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.
|
Post by digit on Mar 27, 2017 19:30:07 GMT -5
Considering the Patriots have signed Chris Hogan, Wes Welker, and Emmanuel Sanders as restricted free agents, I imagine Belichick has been already been through each potential outcome of a restricted free agent, and that the Patriots are not 'most teams'.
(Laveranues Coles was the last one lost as a restricted free agent for a first round pick, if that's relevant at all.)
The rub here you ask is 'if they want anything for him'.
Put it this way. What if they actually -do- want to keep him?
see, here's the scenario:
They can keep a pro bowl corner for 4 million and let him go in a year -or- franchise tag him, keep him for another year, and let him go after that (in which they would have already used up his prime years), or they can hold tight for any pick.
Do you really see any downside in just keeping him and letting him go after using up his prime years here? Is that worth the 32nd pick? Seems like it to me. The only reason NOT to would be to keep an unhappy Butler, but that's also a Butler who would be motivated to stay healthy and play hard to get his big payday.
Is that worth the 32nd pick? Well, they already decided Cooks was worth the 32nd pick for two years of control. Flip that on its head. Is keeping Butler for at least two more years worth sacrificing the 32nd pick?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 27, 2017 19:33:43 GMT -5
Last time a team gave up a first round pick for a restricted free agent was 2003, WR Cole to Washington from Jets. It just barely happens and that's the point. You can't just sit back and let a team sign him if you want to trade him. You have to engage in trade talks.
As to the whole smoke thing, I guess you missed the word "usually"
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 27, 2017 19:42:28 GMT -5
umass you are argumentative with everyone on hear regularly, no problem it is just your style. But it does take a little getting used to. That's certainly not what I want. I value most posters opinions greatly. Just our opinions differ and we debate that.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 27, 2017 19:43:51 GMT -5
If it were up to me I would either keep him on the tender amount or make the Saints sign him and decide if you want to match the contract. I would not trade him.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 27, 2017 19:47:03 GMT -5
Considering the Patriots have signed Chris Hogan, Wes Welker, and Emmanuel Sanders as restricted free agents, I imagine Belichick has been already been through each potential outcome of a restricted free agent, and that the Patriots are not 'most teams'. (Laveranues Coles was the last one lost as a restricted free agent for a first round pick, if that's relevant at all.) The rub here you ask is 'if they want anything for him'. Put it this way. What if they actually -do- want to keep him? see, here's the scenario: They can keep a pro bowl corner for 4 million and let him go in a year -or- franchise tag him, keep him for another year, and let him go after that (in which they would have already used up his prime years), or they can hold tight for any pick. Do you really see any downside in just keeping him and letting him go after using up his prime years here? Is that worth the 32nd pick? Seems like it to me. The only reason NOT to would be to keep an unhappy Butler, but that's also a Butler who would be motivated to stay healthy and play hard to get his big payday. Is that worth the 32nd pick? Well, they already decided Cooks was worth the 32nd pick for two years of control. Flip that on its head. Is keeping Butler for at least two more years worth sacrificing the 32nd pick? I would keep him, I'm on record saying just that. I just feel the Patriots don't seem to feel that way. I would trade Jimmy. If they want to keep him it's simple, they just keep him. He'll sign his tender at some point and I don't think any team signs him to offer sheet.
|
|
|
Post by digit on Mar 27, 2017 20:05:20 GMT -5
I think that actually seems like what's gonna happen, if what Bob Kraft said today is any indication, but the best thing is, I think, that the Patriots have a lot of flexibility to go any which way they want with any offer for either Butler or Garoppolo now, and they'll just go with whatever they like best!
And that's what I think is great about all this. They've given themselves a lot of room to do anything.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Mar 28, 2017 6:52:01 GMT -5
I think that actually seems like what's gonna happen, if what Bob Kraft said today is any indication, but the best thing is, I think, that the Patriots have a lot of flexibility to go any which way they want with any offer for either Butler or Garoppolo now, and they'll just go with whatever they like best! And that's what I think is great about all this. They've given themselves a lot of room to do anything. Totally true, once again BB has put the Pats in a great situation here. All along I have wanted to keep Brown and trade JG for at a minimum of the Cleveland #12. And I am beginning to think it is going to happen and the Pats ill get even more than the #12. With Butler and Gilmore in the secondary and the addition of Cooks along with the other trades, the Pats are looking unbeatable. The rest of the league must be feeling sick to their stomaches.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 28, 2017 8:07:56 GMT -5
I still don't think they will trade Jimmy but nothing will surprise me, other than them trading him for a package that doesn't include a good first rd pick.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Mar 28, 2017 14:59:22 GMT -5
I still don't think they will trade Jimmy but nothing will surprise me, other than them trading him for a package that doesn't include a good first rd pick. I know, we have disagreed on this for a month or so. It has been discussed many times we just have a different view on the next few years.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 28, 2017 15:48:58 GMT -5
If there's any truth to the reports saying Brown's are willing to offer #12 this year and 2-3 second round picks over next two years. I just don't see how you don't trade him.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 28, 2017 15:54:17 GMT -5
I still don't think they will trade Jimmy but nothing will surprise me, other than them trading him for a package that doesn't include a good first rd pick. I know, we have disagreed on this for a month or so. It has been discussed many times we just have a different view on the next few years. This was just my expectation on what they will do. I've already explained why I'm playing both sides of this fence. I argue the opposite side here to provide the counter point that I can see being logical.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 28, 2017 15:59:42 GMT -5
If there's any truth to the reports saying Brown's are willing to offer #12 this year and 2-3 second round picks over next two years. I just don't see how you don't trade him. Yea those are rumors as is all of it. But the simple argument of why Bill wouldn't is because he's obsessed with winning, is not convinced that Brissett is the next guy just yet, thinks Jimmy can be and knows the QB is the most important position on the field so no draft picks are worth giving up that QB security. I know franchising a backup QB is "crazy" but there is one GM in the league that just doesn't give a F#[< and he happens to work in Foxboro. Anyways I know the argument for taking that package and I agree with it but I agree with the alternative too.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 28, 2017 16:00:27 GMT -5
I don't know if I should say I agree with both sides or understand both sides.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 28, 2017 16:05:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 28, 2017 16:28:42 GMT -5
If there's any truth to the reports saying Brown's are willing to offer #12 this year and 2-3 second round picks over next two years. I just don't see how you don't trade him. Yea those are rumors as is all of it. But the simple argument of why Bill wouldn't is because he's obsessed with winning, is not convinced that Brissett is the next guy just yet, thinks Jimmy can be and knows the QB is the most important position on the field so no draft picks are worth giving up that QB security. I know franchising a backup QB is "crazy" but there is one GM in the league that just doesn't give a F#[< and he happens to work in Foxboro. Anyways I know the argument for taking that package and I agree with it but I agree with the alternative too. Cleveland's coach just told ESPN that #1 pick is off the table for a QB, but that #12 could be traded for a QB. So that pick is in play per their coach. So that's not a rumor anymore. I understand your argument and it makes sense. Brady's 40 and Jimmy's a good QB. But we have the best QB of all time, still playing great. In my mind those picks are going to help you win more over the next couple years. Only way Jimmy helps you is if Brady gets injured. While Jimmy most likely gives you best chance to win next year if that happens, your shot at a title is still very low. Give Brady a better chance at a title. That's your best bet at getting another title, Brady and those picks over Brady/Jimmy.
|
|
|
Post by digit on Mar 28, 2017 16:55:57 GMT -5
I know franchising a backup QB is "crazy" but there is one GM in the league that just doesn't give a F#[< and he happens to work in Foxboro. Anyways I know the argument for taking that package and I agree with it but I agree with the alternative too. That GM who doesn't give a A*^@&^ might also be the only GM with the balls to do something completely unexpected and unrumored and trade Tom Brady. If his true objective is to build something that actually lasts, then that is the move he should be pulling, if he feels Garoppolo is a good enough QB to replace Brady with. I can see Garoppolo being traded, but I can also, given Tom's age, see Belichick being the one GM in the NFL who would not give a *&%@&^@! about the media and just trade Brady for even better picks and just keep going with Garoppolo. And you know, I could also see Belichick simply deciding that one year of Garoppolo at a very cheap year -and- franchising him another year would be worthwhile to live with to make sure he's safe if Brady goes down. I think that's why Belichick basically doesn't have to do a dang thing if he doesn't want to unless the Browns -really- pay up that it's worth riding with Brissett as a backup. But dang, I -could- see him completely zagging and trading Brady out of nowhere to, say, San Francisco.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 28, 2017 18:14:22 GMT -5
The idea that the Patriots and the Saints could be holding illicit talks about a Butler trade before he's signed his tender: impossible, how dare you even suggest that, too speculative, means "less than nothing."
The idea that the Patriots might consider trading Tom Brady, arguably the best football player of all time coming off an MVP-caliber season and on a ludicrously team-friendly contract: yeah, I could see it.
|
|
|
Post by digit on Mar 28, 2017 18:34:58 GMT -5
Yeah, good point. Won't happen. Overthinking the whole 'out of nowhere' thing.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 28, 2017 21:46:31 GMT -5
The idea that the Patriots and the Saints could be holding illicit talks about a Butler trade before he's signed his tender: impossible, how dare you even suggest that, too speculative, means "less than nothing." The idea that the Patriots might consider trading Tom Brady, arguably the best football player of all time coming off an MVP-caliber season and on a ludicrously team-friendly contract: yeah, I could see it. I see that the brain eating virus that infects much of the trade proposal subforum has spread to this thread.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 29, 2017 7:04:08 GMT -5
I think people are letting their emotions get in the way of their thinking if they believe there is no chance Brady plays for another franchise. Even he knows that's a distinct possibility. If you look back at the history of the NFL two things are clear:
1. No NFL QB has had more than one great season 40 or older EVER.
2. A lot of great players even QBs who are the faces of their franchises play for another team at the end of their careers. See Manning, Farve and Montana.
Great players usually take longer to accept their skills are declining and not coming back. It seems like everyone here has this confidence that Brady has 3-5 years left in him and he's going to be very good to great that entire time and then the moment things start to slip he's going to know and walk away before it gets too bad.
I can't say what is going to happen with Brady, maybe that scenario plays out but the only reason to have confidence in such a scenario is heavily rooted in blind optimism.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 29, 2017 7:35:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 29, 2017 7:47:39 GMT -5
You're letting your love for Jimmy cloud your judgement. The greatest QB ever playing for Patriots for his whole career has major value to the franchise.
Tom Brady has done things other greats have never done his entire career. I will never bet against Brady. He also takes care of his body in a way few do. His diet is textbook and he's in great shape. He also has no nagging injury problems.
Tom Brady will not be traded and he will not play for another team. It's just not going to happen. Few things are certain in Sports, Tom Brady not being traded is one of them! Manning, Farve and Montana situations were very different. Manning and Montana suffered major injuries. Farve while great in his last season had already started to decline. His two prior years were not good. Also the QBs that replaced them were a HOF QB, a guy on his way to HOF and the highest rated QB prospect since Manning. I really like Jimmy, I see a young Romo type QB. Thing is that's not close to a Young, Rodgers and Luck.
You have to remember Kraft would have to sign off on this and he never will. He looks at Brady like he's his son. Brady is the guy that won him 5 titles and made Kraft one of the most powerful NFL owners.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 29, 2017 7:49:22 GMT -5
I think people are letting their emotions get in the way of their thinking if they believe there is no chance Brady plays for another franchise. Even he knows that's a distinct possibility. If you look back at the history of the NFL two things are clear: 1. No NFL QB has had more than one great season 40 or older EVER. 2. A lot of great players even QBs who are the faces of their franchises play for another team at the end of their careers. See Manning, Farve and Montana. Great players usually take longer to accept their skills are declining and not coming back. It seems like everyone here has this confidence that Brady has 3-5 years left in him and he's going to be very good to great that entire time and then the moment things start to slip he's going to know and walk away before it gets too bad. I can't say what is going to happen with Brady, maybe that scenario plays out but the only reason to have confidence in such a scenario is heavily rooted in blind optimism. You've already been saying this for a few years now, haven't you? Are you going to keep saying it for another 6-7 years?
|
|
|
Post by digit on Mar 29, 2017 8:14:36 GMT -5
Eh... don't get me wrong, I would love to see Brady play his entire career for the Patriots. It's just that it's such a rare situation under Bill Belichick... I think, offhand, only Tedy Bruschi and Troy Brown played their entire careers as Patriots under him.
Belichick just seems to, however, not like being caught without depth, and trading Garoppolo would seem to do that, since I'm not terribly sure Brissett is ready. If Garoppolo were to be traded, I'd think, it'd depend on Belichick's assessment of Brady -and- Brissett's being able to hold down the next few years.
On the other hand, if you keep Garoppolo (and that would be highly dependant on whether they believe he -is- a Super-Bowl caliber QB), you could keep things going longer than what Brady would give you, in which case, you cannot keep Brady because the time window for keeping Garoppolo is narrowing. And to be frank, Belichick is the one person out there who would trade Brady without concern for the wrath of fans.
Watching this QB picture play out over the next few months (or maybe another year) is gonna be interesting as heck.
My guess here is that unless the Patriots are -really- overwhelmed by the offer for Garoppolo, they'll hold on to him until at least once they see how Brissett does in training camp. And if they -do- trade Garoppolo, they'll probably use another high pick on a QB, and shift the 'Brady heir' discussion a few more years, rather than go all-in.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Mar 29, 2017 8:17:08 GMT -5
The thing that is different than anyone before Brady is that I have watched him from the beginning and he is a better athlete now than when he was in his 20's. I see it in his play and he believes it to be true based on his dedication to diet and preparation. It has also been reported that he has improved each of the last 3 years when tested for speed and agility similar to the combine type tests done by the Pats. So taking that into consideration along with his desire to keep playing my position on JG is he will be traded. And it is not just about paying JG, he wants to play, he doesn't want to back TB up indefinitely waiting for an injury. BB is just playing poker waiting for someone to go all in. Something that concerns me a little bit about JG also is his durability. That wasn't a very big hit he took that sidelined him or at least it didn't seem like it at the time.
|
|
|