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...................

Quote:

Originally Posted by hagan714 (Post 165463)

Lets see what do the giants need? OL is the only thing they did not address in the draft. Here we go again, Brown? Stinch & picks? They need a RT. They did not address it in FA or the draft.
So not only will shockey not go away but neither will the OT trade talks.

do u think that one of our main guys would go or what about nicks?...u think we picked him up to deal him perhaps?

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

I thought this was a pretty cogent argument for Shockey from an earlier post (before we go an discuss this all again):

Quote:

Originally Posted by jewagr007
Ok Guys and Gals,

Lets break this down. Johnson and Miller both are classified as balanced/hands TE's not blocking TE's. Miller has better hands and speed where Johnson is a bigger target and runs better routes. While Johnson is better at pass/run blocking than Miller...neither are consistant enough to get the job done in that area. We are not even going to discuss Campbell...mute point. Even though these TE's are considered to be better receivers than blockers they can still be covered by most if not all LB's in the business. This leaves Safeties free to roam to head hunt our receivers.
Shockey on the other hand is a more balanced TE that has decent route running skill, great hands and can block on a more consistent basis than all three of our current TE's. Shockey will draw constant attention up the middle from either strong or free safety and will open up the corner and fade routes down the sidelines. Why do you think Plaxico had some many long TD's this season down the sidelines.

I will concur that Johnson was ranked 11th and Shockey only 8th but you have to look at the whole picture. With our receivers double covered the majority of time leaving LB's to cover Johnson/Miller it is a no brainer for Brees to throw the TE route when he is in man-on-man with a LB. The only problem is is that those passes where being dropped to often or being batted by the LB. Throw Shockey in the mix and that pulls safety help in the middle leaving one-on-one coverage on one of the receivers. Another thing this could force is more defense's to play us in Zone coverage instead on Man-to-Man and this meens less blitzes and softer coverage. We all know what Brees will do with that combination.
I do not believe that the FO would have drafted a TE even if the Shockey trade was completely dead due to the fact that no TE on the board at the round 2 spot would have given them a definite upgrade over Johnson or Miller. You don't draft for position unless it is a need or you can guarantee an upgrade over current players.
This being said I think Shockey would be a good addition but not necessary unless the price is right. You have to remember that he will require a large contract to keep him and there is this little thing called a salary cap that the FO has to deal with also. Will Smith is wanting a contract negotiation and given the choice over paying Shockey or Smith...I'll take Smith any day. Best Offense is a good Defense. Our offense is strong if they can get on the field. The defense could not get off the field last year due to a poor secondary. Fix this hole first...then tweek the rest.

As for a trade: I'd prefer to see us give up nothing higher than a 3rd from next year. However, if they're willing to take an OL, we have a few more than will make the roster. I'd be pro moving Stinch (to make room for some of the potential we've picked up in the last few drafts), but would they want him?

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

OT is the only area of our team thats MIGHT have the depth to afford a major hit. I do not see any other area we can really afford to do something and have the giants go for it. I am just not seeing it. Picks? #2 is in limbo with vilma. A mid round pick next year and a second in 2010? I am not seeing any other way but with a player. Or paying them a higher second pick to differ the higher pick till one year later.

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by hagan714 (Post 165471)

actually our #2 isn't in limbo, it's our #3 apparently.

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL (Post 165461)

If you think that Shockey is going to be happy being traded and keeping his current contract, then I have some lovely beachfront property in Kansas that I'd like to put up for sale.

As for winning the SB, Shockey has been a Giant for many years. Yet the year they win the SB, he didn't play.

Care to explain?

SFIAH

Is it just me are is the quality of your post suffering lately, besides, I love beachfront property. What's available in Kansas anyway... lakefront I suppose?

The Giants won the Superbowl because of DEFENSE. Those guys stepped it up and took Brady out of his game. It's completely stupid to say that they won because Shockey wasn't playing. The guy is a stud player with a get me the ball attitude that many great WRs have. If you've never played, you might not understand. I love his attitude, and so does Payton.

As for Shockey's contract, it is what it is. I've never heard that he wants to restructure it or that's it a problem, so enough said.

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

This Shockey thing will not die . IMHO I hope it happens . A 2nd rd pick next year and a conditional mid round next year. Only problem is Vilma trade obligated that pick to the JETS. At this point a player trade and future considerations seem more likely . Who or What I don't know . I would think that Payton still has some ties with the NYG and knows that the Giants want to move Shockey

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

The whole "the Giants won because Shockey wasn't playing" argument holds no water whatsoever. What if Bush were to get hurt next year, and we made it to the playoffs? Would you say that the reason we made it was because he wasn't playing? You can't say it. Well you can, but it makes no sense.

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

'New chapter' as Vilma dealt from Jets to Saints
By John Clayton
Updated: February 29, 2008, 10:53 PM ET
It was the first time in his football career that he had a season-ending injury. Now, four months removed from surgery, Vilma, was traded to the New Orleans Saints on Friday for a conditional fourth-round choice. The Jets could receive a second- or third-round pick in 2009 depending on how much Vilma plays and if he signs a contract extension. Talks have not started on a contract extension for Vilma, who is entering the final year of his rookie deal.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3270701
Call optimistic but I am hoping to get Vilma all year and signed. Thus loosing a 2nd.

Well we could sit him till Morgan gets his bell rung and hope the # of games is enough to keep our 2nd and fork over just a third. Just a dirty trick but what the heck.

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverfan (Post 165474)

Is it just me are is the quality of your post suffering lately, besides, I love beachfront property. What's available in Kansas anyway... lakefront I suppose?

No. Oceanfront. :D

Quote:

The Giants won the Superbowl because of DEFENSE. Those guys stepped it up and took Brady out of his game. It's completely stupid to say that they won because Shockey wasn't playing.

I didn't say that they won because Shockey wasn't playing. I'm saying that they won despite the fact that Shockey didn't play. There's no reason to think that adding Shockey to the Saints are suddenly going to make them Superbowl favorites.

That's exactly my point.

You outlined my other point too. The Giants won because of defense. The Saints went to heroic measures this offseason to improve their defense. If they go deep into the playoffs this upcoming season it'll be because of the defensive improvements, not the addition of a TE.

The Saints have been #1 and #4 offense in the league the last two years without Shockey. Adding him just isn't going to make the offense that much better.

More importantly the issue of Shockey's addition to team chemistry needs to be addressed. The Saints simply don't have whining superstar divas on their team right now. And Shockey has been shown to be that at times.

Quote:

The guy is a stud player with a get me the ball attitude that many great WRs have. If you've never played, you might not understand. I love his attitude, and so does Payton.

But in our offense where Brees is going to distribute the ball around is that going to be helpful or harmful. If Shockey only gets 3 catches a game, albeit big catches, will he be satisfied?

Payton's offense isn't going to revolve around the TE. Shockey will not be either the leader nor the center of the Saints offense if he comes. Can he live with that? Can he live with the money in his current contract?

Frankly I'd rather have Billy Miller out there working hard, catching passes, and being a integral, productive part of the offense, than Shockey not being happy and therefore being disruptive.

Quote:

As for Shockey's contract, it is what it is. I've never heard that he wants to restructure it or that's it a problem, so enough said.

Hmmmm.

Fantasy Players

SFIAH

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Champ Kind (Post 165478)

It holds gallons of water. What proof do you need that we don't need him to win a SB? He didn't win it for NY. NY went on to win it without his crappy self-serving attitude. He wasn't even on the sidelines during the games.

Don't try and compare apples to oranges (SB or playoffs) but use the same situation if we win the SB without Bush you can easily say the same thing, whats wrong with that... it would be fact.