Looks like Pats are going to get CB Gilmore from the Bills.
Probably the end of the Logan Ryan Era.
Probably the end of the Logan Ryan Era.
I like Barwin a lot in that role. But Long was coming off 2 signficiantly worse years than Barwin is (12 sacks vs 4). I bet he still is looking for a decent money deal, rather than a "prove it" type.
Could Barwin replace Long's production?
Amendola will be cut at his present cap number. Mitchell has a history of knee issues and Edelman has the foot issues as well as the number of hits he has taken over the years. I believe Cooks would upgrade the group and give them more depth and act as a buttress against Edelman going down.Just watched Cooks highlights.
I'd seen him play a bit, but man is he fast. He reminds me a bit of early-years Branch, but quicker.
But here's what I don't get: you'd have Edelman, Gronk, Allen, Mitchell, Hogan, Amendola, Cooks. Someone is the odd-man out.
Is it Gronk, with the idea being they'll move to more 4-WR sets and sign a power runner (like Adrian Peterson)?
This. Love the player...extremely underrated.Curious if the Patriots would kick the tires on Burkhead to fill the RB opening created by LGB. He seems like a very Patriots-esque type player, although his skillset may overlap a bit too much with what we currently have,
Using more power running and trading Gronk to focus on 4 WR sets seems like inconsistent strategyJust watched Cooks highlights.
I'd seen him play a bit, but man is he fast. He reminds me a bit of early-years Branch, but quicker.
But here's what I don't get: you'd have Edelman, Gronk, Allen, Mitchell, Hogan, Amendola, Cooks. Someone is the odd-man out.
Is it Gronk, with the idea being they'll move to more 4-WR sets and sign a power runner (like Adrian Peterson)?
That doesn't mean the Patriots would pass on an opportunity to upgrade.Didn't Amendola say he's willing to restructure to stay?
Girardi reported that he would but I still believe he should be cut if Cooks is acquired.Didn't Amendola say he's willing to restructure to stay?
Cut or Trade Danny Amendola before June 1:
Amendola’s 2017 cap number would then decrease from $7,791,668 to $1,416,668 – the rest of his signing bonus proration for a gross cap savings of $6.375 million. Since a player with a $465,000 salary would then take his place in the Top 51 list, the net cap savings for the Patriots would be $5,910,000 ($6.375 million minus $465,000).
Danny Amendola retires before June 1:
Amendola’s 2017 cap number would then decrease from $7,791,668 to $1,416,668 – the rest of his signing bonus proration for a gross cap savings of $6.375 million. Since a player with a $465,000 salary would then take his place in the Top 51 list, the net cap savings for the Patriots would be $5,910,000 ($6.375 million minus $465,000).
Cut Danny Amendola before June 2 and make him a post June 1 designation:
That means the Pats would carry his $6 million salary and his $375,000 roster bonus on their books until June 2nd. On June 2nd he would be released. His 2017 cap number would then drop from $7,791,668 to $1,416,668 – the rest of his signing bonus proration for a gross cap savings of $6.375 million. Since a player with a $465,000 salary would then take his place in the Top 51 list, the net cap savings for the Patriots would be $5,910,000 ($6.375 million minus $465,000).
Cut or Trade Danny Amendola after June 1:
Amendola’s 2017 cap number would then decrease from $7,791,668 to $1,416,668 – the rest of his signing bonus proration for a gross cap savings of $6.375 million. Since a player with a $540,000 salary would then take his place in the Top 51 list, the net cap savings for the Patriots would be $5,835,000 ($6.375 million minus $540,000).
Danny Amendola retires after June 1:
Amendola’s 2017 cap number would then decrease from $7,791,668 to $1,416,668 – the rest of his signing bonus proration for a gross cap savings of $6.375 million. Since a player with a $540,000 salary would then take his place in the Top 51 list, the net cap savings for the Patriots would be $5,835,000 ($6.375 million minus $540,000).
Lower Danny Amendola’s salary from $6 million to $1.5 million:
This would lower his 2017 cap number from $7,791,668 to $2,916,668 for a cap savings of $4.5 million. If Danny Amendola is active for all 16 games, he will then earn $2 million in cash which is more than he earned in 2016 so one could look as this as a raise.
Lower Danny Amendola’s salary from $6 million to x million with a chance to recoup reduced salary by reaching NLTBE incentives (This is my preferred scenario)
Danny Amendola could agree to lower his salary and he would have the chance to earn the money back by reaching NLTBE incentives. The incentives could be for
These incentives could have different levels. One example is
- Receptions – Anything more than 23 receptions would be NLTBE
- Receiving Yards – Anything more than 243 receiving yards would be NLTBE
- Receiving TDs – Anything more than 4 receiving TD would be NLTBE
- Wins – Anything more than 14 wins would be NLTBE
250 yards – is worth $250,000
500 yards – is worth another $250,000 for a total of $500,000
800 yards – is worth another $500,000 for a total of $1 million
Another example would be to copy his 2015 receptions incentives tiers:
* 40 catches for $150,000
* 50 catches for another $150,000 ($300,000 total)
* 60 catches for another $225,000 ($525,000 total)
* 70 catches for another $225,000 ($750,000 total)
Lower Danny Amendola’s salary from $6 million while extending his contract by a year and giving Amendola a signing bonus
Example – Lower Danny Amendola’s salary to $1 million while giving him a $1,000,000 signing bonus. His 2018 salary would be $2 million. His 2017 cap number would be lowered by $4.5 million. His 2018 cap number would be $2.5 million. I will be surprised if Amendola’s extension happens because I have heard on at least one podcast that Amendola is thinking of retiring this year.
Lower Danny Amendola’s salary from $6 million to $900,000
$900,000 is the lowest minimum salary for a player with Danny Amendola’s experience for a cap savings of $5,100,000. I doubt that Amendola would agree to such a drastic paycut.
More fuel to the fire...This feels like the day Sox traded for Sale.... Saints just signed Ginn BTW....
All but officially signed with Tampa, it seems.Anyone else get the impression that the Cooks smoke is simply to distract from something else going on? it is very unlike the Patriots to pull the trigger on a deal like this that has been bandied about so publicly.
I still think they end up with Desean
All reports, including Schefter, are that he's signing in Tampa.Anyone else get the impression that the Cooks smoke is simply to distract from something else going on? it is very unlike the Patriots to pull the trigger on a deal like this that has been bandied about so publicly.
I still think they end up with Desean
Saw that -- I don't buy it. Sure, he has a track record of turning 4th round picks into quality (Marty) or HOF-caliber (Moss) receivers. But Belichick isn't in the business of making trade partners look bad, much less friends like Payton.Chris BurkeVerified account @ChrisBurke_SI 2h2 hours ago
Trading with Belichick has to be as comforting as forming an alliance in Westeros.
The only thing I'm worried about at this point is an overpay. Like, Butler plus #32 for Cooks. Tennessee can offer the higher pick, but not the quality of player to go along with it. So the only way I see the Pats beating what Tenn can offer is both Butler AND a pick.Ian RapoportVerified account @RapSheet
The belief is that the #Saints will be able to trade away WR Brandin Cooks by this afternoon. #Patriots, #Titans remain in the mix.
They're getting Paul GeorgeSaints have tweeted out the same "eyes" emoji that was doing the rounds at the NBA trade deadline.....
Long live the big nickel.Love getting Harmon back into the fold for the right money. He's a valuable 3rd safety in the Pats scheme.
Ditto. These threads are tough to follow when all of the actual news is Unsupported Media.THANK YOU
Getting value in the form of another player than can consistently play through a full season?Setting aside the fact that he's arguably the best TE ever, and whatever caveat people want to fret about re his back, it's worth noting that Gronk is on a REALLY favorable contract for the Patriots. Plus, the guy they just traded for, Allen, has had a bit of a time staying healthy consistently. Gronk, imo, is NOT getting traded. Why would the FO even reasonably consider it?
I agree with this,that's my ideal too, but I'm worried the Butler thing won't happen, and I'm doubtful about Dont'a too.Ideal scenario: extend Butler, trade JG, get Cooks for picks, sign Verner, sign HT, sign Gillislee for a fifth, draft DE, LB, and TE. All doable.
Love all of this except Verner--as has been discussed elsewhere, his play has badly fallen off.Ideal scenario: extend Butler, trade JG, get Cooks for picks, sign Verner, sign HT, sign Gillislee for a fifth, draft DE, LB, and TE. All doable.
How do you figure that out?Getting value in the form of another player than can consistently play through a full season?
I've said it once, and I'll say it again: it doesn't matter how good a player is or how cheap they are or how much fun they are to watch party if they can't consistently - and more importantly, reliably - produce for your football team. You could have God on your roster, but if God is injury prone because of the way DBs have to approach tackling him, God doesn't matter all that much come your playoff run.
I realize Gronk himself isn't at fault for this, but it is what it is and his frequent trips to IR don't make his contract all that friendly if they're not consistently producing on-field results.
The countdown to the CountdownAdam SchefterVerified account @AdamSchefter 2m2 minutes ago
Free Agency Countdown starts at 2 pm on WatchESPN.
I think this is a "it's better to be a year early than late" move.I'll take a trade Butler for Cooks, trade JG for 12 and 33, resign DHT, get an underutilized DE for about 4 mil, draft a CB, Watt, and a DE with 12, 32, and 33, start counting the days until opening night.
One key point is that Gronk's 2017 contract is what it is; the Pats don't save very much at all (maybe $1M) if he's traded due to the bonus acceleration.Getting value in the form of another player than can consistently play through a full season?
I've said it once, and I'll say it again: it doesn't matter how good a player is or how cheap they are or how much fun they are to watch party if they can't consistently - and more importantly, reliably - produce for your football team. You could have God on your roster, but if God is injury prone because of the way DBs have to approach tackling him, God doesn't matter all that much come your playoff run.
I realize Gronk himself isn't at fault for this, but it is what it is and his frequent trips to IR don't make his contract all that friendly if they're not consistently producing on-field results.