Pats Interested In Mike Wallace (per Miami Herald's Armando Salguero)

[Brady2Moss]

They're in "good shape" because of the methodical moves and patterns that Belichick and Kraft have followed over the years, not because of one deal that was extended. That's ridiculous.

The dead cap hits of the past couple years were actually a tendency to step away from those patterns and take some risks, which could/could not have paid off. Fortuntately for us, they were in such good shape that those deap cap hits didn't even come that close to hampering them in neither a current nor future stance.

Be my guest supa. It's not like I haven't lifted some of your opinions anyway.


You're going to have to explain to me why it's Wes Welker's fault that he excels in a position that the Patriots like to throw at? How is it Welker's fault that the Patriots like to attempt so called high percentage throws across the middle? I'd like an outside receiving threat. I really don't care how that player is acquired, but I sure as hell am not going to blame Wes Welker for the faults of others.

Not his fault, just not worth 8-10 million a year, I'd sign him for 8 if they drafted an outside guy. I'm not even sure what started this argument I think all I said was Bill won't get any impact players because of his "value system", somehow that makes me a moron for thinking this team needs more play makers as opposed to solid veterans.

Actually I remember now its because deus is attacking me for being a moron about my views on Welker in a thread 2 months ago so I just reiterated my argument and how it wasn't "nonsensical" or whatever phrasing he used.

 

[Sciz]

Here's a sad truth guys if you can't draft a certain position you have to pay the piper in free agency to get better or continue rolling out scrubs and burning multiple draft picks on that position. Or you can bring in a band of scrubs every year and cut them all. Remember that AMAZING receiver depth we had last off season oh ya they all got cut or went on IR and we were left with Lloyd and Welker and no one to attack the outside again.

So the Patriots should have just given up on drafting TEs before 2010? They definitely weren't good at it.

 

[Deus Irae]

Again all you do is act like you have some amazing point that I can't think, saying it 100 times doesn't make it true. Cruz isn't responsible for Eli Manning sucking it up this year again you live in a vacuum time to get out and consider the other things going on.

You're point about the highest scoring offenses makes me literally laugh out loud because all of those offenses were flaming turds when they faced a good defense. Not held down by a touchdown from their normal average, usually they scored half of their AMAZING HIGHEST SCORING OFFENSE OUTPUT!

It is the biggest joke to say the regular season production means everything is ok when the playoff results have shown that their offensive performance in the regular season doesn't happen in the playoffs.

..... and you doubled down on the silly. Let's just go to one game:

Quarterback Eli Manning threw one of his better passes of Sunday’s 31-13 loss to the Bengals.

But the football tumbled out of Cruz’s grasp right in sight of the goal line, a drop of what would have been a 38-yard touchdown.

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2012/11/victor_cruz_drops_sure_touchdo.html

or maybe this one:

Last season, Victor Cruz had a drop on a third down in the Giants’ first drive of the season-opening loss to the Washington Redskins.

Tonight, it was same thing. Cruz dropped a pass from Eli Manning on an in cut on the first third down of the season. It was the first of three drops for last year’s breakout star in the 24-17 loss to the Dallas Cowboys at MetLife Stadium.

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2012/09/giants_victor_cruz_has_three_d.html

 

[supafly]

You should align yourself with the smarter posters on this board that believe we shouldn't spend money on receivers and corners, despite the fact we can't draft them for crap.

Again, where we've failed at certain positions we've also been great at others. I would also point out that McCourty and Dennard (2 of our starting 4 in the secondary) were drafted recently.

oh ya they all got cut or went on IR and we were left with Lloyd and Welker and no one to attack the outside again.

Actually if you're talking specifically about the WR position itself, they started and ended the season with Welker and Llyod as their top 2 options.

It was the injury to Gronkowski that left them subject to a lack of outside threat again, not the WR depth. When you have 2 of your top 3 targets as your highly paid and talented TE's (that everyone is copying from, by the way), then how many WRs are actually going to contribute?

Sure, we need a more complete receiver, but that doesn't mean we have to ignore everything that makes sense and immediately jump to the worst possible solution either. Please explain to me how we could afford to pay a guy 10-11 million a year, on top of Brady, Welker, Hernandez, Gronkowski, and Mankins on offense?

Wouldn't that continue to leave a major need on defense?

There are plenty of ways to approach things, and Belichick has normally stayed ahead of the curve by exploring the better alternatives.

 

[Brady2Moss]

..... and you doubled down on the silly.

Attack the poster, ignore the point (Because you know you have no response to your shiny amazing offense crapping itself in the playoffs every year)

Deus Irae 101.

 

[Brady2Moss]

Again, where we've failed at certain positions we've also been great at others. I would also point out that McCourty and Dennard (2 of our starting 4 in the secondary) were drafted recently.



Actually if you're talking specifically about the WR position itself, they started and ended the season with Welker and Llyod as their top 2 options.

It was the injury to Gronkowski that left them subject to a lack of outside threat again, not the WR depth. When you have 2 of your top 3 targets as your highly paid and talented TE's (that everyone is copying from, by the way), then how many WRs are actually going to contribute?

Sure, we need a more complete receiver, but that doesn't mean we have to ignore everything that makes sense and immediately jump to the worst possible solution either. Please explain to me how we could afford to pay a guy 10-11 million a year, on top of Brady, Welker, Hernandez, Gronkowski, and Mankins on offense?

Wouldn't that continue to leave a major need on defense?

There are plenty of ways to approach things, and Belichick has normally stayed ahead of the curve by exploring the better alternatives.

Dennard is a good one and McCourty is going to be a good safety but again was drafted to play corner and was just so so at the position taking the last 3 years into account. They could draft a guy or let Welker walk and use that money for an outside guy theres a lot of things they can do. Best thing would be to sign Welker and hit on a draft pick but I doubt they can evaluate WRs.

I'd rather spend on defense, but alas Belichick will probably let Talib walk, not pay enough for a top CB, and end up with Brent Grimes coming off a torn achilles for a bargain 1 year deal and then if he does good, not resign him because of the cost and move on to the next project.

 

[ausbacker]

Not his fault, just not worth 8-10 million a year, I'd sign him for 8 if they drafted an outside guy. I'm not even sure what started this argument I think all I said was Bill won't get any impact players because of his "value system", somehow that makes me a moron for thinking this team needs more play makers as opposed to solid veterans.

Actually I remember now its because deus is attacking me for being a moron about my views on Welker in a thread 2 months ago so I just reiterated my argument and how it wasn't "nonsensical" or whatever phrasing he used.

I think Welker is worth every bit of the 8-10 million given his production. He's no Megatron and I firmly believe you are selling him short.

The Patriots had no trouble moving the ball on the Ravens. They stalled inside the red zone. That's Gronk's area of expertise.

 

[supafly]

That's fine they manage the cap well, but it hasn't worked the last 8 years to bring them another championship, Brady's time is ending time to go all out and get a stacked team for his last few years. They come close every year, but decidedly every year they don't finish the job. There's a reason for that beyond luck.

Relax, B2M. We all hear your concerns about needing a more complete receiver. Hopefully that's done in a way that produces better results that are spread to improvements on both sides of the ball. It can be done via the draft (maybe a couple picks this time), and also through some vet signings, but it's going to most likely have to be through an exercise that provides good value. I know you currently think that value is overrated, but I think you'll change your mind at some point.

As far as their "failures" lately, I think we'd have to take into account all of the variables that went into their 2 SB losses (a lot of which was either poor bounces/luck and a combination of insufficient secondary play on the final drive(s)). I think the positive is that we've consistently been able to reach the "dance," so to speak, so that's a good thing.. That's definitely a step in the right direction. Hopefully they continue to build a competitive team while also keeping an eye on being successful towards the future.

 

[Deus Irae]

Attack the poster, ignore the point (Because you know you have no response to your shiny amazing offense crapping itself in the playoffs every year)

Deus Irae 101.

Actually, it was "Hit the wrong button. Publish too soon and have to go back and fill out the post." However, I haven't ignored your points. I've dealt with them, repeatedly.

And you keep acting as if "my" shiny offense has crapped itself when it hasn't. "My" shiny offense had a healthy Brady and a Healthy O'Neal in 2007. "My" shiny offense has a healthy Gronk in 2011 and 2012.

"My" shiny offense wasn't even on the field in the 3 losses those years. Also, try to think back to the last offseason. I was very clear that, while he was just wishful thinking, I had Wallace, not Lloyd, as my preferred receiver.

 

[supafly]

Dennard is a good one and McCourty is going to be a good safety but again was drafted to play corner and was just so so at the position taking the last 3 years into account. They could draft a guy or let Welker walk and use that money for an outside guy theres a lot of things they can do. Best thing would be to sign Welker and hit on a draft pick but I doubt they can evaluate WRs.

I'd rather spend on defense, but alas Belichick will probably let Talib walk, not pay enough for a top CB, and end up with Brent Grimes coming off a torn achilles for a bargain 1 year deal and then if he does good, not resign him because of the cost and move on to the next project.

Let's just see how it all plays out. I'd be leery of throwing big money at a guy like Wallace myself since it's just a huge gamble, but maybe Belichick sees it differently this time. I really doubt it, but that may mean something closer to what you'd like to see.

My main concern would be how much the offense itself would change with a more traditional downfield offensive scheme. In this instance I don't want to change what isn't broken, but simply add to it. Bringing in a major money guy like Wallace may force them to make some changes, and that may prove to be an even bigger gamble.

I think we disagree a bit in exactly how close we are to winning the SB again. I don't see them being far off at all. I actually think that could be done by getting a draftee to catch 25-30 balls, while acting as a decoy at times. I also think we'd need to bring in some vets to compete though, and hope that one/two of them stick.

As far as CB, I wouldn't worry too much about losing Talib. He showed us what effective positioning as far as the majority of the secondary can do, along with some halfway effective man coverage. In my opinion that can certainly be duplicated. I think we'll attack the depth of the entire seconday as a whole, and that will lead to an improvement.

 

[Brady2Moss]

Actually, it was "Hit the wrong button. Publish too soon and have to go back and fill out the post." However, I haven't ignored your points. I've dealt with them, repeatedly.

And you keep acting as if "my" shiny offense has crapped itself when it hasn't. "My" shiny offense had a healthy Brady and a Healthy O'Neal in 2007. "My" shiny offense has a healthy Gronk in 2011 and 2012.

"My" shiny offense wasn't even on the field in the 3 losses those years. Also, try to think back to the last offseason. I was very clear that, while he was just wishful thinking, I had Wallace, not Lloyd, as my preferred receiver.

Well damn why don't we have 3 more Lombardis in the Patriots hall those offenses were just so great that having no Gronk shouldn't mean they score like 17 or 13 points in their last playoff games or 14 when a guard leaves and the QB has a bum ankle. No one has all their players come playoff time. Offense is too reliant on a few guys or maybe Brady has become too reliant they need more targets.

 

[Brady2Moss]

Let's just see how it all plays out. I'd be leery of throwing big money at a guy like Wallace myself since it's just a huge gamble, but maybe Belichick sees it differently this time. I really doubt it, but that may mean something closer to what you'd like to see.

My main concern would be how much the offense itself would change with a more traditional downfield offensive scheme. In this instance I don't want to change what isn't broken, but simply add to it. Bringing in a major money guy like Wallace may force them to make some changes, and that may prove to be an even bigger gamble.

I think we disagree a bit in exactly how close we are to winning the SB again. I don't see them being far off at all. I actually think that could be done by getting a draftee to catch 25-30 balls, while acting as a decoy at times. I also think we'd need to bring in some vets to compete though, and hope that one/two of them stick.

As far as CB, I wouldn't worry too much about losing Talib. He showed us what effective positioning as far as the majority of the secondary can do, along with some halfway effective man coverage. In my opinion that can certainly be duplicated. I think we'll attack the depth of the entire seconday as a whole, and that will lead to an improvement.

I agree with almost all of this. I'm just a bit frustrated that we don't make serious runs at guys. I don't even want Wallace that much especially not for 12-15 million like he's projected to get. I think we are damn close to a SB that's why I want to get a few more impact players so that when injuries come we can still kick everyone's ass.

I think they would have won in '11 with Gronk, but that offense was great partly due to how good that O-line was with Brian Waters, I don't know if they could do it against SF (Well maybe the version of SF that came out against the Ravens with their pants at their ankles for 2.5 quarters).

If they add 2 corners instead of Talib or an equivalent number 1 I'd be ok with that. I'm just getting really sick of all our free agents being 33+ and on a steep decline. I absolutely want Welker back if they don't have to overpay because he's a great receiver he just cannot be the focal point or the only option Brady trusts in crunch time because he can be taken away by good D's.

 

[stcjones]

Isn't freeney pretty cooked right about now? And Reed is on the downside of his career. We need to get away from bringing in these guys on the backside of their careers for one year deals where they don't do ANYTHING.....or hardly contribute......I agree that we need to get back the "knock your teeth down your throat" defenses of the 2001-2005 era.....but lets get some fresh legs in there!!!

Freeney and Reed would be huge signing this team needs defense not offense, hell i would be happy if they got one of them

 

[Deus Irae]

Well damn why don't we have 3 more Lombardis in the Patriots hall those offenses were just so great that having no Gronk shouldn't mean they score like 17 or 13 points in their last playoff games or 14 when a guard leaves and the QB has a bum ankle. No one has all their players come playoff time. Offense is too reliant on a few guys or maybe Brady has become too reliant they need more targets.

Because, in life, stuff happens. It's one thing to break down what's happening, to analyze the problems, and to offer solutions, but the Patriots weren't entitled to those trophies. Yes, it's all about the trophies for that team, and it should be. Yes, they've fallen short. Yes, improvements should be made. That doesn't mean you should become so butthurt that you don't bother thinking rationally, and instead start calling for the heads of the the very players that put them in position to have a chance in the first place. Leave that to Jets fans.

Go make a list of all the NFL teams that have won more trophies in a 12 year span. I'm sure you'll find scads of them.

 

[Ring 6]

Oh wait the tight ends operate in the middle of the field like every other weapon on this team... Oh wait a hurry up offense is useless if you hurry up to punt because you can't keep converting 3rd downs or stall in the red zone multiple times.

What are you talking about? The Patriots were #1 in 3rd down conversions.
They led the league by a mile in First downs.
They scored the 3rd most points in NFL history, after scoring the 12th most in history in 2011, and the 10th most in 2010.

I don't care about Wallace if he's going to make 12-15 million, but he's worth offering money to instead of just going for bargains and hoping they give you 1 year of elite play only to cut them in July.

What you describe is not what has ever happened.

 

[Ring 6]

Well damn why don't we have 3 more Lombardis in the Patriots hall those offenses were just so great that having no Gronk shouldn't mean they score like 17 or 13 points in their last playoff games or 14 when a guard leaves and the QB has a bum ankle. No one has all their players come playoff time. Offense is too reliant on a few guys or maybe Brady has become too reliant they need more targets.

There are 32 teams competing every year for a SB. You make it sound like a moron can win one at will.
You are trashing the way the team is built, yet you are saying they are so good they should have won 3 SBs and no one should care if one of their best players just isn't there. You make no sense. At this point it appears you want to whine, and choose to do so without thinking.

 

[patfanken]

There are 32 teams competing every year for a SB. You make it sound like a moron can win one at will.
You are trashing the way the team is built, yet you are saying they are so good they should have won 3 SBs and no one should care if one of their best players just isn't there. You make no sense. At this point it appears you want to whine, and choose to do so without thinking.

That's what people can't get their head's around. It is VERY, very hard to win a superbowl. You can count on one hand the number of teams that have blown through the playoffs like the 85 Bears. Every year the winner of the Lombardi have had more than one "lucky break", "lucky call", or "lucky bounce". They have needed an untimely injury by an opponent, a bad drop, or a "miracle catch". And I don't mean one, I mean several over the course of a playoff run.

Just look at the Pats loss in the 2011 Superbowl. The 3 fumbles that were all recovered by the Giants. The game clinching pass that was missed by Brady or Welker (whomever you choose to blame). The miraculous catch by Manningham (a guy who doesn't make miraculous catches),Brady's brain fart safety, and that's just one game off the top of my head. Where would the Giants have been without the 2 fumbles on special teams in the NFCCG, and there are several other plays you can name in that game.

No team gets through the playoffs without getting more than a few breaks. Its as simple as that. Adding or subtracting a player here or there is NOT going to make or break your team. The cap makes sure you cannot have an all star team at every position, and ultimately the teams that make it to the playoffs are the ones that the whole was better than the individual part. And the ones that make it to the Lombardi, were the best of that elite group, who had the fewest injuries, best calls, most bounces, fewest brain farts, and the majority of signature plays by individuals

So to sit here in March and whine about getting/keeping one guy or another as if the entire season relies on it, is more than just ludicrous. It's embarrassing.

 

[Calciumee]

Would certainly add the speedster deep threat, but how much will he cost?

 

[primetime]

There's a huge amount of variability in any single game, quarter, or drive that makes single game analysis relatively useless. The NFL is a sport of small sample sizes anyways, where a random outcome in one game can mean the difference between the playoffs or missing out (or, say, in 2008 it was between a 1st round bye and missing out entirely).

The key is not to concentrate on any one game, but rather to assemble a roster with the talent that has the greatest probability of winning any one game, which smooths out randomness over a 16 game sample size. The Patriots, with the best regular season record of any team over the last decade, have clearly done that. However, in the playoffs, they've become the victim of random chance in recent years - injuries to Welker, Gronk, normally surehanded Welker drops, batted balls and fumbles. Sure, this team can be improved... as can any team. The defense surely needs fixing, and having a downfield threat would help as well. But it isn't about putting together a team that will win a Super Bowl, but adding pieces that increase the probability of winning any given game. Randomness is always going to exist in football, and the best team is not going to win every Super Bowl because you have a single game playoff rather than a best-of-7 like in any other sport. But that's one reason pro football is the king of sports, too.

Moving off course significantly from what has worked in the past decade may or may not work to increase a team's probability of winning. The Patriots spent in 2007 and it worked, though even then aside from Thomas and Stallworth it was all value players (Moss, Welker, Morris, etc.) As long as Tom Brady is playing at a historic level, that probability is going to be high anyways.

But you have to understand that randomness will always play a part. The way a fumble bounces, for instance, is completely random and can turn a single game (and thus a season). The Patriots could have never won a Super Bowl if Ken Walter had held the ball wrong or Troy Brown drops a pass or if JR Redmond had dropped a pass or if Donovan McNabb didn't get performance anxiety.

They could have won more if Reche Caldwell catches a pass, or Wes Welker catches a couple balls, or Deion Branch gets a catch-and-run, or the ball doesn't stick to Tyree's head, or Asante Samuel holds onto a pick, or Gronk outjumps a slow linebacker downfield, or Matt Cassel beats the Jets in overtime, or the ball isn't batted in the air and picked inside the red zone on their first drive against the Jets...

In other words, there's no accounting for variability. There's just increasing the probability of winning when taking it into account. Basing your team-building strategy on a single game is silly.

 

[Sciz]

Would certainly add the speedster deep threat, but how much will he cost?

Newest report is $13M a year