53-Man Roster Predictions / Cut Watch Thread

[Granite Sox]

I really liked 2013 Tommy Kelly. Sorry to see him go, but assume he wasn't up to last season's level.

I think it also means they're encouraged by what they've seen from Easley and Worthy in limited practice situations. Siliga, Jones, and Vellano are (obviously) more familiar to the staff.

Man, that's 5 young talented interior DLs to go with Papa Vince. Siliga, Worthy, and Easley in particular have me intrigued.

 

[axx]

I had to look up Kelly's contract and sure enough he did restructure his deal this offseason. Under his new deal, the money saved by cutting isn't much (780k) but it does remove the roster bonuses he would have gotten.
 
He may be back under a true vet min deal after week 1.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

Maybe KFP's reaction was "knee jerk".

I for one am agnostic, as I don't pretend to have knowledge remotely close to the coaches', let alone know what plans, if any, they might have for the cap space saved today.

Yes. You're the best sports fan on the planet!

My reaction - to repeat myself because you apparently have a hard time on the first read through - is that the cut signifies Kelly's inability to recover from his injury. I'm bummed that a player who played very well before getting hurt last year isnt able to contribute anymore.

Or I know way more than BB and am shocked they'd release such a superstar.

Donkey.

 

[SMU_Sox]

I had the same reaction when they released him and immediately wondered how Wilfork's recovery was going. It's just a grim reminder that with age you can't always come back at full capacity from an injury.

 

[wutang112878]

These are somewhat classy moves by the Pats to release these guys so early in the process so they have a chance to catch on with someone else.
 
I do wish Kelly could have returned to form, he and Vince are a tough twosome to deal with

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

I agree with most of what KFP says. 
 
Having said that, BinkyWagon thread WELCOMES unabashedly enthusiastic hyperbolic ultra-optimistic proclaims and projections with open arms. 

 

[Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt]

Stevan Ridley could be cut or traded, but I doubt it. He's still their best between the tackles running back. Not elite, but quite athletic and, when not fumbling, is a pretty damn productive runner.

James White hasn't looked great in the games so far, but he has been reported to be fairly impressive throughout the off season, is a high-ish round pick, covers us in case of the likely Vereen-jury problems, and has indeed run with the ones. He was out there in two-back sets with Vereen for several plays the other night. There's not even a one percent chance he gets cut, IMO. No way.

I'm a little bummed/surprised about Tommy Kelly, but I wonder if he's re-signed after week one - in the unlikely event he doesn't get picked up in the next few days - to one of those "I'm a veteran and my contract isn't fully guaranteed if you sign me after the first game"-type contracts.

Jonas Gray could make it if he beats out Bolden. If not, he either signs elsewhere or finds a slot on the practice squad.

EDIT: because I'm dumb and careless.

 

[Super Nomario]

My 53-man projection breakdown (I have 84 players presently under contract)
 
Locks (40)
Lead-pipe locks - uncuttable due to role (21): Brady, Vereen, Edelman, Amendola, LaFell, Gronkowski, Solder, Vollmer, Cannon, Mankins, Wilfork, Chandler Jones, Ninkovich, Mayo, Hightower, Collins, Revis, Logan Ryan, Arrington, McCourty, Harmon
Redshirt brigade - going to make it due to contract / potential but role for 2014 is unclear (6) - Garoppolo, James White, Dobson, Cameron Fleming, Stork, Easley
Special teams locks - either these guys are going to make it or they're going to need a replacement filling the same role (7) - Gostkowski, Allen, Aiken, Slater, Ebner, Kanorris Davis, Chris White
Near-locks - not unthinkable they wouldn't make it but it would be a pretty big shock (3) - Mallett, Ridley, Dennard
Health questions - would seem to be locks if healthy but might end up on IR (3) - Hoomanawanui, Chris Jones, Siliga
 
The Bubble (30)
Earned a job in camp (4) - Develin, Thompkins, Kline, Butler
Competitions, loser gets cut (4) - C (Wendell vs Connolly), S (Tavon Wilson vs Chung)
Need more depth - will take at least one at each of these (16) - RB (Bolden, Finch, Gray), OL (Devey, Halapio, Barker), DL (Vellano, Worthy), Edge (Buchanan, Zach Moore, Fleming, Bequette), LB (Beauharnais, Gordon, Morris, Ja'Gared Davis)
Crowded out - probably enough locks to fill the position, but who knows (6) - WR (Boyce, Gallon), TE (Maneri, Justin Jones), DB (Jemea Thomas, Swanson)
 
Not on the 53 (14)
Stash them elsewhere (4) - Suspended List (Tyms, Browner), IR (Gaffney), NFI (Chris Martin)
Longshots / practice squad (10) - Van Hooser, Derrick Johnson, Cave, Tuipulotu, Bass, Manumaleuna, Skinner, McCuller, Hawkins, Gary
 
Final prediction: the 40 locks above, plus Develin, Thompkins, Kline, Butler, Wendell, Tavon Wilson, Bolden, Halapio, Vellano, Worthy, Buchanan, Zach Moore, Beauharnais

 

[Stitch01]

When the discussion occurred Monday, Stich and Soxfan expressed the view that Ridley is not a lock, and would not be shocked if he were traded. And if there were more than 8 posts on the subject, I'd be surprised.
That's why I was surprised that this bit of out-of-box thinking offended you so much.

I hope it was clear from my comments that i thought the chances of Ridley being cut or moved were still relatively slim and I thought moving on would be a mistake, I just that don't think he's a stone lock.

Im surprised my view is that controversial, I don't think I'm far from Mike Reiss in that Ridley assessment.

 

[Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt]

Given everything I've heard throughout the off season and camps, and given how high they were said to have been last season as he developed, Josh Kline is a lock. He's the first interior lineman off the bench, and may even wind up starting.

 

[soxfan121]

Here's the posts that have KFP's quality-control meter pinned at "fanboy bullshit" and has provoked these lectures about how I have let the forum down:
 

I think Bolden's fate is, in part, tied to what they think of Gray and whether he can sneak through to the practice squad. 
 
I also don't think Ridley's a lock although I personally think it would be a bad move to cut him.

Ridley for a late round pick is certainly within the realm of possibility, given Gray's effort and White's reported development. Vereen, White, Bolden and Gray would be a fine group. 

 
What HOTSPORTZTAKEZ those are! "Not a lock", "personally think it's a bad move" and "certainly within the realm of possibility". 
 
My god...that shit needs to be shut down. Because...
 

 
Because we should hold ourselves to a higher standard.
 
5 years ago, this forum was a steaming pile of shit. The consistent posters in this forum have worked very hard to bring the level of discussion up, and one of the (only) best tools any of the non-mods have is to call people on their bullshit. It's what keeps people honest on this forum and on this board in general.
 
I understand that people get excited for football, but when members - active with a history or new and just getting started - start to make rash and impulsive statements, they deserve to be called on it. People over blowing the Ridley situation was just one example (and, no, that doesn't mean he won't be benched halfway through the season if he starts fumbling all over the field, but that's not the point). Coupling it with a sudden and intense infatuation with the new shiny toys that media members use to fill bandwidth (James White) gives talking points that have no substance. Members aren't using their own instincts and knowledge to see that White looks mediocre and sluggish on the field and that he's running with the second and third team. They buy into the hype that one media member spits out and is regurgitated by every other member of the media circus.
 
That example is only amplified when people turn full fan boy. Ryan Mallett has "popped", Brian Tyms is a serious deep threat and legit X receiver, Justin Jones is a real option to play second fiddle to Gronk, Bolden/Gray/Vereen/White is a "fine group" at running back. Believe it or not, my intent isn't to be a dickhead, but this is the kind of stuff we would kill inferior football boards for.
 
Again, I know everyone is excited for the football season to start, and I also know that we don't have to keep this forum purely informative and educational. But when those statements start to drive false narratives ("Ridley was benched in the preseason! Of course its reasonable to trade him for a 6th round pick!"), it becomes a problem and it should be pointed out. We are better than that.

 
Well, I've learned my lesson. I apologize for using such horrible terms like "realm of possibility" and "fine" so irresponsibly that lower the standards of the forum in their obvious inappropriateness. These are the rantings of a hopeless fanboy who needs to be lectured about what opinions are and are not "in the realm of possibility" or "fine". Because KFP is not going to stand for such fanboy bullshit. 
 
Thanks man. I need you on that wall. I want you on that wall. This forum is definitely better when you are there to keep fanboy bullshit in check. 

 

[Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt]

I believe it's "I want you on that wall, I need you on that wall," in that order.

(That there is some serious, Sorkin-flavored fanboy bullshit.)

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

Taking a brief cool down period. PM me if you don't agree.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

Alright -- coffee break is over. 

 

[Shelterdog]

I think you're conflating disappointment with criticism of the actual decision. And the two are quite different. In my case, I'm disappointed that James Anderson won't be on the team because I liked the signing but I'm not questioning the decision to cut him.

 
I guess I wasn't being clear.  A bunch of folks are surprised that Kelly got cut and I in turn find that surprising because lord knows how ones distinguishes one 5 technique DL from another, particularly given the limited snaps we've seen from starters.  In same cases (KFP's) it seems to be disappointment that Kelly wasn't able to come back; in others (Phragles, some of the guys like Loyko and Girardi on twitter) there's an apparent belief that Kelly is still good.

 

[wutang112878]

My 53-man projection breakdown (I have 84 players presently under contract)
 
Locks (40)
Lead-pipe locks - uncuttable due to role (21): Brady, Vereen, Edelman, Amendola, LaFell, Gronkowski, Solder, Vollmer, Cannon, Mankins, Wilfork, Chandler Jones, Ninkovich, Mayo, Hightower, Collins, Revis, Logan Ryan, Arrington, McCourty, Harmon
Redshirt brigade - going to make it due to contract / potential but role for 2014 is unclear (6) - Garoppolo, James White, Dobson, Cameron Fleming, Stork, Easley
Special teams locks - either these guys are going to make it or they're going to need a replacement filling the same role (7) - Gostkowski, Allen, Aiken, Slater, Ebner, Kanorris Davis, Chris White
Near-locks - not unthinkable they wouldn't make it but it would be a pretty big shock (3) - Mallett, Ridley, Dennard
Health questions - would seem to be locks if healthy but might end up on IR (3) - Hoomanawanui, Chris Jones, Siliga
 
The Bubble (30)
Earned a job in camp (4) - Develin, Thompkins, Kline, Butler
Competitions, loser gets cut (4) - C (Wendell vs Connolly), S (Tavon Wilson vs Chung)
Need more depth - will take at least one at each of these (16) - RB (Bolden, Finch, Gray), OL (Devey, Halapio, Barker), DL (Vellano, Worthy), Edge (Buchanan, Zach Moore, Fleming, Bequette), LB (Beauharnais, Gordon, Morris, Ja'Gared Davis)
Crowded out - probably enough locks to fill the position, but who knows (6) - WR (Boyce, Gallon), TE (Maneri, Justin Jones), DB (Jemea Thomas, Swanson)
 
Not on the 53 (14)
Stash them elsewhere (4) - Suspended List (Tyms, Browner), IR (Gaffney), NFI (Chris Martin)
Longshots / practice squad (10) - Van Hooser, Derrick Johnson, Cave, Tuipulotu, Bass, Manumaleuna, Skinner, McCuller, Hawkins, Gary
 
Final prediction: the 40 locks above, plus Develin, Thompkins, Kline, Butler, Wendell, Tavon Wilson, Bolden, Halapio, Vellano, Worthy, Buchanan, Zach Moore, Beauharnais

 
I'm with you on about 80% of this.  But I was comparing this to last years final 53 and I think there might be some small differences. 
 
- Last year they kept 8 O-lineman, and I wouldnt be surprised if that was Solder, Mankins, Wendell, Cannon and Vollmer as the starts with Connolly, Stork and probably Devey as the backups.  The main reason I think Devey will make it is that he got 56 out of the 72 snaps last week
- I dont think he's a lock but I think Thompkins is a near lock
- I'd say Butler is somewhere just below near-lock
- I just wish a TE was more likely to make the roster than Develin.  Develin's an intriguing piece but I really dont feel like we have the luxury of using a roster spot on him with our questions at TE.  Unfortunately this is a position where we uncharacteristically dont have that much depth, and I really hope we dont have 6 lineman out there when we are facing Miami
- On the edge I think Buchanan makes it because of his ST value
- At WR I wouldnt be surprised if they kept 6 like last year and Boyce initially makes it before being bumped
- I dont have any intelligent thoughts on the matter but outside of Vince I think its going to be very interesting to see which interior D-lineman Bill keeps
- I hate to type it but I think Tavon wins out over Chung because of his ST value

 

[Stitch01]

Reiss latest 53 man projection
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots
 
Biggest change: Reiss has Jonas Gray making it at running back with Ridley and Finch cut (wouldnt shock me, but think it would be a mistake)
He backed off Tyms making the roster even with the suspension
Ten OL with Halapio the odd man out
Nine DL with the thought Worthy could make it to the practice squad
White and Fleming as the backup LB
Butler on the roster at CB
Chung over Wilson with the thought Wilson could make it to the PS.  No K Davis on the roster

 

[Super Nomario]

I'm with you on about 80% of this.  But I was comparing this to last years final 53 and I think there might be some small differences. 
 
- Last year they kept 8 O-lineman, and I wouldnt be surprised if that was Solder, Mankins, Wendell, Cannon and Vollmer as the starts with Connolly, Stork and probably Devey as the backups.  The main reason I think Devey will make it is that he got 56 out of the 72 snaps last week

I could see Devey making it. He has been playing a lot, but that cuts both ways (the obvious starters don't play much). I had Halapio over him but I don't see that as a guarantee; I don't think either would play much, Halapio has more upside, and Devey seems likelier to sneak onto the practice squad (where he'd be great, as a guy with G/T versatility). I don't think Connolly will stick as a backup - they make $3 MM by cutting him, so he's gone unless he's a starter.
 

- I dont think he's a lock but I think Thompkins is a near lock
- I'd say Butler is somewhere just below near-lock

I basically agree with this. I categorized them differently because they're guys who clearly weren't locks coming to camp (and are very cuttable based on contract) but I do see them as near-locks at this point.
 

- On the edge I think Buchanan makes it because of his ST value
- I hate to type it but I think Tavon wins out over Chung because of his ST value

I meant to make this point more explicitly but I didn't - Buchanan (and Moore), Tavon Wilson, and Brandon Bolden have big edges over their competition with their ST contributions. That's a reason I have them all on.
 

- At WR I wouldnt be surprised if they kept 6 like last year and Boyce initially makes it before being bumped

Wouldn't surprise me either - or Gallon even.
 

- I dont have any intelligent thoughts on the matter but outside of Vince I think its going to be very interesting to see which interior D-lineman Bill keeps

I agree. I made fun of projections that had 10 DL and lo-and-behold ... I have 10 DL above. A lot of that is due to uncertainty about Chris Jones / Siliga (/Easley?) injury status and how much 3-4 they're going to run (I'm guessing: not nearly as much as they showed in preseason) but for sure this is one of the most interesting position groups to watch.

 

[lambeau]

Bubble Busters:
 
-Platoon with Harmon may elevate Chung over Wilson's ST value
-Stepping on TB12 unlikely to negate Devey's experience over Halapio
-Bolden's reliability as Ridley backup and ST value probably outweigh Finch's lateral shiftiness
-Neither can cover, but Fleming can tackle and has 4.52 speed -- White doesn't
-I saw Wendell flattened last year more than Connelly

 

[Rico Guapo]

Reiss latest 53 man projection
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots
 
Biggest change: Reiss has Jonas Gray making it at running back with Ridley and Finch cut (wouldnt shock me, but think it would be a mistake)
He backed off Tyms making the roster even with the suspension
Ten OL with Halapio the odd man out
Nine DL with the thought Worthy could make it to the practice squad
White and Fleming as the backup LB
Butler on the roster at CB
Chung over Wilson with the thought Wilson could make it to the PS.  No K Davis on the roster

 
Bolden over Ridley is a joke.

 

[tims4wins]

Yeah I'm fairly certain Ridley will not be cut. None of the other backs are close to his level as a between the tackles runner, fumbles or no fumbles. Why would they cut him when he is still on his rookie deal? If his fumblitis keeps up then they just won't bring him back next year.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Yeah, no shot Ridley gets cut.  I may have been wrong about keeping Kelly and Anderson, but if Ridley gets cut I will lose my mind.  He's the best runner on the team fumbles aside. 

 

[Stitch01]

 
Bolden over Ridley is a joke.

Special teams would be the reason Bolden makes it I assume.  I wouldn't cut Ridley, but would rather keep Gray and Finch if they go this route or look outside for help if they think Gray or Finch will make the PS and want to build depth.

 

[ShaneTrot]

Special teams would be the reason Bolden makes it I assume.  I wouldn't cut Ridley, but would rather keep Gray and Finch if they go this route or look outside for help if they think Gray or Finch will make the PS and want to build depth.

As far as I can tell Bolden did not play against Carolina. Is he injured? I love Reiss but Ridley getting cut seems crazy. If Gray makes it, it's at the expense of Bolden.

 

[Rico Guapo]

Special teams would be the reason Bolden makes it I assume.  I wouldn't cut Ridley, but would rather keep Gray and Finch if they go this route or look outside for help if they think Gray or Finch will make the PS and want to build depth.

 
To me it doesn't make sense to keep a JAG RB with a prior PED suspension for ST reasons (he's not slater out there) over the best pure RB on the team (fumble issues not withstanding).

 

[Stitch01]

As I posted, I agree with you.

 

[j44thor]

Reiss latest 53 man projection
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots
 
Biggest change: Reiss has Jonas Gray making it at running back with Ridley and Finch cut (wouldnt shock me, but think it would be a mistake)
He backed off Tyms making the roster even with the suspension
Ten OL with Halapio the odd man out
Nine DL with the thought Worthy could make it to the practice squad
White and Fleming as the backup LB
Butler on the roster at CB
Chung over Wilson with the thought Wilson could make it to the PS.  No K Davis on the roster

 
Zero chance Ridley is cut, at least 25 teams put a waiver claim on him if that happens so there is some trade value if they decide to go that route.  Why on Earth would they cut Tyms who they have for free for 4 games?  A lot can happen in 4 games especially with this injury plagued receiving crew.  Cutting someone that has zero impact on the roster at a relatively thin position is borderline crazy.

 

[Stitch01]

I was probably portraying Reiss unfairly with my choice of words.  He has Ridley not on the 53 man roster not necessarily cut.  Clearly you are correct, he has trade value.
 
Id keep Tyms on the roster, but disagree somewhat that WR is a thin position.  1-5 seems pretty solid to me.

 

[j44thor]

I was probably portraying Reiss unfairly with my choice of words.  He has Ridley not on the 53 man roster not necessarily cut.  Clearly you are correct, he has trade value.
 
Id keep Tyms on the roster, but disagree somewhat that WR is a thin position.  1-5 seems pretty solid to me.

 
If they all stay healthy I like the depth but all 5 are moderate to significant injury risks.  Lafell is the only one I wouldn't label a greater than average injury risk.  Come week 12 the chances that 2/3 of the 5 are or have missed more than a couple games seems quite high.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

I hope it was clear from my comments that i thought the chances of Ridley being cut or moved were still relatively slim and I thought moving on would be a mistake, I just that don't think he's a stone lock.

Im surprised my view is that controversial, I don't think I'm far from Mike Reiss in that Ridley assessment.

 
Your post wasn't ambiguous or vague. It was fine, and I threw my opinion in accordingly:
 
"Ridley is the best pure runner they have and it's not even close.
 
The fumbles suck, but he's on the team and will receive the lions share of the runs."
 
 

Here's the posts that have KFP's quality-control meter pinned at "fanboy bullshit" and has provoked these lectures about how I have let the forum down:
 
 
What HOTSPORTZTAKEZ those are! "Not a lock", "personally think it's a bad move" and "certainly within the realm of possibility". 
 
My god...that shit needs to be shut down. Because...
 
 
Well, I've learned my lesson. I apologize for using such horrible terms like "realm of possibility" and "fine" so irresponsibly that lower the standards of the forum in their obvious inappropriateness. These are the rantings of a hopeless fanboy who needs to be lectured about what opinions are and are not "in the realm of possibility" or "fine". Because KFP is not going to stand for such fanboy bullshit. 
 
Thanks man. I need you on that wall. I want you on that wall. This forum is definitely better when you are there to keep fanboy bullshit in check. 

 
Your post was ambiguous and vague and was the epitome of a "HOTSPORTZTAKE".
 
Ridley for a "late round pick" is in the "realm of possibility". You don't say? Brady for a first round pick is also within the realm of possibility. So is Mallett to Houston for a 2nd rounder. If you're doing your best Kevin Garnett impression, then you nailed it. ANYTHINGS POSSIBBBLLEEEEE!
 
You validate your Ridley trade with the second half of your statement, "Vereen, White, Bolden, and Gray would be a fine group", which is just opinionated garbage that also borders on fanboyism. A scat back, 4th round rookie, change of pace back, and unsigned free agent (dropped by 2 teams already) are a "fine group". You managed to make this post in a dismissive and matter-of-fact manner, which sucks because there was no meat on those bones.
 
You incorporated all the "HOTSPORTZTAKES" in a few weakly organized posts: 
 
Conjecture: "Ridley for a late round pick is certainly within the realm of possibility."
 
Poorly informed opinion: "Vereen, White, Bolden and Gray would be a fine group."
 
False narrative:  "Ridley dropped the ball and was benched. Stop me if you've heard this before."
 
Goalpost shifting: "It isn't 'fanboy bullshit' to question his place on the team." (no, but declaring "Ridley for a late round pick is certainly within the realm of possibility" is, which is what I responded to.)
 
Strawmen: "The coach thinks turnovers are kind of a big deal."
 
Fanboyism: "I put more stock in the comments about White by BB & Brady than I do in preseason game action. "
 
Quite the tour de force, really. What makes it even better is how you've turned aggressive and combative over it, because who wants to admit they could have been wrong once in their life, amirite?
 
You can bluster, rant, and rave all you want, bud. But if this conversation brings you back to the time where you made useful posts - which was after a long period of you being one of the worst posters in this forum and working pretty hard to get up to a good standard - then I'm all for it.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

It's getting close to a coffee break time again. I suggest not any one get close to "you being one of the worst posters in this forum" type of response [edit: in any context]. It does not move the topic & discussion/argument forward.

I also recommend posting regarding Ridley's value in the RB thread. I'll be moving some of those posts there soon.

 

[Tony C]

 
Zero chance Ridley is cut, at least 25 teams put a waiver claim on him if that happens so there is some trade value if they decide to go that route.  Why on Earth would they cut Tyms who they have for free for 4 games?  A lot can happen in 4 games especially with this injury plagued receiving crew.  Cutting someone that has zero impact on the roster at a relatively thin position is borderline crazy.

 
Zero chance on Ridley, agreed -- ok, will give the Ridley thing a 0.2% shot just because you never know (and giving the benefit of the doubt, maybe Reiss had someone whisper something to him). But the fucker doesn't really even fumble all that much and he's head and shoulders above the rest of the RB crew.
 
And agree as well that also have no idea what Reiss is talking about on Tyms. Why on earth would they cut him if they can keep him without clogging a roster spot? That makes no sense.
 
I love Reiss because I think he's one of the hardest working guys at ESPN. You compare the amount of content and info he produces to, say, Cimini for the Jets, and that's clear. But as an analyst he brings nothing to the table.
 
Despite Devey's snap counts, I don't see him making the roster -- he has sucked. I still think there's some chance that Mallett will be traded. And I think Gallon has a better shot at making it than Boyce. If they like Tyms, it's possible neither make the roster and they go with 5 WRs until Tyms is back. I have no idea which, but I do think Reiss' roster is light on Special Teams guys -- someone like Wilson or Davis will make the squad (my guess would be Wilson).

 

[Mooch]

With the Patriots holding Mallett out of the final preseason game, I think he's in line to be cut if the Pats can't find a trade partner.

 

[DJnVa]

Mallett's not playing Thursday? JG going the whole game?
 
EDIT: Just saw that in the other thread. Carry on.

 

[Shelterdog]

With the Patriots holding Mallett out of the final preseason game, I think he's in line to be cut if the Pats can't find a trade partner.

. If memory serves the Pats had rookie Hoyer play every snap in the last pre season have in 2009 and he performed well enough to be the only back-up. I think this is a similar test for Mallett.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

I think if you connect the dots a trade of Ridley and Mallet to a contender for a 1st or 2nd makes sense if the team is really looking to get rid of Ridley. I just don't know which team could use the combo of both...rams and texans have a running game but no QB etc...

 

[Stitch01]

They aren't getting close to that for those two players.  In the unlikely case that the Pats decided to move those two players and found a contender willing to take both and the Pats got a 4th rounder with some sort of condition that could turn the pick into a 3rd rounder they'd have scored a mini-coup.  I honestly wouldn't expect that much.  Mallet's trade value at this point is a 6th or 7th rounder and no one is giving up a high pick for one year of Steven Ridley.

 

[Shelterdog]

I think if you connect the dots a trade of Ridley and Mallet to a contender for a 1st or 2nd makes sense if the team is really looking to get rid of Ridley. I just don't know which team could use the combo of both...rams and texans have a running game but no QB etc...

. You might be able to get a fourth if you're lucky. It's too late to trade for a QB, They're in the last year of their contracts, and other teams know the Pats might waive them.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I don't think this means a Mallett departure is imminent.  You could look at this as wanting to get Jimmy G as many game reps as possible because he won't be seeing any action this year unless all hell breaks loose.  Could he be traded?  Possibly.  But, just because he's not playing against the Giants doesn't mean he's gone. 

 

[Stitch01]

Mallett got the bulk of PT in the '11 preseason finale, although Brady started and all three QBs played. 

 

[Super Nomario]

. If memory serves the Pats had rookie Hoyer play every snap in the last pre season have in 2009 and he performed well enough to be the only back-up. I think this is a similar test for Mallett.

That was the infamous "Walter didn't play because Hoyer played" game.
 
In that instance, the choice was between a player with NFL experience but no experience in the Pats' system (and Walter wasn't even there for offseason activities, having been cut by Oakland just a month before) and a rookie. Cutting Mallett would be a lot bolder, as he has extensive experience with the system. And unlike when they cut Hoyer to make Mallett the only backup, there's not much cost savings associated with axing Mallett (just $200K vs a UDFA). Of course, with Belichick, you never know.
 
My impression is that if something happened where Brady would miss significant time, Garoppolo would end up taking over at some point, but if Brady was just gone for a series, a half, or a couple games Mallett would be the best bet. Obviously we haven't seen much from Mallett to suggest he's a competent NFL QB, but the Patriots have seen enough to make him the only backup the best two seasons.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

 
Zero chance on Ridley, agreed -- ok, will give the Ridley thing a 0.2% shot just because you never know (and giving the benefit of the doubt, maybe Reiss had someone whisper something to him). But the fucker doesn't really even fumble all that much and he's head and shoulders above the rest of the RB crew.

 
I think this is a key point that has been overblown as of late.
 
Running backs fumble the ball. It happens. The way it happened last year (3 games in a row, all were recovered by the defense, one came in a loss to Carolina, another came in the highest rated game of the season against the Broncos) brought a lot of attention to the issue. It was certainly amplified by his fumble in the previous post season debacle against the Ravens (and no running back would have held onto the football after that hit). Still, nobody was complaining in 2012 when he fumbled 4 times because he rushed for 1200+ yards and only 2 of the 4 were recovered by the defense.
 
I feel bad for Ridley because he's in a no-win situation this year. Ridley will fumble the football at some point. He's the bell cow running back, he'll receive 200 carries, and the typical running back fumbles roughly once every 90 attempts. There is so much attention on this situation now that, unless he is vastly superior to the average NFL running back, he will fumble at some point in the first 8 games, and people will be calling for his head.
 
BJGE tainted the way Patriot fans view fumbling the football.

• Curtis Martin, potentially the best RB the Pats ever had, averaged 4 fumbles a season with the Patriots.

• Antowain Smith, the most consistent RB the Pats ever had, averaged 2 fumbles a season.

• Robert Edwards put up a beastly rookie season before getting injured, and he still fumbled 5 times.

• Kevin Faulk averaged 3 fumbles a season through his first 8 years with the team.

• Corey Dillon averaged nearly 3 fumbles a season in his three years with the Patriots.

 
Hell, LeGarrette Blount fumbled 3 times last year - one less than Ridley with 25 less carries - but he escaped the wrath of Patriots fans (he also fumbled 9 times in his first two seasons with Tampa).
 
Shane Vereen? 44 rushing attempts last year, 1 fumble. If he were to carry the rock 200 times as a lead back, that puts him on pace for 4 fumbles. Same as Ridley (Vereen had 1 fumble in 62 attempts the year prior, which puts him on place for 3-4 fumbles in 2012 as a fulltime back).
 
Does Ridley have ball security issues? Yes. Are they worse than your average running back? Just slightly. 
 
In his last full season as a starter (2012), he carried the ball 290 times and fumbled 4 times. That's an average of 72.5 carries per fumble.
 
Over the last two years, here's a list of solid players with similar or worse fumbling numbers (150+ carries in a season, 4.0 YPC):
 
Ahmad Bradshaw - 73.6 carries per fumble (2012)
Jamaal Charles - 64.75 carries per fumble (2013), 57 carries per fumble (2012)
Alfred Morris - 55.2 carries per fumble (2013)
C.J. Spiller - 50.5 carries per fumble (2013)
LeSean McCoy - 50 carries per fumble (2012)
Reggie Bush - 44.6 carries per fumble (2013), 56.75 carries per fumble (2012)
Ben Tate - 45.25 carries per fumble (2013)
Willis McGahee - 33.4 carries per fumble (2012)
 
You get the point. 
 
Nobody is saying that Ridley's ball security is good, but peoples expectations need to be readjusted. If Ridley comes out and carries 200+ times this year and puts the ball on the ground 3 times, that's pretty standard in today's hard hitting NFL. 
 
Hell, in limited action last year, you got this kind of production out of him. Even with all of his concerns in 2013, FO ranks him as a top 10 running back with a success rate (we all love consistency) at 7th overall. And that includes the fumbles. 
 
How about in 2012 when he was also a top 10 running back and had the 4th best success rate (way to fall forward, big boy!)?
 
What I'm really trying to say is: I'm glad BB is stubborn and doesn't let the media or fans spin his perception on players. While his fumbling can be a cause for concern, I don't think the rope is nearly as tight on Stevan Ridley as the media is trying to portray it. 
 
Edit: SSF, feel free to move this to the RB thread if you think its more relevant there.

 

[dcmissle]

So need to shed 9 more to get to 75 by tomorrow pm. Is that right?

 

[Saints Rest]

Given everything I've heard throughout the off season and camps, and given how high they were said to have been last season as he developed, Josh Kline is a lock. He's the first interior lineman off the bench, and may even wind up starting.

 
 

 
Despite Devey's snap counts, I don't see him making the roster -- he has sucked. 

 
It astounds me how much we heave heard "#67 s reporting as eligible" -- seems like it was practically every other play at times.  This to me suggests A) that we don't see another true TE added (I do believe that Develin makes it as H-Back type) and B) that Kline is a lock.

 

[wutang112878]

I could see Devey making it. He has been playing a lot, but that cuts both ways (the obvious starters don't play much). I had Halapio over him but I don't see that as a guarantee; I don't think either would play much, Halapio has more upside, and Devey seems likelier to sneak onto the practice squad (where he'd be great, as a guy with G/T versatility). I don't think Connolly will stick as a backup - they make $3 MM by cutting him, so he's gone unless he's a starter.

 
Its very limited info obviously, but my take on the Devey / Halapio situation waas that last game Devey played 56 snaps while Halapio played 2.  Some of that may be specific to their position flexibility but I believe Devey is considered a T who could play G and I'm not sure if Halapio has that type of flexibility.
 
 

I agree. I made fun of projections that had 10 DL and lo-and-behold ... I have 10 DL above. A lot of that is due to uncertainty about Chris Jones / Siliga (/Easley?) injury status and how much 3-4 they're going to run (I'm guessing: not nearly as much as they showed in preseason) but for sure this is one of the most interesting position groups to watch.

 
I wouldnt be shocked if they kept 10 D-lineman, last year they only kept 8 but I believe there were less questions marks because they probably expected Vince and Kelly to take the majority of the snaps at DT.  I think DE has a clearer picture this year, Jones and Nink are locks, Buchanan (as we both believe) probably makes it and that just leaves the battle for that 4th DE.
 
DT is where I think there are a lot more question marks and I wouldnt be shocked to see them keep 6 here getting us to the 10.  Vince has looked great considering he is coming back from the injury but its unclear to me how many snaps they can/should be expted to play early on.  Easley is obviously making the roster but I really doubt we get many snaps out of him early on.  I'm sure they want to keep Jones and Siliga but its also unclear how much they can play early on, and Vellano is probably a virtual lock as a result.  Which basically leaves them with Vince (snaps TBD) and a healthy Vellano and a lot of question marks, which is why it probably makes a lot of sense to keep that 10th guy just to have a healthy player ready to go.  Unless they think Jones can go play inside (which I think he can) but then the question becomes whether or not Buchanan and whoever the 4th DE would be can hold down the fort at DE for an entire game.

 

[Stitch01]

 
I think this is a key point that has been overblown as of late.
 
Running backs fumble the ball. It happens. The way it happened last year (3 games in a row, all were recovered by the defense, one came in a loss to Carolina, another came in the highest rated game of the season against the Broncos) brought a lot of attention to the issue. It was certainly amplified by his fumble in the previous post season debacle against the Ravens (and no running back would have held onto the football after that hit). Still, nobody was complaining in 2012 when he fumbled 4 times because he rushed for 1200+ yards and only 2 of the 4 were recovered by the defense.
 
I feel bad for Ridley because he's in a no-win situation this year. Ridley will fumble the football at some point. He's the bell cow running back, he'll receive 200 carries, and the typical running back fumbles roughly once every 90 attempts. There is so much attention on this situation now that, unless he is vastly superior to the average NFL running back, he will fumble at some point in the first 8 games, and people will be calling for his head.
 
BJGE tainted the way Patriot fans view fumbling the football.

• Curtis Martin, potentially the best RB the Pats ever had, averaged 4 fumbles a season with the Patriots.

• Antowain Smith, the most consistent RB the Pats ever had, averaged 2 fumbles a season.

• Robert Edwards put up a beastly rookie season before getting injured, and he still fumbled 5 times.

• Kevin Faulk averaged 3 fumbles a season through his first 8 years with the team.

• Corey Dillon averaged nearly 3 fumbles a season in his three years with the Patriots.

 
Hell, LeGarrette Blount fumbled 3 times last year - one less than Ridley with 25 less carries - but he escaped the wrath of Patriots fans (he also fumbled 9 times in his first two seasons with Tampa).
 
Shane Vereen? 44 rushing attempts last year, 1 fumble. If he were to carry the rock 200 times as a lead back, that puts him on pace for 4 fumbles. Same as Ridley (Vereen had 1 fumble in 62 attempts the year prior, which puts him on place for 3-4 fumbles in 2012 as a fulltime back).
 
Does Ridley have ball security issues? Yes. Are they worse than your average running back? Just slightly. 
 
In his last full season as a starter (2012), he carried the ball 290 times and fumbled 4 times. That's an average of 72.5 carries per fumble.
 
Over the last two years, here's a list of solid players with similar or worse fumbling numbers (150+ carries in a season, 4.0 YPC):
 
Ahmad Bradshaw - 73.6 carries per fumble (2012)
Jamaal Charles - 64.75 carries per fumble (2013), 57 carries per fumble (2012)
Alfred Morris - 55.2 carries per fumble (2013)
C.J. Spiller - 50.5 carries per fumble (2013)
LeSean McCoy - 50 carries per fumble (2012)
Reggie Bush - 44.6 carries per fumble (2013), 56.75 carries per fumble (2012)
Ben Tate - 45.25 carries per fumble (2013)
Willis McGahee - 33.4 carries per fumble (2012)
 
You get the point. 
 
Nobody is saying that Ridley's ball security is good, but peoples expectations need to be readjusted. If Ridley comes out and carries 200+ times this year and puts the ball on the ground 3 times, that's pretty standard in today's hard hitting NFL. 
 
Hell, in limited action last year, you got this kind of production out of him. Even with all of his concerns in 2013, FO ranks him as a top 10 running back with a success rate (we all love consistency) at 7th overall. And that includes the fumbles. 
 
How about in 2012 when he was also a top 10 running back and had the 4th best success rate (way to fall forward, big boy!)?
 
What I'm really trying to say is: I'm glad BB is stubborn and doesn't let the media or fans spin his perception on players. While his fumbling can be a cause for concern, I don't think the rope is nearly as tight on Stevan Ridley as the media is trying to portray it. 
 
Edit: SSF, feel free to move this to the RB thread if you think its more relevant there.

Nice post KFP.  My opinion on Ridley's value corresponds closely with the numbers your laid out here.
 
The only caveats I have are
 
1) Ridley did get his role reduced and was benched for fumbling last year.  He was benched during the Buffalo and Denver games and then inactive for the Houston game.  We can only speculate why he was benched given the compelling statistical case you laid out about Ridley's value above (coaching staff thought they were bad fumbles as opposed to the fumble against Pittsburgh that BB defended, Ridley doesn't react well mentally to fumbles, etc), but the coaching staff did apparently believe its an issue.  
2) Ridley got pulled from the drive after fumbling in the Eagles game two weeks ago and was fourth in snap counts during the Panthers game (and he got 1/3 of the snaps as Vereen did). 
3) This comment from earlier in camp

The 5-foot-11, 220-pound Ridley had a notable comment regarding his offseason diet and coming into camp in better shape: “Obviously that didn’t go too well. Coach still has me in there in ‘Fat Camp’ and running and trying to get this weight off me.”
 

 
Personally, I see enough to wonder if the coaching staff does not feel Ridley is with the program despite his obvious talent and production.  I hope that's not the case as Ridley has been a very productive player, but there's enough smoke for me to wonder.  YMMV.

 

[Stitch01]

 
Its very limited info obviously, but my take on the Devey / Halapio situation waas that last game Devey played 56 snaps while Halapio played 2.  Some of that may be specific to their position flexibility but I believe Devey is considered a T who could play G and I'm not sure if Halapio has that type of flexibility.
 
 
 
I wouldnt be shocked if they kept 10 D-lineman, last year they only kept 8 but I believe there were less questions marks because they probably expected Vince and Kelly to take the majority of the snaps at DT.  I think DE has a clearer picture this year, Jones and Nink are locks, Buchanan (as we both believe) probably makes it and that just leaves the battle for that 4th DE.
 
DT is where I think there are a lot more question marks and I wouldnt be shocked to see them keep 6 here getting us to the 10.  Vince has looked great considering he is coming back from the injury but its unclear to me how many snaps they can/should be expted to play early on.  Easley is obviously making the roster but I really doubt we get many snaps out of him early on.  I'm sure they want to keep Jones and Siliga but its also unclear how much they can play early on, and Vellano is probably a virtual lock as a result.  Which basically leaves them with Vince (snaps TBD) and a healthy Vellano and a lot of question marks, which is why it probably makes a lot of sense to keep that 10th guy just to have a healthy player ready to go.  Unless they think Jones can go play inside (which I think he can) but then the question becomes whether or not Buchanan and whoever the 4th DE would be can hold down the fort at DE for an entire game.

Think you are correct on Devey.
 
I think Moore is close to a lock to make the roster as the 4th DE, so I think there's a decent chance they add a DT vet after week 1 (possibly Kelly) if they don't think Worthy is a ready to play answer (I think Worthy is going to make the roster)

 

[Super Nomario]

Its very limited info obviously, but my take on the Devey / Halapio situation waas that last game Devey played 56 snaps while Halapio played 2.  Some of that may be specific to their position flexibility but I believe Devey is considered a T who could play G and I'm not sure if Halapio has that type of flexibility.

Halapio doesn't - he's a G only. But I'm not sure they need that 8th / 9th OL to be flexible. Cannon can flip between RG and T, Fleming's gotten work inside, Mankins can play LT, Connolly or Stork can play C or any G spot. If they're looking for a guy who can be a gameday backup and fill in a few different spots, Devey's the guy, but if they're just looking for a developmental guy for the future, Halapio might get the nod.
 
They'll carry 8 or 9 OL on the active roster but they probably won't have all those guys active week-to-week; they can hold a developmental prospect or two as as redshirt.
 

I wouldnt be shocked if they kept 10 D-lineman, last year they only kept 8 but I believe there were less questions marks because they probably expected Vince and Kelly to take the majority of the snaps at DT.  I think DE has a clearer picture this year, Jones and Nink are locks, Buchanan (as we both believe) probably makes it and that just leaves the battle for that 4th DE. 

As stitch notes, that's Moore, right? I don't see Bequette beating him out.
 

DT is where I think there are a lot more question marks and I wouldnt be shocked to see them keep 6 here getting us to the 10.  Vince has looked great considering he is coming back from the injury but its unclear to me how many snaps they can/should be expted to play early on.  Easley is obviously making the roster but I really doubt we get many snaps out of him early on.  I'm sure they want to keep Jones and Siliga but its also unclear how much they can play early on, and Vellano is probably a virtual lock as a result.  Which basically leaves them with Vince (snaps TBD) and a healthy Vellano and a lot of question marks, which is why it probably makes a lot of sense to keep that 10th guy just to have a healthy player ready to go.  Unless they think Jones can go play inside (which I think he can) but then the question becomes whether or not Buchanan and whoever the 4th DE would be can hold down the fort at DE for an entire game.

You might be right. I think if they carry 6 DT to start the year they'll trim the ranks some when guys get healthy. I can't see that many DT sticking all year (especially since they rarely contribute on STs).
 

Personally, I see enough to wonder if the coaching staff does not feel Ridley is with the program despite his obvious talent and production.  I hope that's not the case as Ridley has been a very productive player, but there's enough smoke for me to wonder.  YMMV.

I think Ridley is this year's Spikes - a guy who's on the outs (does anyone think the Pats will re-sign him beyond this year?) but still provides enough value that it would be kind of dumb to cut him.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

1) Ridley did get his role reduced and was benched for fumbling last year.  He was benched during the Buffalo and Denver games and then inactive for the Houston game.  We can only speculate why he was benched given the compelling statistical case you laid out about Ridley's value above (coaching staff thought they were bad fumbles as opposed to the fumble against Pittsburgh that BB defended, Ridley doesn't react well mentally to fumbles, etc), but the coaching staff did apparently believe its an issue.  
2) Ridley got pulled from the drive after fumbling in the Eagles game two weeks ago and was fourth in snap counts during the Panthers game (and he got 1/3 of the snaps as Vereen did). 
3) This comment from earlier in camp
 
Personally, I see enough to wonder if the coaching staff does not feel Ridley is with the program despite his obvious talent and production.  I hope that's not the case as Ridley has been a very productive player, but there's enough smoke for me to wonder.  YMMV.

 
Fair assesment, although I would respond:
 
1.) Ridley was benched for his fumbles, but was back to a primary role (or at least 1A-1B with Blount) by the time they squared up against the Ravens in the second to last game of the season.
 
2.) Yes, Ridley was fourth in snap count against the Panthers. He was also the primary (only?) back on the first drive of the second half with the rest of the offensive starters. The coaching staff wanted to see how the starters came out after halftime - which is a common coaching strategy in preseason and exhibition games - and Ridley was the running back on the field. This speaks volumes.
 
3.) He wouldn't be the first successful Patriots running back stuck in fat camp purgatory. Antowain Smith was a staple there - the Herald piece is no longer available - as was, if I recall correctly, Corey Dillon.

 

[Stitch01]

Siliga back at practice, so Pats might not need that extra DT after all.