The Falcoholic: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Steve McNair Dead - Former NFL QB Shot and Killed


Should We Like, Sign Jeb Putzier?

This question was asked first by my batterymate Kirkendall at Cincy Jungle, but I do feel it bears asking for the Falcons.

What I see in Putzier is reasonable pricing, quality all-around skills and the veteran nature coaches just love so gosh darn much. He'd also provide valuable competition for Martrez Milner, who wouldn't be threatened by Courtney Anderson and Dwayne Blakley if they were holding guns to his head. I'm usually of the opinion that all that "age is a virtue" hoo-ha is a load of bullshit, but it would scare me to go into this season with Milner as a clear number one at tight end.

Yes, he's not great. He only played eight games last year and did less than nothing in the receiving game. The point is more that he can, you know, occasionally catch the ball, and he can also block. If Milner kicks ass and passes him, he's a very serviceable backup. If he starts, well, Roddy White needs to get plenty of passes next year anyways.

I also don't feel like tight end should be enough of a priority in the draft that Dimitroff deprive himself of players the team is clearly thirsty for. While I hate that Crumpler is gone (and if he ends up on the Panthers, I will throw myself into the path of an oncoming plow truck), it would be foolish to not bring in a cost-effective replacement. This may be the final time I advocate for a free agent before the draft, but I say go get Putzier.

At the very least, we can call him Putz.

0 recs | Comment 6 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Cuts...
Be forewarned, this is going to be long.

I usually like to think that I am somewhat of an intelligent human being and as such am able to make clear sound decisions in my life.  But, for the life of me, I can not seem to grasp the thought process of GM's when they go through these types of offseason cuts.  Now, I am not saying that I don't understand the end result that the team is looking for, but more that I don't understand the release of high profile or pro-bowl caliber players; in this case that being Crumpler, Coleman, and Gandy.  As for the remaining players that were recently released, well, it's not like they were major contributors in anyway and are therefore non-points.

Let me be more specific on what it is that I think I am missing.  When looking at the three major players on that list, it is clear that they hold a lot of value, be it from their overall contract total or from the stats they post.  Crumpler is argueably one of the top five tight ends in the game even with him having an off year this past season.  And for those saying that he has been injured for the last couple of years, you are obviously not watching this team, as he has been to three straight pro-bowls before this last year.  Coleman is a great defensive tackle putting up numbers that aren't usual for most defensive tackles.  I will agree that he has had some issues staying healthy, but even then he still holds a reasonable amount of value.  And finally Gandy, although clearly nearing the end of his career, had not had any injury issues for thirteen (13 for a left tackle!!) before blowing his ACL this year., so it's not like we can say that he couldn't come back and perform up to par.  He is a very solid left tackle, and being a left tackle holds more value than most other lineman positions.

I speak to value mainly because during this forms of cuts, what I am not understanding is how or why we did not actively pursue some form of return for these players obvious value.  How is it that we did not get any future draft picks for any of these players?  Are you to tell me, Mr. GM, that you could find no suitors in the NFL for Crumpler, Coleman, nor Gandy?  To come to a point where you simply cut valuable assets for absolutely no return value leads me to believe that although the GM has the right intent for the organization, he (and by he, I may also mean any and all involved with these decision, but I haven't decided yet, which is another point entirely) made a rash and rushed decision just to make waves and show his weight.  Maybe, and I am more than willing to accept this, I a perceiving this the wrong way, and given the proper answers as to how one could accept a total loss of value as opposed to lessening the loss by getting a return in value, I assume that I would be able to swallow this news a little more easily.

I have seen this happen many times with many teams, and every time I have failed to understand why these teams do not actively seek to get return value for their valuable assets.  Billions of dollars are paid to these players every year, yet when this happens, in my mind, the team is simply stating that the players have no value whatsoever and aren't worth trying to make a trade to get in the least some draft picks.  If it is a simple salary cap issue, then how is trading for draft picks not a viable solution.  You move the player and his contract and you get help with the rebuilding process.  Draft picks do not equal salary space as it is known that a team does not have to sign a draft pick, which would leave it open to sign a free agent if need be.

If anyone reading this has the knowledge of why a team would simply make a cut versus a trade, please enlighten me.

Also, Dave, I love your first time entry on the previous post.  Oregon Trail: classic, nostalgic, many memories, and you must be one hell of a shot.  Haha!

by Jesse on Feb 18, 2008 8:10 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I see your point but...
"what I am not understanding is how or why we did not actively pursue some form of return for these players"

I get the feeling that once the league catches wind of a team wanting to dump certain players (no matter how good they might be) they realize that they have the upper hand and will try to rob the other team blind.

The Pats got Randy Moss for a 4th round pick.  This isn't Madden where you can just trade players for equal value ("Crumpler's 93 score means a trade for a 1st round pick!").  How much do you realistically think we could have gotten in return for any of those players?  

I think perhaps it was more trouble than it was worth. Either way I concur, a fine post Jesse!

In a way, each of us has an El Guapo to face.

by runningback on Feb 18, 2008 8:48 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Clarfication
I understand the mechanics behind why a team wouldn't trade if they knew a player was going to be release and I understand the concerns about the supposed red flags with players (for the comment below).  I didn't clearly define what it was I thought would be a fair return value for these players, so let me elaborate.

I'll use Crumpler as my main example because he represents everything I don't understand about this release.  Crumpler, regardless of injury, is still one of the five best TE's in the league, period.  To simply drop him for asolutely no return is absurd.  A team such as Buffalo or Oakland, teams that have both a young QB and not so decent recieving, could surely use a player such as Crumpler to give their fledging QB a safety out.  Take into consideration his injuries this past year and sure, I don't believe we could get what he would be worht in his prime, but even a 4th round pick for Moss was more than nothing, right?

So, I never definitively stated that I thought we could have gotten first round picks for these guys, but I did state that getting no return at all was not the best outcome.  To even revieve more low round picks for these players would have been a better end result for our team.  We would have more chances to find those key players that fill roles and become the glue tha holds the team together when the big money players have down games.  We all know where Tom Brady got drafted don't we?  And what about Cromartie?  You never know when that fourth, fifth, or sixth round pick could be your next big superstar.  I liken it to asking a homeless person if he would rather have garbage food or nothing at all, even he knows that something is better than nothing.

Also, you stated that teams know that we are releasing our players and then refuse to trade.  I think that is far from the truth as that would obviously be the dumbest thing any organization's management could possibly do.  Why would a team put that kind of information out there before attempting to trade players?  I'm sure no GM goes to other GMs and says, "Hey, we are going to release this guy, but I thought you might want to trade for him first."  From a business standpoint, the releasing of a player should be the absolute last solution to a teams salary cap issues.  You just do not freely give away valuable assets like that.

Trust me, it's not a matter of me understanding relative value of our assets.  What it is that I am looking for is if our current management understands that same value.  As it stands right now, in my mind that answer is no, and that gives me enough reason for concern.  In the end, I am sure our team will be fine and this will become a non-issue, but I do think that it could have been handled differently so as to give our team a better chance than what we will have now.

I guess one could say that they are getting paid the money to make those decisions and I am not, so I will let them be for now.  It's just an observation and an opinion.

by Jesse on Feb 19, 2008 7:45 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Good points
All good points Jesse.

I thought of one more scenario.  I don't think we ruled out the possibility that both parties might have just agreed to go their separate ways.

Who knows.  What I do know is that I am going miss me some Alge!  He was def. one of my fave Falcons over the past 5 years or so.

In a way, each of us has an El Guapo to face.

by runningback on Feb 19, 2008 9:49 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Cuts
I have not read comments by any Falcons Fan as insightful as those by Jesse on the cuts by the new GM and HC.  While these players might not be in their plans, the value that they hold could have been utilize to give the Falcons more than just a good feeling for those Falcons Fans wanting a cleaning but not knowing what that details.  
Richie

by richie on Feb 18, 2008 11:04 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

trade rules
Great comments.  They really provoked some thought.  Awhile back I came across an interesting post about NFL trade rules.  It is an interesting read and some reasoning might apply as to why we didn't hold onto those players with hopes of trading them.

http://www.dawgtalkers.net/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=3095&Main=3092

The rules that seem to apply hear are:

"RULE FOUR: High priced veterans are NOT attractive to other teams.

[They] are being paid much more than [the team believes] he is worth (or otherwise we wouldn't want to trade him in the first place, right?). Unless a team is in desperate, desperate need for a certain position, they aren't going to take the cap hit on a person that isn't worth it.

This rule is even more so magnified due to the butchering that some cap-troubled teams must do. Why trade for [xyz], when you can pick up someone better for half the cost? Or even yet, why not just wait till [xyz] gets the axe himself? No sense wasting draft picks or players on him."

So obviously teams know the Falcons are in bad shape. They are like circling sharks. They know we need to make cuts and they would rather wait us out.  The Falcons don't have the liberty to wait. For yet another year they are faced with with new schemes and having to find the pieces to fit them.

"RULE FIVE: Players coming off a poor season, whether it be due to poor stats or injury have much less trade value than they normally have.

This even applies to All-Pro's, If someone has a bad year, it's a big red flag to other teams. If their team is trying to trade them, it's an even bigger red flag. If the bad year is caused by injuries, that's a 3rd BIG red flag. Players with injuries usually get the "damaged goods" tag and teams will be unwilling to chance it."

Now I personally don't think any of our main three are damaged goods but the perception in the trade market will be just that.  Teams will balk at wanting to pay too much in a trade.  They will use injuries to their advantage and low-ball the Falcons. Or they will revert to Rule 4 and just wait it out.

Cuts come every year. They sting. Fans rant. I seem to have to purchase a new Jersey: Jam, Smith, Kerney, Rossum, and now Crumpler.

by Section107Row3Seats12thru15 on Feb 18, 2008 6:05 PM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A Falcoholic Primer

Where Falcons fans come to roost.

Start posting about the Falcons »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Cobra_commander_pimp_ava_small
Fantasy Football Leagues Part 1 - Is it for you?

Recent FanPosts

Dude2_small
RIP Steve McNair
Small
Winning Factors
Cobra_commander_pimp_ava_small
Fantasy Football Leagues Part 2 - So many options, what does it all mean?
Small
fantasy football question
Small
Is trading J. Anderson for Greenbay Packer's Aaron Kampman a good trade?
Small
Underrated/Overrated Falcons of the Decade
Small
kudos to this site
Thefalcoholic_small
Ovie Mughelli Football Camp: Press Release
Small
mike vick

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Baron Of All He Blogs

Thefalcoholic_small Dave the Falconer

Marquis Of Musings

Slideshow_777859_rook6_small tlozwarlock

Official Partner of Yahoo! Sports