Welcome to PatsFans.com

If the Patriots can trade Samuel its a BIG win

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by solman, Jun 5, 2007.

  1. solman

    solman Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    BB/SP, masters of the cap game, are quietly thanking their lucky stars that Asante has announced his intention to hold out.

    Here's why:

    If Asante plays for us next year it is a one year $7.8M bet on his on the field performance.

    If Asante plays at the level of an average pro bowl corner back, the bet is a push. We paid $7.8M, and we got roughly the same amount of talent.

    If Asante plays like the best CB in the NFL, he's worth $10M-12M. We win the bet by $2-4M.

    If Asante plays like he did during the first 75% of his NFL career (or worse, get injured) he's worth maybe $2M of cap space. We lose $6M (or more).

    Unless you think that Asante is a future hall of famer, this is a lousy bet.

    Factoring in a few our need for Asante this season, I think it would be a modestly positive event if he plays for us on the tag this season. But nobody should be jumping up and down at the prospect of paying $7.8M for one year of Asante. The expected value of his talent is roughly equal to (probably a little less than) what we'd be paying him.

    But as trade bait, Asante could fetch us a first rounder. If you look at our last 5-10 first rounders, I think its conservative to say that, on average, each of them has supplied us with (or is on pace supplying us with) over $10M more value than salary cap cost over their first five years. Trading "roughly zero" for $10M would be a huge win for the Pats.

    By telling the whole world that he wants a trade, Asante makes it easier for us to ship him to another team. If we offered another team a straight up trade for Asante, they'd know that we have doubts about his ability to reprise his 2006 performance. But with Asante whining at the top of his lungs, we can actively talk trade and the "fortunate" team that receives him will be none the wiser.

    There's only one small catch to all of this. Which team is going to be stupid enough to trade a #1 pick for Asante Samuel AND give him the huge money he's looking for? Surely after last year's Seattle trade, teams are going to be wary of giving the Patriot's another #1 pick for an overpriced player.

    I don't know if there is anyone out there who is that stupid, but I do know that the louder Asante screams, the easier it will be to part them from their #1 pick in 2008.
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2007
  2. zippo59

    zippo59 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    5,072
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Yeah, it's a big win for Samuel.
  3. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,495
    Likes Received:
    259
    Ratings:
    +567 / 6 / -0

    I don't know, Solman...this is the first time that I've ever heard an argument that a player whining loudly and threatening a long hold out improves his team's bargaining position in a trade!

    IMO Asante has had plenty of trade value all along in a league starved for CBs. I also believe the Pats tagged him with every intention of keeping him on the team for the year. As a draftnik, I love it when the Pats pile up extra picks...but you need an actual current team, not just a potential future one. Similar story to Branch last year -- no, he wasn't an elite player. No, he wasn't worth the contract he wanted. Yes, the Pats got a nice pick out of it. But yes, losing him so late in the game really hurt the team. Given the tremendous potential of this year's Patriots and the fact that they already have 5 day-1 picks for 2008, I think I'd rather have the player than the pick this time.
  4. richpats

    richpats Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    3,499
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I could give a crap about getting a 1st-rounder. We need a PLAYER. When the Branch deal went down, we were left with a bunch of no-name receivers inexperienced in the system and Troy Brown. I hope this time around the Pats manage to get a halfway decent corner in the deal to ease the loss of Samuel. I'm not too confident in James/Gay/Hobbs/Scott and maybe Wilson.
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2007
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,380
    Likes Received:
    138
    Ratings:
    +281 / 9 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    There's no doubt in my mind the best long term plan is to get what you can out of a player in his first contract and trade him. Instead of Branch we have Meriweather and whatever wouldn't have been signed with the $6M or so in cap space. Stallworth. Moss. Thomas. Take your pick. Two years from now, using good draft picks and being able to re-sign, say, Warren is more valuable than Samuel.

    The only issue I have is we haven't really replaced him. Tory James could be OK but that's it from what I see. Gay ? He's OK too. Low picks from the past couple of years. If we had a 2nd round CB sitting around then I'd feel great about trading him.
  6. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    Since discovering the existence of the cap your obcession with it has begun to warp your perception of value in team building. Cap space doesn't trump talent, it allows you to acquire or retain it. The Pat's actually want Asante to stay and play here - otherwise they would have goaded him into screaming louder sooner and traded "roughly zero" for that draft pick prior to the 2007 draft. They have offered him a long term deal that averages $6M per and therefore likely includes a double digit signing bonus well in excess of $7.8M, which means they do not share your cap value/holdout induced view of him as a $2M player. Nor do they covet that potential $10M cumulative draft value down the road more than the substantially greater than zero value of having playmaking talent and stability in their backfield for the upcoming season, not to mention the next 4-5 seasons.

    If they end up trading him for a 1st in the 2008 draft it will not be a big win, but rather having made the best of an unfortunately unworkable situation. Same as with Deion, whom they also actually would have much preferred to retain long term. We may or may not be better off without him going forward talent and cap wise, having already traded out of the first with our second pick in the round this season because having 2 first rounders in a shallow draft didn't represent substantial value. And we certainly weren't better off without him in 2006, and will apparently be paying someone (or ones) the money he rejected to cover the position in 2007. We saved substantial cap space going forward last season by replacing an unsignable Branch and Givens with Caldwell and Gaffney et al, but it cost us in offensive production/efficiency and wins. We have been unable or unwilling to replace that via the draft, so we have now begun trading draft picks for veteran WR and paying them as much or more in cap than Branch and Givens would have cost to remedy that deficiency in 2007 and potentially beyond.

    Championships aren't won on paper, solman, and the only real value of cap space or draft picks is measured in the talent it enables you to field being sufficient to meet your goals in the present as well as the future. If we enter the 2008 offseason with tons of adjusted cap space and 3 first round picks and no ring, Belioli will not consider that a big win but rather a crashing disappointment. Because they will have squandered another season in Brady's prime - not to mention potentially the final season of impact players like Harrison's and Bruschi's and Brown's and Seau's careers.

    I think they will figure out a way around this with or without Asante. But I'm not going to kid myself by trying to rationalize how this was their plan all along. Anything short of signing him to a reasonable deal long term is just some variation of plan B.
  7. thecrazyeye

    thecrazyeye Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    this is all well and good but you have to find a team that wants AS's contract and is willing to trade a decent corner of their own. 1st round pick doesnt help us now but its the most likely trade.
    Name a team and a corner that makes sense for both teams. Will that player we get in return just want money also?
    I say swindle Houston into giving us Dunta Robinson. i dont know how, just make it happen.
    Winfield is the other choice, but his contract status isn't settled either.

    We all want a player for AS, but a pick might be a better value, and you know the Pats will always choose value
  8. ironwasp

    ironwasp Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    A great post. Just about got it all in there Mo'. This team will be better in '07 with Samuel than it would be without him. And in '08. If they can't get it done, then they can't get it done, but so much the better if the two parties could find some common ground and Asante gets his ass into camp.
  9. cstjohn17

    cstjohn17 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Messages:
    5,027
    Likes Received:
    20
    Ratings:
    +34 / 11 / -4

    #54 Jersey

    I agree with most of your post, the Patriots are a better team with him. Even if we got a first round pick for him, are we really going to be a championship team with Randall Gay, Chad Scott or James starting at CB?

    The Plan B baffles me. The Patriots have played hard ball with a lot of players. It is unclear whether they have any real intent on signing Samuel. They may view him as a product of the system and will only go so high, he views himself as an elite corner. The truth is in the middle.

    My money is still on Samuel showing up a day or 2 before the season starts so he can collect the checks. Next year they may do the dance again or they may part ways.
  10. patfanken

    patfanken On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    5,675
    Likes Received:
    141
    Ratings:
    +281 / 13 / -8

    #91 Jersey

    I think one factor that seems to be lost in this thread is the fact that it is SAMUEL who controls any possible trade. Samuel is technically a FA right now. He can conduct any kind of negotiation with ANY team he wants.

    What I see happening is that THERE IS NO TEAM out there who is willing to give him the contract he wants AND pay the Pats the 2 first day picks it will take for them to want to trade him. Think about it. The guy wants $20MM+ in guaranteed money over the first 3 years (like Clement's contract). That is a lot of money for a someone who might be a "one year wonder." (BTW- I don't think he is), AND give up significant draft picks (I think a first and 3rd would do it.)

    I think the Pats should sweeten their offer of the Dre Bly deal (IIRC, $12-14 MM Guarantteed, and more than $6MM/yr by about 5%. IF that doesn't do the trick, and he won't sign the tender, then just forget about him. Make no mention of him, and pretend its like he's gotten a 10 game suspension or a 10 game injury.

    If he is STUPID enough to throw away $5MM in an attempt to holdup the Pats with a threat to sit out 10 games, then he will be bitterly disappointed. I really don't think it will help him on the open market in 2008. Like I said, if the league thought he was the best CB out there in FA, WHERE ARE the TRADE OFFERS. There hasn't been a SINGLE one reported.

    BOTTOM LINE: the Pats have won superbowls with a LOT less talent at the CB position than they have right now...even without Samuel. They have put 2 fair offers on the table. They might not be the BEST offers Samuel could get, but they are very good offers. Staying away is going to be HIS choice, and out of the Pats control. AND what do the Pats do when something is out of their control? They eliminate it from their minds and plow on. THAT is how they should treat this situation.
  11. ironwasp

    ironwasp Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    They have?? Jeez it must have been one of the Superbowls I missed. Let's see in SB XXXVI they had Ty Law and Otis Smith starting, in SBXXXVIII it was Ty Law and Ty Poole and in SB XXXIX it was Samuel and Randall Gay.

    So with starting CBs Randall Gay and Ellis Hobbs, we have a better line-up than any of those do we???
  12. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,380
    Likes Received:
    138
    Ratings:
    +281 / 9 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    When push comes to shove I think a single #1 would do it (or a #2 and a future pick) and I think a team would do it just like Seattle did. Yes you need to find a team that feels desperate but all it takes is one and CB is a premium position, moreso than WR.
  13. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,427
    Likes Received:
    113
    Ratings:
    +198 / 4 / -5

    Samuel doesn't have a contract at the moment--which is part of the problem.
  14. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,380
    Likes Received:
    138
    Ratings:
    +281 / 9 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    No it's not, when he says "Samuel's contract" he just means a contract Samuel will sign - the rest is just paperwork.
  15. solman

    solman Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I've had a consistent view of capology for years. What I "discovered" was this board. Not surprisingly, what got me posting here was the ridiculous assertion that the Branch trade wasn't a big win.

    I started this thread with a long post in which I estimated the expectation value of Asante Samuel at $7.8M. Saying that I view him as a $2M player is a deliberate misrepresentation.

    I am saying that paying $7.8M for a $7.8M player is not a big win. Paying $15M for five years of a $6M player IS a big win. Teams that pass up opportunities like this are ultimately forced to put less talent on the field.


    If the Patriots lose Asante Samuel and don't do anything to replace him (not likely), the following will still be true:

    1. They will have a squad that is the clear favorite to win the superbowl.

    2. They will have used more of their long term cap preparing for this season, than preparing for any other season in recent memory.

    Nobody is going to look back on this offseason, and say that it was too heavily devoted towards building for future years. In my opinion, the 2007 Patriots without Asante, are clearly better than the 2003-2004 squads.

    I understand the fan's impulse to throw as much talent at his team before the season starts as possible, but aren't we already there? The Patriots were not built by focusing on one season at the expense of all future seasons. Keeping Asante, when we have a team this talented and a #1 pick is offered, would be the epitome buying the present at the cost of the future.
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2007
  16. patfanken

    patfanken On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    5,675
    Likes Received:
    141
    Ratings:
    +281 / 13 / -8

    #91 Jersey

    What, wasp, did OTIS suddenly become an all pro since 2001. He was an old slow CB even then. THe Pats did a masterful job covering his weaknesses, and he did a marvelous job playing to his strengths. BUT let us not try to rewrite history and suddenly make OTIS better than he was. Who is to say Tory James isn't the next OTIS Smith, and James has a better pedigree.

    AND then you trot out Ty Poole as an example of someone who is BETTER than what we have now?. He was just ANOTHER serviceable CB who did the job and was gone 2 years later. Poole had a great year here, but he wasn't a top CB at that point in his carreer.

    Finally you want to compare Gay and Samuel. Well I think that Hobbs is ahead of where Samuel was in 2004 and Gay is certainly a better more experienced player than he was in 2004. Also our depth at the position is far better than what it was in either 2001, 3, or 4.
  17. ironwasp

    ironwasp Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Randall Gay hasn't played a game since when?? I don't want to open the Hobbs argument up again, because the guy has a lot of heart and I like him a lot, but he gets beaten all over the field by the tier one receivers.

    I appreciate Otis was getting on when he played, and that Poole was a one year wonder. But at present I'll take any of those three pairings - particularly the two that include Ty Law - over what we have now (without Samuel).
  18. solman

    solman Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Yes, it is. The ONLY way he "gets paid" is by engineering a trade in which the Patriots get big value.

    Deion Branch delivered the goods for us and got his ticket out of New England. I hope that Samuel is equally successful.

    There is a key difference, however. Branch was prepared to hold out through week 10. It was costing him very little money compared to his ultimate deal. Asante Samuel is not prepared to hold out past week 1. The best he can hope to do is convince potential trade partners otherwise.
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2007
  19. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,495
    Likes Received:
    259
    Ratings:
    +567 / 6 / -0

    Amen. Cap space and draft picks aren't the goal, they're a means to and end. Right now the Pats look like they have that end -- an uncommonly strong top-to-bottom roster ready to compete for a championship.

    I really hope (and believe) this is just a last-gasp bargaining ploy by Samuel. For a guy who's never had a major payday, throwing away $4 million to sit on your duff is NOT a smart move, it's a mutually-assured-destruction scenario.



    "Already there?" Already thrown the whole offseason into 2007 team? No way! If we had, we wouldn't be looking at 5 day-1 draft picks already in hand. I can't agree that a 6th day-1 pick is so enormously valuable that it's a no-brainer to trade away our #1 corner...indeed, that keeping him "would be the epitome buying the present at the cost of the future"!

    BB/SP have achieved a total balance this year, with the best roster in football, no looming cap disasters, and a commanding position in a strong-looking 2008 draft. Shopping Samuel without a strong prospect behind him, IMO, tilts the balance too much toward gambling on the future at the cost of the present.
  20. solman

    solman Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I certainly think 2007 Hobbs is better than both 2004 Gay and 2004 Samuel. I don't know if the same can be said for 2007 Gay or 2007 James, but you can certainly make the case.

    Remember that in 2004 Samuel was just an OK player with one interception during the regular season.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>