The Case for Kelley Washington

[italia44]

What is Washington's excuse for his 2nd and 3rd years when he wasn't injured? Also, I believe that Washington actually missed his rookie season because of a car accident.



I don't. In fact, I don't expect him on the field in those situations when you have Randy Moss, Dante Stallworth, David Thomas, Mike Vrabel, Ben Watson, Kevin Faulk and Laurence Maroney on the team.



No I don't see Brown on the PUP because I don't see the Pats signing him before he's ready to play. Why tie up the salary cap money?



You claim a lack of versatility and I say BS. Caldwell HAS returned kicks and done a pretty good job. Not for the Patriots, but he did return kicks for the Chargers. And, since Maroney and Hobbs are scheduled starters right now, they aren't your 1st choice for kick return duties.



Caldwell can play the slot, also, and did so in San Diego. However, Gaffney really hasn't done kick returns or punt returns in the pros, so that is a strike against HIS versatility.

As for their hands, Gaffney has 7 drops over the last 4 years on 229 targets while Caldwell has 4 drops on 208 targets over the last 4 years.

Both Caldwell and Gaffney had drops in the play-offs, but people only focus on the 2 drops that Caldwell had in the AFCCG, though only 1 MIGHT have cost the Patriots a TD.




Its irrelevant and overblown? Like hell it is. This is a clear sign of someone who has never actually caught passes as a WR. Any WR will tell you that each quarterback throws the ball differently and that the touch on the ball is different. So you have to learn that. You also have to learn how the QB wants the routes run. There was a big article last year about how Brady took Caldwell aside to show him how he (Brady) was expecting the routes to be run. In an article more recently, Wes Welker basically said that he was planning on sitting down with Brady to do the exact same thing that Brady did with Caldwell last year. Welker said that was a key ingredient to a receiver being successful.

So, how can that knowledge be over-blow and irrelevant?




On these parts I believe we can all agree.

Wow......your debating skills are excellent,however your football acumen is negligible,at best.

As someone who has both played and coached football.....I'll just let this go as your having a bad nitpicking day.

 

[DaBruinz]

Who said that Belichick is convinced that Moss is his former self. Many of the signs point to Belichick being very unsure whether Moss is still what he was.

First, Adam Schefter, who is more plugged in on this story than anyone, said the Pats weren't interested in trading for Moss until they saw how much he was will to give up to get out of Oakland. He also said that the Pats had an attitude that it was great if they got him, but great if they didn't.

Yes, the same Adam Schefter was in on the Pats supposedly taking Harris at 28. And the same Schefter who claimed signings last year that never happened.

Schefter is right about 50% of the time.

Second, if Belichick was convinced Moss was a great talent, he would have given him a deal like Stallworth, not a one year deal. I don't know how you can translate him trading a fourth round pick and only giving Moss an one year deal as a strong ringing endorsement that Moss is still an elite WR.

This is patently false. Do you know why? Because of the salary cap. That's why. The salary cap limits what the Pats could have offered to Moss.

Belichick made this deal because it was a low risk move. I agree with him him. He figures if Randy is not the player he was or he cops an attitude, they can just cut ties with him after the season or sooner. Belichick isn't going to say this publically, but is pretty clear that Belichick is not confident that Moss is the player he once was. He is just playing a low risk gamble and I think he is doing the right thing.

Any low risk/high reward move is a good one. BTW, Belichick has been quated as saying that Moss is still one of the best in the league.

Besides, although Belichick is one of the best talent evaluators out there, he is not perfect especially when it comes to WRs. Some of his dumbest personal moves have been at WR including Donald Hayes (the player they absolutely had to have in the 2002 offseason) and Bethel Johnson (Used a second round pick because he was the fastest man in his draft). He has also found Branch and Givens, but his success rate at WR talent evaluation has been mixed.

Lets not forget that Troy Brown and David Patten also had the best year's of their careers under Belichick. Also, lets not forget that there are plenty of others who also weigh in on the personnel moves. But, you are correct, BB and Pioli are not perfect.

I don't like Moss and I think he isn't the player he once was, but I agree with Belichick's decision to make the move. It is a low risk gamble. It doesn't mean I buy that he will fall in love with New England and take less to stay here after the season or that I believe his motives for taking the deal he did was just because he wanted to win. I think he is using this year to springboard it to a big contract next year.

I don't like Moss either. However, I think your evaluation of him is faulty and that you don't account for several factors that are a MUST when evaluating a player.

And, as others have said, BB is a much better evaluator of talent than anyone on this board.

 

[DaBruinz]

The Pats didn't offer Branch $10 or $11 million in bonuses. The Pats offered Branch a $4 million signing bonus and a $4 million option bonus the following year. Stallworth is getting $10 million in bonus' in the 2008 season and a $2 option bonus in 2009. So Branch would have gotten $8 million in bonuses over two years and Stallworth would have gotten $12-13 million. That is a bg difference.

Also, Branch isn't in the drug program.

You really need to get up to speed. The Pats certainly did offer more than 8 million in bonuses to Branch. The 4 and 4 was on a 3 year extension, not the 5 year extension they offered. The 5 year extension for 33 million had 10-11 million in bonuses and guaranteed money. Oh, and don't forget the SALARY that Branch would have received during that time because it would have brought his contract up to what Stallworth was being paid.

Also, it might be good to note that under the contract he signed with the Seahawks, Branch is making about 14 million in bonuses and 8.98 million in Salary. That is almost 23 million across 3 years.

Stallworth's 3 year total could be as much as 19.6 million across 3 years.

Which would you have rather have? If Stallworth produces, he's well worth it. OH, and where did you hear that Stallworth was in the NFL Drug Program?

 

[sebman2112]

I have already spoken plenty of time about the problems of last season, but Kerry Collins started all 16 games in 2005 and got 3,756 yards, 20 TDs, and 12 INTs. He didn't have Pro Bowl quality year, but it was respectable. I don't care how many QBs the Raiders went through in the last four years because Moss wasn't on the team in two of them and three of the four QBs he had throwing to him were in one season.

I'm sorry, but I have to bust you here. You point out that while it was Kerry Collins QB'ing for the Raiders in '05 they did have some stability that year, and Collins was decent. Guess what? Moss had 60 catches for 1,005 yards and 8 TD's that year. Really, you proved DaBruinz point without even knowing it, since the one year they had some stability Moss produced.

 

[DaBruinz]

I have already spoken plenty of time about the problems of last season, but Kerry Collins started all 16 games in 2005 and got 3,756 yards, 20 TDs, and 12 INTs. He didn't have Pro Bowl quality year, but it was respectable. I don't care how many QBs the Raiders went through in the last four years because Moss wasn't on the team in two of them and three of the four QBs he had throwing to him were in one season.

Sorry to let facts get in the way of your argument, but Collins did NOT start all 16 games in 2005. He only played in 15 games.

While Collins number were respectable, so were Moss'.

Also, since you can't be bothered to see the forest for the trees, the point I was making with the QB Carousel that they had in Oakland is the general mismanagement that they are under. I'm sorry that it flew right over your head.

Oh, and yes, 3 of the 4 different QBs throwing to him were in one season. You should be smart enough to realize from the mishaps of the Patriots (unless you aren't old enough to remember back to the early 90's before Bledsoe) that it doesn't matter how good the WRs are if there is a QB carousel going on that can't get them the ball.

You can't be serious with this one. Plenty of teams make really bad strategic decisions that seriously hurt the team. Just because the Vikes and Raiders mismanaged their teams doesn't mean they burnt Moss. They didn't go out and say selfish things that hurt Moss directly or indirectly or quit on Moss. There is a big difference.

Yes, I am serious. Why is it that you are going out of your way to make excuse for such poorly run organizations. YES, they damn well DID burn Moss. Especially Oakland. And they also used Moss as a scape goat, claiming that MOSS was the one behind their problems. Yet, as has been pointed out to you and you continue to refuse to understand (whether out of ignorance or just plain unwillingness) is that the mismanagement in Minnesota and in Oakland had a lot to do with Moss' attitude. And if you don't understand about MORALE of a workforce it means you definitely are too young to even be talking about this because you wouldn't understand it. A workforce or TEAM in this case, whose morale is low, is going to perform poorly. And its not the responsibility of the PLAYERS to raise morale. Its the responsibility of MANAGEMENT.

Shell was doomed to fail. I agree with that. It doesn't mean that Moss speaking out about how the team quit on him didn't play a roll in Shell getting canned in one year.

What does Shell have to do with him telling Lance Kiffin off and hanging up on him when Kiffin called to introduce himself to him. There are a long laundry list of Moss disrespecting authority.

That's funny because Kiffin said it never happened when asked about it at the draft.

Oh, and here is an article about it.
http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/20689

It would be a good idea for you to go more with FACT and less with RUMOR and heresay.

I never said Moss had to be a star. I used Sapp as an example because Sapp stepped up his game because the offense was so bad eventhough it was obvious that players like Moss had quit on the team. I have never used last year to talk about Moss other than his publically quitting on his team.

The world doesn't revolve around YOU. And NO WHERE did I say that you claimed MOSS had to be a star. Maybe you should take a step back and actually READ what is posted instead of making half-arsed assumptions.

BTW, Warren Sapp did NOT step up his game. They changed the defense and the entire defense got better. That's fact.

Again, I said based on the last three year, not just last year. What was Culpepper's numbers in 2004? What was Collins numbers in 2005? If you just look at this past year, you skew the arguement a lot.

Ok. So, instead of being FAIR and admitting that Moss was injured for 5 games (inactive because of the injury for 3 of them) you just want to claim a lack of production. Go ahead and ignore the fact he had 13 TDs that year while basically missing 5 games. Again, you are the person who doesn't look at the truth of things. In 2005, Moss put up good numbers having 60 receptions, a 16.8 YPC (best since his 3rd year in the league) and 8 TDs on an offense that didn't have a good running game. OH, something else to consider about 2005. Moss was a Target 124 times. He only had 2 drops. How many of the other 62 passed were defended or just poorly thrown? I am not sure because neither Stats nor SI.com have that information. But based on Collins completing only 53.5% of his passes, I would bet its ALOT.

Also, sack numbers can be damning to Moss too. Remember Brady got a lot of sacks and hits early last season because he held onto the ball a lot more because his receivers struggled to get open.

Really? You sure about that? Are you sure that Brady took a LOT of sacks early in the season? Because the game logs would beg to differ.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/187741/gamelogs/2006

The game logs actually show that Brady took MORE sacks in the 2nd half of the season (14) compared to the 1st half (12).

Here are the game logs for Walter and Brooks.
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/423084/gamelogs/2006
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/133233/gamelogs/2006

Sorry, but your "reasoning" just doesn't hold water.

I will conceed Moss is better than Keyshawn, but you will be very hardpressed to prove based over the last three years that Moss is better than Stallworth.

Hmm... well.. since you asked.
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302227
Stallworth: 44 games, 166 receptions, 2437 yards (14.68 YPC), 14 TDs

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/12576
Moss: 42 Games, 151 receptons, 2325 yards (15.4 YPC), 24 TDs

So, in 2 fewer games, Moss had 15 less receptions, 112 less yards, but a higher yards per catch and scored 10 MORE TDs.

I would still say that Moss is better than Stallworth, though marginally so.

 

[sebman2112]

You really need to get up to speed. The Pats certainly did offer more than 8 million in bonuses to Branch. The 4 and 4 was on a 3 year extension, not the 5 year extension they offered. The 5 year extension for 33 million had 10-11 million in bonuses and guaranteed money. Oh, and don't forget the SALARY that Branch would have received during that time because it would have brought his contract up to what Stallworth was being paid.

Also, it might be good to note that under the contract he signed with the Seahawks, Branch is making about 14 million in bonuses and 8.98 million in Salary. That is almost 23 million across 3 years.

Stallworth's 3 year total could be as much as 19.6 million across 3 years.

Which would you have rather have? If Stallworth produces, he's well worth it. OH, and where did you hear that Stallworth was in the NFL Drug Program?

That's how I remembered it as well, and it's good to see someone else who notices Stallworth's contract isn't quite what some have made it out to be.

 

[DaBruinz]

Wow......your debating skills are excellent,however your football acumen is negligible,at best.

As someone who has both played and coached football.....I'll just let this go as your having a bad nitpicking day.

We are talking American football, not soccer. And, so far, you haven't proven that my football acumen is negligable. Yours is the one that, so far, is negligiable.

But, you enjoy being pompous and pretending like you know more than anyone else and not offering up a rebuttal.

 

[sebman2112]

Yes, the same Adam Schefter was in on the Pats supposedly taking Harris at 28. And the same Schefter who claimed signings last year that never happened.

Schefter is right about 50% of the time.



This is patently false. Do you know why? Because of the salary cap. That's why. The salary cap limits what the Pats could have offered to Moss.



Any low risk/high reward move is a good one. BTW, Belichick has been quated as saying that Moss is still one of the best in the league.



Lets not forget that Troy Brown and David Patten also had the best year's of their careers under Belichick. Also, lets not forget that there are plenty of others who also weigh in on the personnel moves. But, you are correct, BB and Pioli are not perfect.



I don't like Moss either. However, I think your evaluation of him is faulty and that you don't account for several factors that are a MUST when evaluating a player.

And, as others have said, BB is a much better evaluator of talent than anyone on this board.

This year it seemed Schefter was correct about 80% of the time, but he works for the league network, so he gets all the contract details when they are mailed to the league before everyone else, so he already has an advantage built in just by working for the league. They could plug someone else into that job and they'd likely have most of the same info.

 

[italia44]

We are talking American football, not soccer. And, so far, you haven't proven that my football acumen is negligable. Yours is the one that, so far, is negligiable.

But, you enjoy being pompous and pretending like you know more than anyone else and not offering up a rebuttal.

oops.....take back what i said about your debating skills......ya can't debate while having a "hissy" fit.

now,you can continue attacking the posters instead of discussing the thread