- Joined
- Oct 10, 2004
- Messages
- 33,218
- Reaction score
- 44,412
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.I am not "jaded toward our roster building this year". I have supported almost every decision the team made in the off-season up until we traded Mankins. Belichick made many great decisions at many positions.
What I disagreed with is the combination of the Mankins trade and the moving so much of the cap money saved into 2015.
The patriots in the off season brought in arguably the best corner back in the league, part of the superbowl winners Best tandem, a WR that is playing incredibly well, extended one of the staples of the Dline, and more recently traded for extra depth on the defensive side of the ball.
Umm, in the title.1) Miguel's blog is below. You can show me where Miguel recommends a $9.5M cap after the beginning of season.
I'm pretty sure that Miguel will tell you that is an estimate that he made and doesn't really reflect his suggestion of Belichick should manage his cap.2) I am NOT the one who is saying the injury reserve should be less. The $2M suggested by Miguel (as he has for years) is fine with me, as long as there is also a cushion for NLTBE bonuses which cushion can be used if there are more injuries or opportunities (like Branch). The rental of Ayers and Casillas cost about $1.1M total, normal for in-season pickups.
How can 'most of us agreed with it' mean anything, ever, much less when it wasn't based upon facts.Miguel made a suggestion in July. Most of us agreed with it. In September, Belichick chose to maintain an additional $3.5M. Miguel explained what purposes Belichick might use the cap money.
Good because I do not need to and actually didn't maintain that.I don't understand your need to maintain that Miguel always suggested $9.5M or that somehow $9.5 was somehow essential.
Who says it would have been spent there?3) I don't understand your idea that if we had spent an additional $2M on a backup, it would mean that Vellano, Moore and White wold get more reps. For example, if the money had been spent on a DT, perhaps Branch would not be needed. And yes, if a backup DE were signed, then perhaps Moore wouldn't have gotten the reps that he got when Jones was injured.
again, who are 'most folks' and why is that relevant to anything?4) Most folks on this board were disappointed when Belichick chose to have a roster with 6 safeties instead of signing an additional backup in the front seven.
You tell me. You create the controversy.I haven't a clue why it is now such a huge controversy for me to suggest that we might have used $2M of the $9.5 for such a backup. Ayers and Casillas were fine pickups. Perhaps they will be part of the the team going forward, perhaps not.
Bottom line?5) The bottom line is that the strategy that almost all of thought was reasonable in July and August is unacceptable today. I applaud the ability to find 3 subs who seem to fit in: Walker, Ayers, and Casillas.
Presuming that 3 continue to work out, I guess we can say in 100% hindsight that subs weren't needed.
Read the bolded. Miguel is trying to guess at what the team will do, not suggesting a prefered approach.MIGUEL's BLOG FROM JULY 10
The cushion suggested was $6M, not the $9.5M that you now seem to think that we all favored. I certainly agree that once Belichick decided on the final cuts and the $9.5M, it was very reasonable to try to understand why Belichick would keep such a number. Miguel provided the many alternative uses for the additional cap money.
"Over the past couple of years the Patriots have used about 2 million dollars for in-season replacements.
I consider the Patriots to have at maximum 5.3 million in easily reached NLTBE incentives. Do not know if the Patriots leave themselves a cushion for those. Wanted to mention them since any reached NLTBE incentives in 2014 will likely lower the Patriots 2015 adjusted cap number. I am trying to guess at how the Patriots will handle having $5.3 million in NTLBE incentives. If they do not leave a cushion for them, the Patriots could end up with an adjusted cap number that is lower than the actual cap number. This is the first time I have seen the Patriots with so much easily attainable NLTBE incentives. Do the Patriots leave a 100% cushion? 0% cushion? Decided to split the difference. I am presuming that the Patriots do leave themselves a 100% cushion or $2,706,250 for the 46-man active roster bonuses and maybe have a 50% cushion ($1.3 million) for the other NLTBE incentives. That is, I guesstimate that the Patriots would like to leave themselves a 4 million cushion at the start of the regular season just to cover reached NLTBE incentives. Why a 100% cushion for the 46-man roster bonuses because as a player reaches that particular NTLBE incentive the amount of their incentive hits the cap the next week."
The trade of Mankins is been proven to be yet another prescient move by Bill. The only quasi-compelling argument against it at this point is, "it looks like a total win right now, but I want to see what happens in the playoffs!"
Even beyond that, though, the cap space from trading Mankins didn't appear on the books until a few days before week 1. What other choice did they have but to push it towards 2015? Any extension you might have wanted them to do is still on the table.
The more you write about this the less it makes sense to me. You can't say moving on from Mankins was a bad move and that they should have done more with the cap space it created. If you feel they could have spent more, then you have to take the position that they should have moved Mankins early enough to act in this past off season.
fair enough
I am not "jaded toward our roster building this year". I have supported almost every decision the team made in the off-season up until we traded Mankins. Belichick made many great decisions at many positions.
What I disagreed with is the combination of the Mankins trade and the moving so much of the cap money saved into 2015. Belichick has often gotten rid of a player a year early, so that is not my issue. I can understand that Belichick didn't think Mankins was worth his salary, and that Belichick received more than adequate compensation for TB. It don't follow that almost all of the cap savings should have pushed into 2015.
IMHO, we needed depth help at DE and LB (and some would say RB). We all thought that this couldn't happen because we were close to the cap, needing a $2M injury fund plus a cushion for NLTBE bonuses.
We all supported the idea of the cushion. We've had one since the SB years. It was the high size of the cushion that is interesting to me. Others wanted to spend $5-$7M on a difference maker in the defensive front seven or at WR. I never supported that. I understood, after our reminders from Miguel, that we needed the cushion.
=======
The DIFFERENCE in opinion now is that before the Mankins trade, we needed a cushion of $4M. After the trade (including the acquisition of a TE), somehow the need for a cushion went up to $7.5M (plus the $2M injury reserve).
I understood (with pain) bringing in JAG after JAG that were found wanting because we couldn't afford the $1M-$3.5M that better additional depth might cost. What we (and the OL coach) found out at the end was that the cap squeeze didn't exist. The $1M-$3.5M was available. Belichick had decided to increase the NTLBE cushion to $7.5M.
============
I don't know why it so controversial to suggest that a million or two might have been used for a LB, DE or DT backup or two, when that position was the position of the vast majority throughout the off-season. Perhaps folks think that we had an absolute need for six safeties.
=============
Maybe it won't matter. Maybe we'll win the SB anyway (someone mentioned 2001). Perhaps, Walker, Ayers, Casillas and Branch will all be serious contributors and difference makers until Siliga and Jones come back at 100% for the playoffs.
It seems that Belichick was committed to either moving on from Mankins or to having Mankins have a much lower cap hit. We fans didn't know that, but Bill did.
I agree with all that you say.
Let me try to clarify the apparent contradiction.
It seems that Belichick was committed to either moving on from Mankins or to having Mankins have a much lower cap hit. We fans didn't know that, but Bill did.
In that context, Belichick knew throughout July and August that he had $1M-$3M available to use on depth. There would be a need for cap money when the season started, but part of that could come from the reduction in cost for Mankins. So, I agree that there few other choices in the week before the season started (perhaps none). The choices were made much longer ago than that.
So, for me, Mankins didn't have to be moved early for Belichick to know that we was going to be moved. The $1M-$3M was always available as long as Belichick had already made the decision on Mankins.
==============
A POSSIBILITY
Folks could convince us that Mankins might have been kept at his high contract, and that it was the fine play of the OL in camp and the preseason that convinced him that Mankins should go.
So, for me, Mankins didn't have to be moved early for Belichick to know that we was going to be moved. The $1M-$3M was always available as long as Belichick had already made the decision on Mankins.
==============
A POSSIBILITY
Folks could convince us that Mankins might have been kept at his high contract, and that it was the fine play of the OL in camp and the preseason that convinced him that Mankins should go.
Read the bolded. Miguel is trying to guess at what the team will do, not suggesting a prefered approach.
Agreed. That is the decision that Belichick made.Perhaps, that projected cap savings on Mankins was what he knew would cover the NLTBEs that are at an record high level.
The title is "7 possible reasons for the Patriots to have about 9.5 million in cap space on September 13, 2014".Umm, in the title.
Then why are you using Miguel as a way to say something was done wrong?I agree. Miguel did not suggest a preferred approach.
Where does Miguel say how much he would set aside? All I see is a long list of reasons to have 9.5 mill in cap room.Miguel analyzed all the factors, as he did almost every week. And yes, some of us, including you, read some of those blogs. Miguel gave us his guess. Some of us though that Miguel's guess was actually a good idea. Apparently you were not one of those folks (or were you?).
Deus Irae mode again? I would like you to flat out tell me that you are saying that it is your opinion that I do not think for myself and simply look at what BB does and say thats what I would do. Or STFU.As I have said all along, one approach for fans is to see what Belichick does and then decide that this is the preferred approach.
Well, the reason you are wrong is because you do not have facts and seem to think that what should be done is what 'we' thought should be done when we didn't know the facts.There is a tremendous advantage in this mode of analysis. First, we can never be wrong in our speculations. Second, we can never be wrong after the fact, since Belichick certainly has more information when making his decisions that we will ever have, and we agreed with Belichick.
Agreed. That is the decision that Belichick made.
Belichick decided to cover 100% of the NLTBE bonus and carry even more into 2015.
Right, because there is no recommendation in there, despite your valiant effort to pretend there is.The title is "7 possible reasons for the Patriots to have about 9.5 million in cap space on September 13, 2014".
That was NOT a recommendation to have $9.5 million in cap space.
If the Mankins cap money were only going to be available with a trade, then you are correct. We all could speculate. I think that when Belichick decides that a player is worth high money, then it's over. Of course, many things could have happened. I just don't think that Mankins playing for us for $7M was a possibility that Belichick was considering. BTW, I think that trading within the division or conference is a bigger issue for fans than for Belichick.I think part of the problem with this logic is that BB may have only been willing to part ways with mankins as part of a trade, meaning that cutting him just wasn't a viable option(seeing Mankins go to the an AFCE rival could have been bad news)
So now you need to factor in which teams want an expensive guard, and which teams have something we need in return(TE, LB, DL) I think Tampa may have been the only REAL option in parting ways with Mankins this season, while also getting good pieces in return, which i think Wright is.
Now on to picking up depth with that extra money, 2-3 million is not a ton of cash to pick up a player before week 1(guaranteed season salary) Akeem Ayers looks like a guy that may fit in well with what we do here, sure it was vs a BAD bears team but we will see more of him this sunday. I don't think we get ayers if we try to trade for him at the start of the season. The titans needed time to know that he was not a fit for them.
Right, because there is no recommendation in there, despite your valiant effort to pretend there is.