Curran: Amendola signed Tuesday, day before Welker left

[Coog548]

Zolak just said he heard they wanted both players. Welker would be in the slot and Danny would be playing on the opposite side of him. That would create an interesting situation with all the TE that we play. I wonder if we would of cut Lloyd then to make this work out.

I knew we talked about cutting Lloyd before but if we got Welker at $5million then we could of kept him.

 

[upstater1]

Why on Earth would it not?

There had to be offers exchanged prior to that, this is why.

Were the Patriots offering $5m per before signing Amendola? Or did they offer $7m?

That makes a big difference in the scenario.

Did they not offer Welker anything at all?

If that's the case, what do you expect Welker to do?

The only way this backfires on Welker is if he had a better deal than the Broncos deal and he turned it down.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Ths makes conflicting story #204 that I've read/heard about the Welker thing since yesterday.

Maybe we should lock all the media in one room until they come up with the really, really true story. After that, set the room on fire with them in it.

 

[ALP]

The Pats aren't stupid, if they wanted Wes they would pay the extra 1 mil over two years....they really didn't care to have him back

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Ths makes conflicting story #204 that I've read/heard about the Welker thing since yesterday.

Maybe we should lock all the media in one room until they come up with the really, really true story. After that, set the room on fire with them in it.

Well, first we take a few folks out of there (including, but not limited to, Mike Reiss and Chris Price).

 

[Ring 6]

Because nothing in it backs up the claim.

Allow me to translate. Dues wants to whine, so facts do not matter. Since he has said the team should keep Welker, he must spit venom at the team for not doing so, and one of the straws he grasps is the baloney about the team being cheap.
Of course this news should shut up those claims, which were dumb to begin with, since choosing to spend my money on choice A rather than choice B while spending all my money is only cheap under an ignorant (usually intentionally) definition.

 

[smg93]

Because nothing in it backs up the claim.

Yes it does. If Curran is right, WW was seeking 8-9m per year and the Pats likely believed they could get similar production from Amendola while costing just 6.2m per year (and likely a smaller cap hit in the first two years of the deal).

That's just good business sense because it allows the team to have more negotiating room for players like Vollmer, Talib, or other FA's they want at a time when the Salary Cap is predicted to be flat.

Pats usually spend close to the cap every year. If that continues this year, all they've done is moved the difference between what WW was seeking and what they paid Amendola (around 2+ million) to another player or players.

That's not cheap.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yes it does. If Curran is right, WW was seeking 8-9m per year and the Pats likely believed they could get similar production from Amendola while costing just 6.2m per year (and likely a smaller cap hit in the first two years of the deal).

That's just good business sense because it allows the team to have more negotiating room for players like Vollmer, Talib, or other FA's they want at a time when the Salary Cap is predicted to be flat.

Pats usually spend close to the cap every year. If that continues this year, all they've done is moved the difference between what WW was seeking and what they paid Amendola (around 2+ million) to another player or players.

That's not cheap.

No, it doesn't. They had the money to keep both players. It does nothing for the claim.


And it's cheap as all get out.

 

[smg93]

No, it doesn't. They had the money to keep both players. It does nothing for the claim.


And it's cheap as all get out.

Huh??? Maybe they didn't want both. Maybe they wanted to use the money on one of them and spend the rest on other players.

Are you asking me to get out??

 

[PatsFan2]

I am glad Weker is gone the Pats have never won a SB with him. There is only so much a miget slot WR can do...good riddens.

 

[grux]

On the surface, this makes a little more sense to me now. I may not agree with the ultimate decision, but I can see it going like this:

1) Welker hits free agency, looking for 8-9 million per season.

2) Patriots, thinking some team will overextend a bit and offer that, assume he's gone and move on to plan B (Amendola).

3) Welker finds out no one is willing to go that high, and gets the 2/12 offer from the Broncos.

4) When he brings it back to the Patriots, they say, "Well, now we have redundancy at your position, so we're only willing to go 2/10 with incentives."

5) Welker says peace.

Great post and I agree. I would have loved to see this offense with Welker and Amendola.

 

[BTTA]

Allow me to translate. Dues wants to whine, so facts do not matter. Since he has said the team should keep Welker, he must spit venom at the team for not doing so, and one of the straws he grasps is the baloney about the team being cheap.
Of course this news should shut up those claims, which were dumb to begin with, since choosing to spend my money on choice A rather than choice B while spending all my money is only cheap under an ignorant (usually intentionally) definition.

I agree with Deus, but for different reasons. The people who call the Pats cheap won't be silenced by the new info about Welker/Amendola because they don't pay attention to real information, and don't have any interest in doing so. They buy into the "Superstars" theory of NFL success. The Pats have a different philosophy that causes them to avoid these signings (although they've made a few).

The only relevant measure is the percentage of the salary cap that is spent. Contracts for individual players are irrelevant in determining "cheapness."

 

[BradyManny]

Still: Wes Welker at $6 million is a bargain.

In this situation, they could've kept both on the roster. I thought the whole point was that Amendola could play outside, anyway?

This might turn out to work just fine. Honestly, it probably will.

But a weapon of Wes' caliber at $6 mill is too affordable to pass up. Sign Amendola, drop Lloyd, keep Wes, and draft a big WR in round 1. Wes is better than Lloyd at any WR position at this point. And the price difference is a couple mill. Denver got themselves a steal.

That said, if we use the money to get better on defense, you won't catch me complaining.

 

[borg]

By with holding the DM signing, maybe the NEP thought they were helping WW secure a higher price from another team. The theory....To secure WW, you have to outbid NEP. Knowng NE was out reduces competition and therefore price.

 

[Patradomous]

Yup
When its all said and done the Broncos got 100+ catch experienced, balls to the wall, tough as nails receiver for peanuts.

For the same money we got a receiver thats on field half a season at a time and will take two years to learn the system if he learns it at all.

If we get 75 catches out of that position next year will be lucky.

Brilliant.

 

[Fixit]

For the life of me, I can't figure out why I took Deus off ignore. Lesson learned.

 

[grux]

I also would like to find out if the Patriots offered Welker a contract in the 7Mill-8Mill range before free agency. If so, Welker and his agent totally miscalculated his value on the open market.

 

[Deus Irae]

Huh??? Maybe they didn't want both. Maybe they wanted to use the money on one of them and spend the rest on other players.

Are you asking me to get out??

What do the maybes have to do with what I was pointing out? All I stated was that the quoted item did not put to rest "all the 'cheapskate' BS people have been posting. "

Hell, I haven't even been one banging the drums about 'cheapskate', since I don't think the team is about cheapskating as much as it is about taking a scattershot approach to personnel instead of a more targeted one (and that does mean that, in certain instances, they will be cheap with the offers). I've been talking about mistreating top players, in this case Welker, which is a different thing.


And, no, I wasn't asking you to get out. "as all get out" is an expression.

Urban Dictionary: as all get out

 

[BradyFTW!]

Why on Earth would it?

Because the story goes from "the Pats were willing to pay Welker $5M per year, but not $6M per year" (which I found more than a little strange) to "the Pats had already decided to move on, and had already spend their budgeted amount for a slot receiver."

In other words, it was less a question of whether Welker was worth $6M per, and more a question of whether Welker was worth $8-9M per, with the added potential risk of losing out on both top targets if they waited around.

In any case, the Pats paid Amendola pretty handsomely, so 'cheapness' is the last thing that should be called into question. If there's anything that warrants questioning at this point, it's their loyalty to veterans (we already know that they don't have any) and their personnel evaluation.

 

[Sicilian]

Yup
When its all said and done the Broncos got 100+ catch experienced, balls to the wall, tough as nails receiver for peanuts.

For the same money we got a receiver thats on field half a season at a time and will take two years to learn the system if he learns it at all.

If we get 75 catches out of that position next year will be lucky.

Brilliant.

I'm not saying Amendola will or will not pick up the system, but if he does why would it take him two years? When players fit, they generally fit right away: Moss, Welker, Gronk, Hernandez, Gaffney, Lloyd (despite what some think), and even Stallworth to a degree, all were active and looked good in their first season with the Patriots. There's no reason to think that Danny won't be the same. IF he's a fit, he'll fit in right away.

In fact, I'm having trouble thinking of a receiver (WR or TE) who didn't look good right away, but after two years suddenly did. I'm sure there's one I'm missing, but I can't think of one.