The W
Views: 98977121
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
17.9.14 1638
The W - Football - Pats to trade WR Randy Moss back to Minnesota!? (Page 2)
This thread has 8 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.33
Pages: Prev 1 2
(435 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (40 total)
lotjx
Scrapple








Since: 5.9.08

Since last post: 10 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#21 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.56
Its a bad move by the Pats. I know JayJay is bringing stats to the table, but that was during Spygate where their stats are going to be skewed as well as their Super Bowl rings. All defense has to do now is double team Welker and watch for the tight ends. Their running back situation is a mess even with someone as interesting as Woodward. Minnesota still has a long way to go. The Bears and Packers have a good two game lead on them for the division. While they are near the top of the pack for a wild card birth. Its nice for Moss to go back home and hopefully retire, but I don't see it ending with a ring or maybe even a playoff birth.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 36 days
Last activity: 36 days
#22 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.55
    Originally posted by lotjx
    I know JayJay is bringing stats to the table, but that was during Spygate where their stats are going to be skewed as well as their Super Bowl rings.


You never fail to amaze me.

(edited by TheBucsFan on 7.10.10 0941)


lotjx
Scrapple








Since: 5.9.08

Since last post: 10 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#23 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.56
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      Originally posted by lotjx
      I know JayJay is bringing stats to the table, but that was during Spygate where their stats are going to be skewed as well as their Super Bowl rings.


    You never fail to amaze me.

    (edited by TheBucsFan on 7.10.10 0941)


Sorry, I brought the very real fact that the Pats cheated during those years.
dMr
Andouille








Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 8 hours
#24 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.94
    Originally posted by lotjx
    Sorry, I brought the very real fact that the Pats cheated during those years.
Come on. I grumble about the Patriots' skulduggery as much as the next man, but writing off their offensive success for most of the last decade as being a result of cheating is quite the stretch.

I'm not totally sold on the move (from the Pats perspective) but they do have a history of being on the right end of trades the vast majority of the time so it's usually safer to give them the benefit of the doubt. Besides, they can pretty much do whatever the fuck they want in the draft next year now.

    Originally posted by lotjx
    Its nice for Moss to go back home and hopefully retire, but I don't see it ending with a ring or maybe even a playoff birth.
I have only a loose understanding of biology, but if he wants to cap a playoff appearance with another child I think he's left it a little late in the day.

TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 36 days
Last activity: 36 days
#25 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.55
    Originally posted by lotjx
      Originally posted by TheBucsFan
        Originally posted by lotjx
        I know JayJay is bringing stats to the table, but that was during Spygate where their stats are going to be skewed as well as their Super Bowl rings.


      You never fail to amaze me.

      (edited by TheBucsFan on 7.10.10 0941)


    Sorry, I brought the very real fact that the Pats cheated during those years.


How do you account for the fact that their most dominant year statistically and in terms of results came after it was all revealed? Does getting busted recording opponents in 2007 automatically discredit a Super Bowl win that happened in 2001? Is what happened in 2007 really relevant to the question of "can the Patriots win without one major No. 1 receiver who catches most of Tom Brady's passes," which is what JayJayDean was talking about?



Psycho Penguin
Liverwurst








Since: 24.6.07
From: Greenacres FL

Since last post: 1439 days
Last activity: 1435 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#26 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.95
Yeah I don't think the Lions would be winners if they were on the sidelines of opponent practices, much less taping them.



http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/recognition/9471.html

http://www.twitter.com/ohheyitsPP
http://www.runningondew.com


"Rick Astley asked me if he could borrow my Pixar DVDs."Okay," I said. "You can have Toy Story, Cars & Wall E but Im never gonna give you Up"
lotjx
Scrapple








Since: 5.9.08

Since last post: 10 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#27 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.56
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      Originally posted by lotjx
        Originally posted by TheBucsFan
          Originally posted by lotjx
          I know JayJay is bringing stats to the table, but that was during Spygate where their stats are going to be skewed as well as their Super Bowl rings.


        You never fail to amaze me.

        (edited by TheBucsFan on 7.10.10 0941)


      Sorry, I brought the very real fact that the Pats cheated during those years.


    How do you account for the fact that their most dominant year statistically and in terms of results came after it was all revealed? Does getting busted recording opponents in 2007 automatically discredit a Super Bowl win that happened in 2001? Is what happened in 2007 really relevant to the question of "can the Patriots win without one major No. 1 receiver who catches most of Tom Brady's passes," which is what JayJayDean was talking about?


They had Moss. Plus, they also were not as proficient in the playoffs, a San Diego team with LT on the bench and a one legged Philip Rivers almost beat them prior to losing the Super Bowl. Have you noticed they haven't won since 2004? 2007, they had unbelievable year, but a good chunk had to with Moss being the giant threat while Wes was able to get the underneath passes in one on one coverage. Moss was the difference maker in that year, 2008, Brady gets hurt and last year, Brady wasn't a 100%. I also don't think one good year exonerates their stats especially if they are bringing in a future Hall of Famer to help the offense.

I don't understand the trade then getting a hording some draft picks which a good percentage won't work out or be able to replace a Hall of Famer. I am also not totally sold on the people coming out in the draft unless they get Julio Jones or someone on his level. At this point, all it does is weaken a team who was already fighting for a playoff spot.
geemoney
Scrapple








Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 2 min.
AIM:  
#28 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.26
    Originally posted by lotjx


    I don't understand the trade then getting a hording some draft picks which a good percentage won't work out or be able to replace a Hall of Famer. I am also not totally sold on the people coming out in the draft unless they get Julio Jones or someone on his level. At this point, all it does is weaken a team who was already fighting for a playoff spot.

I think you're underestimating the worth of draft picks. The Pats acquired Moss for a 4th rounder, they got three good years out of him, and still managed to trade him for a 3rd rounder. That's how I want my franchise to run.
whatever
Lap cheong








Since: 12.2.02
From: Cleveland, Ohio

Since last post: 31 days
Last activity: 4 hours
#29 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.94
    Originally posted by lotjx
    I don't understand the trade then getting a hording some draft picks which a good percentage won't work out or be able to replace a Hall of Famer. I am also not totally sold on the people coming out in the draft unless they get Julio Jones or someone on his level. At this point, all it does is weaken a team who was already fighting for a playoff spot.

Y'know they could use those picks to trade up or trade for other players too. Yes, it is probably a short-term loss but there is something to be said for getting value from someone who clearly won't be back next year and is already providing too many distractions.




"As you may have read in Robert Parker's Wine Newsletter, 'Donaghy Estates tastes like the urine of Satan, after a hefty portion of asparagus.'" Jack Donaghy, 30 Rock

dMr
Andouille








Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 8 hours
#30 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.03
    Originally posted by lotjx
    Have you noticed they haven't won since 2004?
Which supports your argument that it was the exposure of Spygate that derailed them........rather poorly.

    Originally posted by lotjx
    2008, Brady gets hurt and last year, Brady wasn't a 100%.
I wonder if these things might explain them not winning the SB rather better than them not taping opponents' signals? Also, I don't think Samuel, Seymour, Vrabel, Bruschi and Harrison are as productive for them as they were once.

You're right though, Spygate's why they haven't won a Super Bowl for a while.

    Originally posted by lotjx
    I am also not totally sold on the people coming out in the draft
Shit. If only they'd known of your assessment before pulling the trigger on the trade.

You should really listen to....

    Originally posted by geemoney
    I think you're underestimating the worth of draft picks. The Pats acquired Moss for a 4th rounder, they got three good years out of him, and still managed to trade him for a 3rd rounder. That's how I want my franchise to run.
This fella. He knows his onions.

They gave away Moss, who was only going to be with them for what's left of the current season to get a 3rd rounder which they could either use to pick up a guy who could be productive for years, or as trade bait to go after a guy they really like on draft day.

Look around the league. The teams that are consistently near the top of the pile tend to be the ones who like to amass draft picks. The Pats are among the best at it, and they don't suck when it comes to deciding when to part ways with veterans neither.



(edited by dMr on 7.10.10 1651)

(edited by dMr on 7.10.10 1743)
hansen9j
Andouille








Since: 7.11.02
From: Riderville, SK

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#31 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.72
The biggest issue I have with the trade from New England's perspective is that if they had kept Moss for the entire season, he would have almost certainly earned them a compensatory third round pick when he signed elsewhere. So in exchange for given up the services of Moss for the remaining 12 games (plus any playoffs), they only get the 3rd round pick sooner (2011 instead of 2012) and higher (slotted in Minnesota's spot, rather than end of the line). That seems like poor value, unless they were convinced they had to get rid of Moss.



It is the policy of the documentary crew to remain true observers and not interfere with its subjects.
"Well. Shit." -hansen9j
Let's Go Riders! (9-4, 2nd West Division)
Go Pack Go! (3-1, T-1st NFC North)
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 14 days
Last activity: 5 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#32 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.65
Since I'm going to entirely ignore the nonsense in much of the above, allow me to make a point about THIS point:

    Originally posted by hansen9j
    The biggest issue I have with the trade from New England's perspective is that if they had kept Moss for the entire season, he would have almost certainly earned them a compensatory third round pick when he signed elsewhere.


This is true. BUT! You can't trade those compensatory draft picks, so they are not of equal value to the one they acquired from Minnesota in terms of being an asset to the Patriots.



Holy fuck shit motherfucker shit. Read comics. Fuck shit shit fuck shit I sold out when I did my job. Fuck fuck fuck shit fuck. Sorry had to do it....

*snip*

Revenge of the Sith = one thumb up from me. Fuck shit. I want to tittie fuck your ass.
-- The Guinness. to Cerebus
Llakor
Landjager








Since: 2.1.02
From: Montreal, Quebec, CANADA

Since last post: 525 days
Last activity: 517 days
AIM:  
#33 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.45
    Originally posted by JayJayDean
    Since I'm going to entirely ignore the nonsense in much of the above, allow me to make a point about THIS point:

      Originally posted by hansen9j
      The biggest issue I have with the trade from New England's perspective is that if they had kept Moss for the entire season, he would have almost certainly earned them a compensatory third round pick when he signed elsewhere.


    This is true. BUT! You can't trade those compensatory draft picks, so they are not of equal value to the one they acquired from Minnesota in terms of being an asset to the Patriots.


Also there is real draft day value in having a pick a year earlier. As a rule of thumb (and I am grossly over-simplifying) you can trade away your pick THIS year for a better pick next year - like a 2011 3rd rounder for a 2012 2nd rounder.

The Pats do this all the time, so much so that sometimes its frustrating because it seems like they are always trading their draft picks for more future draft picks. On the other hand, there is a reason that the Patriots had what 10 players drafted this year while some teams (Cleveland?) only had 4 picks.



"Don't Blame CANADA, Blame Yourselves!"
hansen9j
Andouille








Since: 7.11.02
From: Riderville, SK

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#34 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.72
    Originally posted by Llakor
    Also there is real draft day value in having a pick a year earlier. As a rule of thumb (and I am grossly over-simplifying) you can trade away your pick THIS year for a better pick next year - like a 2011 3rd rounder for a 2012 2nd rounder.
I shortened my original post from having that comment, but I guess I might as well say it. I agree with your math about the 2nd rounder, so basically they traded 12+ games of Randy Moss and an (inflexible) 3rd rounder for a 2nd rounder. Does that seem like a good trade?



It is the policy of the documentary crew to remain true observers and not interfere with its subjects.
"Well. Shit." -hansen9j
Let's Go Riders! (9-4, 2nd West Division)
Go Pack Go! (3-1, T-1st NFC North)
Llakor
Landjager








Since: 2.1.02
From: Montreal, Quebec, CANADA

Since last post: 525 days
Last activity: 517 days
AIM:  
#35 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.45
    Originally posted by hansen9j
      Originally posted by Llakor
      Also there is real draft day value in having a pick a year earlier. As a rule of thumb (and I am grossly over-simplifying) you can trade away your pick THIS year for a better pick next year - like a 2011 3rd rounder for a 2012 2nd rounder.
    I shortened my original post from having that comment, but I guess I might as well say it. I agree with your math about the 2nd rounder, so basically they traded 12+ games of Randy Moss and an (inflexible) 3rd rounder for a 2nd rounder. Does that seem like a good trade?


12+ games of a sulking, embittered Randy Moss? It's not a perfect solution, but I will take it. Yep, I am still drinking the Belichek Kool-Aid.

Also I saw the post-season with Moss and no Welker. I think I would rather take my chances with Welker and no Moss.



"Don't Blame CANADA, Blame Yourselves!"
hansen9j
Andouille








Since: 7.11.02
From: Riderville, SK

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#36 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.72
Both Bill Simmons and Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders* are saying that the Moss in New England situation was incredibly toxic and that the move HAD to happen. So if that's the case, then never mind my prior arguments.

Also, Adam Schefter reported yesterday that Randy Moss restructured his contract with the Vikings. In what way, you ask? Was it more years? No. Was it more money? No. Was it the Vikings contratually promising to not franchise Moss, and thus give up any leverage in trying to re-sign him at the end of the year? Yes. Yes it was. Wow, Minny; wow.

*Yes, I get the irony of an "outsider" having inside information.



It is the policy of the documentary crew to remain true observers and not interfere with its subjects.
"Well. Shit." -hansen9j
Let's Go Riders! (9-4, 2nd West Division)
Go Pack Go! (3-1, T-1st NFC North)
It's False
Scrapple








Since: 20.6.02
From: I am the Tag Team Champions!

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 18 hours
#37 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.78
    Originally posted by hansen9j
    Both Bill Simmons and Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders* are saying that the Moss in New England situation was incredibly toxic and that the move HAD to happen. So if that's the case, then never mind my prior arguments.

    Also, Adam Schefter reported yesterday that Randy Moss restructured his contract with the Vikings. In what way, you ask? Was it more years? No. Was it more money? No. Was it the Vikings contratually promising to not franchise Moss, and thus give up any leverage in trying to re-sign him at the end of the year? Yes. Yes it was. Wow, Minny; wow.

    *Yes, I get the irony of an "outsider" having inside information.


I agree with this move on Minnesota's part. Assuming that Favre's gone at the end of the year, you can't run the risk of Moss being a malcontent next year if Tavaris Jackson is still the same Tavaris Jackson that made the Vikings want Favre in the first place.

It's an all or nothing type move. They're getting Moss strictly as a rental for Favre. If they can't win with him, they won't need him next year anyway, because they'll have Sydney Rice back at 100%, with none of the headaches.




We're flying a giant orange "CONAN" blimp over the baseball playoffs. Finally, subtlety in advertising.
@ConanOBrien
hansen9j
Andouille








Since: 7.11.02
From: Riderville, SK

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#38 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.72
    Originally posted by It's False
      Originally posted by hansen9j
      Both Bill Simmons and Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders* are saying that the Moss in New England situation was incredibly toxic and that the move HAD to happen. So if that's the case, then never mind my prior arguments.

      Also, Adam Schefter reported yesterday that Randy Moss restructured his contract with the Vikings. In what way, you ask? Was it more years? No. Was it more money? No. Was it the Vikings contratually promising to not franchise Moss, and thus give up any leverage in trying to re-sign him at the end of the year? Yes. Yes it was. Wow, Minny; wow.

      *Yes, I get the irony of an "outsider" having inside information.


    I agree with this move on Minnesota's part. Assuming that Favre's gone at the end of the year, you can't run the risk of Moss being a malcontent next year if Tavaris Jackson is still the same Tavaris Jackson that made the Vikings want Favre in the first place.

    It's an all or nothing type move. They're getting Moss strictly as a rental for Favre. If they can't win with him, they won't need him next year anyway, because they'll have Sydney Rice back at 100%, with none of the headaches.
Rice is also a free agent at the end of the year. But at least they'll have Percy Harvin's headaches! (/rimshot)



It is the policy of the documentary crew to remain true observers and not interfere with its subjects.
"Well. Shit." -hansen9j
Let's Go Riders! (9-4, 2nd West Division)
Go Pack Go! (3-1, T-1st NFC North)
Sec19Row53
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Oconomowoc, WI

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 8 min.
Y!:
#39 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.04
    Originally posted by It's False
    Assuming that Favre's gone at the end of the year...

Why would anyone make that sort of assumption?
Matt Tracker
Scrapple








Since: 8.5.03
From: North Carolina

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 42 min.
#40 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.98
Chris Carter just said the Vikes "pwned" the Packers when Moss made his team debut years ago. I suppose that term really is done now.



"To be the man, you gotta beat demands." -- The Lovely Mrs. Tracker
Pages: Prev 1 2
Thread rated: 5.33
Pages: Prev 1 2
Thread ahead: The W Survival League: version 2010.0 (Week 6)
Next thread: 2010 Week 7: Saturday Bloody Saturday
Previous thread: 2010 Week 6
(435 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
As I have said elsewhere - the Steelers will be better served with Randle El at QB than Tommy Turnover or Charlie Batch......Pats looked good last night - Pittsburgh never stood a chance.
- dunkndollaz, Nice to see (2002)
Related threads: Jared Allen's calf-roping celeb banned by NFL. - Sidney Rice has hip surgery yesterday. - Favre reportedly in the air again headed for MN - More...
The W - Football - Pats to trade WR Randy Moss back to Minnesota!? (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.167 seconds.