Fencer
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2006
- Messages
- 14,293
- Reaction score
- 3,986
After a technical train wreck in the first (main) Seymour thread -- e.g. all the triple posts -- and an online-idiot train wreck in Andy's, I'm trying again.
1. A very gifted player is gone, with no assets coming back immediately. That is bad for the team this year.
2. At least, unlike some similar cases in the past, he's leaving behind a unit that's still well-stocked.
3. Seymour was my least favorite of the Pats' top players. If somebody had to go eventually, I'm glad it was him.
4. That's largely because he seemed to be the least bought-in. Besides the reasons various other people have cited, I think that because of how he threw BB under the bus after Ratgini outcoached him. BB throws himself under the bus often, but his players almost never do.
5. I do think somebody had to go eventually, based on all the usual analysis about guys coming up for their next contracts around the same time.
6. Kaczur is re-signed for multiple millions/year, but Seymour is shipped out. If that's not a strong statement about investing in a middle-class, I don't know what is.
7. Trading a 3rd this year for a high first two years from now is very much a best-case scenario. To say we got the equivalent of a 2009 3rd for Seymour is silly.
8. As for the other long-time vets:
A. Brady is staying for years. Duh.
B. Matt Light has to be hearing footsteps, in German.
C. Kevin Faulk's base-case replacement is Laurence Maroney. Maroney has other value than replacing Faulk, so there's no ticking clock on the transition. Faulk is pretty unique in the role he's played (shotgun RB for a lot of snaps, feature RB for a small but not trivial number), so it's tough to draw analogies from other players in predicting how long he'll last.
1. A very gifted player is gone, with no assets coming back immediately. That is bad for the team this year.
2. At least, unlike some similar cases in the past, he's leaving behind a unit that's still well-stocked.
3. Seymour was my least favorite of the Pats' top players. If somebody had to go eventually, I'm glad it was him.
4. That's largely because he seemed to be the least bought-in. Besides the reasons various other people have cited, I think that because of how he threw BB under the bus after Ratgini outcoached him. BB throws himself under the bus often, but his players almost never do.
5. I do think somebody had to go eventually, based on all the usual analysis about guys coming up for their next contracts around the same time.
6. Kaczur is re-signed for multiple millions/year, but Seymour is shipped out. If that's not a strong statement about investing in a middle-class, I don't know what is.
7. Trading a 3rd this year for a high first two years from now is very much a best-case scenario. To say we got the equivalent of a 2009 3rd for Seymour is silly.
8. As for the other long-time vets:
A. Brady is staying for years. Duh.
B. Matt Light has to be hearing footsteps, in German.
C. Kevin Faulk's base-case replacement is Laurence Maroney. Maroney has other value than replacing Faulk, so there's no ticking clock on the transition. Faulk is pretty unique in the role he's played (shotgun RB for a lot of snaps, feature RB for a small but not trivial number), so it's tough to draw analogies from other players in predicting how long he'll last.
