Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Miguel, Jan 24, 2006.
http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/The Way We Hear It/default.htm?mode=afceast
"We hear that while the Patriots love Givens for his production and work ethic, they are concerned by the fact that he has missed time with various nagging injuries in his career. Word is New England would like to keep Givens and will make an offer to him. However, if a team blows him away with a lucrative deal, the Patriots would probably choose to fill the No. 2 receiver role through the draft rather than having to outbid the suitor."
Not saying that this isn't true, but it's hard to see how it's news. "We like **** but we won't pay an absurd price to keep him". Of whom might that not be said?
makes sense. only i think they'll offer him competetive money. not bank breaking but a good offer. if he goes i think they'll try to fill the #2 spot with free agency and depth in the draft.
They hear it, pretty much the way I've heard it too!
Isn't the maximum RFA tender something like $1.8mil, and a team would have to come up with two draft picks if they signed him?
I think he is a URFA this year. They did tender him last year at 1.4 mil I believe.
Nothing earth shattering there. I think that's about what all of us expected.
He's an Unrestricted Free Agent.
Uh... hello?!?!?! I KNOW he's an UFA this year. They said LAST year he got the highest tender at $1.43m, and my understanding was that 1.43mil is NOT the highest tender as an RFA. There's one at 1.8mil that requires 2 #1 picks as comp.
UFA is a total FA unless you Franchise him (average of top five at position) or Transition him (average of top ten at position). But all the transition buys you is the right to match an offer.
If they had the cap money they could franchise him and try to trade him like with Tebucky - but withdraw the tag if they can't trade him. They'd need to fit his franchise number under the cap until a trade, though, and would also need to sign Adam as they can't both be franchised.
I think that only applies if they tag him as Franchise. Then he would have to get the average pay of the top five WR.
I don't think there is any other way other than - Transition tag. I don't know what he compensation is on that.
There's no compensation for a Transition player, you just get the chance to match any offer.
Yes, I believe you're absolutely right. As I recall Givens received the mid-level tender, not the top level -- the article is mistaken. No clue why so many posters misunderstood you.
Givens is going to the Redskins I fear... they'll offer him the big money, Patten's already there, and they need a solid #2 receiver to Santana Moss.
Whether they were accurate about last year is irrelevant, he's a UFA now and the posts above this accurately describe the options the Patriots have.
What will really bother me is if he goes to the Jets. I can definitely see it happening. I would not be suprised to see the Eagles try to sign him. They can easily afford to overpay a bit for him as far under the cap as they are. But then the Eagles could also try to get Reggie wayne.
Actually, the highest level requires a 1st and a 3rd as comp.
Patch, you are a howl!
Can't understand it either.
Expecting to get a #2 WR from the draft is NOT a wise thing.
I've got no problem with drafting a WR but its a bit of a crap shoot.
But apparently this reporter has never heard of Tony Simmons.
I can promise you that PFW's sources are Michael Felger and Tom Curran. They don't know what the Ptriots are thinking any more than me or anybody else on this board. To suggest that the Pats would look to acquire a #2 WR through the draft is a moronic idea. Since BB has been here, the only guy he's drafted with the idea of making him an immediate starter is Mankins. And there's a big difference between making the transition on the OL and WR. On top of all that, this is probably the weakest WR class in recent memory.
OK. I'll give you Seymour. But Light wasn't counted on to be a starter as a rookie. He won the starting job in camp - sort of like Kaczur or Wilson.
I don't think the Pats would go into TC with the exacat same WR corps they had this year except for a rookie taking Givens' place. IMO, they actually need to keep Givens AND upgrade the #3 WR position.
Branch also played a lot immediately although I forget who was the #2 WR behind Brown out of Patten, Branch and Hayes. But Branch had 43 catches and 7 starts in 2002.
Everyone is saying that David Givens will get some big money offers elsewhere - and he will take it. I do not begrudge a man for taking the money if that is his priority. However, do you really give big money to a number two receiver? And, do any of you believe that Givens could be a number 1?
How about this scenario?
The Skins cut Patten, he comes back here and Givens gets signed by the Skins.
Then we could start another Patten thread...
I doubt he goes to the Jets, i think EM is focusing on Defense first (like his mentor) besides they will have cap problems
I don't think Givens could be a Number 1. Honestly, for a Super Bowl contender I think he's a VERY GOOD Number 3. He just isn't fast or quick enough for my liking. But the Falcons gave Peerless Price a huge contract and traded a #1 for the right to do so - so you never know.
First nominee for "the understatement of the year" Yes, the jets do indeed have cap problems.
I was nitpicking over details. I do think that Light was expected to start. However, perhaps you are right, that we weren't counting on him. I also think bb expected Klemm to start.
I STRONGLY agree with your main point. bb and pioli do NOT count on rookies to start, not even Mankins. They were certainly ready to have Hochstein start if Mankins didn't beat him out. As a matter of principle, they try not to count on rookies to produce at all. Seymour is the exception because he was the #6 pick in the draft. I DO THINK that the top dozen players drafted should be expected to contribute in their first year.
bb and pioli will go into the draft with complete team. There may be a few minor depth issues that could be met with late signings of a couple of veterans at minimum or at about minimum, but certainly no major holes.
bb and pioli will have a solution before us, probably with 5 receivers (including Childress) including a qualified top 3, plus returners. IMHO, we will sign three-four free agents before the draft, not counting on Bethel Johnson or Childress.
THE DRAFT IS TO FIND
a possible future starting running back (we haven't done well)
a future starting OLB
a future starting OLB, and of course
the TE of the year
Separate names with a comma.