Alan Branch signs 2 year deal with Patriots

[Jimke]

Decent player and protects the Patriots butt if Wilfork does not return.

 

[unoriginal]

Unless this is incentive-heavy, kind of weird contract. Branch's last two contracts with Seattle and Buffalo have been in the $3-$4 million a year range too.

He played like 20% of snaps after getting cut for a DUI and getting picked up off the street and it doesn't affect his cap value much at all. You'd think there would have been more of a discount given nobody seemed to be beating down his door.

 

[Marqui]

Solid depth signing even though the initial numbers look a little high. They still need a #1 DT whether it's Wilfork back or Starks/Raji.

 

[RayClay]

I REALLY hate to seem like I'm putting down VW. He's always been a solid Patriot and easy guy to root for. I am just having a hard time seeing 5 million for VW. Is he commanding double teams? Is he still getting push and making the opposition's running up the middle solidly unproductive?
At his age and weight, IMHO, 5 million is too much unless he is a clear and convincing difference maker. This is why, from my POV, another Siliga type who is an inexpensive difficult to move wide body to go along with a 4+ million a year <fill in the blank player> is a much wiser use of money than VW for 5 million.

But! if BB signs him for 5 million a year I completely retract this post

I said, if that's the best offer, two years of vince and his roots here don't make that a tough negotiation IMO.

Hate to keep saying it, but he was our best tackle and never missed a play that I recall, after his "career ending" injury.

He should be better this year and anyone that can come back to play 70% of snaps while rehabbing a torn achilles can play 2 more if healthy and working out unencumbered.

We're all cheering a player with a checkered career who was only enough in shape to play about 20% for letting us pay him 3 million plus for that.

 

[meatface]

unfortunately this likely means that Big Vince is gone for good

 

[supafly]

Is that a one year deal of two? If it's one, the answer is no.

Considering that his agent has stated that they have "multiple" offers of 2/10 (5 million dollars AAV), I'm guessing that we'd be interested around 3.5m dollars or so---yes.

Your suggestion that Wilfork is suddenly only worth 1.75m dollars while Alan Branch just signed for 3+m dollars AAV doesn't really add up, does it?

 

[supafly]

If the best offer Wilfork gets is 5 mil each for two years elsewhere I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him back.

I don't think we'd match the supposed (that I have a hard time believing) 5m dollars AAV offers here in N.England, but your comment shows the enormous gap that we have on the forum regarding the opinion of his worth.

The comment that I responded to a post or two ago stated that his worth was 1.75m or so, whereas you are happy with 5m dollars per year.

 

[RayClay]

I don't think we'd match the (supposed--that I have a hard time believing) 5m dollars AAV offers here in N.England, but your comment shows the enormous gap that we have on the forum regarding the opinion of his worth.

The comment that I responded to a post or two ago stated that his worth was 1.75m or so, whereas you are happy with 5m dollars per year.

He's worth considerably more than Branch with a recently torn achilles. After a year to workout without a leg injury, probably more.

People here seem to think a jag (sorry Alan) turns into an all time great Patriot because there's a hole to fill and an all time great turns into a jag because he has some miles on him.

I do not subscribe to that theory.

 

[supafly]

Regarding 2 LBs being used often (it was almost the base D), I thought that was done out of personnel necessity versus the optimum choice (I could be wrong on that).
What I was getting at, sorta, was swapping areas of conspicuous strength. Last season the secondary was full of 'studs' and the conspicuous area of strength. With half the starting secondary gone and 1:1 replacements unlikely for 'the departed', I'd love to see that conspicuous area of strength now become the LB group. And while I think our LB group as it stands is good, no complaints, I'd like to see that one more semi-stud added making it a fearsome foursome (Ninko on the line).
IMHO spending 3.5/4 million on that is better than spending it on VW. For the interior DL go with Branch, Siliga, as well as an additional, inexpensive, one trick wide body.
I've always been of the opinion that the LB position has the greatest opportunity for playmaking. Even if we have just an adequate overall secondary and DL, a LB group like that can make this D hard to score on.
Or Sup the other possibility, as it's well into Saturday night, I'm simply speaking from the POV of too many glasses of liquid cheer.

I hear you about the want for a more formidable LB corps, I'm just wondering if the signing of Sheard at 5.5m dollars per year makes him much more than "just" a 3rd down pass rushing piece? I'd have a very difficult time envisioning Belichick paying someone that much money unless they were going to play a lot, but that may be just my opinion.

Either way you look at it, since both Ninkovich + Sheard can play DE/OLB, it would appear as though we have our 4th LB one way or the other. It should give us more flexibility to shift back and forth between fronts, and have a better matchup in certain packages.

I'm just wondering which position (DL or CB) Belichick will target in free agency, and which he'll target in the draft? I'd like to see one of each at both positions.

 

[RayClay]

After his career ending injury Wilfork played 70% of snaps, had 47 combined tackles, an interception 2 passes defensed and a leaping block of a field goal.

 

[supafly]

He's worth considerably more than Branch with a recently torn achilles. After a year to workout without a leg injury, probably more.

People here seem to think a jag (sorry Alan) turns into an all time great Patriot because there's a whole to fill and an all time great turns into a jag because he has some miles on him.

I do not subscribe to that theory.

I share your opinion one-hundred percent.

I appreciate the Branch signing. I think it gives up depth/rotational ability, which is obviously needed, and I feel as though he fit in well enough to justify bringing back for at least another year.

I do not feel that it should automatically disqualify any thoughts about bringing Wilfork back though, as I still feel that he was a very valuable piece of our defense last year. He worked hard to come back from such a major injury, then went on to play in 74 percent of the overall snaps. Quite impressive. I'd love to see him brought back for reasonable money. It'd be a win-win for both parties in my opinion.

 

[hwc]

supafly:

I think it's an anachronism to think in terms of DEs and OLBs. Instead, in a league that is in nickle for 70% of the snaps, it's ILBs, DTs, and "edge players". It really doesn't matter whether you call the edge players OLBs or DEs. The same player could technically be both. It's just terminology.

The Pats now have four of these players: Sheard, Collins, Jones, and Ninkovitch. You could have four of them on the field at once by pulling some combination of two ILB and/or DTs out of the game, which would give you a quick pass rush package.

 

[supafly]

supafly:

I think it's an anachronism to think in terms of DEs and OLBs. Instead, in a league that is in nickle for 70% of the snaps, it's ILBs, DTs, and "edge players". It really doesn't matter whether you call the edge players OLBs or DEs. The same player could technically be both. It's just terminology.

The Pats now have four of these players: Sheard, Collins, Jones, and Ninkovitch. You could have four of them on the field at once by pulling some combination of two ILB and/or DTs out of the game, which would give you a quick pass rush package.

Well said, hwc--but does this dispel the notion that we haven't found a 4th LB with skills?

I mean, the fact seems to be that no matter what we'll have Mayo, Collins, Hightower, and some combination of a 4th LB (Sheard, Ninkovich, Chandler Jones), if/when we need a 4th LB. In other words, my response to that specific poster was that I don't feel that we're still looking for another LB. Why would we need another one?

 

[RayClay]

I share your opinion one-hundred percent.

I appreciate the Branch signing. I think it gives up depth/rotational ability, which is obviously needed, and I feel as though he fit in well enough to justify bringing back for at least another year.

I do not feel that it should automatically disqualify any thoughts about bringing Wilfork back though, as I still feel that he was a very valuable piece of our defense last year. He worked hard to come back from such a major injury, then went on to play in 74 percent of the overall snaps. Quite impressive. I'd love to see him brought back for reasonable money. It'd be a win-win for both parties in my opinion.

If they stumble upon a younger guy with the upside to be the big dominant guy to, hopefully, go along with Easley, then maybe they turn the position over. I understand that. However, finding that guy for reasonable money is unlikely at that position.

By contrast, they gambled they could adequately fill the guard position after Mankins and, after some stumbles, were correct, with the guy who wasn't strong enough and couldn't play guard.

Impact DT is probably the hardest position to fill with a low pick type guy, even more than QB, which is really a crapshoot. Massive guys with heart, motivation and smarts stand out from the crowd.

If a healthy Wilfork can play as well as one with a recently torn tendon, he's already worth 4-5 million in the short term. I think, for obvious reasons, he'll be better.

 

[supafly]

If they stumble upon a younger guy with the upside to be the big dominant guy to, hopefully, go along with Easley, then maybe they turn the position over. I understand that. However, finding that guy for reasonable money is unlikely at that position.

By contrast, they gambled they could adequately fill the guard position after Mankins and, after some stumbles, were correct, with the guy who wasn't strong enough and couldn't play guard.

Impact DT is probably the hardest position to fill with a low pick type guy, even more than QB, which is really a crapshoot. Massive guys with heart, motivation and smarts stand out from the crowd.

I'm all for any combination of 2/3:

1) Selecting a higher round (1-3) draft pick at DT.

2) Bringing back Wilfork at a much cheaper price. I think anywhere between 3-4m dollars would be reasonable. You would personally pay a bit more to make this happen, judging by your comments. I wouldn't go above 4m dollars, and even then that's pushing it, as much as I'd like to see him return.

3) Bringing in another DT such as Cofield, Starks, etc.

 

[hwc]

In other words, my response to that specific poster was that I don't feel that we're still looking for another LB. Why would we need another one?

If the Pats are looking for LBs, it's for depth at the ILB position and concern about Mayo's recovery. They are solidly four deep at the edge player position.

If it weren't for the fact that, in today's NFL, you rotate edge players inside on passing downs, they probably have too many starter-caliber edge players. The base defense is a 2-4-5 (or a 4-2-5 depending on what you want to call it).

I think they'll be looking for two more DTs -- one big fatty 2-down run stopper specialist and another young athletic inside DT to go with Easley for the "quick package". I think that, ideally, Belichick would like to be able to play games on passing downs and bring heat across the line of scrimmage from anywhere along the line. It's pretty obvious from the type of players he's been getting in the draft and otherwise.

As it stands right now, I think the starting DTs in the base package will be Siliga and Easley with Branch subbing in on running downs.

I think the Wilfork type big fatty NT will see limited snaps in the Pats defense going forward. Belichick appears to want more quickness on the D-line than we are used to seeing from his defenses. Giving up running yardage is a trade-off he's probably willing to make.

 

[supafly]

I think the Wilfork type big fatty NT will see limited snaps in the Pats defense going forward. Belichick appears to want more quickness on the D-line than we are used to seeing from his defenses. Giving up running yardage is a trade-off he's probably willing to make.

I agree with the rest of your post, aside from the above statement. We'll have to see how it goes moving forward.

 

[Deus Irae]

...I think the Wilfork type big fatty NT will see limited snaps in the Pats defense going forward. Belichick appears to want more quickness on the D-line than we are used to seeing from his defenses. Giving up running yardage is a trade-off he's probably willing to make.

An aging and recovering Wilfork played more than 70% of the defensive snaps this past season. If that had been 30 year old Vince, he might never have left the field.

New England should seriously consider the option of breaking the bank for Dontari Poe, if he hits the market next year.

 

[RayClay]

I'm all for any combination of 2/3:

1) Selecting a higher round (1-3) draft pick at DT.

2) Bringing back Wilfork at a much cheaper price. I think anywhere between 3-4m dollars would be reasonable. You would personally pay a bit more to make this happen, judging by your comments. I wouldn't go above 4m dollars, and even then that's pushing it, as much as I'd like to see him return.

3) Bringing in another DT such as Cofield, Starks, etc.

Well, you get underachievers like Branch for that money. He didn't play much at all last year and it's not because he had a career threatening injury, it's because he was sitting on the couch eating cheetos after driving drunk.

I do think the team values Wilfork's abilities more than the forum seems to.

Sad I can say that and welcome Branch back, but that's what I think of the chances of affordably coming close to replacing Wilfork.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Considering that his agent has stated that they have "multiple" offers of 2/10 (5 million dollars AAV), I'm guessing that we'd be interested around 3.5m dollars or so---yes.

Your suggestion that Wilfork is suddenly only worth 1.75m dollars while Alan Branch just signed for 3+m dollars AAV doesn't really add up, does it?

The OP I responded to was the question was bringing back VW at 3.5m or $4m. It's a nuanced issue. Let me attempt to clarify my position.

If its a 1y/$4m deal guaranteed, no. If it's a 1yr/$4m with a mix of guarantees and incentives, maybe.

If it's $1.75m guaranteed for one year and incentives bring is to $3.5 then yes.

Branch will be 31 in Dec. VW will be 34 in Nov. Age is a big difference.

You can count on one finger the number of players that at age 34 BB has paid $4m a year for. Hint- one is #12.

In addition, if you look at what's happening in the DT FA market thats about what VW will get.

I think the 2y/$10m is propaganda. That was put out by a reporter from South Florida- but yes from Kennard McGuire's office.