Satele could be first of many casualties in Miami

As long as we never get rid of the cheerleaders

 

Many casualties that will garnish very low draft picks. If any.

 

Okay, I'll say it.

Joey Porter?

His value will never be higher than it is right now.

Just saying

 

*cough* Ted Ginn Jr *cough*

 

A Buckeye guy saying Ginn?

 

If we where to trade him, Realistically what would you exspect in return? I would think a 2nd or at the very least a 3rd.

If we did trade him, I wouldn't know how I would feel about it until after the draft...

 

You're right about that.


But the thing is, can we afford to lose him?

We have **** for depth and no passrush aside from him. I know we all have high hopes for Wake, but he's still only one LB IF he turns out to be a monster.

We just don't have enough strength on D to move Porter this year, IMO.

 

We could keep Roth where he is for this season and draft a guy like Sintim, Cushing or English.

I'm not sure what exactly Porter would bring back in return, but I couldn't imagine that it would be anything higher than a 3rd unless a team was really desperate and suffered an injury right before the season like Washington did.

I've never been a big Porter fan, so maybe this is just wishful thinking on my part.

 

Maybe I am misunderstanding the article but is it claiming that Fins should trade away their talent have now (or as many of the 12 unrestricted 2010 FAs as possible) for "possible" future talent through the draft? If that is the case then that doesn't make a lot of sense to me as it seems to make more sense to keep your talent and build depth behind it (ie replacing older players with drafted players once the older players retire or lose a step but not trade them first). The article's plan seems to be such a reach, as the Satele trade just seems to be a system thing and it seems like they are reading too much into things. I think all teams build for the future but they also want to win now (keep the flow of money coming in) and they do that by getting talent and keeping talent then backing that talent up every year through FA and the draft. Once again maybe I am misunderstanding the article

 

I like Porter, but I don't think anybody other than Chad Henne and Jake Long are safe.

 

I don't ever want to see Roth on the field during passing situations. At least not without dramatic improvement. The thought of depending on him for pressure is scary, to say the least.


Even if we did trade Porter and draft a Sintim, Cushing, or English, who's to say they won't become a Vernon Gholston for at least their first season. If that happens, say hello to 4-12.

Love him or hate him, Porter gets the job done. And on this defense, he's the only one that can bring consistant pressure. It'd be hard to say that he isn't our best player on D.

Last year, our D barely hung on in many situations as it is. Take away Porter, yikes.

 

Satele was destined to back up status.
Beck and Wilford are also back ups.
Big difference between these guys and a guy like Joey Porter.
If this line of thinking is to be believed then we are not looking to trade away starters.
We are looking to trade away players who aren't good enough to start. But I don't see them looking to just up and trade away any and everyone just for the sake of getting some mid round draft pick.

 

Right,

thats something that rebuilding teams do in their first year.

We're definitely into much more of a re-tooling and tweaking process.

 

He doesn't fit the mold of a team Parcells likes to build around.

Honestly I'd say late 2nd or 3rd for Ginn. But with the recent trades a 4th would not surprise me.

 

Right, but does anyone here really expect him to have another season like last year? I think if you factor in a tougher schedule next season, Porter's age and his performance last year you have to think about selling high and moving him for the right return. Adding an extra pick would allow you to draft another pass rusher early.

I don't think Miami is going to move him, but they should think about it if they really believe what is in that article.

 

I think some people remember what happen with JT (DPY one year, gone the next) and get concerned that Porter could just fall off the face of the earth as well.

It could happen, but it's not likely IMO. Sure, he'll slow down at some point. But, a freefall like JT isn't likely.

 

Ginn is the perfect example of a monumental blunder in which we have too much invested to cut loose now. Remember the outcry when Cam stepped up to the podium and read out his name? First impressions are right more often than they are wrong. Keyshawn is right -- he is not an elite talent. He is not even a #1 receiver. What we have to hope for is that he improves into a solid #2 receiver and a really good kick returner so that the 9th overall pick we invested in him is only slightly wasted. That is still possible. I don't see us giving up on him now and letting him go for a 3rd or a 4th.

Wilford? He doesn't even dress. He is a walking cap hit. Hopeless. Same rationale, though. Better to see if we can salvage something than to take the cap hit.

Beck may actually show something if Penny and Henne both get hurt. No sense letting him go for nothing, or next to nothing. Someone has to be the #3 QB.

Good luck in San Diego, Samson.

 

If we could get a second I would trade Porter in a heartbeat.

I'd then proceed to pick up H. Nicks, Connor Barwin, Paul Kruger and Clint Sintim in the first two rounds.

Between Cam Wake, Connor Barwin, Paul Kruger and Clint Sintim SOMEONE would emerge as a decent pass rusher. I also try one of them inside, to try to generate a little pass rush up the middle.

And, guess what? Those players would be around for the next seven to ten years, unlike Porter.

I am willing to take a step backwards by losing Porter's production next year. Porter has had knee issues, is aging, and is already wearing down at the end of seasons. He has two or three years of declining production left, tops, imo.

Let's plan for the next ten years, not the next ten months.

 

You will never get value for Porter as high as you could this offseason.

No way he tops his sack totals from last year. And I am not a Joey hater. In fact, in September I was predicting a 16 sack season for Porter when everyone was telling me I was crazy.

I just do not think he can duplicate it.

1) More teams will gameplan him and double him this year.

2) I doubt he is lucky enough to remain free of knee issues for a second straight year.

3) His stamina wore out late last season, and I expect that each year, as he ages, he'll hit a wall sooner and sooner.

Fact is, most great OLBs are declining by Joey's age. Why hang on to a declining great player if you can get great value for him and perhaps draft one who will help you for the next decade.

Or maybe we use the pick we get for Porter to help us acquire a player like Anquan Boldin.

 

Remember, Rule #1 When Parcells is in the house, no one is safe!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

That's why keeping him would be a huge advantage for whoever else is at OLB with him. Having a guy like JP draw a double team every play will sure as hell help Wake, or whoever else we draft.

I just don't see any teams stepping up to give us a high pick for Porter and his monster contract. Mostly, for the other reasons you already stated.


The other thing is veteran leadership. Any young team needs a guy like Porter to step up and take the leader roll on D. Who would we have to do that if he's gone? We just cut Vonnie and the only other vet I can really think of is Ferguson.

I'm not ready to turn that role over to Channing Crowder.

 

I agree 100% with everything you said my friend. Everything. For better or worse, I think we are just stuck with certain players. For now at least.

 

guess you dont like to win..

 

and you would accept a 3rd or 4th for Ginn?

lmao, thats just insane.

 

If Joey isn't able to duplicate last years production, if our team isn't able to duplicate last years production with a tougher schedule, is winning and making it to the playoffs a realistic possibility? Porter isn't going to get better, he's at the point in his career where he's going to start declining and we saw a glimpse of that towards the end of last year.

As someone else pointed out, do we want to focus on the next 10 years or the next 10 months? I'd rather win for the next 10 years.

 

He does as a returner and slot WR, just not as a 1-2 guy.

 

even if Porter has half the season he had last year, we still will win more games with him then without him.

and next 10 years huh? why could we not do both? is a losing season worth a mid round pick? no thanks, ill take the next 10 months. i dont think trading Porter for a mid round pick is going to determine whether we win for the next 10 years or not.


If thats the plan, guess we better trade Will Allen, Bell, Ayodele, Jason Ferguson, Penny, Ricky, David Martin, etc....

 

The cheerleaders are already a perennial success, I'm sure they won't mess with a winning formula!

 

Having two first round picks in Ginn and Allen is a clear indicator of how this team has stumbled over the last few years prior to Parcells and company.
Jake Long had an immediate impact with the Dolphins and that is what should be the formost thing considered when making that choice. I am not slamming Allen and Ginn but its obvious they didn't have the impact you should have in a first round choice.
I don't think Parcells, Ireland and Sparano see the roster from the same perspective as most of us see it. They not only consider what the player offers to the team in the present, but what they offer to the team a year or more down the road. We let personnel sentiment effect our view of what the player means to the team and the trifecta do it the right way. Strictly as a business and what the players real value is to the team. I still remember Parcells statement, that there wasn't any talent on this team and I think he still sees it that way for the majority of Miami's roster but that is JMO.

 

Exactly, there's no reason why we can't in fact do both.
Just my own thoughts.....but I think it's easy to fall into looking at things the way they used to be. In other words, in the past we couldn't necessarily rely on our FO to replace/restock competently.
Too many Eddie Moore's and Ray Lucas's.
I'm okay with the Porter's and Ferguson's and Pennington's because I know when the time comes we will see a competent replacement step in.

 

That's a matter of opinion and not really the point, the point is that we would be taking a step back by trading Porter and taking a step forward by adding a younger piece to the puzzle who will be here far longer than Porter. Porter may only be a 2-3 year player and a young player could be here for the next 10. If we have a tougher schedule and Porter only has half as good a year like you say, do you really think that playoffs are an option, and if they aren't, does it really matter if Porter is there or not?

Why not find a younger piece?

Noone said we couldn't, but keeping the conversation in context of the sentiment in that article, the Phins may feel that it makes more sense to build long term and not get carried away with thinking that we are already a contender.

You speak as if Joey is irreplaceable and he isn't. Yes he did well last year, but he also fizzled towards the end and he has a history of injury concerns. Losing him during the season due to injury would hurt because there wouldn't be a legitimate replacement for him, but if we were to draft a guy like Sintim he would be put into that role from day one. That's alot different than having to shift a backup into that spot.

So losing a vet would hurt temporarily, but the long term strategy would mean that we would be strong at that position for a long time, which is the whole point of the thought process in that article. Whether the Dolphins brass really feels that way, I don't know. But you're talking to a guy who favors the idea of rebuilding and not retooling (what you're proposing), a guy like Porter is expendable if we can draft a replacement IMO.

That's a firesale and not what the article was talking about. What I meant was a strategic move, the selling off a high priced FA at the height of his market value knowing that he wasn't likely to match his production from the year prior and then drafting his replacement this year. A firesale of the magnitude that you just described would leave us with too many holes and wouldn't bring back decent value.

 

Trading Beck would make good sense and dollars, instead of paying millions for a third string guy we could trade him for a 4th or 5th round and clear some room up under the salary cap.
I also believe Ted Ginn should be shopped around he has given this team down side in trade value so if a team is dumb enough to offer a 3rd pick they should jump on it, then he will have finally cleaned up the mess Cameron made.

 

I hear ya. I saw this on another board recently. Assuming it's correct (and I haven't verified each/every entry), it's a pretty sobering review of the '07 draft:

Ted Ginn, WR - Rostered (starter)
John Beck, QB - Rostered (3rd string)
Samson Satele, C - Traded
Lorenzo Booker, RB - Traded
Paul Soliai, DT - Rostered (back up)
Reagan Mauia, FB - Cut
Drew Mormino, C - Cut
Kelvin Smith, LB - Cut
Brandon Fields, PK - Rostered
Abraham Wright, DE/OLB - Cut

I think a blindfolded chimp throwing darts (at the draft board) could've done a better job!

 

no it doesn't this isn't madden

 

First of all, could we all be respectful and not exagerrate, get extreme and unreasonable when characterizing one another's positions?

The hyperbole doesn;t help us have a respectful discussion. If someone suggests a trade, I think it's unfair to characterize them as zealously wanting to get rid of all the players on the roster. They just suggested trading one player.

Disagreeing with that is fine, but let's stick to what's actually being discussed so we can all learn from each other's opinions on this.

I sincerely want to discuss if trading Porter is a poor idea or not.

Okay, moving on... I wanted to reply to slick:

I think you make some good points here, slick. I agree with most of them, but, on balance, I am willing to live with these evils in order to continue building a deep, strong foundation of talent that will last here.

 

Arguing that we are sunk without Porter sound a lot like what people argued when we moved Jason Taylor.

I don;t know about you, but I am very happy we have Chad Henne (whom we selcted with the second round pick we got from Washington) now instead of Jason Taylor.

Trading Porter could reap similar rewards.