ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
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 window. 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!
Hmm, can't agree with you on this. I don't see 5'11" 225-lb. Ridley requiring 5'9" 215-lb. Ingram to be his complementary power back. From what I saw of Ridley, he's awfully hard to bring down inside.
Ingram also just isn't that good a receiver and doesn't really fit as someone to integrate the running and passing games. Vereen - who is extremely strong and physical for his size and who's 32 reps on the bench press was something like a 10 year high for RBs - has much more versatility. Ridley is probably a better receiver than Ingram. Frankly, I didn't understand why the Saints took Ingram, as he doesn't seem to fit into their scheme the way guys like Pierre Thomas and Darren Sproles do.
Although it hasn't been officially announced by the team or reported in the local media, NEPatriotsDraft is reporting that the Pats have signed UDFA RB Brandon Bolden out of Mississippi. Bolden has nice size (5'11" 222#), athleticism (38" vertical, 6.96 3-cone) and receiving skills (76 receptions in college). He's more versatile and athletic than BJGE, and would be a nice back up to Ridley.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi
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: 98
Although it hasn't been officially announced by the team or reported in the local media, NEPatriotsDraft is reporting that the Pats have signed UDFA RB Brandon Bolden out of Mississippi.
Huh, I thought he signed with Washington? I'd be glad to have him, though.
Huh, I thought he signed with Washington? I'd be glad to have him, though.
A piece form the Bleacher Report claimed that Brandon Bolden signed with Washington a few days ago, and a bunch of people repeated it without verification. However, it appears that they confused this with the Redskins signing WR Kevin Bolden out of Southern Mississippi. Besides NEPatriotsDraft, the New York Times has reported that the Pats have signed Brandon Bolden:
Right now there has been no official announcement of Bolden's status by the league, so I'm taking a "wait and see approach". BTW, Reamer picked this up way ahead of me - like you, it snuck under my radar.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi
A piece form the Bleacher Report claimed that Brandon Bolden signed with Washington a few days ago, and a bunch of people repeated it without verification. However, it appears that they confused this with the Redskins signing WR Kevin Bolden out of Southern Mississippi. Besides NEPatriotsDraft, the New York Times has reported that the Pats have signed Brandon Bolden
Thanks, that would be good news! Kind of a BJGE type, but a bit more of a threat in the passing game. Seems like a perfect understudy to keep around on the practice squad.
It's evened out on the last year of the contract. We'll have Jones a year longer than we would have had Wilkerson (to pick a name).
Wilkerson could be re-signed you say ? Sure but if he's a good player he re-signs for a lot more money and costs a lot more on the cap than Jones does in his last. The value of a draft choice is (hopefully) top play at relatively low dollars. Once they re-sign for bigger dollars they aren't a bargain anymore. What's the "opportunity cost" of the extra cap space because Jones is in his last year of his rookie contract when Wilkerson is in the first year of his non rookie contract ?
I'm sorry, but your take here is simply incorrect. If both players are players, the money will kick in with both, and the money means nothing. The lost year of play, in a SB season, can never be gotten back.
__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius
I guess "opportunity cost" is the new buzzword that all the cool kids use.
There was a non zero probability the player we would have drafted would have helped win the super bowl. There was also a non zero probability the player would have cost us the AFCCG, that was so close there's no way to know what would have happened if a different player missed significant minutes. I am confident in saying that the chance of a different player playing 30+ snaps would have had as much chance to cost us the AFCCG as it would have done to win the SB.
We also are playing with basically the worst case scenario and the trade still looks good to me. Why worst case ? Vereen was hurt and the Saints had a good year, only 5 picks from the last. As expected but when you trade for another team's #1 there's the chance the QB gets hurt and you suddenly have a top 15 pick. Didn't happen but the non zero probability of that chance has to be factored in.
I was thinking the same thing. An undrafted rookie kept the Ravens out of the big show. You can make the argument that if Dowling never got hurt and was covering Evans on that play, we're not even in the Super Bowl.
As you said, you have to aknowledge a rookie making a mistake that could lead to a loss (in games that were so close) just as much as making a play that leads to a win.
I'm sorry, but your take here is simply incorrect. If both players are players, the money will kick in with both, and the money means nothing. The lost year of play, in a SB season, can never be gotten back.
Deus, there's something messed up here. You're essentially saying that drafting a player this year gets you another year of value, long-term, versus drafting a player next year. It just doesn't add up.
There was a non zero probability the player we would have drafted would have helped win the super bowl. There was also a non zero probability the player would have cost us the AFCCG, that was so close there's no way to know what would have happened if a different player missed significant minutes. I am confident in saying that the chance of a different player playing 30+ snaps would have had as much chance to cost us the AFCCG as it would have done to win the SB.
Well said. And on top of that, there was a distinctly non-zero probability that if the Pats used both firsts last year they would have traded away later picks, so a "luxury" like 2 RBs wouldn't have happened and they wouldn't have had Steven Ridley last year. None of these decisions take place in a vacuum.
Deus, there's something messed up here. You're essentially saying that drafting a player this year gets you another year of value, long-term, versus drafting a player next year. It just doesn't add up.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the trade led to what was there last year: A useless player taken with the second round draft pick. Because Vereen was useless, a year of the pick (Wilkerson was cited as an example) was lost with nothing gained in return. Had Vereen been worth a damn, there wouldn't be an issue. Because Vereen was as worthless as (insert comparison here), the trade is already (in theory) a year behind the 8-ball, and that year can't be made up. We have no idea what that pick might have done had it been chosen, but we know what we got from Vereen, which was essentially nothing.
__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius
I'm sorry, but your take here is simply incorrect. If both players are players, the money will kick in with both, and the money means nothing. The lost year of play, in a SB season, can never be gotten back.
No, you are incorrect. Sorry.
If Wilkerson and Jones both sign 4 year deals then Wilkerson is a FA after 2014 and Jones is after 2015.
The 2015 season Jones is still playing for his cheap rookie contract. Wilkerson, assuming he is resigned, will be playing for a lot more. That difference in money also represents a lost "opportunity cost".
5Likes
Re: 2011 trade down from #28... how does it look?
Linear Mode
