Content Post Trade Mankins NOW!!

[iapatsfan]

Yeah, you go with that fantasy.

You're right Deus, let's pay him top $. LG is crucial and there is no way we could fill that position with the $ we save by not signing him and the pick(s) we would get in return. You have swayed me, let's spend big coin on an interior OL despite the fact we have 1 viable WR, no legit RB and 1 over the hill TE. We don't need any of those positions if we re-sign Logan Mankins. Logan Mankins makes this team what it is. He is the life blood of the organization. He makes everyone around him better. I say we change this thread into a Logan Mankins worship thread, ala Chuck Norris. If we want the Pats to reach their previous levels of success (you know, when they had guys like Joe Andruzzi and Mike Compton playing OG) we must sign Logan Mankins. Pay him whatever it takes because we do not want to face the prospect of having to play against Logan Mankins. As a matter of fact, from now on all Patriots history Before Logan Mankins is to be known BLM. Because what was this team before we were graced with this game changing interior offensive linemen?

 

[Batman]

You're right Deus, let's pay him top $. LG is crucial and there is no way we could fill that position with the $ we save by not signing him and the pick(s) we would get in return. You have swayed me, let's spend big coin on an interior OL despite the fact we have 1 viable WR, no legit RB and 1 over the hill TE. We don't need any of those positions if we re-sign Logan Mankins. Logan Mankins makes this team what it is. He is the life blood of the organization. He makes everyone around him better. I say we change this thread into a Logan Mankins worship thread, ala Chuck Norris. If we want the Pats to reach their previous levels of success (you know, when they had guys like Joe Andruzzi and Mike Compton playing OG) we must sign Logan Mankins. Pay him whatever it takes because we do not want to face the prospect of having to play against Logan Mankins. As a matter of fact, from now on all Patriots history Before Logan Mankins is to be known BLM. Because what was this team before we were graced with this game changing interior offensive linemen?

Why move light to OG while paying the guy LT money why not trade him away and pay a real OG to play OG rather than assuming a LT can play there and be just as effective?

 

[dhamz]

chump change for him with respect to what he would lose if he got hurt over the summer.........

and it would be up to the pats to cause further harm to a situation that already seems a bit strained..........depends on whether the pats plan on keeping him around after this year

Mankins has made 6.5-7m in his career. By not signing by June 15th he would be voluntarily walking away from 1.7m in 2010. That doesn't seem very likely to me. There is a lockout pending in 2011 and players are being advised by the NFLPA to save as much as they can. Mankins would be giving up 25% of what he has earned in his career to date for the right to miss camp. He wouldn't even be avoiding any of the main injury risk he'd face - the season.

 

[Wretch]

The proper thing to do is what they have done. Franchise -- If no CBA is reached, the fate of their RG is a ways down on the list of concerns.

There may not even be NFL football next year if there isn't a CBA. The Pats are doing the smart thing and not signing contracts that will leave them exposed under the current uncertainty regarding the labor situation.

That being said I agree with Dues, if good guards were so easy to find then why doesn't every team have a good one. Look at how the Pats line underwhelms when Neal is out of the line up and Neal isn't as pivotal a player as Mankins.

Additionally I doubt any team would give up a top 20 pick for Mankins. McNabb garnered a high second and some picks in 2011 and he is a borderline HOF QB. Why would the market for a RG be a 1st rounder?

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Mankins has made 6.5-7m in his career. By not signing by June 15th he would be voluntarily walking away from 1.7m in 2010. That doesn't seem very likely to me. There is a lockout pending in 2011 and players are being advised by the NFLPA to save as much as they can. Mankins would be giving up 25% of what he has earned in his career to date for the right to miss camp. He wouldn't even be avoiding any of the main injury risk he'd face - the season.

he's young enough to know that even if there is lockout in 2011, that he would get paid aplenty once he got back.......this guy ain't off spending his cash somewhere....he's hanging on a farm......guys like him are probably already prepared for the worst.....a work stoppage

things are pointing at this time that he will show up and take the 3M, and at the same time, take any chance of any kind of 'discount' to the pats off the table......he knows what he brings to the table......it would be interesting to how people would regard him if the jets signed him after the 2010 season to replace faneca

 

[tanked_as_usual]

There may not even be NFL football next year if there isn't a CBA. The Pats are doing the smart thing and not signing contracts that will leave them exposed under the current uncertainty regarding the labor situation.

That being said I agree with Dues, if good guards were so easy to find then why doesn't every team have a good one. Look at how the Pats line underwhelms when Neal is out of the line up and Neal isn't as pivotal a player as Mankins.

Additionally I doubt any team would give up a top 20 pick for Mankins. McNabb garnered a high second and some picks in 2011 and he is a borderline HOF QB. Why would the market for a RG be a 1st rounder?

a pro-bowl LG? you forgot to mention that in light of your drivel about mcnabb being a borderline HOF.......farve is an HOF and the vikings got him for nothing

 

[VJCPatriot]

I would want back at least a 1st round pick plus another pick for Mankins. He is a proven commodity, a pro bowl left guard. Any team that wanted him would likewise only want to trade on condition that they negotiated him to a satisfactory long term deal. If we could get back say a 1st and a 4th, we could reload in the draft and increase our chances of getting players to contribute.

A Pro Bowl caliber guard is a good thing to have, but next year we would have to find some way to pay Mankins to a premium contract extension while staying under the cap. So there is some merit to consider trading him if the offer is right.

a pro-bowl LG? you forgot to mention that in light of your drivel about mcnabb being a borderline HOF.......farve is an HOF and the vikings got him for nothing

I'm not sure what your argument is here. Favre was 40 and McNabb is over 30 and out of favor with the Eagles organization and they still got a high 2nd round pick + a conditional future pick for him. Mankins is a young pro bowl caliber guard in his prime.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I would want back at least a 1st round pick plus another pick for Mankins. He is a proven commodity, a pro bowl left guard. Any team that wanted him would likewise only want to trade on condition that they negotiated him to a satisfactory long term deal. If we could get back say a 1st and a 4th, we could reload in the draft and increase our chances of getting players to contribute.

I would rather pay Mankins what he is worth than taking the draft picks. Mankins is worth the money.

 

[Deus Irae]

You're right Deus, let's pay him top $.

Yes. He's a top level guard. Pay him as a top level guard.

LG is crucial and there is no way we could fill that position with the $ we save by not signing him and the pick(s) we would get in return.

One could make this same stupid, sarcastic comment about every starting position on offense and defense.

You have swayed me, let's spend big coin on an interior OL despite the fact we have 1 viable WR, no legit RB and 1 over the hill TE. We don't need any of those positions if we re-sign Logan Mankins. Logan Mankins makes this team what it is. He is the life blood of the organization. He makes everyone around him better. I say we change this thread into a Logan Mankins worship thread, ala Chuck Norris. If we want the Pats to reach their previous levels of success (you know, when they had guys like Joe Andruzzi and Mike Compton playing OG) we must sign Logan Mankins.

Perhaps you missed every game the team's played since 2006, so you haven't seen the difference in line play when Neal is in versus when he's out. Shockingly, but still true, having great guard play really does make a difference in how well offenses play. Then again, you're denigrating Andruzzi and Compton, so it's not as if you're demonstrating any real understanding of guard play.

Pay him whatever it takes because we do not want to face the prospect of having to play against Logan Mankins. As a matter of fact, from now on all Patriots history Before Logan Mankins is to be known BLM. Because what was this team before we were graced with this game changing interior offensive linemen?

Sarcasm only works when it's well done. Yours wasn't. All it takes is a look at last season to understand why needlessly moving top talent and counting on scrubs and draftees to replace them is a bad idea.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

If this team is to try and get back to being an elite team and staying in SB contention they MUST keep thier core of productive players and pay as much as they deem worth.

Mixing new guys in and trading away productive players every year is not going to get this team anywhere but towards the bottom of the division - this is not the early 2000s anymore,you just cant fill round holes with square pegs as easily anymore as more and more teams have caught up to the Patriots methods,they must keep guys like Mankins and they probably will.

Gostkowski I am not so sure about,unless he has a season that makes him hard to replace.

 

[iapatsfan]

Yes. He's a top level guard. Pay him as a top level guard.

Key word - Guard. Let him walk and spend the $ on another position of greater importance. I will bet you BB and Kraft take this approach.

One could make this same stupid, sarcastic comment about every starting position on offense and defense.

Actually no it couldn't. I only use it for guard because the position is easy to fill. I have stated this over and over.

Perhaps you missed every game the team's played since 2006, so you haven't seen the difference in line play when Neal is in versus when he's out. Shockingly, but still true, having great guard play really does make a difference in how well offenses play. Then again, you're denigrating Andruzzi and Compton, so it's not as if you're demonstrating any real understanding of guard play.

Actually I have seen them all. I believe there are certain postions that are much more important than OG (like all of them), and I believe the money should be spent on those positions accordingly. I don't believe the record setting offense of 07 was the machine it was because of the Pats' vaunted guard play. Actually I believe Neal was out for half the games that season. I sure don't remember the offense being affected. Nice try though.

Sarcasm only works when it's well done. Yours wasn't. All it takes is a look at last season to understand why needlessly moving top talent and counting on scrubs and draftees to replace them is a bad idea.

All it takes is the 07 season to see that you can miss your starting guard for half of the season (yes, Neal missed 8 games), and you can still have the most explosive offense in NFL history. Spend the $$ on positions of much greater importance please.

 

[Kontradiction]

I really can't believe that this thread is still going. I would have thought that NOT trading Mankins, one of the better LG's in the league, would be common sense. I guess not...

 

[Deus Irae]

I really can't believe that this thread is still going. I would have thought that NOT trading Mankins, one of the better LG's in the league, would be common sense. I guess not...

This is the same board that wanted to trade Brady because Cassel was playing well.....

 

[Deus Irae]

Key word - Guard. Let him walk and spend the $ on another position of greater importance. I will bet you BB and Kraft take this approach.

Ummm..... they tendered him at the highest possible level. They clearly did not take 'this approach'.

Actually no it couldn't. I only use it for guard because the position is easy to fill. I have stated this over and over.

Actually, yes it could. You repeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it less wrong. Any position is easy to fill if you've already got competent replacements available, and less easy to fill if you don't. That's simple reality, but you seem to have decided to live in a world where unicorns are real, and they poop rainbows.

Actually I have seen them all. I believe there are certain postions that are much more important than OG (like all of them), and I believe the money should be spent on those positions accordingly. I don't believe the record setting offense of 07 was the machine it was because of the Pats' vaunted guard play. Actually I believe Neal was out for half the games that season. I sure don't remember the offense being affected. Nice try though.

The whole point is that you're trying to make moves in a vacuum. There is no player on the team that can serve the function of 2007 Hochstein, never mind trying to find 2 such players.

All it takes is the 07 season to see that you can miss your starting guard for half of the season (yes, Neal missed 8 games), and you can still have the most explosive offense in NFL history. Spend the $$ on positions of much greater importance please.

Apparently you missed the Super Bowl at the end of 2007, all of 2008, and all of 2009, as well as much of 2007 for use as a comparison.

 

[Kontradiction]

This is the same board that wanted to trade Brady because Cassel was playing well.....

Yeah, I guess I shouldn't be suprised by anything.

 

[JDSal45]

Apparently you missed the Super Bowl at the end of 2007, all of 2008, and all of 2009, as well as much of 2007 for use as a comparison.

Neal started the Super Bowl.

Stephen Neal - Official New England Patriots Biography

In fact, some of the games he missed were some of the best offensively for the Patriots that year (San Diego-38 points; Buffalo-38 points;Cincinnati-34 points; Buffalo-56 points; Pittsburgh-34 points; NYG (regular season)-38 points)

He did start their worst offensive performance of the season, the Super Bowl.

J D Sal

 

[Kontradiction]

Neal started the Super Bowl.

Stephen Neal - Official New England Patriots Biography

In fact, some of the games he missed were some of the best offensively for the Patriots that year (San Diego-38 points; Buffalo-38 points;Cincinnati-34 points; Buffalo-56 points; Pittsburgh-34 points; NYG (regular season)-38 points)

He did start their worst offensive performance of the season, the Super Bowl.

J D Sal

He broke his leg and left the Super Bowl.

 

[Deus Irae]

Neal started the Super Bowl.

Stephen Neal - Official New England Patriots Biography

In fact, some of the games he missed were some of the best offensively for the Patriots that year (San Diego-38 points; Buffalo-38 points;Cincinnati-34 points; Buffalo-56 points; Pittsburgh-34 points; NYG (regular season)-38 points)

He did start their worst offensive performance of the season, the Super Bowl.

J D Sal

I'll just assume you're yanking my chain with this post, and stop discussing this with you.

 

[supafly]

Neal started the Super Bowl.

Stephen Neal - Official New England Patriots Biography

In fact, some of the games he missed were some of the best offensively for the Patriots that year (San Diego-38 points; Buffalo-38 points;Cincinnati-34 points; Buffalo-56 points; Pittsburgh-34 points; NYG (regular season)-38 points)

He did start their worst offensive performance of the season, the Super Bowl.

J D Sal

I was always under the impression that Neal's injury was in direct realtion to the NYG starting to overpower our offensive line when he left. I still believe to this day that Neal's injury was enormous, and that it affected us greatly.

Apperently you see it differently?

 

[Sciz]

According to PFF, Neal played 19 of the team's 73 offensive snaps in the Super Bowl. Assuming that those were the first 19 plays of the game and that I counted correctly, the last plays that Neal was in on were, in reverse order: Maroney for -3 yards, Incomplete to Moss, Tuck sack, Mitchell sack, LMo no gain, Maroney for 1, Maroney for -2. And the score was 7-3. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that losing Neal wasn't a huge issue.