Wilfork and his future

[Huckleberry1]

Where did I say get rid of Edelman? Keep Edelman, sign Decker. One of the worst moves an team can make is holding on to old declining vets and paying them expensive salaries based on their names.




Yeah right, draft WRs, that was such a great success story for the Pats last decade. Decker is proven in the NFL. In the last 3 years, only 2 receivers had more TDs than him, Dez Bryant 34 and Megatron 33. Decker has 32. He is in his prime, has size, knows how to get open, doesnt have an injury history.

Brady's window is closing. Its time to go all in and get him a very good weapon.

Hey sure, and while they are at it they can sign Knowshon Moreno and Jimmy Graham as well. And Arthur Jones and Micheal Bennett and Micheal Johnson, and oh yeah Greg hardy too.

 

[mayoclinic]

Hey sure, and while they are at it they can sign Knowshon Moreno and Jimmy Graham as well. And Arthur Jones and Micheal Bennett and Micheal Johnson, and oh yeah Greg hardy too.

As you well know, Decker won't be an option. The only way he gets out of Denver is by wanting more money than they can pay, which will price him out of the Pats' range. Again, you obviously know this, but not everyone does.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

This "solution" is horrible.

It's amazing how hard it is for some fans to let go even though all the signs are there that they should let go.

Thank goodness the Patriots know when to let go.

Seriously, that proposal was one that you make to Wilfork if he *didn't* get hurt last season. I just can't see something like that.

Maybe something like this instead:

- extend contract through/including 2016 season
- $7.5M currently due in 2014 is converted to $3M signing bonus, $1M base salary, $3.5M Pro Bowl/All-Pro incentives
- Base salaries of $2.5M in 2015 and 2016 with same $3.5M Pro Bowl/All-Pro incentives

Wilfork will essentially receive $4M in guaranteed cash in 2014 (versus being cut). 2014 cap charge reduced by $5M. Opportunity to earn big money for D-lineman in mid-30s if he continues to play well (and cap charge would be reasonable for it). If he becomes just an average or below average starter, he is compensated as such. If he can't play well at all in 2014, dead money for cutting him in 2015 is just $2M.

Since Wilfork has gotten paid already, seems to understand the nature of his injury and comeback, and seems to love being a Patriot, it's possible he might be open to something like this. Maybe I'm being too naive in the other direction though....

 

[mgteich]

So, the alternative to paying Wilfork $7.5M for one year is to pay him $7.5M a year for two years?

This deal is essentially a 2-year $15M deal. After 2 years, the patriots have an annual option of Wilfork services for MORE than $7.5M each year.

A good deal for both parties?

BOTTOM LINE
It is hard to imagine Wilfork being projected to be worth $7.5M a year any time soon.

Eric Frenz's proposed restructure can be found at
Restructuring Vince Wilfork's deal in a way that works for both sides - Going Deep - Boston.com

 

[kennyb]

Yeah which would mean (as of now) he’d be the 10th highest cap hit even if he was cut, I really don’t know what would be stupider them carrying Wilfork’s $11,600,000 cap hit or them carrying a $3,600,000 cap hit for a player that isn’t on the roster.

The 3.6M is called a SUNK COST. The pats incur that cap hit if he's on the roster or not.

So the decision centers around 8M, and whether Wilfork is worth that much.

The problem with "guaranteeing it" and deferring cap hits (except the 3.6M which is going to happen no matter what) is that if he can't play, then that's another 8M in cap hits they have to take, spread out or not if in fact, he can't play.

 

[mayoclinic]

So, the alternative to paying Wilfork $7.5M for one year is to pay him $7.5M a year for two years?

This deal is essentially a 2-year $15M deal. After 2 years, the patriots have an annual option of Wilfork services for MORE than $7.5M each year.

A good deal for both parties?

BOTTOM LINE
It is hard to imagine Wilfork being projected to be worth $7.5M a year any time soon.

The 3.6M is called a SUNK COST. The pats incur that cap hit if he's on the roster or not.

So the decision centers around 8M, and whether Wilfork is worth that much.

The problem with "guaranteeing it" and deferring cap hits (except the 3.6M which is going to happen no matter what) is that if he can't play, then that's another 8M in cap hits they have to take, spread out or not if in fact, he can't play.

I don't really understand the logic of "we're not sure if our former franchise DT can play at a high level again, so let's give him an extension".

 

[patsderoer]

Hey sure, and while they are at it they can sign Knowshon Moreno and Jimmy Graham as well. And Arthur Jones and Micheal Bennett and Micheal Johnson, and oh yeah Greg hardy too.

Tell you what mister, how about you make a list with all the starting DTs over 33 years old who have helped their team win a SB. Lets limit this to the last decade, so you dont have to search too much. Feel free to go back even more, if you wish so.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Tell you what mister, how about you make a list with all the starting DTs over 33 years old who have helped their team win a SB. Lets limit this to the last decade, so you dont have to search too much. Feel free to go back even more, if you wish so.

Look at the Pats very own SB roster in 2003

The guy played in the NFL until age 39

 

[mgteich]

AREN'T THESE THE ISSUES
1) Is Wilfork worth $7.5M - $8M for his services in 2014.

2) Is it likely that Wilfork is likely to consider worth $15M for his services in 2014 and 2015?

3) If the answer is truly "I don't know", when would be ready to make such a decision?

IF WILFORK ISN'T WORTH $7.5M-$8M A YEAR
When will the patriots make the decision and free up cap money, perhaps after renegotiating lower compensation?

MY TAKE
The decision has been made and that we'll know by March 12th or so.

 

[JackBauer]

Tell you what mister, how about you make a list with all the starting DTs over 33 years old who have helped their team win a SB. Lets limit this to the last decade, so you dont have to search too much. Feel free to go back even more, if you wish so.

I'm sympathetic to mayoclinic's reasoning re: Wilfork, but considering the NEP relied on not one but two aged DTs on Super Bowl winning teams, I'm not sure if this is really a road you want to go down.

 

[patsderoer]

Look at the Pats SB roster in 2003

The guy played in the NFL until age 39

Its a long list. The guy was given $1,6M for his efforts

 

[SalemPats]

I don't think people understand the impact of a great NT. If we had a healthy Vince against Denver it's a much different game. He demands help in the interior allowing us to blitz with a guy like collins or gives Jones 1 on 1. Not too mention the impact on the run, that he has.

Why we should not re-sign him (rebuttals)
1. ACL injury - I know he's coming off a bad injury, but ACLs don't end players careers like they used to. It happened early in the year so he should be healthy for training camp
2. Age - Yes he's 33 and has miles. But, we're talking about an incredibly hard-worker who is a professional. I'm confident he has some miles left on him

DTs don't grow on trees, we can't just plug and play that position. His leadership is questioned as well.

 

[Patsrock]

I don't think people understand the impact of a great NT. If we had a healthy Vince against Denver it's a much different game. He demands help in the interior allowing us to blitz with a guy like collins or gives Jones 1 on 1. Not too mention the impact on the run, that he has.

Why we should not re-sign him (rebuttals)
1. ACL injury - I know he's coming off a bad injury, but ACLs don't end players careers like they used to. It happened early in the year so he should be healthy for training camp
2. Age - Yes he's 33 and has miles. But, we're talking about an incredibly hard-worker who is a professional. I'm confident he has some miles left on him

DTs don't grow on trees, we can't just plug and play that position. His leadership is questioned as well.

He tore his achilles tendon not acl. If it was a ACL the injury concern and his playing ability would not be that much of an issue. Tearing the achilles tendon is much more problematic than a ACL

 

[mgteich]

If this is true, then we should expect Kelly back, and we probably should sign an extension. He is a valuable starter or backup.

He tore his achilles tendon not acl. If it was a ACL the injury concern and his playing ability would not be that much of an issue. Tearing the achilles tendon is much more problematic than a ACL

 

[patsderoer]

I'm sympathetic to mayoclinic's reasoning re: Wilfork, but considering the NEP relied on not one but two aged DTs on Super Bowl winning teams, I'm not sure if this is really a road you want to go down.

Maybe I will go down the road. Those two aged DT's were given 1.6M and 1M for their efforts. Kelly can play the role of the aged vet much cheaper than Wilfork. And Kelly was playing pretty well before he went down.

 

[JackBauer]

Maybe I will go down the road. Those two aged DT's were given 1.6M and 1M for their efforts. Kelly can play the role of the aged vet much cheaper than Wilfork. And Kelly was playing pretty well before he went down.

Not that I disagree, but you're shifting the goalposts.

 

[mgteich]

Perhaps.

However, if Kelly is expected to be back and should be extended, then we have Siliga, Jones, Kelly, Vellano and Armstead before any free agent or draftee additions. We also have Chandler Jones occasionally playing inside. Even if Kelly isn't extended, $2M for 2014 isn't too much.

So, IMHO, it against this status quo that we must consider Wilfork.

Not that I disagree, but you're shifting the goalposts.

 

[patsderoer]

Not that I disagree, but you're shifting the goalposts.

I'm not shifting any goalposts, just pointing out that those old vets were payed like old vets, on the cheap, not like all-pros. I said before that Kelly can play that role, much cheaper than Wilfork.

 

[JackBauer]

Perhaps.

However, if Kelly is expected to be back and should be extended, then we have Siliga, Jones, Kelly, Vellano and Armstead before any free agent or draftee additions. We also have Chandler Jones occasionally playing inside. Even if Kelly isn't extended, $2M for 2014 isn't too much.

So, IMHO, it against this status quo that we must consider Wilfork.

Argument #1: Old DTs rarely, if ever, are instrumental pieces on Super Bowl winning teams.

Argument #2: Old DTs can be and have been instrumental pieces on Super Bowl winning teams; however, our best, old DT costs too much money.

 

[patsderoer]

Argument #2: Old DTs can be and have been instrumental pieces on Super Bowl winning teams;

Wonder how many of those were coming back from an Achilles.