Belichick Chose Bodden Over Hobbs

[Rob0729]

Personally. I agree with the sentiment that Hobbs was traded because his chanches of returning in 2010 were slim based on his salary expectations and the number of free agents the Pats will have and the fact he saved more money on the cap than Bodden or Springs. Better to get two 5th rounder for the guy and let him walk next year and probably get a 5th rounder in 2011 for a compensatory pick.

I don't think Belichick went into the weekend planning to trade Hobbs away. He was high on Butler, but not high enough to take him in the first round or even with his first second round pick. But when Butler was still sitting there with their third pick in the second round, he decided to pull the trigger. That right off the bat made someone expendable. Hobbs saved the Pats over $2 million on the cap by trading him. Bodden would save only $760k.

Let's face it. Butler, Wheatley, and Whilhite are the future of that position assuming everything goes to plan. Bodde, Springs, and Hobbs were only going to be stopgaps for them to develop. One of the older veterans had to go once Butler was drafted, Hobbs provided the most upside in terms of cap relief and trade value.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

There's a thread on this, and people have claimed that the Patriots did, in fact, try to sign Samuel, but he was asking for too much money.

And had Asante somehow signed early with the Pats for millions but for for a # that was later greatly exceeded there's the strong possibility he'd be disgruntled a la the Eagles players. I believe that the Patriots attempt to determine whether a guy is willing to play along a bit with team needs and success vs max dollars. Lawyer, Ty and Willie were not of that mindset. Looks like BB decided that Hobbsie was out for a max contract in 2010 and decided to go for other options. I DO believe that BB uncharacteristically made a quick and unexpected sudden draft day decision to trade Hobbs figuring the 5ths today were better than a 4th next year given that he had Bodden, Springs and the W CBs. I think it's logical to infer that BB was comfortable with his 2009 CB cast minus Hobbs. The cap relief indicates a possible vet acquisition.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Check. With CBs like Jabari Greer and Dominique Foxworth getting 4 year deals average $6-8M/year, I think the writing was on the wall that Hobbs wouldn't be back. Whatever you may think of him and of the market, I don't think he was worth that kind of money for the Pats.

I don't think any corner is...



Check. I think Bodden and Hobbs were the likely starting CBs for 2009, but there's no guarantee that any of the others wouldn't have won a starting job over one or both of them.

That remains the case with Bodden and Springs (who is making $4.55M this season).


Check. I wasn't in favor of drafting a day 1 CB because we were already 5 deep at the position. Once we drafted Butler we had a logjam, and Hobbs was the obvious odd man out because of his contract situation and his ego. Not because of his play. But unlike James Sanders, who came back at a discount and who will probably accept a situational role gracefully if Chung takes over the starting SS job, Hobbs has a high opinion of himself and would not take gracefully to a non-starting role or to resigning for less than top $.

I guess you haven't yet met Bodden's ego...LOL


Check. That was part of my argument against drafting a day 1 CB - either the rookie would block the development of Wheatley and Wilhite, or Wheatley and Wilhite would block development of a rookie CB. Get rid of Hobbs and the problem goes away.

How's that? LOL That being the rationale, and I doubt it's Bill's, you're in the same fix unless Bodden fails and Springs is injured again...unless you almost assume some of them won't work out for whatever reason, as is most often the case here...

Check. While Hobbs knew the system, I think the chances of keeping him were < 10%, whereas the chances of keeping Bodden are much higher. Bodden wants to prove himself worthy of a long term contract, but there's nothing so far to suggest that he wouldn't be open to staying with the Pats for a reasonable deal. While I'm not anointing Bodden the savior I think he was the best FA CB out there for the Pats given how well he did in a similar system in Cleveland, and I like his size and upside better than Hobbs.

Bodden asked for and received a no tag clause in his $2.25M deal. Like I said, you haven't met his ego yet. He believes he is one of the top corners in the league. Ocho Stinko even told him so. Hobbs could have been RFA'd in an uncapped 2010. He played through nasty injuries at the risk of his big payday. And he was one of the best return men in the league. Slam dunk stiff...

 

[DW Toys]

Works for me. Bodden has a career high 6 INT, Hobbs' is 3. Bodden was also a VERY solid cover guy in Cleveland and we need plays in the backfield. We lost them when we lost Samuel.

Agree.
DW Toys

 

[mayoclinic]

Bodden asked for and received a no tag clause in his $2.25M deal. Like I said, you haven't met his ego yet. He believes he is one of the top corners in the league. Ocho Stinko even told him so. Hobbs could have been RFA'd in an uncapped 2010. He played through nasty injuries at the risk of his big payday. And he was one of the best return men in the league. Slam dunk stiff...

You may be right about Bodden, but I think it was fairly certain with Hobbs. If Bodden doesn't play up to expectations are does and wants outrageous money then we let him go and move on and are no worse off. He has publicly stated that he wants to show the Pats that he is worth of a long term deal, so I think it is somewhat less certain that he'll move on than Hobbs, but both are certainly possible. And if he does play up to expectations then I think he will be more deserving of the $6-8M kind of figure than Hobbs would ever be.

My preference in the draft was not to take CB 1st day, keep Hobbs, and go OLB. BB obviously thought there was better value with Butler, and chose to let Hobbs go. As far as I can tell, the worst case scenario is that we go into 2010 with Butler and Wheatley/Springs as our starting CBs, and Springs/Wheatley and Wilhite as our nickel and dime. That's not the end of the world, and would probably still be much stronger than what we had in 2008. IF Bodden plays well and IF we can sign him long term (admittedly big ifs), then we should be set at the CB position for several years, which would be very nice.

If you accept that Hobbs was going to move on then it makes sense to move him, regardless of what you think the chances are of keeping Bodden. It may have been possible to RFA Hobbs, but Hobbs as a malcontent probably wouldn't be great for the team. I have nothing against Hobbs, but I'm fine with moving him for something while we could still get something for him.

 

[spacecrime]

Belichick brought in Bodden to start in 2009. Bodden might stay, but is likely to look for a big contract elsewhere in 2010.

Belichick has three youngsters to hopefully become the future starters and nickel.

And finally Belichick paid big bucks for Springs to play a major role in 2009 and perhaps for the couple of more years of his contract. Springs will get over $4.5M this year.
=============================
Hobbs was replaced for 2009, pure and simple.

You might be right about Bodden replacing Hobbs, but it isn't pure and simple.

Just because BB signed one CB and traded another doesn't mean he thought one was better than the other.

I doubt BB thought Antwan Harris was better than Milloy. Wilson started at safety only after Harris bombed in Buffalo, but regardless, Milloy was cut, Harris elevated in his place, but it didn't mean purely and simply BB thought Harris was a better player. Lots of reasons to acquire and remove players, and it isn't always a one-on-one matchup based on talent alone.

BB surely didn't think Justice Hairston was better than COrey Dillon, either, not the FAs he signed to replace CHad Eaton and Chris Slade.

I don't disagree with your premise that Bodden is better than Hobbs, but just because two events occurred in sequence does not mean a decision was made to do both in conjunction. It might have happened or it might not, but one thing it isn't is pure and simple.

We are WAYover-analyzing this.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

You might be right about Bodden replacing Hobbs, but it isn't pure and simple.

Just because BB signed one CB and traded another doesn't mean he thought one was better than the other.

I doubt BB thought Antwan Harris was better than Milloy. Wilson started at safety only after Harris bombed in Buffalo, but regardless, Milloy was cut, Harris elevated in his place, but it didn't mean purely and simply BB thought Harris was a better player. Lots of reasons to acquire and remove players, and it isn't always a one-on-one matchup based on talent alone.

BB surely didn't think Justice Hairston was better than COrey Dillon, either, not the FAs he signed to replace CHad Eaton and Chris Slade.

I don't disagree with your premise that Bodden is better than Hobbs, but just because two events occurred in sequence does not mean a decision was made to do both in conjunction. It might have happened or it might not, but one thing it isn't is pure and simple.

We are WAYover-analyzing this.

That's what we do. Because some here need to jump to/establish an immediate conclusion while others strive to hope for the best while still acknowledging the potential for the worst or anything in between, and together we end up spending endless hours massaging any facts at hand to suit our POV. Doesn't matter whether the conclusion is we'll be better than evah (which it generally is here) or we could be a little worse than hoped (which has been the unfortunate result of late) or we won't know one way or another 'til week 8...which is what it is, as the man says. No patience to wait and see here anymore. We haven't even had a mini camp yet... Just one costly rookie camp...whose victim mg has now pronounced NBD.

 

[DW Toys]

You may be right about Bodden, but I think it was fairly certain with Hobbs. If Bodden doesn't play up to expectations are does and wants outrageous money then we let him go and move on and are no worse off. He has publicly stated that he wants to show the Pats that he is worth of a long term deal, so I think it is somewhat less certain that he'll move on than Hobbs, but both are certainly possible. And if he does play up to expectations then I think he will be more deserving of the $6-8M kind of figure than Hobbs would ever be.

My preference in the draft was not to take CB 1st day, keep Hobbs, and go OLB. BB obviously thought there was better value with Butler, and chose to let Hobbs go. As far as I can tell, the worst case scenario is that we go into 2010 with Butler and Wheatley/Springs as our starting CBs, and Springs/Wheatley and Wilhite as our nickel and dime. That's not the end of the world, and would probably still be much stronger than what we had in 2008. IF Bodden plays well and IF we can sign him long term (admittedly big ifs), then we should be set at the CB position for several years, which would be very nice.

If you accept that Hobbs was going to move on then it makes sense to move him, regardless of what you think the chances are of keeping Bodden. It may have been possible to RFA Hobbs, but Hobbs as a malcontent probably wouldn't be great for the team. I have nothing against Hobbs, but I'm fine with moving him for something while we could still get something for him.

Have to tend to agree with you. I think that Bodden must play well in order to re-establish himself as a top tier CB. Please take a look at his numbers in Detroit. He was playing a system that did not suit his skills and he still was their best CB (not saying much but fact). The money obligation was the cut in Detroit, not performance.The assessment on Hobbs was correct. A slot cover, nickle 3rd CB. That's not bad but he was not a #1 guy. All the DBs were guilty last year. We slammed O'Neal but he actually helped win a game or two last year. One singlehandledly. He started the preseason on another team and was here late. He played way to far off the ball and perhaps that was his coaching in Cincinnati. It drove me crazy, but no less than our Safeties taking wrong angles or Ellis not making plays and well as an anemic pass rush. The longer the season the worse they all got it seemed.

Bodden had looks from other teams but his asking price was where he had been, not what Detroit made his market value sink to and teams passed. He went to plan "B". So to get on a good team, he would take less money because his value would increase as the team won games. Not a bad strategy. He was good in Cleveland in a defense similar to ours and not really that bad in Detroit. Remember, he was a CAP cut as they needed to gut their whole team.

Here could be BB's strategy. Getting something for Hobbs who would be getting less playing time in 2009 was the smart play. If Springs and Bodden start which I assume will happen, now Hobbs is three on the depth chart. Does Butler make Hobbs number four as the season goes along (or Wheatley or Wilhite)? The right play was move him and as in the Cassel trade, a bird in the hand is better than an all out auction when the bidders are shy.

The reverse was probably the same in the Alex Smith pick up. The Bucs said lets move him after they take a chance on Winslow like we are taking a chance on Bodden and Springs. He is still young and I was checking some old records in 2005. Smith was rated as the top tight end in the entire 2005 NFL Draft by the Blesto and National Scouting service grades. BB said he had been toying with this offer for a while and after no TE pick up in the Draft, he is going to fix his poor TE play just like his DB purge. Is this just BB being BB?

I would not be surprised to see Watson traded. More CAP room and definitely replaceable but more so, Ben will be seeking a new deal in 2010. Smith is here on a one year look and see and "prove my worth" deal. More incentive to play good for Smith, although Watson would like to improve his worth too but he is the established #1 TE. Baker and Smith can certainly give you more production than last year and Thomas may never get out of the dog house. Thomas is likely gone, but then again he has the best hands which leaves us with......who as odd man out?

Back to Bodden, I would love to see him be the lights out CB he can be to wipe the smile off of Assante's face (though deserved until this point).

DW Toys

 

[mayoclinic]

The reverse was probably the same in the Alex Smith pick up. The Bucs said lets move him after they take a chance on Winslow like we are taking a chance on Bodden and Springs. He is still young and I was checking some old records in 2005. Smith was rated as the top tight end in the entire 2005 NFL Draft by the Blesto and National Scouting service grades. BB said he had been toying with this offer for a while and after no TE pick up in the Draft, he is going to fix his poor TE play just like his DB purge. Is this just BB being BB?

I would not be surprised to see Watson traded. More CAP room and definitely replaceable but more so, Ben will be seeking a new deal in 2010. Smith is here on a one year look and see and "prove my worth" deal. More incentive to play good for Smith, although Watson would like to improve his worth too but he is the established #1 TE. Baker and Smith can certainly give you more production than last year and Thomas may never get out of the dog house. Thomas is likely gone, but then again he has the best hands which leaves us with......who as odd man out?

Trade Watson and Green to Arizona along with a 2010 2nd round pick for Karlos Dansby. Arizona needs DL and TE help badly. Dansby could play OLB or SILB and would greatly solidify the LB corps. Be still my beating heart.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Hobbs was a good kick returner and a good third corner masquerading as a #1 corner. There was nobody else among their top 15-20 earners who was even close to as expendable. I think this is a classic situation proving the axiom that once you know you're not going to re-sign a guy, you're better off trading him or getting rid of him somehow. The future doesn't involve him, so you might as start trying to get on without him. You're going to have to deal with that adjustment eventually anyway. Why not now, and why not get something in return?

Good analysis. I still don't see why people can't get over Hobbs. The Pats were not resigning him at the end of the year anyways. Why not get what value you can for him now? Hobbs was turned into a 2 for 1, OG depth which we needed and a new longsnapper which we also needed. Getting those guys outweighed keeping a 3rd to 5th cornerback on the roster for a year. I think that people are just afraid of change. I suppose that's a normal reaction, but when you look at it logically, there's not that much reason for worry.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Such compelling arguments if not for the fact that no one but armchair GM's on message boards have assessed Hobbs as a decent nickle and no more...and Bodden was traded for cap and attitude reasons - he was spouting off in December that he'd love to stay in Detroit if they got a HC who appreciated his value as a top corner... Apparently he could not locate one in 32 who did. He's here for a career rehab and/or reality check. He won't get away with that crap with Bill. He did with RAC but that's just one of the differences between Bill and that former protoge.

 

[mgteich]

We have been calling Hobbs a decent nickel back who was forced to be our #2 and then #1 corner. Congrats to Hobbs. He has done a decent job for us. We need to move on and try to imporve. To me, Hobbs does not even have the potential to be a decent cover corner. We need to TRY to find players who could cover so that more pressure could be put on the QB's.

Maybe Bodden is that guy, maybe Springs, or maybe we will need to develop Butler, Wheatley and/or Wilhite or even someone next year. One thing seems clear. Hobbs was not ever going to be our STAR corner, our shutdown dependable #1 corner.

NO ONE has compared Bodden to Ty Law. No one should. NO ONE should have compared Hobbs or even Samuel to Ty Law. Such comparisons are between relative unknowns and a future HOFer. We MAY have a shutdown corner this year. It is clear we didn't have one in Hobbs.

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

I'd choose Bodden, Bouton, Bowden, Bedouin, Bodine, or anyone named "Smith" over Hobbs.

 

[Deus Irae]

We have been calling Hobbs a decent nickel back who was forced to be our #2 and then #1 corner. Congrats to Hobbs. He has done a decent job for us. We need to move on and try to imporve. To me, Hobbs does not even have the potential to be a decent cover corner. We need to TRY to find players who could cover so that more pressure could be put on the QB's.

Maybe Bodden is that guy, maybe Springs, or maybe we will need to develop Butler, Wheatley and/or Wilhite or even someone next year. One thing seems clear. Hobbs was not ever going to be our STAR corner, our shutdown dependable #1 corner.

NO ONE has compared Bodden to Ty Law. No one should. NO ONE should have compared Hobbs or even Samuel to Ty Law. Such comparisons are between relative unknowns and a future HOFer. We MAY have a shutdown corner this year. It is clear we didn't have one in Hobbs.

This team may have a shutdown corner this year? Are they trading for Asomugha? I only ask because there sure as hell isn't one on the roster right now. As for this line:

To me, Hobbs does not even have the potential to be a decent cover corner. We need to TRY to find players who could cover so that more pressure could be put on the QB's.

He's already been a "decent cover corner" for his entire career.

 

[supafly]

Personally. I agree with the sentiment that Hobbs was traded because his chanches of returning in 2010 were slim based on his salary expectations and the number of free agents the Pats will have and the fact he saved more money on the cap than Bodden or Springs. Better to get two 5th rounder for the guy and let him walk next year and probably get a 5th rounder in 2011 for a compensatory pick.

I don't think Belichick went into the weekend planning to trade Hobbs away. He was high on Butler, but not high enough to take him in the first round or even with his first second round pick. But when Butler was still sitting there with their third pick in the second round, he decided to pull the trigger. That right off the bat made someone expendable. Hobbs saved the Pats over $2 million on the cap by trading him. Bodden would save only $760k.

Let's face it. Butler, Wheatley, and Whilhite are the future of that position assuming everything goes to plan. Bodde, Springs, and Hobbs were only going to be stopgaps for them to develop. One of the older veterans had to go once Butler was drafted, Hobbs provided the most upside in terms of cap relief and trade value.

Once again, due to the probability of the uncapped year, he could've stayed for 2 more years because of his RFA status next yr. If not we would've gotten a very unprobable 1st and a 3rd for him.

So, I've still yet to understand the "we were going to get rid of him after this yr for salary demands" theory???

Unless, BB knows something about the possibility of a new CBA--which I guess is certainly possible, I still don't understand why everyone assumes he was gone after this yr? He would've been a RFA.

 

[supafly]

This team may have a shutdown corner this year? Are they trading for Asomugha? I only ask because there sure as hell isn't one on the roster right now. As for this line:



He's already been a "decent cover corner" for his entire career.

Yes Deus, he certainly was. At the very worst, he was a very solid #3.

I guess the overall poor performance from the secondary last yr has obviously distorted some views.

In BB I trust, but that doesn't mean I can't question something--or have a certain opinion.

 

[Sicilian]

To simplify, Bodden isnt any different than Tank Williams, Victor Hobson, Deltha O'Neal or Fernando Bryant.

He's also no different than Tyrone Poole, Roman Phifer, Mike Vrabel, Otis Smith, Tebucky Jones, Wes Welker, Antoine Smith, Ted Washington, Keith Traylor, Heath Evans, or Brian Cox. All veterans who came in and DID make an impact. If your point is we don't know, sure, but don't only cite the ones that made no contribution. It's cherry-picking.

I obviously didn't include Rodney Harrison, Roosevelt Colvin, Junior Seau, and Adalius Thomas because when we signed them they were already considered great players. But they too were veteran signings that worked out just fine.

To be fair to you, I'll add Monty Beisel, Duane Starks, and Chad Brown to your list of failures.

 

[KingChre]

Question, do you think it was a coincidence that Bodden was given a contract that was roughly equivalent to the Patriots' cap savings in jettisoning Hobbs? (Roughly $2.25 mil? Correct me if I'm wrong.)

Also, one thing that I think is in Bodden's favor is he does have more a head start in learning the playbook having played in a similar system in Cleveland (and one that even his detractors can agree he played his best in). Now we all know this only goes so far, but I at least feel a bit more confident in his ability vs. someone without that experience.

 

[mgteich]

Bodden and Springs are being compared to previous JAGs and over-the-hill guys that Belichick brought in. Perhaps, that's fair or perhaps Vrabel is a better comparison. No one thought much of him at Pittsburgh or here when we got him.

Belichick is paying Bodden $2.25M this year (probably plus incentives) in a show-me contract. Bodden insisted on a no-franchise clause. Belichick is paying Springs $4.45M this year and over $5M over the next two. These salaries are not chump change for JAG's. They may not work out to be worth the money, but they are not just a shot in the dark. Belichick expects two starters, unless one of youngsters pleasantly surprises us all.

 

[supafly]

Question, do you think it was a coincidence that Bodden was given a contract that was roughly equivalent to the Patriots' cap savings in jettisoning Hobbs? (Roughly $2.25 mil? Correct me if I'm wrong.)

Also, one thing that I think is in Bodden's favor is he does have more a head start in learning the playbook having played in a similar system in Cleveland (and one that even his detractors can agree he played his best in). Now we all know this only goes so far, but I at least feel a bit more confident in his ability vs. someone without that experience.

Bodden was first reported that he signed for the vet minimum, it was later bumped up a bit, although I didn't think it was that much.

After checking, I guess it is for 2.25 million.