PD: SHOULD the Patriots even re-sign Wilfork?

[tanked_as_usual]

Vince's situation is somewhat unique on a couple of levels. Paying him what he potentially wants precludes paying those who surround him. Vince and Bianca have acknowledged their own concerns related to the untimely death of BOTH of his parents when he was just 21 and they were barely 40. Dad died of kidney failure related to diabetes. Mother suffered a stroke. Perillo yesterday touched on this relating how every year Vince predicts he will arrive in camp in better condition carrying less weight. So far he hasn't. Paul thinks the team shares the concern about his ability to carry his weight long range. As well as a concern about paying top tier money for a DL who is essentially a 2 down lineman. And one who might really struggle to maintain weight and conditioning if there is a lockout in 2011.

I like Vince. As a player and a person. I sense the team and ownership feels the same way. Unfortunately it also sounds like Vince made up his mind some time ago that every last cent his career was worth was his ultimate goal. If that's the case he likely wouldn't have ever been extendable here, let alone facing a potential lockout. If he wants a 6 year deal with $30-40M in guarantees, he's not going to get it here and he may not get it anywhere because of the timing of an expiring CBA. I know players will point to some other guys getting big deals, but most of them were QB's. Franchise QB's are the single most difficult piece of the puzzle for any team to land or retain. Which is why if anyone gets the long term deal here before the CBA is settled, it will be Brady. He is the most irreplaceable piece of the puzzle here and the guy they are most inclined to count on making it to his late 30's while remaining highly productive.

And again, facing a potential lockout season in 2011, Vince has less leverage than any of the Fa in recent history - none of whom has held out on a season. If he holds out on camp it will only further damage his chances of landing somewhere with a big deal after the CBA finally gets hashed out, sometime in 2011 or perhaps not even until 2012 when he is 31.

The team has likely offered him the same kind of deal they have always offered their big ticket extensions or FA signings - one with split signing/option bonus language that protects them from drowning in guaranteed money in the event of a work stoppage impacting a players career, because to not do so now would be foolish. Brady's last deal, on the heels of Manning's $34.5M signing bonus deal, offered $14M in signing bonus and $12.5M in option bonus plus some minimal salary guarantees against loss of skill in the middle years of the deal and some small roster bonuses in the outlying years. Even AD took a split signing/option bonus.

Brady took substantially less on the heels of his first Superbowl on a rookie deal that was paying him $360K to sign an incremental deal for $30M going forward to secure his immediate future. He then again took substantially less 4 years later to sign his second big deal (6-$60M) two years early even after winning back to back superbowls to insure his family's future. Next deal he signs will cover the great, great grandchildren.

Vince's future was secure when he was signed in the first round. His family's future could be secured by signing a long term deal of almost any size and duration now. He apparently wants the deal for the generations. He may end up with a one year deal in the alternative. Given the labor landscape, that's not a smart money move. Ty Warren and Dan Koppen and Matt Light are guys who took early incremental deals to secure their family's future. Vince has had that option on the table since 2008. He opted not to. Asante had that option on the table in 2006 and he opted not to. Worked out for him because there were at least 3 years left to play before a lockout so his guaranteed money was something Philly could live with even though his AAV was something they now likely wish they had opted not to since it turns out he's not the difference maker they believed he would be, any more than he would have been here. More often than not teams find out that difference makers aren't the highest paid players on the field. Unless of course they're the QB.

outstanding points.........with one difference......all those incremental deals were done at a time when it was fashionable to sign up for a very good chance to win a superbowl

in reality, neither wilfork nor the pats will be the dictating factor early on......it depends on how the free agent activity start to shape up league-wide once it starts. it will also be interesting to see what kind of talent gets cut simply because since there is no cap, there is no minimum......there are some teams out there who could wind up to 70M below what was the 2009 cap

 

[SeauOUCH]

yes they should re-sign wilfork, and i don't agree with some OP who say we shoud trade him for a #1 and then draft a rookie NT with that pick....? thats just crazy.


if they are going to trade him for a #1 then there is no reason to run the 3-4 next year. they don't have the LB's to run it and have a hard time finding them.


move to the 4-3 and put guyton, and mayo. were they can have more of a impact guyton at 4-3 OLB and mayo at MLB. use the two #1's on two fast DE's like Everson Griffen, and Carlos Dunlap, put warren and wright at DT and draft. Eric Norwood, in the 2th round to play the other OLB spot.

Actually I kinda like this idea. I love Vince but to be honest I don't think he is worth huge $$. He is pretty much a 2 down run stuffer, as good as he is in that role I don't know if tying up a big % of the cap in a 2 down player is a great idea.

4-3 DE's & LB's also seem to be much more plentiful in the draft, it seems you need to be an athletic freak of nature to be effective in BB's 3-4 as an OLB, these type of players are very rare ( & hard to attain ).

As sad as it sounds I rather have the Colts D than ours ( even with Vince ) yes they are a bit softer against the run ( though after watching the Balt game I'm not so sure ) but they get after the QB & are very tough to pass against.

 

[SeymourTrophies]

The thing I worry about with Wilfork is his weight and the fact we have no idea when his knees are going to give out. He's not some 6'5'' monstrosity who weighs 325 and has the weight evenly distributed. He's 6'2'', and 325 (allegedly) is a lot of weight for him to be holding up.

I wouldn't be against tagging and trading Wilfork under the right circumstances. We cannot afford to get nothing for him, which won't happen in the uncapped year if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Run DMC]

My co-worker, who is hard core Raiders homer, says there are reports on the Raiders board that Seymour is trying to lure Wilfork to the Raiders. I reminded him that they haven't even signed Seymour yet. He replies Schefter says this is real. Oh boy. I think we're going to lose Wilfork due to the often unmentioned New England cheapness factor which few here dare to speak of.

 

[The Dynasty]

My co-worker, who is hard core Raiders homer, says there are reports on the Raiders board that Seymour is trying to lure Wilfork to the Raiders. I reminded him that they haven't even signed Seymour yet. He replies Schefter says this is real. Oh boy. I think we're going to lose Wilfork due to the often unmentioned New England cheapness factor which few here dare to speak of.

If the Pats dont resign him they wont just let Wilfork walk, they will franchise him. I cant see him going to the Raiders even if he was on the market. A team much better than the Raiders would want him and pay him

 

[tanked_as_usual]

If the Pats dont resign him they wont just let Wilfork walk, they will franchise him. I cant see him going to the Raiders even if he was on the market. A team much better than the Raiders would want him and pay him

wilfork holds seymour in higher regard than anyone in the pats FO

 

[patsinthesnow]

On the raiders side of it, if they get Big Vince and start Gradcowski who can actually throw the ball, they might have a decent team.

 

[The Dynasty]

wilfork holds seymour in higher regard than anyone in the pats FO

It doesnt matter because once the Pats franchise him they have his rights. They could then trade him for draft picks if they wanted but Wilfork wouldnt have a say as to where he is traded.

If the Pats dont franchise him then Wilfork is on his own and can go anywhere he wants. I still cant see him going to the Raiders, he would get a lot better offers than that.

 

[ausbacker]

IF Seymour wants Wilfork at Oakland, are their picks in 8 and 39 enough?

 

[Ring 6]

Should the Pats re-sign Wilfork? That would be like asking if we should try to breathe today. Of course they should try re-sign him. Outside of Brady, Wilfork is the most important guy on this team.

I disagree.
I recognize that it is widely believed that the NT is the key to the 34 defense.
I happen to disagree with that belief.
Wilfork is a good, not great player.
Not that he is to blame but our defense since 2005 when he took over full time (he split the job in 2004) our D has not been as good as it was in 03 and 04.
Naturally, a defense being worse does not prove an individual is worse, but if he is to be considered the most important player on the defense, then I wouldn't expect, if he were irreplaceable, that we've never been as good since he took over as we were at the peak prior to that.

Again, I recognize most will disagree. And will also disagree with what I say next:
I think in building this team BB uncharacteristically overspent on the DL.
Prior to 2003 when he choseWarren in round 1 followed by Wilfork in 2004, the teams BB won with had been built with DL that were 2 gap specialists, that were not well-known were not real versatile and were 'lunch bucket guys'.
It seems that BBs move to build the DL as the strength of the team with all #1 picks fueled the dynsasty, but in retrospect, not so much.
Seymour was a great pick and not one I consider a trend to spend heavily on the DL. (I acutally think he picked these players because they were the BPA) Warren was Ted Washingtons backup in 03 and a starter in 04, Wilfork split the NT with Traylor in 04. Starting in 05 when we had all 3 starting and experienced, we have not been as good defensively, nor won a SB.
I do not think the play of those 3 players made the D worse or prevented SB titles, but I do think that the opportunity cost of having 3 #1 picks on a 34 2 gap DL did.

In other words, we built a strong DL, but the impact it could have was not as large as we could have gotten in other areas.

I am fine with Wilfork going, being replaced with a lunch bucket 2 gap specialist who lacks Wilforks additional talents, and the 'slot' of Wilfork as a #1 pick, franchise tag, huge contract, guy gets used elsewhere.

 

[ausbacker]

Some fair points throughout the thread with reasons for and reasons against re-signing Wilfork. My biggest concern is going to be paying Wilfork who is traditionally a 2 down player. I'd want to spend that amount on someone out there all the time, not some of the time.

 

[Run DMC]

Most dominant NT that I have seen play for the Pats was Ted Washington. What a beast. I agree with Andy, losing Vince would not be the end of the world.

 

[The Dynasty]

Most dominant NT that I have seen play for the Pats was Ted Washington. What a beast. I agree with Andy, losing Vince would not be the end of the world.

Wilfork is 10 times better than Washington ever was. If you think losing Vince is no big deal, then seeing our defense in complete disarray is no big deal. Vince was the best and most valuable player on this defense all season long. He did everything for this team and gave it his all. He played virtually every position on the DL and played on many 3rd downs when he is usually a 2 down back. In the playoff game vs the Ravens even when he wasnt 100% he still put up 13 tackles. This guy is a beast and the Patriots cannot afford to let him get away. If they do it will be the biggest mistake in the BB era.

 

[SeymourTrophies]

We only give Vince up if we get the opportunity to fix the many holes elsewhere. Presumably, we fill the gap left by Wilfork and fill other needs.

It's risky, but so is resigning a 28 year old who is as heavy as Wilfork is to the money he's apparently asking for.

 

[The Dynasty]

We only give Vince up if we get the opportunity to fix the many holes elsewhere. Presumably, we fill the gap left by Wilfork and fill other needs.

It's risky, but so is resigning a 28 year old who is as heavy as Wilfork is to the money he's apparently asking for.

How would giving up Wilfork give us the opportunity to fill other positions?

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Wilfork is 10 times better than Washington ever was. If you think losing Vince is no big deal, then seeing our defense in complete disarray is no big deal. Vince was the best and most valuable player on this defense all season long. He did everything for this team and gave it his all. He played virtually every position on the DL and played on many 3rd downs when he is usually a 2 down back. In the playoff game vs the Ravens even when he wasnt 100% he still put up 13 tackles. This guy is a beast and the Patriots cannot afford to let him get away. If they do it will be the biggest mistake in the BB era.

dude.....take a look at who's under contract.....the defense is already in disarray......I would question if the pats run defense was ever as good as it was when they had ted washington in the middle. also interesting to note is that both san diego and the jets continued to have sound run defenses after their starting NT's went out....

yes, it would be good to have wilfork back, but it is also interesting to see what the pats could get in his absence......a cheaper NT and a top 10 rookie

 

[SeymourTrophies]

How would giving up Wilfork give us the opportunity to fill other positions?

We're not letting him walk without getting something in return. There would be picks and possibly players (not that it's likely a player in that kind of trade would be a worth damn) in return.

 

[The Dynasty]

dude.....take a look at who's under contract.....the defense is already in disarray......I would question if the pats run defense was ever as good as it was when they had ted washington in the middle. also interesting to note is that both san diego and the jets continued to have sound run defenses after their starting NT's went out....

yes, it would be good to have wilfork back, but it is also interesting to see what the pats could get in his absence......a cheaper NT and a top 10 rookie

Wilfork is the most valuable player on the Patriots defense, there is no argument with that. Without him our run defense goes from mediocre to terrible.

The Jets had Jenkins go out who was their starting DT, not NT. The NT is more important than the DT position in the 3-4 defense. The Chargers had Nwagbuo only miss 4 games. There is a huge difference between 4 games and not even being on the roster in general.

 

[The Dynasty]

We're not letting him walk without getting something in return. There would be picks and possibly players (not that it's likely a player in that kind of trade would be a worth damn) in return.

If we dont franchise him or resign him then we would be letting him walk without getting something in return.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

It doesnt matter because once the Pats franchise him they have his rights. They could then trade him for draft picks if they wanted but Wilfork wouldnt have a say as to where he is traded.

If the Pats dont franchise him then Wilfork is on his own and can go anywhere he wants. I still cant see him going to the Raiders, he would get a lot better offers than that.

That's actually not quite correct. Until he signs his tender, the Pats can't trade him anywhere. OTOH, he can't sign with anyone else, either, unless they're willing to cough up two firsts.