Which WR will be traded?

[patchick]

A failure for Stallworth if he's cut? He'd still have $2.9M of bonus money and can then look elsewhere.

Nope, that's not what I said...I was talking about a failure by him, not for him.

 

[PatsSteve1]

Apparently Belichick is the only GM who trades for players during camp, giving up what is reportedly a conditional pick for a backup CB - unfortunately starting caliber WRs like Gaffney and Caldwell have no trade value whatsoever, which is unfortunate for us.

He doesn't wait until guys are cut because if it's after the down to 53 man cut he has to outbid other teams and the new guy would have to start learning the Patriots system when TC is overwith. It's why a team that really needs a WR would be smart to try and trade now, rather than wait until Sept when guys get cut.

 

[PatsSteve1]

Didn't BB say he got a spot for Caldwell or something like that earlier?

Yeah, but did he say where? - IMO, what either Gaffney or Caldwell did last year won't be what determines who stays if there's a choice between these two. When I read BB's consistency comments I took it to mean what they do in TC and PS games, but I guess that's open to interpretation. It's a what ave you done for me today league.

 

[Rob0729]

Yeah, but did he say where? - IMO, what either Gaffney or Caldwell did last year won't be what determines who stays if there's a choice between these two. When I read BB's consistency comments I took it to mean what they do in TC and PS games, but I guess that's open to interpretation. It's a what ave you done for me today league.

Belichick did say last week that their experience is a huge advantage for them.

 

[JoeSixPat]

He doesn't wait until guys are cut because if it's after the down to 53 man cut he has to outbid other teams and the new guy would have to start learning the Patriots system when TC is overwith. It's why a team that really needs a WR would be smart to try and trade now, rather than wait until Sept when guys get cut.

Yes - I was being sarcastic, given the fact that I seemed to be the lone voice suggesting that, like Belichick, other GMs might actually want to trade for a Gaffney, Caldwell, Washington or whoever rather than contending with 31 othe teams.

So all it takes is another thread about the same thing to validate your opinion and discount the opposing view? Shouldn't you maybe wait until there is an actual trade to post an I told you so?

You're right. I should have posted an "I told you so" when BB traded for a backup/special teams CB to illustrate that, yes Virginia, training camp trades do happen, and if a backup CB has trade value, it's idiotic to suggest that a starting WR doesn't.

Seems elementary to me that a starting WR in fact does have trade value - what that trade value is, remains to be seen - and it also remains to be seen how healthy everyone stays through camp, which would certainly be a factor in our decision to trade among our depth at WR.

But given the absolute "our WRs have no trade value" that was voiced by so many in the other thread, I think this thread makes it pretty clear that there's serious tradeability among the guys competing for WR spots 4, 5 & 6 on our roster.

But everyone's entitled to their opinion. I guess I'd just ask everyone who was so adamant that there is no trade value among our WRs if they still feel that way.

 

[mgteich]

I presume that Jackson and Brown will move to the PUP list or the IR. Even if one makes the 53, I expect that we will keep 5 receivers, not counting either of them.
--------------
We then have six wide receivers copeting for five positions. Some would keep all six. I do not see us cutting or trading anyone until after the last preseason game. We shouldn't, in any case. If one is injured, we would go into the season with the other five. I certainly believe that there is large drop off from any of the six to the alsorans, who really are not worth anything in trade.
--------------
What value does any one of them have? No one knows. I think the value is small, but it is certainly worth a try, before making the final cut. I'm sure that pioli will ahve preliminary discussions with whoever is interested, just as we will have talks withe regard to running backs who play for other teams.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I presume that Jackson and Brown will move to the PUP list or the IR. Even if one makes the 53, I expect that we will keep 5 receivers, not counting either of them.
--------------
We then have six wide receivers copeting for five positions. Some would keep all six. I do not see us cutting or trading anyone until after the last preseason game. We shouldn't, in any case. If one is injured, we would go into the season with the other five. I certainly believe that there is large drop off from any of the six to the alsorans, who really are not worth anything in trade.
--------------
What value does any one of them have? No one knows. I think the value is small, but it is certainly worth a try, before making the final cut. I'm sure that pioli will ahve preliminary discussions with whoever is interested, just as we will have talks withe regard to running backs who play for other teams.

Wow - I'm really intrigued as to how one can rationalize BB's willingness to part with a conditional draft pick for a 3rd string CB - and yet a guy coming off a 61 catch season has no trade value, nor does a guy who averaged 7 catches a game in the playoffs.

No doubt Caldwell Gaffney and Washington are down on our depth chart now - but no doubt they would be much higher on other teams depth charts, unless 61 catches is no longer considered good in the NFL.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I'll even go out on a limb and say I'd feel more comfortable with a game 1 lineup of Gaffney, Caldwell, Welker than Moss, Stallworth, Welker. This offense needs some continuity.

I would definitely NOT go that far.
Randy Moss is a bonafide #1 receiver.
Stallworth is on the cusp of being a 1/2 guy. And his speed can stretch defenses.

Gaffney and Caldwell are more like #2 receivers at best.
And neither of these guys can 'stretch' the field vertically.

The only common denominator in those lineups is Welker who will be our slot receiver, but doesn't have ANY more experience in the Pats offense than Moss/Stallworth.

I can see you have a high level of confidence in Caldwell, however don't get carried away now. Caldwell would not be the #1 receiver on any team in the NFL, and I'm glad that he does not have to resume that role on our team any time soon. I'm just talking about overall talent here. I won't even get into the dropsies.

Brady is what gives our offense its continuity, not the receivers. We've won with different guys catching the ball every year. It is Brady that makes the whole thing go. And now he finally has the weapons to really work his magic. It should be a lot of fun to watch!

I think Moss/Stallorth/Welker are the obvious starters. Caldwell/Gaffney/CJ will be fighting for backup minutes or spending time on PUP/IR.

 

[PaulNEPats]

Yeah, I'm guilty of cherry-picking statistics a bit. But here's an unequivocal statement:

I think Reche Caldwell is a better football player than Kelley Washington.

By all accounts he's also had a better camp. And he has more experience in the offense than any other receiver on the list. I'll even go out on a limb and say I'd feel more comfortable with a game 1 lineup of Gaffney, Caldwell, Welker than Moss, Stallworth, Welker. This offense needs some continuity.

I think this whole continuity jargon is overrated. Sure, it's important to be on the same page, but these are veteran WRs who have been in the league for years, for multiple QBs. You don't leave your #1 WR on the bench just because he hasn't played in a game with your QB yet. Stallworth and McNabb seemed to work out fine when the former/latter weren't injured.

 

[dhamz]

You're right. I should have posted an "I told you so" when BB traded for a backup/special teams CB to illustrate that, yes Virginia, training camp trades do happen, and if a backup CB has trade value, it's idiotic to suggest that a starting WR doesn't.

Unless you are talking about Moss or Stallworth being traded, the Pats won't be offerring any starting WRs for trades.

Just because Gaffney and Caldwell started last year, doesn't mean they are viewed as starting WRs. If the Pats proved nothing this offseason, they proved the don't view either as starting WRs.

 

[patchick]

Hmm, looks like I ought to clarify this statement...

I'll even go out on a limb and say I'd feel more comfortable with a game 1 lineup of Gaffney, Caldwell, Welker than Moss, Stallworth, Welker. This offense needs some continuity.

given this kind of response...

I would definitely NOT go that far.
Randy Moss is a bonafide #1 receiver.
Stallworth is on the cusp of being a 1/2 guy. And his speed can stretch defenses.

Gaffney and Caldwell are more like #2 receivers at best.
And neither of these guys can 'stretch' the field vertically.

You don't leave your #1 WR on the bench just because he hasn't played in a game with your QB yet.

Just want to make clear that when I said game 1 lineup I meant literally that and only that, game 1. I'm not advocating throwing Randy Moss overboard! After all, this thread isn't "should we cut Caldwell or Moss," it's "should we cut Caldwell or Washington."

I was thinking it like this: if the Patriots had to convert 3rd and 8 right now, today, which receivers would you put on the field? Hopefully the answer will be quite different by midseason. But with arguably our top 3 receivers new to the team and 2 of them missing chunks of TC, I think Caldwell and Gaffney are important to this team for the first stretch of the season...important enough, at least, to sway a roster battle with Washington.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Unless you are talking about Moss or Stallworth being traded, the Pats won't be offerring any starting WRs for trades.

Just because Gaffney and Caldwell started last year, doesn't mean they are viewed as starting WRs. If the Pats proved nothing this offseason, they proved the don't view either as starting WRs.

I'll say it again WOW... so a 3rd string CB DOES have more value than a #2 or #3 WR?

No one was tougher on Caldwell than me last year (because of his inability to stretch the field) - but the guy did have 61 catches. That's worth nothing in trade?

We can agree that Caldwell is NOT a #1 WR, even though he was forced into that role last year - but he's shown he can catch a lot of passes and really help a team.

So could he, or Gaffney, or Washington be a #2 or #3 WR on a team? - especially one thin in the WR corps? Well, of course the answer is YES because they did it for us and did it pretty well (not Washington, though he impressed a lot of people with some good moves in the last game, and at 6' 3" with decent hands, you think that's not worth anything to a team?)

I seem to recall we traded for a #3 WR in the offseason. Do you recall what we gave up for him? Now I'm not saying Caldwell, Washington or Gaffney are as good as Welker - nor are going to get as much in trade value. But to say they have NOTHING in trade value????

Injuries will dictate whether there's a trade - and how many guys go on IR - but to suggest that we couldn't get ANYTHING for players who could be a #2 or #3 WR on a team? That just defies logic.

So I'll ask again - BB traded a conditional draft pick for a 3rd string CB - a 7th and a 2nd for a #3 WR. Why last year he even gave up a #5 pick for Doug Gabriel. That's a 5th round pick for a guy coming off a 37 catch season in 2005 - but Caldwell, coming off a 61 catch season is worth NOTHING?

Please explain.

 

[dhamz]

Ibut Caldwell, coming off a 61 catch season is worth NOTHING?

Please explain.

Jabbar Gaffney coming off a 55 catch season was worth less than nothing a year ago. Not only did he not have trade value, he ended up sitting on the sidelines into October.

Please explain.

 

[Rob0729]

The thing going against us in trading any of our WRs is that teams know it is likely we will cut one of them. That means they will be less likely to trade. Besides, there is no one in the WR situation we were in at this point last year.

Also, remember Donte Stallworth who was a proven solid #2 WR only got New Orleans a conditional 4th and a marginal player.

Also, add to the fact that I think it is a growing feeling that WRs who do well in the Patriots system do not neccessarily do well elsewhere. Look at David Patten, David Givens before he got hurt, Deion Branch so far, Tim Dwight, etc.

I don't see the Pats trading a WR, but who knows.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Jabbar Gaffney coming off a 55 catch season was worth less than nothing a year ago. Not only did he not have trade value, he ended up sitting on the sidelines into October.

Please explain.

The Iggles(?) decided to dump Gaffney at the end of TC, when basically everyone had their rosters set. It's hard to get anything at that point, especially if teams aren't terribly desperate (and, after trading a 5 for Gabriel, the Pats weren't--although, in retrospect, I've had traded a 5 for Gaffney instead).

Right now, though, the Titans could definitely use a WR. Don't be surprised if they cough up a pick after this weekend.

 

[PatsFan37]

One of the values David Givens brought to the Pats was that he was a tough-as-nails Hines Ward style run blocker, at 6' 215 lbs. Caldwell brought Givens' size (though not quite his power) and quite a bit more speed and agility. Before another receiver can take Caldwell's spot, he has to prove he can play Caldwell's (i.e. Givens') role.

No one ever thought Givens could be the man to get open deep against Champ Bailey, but he could make the tough 3rd down catch and on first down, knock Bailey on his ass.

I like Gaffney a lot, but of all the receivers on the bubble, I like Caldwell best for that role. That is, until Kelley Washington proves otherwise, which he has yet to do.

 

[mgteich]

I would not trade any of the top six until after the final preseason game. Presuming that the last two games won't influence the decision, the #6 as of now is insurance.

TO be clear, I wouldn't trade any of them for a conditional 5th now

The Iggles(?) decided to dump Gaffney at the end of TC, when basically everyone had their rosters set. It's hard to get anything at that point, especially if teams aren't terribly desperate (and, after trading a 5 for Gabriel, the Pats weren't--although, in retrospect, I've had traded a 5 for Gaffney instead).

Right now, though, the Titans could definitely use a WR. Don't be surprised if they cough up a pick after this weekend.

 

[Jacky Roberts]

I think BB really likes Gaffney and how he played down the stretch. I think Caldwell is a guy who needs to play well to make this team. I dont see Childress sticking.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I would not trade any of the top six until after the final preseason game. Presuming that the last two games won't influence the decision, the #6 as of now is insurance.

TO be clear, I wouldn't trade any of them for a conditional 5th now

I just want to be clear that I'm arguing two different things here--

(1) I wish that BB had given the Eagles a 5 last year for Gaffney instead of sending it to Oakland for Gabriel.

(2) I won't be surprised if the Titans trade for a Pats receiver this year. I'm not 100% convinced it'll happen, though.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Jabbar Gaffney coming off a 55 catch season was worth less than nothing a year ago. Not only did he not have trade value, he ended up sitting on the sidelines into October.

Please explain.

Oh, we're back to that again? (See the old thread about trading a WR)

That's the risk one makes in waiting until the end of Training Camp, that teams are more willing to see how the guys they've had learning the system work out rather than trading for a player. Trade value is effectively an equation between timing and need when there is a player available and a team interested.

The Patriots had a full roster of wide receivers at the time Gaffney was available. They needed a deep threat (Gabriel), rather than a 10 yard per catch guy (Gaffney) What about that don't you understand? Later when Gabriel wasn't working they brought in Gaffney and liked what they saw.

What about that don't you understand?

If BB decides to forgo a trade for WRs, prefering to keep everyone in the fold as long as possible to ensure maximum WR depth, that's fine.

But to suggest that there is trade value for 3rd string CB, or a Doug Gabriel, but none for Caldwell or Gaffney - that just makes no sense.