Gostkowski signs tender

[pats1]

According to Ourlads.com, which I can tell you is a reliable source. We will most likely hear about it today, or when Pro Football Weekly posts their transactions for yesterday (today or Monday).

 

[Rob0729]

Good to hear. Happy to see him back in the fold. Now they need to give him a long term deal.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Not surprising. He had signed a waiver and was working out with the team sans tender I believe.

If Mankins decides to hold out until the June deadline, it will not be an encouraging sign. In fact if they don't have some indication from him that he's sufficiently voiced his displeasure before the draft, don't be surprised if Pouncy doesn't become the safe pick in the first if they can't trade down incrementally if not out of it for a package of second and third and fourth rounders.

 

[Gwedd]

Glad to hear this, mos' def'. The Ghost is a fine kicker and it's nice to have that sort of reliability as well as continuity.

I think the Mankins situation will work out just fine.

 

[Fencer]

I think the Mankins situation will work out just fine.

I'd guess Mankins is looking at Wilfork and copying his playbook. I.e., he's playing as much hardball as he can without being a jerk, but he'll stop short of being a jerk.

They happen to have a lot in common in terms of being elite players at positions that simply don't garner significant stats, so a good strategy for one is apt to be a good strategy for the other.

 

[Nonentity]

Good to hear. I am happy to pay both Gostowski and Mankins their money to be honest, hopefully Mankins's situation will resolve itself like Vince's did.

 

[Kontradiction]

Good to hear. Happy to see him back in the fold. Now they need to give him a long term deal.

This ^^^^^.

 

[PatsChamp88]

Lock this beast up!

 

[RobertWeathers]

Good to hear. Happy to see him back in the fold. Now they need to give him a long term deal.

In the Belichick era, the team has shelled out long-term deals at every position on the field- except guard and fullback. It may be coincidence or an organizational philosophy regarding the value of the position.

Spidey sense tells me that this situation gets worse as each side does not agree on the value of the position and Mankins in particular.

 

[mgteich]

Pouncey is certainly a safe pick. Let's put another way. Our pick is expected to be able to contribute in 2010 and start in 2011.

Are we really counting on Mankins AND Neal AND Koppen to be our starters in 2010 and 2011. Pouncey could start at any of three positions in 2010 (at any time this was needed) and could starter in 2011.

And yes, Pouncey would constitute "Mankins insurance".

Not surprising. He had signed a waiver and was working out with the team sans tender I believe.

If Mankins decides to hold out until the June deadline, it will not be an encouraging sign. In fact if they don't have some indication from him that he's sufficiently voiced his displeasure before the draft, don't be surprised if Pouncy doesn't become the safe pick in the first if they can't trade down incrementally if not out of it for a package of second and third and fourth rounders.

 

[redsx8827]

In the Belichick era, the team has shelled out long-term deals at every position on the field- except guard and fullback. It may be coincidence or an organizational philosophy regarding the value of the position.

Spidey sense tells me that this situation gets worse as each side does not agree on the value of the position and Mankins in particular.

Then Why would the Patriots spend a 1st round pick on any guard - and Mankins specifically? I would think the usage of a 1st round pick on a player or a position means that they believe his position/his talent is on the same level as that of a WR, DL, TE, RB, S, etc. The Patriots have spent recent 1st round picks on all those positions. if the position of Guard is not somewhat equal to the value of one of those positions, then why would they spend an equal draft pick on one? Wouldn't spending a 1st round pick on a certain position mean that, if he performs well, they would pay him a fair salary level?

 

[mgteich]

Belichick has a budget. Perhaps he simply doesn't believe that allocating $6M or more for a guard is prudent.

Personally, I hope that we sign Mankins for $6M, or even a bit more, if that's what it takes. However, Belichick may not agree.

However, Belichick may be fine with drafting Asomah in the 2nd round as insurance and then move on to the tough negotiations, being fully prepared to have Mankins move on.

Then Why would the Patriots spend a 1st round pick on any guard - and Mankins specifically? I would think the usage of a 1st round pick on a player or a position means that they believe his position/his talent is on the same level as that of a WR, DL, TE, RB, S, etc. The Patriots have spent recent 1st round picks on all those positions. if the position of Guard is not somewhat equal to the value of one of those positions, then why would they spend an equal draft pick on one? Wouldn't spending a 1st round pick on a certain position mean that, if he performs well, they would pay him a fair salary level?

 

[Miguel]

In the Belichick era, the team has shelled out long-term deals at every position on the field- except guard and fullback. It may be coincidence or an organizational philosophy regarding the value of the position.

Spidey sense tells me that this situation gets worse as each side does not agree on the value of the position and Mankins in particular.

Why does the 2006 Neal four-year deal not count as a long-term deal???

 

[RobertWeathers]

Why does the 2006 Neal four-year deal not count as a long-term deal???

I worded my point poorly, Miguel. I meant long-term, big-money deals. Neal's 4 year deal was certainly a commitment, but the dollar value was reasonable.

I had forgotten about Compton's. 3 yr $3m was decent money back then- but not big money.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Then Why would the Patriots spend a 1st round pick on any guard - and Mankins specifically? I would think the usage of a 1st round pick on a player or a position means that they believe his position/his talent is on the same level as that of a WR, DL, TE, RB, S, etc. The Patriots have spent recent 1st round picks on all those positions. if the position of Guard is not somewhat equal to the value of one of those positions, then why would they spend an equal draft pick on one? Wouldn't spending a 1st round pick on a certain position mean that, if he performs well, they would pay him a fair salary level?

IMO with the way the Pats manage the draft, they will rarely overpay for talent. If you look at Mankins rookie deal, it was very reasonable. He was at the tail end of Rd 1.

Free agency is a different animal IMO.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

IMO with the way the Pats manage the draft, they will rarely overpay for talent. If you look at Mankins rookie deal, it was very reasonable. He was at the tail end of Rd 1.

Free agency is a different animal IMO.

He was also labeled a first round reach even at 32 by most of the pundits. But depending on the depth at different positions in each draft and the fact that you don't often get to pick again for 32 spots... If you draft an every down player at the tail end of the first and he starts out of the gate he represents tremendous value. I think that happens more often with guys manning the trenches than it does with the skill players. How size, strength and technique will translate from the college to the pros seems to be easier to decipher and often times interchangable amongst the big uglies...Mankins was a LT his entire college career but Bill drafted him to replace Andruzzi at LG. He also had the benefit of being tight with Logan's HC, Pat Hills, so he knew what he was getting. The way the salaries for OLineman had begun to explode a late first rounder who starts for 5 season represented tremendous value.

 

[patriots pam]

Just got a text from NFL Mobile Live that Ghost signed it. :singing:

:woohoo: is reserved for when they do a LTD. Make it happen, Pats FO!!!

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Belichick has a budget. Perhaps he simply doesn't believe that allocating $6M or more for a guard is prudent.

Personally, I hope that we sign Mankins for $6M, or even a bit more, if that's what it takes. However, Belichick may not agree.

However, Belichick may be fine with drafting Asomah in the 2nd round as insurance and then move on to the tough negotiations, being fully prepared to have Mankins move on.

nearly everything the pats have done so far this off season suggests you are right, that they will try to sign Mankins and lock up the key pieces of the current team and then work on Tommy's contract.

it's a damn shame that 2011 might be lost to a strike, as a lot of what the pats are doing seems to come together over the next two seasons.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

:woohoo: is reserved for when they do a LTD. Make it happen, Pats FO!!!

I've said this before. There are two outstanding reasons to keep Gostkowski a Patriot:

(A) In recent years, kickers who make it this far generally tend to get better; almost every kicker who's had a 90%+ accuracy season has had it after age 30.

(B) If Gostkowski's career is a football game, he might still be in the first quarter right now.

Yes, there are no guarantees, but I'd sure as heck hate to see Gostkowski kicking for Denver or I*** for the next decade+.

 

[patriots pam]

I've said this before. There are two outstanding reasons to keep Gostkowski a Patriot:

(A) In recent years, kickers who make it this far generally tend to get better; almost every kicker who's had a 90%+ accuracy season has had it after age 30...

I did not know that.

Interesting tidbit, thanks!

Yes, there are no guarantees, but I'd sure as heck hate to see Gostkowski kicking for Denver or I*** for the next decade+.

My god, man! Are you trying to make me cry or something? The mere thought...