Danny Amendola 2014

[Brady6]

No you are pointing out that rosters go to 90 then are cut to 53 and every player that doesn't make the cut has a dead money hit.

You argued that since the Pats took a dead money hit of $1 million for a guy like Ras I Dowling (which had minimal impact on their cap number) as proof that they would certainly take a $6.8 million dead money hit for Amendola.

As Miguel points out, Two million of $3 million of Amendola's 2014 salary is fully guaranteed. Why would the Pats cut a guy and pay him him 2/3 of his base salary unless he gave them actually no value whatsoever? The fact that 2/3 of Amendola's salary is 100% guaranteed in 2014 means that he is a virtual lock for the 2014 roster.

You can fantasize about Amendola being cut in the offseason. But the reality is that he is almost guaranteed a roster spot in 2014. Unless he gets IRed, he will be final 53 man roster. Any other argument against it is just wishful thinking on your part.

Perhaps a thread comparing Danny and Tim Tebow!

Aaron Hernandez is sui generis.

Amendola would cost an extra $3M if cut next year, and that has to be part of the calculus next year.

OK so my position is that Bill Belichick does not determine roles and roster spots are not guaranteed based on the individual salary cap implications of a player.

Since you all appear to disagree with my position then that must mean that you do believe roles are in fact determine roles and roster spots are guaranteed based on the individual salary cap implication of a player.

 

[Ring 6]

OK so my position is that Bill Belichick does not determine roles and roster spots are not guaranteed based on the individual salary cap implications of a player.

Since you all appear to disagree with my position then that must mean that you do believe roles are in fact determine roles and roster spots are guaranteed based on the individual salary cap implication of a player.

Excellent argument
I now have absolutely no doubt that 2plus 2 equals 456,327.

 

[chasa]

Silly question.

At his contract its doesnt make sense to cut him, hes cheap enough to keep around another year, and his contract also makes him decent trade bait for a WR needy team.

No way they cut him, hes either starting or traded for a 5th round pick at the trade deadline.

 

[Brady6]

Excellent argument
I now have absolutely no doubt that 2plus 2 equals 456,327.

No it equals 4.

 

[moosekill]

My guess is, if healthy he is too valuable to trade, and if injured, no one would want him.

 

[moosekill]

No it equals 4.

I think he was being sarcastic.

 

[RayClay]

mplications of a player.

Since you all appear to disagree with my position then that must mean that you do believe roles are in fact determine roles and roster spots are guaranteed based on the individual salary cap implication of a player.

That is what you call faulty logic. At least two, but probably more, well known logical fallacies.

 

[Brady6]

My guess is, if healthy he is too valuable to trade, and if injured, no one would want him.

I would agree with that, the potential player Amendola is likely worth the money we will invest in 2014. If he plays at a similar level next season as he did this season for any reason (injuries, etc.) I have no question in my mind he will be gone after that season however.

 

[moosekill]

I would agree with that, the potential player Amendola is likely worth the money we will invest in 2014. If he plays at a similar level next season as he did this season for any reason (injuries, etc.) I have no question in my mind he will be gone after that season however.

Kind if depends, if is an injury, you might not be wrong, or they might redo his salary.

 

[Ring 6]

No it equals 4.

You should post as if you understand that.
When you copy in many posts directed at your poor analysis and then make up some ficticious argument that disagreeing with your post equals disagreeing with something entirely different, it gets tiresome.

 

[Brady6]

That is what you call faulty logic. At least two, but probably more, well known logical fallacies.

I see it as an A or B:

A. Your opinion is that the salary cap implications of a player do not determine Belichick’s personnel decision.
B. Your opinion is that the salary cap implications of a player do determine Belichick’s personnel decision.

I am in group A.

 

[Brady6]

You should post as if you understand that.
When you copy in many posts directed at your poor analysis and then make up some ficticious argument that disagreeing with your post equals disagreeing with something entirely different, it gets tiresome.

I don’t know what you’re talking about. My position is very simple to understand – I do not believe that Amendola’s salary cap implications will have any impact on the whether or not he is back in 2014, so if he returns it is because Belichick wants him this team because he feels he can contribute to it winning a championship. That simple Andy nothing more nothing less, I am not sure why this is so incomprehensible for you and the others it is very cut and dry I think you’re overthinking it and looking for something that is not there.

What I don’t understand is why you and a handful of others are so gung-ho about objecting to my views in these Amendola threads currently open but there are 2 polls currently open yet you lack the fortitude to cast your votes in either, that is either reflective of what your agenda and motivation is for this subject or an indication of your being feeble and lacking confidence in your position. Of the Amendola faithful group only Moose had the spine to actually make an actual vote one way or another.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Edelman's uncertain status - as mentioned by another poster - brings up an interesting point. There was little interest in Edelman in the offseason -(and it's kindof amazing the Patriots even let him test the waters with so much uncertainty in the offense in hindsight.)

I think what many teams realize is that guys like Edelman, Welker, and Amendola have a skill set well matched to Brady's skill set. If you have a QB like Kaepernick, it's talent wasted (and the differing QB style saw a guy like Kaepernick have 6 sacks against the Panthers whereas Brady had only 1)

I think part of the reason that Welker had a very short list of teams HE was interested in had as much to do with his desire to go to a contender as it was his desire to go with a QB with whom they had complementary skill sets - Manning being Brady-like in his ability to stay in the pocket and find the guys across the middle.

Likewise Edelman saw limited interest in him. At this point I'd be more worried about Edelman hitting free agency with the team having to deal with other teams inflating his price - but overall I'd expect that both Amendola and Edelman will be back. With good health being the caveat, they've actually got a good young WR corps that can and should get better with time.

Some depth at quality TE would be my top offseason offensive focus as the Gronk/Hernandez caliber dual TE lineup is a big game changer.

 

[RayClay]

I see it as an A or B:

A. Your opinion is that the salary cap implications of a player do not determine Belichick’s personnel decision.
B. Your opinion is that the salary cap implications of a player do determine Belichick’s personnel decision.

I am in group A.

As I said, you have multiple fallacies, all or nothing thinking being just one.

Of course Belichick takes many factors into consideration in player selection, retention. He'd be an idiot otherwise.

Lots of teams are prety dumb, but i don't think even Matt Millen intended to make bad personnel and budget decisions. Like Belichick, he took many things into consideration, but his judgment was flawed.

Of course, the strawman is in that paragraph, but there are likely more.

 

[Ring 6]

I don’t know what you’re talking about. My position is very simple to understand – I do not believe that Amendola’s salary cap implications will have any impact on the whether or not he is back in 2014, so if he returns it is because Belichick wants him this team because he feels he can contribute to it winning a championship. That simple Andy nothing more nothing less, I am not sure why this is so incomprehensible for you and the others it is very cut and dry I think you’re overthinking it and looking for something that is not there.

I think the problem you have is that you don't actually read your own posts.
Then someone responds to what you said and you act as if they are responding to something different. Then it just gets ugly. It seems you are so quick to fire away a response to tell everyone how right you are that you don 't take the time to recognize what you actually posted and which parts of it are being responded to.

In this case you listed every player that was cut and their associated cap hit to 'prove' that BB cuts players without regard to the cap. That is an assinine post, because by definition it proves nothing more than the fact that every player who is cut comes with a cap cost.
Further you equated a 700,000 hit to a 6,000,000 hit by making that argument.
All of the responses to you were about how poor your argument was.
Then you come back and say that means everyone who thinks your argument sucks must believe something that you just made up and had nothing to do with what the responses were directed at.
I just can't do this anymore, its like talking to someone who is doing something else and not paying attention to the conversation.

And,as far as this newly introduced issue, of course the cap enters into personell decisions. Ask Lawyer Milloy. In this case, if you seriously think that Bill Belichick would not consider that the cost of having Amendola is 4.5mill and the cost of not having him is 6.5mill, then we should just agree to always disagree forever.

By the way, another example of your closed minded turbo posting is your fine example of saying that if the cap was a consideration in any decisions, then the guy with the highest cap would be starting. As Ray Clay said, your use and understanding of logic is abysmal.

 

[Brady6]

As I said, you have multiple fallacies, all or nothing thinking being just one.

Of course Belichick takes many factors into consideration in player selection, retention. He'd be an idiot otherwise.

Lots of teams are prety dumb, but i don't think even Matt Millen intended to make bad personnel and budget decisions. Like Belichick, he took many things into consideration, but his judgment was flawed.

Of course, the strawman is in that paragraph, but their are likely more.

So basically you don’t want to commit one way or another which is why you haven’t voted in either of the Amendola polls, you simply want to dispute others opinions or positions without opening yourself up for the same type of scrutiny? I think its **** or get of the pot time aka vote or stop posting in the thread, but you do as you please.

 

[Ring 6]

Edelman's uncertain status - as mentioned by another poster - brings up an interesting point. There was little interest in Edelman in the offseason -(and it's kindof amazing the Patriots even let him test the waters with so much uncertainty in the offense in hindsight.)

I think what many teams realize is that guys like Edelman, Welker, and Amendola have a skill set well matched to Brady's skill set. If you have a QB like Kaepernick, it's talent wasted (and the differing QB style saw a guy like Kaepernick have 6 sacks against the Panthers whereas Brady had only 1)

I think part of the reason that Welker had a very short list of teams HE was interested in had as much to do with his desire to go to a contender as it was his desire to go with a QB with whom they had complementary skill sets - Manning being Brady-like in his ability to stay in the pocket and find the guys across the middle.

Likewise Edelman saw limited interest in him. At this point I'd be more worried about Edelman hitting free agency with the team having to deal with other teams inflating his price - but overall I'd expect that both Amendola and Edelman will be back. With good health being the caveat, they've actually got a good young WR corps that can and should get better with time.

Some depth at quality TE would be my top offseason offensive focus as the Gronk/Hernandez caliber dual TE lineup is a big game changer.

I think wear and tear had a big impact on Welkers market.
As far as Edelman, he was great vs the Broncos, other than that, I think he has just been a guy filling a role. He had a couple other nice games (and no the 13 catch game vs the Jets when they were happy to give us the catches on the routes he made them on was not one) and he has been pretty invisible in other.
I would love to see him continue what he did in the Bronco game, but the reality is, IMO, while he can do everything a WR needs to at some level of competance, there are better options to do each of those things. He is actually a great backup WR because he can step into any role without being awful, but he is not above average at any, with the exception of open field running (and punt returns but I'm talking as a WR here).
I think when he hits the market, those factors will keep his price down.

 

[Brady6]

I think the problem you have is that you don't actually read your own posts.
Then someone responds to what you said and you act as if they are responding to something different. Then it just gets ugly. It seems you are so quick to fire away a response to tell everyone how right you are that you don 't take the time to recognize what you actually posted and which parts of it are being responded to.

In this case you listed every player that was cut and their associated cap hit to 'prove' that BB cuts players without regard to the cap. That is an assinine post, because by definition it proves nothing more than the fact that every player who is cut comes with a cap cost.
Further you equated a 700,000 hit to a 6,000,000 hit by making that argument.
All of the responses to you were about how poor your argument was.
Then you come back and say that means everyone who thinks your argument sucks must believe something that you just made up and had nothing to do with what the responses were directed at.
I just can't do this anymore, its like talking to someone who is doing something else and not paying attention to the conversation.

And,as far as this newly introduced issue, of course the cap enters into personell decisions. Ask Lawyer Milloy. In this case, if you seriously think that Bill Belichick would not consider that the cost of having Amendola is 4.5mill and the cost of not having him is 6.5mill, then we should just agree to always disagree forever.

By the way, another example of your closed minded turbo posting is your fine example of saying that if the cap was a consideration in any decisions, then the guy with the highest cap would be starting. As Ray Clay said, your use and understanding of logic is abysmal.

Andy I really don’t care I actually didn’t even read this post in its entirety because you’re criticizing me while being to gutless to even vote in the 2 polls currently open pertaining to Amendola. If you want me to respect what you say have the fortitude to put your own position out there for the same scrutiny.

I have no interest in going back in forth with you; I would suggest you look elsewhere to satisfy your hunger for conflict because you will not be receiving it from me. Have a good day Mr. Johnson. :bye2:

 

[mgteich]

Your opinion seems to be that salary cap implications are irrelevant to Bleichick's decision whether to keep a player or not.

I have nothing to say other than you apparently have little understanding of the workings of cap and of contracts in the NFL.

I see it as an A or B:

A. Your opinion is that the salary cap implications of a player do not determine Belichick’s personnel decision.
B. Your opinion is that the salary cap implications of a player do determine Belichick’s personnel decision.

I am in group A.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy I really don’t care I actually didn’t even read this post in its entirety because you’re criticizing me while being to gutless to even vote in the 2 polls currently open pertaining to Amendola. If you want me to respect what you say have the fortitude to put your own position out there for the same scrutiny.

1) I am not criticizing you, I am trying to give you insight as to why every thread you post in turns into this. Ironically, you just admit to what I said you did, and called it criticism.
2) Gutless? Are you kidding me? FYI, these kind of posts are not appropriate here any more.
I am not answering your question because I find it to be a stupid question. Why you would want to choose between a player who has been playing hurt and a guy who for the first time in his career is contributing to the offense with 5 games, and most importantly the playoffs still left to play is beyond me. Actually its not, its just another little ploy to feed your Amendola obsession.

I have no interest in going back in forth with you; I would suggest you look elsewhere to satisfy your hunger for conflict because you will not be receiving it from me. Have a good day Mr. Johnson. :bye2:

You must be kidding to call out anyone else in the world as looking for conflict.
I was giving you some friendly advice, but it appears you are so far off the reservation that you didn't even bother to read it before dismissing it with an insult filled rampage.
Remarkable.
I will take Ian's advice and put you on ignore, because there appears to be no possible chance to ever have a civil discussion with you.
Kindly do not respond to any of my posts going forward, as it would be disingenuous for you to do so, knowing I will be unable to see them or reply to them.