If there is no cap, would it be better to trade Thomas... - New England Patriots Forums

Sean Pa Patriot · 01-14-2010, 09:12 AM

Assuming there is no cap, would it be easier to send Adailus Thomas to oh I dont know ,maybee Oakland

, then rather cut him and have him sign with the jets.. Im not sure of the cost was just curious to see if it would be eaiser... Thanks..

Hok · 01-14-2010, 09:17 AM

Send him to Cleveland for Josh Cribbs - disgruntled player for disgruntled player.

***mgteich*** · 01-14-2010, 09:18 AM

The cost to the patriots is the same, cap or no cap.

***tanked_as_usual*** · 01-14-2010, 09:20 AM

he wouldn't help the jets given who they already have

if you're going to have dead money, 2010 would be the year to have it

***Spiral*** · 01-14-2010, 09:27 AM

If he's traded, the team to whom he's traded assumes his contract, which calls for salaries of $4.9M in 2010 and $5.9M in 2011, according to Miguel. I doubt any team would want to pay him that kind of money. They would probably want to re-do this contract, which then begs the question of why they would trade for him in the first place. About the only benefit to trading for him would be that his new team would have exclusive rights to renegotiate his contract, but given the fact that tampering is all but legal, that really is not much of a benefit.

***pats1*** · 01-14-2010, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgteich

The cost to the patriots is the same, cap or no cap.

Right, but said cost does not inhibit signing other players under no cap.

***mgteich*** · 01-14-2010, 09:30 AM

There might be a team that Thomas wants to play for.
Thomas might beworth $5M a year to a team with lots of cash and cap (like KC last year).
We could get a 5th or a 6th.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spiral

If he's traded, the team to whom he's traded assumes his contract, which calls for salaries of $4.9M in 2010 and $5.9M in 2011, according to Miguel. I doubt any team would want to pay him that kind of money. They would probably want to re-do this contract, which then begs the question of why they would trade for him in the first place. About the only benefit to trading for him would be that his new team would have exclusive rights to renegotiate his contract, but given the fact that tampering is all but legal, that really is not much of a benefit.

upstater1 · 01-14-2010, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanked_as_usual

he wouldn't help the jets given who they already have

if you're going to have dead money, 2010 would be the year to have it

There's a provision in an uncapped year that says any dead money gets spread out over succeeding years so that teams don't do salary cap dumps in an uncapped year.

upstater1 · 01-14-2010, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spiral

If he's traded, the team to whom he's traded assumes his contract, which calls for salaries of $4.9M in 2010 and $5.9M in 2011, according to Miguel. I doubt any team would want to pay him that kind of money. They would probably want to re-do this contract, which then begs the question of why they would trade for him in the first place. About the only benefit to trading for him would be that his new team would have exclusive rights to renegotiate his contract, but given the fact that tampering is all but legal, that really is not much of a benefit.

$5 million for a good starting OLB is not much money when you look at the NFL salary structures. I would say he's got 4th rounder value at that contract.

The Patriots would get rid of him simply because of his locker room antics.

***mgteich*** · 01-14-2010, 09:41 AM

To be clear, Thomas is being moved because the team deosn't want him on the team, not because Thomas can't be a valuable OLB. Some would think that the patriots need an OLB.