Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

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

    Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/football/patriots/view/20220425pats_again_in_rush_to_seymour_value/

    was it worth it?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/5_655_Why_Ron_Borges_should_be_fired.html Quoth the hack on MSNBC.com: "On a day when they could have had impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson or the second-best tackle in the draft in Kenyatta Walker, they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard Seymour, who had 1 sack last season in the pass-happy SEC and is too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end. This genius move was followed by trading out of a spot where they could have gotten the last decent receiver in Robert Ferguson and settled for tackle Matt Light, who will not help any time soon." This is one of my favorite quotes. And predicting St Louis to win 73-0 in the SB.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/5_655_Why_Ron_Borges_should_be_fired.html Quoth the hack on MSNBC.com: "On a day when they could have had impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson or the second-best tackle in the draft in Kenyatta Walker, they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard Seymour, who had 1 sack last season in the pass-happy SEC and is too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end. This genius move was followed by trading out of a spot where they could have gotten the last decent receiver in Robert Ferguson and settled for tackle Matt Light, who will not help any time soon." This is one of my favorite quotes. And predicting St Louis to win 73-0 in the SB.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    First, in regards solely towards the initial Q posed on here: Yes, DEFINATELY worth it...  Seymour was gonna be up for 1 more big contract, after signing his 2nd Deal at a huge NE payday for him (deservedly so...at that exact time coming off his rook campaign)- and/after Seymour was injured in something like 4 outta 5 years with NE (on his 2nd hefty summed contract).  For a 1st?  It was a sweet deal, a no-brainer granted what Seymour was giving (i.e. NOT giving) NE the previous 4 or 5 seasons in total.  The issue was the timing (well into Summer Camp when that trade was finalized, with zero back-up solution).

    But in regards to Shenanigan's Ron Borges take on the Seymour Draft Pick...  It's my fav Borges take Ever.  I'm just not sure that'cha can even CONCEIVABLY be THAT wrong on any and ALL your takes on matters, as Borges has consistantly and thoroughly been...  I don't even think the odds of simply flipping a coin on every single subject matter in order to determine your Ultimate Take, would inevitably give you THAT incorrect of a final analyises on simply SO many takes, so often as Borges...  It just defies reason, and mathematical probability on any and every Borges op-ed.  It's almost uncanny:  Take Borges opinion, Do the exact opposite, and BAM=That's bona fide recipe for success each and every time. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    Would it have been great to have Seymour these last years - in a vacuum, Yes. The problem is that if you are paying him 10M then what does VW want when you negotiate with him, and what does LM want, and what does ____ want. And which players do you not have on the roster because you are tying up an extra 6+M at defensive end?
    BB and the salary cap era are all about balancing your roaster and your salary structure and keeping all you best players happy relative to each other. VW is happy with his money because you haven't brought in a lesser player for more money to play next to him.
    Keeping the salaries balanced and the locker room happy is much more important to the team than any one player.

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

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    The Patriots haven't pressured the QB in years. Seymour leaving was bad
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/football/patriots/view/20220425pats_again_in_rush_to_seymour_value/ was it worth it?
    Posted by anonymis[/QUOTE]

         Rotten Ron conveniently leaves out the fact that the Pats got OT Nate Solder in the Seymour trade. Solder played a big role for the Pats in his rookie year. Under the watch of OL coach Donte Scarnecchia, this kid could develop into a pro-bowl caliber OT. Isn't that alone worth 2-3 years without the highly paid Seymour? Could or would the Pats have signed Andre Carter and/or Mark Anderson, if Seymour had still been around? Would Tom Brady have been as successful, if Solder hadn't been around to take over for C-Bass at RT? Finally, with Matt Light gone and no Solder, the Pats would also have to spend a high draft choice on an OT, in this upcoming draft.     
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]The Patriots haven't pressured the QB in years. Seymour leaving was bad
    Posted by BostonBruinss[/QUOTE]

    No...not having any even nominal replacement for him soldified in any way at all- Was Bad.  But from NE's FO Perspective, They saw Seymour hold out of Summer Camp looking for a Massive Deal, which he deserved based off of his rookie contract numbers, And which he received...THEN, they saw him being injured and losing time due to his injuries the next 3 outta 4 years <2005, lost 4 games + 1 playoff game; 2006, lost 0 games; 2007, lost 7 games; 2008, lost 1 game />...plus seeing his numbers go down (17.5 Sacks in his final 4 years w/ a huge contract, 21.5 Sacks his first 4 years w/ his rookie contract...yes 4 sacks make a difference when we're talking about it being around a 20% overall difference, comparatively)...Same goes for TTs, PDs...

    Seymour's best Season by far, was the season directly before he was traded (and he was traded during his Final Contract year off that mega deal he received), WAS his best by far & away:  2008- 51TTs & 8 Sacks...  This sorta places his contributions from the preceding 3 years in an even worse light, right?  Now, you're wondering in NE's FO at the very beginning of the 2009 year, IF you'll be getting the Seymour of last year, OR the Seymour of 3 Full years prior, in this, His last season playing under The HUGE Contract #2.  Then, some team which consistantly svx, offers you up their 1st Round Draft Pick for you giving up the guy you'll likely only have for 1 more season anyway, Richard Seymour...
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattC05. Show MattC05's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    I forgot what a miserable S.O.B. Borges was.  He makes Shaugnessey look like a Patriots cheerleader.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    Borges is a dumb@$$.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour : First, in regards solely towards the initial Q posed on here: Yes, DEFINATELY worth it...  Seymour was gonna be up for 1 more big contract, after signing his 2nd Deal at a huge NE payday for him (deservedly so...at that exact time coming off his rook campaign)- and/after Seymour was injured in something like 4 outta 5 years with NE (on his 2nd hefty summed contract).  For a 1st?  It was a sweet deal, a no-brainer granted what Seymour was giving (i.e. NOT giving) NE the previous 4 or 5 seasons in total.  The issue was the timing (well into Summer Camp when that trade was finalized, with zero back-up solution). But in regards to Shenanigan's Ron Borges take on the Seymour Draft Pick...  It's my fav Borges take Ever.  I'm just not sure that'cha can even CONCEIVABLY be THAT wrong on any and ALL your takes on matters, as Borges has consistantly and thoroughly been...  I don't even think the odds of simply flipping a coin on every single subject matter in order to determine your Ultimate Take, would inevitably give you THAT incorrect of a final analyises on simply SO many takes, so often as Borges...  It just defies reason, and mathematical probability on any and every Borges op-ed.  It's almost uncanny:  Take Borges opinion, Do the exact opposite, and BAM=That's bona fide recipe for success each and every time. 
    Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium[/QUOTE]

    Couldn't agree more. This guy should seriously NOT BE ALLOWED to write about, talk about, or even think about what the Patriots should do with their draft picks. Biggest idiot the Herald employs, and that is saying something...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from elDunker2. Show elDunker2's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In response to "Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour": [QUOTE]Would it have been great to have Seymour these last years - in a vacuum, Yes. The problem is that if you are paying him 10M then what does VW want when you negotiate with him, and what does LM want, and what does ____ want. And which players do you not have on the roster because you are tying up an extra 6+M at defensive end? BB and the salary cap era are all about balancing your roaster and your salary structure and keeping all you best players happy relative to each other. VW is happy with his money because you haven't brought in a lesser player for more money to play next to him. Keeping the salaries balanced and the locker room happy is much more important to the team than any one player. Posted by mia76[/QUOTE] Bingo! and in the process shedding those too expensive but high value players for significant future insurance at much lower cost. Similiar strategy with trading down in the draft. Getting almost as good talent and more of them. This is the essence of the brilliant Pats perpetual rebuilding program
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    Borges = shoot first and ask questions later

    Borges = open mouth, insert foot

    There is a reason Borges is not at the Globe anymore.  I usually like media guys to be their own person and not sycophants.  But Borges is a guy who clearly is anti-BB and will go out of his way to be anti-BB to his own detriment.  His biased opinions lose credibility after a while. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaBlade. Show DaBlade's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    How Borges has a job in journalism is beyond me. Having said that yes the Pats have missed Seyours production if you could know his production would have been as it was sense he left but I think this trade lit a fire under him and I doubt we would have gotten that level of production.
    what we did get for him though should be the starting LT for the Patriots for the next ten years. I like that deal.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    We missed Seymour's production in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 too. The years when he was one of the highest paid players in the NFL. And I ain't seen Oakland winning much of anything lately.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]We missed Seymour's production in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 too. The years when he was one of the highest paid players in the NFL. And I ain't seen Oakland winning much of anything lately.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    See shenanigan, that's what DaBlade's saying...A notion, albeit pretty much unproveable 1 way or the other, which definately believes, that this late summer castoff trade to Oakland, DID Absolutely rekindle the waning fire under Richard Seymour...  I don't believe for 1 second, that he would have had the same season in NE as he did w/ Oakland in his 1st year (even IN the respect of it being another contract year for Seymour...I simply don't).  He was just noticeably nowhere NEAR as dominant he was during his 1st 4 years in NE, as he was during his 2nd 4 year span. 

    It was simply imo, the terribly tough timing of a deal that'cha simply couldn't pass up:  A low season performing team offers you their 1st Rder for a guy who was I'm almost 100% certain THE top-paid guy on your salary for 3 or 4 years, and during that span, was constantly injured and less crazy dominant like he once was, AND he's in the final year of his contract with you???  Sheez=You GOTTA take that deal on the table, RIGHT Then.  Remember too, NE lost their own 1st Rder in 2008...something they could've used in several different Draft ways for a future shot at the next Seymour, A Draft pick which they both lost (to trade for a future 1st rder and another 2nd/3rd rder that year), And 1 which occured before prior knowledge to this deal landing at their doorstep (i.e. they took Mayo, whom yes- they needed...but with knowledge of ZERO Richard Seymour?  That mighta sent them going in another direction and a different angle).

    It WAS a Great & Unpassable Deal...at a real bad time. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]The Patriots haven't pressured the QB in years. Seymour leaving was bad
    Posted by BostonBruinss[/QUOTE]

    The Pats should have locked up Ty Law (through or cut after the '08 season) and Deion (the 7/42 was fair) after the '04 season amidst all the SB euphoria.

    Then we would have won the '06 Super Bowl

    Then they should have locked up Seymour and Samuel after the '06 SB amidst all that euphoria, and traded Ty Warren... who was about to ink an extension that would prohibit us from keeping Seymour.

    This means Pats never get Merriweather and Solder, but those 2 could easily be replaced, esp with a likely 2nd rd pick for Warren.

    Ah well
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In response to "Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour : The Pats should have locked up Ty Law (through or cut after the '08 season) and Deion (the 7/42 was fair) after the '04 season amidst all the SB euphoria. Then we would have won the '06 Super Bowl Then they should have locked up Seymour and Samuel after the '06 SB amidst all that euphoria, and traded Ty Warren... who was about to ink an extension that would prohibit us from keeping Seymour. This means Pats never get Merriweather and Solder, but those 2 could easily be replaced, esp with a likely 2nd rd pick for Warren. Ah well Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE] It's a good theory except the pats were under the cap by $33,000 in 2005 76 cents in 2006 $536 in 2007 So none of those things could actually happen.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour": It's a good theory except the pats were under the cap by $33,000 in 2005 76 cents in 2006 $536 in 2007 So none of those things could actually happen.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    They could have found ways around that as we all know everyone in the league does... Koppen and Rosie Colvin made a lot and as our recent teams that did just fine with connolly and Nink proved, we didn't need to be paying those two 8 million back in '06.

    Regardless of who was cut and who had the contracts restructured you work to keep your top 5 players like those guys were at the times.

    Seymours original extension was short on years, big on $, and cap killing as I recall, a Peppers/Mario type 7/90 would likely have been EASIER on the team than whatever 3 year deal he signed for 07-09.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/5_655_Why_Ron_Borges_should_be_fired.html Quoth the hack on MSNBC.com: "On a day when they could have had impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson or the second-best tackle in the draft in Kenyatta Walker, they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard Seymour, who had 1 sack last season in the pass-happy SEC and is too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end. This genius move was followed by trading out of a spot where they could have gotten the last decent receiver in Robert Ferguson and settled for tackle Matt Light, who will not help any time soon." This is one of my favorite quotes. And predicting St Louis to win 73-0 in the SB.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    So glad you posted this!

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from 15315k. Show 15315k's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    Borges is an idiot. how does he even have a job. Oh yeah and Borges you are not a tough guy at all, your are just a little w with a big mouth.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    Lamenting the loss of Seymour's production in NE is almost the exact same as lamenting Clemens' loss of producion in Boston after he went to Toronto.

    For WHATEVER REASONS, neither would have had the same production here, and would have been paid top dollar while not producing.

    Borges would have been ALL TOO HAPPY to write a piece talking about how SIGNING Seymour, and NOT trading him financially sunk this team and cost them this guy and that.

    Sadly, Borges wins because we're all talking about it, which is all he really wants. If he posted here, he would rightly be called a "troll". He even looks like one.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In response to "Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour : They could have found ways around that as we all know everyone in the league does... Koppen and Rosie Colvin made a lot and as our recent teams that did just fine with connolly and Nink proved, we didn't need to be paying those two 8 million back in '06. Regardless of who was cut and who had the contracts restructured you work to keep your top 5 players like those guys were at the times. Seymours original extension was short on years, big on $, and cap killing as I recall, a Peppers/Mario type 7/90 would likely have been EASIER on the team than whatever 3 year deal he signed for 07-09. Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE] Oh yeah, you're the guy who always knows what to do a year later. You spent all year telling us how you knew who to draft last year even though you didn't make a single past last April when the draft was going on.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour": Oh yeah, you're the guy who always knows what to do a year later. You spent all year telling us how you knew who to draft last year even though you didn't make a single past last April when the draft was going on.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    wow what a bunch of sarcastic BS

    I spent a very SMALL amount of time this year saying what should have been done last year (basically I just wanted them to move up for Watt or take Ayers/Reed instead of Ras-I/Vareen) 

    and if you go back and check you'll see that I posted A LOT before, during and after the draft

    so don't post your lies

    The Pats dropped Ty, Branch, Asante and Seymour more b/c they didn't shut their mouths and take 10-20% below market value like Vrabel, Bruschi, Harrison, Brady, Brown, etc. did and NOT b/c we couldn't have managed to fit them under the cap.

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

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]Lamenting the loss of Seymour's production in NE is almost the exact same as lamenting Clemens' loss of producion in Boston after he went to Toronto. For WHATEVER REASONS, neither would have had the same production here, and would have been paid top dollar while not producing. Borges would have been ALL TOO HAPPY to write a piece talking about how SIGNING Seymour, and NOT trading him financially sunk this team and cost them this guy and that. Sadly, Borges wins because we're all talking about it, which is all he really wants. If he posted here, he would rightly be called a "troll". He even looks like one.
    Posted by ma6dragon9[/QUOTE]

    This might be true

    but like clemens Seymour and Asante and Ty all kinda got the boot b/c they were diva's who rubbed management the wrong way and not b/c they were not worth top dollar
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour

    In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Interesting Take on Value of Seymour : Couldn't agree more. This guy should seriously NOT BE ALLOWED to write about, talk about, or even think about what the Patriots should do with their draft picks. Biggest idiot the Herald employs, and that is saying something...
    Posted by BostonSportsFan111[/QUOTE]

         Don't know about that. Doesn't John Tomase still work there?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share