That was what he said in our pre-trade discussion.
If he rejects Shepherd, I'm done.
Not breaking the bank for Vance.
You is your present starting TE ?
That was what he said in our pre-trade discussion.
If he rejects Shepherd, I'm done.
Not breaking the bank for Vance.
Andrews (BAL), Eifert (CIN) & LaCosse (NE)You is your present starting TE ?
Personally, with what you have at TE, I would not trade Shepard for Vance. .... yes, lots of PIT targets up for grabs but QB's don't normally change their spots and Ben has never been big on favoring a TE over WR and he's had some pretty good ones in the past. Yes, it could happen but with your valuation of TE's being bottom-feeders anyway and high opinions on what you already have - I'd pull that deal off the table now. ....That was what he said in our pre-trade discussion.
If he rejects Shepherd, I'm done.
Not breaking the bank for Vance.
I'm glad you said that.Personally, with what you have at TE, I would not trade Shepard for Vance. .... yes, lots of PIT targets up for grabs but QB's don't normally change their spots and Ben has never been big on favoring a TE over WR and he's had some pretty good ones in the past. Yes, it could happen but with your valuation of TE's being bottom-feeders anyway and high opinions on what you already have - I'd pull that deal off the table now. ....
I'm glad you said that.
Cause I'm not sure I buy all of the Vance hype either. Sure, I see there are a lot of targets up for grabs, but IMO when an elite player leaves, the next guy up doesn't always produce to that level. Generally, the team gets more players involved instead of redirecting all if the targets to the next man standing.
Let me add that my view of TE is a notch above kickers.
That said, if Eifert is healthy, he's a top 5 TE. And I think Andrews is being undervalued, particularly on a Ravens team where there are a lot of question marks on WR expectations. I see him as the beneficiary of that.
It's not like I haven't been wrong before.why even try and trade for Vance?
Well, in honesty, I don't think Vance IS the next guy up. ... it's likely Moncrief or Washington or ??? but I've been wrong before. .... many times.I'm glad you said that.
Cause I'm not sure I buy all of the Vance hype either. Sure, I see there are a lot of targets up for grabs, but IMO when an elite player leaves, the next guy up doesn't always produce to that level. Generally, the team gets more players involved instead of redirecting all if the targets to the next man standing.
I'm glad you said that.
Cause I'm not sure I buy all of the Vance hype either. Sure, I see there are a lot of targets up for grabs, but IMO when an elite player leaves, the next guy up doesn't always produce to that level. Generally, the team gets more players involved instead of redirecting all if the targets to the next man standing.
Well said Harold - thing is, in Joe's case, he's higher than most on what he already has - Shepard would be a hell of a high price for 'another TE' even if he proves to be better than though he already has. If he could've gotten him for one of those other WR's - darn right I'd do it.Yes the targets will get spread around. Certainly agree with that Joe. Between Brown and Jesse James that leaves 202 targets up for grabs.
Brown 169
James 33
If those targets get divided between Moncrief/Washington/McDonald and some to JuJu ( who had a massive 166 targets ) that's about 50 targets a piece increase on average. McDonald had 73 targets last year, that type of increase would/should make him way more valuable then last season. Course the "but" is he usually misses games due to injury annually.
The WR position other then JuJu will most likely be a committee unless or until one separates himself from the pack IMO. Right now Moncrief seems to be in the lead.
Well to be fair at least 2 WR are in a play ever play, often times 3 WRs so it stands to reason they get the lions share of completed passes. Also having Brown thru his prime tilts things towards the WR. All in all 24% doesn't sound all that bad off hand but then I've done no research.
This discussion helped.
It does make me wonder: Ben has been in this league a long time and is an excellent downfield passer. He really has limited his passes to the TE position. So I wanted to see the numbers:
Since 2006, Ben, in 190 games, has completed 3696 passes to the TE and WR.
869 completions to the TE, or 24% which translates to 4.6 TE receptions per game.
2827 completions to the WR, or 76% which translates to 14.9 WR receptions per game.
Leopards don't change their spots.
True. Good point.Well to be fair at least 2 WR are in a play ever play, often times 3 WRs so it stands to reason they get the lions share of completed passes. Also having Brown thru his prime tilts things towards the WR. All in all 24% doesn't sound all that bad off hand but then I've done no research.