Is Danny Amendola the next domino to fall?

long distance said:

But if NE loses High or Collins on account of overloading the offence I dont think many people here will be happy.

Click to expand...

Then perhaps we shouldn't have signed Hogan or McClellan.

The reality is that one CANNOT (or should not) act as if every expenditure means that we won't be able to extend Hightower or Collins (and all the rest). Perhaps they will be re-signed. Perhaps not. Perhaps, there price will be too high to match. But these are independent decisions.

For example, Miguel has many times pointed out that extending Hightower would LOWER our 2016 cap hit, as would the extension of Sheard.

Cutting Amendola because we don't pay Edelman enough is just plain silly, IMHO.

n6249c said:

Face it, if Jules comes into camp and isn't himself after his injury, he could be cut and Dola becomes the #1. BB is nothing if not coldly objective about what it is today, not what a player was in the past.

Click to expand...

I understand your point about Belichick not being terribly sentimental about his players and their past production, but I don't think we'd ever see a situation where Julian Edelman would be cut--at least not anytime soon, that's for sure.

Even if he somehow missed the entire upcoming season, he'd still be on the team under a very reasonable contract with an excellent chance of showing good production for 2017. You can feel confident in going out and purchasing a new #11 jersey. I promise.

Jackson 2 said:

Correct. For crissakes, he came back against KC and was gangbusters. This **** about doubting his future is puzzling, gloom and doom crap. There is no reason he won't be 100%. None.

Click to expand...

I very much agree with you that we shouldn't even entertain the notion of Edelman leaving under any circumstance. Hell, his cheap pact alone would justify his spot on the 53, and that's if he produced about 50 percent of what he normally does.

One spot where I would very respectfully disagree with you would be the thought that "he won't be 100%" as necessarily being chicken little thoughts or doom and gloom crap. We just had a direct quote from him from about a month ago stating that he "honestly" doesn't know if he'll participate in spring OTAs or even if he'll need a second surgery yet. While it's hard to gauge how close to the vest he's keeping his knowledge, the studies and past history alone of the Jones fracture state that there's plenty of reason to hold our breath, should he get up from a tackle limping from an injured foot. There's a much higher likelihood of re-injury with that specific injury, and @PatsWickedPissah stated, it may very well be one of the reasons why they're willing to wait out the Amendola situation for awhile, possibly even keeping him on for 2016 at his currently (much overpriced) salary.

Certainly not meaning to add fuel to the ridiculous notion that Belichick would move on from Edelman, only that your least sentence or two may be debatable.

BradyFTW! said:

Agreed. I'm really intrigued to see if the Pats take Braxton Miller. If they do, Amendola can't feel good about his prospects here.

Click to expand...

I have a feeling that Miller may end up going 10-20 spots higher than most have predicted, but that's just a hunch. Either way, your point is quite valid. If we end up drafting a WR in the top few rounds, it may be a telling sign for Amendola--at least at his current salary.

supafly said:

I have a feeling that Miller may end up going 10-20 spots higher than most have predicted, but that's just a hunch. Either way, your point is quite valid. If we end up drafting a WR in the top few rounds, it may be a telling sign for Amendola--at least at his current salary.

Click to expand...

Why do you presume that a 2nd or 3rd round WR would develop fast enough to be a top contributor in 2016.

I think it take a very special set of assumptions and analysis of our WR depth chart to believe that a WR who Belichick drafted between 60 and 96 would be likely to be a better choice to be a major contributor than Amendola.

#1 Edelman (injured)
#2 Amendola (plus top PR and one of our KR's)
#3 Hogan
#4 (now Washington competing with Martin and others)

I've fine with us drafting a WR in early rounds. He COULD be immediately productive, even though this has rarely happened before. In any case, I have no reason to want to cut Amendola because we brought in an upgrade for Washington/Martin.

mgteich said:

Why do you presume that a 2nd or 3rd round WR would develop fast enough to be a top contributor in 2016.

I think it take a very special set of assumptions and analysis of our WR depth chart to believe that a WR who Belichick drafted between 60 and 96 would be likely to be a better choice to be a major contributor than Amendola.

#1 Edelman (injured)
#2 Amendola (plus top PR and one of our KR's)
#3 Hogan
#4 (now Washington competing with Martin and others)

I've fine with us drafting a WR in early rounds. He COULD be immediately productive, even though this has rarely happened before. In any case, I have no reason to want to cut Amendola because we brought in an upgrade for Washington/Martin.

Click to expand...

I suppose I'd come to that conclusion due to the sheer number of possible roster spots to go around at the position, as well as the fact that we may have already replaced a decent part of Amendola with Hogan. I realize that it's extremely popular to assume 5 WR spots, but the reality is that we've added a top notch receiving threat at TE in Bennett. We've certainly seen situations where only 4 WRs make the opening 53 man roster.

Now...if the assumption is somehow that Edelman will be injured as you've notated in your post, then things would change in dramatic fashion. That's something that only Belichick, the medical team, and #11 truly have any hunch on, and even then they may have to wait to try and see how the foot heals.

Otherwise, I'd have the following at WR:

1) Edelman
2) Washington
3) Hogan
4) New top 3 round rookie WR

That would leave the following players to mix/match/battle it out due to talent, contractual value, etc-and that's assuming (right or wrong) that we'd be keeping 5 wide receivers, which is no sure thing:

1) Amendola
2) Martin
3) Dobson
4) Harper's Muff
5) Boyce (is he even on the PS anymore? I honestly don't know)

mgteich said:

Let's be clear. No draftee available to use could cause belichick to immediately cut Amendola. The very idea that Belichick would have so much confidence in his choice of a draftee being an immediate contributor is simply silly.

Click to expand...

Standing alone, no. but combining it with the cap savings could give give him reason to.

mgteich said:

I think it take a very special set of assumptions and analysis of our WR depth chart to believe that a WR who Belichick drafted between 60 and 96 would be likely to be a better choice to be a major contributor than Amendola.

Click to expand...

Ehh.... I can think of an fairly mundane set of circumstances:

1. Amendola has shown decline in overall athleticism/speed (he has)
2. Amendola's contract is deemed too high for the team's taste (seems to fit the current claims)
3. The team has brought in WRs to replace/offset Amendola, in case of need (Hogan does some of what Amendola does) and/or
   
4. The team has brought in WRs to minimize the problem of losing what Amendola does well (Washington would fit this bill, if they're already sold on him)
5. The team has strengthened other areas to deal with a potential dropoff (Bennett to TE)
   
6. The rookie would be an unnecessary, but welcome, addition if he made any impact in his rookie season, outside of injury issues (a la Edelman)

In short, I look at 2016 Amendola as quite possibly being more important in a subbing for Edelman role than I do in his own distinct role. That being the case, and looking at the team's past history under BB, I could see why they might go in an alternate direction, if Amendola were unwilling to renegotiate.

WR corps, if Amendola cut tomorrow and Miller drafted:

Edelman
Hogan
Washington
Martin
Dobson
Miller
Stiffs (One can argue about who above would be in this group along with the likes of Harper and Carter)

dola was pretty clutch last year and made some great plays here and there. id definitely prefer to keep him around. not sure how it affects the cap, but why not cut him at the end of the year to save money for some of the defensive talent we want to keep?