uffda udfa
  • uffda udfa
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

Number of points I wanted to respond to. Get ready to be bemused.



During Ted Thompson's time here as GM, only the Giants and Steelers (who have been another proponent of draft and develop Packers style) have won multiple Super Bowls. Other top teams including New England and San Francisco have not won a title during that time frame. There have been many great teams over the years that have failed to win a single title, most humorously for us being our purple friends to the west and their teams in the late 60s/early 70s.

Scoffing at our 1 ring under the Rodgers era is ridiculous. Period.

Are there things we could do to improve the team, to improve our chances at winning another title? Yes. Absolutely. And there has been much discussion on this forum over the years as to what exactly those things are. This neither changes the fact that we will still be a contender this year nor does it, in and of itself, make it right to give up two first round picks and sign Graham to a contract that will likely lead to us cutting others to make it work long term.





Those were cases in which we were potentially offering a single 3rd/4th round pick. That's quite a bit different situation than giving up two 1st round picks.



Avril and Bennett were free agents and were signed to pretty manageable deals for Seattle, especially considering that for the last few years they've been operating with many of their key players on their rookie deals still. That gives a lot more cap room to make short term free agency moves.

As you admit, Harvin had effectively nothing to do with Seattle's season. They won in spite of that trade doing nothing for them in the first year. As of right now, Minnesota has got the better end of that trade.

Anquan Boldin cost San Francisco a 6th round pick and was on a reasonable salary. Again, not the same as giving up two 1st round picks and paying a huge salary.

Deion Sanders was a free agent both times.

Great teams have made the roster decisions where the expected return ouweight the risk, where the benefits outweight the costs. Offhand, I'm struggling to think of many, if any, moves where giving up a bundle of high end draft picks and signing a huge contract for a player has payed off with a title. I can think of a number of rather infamous moves that have utterly failed. Though not exactly analgous, there's a couple recent examples of a team giving up bunch of draft picks to move up that I expect to ultimately fail despite the player turning out to be very good: Atlanta with Julio Jones and Washington with RGIII. They just have too many other holes to fill.

I can't think of nor did I find in a cursory search, an example of a team signing another team's franchise tagged player and giving up two first round picks. We're talking about a situation that is effectively free agency, plus giving up two first round picks. Free agency already has a spotted track record before you even contemplate giving up draft picks.



Graham has "started" 37 games according to NFL.com. Then again, he's actually played in 62. I'd bet the vast majority of those non-"starts" were cases in which the first lineup used by New Orleans didn't involve a tight end so he didn't technically "start" the game. He was probably pretty involved in most if not all of those games. For instance, he didn'st "start" week 14 against Carolina but had 6 receptions for 58 yards and 2 TDs.

So you can actually expect roughly 2 touchdowns every 3 games (0.66 per game) from Graham, which is still fantastic; but let's be accurate about it if we're going to highlight his production. For reference, that's more or less the same as Nelson the last 3 years (30 TDs in 44 games or .68 per game).



If you cut any of these players, who do you bring in to replace them and at what cost?

If you cut Bulaga are you content with Barclay as your top right tackle or do you look to free agency? Sherrod is our top backup at left tackle and the potential starter. Bulaga and Sherrod are both free agents after this year. Either they pan out, or we need to replace them with someone else. We pay our offensive line as a unit very little. At some point that's going to have to change. Paying big bucks to three receiving targets does us little good if Rodgers is on his back all game.

Tramon isn't worth 7.5M but he's a free agent after this year and he does have value to the defense. I personally like having a deep stable of corners. I'd rather they just rework it to something more friendly and extend him out 2 years, which would probably take him through his useful years.

Brad Jones and Jamari Lattimore are nothing special to write home about, but what are our options at an alreadly thin position if we cut either or both? Who is still out there in free agency?

BJ Raji has been a huge disappointment the last few years. I would have been fine letting him walk in free agency, but I would have wanted a replacement at nose tackle. We don't have many options that are suited to play a 0 or 1 tech as their primary position. We have more 3 and 5 techs.

Julius Peppers' cap hit accelerates significantly the next two years. We can cut him if he doesn't pan out, but if he does play at high level, it would really help our defense to maintain a significant pass rush threat opposite Matthews.

You mentioned in another post that none of the above is necessary to bring in Graham. True for one year. After that, you'd have to cut someone or let someone go or you're probably not resigning at least one of Cobb and Nelson.



The red zone issues that are a stasticial anomaly under Rodgers/McCarthy era? Last year was the first year New Orleans was better than Green Bay in red zone TD conversion rate since 2010, when Jimmy Graham entered the league. Interestingly, New Orleans was better than Green Bay in red zone TD conversion in 2008 and 2009 with no Jimmy Graham.



The reason people compared the two is because both are the primary receiving target in their respective offense. On passing plays, how often does he stay in to block? He's almost exclusively a receiver. Plus, it seems to be annoyng you... trollers gonna troll.



Probably similar to what Brees does with Graham as far as effectiveness. I'd expect marginally better but similar nonetheless.



In Ted Thompson's tenure as, here are his #1 picks:

'05: Aaron Rodgers - All world. Nothing more need be said.
'06: AJ Hawk - 8 year starter; Named to 2010 pro bowl; May become Green Bay's all-time leader in tackles if he plays 2 more seasons; I know you're not the biggest fan, he's not flashy but he has been a steady, consistent starter for us.
'07: Justin Harrell - Injury risk before taking him and injuries derailed him before he ever really had a chance; they knew the risk and it bit them.
'08: Traded back to get Jordy Nelson - Has been named as an alternate to the pro bowl; arguably a top 10 receiver in the NFL; You'll point to it being 2nd round but we don't get him if we don't have a 1st round pick to trade back.
'09: BJ Raji - Started off very well his first two years and was a major part of our Super Bowl winning team, we might not win that title without him; been named to a pro bowl that he didn't deserve to be in but could and probably should have been named our Super Bowl year; been an utter waste of space from 2011 unward.
'09: Clay Matthews - You try to remove him from the list but if the point is assessing the ability to draft in the first round it's completely nonsensical to do so; multiple pro bowls and all-pro nominations; premier pass rusher.
'10: Bryan Bulaga - Named to the all-rookie team and started at right tackle on our championship team; took huge strides forward in his sophomore year; injuries derailed half of third year and entirety of last year; if he can return healthy, he's a good tackle.
'11: Derek Sherrod - Has been injured most of his career; no significant injury history to speak of in college.
'12: Nick Perry - Has been sidelined by injuries; no significant injury history to speak of in college; has flashed when healthy.
'13: Datone Jones - Didn't play much rookie year; niggling injuries didn't help; hard to judge after only one year but needs to take a big step forward.
'14: Haha Clinton-Dix - Just drafted.

Excluding Haha from the count, 4 of the 10 have been named to at least 1 pro bowl and a 5th has been named as an alternate. 2 of those 5 are at or above Graham's level (Rodgers and Matthews). 4 of the others have missed significant time if not almost their entire career to date due to injury while only 1 of those was flagged as a significant injury risk coming in. The remaining player has only had his rookie year. The first round picks have not been as bad as you're making out. There's no guarantees, but they do have a pretty high expected value and that's what you use in any cost-benefit analysis of a transaction. And keep in mind that under the new CBA, first round draft picks are very cap friendly for their first 4 years.

Bottom line: two first round picks and a contract that means we probably have to let a couple other pieces go is a hefty price tag for any player.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 



I never scoffed at 1 ring under Rodgeers, I said I didn't want it to be the only one like it was in the Favre era.

Again, these comparisons to Jordy Nelson...

You tried detailing TT's picks and came to same conclusion I did... only Rodgers is better than Graham at his position. Clay was NOT our own 1st rounder. We could trade up into 1st if we gave away our 1st away for Jimmy next year. Clay is not part of the conversation here. I do notice that arguments that aren't there to be made are being made to be against this.

The salary cap is projected to go up another 10 million next season and be over 150 million in 2 years. I'm not sure that our financial worries are warranted. I guess that all depends how the Packers figured their cap for the upcoming years. I will err on the side that the Packers played it conservative so when it does go up we'll have a ton of room.

The point I like the best in this entire thread is restructuring Tramon...it would be wrong to pay him 9.5 million this year in my view. I would rather cut him than pay him 9.5 mil (that is what we have to pay him...we'd net 7.5 million in cap savings with 2 million in dead money)but that's me. The posting of the players and their cap savings was a guide to where extra cap room could be found. No specific pesron was automatically cut in my mind to make this happen. It's a reference for those so worried about how we're going to pay Jordy and Randall and also do something bold like adding Jimmy G.

BTW, I realize the number of games Jimmy appeared in... the ratio is about the same as it is for Finley. I had a choice to make about how I wanted to compare their TD's... Starting was more of an equal footing situation as not starting I can't tell how much they actually appeared in that particular game. I assumed starting meant they were likely in the game from the beginning on.

I purposely didn't broach trades like for Julio Jones and RGIII because those were draft day trades for guys who were not NFL known quantities when the trade was made...Jimmy Graham is. I don't think anyone would argue that Jimmy isn't going to be in Canton one day. BTW, off subject...I think it's too early for you to label the Redskins addition of RGIII a dumb move or the Falcons with Jones.

The Steelers are a comparable team to us...the Giants are not. Giants add pieces they need when they need them. That argument is invalid to me. Seattle is not like us and they have already matched Rodgers ring production. Whose odds do you like better to get a 2nd ring first? Green Bay or Seattle? Why? Seattle will go for it. We mostly do not and hope for that one rare season where it all just falls into place. I love that Seattle traded for Harvin... they want to win...now. Green Bay doesn't have that aggressive nature. Wolf had it. I prefer Wolf's mentality to TT's.

I still see no logical reason not to make this trade if it's possible to make it.
UserPostedImage
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."


hardrocker950
11 years ago

I never scoffed at 1 ring under Rodgeers, I said I didn't want it to be the only one like it was in the Favre era.

Again, these comparisons to Jordy Nelson...

You tried detailing TT's picks and came to same conclusion I did... only Rodgers is better than Graham at his position. Clay was NOT our own 1st rounder. We could trade up into 1st if we gave away our 1st away for Jimmy next year. Clay is not part of the conversation here. I do notice that arguments that aren't there to be made are being made to be against this.

The salary cap is projected to go up another 10 million next season and be over 150 million in 2 years. I'm not sure that our financial worries are warranted. I guess that all depends how the Packers figured their cap for the upcoming years. I will err on the side that the Packers played it conservative so when it does go up we'll have a ton of room.

The point I like the best in this entire thread is restructuring Tramon...it would be wrong to pay him 9.5 million this year in my view. I would rather cut him than pay him 9.5 mil (that is what we have to pay him...we'd net 7.5 million in cap savings with 2 million in dead money)but that's me. The posting of the players and their cap savings was a guide to where extra cap room could be found. No specific pesron was automatically cut in my mind to make this happen. It's a reference for those so worried about how we're going to pay Jordy and Randall and also do something bold like adding Jimmy G.

BTW, I realize the number of games Jimmy appeared in... the ratio is about the same as it is for Finley. I had a choice to make about how I wanted to compare their TD's... Starting was more of an equal footing situation as not starting I can't tell how much they actually appeared in that particular game. I assumed starting meant they were likely in the game from the beginning on.

I purposely didn't broach trades like for Julio Jones and RGIII because those were draft day trades for guys who were not NFL known quantities when the trade was made...Jimmy Graham is. I don't think anyone would argue that Jimmy isn't going to be in Canton one day. BTW, off subject...I think it's too early for you to label the Redskins addition of RGIII a dumb move or the Falcons with Jones.

The Steelers are a comparable team to us...the Giants are not. Giants add pieces they need when they need them. That argument is invalid to me. Seattle is not like us and they have already matched Rodgers ring production. Whose odds do you like better to get a 2nd ring first? Green Bay or Seattle? Why? Seattle will go for it. We mostly do not and hope for that one rare season where it all just falls into place. I love that Seattle traded for Harvin... they want to win...now. Green Bay doesn't have that aggressive nature. Wolf had it. I prefer Wolf's mentality to TT's.

I still see no logical reason not to make this trade if it's possible to make it.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I see where you are going with this, but I think cutting Tramon could come back to bite us. He is overpaid - but last thing we need now is losing depth in our defense. I don't see any way restructuring Tramon's contract would help this become a reality. Jimmy is a damn good target, but I don't think he is worth the sacrifice that we would have to make for him. I would rather see the upcoming cap increase as a chance to pay Jordy and Randall - and possibly upgrade in the trenches. If Raji doesn't produce this year, we likely have some cash to spend on a replacement. There are many other places we could drop a few mil that (I think) would be more beneficial.

Our offense is good when healthy - I don't feel he fills a HUGE need as long as our guys can block and catch a few passes. Wreckless spending is killing teams like Dallas, and I sure don't want to be in a sinking boat like them.

play2win
11 years ago

I don't know why you insist on comparing him to Jordy Nelson? Have you ever compared Finley to Jordy Nelson because he's as hybrid of a TE as Graham is. Would anyone in the NFL compare him to Calvin Johnson? Why? Is Calvin Johnson a hybrid WR or just a WR? Is Jordy a hybrid WR or just a WR? You insist on comparing a HYBRID TIGHT END to a PURE WR. That is so illogical I wouldn't know where to begin.

Here's a blurb from JSOnline.com back when Finley was seeking a new contract:

Jermichael Finley is a free agent this off-season and there hasn't been any movement on a new contract. "Hey, it's the NFL," Finley said. "With business right now, I don't even know what's going on. ...You just have to play that (waiting) game. It's the Green Bay way. "I don't know anything. I'll just hope for the best." If Finley does receive the franchise tag from the Packers, it's expected that he will seek to be classified as a wide receiver. An arbitrator would make that final call. The franchise tag number for wideouts will likely be around $9 million.

Sound familiar? Finley was going to go the Graham route, long before Graham ever did, had he been tagged and argue he was more of a WR. So, instead of making the right comparison which is FINLEY to GRAHAM which would not help your argument, you bump it up to a WR vs. a TE and you still can't make the case by skewing the comparison as badly as has been done here.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/34019/technically-jermichael-finley-is-a-wr 

So, try comparing Finley's best season vs. Graham's last. That is the correct comparison. It isn't close... if the Packers thought enough to give Finley 8.75 million last season there is no reason not to give 10 million to Jimmy Graham who is a far better TE. Further, there has been crickets and rightly so on the idea that our franchise has only drafted two players with their own 1st rounders that are as good as Graham is at his position since 1988. Oh no! How dumb to give up 2 1st rounders to get a superstar redzone stud who changes games vs. taking our chances drafting a pair like Sherrod and Perry...or Harrell and Hawk. How could we live without out our precious 1st rounders to net a TE who is going to the Hall of Fame one day? That is dumb.

EDIT: Would you trade Nick Perry and Derek Sherrod for Jimmy Graham? How about AJ Hawk and Justin Harrell? Those are back to back 1st rounders....and...YES...you would, or at least should trade those 1st round pairs for Jimmy Graham. We draft near the bottom of Round 1. The only other time we hit on a superstar with our own 1st rounder other than the gift of Rodgers is when we drafted Top 10 when we were terrible and netted Sterling. The aversion to losing 1st round picks is odd.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



you dont understand comparing the top receivers of two NFC competitors? Too bad for you. I guess this just is not worth another key strok
mi_keys
  • mi_keys
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Senior Member
11 years ago

Clay was NOT our own 1st rounder. We could trade up into 1st if we gave away our 1st away for Jimmy next year. Clay is not part of the conversation here.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

You persist. With the indefensible. If you can't grasp how Clay Matthews, a player taken by Ted Thompson in the late first round, doesn't factor into the discussion/calculation of the expected value of players Ted Thompson might, in the future, take in the late first round, I don't know what to tell you.
Born and bred a cheesehead
uffda udfa
  • uffda udfa
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

You persist. With the indefensible. If you can't grasp how Clay Matthews, a player taken by Ted Thompson in the late first round, doesn't factor into the discussion/calculation of the expected value of players Ted Thompson might, in the future, take in the late first round, I don't know what to tell you.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 



You're right. Clay Matthews was a guy we traded up for. Suppose we dealt two 1st's for Jimmy, what precludes us from trading up into the 1st again? There is no answer to that. Nothing does. You could still get your Clay by trading up. Are you upset we lost picks to trade up for Clay? Who knows who they could've turned into? What stupidity.

What irony that talk about trying to make indefensible points. Delicious irony. Oh, I see what you're trying to do... you're trying to say that we could land another Clay late in the 1st round. Got it. However, trading away two firsts and netting a HOF TE is not much of a gamble at all vs. the chance we won't find a Clay Matthews again late in the first. Obviously, you've ignored the link I posted. Even if you want to count Clay which you seem emboldened to do, that's 2 players since '89...I'll just drop Sharpe in '88 out of the equation. 2 guys who are as good as Jimmy Graham in the first since 1989. That's two guys in TWENTY FIVE YEARS who are better than Jimmy Graham is at his position. TWENTY FIVE YEARS but people are freaked we might lose two 1st's even when one of them is filled by landing a HOF player? So, you really only lose one 1st, in essence, if it would even cost that much.

People like hardrocker who think the resources should be allocated elsehwere, I don't really have an issue with.


UserPostedImage
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."


StarrMax1
11 years ago

You're right. Clay Matthews was a guy we traded up for. Suppose we dealt two 1st's for Jimmy, what precludes us from trading up into the 1st again? There is no answer to that. Nothing does. You could still get your Clay by trading up. Are you upset we lost picks to trade up for Clay? Who knows who they could've turned into? What stupidity.

What irony that talk about trying to make indefensible points. Delicious irony. Oh, I see what you're trying to do... you're trying to say that we could land another Clay late in the 1st round. Got it. However, trading away two firsts and netting a HOF TE is not much of a gamble at all vs. the chance we won't find a Clay Matthews again late in the first. Obviously, you've ignored the link I posted. Even if you want to count Clay which you seem emboldened to do, that's 2 players since '89...I'll just drop Sharpe in '88 out of the equation. 2 guys who are as good as Jimmy Graham in the first since 1989. That's two guys in TWENTY FIVE YEARS who are better than Jimmy Graham is at his position. TWENTY FIVE YEARS but people are freaked we might lose two 1st's even when one of them is filled by landing a HOF player? So, you really only lose one 1st, in essence, if it would even cost that much.

People like hardrocker who think the resources should be allocated elsehwere, I don't really have an issue with.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



So now to validate your point, you are putting Jimmy Graham into the NFL Hall Of Fame?

I want to keep this straight,
Packers are now going to trade away 2 1st round picks, possibly cut 8-9 current roster players, and now The Packers are going to trade back up into the 1st rnd in 2015, which will probably cost them their 2nd and 3rd rnd picks at the minimum in 2015. Probably more like a 2nd 3rd and 4th or 5th round.

But we will say Ted gets the deal done with just a 2nd and 3rd.

In the end Packers give up their 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks in 2015, a 1st rnd pick in 2016, possibly cut some or all of the following

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****

They end up with Jimmy Graham and in all probability a late 2015 1st rnd draft pick.

Let's ignore the fact that Jimmy Graham is going to want 10 mil + a year for an extended time which will probably cost The Packers Nelson and/or Cobb.

I can see the flaws in doing this deal.

Can't wait for you to explain to me just how wrong I am.
steveishere
11 years ago
If Jimmy Graham played here his numbers would be a lot closer to Finley's than they are right now. We aren't throwing the ball 650 times a year and we aren't throwing the ball to 1 person 150 times. It's not like we add Graham and it's like adding an extra 1200 yards to the offense or something lol those receptions and yards are coming from somewhere else. Not saying he wouldn't improve the offense but he wouldn't improve it that much to be worth all that money and draft picks.
steveishere
11 years ago
I would prefer just to keep the picks and re-sign Cobb.
play2win
11 years ago
This is a very simple question of value and return on investment, and it doesnt add up. Especially when you consider we just added two players at the position who look to have very high celings, and the fact that Rodgers has far more quality targets at his disposal to spread the ball around than Drew Brees does in NO.

not to mention, just two seasons ago, Jimmy Graham recorded the worst drop rate in the NFL at TE with 15%, dropping 15 out of 100 catchable balls.

Andrew Quarless dropped just 2 out of 34 catchable balls last season for a 5.88% drop rate. Quarless was ranked the 12th best in the NFL in 2013.

How can we expect a return on such an enormous investment when it took Graham 144 targets to get 16 TDs? That total is nearly double what Finley got in his best years.

NO was incredibly one dimensional last season, and their constantly p

Once again, a gigantic shitstorm of an argument is based upon a single stat, 16 TDs, and that number is skewed.utting the ball up for Graham skewed his numbers. How many TDs could we really expect from him with what would amount to 85 targets at the most?
Zero2Cool
11 years ago

not to mention, just two seasons ago, Jimmy Graham recorded the worst drop rate in the NFL at TE with 15%, dropping 15 out of 100 catchable balls.

Originally Posted by: play2win 



What the hell are you doing? You damn well know we can't knock anyone for drops other than Jermichael Finley around this neck of the woods!! Finley is the worst! He drops every potential first down catch and every potential touchdown catch! No one is worse than Finley!!!!


UserPostedImage
play2win
11 years ago
Sorry Z2C, but I am unable to view the text i wish to edit.

My point is Grahams numbers were incredibly skewed as NO was constantly putting the ball up for Graham last season. That renders this one stat the whole argument is based upon somewhat moot.

Without 144 targets, there is nm? way Graham approaches 16 TDs. How many TDs could we expect Graham to actually get in our system
Zero2Cool
11 years ago

Sorry Z2C, but I am unable to view the text i wish to edit.

My point is Grahams numbers were incredibly skewed as NO was constantly putting the ball up for Graham last season. That renders this one stat the whole argument is based upon somewhat moot.

Without 144 targets, there is nm? way Graham approaches 16 TDs. How many TDs could we expect Graham to actually get in our system

Originally Posted by: play2win 



Attach screenshot of what you're seeing please. I dislike Apple so I have no Apple products, but a screen shot will help me inform the developer how to fix your booboo.

Also, can you try the same thing on Chrome?
UserPostedImage
play2win
11 years ago

What the hell are you doing? You damn well know we can't knock anyone for drops other than Jermichael Finley around this neck of the woods!! Finley is the worst! He drops every potential first down catch and every potential touchdown catch! No one is worse than Finley!!!!

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Actually, Finley was the 3rd worst that year with a 12.88% drop rate, 85 targets, 70 catchable, dropped 9.😆
play2win
11 years ago

Attach screenshot of what you're seeing please. I dislike Apple so I have no Apple products, but a screen shot will help me inform the developer how to fix your booboo.

Also, can you try the same thing on Chrome?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I will try. Yeah, it is really bad. Even if I attempt to place my curser within a body of text to change something in an original post, i am unable. For instance, I am unable to place the curser now to change that lower case i in previous sentence to a cap...

If I attempt to place curser to begin an edit at the end of a post, the entire body text disappears, and a giant curser shows flashing, at an arbitrary location within the text.
play2win
11 years ago
My posts are starting to look pretty freaking funny. I swear I'm not drinking...!

How can you design a site that only works on left brainer equipment? 😉
nerdmann
  • nerdmann
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Premier Member
11 years ago
Fact is, we'd only need him for one year anyway.

I believe at least one of these young guys will step up and be a player for us, but they'll need a year of seasoning first. Meanwhile, Quarless is adequate and Bostick could very well step up.
“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.”
mi_keys
  • mi_keys
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Senior Member
11 years ago

Suppose we dealt two 1st's for Jimmy, what precludes us from trading up into the 1st again? There is no answer to that. Nothing does.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You're right, nothing does. And in no way have I insinuated you couldnt. But if we give up a first round pick and then want to move back into the first round, we have to give away the value of a first round pick. It's an opportunity cost.


Are you upset we lost picks to trade up for Clay? Who knows who they could've turned into? What stupidity.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



When Clay was an unknown commodity, at the time of the trade, I thought it was a risk but the expected return, especially if Clay became a premiere pass rushing talent, would more than pay off. There was also very little financial risk in that trade: it was a 5 year contract maxing out at just over $13M total. I was also giddy to get a pass rusher because that's always been my favorite role on a team.

Oh, I see what you're trying to do... you're trying to say that we could land another Clay late in the 1st round. Got it.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Yes, it really is that simple. Congrats, you finally got there. Here's a gold star.

However, trading away two firsts and netting a HOF TE is not much of a gamble at all vs. the chance we won't find a Clay Matthews again late in the first.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You've annointed him in to the Hall of Fame too early. If he keeps up this production for an extended career, yes he will go. But he could suffer a career ending injury, or an injury that he, while continuing to play, never fully recovers from. That happens in the NFL. Players also drop off some times. Maybe they were just looking to get paid and once they do they don't care. Some people might lose the hunger they initially had. Sometimes a player changes teams and the team chemistry or the system just don't quite click. How many marquee free agents have we seen go to another team and flop? Graham will, in all likelihood, continue on with very high production in New Orleans or elsewhere, should he move. That is not a guarantee though.

Obviously, you've ignored the link I posted. Even if you want to count Clay which you seem emboldened to do, that's 2 players since '89...I'll just drop Sharpe in '88 out of the equation. 2 guys who are as good as Jimmy Graham in the first since 1989. That's two guys in TWENTY FIVE YEARS who are better than Jimmy Graham is at his position. TWENTY FIVE YEARS but people are freaked we might lose two 1st's even when one of them is filled by landing a HOF player? So, you really only lose one 1st, in essence, if it would even cost that much.

People like hardrocker who think the resources should be allocated elsehwere, I don't really have an issue with.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



No, I didn't ignore it. But frankly, I'm more interested in assessing TT's performance on first rounders since he is the GM that would be presuambly using or not using these 1st round picks. 2 players in 10. 20% chance per Ted Thompson pick to get a player as good or better than Graham. That would put the odds of getting a Jimmy Graham calibre player with at least one of the two first round picks at 36% (inverse of not getting Jimmy Graham with both 1-(.8)*(.8)). There's a third, Jordy Nelson, who we used the 1st round pick to trade back and get, that's just a tier below. I'd also like to reiterate if it was not made clear, but a lot of those picks that have not panned out, or should I say have not panned out yet (let's judge Sherrod, Perry and Bulaga on how they come back), have been the victims of injuries. It's been unfortunate for us that we haven't been able to keep a first round pick healthy for the last 4 years or so. But that happens in football and that could happen to anyone we bring in, from a draft pick to Jimmy Graham.

You've also set up this false dichotomy whereby the 1st round pick has to be as good as Jimmy Graham or it isn't worth it. If you get two players that are at Jordy Nelson's level, while neither is as good as Jimmy Graham, that's much better position to be in. I wouldn't trade two Jordy Nelson's for one Jimmy Graham and that's not even close. So you work your way down and there's some value of player where you break even from having two at value x just as much as you value having one Jimmy Graham.

You then have to take into account that two first round draft picks will be on a combined annual salary of somewhere between 3-4M between the two of them and that gives you 4 years of anywhere from 6-9M additional cap space to work with relative to signing Graham to extend your own key pieces or go out and put towards a free agent at a position of need.

That's where the math, for most of us, points out to Jimmy Graham being too expensive at a top dollar contract PLUS two first round picks.

But the last line really says it all for me, that either we've failed to convey or you've failed to understand (or some combination of both) the fact that everyone who is against this is against it because we feel the resources could be allocated elsewhere to yield a higher return.
Born and bred a cheesehead
play2win
11 years ago
Positive effect on offense is negligible. Negative effect on defense is detrimental. Plus, losing ability to add a top talent in R1 for two years, along with the gigantic cap figure of $10M...

Finley's best year he had 85 targets and was split out as a WR as Graham would if he were introduced to our system. That is 59% of the targets that Graham had last season with NO.

59% of 16 TDs is 9.44 TDs. We should want to give up that much of our future for that?
uffda udfa
  • uffda udfa
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
11 years ago
Cherry picking at it's finest....should have some big baskets full by now. How many times do I need to say the cap is projected to be over 150 million in 2 seasons? Next year it's set for another 10 million jump. We have 13.6 availabe right now. The cap isn't our enemy and wouldn't be if we signed Graham especially with some of those guys on that list potentially leaving.

The words being put in my mouth are also of note. False dichotomy? I would have no issue if we got two very good players in Round 1 over the next two years...that would be fine. I would prefer a Hall of Famer and make no mistake that's where this guy is heading barring injury...and injury could happen to anyone: See Packers. We have a better chance of drafting back to back injury guys like a Sherrod and Harrell than we do of a Jimmy Graham. You make this deal you have a guaranteed star joining your team. The fact that Richard Rodgers got some pub during OTA's is used as a reason to not do this is one of my favorite things I've ever read on any Packers forum. That is like a Viking fan saying a few years back... Hey, if Green Bay has to franchise Rodgers in lieu of an extension, we shouldn't trade two firsts to the Packers because we drafted Ponder and Greg Jennings said some glowing things about him during TC. Yes, different positions that don't impact the game the same but same mindset that makes no sense.

Quarless looks very unnatural catching the football...is not anywhere the blocker many have built him up to be because he's nothing in the passing game he must be a great blocker. The guy had 15 bad runs per JSO last year. 3 drops in 34 attempts which would be his best season ever, I believe, as I've looked at his drop rate before and it's awful. The stat being used against Jimmy is for ONE season not his career drop rate, but, of course, the person who posted it is unaware that Graham had a wrist injury for part of that season that very well may have affected his ability to catch the football. Let's not post his career drop rate, which is found earlier in this thread, let's focus on one year when we don't really look any deeper but can't wait to rush over with an Aha! moment to tell me how dumb this is. The fact that anyone is saying we're good at TE without Graham is all that really needs to be said. We aren't good at tight end. We now have a JAG backup slated to be our starter, but he's so non descript (and injured, too) that there's talk we may start a 3rd round comp pick from Cal. Nevermind that the guy we used to trot out was a guy D. coord's had to prepare for and he changed the way teams played us...that's surely not important and won't affect our Graham equivalent (Jordy Nelson). Finley's attention surely didn't help Jordy Randall or anyone else. Removing him from the equation will have no impact at all because we have Andrew Quarless. Andrew freaking Quarless. I'm surprised we spent a 3rd on a TE when we had a guy like Andrew Quarless ready to take the reins. Why would they have done such a thing with a star like AQ already on the roster?

Graham would get as many balls here as he did in New Orleans if he was as productive when we threw it to him. Given our other complementary weapons he'd be even more of a threat here than he is there where he's the focal point of opposing D's.

The cap can accommodate Jimmy just fine and Randall and Jordy also. We can live without the next Hawk, Harrell, Perry, Sherrod, Bulaga, Datone Jones, etc for the right to land one of the most explosive TE's to ever lacem up but I know...we're good at TE, just like ILB and S, too.






UserPostedImage
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."


steveishere
11 years ago


Graham would get as many balls here as he did in New Orleans if he was as productive when we threw it to him. Given our other complementary weapons he'd be even more of a threat here than he is there where he's the focal point of opposing D's.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I see absolutely no reason at all to belive that's true. Finley was producing more yards/target than Graham did last year and was nowhere near on pace for 150 targets. Before Rodgers and Cobb got hurt Jordy was on track for a 1600 yard season and wasn't on pace for even that many targets. We don't throw the ball nearly 650 times a year and the ball is going to be shared around with Jordy/Cobb and now Lacy too. That's not even accounting for the fact that Rodgers routinely targets 8-10 players a game not just 3 or 4.

We've got plenty of offensive weapons and will undoubtedly have a top offense next year, it's a waste to blow 10m+ and two 1st round picks on another receiver - diminishing returns and whatnot. If we were lacking for offense then maybe it would be worth it but we aren't so it isn't. Who we have at TE is pretty much irrelevant. Graham brings nothing to the table besides catching passes so that's what he is, a receiver and we don't need another receiver to be successful.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : What the hell
beast (7h) : Packershome going to the Whiteout unis again
Zero2Cool (13h) : Oh wait, they got Cam Ward. 1st overall right? haha oops
Zero2Cool (13h) : They could send Packers a 1st for a QB they are familiar with
Zero2Cool (13h) : Titans QB Will Levis to have season-ending shoulder surgery
Zero2Cool (19-Jul) : Their season did kind of start there, so 🤷
dfosterf (19-Jul) : Eagles put an engraved Brazil flag on their super bowl rings
Zero2Cool (18-Jul) : Benton unsigned no more
Zero2Cool (17-Jul) : That's good analysis, yes you are getting old. It'd a blessing!
dfosterf (14-Jul) : *analysis* gettin' old
dfosterf (14-Jul) : One of the best analyisis I"ve ever watched at this time of an offseason
dfosterf (14-Jul) : Andy Herman interviewed Warren Sharp on his Pack a day podcast
packerfanoutwest (10-Jul) : Us Padres fans love it....But it'll be a Dodgers/Yankees World Series
Zero2Cool (9-Jul) : Brewers sweep Dodgers. Awesome
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : And James Flanigan is the grandson of Packers Super Bowl winner Jim Flanigan Sr.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : Jerome Bettis and Jim Flanigans sons as well!
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Thomas Davis Jr is OLB, not WR. Oops.
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Larry Fitzgeral and Thomas Davis sons too. WR's as well.
Mucky Tundra (5-Jul) : Kaydon Finley, son of Jermichael Finley, commits to Notre Dame
dfosterf (3-Jul) : Make sure to send my props to him! A plus move!
Zero2Cool (3-Jul) : My cousin, yes.
dfosterf (3-Jul) : That was your brother the GB press gazette referenced with the red cross draft props thing, yes?
Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : Packers gonna unveil new throwback helmet in few weeks.
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade
dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

18-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

15-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

14-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

10-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

10-Jul / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

6-Jul / Random Babble / Martha Careful

4-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

1-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.