12/21/24
July 28, 2011
Washington Trades Haynesworth to Patriots: A day after trading Donovan McNabb to Minnesota, Washington dealt Albert Haynesworth to New England for a 2013 fifth round pick. "In instances like this, Belichick more often than not knows what he's bringing on," writes Eric Wilbur. "But this ... this is the Great Wall of China of attitude reclamation projects."
The big difference here might be that Albert won't be playing NT in the 3-4, and with Wilfork in the center, he'll have an opportunity to actually make plays as opposed to absorbing blockers the whole time. For an ego-based player, that's a pretty big plus.
I'm pretty stoked we're taking him on; the risk is minimal (we cut him if he sucks) and the reward in the area (interior pass rush) we desperately need help is potentially great. I doubt he's going to make the pro bowl, but as long as he shows up and puts pressure on opposing quarterbacks (even when they line up in those hybrid, 4-3ish schemes), he'll do more than a 5th rounder two years from now would to take some pressure off our good, young secondary.
Woo hoo. The big thing here is that the Patriots don't need him, but he'd be an accessory piece that makes the team better. The same was true for Moss and Corey Dillon; when you build your team around a malcontent, you run the risk of problems, but when you add them on the periphery, you can keep them in check by simply saying their leash is very short.
posted by dfleming at 08:45 AM on July 28, 2011
Haynesworth still has an albatross of a contract. He gets paid far too much to be an accessory piece ($5.4 million this year). He did get a bad deal in Washington. They changed the defense as soon as they signed him, which meant he had no chance of being worth what they were paying him. Still, the guy has serious issues, and I believe he still has some criminal charges pending.
posted by bperk at 10:04 AM on July 28, 2011
Haynesworth still has an albatross of a contract.
Not for the Pats he doesn't: most of the guaranteed money is already paid by Washington and if the dude doesn't show up and work out, they cut him, pay him nothing (or close to) and keep the pick. I can't see a downside unless he turns everyone else into a lockerroom lawyer in 3 weeks.
posted by yerfatma at 10:19 AM on July 28, 2011
I'm pretty stoked we're taking him on.. (we cut him if he sucks).. we desperately need help is potentially great.
There's a lot we's in there my friend.
/just sayin'
posted by BornIcon at 10:23 AM on July 28, 2011
I don't see this one working out for the Patriots. Haynesworth's lay-down-and-stay-down act last season shows he's done.
posted by rcade at 10:36 AM on July 28, 2011
Not for the Pats he doesn't: most of the guaranteed money is already paid by Washington and if the dude doesn't show up and work out, they cut him, pay him nothing (or close to) and keep the pick
The $5.4 million for this year is guaranteed, so I believe they have to pay him that money whether they cut him or not.
posted by bperk at 10:38 AM on July 28, 2011
There's a lot we's in there my friend.
I think the association of self with the team you support is pretty normal behaviour. I'm fully aware that I'm not on or associated with the team, other than I root for them every week.
You can like it or not, but it's not like I've reinvented the wheel.
The $5.4 million for this year is guaranteed, so I believe they have to pay him that money whether they cut him or not.
I believe, as per his contract, his skipping the minicamps in 2010 made his 2011 salary non-guaranteed. I've seen it quoted, but not by a source I trust, so I'm not sure.
posted by dfleming at 11:17 AM on July 28, 2011
Per Andrew Brandt (@adbrandt on twitter) "Redskins have paid Haynesworth $35.6 million in 2 yrs. Patriots acquire him for $12.6 for next 2 yrs, with nothing guaranteed."
posted by apoch at 11:23 AM on July 28, 2011
Remember Randy Moss was thought to be washed up after his Raiders debacle. I'm in the camp of good deal for the Patriots as they're one of the few teams where they might make something of Haynesworth.
posted by jmd82 at 11:29 AM on July 28, 2011
Per Andrew Brandt (@adbrandt on twitter) "Redskins have paid Haynesworth $35.6 million in 2 yrs. Patriots acquire him for $12.6 for next 2 yrs, with nothing guaranteed."
Haynesworth's guaranteed money was widely reported as $41 million; the Redskins have paid him roughly $35 million. So, there would have to be some reason why that money is not guaranteed. I can't find any reliable information about it.
posted by bperk at 12:05 PM on July 28, 2011
I think the association of self with the team you support is pretty normal behaviour. I'm fully aware that I'm not on or associated with the team, other than I root for them every week.
Then you have to be able to say "we suck", "we lost", "we are terrible", instead of "they suck", "they lost", "they are terrible" (if that happens).
posted by grum@work at 12:11 PM on July 28, 2011
No we don't. We're Patriots fans. /smug
posted by yerfatma at 01:24 PM on July 28, 2011
Then you have to be able to say "we suck", "we lost", "we are terrible", instead of "they suck", "they lost", "they are terrible" (if that happens).
I'm not going to claim that I'm consistent enough with my grammar to absolutely follow rules, but I have no ideological problem with accepting defeat, if that's what you're implying. I don't always say we, but do I think that it affects exactly zero people if I do.
posted by dfleming at 02:23 PM on July 28, 2011
Relax, it's not that serious. I say we when it comes to the Mets, Cowboys and Celtics but apparently you don't speak sarcasm.
posted by BornIcon at 02:29 PM on July 28, 2011
Then you have to be able to say "we suck", "we lost", "we are terrible", instead of "they suck", "they lost", "they are terrible" (if that happens).
Those phrases become quite common as a Lions fan.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 03:02 PM on July 28, 2011
I'm excited about watching the Lions with Suh and Fairley this year. You (ying yang mafia and co.) had a good draft. Stanton just has to stay healthy. Please, oh, please!
posted by bperk at 04:29 PM on July 28, 2011
Not Stanton, Stafford. It was a long off-season.
posted by bperk at 04:58 PM on July 28, 2011
Last thing I read was that the deal hadn't gone through yet. Even if it does, it is dependent upon a physical. Also, Haynesworth would have to pass the conditioning run, at which he typically has had a lack of success. Looks like a low-cost, high risk sort of deal that could pay off quite well.
posted by Howard_T at 05:34 PM on July 28, 2011
No we don't. We're Patriots fans. /smug
posted by yerfatma at 01:24 PM on July 28
Smug? Maybe. Arrogant, pompous, and obnoxious? Definitely. ; )
j/k
posted by steelergirl at 06:22 PM on July 28, 2011
You forgot beautiful.
posted by yerfatma at 10:41 PM on July 28, 2011
Yes,I was remiss in mentioning beautiful. It must be that pure New England air.
posted by steelergirl at 05:59 AM on July 29, 2011
The Pats have proven numerous times that they can effectively utilize undesirables, but this is ill advised IMO.
There is still not enough veteran leadership on the defense to help keep a guy like Haynesworth in line if things start to get ugly.
Maybe he'll pick up his game going from Snyder to Kraft (he doesn't deserve that kind of upgrade in a million years). If the Pats can get his motor going, they could spin him off for a third rounder to a team that needs line help and is foolish enough to bite on a deal.