Jeremy Shockey

papz · 05-08-2008, 10:25 AM

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.

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.

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.

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.

SaintFanInATLHELL · 05-08-2008, 11:46 AM

Thanks for talking about costs papz.

Originally Posted by papz

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.

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)

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.

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

CantonLegend · 05-08-2008, 11:52 AM

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?

SaintFanInATLHELL · 05-08-2008, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by CantonLegend

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?

In general: the title of Professor is an actual job description. University professors make their living researching and analyzing information.

As a Saints fan: I've been with the Saints since I was a kid. A season ticket holder until I left for college. I'm invested.

I'm really doing nothing more than any avid fantasy footballer would do. It's just that the Saints are my fantasy football team.

SFIAH

papz · 05-08-2008, 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL

Thanks for talking about costs papz.

Maybe for just the 2nd rounder.

So I think we both can agree that's not bad compensation and affordable.

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.

Just trying to show people can and do change... especially if they want to win.

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)

It would be ideal for him to at least play out a year before he does so though. But even he wants one right away, looking at his current contract, a slight raise wouldn't really be a problem. He certainly wouldn't get more than the 17 million that Tony Gonzales got in KC as an extension.

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

In isolation or not, he's production is well worth that risk. He's not as bad as some are making him out to be.

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

Of course not. Our TE's have made plays for us... but they've also had plenty of costly drops and really done stretch the middle of the field for us. Acquiring a dependable guy like Shockey will make everyone's job easier.

Honestly it would be great if we could get Shockey for the right price... but if we didn't make a move for him, we'll be just fine. For me, it's more of me wanting you to see that both sides of the ball need to be addressed just not the defense. I've agreed with everything you've said this offseason besides the criticizing of any suggestion that we could use more help on offense.

05-08-2008, 10:25 AM	#1
papz Problem? Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New Orleans Posts: 11,774	Re: payton wants shockey................... 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. 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. 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. 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.
	Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege. All little common sense goes a long way.

05-08-2008, 11:46 AM	#2
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,783	Re: payton wants shockey................... Thanks for talking about costs papz. Originally Posted by papz 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. 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) 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. 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
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

05-08-2008, 11:52 AM	#3
CantonLegend 1000 Posts + Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 2,685 Blog Entries: 2	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?

05-08-2008, 01:08 PM	#4
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,783	Re: payton wants shockey................... Originally Posted by CantonLegend 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? In general: the title of Professor is an actual job description. University professors make their living researching and analyzing information. As a Saints fan: I've been with the Saints since I was a kid. A season ticket holder until I left for college. I'm invested. I'm really doing nothing more than any avid fantasy footballer would do. It's just that the Saints are my fantasy football team. SFIAH

05-08-2008, 12:21 PM	#5
papz Problem? Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New Orleans Posts: 11,774	Re: payton wants shockey................... Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL Thanks for talking about costs papz. Maybe for just the 2nd rounder. So I think we both can agree that's not bad compensation and affordable. 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. Just trying to show people can and do change... especially if they want to win. 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) It would be ideal for him to at least play out a year before he does so though. But even he wants one right away, looking at his current contract, a slight raise wouldn't really be a problem. He certainly wouldn't get more than the 17 million that Tony Gonzales got in KC as an extension. In isolation this may be worth the risk. But it isn't in isolation. In isolation or not, he's production is well worth that risk. He's not as bad as some are making him out to be. 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 Of course not. Our TE's have made plays for us... but they've also had plenty of costly drops and really done stretch the middle of the field for us. Acquiring a dependable guy like Shockey will make everyone's job easier. Honestly it would be great if we could get Shockey for the right price... but if we didn't make a move for him, we'll be just fine. For me, it's more of me wanting you to see that both sides of the ball need to be addressed just not the defense. I've agreed with everything you've said this offseason besides the criticizing of any suggestion that we could use more help on offense.
	Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege. All little common sense goes a long way.