What to do with Wes Welker?

[Froob]

3 years 30 mill in my opinion. Tag for one more season wouldn't be a bad idea financially but it'd probably piss Wes off.

 

[ATippett56]

I don't think there's anyway they can afford to let Welker walk, they've gone down that road in 2006 and it probably cost them a Lombardi.

It's a miracle the 2006 New England Patriots won twelve games with this wide receiver corps:

Reche Caldwell
Jabar Gaffney
Troy Brown
Doug Gabriel
Chad Jackson

 

[D-Money]

And they should have beaten the damn colts, who could forget Caldwell being wide open and dropping the ball.

 

[Huckleberry1]

I would give him a 2 year deal.If he doesnt accept it then go after someone in the free agent market.

Once again, why on earth would he do that when plenty of teams out there will offer him more?

 

[Huckleberry1]

What kind of stats do you expect from Welker four seasons from now?

To be honest I don't care about his stats 4 years from now, I care about how many rings they get before Brady and Belichick retire, and I cannot think of anything that would be more detrimental to that goal, short of losing those 2 , that would hurt them more than losing Welker. However I expect that when it is done Welker will produce about 75-80%.of what he has been producing while converting dozens and dozens of first downs and big plays, and while giving Brady the instant safety valve he needs when defenses are loading up blitzes at him.

 

[Sciz]

To be honest I don't care about his stats 4 years from now

Well whoever would be offering him that contract would have to worry about it, and it's irresponsible moves like this that got the Jets where they are today.

 

[Deus Irae]

Well whoever would be offering him that contract would have to worry about it, and it's irresponsible moves like this that got the Jets where they are today.

If the Patriots had been smarter about a Welker contract last season, they wouldn't need to worry about year 4 of a new contract after this season. Also, the Patriots were looking to sign the considerably older Reggie Wayne in this past offseason, so let's not go down the "irresponsible" path...

 

[Huckleberry1]

Well whoever would be offering him that contract would have to worry about it, and it's irresponsible moves like this that got the Jets where they are today.

Actually Sciz there is nothing irresponsible about wanting Welker to help them win championships more just out up numbers, and coming from you the statement is pretty ridiculous, as nothing in this arena has been more irresponsible than your yearly clamor to get rid of him for a frigging 2nd round draft pick.

 

[Huckleberry1]

And I am really surprised you chimed in on this Sciz, I would have thought that after being so very wrong for so very long on this issue you would have either acknowledged your many mistakes or just kept quiet. At least some others had the good sense to come to grips with the error of their ways.

 

[Sciz]

If the Patriots had been smarter about a Welker contract last season, they wouldn't need to worry about year 4 of a new contract after this season. Also, the Patriots were looking to sign the considerably older Reggie Wayne in this past offseason, so let's not go down the "irresponsible" path...

What should the Pats have done this past offseason that would have been better? Having him play a year under the franchise tender is definitely better than handing him that $40M over 4 years then.

Wayne being old (for a WR) is the only similarity between him and Welker. He got the kind of contract you give an old WR, one that you can get out of for good value after any number of years. If he had bombed this year and would be cut this offseason, then he would have made $8.5M and have $5M in dead money. A year later, and he makes $13.5M and has $2.5M in dead money. If he plays out the whole thing, he gets $17.5M in three years. That's under $6M a year and $2.5M a year guaranteed. That's a responsible old WR contract. $10M a year with $6M a year guaranteed is not.

 

[Deus Irae]

What should the Pats have done this past offseason that would have been better? Having him play a year under the franchise tender is definitely better than handing him that $40M over 4 years then.

No, it's not. It's your opinion that it's better, and that's fine for you, but there's no "definitely" about it.

Wayne being old (for a WR) is the only similarity between him and Welker. He got the kind of contract you give an old WR, one that you can get out of for good value after any number of years. If he had bombed this year and would be cut this offseason, then he would have made $8.5M and have $5M in dead money. A year later, and he makes $13.5M and has $2.5M in dead money. If he plays out the whole thing, he gets $17.5M in three years. That's under $6M a year and $2.5M a year guaranteed. That's a responsible old WR contract. $10M a year with $6M a year guaranteed is not.

Wayne will be 35 in November. Welker will be 32 next May.

The reality is that, even with a 4 year deal, which is not something I recommended, Welker's contract would still be ending with him at age 34, which means that it would be ending with him at the same age where Wayne's new contract is starting. As for what the Patriots should have done, they should have adapted to the changed WR market:

2 years 20-21, 15 guaranteed
3 years 24-30, 16-20 guaranteed (I'd have looked at 3/24-3/27 as the expected range)

Either of the above could have been offered and, since they'd already franchised him, the 2 year deal would have been a low offer anyway, but would have given Welker a bit more security without ramping his price up higher than the double franchise tag. Reportedly, they never budged off of 2 years 16, which was an insult.

 

[Sciz]

Actually Sciz there is nothing irresponsible about wanting Welker to help them win championships more just out up numbers, and coming from you the statement is pretty ridiculous, as nothing in this arena has been more irresponsible than your yearly clamor to get rid of him for a frigging 2nd round draft pick.

And I am really surprised you chimed in on this Sciz, I would have thought that after being so very wrong for so very long on this issue you would have either acknowledged your many mistakes or just kept quiet. At least some others had the good sense to come to grips with the error of their ways.

I'll take care of these two together, since they're basically the same thing.

First of all, let's address my previous views on Welker.
Welker was a year removed from ACL surgery and had just put up a season of 848 yards. He had essentially no production outside the slot, and he was badly outproduced by Branch in the 2/2/1 sets. Welker was a slot receiver on a team with two elite TEs. And while there are definitely ways to use a slot receiver with two TEs on the field (both WRs on one side, a TE as an outside receiver, going empty), it's limiting to an offense. Even now, the majority of Welker's snaps come in the slot.

There were two main things I did not account for. First of all, that Welker would not only regain his pre-ACL surgery athleticism, but surpass it. You find me a 29 yard old receiver that tears an ACL and then gets faster after recovering from it, and I'll admit that I should have expected him to be Superman. That 2010 season gave us a perfect indication of what Welker's going to be when his athleticism declines, because we got to see him play with one of his legs at far less than 100%.

Second, I did not anticipate that Chad Johnson would bomb so hard. He has more recently claimed that his problems off the field made him unable to concentrate on football, and whatever the reason, he just sucked. Physically, he was what the Pats needed. Based on his previous production, down to the routes he ran and where he caught balls, he was exactly what the offense needed, a guy that you could stick outside to either win one on one matchups or pull attention from the middle of the field, letting the tight ends go to work. He was not a guy that statistically was confined to the slot. He was the exact opposite, and now we more that he was the exact opposite of Welker in more ways than that, especially mentally. Perhaps my trade Welker, trade for Ochocinco proposal was overly simplistic, but while some people expected Ochocinco to not be good, I don't think anybody expected it to be for reasons completely unrelated to his shenanigans, which weren't at all an issue.

Now it's not like I was supporting giving Welker away. You also have to account for the new player. I don't remember if this was before or after the 2010 draft, but there were plenty of good players taken in the second and third rounds of each of those drafts. Maybe Belichick drafts a complete bust, or maybe he drafts Navorro Bowman, TJ Ward, Torrey Smith, or Randall Cobb. Or maybe he turns it into a 2012 first. I don't know, but you're completely ignoring that pick.


Anyway, based what has happened with Welker, you have apparently deemed me too stupid to respond to anything related to him. So, since you have already caught me being wrong once, I'll make sure you benefit if it happens a second time. If, in four years, Welker has a 1,000 yard season (very modest production for a $10M receiver), then I'm gone forever. Feel free set as many alarms for January of 2017 as you need to remember. If Ian is around until then, then I will be too. And after being wrong a second time on Welker, I clearly do not deserve to talk at all about anything related to the Pats ever again.

 

[Sciz]

Wayne will be 35 in November. Welker will be 32 next May.

The reality is that, even with a 4 year deal, which is not something I recommended, Welker's contract would still be ending with him at age 34, which means that it would be ending with him at the same age where Wayne's new contract is starting.

It's not about pure age. Wayne has been plenty productive at 34. But had he not been, it was easy for the Colts to get rid of him with minimal loss ($5M). We don't know if Welker will be productive at 34. Heck, we don't know if he'll be productive at 32. The key there is that regardless of age, the Colts had an easy out of Wayne's contract, where nobody is proposing a Welker contract that has an easy out until it's over.

As for what the Patriots should have done, they should have adapted to the changed WR market:

2 years 20-21, 15 guaranteed
3 years 24-30, 16-20 guaranteed (I'd have looked at 3/24-3/27 as the expected range)

Either of the above could have been offered and, since they'd already franchised him, the 2 year deal would have been a low offer anyway, but would have given Welker a bit more security without ramping his price up higher than the double franchise tag. Reportedly, they never budged off of 2 years 16, which was an insult.

Instead of the two-year contract you propose, the Pats could instead have offered 2 years, $20.933M with $9.515M guaranteed. Heck, they still can do that. That's what he gets if the Pats franchise him again. There's no motivation on the Pats' end to offer him more than $9.5M guaranteed up front except to change the yearly cap hit split from $9.5 and then $11.4M to something more even.

Depending on where in those ranges you end up, Welker is gaining one year, $8-14M, and $0-4 guaranteed. At the low end, it's another non-guaranteed year added onto the $16M/2yr proposal from the Pats. If you think that (or a little more) is enough that Welker would have accepted it, then I think it could definitely be arranged to be a pretty good deal on both ends. I just don't think Welker would be too quick to accept it unless he's getting closer to the $30M than the $27M.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Sciz, I don't consider you stupid at all but you are ridiculous when it comes to Welker. For whatever reason you have been grossly undervaluing him for 3 years and continue to do do. Then you call it irresponsible to give him a fair market deal simply because he is 31. He is the second best player on a team that is set to challenge for titles the next few years and you apparently would rather get a second round pick, which is Sh.t value for a HOF quality player in the prime of his career, just to save a few bucks . If the get rid of Welker they seriously diminish there chances for more rings in the Brady era, and paying him a market value deal seriously enhances their chances at that end goal. 40 for 4 is easily worth it for a 31 year old receiver who puts up ridiculous numbers and has shown absolutely no sign if slowing down. You can predict it all you want but after 3 years it just makes you look blind and stubborn, not prescient.

 

[ATippett56]

Personally, I'm looking forward to New England Patriots tight end Visanthe Shiancoe returning for calendar year 2013. Tight end Jake Ballard hasn't even played a game yet! And as we all know, you can't make the club from the tub!

As opposed to Visanthe Shiancoe's participation in the Miami Dolphins game this past Sunday?

Snaps: Ridley's second wind - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

 

[Huckleberry1]

It's not about pure age. Wayne has been plenty productive at 34. But had he not been, it was easy for the Colts to get rid of him with minimal loss ($5M). We don't know if Welker will be productive at 34. Heck, we don't know if he'll be productive at 32. The key there is that regardless of age, the Colts had an easy out of Wayne's contract, where nobody is proposing a Welker contract that has an easy out until it's over.

Instead of the two-year contract you propose, the Pats could instead have offered 2 years, $20.933M with $9.515M guaranteed. Heck, they still can do that. That's what he gets if the Pats franchise him again. There's no motivation on the Pats' end to offer him more than $9.5M guaranteed up front except to change the yearly cap hit split from $9.5 and then $11.4M to something more even.

Depending on where in those ranges you end up, Welker is gaining one year, $8-14M, and $0-4 guaranteed. At the low end, it's another non-guaranteed year added onto the $16M/2yr proposal from the Pats. If you think that (or a little more) is enough that Welker would have accepted it, then I think it could definitely be arranged to be a pretty good deal on both ends. I just don't think Welker would be too quick to accept it unless he's getting closer to the $30M than the $27M.

Tagging a player as cynically as you suggest is a really sh.tty way to do business, you are screwing the player out of the only guaranteed money they can get, and I sure as hell hope they don't decide to follow this path with Brady in a couple of years, because there will be absolutely no difference in the logic behind it.

Beyond this Sciz I am really curious as to how much longer you think Brady will be around and how they should approach those years. Personally I think he's he for 4, maybe 5 years, and the team they have right now is good enough to win it and with a few tweaks may become dominant, and imo the goal should be close out the era with as many rings as they can get. Getting rid of Brady's most important and reliable target as this stretch begins is the dumbest possible thing that they can do, especially when all it will take is a ballpark offer to anything resembling a fair deal, and the ones you and others are suggesting are as far from a fair market deal as it gets and would only push Welker out the door. A few extra million and a second round pick are nothing compared to the value Welker brings to this teAm, and they should be doing everything in their power to make sure he is here and Brady is set with his weapons for the coming years.

And btw, your "heck, we don't even know if he will be productive at 32" comment is as ridiculous as it gets. By that logic they should never sign any player to anything more than a 1 year deal, and imo is just another cheap shot at a guy who proves you wrong each and every year.

 

[Huckleberry1]

As opposed to Visanthe Shiancoe's participation in the Miami Dolphins game this past Sunday?

Snaps: Ridley's second wind - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

BTW tip I meant to get back to you earlier. I didn't look into the structure of Lloyd's contract before talking about cutting him and i should have. My mistake and getting rid of him when there is no big financial advantage is stupid. Hopefully he has a bigger year next season. the thing i am most surprised by is his Terry Glenn catch it and fall down routine. For a guy with his size and athleticism i really expected more once he had the ball in his hands. nothing outrageous but definitely more than we are seeing. Like i said before i hope he tears it up the rest of the way because they need him.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Well whoever would be offering him that contract would have to worry about it, and it's irresponsible moves like this that got the Jets where they are today.

No, it's not. It's drafting and evaluating poorly and failing to develop talent and overpaying for sub elite FA talent on poorly structured deals you can't bail on and having an idiot owner who makes organizational decisions based on pushing local competition off the back pages and selling PSL's via creating hype.

All that matters about any of these contracts is guaranteed money. If Welker signed a 5 year $50M extension last spring with $25M guaranteed, all he'd have really signed was a 3 year $25M deal ($9.5M of which he has once again clearly already earned leaving $15.5 at risk over the next 2 seasons) that would be all salary thereafter with a dead cap of as little as $5-6M total remaining in the last two seasons where they could retain him on a take it or leave it restructure to whatever they felt his remaining value was or just walk away with millions in cap savings and manageable dead cap. The really sad thing is they could have signed him to a 3-4 year deal for a lot less and they just dug their heels in and refused to. The media concensus when the dust settled was he would have taken a 3 year deal with something just south of $20M guaranteed. While they had gone from 2/$16M to something less. While it's different from what happened with Adam, whom they opted not to tag and offered no guarantees to, it smacks of the same arrogance and total misreading of a player they just assumed would eventually settle for taking whatever he had to just to remain here. And like the Branch deal where once push came to shove they'd have caved only they had already shoved so hard they couldn't. The Branch deal was the difference between $9M guaranteed and the $12+ the player wanted. In the end he got $13.5M from the Seahawks and for a savings of $3M+ (at least half of which was spent trying to bridge the gap) we got Reche Caldwell bumped up to our #1WR in 2006 which likely also cost them another Lombardi.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Brady was 28 in 2006 and they got a first round pick back for Branch, who wasn't anywhere near as productive for the Patriots as Welker has been. They also had a solid defense back then, and didn't have to pretty much rely solely on the offense to win them games. Not really comparable situations.

Except of course for those records they share vs. Jerry Rice. Branch's production was more of the second season variety... I seem to recall a total collapse in the 2006 AFCC game when the offense stalled and the defense collapsed that sent a team they were up three scores on early to a superbowl against a team we'd dominated in the regular season... Thank goodness we got to draft Bang Clock make up for it.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

What kind of stats do you expect from Welker four seasons from now?

Doesn't really matter as by then he will likely be looking at a production adjusted restructure if he's dropped off to whatever they deem he's still worth or he'd be gone creating several million in cap space following a minimal dead cap hit.