Contracts to deal with

[Fencer]

I agree that if Wilfork produced as he did last year, he would be worth $8.5M.

I don't see how you make this work. The incentives would be LTBE since they were reached last year. If such a new contract were to be signed, the incentives would count against the 2015 cap, whether they were reached or not.

It's not important that Wilfork's cap hit would likely all come next season. Indeed, that's probably as it should be for a guy that close to the end of his career.

 

[Fencer]

The thing about Wilfork is that he provided good, not great, DT play for an impressively large number of snaps. So his play last season was actually pretty valuable.

Could he be as valuable or better on fewer snaps, playing better on each one? Quite possibly.

 

[mgteich]

It's not important that Wilfork's cap hit would likely all come next season. Indeed, that's probably as it should be for a guy that close to the end of his career.

I am not being clear. Let us say that Wilfork has $5M of salary and bonus and $3.5M incentives that are LTBE but not actually reached, if someone could find such bonuses. So, Wilfork earns no incentives and everything is fine of is it.

2015 CAP hit - $8.5M
2016 cap hit - ($3.5M) an adjustment because LTBE incentives were not reached.

 

[Miguel]

Here are team-related incentives
Points allowed by Team
Touchdowns allowed by Team
Total defense (net yards)
Average net yards allowed per rushing play
Average net yards given up per passing play
Sacks
Interceptions
Wins
Playoffs - LTBE since Pats won Super Bowl
Conference Championship - Ditto
Super Bowl - Ditto
Touchdowns on returns and recoveries
Net difference takeaways/giveaways

Good luck in finding incentives among the above that would be NLTBE for 2015 AND would be considered reachable by an objective person.

 

[Deus Irae]

Here are team-related incentives
Points allowed by Team
Touchdowns allowed by Team
Total defense (net yards)
Average net yards allowed per rushing play
Average net yards given up per passing play
Sacks
Interceptions
Wins
Playoffs - LTBE since Pats won Super Bowl
Conference Championship - Ditto
Super Bowl - Ditto
Touchdowns on returns and recoveries
Net difference takeaways/giveaways

Good luck in finding incentives among the above that would be NLTBE for 2015 AND would be considered reachable by an objective person.

Exactly

 

[Ring 6]

Last year's first round pick had a total of 5 tackles and was coming off his 2nd ACL surgery, so they had to take it very slow with him. He often saw about 10-15 percent of live game reps. As you know, that was a special circumstance that probably won't be replicated again.

No thats not really true. Easley played the entire game when Jones was first injured. You want to make a lot of excuses. In any event, if you think we are going to draft a DT who is better equipped to beat out Siliga as a rookie than Easley, I would disagree.

The fact remains that our DL talent, depth, and competition was certainly a factor in Siliga starting in 5/16 games last year (something you refer to as a clear cut starter). If the talent and competition improves as it should, Siliga could go back to being rotational depth---yes, of course he could.

Talent and competition was good.
Wilfork
Allen Branch 8 year vet who started 44 games in the past 3 years (on good DLs)
Tommy Kelley 11 year vet who became a starting DT on one of the best defenses in the NFL after being cut
Easley First round pick
Chris Jones full time starter in 2013.

The fact that he played more in 2014 doesn't mean anything at this point in time.

Of course it does. It shows up what playing time he EARNED on this team the last 2 seasons.

We'll have to see if that stays the same moving forward or not. Many here claimed the same thing about other "starters" here in the past few years, and were proven very wrong.

That argument is awful. Someone who posts on this board was wrong once, so that is your evidence that you are right. Come on, you can do better than that.

I'm not disputing the fact that he has progressed and may continue to do so. He's looking like a nice find at the moment, so that's really all that matters in this discussion.

No way matters is what he has done on the field, not you belittling it.

Our difference in the term starter is that you're looking in the past (2014), while I'm looking in the future (2015).[/QUOTE]
Interesting comment since you were focussed on Brandon Deaderick and Joe Vellano a little while back.
I guess this is your way of saying maybe you can be right in the future.
The fact remains that Siliga has been the #1 or #2 DT whenever he has been healthy, and that is because he earned it. He is the kind of player BB likes and unlike you BB has shown no interest in replacing him.

 

[supafly]

No thats not really true. Easley played the entire game when Jones was first injured. You want to make a lot of excuses. In any event, if you think we are going to draft a DT who is better equipped to beat out Siliga as a rookie than Easley, I would disagree.


Talent and competition was good.
Wilfork
Allen Branch 8 year vet who started 44 games in the past 3 years (on good DLs)
Tommy Kelley 11 year vet who became a starting DT on one of the best defenses in the NFL after being cut
Easley First round pick
Chris Jones full time starter in 2013.


Of course it does. It shows up what playing time he EARNED on this team the last 2 seasons.



That argument is awful. Someone who posts on this board was wrong once, so that is your evidence that you are right. Come on, you can do better than that.




No way matters is what he has done on the field, not you belittling it.

Our difference in the term starter is that you're looking in the past (2014), while I'm looking in the future (2015).
Interesting comment since you were focussed on Brandon Deaderick and Joe Vellano a little while back.
I guess this is your way of saying maybe you can be right in the future.
The fact remains that Siliga has been the #1 or #2 DT whenever he has been healthy, and that is because he earned it. He is the kind of player BB likes and unlike you BB has shown no interest in replacing him.

What started as a fine debate as to whether or not Sealver Siliga would be a bona fide full-time starter or not in 2015 has now been totally destroyed by you in every way possible.

There is no one on this forum who is more argumentative than you are. No one. You're completely exhausting, and I think you pride yourself on that. Your attempts to wear people down one sentence at a time are completely pointless.

 

[supafly]

You want to make a lot of excuses.

That argument is awful.

Come on, you can do better than that.

No way matters is what he has done on the field, not you belittling it.

I guess this is your way of saying maybe you can be right in the future.

I mean....how can anyone honestly attempt to have a respectable conversation with you at any point in time? Just look at some of your comments.

I really think you use this forum as a way to take out your frustrations with life. It's truly remarkable. The way that you attempt to talk to people who disagree in any form is absolutely insane.

 

[Miguel]

FYI - Any team performance will be automatically deemed to be “Likely to be earned” if the Team met or exceeded the specified performance during the prior League Year, and will be automatically deemed to be “not likely to be earned” if the Team did not meet the specified performance during the prior League Year.

 

[supafly]

Why would Easley all of a sudden be ahead of Siliga when he wasn't all season?

There are obviously many scenarios who our #1 draft pick would see much more playing time in his second year of play, and that isn't even bringing the injury/recovery situation into play. I wouldn't imagine that anyone would disagree with me here, so I'll assume that you're simply being argumentative.

There's nothing wrong with raising the possibility that Sealver Siliga may play a rotational depth role in the upcoming year, so I'm not sure why you're acting like there's not a chance? There will obviously be many factors that come into play, including some of what I already brought up (improved competition, depth, and talent). I think we've exhausted the conversation, or at least I certainly hope so.

 

[mosi's man]

I wonder what it says about Gostkowski's contract status that Scott O'Brien is at the combine....

 

[mgteich]

There are obviously many scenarios who our #1 draft pick would see much more playing time in his second year of play, and that isn't even bringing the injury/recovery situation into play. I wouldn't imagine that anyone would disagree with me here, so I'll assume that you're simply being argumentative.

There's nothing wrong with raising the possibility that Sealver Siliga may play a rotational depth role in the upcoming year, so I'm not sure why you're acting like there's not a chance? There will obviously be many factors that come into play, including some of what I already brought up (improved competition, depth, and talent). I think we've exhausted the conversation, or at least I certainly hope so.

We certainly would like both Siliga and Easley to get lots of reps at DT in 2015. If I were to guess now, I would say that Siliga is likely to get more reps, but it could go either way. If Wilfork goes, I see these two as the starters, with Branch and Jones in rotational roles.

I agree that aj is being argumentative; that is his style. But I do think that we should all realize that we have a starter quality player in Siliga, and that AS OF RIGHT NOW, Siliga is more valuable that Easley.

For me, this all matters little. I suspect that we will have Siliga as one of the starters and Wilfork or Branch as the other. I understand that much depends on who we are playing. With Mayo back in run support, we can be more flexible in our DT's, and could start Easley inside.

BOTTOM LINE
We are in the last year of the DT transition. We have replaced Kelly and Wilfork (although Wilfork may play one more year). We've added Siliga, Easley and Jones. We should be drafting another DT in the first couple of rounds, although this could be delayed one year if Wilfork stays and Belichick chooses to keep Branch.

 

[McClusky]

I've been nothing but impressed with Siliga's play since we inserted him into the rotation late last season. He's stout at the point of attack, uses his hands well, and his motor runs solid. He seems like a more than adequate piece as a sizeable part of our DT rotation going forward.

I'm a bit more uncertain about Easley's contributions next year. A lot has been made about his injuries, but I believe that some questionable technique was really almost as big of an issue this season. I think the Florida coaching staff did him a disservice. He was so athletic that they basically had him pin his ears back, and focus on nothing but disrupting the middle. It worked really well in college against college lineman, but comparatively to someone like Aaron Donald who is a comparable athlete, he came into the draft way behind him from a development standpoint. There really isn't much from Easley in terms of playing with control, good hand usage, awareness in the running game, and developed pass rush moves. The good think is he's such a moldable athletic ball of clay that he has nowhere to go but up.

I'd be satisfied if his sophmore season looks a lot like Jaime Collins's rookie season, gradually increased playing time, and a couple of wow games. In reality I think he's going to be more of a late bloomer development player like Edelman than a everydown major contributor early. The upside of a player who can become a Jerel Casey or a Geno Atkins is well worth the wait.

 

[Ring 6]

I mean....how can anyone honestly attempt to have a respectable conversation with you at any point in time? Just look at some of your comments.

I really think you use this forum as a way to take out your frustrations with life. It's truly remarkable. The way that you attempt to talk to people who disagree in any form is absolutely insane.

Look at the context.
You keep beating the same drum ignoring all of the facts.

But, what to hell, lets look at them one by one.

↑

You want to make a lot of excuses.

I see a discussion littered with excuses and irrelevant points to back up your argument that Siliga is 'dpeth'
By that I mean you dismiss starting players that he played ahead of. You dismiss him playing by saying surely Easley will be ahead of him next year with no real backup to that claim. Siliga was the 'starter' whenever healthy the last 2 years, and all you have done in this thread is make it seems like he sucked less than a bunch of other sucky guys, which is wrong and was supported by excuses.


↑

That argument is awful.
↑
Come on, you can do better than that.

The argument I called awful was you saying that because 'other posters' were wrong about the playing time of other players in the past that it should be part of the argument regarding Siliga and whether my position is correct or not. Do you disagree that was an awful argument? Both of these comments were in the same paragraph. I do believe you can make a better argument than some poster was wrong once so maybe I am.



↑

No way matters is what he has done on the field, not you belittling it.

This was in response to you say all that matters in a discussion about Siligas role as a starting DT was the 'he was a nice find'. There is nothing wrong with my response.

I'm sorry if you don't like my responses but they are fair responses to your posts.

 

[Ring 6]

There are obviously many scenarios who our #1 draft pick would see much more playing time in his second year of play, and that isn't even bringing the injury/recovery situation into play. I wouldn't imagine that anyone would disagree with me here, so I'll assume that you're simply being argumentative.

No. I am saying when both were available Siliga played more than Easley.
Nothing has yet happened to change that. Something could, but your position is as if it already has. Right now Easley has done nothng to show he will play a larger role than Siliga. You can assume he may progress, but you cannot do what you are doing, which is say as of now Siliga is 'depth'.

There's nothing wrong with raising the possibility that Sealver Siliga may play a rotational depth role in the upcoming year, so I'm not sure why you're acting like there's not a chance? There will obviously be many factors that come into play, including some of what I already brought up (improved competition, depth, and talent). I think we've exhausted the conversation, or at least I certainly hope so.

You have this backwards. I am talking about what he already is. That can change, you have not been saying there is a chance his role could be diminished, you said AT THIS POINT he is 'depth'.

 

[Ring 6]

What started as a fine debate as to whether or not Sealver Siliga would be a bona fide full-time starter or not in 2015 has now been totally destroyed by you in every way possible.

I'm not sure when this was ever a 'fine debate'. I'm not sure how a 'debate' is destroyed by someone backing up their stance with facts.

There is no one on this forum who is more argumentative than you are.

No one. You're completely exhausting, and I think you pride yourself on that. Your attempts to wear people down one sentence at a time are completely pointless.

I love how you pull the 'you are so argumentative and wear people down' card when you try to rebutt every sentence I write, and respond multiple times to my posts. At the worst you are equally as argumentative, and instead of discussing the actual topic you know want to discuss your opinion of me, as if it matters. THAT is argumentative.

 

[supafly]

No. I am saying when both were available Siliga played more than Easley.

Easley had a total of 5 tackles all season long. Take a look at some of the rep charts, where he would get 12/71 game reps....

Obviously, his injury and rookie status went hand in hand with his lack of playing time. One can assume that the NEP will expect a bit more out of their 1st round pick next year.

You have this backwards. I am talking about what he already is. That can change, you have not been saying there is a chance his role could be diminished, you said AT THIS POINT he is 'depth'.

I distinctly said that "the main point of our disagreement is that you see Siliga as a starter in the past (2014), where I am looking into the future (2015)." As a matter of fact, I believe that I made my stance more than clear a couple of times now.

 

[supafly]

I agree that aj is being argumentative; that is his style. But I do think that we should all realize that we have a starter quality player in Siliga, and that AS OF RIGHT NOW, Siliga is more valuable that Easley.

If that's his stance, then I agree; but it wasn't about one being more important than the other (obviously, Siliga is much more important than Easley at the moment).

He took issue with my wording of "rotational depth" (which I still believe he is with Easley out of the lineup and the position unaddressed for the next season)--albeit with an inside track on the starting job for 2015 due to a strong stretch in the later games. The decision to relentlessly break every single sentence down over and over again is pointless, not to mention quite unnecessary.

Issues like this can be solved in an exchange of a couple of posts, nothing more. You and I do it all the time.

 

[Ring 6]

Easley had a total of 5 tackles all season long. Take a look at some of the rep charts, where he would get 12/71 game reps....

Obviously, his injury and rookie status went hand in hand with his lack of playing time. One can assume that the NEP will expect a bit more out of their 1st round pick next year.

This is the point though. You are diminishing Siliga by implying that he played instead of Easley for a reason that you are totally assuming. Easley was healthy enough to play, and even played almost every snap when Jones was injured.
Sure some of it may be because he was a rookie, but the fact that he had 5 tackles all season long kind of explains why he only got 12 snaps.

I distinctly said that "the main point of our disagreement is that you see Siliga as a starter in the past (2014), where I am looking into the future (2015)." As a matter of fact, I believe that I made my stance more than clear a couple of times now.

Therein lies the other issue. Your opinion of the "main point of our disagreement" may describe what you are talking about but it is not my 'main point'. You really aren't attempting to read what am I saying and instead trying to fire off responses to feel right.
Our disagreement is that I am saying Siliga is not 'depth' he is a player who has earned a first team position, and he did it among strong competition. You are downplaying what he did, and what competition we had to support your initial ill-advised position. Siliga earned his role over strong competition, including a first round draft pick, and your comment was that you think he could 'become depth' by the Patriots signing a cheap FA (which would be less than the competition he already beat out) or using a draft pick (which they did last year and that draft pick played behind him). He is a first team DT until someone takes it away from him, not 'depth'.
Your rebuttals to this were naming other players who started, which is the same as saying Darius Butler was a starter once, and failed, so don't count on Brandon Browner, and then trying to bolster your position as correct because I must be wrong since other posters once were.
I don't know why this has had to turn confrontational. I am simply making, explaining and defending my points, and you are reaching for things like above and then resorting to shoot the messenger-type debating tactics as criticizing my rebuttals to your points as argumentative.
If you want to feel Siliga will be beaten out and BECOME DEPTH that is fine, and you are entitle to that opinion, but to ignore his current status and not have a real legitimate explanation for how he will lose his job seems just to be a way to defend your initial poor statement.

 

[supafly]

Our disagreement is that I am saying Siliga is not 'depth' he is a player who has earned a first team position, and he did it among strong competition. You are downplaying what he did, and what competition we had to support your initial ill-advised position. Siliga earned his role over strong competition, including a first round draft pick

Although I agree that the competition had much improved over past years, I don't believe that it was necessarily quite as "strong," as you say; otherwise, many wouldn't be projecting them to take another first round pick at DL. I believe that the play was strong, but the talent can be improved upon--particularly when you consider that we still need to build for the future, while also addressing any losses in FA. Either way, I agree that the play of the DL was good down the stretch.

I'm not "downplaying" anything aside from reminding you that the levels of competition and talent certainly go hand in hand with determining a player's role here. That's a fact.

And to say that 'he beat out a first round pick' is borderline ridiculous--since that first round pick barley played due to injury, and the fact that he was a rookie coming off his 2nd ACL injury who was eventually placed on season-ending IR....

We both agree that Siliga is a fine young player here, so I'll say this for the 3rd or 4th time--that's all that really matters.