Would you trade for Jimmy Graham?· Page 2

nerdmann
Premier Member

10 years ago

I'd consider giving up a second for him.

“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.”

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#12

How is he not a need? I'm puzzled by that statement. For as good as our O is or can be...it struggles in the red zone. WHY is that going to change this season? What's changed? Subtract Jermichael and James Jones and add two rookies and we're better in the red zone? Pure utter nonsense. I'm as big of a fan as anyone here but to think this offense is going to be unstoppable is laughable as we were plenty stoppable in the redzone vs. better defenses. That will continue to be a problem until it's addressed and it hasn't been. Graham blows the red zone issue out of the water. We're fortunate Crosby was good last year... if he reverts to who he was 2 seasons ago with our red zone issues we're going to lose our fair share of close games due to our red zone woes.

I prefer 7 to a Mason Crosby FG attempt but that's just me and I prefer not to falsely believe that subtracting Finley, Jones and adding a rookie WR and TE is going to fix our redzone issues.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

dhazer
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#13

I say this is an easy question and the answer is not just no but a huge HELL NO. Why do we lose 2 wrs for a TE and did we forget that we won a Super Bowl with Quarless as our TE?

To me Graham and Gronk are over rated because look at the teams they play on, They don't have any great WRS on the teams, so they are the main targets, thus the big numbers.

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#14

Originally Posted by: dhazer

To me that tells me how special Graham is... EVERYONE knows it's going to him and he still produces huge numbers.

How do we lose 2 WR's? We likely lose one...Randall or Jordy.

We won the SB with Zombo at OLB opposite Matthews but we spent a 1st rounder to replace Zombo because it was a need. TE is a major need for this team. Andrew Quarless isn't much. We're used to a threat at TE being on the field.

You may believe it's crazy but I believe Ted Thompson has his eye on this. I say that based on giving Finley 8 million and our fascination with the TE position and having no proven option there.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

mi_keys
Senior Member

10 years ago

#15

For as good as our O is or can be...it struggles in the red zone. WHY is that going to change this season? What's changed? Subtract Jermichael and James Jones and add two rookies and we're better in the red zone?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Last year was a statistical anomoly for our offense during the Rodgers/McCarthy era. Here are our redzone TD conversion rate rankings since 2008:

2008: 5
2009: 7
2010: 4
2011: 3
2012: 1
2013: 26

We played most of last year without Finley so how much are we really subtracting year over year?

We played two thirds of the year without Cobb. We played half the year without Rodgers. Bulaga and Sherrod are returning from injury. Our other starting tackle from last year has another year experience. Quarless and Bostick improved towards the end of last year. We've brought in 5 rookies at WR/TE I can think of offhand (our 4 draft picks and Lyerla). The first of those draft picks, Adams, was touted for his vertical/high-pointing ability and his hands, two very useful tools in the red zone. Eddie Lacy has another year of experience.

So is it really so inconceivable that we'll do better in the red zone?

As for the proposed trade, absolutely and unequivocally no. The cost is simply way too much.

Born and bred a cheesehead

cheeseheads123
Member

10 years ago

#16

Can he play defense?

This offense is more than capable of winning a championship.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#17

Profootballtalk.com mentions Packers as a team that hypothetically could pursue Graham:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/07/02/would-another-team-make-a-run-at-graham/

'If anyone actually does it, a franchise with a need at the position that expects to pick low in the first round next year (e.g., the Packers) and/or an NFC South team whose Hall of Fame tight end has retired (i.e., the Falcons) would make sense.'

---Respected NFL writer, Mike Freeman said a half dozen teams might make a run at Graham. Packers "make sense". It ain't crazy and am not sure why the strong reaction against it.

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.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

DarkaneRules
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#18

Sha right... like when pigs fly out of my butt!

Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance

lolleren
Member

10 years ago

#19

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

I for one do not think you are crazy, and it is something we need to look into, I think 2 firsts is abit too much, but if it could be worked out so we give up a first 2015 and perhaps either a second or third in 2016 I would jump at it, assuming we could still keep either Cobb or Nelson.
Most likely Nelson, since Cobb in slot is a luxury and with Graham on the team alot of his production would come out of the slot position.

blank

StarrMax1
Registered

10 years ago

#20

Giving up draft picks, especially 1's and 2's. is not Ted Thompsons way.

Why bring in a guy who may or may not stick around, and if he does, he is going to want WR money (10 mil + a year), when the team already has 2 solid(not spectacular) TE's in Quarless and Taylor, and a group of rookies and 1 yr guys who are going to be pushing them for starting jobs.

This is off season silly talk.
But it is something to talk about.

[grin1]

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (54m) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (2h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (2h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (2h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (2h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (11h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (12h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (12h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (15h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (15h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (15h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (15h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak

beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other

beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)

Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.

beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs

packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.

beast (21-Dec) : Oh, that's how you keep beating buckeye, with cheating

Zero2Cool (20-Dec) : There is a rule that if your name starts with 'b' you lose 15 points. Hey, I don't make the rules, I just enforce them!

wpr (20-Dec) : and then there is Beast. Running away with it all.

beast (20-Dec) : As of tonight, 3 way tie for 2nd in Pick'em, that battle is interesting!

beast (20-Dec) : Lions vs Vikings could be the main last game as it could determine division winners or #1 vs #2 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Or if KC needs to win for the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Right now it looks like the only prime worthy games are Det-Minny and KC-Denver (if Denver can clinch a wild card spot)

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : The entirety of week 18 being listed as flex is weird

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Matt LaFleur today says unequivocally "Ted Thompson had nothing to do with the drafting of Jordan Love."

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Apparently, the editing is what pieces comments together. That Ted thing ... fake news.

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : LaFleur "opportunity that Ted Thompson thought was too good to pass up"

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Jordan Love pick was Ted Thompson's idea.

Mucky Tundra (19-Dec) : Kyle Shanahan on signing De'Vondre Campbell as a FA last offseason: “We obviously made a mistake.”

packerfanoutwest (19-Dec) : Alexander’s last season with GB

Martha Careful (18-Dec) : if I were a professional athlete, I would probably look to see who the agent is for Kirk Cousins and then use him

beast (18-Dec) : $100 million fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins gets benched for rookie

Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : a lower case b

Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : The real lie is how beast capitalized his name in his message while it's normally spelled with

packerfanoutwest (18-Dec) : haha that's a lie

beast (17-Dec) : Despite what lies other might tell, Beast didn't hate the Winter Warnings, it felt refreshing to Beast for some reason.

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : whiteout uniforms in general are pretty lame and weak. NFL greed at it's worst

Martha Careful (17-Dec) : The Viking uniforms, the whiteout uniforms specifically absolutely suck

beast (17-Dec) : Thanks Zero2Cool, looks a lot better now

beast (17-Dec) : Seems like someone has a crush on me, can't stop talking about me

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : Should be gooder now. The forum default theme went to goofy land.

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : What the hell

packerfanoutwest (17-Dec) : yeah beast hates the Winter Warning Unies

Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Okay I'm glad to know it's not just something happening to me lol

Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Zero, did you copy the Packers uniforms from last night and white out the board?

beast (16-Dec) : Oh crap, is the board going to the Winter Warning Uniforms too?!? It's all white on white right now!

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS