|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 9, 2017 16:50:15 GMT -5
I think a coach wanting to win now could be a big factor. I just don't see top 5 picks like people are now reporting. At most a could see a second this year and a first next year, hope I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 9, 2017 16:57:59 GMT -5
I don't see a top 5 pick when just thinking about it on the surface but I see the possibility of one when I factor in everything else.
I have no doubt those teams will try to get the Pats to take a high second and sell it like it's a first but not sure Bill will do that. It's certainly possible but there used to be an argument that a second was maybe more valuable than a first but now they clearly aren't. No 5th Year option and the rookie wage scale makes first round picks real valuable.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 9, 2017 19:45:15 GMT -5
Teams aren't necessarily stupid. I do think teams will overpay for a perceived value, especially when a front office/coach is on a short leash. Also, football teams may overpay their own players for, essentially, their past performance and loyalty... despite their age and declining skills. Baseball free agent signings are evidence that teams sometimes bid against themselves (ARod and many others). Yes, the Pats have leverage. For now. With JimmyG, NE has plenty of variables in play. If NE keeps him and he becomes a free agent, can/would NE pay the going rate, especially if Brady is playing great and they have Brissett in their back pocket? Is Brissett a capable "next man up?" I have to wonder whether NE would pay the going rate for JG next year... while Brady is playing great. The cap is a real challenge. All that said, I could see NE having a serious talk with JG. If his upcoming contract can be constructed so as to create a very low cap hit for a couple years (while Brady plays out the string), then it may make sense to keep him as the heir apparent. I suspect he'll be flooded with high dollar free agent offers if he hits the open market. My guess is JG won't sign a new contract until he sees what's out there. If that's the case, all NE can get (if NE doesn't pay up) is a comp draft pick. But JG has leverage in that he can refuse to sign an extension if NE tries to deal him this year. So NE doesn't have tons of leverage... and that leverage diminishes as time goes by. Rather than just draft pics, maybe NE trades for a pick and a player to fill a need. The thing your missing is that Pat's could franchise Jimmy and then trade him. That's exactly what they did with Cassel. You most likely get less in a trade, but you also get another year of a great back up in case something might happen to Brady. So it's not like if you don't trade him now all leverage goes away. |
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Feb 9, 2017 20:29:06 GMT -5
I didn't think a top 5 pick was feasible either but why not? Just because it doesn't happen often and JG only has 1.5 games of tape.
If you look at all the information it makes sense as I stated before. I also said the propaganda gives the GM some ammunition to pull the trigger. Think there isn't a ton of pressure on San Fran and Cleveland to start winning, they need a QB to do it. Is their anyone in the draft that has greater potential than JG to be a very good one next year or the year after?
If you look at it from the perspective of a team that hasn't had a good one in a while and is always drafting top 10 because they suck. How many times have these teams taken a shot on a QB in the draft yet they still don't have one. Cleveland took Manziel #22 the same year JG came out, how did that workout?
I am now convinced the Pats will get Clevelands #12 at the least. Which is a major coop for the Pats! I know it sounds crazy but the guy is worth a top 5 pick based on all the information.
|
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Feb 9, 2017 22:55:48 GMT -5
I think a Garoppolo trade would be for a 2018 1st round pick plus a mid round pick in 2017. Bill has always been ok with waiting a year for the draft pick and some team with coaches/executives on the hot seat will see it as an opportunity to add the QB for 2017 without paying the cost until the following season (both in terms on the pick and salary). I wouldn't be shocked if they could get a first rounder + for this draft if two teams get into a bidding war.
|
|
|
|
Post by costpet on Feb 10, 2017 9:32:30 GMT -5
I don't know if everyone has seen it, but there is a great website on the Pats salary cap with each player listed. Very informative.
Patscap.com Miguel's Unofficial 2016 Patriots Salary Cap.
Check it out.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 10, 2017 9:40:00 GMT -5
I think a Garoppolo trade would be for a 2018 1st round pick plus a mid round pick in 2017. Bill has always been ok with waiting a year for the draft pick and some team with coaches/executives on the hot seat will see it as an opportunity to add the QB for 2017 without paying the cost until the following season (both in terms on the pick and salary). I wouldn't be shocked if they could get a first rounder + for this draft if two teams get into a bidding war. A lot of those trades for future picks are tied to performance of the player. I don't think the Pats are going to give a team a really good QB and a high draft pick and let them win games and take a lower first round pick. I mean Cleveland will probably suck next year regardless but they have 2 firsts this year; not sure they would want to trade next years first instead of the 12. |
|
|
|
Post by costpet on Feb 10, 2017 9:58:38 GMT -5
No team can win without a good quarterback. It's a quarterback driven league. So, if there's one available, you do what you can to get him. There are 4 teams that desperately need one. Without one, they're lucky to reach .500. Houston, San Francisco, Cleveland, Chicago. All should be in play. I doubt Pats would consider Houston, but the rest might start a bidding war. There are no sure fire QB's in the draft. I expect at least one of them to offer a 1 this year and maybe a 2 next year. The longer the Pats wait, the better the deal. Teams need to know who their quarterback will be next year. The sooner the better. So, keep your hats on. It's going to be fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Feb 10, 2017 12:34:09 GMT -5
I think Bennett, Sheard, Ryan and Harmon all go.
Hightower I think is perfect for the franchise tag. He gets hurt all the time and a long term deal could end up biting them like the Mayo deal. Its a big hit for one year but this seems like the perfect time to do a one year overpay rather than a 3-5 year overpay. I think the Pats will be letting other free agents go and mostly using the draft and cheaper vets to fill holes.
Branch, Develin, Floyd, Bolden, Long, Mingo and Blount are the type of guys they take a look at bringing back.
I think Vollmer and Amendola retire.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Feb 10, 2017 13:35:07 GMT -5
I hope the Patriots keep Amendola for another year. He's pretty clutch. The Patriots don't need him for a full season and they can piggy back him until the playoffs (as we just seen this year). I love this entire receiving core and I think it's the one part of the team that actually doesn't need to change at all. If I were the Patriots, I'd even bring back Floyd for cheap if he's willing to come back on a cheaper deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 10, 2017 15:47:52 GMT -5
I think a Garoppolo trade would be for a 2018 1st round pick plus a mid round pick in 2017. Bill has always been ok with waiting a year for the draft pick and some team with coaches/executives on the hot seat will see it as an opportunity to add the QB for 2017 without paying the cost until the following season (both in terms on the pick and salary). I wouldn't be shocked if they could get a first rounder + for this draft if two teams get into a bidding war. A lot of those trades for future picks are tied to performance of the player. I don't think the Pats are going to give a team a really good QB and a high draft pick and let them win games and take a lower first round pick. I mean Cleveland will probably suck next year regardless but they have 2 firsts this year; not sure they would want to trade next years first instead of the 12. We are going to take best deal. While Cleveland, has two 1st round picks, 49ers and Bears don't. So I could see that happening. I just don't think we get only a mid round pick this year. More like a 2nd or 3rd round pick. Teams rarely trade top 5 picks for Vets, nevermind a young player that has hardly played. I can see a team talking themselves into a deal like this because they think Jimmy makes them close to a .500 team. So next year's pick is around 16. So if your Pat's do you take Clevelands 12th this year or Bears 2nd this year and first next year? I'm taking the Bears deal. I will take the gamble that even with Jimmy they need a few years to increase talent to become a good team. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Feb 10, 2017 15:56:18 GMT -5
A lot of those trades for future picks are tied to performance of the player. I don't think the Pats are going to give a team a really good QB and a high draft pick and let them win games and take a lower first round pick. I mean Cleveland will probably suck next year regardless but they have 2 firsts this year; not sure they would want to trade next years first instead of the 12. We are going to take best deal. While Cleveland, has two 1st round picks, 49ers and Bears don't. So I could see that happening. I just don't think we get only a mid round pick this year. More like a 2nd or 3rd round pick. Teams rarely trade top 5 picks for Vets, nevermind a young player that has hardly played. I can see a team talking themselves into a deal like this because they think Jimmy makes them close to a .500 team. So next year's pick is around 16. So if your Pat's do you take Clevelands 12th this year or Bears 2nd this year and first next year? I'm taking the Bears deal. I will take the gamble that even with Jimmy they need a few years to increase talent to become a good team. Depends on what also Cleveland offers. I'd take the Cleveland deal if they took a 3rd rounder. Of course it depends if Bill thinks this draft has a lot of talent or not. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 10, 2017 19:07:15 GMT -5
Yes I'd take the bears 2nd this year and first next no problem.
Amendola is not retiring.
|
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Feb 10, 2017 19:31:52 GMT -5
Yes I'd take the bears 2nd this year and first next no problem. Amendola is not retiring. You are correct Amendola is not retiring, but he is playing for a lot less. How about Clevelands #12 and next years 3rd? |
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Feb 10, 2017 19:39:54 GMT -5
Yes I'd take the bears 2nd this year and first next no problem. Amendola is not retiring. You are correct Amendola is not retiring, but he is playing for a lot less. Question is do they bring back Floyd also? If so that is a very good group but crowded WR group. I like Floyd, Pats haven't had a WR since Moss with that size, speed and potential. How about Clevelands #12 and next years 3rd? Pats would rather deal him to the NFC but it would be hard to pass up. Could they get a 2 from them next yr to go with the 12? |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 11, 2017 8:08:35 GMT -5
I'd take Just the 12 and be happy... also Cleveland isn't a team you worry about trading him to even tho its in conference.... Houston would be tho
|
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Feb 11, 2017 8:15:19 GMT -5
Yeah I am getting greedy about it based on all the noise.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 11, 2017 9:44:01 GMT -5
The Patriots spent the least amount of money in football last year. The gap between them and 31 was 30 million dollars. That's enormous... historically the Patriots do spend money. They are going to spend a lot of money this offseason.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 11, 2017 11:31:13 GMT -5
So I was just looking at the Rams trade up of Goff. They dealt 2 firsts, 2 seconds and 2 3rds for Goff, a 4th and a 6th... Goff was seen as a red shirt rookie year developmental QB... wasn't supposed to play at all this year.
That tells me he was just a good prospect and not a ready to play sure thing like an Andrew Luck...
The more I think on it I see no way Jimmy isn't worth a first rd pick. Giving up one first for him with no long term financial obligation, if you believe in him is a steal. If it doesn't work, you easily move on. If it does you pay him. Shannahan had him rated the second best QB in his class behind Carr and all he's done is improved his stock since then... I wouldn't be surprised to see them ship the second pick for him. Not predicting they will but with 80m in cap space, no QB plus a high second still, it's not like you're setting the franchise back much. It's easy to talk yourself into that being a worth while gamble.
I just hope this happens well before the draft so I can start dreaming on who they might take.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,860
|
Post by wcp3 on Feb 11, 2017 12:08:04 GMT -5
So I was just looking at the Rams trade up of Goff. They dealt 2 firsts, 2 seconds and 2 3rds for Goff, a 4th and a 6th... Goff was seen as a red shirt rookie year developmental QB... wasn't supposed to play at all this year. That tells me he was just a good prospect and not a ready to play sure thing like an Andrew Luck... The more I think on it I see no way Jimmy isn't worth a first rd pick. Giving up one first for him with no long term financial obligation, if you believe in him is a steal. If it doesn't work, you easily move on. If it does you pay him. Shannahan had him rated the second best QB in his class behind Carr and all he's done is improved his stock since then... I wouldn't be surprised to see them ship the second pick for him. Not predicting they will but with 80m in cap space, no QB plus a high second still, it's not like you're setting the franchise back much. It's easy to talk yourself into that being a worth while gamble. I just hope this happens well before the draft so I can start dreaming on who they might take. For some reason, the right to drafting a complete unknown with plenty of upside is considered to have more value than a QB with a marginal sample size and plenty of upside. It makes you wonder how so many organizations can't seem to get themselves outta the gutter... But I tend to agree - two picks including a 1st seems like a reasonable package for Jimmy G. The Pats have plenty of leverage here, so I doubt they'll be in a rush to trade him without getting great value in return. |
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Feb 11, 2017 12:32:36 GMT -5
So I was just looking at the Rams trade up of Goff. They dealt 2 firsts, 2 seconds and 2 3rds for Goff, a 4th and a 6th... Goff was seen as a red shirt rookie year developmental QB... wasn't supposed to play at all this year. That tells me he was just a good prospect and not a ready to play sure thing like an Andrew Luck... The more I think on it I see no way Jimmy isn't worth a first rd pick. Giving up one first for him with no long term financial obligation, if you believe in him is a steal. If it doesn't work, you easily move on. If it does you pay him. Shannahan had him rated the second best QB in his class behind Carr and all he's done is improved his stock since then... I wouldn't be surprised to see them ship the second pick for him. Not predicting they will but with 80m in cap space, no QB plus a high second still, it's not like you're setting the franchise back much. It's easy to talk yourself into that being a worth while gamble. I just hope this happens well before the draft so I can start dreaming on who they might take. It makes you wonder how so many organizations can't seem to get themselves outta the gutter... But I tend to agree - two picks including a 1st seems like a reasonable package for Jimmy G. The Pats have plenty of leverage here, so I doubt they'll be in a rush to trade him without getting great value in return. I've always wondered the same thing. |
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Feb 11, 2017 13:09:54 GMT -5
Welcome to the party! I came to the same conclusion after wasting hours reading and thinking about it. Trades like the Goff trade and many others for top QB prospects thru the years are examples of teams paying a big price in draft picks to acquire one. Then there is the fact that teams also over reach every year increasing the odds of failure. The reason I keep mentioning the current reports giving GM's ammunition and confidence to pull the trigger is because the trades are usually for other picks not players currently in the league, particularly players with minimum experience. Giving up a ransom of picks for JG makes sense imo but will be hard for a GM to justify, especially if he happens to fail.
Not long ago I would have been ecstatic about the Browns #12 and I guess I still would be but I believe now the price will be higher.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 11, 2017 14:18:25 GMT -5
The short answer is that draft picks (even high first-round draft picks) come with four years of cheap team control (plus a fifth-year option for first rounders). Garoppolo comes with one year of team control. Plus, it's not like Garoppolo has that much NFL experience. He has all of 94 professional passing attempts, only 59 of which have come in competitive game situations.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 11, 2017 15:35:25 GMT -5
Past trades for young QBs
Cutler, Denver got Orton, 2 first round picks(#18) and if I remember right a mid 20s pick, a third rounder and had to send Bears a 5th rounder.
Matt Schaub- Falcons switched 1st round pick #10 to #8 and got two top half of 2nd round picks
Cassel - Pat's got a high 2nd round pick.
I think we should get more than the teams got in Cassel and Schaub trades, but you guys are thinking we get a lot more than what Denver got for Cutler. If you look at a draft chart that assigns points to picks, even the Cutler trade isn't equal to a top 5 pick. You can look at Cutler now and laugh but at the time he was seen as one of the best young QBs in game. It was mind blowing that Denver would trade him.
You can also look at Sam Bradford trade, a first and fourth round pick that was thought to be late 20s in each round.
That's why I think the top 5 picks are a pipedream and even Clevelands #12 pick would take a bid bidding war to get. That's why I think any trade starts with a high second this year and another 2nd next year, maybe a 1st if those teams really want him.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 11, 2017 16:51:46 GMT -5
The short answer is that draft picks (even high first-round draft picks) come with four years of cheap team control (plus a fifth-year option for first rounders). Garoppolo comes with one year of team control. Plus, it's not like Garoppolo has that much NFL experience. He has all of 94 professional passing attempts, only 59 of which have come in competitive game situations. Which is why I don't expect 2 picks in each of the first 3 rounds but one first regardless of how high is reasonable. It certainly depends on your evaluation |
|
