Jimmy G to 49ers for 2nd round pick
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
He could have just as easily asked for Trent Taylor (SF's other fifth) with an eye towards aging Jules (on IR at the time) and Amendola (a pending FA). The Kittle wishcasting needs to stop. Every team that traded with the Pats in 2000 should have asked for Tom Brady, too.
It's also pretty clear from that article that Belichick was not interested in nickel-and-diming or in being nickled-and-dimed. Once they decided to move Jimmy G, he wanted to move quickly, and that seems like at least part of the appeal of working with the 49ers.
Bingo.
Jimmy G also had signficant leverage because his agent could (and likely did but we wouldn't know because no smart agent would say "yeah i threatened BB and it worked") make it known that Jimmy G wouldn't resign with a team unless it was a good situation.
Garoppolo's agent was also Tom Brady's agent, which was a major complicating factor in keeping both QB's on the roster.
Belichick was right up against the trading deadline, and any trade would also necessitate the Pats bringing in a backup QB in very short order. BB didn't have the luxury of screwing around; he knew the 49'ers had interest, they were out of conference, and he rightly guessed that Don Yee would be unlikely to object to his client being in San Francisco and playing for Kyle Shanahan.
Belichick was right up against the trading deadline, and any trade would also necessitate the Pats bringing in a backup QB in very short order. BB didn't have the luxury of screwing around; he knew the 49'ers had interest, they were out of conference, and he rightly guessed that Don Yee would be unlikely to object to his client being in San Francisco and playing for Kyle Shanahan.
I’ve been a member here for close to 16 years and this is one of the funniest things I’ve read, and there is a lot of good competition for that title. Well done.
This is probably right but totally baffles me. If the lens is "do what is best for the team," then Bill should have auctioned off the player to the highest bidder and taken his sweet time in doing it. Moving fast is only a value if you consider Bill's need to move on. That is, unless he credibly believed the Niners would go away if he did not act fast and so would other bidders. I have no idea why he would think that given how valuable an asset Jimmy was at the time.
Putting aside who the Pats should have gotten, it's hard to conclude other than Bill did not get enough, and he valued a quick deal with a trading partner he liked and/or putting Jimmy in a good spot ahead of maxing the return for the Patriots. Unless he had an eye on how that would play with the existing roster or future free agents, it makes no sense to me. And this is a man who dumped Lawyer Milloy right before the season and got rid of the likes of Richard Seymour, Logan Mankins and other veterans, each of which seemed to make Tom Brady and other veterans numb, at least for a while. So the "how it plays" angle seems like a total reach.
I'm left with a petulant reaction to being told by RKK that it was Brady over JG. And that seems hard to believe but no more hard to believe than the return that BB actually got.
Given where they were schedule-wise (closing in on the trade deadline), the combination of moving fast and getting Hoyer back (although not technically part of the trade) was huge. It WAS in the best interest of the team to move quickly. Not just Bill.
That's not the only reason. First, with the trade deadline the next day, the process couldn't be very long-drawn-out. Beyond that, I would add:
1) Belichick is very careful about stuff leaking to the media. Getting more teams and more open bidding potentially gets "Patriots are shopping Jimmy G!" leaked to the press. You and I might not place a ton of value on avoiding this, but Belichick clearly does.
2) There's a long game here. Read Jed York's comments:
Yeah, in any given deal Belichick might be able to squeeze a team for a little more. But the Patriots make more trades than most teams (it used to be way more than anybody, but more young GMs are trade-happy than they used to be), in part because Belichick will listen, Belichick is reasonable, and Belichick is discreet. So when the 49ers drafted Mike McGlinchey and Trent Brown became available, the Patriots and 49ers hammered out a deal, again within hours if not minutes.
How valuable an asset was Jimmy G at the time, really? He'd played 3 halves of football, essentially, and he had half a year left of team control. There was pretty big uncertainty about his future, and you can see that even in Shanahan and Lynch's reactions in the article. There was uncertainty. They were buying a half-year tryout to decide if they wanted to buy or go in a different direction (Cousins).
If they wanted to maximize Jimmy's value, they should have traded him before the 2017 season, but I think the market was a little tougher to navigate mid-season (and there was value keeping a Brady insurance policy at that point). He was a weird asset, where he wasn't proven and he wasn't going to be cost-controlled much longer.
This is a very interesting point with regard to the Trent Brown trade. It's something I've never thought about before.
Is there any evidence of this? Or just wild speculation.
I see it repeated here and by some media members but never any actual evidence or sources. Just media speculation on top of media speculation.
Understanding it might just be for show, but Shannahan has said there's no chance the 49ers were including Kittle in any deal. He loved him and had a backup (actually primary) plan to sign cousins as a free agent.
So what I am getting from this is that BB is the ideal drug dealer. You don’t have to make him feel special. He’s always on time. His prices are fair. He lets you know what merch he has discretely and doesn’t discuss other people’s business with you. Now we know where Welker got his shit from.
I'm late to reply -- was away -- but I really appreciate these thoughtful responses. I still wonder what would have happened had Bill called Cleveland first and sought more from them. I'm still left thinking that the Pats traded a high upside, potential franchise QB for a second rounder when they arguably could have gotten more. But you present very good and thought out replies.
And after watching Jimmy simply not get it done with the ball in his hands with 3 TOs and plenty of time, perhaps I've over valued the asset.
Last edited:
Maybe this is in part an overreaction to a single game but it does seem increasingly clear that JG is a solid, dependable mid-tier QB but will never get to the Brady/Rodgers/Payton/Brees/Mahomes level. Which is not really that bad for the 49ers - the Eagles won with Nick Foles only a few years ago and had the game been managed differently the 9ers might very well have won last night too - but it does suggest that the return the Pats got for him, particularly given the fact he had only played 3.5 games or so at that point, was pretty reasonable. (Guys like Bridgewater and Tyrod Taylor - potentially serviceable starters but ultimately probably destined to be mostly backups - returned 3rd round picks around the same time.)
The team acquiring Jimmy would not only be giving up assets to get him, but they would then have to give him a new deal as his was expiring.
Honestly, getting a 2nd round pick for a middle-of-the-road injury-prone QB you have to pay $140 million seems like a steal for the Pats.
Honestly, getting a 2nd round pick for a middle-of-the-road injury-prone QB you have to pay $140 million seems like a steal for the Pats.
Prior to the 2017 draft, there were basically 3 teams interested in Jimmy G. Cleveland, San Fran and Chicago. At that point, it was rumored that Bill was looking for a haul, as in 2 first round picks. Chicago decided to draft Trubisky, so they were out of the mix, and Cleveland drafted DeShone Kizer. San Fran wasn't giving up that much for Jimmy G., so no deal got done prior to the draft. San Fran started the season 0-8, but Cleveland basically had a lock on the 1st overall pick in 2018 and wanted Baker Mayfield, so they dropped out of the race. Basically, the Pats were in a position with the trade deadline looming the next day and only one team interested, and it was San Fran. At that point, they could give up Jimmy G. for a high 2nd round pick, or let him walk in free agency after the season. Those were really the only two options left at that point.
I agree
and solid followup
I am texting "NFL" to my friends because you guys are killing it.
Wait, now Garoppolo was "injury-prone" as of the date we traded him, because he sprained his shoulder joint in his second game in 2016 against Miami? He would have returned to service not long after that date, had Brady not come back as well, removing Jimmy's opportunity. And no, you don't get to count his 2018 ACL tear, that wasn't a factor in the trade.
This revisionist history sucks. Garoppolo was an attractive asset at the time, less so because he'd have to get paid after 2017, but his value was not really suffering based on a perception of him being injury-prone after taking a pile-driving shot that put him out for a couple of weeks. He had the aura of being a Brady understudy, about whom the only credible information we had on the Patriots' views about him was that Belichick loved him, something not really uttered about any other backup in the Brady era.
It's tough for non-dealmakers to wrap their minds around the concept that a deal can be fairly even, or win-win. But it's true here nonetheless. The 49ers traded a moderate amount for what amounted to a sneak preview of a major FA asset, it went well for them (7-0 finish), and they then signed a QB who - we agree - is very unlikely to be an All-Pro but is also perfectly capable and good enough to start on a title contender. The Patriots unloaded surplus from a position of strength and got a high 2nd rounder, less than a true blue-chip rookie-deal QB prospect would have fetched (see the RG3 trade, or a dozen others), but perfectly good value given the legitimate downsides to his market value. They also got the value of sitting on a depreciating asset for half of 2017 as an insurance policy, while waiting for it to get clear (-er) that Brady would remain effective that year.
The trade didn't have to be one where Belichick ripped the other team's face off, a la the Randy Moss trade, for it to be a good one. More importantly, it can be good for both sides and still be a good trade. And this one was, as evidenced by the fact that Shanahan and Lynch have all been quoted at how happy they were about the deal. It's possible that Belichick could have squeezed slightly more out of Cleveland or another franchise at the time, but it's also possible that he couldn't have - and he didn't have to have done so for it to have been a good deal for the Patriots.
He was injury prone because of the type of hit he took and the decision making that went into it.
In hindsight it's become obvious that the Pats got a great return for him. He's a decent but EXTERMELY flawed player who's making a lot of money.
In hindsight it's become obvious that the Pats got a great return for him. He's a decent but EXTERMELY flawed player who's making a lot of money.
Not true at all. I think he's extremely overrated, but I don't dislike him personally as a player. I was rooting for SF last night.
I think the idiotic hand-wringing I've been subjected to by casual smoothbrained Pats fans about how they should have kept him has been annoying as hell, and it's somewhat gratifying to see it reinfornced keeping Brady over Garoppolo was the obvious and correct decision. That's one argument I won't have to be subjected to ever again. He was awful last night. And having seen that I've concluded that he's never going to be good enough to lead his team to a SB. I could be wrong, but that was my takeaway. Others may feel differently.
I really HATED all the assumptions idiots made that Jimmy was OF COURSE going to lead NE to many SBs if we only traded Brady. Hated hated hated hated that. And Jimmy's performance last night put that shit to bed, permanently.
Last edited:
Nobody, and I mean nobody, hated the Jimmy G. draft pick more than I did. I remember that thread in 2014, and I'll bet someone could super impose it on the new Tom Brady thread about his future and it would look very similar. When they drafted Jimmy G. in 2014, people were saying they were planning for the future, Tom was almost 37 years old and who knew how long he would last, even though he was under contract until 2017. The team had a ton of holes coming out of the 2013 season, and I felt like that pick was better used towards other needs than drafting a backup QB who, at best, would only see the field if Tom retired after 2017, or at worst, would only see the field if Tom got hurt before then.
On top of that, it led to what has now become 6.5 years of debates and arguments about whether or not they should move on from Tom, keep Jimmy, etc.
Anyone paying attention in 2013 knows that Tom Brady was the same guy he was in 2012, or 2010 or 2007. His numbers in 2013 fell off a cliff because, wait for it, he had nobody around him. Gronk missed most of the season, and he was left with Julian Edelman, Amendola, Kembrel Thompkins, and Aaron Dobson. Their offense was extraordinarily predictable because any time you had Ridley or Blount on the field, they ran, and any time they had Vereen on the field, they threw. Of course, Vereen got hurt and missed half the season, and they were left with Brandon Bolden as their "scat" back (and apparently they still think hes fast enough to return kicks 6 plus years later, but I digress).
If any of the above statements sound familiar, they should, because it is basically exactly what went down with the offense in 2019. So, let's get into some numbers:
In 2012, with normal weapons at the skill positions, here were Brady's numbers, 4,827 yards, 34td's, 13ints, 98.7QBR.
In 2013, with a barren set of weapons, his numbers were 4,343 yards, 25tds, 11ints, 88.0 QBR.
He, of course, goes on to win 3 Super Bowls from 2014-2018, but let's fast forward.
In 2018, with normal weapons at the skill positions, here were Brady's numbers, 4,355 yards, 29td's, 11ints, 97.7 QBR
in 2019, with the worst set of skill position players and slowest offensive weapons in the league, he goes for 4,057 yards, 24tds, 8 ints and an 87.7 QBR.
I would love to know what people thought they saw in 2013 and again this year in 2019 that led them to believe that Tom Brady isn't the same guy he was in 2012 or in 2018? Because I don't see it. I see the same guy, doing the same things, but every 6 or so years, he's stuck doing it with inferior players around him. That's one of the reasons I hated the Jimmy G. pick at the time and one of the reasons I hate the idea of moving on from Tom right now. If you send Brady out there with a competent group of offensive personnel around him, and he puts up 2013 numbers or 2019 numbers, then so be it, I'll buy into the "you need to move on and plan for the future..." argument, but folks weren't right when that argument was made after 2013, they weren't right when that argument was made after 2006, and as of right now, I don't know why people think that argument is right in 2019. Other than the "he's going to be 43 years old," what else are people seeing?
I hate Jimmy G. for the aggravation he's caused me over the last half decade plus. I'm glad he got exposed last night because of that, although I wish SF had still won the game, because fuck the Chiefs and their fans. I'm not rational about this, and I don't give a fuck. Rant over.
Wait so you don't think JG will ever win a Super Bowl? Take a look at some of the QB's who have won rings : Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Doug Williams, Mark Rypian, Jeff Hostetler, etc... Are you actually saying that JG is worse than Trent Fucking Dilfer?
I think you lost your mind if you think that.
I need to go back and re-watch the game but it seemed to me that a SF LB had a very good shot at a pick when the Niners were up 20-10 and didn't make the play (shades of Asante Samuel).
I also think that the pass that Jimmy threw to Kittles down the right sideline was gorgeous and that the OPI was questionable, at best.
The Chiefs also got the benefit of several blown calls, including the non-call on the delay of game against SF which would have given SF another shot.
My point is that most games come down to a few breaks and plays, and that while JG did fail in crunch time, and did miss an open receiver for a TD on the last drive, that had a few things happened differently, we would be talking about a SB champion this year.
Make no mistake, I also hate the "shoulda kept Jimmy" mouthbreathers. It's beyond insane. The two Lombardis the Pats won with Brady after the trade should stop every such argument in its tracks And there are of course other responses, but that one should by itself end the inquiry.
But I can see that guy coming back and winning one in the next few years and would not at all be surprised if he uses last night as motivation and improves over time.
I take the points people have made about the trade. They are compelling. But I don't look at that game and conclude that Jimmy wont one day make us really miss him, even while we remain steadfast in our conviction that keeping Brady was overwhelmingly the right move.
I also think that the pass that Jimmy threw to Kittles down the right sideline was gorgeous and that the OPI was questionable, at best.
The Chiefs also got the benefit of several blown calls, including the non-call on the delay of game against SF which would have given SF another shot.
My point is that most games come down to a few breaks and plays, and that while JG did fail in crunch time, and did miss an open receiver for a TD on the last drive, that had a few things happened differently, we would be talking about a SB champion this year.
Make no mistake, I also hate the "shoulda kept Jimmy" mouthbreathers. It's beyond insane. The two Lombardis the Pats won with Brady after the trade should stop every such argument in its tracks And there are of course other responses, but that one should by itself end the inquiry.
But I can see that guy coming back and winning one in the next few years and would not at all be surprised if he uses last night as motivation and improves over time.
I take the points people have made about the trade. They are compelling. But I don't look at that game and conclude that Jimmy wont one day make us really miss him, even while we remain steadfast in our conviction that keeping Brady was overwhelmingly the right move.
Last edited:
Jimmy G. could win the next 5 Super Bowls in a row and I wouldn't miss him one bit.
But he better not win 6, because fuck him.
But he better not win 6, because fuck him.
I mean, I read your post and get your points. But cmon. If Jimmy G is playing at a high level, Brady has retired, and the Pats are stuck in mediocrity with a demonstrably inferior QB, you might not miss JG cause you don't like him or the reaction to him or the sum total of factors you mentioned. But we will all miss having an elite QB, and I still think Jimmy could be that.
Nothing changes the calculus on Brady over Jimmy or whether a late round 2 was indeed sufficient. But I'll miss having a QB that you can contend for a SB with; my bet is that Jimmy will be exactly that.
I think the point was that a team can get to the SB with him and can even win, but he’ll just be along for the ride and not be the reason the team won. Just like the guys you cite.
Sure, I'll miss having an elite QB. More accurately, I'll miss having Tom Brady. Shit, I went to 170 out of 171 straight home games before and during the Brady run. I love this team with every fiber of my being. But at no point will I ever look at Jimmy G. and think of him like the girl that got away. Never. It's like Tom Brady ending up with Giselle Bundchen and pining away for Bridget Moynahan. I mean, Moynahan is pretty and all, and all things considered, almost any man would love to have her, but Tom Brady ended up with the most beautiful woman on Earth, and he couldn't keep them both. Likewise, we Pats fans ended up with the GOAT, and Jimmy G. could turn into a great quarterback, but not for one second will I think to myself we could have had both, because it wasn't possible and in the end, we got the longer end of the straw.
I also have a lot of faith that this organization, which will be led by Jonathan Kraft for years to come, will figure it out when the time comes. I just don't see the need to speed that time along as fast as possible, like so many have tried to do in the last 10+ years at various times.
Man watching Jimmy G made me realize how shitty life will be someday. Maybe as soon as this year.
Overall Jimmy is (or can be) a top 10-15 QB. Something that seems relatively attainable as part of our next 10 years. And yet to look that bad.
So so spoiled.
Overall Jimmy is (or can be) a top 10-15 QB. Something that seems relatively attainable as part of our next 10 years. And yet to look that bad.
So so spoiled.
I am not on board with him looking terrible. He was pretty good up until the end. Yes at the most important time he made some bad throws, but at least some of that was the coaches not trusting their running game, and KC adjusting. Mahomes looked terrible a large part of that game. One of his fumbles bounces the other way maybe JG has another ring.
As for the trade either you hand Jimmy the team or get what you can. They took plan B. If it was just for the 2020 season how many of you pick JG over TB? Not me.
As for the trade either you hand Jimmy the team or get what you can. They took plan B. If it was just for the 2020 season how many of you pick JG over TB? Not me.
Right, we take for granted that if a guy is open and the QB is unhurried, our QB will hit him in-stride, probably in the numbers.
Every game I've watched him, Jimmy G has had a few inexplicable straight up misses. Turfed the ball 10 yards in front of the receiver, overthrew him by a mile, missed wide. He'll make some zingers into tight windows too, of course. He's an NFL-quality QB. But the sheer consistency of making the easy throws 100% of the time, or close enough to not be noticeable, is so easy to take for granted.
And that's before you get into decision-making, giving the defense some misdirection, careful placement of a ball to avoid INT risk or let the receiver avoid taking a big hit, and all the other little things Brady does that are harder to notice. Just the basic act of "here's an open guy for a moment, throw it to him" seems like something that should be table stakes for an NFL QB, and yet, here one is, in the Super Bowl no less...
And Jimmy didn't play terribly! That's definitely an overstatement. But he just straight-up missed some easy throws. A handful. Not enough that people should be shaking their heads. But ones that would have made the team's life a lot easier and maybe, collectively, could have been the difference between winning and losing.
Every game I've watched him, Jimmy G has had a few inexplicable straight up misses. Turfed the ball 10 yards in front of the receiver, overthrew him by a mile, missed wide. He'll make some zingers into tight windows too, of course. He's an NFL-quality QB. But the sheer consistency of making the easy throws 100% of the time, or close enough to not be noticeable, is so easy to take for granted.
And that's before you get into decision-making, giving the defense some misdirection, careful placement of a ball to avoid INT risk or let the receiver avoid taking a big hit, and all the other little things Brady does that are harder to notice. Just the basic act of "here's an open guy for a moment, throw it to him" seems like something that should be table stakes for an NFL QB, and yet, here one is, in the Super Bowl no less...
And Jimmy didn't play terribly! That's definitely an overstatement. But he just straight-up missed some easy throws. A handful. Not enough that people should be shaking their heads. But ones that would have made the team's life a lot easier and maybe, collectively, could have been the difference between winning and losing.
Look at this:
2010: 65.9%, 111.0 rating
2011: 65.6%, 105.6 rating
2012: 63.0%, 98.7 rating
2013: 60.5%, 87.3 rating
- - -
2016: 67.4%, 112.2 rating
2017: 66.3%, 102.8 rating
2018: 65.8%, 97.7 rating
2019: 60.8%, 88.0 rating
I mean, that's eerie. I'd love to see the next two years for Brady be like they were in 2014 and 2015.
One problem: in 2014 and 2015 Brady was 37 and 38 years of age. In 2020 and 2021, Brady will be 43 and 44 years of age. It's going to be a lot harder for him to be great the next two years than it was in 2014-2015.
But honestly, the Pats are not that far off. Scar being gone hurts, but I think the OL should be better in 2020 than it was in 2019. Their RB situation is solid. Edelman and Harry and Sanu are fine, but they really need one more WR playmaker. And they definitely need TE help. But they're not many moves away from being really good on offense again. And the D is already elite. Lest we forget...they were basically the only team to keep KC in check. And they did the best job against Tannehill's Titans. The D is legitimately really good. Just a couple of moves can make the offense dynamic again.
Yep, and those two outlier years coincide exactly with a loss in good skill position players. 2006 was the same way, although his drop off from 2005 to 2006 wasn't as pronounced, mostly because the rule changes that favored passing were just starting to be felt in 2005. I honestly think Brady can be just as good in 2020 and 2021 as he was in 2017 and 2018, if they give him some weapons.
Going into this draft, the Pats need to focus on one thing, and one thing only, IMO. Speed. All over the field. Can someone even guess who the fastest player on the team was this year? My guess is a 30 something Devin McCourty. That's bad. Whether it's at kick returner (Brandon Bolden, seriously?) or running back (I like Sony, but he doesn't have game breaking speed, James White isn't fast, neither is Burkhead, etc.) or wide receiver (Edelman, Sanu and Harry are all slow by comparison to other WR corps) and don't even get me started on the tight ends who may as well have run backwards this year, because they couldn't move much slower than they did going forwards (38 year old Ben Watson better not walk through that door ever again).
They are just too slow. In an era where defenses just get faster and faster and faster, their offense has gotten slower and slower and slower. That has more to do with them getting open than route running or not knowing where they're supposed to be. Couple that with an offensive line in shambles, and Brady being forced to make quicker decisions, guys just couldn't free up. Go find the Raheem Mosterts and DK Metcalf's of the world. DK Metcalf is the pick that I will never forgive. How do you take a N'Keal Harry, who runs a 4.53 40 at the combine over DK Metcalf who looked like a chiseled God and ran a 4.33? How? Speed, speed, speed. There's a reason guys like Ted Ginn Jr. stick around for 1,000 years, and it isn't because he has great hands.
They were just as slow last year and won the Super Bowl. A hobbling Gronk wasn't much faster than Lacosse. (though obviously a lot BETTER) Their WRs weren't any faster than the guys they had this year. The RB group was the exact same.
I'm not saying I wouldn't want to get faster at the skill positions. But you can beat speed with power and skill.
They need speed no doubt about it. The offense struggled to move the ball after Brandin Cooks left and they didn't have anyone outside to run the deep posts and 9 routes. They need someone who safeties need to account for so the middle of the field opens up.
I thought the near-conventional wisdom was that last year, they adjusted to the speed-stopping defenses by going big and running teams over. It seemed to work in 2018. Not in 2019, without Andrews, Develin, Gronk, D.Allen, a long stretch without Wynn, and a seemingly hobbled Mason and Cannon.
It worked for the last 2 games of the regular season and postseason. But if you remember, they struggled to move the ball down the field for most of the season. A prime example was the late season game at Pittsburgh.
Exactly. The way you beat speed is by overpowering them. Speed is somewhat neutralized when you're running bigger, stronger guys right at smaller, faster guys. Then it's a game of power and technique, not of speed.
But of course the Pats need to add speed. Because you need to have more ways of winning games than just power football. Baltimore learned that the hard way this year.
Yeah, but they also don't have any power either. Let's not forget they scored 13 points in the Super Bowl last year, and basically dominated the Chargers and Chiefs with a power running game, but Gronk and James Develin aren't walking through that door either. I don't think they can hope to replace those guys with another huge pass catching threat that doubles as one of the best blockers at the tight end position, and one of the best blocking fullbacks in the last 5-10 years in the NFL.
And let's be clear here, speed and "small" don't go hand in hand anymore. Defenses are faster, and they are bigger now. Meanwhile, we're running slow, small guys at them, which doesn't work at all. Sony Michel was successful last year, not because he's fast, and not because he's powerful, but because he had powerful guys paving the way for him. Gronk took so much attention from the defense that it opened up everything else in the passing game, teams couldn't blitz as much, they couldn't double or press the outside receivers as much. If we can find another Gronk and another James Develin, then of course, I'm all in, but I think you have a better shot of finding guys that can run a 4.4 or less, like the MeCole Hardman's of the world, than you do of finding one of those guys. IMO, this team needs speed, all over the field on offense, which is the model KC and Baltimore are using. I mean, I'd love a model like Minnesota, with Diggs and Theilen on the outside, a good dual threat tight end in Rudolph, a running back with speed and power like Dalvin Cook and a great fullback leading the way in CJ Ham. But I just don't know how you pull all that together in one offseason. So I believe the quickest way to open things back up in today's game is to get faster. A lot faster. Brady doesn't need a lot of time, but he is never going to get enough time to allow this group of receivers to get open, especially with no running threat and no tight end opening things up. Speed will open things up.
Brandon Bolden is returning kicks. Brandon freaking Bolden. That's all anyone needs to know about how far down the speed rung the Patriots have fallen in the past couple of years. And none of these guys are getting younger. I don't know about anyone else, but James White looked slow this year. Edelman is going to be 34. Harry and Sanu couldn't separate from a tree trunk last year. If I were the Pats, I'd go into this draft and not even look at another skill position guy that can't run a sub 4.45 40. Period.
Anecdotally it feels like we have been taking about team speed for like 10 years. But I guess a good portion of that was on D which they mostly fixed. When was the last time they were fast on offense? 2012?
2017 they were pretty fast. Cooks and Hogan on the outside, Edelman/Amendola quickness factor inside, Gronkowski down the seam, James White/Dion Lewis in the flats. Offensively, whenever they've had even just 1 high speed quality WR the offense was so much better because it allowed Edelman/White/Amendola/Gronk to patrol the middle/flats with one less safety and most likely one less LB. Better matchups for everyone. This year, because of the lack of a threat at X, opposing defenses were allowed to double Edelman and White so where could Brady have gone to?
I agree with your points, I think Patriots management would agree and I think it is addressing these exact points is what it will take for Tom to come back.
In 2001 they didn't have any team speed on offense. Troy was average. Wiggins was a slow TE. Smith was a slow, power running RB.
In 2003 they didn't have any real team speed. Branch was more quick than fast. Everything else was the same.
In 2004 they didn't have any real team speed. Dillon was really good but not fast. Everything else was basically the same.
In 2014 they weren't really fast. Vereen was similar to White. Gronk was faster than he was in 2018, so that helped. Edelman and Amendola? More quick than fast. LaFell wasn't particularly fast.
In 2016 they weren't really fast. Gronk was out. Bennett was powerful and had decent speed but was no burner. Hogan, Mitchell, Edelman...none were really fast.
In 2018 they weren't really fast.
I mean, all six Super Bowl wins they've not been very fast on offense. They've been frigging GOOD though. Skilled, quick, strong, and versatile, with the best QB of all time running the show and making the decisions. That's why they've been so successful on offense.
That said, yes I want them to get faster because even though those teams weren't really fast, they weren't slow like this team was in 2019. They do need to get at least a LITTLE faster.
In 2003 they didn't have any real team speed. Branch was more quick than fast. Everything else was the same.
In 2004 they didn't have any real team speed. Dillon was really good but not fast. Everything else was basically the same.
In 2014 they weren't really fast. Vereen was similar to White. Gronk was faster than he was in 2018, so that helped. Edelman and Amendola? More quick than fast. LaFell wasn't particularly fast.
In 2016 they weren't really fast. Gronk was out. Bennett was powerful and had decent speed but was no burner. Hogan, Mitchell, Edelman...none were really fast.
In 2018 they weren't really fast.
I mean, all six Super Bowl wins they've not been very fast on offense. They've been frigging GOOD though. Skilled, quick, strong, and versatile, with the best QB of all time running the show and making the decisions. That's why they've been so successful on offense.
That said, yes I want them to get faster because even though those teams weren't really fast, they weren't slow like this team was in 2019. They do need to get at least a LITTLE faster.