Prescott Burgess Traded To Pats For 7Th Rd Pick

[I AM LEGEND]

just went to the pats board where this is a pretty big topic

some of them seem to think this is about learning about the Ravens

MORE people think this is about learning about REX and his schemes


kill 2 birds with one stone..smart thinking bill belichick

[BloodRaven]

The Pats are very good at evaluating talent. Burgess isnt just a special teamer, you guys seem to forget that he played like he was possessed in the pre-season.

Barring injury he will start one day next to Mayo mark my words hes that good, think about it... the Pats [i]traded for him..[/i]

[Bltravens]

This is some of the dumbest most contradicting trash ever. We dont play Kruger cuz he doesnt play ST, so we trade a guy who outside of Ayenbedejo is arguably the best STer we got for a 7th round pick when we used a 6th on him. Then we pick up a TE with a career 11 catches who is going to take Burgess's old roster spot meaning Kruger still wont even dress. And if they do dress Kruger and sit Curtis then why the hell did they pick him up. Ontop of that we play the Pats in 2 weeks, so you give them a linebacker with talent whos been in our system for 2 years. Also really what the hell are you going to find with two 7th round picks, those guys dont even make it past the 1st cut 90% of the time, and dont tell me its for the other 10%.

Vent over I apologize.

[Purple Punishment]

you sir make an excellent point. I dont like the trade either. I think Burgess was playing pretty well.

[YYZ66]

[quote name='Purple Punishment' date='23 September 2009 - 01:47 AM' timestamp='1253681277' post='240187']
you sir make an excellent point. I dont like the trade either. I think Burgess was playing pretty well.
[/quote]

Same here. I'm against anything that helps Bill Belicheat and the New England Cheatriots!!!
Especially 2 weeks before we play them!
In Ozzie we trust, but I'm very confused on this one......

[darklight1216]

[quote name='Bltravens' date='22 September 2009 - 11:14 PM' timestamp='1253675674' post='240150']
This is some of the dumbest most contradicting trash ever. We dont play Kruger cuz he doesnt play ST, so we trade a guy who outside of Ayenbedejo is arguably the best STer we got for a 7th round pick when we used a 6th on him. Then we pick up a TE with a career 11 catches who is going to take Burgess's old roster spot meaning Kruger still wont even dress. And if they do dress Kruger and sit Curtis then why the hell did they pick him up. Ontop of that we play the Pats in 2 weeks, so you give them a linebacker with talent whos been in our system for 2 years. Also really what the hell are you going to find with two 7th round picks, those guys dont even make it past the 1st cut 90% of the time, and dont tell me its for the other 10%.

Vent over I apologize.
[/quote]
First of all:

[img]http://dogbar.com/prodimages/large__Loopies_ChillPillBright.jpg[/img]

You made some good points in your post.
I have to admit that when I first read my text message telling me about the deal, I started thinking about the Oakland Raiders.
That is a scary thought, let me tell you...

Btw, please do not post around the profanity filters.

[wbirkhead]

OK guys, here's my views on all the different aspects of this move.

1) The coaches/FO decided it was time to have Kruger on the active roster, so a LB had to go. My guess is it was between Burgess and Ayanbadejo, and even though the last 2 games Burgess was playing well on ST, BA is a ST Pro-Bowler.

2) We were going to release him, so getting a 7th round pick (for Ozzie to work his magic with) instead of nothing is great. As far as the Pats are concerned, they probably thought he wouldn't clear waivers so they offered a 7th. There are a few teams ahead of the Pats in Waiver priority that probably would have been interested. Jets (he knows Rex's system and offers great versatility) or a few teams that are brand new to the 3-4 and need versatile linebackers who know the 3-4 (Denver, GB).

3) Furthermore, the Pats need LB depth in the worst way, Burgess knows the 3-4, can play both ILB and OLB in it, and most importantly knows Rex's/the Ravens version of the 3-4. Yeah it's too bad they'll get some info on our scheme for next week, but we don't play the Pats very often. I think the Rex factor as well as his versatility (ILB, OLB, solid ST) were why the Pats traded for him.

4) Edgar Jones never really worked out at TE and LJ just can't seem to shake this current injury. You know how Cam loves the 2 TE set, so they clearly wanted a TE that can both block and catch passes which Curtis can do.

[Runnin Raven]

Obviously Ozzie knows what he's doing. I just thought Burgess was worth more than a 7th rounder. Guess you take what the market gives if he was gonna be released anyway. I do wonder why the guy with all the ST tackles gets released though. Someone else needs to step up.

[ravensfan160]

They said on the Baltimore Sun's website that a possible reason for the trade was that they had decided to get rid of Burgess in favor of Curtis. If they just released him Cleveland may very well have picked him up.

So the people who think Burgess will give information to the Patriots for when we play them in a few weeks, you're probably right. But at least they aren't a team in our division we play twice a year.

Also, I'm not so sure Burgess has all that much to tell. He was injured much of last year and this year it looks like our own defensive players don't understand our defense at times. Mattison is new to being a DC in the NFL so I don't know if he has any tendencies to exploit yet. He's still trying to figure things out himself so anything Burgess can tell about our defense is minimal. Now he may have knowledge of Rex Ryan which is far more intriging to the Patriots.

[WinnipegRaven]

[quote name='RonTN226' date='22 September 2009 - 06:00 PM' timestamp='1253664040' post='240086']
First of all, why would the Patriots want Burgess at all? I don't really see what he has to offer. Atleast for a 7th round pick.[/quote]
They are extremely thin at LB, especially since Mayo went down.

So what with LJ now? Heap is playing like his old self if you ask me... I thought LJ was getting better, but its almost like he's just eating up a roster spot.

[flynismo]

I doubt we resign LJ.

[Marc2k6]

I do not think we picked this guy up to be a Todd Heap or even a L.J. Smith. I think he will be used more as a blocker, special teams and depth at TE, we do not need 10 LB's at some point somebody was going to go.

[macbrak]

We need depth at tight end. Burgess is/was playing for his professional life in preseason and every game. His number has been on the list since BA was signed.

The fact that we can get a pick and a player not going to a division team in one swoop for someone who'd be on the open market anyway is awesome.

[Rob H]

[quote name='Bltravens' date='22 September 2009 - 11:14 PM' timestamp='1253675674' post='240150']
This is some of the dumbest most contradicting trash ever. We dont play Kruger cuz he doesnt play ST, so we trade a guy who outside of Ayenbedejo is arguably the best STer we got for a 7th round pick when we used a 6th on him. Then we pick up a TE with a career 11 catches who is going to take Burgess's old roster spot meaning Kruger still wont even dress. And if they do dress Kruger and sit Curtis then why the hell did they pick him up. Ontop of that we play the Pats in 2 weeks, so you give them a linebacker with talent whos been in our system for 2 years. Also really what the hell are you going to find with two 7th round picks, those guys dont even make it past the 1st cut 90% of the time, and dont tell me its for the other 10%.

Vent over I apologize.
[/quote]

A lot of good points made in a pretty condensed vent session...

[Ravens52]

hope he gets some playing time there.

[smashmouth]

If I'm not mistaken, Curtis was on the PS before we was able to get Devon Drew back. Correct me if I'm wrong please. If this is the case maybe we seen something we liked in him. Afterall Ozzie wanted his draft pick more for the PS, and I'm sure he already knew that he was going to cut a LB to be able to pick Curtis back up.

[baltiMORE RAVENS]

[quote name='smashmouth' date='24 September 2009 - 05:26 AM' timestamp='1253784393' post='240587']
If I'm not mistaken, Curtis was on the PS before we was able to get Devon Drew back. Correct me if I'm wrong please. If this is the case maybe we seen something we liked in him. Afterall Ozzie wanted his draft pick more for the PS, and I'm sure he already knew that he was going to cut a LB to be able to pick Curtis back up.
[/quote]

Isaac Smolko was the one on the PS before Drew. Curtis just worked out for the team last week with a couple of other guys.

[smashmouth]

[quote name='baltiMORE RAVENS' date='24 September 2009 - 11:40 AM' timestamp='1253806826' post='240650']
Isaac Smolko was the one on the PS before Drew. Curtis just worked out for the team last week with a couple of other guys.
[/quote]
Yes you are right, I couldent remember his name but now that you say it I do. Great looking out.

[CorvusCorax]

The more I think about it, the more I like this move. I think we are also looking at trading up come draft day, maybe even for another first round pick. Maybe even for a development WR...

[ravensfan2430]

Stupid question, but do we keep the condition pick we got from NE since NE released Pres.

[Moderator 3]

No, we don't get to keep it.

[BloodRaven]

It looks like we were going to cut him to make room for a TE anyway, and sending him to the Pats is better than one of our division rivals picking him up.

[Smoke]

Does anyone find this a strange that New England trades for Burgess the week before they play the Ravens and then let him go?

[EXEravenforlife]

[quote name='Smoke' date='01 October 2009 - 11:57 AM' timestamp='1254412621' post='245382']
Does anyone find this a strange that New England trades for Burgess the week before they play the Ravens and then let him go?
[/quote]

alot of the conspiracy theorists would say that they traded for him because they wanted to know some of our plays but there is no way that the patriots got anything out of him

[stormie]

[quote name='Smoke' date='01 October 2009 - 11:57 AM' timestamp='1254412621' post='245382']
Does anyone find this a strange that New England trades for Burgess the week before they play the Ravens and then let him go?
[/quote]

They actually cut him and then resigned him!

[url="http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports/newengland/football/patriots/2009/09/30/report-pats-re-sign-prescott-burgess/"]CLICK HERE[/url]

By Mike Petraglia
FOXBORO - Less than 48 hours after being released by the Patriots, linebacker Prescott Burgess has been signed back to the practice squad, according to ESPN.

Burgess, who was in the locker room on Wednesday morning, was acquired from the Ravens last week for a conditional draft pick.

Burgess was released on Monday to make room for defensive tackle Terdell Sands. Wednesday’s move is not a surprise as head coach Bill Belichick hinted during his Tuesday conference call with reporters.

“We’d like to have them both, but we had to make room,” Belichick said. “We’d like to continue to work with both players, if possible.”

The Patriots are preparing to play Burgess’ former team this Sunday at Gillette Stadium.

[MKdave]

So they keep Burgess and the Pick. Trademark sneakiness from Belichick.

[heapitup247]

[quote name='MKdave' date='01 October 2009 - 03:01 PM' timestamp='1254423719' post='245448']
So they keep Burgess and the Pick. Trademark sneakiness from Belichick.
[/quote]

I think we get to keep the pick. If we dont there were some serious flaws in that deal on our half.

[PuRock]

[quote name='heapitup247' date='01 October 2009 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1254430288' post='245545']
I think we get to keep the pick. If we dont there were some serious flaws in that deal on our half.
[/quote]

Well I think they were trying to get something out of nothing. They knew the Pats were going to pick him up anyways if the Ravens cut him. Why not try and make it stick with a draft pick?

[baltiMORE RAVENS]

[quote name='heapitup247' date='01 October 2009 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1254430288' post='245545']
I think we get to keep the pick. If we dont there were some serious flaws in that deal on our half.
[/quote]

The trade was for a CONDITIONAL 7th round draft pick. If Burgess stays on the practice squad the entire year, we probalbly won't get the pick. If Burgess is on the active roster or plays in a certain amount of games, we will get the pick. It all depends on what the CONDITIONS were of the CONDITIONAL pick.

[MKdave]

[quote name='heapitup247' date='01 October 2009 - 09:51 PM' timestamp='1254430288' post='245545']
I think we get to keep the pick. If we dont there were some serious flaws in that deal on our half.
[/quote]

Well, we traded him for a conditional 7th, which = nothing if he never sees the field for them. They then resigned him to a seperate contract which presumably has nothing to do with the trade. I'd be surprised if we get it to be honest.