| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tzimisce
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Posts: 40624
Location: Slowly coming to terms with the inevitable
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:07 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Matts4313 wrote: | | Sciz wrote: | | milanb wrote: | | On the other hand, the Richard Seymour trade has boomeranged on the Patriots in a big way. |
How? They traded Seymour's 2009 season for Nate Solder. Seymour became the highest paid per-year defensive player in the NFL. The Pats needed their franchise tag for Wilfork. Seymour would not have been the difference between the 2009 team getting any further in the playoffs than they did. |
You dont think having Seymour would help your defense? Do you think it would have improved your chances in a very tight superbowl last year? |
Sure, but you have to make a cost-benefit analysis. Trading Seymour netted the Pats Nate Solder who's shaping up to be a solid OT, and it freed up cap room to lock up Vince Wilfork, who is just as good a player as Seymour and one from a harder-to-find archetype.
_________________
https://twitter.com/Zealotry_Metal |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sciz
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 12833
Location: Iowa
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Matts4313 wrote: | | You dont think having Seymour would help your defense? Do you think it would have improved your chances in a very tight superbowl last year? |
Seymour would have been gone after 2009. The Pats tagged Wilfork, so Seymour would've been free to go wherever he wanted. The Raiders ended up giving him $15M a year, just to give you an idea of his post-2009 value.
_________________
Shut up, NBT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matts4313
Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 30416
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Sciz wrote: | | Matts4313 wrote: | | You dont think having Seymour would help your defense? Do you think it would have improved your chances in a very tight superbowl last year? |
Seymour would have been gone after 2009. The Pats tagged Wilfork, so Seymour would've been free to go wherever he wanted. The Raiders ended up giving him $15M a year, just to give you an idea of his post-2009 value. |
Gotcha. I figured you guys would have resigned him. Maybe you were tight up against the cap?
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sciz
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 12833
Location: Iowa
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Matts4313 wrote: | | Gotcha. I figured you guys would have resigned him. Maybe you were tight up against the cap? |
Well that was the uncapped year, but the Pats still wouldn't have overpaid for him like the Raiders apparently were willing to.
_________________
Shut up, NBT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PowerElite
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 7624
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I'd be surprised if the Patriots could get a 5th round pick for him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31504
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| EliteTexan80 wrote: | | nextsuperstar wrote: | | I could see a team realistically giving up a second and a future late round pick. |
The Rams have a LOT of picks over the next two drafts, a bunch of cap room IIRC...and while Welker is the same type of WR as Danny Amendola, we can all somewhat agree that Welker is a bit better, and beyond Amendola and Brian Quick, the Rams are pretty thin at the spot...
Should Jeff Fisher get in on this? |
I doubt it. Could happen but can't see us giving anything like a 2nd up.
| TommyC376 wrote: | | They would probably get a 3rd and a 5th. He is a product of their system. If he went to Denver or even Detroit I can see him being successful, but he would have to go to a team with a good QB that has a solid passing game. |
I don't know about that. His 120 to 130 catch seasons were but the guy can still play. Look at what Danny Amendola is doing in STL, he's a similar type player. Welker will produce if you utilize him correctly in just about any system.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SnA ExclusiVe
Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 10605
Location: Spokane, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Flaccomania wrote: | | Interested to see what team falls into the Patriots' trap again... |
Seriously.
You're getting a 30+ year old one-dimensional WR, yet some team will give up 2 1st's for him probably haha
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The LBC
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 15541
Location: Long Beach, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tzimisce wrote: | If they trade him, it won't be to a contending team within the AFC.
The Browns, Chiefs, Colts and Bengals are the only AFC teams I could see him going to. |
If the Chiefs are still mired in the mundane come Week 6, I could see the possibility of Pioli doing something we've rarely seen done (though he has the pieces at his disposal and, I'll be honest, at what point does he start getting the blame for the state of the team - good and young - yes, "underachieving" - though their collective ceiling might not have been as high as some anticipated, but really it's the veterans Pioli invested in that are the weights dragging them down this season... Cassel, Lilja, depth at boundary corner beyond Flowers... Yay run on parenthetical!):
- Bring in Welker (as presumably the tandem of Baldwin and Breaston can man the boundaries with Welker working out of the slot - not like Brian Daboll would know how to use him anyway).
- Ship out Bowe (who probably could fetch close to a 1st, if not a pair of 2nd's or a 2nd and some premium change)
Welker is, suffice to say, a much more new-QB-friendly asset than Bowe is. The only issue I see is that Pioli's got an early pick sunk into McCluster who Daboll is actually managing to use. So I have trouble seeing them scrap Dex to give up (likely) Top 10-15 in the order draft selections and a high-priced contract for Welker - particularly when their QB is still Matt Cassel.
_________________
| The Cryptkeeper wrote: | | He's Long, he's strong, and down to get the hittin' on. Russell got whacked. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DawgX
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 9907
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Flaccomania wrote: | | DawgX wrote: | I wonder what teams would be interested and what they would give up. It wouldn't shock me if a contending team gave up a first-round pick, although I don't think Welker is worth that due to his age.
Could a team like San Francisco or Houston be interested in him? I think Welker would be a good fit on either of those teams. |
A contending team, unless it's one that's playing over their heads and thinks "hey, we actually have a shot" isn't going to give up a 1st, particularly Houston or SF. SF as well just spent a 1st on a WR and has a very deep WR corps. Houston has built a team that can be perennial contenders, they aren't going to spend a 1st on Welker either. If a team ponies up a 1st, it's going to be some middle of the pack or worse team.
Maybe the Rams since they have the ammo? I don't think it'd be a good idea, but it wouldn't hurt them as much as it would other teams, would help Bradford, and may allow them to sneak into a WC spot or even win the division with how their defense is playing. They may be a darkhorse, though they do have Amendola who fills a similar role. |
I think a contending team is much more likely to give up a first than a non-contending team. Maybe a contending team would think Welker is the player they need to help get them to the Super Bowl. If Welker goes to a non-contender, he might not be very good by the time that team is ready to contend.
_________________
Cleveland Browns Forum Hall of Fame Inductee
Kiltman on the great sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
1BackInBlackFan
Joined: 29 Mar 2010
Posts: 4893
Location: 10 wins, PA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Was this something that was brewing? I'm stunned how all of the sudden there is tension between the Pats and Welker. Not sure what happened but this could be a distraction for the Pats if this lingers.
I really don't see a team giving up a whole lot for Welker.
_________________
The cool high-flying Troy sig courtesy of Lysar529. Great work! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candyman93
Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 34808
Location: Adopt a Brownie 2012: TJ Ward
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tzimisce wrote: | If they trade him, it won't be to a contending team within the AFC.
The Browns, Chiefs, Colts and Bengals are the only AFC teams I could see him going to. |
Why would Cleveland trade for him?
Are people oblivious to our youth movement we've done under Holmgren and Heckertt? 
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spilltray
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 8650
Location: Green Bay, WI
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DawgX wrote: | | Flaccomania wrote: | | DawgX wrote: | I wonder what teams would be interested and what they would give up. It wouldn't shock me if a contending team gave up a first-round pick, although I don't think Welker is worth that due to his age.
Could a team like San Francisco or Houston be interested in him? I think Welker would be a good fit on either of those teams. |
A contending team, unless it's one that's playing over their heads and thinks "hey, we actually have a shot" isn't going to give up a 1st, particularly Houston or SF. SF as well just spent a 1st on a WR and has a very deep WR corps. Houston has built a team that can be perennial contenders, they aren't going to spend a 1st on Welker either. If a team ponies up a 1st, it's going to be some middle of the pack or worse team.
Maybe the Rams since they have the ammo? I don't think it'd be a good idea, but it wouldn't hurt them as much as it would other teams, would help Bradford, and may allow them to sneak into a WC spot or even win the division with how their defense is playing. They may be a darkhorse, though they do have Amendola who fills a similar role. |
I think a contending team is much more likely to give up a first than a non-contending team. Maybe a contending team would think Welker is the player they need to help get them to the Super Bowl. If Welker goes to a non-contender, he might not be very good by the time that team is ready to contend. |
No one is going to give up a 1st for a 31 year old WR on a 1 year franchise tag unless they think he is one of the best 3-5 WR's in football and intend on giving him a HUGE multi year deal. Wes Welker is a nice WR, but he isn't on that tier.
_________________
| Wilfred wrote: | | Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DawgX
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 9907
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tzimisce wrote: | If they trade him, it won't be to a contending team within the AFC.
The Browns, Chiefs, Colts and Bengals are the only AFC teams I could see him going to. |
I don't think any of those teams make much sense. Especially Cleveland and Cincinnati.
_________________
Cleveland Browns Forum Hall of Fame Inductee
Kiltman on the great sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flaccomania
Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Posts: 16543
Location: Parkville, MD
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DawgX wrote: | | Flaccomania wrote: | | DawgX wrote: | I wonder what teams would be interested and what they would give up. It wouldn't shock me if a contending team gave up a first-round pick, although I don't think Welker is worth that due to his age.
Could a team like San Francisco or Houston be interested in him? I think Welker would be a good fit on either of those teams. |
A contending team, unless it's one that's playing over their heads and thinks "hey, we actually have a shot" isn't going to give up a 1st, particularly Houston or SF. SF as well just spent a 1st on a WR and has a very deep WR corps. Houston has built a team that can be perennial contenders, they aren't going to spend a 1st on Welker either. If a team ponies up a 1st, it's going to be some middle of the pack or worse team.
Maybe the Rams since they have the ammo? I don't think it'd be a good idea, but it wouldn't hurt them as much as it would other teams, would help Bradford, and may allow them to sneak into a WC spot or even win the division with how their defense is playing. They may be a darkhorse, though they do have Amendola who fills a similar role. |
I think a contending team is much more likely to give up a first than a non-contending team. Maybe a contending team would think Welker is the player they need to help get them to the Super Bowl. If Welker goes to a non-contender, he might not be very good by the time that team is ready to contend. |
Teams that have built themselves to be perennial contenders wouldn't touch that deal with a 10 foot pole. As I alluded to, I can only see a team that comes out of nowhere to contend (and thus is likely overachieving) making the deal to help their situation.
_________________
Why not Michael Jordan? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carnageehw
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Posts: 2323
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Welker is only a product of the system in the sense that he and Brady have great chemistry.
Almost half of Welkers yards are YAC. That's not being a product of the system.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
