5 weeks into FA season, Pats' approach still makes no sense

[tombonneau]

80% of the numbers is not 80% of the player. I think the first Jets game is an excellent example of that.


Then again, bandying about percentages in this manner is a futile exercise anyway.

I'd prefer to look at Edelman's last start as a pro vs. the Ravens as an example. What sticks out to me was one play at the end, the game out of hand, where he just kept breaking tackles and squirming and fighting for a first down. Awesome stuff.

Edelman replacing Welker for half a season is the least of this offense's worries.

 

[JackBauer]

Yes, fells.

As for the Boldin situation, that's why I've repeatedly mentioned the reports and framed my position based upon a "what if" situation. The reports were that the Patriots were in the hunt and were the 'leaders' for the deal. The reports then claimed that the Patriots bowed out because of Boldin's contract demands. As I've noted before, it's one thing not to be going after him at all. It's another, though, to be going after him and then bowing out because of his contract when he's been screaming about wanting the big deal for years. The former is a rational and legitimate, if questionable, course of action to take. The latter is asinine.

Lastly, regarding Crumpler.... I see more Kyle Brady than Christian Fauria in that situation. I hope I'm wrong.

Fair enough re: Boldin. I think you might be pleasantly surprised with Alge. He's a terrific blocker, high character guy. Best blocker since Graham, which we both agree has been sorely missed.

Plus, he's 3 or 4 years younger than Brady was when we signed him in 2007.

 

[supafly]

Again, I assume the Pats will have a far better #3 WR than they did last year, but I am trying to compare apples to apples. When Edelman was in last year, the #3 WR was Aiken.

I am talking about the roster right now. Again, if the Pats have a #3 WR who can catch around 40 balls solely as a #3 WR, then everything changes. Until they get that guy, we can only talk about what they have right now.

Do you think Welker would catch 130 or so balls if the Pats had a consistent #3 option? Welker has caught so many balls over the last few years partly because of the lack of depth at the position.

I absolutely agree that Welker and Moss' totals have been increased due to lack of depth, good point.

And it doesn't really matter anyway, because at the end of the discussion, I see Edelman's catches averaging about 5 per game (80), while you see it a bit higher at about 6-7 (approx. 105-110). When it really comes down to things, we are disagreeing over a catch, catch and 1/2, per game. No big deal.

I apologize for the minor disagreement, and if it seems as though I have been questioning you. Just a matter of difference of opinion, nothing more.

 

[Rob0729]

Yet you've stated that you see no reason why Tate can't do that.

Again, it hardly matters, so I don't want to get into a big disagreement about it. You see Edelman's production higher than I might. Big deal. No one here is going to agree on everything. Lately, no one is going to agree on much.

It's just that many times you'll argue one way, then later, you'll argue against what you were originally arguing about. You'll say there's no reason Tate can't produce, and argue for Tate to be the 2nd coming of Deion Branch-- then you'll say we don't have a viable #3 right now--and that it's up in the air?

You'll say we can re-sign both Wilfork and Seymour, then you'll say there was no way we were going to re-sign both Wilfork and Seymour. It seems as though your opinion changes due to various circumstances--which is fine too, but sometimes confusing.

I'm not saying I'll always be right/wrong, etc--but I can practically guarantee that I will likely have the same stance. Right, wrong, whatever.

Again, I am basing it on evidence we have at this moment. What evidence do we have that Tate will even make the 53 man roster at this point. I am hopeful the guy will be a great players, but he has yet to really show anything. Did you see something in his zero receptions for zero yards last year that made you think he will be a viable #3? If the Pats added Brandon Marshall tomorrow, my argument would change. If the Pats added Branch, Coles, Holt, or another solid receiver it would change too.

You want to give me a lecture on arguing style when you twist everything like you do? Seriously?!? Yes, I try to have it both ways. Like when I said Shonn Greene's production was based on a limited sample size and that it might not pan out over a full season and then I am a hypocrite because I say that Edelman's production was based on a limited sample size and that it might not pan out over a full season. Talk about talking out of both sides of my mouth.

And if you never change your argument, I am sorry for you. Inflexibility is a problem on this board. It is clear that you can't understand subtilies of an argument which is the reason why you posted this.

BTW, I could easily argue that Tate could be the next Branch and as of right now the Pats don't have a viable #3 WR on the roster under Moss and Edelman. The first argument is speculation. The second argument is a statement of fact based on evidence of production of players on this roster up to this point. Tate could be better than Randy Moss in his prime this upcoming season, but as of right now he is not even guaranteed a roster spot. I don't know why this is hard to understand. For all we know, Welker could return day one and be as good as he was before his injury (the likelihood is very doubtful, but possible).

 

[Deus Irae]

It does make sense. Edelman can do everything Welker can do, just not as well. It is Welker's intangibles that makes him able to avoid contact better than Edelman or bounce off defenders better, but Edelman can and did do all that just not as well.

And you got three responses and this is the last. I am tired of you just trying to start fights for your own amusement.

Ok....

Welker can get tremendous separation within a very tight space. Edelman can't get that same degree of separation. In that sort of case, saying that Edelman doesn't do it as well is the same as saying that Edelman doesn't do it, because the amount of separation is crucial when it comes to throws and catches. That's why your sentence makes no sense in context of discussing football ability. It's like saying that Ron Brace can run a 40 yard dash just like DeSean Jackson, only not quite as fast.

Also, I wasn't trying to start a fight. You're already going back and forth with someone else. You know, as you do all the time nowadays, even as you post here and accuse me of looking for fights.

As I told you before, I've generally ignored your posts because you've become just another shill. This post of yours was about something that was Patriot v. Patriot, and a bit more technical, so I thought it would be a safe area for discussion. Apparently, you're too far gone to even handle something this benign.

 

[BradyFTW!]

It does make sense. Edelman can do everything Welker can do, just not as well. It is Welker's intangibles that makes him able to avoid contact better than Edelman or bounce off defenders better, but Edelman can and did do all that just not as well.

And you got three responses and this is the last. I am tired of you just trying to start fights for your own amusement.

Well, if that's the standard that you want to apply, then I can do everything that Welker can do... just really really slowly and clumsily.

That's not the point. Edelman is not Welker: he can't do all of the things that Welker does at the speed that Welker does them, which is what makes Welker effective in the first place. Doesn't mean that Edelman can't be an effective WR: just means that they're not clones of each other.

 

[Deus Irae]

Fair enough re: Boldin. I think you might be pleasantly surprised with Alge. He's a terrific blocker, high character guy. Best blocker since Graham, which we both agree has been sorely missed.

Plus, he's 3 or 4 years younger than Brady was when we signed him in 2007.

It'll be a good start if the offseason/training camp workouts can get his weight down to something that has him looking more like the Crumpler of Atlanta and less like the Titans version.

 

[Rob0729]

Well, if that's the standard that you want to apply, then I can do everything that Welker can do... just really really slowly and clumsily.

That's not the point. Edelman is not Welker: he can't do all of the things that Welker does at the speed that Welker does them, which is what makes Welker effective in the first place. Doesn't mean that Edelman can't be an effective WR: just means that they're not clones of each other.

Again, I never said he was a clone. He can do everything Welker does, just not as good. He doesn't avoid the hits as well as Welker or shed the blocks as well, but he does it. Can you stay on your feet and keep moving after getting hit by a 250lb ILB? Both Welker and Edelman can.

A lot of QBs can do everything Brady does, but his intangibles and skills makes him do it exponentially better than those QBs. What Brady does is not unique to him and a select few. How he does it is. Same with Welker.

 

[Rob0729]

Ok....

Welker can get tremendous separation within a very tight space. Edelman can't get that same degree of separation. In that sort of case, saying that Edelman doesn't do it as well is the same as saying that Edelman doesn't do it, because the amount of separation is crucial when it comes to throws and catches. That's why your sentence makes no sense in context of discussing football ability. It's like saying that Ron Brace can run a 40 yard dash just like DeSean Jackson, only not quite as fast.

Also, I wasn't trying to start a fight. You're already going back and forth with someone else. You know, as you do all the time nowadays, even as you post here and accuse me of looking for fights.

As I told you before, I've generally ignored your posts because you've become just another shill. This post of yours was about something that was Patriot v. Patriot, and a bit more technical, so I thought it would be a safe area for discussion. Apparently, you're too far gone to even handle something this benign.

Have a nice day!!!

 

[supafly]

Again, I am basing it on evidence we have at this moment. What evidence do we have that Tate will even make the 53 man roster at this point. I am hopeful the guy will be a great players, but he has yet to really show anything. Did you see something in his zero receptions for zero yards last year that made you think he will be a viable #3? If the Pats added Brandon Marshall tomorrow, my argument would change. If the Pats added Branch, Coles, Holt, or another solid receiver it would change too.

You want to give me a lecture on arguing style when you twist everything like you do? Seriously?!? Yes, I try to have it both ways. Like when I said Shonn Greene's production was based on a limited sample size and that it might not pan out over a full season and then I am a hypocrite because I say that Edelman's production was based on a limited sample size and that it might not pan out over a full season. Talk about talking out of both sides of my mouth.

And if you never change your argument, I am sorry for you. Inflexibility is a problem on this board. It is clear that you can't understand subtilies of an argument which is the reason why you posted this.

BTW, I could easily argue that Tate could be the next Branch and as of right now the Pats don't have a viable #3 WR on the roster. The first argument is speculation. The second argument is a statement of fact based on evidence of production of players on this roster up to this point. Tate could be better than Randy Moss in his prime this upcoming season, but as of right now he is not even guaranteed a roster spot. I don't know why this is hard to understand.

First of all, I tried to wrap everything up in the previous post, I tried to be as respectful as possible and end this etc, I even apologized-- but I guess you want to keep rehashing this?

If you can give me an example of 'twisting' things around, then maybe I could understand and not repeat the same mistake twice. I cannot see how taking a stance and sticking with it is 'twisting' things. At least I am not 'flip-flopping.'

Lastly, the argument of Tate etc is irrelevant--the fact is that one day you'll claim the WR core is fine, and that the front office must've seen great things in Tate etc---yet then you'll ask me if "I've seen anything to make me think he can produce?" You will argue for him, then against him. For something, then against it. That is your choice however.

The fact remains that you take both sides of various arguments, and that is a fact. If you can give me an example, now or at a later time, of 'twisting' etc, then maybe I could work on it (?) I see nothing wrong with taking criticism or advice from anyone.

 

[Metaphors]

No about BB being that above, but there is an amount of arrogance that every F.O. maintains. It is hit and miss. A gamble at best.

All player acquisition is a balance between cost, risk, value and upside. You seem more comfortable with higher cost, more certain value and lower risk and upside. Nothing wrong with that. But it is a balance. You don't get a Seymour or Wilfork or Light or Mankins if you trade your picks away. But you don't get a Moss or Welker if you hold onto draft picks too tight.

As an example (just an example please don't question my motives, life and religion) in 2007, I will give every poster on this site credit that they could have made a better Draft class than the Pats F.O. did without question. I would tell anyone that. I ask you Cousin, could YOU have come up with a better list of players in 2007 or not?

As luck would have it, I put my picks down before the draft. As you can see I predicted the early picks exactly. Unfortunately, I got the Jets picks and not the Pats. So lets evaluate my thoughts (post-Welker but pre-Moss):

Revis - Stud
Harris - Solid
John Wendling - Meh
Prescott Burgess - Pats already recycled him
Will Herring - Meh
Dwayne Wright - Blah
Jeff Rowe - Pats have him now

My strategy was to sell out on the non-comp picks and trade up. Got 2 players and a pile of junk (though I kinda like Herring). Actually, my strategy to get to #16 to get Revis wouldn't have worked, but just play along for this exercise.

Here is what the Pats did:
Meriweather - Solid
Mayo (in 2008) - Solid
Crable (in 2008) - Unknown
Moss - Stud
Kareem Brown - Yuck
Bunch of training camp bodies

Which do you think is better? Outside of the top 100 in that draft, unless you picked a TE or a kicker, I'm not sure who did well on the 2nd day of that draft. That class was awful and the Pats correctly wanted nothing to do with it. Getting Welker, Moss, Meriweather, Mayo and Crable from that steaming pile took some work...and reinforces your notion that there are times where trading is the better part of valor.

Just not all the time. And not this year, IMO.

 

[patfanken]

Its going to take some time to build an offense back up....

....And that's were I start to have a problem. Up from WHAT. We had the best passing offense in the league, one of the top total offenses in both total yds and points. Yet for some reason some fans think because we won't have Wes Welker for 8 games, the entire offense is going to fall apart. NONSENSE!

Every team turns over about 20% of their team EVERY YEAR, so there is going to be some degree of team building, just like EVERY season. But to say that the offense is going to take some time to build itself up is ridiculous, unless you mean weeks and not years.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

It does make sense. Edelman can do everything Welker can do, just not as well. It is Welker's intangibles that makes him able to avoid contact better than Edelman or bounce off defenders better, but Edelman can and did do all that just not as well.

And you got three responses and this is the last. I am tired of you just trying to start fights for your own amusement.

I have to agree with Deus and others that disagree. I'm not trying to start a fight with you as I understand what your saying, but the way you explain it doesn't make sense. Edelman and Welker have similar styles of play, but he's he's nowhere near the same level as Welker.

....And that's were I start to have a problem. Up from WHAT. We had the best passing offense in the league, one of the top total offenses in both total yds and points. Yet for some reason some fans think because we won't have Wes Welker for 8 games, the entire offense is going to fall apart. NONSENSE!

Every team turns over about 20% of their team EVERY YEAR, so there is going to be some degree of team building, just like EVERY season. But to say that the offense is going to take some time to build itself up is ridiculous, unless you mean weeks and not years.

They have more holes than just Welker, but he was the tip of the iceberg.

OL - There are extremely soft and they need to figure out what to do with Vollmer, Light and Kaczur. Koppen has gotten worse by the day since super bowl 42. I cringe every time they run the football up the gut. Steven Neal is on his last leg and we don't know what is going on with Mankins. As much as I'd like the Pats to address the pass rush, I wouldn't mind seeing the Pats shoring up the O-line in round 1.

RB - Maroney is what he is, a decent back at best. Morris gets injured all the time and Taylor got injured once again last season. Faulk still produces but the Pats need to find a replacement. It wouldn't shock me to see the Pats pull the trigger on a RB in round 2.

WR - Moss is getting old, who knows how long Welker will be out for, Tate is a question mark, Aiken isn't a WR and Stanback is worthless. The only positive is Edelman as he will get his chance to shine next season. In the end, I see the Pats spending an early pick on WR.

 

[Rob0729]

I have to agree with Deus and others that disagree. I'm not trying to start a fight with you as I understand what your saying, but the way you explain it doesn't make sense. Edelman and Welker have similar styles of play, but he's he's nowhere near the same level as Welker.

All due respect, but when did being 80% of a player mean that they are all that close to being on the same level? Put in terms of taking a test in school. One person gets 100% right and that is an A and the other person got an 80% right which is a B-. Is an A and a B- minus all that close?

Again, Edelman can do what Welker does but not as good. 20% is a significant margin. It still means that Edelman can be very good in the role at 80% of Welker since Welker is arguably one of the best slot WRs in recent history since he got here.

I'm not the first person to use the 80% reference to Edelman. The media has used that quite a bit.

I never said that Edelman was anywhere near as good as Welker, but I am saying he was 80% or 4/5 or whatever you want the type of player Welker was when thrusted into the role. That said he may never reach that level as a fulltime starter in that role (just because he did it in four games doesn't mean he will do it over a 16 game season), but then again he could superseed Welker to be even better for all we know (although very highly unlikely).

You take any elite player in the league and you can find dozens of players who can do what they do, but there is just that something special that puts that elite player on a different level from everyone else.

 

[BostonPatriot]

All player acquisition is a balance between cost, risk, value and upside. You seem more comfortable with higher cost, more certain value and lower risk and upside. Nothing wrong with that. But it is a balance. You don't get a Seymour or Wilfork or Light or Mankins if you trade your picks away. But you don't get a Moss or Welker if you hold onto draft picks too tight.



As luck would have it, I put my picks down before the draft. As you can see I predicted the early picks exactly. Unfortunately, I got the Jets picks and not the Pats. So lets evaluate my thoughts (post-Welker but pre-Moss):

Revis - Stud
Harris - Solid
John Wendling - Meh
Prescott Burgess - Pats already recycled him
Will Herring - Meh
Dwayne Wright - Blah
Jeff Rowe - Pats have him now

My strategy was to sell out on the non-comp picks and trade up. Got 2 players and a pile of junk (though I kinda like Herring). Actually, my strategy to get to #16 to get Revis wouldn't have worked, but just play along for this exercise.

Here is what the Pats did:
Meriweather - Solid
Mayo (in 2008) - Solid
Crable (in 2008) - Unknown
Moss - Stud
Kareem Brown - Yuck
Bunch of training camp bodies

Which do you think is better? Outside of the top 100 in that draft, unless you picked a TE or a kicker, I'm not sure who did well on the 2nd day of that draft. That class was awful and the Pats correctly wanted nothing to do with it. Getting Welker, Moss, Meriweather, Mayo and Crable from that steaming pile took some work...and reinforces your notion that there are times where trading is the better part of valor.

Just not all the time. And not this year, IMO.

Calvin Johnson
Patrick Willis
Revis
Petterson
Laron Landry
Marshawn Lynch
Mike Griffen
Meriweather
Beason
Greg Olson
Anthony Gonzalez
Bowe
Timmons
Meacheum

Round 2:
Paul Posluszny
Kevin Kolb
Eric Weddle
Chris Houston
Sidney Rice
Steve Smith
David Harris
Woodley
Ugoh

Just horrid!

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I read it as he said that after the 3rd round the class was bad

 

[BostonPatriot]

I read it as he said that after the 3rd round the class was bad

Since when does any draft produce many starters after the third round?

I've heard many pats fans say the 2007 draft was poor. It was not poor.

Certain Fans are claiming the draft was poor because Bill decided to trafe a few picks for Moss and Welker (which were good moves, btw).

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

I'm no rube, or homer, but a little context needs to be taken when assessing the offseason. As pointed out ad nauseum by others, nobody has really been significantly upgrading their team so far. The draft is still weeks away.

But what I cannot wrap my head around is that, because people are unhappy with the offseason progress so far (perfectly reasonable, even if i am not in agreement)---why do people then downgrade the signings of Crumpler and Damione Lewis? I mean, I understand that for the basic debater, one who does not consider any viewpoint but his/her own, it is inconceivable to craft an argument that says that the offseason has been a failure while also allowing for some positives. But what does everyone hate about Crumpler and Lewis?

Crumpler, granted, is well past his physical peak, but he is a surehanded target who can really block. Last year people liked the Chris Baker acquisition? How is this any different, other than Baker was ran out for being a jerk and Crumpler has never been accused of being anything other than a great teammate.

Lewis doesn't excite people, and that includes me, in terms of his stats. But the guy has been a consistent rotation player in the NFL for 9 YEARS, and has started the past two. Who's to say he cannot turn into a steady rotation player on the defensive line, rotating with Mike Wright? He has a similar build to Marques Douglas, and even Jarvis Green.

Not saying these two are world beaters but these are the kind of veteran contributers the Pats have done a great job of finding over the years. To me it makes little sense to disparage their abilities just because you're unsatisfied with the Pats moves thus far. These guys will contribute.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Since when does any draft produce many starters after the third round?
I've heard many pats fans say the 2007 draft was poor. It was not poor.

Certain Fans are claiming the draft was poor because Bill decided to trafe a few picks for Moss and Welker (which were good moves, btw).

In fact, it is hard to argue that round 4 and on of 2007 was anything but weak. Consider some of the players taken in round 4 of these drafts:

2004--Shaun Phillips, Demorrio Williams, Nathan Vasher, Jared Allen

2005--Marion Barber, Kyle Orton, Brandon Jacobs, Kerry Rhodes, Brady Poppinga, James Sanders, Darren Sproles

2006--Stephen Gostkowski, Leon Washington, Jahri Evans, Elvis Dumervil, Owen Daniels, Ray Edwards, Brad Smith

2007--seriously the best player I can find in round 4 after LeRon McLain is Zak DeOssie. Post round 3 of this draft, only McLain, DeOssie and Nick Folk have made Pro Bowls.

Now, the 4th round of 2008 doesn't look so strong right now, but I suppose we could argue that 2007 and 2008 are too recent to properly evaluate.

Still, the players I listed were just 4th rounders. Plenty of other quality players were taken lower. Just think looking at the '07 draft, it got weak pretty quick.

 

[JMarr]

I'm no rube, or homer, but a little context needs to be taken when assessing the offseason. As pointed out ad nauseum by others, nobody has really been significantly upgrading their team so far. The draft is still weeks away.

But what I cannot wrap my head around is that, because people are unhappy with the offseason progress so far (perfectly reasonable, even if i am not in agreement)---why do people then downgrade the signings of Crumpler and Damione Lewis? I mean, I understand that for the basic debater, one who does not consider any viewpoint but his/her own, it is inconceivable to craft an argument that says that the offseason has been a failure while also allowing for some positives. But what does everyone hate about Crumpler and Lewis?

Crumpler, granted, is well past his physical peak, but he is a surehanded target who can really block. Last year people liked the Chris Baker acquisition? How is this any different, other than Baker was ran out for being a jerk and Crumpler has never been accused of being anything other than a great teammate.

Lewis doesn't excite people, and that includes me, in terms of his stats. But the guy has been a consistent rotation player in the NFL for 9 YEARS, and has started the past two. Who's to say he cannot turn into a steady rotation player on the defensive line, rotating with Mike Wright? He has a similar build to Marques Douglas, and even Jarvis Green.

Not saying these two are world beaters but these are the kind of veteran contributers the Pats have done a great job of finding over the years. To me it makes little sense to disparage their abilities just because you're unsatisfied with the Pats moves thus far. These guys will contribute.

Good post. I really like what Crumpler brings to the table in terms of blocking, sure hands, and being a good team guy.

As far as Lewis, it would be awesome if we could get Jarvis Green (from two years ago) like production from him in a D-Line rotation.
We might see some 4 man base fronts with he and Wright as DEs, which would be pretty solid in terms of being able to hold up vs. the run in addition to being able to provide pressure on the QB on any given down.