Preliminary Roster Projection (6-8-13)

[MaineMan]

Since we've already begun to engage in speculation about "bubble players", I figured I might as well do the whole (very) preliminary roster projection thing. I've broken down the roster into positional units and each unit into two groups: (A) guys who seem highly unlikely to be displaced (in BOLD), and (B) guys with something yet to prove in order to make the final cut. Some of those "B" guys are probably more like "A-minus" or "B-plus" based on their prior experience and/or proven performance with the Pats (and I've noted a couple in particular), but their roster spots are still not "given" IMHO.

With the exception of QB, OL and probably interior DL (the "Heavies"), the "true", roster-end bubble guys who are "semi-sufficient" at their designated positions (reserves) may help their chances of surviving the final cuts if they can contribute a significant sub-package specialty. But they may help their cause just as much (or even more) if they're consistently very good on special teams. IOW, a "bubble LB" may be competing for one of the last roster spots against a "bubble" DB, WR, TE or FB just as much as he's competing against his fellow "bubble LBs".

Also, it should be taken into account that one or more of the "B" guys could make the Final 53 temporarily if one or more of the "A" guys starts the season on PUP (or IR/DtR), and that this wouldn't necessarily be a simple one-for-one substitution positionally. For example, if Gronk starts out on PUP, his roster spot might be temporarily devoted to a WR, or even an OL or DB rather than another TE. It probably depends on a bunch of considerations that may include (in no particular priority, and among other things):
- ST ability
- making up for a player who's too dinged up to play immediately (but who's NOT on PUP)
- the possibility that the sub/temp may have a better chance of sliding through waivers later during the season
- which position/player may have more value to the game plans for the opponents that the Pats will face while Gronk (or whoever) is missing

And, of course, as we've often seen in the past, a guy may be cut at the end of Camp only to be re-signed in Week-3 or Week-4, after other things have settled out, and then remain with the 53 for the rest of the season.

Finally - and the reason why this is VERY preliminary - I'd guess that there are 2-3 (or more) players who are NOT currently on the roster who will be signed for Camp and who may well have a better chance of surviving final cuts than most of the current bubble guys.

So, with all that in mind, here we go.
---------------

OFFENSE (24-25)

QB - 2 (or 3)
BRADY
MALLETT
Kafka
- Setting aside speculation about Mallett being dealt, Kafka could stick if his performance/potential outweighs that of, say, a 9th OL, a 5th TE or a 6th WR.

RB - 4 (possibly 5)
RIDLEY
VEREEN
Bolden (VG on ST)
Blount (ST???)
Washington (KR/PR)
- Bolden/Blount to "backup" Ridley; Washington (whose proven return skills also may give him an edge over guys at other positions, e.g., Eldelman) to backup Vereen.

TE - 4 (possibly 5 if a guy shows exceptional blocking and ST skills)
GRONK
AHERN
Ballard
Hoomanawanui (VG on ST)
Fells
Sudfeld-R (receiving-TE only, at this point, IMO)
Ford-R
Develin (FB)
Bartholomew (FB)
- I've included the fullbacks here instead of with the RBs since their primary role is NOT to carry the ball, but more akin to that of a blocking TE who catches occasionally (Hooman worked as much or more out of an FB alignment last season than as an inline TE). And, yes, Ballard is on the bubble for me. I simply refuse to think otherwise based on just the ONE good (pre-injury) season with a different team and/or the "thrilling" story about how he was acquired.

WR - 5 (maybe 6)
AMENDOLA
DOBSON-R
Edelman (among the top 3-4 PRs in the league)
Jenkins
Jones
Hawkins
Aiken
Boyce-R
Harrison-R
Thompkins-R
- While I understand that Edelman is backed by at least some proven performance at WR and has been an excellent PR, and that expectations are very high for Boyce (only a Day-3 pick, though, after all), there appears to be a lot of talent and some significant experience among the all the "bubble" competitors to fill out a WR Corps that (we hope) will end up being fairly well-balanced with very consistent primaries and competent reserves at all three (X, Y and Z) spots. And, again, downfield blocking skills and ST contributions may well make the difference between two players who are otherwise "equal".

OL - 8 (possibly 9)
WENDELL (OC)
MANKINS (LG-1)
CONNOLLY (RG-1, OC-2)
SOLDER (LT-1)
VOLLMER (RT-1)
CANNON (RG/RT-2)
N. McDonald (OL, primarily interior)
Zusevics (OL, ?)
Svitek (OT)
Haslam (OG/OT)
Stankiewitch-R (OC)
Kline-R (OC/OG)
C. McDonald-R (OL, interior)
Fisher-R (OG/OT)
Mattes-R (OT - 6062/321)
- Svitek, based on his experience and the lack of OT depth otherwise, is probably at least a "B+", and this may also apply to Haslam to a somewhat lesser degree. Zusevics (6047/303) has been consistently projected as an OT, but, without any actual evidence based on any playing time with the Pats, I really don't see where he fits yet or how he really rates any higher than any of this year's crop of UDFA OL at this point.

----------------------

DEFENSE (24-25)
- I steadfastly refuse to presume to make any projection about how the front seven will be configured for what percentage of snaps, much less what the "base" might be for 2013 (if there even is a "base", per se). Too often over the past couple-three seasons, the front seven alignments (and the coverage schemes) have seemed more or less opponent-specific and even morphed over the course of a game (depending on what the opponent is doing and the Pats' own injuries) for my meager analytical talents to nail anything down. It seems to me that what may scheme/alignment may appear to dominate at the start of the season may be highly dependent on what the front seven players/prospects have demonstrated that can do consistently and successfully during Camp (both individually and in the aggregate), and will also evolve (perhaps even change radically) over the course of the season as some guys develop/expand their skills and other guys get hurt. So, the unit projections below are necessarily somewhat ambiguous and based primarily on what is known (not rumored or speculated) about their current size/bulk as well as prior experience.

Core-DL - 4 or 5
- (4-3 interior guys who might also cover 3-4 DE, hypothetically)
WILFORK
Kelly
Armstead-CFL
Forston
Vellano-R
Grissom-R
Cherrington-R (6016/345)
- Kelly is probably more an "A-minus" than a "B" for his size, experience and performance (thus far) in OTAs. But, honestly, Armstead probably has as much to prove as pretty much all the rest of the bubble guys, despite his "pedigree". Forston doesn't exactly have "oodles" of playing-time to set him above Vellano/Grissom and all three are almost identical to each other, size-wise (roughly 6'1"/310).

DL-Edge/OLB - 5 or 6
JONES
NINKOVICH
Francis
Cunningham
Bequette (?)
Vega-CFL
Buchanan-R
- There's some superficial (IMO) overlap between this group and the Core-DL since several of these edge guys have lined up as interior DL sub-package rushers in the past. However, if a couple of the Core-DL bubble guys break through in terms of overall performance (as well as wrt penetration), we may see somewhat less usage of DL-Edge guys in that capacity (although I'd guess it will still happen sometimes). Regardless of the potential that a semi-consensus appears to think that Bequette possesses, we really don't have any more evidence for him sticking on the roster than we do for Vega and Buchanan. OTOH, Francis and Cunningham have both proven that they can contribute.

LB - 5 or 6
MAYO
SPIKES
HIGHTOWER
COLLINS-R
Fletcher (VG on ST, or was)
Rivera (good on ST)
Tarpinian
Kouts (ST specialist, really)
Benard (VG on ST, or was)
Edds
Beauharnais-R
- There's also a bit of overlap between this group and the DL-Edge group in that Nink and Cunningham are relatively proven performers lined up at OLB, and guys like Hightower, Benard and Collins (especially as a rookie) have some prior experience/ability to drop down to the LoS occasionally, though I wouldn't project any of this group at DL-Edge as a regular thing at this point.

SAFETY - 4 or 5
McCOURTY
T. WILSON
A. Wilson
Gregory (not so good on ST)
Harmon-R
Ebner (exceptional on ST)
Davis-R
- Adrian Wilson, like Tommy Kelly, is probably more "A-minus" due to his unique size, experience and skills, but there may be some overlap between him and the supposed "coverage LB" types (including Fletcher, Tarpinian, Collins and perhaps Beauharnais) such that, if one or more of the latter emerges as exceptional and Wilson doesn't perform quite as well as expected, there may be a tough decision there at the end of Camp (especially if Wilson isn't likely to contribute to ST). While it's highly unlikely that Harmon, as a 3rd-rounder, would be cut as a rookie, his roster spot is not a given, either.

CORNERBACK - 5 (very probably)
TALIB
DENNARD
ARRINGTON
Dowling
Ryan-R
Cole (VG on ST)
Jones-R
Morris-R (6002/191)
- What applies to Harmon above also applies to Ryan. Dowling, when healthy, seems excellent at one thing (RCB), but also seems to lack versatility and (IIRC) ST ability. With Dennard's long term health also a question mark at this point, the door may remain open for Cole. He's not much at DB, but if Jones/Morris are no better, Cole's ST ability/experience could allow him to stick, at least temporarily.

SPECIAL TEAMS Specialists - 4
SLATER (Captain)
GOST - K
MESKO - P
Aiken - LS
Zupancic-R - LS
Ruffer-R - K
Allen-R - P
- As elite as Allen may have been in college, I don't see him unseating Mesko at this point. And Ruffer, who apparently does NOT have a very good college record, seems even less likely to be a real challenge to Gost. We never hear squat about LS performance, though, good or bad, so it's possible that Aiken was actually shaky in 2012 (in the eyes of the coaches) and we never knew about it.

 

[chevss454]

A lot of thought went into that, MM, reps +. You point out beautifully the very difficulty I've had in trying to determine the roster. There's just too much competition at each position other than QB to speculate with any degree of accuracy which players will play best at each position in TC & make the team. This is the only year I can remember that has so many starting positions up for grabs.

 

[MaineMan]

A lot of thought went into that, MM, reps +. You point out beautifully the very difficulty I've had in trying to determine the roster. There's just too much competition at each position other than QB to speculate with any degree of accuracy which players will play best at each position in TC & make the team. This is the only year I can remember that has so many starting positions up for grabs.

IDK. Like I wrote in the Bubble Players thread, around 35 "locks" at this point in the year seems fairly typical. There's a discernable difference, though, between this year and, say, 2009/2010, in that the incumbents who may have been less than satisfactory appear to have a lot of real competition now. Whereas, in past years, for various reasons, the "new guys" simply turned out not to be "all that" and the incumbents sorta skated through.

But, it feels like there's been a remarkable build-up of young (and eager) talent in the ranks (top to bottom) over the last couple seasons that's about to pop and a lot of the "2nd-tier" incumbents face some very real threats to their spots.

 

[(P - shoulder)]

The position that gives me the most headaches is RB. We've got ourselves a real clusterF there, and it seems likely we will have to part ways with someone we really don't want to see go (for me, I like all of them, frankly). As much as I love Blount's physicality, I keep wondering why BB pulled the trigger on that trade, rather than trying to get a pick or a DL or something.

 

[Oswlek]

The position that gives me the most headaches is RB. We've got ourselves a real clusterF there, and it seems likely we will have to part ways with someone we really don't want to see go (for me, I like all of them, frankly). As much as I love Blount's physicality, I keep wondering why BB pulled the trigger on that trade, rather than trying to get a pick or a DL or something.

A 7th rounder for a young guy who had a 1,000 yard season just two years ago seems pretty reasonable to me. :shrug_n:

As for MM's work, I applaud his effort. I do wonder why guys like Ryan, Harmon and Boyce aren't considered locks. Bill has yet to cut a single 1st-4th round draftee in his rookie year. Considering the positions selected, it seems extremely unlikely that he breaks trend in 2013. I also think Ballard is going to have to prove he doesn't belong, and has at least as much of a chance of making the roster as Connolly does.

Other than that, excellent work!

 

[MaineMan]

The position that gives me the most headaches is RB. We've got ourselves a real clusterF there, and it seems likely we will have to part ways with someone we really don't want to see go (for me, I like all of them, frankly). As much as I love Blount's physicality, I keep wondering why BB pulled the trigger on that trade, rather than trying to get a pick or a DL or something.

IDK, RB seems more straightforward at this point than most positions. I see Ridley and Vereen as "locks". I'd project Washington as Vereen's backup, though he'd be a returner first and foremost (and Edelman might still make the roster). Then, it's down to:
- Blount: Hefty guy, though I don't know how is blocking is. Pretty good at carrying (and catching) the rock his first two seasons, until the Bucs drafted Doug Martin. May have some attitude issues. Not sure he does much ST work. BB spent some time with him (and Talib) during last pre-season's joint practices, so he must know what he's getting.
- Bolden: Has shown he can run pretty "big", at least when he was using PEDs. A very good STer, even after his suspension.

I'm thinking it comes down to one or the other as mostly Ridley's "relief man" with perhaps some occasional "power back" work, though neither feels like that guy who converted 3rd/4th-and-short something like 30 straight times for the Fins a couple years back (Hilliard?).

Anyway, WRT the trade, the Pats gave up a "part-time" football player and pocket change for Blount. That probably wouldn't have yielded much of a draft pick (6th?) nor any better DL guy than he could pick up as a free agent.

 

[MaineMan]

A 7th rounder for a young guy who had a 1,000 yard season just two years ago seems pretty reasonable to me. :shrug_n:

As for MM's work, I applaud his effort. I do wonder why guys like Ryan, Harmon and Boyce aren't considered locks. Bill has yet to cut a single 1st-4th round draftee in his rookie year. Considering the positions selected, it seems extremely unlikely that he breaks trend in 2013. I also think Ballard is going to have to prove he doesn't belong, and has at least as much of a chance of making the roster as Connolly does.

Other than that, excellent work!

Well, I did give myself an implied "out" on Ryan and Harmon with that "A-minus/B-plus" caveat, didn't I? Anyway, a case of Foxboro Flu resulting in PUP would be an alternative to "cut", if the guy simply isn't ready - not particularly likely, but possible.

Boyce is facing some very serious competition when he finally sees the field, so, no, BB's history wrt not cutting 4th rounders notwithstanding, Boyce is no lock for me. Not even a B+ until I see some actual performance from him.

Ballard still has to come the rest of the way back from his injury, AND prove that his one good season two years ago was no fluke. At this point, I can't really justify putting him ahead of the rookie UDFAs or the incumbents, however mediocre they may be. Even if Ballard doesn't make it over, say, Sudfeld, he didn't cost squat, so . . .

For all of these bubble guys, the proof is in the performance. We may know more after mini-Camp and can adjust based on that. And, then, probably weekly during August.

 

[chevss454]

Well, I did give myself an implied "out" on Ryan and Harmon with that "A-minus/B-plus" caveat, didn't I? Anyway, a case of Foxboro Flu resulting in PUP would be an alternative to "cut", if the guy simply isn't ready - not particularly likely, but possible.

Boyce is facing some very serious competition when he finally sees the field, so, no, BB's history wrt not cutting 4th rounders notwithstanding, Boyce is no lock for me. Not even a B+ until I see some actual performance from him.

Ballard still has to come the rest of the way back from his injury, AND prove that his one good season two years ago was no fluke. At this point, I can't really justify putting him ahead of the rookie UDFAs or the incumbents, however mediocre they may be. Even if Ballard doesn't make it over, say, Sudfeld, he didn't cost squat, so . . .

For all of these bubble guys, the proof is in the performance. We may know more after mini-Camp and can adjust based on that. And, then, probably weekly during August.

As BB gets older he's definitely cutting his losses quicker than he did in his early years. I wouldn't be surprised if a 4th rounder, or any player, who doesn't show well is cut or traded. (Fwiw, I had Boyce ranked higher than Dobson, as did many draftnik bloggers, so I think he will perform well.)

 

[sg14]

I am curious how the bigs play out on the DL since we jettisoned so many players.
Seems like another re-do without the do.

As far as Blount goes, don't see that as a big deal. I thought I read that the Pats had bigger plans for Bolden. Blount may be the back-up plan.

 

[MaineMan]

I am curious how the bigs play out on the DL since we jettisoned so many players.
Seems like another re-do without the do.

As far as Blount goes, don't see that as a big deal. I thought I read that the Pats had bigger plans for Bolden. Blount may be the back-up plan.

WRT the DL...

The losses:

Pryor - couldn't get/stay healthy
Deaderick - set a pretty low standard for the new guys to surpass
Tracy Robertson (ex-HOU, ex-DET) - had a cuppa coffee in February
Love - maybe they would have tried to bring him back in 2014, but he pretty obviously wasn't ready to do what the Pats needed from him in 2013
Trevor Scott - still UFA, and seemed outplayed by Francis in 2012

Seems to me like the Pats lost so little there that almost anything from the new guys would be an improvement.

 

[Oswlek]

Well, I did give myself an implied "out" on Ryan and Harmon with that "A-minus/B-plus" caveat, didn't I? Anyway, a case of Foxboro Flu resulting in PUP would be an alternative to "cut", if the guy simply isn't ready - not particularly likely, but possible.

Boyce is facing some very serious competition when he finally sees the field, so, no, BB's history wrt not cutting 4th rounders notwithstanding, Boyce is no lock for me. Not even a B+ until I see some actual performance from him.

Ballard still has to come the rest of the way back from his injury, AND prove that his one good season two years ago was no fluke. At this point, I can't really justify putting him ahead of the rookie UDFAs or the incumbents, however mediocre they may be. Even if Ballard doesn't make it over, say, Sudfeld, he didn't cost squat, so . . .

For all of these bubble guys, the proof is in the performance. We may know more after mini-Camp and can adjust based on that. And, then, probably weekly during August.

Either we disagree or it is more of a semantic issue. Sure, it is possible that Boyce is let go, but the team invested a 4th rounder in him for a reason. He would have to play so terribly that he forces their hand, but the same could be said for most of the other 35 "locks" as well. There are only about 15 guys on the team who are pretty much penned in no matter how they perform, the rest are no more assured of a spot than Boyce is.

I agree that the team is more willing to cut bait with rookies than in the past, but Tate and Butler - two guys who demonstrate this new standard - weren't let go until their 3rd seasons. Only McKenzie went sooner, and he clearly had a special circumstance.

The depth at TE probably pushes Ballard off the lock category, but I think the team is a lot higher on him than you are. For all Bill's dismissive talk about unwritten rules, it is true that what NE did is frowned upon in league circles. Add in the salary paid last year to rehab and they had to see some serious value in him. The fact that he has a Patriot tattoo would indicate that the relationship hasn't become strained just yet.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Either we disagree or it is more of a semantic issue. Sure, it is possible that Boyce is let go, but the team invested a 4th rounder in him for a reason. He would have to play so terribly that he forces their hand, but the same could be said for most of the other 35 "locks" as well. There are only about 15 guys on the team who are pretty much penned in no matter how they perform, the rest are no more assured of a spot than Boyce is.

I agree that the team is more willing to cut bait with rookies than in the past, but Tate and Butler - two guys who demonstrate this new standard - weren't let go until their 3rd seasons. Only McKenzie went sooner, and he clearly had a special circumstance.

The depth at TE probably pushes Ballard off the lock category, but I think the team is a lot higher on him than you are. For all Bill's dismissive talk about unwritten rules, it is true that what NE did is frowned upon in league circles. Add in the salary paid last year to rehab and they had to see some serious value in him. The fact that he has a Patriot tattoo would indicate that the relationship hasn't become strained just yet.

Agree 100%.

In talking up Ballard in the past I couldn't figure how to word it, but I think you nailed it. He's not going to tarnish his peer opinion unless he sees some significant value and potential.

 

[MaineMan]

Either we disagree or it is more of a semantic issue. Sure, it is possible that Boyce is let go, but the team invested a 4th rounder in him for a reason. He would have to play so terribly that he forces their hand, but the same could be said for most of the other 35 "locks" as well. There are only about 15 guys on the team who are pretty much penned in no matter how they perform, the rest are no more assured of a spot than Boyce is.

Actually, he wouldn't. He could be good, but simply get consistently outplayed by Amendola, Dobson, Aiken, Jones and Jenkins (the latter three are equally on the bubble, though). In that case, at the end of Camp, maybe they sacrifice the veteran Jenkins, or maybe they carry six WRs (not counting Slater). If Boyce still shows great potential, I'd have to guess that the Pats would find some way to stash him, just maybe not on the 53-man - which makes him a bubble guy.

I agree that the team is more willing to cut bait with rookies than in the past, but Tate and Butler - two guys who demonstrate this new standard - weren't let go until their 3rd seasons. Only McKenzie went sooner, and he clearly had a special circumstance.

Again, it wouldn't necessarily be a "cut bait" situation, just a very difficult decision.

The depth at TE probably pushes Ballard off the lock category, but I think the team is a lot higher on him than you are. For all Bill's dismissive talk about unwritten rules, it is true that what NE did is frowned upon in league circles. Add in the salary paid last year to rehab and they had to see some serious value in him. The fact that he has a Patriot tattoo would indicate that the relationship hasn't become strained just yet.

I've never questioned Ballard's apparent potential, and the coaches may well be happy with where he is now WRT his return from injury. I'm simply saying that he still must perform up to that potential to make the roster, and I don't know that he has yet. If he isn't quite there yet by the start of Camp, maybe they put him on Camp-PUP for a week.

BTW, the salary that the Pats assumed with their claim was only $540k (with no cap hit). For all I know, there may have also been sort of "split" so that they actually paid him a bit less. Either way, in the grand scheme of things, they've invested more on risky things in the past that didn't work out, so . . .

 

[TommyD420]

The position that gives me the most headaches is RB. We've got ourselves a real clusterF there, and it seems likely we will have to part ways with someone we really don't want to see go (for me, I like all of them, frankly). As much as I love Blount's physicality, I keep wondering why BB pulled the trigger on that trade, rather than trying to get a pick or a DL or something.

I dunno, seems like bringing in someone who's actually done it - and essentially serves the same role, spells doom for JAG.

 

[Oswlek]

Actually, he wouldn't. He could be good, but simply get consistently outplayed by Amendola, Dobson, Aiken, Jones and Jenkins (the latter three are equally on the bubble, though). In that case, at the end of Camp, maybe they sacrifice the veteran Jenkins, or maybe they carry six WRs (not counting Slater). If Boyce still shows great potential, I'd have to guess that the Pats would find some way to stash him, just maybe not on the 53-man - which makes him a bubble guy.

Again, it wouldn't necessarily be a "cut bait" situation, just a very difficult decision.

I've never questioned Ballard's apparent potential, and the coaches may well be happy with where he is now WRT his return from injury. I'm simply saying that he still must perform up to that potential to make the roster, and I don't know that he has yet. If he isn't quite there yet by the start of Camp, maybe they put him on Camp-PUP for a week.

BTW, the salary that the Pats assumed with their claim was only $540k (with no cap hit). For all I know, there may have also been sort of "split" so that they actually paid him a bit less. Either way, in the grand scheme of things, they've invested more on risky things in the past that didn't work out, so . . .

One of my favorite things about you, MM, is your willingness to see past the JAG label. No matter how obscure the signing, you are always able to dig up some fact that makes you realize even the most unknown of players has something to offer.

That said, I think you are taking this one a little too far. I just scanned through some recent draft history trying to find some comparables for a Boyce cut, and these are the best I could find.

Lee Smith #159 in 2011

Ted Larsen #205 in 2010

McKenzie (123), Ohrnberger (170) and Bussey (198) in 2009

Jeremy Mincey #191 in 2006

Going through this made me realize that Bill has had a quicker trigger than I initially realized. Looking deeper, Larsen and Mincey were sixth rounders, and the group in 2009 all got hurt, which is a deal changer.

That leaves Lee Smith as the most similar scenario, even more so when you consider that he wasn't even beaten out by anyone. He simply didn't do enough to earn a roster spot. That said, Smith was taken nearly two full rounds after Boyce, comfortably into the area when guys routinely get red-shirted or skirted over to the PS.

Probably the biggest issue I have is with this statement:

He could be good, but simply get consistently outplayed by Amendola, Dobson, Aiken, Jones and Jenkins (the latter three are equally on the bubble, though)

NE has never cut a 4th round rookie in Bill's tenure, let alone one who was taken only 8 picks after the third round. Other than Ohrnberger, not a single one since 2002 (I can't recall what happened to all the no-names in 2000 and 2001) has a guy caught Foxboro Flu for questionable reasons. If you want to be particular and say there is a chance he might be cut, so he can't be a lock, fine. But putting him with scrap heap like Aiken and Jenkins just seems really strange to me. I still maintain that Boyce would have to be positively useless for the team to keep Jenkins over him. Bill just isn't going to drop a top 100 draft talent for a mediocre player who was over-the-hill three years ago. :shrug:

 

[Grumpy_Bottom]

One of my favorite things about you, MM, is your willingness to see past the JAG label. No matter how obscure the signing, you are always able to dig up some fact that makes you realize even the most unknown of players has something to offer.

That said, I think you are taking this one a little too far. I just scanned through some recent draft history trying to find some comparables for a Boyce cut, and these are the best I could find.

Lee Smith #159 in 2011

Ted Larsen #205 in 2010

McKenzie (123), Ohrnberger (170) and Bussey (198) in 2009

Jeremy Mincey #191 in 2006

Going through this made me realize that Bill has had a quicker trigger than I initially realized. Looking deeper, Larsen and Mincey were sixth rounders, and the group in 2009 all got hurt, which is a deal changer.

That leaves Lee Smith as the most similar scenario, even more so when you consider that he wasn't even beaten out by anyone. He simply didn't do enough to earn a roster spot. That said, Smith was taken nearly two full rounds after Boyce, comfortably into the area when guys routinely get red-shirted or skirted over to the PS.

Probably the biggest issue I have is with this statement:



NE has never cut a 4th round rookie in Bill's tenure, let alone one who was taken only 8 picks after the third round. Other than Ohrnberger, not a single one since 2002 (I can't recall what happened to all the no-names in 2000 and 2001) has a guy caught Foxboro Flu for questionable reasons. If you want to be particular and say there is a chance he might be cut, so he can't be a lock, fine. But putting him with scrap heap like Aiken and Jenkins just seems really strange to me. I still maintain that Boyce would have to be positively useless for the team to keep Jenkins over him. Bill just isn't going to drop a top 100 draft talent for a mediocre player who was over-the-hill three years ago. :shrug:

Lee Smith was beaten out by Will Yeatman, who BB tried to sneak to the PS before he was gobbled up by Miami. I wouldn't say it changes anything regarding the point at hand except that a draft pick was outplayed by a UDFA, who they then tried to sneak through and lost. One could possibly draw a parallel between Moe and Boyce except that Moe already got the redshirt

 

[Oswlek]

Lee Smith was beaten out by Will Yeatman, who BB tried to sneak to the PS before he was gobbled up by Miami. I wouldn't say it changes anything regarding the point at hand except that a draft pick was outplayed by a UDFA, who they then tried to sneak through and lost. One could possibly draw a parallel between Moe and Boyce except that Moe already got the redshirt

Yeah, I recall, but Yeatman himself didn't make the opening day roster, so..... :archive:

 

[chevss454]

Yeah, I recall, but Yeatman himself didn't make the opening day roster, so..... :archive:

I read the other day that the Dolphins had been working Yeatman out at RT without a good outcome. He's back at TE & is a great blocker but doesn't catch so well.

 

[MaineMan]

One of my favorite things about you, MM, is your willingness to see past the JAG label. No matter how obscure the signing, you are always able to dig up some fact that makes you realize even the most unknown of players has something to offer.

That said, I think you are taking this one a little too far. I just scanned through some recent draft history trying to find some comparables for a Boyce cut, and these are the best I could find.

Lee Smith #159 in 2011

Ted Larsen #205 in 2010

McKenzie (123), Ohrnberger (170) and Bussey (198) in 2009

Jeremy Mincey #191 in 2006

Going through this made me realize that Bill has had a quicker trigger than I initially realized. Looking deeper, Larsen and Mincey were sixth rounders, and the group in 2009 all got hurt, which is a deal changer.

That leaves Lee Smith as the most similar scenario, even more so when you consider that he wasn't even beaten out by anyone. He simply didn't do enough to earn a roster spot. That said, Smith was taken nearly two full rounds after Boyce, comfortably into the area when guys routinely get red-shirted or skirted over to the PS.

Probably the biggest issue I have is with this statement:



NE has never cut a 4th round rookie in Bill's tenure, let alone one who was taken only 8 picks after the third round. Other than Ohrnberger, not a single one since 2002 (I can't recall what happened to all the no-names in 2000 and 2001) has a guy caught Foxboro Flu for questionable reasons. If you want to be particular and say there is a chance he might be cut, so he can't be a lock, fine. But putting him with scrap heap like Aiken and Jenkins just seems really strange to me. I still maintain that Boyce would have to be positively useless for the team to keep Jenkins over him. Bill just isn't going to drop a top 100 draft talent for a mediocre player who was over-the-hill three years ago. :shrug:

I think the difference between us boils down to making a projection for the bubble guys based on BB's history and college tape evaluations/pro experience, etc. I'm not disagreeing with your projections for Boyce or Ballard (and I'm hoping that your projections are correct), I'm simply not doing that yet. For me, at this point, in this snapshot, there's the "A" guys and the "murk", the "I don't know yet."

A guy on the bubble at this point in the off-season simply means that it's where he stands at the moment, with nothing proven either way and without making any real projections or pre-judgments about him. Aiken could end up being the JAG that many think he is, or he could end up being David Patten. I don't know yet. Boyce could (surprisingly) faceplant or he could stick around at the bottom of the roster to become David Givens in 2014. I don't know yet.

Thus, I have all of the WRs aside from Dobson and Amendola as bubble guys (and even Dobson is based on the fact that he was an early pick, and Amendola is based on his large guaranteed $$) - until I know something more. And, like I said, after mini-Camp, it will likely be time to make some adjustments, some distinctions among the "bubble guys". Assuming that Boyce sees the field, he could move up to a B-plus/A-minus if he performs well. But, he hasn't yet, so - "we'll see how that goes."

BTW - I have a hard time basing projections based on what BB has or as not done WRT draft picks in the past. Every time I've done that, BB goes in exactly the opposite direction, so . . .

 

[OSUBuckeye]

Since we've already begun to engage in speculation about "bubble players", I figured I might as well do the whole (very) preliminary roster projection thing. I've broken down the roster into positional units and each unit into two groups: (A) guys who seem highly unlikely to be displaced (in BOLD), and (B) guys with something yet to prove in order to make the final cut. Some of those "B" guys are probably more like "A-minus" or "B-plus" based on their prior experience and/or proven performance with the Pats (and I've noted a couple in particular), but their roster spots are still not "given" IMHO.

With the exception of QB, OL and probably interior DL (the "Heavies"), the "true", roster-end bubble guys who are "semi-sufficient" at their designated positions (reserves) may help their chances of surviving the final cuts if they can contribute a significant sub-package specialty. But they may help their cause just as much (or even more) if they're consistently very good on special teams. IOW, a "bubble LB" may be competing for one of the last roster spots against a "bubble" DB, WR, TE or FB just as much as he's competing against his fellow "bubble LBs".

Also, it should be taken into account that one or more of the "B" guys could make the Final 53 temporarily if one or more of the "A" guys starts the season on PUP (or IR/DtR), and that this wouldn't necessarily be a simple one-for-one substitution positionally. For example, if Gronk starts out on PUP, his roster spot might be temporarily devoted to a WR, or even an OL or DB rather than another TE. It probably depends on a bunch of considerations that may include (in no particular priority, and among other things):
- ST ability
- making up for a player who's too dinged up to play immediately (but who's NOT on PUP)
- the possibility that the sub/temp may have a better chance of sliding through waivers later during the season
- which position/player may have more value to the game plans for the opponents that the Pats will face while Gronk (or whoever) is missing

And, of course, as we've often seen in the past, a guy may be cut at the end of Camp only to be re-signed in Week-3 or Week-4, after other things have settled out, and then remain with the 53 for the rest of the season.

Finally - and the reason why this is VERY preliminary - I'd guess that there are 2-3 (or more) players who are NOT currently on the roster who will be signed for Camp and who may well have a better chance of surviving final cuts than most of the current bubble guys.

So, with all that in mind, here we go.
---------------

OFFENSE (24-25)

QB - 2 (or 3)
Tebow
BRADY
MALLETT
- WR.

RB - 4 (possibly 5)
RIDLEY
VEREEN
Bolden (VG on ST)
Blount (ST???)
Washington (KR/PR)
- Bolden/Blount to "backup" Ridley; Washington (whose proven return skills also may give him an edge over guys at other positions, e.g., Eldelman) to backup Vereen.

TE - 4 (possibly 5 if a guy shows exceptional blocking and ST skills)
GRONK
AHERN
Ballard
Hoomanawanui (VG on ST)
Fells
Sudfeld-R (receiving-TE only, at this point, IMO)
Ford-R
Develin (FB)
Bartholomew (FB)
- I've included the fullbacks here instead of with the RBs since their primary role is NOT to carry the ball, but more akin to that of a blocking TE who catches occasionally (Hooman worked as much or more out of an FB alignment last season than as an inline TE). And, yes, Ballard is on the bubble for me. I simply refuse to think otherwise based on just the ONE good (pre-injury) season with a different team and/or the "thrilling" story about how he was acquired.

WR - 5 (maybe 6)
AMENDOLA
DOBSON-R
Edelman (among the top 3-4 PRs in the league)
Jenkins
Jones
Hawkins
Aiken
Boyce-R
Harrison-R
Thompkins-R
- While I understand that Edelman is backed by at least some proven performance at WR and has been an excellent PR, and that expectations are very high for Boyce (only a Day-3 pick, though, after all), there appears to be a lot of talent and some significant experience among the all the "bubble" competitors to fill out a WR Corps that (we hope) will end up being fairly well-balanced with very consistent primaries and competent reserves at all three (X, Y and Z) spots. And, again, downfield blocking skills and ST contributions may well make the difference between two players who are otherwise "equal".

OL - 8 (possibly 9)
WENDELL (OC)
MANKINS (LG-1)
CONNOLLY (RG-1, OC-2)
SOLDER (LT-1)
VOLLMER (RT-1)
CANNON (RG/RT-2)
N. McDonald (OL, primarily interior)
Zusevics (OL, ?)
Svitek (OT)
Haslam (OG/OT)
Stankiewitch-R (OC)
Kline-R (OC/OG)
C. McDonald-R (OL, interior)
Fisher-R (OG/OT)
Mattes-R (OT - 6062/321)
- Svitek, based on his experience and the lack of OT depth otherwise, is probably at least a "B+", and this may also apply to Haslam to a somewhat lesser degree. Zusevics (6047/303) has been consistently projected as an OT, but, without any actual evidence based on any playing time with the Pats, I really don't see where he fits yet or how he really rates any higher than any of this year's crop of UDFA OL at this point.

----------------------

DEFENSE (24-25)
- I steadfastly refuse to presume to make any projection about how the front seven will be configured for what percentage of snaps, much less what the "base" might be for 2013 (if there even is a "base", per se). Too often over the past couple-three seasons, the front seven alignments (and the coverage schemes) have seemed more or less opponent-specific and even morphed over the course of a game (depending on what the opponent is doing and the Pats' own injuries) for my meager analytical talents to nail anything down. It seems to me that what may scheme/alignment may appear to dominate at the start of the season may be highly dependent on what the front seven players/prospects have demonstrated that can do consistently and successfully during Camp (both individually and in the aggregate), and will also evolve (perhaps even change radically) over the course of the season as some guys develop/expand their skills and other guys get hurt. So, the unit projections below are necessarily somewhat ambiguous and based primarily on what is known (not rumored or speculated) about their current size/bulk as well as prior experience.

Core-DL - 4 or 5
- (4-3 interior guys who might also cover 3-4 DE, hypothetically)
WILFORK
Kelly
Armstead-CFL
Forston
Vellano-R
Grissom-R
Cherrington-R (6016/345)
- Kelly is probably more an "A-minus" than a "B" for his size, experience and performance (thus far) in OTAs. But, honestly, Armstead probably has as much to prove as pretty much all the rest of the bubble guys, despite his "pedigree". Forston doesn't exactly have "oodles" of playing-time to set him above Vellano/Grissom and all three are almost identical to each other, size-wise (roughly 6'1"/310).

DL-Edge/OLB - 5 or 6
JONES
NINKOVICH
Francis
Cunningham
Bequette (?)
Vega-CFL
Buchanan-R
- There's some superficial (IMO) overlap between this group and the Core-DL since several of these edge guys have lined up as interior DL sub-package rushers in the past. However, if a couple of the Core-DL bubble guys break through in terms of overall performance (as well as wrt penetration), we may see somewhat less usage of DL-Edge guys in that capacity (although I'd guess it will still happen sometimes). Regardless of the potential that a semi-consensus appears to think that Bequette possesses, we really don't have any more evidence for him sticking on the roster than we do for Vega and Buchanan. OTOH, Francis and Cunningham have both proven that they can contribute.

LB - 5 or 6
MAYO
SPIKES
HIGHTOWER
COLLINS-R
Fletcher (VG on ST, or was)
Rivera (good on ST)
Tarpinian
Kouts (ST specialist, really)
Benard (VG on ST, or was)
Edds
Beauharnais-R
- There's also a bit of overlap between this group and the DL-Edge group in that Nink and Cunningham are relatively proven performers lined up at OLB, and guys like Hightower, Benard and Collins (especially as a rookie) have some prior experience/ability to drop down to the LoS occasionally, though I wouldn't project any of this group at DL-Edge as a regular thing at this point.

SAFETY - 4 or 5
McCOURTY
T. WILSON
A. Wilson
Gregory (not so good on ST)
Harmon-R
Ebner (exceptional on ST)
Davis-R
- Adrian Wilson, like Tommy Kelly, is probably more "A-minus" due to his unique size, experience and skills, but there may be some overlap between him and the supposed "coverage LB" types (including Fletcher, Tarpinian, Collins and perhaps Beauharnais) such that, if one or more of the latter emerges as exceptional and Wilson doesn't perform quite as well as expected, there may be a tough decision there at the end of Camp (especially if Wilson isn't likely to contribute to ST). While it's highly unlikely that Harmon, as a 3rd-rounder, would be cut as a rookie, his roster spot is not a given, either.

CORNERBACK - 5 (very probably)
TALIB
DENNARD
ARRINGTON
Dowling
Ryan-R
Cole (VG on ST)
Jones-R
Morris-R (6002/191)
- What applies to Harmon above also applies to Ryan. Dowling, when healthy, seems excellent at one thing (RCB), but also seems to lack versatility and (IIRC) ST ability. With Dennard's long term health also a question mark at this point, the door may remain open for Cole. He's not much at DB, but if Jones/Morris are no better, Cole's ST ability/experience could allow him to stick, at least temporarily.

SPECIAL TEAMS Specialists - 4
SLATER (Captain)
GOST - K
MESKO - P
Aiken - LS
Zupancic-R - LS
Ruffer-R - K
Allen-R - P
- As elite as Allen may have been in college, I don't see him unseating Mesko at this point. And Ruffer, who apparently does NOT have a very good college record, seems even less likely to be a real challenge to Gost. We never hear squat about LS performance, though, good or bad, so it's possible that Aiken was actually shaky in 2012 (in the eyes of the coaches) and we never knew about it.

Fixed & updated