It Looks Like No Long term Deal between Pats and Welker

[RobertWeathers]

Those terms were offered to Randy 4 years ago... And Randy had a history of quitting on teams who stepped up and paid him as well as those who didn't opt to pay him more when he felt entitled to it. And leopards never change their spots. Wes was coming off 5 years of consistently outperforming his first big contract. For them. And never complaining about being grossly underpaid. Talk about apples and oranges.

Point is that they gave RM a 3 year deal when he was a year younger than WW.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Interesting that you compare it to the Vinatieri situation. I know you don't think Adam regrets the decision but do you think the Patriots do? I don't. I think they are perfectly happy with their choice to let him go. I don't recall any big kicks that Gostkowski has missed.

No, but I do seem to recall an instance where they opted not to go for it in a dome at distance...and some periodic yips, not to mention an instance where due to injury Adam's replacement had to be subbed for in game by...wait for it...some short white guy who was his teams #1 WR, until they could hire a professional place kicker off the street to replace him for the duration when he went on IR in week 9. Right after they signed him to the same long term deal Adam took from the Colts 4 years earlier. Of course one of the concerns about Adam at the time was his kickoffs were averaging almost 4 yards per shorter than Gotti's did. That wasn't the case indoors, and of course since then that has become a non issue outdoors. Stats % wise since then they match up pretty close although Adam's % remains a little better at age 39 both in the regular and post season. They make about the same money too.

As for regrets, he did kick Indy into a certain HFA AFCC game they ultimately won over NE.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Point is that they gave RM a 3 year deal when he was a year younger than WW.

Only he wasn't. Unless you're counting by 3 months. He was 31.

 

[RobertWeathers]

He's peaked as a player, I'll accept that. But even if he diminishes at a moderate rate, and three years from now is 80% of the player that he is today, that's still a WR who you could argue wouldn't be hugely overpaid. He has a long way to fall before his value drops to the Deion Branch tier.

I agree completely. If at 33, WW has a year that is statistically 80% of his 2011, (96 or so catches. 1200 yds 7 TDs) hes clearly worth 9m or whatever. The problem is that the Pats don't

That's fair, and I'd mostly agree with it, although it depends on the years involved. If a three year deal was what it would have taken to get it done, then I would have made the deal and cut him in year 3 if his production had dropped precipitously. Don't really see what risk there is in signing Welker that wasn't also there for Mankins, Bodden, TBC, etc. Then again, maybe those contracts are exactly what the Pats learned from that's making them gun-shy now.

If they don't want to commit to Welker long-term because he's the odd one out in the Welker/Hernandez/Chung/Vollmer category, then I can sorta accept that, although i'd prioritize him far ahead of Chung. If they don't think that he can maintain his production for the next three years, then I disagree and I'd guess that they may be basing their decision off of fairly significant information that is not available to us (ie maybe he's been banged up an awful lot behind the scenes these past couple of seasons?)

I think paying an OL is a bit different as they can play a little longer and still be highly effective than a WR. Even though Stephen Neal wasn't healthy, he was still very effective when he played at 34. Bodden was 29 when he signed his deal which was front-loaded and TBC had a deal which was reasonable.

I do think the Pats look at each player differently and do not think that because of what happened with say Bodden, they would not pay WW. There is something else going on....

 

[RobertWeathers]

Only he wasn't. Unless you're counting by 3 months. He was 31.

Yep. You are right. He was 31 for a few weeks before he signed his 3 year deal.

 

[BSR]

No,

Then I am not sure why you think the actions are so bizarre. You compared it to the Vinatieri situation and I think the comparison is fair. In that case, both the player and the team seemed to make out fine.

 

[Clonamery]

Then I am not sure why you think the actions are so bizarre. You compared it to the Vinatieri situation and I think the comparison is fair. In that case, both the player and the team seemed to make out fine.

No, player made out better.....

 

[RobertWeathers]

No, player made out better.....

Based on what? SB? Earnings?

Pats would argue that over the past 6 years, Gost has been a better kicker by every measurable and more cost effective. AV has a .5% better FG sucess rate but kicking indoors certainly helps...

 

[mgteich]

One wonders why our evaluation is so different that that of Belichick. We would recommend paying him pay him $16M/2 in a flash, as you said, as would lots of teams in the nfl. I'd even go for $18M/2.

Belichick seem fine with going forward into 2013 with Gronkowski, Hernandez, Lloyd and Gaffney as our receivers.

If the discrepancy is as great as we think, then perhaps Welker should be traded now, and use the cap monies to extend Hernandez this year or early next. It seems that he is being kept as insurance against the possible failure of Lloyd.

They are not OK paying him 2 years at $16M let alone more.

WW at $8M per is a steal, though. Even for a slot receiver.

 

[Clonamery]

Based on what? SB? Earnings?

Pats would argue that over the past 6 years, Gost has been a better kicker by every measurable and more cost effective. AV has a .5% better FG sucess rate but kicking indoors certainly helps...

You know it's rings. Pats can argue (like you) all they want. He's got a ring and we don't. Everything is a wash (to me). But keep chattering about this or that.

 

[Kontradiction]

Are you saying statistics and historical trends based on 100s of WRs who ever played the game should not be considered when making a multi-million dollar commitment to a 31 year-old player? I agree that WW looks like he will not slow down in the near future. We agree to disagree.

No. I'm saying that they should be disregarded because they're irrelevant. Every athlete and person is different. Pointing to other receivers throughout history and attempting to make a correlation to Welker is a pointless venture in that regard.

I'd consider Gronk a receiver has most certainly been double teamed.

He has, but not in the neighborhood of Welker.

My bad. Let me clarify. From a contractual standpoint, QBs are in a completely different space than positional players.

As was I, prior to noting in the very next sentence how irrelevant it was.

If anything, the terms Randy at age 31 agreed to prove my point...

3 years, $27 million with $15 million guaranteed, $12 million of which is in the form of a signing bonus.

Pats proposal to WW at age 31- 2yr/$16m guaranteed.

$1m more than Randy in guranteed $ and I'm guessing the singing bonuses might be comparable but I do not know that for a fact....

I don't see how. The guts of your counter argument revolve around the reason for the stalemate being that the Pats do not want to extend any more to an aging receiver and that it's a concept that they've always deployed. The Moss contract blows an iceberg sized hole in your argument.

As it stands, though, I'm done with you here. You keep making arguments based on hypotheticals instead of facts. When that argument is turned upside down, you move the goal posts. I hope the two sides agree but, should Welker walk, you'll see just how much he'll be missed. Sort of like the Seymour trade.

 

[BSR]

No, player made out better.....

Why do I care how Vinateri made out?

The only question to me is did the Patriots make a good decision. In hindsight I think their decision was neutral or better than neutral.

As for the Welker situation, I am curious what many of you think Welker would receive on the open market after next year. Does anyone have any recent contract examples for +30 year old WR? The only one I can find is the Steve Smith deal which is a 3 year deal with $18m guaranteed. According to PFT the average annual value on that deal is about $7.25. Any others?

 

[RobertWeathers]

You know it's rings. Pats can argue (like you) all they want. He's got a ring and we don't. Everything is a wash (to me). But keep chattering about this or that.

Chattering??? It's called rational thought.

They paid less money for better productivity. They have no control over other teams winning championships unless they beat them.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Then I am not sure why you think the actions are so bizarre. You compared it to the Vinatieri situation and I think the comparison is fair. In that case, both the player and the team seemed to make out fine.

Player still had to assume all the risk against getting 3 times what he was being offered for one year.. And the risk for kicker vs. slot receivers...a little different. There's an old saying, just because you get away with something doesn't make it right. Most franchise players probably come out of it OK. Some surely don't. Wouldn't want to be the even one guy in 20 who gets screwed, would you?

And it was as bizarre then as it is now. Parcell's would have persued Adam but he never in a million years thought NE was really going to let him walk. No one did. One reason Adam only talked to two teams before signing was no one else was interested in wasting their time early in FA negotiating with someone they assumed NE would simply trump the offer on. I know they cried crocodile tears for PR consumption when he didn't give them an opportunity to match. But Polian made that part of their negotiation, sign now and don't entertain other bidders or the deal is off the table. $3.5M signing bonus, $7.5M guaranteed in the first 3, 5 years $12M and he saw all of it, and $10M more when they signed him to a 3 year extension at 38. The best offer the Patriots put on the table was one year at $2.5M (top of the market) but not guaranteed. Just an unwritten promise they would keep him at the top as long as his production warrented it in their opinion...

Fans here turned on him and labeled him Vinatraitor... That's because most here never believed it would come to that. And when it did they blamed him. Aside from the handful of kickoff worry warts who wanted him gone, whose issue is now basically moot.

Once a free agent, Vinatieri didn't give Patriots a chance - The Boston Globe

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

One wonders why our evaluation is so different that that of Belichick. We would recommend paying him pay him $16M/2 in a flash, as you said, as would lots of teams in the nfl. I'd even go for $18M/2.

Belichick seem fine with going forward into 2013 with Gronkowski, Hernandez, Lloyd and Gaffney as our receivers.

If the discrepancy is as great as we think, then perhaps Welker should be traded now, and use the cap monies to extend Hernandez this year or early next. It seems that he is being kept as insurance against the possible failure of Lloyd.

I'd assume that BB wants to see what he has in Lloyd before locking in extra salary at that position beyond this season. If Lloyd provides what we all are hoping it'll be far less likely that WW's worth to the team will be equal to his true value. Unfortunately (in this case anyways) the trick to being successful in the NFL isn't just not overpaying for guys, it's figuring out the best way to maximize production; I don't think many rational people would argue that what WW has reportedly been asking for isn't reasonable given his talents.

Cue the WW brigade calling me dumb because WW and Lloyd are completely different players in 3... 2... 1...

 

[jason423]

Why do I care how Vinateri made out?

The only question to me is did the Patriots make a good decision. In hindsight I think their decision was neutral or better than neutral.

As for the Welker situation, I am curious what many of you think Welker would receive on the open market after next year. Does anyone have any recent contract examples for +30 year old WR? The only one I can find is the Steve Smith deal which is a 3 year deal with $18m guaranteed. According to PFT the average annual value on that deal is about $7.25. Any others?

Boldin got 3/25 million at 30 years with about 10 million in guarantees. Colston is 29 and got 5/36 million, with incentives to earn more, and 17.7 million in guarantees. I figured Welkers market value is probably close to Boldins total value and years but more along the lines of Colstons guarantee. If NE was way below that there was no way he could sign, but if they were at that number Welker is probably pricing himself too high, though I guess there is always the chance one team might go above that on the open market.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Chattering??? It's called rational thought.

They paid less money for better productivity. They have no control over other teams winning championships unless they beat them.

And the Colts did on the way to that ring. And they paid the pick and salary of a 4th rounder plus signed Gotti to a deal for $2M more three years later. They're about even production wise. Injury replacement wise since.

 

[Steve102]

Player still had to assume all the risk against getting 3 times what he was being offered for one year.. And the risk for kicker vs. slot receivers...a little different. There's an old saying, just because you get away with something doesn't make it right. Most franchise players probably come out of it OK. Some surely don't. Wouldn't want to be the even one guy in 20 who gets screwed, would you?

And it was as bizarre then as it is now. Parcell's would have persued Adam but he never in a million years thought NE was really going to let him walk. No one did. One reason Adam only talked to two teams before signing was no one else was interested in wasting their time early in FA negotiating with someone they assumed NE would simply trump the offer on. I know they cried crocodile tears for PR consumption when he didn't give them an opportunity to match. But Polian made that part of their negotiation, sign now and don't entertain other bidders or the deal is off the table. $3.5M signing bonus, $7.5M guaranteed in the first 3, 5 years $12M and he saw all of it, and $10M more when they signed him to a 3 year extension at 38. The best offer the Patriots put on the table was one year at $2.5M (top of the market) but not guaranteed. Just an unwritten promise they would keep him at the top as long as his production warrented it in their opinion...

Fans here turned on him and labeled him Vinatraitor... That's because most here never believed it would come to that. And when it did they blamed him. Aside from the handful of kickoff worry warts who wanted him gone, whose issue is now basically moot.

Once a free agent, Vinatieri didn't give Patriots a chance - The Boston Globe

Off topic, but the man is no traitor. He stayed, got rings, left, got paid. I have no issue with him wearing the horseshoe on his lid.

 

[Clonamery]

Chattering??? It's called rational thought.

They paid less money for better productivity. They have no control over other teams winning championships unless they beat them.

Fine. Call it what you like, it's your nickel. They paid less money because the replacement player was a rookie.

Choices. Some have worked, some haven't, not condemning their process just their decision that WW is not an exception to their rules.

 

[BSR]

Player still had to assume all the risk against getting 3 times what he was being offered for one year.. And the risk for kicker vs. slot receivers...a little different. There's an old saying, just because you get away with something doesn't make it right. Most franchise players probably come out of it OK. Some surely don't. Wouldn't want to be the even one guy in 20 who gets screwed, would you?

No but then again I don't care. By screwed you are saying, he isn't getting the maximum number of millions he could by going to another team. Really, why would I care? On the flip side, I don't care if the Krafts get the shaft occasionally either (i.e, Ocho). My only concern is what happens on the field and that is what the FO's only concern should be as well. As long as they can continue to sign their players and quality FA I don't have any problem with how they do their business.