Patriots shopping Ben Watson?

[DW Toys]

The only way Ben's value could be any lower right now is if we had drafted a TE. This makes no sense.

Bakes...Think Hobbs. Same deal only different.
DW Toys

 

[mgteich]

Watson is our starting TE. He is a much better receiver that Baker and Smith, and he blocks reasonably well. He is certainly worth the $500K of cap money that might be saved by keeping Thomas instead.

SOME COMMENTS
1) Watson hasn't provided first round value.
2) Watson's being a #1 pick is irrelevant to the current decision with regard to whether to trade him.
3) The options are Thomas, DeVree and Distorti. Watson is certainly a better value for only $500K additional.
4) We probably won't get more in compensation now that we would get as a compensation pick.
5) Watson particpated in 75% of the offensive plays, and was our #4 receiver. Clearly, Belichick thought he was more valuable than Thomas or DeVree. What has changed to make us want to keep one of them instead of Watson on the roster?

MY CONCLUSION
A) Keep Watson with the expectation of not making much of an effort to retain him after the season. Watson will try very hard this season to impress others.
B) Try to extend Smith ASAP, to solidify the TE position long-term, while still looking for help in 2010. Smith is no Kyle Brady. Smith is in the prime of his career and well worth the risk of a long-term contract.

 

[maverick4]

The recent moves signal the end of Watson in New England.

Baker and Smith are our top two tight ends for the next few years.
The only question is if BB wants to let Watson play out his contract and leave, or trade him with 1 year left to get something in return.

 

[RayClay]

He's not what you'd ideally want, but considering that a) he was the last pick of the first round, and b) he's been a serviceable starter for 3+ years, I wouldn't call it a bad pick by a long shot.

I agree. They got an NFL starter with a borderline 1st/2nd. They hoped for a diamond in the rough, but it was a great pick if this is the downside risk.

If he played up to his size speed capabilities, he's a top 5 pick and that's not where we were picking.

Is there a market for him? If so, we should pursue it, because i don't think we'll see eye to eye on a new contract.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Meaning he was the 32nd overall player taken out of all of college that year.
He was a bad pick.
Raw, high potential players are worth fliers on in later rounds, not with high picks.

Watson has proven to be an effective receiver and serviceable blacker as the starting tight-end for some of the best offenses in NFL history. That's not an awful pick at #32. You obviously hope for more when you make the pick, but an effective starter-caliber player shouldn't be underestimated.

 

[upstater1]

We've had injuries at TE the last few years.

The trade speaks more to that than anything else.

 

[patriot lifer]

i have this lasting image of Watson completely whiffing on a basic block in the preseason last year. he was lined up at the standard TE position, and a much bigger lineman or LB blew right by him. It was embarrassing to watch-nothing but air for Watson. I couldn't help but think that this was the primary TE blocking for our TB when Kyle Brady wasn't around (in 2007).

Frankly, I don't trust Watson to block or catch passes. he isn't reliable in my book. According to NFL.com, he only had 22 receptions last season with one fumble. guys like welker, faulk, moss, and others can be counted on to make the basic catches, while Watson seems to struggle. I wouldn't be surprised at a cut if not for the potential dead money suffered by the team. while we shouldn't base our judgment of whether to keep him or not based on him being a bust, he is getting paid like a first rounder and is not of very good value.

that being said, I welcome the competition at training camp and hope that it strengthens the position. I hope Watson proves my sentiments wrong.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

According to Miguel it's elementary my dear Watson costs us $525K if cut or saves us $450K if traded. Neither number is major enough to prohibit or encourage either action by itself. Watson has been a servicable starter who failed to meet the lofty all world expectations many of us had when he was drafted and we learned about his speed, intelligence and size. We've had so many injuries at TE that having several good TEs is insurance that we don't have to field a patchwork offence incapable of executing to plan. That said BB will not keep 4 TEs. If Thomas is a stump in BB's eyes, he goes. Given the expectation that in 2010 Watson expects a big contract, one he won't get here, it is possible though unlikely in my view that BB might trade Watson in his contract year for a performance based 2010 pick and keep the other three TEs.

 

[bagwell368]

According to Miguel it's elementary my dear Watson costs us $525K if cut or saves us $450K if traded. Neither number is major enough to prohibit or encourage either action by itself. Watson has been a servicable starter who failed to meet the lofty all world expectations many of us had when he was drafted and we learned about his speed, intelligence and size. We've had so many injuries at TE that having several good TEs is insurance that we don't have to field a patchwork offence incapable of executing to plan. That said BB will not keep 4 TEs. If Thomas is a stump in BB's eyes, he goes. Given the expectation that in 2010 Watson expects a big contract, one he won't get here, it is possible though unlikely in my view that BB might trade Watson in his contract year for a performance based 2010 pick and keep the other three TEs.

Yes. He can stay or go. If BB can't find a solid trade and/or BW find a heart in training camp, it might be a 3 way open tryout. Pats are so good at cap management they can afford 3 TE's on the roster easily. In this logic, DT would get cut, and at some point Watson or Smith would be extended - but not both, since Baker is already inked for more years.

Watson is potentially a very expensive resign (if he is great in '09). Smith could be resigned right away (as someone suggested above), which could be quite wise money wise. However if they want to deal Watson it would have to come before the resign of Smith because then Watson is a true lame duck, and one would assume any smart GM wouldn't bite at full price (where is Al Davis?) Doesn't he like fast players?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

New Special Teams rules limiting "wedges" to two men calls for some creative thinking. When blocking in space, NE has two sources for bigger bodies capable of matching up 'in space:' Tight Ends and Linebackers.

Linebackers: Alexander (240), Appleby (245), Banta-Cain (250*), Bruschi (247), Crable (243), Craig (242), Guyton (242), Mayo (242), McKenzie (243), Redd (260), Thomas (270), Woods (250) *playing weight while with NE, SF had him at 265 or better.

Tight Ends: Baker (258), DeVree (245), Listorti (255), Smith (258), Thomas (248), Watson (255)

Linebackers - eliminate Bruschi, Mayo, Thomas who will have limited STs reps for various reasons.
-- Tier One (Solid NFL STs history): Alexander, Banta-Cain, Guyton, Woods
-- Tier Two (Limited NFL STs play): Redd
-- Tier Three (No NFL Experience): Appleby, Crable, Craig, McKenzie

Tight Ends - Rotational nature of reps and overall youth prevents elimination.
-- Tier One: Baker, Smith, Thomas, Watson
-- Tier Two: DeVree
-- Tier Three: Listorti

If you are looking for bigger bodies to block in space under the new rules, Tight End becomes a more critical back of the roster spot. Trading Watson and/or Thomas does little to help the team. Acquiring two TE's who are believed to be as good or better blockers than those currently on the roster helps the running game and kick/punt return units. David Thomas blocked well as a rookie, but after breaking his foot struggled, perhaps he'll return to his rookie form in his second year back from the foot injury. Watson always struggles to start the season, but gets into a groove and becomes a more productive blocker as the season progresses. It is not inconceivable to consider four Tight Ends on the roster, BB and Coach O'Brien will be looking closely at Special Teams ideas in Training Camp and Preseason as they get some practical experience with blocking and covering returns under the new rules.

 

[JSn]

New Special Teams rules limiting "wedges" to two men calls for some creative thinking. When blocking in space, NE has two sources for bigger bodies capable of matching up 'in space:' Tight Ends and Linebackers.

Linebackers: Alexander (240), Appleby (245), Banta-Cain (250*), Bruschi (247), Crable (243), Craig (242), Guyton (242), Mayo (242), McKenzie (243), Redd (260), Thomas (270), Woods (250) *playing weight while with NE, SF had him at 265 or better.

Tight Ends: Baker (258), DeVree (245), Listorti (255), Smith (258), Thomas (248), Watson (255)

Linebackers - eliminate Bruschi, Mayo, Thomas who will have limited STs reps for various reasons.
-- Tier One (Solid NFL STs history): Alexander, Banta-Cain, Guyton, Woods
-- Tier Two (Limited NFL STs play): Redd
-- Tier Three (No NFL Experience): Appleby, Crable, Craig, McKenzie

Tight Ends - Rotational nature of reps and overall youth prevents elimination.
-- Tier One: Baker, Smith, Thomas, Watson
-- Tier Two: DeVree
-- Tier Three: Listorti

If you are looking for bigger bodies to block in space under the new rules, Tight End becomes a more critical back of the roster spot. Trading Watson and/or Thomas does little to help the team. Acquiring two TE's who are believed to be as good or better blockers than those currently on the roster helps the running game and kick/punt return units. David Thomas blocked well as a rookie, but after breaking his foot struggled, perhaps he'll return to his rookie form in his second year back from the foot injury. Watson always struggles to start the season, but gets into a groove and becomes a more productive blocker as the season progresses. It is not inconceivable to consider four Tight Ends on the roster, BB and Coach O'Brien will be looking closely at Special Teams ideas in Training Camp and Preseason as they get some practical experience with blocking and covering returns under the new rules.

Nice break-down Box. Makes a lot of sense and highlights another reason trading for Gonzalez wouldn't have optimized roster usage.

 

[mgteich]

Most of us have projected 5 RB's and 3 TE's. Are you suggesting an additional TE?
Most of us have projected 9 LB's. Are you suggesting an additional LB?

I agree that the FO will consider the new rules as the last roster spots are decided. However, I would note that Alexander was re-signed (although I don't have him making the roster).

New Special Teams rules limiting "wedges" to two men calls for some creative thinking. When blocking in space, NE has two sources for bigger bodies capable of matching up 'in space:' Tight Ends and Linebackers. He's not exactly a wide-body.

Linebackers: Alexander (240), Appleby (245), Banta-Cain (250*), Bruschi (247), Crable (243), Craig (242), Guyton (242), Mayo (242), McKenzie (243), Redd (260), Thomas (270), Woods (250) *playing weight while with NE, SF had him at 265 or better.

Tight Ends: Baker (258), DeVree (245), Listorti (255), Smith (258), Thomas (248), Watson (255)

Linebackers - eliminate Bruschi, Mayo, Thomas who will have limited STs reps for various reasons.
-- Tier One (Solid NFL STs history): Alexander, Banta-Cain, Guyton, Woods
-- Tier Two (Limited NFL STs play): Redd
-- Tier Three (No NFL Experience): Appleby, Crable, Craig, McKenzie

Tight Ends - Rotational nature of reps and overall youth prevents elimination.
-- Tier One: Baker, Smith, Thomas, Watson
-- Tier Two: DeVree
-- Tier Three: Listorti

If you are looking for bigger bodies to block in space under the new rules, Tight End becomes a more critical back of the roster spot. Trading Watson and/or Thomas does little to help the team. Acquiring two TE's who are believed to be as good or better blockers than those currently on the roster helps the running game and kick/punt return units. David Thomas blocked well as a rookie, but after breaking his foot struggled, perhaps he'll return to his rookie form in his second year back from the foot injury. Watson always struggles to start the season, but gets into a groove and becomes a more productive blocker as the season progresses. It is not inconceivable to consider four Tight Ends on the roster, BB and Coach O'Brien will be looking closely at Special Teams ideas in Training Camp and Preseason as they get some practical experience with blocking and covering returns under the new rules.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Most of us have projected 5 RB's and 3 TE's. Are you suggesting an additional TE?
Most of us have projected 9 LB's. Are you suggesting an additional LB?

I agree that the FO will consider the new rules as the last roster spots are decided. However, I would note that Alexander was re-signed (although I don't have him making the roster).

I'm projecting nothing. I am looking at the current offseason roster and pondering the thinking behind the trades and roster make-up. If BB felt the best team on cutdown day included 4 TEs, I'd analyze that as a result of Special Teams and play preferences for the acting OC.