Idle thoughts - The "Gronk" edition

[Bruins29]

We won

Those are the only 2 words that matter. Everything else is irrelevant.

 

[Ring 6]

Relevance?

We won because we traded Jones?

When the alternative was to pay him what Arizona did yes.
Flowers took his place, we got players for jones instead of letting him weak for nothing and we are able to use the money he would have cost more effectively.

How many teams win SBs because they pay players huge money to get sacks. I can think of one arguable one (and it’s very arguabke because they really won due to the secondary) and that one fell apart later largely because of it.

 

[patfanken]

When the alternative was to pay him what Arizona did yes.
Flowers took his place, we got players for jones instead of letting him weak for nothing and we are able to use the money he would have cost more effectively.

How many teams win SBs because they pay players huge money to get sacks. I can think of one arguable one (and it’s very arguabke because they really won due to the secondary) and that one fell apart later largely because of it.

Also added to the Jones trade was Cooper. And while the timing didn't work out because he could never get on the field, he turned out to be a good starting G in the league this year. So the idea was correct for value on this trade, Cooper's injury and eventual cut made it look "worse" than it was.

I hated trading Chandler. He was a very good player for the Pats. He has proven that he's been worth the money that THEY paid him to do what he does. HOWEVER, that being said, one of the reasons the Pats have been able to keep on winning year after year, is that they rarely give players huge raises which often double their cap hits while only providing a 10% increase in production they can get from plan B.

Another point is that what Jones is being asked to do with the Cardinals is NOT what he'd do in NE. Playing DE in NE is a LOT harder than in an defense like the Cardinals play. It's why Chis Long didn't stay. At this stage of his career, he didn't want to "set the edge", or slow rush , or be in coverage. He got his ring and wanted to let it rip. I don't blame him.

Think about it. After trading Jones, and Collins and NOT having to pay them over $10MM/yr to keep them, the Pats are STILL going to have cap issues to deal with this upcoming year with big increases to Brady's cap number, etc. It's why Franchising, JG was out of the question.

So in the end, Bill being ruthless in his decisions about talent speak to a couple of things. It's a nod to the reality that you can NEVER keep everyone. It's also a nod to the reality that EVERYONE who plays in the NFL is a great football player. So while they all aren't equally good, the physical differences between the great player and the decent ones aren't as great as the differences in the cap costs. It's a nod to the reality that good coaching can make a good player, a better one. BB has a belief that his coaching system can develop willing players into better players, and we see it all the time in guys like Ninko and Badimosi. And finally it's a nod to the reality that football is a numbers game. It's the ultimate team game, so the old adage that "we are building a team, not adding individual talent", holds so true. Where having 3 or 4 decent players is more important than one elite player. (except QB which is the exception that proves the rule)

 

[Ring 6]

Also added to the Jones trade was Cooper. And while the timing didn't work out because he could never get on the field, he turned out to be a good starting G in the league this year. So the idea was correct for value on this trade, Cooper's injury and eventual cut made it look "worse" than it was.

I hated trading Chandler. He was a very good player for the Pats. He has proven that he's been worth the money that THEY paid him to do what he does. HOWEVER, that being said, one of the reasons the Pats have been able to keep on winning year after year, is that they rarely give players huge raises which often double their cap hits while only providing a 10% increase in production they can get from plan B.

Another point is that what Jones is being asked to do with the Cardinals is NOT what he'd do in NE. Playing DE in NE is a LOT harder than in an defense like the Cardinals play. It's why Chis Long didn't stay. At this stage of his career, he didn't want to "set the edge", or slow rush , or be in coverage. He got his ring and wanted to let it rip. I don't blame him.

Think about it. After trading Jones, and Collins and NOT having to pay them over $10MM/yr to keep them, the Pats are STILL going to have cap issues to deal with this upcoming year with big increases to Brady's cap number, etc. It's why Franchising, JG was out of the question.

So in the end, Bill being ruthless in his decisions about talent speak to a couple of things. It's a nod to the reality that you can NEVER keep everyone. It's also a nod to the reality that EVERYONE who plays in the NFL is a great football player. So while they all aren't equally good, the physical differences between the great player and the decent ones aren't as great as the differences in the cap costs. It's a nod to the reality that good coaching can make a good player, a better one. BB has a belief that his coaching system can develop willing players into better players, and we see it all the time in guys like Ninko and Badimosi. And finally it's a nod to the reality that football is a numbers game. It's the ultimate team game, so the old adage that "we are building a team, not adding individual talent", holds so true. Where having 3 or 4 decent players is more important than one elite player. (except QB which is the exception that proves the rule)

I don’t think it’s so much “ruthless” as it is him having a different opinion on value of some (many) types of players.
B.B. has always stresssed TEAM defense. It’s not made up, it’s his philisophy. When one piece of that team defense costs 2 mill it’s a bargain. When it costs 6 maybe not when it costs 25 surely not.
Every player, and role had a value. Unlike many teams B.B. doesn’t see it as he has to have a RDE who can get 12+ sacks. He’d love to have one but the price of getting one outside of a rookie contract makes doing without one and scheming around it better to him.
Every position, role and skill set had a maximum price on every team. Compared to everyone else belichick sees that price as lower than the rest of them for “superstars” particularly ones that are part of a team effort (no one gets sacks alone).
B.B. would have been happy to have jones at the right price but in his model the price is cost was way out of line.

 

[Sfpat]

Or the Pats could be like Seattle. They had their shot, won a Super Bowl, but now are 8-6, essentially out of the playoff race, getting old and salary capped. Things do not look good in the PNW. Their bloom lasted only six some years.

 

[1960Pats]

You mean when he dove out of the way and Romo called him out?

You mean when he gave a very weak chuck to Bryant over the middle? Compounded by his getting bodied off the ball on the sidelines?

It was a pitiful performance.

On the very next play after he dove out of the way he stayed in the middle and didn't pursue the runner at all.

 

[1960Pats]

Or the Pats could be like Seattle. They had their shot, won a Super Bowl, but now are 8-6, essentially out of the playoff race, getting old and salary capped. Things do not look good in the PNW. Their bloom lasted only six some years.

At least the Seahags are showing some class on the way down, just as they did in SB49 vs the Pats... NOT!

How about the restraint that the Rams showed when the Seahags started to throw punches instead of blocks in their blowout Sunday?

 

[patfanken]

I don’t think it’s so much “ruthless” as it is him having a different opinion on value of some (many) types of players.
B.B. has always stresssed TEAM defense. It’s not made up, it’s his philisophy. When one piece of that team defense costs 2 mill it’s a bargain. When it costs 6 maybe not when it costs 25 surely not.
Every player, and role had a value. Unlike many teams B.B. doesn’t see it as he has to have a RDE who can get 12+ sacks. He’d love to have one but the price of getting one outside of a rookie contract makes doing without one and scheming around it better to him.
Every position, role and skill set had a maximum price on every team. Compared to everyone else belichick sees that price as lower than the rest of them for “superstars” particularly ones that are part of a team effort (no one gets sacks alone).
B.B. would have been happy to have jones at the right price but in his model the price is cost was way out of line.

....and as you know well, it IS a team game. Sometimes I think, for example, that BB has never gone the "getting the elite WR" route because he knows that he can stop (or at least control) one when you go against that.

On the other side of the ball. Revis in his prime was never a factor in Jet/Pats games partially because we didn't have that elite WR than needed to be fed. So he never cared if the guy Revis was covering was non-factor. They just adjusted the game to the rest of the receivers. To the end where Revis a grade A player is taken out of the game covering one of the Pats "grade B" receivers who probably isn't in the primary game plan.

All that being said, It still is pretty amazing watching the Pats hold the Steelers to 7 second half points with THAT front seven. BTW- All I have heard this week so far is how Bell ran at will against the Pats front. But if you take way the 60 yds he got on those 2 sweeps to start the 2nd half (which the Pats defended pretty well after that) I thought the Pats front held their own against Bell.

They are all saying Pittsburgh SHOULD have won the game and they were "in control" for most of it. And if you just compared the rosters they really SHOULD win the game against what the Pats put out there. But as we saw, its not just about the talent.....and that's why the Pats have been so consistently good.

 

[PScottman]

I would trade them both in a second for 15 sacks.

#1 Jones doesnt get 15 sacks in this system at this point in the year. It obvious you have no clue how the Patriots value, deploy, and manage DEs. Early in BB's tenure DEs were more highly valued because DBs could still hold, grab and chuck more than now. Also the running game was more a part of the league offenses then. However, since the infamous rule change, now DB talent is MUCH more valued. BB rarely extends drafted DEs nor signs top FA ones because they are way too expensive for a stat he can get almost as easily with JAGs. He's won two Super Bowls with that approach. PROOF his approach, not spending all the cap room on one or two DEs, works.

#2 Again, so who are you NOT going to sign to forge the Pats opening day roster (not pick up/sign during the year after injuries) to sign Jones? You keep propping up the false canard that keeping Jones is an option and infer that it wouldn't be similarly impacted by the injuries the team has had in currently fielding an 11-3 team. It's ridiculous. Double team Jones then pick on the JAG DB the Pats would have to field because they're paying huge cash to Jones. Not to mention all that cap room means even LESSER mid-year signings after injuries than what they currently have.

#3 How many times has BB eliminated name rushers through scheme? 8-10 times per season? Other teams can do that too.

#4 Results. Cardinals 6-8. Pats 11-3. I think the BB approach to crafting a team - without sacks as a primary driver - demonstrably meets the realities of today's NFL rife with rules emphasizing offense and likewise rife with injuries. Spread the cap first to the QB, then a couple key skill players, then across the defensive backfield (McCourty, Chung, Harmon and Gilmore) and fill in from there. Add in a great scouting and development ability to maximize the JAGs you do have to round out the roster with (along with cheap draft picks) and voila...two out last three Super Bowls...five overall.

But somehow it's the 15 sacks....that's the ticket.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Roethlisberger played a good game - until the last play. I'm stunned he threw it. The Steelers only had one guy run a route and that was a slant right into the middle of the D? Can't throw that - ever. As Romo said, if you want to throw, go for a fade to minimize the risk getting picked. But Roethlisberger's throw was just asking to get picked.

NO ONE on the steelers besides roethlisberger and eli rogers knew about the fake spike. That's why all the steeler players were standing around. It was not a bad call, but very poor execution. Theoretically, worst comes to worst, Ben throws it away or the pass falls incomplete with 5 seconds left, plenty of time to kick a field goal. Except Ben threw it into quadruple coverage.

 

[upstater1]

The answer is 2.

But please, keep telling us how dumb he is.

Are you deranged?

Where did I say Belichick was dumb? I said the opposite.

 

[upstater1]

When the alternative was to pay him what Arizona did yes.
Flowers took his place, we got players for jones instead of letting him weak for nothing and we are able to use the money he would have cost more effectively.

How many teams win SBs because they pay players huge money to get sacks. I can think of one arguable one (and it’s very arguabke because they really won due to the secondary) and that one fell apart later largely because of it.

I think Gilmore got Jones's money. I couldn't be more down on that Gilmore signing.

 

[upstater1]

#1 Jones doesnt get 15 sacks in this system at this point in the year. It obvious you have no clue how the Patriots value, deploy, and manage DEs. Early in BB's tenure DEs were more highly valued because DBs could still hold, grab and chuck more than now. Also the running game was more a part of the league offenses then. However, since the infamous rule change, now DB talent is MUCH more valued. BB rarely extends drafted DEs nor signs top FA ones because they are way too expensive for a stat he can get almost as easily with JAGs. He's won two Super Bowls with that approach. PROOF his approach, not spending all the cap room on one or two DEs, works.

#2 Again, so who are you NOT going to sign to forge the Pats opening day roster (not pick up/sign during the year after injuries) to sign Jones? You keep propping up the false canard that keeping Jones is an option and infer that it wouldn't be similarly impacted by the injuries the team has had in currently fielding an 11-3 team. It's ridiculous. Double team Jones then pick on the JAG DB the Pats would have to field because they're paying huge cash to Jones. Not to mention all that cap room means even LESSER mid-year signings after injuries than what they currently have.

#3 How many times has BB eliminated name rushers through scheme? 8-10 times per season? Other teams can do that too.

#4 Results. Cardinals 6-8. Pats 11-3. I think the BB approach to crafting a team - without sacks as a primary driver - demonstrably meets the realities of today's NFL rife with rules emphasizing offense and likewise rife with injuries. Spread the cap first to the QB, then a couple key skill players, then across the defensive backfield (McCourty, Chung, Harmon and Gilmore) and fill in from there. Add in a great scouting and development ability to maximize the JAGs you do have to round out the roster with (along with cheap draft picks) and voila...two out last three Super Bowls...five overall.

But somehow it's the 15 sacks....that's the ticket.

On #2, Gilmore.

6-8?

Really??!!!!!!!

 

[The Brandon Five]

The answer is 2.

But please, keep telling us how dumb he is.

Actually it's one. Hopefully it will be two in about 45 days.

 

[Ring 6]

I think Gilmore got Jones's money. I couldn't be more down on that Gilmore signing.

I’d rather have Gilmore.

 

[Bruins29]

I’d rather have Gilmore.

Agree especially since Logan Ryan's cap hit is the same is Gilmore's this year and only 1 mil less than Gilmore's next year.

Is there anyone who would rather have Ryan?

 

[n6249c]

Thats where I get out of this conversation because I am happy we got rid of Jones and even happier that we got a talented CB like Gilmore this offseason.

Meh. I'm okay with exiling Jones, but I'm not yet convinced Gilmore is a good value. I think given his performance and paycheck Butler may be a better value.

 

[n6249c]

Welcome back Ken.

Sorry to read that your CA trip wasn't on a good note.

[...]

Request - Can you break down what exactly happened for the Steeler's O to have that 70+ yard run in the last minute pls? I was stunned that the Pats D let such a loose running play (not a wild throw to a WR) in the last minute. Thanks.

....

Agreed, glad you're back, know you were missed, sorry to hear it was for some unpleasant reason.

Regarding that 69 yard completion in the last minute, there are a couple of factors that I've not yet seen mentioned. First one I think is huge. Just watched the replay, and noticed that there was a crosser from the opposite side of the formation that picked Rowe very effectively, causing him to be in trail on JJSS when the ball is thrown. By several steps.

Second is, when Shuster turns up the sideline it looks to me like McCourty gets boxed out by the missed tackle by Richards, which springs JuJu for the bug gain.

Thank goodness he ran out of gas and just stopped instead of trying to continue to push the run around the corner for the score. I think he was so beat he was about to fall down untouched...

 

[NormZauchin]

...So while they all aren't equally good, the physical differences between the great player and the decent ones aren't as great as the differences in the cap costs.

Best one line summation of the reality of running a football team in the NFL that I have read. I bet more than half the GMs in the league are ignorant of this truth.

 

[luuked]

Meh. I'm okay with exiling Jones, but I'm not yet convinced Gilmore is a good value. I think given his performance and paycheck Butler may be a better value.

On his rookie contract ? Sure.

On what Butler wants starting next year ? Not so sure.