Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Seahawks Rivals Grades on Jamal Adams trade? A from Big D

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics. Ex-Seahawks fall into NFL topics. LANGUAGE: PG-13
  • Anybody got other good stuff on "NFC rival media" opinions on the trade? NOT the industry blowards, but actual rival-team-aligned media, Niners, Rams, Vikings etc.

    Here's what some of the Dallas-Cowboys-fan-oriented media thinks. Grade A for the Seahawks on this trade from Cowboys-aligned media. They give the Hawks a higher grade than the Jets on this trade.

    I'd say the envy of a rival is the sincerest form of flattery.

    https://www.dallasnews.com/sports/cowbo ... mal-adams/

    Excerpts:
    "Saturday night’s results: The Seahawks get an A, the Jets earn a solid B and the Cowboys missed the boat even while they were on one." (Jerry Jones is out on his yacht somewhere near Europe I gather)

    "If you take the trade values listed in the famous Jimmy Johnson Draft Chart, Adams had 1,700 points as the sixth player taken by New York. If Seattle hands the Jets maybe the 22nd pick in each of the coming drafts (and the Seahawks might be better than that), that’s 1,560 points. There are smaller pieces involved in the trade, so call it a tie if you like."

    All we know is that the Seahawks, who have played in three of the last 15 Super Bowls, are willing to bet that Russell Wilson can get them to another one in the next year or two.
    ...
    The Cowboys don’t need a bigger boat. But their secondary would be viewed as a much greater weapon if they had landed a shark attack of a safety like Adams.


    Hey, it's nice to have Dallas media endorse the Seattle front office in making this trade.

    Mods, I chose to put this as it's own topic, rather than bury it as page 5 of the Adams thread. Feel free to move it there if you deem that I done chose wrong.
    olyfan63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3868
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:03 am


  • olyfan63 wrote:Anybody got other good stuff on "NFC rival media" opinions on the trade? NOT the industry blowards, but actual rival-team-aligned media, Niners, Rams, Vikings etc.

    Here's what some of the Dallas-Cowboys-fan-oriented media thinks. Grade A for the Seahawks on this trade from Cowboys-aligned media. They give the Hawks a higher grade than the Jets on this trade.

    I'd say the envy of a rival is the sincerest form of flattery.

    https://www.dallasnews.com/sports/cowbo ... mal-adams/

    Excerpts:
    "Saturday night’s results: The Seahawks get an A, the Jets earn a solid B and the Cowboys missed the boat even while they were on one." (Jerry Jones is out on his yacht somewhere near Europe I gather)

    "If you take the trade values listed in the famous Jimmy Johnson Draft Chart, Adams had 1,700 points as the sixth player taken by New York. If Seattle hands the Jets maybe the 22nd pick in each of the coming drafts (and the Seahawks might be better than that), that’s 1,560 points. There are smaller pieces involved in the trade, so call it a tie if you like."

    All we know is that the Seahawks, who have played in three of the last 15 Super Bowls, are willing to bet that Russell Wilson can get them to another one in the next year or two.
    ...
    The Cowboys don’t need a bigger boat. But their secondary would be viewed as a much greater weapon if they had landed a shark attack of a safety like Adams.


    Hey, it's nice to have Dallas media endorse the Seattle front office in making this trade.

    Mods, I chose to put this as it's own topic, rather than bury it as page 5 of the Adams thread. Feel free to move it there if you deem that I done chose wrong.


    I agree people see the two 1st rounders price tag and just freak out, this isn't a team drafting in the top 16 often. these are consistently late 1st rounders with close to second round value. Much like everything else in the World optics mean little when put against the facts.
    Mix
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 204
    Joined: Sun May 31, 2020 9:14 am


  • This is actually a great point. Adams is also proven so not a rookie punt either.
    UK_Seahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3352
    Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:08 pm


  • Also, IF a team was to trade way up from the bottom of the 1st round to get up to #6 where he was drafted??? Two 1st round picks, period.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 17346
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Good points. This is what I posted in the Jamal thread:


    Here's another point to consider, most NFL Draft Scouts will tell you that there are only ~20 players in an average draft that are worth 1st Round evaluation. Beyond, that, the rest are 2nd round talents or later. This is why Pete and John have traded back so often to grab more picks.

    So, like someone else said, we'd be lucky to trade up high enough to get a talent like Jamal Adams. But now we don't have to do that.

    We get a proven All-Pro who was the Jets Team Captain. The IQ of our backfield just jumped, a lot. Go look at the videos of Jamal breaking down plays, especially the one with Baldy and Jaws on NFL Breakdowns. Both guys are impressed with Adam's play and knowledge.

    They don't just let anybody on that show either. You have to be a smart, physically talented Football Player in order to get on that show (Stephon Gilmore).
    ivotuk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 20932
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • I was hoping for more "Enemy Media Reaction", but perhaps I should have posted this in the NFL Forum to get that, and made the topic something like "Seahawks Rivals Grades on Jamal Adams trade? A from Big D". 20/20.

    Just legitimately curious what the rival mindset is. I stumbled across the Dallas media article by accident, curious what the take is in LA, SF, AZ, MN, NO, etc.
    olyfan63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3868
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:03 am


  • olyfan63 wrote:I was hoping for more "Enemy Media Reaction", but perhaps I should have posted this in the NFL Forum to get that, and made the topic something like "Seahawks Rivals Grades on Jamal Adams trade? A from Big D". 20/20.

    Just legitimately curious what the rival mindset is. I stumbled across the Dallas media article by accident, curious what the take is in LA, SF, AZ, MN, NO, etc.


    Thats pretty easy to figure out, F.U. Seattle, wish we had got him.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 35622
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • I can only speak for myself, but I think its was too much in compensation. I feel kinda like I did after the Harvin trade, but I think Adams is a far better player.

    As a Niner fan, I hate that Adams is a Seahawk. Dude is freakishly talented. He'll be all over the place and will have an impact on the run D and pass D. I say this because I don't want to minimize how good a player he is. He's be REALLY good and at an impact position in that Seattle D and he'll make a difference against scrambling QBs like in Arizona and against TEs like Kittle. I would love to have seen SF pull the trigger there...

    ...but not at that price. 2 1s and a 3 for the player and a 4 is still a HUGE price...especially since you'll still have to pay him next year when the cap will likely shrink.

    I hear the argument that the Seahawks 1s haven't been great lately and the picks will likely be in the late 20s at best (best for the Jets that is), but if your plan is to just trade away 1s because you don't draft well then you have a larger problem. 1st round picks are still 1st round picks. They represent the ability to get a good player and hold him for 4+ years on small contracts.

    The 49ers could have kept Buckner at 20 mil+ per year but traded him for a 1st and got Kinlaw in the building for 4 years at a MUCH, MUCH lower number. History will tell if that was a good move or not, but it just illustrates the difference in the way the teams are looking at this.

    Now it could be that Adams makes a HUGE difference and tips the balance in the NFC West. I can't say that won't happen and if it does it may well have been worth it, but for me I wouldn't have been happy if the Niners had paid that price. A few years ago, if they'd made the trade for Khalil Mack (and they offered more than the Bears did), they wouldn't right now have Nick Bosa or possibly Brandon Aiyuk.

    Its gonna suck to play against Bobby Wagner and Jamal Adams patrolling the middle of the field, but WOW. That's a big price tag.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • Marvin49 wrote:I can only speak for myself, but I think its was too much in compensation. I feel kinda like I did after the Harvin trade, but I think Adams is a far better player.

    As a Niner fan, I hate that Adams is a Seahawk. Dude is freakishly talented. He'll be all over the place and will have an impact on the run D and pass D. I say this because I don't want to minimize how good a player he is. He's be REALLY good and at an impact position in that Seattle D and he'll make a difference against scrambling QBs like in Arizona and against TEs like Kittle. I would love to have seen SF pull the trigger there...

    ...but not at that price. 2 1s and a 3 for the player and a 4 is still a HUGE price...especially since you'll still have to pay him next year when the cap will likely shrink.

    I hear the argument that the Seahawks 1s haven't been great lately and the picks will likely be in the late 20s at best (best for the Jets that is), but if your plan is to just trade away 1s because you don't draft well then you have a larger problem. 1st round picks are still 1st round picks. They represent the ability to get a good player and hold him for 4+ years on small contracts.

    The 49ers could have kept Buckner at 20 mil+ per year but traded him for a 1st and got Kinlaw in the building for 4 years at a MUCH, MUCH lower number. History will tell if that was a good move or not, but it just illustrates the difference in the way the teams are looking at this.

    Now it could be that Adams makes a HUGE difference and tips the balance in the NFC West. I can't say that won't happen and if it does it may well have been worth it, but for me I wouldn't have been happy if the Niners had paid that price. A few years ago, if they'd made the trade for Khalil Mack (and they offered more than the Bears did), they wouldn't right now have Nick Bosa or possibly Brandon Aiyuk.

    Its gonna suck to play against Bobby Wagner and Jamal Adams patrolling the middle of the field, but WOW. That's a big price tag.


    Consider the pricetag from this point: Adams is only 24, 3 years in the league, and was taken 6th overall in 2017, a draft value of 1600 based on the chart. Since Pete Carroll has become the Seahawks coach, Seattle has finished above the 21st draft slot only twice, #12 in the 2012 draft, and #18 in the 2018 draft. In that span, Seattle's assigned picks (25, 12, 25, 32, 31, 26, 26, 18, 21, 27) has averaged a value equivalent to 761 on the chart, or roughly the 23rd overall selection. 761 + 761 is 1522, plus Seattle and the Jets swapped 4th rounders in 2022. If you assume (safe bet) in 2021 the Jets finish in the bottom half of the league and Seattle finishes in the top half, then the average difference between those 4th rounders is 34 points in Seattle's favor, bringing the value from 1522 to 1488. Effectively, Seattle dealt the equivalent of approximately the 7th overall pick for a 24 year old All-Pro/Pro Bowler. That isn't too bad.
    Maulbert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7406
    Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:44 pm
    Location: In the basement of Reynholm Industries


  • I think that pass rush is more important than secondary play in building a defense, or at least that the two work in unison. I think that Adams is a freakish talent , but I don't think a better SS will elevate your defense as much as if resources were placed into a stud pass rusher. I guess it also depends on how they use him.

    I would also rank the importance of secondary as CB, then FS, then SS.

    Thinking of great safety play and game changers, I think of FS like Earl Thomas, ED Reed, Eric Berry, Tyran Mathieu

    You don't usually think of the Harrison Smiths, Landon Collins, Eric Weddles

    One exception is Troy Polamalu. I do think that Adams has that kind of talent.

    Two 1 st rounders is a steep price if you are drafting in the top 15, but the Hawks seem to be 20 + year after year.
    94Smith
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 386
    Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:01 am


  • Maulbert wrote:
    Marvin49 wrote:I can only speak for myself, but I think its was too much in compensation. I feel kinda like I did after the Harvin trade, but I think Adams is a far better player.

    As a Niner fan, I hate that Adams is a Seahawk. Dude is freakishly talented. He'll be all over the place and will have an impact on the run D and pass D. I say this because I don't want to minimize how good a player he is. He's be REALLY good and at an impact position in that Seattle D and he'll make a difference against scrambling QBs like in Arizona and against TEs like Kittle. I would love to have seen SF pull the trigger there...

    ...but not at that price. 2 1s and a 3 for the player and a 4 is still a HUGE price...especially since you'll still have to pay him next year when the cap will likely shrink.

    I hear the argument that the Seahawks 1s haven't been great lately and the picks will likely be in the late 20s at best (best for the Jets that is), but if your plan is to just trade away 1s because you don't draft well then you have a larger problem. 1st round picks are still 1st round picks. They represent the ability to get a good player and hold him for 4+ years on small contracts.

    The 49ers could have kept Buckner at 20 mil+ per year but traded him for a 1st and got Kinlaw in the building for 4 years at a MUCH, MUCH lower number. History will tell if that was a good move or not, but it just illustrates the difference in the way the teams are looking at this.

    Now it could be that Adams makes a HUGE difference and tips the balance in the NFC West. I can't say that won't happen and if it does it may well have been worth it, but for me I wouldn't have been happy if the Niners had paid that price. A few years ago, if they'd made the trade for Khalil Mack (and they offered more than the Bears did), they wouldn't right now have Nick Bosa or possibly Brandon Aiyuk.

    Its gonna suck to play against Bobby Wagner and Jamal Adams patrolling the middle of the field, but WOW. That's a big price tag.


    Consider the pricetag from this point: Adams is only 24, 3 years in the league, and was taken 6th overall in 2017, a draft value of 1600 based on the chart. Since Pete Carroll has become the Seahawks coach, Seattle has finished above the 21st draft slot only twice, #12 in the 2012 draft, and #18 in the 2018 draft. In that span, Seattle's assigned picks (25, 12, 25, 32, 31, 26, 26, 18, 21, 27) has averaged a value equivalent to 761 on the chart, or roughly the 23rd overall selection. 761 + 761 is 1522, plus Seattle and the Jets swapped 4th rounders in 2022. If you assume (safe bet) in 2021 the Jets finish in the bottom half of the league and Seattle finishes in the top half, then the average difference between those 4th rounders is 34 points in Seattle's favor, bringing the value from 1522 to 1488. Effectively, Seattle dealt the equivalent of approximately the 7th overall pick for a 24 year old All-Pro/Pro Bowler. That isn't too bad.


    I see the logic there and I'm pretty sure I'd be doin' the math there myself if I were a Seahawks fan, but I still think its too much.

    You are talking about a guy who is going to get PAID huge $$$ (with a shrinking salary cap), not a top 10 draft pick who you will have salary controlled for 4-5 years. You are also talking about a guy who basically talked his way out of New York. These are the kind of situations where you get a guy for LESS than he might be worth. Not more.

    Maybe I'm jaded. Dunno. Garoppolo for only a 2. Dee Ford for only a 2. The thing is with those trades is that they were cheap on compensation because a big contract was going to have to be done.

    Now QB is a different animal and Adams is better than Dee. By alot. I'm not saying he's not. Just seems to me that top dollar (in terms of draft compensation) was paid on a player the Jets needed to move in a hurry. Now I don't know who was offering what but I read this week that BOTH Dallas and SF had said they were not in the bidding. I can't speak for Dallas, but Lynch usually shows you his cards after the fact. He admitted to trying to make deals for Mack and OBJ.

    Now he's older of course, but Niners got Trent Williams for a 3 and a 5. There were alot of other things going on there, but when a guy is disgruntled, you usually get that guy on the cheap, not for a fortune. I felt the same way about Jalen Ramsey and the same arguments were made and I STILL think that was way too much...and that was a CORNER, not a safety.

    So I guess my question is this...who were the Seahawks competing with?

    Adams is a stud tho. He's young and he'll be a playmaker for the Seahawks for years. That part sucks in a big way for 49er fans.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • 94Smith wrote:I think that pass rush is more important than secondary play in building a defense, or at least that the two work in unison. I think that Adams is a freakish talent , but I don't think a better SS will elevate your defense as much as if resources were placed into a stud pass rusher. I guess it also depends on how they use him.

    I would also rank the importance of secondary as CB, then FS, then SS.

    Thinking of great safety play and game changers, I think of FS like Earl Thomas, ED Reed, Eric Berry, Tyran Mathieu

    You don't usually think of the Harrison Smiths, Landon Collins, Eric Weddles

    One exception is Troy Polamalu. I do think that Adams has that kind of talent.

    Two 1 st rounders is a steep price if you are drafting in the top 15, but the Hawks seem to be 20 + year after year.


    Just a note on that last line. That's true...but the reality is you never know where that pick is gonna be. One injury to Wilson and that can be a top 10 pick. It happens.

    Niners went after Mack thinking that it wouldn't be a top 10 pick they lost if they traded it. Garoppolo got hurt in week 3 and all of the sudden they had pick #2.

    It happens.

    Peyton Manning got hurt and the Colts ended up with pick #1 and Andrew Luck.

    Now you are in a pandemic where you can wipe out an entire QB room for several weeks in the blink of an eye. Just seems risky to me.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • Marvin49 wrote:
    Maulbert wrote:
    Marvin49 wrote:I can only speak for myself, but I think its was too much in compensation. I feel kinda like I did after the Harvin trade, but I think Adams is a far better player.

    As a Niner fan, I hate that Adams is a Seahawk. Dude is freakishly talented. He'll be all over the place and will have an impact on the run D and pass D. I say this because I don't want to minimize how good a player he is. He's be REALLY good and at an impact position in that Seattle D and he'll make a difference against scrambling QBs like in Arizona and against TEs like Kittle. I would love to have seen SF pull the trigger there...

    ...but not at that price. 2 1s and a 3 for the player and a 4 is still a HUGE price...especially since you'll still have to pay him next year when the cap will likely shrink.

    I hear the argument that the Seahawks 1s haven't been great lately and the picks will likely be in the late 20s at best (best for the Jets that is), but if your plan is to just trade away 1s because you don't draft well then you have a larger problem. 1st round picks are still 1st round picks. They represent the ability to get a good player and hold him for 4+ years on small contracts.

    The 49ers could have kept Buckner at 20 mil+ per year but traded him for a 1st and got Kinlaw in the building for 4 years at a MUCH, MUCH lower number. History will tell if that was a good move or not, but it just illustrates the difference in the way the teams are looking at this.

    Now it could be that Adams makes a HUGE difference and tips the balance in the NFC West. I can't say that won't happen and if it does it may well have been worth it, but for me I wouldn't have been happy if the Niners had paid that price. A few years ago, if they'd made the trade for Khalil Mack (and they offered more than the Bears did), they wouldn't right now have Nick Bosa or possibly Brandon Aiyuk.

    Its gonna suck to play against Bobby Wagner and Jamal Adams patrolling the middle of the field, but WOW. That's a big price tag.


    Consider the pricetag from this point: Adams is only 24, 3 years in the league, and was taken 6th overall in 2017, a draft value of 1600 based on the chart. Since Pete Carroll has become the Seahawks coach, Seattle has finished above the 21st draft slot only twice, #12 in the 2012 draft, and #18 in the 2018 draft. In that span, Seattle's assigned picks (25, 12, 25, 32, 31, 26, 26, 18, 21, 27) has averaged a value equivalent to 761 on the chart, or roughly the 23rd overall selection. 761 + 761 is 1522, plus Seattle and the Jets swapped 4th rounders in 2022. If you assume (safe bet) in 2021 the Jets finish in the bottom half of the league and Seattle finishes in the top half, then the average difference between those 4th rounders is 34 points in Seattle's favor, bringing the value from 1522 to 1488. Effectively, Seattle dealt the equivalent of approximately the 7th overall pick for a 24 year old All-Pro/Pro Bowler. That isn't too bad.


    I see the logic there and I'm pretty sure I'd be doin' the math there myself if I were a Seahawks fan, but I still think its too much.

    You are talking about a guy who is going to get PAID huge $$$ (with a shrinking salary cap), not a top 10 draft pick who you will have salary controlled for 4-5 years. You are also talking about a guy who basically talked his way out of New York. These are the kind of situations where you get a guy for LESS than he might be worth. Not more.

    Maybe I'm jaded. Dunno. Garoppolo for only a 2. Dee Ford for only a 2. The thing is with those trades is that they were cheap on compensation because a big contract was going to have to be done.

    Now QB is a different animal and Adams is better than Dee. By alot. I'm not saying he's not. Just seems to me that top dollar (in terms of draft compensation) was paid on a player the Jets needed to move in a hurry. Now I don't know who was offering what but I read this week that BOTH Dallas and SF had said they were not in the bidding. I can't speak for Dallas, but Lynch usually shows you his cards after the fact. He admitted to trying to make deals for Mack and OBJ.

    Now he's older of course, but Niners got Trent Williams for a 3 and a 5. There were alot of other things going on there, but when a guy is disgruntled, you usually get that guy on the cheap, not for a fortune. I felt the same way about Jalen Ramsey and the same arguments were made and I STILL think that was way too much...and that was a CORNER, not a safety.

    So I guess my question is this...who were the Seahawks competing with?

    Adams is a stud tho. He's young and he'll be a playmaker for the Seahawks for years. That part sucks in a big way for 49er fans.


    Comparing Garoppolo is silly. He was unproven at best, and you basically gave back NE's original investment to get him, also, he's not an All-Pro. He's solid at best. I'd question how far he'd get you without your defense and running game. As for, Dee Ford, he was 28, and had underperformed for the Chiefs for the most part. Is it the Marshawn Lynch deal? No, but it's hardly a fleecing.
    Maulbert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7406
    Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:44 pm
    Location: In the basement of Reynholm Industries


  • Maulbert wrote:
    Marvin49 wrote:
    Maulbert wrote:
    Marvin49 wrote:I can only speak for myself, but I think its was too much in compensation. I feel kinda like I did after the Harvin trade, but I think Adams is a far better player.

    As a Niner fan, I hate that Adams is a Seahawk. Dude is freakishly talented. He'll be all over the place and will have an impact on the run D and pass D. I say this because I don't want to minimize how good a player he is. He's be REALLY good and at an impact position in that Seattle D and he'll make a difference against scrambling QBs like in Arizona and against TEs like Kittle. I would love to have seen SF pull the trigger there...

    ...but not at that price. 2 1s and a 3 for the player and a 4 is still a HUGE price...especially since you'll still have to pay him next year when the cap will likely shrink.

    I hear the argument that the Seahawks 1s haven't been great lately and the picks will likely be in the late 20s at best (best for the Jets that is), but if your plan is to just trade away 1s because you don't draft well then you have a larger problem. 1st round picks are still 1st round picks. They represent the ability to get a good player and hold him for 4+ years on small contracts.

    The 49ers could have kept Buckner at 20 mil+ per year but traded him for a 1st and got Kinlaw in the building for 4 years at a MUCH, MUCH lower number. History will tell if that was a good move or not, but it just illustrates the difference in the way the teams are looking at this.

    Now it could be that Adams makes a HUGE difference and tips the balance in the NFC West. I can't say that won't happen and if it does it may well have been worth it, but for me I wouldn't have been happy if the Niners had paid that price. A few years ago, if they'd made the trade for Khalil Mack (and they offered more than the Bears did), they wouldn't right now have Nick Bosa or possibly Brandon Aiyuk.

    Its gonna suck to play against Bobby Wagner and Jamal Adams patrolling the middle of the field, but WOW. That's a big price tag.


    Consider the pricetag from this point: Adams is only 24, 3 years in the league, and was taken 6th overall in 2017, a draft value of 1600 based on the chart. Since Pete Carroll has become the Seahawks coach, Seattle has finished above the 21st draft slot only twice, #12 in the 2012 draft, and #18 in the 2018 draft. In that span, Seattle's assigned picks (25, 12, 25, 32, 31, 26, 26, 18, 21, 27) has averaged a value equivalent to 761 on the chart, or roughly the 23rd overall selection. 761 + 761 is 1522, plus Seattle and the Jets swapped 4th rounders in 2022. If you assume (safe bet) in 2021 the Jets finish in the bottom half of the league and Seattle finishes in the top half, then the average difference between those 4th rounders is 34 points in Seattle's favor, bringing the value from 1522 to 1488. Effectively, Seattle dealt the equivalent of approximately the 7th overall pick for a 24 year old All-Pro/Pro Bowler. That isn't too bad.


    I see the logic there and I'm pretty sure I'd be doin' the math there myself if I were a Seahawks fan, but I still think its too much.

    You are talking about a guy who is going to get PAID huge $$$ (with a shrinking salary cap), not a top 10 draft pick who you will have salary controlled for 4-5 years. You are also talking about a guy who basically talked his way out of New York. These are the kind of situations where you get a guy for LESS than he might be worth. Not more.

    Maybe I'm jaded. Dunno. Garoppolo for only a 2. Dee Ford for only a 2. The thing is with those trades is that they were cheap on compensation because a big contract was going to have to be done.

    Now QB is a different animal and Adams is better than Dee. By alot. I'm not saying he's not. Just seems to me that top dollar (in terms of draft compensation) was paid on a player the Jets needed to move in a hurry. Now I don't know who was offering what but I read this week that BOTH Dallas and SF had said they were not in the bidding. I can't speak for Dallas, but Lynch usually shows you his cards after the fact. He admitted to trying to make deals for Mack and OBJ.

    Now he's older of course, but Niners got Trent Williams for a 3 and a 5. There were alot of other things going on there, but when a guy is disgruntled, you usually get that guy on the cheap, not for a fortune. I felt the same way about Jalen Ramsey and the same arguments were made and I STILL think that was way too much...and that was a CORNER, not a safety.

    So I guess my question is this...who were the Seahawks competing with?

    Adams is a stud tho. He's young and he'll be a playmaker for the Seahawks for years. That part sucks in a big way for 49er fans.


    Comparing Garoppolo is silly. He was unproven at best, and you basically gave back NE's original investment to get him, also, he's not an All-Pro. He's solid at best. I'd question how far he'd get you without your defense and running game. As for, Dee Ford, he was 28, and had underperformed for the Chiefs for the most part. Is it the Marshawn Lynch deal? No, but it's hardly a fleecing.


    I wasn't trying to make out like they were the same. In addition to what you said, Jimmy was a QB so thats a whole different thing.

    I also said that Adams is much better than Dee. I can see a trade for a 1 or a trade for a 2 and a 3 and a player.

    2 1s and a 3 for the player and a 4 and you still have to pay the guy? That's too rich for my blood.

    The big problem for me in trading those 1s is that you have no idea right now what your team needs are going to be next year and the year after. I might do this for a premiere LT, QB or Pass Rusher. Strong Safety?

    Anyway, no biggy. If I were you I'd be excited to have that guy at age 24. The cost isn't an issue till later anyway.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • Suck for Luck was a tank job. Different animal.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 35622
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • The value kind of seems fair when you consider his cap #s. The total cap hit from the trade this season is around $2M, and his 5th year option is $10M. Those are not bad numbers. If Clowney (or insert pass rusher) comes back, then you are looking at (talent wise) a legitimate top 3 team in the NFL.
    knownone
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2806
    Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:10 am


  • chris98251 wrote:
    olyfan63 wrote:I was hoping for more "Enemy Media Reaction", but perhaps I should have posted this in the NFL Forum to get that, and made the topic something like "Seahawks Rivals Grades on Jamal Adams trade? A from Big D". 20/20.

    Just legitimately curious what the rival mindset is. I stumbled across the Dallas media article by accident, curious what the take is in LA, SF, AZ, MN, NO, etc.


    Thats pretty easy to figure out, F.U. Seattle, wish we had got him.


    Sure, but another take is, so happy Seahawks overpaid, loss of those future draft choices will weaken their team, yes, it may suck for a year or so, but the loss of draft picks will come back to bite Seattle.

    So far I'm hearing a mix, with the dominant theme being that Adams is a beast and will truly help the Seattle defense--A LOT, against NFC West competition.

    I was pretty happy when the Rams broke the bank for Jared Goff, and Todd Gurley, and... and... and..., and are now in salary cap hell. That Rams offense has been Kryptonite for the Seattle D for several years now. Not to mention the Rams D has dominated the Seattle O quite a bit going back to the Jeff Fisher days. But I digress...

    I was also really happy to see Niners pay Jimmy G, and now have to start making more cap-driven decisions with all the freakish talent on that roster when Jimmy G was cheap. Seattle's one Superb Owl win came in Russell Wilson's 2nd year, when we had a $15M cap advantage over most other teams at the QB position, and almost got another Owl the next year too with a cheap Russell.
    olyfan63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3868
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:03 am


  • knownone wrote: you are looking at (talent wise) a legitimate top 3 team in the NFL.


    Secondary top 5
    Linebackers -probably the best
    Defensive line- not in top 10
    Offensive line- probably not in top 25
    Receivers- Not in top 15
    Tight Ends- not in top 10
    Quarterback - QB2
    Running Backs - top 10

    Top 3? Really? I think that is ambitious. You guys are good because RW3 is awesome and that is the most important position, but top 3 talent?
    94Smith
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 386
    Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:01 am


  • The impact of these missed draft picks probably will not be felt for about 3 years. And by then it won't matter because Carroll is probably gone in 3 years and we are much worse anyway the moment he leaves.

    Will it matter if we pay dearly to win now, knowing we likely go into rebuild mode the moment Carroll exits?

    Can any other coach win with no OL, a mediocre DL, and aging LBs? Even with a great QB?

    While it is possible that another coach might want to coach a team with a great QB like Wilson, the rest of the roster seems a setup for failure for anyone else. I doubt the Seahawks will be as exciting an opportunity for a great HC as we would hope.

    This is it. We have to win now, or at least within 3 years. So you put all your chips on the table because for this period of time we will be competitive.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4952
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:48 pm


  • TwistedHusky wrote:The impact of these missed draft picks probably will not be felt for about 3 years. And by then it won't matter because Carroll is probably gone in 3 years and we are much worse anyway the moment he leaves.

    Will it matter if we pay dearly to win now, knowing we likely go into rebuild mode the moment Carroll exits?

    Can any other coach win with no OL, a mediocre DL, and aging LBs? Even with a great QB?

    While it is possible that another coach might want to coach a team with a great QB like Wilson, the rest of the roster seems a setup for failure for anyone else. I doubt the Seahawks will be as exciting an opportunity for a great HC as we would hope.

    This is it. We have to win now, or at least within 3 years. So you put all your chips on the table because for this period of time we will be competitive.


    I think that's accurate. I think that's the approach of management.

    I just don't think that's a good strategy. Going "all in" doesn't usually work.

    Still, as I said before, if I were a Seahawks fan I'd be looking forward to seeing Adams on the field, cost be damned.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • TwistedHusky wrote:While it is possible that another coach might want to coach a team with a great QB like Wilson, the rest of the roster seems a setup for failure for anyone else. I doubt the Seahawks will be as exciting an opportunity for a great HC as we would hope.



    I think Wilson makes the Seahawks a super attractive job for an offensive-minded head coach. His obvious clutch playmaking ability is complemented by how coachable and how much of a team player he's been. One of the reasons why new coaches fail is that those teams never solve for the QB position (either talent acquisition and/or properly developing)...so they're sunk even before taking the field. Rosters get refreshed so quickly that I doubt existing talent outside of Wilson factors much into the calculus.

    A new coach also has the ability to unveil a pass-heavy template for Wilson, so they'd have an opportunity to bring that level of freshness to the franchise as well. And further, the existing talent for that pass template includes Metcalf, who could be a true game changing #1. I think it could be a really attractive job opportunity.
    Jac
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 789
    Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:50 pm


  • Jac wrote:
    TwistedHusky wrote:While it is possible that another coach might want to coach a team with a great QB like Wilson, the rest of the roster seems a setup for failure for anyone else. I doubt the Seahawks will be as exciting an opportunity for a great HC as we would hope.



    I think Wilson makes the Seahawks a super attractive job for an offensive-minded head coach. His obvious clutch playmaking ability is complemented by how coachable and how much of a team player he's been. One of the reasons why new coaches fail is that those teams never solve for the QB position (either talent acquisition and/or properly developing)...so they're sunk even before taking the field. Rosters get refreshed so quickly that I doubt existing talent outside of Wilson factors much into the calculus.

    A new coach also has the ability to unveil a pass-heavy template for Wilson, so they'd have an opportunity to bring that level of freshness to the franchise as well. And further, the existing talent for that pass template includes Metcalf, who could be a true game changing #1. I think it could be a really attractive job opportunity.


    New Coach and probably GM at the same time and Wilson is traded, he will been in the league approaching 14 or 15 years and a full rebuild will be happening in the new Coaches eyes and scheme.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 35622
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • chris98251 wrote:
    Jac wrote:
    TwistedHusky wrote:While it is possible that another coach might want to coach a team with a great QB like Wilson, the rest of the roster seems a setup for failure for anyone else. I doubt the Seahawks will be as exciting an opportunity for a great HC as we would hope.



    I think Wilson makes the Seahawks a super attractive job for an offensive-minded head coach. His obvious clutch playmaking ability is complemented by how coachable and how much of a team player he's been. One of the reasons why new coaches fail is that those teams never solve for the QB position (either talent acquisition and/or properly developing)...so they're sunk even before taking the field. Rosters get refreshed so quickly that I doubt existing talent outside of Wilson factors much into the calculus.

    A new coach also has the ability to unveil a pass-heavy template for Wilson, so they'd have an opportunity to bring that level of freshness to the franchise as well. And further, the existing talent for that pass template includes Metcalf, who could be a true game changing #1. I think it could be a really attractive job opportunity.


    New Coach and probably GM at the same time and Wilson is traded, he will been in the league approaching 14 or 15 years and a full rebuild will be happening in the new Coaches eyes and scheme.


    You're right. Maybe because I was thinking of the attractiveness of the current roster to a prospective new coach, I had it in my head that the transition would be sooner than later. If Carroll is here for another 4 years, it certainly lessens the value of Wilson as an obvious reason to take on the job.
    Jac
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 789
    Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:50 pm


  • 94Smith wrote:
    knownone wrote: you are looking at (talent wise) a legitimate top 3 team in the NFL.


    Secondary top 5
    Linebackers -probably the best
    Defensive line- not in top 10
    Offensive line- probably not in top 25
    Receivers- Not in top 15
    Tight Ends- not in top 10
    Quarterback - QB2
    Running Backs - top 10

    Top 3? Really? I think that is ambitious. You guys are good because RW3 is awesome and that is the most important position, but top 3 talent?


    Receivers not in the top 15? Really? With Lockett and Metcalf?
    Maulbert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7406
    Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:44 pm
    Location: In the basement of Reynholm Industries


  • Marvin49 wrote:I can only speak for myself, but I think its was too much in compensation. I feel kinda like I did after the Harvin trade, but I think Adams is a far better player.

    As a Niner fan, I hate that Adams is a Seahawk. Dude is freakishly talented. He'll be all over the place and will have an impact on the run D and pass D. I say this because I don't want to minimize how good a player he is. He's be REALLY good and at an impact position in that Seattle D and he'll make a difference against scrambling QBs like in Arizona and against TEs like Kittle. I would love to have seen SF pull the trigger there...

    ...but not at that price. 2 1s and a 3 for the player and a 4 is still a HUGE price...especially since you'll still have to pay him next year when the cap will likely shrink.

    I hear the argument that the Seahawks 1s haven't been great lately and the picks will likely be in the late 20s at best (best for the Jets that is), but if your plan is to just trade away 1s because you don't draft well then you have a larger problem. 1st round picks are still 1st round picks. They represent the ability to get a good player and hold him for 4+ years on small contracts.

    The 49ers could have kept Buckner at 20 mil+ per year but traded him for a 1st and got Kinlaw in the building for 4 years at a MUCH, MUCH lower number. History will tell if that was a good move or not, but it just illustrates the difference in the way the teams are looking at this.

    Now it could be that Adams makes a HUGE difference and tips the balance in the NFC West. I can't say that won't happen and if it does it may well have been worth it, but for me I wouldn't have been happy if the Niners had paid that price. A few years ago, if they'd made the trade for Khalil Mack (and they offered more than the Bears did), they wouldn't right now have Nick Bosa or possibly Brandon Aiyuk.

    Its gonna suck to play against Bobby Wagner and Jamal Adams patrolling the middle of the field, but WOW. That's a big price tag.


    Not a big price tag when the Seahawks go 15-1 this year. If he could be a baller on the Jets, then by virtue of going to Seattle we're going to see a safety the league has never seen before.

    As for the Niners, let's face it, if they got Adams it would have been too big a price. And them not getting Adams is also a failure on their part.

    This is what happens when you hire a former safety to run your team. Can only hope for the best.
    NINEster
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1947
    Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 8:06 pm


  • Maulbert wrote:
    94Smith wrote:
    knownone wrote: you are looking at (talent wise) a legitimate top 3 team in the NFL.


    Secondary top 5
    Linebackers -probably the best
    Defensive line- not in top 10
    Offensive line- probably not in top 25
    Receivers- Not in top 15
    Tight Ends- not in top 10
    Quarterback - QB2
    Running Backs - top 10

    Top 3? Really? I think that is ambitious. You guys are good because RW3 is awesome and that is the most important position, but top 3 talent?


    Receivers not in the top 15? Really? With Lockett and Metcalf?


    I think he pegged the defense well, but the offense got it all wrong.

    Receivers definitely top 10. Lockett is underrated for real. DK Metcalf route 9 extraordinaire works great with Wilson when that guy Chris Matthews could make plays too. The loss of the angry one was felt somewhat but mitigated by others.

    Tight Ends not in the top 10? WTF. I got Dissly as #1 over Kelce/Ertz/etc, Hollister likely cracks top 10 too. Wiilson is still very solid.

    Quarterback - QB2 as in 2nd best in the league? Ok, that's probably fair. I think Mahomes is slightly overrated too, but I'm in the minority on that one.

    RBs is very fair........you get Carson and Penny back, and Hyde.......I mean I know Hyde was just a Niner, but he did have that fluke long run against the LOB his rookie year at Century Link. A poor man's Ezekiel Elliott is still a decent back, esp. in rotation.
    NINEster
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1947
    Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 8:06 pm


  • 94Smith wrote:
    knownone wrote: you are looking at (talent wise) a legitimate top 3 team in the NFL.


    Secondary top 5
    Linebackers -probably the best
    Defensive line- not in top 10
    Offensive line- probably not in top 25
    Receivers- Not in top 15
    Tight Ends- not in top 10
    Quarterback - QB2
    Running Backs - top 10

    Top 3? Really? I think that is ambitious. You guys are good because RW3 is awesome and that is the most important position, but top 3 talent?


    I wish the Niners had top 3 talent, even without a QB.
    NINEster
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1947
    Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 8:06 pm


  • NINEster wrote:This is what happens (paying the necessary price for SS Jamal Adams) when you hire a former safety to run your team. Can only hope for the best.


    Dude! What a b!@ch excellent observation!! (Seriously!) And I'm impressed that you knew this tidbit. I'd forgotten about it.

    Yes Carroll was like a 2nd string safety in his college career. So he absolutely would view the defense from a safety's point of view. So Carroll looked at what his defense could be with a FREAK like Adams roving around the secondary, and had to try not to hyperventilate just thinking about it.
    olyfan63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3868
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:03 am


  • With most college teams not playing this year, the draft will be a $h!t show. The timing of events just made this trade even better for Seattle...lol
    TAB420
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 827
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:11 pm


  • Oh look, a Niner fan trying to talk down the Hawks getting one of the best players in football. The same 49ers who paid Jimmy choke job 28 mil a year.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 17346
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Oh look, a Niner fan trying to talk down the Hawks getting one of the best players in football. The same 49ers who paid Jimmy choke job 28 mil a year.


    LOL.

    Please. I didn't talk down the player. At all. I'll hate facing him and if I were a Seahawks fan I'd be excited to see him...

    ...but come on. You can't tell me that at least at some level the price (draft picks) didn't make you pause a bit.

    If the 49ers had made the EXACT same trade, you'd have said the EXACT same thing I did.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • Marvin49 wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Oh look, a Niner fan trying to talk down the Hawks getting one of the best players in football. The same 49ers who paid Jimmy choke job 28 mil a year.


    LOL.

    Please. I didn't talk down the player. At all. I'll hate facing him and if I were a Seahawks fan I'd be excited to see him...

    ...but come on. You can't tell me that at least at some level the price (draft picks) didn't make you pause a bit.

    If the 49ers had made the EXACT same trade, you'd have said the EXACT same thing I did.



    Pause yes, but then step back and look at the National situation and the future of the draft for a couple year till things get worked out and a vaccine is proven and distributed.

    I suspect Free Agents and trades will be the build mode for two or three years with Cap manipulation being very important.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 35622
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • At first, hell yes. But after taking the time to really look at it, that's the price you pay for a game changer like Adams.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 17346
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:At first, hell yes. But after taking the time to really look at it, that's the price you pay for a game changer like Adams.


    That's fair...but I can't shake thinking that you wouldn't make the "really looking at it" step if you didn't want to justify it on some level.

    I made similar comments after the Graham and Harvin trades and got similar reaction.

    The different here though is that I think Adams is FAR superior to either of those players. If he stays healthy, there is no question he's a difference maker.

    While I can't completely reject my own fandom for having the opinion I do, I can say that I'd have this reaction if ANY team had made that trade, including SF. I do, however, tend to put ALOT of value in my opinions on draft picks. I HATE giving them up. I hate that the Niners still owe Washington a 3 for Trent Williams...tho not that hard to justify it.

    I think tho that the biggest factor is the history of trades for 2 1st round picks. It isn't great.

    http://www.footballperspective.com/trad ... -a-player/

    I also don't default to disliking all Seahawk trades. I thought the Clowney deal was fantastic for Seattle last year. Those are the trades I like. Get value when the player has the team over a barrel. I thought Adams had the Jets in that spot, which was one reason the compensation seemed exorbitant to me.

    That said, if I were a Seahawk fan I'd be counting the days before I could see him on the field in that D. I kinda think SF signing Jordan Reed was partially a counter to Adams deal (and I only say partially because there were rumors of them looking at Reed and Delanie Walker long before the Adams deal). I'm just curious when/if Seattle addresses the pass rush.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • NINEster wrote:
    Maulbert wrote:
    94Smith wrote:
    knownone wrote: you are looking at (talent wise) a legitimate top 3 team in the NFL.


    Secondary top 5
    Linebackers -probably the best
    Defensive line- not in top 10
    Offensive line- probably not in top 25
    Receivers- Not in top 15
    Tight Ends- not in top 10
    Quarterback - QB2
    Running Backs - top 10

    Top 3? Really? I think that is ambitious. You guys are good because RW3 is awesome and that is the most important position, but top 3 talent?


    Receivers not in the top 15? Really? With Lockett and Metcalf?

    but the offense got it all wrong.

    Receivers definitely top 10. Lockett is underrated for real. DK Metcalf route 9 extraordinaire works great with Wilson when that guy Chris Matthews could make plays too. The loss of the angry one was felt somewhat but mitigated by others.

    Tight Ends not in the top 10? WTF. I got Dissly as #1 over Kelce/Ertz/etc, Hollister likely cracks top 10 too. Wiilson is still very solid.



    Wide receivers and Tight Ends --------> https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2020-nfl-season-receiving-corps-rankings
    94Smith
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 386
    Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:01 am


  • NINEster wrote:
    Maulbert wrote:
    94Smith wrote:
    knownone wrote: you are looking at (talent wise) a legitimate top 3 team in the NFL.

    . I got Dissly as #1 over Kelce/Ertz/etc,

    .


    #1 in season ending injuries? Got to be on the field to show your talent
    94Smith
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 386
    Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:01 am


  • 94Smith wrote:
    NINEster wrote:
    Maulbert wrote:
    94Smith wrote:
    Secondary top 5
    Linebackers -probably the best
    Defensive line- not in top 10
    Offensive line- probably not in top 25
    Receivers- Not in top 15
    Tight Ends- not in top 10
    Quarterback - QB2
    Running Backs - top 10

    Top 3? Really? I think that is ambitious. You guys are good because RW3 is awesome and that is the most important position, but top 3 talent?


    Receivers not in the top 15? Really? With Lockett and Metcalf?

    but the offense got it all wrong.

    Receivers definitely top 10. Lockett is underrated for real. DK Metcalf route 9 extraordinaire works great with Wilson when that guy Chris Matthews could make plays too. The loss of the angry one was felt somewhat but mitigated by others.

    Tight Ends not in the top 10? WTF. I got Dissly as #1 over Kelce/Ertz/etc, Hollister likely cracks top 10 too. Wiilson is still very solid.



    Wide receivers and Tight Ends --------> https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2020-nfl-season-receiving-corps-rankings



    I would say both Seattle and S.F are harder to rank and under valued because both team spread the ball all over, that article doesn't include Olsen and Parkinson nor Gordon possibly coming back or Dorsett.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 35622
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • 94Smith wrote:
    NINEster wrote:
    Maulbert wrote:
    94Smith wrote:
    Secondary top 5
    Linebackers -probably the best
    Defensive line- not in top 10
    Offensive line- probably not in top 25
    Receivers- Not in top 15
    Tight Ends- not in top 10
    Quarterback - QB2
    Running Backs - top 10

    Top 3? Really? I think that is ambitious. You guys are good because RW3 is awesome and that is the most important position, but top 3 talent?


    Receivers not in the top 15? Really? With Lockett and Metcalf?

    but the offense got it all wrong.

    Receivers definitely top 10. Lockett is underrated for real. DK Metcalf route 9 extraordinaire works great with Wilson when that guy Chris Matthews could make plays too. The loss of the angry one was felt somewhat but mitigated by others.

    Tight Ends not in the top 10? WTF. I got Dissly as #1 over Kelce/Ertz/etc, Hollister likely cracks top 10 too. Wiilson is still very solid.



    Wide receivers and Tight Ends --------> https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2020-nfl-season-receiving-corps-rankings


    Look, I'm not claiming they're top 5, or even top 10. After Metcalf, we've got a bunch of nobodies, unless we bring back Gordon (AB is pipe dream. No sense wasting thought on something that won't happen.). However, despite the desire to avoid saying anything in line with WHINEster's cringeworthy troll attempts, the fact is Lockett might well BE the most underrated receiver in football, and he and Metcalf are a hell of a tandem. I easily believe those 2 guys elevate this receiver's room into the league's upper half, PFF be damned.
    Maulbert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7406
    Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:44 pm
    Location: In the basement of Reynholm Industries


  • 94Smith wrote:
    NINEster wrote:
    Maulbert wrote:
    94Smith wrote:
    Secondary top 5
    Linebackers -probably the best
    Defensive line- not in top 10
    Offensive line- probably not in top 25
    Receivers- Not in top 15
    Tight Ends- not in top 10
    Quarterback - QB2
    Running Backs - top 10

    Top 3? Really? I think that is ambitious. You guys are good because RW3 is awesome and that is the most important position, but top 3 talent?


    Receivers not in the top 15? Really? With Lockett and Metcalf?

    but the offense got it all wrong.

    Receivers definitely top 10. Lockett is underrated for real. DK Metcalf route 9 extraordinaire works great with Wilson when that guy Chris Matthews could make plays too. The loss of the angry one was felt somewhat but mitigated by others.

    Tight Ends not in the top 10? WTF. I got Dissly as #1 over Kelce/Ertz/etc, Hollister likely cracks top 10 too. Wiilson is still very solid.



    Wide receivers and Tight Ends --------> https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2020-nfl-season-receiving-corps-rankings


    What a joke. Yet NFL had Wilson and Lockett as the #1 QB to WR threat.
    TAB420
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 827
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:11 pm


  • Maulbert wrote:
    94Smith wrote:
    NINEster wrote:
    Maulbert wrote:
    Receivers not in the top 15? Really? With Lockett and Metcalf?

    but the offense got it all wrong.

    Receivers definitely top 10. Lockett is underrated for real. DK Metcalf route 9 extraordinaire works great with Wilson when that guy Chris Matthews could make plays too. The loss of the angry one was felt somewhat but mitigated by others.

    Tight Ends not in the top 10? WTF. I got Dissly as #1 over Kelce/Ertz/etc, Hollister likely cracks top 10 too. Wiilson is still very solid.



    Wide receivers and Tight Ends --------> https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2020-nfl-season-receiving-corps-rankings


    Look, I'm not claiming they're top 5, or even top 10. After Metcalf, we've got a bunch of nobodies, unless we bring back Gordon (AB is pipe dream. No sense wasting thought on something that won't happen.). However, despite the desire to avoid saying anything in line with WHINEster's cringeworthy troll attempts, the fact is Lockett might well BE the most underrated receiver in football, and he and Metcalf are a hell of a tandem. I easily believe those 2 guys elevate this receiver's room into the league's upper half, PFF be damned.


    Honestly, I don't get caught up in rankings like that. Its all subjective and way too dependant on the system, QB, O-Line, etc.

    Example: George Kittle is one of my favorite players and has ridiculous RAC yards...in fact I believe second only to McCaffrey in the NFL (don't quote me....that's from memory). He would likely be good in ANY offense, but would he ranked so high if he weren't in an offense that put him in position to be in space and run after the catch so much?

    Another Example: I'm not really a fan of Metcalf because I think he's kinda deep threat or nothing type guy (just my opinion). However, when Wilson is your QB, that's a pretty damn good skillset to have. Deebo Samuel wouldn't be nearly as good in that offense, but Deebo is fantastic in Shanahans offense where he gets RAC and takes handoffs.

    So yeah....WAY, WAY too subjective to do any rankings. The only think I'd say you can rank is how well a corps matches the offense they are in.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • You clearly don't know much (shocker) about DK if you think he's a one trick pony. But do you.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 17346
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:You clearly don't know much (shocker) about DK if you think he's a one trick pony. But do you.



    Wow. Really?

    THAT'S what you took from the point I was making.

    m'kay.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • You literally just said a deep threat or nothing. He's a very versatile player.
    Go Hawks
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 17346
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:You literally just said a deep threat or nothing. He's a very versatile player.
    Go Hawks


    I didn't suggest I didn't say that. I was surprised that you picked that as the the thing to comment on out of everything I said.

    Heres the point I was trying to make...

    DK Metcalf had 900 yards last year, 278 Run After Catch
    Deebo Samuel had 802 yards, 481 Run After Catch
    George Kittle had 1053 yards, 622 Run After Catch

    The point I'm making isn't who is better. The point I'm making is that DK suits Seattle because he's a tall, fast, speedy WR and Wilson is the best deep ball thrower in the game. That isn't an insult. DK has 11 yards on to 2 carries.

    Samuel suits SF because the entire O is predicated on getting guys opportunities for RAC. Samuel is an Ex RB as is Jalen Hurd. Pettis was a great PR as is Aiyuk, who is also known for his RAC ability. Samuel had 159 yards rushing on 14 carries.

    This isn't "this guy is better than this guy". The point I'm making is the entire argument is arbitrary because they have drastically different roles for the teams they play for and the styles of their offenses and QBs.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • Can't imagine where he got that idea from "Another Example: I'm not really a fan of Metcalf because I think he's kinda deep threat or nothing type guy (just my opinion) ". DK also had more than twice the TD's as Deebo . Catching passes in the end-zone can cut down on YAC... :)
    TAB420
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 827
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:11 pm


  • TAB420 wrote:Can't imagine where he got that idea from "Another Example: I'm not really a fan of Metcalf because I think he's kinda deep threat or nothing type guy (just my opinion) ". DK also had more than twice the TD's as Deebo . Catching passes in the end-zone can cut down on YAC... :)


    Again...I didn't deny saying it. I'm not a fan of Metcalf. Clearly, you guys disagree. Its all good.

    My point tho, AGAIN, was the WR corps rating are subjective.

    If we are talking TDs tho, Metcalf had 7 and Deebo had 3....but Deebo also had 3 more on the ground. AGAIN, subjective as different players have different roles.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • Marvin49 wrote:
    TAB420 wrote:Can't imagine where he got that idea from "Another Example: I'm not really a fan of Metcalf because I think he's kinda deep threat or nothing type guy (just my opinion) ". DK also had more than twice the TD's as Deebo . Catching passes in the end-zone can cut down on YAC... :)


    Again...I didn't deny saying it. I'm not a fan of Metcalf. Clearly, you guys disagree. Its all good.

    My point tho, AGAIN, was the WR corps rating are subjective.

    If we are talking TDs tho, Metcalf had 7 and Deebo had 3....but Deebo also had 3 more on the ground. AGAIN, subjective as different players have different roles.


    You have a frustrating habit of refusing to give credit to opposing players unless their greatness is blindingly obvious, however, you have carved out a reputation of a solid contributor here, so when you give a backhanded compliment like that, yeah, people are gonna notice. You may not like Metcalf, but you are selling him short.
    Maulbert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7406
    Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:44 pm
    Location: In the basement of Reynholm Industries


  • Marvin49 wrote:
    TAB420 wrote:Can't imagine where he got that idea from "Another Example: I'm not really a fan of Metcalf because I think he's kinda deep threat or nothing type guy (just my opinion) ". DK also had more than twice the TD's as Deebo . Catching passes in the end-zone can cut down on YAC... :)


    Again...I didn't deny saying it. I'm not a fan of Metcalf. Clearly, you guys disagree. Its all good.

    My point tho, AGAIN, was the WR corps rating are subjective.

    If we are talking TDs tho, Metcalf had 7 and Deebo had 3....but Deebo also had 3 more on the ground. AGAIN, subjective as different players have different roles.

    Only 4...yes, 4 of DK's catches were 40+ yards. I wouldn't consider that deep threat or nothing.
    TAB420
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 827
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:11 pm


  • Maulbert wrote:
    Marvin49 wrote:
    TAB420 wrote:Can't imagine where he got that idea from "Another Example: I'm not really a fan of Metcalf because I think he's kinda deep threat or nothing type guy (just my opinion) ". DK also had more than twice the TD's as Deebo . Catching passes in the end-zone can cut down on YAC... :)


    Again...I didn't deny saying it. I'm not a fan of Metcalf. Clearly, you guys disagree. Its all good.

    My point tho, AGAIN, was the WR corps rating are subjective.

    If we are talking TDs tho, Metcalf had 7 and Deebo had 3....but Deebo also had 3 more on the ground. AGAIN, subjective as different players have different roles.


    You have a frustrating habit of refusing to give credit to opposing players unless their greatness is blindingly obvious, however, you have carved out a reputation of a solid contributor here, so when you give a backhanded compliment like that, yeah, people are gonna notice. You may not like Metcalf, but you are selling him short.


    I think that's bogus. I didn't like Metcalf BEFORE the draft and much preferred his teammate AJ Brown. In fact, I preferred AJ Brown to Deebo Samuel whom the Niners selected ahead of both Metcalf and Brown.

    I think Metcalf is a physical monster. Height, weight, speed....off the charts. He's a specimen. I think he's limited as a WR. I don't think he's great after the catch and I don't think he's a great route runner. Thats why I made the comment about deep threat. He does that VERY well with his size/spedd and seems to be great catching the ball when its contested. That's my opinion. Could I be wrong? Absolutely. That's my opinion of Metcalf and it was my opinion long before he became a Seahawk. I'm not the only one with that opinion either as a guy with his measurables shouldn't have lasted till the 2nd round. If he works out for Seattle, I'll have been wrong and I won't be afraid to admit it if it happens.

    I CAN admit that he had a better rookie year than I expected. As I have said mutiple times, I think thats because he's a match for what the Seahawks do. Should be noted the number of times I've read "Crapalo", etc about 49er players who are clearly better than most would admit on this forum, but you guys are taking great umbrage with me simply saying I'm not a fan of a player.

    I think its amusing that you guys are harping on that assessment when in the same sentence I said the Wilson was the best deep ball thrower in the NFL. I said I didn't like the Adams trade because of the price, but said he was a GREAT player. I've said in the past the Marshawn Lynch is one of my favorite players in the NFL and it just killed me that he was a Seahawk. I thought Doug Baldwin was a much better player than he ever got credit for...even by many Seahawk fans.

    I think Chris Carson is a stud. Tyler Lockett is annoyingly great, especially paired with Wilson...another great match.

    I simply am not a fan of Metcalf. Sorry. Can't help it. He has a long time to prove me wrong and good luck to him. I'm SURE there are 49ers out there that you can say the EXACT same thing about.
    Marvin49
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7142
    Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:34 pm


  • Marvin49 wrote:
    Maulbert wrote:
    Marvin49 wrote:
    TAB420 wrote:Can't imagine where he got that idea from "Another Example: I'm not really a fan of Metcalf because I think he's kinda deep threat or nothing type guy (just my opinion) ". DK also had more than twice the TD's as Deebo . Catching passes in the end-zone can cut down on YAC... :)


    Again...I didn't deny saying it. I'm not a fan of Metcalf. Clearly, you guys disagree. Its all good.

    My point tho, AGAIN, was the WR corps rating are subjective.

    If we are talking TDs tho, Metcalf had 7 and Deebo had 3....but Deebo also had 3 more on the ground. AGAIN, subjective as different players have different roles.


    You have a frustrating habit of refusing to give credit to opposing players unless their greatness is blindingly obvious, however, you have carved out a reputation of a solid contributor here, so when you give a backhanded compliment like that, yeah, people are gonna notice. You may not like Metcalf, but you are selling him short.


    I think that's bogus. I didn't like Metcalf BEFORE the draft and much preferred his teammate AJ Brown. In fact, I preferred AJ Brown to Deebo Samuel whom the Niners selected ahead of both Metcalf and Brown.

    I think Metcalf is a physical monster. Height, weight, speed....off the charts. He's a specimen. I think he's limited as a WR. I don't think he's great after the catch and I don't think he's a great route runner. Thats why I made the comment about deep threat. He does that VERY well with his size/spedd and seems to be great catching the ball when its contested. That's my opinion. Could I be wrong? Absolutely. That's my opinion of Metcalf and it was my opinion long before he became a Seahawk. I'm not the only one with that opinion either as a guy with his measurables shouldn't have lasted till the 2nd round. If he works out for Seattle, I'll have been wrong and I won't be afraid to admit it if it happens.

    I CAN admit that he had a better rookie year than I expected. As I have said mutiple times, I think thats because he's a match for what the Seahawks do. Should be noted the number of times I've read "Crapalo", etc about 49er players who are clearly better than most would admit on this forum, but you guys are taking great umbrage with me simply saying I'm not a fan of a player.

    I think its amusing that you guys are harping on that assessment when in the same sentence I said the Wilson was the best deep ball thrower in the NFL. I said I didn't like the Adams trade because of the price, but said he was a GREAT player. I've said in the past the Marshawn Lynch is one of my favorite players in the NFL and it just killed me that he was a Seahawk. I thought Doug Baldwin was a much better player than he ever got credit for...even by many Seahawk fans.

    I think Chris Carson is a stud. Tyler Lockett is annoyingly great, especially paired with Wilson...another great match.

    I simply am not a fan of Metcalf. Sorry. Can't help it. He has a long time to prove me wrong and good luck to him. I'm SURE there are 49ers out there that you can say the EXACT same thing about.


    "Should be noted the number of times I've read "Crapalo", etc about 49er players who are clearly better than most would admit on this forum, but you guys are taking great umbrage with me simply saying I'm not a fan of a player." You think that it could have something to do with this being a SEAHAWK board and the players you are talking about are division rivals? Sometimes I think you forget where you're at. You (and others) get away with crap that would never be tolerated at the webzone.
    TAB420
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 827
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:11 pm


Next


It is currently Tue May 11, 2021 1:22 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: Maelstrom787, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 91 guests