Pat Kirwan believes that the..

MatthewT · 04-30-2008, 10:40 PM

I don't think this trade will ever go down. If it does, I would figure it would be a player for player trade. The Saints don't really need Shockey, the TE position is pretty solid as is.

pakowitz · 04-30-2008, 10:59 PM

Originally Posted by MatthewT

I don't think this trade will ever go down. If it does, I would figure it would be a player for player trade. The Saints don't really need Shockey, the TE position is pretty solid as is.

i dont know if the trade will happen but i disagree that the TE position is solid.. we have a lack of playmaking ability at the TE position.. johnson has potential but he is often injured for multiple games and he had some costly drops last year... billy miller got some good PT in but he definetly isnt the long term answer at TE.. best suited as a backup

thesaintsfan · 04-30-2008, 11:35 PM

Here we go again. How can you look at our TEs and think that they are even close to solid? Two of them are broke down and the other one (Miller) is a C grade player at best. I guess the term solid means something different to me. If I were to grade our TEs with the classic A-F format it would look like this: Johnson C, Miller C-, and Campbell F-. I know there's no such thing as a F- but I just made it up. A great unit would be like an A+ and two Cs. A solid unit would have a B, a C, and whatever.

Wow, that even confused me. My point is that our TEs suck, period. We can't continue to try to sugar coat it by calling them solid. We need a playmaker there to open things up more. It's simple Xs and Os.

foreverfan · 05-01-2008, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by thesaintsfan

Here we go again. How can you look at our TEs and think that they are even close to solid? Two of them are broke down and the other one (Miller) is a C grade player at best. I guess the term solid means something different to me. If I were to grade our TEs with the classic A-F format it would look like this: Johnson C, Miller C-, and Campbell F-. I know there's no such thing as a F- but I just made it up. A great unit would be like an A+ and two Cs. A solid unit would have a B, a C, and whatever.

Wow, that even confused me. My point is that our TEs suck, period. We can't continue to try to sugar coat it by calling them solid. We need a playmaker there to open things up more. It's simple Xs and Os.

I think Aaron Brooks got a F- on his Wonderlick score.

JKool · 05-01-2008, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by foreverfan

I think Aaron Brooks got a F- on his Wonderlick score.

Hilarious!

I'm not sure what I think about our current TEs. Shockey would be an upgrade though; I think it would be difficult to deny this.

I suppose, the question might be this - what is this upgrade worth?

Our offense is arguably quite good, even with the bunch of TEs we have. So long as Colston is healthy, it isn't like we need a possession receiver. What critical role does the TE play then? Blocker? Interior threat?

Don't get me wrong, I still think that Shockey is an upgrade and will make us better. The question is this: how much better do we need to be on Offense to win the big game? If the answer is "not very much" then I don't see a critical need to upgrade at TE. If the answer is "a lot", then an upgrade at TE might be something very important.

Again, I'd be pretty pleased to see Shockey on this squad, especially if the price is a 3rd rounder or less.

04-30-2008, 10:40 PM	#1
MatthewT 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Mississippi Posts: 2,729	Re: Pat Kirwan believes that the.. I don't think this trade will ever go down. If it does, I would figure it would be a player for player trade. The Saints don't really need Shockey, the TE position is pretty solid as is.

04-30-2008, 10:59 PM	#2
pakowitz The Dark Overlord Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,450	Re: Pat Kirwan believes that the.. Originally Posted by MatthewT I don't think this trade will ever go down. If it does, I would figure it would be a player for player trade. The Saints don't really need Shockey, the TE position is pretty solid as is. i dont know if the trade will happen but i disagree that the TE position is solid.. we have a lack of playmaking ability at the TE position.. johnson has potential but he is often injured for multiple games and he had some costly drops last year... billy miller got some good PT in but he definetly isnt the long term answer at TE.. best suited as a backup

04-30-2008, 11:35 PM	#3
thesaintsfan The Real Deal Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 174	Re: Pat Kirwan believes that the.. Here we go again. How can you look at our TEs and think that they are even close to solid? Two of them are broke down and the other one (Miller) is a C grade player at best. I guess the term solid means something different to me. If I were to grade our TEs with the classic A-F format it would look like this: Johnson C, Miller C-, and Campbell F-. I know there's no such thing as a F- but I just made it up. A great unit would be like an A+ and two Cs. A solid unit would have a B, a C, and whatever. Wow, that even confused me. My point is that our TEs suck, period. We can't continue to try to sugar coat it by calling them solid. We need a playmaker there to open things up more. It's simple Xs and Os.
	We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams.

05-01-2008, 12:55 PM	#4
foreverfan 12,000 BS Posts Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Metairie, LA Posts: 13,457 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Pat Kirwan believes that the.. Originally Posted by thesaintsfan Here we go again. How can you look at our TEs and think that they are even close to solid? Two of them are broke down and the other one (Miller) is a C grade player at best. I guess the term solid means something different to me. If I were to grade our TEs with the classic A-F format it would look like this: Johnson C, Miller C-, and Campbell F-. I know there's no such thing as a F- but I just made it up. A great unit would be like an A+ and two Cs. A solid unit would have a B, a C, and whatever. Wow, that even confused me. My point is that our TEs suck, period. We can't continue to try to sugar coat it by calling them solid. We need a playmaker there to open things up more. It's simple Xs and Os. I think Aaron Brooks got a F- on his Wonderlick score.

05-01-2008, 01:45 PM	#5
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Re: Pat Kirwan believes that the.. Originally Posted by foreverfan I think Aaron Brooks got a F- on his Wonderlick score. Hilarious! I'm not sure what I think about our current TEs. Shockey would be an upgrade though; I think it would be difficult to deny this. I suppose, the question might be this - what is this upgrade worth? Our offense is arguably quite good, even with the bunch of TEs we have. So long as Colston is healthy, it isn't like we need a possession receiver. What critical role does the TE play then? Blocker? Interior threat? Don't get me wrong, I still think that Shockey is an upgrade and will make us better. The question is this: how much better do we need to be on Offense to win the big game? If the answer is "not very much" then I don't see a critical need to upgrade at TE. If the answer is "a lot", then an upgrade at TE might be something very important. Again, I'd be pretty pleased to see Shockey on this squad, especially if the price is a 3rd rounder or less.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks