- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
With or without Graham?
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:07 am
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:07 am
With Graham:
We have a top TE but less money to spread around on team.
Without Graham:
Offense still works fine (we're good without him). More money for WRs, Defense, offensive line (a little important)
Graham doesn't want Brees type money (dollar wise), but prorated for his position paying this guy what he probably wants will be devastating for the team as a whole. He IS NOT a vital part of the offense like brees is. There would be life with out graham.
We have a top TE but less money to spread around on team.
Without Graham:
Offense still works fine (we're good without him). More money for WRs, Defense, offensive line (a little important)
Graham doesn't want Brees type money (dollar wise), but prorated for his position paying this guy what he probably wants will be devastating for the team as a whole. He IS NOT a vital part of the offense like brees is. There would be life with out graham.
7
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:08 am to Shane4689
Graham will be a Saint next year. He's getting tagged and as a TE.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:10 am to Hugo Stiglitz
quote:
Graham will be a Saint next year. He's getting tagged and as a TE.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:10 am to Shane4689
quote:
Offense still works fine (we're good without him). More money for WRs, Defense, offensive line (a little important)
Graham doesn't want Brees type money (dollar wise), but prorated for his position paying this guy what he probably wants will be devastating for the team as a whole.
Guesses and suppositions.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:11 am to Hugo Stiglitz
quote:
Graham will be a Saint next year. He's getting tagged and as a TE.
Pretty much. I think that he might end up with some kind of composite WR-TE tag though.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:16 am to Peazey
quote:
I think that he might end up with some kind of composite WR-TE tag though.
The league is not going for that. Such a tag would have to be created in arbitration or court.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:19 am to Jwho77
They did it for Suggs on his appeal. There is precedent. Do you think that Graham doesn't want more money as much as Suggs did?
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:20 am to Shane4689
What is may very well come down to is being able to afford to keep Graham or Jordan. Between the two I keep Jordan and try to get everything I can by trading Graham.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:23 am to Peazey
quote:
on his appeal
I don't think the league will bend so easily on such a premium skill position debate.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:25 am to Jwho77
DE is even more of a premium position than WR. It's the 3rd highest paid position group behind QB's and LT's.
ETA: Actually I was wrong. According to this article it is the second highest paid position group.
ETA: Actually I was wrong. According to this article it is the second highest paid position group.
This post was edited on 2/13/14 at 11:28 am
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:37 am to Shane4689
A thread for this time next year.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:40 am to Peazey
Interesting. I still believe that opening the door for tight ends to make WR money is not something the league will do so easily. Besides, a pure edge rusher in a 4-3 or 3-4 can be proven to be the same role in the game today; it happens frequently.
Graham's new contract will surpass Gronkowski's deal slightly (and without a friendly team out clause because Jimmy is more sane!), I surmise.
Graham's new contract will surpass Gronkowski's deal slightly (and without a friendly team out clause because Jimmy is more sane!), I surmise.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:41 am to goatmilker
I say let him walk and use the money to spread across the other position of need, I think Hill can give the team what they need from the TE position, Jimmy is to big to be so soft and can't block, the more physical teams take him out of the game, saints would be putting them in a hole by signing him big big money.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:44 am to Shane4689
Gauge his trade and market value then move from there. It's impossible to make a decision without knowing those things.
What if some team was willing to give two first round picks for him? It would make parting with him easier and possibly a better decision.
What if some team was willing to give two first round picks for him? It would make parting with him easier and possibly a better decision.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:46 am to Hugo Stiglitz
quote:wouldn't you rather trade him for 2 1st rounders or a 1st and a 2nd this year instead of getting nothing for him next year?
Graham will be a Saint next year. He's getting tagged and as a TE.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:54 am to Neauxla
Do you really expect anyone to say NO to that with the way you phrased it 
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:55 am to Peazey
quote:
They did it for Suggs on his appeal. There is precedent. Do you think that Graham doesn't want more money as much as Suggs did?
Suggs and the Ravens came to an agreement and who knows if the Saints and JG will be allowed to come to a similar agreement now that the new CBA has it's own procedure (snaps played at a position). So this might have to go to arbitration which kinda leaves it up in the air (along with the extra ~5 million in cap space that will be needed if he's labeled a WR.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:57 am to bbrownso
I'm waiting for the "jimmy flies planes...we should dump him before he dies" post.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:04 pm to goatmilker
quote:Well we can't franchise him twice, so if we franchise him this year, we will get nothing for him next year when he walks. B/c he isn't worth 10mil/year.
Do you really expect anyone to say NO to that with the way you phrased i
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:08 pm to Neauxla
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that you can franchise him twice. The way that the new CBA worked it is that the salary would have to increase by 25% if franchised two consecutive years. That way there is a heavy disincentive to franchise tag someone two years in a row, but it isn't impossible.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News