3 million a year for Sanders

[RobertWeathers]

I can pretty much guarantee you that Sanders won't be asked to take a pay cut. Jarvis Green and Kevin Faulk were never asked to take a pay cut though they were considered to be over-paid. .

Green was the 4th lineman. Faulk is your 3rd down back and both played regular roles. Of course they wern't going to ask them to take a pay cut.

People like yourself don't take into consideration that there is no salary cap next season. So, it will be MUCH HARDER for teams to ask players to take a pay cut. .

Some teams will spend. Some won't. All depends on their financial situation and comitted $$. Either way, if they Pats don't want to pay Sanders the $$, IMO they will go the route of Vrabel and trade him- thus going the more respectful route and keep him out of the division.

Also, why would they ask Sanders to take a pay-cut. He's only counting 2.95 Million against the cap? That is a very small amount when everything is considered.

Their 2 year commitment in real dollars to Sanders is $5.1m +workout bonuses- too much for a 4th safety IMO.

 

[condon84]

I think there's a decent chance that Sanders, Matt Light and Adalius Thomas all get traded in the offseason. All have starting value for other teams, all are under contract, and all will not be worth their cap hit.

There should be some really nice guys slipping to the 3rd round this year. Guys like Corey Wootton, Adrian Clayborn, Cameron Jordan, Austen Lane, Noel Devine, Dexter McCluster, Toby Gerhart, Mike Johnson, Mike Pouncey, Eric Decker, Dennis Pitta and Rob Gronkowski could possibly be available in that territory. That Pats could stack up on some nice positional depth if they had a few picks in the 3rd round.

Why would another team take on Adalius' or Sanders' contract? Adalius is way overpriced for his performance and age. And Sanders was a free agent last year and nobody offered him a significant enough contract for him to leave. Yeah, his agent said some other team was interested, but what the hell is he supposed to say? "No one's interested in him?" SMH.

3 million a year for a ST player is not good business in the NFL.

 

[maverick4]

Sanders is a solid player and depth is important.

If you don't think Sanders is worth it, then Mike Wright isn't really worth his salary either.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Sanders is a solid player and depth is important.

If you don't think Sanders is worth it, then Mike Wright isn't really worth his salary either.

Missing the point, Mav.

No one is saying that depth is not important. The arguement is that do you pay a 4th safety $5.1m + incentives. IMO it's up for debate. From my perspective I have zero issue with Sanders as a player. By all accounts, Bb likes him, sees value and the kid can play in the regular D and on STs.

Mike Wright is part of the regular rotation and get 20-40 snaps a game. Like comparing apples and oranges.

 

[DaBruinz]

Green was the 4th lineman. Faulk is your 3rd down back and both played regular roles. Of course they wern't going to ask them to take a pay cut.

Green was injured for some of the time. And many people thought he'd be cut/traded this past off-season. Faulk, while the 3rd down back, still had a cap number of 4 million. That's a lot of money to pay a guy who sees 250 snaps in a year...

Some teams will spend. Some won't. All depends on their financial situation and comitted $$. Either way, if they Pats don't want to pay Sanders the $$, IMO they will go the route of Vrabel and trade him- thus going the more respectful route and keep him out of the division.

Again, what makes people think that the Pats won't pay Sanders? Their own speculation and nothing more. As for your comparison to Vrabel, lets get serious. When Vrabel was traded, he was a 33 year old OLB who was due a 1 million roster bonus and would have had a cap hit of over 4.3 million. That's a big difference in comparison to Sanders who is 26 years old and due a cap hit of 2.98 million.

Their 2 year commitment in real dollars to Sanders is $5.1m +workout bonuses- too much for a 4th safety IMO.

Why is it too much? Cause you say so? Chung isn't the starter yet. McGowan has been injury prone. Its only a 1.75 million savings to trade him and less when you consider you have to replace him with someone of lesser skills.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Green was injured for some of the time. And many people thought he'd be cut/traded this past off-season. Faulk, while the 3rd down back, still had a cap number of 4 million. That's a lot of money to pay a guy who sees 250 snaps in a year... .

If hindsight is anything, BB knew that Seymour was on the way out for some time and knowing he would play more nickle and dime this year and needing a pass rusher, thus him needing to manage his risk and keep Green.

Gimme a break with the Faulk marginalization. You are smart enough to know his value to the roster and to the team.

Again, what makes people think that the Pats won't pay Sanders? Their own speculation and nothing more. As for your comparison to Vrabel, lets get serious. When Vrabel was traded, he was a 33 year old OLB who was due a 1 million roster bonus and would have had a cap hit of over 4.3 million. That's a big difference in comparison to Sanders who is 26 years old and due a cap hit of 2.98 million.

Again- cap is important but $5.1m IN CASH + incentives for a 4th string safety who is no longer in the defensive rotation is more important. I'm saying it a reasonable discussion to have. I'm citing the Vrabel way of Sanders potentially moving on- not the Vrabel cap situation specfically.

Why is it too much? Cause you say so? Chung isn't the starter yet. McGowan has been injury prone. Its only a 1.75 million savings to trade him and less when you consider you have to replace him with someone of lesser skills.

Don't pull the "you say so" crap. Thats a BS counter arguement. You spout opinions too. It's a discussion. Maybe $1.75 isn't a lot to you but I'm sure it is to the Pats. Every million counts.

 

[Ice Cold Bruschi]

I think it was a smart move, the only reason it seems like a bad one is because hindsight is 20-20, there was no way to predict McGowan's emergence, the drafting of Chung, or Chung's strong play as a rookie at a difficult position.

 

[borg]

Seasons have come to crashing halts because of a lack of depth at Safety. Not this year. Unlike any other position (LB could be argued), safeties must collide full speed with larger RBs and WRs that are motoring full speed in their direction. Injuries are the norm. The Patriots have been fortunate to stay as healthy as they are at this position.
BB carpet bombed both safety and corner this offseason. This combination is young, improving, and deep. Why tinker when the overall cost of the secondary is cheap in comparison. The real question is....Will the Patriots pay Bodden this offseason.....and what about Springs and his 3 year deal?

 

[mayoclinic]

Seasons have come to crashing halts because of a lack of depth at Safety. Not this year. Unlike any other position (LB could be argued), safeties must collide full speed with larger RBs and WRs that are motoring full speed in their direction. Injuries are the norm. The Patriots have been fortunate to stay as healthy as they are at this position.
BB carpet bombed both safety and corner this offseason. This combination is young, improving, and deep. Why tinker when the overall cost of the secondary is cheap in comparison. The real question is....Will the Patriots pay Bodden this offseason.....and what about Springs and his 3 year deal?

Again, I'm thrilled to have Sanders for depth this year. The question is whether his salary is justified for next year. I'd rather take Sanders and Springs' money and use it on extending Leigh Bodden, personally. That should pretty much get it done.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Seasons have come to crashing halts because of a lack of depth at Safety. Not this year. Unlike any other position (LB could be argued), safeties must collide full speed with larger RBs and WRs that are motoring full speed in their direction. Injuries are the norm. The Patriots have been fortunate to stay as healthy as they are at this position.
BB carpet bombed both safety and corner this offseason. This combination is young, improving, and deep. Why tinker when the overall cost of the secondary is cheap in comparison. The real question is....Will the Patriots pay Bodden this offseason.....and what about Springs and his 3 year deal?

No question Sanders has value...

Pay Bodden no question. For Springs, seems his deal is all salary and front-loaded. Should be reasonable to jettison...

Shawn Springs' three-year contract with the Patriots has a base worth of $9.75 million and includes a $2.7 million signing bonus.
Springs will make $4.55M in 2009, including a $1.75M salary and $100K workout bonus.

 

[DaBruinz]

If hindsight is anything, BB knew that Seymour was on the way out for some time and knowing he would play more nickle and dime this year and needing a pass rusher, thus him needing to manage his risk and keep Green.

So, what you are saying is that BB knew in 2004 that Seymour was on his way out when he gave Green the 5 year deal??? Sorry, that doesn't fly...

Gimme a break with the Faulk marginalization. You are smart enough to know his value to the roster and to the team.

There is no marginalization here. I'm dealing with reality. Faulk gets maybe 250 plays a year. Yet, he's paid very well. In fact, he will have gotten over 10.6 million in the final 3 years of his contract.. Pretty good for a guy who only plays a quarter of the snaps..

Again- cap is important but $5.1m IN CASH + incentives for a 4th string safety who is no longer in the defensive rotation is more important. I'm saying it a reasonable discussion to have. I'm citing the Vrabel way of Sanders potentially moving on- not the Vrabel cap situation specfically.

The cap isn't important because there is no cap next season. And he's not a 4th string safety (talk about a poor attempt at marginalizing someone). In fact, if Meriweather went down, I'm fairly certain we'd see Sanders on the field in his place since Sanders can call plays.. Something that Chung can't do, yet.

Don't pull the "you say so" crap. Thats a BS counter arguement. You spout opinions too. It's a discussion. Maybe $1.75 isn't a lot to you but I'm sure it is to the Pats. Every million counts.

Your argument is what is BS. The "cause you said so?" was to point out that you have no facts to support that opinion. I pointed out two key facts and you ignore them because you got your nose bent out of shape over someone thinking your opinion is questionable at best.. As for the 1.75 Million, if the Pats considered it a lot, then they would never have cut Galloway, McGinest, or Law... BTW, it would be less than 1.75 million since you'd have to replace Sanders with someone of a lesser caliber. So, in the long run, your hurting the team's ability to cope with injuries as well.

Reality is that Sanders is an average starting caliber safety and he's ready to step in if McGowan (Not 1 full season in his 4 previous years) or Meriweather get hurt. Sanders can play both safety positions and has been the play-caller in the secondary. Not to mention that he's only 26 years old. It would seem that those facts would support paying him until the Pats either get a safety who can take his place or until his contract is up.

 

[RobertWeathers]

So, what you are saying is that BB knew in 2004 that Seymour was on his way out when he gave Green the 5 year deal??? Sorry, that doesn't fly... .

Didn't cut Green THIS YEAR.

There is no marginalization here. I'm dealing with reality. Faulk gets maybe 250 plays a year. Yet, he's paid very well. In fact, he will have gotten over 10.6 million in the final 3 years of his contract.. Pretty good for a guy who only plays a quarter of the snaps.. .

No question Faulk is paid very well. But there is incredible value there to the Pats. Since 06 Faulk is averaging 50 catches a game. And he only pick up the blitz, and provides depth in the PR and KR games. You have no idea what you are talking about regarding Faulks value. Are you saying he is overpaid?

The cap isn't important because there is no cap next season. And he's not a 4th string safety (talk about a poor attempt at marginalizing someone). In fact, if Meriweather went down, I'm fairly certain we'd see Sanders on the field in his place since Sanders can call plays.. Something that Chung can't do, yet. .

I put cash outlay + commitments in front of cap in priority for '10. See my post.

Your argument is what is BS. The "cause you said so?" was to point out that you have no facts to support that opinion. I pointed out two key facts and you ignore them because you got your nose bent out of shape over someone thinking your opinion is questionable at best.. As for the 1.75 Million, if the Pats considered it a lot, then they would never have cut Galloway, McGinest, or Law... BTW, it would be less than 1.75 million since you'd have to replace Sanders with someone of a lesser caliber. So, in the long run, your hurting the team's ability to cope with injuries as well. .

What two key facts? What were those? You ignore mine so we are even.

McGinest or Law??? They were front-line players that produced! They deserved the cash. Pats would have kept them in a heartbeat if their salary requirements were in-line with their value system.

Gallaway provided no value. That is why he is gone.

My nose is not out of joint. This is a good discussion.

Reality is that Sanders is an average starting caliber safety and he's ready to step in if McGowan (Not 1 full season in his 4 previous years) or Meriweather get hurt. Sanders can play both safety positions and has been the play-caller in the secondary. Not to mention that he's only 26 years old. It would seem that those facts would support paying him until the Pats either get a safety who can take his place or until his contract is up.

I totally agree that Sanders is a starting-caliber safety and am glad he is on the team. The fact is that he has been outplayed by cheaper players. I would also agree that if whatever unforseen injury hits the seconday, I'm glad Sanders is there.

Simply put, having Sanders is a luxury. If the Pats want to keep him for $5.1m + incentives as a 4th safety, fine with me.

 

[DaBruinz]

Didn't cut Green THIS YEAR.

Sorry, but that isn't what you said originally. You said that BB "knew for some time that Seymour was on his way out"..

No question Faulk is paid very well. But there is incredible value there to the Pats. Since 06 Faulk is averaging 50 catches a game. And he only pick up the blitz, and provides depth in the PR and KR games. You have no idea what you are talking about regarding Faulks value. Are you saying he is overpaid?

It's amazing how you just throw sh!t at the wall to see what sticks. I can guarantee that I have an excellent idea of what Faulk's value is. I said that I deal in reality. And clearly you missed the whole point of my mentioning Faulk. Which was to provide an example where BB paid a highly valuable back-up extremely well. Which is why I believe that he won't be cutting Sanders or asking him to re-structure.

I put cash outlay + commitments in front of cap in priority for '10. See my post.

I saw your post. It doesn't change what I said. What don't you comprehend that the CAP is NOT important for next year because there is no cap? And even if there was, the Pats have over 40 Million in free cap space with 39 players signed.

As I pointed out with Faulk, BB is fully willing to outlay money for a quality player like Sanders or Green.

What two key facts? What were those? You ignore mine so we are even.

I didn't ignore anything. What two facts? Gee. I don't know. The fact that there is no cap next year. The fact that Sanders is 26 and is a average starting-capable safety. Not to mention that Sanders isn't "4th String" since there are two different safety positions that Sanders is capable of playing.

McGinest or Law??? They were front-line players that produced! They deserved the cash. Pats would have kept them in a heartbeat if their salary requirements were in-line with their value system.

McGinest was not a "Front-Line" player when the Pats cut him. He was part of the OLB rotation, but not a starter anymore.

Law was cut because he was coming back from an injury AND his salary was out of whack.

Gallaway provided no value. That is why he is gone.

Yes, and even though he's gone, the Pats still had to pay his entire salary (cash outlay) and signing bonus. I would have thought that you'd have caught that since you were so insistent that people listen to you on it...

My nose is not out of joint. This is a good discussion.

I totally agree that Sanders is a starting-caliber safety and am glad he is on the team. The fact is that he has been outplayed by cheaper players. I would also agree that if whatever unforseen injury hits the seconday, I'm glad Sanders is there.

Simply put, having Sanders is a luxury. If the Pats want to keep him for $5.1m + incentives as a 4th safety, fine with me.

Simply put, the Pats have no reason to cut him or restructure his contract. As I've been saying in this thread from the get go.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Sanders is here for this season, 'nuf said there.

Looking ahead - 2010 salaries:
-- Sanders salary is $2.3M.
-- Chung is $480K.
-- Meriweather is $550K.
-- McGowan is $730K.

At that figure Sanders is getting paid as starter, which he's capable of being, but he's become superfluous by virtue of McGowan's development and how fast Chung is coming on. I'm not talking cap hit since it won't be a factor, Sanders salary is out of line with what the three Safeties playing ahead of him are making. That will change:
-- Trade: A team who might be looking for a starter to help manage a secondary would accept the salaries James is scheduled to make.
-- Restructure: If James wants to stay in NE and is willing to take a lower salary, then restructure him - I offer vet minimum, guaranteed for 2010 and 2011 if I seriously want to keep him - a little sugar with the tonic.
-- Cut: Good Luck, you probably won't make the same money, but you can shop yourself to teams you like.

Replacing James is then relatively easy through the draft or free agency.

I like Sanders, if he was starting now I'd have no kick, but BB found two faster guys who have proven better able to handle the speedy receiving TEs and the bigger WRs - it's a business decision made easier by the way they structured his contract. Such is life.

 

[SidelineSid]

Sanders is here for this season, 'nuf said there.

Looking ahead - 2010 salaries:
-- Sanders salary is $2.3M.
-- Chung is $480K.
-- Meriweather is $550K.
-- McGowan is $730K.

At that figure Sanders is getting paid as starter, which he's capable of being, but he's become superfluous by virtue of McGowan's development and how fast Chung is coming on. I'm not talking cap hit since it won't be a factor, Sanders salary is out of line with what the three Safeties playing ahead of him are making. That will change:
-- Trade: A team who might be looking for a starter to help manage a secondary would accept the salaries James is scheduled to make.
-- Restructure: If James wants to stay in NE and is willing to take a lower salary, then restructure him - I offer vet minimum, guaranteed for 2010 and 2011 if I seriously want to keep him - a little sugar with the tonic.
-- Cut: Good Luck, you probably won't make the same money, but you can shop yourself to teams you like.

Replacing James is then relatively easy through the draft or free agency.

I like Sanders, if he was starting now I'd have no kick, but BB found two faster guys who have proven better able to handle the speedy receiving TEs and the bigger WRs - it's a business decision made easier by the way they structured his contract. Such is life.

Great post. I agree that Sanders is a Pat for the rest of this year. Next year is a different question. He has very good trade due to the fact that he was a starter and a lot of front offices go after our players every year.

On another note, let's talk about the salary cap. We may not have one next year. We're all aware of that. The point that must be considered is we have a great deal of people to resign and restructure.

A number of people on our team are being paid well above their performance level: (Sanders, Adalius Thomas, and Shawn Springs). If those players are restructured, cut, or traded, I would have no problem. Why? Because it would make it easier to resign play-makers if the guy on the bench wasn't making more than them. It's just not good for negotiations.

Also, Sander's 3 million a year could be put towards resigning Vince. In fact, the extra 2 million of Sanders' 3 million salary would be enough to put our best bid over the top.

Side Note: Dan Koppen's contract is going to expire in 2010. We could trade him, like we did Seymour, when we have the most leverage. We could receive a high second round pick for him. Florida's Center Pouncey is highly regarded and most likely isn't going in the first round. Koppen can be upgraded.

 

[BradyFTW!]

The only thing that worries me about jettisoning Sanders is that we'd be relying on McGowan to stay healthy. His style of play and injury history suggest to me that we might be better off hoping for him to stay healthy, but being very well prepared for the likelihood that he won't. You can never have too many starter-caliber safeties.

 

[mgteich]

We have bingo!

Sanders is one injury away from being critical to this defense. If you think that Chung is ready to start, think again.

As was the case for years for Green on the DL, Sanders is well worth his $2M a year as a backup defensive back.

And just BTW, with all due respect, I think you guys are NUTS if you think that Sanders will be dumped because his $2.1M salary is too high. Meriweather and Chung will get theirs when their rookie contracts are completed. McGowan has had an injury history, but is should be extended if he is willing, at more than what Sanders makes.

The only thing that worries me about jettisoning Sanders is that we'd be relying on McGowan to stay healthy. His style of play and injury history suggest to me that we might be better off hoping for him to stay healthy, but being very well prepared for the likelihood that he won't. You can never have too many starter-caliber safeties.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

We have bingo!

Sanders is one injury away from being critical to this defense. If you think that Chung is ready to start, think again.

As was the case for years for Green on the DL, Sanders is well worth his $2M a year as a backup defensive back.

And just BTW, with all due respect, I think you guys are NUTS if you think that Sanders will be dumped because his $2.1M salary is too high. Meriweather and Chung will get theirs when their rookie contracts are completed. McGowan has had an injury history, but is should be extended if he is willing, at more than what Sanders makes.

Chung is already playing more his rookie year than Meriweather did, so where might he be in 2010? Sanders may be one injury away from starting this season, but that doesn't set the policy for 2010 after they've had time to find another McGowan in free agency at a better price.

 

[Deus Irae]

Chung is already playing more his rookie year than Meriweather did, so where might he be in 2010? Sanders may be one injury away from starting this season, but that doesn't set the policy for 2010 after they've had time to find another McGowan in free agency at a better price.

I see two potential problems with this theory:

1.) The current CBA language regarding top teams and free agents in 2010.

2.) If McGowans were easy to find, the team wouldn't have been looking for once since Harrison was signed, and the team wouldn't have needed to draft Chung at all.

I'm not saying that Sanders will, or will not, be back, because I don't know about his mindset, and I don't know precisely how the Patriots plan to respond to the uncapped year should it occur. However, with an uncapped year, it shouldn't be an economic hardship to keep all 4 safeties for another season, especially since McGowan signed a 2 year deal. However this plays out, it should make for a more interesting offseason.

 

[mgteich]

Sure, just get another McGowan at a better price! Perhaps you well end up with a McGowan or perhaps someone like Galloway. It is only only the fans that have disrespected the value of Sanders to this team.

Sure Chung could end up being as good as Meriweather. That is no reason to throw away a starting quality defensive back.

In the end, this matters little. Belichick likes having backup safeties who can play special teams more than players at any other position on the field. And $2.1M is NOT too much for Belichick to pay for a top special teamer , a starting quality safety, and a backup at four posiitons (SS, FS, dime and nickel).

BTW, if there is someone who would want the patriots to cut Sanders, it is Sanders' agent. Sanders could probably find a team that will pay him the same money with a new signing bonus.

Chung is already playing more his rookie year than Meriweather did, so where might he be in 2010? Sanders may be one injury away from starting this season, but that doesn't set the policy for 2010 after they've had time to find another McGowan in free agency at a better price.