Collins traded to Cleveland per Schefter

[lexrageorge]

FWIW, Lombardi on Simmons pod today: "Either you're coaching it or letting it happen, Bill decided he's not going to let it happen anymore." Was very critical of Collins and the lack of leadership on the defense in general. Said they made bad and mediocre QBs look good. Bill had seen enough and had to get it under control so he stepped up.

The QB's the Pats faced so far, and their QBR ranking:

Palmer (27), Tannehill (32), Osweiler (30), Taylor (twice) (10), Kessler (23), Dalton (12), Landry Jones (career 36 after 2 starts, which would be dead last). If you prefer traditional QB rating, the rankings are 20, 21, 30, 23 (2x), 14, and 9, respectively (ignoring Jones and his career 77.3 rating).

The New England defense ranks 14th in overall yards/play, 12th in net yards per passing attempt, 15th in rushing yards/attempt, 13th in completion percentage against, 7th in total yards/pass attempt, 9th in adjusted yards/attempt, and 9th in yards/catch. The latter numbers seem to indicate the ability of the secondary to avoid big plays. But otherwise they are basically middle of the pack despite playing mostly against bottom of the pack QB's.

There was definitely smoke to that fire.

 

[patinorange]

FWIW, Lombardi on Simmons pod today: "Either you're coaching it or letting it happen, Bill decided he's not going to let it happen anymore." Was very critical of Collins and the lack of leadership on the defense in general. Said they made bad and mediocre QBs look good. Bill had seen enough and had to get it under control so he stepped up.

I realize that Lombardi is a BB guy and he is going to put a positive spin on this. With that being said, I really hope this is true. The defense is top tier in points against and the team has the best record in football. Being the spoiled, entitled, Patriots fan that I am, I look at every game from the point of view of how are we going to do in the AFC championship game and the Super Bowl.

With the exception of the Arizona game they really haven't faced an elite QB, and it's possible they won't all the way through.
I still fear a game against Big Ben or even Alex Smith with this defense. I'm hoping that this trade is a signal that Bill is not happy with it as currently constructed.

Maybe this is a step. It's hard to argue with the wizard.

Or maybe he just can't forget Owen Daniels.

 

[ifmanis5]

The QB's the Pats faced so far, and their QBR ranking:

Palmer (27), Tannehill (32), Osweiler (30), Taylor (twice) (10), Kessler (23), Dalton (12), Landry Jones (career 36 after 2 starts, which would be dead last). If you prefer traditional QB rating, the rankings are 20, 21, 30, 23 (2x), 14, and 9, respectively (ignoring Jones and his career 77.3 rating).

The New England defense ranks 14th in overall yards/play, 12th in net yards per passing attempt, 15th in rushing yards/attempt, 13th in completion percentage against, 7th in total yards/pass attempt, 9th in adjusted yards/attempt, and 9th in yards/catch. The latter numbers seem to indicate the ability of the secondary to avoid big plays. But otherwise they are basically middle of the pack despite playing mostly against bottom of the pack QB's.

There was definitely smoke to that fire.

You beat me to it, was going to list the QB's they faced as well. Totally agreed on all points.

DVOA has them ranked as the 18th best defense: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef
which I find to be accurate. It's a bad defense that gives up a lot of yardage (21st), isn't generating turnovers (17th) or sacks (25th!), hasn't been as good in the Red Zone as I thought (19th) and still has trouble on 3rd down (18th). Plus, like you said, those are against middle of the pack offenses. Those numbers don't lie.

 

[Mugsy's Jock]

FWIW, Lombardi on Simmons pod today: "Either you're coaching it or letting it happen, Bill decided he's not going to let it happen anymore." Was very critical of Collins and the lack of leadership on the defense in general. Said they made bad and mediocre QBs look good. Bill had seen enough and had to get it under control so he stepped up.

Whenever Lombardi is on Simmons' podcast, it's worth listening. Was interesting today as Simmons was doing his regular Monday spreads prediction podcast with Cousin Sal when his producer interrupted with news of the Collins trade. Simmons was stunned at first, then called up Lombardi for his take.

As noted above, Lombardi largely toed the BB line -- Collins freelanced too much, wasn't honoring his role, and ultimately wasn't having a good year. What was interesting to me was that Lombardi went one step further and said most of the Pats defensive players were underperforming, and he called out Hightower and Sheard. He felt BB was absolutely sending a message to the rest of the D, particularly with the bye coming up so he'd have time to rebuild the roles and kick some ass.

Simmons then decided that it was a great trade (although he didn't get that the pick coming in was a comp pick) and maybe he never liked Collins after all. Sounding familiar...

 

[InstaFace]

Unrelated- I'd say it's probably that one day, this team is going to trade Tom Brady and Rob Gronkowski. The reaction threads to those are going to be simply outstanding.

Are you kidding? It's going to be like someone's dad died after battling late-stage cancer for several years. Yeah, you knew it had to happen sooner or later, could see it coming, father time is undefeated, at least it brought closure, etc etc... but there will be massive amounts of grown men weeping for the end of a very special part of their (sports) lives. I will likely be among them, at least for Brady.

The reaction threads will only be "simply outstanding" if you're a fan of another AFC East team and have been waiting, at that point, two goddamn decades for that MF'ing Tom Brady to stop torturing you. If you want a little Pats-fan schadenfreude, perhaps, because that's all you can get. Because I don't think there will be very many people making fools of themselves over how they rate the trade.

 

[mauf]

The QB's the Pats faced so far, and their QBR ranking:

Palmer (27), Tannehill (32), Osweiler (30), Taylor (twice) (10), Kessler (23), Dalton (12), Landry Jones (career 36 after 2 starts, which would be dead last). If you prefer traditional QB rating, the rankings are 20, 21, 30, 23 (2x), 14, and 9, respectively (ignoring Jones and his career 77.3 rating).

The New England defense ranks 14th in overall yards/play, 12th in net yards per passing attempt, 15th in rushing yards/attempt, 13th in completion percentage against, 7th in total yards/pass attempt, 9th in adjusted yards/attempt, and 9th in yards/catch. The latter numbers seem to indicate the ability of the secondary to avoid big plays. But otherwise they are basically middle of the pack despite playing mostly against bottom of the pack QB's.

There was definitely smoke to that fire.

The Pats have surrendered a lot of garbage-time yards, and a fair number of garbage-time points. I'd be curious how their first-half defensive stats stack up against the rest of the league.

 

[Super Nomario]

I mean, yeah, that's plausible for the mechanics of it, but "Im not sure how long this has been in the works" isn't. BB made that call, knows when he made that call, and it wasn't like this morning. They traded for a LB and worked out three LB's the next day last week.

Not only that, they signed McClellin and traded for Mingo in the offseason, and they used two (late) draft picks on Roberts and Grugier-Hill. They re-signed Freeny, too, though he's hurt now. I was unprepared for this, but I think Belichick et al have seen this coming for a while.

The Pats have surrendered a lot of garbage-time yards, and a fair number of garbage-time points. I'd be curious how their first-half defensive stats stack up against the rest of the league.

Their first-half stats are better, but I don't think that means it's garbage time. The D got shredded late against Arizona and Miami, for instance, and they almost blew both those games.

 

[riboflav]

Not only that, they signed McClellin and traded for Mingo in the offseason, and they used two (late) draft picks on Roberts and Grugier-Hill. They re-signed Freeny, too, though he's hurt now. I was unprepared for this, but I think Belichick et al have seen this coming for a while.


Their first-half stats are better, but I don't think that means it's garbage time. The D got shredded late against Arizona and Miami, for instance, and they almost blew both those games.

Agreed. I think when a football peer* who BB holds in high regard (and there are not many as we all know) blames the AFCCG loss on one player, then his days in NE are numbered. The Patriots started preparing for this day on the flight home.

*It was laughed at by many here last week but Lombardi's comments last week on Collins were very telling.

 

[j-man]

i know u guys dislike denver but if i was denver GM i wouild had offer 1ST in 17 LB S Barnett and LB T Davis

 

[j-man]

I would argue that had they not traded Branch in 2006 they probably would have won the Super Bowl.

+ 1 thanks for beating sandiego that year souild had won in indy too

 

[j-man]

Yeah, comparing Collins to LT is laughable. Bedard is out of his mind per usual.

as is bedrard 9-7 last place broncos si pick and i told him at least 11 wins for denver

 

[Deathofthebambino]

I don't want to rehash the whole points allowed thing since we've done it several times in the last couple of weeks, but suffice it to say I don't think that stat is indicative of the quality of the defense and if BB did I doubt we'd have seen the trade that occurred today.

Actually, BB was asked a couple of weeks ago which defensive statistics he views as the most important, and points scored was #1. He also talked about third down defense and red zone defense. I think BB's view of the defense in today's world is very different than it was 20 years ago, and I think it's also clouded by the offense he has on this team. I think he's much less inclined to take chances, like say Buffalo, and give up big plays, particularly when the team has a lead, because that's how you let your opponent back into games quickly. If the team has a 3 score lead at the beginning of the 4th quarter, and the opponent has to use up 6 minutes to drive the field and score a td, he's ok with it, much moreso than he would be if they got beat over the top because they brought a blitz, and the opponent scores in 45 seconds. I think earlier in the game, it's a bit of the same, but instead, they clamp down and take more chances in the red zone, leading to more field goal attempts by opponents. Because again, if your offense is scoring 40 points a week, you can let your opponent kick 7 field goals and still win pretty comfortably.

Rex Ryan, on the other hand, another defensive "genius" hasn't changed with the times, and we saw it yesterday. He brings pressure, leaves his guys on islands in the defensive backfield, and the Pats know that, and they respond by Brady looking deep on almost every pass play.

I don't really know how I feel about the Collins trade yet. I certainly wasn't surprised. The grooming of Elandon Roberts, the Van Noy and Mingo signing, Hightower getting the Captaincy were all clues that Collins was the odd man out this offseason. He also has been invisible in virtually every game this year besides Houston. If the reports are true that he was basically out there doing his own thing, and trying to get into the highlight films in an effort to get Von Miller money, then don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. At the end of the day, we'll find out pretty quickly if it is really going to hurt this team. If they end up shutting down Seattle with ease, people will start forgetting Jamie Collins pretty quickly, and that's kind of what I expect them to do.

 

[Stitch01]

Yeah I heard BBs comment. No points scored isn't the best way to evaluate the strength of the defense, it is a team stat not a team defense stat. Third down defense and red zone defense hasn't been good so far this year.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Yeah I heard BBs comment. No points scored isn't the best way to evaluate the strength of the defense, it is a team stat not a team defense stat. Third down defense and red zone defense hasn't been good so far this year.

You should let BB know, he may not be aware. [emoji6]

 

[Ralphwiggum]

That's certainly something BB would say but I'm fairly certain if the greatest football mind of modern NFL times is looking at points scored as a way to measure defensive performance he's subtracting any points allowed by the offense and special teams, and factoring in field position somehow.

 

[Super Nomario]

FWIW, some of the Belichick comments DotB references above can be found here:
http://www.espn.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/81888/patriots-d-ranks-second-for-fewest-points-allowed-but-is-unit-really-one-of-nfls-best

He lists points as #1, but also mentions turnovers, avoiding big plays, red zone, and third down. They're pretty good at avoiding big plays, pretty bad at turnovers, red zone, and third down.

 

[sodenj5]

I know Belichick is an infallible genius, but at what point does trading away players send the wrong message to the locker room? Obviously he rules with an iron fist, but the Patriots are largely a veteran team. Do they need to play scared for their job?

Adam Gase cut Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas after they looked like Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas against Cincy. That's a young coach sending a message to a young team. By now, I think everyone in the Patriots locker room knows to "do your job."

Judging by the reaction, it seems a lot of players were surprised by the trade. Does Bill risk alienating his players with the way he handles guys like Jones and Collins? Players may start to feel he has no loyalty to them and they're just an asset.

 

[wilked]

This seems to be a little bit semantics

If you ask BB what the most important statistic is he might say Wins, second most important would be points scored and points allowed, and so on. Because that is Belichick.

If I am reading it right, the point being discussed is not what is most important (whatever that means) but rather what is most predictive, with the easy analogy being to judge a pitcher on things like WHIP and K/BB rather than wins/losses.

To that end, I would agree that the points mentioned above (turnovers, avoiding the big play, and third down D) could well be better predictors of performance going forward than points scored.

 

[Leather]

Judging by the reaction, it seems a lot of players were surprised by the trade. Does Bill risk alienating his players with the way he handles guys like Jones and Collins? Players may start to feel he has no loyalty to them and they're just an asset.

He can do it because he's Bill Belichick, and the players know that he acts in their collective best interests, and his extensive track record shows that he gets results. Veteran players who sign in NE see that as a feature, not a bug.

 

[sodenj5]

He can do it because he's Bill Belichick, and the players know that he acts in their collective best interests, and his extensive track record shows that he gets results. Veteran players who sign in NE see that as a feature, not a bug.

I agree that Belichick absolutely has the track record and resume to make the moves he's making. But do free agents really see a guy trading away talented players as a perk? I'm pretty sure job security ranks pretty highly on the list when veteran players sign anywhere.

 

[wilked]

Players may start to feel he has no loyalty to them and they're just an asset.

Isn't this exactly how Belichick is? He at least makes no qualms about it, and the smart players take it in stride (such as Wilfork).

Here's just one article in 2013, there's a long list of them for the last 10 years. His lack of loyalty results in a stack of hardware and wins
http://bangordailynews.com/2013/03/15/sports/football/too-much-business-not-enough-loyalty-for-patriots-may-upset-brady/

And then there's the other side, which Kurtenbach writes about (and of course in Kurtenbach fashion goes over the top with) here
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/jamie-collins-new-england-patriots-trade-bill-belichick-trade-cleveland-browns-salary-deadline-draft-pick-stats-salary-103116

Fans want love and loyalty, but what they really want are wins, and in the NFL those are opposing ideals. Other teams will spend big money on popular players to prove to those fans that "they mean business" and that they're "making the commitment to winning." Look at the Colts, who said they spent too much on Andrew Luck to put a good team around him, or the Saints, who have been stuck in neutral because of their over-the-top patronage of Drew Brees — but they're really just making a crowd-pleasing decision in the micro that will more often than not have big macro consequences. They're playing the public relations game when they need to be thinking about economics.

 

[Leather]

Or they look at it like their HOF coach has faith in the guys left in the locker room to do the job even better than before the "talented player". And that's discounting any rancor that a guy grumbling about money and playing me-first ball might be causing.

The thing is, his moves are always based on logic and cold calculation, not spite or rashness. I also suspect the players know more than they are letting on, and are, in part, being kind to an ex-player to the press.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

I know Belichick is an infallible genius, but at what point does trading away players send the wrong message to the locker room? Obviously he rules with an iron fist, but the Patriots are largely a veteran team. Do they need to play scared for their job?

Adam Gase cut Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas after they looked like Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas against Cincy. That's a young coach sending a message to a young team. By now, I think everyone in the Patriots locker room knows to "do your job."

Judging by the reaction, it seems a lot of players were surprised by the trade. Does Bill risk alienating his players with the way he handles guys like Jones and Collins? Players may start to feel he has no loyalty to them and they're just an asset.

I'm sure the timing here was intentional. They have a bye this week, so the players who are upset have a week to stew on this and then get over it. And he's plenty loyal to guys who do the things that he values, until he isn't anymore. I would argue that his ability to pull the trigger on moves like this is a part of what makes him the best. Other than maybe Tom Brady (and since the guy is playing like the GOAT in his prime we really don't know), his ability to understand sunk cost and move on from players too early rather than too late is part of what has allowed them to have this sustained run of success.

I'm not necessarily defending the Collins move in and of itself, because who knows. You can quibble over individual moves and this one is more head-scratchier than some of the others. But you can't really argue with the method the guy uses to build and motivate a team.

 

[jsinger121]

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

I know Belichick is an infallible genius, but at what point does trading away players send the wrong message to the locker room? Obviously he rules with an iron fist, but the Patriots are largely a veteran team. Do they need to play scared for their job?

Adam Gase cut Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas after they looked like Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas against Cincy. That's a young coach sending a message to a young team. By now, I think everyone in the Patriots locker room knows to "do your job."

Judging by the reaction, it seems a lot of players were surprised by the trade. Does Bill risk alienating his players with the way he handles guys like Jones and Collins? Players may start to feel he has no loyalty to them and they're just an asset.

History would say no. He's traded away key contributors like Milloy, Moss, Seymour, Mankins, and Jones without any apparent effect on morale. Like Collins, Moss was an in-season trade at a position of weakness.

That said, I'm not crazy about the trade in terms of on field performance. If nothing else, it hurts their depth in the front 7, which isn't exactly a strength.

Edit: Milloy was cut.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

I agree that Belichick absolutely has the track record and resume to make the moves he's making. But do free agents really see a guy trading away talented players as a perk? I'm pretty sure job security ranks pretty highly on the list when veteran players sign anywhere.

Well, he's been doing this for years ("they hate their coach" after cutting Milloy was what, 13 yeas ago?) and there is no evidence it has cost them the locker room or FA appeal yet. Perhaps at some point it might, but is there some reason to think something has changed here?

Keep in mind they tend to target mid-tier or fringe FAs, so guys look at Sheard growing his value, Akiem HIcks building value, Akeem Ayers building value, guys like Butler, Edelman, etc. getting a real shot without draft pedigree and conclude that on average Pats are more likely to benefit their career than most places. Again, the question is not 'might there be a particular player who stays away' but, at the market level, does this impact them negatively...and I just don't see the evidence it does.

 

[mauf]

Their first-half stats are better, but I don't think that means it's garbage time. The D got shredded late against Arizona and Miami, for instance, and they almost blew both those games.

My post was a tad too glib. Of course, it's not "garbage time" just because you've got a multiple-score lead in the second half, but you're going to play defense differently in those scenarios. Therefore, I'm guessing the Pats' D is a tick better than its stats (yardage, 3rd down conversions, etc.) would suggest.

As I said above, I think this trade was mainly driven by the coaching staff's concern that Collins might not gracefully accept a backup role -- as opposed to some broader desire to "shake up" an underperforming defense.

 

[joe dokes]

I think people are making this way too complicated.
If we assume that trading Collins was performance-related, isn't it pretty likely that the other players on defense know that Collins wasn't performing.

As I said above, I think this trade was mainly driven by the coaching staff's concern that Collins might not gracefully accept a backup role -- as opposed to some broader desire to "shake up" an underperforming defense.

Or that he wouldn't be good at it. If he's not "doing his job" as starter even though he has "talent," why should anyone think he'd do it as a backup?

 

[JimD]

I agree that Belichick absolutely has the track record and resume to make the moves he's making. But do free agents really see a guy trading away talented players as a perk? I'm pretty sure job security ranks pretty highly on the list when veteran players sign anywhere.

History suggests that guys come to the Patriots to be part of a championship-caliber team, not to make the most coin or for the security of a long-term deal (not that they're likely to get either from NE).

Belichick also favors intelligent players when he brings in veterans - the kind of guy he likes is likely smart enough to realize that there is nothing that remotely resembles job security in the National Football League.

 

[mauf]

Or that he wouldn't be good at it. If he's not "doing his job" as starter even though he has "talent," why should anyone think he'd do it as a backup?

If Collins was as bad as you're suggesting, BB would have moved sooner. Maybe Collins lost his starting job to Roberts, but it's hard to believe he couldn't add value playing 10-15 snaps a game and providing injury insurance. I don't think the prospect of landing the 100th pick (give or take) in next year's draft would motivate BB to trade away that value at this point in the season. (If you think Collins had fallen behind Mingo as well as Roberts on the depth chart, then maybe, but BB's usage of Collins suggests that wasn't the case.)

 

[dcmissle]

I know Belichick is an infallible genius, but at what point does trading away players send the wrong message to the locker room? Obviously he rules with an iron fist, but the Patriots are largely a veteran team. Do they need to play scared for their job?

Adam Gase cut Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas after they looked like Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas against Cincy. That's a young coach sending a message to a young team. By now, I think everyone in the Patriots locker room knows to "do your job."

Judging by the reaction, it seems a lot of players were surprised by the trade. Does Bill risk alienating his players with the way he handles guys like Jones and Collins? Players may start to feel he has no loyalty to them and they're just an asset.

We'll he isn't, but I would look at it this way:

What if Collins is not doing what you want him to do, and in BB's estimation it's hurting the team? Where is the leverage other than reducing his playing time? And if that's the case, you eventually reach a point where he is not worth the roster spot, much less the starter spot, and you're better off spinning him to another team. And if a message is communicated to others, then great.

That to me is much more logical than frustration over Collins demanding crazy money and BB really, really valuing Cleveland's 2017 3rd or 4th round pick. That's how it was sized up on M and M this morning, and it's entirely wrong IMO.

People make this point here all the time: don't get upset if the Pats' 3rd or 4th round picks don't work out because League wide they seldom work out. Accurate enough. But then don't try to posit this as BB salivating over Cleveland's pick, especially since they probably get a compensatory 3rd in any case.

It makes no sense to view this as anything other than performance based.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

If Collins was as bad as you're suggesting, BB would have moved sooner. Maybe Collins lost his starting job to Roberts, but it's hard to believe he couldn't add value playing 10-15 snaps a game and providing injury insurance. I don't think the prospect of landing the 100th pick (give or take) in next year's draft would motivate BB to trade away that value at this point in the season. (If you think Collins had fallen behind Mingo as well as Roberts on the depth chart, then maybe, but BB's usage of Collins suggests that wasn't the case.)

It is hard for me to believe that Collins isn't one of the 53 best guys available to BB right now based purely on talent and knowledge of the Pats system, free-lancing or no free-lancing.

But, given the position Collins plays, coming off his rookie deal and a pro-bowl appearance last year, this may be his one chance to get paid as an NFL player. If he was about to start losing significant snaps to Roberts, BB may have just felt that it was a recipe for disaster. I wouldn't blame Collins one bit for being furious at being benched in favor of a rookie in that scenario, and believing that the benching was retribution for what reportedly were becoming difficult contract negotiations.

There's a lot of speculation in there, but if something like that is what was going on, it makes more sense that BB would decide to trade a guy who can probably still help this team in some way.

 

[mwonow]

I agree that Belichick absolutely has the track record and resume to make the moves he's making. But do free agents really see a guy trading away talented players as a perk? I'm pretty sure job security ranks pretty highly on the list when veteran players sign anywhere.

History suggests that guys come to the Patriots to be part of a championship-caliber team, not to make the most coin or for the security of a long-term deal (not that they're likely to get either from NE).

Belichick also favors intelligent players when he brings in veterans - the kind of guy he likes is likely smart enough to realize that there is nothing that remotely resembles job security in the National Football League.

I think the bold answers the italicized. At this point, it's pretty clear that Belichick makes every decision based on optimizing win probabilities within the cap (including both this year's and future years' total spending limits). There's probably a longer list of guys who he's been publicly fond of who he's let go (e.g., Wilfork - heck, Ochocinco) than those he was known to be at odds with (e.g., Adelius) but regardless, the decision is about maximizing Ws and use of cash, and not about anything else. Some vets will value that, and others, and sodenj5 points out, won't. I think BB would prefer that those who value security over optimizing wins/cash find another place to play anyway, so the approach probably works no matter which outcome a particular vet values.

 

[jsinger121]

 

[Eddie Jurak]

i know u guys dislike denver but if i was denver GM i wouild had offer 1ST in 17 LB S Barnett and LB T Davis

I'm guessing that BB accepted a lesser return that he could otherwise have gotten in order to exile Collins to a non playoff team. He'd rather a low 3rd from Cleveland than a low first from someone who will run Collins out against him in January.

 

[joe dokes]

I think the bold answers the italicized. At this point, it's pretty clear that Belichick makes every decision based on optimizing win probabilities within the cap (including both this year's and future years' total spending limits). There's probably a longer list of guys who he's been publicly fond of who he's let go (e.g., Wilfork - heck, Ochocinco) than those he was known to be at odds with (e.g., Adelius) but regardless, the decision is about maximizing Ws and use of cash, and not about anything else. Some vets will value that, and others, and sodenj5 points out, won't. I think BB would prefer that those who value security over optimizing wins/cash find another place to play anyway, so the approach probably works no matter which outcome a particular vet values.

I think Amendola's annual contract restructuring shows where he is. I also think Bennett will have a choice to make after this season (not the same because he'll be a FA, but he is likely to be offered more elsewhere).

And this also dovetails with what we've seen with "better to let them go a year early than a year late." Welker and Mankins each had a good year or two post-Patriots, but BB seems to hate the dead money that usually accompanies longish-term deals to veterans more than he hates turnovers.

 

[cshea]

That seems to run counter to Bill's history of maximizing value. If the Collins trade is performance based, why would he be afraid of facing him down the road? Would he really accept a lesser return just to steer clear of the guy? Cleveland probably had the best offer.

 

[Morning Woodhead]

We'll he isn't, but I would look at it this way:

What if Collins is not doing what you want him to do, and in BB's estimation it's hurting the team? Where is the leverage other than reducing his playing time? And if that's the case, you eventually reach a point where he is not worth the roster spot, much less the starter spot, and you're better off spinning him to another team. And if a message is communicated to others, then great.

That to me is much more logical than frustration over Collins demanding crazy money and BB really, really valuing Cleveland's 2017 3rd or 4th round pick. That's how it was sized up on M and M this morning, and it's entirely wrong IMO.

People make this point here all the time: don't get upset if the Pats' 3rd or 4th round picks don't work out because League wide they seldom work out. Accurate enough. But then don't try to posit this as BB salivating over Cleveland's pick, especially since they probably get a compensatory 3rd in any case.

It makes no sense to view this as anything other than performance based.

The closest BB has ever come to "losing a locker room" was the Adalius Thomas fiasco (09 I believe). It could be as simple as BB not liking the direction this was heading, and solving the problem before it became a bigger issue. Deal with the short term pain.

 

[moondog80]

This was the only thing stopping me from 100% embracing the "they just didn't think he was that good" narrative, so I'll choose to believe it.

 

[DJnVa]

That seems to run counter to Bill's history of maximizing value. If the Collins trade is performance based, why would he be afraid of facing him down the road? .

Because even if he's not good enough to play for BB, he still might make the team he goes to better.

 

[Harry Hooper]

The closest BB has ever come to "losing a locker room" was the Adalius Thomas fiasco (09 I believe). It could be as simple as BB not liking the direction this was heading, and solving the problem before it became a bigger issue. Deal with the short term pain.

Yes, at this point knowing Collins wasn't going to work within the defensive scheme and was bound for limited duty, best to separate now. The small return from Cleveland is better than nothing if he was cut in 2 weeks.

 

[rodderick]

The fact that Mike Lombardi has been going on pretty much every sports show available to trash Collins' play and defend the decision to trade him rubs me the wrong way.

 

[Stitch01]

I know Belichick is an infallible genius, but at what point does trading away players send the wrong message to the locker room? Obviously he rules with an iron fist, but the Patriots are largely a veteran team. Do they need to play scared for their job?

Adam Gase cut Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas after they looked like Billy Turner and Dallas Thomas against Cincy. That's a young coach sending a message to a young team. By now, I think everyone in the Patriots locker room knows to "do your job."

Judging by the reaction, it seems a lot of players were surprised by the trade. Does Bill risk alienating his players with the way he handles guys like Jones and Collins? Players may start to feel he has no loyalty to them and they're just an asset.

\

The message is this is a meritocracy, and its not a new message. If Collins was freelancing, BB wasn't going to keep playing him. This isnt the South Florida circus. He doesn't tolerate clownshows like the Suh situation last year just because a guy has some talent.

So its not really sending a message to the veteran players or any of that crap. This isn't new. He's just not going to tolerate players not playing their assignments, if someone isnt playing within the defense he isn't going to play regardless of name or pedigree or talent.

Collins has a lot of talent. Its too bad it came to this and he might blossom elsewhere, but the track record of BB on these types of moves is pretty good. So, nah, not particularly worried about it, just looking forward to the second half of the season and the playoffs.

 

[Stitch01]

The fact that Mike Lombardi has been going on pretty much every sports show available to trash Collins' play and defend the decision to trade him rubs me the wrong way.

Id suspect BB isn't a big fan of it either.

 

[Toe Nash]

That seems to run counter to Bill's history of maximizing value. If the Collins trade is performance based, why would he be afraid of facing him down the road? Would he really accept a lesser return just to steer clear of the guy? Cleveland probably had the best offer.

Teams do this all the time -- never make trades in their own division or to rivals. I don't really get it in baseball, but football is so scheme-based that I think it makes sense. Collins is obviously talented and it's very possible that his "freelancing" (if that was indeed the problem) works better in another scheme than it does in New England. Or if, say, he's not working hard enough mentally or physically and that's why he's inconsistent, you wouldn't want him to get extra motivated and knock you out of the playoffs.

 

[bakahump]

LT was obviously a GREAT HOF talent. But lets not forget that the Giants Defense was loaded. Having 2 other great players and 5 or 6 other REALLY good players probably added to LTs impact rather then detracted.
I am not sure that the current Pats D is close to that old Giants D. So "letting Collins freelance like LT" (assuming he was even capable of similar impact) was probably impossible as they didnt have the other players to allow a "freelancer" to work.

 

[Shelterdog]

I know Belichick is an infallible genius, but at what point does trading away players send the wrong message to the locker room? Obviously he rules with an iron fist, but the Patriots are largely a veteran team. Do they need to play scared for their job?
.

Take a look at the roster again;other than Brady and the wideouts the Pats are pretty young. (as of opening day 15th youngest in the NFL, and younger than the Dolphins) http://www.phillyvoice.com/ranking-nfl-teams-age-after-53-man-cutdowns-2016-edition/ The defense has 5 rookies and 7 second year guys, as well as a bunch of third and fourth year players who, like Collins, are probably thinking about their next contract (Ryan, Harmon, Hightower, Butler).

Like the Moss trade to Minnesota this really looks like an attempt at addition by subtraction; you're absolutely going to have a less physically talented player on the field and you're not picking up much in draft compensation but BB seems to be gambling that having a less talented player doing his job will lead to better results. Time will tell.

 

[bakahump]

Yeah I heard BBs comment. No points scored isn't the best way to evaluate the strength of the defense, it is a team stat not a team defense stat. Third down defense and red zone defense hasn't been good so far this year.

No team has ever won when scoring 0 Pts. Teams who who have thrown for 400+ yards in a game can lose (ask Jim Hardy). You can also have someone run for over 250 yards in a game and lose (ask Nicoles Murderer).

So Pts is really the ONLY defensive stat that matters.

I get that your argument is that alot more information can be gleaned and some really "tough to play" defenses give up significant yards but at the end of the day it is all about Pts.

 

[Valek123]

The bottom line to me is although he is extremely talented he didn't always "do his job" or follow his assignment. Loose and fast are great and all, but if that results in the rest of the defense needing to shuffle to pick up the slack that talent is wasted. He clearly has been given multiple chances, and he isn't a player that BB loved the skillset above the potential negatives with a group behind him that can step up so he's now in Cleveland. I truly don't care who BB trades away any more, every time a trade goes down there is shock, panic and frustration but at the end of the day we watch 3 hours of football and read reports on the athletes every week. BB knows the ins and outs of his players and constantly is looking long-term which is a luxury we have in New England that almost no other fan base has, and far more often than not he makes the right call.

This move was probably 35% about this year and 65% the next 5, we'll see how the ripples on this one shuffle out but looking at it even in 24 months won't tell the true story.

 

[dcmissle]

No team has ever won when scoring 0 Pts. Teams who who have thrown for 400+ yards in a game can lose (ask Jim Hardy). You can also have someone run for over 250 yards in a game and lose (ask Nicoles Murderer).

So Pts is really the ONLY defensive stat that matters.

I get that your argument is that alot more information can be gleaned and some really "tough to play" defenses give up significant yards but at the end of the day it is all about Pts.

But implicit in the argument is that first-half trends will continue, potentially through Feb.

They have not played a QB worth a damn in the first half, save Dalton, and the same holds true for the second half too perhaps, save Wilson.

But eventually -- the playoffs -- that ends, and the yards turn into points. e.g., Pittsburgh with a healthy Ben. So if the defense is not playing well in the coach's estimation, you make changes.