Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 54
  1. #31
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,550
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by Seahawk_For_Life View Post
    And I think the Seahawks did as well, nice trade for both teams.

    Most likely the draft pick will be 25+, so a late 1st round pick for a proven #1 wide receiver who is still young. Proven player vs the crap shoot that a draft pick always is.

    Look at how many #1 draft picks don't live up to their potential. Trading for a proven player like Branch is a smart move.
    Yea, I'd call it a win-win. You guys traded a piece of paper for a proven receiver (not yet sold on the proven #1 label just yet, but we'll see). For this year, certainly, this is a great move for the Seahawks.......thereafter, I don't know. But the Pats get a 1st round pick in exchange for a disgruntled player, sounds like (on the short term) a definite winner for both sides.

    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  2. #32
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,302
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by akseahawkfan View Post
    Are you all seriously telling me that knowing what you know now about Branch, a Super Bowl MVP, that if he was available at pick 22 in the draft you would pass on him?
    Again it depends who else is on the board, which is why Seattle fans can't just assume this is a good deal because they'll be picking so late in the first that Branch is instantly better than who they could have gotten. Let's look at the kind of players drafted from 20-32 in the first round the last five years...

    • 2006: Tamba Hali, Laurence Maroney, Manny Lawson, DeAngelo Williams, Marcedes Lewis, Nick Mangold
    • 2005: Matt Jones, Chris Spencer, Luis Castillo, Heath Miller, Logan Mankins
    • 2004: Vince Wilfork, Steven Jackson, Chris Gamble, Kevin Jones, Ben Watson
    • 2003: Willis McGahee, Dallas Clark, Larry Johnson, Nick Barnett
    • 2002: Javon Walker, Ed Reed, Charles Grant, Lito Sheppard, Jerramy Stevens


    Yes, the draft is a crapshoot. No one has suggested otherwise. What we have suggested is that very good players with the potential to be great can still be found at the end of the first round, and that given the success of recent Seattle drafts, the liklihood of them losing out by drafting a complete bust in that position seems rather low.

    And since you want to talk about what we know about Branch, what do we really know about him? Well, we know...

    • He's never had a 1,000 yard receiving season.
    • He's never caught more than five touchdowns in a season.
    • He is a Super Bowl MVP, primarily because he made 11 catches for 133 yards (a 12-yard per catch average that isn't exactly mind blowing) and did not catch a touchdown in that game.
    • His 2005 numbers are comparible to TJ Houshmandzadah.
    • He was so valuable to a New England offense already thin at receiver that they decided not to pay him Reggie Wayne-type money and ship him off.
    • Eric Mangini, who was a former defensive coordinator and DB coach in New England and would have seen a lot of Branch in practice, wouldn't offer more than a second for him.


    That's what we KNOW. Frankly, I'm not jumping up and down on a first round pick being great value here, nor should Seattle fans. This helps them win now by adding a talented player, no one's disputing that. But in doing so, they spent more than what Branch is worth, both in my opinion and apparently in the opinion of a former coach on New England's staff. It wasn't a bad deal by any means, but certainly not a great one either. My two cents.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  3. #33
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,495
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    This is a typical contender move. If he ends up being the final piece to the puzzle to get the Hawks over the top, it will be lauded as a great trade.

    But they clearly overpayed. Branch had a great season last year, but still was not a 1,000 yard receiver. Over his career, he's had trouble staying healthy, and has never been dominant.

    Generally, second-tier WRs don't command a first round pick in a trade but, again, Seattle is trying to make a push before their window closes.

  4. #34
    LaRamsFanLongTime's Avatar
    LaRamsFanLongTime is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Foothill Ranch CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    808
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    And I think the Seahawks did as well, nice trade for both teams.

    Most likely the draft pick will be 25+, so a late 1st round pick for a proven #1 wide receiver who is still young. Proven player vs the crap shoot that a draft pick always is.

    Look at how many #1 draft picks don't live up to their potential. Trading for a proven player like Branch is a smart move.
    I will agree with most of this statement. I think the hawks are losing a 20 plus pick most likely. Even if they are more around 15 that still is a gain. The guy is a superbowl MVP. He showed up in the biggest game there is. I would take a proven NFL starter over anything the draft had to throw out. Unless of course Bush was available every year. I think the patriots had better options at wideout then Seattle therefore Branch was not as much of a standout. This is a bad deal for anyone playing the Seahawks no doubt about it. If I was a hawk fan (I would kill myself) I would love this trade.
    LET'S GO DODGERS

  5. #35
    LaRamsFanLongTime's Avatar
    LaRamsFanLongTime is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Foothill Ranch CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    808
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Espn just showed an interesting stat. Branch has more yards and receptions in the post season then the 4 Seahawk receivers combined that made up the depth chart before he was aquired.
    LET'S GO DODGERS

  6. #36
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,302
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    I would take a proven NFL starter over anything the draft had to throw out. Unless of course Bush was available every year.
    You would take a proven NFL starter over ANY player not named Reggie Bush in any future draft?

    I really don't even know where to begin on this one, especially considering those proven NFL starters came right from the draft, and some of them are much more highly regarded than simply being "proven NFL starters."
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  7. #37
    Hawkfandyno's Avatar
    Hawkfandyno is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    64
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    This is a typical contender move. If he ends up being the final piece to the puzzle to get the Hawks over the top, it will be lauded as a great trade.

    But they clearly overpayed. Branch had a great season last year, but still was not a 1,000 yard receiver. Over his career, he's had trouble staying healthy, and has never been dominant.

    Generally, second-tier WRs don't command a first round pick in a trade but, again, Seattle is trying to make a push before their window closes.
    Hey all, been awhile, how ya doing? just wanted to comment here a little. While branch never has had a 1000 yard season (a whopping two yards short last year at 998) there is a good reason. here is a quote from Tom Brady:

    "Deion is the most important player on our offense,” Brady told SI.com. “When I look at the elite receivers in the game, he is second to nobody. He doesn’t get a lot of the credit, because we do spread the ball around here, and he doesn’t feel a need to promote himself like so many guys at that position. But he is that good.”

    Last year brady had 10 or 11 guys with over 100 yards recieiving. so, its no wonder not one reciever on the Pats went over 1000. but Branch was brady's favorite receiver. take it for what its worth. I think Branch has the talent to catch for 1200, given the right situation.

  8. #38
    BlueThunder's Avatar
    BlueThunder is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Arlington Washington
    Age
    53
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Hawkfandyno took the words right out of my mouth. I read something today about the Pats liking to spread the ball around to many different receivers, so none of them come away with eye-popping stats. Branch never complains about it, so they say he is an unselfish "team" player, which is exactly the kind of player Ruskell and Holmgren love.
    Last edited by BlueThunder; -09-12-2006 at 06:43 PM.

  9. #39
    Seahawk_For_Life's Avatar
    Seahawk_For_Life is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    Age
    41
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkfandyno View Post
    here is a quote from Tom Brady:

    "Deion is the most important player on our offense,” Brady told SI.com. “When I look at the elite receivers in the game, he is second to nobody. He doesn’t get a lot of the credit, because we do spread the ball around here, and he doesn’t feel a need to promote himself like so many guys at that position. But he is that good.”
    Doesn't sound like Tom Brady considers him a 2nd tier receiver.
    "We were facing the No. 1 offense in the National Football League", Vitt said.

  10. #40
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,302
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkfandyno View Post
    Last year brady had 10 or 11 guys with over 100 yards recieiving.
    It's rather easy to have so many players with that kind of production when only two of the ten actually played in all 16 games in 2005. Only half of all ten played in more than 12 games last year. Yes, the Patriots spread it around, but you can't ignore that those stats are inflated when half the guys were on and off the field during the year.

    Furthermore, Arizona also had ten players with 100+ receiving yards, but their playmaking wide receivers still commanded the ball and produced at an elite level. When you have guys with elite talent who are capable of being playmakers at the position, they get the ball even if you're spreading it around, IMO.

    Me personally, I tend to put more weight in a former coach trying to get the guy than I do a quarterback who is talking up his receiver to try and convince the front office to keep him. Mangini would only offer a second round pick. Not saying he should have offered a first, but he could have offered a deal with value comparible to a late first if he thought that's where Deion's value was. But he didn't. This guy is a good receiver, but has yet to prove he's a great one, which makes first round compensation much more of a deal for the Patriots than it is for the 'Hawks.


    Quote Originally Posted by BlueThunder View Post
    Branch never complains about it, so they say he is an unselfish "team" player, which is exactly the kind of player Ruskell and Holmgren love.
    You're right, he's such an unselfish team player that he's been holding out since June and incurred around $600,000 in fines in the process because he didn't feel satisfied with his contract situation. Wow, what a guy! :x


    Quote Originally Posted by Seahawk_For_Life View Post
    Doesn't sound like Tom Brady considers him a 2nd tier receiver.
    LMAO, right. Because Brady's going to give an SI interview and not talk up his teammate or say he'd prefer him over other guys. Please, come back to reality. Do you honestly think Brady was going to go to SI and tell them that Branch wasn't first on his list?
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  11. #41
    Seahawk_For_Life's Avatar
    Seahawk_For_Life is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    Age
    41
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    I think someone is feeling threatened.

    I think for the first time ever, we can say the Seahawks have a better wide receiver core than the Rams.

    It's ok, it was bound to happen eventually.
    "We were facing the No. 1 offense in the National Football League", Vitt said.

  12. #42
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,249
    Rep Power
    127

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by Seahawk_For_Life View Post
    I think for the first time ever, we can say the Seahawks have a better wide receiver core than the Rams.
    Come on, do you really believe this? You can say it, but it's not going to make it true.

  13. #43
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,302
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by Seahawk_For_Life View Post
    I think someone is feeling threatened.
    Threatened? How so? I acknowledged in my very first post of this topic that the addition of Branch makes Seattle's group of WRs rather dangerous. That being said, I would likely still take Holt, Bruce, and Curtis over Jackson, Branch, and Burleson. Seattle is making strides to close the gap in the receiver department, but the lack of a true #1 playmaking top-five receiver like Holt separates the Rams as the better unit, IMO. Not to mention that Bruce as the second target in this offense still outperforms (or at worst is on par with) either Jackson or Branch and their accomplishments in the league, and that the difference between Burleson and Curtis from a performance standpoint is marginal at best despite the fact that Burleson has played in ten more games and has 24 more starts than Kevin.

    However, we're getting off topic. My point from response #1 was that this deal isn't as great for the Seahawks as Seattle fans make it out to be, and I'm still waiting to have the very detailed and logical posts that I made supporting that claim to be countered by Seahawk fans. I made a rather lengthy one specifically in response to you earlier on page two, but maybe it's easier for you to just praise this trade and write off any detailed analysis that isn't favorable as a Rams fan feeling threatened? I don't know, you tell me. I'd hate to think you took the time to come to a Rams message board only to ignore what's being posted here.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  14. #44
    maltz88 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    McKenna, WA
    Age
    39
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    And is it still a nice trade for Seattle if that's more like 15-20? .
    I think it's still a good trade for Seattle if the choice winds up being 15-20. Granted, you may wind up with a better player in the first round than Branch. Or you may not. Why hold your cards to play in a crap shoot? The draft is still a 50/50 proposition on players. ESPECIALLY at WR.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    That doesn't even begin to address other potential need positions that could creep up between now and April.
    True, but they can't control that now. What they can control is adding a player that is very, very well liked in the locker room, has an excellent track record in the post season, and they feel will fit in with their offense. I certainly feel that the way to build a successful team is through the draft, but they are a good team now. I think Ruskell is making the right decisions on adding players to try and win right now. The NFL in particular has a very short window for a team to succeed, and if they stand pat it may come to bite them in the rear (see Seattle Mariner trading deadline 98'-01').

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Branch is a good starter but is not the playmaker I think Seattle has been missing at the WR position, at least we haven't seen it out of him.
    I didn't realize they were missing a playmaking WR? Afterall they were the #1 offense in the NFL last year. Will a playmaking WR make them more of a #1?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Furthermore, you have to look at relative value in the league. You don't see many players traded for first round picks. Randy Moss and John Abraham are two recent examples that stand out in my mind, and Branch is no where near that level. Guys like Alexander and James couldn't be moved for first round picks, Culpepper could only get a second rounder. Javon Walker got moved for a second during the draft, Ashley Lelie and Nate Burleson got moved for third round picks I believe. I see Branch somewhere in the grey area between those mid to late first day trades, which is why a first round compensation is questionable.
    I think this also goes to the Seahawks trying to capitalize on their window of opportunity. If you could add someone to help the team win right now wouldn't you do it?

    Also, there are different circumstances surrounding each player that is traded. Moss was turning into a cancer in Minny and wanted out. No argument with Abraham. Alexander and James had two strikes against them....1) They're both considered "old" for RB's since they have such a short career anyway (at least that what most talent evaluators were saying about them) 2) Their contract demands after a trade would have been much higher than what Branches was. Culpepper was coming off of injury, shortly trailing his worst season since coming into the NFL. Ashlie Lelie has been a spotty player at best since coming into the league, was considered lazy in practice, and was disgruntled in Denver. Nate Burelson was a restricted FA, not a trade.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    It would just be nice to hear Seahawk fans admit that they overspent in order to increase the talent on a "win now" team rather than try to make the case that they made a great deal here. Yes, Seattle got a good player, but it wasn't at a bargain by any means.
    I agree and disagree. They are trying to win now. I agree completely. As for overspending.......they were something like 13 million under the cap, which was going to go to waste if they didn't use it. He got a huge bonus, and a front loaded contract so it won't hurt them in the long run. They may have "overpaid" based on the value of a WR, but it was $ that wasn't going to be used if they didn't sign someone anyway.

  15. #45
    LaRamsFanLongTime's Avatar
    LaRamsFanLongTime is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Foothill Ranch CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    808
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    I really don't even know where to begin on this one, especially considering those proven NFL starters came right from the draft, and some of them are much more highly regarded than simply being "proven NFL starters."
    Lets be real honest Nick. Some of those great NFL players came out the 3rd 4th and a couple even later rounds. Top draft picks do not always translate to great NFL players. When you have a player that is already a very good receiver a prospect is not that attractive.

    In my opinion Bush was a player that comes along once in awhile not every draft has one. Even Bush though might falter. The point is you never know what you will get outta your draft pick ,you do however know what Branch is gonna bring to the table. Some stud WR in college could come into the NFL and stink it up.

    As far as playmaker they just need a receiver who shows up and catches the ball. Holt may catch the Ball in the end zone for big plays here and there but he is not a playmaker. He gets open catches the ball and is usually tackled or he dives.Receivers do not need to be playmakers. I think of playmakers as guys that take a 5 yard reception and turn it into a 75 yard TD score. A receiver needs to get open catch the ball and hold onto it. It really is that simple. Branch has proven he could do that consistantly in the NFL.You do that all the way down the field it will result in points.
    Last edited by LaRamsFanLongTime; -09-13-2006 at 03:24 PM.
    LET'S GO DODGERS

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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