Adam Schefter on WEEI

[BelichickFan]

That's why I wonder why anyone would offer a lot to him. But then, I said the same thing about Deion.

In general I think it's a bad way to run a team. But right now, if a team is way under the cap, they can't get an equal player.

Take the Saints - I don't know what their cap situation is but they need a CB badly - if it works for their cap are they better off trading for Samuel or drafting McCauley or Ross and hoping they can play as a rookie ? If they have the money, Samuel is the better option for a contending team.

 

[Displaced - Fan]

I'm not. But I have been a talent evaluator before, have coached before, and was actually offered a player development position for an NFL team. So, excuse me if I get on a "high horse" when someone refutes something by pulling out a position list on NFL.com and highlighting "name" players. I believe that there is a very high level of discussion on this board, which is the main reason I'm here. It's phenomenal, and there are numerous posters with awesome opinions and contributions that make me love this forum. Yours in this thread is weak, and your counter-posts are insulting. Again, please tell me why you feel Samuel is not a top-level CB in the league? Is it because he is currently negotiating a contract and wants to get paid? It's a defense mechanism to bash a player when it looks like he'll leave your team. We saw a lot of it last year with the Branch situation (though I agreed with the masses that the Pats' stance was correct.)

Personally I don't believe 1 season makes a top level CB in the NFL. Given that he struggled through the 2005 season, it was nice to see him bounce back with a great season in 2006. Yet for me to mark him down as a "top" level CB, I feel a player needs to establish himself with several great seasons (now here’s the catch) IN A ROW.

I sure like Samuel and feel he has the potential, but he most certainly hasn't established himself as a "top" CB IMHO.

 

[pats1]

Here is the audio vault link:

http://weei.podzinger.com/viewMedia...4-06_Adam_Schefter_NFL_Ntwk.mp3&il=en&index=1

 

[Ring 6]

Personally I don't believe 1 season makes a top level CB in the NFL. Given that he struggled through the 2005 season, it was nice to see him bounce back with a great season in 2006. Yet for me to mark him down as a "top" level CB, I feel a player needs to establish himself with several great seasons (now here’s the catch) IN A ROW.

I sure like Samuel and feel he has the potential, but he most certainly hasn't established himself as a "top" CB IMHO.

Here is the problem though.
If you only judge players by what they have done over a long period of time, the players you consider 'top' are now past their prime.
The key to cap management is to pay players entering their prime, not leaving it.
I disagree that he only had 1 good year (we won the SB with him starting in 2004, and he played well in 2005, IMO, and the entire defense was the best in the league once the players surrounding him got healthy and the scrubs sat down) however, even if you believe that why does it matter? Players get better when they are young. Why would it be a bad thing to have a guy who developed into a very good corner, even if he wasn't a very good one before he developed? Samuel next year will be the player he has developed into, not the one he started out as.

 

[Ring 6]

It seems to me that the Pats' success over the years has been at least partially due to their keeping a stable of good backups and strong starters in most roster spots, not having 4-6 super-high paid guys and everyone else JAGs earning under a million.

Its actually BOTH. the Pats have been as top heavy as anyone on the cap over the last 4-6 years. Its only logical. If they are saving $$ in the middle and bottom of the roster (and by the way, the way they have done that is drafting well....any draft pick is a bargain in his first contract if he contributes, and ours have contriburted a lot, and by signing role players that their isnt a ton of interest in) then where does it go? To the top.

 

[spacecrime]

I have been a talent evaluator before, have coached before, and was actually offered a player development position for an NFL team. So, excuse me if I get on a "high horse" when someone refutes something by pulling out a position list on NFL.com and highlighting "name" players.

We are in awe of your qualifications. Have a fish. But your high horse I referred to had nothing to do with anyone pulling out a list. It had to do with your opinion based on what you saw was fact, and what others saw needed some kind of proof.

Memory refresher (this is what I call getting on a high horse):

Please refute what I said. You made a generalization, I backed it up with fact from his performances that I watched. I've also watched significant reps of the other players you named. If you want to claim something contrary to my opinion, I'm all for that, however please back it up with something other than rhetoric.

I believe that there is a very high level of discussion on this board, which is the main reason I'm here. It's phenomenal, and there are numerous posters with awesome opinions and contributions that make me love this forum. Yours in this thread is weak, and your counter-posts are insulting.

Insulting? I provide my list of who I think are top five CBs, and you insult me by claiming I only highlighted a list of CBs and pulled out names? Please. You are intelligent and your list is well thought out. Eveyone else is stupid and their list is made by highlighting names? And you call my posts weak and insulting? If you think my saying you were on a high horse is insulting, how would you characterize this post:

Please refute what I said. You made a generalization, I backed it up with fact from his performances that I watched. I've also watched significant reps of the other players you named. If you want to claim something contrary to my opinion, I'm all for that, however please back it up with something other than rhetoric.

Again, please tell me why you feel Samuel is not a top-level CB in the league?

I never said that. I think he is a top CB in hte league. I think he is in the top 15, not bad with 64 starting CBs. I just don't think he is a top five. It's only my opinion, not need to go beserk over it.

Is it because he is currently negotiating a contract and wants to get paid? It's a defense mechanism to bash a player when it looks like he'll leave your team.

What's this? Another insult? I cannot have an opinon of a players worth? It has to be because I bash a leaving player. That simply is not true. I still like Samuel. I hope he gets signed. I do not think the Patriots will collapse if he doesn't.

Why do you need to trash any opinion that differs from your own? Just accept that different people have different ideas. Just because I don't think like you do does not mean other opinions are weak.

 

[spacecrime]

Its actually BOTH. the Pats have been as top heavy as anyone on the cap over the last 4-6 years. Its only logical. If they are saving $$ in the middle and bottom of the roster (and by the way, the way they have done that is drafting well....any draft pick is a bargain in his first contract if he contributes, and ours have contriburted a lot, and by signing role players that their isnt a ton of interest in) then where does it go? To the top.

That's where we differ. I think more up it goes to the middle, or even upper middle, not so much the top. That's what I see on Miguel's excellent cap page, anyway.

Unfortunately, I don't have numbers for other teams. You could be right, but as I look at some rosters, it seems to me to be otherwise.

I'd like to add the salaries of the top five or ten salaries of each team, and the middle five or ten, and the bottom five or ten, and compare them.

Failing that, it is just an unsupported feeling I have. I do notice that we pay well for Brady and Seymour (and I'm glad).

I fully agree about the value of draft picks in performance per unit cost, especially for draft picks not in the top five or eight (very high priced picks).

 

[SeanBruschi54]

I'm not. But I have been a talent evaluator before, have coached before, and was actually offered a player development position for an NFL team. So, excuse me if I get on a "high horse" when someone refutes something by pulling out a position list on NFL.com and highlighting "name" players. I believe that there is a very high level of discussion on this board, which is the main reason I'm here. It's phenomenal, and there are numerous posters with awesome opinions and contributions that make me love this forum. Yours in this thread is weak, and your counter-posts are insulting. Again, please tell me why you feel Samuel is not a top-level CB in the league? Is it because he is currently negotiating a contract and wants to get paid? It's a defense mechanism to bash a player when it looks like he'll leave your team. We saw a lot of it last year with the Branch situation (though I agreed with the masses that the Pats' stance was correct.)

Holy crap, how the hell did you get offered that job? I would love to know and try myself.

 

[Ring 6]

That's where we differ. I think more up it goes to the middle, or even upper middle, not so much the top. That's what I see on Miguel's excellent cap page, anyway.

Unfortunately, I don't have numbers for other teams. You could be right, but as I look at some rosters, it seems to me to be otherwise.

I'd like to add the salaries of the top five or ten salaries of each team, and the middle five or ten, and the bottom five or ten, and compare them.

Failing that, it is just an unsupported feeling I have. I do notice that we pay well for Brady and Seymour (and I'm glad).

I fully agree about the value of draft picks in performance per unit cost, especially for draft picks not in the top five or eight (very high priced picks).

I cannot cite the exact numbers, but Ive followed it closely over the years. Remember, we have had many high cap number guys, including Law, McGinest,colivn, Brady, Seymour, and even Ted Johnson for a while had a very high cap number.

I guess it depends on where you draw the line of top-heavy.
The point I was making is the 'excess' has never been spent on 'depth'. If you draw the line at starters not in their rookie contract, we have certainly always been top heavy. There have been very few,if any backups that we spent heavily on.

The biggest disargeement I have with this topic is when people imply that BB is against getting great players and would rather get cheap medicore guys.
I think he proved this year that when he has the cap room (this is really the first time he has) that he values excellent players just as highly as anyone else does.
The biggest difference between BB and most franchises IMO, is that what he refuses to do is pay players based on what they used to be, when they are ready to or already declining.
That is why FA has has ruined many teams, because they sign 33 year old 'name' players who used to be great, and pay them what they were worth when they were great, and sign them to 5 or 6 year contracts.
I really dont think you can overpay a guy under 30 years old unless you totally blow the evaluation and pay him more than the market. Paying market value for young players in or entering their prime is a must, and BB has record of doing so. Taking the guy you 'have to have' in his 30s and paying him the market, not because he will be worth the money, but because its what you have to pay to get him, even though its too much, is the root of disaster, and BB just wont do it.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Didn't we pay around market price for a 30 something FA LB this season?

 

[AzPatsFan]

What he says he wants, and what he and his representation would be willing to take, may be two different things.

Besides, if this FO had done a better job of drafting DBs (3 in 7 years, plus 1 UDFA), then Samuel wouldn't have the leverage he thinks he has.

That has to be the dumbest quote I have ever heard. The Pats defensive backfield is composed of young quality veterans, most just about to enter their prime, all selected by this FO. Geno Wilson was the only high pick, and a second rounder, not a first.

He has been mentioned as a near pro bowler when healthy. Asante Samuel was a fourth rounder and is getting franchise tag indicating that his pay status is equal to the top five. He too is a near pro bowler. These are the two who have reached their prime.

Two others, still learning, are now experienced after playing early in their careers. James Sanders was getting starts as a rookie and claimed the job full time as a soph. He appears ready to blossom going into his second year as a starter in but his third year. Going into the last Season, Ellis Hobbs was rated superior to Samuels as a CB prospect. He played almost the whole year with one hand and a club, and did not embarrass himself. H too should be ready to blossom in his fourth year as Samuels did. Randy Gay stated in a Super bowl as a rook UDFA and was not viewed a someone not pulling his weight. He was solid starter a s a rook and can be better as a fourth year player.

The reality is the the secondary is young talented, and five deep with drafted or signed Free Agents. In addition there are experienced ex-starter veterans to add solid depth selected by this FO. You know guys like Rodney Harrison, Artrell Hawkins, Chad Scott and Ray Mickens and maybe even Tory James.

All in all a pretty damn good secondary with very good depth. Two near probowlers. Its as you would expect for a club going 14-5. And it cost one, (1), O-N-E, first day pick, a single second rounder.