Belichick Chose Bodden Over Hobbs

[slash83]

If Bodden preforms well, the Pats dont let him go imo, I think they learned there lesson with Assante

 

[Deus Irae]

If Bodden preforms well, the Pats dont let him go imo, I think they learned there lesson with Assante

The lesson they seem to have learned with Asante is to always have 2 CBs left in the pipeline.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

I agree man, no one knows why BB traded him, and we'll probably never know. Everyone's gonna have their various opinions on whether or not Hobbs lived up to their expectations, etc. Certainly not worth arguing or getting all riled up about.

We've lived through some WTF? moments before, so I'm gonna trust our coach on this one, although I'm not sure about some aspects of it totally. I just find this love for Leigh Bodden somewhat ironic, that's all. I hope he does work out, I really do. But I am not 100% on him quite yet, but that's just my personal opinion--and everyone has their own.

same here. The guy had one great statistical year, and now he's worshiped.

I think the secondary will be better, but i worry about injuries. I don't think anyone can say that Hobbs staying would hurt the quality of depth at that position. Oh, i take that back. "condon84" would. He still thinks Hobbs alone, cost us the superbowl

 

[slash83]

The lesson they seem to have learned with Asante is to always have 2 CBs left in the pipeline.

As Reiss mentioned before the Patriots kinda dropped the ball on asante, he thinks they should of extended him a year or 2 before his contract came to an end, I agree.

 

[supafly]

Deltha didnt fit well in the Patriots system, but Bodden had success in a similar system with the Browns when Crennel was head coach! I could see Bodden making a bigger difference than Hobbs and Oneal!

There's pros and cons to both Bodden and Hobbs. I like Bodden's size more than Hobbs, but I liked the fact that Ellis was experienced in our system. I think he took a lot of the crap for the poor secondary play last yr, however, and that may have been unfair.

I hope Bodden can come in, learn the system, and be productive. But I also don't really think he is going to outshine Hobbs all that much, especially his first yr here. I thought Hobbs was proven, but apparently our coach thought he was expendable. I think Bodden has the potential to be as good, if not better than Hobbs. But I am not sure about getting my hopes up too much, because there were other factors in his good yr too. Maybe they had some other variables etc, that will be different here.

I guess it all depends on your assessment of Ellis Hobbs, I think that's the key here. Those who didn't care for him, or somehow blamed him wrongly for the SB TD catch, are the ones who seem to have more immediate love for Bodden. Those who liked Hobbs may, as a whole, be a little more apprehensive about Bodden. I'm just basing it on what I know about football, and for the past few yrs I've thought Ellis Hobbs was an average to above average #2 CB. I don't remember hearing too much about the sheer domination of Bodden, but he did have a decent season--so it'll be interesting to watch and see.

For all we know, BB could've brought Bodden in for some depth and competition. That was my point, we just really don't know. We can assume that Springs was brought here to start, based on his contract. But if you use the same guidelines, then why is a lock that Bodden is the new Ty Law? Maybe BB likes the way the rookies developed, and he is confident that the cream will rise, and Bodden is there for depth. Actually, that may be the case indeed. There's a lot of guessing and speculating, we'll just have to wait and see. I'm guessing too of course, but I guess Springs on one side, and Wheatley on the other, with Wilhite and Bodden battling for the nickel. I think Butler will progressively be played in 5-6 DB situations throughout the yr too.

 

[Deus Irae]

As Reiss mentioned before the Patriots kinda dropped the ball on asante, he thinks they should of extended him a year or 2 before his contract came to an end, I agree.

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.

 

[slash83]

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.

If thats the case then oh well atleast they tried. If Bodden gets back to his days in Cleveland hopefully he and the Pats could work something out.

 

[patsfan-1982]

i hope leigh bodden has a great season but everyone wants him to go back to has glory days of 2007 when he was 5th in the NFL with 6 INT for the browns but i think INT are overrated

INT #1 came vs the bengals carson palmer throw for 401 yerds and 6 TD chad johnson had 11 rec for 209 yerds and 2 TD Houshmandzadeh had 8 rec and 2TD

INT #2 came vs the ravens McNair throw for 307 yerds and Mason had 10 rec

INT #3 came vs the fins Cleo Lemon throw for 256 yerd and 2 TD Chambers had 6 rec

INT #4 came vs the rams Bulger throw for 310 Holt had 110 yerds and a TD

INT #5 and 6 came 8 weeks later vs the bangals Palmer had only 115 yerd and chad had only 4 rec but thay only passed 20 time and ran the ball 33 times

im not saying they got all dose yerds on leigh bodden alone
but if your realy a top 5 NFL corner like your stats say you are then i think your team would do a lil better vs the pass i hope he becomes the next Nnamdi Asomugha but i just think hes one big yer with the browns is overrated

 

[MoLewisrocks]

i hope leigh bodden has a great season but everyone wants him to go back to has glory days of 2007 when he was 5th in the NFL with 6 INT for the browns but i think INT are overrated

INT #1 came vs the bengals carson palmer throw for 401 yerds and 6 TD chad johnson had 11 rec for 209 yerds and 2 TD Houshmandzadeh had 8 rec and 2TD

INT #2 came vs the ravens McNair throw for 307 yerds and Mason had 10 rec

INT #3 came vs the fins Cleo Lemon throw for 256 yerd and 2 TD Chambers had 6 rec

INT #4 came vs the rams Bulger throw for 310 Holt had 110 yerds and a TD

INT #5 and 6 came 8 weeks later vs the bangals Palmer had only 115 yerd and chad had only 4 rec but thay only passed 20 time and ran the ball 33 times

im not saying they got all dose yerds on leigh bodden alone
but if your realy a top 5 NFL corner like your stats say you are then i think your team would do a lil better vs the pass i hope he becomes the next Nnamdi Asomugha but i just think hes one big yer with the browns is overrated

You could be on to something since the Browns traded HIM after that season...

Bodden is here because nobody else wanted him enough to top our one year prove it deal. Don't any of you wonder why that is?

Belichick is on record saying he had no intentions of trading Hobbs until Philly called on draft day 2. And even then he declined until they called back again and he apparently saw value in doing a deal that would ultimately net him another OL in the 4th where he had no picks.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Free agents have known costs. Players about to become free agents are to a large extent unknown in terms of demands on the system. Hobbs would be no Samuel in that department but would end up costing what a free agent would. So that supports the "replacement" theory, as well as the "sure that's your opinion" theory.

Why the timing? Well, the high CB choice was not a given, and BB played chicken to get him later in the 2nd round rather than with pick 23 (or 26 or 34 for that matter. We won't count Brace as playing "chicken" because Butler/Brace picks were interchangeable at that point.) Our guy Butler may not have even been there when we wanted him, and clearly we were "drunk with back-trading power" or something, if we're to believe Peter King. My point is the opposite: going in, there was a significantly likely "not at 23" scenario, or possibly a straight-up "not at 23" decision pre-draft. That leaves the pick somewhere at the top of the second round, going into the draft, and it's quite possible that you aren't picking CB when the first pick comes around.

This train of thought militates for an "if Butler then not Hobbs" scenario, pointed at in the OP's scenario. What was that Pick 40 wait, anyway, when the Pats waited until Pick 41 to grab Brace and Butler together? (or 41/42 or whatever they were... going from memory here.) Had Hobbs already been traded? Again, memory fails. As I recall the Hobbs trade came just after the Butler pick but I might be wrong. That would mean the chronology put us at 1 likely contributor short at CB going into the draft, a spot we meant to fill with Butler, thereby obviating the need for Hobbs and making him expendable. At the time we believe we can fill in the "rising class of 09" slot with our guy (i.e., we think we've nailed down the starting nickel, if that's not a contradiction in terms, which in the Bodden/Springs era we consider the Hobbs slot.) At that point it is possible to get by at the starter level without Hobbs and his future monetary hit.

But we have to wait and see of course. It's May and we want to watch football. We could have had a quite serious discussion a few years back about Chad Jackson coming into training camp, winning the third receiver spot, and being Brady's prime target by the end of the season. I'm sure we did have that conversation in fact.

We sputter, we argue, in the end it is what it is. They grow up, they get expensive, and more often than not, they leave home. We're used to it

PFnV

 

[JSn]

The Hobbs trade was on day 2.

 

[KingChre]

Perhaps I am oversimplifying here, but isn't it far to assume that Hobbs was probably traded because the Patriots addressed the depth issue in the off-season, and Bill felt that the two 5th's and subsequent cap savings was good value for Hobbs?

Sometimes these things are simpler than they appear.

*EDIT* Of course, we can argue all the day the perceived trade value for EH3, but I don't see how the reasons behind the trade can really be in question here.

 

[BelichickFan]

so Deltha O'Neal had 9 INT in 2001 and 10 INT in 2005 do you think he played better then hobbs

I didn't say that, I also said he had good coverage, I watch the Browns consistently when the Patriots aren't playing.

 

[Ungeheuer]

I don't think this issue is all that complicated. The reasoning goes like this:

1. Hobbs was in the last year of his deal and was not going to re-sign. Judging by his comments, his idea of what his value was was completely different from that of the Patriots. So they knew they only had him for this year, and at a number that was (I think) tied with Bodden for the highest cap hit of any of the corners.

2. The Pats were already paying starter money to both Springs and Bodden for 2009. There was no guarantee Hobbs was going to keep a starting job. In fact he was likely their third corner. And if he was demoted to nickel corner in his walk year, he was not going to be happy.

3. The Pats after drafting Butler had three young corners they hoped would eventually beat out Hobbs, plus a new safety (Chung) who could alleviate the need to rely upon Springs for depth at safety.

4. So: even if Hobbs had stayed and played out of his mind and kept himself in the starting lineup, he'd be blocking three young guys the Pats wanted to see the field and pushing a high-priced veteran to the second-unit.

5. But what was more likely was that Hobbs would be a grumpy, overpaid third or fourth or even fifth or sixth corner for most of the year, and then walk for nothing but a low comp choice at the end of it. Instead of accepting that situation, the Pats dumped him for a young lineman and a young long snapper and assumed the cap savings now, while they are still in the hunt for a guy like Jason Taylor.

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?

 

[patsox23]

Is there a group of people, or even one person, who DOESN'T think Bodden is better than Hobbs?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Free agents have known costs. Players about to become free agents are to a large extent unknown in terms of demands on the system. Hobbs would be no Samuel in that department but would end up costing what a free agent would. So that supports the "replacement" theory, as well as the "sure that's your opinion" theory.

Why the timing? Well, the high CB choice was not a given, and BB played chicken to get him later in the 2nd round rather than with pick 23 (or 26 or 34 for that matter. We won't count Brace as playing "chicken" because Butler/Brace picks were interchangeable at that point.) Our guy Butler may not have even been there when we wanted him, and clearly we were "drunk with back-trading power" or something, if we're to believe Peter King. My point is the opposite: going in, there was a significantly likely "not at 23" scenario, or possibly a straight-up "not at 23" decision pre-draft. That leaves the pick somewhere at the top of the second round, going into the draft, and it's quite possible that you aren't picking CB when the first pick comes around.

This train of thought militates for an "if Butler then not Hobbs" scenario, pointed at in the OP's scenario. What was that Pick 40 wait, anyway, when the Pats waited until Pick 41 to grab Brace and Butler together? (or 41/42 or whatever they were... going from memory here.) Had Hobbs already been traded? Again, memory fails. As I recall the Hobbs trade came just after the Butler pick but I might be wrong. That would mean the chronology put us at 1 likely contributor short at CB going into the draft, a spot we meant to fill with Butler, thereby obviating the need for Hobbs and making him expendable. At the time we believe we can fill in the "rising class of 09" slot with our guy (i.e., we think we've nailed down the starting nickel, if that's not a contradiction in terms, which in the Bodden/Springs era we consider the Hobbs slot.) At that point it is possible to get by at the starter level without Hobbs and his future monetary hit.

But we have to wait and see of course. It's May and we want to watch football. We could have had a quite serious discussion a few years back about Chad Jackson coming into training camp, winning the third receiver spot, and being Brady's prime target by the end of the season. I'm sure we did have that conversation in fact.

We sputter, we argue, in the end it is what it is. They grow up, they get expensive, and more often than not, they leave home. We're used to it

PFnV

If we went into the day 1 CB short and meant to fill that with Butler, he'd have come off the board a lot sooner. Fact is all the drafting up talk was BS based on teams above us hoping to use our name to create value in their hard to trade out of picks. Bill says it never happened except in the context of pretty much every team above us calling at some time in the weeks before the draft because they were all looking to trade down... And since the draft we have learned he never intended to draft in the first because he didn't like anyone in that round as value. This was not an elite draft. This was also a draft devoid of elite CB talent. We took the #2 ranked Butler right after the #1 ranked corner went off the board. Meant we had to trade up to also take Brace because we apparently were targeting him at 41 (meaning he ranked higher on our board than the corner). Would we have traded back into the first had the other corner gone earlier, apparently not.

We only traded Hobbs AFTER Philly called us twice on day two. First time they called Bill said he had no interest. Then they called again after the third round when Bill believed he had no picks coming until the end of the 5th and he was anticipating taking an extended break... After thinking it over and assessing his board he did the deal and then immediately did another to flip the two fifths from Philly into a 4th he used within moments on an OL and a 6th he later used on a long snapper.

This wasn't a pre planned deal where Bill told teams to call me if I take Butler... He had no plan to trade Hobbs before Philly called on Sunday. Would he have developed a plan to trade Hobbs post draft? Who knows. But if he did it would likely have been for a 3rd and more in 2010 because once this draft was over there was little he could gain that might help him elsewhere this season. I'm sure part of his risk/reward calculation included having another OL on the roster he probably rated as an excellent value there. In addition to $2.35M in cap space that could be used post draft to fill any remaining voids (like OLB or ILB which is even more plausible given our 3rd rounder is already on IR).

We won't know if his draft or FA value/reward calculations were the right moves for some time. But that's always the risk.

 

[mayoclinic]

I don't think this issue is all that complicated. The reasoning goes like this:

1. Hobbs was in the last year of his deal and was not going to re-sign. Judging by his comments, his idea of what his value was was completely different from that of the Patriots. So they knew they only had him for this year, and at a number that was (I think) tied with Bodden for the highest cap hit of any of the corners.

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.

2. The Pats were already paying starter money to both Springs and Bodden for 2009. There was no guarantee Hobbs was going to keep a starting job. In fact he was likely their third corner. And if he was demoted to nickel corner in his walk year, he was not going to be happy.

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.

3. The Pats after drafting Butler had three young corners they hoped would eventually beat out Hobbs, plus a new safety (Chung) who could alleviate the need to rely upon Springs for depth at safety.

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 $.

4. So: even if Hobbs had stayed and played out of his mind and kept himself in the starting lineup, he'd be blocking three young guys the Pats wanted to see the field and pushing a high-priced veteran to the second-unit.

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.

5. But what was more likely was that Hobbs would be a grumpy, overpaid third or fourth or even fifth or sixth corner for most of the year, and then walk for nothing but a low comp choice at the end of it. Instead of accepting that situation, the Pats dumped him for a young lineman and a young long snapper and assumed the cap savings now, while they are still in the hunt for a guy like Jason Taylor.

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?

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.

 

[RussFrancis]

To simplify, Bodden isnt any different than Tank Williams, Victor Hobson, Deltha O'Neal or Fernando Bryant. He's a vet player that needs to prove he can earn a starting spot on this team. And then play well. Its not easy. This isnt Cleveland, Cinci or Detroit. And one good year does not a career make.

Belichick got rid of Hobbs because he had just drafted a CB who's upside doubled that of Ellis Hobbs, he was already 5 deep at CB without Hobbs, with 4 potential starters, Hobbs was in the last year of a deal, Philly called and BB went for the value. I dont think it had anything to do with Bodden specifically being a better player than Hobbs. There's not really much physical evidence to support that. We nearly went undefeated with Hobbs holding a side of the field down. Im not kicking dirt on the guy now that he's gone.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Is there a group of people, or even one person, who DOESN'T think Bodden is better than Hobbs?

Until I see Bodden play, im not going to assume he's better. Just because some people on a message board say he's good doesnt mean crap to me. I wasnt one of the people who thought Cassel should be cut last preseason, so im not going to rush this one either.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Is there a group of people, or even one person, who DOESN'T think Bodden is better than Hobbs?

There are probably a couple, as there were who thought Cassel was better than Gutierrez. Heck back when Bodden was not drafted there were apparently 32 guys who didn't think so...When he missed several games in 2006 right after signing his first big deal, there were probably lots of people in Cleveland who didn't think so. 31 other teams including Philly could have had him in the off season and apparently they didn't think so. Heck, even BB signed him for less...

Duane Starks was a former pro bowler when he arrived here, and it meant nothing...a raw rookie named Hobbs outperformed him and mercifully kicked him to the curb. Same guy who beat pro bowler Asante Samuel out for the starting LCB job in camp in 2006 and only moved to #2 because he was playing the season with a cast on his broken wrist...

The new guys may all prove to be better or worse than Ellis. That remains to be seen is the issue for some of us. It will be difficult to assess if the additional offseason upgrades in the defense pan out. I think what some of us believe is they might not be any better absent upgrades. Just as I'm sure if Ellis does well in Philly fingers will be pointed at the pass rush he's playing behind...