Pats 2011 pick from Oakland

[Deus Irae]

I know that. I just never get tired of hearing you talk about that piece of paper.

The season's over. The results are in. The trade was a terrible idea and Seymour's absence was clearly a major factor in the team's failed season. It's time to move forward with that understanding, and to hope that Belichick can make enough good moves to get the team back on top.

 

[mgteich]

Whether or not folks agree with the trade, it is indeed time to move on.

The season's over. The results are in. The trade was a terrible idea and Seymour's absence was clearly a major factor in the team's failed season. It's time to move forward with that understanding, and to hope that Belichick can make enough good moves to get the team back on top.

 

[Clonamery]

The season's over. The results are in. The trade was a terrible idea and Seymour's absence was clearly a major factor in the team's failed season. It's time to move forward with that understanding, and to hope that Belichick can make enough good moves to get the team back on top.

Thank you once again for the only possible opinion.

 

[Deus Irae]

Thank you once again for the only possible opinion.

You're welcome, particularly since that opinion was in response to someone posting about 'the paper'. Thanks for your useless post, too.

 

[JackBauer]

The season's over. The results are in. The trade was a terrible idea and Seymour's absence was clearly a major factor in the team's failed season. It's time to move forward with that understanding, and to hope that Belichick can make enough good moves to get the team back on top.

Well, in fairness, I do think it depends on the outcome of the draft choice.

I'm not a fan of the trade either, but I don't think the Patriots are making the Super Bowl this year with or without Seymour.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

The season's over. The results are in. The trade was a terrible idea and Seymour's absence was clearly a major factor in the team's failed season. It's time to move forward with that understanding, and to hope that Belichick can make enough good moves to get the team back on top.

Relax man I was messing with you

 

[Deus Irae]

Well, in fairness, I do think it depends on the outcome of the draft choice.

I'm not a fan of the trade either, but I don't think the Patriots are making the Super Bowl this year with or without Seymour.

Give me this year's Patriots team with a healthy Welker and Seymour on the line, and I like the chances of that team beating the Ravens and Colts in the playoffs.

And I love the chances of that team beating the Saints in a rematch outdoors.


But, alas, it was not meant to be.....

 

[BionicPatriot]

Well, in fairness, I do think it depends on the outcome of the draft choice.

I'm not a fan of the trade either, but I don't think the Patriots are making the Super Bowl this year with or without Seymour.

Tell me this, did Seymour make that much of an impact in 08?

So I wonder why some people act as if having Seymour completely changes the season. You're right, Seymour would not have been the difference in going to Miami or not. To say that, as I've said a million times is piling on BB.

 

[BionicPatriot]

Give me this year's Patriots team with a healthy Welker and Seymour on the line, and I like the chances of that team beating the Ravens and Colts in the playoffs.

And I love the chances of that team beating the Saints in a rematch outdoors.


But, alas, it was not meant to be.....

Has Seymour ever had a big impact on a Colts/Pats game? Sure Welker has, but with him they didn't beat the Colts either. This team was too flawed on defense to win a ring with or without Seymour. Yes the front 7 would have been better, you're right there. But I don't think Seymour is a dominant player to make average players like we had look great. It's not a knock on Sey, rather that Bill just didn't too good outside of Bodden defensively the past off season in free agency.

 

[Deus Irae]

Has Seymour ever had a big impact on a Colts/Pats game? Sure Welker has, but with him they didn't beat the Colts either. This team was too flawed on defense to win a ring with or without Seymour. Yes the front 7 would have been better, you're right there. But I don't think Seymour is a dominant player to make average players like we had look great. It's not a knock on Sey, rather that Bill just didn't too good outside of Bodden defensively the past off season in free agency.

Actually, yes, Seymour has usually had a huge impact on Colts/Pats games. The problem is that you're essentially demanding that a DE personally manufacture victories as a proof when the only positions that are really capable of having that specifically demonstrated are QB, K and returners (and RB to a lesser extent). Great players at the other positions show their impact by improving the overall efficiency of the offense or defense. Seymour collapses the pocket against the pass, preventing the QB from stepping up, and he helps shut down the run. That's a huge impact in a game, as we were able to note by its absence this season. As was discussed on another thread, the Patriots gave up more 300 yards games this season than they had in the previous 2 years combined. This is with a defensive backfield that the vast majority of people would insist was better this year than last, and with TBC getting to the QB more than any linebacker did last year.

 

[The Dynasty]

Actually, yes, Seymour has usually had a huge impact on Colts/Pats games. The problem is that you're essentially demanding that a DE personally manufacture victories as a proof when the only positions that are really capable of having that specifically demonstrated are QB, K and returners (and RB to a lesser extent). Great players at the other positions show their impact by improving the overall efficiency of the offense or defense. Seymour collapses the pocket against the pass, preventing the QB from stepping up, and he helps shut down the run. That's a huge impact in a game, as we were able to note by its absence this season. As was discussed on another thread, the Patriots gave up more 300 yards games this season than they had in the previous 2 years combined. This is with a defensive backfield that the vast majority of people would insist was better this year than last, and with TBC getting to the QB more than any linebacker did last year.

Seymour vs the Colts...

2008: 2 tackles 0 sacks
2007: 5 tackles 0 sacks
2006: 3 tackles 0 sacks
3 tackles 0 sacks
2005: Didnt play

I dont see where your argument here is that Seymour plays well against the Colts. 0 sacks and an average of 3 tackles a game isnt great. Definitely not someone that is a difference between a win and a loss.

Your point on Seymour is all assumptions, there are no facts that say teams would be better with him on them. When you look at facts which are stats it shows that Seymour probably wouldnt of had that much of an effect on the team this season.

I have viewed your posts differently of late and have changed my opinion on you, I respect you as a poster. You are a realist. But this post goes against that and is more a reflection on your love for Seymour.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Seymour vs the Colts...

2008: 2 tackles 0 sacks
2007: 5 tackles 0 sacks
2006: 3 tackles 0 sacks
3 tackles 0 sacks
2005: Didnt play

I dont see where your argument here is that Seymour plays well against the Colts. 0 sacks and an average of 3 tackles a game isnt great. Definitely not someone that is a difference between a win and a loss.

Your point on Seymour is all assumptions, there are no facts that say teams would be better with him on them. When you look at facts which are stats it shows that Seymour probably wouldnt of had that much of an effect on the team this season.

I have viewed your posts differently of late and have changed my opinion on you, I respect you as a poster. You are a realist. But this post goes against that and is more a reflection on your love for Seymour.

Yes, tackles is definitely how you should evaluate a dominant 3-4 DE playing against a pass-first offense. The fact that he reliably collapses the pocket in spite of double teams shouldn't factor into the discussion at all

That said, I agree that it's really time to move on. The season's over, and I like the trade even less than I did when it happened, but they're clearly tagging Wilfork, so Seymour would've walked at this point anyways. Whether or not it would have been a better idea to sign Wilfork long-term and tag Seymour is a whole different question...

 

[The Dynasty]

Yes, tackles is definitely how you should evaluate a dominant 3-4 DE playing against a pass-first offense. The fact that he reliably collapses the pocket in spite of double teams shouldn't factor into the discussion at all

That said, I agree that it's really time to move on. The season's over, and I like the trade even less than I did when it happened, but they're clearly tagging Wilfork, so Seymour would've walked at this point anyways. Whether or not it would have been a better idea to sign Wilfork long-term and tag Seymour is a whole different question...

I was not evaluating Seymour based on tackles, I am just saying that he didnt really contribute anything on the stat sheet in those games. He may help collapse the pocket but Manning would still step up and make plays. Look at his stats in those games vs the Patriots, Seymour's so called "collapsing" of the pocket didnt really have an effect on what Manning did. The argument that you and Deus are making does not have any facts to back it up. If he was getting sacks, then you would have support to your argument instead of assumptions. I will be the first to say that sacks are not everything but when you have a QB like Manning still putting up huge numbers it shows that the so called "collapsing of the pocket" really did not have an effect on the game.

I agree it is time to move on from this trade, it can be reassessed once we see who we draft in 2011 and what he does in the league. This trade was not meant to help the team in 2009 so no one can say that it was a bad trade.

 

[ac0608]

Seymour vs the Colts...

2008: 2 tackles 0 sacks
2007: 5 tackles 0 sacks
2006: 3 tackles 0 sacks
3 tackles 0 sacks
2005: Didnt play

I dont see where your argument here is that Seymour plays well against the Colts. 0 sacks and an average of 3 tackles a game isnt great. Definitely not someone that is a difference between a win and a loss.

Your point on Seymour is all assumptions, there are no facts that say teams would be better with him on them. When you look at facts which are stats it shows that Seymour probably wouldnt of had that much of an effect on the team this season.

I have viewed your posts differently of late and have changed my opinion on you, I respect you as a poster. You are a realist. But this post goes against that and is more a reflection on your love for Seymour.

I think that is an unfair assessment on Seymour's performance. He is a 3-4 DE so his job is to contain the run, eat up space for the linebackers and collapse the pocket. He isn't expected to have many sacks.

On top of that, you're criticising him for not having any sacks against one of, if not the greatest QB of all time who only gave up 10 sacks all year.

Personally, I'm a fan of the Seymour trade. This would have been likely his last year in New England so we took a chance to draft a superstar for the next 5-10 years, and help the team in the long run.

There is no doubt that Seymour would have helped this year, but a likely Top 10 pick against one year of Seymour was too good to pass up.

 

[The Dynasty]

I think that is an unfair assessment on Seymour's performance. He is a 3-4 DE so his job is to contain the run, eat up space for the linebackers and collapse the pocket. He isn't expected to have many sacks.

On top of that, you're criticising him for not having any sacks against one of, if not the greatest QB of all time who only gave up 10 sacks all year.

Personally, I'm a fan of the Seymour trade. This would have been likely his last year in New England so we took a chance to draft a superstar for the next 5-10 years, and help the team in the long run.

There is no doubt that Seymour would have helped this year, but a likely Top 10 pick against one year of Seymour was too good to pass up.

You are correct that I cannot get on Seymour for not having sacks, in the post above yours I addressed that. If he in fact did collapse the pocket then it didnt have much effect because Manning still put up huge numbers. Deus' original claim was that with Seymour we would have won that game against them this year and he had big games against them. I am saying that he did not have big games against the Colts and would not have made a difference in the game this year.

I am with you in being a fan of the Seymour trade. He definitely would not be a Patriot after this season, so why not get something for him and when it is pretty much guaranteed to be a top 10 pick that is pretty hard to pass up. I dont think he would have had that big of an effect on the team this year. He certainly wouldnt have been a difference between any win or loss this year. He is getting up there in age and his production is declining.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Seymour was an awesome Pat. Not only did he collapse the pocket but teams didn't even bother running in his direction. What was it? Like a 2.2 ypc in his quadrant?

Anyway, he's gone.

Regarding the Oakland pick, where we pick is going to depend on Al Davis and if he forces Cable to play Jasuckas Russel. To be honest when that team had Gradowski and Frye playing qb they were a different team. An above 500 team. We could be picking 15 next season or 5. It all depends on Al the QB and the injury situation. I was pretty impressed with Cable coaching despite the beatdown scandal. Ofcourse that was when he actually got to play a different qb.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Brady's replacement is just finishing his freshman year of HIGH SCHOOL. Brady will play at a very high level for another 6-8 years before hanging them up in the HOF. We don't need to become like other teams by deperately taking a high 1st round QB. They will likely draft another late round or UFA QB and seeing if they find another gem but that's it.

I agree that the Pats shouldn't plan on taking a QB in the next year or two, but you really have no way of knowing that "Brady will play at a very high level for another 6-8 years." The odds actually are against that, given how all but a few HOF QB's have fared after the age of 35; Elway and Favre are the exceptions. We just can't know at this point whether he will be like them. The average retirement age of SB Era HOF QB's is 37.

 

[The Dynasty]

Seymour was an awesome Pat. Not only did he collapse the pocket but teams didn't even bother running in his direction. What was it? Like a 2.2 ypc in his quadrant?

Anyway, he's gone.

Regarding the Oakland pick, where we pick is going to depend on Al Davis and if he forces Cable to play Jasuckas Russel. To be honest when that team had Gradowski and Frye playing qb they were a different team. An above 500 team. We could be picking 15 next season or 5. It all depends on Al the QB and the injury situation. I was pretty impressed with Cable coaching despite the beatdown scandal. Ofcourse that was when he actually got to play a different qb.

Seymour is getting much more credit than he deserves. I am not saying he wasnt a good player because he was, but you and others are giving the guy way to much credit. He was injury prone and played when he wanted to play. He wasnt a "Patriots and BB guy". His production also started to decline, especially this year. 4 sacks, 2 on opening night. "Teams didnt bother running in his direction", come on. People are giving Seymour way too much credit.

As for the 2011 pick I can see what you're saying with Oakland being a different team with Gradcowski and how that would effect our draft pick. I cannot see the Raiders being over .500 next season, I just cant. We will most likely be picking between 5-10 in 2011.

 

[jsull87]

I don't think there is any need to argue whether seymour is a good player.. of coarse he is. but he was leaving. As has been said earlier in this post this 2011 1st if in the top 5 can set the patriots up for years to come in more ways than one. If we decide to keep taking the gamble e.g oakland is pick 5 and we trade for pick 10 and their 1st next year e.t.c then we can continually reap rewards if done correctly instead of putting all our eggs in one basket for one year. I will admit i was always a fan of the trade as i like the thought of continual success just as much as a deep playoff run now. I mean if oakland stick with russel next year and we get a chance at say lockyer you can't tell me there won't be a team willing to do that trade. And then we will just be improving our chances of success

 

[The Dynasty]

I don't think there is any need to argue whether seymour is a good player.. of coarse he is. but he was leaving. As has been said earlier in this post this 2011 1st if in the top 5 can set the patriots up for years to come in more ways than one. If we decide to keep taking the gamble e.g oakland is pick 5 and we trade for pick 10 and their 1st next year e.t.c then we can continually reap rewards if done correctly instead of putting all our eggs in one basket for one year. I will admit i was always a fan of the trade as i like the thought of continual success just as much as a deep playoff run now. I mean if oakland stick with russel next year and we get a chance at say lockyer you can't tell me there won't be a team willing to do that trade. And then we will just be improving our chances of success

Not quite understanding what you're saying? Are you saying that we should trade the 2011 pick to get a better pick in 2012? What kind of logic is that? Have you ever seen a team trade a top 10 pick to potentially get a higher top 10 pick the next year?, because it isnt guaranteed that that team would be in the bottom 10 the following year.