Shaq Mason traded to Bucs for a 5th round pick
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
Looking at it... Shaq got a 5th because he's a better guard than Daryl Williams. Williams had a similar contract (given when he was playing tackle) and got no nibbles at all for a trade, getting outright released.
Having Amendola as the 3rd WR, and really the 4th or 5th pass catching option most of the time, was basically a cheat code because no defense could cover all their weapons when healthy.
I don't think one excludes the other. All the plays you listed are on short-term fairly reasonable deals
Also, the last three are core culture, guys, for the team, exactly who you want around as you build in a new foundation.
Well, he's not tearing the team down with an eye towards non-competiveness and a high draft pick. He wants to compete next year so he is bringing back some vets. Plus, an experienced vet like McCourty is probably a good presence for younger guys in the secondary, and same for Slater (with ST unit) and White (for Mac). (Plus they gave very little money to White so if they need to cut him they can.)
The Mason deal I see as being about either thinking Mason has lost something and is no longer worth the contract or just about reallocating resources.
If anything surprises me it is that the team let Karras walk and then traded Mason.
But obviously Bill wants to do something else with that money.
It was some of both. Edelman reduced Amendola's role considerably, but even when Edelman missed the whole year, Amendola only gave them 600-something yards.
I think this year is a bridge year. It may be similar to the Chargers last year. Last year, for the Chargers, Herbert was in the second year of his contract. They missed the post season. During this year's off season, going into the third year on Herbert's contract, the Chargers have already been very aggressive.
Chargers Off Season Moves So Far
I think the Patriots may be looking at their roster in a similar multi-year approach.
During this off-season, they have re-signed older veteran players (Hoyer, McCourty, White, Slater) on short-term deals as part of the bridge year approach. These veteran players can still contribute on the field (excluding Hoyer), but will, also, work as mentors for the younger players. They will help to teach the organization's philosophy to younger players. Long term, however, they are not going to cripple the team's salary cap in future years.
For the remaining off-season, I think the Patriots will spend the majority of their limited salary resources on cheaper players who can fill out the roster holes. Case in point: https://www.sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/patriots-sign-texan-cb-terrance-mitchell-1-year-3-million.36086/
This approach allows them to go into the draft without any obvious needs because they will have duct-taped up all of their holes. This gives them flexibility in the draft so that they can basically allow the draft to come to them. Linebackers, corner backs, offensive linemen, receivers, etc. are still needs obviously, but if, let's say, a great safety drops to them, they can pounce instead of having to skip a great safety to grab an okay receiver.
Post draft, they can almost red-shirt their young players. Maybe in the later rounds they really focus on high upside players that still need to learn and acquire experience (someone like Joshua Williams, the corner back from Fayetteville State). Give those young guys a low pressure year to learn and adapt while getting indoctrinated into the team culture. That explains the veteran signings.
Then, during next year's off season, a lot of those veterans will be coming off the books, and a lot of last years free agents will be off the books (Agholor's contract expires after 2022) or at least easier to move on from. Edit: in addition, we can expect the salary cap to continue to increase with higher in-person attendance to games in a not-yet-post-COVID world.
Now, I am not saying that the Patriots off season next year will be like the Chargers off season this year, but conceptually it makes sense to build this years roster with a real focus on the 2023 roster as their opportunity, but I wouldn't be surprised if Patriots next year were able to trade for a good player similar to how the Chargers were able to trade with the Bears for Khalil Mack - taking advantage of teams that need to reset their rosters.
In addition to all of the above, the Patriots should be in line for some comp picks in next years draft (JC Jackson) which is another reason not to go crazy in this year's free agent period.
Edit: all that being said, I am really hoping that we get more than a fifth for Mason.
Last edited:
I think that’s pretty much right. As I am sure the goal isn’t to get Mac killed, I have faith they’ll work out the line and that the offense will be solid, which with Bill at the helm should mean a competitive team even if not near the upper tier of contenders. (And truthfully that’s what the Bengals were last year so it’s not a horrible place to be.)
It’s still very very early to make definitive declarations either way, but I’m admittedly getting cold feet about the idea of bringing in Allen Robinson. If there’s a deal to be had, sure, but imo there’s too much potential variance in what can be expected of him going forward for me to feel comfortable with them hurting 2023-24 flexibility to bring him in.
It’s still very very early to make definitive declarations either way, but I’m admittedly getting cold feet about the idea of bringing in Allen Robinson. If there’s a deal to be had, sure, but imo there’s too much potential variance in what can be expected of him going forward for me to feel comfortable with them hurting 2023-24 flexibility to bring him in.
I don't think "make your OL meaningfully worse' is part of any reasonable multi-year plan involving a developmental QB, so I don't think the mason deal is solely about the longer term.
I'm more or less there. It's hard for me to think that BB is going to take steps that in his mind make the line materially worse, and you're not getting a replacement starter with the pick they got or the money they saved, so this is about something else.
Bedard kept indicating that there were problems with the o-lines prep in the off-season--I know he's not super reliable but I could imagine BB thinking that Mason is declining a bit and he's not going to be a clubhouse leader that it's better to get what you can as quick as you can and move on.
I think it's a combination. $8 million this year and $9 million next year for what he may see as a declining player, where the player plays at an important position, but in a year with very little salary cap wiggle room versus having that money available this year to plug multiple holes on short term deals but now having yet another hole to plug plus added draft capital.
I'm not the one casting dispersions. Someone said the Patriots had "limited leverage" with Gronk and then you said the Bucs had all the leverage with Brady. I'm just asking which is it, then. Did they have limited leverage or all the leverage? In my book they had a ton of leverage and a 4th was acceptable, but on the low end. Doesn't take away from the fact that they got jack shit for the best players the team had over the past 4 or so years and overpaid for a bunch of "meh" talent.
Brady, Gronk, Gilmore, Mason and JC are all still very good/great players and comprised the core of the 2018 SB winning team. They lost all of them for basically nothing in return and now have to rebuild the OL and the secondary and have a ton of resources tied up to a TE that doesn't produce. Thank God for Mac.
Leverage varied different at different points of the scenario. It's both because the situations and the teams' willingness to act was different.
Gronk sat out for a year and wanted to go back to the Bucs - the Pats had all the leverage to decide his fate at this point. Once they decided they were okay with him returning and going to the Bucs, the Pats had basically no leverage in the trade. If they traded him to the Lions he would've stayed retired.
Brady sat out for 40 days and came back after allegedly wanting to go to a different team. The Bucs kept all the leverage by showing a willingness to let Brady retire and move on from him. Brady could literally do nothing outside of stamp his feet and either stay retired or return to the Bucs.
Gronk unretiring with the Pats would have given them cap problems which shifted the leverage in his favor. He could have called their bluff if they refused to trade him.