Proper Compensation for a Mankins trade?

[mcsully]

I was thinking of a senario where we might please everyone in the thread (except the people aiming for a #1 pick and another pick)


Here's my thought.. Dallas is on the clock at 9 and we trade Mankins, our 17th and in return we get dallas's #9 plus their 3rd rounder. Using the Value Chart as a base line, the move would cost a 2nd rounder..

We then target the Watts or the Quinns of the world (or who ever your heart desires )and pick up a 3rd rounder which we might be able to turn into a 2nd rounder for next year.. or maybe package 2 3rds and move up to the 2nd and a player to replace Mankins.. We bring in a young player under contract for 3-4 years and use that money to signg Matt Light and target a play maker on offense or defense..

Dallas stregthens their OL plus keeps them at 17 so they can pick a Tackle, Safey or CB and fills two needs with only giving up 1 pick and moving down 8.. They save moeny getting out of the 10 top ten and use that savings towards Mankins..

Of course this is dependant on the CBA being agreed on and trades can happen.

 

[dryheat44]

Trade him for Larry Fitgerald and a swap of picks.

I think people are minimizing the effect of a nasty, dominant lineman. They are much harder to find and plug in than Wide Receivers, for example.

I'm willing to bet that Mankins could also be a Pro Bowl right tackle, and an above average left tackle. There's a reason Belichick offered him a significant contract extension.

Bottom line is that the Patriots probably won't be able to / want to re-sign Mankins, the Cardinals certainly won't be able to re-sign Fitzgerald, so a trade makes sense. Kind of like the Bethel Johnson/Jonathan Sullivan exchange a few years back, but with 95% less suck.

 

[bucky]

This is closer to the Branch situation than to Cassel's.

I would argue that Mankins' position puts his situation closer to Adam Vinatieri's than Cassell's or Branch's. Last year, people were afraid that the Colts would give up a 2nd for Gostkowski and I said "let them". Well they didn't, Gostkowski was out half the year and it had zero affect on the Pats' seasonal outcome. Now people are afraid that the Steelers or Chargers are going to get Mankins for a 1? That would be a dream for the Pats!

The most realistic comparison is probably Tebucky Jones. Mankins is better than Jones, but Safeties are a little higher in priority than Guards. So realistically, a 2012 2nd rounder would be the best we could get.

 

[dryheat44]

Well they didn't, Gostkowski was out half the year and it had zero affect on the Pats' seasonal outcome.

Wait, let's clarify something, because I'm not sure I agree with this. Is your point that the Patriots weren't going to be better than 14-2 if they had Gostkowski? If so, very likely true. But that's irrelevant to me.

What is relevant is that on a team whose weakness is on the defensive side, our opponent's average starting position went from something like the 7 yard line to the 30 yard line. That is a huge difference and puts the defense (and ensuing offensive possession) in a significantly worse position.

FG kickers are largely replaceable. Who leads the league one year might be at the bottom the next and in the middle the year after. But those deep kickoffs into the end zone are a big strategic advantage.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I recall the conversations about the compensation for Cassel and people really over rated his worth. We need to compare previous trades and use that as a base line.
Seymour fetched us a 1st round pick 2 years later.. So Mankins is worth more than a future HOF?

In the past five years, what player who plays OL (i'm being general) has been traded to another team and what was the compensation..

Honestly, I don't recall any (of course my brain is fried from studying 1's and 0's)..

Cassel got us pick #33. That's pretty much a 1st round pick.

Mankins is worth a 1st. But I don't think teams will give that up and pay him the $$ he wants. They'll just wait a year for him to reach free agency.

 

[bucky]

Wait, let's clarify something, because I'm not sure I agree with this. Is your point that the Patriots weren't going to be better than 14-2 if they had Gostkowski? If so, very likely true. But that's irrelevant to me.

What is relevant is that on a team whose weakness is on the defensive side, our opponent's average starting position went from something like the 7 yard line to the 30 yard line. That is a huge difference and puts the defense (and ensuing offensive possession) in a significantly worse position.

FG kickers are largely replaceable. Who leads the league one year might be at the bottom the next and in the middle the year after. But those deep kickoffs into the end zone are a big strategic advantage.

My point is that the Patriots would not have finished better than 14-2 with Ghost. Nor would they have won the Jets game. On the other hand, if they'd gotten a #2 pick for Ghost, they could have potentially used it on someone who have helped (it's debatable). I'm not saying that Graham is as good as Ghost, just that I'd rather have Graham and a second than Ghost.

And the theory holds true for Mankins. Is he better than Justin Blalock or Darryn College? Sure he is. But I would rather have one of those guys, a 2nd round pick, and the extra cap space than Mankins.

 

[mcsully]

Cassel got us pick #33. That's pretty much a 1st round pick.

Mankins is worth a 1st. But I don't think teams will give that up and pay him the $$ he wants. They'll just wait a year for him to reach free agency.

It wasn't for 1st round pick and Cassel was a QB.. Looking at previous trades, Pats got a fair trade value.

Here's a question that should be straight forward that hasn't been answered. When is the last time a Probowl OL got traded and what did the team get in return. Use this as a baseline.

 

[dryheat44]

It wasn't for 1st round pick and Cassel was a QB.. Looking at previous trades, Pats got a fair trade value.

Here's a question that should be straight forward that hasn't been answered. When is the last time a Probowl OL got traded and what did the team get in return. Use this as a baseline.

It seems like we're forgetting that the trade was Cassel + Vrabel for pick #34.

Different situation, though, with the backup QB set to make the franchise number for a QB. BB really had to make a trade, and quickly.

 

[CTHuskies]

2012 1st round pick from a foolhardy NFC playoff contender/hopeful...

I would be very happy but I can't see any "foolhardy NFC hopefuls/contenders.

If there is no chance of him staying here beyond this year, get what you can for him and move on. Mankins is a 1st round pick all day long..........but you may get a 2nd if we are lucky (Denver #36 + #46 and San Diego #50 + #61 each have 2 picks in second round).

Mankins is worth more to the Pats so why give him away? We need to back BB against Kraft and sign him! Pats can't keep letting quality players go! This team must win now before Brady looses it.

However, if Kraft will not change his position, then get what you can for him. He will not bring more than a 2nd in trade compensation (unless Al Davis over pays) and we know that 2nd round pick is no sure thing.

How about trading Mankins plus our #60 and #92 to Denver for #36 and #46. (440+540) = 980 – (300 + 130) = 560 = Mankins value = #34
Or San Diego’s #50 + #61 (400 +290) = #32 (may need to add 5th round pick) [sorry for the math]:rocker:

 

[WhiZa]

It seems like we're forgetting that the trade was Cassel + Vrabel for pick #34.

Different situation, though, with the backup QB set to make the franchise number for a QB. BB really had to make a trade, and quickly.

I was right about to post this. If that's the value they are willing to give up for #34 then Mankins should be later then that. Keeping in mind the new team would have to take on his franchise number which is not an easy thing to do cap or not.

 

[CTHuskies]

Well you gotta pay too so it wont be a first. And we wont take a 3rd because we should get a comp pick if he walks. The ideal is a 2nd, but there is a good choice there are no takers and we recind the tag.

I think this is a very good point. Any trade has to bring as much if not more than the compensatory pick would be.

 

[dryheat44]

I was right about to post this. If that's the value they are willing to give up for #34 then Mankins should be later then that. Keeping in mind the new team would have to take on his franchise number which is not an easy thing to do cap or not.

Not really. First of all, Vrabel was on the downside at the time of the trade, and BB had very little leverage with Cassel. Again, he had to trade him or he would have had two of the five highest paid QBs in the league on his roster.

As to your second point, the new team would have to sign Mankins, but not at the franchise number -- neither player nor team wants that. Mankins, like Cassel, would prefer to sign a long-term deal at a lower per-year average than 1 year at the franchise number. The new team would have to be confident they could do so. They would likely know what it would take before the trade.

 

[KDPPatsfan85]

I would take at least a 2nd and a 3rd to trade him away.

 

[IllegalContact]

forget it.....you don't trade away guys like that who can still play......you don't leave brady out there with a bunch of rookies and/or declining OL's.....

let the CBA get done and watch as the 2 sides kiss and make up and blame it all on the CBA or lack of.

 

[DW Toys]

Trade him for Larry Fitgerald and a swap of picks.

I think people are minimizing the effect of a nasty, dominant lineman. They are much harder to find and plug in than Wide Receivers, for example.

I'm willing to bet that Mankins could also be a Pro Bowl right tackle, and an above average left tackle. There's a reason Belichick offered him a significant contract extension.

Bottom line is that the Patriots probably won't be able to / want to re-sign Mankins, the Cardinals certainly won't be able to re-sign Fitzgerald, so a trade makes sense. Kind of like the Bethel Johnson/Jonathan Sullivan exchange a few years back, but with 95% less suck.

My exact thoughts as well. Great job. The only way to extract real value is a reasonable player trade in this case. He's worth more than a second, but we won't get it easy. People value their 17% success rate Draft picks over NFL proven All Pro players (go figure).

I did do a scenario in a post where there is a three way swap with the Eagles involved. Swap Mankins to the Eagles who will take him in a minute for Kolb. Swap Kolb and a third (second?) to AZ for Fitz. I don't care what any of the nay-sayers think. AZ would consider this option. QB is their many issue in 2011. It's the other parts and pieces involved like salaries, which picks and in the end, the damned CBA rules if new.

Do you think Reid would swap his back up QB for the All Pro Guard he likes? I thinks so (by the way I have more inside on that from some media).

Kolb allows the Cards to not waste a pick on a not-sure thing QB (Am I getting a Clausen who was touted as the most NFL ready QB in last years Draft, or am I getting a Schaub who was not a first rounder and played well for another Team to start his career). Plus they pick up another reasonable Draft pick. The mathematics were that the Eagles wanted a first and third for Kolb in a case of highway robbery to some NFL "weak at QB" mark. If the Cards did a first (no #5 in the Draft!!!) and a third, they could get Kolb (the third round pick is probably negotiable)but it is way too much. On the same token, they would probably take a first and third (perhaps second) for Fitz who can get out of AZ next year anyway.

I see this as a win for all parties.

Additionally:
From the Eagles side (not me), their media mentioned Jackson for Mankins (but they wanted more and that won't happen). Jackson is strating to cause contract questions. Maybe we can add a Safety (whichever one is not in trouble at the time......plus a pick or another player) that the Eagles desperately need.

With Fitz the Pats don't need Jackson (or another huge WR contract) but the now WR needy Cards do and Kolb has thrown a few to Jackson so there should be chemistry.

Maybe we convolute this trade and have the Pats go for a Dockett who had an off year but would resolve our DE lack of rush issues.

Eagles=Mankins and a Saftey and a pick (#60?). They get their ransom for Kolb with Mankins and a starting Safety to replay Mikell their FA and a pick of some value TBD.

The Eagles sign Mankins long term

Cards=Jackson and Kolb and a pick (#92 from us and they replace Dockett with one of the top D Line players at #5, plus they can use our third rounder to fill holes like ILB, OLB or O-Line). Jackson makes the Fitz loss tolerable.

The Cards sign Jackson Long Term

Pats=Fitzgerald and Dockett (plus we get to keep our two #1s and #33 plus #74 in the first three rounds).

We can surely Draft a Watkins or Wiseinewski to plug in at Guard. Then our impact OLB, RB and OT. Take a Keo in the fourth or even use #33 for Weddle and you have greatly improved this Team even losing Mankins.

Just for fun-
#17 swap down to say Cinncinnnati so they can get their QB for #35 and their 2nd in 2012

#28 Reed OLB
#35 Watkins OG
#74 Murray RB
#119 in fourth Carpenter OT

Then Romeus DE/OLB, Keo S or Cortez CB or Gates WR in fifth or later

The Pats sign Fitz long term

All this is for fun but doable if each front office is not lazy.

DW Toys

 

[bucky]

As to your second point, the new team would have to sign Mankins, but not at the franchise number -- neither player nor team wants that. Mankins, like Cassel, would prefer to sign a long-term deal at a lower per-year average than 1 year at the franchise number. The new team would have to be confident they could do so. They would likely know what it would take before the trade.

Let's also not forget that Mankins' franchise number is totally bloated for a guard. It will make him the highest paid OG in the NFL by far and away. The Pats might consider paying that for 1 year because (a) they have the cap space, and (b) you could argue that his avg salary of '10-'11 would be about $6 mil/yr. But any way you slice it, Mankins right now is taking up a disproportionate amount of cap space and BB needs to get him off the books as soon as possible to hopefully go after some higher impact players. So heck, I'd even take a 2012 3rd for him.

 

[SanAngeloState]

Let's also not forget that Mankins' franchise number is totally bloated for a guard. It will make him the highest paid OG in the NFL by far and away. The Pats might consider paying that for 1 year because (a) they have the cap space, and (b) you could argue that his avg salary of '10-'11 would be about $6 mil/yr. But any way you slice it, Mankins right now is taking up a disproportionate amount of cap space and BB needs to get him off the books as soon as possible to hopefully go after some higher impact players. So heck, I'd even take a 2012 3rd for him.

Hear, hear! I agree.

Ideally, they'd get Dallas #2. They then draft Danny watkins, both improving at the position AND getting a younger player AND getting him much cheaper. So why would Dallas be stupid enough to do it? I dont' know, but I hope they are.

 

[IllegalContact]

trading mankins to get fitzgerald will only succeed in putting the offense further away from what it needs to be in order to win the big one. more emphasis needs to be placed on power offense and less on this snapping out of the shotgun 80% of the time or else every season will end like the last 2 have.

hell, I'd even hunt down daniel graham and bring him back. perfect guy to knock around the jerkoff bigmouths on the jets.....love to see him take out bart scott

 

[DW Toys]

trading mankins to get fitzgerald will only succeed in putting the offense further away from what it needs to be in order to win the big one. more emphasis needs to be placed on power offense and less on this snapping out of the shotgun 80% of the time or else every season will end like the last 2 have.

hell, I'd even hunt down daniel graham and bring him back. perfect guy to knock around the jerkoff bigmouths on the jets.....love to see him take out bart scott

Good points but the NFL is now a passing league. End of story. I like power but the game is evolving. Your SB Packers team is not a power football team. The Saints the year before that. Our issues are solidly outside the hash marks and deeper in our passing game. Fitz is no diva as well. He makes a Team like the Jets waste Revis and it is good for him if he is helping the other WRs. I don't care if they drink a cup of tea together during the game.

Who then covers Welker, Branch, Gronk and Hernandez? Checkmate BB.
DW Toys

 

[Snake Eyes]

trading mankins to get fitzgerald will only succeed in putting the offense further away from what it needs to be in order to win the big one. more emphasis needs to be placed on power offense and less on this snapping out of the shotgun 80% of the time or else every season will end like the last 2 have.

hell, I'd even hunt down daniel graham and bring him back. perfect guy to knock around the jerkoff bigmouths on the jets.....love to see him take out bart scott

I don't know about that, Fitzgerald can run any damn route on the tree and gets a lot of his yards after the catch, with him brady wouldnt necessarily need to be in the danger zone as long as he was with Moss, who was a lot more limited to the deep routes, which take a lot more time to happen.

Suppose we trade #17 back and instead of grabbing JJ Watt we instead pick up both Pouncey & Danny Watkins, at that point our line would probably be stronger than with Mankins & Neal/Connelly. Pouncey can also be groomed to take over at Center, with perhaps another player being slotted in at Guard down the road.

We can still grab a Kendrick Ellis in the 2nd/3rd and, with our 2 new Guards we'd be doing pretty well. If we can also get our hands on Brooks Reed we'd probably be good for a run with some other.

With both lines solid, we can easily pick up a power HB/FB to increase the power we both want.