What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Indefinite New England Patriots Thread (4 Viewers)

Anarchy99 said:
The problem with insurance is they only cover career ending injuries. They don't cover list wages or decreases in contract value if say he tore his ACL but could play down the road. 
Click to expand...
Exactly. You'd have to never play another down to cash out one of those policies. I'm not sure I've ever heard of a player going into FA who got hurt and exercised a claim and never played again. I'm sure they have some riders where you can pay out the nose to cover a lot season or whatever, but certainly it seems like a very good business for the insurance companies. (Surprise, surprise.)

 
Bossman said:
exactly... a first round pick for a one year rental. Pretty dumb actually.

Saints would be smart to use the draft pick and sign Butler as a UFA next offseason.
Click to expand...
Well the whole basis of this scenario is that NO and Butler are working to negotiate long-term contract. They agree to terms on handshake deal, Butler signs tender, Pats and NO make deal on their own previously agreed-upon trade structure. 

I'm with @Boston and would prefer to have Butler/Gilmore for one year to max out chances of repeat. 

 
Anarchy99 said:
Except Butler wouldn't be a one year rental. NOS would sign him to a multi-year deal in order to acquire him. And there's no guarantee that if they waited for Butler to be an UFA that they wouldn't be outbid (and the salary would likely be much higher than the deal they would have negotiated now).
Click to expand...
... so NO would be giving up the 1.32 for the right to sign Butler to a contract.

This is like when the Red Sox paid $51m for the right to negotiate a contract with Dice-K.

It's just dumb business ... unless you don't value a 1st round draft pick.

This is likely why players with 1st round tenders never fetch a 1st round pick.

 
Bossman said:
... so NO would be giving up the 1.32 for the right to sign Butler to a contract.

This is like when the Red Sox paid $51m for the right to negotiate a contract with Dice-K.

It's just dumb business ... unless you don't value a 1st round draft pick.

This is likely why players with 1st round tenders never fetch a 1st round pick.
Click to expand...
Teams don't extend offers to RFA's because they have to pay a top of the money salary and guaranteed money AND lose their first round pick. 

If the Saints trade for Butler, there will be a new contract that will already be agreed upon and go into effect as soon as the trade is approved by the league. No team would trade away a first round pick and then hope they can sign a player. There likely already is a contract for Butler already agreed upon between him an the Saints. That's what he's supposed to be doing now . . . negotiating with other teams.

 
Anarchy99 said:
Teams don't extend offers to RFA's because they have to pay a top of the money salary and guaranteed money AND lose their first round pick. 

If the Saints trade for Butler, there will be a new contract that will already be agreed upon and go into effect as soon as the trade is approved by the league. No team would trade away a first round pick and then hope they can sign a player. There likely already is a contract for Butler already agreed upon between him an the Saints. That's what he's supposed to be doing now . . . negotiating with other teams.
Click to expand...
Potayto, Potahto ... so the MLB scenario the team negotiates the players contract after payment, and this scenario the team negotiates the contract before payment.

Either way the Saints are paying a 1st for the right to sign him to a contract. Pretty dumb when you could keep your 1st rd pick and sign a free agent like Stephon Gilmore.

 
We'll see how things play out, but paying $13 million a year for Gilmore seems just as curious a move. He doesn't strike me as a Top 3 or Top 5 corner, 

They already had Butler, who they knew fit their system, and they could have just extended him and who I think is a better player. 

You could also say the same think about Cooks. Why trade your first round pick to only have him for two years. NE could have waited it out and paid him top dollar as a free agent instead. 

 
Anarchy99 said:
We'll see how things play out, but paying $13 million a year for Gilmore seems just as curious a move. He doesn't strike me as a Top 3 or Top 5 corner, 

They already had Butler, who they knew fit their system, and they could have just extended him and who I think is a better player. 

You could also say the same think about Cooks. Why trade your first round pick to only have him for two years. NE could have waited it out and paid him top dollar as a free agent instead. 
Click to expand...
The Cooks trade was certainly an odd move for Belichick ... but it makes a little more sense having control of a player for two seasons, and a 3rd if they consider him tag worthy, ... vs trading for a player with one (or zero) years on his contract.

If you figure the rookie WR at 1.32 might be on the bench for his first year and not likely to contribute with Edleman, Hogan, and Mitchell ahead of him on the depth chart ...

that would give NE 3 years of production from the 1.32 rookie, 2018, 19, 20 .... vs. 2 years of Cooks, 2017, 18.

and the way NE drafts WR's :X  .... seems a much safer bet to go with the proven player and win now.

 
Maybe Belichick realized that no one would be willing to give up their 1st rd pick for Butler and he was content to let this play itself out.

With the intention of keeping Butler all along. Seems to me that if NE didn't want Butler he would have been traded to the NOS by now.

... and there's nothing saying that NE doesn't match whatever offer Butler signs.

The more I ponder this, and the longer this lingers, the more I'm realizing that Butler will be back for 2017.

 
Anarchy99 said:
You could also say the same think about Cooks. Why trade your first round pick to only have him for two years. NE could have waited it out and paid him top dollar as a free agent instead. 
Click to expand...
Eh I don't think it's the same thing. With Cooks,  you are getting two years of a surefire top tier WR that BB has seen up close and personal in camps - ironically, watching him undress Butler - who you then have the inside track to extend.

Not only is there real opportunity cost in waiting out those two years - Brady could be out of the league in 2019 - but, even if you covet Cooks and will open up the Kraft checkbook, you are now bidding against 30 other teams and aren't guaranteed to get him.

I think giving up 1.32 for at a minimum two years of a young proven WR is way different than giving up a first for a 27 yo CB who will is in his prime now and you'll likely only get one contract out of.

With Cooks, they have him until he's 25, then can sign him to a 4-5 year deal while he is still in his prime. No brainer. Butler could be done by the end of his first big contract at 31-32. Look at Revis.

 
The Patriots are very unlikely to sign Cooks to a five year $60 or $70 million contract, which is what it will take to keep him. 

He's decent addition while the price is low. They get him for $1.5 million for this year and $8 million and change with the fifth year rookie option in 2018. If they can't work out a deal, the franchise tag for receivers with be over $17 million in 2019. 

NE has not chosen to pay skill position players a ton of money, so IMO it would be unlikely that Cooks plays more than two years for the Pats unless he takes a decent sized discount beyond that. 

Since Welker left, NE has won two SB's paying their WR / RE / TE about as little as possible. The only receiving threat to get decent money was Gronk, and even he is underpaid given current market pricing. 

Paying top dollar for Cooks would not fit their M.O. For the past 17 years, but maybe they will start to pay guys at the going rate. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99 said:
The Patriots are very unlikely to sign Cooks to a five year $60 or $70 million contract, which is what it will take to keep him. 

He's decent addition while the price is low. They get him for $1.5 million for this year and $8 million and change with the fifth year rookie option in 2018. If they can't work out a deal, the franchise tag for receivers with be over $17 million in 2019. 

NE has not chosen to pay skill position players a ton of money, so IMO it would be unlikely that Cooks plays more than two years for the Pats unless he takes a decent sized discount beyond that. 

Since Welker left, NE has won two SB's paying their WR / RE / TE about as little as possible. The only receiving threat to get decent money was Gronk, and even he is underpaid given current market pricing. 

Paying top dollar for Cooks would not fit their M.O. For the past 17 years, but maybe they will start to pay guys at the going rate. 
Click to expand...
I in two years they are more likely swap salaries to pay a 25-26 yo Cooks and let Gronk walk. 

 
Gronk, who will be 28 in a few weeks, is signed for three more years and is due $9.75 million the last year.  If he can still walk at that point, he would be a free agent heading into his age 32 season. 

That's still a far cry from what it will take to re-sign Cooks. Gronk could also choose to stick with the Pats. He doesn't need the money, as he claims to have saved every penny he's made since he entered the league. 

A lot can change in three years, but we can revisit this. 

 
Bossman said:
Maybe Belichick realized that no one would be willing to give up their 1st rd pick for Butler and he was content to let this play itself out.

With the intention of keeping Butler all along. Seems to me that if NE didn't want Butler he would have been traded to the NOS by now.

... and there's nothing saying that NE doesn't match whatever offer Butler signs.

The more I ponder this, and the longer this lingers, the more I'm realizing that Butler will be back for 2017.
Click to expand...
Butler hasn't signed his tender, NE can't trade him now even if they wanted to 

 
What do people see Dwayne Allens role as?  Is he purely a back up to Gronk or will he be used more like Bennett was last year?  Does adding Cooks reduce his opportunity?  Will NE play less two TE sets?

 
Boone22 said:
What do people see Dwayne Allens role as?  Is he purely a back up to Gronk or will he be used more like Bennett was last year?  Does adding Cooks reduce his opportunity?  Will NE play less two TE sets?
Click to expand...
Allen had been used as more of a blocking tight end so fast in his career and the Patriots need guys who can block for Brady at this point in his career because opponents are going to try to knock him on the ground hard early and often.  They also need just a little longer in the pocket if they're going to take shots deep for cooks.  So I would expect his role to be mostly dump offs and option stuff between the 20s. But he's also their only big bodied receiver besides Gronk so I can see him being a preferred red zone target, and I expect the 2017 Patriots to put up a LOT of passing touchdowns.  I can see him ending up as a 450/8 guy.  

 
Good luck trying to project the NE offense this year. They have 4 legit WR threats, 3 receiving backs, Gronk and Allen at TE. Given all the mouths to feed, I would not get too amped up over Allen unless Gronk is hurt. 

IMO, all Pats players not named Brady will be overvalued if they are all healthy. They can't all be fantasy relevant playing at the same time. 

 
I don't know how many times BB has to surprise us before we realize that the past may not be an indicator of the future...

 
Any guesses as to who the dark horse cut will be?  It's of course way too early to get any good indication, but they seem to make one unexpected and surprising cut each year.  

I love Ninko, but I think he'd fit that mold (unexpected and surprising).  While many others would as well, I think he's shown a steady decline over the past two year (not sure if the numbers back that up).

 
Anarchy99 said:
Good luck trying to project the NE offense this year. They have 4 legit WR threats, 3 receiving backs, Gronk and Allen at TE. Given all the mouths to feed, I would not get too amped up over Allen unless Gronk is hurt. 

IMO, all Pats players not named Brady will be overvalued if they are all healthy. They can't all be fantasy relevant playing at the same time. 
Click to expand...
I mostly agree with this although a rising ride could lift all boats if they take a serious run at setting records. And for all the reasons you just described I think that's what they are doing.  This team is built to put Brady at the top of the record books before he retires. The one guy they've made no effort to resign is the one who ran for 18 touchdowns this year.  They might not be planning to run touchdowns in.

 
bostonfred said:
I mostly agree with this although a rising ride could lift all boats if they take a serious run at setting records. And for all the reasons you just described I think that's what they are doing.  This team is built to put Brady at the top of the record books before he retires. The one guy they've made no effort to resign is the one who ran for 18 touchdowns this year.  They might not be planning to run touchdowns in.
Click to expand...
I don't know - I feel like I hear this every hear.  They certainly have done some different things this year that has been outside the norm.  But I think it really is just all to set them up to win as many game as they can against the lineup they will be facing.  They're going against some pass happy teams - so how do you win against primarly pass happy teams?  Not but running.  But through strong pass defense and a productive offense.  

 
captain_amazing said:
Any guesses as to who the dark horse cut will be?  It's of course way too early to get any good indication, but they seem to make one unexpected and surprising cut each year.  

I love Ninko, but I think he'd fit that mold (unexpected and surprising).  While many others would as well, I think he's shown a steady decline over the past two year (not sure if the numbers back that up).
Click to expand...
Amendola?  Or is he a given to be cut?

 
Dola will likely restructure. Theres a few people who could restructure to clear up a lot of space, but not sure they need to tbh. They have plenty of room available.

 
captain_amazing said:
I don't know - I feel like I hear this every hear.  They certainly have done some different things this year that has been outside the norm.  But I think it really is just all to set them up to win as many game as they can against the lineup they will be facing.  They're going against some pass happy teams - so how do you win against primarly pass happy teams?  Not but running.  But through strong pass defense and a productive offense.  
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with you.  I never bought into the vendetta theories and don't believe NE is consumed with personal stats beyond ensuring Brady has as many SB rings as possible.

 
Saboo said:
I don’t think Amendola is a given to be cut, but I would be shocked if he played at the cap number he is at now. He’ll likely take a cut to stay with the Patriots.
Click to expand...
I agree there is no way he plays at his current contract number and I think it is probably 50-50 at best he agrees to another massive cut and stays. I certainly hope he stays, if you watch their last 2 SB wins he made key plays in both and he has proven he can\will play well when it matters most. 

Count me among those thinking Edelman is nearing the end (much like Welker he has taken a beating and its beginning to show); Amendola is an ideal backup for the team at wr & punt returner. Primarily just a matter of dollars and I think Amendola has to know he is worth more to NE than anywhere else and he isn't likely to find all that much money elsewhere. Having said that, he keeps playing well for them in the biggest games and yet they keep cutting his pay. At some point he may decide enuf is enuf and go. Hope the team makes a strong effort to keep him, he deserves it.

 
Anarchy99 said:
The Pats are currently $22 million under the cap, which should only serve to further alienate Butler.
Click to expand...
The Pats or GM B Belichick are not going to overpay for a player. Butler made that interception when Browner stoned his guy at the
line of scrimmage and R Wilson threw the ball before he realized that play was blown up. Butler is a good CB with the misfortune of 
being a restricted FA with this being a deep draft.

The Saints with one of the leagues worst defenses haven't yet made a deal with him.  It's either Butler asking for too much money or
N.E. wants too much on the trade side. 

Amendola will take the pay cut.  We've just witnessed a rookie(M Mitchell) and a FA(C Hogan) blow right past him for playing time.
I think the coaches like the consistent grind it out play over the one big play every five games.    

 
Schefter reporting Peterson trying out with the Pats tomorrow. Please don't sign this guy. HTF can you consider signing this pos after taking Mixon off your draft board?

 
Peterson in NE would be a lock for 12+ TD's.  Yards probably limited to 1,000-1,200 total but can't think of a much better spot for him.

 
Gopher State said:
Agree this would be a great move
Click to expand...
BB has a history of "trying" guys who might be over the hill. Steven Jackson, Torry Holt, Chad Johnson come to mind.  Not sure if ADP would be like those guys or still have gas in the tank, like Corey Dillon..

What a scary NFL (and impossible to predict fantasy) offense that would be!

 
DropKick said:
BB has a history of "trying" guys who might be over the hill. Steven Jackson, Torry Holt, Chad Johnson come to mind.  Not sure if ADP would be like those guys or still have gas in the tank, like Corey Dillon..

What a scary NFL (and impossible to predict fantasy) offense that would be!
Click to expand...
Honestly, I'm not sure how much better 2017 ADP would be from 2016 Blount. I'd much rather they re-sign LG or go for a guy like Connor in the draft if they are still dead set on having the 2-down big back.

 
tombonneau said:
Honestly, I'm not sure how much better 2017 ADP would be from 2016 Blount. I'd much rather they re-sign LG or go for a guy like Connor in the draft if they are still dead set on having the 2-down big back.
Click to expand...
Yep.. almost impossible to predict given the offensive talent gap between NE and MIN. 

I'll say this... I'll take ADP over our current battering ram back (nobody). Glad we're taking a look at him. If they decide he's not a good fit, I'll have faith in Bill's judgement. T

There certainly has to be SOME allure to playing for a team that considers anything other than a Super Bowl appearance to be a failure. 


 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That would be crazy getting AP- but very intriguing. Blount gets relatively low money so why not sign him? Sign Butler? Hmmm... in this system, with White, lewis, and Bulkhead, it could be very interesting. Certainly some TD's to be had- and with more breakaway ability. But Blount is probably universally under-rated, pretty quick and somewhat shifty for a 260 lb guy.

As long as Brady stays upright, good luck AFC east.... greatest show on turf is back.

 
ILUVBEER99 said:
Peterson in NE would be a lock for 12+ TD's.  Yards probably limited to 1,000-1,200 total but can't think of a much better spot for him.
Click to expand...
Hasn't Peterson shown he's not good running out of the shotgun?

 
nightmare said:
I think Brady would line up under the center if he knew ADP was behind him.
Click to expand...
While i think they may incorporate more plays under center... I think a large part of the shotgun formation is to buy brady more time, in conjunction with his quick release, to keep him from getting hit. It's pretty clear that Brady is not a fan of spending a lot of time on the ground, and he certainly seems to play better when he's not fearing for his life. 

 

 
[icon] said:
While i think they may incorporate more plays under center... I think a large part of the shotgun formation is to buy brady more time, in conjunction with his quick release, to keep him from getting hit. It's pretty clear that Brady is not a fan of spending a lot of time on the ground, and he certainly seems to play better when he's not fearing for his life. 

 
Click to expand...
Brady with a play action to ADP slows that rush down.

 
 B Belichick is looking at a 30 year old RB that just did his first 299 carry season(Blount) and thinking
"Let's make the mistake of a year too early". Blount's time may have ended when they signed Burkhead.  

 
ROCKET said:
Schefter reporting Peterson trying out with the Pats tomorrow. Please don't sign this guy. HTF can you consider signing this pos after taking Mixon off your draft board?
Click to expand...
This. League minimum for a vet like AP has to be a decent chunk of change. Take mixon off your board but sign AP? Cmon, man.

 
Spike said:
Hasn't Peterson shown he's not good running out of the shotgun?
Click to expand...
A big part of his value in NE would be based on a bunch of short TD's.  Blount had 13 TD's from 3 yards or less, most of them 1 yard plunges.  Those were almost all with Brady under center.

This year there probably won't be as many of those opportunities, but AD should still be able to get 10-12 cheap/short TD's in that offense.

 
Scott Zolak on his radio show just said the door is definitely not shut on the Pats trading for Sherman. He then went on to say Marshawn Lynch wants to go where Sherman ends up.

:lmao:

 
Heard on the radio today that the Pats met with Mike Gillislee and Damien Williams...both are restricted...either would be an interesting signing...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top