New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com

New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com (https://blackandgold.com/community/)

- Saints (https://blackandgold.com/saints/)

- - Jeremy Shockey (https://blackandgold.com/saints/21136-jeremy-shockey.html)

Re: payton wants shockey...................

SFIAH, i think that the cost argument is worthy....i disagree with the chemistry tho.....every team brings in new starters every year....they are in the NFL so they all have personality problems...think about it..when u were in school....the best players we kinda cocky..it happens.....ne way...shockey is a great TE and he hasnt been allowed to show off his talents...thats like u knowing the answer to a question in school and u raise ur hand but the teacher never calls on u....im not saying shockey is the answer to everything....but he would be happy and he would shut up...he would fall under brees' massive leadership and sit pretty....like moss...if he has a good QB to get him the ball when he is open....he will be happy....he may still do stupid stuff like point at the camera when we miss field goals but he wont talk as much because our locker room is chill all the time

Re: payton wants shockey...................

Every defense has to cover the TE, no matter who the TE is.

Re: payton wants shockey...................

Moss and Shockey are 2 different players who had different problems. You can't compare the 2. Moss showed up to practice and camp. Shockey doesn't.

When Shockey wasn't hurt he was productive. Why does everything thinks he wasn't used. He was!!! It was a far different team when he got hurt, so much different they went on to have one of the biggest upsets in SB history.

We to can win a SB without him.

Re: payton wants shockey...................

I don't see why I can't compare the two. If anything, Moss was more of a distraction on his team than Shockey.

Quote:

Marshall plane crash
In 1997, Randy Moss was quoted, in a Sports Illustrated article as saying the 1970 Marshall plane crash "was a tragedy, but it really wasn't nothing big."[22] Moss claimed that the quote was taken out of context.

Traffic incident
On September 24, 2002 in downtown Minneapolis, Minnesota, Moss was driving and was preparing to make an illegal turn. A traffic control officer, noticing what he was about to do, stood in front of his car, ordering him to stop. Eyewitness accounts of the event differ at this point, but Moss did not comply with the officer's order, and she was bumped by his vehicle and fell to the ground. Moss was arrested, and a search of his vehicle revealed a small amount of marijuana.[23] Initially charged with felony Suspicion of Assault with a Deadly Weapon and a misdemeanor marijuana possession, Moss pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor traffic violation and was ordered to pay a $1,200 fine and perform 40 hours of community service.[24]

Leaving the field during a game
During the last game of the 2004 regular season against the Washington Redskins and with two seconds remaining on the game clock, Moss walked off the field and into the locker room; critics criticized Moss for quitting on his team.[25] Moss stated afterward that he didn’t think Minnesota, who ended up losing 21-18 to Washington, would recover the onside kick.[26]

Playoff mooning incident
On January 9, 2005, the Minnesota Vikings traveled to Green Bay to take on the heavily favored division rival Green Bay Packers, in an NFC wildcard playoff game. Moss was effective, finishing the game with 4 catches for 70 yards and 2 touchdowns in the 31-17 win. After the second score, Moss trotted to the end zone goalpost. Facing away from the crowd, he feigned pulling down his pants, and pretended to moon the Green Bay fans. TV announcer Joe Buck, who was calling the game, was incensed at the mooning, calling it "a disgusting act" on-air. Days later, the NFL fined him $10,000, finding it "unsportsmanlike" and "offensive" during the playoffs. However, Indianapolis Colts head coach Tony Dungy, the former Vikings defensive coordinator, explained Moss' action by pointing out that Green Bay Packers fans are infamous for actually mooning the buses of departing opponents,[27] unlike Moss' fully-clothed imitation.

Marijuana use
In August 2005, during an interview with Bryant Gumbel, Moss admitted that he has smoked marijuana during his NFL career "every blue moon."[28]

Lack of effort
On November 14, 2006, Moss was honored for his success in college as a kick returner by having an award named after him, becoming only one of two black athletes (along with John Mackey) so honored. During the press conference, Moss responded to questions about his dropped passes and lackluster effort in several games, saying "Maybe because I'm unhappy and I'm not too much excited about what's going on, so, my concentration and focus level tend to go down sometimes when I'm in a bad mood."[29] Days later, he reiterated his unhappiness with losing games and being a member of the Raiders on his weekly segment with Fox Sports Radio, saying, "I might want to look forward to moving somewhere else next year to have another start and really feel good about going out here and playing football."[30] Moss made similar comments during his tenure with the Vikings, when he infamously proclaimed, "I play when I want to play."[31]

On May 15, 2007, more than two weeks after the trade to New England, Moss was called out by his former Raiders coaches. His former offensive coordinator, Tom Walsh, who was fired from the Raiders after Oakland's 2-14 losing season, said of Moss, "Randy Moss is a player whose skills are diminishing, and he's in denial of those eroding skills...Randy was a great receiver, but he lacked the work ethic and the desire to cultivate any skills that would compensate for what he was losing physically later in his career." Walsh also reported that Moss told him, "'I'm too old to practice on Wednesday and Thursday, but I'm not too old to play on Sunday.'"[32] However, Moss stated the losing seasons on the Oakland Raiders negatively affected his playing and discouraged him during the team's practice: "...Losing sometimes can get contagious, but as a player I can't let that settle in, and I think that's one of the things that bothered me [in Oakland]. I didn't want it to set in and it didn't set in. It was just really nerve-racking that it was hard for me to win."[32]

Dating violence allegations
On January 15, 2008, Rozzie Franco from Orlando-based radio station WDBO reported that, "New England Patriots wide receiver Randy Moss has been hit with a temporary injunction for protection against dating violence. According to the affidavit Moss committed a battery upon Rachelle Washington,[33] causing serious injury, and then refused to allow her to seek medical attention. The affidavit out of Broward County reveals Moss cannot come within 500 feet of the victim and cannot use or possess firearms."[34]

The next day, in a locker room press conference, Moss claimed the woman was simply looking for money "over an accident,"[35] because her lawyer came to his lawyer, threatening a lawsuit, and asking for money to settle before she went public to the media. Moss claims he has known this woman for about eleven years, and in defense of himself, claims that he has never assaulted a woman in his entire life, and asked that the media and fans "find out the facts" before "rush[ing] to judgment."[36] Moreover, Moss' lawyer, in an e-mail to the Boston Globe accused the woman's lawyer of "blatant threats and attempts to extort money" from Moss.[37] He has not been charged with any crime.

On March 3, 2008 Rachelle Washington filed papers with the Broward County Circuit Court clerk's office requesting that the restraining order be dissolved and the case closed.[38]

Re: payton wants shockey...................

Quote:

Originally Posted by JKool (Post 165861)

SFIAH, nice posts. I enjoyed them a good deal. I'm still almost on board with the Anti-Shockey sentiment. IMO the strongest arguments are the "cost" argument and the "chemistry" argument. The second hasn't convinced me yet (and might never), and it is hard to tell what the cost will be (yet). However, I like this "cost" concern: Shockey's contract will make it difficult to get substantial (and desirable) contracts with Smith and Colston - those two are certainly worth more than Shockey.

I think it's stickier than that. Shockey is under contract. Actually it's pretty cap friendly. He's going to want it reworked. The question is when, and how long will he be satisfied to play under the existing contract.

These are all unknowns. The Saints would be perfectly within their rights to say: "You signed it. Play it out." But the problem I see is that if this, or anything else, makes Shockey unhappy, then what effect will it have in the locker room.

There has to be clarity on both sides on how that would work. Ideally for the team it would be "Show us 2 years of production, then we'll get the huge contract to you."

But I'm unsure if that would work.

Quote:

Regarding the "scoring defense", I'm still a bit unclear. Is this just the "points allowed" category? It is interesting to me that such a stat is a good predictor of championship success.

Yup. Since 1970 and the merger, only 4 SB teams have been outside the top in regular season "points allowed": the 1976 and 1983 Raiders, the 2006 Colts, and the 2007 Giants.

BTW offensive performances were nearly as strong. These teams finished outside the top 10 in points scored the season they won:

82 redskins (strike shortened), 90 giants, 00 ravens, 02 bucs, 03 pats, 07 giants.

I believe the 07 giants are the first SB team in this period to finish outside the top 10 on both sides of the ball and still win.

Looking at the offense started to point to point differential. It seems to be the strongest indicator of all of championship success. Only one team who won the SB since 1970 fell outside the top 10 in point differential for the regular season: The 2007 New York Giants.

Quote:

It is also interesting to me since I think this stat also reflects the success of the offense (which may be your point, I can't tell yet). It reflects the success of the offense, since as we all know, a clock-grinding offense keeps the opponent's offense off the field. Maybe that is your point about the running game?

Going back through it again, I'm just not so sure anymore.

For example in Dan Marino's career with the Dolphins, the offense was consistently excellent. But the only year they went to the SB, the defense was outstanding too. There were other years where the defense was up and down, but they never had the same success.

Quote:

So, overall, I'm not convinced that points allows is a purely defensive statistic (like yards allowed, third downs allowed, and the like, are). Thus, I'm skeptical that "scoring defense" is a good indicator of how good a defense is (but I may be misunderstanding), and, in turn, I now question the simple (though I concede there may be a more complex way of understanding this) version of "defenses win championships".

It looks like I need to rethink this. Almost always SB winning teams have bothe excellent offense and defense and are near the top in point differential.

You need both.

SFIAH

Re: payton wants shockey...................

Quote:

Originally Posted by Euphoria (Post 165873)

Shockey was used...i never said he wasnt...they just didnt know how to use him best...the giants are a run team...that have been since tiki....shockey is explosive as a pass catcher and would flourish in a pass first system...thats what we have....thats a great match....no team needs him to win a super bowl....but u dont need a car to get around...get the idea?....shockey plays hard....moss plays hard too....now.....shockey is consistant when he isnt hurt and if i can find the video of him plowing thru defenders without a helmet then i will post it...hes a beast

Re: payton wants shockey...................

Thanks for talking about costs papz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by papz (Post 165867)

So let's say it's only a 2nd round pick? That's not a bad cost to pay for a ProBowl TE is it? The just drafted a quality S via the draft... I wouldn't think they'd have a big need for Harper anymore.

Maybe for just the 2nd rounder.

Quote:

Now if we're going to talk about money, you were in favor of signing Moss and Shockey wouldn't cost nowhere near as much as Moss would have. Has Shockey even asked for a contract extension yet? Let's say he does, I'm going to use Daniel Graham's contract as a barometer... 30 million for 5 years with 15 million in guaranteed money. That's really not that bad and remember that the league's cap has been going up every year.

I did advocate for Moss. As a free agent he would have only cost money. Still iffy on the locker room. Much drama in the past. Quit in Oakland. Seemed to be a model citizen in New England.
Had better production on the field than any wide receiver in history.

As for those numbers, that's close to his current contract (5 years, $26.3 million, looks like about $14 million guaranteed of which he's already collected about $10 million in signing and option bonuses)

Quote:

Now if we're talking about team chemistry, maybe a change of scenery will serve him Shockey well. There's no guarantee he won't be a "class act" here. Who would have thought Moss would become boy scout once he arrived in New England? He knows Payton... he was productive under Payton. I'm sure his familiarity with Payton and his increased production in our system will keep him happy.

In isolation this may be worth the risk. But it isn't in isolation.

Quote:

Obviously cost is the major issue here... but it's not like we're trying to acquire Antonio Gates here. I'm sure everyone understands the "Defense wins Championships" cliche, but it doesn't mean the offense should be ignored. Just because they're playing at a high level, doesn't mean they will continue to do so. Adding playmakers will only help us maintain our level of success instead of letting the league catch up to us.

On offense we're talking about the TE position because it's one of the few that doesn't have a superstar in place.

Does a productive offense really need a superstar at every position? We're having this discussion as if our TEs didn't make plays or contribute

Just poking around I found this Giants fans thread on the guy. If you get a chance take a read:

Feeling bad for Shockey - NJ.com: Ledger on the Giants

SFIAH

Re: payton wants shockey...................

SFIAH, how did u become such an expert on this subject?.....im not dawgin u im just curious...u have a lot of insight....is there something that u are looking at that we are not?

Re: payton wants shockey...................

If we bring in Shockey and he's used like Payton wants too then he will be cheerleading for the team because we're going to win games this year and make it to the playoffs. Shockey will take pressure off Colston and Reggie.

Re: payton wants shockey...................

SFIAH, thanks for the thoughts on points allowed. I think the conclusion might be something like this: the best predictor of SB victory is a top 10 defense in terms of points allowed.

However, since points allowed is a combined stat (it measures offensive as well as defensive success), it is hard to say which contribution (offensive or defensive) is more important. Thus, defense wins championships isn't supported by "points allowed" results alone.

Perhaps we could compare points allowed to traditional offensive stats (like yards per play, completion percentage, or something) to traditional defensive stats (like yards allowed per play, interceptions, sacks, or something) to determine which contributed more to the "points allowed". Maybe time of possession would be an interesting way to tease apart the contributions of offense and defense to points allowed?

This relates to the Shockey dispute in only one way. If Shockey were significant to increasing our time of possession, he would directly contribute to the important "points allowed" statistic. Of course, the "cost" and "character" arguments would still stand on their own.

Interesting!