Curious to hear everyone's thoughts on Welker

ctpatsfan77 said:

2007:
Moss—160 targets
Welker—145
Stallworth—74
Faulk—59
===TOP 4: 438
Gaffney—50
Watson—49
K. Brady—16

2011:
Welker—173
GRONK—124
Hernandez—113
Branch—90
===TOP 4: 500
Ochocinco—32
Woodhead—31
BJGE—13

Click to expand...

If there's a point to be made with these stats, you will have to point it out.

DaBruinz said:

so, let me get this straight. Welker is going to lose 25% of his production because he got a year older? That's essentially what you are saying..

Sorry, but that makes no sense at all..

Click to expand...

Welker will lose 25% of his production IF the team signs a bonafide threat as a downfield target.

Anyone who thinks Welker would have been at 1,500 yards if OchoSucko would have not stolen 3 Million from Kraft is incorrect IMO.

With a legitimate down the field threat,both Gronkowski and Welker would be at or near 1,000 yards but not well over,if at all.

I don't expect Gronk and Welker to have those types of numbers as they did in 2011 unless we sh!t the bed on another season of no deep threats.

If your TE and Slot receiver are putting up those types of numbers,it shows you what the team has on the outside....not much.

Having both Gronk and Welker at 800 or 900 yards and Hernandez at 600 or 700 yards is fine as long as someone consistently downfield is having a 1,000+ yard season.

Heisenberg said:

Absolutely love Welker. He's one of the best Patriots I've seen in my lifetime. That said, I am open to all scenarios for next year, including letting him walk. I'm not going to say we HAVE to sign him or we HAVE to let him walk. It's all about evaluating the options that FA and the draft provide. If letting him walk will allow us to bring in some playmakers on D and we then choose to also draft a WR in the first or second round or bring in Lloyd/another decent FA WR I could be game for that.

We don't need the second best offense of all time again to win the Super Bowl. We need our youth on D to continue to improve, to bring in some veteran talent alongside them, and for our offense to have a few playmakers and balance. We certainly are going to have a great O-Line, Brady, Gronk and Hernandez. I think Ridley and BJGE or Ridley and Vereen will be a very solid rushing attack. Welker is a great player and a great teammate but isn't vital to another Super Bowl run, especially with our cap flexibility, a stacked FA WR class and 4 picks in the first two rounds. Improve the team as much as possible, with Welker or not. Since we have zero insight into FA/Trade/Draft evaluations there is no reason to claim Welker must or mustn't be signed. I trust Bill to do the right thing with the information he has. He's never fallen in love with a high-profile player which is why we've been consistently in the running for the title for the last decade.

Click to expand...

Actually, he has. Although in Brady's case it didn't hurt us. Some of the others (Moss, AD, Seymour)...meh. He figures it out after a while. And you're making a lot of assumptions. Like the OL, which disappointed again when it mattered most despite a LG and LT making $15M between them, which is currently down 2 starting centers, and possibly the starting veteran RG and LT who may retire. We have no clue what will happen with Ridley let alone Vereen, and Benny is what he is and his reps haven't even had a phone call hinting interest in extending him. Wes has provided us with a lot of that cap flexibility over the last 5 seasons and now is the time to use some on him. They can add to that as well by re-signing Branch at half the price and using the difference plus the money they wasted on Ocho (another love child) to pay for someone like Lloyd. And you must be new here or you wouldn't be down with counting on another drafted WR let alone spending a first or second on it... Heck, most of the FA WR's people are coveting this off season didn't even emerge from those rounds... And the ones who did often include too much attitude and baggage. I'd like to see him spend those draft picks on defensive talent and possibly another Center if they can't get Connelly back long term.

Welker is a franchise level WR in the Patriots system. He's the best slot WR in the game, the best small space receiver in the game, and probably the best 'underneath' receiver in the game (Not including possible RB competitors in this area). He deserves to be paid accordingly. However, since he's not a 'true' WR, it's difficult to define 'accordingly' in context.

He should probably bank something in the area of Fitzgerald money (minus any age penalty), if you're basing everything on production numbers, but his uniqueness will probably end up hurting him in that department. He'll probably settle for something between $8-9 million, and he'll be a bargain at that price if the Patriots can keep it to a 3 year deal.


Just my $.02

Deus Irae said:

Welker is a franchise level WR in the Patriots system. He's the best slot WR in the game, the best small space receiver in the game, and probably the best 'underneath' receiver in the game (Not including possible RB competitors in this area). He deserves to be paid accordingly. However, since he's not a 'true' WR, it's difficult to define 'accordingly' in context.

He should probably bank something in the area of Fitzgerald money (minus any age penalty), if you're basing everything on production numbers, but his uniqueness will probably end up hurting him in that department. He'll probably settle for something between $8-9 million, and he'll be a bargain at that price if the Patriots can keep it to a 3 year deal.

Click to expand...

I think that last part is going to be the sticking point. From everything I've read I don't think he's going to settle for anything less than four.

PATRIOTSFANINPA said:

Welker will lose 25% of his production IF the team signs a bonafide threat as a downfield target.

Anyone who thinks Welker would have been at 1,500 yards if OchoSucko would have not stolen 3 Million from Kraft is incorrect IMO.

With a legitimate down the field threat,both Gronkowski and Welker would be at or near 1,000 yards but not well over,if at all.

I don't expect Gronk and Welker to have those types of numbers as they did in 2011 unless we sh!t the bed on another season of no deep threats.

If your TE and Slot receiver are putting up those types of numbers,it shows you what the team has on the outside....not much.

Having both Gronk and Welker at 800 or 900 yards and Hernandez at 600 or 700 yards is fine as long as someone consistently downfield is having a 1,000+ yard season.

Click to expand...

Ocho stole $6M. Of course the only reason they could allow him to do that was because Wes didn't opt to hold out for being grossly underpaid, as most outside WR's will. And without him I doubt any downfield receiver is going to have a 1000+ yard season with Brady in a body cast. We've been there and done that, albeit absent the TE's, but they were brought - I surmise of perceived necessity - in to upgrade a vertically shortened field because the thousand vertical yards weren't cutting it. Again, we don't need a deep threat. We just need a competent, dependable outside WR - and a little talent infusion on defense to get the status quo over the hump.

Ian said:

I think that last part is going to be the sticking point. From everything I've read I don't think he's going to settle for anything less than four.

Click to expand...

I don't mind the 4 years myself. I just view it as the cutoff year where "bargain" turns into "potential wasted year". Massaging the guarantees and bonuses would be more important in the 4 year deal, and the Patriots would be less likely to get a true bargain but, if the Patriots are serious about bringing in a legitimate middle-deep receiver and another receiver to prepare for Branch's retirement, Welker will be protected somewhat by having more open space underneath (which means fewer big hits), and by not being needed for as many catches overall.

Lloyd/Wallace/etc...
Gronk
Hernandez
Branch/developed WR
RB, other than Woodhead, that the team will actually throw the ball to

Put that together and I think Welker for four years is a relatively safe move, although less likely to be the bargain I was referring to.

patsfan-1982 said:

its not just age, there is no way Brady is going to pass for 5000 yards again if he throws for 4000 yards i just cant see Welker haveing 1500 yards of that with gronk and hernandez on the field, the pass offense was the second best in NFL history last year i dont see any of them haveing the same type of year not Brady Gronk hernandez or Welker all there numbers will be way down

Click to expand...

Welker has averaged 110 receptions and 1221 yards in his 5 seasons with the Pats.. Yet, according to you, because Brady won't throw for 5,000 again, Welker's stats are going to drop to 90-1000. A level below his average...

Sorry, but you offered nothing to support this claim that makes even a modicum of sense. In fact, there is no reason that Brady can't eclipse 5,000 on less than 600 pass attempts next year. Especially if they bring in someone who can function well as the #2 receiver. Someone who can open things up underneath by being able to stretch the intermediate routes..

Deus Irae said:

I don't mind the 4 years myself. I just view it as the cutoff year where "bargain" turns into "potential wasted year". Massaging the guarantees and bonuses would be more important in the 4 year deal, and the Patriots would be less likely to get a true bargain but, if the Patriots are serious about bringing in a legitimate middle-deep receiver and another receiver to prepare for Branch's retirement, Welker will be protected somewhat by having more open space underneath (which means fewer big hits), and by not being needed for as many catches overall.

Lloyd/Wallace/etc...
Gronk
Hernandez
Branch/developed WR
RB, other than Woodhead, that the team will actually throw the ball to

Put that together and I think Welker for four years is a relatively safe move, although less likely to be the bargain I was referring to.

Click to expand...

I agree. I think even in years 3 & 4 he's still going to have at least 800+ yards and be productive and reliable on 3rd downs, red zone, etc. It's probably just going to come down to how much guaranteed money they're willing to give him.

DaBruinz said:

Welker has averaged 110 receptions and 1221 yards in his 5 seasons with the Pats.. Yet, according to you, because Brady won't throw for 5,000 again, Welker's stats are going to drop to 90-1000. A level below his average...

Sorry, but you offered nothing to support this claim that makes even a modicum of sense. In fact, there is no reason that Brady can't eclipse 5,000 on less than 600 pass attempts next year. Especially if they bring in someone who can function well as the #2 receiver. Someone who can open things up underneath by being able to stretch the intermediate routes..

Click to expand...

That's true, but in fairness 2010 Welker was under 900-yards receiving - albeit coming off of a knee injury. So it's tough to predict where he'll be each year, but 900-1000 yards still pretty good provided they're getting actual production from elsewhere instead of having to rely exclusively on 2-3 people, only one of which was really him at the WR position this season. As it stands right now one injury to one of those 3 key people and they're in trouble. Needless to say as I've mentioned I'd love to see them with some decent options to compliment them.

Ian said:

I think that last part is going to be the sticking point. From everything I've read I don't think he's going to settle for anything less than four.

Click to expand...

And why should he.

Four only makes a difference in up front or guaranteed money. And on a single digit per year contract you're talking $3-4M. He'd want that much more up front on a shorter deal - or the deal at a higher per season rate that equals that.

4/$32M plus incentives, $12M signing bonus, $18M over the first 2, $21M guaranteed - first 3 years $3M in guaranteed salaries, final year salary $7M not guaranteed, cap hits of $6M - 2012, $6M - 2013, $8M - 2014, $10M - 2015 ($3M dead cap if released or maybe a $6M cap hit if he remains on reduced salary of $3M guaranteed - which any salary would be come week 1 anyway).

Not much difference between that deal and 3/$27M other than good will because the difference isn't guaranteed.

Wes will turn 31 this summer, not 33 or 34... They gave that kind of money and more in guaranteed terms to both Wilfork and Mankins who were 29 at the time but got it for 5 and 6 years respectively. So they will be 33 and 34 when their deals end.

MoLewisrocks said:

Actually, he has. Although in Brady's case it didn't hurt us. Some of the others (Moss, AD, Seymour)...meh. He figures it out after a while. And you're making a lot of assumptions. Like the OL, which disappointed again when it mattered most despite a LG and LT making $15M between them, which is currently down 2 starting centers, and possibly the starting veteran RG and LT who may retire. We have no clue what will happen with Ridley let alone Vereen, and Benny is what he is and his reps haven't even had a phone call hinting interest in extending him. Wes has provided us with a lot of that cap flexibility over the last 5 seasons and now is the time to use some on him. They can add to that as well by re-signing Branch at half the price and using the difference plus the money they wasted on Ocho (another love child) to pay for someone like Lloyd. And you must be new here or you wouldn't be down with counting on another drafted WR let alone spending a first or second on it... Heck, most of the FA WR's people are coveting this off season didn't even emerge from those rounds... And the ones who did often include too much attitude and baggage. I'd like to see him spend those draft picks on defensive talent and possibly another Center if they can't get Connelly back long term.

Click to expand...

Of course I'm making assumptions. I'm posting on a message board in February with little to none of the information that will be used to make these decisions. I personally loved what I saw out of Ridley this year though. The fumbles were a disaster but that's something that can be worked on in the offseason, not a physical limitation. The kid's explosive and young, and has shown it in games that count, we can work with that.

As far as the OL goes, I absolutely do not put the loss in the SB on them. We made too many mistakes as an offensive unit, which included poor decision making by Brady, poor execution by our WR's and yes, we let up 2 sacks to Tuck but it was nothing like SB 42. We played the best DL in the league and were a drop, or a fumble recovery, or an amazing Manningham catch away from winning. Against Baltimore and the Giants in the playoffs the line gave up a total of 3 sacks. And let's be serious, if we're gonna talk about coming up short on the big stage, Welker's drop was about as bad as it gets. He catches that we win.

Next year, worst case scenario we have Scarnecchia working with a starting line that consists of Solder, Mankins, Connelly, Cannon and Vollmer. That's assuming both Light and Waters retire (which would free up some cash to be re-invested). If that is the case I'm sure we'll add some depth through FA like we did this year with Waters (another assumption, why the hell not). I'd still take that kind of uncertainty with the best OL coach in the league.

Ocho was certainly a love-child but I'm not gonna say it hurt us in other areas, it was a pretty low-risk signing and it didn't work out. We all hoped he'd be a stud but in reality he was brought in as a 4th option and didn't even perform to that level. If Bill keeps him around for another year of non-production then we can say he fell in love with him and it hurt the team. I'd be shocked if he was back this year.

As far as being new here, I'm new to posting but not new to the Pats, I don't see Belichick being gun shy on a draft pick he thinks is the right move. Yea he's missed on a ton of WR's but if he agrees this class is as deep and talented as the experts think maybe he gameplans around a FA/Draft pick combo instead of locking Welker up. All I'm saying is there is absolutely no reason to think Welker has to be the answer when there are seemingly endless opportunities out there for reconstructing our WR position as well as the rest of the team. If we bring back Welker great! I just don't want him to be over-valued and to have his signing prohibit us from making other moves that may have a greater impact.

Logical People do not want Wes to leave. That drop will be forever imprinted in my mind but it was just 1 play and it would have been a fairly good catch if he kept his balance and secured the ball.

Heisenberg said:

....

Click to expand...

:welcome:

...

Ian said:

I agree. I think even in years 3 & 4 he's still going to have at least 800+ yards and be productive and reliable on 3rd downs, red zone, etc. It's probably just going to come down to how much guaranteed money they're willing to give him.

Click to expand...

I think that's the key. I don't know exactly the rules for how much money affects the cap if a guy is cut, but it seems to me that if there's really no penalty to cutting a guy, then you could give him a 10-year contract with all the guaranteed money in the first two years, and then cut him after two years and it wouldn't really hurt you at all.

Of course, I could be completely misunderstanding the cap rules.

ivanvamp said:

I think that's the key. I don't know exactly the rules for how much money affects the cap if a guy is cut, but it seems to me that if there's really no penalty to cutting a guy, then you could give him a 10-year contract with all the guaranteed money in the first two years, and then cut him after two years and it wouldn't really hurt you at all.

Of course, I could be completely misunderstanding the cap rules.

Click to expand...

You can, that's what Washington did with Haynesworth - absorbing the last of his guaranteed money during the uncapped year - it's just if he turns out to be a Haynesworth or a say Jamarcus Russell you're out $34M and you can't recoup any of it. Guaranteed money isn't paid up front like bonus money, it's just guaranteed to be paid. They actually owed Jamarcus some when they cut him and had to pay it even though they had. That probably hurt more than dead cap...

Once guaranteed money is paid there are no other guarantees. Salary is not guaranteed unless it's stipulated as guaranteed money by individual contract. However if you give them signing bonus money which is guaranteed and also amortized over the life of the contract up to 5 years, then you are on the hook for any remaining amortized bonus money to accelerate and hit your cap when you cut the player - even though you paid it to him years ago. It wasn't yet accounted for (for bookeeping purposes) under the cap.

This is a great thread, by the way. And I'm thrilled it didn't turn into another Wallce, Colston, or Lloyd thread.

Ian said:

My issue with Slater is that other than special teams, he's not a guy who can give them any production at receiver. Like I said, he caught one pass that came on the second play of the first game of the season, and then never caught another. So as nice of a special teams player as he is, you basically made my point that if Edelman gets hurt they don't have another viable option.

Click to expand...

If you are the best in the league at what you do you justify a roster spot. ST's are almost a third of the game and he is the captain of the ST's and an all pro.

Calling him a wr is just a label for his roster identity.

I certainly think that in addition to signing Welker we need to get Lloyd and draft a development WR who can make plays outside the numbers (Underwood will be competing in camp for that spot also.

patsfan13 said:

If you are the best in the league at what you do you justify a roster spot. ST's are almost a third of the game and he is the captain of the ST's and an all pro.

Calling him a wr is just a label for his roster identity.

I certainly think that in addition to signing Welker we need to get Lloyd and draft a development WR who can make plays outside the numbers (Underwood will be competing in camp for that spot also.

Click to expand...

I hear you, but the problem is, as someone else pointed out, the new kickoff rules kind of change that. Unfortunately for Slater while he's a "WR" on the roster, they're too thin depth and talent wise to warrant a roster spot on a guy who can't do more than one thing. Again, I don't want to take away from what he's done, but they need another guy (or potentially two) and it's a numbers game. If they bring in two-mid tier guys behind Welker and ahead of Branch, from there you have Edelman on the depth chart at 5. Something would have to give. If someone gets hurt, Slater can't give them anything. Again, I'd love to be wrong, but so far it hasn't worked out that way for him. You can't even make the argument about calling Edelman a DB because in all likelihood they're going to bring in more depth there as well. He was a stopgap fix, I don't think BB wants to start him there again next season.

Ian said:

You can't even make the argument about calling Edelman a DB because in all likelihood they're going to bring in more depth there as well. He was a stopgap fix, I don't think BB wants to start him there again next season.

Click to expand...

I don't recall -- did Edelman see the field at DB in the Super Bowl?