Chung Compare To Griffin?

Elijah said:

Our defense fell apart without him in 2011.

Click to expand...

According to Pro-Football-Reference.com...

Chung played in 7 of the team's first 8 games. The Patriots only 3 losses came during that stretch, and Chung was in 2 of them (he didn't play in the first Bills game).

The team gave up fewer yards in the games Chung missed than in the games Chung played.

The team gave up the same number of points (171) in the games Chung missed as in the games Chung played.

Elijah said:

Our defense fell apart without him in 2011.

Click to expand...

yeah...no....

Safeties who I would take over Chung:

Troy Polamalu
Ed Reed
Adrian Wilson
Eric Berry
Michael Griffin
Donte Whitner
Antrel Rolle
Ryan Clark
Roman Harper
Malcolm Jenkins
Eric Weddle
Antoine Bethea
Earl Thomas
William Moore
Charles Godfrey
Thomas DeCoud
Major Wright
Louis Delmas (went one pick before Chung, still wonder if we would have picked him instead if he was available)
Bernard Pollard
Kurt Coleman
Dashon Goldson (still bummed that the Pats didn't manage to snag him last year)
Quintin Mikell
Gerald Sensabaugh
Chris Harris when healthy
Kam Chancellor
Tyvon Branch
Reggie Nelson
George Wilson
OJ Atogwe
Morgan Burnett
Jairus Byrd
Kenny Phillips

There's 30+. Again, I don't think that Chung is a bad player by any stretch. I like him, and 15 years ago I would have liked him a lot more. But he's iffy in coverage, and doesn't really intimidate people like Ryan Clark or Bernard Pollard do. If he improves in coverage this year, my opinion of him will jump pretty dramatically. I also largely agree with Andy's post: it's hard to evaluate him now, and if he steps up his play and stays on the field this year, then it will change the whole equation quite a bit.

I would take Chung over Landry..you think Chung is injury prone..that guys sneezes and he's out 3 weeks. He is also horrible in coverage

Brady_to_Moss said:

I would take Chung over Landry..you think Chung is injury prone..that guys sneezes and he's out 3 weeks. He is also horrible in coverage

Click to expand...

With Landry, it's the same recurring heel injury that, for some reason, he's afraid to get fixed surgically. If he'd just bite the bullet and get it fixed (which I bet he'll do after this season when--not if--he injuries it again), I would rank him ahead of Chung probably.

BradyFTW! said:

Safeties who I would take over Chung:

Troy Polamalu
Ed Reed
Adrian Wilson
Eric Berry
Michael Griffin
Donte Whitner
Antrel Rolle
Ryan Clark
Roman Harper
Malcolm Jenkins
Eric Weddle
Antoine Bethea
Earl Thomas
William Moore
Charles Godfrey
Thomas DeCoud
Major Wright
Louis Delmas (went one pick before Chung, still wonder if we would have picked him instead if he was available)
Bernard Pollard
Kurt Coleman
Dashon Goldson (still bummed that the Pats didn't manage to snag him last year)
Quintin Mikell
Gerald Sensabaugh
Chris Harris when healthy
Kam Chancellor
Tyvon Branch
Reggie Nelson
George Wilson
OJ Atogwe
Morgan Burnett
Jairus Byrd
Kenny Phillips

There's 30+. Again, I don't think that Chung is a bad player by any stretch. I like him, and 15 years ago I would have liked him a lot more. But he's iffy in coverage, and doesn't really intimidate people like Ryan Clark or Bernard Pollard do. If he improves in coverage this year, my opinion of him will jump pretty dramatically. I also largely agree with Andy's post: it's hard to evaluate him now, and if he steps up his play and stays on the field this year, then it will change the whole equation quite a bit.

Click to expand...

Well, you did show your list. I think however, if that is your list you should admit you DO think he is a bad player, because you essentially listed every S with a certain starting job in the NFL, including many who started for the first time last year and guys like Wilson who only start when there is no one else on a bad team.
Thats fine, but you list guys that ARE bad players and call them better than Chung.

AndyJohnson said:

Well, you did show your list. I think however, if that is your list you should admit you DO think he is a bad player, because you essentially listed every S with a certain starting job in the NFL, including many who started for the first time last year and guys like Wilson who only start when there is no one else on a bad team.
Thats fine, but you list guys that ARE bad players and call them better than Chung.

Click to expand...

I have to agree. I look at that list and think that guy is awful so by default if that's what you're going with Chung is awful.

If Chung stays healthy and has a good season he will get a deal that averages over 5 million per season and probably 8-10 guaranteed. People don't realize just how young he was coming out, he's got a great deal of good football ahead of him.

Listening to people here rip on players for being hurt too much or soft is really comical, 99.99999% of those posting would be in bed crying their hearts out for a month after just one of these hits.

BradyFTW! said:

Safeties who I would take over Chung:

Troy Polamalu
Ed Reed
Adrian Wilson
Eric Berry
Michael Griffin
Donte Whitner
Antrel Rolle
Ryan Clark
Roman Harper
Malcolm Jenkins
Eric Weddle
Antoine Bethea
Earl Thomas
William Moore
Charles Godfrey
Thomas DeCoud
Major Wright
Louis Delmas (went one pick before Chung, still wonder if we would have picked him instead if he was available)
Bernard Pollard
Kurt Coleman
Dashon Goldson (still bummed that the Pats didn't manage to snag him last year)
Quintin Mikell
Gerald Sensabaugh
Chris Harris when healthy
Kam Chancellor
Tyvon Branch
Reggie Nelson
George Wilson
OJ Atogwe
Morgan Burnett
Jairus Byrd
Kenny Phillips

There's 30+. Again, I don't think that Chung is a bad player by any stretch. I like him, and 15 years ago I would have liked him a lot more. But he's iffy in coverage, and doesn't really intimidate people like Ryan Clark or Bernard Pollard do. If he improves in coverage this year, my opinion of him will jump pretty dramatically. I also largely agree with Andy's post: it's hard to evaluate him now, and if he steps up his play and stays on the field this year, then it will change the whole equation quite a bit.

Click to expand...

Nice list.

Now, whittle that down to the guys who are realistically likely to be available to replace Chung for 2013.

Then, whittle THAT list down to the guys who are realistically likely to sign with the Pats for the $3 mil/year or so that folks appear to be saying that Chung is worth, max (and who wouldn't require trading a draft pick for).

Then, we can make a poll out of that much, much shorter list to see who folks around here think would be at least an adequate replacement for Chung (being sure to include a "none of the above" option, of course).

Ivan said:

If Chung stays healthy and has a good season he will get a deal that averages over 5 million per season and probably 8-10 guaranteed. People don't realize just how young he was coming out, he's got a great deal of good football ahead of him.

Listening to people here rip on players for being hurt too much or soft is really comical, 99.99999% of those posting would be in bed crying their hearts out for a month after just one of these hits.

Click to expand...

Given that injury history is important to teams and coaches, and not just fans, the second portion of your post makes no sense.

MaineMan said:

Nice list.

Now, whittle that down to the guys who are realistically likely to be available to replace Chung for 2013.

Then, whittle THAT list down to the guys who are realistically likely to sign with the Pats for the $3 mil/year or so that folks appear to be saying that Chung is worth, max (and who wouldn't require trading a draft pick for).

Then, we can make a poll out of that much, much shorter list to see who folks around here think would be at least an adequate replacement for Chung (being sure to include a "none of the above" option, of course).

Click to expand...

So he should do something completely irrelevant because he was willing to compile a list for someone who asked for it?

The big weakness in Chungs game is he can't read the QB well enough, he makes mistakes because of that.

MaineMan said:

Nice list.

Now, whittle that down to the guys who are realistically likely to be available to replace Chung for 2013.

Then, whittle THAT list down to the guys who are realistically likely to sign with the Pats for the $3 mil/year or so that folks appear to be saying that Chung is worth, max (and who wouldn't require trading a draft pick for).

Then, we can make a poll out of that much, much shorter list to see who folks around here think would be at least an adequate replacement for Chung (being sure to include a "none of the above" option, of course).

Click to expand...

That wasn't really the point. Defending Chung's honor can be handled by Mrs Chung, IMO. The point of the list was to clarify the '30+ better' safeties comments by finding out where he draws that line, and thereby seeing how he rates Chung.
His list gave all the infornation needed. I feel it undervalues Chung, ie, places poorer players ahead of him, but that is the posters analysis, which is what I was looking to see.
If you wish create a defense for the player by turning 'better' into something else, feel free, but that is kind of straying from the point.

Deus Irae said:

So he should do something completely irrelevant because he was willing to compile a list for someone who asked for it?

Click to expand...

I'm sure that would help the Chung family feel better about BradyFTW's assessment of their boy.

There are at least 4 safeties on that list who were benched last season. There's one who was benched and then cut midseason. I think you're reaching quite a bit.

AndyJohnson said:

I'm sure that would help the Chung family feel better about BradyFTW's assessment of their boy.

Click to expand...

Well, given that the final thing talked about was a poll to be taken by people here, I'm sure you're right. The homer percentage will kick in and make Chung's family a very happy one.

AndyJohnson said:

That wasn't really the point. Defending Chung's honor can be handled by Mrs Chung, IMO. The point of the list was to clarify the '30+ better' safeties comments by finding out where he draws that line, and thereby seeing how he rates Chung.
His list gave all the infornation needed. I feel it undervalues Chung, ie, places poorer players ahead of him, but that is the posters analysis, which is what I was looking to see.
If you wish create a defense for the player by turning 'better' into something else, feel free, but that is kind of straying from the point.

Click to expand...

Actually, I did understand the point of the list and my response was in no way intended to "defend Chung's honor" as you or anyone else should understand from reading my previous posts in this thread. If you DO read them, you should see that I share the concerns that others have about Chung's coverage skills and overall abilities and that I previously agreed with you about taking a "wait and see" approach this year.

IOW, you really need to stop the type of knee-jerk bulls**t like the bolded part above that you often slap people with. You make fine points without such crap and it detracts from the good things that you post.

The point of my response to the list was to tie it back to the earlier portion of this thread when several posts suggested that if Chung asks for more than $3 mil/year (much less "Griffin Money") then the Pats should let him walk. If that happens, finding a replacement will be necessary.

So, having a list in hand of 30+ safeties who are better than Chung is fine, and I'm not disputing the "better" part of that at all. But, realistically, how many of them will be available at the end of the 2012 season to replace him (at a "reasonable price")? The point of the poll I suggested would be to, honestly, find out which one of them (if any) this board would actually prefer to a >$3 mil/yr Chung.

And, sure, with a "none of the above" option, the poll itself might get skewed by some "homers", but at least those of us who actually, rationally discuss the pros and cons of the options will have some names to fill in the blank with.

I don't get any of this...if Chung won't take 3 mil from the Pats, why do the Pats then have to pick from free agents and throw money at anybody when they can just use the draft to replace Chung...it's not like Chung has this wellspring of experience that can't be replaced by a rook. I'd trust the decision making of the Pats brass when it comes to handing out a contract like Griffin's.

MaineMan said:

Actually, I did understand the point of the list and my response was in no way intended to "defend Chung's honor" as you or anyone else should understand from reading my previous posts in this thread. If you DO read them, you should see that I share the concerns that others have about Chung's coverage skills and overall abilities and that I previously agreed with you about taking a "wait and see" approach this year.

IOW, you really need to stop the type of knee-jerk bulls**t like the bolded part above that you often slap people with. You make fine points without such crap and it detracts from the good things that you post.

The point of my response to the list was to tie it back to the earlier portion of this thread when several posts suggested that if Chung asks for more than $3 mil/year (much less "Griffin Money") then the Pats should let him walk. If that happens, finding a replacement will be necessary.

So, having a list in hand of 30+ safeties who are better than Chung is fine, and I'm not disputing the "better" part of that at all. But, realistically, how many of them will be available at the end of the 2012 season to replace him (at a "reasonable price")? The point of the poll I suggested would be to, honestly, find out which one of them (if any) this board would actually prefer to a >$3 mil/yr Chung.

And, sure, with a "none of the above" option, the poll itself might get skewed by some "homers", but at least those of us who actually, rationally discuss the pros and cons of the options will have some names to fill in the blank with.

Click to expand...

I asked the guy to give a list of to back up his interesting claim that 30 safeties were better than Chung.
He gave his list.
Your response was to direct him to qualify his list based on a bunch of criteria that have nothing to do with his assessment of the player, and then instruct him to go start a poll. The discussion wasn't who can be signed for what, the discussion was what kind of player Chung is.
It cleared it up for me, because it made it blatantly obvious that the poster and I see 2 different players out there, and do not have a common ground to discuss. If you want to take a negative post about a player and instruct people to do a chore that will boil it down to make an argument you have in mind, perhaps you should just do the chore.
It sounded defensive of Chung. If it wasn't and there was some other thought process, my apologies.

Oh and hey thanks for telling me what I NEED TO DO. Feel free to give me whatever other orders you would like me to ignore.

Rookie safeties who are ready to start are very dificult to find in the draft, especially given where we draft. So, no, I don't expect Chung to be replaced by a rook if he moves on.

Joker said:

I don't get any of this...if Chung won't take 3 mil from the Pats, why do the Pats then have to pick from free agents and throw money at anybody when they can just use the draft to replace Chung...it's not like Chung has this wellspring of experience that can't be replaced by a rook. I'd trust the decision making of the Pats brass when it comes to handing out a contract like Griffin's.

Click to expand...