Position groups BB has under-/over-invested in?

[New England Pride]

Bill seems to like investing high on the inactive/injured reserved.

I wish you were the gm. I love the classic "Burn Belichick and hang him while stabbing him with pitch fork" thread.

 

[RayClay]

What about offensive line and defensive line? You are building a straw man here. Investing in a poor player is over investing. Amendola was an over investment because he was not worth anything close to what he was paid. Tavon Wilson was an over investment because he was not worth anything close to a second round pick. An investment being good or bad is determined based on the return not just the act of it.

Individual player judgment or injuries is obviously not the topic.

 

[RobertWeathers]

The Tommy Kelly move is still a head-scratcher.

Kelly re-did his deal to have a chance to play for the NEP. During camp, he realized that he wasn't going to get the kind of playing time he wanted and basically asked to be cut.

Was that BB's fault?

 

[Fencer]

I think BB's plan is approximately to have "middle-class" players at most positions, including key backup roles, and to enjoy and often pay the major stars wherever on the roster they show up. Some depth roles are deep enough that he's willing to go with JAGs. For example, positions on which he's used a 1st or 2nd round pick include:

QB
TE
WR
RB
OT
OG
DE
DT
LB
S
CB

... in other words, everything except C, FB and ST specialist.

I also think he's given fairly generous contracts to at least one player at every position except FB and LS.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I'd like to see BB pay up for Ayers, up to point. Edge rushers are expensive, but he certainly seems to be worth more than, say, Cannon.

Agreed on Ayers. Has positional flexibility. Is young and can do a number of things. Can't really compare what a OL gets paid to what a OLB/DE gets paid. Different positions. Different roles.

DT is feeling fine right now, even if Easley doesn't produce this year.

Don't assume the VW contract situation is resolved. 2015 is a phony deal IMO. Signing Branch would be a good move. Would be nice to find another Tommy Kelly in the draft.

LB will be an issue for the off-season. If both Mayo and Casillas stay, that's a good start.

Agreed. Mayo, Casillas, HT, Collins and Ayers are a nice unit.

Power RB depth depends on whether Gray can be quickly rehabilitated. (And if Blount is hurt, it should be quick indeed.) Vereen/White is hard to forecast; Vereen seems a bit glassy, but that might also lower his price.

Vereen has been pretty healthy this year. He'll get some interest in FA for sure. I think the team values him over Woodhead but on the same coin, so will the market.

 

[RayClay]

I think BB has done a great job in saving at certain positions to spend elsewhere, while maintaining constant winning seasons. When Brady was throwing darts at players knees early in his career, they got by with what must have been the cheapest Oline around. Outside of Light, Woody and Koppen, they hardly spent anything. even Neal didn't blossom for a while so I doubt a wrestler commanded much of a paycheck.

They spent heavy on their three man line and it carried the team, especially as the LBs got old. Speaking of LBs, without high picks, and the polian rules, they spent on offense and cheaped out at LB, except for the misbegotten Adalius deal, in favor of offense (Maroney, Chad Jackson). Probably a mistake in personnel, but maybe in resorces. Hard to tell what would have happened had they spent those picks on LBs, DBs or D linemen.

Lately, they've been cheaping out on D line, leaning on Wilfork, until the
easley pick and stocking up on LBs and DE-OLB to good effect in the draft. DB depth and Revis Browner have completed a defense that's very young, with picks in LB and DB and good patches at D Line to go with a hopefully healthy easley.

Unlike the old days, with a mature Brady making al the thows, they are paying big on Oline in the future IMO, with young costly tackles, contract for cannon, assumed contract upon performance future for Stork and probably a future guard making more early than conelly wendell (just a guess). Priority being improvement to a great line to keep brady upright.

They aren't spending a lot on WR, RB which suits their team and game plan offense IMO, especially considering the jackpot they've hit at TE with Gronk and the surprising Wright.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Kelly re-did his deal to have a chance to play for the NEP. During camp, he realized that he wasn't going to get the kind of playing time he wanted and basically asked to be cut.

Was that BB's fault?

Couldn't they re-structure his deal in a way that was acceptable to him?

Don't assume the VW contract situation is resolved. 2015 is a phony deal IMO. Signing Branch would be a good move. Would be nice to find another Tommy Kelly in the draft.

Who knew it was that easy?

 

[Gumby]

I think there are too many folks arguing different things as the OP didnt define his terms well enough.

If talking about "investing" by 'position group' I think you can talk about that legitimately two ways:

1. the number of roster spaces allocated (53 and PS rosters)
2. the amount of salary cap allocated

To go off down the road of 'did he invest sufficient QUALITY' (whether by using TRULY SUBECTIVE measures of player A was 'good, bad, great' or still subjective measures of 'Draft-round position') is IMO a distraction to the discussion-argument.

I think at the beginning of the football year (Mar) for any position BB feels extremely weak in he has consistently planned to address the issue through all 3 venues (draft, vet FAs, UDFAs) and then he let the cards fall where they may. sometimes those 'solutions' just dont work out (ocho-stinko, haynesworth, multiple draft picks). The thing is sometimes BB doesnt see 'extremely weak' in the same light the poster community does. But I think that the cleanest argument to have is how many positions out of the 53 (or out of the pre-season 90 if you will) should he be allocating to a particular position group to ensure sufficient depth (competition if you will).

 

[RobertWeathers]

Couldn't they re-structure his deal in a way that was acceptable to him?

They had already restructured it during the 2014 offseason. Kelly's issue was that he felt that during camp, inferior players that made less $ were playing instead of him. In the end, I think that the only thing that could have saved Kelly was that he would have played more.

http://nesn.com/2014/09/ex-patriot-tommy-kelly-does-new-england-want-to-win-or-save-money/

Who knew it was that easy?

Ha. If they only fell of trees. My point is that finding a DT who is stout vs the run and can rush the passer is an area of need for this team.

 

[Brady6]

Individual player judgment or injuries is obviously not the topic.

In regards of topic, I am confused by why this thread even was bumped up today. The investments made by the front office has changed (Ayers, Cassillas, Branch, and Branch) significantly since the opening of this thread on 10/25/14.

 

[Fencer]

Vereen has been pretty healthy this year. He'll get some interest in FA for sure. I think the team values him over Woodhead but on the same coin, so will the market.

Vereen often seems to be underperforming because of a wrist or ankle or whatever. (Reiss' most recent chat says its an ankle at the moment.)

 

[Fencer]

I think there are too many folks arguing different things as the OP didnt define his terms well enough.

If talking about "investing" by 'position group' I think you can talk about that legitimately two ways:

1. the number of roster spaces allocated (53 and PS rosters)
2. the amount of salary cap allocated

I meant #2, except that it's money plus premium picks. There's much more potential variability in those than in roster slots.

 

[RayClay]

In regards of topic, I am confused by why this thread even was bumped up today. The investments made by the front office has changed (Ayers, Cassillas, Branch, and Branch) significantly since the opening of this thread on 10/25/14.

I took it as an overall strategy. the reason that amendola wouldn't applyis, they intended to spend more at the position if welker had taken his contract.

 

[Fencer]

Lately, they've been cheaping out on D line, leaning on Wilfork, until the
easley pick and stocking up on LBs and DE-OLB to good effect in the draft.

Chandler Jones before Easley, actually.

Anyhow, the if-healthy starting front seven is Hightower/Mayo/Collins plus Jones/Easley/Wilfork/Ninkovich, which represents considerable investment. However, the backups are a lot cheaper than back when guys like Jarvis Green, Ted Johnson or even Willie McGinest didn't start. Ayers could be a first step toward spending again on Front Seven depth.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Vereen often seems to be underperforming because of a wrist or ankle or whatever. (Reiss' most recent chat says its an ankle at the moment.)

Not sure I agree that he is underperforms often. However at present he is dinged up.

 

[Fencer]

In regards of topic, I am confused by why this thread even was bumped up today. The investments made by the front office has changed (Ayers, Cassillas, Branch, and Branch) significantly since the opening of this thread on 10/25/14.

Hence my interest in reconsidering the OP. In the areas where BB's balanced investment didn't extend to depth, and the depth was tested this season, he found pretty good players to slot in.

 

[Brady6]

I took it as an overall strategy. the reason that amendola wouldn't applyis, they intended to spend more at the position if welker had taken his contract.

I have honestly moved on from this topic, I am a football fan, and I will admit I do not even remember all my opinions and beliefs from Oct...

For the record, given that we are invested in him I am fine with the value we are getting out of Amendola as a KR/PR, a capable backup to Edelman, and spread offense depth WR. We need that type of quality depth if we want to make a legit run at the Super Bowl. Maybe we can restructure DA in the offseason and who knows he will give us more production than his contract pays for in 2015.

 

[Brady6]

Hence my interest in reconsidering the OP. In the areas where BB's balanced investment didn't extend to depth, and the depth was tested this season, he found pretty good players to slot in.

Brother it was almost 2 months ago in football fan time that is like 2 decades, I was probably advocating to start Bolden at RB, Dobson at WR, Wilson at SAF, and Bequette at RDE around time for Christ sakes…

 

[RayClay]

I have honestly moved on from this topic, I am a football fan, and I will admit I do not even remember all my opinions and beliefs from Oct...

For the record, given that we are invested in him I am fine with the value we are getting out of Amendola as a KR/PR, a capable backup to Edelman, and spread offense depth WR. We need that type of quality depth if we want to make a legit run at the Super Bowl. Maybe we can restructure DA in the offseason and who knows he will give us more production than his contract pays for in 2015.

Right. His personal situation doesn't have to do with investment at the position. They apparently value the slot position more than some teams.

 

[RayClay]

Chandler Jones before Easley, actually.

Anyhow, the if-healthy starting front seven is Hightower/Mayo/Collins plus Jones/Easley/Wilfork/Ninkovich, which represents considerable investment. However, the backups are a lot cheaper than back when guys like Jarvis Green, Ted Johnson or even Willie McGinest didn't start. Ayers could be a first step toward spending again on Front Seven depth.

Hard to have an apples to apples comparison given the different roles. I'm comparing wilfork, Branch and siliga to W, seymour and warren. Much cheaper.