Are the pats short changing Branch?

[spacecrime]

Contracts are based on performance. I don't get this pay me for "potential" or pay me for "talent" crap.

No. contracts are based on what the palyer is exected to do during the life of the contract, not on past performance. If it was on past performance, we should put Andre Tippet backin uniform. Sign Jim Brown.

Pay for next year generally should be for what the player will do next year.

 

[pats1]

No. contracts are based on what the palyer is exected to do during the life of the contract, not on past performance. If it was on past performance, we should put Andre Tippet backin uniform. Sign Jim Brown.

Pay for next year generally should be for what the player will do next year.

But the perceived value is based off past performance. If a player hasn't performed, then who's to say he'll perform in the future?

The only time when past performance should be neglected is when a player has shown declination - or at least signs of it - and pure odds are against the player to retain his past level of performance.

 

[IcyPatriot]

F.B.N.:

Please explain this whole endorsement issue more thoroughly so we can understand it better. Sounds interesting...but first I've heard of it.

I will try when I see him again...I got the impression it had nothing to do with being a star on the team...but he had to run so I'll ask again. I was real surprised to hear it. Especially considering someone who was on the "A" list for endorsements left the team for small change...will he get endorsements in Indy???

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

No. contracts are based on what the palyer is exected to do during the life of the contract, not on past performance. If it was on past performance, we should put Andre Tippet backin uniform. Sign Jim Brown.

Pay for next year generally should be for what the player will do next year.

Wow! You don't seem to get it. Good thing your not a GM! That is the worst approach I have heard. Pay someone because you think he will perform a certain way instead of what he did in the past. Isn't that why players get cut or not re-signed? Because their not performing the way the team would like. Look, bottom line is, if the Pats feel that Branch hasn't performed like a #1 reciever (which he hasn't) then the smart move would be to wait and see what happens. If Branch has at least a 1,000 yard season and at least 6-8 touchdowns, then I wouldn't have any problem signing him to a contract like Javon Walker, or Reggie Wayne or whoever. The reason why recievers are getting big pay days is because they perform at a consistant level during the season. Branch fades in and out, he is too inconsistant. However, I don't put all of the blame on him because Brady likes to spread the ball around to other players. In the end, if Branch wants his money he needs to have a great season. Don't get me wrong, I hope the Pats sign him long-term, at a fair price. End of story.

 

[14thDragon]

The only answer I can come up with to this question is, what did they offer him again?

If they offered him a 5 year 30-33 million dollar contract, ~10mil of that in bonus, then no I would not say they short changed him. That would be reasonable for a WR of his caliber.

If they offered him something in the mid twenties for 5 years, then yeah they would have gone a bit short.

As of yet, I haven't heard word one on where the numbers are.

I certianly believe they know his value on the field, but it really depends on how much cap they believe he deserves.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

THEARCHIVES + SPACECRIME:

Let me see if I can reconcile these two sides of the debate. As Archive suggests, you look at what a player has done in the past to try and figure out what type of player you have.

As Spacecrime suggests, you THEN offer a contract based on what you think that player will achieve IN THE FUTURE.

What do you base these future projections on? What they did IN THE PAST, but you take age and other factors into account (like injury history), and you are really looking to pay them for what you think they will do IN THE FUTURE.

You are looking to pay them only for what they will do in the future, but to estimate this, you need to look also at the past.

 

[Displaced - Fan]

My Patriots contact friend says the Patriots are short @ $750,000/yr. He was going to try to find out more for me...but i only see him once in a while.

I hope he's right because that doesn't seem to be a great amount of $$$ difference.

One other thing I found out is there is a bitterness on the team concerning who can make the xtra endorsements $$$. Word is that is a special club to be in and it's anything but fair.

Thanks to Miguels Salary Page...it is written into all their contracts that everything goes through the team. Doesn't seem quite fair if the endorsement doesn't require any Patriot/NFL gear.

Well with a 5 year contract, that's almost 4 million difference in money.

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

My point on a statement as to whether Branch is being short changed is that the people making that claim have no idea what the offer was - ergo one can't make such a statement.

Joe,

That depends on who made the statement.

However, you posit a very good question. Was the source of Solomon's article his own opinion or was the source Branch's agent?

What better way to plead your case to the public via the media in a discrete way? A sportswriter with ties to an agent can leak info to the media w/o "going public".

Assuming that's the case with Solomon's article, it's bye-bye Deion, since the Pats would never give him Wayne money.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I will try when I see him again...I got the impression it had nothing to do with being a star on the team...but he had to run so I'll ask again. I was real surprised to hear it. Especially considering someone who was on the "A" list for endorsements left the team for small change...will he get endorsements in Indy???

First off, he may not "need" them since he now has security in a long term deal that included a $3.5M signing bonus. Second, guaranteeing he sees several million+ over the first two seasons isn't small change. And third, they do have electricity in Indy now, and all the other things that flow from it like radio, TV, Pizza Places, advertising... He may even get more national attention since the Colts are the national media darlings and the circumstances of his change of scene vs. Vanderchoke is a story line in and of itself. So my guess is if Adam wants endorsements he will get them.

What the Patriots do with branding and marketing is very smart good business. But when it is perceived in the locker room as a means to an end that involves guys settling for a little less in an actual contract, than I can understand that it might generate some resentment. But hey, if it really bothers any of them that much then they should go somewhere where winning football remains a dream and they pay you to fill a hole or plug a gap and when you don't they cut your ass and diss you in the media. Or they could also just go get a real job like the rest of us do in the real world which by and large is equally unfair and generally doesn't pay nearly as well or offer any endorsement opportunities.

 

[Johnny Z]

If it's true that they are only $750,000 apart, and his hunch that an insulting offer would have been leaked to the press is right, then it's very possible the offer to Branch is within 1 million per year of Wayne's contract.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Joe,

That depends on who made the statement.

However, you posit a very good question. Was the source of Solomon's article his own opinion or was the source Branch's agent?

Actually I thought Solomon went out of his way to say that Branch's agent was not a source for that article - and that Solomon was really surmizing that because an agreement hadn't been reached that there was an impasse on the negotitions.

That's probably a pretty safe assumption actually, but having a gap in contract negotiations is nothing new

If anything Solomon states that clearly the Patriots haven't made an insulting offer - so that tends to support a notion that while Branch might want more, it wasn't a completely unfair offer.

Based on what little we know I'd say that the only conclusion one can draw on the question of whether the Patriots are "short changing Branch" is that the answer is "NO!"

 

[Kdo5]

Branch is a PLAY MAKER in the post season and nobody can take that away from him...but your also forgetting another person was the man in two of the Pats Superbowl post seasons....


David Givens. He scored a touchdown in each and every game in the 2003 and 2004 playoffs. He scored in both of our 2006 playoff games, Jacksonville and Denver. 8 touchdowns in 2 1/2 playoff runs. Thats pretty good to me. It was hard to see him leave. He was seriously a great asset during those playoffs.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

GOD! make it go away! That picture is hideous, HIDEOUS!

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

What made Givens a special player was that as a late 7th rounder in 2002, he provided great value from 2003-2005. But when his salary demands skyrocketed, he became overvalued.

I always thought of Givens as an average talent and that the Titans grossly overpaid to get him. Branch helped Givens, not the other way around. With Deion getting 2x-teamed with regularity in 2005, Givens wasn't able to pick up is game a notch on a consistent basis. Branch is a great WR, but the Pats cannot afford to pay him top dollar.

Givens postseason stats...

 Year  Opp   Result  |  RSH    YD  TD  |  REC    YD  TD
---------------------+-----------------+-----------------
 2003  ten  W,17-14  |    0     0   0  |    4    26   0
 2003  ind  W,24-14  |    0     0   0  |    8    68   1
*2003  car  W,32-29  |    0     0   0  |    5    69   1
 2004  ind  W,20-3   |    0     0   0  |    4    26   1
 2004  pit  W,41-27  |    1    -2   0  |    5    59   1
*2004  phi  W,24-21  |    0     0   0  |    3    19   1
 2005  jax  W,28-3   |    0     0   0  |    1     3   1
 2005  den  L,13-27  |    0     0   0  |    5    54   1
---------------------+-----------------+-----------------
TOTAL                |    1    -2   0  |   35   324   7

Branch's postseason stats...

Year  Opp   Result  |  RSH    YD  TD  |  REC    YD  TD
---------------------+-----------------+-----------------
 2003  ten  W,17-14  |    0     0   0  |    3    10   0
 2003  ind  W,24-14  |    0     0   0  |    2    23   0
*2003  car  W,32-29  |    0     0   0  |   10   143   1
 2004  ind  W,20-3   |    1     4   0  |    1    15   0
 2004  pit  W,41-27  |    2    37   1  |    4   116   1
*2004  phi  W,24-21  |    0     0   0  |   11   133   0
 2005  jax  W,28-3   |    0     0   0  |    2    36   0
 2005  den  L,13-27  |    0     0   0  |    8   153   0
---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

Judging a WR primarily by TDs is the equivalent to saying Adam Vinatieri is 90% repsonsible for for the Pats winning SB 36, while ignoring the drive Brady orchestrated to get Adam that kick. Branch is better at moving the chains and as posted earlier, ranked 28th in TYPCA, while Givens ranked 38th, despite Branch's double-teams.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

As much as we all like Givens, I think his collapse at Titans will be one of the stories of the year. He has bust written all over him at this point. Maybe someone else will get the blame, but Givens will not put up big numbers. He is an average number two, and had an accurate QB passing to him. Billy Volek, and Vince Young?

 

[mgteich]

So we shouldn't judge a wide receiver on whether he gets open in the redzone and makes TD catches when it matters, in the playoffs? You judge as you will. Red zone production is essential; getting open and executing is even more so.

Perhaps we should judge teams by how many yards they gain, or how many first downs they make. Does that make sense to anyone?

Or is this part of our syndrome of devaluating the contributions of all players who leave the pats.

I agree that Givens is unlikely to be hugely valuable elsewhere. That doesn't change the fact that he was extremely valuable to the patriots.

Just my 2 cents.

What made Givens a special player was that as a late 7th rounder in 2002, he provided great value from 2003-2005. But when his salary demands skyrocketed, he became overvalued.

I always thought of Givens as an average talent and that the Titans grossly overpaid to get him. Branch helped Givens, not the other way around. With Deion getting 2x-teamed with regularity in 2005, Givens wasn't able to pick up is game a notch on a consistent basis. Branch is a great WR, but the Pats cannot afford to pay him top dollar.

Givens postseason stats...

 Year  Opp   Result  |  RSH    YD  TD  |  REC    YD  TD
---------------------+-----------------+-----------------
 2003  ten  W,17-14  |    0     0   0  |    4    26   0
 2003  ind  W,24-14  |    0     0   0  |    8    68   1
*2003  car  W,32-29  |    0     0   0  |    5    69   1
 2004  ind  W,20-3   |    0     0   0  |    4    26   1
 2004  pit  W,41-27  |    1    -2   0  |    5    59   1
*2004  phi  W,24-21  |    0     0   0  |    3    19   1
 2005  jax  W,28-3   |    0     0   0  |    1     3   1
 2005  den  L,13-27  |    0     0   0  |    5    54   1
---------------------+-----------------+-----------------
TOTAL                |    1    -2   0  |   35   324   7

Branch's postseason stats...

Year  Opp   Result  |  RSH    YD  TD  |  REC    YD  TD
---------------------+-----------------+-----------------
 2003  ten  W,17-14  |    0     0   0  |    3    10   0
 2003  ind  W,24-14  |    0     0   0  |    2    23   0
*2003  car  W,32-29  |    0     0   0  |   10   143   1
 2004  ind  W,20-3   |    1     4   0  |    1    15   0
 2004  pit  W,41-27  |    2    37   1  |    4   116   1
*2004  phi  W,24-21  |    0     0   0  |   11   133   0
 2005  jax  W,28-3   |    0     0   0  |    2    36   0
 2005  den  L,13-27  |    0     0   0  |    8   153   0
---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

Judging a WR primarily by TDs is the equivalent to saying Adam Vinatieri is 90% repsonsible for for the Pats winning SB 36, while ignoring the drive Brady orchestrated to get Adam that kick. Branch is better at moving the chains and as posted earlier, ranked 28th in TYPCA, while Givens ranked 38th, despite Branch's double-teams.

 

[Kdo5]

Branch is a PLAY MAKER in the post season and nobody can take that away from him

Thats what I said, I never said Givens was a better playmaker because they both turned it up when the post season came. Dillon ofcourse had an incredibly good game against Indy and Brady will always be THE playmaker in the playoffs, but offensively it was mostly Branch in Givens over those three post seasons.

Givens is a good reciever. The titans overpayed to get him but he wont fall flat on his face and suck there. Ofcourse thats ignoring season ending injuries. Givens obviously isnt a burner and wont get huge huge gains on one pass. Branch does a great job at pretty much everything and it would be great to have him as our #1 reciever for years to come. But Givens is a pretty damn tough reciever.

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

So we shouldn't judge a wide receiver on whether he gets open in the redzone and makes TD catches when it matters, in the playoffs? You judge as you will. Red zone production is essential; getting open and executing is even more so.

Perhaps we should judge teams by how many yards they gain, or how many first downs they make. Does that make sense to anyone?

Or is this part of our syndrome of devaluing the contributions of all players who leave the pats.

I agree that Givens is unlikely to be hugely valuable elsewhere. That doesn't change the fact that he was extremely valuable to the patriots.

Just my 2 cents.

MG,

My point was this...

Player A: 3 recs for 19 yds and a TD

Player B: 11 recs for 133 yds and 0 TDs

Who had the better game and by how much was he better and why?

Actually, a good way to judge a WR is by TYPCA which tells you how many yards a receiver gains every time a reasonably catchable ball is thrown his way. Every time Vrabel catches a pass it's a TD. Does that make him great? Plaxico Burress averages 16 yards a catch, but can't break the top 15 in TYPCA. That tells me that Plax gains 16 yards every time he catches the ball, but gains far less per pass when you factor in every catchable ball (no throwaways, which the NFL stats credit a receiver) that was thrown his way. TYPCA also rewards players like Joe Jerivicius, who doesn't have a good yards per catch but had a high comp% and therefore a higher TYPCA than Plax or Randy Moss.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

Givens is being brought in to Titans as a #1 weapon. He is not a #1 at getting open, especially in double coverage. His hands are maybe above average, but he has dropped some passes that could have made the difference in mounting a comeback during regular season games. This is the type play that he is supposed to make as a #1. He also has fumbled fairly often, including in playoff games. He does not have break away speed, and wasn't know as the best rhoute runner either.

As a #2, he is good. But I don't see how he can carry a team with questionable QB's as a #1. I can't see him being worth the money, and I just think that they will be drafting another #1 in a year or two.

As far as toughness, he is tough with the ball in his hand, and that is probably his best attribute. And he is a good blocker. But he has spent a fair amount of time nursing some nagging type injuries, I wouldn't say that he is an iron man.

I really see teams blanketing him up and down the field, and limiting his effectiveness as a #1, especially with a 'Run first and ask questions later' QB like Young.