What can we do at Running Back?

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

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : We trade him because if Brady keeps his mind in the game he goes 5 more years. You will put the best QB out there to win the game and that is Brady even at 40 over Mallet. We have a backup we trust in Hoyer. Mallet could walk after his rookie contract so if Brady does not get hurt we will almost have to trade his at some point. Mallets value now would be equal to what it would be 2 years from now. Brady may get hurt but it is a percentage game, the percent that Mallet may save us vs the percent that trading him now will help us. Mallet takes up a roster spot and if we want a sucessor to Brady and Mallet is just a couple years to early for that Aron Rodgers window, we move on and find another guy next year to develop. Last, Mallet may be good but we are starting to act like our 3rd string QB is the next franchise savior ala Brady himself. He may be good but a good chance not that good. A replaceable commodity. Didn't we all talk when we got him he might be a good chip to cash in a year or two down the road?
    Posted by Asher77[/QUOTE]

         Trade Mallett for what? The Pats used a 3rd round pick, 74th overall, to draft him. No one is going to offer the Pats a second rounder for him. Odds are better that the Pats can get a second rounder for Hoyer, than Mallett...and the chances of that happening are slim and none. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : Well I agree with what you said above but I am not as down on Vereen. He is no sure thing but he was injured and set behind then he was also in a more demanding role as far as learning the offense than Ridley. ( BJGE and Woodhead are good backs who contributed to a rather strong offense so no reason to blow up the dynamic mid season, with a full offseason then I am arguing yes, blow it up ) I see Vereen as our #2 back if we can or can't find a #1. If we do not find a true #1 then I think BJGE comes back ( or we ride Ridley, possibly a trade, Jackson? ) and it is buisness as usual. ( we will fold Vereen in more and by season end will see what we have there ) My notes on your post : IDeally, next year you have 1.) A # 1 back(preferabbly F.A./rookie stud (T.Richardson) /or Ridley) 2.) Ridley ( Vereen )  as the next man up, change of pace back. 3.) Vareen as 3rd down, pass catching back(we dont just pass on 3rd,,lol) and 4.) Woodhead, Emergency, jack of all trades back who comes in when needed. 5.) Fullback/short yardage back(Polite) Thats it. Just add one more name and resign Polite. So we carry 5 RB's-  # 1 back(preferabbly F.A.(or trade)) /rookie stud (T.Richardson) ), #2 Vereen, #3 Ridley, #4 Woodhead, #5 Polite
    Posted by Asher77[/QUOTE]

         Hey Ash...would you advocate the Pats trading one of their two #1 picks for Maurice Jones-Drew?: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/963324-jacksonville-jaguars-time-for-maurice-jones-drew-to-be-traded 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from NOISE. Show NOISE's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Either take a #2 (plus maybe a pick next season) and trade for MJD OR  take a #3 and take J. Stewart (who is a everydown back - same with MJD) both can catch out of the backfield as well.  This would certainely 'solidify' the Pats RB situation for sure...either one of these guys.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]I do agree, thats why I like Jonathen Stewart. I think he makes 1.3 mill or something and is in last year of his deal. Even if we get him for a 3rd rounder on a 1 year rental. It would be less pressure on Ridley and Vareen to have to perform. I also think if we could get a vet who is not performing up to his deal(D-Williams Panthers) or Steven Jackson to come in and re-structure the contract.  I think paying a proven veteran NFL caliber RB is worth it to this one dimensional offense. Brady is 35 and he needs to throw less not more, and have more outlets(as in RB's who can catch not named Woodhead) I think this is an underrated necessity on this offense particularly due to Brady's age and wear and tear. IMO we cannot have enough running backs on this roster. What happens if Ridley goes down for the year in pre season? The need for quality RB depth outweighs the amount of money we may or may not have to pay a proven guy...imo
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    DeAngelo I think is getting up in years and plays a style similar to Ridley.

    Stewart would be good, I'd even give pick 63 for him.

    Forte for pick 31? That'd be fine with me too
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? :      Negative! Stewart is in the final year of his rookie deal, and will be an UFA next year. I'd rather see them use one of their second rounders to draft a RB, than use one to make a deal on Stewart. If they do trade for him, the deal must be contingent upon the Pats being able to sign Stewart to a reasonable contract extension.   
    Posted by TexasPat[/QUOTE]

    I have been saying the following trade makes sense for Stewart several times on this board:

    A '12 3rd rd pick and a conditional '13 pick based on his contract status next year.

    If he signs an extension - we owe a 2nd
    If he is franchised (7.7m, this year to franchise a RB) - we owe a 3rd
    If he is allowed to walk - we owe a 4th 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    they have to pick up a legitimate RB.

    Right now they have:
     
    Woodhead - extremely limited

    Ridley - might be a good player

    Vereen - if he ends up average, he's over achieving

    Pretty pitiful that they have had an RB problem for 5 seasons and done nothing to solve it. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Shympters, they believe throwing to Wes for 5 yards is the run game. Only after losing 2 SB', sorry to say, have they realized that they need a Real threat at RB, and throwing to a 5'8" guy as an extension of the run game isnt scaring anyone and it doesnt help the predictability problem either. Last year was very wierd. We not only hardly ever threw to our backs, but we rarley used playaction and to use it, you must run first. We are a pass first team, lets hope that changes this year.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : I have been saying the following trade makes sense for Stewart several times on this board: A '12 3rd rd pick and a conditional '13 pick based on his contract status next year. If he signs an extension - we owe a 2nd If he is franchised (7.7m, this year to franchise a RB) - we owe a 3rd If he is allowed to walk - we owe a 4th 
    Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE]

         Oh hell no! A conditional 3rd in 2013...maybe. But, not a second rounder.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]Shympters, they believe throwing to Wes for 5 yards is the run game. Only after losing 2 SB', sorry to say, have they realized that they need a Real threat at RB, and throwing to a 5'8" guy as an extension of the run game isnt scaring anyone and it doesnt help the predictability problem either. Last year was very wierd. We not only hardly ever threw to our backs, but we rarley used playaction and to use it, you must run first. We are a pass first team, lets hope that changes this year.
    Posted by JayShizzle45[/QUOTE]

         The great majority of the good teams are pass first teams...including the World Champion Giants. The difference was that the G-men had a better defense, and the Pats were unable to take full advantage of what the Giants' "D" gave them...due to the injury to Gronk, lack of a deep threat WR, and a very pedestrian set of RBs.
     
         No "run first" team is going to win a title now, unless it's paired with a great defense...like the 2000 Ravens. Still, a good running game, paired with a great passing attack, is a deadly combination. The Pats really haven't had that since the days of Corey Dillon, in 2004.     
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]they have to pick up a legitimate RB. Right now they have:   Woodhead - extremely limited Ridley - might be a good player Vereen - if he ends up average, he's over achieving Pretty pitiful that they have had an RB problem for 5 seasons and done nothing to solve it. 
    Posted by Schumpeters-Ghost[/QUOTE]

    we've had a pass-rush issue the same amount of time

    yet somehow we won 48 games 08-11 and were a play away from a super bowl this year

    Imagine if we drafted DeAngelo over Maroney or got a guy like Drew or Rice in the 2nd round? What about all those guys like Clay Matthews, Brook Reed, Connor Barwin and Justin Houston we passed over?

    dang
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? :      Champ...I do agree that the Pats must upgrade at RB. I can't see BB going into next season with Stevan Ridley as his #1 guy.      As for Johnathan Stewart, unless he can be obtained cheaply, I don't see him coming to the Pats. Though he's been productive when healthy, he's one of those guys that seems to continually get nicked up, and sidelined. He's in the final year of his rookie deal: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1111333-nfl-rumors-panthers-addition-of-mike-tolbert-makes-jonathan-stewart-expendable #      But, Stephen Jackson of the Rams might be a Dillon-like pick-up, with the Pats 48th overall pick:  http://thepenaltyflagblog.com/rams-richardson-6-steven-jackson-st-louis , and  http://www.turfshowtimes.com/2011/12/6/2615150/st-louis-rams-trade-steven-jackson .      Here are Jackson's stats: http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/5549/steven-jackson . A complication could be that there's no love lost between Rams' head honcho Jeff Fisher, and BB.        Cedric Benson is another possibility...though his twelve (12) fumbles over the past two seasons make this a long shot. Those fumbles likely are the reason why the Bengals were in hot pursuit of BJGE. Perhaps Bennie should send Benson a thankyou card: http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/8419/cedric-benson , and  http://thepenaltyflagblog.com/time-cedric-benson-join-patriots     
    Posted by TexasPat[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, S-Jax has always been my 1st choice, great hands and a power runner who can make people miss. The Fisher/BB relationship is a good point though. He hates us.

    I also agree Stewart for a 2nd can only work if he is willing to sign long term. Yet a lat 3rd rounder for a 1 year rental would be ok imo.

    I don't like Benson for our team for many reasons but most importantly I just don't think he is a Patriot type locker room guy....and he is anti BJGE. He had 5 fumbles in 2 games in a row last year!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? :      Hey Ash...would you advocate the Pats trading one of their two #1 picks for Maurice Jones-Drew?: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/963324-jacksonville-jaguars-time-for-maurice-jones-drew-to-be-traded  
    Posted by TexasPat[/QUOTE]

    I think he is one of the few option out there we could explore that would really balance the offense in the way opposing D's play against us.. I would love to see him in a Pats uniform. At 27 and only been a featured back for 3 seasons he has some years left. I would trade a 1st for him yesterday.

    I question the salary as an issue. He has two years left. We would need to redo after this year or right away. ( we could wait and play TAG game but I hate that ) As stands do we carry his cap hit or just the base salary?

    If we have the $ then MJD is the safer choice and better choice over Richardson. If money prevents the MJD deal then I go back to plan B.

      Base Salary
    S. Bonus Misc. Bonus Cap Hit
    2009 4,100,000 3,500,000 360,000 7,960,000
    2010 4,400,000 3,500,000 360,000 8,260,000
    2011 4,050,000 3,500,000 360,000 7,910,000
    2012 4,450,000 3,500,000 360,000 8,310,000
    2013 4,950,000 3,500,000 360,000 8,810,000
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? :      Trade Mallett for what? The Pats used a 3rd round pick, 74th overall, to draft him. No one is going to offer the Pats a second rounder for him. Odds are better that the Pats can get a second rounder for Hoyer, than Mallett...and the chances of that happening are slim and none. 
    Posted by TexasPat[/QUOTE]


    The mistake in your logic is your using your brain and Draft Board value ratings.

    Start with the Draft Board values. A lone unused pick in the given draft is equal in trade to a next years pick one round higher ( based on trade history ).
    So if we were to trade last years 74th pick we would have gotten a 2nd in return this year. Now normaly once a player is selected they decrease in actual value unless there on field production warrants an alteration of perspective value. This is not true of the QB position relative to the length in years from when the QB was selected and the program / quality of QB they are playing for / sitting behind. ( providing that they are sitting and not playing ).

    A QB ( scouted to have talent and potential ) drafted in the top half of the draft who sits there first year oddly can be viewed to be the potential equivilent of that 3rd round pick ( 2011 ) being traded for a ( 2012 ) second rounder. The difference being that he sat on our bench as a place marker and not the other teams bench for that first year.

    How is it possible that Hoyer is now worth a 2nd? It is not that his play in games has sold him. It is the above law in effect. Each year he sits on our bench behind TB he goes up in value untill he A) sees the field and shows his real value or lack of and B) gets the chance to be a starter in our system ( TB gets hurt ) and is not chosen to be so by BB where then his value drops to almost zero.

    So based on Mallet being a 3rd round pick I adjust his current value to be that of a second to an interested team in need of QB help. Why would we ever trade for less as it would then be either admitting he was not worth the initial choice or it would be a waste in the effort we incorported to train him. Drafting a QB is like investing in venture funding and holding out for the IPO.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    the second part of Mallet's value is based on more of an emotonal ideal.

    A team in search of a QB is desperate and often prone to overeach. In doing so a team will not do so unless it can try to justify why it did not overreach. Conversly a team will not reach at all if it can justify that it did overreach. ( my best LAZ )

    What I am saying is that teams should not have passed on Mallet last year and the teams that did are not the same teams in desperate need of a QB this year. The reason a team passed on Mallet was mainly driven by media bias and availibilty of other QB options. Mallet dropped based on off field ideals. These things are always more prevelent to draft position and magnified in a QB. After time in the league these kind of things go away. Look at M. Vick.

    With Mallet sitting one year in our system and being a model citizen if he were to enter this years draft he would be a top 10 pick, guaranteed. He would go #4 to Clev over Tannehill in 100 out of 100 mock drafts.

    Now Clev wants Mallet on there team< all the scouts still remember his Pro Day and his game film and are seeing alot more when looking at his old wideouts for this years draft.

    Clevland needs to sell it though to ESPN. Based on your logic he is not worth #4 even if talent wise he is becasue he was a 3rd rounder. So Clev needs more than just Mallet and we understand that, but they don't need as much as most imagine they do. They just need enough to sell the deal as fair. What other QB's are young and have franchise portential that they have available to them to start next year? Hoyer, no way, everyone on our team wants to trade him and keep Mallet for the same reason Clev wants him.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Forte is another option.

    His $ will be more than MJD but it should take pick wise less to get him.

    I would rather have MJD.

    I say if all equal I would rate like this:

    MJD /> Forte > T.Rich > Stewart > Jackson

    I put Forte ahead of T.Rich based on what we know he can do vs potential and the excitment that comes with. If I was decideing with my heart I would flip them.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? :      Oh hell no! A conditional 3rd in 2013...maybe. But, not a second rounder.
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    If he performs so well here that we give him a contract extension, commitng to him as our RB for the next several years, I'd think thats worth a pick in the low 60's next year. He's only 24-25 years old.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]the second part of Mallet's value is based on more of an emotonal ideal. A team in search of a QB is desperate and often prone to overeach. In doing so a team will not do so unless it can try to justify why it did not overreach. Conversly a team will not reach at all if it can justify that it did overreach. ( my best LAZ ) What I am saying is that teams should not have passed on Mallet last year and the teams that did are not the same teams in desperate need of a QB this year. The reason a team passed on Mallet was mainly driven by media bias and availibilty of other QB options. Mallet dropped based on off field ideals. These things are always more prevelent to draft position and magnified in a QB. After time in the league these kind of things go away. Look at M. Vick. With Mallet sitting one year in our system and being a model citizen if he were to enter this years draft he would be a top 10 pick, guaranteed. He would go #4 to Clev over Tannehill in 100 out of 100 mock drafts. Now Clev wants Mallet on there team< all the scouts still remember his Pro Day and his game film and are seeing alot more when looking at his old wideouts for this years draft. Clevland needs to sell it though to ESPN. Based on your logic he is not worth #4 even if talent wise he is becasue he was a 3rd rounder. So Clev needs more than just Mallet and we understand that, but they don't need as much as most imagine they do. They just need enough to sell the deal as fair. What other QB's are young and have franchise portential that they have available to them to start next year? Hoyer, no way, everyone on our team wants to trade him and keep Mallet for the same reason Clev wants him.
    Posted by Asher77[/QUOTE]

    So would you trade Mallett with either picks 31/63 or 27/48 or 31,95 and a #1 in '13 for pick #4?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    No, I would not give a 1st in 2013.

    I would give Mallet, one 2012 first, one 2012 second, and filler. Filler being 3rd next year, 4th this year, ect. . If this couldn't get it done I would back out.

    I think we can work it around there desire for Mallet so that are only real impact to this years team coming up is the 2nd round pick we lose and are 3rd string QB.

    I don't think there is any team willing to give a RGIII type deal for the #4 pick and I don't see us having many competing offers, the ones that offer more in picks will not have a QB in the mix and this is the reason Clev does the deal. They are trading out because they want a QB but they are not 100% sold on Tannehill but will be under pressure to draft him. If they give there team Mallet and also come out with more pieces, they win and they can sell that to the fan base. Yes ESPN analysts will say, they could have got 2 first round picks ect..but the other side will say true but there was no other way for them to land the QB of the future this season otherwise as T.Hill was not worth a selection that high and the coaching staff didn't see his upside over Mallet.

    It would go down as a win for both sides and Mallet"s reason for falling last year will be spun as a huge mistake and he will be painted as a great kid who was just misunderstood because he had to much fun in college. His time with the Pats showed him what it took to win a SB and now he is rdy.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    bump
     

Share