Welcome to PatsFans.com

Value in signing Asante to a contract?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by carolinatony, Feb 12, 2007.

  1. carolinatony

    carolinatony Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,845
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    We have the money so my question is; would you sign him to a contract?
    Is he worth this kind of money for 4/5 years to the Pats? Do we get better value to franchise him and try to trade him.

    If you were BB, what would you do?
  2. ironwasp

    ironwasp Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    This is the sort of decision that makes me glad I am not BB. Can he really win here? To resign Samuel, who had a terrific year, costs a small fortune and ties up a lot of cap space, possibly to the extent that it prevents the Pats from addressing other needs in FA.

    If he doesn't then you take out the team's best DB of the season, our only play-maker back there now that Rodney is in his dotage, and leave Peyton et al the opportunity to pick on CBs led by Ellis Hobbs - who I like a lot, btw, this is not an attack on him - and probably a rookie, or maybe Geno is the guy can stay on the field through week two.

    It's an invidious position to be in. If there's a chance to do a long term deal at a price that doesn't paralyse the team's ability to work the cap for the next five years, then I do it. If there isn't then you franchise him and trade him out of town.
  3. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    #24 Jersey

    There's little doubt the best "value" is in trading him. Other than Brady, that's always the case. However these are people, not pieces of fantasy teams, so you can't just move guys in and out.

    Look at The Jest, though. They traded Franchised UFA John Abraham for the pick to get Nick Mangold. They got (probably) a better player, certainly a healthier one. He's younger. And he is way cheaper - they can/could spend the extra $5M elsewhere.

    The DREAM scenario ? Trade Samuel for something good then use the money we would have signed him with to sign Nate Clements. Get a better CB, maybe at a little more money, and get good draft pick(s). Or sign two good players, say Fletcher and Curtis or the like with the money and take the picks. It's the best VALUE way to go.
  4. satz

    satz Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    what no one is thinking is we go through DB`s at a alarming rate.BB/FO always have a budget for a set position.If you pay asante then will we be okay to not use 15 DB`s and use 4-5 DB`s as they spend all alloted money on asante.

    From the last 5 yrs it should tell us that , 1 CB however good is not better than 5-6 avg CB due to our injury history.That is a gamble as if we pay him andm he plays for 3 full yrs withot any injury we are good or else we are screwed as we will no money to hire 10 DB`s over the season.

    If we do not sigh and have some dough ...look for a offer made in end 2007 year to Mr Ty Warran as his contract ends in 08 as they did with dan koppen.
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2007
  5. stinkypete

    stinkypete Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2004
    Messages:
    2,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Great point. Samuel is not worth the money if the team is forced to carry 10 defensive backs like it typically does. That would force us to sacrifice quality at other positions.

    Franchise and trade Samuel. Bring in a couple of vets to upgrade over Gay and Scott, then bring in a day 1 rookie to compete.
  6. patsgo

    patsgo Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    if you sign him to a market contract his cap number will be high to, your better off franchising him playing him and making sure hes the real deal, if hes a bust or inconsistent you wont have the cap hits in future years if you sign long term for big bucks. , so you may pay more franchising hin but its almost like insurance, if he performs next year you can pay him or frnchise hin again and trade him
  7. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    Pretty close to my thoughts also, do not want to overpay Samuel, it will throw the salary structure of the Pats out the window, and will not settle in well with the other 52 guys. I also do not know if this year was the exception or the reality for this guy, last year he played like a nickel this year he played for the contract. Who will emerge in '07, the hungry guy we saw this year or the guy we saw in the '05 year? I favor franchise and trade and am sure if/before they franchise that the trade is already set up.
  8. PonyExpress

    PonyExpress Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,655
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    I would franchise Samuel. His agent seemed to threaten that Samuel would be "unhappy" if he gets the franchise tag, implying that the Pats might not get a committed player playing at 100% under those circumstances in 2007. Knock yourself out, 'Zant. Samuel does not have a resume that can survive a down year in 2007 if he plays like an "unhappy" man. A down year would degrade his open market value. The Pats have the upperhand here. Franchise him in 2007, franchise him again in 2008 and trade him for a 1st rdr. Use the money you save by trading him to help sign Ty Warren to a long term deal.
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2007
  9. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    We all thought Branch didn't have the resume to survive a holdout - the player always has the upper hand. If they tag him to play, and he agrees to to sign the tag, they are on the hook for almost $8M. If he goes down, or gets dinged and is reluctant to play through it and risk further injury while playing under a tag, they are effectively screwed. If he sits out - which he could do as a franchise player because unlike Branch's situation the sit out gets him to UFA, they get nothing but a comp pick now in 2009. He won't come in in week 10 for $3M because that would allow them to rinse, spin and repeat the same cycle. Belichick wouldn't do that dance with Deion, and he isn't gonna do it with Asante. He will want value for him either on the roster or in trade.

    If they can't get a deal done, and it's a good bet they can't given how far apart they were in November when the buzz on Asante was just a murmur, tag and trade him for what should be a pretty decent package of picks and use the $6-8M you don't have to spend on him to improve both the secondary and areas that take pressure off the secondary. That is the Belechick model.
  10. PonyExpress

    PonyExpress Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,655
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    Maybe I'm wrong, which wouldn't be a surprise. Did the franchise rules change, so you can't franchise a player 2 years in a row? If so, the MoLewis scenario seems best.
  11. frankiesfly

    frankiesfly Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    1,357
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Im so sick and tired of this topic. Yes we should sign him, hes worth it. Hes our future at CB. Plaese God let there not be another post about this topic. Please god.
  12. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0


    You can, but they have to accept it the first time or you're DOA. Unlike a player who has not yet completed a contract (like Branch), the league has nothing to toll on a franchise player which is why they aren't even fined if they skip the off season and camp. His committment was met, so if he holds out the entire season he is a FA. Coming in at week 10 would do him no good since he would be swapping 6 weeks of salary for losing guaranteed FA.

    Sometimes the player can't find a trade, like Edge in a flush RB market last spring, so they eventually sign the tag and agree to play though often only after the team agrees not to use it again, as was the case with Alexander and Clements in 2005 and 2006.

    Abraham was coming off some injury plagued seasons, so he decided to sign his tag in 2005 when they told him they would continue to work towards a long term deal provided he showed he could stay on the field. He did, they didn't, and the cap exploded - so when they tagged him again last year he told them he wouldn't play for them. Which was fine with them because they couldn't afford to pay him the tag price or give him a long term deal in the range he wanted anyway - they tagged him the second time strictly in order to get value from him in trade. He and his agent located two teams (Seattle and Atlanta) who would talk deal with him and were willing to trade. Atlanta wasn't willing to trade a first rounder initially, but Seattle was and all it takes is one team to drive the deal. Eventually he insisted he wanted Atlanta and the JETS held firm to wanting a first, so Atlanta traded it's higher first for a lower one they felt better about trading (and picked up some additional picks to balance the difference) and the deal was done in less than a month prior to the 2006 draft.

    I'm not sure BB would pay to have a top 5 corner in his secondary even if Asante truly were one. So I really can't see him tagging this kid to retain him or working out a long term deal given his present overheated market buzz. Doesn't mean he wouldn't love to retain him, just not as something he isn't and something we don't need to have to win (much like Branch). Asante has proven he has the talent and coachability to play the position well in a system built around DL, LB and safety play. He's not the first mid-level corner to prove he can do that, and Starks aside (who couldn't play period) he won't be the last. I think as his core ages BB will look to bolster his LB and safety personnel and retain his Dlinemen. And get reasonably talented corners with good work ethic (like Hobbs and Samuel) who are highly coachable.

    Trading Asante for picks could create value to go do just that. Which is why letting him walk makes no sense unless they value Graham so highly that retaining him under a tag is a greater priority. But I think if that were the case he'd be signed already.
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2007
  13. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,112
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0

    There's a huge difference between sitting out half of a modest rookie-contract year and sitting out half of a nearly $8-million year. Nobody sits out on that kind of money. Skipping off-season programs and minicamps, sure. Maybe even TC. But that's an enormous payday to skip...and remember, he's playing for his next contract. Don't want to risk starting the season out of shape/practice and getting injured.

    The CB pool is weak in both FA and the draft this year. Teams are flush with cash. It will be very, very hard to sign Samuel to a long-term deal. But the franchise tag is a no-brainer.
  14. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    When you're sitting out to secure $20M+ implicitly guaranteed, sure you do. Deion didn't sit out on half of a modest rookie contract year, he sat out with $8M in signing bonus and $13M within 12 months and $19M over 3 years implicitly guaranteed sitting on the table. Under a scenario where he was losing money in fines from day 1 and where if he didn't play they retained his rights and could do so indefinitely. Why...because he knew if he did he it would force their hand, as it did. And he was looking for $12M+ up front on a $39M+ deal, which even with trade compensation he pretty much got.

    Asante and his agent know his value as a FA may never be higher. He already played for his next contract, and he may never be able to duplicate that success even through no fault of his own. They aren't going to jeopardize $20M+ for $7.8M, and I don't think BB would pay him that anyway (or any fraction of it were he to show up for 6 games) so if he's tagged he's traded. The other option is to just let him walk, which would be silly if you can get any kind of decent value for him - which given the market and his buzz you certainly should. So IMO using the franchise tag on Asante is only a no brainer if it's to pave his road out of town.
  15. fgssand

    fgssand PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,763
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0


    Should we really sign him?

    Is he worth it??

    Is he our future at the position??

    This is the debate and there will be dozens more posts because this is really a tough call.

    I think all we can do is rely on BB/SP to not lose sight of the Patriots model and do the right thing as in whatever is BEST for the TEAM.

    Whatever they decide, I am with them.

    I still even think, in the long run, Deion Branch was handled the only way they could have after the agent )IMHO) was less than honest or fair with them.

    Sorry dude, until Assante's situation is resolved - get used to numerous posts.

    I also do not think it will drag on for any where near as long as Deions that for sure, for one thing, Assante did it the right way and this is his time.
  16. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,529
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    Satz hit the nail on the head here - we as a team just can not sink into the mire over Asante Samuel. Add to that, that we have only one good season to go on, though he has shown steady improvement. I do not think they find the common ground necessary to sign him, and I think a NE Patriot that goes and gets a "get paid" tattoo isn't planning on the team making an offer he can live with.

    Franchise once - twice? I don't see it happening. He'll definitely sit by the second one. You franchise to trade in his situation.

    PFnV
  17. VJCPatriot

    VJCPatriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    12,304
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +23 / 1 / -0

    The other thing to note about franchise tags is that the pay increases on consecutive tags so you really can't afford to do it for long. I think the Pats either sign AS long term or they tag and trade him.
  18. Patstopia

    Patstopia Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2006
    Messages:
    680
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I think we need to sign him. He has been our most durable DB and he played at a high level this year. Showing progress is always a good think.

    Also I think it would be good for the team. I think in the locker room, when your rookie contract is almost up, you want them playing because they want to be part of the team and not with a "you got one chance to sign me then I'm gone" attitude.

    Lastly, where the heck are you going to get a replacement? Gay? Can he play more than a few games without being hurt? Put a rookie in? Scott? We have enough questions on the other side.

    I hate that the entire NFL thinks we don't pay. They ignore that we paid Brady and Seymour.

    Anyway we need decent DB'S. You can't do every position on the cheap
  19. Patriot Missile

    Patriot Missile Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    5,279
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 1 / -0

    #75 Jersey

    This is just a mess. I can't fault the front office on how they decide to handle this one. Even if they offer him a fair contract that is comparable to the top 5 cbs in the league, there will be a team like the Jet's that make him a Champ Bailey like contract. He hasn't done enough to warrant that. Great,great season though. Wish he had another season here to prove it wasn't just a one time thing.
  20. frankiesfly

    frankiesfly Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    1,357
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Yes he is worth it, he only led the leauge in interceptions this year, including the one in the postseason he had. Its that the answers are always the same. Whats so hard about going back and looking through the lists of posts and continue adding there. Thats what i do. Ill just bring back a post of the same topic that was already made. Then at least you already have everyones thoughts, and they dont have to write them over, over,over,over, and over again.
  21. pats63

    pats63 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    891
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    TAG AND TRADE!!!!It will be good for the team....More options for BB & SP to choose from....We will upgrade in DBs next season with or without Asante...I always love Asante,but it all about what is best way forward....Asante is want to "get paid".....He has only one chance to "get paid" all the power to him....Let just make where both sides make it to there advantage.....
  22. solman

    solman Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    First, If Asante gets tagged and doesn't play his best (even if due to injury), he will DESTROY his market value because in 2008, 2006 will appear simply to be an abberation. Given the tatoo, and all the quotes from Asante this year, I don't see how anybody can doubt that Asante understands the importance of playing well in a contract year. If we tag him, 2007 IS a contract year.

    Second, Asante NEEDS the money. He has never had a season with a big payday. Considering his attitude, I'll be he's already spending his millions, if not in reality, then in his head. Its absurd to think that this guy will either sit out not give his all.

    Bottom line: ASANTE SAMUEL CARES ABOUT THE MONEY. If he is franchised, the way for him to maximize his money is to give it his all.
  23. WhiZa

    WhiZa Rookie

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    5,040
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    After reading this article (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9992264) it would be in the Patriots best interest to franchise Samuel. Best case is signing him to a deal which is probably what the pats are working on right now. Worst case is you franchise him and a) trade him for more than he's worth b) Let him play one more year for $8 million which is pretty low considering what he may get on the open market. Also, the fact that the draft is pretty thin at CB will also help this decision.
  24. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    If he is franchised the way for him to maximize his money is to quietly announce he will not play under the tag and request the team explore a trade for him from among the teams his agent has already elicited a desire to sign him long term to a deal of his liking. The only way he plays for the tag here is if we are all misreading his market and he doesn't get a long term offer at anything approaching tag money. And then we'd be fools to pay him that for even a year.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2007
  25. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,112
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0

    I see your point, but I think there's a key number missing from your equation. It's not just $7.8M vs $20M, there's also the guaranteed number that the Patriots are willing to offer in a long-term deal. Say the Pats offer includes $17M guaranteed while another team offers $20M. Do you sit out a year for that 15% difference? If you throw away a whole season's earnings in the very prime of your career, that's something you can never get back. And playing under the tag isn't all bad either: $8M in the bank, PLUS the opportunity remains to cash in with a long-term deal at the end of the year.

    I understand the tag-and-trade impulse, but somebody has to actually play CB for this team next season. Neither the draft class nor the FA crop encourage me. If I'm the Patriots, I think I tag Samuel with the intent of seeing him on the field in a NE uniform.

    Lots of players complain and agitate and skip mini-camps and try to maneuver to force a trade when they face a franchise tag. But they don't actually sit out the season.
  26. Brady-To-Branch

    Brady-To-Branch Rookie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Messages:
    722
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    How would the 2006 Pats have finished w/o Asante?

    Who can replace him with? Randall Gay?
  27. solman

    solman Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I think this is foolish. If he refuses to play, he loses $8M for not playing during the season, and probably loses substantially more than that off of his next long term contract, because he'll have been sitting on his butt for a year, instead of coming off of a career season. The Patriots would lose nothing (versus not tagging him).

    If your theory is that BB will automatically cave just because a player threatens to hold out, I think that's insane. BB has proven that he won't be bullied by recalcitrant players, by how he handled the Deion Branch situation. [i.e. he'd only trade a player if he received substantially more than that player is worth].

    I don't see any NFL player walking away from $8M and sitting out the season, much less Asante who has as much as said that he is all about the money, and who has received substantially less than that over the course of his entire career.
  28. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,529
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    Okay, a couple of observations -
    1) Interceptions are a Good Thing. They are not, however, what a cornerback does for his bread and butter. A good corner makes a receiver invisible. The very best corner just removes one half of the field from the QB's possibilities. Now I'm not saying anybody truly is that level of CB right now, and I'm not saying Samuel is "bad" at other coverage areas. I am just pointing out the overrated nature of interceptions as a measure of CB efficacy. If all he did was intercept a ball a little more than once every other game, there'd be little point to him being on the field at all.
    2) Nevertheless, teams can very easily fall into the trap of magnifying interceptions in their evaluation of a CB. Whenever I hear someone is a "playmaker," I start worrying, because this sort of effect is being emphasized. Now again, I'll state that it's very likely that a guy with a lot of INTs will also likely cover pretty well. But if you're looking for the coverage skills, you have to just play tape over and over and over... something BB and staff are famous for -- studying tape til your eyes bleed, then studying it some more.
    3) Given the overvaluation of "playmaker" stats like interceptions, and given the overvaluation of a player's performance in his contract year (an excellent year for Samuel,) it is likely Samuel will be very highly valued in the market.
    4) Given his tattoo and his agent's attitude thus far, it seems Samuel is aware of this likelihood, and means to get the maximum possible effect from it, in monetary terms.
    5) $11M is 1/10 of $110M. Let's talk single-year here; if Samuel wants really elite CB money, he could very well stake the claim that he should get $11M (on the high end, but not impossible). If you pay one player $11M, the rest of the team, on average, must make about 90% of average pay for their position. If you pay five players 1/10 each of $110M, the rest of the team, on average must make about 50% of average pay for the position. Now, you do have to adjust for the fact that every team has the same decision to make, and every team needs at least some special players. But even so, the model the Pats have won with says to make elite status a rarity - so far there are two in the club in New England, total. Think about all the Pats -- considering the "club" to be 2 right now, with perhaps 3 more possible add-ons between now and 2010 (and that is really stretching the model,) do you think Samuel is truly of that caliber? It works about the same way if you're coughing up $8M, by the way.
    6) Countervailing point: We are in a period of rapid cap inflation. This militates for "do the deal now, before it costs even more." But you can use that cap inflation to work out other guys' deals now, before it gets too expensive. Or, you can just go shopping in the FA market, which may or may not adjust commensurate to the new numbers. Still, you are not obligated to look at the good value of "buy now" when inflation is high, and apply that at every position. You can still use the value rule at the overvalued position(s) and go middle class.

    I know I go on and on... but I just don't see CB and WR getting the Pats' attention as they have the rest of the league. Does this mean mediocre secondary play? Yes... it means we can not expect the Pats to ever go to war with the kind of dominant team that just beats the crap out of everybody in their path.

    We'll take a lot of good, tough, smart, versatile players with heart, and combine the skills each brings to the table, to create the best possible crew on the field for each game.

    The Pats are the first team to realize that the guy with the most toys does not win in the NFL... I hope they do not lose sight of that (and I feel pretty secure they won't.)

    PFnV

Share This Page