Amendola or Browner for $5m per year

[Biffins]

If you had $15m to spend on a 3 yr deal for a player, would you give it to Amendola or Browner.

Belichick released Browner who was signed up for a $5m ish deal and restructured to sign-up Amendola for a $5m (with incentives) deal.

I am not sure what the capital allocation process is within the Patriots top brass, but I don't have to think twice about who adds more value, was more valuable last year, and is likely to be more valuable to the team in 2015-2016.

I am really confused by some of this oblique decision making.

 

[Ivan]

The Patriots approached both players about restructuring. One wanted to stay and agreed, the other didn't and left. End of story

 

[jmt57]

I don't believe you can look at it in a vacuum like that.

Releasing Amendola would have cost the Patriots $3,600,000 against the cap. Granted, that could be spread out over two seasons, but that is what the total would be.

Releasing Browner did not cost the Patriots any dead money at all.

There is also discussion in another thread in terms of how Browner would (or would not) potentially fit in with New England's 2015 defensive scheme (i.e., without Darrelle Revis). Another consideration is how Amendola off-loads much of the wear and tear on Julian Edelman (e.g., in the return game) and also offers a plug-and-play replacement if/when an inevitable injury occurs.


Just a few things to consider, in addition to the salary.

 

[EagleT]

Not that simple. The cap implications of each decision make it more complicated - releasing Amendola now results in a higher cap hit than letting Browner walk (which I think comes with a 2016 comp draft pick). And scheme wise, Amendola is a good fit with NE's precision short passing offense that relies on quickness in short spaces, sharp routes and excellent option instincts that synch with the HOF QB. As opposed to Browner, who is more of a fit as a physical press man coverage corner complement to a #1 man corner like Revis, and is less valuable when not paired with a #1 in a man press scheme. So, cap implications and scheme fit make it more complicated than just comparing the two contracts as if they're apples to apples.

 

[SyN65]

Neither. I might be in the minority but Browner just isn't that good. No idea why he gets a pass for committing so many penalties. As for Amendola, I'd love to keep him but not for 5 mil. (thankfully he restructured)

 

[Sicilian]

Also, if I'm not mistaken, Amendola's contract CAN get up to 3/15, but could be as low as 3/12.5. Meanwhile, Browner is 3/18. So really the question is Amendola at 4.5 per year or Browner at 6.

 

[chasa]

I am really confused by some of this oblique decision making.

That must be why you are not the GM of a team that just won their 4th superbowl, in 6 attempts, in 15 years.

 

[IllegalContact]

maybe you meant 'obtuse'?

 

[I.M. Fletcher]

Not to mention, browner will return a 4th round comp pick. Small detail, but still important.

 

[cclocke]

The answer: Neither

However, the Pats gave Browner a very flexible contract with no signing bonus, meaning there is absolutely no cap hit when cut. So that's what they did.

Amendola on the other hand is much more difficult. The question is, would you rather take a cap hit of $5 mill with him, or $3.6 mill without him. I'd prefer to keep him, as the Pats did. I am very happy with how they have handled these two over the past few days.

 

[Fixit]

maybe you meant 'obtuse'?

 

[Luxusdk]

Not to mention, browner will return a 4th round comp pick. Small detail, but still important.

No because he where released and not FA..

 

[cclocke]

No because he where released and not FA..

I'm not sure if that's correct. He was not released, his option was just not picked up. I believe there is a difference.

 

[I.M. Fletcher]

I'm not sure if that's correct. He was not released, his option was just not picked up. I believe there is a difference.

Correct. Browner is worth a pick due to contract language.

 

[Ring 6]

If you had $15m to spend on a 3 yr deal for a player, would you give it to Amendola or Browner.

Belichick released Browner who was signed up for a $5m ish deal and restructured to sign-up Amendola for a $5m (with incentives) deal.

I am not sure what the capital allocation process is within the Patriots top brass, but I don't have to think twice about who adds more value, was more valuable last year, and is likely to be more valuable to the team in 2015-2016.

I am really confused by some of this oblique decision making.

I think you mean translucent because from your side of the glass the facts are very fuzzy.

 

[Luxusdk]

I'm not sure if that's correct. He was not released, his option was just not picked up. I believe there is a difference.

If thats the case Patriots should get 3th from Revis aswell? They didnt pick up he's option.

 

[cclocke]

Correct. Browner is worth a pick due to contract language.

With Revis, Browner, and potentially Wilfork, might be a nice bundle of comp picks headed our way next year. Depending on the amount of signings we make.

 

[cclocke]

If thats the case Patriots should get 3th from Revis aswell? They didnt pick up he's option.

Correct, we will get a comp pick for him as well, as long as we lose more free agents than we sign. You can only get as many comp picks as net free agents signed/lost. If we sign more than we lose, we won't get any. If we lose one more than we sign, we get one comp, which would be Revis, based on his high salary. If we lose two more than we sign, we would get two comp picks, and so on.

 

[Luxusdk]

Not 100% into those rules, but i doubt numbers of total signings is the rule, but more the amount of dollars and value... those 2-3 camp bodys you sign aint removeing a revis 3th etc.

 

[Marinlik]

It's far from that simple. With Revis leaving Browner won't be that good of a fit anymore. Amendola's skills on the other hand are still a perfect fit for what our offense is trying to do.