policyvote Posted March 14, 2009 Author Share Posted March 14, 2009 ...despite the fact that they have almost nothing on the front line? Dunno about this trade. IMO this removes any lingering doubt that Stafford is the pick for DET. Well, Redding completely mailed it in in both 2007 and 2008--and I wasn't expecting any different in 2009. They have a 2008 third-round pick in Andre Fluellen--who's like Redding, only leaner, meaner, and far more athletic. Bobby Bowden called him the best defensive lineman he'd coached many years . . . next to Grady Jackson he should do fine. I won't lie that if there were a shut-up beast of a DT there at #1, he'd be the pick, but there isn't (Raji is a ten-fifteen guy with motivational and weight issues, all these fans calling him a potential #1 overall pick are smoking something). Stafford would be a great 20th pick, but a miserable first overall. He will not succeed unless he has a year or two to sit first. I do not forsee a scenario where Stafford gets drafted 1.1. Frankly, I see the 1.1-to-Denver-for-Cutler deal as being more likely than Stafford getting picked that high. Having Tom "I'll make my client sit out for a year if it means I get more commission" Condon for an agent just seals the deal. There's no way, IMO. Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted March 14, 2009 Author Share Posted March 14, 2009 They were interviewing him on Sirius yesterday, and they were asking about his mere 6 sacks ( I think career wise). Even if it was just last season, they were basically asking why he wasnt involved much in pash rush, and his response was basically the scheme he was in. That said, Ive never seen him play, but according to the interview, he hasnt really had much chance to pass rush. Again, I havent seen him play, so maybe the numbers dont tell the whole tale... Do yourself a favor and check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEwCf7huMgs Make sure you hit "high quality". Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 They tagged Hill because he is their best LB. And Seattle already address the loss of Bernard with Cole. Hill is not our best LB. I like this deal as it adds depth to the interior DL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Ryan Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Hill is not our best LB. I like this deal as it adds depth to the interior DL First off yes he is. Just because he wasnt the most productive, didnt mean he wasnt the best. Troy Aikman was a helluva lot better QB than Tony Romo will ever be, but the stats dont back that statement up. Lombardi Trophies do. The stats here dont say Hill is the best, but when the other 2 high profile guys say Hill is their best LB, forgive me Ill take their word for it over yours. per ESPN http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3979489 SEATTLE -- Pro Bowl linebacker Julian Peterson has refused a pay cut from the Seattle Seahawks, putting his future with the team in question, sources confirmed. The development, first reported by Seattle radio station KJR-AM 950, comes after the team allocated $8.3 million for linebacker Leroy Hill in naming him their franchise player. The team has $20.7 million in 2009 salary-cap space allotted for Peterson, Hill and fellow linebacker Lofa Tatupu. Peterson's contract, a seven-year deal running through the 2012 season, calls for $6.5 million in salary for 2009. Counting bonus money already paid, the contract counts $8.8 million against the salary cap if Peterson remains on the roster and $4.6 million if the team releases him. Peterson, 30, is a five-time Pro Bowl choice. He has earned Pro Bowl honors after each of his three seasons in Seattle, most recently as an injury replacement for Tampa Bay's Derrick Brooks. Tatupu, 26, is a three-time Pro Bowl choice. Hill, also 26, has not appeared in a Pro Bowl, but Tatupu and Peterson have said he might be the best linebacker on the team. Mike Sando covers the NFC West for ESPN.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Ryan Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Personally I do not see how this deal helps Seattle at all. Lofa isnt exactly an iron man, and Peterson was very productive. Cole might just be an upgrade over Rocky Benard to begin with, so why make this move. I understand you need DT help, but the draft is coming and that makes more sense than taking an under achieving DT/DE for a solid playmaking LB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 Aaron Curry's reaction to the deal: http://www.freep.com/article/20090314/SPORTS01/90314053 Actually, I’m very excited about that (trade), being that he’s going to be a perfect Sam linebacker,” Curry said in a phone interview. “Ernie Sims is going to be a great Will (weak-side linebacker) and I just have the opportunity to play the Mike. That Mike position is always a position that I always looked at at Wake Forest that I wanted to play but just never was allowed to really just play it 400 snaps (a season). Good read. Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Well, Redding completely mailed it in in both 2007 and 2008--and I wasn't expecting any different in 2009. I like Scouts take on Redding better, A five-year veteran with good size and athleticism, Redding has been extremely durable for an interior defensive lineman and has been consistent as a run-stopper. He played hard with toughness and intensity last season despite the fact that his sack total dwindled from eight in 2006 to just one a year ago. Redding utilizes great quickness, foot agility and balance to penetrate gaps and disrupt plays in the backfield. He drew many more double teams last season and was eliminated from plays, but that also allowed the linebackers behind him to stay clean and run to the ball. He has quick hands and is adept at slipping blocks, separating and getting to the pile. Redding is an instinctive player who understands leverage and reacts well to blocking schemes, feels pad pressure well and does a nice job pressing back and restricting running lanes. He will have to anchor the inside alone after the departure of fellow big body Shaun Rogers, but Redding is a good football player and a new offensive emphasis on ball control should help him and the rest of the defense. They have him rated as the 8th best DT in the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Personally I do not see how this deal helps Seattle at all. Lofa isnt exactly an iron man, and Peterson was very productive. Cole might just be an upgrade over Rocky Benard to begin with, so why make this move. I understand you need DT help, but the draft is coming and that makes more sense than taking an under achieving DT/DE for a solid playmaking LB. I don't think you can justify it from a talent standpoint. The defensive line has a heckuva lot of depth now, and Redding is restructuring his contract, so it won't be as restrictive from a cap-perspective. The LB corps appears to be thin, but that can be just as easily filled via the draft as the D-line. I like Peterson, but I'm excited to see HIll move away from a spot where his pass coverage is going to be continually exploited. I like the idea that there's a heckuva lot of beef in the depth up front that will free Tatupu to move around the middle more. Otherwise, I'll take a wait-and-see attitude about it. I remind myself that this team was 4-12 last season, and the defense was ranked #30 overall. Not sure that making changes, even if they're designed to spread a little dough around the field, are the worst thing for this club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 (edited) Personally I do not see how this deal helps Seattle at all. Well, Peterson was almost certainly about to be cut for one. Edited March 15, 2009 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 (edited) (Raji is a ten-fifteen guy with motivational and weight issues, all these fans calling him a potential #1 overall pick are smoking something). Peace policy Couldn't agree with that more. Seahawks fans have been calling for him at #4. He just doesn't project high enough to warrant that pick. I guess this explains why Curry was in Seattle earlier this week. I thought it was all smokescreen. Still, I don't get it. Julian has been very very productive, been an emotional leader, and certainly fits Ruskell's character requirements. Unless his money was absolutely necessary to sign our picks, he should still be a Seahawk. With all due respect to Redding, we just brought in the same player two weeks ago and paid him pretty decent money in the process (Cole). This doubles up, and also puts our upside young DT's (Mebane, Bryant) out of the starting lineup. Absolute head scratcher to me. I hear the long-term money thing, but I thought Peterson's contract was over soon anyways. It feels like we no longer get to add a potentially franchise changing player through the draft, but rather simply try to replace a pro-bowler we gave away. As far as who was the best Seahawks linebacker, who knows? Hill was certainly the most consistent, but Lofa is the unquestioned leader, and Peterson was the playmaker. Hill does his job well every day but doesn't tend to make the freakish plays the other two can make. Depending on your values, you could rank them in any order and be right. Hill probably wins the OLB war because of age alone. Poor Julian though. Ruskell said, "so you don't wanna restructure and play nice, off to Detroit you go!" It sounds like the signing of Houshmanzadeh cost us Julian Peterson. I would have much rather just drafted Crabtree and moved on. Edited March 15, 2009 by Seahawks21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 (edited) First off yes he is. The stats here dont say Hill is the best, but when the other 2 high profile guys say Hill is their best LB, forgive me Ill take their word for it over yours. Wrong again but hey, I'm sure that you've watched the Seahawks more than I have. Besides, most of us have witnessed how many times you've been right in the past Edited March 15, 2009 by theprofessor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 With all due respect to Redding, we just brought in the same player two weeks ago and paid him pretty decent money in the process (Cole). The thought that these guys are the same caliber of player isn't supported by anything I've read, and certainly not by their stats. It was nice and all, having Peterson, Hill, and Tatupu. But it's apparent our front wasn't balanced enough over the last 3 seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 (edited) Ha ha, cute. A five-year veteran with good size and athleticism, Redding has been extremely durable for an interior defensive lineman and has been consistent as a run-stopper. He played hard with toughness and intensity last season despite the fact that his sack total dwindled from eight in 2006 to just one a year ago. Redding utilizes great quickness, foot agility and balance to penetrate gaps and disrupt plays in the backfield. He drew many more double teams last season and was eliminated from plays, but that also allowed the linebackers behind him to stay clean and run to the ball. He has quick hands and is adept at slipping blocks, separating and getting to the pile. Redding is an instinctive player who understands leverage and reacts well to blocking schemes, feels pad pressure well and does a nice job pressing back and restricting running lanes. He will have to anchor the inside alone after the departure of fellow big body Shaun Rogers, but Redding is a good football player and a new offensive emphasis on ball control should help him and the rest of the defense. First of all, this quote is from prior to 2008, where he was again "eliminated from plays" on a regular basis. If you read that quote really carefully, it reveals the truth: Cory Redding was a dominant badass in 2006 when nobody knew who he was, and ever since, he's been completely neutralized by double-teams. He's simply not big enough or strong enough to be disruptive. He's a hardworking run-stopper, and that's great, but the Lions signed him to a 7-year, $50M deal two years ago and he's done nothing but "occupy blockers" in return. With Grady Jackson filling that role for 2009, and a logjam of similarly-built, similarly-gifted young men behind him (Andre Fluellen, Landon Cohen, Ikaika Alama-Francis, Langston Moore, and the old-soon-to-be-cut Chuck Darby). I'm not saying Redding isn't a quality player, or a quality guy (in fact, Redding is one of the most active Lions in charity work and in the community). But he was nothing close to what the Lions were paying for, and didn't fit into the new defense very well. Would it be so wrong to say that both teams dealt a disgruntled, overpaid player and gained a valued starter? Peace policy Edited March 15, 2009 by policyvote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 (edited) Ha ha, cute. First of all, this quote is from prior to 2008, where he was again "eliminated from plays" on a regular basis. If you read that quote really carefully, it reveals the truth: Cory Redding was a dominant badass in 2006 when nobody knew who he was, and ever since, he's been completely neutralized by double-teams. He's simply not big enough or strong enough to be disruptive. He's a hardworking run-stopper, and that's great, but the Lions signed him to a 7-year, $50M deal two years ago and he's done nothing but "occupy blockers" in return. With Grady Jackson filling that role for 2009, and a logjam of similarly-built, similarly-gifted young men behind him (Andre Fluellen, Landon Cohen, Ikaika Alama-Francis, Langston Moore, and the old-soon-to-be-cut Chuck Darby). I'm not saying Redding isn't a quality player, or a quality guy (in fact, Redding is one of the most active Lions in charity work and in the community). But he was nothing close to what the Lions were paying for, and didn't fit into the new defense very well. Would it be so wrong to say that both teams dealt a disgruntled, overpaid player and gained a valued starter? Peace policy Did you just say 7 years, 50 million!?!? Holy crap. I thought this was a cost-cutting move. Now I really don't know what to think. I've tried to digest this all day. I guess adding a decent DT isn't a bad thing, but the Seahawks had cheap young prospects that looked like they were ready to get a shot (Brandon Mebane, Red Bryant). IMO any 4-12 team should try to get their best young prospects on the field if they have them, rather than paying big money for an above average veteran. (insert Seattle Mariners joke here) If Peterson got traded to the Lions simply because he wouldn't take a paycut, that's kind of bush. I would think he has earned the money, at least more so than Redding. If I remember right, Peterson has made back-to-back Pro Bowls. He literally is one of the best outside linebackers in the league. I guess you could say he struggled a little last year, but he is a much better player when he has some help from the front 4, which was a faucet last year. Not that he'll have that in Detroit. He isn't as old as most people think either. Peterson and Sims could be pretty awesome together. Unless there is more to this Redding guy than meets the eye, I just can't agree with your statement. I don't think Peterson was here long enough to become disgruntled, unless Ruskell pissed him off. He has a love affair with the fans and media, he's been productive, and he's being paid well. I can't imagine what he would possibly be disgruntled about. Nor do I think he is overpaid. He is one of the best at his position, and is paid as such. My only other scenario is that Ruskell soured on drafting a left tackle who may never play left tackle while he's here. He isn't considering Crabtree anymore, and he simply fell in love with Curry when he was in town last week. If he were to draft Curry, Peterson would become expendable, so he shopped him. I wonder if there was any kind of agreement behind the scenes that the Lions would not take Curry as a result, or maybe the Lions admitted to the Seahawks that they had decided on Stafford or a tackle anyways. Say I'm up to my pessimistic ways, but I just can't like this a whole lot as a Seahawks fan. I still would rather they drafted Crabtree. If they did decide to trade Julian, I think they could have gotten more. I mean, am I supposed to say "Yes!! Cory Redding!! Championship?" You really don't seem that sad to see Redding go. Meanwhile, half the people I know are completely heartbroken right now. I've never had so many text messages in my life. People calling and counseling each other. It was a pretty sad day in Seahawk land today. He wasn't here long, but we sure loved him like he was. Detroit fans should be pretty excited about this. Edited March 15, 2009 by Seahawks21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Did you just say 7 years, 50 million!?!? Holy crap. I thought this was a cost-cutting move. Now I really don't know what to think. I've tried to digest this all day. I guess adding a decent DT isn't a bad thing, but the Seahawks had cheap young prospects that looked like they were ready to get a shot (Brandon Mebane, Red Bryant). IMO any 4-12 team should try to get their best young prospects on the field if they have them, rather than paying big money for an above average veteran. (insert Seattle Mariners joke here) If Peterson got traded to the Lions simply because he wouldn't take a paycut, that's kind of bush. I would think he has earned the money, at least more so than Redding. If I remember right, Peterson has made back-to-back Pro Bowls. He literally is one of the best outside linebackers in the league. I guess you could say he struggled a little last year, but he is a much better player when he has some help from the front 4, which was a faucet last year. Not that he'll have that in Detroit. He isn't as old as most people think either. Peterson and Sims could be pretty awesome together. Unless there is more to this Redding guy than meets the eye, I just can't agree with your statement. I don't think Peterson was here long enough to become disgruntled, unless Ruskell pissed him off. He has a love affair with the fans and media, he's been productive, and he's being paid well. I can't imagine what he would possibly be disgruntled about. Nor do I think he is overpaid. He is one of the best at his position, and is paid as such. My only other scenario is that Ruskell soured on drafting a left tackle who may never play left tackle while he's here. He isn't considering Crabtree anymore, and he simply fell in love with Curry when he was in town last week. If he were to draft Curry, Peterson would become expendable, so he shopped him. I wonder if there was any kind of agreement behind the scenes that the Lions would not take Curry as a result, or maybe the Lions admitted to the Seahawks that they had decided on Stafford or a tackle anyways. Say I'm up to my pessimistic ways, but I just can't like this a whole lot as a Seahawks fan. I still would rather they drafted Crabtree. If they did decide to trade Julian, I think they could have gotten more. I mean, am I supposed to say "Yes!! Cory Redding!! Championship?" You really don't seem that sad to see Redding go. Meanwhile, half the people I know are completely heartbroken right now. I've never had so many text messages in my life. People calling and counseling each other. It was a pretty sad day in Seahawk land today. He wasn't here long, but we sure loved him like he was. Detroit fans should be pretty excited about this. I'm excited about it, Redding absolutely disappeared after his 1 yr wonder, playing next to Rogers. Many were scratching thier heads over his huge deal he got, not just in Detroit either. I hope they still go after Curry and not a qb(Stafford), our D has needed help forever, and Curry, along with the free agents will immediately turn it around. Many questioned Mayhew as GM, but after the Roy trade,(fleeced Dallas ) ,, Grady , Peterson, I like what he's doing alot, especially getting rid of overpaid underachievers who had no heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Did you just say 7 years, 50 million!?!? Holy crap. I thought this was a cost-cutting move. Now I really don't know what to think. Everything I've read suggests that the majority of Redding's guaranteed money has already been paid and the contract was to be renegotiated to make the trade work out. I've tried to digest this all day. I guess adding a decent DT isn't a bad thing, but the Seahawks had cheap young prospects that looked like they were ready to get a shot (Brandon Mebane, Red Bryant). IMO any 4-12 team should try to get their best young prospects on the field if they have them, rather than paying big money for an above average veteran. (insert Seattle Mariners joke here) I think you're overestimating Redding's role on the defense. I don't anticipate he's anything other than depth. Say I'm up to my pessimistic ways, but I just can't like this a whole lot as a Seahawks fan. I still would rather they drafted Crabtree. If they did decide to trade Julian, I think they could have gotten more. I mean, am I supposed to say "Yes!! Cory Redding!! Championship?" You really don't seem that sad to see Redding go. Meanwhile, half the people I know are completely heartbroken right now. I've never had so many text messages in my life. People calling and counseling each other. It was a pretty sad day in Seahawk land today. He wasn't here long, but we sure loved him like he was. Detroit fans should be pretty excited about this. Heartbroken? Really? I have nothing against Peterson. Like him wearing my team's laundry a lot, but you're being as unrealistic regarding his stature among fans and the defense as when you proclaimed Leroy Hill's days in Seattle to be numbered back in January. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Meanwhile, half the people I know are completely heartbroken right now. I've never had so many text messages in my life. People calling and counseling each other. It was a pretty sad day in Seahawk land today. He wasn't here long, but we sure loved him like he was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Ryan Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Well, Peterson was almost certainly about to be cut for one. So you take back a DT, that makes almost as much money. Whats funny to me, is GMs get a wild hair up their ass to have a player take a pay cut. And if they refuse, they cant save face, so they do a stupid trade like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Ryan Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Wrong again but hey, I'm sure that you've watched the Seahawks more than I have. Besides, most of us have witnessed how many times you've been right in the past Funny. Tatupa and Peterson both said Hill was their best LB, yet you argue with me over it. Dude there comes a time..... nevermind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 So you take back a DT, that makes almost as much money. It's been pointed out on a couple occasions that Redding is restructuring his contract as part of the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Funny. Tatupa and Peterson both said Hill was their best LB, yet you argue with me over it. Yea, teammates extolling the virtues of other teammates is an accurate indicator of one's ability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Ryan Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Yea, teammates extolling the virtues of other teammates is an accurate indicator of one's ability. Ability, its a no brainer Leroy Hill is the best LB. But to get an ultras sensitive NFL player with a huge ego to admit someone is better than him. Yea, that happens all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Ryan Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 It's been pointed out on a couple occasions that Redding is restructuring his contract as part of the deal. And your point is. He is an average DL, and will be overpaid regardless of what he accepts. Seattle could have extended Peterson gave him more money up front in signing bonus, and given him a better cap number for this year, and kept him. Instead they give away one of their best defenders for a scrub, who will be overpaid. But then again, this frachise has shown to be stupid in the past. They lose Hutchinson Vikings for a 42 million contract, so what do they do, they overpay the vikings Nate Burleson, what 42 million contract. They sure showed Minnesota, didnt they. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 And your point is. He is an average DL, and will be overpaid regardless of what he accepts. No. Our defense clearly wasn't clicking. For all the talent Seattle had at LB since Peterson became a Hawk, Seattle finished 19th in total defense during their first year together, 15th in Year 2 and 30th in last season. We were a much better 2005 when our defense was more balanced. We got a DT, cut cap space, got an extra draft pick, for trading a 32 year old player with little leverage. By the way, if you really want to stand by teammates public comments on other teammates as the best indicator on one's playing ability, there is a diff between "is" and "might" Reading is fundy-mental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Seattle could have extended Peterson gave him more money up front in signing bonus, and given him a better cap number for this year, and kept him. Instead they give away one of their best defenders for a scrub, who will be overpaid. Wait, I thought he was arguably their 3rd best linebacker? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.