Will Bill Belichick Trade Ryan Mallett?

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Will BB Trade Mallett?

Ergo the only job available to him is backing up Brady...and he seems ill suited to the task even compared to Cassel or Hoyer from what little we'd ever seen from any of them.

Then why have they not had a QB on even the practice squad all season?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Brady is going to play 5-6 more years? Please.

OK, so Brady's almost done, and Mallett's never going to amount to anything.

So what's your solution, then?

 

[MassPats38]

A look at the history of HOF QB's should sober anyone up when it comes to stated goals and the most likely actual outcome.

Better conditioning programs now, plus were those QBs scramblers or pure pocket passers?

Brady has been slowed by his injury in '08, and his age. Did you fail to see him trying to duck shadows earlier this year? Brady has been taking shots lately. It just takes one.

Take a few hits from 320 pounders as Brady did early on when you don't have confidence in your line and see if you aren't a little twitchy. If he isn't doing that now, and by your reference to 'earlier' you believe he isn't, then it really isn't a David Carr psychological issue.

Brady is going to play 5-6 more years? Please.

Brady played 111 consecutive games, sat out a season, and has since played 64 games straight. If Brady, who is a pure passer and not a runner, believes he can make it that far, then he would seem to have a better grasp of his own limitations than you would have of his limitations. In a QB safe NFL with new rules to protect the QB, and a QB who is still genuinely elite, it is not a ridiculous proposition.

 

[Deus Irae]

A look at the history of HOF QB's should sober anyone up when it comes to stated goals and the most likely actual outcome.

Not really.

Baugh played until he was 38
Unitas played until he was 40
Marino played until he was 39
Elway played until he was 38 and walked off with a SB win and his best QB rating
Montana played until he was 38 and made it to the AFCCG at 37
Young retired due to concussions, at 38
Favre played until he was 41, and went to the NFCCG at 40

Elite QBs can last a long time, and they've been doing it in eras that were much more punishing to the QBs than today.

 

[manxman2601]

Suggestions today that Greg Schiano wants to trade Josh Freeman so that he can install a hand picked QB. I wonder whether Mallett could be that handpicked guy for Schiano:

1. My understanding of his offensive strategy is that he wants a power run game backed by a deep ball passing offense. I'd think that would suit Mallett perfectly.

2. Whatever one thinks of Mallett, he had a personal visit with the Pats the year he was drafted. suggests to me that there was something that BB liked about him that went beyond just the value of being available in the 3rd round. And BB and Schiano trust and respect each other. Not a stretch to think that if there's something about Mallett that BB likes, Schiano will like that same aspect too.

3. The first year BB and Schiano are both HC's in the NFL and there's already been a trade between them so it's not as if getting a trade done will be an obstacle.

 

[AzPatsFan]

The 2 best QBs in the NFL this year were 35 and 36 years old. Neither shows much "deterioration", as you put it. Any team that loses a QB of that magnitude is going to experience a significant "deterioration", no matter who steps in.

Mallett assuredly has value. No one's suggesting dumping him. BB clearly values him. But do you really see him starting over Brady in the next 2 years? And do you really see him taking over as the successor to Brady after 2014? If not, then he's likely gone, as he won't want to ride the pine forever, and even if he somehow agreed the cap hit of keeping 2 QBs with high priced deals (which it would take to keep him if the Pats convinced him that he was "the successor") would be prohibitive, so if there is an opportunity to get something of value for him (which there may not be), then it's not unreasonable to consider it.

I think I can see some things that Brady doesn't do well as he used to do. He is not a good or as accurate a long ball thrower, but then that was always the weakest part of his game.

As for Peyton Manning, anyone with any scouting ability can see that his arm is nowhere near what it used to be. His passing is now based on knowing who and where to throw the football. It is not from sheer rocket arm ability as well, as it used to be.

 

[Stilla]

They could trade away Mallett and have an entire offseason to prepare his "successor". That's not an issue.

That statement hints that someone has been given a roll on the roster. BB never does that, the system is built around competition. You have to take the roll from the guy who owns it. BB always has someone lurking on the depth chart to compete for starting rolls.

And its common knowledge that people brought in don't always work out well in one off season.
Ocho comes to mind. A back up QB has to be capable. And I would bet mallet has a better understanding than Ocho does. Otherwise we would have carried a 3rd QB this year.

 

[Deus Irae]

That statement hints that someone has been given a roll on the roster. BB never does that, the system is built around competition. You have to take the roll from the guy who owns it. BB always has someone lurking on the depth chart to compete for starting rolls.

And its common knowledge that people brought in don't always work out well in one off season.
Ocho comes to mind. A back up QB has to be capable. And I would bet mallet has a better understanding than Ocho does. Otherwise we would have carried a 3rd QB this year.

Ocho has nothing to do with the QB situation, so can we please leave him out of of this? The team can bring in 2-4 shiny new QB candidates and let them fight it out. Acting as if this is something revolutionary just defies history, particularly given the possibility that 1-2 of those shiny new candidates could be Cassel and/or Hoyer.

 

[Stilla]

BB doesn't say much so when he does, it means a lot.

After drafting Mallett in the third round last year, Bill Belichick talked about how it's risky to have just two quarterbacks on the roster.

I couldn't find the transcript, but this page recognized the comment made.

Pats 53-man roster projection (v. 1.1) - ESPN

The following offseason Mallet won the back up job.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I think the real question is "will someone be willing to trade for Ryan Mallett?" Since there doesn't seem to be much of a trade market for QBs who have never taken a meaningful snap in the NFL, I'm going to guess that the answer is no.

If, say, Mike Lombardi lands a job and decides that he wants to bring in Mallett, then the Pats should absolutely make that trade, provided that they get a reasonable return for their troubles. Backup QBs aren't the hardest commodities to replace, especially with a full offseason to get them prepared.

 

[Stilla]

Ocho has nothing to do with the QB situation, so can we please leave him out of of this? The team can bring in 2-4 shiny new QB candidates and let them fight it out. Acting as if this is something revolutionary just defies history, particularly given the possibility that 1-2 of those shiny new candidates could be Cassel and/or Hoyer.

I am implying that the 1-2 candidates could both be busts. In Mallet BB knows what he has, and it was worth enough to let Hoyer go.

Its not logical to give up on Mallet for unknown prospects.
Branch sits on the shadow roster because BB knows he fits in the system. We could have just brought in a prospect, but we go with the things we know. Its done as its easier to build around things you understand. Mallet fits that bill.

 

[Deus Irae]

I am implying that the 1-2 candidates could both be busts. In Mallet BB knows what he has, and it was worth enough to let Hoyer go.

Or, he could have let Hoyer going because he didn't want to pay him $2 million to be a backup. That is, in fact, the prevailing theory that was out there amongst the media.

Its not logical to give up on Mallet for unknown prospects.

Sure it is, if Mallett's not the answer for this team.

Branch sits on the shadow roster because BB knows he fits in the system. We could have just brought in a prospect, but we go with the things we know. Its done as its easier to build around things you understand. Mallet fits that bill.

Mallett doesn't fit that bill.

Branch was on the "shadow roster" because he was injured, is at the end of his career, and wouldn't have helped another team nearly as much as he helps the Patriots. If he'd been young and healthy, he'd have been playing somewhere else.

Also, the Patriots did bring in prospects.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Not really.

Baugh played until he was 38
Unitas played until he was 40
Marino played until he was 39
Elway played until he was 38 and walked off with a SB win and his best QB rating
Montana played until he was 38 and made it to the AFCCG at 37
Young retired due to concussions, at 38
Favre played until he was 41, and went to the NFCCG at 40

Elite QBs can last a long time, and they've been doing it in eras that were much more punishing to the QBs than today.

That's before we even get into the fact that sports medicine is light years beyond where it was when a lot of those guys played. It wasn't all that long ago that an ACL tear was essentially a career-ending injury. Now it's a bump in the road. Now look at how advancements like PRPT are adding years to NBA careers by essentially regrowing cartilage in older players' knees, and it's pretty easy to argue that we should start seeing careers extend further out due to medical advances.

 

[manxman2601]

That's before we even get into the fact that sports medicine is light years beyond where it was when a lot of those guys played. It wasn't all that long ago that an ACL tear was essentially a career-ending injury. Now it's a bump in the road. Now look at how advancements like PRPT are adding years to NBA careers by essentially regrowing cartilage in older players' knees, and it's pretty easy to argue that we should start seeing careers extend further out due to medical advances.

One could also argue that QB's today earn a lot more money nowadays and that there is less incentive for some to continue putting their long-term health at risk when their nest is well and truly feathered.

 

[Stilla]

Or, he could have let Hoyer going because he didn't want to pay him $2 million to be a backup. That is, in fact, the prevailing theory that was out there amongst the media.

Sure use the talking heads when it helps your arguments. I know everyone on this board doesn't trust one thing they say. NEXT!

Sure it is, if Mallett's not the answer for this team.

Nate Solder wasn't the answer. Then he played a full season, and everyone loves the guy.

Mallett doesn't fit that bill.

Employers like people with experience, even more when they have worked in exactly the same system. Especially when they run the show.

Branch was on the "shadow roster" because he was injured, is at the end of his career, and wouldn't have helped another team nearly as much as he helps the Patriots. If he'd been young and healthy, he'd have been playing somewhere else.

Also, the Patriots did bring in prospects.

Some how he has more playing time on the field, over our prospects. Go with what you know?

 

[BradyFTW!]

One could also argue that QB's today earn a lot more money nowadays and that there is less incentive for some to continue putting their long-term health at risk when their nest is well and truly feathered.

Do you know anything at all about Tom Brady? Have you ever listened to a single word that he's said about this or any other topic? If you have, then you'll know that this does not apply to him. As a general rule, all-time great athletes get to where they are by being pathologically, irrationally competitive.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Sure use the talking heads when it helps your arguments. I know everyone on this board doesn't trust one thing they say. NEXT!




Nate Solder wasn't the answer. Then he played a full season, and everyone loves the guy.




Employers like people with experience, even more when they have worked in exactly the same system. Especially when they run the show.



Some how he has more playing time on the field, over our prospects. Go with what you know?

You realize that Belichick torpedoed the entire argument that you're trying to make when he cut Hoyer in the preseason, right? 'Experience' as a backup in the offense will only get you so far. It's not a trump card by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Deus Irae]

Sure use the talking heads when it helps your arguments. I know everyone on this board doesn't trust one thing they say. NEXT!

I noted their take on the situation. And you don't know anythiing if you think what you're claiming here.

Nate Solder wasn't the answer. Then he played a full season, and everyone loves the guy.

There were questions about need, and some questions about how long the guy would take (For example, I thought he'd need time to get stronger, which he indeed proved he did need), but there was no board-wide surety that Solder couldn't play. You're basically making things up here.

Employers like people with experience, even more when they have worked in exactly the same system. Especially when they run the show.

Employers like people who can do the job well, regardless of experience level. That's irrelevant, though, to this point. Mallett doesn't fit what you were writing.

Some how he has more playing time on the field, over our prospects. Go with what you know?

Go with what works. The other prospects, first-timers and retreads, didn't work, so Branch is here. Hoyer, on the other hand, with the experience compared to Mallett, is gone.

 

[manxman2601]

Do you know anything at all about Tom Brady? Have you ever listened to a single word that he's said about this or any other topic? If you have, then you'll know that this does not apply to him. As a general rule, all-time great athletes get to where they are by being pathologically, irrationally competitive.

Don't remember saying anything about Tom Brady. Please point out where I did. And I agree with you that top athletes are competitive. But they also retire at some stage and I merely offered an alternate theory that might dictate the point of retirement.