Boston.com

TexasPat3 · posted at 5/19/2009 4:23 PM EDT

I, on the hand, am waiting to hear about how Burgess punched out some guy outside a nightclub. Heck he is Raider.....I'm almost disappointed.
Posted by JohnHannahrulz

You mean like Matt Light??: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1173215.

LOL!!

TexasPat3 · posted at 5/19/2009 4:31 PM EDT

This from the Raiders' fan forum:

     "Just heard it on inside the huddle from John Clayton. Looks like a 2nd or 3rd for Burgess to the Patriots. Trying to get an official word or link."

     This was posted @ 1:15pm.

     Heres' more...some of these are a scream:

"Alright this is a stupid idea. I mean do we really want Burgess going to the Patriots?! Not to mention getting rid of our best player at the position. Excellent. I'd say we keep him for at least this year. I'd rather not give the Patriots another freebie. Ugh."

"At this point in his career, I could give a flying f*ck if it's the Patriots or not. If we can STEAL a 2nd round pick for Derrick Burgess I would even trade him to the Chargers. There is no way Burgess is worth a 2nd round pick, maybe 3 years ago, but certainly not now. I'm ALL for it if we get an extra 2nd rounder in 2010."

"No!! I really cannot take anymore of this Raiders in bed with the Patriots BS. It succs enough being surrounded by Pats fans here in Rhode Island.... I don't need more former Raiders coming here only to perform well and have more of my nose rubbed in it."

"Burgess left long ago when he didn't get a contract extension, and he's been a b!tch ever since. A well-paid one dimensional DE who couldn't get over the fact that HE SIGNED THAT ORIGINAL FA CONTRACT with the Raiders, and when he didn't get an upgrade has had his panties steadily in a bunch!"

"Frankly, Burgess wasn't an asset at any point of the season last year, and was a major liability against the run.": RESPONSE: "lol! I love when people say this... you know why? cause its just not true.. Burgess has played well against the run and has been hands down our best defensive lineman over the past 4 years and we have been a much better team with him on the field, look at the stats in games he played vs games he didnt. He is definitely on the decline as far as production goes and who wouldnt be playing with our defensive front? But a 2nd round pick is a great value and I would say a 3rd round pick is fair. I hate to see him go but chances are we weren't going to resign him anyways."

sportsbozo1 · posted at 5/19/2009 4:47 PM EDT

In my honest opinion I think the Patriots will make the trade for Burgess if the price isn't to steep and they can get him into camp at his present cost,he would be the perfect compliment to Thomas.I would offer Al Davis a guarenteed 4th round pick with upgrades depending on performance,like say he's able to play the whole season and is an okay player then move the pick to the 3rd round, and lets say he ends up being the sack guy we were missing then I'd move the pick to a 2nd round pick,but if he's a J.A.G. leave it at a fourth round pick and in that scenario everyone's happy.Or the Patriots could end up playing musical chairs at the OLB/DE position.

mosseffect43 · posted at 5/19/2009 7:58 PM EDT

I agree with the last statement.he is on the decline,and has had injuries the past couple of years.so yes a 2nd rd pick would be a steal for the raiders.they cried about loseing moss for a 4th rd pick.they would definitely make up for that by getting a 2nd rd pick for burgess.I like the idea of him comeing here but a 2nd would be to much.and haveing just a year left on his contract is another reason.

TexasPat3 · posted at 5/19/2009 8:36 PM EDT

I agree with the last statement.he is on the decline,and has had injuries the past couple of years.so yes a 2nd rd pick would be a steal for the raiders.they cried about loseing moss for a 4th rd pick.they would definitely make up for that by getting a 2nd rd pick for burgess.I like the idea of him comeing here but a 2nd would be to much.and haveing just a year left on his contract is another reason.
Posted by mosseffect43

Agreed...a second round pick is too high a price. But, as for the talk about Burgess being "washed-up", weren't the same things being said about Joey Porter, and Randy Moss?

If the Pats can get him for, say, a 3rd and a 6th, they should do the deal. Anything higher, and I'd tell Uncle Al...no thanks.

mosseffect43 · posted at 5/20/2009 8:45 AM EDT

I dont think he is finished im just saying a 2nd rd pick for a player on his final stretch in his career,and with injuries the last couple of years.is to high.a 3rd rd pick would be fair.

zbellino · posted at 5/20/2009 9:17 AM EDT

For me, the pick value is more about the contract situation. A 2nd rounder is too high for a rental player.

I would rather use it to take another core player next season that will be with the team for a while at a cheap price.

The fact that you are taking a risk on a player who was injured is a given. If Ne thought a triceps strain was enough to seriously effect his performance in 2009 they wouldn't even be looking. Personally, I think the triceps strain was only half the problem, the other half being the fact that he is underpaid to play for the Oakland Raiders.

In that respect, a 3rd is valuable, but not too valuable to use it on a one year $2 mil tryout with a guy who has proved he can post monster sack numbers . . . even in Oakland.

Maybe he will be like Moss, and he will work out well enough to extend him? And if he doesn't, they haven't sacrificed the future.

Al Davis should shut his pie-hole and be grateful because he isn't getting anything out of Burgess in 2009 either way, Burgess doesn't want to be a Raider and has already missed camp with the "stomach flu" or somesuch bogus ailment.

And Al waits he will get *zero* draft picks for him. Which would be hilarious.

kittycat6969 · posted at 5/20/2009 11:12 AM EDT

Agreed...a second round pick is too high a price. But, as for the talk about Burgess being "washed-up", weren't the same things being said about Joey Porter, and Randy Moss? If the Pats can get him for, say, a 3rd and a 6th, they should do the deal. Anything higher, and I'd tell Uncle Al...no thanks.
Posted by TexasPat3

Thanks for another great Post Texas. Many people fail to recognize that our extra 2 second round picks are really thirds that we traded from 2009 draft. Since the season hasn't started yet, trading a 2010 third rd. pick would be like trading a 2009 fourth rd selection. My point is that if we get Burgess for a 3rd, isn't it really a 4th? Your opinion, please.

PatsChowder · posted at 5/20/2009 11:39 AM EDT

Has anyone else got the feeling that they are treating this pass rusher search like a kid playing Madden?

zbellino · posted at 5/20/2009 2:27 PM EDT

Thanks for another great Post Texas. Many people fail to recognize that our extra 2 second round picks are really thirds that we traded from 2009 draft. Since the season hasn't started yet, trading a 2010 third rd. pick would be like trading a 2009 fourth rd selection. My point is that if we get Burgess for a 3rd, isn't it really a 4th? Your opinion, please.
Posted by kittycat6969

I am not sure I get the logic so much. If you are saying that next year's selections are worth less because you are gambling on where they will be then you are 100% right in a way.

I raised the issue in another thread. If the Pats go deep or win it all, which I suppose many people might suspect is a strong possibility, then it is closer to a 4th rounder.

Fans get hung up on round numbers. Front office guys pay attention to the overall number.

Last year was case in point with Cassel. NE received the 34th pick and people rioted because they thought NE was had. If they had somehow recieved the 32nd for Cassel people would have been stoked that they got a first rounder.

The sticking point probably is that Al Davis doesn't like his chances at getting anything better than a 93rd-96th overall.

If you are talking about a differential based on security, then usually the teams assign value based on speculation. So a 2009 fourth rounder might not become a 2010 3rd unless it were a mid 4th rounder. If it is the bottom of the fourth most smart teams wouldn't take it.

Trox1 · posted at 5/20/2009 3:40 PM EDT

Does everyone agree that the only hole on this Pats team is OLB? So why all the negativity about this potential deal? While I agree that Burgess is probably not worth a 2nd rounder given he probably will only be with whatever team trades for him for 1 season.

HOWEVER getting a pass rusher of Burgess's ability helps fill the only hole the Pats have. We have 3 2nd round picks next year. We certainly can afford to give 1 up to help us win it all this year. Getting out of the Black hole and being in a contract year leads me to believe that he will have a very solid year. Would he be worth a 2nd rounder for most teams? No definitely not, but he just might be the missing piece for the Patriots who already are viewed as the favorites to win it all. Is a 2nd rounder(when we already have 3) not worth taking our biggest weakness and improving it greatly?

Oh and I remember some guy who played in Oakland and he was supposedly 2 old, injury prone, and washed up to do much for us. How did that work out?

TexasPat3 · posted at 5/20/2009 5:09 PM EDT

Today, Burgess sat out a Raiders' practice...though attendance wasn't mandatory.Is this a sign that the Pats and Raiders are getting close to a deal?: http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/05/20/burgess-not-at-raiders-practice/

TexasPat3 · posted at 5/20/2009 8:54 PM EDT

Thanks for another great Post Texas. Many people fail to recognize that our extra 2 second round picks are really thirds that we traded from 2009 draft. Since the season hasn't started yet, trading a 2010 third rd. pick would be like trading a 2009 fourth rd selection. My point is that if we get Burgess for a 3rd, isn't it really a 4th? Your opinion, please.
Posted by kittycat6969

     Hi Kitty:

     Yes...the conventional wisdom is that draft picks acquired for the following year as worth a round less than if they were acquired for the present year. This could be the "logic" that Al Davis is employing, in asking the Pats for a second rounder in 2010 for Burgess (did I really use the name Al Davis and the word logic in the same sentence...LOL!!).

     But, as usual these days, ol' Uncle Al is off base. Derrick Burgess will be 31 years old by the start of the season. He is in the final year of his contract. So, he'll be an unrestricted free agent in 2010. In other words, the Pats are, in essence, renting him for one year.

     The Raiders are a rebuilding team. How much is having the services of an unhappy Burgess for one last season going to impact their fortunes? Wouldn't trading him for a draft choice guaranteed to be among the top 100 players selected make more sense, than perhaps winning an extra game due to his presence?

     I don't necessarily buy the idea that a draft choice acquired for one year in the future diminishes its' value...especially with regards to a rebuilding team. Furthermore, many pundits and coaches (BB included), considered the 2009 draft class to be fairly weak...and expect the 2010 class to be stronger.

     So...if I were the Raiders, and the best offer I could get for Burgess would be, say, a 3rd and a 6th rounder...I would make the deal. Another possibility could be that the teams agree to a second or third rounder, depending on how Burgess performs. I would much prefer the former, rather than the latter.

     The bottom line is, Burgess is a proven pass-rusher, something that the Pats sorely lack. But, in my estimation, he's not worth parting with a second round pick.

     Remember last year, when the Redskins, in their wisdom, traded their second round pick in 2009 for Jason Taylor? How did that work out for them? LOL!! The Dolphins ended up with the 44th overall pick in the draft, which they used to select QB/WR Pat White.

     Had the Redskins kept that pick and let veteran Taylor slide, they would have had the necessary ammunition to out-bid the NY Jets in the Matt Sanchez sweepstakes. Then, the 'Skins could have followed that up flipping their current QB, Jason Cambell, to the QB starved Jets, for the Jets' second rounder (52nd selection overall), and back-up QB Brett Ratliff.

     I'm sure that BB is well aware of this.

Trox1 · posted at 5/20/2009 9:02 PM EDT

Wouldn't trading him for a draft choice guaranteed to be among the top 100 players selected make more sense, than perhaps winning an extra game due to his presence?

What if that 1 game is the difference between HFA throughout the playoffs? What if it's a playoff game?

TexasPat3 · posted at 5/20/2009 9:06 PM EDT

What if that 1 game is the difference between HFA throughout the playoffs? What if it's a playoff game?
Posted by Trox1

Do you really think that the Raiders will be good enough to even sniff the playoffs this year?

TexasPat3 · posted at 5/20/2009 9:20 PM EDT

     This from Jerry McDonald, a beat writer for the Raiders:

     "There's been some debate amongst the Oakland media about whether the team should release Burgess, who recently missed mandatory minicamp with a "stomach virus." While the Pats need a pass-rusher, an early round pick seems like a steep price for a 31-year-old, oft-injured player in the final year of his contract".

     Stay tuned.

pats-fan-2007 · posted at 5/21/2009 12:53 AM EDT

4th round draft choice.......no more.

Let's not make Burgess the second coming of Peppers. This guy has gotten worse every year since 2005.

unclealfie · posted at 5/21/2009 1:28 AM EDT

Check his stats. Burgess is 30 years old...and stands at the same height as Adalius Thomas. He's not as injury prone as you suggest. How long are the Pats going to wait for that perfect 10, 6'5", 260lb. OLB, with 4.6 speed? Unfortunately, guys like that have been extremely hard to find. Wouldn't a solid 8 do in the interim? I don't like the idea of the Pats sitting back and "hoping" that Vince Redd or Shawn Crable can fill the Vrable gap. I'd rather know that the Pats have a guy who is a proven outside pass-rusher.
Posted by TexasPat3

Good posts, Texas. You've done your homework once again. I totally agree that this guy would be a great addition, for maybe a 4th rounder, and we won't have to break the bank for him. Still plenty of reps to go around for the younger generation with him in the lineup.

MVPkilla · posted at 5/21/2009 2:00 PM EDT

It seems like this story has died down since it was first reported, has anyone heard any new updates on this possible trade?

kittycat6969 · posted at 5/21/2009 3:30 PM EDT

This from Jerry McDonald, a beat writer for the Raiders: "There's been some debate amongst the Oakland media about whether the team should release Burgess, who recently missed mandatory minicamp with a "stomach virus." While the Pats need a pass-rusher, an early round pick seems like a steep price for a 31-year-old, oft-injured player in the final year of his contract". Stay tuned.
Posted by TexasPat3

Texas-I think I players like this you sometimes go a little more than market. That being said, I hope it is not a second, but I think Burgess would be a great addition. Sometimes adding one player could make all the difference between winning the Super Bowl and ending up a play or two short. We were one play away in the 18-1 season. I would hate that to happen again.

TexasPat3 · posted at 5/21/2009 4:09 PM EDT

Texas-I think I players like this you sometimes go a little more than market. That being said, I hope it is not a second, but I think Burgess would be a great addition. Sometimes adding one player could make all the difference between winning the Super Bowl and ending up a play or two short. We were one play away in the 18-1 season. I would hate that to happen again.
Posted by kittycat6969

Agreed. Thats' why I suggested trading a 3rd and a 6th.

I too have grown frustrated with these near misses. Lets' hope that BB pushes the right buttons to get the Pats over the hump this year.

TexasPat3 · posted at 5/21/2009 4:15 PM EDT

Good posts, Texas. You've done your homework once again. I totally agree that this guy would be a great addition, for maybe a 4th rounder, and we won't have to break the bank for him. Still plenty of reps to go around for the younger generation with him in the lineup.
Posted by unclealfie

Sometimes, to get a guy that a team really needs, they'll pay a bit of a premium. The Pats did that when they acquired RB Corey Dillon for a second rounder in 2004.

Though theres' no way that I would part with a second rounder for Burgess, I can see offering a 3rd...and a 6th to sweeten the pot. Keep in mind that a 3rd from the Pats will likely be one of the last selections in that round.

mosseffect43 · posted at 5/24/2009 7:19 PM EDT

Sometimes, to get a guy that a team really needs, they'll pay a bit of a premium. The Pats did that when they acquired RB Corey Dillon for a second rounder in 2004. Though theres' no way that I would part with a second rounder for Burgess, I can see offering a 3rd...and a 6th to sweeten the pot. Keep in mind that a 3rd from the Pats will likely be one of the last selections in that round.
Posted by TexasPat3

well the raiders are really wanting a lot more then i thought for burgess.i guess they are still bitter about moss.but they need to figure he is 31yrs old,and only has one year on his contract not that the age is an issue,but it is when it comes to compensation.,and he was injured the last couple of years.

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/103861-patriots-still-interested-in-raiders-trade?eref=fromSI

zbellino · posted at 5/24/2009 10:41 PM EDT

well the raiders are really wanting a lot more then i thought for burgess.i guess they are still bitter about moss.but they need to figure he is 31yrs old,and only has one year on his contract,in which he was injured the last couple of years. http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/103861-patriots-still-interested-in-raiders-trade?eref=fromSI
Posted by mosseffect43

I told everyone that Al Davis was going to be cagey about this move. Once bitten twice shy, and BB bit half his ribcage out on the Moss deal.

I had hoped (dreamed really) a third could get it done, but they want a third and second. Sorry. Burgess isn't worth Vollmer and O'Connel.

mosseffect43 · posted at 5/25/2009 7:43 AM EDT

I told everyone that Al Davis was going to be cagey about this move. Once bitten twice shy, and BB bit half his ribcage out on the Moss deal. I had hoped (dreamed really) a third could get it done, but they want a third and second. Sorry. Burgess isn't worth Vollmer and O'Connel.
Posted by zbellino

why would they even want o-connell?they have there star QB Russell,and just signed garcia.even a 2nd rd pick by itself is to much.I understand the pats have three 2nd rd picks next year.but its not wise to just get rid of one foolishly.there has to be better prospects out there for a 2nd rd pick.

Boston.com

Could Burgess Be the Answer to the Pats' Pass Rushing Question?

LOG IN TO COMMENT