Gaffney Released

[ivanvamp]

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.

Duh. But when you are evaluating *whether the Patriots should keep or cut a particular WR*, it's not really constructive to do so without considering the larger context of the whole roster. Why? Again, let me illustrate. The Patriots have only so many roster spots and so much money available. They have a particular philosophy for their offense. They just spent a bunch of money this offseason locking up Gronk and Hernandez for years. They're building their offense around the TE position.

Hernandez is a TE, but part of what makes him so valuable is that he can line up as a WR and can get open from there even against most cornerbacks. So even though he's a TE, he can play the WR position.

Perhaps Belichick looks at his roster and says, you know, I can always swing Hernandez out to WR, so that allows me to carry a 4th TE, which will allow us to go real heavy (all 4 TE plus a RB), but out of that formation, I can then split Hernandez wide, etc. Or if a WR gets hurt, I can just use Hernandez as a 4th WR behind Welker, Lloyd, and Branch, and not lose much, if any, production.

The point should be obvious, even to you, Deus. You can evaluate the quality of a WR isolated from other positions, but you cannot reasonably evaluate whether to cut or keep or acquire a particular player without looking at how that impacts the whole.

Because if we're just going to talk about the WR position in isolation, I would say they should do whatever it takes to get Mike Wallace and trade for Larry Fitzgerald and pair them up with Lloyd and Welker. I mean, after all, it would improve the quality and depth of the WR corps tremendously, right?

 

[Frezo]

What is known:
Gaffney is injured and Lloyd isn't.

What's being assumed:
Gaffney won't be injured and Lloyd will be.

:confused2::confused2::confused2:

What else is known:
Neither player was injured in 2010 and 2011.
Gaffney was released without an injury settlement.

What else is being assumed:
That the Pats would have been better last year with a deep threat
so this year they need two.

:confused2::confused2::confused2:

 

[Deus Irae]

Duh. But when you are evaluating *whether the Patriots should keep or cut a particular WR*, it's not really constructive to do so without considering the larger context of the whole roster. Why? Again, let me illustrate. The Patriots have only so many roster spots and so much money available. They have a particular philosophy for their offense. They just spent a bunch of money this offseason locking up Gronk and Hernandez for years. They're building their offense around the TE position.

Hernandez is a TE, but part of what makes him so valuable is that he can line up as a WR and can get open from there even against most cornerbacks. So even though he's a TE, he can play the WR position.

Perhaps Belichick looks at his roster and says, you know, I can always swing Hernandez out to WR, so that allows me to carry a 4th TE, which will allow us to go real heavy (all 4 TE plus a RB), but out of that formation, I can then split Hernandez wide, etc. Or if a WR gets hurt, I can just use Hernandez as a 4th WR behind Welker, Lloyd, and Branch, and not lose much, if any, production.

The point should be obvious, even to you, Deus. You can evaluate the quality of a WR isolated from other positions, but you cannot reasonably evaluate whether to cut or keep or acquire a particular player without looking at how that impacts the whole.

Because if we're just going to talk about the WR position in isolation, I would say they should do whatever it takes to get Mike Wallace and trade for Larry Fitzgerald and pair them up with Lloyd and Welker. I mean, after all, it would improve the quality and depth of the WR corps tremendously, right?

I'm sorry that this seems to be beyond your ken. Let me try to break it down even more:

1.) WR <> TE/RB/OT/OG/C/QB/DT/LB/CB/S

2.) No matter who you have at TE, or how many TEs you have on the team, Deion Branch is still not going to be a 6'6" receiver running a 4.13 forty. He's going to be Deion Branch whether the team has 1 TE or 42 TEs. Edelman will be Edelman, Welker will be Welker, etc....

3.) The number of players from various other positions on the roster does not change the answer to whether or not the Patriots currently have more than one WR capable of being a legitimate threat middle-deep, or the number of slot wrs, or the number of wide receivers who are over 6' tall, etc...

I hope that helps.

 

[lamafist]

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.

Look, you're a smart guy, so I kind of have to assume you're playing dumb here to a certain degree. I mean, clearly you understand the difference between evaluating a player and evaluating the most effective use of a roster spot, right?

If the Pats were going to keep Gaffney on the 75 man roster, someone else would have to come off it. That someone could be another receiver, or it could be, say, a backup nose tackle. That is the reality of the situation, and you have to take that into account when judging the decision to cut someone or not.

I mean, if you don't constrain your reasoning to the reality of the 75-man roster, then you should logically be against every single cut.

 

[goheels22002]

If the Pats were going to keep Gaffney on the 75 man roster, someone else would have to come off it. That someone could be another receiver, or it could be, say, a backup nose tackle. That is the reality of the situation, and you have to take that into account when judging the decision to cut someone or not.

I figured it out. You are Dan Snyder. He's the only guy in the NFL who would go out, pay some free agent huge money, foist him on his head coach and say, "don't worry about it. This guy is a great wide receiver. All you have to do is cut, say, a backup nose tackle."

Dan, thank you for stopping by. Now go back to your luxury box and let Coach Shanahan get back to work determining his roster. Opening day is in 12 days.

 

[ivanvamp]

Look, you're a smart guy, so I kind of have to assume you're playing dumb here to a certain degree. I mean, clearly you understand the difference between evaluating a player and evaluating the most effective use of a roster spot, right?

If the Pats were going to keep Gaffney on the 75 man roster, someone else would have to come off it. That someone could be another receiver, or it could be, say, a backup nose tackle. That is the reality of the situation, and you have to take that into account when judging the decision to cut someone or not.

I mean, if you don't constrain your reasoning to the reality of the 75-man roster, then you should logically be against every single cut.

I have to be honest here....I am coming to the conclusion that he doesn't see the difference between what he's talking about and what we're talking about. And it's too bad, because we could be having a constructive conversation otherwise.

 

[IcyPatriot]

305 posts about gaffney ... we need the season to begin real soon.

 

[ivanvamp]

I'm sorry that this seems to be beyond your ken. Let me try to break it down even more:

1.) WR <> TE/RB/OT/OG/C/QB/DT/LB/CB/S

2.) No matter who you have at TE, or how many TEs you have on the team, Deion Branch is still not going to be a 6'6" receiver running a 4.13 forty. He's going to be Deion Branch whether the team has 1 TE or 42 TEs. Edelman will be Edelman, Welker will be Welker, etc....

3.) The number of players from various other positions on the roster does not change the answer to whether or not the Patriots currently have more than one WR capable of being a legitimate threat middle-deep, or the number of slot wrs, or the number of wide receivers who are over 6' tall, etc...

I hope that helps.

That whooshing sound is the point going right over your head. Which, given how many times this has now been explained and illustrated to you, is pretty hard to believe.

 

[supafly]

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

I think the debate is that Meriweather would have certainly been an upgrade over Barrett, Brown, and Ihedigbo. I would think that most would agree.

Whether or not we would have won the SB is debatable, but he certainly has a point that it could have been one of the 6-8 reasons that would have allowed us to overcome a deficit on the roster.

I couldn't pick a side of the argument myself b/c there are too many variables, but the thought that NOT getting rid of Meriweather may have helped is not exactly crazy.

 

[BradyFTW!]

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.

Are they better than Sergio Brown and Josh Barrett?

If the answer is yes, then cutting them may well have cost us a SB win. Doesn't matter whether or not they're good - they just have to be better than dog ****, because that's what we replaced them with.

 

[Deus Irae]

That whooshing sound is the point going right over your head. Which, given how many times this has now been explained and illustrated to you, is pretty hard to believe.

Given that you're the one who jumped in late and tried to change the discussion, I'd say that any "whoosh" sound came from above you. No matter how often you try arguing otherwise, discussing the WRs does not require a discussion of the entire roster.

 

[Rob0729]

Are they better than Sergio Brown and Josh Barrett?

If the answer is yes, then cutting them may well have cost us a SB win. Doesn't matter whether or not they're good - they just have to be better than dog ****, because that's what we replaced them with.

First, this is not the 2011 safety situation whatsoever no matter how much you harp on it. There is no way to say that Gaffney would be a starter right now if he was healthy. At best he would be the Pats' #3 WR and could be even behind Branch on the depth chart. The Pats clearly upgraded the WR position with Lloyd. Unlike the safety position last year, the Pats currently have two capable starters at WR and a solid back up.

Second, saying that the Pats lost the Super Bowl because they didn't keep Sanders or Meriweather is complete and utter BS. Everyone wants to spin the reason the Pats lost to fit their agenda. In this thread alone you are arguing that if the Pats didn't cut Sanders or Meriweather the Pats might have won while others say if the Pats had Gaffney the Pats might have won.

The fact of the matter is the Pats were one minute away from winning the Super Bowl and the team as constituted without Sanders, Meriweather, or Gaffney could have won that game is any one or two of about a dozen plays went differently. Besides, if this team was a James Sanders or Brandon Meriweather away from winning the Super Bowl last year, doesn't the addition of Stephen Gregory along with the addition of Lloyd on offense put the Pats over the top?

Third, the season is over two weeks away and we do not know if Belichick has something else planned or that Gaffney might be back by the end of September. People are just overracting like they always do like everyone who were predicting the Pats to be one and done in the playoffs when they cut Sanders and Meriweather.

Sorry to take it out on you, but we are still talking about a back up WR who may be back as soon as the second game of the season. Gaffney is not going to make or break this team especially since the Pats upgraded the starting position. I wish they didn't cut him, but he is a friggin back up.

 

[Rob0729]

I think the debate is that Meriweather would have certainly been an upgrade over Barrett, Brown, and Ihedigbo. I would think that most would agree.

Whether or not we would have won the SB is debatable, but he certainly has a point that it could have been one of the 6-8 reasons that would have allowed us to overcome a deficit on the roster.

I couldn't pick a side of the argument myself b/c there are too many variables, but the thought that NOT getting rid of Meriweather may have helped is not exactly crazy.

It might have helped, but to act like last year was a complete disaster without him is a little ridiculous. Having Meriweather on the roster wouldn't have prevented the safety in the endzone (coming off a stop by the defense BTW), Brady seriously underthrowing Gronk on the INT, Brady and Welker not hooking up in what would have probably sealed a win for the Pats, Mankins playing with a torn ACL, Gronk being barely able to walk and playing, and any one of a dozen real reasons the Pats lost the Super Bowl.

 

[Rob0729]

Back to the Gaffney struggling in camp, here is a comment from Paul Perrillo on it:

Gaffney was similarly inconsistent this summer before injuring his right leg while tracking a deep pass during practice. He missed the last two games with the ailment, and it’s possible that Belichick is simply waiting for the veteran to return to full health before re-signing him. But based on his performance, Gaffney’s return is no sure thing.

Official Patriots Football Weekly Blog | Paul’s Calls: Gaffney, Stallworth sent packing

 

[Sciz]

Are they better than Sergio Brown and Josh Barrett?

That's awfully irrelevant, considering that neither Brown nor Barrett played on defense in the Super Bowl. Whether they're better than Ihedigbo (59 snaps) is what matters.

 

[WinstonSmith]

Are they better than Sergio Brown and Josh Barrett?

If the answer is yes, then cutting them may well have cost us a SB win. Doesn't matter whether or not they're good - they just have to be better than dog ****, because that's what we replaced them with.

Or maybe by cutting them it allowed the Pats to get to the SB.

Or maybe when Meriweather was cut he breathed out deeply, which led to a butterfly in Africa to land on a Lion's nose, who sneezed, which caused a hippo to burp, which altered the wind currents slightly, which ultimately caused hurricane Isaac, which altered storm patterns, which, on 2/3/2013, created a gust of wind that pushed the potential game winning field goal wide right --- leading to to a Patriots' Super Bowl victory.

 

[BradyFTW!]

It might have helped, but to act like last year was a complete disaster without him is a little ridiculous. Having Meriweather on the roster wouldn't have prevented the safety in the endzone (coming off a stop by the defense BTW), Brady seriously underthrowing Gronk on the INT, Brady and Welker not hooking up in what would have probably sealed a win for the Pats, Mankins playing with a torn ACL, Gronk being barely able to walk and playing, and any one of a dozen real reasons the Pats lost the Super Bowl.

I'm going to drop it, since this is drifting pretty far off topic, but I'd think that anyone who watched the secondary at any point last year would freely acknowledge how much of a disaster the safety position was. If that's not beyond debate, nothing is.

 

[ATippett56]

That's awfully irrelevant, considering that neither Brown nor Barrett played on defense in the Super Bowl. Whether they're better than Ihedigbo (59 snaps) is what matters.

Just a footnote, James Ihedigbo and Sergio Brown are still on the New England Patriots roster.

 

[patsfan-1982]

this is not a skock to me Jabar Gaffney is a 32 year old WR who was never realy anything more then a #4 for the pats when he was in he's 20's

 

[ivanvamp]

Given that you're the one who jumped in late and tried to change the discussion, I'd say that any "whoosh" sound came from above you. No matter how often you try arguing otherwise, discussing the WRs does not require a discussion of the entire roster.

<sigh> I'll try one last time (why, I don't know). You aren't simply discussing the wide receivers. You are discussing the merits of keeping or cutting one particular receiver, Jabar Gaffney, and, in light of cutting him, what that did to the quality and depth of the Pats' WR corps.

Ok? Understand that? You were discussing, really, not the wide receivers, but *ROSTER DECISIONS INVOLVING WIDE RECEIVERS*.

And if you're discussing roster decisions involving wide receivers, then it's pretty dumb to do that in isolation of the rest of the roster, because, as was pointed out earlier, if you keep Gaffney (or anyone else), you need to cut someone else, and maybe BB decided that he's very comfortable with the WR group, b/c maybe Demps is showing him something, or maybe Hernandez will be used more outside, or whatever, and that flexibility allows BB to keep another player *at a different position* that he thinks will help the team more than Gaffney would.

I don't think language exists that could communicate this more clearly. If you think you were simply talking about which receiver is better than another, and comparing WR groups just for fun, ok, fine, yes, you can do that without mentioning nose tackles or kickers. But this thread is titled, "Gaffney Released" - it's about...you know...a roster move involving a wide receiver.