redtodd 7 Posted May 1, 2006 The price to move up to the pick to take Chad Jackson was close to the price it was for the Broncos to get Javon Walker. Was it better to get the rookie that isn't asking for big money and coming off the ACL? Or the guy who has already passed the 3rd year rule for WR's and has proven to be able to post big numbers? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boston 0 Posted May 1, 2006 In all probabilty if you deal for Walker than you lose Branch. Branch's deal is up this year and I don't see the Pats giving big money to two wideouts. Therefore I'd rather go the route they went. They get a high quality prospect (obviously he's not a definite) with big upside that doesn't cost too much and has no injury questions to date. Therefore when Branch signs his deal the WR position still isn't a huge piece of the salary cap and hopefully you have solved your #2 wideout position for a long period of time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redtodd 7 Posted May 1, 2006 In all probabilty if you deal for Walker than you lose Branch. Branch's deal is up this year and I don't see the Pats giving big money to two wideouts. Therefore I'd rather go the route they went. They get a high quality prospect (obviously he's not a definite) with big upside that doesn't cost too much and has no injury questions to date. Therefore when Branch signs his deal the WR position still isn't a huge piece of the salary cap and hopefully you have solved your #2 wideout position for a long period of time. I forgot about the Branch issue. I was torn on it. I like Javon Walker a lot, but I would be worried about throwing him a ton of money after his injury. Plus, you know that whatever he gets for a contract, Branch's agent will use a starting point. I think Chad Jackson is an excellent value for where they got him, but I always am worried about rookie WR's because they take so long to develop. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
devildog 0 Posted May 1, 2006 I'll take Jackson and the money saved. Pats have shown they can win without a big time WR. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Arsenal 3 Posted May 1, 2006 Denver would have taken Jackson if he were still there at #37... so they took the next best thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostofMeanMachine99 1 Posted May 1, 2006 Here's what I heard that transpired over the weekend with Javon Walker (courtesy of Howard Eskin from Sportstalk radio WIP in Philly): It came down to Denver, Philly, and New England. Walker came to Philly early Saturday morning, got a physical, and the team was comfortable enough to work out a contract that would have paid him an average of $7.5 mil a season. Walker did not want to leave Philly. However, Denver also wanted a first round choice for the trade, which was too steep for Philly to pay. Consequently, the same price tag went do New England as well, and it appears that price was too steep for New England to pay as well. When that price could not be realized, it boiled down to who could offer the higher 2nd round pick. Denver had the higher 2nd round pick, so they decided to make the trade with them. There is also speculation that Green Bay did not want to trade Walker to another team within the NFC. I guess the Pats and Eagles found the price too steep to pay for Walker. New England will be fine without Walker, and seeing that the Eagles got Winston Justice with the second round pick, we're not really pissed off that they couldn't get Walker (although it would have been nice). With all that being said, it'll be real interesting what kind of contract offer the Broncos can make Walker. Can they give Walker the money the Eagles were willing to give him? If not, does he sit out, does he play, or does he take less money? I'm thinking the Walker story is not quite over (given the cap situation Denver is currently in). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bigtuna 0 Posted May 2, 2006 Here's what I heard that transpired over the weekend with Javon Walker (courtesy of Howard Eskin from Sportstalk radio WIP in Philly): It came down to Denver, Philly, and New England. Walker came to Philly early Saturday morning, got a physical, and the team was comfortable enough to work out a contract that would have paid him an average of $7.5 mil a season. Walker did not want to leave Philly. However, Denver also wanted a first round choice for the trade, which was too steep for Philly to pay. Consequently, the same price tag went do New England as well, and it appears that price was too steep for New England to pay as well. When that price could not be realized, it boiled down to who could offer the higher 2nd round pick. Denver had the higher 2nd round pick, so they decided to make the trade with them. There is also speculation that Green Bay did not want to trade Walker to another team within the NFC. I guess the Pats and Eagles found the price too steep to pay for Walker. New England will be fine without Walker, and seeing that the Eagles got Winston Justice with the second round pick, we're not really pissed off that they couldn't get Walker (although it would have been nice). With all that being said, it'll be real interesting what kind of contract offer the Broncos can make Walker. Can they give Walker the money the Eagles were willing to give him? If not, does he sit out, does he play, or does he take less money? I'm thinking the Walker story is not quite over (given the cap situation Denver is currently in). all good points. Its really CChad Jackson plus whatever player you can sign that makes about Javon Walkers salary vs. Walker. My inclination is toward Jackson. Since the Pats traded one pick ahead of Denver, tells you that DENVER WANTED CHAD JACKSON as well, and consumated the JW deal only after missing out on the player they wanted. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted May 2, 2006 In all probabilty if you deal for Walker than you lose Branch. Branch's deal is up this year and I don't see the Pats giving big money to two wideouts. Therefore I'd rather go the route they went. They get a high quality prospect (obviously he's not a definite) with big upside that doesn't cost too much and has no injury questions to date. Therefore when Branch signs his deal the WR position still isn't a huge piece of the salary cap and hopefully you have solved your #2 wideout position for a long period of time. Good points. It especially makes sense to take this approach with the WR position when you consider that the Pats have so much receiving talent at the tight end position as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sky21 0 Posted May 2, 2006 BB knew that Denver had a hard on for Jackson. He traded into the slot ahead of them to swipe him. Job well done. I'll take Jackson and the saved cash. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sweetness_34 0 Posted May 2, 2006 If it is true that Denver wanted Chad Jackson, then sorry Pat fans, he is gonna blow for you guys. Shanny is 0 for 13 with this WR draftees.....not kidding, this is true. Thank God he had Rod Smith all these years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostofMeanMachine99 1 Posted May 2, 2006 If it is true that Denver wanted Chad Jackson, then sorry Pat fans, he is gonna blow for you guys. Shanny is 0 for 13 with this WR draftees.....not kidding, this is true. Thank God he had Rod Smith all these years. Someone who's worse at drafting WRs than Andy Reid (although Reggie Brown looks like a keeper)? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
