Am I the only one who thinks they trade Gronk

[AvocadoIceCream]

during the offseason?

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

You are the only one who thinks it, starts a thread about it, and provides no reasoning at all. There are probably a few others who also think they will trade Gronk in the offseason, albeit not many people who have watched the Patriots play a game since 2010.

 

[AvocadoIceCream]

no need to be so thin skinned, bro

 

[Jangles]

I think not

But is it just me or does something still seem off with Edelman? Nothing you could tell from looking at the box score, just....something

 

[AvocadoIceCream]

I think not

But is it just me or does something still seem off with Edelman? Nothing you could tell from looking at the box score, just....something

It's not just you.

 

[JayNM]

Not to be rude, but that's kind of a lame OP for sure. You put a very unlikely scenario and don't even try to put on the screen the reasoning? This's almost span-like

 

[AvocadoIceCream]

Not to be rude, but that's kind of a lame OP for sure. You put a very unlikely scenario and don't even try to put on the screen the reasoning? This's almost span-like

It's just a freaking hunch, dude. I'm not saying it's a for sure thing. Just seems like something they'd do.

Jesus the sensitivity around here.

 

[supafly]

I can't think of any reason whatsoever why Belichick would trade our top receiving threat, who also happens to be the best blocking TE in the entire league.

To take it one step further, why would Belichick have put up with the expensive part of Gronk's contract, only to decide to trade him when things become more reasonable and beneficial to the team?

Add in the fact that they'll have about 60+ million dollars in cap space, have once again found flexibility in the 2 TE sets, and currently have Gronk leading the entire league with a 22 ypc average, and this scenario seems to be a bit far fetched (IMO).

 

[AvocadoIceCream]

Yeah, he's never done anything shocking before, lol

How long do you think Gronk can play given the ridiculous physical nature of his game?

I doubt he'll play much further past 30. You think theyd turn down a 1st rounder?

 

[supafly]

I doubt he'll play much further past 30. You think theyd turn down a 1st rounder?

He's currently 27 years old, in a financial situation which is beneficial to the team with cap hits of 6.6m for 2016 and 7m for 2017, and is our top weapon to pair with #12. Hell, he's arguably the NFL's top offensive weapon outside of the QB position.

With the blocking and receiving threats, he allows the team to avoid substitutions by staying in the hurry up. That's huge in this system. He's probably the guy who many would have as one of the least tradeable players on the team, at least for the immediate future (through spring 2018).

Out of any player on the team, why would you pick Rob Gronkowski? No one's saying that your opinion isn't worth considering, or that Belichick may/may not choose to trade a player in surprise fashion, but you haven't provided much reasoning for your thoughts, that's all.

 

[Jangles]

He's currently 27 years old, in a financial situation which is beneficial to the team with cap hits of 6.6m for 2016 and 7m for 2017, and is our top weapon to pair with #12. Hell, he's arguably the NFL's top offensive weapon outside of the QB position.

With the blocking and receiving threats, he allows the team to avoid substitutions by staying in the hurry up. That's huge in this system. He's probably the guy who many would have as one of the least tradeable players on the team, at least for the immediate future (through spring 2018).

Out of any player on the team, why would you pick Rob Gronkowski? No one's saying that your opinion isn't worth considering, or that Belichick may/may not choose to trade a player in surprise fashion, but you haven't provided much reasoning for your thoughts, that's all.

Not to speak for him but I'm sure his reasoning is based on cost, injury frequency and the emergence of Bennett in our system

 

[supafly]

Not to speak for him but I'm sure his reasoning is based on cost, injury frequency and the emergence of Bennett in our system

If so, cost is actually an area that just totally destroys his argument. Rob Gronkowski's cap hit is currently 6.6m dollars, and only climbs to 7m dollars for 2017. He's almost certainly one of the best values in the entire NFL right now.

As for the emergence of Bennett--he may not even be on the team next season, as he's a free agent. It's not like he was just recently extended or anything. I wouldn't think that this idea could even be entertained under these conditions.

I wouldn't see why Belichick would have put up with the first part of Gronk's contract when he remained injured, only to pick up the option and see the team friendly part to kick in, to then...trade him? At least not for the next couple of years or so.

 

[signbabybrady]

Maybe Bill will trade himself just to recoup that trade value they gave up back in 2000 just to acquire Bill.

 

[italian pat patriot]

99% no
1% yes

 

[luuked]

Off to the ignore list you go..

 

[patsbrasilpatriotas]

Am i the only one who thinks they will extend him?

 

[SHOWTIME15]

It's just a freaking hunch, dude. I'm not saying it's a for sure thing. Just seems like something they'd do.

Jesus the sensitivity around here.

people around here don't start threads on a "hunch."

 

[anditsgood]

No

And if you believe that could happen, i would accuse you of NOT thinking

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Yeah, he's never done anything shocking before, lol

How long do you think Gronk can play given the ridiculous physical nature of his game?

I doubt he'll play much further past 30. You think theyd turn down a 1st rounder?

Yes

 

[scout]

Need to get away? I've heard Southwest Airlines has cheap fares.