what would you trade for Richard Sherman?

[Dantés]

What's up with the constant under rating of players that aren't Packers,? The dude basically leads in every major statistical category for corners since he came into the league

I don't know who you're talking to, but I think you have to make a distinction between underrating and considering scheme, especially at the cornerback position.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I don't know who you're talking to, but I think you have to make a distinction between underrating and considering scheme, especially at the cornerback position.

I think what our scheme needs is a healthy dose of CBs that are able to play man aaaaaaand tackle...

House and Sherman would allow capers to blitz more.

 

[RRyder]

How is it any different, other than being opposite ends of the spectrum, between having no concerns he can make the transition and being certain he can't make the transition. Factoring in systems is different than ignoring him because you assume the guy can't make a change.

Because I never said he couldn't make the transition. Not once

Only that it should be a concern factored into what one should be willing to give up and brought up in response to another poster saying he'd have ZERO concerns about Sherman being the missing link on D

 

[Dantés]

How is it any different, other than being opposite ends of the spectrum, between having no concerns he can make the transition and being certain he can't make the transition. Factoring in systems is different than ignoring him because you assume the guy can't make a change.

See, that's the right question. And I think I have an answer.

There is no difference between assuming he can make the switch and assuming he can't. But there is a difference in the consequence of being wrong and there's a big difference in probability. It isn't a 50/50 proposition.

Just by league standards and history, we know it's unlikely that an elite cover 3 corner is also an elite man corner in Capers' scheme. Sherman could be the exception. However, I doubt it. And you almost certainly have to pay for an elite corner in trade capital to find out.

 

[brandon2348]

Another interesting phenomena is that it seems to reverse itself as soon as that player starts distancing himself from the team. If Sherman were to come out and say he hates it in Seattle and wants out I think you would see a lot more Packer fans saying he would be a good fit. The whole enemy of my enemy thing.

He hasn't publicly said that but inside the inner circles that is apparently what might be going on. That's what I've heard from my friends in Seattle.

It sounds like a situation where Sherman wants out and went to them and there probably saying well try to get you out of here but let's "play it cool" and not blow this thing up anymore then it already is. I can say from personal experience that Seattle is a place you either love or hate. Very little middle ground when it comes to Seattle. Beyond that sometimes people want a change of environment and scenery.

 

[brandon2348]

See, that's the right question. And I think I have an answer.

There is no difference between assuming he can make the switch and assuming he can't. But there is a difference in the consequence of being wrong and there's a big difference in probability. It isn't a 50/50 proposition.

Just by league standards and history, we know it's unlikely that an elite cover 3 corner is also an elite man corner in Capers' scheme. Sherman could be the exception. However, I doubt it. And you almost certainly have to pay for an elite corner in trade capital to find out.

I played corner for 8 seasons before I was moved to safety. I never saw any difference lining up on right side or left side. You can either play or you can't. This whole left/right thing is being overplayed. I'm pretty confident Sherman can play man to man better then anyone on our roster and the Seahawks played some man to man although it wasn't there base defense. There was all kinds of stories in Seattle about OTA's and Minicamp where Sherman would play press man to man and lock guys like Tyler Lockett up and shut them down. Maybe with Sherman Capers plays more zone too.

Line Sherman up left and House on right and play it "straight up". We have all the other pieces on the roster to support this. We could even get Randle playing in the middle where he might be more effective. Now playing in the middle vs outside is a big difference and I think Randle's game would be helped immensely with the move.

This move would give us so much flexibility and options that we just don't have now.

 

[Dantés]

I played corner for 8 seasons before I was moved to safety. I never saw any difference lining up on right side or left side. You can either play or you can't. This whole left/right thing is being overplayed. I'm pretty confident Sherman can play man to man better then anyone on our roster and the Seahawks played some man to man although it wasn't there base defense. There was all kinds of stories in Seattle about OTA's and Minicamp where Sherman would play press man to man and lock guys like Tyler Lockett up and shut them down. Maybe with Sherman Capers plays more zone too.

Line Sherman up left and House on right and play it "straight up". We have all the other pieces on the roster to support this. We could even get Randle playing in the middle where he might be more effective. Now playing in the middle vs outside is a big difference and I think Randle's game would be helped immensely with the move.

This move would give us so much flexibility and options that we just don't have now.

I never said anything about left/right.

Again, I have no doubt that Sherman can be a man corner and would be very helpful. What I've continually said is that I doubt he's elite in our scheme as he is in theirs. And I think he will carry the price tag of an elite corner. That's just my take.

 

[brandon2348]

I never said anything about left/right.

Again, I have no doubt that Sherman can be a man corner and would be very helpful. What I've continually said is that I doubt he's elite in our scheme as he is in theirs. And I think he will carry the price tag of an elite corner. That's just my take.

My take is throw Sherman and House outside and let Dix, Burnett, Brice and Randall attack the middle of the field and win a Super Bowl.

 

[thequick12]

would you trade Jason Spriggs for Sherman

 

[Dantés]

would you trade Jason Spriggs for Sherman

Yes. Would Seattle?

 

[thequick12]

idk they traded Ahman green for Fred Vinson but I think that's when TT was on the other side. but realistically maybe they would, I think he's gonna be really good and they really need help at tackle. I'm not sure it's a good trade for packers though as your trading a starting left tackle for a cb but barring something unforseen he'll only be a staring right tackle for packers.

 

[thequick12]

Sherman is actually not more expensive than the 1 cb TT could have signed in free agency. as bouye got 13.5 m/yr and gilmore 13 they were the only number ones available and true may ted tried and failed to sign them but even if he didn't why would that mean he couldn't jump at the opportunity that he didn't know would arise

 

[brandon2348]

would you trade Jason Spriggs for Sherman

Trading Spriggs scares me because we have already lost Tretter and Lang. Losing Spriggs would make us vulnerable at Tackle if Bulaga or Bak get hurt.

 

[Dantés]

Sherman is actually not more expensive than the 1 cb TT could have signed in free agency. as bouye got 13.5 m/yr and gilmore 13 they were the only number ones available and true may ted tried and failed to sign them but even if he didn't why would that mean he couldn't jump at the opportunity that he didn't know would arise

I don't think anyone is worried about Sherman's cap number. It's the trade price tag that gives pause

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I have no problem admitting I am wrong. But did you go and watch the YouTube clip of the 9 catches??? No. You didn't. I know this because you still claim Randall was responsible for 7 catches, 161, 1td.

so I'm supposed to believe your stats rather than my own memory?

I took those numbers from PFF, a website that occupies analyst who worked for either NFL or college teams before and have access to coaches film watching every single snap multiple times. Therefore I trust them way more than you having taken a look at a YouTube clip.

If history holds true you should better trust my stats than your memory as well.

Here is an article that explains exactly my point.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/richard-sherman-earns-career-low-pff-grade-against-packers/

That's all you should take from the article you linked to above:

What we saw last night is that even the league’s best corners get beat sometimes, and even a player as talented and consistently excellent as Richard Sherman can have a bad day at the office.

It's ridiculous to suggest that Sherman isn't an elite cornerback because he was partly responsible for a touchdown reception against the Packers two years ago.

I'm generalizing as usual, saying that we were picking on Sherman, and picked him apart. That wasn't true by the stats. Buy in general, GB was having much more success with him than in the past. To the point of him becoming frustrated... and since you watched every Seattle game recently... is he getting exposed more than usual second half of last season?

Geez, Sherman has given up a total of three receptions in the last four games vs. Rodgers since 2014. The Packers have had more success against the Seahawks exploring other weaknesses in their defense and for some reason being able to shut down their offense but for sure not because #12 has picked apart the Seahawks cornerback.

Just remember that Rodgers didn't even target Sherman after he suffered a significant shoulder injury during the NFCCG, basically playing with only one arm.

I don't think we know enough about Sherman to say that. He's spent the majority of his career playing zone coverage in a defensive system with elite safeties. He's freaking awesome at it. But we can't just assume that, because of that, he'd be elite in any scheme. I highly doubt that's true.

On the other hand I highly doubt that Sherman would struggle within the Packers defensive system. While he has benefitted from playing with Thomas and Chancellor he has proven to be capable of covering opposing top receivers one-on-one.

There is no difference between assuming he can make the switch and assuming he can't. But there is a difference in the consequence of being wrong and there's a big difference in probability. It isn't a 50/50 proposition.

The Packers not trading for Sherman because they're afraid he can't excel in their system could be one of the main reasons the team ends up short of winning a Super Bowl next season as well though.

BTW I think there's a way better chance of Sherman performing at a high level within a different scheme than him struggling with any other team than the Seahawks.

would you trade Jason Spriggs for Sherman

Yes, although the Packers would have to add another backup tackle in this case.

I'm not sure it's a good trade for packers though as your trading a starting left tackle for a cb but barring something unforseen he'll only be a staring right tackle for packers.

Spriggs hasn't proven to be capable of turning into a quality starting tackle by any means so far.

 

[Vrill]

I think Sherman is a product of that Seahawk defensive system and having one of the best rangy Safeties over the top of this era. I'm not sure if Sherman could thrive in just any defensive system.

 

[Dantés]

Trading Spriggs scares me because we have already lost Tretter and Lang. Losing Spriggs would make us vulnerable at Tackle if Bulaga or Bak get hurt.

The latest report on Rotoworld is that the Seahawks want two high picks or a 1st and a really good player. I don't know if Spriggs would qualify, but if we hypothetically say he would, we're talking about Spriggs and a 1st for Sherman.

 

[brandon2348]

The latest report on Rotoworld is that the Seahawks want two high picks or a 1st and a really good player. I don't know if Spriggs would qualify, but if we hypothetically say he would, we're talking about Spriggs and a 1st for Sherman.

That's the first I've heard of that. Not sure what to believe and that is starting to get a little steep if that's the case. I say run this thing to the draft and if Sherman is still not traded when we pick at 29 and there isn't a player on the board available that Thompson has to have in this spot then pick up the phone and offer them our 1st.

I bet Schnieder would personally drive Sherman to GB.

 

[ExpatPacker]

The latest report on Rotoworld is that the Seahawks want two high picks or a 1st and a really good player. I don't know if Spriggs would qualify, but if we hypothetically say he would, we're talking about Spriggs and a 1st for Sherman.

I heard the same. A "really good player" would mean someone like Clay Matthews (would they probably wouldn't accept because of his huge contract). But Spriggs doesn't qualify. I would not want to the Packers to give up someone like Davante Adams for Sherman. Cobb maybe, but again, big contract, Hawks probably wouldn't want him.

Right now the asking price is too high. Hopefully it will come down a bit. I mean, Malcolm Butler for out 1st rounder would be a better deal.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't know if Spriggs would qualify, but if we hypothetically say he would, we're talking about Spriggs and a 1st for Sherman.

I would be fine with the Packers trading this year's first round pick and Spriggs to Seattle for Sherman. Thompson would have to add a decent backup tackle in this case though.

 

[SoonerPack]

A bag of cuties and some broccoli.

 

[brandon2348]

I would be fine with the Packers trading this year's first round pick and Spriggs to Seattle for Sherman. Thompson would have to add a decent backup tackle in this case though.

After thinking about it more I think I'd be okay with sending Spriggs and drafting a replacement. If you get Sherman Thompson could draft OL, RB and developmental corner and be fine. Add another mid round receiver as well. I like Carlos Henderson. Marlon Mack or Brian Hill at RB.

It's just hard to see how the Sherman situation could fail. He has never even missed a game. At the worse case he is a two year fixture at an area we need serious help. He would completely cement the secondary and make the Packers the favorite to win the Super Bowl.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

After thinking about it more I think I'd be okay with sending Spriggs and drafting a replacement. If you get Sherman Thompson could draft OL, RB and developmental corner and be fine.

The Packers would still have to at least add some quality depth at outside linebacker as well.

 

[brandon2348]

The Packers would still have to at least add some quality depth at outside linebacker as well.

That's right. How could I forget that.

 

[lambeaulambo]

If Sherman goes to New England, TT should be on the next plane out of titletown. The suspense here is killing me. For them NOT to pull the trigger here speaks VOLUMES folks. It reinforces all of the shortsightedness that seems obvious on defense. What if Ron Wolf hadn't gone the extra mile and signed Reggie? This is a similar talent impact move.