jeffbiologist

Marshall was tagged last year with a 1st for comp....and Miami got him for a 2nd and a future 2nd, no first involved. The tag is a tool to control a player until the team can get something in return. If we didnt tag Mankins we would have no control, and that control is worth $$. The Krafts arent in the business of giving away $$ regardless if he is wanted or wants to be here. There are alot more tags than normal this year simply because of the uncertainty of the CBA. Alot of players signed their tags quickly because they are afraid of the team dropping the tag later if the cap goes down. Of course even the signed tenders could be null and void depending on the outcome of the CBA.

Snake Eyes

My plan would strengthen the line.

__________________
"The secret of steel has always carried with it a mystery, you must learn it's riddle, Conan, you must learn its discipline, for no one in this world can you trust, not men, not women, not beasts...this you can trust"


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

dryheat44

Nobody's arguing that the defense doesn't need improving. I find it hard, though, to make the argument that the offense would be better by getting back to what won us the Super Bowls. We have perhaps the greatest offense ever right now, and certainly since the 80s Niners. Changing it isn't going to make us better. The O-line wasn't any better during the Super Bowls than it is now. The quarterback is better. The TE and WRs are better.

Yes, we need to keep improving our defense, but that doesn't preclude BB from improving the offense. Adding Fitzgerald gives the defense another guy that requires a double team, something Branch doesn't. Putting a WR corps of Fitzgerald-Welker/Edelmen-and choose the other plus the TEs is downright terrifying to other defenses.

Hell, it's worth it just because the Jets wouldn't be able to rush an extra man.

EDIT: Just noticed your last line. Jerry Rice won Super Bowls. Lots of them. Marvin Harrison won one. It's a funny argument. Only one team a year wins the Super Bowl. A lots of the best of any position has never won the Super Bowl. Munoz, Hannah, Marino, Fouts, Winslow, Gonzalez, Roaf, W Jones, B Smith, etc.

__________________
When it's third and 10, you can have the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time. -- R.I.P. Max McGee

Box_O_Rocks

Per Roger Goodell when fining NE for alleged violation of the video tape rules, NE was to be fined either a first or a second & third, which presented an NFL position of equivalence for those two options. Marshall's trade involving a current year second and a future year second was the equivalent of a second & third (when trading future picks the NFL accept the premise that a future pick is the equivalent of a current year pick one round later). By that standard, Marshall's controlling team received a first round equivalent return. Which is why I believe NE isn't prepared to take significantly less than the two firsts expected of a franchise tag. Of course DeMaurice Smith seems to be messing with my valuation.

__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

jeffbiologist

I dont know any scenario that would make a 1st round pick equal to a 2nd & 3rd from the same team the same year. All anyone has to do is look at the value chart, you know better. Stop being greedy! I enjoy having discussions about options for our team this time of year but inevitably the greedy pee in the pool so much I dont want to swim anymore. They would be overjoyed to take a 2nd TODAY if they could, no more problem child, a decent replacement pick and money to spend in areas of value. Guards just arent valued, neither are holdouts.

Box_O_Rocks

Guards aren't valued? Which is why there are Guards getting $7-8M/year deals? Which value chart? There are any number running around out there, and none are official. But I thank you for skimming my remarks and ignoring the team history from last year's holdout which informed them. I am in awe of your inside access, "overjoyed" with a second for Mankins; you've even outmaneuvered Holley's sources! I am chastised by your moral high ground on greed, I bow to your pulpit, not to mention your puritanical pool standards.

__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ctpatsfan77

Cassel/Vrabel went for #34, and Cassel was of zero value to the Patriots except as a trade chip/insurance policy.

Mankins is slightly more than a trade chip/insurance policy in terms of his value.

I don't know that I see a 1+3 as the floor, but I'd say the floor is more than a 2.

__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots

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

jeffbiologist

Some teams in the league might pay Guards $7-8M and some teams win. Team history? Not applicable. Value chart?
Draft Countdown - Trade Value Chart
Not official but a pretty fair guide. When you went on about us losing a first OR a second and third it wasnt a choice, it was dependant on us making the playoffs, remember?
I dont think we need inside access to see that we dont want to pay him market value and we dont care if he likes the franchise tag. Skimming your remarks? YUP.

Box_O_Rocks

Ah, not applicable, the scientific process at work no doubt.

Fair guides are just "fair."

Indeed I do recall King Roger's decree as to what draft picks NE would forfeit, which begs the question - is a team to be punished less if they fail to make the postseason? While you may argue using an unofficial trade value chart, the league still viewed the penalty options to be punitive in about the same measure. As NE fans we see the injustice, to our less evolved brethren ...

Market rates are an interesting argument. At the moment the players are trying to force a seller's market, and the owners are looking for more of a buyer's market. NE has been operating on a set budget which spends every bit as much as the rest of the NFL as a group, and amidst uncertain market conditions tries to minimize excess. That NE does not open their purse in the same manner as Washington or Oakland does not mean they set an unfair value, certainly we've heard reports claiming the offers last season would have averaged more than $7M/year, if not with as much up front as Mankins may have wished. That price was established because Buffalo and Cleveland and Minnesota, to name three, were shelling out considerable lucre for Guards. It's also a rarely noted factor that NE's run game goes through the interior, behind Koppen, Mankins, and Neal ... or whomever will eventually resurrect those roles in 2011/12.

I submit NE's use of the franchise tag is more than an attempt to control a valuable commodity (which goes to my argument on the valuation of Guards), it is also a valuation of Mankins the player. A valuation which subtly replaces the $1.5M+ (with interest) he forfeited in his holdout last season, while paying him the going rate for a top Guard on a top contender. The other frictions involved aside, NE is stroking Mankins' ruffled feathers with cold, hard cash to show him, and those who care to look, how valuable a commodity he is in NE's eyes.

You choose to call me "greedy," yet the evidence before me does not indicate a team "undervaluing" a player. Nor does it suggest a team which is willing to "settle" for a second round pick in compensation. Tis not greed dictating my appreciation of the situation, follow the money.

__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.