Mr. WEO Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 No one will question ditching high quality defensive players for future picks if their defensive play sucks in the Super Bowl? You sure about that? Because he let those guys go? Maybe not. But if Collins could've been the reason for one more big 3rd down stop that they don't get, or one big run etc etc, there's questions there to be asked. Talib being matched with CHJ on the Bronocs was absolutely a key reason for their defensive dominance. He had 6 passes defensed in the playoffs in 2015. You think Denver doesn't miss a beat without him? If the defensive performance suffers in the Super Bowl, questions will be raised about letting one of your best defensive players go for a 3rd round pick on a year he could have contributed. How can you argue otherwise? That's like saying if the Bills let TT go and the offense doesn't play as well in a game they need to make the postseason, Whaley wouldn't be criticized or at least openly questioned. That's ludicrous. It's not like saying that at all. Collins and Jones were let go and the pats D went continued to dominate and they got further in the playoffs than last year with both players. The SB is one game. Anything can happen against the highest scoring team in the league. Saying that one 3rd down stop which may or may not have had anything to do with the presence or absence of one player not on the team is a huge stretch and very facile thinking. Collins is a good player, but he's not that much of a difference maker to assume he would have made a difference. Teams get beat in the SB for many reasons--it's still just one game. It's not because they stormed into the SB but suddenly felt the sting of not having a guy who left months (or a whole season) ago.
FireChan Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 Because it is pure speculation. He also could have been on IR for this game. Also The D played BETTER after he left, I don't think that's a coincidence. As for Jones, that one could be discussed (unlikely) since their pass rush has been eh at best all year.. (why I hope Cleveland goes dumb and gives us #12 pick for Jimmy G. Imagine the stud pass rusher we get then.. drool ) It's not like saying that at all. Collins and Jones were let go and the pats D went continued to dominate and they got further in the playoffs than last year with both players. The SB is one game. Anything can happen against the highest scoring team in the league. Saying that one 3rd down stop which may or may not have had anything to do with the presence or absence of one player not on the team is a huge stretch and very facile thinking. Collins is a good player, but he's not that much of a difference maker to assume he would have made a difference. Teams get beat in the SB for many reasons--it's still just one game. It's not because they stormed into the SB but suddenly felt the sting of not having a guy who left months (or a whole season) ago. I guess the question is, is the Pats defense better with or without Jamie Collins. I say with. And in that case, the risk of shipping him off is that you have a less talented defense in the short term.
PatsFanNH Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 I guess the question is, is the Pats defense better with or without Jamie Collins. I say with. And in that case, the risk of shipping him off is that you have a less talented defense in the short term. I would have agreed, he is def more talented than any of our other LB (except Hightower) but the Defense has played BETTER since his departure. Now that also could been the teams O they faced since then as well.
Mr. WEO Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 I guess the question is, is the Pats defense better with or without Jamie Collins. I say with. And in that case, the risk of shipping him off is that you have a less talented defense in the short term. They were no different without him. Dominant still. The Bills shut out the pats with Collins. It's always better to have more good players. But the results speak for themselves. If they lose the SB this doesn't change.
FireChan Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 They were no different without him. Dominant still. The Bills shut out the pats with Collins. It's always better to have more good players. But the results speak for themselves. If they lose the SB this doesn't change. Losing the SB is a result, WEO. That's what I guess you don't seem to understand.
PatsFanNH Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 Losing the SB is a result, WEO. That's what I guess you don't seem to understand. One game out of 11 without him would be considered an outlier. We will just have to see.
Malazan Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 (edited) If this is true...when will people ever learn? Unless a QB on the pats is coming with BB and Ernie, don't bother. Edited February 2, 2017 by jeremy2020
CommonCents Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Rumors that the Bears are interested in a trade, obviously they won't move their 3rd overall pick. The report mentioned multiple 2nd rounders.
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Rumors that the Bears are interested in a trade, obviously they won't move their 3rd overall pick. The report mentioned multiple 2nd rounders.That feels like something that the Patriots would have leaked to get the Browns to give up more than pick 33. It might work.
CommonCents Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 That feels like something that the Patriots would have leaked to get the Browns to give up more than pick 33. It might work. Good call, that wouldn't surprise me.
JohnC Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 That feels like something that the Patriots would have leaked to get the Browns to give up more than pick 33. It might work. If the Browns gave up their second first round pick (#12) for Jimmy G it would still be a reasonable deal for them because it would still allow them to acquire an impactful defensive player with its first pick and get a young qb who should be ready to play immediately compared to drafting a qb. If the Browns were a little imaginative they could trade down a tad and come away with a good defensive player and have more picks to work with. The Patriots dangling players on the market shouldn't influence the Browns too much. They can do their own calculations without worrying about the standard charades going on this time of year. As the draft approaches the intensity and frequency of the rumors will swirl. They probably already know now what they are going to do or be willing to do. If you want to see the rumor mill be hyper-active the Billls could dangle TT and see what the market is willing to offer? Houston, Cleveland and maybe Arizona would certainly be interested. I have no clue of what Whaley and the owner think their team is currently at? If they really believe they are close to climbing the ranks then it will take a more patchwork approach to adding talent to the roster. If Whaley and the owner believe that this team has to be reconfigured then it would make more sense to absorb some immediate pain by trading a player such as TT and getting a return for a player that you are really not invested in.
CodeMonkey Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Why would Bill Belichick trade away a young QB who might be good when he has a 39 year old starter? Think about it. Because he has an even younger one under his control for 3 more years and also happens to like him more than Jimmy G.? Yup, plus think what kind of draft picks the Pats would get out of the Browns. !@#$ I hate the Pats.
PatsFanNH Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 That feels like something that the Patriots would have leaked to get the Browns to give up more than pick 33. It might work. Supposedly the teams interested (per our local talking heads): SF,Chicago,Cleveland,Texans,Jets. 8 know I forgot one other team they mentioned, I think it is safe to say the Jets have 0% chance getting him in a trade. (BB hates them the most) and I doubt he would give the Texans their missing piece to a championship bubble. So it's down to SF,Chicago and Cleveland.
TheFunPolice Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Why would they trade him? If they think he's good why not try for the Favre to Rogers transition? If he's good when Brady retires you keep right on winning for another 10-15 years like Green Bad did. Maybe he's not that good, and they know it, and are happy to take a 1st rounder off someone's hands for a mediocre QB.
PatsFanNH Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Why would they trade him? If they think he's good why not try for the Favre to Rogers transition? If he's good when Brady retires you keep right on winning for another 10-15 years like Green Bad did. Maybe he's not that good, and they know it, and are happy to take a 1st rounder off someone's hands for a mediocre QB. This is all speculation on everyone's part. I am shocked no one here started a thread about what Robert Kraft said to the media yesterday about BB and I am paraphrasing "He knows his end date and I know his end date" meaning when he is planning on retiring so if he is planning on retiring in say 4 years you trade Jimmy G. Now for a high draft pick that can help next 2-3 years with Brady and if you win 1 or 2 more SB you pretty much set the standard for HC in the NFL.
ALF Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 This is all speculation on everyone's part. I am shocked no one here started a thread about what Robert Kraft said to the media yesterday about BB and I am paraphrasing "He knows his end date and I know his end date" meaning when he is planning on retiring so if he is planning on retiring in say 4 years you trade Jimmy G. Now for a high draft pick that can help next 2-3 years with Brady and if you win 1 or 2 more SB you pretty much set the standard for HC in the NFL I agree Hoodie retires same time as Brady
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 (edited) If the Browns gave up their second first round pick (#12) for Jimmy G it would still be a reasonable deal for them because it would still allow them to acquire an impactful defensive player with its first pick and get a young qb who should be ready to play immediately compared to drafting a qb. If the Browns were a little imaginative they could trade down a tad and come away with a good defensive player and have more picks to work with. The Patriots dangling players on the market shouldn't influence the Browns too much. They can do their own calculations without worrying about the standard charades going on this time of year. As the draft approaches the intensity and frequency of the rumors will swirl. They probably already know now what they are going to do or be willing to do. If you want to see the rumor mill be hyper-active the Billls could dangle TT and see what the market is willing to offer? Houston, Cleveland and maybe Arizona would certainly be interested. I have no clue of what Whaley and the owner think their team is currently at? If they really believe they are close to climbing the ranks then it will take a more patchwork approach to adding talent to the roster. If Whaley and the owner believe that this team has to be reconfigured then it would make more sense to absorb some immediate pain by trading a player such as TT and getting a return for a player that you are really not invested in. Agree on all fronts. I don't think that the Browns will give up 12 for Garoppolo because I don't think that they have to. they have so many good picks (4 of the top 52 and 5 of the top 65). A trade back from 12 is a really interesting way to call the Pats bluff. Go from 12 to 25 and pick up a 2018 1st and then trade 25 to New England. The Browns hold a LOT of cards in this draft. Hyperbole aside, this might be the most important draft that a team has ever had (at least without an Andrew Luck type prospect). The Browns have a chance to re-shape their franchise this offseason. It started with the Collins signing. Edited February 3, 2017 by Kirby Jackson
PatsFanNH Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Agree on all fronts. I don't think that the Browns will give up 10 for Garoppolo because I don't think that they have to. they have so many good picks (4 of the top 52 and 5 of the top 65). I trade back from 12 is a really interesting way to call the Pats bluff. Go from 12 to 25 and pick up a 2018 1st and then trade 25 to New England. The Browns hold a LOT of cards in this draft. Hyperbole aside, this might be the most important draft that a team has ever had (at least without an Andrew Luck type prospect). The Browns have a chance to re-shape their franchise this offseason. It started with the Collins signing. Funny thing is Cleveland doesn't hold all the cards, the Pats do. They have at least 3 suitors that they would trade Jimmy G to and Cleveland probably the #3 choice so they have to make a sweet deal to get him. (If you think he is going be good you ship him to the NFC so Chicago and SF front runners.. kind of funny how the top 3 teams in the draft are interested.tells you what they think (if true) of this draft class for QBs.)
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Funny thing is Cleveland doesn't hold all the cards, the Pats do. They have at least 3 suitors that they would trade Jimmy G to and Cleveland probably the #3 choice so they have to make a sweet deal to get him. (If you think he is going be good you ship him to the NFC so Chicago and SF front runners.. kind of funny how the top 3 teams in the draft are interested.tells you what they think (if true) of this draft class for QBs.) Cleveland has more, and better assets (that's why they hold the cards). They pick before Chicago and SF and have 2 1sts and 2 2nds. I don't see BB worried about the Browns becoming a threat in the near future. He is going to take the best offer from those 3. I do agree that Houston is out and the Jets as well. Houston is going to have to hit on a QB in the draft because of the money that is tied up in Brock.
PatsFanNH Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Cleveland has more, and better assets (that's why they hold the cards). They pick before Chicago and SF and have 2 1sts and 2 2nds. I don't see BB worried about the Browns becoming a threat in the near future. He is going to take the best offer from those 3. I do agree that Houston is out and the Jets as well. Houston is going to have to hit on a QB in the draft because of the money that is tied up in Brock. Very True, the wild card is Jimmy G is a local boyfor the Bears, and per CSNNE Jimmy G. Is a top priority for them so they may go full on dumb and offer up a lot to get him. (They are also probably the best team of the three as well, their D is decent and they found a good young RB last year so adding Jimmy G and retaining their star WR could make them a playoff team in their eyes.)
Recommended Posts