best bang for the buck

[spacecrime]

So Givens is signed through 2010 for $24 mil, about $5mil a year

AV is signed through 2010 for about 2.5 mil a year.

And now Seymour is signed through 2010, four years averaging $8 mil a year, plus a cap hit of about $4.5 mil in 2006

Looks like the cost of five years of Seymour averages about $7.5 mil a year, just what the cost of Givens and AV averages per year.

If I had to guess whether RS or DG+AV would have the biggest impact on the Pats winning games for hte next five years, I'd have to go with RS.

When you look at it this way, it seems that RS is getting less than his value to the team, and that DG and AV are getting more than their value to their teams.

Idon't knowoff-hand what WMG is averaging per year or I would have included him.

 

[teamplay]

I like your logic. What makes RS so valuable is his ability to force a double team, something the "next best DL" is unlikely to do. As good as J. Green is, he doesn't consistently force the double team. RS changes the game.

As much as I like Givens, he doesn't change the game.

And as much as I like Adam, the handful of clutch FGs he might kick compared to the "next best kicker" do not, IMHO, justify a $2m premium. (Of course, if one of those FGs of Adam's is in the AFC championship against the Pats, I'll really hate it). IF we sum up Adam's "clutch advantage" over the past few years (perhaps someone on the board has already made a list), it might work out to a win per year on his foot (just a fool's guesstimate). Hard to say, but I certainly don't doubt Bioli's decision.

Extending RS was my top wish; I couldn't be happier.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

So Givens is signed through 2010 for $24 mil, about $5mil a year

AV is signed through 2010 for about 2.5 mil a year.

And now Seymour is signed through 2010, four years averaging $8 mil a year, plus a cap hit of about $4.5 mil in 2006

Looks like the cost of five years of Seymour averages about $7.5 mil a year, just what the cost of Givens and AV averages per year.

If I had to guess whether RS or DG+AV would have the biggest impact on the Pats winning games for hte next five years, I'd have to go with RS.

When you look at it this way, it seems that RS is getting less than his value to the team, and that DG and AV are getting more than their value to their teams.

Idon't knowoff-hand what WMG is averaging per year or I would have included him.

If the Seymour deal is as reported 4/$30M and it keeps him here through 2010, then he's actually making $32M over the next 5 seasons or $6.5M per. But since these deal are often over, under or miss reported at first blush, we'll just have to wait and see once the details trickle out.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

Absolutely. The most dominant DL in the NFL (at age 26 -- his prime) is worth way more than a WR who has never caught 60 or more catches a year and good kicker who is 34 years old. The reason is because Adam got 80% percent of his kicks last year (which is his career average, BTW). If we can get a rookie (or Grammatica if beats the rookies out soundly) to kick even 75%, we'll be fine (especially if the KO are better). If we can draft 2 young WR who can each pick up 30 catches, along with Caldwell getting 30 catches, we will be fine because we will have a quanitity of young WR depth.

Here is Given's stats the last three years

2005 -- 59 catches, 738 yards, 12.5 AVG, 2 TD
2004 -- 56 catches, 874 yards, 15.6 AVG, 3 TD
2003 -- 34 catches, 510 yards, 15.0 AVG, 6 TD

The reason I think we will be fine replacing Givens with 2 rookies is because of the following stat.

In 2005, Branch got 78 catches, Givens got 59, Troy Brown got 39, and Tim Dwight got 19.

Thus, if Branch can get 75, Caldwell get 30, Brown get 30, Rookie A get 30, and Rookie B get 30, that would equal 195 catches (the same amount as we got in 2005).

Furthermore, another reason I think we will be fine is because of an interesting stat. In 2005, 58% of Brady's completions went to his WR. That is way up from say in 2003 (the year we beat the Panthers in the SB), when 46% of his completions went to his WR. The reason is because Brady threw to his TE a lot more in 2003 than he did in 2005. In 2003, TE got 21% of his completions. In 2005, it was only 15%. My bet is that in 2006, Brady will throw to his TE (Watson and Graham) a lot more than he did last year.

 

[spacecrime]

If the Seymour deal is as reported 4/$30M and it keeps him here through 2010, then he's actually making $32M over the next 5 seasons or $6.5M per. But since these deal are often over, under or miss reported at first blush, we'll just have to wait and see once the details trickle out.

You are right. I had the idea that the 8 mil a year was new money for the new years of the extension.