Bill from NYC Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 It says here that they are offering up their 2nd round pick and a player for Jeremy Shockey. Honestly, the kid seems like a bit of a headcase to me, but he sure can run patterns and catch the football. I don't remember a time when the Bills had a TE who could pretty much do everything, although I was a huge Pete Metz fan. Can a guy like this grow up? One would think, but who really knows? If (big if) he has his head on straight, he can get the ball into the endzone. Do you guys think that he is worth our 2nd, and perhaps a 3rd or 4th in 09? Or an extra 4th or 5th this year? Tough call, but we are desperate for a TE to the point that I would consider it.
BuffaloRebound Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 It says here that they are offering up their 2nd round pick and a player for Jeremy Shockey. Honestly, the kid seems like a bit of a headcase to me, but he sure can run patterns and catch the football. I don't remember a time when the Bills had a TE who could pretty much do everything, although I was a huge Pete Metz fan. Can a guy like this grow up? One would think, but who really knows? If (big if) he has his head on straight, he can get the ball into the endzone. Do you guys think that he is worth our 2nd, and perhaps a 3rd or 4th in 09? Or an extra 4th or 5th this year? Tough call, but we are desperate for a TE to the point that I would consider it. If we had an established veteran QB, I'd say yes to Shockey. But given that he whines and pouts every time he doesn't get the ball, I don't think that would be good for Edwards development or Losman no matter how talented Shockey is.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 I think a lot of Shockeys problems were Coughlin, and having a very young qb. There's little doubt Shockey is a beast, when motivated. I don't think it's hard to motivate him. Maybe the best "All around" Te sans Jason Witten. Payton was with the giants Shockey's rookie year, so I'm sure he knows what he's getting into. I still think a lot of the suppoused issues with shockey are the NYC Media overblowing the situation.
Bill from NYC Posted March 25, 2008 Author Posted March 25, 2008 If we had an established veteran QB, I'd say yes to Shockey. But given that he whines and pouts every time he doesn't get the ball, I don't think that would be good for Edwards development or Losman no matter how talented Shockey is. Good point. I would hope that if Jason Peters told him to stfu, he might listen.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 One other thing. Having an offense if the trade goes thru that will feature Drew Brees, Colston, Shockey, as well as David Patten, last years 1st rd pick Robert Meachem, Devery Henderson, throw in Bush, and "Mcallister" if he can bounce back. That's some serious good firepower. Say what you want about Reggie, as a "runningback". There's little negative to his game as a receiver out of the backfield. Only Brian Westbrook, and Tomlinson are on par with him in that area.
ndirish1978 Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 Shockey dated Vida Guerra. I would trade a second for HER
ans4e64 Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 Personally, I think Shockey would do well here. I don't think he is cut out for NYC media and drill sergeant Tom Coughlin. He works hard, and he just wants to win. I would like to see some attitude on this team. We really need a leader on offense. I want someone to command the ball, and get on players for not doing their jobs. On a veteran team like the Giants, it might get on some people's nerves, but on a young offense like we have here, it just might make some people play better. If we were going to use a 2nd rounder on a TE anyway, it might as well be a proven player who is one of the top 5 TE's in the league. We aren't going to get the quality pass threat in the draft at the TE position, Shockey can serve as that TE and also our #2 receiver. That means we have even more versatility with our 1st pick and whoever our 2nd WR is, it takes a lot of pressure off. Don't get me wrong, I hate outspoken guys that are not team players, I just don't believe Shockey is that guy. I believe that if a team is running the ball and winning, he wouldn't mind. Maybe I'm wrong, but a player with some attitude would be a nice change in Buffalo. I don't think our franchise would ever go for it, though.
Beerball Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 Shockey dated Vida Guerra. I would trade a second for HER that's about all it would take for ya too
Pete Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 No thanks. I watch the Giants all the time and they are much better without him. Eli is a totally different QB when Shockey is not playing. Shockey had a great rookie year and has never been as good as his rookie year from what I have seen. The guy is a headcase and seems like a total !@#$. I like where our team is going in direction of character and team chemistry. I agree we need a playmaking TE- but preferably not Shockey
AKC Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 No thanks. I watch the Giants all the time and they are much better without him. Eli is a totally different QB when Shockey is not playing. Shockey had a great rookie year and has never been as good as his rookie year from what I have seen. The guy is a headcase and seems like a total !@#$. I like where our team is going in direction of character and team chemistry. I agree we need a playmaking TE- but preferably not Shockey I have to agree- if you just went through that season as a Giant and at the end of it you decided you're better off without him, who could possibly have a better perspective? At the same time, instead of having a young and below average QB, the Saints have as good a veteran QB as any team playing in the league today. Shockey in NO might be a perfect fit for him to be productive and for the Giants to try and find some of the magic once more that put them on top this past season without that risk factor Shockey always presents. The fans in NO will find some love for Shockey's act, and as long as it doesn't become a competition for air time with Bush it could play out well.
Adam Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 I think a lot of Shockeys problems were Coughlin, and having a very young qb. There's little doubt Shockey is a beast, when motivated. I don't think it's hard to motivate him. Maybe the best "All around" Te sans Jason Witten. Payton was with the giants Shockey's rookie year, so I'm sure he knows what he's getting into. I still think a lot of the suppoused issues with shockey are the NYC Media overblowing the situation. Having a great coach tends to be problematic..........
stewy23 Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 No thanks. I watch the Giants all the time and they are much better without him. Eli is a totally different QB when Shockey is not playing. Shockey had a great rookie year and has never been as good as his rookie year from what I have seen. The guy is a headcase and seems like a total !@#$. I like where our team is going in direction of character and team chemistry. I agree we need a playmaking TE- but preferably not Shockey Eli's growth as a QB had nothing to do with Shockey. His progression was aided by: 1. Natual maturation 2. No more Tiki Barber That team relied so heavily on Tiki, they didn't utilize their players. I agree that Shockey can be a nuisance with his mouth, but he adds far more to the team than he takes away. The best thing that ever happened to the Giants was Tiki's retirement. He was a great back, but they put all their eggs in his basket and he didn't deliver. Now the eggs (in the spirit of Easter, I will continue with the egg theme ) are evenly distributed by Manning to Jacobs/Bradshaw, Plax, Shockey/Boss, and Toomer. Addition by subtraction.
marauderswr80 Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 Shockey is an intense player on the field, he has a nasty attitude. He wants to win so bad it hurts. I think its a good move for the Saints if all works as planned for them.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 Having a great coach tends to be problematic.......... Coughlin seriously changed up his style of coaching, from frozen rigid, to flexible and willing to listen to his players. For the better as well. Shockey was part of the anti coughling contingent that infested the giants locker room.
John Adams Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 If the Bills got Shockey for a 2nd and an average starter, I'd do it in a second. Shockey is a bit of a nut but I've never thought of him as a cancer.
SnakeOiler Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 It says that NO OFFERED a 2nd round pick, and the Giants said no thanks. That leads me to conclude the giants are looking for more than a 2nd round pick.
Chandler#81 Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 Bill, I'd love to see him here. I agree with most everyone that he's a tad over the top, but he's a 4X Pro Bowler still in his prime. I'd be concerned that he seems to love the spotlight, and it's not very bright in Buffalo. Looks like it will take a 2nd and something else, though I'd call the G-men's bluff. They obviously didn't miss him..
Buftex Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 From a purely practical standpoint, and any character issues aside, my biggest problem with Shockey is that he is not durable...the guy has missed significant amounts of time for every season, for as long as I can remember.
Pete Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 Eli's growth as a QB had nothing to do with Shockey. His progression was aided by:1. Natual maturation 2. No more Tiki Barber That team relied so heavily on Tiki, they didn't utilize their players. I agree that Shockey can be a nuisance with his mouth, but he adds far more to the team than he takes away. The best thing that ever happened to the Giants was Tiki's retirement. He was a great back, but they put all their eggs in his basket and he didn't deliver. Now the eggs (in the spirit of Easter, I will continue with the egg theme ) are evenly distributed by Manning to Jacobs/Bradshaw, Plax, Shockey/Boss, and Toomer. Addition by subtraction. I agree losing Tiki and Eli maturing helped out a lot but I strongly disagree that he adds to the Giants. If that was the case- how come the Giants played so much better when he was not in there? I live in Pats/Giants territory and have many friends that are huge Giants fans. Well every Giant fan I know thinks they are better off without Shockey- and from what I have seen- I concur
Buffalo_Stampede Posted March 25, 2008 Posted March 25, 2008 Eli's growth as a QB had nothing to do with Shockey. His progression was aided by:1. Natual maturation 2. No more Tiki Barber That team relied so heavily on Tiki, they didn't utilize their players. I agree that Shockey can be a nuisance with his mouth, but he adds far more to the team than he takes away. The best thing that ever happened to the Giants was Tiki's retirement. He was a great back, but they put all their eggs in his basket and he didn't deliver. Now the eggs (in the spirit of Easter, I will continue with the egg theme ) are evenly distributed by Manning to Jacobs/Bradshaw, Plax, Shockey/Boss, and Toomer. Addition by subtraction. You guys are nuts that say Eli was or is better off without Tiki and Shockey. Eli had his worst season as a starter. He had big games in the past. He has always been clutch at the end of games. People just like to look for stories and run with it. The only difference in Manning this year was he had a defense.
Recommended Posts