Would you trade Samuel for...

[BelichickFan]

With $30 mil in cap space I'd prefer to go into next season with as close to a sure thing as possible, rather than counting on a rookie to replace Samuel.

As long as the money is spent well you're better getting the pick. There's other good players out there too. I'll be happy if we re-sign Samuel but a #1 pick and well spent FA money is more cost effective.

For the same money as Samuel we could sign the #1, London Fletcher and Kevin Curtis, for example. Pick your players. As long as the money is spent wisely it doesn't matter is you re-sign your own - you're paying market value now, not 4th round pick value like we were last year.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

The Jest got a #1 pick for Abraham. I know pass rushers are at a premium but he's always hurt and big play CB aren't exactly easy to get either. I would take a #2 along with freeing up the Samuel money to spend elsewhere - but from a comparison standpoint, Samuel should fetch what Abraham did. What I'd actually like is a 2008 #1, I'd love to have two #1s this year and next.

I know Branch got a #1 and Abraham got a #1. I think you have to franchise Samuel if you can't resign him just to see what the market is like out there. You never know if teams get desperate and the bidding war starts going up especially in light of so many teams having so much money to spend. The free agents(good ones and avg) are going to be scooped up quickly.

I've come to the conclusion he needs to be franchised just to see what you could get for him and not let him go without compensation.

 

[JoeSixPat]

As long as the money is spent well you're better getting the pick. There's other good players out there too. I'll be happy if we re-sign Samuel but a #1 pick and well spent FA money is more cost effective.

For the same money as Samuel we could sign the #1, London Fletcher and Kevin Curtis, for example. Pick your players. As long as the money is spent wisely it doesn't matter is you re-sign your own - you're paying market value now, not 4th round pick value like we were last year.

I guess I'd break it down like this:

Which player do you view as more of a risk.

An unproven rookie CB? Or Samuel?

I say the rookie is more of an unknown commodity and a higher risk at a very important position.

As you point out there is no doubt that if they pick the right rookie, he will be more cost effective than Samuel.

But a rookie who can't play, no matter how cheap, is not as cost-effective as Samuel.

We already have two first round picks. My preference would be to consider using one (or trading down for a second) pick on a CB, franchise Samuel, see what we have in that rookie, retaining the right to trade Samuel up until the season for a future 1st rounder if we find we have the real deal in the rookie.

 

[BelichickFan]

I guess I'd break it down like this:

Which player do you view as more of a risk.

An unproven rookie CB? Or Samuel?

That's not a fair breakdown though.

The comparison is :

Samuel

or

#1 pick (the assumption of the thread)
$5M of signed FA as we'd have that left over from the Samuel money not spend minus the #1 pick money.

 

[Gon_Trevil]

As long as the money is spent well you're better getting the pick. There's other good players out there too. I'll be happy if we re-sign Samuel but a #1 pick and well spent FA money is more cost effective.

For the same money as Samuel we could sign the #1, London Fletcher and Kevin Curtis, for example. Pick your players. As long as the money is spent wisely it doesn't matter is you re-sign your own - you're paying market value now, not 4th round pick value like we were last year.

Now THIS is one post I can fully agree with.

Anyway, just to play around, here are the teams picking in the 20s and 30s this year:

20. New York Giants
21. Denver Broncos
22. Dallas Cowboys
23. Kansas City Chiefs
24. New England Patriots
25. New York Jets
26. Philadelphia Eagles
27. New Orleans Saints
28. New England Patriots
29. Baltimore Ravens
30. San Diego Chargers
31. Chicago Bears
32. Indianapolis Colts

The Saints look like the most likely team, but we could still get one of the teams on the early 20s to bite. The Broncos might do it, though I'd prefer to deal Asante to the Cowboys or Giants.

And for those who would consider the top, say, 8 picks of the second round:

1. Oakland Raiders
2. Detroit Lions
3. Cleveland Browns
4. Tampa Bay Buccaneers
5. Arizona Cardinals
6. Washington Redskins
7. Minnesota Vikings
8. Houston Texans

Redskins, maybe? And Romeo might bite, considering that he's probably coaching for his job this year, and Asante should make a bigger difference in '07 than a rookie would. You know, the more I think about it, the more I like this Asante to Cleveland deal.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

if deion branch and john abraham get first round picks i want more for Asante. I want a 2008 1st plus a 3rd or 4th this year (or a future 3 if you're talking trade after the draft).

could you have argued for either of the above being top 5 at their position when they were traded? Asante enters 2008 as a (perceived) top 5 CB. Elite CBs have a ton of value.

definitely franchise him, and pay him 8M for a year if no one meets your asking price. you could do much worse than Asante starting for you this year, and you'd still have the right to franchise him again next year.

 

[juxtapoz15]

As long as the money is spent well you're better getting the pick. There's other good players out there too. I'll be happy if we re-sign Samuel but a #1 pick and well spent FA money is more cost effective.

For the same money as Samuel we could sign the #1, London Fletcher and Kevin Curtis, for example. Pick your players. As long as the money is spent wisely it doesn't matter is you re-sign your own - you're paying market value now, not 4th round pick value like we were last year.

I agree with your assesment, but I do worry about the Pats ability to land these FAs. I've been reading that Curtis might go to the Lions and reunite with Martz. I don't know much about Fletcher-Baker. But we all know the Pats will spend up to the cap, they might not get the flashiest players but they will get players that fit the system and also extend contracts of players they think are vital.

The one thing that does help is that the coaching staff has gotten to know Samuel over the past years. They will know if this year is a fluke/product of the system or if he is the real deal.

One thing is clear is that they have to franchise him just so they don't end up losing him for nothing. I really don't care if that will affect the way he acts towards the orginization since he will have to play for big pay day once again. Hell even after this year if he is still with the team I would franchise him again, but have more of an intention on trading him since his salary would be quite high.