Misc. Pats Offseason News

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
17,765
Good chance she may handle the old Andy Wasynczuk role of contracts/salary cap. Has an MBA/JD from Washington University.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,742
"to the Head Coach" = much fodder for NFL Kremlinologists trying to piece together the emerging organizational structure.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,463
Not sure where this goes, but he mentions Glaser.....
Ive been leery of JKraft only because of my own sons-of-billionaire biases. Ultimately I would defer to anyone with actual insight.

But Ben V. has a bigger hair across his ass for JK than he did for BB. What reporter covers a new coach's press conference with this sort of raging hostility? Did someone put him up to it?

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/01/17/sports/jonathan-kraft-robert-kraft-patriots-jerod-mayo/
 
Last edited:

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,687
Newton
Not sure where this goes, but he mentions Glaser.....
Ive been leery of JKraft only because of my own son-of-billionaire biases. Ultimately I would defer to anyone with actual insight.

But Ben V. has a bigger hair across his ass for JK than he did for BB. What reporter covers a new coach's press conference with this sort of raging hostility? Did someone put him up to it?

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/01/17/sports/jonathan-kraft-robert-kraft-patriots-jerod-mayo/
Probably goes in the GM search thread. But hasn’t the team already said flat out that Jonathan won’t be involved in football decisions?

I’ve said this before but Volin 1) Doesn’t work very hard – Howe has noted in the past that he reported on camp from his sofa, and 2) Has zero sources inside the building. Literally the last scoop he had was Revis getting cut by TB and coming to the Pats, which was probably due to his Florida connections more than anything.

In this case, I suspect that he was hoping the latter would change with Belichick gone—after all, he wrote about 4,891 articles on Bill getting canned for the last two months—only to discover Stacey James still isn’t returning his texts. So now he’s “using his platform” to go scorched earth on the team. I’m sure that will work out great.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,463
Probably goes in the GM search thread. But hasn’t the team already said flat out that Jonathan won’t be involved in football decisions?

I’ve said this before but Volin 1) Doesn’t work very hard – Howe has noted in the past that he reported on camp from his sofa, and 2) Has zero sources inside the building. Literally the last scoop he had was Revis getting cut by TB and coming to the Pats, which was probably due to his Florida connections more than anything.

In this case, I suspect that he was hoping the latter would change with Belichick gone—after all, he wrote about 4,891 articles on Bill getting canned for the last two months—only to discover Stacey James still isn’t returning his texts. So now he’s “using his platform” to go scorched earth on the team. I’m sure that will work out great.
Makes sense. (as much as it can, anyway). Job is reporter. Attitude is columnist.
 

Bowser

New Member
Sep 27, 2019
440
Ive been leery of JKraft only because of my own son-of-billionaire biases. Ultimately I would defer to anyone with actual insight.
Not exactly insight, but I know two people who've interacted with JK. One is a longtime TV camerman, the other a former Bain Capital guy. Both used the same word to describe him: dipshit.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,887
Needham, MA
I mean who knows for sure, but it isn't like Jonathan hasn't been visible to Pats fans for the better part of 20-something years now. I guess he could be a dipshit or he could be a failson, but if he is he certainly does a good job of hiding it in front of the camera.

Kraft was always going to be handing things over to him, they aren't going to sell the team any time soon. Maybe I'll be proven wrong but I've never worried all that much about JK taking things over.
 

Jinhocho

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2001
10,308
Durham, NC
Lots of reports out there that Onwenu will not be returning to the Pats (his choice). I wonder if he ends up where Bill does.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,834
Hartford, CT
Lots of reports out there that Onwenu will not be returning to the Pats (his choice). I wonder if he ends up where Bill does.
Apparently Jeremy Fowler stated that ‘The Patriots essentially know he isn’t coming back’ in this article, which is paywalled so I can’t confirm apart from all the people aggregating it. If true, it would suggest they don’t plan to franchise Onwenu.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/insider/story/_/id/39235162/2024-nfl-offseason-guide-every-team-priorities-free-agents-draft-predictions
 
Oct 12, 2023
801
Losing Onwenu and moving on from Brown is going to be really really difficult to overcome. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that, because losing one of those guys is hard enough to deal with. Losing both your starting tackles is basically ensuring trash OL play next year. The free agent crop outside of those guys is awful and nobody is going to trade a decent tackle.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,834
Hartford, CT
They have like 68M in cap space for 2024, with about 82M when you account for the presumably soon to be cut JCJ’s cap hit. Giving out big deals to a couple of their key FA doesn’t seem like a problem to me. Hell, they could franchise Onwenu at about a 20M salary and have plenty of breathing room under the cap.

I wonder if there is a deeper problem between the team and player there (does he have an issue with bouncing between OG and OT?), but you’d like to think Mayo could attempt a reset there, if true. And if the relationship is deemed unsalvageable then I think you’d be able to readily tag and trade him given how horrible the OL FA market is and the Pats’ ability to carry the cap hold for the tag and still maneuver in FA.

It’s one line in one article, mind you, but it’s puzzling nonetheless.
 

Caspir

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,255
I don’t k own if he’s “worth” the tag, but nobody else on this roster is, so if either tag and trade, tag and extend, or tag and play it out. Losing him for nothing would suck, assuming Brown is also a goner.
 

6-5 Sadler

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
239
Apparently Jeremy Fowler stated that ‘The Patriots essentially know he isn’t coming back’ in this article, which is paywalled so I can’t confirm apart from all the people aggregating it. If true, it would suggest they don’t plan to franchise Onwenu.
The article basically says that some teams view Onwenu as the top free agent lineman and will have many bidders. I interpret the author’s speculation around him not coming back as more around cost vs relationship with team.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,996
I really hope it's just Fowler's speculation because going into the offseason needing to find two starting tackles plus a QB in a super weak free agent class would be a disaster.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,595
Mike Onwenu: Many teams view Onwenu as the top offensive lineman in free agency because of his physicality, quickness and ability to play guard or tackle. The Patriots essentially know Onwenu isn't coming back, and he will have high bidders. -- Fowler
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,758
Mike Onwenu: Many teams view Onwenu as the top offensive lineman in free agency because of his physicality, quickness and ability to play guard or tackle. The Patriots essentially know Onwenu isn't coming back, and he will have high bidders. -- Fowler
Mike Reiss says the Pats and Onwenu are playing the waiting game and so nothing is definitive yet.

Maybe the team views his return as uncertain. Seems strange that they would be so quick to let their arguably best OL leave without making any attempt to keep him. At the same time, BB had a chance to extend him and it never happened, so maybe there is something there.
 

MuppetAsteriskTalk

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2015
5,468
Full rebuild. Grab a QB, two tackles, and two WRs in the draft. And hold on to your butts.
Unless they settle for one of the lesser QB prospects, I don't see how they could do that. It seems like most of the tackles worth taking will be gone by somewhere around pick 40? You could probably do QB at 3, maybe grab a tackle in the early 2nd, and then grab a bunch of the lesser WR available and hope 1 pans out. But I don't see how you get two tackles, two WR, and a QB unless you trade back out of 3 for a haul, but that means gambling on the QB. Of course that's a fine strategy if they don't see a QB they really like available at 3.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,818
Unless they settle for one of the lesser QB prospects, I don't see how they could do that. It seems like most of the tackles worth taking will be gone by somewhere around pick 40? You could probably do QB at 3, maybe grab a tackle in the early 2nd, and then grab a bunch of the lesser WR available and hope 1 pans out. But I don't see how you get two tackles, two WR, and a QB unless you trade back out of 3 for a haul, but that means gambling on the QB. Of course that's a fine strategy if they don't see a QB they really like available at 3.
If they’re losing both Ts I’d prefer the trade down approach. Maybe in stages to get a couple of draft hauls in order to pick up McCarthy in the 20s and enough picks to add Ts and WRs.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
12,301
around the way
If they’re losing both Ts I’d prefer the trade down approach. Maybe in stages to get a couple of draft hauls in order to pick up McCarthy in the 20s and enough picks to add Ts and WRs.
I think that there are enough good tackles in this draft to get someone in round 3 that's a day 1 starter. Pick up someone else via FA if Mike prices himself out.
 
Oct 12, 2023
801
Unless they settle for one of the lesser QB prospects, I don't see how they could do that. It seems like most of the tackles worth taking will be gone by somewhere around pick 40? You could probably do QB at 3, maybe grab a tackle in the early 2nd, and then grab a bunch of the lesser WR available and hope 1 pans out. But I don't see how you get two tackles, two WR, and a QB unless you trade back out of 3 for a haul, but that means gambling on the QB. Of course that's a fine strategy if they don't see a QB they really like available at 3.
It’s a really deep group of tackles and WR this year. A good tackle at the top of the 2nd and a decent WR atop the 3rd is definitely possible. Obviously you don’t want to be in a position to “have” to hit a specific position at each pick but there will be quality players at both positions (most likely)
 

MuppetAsteriskTalk

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2015
5,468
It’s a really deep group of tackles and WR this year. A good tackle at the top of the 2nd and a decent WR atop the 3rd is definitely possible. Obviously you don’t want to be in a position to “have” to hit a specific position at each pick but there will be quality players at both positions (most likely)
But I was responding to somebody that said we needed to get a QB, two OT and two WR and I don't see how they can do that without one or two trade backs and then holding your ass and hoping that the QB you hoped for near the end of the 1st doesnt get snapped up.
 
Oct 12, 2023
801
But I was responding to somebody that said we needed to get a QB, two OT and two WR and I don't see how they can do that without one or two trade backs and then holding your ass and hoping that the QB you hoped for near the end of the 1st doesnt get snapped up.
Take a QB at 3, tackle in rounds 2 and 4, WR in rounds 3 and 5 etc

can you get two opening day starters at T and WR? No probably not. But one decent prospect with starting potential and a developmental guy or two? Seems feasible albeit unlikely that they’d hit just those 3 positions and ignore the other holes on the roster

Definitely need to draft 2-3 tackles, barring something unexpected with veterans as they have nothing there
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,671
Philadelphia
I don't think Onwenu is worth a $21m tag in the abstract but this is a spot where you really should just do it, so long as the plan is to draft a QB at #3 (and everything points that way).

You need to put that QB into a position to succeed and that starts by avoiding a dumpster fire OL. Tag Onwenu for a year to play RT, add a cheap depth tackle in FA, and look to draft an LT with your 2nd or 3rd rounder. If there is a LT prospect you like and a trade up to be made from 34 into the mid-late 20s, I would seriously consider that. Its very hard to find plug-and-play tackles after the 1st round so I would be willing to pay the price if necessary to get a guy you are confident about.

Maybe Onwenu signs a long term deal, maybe he just walks next year and you have 21m in cap space while hopefully the drafted tackle has established himself as a decent NFL player.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,437
I agree @Morgan's Magic Snowplow - franchise Onwenu if you have to this year. Not ideal, but it can get you through a season. And I don't understand why so many players hate the franchise tag. It's guaranteed money at the top of the pay scale at your position. Yes, for just one year, but still...it's a lot of money and usually represents an enormous pay raise.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,595
I agree @Morgan's Magic Snowplow - franchise Onwenu if you have to this year. Not ideal, but it can get you through a season. And I don't understand why so many players hate the franchise tag. It's guaranteed money at the top of the pay scale at your position. Yes, for just one year, but still...it's a lot of money and usually represents an enormous pay raise.
Because a longer term deal gives more security and more guaranteed money. You get franchised before ever signing your big FA deal and get hurt, then that's gonna suck.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,758
I agree @Morgan's Magic Snowplow - franchise Onwenu if you have to this year. Not ideal, but it can get you through a season. And I don't understand why so many players hate the franchise tag. It's guaranteed money at the top of the pay scale at your position. Yes, for just one year, but still...it's a lot of money and usually represents an enormous pay raise.
I wouldn't bother tagging him if he's made it known he doesn't want to be here. That won't help culture.
First, we don't know whether he doesn't want to be here. Bedard claims that is the case; Mike Reiss claims the opposite.

As for the tag itself, the reason players don't like it is that it caps their guaranteed money; Onwenu could probably get more guaranteed money on the free agent market, spread out over multiple years. At the same point, the Patriots are certainly well within their rights to use their leverage here. Tag and trade is always a possibility, and is often better than letting a player walk for a theoretical compensation pick in a future draft.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,891
Hingham, MA
First, we don't know whether he doesn't want to be here. Bedard claims that is the case; Mike Reiss claims the opposite.

As for the tag itself, the reason players don't like it is that it caps their guaranteed money; Onwenu could probably get more guaranteed money on the free agent market, spread out over multiple years. At the same point, the Patriots are certainly well within their rights to use their leverage here. Tag and trade is always a possibility, and is often better than letting a player walk for a theoretical compensation pick in a future draft.
Agree, just saying IF it is the case.
 

MuppetAsteriskTalk

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2015
5,468
Take a QB at 3, tackle in rounds 2 and 4, WR in rounds 3 and 5 etc

can you get two opening day starters at T and WR? No probably not. But one decent prospect with starting potential and a developmental guy or two? Seems feasible albeit unlikely that they’d hit just those 3 positions and ignore the other holes on the roster

Definitely need to draft 2-3 tackles, barring something unexpected with veterans as they have nothing there
Maybe my assumptions are wrong, and I'm sure there are exceptions that could be cited, but I've always thought a round 4 OT is typically slotted in as a G in the NFL.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,595
Maybe my assumptions are wrong, and I'm sure there are exceptions that could be cited, but I've always thought a round 4 OT is typically slotted in as a G in the NFL.
It's supposed a deep tackle draft so that could slide back.

PFN has 6 OTs with 1st round grades and 3 with 2nd round grades, so 9 OTs in top 57 on their board. Our 3rd round pick is #68. The #10 OT is down at #94. So there are a lot of them, but if those rankings hold a lot of them will be gone if we don't grab one in the 2nd round.

They have 12 WRs listed in their top 68.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,437
Because a longer term deal gives more security and more guaranteed money. You get franchised before ever signing your big FA deal and get hurt, then that's gonna suck.
It might. But you may get a bigger overall contract with less guaranteed money as a FA, as opposed to a massive one year deal via the franchise tag.

Like if he gets tagged it might be something like $18.2 million guaranteed for one year, but as a FA, he might get offered a 3-year deal worth $45 million, but it's possible that less than the $18.2 million is guaranteed. Or even if a little more is guaranteed, the team has control over him for 3 years, as opposed to the player getting a huge one year guaranteed payday and then he becomes a free agent, whereupon he could get another huge payday.

It's a risk for sure. But it's not like the guys getting franchised are getting ripped off - they're suddenly making top dollar for their position.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,687
Newton
First, we don't know whether he doesn't want to be here. Bedard claims that is the case; Mike Reiss claims the opposite.
The one thing we do know is that if Onwenu is allowed to leave, Bedard will claim how right he was the whole way. In a market chock full of insufferable and thin-skinned writers, Bedard takes the cake.

It's a risk for sure. But it's not like the guys getting franchised are getting ripped off - they're suddenly making top dollar for their position.
It's also one season, so it's not like you are tying up long-term dollars. By then, maybe Sow or Mafi or another guy they get this year steps up. I also think that ending the dysfunction on the offensive side of the ball--which includes the OL--is as important than talent acquisition.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,725
I think you can definitely get a good tackle in the 2nd... after that I am dubious.
I think you can definitely get WR talent through the early 3rd.

After that it's mostly punts. As an example... I don't particularly want them to draft any later round WRs this year. You have Douglas, you have Boutte, you'll likely have Juju, and Parker, plus Thornton will still be competing for a spot. If you're drafting a WR in the 1st three rounds, and probably at least making some effort to re-sign Bourne or add a FA WR..... that's too crowded a room for a 5th, 6th, 7th rounder to be a good use of a pick likely, you already have your developmental guys, your vets and your impact rookie (you hope).

I would kind of expect the 1st three rounds to be some combination of QB/WR/T, a chance of another T in the 4th if someone falls, but the mid-late rounds I'd be expecting the value to be on defense, RB, TE or maybe interior line if they think they need more depth.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,595
It might. But you may get a bigger overall contract with less guaranteed money as a FA, as opposed to a massive one year deal via the franchise tag.

Like if he gets tagged it might be something like $18.2 million guaranteed for one year, but as a FA, he might get offered a 3-year deal worth $45 million, but it's possible that less than the $18.2 million is guaranteed. Or even if a little more is guaranteed, the team has control over him for 3 years, as opposed to the player getting a huge one year guaranteed payday and then he becomes a free agent, whereupon he could get another huge payday.

It's a risk for sure. But it's not like the guys getting franchised are getting ripped off - they're suddenly making top dollar for their position.
I would 100% bet that the guaranteed money is going to be more on the longer deal because that's the entire point. I can't see a player saying "Nah, I don't want $18.2M guaranteed for 1 year, I want $18M guaranteed for 3,"

The players point though is they want the choice. I do agree that they should work to get that out of the CBA if it's that big of an issue to them.
 
Oct 12, 2023
801
I think you can definitely get a good tackle in the 2nd... after that I am dubious.
I think you can definitely get WR talent through the early 3rd.

After that it's mostly punts. As an example... I don't particularly want them to draft any later round WRs this year. You have Douglas, you have Boutte, you'll likely have Juju, and Parker, plus Thornton will still be competing for a spot. If you're drafting a WR in the 1st three rounds, and probably at least making some effort to re-sign Bourne or add a FA WR..... that's too crowded a room for a 5th, 6th, 7th rounder to be a good use of a pick likely, you already have your developmental guys, your vets and your impact rookie (you hope).

I would kind of expect the 1st three rounds to be some combination of QB/WR/T, a chance of another T in the 4th if someone falls, but the mid-late rounds I'd be expecting the value to be on defense, RB, TE or maybe interior line if they think they need more depth.
As far as WR goes, there’s a lot that needs to shake out obviously with the veterans and whether or not the new GM is willing to eat dead cap to get rid of Parker or less likely JJSS. But the presence of a total flop like Thornton or a non entity like Boutte shouldn’t preclude them from taking a developmental guy. That’s kind of like saying the Pats shouldn’t have drafted Douglas (or tried to take someone higher) because they had Tre Nixon on the roster. I guess if Groh/Wolfe are the guys and they don’t want to give up on their previous acquisitions, maybe they think they’re in a better spot than it appears at WR. But once you get into the later rounds, you need to just find good players regardless of position

tackle they have almost literally nothing on the roster and while I expect them to overpay for bad veteran options (simply due to needing to fill a need and no actual supply of talent), they badly need a developmental guy or three on the bottom of the roster or practice squad. You can never have too many linemen in camp and other than Strange, Andrews and Sow, I don’t think any of these guys have proven to be worth keeping. Maybe Mafi.

Regardless, there’s so much to do with respect to veterans that any real position projections other than QB are purely speculative but my overarching point was that it wouldn’t be crazy to have a rookie QB, two rookie tackles and 2 rookie WR on the 53 man roster next year. I would only expect (hope? Dream?) of two of those guys actually being useful starters simply because most picks fail.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,725
As far as WR goes, there’s a lot that needs to shake out obviously with the veterans and whether or not the new GM is willing to eat dead cap to get rid of Parker or less likely JJSS. But the presence of a total flop like Thornton or a non entity like Boutte shouldn’t preclude them from taking a developmental guy. That’s kind of like saying the Pats shouldn’t have drafted Douglas (or tried to take someone higher) because they had Tre Nixon on the roster. I guess if Groh/Wolfe are the guys and they don’t want to give up on their previous acquisitions, maybe they think they’re in a better spot than it appears at WR. But once you get into the later rounds, you need to just find good players regardless of position

tackle they have almost literally nothing on the roster and while I expect them to overpay for bad veteran options (simply due to needing to fill a need and no actual supply of talent), they badly need a developmental guy or three on the bottom of the roster or practice squad. You can never have too many linemen in camp and other than Strange, Andrews and Sow, I don’t think any of these guys have proven to be worth keeping. Maybe Mafi.

Regardless, there’s so much to do with respect to veterans that any real position projections other than QB are purely speculative but my overarching point was that it wouldn’t be crazy to have a rookie QB, two rookie tackles and 2 rookie WR on the 53 man roster next year. I would only expect (hope? Dream?) of two of those guys actually being useful starters simply because most picks fail.
I mean... if Boutte is a non-entity, so are all the late rounders in this draft. Sure you COULD roll the dice and have 3,4 guys compete for the last spot in the WR room, but it's probably not a good use of a pick given the huge number of needs on this team. People are treating it like "we need WRs so draft a ton", but... we don't need more long-term developmental guys, or #3 WRs, we have several, we also have several #3 types, and we might sign a WR. A guy taken late rounds at WR would face a huge uphill battle to make the roster, where we have a number of positions where we don't have any depth or developmental players, and a guy would easily make and improve the roster.
 
Oct 12, 2023
801
First, we don't know whether he doesn't want to be here. Bedard claims that is the case; Mike Reiss claims the opposite.

As for the tag itself, the reason players don't like it is that it caps their guaranteed money; Onwenu could probably get more guaranteed money on the free agent market, spread out over multiple years. At the same point, the Patriots are certainly well within their rights to use their leverage here. Tag and trade is always a possibility, and is often better than letting a player walk for a theoretical compensation pick in a future draft.
makes an interesting argument though since tackle is a higher pay scale. Do the Pats try to pay Onwenu as a tackle or guard? Does he see himself as a tackle or guard? Nobody is going to pay him 18M to play guard, maybe half that. But if teams are convinced he can/will play tackle long term, he could definitely get 15M AAV+ given the terrible market.


for what it’s worth, I think the Pats would be crazy to let Onwenu go without trying every route to keep him. Even if it’s the seldom used transition tag (I’d outright franchise tag him). He’s a plus player at a position of extreme need where veteran options are much much worse than he is and likely will be significantly more overpaid relative to value provided.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,246
Seems we don't really have a UFA thread yet so guess this is as good as any.

Looking over the FA list, this is the year to retool a defense. I'd imagine some of the currently potential FAs will get tagged but even so there are so many quality options at all levels of defense this is probably the best area to "burn cash" this off-season and dump draft capital into offense.
For those lamenting possibly losing Dugger, he could be be upgraded with Antoine Winfield Jr. out of TB or Xavier McKinney out of NYG. Both are much, much better in coverage and still good enough vs. the run.

Need an edge, look no further than Josh Allen, decent chance he gets the franchise unless JAX tag Ridley instead, if not he would be my #1 target as Judon is coming off significant injury and isn't getting any younger. Allen is a dominant pass rusher who is also stout vs. the run. An extreme rarity these days. Danielle Hunter is another elite pass rusher though not as good vs. the run. If you want interior Defensive help none better than Chris Jones but this UFA class is loaded as well with Christian Wilkins, Leonard Williams and DJ Reader all likely available. At CB you have Jaylon Johnson, the best CB no one has ever heard of, though he is a likely tag candidate, along with LaJarius Snead, Kendall Fuller and Awuzie all potential CB2s.

LB group is somewhat lacking, there are some good 2 down LBs but really the only 3 down LB looks to be Patrick Queen a close comp of his is Jamie Collins in his prime.

As great as this class looks on the defensive side it is basically that barren on the offensive side.
Only WRs I'd be interested in, assuming Higgins and Ridley are frachised, are Gabe Davis who can stretch the field and is dominant in the run game basically a better Devante Parker, and Curtis Samuel a great slot option to pair with Pop and perhaps even handle some 3rd down RB snaps as he is a true swiss army knife. Outside of those two there are some depth OL options but nothing really exciting besides some RBs which are typically the worst values in FA.

Given they don't have a ton of needs on the defensive side of the ball I wonder if NE FO gets creative in the trade market and absorbs some bad contracts for picks or players that they couldn't otherwise acquire.

The draft is getting all the hype but NE is more than a draft away from putting together a competitive offense. It will be very interesting to see what they do in FA/trades given all their cap space but not obvious fits in FA.
 

k-factory

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2005
1,963
seattle, wa
With a new QB they need to nail the supporting cast around him.
Here is PFF’s FA guide:
https://www.pff.com/nfl/free-agency

On the WR topic: They expect both Tee Higgins and Michael Pittman to be franchise tagged. Which leaves oft-injured Evans who is on the wrong side of 30 and the enigmas in Marquise Brown, Calvin Ridley and Darnell Mooney.
At this point unless BB scoops him up in Atlanta or wherever might as well re-sign Bourne and draft a WR in Rd 3 or later. Not great but the O-line is more crucial.

In terms of tackle the FA class is even more barren. PFF suggests they will franchise Dugger. But Onwenu makes much more sense. Doubt they gamble on old Tyron Smith who probably won’t want to come to a rebuild anyway. But maybe a Jonah Williams helps shore up the line and you get one of the top 5 tackles in the 2nd round?
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,860
In 10 years, Evans has only played less than 15 games once. In that season, he played 13 games. Evans is a get for anyone if Tampa doesn’t keep him.
Evans takes great care of himself. He's stayed light and "pliable". I think TB12 had something to do with that. For 2-3 years, I think he'd be a great get. Buffalo makes sense. He could have a crazy few years in KC.
 
Oct 12, 2023
801
I mean... if Boutte is a non-entity, so are all the late rounders in this draft. Sure you COULD roll the dice and have 3,4 guys compete for the last spot in the WR room, but it's probably not a good use of a pick given the huge number of needs on this team. People are treating it like "we need WRs so draft a ton", but... we don't need more long-term developmental guys, or #3 WRs, we have several, we also have several #3 types, and we might sign a WR. A guy taken late rounds at WR would face a huge uphill battle to make the roster, where we have a number of positions where we don't have any depth or developmental players, and a guy would easily make and improve the roster.
you could make that “Boutte” argument for almost any position. Why draft a RB? They have Harris. Why draft a safety? They have Bledsoe. Why draft a DL they have Pharms. Why draft a developmental tackle, they have Lowe. They have Bolden and Austin at CB.

they have 1st and 2nd year players at almost every position (TE and EDGE are the exceptions).

personally, I’m glad they drafted Douglas despite having Nixon on the roster last year as a developmental guy

I get that’s there’s limited playing time and reps for positions so you can’t bring in 100 guys. But there will be a lot of bodies at all of these positions and the presence of low end young players (like Lowe, Boutte, Wheatley, Harris, Pharms etc) shouldn’t preclude them from taking a shot on a good player if it’s the best guy available on the board in the late rounds.
 
Oct 12, 2023
801
With a new QB they need to nail the supporting cast around him.
Here is PFF’s FA guide:
https://www.pff.com/nfl/free-agency

On the WR topic: They expect both Tee Higgins and Michael Pittman to be franchise tagged. Which leaves oft-injured Evans who is on the wrong side of 30 and the enigmas in Marquise Brown, Calvin Ridley and Darnell Mooney.
At this point unless BB scoops him up in Atlanta or wherever might as well re-sign Bourne and draft a WR in Rd 3 or later. Not great but the O-line is more crucial.

In terms of tackle the FA class is even more barren. PFF suggests they will franchise Dugger. But Onwenu makes much more sense. Doubt they gamble on old Tyron Smith who probably won’t want to come to a rebuild anyway. But maybe a Jonah Williams helps shore up the line and you get one of the top 5 tackles in the 2nd round?
Williams is a mediocre tackle who will get paid well because he’s durable and consistent. Low ceiling, high floor. He’s never particularly great but never really worse than below average which for a starting tackle these days is worth a lot of money. He’s going to get paid B+ money for C level performance. Might be worth it just because you know what you’re getting and the alternatives are all very risky (Becton, Smith) or pretty bad (Nijman, Fant, Wynn)

Not sure Ridley gets franchise tagged. He’s a good player (clearly an upgrade on what the have), but a bit overrated at this point of his career. He’s going to be 30 next year (albeit in December). Seems like a bad investment in any sort of 3+ year contract with the type of AAV #1 WR get.

If I’m Cincy, I’m thinking long and hard about tag and trading Higgins. I don’t think they can justify paying him long term with Chase and Burrow and it’s the best possible draft to try to get a replacement. If they can get a late 1 or early 2 for him, it’s probably worth it. Or run it back with him playing on the tag and let him go for the possible 2026 comp pick. They can afford him on the tag in 2024 but 2025 and beyond having 2 WR + Burrow chewing up 35%+ of their cap seems less than ideal

Pittman seems like a no brainer to get tagged by Indy. Not sure what Tampa does with Evans but I think they try to keep him and Mayfield together if they can squeeze them into their budget