JackBauer
Hall of Fame Poster
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2005
- Messages
- 25,365
- Reaction score
- 7,823
I will give you the Colts, but the Saints?!? The Saints' leading WR (Marques Colston) had 70 catches (27th in the league), 1074 yards (18th), and 9 TDs (10th). The Saints in 2009 didn't have close to an elite WR. Also, their defense didn't have a lot of deficiencies just not spectacular.
Adding Fitzgerald doesn't foreclose improvement, but it almost guarantees modest improvements over significant improvements. The Pats will not have tons of picks if they trade for Fitzgerald. To get a deal done, they will most likely go from three picks in the top 33 picks to one. To make a significant trade like that, a new deal would have to be in place to do so. That means that Fitzgerald would be the highest paid WR in the league limiting the cap dollars available.
Hey if people are happy with an explosive and dynamic regular season team with an elite offense that can't win a Super Bowl, support this trade. I'd rather build the best TEAM in the league where the defense can win games when the offense has games like they just had vs. the Jets. This team has not won a Super Bowl without a top defense.
People are too much in love with offense and offensive skill players. The Pats have tons of playmakers on offense (Brady, Welker, Gronk, Branch, Hernandez, Woodhead, BJGE), but few on defense. That is where they need to make a big splash if they are going to make a high profile acquisition. There are plenty of free agent WRs this year who can improve the offense without giving up the farm like you will have to for Fitzgerald.
This is a moot argument because the likelihood of Belichick giving up what it takes to get Fitzgerald is next to zero.
Why not sign one of the legion good but not elite FA wideouts (e.g. Sims-Walker), instead of dealing picks for elite talent? That would make much more sense.