Gaffney Released

[Rob0729]

Appeals to authority won't accomplish anything. Logical fallacies 101.

Not to mention that the Patriots have proven to be plenty fallible in personnel evaluation over the past few years, and at least a couple of those failings were apparent even as they were happening.

I can't remember many players they cut that came back to haunt them. You can say they have made some mistakes in acquiring a player, but they are rarely wrong when they let a player go.

 

[Deus Irae]

...That's why I say you can't look at this simply in isolation. And for that, you think I'm insane.

:bricks:

Of course it's insane.

 

[ivanvamp]

Of course it's insane.

Now I know you're just playing with me because that is almost certainly the stupidest thing ever typed into a keyboard and sent into patsfans.com.

And I know you cannot possibly be that stupid.

 

[Rob0729]

1. QB is obvious. Pretty big drop off going from the GOAT to Hoyer.

2. This team is a RBBC pass-first team. Losing any one of Ridley, Woodhead, Vereen, Bolden, or Demps isn't going to hurt as bad as losing a Lloyd or a Welker.

3. I like the depth currently at LB. Could it improve? Sure. But there's more depth there than there is at WR right now. So I'll just disagree there.

4. Given what Cannon has looked like, I think OT can be comparable to WR in the event of injury to either Vollmer or Solder as compared to Lloyd or Welker. The difference is that the team hasn't released Cannon.

Given the bolded, though, I'll drop it at this time.

1.) To say that the OT position is comparable to WR position is a stretch. If Vollmer or Solder go down, they are replaced by an unproven second year player playing out of what is his natural position in the NFL and has been getting schooled all preseason. If Welker or Lloyd go down, they are replaced by a a former starter who has a great relationship with Brady and started most of the games last year.

2.) Until proven otherwise, there is a significant drop off from Ridley and the rest of the backs in terms of a rusher. Typically even if a RBBC, the Pats have a primary RB.

3.) As for the LBs, after Carpenter they got Koutovedes and Tarpenian. That's it. I don't think any of them are good enough to start. Carpenter will be a very goof situational guy. I disagree there is more depth there.

 

[Deus Irae]

Now I know you're just playing with me because that is almost certainly the stupidest thing ever typed into a keyboard and sent into patsfans.com.

And I know you cannot possibly be that stupid.

I'm not playing with you. Your argument that you cannot talk about the WR position in isolation is insane.

 

[ivanvamp]

I'm not playing with you. Your argument that you cannot talk about the WR position in isolation is insane.

It's linguistically possible, but, in the context of roster-shaping (who to cut, who to keep, etc.) it's colossally stupid. And that is the context, because we're discussing the cutting of Jabar Gaffney. No coach or GM, including Belichick, just makes those decisions in isolation from the rest of the roster.

 

[ATippett56]

So are you saying that even though Gaffney is one of Brady's and McDaniels' binkies that they suddenly got stupid and know less than the fans and didn't fight Belichick to cut him.

Belichick is not infallible. Refer to the safety position last year at this time or pissing away valuable draft picks for Ochostinko and Haynesworth.

Again, it is highly likely this was a see you in a few weeks when you have healed type of deal where the Pats re-sign him when he is healthy. If not, Gaffney did something to force himself off the roster.

No one knows for sure what prompted Bill Belichick to release Jabar Gaffney at this point in time.

Either he is injured and the Pats intend to re-sign him when he is healthy or he wasn't good enough to make the roster. If he isn't healthy, he isn't going to help the Pats taking a roster spot and riding a bike in practice.

No one knows for sure the injury status of Jabar Gaffney.

I still don't think losing the #4 WR is that big of a deal. The Pats still have more receiving weapons than last year. I think he would a nice luxury to have though if healthy and he is good as must of us think.

Depth at all positions is critical, especially at the wide receiver position, since Deion Branch has not been the picture of perfect health throughout his career.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's linguistically possible, but, in the context of roster-shaping (who to cut, who to keep, etc.) it's colossally stupid. And that is the context, because we're discussing the cutting of Jabar Gaffney. No coach or GM, including Belichick, just makes those decisions in isolation from the rest of the roster.

As I said, given your insane position, there's no sense discussing this further. When you realize what every other football-following member of the human race realizes, which is that you can talk about just wide receivers when you are talking about just wide receivers, let me know. At that point, we can take this up again.

 

[Deus Irae]

...Depth at all positions is critical, especially at the wide receiver position, since Deion Branch has not been the picture of perfect health throughout his career.

Not only that, but even looking just at Lloyd shows a need for the depth. In 9 seasons, Lloyd has played a full 16 games only three times.

 

[ivanvamp]

As I said, given your insane position, there's no sense discussing this further. When you realize what every other football-following member of the human race realizes, which is that you can talk about just wide receivers when you are talking about just wide receivers, let me know. At that point, we can take this up again.

Great. You win. The Pats' WRs aren't as good or as deep as some other teams in the league. I wish they had kept Gaffney. I wish the Pats had more depth and talent at the WR position.

There you go. You win the argument. Congratulations.

Now, let's get back to the real world and discuss the WR situation *in the context of the entire roster*, which is what every coach and GM in the football world does.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I can't remember many players they cut that came back to haunt them. You can say they have made some mistakes in acquiring a player, but they are rarely wrong when they let a player go.

Sanders and Meriweather immediately jump to mind. Not to say that they've been great since leaving, but we wouldn't have had a historically bad pass defense (and therefore probably would have won the Super Bowl) if they'd been around instead of Barrett and Brown

 

[Deus Irae]

Great. You win. The Pats' WRs aren't as good or as deep as some other teams in the league. I wish they had kept Gaffney. I wish the Pats had more depth and talent at the WR position.

There you go. You win the argument. Congratulations.

Now, let's get back to the real world and discuss the WR situation *in the context of the entire roster*, which is what every coach and GM in the football world does.

It's not about winning, and it's not about "In the context of the entire roster". "The entire roster" doesn't change the current makeup of the wide receivers, and "the entire roster" didn't change the past makeup of the wide receivers. This is because the wide receivers are the wide receivers regardless of the rest of the roster. As I said, it's a waste of time continuing with this.

 

[ivanvamp]

It's not about winning, and it's not about "In the context of the entire roster". "The entire roster" doesn't change the current makeup of the wide receivers, and "the entire roster" didn't change the past makeup of the wide receivers. This is because the wide receivers are the wide receivers regardless of the rest of the roster. As I said, it's a waste of time continuing with this.

I'm sure that's how conversations in the Patriots' front office go. One guy wants to talk about which receivers to keep and BB says, well, we need to look at them in light of the entire roster. The other guy throws up his hands and says, this is a waste of time...we should just be talking about the wide receivers.

Yeah, I'm sure that's pretty much how it goes.

If you want to just talk about the WRs, what, exactly, do you want to talk about with respect to them? You really should leave out which WRs should stay and which ones should go because, you know, again, that's a conversation that really only makes sense in light of the whole. So.....wanna talk about which patterns you think Welker will run? Which WR will end up with the most yards and catches? Which WR will see the most playing time?

 

[lamafist]

No, you didn't. I'll give you that. But you did try to equate his ability to threaten outside the numbers with Gaffney's.

Last season, Branch caught 34 of his 51 passes on either the right or left sideline. Gaffney caught just 23 of his 68 passes on either sideline.

In 2010, with McDaniels as his coach, he caught 25 of 65 on either sideline, while Branch caught 34 of his 48 passes as a Patriot at the sideline.

And finally, in 2009, also in McDaniels' offense, Gaffney caught 23 of 54 passes at the sideline, while Branch, on the Seahawks, caught 24 of 45 at the sideline.

So, in total, over the past three seasons, 64% of Branch's receptions have been at the sideline, compared to Gaffney's 37%.

In no season did Gaffney have more total sideline catches than Branch, despite having more total receptions than Branch in all of them.

Just saying.

Given the way defenses played our offense to end last season, I'll just end things by saying that I disagree that WR depth is a minor concern.

The Patriots averaged 36.4 points per game in the 2nd half of the season vs. 27.7 in the first half. The Pats scored 30 points or less only once in the 2nd half of the season, as compared to four times in the first half.

The passing game went from averaging 8.4 yards per attempt to 8.8, an INT% of 3.1 as compared to 0.7, and a 100 passer rating to 112.

By all accounts, teams were actually having better luck against our offense earlier in the season rather than later.

 

[lamafist]

It's not about winning, and it's not about "In the context of the entire roster". "The entire roster" doesn't change the current makeup of the wide receivers, and "the entire roster" didn't change the past makeup of the wide receivers. This is because the wide receivers are the wide receivers regardless of the rest of the roster. As I said, it's a waste of time continuing with this.

The decision to cut a player is made exclusively in the context of the entire roster. So if you're going to evaluate the team's decision to cut a player, the only sensible way to do it is in the context of the entire roster.

If you just want to talk about this year's (putative) WR unit to last year's simply in terms of how you expect them to compare, you can do so in isolation -- but as soon as you want to extrapolate from that into assessing personell decisions, you have to start thinking in terms of the entire roster again, or else your judgement ceases to be tethered to the reality of building the team.

 

[Deus Irae]

The decision to cut a player is made exclusively in the context of the entire roster. So if you're going to evaluate the team's decision to cut a player, the only sensible way to do it is in the context of the entire roster.

If you just want to talk about this year's (putative) WR unit to last year's simply in terms of how you expect them to compare, you can do so in isolation -- but as soon as you want to extrapolate from that into assessing personell decisions, you have to start thinking in terms of the entire roster again, or else your judgement ceases to be tethered to the reality of building the team.

There's got to be something in the water for some of you. When evaluating a WR, you don't talk about the NT, for crying out loud.

 

[Rob0729]

Belichick is not infallible. Refer to the safety position last year at this time or pissing away valuable draft picks for Ochostinko and Haynesworth.

First, I said Belichick is rarely wrong about when to let players go. Almost every player he has released has not played well elsewhere.

As for Ochocinco and Haynesworth, both were low risk, high reward type of players. Everyone acknowledged especially with Haynesworth that neither might workout.

No one knows for sure what prompted Bill Belichick to release Jabar Gaffney at this point in time.

But everyone is killing him for it because they know better than Belichick. What if Belichick had a legitimate reason or there is a handshake agreement to bring him back when he is healthy? People rather kill him.

No one knows for sure the injury status of Jabar Gaffney.

Yet many of the people complaining seem to assume he is fine.

Depth at all positions is critical, especially at the wide receiver position, since Deion Branch has not been the picture of perfect health throughout his career.

Neither Branch nor Lloyd have missed a game for health reasons in two years. Welker hasn't missed many games throughout his career.

 

[goheels22002]

If you just want to talk about this year's (putative) WR unit to last year's simply in terms of how you expect them to compare, you can do so in isolation -- but as soon as you want to extrapolate from that into assessing personell decisions, you have to start thinking in terms of the entire roster again, or else your judgement ceases to be tethered to the reality of building the team.

It is not how we expect them to compare - it's that they are virtually identical. The Patriots are the definition of stability. The coach - same old grumpy dude. Owner - same dude with white collars and devoted son.

If Waters comes back, the starting offense will be the same nine guys plus Brandon Lloyd instead of Ocho and Stevan Ridley instead of Green-Ellis. Big woop. Put another way, it's the same offense that went 13-3 last year. The WR corps is the same too with a possible upgrade with Lloyd.

Kicking game? Zero change.

Defense? Significant changes with stability at all three levels. The key guys are the same - Wilfork/Mayo/Chung.

I doubt there is a team with fewer changes in the league.

 

[Rob0729]

Sanders and Meriweather immediately jump to mind. Not to say that they've been great since leaving, but we wouldn't have had a historically bad pass defense (and therefore probably would have won the Super Bowl) if they'd been around instead of Barrett and Brown

Getting rid of Sanders and Meriweather were not bad moves in themselves. Both players are on their third team in two years. Meriweather was benched by the Bears for poor play and not resigned and signed with the Redskins. Sanders had a mediocre season last year with the Falcons and was signed this year with the Cardinals. Meriweather was uncoachable.

You can slam the Pats for not having adequate replacements, but neither Sanders nor Meriweather are any good anymore. Again, I have said that Belichick makes more mistakes evaluating players he acquires than releases.

 

[Keyser Söze]

We would have won the SB with Meriweather? he's atrocious.