Deion is performing up to the level of a 2nd round pick

[tombonneau]

Ergo, I simply don't see what his gripe is? You draft a guy in the 2nd round, you expect the kind of production he is delivering.

He hasn't had over 1000 yards.

He hasn't scored double-digit TDs.

He hasn't made the pro-bowl.

To my knowledge, he hasn't even been in the top 10 of any receiving category.

So how is he treated unfairly? Its not like he was drafted and put up Moss #s for a 3 seasons. IMO, the Pats are well within their rights to stick to their guns on this one.

Sorry for another Branch post, but just read the blurb about him on PFT this morning and had to voice my opinion finally.

 

[TomBradyWoot]

But the Patriots and their players have never been about statistics. I mean Seymour has never been in the top 15 of anything for a defensive player and he's still the best lineman in the game.

 

[tombonneau]

Totally different scenario. Seymour is dominant, despite it not showing up on the stat sheet, and the Pats know that is the nature of the role he plays on defense.

One need only look at how the D performed with vs. without him in 06.

Conversely, the Pats not only have one without Deion, but in games where D's focus on Deion and double-team him, he literally disappears.

Look, I like Deion, but the dude needs to shut his mouth, show up, have a great 06, and if he wants to chase the $$$, he can do it at that time.

Seymour he is not.

 

[TomBradyWoot]

You missed my point but thats fine.

 

[richpats]

Looking back I think we should have tried to extend him before free agency started. Givens' deal is really hurting the Pats as far as negotiations with Branch go. If we had extended Branch early, we would essentially have given up Givens, but at least we'd keep one around for a while.

 

[letekro]

Totally different scenario. Seymour is dominant, despite it not showing up on the stat sheet, and the Pats know that is the nature of the role he plays on defense.

One need only look at how the D performed with vs. without him in 06.

Conversely, the Pats not only have one without Deion, but in games where D's focus on Deion and double-team him, he literally disappears.

Look, I like Deion, but the dude needs to shut his mouth, show up, have a great 06, and if he wants to chase the $$$, he can do it at that time.

Seymour he is not.

I think you're proving his point by noting that teams often double-team Deion. That, combined with the way TB spreads it around make Deion's statistics a little misleading.

 

[patchick]

Looking back I think we should have tried to extend him before free agency started. Givens' deal is really hurting the Pats as far as negotiations with Branch go. If we had extended Branch early, we would essentially have given up Givens, but at least we'd keep one around for a while.

I don't imagine it was an option. With the CBA up in the air and the prospect of an uncapped year, agents weren't rushing out to sign long-term deals based on "old" dollars.

 

[tombonneau]

I think you're proving his point by noting that teams often double-team Deion. That, combined with the way TB spreads it around make Deion's statistics a little misleading.

Right, teams DT him bc he is out #1 WR. He if he was a true #1WR and deserved true #1 WR money he would beat the DTs rather than not have any catches in a game where he is DT.

Just bc a guy is your best WR and sometimes is DT'd doesn't mean he deserves big-time money.

 

[richpats]

I don't imagine it was an option. With the CBA up in the air and the prospect of an uncapped year, agents weren't rushing out to sign long-term deals based on "old" dollars.

Yeah, I forgot about that whole mess.

I hope Deion pulls a Hines Ward and shows up mid-preseason as a sign of good faith - it could grease the wheels on a contract extension. We won't play Deion in the preseason anyway.

 

[tombonneau]

You missed my point but thats fine.

No, I got your point, but my counter is its apples-to-oranges when you compare what Seymour does and saying it doesn't show up on the stat sheet vs. what Branch does not showing up on the stat sheet.

A WRs merit will generally be statistically validated, unless you want to count down-field blocking.

I like Deion. I think the Pats value him too. Just not enough to pay him like he is one of the best WRs in the league, bc he simply isn't.

And I agree completely with the person who said they should have done this before Givens got his ridiculous deal, as that is now a natural starting off point for Deion.

 

[tombonneau]

I would also contend that the theory that the Pats "like to spread the ball around" is a sort of self-fulfilling fallacy.

The Pats orig. liked to spread the ball around bc they haven't had one dominant player. If they had a guy who was being dominent (i.e. Troy Brown when he caught 100 balls) they would feed it to him.

 

[letekro]

You're right, he's not a dominating player, but no one's saying he deserves (pre-meltdown) T.O. money. He is, however, a far better player than David Givens or ARE, whose contracts I'm sure are weighing pretty heavily on his decision to hold out.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

Look, I like Deion, but the dude needs to shut his mouth, show up, have a great 06, and if he wants to chase the $$$, he can do it at that time.

I'm not sure I get all the animosity towards Branch by some fans. You make him out to be like TO or something with this contract issue. I don't see or read about him running his mouth.

 

[PatsFan37]

I'm not sure I get all the animosity towards Branch by some fans. You make him out to be like TO or something with this contract issue. I don't see or read about him running his mouth.

No, but I hold him responsible for what his agent says to the press, considering his agent has been quoted over a period of several days and Branch has had plenty of opportunity to muzzle him.

Branch strikes me as a quiet, hardworking, talented guy and he should know better than to allow his agent to negotiate through the media. However frustrated he may be (and he obviously is), it's a bad tactic, particularly with this team.

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

Tom, I'm not disagreeing with you about Branch, but some your arguments are flawed. I'll play devil's advocate...

He hasn't had over 1000 yards.

Branch had 998 rec yards in '05. Would two extra yards in a regular season make that much of difference?

He hasn't scored double-digit TDs.

Neither has Troy Brown. TD totals isn't the most important category when judging a WR. While it's not rare, it is uncommon to find a deep or medium pass play that brings a TD. WRs are supposed to move the chains and keep drives alive in the process. The most common TD plays are from inside 10 yards.

Here were the WRs who had double-digit Rec TD numbers in 2005...

Marvin Harrison (12)
Steve Smith (12)
Hines Ward (11)
Chris Chambers (11)
Larry Fitzgerald (10)
Joe Jurevicious (10)
Joey Galloway (10)

NOTE: Reggie Wayne had 5 TDs

How many of this list would you consider top 5 WRs?

I go by ESPN Insider KC Joyner's receiving metrics (gleaned from game film) to judge a WR. Based on these metrics the best WR in 2005, IMO was Santana Moss (9 TDs). Steve Smith has baggage that brings down the value of a player in my eyes.

Moreover, avoid looking at yards per reception numbers as they are deceptive since most WRs can look good when they catch the ball. Rather look at yards per attempt, which includes all balls (caught and incomplete) thrown to that WR.

Joyner made a strong case for Branch being the top WR in 2004 (he includes playoff games in his analysis). I don't have Deion's 2005 metrics but I'm expecting Joyner's Scientific Football: 2006 in the mail any day and will post them here once I get it. However, Branch's 2005 TYPCA (total yards per catchable attempt) was ranked at 28th, which is in the top 3rd, but not in the elite area.

He hasn't made the pro-bowl.

Big deal. Donovan McNabb had been a perennial pro bowler. Branch was SB 39 MVP and did have some of his best games in the postseason.

My arguments against Branch are his past injuries, small size, and that he's wasn't efficient enough to be placed in the "elite" group...

Most efficient WRs 2005 based on Success % x Yards Per Attempt...

Yards Per Attempt
1. Santana Moss -- 11.4
2. Eddie Kennison -- 10.9
3. Steve Smith -- 10.7
4. Ernest Wilford -- 10.2
5. Terry Glenn -- 9.8

Success %
1. Joe Jurevicius -- 75.6%
2. Eric Parker -- 75.3%
3. Bobby Engram -- 73.1%
4. Steve Smith -- 72.4%
T5 Derrick Mason -- 71.9%
T5 Rod Smith -- 71.9%

Success % x Yards Per Attempt
1. Steve Smith -- 7.7
2. Santana Moss -- 7.6
3. Eddie Kennison -- 7.3
4. Eric Parker -- 7.2
5. Joe Jurevicius -- 7.0

 

[tombonneau]

I'm not sure I get all the animosity towards Branch by some fans. You make him out to be like TO or something with this contract issue. I don't see or read about him running his mouth.

Its not animosity. As I said above, I like him. Think he seems like a nice guy. But his performance for a 2R pick simply does not merit a holdout. Hey, I'm sorry Snyder is a dope and gave ARE a truckload of money. That doesn't mean you can hold out for the same change. Just play this year and you can go collect the big bucks in 07.

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm not sure I get all the animosity towards Branch by some fans. You make him out to be like TO or something with this contract issue. I don't see or read about him running his mouth.

Sooner -
6 weeks ago, Branch said he would honor his current contract like a man. Last year, in an interview with ESPN The Mag, Branch said it wasn't about the money.

Now, Branch , through his agent, feels he's not being treated fairly when he's offered a 3 year 18.75 Million contract that pays him 9.75 million in the 1st year in bonuses and salary and 9 million over the last 2 years of the contract.

That is money that is worthy of a #1 receiver, though not an ELITE receiver. Branch is NOT an Elite receiver and doesn't deserve to be paid like one.