1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Big Announcement Coming for 2015 Football Season!!

    Be on the look out for a big Packer Forum announcement when the schedule is released. Full details coming soon...

Jimmy Graham

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Ace, Mar 3, 2014.

  1. Pack....man!!!

    Pack....man!!! Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    81
    Ratings:
    +7
    How about this Deone Bucannon? Tape measures well 6'01" 215 4.58 high 4.49 low 40yrd dash... From what they are saying might be around on the second round for the Pack... Hard hitter but still raw... Any thoughts?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  2. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,793
    Ratings:
    +1,311
    Let's be realistic here. "Projecting similarly" to Graham and actually turning out to be the next Jimmy Graham are way, way different things. If every team could be assured that Jace Amaro was going to turn out to be the next Jimmy Graham, he would be a top 5 pick, not a 2nd or 3rd round pick.

    Also, pointing out that Jarrett Boykin will get less targets if Jimmy Graham is here is a little silly. I don't' hardly think working Graham into offensive formations would really turn out to be a headache.

    Decent points on the value bit -- losing two reasonable price first round picks to make the transaction and having that take up quite a bit of payroll -- fair point there.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,911
    Ratings:
    +984

    1st round , hence the reason I wouldn't care if he gave up the picks for Graham. His best picks have been in the later rds with the exception of Matthews and Rodgers.
     
  4. BorderRivals.com

    BorderRivals.com Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    594
    Ratings:
    +499
    I don't mean to be rude, but this is the most asinine comment. This is the fantasy football crap that is so agitating to read in these forums.

    1. Why do you think it's so easy to get Tramon to restructure? There's no leverage for the Pack to do it. Tramon was our best CB the last half of last season. He earned his salary by his play.
    2. Do you really think Clay and Burnett would restructure merely ONE year after signing their deals?! Come on, Man! Again, little leverage for the Packers in doing that for either player. Burnett may have been terrible, but he's the best option. So, we aren't going to cut him. Since that is the case, restructuring doesn't happen just for the sake of restructuring.
    3. Here we go with the fantasy football part. Sign the most expensive free agent safety who's been the "leader" of one of the worst defenses in the league for the last several seasons. Then, let's trade several first round picks to take fliers on a kid from Buffalo or a kid from UCLA, neither of whom are guarantees - because it's the draft!!!
    4. Signing Byrd and moving up into the draft would require a lot of money. And signing Byrd would hamper our ability to resign key players in the future like Jordy, Cobb, Bulaga, etc. Signing Byrd also means Shields is gone too. So maybe it's an addition (assuming a FA signing works out) and a subtraction.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  5. Ace

    Ace Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    736
    Ratings:
    +302
    Fair enough
     
  6. BorderRivals.com

    BorderRivals.com Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    594
    Ratings:
    +499
    Do you understand that getting Graham is so much more than trading picks only? He'd require the richest contract ever given to a TE. That has huge implications for our ability to resign core players in the future. And losing first round picks hampers teams in the long run usually. You just need to reference how the Julio Jones draft day deal has hampered Atlanta's ability to build a true team around it's star player. But, again, you don't bother with thinking about the complete picture when making these fantasy football decisions.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,911
    Ratings:
    +984
    How the heck is signing Byrd fantasy football? Just stop reading my post please because you always have something negative to say and that's what's annoying. Get rid of Brad jones, restructure Burnett, Tramon Williams, Aaron Rodgers and you have plenty of money so I don't wanna hear about not having the money. Rodgers knows the defense is the issue so I'm sure he will do what he can if TT asked the question. Rings is what he wants he's got plenty of money.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  8. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,883
    Ratings:
    +2,055
    I really don´t think it would make any sense for the Packers to trade for Graham. First of all it´s the defense that needs to get fixed and the two first round picks we would have to give up for Graham should be used to draft impact players on that side of the ball. Graham would cost a lot of money and I rather have the Packers re-sign Nelson and Cobb on the offensive side of the ball, which won´t be cheap either.

    In addition, I´m surprised that nobody has even mentioned that Graham isn´t a good run blocker, with the Packers new-found success in the run game I don´t want him to block for Lacy.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,452
    Being freash into a new deal, I doubt that Arod will restructure. Asking that many people to take pay cuts and getting rid of one who would end up costing us money that we would owe him any how does not really free up anything. I doubt all those guys that would have to be restructured just for one newbie coming in would be very happy with that type of treatment. Not worth the nightmare it would cause right away and down the road. Not even close to being a plan worth looking into. Borderrival is/was correct, that is more of a fantasy than a reality.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. thisisnate

    thisisnate Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Messages:
    314
    Ratings:
    +181
    We're not getting rid of Brad Jones. Burnett and Rodgers are absolutely not restructuring. Tramon is very unlikely to restructure. Carry on.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,793
    Ratings:
    +1,311
    http://msn.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/packers-annual-checkup-brad-jones-030314

    There actually has been from talk from ESPN reporters that we may look to move on from Brad Jones and upgrade there in the middle. I think he'll get another year, though.

    I agree on everything else, although one more disappointing year from Burnett could really change things. Tramon has too much leverage now with Shields on the market, and his second half last year saved him from having to take a paycut or get cut.
     
  12. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,452
    Tramon still NEEDS a paycut. He only played well for that last 5-6 games of the season. Giving him a "half season" of good play is being generous at best. With what he is scheduled to make, it does not add up to his ability or his play.
     
  13. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,793
    Ratings:
    +1,311
    The problem is we can't just let Shields walk in free agency AND cut Tramon unless they're planning on moving up and grabbing Justin Gilbert or looking elsewhere for corners in free agency. So we really lack the leverage to insist on a paycut for Tramon.

    Should we sign Shields, I think the chances of a restructure for Tramon go up.
     
  14. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    993
    Ratings:
    +352
    You're forgetting that there's a reaon he'll be the highest paid TE in the NFL...he's one of the top-5 receiving weapons in the entire NFL. Think about that. I don't want him on the Packers because our offense doesn't need him; we're a top-5 offense without an elite TE, adding him on offense would just be silly. However, if he plays for the franchise tag for one season and the PAckers are faced with paying Cobb $8m+ or Graham $12m+, I'd pay Graham without hesitation.

    Just ask yourself this, which team would say no to this trade? Graham for Raji+Hawk+Bulaga
     
  15. BorderRivals.com

    BorderRivals.com Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    594
    Ratings:
    +499
    I'd want Cobb for the $4M savings. Cobb is extremely versatile, can be a player in the return game if necessary, and has a team-first attitude. For the savings, I'd take Cobb without hesitation.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. Pack....man!!!

    Pack....man!!! Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    81
    Ratings:
    +7
    The Saints would NO !!...I wouldn't trade three starters for one and 2 of them defensive players which will leave us in a deeper hole... Great defense beats great offense every time. Lets get Shields sign and make a run at Byrd or Whitner...which ever one wants to Win a Superbowl next year.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  17. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,185
    Ratings:
    +616
    I'm glad you posted this. I'm sure Mike McCarthy would just be standing on the sidelines mumbling "How am I supposed to work Jimmy Graham into the offense? Why me?!?"
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  18. 7thFloorRA

    7thFloorRA Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,886
    Ratings:
    +831
    If I want a TE I am not trading 2 1st round picks and paying the guy through the roof. I am taking Ebron or Amaro in the 1st round and paying them their allotted slot money and I am liking it. Say graham blows his ACL in week 5. Now you have blown basically 2 seasons, a ton of money and 2 picks. WAY too much risk for the reward.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,793
    Ratings:
    +1,311
    Another thing to consider is that we are usually picking near the back end of the first round. Project that we pick, say, #25 next year, and #21 this year, that is actually worth the same as just the #7 overall pick in the draft. The Falcons for example have the #6 overall pick, and if money wasn't a factor, I'm guessing they would give that pick up in a heartbeat for Jimmy Graham.

    So the value isn't crazy there at all. Money is probably moreso...I get that. But like you said, it's not an insane proposition at all. Same as you, I'm not advocating for this to happen or in any way think it will, just don't think it's a ridiculous suggestion by any stretch of the imagination.

    Pointing out that Graham could blow out his ACL in Week 5 is pointless. This applies to every player and potential draft pick. Our 2010 and 2011 first round picks have both missed basically the last two seasons with injuries, and our 2012 and 2013 first round picks have been hampered by injuries that have made them less effective than they would normally be.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  20. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,005
    Ratings:
    +4,016
    That's ridiculously untrue
     
  21. 7thFloorRA

    7thFloorRA Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,886
    Ratings:
    +831
    I get what you are saying in response to my week 5 comment but with graham you are EXPECTING massive production and paying for it. That would be like 4 players being out for the season all in one. That would be a devastating blow to the organization where if it were just a single guy it would be absorbable.
     
  22. Pack....man!!!

    Pack....man!!! Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    81
    Ratings:
    +7
    Okay maybe not every time but most of the time... IE the Great Broncos offense lead by the great Peyton Manning got their arses handed to them by a great defense...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  23. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,005
    Ratings:
    +4,016
    Or the packers beating a #1 ranked steelers defense.

    God peoples memories are short. I swear whoever won the SB that's what everyone thinks is the only way to win until a diff team wins it next year.
     
  24. Pack....man!!!

    Pack....man!!! Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    81
    Ratings:
    +7
    But Pack D was also pretty good too...but u are right. The D caused that costly fumble. Defense got us to the SB. But its cool.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  25. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,793
    Ratings:
    +1,311
    Looking at the last 1o Super Bowl Champions....

    Neither the Steelers '05 team or '08 team was a particularly elite offense. Both had elite defenses.
    The Giants '07 offense was pretty average, the '11 offense, top 8.
    Indy of '06 had a top 3 offense and a below average defense.
    Same with the Saints of '09. Top offense, well below average defense.
    Packers of '10 were pretty well balanced in having a very good offense and defense.
    Ravens of '12 are an odd example in that they were nothing above average either offensively or defensively. Just peaked with all units at the right time.
    Seattle of '13 -- top D, average O.


    I'd conclude that you need at least an average offense to win the Super Bowl. You might be able to compensate for a bad defense with a good offense, but they better be REALLY good. The '09 Saints were able to. The '11 Packers were not.

    You'd have to go back to the early 2000's with the Ravens and Bucs to find a Super Bowl champ with a below average offense. So it's been awhile.
     

Share This Page