Draft pick for Alex Smith

[bagwell368]

just musing...

A Pats 5th rounder for Smith - that means IMO #160. I think that's a major deal for us.

Now if you can get Pioli to deal for Watson. The deal:

Watson
Pats 6th
Eagles 7th

for:

KC 4th rounder

Or look at both deals this way: Smith, KC 4th, $449k of usable cap space.
For: Watson, Pats 5th & 6th, Eagles 7th, and 526k of dead cap space.

take that every day. It's perfect, KC needs a TE. It's hardly too much for a guy that Pioli loves....

PS: We can't cut Smith - his cap number is $1.55M, cap hit if cut/traded $1.09M (making cutting him a very bad deal). Its the same thing with Baker. It's got to be Baker/Smith and whomever isn't traded cut out of Watson/Thomas pair (Thomas is worthless in a deal and has very little cap help for us, Watson is actually worth something). KC deals for him, he has a solid year by Watson standards, he walks and they end up with a comp pick the year after - a 4 or a 5... good deal for them, even if Watson is a one year fix - if he's awesome <cough>, then they extend him..

 

[Miguel]

PS: We can't cut Smith - his cap number is $1.55M, cap hit if cut/traded $1.09M (making cutting him a very bad deal).

I fixed the problem with my numbers. Had that number in the wrong column. Sorry about that.

 

[RayClay]

With all due respect, may I beat on this statement a little?

#1. TB offense is not the NE offense
#2. BB's designs for AS are not clear, if he if's backup/special teamer, forget stats.
#3. Watson is a soft as butter as a player (in the wrong ways), a YPC or RPG isn't going to get you very far in comparing them - IMO.

Beat on it all you want, I just provided a statistic. I didn't give an opinion, I have none, it's a numerical fact.

 

[JoeSixPat]

A fifth for a player whose contract expires after 2009.

A more than worthwhile trade. What would you say if you could give up a 5th rounder to try out a player worthy of a #1 draft pick for one year - cut your losses and go your separate ways if he sucks - and someone you'll have the lead on signing if he pans out (with the option.threat of using one of two defacto franchise tags on him if need be should he decide not to sign)

Sure they're giving a 5th rounder up - but its a worthwhile gamble.

 

[bagwell368]

Beat on it all you want, I just provided a statistic. I didn't give an opinion, I have none, it's a numerical fact.

A numerical "similarity" using players that operate in markedly different conditions that do not match is not a fact.

My belief is that:

comparing a mid round pick (#71)
on a team that was 11/32, 16/32, 26/32 over the past 3 years in offensive passing yardage (OPY) (17.7/32)
​

versus

a player (#32 pick)
on a team with a 12/32, 1/32, 12/32 over the past 3 years in OPY (8.3/32 - or MORE then twice as effective by rank then TB)​

Is simply too different to draw firm conclusions on - perhaps that neither one will be a HOF would be fair.

We'll see.

 

[RayClay]

A numerical "similarity" using players that operate in markedly different conditions that do not match is not a fact.

My belief is that:

comparing a mid round pick (#71)
on a team that was 11/32, 16/32, 26/32 over the past 3 years in offensive passing yardage (OPY) (17.7/32)
​

versus

a player (#32 pick)
on a team with a 12/32, 1/32, 12/32 over the past 3 years in OPY (8.3/32 - or MORE then twice as effective by rank then TB)​

Is simply too different to draw firm conclusions on - perhaps that neither one will be a HOF would be fair.

We'll see.

Don't be a clown. I posted a statistic. If he had 2 catches and the other guy had two catches, that wouldn't be a similarity, that would be an equal amount of catches.

 

[Isaac]

...KC deals for him, he has a solid year by Watson standards, he walks and they end up with a comp pick the year after - a 4 or a 5... good deal for them, even if Watson is a one year fix...

With all their cap space, it's not a safe assumption that they'll be losing more free agents than they'll sign next offseason.

 

[bagwell368]

Don't be a clown. I posted a statistic. If he had 2 catches and the other guy had two catches, that wouldn't be a similarity, that would be an equal amount of catches.

I think we can all agree that 2 == 2, clowning and/or ego aside.

However, context matters. David Ortiz was interesting in Minn, but, not a force, he came to Boston, and became a game changer. You deny that a change of scenery might be what Smith or Baker need to increase productivity in a marked manner? If you do not think so, then why did BB get them? Just stick with the same guys over time since after all, 2 == 2? I can see foresight and multi-variant analysis is not your forte. Sorry to bother you, I'll look for more flexible and apt minds for my "clowning".

Have a nice day/life.

 

[RayClay]

I think we can all agree that 2 == 2, clowning and/or ego aside.

Well, we're making progress.

By the way, I lived in Tampa up til September and are somewhat aware of what passes for an offense there. Some have said Smith is a better blocker. I didn't, but i wouldn't doubt it.

I do know Watson's been thrown to by Brady and Cassel exclusively, while Smith has been thrown to by a motley bunch of rejects and transients outside of Garcia.

Had i wished to seem like I knew more than i do, or care, I could have brought that up, but i didn't. I only noted he'd caught almost as many balls as Watson in the last four years, which was correct as i wrote it and didn't involve any analysis or opinion on either TE.

 

[RayClay]

You deny that a change of scenery might be what Smith or Baker need to increase productivity in a marked manner? If you do not think so, then why did BB get them?

Who are you arguing with, anyway? You need to go back and try to find someone's post that fits your argument. It's really comical.

Seriously. I lived in tampa. Smith is a good tight end and I'm not a big Watson fan.

I assume you have me confused with another poster, so you might want to backtrack.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I think we can all agree that 2 == 2, clowning and/or ego aside.

However, context matters. David Ortiz was interesting in Minn, but, not a force, he came to Boston, and became a game changer. You deny that a change of scenery might be what Smith or Baker need to increase productivity in a marked manner? If you do not think so, then why did BB get them?

Because Baker and Smith are both good blockers for the position and Baker cost 0 draft picks, just cash, and Smith cost only a future 5th round pick which is devalued to a current 6th rounder. The Pats TE blocking game clearly took a turn for the worse without Dan Graham.

These two guys have the chance to be a Graham type of player x2. IE BB is doubling up on his chances in case one of them doesn't turn out as well as he expects. To expect every guy who switches teams to turn into a Welker or an Ortiz as you put it, is unrealistic.

Any offensive contributions from these guys would be gravy, I expect most of their impact to be made in the blocking game. It's not as if we got Antonio Gates in these pickups, more like a poor man's version of Dan Graham.