Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

So far, the Patriots have made a series of "prove it" deals, most recently and notably with Bryant and Hobson. They took two guys who have started and played well and signed them for vet min for 1 season. The club gets a potential steal for a season while the player gets the chance to prove his worth on the best team in the league, inevitably leading to either a solid contract with said team or a cash-in elsewhere.

Let's see how this strategy worked for the past season for 3 somewhat situations, and I'm including Stallworth and Washington's deals as this type of "prove it" deal:

RANDY MOSS: A+
I'm not even going to add commentary to this. It goes without saying.

KELLEY WASHINGTON: B
Didn't work out for Washington in terms of dollar bills, but he seems happy as a Patriot, and I think we all appreciate and respect that. In terms of what the Pats got, well they didn't need Washington's services when it came to pass-catching, but he proved an ST gem and may contribute as a receiver this season. All in all, a good signing for both parties involved.

DONTE STALLWORTH: C
I may be in the minority, but I was pretty disappointed in Stallworth's play, and I think if he had been able to play at a bit of a higher level and contribute more than just YAC capabilities, then the "blueprint" that teams adopted to use against this offense would have failed miserably. I believe that if Chad Jackson develops into the threat he was drafted to be, he will be a huge upgrade over Stallworth. Donte proved to be a poor deep threat, was terrible on jump balls, had occasionally shaky hands, earned Brady a few picks, never seemed to grasp the offense, and didn't contribute much at all in the intermediate passing attack. All that said, he was an explosive and deadly guy with the ball in his hands, but we needed more from him. Ultimately, this deal worked out better for Donte. Just by having Brady toss him a few balls around the line of scrimmage and let him run, he ends up signing a bloated deal at the end of the season.


I look forward to seeing how the Hobson/Bryant/Webster/Sanders deals pan out, b/c I think particularly the Hobson/Bryant deals have a lot of upside and were really steals for the Pats.

Re: Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

I liked Stallworth for his YAC abilities, but there was a definite decline from the first half to the second. Additionally, while I normally hate dealing with rumors, it was rumored that he was Shockey-like in his route running. If that struggle with running the right routes is true, it's easy to see why he wasn't brought back given the nature of his contract.

I wanted Stallworth back, but I think that may have been because being with Brady/BB enhanced his resume quite a bit. His DVOA numbers jumped tremendously from even his past two 'great' seasons to this past season, so I think I may have bought into the Patriots factor a bit too much on him. However, I also think that Stallworth has the physicality to be effective on slant routes, and the team just didn't run all that many of those with the outside wide receivers last year.

All the above being true, I really don't know how to grade him. I'm with you on Moss and I think Washington did fine, though he was not an impact receiver like some of his earlier supporters thought he would be.

Re: Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

Don't get me wrong, I think Stallworth is a valuable receiver - just not the man for what the Pats needed. When we signed him, we didn't know we'd have Moss, the shape of the offense wasn't clear. Stallworth was probably penciled in as the deep threat before we got Moss. And I agree that the team needs their other outside receiver to head over the middle more, and whether Stallworth can do it, we didn't really get to see. But Chad Jackson thrived at that in his final season at UF and is built - as others said in the recent CJ thread - like a linebacker. Truly, IF and I know it's a big if, but if Chad Jackson pans out, he will be the perfect addition to the offense.

Re: Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

Don't let Deus hear you say that the lack of a deep threat alternative to Moss had any adverse effect on the offense.

He gets very upset when anyone suggests that - and will "prove" that Gaffney, Welker and Faulk are all players who "stretch" the defense and caused defenders to pull coverage away from Moss (I guess they would have put 4 guys on Moss without them!)
;)

Of course I very much agree with you - and certainly hope that Jackson has a big season. I think having an additional deep threat (and no, I don't consider Gaffney a deep threat) makes Moss even MORE productive than he was last year.

Why Stallworth didn't contribute more or wasn't used more as a deep WR I'm not sure. While many say he was "confused" by the playbook I don't think running fast and deep is considered by many to be all that complicated.

It will be interesting to see if the offense does make any adjustments next season. The "Reporter Who Cannot Be Named" recently suggested that the team was concerned about an overly Moss-centered offense that in turn allowed defenses to limit Moss's effectiveness, and wore down Moss as the season went on. Pretty much exactly what my concern was in questioning why McDaniels didn't better utilize an alternative deep WR in his playcalling.

Of course my contention that our offense would have benefitted by having an alternative deep threat being "disproven" by Deus - I suppose if Belichick did make such an adjustment it would undermine those who think that the #1 offense doesn't need any improvement, just as Belichick discounted the notion after the 2006 season that the #7 offense was just fine with only Caldwell and Gaffney at WR.

Re: Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

From a purely "GFY" perspective, it would be wild if Chad showed himself to be the player the Patriots thought he might be this season. His high end is combining Stallworth/Moss speed with an ability to round crisp routes as a #2 outside receiver paired with Moss.

Guys like the ESPN crew would be apoplectic.

Re: Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

Stop lying about what I posted. It's pathetic and should be beneath anyone who posts on this board.

Re: Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

I don't think Stallworth qualified as a good deep threat opposite Moss. IMO, he didn't get great separation and showed poor timing and hands on a few deep balls thrown his way (ie the interception in the Colts game) and maybe lost the faith of Brady/McD in that role.

Chad Jackson not only provides a potential deep threat, but also the guy for the intermediate game, running posts or slants or anything taking him inside. Really, I can't wait for even the friggin passing camp, b/c just watch, Chad Jackson is going to re-gain that hype he had going into TC before his injury rookie year.

Re: Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

Co-sign. Perfectly said and more succinctly than I could've.

Re: Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

I don't think there's any argument based on Stallworth's production - nor your statement that he had few deep balls thrown his way. Which was it? Probably some of both.

I just know that neither Gaffney nor Faulk nor Welker, regardless of what stats anyone attributes to them, are considered deep threats.

Maybe Stallworth's 19 ypc average in 2006 was an aberration, and he's really NOT the deep threat we all thought he was. I think the Browns think they're getting someone who can stretch the offense this season, so we'll likely find out.

Re: Evaluating the 1 year "prove it" deals from the past season
 

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-...ney#post833018