Branch is a true #1

[Kdo5]

The time to extend him is before training camp. Do I think he deserves an extension? Yes. I'm not saying he deserves a big time contract, but he still deserves a good one. I have liked what I've seen from him since 2003. Even if he was double covered in 2005 he still got 78 receptions for 998 yards and 5 TD's. Thats his career best for all three. And he can certainly push those stats further as time goes on. We'll extend him...we wont let him go and give him a shot in free agency. We have Caldwell and Jackson. Who knows if Brown will retire after this year, problably. We dont have many other great recievers. We have some good tight ends but thats it. We will keep him as it makes sense for him to be our #1 WR for many seasons to come. And I certainly do see him as a gifted reciever and a #1 reciever.

 

[PonyExpress]

VJC,
I agree with you to this extent, as I mentioned earlier:The question may not be whether Branch is a top-10 receiver, but whether BB would pay him even if he were. That is a deeper philosophical question which we may not be able to answer. Once again I am basing my opinions on Branch's 2004 season, and have admitted that fact, so there is a major hole in my source data. But I found the '04 info amazing, and worthy of mention.

 

[Miguel]

That is approximately the same money you said earlier that they offered Givens to be their #2.

Except that Givens is much younger than Mason. When the Pats give a big-money deal to a player over 30, I have hard time believing that it would be for #2.

 

[Johnny Z]

statsinc on drops:

2005 - 6
2004 - 0
2003 - 4

Any GM bringing that up is going to go nowhere.

One thing Joyner does that is different is he combines regular season and playoff stats, so you really have to figure out the total number of games his numbers represent.

2004:

targeted - 73 times (statsinc counts 9 season games - 51 throws to Branch)
completion % - 69.9%

So by Joyner's method Branch was the 64th least targeted WR in the NFL, and he caught the highest percentage of his chances of any WR in the NFL.

That is like hyper efficiency.

It's not all about total receptions and total yards.

 

[Miguel]

When is the last time that a "true" #-1 WR won a Super Bowl ring?

Ask Hines Ward.

 

[Miguel]

Once again I am basing my opinions on Branch's 2004 season, and have admitted that fact, so there is a major hole in my source data. But I found the '04 info amazing, and worthy of mention.

But why should the Pats reward in 2006 Branch for what he did in 2004???

 

[Johnny Z]

Ask Hines Ward.

And if Hines Ward made a career of putting up stats like he did last season a ton of critics would be saying he's not really a "true" #1 because there would typically be about 20 guys with more receptions and 20 guys with more yards just about every season.

 

[PonyExpress]

Except that Givens is much younger than Mason. When the Pats give a big-money deal to a player over 30, I have hard time believing that it would be for #2.

I believe Mason is a great receiver, and rather than getting caught up in arguing for its own sake, let's say the Pats believed by signing Mason they would have two #1s, which would make us both happy. Also BB could have foreseen the salary cap boost coming from a new agreement, and understood that Mason's pre-CBA deal would become a bargain afterwards. Signing Mason would have prepared the Pats for letting Branch go in '07, thereby avoiding having to pay post-CBA prices for a #1 receiver and maximizing salary cap value at the position. By then, if the Pats had foreseen the need to a draft a top WR in 2006 according to a team-building schedule, that player (who turns out now to be Chad Jackson) would be entering his second year in '07, cushioning the loss of Branch.

But none of that happened; and without knowing BB's vision for the future, we can guess that even if Branch were a #1, BB would be extremely reluctant to pay him like one.

 

[PonyExpress]

But why should the Pats reward in 2006 Branch for what he did in 2004???

The only info I currently have available to me is from the 2004 season. If the 2005 info differs from 2004 assessment of Branch, I have no problem accepting I was wrong, and will post that acknowledgent (if anybody cares what the hell I think...

 

[Pats726]

If you read my original reply to Miguel you would have seen my reason's for supporting Branch...

You didn't answser my question...I read what you posted and I was looking for something MORE than that..you keep mentioning a book without stating what in the book influenced your opinion of why Branch is a top ten. So far ALL your opinion.. and nothing connecting to the book.

 

[PonyExpress]

One last comment on the Givens contract proposal. After Givens signed with Tennessee, I remember reading an interview with Brad Blank, his agent, where Blank made some interesting comments. He said that prior to free agency, he had had a discussion with Pioli where he told Scott what he expected Givens to sign for, a number around 20 million with a certain bonus figure... the numbers are fuzzy to me now. And Scott corrected him and told Blank that Givens would end up getting closer to 24 million or thereabouts, a higher number than Blank had expected, and very close to what Givens ended up getting from the Titans. This was revealing for a number of reasons... It showed how Scott relates to agents, helping them and even setting expectations for their negotiations with other teams; It revealed Scott's accurate knowledge of the bidding wars and player value on the open market; and it also showed that the Pats offer to Givens was a straw man, a show of thanks for Givens' past contributions, and a sop to the public, which all organizations, including the Pats, are not above for publicity's sake. After reading this interview it seemed apparent the Pats were never serious about resigning Givens despite reports of that proposal. The fact it even crossed Givens' mind to accept, if it even did, shows how grateful he was to the organization and how much he loved his teammates.

 

[mgteich]

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)?

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

Q3 Do we think Branch is better than Givens?

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.

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?

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

 

[Pats726]

I believe they will try to sign him for reasonable money...NOT the top ten money which he is not part of. I think it is that simple. I don't know whether he will go for it on not. I do think he has much at risk, especially if hedoes NOT have a great year or is injured. in that case, he loses as his stock falls. THAT is what he needs to think about now...whether that is a large or small gamble.
It's interesting that this great season of Branch in 04, he was injured for a lot of it.

 

[Miguel]

One last comment on the Givens contract proposal. After Givens signed with Tennessee, I remember reading an interview with Brad Blank, his agent, where Blank made some interesting comments. He said that prior to free agency, he had had a discussion with Pioli where he told Scott what he expected Givens to sign for, a number around 20 million with a certain bonus figure... the numbers are fuzzy to me now. And Scott corrected him and told Blank that Givens would end up getting closer to 24 million or thereabouts, a higher number than Blank had expected, and very close to what Givens ended up getting from the Titans. This was revealing for a number of reasons... It showed how Scott relates to agents, helping them and even setting expectations for their negotiations with other teams; It revealed Scott's accurate knowledge of the bidding wars and player value on the open market; and it also showed that the Pats offer to Givens was a straw man, a show of thanks for Givens' past contributions, and a sop to the public, which all organizations, including the Pats, are not above for publicity's sake. After reading this interview it seemed apparent the Pats were never serious about resigning Givens despite reports of that proposal. The fact it even crossed Givens' mind to accept, if it even did, shows how grateful he was to the organization and how much he loved his teammates.

Your memory is rather fuzzy.

http://www.boston.com/sports/footba...2006/03/16/inside_the_givens_talks/?page=full

" He'd been on a conference call earlier in the day with Patriots coach Bill Belichick and personnel director Scott Pioli, who asked what he felt the market would be. His response surprised them.

''I told them I hadn't negotiated with anyone and that they were asking me to predict and I'd heard in the past that predictions weren't worth anything," Blank said, a reference to Belichick's disavowal of such notions. ''Bill laughed. That was it."

But Blank had sorted out the Givens market after much research, believing it would be between $4.5 million and $5 million a year with the new cap. They would land a deal worth $4.8 million a year. His numbers had been right but Blank had no way of knowing then how -- or where -- he would get them from."

 

[Miguel]

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)?

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

Q3 Do we think Branch is better than Givens?

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.

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?

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

A1. Yes
A2. No.
A3. Yes
A4. Depends on if Branch ends the 2006 healthy and if Branch shows that he can beat double-teams.
A5. The Pats should offer fair value for a player who has one player left on his contract. The Pats should not pay Branch as if he is a free agent. Brady and Seymour, far better players, gave an injury risk discount. So should Branch.

Prediction - If the Pats sign Branch to a long-term deal this year, the numbers will be closer to Givens' than to Wayne's.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Joe Six Pat,
Let's just agree to disagree at this point. I have reasons which I believe support my argument. As I said earlier, I reserve the right to change my opinion on Branch when I get a chance to review the 2005 season. In the interim it appears many other respectable posters have an entrenched position, including Miguel, whose opinions hold great weight for all of us. So, I respect your various opinions and my position is not that of a troll intending to stir up irrational debate. Also, if any of my replies appeared flippant, i apologize... cornered dog syndrome.

I'm not trying to corner you but appreciate your sentiment nonetheless.

I just don't think there's anything to disagree about when it comes to the Pats intentions on the attempted signing of Mason.

Everyone in the league understood that Mason was a #1 WR at the time he was signed. He had been a consistent performer and was coming off a 95 reception season. He deserved, was offered, and accepted #1 WR money.

Although the Patriots certainly hope EVERY WR on the team has the ability to catch 95 passes, there's also no question that as of 2004 they felt they needed a #1 WR and were attempting to lure Mason to fill their #1 spot.

Now of course all of that only speaks to what the Patriots thought of Branch in 2004.

The only issue right now is what the Patriots think of Branch TODAY.

Has Branch's one season pulling in #1 WR numbers (slightly low catches for a #1 WR but I think we all recognize the Pats like to spread the ball) convinced them that he is a bonifide long term #1 WR?

I'd expect that's the question the Patriots are mulling right now, and are not prepared to offer the same CBA adjusted salary they offered to a PROVEN #1 WR (Mason) to a POTENTIAL #1 WR (Branch).

That's where I guess we have to agree to disagree. The stats you favor suggest to you that Branch is a proven #1 WR.

The stats I favor are more conservative and see consistent #2 WR numbers followed by a year of #1 WR - in a year when Branch was far and away the best WR on the team by default and therefore saw the bulk of passes thrown his way, much like Troy Brown was in 2001/2002.

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

IIRC, the Pats offered Givens a 5 year, $17 million deal. That action tells me more than anything that KC Joyner may write that Givens is a good receiver.

According to Joyner, Givens ranked 38th in TYPCA - Total Yards Per Catchable Attempt (Branch ranked 28th). That's unworthy of the deal he got in Tennessee.

 

[PonyExpress]

Your memory is rather fuzzy.

http://www.boston.com/sports/footba...2006/03/16/inside_the_givens_talks/?page=full

" He'd been on a conference call earlier in the day with Patriots coach Bill Belichick and personnel director Scott Pioli, who asked what he felt the market would be. His response surprised them.

''I told them I hadn't negotiated with anyone and that they were asking me to predict and I'd heard in the past that predictions weren't worth anything," Blank said, a reference to Belichick's disavowal of such notions. ''Bill laughed. That was it."

But Blank had sorted out the Givens market after much research, believing it would be between $4.5 million and $5 million a year with the new cap. They would land a deal worth $4.8 million a year. His numbers had been right but Blank had no way of knowing then how -- or where -- he would get them from."

That's not the interview I was referring to. I can't recall the source. I'll try to find it. It may have been a radio interview. Maybe Felger's show...

 

[Johnny Z]

List the top-10 WRs in the NFL today.

 

[maverick4]

re

I think WR statistics are extremely misleading numbers. The WR's with the most yards are on teams that are usually trailing, or play very straight-forward offenses. Branch is on a team that usually has the lead, and most plays are not designed for any single player, but to whoever is open. Even if Branch only gets 60 catches and 900 yards, that is still more impressive than an Anquan Boldin getting 90 catches for 1400 yards. It's about how productive you are with your chances, and I can buy that Branch is one of the best in that regard.

I think Branch is valued by Piolichick as a top talent, but they will want to pay him top #2 money, because of the system the Patriots have. The Patriots don't need a true #1 in order to be successful, so I don't see them splurging to pay any player in the NFL #1 WR money. Based on depth chart and scarcity, I do see the Pats pony-ing up for Branch before they pony up for Graham, though