Well Done: Cooks' Season One in NE

quint

Caught Looking
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,512
a really good source
Jesus tittybanging Christ people, if he wasn't really good enough for New England to place a first round tender on him after this year he could do whatever.

He can't now. He's good. He either plays for NE or they get compensation for developing the guy.

It's not rocket science.
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,893
Alexandria, VA
Just so we're clear (please correct any mistakes):

Butler's a restricted free agent because he has 3 accrued seasons (basically, seasons with 6+ games played).

The Pats had the option to tender him an qualifying offer at one of 4 levels (first round, 2nd round, drafted round, or no compensation); the first 2 are much more expensive but guarantee a compensation pick of that level if he signs an offer sheet elsewhere and leaves the pats. They tendered him a first round qualifying offer, which this year is $3.91 million dollars.

Butler now has the following options:
1. Negotiate a contract with the Patriots (usually this would be a multi-year extension, but it's whatever the two parties agree to).
2. Sign the tender/qualifying offer, which amounts to a 1 year contract at $3.91 million.
3. Sign an offer sheet with another team: he can do this without signing/accepting the tender. If he does this, New England can either:
a) Match that offer sheet themselves, in which case it becomes the new contract between New England and Butler
b) Decline to match it, in which case it becomes the new contract between the other team and Butler AND New England receives a first round compensation pick from the other team.​
4. Not play in the NFL.

Until Butler is under contract with the Patriots (which would happen under (1), (2), or (3)(a)), he cannot be traded, though he could negotiate a trade-and-sign a la Welker with the Pats and another team.

The last date for him to sign an offer sheet with another team is April 21st; after that, he's limited to signing the QO, negotiating a contract with the Pats, or holding out.

After June 15th, the Pats can reduce the QO to $660,000 (110% of his 2016 salary).
 

Untold

New Member
May 1, 2012
9
Even should Butler sign his tender, it's unlikely anyone will be trading a 1st for him as this is the deepest CB draft class in recent memory.
The biggest obstacle this team has now for 2017 is staying healthy. The offense is going to be lethal and opposing teams are going to be forced to pass to keep up - and they get to do that against one of the best secondaries in the league.

I don't think trading out of 1 and 2 necessarily signals that JG is gone, either. I get the feeling this is the last year for Brady as a Patriot. I would rather he retire than move on, but this is football (see Montana, Young.) Hopefully we repeat, Bill is certainly setting up the team to do just that.

(If we do trade JG I have to think a 2018 1st rounder is a must - that will be the QB pick to succeed Brady.)
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,432
If he doesn't sign NE's RFA sheet, he can't do or go anywhere other than with the Patriots. They have exclusive rights as a undrafted rookie.

Shitty deal if you have talent, but that's the current CBA.
This is incorrect. See Sumner's post.

You are thinking of exclusive rights free agent. That is for players with 2 or less years. Those players can only re-sign with current team.

Butler had 3 years which makes him a RFA that Sumner explains very well.

4 years and they become UFA.


The reason NO doesn't just sign Butler is they likely do not want to give up the #11 pick for him.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
The reason NO doesn't just sign Butler is they likely do not want to give up the #11 pick for him.
Slight correction. Saints can't quite just "sign" him. They (or any other team with a #1 pick to lose) can only make an offer, which NE has the right to match. If NE chooses not to, he goes to NO, gets paid whatever NO offered, and NO gives up their #1. Or NE matches and he stays. (I'm guessing you knew that, but in reading this thread, I think precision is called for, lest the Romulans steal Butler).

I don't know.
3rd base.
 

MuppetAsteriskTalk

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2015
5,398
Snip....

After June 15th, the Pats can reduce the QO to $660,000 (110% of his 2016 salary).
Seems this greatly reduces the chances Butler holds out 6 games and comes back just in time to play enough to accrue a season and become an UFA in 2018.

If it was me, I would lock up $3.9 mm in case of some terrible injury.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Seems this greatly reduces the chances Butler holds out 6 games and comes back just in time to play enough to accrue a season and become an UFA in 2018.

If it was me, I would lock up $3.9 mm in case of some terrible injury.
Or suggest to the Pats a 4 year deal for $32 million with $16 million guaranteed (or something down that road)?
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,345
Philadelphia
The more Cooks highlights I watch the more excited I get. This guy is super versatile. He can line up in the slot or outside. He has great quickness and can accelerate in a way that should make him a super tough matchup on crossing routes and bunch formation/man beater type stuff. But he can also really take the top off a defense and do damage along the sidelines. And he is dynamite after the catch too.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Are they able to Franchise Tag him after this season if he plays out the RFA year?
Yes...which would get him something like $18m next year. So it would be like a 2 year/$22m deal.

Then he's 29 pushing 30...
 

shoosh77

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2009
4,374
New Canaan, CT
Yes...which would get him something like $18m next year. So it would be like a 2 year/$22m deal.

Then he's 29 pushing 30...
If the dust settles and they have Hightower back and 20+ million in cap room still, just offer him a 2/22 with clause about not franchising at the end. Pull some of next years tag money forward to this year.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
If the dust settles and they have Hightower back and 20+ million in cap room still, just offer him a 2/22 with clause about not franchising at the end. Pull some of next years tag money forward to this year.
The problem with this is the Pats clearly don't like tagging players any more. No point in creating ill will. If the player won't be satisfied he will be traded.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The more Cooks highlights I watch the more excited I get. This guy is super versatile. He can line up in the slot or outside. He has great quickness and can accelerate in a way that should make him a super tough matchup on crossing routes and bunch formation/man beater type stuff. But he can also really take the top off a defense and do damage along the sidelines. And he is dynamite after the catch too.
Agreed. Watching the beginning of that highlight reel posted upthread made him look like a pure long ball guy. Then he was doing the slants and crossing patterns. Then it showed an awesome YAC play on a classic bubble screen.

I imagine Josh McD will have a lot of late nights scheming up new ways to utilize him in the context of all the other NEP offensive skill weapons.

Speaking of, where did Cooks fit into the NO offense? Was he their main man, second threat, or one of many?
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
They spread the ball around a good bit, but Thomas became slightly more of the main volume guy as the season went on. Cooks grumbled some about not getting enough looks, particularly after the 49-21 win over the Rams where he wasn't targeted where he was pretty openly frustrated.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
58,878
San Andreas Fault
Agreed. Watching the beginning of that highlight reel posted upthread made him look like a pure long ball guy. Then he was doing the slants and crossing patterns. Then it showed an awesome YAC play on a classic bubble screen.

I imagine Josh McD will have a lot of late nights scheming up new ways to utilize him in the context of all the other NEP offensive skill weapons.

Speaking of, where did Cooks fit into the NO offense? Was he their main man, second threat, or one of many?
Targets for the Saints were:

Michael Thomas 121
Brandin Cooks 117
Willie Snead 104
Coby Fleener 81

Drew Brees be spread it around.

Other stuff like leader on possession/3rd down passes or red area, anybody watch the Saints enough to get a feel for these?
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
63,756
Rotten Apple
Brady spreads it around also so he better know that coming in. I'll assume that winning games will cure some of the grumbling.
 

foulkehampshire

hillbilly suburbanite
SoSH Member
Feb 25, 2007
5,099
Wesport, MA
Targets for the Saints were:

Michael Thomas 121
Brandin Cooks 117
Willie Snead 104
Coby Fleener 81

Drew Brees be spread it around.

Other stuff like leader on possession/3rd down passes or red area, anybody watch the Saints enough to get a feel for these?
A terrible defense mixed with a Jekyll/Hyde run game. Though, I do think the rushing game wasn't all that bad despite the overblown ball security incidents with Ingram. A healthy 5.1 Y/A, Almost 1400 Yscm in parts of 16 games (14 GS, a few early exits as well) with 205 att. Always felt like it was a coaching/gameflow issue.

He was always having to chuck it up and make stuff happen via the air. Led the league in passing attempts. He's always been one to share the wealth as far as receivers though.
 

Hoodie Sleeves

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2015
1,204
I don't think trading out of 1 and 2 necessarily signals that JG is gone, either. I get the feeling this is the last year for Brady as a Patriot. I would rather he retire than move on, but this is football (see Montana, Young.) Hopefully we repeat, Bill is certainly setting up the team to do just that.
I'm with you here - people read way too much into things. You could just as easily argue that they're making all these trades to make sure that JG starts with a good supporting cast (because they need to win a lot of games the first year after they trade Brady to deal with public backlash) I'm not arguing thats whats going on, but there's a lot of ways to interpret these moves.

The most reasonable explanation is that they think using a 1st and a 3rd on a 23 year old receiver who looks really good is a better use of those picks than using them on some kid(s) who they have a lot less info on in the draft. I don't think the Welker/Moss trades were part of some conscious "Go for it now" decision - they were just better uses of the picks than using them in the draft.
 

SoxinSeattle

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 6, 2003
2,368
Here
They also traded the uncertainty of pick 32 for a sure thing. Hopefully Cooks will sign an extension after the season.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
He says he loves the player but the value of the deal is in the Saints' favor. I don't disagree as the pats gave up 5 years of control in a 1st rd pick for 2 years of Cooks. But I'll take that loss because the player is that good.
Of course I'm quite sure he also doubts BB's drafting ability.
 

yep

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2006
2,465
Red Sox Natin
I love everything about this trade. I love that we keep Butler, and Cooks is a sure-thing offensive weapon that makes this team better, and he's just coming into his prime. Even if Cooks is only for two seasons, that is a lot more football value than the picks are likely to deliver.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,288
AZ
I'm confused. Why are people talking about an extension or franchise? He's a first round pick in the second half of the round so the team has a fifth year option for 2018, which it must exercise this year by May and which should pay him around $9 million. It's guaranteed only for injury. Franchise would be in 2019 if applicable.

Edit: Oh, that was about Butler.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
I love everything about this trade. I love that we keep Butler, and Cooks is a sure-thing offensive weapon that makes this team better, and he's just coming into his prime. Even if Cooks is only for two seasons, that is a lot more football value than the picks are likely to deliver.
This is where I stand. It's entirely possible that the pick(s) would have yielded more value, but that's why all trades are a gamble. I like this gamble.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
Just saw this in the Ian Rapoport piece looking back at the Cooks trade:

"Closed mouths don't get fed," he told reporters. That week, reports (including from NFL Network) discussed the two sides parting ways in the offseason.

Internally, when Payton discussed the issue with Cooks, the receiver never left satisfied. The longtime coach pacified the issue, telling Cooks he'd get targets. And the following week he did -- a season-high seven catches the next week. But Cooks felt the elephant in the room -- Brees' arm strength not enabling him to find Cooks deep -- couldn't be talked about on any level.

That was frustrating to him, though personally and professionally he loved Brees.
The situation and Cooks' feelings were addressed with Payton, his receivers coach John Morton, offensive coordinator Pete Carmichael and general manager Mickey Loomis. Some talks even began in the preseason.
 

kelpapa

Costanza's Hero
SoSH Member
Feb 15, 2010
4,639
This is an article discussing Brandin Cooks vs slow and fast corners, and while it's geared toward fantasy, there is some good information in it.

Throughout his career, Cooks has seen 90 targets against cornerbacks who posted a 40-yard dash of 4.44 or faster at their respective combines. He averages 1.65 PPR fantasy points per target against these “faster” cornerbacks.

Cooks has seen 75 targets against cornerbacks that ran a 4.45 or slower 40 at their respective combines. He averages 2.91 fantasy points per target against these “slower” cornerbacks.

Among 139 qualifying wide receivers to see at least 125 such targets over the past decade, that +1.26 fantasy-point-per-target differential is the largest of any wide receiver this past decade.

In fact, it’s 0.69 fantasy points per target more than the next-closest wide receiver.
The breakdown of corners that posted a sub 4.44 40-yard dash is not ideal, and there is obviously going to be some noise there for older CBs. Here is a reddit post showing his upcoming CBs:
Week 3 vs Texans

  • Jonathan Joseph (33 years old): 4.31 40 yard dash

  • Kareem Jackson (29): 4.48
Week 4 vs Panthers

  • James Bradberry (24): 4.50

  • Daryl Worley (22): 4.64
Week 5 vs Buccaneers

  • Brent Grimes (34): 4.57

  • Vernon Hargreaves (22): 4.50
Week 6/Week 17 vs Jets

  • Morris Claiborne (27): 4.50

  • Juston Burris (24): 4.53
Week 7 vs Falcons

  • Desmond Trufant (27): 4.38

  • Robert Alford (28): 4.39
Week 8 vs Chargers

  • Casey Hayward (28): 4.57

  • Jason Verrett (26): 4.38
Week 9: BYE

Week 10 vs Broncos

  • Aqib Talib (31): 4.44

  • Chris Harris (28): 4.48
Week 11 vs Raiders

  • David Amerson (25): 4.44

  • Sean Smith (30): 4.51
Week 12/Week 14 vs Dolphins

  • Byron Maxwell (29): 4.43

  • Xavien Howard (24): 4.58
Week 13/Week 16 vs Bills

  • Tre'Davious White (22): 4.47

  • E.J. Gaines (25): 4.51 (Pro Day)
Week 15 vs Steelers

  • Joe Haden (28): 4.57

  • Artie Burns (22): 4.46
He has some favorable matchups for the next four weeks (given Joseph's age).
 

kelpapa

Costanza's Hero
SoSH Member
Feb 15, 2010
4,639
That seems like an exercise in picking favorable end points. Why 4.45 as the cutoff?
Didn't look like there was a reason for the 4.44 cut off and it most likely was the point that made the results look best.

It did produce 90 targets on one side and 75 on the other.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
That seems like an exercise in picking favorable end points. Why 4.45 as the cutoff?
Because they were trying to tease out numbers and see where the performance changed?

If you say a hitter can't hit fastball over 98.5 mph, and the numbers back that up, it's not cherry-picking to do so--that's what you're trying to show.

In this case, for whatever reason, CBs slower than 4.45 represent the point where Cook's performance really takes off.
 

Hoodie Sleeves

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2015
1,204
Thats not a penalty in and of itself
It is, a receiver in the air is by definition defenseless:

  1. A receiver attempting to catch a pass who has not had time to clearly become a runner. If the player is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player
And the contact that is illegal is:
  1. Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
    1. forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenselessplayer by encircling or grasping him
    2. lowering the head and making forcible contact with the crown or ”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenselessplayer’s body
    3. illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenselessplayer, as defined in Article 7.)


  1. I've seen like a million of these not called, so its not surprising, as the contact wasn't all that bad, but it is against the rules.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
It is, a receiver in the air is by definition defenseless:


And the contact that is illegal is:


  1. I've seen like a million of these not called, so its not surprising, as the contact wasn't all that bad, but it is against the rules.
Well I stand corrected, didnt think he was a defenseless receiver. Next glancing blow to the head that gets called will be the first one.
 

Hoodie Sleeves

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2015
1,204
Well I stand corrected, didnt think he was a defenseless receiver. Next glancing blow to the head that gets called will be the first one.
There's some leeway with the "forcibly".

I wouldn't call that glancing though - he hits him pretty full force with the forearm/elbow, and Cook's head only stops moving forward because his facemask hits his chest. It's not bad looking, but its absolutely the sort of thing the NFL would be calling if they were actually serious about CTE.