Speculation of the Seymour Trade

[amazinPats]

WHY, WHY, WHY??? Try the uncertain labor situation and our committment to sound fiscal discipline whatever circumstances arise. Kraft keeps referring to it as the rationale but no one wants to listen, apparently. BTW I'll take this teams/organizations record over the last 8 or even last 4 years to anyone else's. It's not about draft pick values, it's about constructing and maintaining a consistent contender in a shifting environment through all possible means. There are a small handful of teams who do that well. We are one of them, arguably the best of them all things considered.

Great post! I agree all the way.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Well, given Seymour's history with them, I'm sure the Pats didn't consider him a "team player". Translation: he had balls, and stood up to them, LOL.

He's almost 30. He's been slipping a bit. He's not as good in the 4-3. He's in his final year. They knew they probably weren't going to be able to keep both Wilfork and Seymour, and obviously valued Wilfork more. They're deep enough on the D-line to absorb his loss with the least impact. (Note: I'm not saying they won't miss him, or wouldn't be better with him. Of course they would. But the dropoff without him, considering the other talent on D, obviously wasn't worth his cost or losing the chance to get a 1st-rounder for him.)

The Pats are all about value. It would be nice to have A+ players at every position, with A- players backing them up. It's not realistic. Hell, most teams don't have ONE A+ player, let alone more than one, let alone backups better than a C+. On the D-line, they had a lot of A+ and A starting, and a lot of B+ backing up. That's a lot of cash. They must've figured they weren't getting value, having Seymour starting and having the backup guys ride the pine.

The problem with this trade is the injury unknown. It's like the Red Sox, every frickin' season. If I hear, in April, the words "the Sox are loaded with starting pitching" ONE MORE TIME I'm goin' postal. Every April we hear about how they have "six or seven MLB-quality starters!" And every August we're bemoaning the lack of starting pitching as it cripples their chances. Yeah, it looked good in April... until Smoltz and Penny washed out, Daisuke turned into a $50M albatross, the 78-year-old Wakefield got dinged up, and now Beckett has magically lost it. So, from where we now sit, it's easy to say th D-line is deep and can weather the Seymour-less storm... until the Bills game, if (God forbid) Green and Wright both go down with season-ending injuries, then suddenly we're screwed.

I still like the trade. They got a 1st--potentially a high 1st--for a guy who was probably walking after this season. A guy who's approaching 30 and whose best years are probably behind him. They drafted him 6th IIRC, got many Pro-Bowl years out of him, won three Super Bowls with his input, and traded him for what might be--a 6th. You can't ask for better than that. (Unless it's Randy Moss for a swindle, LOL.)

I would be willing to bet the Pats weren't LOOKING to move Seymour. But maybe the Raiders called with, to quote the great Don Corleone, an offer they couldn't refuse. Look, we love the players on the team, but no one's untouchable for the right price. Not even Brady, probably. Think about it: the way Cassel stepped in last season, with Brady coming off a bad injury... if someone had called Belichick in March and said, "We'll give you this years 1st and 2nd, next years's 1st and 2nd, and 2011's 1st and 2nd, for Tom Brady," Belichick WOULD entertain that deal. It's what he does best: putting the team first, putting them in position to be successful down the road, and making sure they're not a one-year wonder like the Bucs and Raiders in '02.

As the Pats players like to say, "It's a business."

Probably about the fairest post I've seen on the issue. Very well said.

 

[jeffbiologist]

WHY, WHY, WHY??? Try the uncertain labor situation and our committment to sound fiscal discipline whatever circumstances arise. Kraft keeps referring to it as the rationale but no one wants to listen, apparently. BTW I'll take this teams/organizations record over the last 8 or even last 4 years to anyone else's. It's not about draft pick values, it's about constructing and maintaining a consistent contender in a shifting environment through all possible means. There are a small handful of teams who do that well. We are one of them, arguably the best of them all things considered.

I understand the fiscal responsibility. I understand each individual decision, but what I dont exactly understand is how it affects the team as a whole. Chemistry. How many rivets can you take out of a plane before it crashes? Do you really want to know?? History tells us better the devil you know than the one you dont. And doesnt it fit the mutual fund analogy:" past successes arent reflective of future earnings"? The Pats are the best at manipulating the cap, without question. But these changes could very well remove the advantages we had. Its something they are definately planning on, and they are doing it a bit different than other teams. We could be ahead of the game and we could be far behind, only time will tell...like gambling on a wind shift in sailing. If your wind stops you find yourself bobbing in the water. Sometimes its ok to follow the crowd and allow your coaching and your players to outplay the other team without overplanning everything.

 

[shmessy]

I just don't think the Pats winning it would sway the owners one way or another...they look at the bottom line...MONEY and how to generate a lot...There are plenty of OTHER issues that are far more important.

I agree with you. My post was was tongue-in-cheek.

 

[loofasisgeek]

Re: Seymour's Real Value

I think you guys are all searching deeper than you need to for a reason. It was a very simple equation, and all of this miscellaneous crap on the side probably doesn't enter into it. Seymour in 2009 + 3rd in 2011 vs. no Seymour in 9 + 1st in 2011. It's that simple.

Small point but it's not necessarily the case that we'd get the comp pick. You only get it if you lose more than you acquire- in terms of numbers of guys. Given that we'd get a sure-fire third for Seymour at the number he'd get paid, I think they'd make sure they played it right (but that's sort of the tail wagging the dog).

 

[BradyFTW!]

read somewhere that Wilfork, Warren or one of those guys said they were expecting this.. so there is, as usual, more to this picture than meets the eye..

Sorry cannot be more specific, but a lot has been written on this in the last couple of days...

Warren said that Seymour had mentioned that he 'saw the writing on the wall' and didn't expect to be a Pat in 2009.