John Clayton: Pats Talking with Raiders About Derrick Burgess

[nashvillepatsfan]

The Reiss article said possibly a 2nd round pick?

Maybe i just havent had my BB koolaid tonight, but i really question giving up a 2nd round pick for a guy who's been injured the past 2 seasons, and is about to turn 31. Is he REEEEELLY gonna make that much of a difference?

 

[Patjew]

The Reiss article said possibly a 2nd round pick?

Maybe i just havent had my BB koolaid tonight, but i really question giving up a 2nd round pick for a guy who's been injured the past 2 seasons, and is about to turn 31. Is he REEEEELLY gonna make that much of a difference?

That's what I'd like to know. Does this guy have a chance to be the final piece of the puzzle?

 

[TheComeback]

The Reiss article said possibly a 2nd round pick?

Maybe i just havent had my BB koolaid tonight, but i really question giving up a 2nd round pick for a guy who's been injured the past 2 seasons, and is about to turn 31. Is he REEEEELLY gonna make that much of a difference?

Yes, he will. He is twice as good as anyone on our roster with exception to Adalius Thomas. He has played 3-4 OLB in his career (in 05 and 06, before the Raiders switched to a 4-3) and had a lot of success doing it, so his learning curve will be next to nothing.

We have three 2nd round picks in 09, and if Belichick wants to cash one to improve the defense, I'm fine with that. I think it is worth the risk. In the best case scenario, Burgess is even better than Colvin used to be. In the worst case scenario, he does little but Belichick either trades our first rounder into another 2nd or uses the two we already have. The payoff not only in pass rush, but in general playing experience for our D could be well worth a 2nd rounder.

 

[patsfan-1982]

The Reiss article said possibly a 2nd round pick?

Maybe i just havent had my BB koolaid tonight, but i really question giving up a 2nd round pick for a guy who's been injured the past 2 seasons, and is about to turn 31. Is he REEEEELLY gonna make that much of a difference?

i think oakland is looking for a 2nd round pick for him because he may turn in to a randy moss come to the pats and become the player he was a few year's ago but i dont see the pats giveing up a #2 for him that's all they where giveing for peppers he would sign for a lot less then peppers would but even at 2 million a year he would take up half of the CAP and they did not sign the rookie's yet i say let crable play

 

[furley]

If this is the best option, then you go for it. But, I wonder if this is the best option out there that's available. A second or third round selection seems like a high price for what could amount to an one-year rental player.

The purported deal the Patriots are considering would send either a second-round pick (New England has three in 2010) or a third-round pick to Oakland for Burgess, who is in the final season of a five-year deal he signed after leaving Philadelphia for Oakland as a free agent in 2005.

The 6-2, 260-pound Burgess, a two-time Pro Bowler, has played defensive end in his career, but would be a 3-4 outside linebacker for the Patriots, helping fill the void created when the team traded Mike Vrabel to Kansas City.

The 30-year-old Burgess, who carries a $2 million base salary for 2009, would be a relatively cheap option at outside linebacker and could boost New England's pass rush.

Patriots blog - Reiss' Pieces - Boston.com

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Yes, he will.

but what about the injury concerns? what was his injuries the past two seasons? admittedly, i dont know anything about this guy

after looking around, all i can find is that he had a nagging calf injury during the 07 season, but nothing about last year, even though it was reported he was injured. I wonder what it was.

 

[Grizzafted]

Davis is going to demand a 2nd, and in the end I doubt Belichick gives him that. That's a steep price; but I'd like to see it happen for a 3rd round pick. At 31, a guy can come in and have two or three good seasons, which is basically exactly what we need while we develop the young OLB talent we have right now. I'm all for this move, but I think Al Davis is still stung about the Randy fleecing, and he'll probably cut off his nose to spite his face and demand a high pick. I just don't see it. A 2nd round pick for this guy? I mean, maybe...but can he set the edge?

 

[JoeShmoe]

i think oakland is looking for a 2nd round pick for him because he may turn in to a randy moss come to the pats and become the player he was a few year's ago but i dont see the pats giveing up a #2 for him that's all they where giveing for peppers he would sign for a lot less then peppers would but even at 2 million a year he would take up half of the CAP and they did not sign the rookie's yet i say let crable play

ever heard of full stops ... I nearly ran out of breath reading that

 

[bagwell368]

A 2nd and a 3rd is insane.

This guy who will be 31 in August, has seen his sack/tackles totals decline 4 years in a row from very good, good, OK, crummy. Historically 31 year old players don't start playing like they were 27 again - ever.

On top of that, he is signed for only one year (albeit at a decent price to us). He is already spitting out Al's kool-aid by not showing up in camp.

A sliding scale deal 3rd round through 6th round - that's it. If Davis is still smarting from getting nailed on the Moss deal, don't give in, that's his problem, not ours. We'll find a solution including Crable, cap cut downs, etc.

As for not having cap space - piffle. We are going to cut at least 6 guys that were on the 51 man roster last year, and at least that many out of the next 40.

 

[patchick]

A 2nd and a 3rd is insane.

This guy who will be 31 in August, has seen his sack/tackles totals decline 4 years in a row from very good, good, OK, crummy. Historically 31 year old players don't start playing like they were 27 again - ever.

On top of that, he is signed for only one year (albeit at a decent price to us). He is already spitting out Al's kool-aid by not showing up in camp.

A sliding scale deal 3rd round through 6th round - that's it. If Davis is still smarting from getting nailed on the Moss deal, don't give in, that's his problem, not ours. We'll find a solution including Crable, cap cut downs, etc.

Seems to me that this situation screams "conditional picks." If Burgess starts or sees 50%+ of the snaps in 14+ games, take the 2nd rounder with my compliments.

 

[JackBauer]

A 2nd and a 3rd is insane.

Reading is essential.

 

[BelichickFan]

A 2nd and a 3rd is insane.

No-one has said and 2nd and a 3rd except someone who misread the article. 2nd OR 3rd, not that that's a low price but we need to stop repeating 2nd and 3rd.

 

[The_Riddler]

Save the draft pick, CAP space and allow Crable to develop. A 3rd round pick for this guy is even too high. The 2010 draft is supposed to be extremely deep, let's not part with any of those Round 1-3 picks for a declining veteran in place of a developing cheaper option in Crable.

I mean BB didn't want to draft a Connor Barwin with a 2nd, yet he's contemplating spending a 2nd on a declining Burgess, I just don't see that logic.

 

[JackBauer]

I mean BB didn't want to draft a Connor Barwin with a 2nd, yet he's contemplating spending a 2nd on a declining Burgess, I just don't see that logic.

Could it be that he simply wasn't as impressed with Barwin as a prospect as some of the posters on this forum? It beggars belief, I know...

Same thing with Maualuga (dull as a board) and Laurinaitis (Bobby Carpenter redux).

 

[mayoclinic]

Save the draft pick, CAP space and allow Crable to develop. A 3rd round pick for this guy is even too high. The 2010 draft is supposed to be extremely deep, let's not part with any of those Round 1-3 picks for a declining veteran in place of a developing cheaper option in Crable.

I mean BB didn't want to draft a Connor Barwin with a 2nd, yet he's contemplating spending a 2nd on a declining Burgess, I just don't see that logic.

I think a 3rd or 4th might be reasonable, but definitely not a 2nd round pick. I agree with you about passing on Barwin vs. Burgess - Barwin would have been younger, taller, faster, cheaper, and with better coverage skills. But obviously more raw as a pass rushing OLB. Clearly BB didn't see it that way.

 

[CoachK]

Could it be that he simply wasn't as impressed with Barwin as a prospect as some of the posters on this forum? It beggars belief, I know...

Same thing with Maualuga (dull as a board) and Laurinaitis (Bobby Carpenter redux).

BINGO!! ....Jack has bingo !!

 

[Dragda]

Based on the fact that they paid his roster bonus and really need his pass rush in Oakland this season, I just don't see this happening. This is just a rumor. Even the Raiders aren't this stupid.

Well, now that I think about it...they are that stupid. Al Davis tried to get a 40 year old Howie Long to come out of retirement, after all. They drafted a no name safety from Ohio Dog Groomer Institute--HIGH IN THE SECOND ROUND! If you want to be draft by the Raiders, just sprint really fast across the stage at Radio City Music Hall right before the Raider's selection.

 

[TimU]

So if we got a 2 for Cassell and Vrabel, but now give up a 2 for Burgess in order to replace Vrabel, the franchising of Casell really didn't help us that much, did it? The team on the field and the cap situation just aren't that different than if we had let Cassell go as a free agent.

It was worth a shot, but it didn't really work out.

 

[BelichickFan]

So if we got a 2 for Cassell and Vrabel, but now give up a 2 for Burgess in order to replace Vrabel, the franchising of Casell really didn't help us that much, did it? The team on the field and the cap situation just aren't that different than if we had let Cassell go as a free agent.

I guess it depends on whether you like Burgess more than Vrabel and consider Chung to be worthless.

Trading Cassel would have resulted in Chung and Burgess vs. Vrabel in the worst case that we trade a #2.

 

[patchick]

So if we got a 2 for Cassell and Vrabel, but now give up a 2 for Burgess in order to replace Vrabel, the franchising of Casell really didn't help us that much, did it? The team on the field and the cap situation just aren't that different than if we had let Cassell go as a free agent.

Burgess wouldn't be replacing Vrabel, he'd be replacing Woods who was clearly going to be the starter even if Vrabel were still around. Vrabel wouldn't be gone if the Pats thought he'd be a significant contributor this year; he wasn't traded so much as jettisoned.