Reiss revisits Chad Jackson trade

[SVN]

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2008/06/trade_revisitie.html

 

[ScottieC]

Re: Trade Revisted

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2008/06/trade_revisitie.html

Yea, hard to argue Chad's side on that trade.

Lets hope he proves a lot of people wrong (or right - BB & Scott P.) this year.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Trade Revisted

You gotta give a WR three years to emerge, but as of right now it is clear that the Packers got the better end of the deal and it isn't even close.

 

[signbabybrady]

Re: Trade Revisted

You gotta give a WR three years to emerge, but as of right now it is clear that the Packers got the better end of the deal and it isn't even close.

even if he emerges it will be extremely hard to pass the combined production of those two. But we can hope.

realisticly though I think he will have a decent to good year and we will all finally be happy.

 

[mcsully]

Re: Trade Revisted

Jennings is a solid young players that shows flashes of going to the next level. But his development will be stunted this year with Favre gone.

 

[Pats726]

Re: Trade Revisted

I agree...2 players that have emerged as starters are clearly better than one, especially when that one that has been limited due to injury and barely on the field. This is Chad's year to shine...HOPING he does!!

 

[Doctor DDS]

Re: Trade Revisted

I hate these type of scenarios as it's not as if the Pats would have taken those playesr if they kept their picks. There will always be players taken after you that turn out good just as there will be busts taken before you. Several of the draftees we are talking about now won't even make the team. Does not necessarily mean they were bad picks. Sometimes taking several high risk picks is better than several safe ones. As an 18-1 team we should be swinging for the fences on all picks after the 2nd round in my opinion.

 

[363839]

Re: Chad Jackson trade revisited

Even if you could call Jackson/Jennings a wash, the Packers also
got a pretty solid guard in Jason Spitz.
http://jsonline.stats.com/fb/playerstats.asp?id=7824&team=9

Our FO got their azzes handed to 'em on that one.
It happens.

 

[Doonan24]

Re: Trade Revisted

I hate these type of scenarios as it's not as if the Pats would have taken those playesr if they kept their picks. There will always be players taken after you that turn out good just as there will be busts taken before you. Several of the draftees we are talking about now won't even make the team. Does not necessarily mean they were bad picks. Sometimes taking several high risk picks is better than several safe ones. As an 18-1 team we should be swinging for the fences on all picks after the 2nd round in my opinion.

Couldn't have said it better. Everyone has their own draft board, it's kind of silly to play the "who got the better end of it" when its for a draft pick.

 

[sieglo]

Re: Trade Revisted

I haven't been keeping up with Pats news for a couple days -- for a second reading the title of this thread I thought they had traded Jackson!

 

[BradyManny]

Re: Trade Revisted

I hate these type of scenarios as it's not as if the Pats would have taken those playesr if they kept their picks.

Good point. The other thing worthy of note is that even if the Pats had landed Jennings instead for some reason and if he performed the same way here as he has in Green Bay (debatable given how complex our passing offense is considered), then we have less need to trade for Moss and the historic pairing of Moss and Brady may never occur.

As for Jackson - lets give him time. This is his make or break season.

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Trade Revisted

Jennings is a solid young players that shows flashes of going to the next level. But his development will be stunted this year with Favre gone.

Not in that style of offense. The QB's primary job is to get the ball out as quickly as possible and into the hands of a receiver. Rodgers has spent three years learning that behind Favre and has altered his release to accomodate that style. Plus, Rodgers supposedly has a quicker release than Favre. Jennings should be okay this year without Lord Brett.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Trade Revisted

Good point. The other thing worthy of note is that even if the Pats had landed Jennings instead for some reason and if he performed the same way here as he has in Green Bay (debatable given how complex our passing offense is considered), then we have less need to trade for Moss and the historic pairing of Moss and Brady may never occur.

As for Jackson - lets give him time. This is his make or break season.

Personally, I am convinced that the trades for Moss (and Welker) would likely have happened regardless of how the 2006 season ended: if you can get that much talent for that little actual cost, how do you not make that trade?

OTOH, I think that if the Pats had had a better passing game in 2006, then Stallworth and/or Washington might never have been Patriots.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

Re: Trade Revisted

I'm certainly not going to argue in favor of the Patriots on this trade but if Jennings had torn his ACL a year ago and Jackson hadn't, things could look different right now; it's not the Patriots' nor Jackson's fault that he tore his ACL.

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Trade Revisted

I'm certainly not going to argue in favor of the Patriots on this trade but if Jennings had torn his ACL a year ago and Jackson hadn't, things could look different right now; it's not the Patriots' nor Jackson's fault that he tore his ACL.

Yes it is. Don't you know that Bill Belichick invented torn ACLs?

 

[VJCPatriot]

Re: Chad Jackson trade revisited

Well all we need is for Chad Jackson to replace Stallworth's production and this offense won't skip a beat. Believe it or not Stallworth had under 700 yards and 3 tds last season. Obviously the lion's share of TDs went to Moss, but still Stallworth's production shouldn't be that hard to replace. If CJ can get 700 yards and show good reliable hands this year, I'm satisfied.

 

[PatsFan37]

Re: Chad Jackson trade revisited

Well all we need is for Chad Jackson to replace Stallworth's production and this offense won't skip a beat. Believe it or not Stallworth had under 700 yards and 3 tds last season. Obviously the lion's share of TDs went to Moss, but still Stallworth's production shouldn't be that hard to replace. If CJ can get 700 yards and show good reliable hands this year, I'm satisfied.

That assumes Moss and Welker have the same astronomical year they had in 2007. It's unlikely. Both were in prove-it years, both stayed healthy, and the stars seemed to be aligned for the passing game.

I think for one reason or another -- health or craftier opposing defenses or simple probability -- neither player will have that kind of marquee year, which leaves an opportunity. That's why Jackson had better be ready. If he isn't, Gaffney and Washington will eat his lunch.

 

[BradyManny]

Re: Trade Revisted

Personally, I am convinced that the trades for Moss (and Welker) would likely have happened regardless of how the 2006 season ended: if you can get that much talent for that little actual cost, how do you not make that trade?

OTOH, I think that if the Pats had had a better passing game in 2006, then Stallworth and/or Washington might never have been Patriots.

Yeah, that's quite possible, good point. Either way, I'm happy so far with the way things have gone with our receiving corps, and I'm hoping - and cautiously optimistic - that this season Jackson proves to be worth the price we paid for him.

 

[onegameatatime]

Re: Trade Revisted

Jennings is a solid young players that shows flashes of going to the next level. But his development will be stunted this year with Favre gone.

In addition to the logical flaw pointed out elsewhere that odds are the Pats would likely not have taken those guys and GB might not have taken Jackson, even looking at it that way, would Spitz have started over Neal or Mankins? And who did Jennings have to beat out? certainly not Moss, Welker, and Stallworth.

 

[bradmahn]

Re: Chad Jackson trade revisited

That assumes Moss and Welker have the same astronomical year they had in 2007. It's unlikely. Both were in prove-it years, both stayed healthy, and the stars seemed to be aligned for the passing game.

I think for one reason or another -- health or craftier opposing defenses or simple probability -- neither player will have that kind of marquee year, which leaves an opportunity. That's why Jackson had better be ready. If he isn't, Gaffney and Washington will eat his lunch.

Is it possible for Moss and Welker to catch 95 and 100 balls, respectively? I don't think it's out of the question for Welker to finish with 100/1100/9 or Moss to finish with 95/1400/15. The TDs can come from others (rushing/receiving) but if they put up those numbers there will be a significant number of opportunities at the goal line.

Jackson doesn't have to replace Stallworth, he has to get on the field. He'll see plenty of passes once that happens. Moss and Brady are almost locks not to put up the types of seasons that they had last year but I could see Maroney, Morris, Watson, Jackson, Dave Thomas and Jabar Gaffney all being more productive than they were.