Boston Globe: "Patriots Need to Protect Mac Jones Before the Developmental Damage is Done"

[50-yard-line]

Both tight ends are making top dollars, like 4th after the big names. And both pre Pats looked good on the Titans and Chargers respectively. They get here and almost no targets to try to get them the ball in the red zone.

.

We've been through this - I went through EVERY starting TE in the league, salary and production. Every one. I know you saw it.

I'm not arguing with you on whether or not they're using them correctly -t o this point, they're obviously not.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

We've been through this - I went through EVERY starting TE in the league, salary and production. Every one. I know you saw it.

I'm not arguing with you on whether or not they're using them correctly -t o this point, they're obviously not.

Why are you pretending both tight ends are not highly paid. They are. That's how the Pats got them to sign right when FA started

 

[50-yard-line]

Why are you pretending both tight ends are not highly paid. They are. That's how the Pats got them to sign right when FA started

They're paid in the ballpark with Austin Hooper (his contract is a year older), and they're both better players.

They are tied for 4th, yes, and there's a wall of crap behind them other than guys on rookie deals, or a surprise breakout player (Waller, who did absolutely nothing previous to his re-signing). Both Henry and Smith would have gotten a similar deal elsewhere. I'd rather have them here. There's no Void Years involved in these contracts. The Pats aren't in cap hell over the next three years at all. They've got a ton of young players on the roster, and now have a middle class (guys 24-28) of veterans - Smith, Henry, Judon, Mills, Agholor, Bourne - which they were missing when all of their own worthy pieces got poached.

The problems right now are OL and rookie QB - Henry should have another 75 yards and 2 TDs, for example. You want to blame Josh, and I'm not even arguing the point with you. You've got two really good TEs. USE THEM.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

They're paid in the ballpark with Austin Hooper (his contract is a year older), and they're both better players.

They are tied for 4th, yes, and there's a wall of crap behind them other than guys on rookie deals, or a surprise breakout player (Waller, who did absolutely nothing previous to his re-signing). Both Henry and Smith would have gotten a similar deal elsewhere. I'd rather have them here. There's no Void Years involved in these contracts. The Pats aren't in cap hell over the next three years at all. They've got a ton of young players on the roster, and now have a middle class (guys 24-28) of veterans - Smith, Henry, Judon, Mills, Agholor, Bourne - which they were missing when all of their own worthy pieces got poached.

The problems right now are OL and rookie QB - Henry should have another 75 yards and 2 TDs, for example. You want to blame Josh, and I'm not even arguing the point with you. You've got two really good TEs. USE THEM.

I'd rather we have them too. But USE them. Almost no red zone targets is insane. The team really misses Chad O'Shea running the red zone. Team has been ineffective in red zone since O'Shea left after 2018

 

[DropKickFlutie]

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

They're paid in the ballpark with Austin Hooper (his contract is a year older), and they're both better players.

Austin Hooper sucks for that money. Last year I noted, specifically, how horrible that signing was. An absolute joke. This is like saying a few years ago, hey, Andy Dalton costs $25M…but hey, Sam Bradford cost $20M. I don’t care what Andy Dalton’s market value was based on him being one of few QBs up for a new contract and the subsequent pecking order. The question is: is this a good cost/value for the team, or was he a poor value due to an overinflated QB market at the time? And the answer was obviously, always, absolutely a poor value.

The Bengals were morons to pay Dalton that much. The Vikings were morons to pay Bradford that much. The Browns were morons to pay Hooper that much. The Patriots were morons to pay Henry and (especially) Smith that much. This is why the Patriots have so often walked away from deals on players overvalued by market circumstances. Basic supply and demand economics that Bill subscribed too.

They are tied for 4th, yes, and there's a wall of crap behind them other than guys on rookie deals, or a surprise breakout player (Waller, who did absolutely nothing previous to his re-signing). Both Henry and Smith would have gotten a similar deal elsewhere. I'd rather have them here.

Of course…they would have signed somewhere else for a similar amount, maybe a little less. That’s what market value is; that other team would have been the sucker team (slightly less of a sucker). Usually, the other teams are the desperate bad deal makers and the Patriots aren’t.

It seems you just keep coming back to same old rationalization, which pointing out the market value of Henry and Smith. Paying market value, when the market is an inefficient way to build a team, doesn’t mean you didn’t badly overpay. Using Austin Hooper as a benchmark seems like the exact reason you don’t make this deal. You could make the same argument about every bad free agent contract ever given out...that a team made a good move because they paid high end market value for a position of need. That type of transaction, of course, is the opposite of what Belichick used to do and widely rejected as a sound strategy.

 

[JMC00]

Also the WRs cannot get open so Mac has to hold onto the ball too long; the OL cannot protect him forever. The WR situation on the Patriots is a pretty dire.

Incorrect

 

[50-yard-line]

Austin Hooper sucks for that money. Last year I noted, specifically, how horrible that signing was. An absolute joke. This is like saying a few years ago, hey, Andy Dalton costs $25M…but hey, Sam Bradford cost $20M. I don’t care what Andy Dalton’s market value was based on him being one of few QBs up for a new contract and the subsequent pecking order. The question is: is this a good cost/value for the team, or was he a poor value due to an overinflated QB market at the time? And the answer was obviously, always, absolutely a poor value.

The Bengals were morons to pay Dalton that much. The Vikings were morons to pay Bradford that much. The Browns were morons to pay Hooper that much. The Patriots were morons to pay Henry and (especially) Smith that much. This is why the Patriots have so often walked away from deals on players overvalued by market circumstances. Basic supply and demand economics that Bill subscribed too.

Of course…they would have signed somewhere else for a similar amount, maybe a little less. That’s what market value is; that other team would have been the sucker team (slightly less of a sucker). Usually, the other teams are the desperate bad deal makers and the Patriots aren’t.

It seems you just keep coming back to same old rationalization, which pointing out the market value of Henry and Smith. Paying market value, when the market is an inefficient way to build a team, doesn’t mean you didn’t badly overpay. Using Austin Hooper as a benchmark seems like the exact reason you don’t make this deal. You could make the same argument about every bad free agent contract ever given out...that a team made a good move because they paid high end market value for a position of need. That type of transaction, of course, is the opposite of what Belichick used to do and widely rejected as a sound strategy.

I keep coming back to it because it's the truth of that matter - and I'd rather have them here than elsewhere. I like a two TE offense, particularly for a rookie QB (I just wish they'd use it). And yes, I think both are good for the Pats, because TE value was lagging and is only now catching up, and I also think that both Henry and Smith are much better than we've seen - I'd ratehr have them on the roster for the next three years than Kelce, and the only guys behind them I'd prefer are either on rookie deals...maybe...or Waller, who did nothing his first years in the league.

The Patriots were thick with money and had few veterans under 30. That is untenable in the NFL. Maybe they should have gone to different positions - Leonard Williams? Resign Thuney? - but the broken record complaining crowd is tiresome.

You salivate over Tampa - the just franchised Godwin for 18, gave Evans top of the market money a few years ago, gave David another big deal with void years, and paid Barrett a chuck of change. You can't have it both ways, but then, I don't know why I bother - you still think Tampa isn't loaded and would be a terrible or middling team except for superman.

As for "what Belichick used to do" is irrelevant, because the horses he built that strategy around are all long gone, including Brady, or are post-30.
The cupboard went bare, but gave us a helluva run from 14-18 in the process.

If the Pats had mortgaged the future to sign the players they got in FA, I'd be more leery, but they didn't and they've got money, and a ton of flexibility going forward.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

I keep coming back to it because it's the truth of that matter - and I'd rather have them here than elsewhere. I like a two TE offense, particularly for a rookie QB (I just wish they'd use it). And yes, I think both are good for the Pats, because TE value was lagging and is only now catching up, and I also think that both Henry and Smith are much better than we've seen - I'd ratehr have them on the roster for the next three years than Kelce, and the only guys behind them I'd prefer are either on rookie deals...maybe...or Waller, who did nothing his first years in the league.

The Patriots were thick with money and had few veterans under 30. That is untenable in the NFL. Maybe they should have gone to different positions - Leonard Williams? Resign Thuney? - but the broken record complaining crowd is tiresome.

You salivate over Tampa - the just franchised Godwin for 18, gave Evans top of the market money a few years ago, gave David another big deal with void years, and paid Barrett a chuck of change. You can't have it both ways, but then, I don't know why I bother - you still think Tampa isn't loaded and would be a terrible or middling team except for superman.

As for "what Belichick used to do" is irrelevant, because the horses he built that strategy around are all long gone, including Brady, or are post-30.
The cupboard went bare, but gave us a helluva run from 14-18 in the process.

If the Pats had mortgaged the future to sign the players they got in FA, I'd be more leery, but they didn't and they've got money, and a ton of flexibility going forward.

They aren't trying to use the TEs. No red zone targets

 

[50-yard-line]

They aren't trying to use the TEs. No red zone targets

It was the same with Harry last year. The guy has three red zone TDs. he made a good back-shoulder against Dallas with Brady, he blew away the Chiefs corner on the second, a corner fade, and he just manhandled Charger Chris Harris on the third, a high-pointer.

That high-point TD SHOULD have turned a corner in that offense last year - Harry against most CBs on a high-point pass is a mismatch. They didn't call that effing play again ALL YEAR.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

You salivate over Tampa - the just franchised Godwin for 18, gave Evans top of the market money a few years ago, gave David another big deal with void years, and paid Barrett a chuck of change. You can't have it both ways, but then, I don't know why I bother - you still think Tampa isn't loaded and would be a terrible or middling team except for superman.

You make huge assumptions that I “salivate over Tampa.” All offseason I said they should punt on Barrett, who plays an overpriced position and only adds value if the other guys up front dominate. I just commented on that signing again two days ago. On Godwin, I was very much on the fence because of all of their pass catching options and his numerous issues in 2020. David, if the production is still there, is a unique player who, along with White, allows the team get away with so many things, so that was a solid signing at a good value position.

I said Tampa would have been much better off passing on Barrett (and maybe Godwin) and trying to trade for an elite cornerback, since elite cornerbacks make a bigger impact than an edge rusher, cost a similar amount, and Tampa had a handful (before injuries) of good, not great, CBs who would improve sort of like Patriots CBs did with Gilmore out there.

When did I say Tampa is/isn’t loaded right now? They have a very solid roster…though they have flaws too. They weren’t as great as the perception last year, as KC played an F-game in the Super Bowl. What I’ve pointed out is that the perception the team was stacked only became a real thing after the postseason. They were considered a fringe contender, similar to the Patriots at the beginning of last season. That discussion is about the state of the team when Brady went there, and non-existent idea, hindsight that he went to the team that had a great chance to win and abandoned a team that was destined to crash and burn. Obviously, Tampa had a lot better drafts - and many lottery picks - for years, and they’re in a win-now cap mode, so they have a lot more results to show for it. None of that changes the Patriots poor approach to team building which is uncharacteristic of Bill.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Oline will get better. Mac Jones threw one of the best deep balls in college. So far he hasn’t been close, even when he’s had time. I’m gonna chalk it up to being a rookie, playcalling and protection. Hopefully that completion percentage improves. It can’t get worse. Still a lot to like about Mac and people just need to be reminded he is still just a rookie.

 

[FredFromDartmouth]

Incorrect

Explain

 

[Patriot Missile]

Also the WRs cannot get open so Mac has to hold onto the ball too long; the OL cannot protect him forever. The WR situation on the Patriots is a pretty dire.

Did anyone see the quick slant completion to Bourne in the 4th quarter? It was a simple enough play and something that should be practiced to perfection to make them back off the blitzes. One of the members of this board put it out there that Mac in the first 3 weeks has been blitzed more than Lawrence and Wilson combined. I found that to be an interesting stat, you would hope his recognition skills improve immensely from the opposing defenses.

 

[FredFromDartmouth]

Did anyone see the quick slant completion to Bourne in the 4th quarter? It was a simple enough play and something that should be practiced to perfection to make them back off the blitzes. One of the members of this board put it out there that Mac in the first 3 weeks has been blitzed more than Lawrence and Wilson combined. I found that to be an interesting stat, you would hope his recognition skills improve immensely from the opposing defenses.

Quick slants can be good, but if the D knows it is coming, they can blow up the WR. You would not want to try that against, say, Cam Chancellor, ouch. Maybe if you keep the pass low it would be OK.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Quick slants can be good, but if the D knows it is coming, they can blow up the WR. You would not want to try that against, say, Cam Chancellor, ouch. Maybe if you keep the pass low it would be OK.

It’s about preparation and execution. If Mac throws it knowing the safety or lb is coming over the top than yeah, bad idea. However these throws to the flats for 1 yard gains will only increase the defense to blitz more. Pretty much the worst so far in yards per attempt and deep ball completions.

I’m not a McDaniels hater like some but have to admit I haven’t been a big fan of the playcalling so far this season. I’m gonna go with the coaches track record that these things will improve.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I guess the good news is that P. Manning endured an awful rookie year starting and ended up ok...not TB12 ok, but HOF ok by any reasonable measure (and, if you're expecting Jones to be TB12, please let me know what you're smoking or drinking).

The Patriots' "brain trust" (I guess that's Josh, BB, Kraft and Adams if he's still around) decided to send Jones out without training wheels and figure it out on his own. But with such lousy protection and unimaginative play calling, they're not keeping up their end of the bargain.

I'm one of the few out here who will say that I think they should have let Jones settle in and started Cam for the beginning of the season and then seen how it went. If nothing else, it would be nice to have someone who's played well in the NFL ready to lead a few drives when Jones finally has to sit out some plays or games. The way he got hammered last week suggests that that might be sooner rather than later. Todd Bowles wasn't much use as an HC, but he's one heck of Defensive Coordinator and I suspect he watched the Saints' game tape very carefully.

 

[XLIX]

I sure wish Bill Belichick would listen more to the Boston Globe when making his decisions. We could have had David Terrell, d%#*!@t.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

I sure wish Bill Belichick would listen more to the Boston Globe when making his decisions. We could have had David Terrell, d%#*!@t.

That's right, let's completely ignore this one, OLine has no issues and Mac isn't being beaten into oblivion every week

.

 

[TheRainMaker]

I sure wish Bill Belichick would listen more to the Boston Globe when making his decisions. We could have had David Terrell, d%#*!@t.

The rare time he got it right.

Funny how this example is always used as it’s really the only one.

By the way, I wanted David Terrell or Deuce McAllister badly.

Fun fact, LT thought he was going to the Pats.