Brandon Lloyd
 

I assume you guys have seen the Post article from this morning indicating that the Skins are interested in Brandon Lloyd. I was just interested in hearing thoughts because I'd expect reactions to be mixed, like mine is.

On one hand, I think he's a promising young receiver who's big enough, runs good routes, and has a knack for making plays. On the other hand, we'd have to give up a pick to get this guy. The 49ers have tendered him at a level requiring a 1st rounder as compensation. We don't have a 1st rounder, but teams often consider other compensation packages, and the 49ers might do the same.

So what is this guy worth? Would you give a pick for him, say our 2nd rounder? Is he that much better than David Givens or Isaac Bruce, or any other WR you might prefer?

Part of me is excited by his potential, and the other part of me says it just doesn't make logical sense to give up a high pick for this guy when there are other FAs on the market. Thoughts?

[url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/10/AR2006031000023.html"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/10/AR2006031000023.html[/url]

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

Age is a major factor. They could sign this guy to at least a 5 year deal. Plus we would be getting him in his prime. No doubt Bruce and Givens are great too. But this would be amazing, if we picked him up. Think of it this way: if there arent any good receivers available in the second round and thats what we are trying to get, then trading our pick for Lloyd would make perfect sense.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

No way I'd spend a 2nd rounder on him. He's the type of guy that follows a phenominal catch up with two easy drops. He's just too inconsistent. He does have great potential, but I just don't see him as the answer to our problems at WR. To me, it'd be a coin flip between making Lloyd the #2 or Patten the #2. A guy like Givens or Bruce though, to me, are clearly solid #2 WRs over Patten (or Lloyd). I think we'd be better off getting a solid #2 or even keeping Patten as our #2 and getting a guy like Jurivicious as a #3 (possession and redzone). And, we wouldn't have to sacrifice one of the very few picks we have in my scenario. Just doesn't make sense to me have to give up so much for a Lloyd when you can get Bruce, Givens or Jurivicious for free.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]I assume you guys have seen the Post article from this morning indicating that the Skins are interested in Brandon Lloyd. I was just interested in hearing thoughts because I'd expect reactions to be mixed, like mine is.

On one hand, I think he's a promising young receiver who's big enough, runs good routes, and has a knack for making plays. On the other hand, we'd have to give up a pick to get this guy. The 49ers have tendered him at a level requiring a 1st rounder as compensation. We don't have a 1st rounder, but teams often consider other compensation packages, and the 49ers might do the same.

So what is this guy worth? Would you give a pick for him, say our 2nd rounder? Is he that much better than David Givens or Isaac Bruce, or any other WR you might prefer?

Part of me is excited by his potential, and the other part of me says it just doesn't make logical sense to give up a high pick for this guy when there are other FAs on the market. Thoughts?

[url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/10/AR2006031000023.html"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/10/AR2006031000023.html[/url][/QUOTE]

and on the 3rd hand, ive heard that he drops more balls than 50/50.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

Well he is certainly worth a 2nd rounder. The chances of finding a WR like LLoyd in the 2nd is low so he is worth it. The question is whether we have a more pressing need with that 2nd pick. I'd say no. We only need to replace Arrington on defense but we absolutly need a 2nd WR. If the package isn't much more than a 2nd then I am all for it as long as someon can atest that Lloyd isn't going to be an issue in terms of attitude.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

I think he could very well be worth it. He's what 24 yrs old, so there's upside as far as development goes. I still remember a couple of catches he made against us last year.

I really think it's difficult to quantify his worth, much like it was with Santana. Hindsight, Santana was a steal - at least so far. But when you look at the current market for WRs and the dollars they will command, etc., he could very well end up being a bargain.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

On the other hand though, if this is the guy they really want, this is the guy they are gonna get.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

See, I actually think we do have more pressing needs for our 2nd round pick. If we let Harris go, who is our nickleback? I'd much rather grab a promising CB in the 2nd round and address our #2 WR through free agency. We could also stand to add some depth along the D-Line (perhaps a pass rushing DE), and it might not be a bad idea to add some depth at safety (there really is a chance that ST might not be around next year). If there weren't any good options available via free agency, I might agree with spending the pick, but I don't like paying an unnecessary price for an unproven commodity.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

I saw there are actually a decent amount of above average tackles available. I'd love us to pick up one or two of these guys.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

Brandon freakin' Lloyd. I like the idea of going after a younger #2 receiver (as opposed to the older veteran route), but if we're targeting restricted free agents, take a run at Nate Burleson. We'd only have to compensate the Vikings with a 3rd round pick and he'd probably cost less in salary than Lloyd. Both receivers are young with good potential. They have similar size. Injuries killed Burleson's season last year and a team going after him is buying low while his stock is down.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

DTs or OTs, MC?

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

DTs.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

There was this guy from the Ravens who expected the Skins to give him a call.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

Is there anything about Lloyd that people like more than Givens? To me, they're similar age, size, potential, numbers.......except that Givens is more consistent and drops less balls. So why not target him without giving up a draft pick instead of Lloyd?

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]DTs.[/QUOTE]

I'm with you then.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

With Moss out of the picture, Burleson put up some pretty solid numbers in '04. You don't think Burleson's gonna cost more than Lloyd?

Even with his injury, Burleson has put up as much yardage (1334) and TD's (10) as Lloyd has (1298yd, 11TD) in the past two seasons.

I can't see us getting him cheaper than Lloyd.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=PSUSkinsFan21]Is there anything about Lloyd that people like more than Givens? To me, they're similar age, size, potential, numbers.......except that Givens is more consistent and drops less balls. So why not target him and give up no draft picks instead of Lloyd?[/QUOTE]

To be fair, look who's throwing to each receiver. Is Givens really that good? Is Lloyd really that bad?

And what the hell do we do with Patten?

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=dgack]To be fair, look who's throwing to each receiver. Is Givens really that good? Is Lloyd really that bad?

And what the hell do we do with Patten?[/QUOTE]

True, but if there is one thing we all know about Brady, he spreads the ball around perhaps better than anyone else in the league. On another team, being the solid #2 guy, I really don't see why Givens wouldn't be as good, if not better than Lloyd.

As for Patten, that problem remains regardless of whether we would pick up Givens or Lloyd.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=PSUSkinsFan21]True, but if there is one thing we all know about Brady, he spreads the ball around perhaps better than anyone else in the league. On another team, being the solid #2 guy, I really don't see why Givens wouldn't be as good, if not better than Lloyd.

As for Patten, that problem remains regardless of whether we would pick up Givens or Lloyd.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I wasn't comparing stats there, just saying that being Tom Brady's WR1/2 is a lot easier job than being WR1 on the Niners (no matter who's throwing the ball).

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=dgack]Yeah, I wasn't comparing stats there, just saying that being Tom Brady's WR1/2 is a lot easier job than being WR1 on the Niners (no matter who's throwing the ball).[/QUOTE]

Certainly can't argue with that.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=dgack]With Moss out of the picture, Burleson put up some pretty solid numbers in '04. You don't think Burleson's gonna cost more than Lloyd?

Even with his injury, Burleson has put up as much yardage (1334) and TD's (10) as Lloyd has (1298yd, 11TD) in the past two seasons.

I can't see us getting him cheaper than Lloyd.[/QUOTE]

The 49er's made a much better tender offer to Lloyd (about $1.55 million) than the Vikings gave to Burleson (about $712,000). This doesn't necessarily equate to salary if either player signs with another team, but it gives you an idea of how that player is valued by the team and where you'd have to start in order to make a run at them. Burleson also had such a bad year last year that I think he fell off the radar for some teams.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=Elfsdad]The 49er's made a much better tender offer to Lloyd (about $1.55 million) than the Vikings gave to Burleson (about $712,000). This doesn't necessarily equate to salary if either player signs with another team, but it gives you an idea of how that player is valued by the team and where you'd have to start in order to make a run at them. Burleson also had such a bad year last year that I think he fell off the radar for some teams.[/QUOTE]

Man, it's no wonder the Vikings are always circling the bowl!

Thanks for the tender offer numbers, I hadn't seen those. I always use the NFLPA player database for salary info but with all the intricacies and loopholes of NFL contracts, it's hard to actually tell how much a guy is getting paid.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

I'm actually more intrigued by some of the other names brought up in this article:

LB/DE: Andre Carter - versatile player who can get after the QB.

DT: Maake Kemoeatu - this guy is a monster DT (6-5, 350) who could really plug up the middle and free up Griffin.

If we grabbed Carter, Kemoeatu and Lloyd, that would be a hell of a start to the offseason!

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

I was interested in Carter myself. He wouldn't command a high price and would be a great replacement to LaVar since he plays LB and could be used at DE.

I THINK I'd pass on Lloyd. I think there are better options for less $$$.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

I am a little mixed. I think we could use the second round pick to help our secondary, but if they are willing to send it to the 49ers for Lloyd, then they obviously have a plan regarding adding CB or safety help. I think I would be alot better move than signing Bruce, or Randel EL. He is only 24, and is going into his prime in the next year or two. Like someone said earlier we can sign him to a long term deal, 4 or 5 years. Might be a pretty good move. 2nd round pick would be 22 years old and not ready to play in a year or two anyway.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

The problem with Burleson is that he is a RFA. I know Lloyd is too, but the Vikes probably have the most salary cap play to work with. I wouldn't look for Burleson to be going anywhere. I can't say the same for Culpepper though.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I'm actually more intrigued by some of the other names brought up in this article:

LB/DE: Andre Carter - versatile player who can get after the QB.

DT: Maake Kemoeatu - this guy is a monster DT (6-5, 350) who could really plug up the middle and free up Griffin.

If we grabbed Carter, Kemoeatu and Lloyd, that would be a hell of a start to the offseason![/QUOTE]

I've been wanting Carter for a while now, but some people have been saying he's better suited for a 3-4 apparently

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

ive heard that too, but i just dont see how someone can be better suited for a 3-4. i mean if you can tackle, you can tackle.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]I've been wanting Carter for a while now, but some people have been saying he's better suited for a 3-4 apparently[/QUOTE]

GW does run it now and then.

Carter is a very versatile player which I think GW loves. We could line him up at DE in the 4-3 and 46, and LB in the 3-4.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

AND better yet, he won't bitch about it.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

espn.com just reported that Bruce re-signed w/the Rams for 3 yrs. 15 mil

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

One geezer off the table.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

Bruce was an interesting name but it's good to see us steering clear of the 30+ crowd of players.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]AND better yet, he won't bitch about it.[/QUOTE]

An exceptionally under valued trait this time of year.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

Exactly. If I were to have a wish list of the WR we could possibly sign, Koren Robinson and Joe Jurevicious would be on the top. Givens a close second.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

Lloyd would complement moss nicely

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

I'd like us to look at Antonio Bryant as well. I don't think he's quite the malcontent he's been made out to be.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

I agree. He'd be Miss Congeniality of my list.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

He sounds too much of what we already have at WR (size). We need a taller receiver to complment Moss and Patten.

Re: Brandon Lloyd
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]I'd like us to look at Antonio Bryant as well. I don't think he's quite the malcontent he's been made out to be.[/QUOTE]

He may not be but I think his character may still a concern to someone like Gibbs.

Sounds like we may be going after another smallish/speedy type though, obviously Gibbs doesn't buy into this [size=6]BIG[/size] WR thing.