Welcome to PatsFans.com

Revisiting Seymour trade

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by DonBlackmon55, Sep 28, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DonBlackmon55

    DonBlackmon55 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

  2. BSR

    BSR Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,903
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    I hated when they traded Seymour because I always felt as if he was the most important part of the D. However, I was willing to take a wait and see approach. So far we have definitely been on the short end of the deal but it all depends in the long run on how Nate turns out. Still it would have been nice to have Richard around for the past few years. I really wonder how last year would have turned out if we had him.
  3. Froob

    Froob Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    4,825
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    #32 Jersey

    Mark Anderson is on pace for 10 sacks and Brady is on pace for 58 touchdowns and 7077 yards. 3 games is a really small sample. I really don't think Seymour would re-sign he had beef with Belichick supposedly about coming out on 3rd down or something like that. And he wanted BIG money. If he becomes a free agent he isn't resigning here. Seymour is a great player and all but, I still believe trading him was the best option. It comes down to this, with or without seymour they don't win the super bowl in 09. Only other option I see is maybe they sign vince earlier and franchise tag seymour last year.
  4. condon84

    condon84 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    We took an L on this. No matter how good Solder becomes, Seymour would have made a huge difference on our defense last year. No way the Jets go marching down the field with Seymour in our lineup.

    Last year should have been the 4th ring for our team and we'd be in a better position this year for a 5th.
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2011
  5. sbpatfan

    sbpatfan Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,930
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It was a good trade. They didn't have the money to keep him and Seymour wasn't the missing link in 2009. That team wasn't going anywhere.
  6. satz

    satz Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    This has to go down as a bad trade. Nothing to do with solder we always could traded up to get him with all the bust 3rd and 2nd we blew, after seymour left we lost attitude in the DL. He used to be a bad az and bully on the dline.He is not only tough but someone who other teams OL do not push around.I remember so many games he was a nightmare due to his mental makeup.

    We still are looking for attitude on the DL. shawn ellis has other than that nothing.ellis is too new. Every good DL in the league has attitude and a bad mother in the middle pushing and shoving , seymour was our instigator.
  7. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,360
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +59 / 1 / -0

    Several things:

    1.) As pointed out in the article, there was a good chance that Seymour would have left after the 2009 season because the Pats weren't going to be able or not willing to pay both him and Wilfork. So comparing what he could have done over the last two years might not be a fair comparison in evaluating the trade because he might have been gone in 2010 no matter if he was traded or not.
    2.) Seymour isn't likely to get 14 sacks or even double digit sacks. He got two sacks vs. the Broncos who are in the top 10 in sacks allowed. He was also sacked 5 times in that game. So the Broncos just had troubles with protection that game. In the last two games, he has had 0.5 sacks coming against the Jets who are the eight most sacked team in the league.
  8. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    40,771
    Likes Received:
    58
    Ratings:
    +81 / 3 / -1

    Disable Jersey

    Lousy trade then

    Lousy trade now

    The excuses by those trying to defend it have never held up, and they still don't


    Not much more to say on the subject, really
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2011
  9. sbpatfan

    sbpatfan Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,930
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    If you keep Seymour to 2010, whose contract do you want to rip up? Brady's or Wilfork's?
  10. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,360
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +59 / 1 / -0

    Really? So the Pats don't trade him, they franchise Wilfork, and Seymour leaves in free agency and plays for another team last year; he would have made a difference on the Pats defense last year? So the Pats would have won the Super Bowl if he was playing for the Jets last year instead of the Raiders?

    Sorry, people forget that that if the Pats didn't trade him, there was at least a decent chance he would have only stuck around one more year and been gone before last season. The Pats weren't likely to pay him last year and he would have gotten a Julius Peppers type of deal on the free market.
  11. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    40,771
    Likes Received:
    58
    Ratings:
    +81 / 3 / -1

    Disable Jersey

    Neither would have needed to be ripped up.
  12. PATRIOTSFANINPA

    PATRIOTSFANINPA Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    15,718
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    In his final years here,Seymour was not a difference maker on this team and was frequently injured weeks at a time.

    Maybe he just fits in as a Raider than he was here for some reason.

    I don't think his presence was all that huge after the 2005 season and I really don't think he would have been a destructive force had he been here now.
    Some people live on the early years of Seymour when he was that all pro wrecking ball.....he left here as a shallow of that player.

    I don't miss him all that much and our defense would still suck ass right now,even with him on the line...there are more problems with this D than just adding a player in his 30s to it.
  13. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,360
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +59 / 1 / -0

    I don't know if they would have needed to rip up the contract of anyone, but there was little chance that they were going to have two of the highest paid d-linemen in the league. That's what it would have took to keep Seymour and his injury history and lowered production from his All Pro days obviously had the Patriots thinking he wasn't worth it.

    Seymour is still a very good d-lineman, but he is no longer an elite d-lineman. The Raiders are paying him elite money and the Pats probably would have had to do it too.
  14. satz

    satz Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Even though the leageu considers him as one but ROB does not.
  15. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,360
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +59 / 1 / -0

    Seymour hasn't been all that great with the Raiders either. He had a very good year last year and a decent year in 2009.
  16. VJCPatriot

    VJCPatriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    12,304
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +23 / 1 / -0

    If Seymour was playing for the Pats like he's playing for the Raiders now, we would have never let him go. Problem was that he was a bit injury prone and not as consistent as before. Yes in hindsight maybe it would have been better to extend Seymour and franchise Wilfork, but those are the tough decisions you have to make. Can't get them all right. And I'm not sure we could have afforded Seymour and Wilfork at the same time even if we wanted to.
  17. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,360
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +59 / 1 / -0

    LOL! I guess I missed the memo where the league considered him an elite d-lineman. The players voted him #66 of the top 100 players in 2010 (in between Vonte Leach at 65 and Brian Waters at 67) . He was the eleventh d-lineman ranked. They had Justin Tuck (60), Tamba Hali (64), and Robert Mathis (57) ranked higher than him and I don't consider any of the elite. That makes him in the very good category not elite. I think the players agree with me.

    Right now, he is the highest paid d-lineman in the league and the league doesn't consider him top 10.

    http://top100.nfl.com/

    If there is actual proof that the "league" considers him elite, please provide.
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2011
  18. Froob

    Froob Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    4,825
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    #32 Jersey

    Seymour is making 15 mill a year over the next two years. How do the pats fit that it?
  19. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    40,771
    Likes Received:
    58
    Ratings:
    +81 / 3 / -1

    Disable Jersey

    1.) That's now, not then.

    2.) That's the Raiders overpaying.

    3.) J. Kraft stated categorically that the Patriots have never lost a player they wanted to keep over money.
  20. Hubie

    Hubie Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Neither. There was no cap in 2010 and if they'd signed Vince early, which it seems they don't like to do so much anymore, his cap hit this year would likely be substantially less than the 4.65 mil it is. In any event they're $10.5 mil under the cap for 2011.

    As someone said;
    Bad deal then, bad deal now.
  21. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    12,926
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0 / -0

    Seymour was a casualty of the CBA negotiations. With Brady, Wilfork and Seymour up, you'd be hardpressed to shell out $75 million to these guys up front, especially in this economic climate.

    In hindsight, we have plenty of cap room so the Patriots could have signed Seymour, there's a good CBA in place, etc.

    But that's in hindsight.

    Not so concerned about Solder either. clearly the Patriots wanted him and they could have traded their #1 with the Vereen pick, a 2 and a 4, whatever, to move up from 28 or whereever to 18. They would have had Solder regardless.

    In the future, we need to sign our best players. We should have stayed with branch and Seymour, but given the variables around Seymour's contract, it's hard to say. The business climate got in the way.
  22. The Boston Patriot

    The Boston Patriot PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Messages:
    851
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    At the time of the trade, Sey was at best average for us (when he was on
    the field) and looking for the really big payday. I doubt he would have signed
    with us unless it was under the franchise label. I'm satisfied with the trade. I
    do think the Raiders got the better part of the deal since the trade, but at a
    very big price. Over the next few years hopefully that will even things out and
    it becomes a big win-win for both teams.

    The only part of Sey that bothers me to this day was I thought the last
    couple of years he was just 'playing' the game and was not 'working'
    at his craft. I am probably wrong but that's how I saw it.
  23. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,360
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +59 / 1 / -0

    The CBA had most teams hesitant to sign big deals. Who knew how the CBA would have turned out. Personally, I think if the Pats didn't make the trade, they would have let Seymour walk before last season. If they knew then, what they knew now they might have made a deal. But at the time, I don't see them giving big contracts to Brady, Wilfork, and Seymour especially since Seymour appeared to be on the decline.
  24. everlong

    everlong Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    5,697
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +33 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    I think he meant to say just money. In the cases of Assante, Seymour and Branch there were other factors but money certainly was in the list of deal breakers.
  25. Bostonian1962

    Bostonian1962 Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,044
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    I always find it interesting that a player plays at a lesser level than is expected, and gets traded. Player is insulted/embarressed/motivated, and turns it up a notch with new team. Suddenly, many feel like the team never should have traded that player, as if he would have played that way for the old team (which he was not doing).

    P.S. - He hasn't exactly been one of the best DLinemen in the league since he left. Better than he was, yes. Elite, and worth being the highest paid at his position? No way.
    P.P.S. - If Solder plays at a top level for the next 12 years, what will folks say then?
  26. letekro

    letekro Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,153
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Haha. Seymour wouldn't have resigned with us after 2009, so you're completely wrong. Never minding that small problem, why exactly would he have made the difference last year?? He would have tackled Cotchery on that ridiculous play in the 4th quarter? He would've played TE and caught that touchdown pass that Crumpler dropped?

    Not suprised to see you jump in on this thread started by your Brother in Misery.
  27. PlainOldEd

    PlainOldEd Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The question isn't "would this team be better with Seymour?", I think we all agree that it would. The question is was the trade a good or bad idea. Personally, even if he hadn't been traded, I don't think he would have re-signed. So I would vote that it was the right thing to do at the time.
  28. aluminum seats

    aluminum seats Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2006
    Messages:
    2,419
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    I vote that it's water under the bridge. We coulda done this, we shoulda done that, whatever. It'd be nice having Seymour on the team, and it is nice Solder's on the team. That's about it. Play on.
  29. FCB02062

    FCB02062 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1,181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The Patriots footy pajama brigade will defend this trade, the drafting of Chad Jackson, the effectiveness of the "big nickel", the double tight end threat of Ben Watson and Daniel Graham, etc., until the cows come home.
    Unless Nate Solder can suddenly sack the quarterback, then this trade to me is and always has been baffling....but wait, was Solder a "value pick"?
  30. PATRIOTSFANINPA

    PATRIOTSFANINPA Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    15,718
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    The league also considered Brandon Meriweather one as well with his two Pro Bowls....:rolleyes:
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page