Mike Wallace = target for Pats deep threat?

[Deus Irae]

You know DI, I don't think anyone else on this board is in love with the sound of his own "voice" than you. You consistently act as if your words are the final authority, even when shown differently

Never claimed they were, never acted as if they were. True story, Ken... people can disagree with you and still be right. In fact, it's not unusual to see that happen here.

ANY offense would have more problems "functioning" against a top defense than one that isn't. You are hardly breaking new ground here. You can't score 30+ points against everyone.

I see you're tossing out the red herrings early in this post of yours, since I didn't invoke 30 as some magical number. However, since you brought it up, the Patriots have scored 21 points or fewer in their last 3 playoff losses. They also scored 21 points or fewer in 3 of their 4 losses in 2011, all 3 of their losses in 2010 and in 5 of the 7 loses in 2010, so there's no need to point to 30 as the magic number even if I'd been searching for one. The Patriots have scored 21 points or fewer in 11 of their 14 losses since Brady's return.

That's not an answer. That's a poor defense. You DON'T get what I'm saying, not even close. Let me try again, because your self appointed position on Mt. Olympus is evidently keeping you from hearing what's going on among the rest of us.

Its not about wanting to get a WR who can "stretch" the defense. EVERYONE would like that. It is ALL about determining what resources you are willing to give up to attempt to gain those skills. You think that BB will be willing to go "all in" on the WR position and give up a first round pick AND a max contract to fill that perceived need. And to back that up you use Ocho's $6MM contract.

Actually, Ken, I get what you're saying. I find it idiotic that you think otherwise, since I called the idea of getting Wallace a 'dream' scenario

Just to reiterate, Wallace is a dream scenario. It's extremely unlikely to happen. Roethlisberger certainly expects Wallace back in Pittsburgh. The Steelers have already shaved $15 million off their 2012 cap number by restructuring the deals of Timmons, Taylor and Woodley.

However, unlike you, I'm able to see BB trying to address the problem with a pick and good money, and I'm able to say "Hey, what if BB were willing to address the problem with a higher pick and more money?". It's too bad for you that you can't see such an obvious potential progression.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think that BB WILL NOT do that and History will back me up. He's NEVER used a first round pick on a WR in the past 12 years. He cut the most talented WR in the past 20 years in favor of 2 guys who couldn't "stretch" the defense and won 3 superbowls in the process. When he DID invest heavily in a player who could "stretch" the defense, he had a record breaking offense an NO Lombardi's

Ken, the "never used a first round pick on..." is a ridiculous argument, and you know it. He'd never used a first round on a linebacker until 2008, or on a corner until 2010, either.

BB WILL look to find a field stretching WR this off season, but is NOT going to expend the kind of resources that it would take to get Mike Wallace. He is not going to spend $8MM+ on Wes Welker AND sign ANOTHER WR to a similar kind of contract. He is NOT going to spend 17% of his total cap space on 2 WRs. He never has and never will.

He'll use whatever resources he feels is appropriate, regardless of what patfanken thinks. Also, I love the

You consistently act as if your words are the final authority

line from the guy who's capitalizing his words to show his 'final authority' regarding what Belichick "WILL" and "WILL NOT" do regarding WRs. The hypocrisy is very amusing to watch.

 

[Deus Irae]

And I'm not advocating being "cheap". I'm just not willing to spend first round picks or $8-10MM/yr contracts on his replacement.

Yes, Ken, you are advocating being cheap. You can pretend otherwise all you want.

Yes DI, of course, the Pats could accommodate 2 max contracts at WR, but at WHAT expense.

You are looking myopically at the situation. What would make the Pats more likely to win a superbowl, using their resources to find a field stretching WR OR using them to improve your defense.

But since you are being obtuse, let me make it even more simple for you. You have limited resources. You have a very high ranking offense. You have a very low ranking defense. Given that where would it make more sense to spend those limited resources,

I'm not looking at it myopically at all, Ken, as you get it wrong once again. The cap is expected to jump in 2014, which means that more money will be available when the tight ends are due their next contracts. The Patriots should have the ability to open up more than $25 million in cap space for 2012, so signings this year shouldn't be an issue. The Patriots can afford Welker, a top WR and a top safety, and can still keep most, if not all, of their own players, if that's the route they choose to go.

Wouldn't the offense, even if they made NO changes, be better if they were able to get 2-3 more possessions per game because the defense was better.

1.) It's not an either/or scenario

2.) The defense would be better protected if the offense could score more than 21 points against tough defenses in the playoffs, so that sort of argument goes both ways.

3.) If the offense isn't beating top defenses in the playoffs, it's not beating top defenses in the playoffs.

BOTTOM LINE - Sure look to improve the WR position, but don't spend too large a percentage of your resources to do it. I'd be fine spending Ocho's $6MM on an upgrade. I'd be OK spending a 2nd round pick on a WR (though I'd prefer it was a 3rd or 4th round pick.) But getting back to the original point of this thread, I would NOT be OK with spending a first round pick plus a max contract in order to get Mike Wallace

Bottom line, Ken, is that I've been consistently behind the idea of getting Lloyd as the WR all along, and have talked about getting one of the top safeties on the market as a way to improve the defensive secondary. I've even floated the idea of getting one of the top corners (Finnegan/Rogers/etc...). Despite your apparently ignorant admonitions to me about the defense v. offense spending, I'm fully away of the team needs and understand what side of the ball needs more help.

I mentioned Wallace as a dream scenario, understanding that it would be highly unlikely to occur, because he's young and still improving, and would only cost a first round pick, which is something you'd give up in the draft if you thought the player was going to develop into what Wallace has. The money is irrelevant, as long as the team has it, because the cap can be massaged next year, if needed, and it is supposed to get a significant bump in 2014. You decided to jump up on the PFK high horse, yet again, and you apparently didn't know what I've generally been advocating as the Patriots moves.

 

[zipster9]

Yes, Ken, you are advocating being cheap. You can pretend otherwise all you want.



I'm not looking at it myopically at all, Ken, as you get it wrong once again. The cap is expected to jump in 2014, which means that more money will be available when the tight ends are due their next contracts. The Patriots should have the ability to open up more than $25 million in cap space for 2012, so signings this year wouldn't be an issue. The Patriots can afford Welker, a top WR and a top safety, and can still keep most, if not all, of their own players, if that's the route they choose to go.



1.) It's not an either/or scenario

2.) The defense would be better protected if the offense could score more than 21 points against tough defenses in the playoffs, so that sort of argument goes both ways.

3.) If the offense isn't beating top defenses in the playoffs, it's not beating top defenses in the playoffs.



Bottom line, Ken, is that I've been consistently behind the idea of getting Lloyd as the WR all along, and have talked about getting one of the top safeties on the market as a way to improve the defensive secondary. I've even floated the idea of getting one of the top corners (Finnegan/Rogers/etc...). Despite your apparently ignorant admonitions to me about the defense v. offense spending, I'm fully away of the team needs and understand what side of the ball needs more help.

I mentioned Wallace as a dream scenario, understanding that it would be highly unlikely to occur, because he's young and still improving, and would only cost a first round pick, which is something you'd give up in the draft if you thought the player was going to develop into what Wallace has. The money is irrelevant, as long as the team has it, because the cap can be massaged next year, if needed, and it is supposed to get a significant bump in 2014. You decided to jump up on the PFK high horse, yet again, and you apparently didn't know what I've generally been advocating as the Patriots moves.

Assuming Patriots do pursue Wallace, and Steelers tender him (not franchise tag) highest. It will cost Patriots only the 31st pick. Not too bad for a proven WR, given Patriots crappy Drafting of WRs.

Now, how much do you want to give Wallace?

Will it be more, less or same $$/yr than Welker?

IMO - I'd do this in a hearbeat. Wallace rarely drops catches, fast, vertical and slot, and is only 26 starting 2012 season. Lock him up 4/5 yrs.


Then, see if Assante comes back at vet min. Ocho is cut. Now, you have improved your WR corp...

 

[MaineMan]

brady can't throw the ball that far

bowe would be a better fit

Exactly how far is that?

In 2010, Wallace's average reception was less than 15 yds downfield. In 2011, it was less than 10 yds downfield. In 2011, 493 yds of Wallace's 1193 were YAC - another benefit of speed, agility and knowing how to get open (not an easy task with a QB who might end up throwing from almost anywhere).

Also, his catch rate increased to 64% (from 60%).

IOW, Wallace seems to me a younger, faster, more athletic version of Branch/Ocho (and about the same size).

Bowe is taller/heavier, catches most stuff in the same vicinity, but his catch rate has been lower (around 56%).

 

[MaineMan]

Mike Wallace and any WR not named Wes Welker that wants more then 6 million a year is not going to be a patriot, a young KR/PR with Lightning speed that can play 5 to 10 snaps a game on offense runing a post route is all the pats need,

Welker gronk and hernandez had 3806 yards rec and 33 TD's if they pats are going to spend any money on FA's it need to go on a vet safety and on keeping Carter and Anderson, pats won 13 games and were one play away from winning it all with the 31th ranked defense imagine how good they can be with the 15th ranked defense that can make key stops when they need them

Really? I wonder if Brandon Tate is still available, since you've pretty much described everything he could do.

 

[Deus Irae]

Hmmm..... It's not just a couple of random Patfans.com posters looking at this:

Mike Wallace to Patriots? - ESPN Video - ESPN

BostonHerald.com - Blogs: Rap Sheet» Blog Archive » Linking the Patriots and deep threat WR Mike Wallace: Hmmmmmm….

Shocking.

 

[zipster9]

Exactly how far is that?

In 2010, Wallace's average reception was less than 15 yds downfield. In 2011, it was less than 10 yds downfield. In 2011, 493 yds of Wallace's 1193 were YAC - another benefit of speed, agility and knowing how to get open (not an easy task with a QB who might end up throwing from almost anywhere).

Also, his catch rate increased to 64% (from 60%).

IOW, Wallace seems to me a younger, faster, more athletic version of Branch/Ocho (and about the same size).

Bowe is taller/heavier, catches most stuff in the same vicinity, but his catch rate has been lower (around 56%).

Bowe is very good. But, he has the droppies..

As we have seen the droppies in the SB will cost you.

 

[robbomango]

This guy has f#$%^ing turbo boosters. Gawd DAYUM!
http://gifsoup.com/
http://gifsoup.com/
Looks like he's been catching balls all over the field this season coupled with his deep routes he looks like an asset for most any offense. Is it a matter of priority, money, a little of both? Either way it's a fun prospect worthy of debate imo.

 

[BradyBranch39]

Is it a matter of priority, money, a little of both? Either way it's a fun prospect worthy of debate imo.

In the video I saw this morning (probably the same one that's linked above) they mention a high year 1 cap hit as something the Steelers would have a hard time matching. If we can do that and get him at only like $3M per after the first year, he's easily worth surrendering the pick for.

 

[robbomango]

In the video I saw this morning (probably the same one that's linked above) they mention a high year 1 cap hit as something the Steelers would have a hard time matching. If we can do that and get him at only like $3M per after the first year, he's easily worth surrendering the pick for.

I was reading this article by Kirwin
Creative team with WR needs could pry Wallace away from Steelers - NFL - CBSSports.com News, Rumors, Scores, Stats, Fantasy Advice

Now the deals have to be legitimate, but the Steelers have some salary-cap issues that are restricting their ability to defend themselves in the world of finance. A team could frontload a contract with a big roster bonus, where the entire bonus counts under the 2012 salary cap, which would be problematic for the Steelers. As one GM said, "Salary cap space is power this time of year." The Ravens, Patriots and 49ers all have significantly more cap space than the Steelers.

Just curious as to what this front loaded bonus would look like. Not sure if some of this stuff has been posted, I'm having trouble flipping pages(f'd up internet connec rght now)

 

[Deus Irae]

...Just curious as to what this front loaded bonus would look like. Not sure if some of this stuff has been posted, I'm having trouble flipping pages(f'd up internet connec rght now)

A team like the Bengals ($60 million to spend) could easily give Wallace a top end deal that included something like a $20 million dollar roster bonus. That bonus would apply against the cap immediately, but the Bengals would still have $40 million under the cap so it wouldn't prevent them from making plenty of other moves. Pittsburgh would then have to find a way to get $20 million (Plus base salary, etc...) under the cap, which would likely result in them cutting other players if they really wanted to keep Wallace.

 

[Daigle]

So what happens if two team offer him contracts? I assume he has the right to chose which contract Steelers have to match or how does this work ?

 

[Deus Irae]

So what happens if two team offer him contracts? I assume he has the right to chose which contract Steelers have to match or how does this work ?

He agrees to a deal with one of the two teams (his choice), and the Steelers have a week to decide whether or not to match it.

 

[MaineMan]

You're dumb, go away.


And YES you have been cherry picking stats this whole time clinging to the point that Colston has averaged more catches per year than Wallace has...

Thats the one stat that Colston has on Wallace, so by definition YOU ARE CHERRY PICKING STATS to attempt to prove your point.

Colston has more catches, but his targets are shorter throws than a lot of targets Wallace gets, therefore the probability of a completion is much higher. Colston averaged 7.6 targets per game last year, while reeling in 5.7 catches per game. Wallace? 7.1 targets per, while catching 4.5 per game. Sure Colston has more catches, but Wallace is a deep WR (for the most part) running routes that require throws that have a MUCH lesser probability for completion. So for you to say Colston's catch totals are more impressive is YES, like some said.. Cherry picking stats without understanding the full meaning of them, and the context in which they were attained.

But, I'm confident that's a bit too much information for your small mind to be able to process.


Colston is great, but he's not the deep, field stretching WR we need. Wallace is the type of WR the Patriots need.

They need someone with a high YPC. For you to say no one cares about that just proves everyone's point here that you have no clue what you're talking about. Keep rating players based on Fantasy Football, though.

M. Colston, 6'4"/225:

2006 - 70/1038, 14.8 ypc (9.6 air, 23% YAC), 8 TD, 21% 20+, 74 ypg, 51 1-dn, 61% CR
2007 - 98/1202, 12.3 ypc (8.3 air, 27% YAC), 11 TD, 14% 20+, 75 ypg, 64 1-dn, 68% CR
2008* - 47/760, 16.2 ypc (11.0 air, 33% YAC), 5 TD, 26% 20+, 69 ypg, 35 1-dn, 53% CR
2009 - 70/1074, 15.3 ypc (10.3 air, 32% YAC), 9 TD, 26% 20+, 67 ypg, 54 1-dn, 66% CR
2010 - 84/1023, 12.2 ypc (8.9 air, 32% YAC), 7 TD, 14% 20+, 68 ypg, 57 1-dn, 63% CR
2011 - 80/1143, 14.3 ypc (11.0 air, 35% YAC), 8 TD, 19% 20+, 82 ypg, 55 1-dn, 75% CR
-- * 11 games in 2008

M. Wallace, 6'0"/199:

2009 - 39/756, 19.4 ypc (15.9 air,17% YAC), 6 TD, 36% 20+, 47 ypg, 28 1-dn, 54% CR
2010 - 60/1257, 21.0 ypc (14.9 air, 29% YAC), 10 TD, 43% 20+, 79 ypg, 48 1-dn, 60% CR
2011 - 72/1193, 16.6 ypc (9.7 air, 41% YAC), 8 TD, 25% 20+, 75 ypg, 54 1-dn, 64% CR

Kind sir, would you prefer the Maserati or the Lamborghini?

Seriously.

Colston has been one of the most consistently excellent WRs over the past six seasons and arguably the best of the 2006 class (although he was nearly Mr. Irrelevant). To say that "he's not the deep threat that Wallace is" kinda glosses over the reality a bit. Colston runs all the routes effectively, including the deep ones (one of the reasons he's been so consistently good). His deep routes certainly don't represent as large a portion of his total routes as Wallace's deep routes USED TO - in his first two seasons.

Wallace seems to be evolving - expanding his route portfolio to include shorter stuff, leading to an improved catch rate.

[It should be noted, though, that 54% on a 19+ ypc is very good in the NFL, and 60% on a 21 ypc is phenomenal. Most guys posting ypc anywhere near that high are in the 47%-52% range.]

The fact is that Wallace maintained a very good ypc in 2011 based on his YAC - which actually fits in very well with what Welker, Gronk and Ahern did this season (1907 YAC between them; all three among the Top 9 in YAC) - IOW, still gaining a lot of yards on shorter, higher-percentage throws, thus proving that a guy doesn't always have to be behind the entire secondary BEFORE he makes the catch in order to be an effective "deep threat".

I'd be pretty happy with either of them on the Pats. I'm guessing that Mr. Brady might be moderately pleased as well.

 

[BradyBranch39]

colston/wallace

Yes. But there have been concerns for a long time about how long Colston's knees will allow him to play. Thus far, he's been able to constantly exceed expectations. But giving him a big-money, long-term contract is pretty risky.

 

[MaineMan]

While we're on the subject (a-GAIN!), here are TWO potential "deep threats", neither of whom has worked with a truly elite QB his entire career:

Player "A", age 29, 6'3"/211 - 7 yrs exp (7 career games lost to injury):

Career stats: 341/5323, 15.6 ypc, 39 TDs,
----- 3 yrs 6+ TDs, 4yr 870+ yds, 5 yrs 15.3+ ypc, 29% YAC, 48% CR.
** Might be willing to sign for around $1M base salary and a couple mil in incentives.


Player "B", age 31, 6'0"/192 - 9 yrs exp (31 career games lost to injury):

Career stats: 311/4784, 15.4 ypc, 31 TDs,
----- 2 yrs 6+ TDs, 1 yr 870+ yds, 2 yrs 15.3+ ypc, 16% YAC, 48% CR.
** Might want as much as $3M base plus incentives.

 

[robbomango]

While we're on the subject (a-GAIN!), here are TWO potential "deep threats", neither of whom has worked with a truly elite QB his entire career:

Player "A", age 29, 6'3"/211 - 7 yrs exp (7 career games lost to injury):

Career stats: 341/5323, 15.6 ypc, 39 TDs,
----- 3 yrs 6+ TDs, 4yr 870+ yds, 5 yrs 15.3+ ypc, 29% YAC, 48% CR.
** Might be willing to sign for around $1M base salary and a couple mil in incentives.


Player "B", age 31, 6'0"/192 - 9 yrs exp (31 career games lost to injury):

Career stats: 311/4784, 15.4 ypc, 31 TDs,
----- 2 yrs 6+ TDs, 1 yr 870+ yds, 2 yrs 15.3+ ypc, 16% YAC, 48% CR.
** Might want as much as $3M base plus incentives.

Colston will be cheaper than Lloyd?

EDIT: sorry, missed the "incentives vs mil in incentives"

 

[Daigle]

I think its quite a good deal to get Wallace for a first rounder. Its like most people say, the risk of drafting a WR is greater than getting Wallace since he is NFL proven.

Not sure about the cash he wants but if Ocho got 6 mil ? I think we can fork over some extra on this guy. If it is only 9 mil total, we can cut ocho and give him his money. Bring in Branch as 3rd WR.

On another note, I still think we should get better O-line in terms of running and that will be enough to win. Running the ball also opens the field. Its also paying of twoways, usually since you both get better pass protection with better linemen and better running the ball.

How about we trade the 31st and some more for David Decastro ? Might be better alternative cost/gain ?

 

[MaineMan]

Colston will be cheaper than Lloyd?

EDIT: sorry, missed the "incentives vs mil in incentives"

heh.

Neither player is Colston.

Guess again.