Wilfork and his future

[Brady6]

He's not..."the best"....and after this surgery he might be lucky to be playing at all in the league. He was terrible at the beginning of this past year and if you think that having a ruptured achilles and being a year older (and 33 years old) will somehow make him "better"....well, that's idiotic thinking.

How exactly would you "restructure" his compensation? Pay him what he's not worth and spread it over several years so we can have more dead money on the books. Now that's brilliant!

Cutting someone isn't treating them like garbage...it's life in the NFL. It's happens to the majority of players. The Patriots will not make a single personnel move based upon "feelings". The decision will be cold and heartless and will be based strickly on ROI and that is what I love about the Patriots and why they have been so successful since Bob Kraft took over.

First let me say that I agree with you in terms of cutting a player is not treating them like garbage, the Patriots have paid Wilfork $43,773,060 since he entered the NFL in 2004, if he has been treated like garbage than I have serious issues with my employer. The problem is some posters over emotionalize situations and somehow become concerned with the “feelings” of a football player that likely makes more money in interest annually than they make period. They will refer to everything as fantasy football thinking and imply that is flawed but realistically the only one living in a fantasy is the ones who feel they have an emotional relationship with football player like Vince Wilfork.

Secondly I do not think cutting Wilfork outright (unless he is unable to perform due to injury) is the best decision because even though we save $7,500,000 we still have a $4,100,000 cap hit on the books. What a lot of posters don’t realize is that Wilfork is not going to receive a $11,600,000 check from the Patriots in 2014 he is only going to $7,500,000 in salary, $300,000 as weight clause and $200,000 for a workout bonus which means the variance between what he actually makes and what the Patriots would be liable against the cap even if they cut him outright is around $3,500,000-$4,000,000. If the Patriots are going to pay him $7,500,000 either way why not restructure it.

 

[Patsrock]

The cap hit if they cut him is like 2.8. But that's a sunk cost. Same cap hit if he's cut or restructured.

They'd have to restructure to vet min plus incentives. That would free up about 8m in cap space. He may not go for that as he's probably got 20 million in the bank. Guarantee 8m and extend for 3 years and the cap hit would be 4.8m this year even if cut. Then another 6m next yea if cut. That would be problematic.

Pats can't protect themselves by guaranteeing money to a guy who may not be able to play.

Cap hit is 3.6M if cut.

 

[Brady6]

When posters say cut Wilfork to save money that is the definition of penny pinching. I don't have an issue with re-working Wilfork's contract but the guy deserves every penny he gets from New England.

Wilfork was ridiculously dominant in 2011 and 2012. Perhaps people have conveniently forgotten how crap the Patriots interior run D was in 2013 minus Wilfork and Mayo. I have my reservations that Wilfork can return to the player he was but I'm willing to see how the cards fall before throwing the contract card in his face.

I don’t see an upside in cutting him, sure we save the $8,000,000 against the cap but we’re still paying $3,600,000 for a player that isn’t contributing jack ****. To put that in perspective if everything else stayed the same Wilfork would have the 10th highest cap hit on the team as a player we cut. That is not a win in my opinion.

On the flipside the Patriots can’t carry Wilfork’s cap hit, heck even if Wilfork was a healthy all-pro this season I would have a hard time saying we should just let him play it out, he has to restructure. I don’t really see it as the issue that so many others do, it might sound simplistic but I don’t think Wilfork would have been on the sidelines, and traveling with the team in the 2nd half of the season when he didn’t have to if there was not a plan in place.

 

[Brady6]

Cap hit is 3.6M if cut.

Yeah which would mean (as of now) he’d be the 10th highest cap hit even if he was cut, I really don’t know what would be stupider them carrying Wilfork’s $11,600,000 cap hit or them carrying a $3,600,000 cap hit for a player that isn’t on the roster.

 

[supafly]

it might sound simplistic but I don’t think Wilfork would have been on the sidelines, and traveling with the team in the 2nd half of the season when he didn’t have to if there was not a plan in place.

Interesting. You could be onto something, as simple as it sounds--not that they necessarily have any kind of deal in place, but that they think of Wilfork more highly than some of us are thinking re: just the business side, etc.

Personally, I think that the team values Wilfork, is definitely 100% willing to see how it plays out first. We'll have to see. Hopefully Wilfork is willing to play ball too, and they can re-assess this issue down the line a bit once the proper time frame passes.

In the meantime, we definitely needed to draft a DT anyway, so that doesn't really come into play regarding the draft plans in my opinion. Boy, would it be nice if Siliga ended up continuing his decent play down the stretch into next year too.

 

[mgteich]

Brady6, it is clear that we all should have a clearer discussion of what cap numbers mean.

The $3.6M i simply the unamortized portion of bonus money. Contracts are usually set up so that there is dead money at the end of the contract. Folks call these deals "cap-friendly" because they have lower first year cap effects, delaying money until later. But make no mistake, this is dead money, sunk cost.

Let us say I want to sign a corner to a show-me of $6M but I could afford the hit. I could sign him to a 5 year contractor one or two years., with a $5M contract, with a first year hit of $2M. If I cut him the next year, I could choose whether to take the $4M hit over one or two years. Your logic would say that when Year 2 came, that it was terriblng e to have a $4M cap hit.

WILFORK
1) There was NEVER any intention taking an 11.6M cap hit.
2) Also, there is nothing wrong with a dead money hit. It's simply a cap hit deferred. How many folks talk about restructuring contracts. That's what restructuring does. It creates very high last year cap hits, forcing the team and player to make a decision at that time.
3) Well, here we are. We would be with Wilfork even if he were healthy.
4) If Wilfork and the team can come to terms, great. If not, theylfork will go their separate ways. But make no mistake, this was supposed to happen, and is part of normal business. The question was always to be how much a 33 year old was worth in a new contract. The default decision was to pay him $8M for one year, or not.
5) For me, the issue CANNOT be total cap. That is inflated because of accounting. The real issue is NEW MONEY. For me, Wilfork's 2014 services are not worth $8M. We need to see what he's worth. The cap will take care of itself.

Yeah which would mean (as of now) he’d be the 10th highest cap hit even if he was cut, I really don’t know what would be stupider themrk carrying Wilfork’s $11,600,000 cap hit or them carrying a $3,600,000 cap hit for a player that isn’t on the roster.

 

[PatsChamp88]

 

[mgteich]

The $3.6M is sunk cost. It will count against the cap no matter what. There is NO decision to be made regarding this cap hit.

The $8M is new money associated with 2014 services. There is a decision to be made.

The two amounts are not related.

I don’t see an upside in cutting him, sure we save the $8,000,000 against the cap but we’re still paying $3,600,000 for a player that isn’t contributing jack ****.

 

[patsderoer]

Cutting someone isn't treating them like garbage...it's life in the NFL. It's happens to the majority of players.

Absolutely. The best player in the NFL this season, Peyton Manning, was CUT by the Colts, and he did for that team far more than Wilfork did for the Pats. Manning carried that team for more than a decade, something which cant be said for Wilfork.

Its life in the NFL. Every player is one hit away from never playing again. Even if Wilfork plays again, there's no guarantee that he will perform better than a jag. His game is all about anchoring, the Achilles will probably greatly impact his future performances.

Those 7.5 $ could be used to sign Decker or Mack, either which will help the Pats far more than a 50% 33 year old coming back from a ruptured Achilles Wilfork.

 

[supafly]

WILFORK
1) There was NEVER any intention taking an 11.6M cap hit.
2) Also, there is nothing wrong with a dead money hit. It's simply a cap hit deferred. How many folks talk about restructuring contracts. That's what restructuring does. It creates very high last year cap hits, forcing the team and player to make a decision at that time.
3) Well, here we are. We would be with Wilfork even if he were healthy.
4) If Wilfork and the team can come to terms, great. If not, theylfork will go their separate ways. But make no mistake, this was supposed to happen, and is part of normal business. The question was always to be how much a 33 year old was worth in a new contract. The default decision was to pay him $8M for one year, or not.
5) For me, the issue CANNOT be total cap. That is inflated because of accounting. The real issue is NEW MONEY. For me, Wilfork's 2014 services are not worth $8M. We need to see what he's worth. The cap will take care of itself.

Nice breakdown, mgteich.

Those 7.5 $ could be used to sign Decker or Mack, either which will help the Pats far more than a 50% 33 year old coming back from a ruptured Achilles Wilfork.

Unless they can agree on a payment that is fair for Wilfork's services, when the time comes to make that determination. In the meantime, they'll probably be prepared to address the DT situation via the draft and possibly free agency anyway, since it needs addressing on some level for youth and new talent as it is.

As far as the Manning comparison---one thing that isn't getting brought up is that both sides would have gladly come to an agreement if Manning would have been okay with a lesser payday. No one knows what numbers NE and Wilfork would be okay with in this instance, as every situation is different. One would think that they won't just go kicking him to the curb due to the fact that he became injured, and as mgteich stated--the contract was structured in a way where a decision for extension/restructure/cut was already going to have to be done regardless of whether he was injured or a probowl player in 2013.

 

[Huckleberry1]

I have seen that and wondered what that is based on.

Is that including the players on IR?

It was repeated down the stretch and in the playoffs repeatedly during games, but apparently not completely accurate according to what patsrock just said, but even if it was after they lost some key players a number of their replacements, such as Siliga and Chris Jones, possibly Vellano and others have a good shot at returning next season, and overall there are a good number of really young players on that defense.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Wilfork ruptured his Achilles tendon. It's the largest and strongest tendon in the body, and is responsible for all efforts involving "pushing off" with the foot. Age and obesity are both risk factors for Achilles tendon rupture, and most occur as non-contact injuries in athletes. The most common age for injury is between 30 and 40 - when circulation begins to become compromised at the micro-vascular level, but when athletes are still trying to perform at an elite level.

We'll never know, but I strongly suspect that Wilfork's "foot injury" listed on the injury report earlier this season was tendonitis of his Achilles tendon, and that he tried to play through it. It would account for why he had no power pushing off and was pushed around by Vlad Ducasse in the first Jets game. It would also be consistent with the tendon finally rupturing completely 2 games later against Atlanta.

Players have come back from Achilles' injuries, even those requiring surgery. Terrell Suggs took only 5 months last year. It's arguable whether he's been the same player he was before the injury. Isaiah Thomas was never the same after his Achilles' rupture. There aren't a lot of case reports of 325+lb. (conservatively) 32 year old defensive tackles coming back from such an injury. Wilfork's entire game involves anchoring and pushing off against 300+lb. NFL linemen, and I personally doubt that he'll ever have the same power or explosiveness that he did prior to the injury.

The other factor to keep in mind is that both of Wilfork's parents had diabetes. While Wilfork himself hasn't been diagnosed with diabetes, his strong family history could suggest that he may have some degree of micro-circulatory compromise, which could affect healing and recovery. His weight will most certainly be a factor.

Add it all up, and I'm very dubious that we'll ever see the 2004-2012 vintage Wilfork or anything close to it, and I would be surprised if he is able to play with any significant effectiveness in 2014.

Should the Patriots find some way to "take care" of Wilfork and reward him for his immense contributions to the team? Certainly. But to do so under the salary cap would be extremely risky. Any attempt to "restructure" Wilfork probably just means moving money further out into the future for a player who is unlikely to play again at a meaningful level. I doubt it's the money that's the issue; it's the direction of the team, and the ability under the cap to move in another direction.

It's a horrible situation. I understand the sentiment. But personally, I think you have to move on from Wilfork as a player, and find another way to take care of him or reward him for past contributions.

Son of a b.tch.


I have a great deal of respect for you mayo but invoking vast knowledge and understanding of the injury and context for it card is simply playing unfair.

All of your knowledge and understanding aside i still fall back on the simple fact that I love Vince Wilfork, and he will still be great, so take that.


Pay the man/"beast."

 

[Huckleberry1]

Absolutely. The best player in the NFL this season, Peyton Manning, was CUT by the Colts, and he did for that team far more than Wilfork did for the Pats. Manning carried that team for more than a decade, something which cant be said for Wilfork.

Its life in the NFL. Every player is one hit away from never playing again. Even if Wilfork plays again, there's no guarantee that he will perform better than a jag. His game is all about anchoring, the Achilles will probably greatly impact his future performances.

Those 7.5 $ could be used to sign Decker or Mack, either which will help the Pats far more than a 50% 33 year old coming back from a ruptured Achilles Wilfork.

Hey everybody, let's get rid of Julian Edelman and Vince Wilfork so we can sign Eric Decker for 8 million.



Or they could just pay Edelman, restructure Wilfork, and draft a really good WR for a fraction of the cost?

 

[mayoclinic]

Son of a b.tch.


I have a great deal of respect for you mayo but invoking vast knowledge and understanding of the injury and context for it card is simply playing unfair.

All of your knowledge and understanding aside i still fall back on the simple fact that I love Vince Wilfork, and he will still be great, so take that.


Pay the man/"beast."

I understand your feelings and sympathize. It's a horrible situation.

 

[Marinlik]

Hey everybody, let's get rid of Julian Edelman and Vince Wilfork so we can sign Eric Decker for 8 million.



Or they could just pay Edelman, restructure Wilfork, and draft a really good WR for a fraction of the cost?

I think that we should keep Edelman if we can get him for $5m or under a year with protection for us against injury and not too much guaranteed. Because Edelman has had a problem with injuries and he has only one year of production.

I understand that you like Wilfork. But we can save about $7m in cap space by releasing him. That's a lot of cap room. You can't pay someone just because what they have done. Not when they old in terms of NFL players. coming off a big injury. We could get some really needed players for that cash.

 

[patsderoer]

Hey everybody, let's get rid of Julian Edelman and Vince Wilfork so we can sign Eric Decker for 8 million.

Where did I say get rid of Edelman? Keep Edelman, sign Decker. One of the worst moves an team can make is holding on to old declining vets and paying them expensive salaries based on their names.

Or they could just pay Edelman, restructure Wilfork, and draft a really good WR for a fraction of the cost?

Yeah right, draft WRs, that was such a great success story for the Pats last decade. Decker is proven in the NFL. In the last 3 years, only 2 receivers had more TDs than him, Dez Bryant 34 and Megatron 33. Decker has 32. He is in his prime, has size, knows how to get open, doesnt have an injury history.

Brady's window is closing. Its time to go all in and get him a very good weapon.

 

[RIpats88]

Where did I say get rid of Edelman? Keep Edelman, sign Decker. One of the worst moves an team can make is holding on to old declining vets and paying them expensive salaries based on their names.




Yeah right, draft WRs, that was such a great success story for the Pats last decade. Decker is proven in the NFL. In the last 3 years, only 2 receivers had more TDs than him, Dez Bryant 34 and Megatron 33. Decker has 32. He is in his prime, has size, knows how to get open, doesnt have an injury history.

Brady's window is closing. Its time to go all in and get him a very good weapon.

soooo get brady a good weapon, and weaken the defense in the process...how does this make any sense at all?

we can easily re-structure wilforks contract to lessen the cap-hit for us.

 

[Miguel]

Eric Frenz's proposed restructure can be found at
Restructuring Vince Wilfork's deal in a way that works for both sides - Going Deep - Boston.com

 

[mayoclinic]

Eric Frenz's proposed restructure can be found at
Restructuring Vince Wilfork's deal in a way that works for both sides - Going Deep - Boston.com

The fundamental problem I have with this and all other extension proposals, is that we don't know if Wilfork can ever play again effectively. If he can, then he's worth his deal. If he can't, then no restructured deal is worth it - the Pats need to move on and find a replacement, and use his cap money elsewhere, and figure out how to save face for Wilfork or recompense him for past heroics separately. I personally think it's unlikely that he will be an effective player, but I'm sure there will be other opinions.

 

[RI Patriots fan]

Eric Frenz's proposed restructure can be found at
Restructuring Vince Wilfork's deal in a way that works for both sides - Going Deep - Boston.com

This "solution" is horrible.

It's amazing how hard it is for some fans to let go even though all the signs are there that they should let go.

Thank goodness the Patriots know when to let go.