| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pack4life7
Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 2921
Location: Illinois
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:11 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| justo wrote: | | Quick question: Is Finley the best pass catching TE in Packers history? |
Yes. Take it for what it's worth though.
_________________
Ted brought us Clay
Same Old Jay |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pugger
Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 4510
Location: UWGB for the summer!
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| spilltray wrote: | | Siman08/OH wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | I just don't see how you can justify Finley's production as worth 8.5 mil next year (or 7.5 a year if you want to average this 2 year contract). 55 catches 700 yards and 6 TDs (as a rough average of his 3 seasons he's been able to stay on the field, more or less) ...Yes maybe if he kept at his highest level all the time you might see more like 70 for 1,000 and 9 TDs but I see no reason you can reasonably expect Finley to consistently play at his best. He is far from irreplacable and at times can be as much of a liability as an asset. I just don't see how that makes sense financially or in long term planning. |
Where is he going to take those numbers from?
He fits in. We have a whole CREW of receiving targets, not 1 or 2 stats guys. |
Which is why paying a premium for a TE who isn't top of the league elite makes no sense. Having a bunch of money invested in any 1 option in the receiving group doesn't make sense. Having a depth of options is the important part. Paying Finley like he is a top of the league elite TE isn't justified by his production. Gronkowski just signed an 8 year deal worth 6.9 mil a year. Finley is averaging 7.5 on his current deal. You can get the kind of production the Packers do out of Finley for alot less than what Finley makes and his attitude and effort levels aren't the kind that would make me feel good about giving him any sort of long term deal unless it's very little guaranteed money and very team friendly in it's terms. He also isn't worth anywhere close to the 2 year 15 mil deal he is currently playing on, especially with 8.5 of that due next year. |
We fans may think the guy is vastly overpaid but it is evident the Packers' don't seem to have an issue with it. If they did they wouldn't have given him that contract. It will be interesting to see if they try to re-do this deal in the offseason.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Terranimal
Joined: 31 Oct 2011
Posts: 254
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| justo wrote: | | Quick question: Is Finley the best pass catching TE in Packers history? |
Depends on the criteria you are using and how can compare apples to apples with different eras? Bart Starr era? Lynn Dickey era with Paul Coffman? Brett Favre era with Chumura and Keith Jackson? How would any of those TEs fare in today's NFL and this Offense?
Jackson, Biars, and probably Kellen Winslow set the bar for today's TEs like the Gates, Gronks, Whittens, Gonzalez, etc.
Actually thinking back, while Belechick (sp?)is getting the praise for using 2 TEs, MH did it with Jackson and Chumura years earlier and Philly had that with Biars and Jackson before MH. (side thought) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wgbeethree
Joined: 15 Dec 2009
Posts: 2447
Location: Denver, CO via Racine, Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| spilltray wrote: | | GBPackers79 wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | ChaRisMa wrote: | | People keep looking to Finley to catch 100 balls and score 15 TDs. There's nothing wrong with 55 for 600 yards and 6TDs when you are drawing plenty of attention and the 4th option in the passing game. Pay him--so he can forget about numbers, add blocking strength, and feel appreciated. |
For the kind of money Finley thinks he's worth, 2 years 15 mil or 8.5 mil next season, you better believe I expect him to do a TON better than 55 catches for 600 yds and 6 TDs. The kind of stats he's putting up you can find guys who can do that on their rookie contracts for 2 mil a year or less or vets who will do it for 4-5 mil per year tops.
Why pay him so he can forget about the numbers unless that price tag reflects the production he can actually put up? A 4th option in the passing game (at BEST) isn't worth much more than half the price tag he is getting. |
How do you know what money he thinks he's worth?
Serious question. Did he say something? |
Because when he was franchise tagged as a TE he appealed saying he should get WR tag money. Green Bay pretty much split the difference with the 2 year/15 mil deal. He thinks he's every bit the playmaker a top flight WR is and it's just not the case. If it was and he was willing to sign for 5.5-6 mil a year I'd bet the Packers would have him on a longer contract but he thinks he's worth more in the 7-8 mil range a year which is why he only got a 2 year "prove it" deal. |
Wait? Did that actually happen or was that just speculation on what might happen if he was franchised. Thought they agreed to terms before that point.
_________________
Adopt-A-Packer Randall Cobb | TytybearsFan21 wrote: | | Justo knows nothing about sportz |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spilltray
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 8742
Location: Green Bay, WI
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| wgbeethree wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | GBPackers79 wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | ChaRisMa wrote: | | People keep looking to Finley to catch 100 balls and score 15 TDs. There's nothing wrong with 55 for 600 yards and 6TDs when you are drawing plenty of attention and the 4th option in the passing game. Pay him--so he can forget about numbers, add blocking strength, and feel appreciated. |
For the kind of money Finley thinks he's worth, 2 years 15 mil or 8.5 mil next season, you better believe I expect him to do a TON better than 55 catches for 600 yds and 6 TDs. The kind of stats he's putting up you can find guys who can do that on their rookie contracts for 2 mil a year or less or vets who will do it for 4-5 mil per year tops.
Why pay him so he can forget about the numbers unless that price tag reflects the production he can actually put up? A 4th option in the passing game (at BEST) isn't worth much more than half the price tag he is getting. |
How do you know what money he thinks he's worth?
Serious question. Did he say something? |
Because when he was franchise tagged as a TE he appealed saying he should get WR tag money. Green Bay pretty much split the difference with the 2 year/15 mil deal. He thinks he's every bit the playmaker a top flight WR is and it's just not the case. If it was and he was willing to sign for 5.5-6 mil a year I'd bet the Packers would have him on a longer contract but he thinks he's worth more in the 7-8 mil range a year which is why he only got a 2 year "prove it" deal. |
Wait? Did that actually happen or was that just speculation on what might happen if he was franchised. Thought they agreed to terms before that point. |
It actually happened.
_________________
| Wilfred wrote: | | Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
incognito_man
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 26526
Location: Madison
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| spilltray wrote: | | wgbeethree wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | GBPackers79 wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | ChaRisMa wrote: | | People keep looking to Finley to catch 100 balls and score 15 TDs. There's nothing wrong with 55 for 600 yards and 6TDs when you are drawing plenty of attention and the 4th option in the passing game. Pay him--so he can forget about numbers, add blocking strength, and feel appreciated. |
For the kind of money Finley thinks he's worth, 2 years 15 mil or 8.5 mil next season, you better believe I expect him to do a TON better than 55 catches for 600 yds and 6 TDs. The kind of stats he's putting up you can find guys who can do that on their rookie contracts for 2 mil a year or less or vets who will do it for 4-5 mil per year tops.
Why pay him so he can forget about the numbers unless that price tag reflects the production he can actually put up? A 4th option in the passing game (at BEST) isn't worth much more than half the price tag he is getting. |
How do you know what money he thinks he's worth?
Serious question. Did he say something? |
Because when he was franchise tagged as a TE he appealed saying he should get WR tag money. Green Bay pretty much split the difference with the 2 year/15 mil deal. He thinks he's every bit the playmaker a top flight WR is and it's just not the case. If it was and he was willing to sign for 5.5-6 mil a year I'd bet the Packers would have him on a longer contract but he thinks he's worth more in the 7-8 mil range a year which is why he only got a 2 year "prove it" deal. |
Wait? Did that actually happen or was that just speculation on what might happen if he was franchised. Thought they agreed to terms before that point. |
It actually happened. |
No it didn't... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spilltray
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 8742
Location: Green Bay, WI
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
the appeal was filed but before it was resolved, the Packers split the difference on this 2 year deal.
_________________
| Wilfred wrote: | | Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
incognito_man
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 26526
Location: Madison
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| spilltray wrote: | | the appeal was filed but before it was resolved, the Packers split the difference on this 2 year deal. |
no it wasn't.
he was never tagged. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChaRisMa
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 5493
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
You aren't going to pay 7.5 Mil over a 4 or 5 year contract with Finley. There isn't a market for his production at that rate. Ted had a number of reasons to overpay before. He obviously didn't want to give him a long term deal--so if paying 15 mil over two year bought him out of committing to 32 over 5, that made a lot of sense to avoid committing to Finley. The biggest reason he did that was that knee surgery. Two years later, no issues with the knee--but the ceiling on Finley looks lower now than it did two years ago. Hands weren't an issue before. He has caught unnecessary attention--albeit half the media. Finley and his agent clearly thought avoiding the tag would pay off with a huge deal. It was 2010. The lack of a cap blew on contracts. The markets are night and day different.
It sounds crazy, but Ted is in about as good of a position as it gets unless Finley blows up in the playoffs. A guy who has produced, and has stayed healthy, and could suddenly produce a mega-game at any moment. But he hasn't been amazingly productive, has an injury history, and he has made waves out of the locker room. And he has no true breakout year.
_________________
| Ted Thompson wrote: | | I'm new school. |
| Santana Dotson wrote: | | "I've always told people that you had your mom and dad looking out for your best interests, and then you had Reggie White. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChaRisMa
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 5493
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| incognito_man wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | the appeal was filed but before it was resolved, the Packers split the difference on this 2 year deal. |
no it wasn't.
he was never tagged. |
Correct. Never Tagged. Everyone knew if a deal wasn't reached that it was coming, and Finley and his agent made it known they'd appeal for the WR tag. It was a huge relief because it freed up the tag for someone else--but we ended up never using it.
_________________
| Ted Thompson wrote: | | I'm new school. |
| Santana Dotson wrote: | | "I've always told people that you had your mom and dad looking out for your best interests, and then you had Reggie White. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChaRisMa
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 5493
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
And for the whole--his production doesn't warrant those numbers argument--you have to keep in mind that his role is a lot like Raji's. His impact isn't in making the tackle or catch--it's freeing up everyone else to produce behind him.
Why does every MLB we plug in work well? Raji effect. Why does every WR we put out there produce? Finley effect.
_________________
| Ted Thompson wrote: | | I'm new school. |
| Santana Dotson wrote: | | "I've always told people that you had your mom and dad looking out for your best interests, and then you had Reggie White. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spilltray
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 8742
Location: Green Bay, WI
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ChaRisMa wrote: | | Why does every MLB we plug in work well? Raji effect. Why does every WR we put out there produce? Finley effect. |
That's a load of horse manure. The WRs produced like that before Finley and they do it without Finley. The reason it works is because the Packers can go 4-5 deep in the passing game much better than other teams can cover 4-5 deep. You don't get there by loading up on the top end, you get there through depth. Finley isn't that explosive or scary that he demands that kind of attention, especially if his effort drops, which has a tendency to happen.
_________________
| Wilfred wrote: | | Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wgbeethree
Joined: 15 Dec 2009
Posts: 2447
Location: Denver, CO via Racine, Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| spilltray wrote: | | ChaRisMa wrote: | | Why does every MLB we plug in work well? Raji effect. Why does every WR we put out there produce? Finley effect. |
That's a load of horse manure. The WRs produced like that before Finley and they do it without Finley. The reason it works is because the Packers can go 4-5 deep in the passing game much better than other teams can cover 4-5 deep. You don't get there by loading up on the top end, you get there through depth. Finley isn't that explosive or scary that he demands that kind of attention, especially if his effort drops, which has a tendency to happen. |
Since 2009 the Packers averaged 31.1 PPG with Finley in the lineup and 24.9 PPG in the games he was injured.
Since 2009 the Packers have scored less than 21 points in 5 of the 48 games Finley was in the lineup (10.4%) and 6 of the 19 games he was injured (31.6%).
Coincidence? Maybe, but the numbers clearly seem to say that the offense is much more productive with Finley than without.
_________________
Adopt-A-Packer Randall Cobb | TytybearsFan21 wrote: | | Justo knows nothing about sportz |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Terranimal
Joined: 31 Oct 2011
Posts: 254
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| wgbeethree wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | ChaRisMa wrote: | | Why does every MLB we plug in work well? Raji effect. Why does every WR we put out there produce? Finley effect. |
That's a load of horse manure. The WRs produced like that before Finley and they do it without Finley. The reason it works is because the Packers can go 4-5 deep in the passing game much better than other teams can cover 4-5 deep. You don't get there by loading up on the top end, you get there through depth. Finley isn't that explosive or scary that he demands that kind of attention, especially if his effort drops, which has a tendency to happen. |
Since 2009 the Packers averaged 31.1 PPG with Finley in the lineup and 24.9 PPG in the games he was injured.
Since 2009 the Packers have scored less than 21 points in 5 of the 48 games Finley was in the lineup (10.4%) and 6 of the 19 games he was injured (31.6%).
Coincidence? Maybe, but the numbers clearly seem to say that the offense is much more productive with Finley than without. |
But the best Stat? A SB Victory w/o Finley and NO SB wins(so far) with him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
incognito_man
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 26526
Location: Madison
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Terranimal wrote: |
But the best Stat? A SB Victory w/o Finley and NO SB wins(so far) with him. |
if by 'best' you actually mean 'worst', then yes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
