New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com  Patriots Fan Messageboard

New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard (http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/)
-   PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum (http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/patsfans-com-patriots-fan-forum.html)
-   -   First Things First - Extend Samuel (http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/52963-first-things-first-extend-samuel.html)

patsfangr 03-20-2007 03:24 AM

First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
I know it's fun to speculate and wish about additional FA's that could help us. However, IMO, our only big bucks priority now should be to close the deal on a contract extension for Samuel. Doing so will really solidify our CB situation, and clarify the priorities for all other needs.

I can't understand the wishes for trading and signing Briggs, when it seems likely that doing so would seriously threaten our ability to get a deal done with Samuel.

The guy who's still out there that I'd like more than Briggs is S Ken Hamlin. But I feel the same about him as I do about any other high priced FA. He is a lower priority than re-signing Samuel.

pats1 03-20-2007 05:58 AM

Re: First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
Butch Stearns on Fox25 News last night said he talked to Shavers and that he and the Pats are "in discussions."

solman 03-20-2007 06:00 AM

Re: First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfangr (Post 380863)
I know it's fun to speculate and wish about additional FA's that could help us. However, IMO, our only big bucks priority now should be to close the deal on a contract extension for Samuel. Doing so will really solidify our CB situation, and clarify the priorities for all other needs.

I can't understand the wishes for trading and signing Briggs, when it seems likely that doing so would seriously threaten our ability to get a deal done with Samuel.

The guy who's still out there that I'd like more than Briggs is S Ken Hamlin. But I feel the same about him as I do about any other high priced FA. He is a lower priority than re-signing Samuel.

1. Samuel had a great year last year, but so far its his only one. It would hardly be unprecedented if his fourth season turned out to be the best.

If Samuel's assessment of his own value included a substantial discount because of this, I would agree with you that we should sign him right now.

But from all outward appearances, it looks like Samuel thinks he will be a perennial pro bowl contender. If so, we should wait for him to prove it by having a second consecutive great season. If he does, we can talk extension during the season. If not, maybe his self-assessment will become more reasonable, and we can talk about a far more modest extension during the season.

2. We can get both Briggs AND sign Samuel long term. But by doing so, we risk future salary cap difficulties if any of our big signing (Samuel, Briggs and AD) don't turn out as we expect. Unfortunately, there IS a pretty good chance that one of the three won't turn out as we expect (and I mean any one of the three, not just Samuel). Briggs would probably have to accept an AD style Patriots discount for this to be worth the risk.

Underoath 03-20-2007 06:19 AM

Re: First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
Ok seriously. Why would we want Briggs? We have Colvin and Thomas on the outside, Bruschi and Vrabel inside, and Vrabel and Thomas will switch around some. I don't understand it. How about instead of wasting money on a probowler that won't play much, and signing a decent backup for far less money. We don't need another OLB.

BelichickFan 03-20-2007 07:21 AM

Re: First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pats1 (Post 380896)
Butch Stearns on Fox25 News last night said he talked to Shavers and that he and the Pats are "in discussions."

I assume Shavers is Samuel's agent ?

BelichickFan 03-20-2007 07:23 AM

Re: First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Underoath (Post 380899)
Ok seriously. Why would we want Briggs? We have Colvin and Thomas on the outside, Bruschi and Vrabel inside, and Vrabel and Thomas will switch around some. I don't understand it

Depth and rotations.

Depth because we always seem to have a lot of injuries. Rotations because that still only leaves us with 5 starters for 4 spots - we could keep everyone fresh until injuries hit. Big advantage in the 4th quarter.

MoLewisrocks 03-20-2007 10:52 AM

Re: First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by solman (Post 380897)
But from all outward appearances, it looks like Samuel thinks he will be a perennial pro bowl contender. If so, we should wait for him to prove it by having a second consecutive great season. If he does, we can talk extension during the season. If not, maybe his self-assessment will become more reasonable, and we can talk about a far more modest extension during the season.

2. We can get both Briggs AND sign Samuel long term. But by doing so, we risk future salary cap difficulties if any of our big signing (Samuel, Briggs and AD) don't turn out as we expect. Unfortunately, there IS a pretty good chance that one of the three won't turn out as we expect (and I mean any one of the three, not just Samuel). Briggs would probably have to accept an AD style Patriots discount for this to be worth the risk.


We can certainly talk extension but we cannot sign a multi year extension with him after July 15 until the last week of the regular season. Between those periods a franchise tagged player can only be signed to a one year deal, which seldom happens except as a means to get them into camp (basically the tag salary guaranteed and an agreement not to re-tag as was done with Alexander).

Once he makes it to that point he is a playoffs appearance away from being a FA again, and since his signing bonus here/then would incorporate what he already pocketed in tag salary there is a liklihood he would opt instead to hold off on a deal preferring to test the market again (and receive an additional double digit signing bonus in 2008 or be re tagged at $9.5M.)

There is also the possibility that Stallworth proves to be a stellar addition at #1 and his option is exercized. I know there are those who believe that his $11M option bonus would then be renegotiated, but I doubt Donte and his agent are in that camp.

There are only so many $6M+ players you can carry on a roster before they start to seriously impact your ability to carry quality players at every position including depth. Or your ability to replace one of them if the unthinkable happens. Not to mention your ability to retain other talent completing their rookie deals.

That's why I still believe they will either come to agreement prior to draft day or flip Asante for picks. After that the only viable options remaining are to give him what he wants long term or perhaps trade away the right to re-tag him in order to get him into camp. If they flip him it's possible they would persue another expensive LB and opt to focus the draft on the secondary.

Tom Curran was on WEEI yesterday and someone asked him how close he thought they were last November to getting a deal done - and his response was not close at all, and that was before he added several more picks to the equation. So while Shavers and the team are in discussions those may not yet lead to a deal and could very well yet lead to a trade. But unlike the Briggs (or Branch) situation, I do think they will lead to something amenable to both sides and probably prior to the draft. I just don't think Belioli will head into another TC with a potentially ugly holdout situation marring an otherwise promising off season.

PatsFaninAZ 03-20-2007 11:17 AM

Re: First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
Samuel was amazing the second half of last year, but I have to admit to being a bit skeptical. Just by happenstance, I watched some of the Carolina Panthers game last night -- it lives permanently on my tivo. He really got torched quite a bit.

If the staff thinks he's worth signing long term, so be it, and I'll be glad for the extra cap room. But I am a bit concerned about complacency with a long-term deal. He might play better next year under a franchise tag.

BradyManny 03-20-2007 11:25 AM

Re: First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MoLewisrocks (Post 381066)
We can certainly talk extension but we cannot sign a multi year extension with him after July 15 until the last week of the regular season. Between those periods a franchise tagged player can only be signed to a one year deal, which seldom happens except as a means to get them into camp (basically the tag salary guaranteed and an agreement not to re-tag as was done with Alexander).

Once he makes it to that point he is a playoffs appearance away from being a FA again, and since his signing bonus here/then would incorporate what he already pocketed in tag salary there is a liklihood he would opt instead to hold off on a deal preferring to test the market again (and receive an additional double digit signing bonus in 2008 or be re tagged at $9.5M.)

There is also the possibility that Stallworth proves to be a stellar addition at #1 and his option is exercized. I know there are those who believe that his $11M option bonus would then be renegotiated, but I doubt Donte and his agent are in that camp.

There are only so many $6M+ players you can carry on a roster before they start to seriously impact your ability to carry quality players at every position including depth. Or your ability to replace one of them if the unthinkable happens. Not to mention your ability to retain other talent completing their rookie deals.

That's why I still believe they will either come to agreement prior to draft day or flip Asante for picks. After that the only viable options remaining are to give him what he wants long term or perhaps trade away the right to re-tag him in order to get him into camp. If they flip him it's possible they would persue another expensive LB and opt to focus the draft on the secondary.

Tom Curran was on WEEI yesterday and someone asked him how close he thought they were last November to getting a deal done - and his response was not close at all, and that was before he added several more picks to the equation. So while Shavers and the team are in discussions those may not yet lead to a deal and could very well yet lead to a trade. But unlike the Briggs (or Branch) situation, I do think they will lead to something amenable to both sides and probably prior to the draft. I just don't think Belioli will head into another TC with a potentially ugly holdout situation marring an otherwise promising off season.


In this instance, I don't see how the fair and reasonable offer that the Pats will and should make could possibly come near the bloated and ridicolous offer Samuel would get on the market.

Unless Samuel really wants to remain a Patriot long term to the point he's willing to sign for much less than he could get or the Patriots determine he will be OK with playing under the tag, then I think he gets moved for picks.

hwc 03-20-2007 01:03 PM

Re: First Things First - Extend Samuel
 
My hypothesis is that the Pats and Samuel have already agreed to a deal, but are waiting until after the draft to formalize it. Knowing that the Pats had a long-term deal with Samuel would give a lot of information to other teams about the Pats draft priorities -- information that Belichick would rather hold close to the vest.

Why do I think this? Asante couldn't stop the big grin in the TV interview when he said things were "going good" with the Pats.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

© Copyright 2000-2012. PatsFans.com Is a Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.
The opinions posted in this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of our staff at PatsFans.com or USA Today.
We are not affiliated with the New England Patriots™ or the NFL™. The Photo Used In the header was taken by Ian Logue.

This site is owned and operated by I&K Internet Design Enterprises, LLC


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566