Time To Free Up Some Cap Room?

[TealSox]

That would leave us with what, two or three picks in the entire 2012 draft? I don't think that will be their choice.

Assuming they aren't moving down in this years draft, while acquiring picks for 2013.

 

[Ivan]

Wes Welker for Jared Allen,
Wes Welker for Tim Tebow,
Wes Welker for current and or future draft picks.
Right now we have little to no holes going into the draft.
Something has to occur to stir us up cutting or trading Wes would do just that,
Gonzalez and Stallworth who can both do some damage in the slot.
Softens the blow.

Awesome idea, they should deliberately get much worse just for the hell of it. Do you people actually watch real football or are you so fixated on Madden that you never have the time? The people who want to get rid of Welker are true idiots. Jesus this crap is stupid.

 

[Deus Irae]

...Some of you guys are acting like we didn't just go to the Super Bowl and have back to back #1 seeds in the past 2 yrs.

If they managed to have a middle of the road defense being 15th in pts allowed, and made great strides against top notch competition in the playoffs, then why wouldn't they be able to improve in a couple of areas with 5 picks in the first 100 choices, and a bunch of recent free agency signings--with only more to come?

1.) The Patriots aren't winning on the strength of a top defense. They're winning because of their offense.

2.) When we say things like "This team needs only... X players", that's sometimes misleading. Does the team "need" to upgrade over Arrington? Probably not, as he can be protected as long as both of the other CBs are getting it done. Would it be in the team's best interest to replace Arrington as one of the team's top 3 CBs? Absolutely.

3.) This team is weak at both DE spots, at 1 OLB spot (arguably both spots) and at least 1 safety spot. 2 of the top 3 spots at corner are open questions, as well. Realistically, the team likely doesn't know if it's really in good shape at 6 of the 11 starting spots, and that's even when giving the nod to Ninkovich. Time will tell, but it's to be expected that the optimists will say things like "Dowling looked great before getting injured..." while others will say "Dowling's made of glass and we don't know how good he is anyway....". It's the annual over/under rating of the players.

 

[chicowalker]

The holes in the defense may not be as many as you think though.

They are potentially one or two players away from being a lot better, most likely coming in the front seven. One playmaker at DE/OLB + one solid big guy with youth and muscle on the line, and things are a lot better than you think.

I am still hoping for a guy like Castillo at DE, that would really lessen the needs on the line in my opinion. I think there will be a low level FA signing or two at some point, like last yr if Castillo doesn't come here. Carter will almost certainly be back. Pryor is returning from injury, and has the potential to be a strong presence as an interior rusher. Fanene and Scott are also here for competition and depth. Wilfork, Deaderick, and Love are all here. The D line will be addressed still, but it should be a lot closer to being just as good as last yr, if not improved altogether.

LB is pretty set, with the addition of a 1st/2nd round pick. They have Mayo, Spikes, Fletcher, Ninkovich, Cunningham, White, Tarpinian, and maybe even M.Carter. One more big, young, playmaker here--and we're instantly in good shape.

CB/S are also in a lot better shape than you are thinking, at least in my opinion. We saw great strides down the stretch of the season last yr, and IIRC they only allowed one 300+ passer in the last 1/2 of the season, including playoffs. That's over the last 11 games. A lot of the earlier problems were due to scheme change, injuries, and the struggles of DMcC and the safeties. As long as the safety position is improved, we have McCourty, Dowling, Arrington, Moore, and a few ST'er as CB's.

Safety is probably the biggest problem/weakness on this team. A positive aspect of this is that many of the CB's can likely also back up or even take over one of the safety positions in a worst case scenario; although that is not what we necessarily want to have to rely on.

I am seeing a total of maybe 4-5 possible improvements out of the 25 (approx.) players on defense. A couple of those will be addressed via the draft. A couple of those will still be addessed via free agency, or team cuts later on in the spring/summer. When you think about it, that isn't as many "holes" as you'd think. The positions of front seven (3-4 improvements/additional depth), and backline secondary (maybe 2 improvements/additional depth) are not that bad of a situation to be in.

maybe you read a lot more into my comment than I was actually saying, but all you've done here -- in far more detail, admittedly -- is agree with me while saying that I was wrong.

You cite 4-5 improvements -- I call those holes. Just to be clear, though, I didn't say that we're in a "bad situation".

If we get an immediate impact player on defense out of the draft and a couple other defenders (through the draft or FA) who can contribute, I agree, the defense should be much improved. But for now, those spots are holes.

 

[BradyManny]

Actually we may be getting tight. Jason at jetcap has us at $118.4M for top 51 plus dead cap on an adjusted cap of around $128.9. But that does not yet include Lloyd, Fanene, Gallery, Fells, Scott, Cole or Stallworth. Those deals will likely eat up $5 million plus even with adjustment for replacing current top 51 since a couple of them are multi year deals averaging in the $2-3M range that will likely hit this years cap in excess of $1M. Eventually we have to have space for the rookie cap, and ours will be on the high side pending what he trades out of...

So if he's still interested in retaining Benny and Carter and/or Anderson let alone coveting any other potential cuts or remaining FA... And I do expect him to bring Branch back.

I think we have to move on from Benny & Anderson, personally - and don't view that as an issue. Their production can be replaced much more efficiently, cap-wise.

Carter should come on the cheap, same as Branch. If I'm wrong, well then it might be a different story. But I would expect very reasonable deals for both, especially where Carter wants to be here and is coming off a season ending injury.

 

[BrickPat]

Wes Welker for Jared Allen,
Wes Welker for Tim Tebow,
Wes Welker for current and or future draft picks.
Right now we have little to no holes going into the draft.
Something has to occur to stir us up cutting or trading Wes would do just that,
Gonzalez and Stallworth who can both do some damage in the slot.
Softens the blow.

I think something is worng with your keyboard because it somehow typed a "Welker for Tebow trade" without a smiley face or insanity face.

 

[Ivan]

Wes Welker for Jared Allen,
Wes Welker for Tim Tebow,
Wes Welker for current and or future draft picks.
Right now we have little to no holes going into the draft.
Something has to occur to stir us up cutting or trading Wes would do just that,
Gonzalez and Stallworth who can both do some damage in the slot.
Softens the blow.

lmao-this post more than possibly any other shows just how ridiculous these ideas are. "We have little or no holes heading into the draft..." So hey, let's get rid of the 2nd best player on the team so we can create a gaping hole where none exists.

"Something has to occur to stir us up...." Huh? The Patriots are systematically improving the team, so you want to shake things up to make them worse? That is CRAZYTALK, pure and simple, it doesn't get any dumber unless you count the posts from those who think Welker's skin color is a real factor in team building and contract discussions.

 

[captain stone]

How much $$$ will we save if Bill releases "pro-bowler" (snicker) Matt Slater?

Naturally, I was highly pissed-off that he was re-signed to captain our thoroughly mediocre,
under-performing (exc. for Edelman's punt returns) STs.

JAGs like him who don't return KOs, or contribute even a little on offense or defense, are dime/dozen,
minimum-wage flotsam, completely unworthy of a multi-year, $1M+ /year contracts.

Of course, releasing OchoStinko is Step 1 in clearing cap space.

 

[AzPatsFan]

He probably doesn't realize that we only have 6 picks in the draft this yr, and that would total between 33% to 50% of the entire draft.

Then again, when you consider the fact that we will most definitely be trading down for additional picks this yr, his early side prediction of 2 may not be too far off.

I can't imagine Belichick being okay with not having any picks in the 5th, 6th, or 7th rounds, so I am sure that some of the early picks will be traded into a round or two lower; with the additon of some picks added in of course.

I agree that he Defense is a lot better than people think. Fans were really down on McCourty, who in many cases was blamed erroneously. He was often playing "inside and behind trail technique" correcly, with a Safety supposed to come over and pickup "outside and over" technique.

They were no where to befound, always so late and just in time to see McCourty have to make the tackles after a completion. McCourty at FS along with the return of Chung changed that for the other CBs; Gregory will change that, along with an extra year for Edelman to transition from college QB, good PR, and slot WR, to his future position as a FS. This will allow McCourty to return to CB most of the time.

But I disagree about trading for lower round picks this year. I think the verification of that is the rather extensive signing of vet FAs right now. In normal years those positions might be expected to be filled with draftees and Bill Belichick is loading up on vet FAs in lieu of that.

I agree that Bill will trade out and up for a high pick next season though as has been his modus operandi. A 1, or a 2, for a 2 and a 1, next season, for example.

 

[supafly]

But for now, those spots are holes.

Maybe we could have the draft early? :rocker:

Then there wouldn't be any holes as of March 20th, with the season 6 months away.

I'm not seeing this as any different than any other year, or a situation that every other team in the NFL doesn't have.

Improvements and additions always need to be made, especially on the back end of a rebuilding phase. It's a good thing the team has 5 picks in the first 100 choices, and hasn't lost more than they've added on that side of the ball.

 

[supafly]

I agree that he Defense is a lot better than people think. Fans were really down on McCourty, who in many cases was blamed erroneously. He was often playing "inside and behind trail technique" correcly, with a Safety supposed to come over and pickup "outside and over" technique.

They were no where to befound, always so late and just in time to see McCourty have to make the tackles after a completion. McCourty at FS along with the return of Chung changed that for the other CBs; Gregory will change that, along with an extra year for Edelman to transition from college QB, good PR, and slot WR, to his future position as a FS. This will allow McCourty to return to CB most of the time.

But I disagree about trading for lower round picks this year. I think the verification of that is the rather extensive signing of vet FAs right now. In normal years those positions might be expected to be filled with draftees and Bill Belichick is loading up on vet FAs in lieu of that.

I agree that Bill will trade out and up for a high pick next season though as has been his modus operandi. A 1, or a 2, for a 2 and a 1, next season, for example.

I agree with your comments on the secondary.

It will be interesting to see if the Edelman prediction comes to fruition or not, I think it's a possibility.

So, you don't see any picks being traded down + added this year? No picks in rounds 5,6, or 7? I'm going to have to respectfully disgaree on that one.

 

[supafly]

1.) The Patriots aren't winning on the strength of a top defense. They're winning because of their offense.

2.) When we say things like "This team needs only... X players", that's sometimes misleading. Does the team "need" to upgrade over Arrington? Probably not, as he can be protected as long as both of the other CBs are getting it done. Would it be in the team's best interest to replace Arrington as one of the team's top 3 CBs? Absolutely.

3.) This team is weak at both DE spots, at 1 OLB spot (arguably both spots) and at least 1 safety spot. 2 of the top 3 spots at corner are open questions, as well. Realistically, the team likely doesn't know if it's really in good shape at 6 of the 11 starting spots, and that's even when giving the nod to Ninkovich. Time will tell, but it's to be expected that the optimists will say things like "Dowling looked great before getting injured..." while others will say "Dowling's made of glass and we don't know how good he is anyway....". It's the annual over/under rating of the players.

I understand what you're saying, Deus.

As far as the CB situation goes, I've never been sold on Arrington playing straight up/outside CB; however, he seems to be a viable solution to play the slot. I think that was the idea last yr before Dowling got injured. All in all, I think adding a CB is a possibility, although an unlikely one. It's my opinion that Belichick is going to be fine with the CB's that we have.

If I had to guess at picks, I'd say DL and OLB/DE of course, (maybe even 2 this yr--why not?), and also a safety. The depth for those will have to continue to be added via cuts etc, and they'll have to be creative.

At the end of the day though, I can't help by see an improvment from last yr. I could be way off base, and I'd be the first to admit it if so.

 

[Deus Irae]

I understand what you're saying, Deus.

As far as the CB situation goes, I've never been sold on Arrington playing straight up/outside CB; however, he seems to be a viable solution to play the slot. I think that was the idea last yr before Dowling got injured. All in all, I think adding a CB is a possibility, although an unlikely one. It's my opinion that Belichick is going to be fine with the CB's that we have.

If I had to guess at picks, I'd say DL and OLB/DE of course, (maybe even 2 this yr--why not?), and also a safety. The depth for those will have to continue to be added via cuts etc, and they'll have to be creative.

At the end of the day though, I can't help by see an improvment from last yr. I could be way off base, and I'd be the first to admit it if so.

I hear what you're saying, and I think that there's definitely a valid argument for being optimistic right now.

 

[supafly]

I hear what you're saying, and I think that there's definitely a valid argument for being optimistic right now.

It's a somewhat new position for me, as I'm not an extremely optimistic kind of guy.

Lots of draft picks, and improvements on offense too. I think the defense should be good enough to keep us in a managable position.

I don't think we go back to the 2004 days on that side of the ball, as those days will have to wait; but some of the problems from last year should be improved.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's a somewhat new position for me, as I'm not an extremely optimistic kind of guy.

Lots of draft picks, and improvements on offense too. I think the defense should be good enough to keep us in a managable position.

I don't think we go back to the 2004 days on that side of the ball, as those days will have to wait; but some of the problems from last year should be improved.

I'm looking at it from a "complete the offense and fill in on defense" standpoint, so I'm looking at an offense that really just needs a RB4 and another WR to make me happy for this year (drafting an interior OL for the future would be great, too). That leaves the defense and, other than thinking that getting another veteran safety would be a good idea, I'm content to see what BB & Co. do in the draft as far as that side of the ball goes.

 

[mgteich]

I missed something.

We had a below average defense last year.

We've replaced an outside pass-rush of Carter and Anderson with one of Scott.
===============

Our biggest weakness last year was at safety.
We brought in Gregory to replace Ihedigbo as our starter.
===================
How is this manageable?

. I think the defense should be good enough to keep us in a managable position.

 

[chicowalker]

Maybe we could have the draft early? :rocker:

Then there wouldn't be any holes as of March 20th, with the season 6 months away.

I'm not seeing this as any different than any other year, or a situation that every other team in the NFL doesn't have.

Improvements and additions always need to be made, especially on the back end of a rebuilding phase. It's a good thing the team has 5 picks in the first 100 choices, and hasn't lost more than they've added on that side of the ball.

You again appear to be responding to things I haven't said.

What I said in the first place: "...As for holes and the draft -- think defense -- plenty of holes there..."

Nothing about the defense being bad, nothing about there not being time, nothing about being worse off than other teams, etc.

 

[supafly]

I missed something.

We had a below average defense last year.

We've replaced an outside pass-rush of Carter and Anderson with one of Scott.
===============

Our biggest weakness last year was at safety.
We brought in Gregory to replace Ihedigbo as our starter.
===================
How is this manageable?

I think what you 'missed' or may be overlooking is the fact that it's March 20, and the season is almost 6 months away.

We had a below average defense in the passing game/secondary. The important stat is points allowed, and we saw them clamp down on that. Even with all of the negatives, they still finished at 15th in pts allowed. That is not 'below average.'

The main problems were the inconsistency/inadequacy of the safeties, and 3 key injuries to guys who missed approx. 1/2 of the year in Spikes, Chung, and Fletcher.

When they returned and the safety position was improved, the whole defense looked pretty good. I see it one way, you see it the other.

They were good enough to hold the opposition to 23 or less in 18 of 19 games. To me, that's about average.

With situations addressed at the other side of the ball, I will stand by my statement: "I see the defense being good enough to keep us in a managable position."

They kept us in a managable position last yr, and they had a lot of issues at times. Why do you think they will be taking steps backwards?

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

drop ocho..now

 

[supafly]

You again appear to be responding to things I haven't said.

What I said in the first place: "...As for holes and the draft -- think defense -- plenty of holes there..."

Nothing about the defense being bad, nothing about there not being time, nothing about being worse off than other teams, etc.

If your comment was taken in the wrong way than you intended then apologies.

My original response to "think defense--plenty of holes there" was that there may not be as many holes as you think.

For the most part I think we agree that there are some positions of question, and positions that need improvement. I also think we agree that they can be satisfied enough to put out a competitive product; at least one that can keep the other team to approx. 20 pts or so.

To me, that's a defense that's "keeping us in a managable position," when you consider the fact that our offense should score more than 20+ the majority of the time.