SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
2015 Patriots Offseason Thread
|
Post by jmei on Mar 11, 2015 9:32:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Mar 11, 2015 9:36:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Mar 11, 2015 9:39:14 GMT -5
Why would Oakland trade anything for him? They're not a contender, so having him for one year doesn't matter, and if they wanted him long-term, they'd just try to sign him in free agency. The same analysis applies to pretty much every other team out there. Maybe more importantly, the Patriots aren't so afraid of the Jets and aren't going to lose out on a high comp pick just to avoid facing him for one year. The Raiders were in on him and a 7th rounder isn't worth much even to them. Cleveland was also in on him. Losing a late 3rd round pick is absolutely worth getting him out of our division, we have an easier schedule next year and Brady only has a few years left. Its not the same as getting a first rounder or second rounder as compensation in my eyes.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 11, 2015 9:43:09 GMT -5
They used the money saved from not paying Law to build literally the best offense in NFL history in 2007, and that 2007 team is on the short list of best NFL teams ever and was one play away from sealing that achievement. That 2008 team was a near-consensus preseason #1 until Brady tore his ACL and won 11 games despite that.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,824
Member is Online
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 11, 2015 9:44:25 GMT -5
Still waiting for someone to name a single instance of the Pats screwing up when trading/ letting an aging vet go. They're not an infallible organization, but they are when it comes to these types of decisions. Ty led the league in INT's the year after he left. The next good CB the Patriots had after Samuel came 6 years later... The Patriots simply do not draft and develop CB's well. ...and was he worth the money for the duration of the contract? The answer is no. Like it or not, the Pats won't sign a contract if they don't think they'll get good value For the entire duration of that contract. It's how they've always operated, and they're not making an exception for anyone.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Mar 11, 2015 9:46:04 GMT -5
They used the money saved from not paying Law to build literally the best offense in NFL history in 2007, and that 2007 team is on the short list of best NFL teams ever and was one play away from sealing that achievement. That 2008 team was a near-consensus preseason #1 until Brady tore his ACL and won 11 games despite that. We can battle back and forth about this all day, but long story short, they have not won without an elite shutdown CB/all around Defense, and that's fact, not opinion.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 11, 2015 10:00:48 GMT -5
They used the money saved from not paying Law to build literally the best offense in NFL history in 2007, and that 2007 team is on the short list of best NFL teams ever and was one play away from sealing that achievement. That 2008 team was a near-consensus preseason #1 until Brady tore his ACL and won 11 games despite that. We can battle back and forth about this all day, but long story short, they have not won without an elite shutdown CB/all around Defense, and that's fact, not opinion. Ty Law was injured for the last nine games and the playoffs of the '04 season-- they won that title with Randall Gay, Hank Poteat, a second-year Asante Samuel, and Troy Brown at cornerback. They were the consensus best team in football between 2005-2013 without an elite CB. Their 2014-15 defense was more good than great (finished the year ranked just 12th in weighted defensive DVOA). Again, there are no prerequisites to winning, and you're reaching for simple narratives here.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 11, 2015 11:20:48 GMT -5
Last years defense was great in the second half of every game the last half of the the season (just about - don't go showing me week 9 stars if I'm Off a week) and through the playoffs. That's just the truth. It maybe wasn't an all-time great defense but last years defense was great. They were able to do things they won't be able to do this year that helped them dominate games in the second half. That's just the truth.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 11, 2015 11:55:17 GMT -5
It's incredible how arrogant you can be.... Revis is looked at as an exception and for damn good reason. He was the difference in having completely suspect defenses the previous 8 years or so and having a very good one last year. He plays the most important position on the field other than QB. Having him or a player like him (healthy Talib was similar) completely transforms the defense and makes it top notch. On top of it they have 5m in dead money this year from his contract so the assertion that 5m in dead money 4 and 5 years from now is a big deal is disingenuous at best. The cap at that time will be way higher than it is now. Plus, extending yourself for a guy like Revis is not what gets you in cap hell. Extending yourself for good to great players is. Revis is an all-time great in his prime playing some of his best football. He's not even some great player, he's one of the 10 best players in football at an extremely important position. I don't know how the negotiations went so I can't get too mad at the team. Unfortunately, a lot of times these things don't get done because there is no trust and transparency so you can't be sure what you really need to pay to get a guy back, but make no mistake this is an epic loss and possibly even crippling to their chances at a repeat. If retaining him meant losing one of Hightower or Collins down the road then so be it. Those guys are replaceable. Revis, Brady and Gronk are not. Last year's contract with Revis was widely recognized as one of the few times in recently history that the Patriots played cap shenanigans with made-up years and future dead money. It's not something they like to do, and while they'll do it once for an elite player in his prime on a one-year deal, they weren't willing to do so again for a long-term deal into that player's mid-30s. That last bit is what you're ignoring-- while Revis may have a year or two of his prime left, he does turn 30 this year, and the aging curve for cornerbacks is pretty damn steep. dcsoxfan1989 brought up Ty Law earlier in this thread-- the Patriots let him go entering his age 31 season, he had one good year with the Jets, signed a big deal with the Chiefs, and promptly sucked and was released. Asante Samuel, Nnamdi Asomugha, etc.-- even the formerly elite guys are prone to falling off a cliff. That position relies on elite athleticism, and once that begins to slip, no amount of technique or veteran wiles can help you run step for step with some young guy with 4.4 speed. You pay for future performance, not past performance, and there is no guarantee that Revis is going to be the same guy going forward. This is just like the Lester situation all over again-- no player is irreplaceable, and there are no prerequisites to winning. Those so-called suspect defenses, by the way, were two plays away from winning two additional Lombardi trophies, with two other AFC Championship Game appearances and seven total division titles. With single-game eliminations and a hard salary cap, the way to sustain success in the NFL is even more so to trust the process and build a strong team every year. That's how the Patriots have always operated, and they have a pretty damn good track record to show for it. The point you seem to be missing is that Tom Brady is going to be 38 years old next year. Please stop with we don't want to ruin our cap 4 or 5 years from now. By that time most likely we don't have Tom Brady and we are rebuilding. So some dead money on the Cap won't really hurt us. When one of the all time greats is nearing the end of his career you need to do everything in your power to go for it.
Also Revis isn't just some cornerback, he is an all time great like Brady. If there is a player that can play at a high level into his early to mid thirties its going to be Revis! Samuels was never an elite cornerback, he was a playmaker who's value came from interceptions. While Ty Law was better, he was never seen as being the best cornerback in the game while he played. Revis is an all time great, you don't let players like that go because you might cut him and have dead money on your cap.
Also please stop with the we never sign a player to a contract if we feel he won't play out that contract. Last year they did it with both Revis and Wilfork. So they can and will do it. You can all say the reason we have been good to great for the past 10 plus years is Bill being a great GM, but lets not fool ourselves its because of Tom Brady!!!! And please don't bring up the year Tom went down, while they did have an ok record, they didn't make the playoffs without Brady and that was a team that could have won a title with Brady!!!
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 11, 2015 12:00:22 GMT -5
Revis is probably in the Brady category. I wouldn't be surprised if he's a safety at age 40 like Rod Woodson.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 11, 2015 12:56:23 GMT -5
The point you seem to be missing is that Tom Brady is going to be 38 years old next year. Please stop with we don't want to ruin our cap 4 or 5 years from now. By that time most likely we don't have Tom Brady and we are rebuilding. So some dead money on the Cap won't really hurt us. When one of the all time greats is nearing the end of his career you need to do everything in your power to go for it. The point you seem to be missing is that Belichick has no interest in spending 2 or more years in cap hell, he's pretty old too. He has decided not to sacrifice the future - you'll thank him later. (The other point you're missing is that it's not useful to full quote the message you're replying to and the message that message replied to.)
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 11, 2015 12:59:43 GMT -5
The Raiders were in on him and a 7th rounder isn't worth much even to them. Cleveland was also in on him. Losing a late 3rd round pick is absolutely worth getting him out of our division, we have an easier schedule next year and Brady only has a few years left. Its not the same as getting a first rounder or second rounder as compensation in my eyes. Just because a team is interested in Revis for $12m/year or so does not automatically mean they are willing to give up a draft pick to pay him $20m for a year. I mean, you do realize that free agency exists, right? Of course you already invalidated your own argument by pretending that the J-E-S-T might win the division.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 11, 2015 13:03:44 GMT -5
Last years defense was great in the second half of every game the last half of the the season (just about - don't go showing me week 9 stars if I'm Off a week) and through the playoffs. That's just the truth. It maybe wasn't an all-time great defense but last years defense was great. They were able to do things they won't be able to do this year that helped them dominate games in the second half. That's just the truth. The defense had a great six/seven week stretch, especially versus opposing passing games. The rest of the year (including two of their three playoff games), it was pretty mediocre. You can't just arbitrarily cut off half the season because it doesn't fit your narrative. Revis played in those games, too.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Mar 11, 2015 13:20:51 GMT -5
The Raiders were in on him and a 7th rounder isn't worth much even to them. Cleveland was also in on him. Losing a late 3rd round pick is absolutely worth getting him out of our division, we have an easier schedule next year and Brady only has a few years left. Its not the same as getting a first rounder or second rounder as compensation in my eyes. Just because a team is interested in Revis for $12m/year or so does not automatically mean they are willing to give up a draft pick to pay him $20m for a year. I mean, you do realize that free agency exists, right? Of course you already invalidated your own argument by pretending that the J-E-S-T might win the division. We barely beat them twice last year with Revis, Browner, and literal Geno Smith quarterbacking the Jets. Its a possibility.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 11, 2015 13:30:06 GMT -5
Just because a team is interested in Revis for $12m/year or so does not automatically mean they are willing to give up a draft pick to pay him $20m for a year. I mean, you do realize that free agency exists, right? Of course you already invalidated your own argument by pretending that the J-E-S-T might win the division. We barely beat them twice last year with Revis, Browner, and literal Geno Smith quarterbacking the Jets. Its a possibility. And then they won the Super Bowl. I think the gap between the two teams is a little larger than that. They always play down to crappy teams.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Mar 11, 2015 14:30:56 GMT -5
I know people want to pretend the difference between this year and past postseason failures was all about forming a shutdown defense around Revis, but that's not what actually happened. The Patriots, like most seasons, earned a postseason bye and home field advantage. This year, unlike past seasons, the offense was highly productive throughout the entire postseason.
After the 07 AFCCG loss, the Patriots offense scored 14, 14, 17, 21, 13, and 16 points in elimination game losses. Even with an elite defense those aren't scores that you win many postseason games with. I'm not putting all the blame on the offense for past failures, but the 2011 SB team for example had one of the weakest defensive backfields I can remember and could've won that SB as easily as the Patriots could've lost this past one. The story of this postseason wasn't Revis, it was Brady and the offense playing all time great playoff football. I'm confident the Patriots could win with a lesser corner group if the offense has another all time great postseason performance. On the other hand, if the offense struggles to the tune of 13-17 points in a playoff game next season I wouldn't expect Revis and the defense to bail them out either. Football games are won and lost in many ways.
The way I see it I'm relieved Belichick didn't "overextend" in future commitments just to keep this team together in the short term, even if I wanted Revis back. The day Belichick starts making win now moves is the day he's beginning to plan an exit strategy. His job security gives him a unique ability to maximize the long term interests of the team.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,824
Member is Online
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 11, 2015 14:44:26 GMT -5
Also, having a healthy Gronk throughout the postseason was probably at least as important as having elite corners.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 11, 2015 15:39:05 GMT -5
The point you seem to be missing is that Tom Brady is going to be 38 years old next year. Please stop with we don't want to ruin our cap 4 or 5 years from now. By that time most likely we don't have Tom Brady and we are rebuilding. So some dead money on the Cap won't really hurt us. When one of the all time greats is nearing the end of his career you need to do everything in your power to go for it. The point you seem to be missing is that Belichick has no interest in spending 2 or more years in cap hell, he's pretty old too. He has decided not to sacrifice the future - you'll thank him later. (The other point you're missing is that it's not useful to full quote the message you're replying to and the message that message replied to.) The point you seem to be missing is that Bill might not be around very long after Brady is done. Please explain how the could be in cap hell for two or more years? If they moved on from Revis they could take the hit that year or spread it out over two years.
Also please stop acting like everything Bill has done has worked out. Overall he has done a great job, but he has made mistakes. Trading away Seymour was a mistake, he weakened a title contender to improve the teams long term outlook. When Brady was young and you had many years left with him that made sense. Chances are you have Brady for 3-4 years, then the rebuild begins. I would mortgage the future all day long right now to get 1 or if lucky maybe two more titles. I have no problem with this team being in cap hell 4 or 5 years from now. I want as many title as possible with our all time great QB. SO I WILL NOT IN ANY WAY BE THANKING BILL LATER!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Mar 11, 2015 15:40:15 GMT -5
Quick thoughts, entirely opinion, as is every other post above....
1- Yes it was a mistake to not sign Revis, even at the dollars involved. Most offenses have 1 or 2 elite players or positions (in the case of "RB-by-committee" team, or offenses that favor the short passing game to the TE, etc). Contenders have 2 or sometimes 3. Revis is one of the handful of players who can erase one of those players/positions by himself. This allows the defense to scheme ("tilt the field", if you will) to remove the other 1 or 2. Opinions may differ, I would implore those who disagree and think we can simply scheme to cover for the lack of Revis to watch the AFC Championships against Baltimore and Denver. Note the difference before/after Talib was hurt. Each went from a back-and-forth affair to a mismatch against the Pats D almost immediately at that point.
2- I may root against the Jets, but not Revis specifically at this point. He was part of a great team and deserves an incredible amount of respect for what he does. He proved (again) that he is one of the few, elite difference makers on defense, and he deserved to get every cent. Thank you Darrelle.
3- The "moving on" names in free agency are stopgaps: Cromartie, Williams, etc. It will be interesting to see if they pursue either.
4- It's highly unlikely that names like Peterson, Haden, Grimes, Sherman, et al are available via trade.
5- The draft holds some promise, possibly another from a Michigan school (Mich State, rather than U of M this time). Possible for Trae Waynes to be another Ty Law? Ehhhh, possible I guess, but they'd have to trade up to have a shot at him.
6- The team has been gunning to get Brady his 4th and that box was checked. It will be interesting to see if the re-tooling becomes a bit more flexible now. Definitely too much talent for a re-build, but interesting to see if the moves indicate more of an eye to the long term plan (more than usual that is).
7- Everyone in this thread is passionate about the Pats, myself included. I respect everyone's opinion, and in some cases may amend my view in light of a well-reasoned argument. At the end of the day, we're all pulling for the same team and the same goal.
Be well, all.
edit: grammar
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Mar 11, 2015 15:47:10 GMT -5
The point you seem to be missing is that Belichick has no interest in spending 2 or more years in cap hell, he's pretty old too. He has decided not to sacrifice the future - you'll thank him later. (The other point you're missing is that it's not useful to full quote the message you're replying to and the message that message replied to.) The point you seem to be missing is that Bill might not be around very long after Brady is done. Please explain how the could be in cap hell for two or more years? If they moved on from Revis they could take the hit that year or spread it out over two years.
Also please stop acting like everything Bill has done has worked out. Overall he has done a great job, but he has made mistakes. Trading away Seymour was a mistake, he weakened a title contender to improve the teams long term outlook. When Brady was young and you had many years left with him that made sense. Chances are you have Brady for 3-4 years, then the rebuild begins. I would mortgage the future all day long right now to get 1 or if lucky maybe two more titles. I have no problem with this team being in cap hell 4 or 5 years from now. I want as many title as possible with our all time great QB. SO I WILL NOT IN ANY WAY BE THANKING BILL LATER!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't you think 4 might warrant at least a small "thank you"?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 11, 2015 16:25:10 GMT -5
The point you seem to be missing is that Bill might not be around very long after Brady is done. Please explain how the could be in cap hell for two or more years? If they moved on from Revis they could take the hit that year or spread it out over two years.
Also please stop acting like everything Bill has done has worked out. Overall he has done a great job, but he has made mistakes. Trading away Seymour was a mistake, he weakened a title contender to improve the teams long term outlook. When Brady was young and you had many years left with him that made sense. Chances are you have Brady for 3-4 years, then the rebuild begins. I would mortgage the future all day long right now to get 1 or if lucky maybe two more titles. I have no problem with this team being in cap hell 4 or 5 years from now. I want as many title as possible with our all time great QB. SO I WILL NOT IN ANY WAY BE THANKING BILL LATER!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fortunately, Belichick recognizes that he coaches the New England Patriots, not the Tom Bradys. Wins matter after Brady retires, and they matter after Belichick retires, too. It's just tough to commit yourself to a cornerback that, by his age 32 season, will still have $20m+ of dead cap hits coming his way. PS: most Patriots fans recognize the Seymour trade as a rousing success. In the four seasons following that trade, they made two Super Bowls (winning one) and made two other AFC Championship games, and it seems pretty unreasonable to think that they could have done any better than that. They don't have that success without an above-average starting left tackle making the rookie scale during those years.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 11, 2015 16:34:15 GMT -5
Last years defense was great in the second half of every game the last half of the the season (just about - don't go showing me week 9 stars if I'm Off a week) and through the playoffs. That's just the truth. It maybe wasn't an all-time great defense but last years defense was great. They were able to do things they won't be able to do this year that helped them dominate games in the second half. That's just the truth. The defense had a great six/seven week stretch, especially versus opposing passing games. The rest of the year (including two of their three playoff games), it was pretty mediocre. You can't just arbitrarily cut off half the season because it doesn't fit your narrative. Revis played in those games, too. You're better than that. You know how the patriots do things. If you want to just by the numbers, that doesn't fly in football. First BB layers things throughout the year so natural progression is the result. Secondly, a dominating run to end the year is not an arbitrary point. You're still trying to justify your lack of a belief in their defense.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 11, 2015 16:51:02 GMT -5
Do you really think Belichick doesn't care about the early-season games? There's also significant evidence to the contrary. Take 2013's defense, for example, which got significantly worse as the season went along: I also already mentioned how the defense was good but not great in two of their three playoff games.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 11, 2015 16:51:47 GMT -5
Also, having a healthy Gronk throughout the postseason was probably at least as important as having elite corners. No doubt about this, but doesn't lessen the importance of Revis. Revis, Gronk and Brady all irreplaceable. Everyone else, replaceable.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 11, 2015 16:54:09 GMT -5
1- Yes it was a mistake to not sign Revis, even at the dollars involved. Most offenses have 1 or 2 elite players or positions (in the case of "RB-by-committee" team, or offenses that favor the short passing game to the TE, etc). Contenders have 2 or sometimes 3. Revis is one of the handful of players who can erase one of those players/positions by himself. This allows the defense to scheme ("tilt the field", if you will) to remove the other 1 or 2. Opinions may differ, I would implore those who disagree and think we can simply scheme to cover for the lack of Revis to watch the AFC Championships against Baltimore and Denver. Note the difference before/after Talib was hurt. Each went from a back-and-forth affair to a mismatch against the Pats D almost immediately at that point. A few thoughts: - Revis did not always match up against the opponent's best receiver last season, more often marking the second-best receiver while the primary receiver was double-teamed. This happened with Calvin Johnson, Brandon Marshall, T.Y. Hilton, Jordy Nelson, etc. Now, there were times that he did match up against the number one guy (he shut down A.J. Green and Keenan Allen, for instance), but he was often matched up against the Reggie Waynes of the world. That's a matchup you can win with a lesser cornerback.
- There's also a reason he didn't match up with the primary receiver every time. He's still great, but he's slipped a little since his peak, and that trend is probably going to continue going forward. If you knew you were getting peak Revis, you'd happily pay that cost, but you don't know that for sure. Aging curves are real and they matter.
- Opportunity cost also matters. Every dollar you spend on Revis is a dollar you can't spend elsewhere, and this roster has a sneaky amount of holes (defensive line, interior offensive line, running back) and a bunch of guys they need to extend (Solder, Hightower, Jones, Collins).
|
|
|