Forget for a moment how good Asante Samuels is, or is not. Instead, think about what the real Patriots "blueprint" is, and how they execute their plan. Essentially, the Pats do a thorough evaluation on their players and that position - and then place an absolute top value on that player. If they cannot sign that player for that amount of money (or less), they let the player leave. Now they take that money and sign another player (e.g., Rodney Harrison) and keep themselves out of a poor salary cap position. Part of the value placed on a player (in this case, Asante Samuel), is also based on what other players are available at that position. Part is also placed on how much money is needed for players at every other roster spot on the team.
To put it another way, think about what happened with Adam Vinatieri. The Pats would have loved to keep Vinatieri, but they realized that what he wanted was too much for the position of kicker. If the Pats signed him, they would have weakened themselves at another position or two, due to having less money to spend at those other positions.
The decision was that the team was better off spending no more than "x" at this position so they could spend "y" at that position - and it made more sense than "we have to re-sign him" and then be forced to make budget cuts elsewhere later.
It is this philosophy and long range thought process that has resulted in the Patriots being the best team of the decade - as opposed to other teams that fluctuate between good years and bad due to having money to spend one year and being in cap hell the next year.
