Phil Taylor yet again

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Phil Taylor yet again

    I know that we all discussed about wanting to trade for Phil Taylor last year as a potential long term Wilfork replacement and using Mallett to get it done and there were rumors that the Pats had interest for the right price. Well a report came out that the Browns might not pick up Taylors 5th year (like the Pats did with Solder) making him a URFA in 2015. Now they wouldn't tag him (the tag would be worth more than the 5th year option) so that leads me to believe they might be willing to let him go. Given Wilfork's contract moving forward it could be possible to trade for Taylor and extend him long term to a contract similar to what they gave Wilfork after his was done and just have the two contracts overlap in a way that it's doesn't add a ton of cap space to acquire Taylor. With that said I have no clue what the asking price would be for Taylor but if they are willing to let him go in 2015 I'm guessing it's not a 1st or 2nd. I'm thinking if we swap Mallett and add our 3rd that might be enough to get it done. Then Browns can take a Sea approach and get a QB via the draft in the 2nd or 3rd and see which one they like better. The Pats are freed up to grab a QB in the 2nd or 4th (say if they really do like Savage, McCarron, or Thomas) because they got their 1st round caliber DT in Taylor.


    I know I'm just tossing stuff against the wall right now but seems like a deal that might interest both parties and could be reasonable pulled off if indeed the Pats had interest in Taylor as a long term Wilfork replacement and if the Browns also don't have interest keeping Taylor long term.


    NT Phil Taylor is unsure if the Browns will pick up his fifth-year option.
    If the Browns don't pick up Taylor's $5.5 million option by May 3, he'll be an unrestricted free agent in 2015. It's an interesting decision for the new Mike Pettine regime. Taylor has started 37 games over the last three seasons, showing well as a run stuffer last year but coming off the field on pass downs. His value will depend on how Pettine uses him in his hybrid 3-4 scheme.


    http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/6537/phil-taylor" rel="nofollow">http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/6537/phil-taylor



    I swear by lil 10 pound bearded baby Jesus

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

    Re: Phil Taylor yet again

    I just can't see them accepting Mallett and a 3rd for a former first round pick at this point. With Mallett not playing a meaningful minute in the NFL and us bringing in every single draft eligible quarterback for a visit, it certainly doesn't increase his trade value. I wish it would happen, but I don't see it.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Phil Taylor yet again

    In response to mthurl's comment:


    I just can't see them accepting Mallett and a 3rd for a former first round pick at this point. With Mallett not playing a meaningful minute in the NFL and us bringing in every single draft eligible quarterback for a visit, it certainly doesn't increase his trade value. I wish it would happen, but I don't see it.




    [object HTMLDivElement]


    The way I look at it. If they are willing to let him go then they aren't looking for a 1st as compensation. Otherwise might as well option that 5th year then trade him for that 1st then. Looking at previous trades in the more recent past 3rd seems like the normal compensation for someone of his caliber that isn't tagged or isn't a RFA. You don't normally hear of a player traded for more than a 3rd unless they have a tag or RFA is involved. Even if they lose Taylor to FA the best they could hope to get back from his loss is a comp 3rd so that's where I would start and getting an extra QB in Mallett who has some upside is more a sweetener than the deal itself. So I based the value of the trade solely on historical precedence based on picks with Mallett just being a toss in piece that will allow Clev (who really has no QBs right now) to hedge their beats Sea style

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

    Re: Phil Taylor yet again

    trading for Mallett, who I feel you have very much over rated his value, would put Cleve in the same spot next year. they will either have to pay him free agent $$$, or they will again be looking for a QB. Rather than trade for Mallett, they can take a QB in the draft and control him for 5 years at reasonable money. 


    I love Mallett's talent and believe in him. I watched him a lot, and he can play well in the NFL. But there is a difference between talent and value, and the Pats have done a poor job in developing Mallett's value. If there was a QB traded today, who has more value (not talent)


    Mallett


    Glennon


    Hoyer


    Cousins 

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

    Re: Phil Taylor yet again

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    trading for Mallett, who I feel you have very much over rated his value, would put Cleve in the same spot next year. they will either have to pay him free agent $$$, or they will again be looking for a QB. Rather than trade for Mallett, they can take a QB in the draft and control him for 5 years at reasonable money. 


     


    I love Mallett's talent and believe in him. I watched him a lot, and he can play well in the NFL. But there is a difference between talent and value, and the Pats have done a poor job in developing Mallett's value. If there was a QB traded today, who has more value (not talent)


     


    Mallett


     


    Glennon


     


    Hoyer


     


    Cousins 


    [/QUOTE]


    That's an interesting thought, did the pats do a poor job developing Mallett's value? I guess they probably did - I mean their focus is on winning games - but I suppose they could of/should of put this guy in there on occasion. It makes me think they were worried that by playing him they were concerned of actually lowering his value. I'm not a big fan of this guy, I've seen him play a bit too....I don't like his accuracy or decision making. Now the decision making might of improved with more reps in practice, plays tailored for him, etc, but the accuracy might not of.

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

    Re: Phil Taylor yet again

    why is Cleveland not extending? makes you wonder.

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

    Re: Phil Taylor yet again

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    trading for Mallett, who I feel you have very much over rated his value, would put Cleve in the same spot next year. they will either have to pay him free agent $$$, or they will again be looking for a QB. Rather than trade for Mallett, they can take a QB in the draft and control him for 5 years at reasonable money. 


     


    I love Mallett's talent and believe in him. I watched him a lot, and he can play well in the NFL. But there is a difference between talent and value, and the Pats have done a poor job in developing Mallett's value. If there was a QB traded today, who has more value (not talent)


     


    Mallett


     


    Glennon


     


    Hoyer


     


    Cousins 


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]


    rkarp you need to read my post again. Mallett would be the toss in sweetener not the main part of the trade, that would be the 3rd. Historically, players of Taylors caliber go for a 3rd unless they are tagged or RFA's so I'm not over valuing Mallett as much as this gives them a high upside player who can compete in camp and they can see what he has.


    Also, I said they should additionally draft a QB taking the Sea approach. Getting a young high upside QB and additionally drafting one and letting them compete. It's hedging your bets and they get an extra 3rd. If they don't intend to keep Taylor they would at least get a day 2 pick and get a high upside QB they can have compete against a drafted one to double down. As of right now they have 1 QB on the roster who's best quality is his arm strength holding up a clip board. So, they need to grab maybe 2 QB's regardless. 

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

    Re: Phil Taylor yet again

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    trading for Mallett, who I feel you have very much over rated his value, would put Cleve in the same spot next year. they will either have to pay him free agent $$$, or they will again be looking for a QB. Rather than trade for Mallett, they can take a QB in the draft and control him for 5 years at reasonable money. 


     


     


     


    I love Mallett's talent and believe in him. I watched him a lot, and he can play well in the NFL. But there is a difference between talent and value, and the Pats have done a poor job in developing Mallett's value. If there was a QB traded today, who has more value (not talent)


     


     


     


    Mallett


     


     


     


    Glennon


     


     


     


    Hoyer


     


     


     


    Cousins 


     


    [/QUOTE]


    That's an interesting thought, did the pats do a poor job developing Mallett's value? I guess they probably did - I mean their focus is on winning games - but I suppose they could of/should of put this guy in there on occasion. It makes me think they were worried that by playing him they were concerned of actually lowering his value. I'm not a big fan of this guy, I've seen him play a bit too....I don't like his accuracy or decision making. Now the decision making might of improved with more reps in practice, plays tailored for him, etc, but the accuracy might not of.


    [/QUOTE]

    reviewing 2013, preseason was about getting the WR's comfortable with TB. I understand Mallett not getting to show his progression. And looking at each game in hindsight, hard to say if/when TB may have been taken out of a game because it was safe in hand.


    but look at some of the scores from 2013 reg season. surely, Mallett could have been playing some of those 4th quarters and developing some value.


    I agree, accuracy cannot be taught. I do think that decision making can be improved as a QB gets more and more comfortable in a system. What Mallett does posess is a howitzer to make any throw, good feel for the deep ball, nice touch on the fade route. He wont panic in the pocket, has a nice slide step, and can throw on the roll left or right.


    Of course no one wants to see TB go down. But if he did, I really have full confidence this is a 10 win team with Mallett at QB..


    Surely I do not want to go into this season with TB and Savage or Garoppolo as the back up QB.


    Pats need to bite the bullet, stay with Mallett this year and draft a QB for development. It w/b interesting if the Browns do draft a QB in the top 50 picks, if next year Hoyer is available and would he come back?


    I also saw with interest what a QB like Brandon Weedon signed for on the open market. Weedon did not work out for the Browns, but he did have some games that he did play very well. He does have a body of work that is much greater than Mallett. Is anyone breaking down the doors to sign Mallett to big money and hand him the starting job? Would he take a deal here, with the understanding he is the favorite to be the starting QB in his 28th age year?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Phil Taylor yet again

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


     


     


    trading for Mallett, who I feel you have very much over rated his value, would put Cleve in the same spot next year. they will either have to pay him free agent $$$, or they will again be looking for a QB. Rather than trade for Mallett, they can take a QB in the draft and control him for 5 years at reasonable money. 


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    I love Mallett's talent and believe in him. I watched him a lot, and he can play well in the NFL. But there is a difference between talent and value, and the Pats have done a poor job in developing Mallett's value. If there was a QB traded today, who has more value (not talent)


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    Mallett


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    Glennon


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    Hoyer


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    Cousins 


     


     


     


    [/QUOTE]


    That's an interesting thought, did the pats do a poor job developing Mallett's value? I guess they probably did - I mean their focus is on winning games - but I suppose they could of/should of put this guy in there on occasion. It makes me think they were worried that by playing him they were concerned of actually lowering his value. I'm not a big fan of this guy, I've seen him play a bit too....I don't like his accuracy or decision making. Now the decision making might of improved with more reps in practice, plays tailored for him, etc, but the accuracy might not of.


     


    [/QUOTE]

    reviewing 2013, preseason was about getting the WR's comfortable with TB. I understand Mallett not getting to show his progression. And looking at each game in hindsight, hard to say if/when TB may have been taken out of a game because it was safe in hand.


     


    but look at some of the scores from 2013 reg season. surely, Mallett could have been playing some of those 4th quarters and developing some value.


     


    I agree, accuracy cannot be taught. I do think that decision making can be improved as a QB gets more and more comfortable in a system. What Mallett does posess is a howitzer to make any throw, good feel for the deep ball, nice touch on the fade route. He wont panic in the pocket, has a nice slide step, and can throw on the roll left or right.


     


    Of course no one wants to see TB go down. But if he did, I really have full confidence this is a 10 win team with Mallett at QB..


     


    Surely I do not want to go into this season with TB and Savage or Garoppolo as the back up QB.


     


    Pats need to bite the bullet, stay with Mallett this year and draft a QB for development. It w/b interesting if the Browns do draft a QB in the top 50 picks, if next year Hoyer is available and would he come back?


     


    I also saw with interest what a QB like Brandon Weedon signed for on the open market. Weedon did not work out for the Browns, but he did have some games that he did play very well. He does have a body of work that is much greater than Mallett. Is anyone breaking down the doors to sign Mallett to big money and hand him the starting job? Would he take a deal here, with the understanding he is the favorite to be the starting QB in his 28th age year?


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]


    if I'm the Browns I'm riding hoyer out and using my draft picks to bolster interior lines on both sides. They have 3 picks in the top 40 I believe. They could really beef up their pass rush and qb protection.  The players like hoyer and he played pretty well until he got hurt. If they don't use all their picks then trade one into next year for a qb.  If they grab one of this years qb's it tells me their panicking 


    if a Taylor loss is inevitable then getting a 3 rd and mallet might not be bad but I'd hold out for a second. If we're going to use our second on a DT then Taylor would be good value to me. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Phil Taylor yet again

    Speaking as an out-of-market fan, when rubes around here suggest that the local 11 trade anything at all for Ryan Mallet, people who actually make a living knowing stuff about football laugh quietly to themselves.


     


    Now you listen here! He's not the Messiah . . .   he's a very naughty boy!



     

Share