Kaczur, Patriots headed for split

[zipster9]

Kaczur isn't very good. I hope they don't end up compromising.

Yep. Kaczur is about-average OG at best. In 2008, 2009, I've seen he was constantly beat, pushed around like a ragged-doll.

WHY BillB signed him to a 4yr contract in 2009, I'll never know.

I see the Patriots draft AT LEAST one or 2 OT's and OG's in the draft.

With StevenNeal (always hurt) most likely done, we need to stock-up..

 

[zipster9]

You're absolutely right. And according to Miguel's page, there's no bonus due. So I don't see any reason to hurry and get rid of him.

Can we trade Kaczur for a 5th rounder?

 

[mgteich]

I'm sure there will be teams lining up for the right to pay a 5th in order to get Kaczur for $3.5M this year and $4.2M in 2012 (I included the workout bonuses).

Can we trade Kaczur for a 5th rounder?

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Can we trade Kaczur for a 5th rounder?

Well right now we can't trade players because of the CBA expiring. But even if we could, I think it'd be tough because of his injuries last season.

Maybe if he hadn't been injured, a 5th would be possible for a decent starting-caliber RT.

I still think we should hold onto him at least until we figure out what's going on with Light.

 

[jmt57]

As soon as Vollmer performed well enough to earn playing time this was inevitable. I was hoping Kaczur would be open to a restructure/pay cut for flexibility and depth on the line, but I'm not surprised by his stance.

Although I know this is 20-20 hindsight, but this makes the decision to cut Larsen and keep Kaczur during the final cuts at the end of last training camp tougher to swallow. I know the Pats were in a tough spot at the time with Mankins holding out, but they also had to have known that there was a very good chance they weren't going to hold onto Kaczur due to his contract - and that's without even taking into consideration the slim chances of a guy returning to play that quickly after back surgery.

 

[jczxohn1]

Kaczur's lowered value is more because of his lack of fit as a RG than his being over-priced as a back-up tackle.Before the injury, there was talk that he was having trouble adjusting and "played too high" at RG. Possibly the cause of his injury? Possible fear of re-occurrence of pain meds?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

The Patriots lost Nick Kaczur to a back injury this season, and he later injured his shoulder.

Doesn't look like the back injury was what put him on IR.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Kaczur's lowered value is more because of his lack of fit as a RG than his being over-priced as a back-up tackle.Before the injury, there was talk that he was having trouble adjusting and "played too high" at RG. Possibly the cause of his injury? Possible fear of re-occurrence of pain meds?

I recall Bru commenting about the need to play lower inside at Guard than outside at Tackle and expressing concern about Nick making the transition, I don't recall that anyone actually confirmed there was an issue. NE certainly made an effort to hang onto Nick for someone who was struggling. :confused2:

 

[Ring 6]

I do think that this leak makes it even more likely that Belichick will draft an OT in the first round. The open question will be how Belichick ahs each of the OT's rated and how many he believes are worth a first round pick. Finally Belichick's folks will do their mocks to see where they think the OT's will fall.

I would not be surprised to see us draft an OT at 17, 33 or anywhere in between.

If Light is resigned as expected, why would we draft a backup T in the first round? And why would Kaczur really impact that? He was being moved to G because of Vollmer's emergence.
If Light does not come back, we have T needs, if he is resigned we simply need depth which would not be a good use of a 1st round pick.

 

[SONS_OF_BELICHICK]

I think this is a good move...I think he is not worth the money and was surprised when they signed to a contract. I think the guys we have behind him will fill in nicely.

 

[Ring 6]

Well right now we can't trade players because of the CBA expiring. But even if we could, I think it'd be tough because of his injuries last season.

Maybe if he hadn't been injured, a 5th would be possible for a decent starting-caliber RT.

I still think we should hold onto him at least until we figure out what's going on with Light.

He is untradable at that contract coming off a missed season.

 

[Ring 6]

I recall Bru commenting about the need to play lower inside at Guard than outside at Tackle and expressing concern about Nick making the transition, I don't recall that anyone actually confirmed there was an issue. NE certainly made an effort to hang onto Nick for someone who was struggling. :confused2:

He made it exactly one day as a G.
No one has a clue how it was going to work out.
Many posters like to hand Kaczur the starting G job last year if he wasnt injured in order to demean Connolly, but Kaczur at LG was an expirement that ended on day 2. To say he was going to start at LG is a tremendous stretch.

 

[mgteich]

1) I may re-think if Light is re-signed to a long term contract before the draft.

2) For the meantime, I would like an OT who can also project at LG or RG. Since many OT's convert to guards in any case, I think that this is a reasonable position to take. For example, I would take BOTH Watkins (OT/OG) and Weisnewski (OG/OC) at 28 and 33 if they are there.

3) Folks here know better than I with regard to which players project best at both RT and OG. I suspect that there are several among the top rated OL's that will likely be gone by 35.

If Light is resigned as expected, why would we draft a backup T in the first round? And why would Kaczur really impact that? He was being moved to G because of Vollmer's emergence.
If Light does not come back, we have T needs, if he is resigned we simply need depth which would not be a good use of a 1st round pick.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

If Light is resigned as expected, why would we draft a backup T in the first round? And why would Kaczur really impact that? He was being moved to G because of Vollmer's emergence.
If Light does not come back, we have T needs, if he is resigned we simply need depth which would not be a good use of a 1st round pick.

Matt Lights days as a Left Tackle are nearing an end IMO, pro bowl or not. BB has stated Light is not an option at RT. I'd draft a tackle in with one of the top 3 picks, maybe a guard at 60 (depending on what happens with Mankins) and resign Light with the expectation he would transition to guard whenever the tackle is ready to start. Vollmer can play either LT or RT.

 

[RayClay]

Matt Lights days as a Left Tackle are nearing an end IMO, pro bowl or not. BB has stated Light is not an option at RT. I'd draft a tackle in with one of the top 3 picks, maybe a guard at 60 (depending on what happens with Mankins) and resign Light with the expectation he would transition to guard whenever the tackle is ready to start. Vollmer can play either LT or RT.

Didn't coach BB play Light at Right Tackle in the pro bowl, you know the position he absolutely can't play?

Now for one more odd sight: Matt Light at right tackle. That’s where he was lined up for some of the practice, with Cleveland’s Joe Thomas at left tackle. Don’t read too much into it. This is just a Pro Bowl.

BostonHerald.com - Blogs: Rap Sheet Pro Bowl

Well that's just the practice. Couldn't be BB is using the Pro bowl excuse to give Light a look at a position that might extend his career and paycheck?...

 

[Spiral]

If the consensus is that he's not tradeable, why get rid of him now if he's not due any bonus money? Keep him until the cut-down date. If he looks great and/or other guys get hurt, keep him or trade hime. If he doesn't, renegotiate or cut him. There is absolutely no reason to make a decision in March.

 

[Ring 6]

Didn't coach BB play Light at Right Tackle in the pro bowl, you know the position he absolutely can't play?


BostonHerald.com - Blogs: Rap Sheet Pro Bowl

Well that's just the practice. Couldn't be BB is using the Pro bowl excuse to give Light a look at a position that might extend his career and paycheck?...

No. There are 3 Ts on the ProBowl team. Thomas was voted the LT starter. If Light is out there with him, Light plays the right side. This happens in every probowl.

And to clarify, BB said that in 2001 he tried Light at RT and it didnt go real well. I believe he also tried him at G and said the same thing about it.
I love how people misquote BB then use that incorrect quote to act as if they know something.

 

[Ring 6]

1) I may re-think if Light is re-signed to a long term contract before the draft.

2) For the meantime, I would like an OT who can also project at LG or RG. Since many OT's convert to guards in any case, I think that this is a reasonable position to take. For example, I would take BOTH Watkins (OT/OG) and Weisnewski (OG/OC) at 28 and 33 if they are there.

3) Folks here know better than I with regard to which players project best at both RT and OG. I suspect that there are several among the top rated OL's that will likely be gone by 35.

I've always been a fan of stud OLineman. I have not seen BB act as if he agrees.

 

[Triumph]

All the source said was that Kaczur was asked to take a cut and that he declined. That is a long way from that to "heading for a split".

Like Milloy?

The report says Kaczur was asked to take a massive cut. Cya Nick.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

No. There are 3 Ts on the ProBowl team. Thomas was voted the LT starter. If Light is out there with him, Light plays the right side. This happens in every probowl.

And to clarify, BB said that in 2001 he tried Light at RT and it didnt go real well. I believe he also tried him at G and said the same thing about it.
I love how people misquote BB then use that incorrect quote to act as if they know something.

Yeah so do I. That and making stuff up to fit your argument. No mention of trying him at guard. Feel free to point out what was misquoted or used incorrectly on my part.


BB quote about Light:


"It’s a little unusual for tackles to be able to play both sides at a high level, period," Belichick said. "Usually when you look at the normal draft board, you look at tackles, and you say, ‘This tackle’s more of a left tackle, this guy’s more of a right tackle.’ And then you have a few guys, maybe a quarter of them, as a guesstimate, that you could say, ‘Well, he could be a swing tackle.’ . . .

"When you look at Vollmer . . . as we did last year and now after having him this year, he legitimately can play both tackle spots."

An example of how it isn't always that way? Here we go ...

"In my brilliance," Belichick said with a smile, "I put (Light) at right tackle as a rookie. It didn’t really work out at all. He has the physical skills to play over there. But, then, he just … Matt’s just a left tackle. When you look at his skills, I don’t think you look at him and say, ‘Well, I don’t think he has the skills to play right tackle.’

"But he’s just much more comfortable on the left side and he’s a much better left tackle than he was a right tackle, when we tried to play him there his rookie year. Once we got him back to left tackle, he was a much better football player. That was his rookie year, so maybe if it was his third year, he would’ve adjusted to it better. I don’t know, we just left him at left because he’s done a good job for us over there."