If it's either/or for Parsons and McLaurin, who would you go after?

[Huckleberry1]

Has nice assets but I cant help but feel her face kind mid

Yeah, I don’t get it, I think she’s fairly average.

 

[Real fan 02]

I highly doubt they will get both, and it's honestly not that likely they'll get either. But assuming that they decide they can only get one of them, who would you go for?

Scary Terry is 29.
Parsons is 26.

Both want a lot of $$$.

Both are negotiation tactics by thier agents wich is a smart move. As far as a culture fit Mclurin is that. As great as Micah is.. knocks on him is injury.

 

[rochrist]

That's because he wasn't.

Kind of the point.

 

[Froob]

terry. parsons has some…concerning history at penn state. rather steer clear.

 

[BTTA]

Richard Seymour, Vince Wilfork, and Christian Gonzalez is looking like a perennial All Pro. Plus a whole bunch of other players, like McCourty, Hightower, and Jones, who were great players.

I love Parsons, he was the guy I wanted in that draft, but this is a move you make when you are knocking on the door, and he’s the piece that puts you over the top, not when you are still building, and a couple years or more from truly contending for a Brady Trophy.

In terms of impact on a game, McCourty and Hightower might be considered equals of Parsons.
In other words, the odds on any of our #1 picks in the next 5 years becoming a player as good as Parsons are slim.
Agree with your last sentence, although the range of opinion on what the team needs to become a legit contender varies a lot. Add Parsons to the current defense, and suddenly every other player in the front seven is being met with lower quality blocking on passing downs, making every one of them more effective. With the current backfield, that could be quite good, very fast.
But we are all just guessing.

 

[Rob0729]

Look at the pressure numbers for the Cowboys with and without Parsons in the line up. They are top 3 with him and bottom three without him. Parsons is a difference maker that only a small handful of players in the league are. I would rather have him.

Plus, McLaurin is only a few year solution. Parsons could be a 5-7 year impact player.

Now the cost to get Parsons will be far, far higher than McLaurin. Parsons will require two first round picks and more. McLaurin will require a second round pick and more.

I don't see either getting traded. But even with the draft capital the Pats have to give up, I would still rather have Parsons.

 

[rochrist]

In terms of impact on a game, McCourty and Hightower might be considered equals of Parsons.
In other words, the odds on any of our #1 picks in the next 5 years becoming a player as good as Parsons are slim.
Agree with your last sentence, although the range of opinion on what the team needs to become a legit contender varies a lot. Add Parsons to the current defense, and suddenly every other player in the front seven is being met with lower quality blocking on passing downs, making every one of them more effective. With the current backfield, that could be quite good, very fast.
But we are all just guessing.

Neither McCourty nor Hightower were close to the equal of Parsons.

 

[Huckleberry1]

In terms of impact on a game, McCourty and Hightower might be considered equals of Parsons.
In other words, the odds on any of our #1 picks in the next 5 years becoming a player as good as Parsons are slim.
Agree with your last sentence, although the range of opinion on what the team needs to become a legit contender varies a lot. Add Parsons to the current defense, and suddenly every other player in the front seven is being met with lower quality blocking on passing downs, making every one of them more effective. With the current backfield, that could be quite good, very fast.
But we are all just guessing.

Sorry BTTA but after Brady Vince Wilfork is the most dominant player to ever wear a Patriots uniform. He took on double teams his entire career, still dominated, and I never saw him have a bad game until he tore his Achilles at the end of his career. McCourty and Hightower were great players, but they were never on the same level as the HOF caliber players, Seymour, Wilfork, Mankins. Harrison also belongs in the Hall, but played most of his career in S.D.

If they trade for Parsons and don’t overpay I’m fine with it. and if they don’t I’m fine with that. 95% of these ideas are pipe dreams. However Parsons just said that he wants to play for the Patriots, because they win rings. So I guess that Patriot stink everyone was worried about is now gone.

 

[Guts]

Sorry BTTA but after Brady Vince Wilfork is the most dominant player to ever wear a Patriots uniform. He took on double teams his entire career, still dominated, and I never saw him have a bad game until he tore his Achilles at the end of his career. McCourty and Hightower were great players, but they were never on the same level as the HOF caliber players, Seymour, Wilfork, Mankins. Harrison also belongs in the Hall, but played most of his career in S.D.

If they trade for Parsons and don’t overpay I’m fine with it. and if they don’t I’m fine with that. 95% of these ideas are pipe dreams. However Parsons just said that he wants to play for the Patriots, because they win rings. So I guess that Patriot stink everyone was worried about is now gone.

Are you just talking about defensive players?
Cause Gronk is probably below Brady in all time Patriots including the Hog

 

[Wozzy]

This question is ambiguous because you need to trade for and pay both players. What did you trade, how much did said player then get paid?

Parsons is the better player, he’ll presumably require a higher draft pick to acquire. He’s also young and in his prime.

Terry has less trade value, especially at his age. You’ll also sign him to a big money contract, but for fewer years… he’d be cheaper.

So sure…. you always take the generational pass rusher… if it were that simple.

The last question you have to ask, since we’re doing this, who can best help this team win?

IMO a Pro Bowl WR who costs less in every way, and starting Harold Landry who averages 11 sacks per season the last three years instead would be smarter.

Keep next year’s first round pick… I don’t see that happening with Jerry Jones.

 

[WhatJustHappened]

Neither.

 

[Wozzy]

Neither.

Terry for a 4th, I would.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Are you just talking about defensive players?
Cause Gronk is probably below Brady in all time Patriots including the Hog

No, I was talking about all Patriots. I can see a strong argument for Gronk being made, but imo Wilfork’s consistency, and the fact that he was double teamed throughout his career and still dominated gets him my vote. Until he injured his Achilles I never came away from any game thinking that he played a bad game, and I can’t say that for anyone else. Even Brady had bad games, but the GOAT is still the GOAT.

 

[Love The Drake]

Terry for a 4th, I would.

They wouldn’t.

 

[Wozzy]

They wouldn’t.

I don’t think so either, but you start there and eventually offer a 3rd, or a 4th and a player like Bourne. If they still won’t do it the cost is too rich.

 

[DoubleDeluxe]

I don’t think so either, but you start there and eventually offer a 3rd, or a 4th and a player like Bourne. If they still won’t do it the cost is too rich.

I read a 3rd would be the likely price. That said it ain't happening. If the Skin...Anders trade him, they are dumb beyond belief.

 

[Dec54]

I saw Jerry talking about the Parsons contract negotiations, he had a grin all over his face, I swear he thinks its a great joke, he loves all the attention. He must be murder to deal with.

 

[ScottishPatriot]

If you’re asking me, in an ideal world, which one I would like to have, it’s Micah and it’s not remotely close. It’s not a question of need; it’s a matter of quality and age.

However, that hypothetical scenario isn’t actually the question. The question is ‘who should we trade for?’ in real life, in the here and now, while we’re trying to build a viable playoff roster around this young QB.

So I voted ‘neither’. We cannot be giving up the kind of trade capital it would take to get either of these players (especially Micah). Our 1st rounder next year potentially secures a WR1 at what? A 6th of the money we’d be paying McLaurin?

Do we need a bit more help in the front 7? Sure. Not for $40m per year though, when we could be giving that to 3 players, beefing up the secondary and O line (for example) into the bargain.

IMO both players stay where they are. Micah the more likely to leave, but even if he does, he isn’t coming here. Bills, Bucs, or any other team that’s one or two players away would sign him. That’s not us.

 

[DC Patriots]

This is like asking if I would rather spend a night with Ana de Armas or Sydney Sweeney.

Agree 100%. Get them both. At the same time. And be prepared to spend a ton of money.

 

[TheRainMaker]

I voted neither. McLovin' is asking too much money. Signing him to that big contract would make absolutely no sense when Diggs has had the better career making less. They are only two years apart. Terry also isn't really a game changer.

Parsons would require too much capital and would have to be used correctly. He moved around in Dallas a lot finding favorable matchups to get his sacks. He's also coming off a serious injury.