To trade or not to trade,That is the question

[Wesson44]

Dolphins | Could make offer for Boldin

Comment (0)

Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:06:21 -0800

 

Barry Jackson, of The Miami Herald, reports two people in contact with the Miami Dolphins said they could envision the team offering a draft pick for Arizona Cardinals WR Anquan Boldin. The pick would likely be in the third round or later.

 

 

[balta1701-A]

A 4th round pick? Do it in half a second.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Dolphins | Could make offer for Boldin

Comment (0)

Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:06:21 -0800

 

Barry Jackson, of The Miami Herald, reports two people in contact with the Miami Dolphins said they could envision the team offering a draft pick for Arizona Cardinals WR Anquan Boldin. The pick would likely be in the third round or later.

 

 

Uhm, I be willing to give a third round and Hester. That should seal the deal.

 

[nfoligno]

One, it says they could offer a 3rd.

 

Two, that is just what they may initially offer. That does not mean Az would accept it, or it is their final offer. You have to believe that if they are willing to enter discussions talking about a 3rd, they are likely willing to go higher.

 

Dolphins | Could make offer for Boldin

Comment (0)

Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:06:21 -0800

 

Barry Jackson, of The Miami Herald, reports two people in contact with the Miami Dolphins said they could envision the team offering a draft pick for Arizona Cardinals WR Anquan Boldin. The pick would likely be in the third round or later.

 

[madlithuanian]

Send Tommie and a 5th...of vodka!

 

 

One, it says they could offer a 3rd.

 

Two, that is just what they may initially offer. That does not mean Az would accept it, or it is their final offer. You have to believe that if they are willing to enter discussions talking about a 3rd, they are likely willing to go higher.

 

[nfoligno]

Personally, I don't want to trade for Boldin. I realize what he can be as a WR, when healthy, but as stated, I like who we have. WR is simply an area I do not consider a need. We have tons of needs, and little by way or draft picks or money to deal with those needs. If we were going to trade a player, I would rather it be for a area of greater need, like OL, DE, DT, CB, FS.

 

Send Tommie and a 5th...of vodka!

 

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Personally, I don't want to trade for Boldin. I realize what he can be as a WR, when healthy, but as stated, I like who we have. WR is simply an area I do not consider a need. We have tons of needs, and little by way or draft picks or money to deal with those needs. If we were going to trade a player, I would rather it be for a area of greater need, like OL, DE, DT, CB, FS.

 

And that player should be Hester....

[madlithuanian]

I can't really disagree with your assessment. But I think Boldin offers up a special opportunity than just picking up a WR off the scrap heap (a la Holt) or hoping one of our youngsters comes through. Boldin is big, proven, and not too old. Imagine for a moment...

 

QB - Cutler

RB - Forte

WR1 - Boldin

WR2 - Hester or DA

WR3 - DA or Hester or Knox

WR4 - Knox

TE1 - Olsen

 

That to me looks like a recipe for success for Martz. All of a sudden, if the OL doesn't give, that's an extremely dangerous passing/receiving group...

 

I still agree that OL and DL are our most pressing needs. Then secondary (safety especially).

 

But, I'm always of the frame of mind that when the right opportunity presents itself, you take it. As we did with Cutler.

 

 

 

Personally, I don't want to trade for Boldin. I realize what he can be as a WR, when healthy, but as stated, I like who we have. WR is simply an area I do not consider a need. We have tons of needs, and little by way or draft picks or money to deal with those needs. If we were going to trade a player, I would rather it be for a area of greater need, like OL, DE, DT, CB, FS.

 

[nfoligno]

I get the opportunity, but you also have to be in a position for an opportunity to make sense.

 

Your a poor person holding some change in your hand. Its all the money in the world you have. You are hungry. Your clothes have more holes than swiss cheese. You are dirty and have no home. You enter a grocery, and they have a great sale on gum. Man, you love gum, and would love to buy some, especially at that price, but then your stomach growls. Gum will do nothing to end your hunger, regardless how good of a deal you can get it for.

 

Opportunities are hard to pass up, but you need to be in a position to take advantage of such opportunities. W/ no 1st or 2nd round pick, (IMHO) a conservative amount set to spend in FA and so many holes, we are simply not in a position to take advantage of such opportunities.

 

Some are saying for a 3rd, no problem. Well, that 3rd is our top pick, and with so many holes, I just can't wrap my head around spending our top pick on a WR, regardless if he is a proven player or not. Even if that 3rd round pick isn't as high as we all would want, regardless, we can't just act like it is a throw away pick. That pick could be used on the OL, DL or secondary, which are true needs.

 

Honestly, at the end of the day, it simply comes down to this for me. I view the WR position as being among our few non-hole units. Further, not only do I view the position as solidified, but I consider it a strength. It just doesn't make sense to me to add a WR when we have so many truly sizable holes.

 

I can't really disagree with your assessment. But I think Boldin offers up a special opportunity than just picking up a WR off the scrap heap (a la Holt) or hoping one of our youngsters comes through. Boldin is big, proven, and not too old. Imagine for a moment...

 

QB - Cutler

RB - Forte

WR1 - Boldin

WR2 - Hester or DA

WR3 - DA or Hester or Knox

WR4 - Knox

TE1 - Olsen

 

That to me looks like a recipe for success for Martz. All of a sudden, if the OL doesn't give, that's an extremely dangerous passing/receiving group...

 

I still agree that OL and DL are our most pressing needs. Then secondary (safety especially).

 

But, I'm always of the frame of mind that when the right opportunity presents itself, you take it. As we did with Cutler.

 

['TD']

I get the opportunity, but you also have to be in a position for an opportunity to make sense.

 

Your a poor person holding some change in your hand. Its all the money in the world you have. You are hungry. Your clothes have more holes than swiss cheese. You are dirty and have no home. You enter a grocery, and they have a great sale on gum. Man, you love gum, and would love to buy some, especially at that price, but then your stomach growls. Gum will do nothing to end your hunger, regardless how good of a deal you can get it for.

 

Opportunities are hard to pass up, but you need to be in a position to take advantage of such opportunities. W/ no 1st or 2nd round pick, (IMHO) a conservative amount set to spend in FA and so many holes, we are simply not in a position to take advantage of such opportunities.

 

Some are saying for a 3rd, no problem. Well, that 3rd is our top pick, and with so many holes, I just can't wrap my head around spending our top pick on a WR, regardless if he is a proven player or not. Even if that 3rd round pick isn't as high as we all would want, regardless, we can't just act like it is a throw away pick. That pick could be used on the OL, DL or secondary, which are true needs.

 

Honestly, at the end of the day, it simply comes down to this for me. I view the WR position as being among our few non-hole units. Further, not only do I view the position as solidified, but I consider it a strength. It just doesn't make sense to me to add a WR when we have so many truly sizable holes.

 

You were a big fan of the Cutler trade. QB was far from a gaping hole when it was made. This is less 2 less first round picks for as much of an upgrade at WR as Cutler was at QB.

 

Secondly, how much did last years 3rd round picks do for the Bears? A 3rd is a 3rd, even if it is your top pick.

[madlithuanian]

You're skewing the argument to your favor!

 

I also never said I'd be for giving up our 3rd... I stated a 5th (really a pick not a bottle of booze) and Harris.

 

Everything has a cost benefit. And the example I give I think the benefits outweigh the costs.

 

I think you're a little too high on our WR corps. They are not a glaring need. But a legit bonafide proven big game WR would make Cutler, the WR's, and the running gaem all better... And in turn, that could help the OL. I think it's got a big potential for a trickle down effect.

 

Again, I don't want to give up a 3rd (although w/ JA picking, I may not really be that opposed to it...)...but for something else, it's worth looking into. If JA does not, he is not doing his due dilligence and should be fired immediately.

 

I get the opportunity, but you also have to be in a position for an opportunity to make sense.

 

Your a poor person holding some change in your hand. Its all the money in the world you have. You are hungry. Your clothes have more holes than swiss cheese. You are dirty and have no home. You enter a grocery, and they have a great sale on gum. Man, you love gum, and would love to buy some, especially at that price, but then your stomach growls. Gum will do nothing to end your hunger, regardless how good of a deal you can get it for.

 

Opportunities are hard to pass up, but you need to be in a position to take advantage of such opportunities. W/ no 1st or 2nd round pick, (IMHO) a conservative amount set to spend in FA and so many holes, we are simply not in a position to take advantage of such opportunities.

 

Some are saying for a 3rd, no problem. Well, that 3rd is our top pick, and with so many holes, I just can't wrap my head around spending our top pick on a WR, regardless if he is a proven player or not. Even if that 3rd round pick isn't as high as we all would want, regardless, we can't just act like it is a throw away pick. That pick could be used on the OL, DL or secondary, which are true needs.

 

Honestly, at the end of the day, it simply comes down to this for me. I view the WR position as being among our few non-hole units. Further, not only do I view the position as solidified, but I consider it a strength. It just doesn't make sense to me to add a WR when we have so many truly sizable holes.

 

[madlithuanian]

Good point...

 

Secondly, how much did last years 3rd round picks do for the Bears? A 3rd is a 3rd, even if it is your top pick.

 

[nfoligno]

You were a big fan of the Cutler trade. QB was far from a gaping hole when it was made. This is less 2 less first round picks for as much of an upgrade at WR as Cutler was at QB.

 

One, sorry, but QB is an exception to most every rule, especially when talking about a "franchise QB"

 

Two, QB being "far from a gaping hole" is your opinion. I am not looking to get into a big Orton debate here, but many would argue QB was a sizable hole, including Angelo who declared QB a top priority at the end of the season.

 

Secondly, how much did last years 3rd round picks do for the Bears? A 3rd is a 3rd, even if it is your top pick.

 

Disagree w/ the idea that a 3rd is a 3rd, even if it is your top pick. If it is your top pick, it has a very different meaning. If you have already drafted 1st and 2nd round picks, you can take more risk on a 3rd, or go after a player in the 3rd who is raw and needing more developing. On the other hand, if your 3rd is your top pick, then you need to be looking for an immediate contributor, if not starter.

 

And I question using last year as an example, as those players have not had much of a chance to prove or disprove their worth. How about some other 3rd rounders for us like Briggs, Berrian and even Bennett, who proved a capable starter this past year. Sure, there are examples that go the other way, but the point is we have found some pretty damn good players in the 3rd.

 

 

[nfoligno]

You're skewing the argument to your favor!

 

And your point

 

I also never said I'd be for giving up our 3rd... I stated a 5th (really a pick not a bottle of booze) and Harris.

 

Talking about the 3rd was more about the current discussion of Boldin's value.

 

Everything has a cost benefit. And the example I give I think the benefits outweigh the costs.

 

And I disagree. Is Boldin worth a 3rd round pick? Sure. No argument there. But a 3rd round pick could also mean a potential starting OL, or FS, or CB. I view those are far more important.

 

One other thing few are really talking about here. Why does Boldin want to bolt Az? Money. He wants a deal similar to Fitzgerald. One, I am not sure I agree he is worth that much, to us or in general. Two, w/ the belief our owners are only going to spend so much money on player contracts, I sure as hell don't want to use up all our allowance on a WR, regardless how good he is, while plugging trash at areas of true need.

 

I think you're a little too high on our WR corps. They are not a glaring need. But a legit bonafide proven big game WR would make Cutler, the WR's, and the running gaem all better... And in turn, that could help the OL. I think it's got a big potential for a trickle down effect.

 

One, I disagree w/ the theory that better WRs improves the OL. I simply feel it the other way around. I understand the argument. If your WRs are good enough, the QB doesn't have to hold the ball as long, thus the OL doesn't have to hold their blocks as long. But (a) I question how consistently you can rely on that and ( that may help on quick, 3 step drops, but regardless how good the WR is, it it still on the OL to hold blocks when receivers run longer developing routes.

 

Two, would a bonafide proven big game WR make Cutler and the rest better? Sure. You can say the same for so many other teams. What I would like though is to instead give your young WRs an opportunity. Are you sure we don't have a Wr on the roster who could be as good, or even better, than Boldin?

['TD']

Two, QB being "far from a gaping hole" is your opinion. I am not looking to get into a big Orton debate here, but many would argue QB was a sizable hole, including Angelo who declared QB a top priority at the end of the season.

 

About everything anyone writes on here is their opinion. Last year, my opinion was the offensive line was the biggest hole. I felt WR was the next biggest hole going into the draft. Free Safety was my next biggest hole. The d-line needed help with O-Gun probably going to leave this year, Harris's diminished play and so on. It was basically the same holes.

 

I'm not trying to get into the Orton vs. Cutler thing, just stating that major holes were on the team, still on the team, but it was ok with you to lose much higher picks in that case. JA while thinking QB was a major need, was also wrong at how he addressed most of the rest of the major needs on the team last year. I don't give his opinion much credit, esp. on the offensive side of the ball.

 

Disagree w/ the idea that a 3rd is a 3rd, even if it is your top pick. If it is your top pick, it has a very different meaning. If you have already drafted 1st and 2nd round picks, you can take more risk on a 3rd, or go after a player in the 3rd who is raw and needing more developing. On the other hand, if your 3rd is your top pick, then you need to be looking for an immediate contributor, if not starter.

 

And I question using last year as an example, as those players have not had much of a chance to prove or disprove their worth. How about some other 3rd rounders for us like Briggs, Berrian and even Bennett, who proved a capable starter this past year. Sure, there are examples that go the other way, but the point is we have found some pretty damn good players in the 3rd

 

Third round contained the Bears 2 highest picks last year. You say that if your other picks are gone you need an immediate contributer from the round, and then say last year's third rounders were bad examples even tho they didn't play. Yes, you can find good players in the third. No, I don't think you can count on immediate contributers in the third round.

 

Boldin's contribution to the team should easily outway the contribution made by any third round pick next year.

[nfoligno]

About everything anyone writes on here is their opinion. Last year, my opinion was the offensive line was the biggest hole. I felt WR was the next biggest hole going into the draft. Free Safety was my next biggest hole. The d-line needed help with O-Gun probably going to leave this year, Harris's diminished play and so on. It was basically the same holes.

 

I'm not trying to get into the Orton vs. Cutler thing, just stating that major holes were on the team, still on the team, but it was ok with you to lose much higher picks in that case. JA while thinking QB was a major need, was also wrong at how he addressed most of the rest of the major needs on the team last year. I don't give his opinion much credit, esp. on the offensive side of the ball.

 

The point I was making was....you said QB was not a need, and I would disagree, as would many others. I realize well it is an opinion board, but your argument (seemed) to imply that QB was in fact not a need, rather than simply how you viewed it. If I said today kicker is not a need, I think you would agree that is closer to fact than opinion. Most would agree. You saying QB was not a need last year I think would fall into the minority. For the record, I full well realize my saying WR is not only a non-need area, but in fact an area of strength, is more in the minority.

 

Also, as stated before, QB (and especially a perceived franchise QB) is an exception to the rules. For most any other player, at most any other position, if you talked about giving up what we did, need or not, I think most fans would scream hell no. Franchise QBs are simply an exception to the rule though.

 

Third round contained the Bears 2 highest picks last year. You say that if your other picks are gone you need an immediate contributer from the round, and then say last year's third rounders were bad examples even tho they didn't play. Yes, you can find good players in the third. No, I don't think you can count on immediate contributers in the third round.

 

The day we drafted those players last year, do you think they were envisioned as day one starters? I don't. On the other hand, if we had drafted players at various other positions, I think they would have.

 

Either way, my point is simply that 3rd round picks definitely have value, especially today as it is the first round of day two. Used to be, the 4th round was very highly regarded as it was the first round after the league gets a breather, and is able to re-examine who is gone and who has fallen. That is now the 3rd round. The 3rd round is still one that has some really great value and talent.

 

Now, does that mean I would not consider trading our 3rd for anyone? No. But I would only consider trading our 3rd round pick for a player at a need position, which I simply do not view WR as being.

 

Boldin's contribution to the team should easily outway the contribution made by any third round pick next year.

 

Depends. If we spent that 3rd on an OL who could start (not uncommon for 3rd round OGs to be immediate starters) I would argue a more solidified OL would have a greater impact that Boldin. If that 3rd rounder became a FS that solidified our secondary, I would argue that contribution would be greater than Boldin.

 

One more point that has not really be touched on. Why does Boldin want out of Az? Money. He wants to be among the top paid WRs in the game, and his agent has pointed to Fitz' contract as a "starting point". I believe, especially w/ the CBA issues, there is a set amount of money on the table for the team to work with. If we trade for Boldin, you have to "pay" him. To do so, IMHO, would likely use up all the funds which may otherwise help other areas of need.

[madlithuanian]

The case for Boldin

 

Bottom line, tell me this guy is not worth it?

 

Rookie of the Year 2003

Pro Bowl 2003

Pro Bowl 2006

Pro Bowl 2008

 

Age 29

 

586 receptions

7,520 yds

44 TD's

 

1. That's 3 pro bowls out of 7 years. About 43% of the year he plays. So you could say he's pro bowl calibur every other year. Also, his selection to the pro bowl are well spaced out, from the beginning, middle and end of his career to date.

 

2. He's not that old. He will be hitting the stride of his career if brought on by the Bears.

 

3. We know he didn't play all the games in his career due to injury (especially that horrible head injury), but we we assume he did regardless, that amounts to:

 

a. 84 receptions per season, 5 per game

b. 1,074 yards per season, 67 per game

c. 6 TD's per season, .4 per game

 

We could use that I think.

 

Let's also factor in that Boldin pretty much started as a #1 (the way virtually everyone on earth uses the term in pro football) WR for 2 years before Fitz came on. And, he makes tough catches.

 

You draft for need, but if a difference makes is available, you take him. I think Boldin is a difference maker. I've re-thought my position, and I would take Boldin for a 3rd. As much as we need an OL, I just simply feel that a bird in the hand is better than only 1 in the bush. Especially if the bird catcher is JA.

[madlithuanian]

Ha!

 

Point well made on the 3rd...and actually I've come around to thinking a 3rd is OK.

 

So what your saying is you view a potnetial draft pick chosen by the current brain trust in the 3rd round to be more valueable than a proven pro bowl difference maker?

 

I think that's just the crux where we differ in opinion.

 

The money will be there for him...either with an increase in the cap as TV revenues continue to skyrocket (just look at the SB ratings...) or the cap gets throuwn out alltogether. And we have some dead weight like Vasher that can be tossed...

 

Maybe I over-thought the potential for improvement on the OL based on an outstanding WR. I still feel that way, but maybe % increase isn't that huge. My thought process on that was a stronger passing attack makes for a different look at the LOS, thus improving the running game, which in turn helps the OL. Again, my point wasn't that all of a sudden Boldin would turn our turnstiles into Munoz'es...but I think it certianly cannot hurt in the least.

 

I feel pretty certain we don't have that WR on our roster. Are you so sure we do that you'd pass up Boldin?

 

 

 

 

You're skewing the argument to your favor!

 

And your point

 

I also never said I'd be for giving up our 3rd... I stated a 5th (really a pick not a bottle of booze) and Harris.

 

Talking about the 3rd was more about the current discussion of Boldin's value.

 

Everything has a cost benefit. And the example I give I think the benefits outweigh the costs.

 

And I disagree. Is Boldin worth a 3rd round pick? Sure. No argument there. But a 3rd round pick could also mean a potential starting OL, or FS, or CB. I view those are far more important.

 

One other thing few are really talking about here. Why does Boldin want to bolt Az? Money. He wants a deal similar to Fitzgerald. One, I am not sure I agree he is worth that much, to us or in general. Two, w/ the belief our owners are only going to spend so much money on player contracts, I sure as hell don't want to use up all our allowance on a WR, regardless how good he is, while plugging trash at areas of true need.

 

I think you're a little too high on our WR corps. They are not a glaring need. But a legit bonafide proven big game WR would make Cutler, the WR's, and the running gaem all better... And in turn, that could help the OL. I think it's got a big potential for a trickle down effect.

 

One, I disagree w/ the theory that better WRs improves the OL. I simply feel it the other way around. I understand the argument. If your WRs are good enough, the QB doesn't have to hold the ball as long, thus the OL doesn't have to hold their blocks as long. But (a) I question how consistently you can rely on that and ( that may help on quick, 3 step drops, but regardless how good the WR is, it it still on the OL to hold blocks when receivers run longer developing routes.

 

Two, would a bonafide proven big game WR make Cutler and the rest better? Sure. You can say the same for so many other teams. What I would like though is to instead give your young WRs an opportunity. Are you sure we don't have a Wr on the roster who could be as good, or even better, than Boldin?

 

[nfoligno]

Trust me. I understand the arguments for Boldin. Hey, I like him a lot myself as he has done well for my FF team several times. For me, it really comes down to:

 

(a) As good as he may be, if we don't upgrade the OL, he just can't help us, despite his past numbers. Getting a player like Boldin sounds great, but if all he is doing is running 5 yard routes, you are basically wasting him.

 

( Money. As I said, he wants to be paid, and paid a lot. I just don't think we plan to spend a ton of money, and even if we did sign him, I think it would come at the cost of the other positions of need. Ignore the 3rd round pick for a moment and pretend he was a FA. I am sure you would want to sign him, but what if you were told you could have him, but would then not be able to sign a FS, CB, DL or OL. The money it would take to sign him would negate your ability to sign others. Would you still do it?

 

© I am in the minority maybe, but I simply think we have some outstanding potential now at WR. To me, it isn't our WRs holding us back but the OL. If we fix the OL, I think Bears fans would be shocked at the ability our current group would show. I think, with a fixed OL, we could have an elite passing attack. We don't need, IMHO, a player like Boldin to have that. We need an OL that can sustain blocks long enough for our WRs to run their routes.

 

The case for Boldin

 

Bottom line, tell me this guy is not worth it?

 

Rookie of the Year 2003

Pro Bowl 2003

Pro Bowl 2006

Pro Bowl 2008

 

Age 29

 

586 receptions

7,520 yds

44 TD's

 

1. That's 3 pro bowls out of 7 years. About 43% of the year he plays. So you could say he's pro bowl calibur every other year. Also, his selection to the pro bowl are well spaced out, from the beginning, middle and end of his career to date.

 

2. He's not that old. He will be hitting the stride of his career if brought on by the Bears.

 

3. We know he didn't play all the games in his career due to injury (especially that horrible head injury), but we we assume he did regardless, that amounts to:

 

a. 84 receptions per season, 5 per game

b. 1,074 yards per season, 67 per game

c. 6 TD's per season, .4 per game

 

We could use that I think.

 

Let's also factor in that Boldin pretty much started as a #1 (the way virtually everyone on earth uses the term in pro football) WR for 2 years before Fitz came on. And, he makes tough catches.

 

You draft for need, but if a difference makes is available, you take him. I think Boldin is a difference maker. I've re-thought my position, and I would take Boldin for a 3rd. As much as we need an OL, I just simply feel that a bird in the hand is better than only 1 in the bush. Especially if the bird catcher is JA.

 

[nfoligno]

So what your saying is you view a potnetial draft pick chosen by the current brain trust in the 3rd round to be more valueable than a proven pro bowl difference maker?

 

Yet, correct me if I am wrong, but you are willing to trade Olsen for a draft pick? You are willing to trade a top 10 TE for a pick, so Angelo can make a selection?

 

The money will be there for him...either with an increase in the cap as TV revenues continue to skyrocket (just look at the SB ratings...) or the cap gets throuwn out alltogether. And we have some dead weight like Vasher that can be tossed...

 

It has nothing to do with cap space. If cap were the only issue, sure, we could sign him. No, I am talking about our owner actually spending the cash. W/ the CBA issues, and the potential of a lockout, I think our ownership will tighten the purse strings this offseason. I don't think we will be nearly as free spending as fans want. There will be money to spend, but if we were to sign Boldin, I think that would pretty much eat up all our allowance. So to me, trading for Boldin would come at the cost of fixing other areas of far greater need. It isn't about the cap. It is about the team spending cash, and I just don't think the owners plan to spend nearly as much cash as it would take to (a) sign Boldin and ( fix our areas of great need.

 

Maybe I over-thought the potential for improvement on the OL based on an outstanding WR. I still feel that way, but maybe % increase isn't that huge. My thought process on that was a stronger passing attack makes for a different look at the LOS, thus improving the running game, which in turn helps the OL. Again, my point wasn't that all of a sudden Boldin would turn our turnstiles into Munoz'es...but I think it certianly cannot hurt in the least.

 

He would hurt in the sense of the above argument. If signing Boldin prevents you from having the cash to fix other areas of need, have you really helped the team?

 

I feel pretty certain we don't have that WR on our roster. Are you so sure we do that you'd pass up Boldin?

 

I believe we have young WRs on the roster who could prove special. Look at Eddie Royal. As a rookie, w/ Cutler, he had 91 catches for 1,000 yards and 5 scores. W/o Cutler, 37 catches for 345 yards and no scores. I believe w/ Cutler, and an improved OL, fans would be shocked at how good our WRs could be. W/ an awful OL, Hester was on pace to have 1,000 yards. DA looked special in his limited opportunities. Knox broke out as a rookie. And my feelings are known as to Iglesias. So yes, I do believe we have the potential for a WR equal to Boldin.

 

Am I so certain? No. I would not say that. What I do feel certain about though is that if we did add Boldin, and paid him, it would come at the expense of filling other areas of need, and that would negate any positive effect Boldin might have on the team.

[madlithuanian]

Will to send Olsen for a high pick. No less than round 2... And he hasn't shown wnough. Davis and Clark can fill his shoes. It's apples and oranges...

 

I just think the cash situation will work itself out. It's one thing Teddy's good at.

 

I'm glad you have faith in our cornocopia of WR's...I really don't.

 

 

So what your saying is you view a potnetial draft pick chosen by the current brain trust in the 3rd round to be more valueable than a proven pro bowl difference maker?

 

Yet, correct me if I am wrong, but you are willing to trade Olsen for a draft pick? You are willing to trade a top 10 TE for a pick, so Angelo can make a selection?

 

The money will be there for him...either with an increase in the cap as TV revenues continue to skyrocket (just look at the SB ratings...) or the cap gets throuwn out alltogether. And we have some dead weight like Vasher that can be tossed...

 

It has nothing to do with cap space. If cap were the only issue, sure, we could sign him. No, I am talking about our owner actually spending the cash. W/ the CBA issues, and the potential of a lockout, I think our ownership will tighten the purse strings this offseason. I don't think we will be nearly as free spending as fans want. There will be money to spend, but if we were to sign Boldin, I think that would pretty much eat up all our allowance. So to me, trading for Boldin would come at the cost of fixing other areas of far greater need. It isn't about the cap. It is about the team spending cash, and I just don't think the owners plan to spend nearly as much cash as it would take to (a) sign Boldin and ( fix our areas of great need.

 

Maybe I over-thought the potential for improvement on the OL based on an outstanding WR. I still feel that way, but maybe % increase isn't that huge. My thought process on that was a stronger passing attack makes for a different look at the LOS, thus improving the running game, which in turn helps the OL. Again, my point wasn't that all of a sudden Boldin would turn our turnstiles into Munoz'es...but I think it certianly cannot hurt in the least.

 

He would hurt in the sense of the above argument. If signing Boldin prevents you from having the cash to fix other areas of need, have you really helped the team?

 

I feel pretty certain we don't have that WR on our roster. Are you so sure we do that you'd pass up Boldin?

 

I believe we have young WRs on the roster who could prove special. Look at Eddie Royal. As a rookie, w/ Cutler, he had 91 catches for 1,000 yards and 5 scores. W/o Cutler, 37 catches for 345 yards and no scores. I believe w/ Cutler, and an improved OL, fans would be shocked at how good our WRs could be. W/ an awful OL, Hester was on pace to have 1,000 yards. DA looked special in his limited opportunities. Knox broke out as a rookie. And my feelings are known as to Iglesias. So yes, I do believe we have the potential for a WR equal to Boldin.

 

Am I so certain? No. I would not say that. What I do feel certain about though is that if we did add Boldin, and paid him, it would come at the expense of filling other areas of need, and that would negate any positive effect Boldin might have on the team.

 

[nfoligno]

Will to send Olsen for a high pick. No less than round 2... And he hasn't shown wnough. Davis and Clark can fill his shoes. It's apples and oranges...

 

Is it? Whether a 2nd or 3rd, isn't it still Angie making the pick? Olsen has not yet lived up to the hype, but even still is a top 10 TE (top 5 in scoring). Weren't you talking about bird in the hand, or whatever?

 

I just think the cash situation will work itself out. It's one thing Teddy's good at.

 

Teddy, and Jim Miller, are excellent at (a) getting money from ownership and ( working within the cap. This year may be different though, and there are signs of the same in most cities. Owners are getting ready for a lockout, and I am simply not sure we are going to see a big spending spree.

 

Even if this were not an unusual year, you usually see our team sign one big FA, and then a buch of lesser guys. We are always limited in money, one way or another. This year may be even more so. Either way, I would argue that if we spend huge buck on Boldin, which is what it will take to make him happy, there is little question (in my mind) it will affect how much we have to spend at other positions.

 

I also have to ask this. Boldin will turn 30 this season. He already has 7 seasons in the NFL, and only two of those seasons did he play a full 16. He is an awesome receiver today, I will not argue, but he is going to be seeking a huge contract, which is going to be quite a few years. How good do you think he will be playing at 32 or 33, which will likely still be in the first part of his contract.

 

Some receivers can play well after 30, but while 30 may not represent the dropoff point for WRs like RB, it isn't far from it. Do you want to give a 7 year contract to a player who will be 30 this season? He isn't old as dirt by any means, but he is no spring chicken anymore either.

 

I'm glad you have faith in our cornocopia of WR's...I really don't.

 

For the record, that faith comes as much from Cutler as our WRs. Before adding Cutler, I had always said we needed to upgrade the WR position. Some will argue, but I viewed Orton as the sort of QB who needed to be surrounded by solid weapons in order to play at a high level. Orton was a QB who needed others to prop him up. Cutler is a QB who props up those around him. For the record, I am not talking OL. Everyone, including Manning, Brady, etc need OL. But rather, I am talking weapons.

 

There is little question in my mind much of what Knox showed this year was due to having a QB like Cutler. DA finished the season very strong, and again, I credit much to Cutler. So it isn't just that I have faith in our WRs, but faith in our WRs in combination w/ Cutler. If we still had Orton running the show, I would be with you screaming for Boldin.

[jason]

Personally, I don't want to trade for Boldin. I realize what he can be as a WR, when healthy, but as stated, I like who we have. WR is simply an area I do not consider a need. We have tons of needs, and little by way or draft picks or money to deal with those needs. If we were going to trade a player, I would rather it be for a area of greater need, like OL, DE, DT, CB, FS.

 

Agreed. Focus needs to be elsewhere.

[Connorbear]

Agreed. Focus needs to be elsewhere.

Exactly. I am happy with the development of our WRs. Please don't mess with it.

 

Peace

[AZ54]

The case for Boldin

 

Bottom line, tell me this guy is not worth it?

 

Rookie of the Year 2003

Pro Bowl 2003

Pro Bowl 2006

Pro Bowl 2008

 

Age 29

 

586 receptions

7,520 yds

44 TD's

 

1. That's 3 pro bowls out of 7 years. About 43% of the year he plays. So you could say he's pro bowl calibur every other year. Also, his selection to the pro bowl are well spaced out, from the beginning, middle and end of his career to date.

 

2. He's not that old. He will be hitting the stride of his career if brought on by the Bears.

 

3. We know he didn't play all the games in his career due to injury (especially that horrible head injury), but we we assume he did regardless, that amounts to:

 

a. 84 receptions per season, 5 per game

b. 1,074 yards per season, 67 per game

c. 6 TD's per season, .4 per game

 

We could use that I think.

 

Let's also factor in that Boldin pretty much started as a #1 (the way virtually everyone on earth uses the term in pro football) WR for 2 years before Fitz came on. And, he makes tough catches.

 

You draft for need, but if a difference makes is available, you take him. I think Boldin is a difference maker. I've re-thought my position, and I would take Boldin for a 3rd. As much as we need an OL, I just simply feel that a bird in the hand is better than only 1 in the bush. Especially if the bird catcher is JA.

 

I'll take that challenge. First let me start by asking why would a team get rid of a player of the caliber you believe him to be for just a 3rd Rd pick? Why would they do it for just a 2nd Rd pick? Last year the Cardinals wanted a 1st Rd pick for Boldin but in large part that was because they weren't confident in Early Doucet. This past season when Boldin was hurt (again I might add because he's only had 1 full season in his career) Doucet stepped up in a big way in the playoffs and he was pretty good. That's two years in a row he couldn't play in the playoffs.

 

If we trade for Boldin you will get a player who plays the game the right way but also one whose body is feeling the effects of that. He is nowhere near as fast as any of our current WR and he has trouble getting separation from DBs. He could still catch passes from Kurt Warner because they are so accurate but I also watched him drop quite a few.

 

I like the guy but he's only going to add an underneath WR to the roster and we don't need that. Breaston and Fitz typically ran the deeper routes for the Cards. I see no reason to trade for Boldin at all when Greg Olsen can do most of what he does on the field and we've already got him for a lot cheaper. Did I mention Boldin wants $9,000,000/yr? I'll keep the combination of Greg Olsen, 3rd Rd pick, plus $9 mil in FA and come out way ahead of any trade for Boldin.