HumanCockroach wrote:http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/3653/brandon-marshall
I'm not sure I want the Hawks paying between 8 and 10 million a yr. For an aged Marshall on the downward swing.
Zorn76 wrote:Even if he's solid mentally, 8-10 mil/per is WAY too much for a guy entering his 10th yr in the league. And his best yrs are behind him, not in front.
This will go down as another dumb WR move if we bring him in at that cost. If he'd play for 3-4 mil per, then I (sort of) get it, but not between 8 & 10. Spend the money elsewhere.
I mean, at that cost couldn't we afford to keep Maxwell, who's a strong possibility of leaving because we may not be able to afford him now?
Would make zero sense to lose a guy like him for a WR like B.M., IMO.
Let somebody else overpay for Marshall.
NorthHawk wrote:I'm the one who started the Maxwell idea for trade purposes, but it was just a discussion point with nothing to base it on.
I, too think Maxwell should be re-signed if at all possible, so I wonder what other trade options might there be for Marshall should they pursue him?
depaashaas wrote:
QB LOL, not sure what bears would be looking for. I think this year Hawks have all their draft pick maybe they are talking about one of those
HumanCockroach wrote:I MUCH prefer the idea of signing a guy like Torrey Smith, Cecil Shorts or Nate Washington to paying that kind of cash for Marshall ( along with a pick/s).... Most here know how strongly I supported bringing Marshall to Seattle when leaving Denver and Miami, and yet here at that price, after that amount of time, I simply don't see it as anything more than paying for the priviledge to see if you can squeeze out another couple decent seasons from a guy who's better days are long past.
I agree with the desire to bring in a "big bodied" receiver, just don't believe Marshall is the right one, at that cost.
HumanCockroach wrote:See you say he had a "down" year because of Cutler, and IMO he only had the numbers you are ponting out because the Bears threw, and threw and threw, and when Jay was the QB those throws were unproportiately directed at one guy, Marshall.
Seattle doesn't ( and good lord I hope they don't change) throw the ball 40-55 times a game. So unless the "value" of that contract in your eyes encompasses LESS production than last season ( when he averaged 13 targets a game, I'm not sure what you are seeing?
Marshall "better" days are in the rearview mirror, and for 9 million dollars a year, in a running offense, I still don't like that amount of capital spent. If you do, I'm fine with that, and if the Hawks do, I can accept that as well, I hope I'm wrong if it plays out that way.
HumanCockroach wrote:Um, weren't you talking about his "successful" seasons, if so, you are way, way, way off...
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... fied/false
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... /year/2012
Do you think in Seattle he'll receive 165 targets? Much less the 194 he received the year prior? His targets last year were down ( of course they were, he missed 3 games and was injured in several he played in the beginning of the year). You are welcome to your opinion he is still a bonafide number 1 receiver. I simply don't in anyway agree with that assessment.
I have always supported attempting to get Marshall to Seattle, but that time for me, has passed. If we were talking about a true bonafide number 1 with tread left on the tires, I would change my position on that, or even a receiver that helps in more areas than simply the offensive side of the ball ( Cobb for instance) or one that is getting better, and hitting his prime ( Jeffries, Green, Bryant, etc) or even one that could pop, and costs little ( Smith, Shorts, etc) and is YOUNG.... Marshall IMHO doesn't fit any of those parameters, and to me feels like a trade for Boldin #2 with the added benefit of paying 10 million to do so.....
Just don't like the move. If Marshall was due under 6, I suppose I could get on board depending on the pick sacrificed ( notice Boldin cost basically nothing for SF to aquire) but that isn't the situation.
NorthHawk wrote:I look at it a different way.
There's no way his stats would show added value here as we aren't a prolific passing Offense. The stats (again) aren't particularly relevant.
The questions in my mind about getting him is can he make the BIG play when needed and does his size create a mismatch in the Red Zone that we can take advantage of?
As well, if Matthews does make it as a starter, will both big receivers give us a much better option on pass plays?
I think the answers to all 3 questions is yes, and can be for 3 or 4 years. He's not a speed guy, so losing a step as he gets older isn't an issue. The concern is whether he has the desire to play until he is 34 years old.
NorthHawk wrote:I think any compensation would be more than a 5th round selection as our pick is pretty much a 6th.
That being said, JS likes to trade down for more picks so giving up a 4th or even a 3rd might not be bad should they get a bunch in the middle rounds.
Won't we also get some compensatory picks this year (non-tradeable) that could mitigate sending one to Chicago.
Yeah, I was talking about the season prior to 2014, I thought you were saying he was a getting 13 targets/game last year, but my point was more to the fact that you were saying Cutler was basically forcing it to him: "unproportiately directed at one guy, Marshall." The season in which he had 165 targets Jeffery had 150, which doesn't seem unproportunate to me. I was also using
NorthHawk wrote:I look at it a different way.
There's no way his stats would show added value here as we aren't a prolific passing Offense. The stats (again) aren't particularly relevant.
The questions in my mind about getting him is can he make the BIG play when needed and does his size create a mismatch in the Red Zone that we can take advantage of?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests