Sutton, Mike Williams, possibly both of the WRs who got tagged (Pittman and Higgins) Diggs,
Patriots' 2024 Free Agency Thread
- Thread starter Jake Peavy's Demons
- Start date
I wonder if Allen is attainable over Williams. Chargers are way over the cap and both WR have the same cap hit.
Gallup will be traded/released by DAL post June 1. He was formally given permission to seek a trade. 28YO with strong seasons a few years ago, unclear if he has much left after multiple injury marred seasons but could be worth kicking the tires on for a late rd pick swap. No guaranteed money outside of roster bonuses left. Not a sexy option but there really aren't any sexy options out there beyond the draft.
Can someone who understands the salary cap help me explain why so few players renegotiate their deals when they become unaffordable and instead get released? Is it a player’s pride “I will not take less money from the same employer but will take a lesser deal with someone else” thing or is the team’s “the hit would get spread out into the next years and we don’t want to pay that either” thing?
More do than you'd think, but of the ones who don't the answer is usually that what the team will give them in guarantees in a renegotiation is less than what they expect on the market.
Are we expecting a wild ride here these next few days? Or will the Pats play it cool and we will see movement later in the offseason?
been some hints at aggressive big spending. On the other hand the M.O. of basically everyone Wolf came up under was to never spend big early.
I would guess we see a big splash defensive signing, then they wait out the other markets a bit.
You tell me. Here's a direct quote from Mayo:
Edit - for more context, he did walk back that statement and talk about not spending it all in one season. I assume he didn't understand the workings of rolling cap over, etc (a little surprising, tbh), and was approached by Wolf or Kraft after the statement.
Either way, the team knows they have holes, and they know they're missing top end talent. My guess is:
- big FA signing on defense
- Calvin Ridley or a trade for a WR of that ilk
- Onwenu resigned
- 2nd tier tackles signed
- Other depth pieces to fill out roster
My guess is a big splash or two in the next couple days, then laying low until teams run out of money and they can find some bargains.
They should move quickly, not really any reason to wait for the market to develop. They have the cap space and don't have the talent. Of course, don't spend it willy nilly on mediocre players, but that to me entails being aggressive, very rare to see the top options last deep into NFL free agency.
I'm confident that they'll be aggressive, and they have done a nice job building a base thus far by keeping two of their main internal guys (Bourne, Henry). I'd like to see a big ticket on both offense (WR or OT) and defense (DT, Edge or CB) in the first wave, supplemented by later moves in advance of the draft. Maybe one of those can be a trade for a franchised guy, as long as the cost is not prohibitive.
Who are these players? Would you be happy with Tyron Smith, DJ Reader, and/or Kendall Fuller? Tyron Smith and Danielle Hunter? Those signings don't seem like Big Ticket items, but they're the best available at their positions.
I feel like those who want the Pats to sign their way to improvement are going to be wildly disappointed. There just isn't a lot of talent at the positions of need on the FA market. None of those guys above would move the needle all that much.
I'd rather they wait out the first few days of FA, then sign depth with whoever is left over looking for a contract, focus on building the team in the draft, and carry a lot of space into future years. The salary floor is a four-year average - no need to blow it now on declining 30 year olds.
Higgins just came out and requested a trade. He's in the big ticket category. I'd think hard about our R2 pick for him. I am less excited about Ridley. T.Smith would be a good get on a short contract.
On Defense, Wilkins, Smith or Sneed are all major acquisitions.
They can't do all of these, of course, but they're indicative of the kind of moves I would see as major.
A second isn't getting it done for Sneed or Higgins I don't think. We can't trade our first as is because it's too valuable. Hypothetically, we could trade next year's first... but that seems like a terrible idea because that could also be a top ten pick, which is significantly more valuable than Sneed or Higgins for where this Pats team is at IMO.
I'll grant you Wilkins would be a big signing, but do you mean Z'darius Smith? He's 31. I can't imagine he's going to get a big contract and I don't see that as major - he'd hardly move the needle.
With any of the above, it just all seems pointless if we don't know who the QB is. Like, is this team coming or going? Why give up a huge contract to Tee Higgins AND draft capital if you don't know who is going to throw him the ball? if you sign Christian Wilkins to a huge contract, then you have to give Christian Barmore a huge extension next season, you have a big chunk of cap tied up in DT (a place where you can find depth pretty easily)... for what? You don't even know what your team is going to be yet. IDK, just feels like putting the cart before the horse if they blow their wad right now.
And it's not just that we have cash--it's that the rules say we gotta spend a lot of it.
Wolf and co. have a very good idea of who are QB will be, even if we don't. If it's a rookie it's A or B. If a vet, I am sure they have that charted out.
Fair enough on spending now versus in subsequent years when the roster is more solidified, but I think you are offering a false choice. They can do both to different degrees.
I did type Smith, but I was also thinking Burns. He'd take a premium pick. I wouldn't trade a R1 for any of these guys, so if that's the cost, then you just walk away.
The rules say that you have to spend to 89% of the cap over a four year period. There's no demand put on teams to do that every year. They don't have to spend if they don't feel like it, and they can roll their cap over to future years to get more flexibility.
I don't think Higgins is worth a 1st. He has been playing opposite a coverage magnet in Chase, has never had more than 74 receptions in a season, and is coming off an injury-marred 2023 season (including two hamstring injuries, which scare the crap out of me for a WR). He may get a 1st, but this isn't Stefon Diggs or Tyreek Hill. I think a 2nd and 4th are as high as I would go for Higgins.
I know--I didn't say every year. But we haven't in a while and rolling it over to next year would likely be insane. Ergo, they're gonna spend.
I would surmise we'll hear about Brissett today. Word was that Mac was informed of his potential deal right after the combine, which I take to mean they are comfortable with the rookies after interviewing them and have a pretty good idea that they'll have someone else signed pretty quickly.
They may know who they'll select for their QB. They do not know how they'll perform. If a rookie, there may be bumps in the road, or they may have this year's CJ Stroud. If it's a vet, they may see improvement from Fields, or Kirk Cousins may not be able to throw outside. There's nothing they can count on in terms of performance. Nothing. Unless they stick with Zappe - then they can count on "bad."
And yeah, degrees here matter - I'm not saying "Don't sign anyone." We just know that the top of the FA market is not all it's cracked up to be, and there's a winner's curse with all these top-tier signings. With so many unknowns on this team, getting the best available DT at above-market money is a fool's errand.
2023: NFL Salary Cap $222 million, Patriots were at $221 million
2022: NFL Salary Cap $210 million, Patriots were at $208 million
2021: NFL Salary Cap $205 million, Patriots were at $200 million
If anything, they've been spending too much in recent years and leaving themselves with no flexibility. Rolling it over to next year is not insane at all - it's probably the most sane thing they could do given the state of the team.
I wonder how many years Brissett will get. The Patriots have to be a compelling option in the short term but it is hard to imagine he wants to keep doing this one year at a time. I think his market is mostly as a backup if he doesn’t go with the Patriots though I guess Washington is in a similar position to us and may be his main alternative though he is blocked by Howell.
Atlanta seems possible too. I wonder if the Cousins domino needs to fall before Brissett decides. I think he does not have an agent and I wonder how that works on timing.
1/8 would be good but 2/15 or something and I am not sure we want to go there.
Atlanta seems possible too. I wonder if the Cousins domino needs to fall before Brissett decides. I think he does not have an agent and I wonder how that works on timing.
1/8 would be good but 2/15 or something and I am not sure we want to go there.
Worth noting he put up basically identical numbers as the true #1 as a rookie when he was catching balls from rookie Burrow, Brandon Allen and Ryan Finley.
I don't care at all about total number of catches, that's just a product of volume, 74 catches on under 110 targets is a great result.
I wouldn't trade a future 1st for him, because I don't think I'd trade a future 1st for any WR you have to pay. But he's a borderline #1, and arguably better than Diggs was in MIN. Diggs' "breakout" in BUF is that he gets 160 targets a year
I guess in all honesty I don't really understand the difference between cap hits and "cash spending" by teams.
Like, let's say that the Pats have player X on contract and then cut him. And his dead cap hit is $5 million. Ok, so the team isn't spending that $5 million in cash, but they also can't spend that $5 million on real players because they're up against the salary cap.
So "cash spending" isn't the most important thing, is it? It's the actual cap hit, because it restricts how much cash you can actually spend.
But what am I missing?
Agree Higgins isn't worth NE's first but counterpoint to the Chase argument is that in 5 games without Chase in the lineup Higgins has 511 yards, 3TDs and 31 Recs. When given the opportunity he has shown he can be at worst a 1B WR in the league.
Apparently Higgins requested the trade because CIN hasn't even discussed a contract extension with him in over a year so perhaps they just want to run it back next season and won't trade him short of a massive overpay.
What? They lead the league in combined cap space for 2024-2026. They have had more flexibility to spend cash than any team in football for the past couple of seasons and chose not to. They absolutely have not been spending too much. The Patriots have been pretty much the only team reticent to create cap space by converting future money into signing bonuses while spreading out the cap hit in the past few seasons. They could have spent a shit ton last off-season while still remaining in great financial position for the future. They didn't, and now they have basically infinite money to play with.
Generally speaking, cash spending will equal cap spending. Any time you have a dead cap hit, you paid the money. Well, almost any time. Usually a dead cap is the result of a signing bonus or guarantee that you have written the check for. There are weird circumstances but by and large they are the same. The difference is in timing. You can spend $30 million one year in cash out the door but only have it count $6 million on the cap.
Right so when people call the Patriots "cheap" for low cash spending, that's not really a fair criticism if their cap hit is right up to the max, right?
Isn't it the cash to cap % that's important? There were a ton of stories earlier this offseason that said despite the Pats spending near the cap, their cash spending was low and they needed to spend this offseason. If that's wrong, my bad. But that was out there.
Link: Patriots mailbag: Is Justin Fields an option at quarterback? – Boston Herald
So yes, they can roll it over, but since they need bodies and they have to spend, I think they're gonna spending. You keep pushing that down the road, you overpay guys to get to where you need to be,
Sorry, "spending too much" is the incorrect terminology. All I'm pushing back on is the idea that they haven't been up against the cap in recent years, and thus need to spend this offseason to get above the salary floor. That seems like a red herring to me, and not a reason to overpay mediocre talent on the FA market.
Yes. What the Patriots have not done since Brady left is tricks that use up future year cap. So they are in good shape right now.
They have been up against the cap because by rule every team needs to be up against the cap. The concern isn't getting up above the cap floor, it's rebuilding the talent base of the roster. Yeah, ideally you want to get that done through the draft, but they have a ridiculous amount of available cash/cap and it would be silly not to hone in on top tier free agent talent.
I never said they were not spending to the cap. I said "And it's not just that we have cash--it's that the rules say we gotta spend a lot of it. "
Which is true. Can they spend very little and kick some to next year? Sure. Technically they could spend all that cash in year 2 of the 2024-2026 time frame. That seems...wrong to me.
No, it is a fair criticism. Present cap space means more than future cap space, just like 100 bucks today are more valuable than 100 bucks in 2025. The fact that they have been reticent to pay cash up front in order to create present cap space and spreading out the cap hit to the future reflects an unwillingness to spend, I don't know what else it could constitute. No one is arguing for the Mickey Loomis model, the Patriots have just been on the other radical end of the spectrum in contrast to that.
The Pats spent money within a 3-year plan based on a rookie QB so that if that QB turned out to be a bust they would be in a position to reset quickly.
Complaints about how they have spent money in the last 3 years (not talking about on whom), is weird.
Complaints about how they have spent money in the last 3 years (not talking about on whom), is weird.
I think market share of catches is something that matters for WRs. Yes, catches are a result of volume, but efficient volume is what you need from a true WR1. Can you operate at the highest level possible when everyone knows the ball is coming your way? That's what I pay a WR1 for. Higgins may be close, but close isn't worth a 1st that it may take to get him in my book.
The point there is that maybe they haven't managed the cap great, but that's a different criticism than them being "cheap". Right?
I think this will take care of itself. Heck, they are going to spend about $28 million this year just on Number 3. Probably $11 million on Bourne.
The Patriots have about $80 million in space. Figure $10 million in rookie contracts (space not cash) and another $12 million needed to get through the year. That leaves about $58 million in cap space to use on free agents or more if they do restructures. Figure $6 million for Bourne. They could easily spend $80 million in cash to sign players taking up $40 million in cap space.
Specifically, this season marks the start of a new multi-League-Year period 2024-2026 under the CBA. So whether one thinks they've been frugal or cheap the last few years is in a way not that relevant. They need to at a minimum spend 90% of the salary cap during the next 3 years. If they choose to not spend this year, that means they will be forced to spend more in 2025 and 2026, which may make sense if they want to load up then, or may simply create a situation of overpaying for mediocrity.
Collective Bargaining Agreement
https://overthecap.com/collective-bargaining-agreement/article/12/section/9/(b)/
Look, it's pedantic at this point, but you said that they have to spend a lot of it this year per the rules... and they don't. They have to do it over the next three years, which would include extensions for current players, extensions for later round rookies we draft this year, possible trades... there are many ways to skin a cat.
Whether you think the best way to do that is this year or the next two offseasons is a matter of opinion, but there is no requirement for them to spend big this offseason.
Timing of a spending surge could also affect compensatory draft picks in the future. BB seemed pretty smart about optimizing that. Spend a lot this year, you probably don't get comp picks next year.
This is where the Patriots have ranked in terms of actual cash spending over the last six seasons, per the Boston Globe. Generally on the cheaper side, which you can either interpret as cheapness or prudence.
| Year | NFL ranking |
| 2018 | 23rd |
| 2019 | 11th |
| 2020 | 32nd |
| 2021 | 3rd |
| 2022 | 27th |
| 2023 | 31st |
This cash spending thing is a red herring. It is cyclical. It really is going to take care of itself and is not worth worrying about. If they use a good chunk of their cap space it means they are signing free agents, which result in writing big checks that get cap amortized but count as spending.
Not for me to say what others should worry about, but I am a worrier and this does not concern me in the least. Use the cap space as wisely as you can and the rest will take care of itself.
Not for me to say what others should worry about, but I am a worrier and this does not concern me in the least. Use the cap space as wisely as you can and the rest will take care of itself.
I never said "this year" but whatever. I thought my point was obvious--they have cap space, they need players, and and this is a new 3 year window. If you think pushing that 3 year window into the next 2 years and not this one is a good option, we disagree. Therefore, we gotta spend.
It was a throwaway line about the very obvious fact the Pats will be active.
Would you resign Josh Usche or let him go to free agency? Another decision we are about to hear about.
It's cyclical for the average team, but the Patriots have ranked at or near the bottom of the league by pretty much any time frame you want to measure cash spending in the past 15 years.