Is Gaffney good enough for our #2 WR?

[JoeSixPat]

Dude, no one is saying the money he was owed had something to do with him being let go. We all knew when he signed his contract it was a "Prove It" deal. What *I* am saying is his money had NOTHING to do with his loss of playing time to Jabar Gaffney. He finished the season as the #4 WR because Gaffney worked harder and is a better route runner. He didn't prove he was worth the $6 million he was owed and the team let him go.

What *you're* saying (as I am understand it) is that Bill Belichick didn't play Stallworth BECAUSE he was going to be getting that big pay raise at the end of the year. And that makes no sense at all...why would the team sign him to a prove it deal and then bench him?

To answer your question, I would keep NEITHER. Jabar Gaffney is not worth 11 million dollars, and Dante Stallworth is lazy and not a real "Patriots" type of guy. Now, please, answer my question...do you honestly think he was sitting on the bench because of his upcoming contract?

Unlike you I don't deal in absolutes.

I can't rule out the fact that Belichick, knowing that there was no way he was going to bring back Stallworth at $11 million for 2008, would have seen some benefit into transitioning towards the much more cost effective WR in Gaffney that he had signed for 2008 and that was ONE of many factors.

Yet you seem able to say with 100% what Belichick was thinking and that there is NO WAY that could have been one of many factors. Amazing.

Thanks for admitting that you'd cut Gaffney at $11 million a year by the way - even though you refused to answer the question as posed.

I think that's your way of trying to save face and admit that Stallworth's salary - even with a "lazy" 46 catches last season - WAS a factor in why he was cut.

By the way - which games was Stallworth "benched" for again?

 

[blackglass3]

What I claim to know 100% is that the players who put the team in the best position to win are the ones who play the games. To suggest anything else means the coach is not trying to win with the best players he has. And sorry, but I just don't think you are correct (I am not the only one who feels that way, BTW). I also think you're being kind of an a$s about it. If I am coming off like that I apoligize.

Also, I never said "benched". But, towards the middle of the season is when Stallworth got shot down the roster from #2 to #4. And he stayed there until the Super Bowl. I think it's because Gaffney outworked him in practice (I think BB even said something along those lines, but I can't be positive) and played just as well, if not better, on the field.

Anyways, I am in "agree to disagree" mode. Nothing you say is going to convince me that the coaching staff felt Gaffney was better soley based on football play, and I doubt anything I say will change your mind. So, have a good night.

 

[RayClay]

What's absurd is the number of different definitions people have of what a #2 and #3 and #4 WR is.

Now we have "midget slot receiver" working into the mix?

Does that make Moss a "Giant WR" and therefore anyone subject to terming him a #1 WR is subject to derision?

He's 5'9" and 185 lbs. Most guys that small are listed over there actual height. I wouldn't be surprised if he was 5'6" to 5"8". He mostly runs 5 yard safety valve routes.

He's maybe the best slot receiver I've ever seen, by the way.

What do you want me to say? He's a slot receiver and not interchangeable with a 6'1" guy.

 

[JoeSixPat]

He's 5'9" and 185 lbs. Most guys that small are listed over there actual height. I wouldn't be surprised if he was 5'6" to 5"8". He mostly runs 5 yard safety valve routes.

He's maybe the best slot receiver I've ever seen, by the way.

What do you want me to say? He's a slot receiver and not interchangeable with a 6'1" guy.

Gaffney's strong suit is that he's versitile. He can play the slot. He's not barred from doing that because he's 3 inches taller than Welker.

Gaffney's only "problem" is that he's NOT a typical #2 WR. He doesn't have the speed to consistently beat WRs deep and he's certainly not as good as Welker as a short pass slot receiving specialist.

But that's not to say he can't. In fact if we didn't have Welker on the team I think that's exactly where Gaffney would be playing - as the #3 WR or whatever you want to term it.

 

[JSn]

I hope Gaffney stays. It's easy to highlight his mis-steps (and only one real game-wrecker) and ignore his contributions. He was excellent at the ends of the year too. I'm thinking he has big plays in him yet and I hope they happen whilst there's a flying Elvis on his hat.

 

[JoeSixPat]

What I claim to know 100% is that the players who put the team in the best position to win are the ones who play the games. To suggest anything else means the coach is not trying to win with the best players he has. And sorry, but I just don't think you are correct (I am not the only one who feels that way, BTW). I also think you're being kind of an a$s about it. If I am coming off like that I apoligize.

Also, I never said "benched". But, towards the middle of the season is when Stallworth got shot down the roster from #2 to #4. And he stayed there until the Super Bowl. I think it's because Gaffney outworked him in practice (I think BB even said something along those lines, but I can't be positive) and played just as well, if not better, on the field.

Anyways, I am in "agree to disagree" mode. Nothing you say is going to convince me that the coaching staff felt Gaffney was better soley based on football play, and I doubt anything I say will change your mind. So, have a good night.

We're back to the "solely" stuff again. You're thinking of someone else because the only absolute I would ever deal in is to say that I would NEVER deal with absolutes.

 

[stcjones]

To answer the thread question succinctly: Absolutely not.

Amen..............been a good receiver for us overall....made some clutch catches. Did LITTLE this year to make the coaching staff think he is not expendable. If what you say is true about the 6mil bonus and re-signing....doubt he is here next season. We shall see,,,

 

[Patjew]

I like Gaffney, but my dream would be to have Deion Branch back to replace him. I know that won't happen.

 

[blackglass3]

I like Gaffney, but my dream would be to have Deion Branch back to replace him. I know that won't happen.

Welcome back, PJ.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I like Gaffney, but my dream would be to have Deion Branch back to replace him. I know that won't happen.

Chances are you saw Patriots Football Weekly hypothesized that - i.e. he's not lived up to his contract and that he has a big signing bonus...

I think his play at the end of the season may have saved him if that ever were a possibility, but I'd go along with you on that one.

 

[Patjew]

Welcome back, PJ.

Thanks alot.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Thanks alot.

Who is this Patjew person? It's been so long, I almost forgot about you

JK, welcome back

 

[Patjew]

Who is this Patjew person? It's been so long, I almost forgot about you

JK, welcome back

Thank you, kind sir.

 

[Deus Irae]

Thank you, kind sir.

Yes, welcome back. Will you be sticking around (Lord knows we can use your posting) or are you just dropping by?

 

[Patjew]

Yes, welcome back. Will you be sticking around (Lord knows we can use your posting) or are you just dropping by?

Thanks alot DI.

I'm back for good. I had a little off season, rehabbed and got my head straight, and now I'm looking at being a solid contributor after I ease my way back into the starting line up.

I also took a course in hyperbole, obviously.

Hopefully Kontra will be back soon, too.

 

[Julius]

HE THOUGHT HE WAS OUT...BUT THEY KEEP PULLING HIM BACK IN! Why not just trade Cassel for Anquan Boldin and callit a day?

 

[T-ShirtDynasty]

I like Gaffney, but my dream would be to have Deion Branch back to replace him. I know that won't happen.

Welcome back. I'm not sure I agree with the hypothetical of replacing Gaff with Branch... not that I don't love Branch's hands and route running, but one thing people are overlooking in this discussion is that Gaff is a hell of a run blocker.

 

[Pat_the_Patriot]

I think that Gaffney is a good option, but I believe that Aiken will battle for the spot, as well. Barring some young talent coming onto the team, I think that Gaffney and Aiken will battle for the 2/4 spot.

... and let me say first of all, I don't mean #2 as in number of passes caught - I mean #2 as in playing the opposite, outside, deep WR position - opposite Randy Moss.

Last offsesaon many of us spent a lot of time and effort questioning whether Gaffney had the deep route speed and skills to take advantage of the fact that Moss would be routinely double-teamed.

Statistics-wise I hesistate to draw too many conclusions from Gaffney's numbers seeing as early on in the season we had a QB who was being restrained from looking too deep, and with whom no receiver had any experience with - and late in the season we had some very bad weather games - so IMO its a little unfair to look solely to Gaffney's stats this season.

As I often do, I default to the "eyeball test" and while I don't think the season will be won or lost on whether Gaffney's the #2, I can see a lot of upside in having a WR who can really make Defenses pay for devoting too much coverage to Welker and Moss.

If I were GM I'd definately see if I could find an upgrade at Gaffney's position, especially with someone who could be more of a deep threat - but if the price were too high, sticking with Gaffney.

 

[Patjew]

Welcome back. I'm not sure I agree with the hypothetical of replacing Gaff with Branch... not that I don't love Branch's hands and route running, but one thing people are overlooking in this discussion is that Gaff is a hell of a run blocker.

Thanks. That's a good point. Gaff actually seems to enjoy run blocking more so than most WRs.

 

[rabthepat]

No he is not #2 worthy. He is slightly better than Reche Caldwell. He came up small time this year. He will soon be a special teams player for the Broncos. Bank it!!!!!!!!!!