Branch is a true #1

[Lloyd_Christmas]

Everyone wants to sign Branch for reasonable money. I presume that means at a discount from the market.

Q1 Do we think that Mason is better than Branch (or even was)?

I would say about equal although I am aware that Mason has better stats

Q2 Do we believe that we should offer Mason type money, escalated to post CBA money to Branch?

Yes

Q3 Do we think Branch is better than Givens?

Hel! Yes

Q4 How much more than Givens money do you think Branch will get in 2007 if he waits? What's your guess? The team and Branch will need to guess.

not sure

Q5 Should the pats offer more than that now or about the same to get him to sign, or should they not come close to those numbers?

If we resign him this year instead of waiting, we should get a discount. Otherwise, what is the team's incentive to do so.

Given the above, what do you think the team WILL do?

I think the team will pay him, but I guess it depends on Branch as well. How reasonable are his expectations of his worth? If it becomes absurd, we will let him walk and find replacements in the draft and FA. Assuming he is remotely resonable, we will pay him good money to keep him

10 characters

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

My Top 10

Reggie Wayne is NOT better than branch IMO. If he wasn't on a team designed to pile up absurd passing yards .... and accross from one of the best WRs ever... his stats would not be what they are. You can't just go off stats.

Here's my list:

Holt
Steve Smith
Harrison
Owens (Character Counts, otherwise he would be top 3)
Hines Ward
Chad Johnson
Randy Moss (He laid of the antics, so I only dropped him down a little)
Andre Johnson
Branch
Fitzgerald (Too early to tell)
Santana Moss (He is a Branch clone, but not quite as good IMO)

 

[ilduce06410]

$750,000 a year apart? SEZ WHO?

Per my very good Patriots contact Branch and the Patriots are @ $750,000/year apart. Seems like small peanuts except that a meeting in the middle of that number will not do it....most of that $$$ is expected to DEAL OR NO DEAL.
Belichick's habit of having several contracts up in the air does not go over well in the locker room I hear. I tried to get more info on that but my friend had to go and said he'd get more info for me next time.

WHO MADE A CONTRACT OFFER?
doen't seem that branch or his people have offered one.
WHERE IS IT?
can anybody find it anywhere and post a link to it?
WHY DISSECT A CONTRACT OFFER THAT CAN'T BE FOUND?
Last time i made this post, June 20th, the only response i got was from Pats 726, who said,
"Oh...you don't work in the Patriots FO??? Oh..OK...If I remember corectly there was a mention about some kind of impasse in an SI. com story..."

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

From Joyner's SF: 2005 book...

Deion Branch 2004 metrics at ALL depth levels (includes playoffs)...

Attempts: 73 (47th)
Comp%: 69.9% (1st)
Rec Yds: 718 (45th)
YPA: 10.0 (5th)
Rec TDs: 5 (11th)
o1% - open by 1 step: 32.9% (36th)
o12% - open by 1-2 steps: 39.7% (24th)
o2% - open by 2+ steps: 13.7% (8th)
tcv% - tight coverage ~ QB has no chance to complete pass: 2.7% (16th)
gcv% - good coverage ~ QB must throw an accurate pass to completion: 5.5% (2nd)
tcv/gcv% - combined good/tight coverage: 8.2% (4th)
drops: 0 (1st)

Based on his 2004 metrics, a case can be made that Branch was the best WR that season.

I can't wait to see his 2005 metrics. All I know is that Branch ranked 28th in TYPCA (Total Yards Per Catchable Attempt) in 2005. Givens ranked 38th.

 

[Pats726]

From Joyner's SF: 2005 book...

Deion Branch 2004 metrics at ALL depth levels (includes playoffs)...

Attempts: 73 (47th)
Comp%: 69.9% (1st)
Rec Yds: 718 (45th)
YPA: 10.0 (5th)
Rec TDs: 5 (11th)
o1% - open by 1 step: 32.9% (36th)
o12% - open by 1-2 steps: 39.7% (24th)
o2% - open by 2+ steps: 13.7% (8th)
tcv% - tight coverage ~ QB has no chance to complete pass: 2.7% (16th)
gcv% - good coverage ~ QB must throw an accurate pass to completion: 5.5% (2nd)
tcv/gcv% - combined good/tight coverage: 8.2% (4th)
drops: 0 (1st)

Based on his 2004 metrics, a case can be made that Branch was the best WR that season.

I can't wait to see his 2005 metrics. All I know is that Branch ranked 28th in TYPCA (Total Yards Per Catchable Attempt) in 2005. Givens ranked 38th.

Wasn't he injured in 04 for over half the season???

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

Wasn't he injured in 04 for over half the season???

Branch played in 9 RS games and 3 playoff games for a total of 12. The metrics I quoted included the postseason games.

 

[Pats726]

Branch played in 9 RS games and 3 playoff games for a total of 12. The metrics I quoted included the postseason games.

OK..cool...

 

[stcjones]

well......

Branch a top 10 WR?

let me name better than him ..not in order

RandyMoss
SantanaMoss
Steve Smith
Tory Holt
Terrell Owens
Anquan Boldin
Larry Fitz
Hines Ward
Plaxico Buress
Chad Johnson
Andre Johnson
Isaac Bruce
Javon Walker
Derrick Mason
Marvin Harrison
Reggie Wayne
Joe Horn
Darrell Jackson

those are better..more impact guys.

I love Branch..my sig is Branch..but hes not a top 10..top 20 yes but not 10

Bruce is getting close to "done" because of injuries,......and Derrick Mason hasn't been a #1 for the past 2 years has he?.......Burress.........has been a great bridesmaid...... but a consistent #1 WR? Don't see that one....Andre Johnson better than Branch????? Not at all....look at last years numbers for instance between Branch and Johnson and you will see that Branch is CLEARLY the better, more productive receiver......Branch is also better than Santana Moss overall IMHO....and had far better numbers than Horn and walker last year......and comparable the year before ..considering the number of games he played........anyways, is he a top 10 WR in the NFL.....maybe not.....but neither are several of the guys you mentioned....is he a top 15.....DEFINITELY....one man;s opinion....

 

[spacecrime]

Based on his 2004 metrics, a case can be made that Branch was the best WR that season.

I can't wait to see his 2005 metrics. All I know is that Branch ranked 28th in TYPCA (Total Yards Per Catchable Attempt) in 2005.

If he was the best WR, shouldn't he be better than 28th? Or have more than 700 yards in a season?

Anyway, for 7 games of 2004, just about every WR in the league was better than Branch. I think if you want to say a player is the best that year, it ought to be a palyer who doesn't miss half the season.

Not his fault, I know, but if he wasn't on the field, how could he be the best?

And even when he was on the field, he wasn't better than a dozen or so WRs.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Derrick Mason hasn't been a #1 for the past 2 years has he?

Yeah, he's only averaging 91 receptions and about 1100 yards a season. I'm hoping they might cut him and we can sign him on the cheap.

Seriously, his 3 TDs last year strike me as a bit low for a #1 WR but the Ravens seem to favor Todd Heap on the goaline - a TE who might not as be as great a blocker as Daniel Graham, but his 75 receptions and 7 TD somehow allow him to maintain a spot on the roster.

Actually as I look at all the stats for the Ravens its amazing how BAD that offense actually was last season, making Mason's 86 catches and Heap's 75 all the more impressive. Just 17 passing TDs for the season and 5 rushing TDs.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

What would Mason's stats be for the last two years if his QB could play without leaning one knee on the ground?

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

If he was the best WR, shouldn't he be better than 28th? Or have more than 700 yards in a season?

I was talking about 2004. His 28th TYPCA ranking (which is above average, btw) was for 2005. Branch probably did see more double teams in '05 than at anytime in his career.

Anyway, for 7 games of 2004, just about every WR in the league was better than Branch. I think if you want to say a player is the best that year, it ought to be a palyer who doesn't miss half the season.

He played 9 RS games and 3 playoff games in 2004 for a total of 12. I don't know where your getting 7 from. The 3 playoff games helped his stats. Those 3 are do-or-die games against elite competition. The Pats ranked 22nd in total pass attempts in 2004. That affected Branch's numbers.

Not his fault, I know, but if he wasn't on the field, how could he be the best?

In 2004, for 12 games, Branch excelled in catching the ball, getting open, and in yardage efficiency. No other WR was proficient in all these areas at once. Moreover, according to Joyner, Branch was one of the few 2004 WRs to excel at all 3 depth levels: deep, medium, and short.

And even when he was on the field, he wasn't better than a dozen or so WRs.

Based on what? I never said Branch was good or bad in 2005. Total yards and yards per reception can be deceptive stats. Burress and Randy Moss excel in those areas, but they've lacked production as neither of them finished in the top 15 in TYPCA.

 

[ilduce06410]

Deion has every right as a free person in a free country to show up or not show up, and none of you can take that away from him!!!!
The Pats also have the right to not pay him a penny more than he is worth!!!!
One way or the other, Branch will play football this year. He simply can't just take a season off at this point in his career, Pats have him by the balls.

Yes, they can refuse to pay him above his worth. But what's his worth?
IMO Branch has a subjective worth:
great performance(s) in SBs, a "dangerous" WR, a good kid, underpaid in his rookie contract. also, not showing up at that charity event not required to, but not good. really not good.
He has an objective worth:
very small WR, can't "carry" the tandem--needs another good WR on the other end, his numbers not that hot to be paid as a #1 WR.

sports teams have struggled with this issue for over a century.
e.g., i'm still pissed that the homeboys wouldn't overpay 2 "heart of the team" guys (even with declining play), to keep that "patriot football" atmosphere. it was doable, altho it involved maybe $2.5 million a year.
i take note of the millions of cap money thrown away on ty poole and duane starks.
perfectly happy, tho, to get rid of other guys using quantified performance.
who knows.

 

[spacecrime]

i'm still pissed that the homeboys wouldn't overpay 2 "heart of the team" guys (even with declining play), to keep that "patriot football" atmosphere. it was doable, altho it involved maybe $2.5 million a year.
i take note of the millions of cap money thrown away on ty poole and duane starks.

I don't think you should be deciding to pay a guy 3 mil because you paid a different guy 3 mil and he sucked. There are lots of DBs who were better than Starks. Doesn't mean we should pay them all 3 mil.

Likewise, just because we paid Poole millions andhe was hurt, doesn't mean we should pay guys who don't get hurt millions simply because they don't get hurt.

Figure out a guy's value GOING FOARWARD. What do you think he wil be worth to the team during the term ofhis contract. Pay him no more than that. If he won't play for that, use the money elsewhere. That is the only thing that makes sense.

If another team values the guy more than you do, then they should pay the guy what he is worth to their team. It doesn't mean that he is worth more to YOUR team.

As far as the oblique reference to Vinatieri, get over it. You guys are starting to sound like 2001 Raider fans.

Say to yourself 300 times: "Vinatieri didn't want to play in NE. It is his right. It was his right not to give the Pats a chance to match. He didn't have to. NE did the right thing by him by not franchising him. He is now a Colt." Take two aspirin and post in the morning.

 

[stcjones]

He WAS......

Yeah, he's only averaging 91 receptions and about 1100 yards a season. I'm hoping they might cut him and we can sign him on the cheap.

Seriously, his 3 TDs last year strike me as a bit low for a #1 WR but the Ravens seem to favor Todd Heap on the goaline - a TE who might not as be as great a blocker as Daniel Graham, but his 75 receptions and 7 TD somehow allow him to maintain a spot on the roster.

Actually as I look at all the stats for the Ravens its amazing how BAD that offense actually was last season, making Mason's 86 catches and Heap's 75 all the more impressive. Just 17 passing TDs for the season and 5 rushing TDs.

a great WR for several years in Tenn......hell he was one of (if not THE) best WR's on my fantasy football team for two years......However, that having been said...he fell off last year....and I believe the year prior he didn't have that great a year and was a little banged up........It's like Eric Moulds in a way.....will he come back and be TOP 10 with a new club...or is he on his way down....guess that was my point.....don't question that the guy was a TOP 10 at one time though......

 

[JoeSixPat]

a great WR for several years in Tenn......hell he was one of (if not THE) best WR's on my fantasy football team for two years......However, that having been said...he fell off last year....and I believe the year prior he didn't have that great a year and was a little banged up........It's like Eric Moulds in a way.....will he come back and be TOP 10 with a new club...or is he on his way down....guess that was my point.....don't question that the guy was a TOP 10 at one time though......

I don't play fantasy football - but do you not factor in who the QB is when assessing the expected stats of a WR?

I'm not real stats oriented but when you have Anthony Wright and Kyle Boller splitting the season and lighting up the scoreboard with a 71.7 QB rating, 86 receptions for Mason looks pretty damn good I'd say.

And if Mason, with 86 receptions is so clearly not a #1 WR, then I don't think Branch has any hope of being considered a #1 WR.

I don't know what it really takes to be considerd a #1 WR if 86 receptions isn't enough. Does it have to be at least 90? 100? 120?

I know 86 is about 10 fewer receptions than Mason averagered before joining a team with no QB - and that Mason alone had nearly 30 more receptions than all the other WRs on the team combined, but again, that's a stat that reflects just how bad the QBs were.

 

[spacecrime]

Yeah, he's only averaging 91 receptions and about 1100 yards a season. I'm hoping they might cut him and we can sign him on the cheap.

Seriously, his 3 TDs last year strike me as a bit low for a #1 WR but the Ravens

That's all you have to say. Just mention Ravens and we know why a receiver's stats are bad. I'm still amazed that he chose to catch passes from Boller rather than Brady. I think that alone ought to single him out for drug testing.

 

[ilduce06410]

hey man its still football, not world peace

I don't think you should be deciding to pay a guy 3 mil because you paid a different guy 3 mil and he sucked. There are lots of DBs who were better than Starks. Doesn't mean we should pay them all 3 mil.
Likewise, just because we paid Poole millions andhe was hurt, doesn't mean we should pay guys who don't get hurt millions simply because they don't get hurt.
Figure out a guy's value GOING FOARWARD. What do you think he wil be worth to the team during the term ofhis contract. Pay him no more than that. If he won't play for that, use the money elsewhere. That is the only thing that makes sense.
If another team values the guy more than you do, then they should pay the guy what he is worth to their team. It doesn't mean that he is worth more to YOUR team.
As far as the oblique reference to Vinatieri, get over it. You guys are starting to sound like 2001 Raider fans.
Say to yourself 300 times: "Vinatieri didn't want to play in NE. It is his right. It was his right not to give the Pats a chance to match. He didn't have to. NE did the right thing by him by not franchising him. He is now a Colt." Take two aspirin and post in the morning.

sorry, i didn't mean for the reference to vinatieri to be "oblique". just my poor writing again. i don't know why i have to get over vinatieri. heck i may pllllss and moan for 5 more years and ya still gtaa read it baybee.
Vinatieri didn't want to play (or stay) in NE. looks pretty defensible to me, since he got up and went thru the upheaval of moving hiis family to a new city.
he had the right not to wait. patriots would have had to pay lots more than what he was even asking if they'd francihsed him.
good kickers are OK at a 90% success rate. vinatieri kicked at 80% last year.
them's the facts.
the patriots don't have to pay on the money every time. they're not perfect, spacey. they can err every once in a while, whether circumstantial or deliberate. does the willieray/adam situation mean they should (notice should, not 'Have') have overpaid them? heck no.
but they could have, cause they wanted them around.
repeat after me:
football is both an art and a science, objective and subjective.
it's not always just about the money.
so you gotta listen to me for a good long while. get used to it.

 

[JoeSixPat]

That's all you have to say. Just mention Ravens and we know why a receiver's stats are bad. I'm still amazed that he chose to catch passes from Boller rather than Brady. I think that alone ought to single him out for drug testing.

I didn't fully realize just how awful that offense was - with the exception of Mason and Heap - until I really looked at those stats. That's jaw droppingly bad.

No wonder they want McNair.

And to think the Ravens went out of their way to trade with the Patriots to grab Boller in the first round.

 

[ClevTrev]

On this team, I also think that Seymour was and will be the exception, will be interesting to see how they deal with Branch. Pay him now and risk the hold out flood gate opening formany. Don't give in and we are going to be hurting at that position for sure.

And this is the whole point with Branch. Deion picked the wrong time to put pressure on the team. The Patriots, more than any team, put value on fielding a balanced squad at every position. BB has indicated he won't pay anyone top salary for his position even if he's the consensus top player.

For the Pats, it's a zero-sum game. Unbalanced salaries contribute to weaknesses at other positions. Some teams hide weaknesses on special teams, some in other areas. Eventually, they get exploited by better teams.

So, and as fgssand points out, the Pats have created a potential cancer. If Branch continues to put pressure on the team, his tenure with the Pats will be very short. The team cannot afford to create a "traditional holdout period" around mini-camp every year. They must end it now, practically and symbolically. We can discuss statistics all we want, but moving in a direction opposite to what made the Pats successful over the past 5 years is a major mistake. That will not stand with BB/SP. Deion picked the wrong time to take a stand. If they have to, they'll severe a limb with gangrene rather than let the body die, even if the lack of depth at WR is obvious. It's that important to their overall philosphy and ongoing success.