Diner morning news: Raiders' risky move

What other options were available to the Raiders? They desperately needed a defesnive end who can pressure the QB and stop the run. I don't believe he will do a Randy Moss given that he's young enough for one last big contract.

Mike:

I was looking forwrad to your analysiis given your perspective on the Raiders. While I certainly applaud the long-term benefits for the Patriots, how much do you see this impacting the Patriots 2009 Super Bowl aspirations? Does the defense as currently constituted have enough firepower to win, even with a prolific offense carrying it?

Thanks again for the great work.

So basically, what you are inferring is that this will go over as well as when Randy Moss was traded to the Raiders? Yeah, I think 99% of football fans feel this way. But don't you feel that if the Raiders sign him to a long contract with a big signing bonus, that he'll just half-heart it and collect his money? Why not just have him play out the season where he'll try to prove to other teams that he's not washed-up, and give considerable effort - and then franchise him.

I think the biggest mistake would be to do what other losing culture teams like the Lions, Browns, and Bengals do - and give a star player a big contract - thus ensuring him to half-heart it to retirement.

I agree both sides are taking a risk and that is okay.

The downside for the Patriots is that they do not have, or find, a replacement (IMO they are thinking Carter for one year pretty much an equal replacement) and suffer this year. Next year moot as they were not going to resign him. Upside - no negative impact this year, their defense with him for last 2 -3 years is what has cost them as they could not stop opposing teams at crucial times so how does kepping him change that? - and a very high #1 in slotted 2011.

Raiders - Downside - a lot - refuses to go - plays mediocre for 1 year - thye then lose him and have give up a very high #1 in 2011. Upside - ??? - plays well. They improve dramatically and resign him for another couple years at decent salary.

I do not see the possible Oakland upside as more probable than the downside nor does it come close to outweighing the downside IMO.Upside for Pats way higher and more probable than downside.

Thoughts?

Gotta hand it to you Lombardi, droppin' Belichik & Walsh's name in the same article. you must be in heaven! but let's not forget the Pittsburgh Steelers, they've been making these kind of personnel decisions longer than your Bill Buddies.

This is like watching a bad fantasy football trade involving a very experienced owner and a complete moron. As a huge NFL fan, this deal makes me ill.

I'm not a Raider fan or Raider hater. In fact, I greatly appreciate what Al Davis and the Raiders have brought to the NFL. I applaud Davis for attempting to make a move that he believes will help his team...but, that's just the problem -- he no longer has any sense of reality.

Raider fans who support this trade need to get a clue. This is one of the most ridiculous trades in NFL history.

Once again, Mr. Davis using his Oakland Raiders like a 12 yr. old playing franchise mode on Madden Football. His last few trades have been neurotic and bombshells. The Raiders had a chance to upgrade their d-line in the draft and passed on it. Instead they gave the Patriots Ron Brace in the draft, and then Derrick Burgess for no compensation. And last I checked they also took Randy Moss from us for less than market value. At the end of the day, I'm still a Raiderfan just not an Al fan.It is plain to see Mr.Davis is being took by Belichek and NE, at every transaction.

You have to wonder just how dumb you can be and still get a job in an NFL front office. This is a guy who had issues in NE, where malcontents go to be reborn. Somehow the Raiders think he will give 100% for them? Unreal. And the terms. A number one for a guy in his contract year? Who will have to be franchised, with all the headaches that brings? And we can be pretty sure that a Raiders number one will be top ten at least.

Not fair to lump Seymour in with the likes of Javon Walker and others the Raiders traded for. Seymour is a stud. He's a proven big game player who is at his best when the stakes are highest.

I kind of disagree with painting Seymour as a malcontent that needs to be kept motivated. He's been hurt; yes, but when healthy he wins his match ups and is a disruptive force.

Why are people so into analyzing this trade? There are so many ifs that this trade engenders that no real analysis can take place until at least after the 2011 draft.

Why do people read Michael Lombardi - he got fired from every job that he held including the one that he worked for free.

Let it go Lombardi, they dumped you because you were a snitch and talked out of bothe sides of your mouth, let it go.

You were so ticked off that after no other NFL team would give you the time of day, you offered your services to the Denver Broncoo's FOR FREE to try and get back at old Al. Denver took you in for a day picked your brain and kicked you to the curb.

Iread an article by a RESPECTED NFL person that STILL IS ABLE TO WORK IN THE NFL that told it just like it is, great trade for the Raiders and good for New England.

The guy wrote that all the negative that you hear is being spread by the jealous people that were floored by the bluckbuster trade that Mr. Davis pulled out of his hat.

You look the fool Lombardi when you write about the Raiders, and lets get real. Years from now NFL History will not even speak your name or know that you were alive, Mr Davis on the other hand is NFL History,

I like this site but seldom read your work, I like the others on this site that do not let their bias and hurt feelings to show in their work, but I just had to hit the site today to collect my bet from a friend after proving you would have an article as a main item knocking the move, I won.

It is almost always a good trade for a team if they can secure a 1st round pick in the draft, and NE was able to do that with the Seymour trade. His disruptive ways on the defensive line have faltered over the past few years. Good for NE to get significant value for him. I don't think many teams would have given up a 1st rounder for Seymour. The Raiders did, and they incur a tremendous risk. They have to sign him or franchise him. Can he get back to the force he was a few years ago? As a Bills fan, I saw Seymour dominate Bills OL like Trey Teague. He would whip the Bills at the line of scrimmage all the time, it seemed.

The question I would ask and maybe the raider fans on this sight could answer it is why would Al not pursue a younger D-Lineman who was not in a contract year? If a number 1 was being dangled as bait did he go after anyone else? Surely other teams would have been interested. Or was it a case of BB going back to the old man to see what he could fleece from him?

Thanks for the analysis, Mike. I m an analyst myself, so I can appreciate your analysis, no hater calls here.

AD made a risky move, but I think it will work. I don't think he can make the call on skill positions (Moss, Hall) but in the lines this is a good shot. If Seymour is not happy, then all the better. He will play his ass off to get out. Anyone who lives here in Northern California knows that AD does not place alot of value on the draft-so for the Raiders, you are really thinking real value vs.perceived value. . AD is going for the value, because he knows he will produce in the short term.

I think this is AD's Charles Haley move.

Mike, when are you gonna return to Alameda and run the show again? I think you and AD have a love/hate thing going on here. I think you miss the juice off running a team.

Keep on keeping on, Mike/Bobby Baccala

Why is everyone so quick to rip this trade? It does help the Raiders this season to have a veteran on the defensive line that can make a difference. He will be an upgrade . Seymour's play will also help the Raider linebackers . The first round draft pick is a high risk as it is. I can see the Patriots view. They traded a older player for the future. They now can trade either pick or both and draft in the lower rounds as they have done before.
The Raiders team is so young Coach Cable needed a playmaker and better yet just a player who can fight off a block and make a tackle.. If the first round picks this year are overpaid interms of bonus and salary, how much will it cost in the era of no Salary cap that starts in 2011?

I'm sorry, if you think this is a good trade for the raiders then you simply haven't thought it through. It might become an ok piece of business if he signs for more than 1 year but giving up a 1st round pick (ie a top notch player) for someone who can decide to play 1 year and leave isn't good business..... but it is what have we come to expect over the last few years from the Raiders.

How exactly do the Raiders plan to get better in the next 5 years if they trade 1at round picks for a player who won't be playing in 5 years?

Wow, as much as people can support their team, it is unusual to see such personal attacks on one's analysis simply because it doesn't fit one's sense of reality. You can disagree with Lombardi's viewpoint but keep it civil.

Now as to the move from my perspective, as one who has no vested interest in the Raiders or Patriots, this move goes to show why the Pats have won what, 4 Super Bowls and appeared in 6 during the same period the Silver and Black have bombed in one. This is a deal from strength to one of desperation. Face it Raiders Nation, if Davis and his front office had any sense at all this would have been perhaps a 2nd next year, conditional 3rd or 4th in 2011. Given what Davis gave up for a star player on the downside, it boogles the mind to think what TT might have gotten if he could have peddled off a 39 year old Q-back with a bad attitude and bad shoulder to Davis.

Hey Dianna are you Al Davis in disguise?

Good move on two fronts, 1) we get some help (veteran, Super Bowl Exp) on the D - line where it was most needed. Secondly, we wont have to shell out another 30 mil to another rookie. Lets just hope he has something to prove once he gets here.

Since you've worked in the Raiders front office, perhaps you can give me some insight.

Does Al Davis actually believe the current team is a legitimate Superbowl contender?

It seems as if every move the Raiders make is predicated on this belief. Obviously all owners say they have a playoff team but thats just marketing hype, I'm sure few actually believe it. But every move the Raiders make seems to be a grasp for that one last player.

Diana, can you provide a link to that article by the "respected" NFL analyst who called this deal a blockbuster? I havent found anyone call this anything but a relative fleecing again by the Pats to their Triple A team out in Oakland, so Id be interested to read that.

Sad to see another Pats stalwart gone, but love what they got in return, and I dont know that Seymour has shown anything in the past few seasons that prove to me he is still a stud. The downfall of the Pats since their last Super Bowl has been their inability to make stops when it mattered, so I dont see much problem with getting great value in return for a guy they weren't going to resign who hasn't played at a championship level for a while.

As for the people on here who don't like Lombardi and his views, then why do you read them? I never understood that. If you dont agree, why waste your time reading it? So you can spout obnoxious bs on a message board?

He obviously has grudges, but truthfully, the NFPost is a much more successful entity than the Raiders right now, so he's in a good place.

MikeM6400, more than likely there will be a cap on rookie contracts beginning in 2001, why the Patriots made the trade. The high picks will once again be extremely sought after and valuable if that does indeed happen.

Let's face it: the Raider always get ripped for whatever move they are making. The medial reactions are always so predictable.

If the Raiders do nothing, they suck.
If the Raiders upgrade an obvious gap in their roster with a proven talent, they suck.
If they like Rookie WR Number One better than Rookie WR Number Two and decide to gamble on him instead of gamble on the other, they suck.
If they bring in a veteran QB to challenge Russell, they suck because this obviously proves Russell is a bust.
If they then cut this veteran QB because he showed absolutely zero added value compared to Russell and the other backups, they suck.

Eastcoast media writing about the Raiders is the chinese watertorture of sporting news.

Well I can't fault Al for trying any play he could at upgrading a horrible defensive front. And if he still is around in 2011, with selected picks like DHB and then giving him 23.5 mil guaranteed, then we dont have any value in the !st Rd as far as the draft is concerned. My only hope as a Raider fan is that the defense plays with a new swagger and attitude with 2 pro-bowlers anchoring each side of the line. And their play alone will elevate those around them, or single-out the sandbaggers. Last time I looked we are in the AFC West!

I think there are risks to both sides on this. One unique benefit is Wilfork has to feel confident a new deal is imminent. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Pats trade into the first round this year if they're trying to rebuild their team.

I see this trade is already panning out badly for Oakland. According to the Wilson Wire, Seymour is refusing to report. So not only are the Raiders overpaying, they won't even be getting the value they bargained for. He'll obviously be useless to them this week if he's not there tomorrow.

Maybe they can use his failure to report to get out of this terrible trade.

Belichick fleeced the Raiders again! Bill has it made, he has THREE teams in the AFC west to dump players on for draft picks and all three are so mismanaged that none of them realize it.

And I'm sure he checked with a certain ex-Raider he's been in camp with to find out the fastest way out of Oakland.

@Mike: maybe because every move they make or don't DOES suck.

Curry? Walker? Gallery? Heyward-Bey? Cable? Kiffin? Sands? I could go on and on, and it has nothing to do with East Coast bias, because I'm not east coast and I'm not media.

I pity your team and its fans for their suffering, but you can't lash out when everyone's telling the truth about how awful your organization is.

Boy I love Mike your work and your insight but whenever it involves Pats or alumni from Bill your objectivity goes out the window. If the Pats are considered Super Bowl contenders you can not I repeat can not remove a pro bowl player from your team. There are only so many opportunities to win it all, and each must be pounced upon. How can removing a pro bowl defender help a team whose defense was the reason for the team not making the playoffs. This has been completely overlooked time and time again. The Pats defense is the reason for the team not wining a fourth super bowl, and it is the reason last year they did not win more games. And yet, people think become Brady is back that somehow this team is the front runner to win it all. Brady will be better than Cassel but the reality was the defense not able to hold a team from scoring and scoring lots of points. Now the Pats are getting rid of one of their best defenders and this is a good move? Another reality check here. This move has also become necessary because outside of Mayo and Wilfork this team has done a very poor job in drafting (although you would never know that since all the fawning writers like Mike keep giving Pats high marks for their drafts eventhough the playing on the field has been just the opposite). I agree with the argument that the Raiders are stupid to make this move since it is a NOW move when they need to rebuild, but to not criticize the Pats for a LATER move when the NOW is here and present and attainable is ludicrous.

Here's how Lombardi and others need to re-focus their mind when talking about the Raiders and more specifically Al Davis. The Raiders don't and won't do things that make sense to the rest of the league because Al Davis is old, knows he's old, knows he doesn't have more than a few years to see the Raiders win one more super bowl before he passes and will sell the future of the franchise because he won't be around for the clean up. If you look at the Raiders as a franchise that will only be around for two more years, then what they do makes sense, they are trying to win now at the expense of everything else.

Potentially a bad move for the Raiders, but a bad move for the Patriots too if thier goal is to win the Super Bowl this season.

I know no one likes to criticize the Patriots but they're now running with 2 rookies in DL rotation, two of their starting LBs are over 30 and they have a mismatch secondary. How are they win in December / January with that defense?

I love reading Raider fans. Every year they get a little more delusional...

This is a terrible trade for the Raiders. The best case scenario is that he helps turn a bad team into a mediocre team. Then, given his past performance, he will receive a large contract and, given his age, decline. In a few years, when the Raiders window is opening (again, we're talking best case scenario for Oakland), he's a good player.

The worst case scenario is that the Raiders get one unmotivated year out of him, he gives them minimal improvement, and they have lost a high pick.

The best case scenario is neither very good nor very likely. Al Davis is a legend for the things he did back when he was competent. Now he's a crazy old man who is ruining an NFL team with a great history and passionate (if occasionally amusingly stupid and belligerent) fan base.

I wish Lombardi would give the alternative the Raiders should do to fix their D line woes .

I mean he knows so much and used to work there . No one can deny the D-line in Oakland has been terrible . I was upset they didn't adress this higher up in the draft . No doubt something had to be done .

Giving up a #1 2 seasons from now is really like giving up a #2 in next years draft . Thats the value of that pick at this time actually a little less regardless of how one wants to predict the future labor agreement . Denver traded next years #1 for a 2nd rder in this years draft for a 5'9" corner .

So instead of speculating on how hight the pick will be Lombardi why not call this value for what it actually is RIGHT NOW . A mid to late 2nd rder right NOW which is what time it is right ? And then answer if Richard Seymour is worth that . I am amazed some people are paid to write this kinda crap while leaving out important facts like pick value . Some of us aren't stupid .

Agree with the devalue of future picks. Also I'm curious as to what happens if there's a lockout in 2011? Or if there's no draft at all? The draft is presently only in place through 2010, right?

Might be a better deal for the Patriots down the road, but I don't see how this does anything but hurt them this year, a year when they're a favorite. Opposite is true for Oakland. It helps them this year, but so what? Odd deal either way.

The Raiders might as well trade away their first round picks. They waste them every year anyway.

This is genious by the Pats. The Raiders are not going to be good for many years to come untill AL Davis hangs it up and the team is sold. He does not get the modern NFL and his 70's mentality does not work. Giving up a 1st round draft pick for an aging player that will command a huge salary or won't be worth the money is foolish for a team that needs to be rebuilding. If the Raiders were that one peice away from a Lombardi this move would be somewhat justifiable. In reality they got jobbed again just like when they traded moss to NE for a 4th round pick HAHAHAHAHA. Raiders just screwed their next Head coach out of a 1st rounder. Cable will be lucky to last through the season with the joke of a team they have.

E-A-G-L-E-S

As a Patriot fan I’m appalled at the way the locals are panning Seymour. You wouldn’t believe the calls on talk radio. Not that the average fan spends any time watching the line play anyway…most of them know near nothing of what they’re talking about.

This is a guy who did things as a rookie that very few interior Dlinemen can duplicate in their first season.

All through his tenure here he’s done the plug the gap thing in the 3-4, and then when the pressure is turned up, and the game’s on the line, he’s suddenly a ferocious play maker.

Speaking of Seymour and the Raiders; It was a rookie Seymour who nailed John Ritchie in the backfield on fourth down at a pivotal game changing moment during the snow bowl.

A Patriot fan here said “he hadn’t seen much from Seymour lately.” I saw him nail Chad Pennington late in a big game vs the Dolphins in Miami on a critical 3rd down play. That’s just off the top of my head but this guy excels late in close games.

This is one of the best interior linemen in the league. To suggest Oakland got anything but one of the very best players on the Patriots roster is spin control.

He’s not perfect. He’s been hurt and his play has leveled a little at times, but he as good as anyone at what he does IMO. He hasn’t played much 4-3 attack defense and I think people are in for a surprise at what his production will be. Double digit sacks are a given.

Tom Brady is a once in a lifetime QB. Every year you have him behind center you maximize your roster to compete THAT YEAR. When he’s gone he’s gone. You don’t just draft the next Tom Brady. You do whatever it takes to win with him each year.

This reminds me of the Deon Branch trade for a 1st rounder. Yes the Pats got good value, but they wasted a year of Tom Brady’s prime, when he had nobody to throw to in the playoffs.

Seymour has 3 or 4 years of high level production left and it’s really a shame he won’t be competing at the highest league level. He’s a player that responds well to the challenge.

This post is like a Rorschach diagram -- the responses probably saying more about the writers than the story.
What's interesting to me about this is how Belichick really does try to maintain long-term excellence, even at the cost of a top DL, though to be fair he hasn't been as dominant as he once was, and Belichick probably noticed something in camp this year. My sense is that he doesn't think of his team as one big collective group -- it's more a package of tools that he can shape to win each game, one at a time. Sounds like he thinks he still has those tools minus Seymour.

A lot's been made, particularly in the Boston Globe (though not by Mike Reiss so much) about turnover on the NE defense. The thing is that NE's defense last year was terrible -- last in red zone, one of the worst pass defense teams. There should have been a lot of turnover.

Not to go all "In Bill We Trust" on you, but I have to believe Belichick doesn't think that trading away Seymour submarines their chances this season. There are a lot of things to take into account when you're a coach/GM of a team, and obviously he believes the team can still compete for a championship this year w/o Seymour, or the trade wouldn't have been made.

The defense could definitely use some youth and energy and it has that now. If the coaches think they can perform a a championship level, then who the hell are we to question it? If they fail to win, Im sure people will look to this trade and ask questions, but there are economics involved (Id much rather use the money to sign Wilfork) and there is a future to deal with. Someone said Tom Brady is a once in a lifetime QB, and thats great, but he wont be around forever either, so stockpiling a top pick two years from now while he still has an in his prime Moss and maybe the best slot WR in Welker still makes me think Belichick knows what he is doing.

While I see why every move made by Oakland is looked at skeptically due their recent past, it has gotten to the point where every single move they make is automatically deemed a mistake without proper justification. I do not understand why everyone out there has this hatred towards the Raiders. Yeah, the owner has made some mistakes recently but what organization hasn't. You find me the tam that hasn't had a draft bust in the last 8 years.

New England wanted a 2nd rounder next year, the Raiders wanted to keep next years draft intact, so they offered a 1st in 2011 which is proper value. If he plays for the Raiders for 3 or 4 years, this is a no brainer. The Broncos traded their 1st rounder next year for a 2nd rounder during the draft which was used on Alphonso Smith, a 5'9" corner. Are you kidding?? The Broncos will be rafting in the top 10 and you are telling me this is a better deal than the deal Oakland made??

While the Pats did well for themselves, the trade is a concession that NWE doesn't view this year as a Super Bowl run. They see themselves as 4th or 5th best in AFC, too QB reliant and not enough defense or running game. Not happening in 2009. But they're focused on Brady's last couple of truly good years in 2010-11 (then he gets sold too), so kudos for the admission and vision.

silver ghost why don't you answer your own question?

When it comes to Oakland and Belichick, Lombardi is too biased. Even if they traded Brady to OAK he would think New England got the better end of the deal

Mike:
What's the franchise tag # for next year on DE's and DT's?
I know they're 2 separate #'s, but I don't kn ow where Oakland is gonna play him.

Two years ago when the Pats went 18-1, Seymour only played in 9 games and I believe had 1 and half sacks. So obviously they can win w/out him.

He isn't the fixture and force he once was, Seymour still controls his gaps for the most part. Not entirely fundamentally sound now, but Bill B was really going vanilla with his presence and using him to flatten the line of scrimmage for covering the weakness he had at LB positions, etc.

He knows what it takes to win.

Your team has to get better before it can ever hope to be the best.

Contract years are motivation enough. Money makes the NFL world go around. A contract year approaching uncapped times is like mountain climbing. The bigger and better it gets, the view is good from atop the free agency pool.

Diana,

Mr. Davis is indeed NFL History - the worst owner in the history of the league. Not only the worst owner in the league, but has been so awful that he has erased any positives the Raiders may have had in decades before.

I suspect Mr. Lombardi would prefer to be unknown in terms of history than to be held in the same regard as someone like Donald Sterling - forever the object of ridicule and humiliation.

I also find it ironic that Mr. Lombardi has a firm grasp of leadership and Al Davis can't even spell leadership. I suspect this lead to your "snitch and talked out of both sides of your mouth" comment.

Leaders don't drink Kool-Aid.

Stupid, stupid stupid trade by the Raiders. They suck and will continue to suck until that old lizard Al Davis kicks the bucket. Can't buy a championship.