Go Back   New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com > Main > Saints

If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; ok i get your point Jimmy suxs as a TE. Jimmy suxs as a WR He excels in the middle of the two. their is your contract range. 7 mill vs 11 mill 9 mill a year it is Then ...

Like Tree17Likes

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-11-2014, 02:22 PM   #21
LB Mentallity
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,976
Blog Entries: 52
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

ok i get your point

Jimmy suxs as a TE.
Jimmy suxs as a WR

He excels in the middle of the two.

their is your contract range.

7 mill vs 11 mill

9 mill a year it is

Then again i should come out cheaper just to tag him this year and next.

Last edited by hagan714; 07-11-2014 at 02:33 PM..
hagan714 is offline  
Old 07-11-2014, 09:34 PM   #22
100th Post
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Southern California
Posts: 267
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

Sign our best asset, trade him for unknown commodities and take the cap hit? No no noooo
AliJee is offline  
Old 07-11-2014, 10:06 PM   #23
Site Donor 2016
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,524
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

I would stand pat right where I was and if doesn't sign so be it. We wont have as much cap work to do next year when Jordan and Hicks want money. Jordan is going to command a top salary and deservedly so.
halloween 65 likes this.
The Dude is offline  
Old 07-12-2014, 05:06 PM   #24
Site Donor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 4,839
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

So we are at t minus 72 hours until the 7/15 3pm deadline.
No appeal yet from JG and his straight from hell agent.

Are they going to appeal in the 11th hour?
Is Jimmy going to sign and be come the highest paid TE, and be happy about it?
Or, is he going to play under the tag?

Actual question for the smarter members of the group: if JG plays under the 1 year tag, when can we start negotiating again?
ScottF is offline  
Old 07-12-2014, 06:57 PM   #25
1000 Posts +
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bossier City, LA
Posts: 3,314
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

Originally Posted by ScottF View Post
So we are at t minus 72 hours until the 7/15 3pm deadline.
No appeal yet from JG and his straight from hell agent.

Are they going to appeal in the 11th hour?
Is Jimmy going to sign and be come the highest paid TE, and be happy about it?
Or, is he going to play under the tag?

Actual question for the smarter members of the group: if JG plays under the 1 year tag, when can we start negotiating again?
After July 15, the Graham can only sign a one-year deal with Saints if nothing has been done at that point. It can be can contain any number of terms, but it cannot be for longer than one year.

If he does sign the tag then you can start negotiating for the following year immediately, but you cannot have any deal effective until the one year deal is completed.
ScottF likes this.

Last edited by AsylumGuido; 07-12-2014 at 06:59 PM..
AsylumGuido is offline  
Old 07-12-2014, 07:04 PM   #26
1000 Posts +
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bossier City, LA
Posts: 3,314
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

Originally Posted by The Dude View Post
I would stand pat right where I was and if doesn't sign so be it. We wont have as much cap work to do next year when Jordan and Hicks want money. Jordan is going to command a top salary and deservedly so.
The cap will not be an issue at all next year. It will be increasing by approximately $10 million and any deal Loomis makes with Jordan and Hicks will have a minimal hit in years one and two. It will also be about time to extend Brees' deal, thus freeing up additional cap. We are in very good shape moving forward.
AsylumGuido is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 08:01 AM   #27
1000 Posts +
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,441
Blog Entries: 2
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido View Post
First of all, let's address your first major misconception. For some reason you identify Graham with drops. Let's looks at a few facts.

In 2013 Graham was targeted 143 times and was credited with THREE drops (2.1%). That was the most targets in the entire NFL with a drop percentage as low as 2.1% or lower. The next closest was Alshon Jeffery at 3.4%. Others with far worse drop percentages included AJ Green, Julio Jones, Anquan Boldin, Vernon Davis, Josh Gordon, Calvin Johnson, Roddy White, Eric Decker, Demaryius Thomas, Reggie Wayne, Stevie Johnson, Miles Austin, etc!!!!

That my friend is a fact!

Now on to blocking. Graham is not recognized by experts as a bad blocker. He is simply not called upon in Payton's offensive scheme to be a blocker. You speak of being a "well rounder TE". A well rounded TE is one that does not excel at anything, but can perform well at all disciplines. I have used this example before ... Deion Sanders. Sander is widely recognized as the best cornerback in NFL history and he could not tackle worth a crap. Under your understanding of "value" a "well rounded" CB would be worth more than Sanders any day.

Oh, and the last time I looked, Grubbs and Evans are offensive guards whose sole duty is blocking.

You, sir, have shown me nothing that supports your view that Graham should not be the highest paid TE in the league when the rest of the civilized world feels he should.

I'm sorry, but your credibility level is currently in the red and sinking lower each and every time you hit "Submit Reply".
Your opinion could not possibly be more meaningless to me. You don't like what I have to say? Stop reading. I don't like what you have to say, but I don't reply to every thread you post in to tell you what a sanctimonious jerk you are. But now that I got that out of the way, let's address your dumb comments.

First off, I never said he was a bad blocker, though he surely isn't a good one. I recognize the scheme he is used in. He isn't used in blocking schemes because he's not a proficient enough blocker when we need to pick up some yards on the ground. That makes us more predictable. Just as was the case with the overuse of screens when Sproles was in the game. Guys like Gronkowski (as much as I hate to give him any credit) and Gonzalez when he was in his prime either have been or still are THE top receivers on their teams and yet they were able to stay on the field for running plays.

So don't give me that crap about the system he plays in... Back to the original reason that I even brought up blocking was that the person I replied to said that things like blocking aren't numbers. Which brought me to the point of saying that if blocking doesn't matter because it's not a number than why did we pay some much on Grubbs and Evans? Why not just pay them the minimum? It's obvious sarcasm, as we all understand the importance of linemen, and we should at the same time understand the importance of every player doing what it takes to win. Blocking is not the primary job of Jimmy Graham or Marques Colston or any other skill position, but it most certainly matters whether or not you can do it, and do it well. That was the point. But obviously you missed that and chose to go the 5 year old, captain obvious route and point out that Grubbs and Evans are paid to block... Genius.

And finally, I don't know who compiled those stats on drops but they obviously have a lot of requirements to constitute what they consider to be a drop. If you have any kind of decent chance to make the catch, you need to make the catch. I saw him drop many balls in traffic that other receivers on our team would have caught. There is no way in hell that he dropped only 3 passes. I'm not about to be the only person who recognizes that. He can make great catches, and as I've said before, he is the most TALENTED receiving tight end in the league. If you want to make him the highest paid TE based on that, that's you. I would rather see him be more consistent. He has the raw numbers when you just look at season stats, but he tends to disappear at really bad times.

It's not unlike the opinions of most on Tony Romo. We can look at raw numbers all day long and argue that he's worth all this money, but where are you when it matters the most? I'd like to think Jimmy can make that next step and I'm not in any way suggesting that he won't. But this isn't about the future. It's about what I've seen up to this point.

If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.
burningmetal is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 10:14 AM   #28
1000 Posts +
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bossier City, LA
Posts: 3,314
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

Originally Posted by burningmetal View Post
Your opinion could not possibly be more meaningless to me. You don't like what I have to say? Stop reading. I don't like what you have to say, but I don't reply to every thread you post in to tell you what a sanctimonious jerk you are. But now that I got that out of the way, let's address your dumb comments.

First off, I never said he was a bad blocker, though he surely isn't a good one. I recognize the scheme he is used in. He isn't used in blocking schemes because he's not a proficient enough blocker when we need to pick up some yards on the ground. That makes us more predictable. Just as was the case with the overuse of screens when Sproles was in the game. Guys like Gronkowski (as much as I hate to give him any credit) and Gonzalez when he was in his prime either have been or still are THE top receivers on their teams and yet they were able to stay on the field for running plays.

So don't give me that crap about the system he plays in... Back to the original reason that I even brought up blocking was that the person I replied to said that things like blocking aren't numbers. Which brought me to the point of saying that if blocking doesn't matter because it's not a number than why did we pay some much on Grubbs and Evans? Why not just pay them the minimum? It's obvious sarcasm, as we all understand the importance of linemen, and we should at the same time understand the importance of every player doing what it takes to win. Blocking is not the primary job of Jimmy Graham or Marques Colston or any other skill position, but it most certainly matters whether or not you can do it, and do it well. That was the point. But obviously you missed that and chose to go the 5 year old, captain obvious route and point out that Grubbs and Evans are paid to block... Genius.

And finally, I don't know who compiled those stats on drops but they obviously have a lot of requirements to constitute what they consider to be a drop. If you have any kind of decent chance to make the catch, you need to make the catch. I saw him drop many balls in traffic that other receivers on our team would have caught. There is no way in hell that he dropped only 3 passes. I'm not about to be the only person who recognizes that. He can make great catches, and as I've said before, he is the most TALENTED receiving tight end in the league. If you want to make him the highest paid TE based on that, that's you. I would rather see him be more consistent. He has the raw numbers when you just look at season stats, but he tends to disappear at really bad times.

It's not unlike the opinions of most on Tony Romo. We can look at raw numbers all day long and argue that he's worth all this money, but where are you when it matters the most? I'd like to think Jimmy can make that next step and I'm not in any way suggesting that he won't. But this isn't about the future. It's about what I've seen up to this point.
I am afraid that Graham did only drop THREE balls this past season. Perhaps your image of Graham's supposed tendency is based upon 2012, instead. Graham did have 14 drops in 2012, but one must consider that he was playing with an injured wrist. In 2011 his drop percentage was only 3.4% with five drops in 149 possibilities.

As for disappearing, any player would disappear with the muggings that the officials allowed from NE's Talib and Seattle's Sherman. It was during that NE game that Graham suffered the Plantar fasciitis injury that slowed him for the remainder of the season. I can see that you place the blame for those loses on Graham. He was doubled repeatedly during both of those games which should have freed up someone else one would think. Any player can be taken out of a game, regardless of how good they are, but in doing so the defense risks some other player blowing up instead. It was the rest of the Saints' offense that deserve the blame in those games, not Graham.
AsylumGuido is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 10:57 AM   #29
Site Donor 2016
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,524
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido View Post
The cap will not be an issue at all next year. It will be increasing by approximately $10 million and any deal Loomis makes with Jordan and Hicks will have a minimal hit in years one and two. It will also be about time to extend Brees' deal, thus freeing up additional cap. We are in very good shape moving forward.
That's good to hear. I had no idea. To hear some people tell it we are screwed cap wise until Bree's and others contracts are up. Good news because I think both Hicks and Jordan will ball this year and earn big paydays.
The Dude is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 12:53 PM   #30
1000 Posts +
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,645
Re: If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract

I could see a 3 year 10 mil a year.
voodooido is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://blackandgold.com/saints/66695-if-you-were-loomis-writing-grahams-contract.html
Posted By For Type Date Hits
If you were Loomis writing Graham's contract This thread Refback 07-04-2014 10:07 AM 41
The Latest New Orleans Saints News | SportSpyder This thread Refback 07-04-2014 10:05 AM 2


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:23 PM.


Copyright 1997 - 2014 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts