Butler visiting Saints

[ATippett56]

That's all true. And completely irrelevant. If Belichick wants draft picks from New Orleans in return for Butler he will have to negotiate for them. Because New Orleans isn't giving Butler an offer.

Bill Belichick did not cave into Logan Mankins. As a matter of fact, Logan Mankins earned chump change in his 6th NFL Season.

www.spotrac.com/nfl/tampa-bay-buccaneers/logan-mankins-4593/cash-earnings/

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Bill Belichick did not cave into Logan Mankins.

Yes, and? I noted your alleged point many messages ago. The problem is that it's NO that needs to cave, not Butler.

Let's go through this step by step.

First, let's start with the assumption (which may or may not be true) that Belichick wants draft choice(s) from NO for Butler.

Belichick says "sign Butler to an offer. We won't match and you can have him and we'll take your #11."
New Orleans says "Nope."
However, Belichick still wants draft choices from NO for Butler.

Now, what exactly do you propose happens next? Be specific.

 

[ATippett56]

Yes, and? I noted your alleged point many messages ago. The problem is that it's NO that needs to cave, not Butler.

Let's go through this step by step.

First, let's start with the assumption (which may or may not be true) that Belichick wants draft choice(s) from NO for Butler.

Belichick says "sign Butler to an offer. We won't match and you can have him and we'll take your #11."
New Orleans says "Nope."
However, Belichick still wants draft choices from NO for Butler.

Now, what exactly do you propose happens next? Be specific.

How do you know what Bill Belichick considers fair value for Butler let alone Garoppolo? You want Bill Belichick taken to the cleaners.

 

[ATippett56]

Yes, and? I noted your alleged point many messages ago. The problem is that it's NO that needs to cave, not Butler.

Let's go through this step by step.

First, let's start with the assumption (which may or may not be true) that Belichick wants draft choice(s) from NO for Butler.

Belichick says "sign Butler to an offer. We won't match and you can have him and we'll take your #11."
New Orleans says "Nope."
However, Belichick still wants draft choices from NO for Butler.

Now, what exactly do you propose happens next? Be specific.

You sure want to run Butler out of town when the New England Patriots can have Butler on the roster for the 2017 NFL Season whether Butler likes it or not. Suck it up son. By the way, the New England Patriots can slap the franchise tag on Butler for the 2018 NFL Season, salary cap space permitting, and whole process can be repeated once again.

 

[XLIX]

Bill Belichick did not cave into Logan Mankins. As a matter of fact, Logan Mankins earned chump change in his 6th NFL Season.

www.spotrac.com/nfl/tampa-bay-buccaneers/logan-mankins-4593/cash-earnings/

You harping on Logan Mankins as if that situation has any relevance here is ridiculous. That was an entirely different time, a different position, a different CBA, and the unique situation that his 6th year was the so-called "uncapped" season where even players with 5 accrued years were still subject to being RFA's.

Not only that, but IMHO Mankins did himself no favors by holding out whereas Butler's camp has already leaked word that if it comes to it, he won't be doing so.

 

[XLIX]

You sure want to run Butler out of town when the New England Patriots can have Butler on the roster for the 2017 NFL Season whether Butler likes it or not. Suck it up son. By the way, the New England Patriots can slap the franchise tag on Butler for the 2018 NFL Season, salary cap space permitting, and whole process can be repeated once again.

OK, cool..... I'll put you in the list of people content to let Jimmy Garoppolo go for absolutely nothing in return except a 3rd round compensatory in order to keep Butler here for 1 year at around $15 million.

 

[ATippett56]

Yes, and? I noted your alleged point many messages ago. The problem is that it's NO that needs to cave, not Butler.

Let's go through this step by step.

First, let's start with the assumption (which may or may not be true) that Belichick wants draft choice(s) from NO for Butler.

Belichick says "sign Butler to an offer. We won't match and you can have him and we'll take your #11."
New Orleans says "Nope."
However, Belichick still wants draft choices from NO for Butler.

Now, what exactly do you propose happens next? Be specific.

The price tag just went up on Malcolm Butler:

www.ninersnation.com/2017/3/11/14895244/cb-sidney-jones-achilles-injury-pro-day-workout

 

[QuantumMechanic]

How do you know what Bill Belichick considers fair value for Butler let alone Garoppolo? You want Bill Belichick taken to the cleaners.

Have you ever seen the word "assumption" before? Go back and reread what you quoted. Also, given all the reports in the aftermath of the Cooks trade it's pretty clear that Belichick wanted Butler in the trade and that if he had been he'd have taken the place of the #32 NE traded.

 

[Marqui]

Also, given all the reports in the aftermath of the Cooks trade it's pretty clear that Belichick wanted Butler in the trade and that if he had been he'd have taken the place of the #32 NE traded.

This is clearly true and will happen if Butler and NO agree on a contract. I'm desperately hoping those negation will fall apart and Butler is forced to stay here at least 1 more year.

 

[HawaiianPatsfan]

Has anyone thought of this trade scenario?

I have a hard time seeing NO actually making a offer under the RFA guidelines and giving up their 11th pick.

With that being said, I think trading the 32nd pick is much more likely. However, a part of me isnt content with getting that pick back, id want a little more, even if its only upside.

I think a trade that could be interesting would be...

Butler and Patrick Chung, for 32 and Kenny Vaccaro

Ive always liked Kenny Vaccaro and think he would fit in and do amazing on this team, despite losing Butler. Vaccaro has had an up and down career in NO, but I think some of that has been due to their disaster situation on D. He's a very versatile player, and I believe, if used properly and surrounded by good talent, a top 5 SS in the league. He's on his last year (5th) of his rookie deal, and is owed about the same amount as Chung is. With the top SS's in the league averaging around 5-8 million a season, the likelyhood of us being being able to sign him long term, along with taking into consideration the talent he could add to this defense, seem to me like a better way to improve the secondary long term, then to pay a borderline #1/#2 CB (Butler) top dollar money. We could then take the 32nd pick, and draft a CB in this draft and have a borderline elite secondary with great potential locked up for the next 4-5 years, all of whom would be essentially in their primes.

@manxman2601 Im pretty sure you liked Kenny Vaccaro at one point, what do you think about this?

Of course, this is if NO is willing to consider the trade. Remember, NO is still in somewhat of a bad place in terms of cap space, and Chung has a relatively team friendly deal next season (2018) of about 3 million. This could be a way from then to retain some talent, and help with their cap issues. Chung and Vaccaro have pretty much flipped back and forth good seasons for the past 3 years.

I might even be willing to throw in a conditional pick like a 5th if he's on the roster in 18, or even a 4th if he's on the roster in 18 and meets certain performance stats this year.

A man can dream right...

 

[Mack Herron]

 

[manxman2601]

Has anyone thought of this trade scenario?

I have a hard time seeing NO actually making a offer under the RFA guidelines and giving up their 11th pick.

With that being said, I think trading the 32nd pick is much more likely. However, a part of me isnt content with getting that pick back, id want a little more, even if its only upside.

I think a trade that could be interesting would be...

Butler and Patrick Chung, for 32 and Kenny Vaccaro

Ive always liked Kenny Vaccaro and think he would fit in and do amazing on this team, despite losing Butler. Vaccaro has had an up and down career in NO, but I think some of that has been due to their disaster situation on D. He's a very versatile player, and I believe, if used properly and surrounded by good talent, a top 5 SS in the league. He's on his last year (5th) of his rookie deal, and is owed about the same amount as Chung is. With the top SS's in the league averaging around 5-8 million a season, the likelyhood of us being being able to sign him long term, along with taking into consideration the talent he could add to this defense, seem to me like a better way to improve the secondary long term, then to pay a borderline #1/#2 CB (Butler) top dollar money. We could then take the 32nd pick, and draft a CB in this draft and have a borderline elite secondary with great potential locked up for the next 4-5 years, all of whom would be essentially in their primes.

@manxman2601 Im pretty sure you liked Kenny Vaccaro at one point, what do you think about this?

Of course, this is if NO is willing to consider the trade. Remember, NO is still in somewhat of a bad place in terms of cap space, and Chung has a relatively team friendly deal next season (2018) of about 3 million. This could be a way from then to retain some talent, and help with their cap issues. Chung and Vaccaro have pretty much flipped back and forth good seasons for the past 3 years.

I might even be willing to throw in a conditional pick like a 5th if he's on the roster in 18, or even a 4th if he's on the roster in 18 and meets certain performance stats this year.

A man can dream right...

Actually I wasn't overly enthused by Vaccaro particularly, it must have been someone else. Grid or Mayo perhaps?

Personally, if I was BB I wouldn't trade Butler. If NO make an offer I'm not prepared to match then fine, I'd happily take their 11 but I'd also be very happy to pair Butler and Gilmore backed up by Rowe. Creative trade idea though.

 

[HawaiianPatsfan]

Actually I wasn't overly enthused by Vaccaro particularly, it must have been someone else. Grid or Mayo perhaps?

Personally, if I was BB I wouldn't trade Butler. If NO make an offer I'm not prepared to match then fine, I'd happily take their 11 but I'd also be very happy to pair Butler and Gilmore backed up by Rowe. Creative trade idea though.

I love Butler, I really do. I would like him on this team for a long time. However, after putting a lot of thought into it, I just don't think its the best investment of money considering what he's looking to make, 12+ a season. Im thinking long term, both Rowe and Butler would be FA's in 18, and if we don't trade JAG, then the Franchise tag is a serious consideration for JAG in 18, which almost certainly would mean we would lose Butler. If we lost Butler, we might be forced to overpay Rowe, or be in a bad place for the 2018 season. Despite getting a 3rd comp for Butler if he left, it wouldn't come until 19, a could leave us with a gaping hole in 2018. I think it would be better to have a rookie CB this year while rowe is guaranteed on the team, the to have one when he possibly might not be. I think taking all things into consideration, taking the trade and getting a good CB in this years deep CB class and having him on a cheap 5 year contract, might just be the best long term option, despite how much it would suck to lose Butler.

 

[manxman2601]

I love Butler, I really do. I would like him on this team for a long time. However, after putting a lot of thought into it, I just don't think its the best investment of money considering what he's looking to make, 12+ a season. Im thinking long term, both Rowe and Butler would be FA's in 18, and if we don't trade JAG, then the Franchise tag is a serious consideration for JAG in 18, which almost certainly would mean we would lose Butler. If we lost Butler, we might be forced to overpay Rowe, or be in a bad place for the 2018 season. Despite getting a 3rd comp for Butler if he left, it wouldn't come until 19, a could leave us with a gaping hole in 2018. I think it would be better to have a rookie CB this year while rowe is guaranteed on the team, the to have one when he possibly might not be. I think taking all things into consideration, taking the trade and getting a good CB in this years deep CB class and having him on a cheap 5 year contract, might just be the best long term option, despite how much it would suck to lose Butler.

Thing is, I think you'll still be able to get starter potential CBs in the 3rd round in this draft. Kevin King, Akhello Witherspoon and Howard Wilson are still being considered as 3rd rounders for now. All are good CBs with longer term starter potential. And of course, they could always draft one next year. Personally, considering the way the roster is currently constructed, it's a bit of an all in year and I'd rather not weaken it given the choice. It's why I've come around to being fine if we don't trade Jimmy G.

 

[RobertWeathers]

No way they can offer a deal like that right now. They only have about $16 million in cap space.

Unless the cut players that's my take as well.

 

[borg]

594 posts now in the "Butler Visiting Saints" thread and still so many choose to ignore the reality...This Cake is Already Baked.
It's not as if the media hasn't laid out a "connect the dots" map with timelines included.
Then there's the delusional musings by some insisting Butler's real worth is so much more than Cooks. They ignore the reality that many NFL teams were jockeying for Cooks this offseason....but Butler...not so much. They ignore the reality that Cooks is contractually controlled for two years...Butler....just one.
Fans will be fans....and some wait with bated breath for Max Kellerman's next utterance.

 

[manxman2601]

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Whoa... how could the Saints possibly be able to give Butler the contract he's worth with that little cap space?

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Whoa... how could the Saints possibly be able to give Butler the contract he's worth with that little cap space?

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Probably makes better sense to keep our #32, right?