Pats vs. Raiders Preseason

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Co-sign this.

If the Raiders end up with the 15th pick in the draft, will the Seymour trade have been worth it?

I still support the Seymour trade even if the Raiders win the super bowl this year. Last 2 years were a rebuilding phase for this defense, it was noted during the Falcons game that the only starter left on this defense from the 2007 team was VW, that just TWO seasons ago and one starter is left.

Would he have made this team better last year, yes without a doubt. Would he have made it better to an extent where we would have became a super bowl caliber team? Doubtful. Especially once Welker went down and Wilfork/Warren/Brady/Moss were as banged up as we found out they were, it became pretty clear that team wouldn't have had much of a shot to go through SD/Indy/and whoever else with or w/o Seymour. In the end, having Seymour may have pushed us a round further if that. Also let's not act like our pass rush was firing on all cylinders in '08 when Sey was still on the team. To get a first rounder out of it is definitely worth it.

 

[makoute]

It's still just preseason and they're still the Raiders. Remember how good they looked the first couple weeks last season and where they winded up.

Campbell is an upgrade (anybody is an upgrade over Russell) but I don't see him making them a .500 team. I agree with the 5-6 win predictions with a slight chance at 7-9. More reason to cheer for Pioli and McDaniels.

The redskins was a .500 team with him, in a tougher division, so he maybe keep them at or near .500 hundred.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

The redskins was a .500 team with him, in a tougher division, so he maybe keep them at or near .500 hundred.

That was one of his better seasons, and it's uncertain how the supporting cast that particular year (I think you're talking about 2008) compares with the one he'll have this year in Oakland.

His overall record with the Redskins was 19-35 according to a link on google. His latest season was leading them to a 4-12 record.

Oakland's schedule looks pretty tough aside from the NFC west games.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

In their division, I see the Raiders losing both games to San Diego, splitting with Denver, and winning both vs. KC (3-3).

Against the AFC south, I see them beating Jacksonville, but losing to Hou, Indy, and @ Tenn (1-3).

Against the NFC west, I see them beating St Louis and Seattle, but losing @Arizona and @San Francisco (2-2).

That leaves Miami and @Pittsburgh, and I see them losing both of those (0-2).

So that's a total record of 6-10. Losses that they could possibly win include @Denver, Houston, and Miami. If they steal one of those, they're 7-9.

And a 6-10 record gets them the 9th pick or so based on last year's record. FWIW, in 2008, the Lions went 4-0 in the pre-season and proceeded to go 0-16 when it counted.....

 

[bresna]

They wouldn't have been able to franchise Seymour and Wilfork. You can only franchise 1. They decided Vince was their franchise player. I think they made the right choice.

Honestly, if they had kept Seymour and let Vince walk, most of us would be saying we are in big trouble.

And besides, if history is any indicator, Big Sey will miss a few games this year and/or his production will go down. He ain't getting any younger.

 

[TheBaronPatriot]

5 of them sacks were against the Bears first O-Line! And that line really sucks!

Nearly as much as the Jets!

Ferguson and Mangold both went to the pro bowl last year.
Both are young and will be good for a while.
Check your facts again.

 

[40yrpatsfan]

The Seymour trade was an excellent deal for the Pats. He would not have gotten us to the SB last year (anyone disagree with that?), and anything short of a SB is a lost season for us. And BB was convinced that Seymour would have left us after the 2009 season - no reasonable deal possible.

So you could argue that they got this 2011 1st rounder at no meaningful cost at all. And there's about an 80% chance that it's going to be a top 16 pick, and probably a 40% chance that it's a top 10 pick. Not like we were trading with the Colts or Saints.

Belichick has a long term mentality, and will make the best overall deal available, not necessarily the one that most impacts the next season. He's always thinking of the 5 year plan, not just the 1 year plan. That's why he trades picks from one draft to the next, and that's why we're consistently good every year and superior at least once every few years.

This team looks really loaded for the next few seasons. I think the Ravens and Saints are our main competition, we've passed Indy and the Jets aren't for real.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Seymour trade was an excellent deal for the Pats. He would not have gotten us to the SB last year (anyone disagree with that?), and anything short of a SB is a lost season for us. And BB was convinced that Seymour would have left us after the 2009 season - no reasonable deal possible.

So you could argue that they got this 2011 1st rounder at no meaningful cost at all. And there's about an 80% chance that it's going to be a top 16 pick, and probably a 40% chance that it's a top 10 pick. Not like we were trading with the Colts or Saints.

Belichick has a long term mentality, and will make the best overall deal available, not necessarily the one that most impacts the next season. He's always thinking of the 5 year plan, not just the 1 year plan. That's why he trades picks from one draft to the next, and that's why we're consistently good every year and superior at least once every few years.

This team looks really loaded for the next few seasons. I think the Ravens and Saints are our main competition, we've passed Indy and the Jets aren't for real.

 

[Brady_12]

I really dont care what slot the Raider pick falls to as long as the other one is #32.

This 10 ch

 

[WhiZa]

The Lions went 4-0 in the 2008 preseason. Maybe the Raiders can too

 

[jsull87]

i have gone on the record in saying i loved the deal... basically because i love draft time. But aside from that last year with sey would we have won come play off time? maybe...

But i think BB made a pretty solid move by saying ok i will lose one year of a guy that was not in our plans to resign for a 2011 1st rounder from a team that has consistently picked below 15 the past 5 years.

I understand other peoples positions but i think the move was right for this re-tooling defense. But in the end i think everyone on this board will judge this trade by the caliber of player that the traded pick gets us... if it's fitzgerald/ngata/ware ... winner if it's a maroney/a j hawk/ JaMarcus Russell then we will all be crying foul.

Something else i came across was of the top 15 picks 2003-2007 around 38/75 have turned out to be pro bowlers. Thats not including the Ty Warrens e.t.c who are on the cusp. I Just think it was a pretty solid move for the long term

 

[Bostonian1962]

i have gone on the record in saying i loved the deal... basically because i love draft time. But aside from that last year with sey would we have won come play off time? maybe...

But i think BB made a pretty solid move by saying ok i will lose one year of a guy that was not in our plans to resign for a 2011 1st rounder from a team that has consistently picked below 15 the past 5 years.

I understand other peoples positions but i think the move was right for this re-tooling defense. But in the end i think everyone on this board will judge this trade by the caliber of player that the traded pick gets us... if it's fitzgerald/ngata/ware ... winner if it's a maroney/a j hawk/ JaMarcus Russell then we will all be crying foul.

Something else i came across was of the top 15 picks 2003-2007 around 38/75 have turned out to be pro bowlers. Thats not including the Ty Warrens e.t.c who are on the cusp. I Just think it was a pretty solid move for the long term

This organization does not like the value of Top 10 picks, but they may like it under a new system. In any event, I don't care where the pick falls. We'll get a good player out of it. I'm like others, in that I just want the 32 with the Pats' pick.

If we don't show any pass rush in the last two games, what will you all think?

 

[alvinnf]

Raiders 7-9..... Write it down. Good season for crazy AL.....

 

[patsinthesnow]

If the Raiders pick is in the Top 10, I want a defensive stud.

If the Raiders pick is in the Teens, I want a RB.

If the Raiders pick is in the Twenties, I'll laugh.

 

[spacecrime]

The reasoning behind the trade was a) we would get a top prospect b) we would do so with a rookie wage-scale in place.

No way. Where did you get that? Gary Tanguay?

The reasoning was much more straightforward. BB decided that one year of Seymour was not worth as much to the Patriots in the long run as five years of a first round pick.

Whether you agree with that philosophy or not is one thing, but Occam's Razor dictates here.

It's really just a variant of the philosophy BB uses when he trades a pick this year for a one-round-lower pick next year:

Which is more useful to the Pats in the long run:
a) a third round pick for four years starting this year
b) a second round pick for four years starting next year.

Many want the player right now, others want a better player starting next year. It is plain what BB prefers.

 

[rookBoston]

So, how good would Mark Ingram look running for the Pats in 2011? Direct from Saban's hands into Belichick's backfield, brought to you by our friendly trading partners in Oakland.

 

[stinkypete]

If the Raiders end up with the 15th pick in the draft, will the Seymour trade have been worth it?

Yes.

Was Richard Seymour the difference between the Patriots winning the Super Bowl and losing badly in the playoffs. I don't think so. There were far too many holes in the team.

Would Richard Seymour be the difference in the Patriots winning, or not making, the Super Bowl. I'm inclined to say no, even in the light of Warren's injury. Compare the 2001 -2004 defenses with the 2005 - 2008 defenses. The years the Patriots had dominant linebackers and defensive backs, they won Super Bowls. The years they had dominant defensive linemen but flawed back 7's, they came ooh so close but couldn't finish.

I think, as exciting as the luxury of the Warren/Wilfork/Seymour group was, it was maybe too much invested in one aspect of the defense. I did not see much dropoff in the defense's overall play in 2009 compared to 2008. We're ok with Wilfork and some JAGs if the linebackers and defensive backs perform. If the linebackers and defensive backs don't perform, it doesn't matter who is on that line.

And the value is undeniable. Even if Oakland picks around #15 (I don't see them that high, but #10-#12 sounds about right), that is sensational value for a player who's best years a 5 years behind him. He's still rock solid, but no difference maker.

 

[Reckedtrek]

So, how good would Mark Ingram look running for the Pats in 2011? Direct from Saban's hands into Belichick's backfield, brought to you by our friendly trading partners in Oakland.

I like the way that sounds, but I'm guessing we're going defense with the pick from Oakland. Ingram or a DL or OLB play maker... either fills a big need in 2011.

 

[tombonneau]

Yes.

Was Richard Seymour the difference between the Patriots winning the Super Bowl and losing badly in the playoffs. I don't think so. There were far too many holes in the team.

Would Richard Seymour be the difference in the Patriots winning, or not making, the Super Bowl. I'm inclined to say no, even in the light of Warren's injury. Compare the 2001 -2004 defenses with the 2005 - 2008 defenses. The years the Patriots had dominant linebackers and defensive backs, they won Super Bowls. The years they had dominant defensive linemen but flawed back 7's, they came ooh so close but couldn't finish.

I think, as exciting as the luxury of the Warren/Wilfork/Seymour group was, it was maybe too much invested in one aspect of the defense. I did not see much dropoff in the defense's overall play in 2009 compared to 2008. We're ok with Wilfork and some JAGs if the linebackers and defensive backs perform. If the linebackers and defensive backs don't perform, it doesn't matter who is on that line.

And the value is undeniable. Even if Oakland picks around #15 (I don't see them that high, but #10-#12 sounds about right), that is sensational value for a player who's best years a 5 years behind him. He's still rock solid, but no difference maker.

I don't think he would have made a difference in the Ravens game, but you have to wonder if his leadership and defense wouldn't have prevented one or even two fourth quarter collapses. Then you're talking about having a bye and the ravens game never happens.

I'm actually for the trade. Was then and still am now. But when playing What If? you have to look at the whole season.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Many want the player right now, others want a better player starting next year. It is plain what BB prefers.

Except that that's not always what he prefers.

IIRC, there were reliable reports that the Patriots were offered packages to trade #34 in 2009 for a 2010 first + lower 2009 picks, but turned such offers down.