Men's Apparel Jerseys Hats Novelties Throwback Women's Youth
 
REGISTER FOR PATSFANS.COM

Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!


Go Back   New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard > PatsFans.com Forums > PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum
Forgot Password? Join PatsFans.com!
Register Blogs FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read Chat Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-12-2006, 01:07 PM   #11
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,275
Blog Entries: 14
Default Re: Ty Law Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5 Rings for Brady!!
Pats60: To build on what you say about the scrubs we had last year:

I will always believe that if we kept Ty and Keith Traylor last year we may have made it to the superbowl.
Ty Law was how much cap space??? I thought THAT was the reason he was cut..a LARGE bloated salary...That sounds good in theory until you realize it would have cost a LOT of money...who do you wish they NOT have had???? If you are going to add Ty Law..who do you subtract?? THAT really is the key to what you are saying...I don't know what the deal was with Traylor..why they dropped him..But I do not think his being with the squad would have made a big difference..SOME yes..but not really earth shattering...enough for a Superbowl. Law would have been a good addition..but NOT at the 10 mil plus number.

Last edited by Pats726; 07-12-2006 at 01:09 PM.
Pats726 is offline   Reply With Quote
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!

Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a free Patriots T-Shirt and save 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account.

NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 188

Updated 10/31/09

Help Us Reach Our Goal!

Old 07-12-2006, 01:13 PM   #12
PatsFans.com Supporter
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,633
Default Re: Ty Law Question

The point I was really driving at was the qualifying wanting Law back with 'at the right price'.

Wouldnt the right price be what we can afford on the cap?
And given our cap situation we should be able to outbid other teams.
That would end up being more than the 'right price' if we didn't have excess cap room.

Put another way, if in a vacuum Laws value to the Pats is 5mill a year, and the market dictates it will take 8 mill to sign him, if we could afford 8mill under the cap, wouldn't 8mill be the right price?

I may not be saying this very clearly.

I guess I am trying to distinguish between wanting Law only if we can afford, or wanting Law only if we "Win the negotations".
If Ty Law has us by the b@lls in negotations, and forces BB to pay more than he deems Law's value to be, but what he can afford, do you do it?
Better to overspend by a mill or to get the guy who will help you or refuse to overpay and get no one?
AndyJohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 01:16 PM   #13
PatsFans.com Supporter
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,633
Default Re: Ty Law Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pats726
Ty Law was how much cap space??? I thought THAT was the reason he was cut..a LARGE bloated salary...That sounds good in theory until you realize it would have cost a LOT of money...who do you wish they NOT have had???? If you are going to add Ty Law..who do you subtract?? THAT really is the key to what you are saying...I don't know what the deal was with Traylor..why they dropped him..But I do not think his being with the squad would have made a big difference..SOME yes..but not really earth shattering...enough for a Superbowl. Law would have been a good addition..but NOT at the 10 mil plus number.

I dont get the Traylor thing. He was CUT, it had nothing to do with $$.
BB decided that he did not want Traylor on his team.

Why would we have been better with him?
Personally, I thought he was horrible in 2004 anyway. He was not a good fit for our system. He would show up making some plays in the backfield, but the truth is that was because free lanced and didnt keep his gap discipline.
For every play in the backfield he made, there were 2 more where he freelanced his way out of position and hurt us.
AndyJohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 01:17 PM   #14
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
 
CrazyDave's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The Berkshires
Posts: 1,836
Default Re: Ty Law Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJohnson
The point I was really driving at was the qualifying wanting Law back with 'at the right price'.

Wouldnt the right price be what we can afford on the cap?
And given our cap situation we should be able to outbid other teams.
That would end up being more than the 'right price' if we didn't have excess cap room.

Put another way, if in a vacuum Laws value to the Pats is 5mill a year, and the market dictates it will take 8 mill to sign him, if we could afford 8mill under the cap, wouldn't 8mill be the right price?

I may not be saying this very clearly.

I guess I am trying to distinguish between wanting Law only if we can afford, or wanting Law only if we "Win the negotations".
If Ty Law has us by the b@lls in negotations, and forces BB to pay more than he deems Law's value to be, but what he can afford, do you do it?
Better to overspend by a mill or to get the guy who will help you or refuse to overpay and get no one?
Interesting question. This is how I feel about Branch.
CrazyDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 01:29 PM   #15
PatsFans.com Supporter
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,633
Default Re: Ty Law Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyDave
Interesting question. This is how I feel about Branch.
If you mean the cost of Branch, whatever it is, outwieghs the potential damage of losing him I agree.

Heres another way to look at it.

Brady is the best QB in the NFL. Hypothetically, and if he wasnt who he is, being the best means he costs $2mill more than the 2nd best. But he wants 3 mill more.
Do you want Brady plus what you can use the 3mill on or the 2nd best QB.

IMO, there are players that you need to overpay. Not necessarily because they are a Brady, but also because of the gap to the replacement.

The discussion on trading Branch fits this. Lets say we could trade Branch for a #1 next year, or let him play out his contract and become a FA next year.

There is certainly value in getting the #1 pick, but what does that do to this year?
Is sacrificing this year worth it to gain things in the future? To me it is not.
AndyJohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 01:52 PM   #16
In the Starting Line-up
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,395
Default Re: Ty Law Question

I personally don't really care how much Law would have cost to keep last year if it was at all able to be done, because I feel that if we beat the Broncos and one or two other teams during the regular season, we really would have had home field advantage and a bi-week. We would have been a game closer to the superbowl, and maybe not playing in Denver. I didn't say we would win it, but I bet we might have gotten there with Ty. To me, not being a cap expert or anything, I wish they kept him. Maybe Miguel knows all the numbers, and knows better!

As far as Traylor, he played good enough in the 2004 playoffs, and we only needed him for the games that Seymour went down. He would have helped in some of those games, and his cost was veteran minimum.

As far as signing Law this year, I just can't believe that the Pats wouldn't have tried already after having him for an exam, unless they just don't want him. Most likely, he already got an offer or at the very least, a 'ball park' offer over the phone to give him an idea of what the Pats consider reasonable, and is awaiting a larger counter-offer. If the Pats want him, they will match or beat Kansas's offer. Ty will make sure to let them beat it, because he won't leave a penny on the table.

Even if the Pats never hinted at any numbers, they are then waiting to find out what Kansas or other teams offer.

I feel that if we are willing to overpay him this year, then we should have been willing to last year. I don't know if we really would have had to replace other people on his behalf, but it may have been worth it, IMHO. I am willing to overpay him a little this year, if his physical was okay.

Last edited by 5 Rings for Brady!!; 07-12-2006 at 01:55 PM.
5 Rings for Brady!! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 01:57 PM   #17
PatsFans.com Supporter
 
fgssand's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Foxboro
Posts: 4,060
Default Re: Ty Law Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJohnson
If you mean the cost of Branch, whatever it is, outwieghs the potential damage of losing him I agree.

Heres another way to look at it.

Brady is the best QB in the NFL. Hypothetically, and if he wasnt who he is, being the best means he costs $2mill more than the 2nd best. But he wants 3 mill more.
Do you want Brady plus what you can use the 3mill on or the 2nd best QB.

IMO, there are players that you need to overpay. Not necessarily because they are a Brady, but also because of the gap to the replacement.

The discussion on trading Branch fits this. Lets say we could trade Branch for a #1 next year, or let him play out his contract and become a FA next year.

There is certainly value in getting the #1 pick, but what does that do to this year?
Is sacrificing this year worth it to gain things in the future? To me it is not.
When discussing using money to sign Branch, I feel Koppen, Samuels, Graham and other potential FA's fo rnext year should also be mentioned.

We have enough money to sign them all and Ty Law as well, if we want too.

We outbid the Ravens for Mason last year, so it is not a willingness to spend issue in my mind either.

Were it my decision to make, I would have Koppen and Branch resigned as well as Ty Law in camp from day one.

I am quite confident they already know exactly what they plan to do and are in process of putting it all together, there is no doubt that off the field - the Patriot brain trust is second to none. Is great to sit back and watch it al play out.
fgssand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 02:03 PM   #18
Practice Squad
 
belichickaholic's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the river in egypt
Posts: 394
Default Re: Ty Law Question

I'm sick and tired fo Ty Law! I'm sick of him playing one team against the other as if all the NFL front offices are a bunch of 12 years olds. And what's this crap about him holding out until after training camp just so he doesn't have to work hard and go through two a days!

Screw' em! Didn't we win a sb without him? He's become too much of a prima donna! How can we ask other vets on the team to take vet min or less money, and then turn around and pay this jerk big money?

And I don't buy this crap about us winning another sb if we had him last year. He didn't help the jets very much! And I think it's pretty safe to say that if we had Seymour, Bruschi and Harrison we would have had a better chance to get there too.

Sign the players who've been working hard with the team these past couple of years! Branch, Koppen and them, They deserve it more than Mr Money Bags!
belichickaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 02:04 PM   #19
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,275
Blog Entries: 14
Default Re: Ty Law Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJohnson
I guess I am trying to distinguish between wanting Law only if we can afford, or wanting Law only if we "Win the negotations".
If Ty Law has us by the b@lls in negotations, and forces BB to pay more than he deems Law's value to be, but what he can afford, do you do it?
Better to overspend by a mill or to get the guy who will help you or refuse to overpay and get no one?
Andy...I agree with you now about Law...was trying to distinguish between last season keeping him for LARGE dollars and this year...I think this year we get Ty back...
Pats726 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 02:05 PM   #20
In the Starting Line-up
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,395
Default Re: Ty Law Question

Ty Law with Jets: 10 interceptions

Patriots defense combined: 10 interceptions
5 Rings for Brady!! is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Sponsored Links


PATRIOTS MERCHANDISE

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0

© Copyright 2008 PatsFans.com - The opinions posted in this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of PatsFans.com or our staff.
We are not affiliated with the New England Patriots™ or the NFL™. The Photo Used In the header was taken by Ian Logue.

This site is owned and operated by I&K Internet Design Enterprises, LLC


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426