Patriots Interested "Red Rifle" Trade If Brady Leaves
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
He was bad but his weapons were also pretty bad. Tyler Boyd is good and the RB too, but no real second receiving option minus Green.
I mean his weapons were not any worse than Brady’s especially when you consider he had a very effective running game.
I agree with your overall point in the first post that this would be a curios trade. If Brady leaves, the rebuild should start and they should just play Stidham.
“The Colts and Patriots are other teams that may have interest in Dalton, Ian Rapoport of NFL Network reports.”
Thread title is misleading. This might be Rapoport throwing something against the wall as he sometimes does. Wake me when it comes from Schefter.
Thread title is misleading. This might be Rapoport throwing something against the wall as he sometimes does. Wake me when it comes from Schefter.
I agree his weapons were not worse than Brady's. But they were similar and both bad.
I agree Stidham is the most sensible plan B.
Bingo. Dalton’s 2020 cap number is $17.7 million. Nobody is trading for that contract; he’s getting cut.
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cincinnati-bengals/andy-dalton-7750/
Not many teams will offer Dalton a chance to compete for the starting job, so I could definitely see him landing here if TB12 is out.
Rappaport is not alone on this. Felger on the radio a few days back was talking about some rumblings he'd heard "around" Foxboro about Dalton. Plus, Greg Bedard wrote this about the Pats in a recent Q&A:
I don't think there's a point talking about this until Brady leaves, but if we win the SB next year with Dalton, heads everywhere are going to combust. the guy I think is beyond salvageable from a coaching standpoint, but what do I know?
There's a big difference between the Patriots being legit interested in Dalton and media members throwing stuff against the wall saying they "may" have interest.
Exactly. Take that $17.7 million and add Brady's cap charge and the fact we'll be trading assets? No thanks. I don't hate Dalton, but we're not paying him $25 million and trading picks or players to do it.
Please no Andy Dalton. What has he done for the Bengals? Is that a joke or a platitude?
On the plus side, every time I hear his name I think of red rocket from South Park.
On the plus side, every time I hear his name I think of red rocket from South Park.
I can’t name a team that I think would do so. Rapoport’s unnamed sources notwithstanding, I’d expect the Bears and Colts to stick with their incumbents for another season rather than trading an asset for the right to pay Andy Dalton $17.5 million. And while some of us think Dalton might make sense on the post-Brady Pats, none of us want him at that price.
I think Dalton gets cut and signs a deal that makes him the league’s best-paid backup (assuming Foles will start in Jacksonville), but I don’t see him getting any material guaranteed money beyond 2020 from anyone. So the flexibility of a one-year deal isn’t something you need to give the Bengals an asset to get.
Yup, he's about to transition to the clipboard carrier / training camp competition stage of his career.
A full on rebuild is the correct move if Brady leaves, but does Bill Belichick have any real interest in tearing down the roster, finding a QB, and starting from ground zero again?
Dalton seems to make sense in that he won’t cost a ton, either in draft capital or salary cap, he’s young enough where it’s definitely feasible he can either be a bridge QB or steer the ship for 2-3 years, and can be a competitive QB that can lead a team to the playoffs when surrounded by talent.
It can also backfire, and he can put the Pats on the wheel of mediocrity where they’re not good enough to win anything meaningful, but too good to get high draft picks and actually turn the team around. Football’s version of purgatory.
Dalton seems to make sense in that he won’t cost a ton, either in draft capital or salary cap, he’s young enough where it’s definitely feasible he can either be a bridge QB or steer the ship for 2-3 years, and can be a competitive QB that can lead a team to the playoffs when surrounded by talent.
It can also backfire, and he can put the Pats on the wheel of mediocrity where they’re not good enough to win anything meaningful, but too good to get high draft picks and actually turn the team around. Football’s version of purgatory.
Spending $31 million on the QB position necessitates cuts elsewhere, which would have a detrimental effect on a team that would be reliant on the defense and running game to win games.
Exactly!
"May" have interest means zero. Especially from Rapaport.
I think I've heard some media member speculate they "may" have interest in basically every QB that is remotely available if they lose Brady.
Cincy can redo his contract, turn some of the $17.7M into a signing bonus--say half. Then trade him and his cost to NE (or whoever) could be like $9M, on a one year deal. That plus Brady's cap cost wouldn't be onerous and could give them one more season to see what Stidham is.
Kyed says it better:
https://nesn.com/2020/03/andy-dalton-uninspiring-but-wouldnt-be-patriots-worst-backup-plan/
Kyed says it better:
https://nesn.com/2020/03/andy-dalton-uninspiring-but-wouldnt-be-patriots-worst-backup-plan/
I guess my question would be--why would Cincy take "almost nothing" in trade for him if they have to eat a portion of his deal when they could just cut him?
Correct - they can cut him for free. There is no point to them trading him. Paying half his salary is not worth a 5th round pick or whatever
I'll take Teddy Bridgewater over Andy Dalton, thank you. (Pats liked him coming out of college, FWIW).
Which is exactly what’s going to happen. They’re going to flush him from their cap to add as much help as they can for their shiny new QB.
I recall Mike Lombardi recently saying the opposite, that the Pats weren't interested in Bridgewater out of college because they thought he wasn't a scheme fit. It was almost a throwaway line in an Athletic story, I'll see if I can track it down.
Bridgewater is going to command $20M+ a year. Added to Brady's cap cost that's....a lot.
If I'm Dalton I might sign on with the Pats on a really really cheap one year deal. Even though he's not terrific, with the strength of the Pats organizations it would be very easy to imagine him having a statistically solid year for an 11-5 team and then being able to sign one last pretty big contract somewhere.
There's almost literally no reason for the Patriots to trade for Dalton. There won't be a trade market for him. Why give up assets for the right to pay him $17m a year, when you can pick him up for nothing and almost certainly pay him a lot less than that?
Found it, though it's behind a paywall. Was in an article about Jimmy G.
Relevant quote from Lombardi, on the QBs Pats were looking at heading into that draft:
https://theathletic.com/1567397/2020/01/28/the-mcginn-files-hes-ok-a-dink-and-dunk-guy-but-i-love-the-kid-as-a-person-the-talk-about-jimmy-g-before-the-draft?source=shared-article
The Pats are probably division favorites next season without Brady if they find a cost-controlled QB who’s within shouting distance of league average and use the savings to address other needs.
Obviously, it’s a lot easier to say “find a cost-controlled QB who’s within shouting distance of league average” than it is to, you know, actually find one. But I think the Pats are much more likely to bring in a veteran like Dalton to compete with Stidham for the starting job, and hope that one of them fits the bill, than they are to blow up the whole thing. Besides, it’s not like there’s a lot of evidence that multi-year tanking is an effective strategy in the NFL; the opportunity cost of trying to compete is not that great.
When was the last time the Pats brought a QB in, with the intention of maybe starting him, after the QB had been a legit starter for another NFL team?
It's been like...45 years? Just a random thought.
It's been like...45 years? Just a random thought.
Try 50 ... it was Joe Kapp
What a list since ... there were FIVE starting quarterbacks in 1987, one of which I have absolutely no memory of
https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/passing#average-yards-to-sticks
Bridgewater threw on average -3.3 yards beyond the sticks, meaning his receivers had to get 3.3 yards of YAC to get a first down; that is the worst mark in the NFL, the second worst was Jimmy at -2.5. As some of it might've been scheme as Brees was at -2, and Brady was at -1.6 so he is not throwing very deep either, but Bridgewater seems to be ultraconservative. Not that you necessarily want to see a positive number there,, but -3.3 is really low.
1987 was the year of the replacement players.
Grogan and Eason each struggled with injuries. They had drafted Tom Ramsey, but he wasn’t very good in the games he started. Bleier and later Doug Flutie were brought in as replacement players.
Doesn't this kind of depend on the CBA? Three caveats: (1) I am a dummy, (2) the NFL salary formula is confusing, (3) I don't follow the Bengals (or know anything about their salary history over the past couple of years).
All those caveats aside, don't teams have to spend a set amount over each four year period of the expiring CBA? I think it's 80% of the salary cap. If the Bengals aren't there now, they could use some of that money (that they have to spend to get to the salary floor) to pay off Dalton which will in turn free up a portion of his salary to spend this year, while also acquiring a late draft pick or two. The alternative would be to spend that money (that they have to spend) to sign free agents, but those free agents would likely be for multi-year contracts which could in turn impact their salary for future years.
The CBA has no bearing. They can cut Dalton and not be on the hook for a single dollar.
Right, but are they on the hook within the expiring CBA to spend up to the salary floor for the past four year period?
Whenever I see this thread title pop up I get this "Sox are now the Rays and Pats will become the Bengals" wave of throw up in my mouth.
Please, no Dalton.
And yup, it's true, being the Rays wouldn't actually suck in 2020 and two players on offense doesn't actually mean the Pats are the Bengals. It's my mouth, whether it's rational for it to be pukey or not.
Please, no Dalton.
And yup, it's true, being the Rays wouldn't actually suck in 2020 and two players on offense doesn't actually mean the Pats are the Bengals. It's my mouth, whether it's rational for it to be pukey or not.
You are right as always. Just some numbers in case anyone is interested.
As I understand it, the salary floor is 89% of the salary cap for the combined four year period (2017-2020). Based on a salary cap of $201.2 for this year, I calculate the total salary cap as $733.6 million for the four year period. 89% of this would represent a floor of $652.90.
According to Over the Cap, for 2017, the Bengals active spending was $154,869,317. For 2018, it was $167,673,608. For 2019, it was $166,446,832. For 2020, it is currently $163,157,261. That's a total of $652 million already for the four years (hitting the floor) with $44 million in cap space for this year on it's own (including the roll-over amount). Now if they cut Dalton outright, they will drop below the floor. That's $18 million that they will have to spend this year, but that will be no problem to overcome.
The floor is cash, not cap. They spent $180MM+ in cash in 2018 and 2019, so they're even closer to the floor than your analysis says, if not already over. They are lower in 2020 cash, but it's not hard to up your cash (with or without upping your current cap). And Burrow alone will represent 25MM+ in cash.