Opinion: Pats will and should refrain from Desean Jackson trade

Before I start this column, let me clarify that when I heard the news that the Patriots had inquired about a trade for Desean Jackson, I did fantasize briefly about the prospects of Tom Brady throwing wide open bombs down the sideline to him. I thought about the hell trying to defend both Jackson and (eventually) Gronk would inflict on opposing defenses, particularly for the safeties. I thought of how nicely Jackson's skill set (explosive run after the catch ability, elite deep speed) would fit in the Patriots high percentage passing attack. When it comes to strictly football, I actually really like the fit here.

But that led me to look up Jackson's contract on the always reliable OvertheCap.com. Reality was quick and sobering.

OvertheCap.com

In a word, yikes. Jackson's highly backloaded contract leaves him with massive cap hits in the remaining three years of his deal. Even with the Eagles picking up his remaining dead money (which they'll automatically do by trading him), Jackson will cost a whopping $10.5 million for 2014 and $10 million for each of the next two years. The one saving grace is that Jackson's contract post-trade will contain almost no guaranteed money, giving the Patriots maximum flexibility to cut him after each year with minimal consequence.

However, that cap number is significant because the Patriots currently have very little cap space. Miguel of the excellent PatsCap.com has the Patriots at approximately $4,019,034 in space, a number that includes both the new deals for Revis, Browner, Edelman and LeFell and the $11.6 million cap hit Vince Wilfork currently has on the books. Cutting Wilfork will bring you up to about $11,524,034, leaving you with juuuust about $1 million left after adding Jacksons $10.5 mill.

Now, a supporter of a Jackson trade could correctly point out that cutting overpriced veterans Dan Connolly ($3 million in savings) and Adrian Wilson ($1,166,666 in savings) would open up additional space, as would working an extension with Stephen Gostkowski or possibly even Devin McCourty. I'd be lying if I told you a Desean Jackson trade is financially impossible for the Pats to pull off.

However, I would urge said trade supporter to consider the number of needs the Patriots still have to be filled: sub pass rusher/rotational defensive end, defensive tackle (presuming Wilfork is cut), depth at linebacker (preferably with athleticism in coverage), Duron Harmon insurance at safety, starting tight end, starting center, and starting guard if you either cut Connolly or move him back to center. There are simply too many holes remaining on the roster to rely solely on the draft for further offseason improvement. The Patriots will have to make a few more moves in free agency to ensure that they cover all their bases.

Trading for Jackson's salary would severely limit the Patriots ability to fill all of those needs. Think of it this way: the Pats can theoretically get to about $16 million in space by cutting Wilfork, Connolly and Wilson. Would you rather spend $10.5 million of that just to get Desean Jackson, leaving you with about $5.5 million for the rest of the roster? Or, does it make more sense to use that space on some combination of a legitimate defensive end (perhaps Jared Allen's dwindling market makes him an option?), a solid run stuffer, an veteran safety and, say, Kenny Britt on a one year deal?

Keep in mind that choosing the first option comes with a high risk of having to really cheap out on filling some of those aforementioned voids. Even if they cut all the logical guys and save money by monkeying around with some of their current deals, it's hard to imagine the Pats mustering more than $10 million in space to shore up the rest of the roster after taking on Jackson's salary. Being cautious about acquiring Jackson due to his contract isn't a matter of being "cheap", it's a matter of discerning the most effective way to spend your set amount of money.

Make no mistake, bringing in a well-known pain-in-the-ass with a $10.5 million cap hit like Jackson would be a major departure from the Patriots way of doing business. Some would argue that they already made a departure like this by signing Darrelle Revis, but I would contend that the Revis signing actually didn't deviate much from the Patriots typical approach. The Patriots financial model has always been based on value and, contrary to popular belief, they've always been willing to open up the checkbook for the players they feel are worth it (see their current top of the market contracts for Wilfork, Logan Mankins, Jerod Mayo and Rob Gronkowski). The Patriots felt like Revis was actually a good value, even at his hefty price, due to how good he is and how valuable his skill set is on the field. Basically, Revis is an exception to the normal system because he's a 28 year old future Hall of Famer.

Even as good as Jackson is, it's hard to imagine the Patriots would consider paying Desean Jackson over $10 million a year to be good value, especially considering their tendency to shy away from paying big money to receivers. This would hold true in a vacuum, let alone under the circumstances of the Patriots current situation.

This trade proposal would become more worthwhile of a discussion if Jackson is open to lowering his cap hits through an extension. However, that seems highly unlikely, considering that Jackson made noise in January about wanting to renegotiate his contract and get a raise. Yes, he wants a pay raise from a deal that will pay him just over $10 million a year for it's remaining three years.

And no, throwing Danny Amendola into a Jackson trade doesn't make the money work. As NFL rules state, trading a player requires a team to take a cap hit for that player's remaining dead money. As a result, trading Amendola would result in a dead money cap charge of $6.8 million, higher than his current 2014 hit of $4.57 mill. Trading Amendola would simply make the move $2.2 million more expensive for the Pats.

Even if the opportunity arose to get Jackson at a somewhat reduced cap hit, I'd still have to think long and hard about bringing him to New England. The 5'10", 175 pound dynamo has earned every bit of his league-wide reputation as a pain-in-the-ass in Philly. Doesn't it speak volumes that the Eagles are taking calls in the first place about a 27 year old under-contract receiver coming off of an 80 catch, 1,300 yard, 9 touchdown season?

Jackson is prone to angry, immature outbursts, be it at his teammates or coaches. He's been known to pout when he feels he isn't getting the ball enough. He gets the occasional dumb taunting penalty that drives football coaches up a wall. He essentially admitted he didn't play as hard in his contract year. Oh, and DeSean has a history with guns, having had two semi-automatic handguns stolen (amongst other things) from his South Philly residence this January.

Are you sure this is the guy you want to bring into the meeting room during the development of Aaron Dobson, Kenbrell Thompkins and Josh Boyce? Really?

My educated guess on what happened between the Patriots and Eagles? According to CSNPhilly's Derrick Gunn, the Eagles reached out to Jackson "early last week" to inform him that they were not actively shopping him but were merely taking calls about him. By that timeline, it's seems pretty safe to assume the Patriots initial inquiry happened prior to the start of free agency, before the Patriots had used up well over $12 million in cap space by signing Darrelle Revis, Brandon Browner, Brandon LeFell and Julian Edelman. The circumstances have changed drastically since then.

The story is exciting and worth discussing just because of the talent level of the player involved. However, it seemed far-fetched from the start, and today's report that Chip Kelly has reached out and told Jackson "not to worry" about these trade rumors should speak volumes.

If the two teams had continued to talk about a potential deal, it would almost surely be included in yesterday's report. This sounds like a basic matter of the Patriots doing their due diligence on a potential option prior to free agency and ultimately deciding to move on and spend their money elsewhere.

Considering the circumstances at hand, I think they've clearly made the right choice.