My take on what will happen

[midwestpatsfan]

I to hope this is the case, but I think we are discounting a few things about this offseason.
Don't for one minute believe that the Patriots have truely been sitting around doing nothing just so they could resign these guys. From all accounts the Patriots counter offered to Givens TWICE-going up to as high as 20 mil.
Its also been reported that they offered and were extremely close to signing desha Townsend, same goes for Fabini, but they took other offers.
Finally, the Vinatieri saga also has reports saying the Patriots tried to get something done with him as late as yesterday afternoon.
So they have indeed tried to spend some of that money, they just havent been succesful.

Maybe these moves would still have allowed the team to resign some of these guys like Miguel suggests, but we are being naive to think that this plan was truely their first option and gameplan going into free agency.

 

[Miguel]

but we are being naive to think that this plan was truely their first option and gameplan going into free agency.

I did not say that it was their first option nor did I ever think that this was their plan before free agency started. No team gets 100% of what they want out of free agency. Teams have to have contigency plans. Please note that this was the 1st time ever that I brought up the idea of moving Colvin's 2007/2008 money into the 2006 season.

 

[marty]

Miguel, I may or may not have posted anything to this same effect, but I've been thinking (swear to God,) that the Pats' lack of action was related to the value, value, value approach. As in - what does the disciplined organization do when it believes the prices on the table exceed the players' value to the team? Fahgedaboutit.

That's not to say these guys aren't worth it, for another model. Receivers especially seem to pull down the tall cakes when they hit elite or even good status. I loved Givens, but did I read his contract gives him 5 mil a year? If so, think about that - that number would put him up in the top 5 on the Pats. And he's a number 2 receiver.

What would you predict is the response of the consumate businessman, when the big name free agents are on the market, there's a semiunexpected cap windfall, and teams are spending like there's no tomorrow? Gee that sounds like high demand and limited supply to me. Is that a time to buy?

So, yeah - do the deals you know you have to do, do what you can with the mid-tier guys, use today's money for tomorrow's needs, if today's needs can't be addressed without succumbing to a frenzied environment.

One more prediction to add to yours - LaVar Arrington does not belong in New England, in my opinion. He's a pouter and a whiner. I know from being in the Washington area for so long. That said, who was that guy that threw his gear to the fans in Cincinatti on his last game...

Last note and I'll shut up. You ever notice that you can have a perfectly good house on the market (in most times) for months, and not get close to the asking price, especially if there are slightly newer or slightly bigger versions nearby? Ever see someone who's had it on the market for months, agonizing about dropping the price? You've got to figure the Pats wait for the first rush of signings to be over every year, because as you get closer to camp, the market resembles a "buyer's market" more and more. Since they're already more interested in getting a "Pats Fit" than a superstar, that dovetails well with the overall approach.

Thanks for your cap page, thanks for your (as always) informed spin, and if I weren't freakin house-poor I'd hit your sister's page immediately with a donation. (I gotta get Paoli to be my realtor next time.)

PFnV

Good post! Many of your observations of the Pats approach to free agency seem on the money. However, I think that they will be aggressive when looking to fill a particular need, example of Colvin and Mason last year. But overall they'll wait out the feeding frenzy that usually benefits the agents the most. The Pats look at the overall effect on their team and pay structure when signing players. (ie Given's situation effects Branch's re-signing) As they always pay to the cap every year, I'm happy with the way they spread it around and get the best value out of their players.

 

[mgteich]

Wow, even Miguel doesn't see how the team will spend the money under their usual cap methods!

I agree with the estensions. I would add Hochstein, Samuel, Graham and Pass; and perhaps even Wilson and Bruschi. I don't know how many will sign. I hope I'm wrong on Branch, but I don't see him staying.

However, I don't see front loading or moving Colvin money into 2006. I do see more levelized extensions, with more in 2006 (smaller signing bonus, more salary guaranteed this year instead). Maybe that's what Miguel meant about the free agents.

If in the end we money left over, pioli is clever enough to craft a LBTE that isn't reached. We have moved money forward this way before (Gorin 2004 I think).

By all media accounts, the Pats are under the cap by around $18 to 20 million. The Pats are going to use that cap space. Why??Because it is the right thing to do.

How???

1.) They are going to extend Seymour. His deal will be the largest ever for a non-QB.
2.) They are going to extend Branch with a 5 year $27 million deal.
3.) They are going to move some of the money due Colvin in 2007/2008 to the 2006 season.
4.) They are going to sign several middle-tier free agents. One of them is going to get a front-loaded deal atypical for the Patriots.
5.) If Koppen rebounds from his injury and plays well, he, too, will be extended.
6.) They are going to give Tedy a raise.

If this does not happen, forget this post. If this happens, do not worry about remembering this because I will remind you of it

Miguel (who predicted that Adam would go to the Colts and who predicted that Givens would go to the Browns)

 

[midwestpatsfan]

I understand what you are saying Miguel, and I knew that is what you meant. I just wanted to make sure everyone kept things in perspective. Like I said earlier, I completely agree and hope that your post is true. The one thing I do know is that you know a whole lot more about this stuff than I do.

 

[maverick4]

re

Miguel, I may or may not have posted anything to this same effect, but I've been thinking (swear to God,) that the Pats' lack of action was related to the value, value, value approach. As in - what does the disciplined organization do when it believes the prices on the table exceed the players' value to the team? Fahgedaboutit.

That's not to say these guys aren't worth it, for another model. Receivers especially seem to pull down the tall cakes when they hit elite or even good status. I loved Givens, but did I read his contract gives him 5 mil a year? If so, think about that - that number would put him up in the top 5 on the Pats. And he's a number 2 receiver.

What would you predict is the response of the consumate businessman, when the big name free agents are on the market, there's a semiunexpected cap windfall, and teams are spending like there's no tomorrow? Gee that sounds like high demand and limited supply to me. Is that a time to buy?

So, yeah - do the deals you know you have to do, do what you can with the mid-tier guys, use today's money for tomorrow's needs, if today's needs can't be addressed without succumbing to a frenzied environment.

One more prediction to add to yours - LaVar Arrington does not belong in New England, in my opinion. He's a pouter and a whiner. I know from being in the Washington area for so long. That said, who was that guy that threw his gear to the fans in Cincinatti on his last game...

Last note and I'll shut up. You ever notice that you can have a perfectly good house on the market (in most times) for months, and not get close to the asking price, especially if there are slightly newer or slightly bigger versions nearby? Ever see someone who's had it on the market for months, agonizing about dropping the price? You've got to figure the Pats wait for the first rush of signings to be over every year, because as you get closer to camp, the market resembles a "buyer's market" more and more. Since they're already more interested in getting a "Pats Fit" than a superstar, that dovetails well with the overall approach.

Thanks for your cap page, thanks for your (as always) informed spin, and if I weren't freakin house-poor I'd hit your sister's page immediately with a donation. (I gotta get Paoli to be my realtor next time.)

PFnV

PFnV, that was a nice post. Where have you been this whole time!?

I think Miguel is dead on with his predictions. Resigning our talented youth is a key to continued success.

I think Pats fans will feel more calm when they realize that the Pats WILL spend to the cap limit (they always do), but that they'll have a lot more overall talent-per-dollar than the teams that have gone crazy in these first few weeks of free agency.

.

 

[big mike]

Ok sounds like a good plan/prophesy but how many help us win this year's SB.
1 and 2 help but paying the most for seymour shouldn't be a goal.

How do you interpret what he said as them having the goal of paying Seymour as much as possible? It's that they want to keep Seymour, who will likely command big, big money.

3 doesn't help win this years SB

When has BB ever used a strategy that focuses entirely on the current year, at the expense of next year?

4 helps but needs to be a few more than several.
5 and 6 helps longterm but not this year.
Basically what you are saying is long range strategy rather than focusing on winning this year.

Any team that focuses more on this year than long term is a team that won't win. Look at the Redskins, Raiders, etc..

Another way to look at it is slaughter of our FAs so a few guys get raises.

No. It's a matter of deciding which players are most important to the team, and making sure you keep them - although that may mean letting go some guys who feel they can get more money elsewhere (i.e. Givens getting paid as a #1 WR, even though he isn't one).

 

[RayClay]

Ok sounds like a good plan/prophesy but how many help us win this year's SB.
1 and 2 help but paying the most for seymour shouldn't be a goal.
3 doesn't help win this years SB
4 helps but needs to be a few more than several.
5 and 6 helps longterm but not this year.
Basically what you are saying is long range strategy rather than focusing on winning this year.
Another way to look at it is slaughter of our FAs so a few guys get raises.

The goal is to compete for a super bowl every year.

It's worked for the Patriots and for the Steelers, despite their chokes.

Some people play roulette, some play blackjack.

 

[Mainefan]

I think it's a conscious part of BB's strategy to hang back and let other teams spend too much of their cap space on free agency. The result is very useful. It saddles other teams with players who aren't worth the money and it harms their ability to get under the cap in future years.

This is in line with the Patriots' stated mission of consistently fielding a competitive team, in other words, being a contender every year, year after year.