- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 5,511
- Reaction score
- 2,299
His 2007 salary was also guaranteed.Part of the 17 million in guaranteed money is his salary. His 2008, 2009, and 2010 salaries are guaranteed.
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.His 2007 salary was also guaranteed.Part of the 17 million in guaranteed money is his salary. His 2008, 2009, and 2010 salaries are guaranteed.
Part of the 17 million in guaranteed money is his salary. His 2008, 2009, and 2010 salaries are guaranteed.
So you are telling me AP has a $40M contract and you believe that it breaks down as follows:If that is accurate and that is the going rate for the #7 pick, you are absolutely justified in suggesting the Pats shouldn't trade down. That is a little over $4M a year average and the total package can likely be reduced even more if he is cut after year 4 (in case of devastating or chronic injury).
- $17M guaranteed (salary + bonus)
- $8M in other salary + reasonable/reachable incentives
- $15M in unreachable (requiring an amazing year) incentives
I'm really pleasantly surprised that the #7 pick is that affordable. That puts the Pats in a great position to either take the pick or trade down (since teams should be very willing to trade up to #7 since the cost is so reasonable). Very nice.
Once again we are drafting players not cap hits. If there is a much better player available, who fits the Patriots, at #4 they should go up and get him. Why draft a lesser player between 7-15 because of cap considerations which smart teams will work around.
Once again we are drafting players not cap hits. If there is a much better player available, who fits the Patriots, at #4 they should go up and get him. Why draft a lesser player between 7-15 because of cap considerations which smart teams will work around.
I would like to see the Patriots trade up where necessary to obtain
three or four players who can really help them this year or next year.
If they use all their current picks, I expect their last two or three
picks will have very little chance of making the team.
The bold text above is the key. "Much better" is a value statement that has an associated cost (in cap space and draft picks needed to trade up). Just like anything else, if the value exceeds the cost then you make the move.
For example, I could trade a 2nd round pick and move up to grab CLong. Or I could stick at #7, take Gholston and use the 2nd round pick for Lofton/Henderson/Goff/Godfrey/Lee/etc. So you use the Pats value system and evaluate which is better:
CLong vs. Gholston + Godfrey (for example)
The cap consideration should be taken into account since that is part of the Pats value system in player acquisition. So I don't get your implication of getting lesser players to minimize the cap hit. As a goal, that is foolish. However, player evaluation DOES take into account contract costs. The goal is to get the right players at the right price...not the right players at any price or best available players at the cheapest price.
The goal is to get the right players at the right price...not the right players at any price or best available players at the cheapest price.
The 17 million consisted ofSo you are telling me AP has a $40M contract and you believe that it breaks down as follows:
- $17M guaranteed (salary + bonus)
Interestingly enough, Scott Pioli had a slightly different take on the situation in the NFL Top 10 segment on Brady being the biggest steal in NFL Draft history. He basically said that the Pats did have Brady higher on their draft board than a sixth-round pick. But, because of the Pats' residence in cap hell (<40 players signed, $10M over the cap), they just couldn't justify taking him in, say, the third or fourth round. By pick 199, though, he was so far above the rest of the players remaining on the Pats' draft board that, thank God, they couldn't justify not taking him.
In other words, the cap hits are a concern, too, but they're by no means the only one.
[/LIST]The 17 million consisted of
3 million signing bonus
7.775 million option bonus
1.255 million 2007 roster bonus
2.45 million NTLBE incentive which was very easy to reach
2.55 million in salaries (2007 through 2010).
Right now his 5 year APY is 4.46 million. But I think Peterson will do enough to raise it to $5million.
That's the differece between then and now. They had poor cap management then and they have excellent cap management now.
Can you sum up your thoughts in this area since I don't think getting the point? You seem to be saying that the Pats should just get the best player for them in the draft and not worry about cap implications. That may be too simplistic and don't want to put words in your mouth.
The "trade down" crowd (myself included) seems to believe that there isn't a player in the top 7 that is worth (for the Pats) the contract they would get. Are you just evaluating the players differently (higher value) or just thinking that people are over-inflating the cap costs of a top 7 contract?
Both. I think that both C. Long and Gholston can become special players for a long time. They also fit a position of need for the Patriots. It may be a long time (we hope) before the Patriots will be back in this postion in the draft.
I also think that trading up to #4 or #5 to get them will not be a cap buster or even a cap strain for the future.
Both. I think that both C. Long and Gholston can become special players for a long time. They also fit a position of need for the Patriots. It may be a long time (we hope) before the Patriots will be back in this postion in the draft.
I also think that trading up to #4 or #5 to get them will not be a cap buster or even a cap strain for the future.
You seem to be saying that the Pats should just get the best player for them in the draft and not worry about cap implications.
I think that the latter is true.The "trade down" crowd (myself included) seems to believe that there isn't a player in the top 7 that is worth (for the Pats) the contract they would get. Are you just evaluating the players differently (higher value) or just thinking that people are over-inflating the cap costs of a top 7 contract?
If it would only cost us one of our 3rd rounders (and a latter 2nd day pick say 6 or 7th which will only be training camp fodder) , and IF we can manage the cap - then I would be open to the idea to trade up and grab one of the Longs or Gholston.
Only problem is - it goes against the Patriots way of having a deep middle class and pay mega bucks to only a few elite veteran players. Doesn't send the best message to the locker room to pay this kind of $$$ to a rookie.
Moving up from 7 to 4 or 5 is not going to create a cap busting contract. It is not horribly prohibitive