|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 26, 2017 8:24:43 GMT -5
Yea that might be the one guy they couldn’t afford to be without.... we’ll see.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 26, 2017 14:09:02 GMT -5
No Hightower, no Edelman. Brady is going to have to pull a rabit out of his butt if he wants a title this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 26, 2017 15:22:47 GMT -5
Keeping Harris paid off. This is a big blow, but Van Noy can now play his role. He has impressed me this year. Do they play Flowers as second LB in passing downs or go get a guy? Langi could have been that player, but he got injured.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Oct 26, 2017 16:10:42 GMT -5
Sign Ayers, I suppose. See what is available in trade? Both?
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 26, 2017 19:27:28 GMT -5
I really liked Ayers a couple years ago
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Oct 26, 2017 20:08:39 GMT -5
Doubt he can be that guy again but his availability and knowledge of the system may be an advantage. Wouldn't have to give up assets (which you could use on another front 7 guy).
I may be grasping.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Oct 30, 2017 19:48:30 GMT -5
Well, I certainly did not see them trading Garappolo. And I can't say that the 2nd round pick screams "win now" either. Granted it should be a really good 2nd round pick (which the Patriots seem to love over the years), but now we're really screwed if Brady has to miss any time.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 30, 2017 19:52:23 GMT -5
I guess the difference in value between what they could have got before the season was probably worth the difference between what they got now minus the certainty that Brady wouldn't get hurt in the first 8 games. (and that they're trading with an 0-8 team)
|
|
|
|
Post by prangerx on Oct 30, 2017 21:09:00 GMT -5
Well, I certainly did not see them trading Garappolo. And I can't say that the 2nd round pick screams "win now" either. Granted it should be a really good 2nd round pick (which the Patriots seem to love over the years), but now we're really screwed if Brady has to miss any time. But if Grappolo is any good the niners could win more games. The whole thing seems like a missmanagement off an assett to me. |
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Oct 30, 2017 21:23:25 GMT -5
I can't remember if I said this before the season, or even early this year, but I always thought that the Pats could have got a better(?) pick for Jimmy before this year's draft.
Hindsight is 20/20, and this thought sounds even more ridiculous at this point in the season, but I really wanted Watson to back up Brady for a year or two before taking over NE.
I know Watson went 12th overall, but I still dream about a world in which we had him riding the bench right now, under the best QB ever. It would have taken some work to get up to that pick, but imagine where the Pats would be sitting right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Oct 30, 2017 22:45:33 GMT -5
The problem with making a trade before the draft is that you would've lost the highest first rounder you acquired due to the deflategate punishment.
|
|
|
|
Post by marrcus on Oct 30, 2017 23:21:15 GMT -5
IMO BB liked Garappolo's talent but not his toughness. I don't think they were convinced he could play through inj.
They have a QB problem now? And I doubt they can get a top guy with that #2 like they got with Jimmy?
This season IDK? At the rate he's getting hit Tom doesn't last through the second half. He holds too long without his prime receivers.
Big risk all around...2017 and beyond.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Oct 30, 2017 23:31:28 GMT -5
The problem with making a trade before the draft is that you would've lost the highest first rounder you acquired due to the deflategate punishment. That was the 2016 draft, not the 2017 draft. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 31, 2017 1:22:27 GMT -5
I don't get this. Were the reports wrong? Did they change their mind? I need to know what the Browns offered before the draft.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 31, 2017 4:02:02 GMT -5
Win for me. Jimmy G probably isn't that good.
Brady never gets injured, except for that one fluke season. He's superman in my eyes.
|
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Oct 31, 2017 4:15:20 GMT -5
I actually trust that Schefter knows what he is talking about and has the inside scoop, he is the one who said they were not trading him regardless of the package. Now he is the one saying the Pats did want to keep him but contract negotiations were not going well. If that is the case then this is a big mistake on BBs part.
The timing is terrible, the compensation isn't what it could have been and it was not well thought out if they didn't realize JG was going to want a big contract. No one is perfect and BB proves it here. Oh well coach go lead the Pats to another SB win and all is well, in BB we trust.
|
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Oct 31, 2017 4:24:11 GMT -5
Win for me. Jimmy G probably isn't that good. Brady never gets injured, except for that one fluke season. He's superman in my eyes. Hope this is the case but it is a big gamble to not have a back up QB half way thru the season. In fact I don't think I have ever seen it before on any team. Yes I am sure it has happened based on jnjuries but to do it intentionally? Risky at best, foolhardy if Brady goes down. Then again it could be a case where the team only considers winning a SB a worthy season and anything else just doesn't matter. If they feel Brady goes down and the chances of winning are gone so it doesn't matter, well I just don't know. Tough one to figure out. |
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Oct 31, 2017 5:44:23 GMT -5
Ok so upon reading more we can eliminate the back up QB problem with Hoyer. I think we can all agree that the Pats aren't going to win a SB with him at the helm but at least they have someone who can fill the position.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 31, 2017 6:41:15 GMT -5
Maybe the team determined that they could not possibly win the SB without Brady. That looks likely to be the case.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 31, 2017 7:56:36 GMT -5
Maybe the team determined that they could not possibly win the SB without Brady. That looks likely to be the case. Sure, but QBs don't always get injured for the rest of the season. If Brady gets hurt and misses, say, three or four weeks, you want a backup that can win as many of those games as possible and keep you in the playoff race until Brady returns. It's a calculated gamble on Belichick's part. I also think it suggests that the offers they received for Garoppolo during the offseason were less impressive than was speculated by the fan base. |
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Oct 31, 2017 8:44:52 GMT -5
Maybe the team determined that they could not possibly win the SB without Brady. That looks likely to be the case. I absolutely agree with you....IF they traded Garappolo for an asset that helps us win this year. Trading him for a draft pick seems like a lateral move in what should be a "win at all costs" year. |
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Oct 31, 2017 12:00:46 GMT -5
The problem with making a trade before the draft is that you would've lost the highest first rounder you acquired due to the deflategate punishment. That was the 2016 draft, not the 2017 draft. You're right, it was the 4th round pick they were losing in this past draft. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 31, 2017 12:12:35 GMT -5
I said this all before, I just never understood how they could pay both guys. Jimmy was going to want to play, not sit on the bench. So unless you were willing to franchise him, this always seemed likely. They were never going to get rid of Brady, it just wasn't going to happen.
So if the reports were right we just cost ourselves a crap load. Reports were saying Browns second first round pick and likely another 2nd round pick were on the table. The Browns wanted Jimmy bad, yet we passed. Wow. That's like getting 20 cents on the dollar for nothing. If you believed you win nothing without Brady, why didn't you trade Jimmy before draft? This really seems like Bill underestimated how much QBs cost and knew the team couldn't afford to franchise Jimmy without handicapping the team in Brady's final years. This might be Bill's biggest mistake. I really don't get it, this always seemed like what was going to happen. For this price I would just have kepted Jimmy incase we win another title and Brady walks away. If not franchise him and trade him. I bet you still get a 2nd round pick, maybe just a little lower.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Oct 31, 2017 12:34:42 GMT -5
I’m pretty sure this team is a lot worse especially defensively than they expected. They probably felt coming into the season the team was so good they could win with Jimmy. At least that’s entirely possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Oct 31, 2017 13:23:20 GMT -5
The whole "they don't think they can with Jimmy if Brady goes down" logic seems very farfetched and does not vibe at all with the way Belichick operates. No need to overanalyze this. We've said all along that if they can't find a way to keep Garoppolo and Brady on the same roster beyond this year, and that Brady looks good to continue his career beyond 2018, then Garoppolo would be traded. Could the return have been better if they traded him before this season? There are some rumors suggesting 'no,' but I tend to think if they pushed him hard and created a bidding war between couple of teams, I could imagine a slightly better return. That said, don't discount the Brian Hoyer's involvement here. If (really, when) the Pats sign Hoyer, this will look like more a Garoppolo for a top-end 2nd round pick PLUS Hoyer. I'm sure that factored into Bill's decision considerably.
|
|
