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, 10:28 AM   #1
PatsFans.com Supporter
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,042
Default Ty Law Question

I think it is pretty safe to assume that we know Law's priority, and what his decision will be based on. I wouldn't exactly say he would play for any team or any coach regardless just for the money, but his #1 concern will be money.

I have seen many comments saying "I'd like Law back.............for the right price"

My question is this:

Considering our cap position, have double-digit millions in cap room after signing rookies, and having plenty of room after extending anyone we would choose to, does "for the right price" even matter?

What if in order to sign Law, would in many peoples opinions, I think, would be the best addition we could find at this point, we had to overpay. We had to win a 'bidding war' but we had the cap room to do it? Shouldn't we still do it? Wouldnt the alternative be to just not spend the cap money? I dont know where else we would use it (and my question presupposes we wouldn't).

Example:

Our latest offer to Law costs 5mill on the cap (all hypothetical made up #s) the Chiefs offer cost 6mill. Wouldnt we outbid the Chiefs, given that we have the cap room, and wouldnt be spending it otherwise?

Of course the other consideration is the cost in future years, but it appears from everything I have seen we are in excellent cap shape going forward as well.
AndyJohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
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
including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.

NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 206

Updated 2/4/10

Help Us Reach Our Goal!

Old 07-12-2006, 10:44 AM   #2
In the Starting Line-up
 

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

First off, I think this thread should be merged with the other new thread.

But to answer the question, I feel that the Pats gave Ty their 'value' offer a while ago, like when he had the physical exam, and he is simply waiting for somebody else to beat it. He announces to the Kansas City media that signing in NE is a possibility, because I think he already has a fair value offer from Pioli.

Like with Adam, Ty is being left to do as he pleases. But if he doesn't get much more from elsewhere, I believe that he will try to get the Pats to match or beat the offer (unlike Adam, for reasons previously discussed Ad Nauseum).

I agree that the Pats could step up to the plate and sign him, but I think that he is currently playing hard to get, and probably knows what he is worth to the Pats. Hopefully, he will come back with a reasonable request and the Pats will sign him. But he is apparently talking to Kansas City media about this, and not the Boston media.

All speculation on my part.
5 Rings for Brady!! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 10:49 AM   #3
PatsFans.com Supporter
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: brockton ma
Posts: 392
Default Re: Ty Law Question

I agree with you the money is not coming out of
my pocket.
With what they spent on Poole, Sparks, and both scotts we could have
spent it on ty
pats60 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 10:56 AM   #4
In the Starting Line-up
 

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

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 helps us win a couple more games, like against the Broncos in the regular season. Traylor fills in much better for Seymour for a few games as a Line of Scrimmage veteran. He keeps Wilfork focused with a little guidance. We win an extra game. Suddenly, we have home field during the playoffs.

Crazy, yes, but that's what I feel could have happened last year. We essentially went 11-5 (10-6) without the extra help of two quality players at positions of need.

Traylor also took out Koppen last year.

Last edited by 5 Rings for Brady!!; 07-12-2006 at 10:59 AM.
5 Rings for Brady!! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 11:16 AM   #5
Second Team and Threatening Starter's Job
 
smg93's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,485
Default Re: Ty Law Question

I would pay a little more for a proven commodity in our system. Ty Law is is one such player who has proven his worth in the Patriots system. Sign him. He'll be an integral part of another superbowl run IMHO. If it takes 6 million to do it, that would be just fine with me.

Last edited by smg93; 07-12-2006 at 11:23 AM.
smg93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 11:25 AM   #6
In the Starting Line-up
 

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

Doesn't it seem likely that the Pats already tried to sign him when he came and took the physical, and that the reason that he is not signed, but talks about returning to NE, is because he is trying to get a better offer in Kansas City by stirring up the competitive juices?

It's not like he said this to the Boston media. Why would the Pats flat out have not tried to sign him already if he came and got checked out? He is playing hard to get.
5 Rings for Brady!! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 11:29 AM   #7
On the Roster
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 70
Default Re: Ty Law Question

If we could sign Law to a short term deal, they I would not have a problem spending big money on him.

I do not like the idea of giving him big money up front. Any contract for Law I would hope would be a pay as you go type deal. Keep some incentives in the deals to keep Law hungry.

I think I would be ok with $21mil over 3yrs.

$6mil Roster Bonus upon signing, to put cap charge in '06.
$3mil Salary in '06 with Incentives to earn another $2mil
$3mil Salary in '07 with Incentives to earn another $2mil
$4mil Roster Bonus as of 3/1/08, so the Pats have to decide to Keep him or cut him right at the start of Free Agency. $2mil Salary in '08 with Incentives to earn another $2mil. This would basically make it a 2 year deal with a 3rd year option.

This would be between 18-24 mil over 3 yrs. (or 12-16 over 2yrs) Make the '06 Bonus LTBE (if possible) to create $11mil in used cap space for '06.

My 2cents
hughthehand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 11:31 AM   #8
Minuteman Target
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,843
Default Re: Ty Law Question

Excellent question, as usual.

The question falls into two parts: how much should we pay for Ty? and, what else should we do with the money?

The second is the more important question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJohnson
and having plenty of room after extending anyone we would choose to
Is that true? Remember, we're in a period of slack because the cap has just gone up by a lot but the going rate for players hasn't caught up. We should be taking advantage of that as much as we can. Immediately, there's Graham, Koppen and Branch to deal with. I'd make keeping all three a priority over signing TL.

Then there's what happens after this coming season.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJohnson
Of course the other consideration is the cost in future years, but it appears from everything I have seen we are in excellent cap shape going forward as well.
Looking quickly at Miguel's Future Cap Hits, there are several players with sharply escalating cap numbers in 2007 (Seymour, Colvin, Vrabel, Faulk -- though Brady goes the other way) and large signing bonuses outstanding (notably Corey Dillon). I hate it when we have to cut a player because of phony numbers at the end of a deal (Troy, Ty, Willie). We could address some of those issues.

But if all of that can be taken care of, and the Patriots are convinced that Ty would improve the team significantly, then I'm with you. The answer to the first question becomes: whatever it takes that we can afford. I don't think that "overpaying" comes into it if you're in an auction. You pay what something (in this case, someone) is worth to you -- and unused cap room is worth nothing (except, of course, $$ in the Krafts' bank account).
__________________
Q: Could Randy Moss play for the Patriots? Bill Belichick: Why not?

My prized possessions: Our family pictures; my dad and me getting doused by Bruschi in Super Bowl XXXIX [Shalize Manza Young Up Close with ... Bill Belichick]


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


They say what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Well, Pats fans should be invincible by now. [Fitzy, 16 November 2009]

Still here to learn
Mike the Brit is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 11:34 AM   #9
On the Roster
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Haven, CT
Posts: 71
Default Re: Ty Law Question

Well, not that this is adding anything that everybody isn't already aware of, but ESPN Radio is reporting at lunchtime today that Ty is "waiting for the legitimate offers to come in" before making a decision, probably right at the start of camp or shortly thereafter. According to the report, KC and NE are the only serious players so, will NE get into a bidding war with KC just because they have the cap room? Nah, not a chance. Depending on how serious Piolichick deems the secondary situation, they might, might, overpay slightly but only slightly. I don't remember what the cap situation was last year but if they were willing to let him go to a division rival last year, they certainly won't have any problem letting him go to KC this year. If KC is willing to throw ridiculous money at him it's buh bye and thanks for the memories Ty. Bottom line for me is, I'd like to see him back but I'm not totally uncomfortable with our secondary mix going into camp today.
usmcmgb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 11:50 AM   #10
Moderator
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,357
Default Re: Ty Law Question

I would "overpay" for Ty. I agree that we would have been two games better last year with Ty and traylor on the team. I believe that we would be better off this year with Ty Law and a quality NT backup on the team. I don't know what overpay means. Would I give him $21 over 3 years? Sure! The argument would be about the timing of bonuses. More? Maybe.

However, you assume that the alternative is not to spend the cap money. To me rolling into next year is indeed spending the cap money, although I would rather use the money for a couple of free agents, including Ty.

BTW, I would be very surprised if more than $6M isn't paid to Seymour. Otherwise the 2007 cap for him is very high.







Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJohnson
I think it is pretty safe to assume that we know Law's priority, and what his decision will be based on. I wouldn't exactly say he would play for any team or any coach regardless just for the money, but his #1 concern will be money.

I have seen many comments saying "I'd like Law back.............for the right price"

My question is this:

Considering our cap position, have double-digit millions in cap room after signing rookies, and having plenty of room after extending anyone we would choose to, does "for the right price" even matter?

What if in order to sign Law, would in many peoples opinions, I think, would be the best addition we could find at this point, we had to overpay. We had to win a 'bidding war' but we had the cap room to do it? Shouldn't we still do it? Wouldnt the alternative be to just not spend the cap money? I dont know where else we would use it (and my question presupposes we wouldn't).

Example:

Our latest offer to Law costs 5mill on the cap (all hypothetical made up #s) the Chiefs offer cost 6mill. Wouldnt we outbid the Chiefs, given that we have the cap room, and wouldnt be spending it otherwise?

Of course the other consideration is the cost in future years, but it appears from everything I have seen we are in excellent cap shape going forward as well.
mgteich is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Sponsored Links



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 09:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, 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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445