TE Witten's new contract and its impact on Daniel Graham

[JoeSixPat]

Umm.. No, I am NOT making your point. The ONLY reason we are using Graham and potential in the same sentence is because the guy has bent over backwards to improve an unheralded part of his game. And, because he's become one of the best, if not the BEST, blocking TE in the league because the Patriots needed another blocker on the O-line. Why should he be penalized for it, as you seem to be suggesting.

JSP. You are a damn intelligent poster, but I am amazed at your statements. The Patriots offensive schemes had to CHANGE because Klemm and then Ashworth went down in 2004 and because Gorin couldn't handle the job alone. All you have to do is look at Graham's stats before Ashworth went down and after Ashworth went down to see that it was night and day. Graham was forced to stay in and block on almost every down because Gorin couldn't handle the assignments alone. Even last year, Graham was stuck having to block because Watson wasn't nearly as good, Light was out and so was Ashworth. Yes, Kaczur improved and helped to free him up. Yes, Watson improved, but not nearly to the level of Graham. But, by the time they did, Graham was already injured again from all the blocking he was doing.

I don't doubt that TDs and yards get paid the money. But I also don't doubt that Graham, given the chance, could perform in this offense and put up 40-50 receptions, and 5-10 TDs.

Again, you seem to be saying that Graham should be penalized because he sacrificed STATS for the benefit of the team.

BTW, why are you putting words into my mouth. I never said the Pats should pay Graham more than the market requires. I am just recognizing that Graham had to sacrifice personal glory (stats) for the sake of the team for 2 years because our OTs can't stay healthy and we're required to rely on a semi adequate reserve in Gorin.

According to NFL.COM, Al Johnson started all 16 games last year. Guorode started 2. At guard. In place of Marco Rivera. So, I am not sure what mess you are talking about. Nor do I see how having an OT and a C go down compares to losing both starting OTs.

Last I looked, the Cowboys offense has defined receivers with Witten being the Drewpy's security blanket. In other words, on nearly every play, Witten was the safety valve at the absolute minimum and had to be ready for the pass. The same can't be said about Graham when he was given blocking assignments like taking on Julius Peppers and Brenston Buckner in the SB, now can it?

Gonzalez didn't block more. Jason Dunn did. So did Kris Wilson. Gonzalez was still the Chiefs primary receiver last year. Its amazing how you want to ignore that the Patriots system is designed to spread the ball around and NOT focus on one player while also ignoring the fact that other teams offenses DO have a primary receiver who is the GOTO guy.

Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth. My point is that for your TEs to succeed, your O-line has to be doing its job or you have to be running Multi-TE sets with one definied as a blocker and the other as the pass catcher. Dallas and KC run the 2nd type quite a bit.

And, with Coates, he was Drewpy's safety blanket. The Patriots offense had a defined receiver chart. This Patriots offense does not. On any given game day, one of the receivers could be the primary target for the game because of the mismatches they create. Its how the Patriots are able to keep opposing teams off-balance. And that is something that I could have sworn a knowledgable Patriots fan like yourself has admitted to on more than one occasion.

Graham didn't have any dropped passes according to Stats.com. Or, at the very most, he had one.

I never said you were trying to BASH Graham. However, all I am trying to do is point out what I believe are flaws in your thinking. You want to ignore the circumstances that have forced Graham into the role he is in now (the fact that the Pats have lost 2 OTs to IR in each of the last 3 years), if he is truly in a "blocking TE" role. You seem to want to ignore that other "Marquis" TEs are NOT asked to block nearly 20% as much as Graham is, nor have those players needed to. Not Gonzalez. Not Witten. Not McMichael. Not Gates. You want to ignore that the Patriots offense was/is designed NOT to favor one target over another, thus keeping the opposing defenses off balance and spreading the ball around. Why else would they have at least 9 players in double digit receptions in each of the last 3 years.

I guess we'll again agree to disagree. Graham was heralded as perhaps the best all around TE coming out of college - he's proven himself excellent as a blocker but more mediocre as a pass catcher, to the point where his TD production is equaled by a LB.

Does he have potential? Absolutely. Have OL injuries played a role in his production. Of course. But plenty of other teams have had backups in at C , LT, RT and G, requiring TEs to assist in blocking duties and they have still been productive, so after 4 years I'm not going to accept that as an excuse for Graham anymore.

I'm sure NFL.com has ok stats, but I'm going by articles by Dallas and Kansas City beat writers about their significant OL injuries last year- and I think its more likely that the statisticians at NFL.com aren't watching teams quite as closely as those reporters. Besides, no one was saying those guys on Dallas didn't play - they were just saying they weren't starting caliber - i.e. they were playing backups just like we were.

As far as paying Graham more than market value, its simply a matter of determining what that market value is. I don't believe market value for Graham is on par with that of Witten given past production. As such, giving Graham a 7 year $29 mil contract would be way above market value.

Others seem to think he will command $4 mil a year - and I suppose he might if someone overpays, but I don't think we will.

 

[maverick4]

For posters who argue that Graham sacrifices his true value by playing on the Patriots... Consider how the Patriots value a WR...No receiver on our team gets huge yardage numbers or catches, because Brady spreads the ball around so much.

Take David Givens for example, or David Patten. Do you pay them what they MIGHT do in another system, or pay them what they will likely do for you based on past production?

Based on how the Pats have handled this, it's clear they don't pay for what a player could be doing in another system. Even though Deion Branch, Givens, or Patten potentially could get a 1300 yard / 12td season with another team, their value as a player in the Patriots system is a lot lower.

Now... back to Graham. I like what rookBoston said about how the only way they would take back Graham would be if he probably re-signed for way below market.

Also, in addition to the roster turnover/development argument, just look objectively at what Graham brings to the table: he's a great 6th blocker, and a decent pass catcher. He doesn't have great speed, and he has had and will likely have durability issues his entire career. In my opinion, his skill set is replaceable and not worth opening the wallet for.

Finally, here's another issue. I think that Watson is set to be a top 10 tight end this year, and I think Thomas and Mills will be strong backup players. Re-signing Graham to an expensive contract (anything over 3M), to me, is a waste, similar to how having two running backs with expensive deals on the same team is a waste as well.

 

[AdamJT13]

According to NFL.COM, Al Johnson started all 16 games last year. Guorode started 2. At guard. In place of Marco Rivera. So, I am not sure what mess you are talking about. Nor do I see how having an OT and a C go down compares to losing both starting OTs.

The Cowboys lost both offensive tackles who were supposed to be starters. Flozell Adams, obviously, was one. The other was Jacob Rogers, who was lost for the season to a knee injury during the first preseason game. Rob Petitti, a sixth-round rookie, stepped in and started all 16 games. But going into the season, he wasn't supposed to be the starter.

 

[JoeSixPat]

The Cowboys lost both offensive tackles who were supposed to be starters. Flozell Adams, obviously, was one. The other was Jacob Rogers, who was lost for the season to a knee injury during the first preseason game. Rob Petitti, a sixth-round rookie, stepped in and started all 16 games. But going into the season, he wasn't supposed to be the starter.

A 6th round rookie? No wonder Witten only had 66 catches.

 

[spacecrime]

Your points are extremely well articulated and on target.

That is exactly how the Pats run things and it obviosuly works very very well.

The disconnect comes in, IMO, when you compare numbers with teams that don't have Brady spreading the ball around. It is easy to dismiss Branch as never having 1000 yards, or point to low number of catches by oukr TEs compared to other teams.

Our WRs and TEs are showing their value to our team. It may be a mistake to look at players for another team and think they would do as well here as they did at their old team. Particularly, if a WR grabs 1000 yards and 10 TDs for another team, it would be wise not to think he could repeat it here.

The DL is another place where Patriots sacrifice stats for team defense. If you go by sacks alone, there are a lot of players better than Seymour, but I wouldn't want to trade im for any of them!

For posters who argue that Graham sacrifices his true value by playing on the Patriots... Consider how the Patriots value a WR...No receiver on our team gets huge yardage numbers or catches, because Brady spreads the ball around so much.

Take David Givens for example, or David Patten. Do you pay them what they MIGHT do in another system, or pay them what they will likely do for you based on past production?

Based on how the Pats have handled this, it's clear they don't pay for what a player could be doing in another system. Even though Deion Branch, Givens, or Patten potentially could get a 1300 yard / 12td season with another team, their value as a player in the Patriots system is a lot lower.

Now... back to Graham. I like what rookBoston said about how the only way they would take back Graham would be if he probably re-signed for way below market.

Also, in addition to the roster turnover/development argument, just look objectively at what Graham brings to the table: he's a great 6th blocker, and a decent pass catcher. He doesn't have great speed, and he has had and will likely have durability issues his entire career. In my opinion, his skill set is replaceable and not worth opening the wallet for.

Finally, here's another issue. I think that Watson is set to be a top 10 tight end this year, and I think Thomas and Mills will be strong backup players. Re-signing Graham to an expensive contract (anything over 3M), to me, is a waste, similar to how having two running backs with expensive deals on the same team is a waste as well.

 

[tailgater]

Player Gms REC TD (2002 to present)

Graham 51 99 15
Branch 53 213 14
Shockey 54 248 17
Stevens 60 108 11

Given a lot less opportunities, it would look to me that Graham is fairly 'productive' for the Pats. He does have more receptions for TD's than any other Patriot since he joined the team.

By one standard (receptions) he doesn't rank highly. He can only catch those that go to him. Brady trusts Graham, so why isn't he getting more looks? With more opportunities will come more TD's. When has he failed the team in the past 2-3 years? He hasn't to my recollection.

JSP, you seem to think his numbers are low because he's not getting open, or the staff doesn't trust him, or he has bad hands....a combo of all the above? Many of us seem to think, unlike other 'good' TE's, that he is kept on the line to block rahtrer than released downfield, because of need, not a lack of talent.

About Watson. I love his potential, but he had 29 receptions all season and has already missed more games than Graham, yet somehow people can extrapolate his future numbers insanelywhile writing off Graham entirely. Why? Given the numbers, he's doomed already! He misses one of every two games for gods sake!

 

[JoeSixPat]

JSP, you seem to think his numbers are low because he's not getting open, or the staff doesn't trust him, or he has bad hands....a combo of all the above? Many of us seem to think, unlike other 'good' TE's, that he is kept on the line to block rahtrer than released downfield, because of need, not a lack of talent.

I'm not quite sure where the perception comes from but Graham and other blocking TEs are not relegated to static 6th offensive linemen. Often the blocks that they make happen downfield, focusing on safetys or LBs gunning for the QB. And while our OL has had injuries, its we're only playing with 2 or 3 linemen out there, requiring Graham to play OL. Graham's just a valuable extra hand to handle situations that would otherwise tax a less experienced OL.

TEs are not offensive linemen, even when blocking, and can still serve as outlet receivers. This notion that Graham's prevented from being a receiving option 90% of the time just doesn't match what I see in the games. He's often downfield, making blocks, and is often a reception option - but for whatever the reason, its just never happened for him - maybe he's well covered or doesn't get open... tough to say without breaking down all the film - certainly not the way we had hoped 4 years ago upon drafting him.

Perhaps Pats1 can break down some tape and enlighten us as to whether Graham is only a receiving option 10% of the time as some suggest. I don't think that's the case but let's see.

 

[maverick4]

The Cowboys lost both offensive tackles who were supposed to be starters. Flozell Adams, obviously, was one. The other was Jacob Rogers, who was lost for the season to a knee injury during the first preseason game. Rob Petitti, a sixth-round rookie, stepped in and started all 16 games. But going into the season, he wasn't supposed to be the starter.

Great example. The Pats aren't the only ones who have dealt with depleted O-Lines in the past. It's not like there is a shortage of tight ends in the world who can stay in and act as a 6th blocker.

 

[DaBruinz]

The Cowboys lost both offensive tackles who were supposed to be starters. Flozell Adams, obviously, was one. The other was Jacob Rogers, who was lost for the season to a knee injury during the first preseason game. Rob Petitti, a sixth-round rookie, stepped in and started all 16 games. But going into the season, he wasn't supposed to be the starter.

That is different than losing both starting OTs during the season. The Cowboys had time to get Pettitti into the fold and he started 15 of 16 games. (Only Mankins, Ware, and Derrick Johnson started all 16 games as rookies last season). Yes, it is slight semantics, but the Patriots didn't have a rookie as good as Pettitti. They had Gorin and were forced to keep Graham in much of the time.

The Patriots last year, during the season, had BOTH their starting LT (Light) and RT (Ashworth) out. This forced Kaczur and Gorin to be the starting Tackles. And Graham was held in to help out in the blocking (mostly helping Gorin).

 

[maverick4]

DaBruinz,

Do you use the same logic for running backs? Running backs block in the backfield, so would you attribute lower catches to the fault of the offensive line?

Let's say there are two starting RB's on different teams. One has 50 catches a year, the other has 10 catches a year. To me, that would tell me the first RB has better hands than the second RB. However, it sounds like you would argue that the first RB had to block all the time, and that is the main reason to explain the discrepency.

Do you understand the similarities with how you are talking about Graham?

.

 

[tailgater]

I'm not quite sure where the perception comes from but Graham and other blocking TEs are not relegated to static 6th offensive linemen. Often the blocks that they make happen downfield, focusing on safetys or LBs gunning for the QB. And while our OL has had injuries, its we're only playing with 2 or 3 linemen out there, requiring Graham to play OL. Graham's just a valuable extra hand to handle situations that would otherwise tax a less experienced OL.

TEs are not offensive linemen, even when blocking, and can still serve as outlet receivers. This notion that Graham's prevented from being a receiving option 90% of the time just doesn't match what I see in the games. He's often downfield, making blocks, and is often a reception option - but for whatever the reason, its just never happened for him - maybe he's well covered or doesn't get open... tough to say without breaking down all the film - certainly not the way we had hoped 4 years ago upon drafting him.

Perhaps Pats1 can break down some tape and enlighten us as to whether Graham is only a receiving option 10% of the time as some suggest. I don't think that's the case but let's see.

Not that I'm surprised, but no comment from you or Maverik on the numbers? Does this mean the # of receptions is the be-all and end-all for measuring a TE's success? Forget blocking and TD's?

I forget who posted it, but someone came out and said a number of TE's drafted in 2002 outperformed Graham by a wide margin. I looked up the first 4 or 5 guys drafted and none had more TD's than Graham. Shockey didn't (another injury-prone TE), Stevens didn't, Jolley didn't Schoebel didn't. Who did?

I would think alll these other supposed stellar TE's would have many more TD's based on the number of catches and attempts, but that is not the case. If Grahams hands are so bad, why does Brady go to him?

Also whats all this hype on Watson? Because of his speed? He did catch Champ Baily, true. he was also the guy who missed his block and left Brady exposed to the rush. He also seems to run the wrong route all the time (at least Brady seems to be in his face all the time). Add in he has missed more games and has few stats to support the hype leaves me confused as to where these arguments are coming from. When he shows half the ability ON THE FIELD, and not on film, of Graham, I'll get excited.

I can't understand what you guys are seeing. It isn't supported by the facts to date...unless you go by # of receptions only, and what Pats player has great numbers? None.

 

[maverick4]

Not that I'm surprised, but no comment from you or Maverik on the numbers? Does this mean the # of receptions is the be-all and end-all for measuring a TE's success? Forget blocking and TD's?

Go back a page and read before posting.

I've seen Graham lay some viscious blocks before, but at some point you have to trust numbers more than what you've seen with just your eyes a few times. He's a great blocker (but replaceable in this area), with okay hands, average speed, and durability issues.

I'll repeat the RB analogy again. Consider:
Running back A: 50 catches, 8 reception TD's
Running back B: 10 catches, 1 reception TD.

Which running back is a better receiver? Using your logic, you would say you can't say for sure. You could claim that running back B had to block much more in the backfield, and that the numbers do not say anything about that player's ability to catch passes. I would say that running back A brings more to the table in the passing game.

You are trying to use this approach with Graham, and I'm not buying it.

 

[tailgater]

Go back a page and read before posting.

I've seen Graham lay some viscious blocks before, but at some point you have to trust numbers more than what you've seen with just your eyes a few times. He's a great blocker (but replaceable in this area), with okay hands, average speed, and durability issues.

I'll repeat the RB analogy again. Consider:
Running back A: 50 catches, 8 reception TD's
Running back B: 10 catches, 1 reception TD.

Which running back is a better receiver? Using your logic, you would say you can't say for sure. You could claim that running back B had to block much more in the backfield, and that the numbers do not say anything about that player's ability to catch passes. I would say that running back A brings more to the table in the passing game.

You are trying to use this approach with Graham, and I'm not buying it.

I've read every post. Just because you write something doesn't mean it makes any sense or is accurate.

Using that argument gets us nowhere. Now if the RB didn't get any rushes (his main occupation) then it might mean something, but otherwise it doesn't amount to much. If you were talking about Garrett Mills, it might relate. The guy is a better receiver than he is a RB, so he'll likely have a lot more receptions than rush attempts.

I guess Watson sucks too, since he has less balls throw to him and is obviously fragile. 29 receptions and he's better than Graham? At least be consistent! Your entire argument is the number of receptions. I think thats a flawed analysis, otherwise why would TE's ever be expected to block? They'd just be big WR's.

As to Grahams blocking ability easily replacable....how? Who? Fauria and Watson certainly couldn't do the job. What other mega-blocking TE's are on the market for vet min that they can snap up and 'replace' Graham with?

Using your example, I'd say RB A is Dillon, while RB B is Faulk. Nothing else to take away from that for me.

Not surprised you brush over everything else that doesn't agree with your point. That seems to work for you. Now if you could explain why Brady would prefer to go to Graham in the red zone over any other target over the past five years, considering his average at best hands? Nah, doesn't fit your POV, so ignore it. What about Grahams dramatic drop in numbers once the OL started taking hits? Did he have good hands early in the year, then didn't? It certainly wasn't Watsons emergence as a threat.

 

[DaBruinz]

Go back a page and read before posting.

I've seen Graham lay some viscious blocks before, but at some point you have to trust numbers more than what you've seen with just your eyes a few times. He's a great blocker (but replaceable in this area), with okay hands, average speed, and durability issues.

I'll repeat the RB analogy again. Consider:
Running back A: 50 catches, 8 reception TD's
Running back B: 10 catches, 1 reception TD.

Which running back is a better receiver? Using your logic, you would say you can't say for sure. You could claim that running back B had to block much more in the backfield, and that the numbers do not say anything about that player's ability to catch passes. I would say that running back A brings more to the table in the passing game.

You are trying to use this approach with Graham, and I'm not buying it.

The problem with the argument that you, maverick, and JSP are making is that you are acting like its Graham's fault that he has been asked to block so much to help out the O-line. You are also acting like the kid has hands of stone and he doesn't. He's actually got very good hands. If the reason that Graham's lack of production was truly his own abilities, I would agree with you. But the reasons have been the inability of the RTs (First Ashworth and then Gorin) to not be able to play their position properly, requiring TE help to block Pass Rushing DEs.

Also, someone mentioned about Vrabel being out there in Goal Line situations and I made a very good point that has be ignored. The goal line situation is about blocking. Graham is out there to help with the blocking because the Pats really haven't had anyone else who could do it. Vrabel isn't nearly as good a blocker as Graham is in that situation. Nor anyone else. Yet, Graham is getting knocked for not getting TDs in those situations while Vrabel is.

So, I ask again, which are you going to do? Put a great blocker with good hands in to block or put a mediocre blocker with good hands in to block. The answer is obvious. You put your best blockers in to block and your best receivers in to receive. And if one of your receivers happens to be a better blocker, then he blocks.

Putting Vrabel in on Goal Line situations tells me more about the lack of faith in Fauria and the other TEs than it does in the lack of faith in Graham.

Also, if you are going to knock Graham regarding his TDs, are you knocking Watson as well since Watson didn't get a single GOAL LINE reception?

 

[JoeSixPat]

Not that I'm surprised, but no comment from you or Maverik on the numbers? Does this mean the # of receptions is the be-all and end-all for measuring a TE's success? Forget blocking and TD's?

I forget who posted it, but someone came out and said a number of TE's drafted in 2002 outperformed Graham by a wide margin. I looked up the first 4 or 5 guys drafted and none had more TD's than Graham. Shockey didn't (another injury-prone TE), Stevens didn't, Jolley didn't Schoebel didn't. Who did?

I would think alll these other supposed stellar TE's would have many more TD's based on the number of catches and attempts, but that is not the case. If Grahams hands are so bad, why does Brady go to him?

Also whats all this hype on Watson? Because of his speed? He did catch Champ Baily, true. he was also the guy who missed his block and left Brady exposed to the rush. He also seems to run the wrong route all the time (at least Brady seems to be in his face all the time). Add in he has missed more games and has few stats to support the hype leaves me confused as to where these arguments are coming from. When he shows half the ability ON THE FIELD, and not on film, of Graham, I'll get excited.

I can't understand what you guys are seeing. It isn't supported by the facts to date...unless you go by # of receptions only, and what Pats player has great numbers? None.

Actually I did address the numbers - you must have just overlooked them - as I noted that no one's provided any evidence to support the notion that Graham can only act as a receiver option only 10% of his time on the field, asking for Pats1 to look at tape to give his assessment.

Technically all I know is what I see from watching games - that Graham moves downfield quite often during receiving situations and not relegated to a static OL flanking position 90% of the time as others suggest. But perhaps Pats1 would lend his efforts to this matter and could determine whether Graham was just not open, not looked to as a primary receivng threat, or simply serving as a 6th lineman.

The other mention you refer to wasn't limited players drafted only in 2002 - nor specific only to TDs. Rather there are plenty of guys like Witten drafted later than the 1st round who have outperformed Graham as TEs - many both in terms of receptions and TDs. That all speaks to Graham's market value if and when he enters negotiations with the Patriots, as he can't expect to receive a premium for being a former #1 draft choice when so many others have out performed him who were drafted later.

If we have to keep comparisons to Graham to only the 2002 draft and only to TDs I suppose it might help show Graham to be a better TE but that's not really the issue - more just the question of how other TEs have performed - even those drafted after the first round - compared with Graham, even when their teams were working with patchwork OLs

 

[AdamJT13]

That is different than losing both starting OTs during the season. The Cowboys had time to get Pettitti into the fold and he started 15 of 16 games. (Only Mankins, Ware, and Derrick Johnson started all 16 games as rookies last season).

What? Petitti not only started all 16 games, he played EVERY offensive snap.

Yes, it is slight semantics, but the Patriots didn't have a rookie as good as Pettitti.

So you're saying Petitti was better than Kaczur and Mankins?

The Patriots last year, during the season, had BOTH their starting LT (Light) and RT (Ashworth) out. This forced Kaczur and Gorin to be the starting Tackles. And Graham was held in to help out in the blocking (mostly helping Gorin).

Kaczur and Gorin were the starting tackles for only five games, and in three of those, Ashworth played as a backup. (Ashworth even started one of those games -- as a blocking tight end.) Ashworth missed only two games. And Gorin had started 10 games at right tackle in 2004 -- he wasn't exactly a sixth-round rookie.

And you're saying that Petitti being forced into the starting lineup during the preseason was better for the Cowboys than if had had been a backup for eight weeks before being thrown in? I'm not buying it.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Witten Vs. Graham is the debate right?

Let's see
Witten
2004 87 980
2005 66 757
Tot 153 1,737

Graham
2004 30 364
2005 16 235
Tot 46 599

Watson
2004 2 16
2005 29 441
Tot 31 457

Okay let's just do the math on the offense for a minute, and leave the debating on the blocking till later.

Let us consider Graham as the baseline performer Alright.

On average Graham would have
23 catches for 300 yards per season = 100% offensive performance
Watson would have
15 catches for 229 yards per season = 75% offensive performance
Witten would have
77 catches for 869 yards per season = 290% offensive performance

Now these numbers are on average. And they ignore the fact that Watson made a tremendous leap from his rookie season to 2005. I don't think it is a stretch to think that Watson can improve on those numbers and reach at least 100%, ie Graham offensive level performance if not more in 2006.

Ok let's say you believe that catches caught and yardage gained gives an incomplete picture of the tight end's offensive value. What other measurements can we use to gauge performance?

I submit the following stats that were compiled by Football Outsiders on the performance of tight ends in 2005. They rank tight ends by a stat called DPAR.

"Tight ends are ranked according to DPAR, or Defense-adjusted Points Above Replacement. This number represents the total number of points scored due to plays where this TE caught the ball, compared to a replacement-level TE in the same game situations. DPAR (and its cousin, PAR, which isn't adjusted based on opponent) is further explained here."
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/methods.php#voaexplained

"The simple version: DPAR means a tight end with more total value. DVOA means a tight end with more value per play."

Their top ranked Tight ends were:
----------------DPAR---DVOA
1- A. Gates 34.4---26.7%
2- J. Witten 25.9---32.3%
3- T. Gonzalez 22.6---19.3%
15- B. Watson 8.9---11.7%
22- D. Graham 3.6---16.7%
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php

Well there you have it. The "Outsiders" perspective on tight end offensive value.

One can see here that even on an overall value basis Graham's offensive production is far below that of Witten who was a top 3 tight end last year, and was even trailing that of Watson.

Does Graham's blocking prowess add to his value? Sure. Does it make up for it enough that one could go so far to say he is good as Witten? The numbers tell the tale.

Graham isn't even the best tight end on his own team. This may be a situation much like Coates vs. Cook. Where the better tight end stuck and the other faded into obscurity.

If Watson continues to improve his numbers would you rather retain Watson or overpay Graham 4M per year like Witten when clearly his performance is not commensurate with that top level?

Yeah there are intangibles in football that are not measured by numbers but you have to have SOME numbers to make the comparison plausible.
Witten is putting up 290% of Graham's offense by traditional stats.
Witten has 720% (3.6/25.9) the DPAR value that Graham has.
Witten is putting up 1.9x (16.7/32.3) the DVOA per offensive play.


Right now making a direct comparison sound plausible is not feasible. If Graham has a bounce back year and puts up more like 500-600 yards in 2006 then he has a value argument. Until then I don't see the Pats putting up Witten type dollars for Graham level performance.

 

[Flying Fungi]

Graham isn't even the best tight end on his on team.

I am not a Graham apologist, but right now, this is not accurate. Watson may have the potential to be the better TE than Graham, but he isn't there yet.

 

[maverick4]

Witten Vs. Graham is the debate right?

Bravo on all those stats and comps.
<clapping hands>

Graham is nowhere in the same ballpark as Witten. Paying him Witten-like money would be a waste of capital.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Witten Vs. Graham is the debate right?

Right - so given the unbiased - or at least less biased view - there's just no way the numbers justify paying Graham anywhere near as much as Witten as of right now - so if Witten's contract is ballpark $7 years $29 mil - roughly $4 mil a year - work your way backwards to see what Graham would be looking at. That's really my only point here.

Frankly I think Graham would have to be crazy to even consider an extension right now even if the Pats were offering, based on his current stats. He needs a year in which Watson becomes a major threat that teams devote extra coverage to him, leaving Graham as the preferred TE option. That might allow him to finally be discussed in terms of more than "potential" and put up some numbers worthy of a better contract.

In other words, its in Graham's best interest to wait - and hope that he can stay injury free of course.