Ballard Move = Brilliant

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from JulesWinfield. Show JulesWinfield's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    Anyone who claims that there's some kind of unwritten rule in cases like this, or in stealing players off other teams' practice squads, are just plain wrong.  No dishonor in that.  Sounds like the Giants took a stupid risk by doing this when the rosters were at 90 - no one would have claimed him if they had to put him on the 53-man roster, but it's easy to find room on a 90-man roster...

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from magicalhobo. Show magicalhobo's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    Great move. The Giants took the risk and thr Pats capitalized. All is fair in love and war and the NFL is essentially a never ending war with each game being the battles. The Pats planned on making the TEs a bigger part of the offense and needed insurance in case Gronk or Hern got injured. Well, both are injured, so now we have a very solid backup to take over if needed. Unwritten rule my @$$.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to jfaust1954's comment:

    Giants did take a stupid risk...time will tell whether they pay for it....looks like BB made a very shrewd move :) (yea!)



    Perfect!

    I hope his knee holds up.  It would be amazing to see what the Pats would do with these 3, (Gronk, Hernandez and Ballard) healthy TE's.  Hope all of them can recover and stay healthy for this season.

     

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    I like Ballard. I think he will contribute to the team this year. But to think he is much more than Daniel Fells IMO is incorrect. The Pats for some reason under utilized Fells, hopefully they have a role for Ballard.

    If Gronk and Hern can stay healthy, I can see Ballard with 15-20 catches and the blocking end on PAT's rather than Gronk.I can also see Ballard lining up as the 3rd TE in short yardage situations. Maybe as a FB in short yardage situations.

    Useful player. Hopefully he fully recovers. But on this team he is the 7th option. Sure the Jints would have liked to keep him at $540k...but he is far from a pro bowl player

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    The Pats have lost players by exposing them to the waiver wire as well (Salas, Mills - the TE from Tulsa a few years back, others), and BB has said many times that if you waive a player you do so assuming he will not be back.  It's a chance you take.  If Ballard can be a solid blocker and a receiving threat then the claim and rehab process was well worth it.  He looked to be a decent TE before getting hurt.    

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    Brilliant? Must be.

     

    How else could a guy know that he will need to pull a fast one on the waiver wire because his HOF caliber TE will be mired in a series of injuries due to being used as a blocker on extra points?

    Absolutely brilliant that he would know he would have to make up for his own stupidity.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from raptor64d. Show raptor64d's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    Brilliant? Must be.

     

    How else could a guy know that he will need to pull a fast one on the waiver wire because his HOF caliber TE will be mired in a series of injuries due to being used as a blocker on extra points?

    Absolutely brilliant that he would know he would have to make up for his own stupidity.

     



    Oh, I forgot Bill is stupid. Thanks for reminding us. Man I can't wait until this dummy retires.

     

    Just one question, did Bill steal a girl from you or something because you hatred of the man puzzles me.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

     

     

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

    At least according to Reiss:

    Belichick's Ballard claim looks brilliant May, 22, 2013 May 22 1:30 PM ET By Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- Eleven months ago, Bill Belichick seemed amused when asked a question about potentially breaking an "unwritten rule" by claiming injured tight end Jake Ballard on waivers from the Giants.

    The long story short: The Giants were waiving Ballard with the intention of placing him on their PUP/reserve list because Ballard was recovering from microfracture knee surgery and a torn ACL suffered in the Super Bowl (against the Patriots), and wasn't expected to play in 2012. But because the Giants were making the move while teams had a 90-man roster limit, Ballard was subject to the waiver system before landing on PUP/reserve. The Patriots intercepted the move by claiming Ballard.

    Giants coach Tom Coughlin called it " very disappointing" but made it clear he didn't harbor any ill feelings toward the Patriots. He called the move a "calculated risk [that] didn't work."

    Belichick said simply that there are no unwritten rules on claiming injured players.

    Still, that didn't stop some from questioning Belichick's decision. The Patriots already had a stocked depth chart topped by Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez and Daniel Fells, and they would later add Michael Hoomanawanui, so why did they even need Ballard?

    This is why.

    At the time of the waiver claim, June 12 of last year, Belichick couldn't have projected what his tight end depth chart would look like. The tight end personnel might have looked good at that moment, but in the physical game of football, an injury or unexpected turn of events could alter the picture at a position that is vital in the team's offense.

    So Belichick weighed the cost of paying Ballard his 2012 salary of $540,000 while he rehabbed with the potential reward of seeing him on the field in 2013 when he'd earn a base salary of $630,000 (if he made the roster). He decided the investment of tight end insurance was worth it -- the only coach/personnel man in the NFL to do so -- and it's a move that is looking awfully smart right now as Gronkowski (left forearm/back) and Hernandez (shoulder) are rehabbing.

    In Tuesday's organized team activity, Ballard's presence on the field was arguably the most notable storyline. It was the first clear-cut indication that his rehabilitation from serious knee surgery has gone well enough to put him in position to compete for a roster spot. At one point, he caught a pass from quarterback Tom Brady, and Brady yelled out his encouragement as the two are in the early stages of building a rapport.

    Time will tell if Ballard emerges as a contributor for the Patriots, but the early indication is that this is another classic case of the forward-thinking Belichick building crucial depth on his roster.




    (rolls eyes)

     

    well you know what they say: if you can't beat 'em steal their TE  Cool

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan94. Show redsoxfan94's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

     

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

     

    At least according to Reiss:

    Belichick's Ballard claim looks brilliant May, 22, 2013 May 22 1:30 PM ET By Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- Eleven months ago, Bill Belichick seemed amused when asked a question about potentially breaking an "unwritten rule" by claiming injured tight end Jake Ballard on waivers from the Giants.

    The long story short: The Giants were waiving Ballard with the intention of placing him on their PUP/reserve list because Ballard was recovering from microfracture knee surgery and a torn ACL suffered in the Super Bowl (against the Patriots), and wasn't expected to play in 2012. But because the Giants were making the move while teams had a 90-man roster limit, Ballard was subject to the waiver system before landing on PUP/reserve. The Patriots intercepted the move by claiming Ballard.

    Giants coach Tom Coughlin called it " very disappointing" but made it clear he didn't harbor any ill feelings toward the Patriots. He called the move a "calculated risk [that] didn't work."

    Belichick said simply that there are no unwritten rules on claiming injured players.

    Still, that didn't stop some from questioning Belichick's decision. The Patriots already had a stocked depth chart topped by Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez and Daniel Fells, and they would later add Michael Hoomanawanui, so why did they even need Ballard?

    This is why.

    At the time of the waiver claim, June 12 of last year, Belichick couldn't have projected what his tight end depth chart would look like. The tight end personnel might have looked good at that moment, but in the physical game of football, an injury or unexpected turn of events could alter the picture at a position that is vital in the team's offense.

    So Belichick weighed the cost of paying Ballard his 2012 salary of $540,000 while he rehabbed with the potential reward of seeing him on the field in 2013 when he'd earn a base salary of $630,000 (if he made the roster). He decided the investment of tight end insurance was worth it -- the only coach/personnel man in the NFL to do so -- and it's a move that is looking awfully smart right now as Gronkowski (left forearm/back) and Hernandez (shoulder) are rehabbing.

    In Tuesday's organized team activity, Ballard's presence on the field was arguably the most notable storyline. It was the first clear-cut indication that his rehabilitation from serious knee surgery has gone well enough to put him in position to compete for a roster spot. At one point, he caught a pass from quarterback Tom Brady, and Brady yelled out his encouragement as the two are in the early stages of building a rapport.

    Time will tell if Ballard emerges as a contributor for the Patriots, but the early indication is that this is another classic case of the forward-thinking Belichick building crucial depth on his roster.

     




     

    (rolls eyes)

     

    well you know what they say: if you can't beat 'em steal their TE  Cool

     



    hmmm....maybe the giants should worry about beating their division rivals, because while the pats were in the afc championship game last year, the giants were at home like the rest of us watching. the giants luck seems to have run out and they will now go back to mediocrity where they belong.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to raptor64d's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    Brilliant? Must be.

     

    How else could a guy know that he will need to pull a fast one on the waiver wire because his HOF caliber TE will be mired in a series of injuries due to being used as a blocker on extra points?

    Absolutely brilliant that he would know he would have to make up for his own stupidity.

     



    Oh, I forgot Bill is stupid. Thanks for reminding us. Man I can't wait until this dummy retires.

     

    Just one question, did Bill steal a girl from you or something because you hatred of the man puzzles me.




    Oh no. BB is infallible and has never made a mistake. Pffft.

     

    I have only said BB was "stupid" about two things; spygate and playing Gronk to block for extra points.

    And I have simply said as a GM he has been far from the greatest ever that many claim him to be.

     

    But "I hate him" is the conclusion some draw from this. That is proof of an inability by kool-aide guzzlers to be objective on the matter whatsoever.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to raptor64d's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    Brilliant? Must be.

     

    How else could a guy know that he will need to pull a fast one on the waiver wire because his HOF caliber TE will be mired in a series of injuries due to being used as a blocker on extra points?

    Absolutely brilliant that he would know he would have to make up for his own stupidity.

     



    Oh, I forgot Bill is stupid. Thanks for reminding us. Man I can't wait until this dummy retires.

     

    Just one question, did Bill steal a girl from you or something because you hatred of the man puzzles me.

     




    Oh no. BB is infallible and has never made a mistake. Pffft.

     

     

    I have only said BB was "stupid" about two things; spygate and playing Gronk to block for extra points.

    And I have simply said as a GM he has been far from the greatest ever that many claim him to be.

     

    But "I hate him" is the conclusion some draw from this. That is proof of an inability by kool-aide guzzlers to be objective on the matter whatsoever.

     

     




    I am not convinced BB is the greatest GM ever, but all of the objective analyses of the Patriots' drafts over a multi-year time span (or at least the ones kicked about here) show that the Patriots and BB's draft record is right up there with the other respected teams/GMs of this era.  If there are analyses that show that the Pats are not good over more than just a 1-year window then I haven't seen one.  Not to say they don't exist - maybe they do - but it's been easy for some people to point to certain players and say "BB scuks at drafting".       

     

    I think the Ballard move was a chance to get an NFL-proven talent at little cost -- assuming he recovers from injury.  Genius?  I don't think so.  Low risk high reward?  Yes.  I do think a lot of BB moves are called genius in action (Chad Johnson, Chad Jackson, Haynesworth, etc.) but look bad with hindsight.  You win some, you lose some, and I can't take fault with BB for taking chances.    

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:

     




    I am not convinced BB is the greatest GM ever, but all of the objective analyses of the Patriots' drafts over a multi-year time span (or at least the ones kicked about here) show that the Patriots and BB's draft record is right up there with the other respected teams/GMs of this era.  If there are analyses that show that the Pats are not good over more than just a 1-year window then I haven't seen one.  Not to say they don't exist - maybe they do - but it's been easy for some people to point to certain players and say "BB scuks at drafting".       

     


    The draft analysis you speak of here have been thoroughly debunked by myself and others.

    I have never said BB sucked at drafting. He is, meh, at drafting. I have always said he is a good trader and manages the cap well. I measure team building by Lombardis. Inthe end, all else is moot.

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:

     

     




    I am not convinced BB is the greatest GM ever, but all of the objective analyses of the Patriots' drafts over a multi-year time span (or at least the ones kicked about here) show that the Patriots and BB's draft record is right up there with the other respected teams/GMs of this era.  If there are analyses that show that the Pats are not good over more than just a 1-year window then I haven't seen one.  Not to say they don't exist - maybe they do - but it's been easy for some people to point to certain players and say "BB scuks at drafting".       

     

     

     


    The draft analysis you speak of here have been thoroughly debunked by myself and others.

    I have never said BB sucked at drafting. He is, meh, at drafting. I have always said he is a good trader and manages the cap well. I measure team building by Lombardis. Inthe end, all else is moot.

     

     




    There was more than one analysis, there were a few, and I'm sure they can be unearthed pretty easily.  If one was debunked it wasn't the only one discussed here and while some may have  debunked it there were others who probably saw its merits.  But point taken about a GM being more than his draft results.  The BB as GM argument tends to get as long and drawn on as arguments about the running game, TB's playoff performances, the need for a deep threat WR and the effectiveness of the D esp., in the playoffs.  Seems there is no shortage of debate fodder.       

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:



    I am not convinced BB is the greatest GM ever, but all of the objective analyses of the Patriots' drafts over a multi-year time span (or at least the ones kicked about here) show that the Patriots and BB's draft record is right up there with the other respected teams/GMs of this era.  If there are analyses that show that the Pats are not good over more than just a 1-year window then I haven't seen one.  Not to say they don't exist - maybe they do - but it's been easy for some people to point to certain players and say "BB scuks at drafting".       

     

     

     


    The draft analysis you speak of here have been thoroughly debunked by myself and others.

    I have never said BB sucked at drafting. He is, meh, at drafting. I have always said he is a good trader and manages the cap well. I measure team building by Lombardis. Inthe end, all else is moot.

     

     

    Actually what you have done is take issue with it - you have not ' thoroughly debunked' it.  Truthfully, you haven't even marginally debunked it.  You've been asked repeatedly to provide a link that would actually contradict the cold hard football facts link and have not done so.  I'm not saying you couldn't do it, Babe.  I'm simply saying you haven't done it yet.

    Simply repeating that something has been done doesn't mean that it has. 

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

     

    At least according to Reiss:

    Belichick's Ballard claim looks brilliant May, 22, 2013 May 22 1:30 PM ET By Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- Eleven months ago, Bill Belichick seemed amused when asked a question about potentially breaking an "unwritten rule" by claiming injured tight end Jake Ballard on waivers from the Giants.

    The long story short: The Giants were waiving Ballard with the intention of placing him on their PUP/reserve list because Ballard was recovering from microfracture knee surgery and a torn ACL suffered in the Super Bowl (against the Patriots), and wasn't expected to play in 2012. But because the Giants were making the move while teams had a 90-man roster limit, Ballard was subject to the waiver system before landing on PUP/reserve. The Patriots intercepted the move by claiming Ballard.

    Giants coach Tom Coughlin called it " very disappointing" but made it clear he didn't harbor any ill feelings toward the Patriots. He called the move a "calculated risk [that] didn't work."

    Belichick said simply that there are no unwritten rules on claiming injured players.

    Still, that didn't stop some from questioning Belichick's decision. The Patriots already had a stocked depth chart topped by Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez and Daniel Fells, and they would later add Michael Hoomanawanui, so why did they even need Ballard?

    This is why.

    At the time of the waiver claim, June 12 of last year, Belichick couldn't have projected what his tight end depth chart would look like. The tight end personnel might have looked good at that moment, but in the physical game of football, an injury or unexpected turn of events could alter the picture at a position that is vital in the team's offense.

    So Belichick weighed the cost of paying Ballard his 2012 salary of $540,000 while he rehabbed with the potential reward of seeing him on the field in 2013 when he'd earn a base salary of $630,000 (if he made the roster). He decided the investment of tight end insurance was worth it -- the only coach/personnel man in the NFL to do so -- and it's a move that is looking awfully smart right now as Gronkowski (left forearm/back) and Hernandez (shoulder) are rehabbing.

    In Tuesday's organized team activity, Ballard's presence on the field was arguably the most notable storyline. It was the first clear-cut indication that his rehabilitation from serious knee surgery has gone well enough to put him in position to compete for a roster spot. At one point, he caught a pass from quarterback Tom Brady, and Brady yelled out his encouragement as the two are in the early stages of building a rapport.

    Time will tell if Ballard emerges as a contributor for the Patriots, but the early indication is that this is another classic case of the forward-thinking Belichick building crucial depth on his roster.

     




     

    (rolls eyes)

     

    well you know what they say: if you can't beat 'em steal their TE  Cool

     

     



    hmmm....maybe the giants should worry about beating their division rivals, because while the pats were in the afc championship game last year, the giants were at home like the rest of us watching. the giants luck seems to have run out and they will now go back to mediocrity where they belong.

     




    well u know pro division vs college division

    funny they always get "lucky" against the Pats too Rusty jr

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    As long as we don't see Jake doing this on a Patriots sideline then all will be great!

    I know, it's mean and I'm sorry.  I will probably go to hell for laughing at this when they showed it on tv during the SB.  I don't wish any injury on anyone but it just struck me funny at the time.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Eldunker. Show Eldunker's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    As an ex athlete, and having experienced a torn ACL (independent of a microfracture as well), I can't comprehend how these super humans can come back and play pro football, virtually as good as new in less than 2 years.    

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

    At least according to Reiss:

    Belichick's Ballard claim looks brilliant May, 22, 2013 May 22 1:30 PM ET By Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- Eleven months ago, Bill Belichick seemed amused when asked a question about potentially breaking an "unwritten rule" by claiming injured tight end Jake Ballard on waivers from the Giants.

    The long story short: The Giants were waiving Ballard with the intention of placing him on their PUP/reserve list because Ballard was recovering from microfracture knee surgery and a torn ACL suffered in the Super Bowl (against the Patriots), and wasn't expected to play in 2012. But because the Giants were making the move while teams had a 90-man roster limit, Ballard was subject to the waiver system before landing on PUP/reserve. The Patriots intercepted the move by claiming Ballard.

    Giants coach Tom Coughlin called it " very disappointing" but made it clear he didn't harbor any ill feelings toward the Patriots. He called the move a "calculated risk [that] didn't work."

    Belichick said simply that there are no unwritten rules on claiming injured players.

    Still, that didn't stop some from questioning Belichick's decision. The Patriots already had a stocked depth chart topped by Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez and Daniel Fells, and they would later add Michael Hoomanawanui, so why did they even need Ballard?

    This is why.

    At the time of the waiver claim, June 12 of last year, Belichick couldn't have projected what his tight end depth chart would look like. The tight end personnel might have looked good at that moment, but in the physical game of football, an injury or unexpected turn of events could alter the picture at a position that is vital in the team's offense.

    So Belichick weighed the cost of paying Ballard his 2012 salary of $540,000 while he rehabbed with the potential reward of seeing him on the field in 2013 when he'd earn a base salary of $630,000 (if he made the roster). He decided the investment of tight end insurance was worth it -- the only coach/personnel man in the NFL to do so -- and it's a move that is looking awfully smart right now as Gronkowski (left forearm/back) and Hernandez (shoulder) are rehabbing.

    In Tuesday's organized team activity, Ballard's presence on the field was arguably the most notable storyline. It was the first clear-cut indication that his rehabilitation from serious knee surgery has gone well enough to put him in position to compete for a roster spot. At one point, he caught a pass from quarterback Tom Brady, and Brady yelled out his encouragement as the two are in the early stages of building a rapport.

    Time will tell if Ballard emerges as a contributor for the Patriots, but the early indication is that this is another classic case of the forward-thinking Belichick building crucial depth on his roster.



    This is an example of why BB is a VERY good GM. It is not ALL about drafting. THough his record drafting is not bad.. he has his share of bad picks but so does everyone else.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

     

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

     

    At least according to Reiss:

    Belichick's Ballard claim looks brilliant May, 22, 2013 May 22 1:30 PM ET By Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- Eleven months ago, Bill Belichick seemed amused when asked a question about potentially breaking an "unwritten rule" by claiming injured tight end Jake Ballard on waivers from the Giants.

    The long story short: The Giants were waiving Ballard with the intention of placing him on their PUP/reserve list because Ballard was recovering from microfracture knee surgery and a torn ACL suffered in the Super Bowl (against the Patriots), and wasn't expected to play in 2012. But because the Giants were making the move while teams had a 90-man roster limit, Ballard was subject to the waiver system before landing on PUP/reserve. The Patriots intercepted the move by claiming Ballard.

    Giants coach Tom Coughlin called it " very disappointing" but made it clear he didn't harbor any ill feelings toward the Patriots. He called the move a "calculated risk [that] didn't work."

    Belichick said simply that there are no unwritten rules on claiming injured players.

    Still, that didn't stop some from questioning Belichick's decision. The Patriots already had a stocked depth chart topped by Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez and Daniel Fells, and they would later add Michael Hoomanawanui, so why did they even need Ballard?

    This is why.

    At the time of the waiver claim, June 12 of last year, Belichick couldn't have projected what his tight end depth chart would look like. The tight end personnel might have looked good at that moment, but in the physical game of football, an injury or unexpected turn of events could alter the picture at a position that is vital in the team's offense.

    So Belichick weighed the cost of paying Ballard his 2012 salary of $540,000 while he rehabbed with the potential reward of seeing him on the field in 2013 when he'd earn a base salary of $630,000 (if he made the roster). He decided the investment of tight end insurance was worth it -- the only coach/personnel man in the NFL to do so -- and it's a move that is looking awfully smart right now as Gronkowski (left forearm/back) and Hernandez (shoulder) are rehabbing.

    In Tuesday's organized team activity, Ballard's presence on the field was arguably the most notable storyline. It was the first clear-cut indication that his rehabilitation from serious knee surgery has gone well enough to put him in position to compete for a roster spot. At one point, he caught a pass from quarterback Tom Brady, and Brady yelled out his encouragement as the two are in the early stages of building a rapport.

    Time will tell if Ballard emerges as a contributor for the Patriots, but the early indication is that this is another classic case of the forward-thinking Belichick building crucial depth on his roster.

     




     

    (rolls eyes)

     

    well you know what they say: if you can't beat 'em steal their TE  Cool

     




    Stealing is illegal. The Giants got too cute. Not something you should do in a highly competative environment of any sort. This was a smart move by BB but an even more stupid mistake by the Giants (worse because his value was more to them than his value to the Pats).

    This is one of those moments when you should be upset with your team for being boneheads.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

     

    At least according to Reiss:

    Belichick's Ballard claim looks brilliant May, 22, 2013 May 22 1:30 PM ET By Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- Eleven months ago, Bill Belichick seemed amused when asked a question about potentially breaking an "unwritten rule" by claiming injured tight end Jake Ballard on waivers from the Giants.

    The long story short: The Giants were waiving Ballard with the intention of placing him on their PUP/reserve list because Ballard was recovering from microfracture knee surgery and a torn ACL suffered in the Super Bowl (against the Patriots), and wasn't expected to play in 2012. But because the Giants were making the move while teams had a 90-man roster limit, Ballard was subject to the waiver system before landing on PUP/reserve. The Patriots intercepted the move by claiming Ballard.

    Giants coach Tom Coughlin called it " very disappointing" but made it clear he didn't harbor any ill feelings toward the Patriots. He called the move a "calculated risk [that] didn't work."

    Belichick said simply that there are no unwritten rules on claiming injured players.

    Still, that didn't stop some from questioning Belichick's decision. The Patriots already had a stocked depth chart topped by Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez and Daniel Fells, and they would later add Michael Hoomanawanui, so why did they even need Ballard?

    This is why.

    At the time of the waiver claim, June 12 of last year, Belichick couldn't have projected what his tight end depth chart would look like. The tight end personnel might have looked good at that moment, but in the physical game of football, an injury or unexpected turn of events could alter the picture at a position that is vital in the team's offense.

    So Belichick weighed the cost of paying Ballard his 2012 salary of $540,000 while he rehabbed with the potential reward of seeing him on the field in 2013 when he'd earn a base salary of $630,000 (if he made the roster). He decided the investment of tight end insurance was worth it -- the only coach/personnel man in the NFL to do so -- and it's a move that is looking awfully smart right now as Gronkowski (left forearm/back) and Hernandez (shoulder) are rehabbing.

    In Tuesday's organized team activity, Ballard's presence on the field was arguably the most notable storyline. It was the first clear-cut indication that his rehabilitation from serious knee surgery has gone well enough to put him in position to compete for a roster spot. At one point, he caught a pass from quarterback Tom Brady, and Brady yelled out his encouragement as the two are in the early stages of building a rapport.

    Time will tell if Ballard emerges as a contributor for the Patriots, but the early indication is that this is another classic case of the forward-thinking Belichick building crucial depth on his roster.

     




     

    (rolls eyes)

     

    well you know what they say: if you can't beat 'em steal their TE  Cool

     

     




    Stealing is illegal. The Giants got too cute. Not something you should do in a highly competative environment of any sort. This was a smart move by BB but an even more stupid mistake by the Giants (worse because his value was more to them than his value to the Pats).

     

    This is one of those moments when you should be upset with your team for being boneheads.

     




    actually Port i agree...not sure why they let ballard hang out there and coughlin wasn't too happy about it nor were giants fans in general-if there was a good reason they have not said it yet

    that said the giants actually had two TE's who were effective that year so Ballard wasn't essential and he is good and young but let's not make it like the gmen lost Tony Gonzalez or Russ Francis  (thought i would throw a little Pats in there)-the giants will replace him and not miss a beat like they did with Shockey and Boss

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:

     

     




    I am not convinced BB is the greatest GM ever, but all of the objective analyses of the Patriots' drafts over a multi-year time span (or at least the ones kicked about here) show that the Patriots and BB's draft record is right up there with the other respected teams/GMs of this era.  If there are analyses that show that the Pats are not good over more than just a 1-year window then I haven't seen one.  Not to say they don't exist - maybe they do - but it's been easy for some people to point to certain players and say "BB scuks at drafting".       

     

     

     


    The draft analysis you speak of here have been thoroughly debunked by myself and others.

    I have never said BB sucked at drafting. He is, meh, at drafting. I have always said he is a good trader and manages the cap well. I measure team building by Lombardis. Inthe end, all else is moot.

     



    Actually I have seen NOTHING here (or elsewhere) that debunks the independent analytical analysis on team draft records which have in fact shown the Pats to be roughly in the top 20% draft performance wise in the league. Some individuals (plural) give themselves credit where no credit has been earned. You may debunk the analysis I have read (more than one) but I have not seen it. Simply pointing to mistakes is anecdotal and not at all sytematic and certainly not statistical. Nor is it (CRITICALLY) comparative.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Ballard Move = Brilliant

    Garrett Mills and Greg Salas arent exactly lighting the world on fire.  If this move pans out, then It will look very good in hindsight if Gronk is not ready week 1

     

Share