Seattle shopping Branch

[pats1]

From rotoworld regarding Branch

9/12/2006: Signed a six-year, $39 million contract. The deal includes $13 million guaranteed. 2009: $4.94 million, 2010: $5.47 million, 2011: $5.95 million, 2012: Free Agent. Cap charge: $$7,546,240 (2009).

Not sure how the $$ id spread out but it's fair to say there is no way on god's green earth that BB is paying Branch $5.47 next year and $5.95m in 2011.. Only way he comes is to renegotiate and we all know how much Branch loves the almighty dollar...I'm sure Chayut is chomping at the bit to have Branch make the vet minimum....

Better than getting cut by Seattle after this season and not earn any of that. Nobody is paying Branch anything above $1-2M a year given his performance over the past 3 1/4 seasons.

 

[mgteich]

Why would Branch tear up his contract which guarantees his 2009 salary?

Trades & contracts confuse me, so forgive me if this is way off - but couldn't we rip up his contract upon the trade and write a new one, like we did w/ Moss? Seattle has to pay the rest of his signing bonus his contract for this year can get re-written?

 

[pats1]

Why would Branch tear up his contract which guarantees his 2009 salary?

What is your source that his 2009 salary is guaranteed?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Better than getting cut by Seattle after this season and not earn any of that. Nobody is paying Branch anything above $1-2M a year given his performance over the past 3 1/4 seasons.

Agree 100%. Not sure Branch is as much of a realist as you or I!

 

[bostonia3333]

Before calling Branch old and decrepit(including myself), I just took a look at his profile and was shocked to see he's still only 30 years old. Galloway is 40! Looking at Branch's stats in Seattle, they haven't been horrible and to my surprise there hasn't been a dropoff in yards per catch and TD receptions. In fact his yards per catch increased in Seattle and his touchdowns were exactly 4 per year from 2006-2008. Not bad I think. These stats would dwarf anything Galloway would do for NE in 7 years.

 

[BradyManny]

Yes, but you still need the cap room to initially absorb the contract before the renegotiation. Brady had to tweak his deal the night of the trade in 2007 in order to fit Moss' old contract under the cap.

OK, gotcha.

 

[pats1]

Agree 100%. Not sure Branch is as much of a realist as you or I!

Even if Branch's 2009 salary is guaranteed, there would be incentive for him to renegotiate down. If he doesn't, he picks up the rest of his $4.9M this year, gets cut after the season, doesn't see his $12M over 2010-11, and instead gets pennies on the free agent scrap heap.

If he does renegotiate down, then he gets a chance to go back to the Patriots, as they would likely not agree to the trade otherwise, and resurrect his career with Brady. He loses $2-3M over the renegotiation this year, but if he performs well has a chance to pick up a decent (but incentive-based) deal after the Pats cut him this offseason (they wouldn't pay him his $12M over 2010-11 and couldn't restructure his contract again within a one-year period, so they would have to cut him and re-sign him to a better deal).

 

[RobertWeathers]

Even if Branch's 2009 salary is guaranteed, there would be incentive for him to renegotiate down. If he doesn't, he picks up the rest of his $4.9M this year, gets cut after the season, doesn't see his $10M over 2010-11, and instead gets pennies on the free agent scrap heap.

If he does renegotiate down, then he gets a chance to go back to the Patriots, as they would likely not agree to the trade otherwise, and resurrect his career with Brady. He loses $2-3M over the renegotiation this year, but if he performs well has a chance to pick up a decent (but incentive-based) deal after the Pats cut him this offseason. Or he could just sign an extension with the Pats, as dead money/double SB would not be an issue.

Yep. It's the exact same scenario w/ Moss in the 07 offseason. Contract-wise he stood to make some decent money. The likely scenario was that RM was going to get released or forced to take a salary cut.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Yes, but you still need the cap room to initially absorb the contract before the renegotiation. Brady had to tweak his deal the night of the trade in 2007 in order to fit Moss' old contract under the cap.

It's the same situation as the Peppers deal in the offseason - the Pats would have needed to clear enough cap room to absorb Peppers' huge franchise tag hit ($15M?) before they could restructure. The only other option would have been the Panthers signing an extension first, but when they traded him the SB would have accelerated and hit them; the only way around that would have been to work a SB-less deal that wouldn't have any acceleration on the trade.

Right now Branch is making a little less than 5 mil for this year, and with 6 games already in the books, that would put his cap hit for this year at @ 3.2. So (according to Miguel) the Pats have enough room to assume that salary. Branch has 2 more years remaining on that deal (5.4 in 2010, 5.9 in 2011 (all money he will never see)) so he might not be adverse to a renegotian, but I doubt the Pats could work out something that quickly.

The only time Branch has looked like the Branch that played here was the game against the Pats. I wonder what a chance to play with Brady agaisn would do for his motivation. I still say if they can bring him in on the cheap, why not, but Tate is coming off the PUP list and that 3rd WR spot will eventually be his.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Before calling Branch old and decrepit(including myself), I just took a look at his profile and was shocked to see he's still only 30 years old. Galloway is 40! Looking at Branch's stats in Seattle, they haven't been horrible and to my surprise there hasn't been a dropoff in yards per catch and TD receptions. In fact his yards per catch increased in Seattle and his touchdowns were exactly 4 per year from 2006-2008. Not bad I think. These stats would dwarf anything Galloway would do for NE in 7 years.

True but this year his ypc is abysmal. May be more related to Hasselback being out than DB.

 

[pats1]

Right now Branch is making a little less than 5 mil for this year, and with 6 games already in the books, that would put his cap hit for this year at @ 3.2. So (according to Miguel) the Pats have enough room to assume that salary. Branch has 2 more years remaining on that deal (5.4 in 2010, 5.9 in 2011 (all money he will never see)) so he might not be adverse to a renegotian, but I doubt the Pats could work out something that quickly.

The only time Branch has looked like the Branch that played here was the game against the Pats. I wonder what a chance to play with Brady agaisn would do for his motivation. I still say if they can bring him in on the cheap, why not, but Tate is coming off the PUP list and that 3rd WR spot will eventually be his.

I don't believe Miguel has updated his numbers as of the activity over the past month (i.e. Seau, Sands, other minor moves). So I would bet you the actual number is more like $4M, if not lower, and you're going to want at least a $1M buffer for emergency signings.

 

[102 Pat]

I'd like to see him back as long as it's not too high of a draft pick.

 

[RobertWeathers]

The only time Branch has looked like the Branch that played here was the game against the Pats. I wonder what a chance to play with Brady agaisn would do for his motivation. I still say if they can bring him in on the cheap, why not, but Tate is coming off the PUP list and that 3rd WR spot will eventually be his.

What makes you so confident in Tate? He hasn't played. He hasn't practiced. He coming off a serious knee injury. Only one rookie WR has more than 20 catches in their rookie year- Branh. Granted Edelman may be the 2nd...

 

[SVN]

one small thing to remember. the system in which branch played here in the past is no longer the same which is played here. he can be definitely better than galloway.

 

[pats1]

Right now Branch is making a little less than 5 mil for this year, and with 6 games already in the books, that would put his cap hit for this year at @ 3.2. So (according to Miguel) the Pats have enough room to assume that salary. Branch has 2 more years remaining on that deal (5.4 in 2010, 5.9 in 2011 (all money he will never see)) so he might not be adverse to a renegotian, but I doubt the Pats could work out something that quickly.

The only time Branch has looked like the Branch that played here was the game against the Pats. I wonder what a chance to play with Brady agaisn would do for his motivation. I still say if they can bring him in on the cheap, why not, but Tate is coming off the PUP list and that 3rd WR spot will eventually be his.

And also don't forget that if Galloway was traded in a companion deal (Ravens?) that would wipe 11/17 of $1.15M off.

Eventually, but you can't rely on a rookie who hasn't played in over a year to become a 3rd WR on a potential Super Bowl team. If it's only going to cost you a couple million, then you bring in Branch to replace Galloway. That would appear to be a personnel upgrade and one that the Pats do need. I think there's something to Branch reuniting with Brady; one of the majro issues Brady seems to have with Galloway is that, well, he isn't Branch or Galloway. Keep in mind those two were best buddies when they were here.

 

[pats1]

one small thing to remember. the system in which branch played here in the past is no longer the same which is played here. he can be definitely better than galloway.

The system is exactly the same, especially terminology-wise. The Pats have only taken a different offensive approach game-plan wise than in past years.

 

[klinefan]

What is your source that his 2009 salary is guaranteed?

If he's on the roster boster at opening day, doesn't that mean his salary for the year is guaranteedo?

So if cut, he could just sit out and do nothign and collect his money. If he renegotiates a newer lower salary, does Seattle have to pay him the difference?

If so, maybe there's no downside to him playing for vet. minimum.

 

[RobertWeathers]

one small thing to remember. the system in which branch played here in the past is no longer the same which is played here. he can be definitely better than galloway.

My understanding is that the base offense is the same. Plays have been added/changed but it's pretty much what Weis/BB installed in 2000. No?

 

[thewaylifeshouldbe]

It has been asked several times in this thread where the source is for the title "Seattle Shopping Branch", and not a single link/source of this news.

OP, either change the damn title or post a source for it.

 

[pats1]

If he's on the roster boster at opening day, doesn't that mean his salary for the year is guaranteedo?

So if cut, he could just sit out and do nothign and collect his money. If he renegotiates a newer lower salary, does Seattle have to pay him the difference?

If so, maybe there's no downside to him playing for vet. minimum.

Yes, it "guarantees" his salary, but people use that term more loosely than they should. It's different than when a contract explicitly guarantees a base salary. In Branch's case, his 2009 (and 2010, and 2011) salary is only "guaranteed" because, if cut, he can collect one-time termination pay in the amount of the salary balance.

If Seattle (or more realistically, the Pats) were to renegotiate his contract, he can't (as far as I know) collect termination pay on that.

Therefore, the difference is, the entire balance of his 2009 salary would be on the Pats books no matter what if it was truly "guaranteed," but since it's not, a renegotiation would only mean that new renegotiated amount counts against the cap.

The fact of the matter is, it is unlikely that Branch would cling to his termination pay option knowing that he's going to get cut after the season and that if he goes to the Pats, with a lower salary this year, he's likely going to pick up more come free agency than what he would have.