Branch vs Graham

[maverick4]

Re: re

I guess the first debate is whether Graham will be re-signed or not. Second, if the answer is no, do you let him play out his contract and get nothing back, or trade him for some value?

Reviving this old thread. Given what we know has ended up happening, would anyone here have traded Graham last off-season for a pick or a player?

 

[dryheat44]

Re: re

Reviving this old thread. Given what we know has ended up happening, would anyone here have traded Graham last off-season for a pick or a player?

Nope. I'm in agreement with myself from last year. With the current free agency market, Graham is going to net us a good comp pick..or maybe not the way we're signing FAs. But he's going to go put a pretty big chunk next to the "net losses" part of the ledger.

We came within a play of the Super Bowl last year. I think Graham contributed to that, and I'm glad we didn't trade him for something last year.

I think the 2006 season also showed definitively that:

1. Graham has better hands than Watson.
2. Watson can't block half as good as Graham.

 

[maverick4]

Re: re

Nope. I'm in agreement with myself from last year. With the current free agency market, Graham is going to net us a good comp pick..or maybe not the way we're signing FAs. But he's going to go put a pretty big chunk next to the "net losses" part of the ledger.

We came within a play of the Super Bowl last year. I think Graham contributed to that, and I'm glad we didn't trade him for something last year.

I think the 2006 season also showed definitively that:

1. Graham has better hands than Watson.
2. Watson can't block half as good as Graham.

But if you know you can somewhat replace Graham by signing a Kyle Brady, and also that Graham is gone after the year, you don't try to preserve some of his value by getting something back?

 

[holyredeemer]

Re: re

Nope. I'm in agreement with myself from last year. With the current free agency market, Graham is going to net us a good comp pick..or maybe not the way we're signing FAs. But he's going to go put a pretty big chunk next to the "net losses" part of the ledger.

We came within a play of the Super Bowl last year. I think Graham contributed to that, and I'm glad we didn't trade him for something last year.

I think the 2006 season also showed definitively that:

1. Graham has better hands than Watson.
2. Watson can't block half as good as Graham.

Let's not give up on Watson quite yet. Hell, I remember the one thing always being the knock on Graham earlier in his career was his inability to hold onto perfectly catchable balls. Doesn't really matter though, Thomas is going to take over the show, nad I cant wait to see the receiving threat of both Thomas and an improved Watson. He has to get better....doesnt he?

 

[dryheat44]

Re: re

But if you know you can somewhat replace Graham by signing a Kyle Brady, and also that Graham is gone after the year, you don't try to preserve some of his value by getting something back?

No. Not while we have a team that is a threat to win the Super Bowl every year. I mean, if we could have gotten a player that would have provided as much value to the team in 2006 as Graham, and was affordably signed for a few years, then sure. But I wouldn't have traded Graham for a future pick or young player that wouldn't be a contributor in the present.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: re

Reviving this old thread. Given what we know has ended up happening, would anyone here have traded Graham last off-season for a pick or a player?

We needed Graham more than ever last season given the dearth of WR talent. I don't think we'd have come one play from the SB without him.

So hindsight being 20/20 I guess one could say it doesn't matter how close we came to the SB if we didn't win it - there's no question we needed him bigtime last year.

 

[kas]

Just a side note, I find it funny how so many people are now saying Graham has such better hands than Watson, when up until this year nobody trusted DG to catch a cold on a rainy day. Not saying who's better between the two, just that you have to give players time to improve and perfect their craft. Watson's blocking has improved tremendously (although admittedly he still has a ways to go), and can get open as well as just about any TE in the league. If he can improve his hands a bit like Graham did (both catching and fumbling), we should be a dominant player. He's already a very good player, his improvement over the next little while will show if he can take the next step in his development.

 

[shakadave]

Re: re

Nope. I'm in agreement with myself from last year. With the current free agency market, Graham is going to net us a good comp pick..or maybe not the way we're signing FAs. But he's going to go put a pretty big chunk next to the "net losses" part of the ledger.

We came within a play of the Super Bowl last year. I think Graham contributed to that, and I'm glad we didn't trade him for something last year.

I think the 2006 season also showed definitively that:

1. Graham has better hands than Watson.
2. Watson can't block half as good as Graham.

I mostly agree with you from last year too. I can't understand why we seem to be letting Captain Graham go. I love what we've been doing with our cap room, but why not toss a chunk Daniel's way, too?