Jump to content

Bring two back from IR


Hunter2_1

Out of the three expected back  

12 members have voted

  1. 1. Can only pick 2

    • Shea McClellin
    • Vincent Valentine
    • Malcolm Mitchell
    • Other: bring someone else in via trade or FA
      0


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, bluemushrooms said:

Amendola and Gronk are injury prone and Hogan's gotten the **** beat out of him this season.  Similarly Burkhead and Lewis are having injury problems.  Mitchell actually adds a lot to our offense as a mid-range threat with great YAC ability and as a run blocker.  

 

McClellin just doesn't really add anything to our defense.  

I'd argue that McClellin takes away from the D if he's playing over anyone other than Flowers

The offense needs to be elite, like 30+ points a game against good D, for the 2017 Pats to win a Super Bowl. Their most important offensive players are often injured. That means they need as many quality reinforcements as possible.

McClellin is the difference between a bad D being bad and being some other similar version of bad. Mitchell could be the difference between an offense being good but not great and an offense being great. Obviously irrelevant if he's too hurt to play but I'd take a good receiving threat over a backup LB at this point 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, childofpudding said:

Hightower is also injury prone. McClellin brings depth at a position where the team is severely lacking. Mitchell brings depth where they don't currently need it.

McClellin brings less value than Hightower and Van Noy, about as much as Roberts, and more than Flowers or Harris. Mitchell, particularly with a healing knee injury, would bring less value than Cooks, Hogan, Amendola, Gronkowski, and about the same as White, Lewis and Burkhead.

White is way more important to the offense than Roberts is to the D. You're proving that Mitchell is more important

McClellin doesn't fix the D. He doesn't move the needle at all. At best, he's a lateral move. So with or without him, it's a bad D until other factors change. To carry a bad D, they need an elite offense.  The Pats offense is elite now but is one injury away from being less than elite. Two injuries away from being pretty shaky.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, mcmurtry86 said:

White is way more important to the offense than Roberts is to the D. You're proving that Mitchell is more important

McClellin doesn't fix the D. He doesn't move the needle at all. At best, he's a lateral move. So with or without him, it's a bad D until other factors change. To carry a bad D, they need an elite offense.  The Pats offense is elite now but is one injury away from being less than elite. Two injuries away from being pretty shaky.

 

Not going to go over the same points I've already detailed. Agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Can't we make room for all 3...lol

I suspect it's a moot point because Mitchell may not be ready for a long time (well after the other guys are good to go). 

Hoping for some miraculous health on offense. They're going to need near perfect health unless the D turns it around in a major, almost incomprehensible given the talent, way 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tonyto36 said:

We're talking about guys who can succeed in a primary role as pass catchers vs role players.  Amendola can't handle a full season load, and when he's not being used in spread situations matched up against linebackers with brady manipulating the defense, I suspect he wouldn't be as successful.   Dorsett is virtually worthless.   Running backs are not guys you can ask to carry a passing game.  They're supplementary.  

Guys who can succeed in a primary role as a pass catcher: Cooks, Hogan, Gronkowski, Amendola. Guys who can succeed in a primary role as a LB: Hightower.

Saying Dorsett is virtually worthless this early in the season is silly. He hasn't had nearly as many practice and game reps with Brady as the others, and there are many players who were here in preseason who are still trying to find their way. See Bill Belichick: 'Incomprehensible' to expect finished product right now

You're basically saying we need (a likely hobbled) Mitchell for depth because Amendola and Gronkowski might get hurt, while ignoring that the LB depth is already thin even if Hightower doesn't get injured, which is also likely.

But that's OK, different opinions for different people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tonyto36 said:

We're talking about guys who can succeed in a primary role as pass catchers vs role players.  Amendola can't handle a full season load, and when he's not being used in spread situations matched up against linebackers with brady manipulating the defense, I suspect he wouldn't be as successful.   Dorsett is virtually worthless.   Running backs are not guys you can ask to carry a passing game.  They're supplementary.  

Excellent points. I'd also point out that, in the event of a Gronk or WR injury, Lewis and Burkhead aren't going to be an adequate replacement. Lewis is basically useless in the pass game outside of dump offs or screens. Burkhead can help a little in the slot but lacks the precise route running to replace Amendola and can't do anything downfield. 

Using a RB in the slot is ok for a short period or in certain matchups but in the playoffs or for an extended period, it would really hamper the offense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, childofpudding said:

Guys who can succeed in a primary role as a pass catcher: Cooks, Hogan, Gronkowski, Amendola. Guys who can succeed in a primary role as a LB: Hightower.

Saying Dorsett is virtually worthless this early in the season is silly. He hasn't had nearly as many practice and game reps with Brady as the others, and there are many players who were here in preseason who are still trying to find their way. See Bill Belichick: 'Incomprehensible' to expect finished product right now

You're basically saying we need (a likely hobbled) Mitchell for depth because Amendola and Gronkowski might get hurt, while ignoring that the LB depth is already thin even if Hightower doesn't get injured, which is also likely.

But that's OK, different opinions for different people.

Dorsett was useless in Indianapolis. Maybe he can be an ok #4 but expecting him to succeed in a big role if needed is questionable at best. 

Not sure why you're so stuck on LB depth or Hightower's durability. McClellin isn't an upgrade over the 2 "next men up" unless you think he improved over the offseason. Yes, the team lacks LB depth. The thing is, they lack good LB's. They're knee deep in marginal ones. The difference between McClellin and any of the guys on the roster is slim. If Hightower blows out his knee, McClellin will not make things any better than promoting someone off the practice squad or using David Harris. 

I really am confused on where the idea that McClellin makes the D better comes from. Everyone here (presumably) saw him play last year. Easily blocked on his pass rush. Awful tackling. Bad reads when playing inside. Slow to react in zone coverage. Always a step behind in man. Simply being a guy who logged some snaps last year doesn't make him better than a random LB the Pats could pick up in an emergency.  

He was so bad at times last year that I'm surprised anyone sees him as an upgrade. If you think 2017 Van Noy or Roberts are bad, you should think 2016 McClellin was bad because he was worse that what we've seen this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, mcmurtry86 said:

Dorsett was useless in Indianapolis. Maybe he can be an ok #4 but expecting him to succeed in a big role if needed is questionable at best. 

Not sure why you're so stuck on LB depth or Hightower's durability. McClellin isn't an upgrade over the 2 "next men up" unless you think he improved over the offseason. Yes, the team lacks LB depth. The thing is, they lack good LB's. They're knee deep in marginal ones. The difference between McClellin and any of the guys on the roster is slim. If Hightower blows out his knee, McClellin will not make things any better than promoting someone off the practice squad or using David Harris. 

I really am confused on where the idea that McClellin makes the D better comes from. Everyone here (presumably) saw him play last year. Easily blocked on his pass rush. Awful tackling. Bad reads when playing inside. Slow to react in zone coverage. Always a step behind in man. Simply being a guy who logged some snaps last year doesn't make him better than a random LB the Pats could pick up in an emergency.  

He was so bad at times last year that I'm surprised anyone sees him as an upgrade. If you think 2017 Van Noy or Roberts are bad, you should think 2016 McClellin was bad because he was worse that what we've seen this year. 

I don't expect Dorsett to succeed in a big role, and never said that. If Gronk and/or Amendola get injured, I don't expect the team to suddenly lean heavily on a hobbled Mitchell either. His return does little for the offense.

I'm stuck on LB depth because it's a bigger issue then depth at offensive skill positions. Hightower's durability at LB is just as much an issue as the durability of Gronk and Amendola, which you're "hung up on."

I never said McClellin makes the current defense better. I don't think Mitchell makes the current offense better either. It's about a position of need for me, and this team needs defensive bodies over more offensive skill players.

Pretty much every criticism you cite for McClellin could be given to Flowers, Roberts, and Van Noy to a lesser extent. We simply disagree on his value, and at least some familiarity with the system and taking reps in camp does matter and makes him better than a random LB the Pats could pick up. I mean, they're paying a veteran LB in Harris $2m+ this season and he can't even get snaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Mitchell came off IR, he wouldn't be hobbled.

You say the D needs bodies, and admit McClellin won't improve things. So what does it matter if he stays on IR and they use some other random fringe player if injuries strike?

My point is simple - this team will live and die by Tom Brady's ability to put up big numbers on good defenses. They need to do everything possible to ensure that happens - including having quality, trusted targets for him in the postseason. I don't think Amendola and Gronk will both be healthy (I'd be surprised if either were TBH). A healthy Mitchell fills that gap much better than anything McClellin brings.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, mcmurtry86 said:

If Mitchell came off IR, he wouldn't be hobbled.

You say the D needs bodies, and admit McClellin won't improve things. So what does it matter if he stays on IR and they use some other random fringe player if injuries strike?

My point is simple - this team will live and die by Tom Brady's ability to put up big numbers on good defenses. They need to do everything possible to ensure that happens - including having quality, trusted targets for him in the postseason. I don't think Amendola and Gronk will both be healthy (I'd be surprised if either were TBH). A healthy Mitchell fills that gap much better than anything McClellin brings.

 

Coming off IR doesn't mean you're 100% all of the sudden, especially when it's a knee injury to a WR. Silly to argue otherwise. Even a 100% healthy Mitchell doesn't really improve the current offense. And if Gronk and/or Amendola are injured, Mitchell won't be the savior, healthy or not.

I'm not in favor of throwing up our hands on the defense this early in the season. Again, see Bill Belichick: 'Incomprehensible' to expect finished product right now . Having McClellin back matters for depth, as I've said 20 times today. Share snap count, insurance if Hightower or another LB is injured, insurance that is needed much more than at the offensive skill position. And  yes, better than a body off the street.

Pretty sure we've exhausted our arguments at this point, so this will be my last post on the topic. Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, childofpudding said:

Coming off IR doesn't mean you're 100% all of the sudden, especially when it's a knee injury to a WR. Silly to argue otherwise. Even a 100% healthy Mitchell doesn't really improve the current offense. And if Gronk and/or Amendola are injured, Mitchell won't be the savior, healthy or not.

I'm not in favor of throwing up our hands on the defense this early in the season. Again, see Bill Belichick: 'Incomprehensible' to expect finished product right now . Having McClellin back matters for depth, as I've said 20 times today. Share snap count, insurance if Hightower or another LB is injured, insurance that is needed much more than at the offensive skill position. And  yes, better than a body off the street.

Pretty sure we've exhausted our arguments at this point, so this will be my last post on the topic. Cheers.

The Pats have almost never (I'd actually say never but there could be a guy or two I'm forgetting) rushed a guy back from injury unless it's a critical player in a big game (Gronk in SB46, Brady in SB42). It's not "silly" to think that if Mitchell were activated, he would be reasonably healthy. They wouldn't activate him otherwise

As for the D, I'm not giving up but the ability to improve has nothing to do with the presence of a very bad player.

McClellin and Ninkovich were the two worst guys on the field last year when they played (Sheard had some really bad games too). That people are pining for them tells me that some don't understand the real challenges the D is facing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, mcmurtry86 said:

Dorsett was useless in Indianapolis. Maybe he can be an ok #4 but expecting him to succeed in a big role if needed is questionable at best. 

Not sure why you're so stuck on LB depth or Hightower's durability. McClellin isn't an upgrade over the 2 "next men up" unless you think he improved over the offseason. Yes, the team lacks LB depth. The thing is, they lack good LB's. They're knee deep in marginal ones. The difference between McClellin and any of the guys on the roster is slim. If Hightower blows out his knee, McClellin will not make things any better than promoting someone off the practice squad or using David Harris. 

I really am confused on where the idea that McClellin makes the D better comes from. Everyone here (presumably) saw him play last year. Easily blocked on his pass rush. Awful tackling. Bad reads when playing inside. Slow to react in zone coverage. Always a step behind in man. Simply being a guy who logged some snaps last year doesn't make him better than a random LB the Pats could pick up in an emergency.  

He was so bad at times last year that I'm surprised anyone sees him as an upgrade. If you think 2017 Van Noy or Roberts are bad, you should think 2016 McClellin was bad because he was worse that what we've seen this year. 

2017 Van Noy has been way better than I thought he'd ever be.  Still not great but, I think a few more games and he'll be a solid LB.  Unsure if it's his instincts or tackling but, he always ends up parallel to the ground when RB's cut back to the weakside and ends up missing the tackle.  Maybe just a combo of mediocre athleticism and instincts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...