Would you have traded for Suh??

[jeffbiologist]

Now I'm not a pop fan here, and I am not of the "trade up" style unless you can get a super-impact player. Last year I proposed the trade of basically McCourty, Spikes, Brace and the Raiders pick at #17 for Suh. To me he was the surest thing since I've been keeping track, cant remember the last rookie DL to start their first Pro Bowl. Now we can look at it differently I still say do that trade even knowing how well these others came through this year. I cant help but think that at DE this year he couldnt have caused more commotion than the CB. What do you think knowing how rare such a DL like that is??

 

[State]

It's a close call, but I'd go with what we have. McCourty is too talented to pass up.

And football is a team sport.

 

[ddanny1992]

I think I can speak for all of us saying that we would love to have Suh on our team. In my opinion Suh is comparable if not on the same level that Seymour was for us. I have really high hopes for this athlete, this guy made immediate impact in the NFL, he is a wreaking havoc.

 

[jeffbiologist]

I think I can speak for all of us saying that we would love to have Suh on our team. In my opinion Suh is comparable if not on the same level that Seymour was for us. I have really high hopes for this athlete, this guy made immediate impact in the NFL, he is a wreaking havoc.

Now McCourty is a fine player, Brace and Spikes nice role players and I'm sure we will do something to make #17 into another good value player. But guys like Suh come around once a decade and I think you do everything you can to get him. Even if McC is better than Asante, BB has proven many times how replacable DBs are. I know we have a TON of good value players on the team now and are one of the lowest payrolls in the league. I did notice that we seemed to win Super Bowls when we were a bit more atop the league in that stat...

 

[ddanny1992]

Now McCourty is a fine player, Brace and Spikes nice role players and I'm sure we will do something to make #17 into another good value player. But guys like Suh come around once a decade and I think you do everything you can to get him. Even if McC is better than Asante, BB has proven many times how replacable DBs are. I know we have a TON of good value players on the team now and are one of the lowest payrolls in the league. I did notice that we seemed to win Super Bowls when we were a bit more atop the league in that stat...

Oh yeah, there is no doubt that I'm really happy with what McCourty has shown what he can do. I didn't expect this level of play from him, you know leading the rookies in interceptions. Brace and Spikes will continue to grow, and I hope that they raise their bar of expectations next season. "I did notice that we seemed to win Super Bowls when we were a bit more atop the league in that stat.." Which stat, being the lowest payroll in the league or...?

 

[MaineMan]

Now McCourty is a fine player, Brace and Spikes nice role players and I'm sure we will do something to make #17 into another good value player. But guys like Suh come around once a decade and I think you do everything you can to get him. Even if McC is better than Asante, BB has proven many times how replacable DBs are. I know we have a TON of good value players on the team now and are one of the lowest payrolls in the league. I did notice that we seemed to win Super Bowls when we were a bit more atop the league in that stat...

Unless I'm mistaken, the roster when we won those Superbowls was quite a bit more skewed toward accomplished veterans on their second, if not third, contracts, which would tend to increase the payroll relative to other teams, yes?

Also, IIRC, during the 2009 off-season, when we franchised Cassel, his $15 million put us so close to the cap that we had to move it off the books by trading him before we could reasonably risk re-signing some of our own free agents. Since then, in a rebuilding phase, we've had something like a 43% roster turnover - with the sudden influx of new guys being either recent draft picks made in approximately the same ranges as usual during BB's tenure or, as has also been common during BB's years, "bridge" veterans working for close to the vet minimum.

Seems to me that the current lower payroll has been a natural consequence of the rebuilding situation, not the goal. I'm sure that the payroll will rise again soon enough as contracts are extended and renewed.

 

[RodThePat]

He is a "shoot the gap" kind of DL that doesn't fit our system. He doesn't occupy blocks or stop the run nearly enough to be thought of as a slam dunk success at DE in our defense.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Now I'm not a pop fan here, and I am not of the "trade up" style unless you can get a super-impact player. Last year I proposed the trade of basically McCourty, Spikes, Brace and the Raiders pick at #17 for Suh. To me he was the surest thing since I've been keeping track, cant remember the last rookie DL to start their first Pro Bowl. Now we can look at it differently I still say do that trade even knowing how well these others came through this year. I cant help but think that at DE this year he couldnt have caused more commotion than the CB. What do you think knowing how rare such a DL like that is??

OTOH, let me point this fact out: Suh's contract is worth between $60M and $68M.

That is roughly equivalent to the rookie contracts of the Patriots' 2009 and 2010 rookie classes—combined.

As awesome as Suh might be, the cost would just be too high.

 

[Sciz]

Without knowing how McCourty would turn out, I would've traded up to like 6 or something for Suh.

 

[jsull87]

He is a "shoot the gap" kind of DL that doesn't fit our system. He doesn't occupy blocks or stop the run nearly enough to be thought of as a slam dunk success at DE in our defense.

lets not kid ourselves... he would dominate in our d just like any d.

but would i give up a pro bowl cb (rookie), starting ILB (rookie), Starting DE (brace has done ok this year) and our 17 this year for Suh? No. Just my opinion.

 

[ZoisKing]

Football is a team sport. That line has been regurgitated countlesss times, but it still is the standard by which this team is built. You don't trade four contributors, especially the level that we have or will have based on your prospective trade, for one player. That player cannot win games by himself, and only the quarterback is worthy of such value.

Look at the players on this team that were acquired by BB doing trade downs. He manages the money available by making smarter selections in the draft, and in the end has a better ball club than the next guy. Matthews is a constant topic tosses around, but once again he got a handful of guys who are all solid contributors instead of one guy.

Falling in love with one player isn't something BB is going to do, and our team is better off because of it.

 

[Potstickas]

the last two years, the team was in transition/rebuilding mode. It requires, not a stud in any position, but many picks to restock.

we would not be the team we are today if we traded our entire 2010 draft for Suh.

Now if Suh was in the draft THIS year, I would go for it, and I think we would have had the picks to make the trade.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Yes, Yes Yes and Yes, I would have traded a ton of picks for Suh.

What a stud, once in a generation type DT with the versatility to convert to DE in our defense.

PS: I think we still could have gotten McCourty in the second round, but the Ravens would have stolen Gronkowski from us. And we could have stolen Cody from the Ravens.

Suh - Cody - Wilfork! What a D Line. We give up maybe 70 YPG on the ground with that D Line.

 

[Potstickas]

Yes, Yes Yes and Yes, I would have traded a ton of picks for Suh.

What a stud, once in a generation type DT with the versatility to convert to DE in our defense.

PS: I think we still could have gotten McCourty in the second round, but the Ravens would have stolen Gronkowski from us. And we could have stolen Cody from the Ravens.

Suh - Cody - Wilfork! What a D Line. We give up maybe 70 YPG on the ground with that D Line.

you trade for suh, you can pretty much do a ditka, and go golfing for the rest of the draft.

 

[ZoisKing]

you trade for suh, you can pretty much do a ditka, and go golfing for the rest of the draft.

Agreed-Suh would have been close to unobtainable to get last year. Last year's draft isn't one I'll be second guessing anytime soon, nor wishing to change.

 

[patchick]

Now I'm not a pop fan here, and I am not of the "trade up" style unless you can get a super-impact player. Last year I proposed the trade of basically McCourty, Spikes, Brace and the Raiders pick at #17 for Suh. To me he was the surest thing since I've been keeping track, cant remember the last rookie DL to start their first Pro Bowl. Now we can look at it differently I still say do that trade even knowing how well these others came through this year. I cant help but think that at DE this year he couldnt have caused more commotion than the CB. What do you think knowing how rare such a DL like that is??

Hold on, you have your trade wrong -- Brace was drafted the year before. Perhaps you meant Gronkowski? Plus Aaron Hernandez and Taylor Price were also drafted with the McCourty pick.

So let's start with McCourty, Gronkowski, Spikes, Price, Hernandez and the 2011 #17 for Suh.

In terms of "draft value," recall that in Gosselin's redraft he ranked 3 of those players #4, #19 and #30 overall in a verrry deep class. Since this is a hindsight draft, his retrospective rankings are a reasonable source of input for our value equation. So you've just traded the equivalent of #4, #19, #30, #61 and the following year's #17 for one of the best d-line prospects the league has ever seen.

Practically speaking, where does that leave your team?

Well, a defensive line of Suh, Wilfork and G. Warren would be phenomenal. But Gary Guyton would be your every-down ILB, Kyle Arrington and Darius Butler would be your starting CBs with a street FA at nickel, and Alge Crumpler would be your #1 option at tight end, backed up by street FAs. (Don't even think about filling holes with any vets making above minimum, this year or next, because you've just added $10 mil/year to your payroll. Suh's contract is closer to Brady's than Wilfork's.) And you don't have a lot of ammo to restock cheaply in the 2011 draft, either.

So on balance, I'm very happy as is. The 2010 draft was a rare bird, with deep enough talent to do a vast restocking of the roster. I wouldn't have wanted to sit it out, not even for Suh.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Hold on, you have your trade wrong -- Brace was drafted the year before. Perhaps you meant Gronkowski? Plus Aaron Hernandez and Taylor Price were also drafted with the McCourty pick.

So let's start with McCourty, Gronkowski, Spikes, Price, Hernandez and the 2011 #17 for Suh.

In terms of "draft value," recall that in Gosselin's redraft he ranked 3 of those players #4, #19 and #30 overall in a verrry deep class. Since this is a hindsight draft, his retrospective rankings are a reasonable source of input for our value equation. So you've just traded the equivalent of #4, #19, #30, #61 and the following year's #17 for one of the best d-line prospects the league has ever seen.

Practically speaking, where does that leave your team?

Well, a defensive line of Suh, Wilfork and G. Warren would be phenomenal. But Gary Guyton would be your every-down ILB, Kyle Arrington and Darius Butler would be your starting CBs with a street FA at nickel, and Alge Crumpler would be your #1 option at tight end, backed up by street FAs. (Don't even think about filling holes with any vets making above minimum, this year or next, because you've just added $10 mil/year to your payroll. Suh's contract is closer to Brady's than Wilfork's.) And you don't have a lot of ammo to restock cheaply in the 2011 draft, either.

So on balance, I'm very happy as is. The 2010 draft was a rare bird, with deep enough talent to do a vast restocking of the roster. I wouldn't have wanted to sit it out, not even for Suh.

I get it. We knew it was going to be a deep draft....but our "star" system seems to be pretty selective. I kinda have a feeling BB could get by with Suh and JAGs at CB and ILB(didnt Guyton start a whole season for us?). Oh, and I did propese throwin in Brace as it was before the draft and the swap of value and roster position...back before he made it onto the field.

 

[CanadianPat'sFan]

Looking back now I would have traded Randy Moss and our Oakland Pick from this year and keep all the guys we picked maybe give up the Cunningham selection in the second round(not saying anything about Cunningham).

With that being said to go into this year with only Tate and Mini Welker would have troubled me but picking up Branch to go with both TE from the draft would make things easier. Branch has performed beyond my wildest dreams but I love Suh and he would have been a almost PRICELESS piece to our defense. He is the new "Mean Joe Greene" of football today IMO and maybe the best DL I have seen come out of the draft in a long time.

 

[CanadianPat'sFan]

Suh - Cody - Wilfork! What a D Line. We give up maybe 70 YPG on the ground with that D Line.

Heck if we knew Warren would be taking the year off we should have offered him with a lower pick and go with Suh, Cody and Willfork. Our DL which would have been in place for the next 4-5 years with Wilfork resigning. The cap room dumping Warren would have made it easier to sign Suh but I would have still put Cody on a diet

 

[Off The Grid]

OTOH, let me point this fact out: Suh's contract is worth between $60M and $68M.

That is roughly equivalent to the rookie contracts of the Patriots' 2009 and 2010 rookie classes—combined.

As awesome as Suh might be, the cost would just be too high.

Beautifully put, and it's a point I harp on: I don't know if I've ever seen a single post, proposing a Trade Up, that took into ANY account the full Salary Cap implications: Not only would we be GUTTING the Depth of Talent of our team, based on that trade, alone, it would've further shredded the Depth of Talent by forcing us to reduce cost at several other critical spots on the 53 man roster.

I don't know if Trading Up is EVER a good idea, frankly. The ripple effect on the Quality of Depth on the entire roster is simply awful. Furthermore, the idea that we need to chase down these alleged "Elite" players, in order to compete for the Super Bowl, is patently false.

Every one of our Super Bowl Championship teams had a minimum of "Elite" draft picks, and a deep roster of Role Players...And not one of those teams exemplified that approach any better than this current team.