Rumor: Boldin for a 2nd round pick

[Rob0729]

As has been pointed out in numerous sources, though, that doesn't mean the Pats can spend as much as they want with impunity.

The general consensus is that no one will spend like crazy and most teams will be very cautious. That means Boldin may opt to play out his current contract in a trade (why I think he will go for much less than a 2nd). He also may opt to take what is considered a good contract for 2010 which should be a relatively Patriots friendly deal.

Personally, I think the Cards want to unload him since with Warner retiring, they are in rebuilding mode. I see Boldin who would be a free agent in 2011 (assuming there is football) willing to play out his current deal assuming he goes to a team that will put him in a good spot to display his talents and increase his value. The Pats fit that bill because late in the season this year, both Welker and Moss were in the top 5 for WRs. My guess this is the most likely scenario how Boldin comes here (if he comes here). The Pats trade for him with a third or a fourth rounder and he plays out his current deal and the Pats either resign or franchise him in 2011 or just let him be a free agent.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

It's 50% I believe

that means if we're willing to pay him 7 million a year we can pay him 14 next season

Hardly an amount of money worth turning your nose up at

I don't think it's 50% man. Admittedly I'm too lazy to look it up right now but I can say with fair confidence it's not that high

 

[Deus Irae]

As has been pointed out in numerous sources, though, that doesn't mean the Pats can spend as much as they want with impunity.

If they wanted to, they could give Boldin a one season, $100 million dollar contract. There is essentially no drag on salary. The only issue is the breakdown on a multiple season deal. Even with that, one can have a 50% drop from the 2010 salary to the 2011 salary.

 

[Jangles]

I don't think it's 50% man. Admittedly I'm too lazy to look it up right now but I can say with fair confidence it's not that high

I'm pretty certain that it is

I remember seeing a discussion here about it not long ago on this site

^^ above me is the answer

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I don't think it's 50% man. Admittedly I'm too lazy to look it up right now but I can say with fair confidence it's not that high

There's actually no rule explicitly limiting what can be paid; the rule in question states that if a player's salary drops by more than 50% from year one of a contract to year two, the entire difference from the first year's salary is treated as if it were a signing bonus (e.g., if a player is paid $10M in year one, $3M in year two, his first year salary is treated as if it were $3M salary and $7M signing bonus).

The problem is that no one knows for sure what will happen to contracts signed in an uncapped year if/when the cap returns.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I'm pretty certain that it is

I remember seeing a discussion here about it not long ago on this site

^^ above me is the answer

So what if he's looking for a long term deal?

Besides, cap or no cap I'm not sure BB/Kraft will want to give Boldin $14M for one year

 

[Deus Irae]

There's actually no rule explicitly limiting what can be paid; the rule in question states that if a player's salary drops by more than 50% from year one of a contract to year two, the entire difference from the first year's salary is treated as if it were a signing bonus (e.g., if a player is paid $10M in year one, $3M in year two, his first year salary is treated as if it were $3M salary and $7M signing bonus).

The problem is that no one knows for sure what will happen to contracts signed in an uncapped year if/when the cap returns.

Which is why the 50% drop is the practical limit in order to avoid having that money count against a cap under a new CBA.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Which is why the 50% drop is the practical limit in order to avoid having that money count against a cap under a new CBA.

You're assuming, of course, that the new CBA will keep that rule intact with no one-time clauses to account for uncapped year contracts. That may or may not be the case, especially given the revenue sharing issues among the owners. [For example, there are specific clauses in the 2006 CBA that pertained only to the 2006 season, and not future ones, so there's certainly precedent for clauses that apply specifically to contracts signed in 2010.]

 

[Jangles]

So what if he's looking for a long term deal?

Besides, cap or no cap I'm not sure BB/Kraft will want to give Boldin $14M for one year

You never know

Finding Brady some people to throw to is a key point this offseason. We also need a proven WR, not a project from the draft that may or may not work out

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

You never know

Finding Brady some people to throw to is a key point this offseason. We also need a proven WR, not a project from the draft that may or may not work out

I agree we need a veteran WR along with a draft pick or 2 to develop

 

[Deus Irae]

You're assuming, of course, that the new CBA will keep that rule intact with no one-time clauses to account for uncapped year contracts. That may or may not be the case, especially given the revenue sharing issues among the owners. [For example, there are specific clauses in the 2006 CBA that pertained only to the 2006 season, and not future ones, so there's certainly precedent for clauses that apply specifically to contracts signed in 2010.]

Yes, because the league isn't going to screw itself.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Yes, because the league isn't going to screw itself.

It's not about the league screwing itself. It's about the difference between the haves and the have-nots among the owners. Ralph Wilson's vote on a new CBA counts the same as Bob Kraft's.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's not about the league screwing itself. It's about the difference between the haves and the have-nots among the owners. Ralph Wilson's vote on a new CBA counts the same as Bob Kraft's.

No, it would be about taking teams that used the CBA to their advantage and imposing an enormous penalty on them for that. That would screw the league, because those teams could potentially be destroyed moving forward.

 

[Kontradiction]

I don't see any way that this team is going to pay Boldin, the best #2 receiver in the league, #1 money.

 

[DW Toys]

We have gaping holes at OL, LB, have many of our own FA. Why would BB spend a 2Rd pick on 30yr old WR who missed 4 games in '07 and '08. This would be CAP lunacy. For a change use the Draft to build the team up. Stop chasing after these FA.

BTW, we had a chance to draft Bolding coming out of FSU, but passed him up for ? wanna guess ?...........all world WR Bethel Johnson.:bricks:

OK, Fair enough. Now lets look at the Saints who won last night.
23 players on their team were Trades of FAs out of their basic 53 (43%!!!!). 8 were starters of the 22. You helped my cause by mentioning Bethel Johnson. Now add Chad Jackson, Terrance Wheatley, Jonathan Whithite, Shawn Crable, O'Connell, Maroney, David Thomas (ironic!), Ron Brace (for now), Matthew Slater (what was that all about!) and many others and you see how bad these choices have performed. Some were Drafted way too high for what they have done. Yes some have been hurt. Some have not had playing time. But for the most part, our success in 2007 had a lot to do with the FA acquisitions.

We have 15 positions of need and upgrading as well as depth going into 2010. We have 8 Draft choices. That does not even get us close. We are very skinny on backups that can start (Alexander, Titus Adams, Sam Aiken etc.)

A FA with experience gets to play now in our system. Not so much a Rookie (see Merriweather, Chung, Brace). Of those 8 in the 2010 Draft, let's say we are lucky and 5 work out. If you have a base of talent, building through the Draft works like the old Cowboy teams, but we are lacking the talent we had a few years ago. We need a great Draft and FAs. We need more leaders. They do not come as 22 year old kids.
DW Toys

 

[DonBlackmon55]

OK, Fair enough. Now lets look at the Saints who won last night.
23 players on their team were Trades of FAs out of their basic 53 (43%!!!!). 8 were starters of the 22. You helped my cause by mentioning Bethel Johnson. Now add Chad Jackson, Terrance Wheatley, Jonathan Whithite, Shawn Crable, O'Connell, Maroney, David Thomas (ironic!), Ron Brace (for now), Matthew Slater (what was that all about!) and many others and you see how bad these choices have performed. Some were Drafted way too high for what they have done. Yes some have been hurt. Some have not had playing time. But for the most part, our success in 2007 had a lot to do with the FA acquisitions.

We have 15 positions of need and upgrading as well as depth going into 2010. We have 8 Draft choices. That does not even get us close. We are very skinny on backups that can start (Alexander, Titus Adams, Sam Aiken etc.)

A FA with experience gets to play now in our system. Not so much a Rookie (see Merriweather, Chung, Brace). Of those 8 in the 2010 Draft, let's say we are lucky and 5 work out. If you have a base of talent, building through the Draft works like the old Cowboy teams, but we are lacking the talent we had a few years ago. We need a great Draft and FAs. We need more leaders. They do not come as 22 year old kids.
DW Toys

Given the flexibility of draft picks Pats have had last few years, the draft record is P*SS poor. Trading down to amass more picks and passing on playmakers has bit them. The fact that this team cannot think a college LB or RB can even learn their system, yet keeps drafting bust after bust DL, WR, or TE further points to it. ALL playmakers (Moss , Welker) Pats have on Offense were TRADES

Yes, there have been sprinkles of hits here and there, however, the coaching staff also has not helped develop the players like Maroney, Watson, Jackson, etc over past few years that should have been the "Top Tier" talent from Rd 1,2 picks. Yet, what good is drafting the fastest TE and never throw to him.

So, it boils down in the end to a change in O philosophy, and drafting players that can produce or put them in a position to produce. It seems organization keep bringing players who rot away on the bench or somehow cannot learn the system

On leadership, likes of AD, Burgess, Springs, Galloway et etc certainly did not bring squat via trade or FA

 

[JFK]

play here? at least with the cards, he won a playoff game?

what would be so enticing for him to want to be here instead?

They no longer have a QB...At least not yet.

 

[DonBlackmon55]

They no longer have a QB...At least not yet.

neither does TO. He too maybe available

 

[Rob0729]

They no longer have a QB...At least not yet.

Well, they do have a QB. The only problem his success rate is far, far higher in his attempts to hit on co-eds at keggers in the local Phoenix area than its for hitting a WR in stride.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I'd rather have Steve Breaston. He would come cheaper I think and you wouldn't have to pay him near as much as a Boldin. Additionally, Breaston is an impact player in the return game and he is only one season removed from 1,000 yards receiving. He has stretch the field speed. Wonder if Arizona would take Maroney and say a 4th or 5th round pick for Breaston?