So far halfway decent is the best we have on this team. Trade Hartline without a proven WR and it will be a replay of our RB situation last year where you pin all your hopes on unproven commodities. Of course this all might be pointless if Tanny doesn't progress this year.
what if...we traded B.Hartline?
- Thread starter joeylats
- Start date
So far halfway decent is the best we have on this team. Trade Hartline without a proven WR and it will be a replay of our RB situation last year where you pin all your hopes on unproven commodities. Of course this all might be pointless if Tanny doesn't progress this year.
Wallace17Miami
☠️ Banned ☠️
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2013
- Messages
- 765
- Reaction score
- 4
Not in favor of trading Hartline, I ilke him a lot.
Other problem is I don't think other teams value him as much as the Dolphins and wouldn't want to pay that contract.
Worth the risk to me. I see no difference between mediocre and bad. Both end up out of the playoffs. Trading Hartline would come with the expectation that Tannehill and Wallace develop a better rapport and the likelihood that we draft a WR in this year's draft that is full of talented WRs. I'm counting on both, as well as holding onto Hartline (because nobody is trading a 2nd or likely even a 3rd for him). That also means he's probably gone next year for no compensation outside of cap savings.
And everyone else suggesting that "the unknown" is a negative...
http://mmqb.si.com/2014/02/21/nfl-players-on-what-joe-philbin-didnt-know/
Not sure what this proves, but the Steelers have won six Super Bowls since the Dolphins last Super Bowl win and have won 2 since the Phins have appeared in an AFC championship game.
Also we are not discussing and aging vet making 10 - 15 million this season, but a 26 WR in the prime of his career...
I should make it clear that I am not against the draft at all....I love the draft and the hope in brings for the team. I also have no problem drafting a WR and have discussed with several member on this forum about the possibility of drafting one in the first. My argument is you don't give up a player until you have a legitimate and viable option to replace that player.
Like him or not, he is our most consistent WR. The trick to having a good team, is keeping the players that actually produce or can be counted on, not get rid of them the moment another team offers you a player or draft pick in hope of maybe getting back a player as good or better.
dgb11112
☠️ Banned ☠️
If we got extremely lucky, we'd be lucky to get a 4th of him. Cleveland wouldn't give up a 2nd because they can use their own second to get better than Hartline. It's way to deep of a draft this year and there are enough WR to go middle of the 4th for like talent.
enigmatics
Go get me a juice box!
Tell you one thing, the sky would not fall out if we traded Brian Hartline.
He's a hard worker and a nice complementary player, but he'll never be a proverbial playmaker and that's what this team is sorely in need of. We're already seeing his ceiling IMO. I'd part with him for the opportunity to develop a legit talent.
He's a hard worker and a nice complementary player, but he'll never be a proverbial playmaker and that's what this team is sorely in need of. We're already seeing his ceiling IMO. I'd part with him for the opportunity to develop a legit talent.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2006
- Messages
- 4,009
- Reaction score
- 460
Just have to shake my head at the statement that Hartline has "crazy chemistry" with Tannehill.
That's a myth pure and simple.
Tannehill has the ability to hit Hartline with zero separation when the timing doesn't break down, but watching DBs sit all over Hartline's routes and watching tight man eat him up -- chemistry is a myth. Tannehill's accuracy to zero separation windows is what got Hartline his numbers. Put a better WR in the number 2 spot that DBs can't sit all over -- a WR that doesn't take double and triple moves to get open -- and you'll see how little that "chemistry" is. Hartline is to the number 2 WR position what Bess was to the number 3 WR position: A mediocre player that homer fans get high on and that can be replaced by almost anyone.
People have to look at how a WR gets his catches and yards. What goes above and beyond mediocrity? What plays does he make that another decent WR couldn't make better? People NEVER did this with Bess, and considered him the greatest thing since cornflakes. Gibson comes (a mediocre player in his own right) and makes Bess look like the UDFA that he was.
Same thing will happen w. Hartline. As soon as a decently skilled WR w. good upside comes in that can play the 2, Hartline will move to the natural 3 or 4 or 5 that he is. And the team will be immensely better.
LD
That's a myth pure and simple.
Tannehill has the ability to hit Hartline with zero separation when the timing doesn't break down, but watching DBs sit all over Hartline's routes and watching tight man eat him up -- chemistry is a myth. Tannehill's accuracy to zero separation windows is what got Hartline his numbers. Put a better WR in the number 2 spot that DBs can't sit all over -- a WR that doesn't take double and triple moves to get open -- and you'll see how little that "chemistry" is. Hartline is to the number 2 WR position what Bess was to the number 3 WR position: A mediocre player that homer fans get high on and that can be replaced by almost anyone.
People have to look at how a WR gets his catches and yards. What goes above and beyond mediocrity? What plays does he make that another decent WR couldn't make better? People NEVER did this with Bess, and considered him the greatest thing since cornflakes. Gibson comes (a mediocre player in his own right) and makes Bess look like the UDFA that he was.
Same thing will happen w. Hartline. As soon as a decently skilled WR w. good upside comes in that can play the 2, Hartline will move to the natural 3 or 4 or 5 that he is. And the team will be immensely better.
LD
What did we get in that Bess trade with Cleveland? Yah you are only getting slightly better with Hartline
Spesh
#freespesh
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2007
- Messages
- 15,619
- Reaction score
- 1,272
It was showing that there is a team that follows, word for word, your spoken philosophy. I mean, it was pretty point blank. You (and others) repeatedly have stated its more important to keep what you know instead of going after cheaper options that you do not know about. Stephen Jones said that damn near identically. If you cant see the connection(and the results of that philosophy) then i dont know what to tell you.
And great for the Steelers, they are a model of success, a very well run franchise. Now, ugh, were you going anywhere with that? No? Alright, but i like the Steelers example, so if you dont mind, lets examine them:
Despite spending a 3rd round pick on some scrub called Hines Ward, the Steelers spent the 8th overall pick on a receiver named Plaxico Burress. A mere 2 years after that, and a whooping 4 years after the Ward selection, the Steelers turned around and spent a 2nd round pick on Antwaan Randle El. After a few years it was clear ole' Plaxico was a bit of a nutjob so they shipped him off right before winning a Superbowl ring. Immediately after that they allowed Antwaan to seek greener pastures. Why did they do this?
Well, it could have been because they had some capable receivers in Ward and tight end Heath Miller, but i like to think its because they felt they could spend yet another first round pick on a receiver in the draft. Which they did. Named Santonio Holmes(who they traded up to get no less). Who became their Superbowl MVP for their second ring in 4 years. By that point they still had the ever capable Ward, the reliable Miller, the potentially game breaking Holmes, and the former 2nd round pick Limas Sweed. Pretty set receiving core, certainly they wouldnt consider upgrading it further.
But wait...the Steelers then drafted some little know receiver from Mississippi in the 3rd round. Some deep threat who left the Steelers for a lot more money from some Florida team, his name escapes me at the moment. Anyways, after Holmes proved difficult, they shipped him off to the Jets. After that, despite still having Ward, Sweed, former 3rd round deep threat whose name i totally forget at the moment, the Steelers packed it up and never spent another draft pick on a receiver again....oh, wait a minute, they did the exact opposite. They spent a 3rd round pick on a guy named Emmanuel Sanders(and a 6th on Antonio Brown, but thats not a high selection so i'll ignore it). In a complete coincidence, they were back in the Superbowl but, respectably, losing in a shootout against the Packers.
And then in 2013 they spent a 3rd round pick on Markus Wheatan. Yeah, i know thats sort of tacked on at the end.
According to you and others, the Steelers should never have invested in anyone after Hines and Burress. They shouldnt have traded away troubled players right before they went off the deep end. I mean, they were established, everyone else was unknown. Yet, they kept investing high draft picks in that position year after year.
Seriously people, first Detroit and now Pittsburgh. You all have to start picking better examples.
Winning teams give up on players when its in the best interest of the team to do so. Winning teams have the expectation of being able to replace that player. Winning teams understand how to scout. Winning teams understand they arent walking out of the draft with a "bunch of unknowns" but players they have studied for years and have a reasonable(if not complete or foolproof) understanding of what they can become. I vote we follow their model instead of doing what Dallas does: hang onto older, more expensive, players simply because "they are known". If someone is foolish enough to offer us anything above a 4th round pick for Hartline, you pull the trigger without hesitation. If its a 2nd round pick, you agree to the deal as quickly as possible so you can get off the phone before the other team hears you burst out laughing.
We aren't one player away from a Superbowl. Hartline is not going to make or break our season. Years of atrocious drafting have left us bereft of talent, this is going to take time to fix. The best way to get talent is the draft and the more draft picks we have the more chances we have of improving this roster.
Also, Hartline is turning 28 this season. Still in his prime, but distinctly not 26. Not to mention his age has nothing to do with him being an extremely average receiver who could be easily replaced with a vastly cheaper and younger player.
YungRobbin
Practice Squad
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2014
- Messages
- 75
- Reaction score
- 0
It was showing that there is a team that follows, word for word, your spoken philosophy. I mean, it was pretty point blank. You (and others) repeatedly have stated its more important to keep what you know instead of going after cheaper options that you do not know about. Stephen Jones said that damn near identically. If you cant see the connection(and the results of that philosophy) then i dont know what to tell you.
And great for the Steelers, they are a model of success, a very well run franchise. Now, ugh, were you going anywhere with that? No? Alright, but i like the Steelers example, so if you dont mind, lets examine them:
Despite spending a 3rd round pick on some scrub called Hines Ward, the Steelers spent the 8th overall pick on a receiver named Plaxico Burress. A mere 2 years after that, and a whooping 4 years after the Ward selection, the Steelers turned around and spent a 2nd round pick on Antwaan Randle El. After a few years it was clear ole' Plaxico was a bit of a nutjob so they shipped him off right before winning a Superbowl ring. Immediately after that they allowed Antwaan to seek greener pastures. Why did they do this?
Well, it could have been because they had some capable receivers in Ward and tight end Heath Miller, but i like to think its because they felt they could spend yet another first round pick on a receiver in the draft. Which they did. Named Santonio Holmes(who they traded up to get no less). Who became their Superbowl MVP for their second ring in 4 years. By that point they still had the ever capable Ward, the reliable Miller, the potentially game breaking Holmes, and the former 2nd round pick Limas Sweed. Pretty set receiving core, certainly they wouldnt consider upgrading it further.
But wait...the Steelers then drafted some little know receiver from Mississippi in the 3rd round. Some deep threat who left the Steelers for a lot more money from some Florida team, his name escapes me at the moment. Anyways, after Holmes proved difficult, they shipped him off to the Jets. After that, despite still having Ward, Sweed, former 3rd round deep threat whose name i totally forget at the moment, the Steelers packed it up and never spent another draft pick on a receiver again....oh, wait a minute, they did the exact opposite. They spent a 3rd round pick on a guy named Emmanuel Sanders(and a 6th on Antonio Brown, but thats not a high selection so i'll ignore it). In a complete coincidence, they were back in the Superbowl but, respectably, losing in a shootout against the Packers.
And then in 2013 they spent a 3rd round pick on Markus Wheatan. Yeah, i know thats sort of tacked on at the end.
According to you and others, the Steelers should never have invested in anyone after Hines and Burress. They shouldnt have traded away troubled players right before they went off the deep end. I mean, they were established, everyone else was unknown. Yet, they kept investing high draft picks in that position year after year.
Seriously people, first Detroit and now Pittsburgh. You all have to start picking better examples.
Winning teams give up on players when its in the best interest of the team to do so. Winning teams have the expectation of being able to replace that player. Winning teams understand how to scout. Winning teams understand they arent walking out of the draft with a "bunch of unknowns" but players they have studied for years and have a reasonable(if not complete or foolproof) understanding of what they can become. I vote we follow their model instead of doing what Dallas does: hang onto older, more expensive, players simply because "they are known". If someone is foolish enough to offer us anything above a 4th round pick for Hartline, you pull the trigger without hesitation. If its a 2nd round pick, you agree to the deal as quickly as possible so you can get off the phone before the other team hears you burst out laughing.
We aren't one player away from a Superbowl. Hartline is not going to make or break our season. Years of atrocious drafting have left us bereft of talent, this is going to take time to fix. The best way to get talent is the draft and the more draft picks we have the more chances we have of improving this roster.
Also, Hartline is turning 28 this season. Still in his prime, but distinctly not 26. Not to mention his age has nothing to do with him being an extremely average receiver who could be easily replaced with a vastly cheaper and younger player.
Fantastic post.
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Djavelin
Head Dolphin In This Pod
NO. I wouldn't trade.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2006
- Messages
- 4,009
- Reaction score
- 460
It was showing that there is a team that follows, word for word, your spoken philosophy. I mean, it was pretty point blank. You (and others) repeatedly have stated its more important to keep what you know instead of going after cheaper options that you do not know about. Stephen Jones said that damn near identically. If you cant see the connection(and the results of that philosophy) then i dont know what to tell you.
And great for the Steelers, they are a model of success, a very well run franchise. Now, ugh, were you going anywhere with that? No? Alright, but i like the Steelers example, so if you dont mind, lets examine them:
Despite spending a 3rd round pick on some scrub called Hines Ward, the Steelers spent the 8th overall pick on a receiver named Plaxico Burress. A mere 2 years after that, and a whooping 4 years after the Ward selection, the Steelers turned around and spent a 2nd round pick on Antwaan Randle El. After a few years it was clear ole' Plaxico was a bit of a nutjob so they shipped him off right before winning a Superbowl ring. Immediately after that they allowed Antwaan to seek greener pastures. Why did they do this?
Well, it could have been because they had some capable receivers in Ward and tight end Heath Miller, but i like to think its because they felt they could spend yet another first round pick on a receiver in the draft. Which they did. Named Santonio Holmes(who they traded up to get no less). Who became their Superbowl MVP for their second ring in 4 years. By that point they still had the ever capable Ward, the reliable Miller, the potentially game breaking Holmes, and the former 2nd round pick Limas Sweed. Pretty set receiving core, certainly they wouldnt consider upgrading it further.
But wait...the Steelers then drafted some little know receiver from Mississippi in the 3rd round. Some deep threat who left the Steelers for a lot more money from some Florida team, his name escapes me at the moment. Anyways, after Holmes proved difficult, they shipped him off to the Jets. After that, despite still having Ward, Sweed, former 3rd round deep threat whose name i totally forget at the moment, the Steelers packed it up and never spent another draft pick on a receiver again....oh, wait a minute, they did the exact opposite. They spent a 3rd round pick on a guy named Emmanuel Sanders(and a 6th on Antonio Brown, but thats not a high selection so i'll ignore it). In a complete coincidence, they were back in the Superbowl but, respectably, losing in a shootout against the Packers.
And then in 2013 they spent a 3rd round pick on Markus Wheatan. Yeah, i know thats sort of tacked on at the end.
According to you and others, the Steelers should never have invested in anyone after Hines and Burress. They shouldnt have traded away troubled players right before they went off the deep end. I mean, they were established, everyone else was unknown. Yet, they kept investing high draft picks in that position year after year.
Seriously people, first Detroit and now Pittsburgh. You all have to start picking better examples.
Winning teams give up on players when its in the best interest of the team to do so. Winning teams have the expectation of being able to replace that player. Winning teams understand how to scout. Winning teams understand they arent walking out of the draft with a "bunch of unknowns" but players they have studied for years and have a reasonable(if not complete or foolproof) understanding of what they can become. I vote we follow their model instead of doing what Dallas does: hang onto older, more expensive, players simply because "they are known". If someone is foolish enough to offer us anything above a 4th round pick for Hartline, you pull the trigger without hesitation. If its a 2nd round pick, you agree to the deal as quickly as possible so you can get off the phone before the other team hears you burst out laughing.
We aren't one player away from a Superbowl. Hartline is not going to make or break our season. Years of atrocious drafting have left us bereft of talent, this is going to take time to fix. The best way to get talent is the draft and the more draft picks we have the more chances we have of improving this roster.
Also, Hartline is turning 28 this season. Still in his prime, but distinctly not 26. Not to mention his age has nothing to do with him being an extremely average receiver who could be easily replaced with a vastly cheaper and younger player.
Rack.
Restores my faith in Dolphin fans, lol.
LD
Might want to fix some of the details in that 6th-round pick in your signature :up: