If it's only 1 pick from this year, I'd at least have the conversation and see what 2025 picks they'd need in addition.
Patriots' 2024 Free Agency Thread
- Thread starter Jake Peavy's Demons
- Start date
It would definitely be risky but there is upside here of unlocking a better version of Maye/Daniels, which is how this team actually wins. Mac didn’t have close to the talent level but we saw what surrounding a young QB with bad talent can do.
It's basically that you'd be allocating a big chunk of your resources to a WR without knowing that you have a viable team with a QB that can get you there (I get that this would help the QBs development, but we might still draft an irredeemable lemon), while also precluding yourself from addressing other needs, like OT and taking your own swings in the draft at the next Jefferson. Really good WRs on very bad teams have not been much of a success story. Ideally you'd want the other pieces in place first.
That said, I could see the logic to the trade that was proposed given our relatively settled defense and that we don't expect to draft a dud QB. And it'd be exciting. Didn't BB want to draft Jefferson before getting swooped and pivoting to the trade back for Dugger? I think there's audio on that from the "Nike" draft.
I'm all for using #34 to draft the best WR talent available. I'm just saying if the team decides they want JJ, he's the type of guy you pay. He's young and insanely productive.
If the team's plan is sign a few more FA OL and get guys to catch the ball in the draft, I'm 100% okay with that.
I see. Seems pretty unlikely to me. I would think it would have to be more like two first, including a top 10, for the Vikings to even think about it if he really is going to extend for 4 years beyond 2024.
Extending him is more important for the Vikings than us. They need some cap room and that's going to open up at least $10 million.
If he's really not going to hit the market, I can't imagine they would trade him without the offer being overwhelming.
It's not about the dollars. It's about giving up three picks, two of them prime ones, in addition to paying him top of the market dollars.
I would suggest this is exactly the wrong time to do that.
I mean, Mac's best success came with the same or worse WR corps... he was an example of why a young QB, particularly one who isn't mobile is really tied to his O-line more than anything. Good O-line, mid WRs/TEs.... pretty good... bad O-line.... unplayably bad.
Jefferson is tempting (with a new deal, of course), but I'd prefer to use those picks on solidifying the line
... or what Cellar-Door just said
yeah, I'm actually good with either idea. They both show that team has an idea for strengthening the position.
No one is saying trade #3. The idea that kicked this off is #34 and future picks.
I think there are reasonable arguments to be made on both sides here. It would be a bold move and could certainly backfire. I’m tired of watching a listless passing attack but others may have more patience than me. Right now, I don’t see a material improvement coming that excites me but I guess we’ll see.
My only argument is that if the Patriots become fringe contenders and the QB produces even without top tier talent around him, people will also say that they don't need to wast the picks and money on a luxury piece like Jefferson. There will never be a "right time" if that's the mindset. Receiver is now treated as the second most valuable position in the sport, if you want one of the top guys you'll need to trade a bunch of high picks plus give them market setting money, unless you're able to find one through the draft.
I don’t think you need the best receiver in the NFL to fix your competitiveness problems (just ask the Vikings).
I would not give up a haul of critical (cost-controlled) high draft picks for the privilege to pay Jefferson $120m+. Would I give up *a* 2nd rounder? Probably, though I’m more intrigued by drafting and developing and spreading the cost of the WR position across multiple young talent. This team has too many holes to fill to give up a boatload of high picks for one guy (that isn’t a blue-chip QB).
Use those picks to build a team, including drafting one of the many talented WRs in this draft. If the Niners or Bengals would take a third for Higgins or Aiyuk, kick the tires and consider it if a reasonable extension can be agreed upon, but don’t give up the farm for the right to drop 1/7th of your future cap space on one receiver.
I would not give up a haul of critical (cost-controlled) high draft picks for the privilege to pay Jefferson $120m+. Would I give up *a* 2nd rounder? Probably, though I’m more intrigued by drafting and developing and spreading the cost of the WR position across multiple young talent. This team has too many holes to fill to give up a boatload of high picks for one guy (that isn’t a blue-chip QB).
Use those picks to build a team, including drafting one of the many talented WRs in this draft. If the Niners or Bengals would take a third for Higgins or Aiyuk, kick the tires and consider it if a reasonable extension can be agreed upon, but don’t give up the farm for the right to drop 1/7th of your future cap space on one receiver.
It’s a tough calculus, and I don’t have a strong opinion. Trading a ton of picks and paying Justin Jefferson may help you unlock your top 3 QB, but (1) you need to improve your OL pipeline ASAP, and (2) if you miss on the QB, you’re probably set back several years in taking another realistic shot at a high level prospect because you traded a package including a future first to get Jefferson.
I think what’s important to remember about the aggressiveness of SF, PHI, and LAR in the elite player trade market over the past 3-4 years is they already had strong foundations of talent. The picks they moved were simply not as valuable to them as a few difference making players given they were already firmly in their title contention window.
I think what’s important to remember about the aggressiveness of SF, PHI, and LAR in the elite player trade market over the past 3-4 years is they already had strong foundations of talent. The picks they moved were simply not as valuable to them as a few difference making players given they were already firmly in their title contention window.
Agreed.
I’m so much more in the “trade back to #8 or #11 if it’s there and draft OL, QB, WR in that order” than I was before.
I’d so much rather have Fuaga or Alt and then draft Penix or Nix and then McConkey or Mitchell (and then maybe get Legette R3).
Build the team.
I’m so much more in the “trade back to #8 or #11 if it’s there and draft OL, QB, WR in that order” than I was before.
I’d so much rather have Fuaga or Alt and then draft Penix or Nix and then McConkey or Mitchell (and then maybe get Legette R3).
Build the team.
I'm glad to see my JJ trade proposal met with some good responses.
My thought process:
My thought process:
- You hope/pray that #34 can turn into a WR1, but in my mind that might mean someone like Garret Wilson or Chris Olave. But JJ is better than pretty much everyone.
- Recent history has shown that giving your young QB an ace of a WR is the fast-pass to success (cf. Burrow/Chase; Allen/Diggs; Tua/Tyreek; Hurts/Brown).
- Adding JJ makes every pass-catcher on this team better from his gravity. Bourne, Pops, Henry, etc.
- JJ mega-salary + rookie QB for next 4-5 years are still manageable cap-wise.
- As long as we are praying/hoping, imagine putting CJ Stroud and CeeDee Lamb (from last year) on the 2023 Pats instead of Mac and Davante. How many wins would you have?
- And if that were the outcome for Pats 2024, then the 2025 picks are notably less valuable than this year's.
But those WR all came a year or two after the QB. If you want to trade 3 picks for JJ, why not just draft a WR with the top 10 pick we get next year? This team is not competing to win playoff games next year. We need to have a 3-5 year focus.
It's funny, I was going to suggest 2024 2nd, 2025 1st, & 2025 2nd for an extended JJ yesterday, but decided against it.
The idea was that even if whoever we draft at #3 is a QB, there's 2 years to figure out if they are serviceable. Sign Tyron Smith, & work with the O-Line to be formidable. I do see pieces. With a revamped O-Line & JJ, you're almost there.
If QB3 is working, great, continue to build the team for 2026. 2025 draft *looks like* it'll be weak for QBs. If QB3 is not working out, work your way to draft Arch Manning. Maybe QB3 gets the Darnold package or a subset of that when traded to his 2nd team. QBs are everything in today's NFL. Best way to work in a young QB is an elite WR (mentioned upthread already).
The idea was that even if whoever we draft at #3 is a QB, there's 2 years to figure out if they are serviceable. Sign Tyron Smith, & work with the O-Line to be formidable. I do see pieces. With a revamped O-Line & JJ, you're almost there.
If QB3 is working, great, continue to build the team for 2026. 2025 draft *looks like* it'll be weak for QBs. If QB3 is not working out, work your way to draft Arch Manning. Maybe QB3 gets the Darnold package or a subset of that when traded to his 2nd team. QBs are everything in today's NFL. Best way to work in a young QB is an elite WR (mentioned upthread already).
My frustration with the roster is not their moves in FA so far but that they don't have any extra picks in the top 5 rounds of the next two drafts with which to rebuild the team. Plus, they have the #3 which is great but will hamstring them if the QB they pick isn't the guy.
The rebuild was always going to come down to how well they are drafting and they don't have a lot of extra lottery tickets. There is nothing really to do about this at this point, and I don't think you trade the #3 since you have to take a shot at a QB but maybe they can trade down in the 2nd for extra picks. I would not outbid other teams for an established star when the team needs so much elsewhere. Even with the defense, their best player is old, Gonzalez has only 4 career games, and other than that they have a number of good players but few who project as stars and a number of guys will need to be re-signed or replaced before 2025.
The rebuild was always going to come down to how well they are drafting and they don't have a lot of extra lottery tickets. There is nothing really to do about this at this point, and I don't think you trade the #3 since you have to take a shot at a QB but maybe they can trade down in the 2nd for extra picks. I would not outbid other teams for an established star when the team needs so much elsewhere. Even with the defense, their best player is old, Gonzalez has only 4 career games, and other than that they have a number of good players but few who project as stars and a number of guys will need to be re-signed or replaced before 2025.
Lots of good stuff in this thread. Maybe I’m looking at it wrong, but the only approach I don’t get and can’t see the upside in is the “skip qb at 3 and draft a developmental/project qb” stuff. Trade back if you don’t like the qb at 3 and take Alt or whatever- sure. But the plan shouldn’t include targeting a late round QB rather than a first round QB like they have equal likelihood of ever actually playing a snap. It’s not that a later round QB playing meaningful football is going to happen it’s just going to take longer than an early pick— it’s that the odds go from not great but the best you can do to acquire a QB to basically zero. Of course there are unicorns but the stats have been reviewed here and are pretty clear. If someone interesting is there late and they want to take a shot okay but I don’t see how you plan on it like it’s a path to an actual QB.
Last edited:
From Minny's perspective, I think the only thing that could entice them to trade JJ (without a trade request by JJ) is a shot at a franchise QB. Any deal with the Pats starts with #3, and maybe the Pats could build something around swapping #3 for #11 and then adding a 2nd and new year's first.
I think you could make the argument that their best defensive player is Barmore and he is in his prime. Of course, if he has a good year this year, you're looking at a $100 million+ player.
Agree with this take, they'll certainly want #3 coming back and wouldn't that say something that they'd rather a shot at an elite QB prospect over JJ?
Right after I typed my last post, I jumped in the car to run a quick errand. NY sports radio 1050 (I think ESPN station) was talking about an idea of ARI trading #4 and 2025 1st for Jefferson with MIN using 4 for JJ McC and 11 for a WR. Seemed to me that ARI could keep their 2025 1st, keep their money, and draft MHJ so no idea why they would do that.
BleacherReport has 6 teams that should be calling about a trade for JJ.
Minny has no reason to trade Jefferson. Even if he requested a trade they wouldn't and he hasn't.
I don't think that anyone rational would ever say the bolded, and you don't need to keep the ptsd about whether the football ops will devalue the receiver position like Bill did when he had the goat. I don't mean that snarkily--we all have a little of that ptsd about mostly shitbum receivers with the occasional absolute stud thrown in every seven years or so.
A true X like Jefferson levels up all of the other receivers too, because of the attention that they command. He's not a luxury piece. That shit is the foundation of a passing attack. However, this team needs a lot more than one guy to be sustainable and you either pay top dollar for a foundational piece or you pay top picks for a foundational piece--but not both. Not when there are so many holes.
And like @67YAZ said Minny would only consider a trade that includes #3, but if the Pats are using the third pick to get a franchise WR, why not use it on MHJ, save $$$ and future picks? Using using multiple seconds and firsts to get one WR is a waste for a team in with a shallow talent pool, like the Pats.
I’m not arguing for this, but the idea would be that MHJ might someday be as good as Jefferson if everything goes right, but Jefferson is already the best in the league and is young with many great years ahead.
Until I have a franchise QB in place, I would not trade a future first. It’s the clearest path forward and I want to avoid a lengthening this run of crappy QB play (the meter’s already 4 years running). At least a future first gives one hope.
Actually, this is a fantastic, concise point that I had not considered. I was leaning toward giving up whatever it took to get Jefferson, in order to help the rookie QB. But holding on to future firsts seems to be the most important strategy until you have that franchise QB in place. 100% agree with this take.
This would be the way to go if you're going to do a Jefferson deal. They'll want 3, so start with a pick swap and add in another high pick this year and next year.
Is there any reporting that Minnesota wants to do a deal? They just lost a quarterback that people seemed to like. They have the best receiver in the game, arguably, and need to sell tickets. Plus, they could get some cap space by restructuring.
I don't have problem if it's just hypothetical. Just wondering if it's something that anyone thinks could happen.
I don't have problem if it's just hypothetical. Just wondering if it's something that anyone thinks could happen.
No, people want JJ and so we're inventing wild scenarios where the Vikings trade him for no reason
I don't think they have "no reason". If they can get a draft haul, there could be a compelling case.
Why?
The control him for several more years, they don't need a draft haul, they aren't a teardown team. If they could trade him for a no doubt stud QB sure,.... otherwise why? They can get a draft haul in a year, or 2 years.
I have yet to see a single compelling argument for them to trade Jefferson, all of it is from the perspective of "we want Jefferson!"
He's a UFA next year. They have no control other than the franchise tag. They don't have a quarterback.
Sure, they could franchise him but he won't be happy about that.
If I was the Vikings GM I would absolutely be exploring offers for him.
So on today's Athletic live show, Mays and Tice had the Patriots as one of (the 1st) the teams that they most like the approach to FA so far from
Um. Then technically every team has complete control over any individual free agent. Sorry, but LOL at that concept.
Well only 1 per team, and only if he doesn't have voids or clauses to prevent it, but yeah? The point is the Vikings have Jefferson, they have zero threat that they won't have him next year, as they can tag him for FAR less than he's worth. The idea that they have any contract related incentive to trade him is just silly.
The point is that he is going to get super expensive, and that if you can trade him for a haul of picks, you might be better off. You're acting as if this is some crazy thought for a GM to have. If I just lost my starting QB I'd absolutely be looking at any and all possibilities. You wrote that they don't need a draft haul / they're not a teardown team. Why, because Sam Darnold could lead them to 7 to 9 wins?
Because they just made a bunch of non-teardown moves in FA, you don't make those moves if you're planning to tear down. They're far more likely to trade picks for a QB than trade their superstar WR in a year where he's making 12.8M. Do you think that teams are going to suddenly NOT want him in a year? Could they trade him.... sure, possible if unlikely, but none of the arguments people are making in this thread are based on anything than a hope that the Patriots could get him. He's not expensive yet, he's not able to leave for nothing any time soon, etc.
First of all, he is making $19.7M this year.
Of course teams will want him in a year. Ok, so the Vikings franchise him. Well, then other teams would have to give up two first round picks for him. I don't think a team has ever signed a player who has been franchised in the history of the league. So, that's off the table. The Vikings could still trade him under that scenario. But they are risking creating a situation where they have pissed off their best player who has been under paid every season of his career and might be 100% on leaving whenever he has the opportunity, thereby reducing the asking price.
They haven't paid him yet. Most teams, with elite WRs on their rookie deals, already extend those players. The Vikings haven't with Jefferson. On top of that, they let their QB walk. It's not hard to imagine that Jefferson is one upset dude right now and jus waiting at the opportunity to leave. And if the Vikings don't trade him, they risk letting him leave for nothing eventually.
Good catch on the salary, had that flipped.
They offered him $30M a year and he rejected it, they'll try to sign him. Likely he's doing a DK Metcalf, wants to wait for Aiyuk and Lamb to sign and get the most in his class. They let the QB walk..... so they can pay Jefferson. Is he mad... who knows, he hasn't demanded a trade, but even if he did, they can ignore it, he has no control. the two 1sts is the non-exclusive tag and only if the current team declines to match btw, they can just exclusive tag him if they want, though no reason to. Could they hypothetically lose him for nothing at some point if they tag him 3 times... sure, but I doubt Jefferson wants to not sign long term eventually. Will he be pissed, who knows, but assuming he won't negotiate a deal or will force his way out is fanfic not analysis.
You still haven't outlined a reason for them to trade him that makes any sense for MIN, a team that needs a QB, but is otherwise ideally set up to be a playoff team or more for the forseeable future. It's all wishcasting about how they might trade him because you're starting from the "Justin Jefferson gets traded" and trying to reconstruct a path to that outcome.
I'm not wishcasting anything. I actually am not in favor of the Pats trading for him - I am compelled by the argument that the Pats should not be trading any future first round picks until and unless they find The Guy at QB. I'm saying that if I was the Vikings GM, while I'd want JJ to sign long term even at $25M+ per year, I would absolutely be open to trade offers. Perhaps the 35th pick and a 2025 1st rounder and 2025 3rd rounder wouldn't be quite enough to get it done, I don't know. But there is a trade return that is too hard to turn down that, even though JJ is a top 5 receiver in the league, still increases the chances of the Vikings becoming a championship contender in the next few years.
I'm not arguing that they SHOULD trade him no matter what. I'm arguing that it's not crazy for them to trade him depending on the return. The motivation would be to improve the football team. Simple as that.
Whens the last time one of the top WR's got traded at 25 years old (JJ is 24 now)?
We traded Deion Branch at 26, and that was almost 20 years ago. He also wasn't really in that categfory of "top WRs".
Stephon Diggs was traded at 27.
Tyreek Hill, Amari Cooper, and Deandre Hopkins were traded at 28.
Devante Adams was 29.
I dunno. I don't think theres much history to suggest that teams will trade away guys like this until theyre in their later 20's and the teams desperately need cap or are in rebuild mode. I dont see JJ going anywhere, at least not for a few years.
We traded Deion Branch at 26, and that was almost 20 years ago. He also wasn't really in that categfory of "top WRs".
Stephon Diggs was traded at 27.
Tyreek Hill, Amari Cooper, and Deandre Hopkins were traded at 28.
Devante Adams was 29.
I dunno. I don't think theres much history to suggest that teams will trade away guys like this until theyre in their later 20's and the teams desperately need cap or are in rebuild mode. I dont see JJ going anywhere, at least not for a few years.