Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
11 Pages<1234>»
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline DoddPower  
#26 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 2:19:35 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 2,097
Applause Received: 530

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post
Our O likely is NOT good enough to beat Seattle and it hasn't been good enough to beat SF for a few years. Graham could get us over the SF hump and help us compete with Seattle.


I don't think I'm buying this statement. I think the offense was mostly OK. I just think the defense wasn't good enough. How many yards does the defense usually give up when we play the 49'ers? I'd rather bring in a superstar defender instead of a superstar receiver. If the Packers defense could be average to "good," the Packers would be incredibly difficult to beat. By any team in the NFL.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
play2win on 7/4/2014(UTC)
Offline sschind  
#27 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 2:30:11 PM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN

Applause Given: 123
Applause Received: 450

Originally Posted by: DoddPower Go to Quoted Post
I don't think I'm buying this statement. I think the offense was mostly OK. I just think the defense wasn't good enough. How many yards does the defense usually give up when we play the 49'ers? I'd rather bring in a superstar defender instead of a superstar receiver. If the Packers defense could be average to "good," the Packers would be incredibly difficult to beat. By any team in the NFL.


I agree. I think our offense can score on anybody and score a lot. The question is can our defense keep them from scoring more on us.
I respect your right to have your opinion but that doesn't mean I agree with it or respect you for having it.
Offline DoddPower  
#28 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 3:28:43 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 2,097
Applause Received: 530

Originally Posted by: sschind Go to Quoted Post
I agree. I think our offense can score on anybody and score a lot. The question is can our defense keep them from scoring more on us.


Yeah, of course it would be very nice to have Jimmy Graham on the Packers roster. But there are constraints to work under. Therefore, the team should focus on the highest priority needs, which in my opionion, are largely on the defensive side of the ball. The Packers are going to have a top-10 offense, at worst, and likely a top five. Solidify the defensive weaknesses and the Packers are as good as any team in the league.
Offline uffda udfa  
#29 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 4:06:03 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 149
Applause Received: 150

What's the precedent? Ted Thompson tried trading for Tony Gonzalez years back...same for Randy Moss. If there is the potential to add a special player, Ted Thompson will do his "due diligence". There is no way I can conceive of that he wouldn't be doing "due diligence" on the Graham situation. That guy changes games. Special player.

I find it odd that people are referring to Quarless and Taylor????? as SOLID? Huh? Wow, that is way overvauling your own. Quarless is JAG and Taylor doesn't and hasn't played on offense very much. Finley was an 8+ million dollar a year player, as valued by the Packers. I think most of us would say he was nowhere near an 8 million dollar player for us...ever. Quarless makes 7 times less than what Finley made as our #1 TE if we're talking cap hit. Jermichael's cap hit was 8.75 million last season, Q's is 1.25 million.

If you were okay with 8.75 million for Jermichael, I don't know why you'd have a problem to have a truly special player for a few million more.

Our roster has been TE heavy for the past few years. Obviously, this franchise greatly values that position and it shows that they were willing to pay and pay big for a guy like Finley who has never produced like Graham. Finley has started 48 games and amassed 20 TD's. Graham has started 36 games and amassed 41 TD's. So, about every 2.5 games you can count on a TD from Finley. Meanwhile, in every game, on average, you can count on one from Graham.

The GREAT teams go out and add things... Seattle kept adding last year Avril, Bennett...did they really need to trade for Harvin? No. Went to the SB without any help from him, and then used his help in it and thrashed Denver. Did SF need Anquan Boldin? Did the great Niners and Cowboys of old need Deion Sanders? This idea that Green Bay is okay/good enough is deadly to winning another SB. The whole we have Aaron Rodgers and our O is going to be great sounds eerily similar to the many years Packers fans said the same exact things when Favre was under center. Net result...1 ring in Favre era. We got our 1 ring in Favre era when we went for it by signing Reggie White, Sean Jones, Santana Dotson, etc... Our ring in the Rodgers era seems to be a totally anomaly. Haven't been back to an NFC Championship game since, or even sniffed one. We aren't good enough, haven't been good enough and adding Julius Peppers is a potential right kind of move to help get us back. Graham is on that same line of thought. This Ted Thompson "we think we're pretty good and we like the guys we've got" has been bought by the fanbase. Rodgers covers a multitude of sins.

If you can get Jimmy Graham and it isn't going to absolutely derail you, you have to try and do it. The great teams do things like that....it'll be crushing to see a Seattle or New England go get him, or some other on the cusp team.

If we added Graham, somehow, we could cut Quarless (who didn't participate in the off season program at all which is terrible for your "#1 TE") and save a little off the cap. If we could give Finley 8.75 of our cap last year and we can save close to a million with Quarless...that puts us close to 10 million toward Graham. However, the Peppers contract might have been given due to Jermichael being a FA and not having to commit that money to him.

Packers are an esitmated 13.6 million under the cap. We could cut the following players at these cap savings to improve our standing...plus cap is going to go way up over the next few years.
1) Tramon Williams-- 7.5 million (would have to eat 2 mil to gain the 7.5 but might be worth it)
2) Brad Jones-- 1.925 million
3) Jarrett Bush--- 1.7 million
4) Derek Sherrod--1.25 million
5) Jamari Lattimore--1.43 million
6) BJ Raji-- 3.5 million
7) Andrew Quarless-- 900k
8) Bryan Bulaga--2.66 Million
****Hawk's release would net us 1.9 million, but I can't see the Packers eating 3.2 million for him not to play for us****

----I could make a case for any or all of those guys not making the team this year. I can't wait to see pre-season action and read about TC. If we have guys who are playing well at those positions above, we won't need to spend as much on some of these guys. Tramon is the big fish. How much better are we with him vs. who would have to replace him at that cap savings if he's gone? I don't know if the guy next after Tramon is 7.5 millon dollars worse.

Start playing with the figures above and subtract some combo of them off the books and I don't see why we couldn't afford Graham and both Jordy and Randall, but that money would come from the 13.6 million left and what savings we can come up with by releasing some of our veterans. Letting Tramon go puts at over 21 million in cap space with that cap climbing over the next few years.

On an unrelated note...it is sad that our D chews up nearly 68 million of our cap while our offense checks in at only almost 52 million. Our D hasn't been good as we all know, but to know we're spending that much on it to get what we're getting is really sad.

EDIT: The current salary cap is 133 million. The salary cap jumped by 10 million from 2013-2014 and is expected to jump at least another 10 million next year. Projections are that it will likely be over 150 million by 2016. So, in essence, the Rodgers cap hit will be absorbed by the rise in the cap next year. We will have plenty of green to dole out for extensions to Jordy and Randall if cap is going up another 10 million.

Message modified by user Thursday, July 3, 2014 4:22:54 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline nerdmann  
#30 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 4:56:36 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,715
Applause Received: 667

Price is way, way too high.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
thanks Post received 2 applause.
Dexter_Sinister on 7/3/2014(UTC), play2win on 7/4/2014(UTC)
Offline DoddPower  
#31 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 5:07:25 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 2,097
Applause Received: 530

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post
What's the precedent? Ted Thompson tried trading for Tony Gonzalez years back...same for Randy Moss. If there is the potential to add a special player, Ted Thompson will do his "due diligence". There is no way I can conceive of that he wouldn't be doing "due diligence" on the Graham situation. That guy changes games. Special player.

I find it odd that people are referring to Quarless and Taylor????? as SOLID? Huh? Wow, that is way overvauling your own. Quarless is JAG and Taylor doesn't and hasn't played on offense very much. Finley was an 8+ million dollar a year player, as valued by the Packers. I think most of us would say he was nowhere near an 8 million dollar player for us...ever. Quarless makes 7 times less than what Finley made as our #1 TE if we're talking cap hit. Jermichael's cap hit was 8.75 million last season, Q's is 1.25 million.

If you were okay with 8.75 million for Jermichael, I don't know why you'd have a problem to have a truly special player for a few million more.

EDIT: The current salary cap is 133 million. The salary cap jumped by 10 million from 2013-2014 and is expected to jump at least another 10 million next year. Projections are that it will likely be over 150 million by 2016. So, in essence, the Rodgers cap hit will be absorbed by the rise in the cap next year. We will have plenty of green to dole out for extensions to Jordy and Randall if cap is going up another 10 million.


I don't think it's as much about the salary cap implications as it is about the two first round draft picks (or more so the cumulative aspects). Those are even more valuable than the money Graham's contract would cost (which would also mean losing at least one good player, probably. But that would likely be worth it).

As I said, if Thompson wants to make a blockbuster move, go after a defensive superstar, not an offensive superstar. I think that would benefit the Packers far more than adding another superstar offensive player. I'd personally rather keep the two first round draft picks. If a team is going to take risks like these, take them during free agency when the only ramifications would be financial. Not financial AND valuable draft picks. At this point in the season, I'd rather just focus on locking up the key players for the next few years and keeping the draft picks. The Packers offense is going to be very good regardless. My biggest concern is the defense, which is likely still going to be a liability.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Wade on 7/3/2014(UTC)
Offline mi_keys  
#32 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 5:18:45 PM(UTC)
mi_keys

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 227
Applause Received: 359

And if you do go big on offense, elite offensive tackle please.
Born and bred a cheesehead
thanks Post received 2 applause.
Wade on 7/3/2014(UTC), DoddPower on 7/3/2014(UTC)
Offline uffda udfa  
#33 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 6:36:03 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 149
Applause Received: 150

I'm not sure you can pump many more resources in the defense... we've drafted a lot of guys high to play D for us and it's been a total disaster. When 68 million of your cap is already committed to defense, how much higher can you go? I know you have to keep trying... but it just sucks to have to keep using high picks on D that don't work out.

If this team fails on D, again, which seems well within the realm of possibility, it's time not only for Capers to go, but Ted Thompson as well as he's the one who built our current defensive mess. We don't have a defensive starter who wasn't a Ted Thompson addition unless I've overlooked someone. This is TT's team. If it fails, he has to be accountable. I'm willing to buy the injury thing as we've been hit hard but some of these guys who are injured weren't going to offer us much anyway.

Bottom line...Gimme Jimmy!





UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline sschind  
#34 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 8:53:28 PM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN

Applause Given: 123
Applause Received: 450

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post
What's the precedent? Ted Thompson tried trading for Tony Gonzalez years back...same for Randy Moss. If there is the potential to add a special player, Ted Thompson will do his "due diligence". There is no way I can conceive of that he wouldn't be doing "due diligence" on the Graham situation. That guy changes games. Special player.

I find it odd that people are referring to Quarless and Taylor????? as SOLID? Huh? Wow, that is way overvauling your own. Quarless is JAG and Taylor doesn't and hasn't played on offense very much. Finley was an 8+ million dollar a year player, as valued by the Packers. I think most of us would say he was nowhere near an 8 million dollar player for us...ever. Quarless makes 7 times less than what Finley made as our #1 TE if we're talking cap hit. Jermichael's cap hit was 8.75 million last season, Q's is 1.25 million.

If you were okay with 8.75 million for Jermichael, I don't know why you'd have a problem to have a truly special player for a few million more.

Our roster has been TE heavy for the past few years. Obviously, this franchise greatly values that position and it shows that they were willing to pay and pay big for a guy like Finley who has never produced like Graham. Finley has started 48 games and amassed 20 TD's. Graham has started 36 games and amassed 41 TD's. So, about every 2.5 games you can count on a TD from Finley. Meanwhile, in every game, on average, you can count on one from Graham.



I am sure Ted is doing his due dilligence. In fact I would be willing to bet almost anything that he has looked into it. He is a good GM and that is what good GMs do, they look into every possible avenue to improve their team. I don't think anyone is saying he isn't. What they are saying, and I agree is that the price will likely end up being too high and I am not talking about salary. You mention the precedent set with Moss and Gonzales but we didn't ge those guys and why not? Because Ted didn't offer enough.

Not only do I not see him parting with two first round draft picks in essence it would probbaly cost us Nelson or Cobb as well. Granted we still might lose one of them but signing Graham would just about ensure it. Yeah we could cut all those guys you mentioned and make up the money but I highly doubt that he would.

Absolutely Graham would be an improvemnet over what we have now at TE. He might be the best TE the Packers ever had but I just don't think it is a high priority position of need right now and if it costs 2 firsts and Cobb I say its too high off a price to pay.

I respect your right to have your opinion but that doesn't mean I agree with it or respect you for having it.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower on 7/3/2014(UTC)
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#35 Posted : Thursday, July 3, 2014 9:53:55 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

It all boils down to one overwhelming obstical.

Graham won't get enough targets to cover the cost.

Rodgers has too many weapons and likes to spread the ball around too much.

That is why they didn't chase Jennings and Jones.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline uffda udfa  
#36 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 1:04:33 AM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 149
Applause Received: 150

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister Go to Quoted Post
It all boils down to one overwhelming obstical.

Graham won't get enough targets to cover the cost.

Rodgers has too many weapons and likes to spread the ball around too much.

That is why they didn't chase Jennings and Jones.


The Jennings thing isn't true. Greg turned down an offer of over 11million from the Packers before the start of his last season with us, and then took less from Minnesota. We wanted Greg Jennings and were willing to pay the kind of money it would take to land Graham.

What I once thought was going to be difficult to do...sign Cobb and Nelson, is now really not that difficult only a matter of whether you want two big money deals in your WR corps. I'm not sure they want to do that. I wasn't aware the cap was going to go up as much as it's projected to go up. From 123 million in 2013 to over 150 million by 2016 gives you a ton of flexibility. I no longer believe we'd have to part with Jordy or Randall and we'd still be able to get Graham in here.

BTW, I realize two 1's is a steep steep price but given the odds of landing someone like Jimmy Graham with one of our 1st's would be unlikely. One first for him makes all the sense in the world to me even with his age. He could likely keep it going for 7 seasons and he will never lose his size. If we didn't have Aaron Rodgers or Clay Matthews would it have been worth it to you to cough up two 1st's to get either of them? I would do it because Graham is a known superstar who is getting better and better. We debated who you'd take if you could only have one... Jordy or Randall. If I could only have one between Jordy, Randall or Jimmy...I'd choose Jimmy.

One potential side benefit to landing someone like Graham would be his potential influence on a kid like Lyerla. We don't know all of Colt's story but Jimmy's is well documented. The amount of help Jimmy could provide to Colt would be immeasurable. If you are unaware of JImmy Graham's story you should take a minute to watch it as it: Jimmy Graham's Unlikely Path to the NFL
UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline DarkaneRules  
#37 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 5:42:55 AM(UTC)
DarkaneRules

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/15/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 211
Applause Received: 358

It is amazing that you have given quite a lot of compelling arguments here and they were really close to swaying me. In the end, I prefer cultivating draft picks and not trading them away. I like this method. The argument has been solid given our recent history pointing to the fact that we have not really been hitting on the first round picks lately. But this is the year where we can really see if those swings in the recent early rounds pay off. Maybe some other year, I entertain the idea for another star free agent signing, but not this year. We already got Peppers, and I am content with that move.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
Offline sschind  
#38 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 6:59:53 AM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN

Applause Given: 123
Applause Received: 450

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post
The Jennings thing isn't true. Greg turned down an offer of over 11million from the Packers before the start of his last season with us, and then took less from Minnesota. We wanted Greg Jennings and were willing to pay the kind of money it would take to land Graham.

What I once thought was going to be difficult to do...sign Cobb and Nelson, is now really not that difficult only a matter of whether you want two big money deals in your WR corps. I'm not sure they want to do that. I wasn't aware the cap was going to go up as much as it's projected to go up. From 123 million in 2013 to over 150 million by 2016 gives you a ton of flexibility. I no longer believe we'd have to part with Jordy or Randall and we'd still be able to get Graham in here.

BTW, I realize two 1's is a steep steep price but given the odds of landing someone like Jimmy Graham with one of our 1st's would be unlikely. One first for him makes all the sense in the world to me even with his age. He could likely keep it going for 7 seasons and he will never lose his size. If we didn't have Aaron Rodgers or Clay Matthews would it have been worth it to you to cough up two 1st's to get either of them? I would do it because Graham is a known superstar who is getting better and better. We debated who you'd take if you could only have one... Jordy or Randall. If I could only have one between Jordy, Randall or Jimmy...I'd choose Jimmy.

One potential side benefit to landing someone like Graham would be his potential influence on a kid like Lyerla. We don't know all of Colt's story but Jimmy's is well documented. The amount of help Jimmy could provide to Colt would be immeasurable. If you are unaware of JImmy Graham's story you should take a minute to watch it as it: Jimmy Graham's Unlikely Path to the NFL


I just don't know if trading away two first round picks and then mortgaging the future by signing three expensive players (Graham, Nelson and Cobb) to backloaded contracts to take advantage of an anticipated rise in the salary cap is the smart thing to do. Lets just say we do that and the cap doesn't go up as much as anticipated. we could be in a world of trouble. Yeah we may be fine with being able to keep those three guys but at the expense of which others. I just don't think it makes good business sense to play with unknowns like that.

The thing is I think there are a lot, well OK maybe not a lot but more than just one or two, of players who could do what Graham does if asked to do it. Make any athletically talented guy the focus of your passing game and he will most likely rise to the top and put up amazing numbers. I'm not saying we have one of those guys on our team now but who knows? I'd be willing to bet McCarthy and Rodgers could take one of our TEs and make him a top 5 TE in the league if they really wanted to. If not one of our own then any number of good TE's in the league that could be had much cheaper than Graham. If they wanted to make the TE the focus of our passing game and turn our TE into our top pass catching threat they could. Of course that would cut down on one of our strengths. That being our ability and desire to spread the ball around. Although, with the relative lack of experience in our receiving corps compared to the last few years it remains to be seen if we can still do that but I believe Rodgers can get it done.

The bottom line is you don't need a freakishly talented TE to make the TE your main focus in the passing game. You need a guy that can catch the ball but more importantly you need and offense built around that and a coach and a QB willing to make it so. I'm not sure we have that and I am not sure I want that.

I should add that I agree with Darkane in that you do give compelling arguments. Unlike so many similar threads that simply say crap like "we should do this because he is really really really good" Though I disagree with you I don't think it is as crazy as it may seem to some people.
I respect your right to have your opinion but that doesn't mean I agree with it or respect you for having it.
Offline nerdmann  
#39 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 7:22:09 AM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,715
Applause Received: 667

This is just about the dumbest football conversation I've ever seen. LOL
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Dexter_Sinister on 7/5/2014(UTC)
Offline play2win  
#40 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 8:09:55 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Originally Posted by: sschind Go to Quoted Post
I just don't know if trading away two first round picks and then mortgaging the future by signing three expensive players (Graham, Nelson and Cobb) to backloaded contracts to take advantage of an anticipated rise in the salary cap is the smart thing to do. Lets just say we do that and the cap doesn't go up as much as anticipated. we could be in a world of trouble. Yeah we may be fine with being able to keep those three guys but at the expense of which others. I just don't think it makes good business sense to play with unknowns like that.

The thing is I think there are a lot, well OK maybe not a lot but more than just one or two, of players who could do what Graham does if asked to do it. Make any athletically talented guy the focus of your passing game and he will most likely rise to the top and put up amazing numbers. I'm not saying we have one of those guys on our team now but who knows? I'd be willing to bet McCarthy and Rodgers could take one of our TEs and make him a top 5 TE in the league if they really wanted to. If not one of our own then any number of good TE's in the league that could be had much cheaper than Graham. If they wanted to make the TE the focus of our passing game and turn our TE into our top pass catching threat they could. Of course that would cut down on one of our strengths. That being our ability and desire to spread the ball around. Although, with the relative lack of experience in our receiving corps compared to the last few years it remains to be seen if we can still do that but I believe Rodgers can get it done.

The bottom line is you don't need a freakishly talented TE to make the TE your main focus in the passing game. You need a guy that can catch the ball but more importantly you need and offense built around that and a coach and a QB willing to make it so. I'm not sure we have that and I am not sure I want that.

I should add that I agree with Darkane in that you do give compelling arguments. Unlike so many similar threads that simply say crap like "we should do this because he is really really really good" Though I disagree with you I don't think it is as crazy as it may seem to some people.


To your point sschind, NO makes Graham their top target, and he remains their top receiver. make no bones about it, he is more WR than TE. considering this, we already have that player with very similar numbers on our roster in Jordy Nelson. Grahams' best season, last year, he caught 16 TDs. Nelson's best year, 2011, he caught 15 TDs.

when you compare their numbers, there just seems little to no real added value in a deal where we are forced to cough up two R1s and a $10M contract.

No way.

Graham doesnt get those numbers without having in the neighborhood of 120 targets, same for Jordy.

the real crux of the biscuit is NO became one dimensional using a hybrid TE as a feature WR. They were 27th in rushing last season. GB ranked 7th, largely due to the fact that we employed a good blocking TE in Quarless, and were able to spread the ball around more effectively than NO, in spite of the fact that Breese had over 5000 yds passing, and Rodgers was injured for most of the season.

pick a player to feature and feed him the ball. NO did that with Graham, we've done it with Nelson, with nearly identical results in their best seasons.

Rodgers and Lyerla will make our TE position not only deeper, but more versatile. cant say the same for Graham, who would be far more one dimensional. Graham is essentially a WR, who offers zero blocking at the line. Is that worth 2 first round picks? Not to me.
thanks Post received 2 applause.
DarkaneRules on 7/4/2014(UTC), Dexter_Sinister on 7/5/2014(UTC)
Offline nyrpack  
#41 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 8:17:30 AM(UTC)
nyrpack

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Location: long island, ny

Applause Given: 5
Applause Received: 64

let me think about this...... yesssss !!
jimmy b.
Offline play2win  
#42 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 8:45:19 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

I have to admit, our coaching staff loves to use a hybrid TE. I just dont see them forking over those high picks and giant cash to make a Graham trade happen.

As feature receivers, both players have roughly 3800 yds receiving over the last 4 seasons, with Graham having 41 TDs to Nelson's 32.

Message modified by user Friday, July 4, 2014 9:06:29 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Offline uffda udfa  
#43 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 1:11:59 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 149
Applause Received: 150

The Packers did try featuring Finley many times and he simply did not and could not put up numbers like Graham. The guy is 6'7. 6'7! Red zone issues...SOLVED. That is such a HUGE part of the NFL game. The difference between a FG attempt and a TD is gigantic.

Trying to compare Jordy Nelson to Jimmy Graham is odd to me. Graham was ruled a TE not a WR. For the sake of argument Graham is now being considered a WR? That doesn't make much sense. Finley was as much a hybrid TE as Graham. If memory serves, in the past, Finley groused about how he should be viewed when it came to paying him as he felt he was more of a WR.

Graham runs 4.53 at 6'7.... he's faster than our new 2nd round WR and 6 inches taller. This guy is special and it's a little insulting for me to read that he's like Jordy Nelson who plays a different position and doesn't offer what Jimmy does. Jordy as a WR is nowhere near as good as Graham is as a TE. It isn't close. Graham is loved in his locker room and works and works to be better and better. He'd be a tremendous fit in that regard. Plus, you know Ted Thompson has a soft spot for guys with stories like Jimmy's.

I just keep thinking if Rodgers could make something for James Jones with his limited speed and athleticism how much could he do with someone who has tons of it? Nelson on another team isn't likely as good as he is with us. I love Jordy...think he's a very good WR. He's just not in the same zip code when it comes to what he offers vs. what Jimmy Graham offers. Graham is one of the few incredibly special pass catchers in the NFL. Rodgers has yet to have a guy like that. Brett had his Sterling for a little while. Aaron hasn't had his and maybe never will.

As for the caution on the cap... that's a good point, however, with the TV games on Thursdays and now half of them simulcast by CBS, the money is growing and growing. I believe the NFL has a good handle on money and don't think it's all that risky to believe the cap will be much higher in the next year and the ones following.

Again, the GREAT teams are relentless about trying to get better and better. Draft and develop is something all 32 teams do not just us so that philosophy is beaten by teams who draft and develop AND add stars. Peppers is a nice attempt at improving but he's 30 freaking four. I hope he can squeeze a good year or two out of that old body of his. The one big move we made comes riddled with question marks and rightly so. Jimmy Graham comes with no such questions as his arrow is pointing the opposite of Peppers. Saying we added Peppers and should be content is wrong to me as, again, we don't know if he has anything left. A guy like Graham is in the prime years of being a terror on the football field.

I wish to see a 2nd ring in the Rodgers era. It will more likely be accomplished by going for it than playing safe hoping you get that anomalous season every 10-15 years. We have the best passer ever to throw the football on our roster right now. Why would you not give him a Jimmy Graham? Richard Rodgers and Davante Adams are good enough? Ugh, I hate that thinking. Ron Wolf lamented he never gave Brett enough weapons. Ted Thompson may have the same regrets.

Jordy is not a dominant WR. He's very good...not dominant. We're not even sure who our real #1 is because there's not much of a gap or one at all between him and Randall. Graham is better than both of them and he's a TE. Win...now. Aaron is 30... his best years are fading. Give him the help TODAY, not wish and hope that a few years down the line Adams and Richard Rodgers might be solid players. Very good is not good enough. Winning isn't everything it's the only thing...and signing Graham squares more with Lombardi's philosophy than draft and develop ever will regardless of how successful it's been which is really masked by having a great QB for 25 years.

Message modified by user Friday, July 4, 2014 1:34:07 PM(UTC)  | Reason: wrong use of our

UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
lolleren on 7/5/2014(UTC)
Offline dhazer  
#44 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 2:03:39 PM(UTC)
dhazer

Rank: Pro Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2013Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2009PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2013

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 49
Applause Received: 204

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post
What's the precedent? Ted Thompson tried trading for Tony Gonzalez years back...same for Randy Moss. If there is the potential to add a special player, Ted Thompson will do his "due diligence". There is no way I can conceive of that he wouldn't be doing "due diligence" on the Graham situation. That guy changes games. Special player.

I find it odd that people are referring to Quarless and Taylor????? as SOLID? Huh? Wow, that is way overvauling your own. Quarless is JAG and Taylor doesn't and hasn't played on offense very much. Finley was an 8+ million dollar a year player, as valued by the Packers. I think most of us would say he was nowhere near an 8 million dollar player for us...ever. Quarless makes 7 times less than what Finley made as our #1 TE if we're talking cap hit. Jermichael's cap hit was 8.75 million last season, Q's is 1.25 million.

If you were okay with 8.75 million for Jermichael, I don't know why you'd have a problem to have a truly special player for a few million more.

Our roster has been TE heavy for the past few years. Obviously, this franchise greatly values that position and it shows that they were willing to pay and pay big for a guy like Finley who has never produced like Graham. Finley has started 48 games and amassed 20 TD's. Graham has started 36 games and amassed 41 TD's. So, about every 2.5 games you can count on a TD from Finley. Meanwhile, in every game, on average, you can count on one from Graham.

The GREAT teams go out and add things... Seattle kept adding last year Avril, Bennett...did they really need to trade for Harvin? No. Went to the SB without any help from him, and then used his help in it and thrashed Denver. Did SF need Anquan Boldin? Did the great Niners and Cowboys of old need Deion Sanders? This idea that Green Bay is okay/good enough is deadly to winning another SB. The whole we have Aaron Rodgers and our O is going to be great sounds eerily similar to the many years Packers fans said the same exact things when Favre was under center. Net result...1 ring in Favre era. We got our 1 ring in Favre era when we went for it by signing Reggie White, Sean Jones, Santana Dotson, etc... Our ring in the Rodgers era seems to be a totally anomaly. Haven't been back to an NFC Championship game since, or even sniffed one. We aren't good enough, haven't been good enough and adding Julius Peppers is a potential right kind of move to help get us back. Graham is on that same line of thought. This Ted Thompson "we think we're pretty good and we like the guys we've got" has been bought by the fanbase. Rodgers covers a multitude of sins.

If you can get Jimmy Graham and it isn't going to absolutely derail you, you have to try and do it. The great teams do things like that....it'll be crushing to see a Seattle or New England go get him, or some other on the cusp team.

If we added Graham, somehow, we could cut Quarless (who didn't participate in the off season program at all which is terrible for your "#1 TE") and save a little off the cap. If we could give Finley 8.75 of our cap last year and we can save close to a million with Quarless...that puts us close to 10 million toward Graham. However, the Peppers contract might have been given due to Jermichael being a FA and not having to commit that money to him.

Packers are an esitmated 13.6 million under the cap. We could cut the following players at these cap savings to improve our standing...plus cap is going to go way up over the next few years.
1) Tramon Williams-- 7.5 million (would have to eat 2 mil to gain the 7.5 but might be worth it)
2) Brad Jones-- 1.925 million
3) Jarrett Bush--- 1.7 million
4) Derek Sherrod--1.25 million
5) Jamari Lattimore--1.43 million
6) BJ Raji-- 3.5 million
7) Andrew Quarless-- 900k
8) Bryan Bulaga--2.66 Million
****Hawk's release would net us 1.9 million, but I can't see the Packers eating 3.2 million for him not to play for us****


----I could make a case for any or all of those guys not making the team this year. I can't wait to see pre-season action and read about TC. If we have guys who are playing well at those positions above, we won't need to spend as much on some of these guys. Tramon is the big fish. How much better are we with him vs. who would have to replace him at that cap savings if he's gone? I don't know if the guy next after Tramon is 7.5 millon dollars worse.

Start playing with the figures above and subtract some combo of them off the books and I don't see why we couldn't afford Graham and both Jordy and Randall, but that money would come from the 13.6 million left and what savings we can come up with by releasing some of our veterans. Letting Tramon go puts at over 21 million in cap space with that cap climbing over the next few years.

On an unrelated note...it is sad that our D chews up nearly 68 million of our cap while our offense checks in at only almost 52 million. Our D hasn't been good as we all know, but to know we're spending that much on it to get what we're getting is really sad.

EDIT: The current salary cap is 133 million. The salary cap jumped by 10 million from 2013-2014 and is expected to jump at least another 10 million next year. Projections are that it will likely be over 150 million by 2016. So, in essence, the Rodgers cap hit will be absorbed by the rise in the cap next year. We will have plenty of green to dole out for extensions to Jordy and Randall if cap is going up another 10 million.


So looking at your list you suggest we get rid of 5 maybe 6 starters so we can bring in a TE. I saw if we brought him we just trade CM3 for Graham. We would get about the same amount of production for the cost from both. CM3 is way over paid and I wouldn't mind seeing him gone. Hell he only plays 1/2 the season anyway and collects his 15 million,
UserPostedImage

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be :)
Offline uffda udfa  
#45 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 4:53:48 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 149
Applause Received: 150

Originally Posted by: dhazer Go to Quoted Post
So looking at your list you suggest we get rid of 5 maybe 6 starters so we can bring in a TE. I saw if we brought him we just trade CM3 for Graham. We would get about the same amount of production for the cost from both. CM3 is way over paid and I wouldn't mind seeing him gone. Hell he only plays 1/2 the season anyway and collects his 15 million,


Nobody on the list of guys I posted are irreplaceable. Tramon is the big fish and the toughest call. I wouldn't have much issue with seeing the rest of that list gone. BTW, I never said cut them all...I said we could cut some salary cap by cutting one, or some combo.

Also, none of that is even necessary to bringing Graham into the fold... it's just a picture of the way we can finagle the cap to accommodate certain moves like Randall, Jordy and potentially the longshot of Jimmy Graham wearing the "G".

Signing Peppers was a sign of what? Going for it for THIS year. Peppers is not going to be around for very long...we all know that. He was signed during Aaron's prime window for another ring. If we're going all in this season which Peppers signing is a reflection of why stop there IF it's possible to get Jimmy here.

Unlike most, I see his potential addition as a major need not a luxury. I ripped our TE group days ago before the story broke that Graham's franchise number was going to be 5.3 million less than he was hoping for. Now, discontent really comes into play on Graham's part and the Saints don't have anywhere the flexibility we do. Perhaps, they start ditching cap to keep him real soon.

Getting Graham would be TT's close equivalent of Wolf bringing Reggie to Green Bay. Ted Thompson learned under Wolf. He's yet to make a huge signature move as to an addition of superstar status. Woodson was thought to be near his end when we scooped him and Peppers even further near his end. Ted Thompson has not brought a superstar in his prime to Green Bay in his tenure. Ted Thompson can and will surprise you...I hope to be pleasantly surprised.
UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline uffda udfa  
#46 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 5:16:04 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 149
Applause Received: 150

Here's a piece on where things stand between the Saints and Jimmy Graham... will be an interesting 11 days:

http://profootballtalk.n...reduced-offer-to-graham/
UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline SINCITYCHEEZE  
#47 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 6:19:09 PM(UTC)
SINCITYCHEEZE

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 162
Applause Received: 110

Two First Round Picks for Graham!?!?!?!? Who do they think we are????......................................
THE VIKINGS!!!!!!!!Laughing Flapper Tongue Neener, Neener Boombutt
Wisconsin Born, Packer Bred
UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 4 applause.
uffda udfa on 7/4/2014(UTC), nerdmann on 7/4/2014(UTC), play2win on 7/4/2014(UTC), Dexter_Sinister on 7/7/2014(UTC)
Offline StarrMax1  
#48 Posted : Friday, July 4, 2014 10:56:09 PM(UTC)
StarrMax1

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 5/9/2014(UTC)
Location: Toledo

Applause Given: 92
Applause Received: 84

ackers are an esitmated 13.6 million under the cap. We could cut the following players at these cap savings to improve our standing...plus cap is going to go way up over the next few years.
1) Tramon Williams-- 7.5 million (would have to eat 2 mil to gain the 7.5 but might be worth it)
2) Brad Jones-- 1.925 million
3) Jarrett Bush--- 1.7 million
4) Derek Sherrod--1.25 million
5) Jamari Lattimore--1.43 million
6) BJ Raji-- 3.5 million
7) Andrew Quarless-- 900k
8) Bryan Bulaga--2.66 Million
****Hawk's release would net us 1.9 million, but I can't see the Packers eating 3.2 million for him not to play for us****

Jones, Lattimore and Possibly Hawk, well, that leaves 2013 7th round pick Sam Barrington as you veteran ILB, this is just to laughable to be serious.
You want to dump 8 maybe 9 players from the current roster, and give up 2 1st rnd picks, for Graham?

Ted would never give up the 2 1st rnd picks, and i sure as hell hope he wouldn't be dumb enough to gut his defense and weeken his O-line just to sign a TE, no matter how good he is.

Ted pulls off that move and The Packers are looking at losing seasons for years to come.

The 80's just called, they love the move!!!!!!
thanks Post received 2 applause.
play2win on 7/5/2014(UTC), Dexter_Sinister on 7/7/2014(UTC)
Offline uffda udfa  
#49 Posted : Saturday, July 5, 2014 2:00:39 AM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 149
Applause Received: 150

Originally Posted by: StarrMax1 Go to Quoted Post
ackers are an esitmated 13.6 million under the cap. We could cut the following players at these cap savings to improve our standing...plus cap is going to go way up over the next few years.
1) Tramon Williams-- 7.5 million (would have to eat 2 mil to gain the 7.5 but might be worth it)
2) Brad Jones-- 1.925 million
3) Jarrett Bush--- 1.7 million
4) Derek Sherrod--1.25 million
5) Jamari Lattimore--1.43 million
6) BJ Raji-- 3.5 million
7) Andrew Quarless-- 900k
8) Bryan Bulaga--2.66 Million
****Hawk's release would net us 1.9 million, but I can't see the Packers eating 3.2 million for him not to play for us****

Jones, Lattimore and Possibly Hawk, well, that leaves 2013 7th round pick Sam Barrington as you veteran ILB, this is just to laughable to be serious.
You want to dump 8 maybe 9 players from the current roster, and give up 2 1st rnd picks, for Graham?

Ted would never give up the 2 1st rnd picks, and i sure as hell hope he wouldn't be dumb enough to gut his defense and weeken his O-line just to sign a TE, no matter how good he is.

Ted pulls off that move and The Packers are looking at losing seasons for years to come.

The 80's just called, they love the move!!!!!!


These kind of replies are mindboggling. NOWHERE did I say we should cut all these guys. I posted it as a guide to keep an eye on where this team might find some cap relief for any reason, Jimmy Graham related included.

I wholeheartedly disagree with the notion that giving up 2 1st rounders sets us back. You have to keep in mind that getting Graham is almost assuredly better than ANYONE you're going to draft in the 20-32 range. So, losing 1 first rounder for Graham is a no brainer to me. That 2nd 1st is a little tougher to swallow but if I look at how things go for the Packers to think we might draft a Sherrod and Harrell with our 1's over the next two years, how does that set us back if we traded for Graham. The odds we hit huge on both 1st's over the next two seasons is minute. Give me consecutive years 1st rounders that Ted Thompson has found superstars. Rodgers, Hawk, Harrell, Jordy(2nd rounder in trade out of 1st round), BJ Raji, Bryan Bulaga, Sherrod, Perry, Datone Jones, Ha Ha. Who is the best pairing back to back years? We won't be drafting a QB and that is the money position on any team so we won't be missing on a franchise QB in the next two seasons. I would trade any 2 year stretch of 1st rounders for Jimmy Graham save for the one that included Aaron Rodgers.

The mindset of not wanting to give up 1st's just because they're firsts is ludicrous. Go back through draft history and look at how often you really hit it big with a 1st rounder. Would it be fair to say it's 50% or less? I think that's more than fair. Scroll back through Packers history on 1st rounders. I'd say hitting it big in Round 1 is way less than 50%. I would argue since Ted Thompson started drafting for us in '05 that the only guy he really hit it big with was Rodgers. Yes, we hit it big with Matthews but he was a trade up, not our natural selection. ONE time in TT's tenure did he pull us a superstar. Once. You get Graham you get another superstar without rolling the dice that aren't in your favor in two consecutive years much less all the others he didn't strike gold. You're basically trading 2 less than 50% chances on finding a special player for one GUARANTEED superstar.

EDIT: In looking back on Packers 1st round draft history back to 1988...the only two players that are better than Jimmy Graham are Sterling Sharpe and Aaron Rodgers. I LOVE how Ron Wolf thought regarding trading a 1st for Brett Favre: “The opportunity to acquire Brett Favre, in my opinion, easily outweighed the unknown quantity that might have been available to us in the 17th pick in the first round of this year's draft,” Packers general manager Ron Wolf explained. --Jimmy G. easily outweighs the unknown quantity the next two firsts would bring us, in my opinion. Rodgers window is about as big as Jimmy's ...would love to pair a true star with Rodgers while Aaron is 30.

Message modified by user Saturday, July 5, 2014 2:20:36 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline StarrMax1  
#50 Posted : Saturday, July 5, 2014 5:04:57 AM(UTC)
StarrMax1

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 5/9/2014(UTC)
Location: Toledo

Applause Given: 92
Applause Received: 84

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post
These kind of replies are mindboggling. NOWHERE did I say we should cut all these guys. I posted it as a guide to keep an eye on where this team might find some cap relief for any reason, Jimmy Graham related included.

I wholeheartedly disagree with the notion that giving up 2 1st rounders sets us back. You have to keep in mind that getting Graham is almost assuredly better than ANYONE you're going to draft in the 20-32 range. So, losing 1 first rounder for Graham is a no brainer to me. That 2nd 1st is a little tougher to swallow but if I look at how things go for the Packers to think we might draft a Sherrod and Harrell with our 1's over the next two years, how does that set us back if we traded for Graham. The odds we hit huge on both 1st's over the next two seasons is minute. Give me consecutive years 1st rounders that Ted Thompson has found superstars. Rodgers, Hawk, Harrell, Jordy(2nd rounder in trade out of 1st round), BJ Raji, Bryan Bulaga, Sherrod, Perry, Datone Jones, Ha Ha. Who is the best pairing back to back years? We won't be drafting a QB and that is the money position on any team so we won't be missing on a franchise QB in the next two seasons. I would trade any 2 year stretch of 1st rounders for Jimmy Graham save for the one that included Aaron Rodgers.

The mindset of not wanting to give up 1st's just because they're firsts is ludicrous. Go back through draft history and look at how often you really hit it big with a 1st rounder. Would it be fair to say it's 50% or less? I think that's more than fair. Scroll back through Packers history on 1st rounders. I'd say hitting it big in Round 1 is way less than 50%. I would argue since Ted Thompson started drafting for us in '05 that the only guy he really hit it big with was Rodgers. Yes, we hit it big with Matthews but he was a trade up, not our natural selection. ONE time in TT's tenure did he pull us a superstar. Once. You get Graham you get another superstar without rolling the dice that aren't in your favor in two consecutive years much less all the others he didn't strike gold. You're basically trading 2 less than 50% chances on finding a special player for one GUARANTEED superstar.

EDIT: In looking back on Packers 1st round draft history back to 1988...the only two players that are better than Jimmy Graham are Sterling Sharpe and Aaron Rodgers. I LOVE how Ron Wolf thought regarding trading a 1st for Brett Favre: “The opportunity to acquire Brett Favre, in my opinion, easily outweighed the unknown quantity that might have been available to us in the 17th pick in the first round of this year's draft,” Packers general manager Ron Wolf explained. --Jimmy G. easily outweighs the unknown quantity the next two firsts would bring us, in my opinion. Rodgers window is about as big as Jimmy's ...would love to pair a true star with Rodgers while Aaron is 30.



"We could cut the following players at these cap savings to improve our standing..."

I think this is the problem, you post these long winded ideas, then post long winded explanations, thinking that most here are actually reading the entire content of your posts.

You did say "we could cut the following players at these cap savings to improve our standing"

I took that as to sign Jimmy Graham and make it work, you would give up 2 1st rnd picks and cut those players.

If you meant something else, well that is not the way it reads.

This is the problem I find with your posts, you choose a subject, then fly off in 15 different directions tryin to get people to agree with you.

I'll keep it simple, No way is Jimmy Graham worth 2 1st round picks, especially when he is going to want 10 mil + a year,

thanks Post received 2 applause.
DoddPower on 7/5/2014(UTC), Dexter_Sinister on 7/7/2014(UTC)
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
11 Pages<1234>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / stevegb

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

27-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

27-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / rabidgopher04

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann