Backup Quarterback

[mgteich]

Some teams carry three quarterbacks, since the QB position is so important, and the backup could play a crucial role in the season. Our 199th pick was our 4th QB one year. The patriots usually carry 2 quarterbacks.

IMHO, it is critical to have a solid backup in case Brady is out for a game, or even a few games. The season should not be lost because we are not willing to use resources for our one backup roster spot.

In recent years, the patriots have been willing to use a 3rd round pick to find a backup (O'Donnell in 2008. Mallett in 2011). Such developmental quarterbacks are often the #3 for a year.

Perhaps Kafka is good enough to be the backup. If so, I would think that the patriots would have used a roster spot during the season for him, so that he could get some practice experience and so that other teams might not sign him.

BOTTOM LINE

1) I don't see Mallett going anywhere this year, unless Kafka has a great camp.

2) It is reasonable to carry both Kafka and Mallett, with the idea of trading one of them next year.

3) It is indeed possible that Josh really like Kafka and would be willing to lose Mallett even now.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

What ever low # Mallet's trade value is now, it will be worse next year, his contract year, barring a Cassel event.

 

[Patsrock]

What ever low # Mallet's trade value is now, it will be worse next year, his contract year, barring a Cassel event.

I disagree because teams next year can do a new deal with him and extend before trading for him. A team this year can't if they were to trade for him.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I disagree because (A) teams next year can do a new deal with him and extend before trading for him. (B) A team this year can't if they were to trade for him.

Could someone please explain to me how situation (A) is preferable to (B), when (B) means that you get a year to evaluate him at a salary of about $500K before making a massive commitment?

 

[IllegalContact]

mallett is the future......for the pats

 

[Patsrock]

Could someone please explain to me how situation (A) is preferable to (B), when (B) means that you get a year to evaluate him at a salary of about $500K before making a massive commitment?

I think teams are willing to give up more value for someone they can sign to a long term deal

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I disagree because teams next year can do a new deal with him and extend before trading for him. A team this year can't if they were to trade for him.

Maybe, but another thing to consider is it's doubtful next year's rookie QB class will be worse than this year's making him less of a commodity.

 

[ralmat55]

I think teams are willing to give up more value for someone they can sign to a long term deal

A team can sign him long-term after next season and have the right to franchise him after his 4th season. This not being able to sign him to an extension is a non-factor.

Mallett's trade value can only improve next off-season over this off-season if, heaven forbid, #12 gets hurt, and Mallett plays well in his absence. At which point, we'd have a full-blown QB controversy around here given Brady's age.

To me, even if it's not in the best long-term interest of the Patriots, Brady has earned the right to play out his extension without having such a controversy casting a shadow over things.

Trade Mallett this off-season with it's weak rookie QB class. Get some picks to close the 4-6 round draft hole the Pats currently have and a conditional high draft pick in 2014. Bring Brady Quinn in to challenge Mike Kafka and become the shadow roster starting QB once Kafka beats him out.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

You had me until you mentioned Brady Quinn