This year's ESPN hit piece

[Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt]

Do we know that no other calls were made before SF? We just know that call was quick and deal done. We don’t know who he called before that.

Nothing in BB’s history says he isn’t thorough.

Shortsighted, snarky answer: This does.

Non snarky answer: You're right, we don't know that other calls weren't made. And we don't know if the SF "we were surprised, ten minutes, etc." version is even the truth. But if it is, it's ridiculous, imo, not to have gotten at least, yes a conditional 4th or 2nd or something else.

And I actually do feel like the last several years has seen an uptick in BB's willingness to overpay (under-ask?) on draft pick comp compared to the first several years, where it seemed like he valued every pick more. This may very well be due to his learning that UDFA's were not all that different from 6th and 7th rounders. I think that may explain it, and explain it well.

It just felt, and now feels, like a quick trigger finger for what we know the 49ers believe is a franchise QB whose tutelage came at the knee of the GOAT and the best coach in the history of the league. To me that compensation wasn't just slight, it's not some thing folks are merely quibbling over. It was not enough for what the Patriots gave up. And if it only took ten minutes, I would like BB to have tried, say, hanging up and saying, "just a 2nd? Forget it." And wait another ten minutes.

Edit typos and autocorrect

 

[Buck Showalter]

This is all click bait bullshit.

All of it? Every single morsel?!

Yup – nothing to see here. It’s ESPN making stuff up.

So Guerrero was not previously allowed on the sidelines and housed in an office within Gillette….got it.

Belichick, the consummate thinker and architect of the most successful run in the history of the NFL, couldn’t possibly be thinking of moving-away from a 41 year-old quarterback and his $22 million cap hit….nope, wouldn’t even cross his mind, nothing to see here.

The story of JG’s injury and his request to be treated by the TB12 trainers (details which would only have been known by high-level staffers – with little or no fear of retribution from the organization when leaking that to a national writer), a total concoction on the part of a national writer that pulled fiction out of the air.

Trading Garoppolo for a second round pick late in 2017 despite plenty of interest in the spring? It was simply the by-product of an insurance policy on Brady for half of the 2017 season. But no big deal, Josh and Bill will just go right back into the 2018 draft and find another answer at QB to take the reign from Brady somewhere down the road. No short-term plan necessary…heck, trade all of our back-up quarterbacks.

But all is well. Everyone and anyone that thinks a portion(s) of the article has merit – they’re just trolls wasting their time and looking to take down the franchise.

And Brady, Belichick and Kraft....they're all on the same page. They said so publicly. Yes indeed.

 

[Jimbodandy]

The guy built and also coached the team that wins 12 games and goes to the AFCG every year, but damn he must have been fleeced or coerced if he only got (what was) pick 34 plus his chosen backfill for a second round pick with two starts to his name.

Jesus, people

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

All of it? Every single morsel?!

After Deflategate, especially knowing that Wickersham has contributed to the whole ugly saga, wouldn't you think that Pats fans would consider "every single morsel" to be a trolling job?

 

[MillarTime]

Buck Showalter living up to his handle for sure!

 

[joe dokes]

I think many of us acknowledge what a bunch of you are saying, but disagree that - even with the special circumstance of Hoyer knowing the system - getting a second round pick "and Hoyer," however that came about, and being on the phone for only ten minutes with what sounds like a pretty pleasantly surprised SF F.O., suggests a misreading of the market or a lack of getting the absolute best possible return for a prime asset.

Perhaps they didn't get the "absolute best possible return." But people holding out for that sometimes get nothing (or at least less than what they could have). If there was a misreading it would be that SF would go 5-0 down the stretch. And maybe the cost was for what BB thinks is an adequate backup

Stitch01 said: ↑
I think its possible that they left value on the table, but amount of "lost value" seems disproportionate to the attention its getting. Would everyone really be that much happier if they had gotten a 2nd and a conditional 4th or something?

That's how I see it. Why isn't the return they got for Cassel a reasonable comp?

 

[troparra]

[

Perhaps they didn't get the "absolute best possible return." But people holding out for that sometimes get nothing (or at least less than what they could have). If there was a misreading it would be that SF would go 5-0 down the stretch. And maybe the cost was for what BB thinks is an adequate backup



That's how I see it. Why isn't the return they got for Cassel a reasonable comp?

The Cassel situation is interesting because, for one, the Jimmy G trade netted more, and two, Cassel didn't really end up the franchise QB everyone thought he might be.
You can be sure that SF was fully aware of the track record of NE backup QBs.

 

[Stitch01]

All of it? Every single morsel?!

Yup – nothing to see here. It’s ESPN making stuff up.

So Guerrero was not previously allowed on the sidelines and housed in an office within Gillette….got it.

Belichick, the consummate thinker and architect of the most successful run in the history of the NFL, couldn’t possibly be thinking of moving-away from a 41 year-old quarterback and his $22 million cap hit….nope, wouldn’t even cross his mind, nothing to see here.

The story of JG’s injury and his request to be treated by the TB12 trainers (details which would only have been known by high-level staffers – with little or no fear of retribution from the organization when leaking that to a national writer), a total concoction on the part of a national writer that pulled fiction out of the air.

Trading Garoppolo for a second round pick late in 2017 despite plenty of interest in the spring? It was simply the by-product of an insurance policy on Brady for half of the 2017 season. But no big deal, Josh and Bill will just go right back into the 2018 draft and find another answer at QB to take the reign from Brady somewhere down the road. No short-term plan necessary…heck, trade all of our back-up quarterbacks.

But all is well. Everyone and anyone that thinks a portion(s) of the article has merit – they’re just trolls wasting their time and looking to take down the franchise.

And Brady, Belichick and Kraft....they're all on the same page. They said so publicly. Yes indeed.

Bolded seems pretty likely to have been simply wrong by the writer based on other comments.

The idea of BB leaking a story to, of all outlets, ESPN, is more ludicrous than anything you describe in your post.

The 41 year old quarterback you are referring to was the best player in the league this year. The local writers on BSJ suggest that BB was going to pick Brady for the '18 quarterback no matter what. The one on the record quote about BB's thoughts on the subject comes from John Lynch and doesn't suggest BB was looking to move on from Brady.

BB, Belichick, Brady are pretty locked in for the remaining 1-3 years or w/e of the run that's left at this point, so Im not that worried about it. They're all gonna be on the same page for what matters for that time period. I doubt things are completely rosy between BB and Guerrero and I think there has been some tension in the building this year, but I think some people are writing some creative fan fiction that's out of proportion to what's actually happened.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

But all is well.

I agree, all is well. They are the defending Super Bowl champs, just went 13-3 and are the #1 seed heading into the playoffs, and are two home games away from another appearance in the Super Bowl. Whatever issues there are or were, they certainly haven't manifested themselves into any on-the-field issues, so who gives a fuck?

The plan for the bridge from Brady to Jimmy got fucked up by Brady playing at an MVP level into his 40s. I don't know why they didn't trade him last off season (I would have), maybe it was a hedge against Brady falling off a cliff. But, once we got halfway into the season, the choices for BB were to (a) franchise Jimmy, most likely against his will, and keep both which would have required them to gut their roster in other key positions, (b) release or trade Brady coming off an MVP season and potentially another Super Bowl and take the cap hit while also signing Jimmy to a long-term deal, also not ideal, or (c) trade Jimmy and get what you can get.

None of those are particularly great options (all all fall under "really good problems to have"), but I can understand the reluctance on the part of the owner to move on from the greatest player in league history coming off of a season where he's still playing great.

 

[yecul]

There are likely people you could talk to that would give you quotes to write this article. However, there are clearly contrary quotes and opinions to be gathered.

If you want to write a salacious article that gets views then you talk to the former and not the latter. You're not "wrong" but that doesn't make it right.

 

[joe dokes]

After Deflategate, especially knowing that Wickersham has contributed to the whole ugly saga, wouldn't you think that Pats fans would consider "every single morsel" to be a trolling job?

I doubt Wickersham "made anything up." But there's a fair distance between "making it up" (Janet Cooke-style), and using sources that may have something less than the "knowledge" they purport to have. I am confident that Wickersham was much closer to the latter.

The only we things that are known are that Guerrero's access was changed and that JG was traded. Both were the kind of difficult things that successful professional adults generally handle, without it turning into the Fall of the Empire. Since ESPN's target audience is "shiny object likers," they took the information they had and turned it into a shiny object. Wickersham probably does have sources for what he wrote. I would guess that if they were known, they might elicit some laughter at the extent of their claimed knowledge. And he did himself no favors by getting the trade deadline and other small verifiable facts indisputably wrong.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Other than the fact that Cleveland had every incentive after the fact to inflate what they had been offering for JG to placate their fans (they still have at least a few, right?), which has already been discussed, is it possible that the Patriots put more value on the Brian Hoyer part of this deal than we might first initially think? In one of his interviews after this article came out Kraft said something along the lines of "the trade was basically a second-round pick and Hoyer for Jimmy but it ended up that Hoyer had to be cut and then signed by us," so I wonder if the Patriots didn't view the benefits of having Hoyer - someone who already has at least some familiarity with the system - as the backup rather than QB X they could sign off the street. I don't really think Hoyer is any better than a replacement QB but Belichick might have different thoughts on that, and that could be part of the reason why they would trade with SF and not other teams. It wouldn't be the difference between, say, a high first-round pick and what they got, but if the Pats thought Cleveland's best offer would likely be their own second-round pick or something, the knowledge they would get Hoyer back could make up that difference. Just a thought.

This is a reasonable take. I have a somewhat dim view of Hoyer and think that unlike with Jimmy, their chances of winning the SB with him are nonexistent in the horrible event that Brady got hurt. But that is not the right comparison in that it's Hoyer versus someone else other than Hoyer. Said differently, I think both points -- Cleveland putting it out there now to win PR points and the Hoyer factor -- are good thoughts.

Others keep harping on the "failure " to get "maximum value" for JG, as though getting that value was somehow going to occur in an abstract vacuum, without consideration of any other factor related to the team. Some people might take a few thousand less when they sell their house because their wife and kids are miserable where they are, or there's a new job they have to get to today, or whatever. There's a million moving parts on a football team, to just isolate the JG transaction is lazy and sloppy.

I think this itself is a lazy and sloppy take.

Of course there are many moving parts. I listed multiple reasons why BB might have made this move and it's obvious that there would be multiple factors. Everyone here seems to get that. At bottom, though, IF BB could have gotten more -- and the analogy to leaving a few thousand bucks on the table in a residential home scenario is ridiculously off in that there's a more substantial difference in what SF sent the Patsand what Bill presumably might have gotten than just a few sheckels -- it remains curious that Bill did not get more than a second for Jimmy, and it begs some questions. That there are questions doesn't mean that there aren't really good answers. And yep, nothing exists in a vacuum. But we're dealing with an elite Grand PooBah in Belichick, and when he comes away with only a second round pick for an asset like Jimmy, and there are reports that other teams would have paid higher, I think that warrants a few raised eye brows and is noteworthy. It's just not the norm.

What it doesn't do, at all, is give rise to the Trouble in Paradise narrative that Wickersham is selling. Or the stuff about "sadness" in the building. That is hard to believe in my view. But even with multiple other factors, I expect Bill to do better in trades than he did here.

In the end, we have the best HC and team builder in the NFL, a team that has a great chance to get Number Six and this is far from the first personnel move that he has made that was curious to me. Lawyer Milloy, trading Branch after losing Givens, not offering AV enough to keep him away from Indy, trading Seymour...all of those were hard to fathom at the time, to varying degrees. So nothing to lose sleep over but curious nonetheless.

 

[Jimbodandy]

I agree, all is well. They are the defending Super Bowl champs, just went 13-3 and are the #1 seed heading into the playoffs, and are two home games away from another appearance in the Super Bowl. Whatever issues there are or were, they certainly haven't manifested themselves into any on-the-field issues, so who gives a fuck?

The plan for the bridge from Brady to Jimmy got fucked up by Brady playing at an MVP level into his 40s. I don't know why they didn't trade him last off season (I would have), maybe it was a hedge against Brady falling off a cliff. But, once we got halfway into the season, the choices for BB were to (a) franchise Jimmy, most likely against his will, and keep both which would have required them to gut their roster in other key positions, (b) release or trade Brady coming off an MVP season and potentially another Super Bowl and take the cap hit while also signing Jimmy to a long-term deal, also not ideal, or (c) trade Jimmy and get what you can get.

None of those are particularly great options (all all fall under "really good problems to have"), but I can understand the reluctance on the part of the owner to move on from the greatest player in league history coming off of a season where he's still playing great.

People are underselling the value of insurance. Not just "fall of the cliff" insurance. How about broken clavicle, separated shoulder, MCL insurance? We have seen QBs get all of those recently.

If TFB were to be out from week 2 through week 9, JG would have been a top notch backfill. At week 11, season is probably fucked anyway. So make the deal.

Makes sense to me.

 

[Buck Showalter]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22012605/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-says-celebrate-jimmy-garopplo-trade-san-francisco-49ers

Asked what was true in the story, Brady called that "a tough question."

"Everyone has different truths," Brady said. "When you talk about the way I see things, the way you guys see things, the way the writer may see things, the way Coach Belichick may see things, everyone has different truths based on their perspectives. I feel like I go about my business like I have every year, and again, I like to speak for myself, because that's how -- I don't want to speak on someone else's behalf or what their experiences are. I try to do the best I can do, like I've always done."

---

Even TB12 is smart enough not to tackle the details within the article.

He chose wisely.

 

[ElcaballitoMVP]

The guy built and also coached the team that wins 12 games and goes to the AFCG every year, but damn he must have been fleeced or coerced if he only got (what was) pick 34 plus his chosen backfill for a second round pick with two starts to his name.

Jesus, people

Agreed. And you have to consider this: How many teams would've given up more for JG at the deadline? You need a QB-needy team that is willing to commit not only draft picks in a trade, but a big expensive contract for an unproven QB in the offseason. That team is also likely to be rebuilding (for example, I doubt Jax would've upset the apple cart to bring in an unknown midseason).

How many potential suitors are there? CLE, NYG, NYJ, DEN, MIA, ARI? And BB is getting how much more from one of these teams? Take out NYJ and MIA being in the division. Take out DEN since they're potential AFC competition. I just don't see the magical fit that is getting the Patriots some unbelievable draft pick bounty.

 

[Jimbodandy]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22012605/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-says-celebrate-jimmy-garopplo-trade-san-francisco-49ers

Asked what was true in the story, Brady called that "a tough question."

"Everyone has different truths," Brady said. "When you talk about the way I see things, the way you guys see things, the way the writer may see things, the way Coach Belichick may see things, everyone has different truths based on their perspectives. I feel like I go about my business like I have every year, and again, I like to speak for myself, because that's how -- I don't want to speak on someone else's behalf or what their experiences are. I try to do the best I can do, like I've always done."

---

Even TB12 is smart enough not to tackle the details within the article.

He chose wisely.

Congratulations. One of the principals acknowledged that some people exist whose opinions may not be 100% in conflict with some portion of that article.

Build your house on that foundation.

 

[Stitch01]

Some people took it as fact that the Pats turned down #12 from Cleveland in the offseason. Later, reports came out that the #12 offer never happened.

Now, I guess, we're supposed to take at face value that Cleveland, who was trying to trade for AJ Mccarron at the deadline, who managed to fail to execute an agreed upon trade, and whose front office was fired a month later, would have been able to quickly offer the Houston pick based on a leak after JG looks good down the stretch.

Personally, Im skeptical.

 

[joe dokes]

T
Of course there are many moving parts. I listed multiple reasons why BB might have made this move and it's obvious that there would be multiple factors. Everyone here seems to get that. At bottom, though, IF BB could have gotten more -- and the analogy to leaving a few thousand bucks on the table in a residential home scenario is ridiculously off in that there's a more substantial difference in what SF sent the Patsand what Bill presumably might have gotten than just a few sheckels -- it remains curious that Bill did not get more than a second for Jimmy, and it begs some questions. That there are questions doesn't mean that there aren't really good answers. And yep, nothing exists in a vacuum. But we're dealing with an elite Grand PooBah in Belichick, and when he comes away with only a second round pick for an asset like Jimmy, and there are reports that other teams would have paid higher, I think that warrants a few raised eye brows and is noteworthy. It's just not the norm.

The only thing that "begs the question" (assumes the answer to the question in the question) is referring to the traded QB as "an asset like Jimmy."

I'll go back again to, "Why is the Cassel return not a good comp?"

 

[BigJimEd]

I'll go back again to, "Why is the Cassel return not a good comp?"

Why would he be? Just because he was a backup in NE?

Different QBs with different pedigrees ten years apart.
Why would you assume teams would pay similarly for them?

 

[Van Everyman]

FWIW even tho I think this story has been overstated to some degree, I think it’s fine that @Buck Showalter is pressing us a bit here and even being a bit of a troll about it. I do think we shouldn’t put any stock in public comments by Kraft/BB/Brady – or “Jimmy had a TB12 keycard” refutings of details in the story. When we do, we make ourselves look like (the) fanboys (we are).

Smoke is more probable than not, you might say.

 

[k-factory]

The most surprising thing so far is how much chatter has come from the principals. Once the joint statement was issued i was convinced that everyone in the org would just say something vanilla like "we've addressed this, next question" but thats not been the case.

 

[Blue Monkey]

The most surprising thing so far is how much chatter has come from the principals. Once the joint statement was issued i was convinced that everyone in the org would just say something vanilla like "we've addressed this, next question" but thats not been the case.

That’s what I’m saying!! I don’t get it. It’s definitely outside the norm

 

[DavidTai]

Even TB12 is smart enough not to tackle the details within the article.

He chose wisely.

Basically, Tom is much more self-aware to know that people's perspectives of him might color what they're saying (like the movie Rashomon), but he's not going to disregard that people -will- think these things. Nobody is going to be 100 percent sure that people will say the same thing behind their backs that they say to their faces.

If for example, he says something he didn't intend to be taken one way, but someone else does, well then, he might not realize it till it's pointed out to him. (I think people already mentioned the Player of the Week reward not existing, but I wonder if he'd gone 'dammit, I wanted that parking spot' practice reward at some point, which got translated through a game of telephone into 'not happy with getting the Player of the Week'. The perils of unnamed sources and hearsay.)

I'd say most people are smart enough to get that, but apparently I was wrong.

While I'm at it, I still don't get why people think the Browns would have seriously offered the Houston pick at the deadline. As I recall it, I remember Hue Jackson being -pissed- that Cleveland made no play for Garoppolo.

Hell, the Cleveland paper states:

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2017/10/hue_jackson_pushed_hard_for_ji.html

One source told cleveland.com that "it's highly doubtful'' the Browns made a run at Garoppolo this time around.

 

[Jimbodandy]

FWIW even tho I think this story has been overstated to some degree, I think it’s fine that @Buck Showalter is pressing us a bit here and even being a bit of a troll about it. I do think we shouldn’t put any stock in public comments by Kraft/BB/Brady – or “Jimmy had a TB12 keycard” refutings of details in the story. When we do, we make ourselves look like (the) fanboys (we are).

Smoke is more probable than not, you might say.

This last sentence is a copout.

Two different summaries of key takeaways from the last week:

1. TFB is so petty that he did an end run on BFB and got RFK to force a personnel move, against all precedents in all cases here.

2. TB12 enterprises blurred a few locker room lines, forcing BFB to draw some boundaries, likely not to TFB's liking, but nothing they can't get past.

The latter is entirely believable. The former is based on jack shit.

Of course a professional writer didn't write a Tolstoy length exposee that's 100% fabrication and agenda driven nonsense. But the fact that the important parts are refuted by all of the principals, have no precedents on which to be believed to begin with, have had no public corroboration whatsoever, and are accompanied by such sloppy reporting of details--that speaks for itself.

The fact that TFB felt aggrieved when his binky got the Siberia treatment doesn't validate the rest of this nonsense.

 

[JokersWildJIMED]

The only thing that "begs the question" (assumes the answer to the question in the question) is referring to the traded QB as "an asset like Jimmy."

I'll go back again to, "Why is the Cassel return not a good comp?"

Just because Cassel was also traded by the Pats I am not sure why he is such a great comp. The guy never played in college and then went and played for an entire season on an absolutely stacked NEP team, showing plenty of flaws that were later fatally exposed, whereas Jimmy had a stellar college career but only played 1.5 pro games. How Jimmy played in those 1.5 games was telling and is was obvious to many of how special he was (so special that BB was rumored to want "multiple" first rounders in the offseason). Also there was very little difference with how Jimmy played against AZ and MIA, vs. how he played for SF in the last five games...i.e. national media folks were gushing over him after his 1.5 games, it was only his injury that slowed the flow of good press.

Everyone understands the salary cap issues, but the return for such a valuable asset seemed low at the time. Either something else was up (as others have speculated, BB tried to screw the Pats?, panics?, tried to find the best possible landing place for Jimmy damn the effect on the overall return to NEP?, etc.) or BB just "messed up" on the return (didn't really try to maximize) and tried to make the expedient deal with a colleague. Given the way trades have gone down, as well as the return (buying or selling) over the last couple of years, I go with the latter.

Cleveland did not make a run at JG because they were never given the opportunity, at least according to their FO at the time.

 

[tims4wins]

On the flip side, there was 16 games of film of Cassel, and he was recruited by USC - not Eastern Illinois.

 

[Al Zarilla]

Somebody awhile back on another thread (I'm too busy/lazy to hunt it down) alluded to a "silent handshake deal" between BB and Jimmy that the Pats would get him back in three years as a condition of the SF deal. Any validity to this? Anyone?

Reports out here (SF Bay Area) were that he couldn’t wait to get on the plane for San Francisco. He wanted to play, mon.

 

[Saints Rest]

Agreed. And you have to consider this: How many teams would've given up more for JG at the deadline? You need a QB-needy team that is willing to commit not only draft picks in a trade, but a big expensive contract for an unproven QB in the offseason. That team is also likely to be rebuilding (for example, I doubt Jax would've upset the apple cart to bring in an unknown midseason).

How many potential suitors are there? CLE, NYG, NYJ, DEN, MIA, ARI? And BB is getting how much more from one of these teams? Take out NYJ and MIA being in the division. Take out DEN since they're potential AFC competition. I just don't see the magical fit that is getting the Patriots some unbelievable draft pick bounty.

I am 100% in agreement with ElCab. I would also add that no other team could include in the return (and I completely believe that this was an unspoken agreement) a backup QB who could step right in to the system and culture as Brian Hoyer. I firmly believe that this deal really must be considered as JG for BH + 2nd round pick.

The only thing that "begs the question" (assumes the answer to the question in the question) is referring to the traded QB as "an asset like Jimmy."

I'll go back again to, "Why is the Cassel return not a good comp?"

When Cassel was traded, he had 15.5 games under his belt. When JG was traded, he had 1.5.
When Cassel was traded, he was signed for a full year. When JG was traded, he had only half a season.
When Cassel was traded, he also had Vrabel as part of the package going that way.

 

[OurF'ingCity]

At bottom, though, IF BB could have gotten more -- and the analogy to leaving a few thousand bucks on the table in a residential home scenario is ridiculously off in that there's a more substantial difference in what SF sent the Patsand what Bill presumably might have gotten than just a few sheckels -- it remains curious that Bill did not get more than a second for Jimmy, and it begs some questions. That there are questions doesn't mean that there aren't really good answers. And yep, nothing exists in a vacuum. But we're dealing with an elite Grand PooBah in Belichick, and when he comes away with only a second round pick for an asset like Jimmy, and there are reports that other teams would have paid higher, I think that warrants a few raised eye brows and is noteworthy. It's just not the norm.

This to me is the most annoying part of Wickersham's article. There is a really good, interesting story to be written about the JG saga starting with the Brissett trade and going through the JG trade. Talk to people in the Browns organization - what was really offered prior to the draft? Talk to people in the Pats organization - what was the thinking behind not trading JG at that time? Was it the "insurance" JG provided? Were the offers just not as good as reported? Did something change in how the organization viewed Brady? And then take us through the trade when it did happen - did Jimmy demand a trade to only specific teams? Did the Pats take less intentionally to do Jimmy a solid? How does the cap situation play into all of this - what exactly would the Patriots have needed to do to keep Jimmy and Brady for at least one more year?

Some of those questions have been somewhat addressed in scattershot reports by others but no one has put together the full timeline yet. But because Wickersham so obviously set out to write a "Patriots on the brink of collapse" piece (and probably because it's much easier to get low-level sources to dish gossip about how the team "feels" instead of higher-level sources about the actual facts of what happened), we instead get second-hand reports that certain Pats "staffers" thought the trade "made no sense," which, regardless of your feelings on the veracity of the rest of the story, is just lazy reporting.

Edit: And even if you believe Kraft forced the trade, that doesn't explain (a) why he apparently changed his mind between the draft and the deadline (if he wanted to keep Brady wouldn't he have told Belichick to trade JG at the draft when supposedly the offers were better) and (b) why JG was "practically given away" (Wickersham's words and obviously a ridiculous statement in itself showing an utter lack of understanding of the value of draft picks and contract length) after Kraft's demand. Kraft is no dummy so even if he wanted JG gone he would never have told Belichick to take the first offer on the table - he would have told Belichick to trade him for the highest value possible.

 

[Stitch01]

The most surprising thing so far is how much chatter has come from the principals. Once the joint statement was issued i was convinced that everyone in the org would just say something vanilla like "we've addressed this, next question" but thats not been the case.

They did today now that Tennessee work has started in full. Given that the piece is half of an attack on their star player, its not really surprising to me that there's some commentary.

FWIW even tho I think this story has been overstated to some degree, I think it’s fine that @Buck Showalter is pressing us a bit here and even being a bit of a troll about it. I do think we shouldn’t put any stock in public comments by Kraft/BB/Brady – or “Jimmy had a TB12 keycard” refutings of details in the story. When we do, we make ourselves look like (the) fanboys (we are).

Smoke is more probable than not, you might say.

I disagree with those who say he's trolling. This is what Buck believes and Buck believes he's more woke than the mere plebes that post here and posts accordingly, but he posts what he believes. Its not trolling. So that's his view and that's fine. I agree with you that there's likely tension in the building

That said, the idea that this article is a warning shot fired by BB at the organization through a leaked article to ESPN, of all outlets, has no real grounding in reality and deserves push back.

 

[lexrageorge]

All of it? Every single morsel?!

Yup – nothing to see here. It’s ESPN making stuff up.

So Guerrero was not previously allowed on the sidelines and housed in an office within Gillette….got it.

This story was broken over a month ago, so is nothing new. Noone here ever claimed that the ESPN reporter made it up, either.

Belichick, the consummate thinker and architect of the most successful run in the history of the NFL, couldn’t possibly be thinking of moving-away from a 41 year-old quarterback and his $22 million cap hit….nope, wouldn’t even cross his mind, nothing to see here.

He may be thinking about it, but the season Brady just had made that decision all the more difficult. Such is life.

The story of JG’s injury and his request to be treated by the TB12 trainers (details which would only have been known by high-level staffers – with little or no fear of retribution from the organization when leaking that to a national writer), a total concoction on the part of a national writer that pulled fiction out of the air.

This story has been thoroughly debunked by multiple local beat writers. JG had a pass code to enter the facility. Links are earlier in this thread. Also, if you read the very carefully phrased paragraph that the author wrote discussing the story, it's clear that he's attempting to piece together some rumors he's heard from low-level functionaries.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22012605/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-says-celebrate-jimmy-garopplo-trade-san-francisco-49ers

Asked what was true in the story, Brady called that "a tough question."

"Everyone has different truths," Brady said. "When you talk about the way I see things, the way you guys see things, the way the writer may see things, the way Coach Belichick may see things, everyone has different truths based on their perspectives. I feel like I go about my business like I have every year, and again, I like to speak for myself, because that's how -- I don't want to speak on someone else's behalf or what their experiences are. I try to do the best I can do, like I've always done."

---

Even TB12 is smart enough not to tackle the details within the article.

He chose wisely.

Nice cut and paste job. I listened to this interview live. You deliberately missed the quote where Brady openly disputed the fact that he celebrated Garappolo's being traded, which was one of the central claims in the ESPN article. He also helped debunk the story that the Hogan pass in the Chargers game was a result of Brady's missing an open receiver, a story that has also been debunked by multiple reporters already. so, yes, he did indeed tackle the details. Or at least the details that directly involved Brady.

 

[Bowhemian]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22012605/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-says-celebrate-jimmy-garopplo-trade-san-francisco-49ers
Even TB12 is smart enough not to tackle the details within the article.
He chose wisely.

Keep on keepin' on Buck. Here is some more details in the article you may have missed:

"I think that's just such a poor characterization of anything. In 18 years, I've never celebrated when someone has been traded, been cut," Brady said Tuesday in his weekly interview on sports radio WEEI's Kirk and Callahan Show. "I would say that's disappointing to hear that someone would express that, or a writer would express that, because it's so far from what my beliefs are about my teammates.

"I think I'm very empathetic toward other people's experiences. I know those situations aren't easy. I've never been traded or released, but I can imagine how that might feel. I would never, ever feel that way about when Jimmy got traded, when Jacoby [Brissett] got traded. I've kept in touch with all those guys. When Matt Cassel was gone. All these guys I've worked with, I felt like I had such a great relationship with all the quarterbacks I've worked with. I kept in touch with basically everybody. So to characterize that as a certain way is just completely, completely wrong."

 

[Bowhemian]

And one more detail you may have missed:

Brady also denied preventing Garoppolo from working with Alex Guerrero while defending his relationship with his personal trainer and business partner.

"You guys obviously know how I feel about Alex and the work we've done together," Brady said. "I just keep doing what my process has been and worked [for me] for a long time."

 

[lexrageorge]

Just a note regarding the JG trade. I think one of the issues is that deadline day trade deals in the NFL seldom involve high draft picks (Randy Moss plus a 7th rounder netted a 3rd rounder). BB may have honestly felt a 2nd rounder from a winless team was the best he could get, and did not want to take any risk of having the trade fall through over the off chance of picking up a couple of slots in the draft. Were the Browns surprised? Likely. Would they have offered more? Noone really knows for sure. But the Browns aren't Belichick's problem. Sometimes you take the deal that's on the table and don't look back or worry that you could have gotten more. That's basic business, actually.

And the trade did net the Pats a backup QB, which is not something that they would easily find off the scrap heap in November. And, as for Hoyer, he does have knowledge of the system, so he's about the most "plug compatible" backup they could get at that time.

Is Hoyer good? Not really. But could he had helped the team to victory against the Bills or Yets during the second half of the regular season if Brady needed to miss a game or two? Quite possibly. Fortunately, we did not need to test that theory.

 

[BusRaker]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22012605/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-says-celebrate-jimmy-garopplo-trade-san-francisco-49ers

Even TB12 is smart enough

I'm a little disappointed that you all are giving this troll job so much attention

 

[TheoShmeo]

The only thing that "begs the question" (assumes the answer to the question in the question) is referring to the traded QB as "an asset like Jimmy."

I'll go back again to, "Why is the Cassel return not a good comp?"

Others have answered the question well. I will add that Matt Cassell looked to me like a serviceable guy who played better than I expected. I saw MUCH more in Jimmy than Cassell during his limited playing time in NE, and I think Jimmy -- while of course still with only limited mileage -- has continued to demonstrate substantially more promise than Cassell ever did. I also think that my perceptions of the relative merits of the two are not unique and that the view of Jimmy's upside is generally a lot higher than Matt's was.

To ElCab's point, I think the very fact that BB is the best in the business is what makes this return curious. We're not at the point when all moves must be good ones precisely because he made them. I don't think he got fleeced either. I do think he could have gotten more than the got, and that remains weird to me.

 

[DavidTai]

Cleveland did not make a run at JG because they were never given the opportunity, at least according to their FO at the time.

I don't believe that. They simply didn't try, at least not according to their reporters at the time.

 

[troparra]

The most surprising thing so far is how much chatter has come from the principals. Once the joint statement was issued i was convinced that everyone in the org would just say something vanilla like "we've addressed this, next question" but thats not been the case.

You forgot about Deflategate. The Pats took info they received at face value and reacted as if those were the facts. They kept doing that for a bit, and playing the game, and it bit them right on the ass and now 2/3 of the country is convinced they are cheaters. They are doing things differently now because things are different now.

 

[InstaFace]

I'm a little disappointed that you all are giving this troll job so much attention

Buck has been posting here for at least 10, maybe 15 years. I believe he is sincere in his statements (even if completely wrong), about as much as I believe that Kraft didn't order the code red. You can't make thousands of posts on a board without people coming to know how your mind works at least a little.

Look, part of the cost of participating in a message board that isn't an echo chamber - one that has opinions from all sides, all walks of life, multiple fanbases, etc - is presuming good faith in your fellow posters, even when your jerk reaction would be to dismiss them out of hand. It's necessary to get the benefit of a place like this. There's at least one poster who isn't here anymore, because he violated that presumption, so you can rest assured the mods are very concerned about actual trolling. But anyone who's sitting around here claiming "troll!" has the burden of proof on them.

 

[joe dokes]

I am 100% in agreement with ElCab. I would also add that no other team could include in the return (and I completely believe that this was an unspoken agreement) a backup QB who could step right in to the system and culture as Brian Hoyer. I firmly believe that this deal really must be considered as JG for BH + 2nd round pick.


When Cassel was traded, he had 15.5 games under his belt. When JG was traded, he had 1.5.
When Cassel was traded, he was signed for a full year. When JG was traded, he had only half a season.
When Cassel was traded, he also had Vrabel as part of the package going that way.

I think we agree. They got an upper 2d round pick and Hoyer for JG; they got an upper 2d rounder for Cassel and Vrabel. The claims of "insufficient value" on the JG trade seem to be overblwon hair-splitting. (or maybe I completely mis-read your post?)

 

[joe dokes]

Others have answered the question well. I will add that Matt Cassell looked to me like a serviceable guy who played better than I expected. I saw MUCH more in Jimmy than Cassell during his limited playing time in NE, and I think Jimmy -- while of course still with only limited mileage -- has continued to demonstrate substantially more promise than Cassell ever did. I also think that my perceptions of the relative merits of the two are not unique and that the view of Jimmy's upside is generally a lot higher than Matt's was.

To ElCab's point, I think the very fact that BB is the best in the business is what makes this return curious. We're not at the point when all moves must be good ones precisely because he made them. I don't think he got fleeced either. I do think he could have gotten more than the got, and that remains weird to me.

I seem to recall quite a few, "they gave up Cassel AND Vrabel and only got a 2nd round pick?" at the time. But I could be misremembering.

 

[BigJimEd]

I think we agree. They got an upper 2d round pick and Hoyer for JG; they got an upper 2d rounder for Cassel and Vrabel. The claims of "insufficient value" on the JG trade seem to be overblwon hair-splitting.

Again how is Cassell a comp? Just because he wad traded by the Patriots?

Not that I think the Pats could have gotten much more value but I think Cassel is about as relevant as Plunkett.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Nm. Not worth it.

 

[joe dokes]

Again how is Cassell a comp? Just because he wad traded by the Patriots?
Not that I think the Pats could have gotten much more value but I think Cassel is about as relevant as Plunkett.

I know you weren't being literal, but Plunkett was basically deceased when he was let go, until his Oakland resurrection.

No comps are perfect......Young Brady backup with limited, but successful, mileage, traded in the salary cap era, with cap concerns, etc. etc. . I think its a reasonable comp that somewhat dispels the idea that there was some magical maximum, optimum value out there, that BB failed to capitalize on, under the circumstances.

 

[Auger34]

This isn't the hottest take in the world but I don't think there's some vast conspiracy around the Garroppolo trade. I think there were a few key factors which led BB to target SF as a trade partner for Jimmy G
Belichick wanted to trade Garoppolo to the NFC because he thinks he's the real deal. That eliminates the Browns (and I do think the Browns would have given up a good amount more than a single 2nd round pick. I'd venture they'd do two 2nd rounder and another 3rd or 4th rounder but I digress)
BB also wanted to reward Jimmy G (and to a much lesser extent Don Yee) for being a good soldier and trade him somewhere where he would flourish. I think Belichick thinks a lot of Kyle Shanahan and his ability to scheme an offense/develop quarterbacks. (Lombardi talks up Shanahan all the time on his podcasts). In an effort to eliminate any possible distractions and/or leaks about a possible trade, he makes Dan Fran a reasonable offer he knows they will accept.

Done deal

 

[InstaFace]

Others have answered the question well. I will add that Matt Cassell looked to me like a serviceable guy who played better than I expected. I saw MUCH more in Jimmy than Cassell during his limited playing time in NE, and I think Jimmy -- while of course still with only limited mileage -- has continued to demonstrate substantially more promise than Cassell ever did. I also think that my perceptions of the relative merits of the two are not unique and that the view of Jimmy's upside is generally a lot higher than Matt's was.

To ElCab's point, I think the very fact that BB is the best in the business is what makes this return curious. We're not at the point when all moves must be good ones precisely because he made them. I don't think he got fleeced either. I do think he could have gotten more than the got, and that remains weird to me.

I think you're looking at this pretty objectively. On the other hand, in the eyes of many of us, we ARE at the point where, if BB made the move, we must presume it to be optimal unless proven otherwise. He takes bets, and not all of them pay off, but his mistakes so rarely cost the team anything material that it'd be harsh indeed to get on his case.

This is obviously a big move, as a 1st-rounder or near-1st-rounder is a major, team-altering asset. But I think you've heard a number of possibilities that answer your question. With the caveat that we'll never know for sure, you need to remember:

- We didn't hear about Cleveland's supposed offer on (say) Nov 4th. We heard about it after Garoppolo set the league on fire down the stretch. Ass-covering, rather than factual statement, should be the presumption.
- Cleveland's front-office turmoil may have made a good deal unlikely to get approved in short order
- Houston looked like a solid mid-table / borderline playoff team at the time of the deadline
- Belichick hates leaks of things that may not happen, so running a true auction (even among only the 4-5 likely midseason suitors) would be against his nature
- The GMs in the league generally overvalue their first-round picks, because of the PR risks of trading it. Trade it for something less than stellar, even if it was a good bet at the time, and you (the GM) get crucified; merely make a bad pick on draft day, and it's the player gets blamed 2-3 years down the road.

So any of the following are both plausible and would be sufficient to explain things, individually or in combination:

1) None of the other plausible suitors at the time (CLE, ARI, JAX, DEN, MIA) would entertain a topping offer when called upon, and now several are lying to the press and/or their owners
2) Several of the plausible destinations may have been only a good QB away from being a threat to NE (JAX, MIA, BUF), so downstream considerations weighed in
3) BB felt he had a good idea of the other suitors' valuations of Garoppolo based on offseason conversations, that they were lower than what he sought with SF, and as nothing had materially changed with Garoppolo, he could assume those valuations hadn't changed either
4) Garoppolo / Yee had given Belichick a list of teams that he would view favorably for signing a long-term deal with, and SF was on there but others (particularly CLE) were not
5) The old man is getting sentimental and felt Garoppolo could succeed in SF but wouldn't in several other places (Arians retiring, immediate playoff expectations in JAX/DEN, pit of misery in CLE, etc), and felt Garoppolo had given him enough that he deserved a good turn in reply

I'd say all of those are likelier than (6) Belichick did something hastily at the last minute and got taken, or (7) Belichick drastically misread the value of the QB he had been nurturing for 3 years.

 

[BigJimEd]

I know you weren't being literal, but Plunkett was basically deceased when he was let go, until his Oakland resurrection.

No comps are perfect......Young Brady backup with limited, but successful, mileage, traded in the salary cap era, with cap concerns, etc. etc. . I think its a reasonable comp that somewhat dispels the idea that there was some magical maximum, optimum value out there, that BB failed to capitalize on, under the circumstances.

Yeah. Plunkett and my post in general was a bit over the top.
I don't necessarily agree on the comp but think they probably got what they could at the deadline.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

Buck has been posting here for at least 10, maybe 15 years. I believe he is sincere in his statements (even if completely wrong), about as much as I believe that Kraft didn't order the code red. You can't make thousands of posts on a board without people coming to know how your mind works at least a little.

Agreed with this. I disagree with Buck's take but do believe his posts are sincere and do not intend to troll.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Buck has been posting here for at least 10, maybe 15 years. I believe he is sincere in his statements (even if completely wrong), about as much as I believe that Kraft didn't order the code red. You can't make thousands of posts on a board without people coming to know how your mind works at least a little.

Look, part of the cost of participating in a message board that isn't an echo chamber - one that has opinions from all sides, all walks of life, multiple fanbases, etc - is presuming good faith in your fellow posters, even when your jerk reaction would be to dismiss them out of hand. It's necessary to get the benefit of a place like this. There's at least one poster who isn't here anymore, because he violated that presumption, so you can rest assured the mods are very concerned about actual trolling. But anyone who's sitting around here claiming "troll!" has the burden of proof on them.

There’s a vast difference between being a dissenting opinion to avoid an echo chamber and trolling. Buck is quite clearly doing the latter.

It’s most definitely a positive to have different opinions and ideas, to challenge opinions, etc, but when you get to the point of completely ignoring things that are contradictory to your stance - oh, I dunno, let’s say the simple fact that JG was in fact not denied access to TB12 and in fact had his own key card, for one- and then double down on wild ass assumptions to back yourself up, then that’s beyond that. He’s trolling.

And it’s great he’s been here a while and has a lot of posts, it’s great that some have been kicked out for doing it, but we all know it doesn’t stop it from happening (as DH3/Plympton can affirm) or that a lot aren’t just let back in later (as you and Moviegoer can affirm). There is, in fact, a line though. Or at least there ought to be.

 

[InstaFace]

There’s a vast difference between being a dissenting opinion to avoid an echo chamber and trolling. Buck is quite clearly doing the latter.

Oh, well that settles it then.