Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 77
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    11,948
    Quote Originally Posted by TrueFan420 View Post
    Look I get the hindsight argument but itís not complicated. You can grade out a trade contextually. Right now this trade was a bad trade for the Seahawks and great for the Jets. Letís say the Jets mess up their draft and gets scrubs. Well then the trade didnít work out well for them in the end but at the time the made it it was still a good trade. Letís say the Seahawks go to the Super Bowl and win off an Adams pick 6. Well the trade turned out well for them in the end but they still gave up more compensation then they needed to at the time they gave it up.
    Counter argument, no team is a SS away from being a super bowl team. If the Seahawks win a SB it's not because of this trade, they're a yearly playoff team with a top 10 QB and routinely good defense and good coaches. They'd have been better off investing in almost any other position if they're trying to add wins by an individual player. Adams isn't carrying the defense to a higher level the way a shutdown CB, rangy FS, or elite lineman can.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,536
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    For me you hit much of the reason why you grade a trade in hindsight. Along with the fact of we just donít know what those picks will be. Like I said, Wilson could get a season ending injury in week one, Seattle gets a top 5 pick, and it goes to the Jets. Is that entirely fair to say Seattle shouldnít have done the trade? No. But it really makes the trade a win from the Jets standpoint. Thatís what happens when you trade for and unknown commodity (draft pick in the future) vs a known commodity (draft pick after the season or another player).
    Who the jets draft and where they draft is irrelevant. They got max value. It was a good trade for them.
    Some teams will execute in the draft while others fail but that doesnít change the value.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    20,412
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    I disagree with this thinking on it because thatís not a similar thing at all.

    Canít make revisionist history on trades at all because you need to see what happens before you call it good or bad. Just like draft grades, itís fun to look at it right away, wonít know the real result until years later.
    But... You literally just claimed that it was a good trade for the Steelers a few posts up and it hasn't even been a year lol.

    Fact is that Minkah could leave as a free agent. Or he could be a flash in the pan. Or something worse.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    20,412
    Quote Originally Posted by mariner4life View Post
    Didnít know the terms but the probabilities were that the Steelers were going to pick close to a top 5 pick.
    Without having your QB of the future on your roster it was a stupid gamble.
    Sure itís not so bad now but the thinking process behind the deal was crazy.
    I still think it's bad because you traded for a young player who didn't want to be part of a rebuild. Meanwhile when Big Ben retires or starts to suck, the Steelers enter a rebuild. So then Fitzpatrick is either unhappy or he leaves.

    If he plays for them for at least 7 years then I think it's a good trade... If the Steelers gave up a first round pick for a couple year rental, then it sucked for the Steelers

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Bay
    Posts
    15,770
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    I would disagree with that last part to an extent. I think grading the process is a valid exercise. But if adams pushes Seattle over the top, then the process isn't bad. They saw a guy they wanted and capaitalzed on it. I agree on the draft pick part. Who the Jets pick is less relevant because draft picks always are more of a hypothetical exercise. But when looking at the actual player, using highsight isn't a bad thing, particularly in the short term to see what that player does for the team. Overpaying isn't a bad thing if that player makes a major difference.

    To me, the trade is a win for the Jets already. Even if the Hawks win back to back super bowls and those are both pick 32, getting those picks for a guy who clearly wasn't the one guy to push them into even being a good team is a win. But from Seattle's perspective, I think it's still open. We don't know what adams will do to that defense. If he's a difference maker, then trading two picks for a difference maker might be worth it, even if they have to pay him a record deal.
    I think you missed my point but I could have articulated it better. Essentially you grade a trade multiple times based on the context. The initial trade has a grade. The value of those pick as assets player or not is grade-able. Jamal Adams on paper for Seahawks is grade-able. You then go back and do another review of it once the players are selected. Then a 3rd time later down the road once you have an idea of the full picture.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    59,699
    Quote Originally Posted by mgjohnson7851 View Post
    But... You literally just claimed that it was a good trade for the Steelers a few posts up and it hasn't even been a year lol.

    Fact is that Minkah could leave as a free agent. Or he could be a flash in the pan. Or something worse.
    Yea itís good right now. All pro for the 19th pick. Iíll take that right now. But again you are using what ifís to justify it as bad.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    59,699
    Quote Originally Posted by mgjohnson7851 View Post
    I still think it's bad because you traded for a young player who didn't want to be part of a rebuild. Meanwhile when Big Ben retires or starts to suck, the Steelers enter a rebuild. So then Fitzpatrick is either unhappy or he leaves.

    If he plays for them for at least 7 years then I think it's a good trade... If the Steelers gave up a first round pick for a couple year rental, then it sucked for the Steelers
    Thereís more to why he left than just the rebuild. So giving up one first means we had to get 7 years out of him what does 2 picks equate to to consider it a good trade?

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Bay
    Posts
    15,770
    Quote Originally Posted by manbearchef View Post
    Counter argument, no team is a SS away from being a super bowl team. If the Seahawks win a SB it's not because of this trade, they're a yearly playoff team with a top 10 QB and routinely good defense and good coaches. They'd have been better off investing in almost any other position if they're trying to add wins by an individual player. Adams isn't carrying the defense to a higher level the way a shutdown CB, rangy FS, or elite lineman can.
    I donít disagree but if Adams comes up and makes massive plays all year and plays great in the super bowl itís hard not to point to that as a piece that put them over the top.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,110
    Quote Originally Posted by mariner4life View Post
    Who the jets draft and where they draft is irrelevant. They got max value. It was a good trade for them.
    Some teams will execute in the draft while others fail but that doesnít change the value.
    I agree with that. I think given what we've seen out of adams as a Jet, it's obvious it was a good deal for the Jets in my mind. But that doesn't mean it can't also be a good deal for the Seahawks. If he helps push them over the top, it's worth it. If they really aren't any noticeably better on defense, then it was a bad trade.

    To me, the jets got a really good deal for a disgruntled, albeit pretty good to very good player. Seattle seemingly overpaid for said player, but if he helps them take a step defensively, it's hard to argue its an overpay and could be a win/win. I know in everything sports related we always want a winner and a loser. I'm okay saying the jets may have "won" the trade but I don't think that means the hawks lose it.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    20,412
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    Thereís more to why he left than just the rebuild. So giving up one first means we had to get 7 years out of him what does 2 picks equate to to consider it a good trade?
    I mean. You expect your first round pick up help you for at least 7 years so if you trade that pick for a player, you should have the same expectation.

    For 2 first round picks? He better be a pretty damn good QB lol

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    20,412
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    Yea itís good right now. All pro for the 19th pick. Iíll take that right now. But again you are using what ifís to justify it as bad.
    Yeah it's good right now... But you yourself said you can't judge it for several years. So why are you judging it right now?

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,536
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    Yea itís good right now. All pro for the 19th pick. Iíll take that right now. But again you are using what ifís to justify it as bad.
    Trading your first round pick when there was so much uncertainty with the most important position was idiotic.
    The Steelers basically took out their life savings and bought lottery tickets. Luckily made money and now your gloating what a great investment it was.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    59,699
    Quote Originally Posted by mgjohnson7851 View Post
    Yeah it's good right now... But you yourself said you can't judge it for several years. So why are you judging it right now?
    I also said up above that itís a constantly changing thing. I was more commenting on the perception thatís itís still a bad trade because of the uncertainty of what could happen with the pick. We now know itís not high so there should be an adjustment happening. Iíve seen commentary on how itís an ok trade because itís expected to be low 1sts traded away. Judging and grading it based on that rather than what it turns out to be is setting up one side to look better or worse.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    59,699
    Quote Originally Posted by mariner4life View Post
    Trading your first round pick when there was so much uncertainty with the most important position was idiotic.
    The Steelers basically took out their life savings and bought lottery tickets. Luckily made money and now your gloating what a great investment it was.
    Conversely it should have meant that their scouting didnít like any of those option in this draft. Or as shown they could be a boarder line playoff team with a strong defense.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    10,412
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    Isn't that where the safety position is headed in today's game though?
    Maybe. It seems like everyone who "knows football for a living" knows he's effectively a DL player, not a S. So his salary request isn't particularly high.
    Dak: 15,778 @ 65.8%, 7.6 per att, 97+21 TD, 36 INT+31 FMB, 97.0 Rate
    Wentz: 14,191 @ 63.8%, 6.9 per att, 97+3 TD, 35 INT+48 FMB, 92.7 Rate

    2020:
    Dak: 266 @ 64.1%, 6.8 oer att, 1 TD, 0 INT, 92.5 Rate
    Wentz: 270 @ 57.1%, 6.4 per att, 2 TD, 2 INT, 72.5 Rate


    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    I'll leave PSD if Foles isn't the starter in Jax (or elsewhere) next year.
    "Hater" is a term used by weak minded people in the face of legitimate criticism.
    -Scott van Pelt

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •