Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

Ted Ginn joins the Panthers on a one-year deal


  • Please log in to reply
384 replies to this topic

#261 koolkatluke

koolkatluke

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,847
  • Reputation: 474
  • LocationNonya
HUDDLER

Posted 22 March 2013 - 05:41 PM

Santana Moss 41 receptions, 573 yards and 8TDs > LaFell's 44, 677, and 4 (and he's not even a starter).
Pierre Garcon who had a bad foot had numbers similar to LaFell, 44, 633 and 4.
The Leonard Hankerson, WR extraordinaire (sarcasm), even put up 38, 543 and 3 on 19 less targets.

Blame it on the read option all you want. That's really the only argument that you can cling onto at this point,. LaFell really had the the same or less impact of an old guy who was not a starter, and a guy on a bad foot can equal the production of your prized WR2. He was a little better than another guy who was not a starter, but who arguably was supposed to have his break out year also, but turned out to be a mediocre WR just like LaFell. Like I said, the stats really just prove what I've been saying all along. Moreover, if I had film of LaFell, I would have to bring my pillow because I'd probably fall asleep. It would be named The Disappearing Man.

Regarding Olsen and Tolbert, I already answered it, but let me make it simple: Good players rise to the occasion, so LaFell is not going to get a pass because he doesn't warrant more attention because of his inability to get open and make a great impact upon the game. Oh, he is a mediocre WR whose job is to catch the ball, but because he doesn't do his job as effectively as more than a few others, he loses touches to the TE and the FB. OK.

Smith's numbers were still decent, notwithstanding the fact that LaFell couldn't break out and command the attention of defenses.


Again those are not great numbers. That is still the same area as Lafell and Smith were. So you just made my point. The offense didn't give many opportunities for Smith or Lafell to put up numbers.

Smith numbers were well below his avg. He didn't score his 1st TD until half way thru the season. You're full of it lying to yourself like that to downgrade lafell.

Dude I understand you don't like the guy but don't deny the facts.

#262 h0llywood

h0llywood

    I HATE LUKE KUECHLY!

  • Joined: 04-September 12
  • posts: 2,956
  • Reputation: 1,641
  • LocationPasadena, CA
SUPPORTER

Posted 22 March 2013 - 05:45 PM

So huge potential needs to be developed a bit more mentally?

I'm just reading his history and he was a bust at Miami and traded for a 5th. Then largely a bust in SF.

Seems like a failed project we are taking one more stab at. Hopefully I am wrong.


I can't really defend him from being called a bust but i have hope he can be salvaged. Even if he never becomes a WR and remains a threat on ST, it's already a huge upgrade to what we currently have on ST.

His Rookie season, in fairness to Ginn, the QB he received the most passes from was Leo Clemon. To be honest, I cannot actually say I know who the hell he is. The leading receiver on the team in 2007 was Marty Booker with 556 yards.

Chad Pennington came around in 2008 and threw for 3,600 yards that year. Ginn actually led the team that season with 790 yards.

His first year in SF, he was brought in primarily for ST and he played behind Crabtree, Morgan and Davis. Having a bad Alex Smith and Troy Smith throw the ball didn't help either.

Maybe having #89 mentoring him and Cam throwing to him will make him a legit #3 WR. I dunno. But as I said, ST value is great.

#263 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • Joined: 16-March 09
  • posts: 18,501
  • Reputation: 3,467
SUPPORTER

Posted 22 March 2013 - 06:04 PM

I can't really defend him from being called a bust but i have hope he can be salvaged. Even if he never becomes a WR and remains a threat on ST, it's already a huge upgrade to what we currently have on ST.

His Rookie season, in fairness to Ginn, the QB he received the most passes from was Leo Clemon. To be honest, I cannot actually say I know who the hell he is. The leading receiver on the team in 2007 was Marty Booker with 556 yards.

Chad Pennington came around in 2008 and threw for 3,600 yards that year. Ginn actually led the team that season with 790 yards.

His first year in SF, he was brought in primarily for ST and he played behind Crabtree, Morgan and Davis. Having a bad Alex Smith and Troy Smith throw the ball didn't help either.

Maybe having #89 mentoring him and Cam throwing to him will make him a legit #3 WR. I dunno. But as I said, ST value is great.


cool

#264 carolina-chuck

carolina-chuck

    HORNETS 2014

  • Joined: 11-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,678
  • Reputation: 2,761
  • LocationKurby
HUDDLER

Posted 22 March 2013 - 06:35 PM

Right now Pilares is the #3. Ginn most likely is #4


I'm gonna shoot my brain out. Pilares may not even make the 53 man squad at the end of the day.

#265 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 13-June 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,675
  • Reputation: 1,122
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC
HUDDLER

Posted 22 March 2013 - 07:06 PM

For our needs, Lafell fits nicely. Can he be upgraded? Sure he can. But it ain't as easy as some would have you believe.

#266 Whitaker 24

Whitaker 24

    Member

  • Joined: 12-January 09
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 145
  • Reputation: 39
HUDDLER

Posted 22 March 2013 - 07:26 PM

Guys why only a one year deal? Why not 2 if possible he is only 27 and proven.

#267 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: -28,897
  • Reputation: 7,795
Moderators

Posted 22 March 2013 - 07:40 PM

Guys why only a one year deal? Why not 2 if possible he is only 27 and proven.

hardly anyone is getting more than one year this year. no reason to give out more. also no money, but that's another story.

most FAs the next couple years are only going to be getting cheap one year deals. if they work out, give them another one. if they don't, you aren't stuck with a contract/player you don't want. surplus of players on the market and an unexpected flat cap and very little money to go around makes it the buyers market it is.

#268 Guest_FredLane4Ever_*

Guest_FredLane4Ever_*
Guests

Posted 22 March 2013 - 07:58 PM

PJ HAIRSTON IS THE MAN

#269 Guest_FredLane4Ever_*

Guest_FredLane4Ever_*
Guests

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:12 PM

Once again PJ HAIRSTON IS THE MAN

#270 top dawg

top dawg

    The Creative Cat

  • Joined: 11-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 8,317
  • Reputation: 2,933
  • LocationWITHIN MY MIND'S EYE
HUDDLER

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:24 PM

Again those are not great numbers. That is still the same area as Lafell and Smith were. So you just made my point. The offense didn't give many opportunities for Smith or Lafell to put up numbers.

Smith numbers were well below his avg. He didn't score his 1st TD until half way thru the season. You're full of it lying to yourself like that to downgrade lafell.

Dude I understand you don't like the guy but don't deny the facts.


Whatever. LaFell's numbers prove my point, as does our need for another legitimate WR---the same need that we have had ever since Muhammad went to the Windy City. I am not the one who makes the dude more than he is every offseason like clockwork. I don't dislike Lafell I just see the reality for what it is: we need, and have needed, a whole lot more at WR (particularly our merry band of 2s over the last 5 years, and we are hopefully going to get it.

And, furthermore, Smitty's numbers were actually above/near his career average when you take the last eight years into account (which obviously make for better stats overall than just looking at his entire career).


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users