Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 54 of 54
  1. #46
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,354
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by maltz88 View Post
    Granted, you may wind up with a better player in the first round than Branch. Or you may not.
    ...or, you may. While the draft is a crapshoot in that it's impossible to know with 100% accuracy who is going to develop into a great player and who won't, many good teams curb those odds a great deal with good scouting and analysis. I would contend based on recent previous drafts that Seattle is one of those teams.

    I personally don't think you trade away your high draft picks simply because of the risks involved with the draft. If that's your argument, why not trade all your picks every year for proven NFL players? I just don't agree with the logic, especially when you consider that guys coming onto new teams aren't exactly sure things either. How many times have we watched a team sign a good player in free agency only to watch him not live up to expectations on the new team?


    Quote Originally Posted by maltz88 View Post
    I think Ruskell is making the right decisions on adding players to try and win right now.
    And I said exactly that four responses ago: "This helps them win now by adding a talented player, no one's disputing that." My point though is that in an effort to get players that help them win now, the organization sacrificed compensation that was worth more than Branch at this point in his career. Maybe that doesn't matter to a "win now" team, but it should matter in the analysis of how good of a deal this was from a compensation standpoint.

    Furthermore, the idea that seems to be predominant about why Branch hasn't produced as well in New England is because they spread the ball around. Does anyone realistically think Branch is going to somehow become a huge focal point of the Seattle offense? When Darrell Jackson over his first five years (excluding last year since he was injured) could only average 68 receptions a year, I have a hard time believing Branch is going to somehow burst onto the scene with huge production in that offense, either.

    It seems like Seattle fans are trying to have their cake and eat it too in that they recognize this not just as a move to improve the team now but also claim it was a great deal for them. Based on what Branch has done and the relative value established both by other players and other bids on Branch himself, I see no evidence to suggest this deal was great from a compensation standpoint.


    Quote Originally Posted by maltz88 View Post
    Also, there are different circumstances surrounding each player that is traded.
    There are circumstances surrounding every trade, but the fact remains that getting first round compensation for players is exceptionally tough. Of the two recent examples I showed you, both of them are really two of the top players at their position. Can we say the same of Branch? No way. I could probably name fifteen receivers in the NFL right now I would take over Branch, and I just don't see how you can trade a first round pick - even a low one - for a guy who has yet to really take his game to the next level.

    As for your analysis of the players I mentioned, even as a cancer Moss commanded a top ten pick and a player. Abraham, considered to be one of the best defensive ends in the league, was traded for the 29th overall pick in last year's draft. Is Deion Branch on the same level as John Abraham at his respective position? Again, no way. Culpepper was coming off injury, but I see no evidence to suggest that he would have warranted first round compensation if he wasn't. As for Burelson, yes he was a restricted free agent, but RFA works very much like a trade, and Minnesota's placement of only a third round offer sheet on Burleson again seems to suggest their opinion about his value.

    The bottom line is relative value has been established with previous trades. Even if you refute the situation about some of the trades, you didn't contest the Abraham deal. If John Abraham, who as a defensive pass rusher plays arguably one of the most important positions on an entire team IMO, gets dealt for the 29th pick in the draft, then you're going to have a hard time convincing me Deion Branch is of similar value in terms of draft pick compensation.

    And again, this doesn't even begin to address the offer put forth by former Patriots coach Eric Mangini, who could have easily made an offer equivilent to the value of a late first round pick but instead put his best offer forth as a second rounder. Again, this is a guy whom I would suggest is in more need of help at receiver in New York than the Seahawks are in Seattle, a guy who saw Branch on the practice field for years. His evaluation and offer deserves quite a bit of attention in this instance.


    Quote Originally Posted by maltz88 View Post
    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.
    We're not talking about contract money. We're talking about the first round compensation, and I think I've made a pretty strong case based on relative value of other players as well as the offer made by Magini that Branch simply does not carry a first round value.

    Of course, maybe the Seahawk organization and their fans simply don't care. Hey, that's fine! The attitude is clearly "win now" and they made a move to do so. If that's the attitude, then overcompensating another team to help you now may carry no weight. However, don't try to convince me that their "win now" move was also a great deal in terms of compensation and player value. It's perfectly fine to be happy about this trade for a Seattle team that wants to get back to the Super Bowl, but I think also trying to make the case (as some fans have, elsewhere as well) that this is a great trade for Seattle from a value perspective is just going overboard.


    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    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.
    I tried to address a lot of this in the first part of this response, but I'll note some additional points here. It's true, you never know exactly what you're going to get out of the draft... but it's not inaccurate to say you have a fairly good idea, especially the teams that scout well. Furthermore, you never know exactly what you're going to get out of a free agent or a traded player. Did the Rams know exactly what they were going to get when they traded for Kyle Turley? Did Kansas City Chiefs know exactly what they were going to get when they signed Kendrell Bell to a huge deal a few offseasons ago? Nothing is ever certain, and there's a risk involved in everything. Thus, using that risk as an excuse to not spend first round picks on players just seems illogical to me.

    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  2. #47
    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 tried to address a lot of this in the first part of this response, but I'll note some additional points here. It's true, you never know exactly what you're going to get out of the draft... but it's not inaccurate to say you have a fairly good idea, especially the teams that scout well.
    I do not agree at all. Many players that you scout are great in College and then after they get their money just dont have the drive to retain their skills. Or they just cannot adapt to the speed of the NFL.There has been plenty of first round bust to prove this point.

    Did the Rams know exactly what they were going to get when they traded for Kyle Turley?
    Absolutely they did. They knew they were getting a really agressive controversial player that liked to run his mouth. It was no secret. The guy played good till he got injured and that is where the trouble started. You tell me the Eagles did not know that TO had been known to cause problems from time to time. Predicticting the magnitude of this mistake was hard but to not question it all cmon you know they discussed it.And if you are just talking about Turleys injury he passed the physical and suited up. You can never tell if a player is gonna get hurt.

    Thus, using that risk as an excuse to not spend first round picks on players just seems illogical to me.
    Im not saying that at all. Of course you want to have a good pick in the draft. Hell if you get two your stoked.I dont think there needs to be any excuses given on the subject though. The seahawks said hey we like Branch, we want him. The deal ended up being made and worked well for both teams in my opinion. I really honestly beleive a player that could prove he had what it takes to be a Super Bowl MVP, and have great post season stats all around is less of a risk then a first round pick. Ask Tom Brady if he would rather have Branch or that pick we already know what he would want.I really think that says it all.
    LET'S GO DODGERS

  3. #48
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,354
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    I do not agree at all. Many players that you scout are great in College and then after they get their money just dont have the drive to retain their skills. Or they just cannot adapt to the speed of the NFL.There has been plenty of first round bust to prove this point.
    We're really getting off topic here, but while there have been plenty of first round busts, but there have also been plenty of first round gems. And some veteran players underperform after their pay day as well. I don't see how this situation is unique to rookies and thus supports the idea of trading away picks for proven players, especially when we're talking about Deion Branch.

    I mean, we're talking about a guy who is supposedly Brady's favorite target, yet has worse numbers than Donte Stallworth, who has had Aaron Brooks throwing to him and has been a #2 for four years in New Orleans. Stallworth, interestingly enough, was traded for a fourth round pick a few weeks ago.

    Again, when you look at relative value, I think it clearly shows Seattle gave up too much for this player. Teams don't give up first round picks simply on proven NFL starters. They give up first round picks for NFL studs - Randy Moss, John Abraham, etc. When they don't, such as the Drew Bledsoe to Buffalo trade, it's a rather significant mistake, IMO.


    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    Absolutely they did.
    Really? They knew that Turley and the head coach would have serious personality clashes and that Turley would only spend two seasons with the team?

    You're addressing the example but skipping over the point, which was even with free agent players and trades for proven guys, you don't know exactly what you're going to get. Same as with rookies. I doubt Atlanta knew they were getting a mediocre receiver when they signed Peerless Price as a free agent in 2003.


    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    I really honestly beleive a player that could prove he had what it takes to be a Super Bowl MVP, and have great post season stats all around is less of a risk then a first round pick.
    You say Super Bowl MVP as if it's a league MVP. Let's be clear here. Super Bowl MVP means you were the best player in one game for the winning team. It says nothing about what you were to that team during the entire season, which I would contend is quite a bit more important.

    Dexter Jackson was a Super Bowl MVP as well, but I wouldn't trade a first round pick for him because of it. Sometimes guys just have great games. I'm sure Branch has had more than a few, but that doesn't change the fact that Branch, in four years in the league on an excellent team with one of the top quarterbacks in the NFL, has yet to separate himself as a top receiver in this league.


    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    Ask Tom Brady if he would rather have Branch or that pick we already know what he would want.I really think that says it all.
    No, what really says it all is what a former New England coach in need of a receiver offered for Branch - a second round pick.

    Using a player's opinion on his teammat is inviting bias, especially in Brady's case since he said he'd rank Branch as second to no one at the receiver position, which is an incredibly suspect assertion. I wouldn't rank him in the top fifteen if I were making a list, arguably top twenty. That's not the kind of player you spend first round compensation on, and if you do, you certainly don't try to call it a great deal on your side afterwards when it's pretty clear you overspent in an effort to make immediate improvements!
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  4. #49
    RamJackson39's Avatar
    RamJackson39 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    990
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Branch is an overrated receiver. He's had Tom Brady as his QB and has faced single coverage his entire career, yet has not had a single season with over 1,000 yards receiving.
    The Roman and The Prince. Playmakers until the end.


  5. #50
    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

    Really? They knew that Turley and the head coach would have serious personality clashes and that Turley would only spend two seasons with the team?

    You're addressing the example but skipping over the point, which was even with free agent players and trades for proven guys, you don't know exactly what you're going to get. Same as with rookies. I doubt Atlanta knew they were getting a mediocre receiver when they signed Peerless Price as a free agent in 2003.
    If you gonna use bits and pieces of the point, then the point looks invalid. Turley's problems started after the injury.Before then he played good and things worked. The Rams did also know that the guy had a hot temper we had seen it before.

    As per the underlined portion of your quote you are stating its a wash then? If the risk are the same whats the problem with taking the deal?

    You talk about scouting being so important. That a good scouting team can limt risk. Are you honestly saying that these same people cannot just as effectively assess a NFL player and limit risk? That makes no sense at all. These guys get paid alot of money to evaluate talent.
    LET'S GO DODGERS

  6. #51
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,354
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    As per the underlined portion of your quote you are stating its a wash then? If the risk are the same whats the problem with taking the deal?
    Um, I've outlined the primary problems repeatedly in multiple posts. The problem with taking the deal, IMO, is the relative value for other players combined with what Branch has accomplished in the league. Based on that information, Branch is not worth a first round pick.


    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    Are you honestly saying that these same people cannot just as effectively assess a NFL player and limit risk?
    Of course I believe they can, which is why I cited Eric Mangini's offer for Branch multiple times! A citation that continues to get ignored because people would rather pretend that Tom Brady's opinion is somehow more objective on this matter.

    But Mangini, a former coach on the New England staff, offered a second round pick for Branch's services. Considering Mangini saw Branch constantly in practice while Branch worked against Mangini's defense and secondary, I trust his ability to assess the player and assign an appropriate value.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  7. #52
    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

    Of course I believe they can, which is why I cited Eric Mangini's offer for Branch multiple times! A citation that continues to get ignored because people would rather pretend that Tom Brady's opinion is somehow more objective on this matter.

    But Mangini, a former coach on the New England staff, offered a second round pick for Branch's services. Considering Mangini saw Branch constantly in practice while Branch worked against Mangini's defense and secondary, I trust his ability to assess the player and assign an appropriate value.
    Yeah you trust him the Jets trust him yet he does not work for the Seahawks. He worked with Branch your right. Does that make him the overall authority? The Pats worked with Branch for years they seemed to think they did not want to let him go for a second round pick. The Jets are also gonna be investigated for tampering which would lead me to beleive that they wanted Branch a little bit more then you seem to think. Why do you walk the line and take that risk for a player that was only worth a second round pick?



    Um, I've outlined the primary problems repeatedly in multiple posts. The problem with taking the deal, IMO, is the relative value for other players combined with what Branch has accomplished in the league. Based on that information, Branch is not worth a first round pick.
    We unfortunatley will not know the answer to this debate till it all plays out.Unfortunatly the argument of relative value for a college player in my opinion means very little. A college player is a bigger question mark then a NFL receiver that has been a major contributor to the only dynasty in this decade.That is the way I see it and till we see Branch play subpar or the Pats use that pick to obtain a player that far exceeds Branch in value this argument could go on forever.

    I will concede to the fact that you present some valid points and know the draft very well. Your not called Draft Nick for nothing.I think there is very little either one of us can do to change the others opinion though at this point.This is just one of those wait and see kind of things.
    LET'S GO DODGERS

  8. #53
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,354
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    The Pats worked with Branch for years they seemed to think they did not want to let him go for a second round pick.
    Well obviously they're going to ask for as high a price as they can, because they want to get the most compensation possible. That's a fundamental part of the negotiation process. Using this to try and gauge Branch's actual value is pretty suspect, IMO.


    Quote Originally Posted by LaRamsFanLongTime View Post
    The Jets are also gonna be investigated for tampering which would lead me to beleive that they wanted Branch a little bit more then you seem to think.
    ...what? If they wanted Branch more than I give them credit for, then they could have simply made a better offer to New England. They didn't - their best known offer was a second round pick.

    As for the tampering investigation, the premise of the investigation is that New England feels New York inappropriately brought Branch's representatives in on the trade talks when the talks should have simply been between the two organizations alone. I don't see how that has anything to do with a deeper desire for the player since, again, if the Jets really wanted him they simply could have increased the value of their offer.

    Fair enough about having to wait and see, though I don't envision many circumstances where Branch is going to do something that somehow going to increase his value to that of a first round pick. Let's face it, as a full time starter from 2001-2004, Darrell Jackson averaged about 72 receptions a year. And the Seahawks weren't exactly loaded with WRs who were taking away from Jackson's production.

    Meanwhile, Deion Branch had his best career season with 78 receptions last year. Is he really going to get more opportunities in a Seattle offense now featuring Shaun Alexander, Jackson, Nate Burleson, Bobby Engram, and Jerramy Stevens? I seriously doubt it, making a true break out somewhat unlikely IMO. So if Branch is still hovering around his same production levels, still sitting in that 60-70 catch range, it certainly isn't going to justify trading a first round pick for him.
    Last edited by Nick; -09-14-2006 at 03:03 PM.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  9. #54
    RAMMAN68's Avatar
    RAMMAN68 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Escondido, CA
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,714
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Branch traded to Seattle

    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.
    The squawks have been doing that for years,(see Fisher and Wistrom).
    Branch is an average WR and I don't see him making a big impact.
    All you need to do is put eight in the box to slow down Alexander, and force Hussledork to beat you, which he won't.
    JUST WIN ONE FOR THE FANS


    "HIT HARD, HIT FAST, AND HIT OFTEN"
    Adm. William "Bull" Halsey

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

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
  •