Branch vs Graham

[maverick4]

re

so you would take playing time away from Watson and Graham to get the 2 rookies on the field more often?

intriguing...

Sorry, you might have missed earlier how I said I thought Graham would be traded before game 1 for picks or a defensive player, in which case Watson would play with either Thomas or Mills.

 

[maverick4]

re

I think there are a few things that are influencing my view of this....

After we drafted Graham, very few people expected us to use a #1 pick the next year on Watson - though once we caught a glimpse of him we recognized his value - and the value of two TE sets - though it had already become clear that Graham's pass catching left a lot to be desired.

This year with 2 high round choices signed, how many people - especially after taking 2 offensive players in the 1st 2 rounds - were expecting that we'd make TE a priority over our defensive needs?

I'm guessing very few again. And even fewer expected another TE to be taken in the 4th round.

What kind of message is this sending?.... and don't give me the "best player available" mantra... there are a great many people out there who logicially look at this as BB preparing for life without Graham...

BB hasn't taken the podium and said so but his actions - and some published reports - indicated that there's a strong possibility Graham won't be back.

Is Graham a valuable player? Yes - especially under his rookie contract.

Do we expect Graham - as a former 1st round pick - will demand a raise? You bet!

So what would you pay Graham? Is he a top tier TE? Does he THINK he should be paid like a former #1 pick.

I don't think he's quite that good - I think he's worth about $2 mil a year to this team tops - and I think Graham's perception of his worth is much higher than that.

If Graham is reasonable about his worth as an excellent blocker and mediocre pass catcher than there shouldn't be a problem re-signing him... but if there's a disconnect I guess we'll find out where BB comes down in this debate.

My prediction is that the offseason moves strongly suggest that Graham is not with the team next year... that BB does not expect Graham to accept the amount of $ that is commiserate with his value for Graham - and that he can save a good chunk of change assuming at least one of our two rookie TEs shows potential (I think Thomas is already there).

What he said.

I'm basically trying to read between the lines as to how Piolichick wants to shape the team and their short term vision based on their various moves and signings.

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?

 

[dryheat44]

What he said.

I'm basically trying to read between the lines as to how Piolichick wants to shape the team and their short term vision based on their various moves and signings.

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?

Well, assuming that the decision is made not to re-sign Graham, I don't recall BB ever trading a starting calibre player to "get something for him". I realize that the rules tweak might make it easier. However, if the past is any indication, BB will keep a player who will help him win and accept the comp pick rather than trade the player to get a possibly better pick at the expense of the team's immediate success.

How much do you think another team will pay for Graham for one year anyway? Probably not more than a third. And I don't know that Belichick will allow Graham's agent to talk extension with a new team.

The "get something rather than nothing" school of thought is why the Bruins haven't been able to win the Cup in 30 years, and why the Red Sox under Lou Gorman sucked for a long time.

 

[maverick4]

re

The "get something rather than nothing" school of thought is why the Bruins haven't been able to win the Cup in 30 years, and why the Red Sox under Lou Gorman sucked for a long time.

I think that's hardly why they didn't win for so long. Tbe Bruins had their own self imposed spending limit before the NHL cap and would never take the extra step to win. The Red Sox took 86 years to learn that pitching and defense wins championships, not hitting.

In the NFL, under the salary cap era with the new CBA, I think it will become commonplace to trade players who you won't re-sign.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Marv Cook has accomplished a whole lot more in his career than your binky Graham. Marv Cook went to the probowl several times. And I specifically put him on the list because he was a Patriot and a low round, ie not 1st round TE selection. This is to demonstrate you don't need to spend 1st round picks to get a good tight end. To refresh your apparently failing memory let me go back to the stats.

Marv Cook
2-time Pro Bowler: 1991, 1992 - drafted 3rd round
| 1989 nwe | 16 | 3 13 4.3 0 |
| 1990 nwe | 16 | 51 455 8.9 5 |
| 1991 nwe | 16 | 82 808 9.9 3 |
| 1992 nwe | 16 | 52 413 7.9 2 |
| 1993 nwe | 16 | 22 154 7.0 1 |

Let's look at Grahams stats, the guy you continually compare to Antonio Gates. I don't know where this stupid comparison is coming from btw, they are worlds apart.

Daniel Graham
ZERO pro bowls - drafted 1st round
| 2002 nwe | 11 | 15 150 10.0 1 |
| 2003 nwe | 14 | 38 409 10.8 4 |
| 2004 nwe | 14 | 30 364 12.1 7 |
| 2005 nwe | 11 | 16 235 14.7 3 |

As far as being a threat in the passing game Marv Cook is TWICE the man Graham ever was. Next time you dump on a former Pat pro bowler, look up the stats before inserting foot into mouth.

Anyone else want to make a ridiculous statement to support the Dan Graham "myth"?

Are you actually putting Marv Cook on a list of best tight ends in recent history? Sharpe and Coates played for tiny schools, and Gates didn't play at all. Plus the game's changed. I provided you a list of TE starters currently in the NFL, and the vast majority of starting caliber TEs are drafted in the first round. But I still can't get over Marv Cook's inclusion on your list. Really made my morning.

 

[dryheat44]

I think that's hardly why they didn't win for so long. Tbe Bruins had their own self imposed spending limit before the NHL cap and would never take the extra step to win. The Red Sox took 86 years to learn that pitching and defense wins championships, not hitting.

In the NFL, under the salary cap era with the new CBA, I think it will become commonplace to trade players who you won't re-sign.

Both teams routinely traded away their best players if they had doubts they were going to be able to re-sign them. Just this season, the Bruins got rid of Samsonov for that reason, although that's not a great example because they were already assured of having a bad season.

 

[maverick4]

re

Both teams routinely traded away their best players if they had doubts they were going to be able to re-sign them. Just this season, the Bruins got rid of Samsonov for that reason, although that's not a great example because they were already assured of having a bad season.

Right, that's what I said, that the Bruins had their own self imposed, hard cap before there was even an NHL cap. As for trading Samsonov and Thornton... I have no clue why they did that.

However, I will say that they may start to do better due to the fact that all teams now play by a cap. It sucks, but trading away a guy you won't re-sign is the best move under a cap. The reason it didn't work for the Bruins before was because every other team spent as much as they could to put together a better team, while the Bruins assembled a team under a self-imposed spending limit.

Anyway, talk of the Bruins is neither here nor there. The bottom line is, the best move for the Pats, if they won't re-sign Graham, is to trade him for something. That's what I am proposing.

 

[PatsFan37]

Sorry, you might have missed earlier how I said I thought Graham would be traded before game 1 for picks or a defensive player, in which case Watson would play with either Thomas or Mills.

Since when has Belichick traded the chance of winning a superbowl for a future draft pick? Graham isn't merely a starting caliber player, heck, Gorin is a starting caliber player. Graham is a top NFL TE who can keep Brady free from the quickest pass rushers in the league, spring a running back and catch a TD.

Would he trade a pick for Graham and watch Brady get repeatedly sacked by Freeny or Joey Porter and loose in the playoffs? Not a chance.

 

[dryheat44]

Marv Cook has a accomplished a whole lot more in his career than your binky Graham. Marv Cook went to the probowl several times. And I specifically put him on the list because he was a Patriot and a low round, ie not 1st round TE selection to boot. This is to demonstrate you don't need to spend 1st round picks to get a good tight end. To refresh your apparantly failing memory let me go back to the stats.

Marv Cook
2-time Pro Bowler: 1991, 1992 - drafted 3rd round
| 1989 nwe | 16 | 3 13 4.3 0 |
| 1990 nwe | 16 | 51 455 8.9 5 |
| 1991 nwe | 16 | 82 808 9.9 3 |
| 1992 nwe | 16 | 52 413 7.9 2 |
| 1993 nwe | 16 | 22 154 7.0 1 |

Let's look at Grahams stats, the guy you continually compare to Antonio Gates. I don't know where this stupid comparison is coming from btw, they are worlds apart.

Daniel Graham
ZERO pro bowls - drafted 1st round
| 2002 nwe | 11 | 15 150 10.0 1 |
| 2003 nwe | 14 | 38 409 10.8 4 |
| 2004 nwe | 14 | 30 364 12.1 7 |
| 2005 nwe | 11 | 16 235 14.7 3 |

As far as being a threat in the passing game Marv Cook is TWICE the man Graham ever was. Next time you dump on a former Pat pro bowler, look up the stats before inserting foot into mouth.

Anyone else want to make a ridiculous statement to support the Dan Graham "myth"?

Jeebus. Who pissed in your Corn Flakes? Marv Cook lost his job to Coates (understandable) and, to my knowledge, never hooked up with another team. (Edit: 1 year with Chic, 1 year with St. L) And he was a piss-poor "blocker". If you want stats, I'll put some up that show that Tony Eason, Steve Grogan, and Drew Bledsoe are better than Brady.

Give the hostility a rest, it's not my style. I never once compared Graham to Gates. I did nothing more than list the better tight ends in the league and when they were drafted. I won't fight with you, so in the nicest way possible, go f@ck yourself. I'm not going to join your little game of instigating pissing matches. Go goad somebody else here, there's plenty that will engage you. And the ignore list grows.

p.s. Several does not equal 2. Just a heads up.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I'd agree that a Graham trade is unlikely this season UNLESS BB felt he could acquire talent that would improve the team right away.

It seems nutty to be talking about FOOTBALL trades, but the new rule has encouraged that as of late and teams are taking advantage. The latest example being BJ for Sullivan.

Since when has Belichick traded the chance of winning a superbowl for a future draft pick? Graham isn't merely a starting caliber player, heck, Gorin is a starting caliber player. Graham is a top NFL TE who can keep Brady free from the quickest pass rushers in the league, spring a running back and catch a TD.

Would he trade a pick for Graham and watch Brady get repeatedly sacked by Freeny or Joey Porter and loose in the playoffs? Not a chance.

 

[maverick4]

re

Since when has Belichick traded the chance of winning a superbowl for a future draft pick? Graham isn't merely a starting caliber player, heck, Gorin is a starting caliber player. Graham is a top NFL TE who can keep Brady free from the quickest pass rushers in the league, spring a running back and catch a TD.

Would he trade a pick for Graham and watch Brady get repeatedly sacked by Freeny or Joey Porter and loose in the playoffs? Not a chance.

I think people are giving way too much credit to Graham. What about Brady's quick release and ability to move in the pocket? How about our RB's ability to pick up the blitz? How about Ben Watson's emergence as a top-flight, complete tight end?

When our O-Line gave up zero sacks in the playoffs and beat Carolina for the Superbowl, I think there was a lot more than just Dan Graham blocking everybody.

 

[dryheat44]

Anyway, talk of the Bruins is neither here nor there. The bottom line is, the best move for the Pats, if they won't re-sign Graham, is to trade him for something. That's what I am proposing.

See, I think the better move is to use him for the season. We're a better team with him than without him. IMO, Graham for 2006 + Comp pick (4th or 5th) > No Graham this season + 3rd round pick.

Just my opinion, your theory is also valid.

 

[maverick4]

re

See, I think the better move is to use him for the season. We're a better team with him than without him. IMO, Graham for 2006 + Comp pick (4th or 5th) > No Graham this season + 3rd round pick.

Just my opinion, your theory is also valid.

Fair enough. I think I just have more faith in Watson than you do. I think he is going to do great things at tight end.

Also, I don't think a trade would net 'No Graham + 3rd roung pick', but something higher like a solid defensive player, or a 2nd round pick.

 

[bucky]

Branch is harder to replace for the following 3 reasons:

1) He's the best route runner on the team and probably in the top 10 in the NFL. He may not be as good at the short routes as Troy, but Troy's inability to run the deep routes gives the overall edge to Branch.

2) Branch is Brady's go-to receiver. I know everybody says we have a "distributed" offense and it's true. But every QB has a guy who he knows will always be on the same page and making the same reads.

3) Branch is to a point now that if his game goes up another notch, he will become an elite WR. He may still not have the reception numbers to back it up, but he'll draw the double teams to prove it.

I agree that Graham is a great blocker an above average receiver for a TE. But considering Watson's development and assuming Thomas and/or Mills develops into a good receiver and decent blocker, this team would be fine if it downgraded from Graham to someone who's a very good blocker and an average (or even just below average) receiver. That's a lot more palatable than finding a legit #1 WR who's on the same wavelength as Brady.

 

[rhubma]

Add Dan Koppen to the FA equation

If it comes down to only keeping 2 out of 3 of the "D"s (Dan (28), Daniel (27) or Deion (27)) for money issues, personally I would rather complete (and hold together) the O line with the 2 Dans and lose Deion. IMO, blocking for Brady is THE crucial component of the team through, at least, 2009-10 when many contracts conclude.

Even though I love Branch and would like him to stay for his entire career, WR and RBs usually peak in their mid 20s when they are the fastest & quickest. OL and TE often can perform well into their early 30s, even if they lose a step.

Ultimately, I believe that the Pats WILL resign all 3 (with Graham being the least likely to resign and Koppen the most likely).

 

[Jacky Roberts]

Graham vs. Branch is a slam dunk decision. Graham, although a first rounder, has been a quasi-bust. Branch is an emerging star. With about 100 other Tight Ends on the roster, Graham is expendable.

 

[Clonamery]

There are 4 TE's on the roster (Graham, Watson, Thomas, Mills).

I imagine you are talking TE's for goalline situations when you talk about '100 other Tight Ends?'

 

[spacecrime]

don't give me the "best player available" mantra... there are a great many people out there who logicially look at this as BB preparing for life without Graham....

Just because people look at it that way doesn't mean it is that way. If you don't believe that BB has a value board, and picks the player with the most value to the team, then you don't. (But he does.)

My prediction is that the offseason moves strongly suggest that Graham is not with the team next year... that BB does not expect Graham to accept the amount of $ that is commiserate with his value for Graham - and that he can save a good chunk of change assuming at least one of our two rookie TEs shows potential (I think Thomas is already there).

That is like saying the Jaguars sent a message to Leftwich by drafting QB Matt Jones. Don't think of Mills as a TE just because he played TE in college. Mills is too small to be a TE in the Pros, and that is why he was listed as a FB in all the draft guides. Think of Mills as a long-overdue replacement for Larry Centers and Marc Edwards, and for Ritchie Anderson who almost signed with BB.

Thomas was a replacement for Fauria, not a pre-replacement for Graham. For the past three years BB has kept three quality TEs, which is what you need tio consistently run a 2 TE offense. With Fauria gone, another TE is needed.

If Graham leaves, we will need to draft another TE next year. Not to prepare for Watson leaving, but to replace Graham.

Where you an I are in agreement is that it is likely that Graham will be gone after this year. You because you think Graham isn't that good, and me becasue I think Graham is too good, and will command much more money that BB is likely to pay. Also, with most offenses, Graham won't be required to block a lot. We also differ on how good a pass catcher he is, but I think he is good enough to command a top ten salary easily.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Just because people look at it that way doesn't mean it is that way. If you don't believe that BB has a value board, and picks the player with the most value to the team, then you don't. (But he does.)

That is like saying the Jaguars sent a message to Leftwich by drafting QB Matt Jones. Don't think of Mills as a TE just because he played TE in college. Mills is too small to be a TE in the Pros, and that is why he was listed as a FB in all the draft guides. Think of Mills as a long-overdue replacement for Larry Centers and Marc Edwards, and for Ritchie Anderson who almost signed with BB.

Thomas was a replacement for Fauria, not a pre-replacement for Graham. For the past three years BB has kept three quality TEs, which is what you need tio consistently run a 2 TE offense. With Fauria gone, another TE is needed.

If Graham leaves, we will need to draft another TE next year. Not to prepare for Watson leaving, but to replace Graham.

Where you an I are in agreement is that it is likely that Graham will be gone after this year. You because you think Graham isn't that good, and me becasue I think Graham is too good, and will command much more money that BB is likely to pay. Also, with most offenses, Graham won't be required to block a lot. We also differ on how good a pass catcher he is, but I think he is good enough to command a top ten salary easily.

I suppose you can, but ideally you don't draft a rookie - especially a 3rd round rookie - to fill in the role of a departed veteran.

Assuming our rookie TEs are decent - if Graham is not here next year he would be replaced by one of this year's rookies - likely Thomas. Thomas in my mind defies categorization anyway so I'd have supported his selection even if Graham and Watson were locked up for the next decade, but Thomas would be the replacement for Graham - probably not a rookie.

Maybe its semantics but I don't even look at someone like Jackson as a replacement for Givens... rookies need to be given time to develop and while I hope Jackson is at Givens level ASAP that can be asking a lot of a rookie WR.

 

[VJCPatriot]

The hostility is entirely imagined on your end. What's wrong can't stand the use of facts in a debate on a football forum?

Anyways it's funny that you mention Cook and Coates. Because as I think about it I think the situation is quite parallel with Graham and Watson.

Cook's depature was hastened by the emergence of Coates. And rightfully so since Coates turned out to become arguably a HOF quality TE. I think the same situation is emerging between Graham and Watson.

Can't say for sure that Watson will enjoy the same success as Coates, but clearly he is already the better receiver and deep threat then Graham. Plus Graham may be looking for too many bucks once free agency approaches.

Thus the Pats will keep the newer more explosive TE model in Watson and sadly Graham is likely to leave or be dealt away, probably never to be heard from again.

Jeebus. Who pissed in your Corn Flakes? Marv Cook lost his job to Coates (understandable) and, to my knowledge, never hooked up with another team. (Edit: 1 year with Chic, 1 year with St. L) And he was a piss-poor "blocker". If you want stats, I'll put some up that show that Tony Eason, Steve Grogan, and Drew Bledsoe are better than Brady.

Give the hostility a rest, it's not my style. I never once compared Graham to Gates. I did nothing more than list the better tight ends in the league and when they were drafted. I won't fight with you, so in the nicest way possible, go f@ck yourself. I'm not going to join your little game of instigating pissing matches. Go goad somebody else here, there's plenty that will engage you. And the ignore list grows.

p.s. Several does not equal 2. Just a heads up.