Takeo Spikes to Eagles...

[AmishCowboy]

This is a team who very rarely gives contracts to players over 30 and whose QB has been hurt 3 of the last 4 years, I think they see the window slowly closing.

 

[carphalen5150]

This is a good trade by the Eagles. Walker was in the last year of his deal and they have invested in Patterson and Bunkley, while adding Reagor, so Walker was expendable.

I do find it funny though that this is getting bashed by some on the board. Spikes is still a good player and should excel under Johnson. However, since it is the Eagles we have to find fault in the deal. Lame.

 

[baj1dallas]

Your obvious implication is that both McNabb, Feeley, Spikes and the "Freak" will be injured and need replacements. Naughty thought ...I'm hoping everyone on all teams (yes even the Cowboys) remain healthy and compete hard ...you're going to need to!

Has Kearse played a full season since his first or second year? I hate to see him go down because he's great when healthy, but it seems a foregone conclusion, even moreso than McNabb.

 

[superpunk]

This is a good trade by the Eagles. Walker was in the last year of his deal and they have invested in Patterson and Bunkley, while adding Reagor, so Walker was expendable.

I do find it funny though that this is getting bashed by some on the board. Spikes is still a good player and should excel under Johnson. However, since it is the Eagles we have to find fault in the deal. Lame.

Are any concerns anyone has brought up illegitimate?

You have a team that struggled against the run, especially along the interior, trading away one of their DTs for a LB getting over an achilles problem.

It's a good gamble for Philly to take maybe, but criticism is hardly unfounded.

 

[Stash]

This is a good trade by the Eagles. Walker was in the last year of his deal and they have invested in Patterson and Bunkley, while adding Reagor, so Walker was expendable.

I do find it funny though that this is getting bashed by some on the board. Spikes is still a good player and should excel under Johnson. However, since it is the Eagles we have to find fault in the deal. Lame.

Lame?

More like ignorant. On your part.

They've invested in Patterson and Bunkley?

So what.

Neither did anything to help the league's 26th ranked rush defense.

And Spikes didn't help the Bills' poor rush "D" either - and he wont in Philly either.

Reagor goes 285 - he's a pass-rushing DT that the run-challenged Colts defense didn't want back - no help there either.

More "shiny object" logic that because it's a "name" that some have heard of, it must be a good move.

I can't wait to see Davis run-blocking against that "little" line.

 

[carphalen5150]

Are any concerns anyone has brought up illegitimate?

You have a team that struggled against the run, especially along the interior, trading away one of their DTs for a LB getting over an achilles problem.

It's a good gamble for Philly to take maybe, but criticism is hardly unfounded.

Some is, sure, but you think you would hear a different tune if he was coming to Dallas...answer honestly.

 

[superpunk]

Some is, sure, but you think you would hear a different tune if he was coming to Dallas...answer honestly.

Maybe. I also think there would be overwhelming skepticism, just as there is for Hamlin, who has a situation that is at least similar to Spikes'.

This could turn out to bea great gamble for the Eagles. It could turn out as crap. Thinking it's a bad idea, if qualified with a reasonable outlook, hardly makes anyone some silly homer. I didn't see anyone just bash the move unreservedly. There are pros and cons to everything, and both are presented in this thread. No need to bash unreservedly, just as there is no need to give unrestricted praise just to show what an un-homer you are.

 

[Vintage]

Some is, sure, but you think you would hear a different tune if he was coming to Dallas...answer honestly.

If Takeo came to Dallas for something similar...

I would be complaining. In all honesty.

If we signed him after Buffalo cut him....then, no. I wouldn't complain.

If we got him for peanuts (say, a 7th rounder), I wouldn't complain.

If we gave up a starter as you did, I probably would complain.

 

[Vintage]

Maybe. I also think there would be overwhelming skepticism, just as there is for Hamlin, who has a situation that is at least similar to Spikes'.

This could turn out to bea great gamble for the Eagles. It could turn out as crap. Thinking it's a bad idea, if qualified with a reasonable outlook, hardly makes anyone some silly homer. I didn't see anyone just bash the move unreservedly. There are pros and cons to everything, and both are presented in this thread. No need to bash unreservedly, just as there is no need to give unrestricted praise just to show what an un-homer you are.

Hamlin's is different.

We signed him as a free agent. Worse case scenario, we go with Watkins and rid ourselves of Hamlin after the year.

We didn't have to part with players/picks that make the situation risky. The Hamlin signing is a pretty safe move, actually.

 

[carphalen5150]

Lame?

More like ignorant. On your part.

They've invested in Patterson and Bunkley?

So what.

Neither did anything to help the league's 26th ranked rush defense.

And Spikes didn't help the Bills' poor rush "D" either - and he wont in Philly either.

Reagor goes 285 - he's a pass-rushing DT that the run-challenged Colts defense didn't want back - no help there either.

More "shiny object" logic that because it's a "name" that some have heard of, it must be a good move.

I can't wait to see Davis run-blocking against that "little" line.

It's a good deal for the Eagles. Walker is in the last year of his deal and they don't give out big deals to older players. Spikes has 2 club option years on his contract...so if he does not work out they can get rid of him after next season. It's a low risk gamble that is predictably getting bashed.

 

[superpunk]

Hamlin's is different.

We signed him as a free agent. Worse case scenario, we go with Watkins and rid ourselves of Hamlin after the year.

We didn't have to part with players/picks that make the situation risky. The Hamlin signing is a pretty safe move, actually.

Well, I'd have a difficult time finding a 1 to 1 comparison, but Hamlin is similar considering they both spent the last year getting over significant injuries, but had played to VERY high levels previously. Hamlin's alot safer for us, as you mentioned.

If Spikes gets back to being the player he was, this is probably a good trade, because that player is far better than what Walker ever was. If not, it's pretty sucky.

Always two sides...

 

[Stash]

It's a good deal for the Eagles. Walker is in the last year of his deal and they don't give out big deals to older players. Spikes has 2 club option years on his contract...so if he does not work out they can get rid of him after next season. It's a low risk gamble that is predictably getting bashed.

In your opinion, it's a good deal.

In my opinion, it isn't.

They don't give out big deals to older players while they just "acquired" one over 30 after an achilles injury?

A bit "inconsistant" there.

Is it "low risk" when they got gashed by the run with Walker?

As a Cowboys fan, I'm looking forward to it.

Despite the fact that they've invested in Patterson and Bunkley, I haven't seen anything to make me think that investment was a wise one.

Show me the greatness of Takeo Spikes over the last several years anyway?

I'm not impressed.

Or scared.

 

[carphalen5150]

In your opinion, it's a good deal.

In my opinion, it isn't.

They don't give out big deals to older players while they just "acquired" one over 30 after an achilles injury?

A bit "inconsistant" there.

Is it "low risk" when they got gashed by the run with Walker?

As a Cowboys fan, I'm looking forward to it.

Despite the fact that they've invested in Patterson and Bunkley, I haven't seen anything to make me think that investment was a wise one.

Show me the greatness of Takeo Spikes over the last several years anyway?

I'm not impressed.

Or scared.

If they got gashed with Walker then what was the point of keeping him around? Their thinking must be if they bulk up the LB corps that it will help the run defense, while hoping for the development of their young DTs. It seems reasonable.

 

[Stash]

If they got gashed with Walker then what was the point of keeping him around? Their thinking must be if they bulk up the LB corps that it will help the run defense, while hoping for the development of their young DTs. It seems reasonable.

Reasonable to some maybe.

Not me.

Walker was the best they had against the run - like Hollis Thomas was before they traded him away.

I don't put much stock in linebackers shoring up run defense.

That happens up front - or in some cases it doesn't.

Again, I'm happy about it. My team just signed a 375 lb guard to line up against that run defense!

 

[alancdc]

This is a very un-Eagles like trade, I wonder what brought this about? They traded a young, up-and-coming tackle for a linebacker near the end of his career. Spikes is well above the age that the Eagles usually jettison players. They also traditionally undervalue linebackers.

I guess the Eagles feel like they have depth at DT and could spare Walker? Not sure why though.

Hopefully, if history is any indication he has had horrible luck being on losing teams, and that trend will continue.

 

[mcnabbmcnow]

This is a very un-Eagles like trade, I wonder what brought this about? They traded a young, up-and-coming tackle for a linebacker near the end of his career. Spikes is well above the age that the Eagles usually jettison players. They also traditionally undervalue linebackers.

I guess the Eagles feel like they have depth at DT and could spare Walker? Not sure why though.

Walker IS NOT a young, up and coming tackle. He has progressively gotten worse the last two years, and got run over in numerous games last year. On many plays watching on tape, he got pushed 8-10 yards back by offensive lineman. He was a HUGE liability against the run, and just an average pass rusher who couldn't do anything against good teams..Signing Reagor made Walker expendable..

 

[Stash]

Walker IS NOT a young, up and coming tackle. He has progressively gotten worse the last two years, and got run over in numerous games last year. On many plays watching on tape, he got pushed 8-10 yards back by offensive lineman. He was a HUGE liability against the run, and just an average pass rusher who couldn't do anything against good teams..Signing Reagor made Walker expendable..

Of course, since Reagor is such a "rock" against the run, right? Especially at 285 lbs coming off serious injuries.

They made a mistake trading Hollis Thomas last year and they fell from 21st to 26th against the run.

Trading away Walker for Reagor makes them even worse, not better.

While I hope the Eagles fans are happy, as a Cowboys fan, I know I'm happy.

 

[Smashmouth24]

Of course, since Reagor is such a "rock" against the run, right? Especially at 285 lbs coming off serious injuries.

They made a mistake trading Hollis Thomas last year and they fell from 21st to 26th against the run.

Trading away Walker for Reagor makes them even worse, not better.

While I hope the Eagles fans are happy, as a Cowboys fan, I know I'm happy.

Walker was not their best defensive tackle against the run. He was, however, their most proven defensive tackle against the pass but one of many defensive tackles they have that fit the same role. This is precisely why he the Bills want him and precisely why the Eagles think they can afford to take a chance on letting him go. In the end, it is more important to be good at stopping the pass than it is to be good at stopping the run.

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

In the end, it is more important to be good at stopping the pass than it is to be good at stopping the run.

I agree with 75% of what You said ...but In the end, it's far more important to render a team 1-dimensional. But stopping the run or the pass you are doing just that! By stopping both the run and pass, you've literally beaten that Team!

 

[Smashmouth24]

I agree with 75% of what You said ...but In the end, it's far more important to render a team 1-dimensional. But stopping the run or the pass you are doing just that! By stopping both the run and pass, you've literally beaten that Team!

There are more factors that go into making a team one dimensional than whether your defense is good against the pass or run. It's far more important to prevent a team from making plays in the passing game and to be able to make your own plays in the passing game. There is no bigger myth in football than the importance of running and stopping the run when compared to the passing game.