Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    No. Not even close. The offense is not the same without him. He is the best player that isn't Brady.

     

    That said, he will be fine. Brady had his knee cleaned out after his first operation around the draft a few years ago, and there was sheer panic here. They'll fix it. 

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from palookaski. Show palookaski's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     

    No. Not even close. The offense is not the same without him. He is the best player that isn't Brady.

    That said, he will be fine. Brady had his knee cleaned out after his first operation around the draft a few years ago, and there was sheer panic here. They'll fix it. 

     



    This ^^^^ Exactly what my Jolly Giant Son said (Internal Medicine), who also knows Dr. Gill - very high marks. Unusual that Dr. Gill did'nt perform the 2nd Gronk surgery is a ? mark as a prominent Drs' reputation, as he would insist on seeing for himself the cause(s). He wonders why not. Could be a bit of dis-satisfactionary behavior by Gronk. HMMMM.

     

    You point They'll fix it, no panic..... ;-) Come around more Z

     Edit: Off topic. ZBellino, I've been reading the forum since 04-05 and YOU are the guy I always LQQKed forward to reading, so then I finally decided to sign-up. I Miss your great work here..;-)

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

    In response to bredbru's comment:

     

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 

     



    That makes sense. However, what would the offense look like with Hern as your slot, Danny the flanker, Ballard and Gronk as you inline te's, and possibly sanders, hopkins, Rogers playing outside? That sounds nice to me, but if Gronk isn't in that mix, it really weakens the lineup . Now, what happens if we drafted eiffert to spell Gronk if out. He is an excellent receiving TE and a decent blocker. when Gronk returns, and even assumes he misses no time, eiffertb could line up outwide, in the slot or flanker and now you have 3, 6'6" guys on the field who can catch And block. 

     

     

     

    hey lifer,

    it would be a wealth of talent if we got eifert too.

    i must say your post brought a smile to my face posing hopkins and rogers in the lineup; the 2 wrs ive been posting this whole offseason for the pats :)

    re the te thogh, if bb had shored up positions (instead of drafting the same one over and over and missing) we might could adfford a luxury like eifert. now, i think it would be a mistake. though with bb' spropensity of grabbing tes you never know. further note, in this crazed scenario of the killer tes., we need wrs on the field (ideally big ones aka rogers)who can separate wide. wihtout tht good des play the niddle of th field and jam teh short wr routes. 

    note, i dont know how youd have sanders AND hopkins and rogers unless yo spent all 3 picks on wr. idotn think thatd be wise

     



    Yes, meant to put an "or" between sanders, Rogers and Hopkins..

     



    i think i unconsciously picked that up and reponded to THAT  initially. when i re reread your post, i decided to ask you if you literally meant it (and allowed for the possibility).

    thanks for clarifyign your position (which i clrealy share).

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to alfred-e-bob-neumier's comment:

    With only 5 picks there is little chance they will use one on a TE....maybe sign an undrafted FA TE ortwo, yes, but certainly not one of their top 3 picks, unless the medical reports are much worse than they are letting on....but I doubt it...

     

    Besides....who could they draft to give the team what a healthy Gronk gives them? Anyone in the NFL do what he does? ...Not really...if he doesn't play they loose a whole bunch in terms of Off. schemes and philiosophy....Hernandez doesn't give you what Gronk does, their skills are vastly different.



    Well I wouldn't say that. Faucet said something in the draft thread that got me thinking. If you draft someone like Nick Kasa in the 3rd or 4th (provided a trade) then you start the season with Hern and Ballard as starters and Nasa with Hoom being primary backups. Once Gronk comes back Hern moves out to WR and that would be essentially a 2nd WR taken in the draft but you know what you get in Hern. Then you'd have a 4 WR core of Amendola, Hern, Drafted player, Jones which would be a decently strong core and a TE core of Gronk, Ballard, Nasa, Hoom (release Fells once Gronk gets back) which would be a good TE core in itself. I could see something like this happening, just not taking a TE in the 1st.

     

    As for the Ballard question, he did start for the Giants and looked pretty good. He's not Gronk by any means but he'd be a solid #2 starting TE

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    lets put it into context. Ballard has played 1 NFL season. He also will have not played in approx 18 months. He should be completely healed, but he will be rusty, and again, only a 2nd year player.

    I think he was the equal or exceeded Gronk as a blocker. As a pass catcher, Ballard did not run every route, and the Giants ask less of the TE in route running than the Pats do. Ballard has soft and sure hands, but at 280 pounds doesnt run every route in the tree.

    Hooma and Fells are good back ups, but they nor Ballard offers what Gronk does to this offense. Losing Gronk would really diminish what the Pats want to do this year on offense.  

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to alfred-e-bob-neumier's comment:

     

    With only 5 picks there is little chance they will use one on a TE....maybe sign an undrafted FA TE ortwo, yes, but certainly not one of their top 3 picks, unless the medical reports are much worse than they are letting on....but I doubt it...

     

    Besides....who could they draft to give the team what a healthy Gronk gives them? Anyone in the NFL do what he does? ...Not really...if he doesn't play they loose a whole bunch in terms of Off. schemes and philiosophy....Hernandez doesn't give you what Gronk does, their skills are vastly different.

     



    Well I wouldn't say that. Faucet said something in the draft thread that got me thinking. If you draft someone like Nick Kasa in the 3rd or 4th (provided a trade) then you start the season with Hern and Ballard as starters and Nasa with Hoom being primary backups. Once Gronk comes back Hern moves out to WR and that would be essentially a 2nd WR taken in the draft but you know what you get in Hern. Then you'd have a 4 WR core of Amendola, Hern, Drafted player, Jones which would be a decently strong core and a TE core of Gronk, Ballard, Nasa, Hoom (release Fells once Gronk gets back) which would be a good TE core in itself. I could see something like this happening, just not taking a TE in the 1st.

     

     

    As for the Ballard question, he did start for the Giants and looked pretty good. He's not Gronk by any means but he'd be a solid #2 starting TE




    everyone wants to be #1 but there's nothing wrong with a solid #2

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from DanishPastry. Show DanishPastry's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    Nobody does what Gronk does, it's a big loss IF he is not ready.

    Optimal scenario (2 WR, 2 TE, 1 RB set) is Sanders, Amendola, Hern, Gronk, Ridley. That's the bread and butter. That looks scary to me. In this case you've got 2 elite players and 1 good one (Hern, Gronk, and Ridley) with experience in the system, and 2 newcomers with potential to be elite (Sanders and Amendola).

    Not so optimal scenario: Jones, Amendola, Hern, Ballard, Ridley. That set is still going to produce, but is it scaring the living daylights out of D's? In this case you've got 1 elite player and one good one (Hern and Ridley) with experience, 1 newcomer with elite potential (Amendola), 1 newcomer with potential to be good (Ballard), and 1 newcomer with so-so potential (Jones).

    That said, looking only at TE's, the dropoff is from Gronk to anybody else. I don't really care if they put Ballard, Hooman or Fells in there, the skillsets may vary but the overall level of those three is about the same in my book.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    lets put it into context. Ballard has played 1 NFL season. He also will have not played in approx 18 months. He should be completely healed, but he will be rusty, and again, only a 2nd year player.

     

     

    The question is . . . Will he wear the Burger King costume on the field?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from DanishPastry. Show DanishPastry's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    lets put it into context. Ballard has played 1 NFL season. He also will have not played in approx 18 months. He should be completely healed, but he will be rusty, and again, only a 2nd year player.

    I think he was the equal or exceeded Gronk as a blocker. As a pass catcher, Ballard did not run every route, and the Giants ask less of the TE in route running than the Pats do. Ballard has soft and sure hands, but at 280 pounds doesnt run every route in the tree.

    Hooma and Fells are good back ups, but they nor Ballard offers what Gronk does to this offense. Losing Gronk would really diminish what the Pats want to do this year on offense.  

     




     

    The question is . . . Will he wear the Burger King costume on the field?




    LOL!

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    lets put it into context. Ballard has played 1 NFL season. He also will have not played in approx 18 months. He should be completely healed, but he will be rusty, and again, only a 2nd year player.

     

     

    The question is . . . Will he wear the Burger King costume on the field?



    even though I have that idiot on ignore, you have to bring his name up Laughing

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    Ballard is a good TE, he'll fill in nicely for Gronk till Gronk comes back. 

     

    Is he as good as Rob? Hell no, Rob is a FHOF, but Jake will do fine. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Action-Jackson. Show Action-Jackson's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    .

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rtuinila. Show rtuinila's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    With the latest news about Gronk do the Pats look for a dependable starter in case he is never dependable? The offense has been changing since the two TEs got here and I expect more changes in this direction - 2 and 3 TEs helping both the running and passing games. But Gronk is really a critical piece. Without a superior blocker who is also a superior receiver it is not as formidable. I think his loss in big playoff games the last two years is one key reason for the O flops. It shows how much the O relies on him being healthy. So while we can hope he becomes reliable do we look for a second choice while we hope he gets it together? If so do we look to the draft?




    When did Gronk die? Who killed him? What killed him? And it isn't even on the local news!

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 




    Sure

    Worst case is the 6 week PUP for Gronk, I mean he can't actually be messed up to the point of missing the season can he?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to rameakap's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 

     




    Sure

     

    Worst case is the 6 week PUP for Gronk, I mean he can't actually be messed up to the point of missing the season can he?



    Amputation?

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to rameakap's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 

     




    Sure

     

    Worst case is the 6 week PUP for Gronk, I mean he can't actually be messed up to the point of missing the season can he?

     



    Amputation?

     



    Then he will have to hold his beer in the other hand.  

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BuzyDizzyIzzy. Show BuzyDizzyIzzy's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    Simply put, Ballard has the size and talent to be special......a "Gronk lite" if you will. The Patriots don't need to draft or pursue any more TE's. Im assuming Gronk will be out for the first part of the season......and thats fine. Get him 1000% healthy BEFORE they let him even SNIFF the playing field. In the meantime Ballard can fill his role nicely and develop/improve. The Giants had big plans for Ballard and he was their TE of the future. Snagging him off waivers was HUGE.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    with or without gronk, tem needs legit weapon outside with speed, ideally with big body a and  definitley with the ability to snag the ball in traffic.

     

Share