Raiders Kirk Morrison drawing interest from few teams

[muzz]

Tackle wise Kirk was doing pretty well for a few years, I noticed his production dipped a bit when Thomas was brought in...
I had both of them in FF 2 years ago, and Kirk the year before that.

I don't get to watch him play, so I have no clue if he's where he's supposed to be.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

Explain your logic please.

Mine is simple as I just explained

Based on the Patriots track record with top 15 picks (Sey and Mayo) in BBs tenure I surmise we will get more production out of the Raiders pick then they will out of Seymour. This logic also gives the raiders the benifit of the rest of Seymours career which we would not have had as it was an all but certainty he was gone this offseason So really this trade from our prespective really comes down to a top ten rookie vs one year of Sey. but as this discussion is Raiders Vs Pats in the deal I will include Seys full tenure at Oak and I still see us geting more out of a top ten guy.

I've posted on it time and again, so please forgive me for not going in depth. The player gotten in 2011 is all but irrelevant. Pissing away the 2009 season, along with the moves that could have been made for 2010, is more than enough to evaluate the trade as an absolute disaster.

But, then again, some people don't seem to mind that the 2009 season was pissed away a week before it began.

 

[SteveKiner]

I posted this in an earlier thread but I hope the Pats do NOT pursue Kirk Morrison

I watched every game the Raiders played this year(don't ask!) and I just don't see it. IMO Morrison not very good. I think the Raiders are hoping someone signs him and they get a third. I understand that Morrison looks good when you look at the stats but I don't remember him making any tackles for loss or even making any tackles at or near the LOS. The weakest part of his game is shedding blockers so I don't see him fitting at ILB in the Pats 3-4. The Raiders run defense, especially up the middle, was absolutely putrid. I never watched him until this past year so maybe I'm missing something but IMO he was the worst starting LB on the Raiders and they probably had the worst LB's in the league. I think Ricky Brown was doing better than Morrison until Brown got hurt. I hope I'm wrong about him if the Pats sign him, but IMO the Pats had a Kirk Morrison on the team last year. They called him Paris Lenon. Hopefully they pass, even at a third.

 

[alphilip77]

Well....we have a guy who can't rush the passer (Thomas) and they have a guy who apparently can't tackle. I say...let's trade problems!!

 

[signbabybrady]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

I've posted on it time and again, so please forgive me for not going in depth. The player gotten in 2011 is all but irrelevant. Pissing away the 2009 season, along with the moves that could have been made for 2010, is more than enough to evaluate the trade as an absolute disaster.

But, then again, some people don't seem to mind that the 2009 season was pissed away a week before it began.

They obviously would have had a better chance at a SB last year with Seymour. would they have won? I don't know I can certainly say he would have helped vs the ravens run game so you have a point. But I can also say that the 2011 first rd pick will help us win a SB in 11,12,13, and or 14 and on more than having Sey for a year would.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

They obviously would have had a better chance at a SB last year with Seymour. would they have won? I don't know I can certainly say he would have helped vs the ravens run game so you have a point. But I can also say that the 2011 first rd pick will help us win a SB in 11,12,13, and or 14 and on more than having Sey for a year would.

This is the classic argument that people have tried to use to justify the trade. I don't buy it, though. First, tossing away last season means one less year of Brady's 'prime' for the team to have tried to win it all. Second, they could have held on to Seymour for at least 3 seasons (last year and 2 franchise years) before his salary became too monstrous. Third, the opportunity costs of trading him last year were fully on display, as the team couldn't generate any real pass rush without him. Fourth, Seymour is a Hall Of Fame talent, and even at the top of the draft, those players don't just grow on trees. Fifth, 2011 is likely going to be a much weaker draft than it normally would have been, due to the enormous influx of players into this year's draft, which means that it's less likely the Patriots will be plucking diamonds from that draft mine next year. Sixth, even if the player chosen is almost God-like, his major impact isn't likely to be felt until his second or third season, so you're looking at him hitting his stride when Brady is 35 or 36 years old.

 

[signbabybrady]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

This is the classic argument that people have tried to use to justify the trade. I don't buy it, though. First, tossing away last season means one less year of Brady's 'prime' for the team to have tried to win it all. Second, they could have held on to Seymour for at least 3 seasons (last year and 2 franchise years) before his salary became too monstrous. Third, the opportunity costs of trading him last year were fully on display, as the team couldn't generate any real pass rush without him. Fourth, Seymour is a Hall Of Fame talent, and even at the top of the draft, those players don't just grow on trees. Fifth, 2011 is likely going to be a much weaker draft than it normally would have been, due to the enormous influx of players into this year's draft, which means that it's less likely the Patriots will be plucking diamonds from that draft mine next year. Sixth, even if the player chosen is almost God-like, his major impact isn't likely to be felt until his second or third season, so you're looking at him hitting his stride when Brady is 35 or 36 years old.

I know there is a certain window with Brady as QB but 1 I hope we get at least 5 more with him. 2 call me crazy but regardless of how long Brady does stick around I hope this team can compete for titles without him (Cassel year as evidence).


That franchise argument is mute as they had to use it on Vince and if Sey was around they each would have had more leverage in a deal.

The weak draft is mute too as if it turns out to be a weak draft than it will be even more key to be at the top of it.

So what if the 2011 talent takes a year or two to develope again I want to continue to compete for titles forever not just during a window that you are randomly setting.


Did I like losing Seymour no, am I saying we fleeced the raiders in the deal no, I am saying the deal was pretty fair and that I am sure both sides are OK with the way the deals between the two have shaken out as far as fairness in the deal and not the team success which is seperate.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

That franchise argument is mute as they had to use it on Vince and if Sey was around they each would have had more leverage in a deal.

This is absolutely incorrect. First, they should have gotten a deal done with Wilfork even before the season started. Second, the threat of a franchise tag is not what I'm talking about. The team should have signed Wilfork. It could then have slapped the franchise tag on Seymour. Instead, the team chose to extend players like Kaczur before they had to.

The weak draft is mute too as if it turns out to be a weak draft than it will be even more key to be at the top of it.

1.) You don't know that the pick will mean that the Patriots are on top of the draft

2.) The Patriots already had a 1st round pick and could have packaged it with other picks to move up. Instead, it's an extra pick in what's likely to be an historically weak draft.

So what if the 2011 talent takes a year or two to develope again I want to continue to compete for titles forever not just during a window that you are randomly setting.

No team competes forever, and the window I am setting is clearly not random.

Did I like losing Seymour no, am I saying we fleeced the raiders in the deal no, I am saying the deal was pretty fair and that I am sure both sides are OK with the way the deals between the two have shaken out as far as fairness in the deal and not the team success which is seperate.

It was a terrible deal for the Patriots. Anyone who looks at the lack of pass rush, and at the inability to stop the run when it mattered, should be willing to admit to the disaster that was that trade.

 

[signbabybrady]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

This is absolutely incorrect. First, they should have gotten a deal done with Wilfork even before the season started. Second, the threat of a franchise tag is not what I'm talking about. The team should have signed Wilfork. It could then have slapped the franchise tag on Seymour. Instead, the team chose to extend players like Kaczur before they had to.

The fact is they couldnt get the deal done with Vince prior to the year. They couldn't even get it done without the use of the tag even when there wasnt someone else to use the tag on. so they did something else to ensure they didn't lose that value becuase you didn't like losing Seymour which I didn't either doesn't mean the deal was a bad one long term.

1.) You don't know that the pick will mean that the Patriots are on top of the draft

Come on you really think the Raiders wont be top ten in the draft next year

2.) The Patriots already had a 1st round pick and could have packaged it with other picks to move up. Instead, it's an extra pick in what's likely to be an historically weak draft.

They still could do this if they wanted and they still have the Sey pick

No team competes forever, and the window I am setting is clearly not random.

No team can but that doesn't mean mortgage the future for any one given year. I want this team doing everything within their power to try and compete forever

It was a terrible deal for the Patriots. Anyone who looks at the lack of pass rush, and at the inability to stop the run when it mattered, should be willing to admit to the disaster that was that trade.

I will admit the deal hurt us last year but it will help us for more years than it hurt us. 5-6 years of player X who should be a top ten pick will help us more than Big Sey could have last year and more than Big Sey will help the Raiders last year and for however long he is there.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Now that Morrison has signed his tender there are rumors of a Patriots move to get him by the RFA deadline...we shall see

 

[Rob0729]

Now that Morrison has signed his tender there are rumors of a Patriots move to get him by the RFA deadline...we shall see

Not doubting you heard the rumors, but where did you see it? I haven't heard anything about a potential trade of Morrison other than Florio speculating that team could have him for a fourth rounder.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Not doubting you heard the rumors, but where did you see it? I haven't heard anything about a potential trade of Morrison other than Florio speculating that team could have him for a fourth rounder.

Yeah,it came from Twitter,Might have been Florio or Breer....Could happen,but I would think Al is done with the Pats for awhile....I think he mentioned a 5th rounder

 

[Rob0729]

Yeah,it came from Twitter,Might have been Florio or Breer....Could happen,but I would think Al is done with the Pats for awhile....I think he mentioned a 5th rounder

If the Pats give up a fifth rounder for him, it would be a good deal. He has been a leading tackler in the league the last three years. He might be overrated, but for a 5th rounder it is worth the gamble.

As for Al being done with the Pats, I thought he would be done after his little tirade two years ago about the Pats tampering with Moss before the trade, but he made two trades with the Pats since.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

I've posted on it time and again, so please forgive me for not going in depth. The player gotten in 2011 is all but irrelevant. Pissing away the 2009 season, along with the moves that could have been made for 2010, is more than enough to evaluate the trade as an absolute disaster.

But, then again, some people don't seem to mind that the 2009 season was pissed away a week before it began.

So you really think that the Pats would have done better had they not traded Seymour?? I didn't realize that Seymour played Guard or Center on the O-line. I didn't realize that Seymour played MLB on defense.

Those were two of the GLARING areas last year. More so than 3-4DE/4-3 DT. Which is where Seymour would have been playing.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

SMY now has it on Boston.com

An attractive Raider? - Extra Points - Boston.com

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

So you really think that the Pats would have done better had they not traded Seymour?? I didn't realize that Seymour played Guard or Center on the O-line. I didn't realize that Seymour played MLB on defense.

Those were two of the GLARING areas last year. More so than 3-4DE/4-3 DT. Which is where Seymour would have been playing.

Yes, I think the Pats would have done better last year had they not traded Seymour. A blind man could see that.

Also, call me when "MLB" is the only position of worth on a defense, particularly one playing a 3-4. Had the DE spot not been a problem, the Patriots wouldn't have had to move Wilfork out there, and Greene would have been retained. Also, while I'm sure the Patriots did not need Seymour's ability to help with the pass rush <cough>, Albert Breer noted Seymour's ability to influence a locker room among the things that were missing when talking about the Patriots problems last season.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

This is the classic argument that people have tried to use to justify the trade. I don't buy it, though. First, tossing away last season means one less year of Brady's 'prime' for the team to have tried to win it all. Second, they could have held on to Seymour for at least 3 seasons (last year and 2 franchise years) before his salary became too monstrous. Third, the opportunity costs of trading him last year were fully on display, as the team couldn't generate any real pass rush without him. Fourth, Seymour is a Hall Of Fame talent, and even at the top of the draft, those players don't just grow on trees. Fifth, 2011 is likely going to be a much weaker draft than it normally would have been, due to the enormous influx of players into this year's draft, which means that it's less likely the Patriots will be plucking diamonds from that draft mine next year. Sixth, even if the player chosen is almost God-like, his major impact isn't likely to be felt until his second or third season, so you're looking at him hitting his stride when Brady is 35 or 36 years old.

Your Fifth point is BS. There are no more underclassmen in this draft than there has been in any of the previous drafts..

As for your Sixth point, one only has to look at Seymour and Mayo to know that you can find players who will make an impact at the top of the draft..

This idea that they "pisssed" the season away is a figment of your imagination. Did they make it harder on themselves? Yes. I will not disagree there. But this idea you are trying to perpetuate that Seymour would have been the difference between losing out in the wild card round and losing out deeper in the play-offs is you guessing. Plain and simple.. You have nothing that says that the Pats would have gone deeper in the play-offs than they did.

You also seem to be forgetting that the Pats had more trouble with the MLB position due to Mayo's injury and with the O-line. How would Seymour have fixed those problems?

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

Yes, I think the Pats would have done better last year had they not traded Seymour. A blind man could see that.

Also, call me when "MLB" is the only position of worth on a defense, particularly one playing a 3-4. Had the DE spot not been a problem, the Patriots wouldn't have had to move Wilfork out there, and Greene would have been retained. Also, while I'm sure the Patriots did not need Seymour's ability to help with the pass rush <cough>, Albert Breer noted Seymour's ability to influence a locker room among the things that were missing when talking about the Patriots problems last season.

Newsflash - The Pats played more 4-3 Base and Nickle last year than they did 3-4. That's fact. BB acknowledged it early in camp. And that is what happened during the season.

Instead of sweeping aside valid points because they take apart your argurment, how about addressing them. The FACT is that you are as CLUELESS as the rest of us when it comes to predicting what would have happened had Seymour not been traded.

The fact that Mayo missed significant time at MLB was huge early in the season. The fact that the O-line played so inconsistently was also huge.

Taking out Burgess and putting in Seymour would have upgraded the defense. But there is no way in hell you can say with any certainty that the Patriots would have gone farther in the play-offs. And you're lying to yourself and everyone else if you believe otherwise.

 

[JSn]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

Your Fifth point is BS. There are no more underclassmen in this draft than there has been in any of the previous drafts..

Didn't Bill say there were in his presser?

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Raiders Kirk Morrisondrawing interest from few teams

Your Fifth point is BS. There are no more underclassmen in this draft than there has been in any of the previous drafts..

Hmmm...

Fifth, 2011 is likely going to be a much weaker draft than it normally would have been, due to the enormous influx of players into this year's draft, which means that it's less likely the Patriots will be plucking diamonds from that draft mine next year.

Tell it to everyone talking about it. This is considered one of the deepest drafts in years. The underclassmen are a big part of that, and that will impact the strength of next year's draft.

As for your Sixth point, one only has to look at Seymour and Mayo to know that you can find players who will make an impact at the top of the draft..

Given that my Sixth point states nothing to the contrary to what you posted here, and that I think you can find players who will make an impact at any point in the draft, I'll just say "Ok". :confused2:

This idea that they "pisssed" the season away is a figment of your imagination. Did they make it harder on themselves? Yes. I will not disagree there. But this idea you are trying to perpetuate that Seymour would have been the difference between losing out in the wild card round and losing out deeper in the play-offs is you guessing. Plain and simple.. You have nothing that says that the Pats would have gone deeper in the play-offs than they did.

Wait, is it a figment of my imagination that the Burgess trade was a bust, too? Is it a figment of my imagination that the Patriots actually had to move Vince Wilfork out to DE on occasion? Is it a figment of my imagination that the Ravens running game was part of what destroyed the Patriots in the playoffs, and that the defensive pass rush was a problem all year? It seems that you may not know what "figment of your imagination" actually means.

Plain and simple, you have proffered a different opinion from mine. That's your right. The opinion you've put forward is a ridiculous opinion that you have to know is a crock. That's my take. We seem to be at an impasse. Such is life.

You also seem to be forgetting that the Pats had more trouble with the MLB position due to Mayo's injury and with the O-line. How would Seymour have fixed those problems?

How does a great defensive lineman help his linebackers? You're seriously asking that question? Have you been drinking this morning?