Kraft might be the reason Mankins leaves

[Deus Irae]

It wasnt much of a risk, Rob said the same thing. I think its something they try almost every year depending on whos available, that year just worked out better than previous years.

C'mon now. Moss and Stallworth were major risks, although the team took steps to limit those risks. Welker was giving up both a contract and draft picks.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Hence my immortal post before the draft last year...how profetic.... TRADE MANKINS NOW!!!

 

[Deus Irae]

Hence my immortal post before the draft last year...how profetic.... TRADE MANKINS NOW!!!

Prophetic? You mean the post where you claimed that Mankins would not play at all for the Patriots this past season?

 

[moosekill]

Prophetic? You mean the post where you claimed that Mankins would not play at all for the Patriots this past season?

Deus, I enjoy reading your posts on most subjects, but when it comes to anything dealing with players currently on the team you are just like a 10 year old kid with a Bledsoe jersey crying because the Patriots just traded him to the Bills.

No matter what you want, the Pats are in an era with a salary cap, they have succeeded for the past decade because they understand that. They realize they can't always pay every single cent every "fan favorite" wants, especially if those fan favorites aren't reasonable in their demands.

Time and again, you call out the pats for not ponying for every single demand the players want. You look at those contracts in a vacuum, forgetting the things the Pats would have lost if they had decided to bow to the players they were negotiating with, demands.

The Patriots are going to win some of those negotiations and lose some, it is the way life works and it is the business model the Patriots have decided works. It has one them 3 super bowls, gotten them into another one, and left them one play from a 5th in 10 years. It has also gotten them into the playoffs in 3 of the other 5 years and left them with 11-5 and 10-6 records for the other two. Based on those results, it is very hard to take your side of this argument and say their model isn't working.

 

[Patjew]

So Mankins is Jewish. Who knew?

 

[patsfan-1982]

yes Kraft could be the reason he leaves because so far he is not giveing him the 20+ million up front money that he is looking for... i want the pats to sign Mankins but this is a business and they just give Brady 48 million guaranteed so im sure he's not to happy about pulling 20 more million out of he's pocket for a G

 

[Triumph]

yes Kraft could be the reason he leaves because so far he is not giveing him the 20+ million up front money that he is looking for... i want the pats to sign Mankins but this is a business and they just give Brady 48 million guaranteed so im sure he's not to happy about pulling 20 more million out of he's pocket for a G

But, it was rumored that Mankins and the Pats had a long term deal consummated but Mankins refused to make a public apology which squashed the whole deal.

If true, evidently NE and Mankins found a number that was palatable.

 

[DEVIOUS 1]

Deus, I enjoy reading your posts on most subjects, but when it comes to anything dealing with players currently on the team you are just like a 10 year old kid with a Bledsoe jersey crying because the Patriots just traded him to the Bills.

No matter what you want, the Pats are in an era with a salary cap, they have succeeded for the past decade because they understand that. They realize they can't always pay every single cent every "fan favorite" wants, especially if those fan favorites aren't reasonable in their demands.

Time and again, you call out the pats for not ponying for every single demand the players want. You look at those contracts in a vacuum, forgetting the things the Pats would have lost if they had decided to bow to the players they were negotiating with, demands.

The Patriots are going to win some of those negotiations and lose some, it is the way life works and it is the business model the Patriots have decided works. It has one them 3 super bowls, gotten them into another one, and left them one play from a 5th in 10 years. It has also gotten them into the playoffs in 3 of the other 5 years and left them with 11-5 and 10-6 records for the other two. Based on those results, it is very hard to take your side of this argument and say their model isn't working.

Amen brother, amen.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

But, it was rumored that Mankins and the Pats had a long term deal consummated but Mankins refused to make a public apology which squashed the whole deal.

If true, evidently NE and Mankins found a number that was palatable.

Only it came out that it wasn't true... Any more than it was true that they promised to take care of him in the uncapped year and then didn't even offer him a deal...

His idiot agent recently included in one of his wahhhhhhhhhh sessions that he was tendered as a RFA because the negotiations had gotten off to a slow start... Maybe that was because he never countered their offers...

 

[Rob0729]

Rob....

"It's really not surprising that the only time since 2004 that the team has been back to the Super Bowl is in the year where the team took a risk and made a big jump into the pool with guys like Stallworth, Moss and Welker,"

That's pretty clear, yet you either missed or ignored it prior to writing this portion of your post.

Deus....

You also wrote this:

Your position used to make sense as a 'style', especially in a salary capped league. However, given that the team hasn't won the Super Bowl since 2004, it no longer does.

You made the argument. Own it. If you want me to take into account your subsequent statements, I can say you are arguing in circles and disproving your own points. Either this negotiating style doesn't work anymore because the Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since 2004 or it does work as long as they make more aggressive moves in trades and free agency like in 2007. You can't argue both.

Availability of a replacement is crucial in contract negotiations. How are you questioning that even for a moment? It's not even debatable.

I disagree with that because every year teams have holes to fill in free agency and the draft. Teams don't go into free agency and the draft knowing for sure how they are going to fill those holes. Losing a high priced free agent is just another hole and letting them walk in free agency may allow teams to fill several holes needed to be filled.

The Pats are one of the most forward thinking teams in the league and one of three or so teams who have been consistent division winners and Super Bowl contenders year after year. I have faith in Belichick's master plan and don't get hung up on individual deals. Until their plan fails, I will subscribe in "In Bill We Trust".

Actually, they did. They spent picks and money on a player that was seemingly on the down side and a problem child, a player that was a consistent disappointment, and a player who they wanted enough to trade for in an RFA situation.

Really?!? They spent a fourth round pick (the same that they spent on Ted Washington and less than they spent on Derrick Burgess) and re-negotiated a deal to give him an one year deal with a $2.5 million base salary, $500k signing bonus, and $1.7 million in incentives. So if he was a disaster, the most the Pats would have given up was a fourth rounder and $3 million (or only $500k if he didn't make it out of camp). That doesn't represent a huge risk. The Pats risked slightly more on Deion Branch this season since the pick was the same round, but Branch's salary is higher.

 

[shmessy]

Deus, I enjoy reading your posts on most subjects, but when it comes to anything dealing with players currently on the team you are just like a 10 year old kid with a Bledsoe jersey crying because the Patriots just traded him to the Bills.

No matter what you want, the Pats are in an era with a salary cap, they have succeeded for the past decade because they understand that. They realize they can't always pay every single cent every "fan favorite" wants, especially if those fan favorites aren't reasonable in their demands.

Time and again, you call out the pats for not ponying for every single demand the players want. You look at those contracts in a vacuum, forgetting the things the Pats would have lost if they had decided to bow to the players they were negotiating with, demands.

The Patriots are going to win some of those negotiations and lose some, it is the way life works and it is the business model the Patriots have decided works. It has one them 3 super bowls, gotten them into another one, and left them one play from a 5th in 10 years. It has also gotten them into the playoffs in 3 of the other 5 years and left them with 11-5 and 10-6 records for the other two. Based on those results, it is very hard to take your side of this argument and say their model isn't working.

Deus Irae knows there is a salary cap. He just refuses to acknowledge it.

Kind of like Don Trump with his obvious comb-over.

In the meantime, The New England Patriots have gone the past EIGHT (8) years with their WORST record being 10-6.

Res Ipsa Loquitur.

 

[TruthSeeker]

C'mon now. Moss and Stallworth were major risks, although the team took steps to limit those risks. Welker was giving up both a contract and draft picks.

A fourth round pick and a relatively small contract is a "major risk"??? When the trade actually happened, there was a huge consensus on this board that there was great upside and little downside. Yet 4 years later you call this a "major risk". Enough said.