SITE MENU
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.You seem to have no concept of discounted value. Why not trade Seymour for a 2013 1st?
The reality is that each year a draft choice is dimished by one round.
======================================================
It is VERY LIKELY that Belichick would have been able to move on of our 2010 seconds forward to a 2011 first. How many firsts do you think Belichick wants each year. Sure, Belichick will do well with the pick. But that pick may be no different than the two 2009 3rds Belichick traded into 2010 2nds, one of which might have been traded into a 2011 first.
In fact, apparently Belichick was offered a 2010 second, but wanted the 2011 first insteade, in essense doing the 2010 draft day trade ahead of time.
The bottom line is Seymour was dumped for the equivalent of a 2009 3rd round draft choice. Oh, and did I mention that we likely could have kept Seymour and gotten a 2011 3rd when he left.
I wouldn't underestimate the rookie seasons of messrs. Mayo and Seymour.
Of course, they (probably, re Mayo) don't hit a peak in year one. I'll take Mayo's and Seymour's rookie seasons over the 2009 Seymour any day.....and twice on Sunday.
That's fine, but that's not what I'd asserted. Also, even within the bounds of your post, I would point to Mayo's struggles in pass coverage as an example of why you need the time for these players to develop.
I take back my earlier answer.
Who I would trade it for.
Larry Fitzgerald.
Adrian Peterson.
Ryan Clady (taking age into account)
Peppers
Freeney (since we are 4-3)
Patrick Willis
DeMarcus Ware
Nnamdi Asomugha/Asante Samuel
Ed Reed.
That's pretty much it.
I take back my earlier answer.
Who I would trade it for.
Larry Fitzgerald.
Adrian Peterson.
Ryan Clady (taking age into account)
Peppers
Freeney (since we are 4-3)
Patrick Willis
DeMarcus Ware
Nnamdi Asomugha/Asante Samuel
Ed Reed.
That's pretty much it.
I would trade the 2011 pick for a ball hawking DB.
Correct.
Therefore that pick for Seymour is a bargain.
Let's not forget that all of this assumes that BB is using a defensive scheme in which Seymour would be used (for the same amount of reps), that he has in the past.
1) I don't think the evidence supports that, and in fact in a ton of other "Seymour" thread, indications are the opposite.
Only 1 person (okay perhaps a few) know really how our defense will scheme this year and have all of the information to know how ANY of our D-linemen will project into it.
will we be having a little more aggressive, stunting 4-3 setup that requires a little less bulk and more speed on the end in more situations. If that's the case, Jarvis's stock goes up a little, and Seymour's goes down.
Not saying that's what's gonna happen, but the reality is that the D-line is a series of moving parts, and the premise that BB just arbitrarily got rid of someone and deliberately hurt the team is just silly. It's one thing to get caught of guard with a "Branch" scenario, another to make a deliberate move like this.
The fact that Wilfork was also mentioned in all this tells me that whatever roll they may have filled over the last few seasons, may not exactly be the same as what BB is looking to do. Ditto Vrabel or anyone else that ain't here from last year.
Maybe, but how does he vary to Mayo?Not DeMeco Ryans?
So you think that Belichick would have been unable to use Seymour's talents is his 2009 defense? ??????????????
Did I say that? Reading comprehension is not your strong suit is it?
I don't think BB thinks in terms of individual players when constructing his defense. He hasn't in the past. He decides what he wants and then makes sure he has players that fit that scheme. He knows what he wanted and for whatever reason, Seymour was expendable in it, at least to the potential level of a 2011 1st round pick.
Time will tell if that is correct or not.
Did I say that? Reading comprehension is not your strong suit is it?
I don't think BB thinks in terms of individual players when constructing his defense. He hasn't in the past. He decides what he wants and then makes sure he has players that fit that scheme. He knows what he wanted and for whatever reason, Seymour was expendable in it, at least to the potential level of a 2011 1st round pick.
Time will tell if that is correct or not.
Of course Belichick can develop a defense with out Seymour this year, and without Wilfork for that matter.
The open question is why he would want to. And yes, we will find out in the playoffs or the Super Bowl.
By the way, I would go for a monster LT.