A little early, but: should the Patriots try to re-sign Wes Welker? - Page 24 - New England Patriots Forums

robertweathers · 01-04-2013, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aluminum seats

Pretty much agree w/this, at least based on what he's actually done here. Keep in mind that the secondary improved late season last year as well. Don't get me wrong, it seems clear that Talib (and the resulting position shifts) have markedly improved things, but looking to break the bank on Talib already seems a bit hasty.

For me, this falls cleanly into the trust Belichick category. I feel like whatever they end up doing there will most likely be the right decision.

By the way, good aggressive posting by a couple of guys here on Welker. Completely agree that he's the biggest FA the Pats will have. Honestly, if you don't think so, then you just don't value the receiver position very highly.

In the 12 years BB has been here, he has never doled out a big contract to a CB. He interited Law's and it has been said that BB was considering trading him/cutting him in 2000 and 2001 because his deal and the whole X thing in Buffalo.

We know about Asante.

Bodden's deal was mid-market.

Talib is a difference-maker. When his head is on right he is the complete package. He tackles. He plays zone. He can play man. He gets his hands on balls and can have them stick to his hands. The question is how much has his value been increased by his time here and decreased with the shenanigns in TB. Dont know yet..

***mgteich*** · 01-04-2013, 11:26 AM

One possibility is THREE $4M corners, expecting that two will produce.

Quote:

Originally Posted by supafly

It obviously also depends on Belichick the most.

He hasn't typically wanted to join the overspending parade at the position of CB for too many players, IIRC. Not only that, he also has McCourty coming up next year too, where he simply won't have much of a choice in what he pays him. All accounts point to Belichick wanting McCourty here for the future in my opinion, so that's something to take into account this year with Talib's situation...or maybe it's not?

He may very well decide to go the route of trying to keep Arrington for the money that you mentioned (which also gives him starter capability in a pinch, although with a talent dropoff it certainly still counts), while replacing the money that would be sunk in retaining Talib.

Lots of chatter for a guy who came during the Colts game and has pretty much been out since the 49'ers game. He did break up 2 passes here and had the INT return, but there are alternatives that would still allow DMcC to stay at safety (he was there already), and to keep Arrington in the slot. After all, Dennard was already on the outside too.

I still believe that Talib is a very good CB here and would like him for the future, but I also believe that he is being tremendously overvalued by some. Then again, I've been wrong before, so keep in mind it's only my humble opinion.

***Deus Irae*** · 01-04-2013, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgteich

Obviously, a starting #1 corner and a starting nickel are in 2 different categories, as you indicate.

I would put a starting corner at around $8M a year.

I would put a starting nickel at about $4M a year.

Of course, we might get replacements for less than the above. It depends on the market in February.

So, just to make sure I've got this right, you would pay Arrington $4 million dollars a year?

The Brandon Five · 01-04-2013, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by supafly

Lots of chatter for a guy who came during the Colts game and has pretty much been out since the 49'ers game. He did break up 2 passes here and had the INT return, but there are alternatives that would still allow DMcC to stay at safety (he was there already), and to keep Arrington in the slot. After all, Dennard was already on the outside too.

What are they?

PatsFan2 · 01-04-2013, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATippett56

Another load of crap!

Tom Brady survived with the following players at the right tackle position:

Tom Ashworth
Brandon Gorin
Nick Kaczur

And none are No Where as good as Vollmer...Vollmer might not be as expandable as some of us think.

JackBauer · 01-04-2013, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robertweathers

Would not be suprised if Woody, Arrington, Chung are gone.

I would be shocked, actually, if Woodhead is gone next year.

***AndyJohnson*** · 01-04-2013, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivan

First, i have never argued that there are no consequences to big money deals, there is obviously a cap and they have to be under it, however i don't agree that he is right because i don't think Seymour was going to be re-signed under any circumstances, they knew he wanted too much and weren't going to pay it.

How is that different than what I said?

Quote:

Second, I have never argued simply to give Welker anything they demand but have argued that he would take a very fair deal to the patriots, which would be in the 4-40 area, and possibly less.

I didn't say you did.

Quote:

Third, the question I posed was which re-signings did the Brady. Wilfork, and Mankins deals prevent from happening and still haven't seen evidence of any,

You can't expect to pick a player and indentify him as the consequence of someone elses contract. There are numerous additions not made or subtractions made that were influenced by each of those deals.

Quote:

other than conjecture that it led them to trade seymour long before signing a deal with Wilfork, which was actually contentious and may not have even happened, in which case you would be arguing that a deal that didn't exist cost them Seymour.

We tagged Wilfork. So it DID happen. We couldn't tag both, we wouldn't pay both, one had to go. If there were no Wilfork on the roster, Seymour would very likely have been handled differently.

Quote:

Fourth, they have blown tens and tens of millions of dollars on player moves that didn't help them, so if the concern is that they may overspend on Welker by a couple million a year then they should be able to make that meager amount up simply by being a little smarter in some of their riskieer moves.

You do realize that 'blowing tens of millions' has to be part of cap management considerations, since every team in the NFL carries dead money, signs free agents who underperform and make draft choices that turn out badly, right?
Your answer is you can afford more, you just have to make no mistakes?
That is too Pollyannaish to not chuckle at.

The concern is clear and obvious. The risk with Welker is higher than normal, because of the combination of his age, the beating he takes, and the risk of losing a step. IMO, the benefits of Welker far exceed those risks though, but you can't just ingone them.

Quote:

Last point, the deal i recommended is 4-40, if you think that will break them by all means make that argument that they can't pay him that and why, i would be interested to see it.

I have said nothing of the sort. AGAIN, I think Welker is high risk, but higher reward, and he should be paid.

***AndyJohnson*** · 01-04-2013, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFan2

And none are No Where as good as Vollmer...Vollmer might not be as expandable as some of us think.

Depends on the price tag, and the real story of his health.
His replacement will be cheap.
It is very reasonable to me that the dropoff from Vollmer to whoever would replace him is much less than the upgrade that can be gotten elsewhere with the money.

PatsFan2 · 01-04-2013, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyJohnson

Depends on the price tag, and the real story of his health.
His replacement will be cheap.
It is very reasonable to me that the dropoff from Vollmer to whoever would replace him is much less than the upgrade that can be gotten elsewhere with the money.

AJ: Vollmer is a swing Tackle who can proctect a QB's blindside in a pinch. Who otherthan Vollmer could we insert at Left Tackle if Nate Solder goes down??? Vollmer has value and I think BB will value him.

***AndyJohnson*** · 01-04-2013, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patfanken

It's certainly a realistic possibility, Andy. On one hand his back has to be a big concern in any long term deal, on the other hand, its his back that might keep the price for his services more reasonable than they would be if he were completely healthy

We all can acknowledge that, when healthy, Volmer is a top 5 RT in this league. Plus he's proven he can play LT well when needed.

Ya know if I had to choose between Welker and Volmer, the thing that would make me favor Volmer by just a hair, is this. Welker, and this goes for any WR, on a good day will impact the game 10-15 plays/game. OTOH, the OT will have an impact the game on all 70+ plays.

Welker impacts every play too. His impact is less on run plays, but it is still there. On pass plays that do not get thrown to him, he also draws coverage away from the target. You know better than to overlook that.
Finally, his presence alone affects the defensive call on every play making the other 10 players jobs easier.

Quote:

The 2nd reason, is more mundane. The simple fact is that there are more people on this planet that can do what Wes Welker does, than can do what Sebastian Volmer can.

That is not true. There is no one who can do what Welker does as well as he does it. There are many who can play RT at the level Vollmer has this year.

Quote:

The 3rd reason would be this. I would acknowledge that if we resign Edelman for, say, 3MM/yr he wouldn't be as good as the Wes Welker we sign for $10MM/yr. But the question I would ask, is Welker $7MM better? Would his production be 3 times better? More importantly forget about individual comparisons, would the offense as a whole be THAT much more productive? Would the money I saved by signing Edelman, make the team better being spent elsewhere?

You can make the exact same argument subtituting Vollmer and Cannon for Welker and Edelman.
But what you miss is that the design of the offense revolves around Welkers role. NO TEAM in the NFL will defend the Patriots the same with Edleman in Welkers place. It just won't happen. You take away from every other receiver on the field by doing that. Yes it has MUCH more than a 7,000,000 impact.

Quote:

Again this isn't about Welker the player. He's great and productive. But are we a better team with him and not Volmer, or him and not Talib, not just next year but going forward.

Yes, we are.

Quote:

I think most of the people on this board think that keeping Welker is a no brainer. It should be an easy decision. But I think its a lot harder than that. There are a lot of ripples that are created when you sign any player to a big contract, whether its Welker, Talib, OR Volmer. I, at least recognize, that, and I'm glad I don't have to make that choice.

Welker is more valuable to this team than anyone else who is a FA.

Quote:

Hey MAYBE the choice doesn't come down to either Volmer of Welker. Maybe we let Talib walk, send McCourty back to CB, and draft a safety from what is supposed to be a deep and talented class this year and save enough money to pay BOTH Volmer and Welker.

Keep Talib, move McCourty back to corner, sign a topp safety, and draft another. Bring Welker back, draft. Championship.

Quote:

The offense would benefit, but does the defense take a step back adding ANOTHER very talented but very young player? See Andy no easy answers.

I think the answers are clear. If you think you can't lose anything them you get to the point of no easy answers. If you think giving up Welker is smart, then you get to the point of ridiculous.