Your opinion could not possibly be more meaningless to me. You don't like what I have to say? Stop reading. I don't like what you have to say, but I don't reply to every thread you post in to tell you what a sanctimonious jerk you are. But now that I got that out of the way, let's address your dumb comments.

First off, I never said he was a bad blocker, though he surely isn't a good one. I recognize the scheme he is used in. He isn't used in blocking schemes because he's not a proficient enough blocker when we need to pick up some yards on the ground. That makes us more predictable. Just as was the case with the overuse of screens when Sproles was in the game. Guys like Gronkowski (as much as I hate to give him any credit) and Gonzalez when he was in his prime either have been or still are THE top receivers on their teams and yet they were able to stay on the field for running plays.

So don't give me that crap about the system he plays in... Back to the original reason that I even brought up blocking was that the person I replied to said that things like blocking aren't numbers. Which brought me to the point of saying that if blocking doesn't matter because it's not a number than why did we pay some much on Grubbs and Evans? Why not just pay them the minimum? It's obvious sarcasm, as we all understand the importance of linemen, and we should at the same time understand the importance of every player doing what it takes to win. Blocking is not the primary job of Jimmy Graham or Marques Colston or any other skill position, but it most certainly matters whether or not you can do it, and do it well. That was the point. But obviously you missed that and chose to go the 5 year old, captain obvious route and point out that Grubbs and Evans are paid to block... Genius.

And finally, I don't know who compiled those stats on drops but they obviously have a lot of requirements to constitute what they consider to be a drop. If you have any kind of decent chance to make the catch, you need to make the catch. I saw him drop many balls in traffic that other receivers on our team would have caught. There is no way in hell that he dropped only 3 passes. I'm not about to be the only person who recognizes that. He can make great catches, and as I've said before, he is the most TALENTED receiving tight end in the league. If you want to make him the highest paid TE based on that, that's you. I would rather see him be more consistent. He has the raw numbers when you just look at season stats, but he tends to disappear at really bad times.

It's not unlike the opinions of most on Tony Romo. We can look at raw numbers all day long and argue that he's worth all this money, but where are you when it matters the most? I'd like to think Jimmy can make that next step and I'm not in any way suggesting that he won't. But this isn't about the future. It's about what I've seen up to this point.

I am afraid that Graham did only drop THREE balls this past season. Perhaps your image of Graham's supposed tendency is based upon 2012, instead. Graham did have 14 drops in 2012, but one must consider that he was playing with an injured wrist. In 2011 his drop percentage was only 3.4% with five drops in 149 possibilities.

As for disappearing, any player would disappear with the muggings that the officials allowed from NE's Talib and Seattle's Sherman. It was during that NE game that Graham suffered the Plantar fasciitis injury that slowed him for the remainder of the season. I can see that you place the blame for those loses on Graham. He was doubled repeatedly during both of those games which should have freed up someone else one would think. Any player can be taken out of a game, regardless of how good they are, but in doing so the defense risks some other player blowing up instead. It was the rest of the Saints' offense that deserve the blame in those games, not Graham.

You are going by official stats which only give credit for obvious drops. They don't think losing the ball after being hit counts. But the great one's sure count it against themselves.

And you're dead wrong about the NE game. They had Talib on him, period. I never once saw him doubled, and even if he was it would have been very seldom. You think Talib would play any differently against the rest of the league if he can just mug people and get away with it? Of course not, yet he completely shut down Graham and struggled against pretty much everyone else the rest of the season. That didn't speak well of jimmy. Because that's just it. If you're physical with Jimmy, he gets frustrated. More and more teams are going to start banging him around, because that's what you have to do. Does Calvin Johnson get doubled? Does he get mugged? Does anybody shut him down? The first two answers are yes, and the last one is NO.

I don't blame the loss to NE only on Jimmy, but as someone who wants to be the highest paid TE I sure expect him to do more than absolutely nothing as he did in that game. I Remember how Jimmy played in that playoff game against the 49ers a couple years ago. That's the intensity I want to see. I just haven't seen him respond to that type of challenge since then.

Calvin Johnson makes over $18million per year. The discussion is $7million vs. $12 million. Nobody has suggested the Saints pay Graham "Calvin Johnson money". Apples and Oranges.

Although you might want to check out who's made more touchdowns over the last three seasons.

The argument is not about who makes more money, I'm talking about how great players respond to adversity. It doesn't matter how much more money Calvin Makes, because the Lions have their own priorities.

As for who has more touchdowns, I've already responded to you when you said the exact same thing in another thread. Touchdowns have more to do with opportunity than anything else. I care more about what you do between 20's that puts your team in that position. Drew Brees is light years better than Stafford and he has more decoys on the field than Stafford has had. The lions don't get in the redzone nearly as much as we do. Do I really need to continue with this comparison?

I am a Saints fan. I want my team to win. Does Graham give me a better chance to win than lessor TE's? Yes. I don't give a flying rat's ass what he is paid. I want him on my team. What is your frickin' hangup about the money?

Everything I have said up to this point is my hangup. This isn't a normal business. There is a salary cap. I understand he deserves more than he has been making. I just don't want to see a ridiculously high number thrown at him, because we're already on the hook with Drew.

The argument is not about who makes more money, I'm talking about how great players respond to adversity. It doesn't matter how much more money Calvin Makes, because the Lions have their own priorities.

As for who has more touchdowns, I've already responded to you when you said the exact same thing in another thread. Touchdowns have more to do with opportunity than anything else. I care more about what you do between 20's that puts your team in that position. Drew Brees is light years better than Stafford and he has more decoys on the field than Stafford has had. The lions don't get in the redzone nearly as much as we do. Do I really need to continue with this comparison?

The Saints averaged less than two points/game more than the Lions, there weren't that many red zone opportunities.

What do decoy's have to do with anything. I could easily argue Graham has to share the ball more than Johnson. Graham was targeted 144 times, Johnson targeted 156. That argument works both ways.

OK, let's expand the definition of "shut down" then. How many games did Calvin Johnson get held to less than a hundred yards and no touchdowns?
How many games did Jimmy Graham get held to less than a hundred yards and no touchdowns?

Decoys have to do with opening up the field in the redzone. And I'm not talking about last years stats alone, I'm talking about over the last few seasons combined, because that is the original example you used.

I don't have a sheet in front of me to tell you how many games either player was held to less than 100 yards and no touchdowns. so I don't have any idea. That isn't what constitutes being shut down for me. Being down is doing next to nothing.