Wilfork wants Seymour money

[RayClay]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

If the patriots really want to keep Wilfork, then they will be able to do so as they did with Seymour and Warren. They will do so in the same manner, cordial meetings before camp.

I bet they are in contact with his agents. Big Vince has been civil, but it's a big contract and he's a valuable commodity. The Patriots are posturing a bit with the drafted NTs, although that's a good value play. vince has been all happy and upbeat, but looks ike he's sending a message.

His agent isn't talking which tells me there's no acrimony at this point.

His agent is Kennard Maguire and he has a good number of NFL clients including Colvin, Springs and Shaun Rogers.

It's usually the flashy loud guys that give problems, he seems like a pro and hasn't said a thing that I can find.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

Have the Patriots ever done this under BB? I know Samuel was promised not to be franchised AGAIN. But to promise to set aside the CBA and promise not to use the franchise tag ever on a certain player? Really? If BB has ever done this for a player, please correct me.

In the Branch case they bailed on him and traded him under the threat of a holdout unless they promised not to franchise him. They haven't done this exact thing yet but combining what they did with Branch then what they did with Samuel which was similar though not exact, they're clearly willing to move on. What they did with Samuel also "set aside the CBA" as the CBA allows a player to be Franchised twice and they agreed to forego the second.

 

[bagwell368]

You're totally missing the point, and Vrabel is actually a good example. The 1M cap hit was on the books whether or not Vrabel stays, which is why its irrelevant to the decision making process. That money was lost the second they signed the contract a couple years back. The decision is made based on the money that is still avoidable, in most cases, the actual salary.

The Vrabel cap hit is dead cap space, it cannot be reused, so it is not irrelevant. Say they sign another LB to replace the Vrabel for the exact same contract, now there is over $2M absorbed in cap space, but we have one player not two. Somebody has to take the roster spot. You could use all min sal guys to do it, but that seems non conducive to winning.

you really need to learn about "sunk cost"

From Wiki:

Don't lecture me on sunk costs son. Instead understand what someone is writing before you go off on ego driven jog. The money is gone true, and its more gone when a guy gets traded/cut, and it can hamper the quality of the roster if you create too much dead cap space. Hopefully you now understand.

 

[Miguel]

Not at all. Mgteich said it could be done, I said it couldn't. You just wanted me to give Wilfork a contract when I had no idea what he was asking for at the time.

Your words.

"http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/241234-we-dont-need-find-more-cap-room.html

"They can't sign Wilfork to an extension until they get more cap room, and that's just one move still to be mad"

With the Pats under the cap by 6 million at that time of your post and if you had no idea what he was asking for at the time, then what was the basis for your post? All I asked was for you to back up your opinion.

 

[Jimke]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

In the Branch case they bailed on him and traded him under the threat of a holdout unless they promised not to franchise him. They haven't done this exact thing yet but combining what they did with Branch then what they did with Samuel which was similar though not exact, they're clearly willing to move on. What they did with Samuel also "set aside the CBA" as the CBA allows a player to be Franchised twice and they agreed to forego the second.

The Branch situation became complicated when the Pats let his agent
determine his market value. The agent came up with a couple of
acceptable salary offers but the teams were only willing to give up
a #2 draft pick.

The NFL scheduled a meeting to resolve the matter. Before the meeting,
the Pats traded Branch to Seattle and the meeting was not necessary.

 

[Deus Irae]

Your words.

"http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/241234-we-dont-need-find-more-cap-room.html

"They can't sign Wilfork to an extension until they get more cap room, and that's just one move still to be mad"

With the Pats under the cap by 6 million at that time of your post and if you had no idea what he was asking for at the time, then what was the basis for your post? All I asked was for you to back up your opinion.

Because I knew that, due to other needs, they didn't actually have $6 million under the cap in free money. It doesn't mean that I knew the exact amount of money he'd ask for in his contract. If I want to buy a new car but only have 30 bucks, I know I'm not getting the car. It's not going to matter how much the car actually costs, since it's certainly going to cost more than that 30 dollars.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

The Branch situation became complicated when the Pats let his agent
determine his market value. The agent came up with a couple of
acceptable salary offers but the teams were only willing to give up
a #2 draft pick.

The NFL scheduled a meeting to resolve the matter. Before the meeting,
the Pats traded Branch to Seattle and the meeting was not necessary.

The point is that when Branch was exactly where Wilfork is now, he said he was sitting out without a new deal unless we promised to not Franchise him. The end result is we traded him. If Wilfork makes the same threat we are in the same position. Risk an unknown holdout, make the promise and get the contract year of play out of him or trade him. With Branch we picked the latter.

 

[klinefan]

I say get rid of him. He's a good player, sure, but Brace is probably more of a natural 3-4 NT....bigger more of a space eater, not as quick but I don't think that matters that much.

He wants an extra 6M or so per year, that's a lot of money.

No way can they spend 20M on their DL.

 

[Pats726]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

The Branch situation became complicated when the Pats let his agent
determine his market value. The agent came up with a couple of
acceptable salary offers but the teams were only willing to give up
a #2 draft pick.

The NFL scheduled a meeting to resolve the matter. Before the meeting,
the Pats traded Branch to Seattle and the meeting was not necessary.

The Branch situation was entirely different..the Twig did not negotiate at all in good faith.. far far different here..if anything closer to the Seymour situation...There's a LOT that will have to happen for it to deteriorate...I agree with Rayclay..

 

[mgteich]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

Ignoring the issues of bad faith with Branch, the situation is much different in that Wilfork is one of the very best at his position. Branch was maybe top ten. Also, the NT position is much more critical since only one usually play at a time, and the position is key to the success of the success of the defense.

It would like debating the need for Moss and Wilfork. Most have posted that Wilfork is more important, although some hae posted that Moss is more important. It may be close. However, to state the obvious, Branch is no Moss.

And this is NOT an esoteric discussion. Belichick believes in spending money and picks on our defensive line. We have three number ones, a number two and a number four. We have paid Green like a starter, we negotiated early lucrative extensions for both Seymour and Warren. Belichick doesn't take contract risks with the defensive line. As we know, this year he signed a perenial backup to a nice three contract and used a 2nd for a player we expect to also be a backup (or at least we hope so).

I would not be surprised to see us extend both Wilfork and Green by this time in July.

The point is that when Branch was exactly where Wilfork is now, he said he was sitting out without a new deal unless we promised to not Franchise him. The end result is we traded him. If Wilfork makes the same threat we are in the same position. Risk an unknown holdout, make the promise and get the contract year of play out of him or trade him. With Branch we picked the latter.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

Ignoring the issues of bad faith with Branch, the situation is much different in that Wilfork is one of the very best at his position. Branch was maybe top ten. Also, the NT position is much more critical since only one usually play at a time, and the position is key to the success of the success of the defense.

It would like debating the need for Moss and Wilfork. Most have posted that Wilfork is more important, although some hae posted that Moss is more important. It may be close. However, to state the obvious, Branch is no Moss.

And this is NOT an esoteric discussion. Belichick believes in spending money and picks on our defensive line. We have three number ones, a number two and a number four. We have paid Green like a starter, we negotiated early lucrative extensions for both Seymour and Warren. Belichick doesn't take contract risks with the defensive line. As we know, this year he signed a perenial backup to a nice three contract and used a 2nd for a player we expect to also be a backup (or at least we hope so).

I would not be surprised to see us extend both Wilfork and Green by this time in July.

Interesting. You think they are likely to keep Green around for the future, then. Is there any particular reason for this, or is it just a feeling? I'm just curious, because I looked at the Mike Wright re-signing in combination with the Brace pick as a reason for not re-signing Green, and maybe even cutting him loose. I'd love to get the take from someone who's looking at it differently, the way you seem to be.

 

[mgteich]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

Green is the engima. The team could be looking to cut or trade him, play him for a year, or extend him. Much may depend on the status of his $2.3M bonus.

I think that the Wright signing is just what it seemed, solidifying a backup spot for a perennial backup who can play anywhere on the line, our #5 DL spot, the 2nd player off the bench after Green.

I think that the drafting of Brace is exactly what it seemed, drafting a backup/relief for Wilfork, and if the unthinkable happens, a competitor at NT (although I think that we would bring in a vet to share the spot as we did when Wilfork first started). If Brace were to start, he would likely be the slowest starter in the NFL. He certainly will be among the slowest backups. Brace is a fine pick, but he should not be considered to play anywhere near the same role as Green. Brace might have a role in short yardage defenses in a 4-3 formation, replacing Wright in that role, or not.

LeKevin Smith could take a lot of Green's reps, if Belichick thinks that Smith is ready to be the pass-rushing DE, the first DL off the bench, and a backup at all the roster spots, who could start anywhere need be. I have indicated that I thought that these players are both competing for this role. I don't think that Smith is near the player that Green is (ducking for Keegs). Green is being paid as a starter and could likely start elsewhere.

The bottom line is that I have seem no indication that Belichick thinks any less of Green than he has in previous years. Jarvis Green is belichick's kind of flexible player. IMHO, the drafting of DL's has more to do with the contract situations of Seymour, Wilfork and Smith than that of Green. The decision on Green is an independent decision. Either the coaches still think of him as still being worth starter money, or they don't.

Interesting. You think they are likely to keep Green around for the future, then. Is there any particular reason for this, or is it just a feeling? I'm just curious, because I looked at the Mike Wright re-signing in combination with the Brace pick as a reason for not re-signing Green, and maybe even cutting him loose. I'd love to get the take from someone who's looking at it differently, the way you seem to be.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

Green is the engima. The team could be looking to cut or trade him, play him for a year, or extend him. Much may depend on the status of his $2.3M bonus.....

The bottom line is that I have seem no indication that Belichick thinks any less of Green than he has in previous years. Jarvis Green is belichick's kind of flexible player. IMHO, the drafting of DL's has more to do with the contract situations of Seymour, Wilfork and Smith than that of Green. The decision on Green is an independent decision. Either the coaches still think of him as still being worth starter money, or they don't.

Got it, thanks.

 

[Miguel]

Because I knew that, due to other needs, they didn't actually have $6 million under the cap in free money. It doesn't mean that I knew the exact amount of money he'd ask for in his contract. If I want to buy a new car but only have 30 bucks, I know I'm not getting the car. It's not going to matter how much the car actually costs, since it's certainly going to cost more than that 30 dollars.

Poor analogy.

I happen to think that if the Pats wanted to extend Wilfork this 2009 at their price then they will make it happen.

 

[crowell33]

Poor analogy.

I happen to think that if the Pats wanted to extend Wilfork this 2009 at their price then they will make it happen.

Just curious Miguel, but in your best estimation, what do you believe is "their price"?

 

[slash83]

Poor analogy.

I happen to think that if the Pats wanted to extend Wilfork this 2009 at their price then they will make it happen.

Of course if they wanted to extend wilfork at THERE price they would do so, but there price is hardly ever his price. Huge mistake if wilfork isn't on this team, I don't care if they drafted brace in the second round he isn't as good as vince and odds are he will never be as good as him.

 

[Miguel]

Just curious Miguel, but in your best estimation, what do you believe is "their price"?

Warren got $18 million in the 1st 3 years of his extension.
Seymour got about $26.2 million in the 1st 3 years of his extension.
Haynesworth will get $41 million in the 1st 3 years of his extension.
Tommie Harris will get over 20 million in the 3 years of his extension.

I think that Patriots would like to sign Wilfork in the Tommie Harris range.

 

[spacecrime]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

The Branch situation became complicated when the Pats let his agent
determine his market value. The agent came up with a couple of
acceptable salary offers

That's not what happened as I recall it. The agent was given permission only to discuss a trade (draft picks) not money. When the Jets talked money, the pats filed a tampering charge. But it was complicated.

 

[matt9071]

Vince has stated many times he wants to stay in NE. Im not worried we will find a way to keep him.

 

[Miguel]

Of course if they wanted to extend wilfork at THERE price they would do so, but there price is hardly ever his price.

My point is that Deus Irae is implying that even if Wilfork and the Patriots agreed on a price that the Pats do not have enough cap room to extend Wilfork or will be able to create even cap space to accommodate an extension.

His words - "They can't sign Wilfork to an extension until they get more cap room, and that's just one move still to be made"