I want it all, including a #3 WR

[signbabybrady]

I think one Major thing is being left out of this discussion. I would love a better number 3 but I think the offense would be more balanced and it would gain the same from getting a TE who has better hands than Watson. Watson stretches the field because of his speed and is a better blocker than most of us though but other than his speed he is not the recieving TE we thought he would be. And making him the #2 TE and getting a Tony G (only used him because he was rumored to want out of KC) IMO would benifit this team and offense far more than improving Gaffney's spot would.


Screw it lets improve both through FA and get Asmougha, Gamble, Robinson, or the like and fix our main problems before the draft so we can use the draft to fill in minor needs and stock up for the future.

 

[RayClay]

I hope we get an all pro # 3. People would still want to draft all WR and running backs anyway, so what's the difference?


Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Dante Stallworth, Jabbar Gaffney = lost Super Bowl.

Troy Brown, David Patten, Charles Johnson, Fred Coleman = won super Bowl.

 

[Deus Irae]

I hope we get an all pro # 3. People would still want to draft all WR and running backs anyway, so what's the difference?


Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Dante Stallworth, Jabbar Gaffney = lost Super Bowl.

Troy Brown, David Patten, Charles Johnson, Fred Coleman = won super Bowl.

Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl, too.

 

[TruthSeeker]

The reality is that when this team loses it is often because the offense struggles.

The reality is that if this team had a good defense this year, we had a realistic shot of going to the Super Bowl. Our offense was not the significant problem this year.

That being said, a better #3 receiver would of course be great for the offense. Personally, I'd prefer to upgrade our Left Tackle.

 

[RayClay]

Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl, too.

He did his job. What's your point?

If what you're saying in that case is defense wins championships, I have to agree with you.

 

[JoeSixPat]

The reality is that when this team loses it is often because the offense struggles.

You're starting a controversial subject suggesting that the team could upgrade at what you term the #3 WR (different people have different definitions - you seem to be numbering them by the number of catches - whereas I look at Gaffney playing the #2 - i.e the #1 & 2 are the matched WRs on the outside, with Welker playing the inside route (though Gaffney is a jack of all trades, but master of none)

I do agree with you though - that an upgrade over Gaffney would pay dividends to Welker and Moss, as well as Gaffney's upgrade putting up more than 36 catches.

But I'm not sure I agree with the contention that when the team loses its because of the offense. I'm having a tough time remembering a game this year that I felt was lost because of Cassel & Co. - it was mainly defensive lapses that I recall.

 

[signbabybrady]

You're starting a controversial subject suggesting that the team could upgrade at what you term the #3 WR (different people have different definitions - you seem to be numbering them by the number of catches - whereas I look at Gaffney playing the #2 - i.e the #1 & 2 are the matched WRs on the outside, with Welker playing the inside route (though Gaffney is a jack of all trades, but master of none)

I look at numbering guys as this is your first option and this is your second favorite option and find it much easier to use X, Y, and Z when referring to position rather than 1,2,3 which are not football terms. I figured I would throw my two cents in just to stir the pot.

 

[RayClay]

Wide receiver is the strongest position on our team. We have two all pros and a good versatile role player.

We need to run enough to be balanced to avoid what happened two years ago, have the best third down back/receiver in football, two other decent receivers at RB, two decent receiving TEs and only one football.

On defense we have an extremely limited amount of proven young talent behind our 3 man line.

If you think another receiver is anywhere near a priority, that's fine. We could pick up a low rounder or FA castoff and take time developing them, because no one we add is going to get any significant catches anyway with Moss and everyone else mentioned and the establishment of a running game.

 

[Deus Irae]

He did his job. What's your point?

If what you're saying in that case is defense wins championships, I have to agree with you.

You can find mediocre talent that won Super Bowls at every position. It doesn't mean that you don't go out looking for a Randy Moss at receiver.

 

[Synovia]

You're looking back to the wrong season. We're assuming a healthy Brady back, and if so, you have to look back to the Giants game, and see what would've won us that. Granted, the defense not choking would've won us the game, but on the offensive side of the ball, there is a quick fix, and that's a 3rd wideout who can get to the intermediate part of the field before the D can get to Brady. Moss is going deep, Welker is underneath, a quicker 3rd wideout would be lethal.

The defense didn't choke in that game. They lost because Brady couldn't hit wide open receivers, and because of injuries on the offensive line.


Stallworth was an elite #3, and Gaffney is better than most teams have at #3.

 

[VJCPatriot]

#3 WR? How about Devery Henderson? Failing that, there are plenty of KR/WR types that you could draft in round 3. That way you'd get special teams impact as well as an upgrade at WR3. How good would Devin Hester have looked for us?

 

[Lifer]

this thread reminded me how much I think the Patriots missed Donte Stallworth. In 2007 I always considered him our "If Randy goes nuts" insurance. I like Gaffney, but Stallworth was a better # 3 and with Gaffney gave Brady 4 legit WR targets in 2007.

 

[Synovia]

That being said, a better #3 receiver would of course be great for the offense. Personally, I'd prefer to upgrade our Left Tackle.

Why? Light is a good pass blocker and an elite run blocker.


If you're going to upgrade the line, upgrade Neal. Hes great, but he can't stay on the field and isn't getting younger.

 

[Synovia]

I like Gaffney, but Stallworth was a better # 3 and with Gaffney gave Brady 4 legit WR targets in 2007.

If Stallworth was a better 3, Gaffney wouldn't have replaced him in the 2nd half.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

If Stallworth was a better 3, Gaffney wouldn't have replaced him in the 2nd half.

stallworth outproduced gaffney in the playoffs.........gaffney's 2 big games occurred once the blowout was already on

gaffney is OK, but he is still too prone to disappearing for whole games even though he is out there alot....need better hands at #3

 

[supafly]

The last time the Pats did that it didn't turn out well.

1)Maroney = I have already given

2)Chad Jackson = Is he even in this league?

3) Dave Thomas = Are you kidding me.

4a) Stephen Gostkowski = The kicker made Pioli save face.

4b) Garrett Mills = This pick made no sense whatsoever to me at the time...sadly even now.

Other than Ghost the Kicker that's a pretty pathetic Offensive Heavy Draft. Be careful what you wish for.

I totally and obviously agree, that going offense that particular draft didn't produce very well. But I for one, kinda liked the Garrett Mills pick, and would've liked to see how we would've used him. I believe he was pretty versatile, and we all remember how much BB liked him. Remember the games with Brad Childress etc. Don't know whatever happened to him, maybe he was hurt? Probably just poorly used in scheme selection. But you have quite a valid point about the offensive picks regardless. Still curious if we would've used him differently though, or if he could've contributed someway.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

Since we got Branch and Givins in 2002, BB has a tough time picking WR's. Bethel Johnson and Chad Jackson were pretty much busts. PK Sam didn't work out, and Matthew Slater doesn't look like he is going to work out either.

How about if we dedicate our draft to secondary and linebacker concerns and pick up a number 3 in free agency? The team needs a cornerback, OK two cornerbacks, a lot more than a replacement for Gaffney.

 

[Sicilian]

did I say that? learn to comprehend........nobody said elite #3, again, learn to comprehend..........but they have to be better than gaffney......

and yes, gaffney's drop against the colts could be seen as the single biggest play to cause the pats to miss the playoffs......not the 3rd and 15 against the jets because the D could have still stopped them........not thomas mental fart against the colts........the single play that should have been made and wasn't was gaffney's drop........he has been around long enough where he should be a regular part of the offense and isn't.......he disappears for weeks at a time

nobody is saying to go get someone else's number 1 to have as a number 3..........but a shaun macdonald, or brandon jones are improvement over gaffney

But again, the argument that you're trying to make is that the #3 WR was a weakness that needs equal attention to the needs of the defense, and IMO that is not the case. As I also stated, I would not be surprised to see them bring in other WRs through FA or the draft. But I don't believe that upgrading Gaffney would A) have a significant impact on our Super Bowl chances compared to other positional moves, and B) be cost effective given the other needs of the team.

 

[Sicilian]

I preface this by saying I agree with you that a "better" #3 WR isn't even a top 5 concern personnel-wise for the Pats, and I hope the draft and FA leads them to defense, defense, and more defense...

But you can't play this game, and it's a huge pet peeve when people try to. Maybe a "better" WR gets open in the Dolphins game, New England gets up 14-0, and the Wildcat never sees the light of day. Maybe that same #3 WR is a kick returner in Pittsburgh, and doesn't muff the kickoff (although with different personnel, nothing about that game is the same).

Even one small personnel change changes the entire complexity of the game. So to say a #3 WR would have changed the outcome of those games (or the W's, even) isn't impossible. But it's also entirely possible to say that "if we had a better 3rd string OT, we could have won" as well...

But going back to the discussion, I'm not as down on Gaffney as a lot of people are. In fact, I think Gaff is one of the better #3's in the league. Drops are something that can be corrected with work, work, and more work. Standing in front of a jugs machine for hours a day can help eliminate the dropsies real quick. I don't remember this being a concern in 2006 or 07, either....

Trust me, I agree with that, but isn't that the point? If you can't look at those plays to say what cost the Pats a trip to the playoffs, can you name ANY play that Gaffney made (or didn't make) that did the same?

How many Super Bowl teams have two pro-bowl WRs PLUS a 3rd who's getting a ton of catches. Not to mention that the plays called by the patriots seem to include the RB and (to a lesser extent) the TE. How many catches did anyone expect Gaffney to make as a #3 WR (and likely 4th or 5th OPTION in an offensive play)?

 

[Synovia]

#3 WR? How about Devery Henderson? Failing that, there are plenty of KR/WR types that you could draft in round 3. That way you'd get special teams impact as well as an upgrade at WR3. How good would Devin Hester have looked for us?

Devery Henderson, In my mind, would be a downgrade on Gaffney. He's got the same catch rate as Gaffney (57 vs 58%), doesn't block nearly as well, runs really poor routes, etc. Yeah, hes faster, but hes not a good WR.