FOURTEEN Million of free agency money

[DaBruinz]

After allowing for bonuses earned, this year's rookie and workout bonuses, we have fourteen million available per Jason.

There will future costs that could be paid for by a late cut or two and/or a restructure or two: Player 52 and 53, the Practice Squad, IR players and their replacements (in camp or in season). We need not worry about this now since we have a method of paying for this in August.

There is precious little additional sources of revenue. For example, we could save a million by cutting Fells now, but it seems better to have the camp competition. Gronk, Hernandez, Ballard, Brad Herman (who had signed a 3 year deal). There are 4 TEs and 3 of them are all but guaranteed a spot. Fells fell behind Hoomanawanui on the depth chart and never seemed to get up to speed. They can cut him and add 2 ROOKIE UDFA for camp competition for what he costs. And those UDFAs are more likely to end up on the PS down the line and possibly contribute.

Since players replace a player already on the roster, we should consider only net costs, with a player considered to be replacing a $500K player on the roster. Minimum salary vets don't add much cost at all. We will likely add our usual dozen.

======
LASER FOCUS FOURTEEN MILLION FOR FREE AGENCY
As of now, we are losing players at every position (a normal situation). Who would you use precious free agency money to keep? How would you allocate our free agency money. Remember you have only fourteen million to spend on re-signings AND on free agencts from other teams.

As a final caution, I would note that the cap next year is very tight. Pushing a lot of money into next year is not a good idea. It is not at all clear when the nfl will see the next major raise in the cap.

I would also note that we are not choosing a final roster, just who to bring into camp.
=====================
OUR FREE AGENTS
RB Woodhead
WR Welker, Edelman, Branch, Stallworth
TE Hooman (RFA)
OL Vollmer, Thomas
DL Scott, Brace, Harrison Neither Brace nor Harrison are Pats UFAs. They are Street UFAs since they were cut during the season.
LB Koutouvides, White
CB Talib, Arrington, Cole, Martin
S Chung, Allen, Barrett
==================
Personally, I would allocate $2M to four low-level free agents (a million a year folks like Cole). That would leave twelve million a year for mid and top level free agents.

The Pats will have to look for players who can make special teams contributions. Players like Arrington, Cole, Koutivedes, and White made their names on the Special Teams Units.

 

[supafly]

We have our starting TE's. We have our backup (Ballard). We can use a blocking TE. Fells is under contract and will likely lose a camp competition to someone who will cost less than his net one million. Hooman is a possibility to compete for the blocking TE position.

Andy would like us to get a couple of jAG's and let them fight it out for this inactive position. After all, our TE's get injured so rarely. ??

I tend to agree with you regarding Daniel Fells. There will obviously be several other players who clear more cap room too, so that will be an ungoing process of give and take, just as it always is.

It's this reason, and the potential extensions of Brady and maybe even Wilfork, that make this whole "projected" cap amount less relevant in my opinion.

Will they be major players in free agency? No, but they rarely, if ever are. They should however, have an opportunity at signing some of their own and shoring up other positions that need attention, just as they always do.

At the end of it, they are likely in just as good of shape if not better, than the surrounding teams who currently have positive cap numbers that climb arround 18-19 million.

And the rookies won't be signed until the summer, so I don't think we need to worry as much about them right at the moment, although of course it should be kept in mind.

I'm not saying that I'm not very interested in the current cap standings, but when you are anywhere over 10 million or so, things are probably pretty much the same as any other year. After all, they plan it that way.

 

[DaBruinz]

Edelman and Talib would be my priorities in FA.

Edelman is a younger, more explosive Welker. He isn't as nearly as durable, but he'll be way cheaper to keep.
Talib is key to our secondary. If we don't re-sign him, get ready for another Rookie and some UDFA's like Arrington getting roasted in our secondary. Maybe some more JAGs like Shawn Springs a couple years ago.

If you aren't on the field making catches, then you aren't helping the team and you are forcing them to spend more money on the position than needed. I'm an Edelman supporter, yet even I know he's not a "more explosive" Wes Welker. Edelman is a guy who is slightly faster, but not as quick. He has excellent field vision and that comes from his time as a QB.

The Pats don't need to bring in JAGs. What they need to do is bring in some LEADERS who are in their last years.. Which is what they did in 2001 when they brought in Bobby Hamilton and Brian Cox. Adrian Wilson would be a nice addition. Him and McCourty with Tavon Wilson and a rookie safety backing them up would be an excellent situation. Wilson would probably come at a cheaper price than Ed Reed.

Talib isn't the "KEY" to our secondary. A competent press coverage CB who can line up opposite Dennard is the key to our secondary. Whether that be Dowling (finally), Talib, or someone else, that's what's needed.

A coverage LB like Danell Ellerbe would be nice. Taking him from the Ravens would be huge. He is a guy who I'd feel comfortable putting on the field instead of Spikes full-time. I think it would allow the Pats to go back to the 3-4 with moving Hightower to an OLB position. That is, of course, unless they can transform Hightower into a better coverage LB..

 

[Mike the Brit]

If Fells were Algae Crumpler, I wouldn't consider cutting him. We'd be all set.

........

 

[mgteich]

My mis-spelling of player names is infamous. In this case, I copied the spelling from the post I was responding to.

........

 

[mgteich]

It is not the total cap number that is the primary issue. It is having 3 MAJOR position needs (before considering an potential upgrades), needing a major and minor re-signing or replacement at each position. Welker, Vollmer and Talib are key players, all among the top free agents available (all in Rotoworld's top 20).

We'll see where we are in a month. I expect several re-signings before free agency starts. It was quiet this past week, as folks were off playing golf.

I tend to agree with you regarding Daniel Fells. There will obviously be several other players who clear more cap room too, so that will be an ungoing process of give and take, just as it always is.

It's this reason, and the potential extensions of Brady and maybe even Wilfork, that make this whole "projected" cap amount less relevant in my opinion.

Will they be major players in free agency? No, but they rarely, if ever are. They should however, have an opportunity at signing some of their own and shoring up other positions that need attention, just as they always do.

At the end of it, they are likely in just as good of shape if not better, than the surrounding teams who currently have positive cap numbers that climb arround 18-19 million.

And the rookies won't be signed until the summer, so I don't think we need to worry as much about them right at the moment, although of course it should be kept in mind.

I'm not saying that I'm not very interested in the current cap standings, but when you are anywhere over 10 million or so, things are probably pretty much the same as any other year. After all, they plan it that way.

 

[Mike the Brit]

My mis-spelling of player names is infamous. In this case, I copied the spelling from the post I was responding to.

Sorry -- no put-down intended. I just have a VERY childish sense of humour ...

 

[Ring 6]

Cherry picking is stupid. If Jones is healthy the whole year we have 42 sacks and the team is top 10.

Its not cherry picking and nothing like making up what would have happened if a guy were healthy.
You brought up sack totals and I pointed out that while they were tremendous in that game they totalled on 30 in the other 15 and were awful in the AFCCG.
Is the point to be really good against a team that plays like crap, or be consistently good? If we had 20 sacks vs the Dolphins it wouldn't change what happened in the other 15 games, or the AFCCG.
Lets not forget that this is a team who lost at home to Arizona, SF and Baltinmore and was one play away from losing at home to the Jets and Bills, and one of the major reasons was the absence of any kind of pass rush. Dominating the Dolphins doesn't make me feel better about those FIVE home losses/close wins vs bad teams.

I think without Jones we did all we could. That's like the Giants line without JPP, game over.

We did....nothing. If one player being out means we have zero pass rush, that means we need more pass rushers.

We just disagree on Ninkovich. I see him as a 10 sack guy next year whos decent-good vs. the run.

He has never had 10 sacks. He is one of the major reasons we lack a consistent pass rush. Getting a sack every other game on average and very little pressure otherwise is not a good thing.

I agree with this. I'd love Star Loutelei or Henry Melton to boost the interior pass rush, but its simply not happening. Furthermore, I don't think we can afford to draft a DL in round one or 2, we gotta live with what we got. The FA cap has to go towards WR and CB too.

Then we will continue to get eaten alive by the pass. How can that just be acceptable?
I sat and watch a totally impotent pass rush send the Ravens to the SB allowing 3 consecutive TD drives, basically without any resistance. They faced 1 3rd down on the 3 drives COMBINED. You could have the greatest secondary in the world, but if you can get close to the QB, you are done. I have rarely seen football games where the pass rush was less effective than ours in that game. How can we not afford to fix that?

 

[DocHoliday]

Its not cherry picking and nothing like making up what would have happened if a guy were healthy.
You brought up sack totals and I pointed out that while they were tremendous in that game they totalled on 30 in the other 15 and were awful in the AFCCG.
Is the point to be really good against a team that plays like crap, or be consistently good? If we had 20 sacks vs the Dolphins it wouldn't change what happened in the other 15 games, or the AFCCG.
Lets not forget that this is a team who lost at home to Arizona, SF and Baltinmore and was one play away from losing at home to the Jets and Bills, and one of the major reasons was the absence of any kind of pass rush. Dominating the Dolphins doesn't make me feel better about those FIVE home losses/close wins vs bad teams.


We did....nothing. If one player being out means we have zero pass rush, that means we need more pass rushers.


He has never had 10 sacks. He is one of the major reasons we lack a consistent pass rush. Getting a sack every other game on average and very little pressure otherwise is not a good thing.


Then we will continue to get eaten alive by the pass. How can that just be acceptable?
I sat and watch a totally impotent pass rush send the Ravens to the SB allowing 3 consecutive TD drives, basically without any resistance. They faced 1 3rd down on the 3 drives COMBINED. You could have the greatest secondary in the world, but if you can get close to the QB, you are done. I have rarely seen football games where the pass rush was less effective than ours in that game. How can we not afford to fix that?

Good post. A hidden benefit of getting excellent pass rush is better field position on punts and more turnovers, as well as higher TOP.

Help the defense help the offense get more shots at scoring.

 

[patsinthesnow]

Its not cherry picking and nothing like making up what would have happened if a guy were healthy.
You brought up sack totals and I pointed out that while they were tremendous in that game they totalled on 30 in the other 15 and were awful in the AFCCG.
Is the point to be really good against a team that plays like crap, or be consistently good? If we had 20 sacks vs the Dolphins it wouldn't change what happened in the other 15 games, or the AFCCG.
Lets not forget that this is a team who lost at home to Arizona, SF and Baltinmore and was one play away from losing at home to the Jets and Bills, and one of the major reasons was the absence of any kind of pass rush. Dominating the Dolphins doesn't make me feel better about those FIVE home losses/close wins vs bad teams.


We did....nothing. If one player being out means we have zero pass rush, that means we need more pass rushers.


He has never had 10 sacks. He is one of the major reasons we lack a consistent pass rush. Getting a sack every other game on average and very little pressure otherwise is not a good thing.


Then we will continue to get eaten alive by the pass. How can that just be acceptable?
I sat and watch a totally impotent pass rush send the Ravens to the SB allowing 3 consecutive TD drives, basically without any resistance. They faced 1 3rd down on the 3 drives COMBINED. You could have the greatest secondary in the world, but if you can get close to the QB, you are done. I have rarely seen football games where the pass rush was less effective than ours in that game. How can we not afford to fix that?

Propose a solution then. Spend 6-7 million on a DE/DT, use a first round pick again on DL?

 

[DocHoliday]

Propose a solution then. Spend 6-7 million on a DE/DT, use a first round pick again on DL?

I hope this team gets some production out of Bequette.

 

[Mike the Brit]

I sat and watch a totally impotent pass rush send the Ravens to the SB allowing 3 consecutive TD drives, basically without any resistance. They faced 1 3rd down on the 3 drives COMBINED. You could have the greatest secondary in the world, but if you can get close to the QB, you are done. I have rarely seen football games where the pass rush was less effective than ours in that game. How can we not afford to fix that?

I watched the same game as you. Compared with that, everything else in the game fades into insignificance (though I'm still POed that our number one cornerback pulls a hamstring with no one near him -- don't they stretch? don't they warm up?).

Still, I don't remember the 9ers getting much pressure on Flacco -- or the Broncos (they did have a strip sack, though, if memory serves). Perhaps we just have to admit that the Ravens O-line was that good.*

Given the cap constraints and the team's needs other things may have to come first.

* Broncos -- 1 sack v Ravens, Patriots -- 2 sacks, 49ers -- 2 sacks

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I hope this team gets some production out of Bequette.

I think he's taken the Ron Brace slot on the team as the guy who we all want to do something that has done nada.

 

[Deus Irae]

I hope this team gets some production out of Bequette.

He'll be the best coffee fetcher the team has had in years.

 

[Ring 6]

Propose a solution then. Spend 6-7 million on a DE/DT, use a first round pick again on DL?

I disagree with the approach that we ignore positions where we are mediocre and focus on positions where we have no one signed.
I think we should focus on the positions that will have the most impact and if that means upgrading mediocrity to excellence and no one to mediocre, so be it.
I want to ramp up the pass rush. I want a better LDE than Ninkovich.
If it costs 6-7 mill, so be it. If there is a 1st rounder out there that can play the other side and complement Jones, that is fine too.
I want another inside pass rusher. Armstead may be the guy. The new LDE may be able to move inside in sub.
Armstead is the wild card, but if he can be an effective inside pass rusher then we really need one more, excellent player.
Base
New LDE-Wilfork-Armstead-Jones
Sub
New LDE-Cunningham-Armstead/cheaper FA-Jones

Plug a stud LDE in there, and we have a dominant front 7. Brady with reasonable weapons and a dominant front 7 = SB.

I would retain Welker.
I would add a top safety and move McCourty back to his natural LCB position.

 

[Ring 6]

I watched the same game as you. Compared with that, everything else in the game fades into insignificance (though I'm still POed that our number one cornerback pulls a hamstring with no one near him -- don't they stretch? don't they warm up?).

Still, I don't remember the 9ers getting much pressure on Flacco -- or the Broncos (they did have a strip sack, though, if memory serves). Perhaps we just have to admit that the Ravens O-line was that good.*

Given the cap constraints and the team's needs other things may have to come first.

* Broncos -- 1 sack v Ravens, Patriots -- 2 sacks, 49ers -- 2 sacks

I think the pass rush should be the #1 priority because it is as bad as any aspect of the team.

 

[Ring 6]

I hope this team gets some production out of Bequette.

I'd rather find a guy who was good enough to not only get on the field, but play well in 2012 and pin our hopes their, than hope a guy can go from not good enough to see the field, to effective.

 

[MTaylorJ1]

I disagree with the approach that we ignore positions where we are mediocre and focus on positions where we have no one signed.
I think we should focus on the positions that will have the most impact and if that means upgrading mediocrity to excellence and no one to mediocre, so be it.
I want to ramp up the pass rush. I want a better LDE than Ninkovich.
If it costs 6-7 mill, so be it. If there is a 1st rounder out there that can play the other side and complement Jones, that is fine too.
I want another inside pass rusher. Armstead may be the guy. The new LDE may be able to move inside in sub.
Armstead is the wild card, but if he can be an effective inside pass rusher then we really need one more, excellent player.
Base
New LDE-Wilfork-Armstead-Jones
Sub
New LDE-Cunningham-Armstead/cheaper FA-Jones

Plug a stud LDE in there, and we have a dominant front 7. Brady with reasonable weapons and a dominant front 7 = SB.

I would retain Welker.
I would add a top safety and move McCourty back to his natural LCB position.

I like Datone Jones as the fit there. Can play Base 4/3 DE

Jones-Armstead-Wilfork-Jones

and move INSIDE for Sub

Nink-Armstead-Jones-Jones

Looked back at the playoff game logs earlier today. From 2001-2007 (Seymour years) I think we failed to force a TO in 1 playoff game (Oakland) and forced multiple TOs in 11 of 17 games. Since we've done it once (Baltimore in '09) and have failed to force a TO in 3 of the last 6. To me that speaks a great deal to not being able to make QBs uncomfortable in the pocket.

 

[fumbrunner]

In four playoff seasons with the Patriots, Welker's only played in a single 'one-and-done' season, and that was the 2010 game where Brady threw an unpressured INT to a back and Crumpler dropped an easy TD pass, so the team can clearly win "the big games" with him.

While it's true that Welker's had a couple of important drops, so have other receivers. Welker is averaging better than 7 receptions per game in the playoffs, which equates to 123 catches over the course of 16 games. He's also rung up 686 yards in those 9 games, which would be a 1220 yard season.

Welker's not the problem.

I agree Deus. They guy puts up HOF numbers year in and out. He has had some backbreaking drops in important games, but you can't replace his production. I don't get how people are so anxious to see him out the door.

 

[Fencer]

I don't think the Pats are going to pay top dollar for Welker or Vollmer, nor close enough to top dollar to retain them. I foresee Welker going somewhere he can make a 2nd-tier QB look good and hence also make look good the GM who selected that QB. I foresee Vollmer going somewhere with a need at LT.

Talib is a different matter. Nobody else has a much greater need for what he brings than the Pats do.