Rumors: Teams interested in Mallett, Pats have rejected past offers

[ctpatsfan77]

Thanks, I'll look more closely at them! (Though I'd be surprised if Murray OR Mettenburger last to the final rounds.)

IMO the only real reason it makes sense to trade Mallett is that he's in the final year of his contract. NOT because backup QBs aren't important or are easy to replace, which seems to be implicit in a surprising number of posts.

Which is why I personally am stunned that they haven't even bothered with a PS QB the last two years.

 

[supafly]

I asked that question a while back and got no answer.

IMO the only real reason it makes sense to trade Mallett is that he's in the final year of his contract. NOT because backup QBs aren't important or are easy to replace, which seems to be implicit in a surprising number of posts.

This has been my biggest reason why I have a hard time imaging Belichick trading Mallett.

I think the only season we've ever seen a backup brought in to take over immediately was maybe O'Connell, when they traded Cassel. Other than that, Belichick normally likes to groom his replacement for a good solid year or so, just due to many reasons. One of them being the obvious complexity and time period that it'd take to even learn the playbook.

I also find it very odd that others are not talking about this, or like ctpatsfan77 said--the fact that Belichick obviously didn't seem to be thinking too much about trading Mallett by not bringing in another QB, even on the PS.

I just don't see Mallett leaving this year.

 

[patchick]

I think the only season we've ever seen a backup brought in to take over was maybe O'Connell, when they traded Cassel. Other than that, Belichick normally likes to groom his replacement for a good solid year or so, just due to many reasons. One of them being the obvious complexity and time period that it'd take to even learn the playbook.

That's a great point, though Mallett's year behind Hoyer might deserve an asterisk because his draft class got such a late start after the lockout.

I think people tend to discount the value of Brady's backup in a fatalistic way: "If Brady goes down, it's all over anyway." But a scenario like this isn't hard to imagine:

Brady is injured and misses 5 games. If the team goes 4-1 over those games, they end up with a bye. If they go 3-2, they win the division but no bye. 2-3 and they nab a wild card berth. 1-4 and they're out of the playoffs.

In which case, I'd really, really like a backup quarterback BB & co. have developed and show confidence in.

 

[moosekill]

This is why I don't think they will trade Mallet unless they get a good deal. Why trade him for a third or a fourth if you have to turn around and spend it on someone to replace him, who probably isn't as good.

 

[ausbacker]

I don't know why we're flipping out about a back up Quarterback who may or may not be a potential starter. As the team is currently constructed, they're not going to win the Super Bowl without Tom Brady being his normal brilliant self.

If good offers are coming through for Mallett, get the deal done and stop worrying about maybes. The simple reality is, the Patriots aren't going to sniff a Super Bowl without Brady unless the D transforms into the Seahawks during this off season.

 

[supafly]

I think people tend to discount the value of Brady's backup in a fatalistic way: "If Brady goes down, it's all over anyway." But a scenario like this isn't hard to imagine:

Brady is injured and misses 5 games. If the team goes 4-1 over those games, they end up with a bye. If they go 3-2, they win the division but no bye. 2-3 and they nab a wild card berth. 1-4 and they're out of the playoffs.

In which case, I'd really, really like a backup quarterback BB & co. have developed and show confidence in.

I don't know why we're flipping out about a back up Quarterback who may or may not be a potential starter. As the team is currently constructed, they're not going to win the Super Bowl without Tom Brady being his normal brilliant self.

If good offers are coming through for Mallett, get the deal done and stop worrying about maybes. The simple reality is, the Patriots aren't going to sniff a Super Bowl without Brady unless the D transforms into the Seahawks during this off season.

I'm guessing that you're definitely right, but there may be other injury possibilities that warrant seeing the backup QB that may not be end of the year type scenarios.

In other words, something like patchick's scenario, where maybe Brady misses 4-5-6 games, then is able to return. Obviously, it would be very important to have a backup who knows the system/playbook for that kind of situation.

 

[supafly]

This is why I don't think they will trade Mallet unless they get a good deal. Why trade him for a third or a fourth if you have to turn around and spend it on someone to replace him, who probably isn't as good.

I'm thinking that you may be right, and that they'd hold out for something in the range of what's been reported--knowing damn well that it's probably very unlikely that anyone is willing to part with a 2nd/3rd round pick.

In the meantime, if it happens--it'd be hard to pass up.

 

[Fencer]

I just realized something -- the Texans would be crazy to trade for Mallett until right before the draft.

Why? Because the trade would signal that they're not drafting a QB with the top pick, and that might lower their leverage in negotiations for trading down from the top spot.

 

[patchick]

I just realized something -- the Texans would be crazy to trade for Mallett until right before the draft.

Why? Because the trade would signal that they're not drafting a QB with the top pick, and that might lower their leverage in negotiations for trading down from the top spot.

:youtheman:

Makes total sense. That means means that no news on Mallet for the next 30 days will mean just about nothing, since any handshake deal isn't likely to be formalized and announced until the draft is underway.

Woo-hoo, 30 more days to rehash how little any of us really know about Mallett's value!

 

[mgteich]

I am somewhat disinterested with this whole issue. IMHO, belichick would use what we get for Mallett (Houston's third) to draft a quarterback.

:youtheman:

Makes total sense. That means means that no news on Mallet for the next 30 days will mean just about nothing, since any handshake deal isn't likely to be formalized and announced until the draft is underway.

Woo-hoo, 30 more days to rehash how little any of us really know about Mallett's value!

 

[ausbacker]

I'm guessing that you're definitely right, but there may be other injury possibilities that warrant seeing the backup QB that may not be end of the year type scenarios.

In other words, something like patchick's scenario, where maybe Brady misses 4-5-6 games, then is able to return. Obviously, it would be very important to have a backup who knows the system/playbook for that kind of situation.

I don't deny there is a positional requirement for a like for like back up Quarterback it's more I'm just not that concerned if it's Ryan Mallett or someone else. A slight regression in performance is still going to keep Tom Brady in the top 5 of NFL QB's for the next few years unless something drastic happens. If Brady can start and still produces, he stays as long as he wants. The back up isn't going to sniff that role unless a calamity occurs.

 

[SB39]

i find it hard to believe that BB would pass up a 2th round pick for mallet not once but twice

What probably happened was this:

Denver: We will give you a 2nd rounder plus Tim Tebow for Mallett.
Belichick: No, but we will accept just the 2nd rounder for Mallett.
Denver: No deal.

 

[SB39]

That is why the transition tag is most likely.

No one would likely pay that franchise tag fee so the Right of First Refusal via the Transition tag is intriguing, as I delineated. Even the foolish and thoroughly stupid know that.

Do the foolish and thoroughly stupid realize that a transition tag guarantees that he gets paid an amount equal to being a top-10 QB in the league and that there is ZERO chance whatsoever the Patriots pay a backup that much?

 

[SB39]

Thanks. It just rubs me the wrong way when a fellow poster disrespects his fellow Patriots fans with name-calling.

Never rub another man's rhubarb

 

[Fencer]

Do the foolish and thoroughly stupid realize that a transition tag guarantees that he gets paid an amount equal to being a top-10 QB in the league and that there is ZERO chance whatsoever the Patriots pay a backup that much?

So you think it's impossible that -- at least for as long as Tom Brady is one of the top QBs in the league -- the Patriots would ever use a transition or franchise tag on their backup QB?

 

[billdog3484]

i find it funny that a texan beat reporter states the texans will not trade for mallett and have no interest in him and it is treated as bible. he may be right.

but i do know that about 4 weeks ago a new regime entered there. so many contacts mcclain had are undoubtedly no longer there and the new members arent as close with him.

i believe where the is smoke there is fire. nothing may get done in terms of a deal but i wouldnt be sure nothing has been discussed.

we'll see.

 

[supafly]

I am somewhat disinterested with this whole issue. IMHO, belichick would use what we get for Mallett (Houston's third) to draft a quarterback.

Possibly, but I think you're missing the point a bit, which is that whatever new QB was chosen wouldn't realistically be able to step in and actually lead us to a handful of wins should Brady go down for 4-5 games in their very first season. One would think that if Belichick were actually considering trading Mallett, that he would have had brought in another QB last season--even if that were a PS QB. That would have allowed us to have had someone who was at least familiarizing themselves with our scheme and playbook.

After all, aside from the gamble BB took with O'Connell, there has never been a backup QB who hasn't had at least one full season under Brady's tutelage; more important, there hasn't been a backup QB who probably even had 1/4 of the playbook down pat in under a year, particularly in this kind of complex offense.

In other words, it would make zero sense (not trying to question or disrespect you) to swap out QBs for the 2014 season, although it would be obviously beneficial for the longer period of the future.

If Belichick trades Mallett, he'll be gambling a lot and leaving the all important backup position wide open. That seems awfully un-like Bill Belichick. Many have pointed out the fact that it wouldn't matter anyway since we won't go too far, but it could matter if Brady went down from weeks 5-11 or something, as it could cost us a playoff spot, etc.

I think this is one of the reasons why Belichick is pricing Mallett so high with a 2nd round pick. That seems to be what it would take for him to be willing to make such a gamble, as it'd be too good to pass up.

 

[mgteich]

I agree with all that you posted.

I was very surprised that we didn't carry a 3rd QB last year.

We don't disagree. The only issue is price. If someone offered a first, everyone would trade Mallett in a second, and have to deal with the issue of a backup quarterback. The question is how look a pick is acceptable.

Belichick needs to sign a quarterback for 2015 in any case. If we had carried a 3rd QB last year (and a 4th on the Practice Squad), Belichick would be able to simply take the highest bid for Mallett. As it is, I don't think that he should trade him unless it is for a 2nd and he lkes the quarterbacks available in the 2nd and 4rd rounds of the draft.

Possibly, but I think you're missing the point a bit, which is that whatever new QB was chosen wouldn't realistically be able to step in and actually lead us to a handful of wins should Brady go down for 4-5 games in their very first season. One would think that if Belichick were actually considering trading Mallett, that he would have had brought in another QB last season--even if that were a PS QB. That would have allowed us to have had someone who was at least familiarizing themselves with our scheme and playbook.

After all, aside from the gamble BB took with O'Connell, there has never been a backup QB who hasn't had at least one full season under Brady's tutelage; more important, there hasn't been a backup QB who probably even had 1/4 of the playbook down pat in under a year, particularly in this kind of complex offense.

In other words, it would make zero sense (not trying to question or disrespect you) to swap out QBs for the 2014 season, although it would be obviously beneficial for the longer period of the future.

If Belichick trades Mallett, he'll be gambling a lot and leaving the all important backup position wide open. That seems awfully un-like Bill Belichick. Many have pointed out the fact that it wouldn't matter anyway since we won't go too far, but it could matter if Brady went down from weeks 5-11 or something, as it could cost us a playoff spot, etc.

I think this is one of the reasons why Belichick is pricing Mallett so high with a 2nd round pick. That seems to be what it would take for him to be willing to make such a gamble, as it'd be too good to pass up.

 

[supafly]

I agree with all that you posted.

I was very surprised that we didn't carry a 3rd QB last year.

We don't disagree. The only issue is price. If someone offered a first, everyone would trade Mallett in a second, and have to deal with the issue of a backup quarterback. The question is how look a pick is acceptable.

Belichick needs to sign a quarterback for 2015 in any case. If we had carried a 3rd QB last year (and a 4th on the Practice Squad), Belichick would be able to simply take the highest bid for Mallett. As it is, I don't think that he should trade him unless it is for a 2nd and he lkes the quarterbacks available in the 2nd and 4rd rounds of the draft.

Yep, considering that Mallett will be gone one way or another either now or by the end of the season, we'll definitely see another QB brought in somewhere along the line.

I agree with your 2nd round trade as well. The only exception could be Mallett to HOU for their #1 pick in the 3rd round; I suppose that would be pick # 65. Anything less than that probably isn't worth it in my opinion. Others aren't as worried about the backup QB position, and while I can understand that, I just don't agree with it myself.

 

[OhExaulted1]

I am somewhat disinterested with this whole issue. IMHO, belichick would use what we get for Mallett (Houston's third) to draft a quarterback.

We're going to use our 6th round comp pick to draft a guy named Tom. You heard it here first.