New England Patriots Thread Mod Warning Post #253

ScrubsfanChris

I don't know, that last season with the Pats he looked completely done.
Receiving yards were down 40% on the previous year and just 3TDs

Hope he does well, but I'm thinking he had no intention of coming back but only doing it now because it's Florida

eagle eye

Two of my favourite players of all time but I'm hoping it all goes wrong in Tampa. I honestly don't want them to do well.

I'm more interested in our Pats moving on and hopefully still dominating the AFC.

I'd have refused to let Gronk go there. I'd have traded him somewhere else instead like Carolina or Atlanta or even New Orleans.

dh1985

I think that's a good move for the bucs. Gronk is still only 30. Not that old for a TE. He has had some injuries and slowed down but he is a big unit and hard managed and can surely still be effective blocking. And might be refreshed after time out.
Would be happy.to see himself and brady go well. The backbone of the Pat's offence for many years along with Edelman. Couldn't resent a run of success for either away from foxboro.

StringerBell

Shot to nothing for the Bucs, great move by them in all honesty.

Foxtrol

eagle eye wrote: »

Two of my favourite players of all time but I'm hoping it all goes wrong in Tampa. I honestly don't want them to do well.

I'm more interested in our Pats moving on and hopefully still dominating the AFC.

I'd have refused to let Gronk go there. I'd have traded him somewhere else instead like Carolina or Atlanta or even New Orleans.

By doing that they would be cutting off their nose to spite their face. Gronk said Tampa with Brady or nowhere.

The Patriots organisation have no right to feel bitter about him looking for a trade away now anyway, sure they agreed to trade him to the Lions in 2018 and it only fell through when Gronk said he'd retire.

Gronk's trade value has plummeted in the interim though:

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1252707661705076738?s=20

Podge_irl

eagle eye wrote: »

I'd have refused to let Gronk go there. I'd have traded him somewhere else instead like Carolina or Atlanta or even New Orleans.

They would have struggled to trade a retired player.

eagle eye

Podge_irl wrote:

They would have struggled to trade a retired player.

He isn't retired.

Podge_irl

eagle eye wrote: »

He isn't retired.

And if they tried to trade him elsewhere he would be. They had no way of getting anything from anyone else for him.

eagle eye

Podge_irl wrote:

And if they tried to trade him elsewhere he would be. They had no way of getting anything from anyone else for him.

They'd get a comp pick eventually.

The_Dave

Foxtrol wrote: »

By doing that they would be cutting off their nose to spite their face. Gronk said Tampa with Brady or nowhere.

The Patriots organisation have no right to feel bitter about him looking for a trade away now anyway, sure they agreed to trade him to the Lions in 2018 and it only fell through when Gronk said he'd retire.

Gronk's trade value has plummeted in the interim though:

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1252707661705076738?s=20

It's hard to compare, he's that much older and the contract has only 1 remaining on it

Podge_irl

eagle eye wrote: »

They'd get a comp pick eventually.

Get a comp pick for what?

The options were
A) trade him to the Bucs for whatever they can get
him staying retired and they get nothing

eagle eye

Podge_irl wrote:

Get a comp pick for what?

When his contract ended the Patriots would get a comp pick.

adrian522

eagle eye wrote: »

When his contract ended the Patriots would get a comp pick.

Only if he sat out the 2020 season, then he signed somewhere else and even then it depends on the value of the contract and who else NE lose and sign that off season.

eagle eye

adrian522 wrote:

Only if he sat out the 2020 season, then he signed somewhere else and even then it depends on the value of the contract and who else NE lose and sign that off season.

He had a big contract and he doesn't have to sign with another team. We're talking 4th rounder at worst.

Podge_irl

I was under the impression you do not get comp picks for retirements. Why would you?

adrian522

Podge_irl wrote: »

I was under the impression you do not get comp picks for retirements. Why would you?

You dont. You only get comp picks for players that sign elsewhere and only where you lose more free agents than you sign.

eagle eye

adrian522 wrote:

You dont. You only get comp picks for players that sign elsewhere and only where you lose more free agents than you sign.

Unless it's changed you are wrong. Can you link me to where this printed?

Foxtrol

The_Dave wrote: »

It's hard to compare, he's that much older and the contract has only 1 remaining on it

He isn't much older, only 2 years have passed and he only took 1 season of damage followed by a year of rest. The difference in contract is only 1 year as it was paused while he was retired.

adrian522

eagle eye wrote: »

Unless it's changed you are wrong. Can you link me to where this printed?

It hasn't changed its always been like this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_Draft#Compensatory_picks

In addition to the 32 selections in each of the seven rounds, a total of 32 compensatory picks are awarded to teams based on the players they lost and gained in free agency. The league defines a class of unrestricted free agents as "compensatory free agents ("CFA"). Teams that have lost more compensatory free agents than they signed in the previous year receive between one and four picks somewhere in the third through seventh rounds.[68] Teams that gain and lose equal numbers of players but lose higher-valued players can also be awarded a single seventh-round pick. Compensatory picks are awarded each year at the NFL annual meeting which is held at the end of March; typically, about three or four weeks before the draft. Compensatory picks can be traded; this began with the 2017 NFL Draft.[

ELM327

eagle eye wrote: »

Unless it's changed you are wrong. Can you link me to where this printed?

Plenty of sources online for this, not only every draft and wiki.
Here's the first source on google.

https://www.profootballrumors.com/2020/03/nfl-announces-compensatory-picks-for-2020-draft


You categorically do not get comp picks for players that retire or that you trade away. You only get comp picks for players that you lose in FA and if you do not sign a comparable FA

eagle eye

adrian522 wrote:

It hasn't changed its always been like this.

That says players you lost in free agency. Once a players contract expires and he does not resign you have lost him in free agency.

adrian522

eagle eye wrote: »

That says players you lost in free agency. Once a players contract expires and he does not resign you have lost him in free agency.

Thats incorrect, if he doesn't sign elsewhere you don't anything for him. Even if he does sign elsewhere but it happens after June 1st you still don't get anything for him.

There are no examples that I know of where retired players resulted in a comp pick.

There are only comp picks per year, much more than this retire every year,

eagle eye

adrian522 wrote:

Thats incorrect, if he doesn't sign elsewhere you don't anything for him.

Show me where it says that.

adrian522

Definition of Compensatory Free agent below.

Compensatory Free Agent (“CFA”) shall be defined as an Unrestricted Free Agent (“UFA”) who: (i) signed with a new Club during the prior free agency signing period […] prior to 4:00 p.m., New York time, on the Monday following the NFL Draft for that League Year1 […]; and (ii) ranked within the top 35%2 of all League players […]. Clubs that lose to other Clubs a greater number of CFAs than they sign or acquire from other Clubs shall be eligible to receive a Compensatory Draft Selection in the College Draft to be held in the following League Year subject to the provisions set forth below.

https://overthecap.com/the-basics-and-methodology-of-projecting-the-nfls-compensatory-draft-picks/

Foxtrol

eagle eye wrote: »

Unless it's changed you are wrong. Can you link me to where this printed?

What adrian said is pretty accurate, the only difference is that the FAs are banded in rounds and cancel out. So if you sign 12 backup level talent FAs it doesn't negate your star QB that signs for another team.

adrian522

eagle eye wrote: »

Show me where it says that.

Show me a single example of a retired player resulting in a comp pick.

Foxtrol

adrian522 wrote: »

Thats incorrect, if he doesn't sign elsewhere you don't anything for him. Even if he does sign elsewhere but it happens after June 1st you still don't get anything for him.

There are no examples that I know of where retired players resulted in a comp pick.

There are only comp picks per year, much more than this retire every year,

That is because contracts are paused, the player is moved to retired list, and teams eat the dead cap once a player retires. The contract never runs out because it isn't running so they can never become an FA.

eagle eye

adrian522 wrote:

Show me a single example of a retired player resulting in a comp pick.

I asked you to show me where it says you don't.

adrian522

eagle eye wrote: »

I asked you to show me where it says you don't.

Post 3985 above, quoted from the CBA.

Foxtrol

eagle eye wrote: »

I asked you to show me where it says you don't.

If your logic was correct then Gronk would be a free agent this year and the Bucs wouldn't have had to trade for him because he would be a FA.

The last year of his contract was paused when he retired with the Patriots, like all players, so now he still has a year left when he returned