Jump to content
SportsWrath

Shockey Traded?


Lubeck

Recommended Posts

Good Riddance, now he can take his me first, team second attitude to another team and lets see how they deal with it when he practices somewhere else in the offseason. Lets see if he lasts a full season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shockey is probably past his best , drops too many balls , is coming off a broken leg and doesnt want to play for our team anymore......its a shame ....but it seems like Reese had no option

 

This is not a disaster , it is a fair trade IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I keep forgetting half of the posters here wanted to release Eli Manning

after the playoffs in 2005 because he fell off in the 2nd half of that season.

 

If the Giants didn't give up on Corey Webster, they aren't going to give up on Moss

just this second.

i think the giants are really high on jennings. if he still has his speed in camp this year he might give Moss a run for his money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was a good blocker, but he didn't like doing it and bitched about it to the coaching staff. That is what he is talking about.

 

As for the concerns about Shockey being out of the lineup affecting the offensive production, defensive coordinators will focus more on Burress and company. But they weren't after Shockey was injured? Now I am not trying to say the offense was better without him, even though a strong case could be made that that is true, all I am saying is that his lost production and presence on the field did not make the offense worse.

Lubeck,

 

I sat and heard the defense coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys, on the radio, say they were going to double cover Shockey all game in the first game. That's why Burress scored 3 TD that game. Before the second game, he said he's not going to make the same mistake twice. Shockey kills them for 11 catches. When askes about Boss before the playoff game. He said "He's no Shockey that's for sure."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was a good blocker, but he didn't like doing it and bitched about it to the coaching staff. That is what he is talking about.

 

As for the concerns about Shockey being out of the lineup affecting the offensive production, defensive coordinators will focus more on Burress and company. But they weren't after Shockey was injured? Now I am not trying to say the offense was better without him, even though a strong case could be made that that is true, all I am saying is that his lost production and presence on the field did not make the offense worse.

 

I agree....I see alot of similarities between Shockey and Tiki Barber - two very talented malcontents.

 

Funny, but each had the same impact on our Super Bowl Championship run - absolutely zero.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please find the quote where Shockey bitched about blocking. The quote, not the rumour. Shockey was one of the better blocking TEs in the league and our offensive production, and Eli's confidence which was proven to be pivotable in our success, are not better served by his absence.

 

 

He bitched about the way he was used in the Giants system, which includes him run blocking.

I liked Shockey, I really did...but he began to wear out his welcome here in New York.

 

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but Eli did get better in the playoffs when he was spreading

the ball to all of his different backs and receivers. I expect now that Shockey is gone that a bunch

of guys will chip in a replace his production, just like the Giants did when Tiki retired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I keep forgetting half of the posters here wanted to release Eli Manning

after the playoffs in 2005 because he fell off in the 2nd half of that season.

 

If the Giants didn't give up on Corey Webster, they aren't going to give up on Moss

just this second.

 

 

Well ost posters must be morons. I never wanted Manning gone and always knew we would win the big one with him. So save that for someone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh Jesus fucking Christ with the "3 yard curl routes" SHUT THE FUCK UP with that shit.

Tight Ends have two jobs and one of them was to block, Shockey didn't want to do that.

Tough shit Jeremy.

Sorry, I meant 4 yard curls. :rolleyes:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lubeck,

 

I sat and heard the defense coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys, on the radio, say they were going to double cover Shockey all game in the first game. That's why Burress scored 3 TD that game. Before the second game, he said he's not going to make the same mistake twice. Shockey kills them for 11 catches. When askes about Boss before the playoff game. He said "He's no Shockey that's for sure."

you know whats funny? we lost the two games with shockey, and won without him.

 

theres no denying shockey is a force and a great player but its clear he was not willing to be a NYG this season. and with that he had to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lubeck,

 

I sat and heard the defense coordinator of the Dallas Cowboys, on the radio, say they were going to double cover Shockey all game in the first game. That's why Burress scored 3 TD that game. Before the second game, he said he's not going to make the same mistake twice. Shockey kills them for 11 catches. When askes about Boss before the playoff game. He said "He's no Shockey that's for sure."

 

And we won that game. Based on what you said I would imagine the Dallas DC planned to beat the Giants offense with the idea that Shockey was not in the game. But thanks for backing up my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect now that Shockey is gone that a bunch of guys will chip in a replace his production, just like the Giants did when Tiki retired.

 

And they won't bitch when the ball doesn't come their way.

 

Listen I loved the Shockey pick and he made watching games a lot of fun, but he was not a team player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know whats funny? we lost the two games with shockey, and won without him.

 

theres no denying shockey is a force and a great player but its clear he was not willing to be a NYG this season. and with that he had to go.

Dude, the only reason why the Giants did something in the playoffs was the emergence of Steve Smith. Not Boss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And we won that game. Based on what you said I would imagine the Dallas DC planned to beat the Giants offense with the idea that Shockey was not in the game. But thanks for backing up my point.

What point?... It was steve Smith who took over for Shockey. Not Kevin (I can't block for shit) Boss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, the only reason why the Giants did something in the playoffs was the emergence of Steve Smith. Not Boss.

 

There were many reasons why they did something in the playoffs.

 

But as far as the Smith vs Boss argument goes, do you really care who is catching the ball so long as someone is catching the ball?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, the only reason why the Giants did something in the playoffs was the emergence of Steve Smith. Not Boss.

Nem if you were the GM and you had a player walking into the locker room with a selfish attitude on a team that is defined by its selflessness would you keep him? Becuase this is what it's about. Not the fact we won the SB without him, but the fact he doesnt want to be a Giant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were many reasons why they did something in the playoffs.

 

But as far as the Smith vs Boss argument goes, do you really care who is catching the ball so long as someone is catching the ball?

There's a big difference between who's on the field and who's not.

 

Burress

Toomer

Smith

Shockey

Jacobs

 

looks alot better than

 

Burress

Toomer

Boss

Hedgecock

Jacobs

 

because Shockey is a great blocker and a good receiver you can do alot more things. Now with boss, you have to use Hedgecock to help out with the running game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love Shockey's grit and he was quite a force. I think he still will be; we all owe him a lot. At a time when our team had nearly no personality, he brought some intensity + talent to the organization.

 

I also see him past his prime and he's best when left to freelance, but that's a tall order when most schemes are tighter than Fassel's go out and get open.

 

Our power running game emerged with Shockey's blocking and it took pressure off of Eli to throw, throw, throw.

 

I think that we're a better team without Shockey, however I'll always miss him and wish that we had that big dude on our side.

 

The mention (above) about Shockey and Dallas is a great example of what can happen with his presence. My guess is that they'll double Burress and a new star or two will emerge in those games...should make fantasy football somewhat more unpredictable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It certainly does look better Nem. But he was not happy, did not want to be a part of this team, and I think he would have caused a distraction in camp.

 

Talent-wise the Shockey lineup is better. But I think your second lineup will work better as a team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone think what this might do to our running game? I mean with Shock we had a pretty good power running game with him blocking down on the end. Now since Boss is no Shockey can anyone see us using Bradshaw more? Having more of a quick running game like we did with Tiki? I mean using a 3 WR or 4 WR set to spread the D out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 2nd and a 5th for a player coming off a broken fibula who in my opinion didn't want to be here? I'll take it. I don't think anyone is saying Boss is a better TE. Are Jacobs, Bradshaw and Ward better than TiVi Tiki? No, but we won without Barber and Shockey. I'm not overly worried. Boss is a young hard working TE who will improve over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...