One thing that always pisses me off is this type of comment:
Quote:
|
With the lack of premier wide receivers on the field what were the Patriots going to do to try and shore up this depleted position? In 2006, as most everyone knows with the departure of Deion Branch and David Givens, the Patriots were playing with a core of makeshift receivers who would normally be number twos and number threes on another staff. Reche Caldwell and Jabar Gaffney did a good job, but were never considered an elite corp of receivers.
|
...as if Branch and Givens (or Brown and Patten before them), were
ever considered an elite corp of receivers while they were here. It's revisionist history, looking back fondly on those days but forgetting that the fans were constantly wishing BB would draft a legitimate elite "big" receiver early in the draft because the iron smurfs were "so limited" and "injury prone". Remember the talk about trading up for Mike Williams? LOL.
This team has won SBs with moderately good, but never elite, receivers. As a measure, guys like Dedic Ward and Fred Coleman were important contributors for us. The only reason we hear anything like the negative crap that Caldwell and Gaffney (and the alleged dropoff from Branch and Givens) is because it's an easy journalistic setup to introduce Moss and Stallworth. It's just bad journalism.
And what pisses me off more is when observers frame Moss and Stallworth a too-little, too-late panic response by the braintrust to the sudden realization that losing Branch was a horrible mistake. Puh-lease. Branch wasn't as core to the Pats success as everyone seems to remember. Givens was never considered an elite receiver. Caldwell was productive and Gaffney quickly established an explosive game after joining the team mid-season.
Gaffney, who I see as Branch's legitimate peer in terms of talent, signed for 2 years, $1.8M. Branch got 6 years $39M. The difference is shocking.
Stallworth, who is a higher level of talent compared to Gaffney or Branch, if we keep him for all 6 years of his ridiculous contract, still signed for
less money than Seattle spent on Branch... plus we're ahead the first rounder. In fact, Gaffney and Stallworth together will cost as much as Seattle spent on the Branch deal.
Welker was signed to a 5 year $18M deal, which compares very well to the 5 year $24M deal the Titans gave Givens. And even after hitting a salary escalator, Caldwell will only cost $1.65M in 2007.
So, for roughly the same money it would have taken to retain Branch and Givens, we got Gaffney, Caldwell, Stallworth and Welker. We're ahead in draft picks, even after spending the 2nd on Welker. How is this a panic response? This seems very calculated and methodical.
Moss, of course, is a whole other side bet in the equation-- he's a HOF talent and something special. That deal was entirely a question of being opportunistic.
One blogger's thoughts on the offseason and the coming year
Linear Mode
