I don't really get the criticism of the Pats for trading down 3 spots. Ladd McConkey went 34, the Pats original slot. Two DTs went 35 and 36 (Ohrorhoro Your Boat and Newton). Then the Pats were up at 37 and took Polk. They might not have even wanted McConkey or the DTs.
Personally, I wanted Kingsley Suamataia at 34, or 37, and he fell so far (63) that I had my hopes up that they would take him at 68, which did not quite work out.
I'm not knowledgeable enough to comment specifically on Polk and Wallace. The latter preferred really wanted someone else. They did bring Wallace in for a visit though, so they must have liked something about him.
The criticism of the Pats for drafting for need is hilarious to me. If they had drafted, say, a DT and an interior OL who were consensus BPA, we'd be hearing the criticism "why aren't they addressing their weaknesses?" I'm just happy that the Pats did not reach for a slow footed safety in R2.
Personally, I wanted Kingsley Suamataia at 34, or 37, and he fell so far (63) that I had my hopes up that they would take him at 68, which did not quite work out.
I'm not knowledgeable enough to comment specifically on Polk and Wallace. The latter preferred really wanted someone else. They did bring Wallace in for a visit though, so they must have liked something about him.
The criticism of the Pats for drafting for need is hilarious to me. If they had drafted, say, a DT and an interior OL who were consensus BPA, we'd be hearing the criticism "why aren't they addressing their weaknesses?" I'm just happy that the Pats did not reach for a slow footed safety in R2.
Last edited: