Are Patriots Giving Butler away for a 2nd Round Pick?

[RayClay]

That was the discussion and consensus on the NFL network round table.

My question. Why would New England give up their leverage where they'd get a 1st round pick for any team who signed him? Why would they take LESS?

Makes no sense whatsoever. You tell me, a 2nd round pick or a year with Butler (worst case scenario) and even two years if you want to franchise him.

Butler is worth a 1st round pick. And the Pats have the leverage to get that compensation for him. Can't imagine Bill Belichick being that nice to anyone, pals or not with SP.

Is he worth a first round pick to the other team though? Not plus a top contract, I'm guessing.

 

[RayClay]

WTF was the point of sticking a first round tender on him if they intend to give him away for a second? To me, that seems nonsensical and flies in the face of Belichick's do what's best for the team mantra.

You've never bought anything on sale? If no one buys at a price, you negotiate. What would force other teams to give a 1st and a huge contract if they think that price is too high?

 

[RayClay]

As usual, people want to wish away the actual situation. They were negotiating for a while. Negotiations have broken down. It's very unlikely the Pats will satisfy Butlers agent and also unlikely Butler will willingly play for his contract. His agent isn't smart enough to do some sort of bridge deal and the Pats have all the leverage, so they will likely get what they can for a disgruntled employee.

 

[IllegalContact]

Gilmore did not cost the pats any picks

just sayin'

or was this all about taking the best corner off the FA market to create a bigger market for butler, therefore getting a higher pick for him

I mean if Ryan was worth 10M........

 

[Kontradiction]

I sincerely hope not. I'd rather get another year out of Butler then trade him this year for a second rounder.

 

[ausbacker]

You've never bought anything on sale? If no one buys at a price, you negotiate. What would force other teams to give a 1st and a huge contract if they think that price is too high?

Except the Patriots hold all the cards and don't have to trade Butler. In fact, Butler is the only one who truly loses out by not signing his RFA tender, holding out etc. Why his agent can't see this is beyond my understanding.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Here's my theory if the Butler deal happens. The Saints gave the Patriots their fourth rounder in the Cooks deal. The Patriots need to unload that pick due the Deflateate penalty...it's complicated, but essentially they would lose that pick and restore their own fourth round pick, which is later in the round. So that pick is almost certain to be traded since it is more valuable to any team than the Patriots, and there is more value in trading it than keeping it. I suspect the Patriots will trade back that pick to the Saints as part of the deal because it only made sense for them to get it knowing they would trade it, and it is acting as a placeholder. I think the Patriots would trade Butler along with restoring the Saints with their fourth round pick, and the Patriots will probably get a third round pick back from the Saints (not the one they traded...the Saints higher third round pick) along with a fifth...this is another logical Deflategate maneuver because an early fifth round pick essentially restores their late fourth round pick, which was stripped/stolen by Ginger. So there you have it, Butler and a restored fourth for the Saints.

NE does not own the pick they got from the Saints, the NFL does. When the trade was made the #118 went into the NFL lockbox and the #132 was taken out of the lockbox and returned to NE. So NE cannot trade the #118 to NO nor to anyone else. The only way NE could trade the #118 to anyone is to swing some deal to get a pick earlier in the 4th round than #118. Then that new pick would go into the lockbox and the #118 would be returned to NE.

 

[Simpelton]

Which is why the trade that did execute was one both sides could live with even if Butler could never be included. But that doesn't mean there's no second half coming if Butler and NO reach mutually-acceptable terms.

So the best evidence for this theory is the fact that there's no evidence against it?

Yep sounds like yet another whackadoodle mediot conspiracy theory. I guess we'll see.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Except the Patriots hold all the cards and don't have to trade Butler. In fact, Butler is the only one who truly loses out by not signing his RFA tender, holding out etc. Why his agent can't see this is beyond my understanding.

The Patriots do not "hold all the cards". Specifically, they don't hold any cards on what other teams are willing to pay. NE can scream to the wind all it wants that a team has to give up its original 1st for Butler, but none of that screaming can force any other team to do anything. If no one will pay NE's price NE has two choices: keep the player, or -- if NE does in fact want picks for the player -- negotiate with another team.

As for Butler, he has done nothing wrong whatsoever by not signing the tender. First, why the hell on earth should he sign the tender even a second before the deadline (21 April) for other teams to make offers?? Second, the team can do nothing to him as long as he signs it before 15 June (after 15 June the team can unilaterally reduce the tender amount from $3.9mil to 110% of previous salary). Finally, he's given no reason to expect that he'll hold out. In fact, his camp has already leaked that if worse comes to worse he'll sign the tender and play out the season.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

So the best evidence for this theory is the fact that there's no evidence against it?

The best evidence for it is the widespread reports before the Cooks trade that Butler was going to be part of the trade.

 

[maineman209]

Best case scenario:
- After having shopped himself around, Butler comes back with informal offers in hand that demonstrate his market value and agrees to a similar contract extension with the Pats.

Unlikely scenario:
- A team submits a formal offer sheet that exceeds what the Pats are willing to pay and they give up their 2017 1st rounder.

Second best scenario:
- The informal contract offers that Butler comes back with exceed what the Pats are willing to pay, so they enter into an agreement with another team to trade Butler to them for something less than their 2017 1st round pick.

Worst case scenario:
- The Pats play hardball and insist on following the formal offer-sheet/1st round pick process. If no team agrees to that, the Pats would effectively be attempting to force Butler to:
1) agree to their terms, acceptable to him or not
2) play 2017 for $3.91M (and hope he doesn't get hurt)
3) sit out until Wk-10 (or go through all of this all over again in 2018)

 

[maineman209]

Best case scenario:
- After having shopped himself around, Butler comes back with informal offers in hand that demonstrate his market value and agrees to a similar contract extension with the Pats.

Unlikely scenario:
- A team submits a formal offer sheet that exceeds what the Pats are willing to pay and they give up their 2017 1st rounder.

Second best scenario:
- The informal contract offers that Butler comes back with exceed what the Pats are willing to pay, so they enter into an agreement with another team to trade Butler to them for something less than their 2017 1st round pick.

Worst case scenario:
- The Pats play hardball and insist on following the formal offer-sheet/1st round pick process. If no team agrees to that, the Pats would effectively be attempting to force Butler to:
1) agree to their terms, acceptable to him or not
2) play 2017 for $3.91M (and hope he doesn't get hurt)
3) sit out until Wk-10 (or go through all of this all over again in 2018)

One corollary to my "Second best scenario" above ...

That can happen anytime, even after the deadline for formal offer sheets (April 21st), and even after June 15th, etc.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

One corollary to my "Second best scenario" above ...

That can happen anytime, even after the deadline for formal offer sheets (April 21st), and even after June 15th, etc.

Well except that if it happens much after 21 April it obviously can't involve 2017 draft picks.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

NE does not own the pick they got from the Saints, the NFL does. When the trade was made the #118 went into the NFL lockbox and the #132 was taken out of the lockbox and returned to NE. So NE cannot trade the #118 to NO nor to anyone else. The only way NE could trade the #118 to anyone is to swing some deal to get a pick earlier in the 4th round than #118. Then that new pick would go into the lockbox and the #118 would be returned to NE.

I don't think that's the case. My understanding is that fourth round - 118- Patriots pick is free to trade until they are on the clock holding it, or at least until draft day. As long as they keep their original pick to forfeitl, they should be able to trade it. Admittedly, Volin was the source of this, and he isn't the most trusted authority. There was a thread about their options, but Incant find it now. It would make no sense for the Patriots to get the pick otherwise. They could have asked for a fourth round pick in 2018. If what you saying is true, they are just throwing away value and making their D-Gate penalties even worse by their own choice.

Otherwise, they would have been better off trading for the Saints fifth round pick and, say, a seventh next year, just to avoid wasting 20 draft spots for no reason.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I don't think that's the case. My understanding is that fourth round - 118- Patriots pick is free to trade until they are on the clock holding it, or at least until draft day. As long as they keep their original pick to forfeitl, they should be able to trade it. Admittedly, Volin was the source of this, and he isn't the most trusted authority. There was a thread about their options, but Incant find it now. It would make no sense for the Patriots to get the pick otherwise. They could have asked for a fourth round pick in 2018. If what you saying is true, they are just throwing away value and making their D-Gate penalties even worse by their own choice.

Volin has been contradicted on this by others, including Reiss.

Otherwise, they would have been better off trading for the Saints fifth round pick and, say, a seventh next year, just to avoid wasting 20 draft spots for no reason.

No, they wouldn't have been because it got them back the #132, which is better than the Saints 5th round pick.

Stop thinking about it as a trade that included the #118 pick. Think about it as a trade that included the #132.

By doing the trade they did, the Patriots in essence acquired the #132 overall.
If they traded for the NO 5th-rounder, that'd be something a bunch worse than the #132 overall. Even coupled with a 7th it's likely still worse than the #132 overall.

So why would you make a trade that got you something worse than the #132 when you could do a trade that did get you the #132?

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Volin has been contradicted on this by others, including Reiss.



No, they wouldn't have been because it got them back the #132, which is better than the Saints 5th round pick.

Stop thinking about it as a trade that included the #118 pick. Think about it as a trade that included the #132.

By doing the trade they did, the Patriots in essence acquired the #132 overall.
If they traded for the NO 5th-rounder, that'd be something a bunch worse than the #132 overall. Even coupled with a 7th it's likely still worse than the #132 overall.

So why would you make a trade that got you something worse than the #132 when you could do a trade that did get you the #132?

I was thinking if the Saints were willing to give up 118, they would be willing to give up the equivalent of 118 in other rounds. Or in other words, Patriots would have the choice of getting 132 or the equivalent of 118. Maybe sat that point the negotiations just get too cumbersome...I don't know.

I didn't know that Volin was disproven, but I'm not surprised.

 

[The Gr8est]

I don't think that's the case. My understanding is that fourth round - 118- Patriots pick is free to trade until they are on the clock holding it, or at least until draft day. As long as they keep their original pick to forfeitl, they should be able to trade it. Admittedly, Volin was the source of this, and he isn't the most trusted authority. There was a thread about their options, but Incant find it now. It would make no sense for the Patriots to get the pick otherwise. They could have asked for a fourth round pick in 2018. If what you saying is true, they are just throwing away value and making their D-Gate penalties even worse by their own choice.

Otherwise, they would have been better off trading for the Saints fifth round pick and, say, a seventh next year, just to avoid wasting 20 draft spots for no reason.

Maybe we should look at all the other NFL* imposed punishments, where they have prevented a team from obtaining a higher draft pick in the same round, for guidance.

 

[XLIX]

Well here is how it's going down. Butler has a agent who is an ambulance chaser as isn't competent to understand NFL contracts and the CBA.

BB realized there wasn't a deal to be made to Butler and started to move on by putting a first round tender on Butler.

THe talks for Cooks ensued and Butler was originally going to be part of the deal, but Butler hasn't signed the tender offer, There was an agreement for a trade in place not time to complete the deal, they proceeded with part 1 of the deal and now IF Butler's agent can work a deal with the Saints he will sign the tender and BB and Payton will complete the deal they have already agreed to.

BB has known Payton since their days with the Giants. If they had an agreement in place BB isn't going back on it. That is how you do business in the NFL if you screw people and go back on your word no one will deal with you in good faith.

Payton did not work for the Giants when Belichick was there. BB was long gone by the time Payton got to East Rutherford.

Their closest professional connection is a very tenuous one: They both worked for Parcells (although not at the same time). Belichick's history with Parcells is well known, and Payton spent a couple years on Parcells' staff in Dallas.

By all accounts they have a good working relationship and are friendly with each other, including practicing together. Whether or not that factors into any of this, who knows.....

 

[XLIX]

Except the Patriots hold all the cards and don't have to trade Butler. In fact, Butler is the only one who truly loses out by not signing his RFA tender, holding out etc. Why his agent can't see this is beyond my understanding.

I think his agent sees all of the above perfectly fine and is currently doing his best to get his client what he wants subject to the restrictions they have to deal with.

You do realize that Butler gains nothing by signing the tender at this moment in time (but loses a lot), Butler hasn't held out and word is that if no deal can be made, he won't hold out, right?

I reserve the right to change my mind if anything changes but right now, Butler (and his counsel) have handled the situation in a perfectly professional and wise manner.

 

[luuked]

Best case scenario:
- After having shopped himself around, Butler comes back with informal offers in hand that demonstrate his market value and agrees to a similar contract extension with the Pats.

Unlikely scenario:
- A team submits a formal offer sheet that exceeds what the Pats are willing to pay and they give up their 2017 1st rounder.

Second best scenario:
- The informal contract offers that Butler comes back with exceed what the Pats are willing to pay, so they enter into an agreement with another team to trade Butler to them for something less than their 2017 1st round pick.

Worst case scenario:
- The Pats play hardball and insist on following the formal offer-sheet/1st round pick process. If no team agrees to that, the Pats would effectively be attempting to force Butler to:
1) agree to their terms, acceptable to him or not
2) play 2017 for $3.91M (and hope he doesn't get hurt)
3) sit out until Wk-10 (or go through all of this all over again in 2018)

Best case scenario for the Pats is that Butler comes back and accepts an extremely team friendly 2-3 year deal that gives him another shot at FA while still in his prime.

Thats the only scenario I see for Butler being here beyond 2017. But it is obviously incredibly unlikely.