Could Stephen Gostkowski be a surprise cap casualty?
 |
| Bob Breidenbach/ Providence Journal |
One such situation is the contract situation of kicker Stephen Gostkowski. The eight year veteran is due $3.8 million in 2014, the last year of his five year deal. That figure would make him the ninth highest paid player on the team next year.
Gostkowski's on-field play alone makes him an obvious candidate for an extension. While he's been very reliable throughout his career, he turned it up another notch in 2014, posting career highs in accuracy (38-41, 92.7%), 50 yard field goals (six, doubling his previous career high) and points (158). Gostkowski's leg strength also made him an asset on kickoffs, where he was consistently able to keep the ball away from dangerous return men by kicking the ball through the end zone for touchbacks.
As good as Gostkowski has been, it would be ridiculous for the cash-strapped Patriots to justify doling out a $3.8 million cap hit to a kicker. The logical next step, assuming the Patriots want to keep him around, would be to sign him to an extension.
Such a deal would be beneficial to both sides. Gostkowski would get a nice chunk of guaranteed money, plus the long-term security of a multi-year deal, while the Patriots would significantly lower that 2014 cap hit. The money saved could then go towards the cause of resigning at least one of Talib/Edelman/Blount.
Gostkowski's age (30) would normally be a consideration for the length of an extension, but his position as a placekicker alleviates some of those concerns. Kickers are obviously far less reliant on athleticism than position players, allowing them to generally remain productive even into their mid-to-late 30s.
The other possibility would be for the team to cut ties with Gostkowski, saving $3 million in cap space. While this would be a major surprise considering Gostkowski's production, it would also be consistent with the line of thinking that brought Gostkowski to New England in the first place.
Adam Vinatieri was a vital part of three championship teams, but the Patriots did not want to commit top-level money to a 33 year old kicker. As a result, the Super Bowl hero left town for Indianapolis, leaving the Patriots to draft Gostkowski, a much cheaper replacement in the fourth round of the 2006 draft. The decision was unpopular at the time, but the Patriots have gotten better production for less money with Gostkowski than the Colts have with Vinatieri.
Could a similar line of thinking lead the Pats to look for savings at the kicker position? Signing Gostkowski to an extension will save money in the short-term, but will also likely lock them into several more years of spending over $3 million on the kicker position. Gostkowski is still three years younger than Vinatieri was at the time of his departure, but the line of thinking behind such a move would still be the same.
Kicker is one of the most fungible positions in football, with cheap talent always readily available. This has become particularly evident in the past few seasons, with players like Blair Walsh (average of $554,483 per year), Greg Zuerlein (average of $568,868 per year) and Justin Tucker (average of $480,000 per year) bringing star level production to their teams. Cutting Gostkowski obviously carries the risk of losing a sure thing, but the benefits the team would reap if they could find a capable replacement are obvious.
Signing Gostkowski to an extension would save the team money this year, but it would also ensure that the Pats continue to spend top rates on their kicker. Drafting a capable replacement would keep the cap hold for the kicker position low for the next couple of seasons, opening up a rough estimate of $2.5-3 million to spend elsewhere on the roster. Tom Brady's age (37 in August) gives the team a little extra incentive to free up that money and help the team make an extra push to win now. It would certainly be a controversial move, but one that could definitely help the Pats overall.
Do you want to see Gostkowski's deal extended? Or would you rather the Patriots save that money to fill other needs on the roster? Chime in below in the comments
