I don't get it, was the rule that they'd lose the highest pick they had in the 4th round? I haven't seen that anywhere in writing.
Well Done: Cooks' Season One in NE
- Thread starter Ed Hillel
- Start date
Likely crooked NFL statement in response "we interpret the penalty to require Pats to forfeit any player involved in a trade of any 4th round pick"
I think the crooked NFL thing is over for now. They tried, and Bill and Co ended up asking them how the Pats' ass tastes. They've been exposed.
How is the option calculated for 2018? I see reports that say that since he wasn't a top 10 pick that it's likely to be around $9 million, but it's all kind of vague. Looks like the option must be exercised by early May.
At what age do CBs start to decline? I was just surprised to learn that Butler is 27 years old.
Justvout of curiosity: what happens if it Pats just don't have any 4th round picks? Does it get to a point where the league says 'oh you can't trade that pick, that's the one you forfeit'?
It would just be funny if it was worded somehow that had a loophole.
Butler has a 1st round RFA tender, right? Why bother with a trade...NO can just sign Butler to a big deal right now.
No credible inferences can be drawn about how BB feels about this draft. By every account, this draft is hip deep at TE and CB, positions at which BB has historically thrown high draft picks. But draft picks are just another form of currency, and Bill went the FA and trade routes this year.
Considering the rookie wall and the difficulties of rookies adapting to the NFL, the more credible inference is that Bill is in GFIN mode. I am not drawing that inference either. But it is more credible than the one some are drawing -- that Bill thinks this draft sucks. At corner and TE, nobody believes that. Nobody.
Please do not kill the messenger, I am as big a Patriots fan as anyone on this site, and I Love reading the posts and analysis. Some very very bright people post here, and when it comes to trades, and rumors I just love SOSH. My point/question is this.......... Deflategate was all about us getting screwed by Roger and the other owners, because they were tired of us winning and it feeling unfair for the other owners. With Roger's commissioner powers seeming having no bounds, would he have the right to strike down this deal, maybe like Stern did in the NBA when CP3 was traded to the Lakers, and he(Stern) felt it gave 1 team too much of a competitive advantage. I would be shocked by it for sure, but if Deflategate proved anything it was Roger can do what he likes just on his own Whim
Aside from this being ridiculous on its face, the NBA was able to rescind the Paul trade because the league owned the Hornets at the time and could make a "basketball reasons" argument. Was it bs? Probably, but nowhere near what you're suggesting. A 1st round pick is a serious haul in this league.
I'm sure this has been mentioned... but Cooks is only 23. Just want to make sure everyone is aware of that.
I agree with you all and was not trying to suggest anything, more of wondering out loud. It would be ridiculous for sure thanks for adding perspective
The trade guidelines are handled much differently. As long as the trade itself doesn't violate any current league rules, the league office won't prevent it. This is a completely valid trade, barring any unknown complications.
The Osweiler deal is something that will likely drive a rule change next year.
That's not why the CP3 trade was rescinded. In that deal Houston and LA ended up with the all stars and tens of millions in dead salary was dumped on the other 28 owners. As the other 28 guys were responsible for all that money, which clogged the team's cap without giving it any assets, they did what owners have done since time immemorial, they rejected the deal their GM gave them. They were under no obligation to subsidize the Lakers (or the Rockets).
He doesn't need to sign his tender to shop around as an RFA. He can sign an offer sheet with any team that has a first round pick.
They can sign him to an offer sheet. Quint was responding to a post that said they can sign him to a deal. It's semantics
I'm just slightly sad that the first night of the draft is going to be held without Goodell having to announce a Patriots pick*.
*Yet
It's better this way. Now the first person to utter "...the Super Bowl Champion New England Patriots select..." can be someone like Kevin Faulk.
Until Butler signs his RFA, no other team in the league can sign him to anything.
Sure he/his agent can gauge his value with teams he may want to play for, or conversely may be willing to offer him a boatload of cash, but that's pretty much as far as talks can go - nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
Once he does a team can definitely offer to trade for him, possibly as a one year rental (I'm not sure what the tag rules for the following season are in his instance, mostly because of when he was tendered) but more probably on a long term deal - assuming another team wants to surrender a first rounder for him.
And even then NE can match any offer if they so choose.
Sooo, yeah. Until it all plays out NO can't really sign him to fuckall.
And all this is being said with the caveat that he may choose to hold out until well after draft to undermine NE's draft comp (up to the sixth week of the season, I believe?) togain his accrued year, plays under the prorated tag and walks to set his own market.
Which is an whole other can of worms. Altogether.
That kind of sucks. Why did NE trade for a pick they immediately lost? Would NO not trade for a 4th next year instead? Seems like a waste of draft capital to take a mid round 4th that isn't yours. I guess both NO and NE are not in the FO's good graces so perhaps they couldn't play loose with the rules but would have been nice to see them trade for a much lower 4th rd pick + additional pick and flip those to NE.
I think they just wanted to get it done. The Patriots do get a 4th rounder from the deal, just Seattle's #131 instead of New Orleans' #118. Maybe if they had more time, they could have brought in a third team like KC and sent #118 to KC with KC sending #132 and a sixth or seventh to NE. It seems like getting the player was the priority and once NO agreed, Belichick was happy to complete the deal before they could rethink it.
Edit:It could also be that they tried it with the sixth or seventh going to NO, but they couldn't find a third party.
Last edited:
Wait for the collective sigh when BB trades JG for the 12th pick just to draft Jabril Peppers.
Or trades for the 12 and deals down twice, just so Roger can keep saying the team name
I almost feel bad for Butler (he'll still make a shitton of money, but he's going to get a bit screwed). I wouldn't be surprised to see the Pats play him on the RFA tag this year, franchise him next year, and let some other team sign him to a too-long deal at 29.
Gilmore, on the other hand, will have his deal ending at 31.
It's Friday night, which means I'm drunk, but this doesn't seem right at all. The Patriots only need Butler to sign the tender if they want to trade him. Any team can sign Butler to an offer that the Pats have the right to match or get the pick. No?
Edit - are you confusing him with an exclusive RFA?
You don't get the part where if Butler accepts the tender he plays here?
You may be drunk.
And I'm not saying he would or will, but there's a lot of moving pieces here.
But not one is NO signing him right now.
But not one is NO signing him right now.
http://www.espn.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/83145/patriots-restricted-free-agent-malcolm-butler-getting-hefty-raise
"That's a well-deserved raise from the $600,000 that Butler earned in 2016, although a compelling case could be made that Butler is deserving of a more lucrative extension. After coming close to striking an extension last year, perhaps the sides can push it over the goal line this year.
If they don't, Butler could be signed to an offer sheet by another team. If the Patriots elect not to match the offer sheet, they would receive a first-round draft choice in return and Butler would be playing elsewhere in 2017."
"That's a well-deserved raise from the $600,000 that Butler earned in 2016, although a compelling case could be made that Butler is deserving of a more lucrative extension. After coming close to striking an extension last year, perhaps the sides can push it over the goal line this year.
If they don't, Butler could be signed to an offer sheet by another team. If the Patriots elect not to match the offer sheet, they would receive a first-round draft choice in return and Butler would be playing elsewhere in 2017."
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.