Trading Tony G

Direckshun · 04-12-2009, 02:41 PM

If we trade Tony G, doesn't this entire draft become about offense?

We need another RB (LJ), we need to fill two spots on the OL (C and RT), and we're going to need a whole new set of receiving options if we lose Tony G.

This is a very big loss that we're going to need a couple picks to fill.

Mecca · 04-12-2009, 02:51 PM

I don't think we're building a 1 year team, but in fairness the draft is much deeper on offense than defense this year...

This is generally what I'd tell you this team needs core positions, TE isn't one of them.

htismaqe · 04-12-2009, 03:05 PM

This draft is a better offensive draft anyway.

aturnis · 04-12-2009, 03:55 PM

Just b/c it's better, doesn't mean it's all that great either. In all fairness though, the real value really is on the offensive side of the ball.

**RealSNR** · 04-12-2009, 04:32 PM

We drafted Cottam last year. It's ****ing reerunED to spend another pick on a TE

Direckshun · 04-12-2009, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR

We drafted Cottam last year. It's ****ing reerunED to spend another pick on a TE

Well when you have 1 TE...

**RealSNR** · 04-12-2009, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Well when you have 1 TE...

I'm not against a late round pick, but when you trade Tony for a 2nd and spend a 3rd rounder to get a good replacement, and put in Cottam as Tony's replacement, you get a significant downgrade at the position for moving your 3rd round pick up a couple spots.

That's dumb.

Great Expectations · 04-14-2009, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR

We drafted Cottam last year. It's ****ing reerunED to spend another pick on a TE

I don't understand this mentality. I don't think it matters who we drafted last year or the 10 years before that. The previouse regimes blew at the draft outside of the secondary, one offensive lineman, and one wide receiver.

We need to draft on what we need, if we need a TE draft one. If we need a DT draft one, if we need an OL draft one. You have to move forward, if we keep waiting on Herm's players to develop we won't get much better.

Coogs · 04-14-2009, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Great Expectations

We need to draft on what we need, if we need a TE draft one. If we need a DT draft one, if we need an OL draft one.

If two players are rated equal at the pick, then yeah, probably go with the need.

Last night on Total Access, right at the end of the show they did their standard 4 Downs question. One of the questions was "Would aquiring TG put Atlanta in the Super Bowl hunt?" (Or something pretty close to that, as I am paraphrasing)

The reply was something like this...

TE's don't win you Super Bowls...

Chiefnj2 · 04-14-2009, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

If two players are rated equal at the pick, then yeah, probably go with the need.

Last night on Total Access, right at the end of the show they did their standard 4 Downs question. One of the questions was "Would aquiring TG put Atlanta in the Super Bowl hunt?" (Or something pretty close to that, as I am paraphrasing)

The reply was something like this...

TE's don't win you Super Bowls...

I don't think the Ravens win the Super Bowl without Sharpe. He was their only source of big plays in the playoffs.

**Buehler445** · 04-12-2009, 04:43 PM

Yes. I think this teams becomes pretty horrid offensively if TG leaves.

O-Line - Shitty. Shittier if TG isn't around to block sometimes.
QB - 1 solid year, but loses a go to guy.
RB - LJ (

), a speedster that is not an everydown back, an oft busted Kolby Smith
FB - Cox played well (who knows if we will use a FB though.
WR - Bowe (who will now get double teamed), Cottam - has potential but hasn't caught many passes, Bradley has potential but is broken a lot, and old guys.

Gah...

KCDC · 04-12-2009, 05:55 PM

This year it is about relearning how to win. Someone like TG is invaluable for that on the offensive side. Brian Waters might qualify, but we need a big play guy.

We had no one on the defensive side that could do that last year, but now maybe Vrabel and Thomas can fill that role. Use a veteran leader on each side of the ball and re-instill confidence that we can win and no longer fold in the third quarter like a cheap suit.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-12-2009, 06:00 PM

WTF do we need to spend ANOTHER pick on a TE for?

Haley's offense doesn't use the TE anyway.

Build for the future, not wasting picks trying to fill a HOF'ers shoes.

htismaqe · 04-13-2009, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

WTF do we need to spend ANOTHER pick on a TE for?

Haley's offense doesn't use the TE anyway.

Build for the future, not wasting picks trying to fill a HOF'ers shoes.

It wouldn't hurt to draft one late.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-13-2009, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

It wouldn't hurt to draft one late.

Can't disagree with that.

But there are plenty of people here who think we have to turn that 2nd round pick we'd get for TG into another TE.

04-12-2009, 02:41 PM	Topic Starter
Direckshun __ Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Springpatch Casino cash: $2033447	Trading Tony G If we trade Tony G, doesn't this entire draft become about offense? We need another RB (LJ), we need to fill two spots on the OL (C and RT), and we're going to need a whole new set of receiving options if we lose Tony G. This is a very big loss that we're going to need a couple picks to fill.
Posts: 59,693

04-12-2009, 02:51 PM	#2
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-712950	I don't think we're building a 1 year team, but in fairness the draft is much deeper on offense than defense this year... This is generally what I'd tell you this team needs core positions, TE isn't one of them.
Posts: 115,380

04-12-2009, 03:05 PM	#3
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $8099900	This draft is a better offensive draft anyway.
Posts: 104,421

04-12-2009, 03:55 PM	#4
aturnis MVP Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Iowa Casino cash: $9975811	Just b/c it's better, doesn't mean it's all that great either. In all fairness though, the real value really is on the offensive side of the ball.
Posts: 13,873

04-12-2009, 04:32 PM	#5
RealSNR Special Teams ACE!!! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Where the hell is SNR Casino cash: $-1534792	We drafted Cottam last year. It's ****ing reerunED to spend another pick on a TE
Posts: 93,431

04-12-2009, 04:43 PM	#11
Buehler445 Supporter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Scott City KS Casino cash: $-1595266	Yes. I think this teams becomes pretty horrid offensively if TG leaves. O-Line - Shitty. Shittier if TG isn't around to block sometimes. QB - 1 solid year, but loses a go to guy. RB - LJ (), a speedster that is not an everydown back, an oft busted Kolby Smith FB - Cox played well (who knows if we will use a FB though. WR - Bowe (who will now get double teamed), Cottam - has potential but hasn't caught many passes, Bradley has potential but is broken a lot, and old guys. Gah...
Posts: 60,022

04-12-2009, 05:55 PM	#12
KCDC Starter Join Date: Mar 2009 Casino cash: $9616110	This year it is about relearning how to win. Someone like TG is invaluable for that on the offensive side. Brian Waters might qualify, but we need a big play guy. We had no one on the defensive side that could do that last year, but now maybe Vrabel and Thomas can fill that role. Use a veteran leader on each side of the ball and re-instill confidence that we can win and no longer fold in the third quarter like a cheap suit.
Posts: 886

04-12-2009, 06:00 PM	#13
OnTheWarpath15 MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $2051115	WTF do we need to spend ANOTHER pick on a TE for? Haley's offense doesn't use the TE anyway. Build for the future, not wasting picks trying to fill a HOF'ers shoes.
Posts: 60,758