What the Pats want for Mallet according to

[50-yard-line]

At what point do the Pats think they're better off taking a shot with a less-proven (in their minds) back-up?

They say they want a 2nd-rounder, but is that really plausible? I doubt it, and certainly not the #33 pick!

How about Houston's 3rd rounder? I'd take it if I'm the Pats, but I doubt Houston would offer it.

How about Houston's 4th? At what point is it better to just keep the backup you've come to trust?

If Mallett gets traded, I suspect it will be part of a bigger deal involving draft picks back and forth, with Mallett taking up the equivalent of a 3rd rounder.

 

[Deus Irae]

Because I'm assuming that the Texans wouldn't want to give up a second round pick for a guy who would be an UFA in two seasons. Could be wrong, but I would think that having their QB at an advantageous cost would be an important part of any potential trade, since the alternative is drafting someone, which would give them 4-5 years of control at a low cost.

I think people are reading too much into their posts on this. This isn't a Cassel situation, or a Schaub situation, or even a Cousins situation. This is a guy who's thrown 4 passes in an NFL game and has had as many caught by the opponents as by his teammates.

If someone thinks Mallett's the real deal, they'll make a move and will have an idea of what they're looking for contractually already in their mind. Given how much like crap Mallett's looked like during his time in the NFL, it's probably going to be someone who's seen a lot of Mallett behind the scenes (i.e. BOB), and not a team that's barely seen the kid play. If nobody is convinced, that'll be the end of it.

The alternative doesn't matter, unless the would-be trade partner thinks there's no difference between the players, or the alternative would yield the better player and, if that's the case, the trade never had a shot anyway.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I think people are reading too much into their posts on this. This isn't a Cassel situation, or a Schaub situation, or even a Cousins situation. This is a guy who's thrown 4 passes in an NFL game and has had as many caught by the opponents as by his teammates.

If someone thinks Mallett's the real deal, they'll make a move and will have an idea of what they're looking for contractually already in their mind. Given how much like crap Mallett's looked like during his time in the NFL, it's probably going to be someone who's seen a lot of Mallett behind the scenes (i.e. BOB), and not a team that's barely seen the kid play. If nobody is convinced, that'll be the end of it.

The alternative doesn't matter, unless the would-be trade partner thinks there's no difference between the players, or the alternative would yield the better player and, if that's the case, the trade never had a shot anyway.

That has pretty much nothing to do with my point. My point is that even if the Texans are high on Mallett based on BOB's experience with him --which you'd have to figure they are if they're willing to trade a second round pick for him -- there is the separate issue of salaries and roster construction. Trading a second round pick for a guy who has only moderately less uncertainty surrounding him than a rookie, and who will also be under your control for half as long as a rookie would be before hitting FA, is not good business.

Say that Mallett turns out to be a really good quarterback. If the Texans trade for him and only extend him for one year, then that means they'll have exactly two years with him on a cap-friendly deal before they have to pay him big bucks. It pretty much eliminates the possibility of getting a Luck/Kaepernick style window where you're getting upper echelon production at a low price.

The opportunity to get that window matters a lot, and if they can get it by drafting their QB but not by trading for Mallett, then that will be a significant point in favor of turning to the draft to find their quarterback.

 

[Deus Irae]

That has pretty much nothing to do with my point. My point is that even if the Texans are reasonably confident that Mallett is the real deal -- which you'd have to figure they are if they're willing to trade a second round pick for him -- there is the separate issue of salaries and roster construction. Trading a second round pick for a guy who has only moderately less uncertainty surrounding him than a rookie, and who will also be under your control for half as long as a rookie would be before hitting FA, is not good business.

Say that Mallett turns out to be a really good quarterback. If the Texans trade for him and only extend him for one year, then that means they'll have exactly two years with him on a cap-friendly deal before they have to pay him big bucks. It pretty much eliminates the possibility of getting a Luck/Kaepernick style window where you're getting upper echelon production at a low price.

The opportunity to get that window matters a lot, and if they can get it by drafting their QB but not by trading for Mallett, then that will be a significant point in favor of turning to the draft to find their quarterback.

Your argument is, basically, that if Mallett is a top shelf QB from year one, the Texans won't have a win window. They've got that right now. They're drafting #1 just a year after going 12-4, in no small part because of their (former) starting QB crapping out. That QB is going to be gone, either this year or next, meaning the Texans will be getting up to $10m in cap savings.

Just by going with the 2 year deal, the Texans avoid stacking Watt and Mallett, and their cap opens up in 2015.

 

[Bhelmet]

I would rather have Tyler Wilson (the other, better Razorback) - Mallett may be worth a straight-up trade for him, but little more.

 

[Sciz]

I would rather have Tyler Wilson (the other, better Razorback) - Mallett may be worth a straight-up trade for him, but little more.

Tyler Wilson who was cut by the Raiders in November and went unsigned for almost three weeks? :bricks:

 

[PP2]

If someone thinks Mallett's the real deal, they'll make a move and will have an idea of what they're looking for contractually already in their mind. Given how much like crap Mallett's looked like during his time in the NFL, it's probably going to be someone who's seen a lot of Mallett behind the scenes (i.e. BOB), and not a team that's barely seen the kid play. If nobody is convinced, that'll be the end of it.

You forget, though, that BB cut the more dependable Hoyer in favor of Mallett. That alone speaks volume as far as what BB thinks of Mallett. Hoyer as we know has shown that he is very capable of quarterbacking at the NFL level.

 

[supafly]

You forget, though, that BB cut the more dependable Hoyer in favor of Mallett. That alone speaks volume as far as what BB thinks of Mallett. Hoyer as we know has shown that he is very capable of quarterbacking at the NFL level.

I'm not sure that Brian Hoyer was 1/2 of what you're claiming, PatsPsycho; at least not while he was here.

Since we released him, he bounced around from N.England to Pittsburgh to Arizona to Cleveland....4 teams in a little over 1.5 yrs.

He proved to be a capable enough backup while here, but I'm not sure exactly how much we can read from Belichick's move to save some money by going with 2 instead of 3 QBs.

Not meaning to knock him, b/c I think it's great that CLE gave him a chance and he attempted to make the most of it, but that was very recent, and had nothing to do with Belichick's decision in the spring/summer of 2012.

I think it's much more likely that Belichick felt comfortable enough with Mallett's knowledge after 1+ yrs here to make a cost cutting move to choose to go with 2 QBs on the depth chart, as opposed to how "good" he felt about Ryan Mallett.

By your thinking, we could make the same exact argument should Belichick bring in another new QB this year and trade Mallett. You could say that "obviously Belichick liked the new QB," and that may not be as true as you'd be making it out to be. Both situations likely would have much more to it as it pertains to the cap, the 53 man roster, and the future of the team in general.

 

[Off The Grid]

Most considered Mallett a great value pick at #74 in 2011 when the Patriots drafted him.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

IMO, Belichick might regret not being able to play Mallett as much as perhaps he should have, but I don't think he regrets drafting him in the first place.

For all we know, the Patriots' plan might have been to just keep him for four years and then let him walk unless they were blown away by an offer. As a point of comparison:

Kyle Orton, 2012-2014: $10.5M
Ryan Mallett, 2012-2014: $1.9M

 

[OhExaulted1]

IMO, Belichick might regret not being able to play Mallett as much as perhaps he should have, but I don't think he regrets drafting him in the first place.

For all we know, the Patriots' plan might have been to just keep him for four years and then let him walk unless they were blown away by an offer. As a point of comparison:

Kyle Orton, 2012-2014: $10.5M
Ryan Mallett, 2012-2014: $1.9M

Well, as we all know on the next man up Patriots you need to be prepared and capable in case of injury and Mallet was backing up a QB with prior injury history. I think Bill's plan was he had confidence in Ryan running the offense in case of catastrophe so he didn't feel the need to bring in another QB as Mallet's backup unless forced into that situation.

I doubt cap room weighed that heavily in the decision into carrying only 2 QB's.

 

[varjao]

I think the idea was to use Mallet a little more in this last season in blowout games and get a good film but unfortunately things went very different as the majority of games was really close.

The only good film is a pre-season game, the last one, when even Tebow threw TD's.

 

[PP2]

I'm not sure that Brian Hoyer was 1/2 of what you're claiming, PatsPsycho; at least not while he was here.

Since we released him, he bounced around from N.England to Pittsburgh to Arizona to Cleveland....4 teams in a little over 1.5 yrs.

He proved to be a capable enough backup while here, but I'm not sure exactly how much we can read from Belichick's move to save some money by going with 2 instead of 3 QBs.

Not meaning to knock him, b/c I think it's great that CLE gave him a chance and he attempted to make the most of it, but that was very recent, and had nothing to do with Belichick's decision in the spring/summer of 2012.

I think it's much more likely that Belichick felt comfortable enough with Mallett's knowledge after 1+ yrs here to make a cost cutting move to choose to go with 2 QBs on the depth chart, as opposed to how "good" he felt about Ryan Mallett.

By your thinking, we could make the same exact argument should Belichick bring in another new QB this year and trade Mallett. You could say that "obviously Belichick liked the new QB," and that may not be as true as you'd be making it out to be. Both situations likely would have much more to it as it pertains to the cap, the 53 man roster, and the future of the team in general.

I disagree, simply because trading Mallett in favor of an unknown QB just isn't going to happen.

I also don't think I am overrating Hoyer. Every time I saw him on the field, I saw someone who was a very decisive QB who rarely got happy feet, knew the system, and knew how to read and execute. He was more often than not moving the chains.

 

[Kontradiction]

I disagree, simply because trading Mallett in favor of an unknown QB just isn't going to happen.

I haven't read the whole thread so I might have missed your answer to this, but why not? The team could very easily trade Mallett to Houston, for example, giving BOB a quarterback well versed in the system that has sat behind Brady for a few years while the Pats use a later pick to draft guys like Aaron Murray or A.J. McCarron to back up Brady.

 

[PP2]

I haven't read the whole thread so I might have missed your answer to this, but why not? The team could very easily trade Mallett to Houston, for example, giving BOB a quarterback well versed in the system that has sat behind Brady for a few years while the Pats use a later pick to draft guys like Aaron Murray or A.J. McCarron to back up Brady.

But has that ever happened in the BB era? Brady and just one backup with zero experience in the system?

When BB drafts or signs an unknown QB, it's a 3rd string move.

 

[Kontradiction]

But has that ever happened in the BB era? Brady and just one backup with zero experience in the system?

When BB drafts or signs an unknown QB, it's a 3rd string move.

Not that I can recall. That said, it was also out of the ordinary for the Pats to roll into the season with just two QB's. But it happened in 2012 and 2013 (carry over). What happens in the past with this team doesn't have much effect on the future. If he thinks it's in the team's best interest and if he has a trading partner willing to pony up a second rounder, BB will trade Mallett and draft a QB. After that, whether or not he signs a vet to compete with the rookie depends on who is available.

 

[SB39]

I disagree, simply because trading Mallett in favor of an unknown QB just isn't going to happen.

I also don't think I am overrating Hoyer. Every time I saw him on the field, I saw someone who was a very decisive QB who rarely got happy feet, knew the system, and knew how to read and execute. He was more often than not moving the chains.

Yeah, I suppose when you throw an INT, you're "moving the chains" but I'm not sure that's what that is supposed to mean....

 

[PP2]

Yeah, I suppose when you throw an INT, you're "moving the chains" but I'm not sure that's what that is supposed to mean....

Are you talking about the only INT that Hoyer threw in his three years here?

 

[PP2]

Not that I can recall. That said, it was also out of the ordinary for the Pats to roll into the season with just two QB's. But it happened in 2012 and 2013 (carry over). What happens in the past with this team doesn't have much effect on the future. If he thinks it's in the team's best interest and if he has a trading partner willing to pony up a second rounder, BB will trade Mallett and draft a QB. After that, whether or not he signs a vet to compete with the rookie depends on who is available.

I don't put it past BB to go against the grain every now and then.

But should (God Forbid) Brady happen to go down early in the season, I just don't see BB handing the reins of a hugely successful franchise to an unknown QB without seeing if he can first grasp the system and master the concepts.

 

[Kontradiction]

I don't put it past BB to go against the grain every now and then.

But should (God Forbid) Brady happen to go down early in the season, I just don't see BB handing the reins of a hugely successful franchise to an unknown QB without seeing if he can first grasp the system and master the concepts.

Why not? He handed the reins to a skinny kid out of Michigan in his second professional season that had done absolutely nothing before that. Naturally, he would have to make sure that the kid can grasp the system and can make pre-snap reads.

As a fan, I wouldn't care one way or another. If Brady goes down, this team isn't going anywhere anyway.