To all the "Kraft is cheap" "we need Vjax" "trade for Fitzgerald/Johnson" folks

[letekro]

Welker is still Welker and still 500 million times better than Amendola. Welker's "decline" is because of 3 things:

1. He's not nearly the best WR on his new team. (This speaks to the mantra of Tom doing more with less... our star receivers like Welker and Branch move to other teams where they're utterly silent. Hell, even Caldwell was huge on our team. Bug eyes and all.)
2. Manning isn't as good as Brady, so can't get Welker the ball in some ideal "Welkah" situations. (He can't zip the ball through a tight window and low to a running Welker the same.) Again, this is because Brady is better.
3. Manning leads receivers into injuries for the sake of one play. With a little guy like Welker, that leads to predictable injuries and hence less playing time and confidence/aggression when on the field.

I'm not saying letting Welker go wasn't the right thing to do. It was, but the reason isn't because he's not the same player and all that nonsense. Welker's performance after leaving (and pretty well the performance of every receiver after the leave here) is pointing to EXACTLY what the so-called whiners are complaining about: Brady never has elite weapons. (Gronk the exception but he's not a WR so hence not on-topic.) Even the guys we think are elite prove not to be on other teams. His 1 true full season with Moss they re-wrote the recordbook. So investing a little coin in 1 legit #1 like a VJax or Fitzgerald is certainly a tantalizing option and probably still advisable.

Love the parenthetical about Gronk not counting as a weapon because he's not a WR. Did you actually type that with a straight face? Gronk is, at worst, the second most dominant receiving threat in the NFL. Couple that with LaFell, on pace for almost 1,000 yds and 10 touchdowns as an outside the numbers guy, arguably the best slot receiver in the league in Edelman and one of the best pass catching RBs in the league. Then, Amendola as a 5th option. This might not quite match peyton's crew, but this is far from a bare cupboard. Not even speaking of Ridley, who is far better than Montee Ball.

And yes, Yes, Welker IS still Welker--a guy that can't hold on to the ball in critical in situations. Thanks for the laughs!

 

[Rob0729]

Welker is still Welker and still 500 million times better than Amendola. Welker's "decline" is because of 3 things:

1. He's not nearly the best WR on his new team. (This speaks to the mantra of Tom doing more with less... our star receivers like Welker and Branch move to other teams where they're utterly silent. Hell, even Caldwell was huge on our team. Bug eyes and all.)
2. Manning isn't as good as Brady, so can't get Welker the ball in some ideal "Welkah" situations. (He can't zip the ball through a tight window and low to a running Welker the same.) Again, this is because Brady is better.
3. Manning leads receivers into injuries for the sake of one play. With a little guy like Welker, that leads to predictable injuries and hence less playing time and confidence/aggression when on the field.

I'm not saying letting Welker go wasn't the right thing to do. It was, but the reason isn't because he's not the same player and all that nonsense. Welker's performance after leaving (and pretty well the performance of every receiver after the leave here) is pointing to EXACTLY what the so-called whiners are complaining about: Brady never has elite weapons. (Gronk the exception but he's not a WR so hence not on-topic.) Even the guys we think are elite prove not to be on other teams. His 1 true full season with Moss they re-wrote the recordbook. So investing a little coin in 1 legit #1 like a VJax or Fitzgerald is certainly a tantalizing option and probably still advisable.

Welker is not Welker. Welker is clearly in decline. Welker was a big short yardage target early last year. This year he is an 1-2 catch a game type of player.

And the Welker that was here would be nearly the best receiver on his new team. At least better than Sanders.

Welker right now is a shell of what he was the first eight games of last year with the Broncos which was a decline from what he was here.

 

[Bruins29]

The Welker homers just cant let go.

 

[BradyManny]

Hindsight says that the Pats were probably dead on with both those moves.

I agree about the way the interior OL is playing with its starters back and in positions that suit them. But the interior OL play in the first four weeks notched us 2 losses. Mankins most certainly would've helped during that time-frame.

The question is: was moving Mankins, saving a ton of $$, and acquiring a young TE worth weathering the storm (two losses)? If the last five games are any indication, most certainly yes. The team is going to be stronger for it come post-season. And if they use the $$ to lock up key guys, all the better.

What always worries me most is this OL's ability to hold up against big, tough, fast DLs in the post-season, and even though Mankins was our best OL, he was part of the problem in some of those letdowns as well. Stork at C gives us hope of having more strength in the middle.

Agree 100% about Welker.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Welker homers just cant let go.

It's pretty clear that it's the other side of the coin who can't let things go.

 

[Rob0729]

I agree about the way the interior OL is playing with its starters back and in positions that suit them. But the interior OL play in the first four weeks notched us 2 losses. Mankins most certainly would've helped during that time-frame.

The question is: was moving Mankins, saving a ton of $$, and acquiring a young TE worth weathering the storm (two losses)? If the last five games are any indication, most certainly yes. The team is going to be stronger for it come post-season. And if they use the $$ to lock up key guys, all the better.

What always worries me most is this OL's ability to hold up against big, tough, fast DLs in the post-season, and even though Mankins was our best OL, he was part of the problem in some of those letdowns as well. Stork at C gives us hope of having more strength in the middle.

Agree 100% about Welker.

Mankins did not cost the Pats 2 games early in the season. We really need to stop with that misnomer. The loss of Mankins did not let Knowshon Moreno and Jamal Charles run all over the defense. Even though the o-line was a factor in both those losses, I think the o-line still would have been a mess with Mankins who is looking old and declining in Tampa.

Also, I trust this o-line more to hold up to a big, strong d-line than I trusted last year's line with Mankins. I still maintain that if the Pats retained Mankins that he might not have kept his starting job. Connolly is a better LG this year than he was last year.

 

[Rob0729]

It's pretty clear that it's the other side of the coin who can't let things go.

This coming from a guy who still isn't over the Pats trading Seymour to the Raiders in 2009.

If Welker was playing remotely well, Deus would be the first to slam the Pats for letting him go. Now that it looks like the Pats were right to move on from Welker because he got old fast, he is over the trade.

 

[BradyManny]

Mankins did not cost the Pats 2 games early in the season. We really need to stop with that misnomer. The loss of Mankins did not let Knowshon Moreno and Jamal Charles run all over the defense. Even though the o-line was a factor in both those losses, I think the o-line still would have been a mess with Mankins who is looking old and declining in Tampa.

Also, I trust this o-line more to hold up to a big, strong d-line than I trusted last year's line with Mankins. I still maintain that if the Pats retained Mankins that he might not have kept his starting job. Connolly is a better LG this year than he was last year.

I agree with most of this. Perhaps I overstated to blame the losses purely on him - but let's face it, the OL was atrocious in those games, and no, it did not help having no Mankins there. Whether he would've made the difference? I do not know. And our run defense is greatly affected by the offensive output, as in games where we get ahead or can match score for score, run D flaws tend to get covered up. We sucked in the trenches on both sides in those games. That's for sure.

I do agree that our interior line, if it stays healthy and as constituted, could be more reliable in the postseason.

 

[Bruins29]

I agree. You can hate the trade all you want- for whatever reason you choose. I have a hard time pinning those loses because Mankins was not on the team. Talk about myopic.

 

[AzPatsFan]

How silly do you feel right now?

the past few weeks I've sat back and watched some of the typical posters rail against BB and Kraft about not spending enough money, not giving Brady weapons, How BB ruined any chance this team had by trading Mankins.

How this team "isn't very good", and how it has "not played any good teams".

Well after Sundays win the Patriots are now Number 1 in offense(tied). This team doesn't need an expensive old Wide reciever(vjax/Johnson/Fitzgerald) It's got size all over the place(Lafell, Wright, Gronk) to mix in with its speed(Amendola/Minitron)

And they did it by playing teams mostly in the top half of the league in defense(chiefs 2nd, dolphins 3rd, bills 6th, vikings 13th, broncos 16th)

This is a more complete team then what we had last year, and its a team that was built in a way that its going to remain complete for a few years to come.

It is amazing how young this emerging team really is. BB won unexpectedly in 2001 with a team of 5-10 year veterans that he collected and organized.

Now he is winning with a team of 3-7 year veterans that he collected and organized. Ordinarily teams of that sort are still making errors and are missing POISE. Not here though.

 

[patchick]

More awesomeness on offense would, of course, be even more awesome. But as for the "inexcusable" "lack of weapons"...

The Patriots have scored the most points of any team in the NFL.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I agree about the way the interior OL is playing with its starters back and in positions that suit them. But the interior OL play in the first four weeks notched us 2 losses. Mankins most certainly would've helped during that time-frame.

The question is: was moving Mankins, saving a ton of $$, and acquiring a young TE worth weathering the storm (two losses)? If the last five games are any indication, most certainly yes. The team is going to be stronger for it come post-season. And if they use the $$ to lock up key guys, all the better.

What always worries me most is this OL's ability to hold up against big, tough, fast DLs in the post-season, and even though Mankins was our best OL, he was part of the problem in some of those letdowns as well. Stork at C gives us hope of having more strength in the middle.

Agree 100% about Welker.

I don't accept your premise that we lost 2 games because of Mankins absence. I would much more accept the absence of Siliga, Chris and Chandler Jones, and the hobbling LBs, for the run game pastings, we suffered in the Miami Summer Heat and primetime Arrowhead rushing rampages.

 

[AzPatsFan]

More awesomeness on offense would, of course, be even more awesome. But as for the "inexcusable" "lack of weapons"...

The Patriots have scored the most points of any team in the NFL.

Shush, Don't confuse them with Facts!

 

[BradyManny]

I don't accept your premise that we lost 2 games because of Mankins absence. I would much more accept the absence of Siliga, Chris and Chandler Jones, and the hobbling LBs, for the run game pastings, we suffered in the Miami Summer Heat and primetime Arrowhead rushing rampages.

As I said, I'm willing to concede those factors played a role and say that crediting two games to Mankins loss is too strong. But I don't think it's too strong to say the interior OL play was a big factor in those losses. I think people are forgetting how bad the OL was in the early going. There were a lot of possessions in some of those games (13 vs. Miami, seven in the 2nd half) and we still weren't scoring b/c it was a jail-break when Brady dropped back.

As soon as it was shored up, and as soon as Gronk was back, the offense exploded. Mankins wouldn't make a difference at this stage.

 

[AzPatsFan]

As I said, I'm willing to concede those factors played a role and say that crediting two games to Mankins loss is too strong. But I don't think it's too strong to say the interior OL play was a big factor in those losses. I think people are forgetting how bad the OL was in the early going. There were a lot of possessions in some of those games and we still weren't scoring b/c it was a jail-break when Brady dropped back.

As soon as it was shored up, and as soon as Gronk was back, the offense exploded. Mankins wouldn't make a difference at this stage.

The Patriots had no problems rolling up a 20-3 halftime lead in Miami.

The hobbled Defensive players attempting Iron-Man performances without relief, in the Summer Heat was responsible for that loss, IMHO.

 

[Oswlek]

I think people are forgetting how bad the OL was in the early going.

I wish I could forget! What I think people also forget is how mediocre-to-poor Mankins has been at pass blocking for years. And unless someone wants to make the case that Logan is just going through the motions in Tampa and he'd be better had he stayed in NE, that argument falls apart even further.

 

[BradyManny]

The hobbled Defensive players attempting Iron-Man performances without relied inthe Summer heat was responsible for that loss, IMHO.

Certainly the defense had its issues in that game, and the heat was a factor, but the offense in the 2nd half had seven possessions (very above average), zero points, two turnovers, and 47 yards, with the bulk of that coming when the game was effectively out of reach. Probably one of the outputs in the Brady/Belichick era.

 

[BradyManny]

I wish I could forget! What I think people also forget is how mediocre-to-poor Mankins has been at pass blocking for years. And unless someone wants to make the case that Logan is just going through the motions in Tampa and he'd be better had he stayed in NE, that argument falls apart even further.

Perhaps true. I have not watched Logan in TB, so I cannot comment on how he would be faring this year. My assumption was he would be better than what we trotted out there in the first few weeks, but maybe that is unfounded.

 

[Bruins29]

Perhaps true. I have not watched Logan in TB, so I cannot comment on how he would be faring this year. My assumption was he would be better than what we trotted out there in the first few weeks, but maybe that is unfounded.

Just assume. Its easier.

 

[Oswlek]

Perhaps true. I have not watched Logan in TB, so I cannot comment on how he would be faring this year. My assumption was he would be better than what we trotted out there in the first few weeks, but maybe that is unfounded.

He would have been better in week 1 (Mankins was terrible in Miami in 2013, but he still would have helped in the second half). It is debatable in week 4, but the defense was so bad it wouldn't have mattered.