The Jamal Adams mistake (IMO)

[jamescasey1124]

Ok so if he is listed as ss, but plays mostly down by the line and disrupts, then who cares what his title is if he produces. Stop looking at specific positional titles vs what a player can actual do. Specially when we have other safeties who can ball. He is Sacks!!! I dont care what you call him. Gatorade bottle filler or towel boy. He ain't going anywhere. Plus he is more than sacks. He is backfield pressure consistently. Whether running plays or pass. I gurantee he is top of the league in negative plays and behind the line of scrimmage. He was worth more first rounders and then some. Ss, lb, de doesnt matter.

 

[chris98251]

Ok so if he is listed as ss, but plays mostly down by the line and disrupts, then who cares what his title is if he produces. Stop looking at specific positional titles vs what a player can actual do. Specially when we have other safeties who can ball. He is Sacks!!! I dont care what you call him. Gatorade bottle filler or towel boy. He ain't going anywhere. Plus he is more than sacks. He is backfield pressure consistently. Whether running plays or pass. I gurantee he is top of the league in negative plays and behind the line of scrimmage. He was worth more first rounders and then some. Ss, lb, de doesnt matter.

Yeah we should bring back Etric Pruitt, Cary Williams and then one of these.



The man needs to be given a chance to show what a healthy Adams can do in our system and understanding the position role more, our defense was thrown together on the run and they were trying to pick what they could up as they could. Adams even said something referencing that.

 

[massari]

In the context of "I regret the Jamal Adams trade because it robbed Seattle of the chance to draft a running back with their highest pick," yeah. Even the great backs really don't provide much value over the replacement-level average back compared to other positions. Not just that, but the good ones come from all over the draft board.

It's fine to want draft capital back, but for running backs? Why?

Lol you're talking as if I want a RB with every pick, then use the $18M APY on more RBs.

RBs were only brought up in response to someone saying "all 2021 draft picks are essentially worthless", because like I mentioned, those top RBs are literally all I know about the draft, and they're very good, not worthless.

If there's a good OL/DL/CB prospect available, then yeah, pick him instead of one of those top RBs.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

I still like him as a player. Smart and an alpha personality and talent. He's never been a ball hawk. But I think for what he does, he does it at a high level.

His skillset really is unique. I kind of wish we'd add pieces around him to make him have a greater impact. If Seattle can manage to add Alim McNeill and go with a truer hybrid defense -- Adams could really elevate that kind of lineup.

Adams' play recognition, speed and ability to eliminate YAC has significant value.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Not a mistake at all. Matter of opinion.
He's a game changer, and one of the best players in football. You don't let those guys go. And he isn't going anywhere. Seems like on dot net, every player that makes good money...…….trade him!

 

[massari]

Some stats:

Adams blitzed 98 times in 12 games, had 9.5 sacks. So about 90 times he was taken out of coverage without a sack.

He got to the QB untouched/unblocked all but 2 times, when he beat a TE against the Bills, and a RB against the Giants.

 

[misfit]

Some stats:

Adams blitzed 98 times in 12 games, had 9.5 sacks. So about 90 times he was taken out of coverage without a sack.

He got to the QB untouched/unblocked all but 2 times, when he beat a TE against the Bills, and a RB against the Giants.

Personally, I think the Seahawks should go into next season and never blitz, because every time you blitz and don't get home you take people out of coverage. If we don't blitz all season long, we will leave more people in coverage and our defense will be much improved. :2thumbs:

 

[jamescasey1124]

Some stats:

Adams blitzed 98 times in 12 games, had 9.5 sacks. So about 90 times he was taken out of coverage without a sack.

He got to the QB untouched/unblocked all but 2 times, when he beat a TE against the Bills, and a RB against the Giants.

I'm confused on what your going for here. Are you pointing out he should have more sacks with chances or that he was taken out of coverage assignments specifically? Either way...he is still top of the league in tackles for loss and taking him out of coverage would mean they just let him blitz freely and no one else covers his assignment in coverage. Which isnt true. If he blitzes someone assumes his zone or man.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Some stats:

Adams blitzed 98 times in 12 games, had 9.5 sacks. So about 90 times he was taken out of coverage without a sack.

He got to the QB untouched/unblocked all but 2 times, when he beat a TE against the Bills, and a RB against the Giants.

Personally, I think the Seahawks should go into next season and never blitz, because every time you blitz and don't get home you take people out of coverage. If we don't blitz all season long, we will leave more people in coverage and our defense will be much improved. :2thumbs:

Had to manufacture pressure somehow with the front-4 not consistently getting home. The team adapted a 3-4 philosophy with 4-3 under personnel groupings to do so. Taking the blitz entirely off the table probably isn't a good idea - it's good to have different looks. Seattle blitzes killed Jimmy G this past season.