Torn between FA WRs Mike Wallace and Brandon Lloyd...

[supafly]

We've had guys in here before who had lots of thousand yard seasons and they couldn't approach that in this system. This kid has talent. He has speed. We've drafted kids like that and seen them fail to develop here. He also fell off a cliff in the second half of last season. We have no idea what his mental capacity or mental toughness and coachability is. His own HC labeled him a one trick pony at some point. They don't run a similar system in Pittsburgh. In fact with Ben under center they have increasingly run the seat of my pants offense. Talent can shine under those circumstances. Yet fail in a disciplined and demanding scheme.

I couldn't agree with you more.

There's absolutely NO way that this team is going to do the following:

1. Take a huge gamble (not even close to their style)

2. Pay someone #1 WR money to get the exact same amount of targets that they would have with Welker, Gronkowski, and Hernandez. That's 4 targets. No one here is the 'true' defintion of a #1 WR. We actually may be seeing them stand their ground with that assessment during the Welker negotiations right now.

3. Give up a precious #1st round draft pick, especially in a very valuable era where the rookie cap was just placed last yr. Picks like that give you the potential to receive great production for a player who is extremely cheap.

4. Give up a #1st rd pick AND also immediately pay him 10 million a year to "hope" that he fits into the system here.

5. Do any of the above for a guy who has not even proven himself as a WR who belongs in the same category as the top-tier 'elite' WR's in the game. Wallace has potential, but we've seen that as a 50/50 split many times in terms of it that will ever be reached.

Mike Wallace is exactly the opposite kind of guy who the NEP would ever target, at least in my opinion. There are many arguing over whether or not the team should be interested in a guy like Mario Williams (former #1 overall pick), proving that there are +'s and -'s to every issue/player. Yet somehow we're suddenly supposed to believe that they'd be interested in a guy like Mike freaking Wallace. That's hilarious.

Just b/c they have a need for more production for a guy outside the numbers, and want to improve the downfield ability to open up some more underneath routes for their bread and butter guys does not suddenly mean they are going to jump off of the 'end of the extreme' scale, and suddenly change the way they've proven successful at doing their business time and again.

 

[supafly]

After re-reading my previous post, I think that it's a bit unfair to have such an extreme "right or wrong" opinion about any one issue.

It's easy (and fun to some extent) to try and play GM/front office guru, but luckily the team has much better suitors in place to make those kinds of decisions.

While I stand by my assessment of the M.Wallace situation (I feel it is all media driven BS based on our 'need' for a better downfield threat), it is bone-headed of me to assume that I could have such a strong-headed opinion one way or another.

It's more than reasonable that the front office may think that Wallace is the second coming of Calvin Johnson, and they are willing to take many risks to hope that comes to fruition. More importantly, there are plenty of posters who could be more than right about their feelings on the matter, thus proving my knowledge to be nothing more than what it is...a fan with an opinion.

 

[Deus Irae]

Not sure about the comparison, Deus.

Moss was already proven as one of the best WR's in the NFL, and also known as a good X and O guy who learned quickly and was 'football smart.'

The whole key to the deal supposedly came when he didn't even flinch for a second when the Pats put out a feeler for him, telling him that he would not be making much money at all--at least until he proved himself. I think that proved to them that he was certainly worth the relatively low risk.

Wallace on the other hand---still has a TON to prove in many areas, and is supposedly looking for 'elite' WR money. That's a pretty big gamble when trying to assess whether he can read the defense, run the entire route tree, be in the exact same place in that split-second instance, and develop a winning rapport with Brady.

He's proven that he can flourish (at times) in a backyard football system where the QB runs around for his life, hoping for enough time for his guys to get open. It certainly seems as though they do things a bit differently in Pittsburgh in regards to their offensive scheming and execution.

One was an extremely low risk who had already proven himself as being a superstar. One is an extremely high risk, who has not proven to be anywhere close in Moss' league.

I get what you're saying, that we shouldn't make assumptions on whether or not Wallace could fit here; but in the end he's not worth the risk AND #1 WR money just to get equal targets with 3 other guys (Welker, Hernandez, Gronkowski). No way in hell that this team is going to pay anyone like that top-tier #1 WR money. There's just not enough balls to go around. It would be senseless. We can still stretch the field to some degree and get better production from someone a lot cheaper, and possibly even more polished and proven (see Wayne, Reggie).

Just my opinion of course, buddy. Not trying to say that you are incorrect/and I am correct; just that I'm not sure about the comparison + I can understand those who aren't fully buying into the Mike Wallace hype.

Moss was, essentially, a downfield threat and pretty much only a downfield threat with a very occasional short reception. He wasn't going to go running 15 yard in cuts all over the place. Wallace actually does more than Moss in that sense, which is the mold I was referring to. For people to argue that the value's not there is a subjective thing that I can certainly understand: I'm not sure if I'd pull the trigger were I BB. For people to question whether or not Wallace will truly be effective running outside the numbers within the 20 yard spread is worth a serious analysis and discussion, IMO. I get all that.

What I can't buy is the notion that a deep receiver is somehow going to struggle with go, post and corner routes just because he signs up with the Patriots.

 

[supafly]

Moss was, essentially, a downfield threat and pretty much only a downfield threat with a very occasional short reception. He wasn't going to go running 15 yard in cuts all over the place. Wallace actually does more than Moss in that sense, which is the mold I was referring to. For people to argue that the value's not there is a subjective thing that I can certainly understand: I'm not sure if I'd pull the trigger were I BB. For people to question whether or not Wallace will truly be effective running outside the numbers within the 20 yard spread is worth a serious analysis and discussion, IMO. I get all that.

What I can't buy is the notion that a deep receiver is somehow going to struggle with go, post and corner routes just because he signs up with the Patriots.

All of that reasoning is certainly very fair, and you make some valid points.

My mis-interpretation of the comparison was based off of a whole different level, and you are right in your explanation.

It is a tough call, and I would expect the team to make the right choice more often than not.

I still think the position and problem gets addressed through both the draft and free agency, and that we are in a better place come September no matter what.

 

[Deus Irae]

All of that reasoning is certainly very fair, and you make some valid points.

My mis-interpretation of the comparison was based off of a whole different level, and you are right in your explanation.

It is a tough call, and I would expect the team to make the right choice more often than not.

I still think the position and problem gets addressed through both the draft and free agency, and that we are in a better place come September no matter what.

I hear you.

I've been driving the "Sign Lloyd and draft a rookie WR" bandwagon, and I still think that's a much more likely solution. I just think that the idea of getting a WR who's already what you'd be hoping to get via the draft, and being able to lock him up for 5 years, is a dream scenario for a team that really needs to get younger in the WR corps. People talking about the money are, I think, overrating that, because we're not talking about Wallace's contract as a standalone but, rather, we're talking about it as being whatever is the difference between a Wallace signing and a Lloyd/Colston/Wayne signing.

To me, it's not "Would you want to pay $11 million for Wallace?...", it's "Would you be willing to pay $4 million (or whatever the number turns out to be) more a year, and a draft pick for a 25 year old who's a top notch deep threat in the NFL, or would you rather have a lesser player who's in his 30s and keep the pick?". I can understand the argument for both positions.

 

[Simple Jack's Brother]

Since I'm still new I can't post new threads yet, but just saw on NFL.com that the eagles are looking for "more than a 3rd rounder" for DeSean Jackson...I don't know about you but if it only cost a 2nd round pick for us to get him, I'd be extremely tempted to kick the tires on that one. Obviously money is a factor, but if you're screaming to get Mike Wallace from the Steelers at the cost of a 1st round pick and money, wouldn't Jackson be more of a bargain for exactly the same skill set? Granted Wallace is more of a team player, but economics are always the biggest consideration.

NFL.com news: Franchise Season: Making sense of tags and tenders

 

[Snake Eyes]

Since I'm still new I can't post new threads yet, but just saw on NFL.com that the eagles are looking for "more than a 3rd rounder" for DeSean Jackson...I don't know about you but if it only cost a 2nd round pick for us to get him, I'd be extremely tempted to kick the tires on that one. Obviously money is a factor, but if you're screaming to get Mike Wallace from the Steelers at the cost of a 1st round pick and money, wouldn't Jackson be more of a bargain for exactly the same skill set? Granted Wallace is more of a team player, but economics are always the biggest consideration.

NFL.com news: Franchise Season: Making sense of tags and tenders

I wouldnt touch Jackson, he's exactly what we don't need.

 

[Ivan]

Lloyd would be my choice. I would go with the guy who they know can play the system they run instead of investing big money on the hope the player can get it.

 

[PatsFan2]

Since I'm still new I can't post new threads yet, but just saw on NFL.com that the eagles are looking for "more than a 3rd rounder" for DeSean Jackson...I don't know about you but if it only cost a 2nd round pick for us to get him, I'd be extremely tempted to kick the tires on that one. Obviously money is a factor, but if you're screaming to get Mike Wallace from the Steelers at the cost of a 1st round pick and money, wouldn't Jackson be more of a bargain for exactly the same skill set? Granted Wallace is more of a team player, but economics are always the biggest consideration.

NFL.com news: Franchise Season: Making sense of tags and tenders

JB, i love DeSean Jackson - Marshawn Lynch and Aarron Rodgers all who played for California. They all are still in the NFL and have better careers than their USC counter parts. I see your economics consideration but DeSean Jackson is an absolute *fill in the blank* words i can't say. And i know he would solve our problems because he is not only a receiver but a BEAST in the Return gameas well. The Guy is just a straight out Cancer...he's not a Team player. The Patriots orgainization have always been Team Players over Cancer. I just cannot dissagree with that approach in a world of prima donna's.

 

[JackBauer]

I wouldnt touch Jackson, he's exactly what we don't need.

Co-signed.

If you could take every negative characteristic of a wide receiver, stereotypes and otherwise, and bundle them into one package, you'd get DeSean Jackson.

 

[Simple Jack's Brother]

JB, i love DeSean Jackson - Marshawn Lynch and Aarron Rodgers all who played for California. They all are still in the NFL and have better careers than their USC counter parts. I see your economics consideration but DeSean Jackson is an absolute *fill in the blank* words i can't say. And i know he would solve our problems because he is not only a receiver but a BEAST in the Return gameas well. The Guy is just a straight out Cancer...he's not a Team player. The Patriots orgainization have always been Team Players over Cancer. I just cannot dissagree with that approach in a world of prima donna's.

Haha I feel ya...just tossing it out there. He's been a POS for sure, but just curious if anyone else thought BB might be able to turn that around...after all, he knows the Eagles need him rather than vice versa. Just dreaming of a deep threat again....sigh.

On a lighter note, only 2 more weeks til FA starts and we all look like morons.