Jeremy Shockey

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

05-08-2008, 11:46 AM	#11
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,789	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.