WP Article March 31- Gardner Trade Speculation

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7

SKINSnCANES
04-06-2004, 12:55 PM
Whos contracts are up next year other than RG and Smoot. If those are the main two I see us resigning atleast one during the season so that we can use a tag on the other if we have to.

offiss
04-06-2004, 01:25 PM
I think rod's value may be a little higher around the league than on this site, I think gardner and a pick would bring back a 2nd rd pick, I think someone one would go for that, based on his potential, obviously.

Beemnseven
04-06-2004, 04:56 PM
I think rod's value may be a little higher around the league than on this site, I think gardner and a pick would bring back a 2nd rd pick, I think someone one would go for that, based on his potential, obviously.

I just don't see it. He's known for periodically having a case of the dropsies, has never been to the Pro Bowl (and has essentially done nothing to convince anyone that he belongs there) and I really don't think he has the presence on the field that commands attention from opposing defenses.

With all that said, I'd certainly trade him for a 2nd rounder, but otherwise, we might as well keep him for his contract year.

]<ing
04-06-2004, 05:08 PM
Personally, I like Gardner -- but he also comes across as someone that may not be a "Gibbs" type of guy. Couple that with the additional needs on the D and there you go.

This may be as simple as that.

SKINSnCANES
04-06-2004, 05:14 PM
Mabye Gardner can use his talents to play defense??? Bulk him up a little and he might be a good end

CrazyCanuck
04-06-2004, 05:20 PM
What about using Gardner, Brunell and Ramsey in a 3-QB set?

SKINSnCANES
04-06-2004, 05:27 PM
lol, he does have teh best QB rating on our team, why not. We could even implement some of spurriers sets and get rid of the O-line. Three QBs, Portis, Six WR and a center.

jdlea
04-06-2004, 06:36 PM
Taylor Jacobs will probably never take over the #2. I'll be surprised if he lasts much past next season. I know he was hurt and all, but I don't think he'll make the adjustment. As for McCants, he's not quite there yet. While we're talking about the dropsies...look at McCants, he does it all the time...and he fumbles. He does make good catches, but he does the same things as Gardner.

My vote: Keep Rod Gardner. He's the second best reciever on the team going away and he's of little value to other teams. On top of all of that, he doesn't make much money.

joecrisp
04-06-2004, 10:04 PM
Just so you guys know... Gardner is signed through 2005, so NEXT year is his "contract year", not this year.

I would hope that Gardner sees the writing on the wall, and works his tail off this offseason to hold onto the #2 spot, knowing that Gibbs has liked what he's seen thus far of Jacobs.

jdlea, I agree with you on McCants-- he's been just as inconsistent as Gardner, though he did come up with some nice catches in the red zone last year.

However, I respectfully disagree with you on Jacobs. For everything that Gardner and McCants lack in focus and concentration, Jacobs has in spades. Add in the fact that Jacobs is adding some muscle this offseason to go with his speed and quickness, and I think he's going to surprise a lot of people this year. I think last year went about as bad as it could've possibly gone for Jacobs, and he's really determined to prove that he's not the wasted draft pick that so many fans are already saying he is.

offiss
04-07-2004, 03:33 AM
The thing about MCcant's is he came into the league as a project, last year you could observe his maturation as a reciever, he seemed to have started to become a more reliable reciever, at least toward's the end of the year, he was hauling in whatever came his way, gardner came in much more refined, and seemed to have gone backward's to the point where MCcant's is getting ready to pass him by, gardner has been stagnant were as at least IMO MCcant's has made stride's, If you wan't to say give gardner a shot under Gibb's? I will buy that, but 1 thing that a coach really has nothing to do with is a player's abiltity to catch the ball, and If gardner isn't going to haul in 95% of the ball's that hit him in the hand's then you just can't take a chance on throwing to him, that will land him on the bench, I know he has all kind's of potential, but as forrest say's, stupid is as stupid does, and gardner has shown no propensity for maximizing his talent's. physically he's more gifted than Monk, but that's where the comparison end's.

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum