Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Grogan77. Show Grogan77's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    shocked about this trade, but I agree it's an excellent trade for the Pats!  This will be a top 6 pick.  Seymour was overrated the last few years and probably would have been injured for this season. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    In Response to Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree? : I watched every game as I'm sure you did. Please tell me which game he was dominant in like he was 5 years ago. I hear you on the sacks but stats don't tell the whole story. Our defense got run over last year and a big part of that is that he just wasn't the force he has been in the past. I don't remember 1 game last year when I left saying.."Boy our Dline looked good. Most sacks the Pats got last year were coverage sacks and for the most part the whole D was a day late and a dollar short. I can't imagine we will be worse this year without him.
    Posted by ewhite1065[/QUOTE]

    Seymour is pretty much as good as ever because he still gets doubled on almost every play which opens things  up for a pass rush. Unfortunately last year we didnt have a pass rush because vrabel got old and everybody else was hurt. You are right in saying Seymours stats dont tell the whole story.. they never have. He is not gonna get Dwight Freeney sack numbers because he plays inside a lot. He is going to create major mismatches and open things up for lb's to get to Qb as well as smash through 2x teams and still pressure Qb out of pocket.

    Good Value but again does not help 2009 Patriot defense!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    The retirement of Bruschi and the trade of Seymour means that this team should be playing a TON of 4-3. Am I correct?

    Seymour is less effective/versatile as a DT in the 4-3, when he's mostly asked to stop the run and take up space/on two O-lineman.

    Burgess isn't going to be a 16 sack guy, but he could be a 7-10 sack guy at one end. Green could be a 7-10 sack guy at the other end. 

    Warren and Wilfork will be a good inside duo. The front 4 should be fine.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrogLegs. Show FrogLegs's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    In Response to Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?:
    [QUOTE]How does a first round pick equal a 2nd round pick.  No one knows how strong the draft will be next year or in 2011.   What if that 1st round pick turns out to be a top 10 pick (great likelyhood it's the Raiders) and that pick turns out to be a franchise RB or LT, I don't think anyone will be complaining then.
    Posted by DuncanOrange[/QUOTE]

    Usually teams acquire a second rnd pick in the current draft year by trading their 1rst rnd pick of the next draft year (as Denver did this year).

    Beside that there are too many "what if" in that deal.
    As a fan the only thing I know is that it won't help to Pats to win a Superbowl in 2009...
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ewhite1065. Show ewhite1065's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    In Response to Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree? : Seymour is pretty much as good as ever because he still gets doubled on almost every play which opens things  up for a pass rush. Unfortunately last year we didnt have a pass rush because vrabel got old and everybody else was hurt. You are right in saying Seymours stats dont tell the whole story.. they never have. He is not gonna get Dwight Freeney sack numbers because he plays inside a lot. He is going to create major mismatches and open things up for lb's to get to Qb as well as smash through 2x teams and still pressure Qb out of pocket. Good Value but again does not help 2009 Patriot defense!
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    I hear what you saying but he has gotten doubled for many years and done a lot better at holding his ground. What we saw last year was horrible and I can't lay it on Mike Vrabel who also had 8 sacks along with his tackles and decent pass coverage for a linebacker.These guys provided no push at all when we needed a pass rush and double team or not he got pushed around a little last year. I'm not saying he is bad but the guy is not a top flight D lineman any more and it's time to move on. The Patriots pressure last year was when a QB stood back in the pocket for 4+ seconds and was part of the reason our secondary looked so vulnerable. We don't have the rush that we had 5 years ago. Part of that is because of the LB's and Rodney getting older but a good part of it is because we used to be able to count on seymour to be a game changer and we can't any more.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from NoahJustin. Show NoahJustin's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    I haven't heard to many theories about how we could sign both Seymour and Wilford in a era of salary cap. It was time to say goodbye while we still could get value for Richard. Who knows, if the pick turns out to be a top ten and we get someone young and great, then BB is a genius.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rocky. Show Rocky's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    A great NT is hard to come by......That is why they need to keep Vince!

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

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    In Response to Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?:
    [QUOTE]First off it stinks we have a NFL where guys like Richard Seymour don't play until they are 35 in one uniform and retire, but with the salary cap that's not the way it is.   Obviously BB feels he can win without Seymour, hell he won 11 games without Brady last season.  Plus it seemed unrealistic we could sign Seymour to a long-term deal with other players needed to be resigned in the immediate future that were bigger priorities.  If we traded Seymour for a 2nd round pick, I would have been pissed.  If we traded Seymour for a 1st round pick to a playoff team like the Cardinals or Cowboys, I would have been a little upset.  But a first round pick to a horrible team like the Raiders, it's going to probably be a top 6 pick like they year we traded with the 49'ers.     Each year the draft gets better and better and BB uses it to keep this team young.
    Posted by DuncanOrange[/QUOTE]

    I agree with you. Making these tough decisions is what keeps the Pats competitive. There's no gurantee that Seymour would have even stayed healthy. I think he would have missed at least four or five games with injury and then played another three or four not at 100%. I don't think he's looked that great the last couple of years and it would have been obvious this year.  We got something versus nothing for him.

    Would we have been better with Seymour? Absolutely! But sometimes coaches have to make hard decisions and I applaud the Pats for having the stones to do this. Maybe the defense is the same as last year but in 2010 they get a stud O-lineman or an elite cover corner.

    Are they catastrophically worse without Seymour? No way! Remember the guy never stays healthy anymore. We've won a lot of games without him in the past and some of the games we lost had more to do with teams figuring out they could abuse the secondary which imploded everything else. I love Jarvis Green and some of these new guys I'm seeing and above all else "In BB we trust."
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1020us. Show m1020us's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    In Response to Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?:
    [QUOTE]The retirement of Bruschi and the trade of Seymour means that this team should be playing a TON of 4-3. Am I correct? Seymour is less effective/versatile as a DT in the 4-3, when he's mostly asked to stop the run and take up space/on two O-lineman. Burgess isn't going to be a 16 sack guy, but he could be a 7-10 sack guy at one end. Green could be a 7-10 sack guy at the other end.  Warren and Wilfork will be a good inside duo. The front 4 should be fine.
    Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE]

    Tully Banta-cane(sp?) is going to get some sacks as well...
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    Unless the Pats are planing to auction off their 3 number 1s off to the Panthers for Peppers this is a bad deal. Our defense is alot weaker than it was yesterday. 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    I agree with our defense getting weaker,I agree the 1st rd pick is sweet,but I wonder if the pats didnt pull the trigger to quickly,if they might have gotten more from denver,who has loads of picks,and needing defensive help.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    Based on where the Raiders will likely be picking in 2011 we could very well get the same #6 overall pick we used on Seymour back in 2001.  So, we got his services for 8 years and could get the same pick or higher - not bad.

    Given our depth on DL and lack of depth at LB I think we will feature 4-3.  The guestion then is who starts in the 4-3? 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaBlade. Show DaBlade's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    No problem with the move. I will miss his play and to say he was a Pansy is not understanding what he did on the average play. He consistantly had double and sometimes tripple teams to beat thus freeing up other players. I think we got great value and I think the youngsters are ready to make the difference and like was mentioned the Patriots Hybrid defense is in a 3-3-5 alignment often maybe as much as 60% of the time over a season so they will be fine.
    I Stole the jist of this from another poster, and the defensive moves basicly break down like this:


    1. Vrabel's gone; they've added Derrick Burgess.
    2. Bruschi's gone; Gary Guyton looks like he is ready to step up. 
    3. Hobbs is gone (isn't even starting now and btchn bout it too), Bodden is better anyway.
    4. Seymour's gone, Jarvis Green is ready to take up the slack
    5. Harrison's gone, but Chung shows promise and Meriweather looks great, and Sanders brings some lightnin!

    I'm not ready to throw the towel in yet, I like the youth move and mostly like that it opens salary cap space for Mankins and Wilfork.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    In 2007 our D was excellent if not dominant the first 6 games while Seymour was on PUP and Green was filling in for him.  We didn't even have Rodney Harrison the first four games but the D was dominant (see San Diego game).  The D only started having troubles in 2007 after Rosie Colvin went down - that's when Vrabel teetered off.  So the D will be basically the same with or without Seymour.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    The implications are clear. More 43 defense is on the way. If that is the case, then  it doesn't make sense to lock up so much value in a player who will be splitting time. You simply don't need 3 first round selections AND a high second rounder in Brace manning two DT spots.

    The aching question in my mind at this point is are Green and Burgess good enough 4-3 Ends for this to be a truly sucessful defense? I would hope they could flip this selection or some other combo and get a truly dominant end like Peppers or someone who is a versatile "elephant" type end like McGinest was.

    Who that could be I don't know, but I don't think it will be Green, and am sure it won't be Carter.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    Who the f*ck is Carter?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    In Response to Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?:
    [QUOTE]Who the f*ck is Carter?
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]

    Not Richard Seymour. That is for durned sure.

    But in long-form, a 35 year old DE the Pats worked out. He used to be great . . . when he was like 29. This is cold leftovers, but people here keep talking him up for some reason.

    If you are replacing Sey with a 43 end, it better be someone like Jared Allen or Julius Peppers, like a real HOF game changer. Otherwise, you are on the losing end all the way.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dahook20. Show dahook20's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    Heres a unique perspective on the trade.
    http://dereksports.blogspot.com/

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Patriots1970. Show Patriots1970's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    Woke up this morning and just saw this. This was something I had written about if they were to pursue Peppers in Carolina.

    Oddly enough we are in a 4-3 3-4 hybrid but Peppers is now at too big a price.

    I like the trade if only to get a future value for someone we lose at the end of the season. We have lost a great player for this season and the DL was our best area on the team.

    Now other players (younger players) have to step up!

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    In Response to Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?:
    [QUOTE]Woke up this morning and just saw this. This was something I had written about if they were to pursue Peppers in Carolina. Oddly enough we are in a 4-3 3-4 hybrid but Peppers is now at too big a price. I like the trade if only to get a future value for someone we lose at the end of the season. We have lost a great player for this season and the DL was our best area on the team. Now other players (younger players) have to step up!
    Posted by Patriots1970[/QUOTE]I'm listening to Bruce Jacobs a late night Foxsports Radio talkshow host,he's a devout NY Jets fan and he's trying to sell to all the listeners that the Raiders finally fleeced the Patriots in a trade,but evidently he doesn't realize that Big Sey is a FA after this season and that more than likely had they just waited they could have just signed him as such because there is no way the Patriots would have attempted to sign him !!So much for the fleecing theory...Look the Patriots may wind up with a top 5 pick for a guy they wouldn't,couldn't or had no interest in resigning after this season regardless...So if there was any fleecing going on I'm here to tell you that BB has just now put the sheers away after another busy day at the sheep to slaughter p/t job he has as the Patriots private resident Sheep barber.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from DuncanOrange. Show DuncanOrange's posts

    Re: Outstanding Value For Richard Seymour. Anyone Disagree?

    I think we can all trust BB.   

    Here's just a few reasons why. 

    1.  Makes Tom Brady the backup QB in 2001 as a 2nd year 6th round pick.  Smart move.

    2.  Trades Bledsoe, keeps Brady.  Smart move.

    3.  Traded Tebucky Jones and cuts Lawyer Milloy, Rodney Harrison and co win a superbowl that year. 

    4.  Trades star WR Deion Branch and refuses to overpay for good WR David Givens.  The Patriots make it to the AFC Championship that game. 

    5.  Trades a 2nd round pick for Wes Welker, a guy who some thought was way too much for who didn't prove himself yet as a great starting WR. 

    6.  Trades a 2nd round pick for Corey Dillion who everyone said was done and a headcase. 

    7.  Traded for Randy Moss who everyone besides Green Bay didn't want. 

    8.  Tom Brady goes down in 08, BB doesn't bring in any experienced QBs like half the coaches in this league would do, instead he makes Cassel the starting QB.

    One thing is for sure, BB knows what he is doing.  No Coach in NFL history has had so much player personnel decisions and had so much turnover and still won and continues to be a contender year in and year out.  Remember 2002 and 2008 when we didn't make the playoffs we were still 9-7 and 11-5 and once again Brett Farve was the reason we didn't.  Hate that guy.
     

Share