FOURTEEN Million of free agency money

[Ring 6]

How can you hate on Ninko? Dude is mega ****** clutch. 8 sacks is pretty damn good. Not every team has two 10+ sacks DE. Pretty good run stuffer too.

Ive explained it a few times, I'll try again.....
1) 8 sacks as a career high is not a good thing
2) On top of those 8 sacks he got very little other pressure. All DL getting 8 sacks are not the same, its the other pressure they get that means more
3) As an OLB I can understand giving him an avg or above run defense grade, but to call him a 'run stuffer' at LDE is laughable. He is totally overmatched by RTs in the running game.
4) Do you actually watch him play, or just look up how many sacks he had? Hanging your hat on 8 sacks is dubious to begin with, but when everything behind that is shaky, I begin to wonder if you just have fond memories of him making a few plays.

If we didn't have 3 better LBs, I would be OK with him moving to LB and starting. Since we do, there is nowhere for him to start and be an effective player. You do realize he was the guy who was supposed to be disrupting those QBs that stood in the pocket all day against us right?
I don't think he got close enough to Flacco to spit on him in those 3 consecutive TD drives where we forced a grand total of 1 3rd down attempt.

So, I'm not 'hating on dude' I'm assessing his play which is subpar.

 

[patfanken]

If you think our pass rush was anything like the 49ers, you aren't watching the games. TEAMS are successful or unsuccessful for many different reasons, and one of the primary ones this team hasn't gotten further is a weak pass rush. Finding teams who were successful despite a weakness is not a reason to ignore a weakness. (And the ones you picked we much stronger at rushing the passer. Sack totals are a small part of the equation)

Andy, I'm not saying its a "weakness", I'm just saying its not the biggest weakness. And as far as not getting far, I would think that ending up in the final 4 and final 2 over the last 2 years with our "poor" pass rush blows your contention that its the reason we didn't advance further out the window. We didn't lose the 2011 superbowl because of a poor pass rush In fact we wound up 2nd in sacks during that post season, and had more sacks in the superbowl than the Giants did. Nor did we lose the AFCCG because of it. We lost that game because we had 5 trips into the red zone and only one TD. We lost that game because we had 2 TO's and got none back.

Again, let me repeat. I'm all for a improving the pass rush, but merely replacing Ninkovich ISN'T the answer, and we'd be hard pressed to find someone who would improve on his overall production.
If pass rush improves it will be because of a changing mindset schematically. It will be because we blitz more. and finally improve our back end coverage.

Because he is overmatched in his role. Making some plays now and then is nice, but the standard for not goosd enough is a bit higher than never making a play. Comparing Ninkovich to Vrabel is, simply, ignorant. And Vrabel never played LDE.

Vrabel was a DE in college and played a lot DE when he was with Pittsburgh. My comparison of Vrabel and Ninkovich is because regardless of position, their primary role was as edge rushers, whether it was as a 3-4 OLB or a 4-3 DE - and calling player with 60 tackles 5 forced fumbles and an interception "over matched is what's ignorant, not my comparing Vrabel to Ninkovich

Sack totals are a small piece of the puzzle, and even then 19.5 in 4 years is not something to jump up an down about. Ninkovich generated next to no pressure beyond those 8 sacks, and that just isn't good enough.

No doubt sack totals are but part of the puzzle, but if you check his "hurries" and "QB hits" stats you'll find that are comparable to his sack totals.

Now I'm certainly not saying he's any kind of elite player. But he IS a very good one. A very dependable one and over the last 2 years one of 3 or 4 best defensive players on the team. There are a number of players I'd like to see replaced or improved on before you get to Rob Ninkovich

I'm good with him as a reserve, both at LB and DE. But if we start Rob Ninkovich at LDE next year, with Kyle Love and VW at DTs, we will be near the bottom in pass defense again, no matter who the DBs are.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but the DL is only a part of the pass rush equation. Even if your scenario comes to pass, I expect our pass rush to be much improved next season, even if only because I think the increased aggressiveness we saw at the end of the season will continue on into this one. I see our back end getting stronger with Dowling getting back, Dennard's 2nd year jump, and the potential additions we make either to S or CB. I think a healthy Jones who will be more experienced and stronger will be a key aspect to an improved rush. I even have hopes for a better interior pass rush from the likes of Armstead, Deadrick, Pryor, and Cunningham.

All that combined might not make the Pats pass rush "fearsome", just better and more consistent and effective, AND the reason why I would expect Rob Ninkovich to wind up with 10 sacks even though its my sincerest hope that he, along with Vince, will playfar fewer snaps

 

[grux]

I think the pats have spent quite a bit of money on the offensive side of the ball and don't have a lombardi trophy to show for the efforts. We have Gronk, Hernandez and Lloyd taking up 11.2M of the cap. If the cap stays flat and we sign Welker to a long term deal that number goes up to at least 20.2M. That would be a cap hit of around 18% for this season. I think it would be in the Pats best interest to roll the dice and let Welker walk. They can sign Edelman and either draft or sign some FA wide receivers. We can then use some of the Welker money to sign a solid corner back to help out the defense. This would give us a very solid offense and a much improved defense.

 

[mgteich]

We currently spend $64M on the offense and $38M on the defense. In patriot circles, this is known as balance.

We seem to get great value for our defensive money. We're in the middle of the pack, while only 3 teams spend less than us on defense (lions, titans and bengals).

I think the pats have spent quite a bit of money on the offensive side of the ball and don't have a lombardi trophy to show for the efforts. We have Gronk, Hernandez and Lloyd taking up 11.2M of the cap. If the cap stays flat and we sign Welker to a long term deal that number goes up to at least 20.2M. That would be a cap hit of around 18% for this season. I think it would be in the Pats best interest to roll the dice and let Welker walk. They can sign Edelman and either draft or sign some FA wide receivers. We can then use some of the Welker money to sign a solid corner back to help out the defense. This would give us a very solid offense and a much improved defense.

 

[BradyBranch39]

The fact that the Bengals spend bottom 3 says a lot about Lewis and Zimmer.

 

[Kontradiction]

The fact that the Bengals spend bottom 3 says a lot about Lewis and Zimmer.

To me, it says more about their owner (who is notoriously cheap)...

 

[Fencer]

Of course, if you are right and the team is ready to announce the extension of Brady and Wilfork, then we would not be very constrained by the cap at all.

THIS year.

 

[Deus Irae]

We currently spend $64M on the offense and $38M on the defense. In patriot circles, this is known as balance.

We seem to get great value for our defensive money. We're in the middle of the pack, while only 3 teams spend less than us on defense (lions, titans and bengals).

Take away the elephant in the room of any team with an elite CB (Brady's $20 million), and you've got a much more balanced team, financially. Then, when you consider that the offense has more of the veterans (Mankins, Lloyd, Connolly) and second contract players (Gronk, Hernandez), the difference makes sense.

What's helped to create the financial imbalance is the failure of the drafts in 2007-2009, as those were defensive drafts and failed to produce many defensive talents. McCourty, Spikes, Hightower, Jones, Dennard and Love are 6 of the Patriots defensive starters that are still on their first contracts. The only veteran contracts on defense are Wilfork (mega deal), Mayo (mega deal), Ninkovich (borderline starter/backup), Gregory (FA signing, overpaid).

So, 6 of 10 are on rookie deals, 2 of 10 are on high end deals, one is on an overpaid FA deal, and only Ninkovich is left to debate. When I look at it that way, the financial numbers make sense.

 

[supafly]

THIS year.

I am assuming that you feel that extending Brady and Wilfork would limit any further down the line cap moves in the last couple years of their deals. I am not necessarily seeing these constraints, but you may see things differently.

What are your specific concerns, and how would you change the approach of extending both of these key players who currently only have 2 seasons remaining on their deals?

The way that I see it (aside from reducing the obvious high cap hits for this year, which you agree with and see as a positive) we'll likely need both of these players for at least another couple of years after their 2 yrs are up, and both will likely come at pretty high costs still, so extending them now may actually prove to be somewhat of a bargain on some level.

I would very much like to see both Wilfork and Brady for 4 more seasons to end their careers, yet they only have 2 remaining. How is offering them an extension now the wrong move, and what would you change differently?

I am just curious to see a different side of things and am always here to learn, particularly regarding the contractual situations where I am in need of more knowledge. Thanks.

 

[Bourne Again Christian]

Some thoughts come to mind
The Bengals have hit on their defensive drafted players with a very high percentage
I'm curious if that is the coaches picks or personel department.
When you look at overall how young and cheap our defense is, the fact we've missed on defensive talent in past drafts so they never reach their second contract with the team it makes sense.
I'm scared to pay Talib elite money with his injury concerns. What about Keenan Lewis from Pittsburgh.
You could pry get him for 5 mill a year he has gotten better every year.
No off field baggage that we know of has very little turnovers but that's due to the fact he wasn't targeted or picked on much.
Is the same age as Talib and fits the 6ft long arms mentality he isn't as athletic but he plays more physical.
In a perfect world we would see Dowling take the next step stay healthy and become that number 1 number 2 defensive back w have been hoping for.
I think we gave up on Butler to early.

 

[JackBauer]

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

So you want to roll with one hypothetically starting-caliber safety?

 

[Ring 6]

So you want to roll with one hypothetically starting-caliber safety?

I would be adding a top level safety. They would be paired with Gregory, Wilson, and whoever else we can get in on a cheaper veteran contract.

 

[JackBauer]

I would be adding a top level safety. They would be paired with Gregory, Wilson, and whoever else we can get in on a cheaper veteran contract.

Gregory is a rotational guy at best and Wilson hasn't shown much to indicate he's a starting caliber player.

 

[Fencer]

I am assuming that you feel that extending Brady and Wilfork would limit any further down the line cap moves in the last couple years of their deals. I am not necessarily seeing these constraints, but you may see things differently.

What are your specific concerns, and how would you change the approach of extending both of these key players who currently only have 2 seasons remaining on their deals?

The way that I see it (aside from reducing the obvious high cap hits for this year, which you agree with and see as a positive) we'll likely need both of these players for at least another couple of years after their 2 yrs are up, and both will likely come at pretty high costs still, so extending them now may actually prove to be somewhat of a bargain on some level.

I would very much like to see both Wilfork and Brady for 4 more seasons to end their careers, yet they only have 2 remaining. How is offering them an extension now the wrong move, and what would you change differently?

I am just curious to see a different side of things and am always here to learn, particularly regarding the contractual situations where I am in need of more knowledge. Thanks.

I don't have any particular numbers at my fingertips. But my general observation was along the lines:

• Players do not generally get much more valuable over the lives of their contracts, rookie contracts excepted. If we adjust for the risk of a career-ending/career-diminishing injury, even the younger ones (such as Mayo) perhaps can't be expected to. Brady and Wilfork certainly can't.
• So if we theoretically matched pay to value, cap hits would stay level or even decline over the life of a contract. They surely wouldn't be back-end loaded.
• Thus, if you back-end load your contracts, you get more talent than you can afford.
• The downside is that when the back-end comes around, you get less talent than you can afford.
• The traditional work-around is to find other contracts to back-end load at that point. Ultimately, this is a Ponzi scheme, although perhaps you can postpone the year of reckoning to some time after your "window of championship opportunity".

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I don't have any particular numbers at my fingertips. But my general observation was along the lines:

• Players do not generally get much more valuable over the lives of their contracts, rookie contracts excepted. If we adjust for the risk of a career-ending/career-diminishing injury, even the younger ones (such as Mayo) perhaps can't be expected to. Brady and Wilfork certainly can't.Not that they have to, they can simply remain as valuable or productive and as salaries around them increase they become even more valuable because they are earning less than present market.
• So if we theoretically matched pay to value, cap hits would stay level or even decline over the life of a contract. They surely wouldn't be back-end loaded.The Patriots contracts are seldom heavily back end loaded. Structure of bonus money sometimes makes them appear that way (the too big cap hit) but that is a choice teams make. You can always cut them. Mankins deal actually has an empty amortization year at the end where his cap hit and salary are one in the same at $7M. They can dump some money from the next few years into that year as dead cap if they choose. The cap will be higher then and the space may be more beneficial today.
• Thus, if you back-end load your contracts, you get more talent than you can afford.
• The downside is that when the back-end comes around, you get less talent than you can afford.Not necessarily. Because eventually the cap does go up and market deals go up. And the potential for restructure always exists, as does the potential to walk away from the player in favor of a younger potentially as if not more talented player at lower cost.
• The traditional work-around is to find other contracts to back-end load at that point. Ultimately, this is a Ponzi scheme, although perhaps you can postpone the year of reckoning to some time after your "window of championship opportunity".

It's not a ponzi scheme. It's an accounting tool relative to the cap. As long as this league doesn't fully guarantee contracts, the backend is almost meaningless. Teams who get in trouble generally do so via restructure or investing in crap like the Jets did with Sanchez and guaranteeing mediocre talent money it's not remotely worth.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy, I'm not saying its a "weakness", I'm just saying its not the biggest weakness.

We have been near the bottom in pass defense 2 years in a row. IF you watch games you know that is happening with no pressure on the QB. What bigger weakness do we have?

And as far as not getting far, I would think that ending up in the final 4 and final 2 over the last 2 years with our "poor" pass rush blows your contention that its the reason we didn't advance further out the window.

Where we advanced to is proof that my reason we didn't advance further is wrong? That makes no sense.

We didn't lose the 2011 superbowl because of a poor pass rush

The Giants didn't walk right down the field for the game winning TD? Eli Manning didnt sit back and complete 75% of his passes for 300 yards with no consistent pressure?

In fact we wound up 2nd in sacks during that post season, and had more sacks in the superbowl than the Giants did.

If you want to pretend that sack totals define the amount of pressure you had on the QB, why bother discussing the topic?

Nor did we lose the AFCCG because of it. We lost that game because we had 5 trips into the red zone and only one TD. We lost that game because we had 2 TO's and got none back.

We lost because we allowed the Ravens to drive 197 yards in 3 consecutive drives with no pass rush, no resistance, and a defense that got it to 3rd down 1 time in 3 TD drives. That is as bad as a defense and pass rush can be.

Again, let me repeat. I'm all for a improving the pass rush, but merely replacing Ninkovich ISN'T the answer, and we'd be hard pressed to find someone who would improve on his overall production.

Do you actually watch games? Ninkovich went entire games without sniffing the QB. He was never near the QB, almost at all besides his 8 sacks. What is 'overall production'? He had 8 sacks, less pressure than most any starting DE in the league, and was below avg vs the run (because he was playing a position he just isnt stout enough to play).

If pass rush improves it will be because of a changing mindset schematically.

Why not improve the players doing the pass rushing? Why keep weak pass rushers and expose the secondary to try to scheme for a pass rush? When we do that our weak pass rushers don't get there, and we give up big plays. Players make plays not schemes.

It will be because we blitz more. and finally improve our back end coverage.

The secondary is screwed if we blitz with this talent level rushing the QB.

Vrabel was a DE in college and played a lot DE when he was with Pittsburgh.

That not relevant to whether Ninkovichs is producing like Vrabel unless you are talking about Vrabel in Pitt.

My comparison of Vrabel and Ninkovich is because regardless of position, their primary role was as edge rushers

That is absolutely not true. Until 2007 Vrabel rarely rushed the passer. McGinest or Colvin was in the rush every down OLB role. Vrabel was in coverage, and didn't play DE in the sub more than maybe 1/3 of the time until 2007, playing mostly in coverage.

, whether it was as a 3-4 OLB or a 4-3 DE - and calling player with 60 tackles 5 forced fumbles and an interception "over matched is what's ignorant, not my comparing Vrabel to Ninkovich

Ninkovich made 32 tackles, 2 per game, and assisted on 26 others, less than 2 per game.
2012 New England Patriots Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com
Please explain how making 2 tackles a game is proof he wasn't overmatched by RTs in the run game. Again, do you watch? He had a horrendous time getting off blocks of 300+lb RTs. Are you honestly telling me you think he didnt?

No doubt sack totals are but part of the puzzle, but if you check his "hurries" and "QB hits" stats you'll find that are comparable to his sack totals.

Ummm, no you won't, that is the point.

Now I'm certainly not saying he's any kind of elite player. But he IS a very good one.

Very good? Very good players go to probowls, control games, and consistently get the job done. As an OLB he may be average or a bit above. As a DE he is below average. How many NFL teams do you think would pursue Rob Ninkovich to start at LDE for them? If he were very good the number would be around 25. Since he is what he is that number is under 10.

A very dependable one and over the last 2 years one of 3 or 4 best defensive players on the team.

So which of
Wilfork
Jones
Spikes
Mayo
McCourty
Hightower
do you think he is better than? The answer is none, and the only guys left to say he is better than are guys we need to replace.

There are a number of players I'd like to see replaced or improved on before you get to Rob Ninkovich

No, not really.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but the DL is only a part of the pass rush equation.

By miles and miles the most important part. When your DL lacks pass rush skills you can't blitz because you still don't get to the QB and you leave your secondary exposed while gaining little.

Even if your scenario comes to pass, I expect our pass rush to be much improved next season, even if only because I think the increased aggressiveness we saw at the end of the season will continue on into this one.

Outside of the Miami game, the pass rush was pretty weak no matter what scheme we played. We certainly sucked in the AFCCG rushing the passer.

I see our back end getting stronger with Dowling getting back, Dennard's 2nd year jump, and the potential additions we make either to S or CB. I think a healthy Jones who will be more experienced and stronger will be a key aspect to an improved rush. I even have hopes for a better interior pass rush from the likes of Armstead, Deadrick, Pryor, and Cunningham.

Aside from Jones, you didnt name a single man who has proven to be a good NFL football player. We can sit here and name guys on the roster and pretend they will all of sudden become good, do nothing and be back here next year disagreeing about what the reason the defense sucked was. I'm tired of it. We have 6 good defensive players, and a 7th (Dennard) who looks promising. Why don't we add talent to that, in the area that it is most lacking: The ability of individual players to beat their blocker and rush the QB.
You can't possibly find more than a handful of dysfunctional teams that have less individual pass rush talent than we do. It is as bad as any aspect of the team.

All that combined might not make the Pats pass rush "fearsome", just better and more consistent and effective, AND the reason why I would expect Rob Ninkovich to wind up with 10 sacks even though its my sincerest hope that he, along with Vince, will playfar fewer snaps

So you are going to hand him 2 more sacks than he ever had, because????you need it for your argument? you like his beard? You have nothing more intelligent to post?
But then you want him off the field.
How about we go sign a guy that we want to be on the field? Wouldnt that be better?

 

[Ring 6]

Gregory is a rotational guy at best and Wilson hasn't shown much to indicate he's a starting caliber player.

I'm OK playing them next to a top level safety with an improved pass rush.
Much more than I am having a different secondary behind a front 7 that cant sniff the QB.

What is your plan? Sign a top corner and a top safety, and ignore the pass rush deficiencies?

 

[Deus Irae]

Gregory is a rotational guy at best and Wilson hasn't shown much to indicate he's a starting caliber player.

I agree. Neither player should be starting. If they are, the defense is going to starting off by covering up holes in the secondary again. This defense needs S1. This defense needs CB1. This defense needs CB3. This defense needs CLB (Unless the team is positive Fletcher is that guy, which I doubt). Those are the 4 need positions on the defense for this season, IMO.

 

[supafly]

I don't have any particular numbers at my fingertips. But my general observation was along the lines:

• Players do not generally get much more valuable over the lives of their contracts, rookie contracts excepted. If we adjust for the risk of a career-ending/career-diminishing injury, even the younger ones (such as Mayo) perhaps can't be expected to. Brady and Wilfork certainly can't.
• So if we theoretically matched pay to value, cap hits would stay level or even decline over the life of a contract. They surely wouldn't be back-end loaded.
• Thus, if you back-end load your contracts, you get more talent than you can afford.
• The downside is that when the back-end comes around, you get less talent than you can afford.
• The traditional work-around is to find other contracts to back-end load at that point. Ultimately, this is a Ponzi scheme, although perhaps you can postpone the year of reckoning to some time after your "window of championship opportunity".

It's not a ponzi scheme. It's an accounting tool relative to the cap. As long as this league doesn't fully guarantee contracts, the backend is almost meaningless. Teams who get in trouble generally do so via restructure or investing in crap like the Jets did with Sanchez and guaranteeing mediocre talent money it's not remotely worth.

Thanks for the in depth breakdowns and the knowledge, it is much appreciated. As I said, my knowledge of the cap and contractual issues is limited at best, so it's always great to hear the opinions of respected posters.

I think my opinion would be that maybe I am just too optimistic due to the fact that it seems as though the front office/Belichick have followed a pretty strict protocol when assessing these individuals and the potential deals. There hasn't been the "all or nothing" approach that we've seen with many teams, it's been something much more of a balanced approach that allows the team to always have an eye on the future while doing their best to put a very competitive product on the field.

It's that reason alone why I seem to trust the fact that any deals they will do which mirror the gambling approach of the "bad" or backended deals of other teams will still be done in a somewhat cautious approach that will allow the team to get out of the last year or so if needed with as little backlash as possible. I don't think we can realistically expect all of the bigger deals to work out, and I doubt the team does either; but in the meantime, the approach still remains cautious on a level that overlooks the majority of these deals, and that is probably why I remain confident that a big deal going belly up won't handcuff the team as much as some may feel. There's also the fact that the cap will once again begin to rise more steadily as these years begin to approach their ends, much like MLR stated.

 

[grux]

I agree. Neither player should be starting. If they are, the defense is going to starting off by covering up holes in the secondary again. This defense needs S1. This defense needs CB1. This defense needs CB3. This defense needs CLB (Unless the team is positive Fletcher is that guy, which I doubt). Those are the 4 need positions on the defense for this season, IMO.

Do you think we can sign all of those players and keep Welker?