official Jimmy Graham signed

[Dantés]

Rant off topic? Not sure how much more clear I can be that I like the signing and I believe the value is there in regards to Graham. We have signed a FA that is mostly having a HOF career and yet some are comparing him to Bubba Frank's. Not gonna go there.

I know your butt hurt they didn't sign Burton but that doesn't mean that Gute didn't get good Value for Jimmie Graham. Lastly, if we win the Super Bowl are you really gonna sit here and question the contract?

I called you out on comparing his contract to wide receivers and you completely ignored it and starting cussing about Ted Thompson. It’s entertaining despite its predictability.

 

[brandon2348]

I called you out on comparing his contract to wide receivers and you completely ignored it and starting cussing about Ted Thompson. It’s entertaining despite its predictability.

He is more receiver then TE. Once again he is truly a unique player.

 

[AmishMafia]

Are you gonna cry this much when we draft Courtland Sutton too?

We may have to trade up to get him. Not sure he is worth it. But if Sutton is still there early in the 3rd, we could package our 3rd and a 5th to move up and get him.

 

[Dantés]

He is more receiver then TE. Once again he is truly a unique player.

It’s 2018. Most good tight ends are more receiver than TE. That’s not unique.

 

[brandon2348]

It’s 2018. Most good tight ends are more receiver than TE. That’s not unique.

And most TE's aren't 6'7 with his catch radius along with his agility and speed at that size.

 

[GleefulGary]

Jimmy Graham can be a good player and be a bad value. It is possible for those two things to exist at the same time.

His prior year in Seattle was not impressive. Seattle also didn't use him well.

We absolutely needed a TE1, and Graham is one and a definite improvement, but that doesn't mean we can't say that we paid too much too.

 

[GleefulGary]

And most TE's aren't 6'7 with his catch radius along with his agility and speed at that size.

Dawg. His speed and agility isn't what it was. He's still good, he's still a mismatch, but he's not New Orleans Jimmy.

 

[brandon2348]

Dawg. His speed and agility isn't what it was. He's still good, he's still a mismatch, but he's not New Orleans Jimmy.

And I've posted as such. He had the big injury and the way he came back from that changed how I viewed him. He is stronger then he used to be physically. He is still a huge mismatch as you posted.

I will say another thing. As much as Seattle misused him the guy never complained and whinned. He sucked it up and went along with the program. Can't say that about our recent Marty B experiment. People are gonna be very happy with This signing barring a major unforseen injury.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Jimmy Graham can be a good player and be a bad value. It is possible for those two things to exist at the same time.

His prior year in Seattle was not impressive. Seattle also didn't use him well.

We absolutely needed a TE1, and Graham is one and a definite improvement, but that doesn't mean we can't say that we paid too much too.

Agreed but looking at what tight ends have been getting every tight end would have been paid too much.

 

[brandon2348]

Thank you Gute! Please keep up the great work.

https://mobile.twitter.com/WhistleSports/status/973993744352518145/video/1

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Jimmy Graham can be a good player and be a bad value. It is possible for those two things to exist at the same time.

His prior year in Seattle was not impressive. Seattle also didn't use him well.

We absolutely needed a TE1, and Graham is one and a definite improvement, but that doesn't mean we can't say that we paid too much too.

Pretty well put.

I can create a "story" that makes almost any player seem overpaid. The bottom line is what does he provide the team in the way of not just stats, but what influence he has both on and off the field.

Had the Packers been able to sign Graham when he left New Orleans, this place would have been on fire (except a few people). But 3 years removed and in a different offense, I can see why some think he isn't the player he once was. We will see and I am glad we will be seeing what happens first hand in Green Bay.

 

[C-Lee]

Graham will be nice in this offense. If we can manage to get a speed WR in the draft or free agency (Pryor maybe?), this offense is set.

Just stay healthy, Godgers.

 

[gopkrs]

I am very happy we have Graham. Looking forward to the draft.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

And most TE's aren't 6'7 with his catch radius along with his agility and speed at that size.

I will agree with catch radius. However, at this point, his agility and size are no longer elite at the position, probably closer to above average. I would hazard to say that Cook was more athletic when the Packers had him than Graham is at this point. Graham, however, does have that impressive size.

 

[brandon2348]

I will agree with catch radius. However, at this point, his agility and size are no longer elite at the position, probably closer to above average. I would hazard to say that Cook was more athletic when the Packers had him than Graham is at this point. Graham, however, does have that impressive size.

Thats fine but Cook isnt nearly the redzone threat. His career year is 5TD's. He only scored two TD's last year. He is basically a 40-50 catch guy. Yes, Graham is taller and considerably bigger and while not 2012 fast he still gets around pretty good. He is far from slow and can still get up the seam. I wouldnt be surprised if Graham catches upwards of 15 TD passes this year.

 

[Ogsponge]

Has he even officially signed?

 

[PackerDNA]

Has he even officially signed?

Yep. Didn't get into Green Bay until last night or this morning, but it's done.

 

[Mondio]

Has he even officially signed?

yes, I saw today it was finally official

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

I actually think this is a good move for this organization and think we might have a guy who can really add that TE weapon we've been wanting that we never got out of Bennett. Plus, I'd say he has less personal baggage than Bennett and isn't too likely to quit on us should something (hopefully not) go wrong. Plus, maybe at least now any Gute knockers can put to rest the idea that he's purely Ted Thompson's carbon copy.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Jimmy Graham, 2017: 57 receptions, 520 yards, 10 touchdowns.

Richard Rodgers, 2015: 58 catches, 510 yards, 8 TDs

Rodgers did that on 85 targets. Graham? 96 targets.

Shocking, huh?

This is not a defense of Rodgers, not by any stretch.

$3o mil / 3 years? And a year older? I would have rather seen them put that money and Wilkerson's toward a second contract impact WR or CB.

I can't help but recall the enthusiasm for the Bennett signing.

 

[GleefulGary]

We signed those two AND still had the ability to sign a CB to a 4 year 14 per contract.

You're overstating the cap "issues".

 

[HardRightEdge]

We signed those two AND still had the ability to sign a CB to a 4 year 14 per contract.

You're overstating the cap "issues".

Was that meant for me? I'll assume so. It was purely accidental that I saw your post. Why no "reply" so I'd get an alert? Hmm.

After the Wilkerson signing shaved $5 mil off modest cap space , any subsequent free agent signing of consequence requires you cut somebody to make space. Nelson out, Graham in, duh, with perhaps 2 additional years of tail risk. We await details.

Why don't YOU do the math. I already have and posted it. There's a thread devoted to it. Had the Packers signed Fuller, which would have been a nice move considered in isolation, they would have had to clear cap sometime before the 53 man roster is set and maybe even before signing the draftees.

I'll update the details when the recent signing details are available. Will you?

The other possibilility is a Rodgers renegoitation with balooning cap hits in the back half of the contract. I gave an example of the consequences of that approach with what was probably low in guarantees as QB prices skyrocket and bought only 5 mil in cap for this season. That might squeek in another player of consequence. One problem is the signing bonus can only be spread over the first 5 years of the contract limiting how much can be backloaded.

There's the additional complication of Rodgers shoulder and to what degree his throwing mechanics have been affected.

If you don't agree with these assessments, then YOU do the math and prove it is not so.

All of this is a repetition of previous posts which you evidently didn't bother to consider.

By the way, it's fairly evident the two year plan I advocate is not the Packers approach.

 

[sschind]

I think anytime you hit free agency and sign the top free agent at a position, it is only normal to wonder if it was a smart move. It's top dollar and every other player below could have been signed cheaper. From memory, this is the first time the Packers have done that (sign the top FA at a position) since maybe Reggie White, unless Mo Bennett was considered to be that last year?

I guess for all those that hate this move, what would you have done?

They would have signed him for a lot less money of course.

Seriously though, I wonder how many FA would actually get signed if they had offers like the fans want.

When you talk about value, I'm thinking of finding a guy who can perform above his pay grade. Wilkerson has the potential to play like a top 5 iDL, but he's only going to make a max of 8M. So his play could far exceed his price. That's what I'm thinking of when you say value.

Graham could play very well in Green Bay. But he's basically the highest paid TE in the league at this point. So if he plays exceptionally well, he's only matching his price tag. I don't see a scenario where he outplays his price tag.

I understand the move and the need. But I don't see the pathway to ++ value. I also don't see why we would judge it based on comparisons to wide receiver contracts. That's clearly a different market.

Unless Graham puts up otherworldly numbers I agree I wouldn't consider him a value signing. I also don't know what kind of team you could build if all you looked for were value players. I'm guessing not a very competitive one.

Richard Rodgers, 2015: 58 catches, 510 yards, 8 TDs

Rodgers did that on 85 targets. Graham? 96 targets.

Shocking, huh?

This is not a defense of Rodgers, not by any stretch.

$3o mil / 3 years? And a year older? I would have rather seen them put that money and Wilkerson's toward a second contract impact WR or CB.

I can't help but recall the enthusiasm for the Bennett signing.

Jimmy Graham 2013 86 receptions 1200+ yards, 16 TDs

Richard Rodgers 2017 12 rec. 160 yds 1 TD

I figure if you can pick and chose the stats that fit your argument why can't everybody else.

Truthfully I think the Packers/Rodgers can make any TE into a top 10 or even top 5 TE if they really wanted to. All they have to do is make the effort. The thing is with some TEs it would take a lot more effort. I don't think it would take much effort on the Packers/Rodgers part to make Jimmy Graham into a top 5 TE. He is making a lot of money and I do not know if he will end up being worth it in the long run so I do understand your concerns. I have some of the same ones but when it comes right down to it having stars and play makers costs money. I prefer to wait until it all shakes out than get to concerned over how the roster looks like today. All this hand ringing over who we coulda/shoulda/woulda got is no more realistic than the concerns over who we did get.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Thats fine but Cook isnt nearly the redzone threat. His career year is 5TD's. He only scored two TD's last year. He is basically a 40-50 catch guy. Yes, Graham is taller and considerably bigger and while not 2012 fast he still gets around pretty good. He is far from slow and can still get up the seam. I wouldnt be surprised if Graham catches upwards of 15 TD passes this year.

I would be shocked, SHOCKED, if he hits that number. Since 2001, 18 other players have scored 10 or more TDs in the redzone and not a single one scored double digits the next year. That includes Gronk and Randy Moss in that list (stats brought to you by ESPN). Graham is very good but it's not like the Packers struggled in the redzone without him. Graham will be good, I don't think anyone is arguing against that. It's just seems a bit much to give Graham the highest annual salary of any tight end in the NFL.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It's just seems a bit much to give Graham the highest annual salary of any tight end in the NFL.

Same could be set with just about every new top FA signed, its the nature of inflation in the NFL. Is Cousins worth more than some of the QB's making less than him? What would Gronk or Kelce be paid if they were free agents? If you want to sign top free agents, you have to play the market with the other 31 teams. Now if we find out that everyone else was offering Graham $7M/year, then we way overpaid. The Packers saw a player they wanted, went after him and got him. This idea of signing guys at "the best possible value" is probably what got us into a bit of trouble with TT's approach to Free Agency.