No GRONK: people may say it doesn't matter, but it matters

[primetime]

Last year at this point in the season, their top targets were Gronk, an injured Edelman, an injured Amendola, James White, Brandon Bolden, Keshawn Martin (now out of the league), and Brandon LaFell. Their top running backs were the fearsome three-headed monster of James White, Brandon Bolden, and Steven Jackson. Their offensive line was riddled with injuries and folded like a wet paper bag in the face of pressure.

This year, they have a healthy Edelman, Martellus Bennett, Dion Lewis, Michael Floyd, James White, Chris Hogan, Malcolm Mitchell, and likely Amendola. All of these players, with the exception of Amendola and possibly Mitchell, are as healthy as they've been all year. Their running backs are LeGarrette Blount, Dion Lewis, and James White, none of whom have been injured or driven into the ground with heavy usage this season. The offensive line has been consistently one of the league's best this year and has stonewalled several of the best pass rushers in the game.

Would they be better with Gronk? No doubt. Are they nevertheless the most talented offense top-to-bottom in the playoffs? I'd say so. Anything can happen on any given Sunday, but even without Gronk they're deserved favorites.

 

[mikey m]

I'd say it matters in that this offense is certainly not as dynamic without him. It doesn't matter in that we are still the best and otherwise healthiest team. Let's go get #5!

 

[brdmaverick]

I absolutely love Gronkowski. He is an incredible talent, and I believe he is the best non-QB in the entire NFL over everyone, including a healthy JJ Watt, Antonio Brown, or Julio Jones. That said, it was very eye opening when I heard a Las Vegas oddsmaker explain the impact of losing Gronkowski on the point spread. Would you like to know how much the line is adjusted with him out? 1 point. And beyond that, the Patriots Super Bowl chances dropped about 2-3% when he went out. So yes, he is an incredible player and a big loss for the team, but the reality from people who truly understand football - where you have 22 players on the field - is that any position outside of quarterback is really not going to massively change a team's chances of winning games. Absolutely, there are situations where I think Gronkowski would have made the difference - SB46 being the most memorable and painful - but let's remember that even in that game, and in many games, the Patriots were certainly capable of winning. In addition, there have been plenty of games where even with a healthy Gronkowski, they offense has struggled.

Just curious, what do you think the Texans record would have been this season had JJ Watt remained healthy? I'm guessing 9-7. And what would the spread by on Saturday for this game with a healthy Watt? Maybe a difference of a point at most?

Good post because as great as Gronk is I do understand the counter argument.

After all, we all agree the Pats are GREAT with Gronk.

And there are many (including myself) who believe the Pats can still win without him.

So I suppose if the Pats do win the Super Bowl, those people who say 'it doesn't matter' will actually be right that his injury didn't matter in preventing the Pats from winning the SB.

Of course, they can still acknowledge that the road will be tougher, but at the end it may not have actually mattered at the end of the day.

 

[archstanton543]

Gronk is amazing and more importantly, Gronk and Brady are magic. Go back and watch last years AFCGC. Watch the Seattle game for that matter. Gronk, like Brady, is a once in a lifetime player (if your team is lucky!).

If the Pats can win this year without him, it will be a huge accomplishment. With him, I think they could win the Superbowl by 10+.

Tom Brady had won the vast majority of his Super Bowls without Gronk.

 

[luuked]

Precisely my point, plays where you KNOW Gronk would make have now become WILL the others make. 2 very different things although it won't matter much against Houston.

You and most others here are focusing way too much onto plays that go towards Gronk and ignore the maybe even more important occassions where him being double covered opens up space for other players.

Personally, I miss Gronk more as a blocker and chess piece to manipulate matchups than his receiving ability. And when I say blocker then I obviously mean that his amazing blocking gives the offense a lot of variability to run/change plays/be creative.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

What's the point of this ? Obviously he's a huge loss. But he's gone and, this season, not coming back. It's over. We have 53+ guys in the locker room that can still play a great game of football. Gronk's out. He's missed. The game stops for no-one. It sucks but we have a game on Saturday.

 

[mosslost]

I don't think anyone said having no gronk doesn't matter. Anyone who does is in the idiotic minority and should just be ignored.

this. My only point was the OP stating it would be a "monumental" achievement "to win this without Gronk" is a ridiculous comment. Tampa Bay won a Super Bowl for god sake. There are three football games that we have a better than decent shot ti win. Win or lose nothing is monumental regardless how it ends up. If we win it is just another nice championship, they didn't land on the moon or anything. We are the favorites is a field of 3 remaining teams. (three because we only care about whatever three we face) I basically expect them to win or be in the Super Bowl, but there is nothing remarkable about the result, win or lose, Gronk or not.

 

[mosslost]

I will call winning it this year "monumental" because it gives Brady and the Pats FIVE Super Bowl Rings. That I do consider monumental. But it has nothing to do with Gronk or no Gronk or this specific season being any more remarkable than another championship, if they are so fortunate to win it.

 

[Bill Lee]

Very true but the notion that he goes down but it's ok we go on is very insulting to someone who is already in the conversation for best TE ever. At the very least we are in a better position to succeed this time round but like i said monumental if this team pulls it off.

Do you think Gronk is at home (training 24x7, no doubt) feeling insulted because some people say his absence doesn't matter?

Personally, I think he'd be one of the first to say that the Pats can and will carry on without him.

This ain't fantasy football. It's about having the best 53 players. I might be biased, but I think the Pats have the best 53.

I don't think it'll be 'monumental' if the Pats win the SB without Gronk, it'll be about doing your job. It seems clear the staff knew they needed a plan in case Gronk went down. They made a strong move for Marty B and kept lots of TEs in play throughout pre-season and early part of the season. Given Gronk's injury history it was the only prudent thing to do.

 

[moejr]

TB won 3 SB's without Gronk. He can win another without him.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

It clearly matters, but if we run the ball, play d, and protect brady the way we have the last 2 months, nobody is beating us. This team is far more equipped for life without gronk than in 11, 12, or 13.

 

[deroc5050]

Last year at this point in the season, their top targets were Gronk, an injured Edelman, an injured Amendola, James White, Brandon Bolden, Keshawn Martin (now out of the league), and Brandon LaFell. Their top running backs were the fearsome three-headed monster of James White, Brandon Bolden, and Steven Jackson. Their offensive line was riddled with injuries and folded like a wet paper bag in the face of pressure.

This year, they have a healthy Edelman, Martellus Bennett, Dion Lewis, Michael Floyd, James White, Chris Hogan, Malcolm Mitchell, and likely Amendola. All of these players, with the exception of Amendola and possibly Mitchell, are as healthy as they've been all year. Their running backs are LeGarrette Blount, Dion Lewis, and James White, none of whom have been injured or driven into the ground with heavy usage this season. The offensive line has been consistently one of the league's best this year and has stonewalled several of the best pass rushers in the game.

Would they be better with Gronk? No doubt. Are they nevertheless the most talented offense top-to-bottom in the playoffs? I'd say so. Anything can happen on any given Sunday, but even without Gronk they're deserved favorites.

They may not be the most potent offense but they are definitely top 3. And they are a top defense. So the whole roster from top to bottom is the best in the league, including coaching of course.

The only thing that might give Pats fans some reservations about a Super Bowl win is the QB's they faced most of the year. Every QB since seattle has been below average. I am not talking about SOS, I am talking about strictly facing an elite QB. We haven't had to many to choose from.

 

[ErniesPinkStripes]

Anyone saying it doesn't matter is being ridiculous, but I have a feeling this team is equipped, prepared and determined to overcome the loss.

 

[RayClay]

Is it possible that the excellence/greatness that our QB shows devalues just how important #87 is? You see a lot of people in New England media and the football media in general say it simply doesn't matter as long as #12 is being #12 on gameday. That may be true to a certain extent but take away any number 1 receiver from their team and see how good they are in the playoffs.

That's why i say i can't see the Pats getting any better on Offense from here on out instead it will be more of a 'can we survive and make it over the line' sort of Offense without Gronk. What i mean by that is, having 87 on the field elevates this offense to the point where on 3rd and 16 you almost expect to pick up 25 yards let alone the 16 even against the toughest of defense. However when you don't have him 3rd and 16 becomes more of 'this will take an oustanding effort to make this' kind of play. That's what we will be missing and especially as the calibre of opposing Defenses and pressure rises.

Go ask the #12 in Green Bay how difficult it's going to be in Dallas to get out of a a sticky 3rd and long this weekend without Jordy Nelson. People are overlooking this because we haven't had Gronk for a while now and because #12 is superhuman and doesn't miss a beat we assume everything is ok. But look at the plays in the big moments that Gronk made in the post season when we had him out there. We are all hoping it will be Bennett that could make the type of play that Gronk made before half time against Seattle for the TD in the SB for example but at this stage it is just hope even though he has that ability in him.

I will never ever doubt the greatest QB ever to find a way but even Brady pulling off another Super Bowl run without the biggest game changer there is in the NFL will be nothing short of monumental in my opinion because every team needs their go to guy to reach the promise land.

Hey. We traded for Martellus Bennett, did you hear?

 

[AzorianPats]

Hey. We traded for Martellus Bennett, did you hear?

Bennett is no slouch, and I think Floyd can replace some of the big plays Gronk gave us.

Not having Gronk sucks, but this isn't 2013 where the offense lived and died thru him.

 

[patsfan-1982]

the pats have three outside WR's two slot WR's still have a 6.6 275lbs TE who had 7 TD's a 1100 yard rushing back and two playmaker pass catching backs...even with out Gronk this is the deepest offense Brady has ever had in the playoffs

 

[PatsFanSince74]

It matters.

 

[1960Pats]

I think we can all agree Gronk is an elite, game-changing talent. Catching, blocking, defenses key on him and free up other guys, etc. The man changes games. With him,losses become wins and close wins are blowouts.

Unlike years past I'd like to think they have enough talent on offense and defense to account for his production and ability to make plays when they are needed.

I think there will be a number of plays during the playoff run that fall into that "Gronk can make them can others" category.

They question is do players like Marty, Hogan, Floyd, Dion, Blount, JE, etc have what it takes to rise up and make a game changing play WHEN they need to be made.

That is the question.

I like every name on that list and it wouldn't surprise me if any of them came up big. One of the proven game-changers is missing too. That would be Danny Amendola, the guy some fans are looking to dump every off-season. He had a few HUGE plays during the 2014 SB run.

As for Gronk, this thread comes across as an excuse if the Pats lose the SB or a chance to prop them up if they win. Gronk is gone for the season and for all we know he could have made a costly fumble that cost them a game. It's well past the time to move on.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I like every name on that list and it wouldn't surprise me if any of them came up big. One of the proven game-changers is missing too. That would be Danny Amendola, the guy some fans are looking to dump every off-season. He had a few HUGE plays during the 2014 SB run.

As for Gronk, this thread comes across as an excuse if the Pats lose the SB or a chance to prop them up if they win. Gronk is gone for the season and for all we know he could have made a costly fumble that cost them a game. It's well past the time to move on.

DA absolutely needs to be added. Other than Brady and Malcolm, he might be the 3rd best clutch player on the team.

 

[1960Pats]

I wouldn't put much stock into Vegas point spreads & odds. They didn't alter them very much because they know people still love to bet the Pats. They set them to make money. They're not really meant to predict outcomes.

People like to bet the Pats because they've been shattering the lines more than any other team, and the next team isn't even close. The bookies (especially those around here) are getting killed on the Pats.