Future Extension for Cooks

[RobertWeathers]

Because there is a good chance BB feels like he can have 80% of that production for 50% of the money. I think you are getting hung up on that first round pick too much. That pick was primarily for 2 years of a known commodity that needs no development and can produce immediately at cheap.

Again we are all basing this off what happened this year so far. I like Cooks and think that we are not using him close to his potential yet but everything he has shown so far is not worth a market rate WR contract to me. But that is as much his fault as it is the fault of Brady and McDaniels.

In this offense with this QB?

I don't think there is a good chance at all to get 800 yds and 48 catches for $7m.

I am focused on the 1st rounder because that is a big chip to give up for a player who will only be here for 2 years.

You hit the nail on the head. I think they have held him back some.

 

[TomPatriot]

Because there is a good chance BB feels like he can have 80% of that production for 50% of the money. I think you are getting hung up on that first round pick too much. That pick was primarily for 2 years of a known commodity that needs no development and can produce immediately at cheap.

Again we are all basing this off what happened this year so far. I like Cooks and think that we are not using him close to his potential yet but everything he has shown so far is not worth a market rate WR contract to me. But that is as much his fault as it is the fault of Brady and McDaniels.

I wouldn’t be 100% sure you will need to pay him at market rate. Frankly, the key to all NFL contracts is guaranteed money.

 

[PF_SU]

Very interesting. His catch rate on deep passes is very, very good.

The stats for his deep passes are

22/41 - 697 yards - 3 TDs - 2 INTs (both by Xavien Howard in Miami) - 17.0 Y/A - 31.7 Y/C

I would guess that this is the most production by a Patriots' receiver on deep passes since 2007 Randy Moss:

21/48 (43.8%) - 748 yards - 10 TDs - 3 INTs - 15.6 Y/A - 35.6 Y/C

And if you compare it to 2007 Moss it's stunning to see that a higher percentage of Cooks' yards have come off deep passes. Moss had a total of 1493 yards that season, 50.1% from deep passes. Cooks has 1003 yards right now, with a whopping 69.5% of his yards coming from deep passes.

If we dive deeper into the numbers, Brady (and Hoyer) combine for 433 short pass attempts this season. The majority of the targets went to:

Gronk: 76/54 - 71.1% catch rate - 687 yards
Dola: 69/52 - 75.4% catch rate - 486 yards
White: 69/54 - 78.3% catch rate - 381 yards
Cooks: 62/38 - 61.3% catch rate - 306 yards
Hogan: 42/30 - 71.4% catch rate - 330 yards
Burkhead: 34/29 - 85.3% catch rate - 235 yards
Lewis: 28/26 - 92.9% catch rate - 174 yards

Breaking it down by game average, Gronk is getting 5.8 short targets per game, Dola and White 4.9, Cooks 4.1, Hogan 4.7. So Cooks is basically option #4 for short passes. And his performance there is underwhelming compared to the others. Here is where film study would be useful in breaking down the reason. Does he have problems getting open on those short passes? Is there a lack of chemistry on the short ones with Brady? Play design?

It's stunning to see the lack of production in the short passing game from Cooks, since he excelled there with the Saints the previous two years. Over that timeframe he got 164 short targets (5.1 per game) and caught 127 (77.4%) for 1086 yards. So there is reason to hope that he can do better in this area.

 

[luuked]

In this offense with this QB?

I don't think there is a good chance at all to get 800 yds and 48 catches for $7m.

This will most probably cause some downvotes but to be honest I haven't been blown away by anything Cooks has done so far this year.

He has been good and consistent and that is worth something by itself but I can't remember a single play this year that made me go "Wow" the same way other top receivers (or Gronk) do.

I don't see why a player like Dorsett (or whatever token speedy guy with good hands) if used exactly as much on the same routes wouldn't be able to get close to 700-800 yards for less money.

I am focused on the 1st rounder because that is a big chip to give up for a player who will only be here for 2 years.

Given how we are drafting consistently in the high 20s (or 30s) I tend to think about all of this essentially as a situation where you can get 2 out of 3:

a) high talent
b) cheap
c) contract length

You can get someone who is cheap and on a longer contract but this usually means that he is not as good or at least needs some development.

You can also get someone highly talented and a long contract but that means it wont be cheap.

And finally you can get the highly talented guy for cheap but that usually only via the rare trade around the end of their contracts.

To have a shot a player that fulfills all 3 (i.e. blue chip player) you need to tank or have a very bad year.

 

[maineman209]

Given how we are drafting consistently in the high 20s (or 30s) I tend to think about all of this essentially as a situation where you can get 2 out of 3:

a) high talent
b) cheap
c) contract length

When I was working in corporate IT, urgent requests for new software package migrations from heads of non-techie departments (e.g., the satanic cult known as "Marketing"), the response from project managers was always the same:

"We can implement this quickly.
We can implement this cheaply.
We can implement this so that it will work trouble-free.

Pick two."

 

[tom444]

I played WR all my life. I love the position, I love how much one reception can mean for a victory

That being said, WR is THE most overrated position in the NFL. Even in a great day, a WR would only touch the ball close to 10% of the offensive snaps. Even a great WR becomes useless if there isn't a QB to throw him the ball or an OL who gives the QB time to throw.

You can receive similar production out of cheaper contracts VERY easily. One example doesn't prove the point, but take last years Championship games: Julio Jones and Chris Hogan both had 186 yards (don't remember if they had the same number of catches, but it was close).

Great WRs can't change a game by themselves. Think of great WRs that simply couldn't elevate their teams alone, recent examples: Calvin Johnson, AJ Green.

In the era of the salary cap, i think it's a plain mistake to pay a WR too much money for too long. This money could be better distributed to other areas and you can get performance out of cheap WR. I've actually done some research on this: The last time a team with a WR that took more than 10% of the cap won the Super Bowl was in 2006, with the Colts (Marvin Harrison).

I love Cooks. He's a great player, but I would not pay top dollar for him or any other WR.

I both agree and disagree with your take. Yes, wide recievers need a supporting cast. However, given that cast the great ones can make a good team a truely great team. Yet again, as we've seen here, multiple average to above average recievers can elevate a team also. So, would I pay Cooks the big bucks, no. I like the guy a lot, if who we've seen in public is who he is. I'd be disapointed if we lost him. But there have only been a few recievers that are worth the big bucks in my mind. Randy Moss, Larry Fitzgerald, to name two. Gronk, while not a WR, is a reciever worth the money.

 

[maineman209]

He has been good and consistent and that is worth something by itself but I can't remember a single play this year that made me go "Wow" the same way other top receivers (or Gronk) do.

Given the Pats' history of difficulties integrating new pass-catchers (WRs & TEs, primarily) into their offensive system ...

And given the fact that three of the Pats top pass-catchers from last season became suddenly and unexpectedly unavailable at the last minute (plus, Bennett was gone in FA) ...

While I, too, have not been "Wowed" by any single play from Cooks (comparisons to Gronk are kinda unfair here), I think Cooks' body of work for the season has been pretty impressive.

Looking forward ...

There's tomorrow and (hopefully) three playoff games remaining (including the SB). There's at least some possibility that both Mitchell and Hogan are back on the field for at least some of those, legitimately drawing coverage away from Cooks a bit. So, there may be some opportunities left for Cooks to make a "Wow" play or two yet this season.

Then there's Free Agency, during which we'll see what actually happens to the market price of veteran WRs in 2018. At this point, we only have the Jeffery and Adams contract extensions to go by.

After that, there's the draft - which may or may not bring another 6-8 really good, young WRs into the market.

After that, there's the Pats own roster-building process through OTAs and into Camp, during which time BB and the coaches will have further opportunities to observe what more Cooks may be able to do (and Amednola/Edelman/Hogan/Mitchell/Dorsett/whoever).

So, the Pats don't really need to decide on an extension offer amount for Cooks until they have more information, and there's a lot more of that coming.

 

[BigPharma]

IDK.

Cobb is 27 years old and has been maintaining a 67%-72% catch rate for most of his career (72% this season) at ~10 ypc as a possession receiver. He's also been an excellent punt returner (back up to Trevor Davis the past two seasons).

Nelson is 32 and has been more of a downfield threat for them, even though he's a "slot receiver". He's been Rodgers' favorite tgt and biggest yardage and TD producer since 2011. However, his catch rate began declining back in 2014 from 67%+ to below 64% in 2016 while his YPC also declined.

Both are UFA at the end of 2018, so both seem to be candidates for extensions that reduce their future cap hits.

BTW - Prior to Adams' extension, the Packers had about $42M in 2018 cap space. So they're not really hurting.

Cobb is getting paid as much as the best in the league @ 12.5M next year. I can't see them keeping someone putting up 600 yards a season regardless of catch percentage. He's also been steadily declining since his injury - I look at it like how we pay Amendola... I'd pay 5 million tops.

 

[maineman209]

So, would I pay Cooks the big bucks, no.

Current APY ranges:

Top-five (Antonio Brown thru Demaryius Thomas) = $17M - $14M
Next five (down thru Keenan Allen) = $13M - $11.2M
3rd five (down thru Allen Hurns) = $11.1M - $10.1M
4th five (down thru Marvin Jones) = $10M - $8M

That's just for 2017. The Alshon Jeffery and Davante Adams contracts will already be pushing everybody downward from about #6. Also note that the real-world contributions of at least a few of the top-20 aren't particularly commensurate with their pay (and none are particularly "underpaid").

So, define "big bucks".

 

[luuked]

When I was working in corporate IT, urgent requests for new software package migrations from heads of non-techie departments (e.g., the satanic cult known as "Marketing"), the response from project managers was always the same:

"We can implement this quickly.
We can implement this cheaply.
We can implement this so that it will work trouble-free.

Pick two."

Yeah thats pretty much exactly where I was coming from. The classic software engineering / project management triangle...

 

[luuked]

I both agree and disagree with your take. Yes, wide recievers need a supporting cast. However, given that cast the great ones can make a good team a truely great team. Yet again, as we've seen here, multiple average to above average recievers can elevate a team also. So, would I pay Cooks the big bucks, no. I like the guy a lot, if who we've seen in public is who he is. I'd be disapointed if we lost him. But there have only been a few recievers that are worth the big bucks in my mind. Randy Moss, Larry Fitzgerald, to name two. Gronk, while not a WR, is a reciever worth the money.

That is on some level the good old Chandler Jones argument. If you have someone who wants (close to) tier 1 money he better be a game changing force like Watt or Donald. Those players are -- like Gronk -- worth their top of the line money because they fundamentally change how the other team operates.

It really is the second tier of players that have great looking stats but are either inconsistent, streaky or just stats compilers that you want to avoid paying a lot of money to. Those are great players to have on rookie contracts because their production relative to their salary is pretty good.

And once you get to the middle class of players there is a ton of value to be had if you have a good vision of your schemes and a great pro scouting department. Who would you rather have ? Marvin Jones for 8.6m or Chris Hogan for 3.5m next year ?

This is where we feast..

 

[maineman209]

Cobb is getting paid as much as the best in the league @ 12.5M next year. I can't see them keeping someone putting up 600 yards a season regardless of catch percentage. He's also been steadily declining since his injury - I look at it like how we pay Amendola... I'd pay 5 million tops.

Cobb's cap it is actually $12.675M for 2018 in the last year of his previous deal - none of it guaranteed except for the final pro-rated payment on his signing bonus. There are at least 15 WRs who will be hitting the cap for more than that - several for significantly more - in the middle years of their deals, with guarantees above and beyond signing bonus payments.

Cobb is just turning 28 next season. The Packers could offer him a 3-year extension through 2021 that would yield a 4-year APY around $7M-$7.5M (no guarantees beyond 2019). By 2021, $7M a year will likely seem pretty cheap.

But $5M? He'll likely get more from another from another team and be a solid contributor for them for another four years.

 

[supafly]

Devante Adams’ new pact is worth 14.5m a year and pays him 32m in the first two years. That’s a lot of money for him in my opinion.

When Randy Moss set the NFL record with 23 TD catches, negotiations went all the way to FA and lasted days with him fielding multiple offers, where he eventually had to turn down other deals and take a hometown discount just to stay at below market value. This isn’t a position that Belichick has lost sleep over based on the fact that he moved on from Deion Branch in his prime, Randy Moss in 2010, and Wes Welker a few years later. He hasn’t shown much of a tendency to hand out big 50-60m dollar deals, has he?

Unless Cooks steps up his game, he isn’t likely to be viewed as worth close to 15m a year. Just my opinion. 12m a year? Maybe, 13m a year? Maybe, but we’ll cross that bridge when we get to it in the spring of 2019 based on how he progresses next season, and that’s still a boatload of cash. The fact that he gave up a first rounder for what should be assumed as two solid years of good value means nothing to a coach who hasn’t gotten much of anything out of his first rounders since 2012. Hopefully, Malcolm Brown changes that.

 

[stinkypete]

We can add Davonte Adam's deal to the list of comps. $14M per year is big money for a WR.

The problem with Cooks' value specific to the Patriots is that his skillset makes him a #3-#4 option in this system. The passing game is built around the slot, the TE and the RB, Cooks currently is an extra dimension.

I think we are looking at a similar situation to that of Brady/Garoppolo. Belichick knows he has until 2019 to make a decision on Cooks. This gives him a year to feel out Edelman's return from the ACL and Gronk's health overall. If both are healthy and productive and indicate plans to play long term, then Cooks may be an odd man out. If one declines, then Cooks has much more value to the team.

 

[RayClay]

Well, market price = flexibility of demand + perceived scarcity. Has nothing whatsoever to do with any objective "value" proposition. There are a lot of goods and service that I need (inflexible demand) that I think are overpriced, but there's nothing much I can do about it. It is what it is.

With 3+ years of consistently elite (or near elite) production already at his young age, demand for Cooks' services is almost certain to be high enough to generate offers in the $15M+ APY range, if he becomes a UFA at the end of 2018 . That's simply the reality, whether we think it's "right" or not.

The other reality is that Hogan turns 30 next October, Edelman turns 32 in May, and Amendola turns 33 next November. Guys like these (and Welker and Moss) make it seem like the Pats always come up with WRs who way out-produce their relative pay grade, but the reality is that the Pats have also had way more misses than hits. We may be happy with having these guys "on the cheap", but that simply isn't going to last much longer. And, behind Hogan, Edeman and Amendola, for 2018 the Pats currently have only Mitchell, Dorsett and Cooks.

At the moment, $15M seems like a lot, but, if the cap continues to rise at its recent rate, by Year-4 of a 5-year contract, that "extravagance" may seem like a relative bargain (assuming Cooks maintains his current productivity level).

I'm guessing that a Pats' extension offer next season might max out at ~ $12.5M plus a lot of incentives. After that, it's up to Cooks.

Obviously, the Patriots have not found a top dollar wide receiver to be a necessity for winning super bowls, therefore the substitution effect is in order. As long as they can find Edelman's, Hogans, Amendola's, Welkers. Branches, Troy Browns, and win SBs, the marginal utility of a 15 million dollar contract is not positive.

The opportunity cost of an extra 10 million a year could be a top DL or OL, or both.

 

[RayClay]

I would just point out that this discussion is really about 2019. We're all set for 2018 (even if one of the six doesn't make it into 2018 for health reasons:

COOKS
EDELMAN
HOGAN
AMENDOLA
DORSETT
MITCHELL

We even have a backup returner and #7 WR in Reedy.
========
That being said, Belichick and Cooks may be willing to sign a long-term deal. However, it needn't be completed early in the next off-season.

Reedy?

 

[supafly]

Reedy?

The next great WR waiting in the wings.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

What the heck is Gronk worth on the open market if Cooks is around $12M???

 

[luuked]

The problem with Cooks' value specific to the Patriots is that his skillset makes him a #3-#4 option in this system. The passing game is built around the slot, the TE and the RB, Cooks currently is an extra dimension.

You are substantially undervalueing how much he affects coverages and his ability to create space with certain routes. It actually doesnt matter what happens post snap and who ends up being the target. As long as Cooks is on the field and looks like a viable target the opponent has to respect him.

 

[RobertWeathers]

This will most probably cause some downvotes but to be honest I haven't been blown away by anything Cooks has done so far this year.

He has been good and consistent and that is worth something by itself but I can't remember a single play this year that made me go "Wow" the same way other top receivers (or Gronk) do.

I don't see why a player like Dorsett (or whatever token speedy guy with good hands) if used exactly as much on the same routes wouldn't be able to get close to 700-800 yards for less money.




Given how we are drafting consistently in the high 20s (or 30s) I tend to think about all of this essentially as a situation where you can get 2 out of 3:

a) high talent
b) cheap
c) contract length

You can get someone who is cheap and on a longer contract but this usually means that he is not as good or at least needs some development.

You can also get someone highly talented and a long contract but that means it wont be cheap.

And finally you can get the highly talented guy for cheap but that usually only via the rare trade around the end of their contracts.

To have a shot a player that fulfills all 3 (i.e. blue chip player) you need to tank or have a very bad year.

I philosophically 100% agree with your approach to team building. I'm all in. I just don't think the chances are strong they just up and find someone.

I also think the gap between Cooks and Dorsett is the size of the Grand Canyon.

I think we disagree on Cooks's current/future value. The play vs HOU to win the game was elite.