Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
I'd like to see the Pats trade Graham (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Bri
- Start date
diesel7982
Footballguy
What kind of value are you expecting? Graham is more important than a second day pick to the Pats.
diesel7982
Footballguy
Not with the TE depth this year/his contract being almost up.
AnonymousBob
Footballguy
I can completely understand not trusting the Pats track record in front office decisions.
Boston
Footballguy
Absolutely not unless someone would overpay. Here's why:
*While not turning into the pass catcher we thought we were getting (that appears to be Watson's role now) he's as good a blocking TE as there is. When you put him and a T on a DE they can usually take that guy out of the game. Factor in all the injuries the Pats have had at O line recently and this increases his value even more.
*Watson missed a whole year two years ago. He has to prove he can stay healthy. Add in the fact that if Fauria does return (he's currently unsigned) he's not getting any younger and if you deal Graham a definite strength could become a weakness very quickly.
*The Pats run a lot of two TE sets. They currently don't use a traditional FB. Therefore TE depth is very important.
*Graham doesn't make big money and is still signed for two more years.
*While he misses the easy catch he is still very athletic and has to be accounted for by the defense. He has made some very big plays over the years and gives an offense that spreads the ball around another option.
In the end I don't see how dealing Graham would benefit the Pats (unless someone makes a silly offer which won't happen). Watson can still become the man with Graham on the team...and that is actually the best case scenario because it really makes the Pats O a big time matchup problem for defenses because it allows a ton of diversity in their attack...while providing quality depth.
*While not turning into the pass catcher we thought we were getting (that appears to be Watson's role now) he's as good a blocking TE as there is. When you put him and a T on a DE they can usually take that guy out of the game. Factor in all the injuries the Pats have had at O line recently and this increases his value even more.
*Watson missed a whole year two years ago. He has to prove he can stay healthy. Add in the fact that if Fauria does return (he's currently unsigned) he's not getting any younger and if you deal Graham a definite strength could become a weakness very quickly.
*The Pats run a lot of two TE sets. They currently don't use a traditional FB. Therefore TE depth is very important.
*Graham doesn't make big money and is still signed for two more years.
*While he misses the easy catch he is still very athletic and has to be accounted for by the defense. He has made some very big plays over the years and gives an offense that spreads the ball around another option.
In the end I don't see how dealing Graham would benefit the Pats (unless someone makes a silly offer which won't happen). Watson can still become the man with Graham on the team...and that is actually the best case scenario because it really makes the Pats O a big time matchup problem for defenses because it allows a ton of diversity in their attack...while providing quality depth.
Last edited by a moderator:
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Graham is only signed through the 2006 season with a base salary of $545,000. After that I think it will get interesting to see what they plan to do with him.
Boston
Footballguy
Didn't they sign him to a six year deal? I thought there was a team option on the sixth year? I know six year deals were a standard the Pats were trying to set with their #1's which is why Watson's signing was a little dicey. He was a little older when he got drafted and didn't want to wait that long for his next deal.Do you have a link to all contract info?
David Yudkin
Footballguy
David Yudkin
Footballguy
excellent postAs David mentioned it's just one more year, and my opinion is to get something "now or never" for him.
When I see the Pats run two TE sets(and I'm not always looking for that, the slew of RBs caught my eye alot of last season) they run. IMO that's just like every other team and not using the two TEs to their advantage as much as they could. It's entirely possible I missed some plays. Due to a fire we were without power for almost a month in November so I missed 4 games right there. It's probably pretty safe to say that they never use two TEs half as much as people think they will every preseason.
You mention his blocking and seem to put some weight into those statements but how hard is it to find a blocking TE? For years more than half the NFL TEs were considerred "good blocker but not the best receiver".
Fauria does pretty well for a backup and I think with Watson and Fauria it'd still be a strength for them.
I've seen what I think is alot more good LBers than normal in this draft. Bruschi's health is a ? and Ted Johnson is gone. Is Chad Brown a good enough inside backer or should he go back outside? I'd like to see them get an ILB or two.
Boston
Footballguy
*Chad Brown is luggage. He is in way over his head at ILB and simply can't handle that position. *The problem with the Pats drafting LBs (they rarely do it at all) is the typical college system does not translate to their 3-4 BB style D. Therefore most kids out of college will be usually overwhelmed and unprepared to contribute as LBs for the Pats. Also, the Pats generally like their LBs to be big because they will be asked to be more diverse in this system than probably any other. They all play the run, the pass and need to be able to rush the passer. What that means is there isn't a huge pool to choose from as far as a LB that can fit into what they do. That being said they are in dire need of depth because after the starting four the cupboard is pretty bare unless Beisel plays 10 times better than he did last year.
*Finding a blocking TE isn't difficult. Finding a blocking TE that contributes in the passing game is. One of the key elements the Pats look for is diverse skills. They usually don't go after guys who can only do one thing. That goes against BB's philosophy and would limit some of the gameplanning that makes him so effective. You just never know what the Pats will do because their players tend to be multi-dimensional. Losing Graham and adding a blocking only TE is a step backwards for what BB likes to do.
*If Graham leaves and Watson has to block even more he than loses much of his effectiveness/verstality in the passing game. If he is blocking more than he can't line up at FB and Wideout which is a big part of what his value is. Also, with Graham around they don't have to rely on Watson when they need to double team a stud like Freeney.
*Fauria is unsigned. He's either gone or back for another year. Regardless his time here is short. He can still contribute but he's a #3 now. The Pats TE position would not be what they want if Watson went down and Fauria was asked to be a full timer.
*The Pats basic set is a two TE formation. Right now they don't even carry a real FB. Add in the fact that the WR corps is currently very thin and the TE position is even more important.
Borat
Footballguy
Great posting, Boston.
Bri, one thing I'd like to comment on is your idea that we must trade Graham now or we'll get nothing for him when he walks as a free agent. I happen to think that Graham is one more guy who loves playing here, loves the winning atmosphere here, and would probably rather stick around here for decent money than break the bank signing with some other team. No evidence to back that up, besides what I've heard of Graham's character in various interviews with his teammates and coaches. But I definitely think he'll be re-signing with New England.
Bri, one thing I'd like to comment on is your idea that we must trade Graham now or we'll get nothing for him when he walks as a free agent. I happen to think that Graham is one more guy who loves playing here, loves the winning atmosphere here, and would probably rather stick around here for decent money than break the bank signing with some other team. No evidence to back that up, besides what I've heard of Graham's character in various interviews with his teammates and coaches. But I definitely think he'll be re-signing with New England.
Last edited by a moderator:
Boston
Footballguy
I get the feeling that if the Pats want to resign Graham they will be able to do so. He's not a guy who's going to break the bank. Also, he is probably more effective with the Pats than he would be with another team. Unfortunately his hands aren't reliable enough for him to be a real legit #1 on a team that plays mostly single TE formations. Playing side by side with Watson where his blocking can be fully utilized and he's also a contributor to the passing game is probably the best fit for both he and the Pats.
Adrian Peterson
Footballguy
When you want to runt he ball and can play double tight with Graham and Watson - you have not only solid blokcing, but great weapons in play action.Graham has to stay.
diesel7982
Footballguy
You can only be an RFA after your 3rd year in the league, if you didnt sign a deal longer than 3 years.
Mike
Footballguy
I can completely understand not trusting the Pats track record in front office decisions.
The get something "now or never" argument doesn't hold water here. Sure you get something in trade today instead of potentially losing the player's services after the 2006 season, but by doing that you also lose him for the 2006 season. Is he worth $500,000 to contribute to the team in 2006? Absolutely. He's worth more than that. Why throw that away when you don't have to?Hello Boston.
Fauria is a good TE. He can block and catch just fine. Losing Graham does not leave them "high and dry" at all. A blocking TE as their third TE, not replacing Graham as Fauria would move up the depth chart, is fine by me. In re-reading your posts you'd think the Pats were the Chargers and they had Gates. Their TEs combined for only 53 receptions. While that's good you're painting too rosy a picture of their production.
Graham was a top TE coming out of college and we've seen Watson's skill and people have gawked at them. I believe two things-the more time Watson gets(not sharing with Graham) the better he'll be as the experience will further his development. If the TE has to stay in alot to help the T block then re-signing the TE isn't the answer it's a bandaid, getting a better T is.
diesel7982
Footballguy
I think hes just saying what I said in my first post. Theres no value to the Pats for them to trade him for his market value, and it seems the only people a trade like this would help would be the fantasy players with Ben Watson on their team.how is this good posting? There's been tons of discussion not necessarily related to FF
Borat
Footballguy
I think you overestimate Fauria at this point of his career. The Pats use a lot of two-TE sets, as has been pointed out here already. Why would you NOT want two very good TEs (Graham and Watson)? Not that Fauria is a bad TE, but he does not have anything even close to the athleticism and blocking ability that Graham has.I also disagree that Graham's presence is hindering Watson's development. Again, they use a lot of two-TE sets; Watson has plenty of opportunity for playing time, as long as he can stay healthy. He's also still very young, and can benefit greatly from a veteran presence like Graham.
And unless we're talking a Walter Jones type, every tackle in the league is going to need some help blocking the better defensive linemen in the league at some point or another. There's nothing wrong with that; the Patriots have done just fine offensively the past few years.
Borat
Footballguy
No offense, but I think you're looking at this through homer glasses. I don't think Graham has the high trade value that you perceive him to have. He's a very good - not great, but very, very good - tight end. What he did in college is irrelevant at this point.I'm a huge fan of Daniel Graham's, so I hope you don't think I'm just trying to give you a hard time, but give this some thought. Say we did trade Graham, and Fauria retires, and now we need a second TE. How high of a pick would you like to see the Patriots give up for a TE?
Mike
Footballguy
Exactly. I understand something will come back in a trade, but you seem to be heavily discounting the value he represents this season in terms of contribution to the team while earning a modest salary. No way the something in the trade will exceed that value. Should all teams trade every player in the final year of their contract? Who would take them?
I wouldn't want them to do it if Fauria retires.In the end, I want one of these young stud TEs to produce like a young stud TE. I don't want 20-30 receptions from a guy that's possibly capable of so so much more. If Watson was a full time TE and Fauria spelled him from time to time, how well do you think he could do? I think it's possible he could be 7th-8th best TE in the NFL if not higher.
We don't have one of the better WRs that demands the Ds full attention and they adjust their gameplan for him. We might have one of the best TEs that could command that. We might not. Right now all we've got is a couple of 25 reception TEs.
Borat
Footballguy
The hypothetical situation I presented wasn't for you to critique - I'm just trying to ask you how much YOU would give up for a TE like Graham if you were the one giving up the draft pick. I think you're only looking at a potential Graham trade from the Patriots' side, not from both sides. The point I'm getting at is that no team is going to give up a high draft pick for Graham. Sure, it would be nice to get a 1st or 2nd round pick for the guy, but that's simply not going to happen. His trade value just isn't that high. If they didn't have Ben Watson, would you want the Pats to trade away a high draft pick for a TE like Graham - a very, very good TE, but certainly not a great TE? I certainly wouldn't. So why would any other team do that?It also looks like you really are looking at this from a fantasy football perspective. Who really cares how many receptions each individual is making, as long as the Patriots are winning? Why do you insist on having one guy that opposing defenses have to focus on stopping? The Patriots have not had that one guy during their recent Super Bowl run, and they seem to be doing fine. Brady spreads the ball around so much that there's probably not an opportunity for one guy to really stand out above the rest no matter how good that WR or TE might be. You pointed out how valuable Ben Coates was while he was here, but how many championships did that result in?
Last edited by a moderator:
Borat
Footballguy
I'm just asking why you're so hell-bent on having a TE who puts up big numbers when it's been proven that the Patriots can win without one. The same could be said of the New England WRs, by the way.I hope you're not taking offense to our difference of opinion here. I'm just giving my take on your proposal to trade Daniel Graham. I just think we'd lose out on that scenario.
