ESPN.com's Early Free Agency winners and Losers

[NE_PATS_FAN_54]

2. New England Patriots: Too bad they didn't do this last year. Had they been this aggressive in free agency then, they might have added that one receiver or one defensive back who could have led them back to the Super Bowl. Linebacker Adalius Thomas is one of the best signings of the offseason. Although he probably won't have as many sacks or tackles as he had in Baltimore, Thomas will be a great weapon for brilliant Bill Belichick. Halfback Sammy Morris and tight end Kyle Brady are good role players for the offense. The most interesting move was trading two draft picks (their second- and seventh-round picks) to Miami for 5-foot-8 Wes Welker. The Patriots like smaller receivers who are quick out of breaks. Although they might have overpaid in draft choice compensation, they acquired a receiver they liked as opposed to just taking guys off the street the way they did last year.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2789661

 

[upstater1]

Yeah, why didn't we sign Adalius Thomas last year?!!!

 

[primetime]

Yeah, why didn't we sign Adalius Thomas last year?!!!

Hahaha... love it.

 

[patsox23]

LOL. Clayton, even in naming the Pats a winner, HATES the Patriots.

 

[khayos]

How on God's green earth are we #2 behind the 49ers?

 

[Fixit]

How on God's green earth are we #2 behind the 49ers?

I was wondering that myself.

 

[jeffd]

How on God's green earth are we #2 behind the 49ers?

because the niners improved their team more. last year we were division champs and one of the best 4 teams in football. that doesn't leave alot of room to improve. the niners with their moves may have gone from average to divisional or conference contenders.

 

[Gopats!!!]

How on God's green earth are we #2 behind the 49ers?

Three letters --- T B C

 

[hwc]

Yeah. It was definitely a huge mistake re-signing Richard Seymour last offseason. What were we thinking?

 

[Pats Fanatic]

How on God's green earth are we #2 behind the 49ers?

Because they signed Tully Banta-Cain.

 

[spacecrime]

I wish he'd done all the teams, not just the top and bottom five. I'dlike to see a reacp of jets, colts, steelers, bills, chargers

 

[drew4008]

the niners with their moves may have gone from average to divisional or conference contenders.

You're out of your mind if you believe that.

 

[salty]

You're out of your mind if you believe that.

I'd say they are definitely divisional contenders. They would've been if they hadn't done ANYTHING this off-season. Their main competion is the Seahawks, a team on a downward trajetory. Also, the Niners beat them twice last year.

Hell, its not even outlandish to say they can contend for the conference. The NFC is weak. The frigging Bears (with Wrecks Grossman!) were the best NFC team last year.

That said, I still think the Pats have had the better off-season so far. Their additions fit the team perfectly, and all came at pretty good prices. I don't know that you can say either of those things about Nate Clements.

 

[zippo59]

This dissapoints me. Just because a team is the most active doesn't automatically mean they are free agency winner.

 

[Gon_Trevil]

This dissapoints me. Just because a team is the most active doesn't automatically mean they are free agency winner.

Exactly; especially when media types measure your success at this time by how big a name you signed and how big a contract you gave him.

If the Pats had given A.D. 80 million then Clayton would have probably rated them above the Niners. Sad.

 

[DarrylS]

Clayton has been pretty irrelevant lately, do not get this 49'ers as #1 though, maybe the value of TBC being an ex patriot carries extra weight.

 

[JDP111]

Who cares what Clayton and ESPN think. . . . .It's not something I'll lose sleep over.

 

[ClevTrev]

Up to this season, the Redskins traditionally have been the most active in the FA market. It's really been productive for them . . .

Clayton uses a lot of words, but not a lot of thought.

 

[spacecrime]

This dissapoints me. Just because a team is the most active doesn't automatically mean they are free agency winner.

Well, if yoiu think of it as "Who has improved themselves SO FAR since March 1?" you will understand what he is talking about. Who has improved themselves the most by the net gain of quality players and who has deproved (is deproved the opposite of improved?) themselves the most by having the biggest net loss of quality players.

I don't think of it as just who is most active, but who has helped their team the most. These are actually close to the same thing so far, as mostly quality FAs have been signed/traded for.

 

[zippo59]

Well, if yoiu think of it as "Who has improved themselves SO FAR since March 1?" you will understand what he is talking about. Who has improved themselves the most by the net gain of quality players and who has deproved (is deproved the opposite of improved?) themselves the most by having the biggest net loss of quality players.

I don't think of it as just who is most active, but who has helped their team the most. These are actually close to the same thing so far, as mostly quality FAs have been signed/traded for.

But overpaying for players, especially average ones, can do more harm than help. Also a team losing a player isn't always a bad thing depending on the circumstances.