DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Andy Lee traded to the Panthers

j/c:

I'm not mad or happy about the Andy Lee trade. What I will say is that it fits in line with exactly what this new regime has done so far- accumulate assets for the future while not being too worried about what happens this year (wins/losses) except for the development of the young players. Andy Lee, who probably wouldn't be on this team in a couple of years, provided a way to get value that will be worth more than him in 2018. We'll just have to use the selection wisely, which has traditionally been an issue.

I don't think it's about money at all. If fact, I laugh at that notion. Haslem has never exhibited a cheap approach towards players (I'll get to that in a moment). Another reason I don't think it's about money is because these don't seem like Haslem moves. This is the FO (w/ Hue) getting rid of players that won't be around in a couple of years and might as well get assets for whichever ones they can-- Again, a move that makes sense with what this FO has exhibited since they took over. The trade was about accumulating assets for the future.

Future Returns= Relevant
Present Returns (minus youth & draft assets) = Not relevant

From Haslem's initial comments when he took the podium announcing the firings of Farmer & Pettine and promoting Sashi, what was the general tone regarding the future of the team? Something like this will take time or a long-term approach...something to that effect. Agree or disagree with the approach, that's essentially the gist of it.

Back to it being a money thing...Since Haslem took over he's paid out the following contract in guaranteed money:

Joe Haden: $23M- given after a 4 win year
Paul Kruger: $20M- given after a 5 win year
Alex Mack: $18M- given after a 4 win year
Karlos Dansby: $14M- given after a 4 win year
Des Bryant:$12M- given after a 5 win year
Donte Whitner $11M- given after a 4 win year
Tramon Williams: $10M
Dwayne Bowe:$9M

Maybe I'm missing a couple but that totals to $117M guaranteed to 8 players. Six of them aren't even on the roster, assuming Bryant's days are done!! In three years, that's rather significant chunk of change. I don't think Haslem is cheap and doesn't want to pay players.

Not to forget the $5M renovation in Berea in 2013 AND the most recent $15M renovation completed over the summer. But yeah, it all about money. Again, why I laugh.

I think it's all a matter of starting over (almost completely from scratch) and trying to build upward from here. There is no guarantee that this will work, but the Andy Lee deal is essentially the poster child for what this regime has set out to achieve. Liking or not liking the approach, they've at least been consistent about it.

If you look at the replay after he slacked off, Jackson was in his face big time. Maybe that's the reason. That and maybe an ageing vet who costs a lot?

I'm not trying to agitate at all. He set team records last season at his position, and punting was not a worry. Now, it could be. And yes, I remember Shanky McFrost quite well.

I guess a few things - some I mentioned in earlier post:

- Rank in order of importance each position on the team. Where does the punter fall?

- If the team is going to be bad this year - it could be argued that having an elite punter would be a big deal. It could also be argued that at the end of a crappy losing season, having a 4th round draft pick in 2018 is of more comfort and assistance to the team than the warm fuzzy feeling of knowing we had a punter go to the pro-bowl.

- I'll add, the decision is not made in vacuum without ANY regard to money and salary. Salary and cap space are going to be a part of all decisions to some extent. And for a young, rebuilding team that is looking to the future 2017 and probably 2018 before we're planning to be compete for a play off spot - the $3 million probably did factor into the equation and it makes the trade even more right.

j/c

Who were the last 10 punters to participate in the Superbowl?

...just saying *shrug*

Yes, good punters have played in the Super Bowl. I just don't ever remember thinking "if only they had a better punter" afterwards.

That's not to say that hidden yardage doesn't matter...but, by the time we're good enough for it to really matter for us, he probably wouldn't have been with the team anyway.

When you can't win the argument, resort to personal attacks. That's all guys like you 888 got.

And maybe that is the problem in a nutshell. Teams that go to the superbowl are very good. Very good teams don't get wound up about how great, good, average etc their punter is. . . However, on a crappy rebuilding Browns team where Lee was one of the best on the team, it's a huge issue and scandal worthy of PAGES of debate.

Another angle - Just imagine the praise and adoration the Patriots would get if they traded away a punter for a 4th round pick !!! I can see it now - pages and pages of articles explaining this is exactly what makes the Patriots a dynasty.

Seriously? YOU are saying this?!

j/c

I don't have a problem with the trade even if he hadn't pulled that stunt last Friday. He's already 34 years old and even when/if we get this team turned around he won't likely be here anyways plus with the high salary he makes for a punter he was expendable. Personally I would have traded him just for what he did in the Buccs game. You practice like you play.

We shouldnt need to rely on a punter so much, geesh. We traded an older punter for a 4th round pick. Seems like a decent deal to me.

It is extremely high for a punter. When I saw he was traded I assumed 6th rounder.

j/c

Andy Lee is a great punter, he's going to be missed. However, he's 34, and we received a 4th round pick for him. Also, we picked up a young, upcoming punter for a 7th round pick. That's a deal that is hard to pass up. Emotionally, I initially didn't like the trade. Now, logically, I can't argue with it.

I'm completely torn about this thread.... on one hand, we got a 4th for a punter. On the other, it isn't until 2018. Then again, Andy Lee was one of our only consistent performers.... but, then again, people are wallowing over losing our freaking punter. Our. Punter. How bad have we gotten that losing the punter is cause for so much distress??!


Someone call Peyton Manning, I need a "stupid kicker" soundbite from him.

If you agree that field position is important, then it might be a little easier to understand why this trade grinds some of us. We traded him for a guy that's a sophomore or freshman in college right now. 2018 is two seasons from now.

We did get a different punter as part of the trade, too. He'll probably get plenty of work this week. Let's see how he looks.

Well, 2018 gives us plenty of time to continue filtering through the bad players. Hopefully by then, we'll not have as many glaring and gaping holes to fill. Hopefully by then, we'll have a somewhat established base of very young players. Hopefully by then, we'll see alot of young player development and improvement. Hopefully by then, ah who is in the business of "hope" these days?

What part of the recent moves has to do with Hue/the staff/the FO seeing the GLARING holes during the TB game?

Maybe they just said, "yeah, this is a bigger dumpster fire than we realized ... torch it all"

I don't get why people are flipping out about this. He's a punter. We're a 4-12 team, with or without him. If we're a team that's 8-8 with a chance for a playoff spot, then yeah, we probably keep him. But we just got a 4th round pick for something that's a luxury at best. That's some the the highest value for a punter you're ever going to see.

Are people really going to be that miffed that we can't pin a team inside the 20 when the defense is just going to roll over and let the other team score anyway?

Ask and it will be given to you. Also, it was "idiot kicker".

I fully understand the importance of field position.
I also fully understand that punting is the fallback, last-resort option for affecting field position. The best ways of controlling and affecting field position is with your offense and defense.

The only thing that makes this seem dire is the fact that it was all we really had left in terms of being able to have any hope of affecting field position, at all, and it was apparent that our game plan for 2016 was to tire the opponent by making them drive the field. Now, as was suggested earlier, our plan is to give them shorter fields so that our O gets back out there quicker.

It really shows the state of our team when there is so much consternation over trading a kicker, and getting the high pick that we did.

Vers has a point, except that I really don't think this is about effort at all. The price paid is the highest in 20 years, or something. What would you all have said if you learned we turned this deal down?? Chew on that one.


No, this had nothing to do with effort. To Vers's point, several others would've gotten gone before Andy. The Panthers gave us an offer we just couldn't pass on, so we didn't pass on it.

That's about all there is to it, I suppose. He wasn't a blue-chip player and he wasn't going to make a difference in the bottom line this season (or next), so when you get a deal that strong shoved under your nose, you snap it up.

What would of everyone said if we drafted a punter in the 4th round?

Also, if anyone is still worried about the effects of a punter on a team, look at the the top 10 punters in any of the major categories (Gross, Net, Inside the 10)

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/punting/sort/grossAvgPuntYards

There are no more than 3 punters from playoff teams in any one of those categories in the top 10.

Wouldn't it be something if the guy we got back wound up having a better year than Lee?

I mentioned it, said it wasn't a big deal to me.. still isn't. Evidently it is to Hue and the FO.. either that or there is something else going on here.

Anyone else find these stats somewhat revealing?

I don't think the non tackle really had any bearing on this trade, I think they got an offer for a 4th round pick and ran with it as soon as the words left the Panthers mouth. I think this was a no brainer. Like it was said ExclDawg, what would everyones reaction be if we spent a 4th round pick on a punter?

He'll probably get more opportunities.

Given the amount of holes we have, the lack of depth across the board and etc if we burned a 4th rounder on a kicker of any sorts... I'd have to take five or so minutes to calm down before opening my mouth lol.

Practice Makes Perfect.

A music teacher I worked with at one time said, "Practice makes Permanent".

I guess it depends on how much you value the kicking game. I get that a lot of fans, announcers, and media members like to make fun of kickers and don't seem to respect how important the kicking game and special teams actually are, but I believe that most coaches don't agree w/the rest of you.

Interesting thing Excl found there. Food for thought, I might re-examine my stated opinion.

When you have an established culture you can give a punter a pass, perhaps. When you're trying to establish a culture you've got to hold everyone accountable. I think Hue on the sideline was him holding Lee acountable, though. I think the front office just saw more future value for us in the trade offer. Up and coming punter and 4th rounder vs. aging good veteran punter. In 3 years, the prior will probably be more valuable to a team. Hopefully this means we will actually give the plan at least that long to come together.

The punter wasn't traded because he failed to hustle. The punter was traded because we were offered a fourth round pick for a punter.

Yeah, except that the Browns haven't done that.

Josh Gordon has been suspended for longer than he has played, yet he shows up overweight. I mean......how freaking lame is that?


Gilber was a first round pick who said he would rather sleep than study. Then, he gets a start in preseason and wusses out on several tackles. How in the heck is a punter supposed to be a better tackler than your corner?

Sorry guys........I ain't buying this stuff.

Thank you, Dee.