Is Caldwell done?

[solman]

Did the Chargers underpay less for their talent than the Patriots?

I'd say yes.

Did they have more talent because of that?

I'd say yes. You just said yes.

Therefore, they underpaid less to maximize their talent.

I believe that the Chargers paid LESS for their talent in 2006 than the Patriots did.

This resulted in them having a MORE talented team.

You will find several other threads where I praise AJ Smith. He has done an AMAZING job there.

Entering 2007, I view San Diego as our biggest competition.

 

[pats1]

I don't understand. Why purpose would be served by cutting Caldwell before we even owe him money?

Keep in mind that a couple of weeks ago we didn't know if we'd get ANY receivers in free agency.

How would the situation change between now and the final cutdown?

 

[solman]

The Patriots will spread the ball around in 2007 just as much as they did in 2006, which was just as much as they did in 2005.

Having better WRs around Caldwell will make him better. No longer will defenses target him. He'll be open more. Brady will hit the open man.

Assuming that he's on the field instead of Stallworth, Welker, Washington, Gaffney, Jackson, any new draft picks, etc.

If the Pats keep him on the roster and he has the kind of playing time that Bam Childress had last year, he'll put up Bam Childress type numbers.

 

[salty]

Caldwell Stays,

He's Tough as Hell, He's a great teammate, works hard, Brady and BB value him more than most of you do.

Caldwell is tough?!

Why then does he always immediately fall to the ground or run out of bounds after making a catch? Wouldn't a "tough" player try to fight for a few more yards every now and then? I never ONCE saw Caldwell do that, and I don't think its the ball he was concerned about protecting.

 

[pats1]

I believe that the Chargers paid LESS for their talent in 2006 than the Patriots did.

This resulted in them having a MORE talented team.

You will find several other threads where I praise AJ Smith. He has done an AMAZING job there.

Entering 2007, I view San Diego as our biggest competition.

He certainly prolonged a rotten relationship with Schottenheimer.

They lost both of their coordinators.

How many arrests have they been hit with in the past year?

 

[Kdo5]

Reche didnt lose us the AFCCG. That was the defense. Absolutely out of gas. Couldnt stop Manning for their lives. Some blame has to be layed on the offense, not quite as productive in the second half but mainly the defense.

 

[solman]

How would the situation change between now and the final cutdown?

1. We will have to pay him money. Every penny that we pay him reduces our cap space.

2. We will have to cut our roster down to 53. Even with a fixed cap, I'm sure BB would love to have 60 guys on his roster. Using up a roster space on Reche means that somebody else has to be cut.

 

[Kdo5]

1. We will have to pay him money. Every penny that we pay him reduces our cap space.

2. We will have to cut our roster down to 53. Even with a fixed cap, I'm sure BB would love to have 60 guys on his roster. Using up a roster space on Reche means that somebody else has to be cut.

Then so be it. Why not use up a roster spot for Reche? He has done NOTHING to get cut.

 

[solman]

He certainly prolonged a rotten relationship with Schottenheimer.

They lost both of their coordinators.

AJ Smith wanted to get rid of Marty LAST year.

Spanos is responsible for keeping Marty on board and losing the coaches that AJ had worked so hard to out in place.

How many arrests have they been hit with in the past year?

The Chargers players are utterly classless, you'll never hear me say otherwise. I put LT just a step behind Merriman in this regard. It sickens me to hear everyone talk about how classy he supposedly is.

But their front office has still done one heck of a job when it comes to finding talent in the draft, trading talent, and re-signing talent.

 

[salty]

Nobody else had those crazy looking eyes. I'm serious. I think that the way his eyes looked after the drops is contributing more to the perception about him than the drops themselves.

You could be right. I will not deny that the first moment I had doubts about Caldwell was the Denver game, when his crazy eyes lit up TVs nation-wide.

 

[pats1]

Assuming that he's on the field instead of Stallworth, Welker, Washington, Gaffney, Jackson, any new draft picks, etc.

If the Pats keep him on the roster and he has the kind of playing time that Bam Childress had last year, he'll put up Bam Childress type numbers.

Why do you INSIST on keeping Caldwell out of any roster you project?

Here's how it goes, assuming the Pats keep 6 WRs:

-If Chad Jackson it out, Kight stays. (Stallworth (Z), Caldwell (X), Welker (Y), Washington, Gaffney, Kight.)

-If the Pats sign/draft somebody else, Kight goes. (Stallworth (Z), Caldwell (X), Welker (Y), Washington, sign/draft)

-If the Pats sign/draft somebody, else, Gaffney goes. (Stallworth (Z), Caldwell (X), Welker (Y), Washington, sign/draft, sign/draft)

Washington could also potentially be behind those picks.

 

[solman]

Then so be it. Why not use up a roster spot for Reche? He has done NOTHING to get cut.

Neither did Lawyer Milloy, but cutting him made the Patriots a better team.

The goal here is to win championships.

That's one reason why players are taking less money for the opportunity to come here.

 

[ayjackson]

I think his strong season is entirely the result of being Tom Brady's go to guy.

He didn't show me anything special last year.

Now that Brady has better options, he'll be lucky to return to his 2005 level.

This is hardly an irrational viewpoint. I can't understand why so many have gone to great lengths (twisting words, changing arguments) in this post to hammer Solman for speaking these words. I bet he's right.

 

[pats1]

1. We will have to pay him money. Every penny that we pay him reduces our cap space.

The Pats don't have to pay Reche a penny between now and the first game.

He's likely already earned that roster bonus - they're usually handed out the first or second week of March.

2. We will have to cut our roster down to 53. Even with a fixed cap, I'm sure BB would love to have 60 guys on his roster.

The Pats aren't in dire salary cap shape by any stretch of the imagination.

If they are forced to cut Reche and keep Kight because of monetary reasons, then that's a product of cap mismanagement elsewhere. But up until now, they've had no problems with that.

Using up a roster space on Reche means that somebody else has to be cut.

"Using up roster space?" You're making it sound like Caldwell doesn't deserve to be on the 53-man roster. That's utterly pathetic.

Unless the Pats carry 2 WRs - Stallworth and Welker - Caldwell will make the team. Washington, Gaffney, Kight, Childress, and Smith will all be cut before Caldwell, as the Pats will in all likelihood have no financial implications to keeping Caldwell instead.

 

[solman]

Why do you INSIST on keeping Caldwell out of any roster you project?

I don't really insist on it. If you go back to the beginning of the thread, you'll see that I started off thinking it was likely, but being quite ambivalent about it.

It was only when people started declaring that it would be "ignorant" to suggest cutting him, that I decided to make the case.

Plus, it had been years since I'd had a decent flame war.

 

[pats1]

This is hardly an irrational viewpoint. I can't understand why so many have gone to great lengths (twisting words, changing arguments) in this post to hammer Solman for speaking these words. I bet he's right.

Who is going to start instead of Caldwell?

Who will the defense target the least in a 3 WR set - Stallworth, Welker, or Caldwell?

Who, then, will be the open man?

Who will Brady throw to?

Or, let me put it this way:

-In 2003-5, when in a 3 WR set, did Brady ever noticeably favor one or two receivers over another? No. He hit the open guy.

 

[pats1]

I don't really insist on it. If you go back to the beginning of the thread, you'll see that I started off thinking it was likely, but being quite ambivalent about it.

It was only when people started declaring that it would be "ignorant" to suggest cutting him, that I decided to make the case.

Plus, it had been years since I'd had a decent flame war.

I'll take that as a sign of defeat.

 

[pats1]

Neither did Lawyer Milloy, but cutting him made the Patriots a better team.

The goal here is to win championships.

That's one reason why players are taking less money for the opportunity to come here.

There were financial implications to keeping Milloy. In that case, it was a near necessity for them to keep Aric Morris instead of Milloy.

But there is no necessity to keeping Kight over Caldwell.

 

[salty]

My take on this thread is that Keegs, Solman, etc. (and myself) are right to question Caldwell's toughness and performance in clutch situations. I sure hope he is not a starter on this team. My gut feeling is that Belichick and Pioli hope so as well -- why were they so determined to get a bunch of wide receivers in here this offseason? They wanted to get somebody out of the lineup, and I'd guess its Caldwell much more than Gaffney.

That said, he will not be cut. He would be a very nice option as a 4th WR. Plus, with all the wide receivers coming in this off-season, it would be good to keep Caldwell around in a limited role purely for the sake of continuity.

I think it will be Stallworth and Gaffney starting, Welker in the slot (and sometimes on the field as an outside WR), and then Caldwell 4th. I'd be a little surprised if Washington even made the team.

 

[solman]

The Pats don't have to pay Reche a penny between now and the first game.

He's likely already earned that roster bonus - they're usually handed out the first or second week of March.

Miguels notes have this:

Dan Pires was quoted on the PatsFans.Com message board as reporting that Caldwell's "only significant incentive is a $300K roster bonus which is due sometime this year/season - as in down the road."

which I interpreted as meaning that the second year roster bonus may also not be due at the regular time (although I've been using weasle words).

The Pats aren't in dire salary cap shape by any stretch of the imagination.

If they are forced to cut Reche and keep Kight because of monetary reasons, then that's a product of cap mismanagement elsewhere. But up until now, they've had no problems with that.

"Using up roster space?" You're making it sound like Caldwell doesn't deserve to be on the 53-man roster. That's utterly pathetic.

The Pats aren't in dire salary cap shape at least in part because they are proactive about their cap position, even when they have room to maneuver (like this year and last).

It would have been nice if we didn't have to cut Dillon too. But being nice to players who have served us well, and winning championships, are two diametrically opposed goals.

I vote for the latter.