Crumpler cut

We need another receiving option opposite Smith. Crumpler certainly upgrades that, and means that a higher monetary position, WR, can be filled more consistently with a role player.
King isn't bad, but he's a cheap option. His blocking wasn't what I hoped, and he could be more consistent. He can improve with another year, but he's not impact and that's what we're looking for.

 

Not substantially, no. King caught 46 balls for 406 yards. Crumpler caught 42 for 444. Alge isn't the player he used to be, and Abusive made a good point about how he benefited from Vick breaking down defenses. Crumpler isn't and never has been someone like Tony Gonzalez, and without that, I don't see the point in spending big on a pass catching tight end. King is solid, and if anything we need a better blocker to pair with him at that position.

 

You could argue the opposite about how good he could be if he had competent quarterbacking. Or a receiver threat around him. Age can be concerning, but he's only 30. The knee is on everyone's lips, but he missed 4 games in 5 years.
He's not a must-have, but he does significantly upgrade us.

Fair point about RG. We really need an upgrade at one line spot, and that'll make me feel better about standing pat (v/s getting young and mistake-prone) at OT.

Too bad it's such an awful year top-end for G - it'd probably be smarter to draft a sure-thing Faneca type player than spend on the 32 year old version. Right now, an Otah trading down would make as much sense at guard as anything, and that's a high price too.

 

I'd say he does. King caught 46 balls because he got ten scared dumpoffs in one game. He's also a redzone threat, where we spread the ball around amongst our TEs at goal.

We could get by with just a vet blocker, and I've asked for that in part because it's a problem with King, but people are clamoring for us to do more than just "get by".

 

Not if you watched the games. A hefty portion of Crumpler's production came from Vick breaking down the defense and Alge flowing to an open space. He's not a crisp route runner and doesn't have the best hands in the world, so it's not like he'd be huge in a timing passing attack. Heck, if he comes cheap somehow then I'm all for it, but it's a mistake to suggest that he would dramatically upgrade our passing attack. He wouldn't.

 

So a theoretical would be cleared up by watching the games of something that only happens in my theory?

 

No need to be a smartass just because I corrected your lack of knowledge. Again, anyone who watched Atlanta games would notice that Crumpler benefited tremendously from the times when Vick would scramble, the defense would lose its assignments, and Crumpler would find an open spot in the coverage. That's one of the reasons his production fell sharply with Vick gone even though he was obviously never a very good passer.

 

Or, you just plugged in your "if you actually watched the games" condescension in a way that doesn't work since it's a theoretical.

He did benefit from it. I believe he would benefit from better QB play, which seems to be a no-brainer. You can disagree, but saying "obviously not based on something that didn't happen" just doesn't sound right to me.

 

Except that it does, but of course you're getting defensive. In the theoretical of Crumpler playing in a system with a solid pocket passer, he loses all that production he gained from Vick breaking down defenses. And given that he's not a great route runner, I don't see where there's any validity in the suggestion that he'd see any improvement to counteract that loss. The only way Crumpler's numbers would be as good as they were in Atlanta with Vick is if that team passed a hell of a lot more than Atlanta did (Indianapolis, for instance).

Again, he's aging (turns 31 this season), seems to be getting nicked up more frequently, and he's not some pass catching machine. There really isn't much reason to think he'd be substantially better than King was this season, and yet Crumpler would presumably cost a lot more.

 

You've consistently tried to hang the "you don't know what you're saying/you didn't watch the games" stuff, but in this case, you're talking about watching something I'm talking about in theory, that they haven't had. So I guess you can say it works, but it doesn't.

I know you liked him coming out, but I just don't see in King what you do. And though we disagree on the level that Crumpler brings, I feel like an upgrade is not un-needed.
Also, Crumpler is 30 and missed 4 games last year. He's not Dan Morgan.

he's not a must-have. But we need to improve, and we're not going to do that standing pat.