Everson Griffen is now a free agent (and future Seahawk?)

February 20th, 2020 | Written by Rob Staton

Things seem to be falling into place quickly for the Seahawks.

With the combine on the horizon and Greg Olsen already filling one vital off-season need, now it’s emerged that Everson Griffen has voided his contract and will be a free agent.

It was always inevitable that Griffen would depart Minnesota one way or another. It was just a question of how it happened. Would they cut him? Would he void his contract? Would he be traded? None of this was a review of Griffen’s value or performance. The Vikings’ cap situation is simply a mess.

Today’s move just about puts them in the black for 2020. Yet they’ll still need to raise major funds if they want to retain star safety Anthony Harris (and presumably that is a priority). They’re also set to lose two cornerbacks in free agency, making it a much tougher call to cut or trade Xavier Rhodes when it would otherwise seem obvious.

In 2019 Griffen had eight sacks — a fair amount as a compliment to Danielle Hunter. Yet he also had 13 QB knockdowns (one more than Nick Bosa), 35 pressures (the same amount as Robert Quinn and Dante Fowler) and 13 hurries (as many as Za’Darius Smith and DaMarcus Lawrence).

The Seahawks don’t just need someone who can provide sacks — they lacked any kind of consistent pressure last season. That’s what Griffen provides. He will test opponents, draw attention and impact games. He’s not Von Miller or a Bosa brother — particularly now he’s 32. He certainly can be Chris Clemons for this Seahawks team though — a productive veteran who consistently delivers.

Seattle’s top priority this off-season will be to make sure the defense is significantly better in 2020. That unit held the team back. Here’s a reminder of the raw stats:

The Seahawks finished the 2019 season with 28 sacks, second fewest in the league behind only Miami (23). Their sack percentage was 4.5% — third worst overall.

They had only 126 pressures, sixth fewest in the league behind Detroit (125), Oakland (117), Houston (117), Atlanta (115) and Miami (96). Seattle’s pressure percentage was the fourth worst in the league (19.3%) behind Detroit (18.9%), Houston (18.1%) and Miami (16.7%).

Seattle hit the quarterback 68 times — fourth fewest. They had 52 TFL’s — again, fourth fewest.

They gave up 55 explosive running plays on defense, seventh most in the NFL. Yet their explosive run play percentage (14%) was the third worst overall behind only Carolina (16%) and Cleveland (15%).

In the passing game they conceded 54 explosive plays — the 14th most.

They also gave up 4.9 YPC — fourth most overall.

The other startling statistic is the sheer number of missed tackles. They had 131 during the regular season — the fourth most.

You can’t win a Championship with a defense ranking in the bottom five in so many categories like this. Bad tackling, no pass rush, poor run defense. You can keep adding and adding to the offense. You can’t roll out one of the NFL’s worst defenses as a compliment and expect to win a Super Bowl.

For that reason, they’re going to need to add multiple pieces as we’ve discussed so often already. It starts with attempting to retain Jadeveon Clowney as the priority. It also includes adding pieces around him.

Griffen would be an ideal compliment. It would provide the makings of a defense capable of rushing with four. They would still need to add some complimentary speed to the pass rush and a defensive tackle (especially if Jarran Reed departs). The draft could provide solutions there — either in the form of someone like Raekwon Davis or Julian Okwara or one of the SAM types who are part of this class.

There could also be opportunities in the trade market or second wave of free agency. It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out. After all, who expected the Seahawks to be able to acquire Jadeveon Clowney and Quandre Diggs for such a paltry return or sign Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril in 2013, weeks after trading for (and paying) Percy Harvin? The Seahawks have a way of making things happen.

Griffen ticks a lot of boxes. His recent production, his experience, his physical profile (he ran a 4.36 short shuttle at his combine).

So how likely is it that he’ll land in Seattle?

Ben Goessling immediately made the connection to Seattle as soon as the news broke. This tweet is interesting because it suggests more than a mere ‘he’d be a good fit there’. He says there’s interest, either from the player or Pete Carroll, in reuniting former USC pass rusher with former USC coach.

During the 2019 season John Clayton said on multiple occasions on the radio that the Seahawks had tried to trade for Griffen. Presumably this happened after Frank Clark was dealt to the Chiefs. The Vikings weren’t interested in a trade at the time. Now with Griffen a free agent, the Seahawks have no hurdles to clear.

Already it feels like this is trending a certain way.

Nothing’s ever certain because who knows what other teams will be offering? Yet the Carroll connection feels important. Given Griffen’s recent mental health issues, picking the right environment could be his biggest factor. That would seemingly make Seattle and a return to Minnesota the most likely scenarios. The difference is — Seattle has cap space, Minnesota doesn’t.

A short-term deal could also significantly benefit the Seahawks if they want to make other moves in free agency. We’ve noted a lot recently that just because you sign a player to a significant long term contract — teams often structure the deals to limit the first-year cap hit. Frank Clark’s cap hit in 2019 was just $6.5m despite signing a deal in Kansas City to become the third highest paid EDGE in the NFL. Khalil Mack’s Chicago cap hit in 2018 was $13.8M and last season it was just $11.9M.

Players like Griffen and Greg Olsen might take up a chunk of the remaining 2020 cap but they’ll be off the books by 2021 or, if Griffen signs for multiple years, 2022. This enables the Seahawks to fit bigger contracts in with larger cap hits down the line, as they try to max out the opportunity to contend in 2020. You don’t want to do this with too many players but it’s just part and parcel of the NFL. The Chiefs are already doing it before they even pay Patrick Mahomes and Chris Jones.

If the Seahawks kick off free agency by retaining Clowney and adding Griffen, having already signed Olsen, they will be well placed to have the kind of off-season needed to contend next season.

If you missed yesterday’s 2020 draft tier list, check it out here.

You can now support Seahawks Draft Blog via Patreon by clicking the tab below.

Become a Patron!

136 Responses to “Everson Griffen is now a free agent (and future Seahawk?)”

  1. Sea Mode says:

    Let’s make it happen. Like you say, it definitely feels like it’s trending that way.

    Would be great to have two huge needs already covered before FA and the draft. Gives us lots of flexibility and also shows Clowney and other potential targets that we are aggressively making moves to contend. Hop on the train, boys!

    • Rob Staton says:

      It’s worth noting that they can’t sign Griffen before FA. He’s a regular, standard free agent. However, it seems like Griffen wants to be somewhere he’s comfortable and rightly so. That means Minnesota and Seattle. And it feels like him ending his career with Pete is trending and destined to happen. Especially with the Vikings having no money to spend.

      • Sea Mode says:

        Yup. Plus, if the report is true that the Seahawks made pushes for him throughout the season, he and his agent will have received notice of the earnest interest.

  2. Bertelli says:

    Very true. Rob, you had suggested a combo-deal for both Diggs and Griffen. If we were to sign Griffen, what do you think it would take to pry away Digg’s by himself? A first rounder or less? Thanks for the great articles, I don’t often post, but read nearly everyday!

    • Sea Mode says:

      Not Rob, but I think you would have to start talks with a R1 pick to even get them to pick up the phone. Then probably add another R2-R4 pick from next year, especially considering all the dead money they would take on.

      Diggs is one of the league’s best route runners, one of the league’s best deep threats, and yet he saw only 94 targets last season (34th most among wide receivers) and only once saw 10-plus targets in a game once. He posted an astounding 17.9 yards per reception last season and 12 yards per target, helping him notch a career-best 1,130 receiving yards, topping his previous high (set the season before) by 109 yards even though he had 39 fewer catches. And that, of course, includes the fact that Diggs sat out the regular-season finale along with other starters, and that he began the season with only six catches for 101 yards in the first three games, helping prompt the early frustration.

      That’s from the Vikings reporter for the Athletic. So while them trading him is certainly not impossible, I tend to agree with the conclusion of said article:

      The math in trading Diggs makes a lot more sense after the 2020 campaign. It doesn’t matter that he sends hard-to-decipher tweets or deletes his Instagram posts. Right now, unless an offer comes along that is too good to pass up, the Vikings don’t have many reasons to trade Diggs.

      https://theathletic.com/1620082/2020/02/20/stefon-diggs-trade-vikings-reasons-arguments-deconstructing

      • Bertelli says:

        Thanks for the info, Sea Mode. I sort of figured that would be the case. Would you bite if they would accept your proposal of a 2020 #1 plus a RD2-R4 pick in 2021? I think I would do it, but you have to have a willing partner to make it happen.

      • McZ says:

        Compared to the WR market, Diggs contract provides the Vikes with an affordable top end player. Same goes for Adam Thielen. The cost to cut Diggs is 9m in dead cap.

        There are other players the Vikes could and will cut first. Linval Joseph, Harrison Smith, Xavier Rhodes, Riley Reiff.
        They can restructure deals.

        • Rob Staton says:

          So when they’ve cut all those players and re-signed Anthony Harris, are they go to incorporate a new age six-man defense?

          Or alternatively they could trade a disgruntled player and give his salary to Harris. They don’t have to gut the defense. They get picks in return and this is a great WR draft.

          People are trying too hard on this Diggs proposal.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I don’t know on Diggs. In my previous piece I pitched a first rounder trade scenario for a few reasons. Firstly, that’s what it took to get Amari Cooper. Secondly, the Vikings want to retain Anthony Harris and trading Diggs would allow them to shift his salary to Harris. Thirdly, they are in cap hell so if you can make a saving (he’d save $5m in 2020) and acquire an asset (a R1 pick) to invest in cheap talent — then it makes sense for a team in Minnesota’ situation. Fourthly, he seemingly wants out. It might take a deal similar to the Harvin deal, which I think also included a R3. But who knows? I pitched it as an idea, as I’ve done with a few other players.

      • Bertelli says:

        Thanks, Rob! Although I’ d like to see Diggs in a Hawks jersey and shore up our WR core, I’m not sure he’s worth the cost. I guess it comes down to what they could potentially get with #27 versus the immediate impact Diggs could have and the potential of next year’s pick. As you said, “who knows”. I appreciate this site and will continue reading.

      • Dan P says:

        All things considered, a big time WR doesn’t seem the best way to attack next season. But there’s exceptions, as with many things.

        His skill set, age and contract make it an appealing option.

        Fun to chew on either way.

        Thanks for doin what you do, Rob.

  3. DC says:

    Add Calais Campbell to those two and our DL will become a named unit.

  4. Kyle says:

    While Griffen is a stop gap, could we possibly be looking at that wrong. What are the odds of being able to recruit and trade for Joey Bosa? Pair him with Clowney (must retain). I just see it as he is not happy in a downtrending chargers uniform. Is that a possibility?

    • Sea Mode says:

      What are the odds

      not good…

    • Rob Staton says:

      But why would the Chargers do that?

      They’re just about to move into a new stadium. Trading away the best player wouldn’t make much commercial sense.

      • Kyle says:

        Potential draft value to get their qb of the future? I know it’s a long shot and more rosterbation. But I’d like to really pair two stud de’s together. I’m more hesitant on age then is probably needed. I just don’t want to get into another ziggy situation and waste a year of our window.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I think we can all agree on that regarding Ziggy.

          To me it just feels at least a year too early for Joey Bosa trade talk. Imagine starting the season having lost Rivers, Gordon and then Bosa and the opening gambit to the LA market is a roster boasting a rookie QB who you spent loads of picks on. Next year when he has one year left on his contract and if he threatens a hold out, I think it’s possible. It’d be a repeat of the Khalil Mack scenario. But this year, right when they move into a stadium, the last thing I think they’d do is trade Bosa. I think they’re more likely to go big on a QB like Tom Brady or Cam Newton and try and generate some interest.

      • LLLOGOSSS says:

        LA hates the Chargers anyway, and they’re about to embark on a rebuild. All their key players are either departing, departing soon, or past their prime. I’d give two 1sts and then some right now for Bosa…

  5. Cameron says:

    Even more appealing, like Olsen, Griffen would not count toward the compensatory pick formula due to exercising his player option to void his contract.

    See section ‘Special Cases’, bottom of the article.
    https://overthecap.com/the-basics-and-methodology-of-projecting-the-nfls-compensatory-draft-picks/

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think the Seahawks will be too active in FA to worry about comp picks.

      • Alex Higgins says:

        You may be right but what we lose Clowney and Reed to gigantic contracts? Wouldn’t we be in position to accumulate talent through guys like Olsen and Griffen, thus getting comp picks?

        • Rob Staton says:

          So then what? You only sign cut players or do trades?

          The aim of this off-season is for the Seahawks to be in position to win a Championship. Not gain a late third round pick in 2021.

    • Ashish says:

      This is the year we should not care about comp pick. Max a team can get comp picks is 4, min zero :). Since we are going to need some help from FA, let’s be this year to be zero but look for best possible case to improve the team.

    • cha says:

      If Griffen is determined to be not eligible that could be an interesting path to getting a comp pick.

      Sign Griffen
      Resign Clowney
      Resign Fant as your new RT
      Trade draft picks for a DT or a an offensive weapon

      If those options work out as is, there’s the chance they could get a nice pick for Ifedi and a middling pick for Reed. In fact you could get aggressive in the trade market knowing you’d have some additional draft stock to play with.

      There’s a lot of ‘ifs’ in that scenario and I’d rather the Hawks say forget the comps and just go for it. But there’s a not-out-of-the-realm-of-possibility way to net some picks.

      • Rob Staton says:

        I doubt they’re even thinking about comp picks.

        They know this is a HUGE off-season. They need to take a step towards contention and be aggressive.

        • cha says:

          I absolutely think they do consider comp picks in their offseason plan.

          Just as I said, this year’s cap shape/need/availability they’ll very very likely swing the weight towards signing the FA’s they deem they need and plan on no comp picks in 2021. And that’s my preferred way to go if I’m the guy making the decisions this year.

          So getting any comp picks in 2021 would be viewed as a silver lining, not a determining factor in decision making.

          All I’m saying is being aggressive in the trade market could possibly result in getting comp picks. But if the talent you need is in the FA market, that’s the way it goes.

          • drewdawg11 says:

            I really don’t get the obsession with comp picks. At best they are a late third nobody is building a roster with comp picks. An extra 3rd, a 5th, a 7th. I’d rather have a proven player who can help us win a title.

            • cha says:

              If the Hawks manage to trade their ET comp pick (3rd) and their Coleman comp pick (4th) as part of a deal for a Calais Campbell or Von Miller type player would that change your mind?

    • EranUngar says:

      I a not sure the “Special cases” say anything about the Seahawks in this case.

      I think it states the MIN will not get a comp pick if Griffen is signed after he voided his contract.

  6. RWIII says:

    Rob: What can I say. Your are articles are great.

  7. Jordan says:

    Let’s add him. Hopefully we can do something around $10-12 million per year for 2 years or so. He may be more interested in the guaranteed money at this point.

    If we can pair him with Clowney (~$22mill) then we would have already addressed some of the biggest gaps in this team. This would be about 40 million already of our cap when adding the Olsen deal. (WOW the hawks cap space has gone by quick!)

    If we cut Britt we could even look into adding another another DL (Fowler? Robert Quinn? Vic Beasley? Suh? Michael Pierce? Mike Daniels) ~6-12 mill mark. Draft a C/OT & WR early in the draft. Brandon Scherff could be an option too if we want to lessen the impact of having 2 younger starters on the line.

    Might be worth making a trade of a DL instead of a signing here as this will count against our comp picks. Ifedi & Fant may give us a R3 & R4-R5 if we do not sign any big guys.

    Hawks need to be smart with these deals coming !

    • Rob Staton says:

      Again though — if they sign Clowney for $22m, the 2020 cap hit could be as low as $6.5m. So it won’t go as quickly this year as you might think.

      Anything is possible. You can never predict fully how things pan out. Who thought they’d be able to add Harvin, Bennett and Avril in a fortnight in 2013? Who thought they could get Clowney and Diggs for such a cheap price? We need to see how things develop.

      What I’m almost certain won’t happen though is players like Scherff being added. You’re talking about $13-15m for a guard and that’s not only something they’ve never done under PCJS — but this is also a really terrific interior OL draft plus they already have Fluker and they like Haynes, Pocic and Jones. So I think it’s more likely they add another cheap veteran or draft someone (or both) than a major splurge at guard. And I don’t think they’ll be players for Conklin etc. But it’s a good OL draft so it’s no biggie.

      • Jordan says:

        Oh man! Now that makes me more excited. Clowney was a good team player last year- I think he would have no problem having a lower cap hit this year given he gets money anyway.

        Gotcha, I can see your reasoning there. For me- I am very against us spending a lot for Conklin / any of the FA OTs. I think they are way too overvalued. Scherff would be the only OL worth it (if they do want OL in FA) in my opinion since he actually does have some all-pro potential and record. A solid guard like that could be something that we retain for years and changes our Oline from below average to actually good. I think of when the Colts drafted the G Quenton Nelson…

        Hawks should only pay guys big bucks who are big time players or “superstars.” Don’t make mistakes like Arizona just did. On that note- I agree with your logic that only drafting a OL makes a lot of sense for this team.

        Personally, I would prefer that they spend most of the available cap left like 80% on the defensive line. Clowney, Griffin, Chris Jones (if he can somehow be available via trade); and then all of the other DL I mentioned earlier would be great fits. Improving the DLine along will make the rest of this defense look much better.

      • John_s says:

        Two big questions for Clowney will be if he will accept a 4 year deal or would he want a 5 year. Seattle usually only goes out 4 years max. It would be out of their normal MO to go 5 years.

        Second question is what will he accept as a signing bonus? Clark, Lawrence and Flowers got between 25-28 mil spread over 5 years.

        Accounting for inflation let’s say it’s $30 mil that $7.5 mil spread through 4 or $6 mil spread through 5. Then you got the base will he accept a base minimum year 1 (820k for ‘20)? Clark and Trey Flowers did. Lawrence had a $1.5 base plus $6 mil roster bonus.

        You’re looking at between $7 mil – $9 mil first year but if Clowney is willing to work with the team.

        • Jordan Epistola says:

          Really good point John. A lot of what happens will be very contingent on Clowney signing. If he really wants to win a SB next few years then hopefully he works work with the team.

    • Madmark says:

      I would look to draft 2 OL this year. I would like Isiah Wilson at RT and if II could get Cesar Ruiz to fill backup at RG and study to take center in a couple of years. Maybe Damian Lewis drops and can be had in 4th round for guard position. I think we need an infusion of youth here and this is a good draft for it.

  8. WALL UP says:

    It would appear that what would help the pass rush get home to the QB, is to have a more effective coverage by the secondary. While signing Griffen and Clowney, which I wholeheartedly am on board with, there is still work to be done in coverage, to allow more time to get to the QB.

    There are (2) areas of improvement needed by the defense, (1) LB coverage over the middle and (2) DB coverage on edges and crossing routes from the slot. Presently, the personnel lacks the speed needed to stay with the receivers.

    Having tight man coverage the first 3.5 seconds would give the DL the opportunity to get home. I’m high on Ugo, but not sure if he might be best suited to work behind Diggs. It’s hard pressed to find a starting nickle in the draft with tight man skills, to handle the demands of slot coverage, of most cases, the fastest WR on the the opposing offense.

    One player that I find interesting is Detroit’s Darius Slay. He wants to be the highest paid player, is what is being put out there, for suitors for a trade. But, placing him with Griffin, and them moving him around against the #1WR, in nickle situations with Flowers rotating in at his old position on the #3WR, may be a better solution. This could afford them to play more man principles, inside a zone.

    Another player added to the LB group, in nickle, would be a prospective draft pick I hope they get in the 2nd Rd. He is Kyle Dugger. It would be great to have Dugger, and Blair, play on the sides of BWag, with Dugger playing the LB position covering TEs and zones, and Blair @ SS on the other side. These could play good press coverage as well, and afford the DL to reach the QB.

    The success of the DL, in the Bennett & Avril days, was do to the coverage of back in. Right now the present secondary doesn’t cover as well as needed.

    Bringing in Slay would be costly, and would require roster cuts and restructures to allow it to happen, McD, KJ, & Britt in particular. But, it could be done, and they need more man coverage techniques, and speed, in order to get after the QB, regardless of who plays at DE.

    What helps with Slay besides his All Pro cover skills, is that Diggs has played with Slay, and is aware of his playing style, which could help him transitioning into a new scheme. He is that star player they need in the back in that will make the life of the DL much easier.

    The offensive weapons they may get from the draft, rather than FA acquisitions. Just a thought of what is available and where they can go. I have a potential trade for Slay with DET & SEA where:

    SEA (1)27 [680pts] for DET (2)35 [550pts] and Slay. It amounts to a 3rd Rd pick in exchange for Slay @ [130pts] which is better than the comp they would receive, if not traded after this 2020 season. It looks like they go after Okudah with their 1st pick. But, they could go after D. Brown instead, and pick up C. Henderson with the 27th pick. Or, they could used it to trade up for Young. They do have a defensive minded head coach in the rebuilding process. Any thoughts?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Seattle’s pass rush woes were not down to a lack of ‘coverage sacks’.

      Seattle’s pass rush woes were down to the D-line being shite.

      I like Darius Slay and would be open to having him in Seattle. I just can’t see them parting with a high pick then paying an outside cornerback. It’s the one position they’ve been consistent with — draft and develop.

      • dcd2 says:

        I like Lavert Hill at nickel. He seems really solid at the LOS and I think he’ll test well, while hopefully being available later. I think there will be some late DB’s that will test in the vein of Justin Coleman who might be available late. Coleman stands out for his short shuttle time (3.98).

        Ugo was a 4th rounder. I think they’ll look for a nickel, but probably later in the draft and probably not for draft capital.

    • WALL UP says:

      They did pay the LOB handsomely, more so than the DL back in the day. They just don’t have anyone in the back in that is close to reaching that star potential, other than Diggs and Shaq. With loose coverage it doesn’t matter whose on the line, if the QB gets the ball out just under 3 secs.

      Even with Clowney & Griffen trying to reach Mahomes, Rogers, or a Brees type QB, it may still pose a challenge. They need tighter coverage from their DBs to be successful for increasing their sack total. You just can’t lean entirely on Clowney, Griffen and a new rookie, to bring about a change of what transpired last year.

      Pete even mentioned that they, the DBs have to do better. That is what will help the DL. They just need more time.

      • Rob Staton says:

        They paid to retain a legendary secondary they drafted and developed.

        They didn’t pay major outside FA’s or traded players big money.

        Look, the DB’s can play better. But no, they were NOT the reason the pass rush sucked.

      • BobbyK says:

        I believe that Blair is going to improve things in 2020. He’s got a year of experience under his belt and you could tell that when he was on the field that there was talent oozing out of him. He just needs to put it together upstairs.

        Blair having a year under his belt, Flowers going into his third ever season playing CB, Griffen playing for a contract and Diggs actually playing for this team at the start of training camp are all reasons the DBs will improve. Imagine how much better they’re going to be if they are aided with a pass rush. I also like our nickel moving into ’20 and then there’s McDougald who plays better when he doesn’t have to make calls (like Diggs). Really, they can mostly stand pat at DB and it’s going to improve and drastically improve with a better pass rush.

      • Mark Souza says:

        WALL UP, DBs are covering massively quick people capable or running 4.4 and 4.3 forties. The less time they have to hang with these people, the better off the defense will be. Ideally you want to give the receivers and QB less than 3 seconds. If instead, you’re asking your DBs to cover for 4 or 5 seconds to allow a mediocre pass rush to get home, you’re looking at a losing formula. Even the LOB, who were outliers would not fare well under those conditions. The pass rush and DBs work together, but the DBs lose if the pass rush isn’t hurrying the QB. It is far easier and far more successful to have a D-line making the DBs look good by getting home quickly, than it is for DBs to make the defense look good by covering up receivers for an excessive amount of time to allow a flaccid pass rush to get home.

        • drewdawg11 says:

          Pass rush >>>> coverage. Also, I would never want Flowers bumping inside to the slot. He’s not good enough as an outside corner where he gets to use the sideline. Every slot would have a 2-way go on him and he would be riding the pine. Slay is a good player. He’s not going to transform this defense.

    • Chris says:

      I’m pretty sure that there’s no way that Detroit is trading Slay for the equivalent of a 3rd round pick.

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        The Seahawks teach outside CBs a “kick-step” technique for press man coverage. Some players take to it easily. Others struggle to learn it. Veterans who have years of coaching and success using different techniques, like Slay, are a challenge because you are paying for top-level performance but you may not get it if they struggle to learn the Seattle technique.

        In fact, the limited history of Seattle signing veteran FA corners doesn’t show much success at all. Better odds for Seattle to draft another Shaquille and train them up than gamble big $ and draft picks on a successful Slay conversion; especially with other clear needs.

  9. Kingdome1976 says:

    I wonder why the Vikings didn’t get anything for Griffin. Couldn’t the Seahawks have thrown a 6th rounder toward them and landed him?

  10. cha says:

    Signing Griffen has a certain fait accompli feel to it that Hawks fans have felt before. Like Clowney deciding he wants to come to Seattle instead of Miami.

    Does he typically line up against the LT most plays, or can he rove all over the DL?

    • Aaron Bostrom says:

      Usually played the edge as I remember. I live in MN. He did play inside a lot against the Saints in the playoffs and had lots of success. He seems versatile.

  11. Kingdome1976 says:

    If we sign Griffin I think we should try and retain Reed as well. We need as many BAMF type players as possible. I would be ok with letting Britt go and drafting a first or second round Center to replace him as well. I don’t think we should let Ifedi go though. He’s just starting to become as good RT.

    • Alex Higgins says:

      We could lose Clowney, Ifedi and Reed to big contracts. I’m not sure we should write off getting comp picks this year.

    • Kelly says:

      I would classify Reed as more of “just a guy” he’s no where near the level of BAMF. I’m fine with seeing him walk.

      • Kingdome1976 says:

        I disagree. He is a BAMF….and seemingly the only one on our defense.

        • Kelly says:

          When I think of BAMF I think of Aaron Donald, Geno Atkins, Chris Jones. Reed doesn’t even come close to the players. To top it off he was supposed to be good against the run. I thought (while he missed time) last year was the worst he looked as a Seahawk.

        • drewdawg11 says:

          Wait, what? Bobby Wagner and Clowney would like a word. They actually perform like that. Reed has had 3 pedestrian seasons out of four. What are you seeing that nobody else is? It’s cool to like a player and all. To totally forget that we have Bobby and Clowney and claim that reed is the one on the defense, this seems like a troll job.

      • Michael P Matherne says:

        Yet, if he can put together another year like 2018 we’d be glad we retained him

        • Kelly says:

          That’s my issue. He’s done that exactly once in his career. Unless he comes back on the cheap I’d rather not pay him. I honestly though Al Woods looked better and made more splash plays behind the LOS than Reed did last year. Reed never jumps off the screen to me.

    • Jhams says:

      Reed is JAG who had one good year because Frank Clark was wrecking shop. I’d rather see them grab Danny Shelton for $5-6m.

  12. Anthony says:

    At this point I think the Seahawks are gonna let Clowney test the market and whatever the best offer he gets I think he’ll give the Seahawks the chance to match it (They seem to have a good relationship). If the number gets crazy though in that close to 20 million per year range I think the Seahawks are better off letting him go. Use that money instead to get someone like Dante Fowler and then build a pass rush rotation (Griffin, interior rush help, maybe Suh?) with the rest of the money that would of gone to Clowney.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think you’re right in terms of him establishing his market but I will say this. Clowney at $22m might sound a lot but if Dante Fowler is a $17m a year pass rusher (for example) what rotation are you building with that $5m? This only really works if you can Fowler for $12m and another player for a similar amount.

  13. TCHawk says:

    I just don’t see it. Griffen evidently voided his contract because he wants to get max dollars. He averaged $14.5M/year on that contract, but it wasn’t enough. If he wants more, that is too rich for me. He’s also 32 years old, so it’s likely his last major contract. I’m on board with locking up Clowney for multiple years. I would like the addition of Griffen for a couple of years based on his play, but his view of his value is likely to make that unlikely for the Hawks. However, if he tests the market and finds out his value isn’t that high, and we can get him for $13M/yr for 2 years, sign me up.

    • Rob Staton says:

      He voided his contract because he was going to be cut anyway.

      Minnesota were -$12m in the red in terms of cap space.

      You’re jumping to conclusions on how he views his ‘value’.

      • Tecmo Bowl says:

        Cut or traded somewhere he doesnt want to go.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Indeed. This was simply Griffen taking control of the situation.

          • LLLOGOSSS says:

            I’m sure he wants to re-enter the market place and get a good return on his services. Topping $12 mil shouldn’t be a problem, and getting some guarantees for 2021 should be his goal. That’s probably why he voided the deal.

            That said, none of that is a dealbreaker for me at all. Something like two years, $28 mil with $18 mil gtd. sounds reasonable for both parties.

  14. TCHawk says:

    I heard Robbie Tobeck commenting on the future prospects for Fant and Ifedi. He knows Fant wants to be a starter, but thinks he lacks the necessary skills. He’s good as a 6th lineman or an emergency fill-in. Fant will probably seek his fortune elsewhere. He thinks Ifedi is probably gone also. His opinion is that Ifedi is, and can be, very effective but the well is tainted in Seattle due to his history. He thinks someone else will pay him more than Seattle is willing to, and a parting would be mutually beneficial. I’m glad to hear this is a good draft for OL.

    • Aaron Bostrom says:

      They both could be gone, but I don’t see a huge market for Fant. It doesn’t matter what he wants if no one thinks he’s capable or worth it. He’s never been a starter, even though Ifedi was constantly rated as one of the worst tackles in the game. But who knows.

      I’d probably let Ifedi walk, keep Fant at a modest price and draft a tackle in the first two rounds and have them compete for the starting tackle job, while the other one provides depth.

      • Doug says:

        If we lose Ifedi and/or Fant, could Jack Conklin (Titans FA) be an option at RT? Older, but able to move bodies and protect. On a short contract while we develop a drafted player might work.

        • Coleslaw says:

          I would guess if we lost Ifedi and Fant then we would look at guys like Conklin, but Conklin is likely to be signed before or the same time as Ifedi and Fant so we might not have the luxury of waiting to see what happens with them before the top FAs are gone.

          • Spencer says:

            I don’t think that other teams will be high on Fant. Relatively few snaps and even less starts, so he’s not a proven commodity and if he wants proven commodity money I think he’ll find that in a deep OT draft class that teams will just draft a guy for a fraction of the price.

  15. Steve Nelsen says:

    I think there is a strong chance they both leave. There are a number of veteran FA tackles that we might get fairly low cost late in FA (similar to the deal for Iupati) and I think we use one of our top 3 picks for an OT.

  16. BobbyK says:

    Yes – would be nice to sign Griffen. I would be happy with that and the fact they didn’t trade any of their picks in this draft to make it happen. It means they still could trade a pick for another addition (perhaps Campbell?).

    Rob – out of curiosity, do you think they would take Davis at #27? I think they would take a guy most people don’t think will go that high because it seems they’ve done it in the past – just wondering your thoughts. I know FA will dictate a lot, but just in general. Or would you envision them trading into the early-second to nab him?

  17. AndrewP says:

    This might belong on the Tier article, but…

    The Athletic did an article on Dugger today… ‘Your’ secret is out, Rob!!!

  18. astro.domine says:

    Hey, just wanted to share a cool website I found:

    https://www.playerprofiler.com/

    Super useful and easy way to compare the athletic profiles of different players!

    • Sea Mode says:

      I use https://www.mockdraftable.com/ for athletic comps, but yours is nice that it includes performance stats. I also really appreciate the detailed and easily legible injury history.

      Thanks for sharing! Definitely needs to go into SDB’s “useful links” collection whenever we get that up to date.

  19. Damon Harrison just released. Best run defender in the NFL.

  20. astro.domine says:

    Here’s a dark-horse FA pass rusher: Emmanuel Ogbah.

    Ran a 4.63 forty at 273lbs. Has 35 1/2″ arms. 26 years old.
    Only problem is mediocre agility.

    Any thoughts?

  21. Coleslaw says:

    I think the most likely landing spots for Stefon Diggs other than Minnesota is

    1. Buffalo. They could really use him and would give them a legit top offense while putting your young star QB in the best position to win now and to develop for the future. They could make a big offer.

    2. Green Bay. Really needs a #2. Just not sure if vikings would keep him in the division.

    3. Oakland. Pair Diggs with Brady for a HUGE entrance to Las Vegas.

    • Ghost Mutt says:

      I think the Pats make most sense. Give Brady a number 1 to convince him to finish his career out there, and Diggs will get targets galore there.

      It’s the only thing that makes me hesitate about adding him – we’ve made tons of hard decisions geared towards getting the locker room vibe right again. Don’t want to see another guy pouting on the sideline.

  22. Volume12 says:

    WALL UP, according to Tony Pauline, Rams and Broncos are the frontrunners for Darius Slay.

    • cha says:

      My spiteful side almost wants the Rams to trade for Slay. They already have no first round pick this year or next due to the Ramsey trade, so let’s blow out their 2nd round picks for the next two years too. And dole out huge contracts for Slay and Ramsey while we’re at it.

    • charlietheunicorn says:

      How do the Rams have any cap space to accommodate his salary and they wouldn’t be able to keep him long term, unless they are planning on cutting Gurley at some point????

      Broncos could be a nice fit. The Redskins might be a dark horse in my estimation as well.

    • WALL UP says:

      I’m sure No-E prefers that he stays out of LA. 😉

  23. Volume12 says:

    I guess the Rams think he can protect Jared Goff or something. 🤷‍♂️

  24. Coleslaw says:

    Theres no one I want to see at the combine more than Antonio Gibson. The dude could be a matchup nightmare lining up at RB. Have him be your 5th or 6th WR also and use him in motion to expose the defense’s calls. Not sure he would be a fit here but hes intriguing. Could replace Prosise with a player capable of a very similar role.

  25. One Bad Mata'afa says:

    Sorry if this was already covered today, but WOW did anyone read Gilbert’s opening paragraph (salvo?) today in his Griffen article on FGulls?

    That was so unnecessary and unprofessional. Way to pat yourself on the back buddy lol. Yikes.

    Anyone have thoughts on Marcus Golden, assuming we re-sign Clowney and bring in Griffen? Might be a bargain, upside signing.

  26. Coleslaw says:

    This piece got me pumped so f it.

    Resign Clowney, Fant, Woods, QJeff, Hollister, Moore.
    Extend Britt
    Sign Griffen, Damon Harrison, Vic Beasley

    2.(trade down from 27). Raekwon Davis
    2. (Trade up from 59 with the 3rd you got trading down from 27). Kyle Dugger
    2.64. (Traded to Jacksonville for Calais Campbell)
    3.103. Lucas Niang
    3. (Trade up from 133). Clyde Edwards Helaire
    4.155. Damon Arnette
    6. Nick Coe
    7. *anything* lol

  27. charlietheunicorn says:

    John Clayton proposed a scenario…. (roughly)

    Clowney for +/- 22M
    Griffen for ~ 8M
    Irvin for ~ 4M

    That leaves figuring out the DT with either retaining who you have or bring in a few low cost FA and/ordrafting a quality DT top 3 rounds in draft. This could also be where a trade comes into fruition. Essentially, go for a guy like Judon for a spare 2nd round pick.

    For total cost, that is not bads at all.. about 30M and you then have plenty of pass rushers and also have some cap room to spare.

    This also free up the draft to mostly work on offensive playmakers (and OL).

    I’ll also throw another nakme out there, how about bringing in Jason Witten as your 3rd TE.. to give you a complete TE group, with none of them expected to carry the load, but all very capable of producing if you need them to. This would keep plenty of options for the potentially “rich” 2021 TE draft.

    • drewdawg11 says:

      I think we need to co wider Danny Shelton at DT. He is a local kid who had a nice season in 2019. He can occupy 2 blockers and he’s underrated as an athlete. He would be motivated to play well in front of his family. Reed can go for all I care. He’s had one big year and that’s it. Danny will play the run better at a much better cost.

      • GerryG says:

        I think we can definitely count on a DT vet signing that brings a lot of value, we get one every year. Last years was one of the better ones til Woods got the PED suspension, which is much overlooked loss.

  28. Coleslaw says:

    Pete Carroll said that line “you’re gonna like what we have planned” after trading for Clowney, right? If so he was probably talking about Griffen considering the failed trade attempt.

  29. GerryG says:

    Remember that scene at the start of Pulp Fiction when Samuel L Jackson says “say what again m-f- I dare you”

    That’s how I feel reading these comments about the term “comp picks”.

    This is not the year to look for an extra third rd pick next April.

    • Troy says:

      100%…usually it is smart to be concerned with comp picks and to try and “game” the system if you can. This year is not one of those years lol. When you have 60 or more million in cap space you need to bring in impact players THIS year, not 3rd round or worse picks next year…let’s go free agency and draft!

  30. Kingdome1976 says:

    Remember the year SF went to Harbaugh Super Bowl and lost. Then the next year we showed them who was really the boss in the division.

    Here’s to repeating history:)

  31. Sea Mode says:

    Well, why not…? Just be ready for next year’s playoffs. (just kidding… hopefully)

    https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28746942/marshawn-lynch-fun-pretty-substantial-role-hbo-westworld

    Side note: anyone watch the series so far? Recommend?

  32. EranUngar says:

    The new CBA could be a game changer for the Seahawks.

    In previous comments regarding back loading contracts I said that its clear they would do it on their biggest contract (Clowney) but they can not do it on more contracts – I WAS WRONG.

    The new CBA is practically set and the owners/players are due to vote on in in the coming days. When I looked at the estimated numbers – the total cap is about to go up from 2.5B to over 3B in the next two year and could reach more than 3.5M in 2022 with a 17th game added.

    In terms of team cap – we are taking about 230-240M as early as 2021. That’s 30-40M increase of 2020.

    It plays perfectly into the hands of teams that have enough cap space now to pay the lower cost of the first year over multiple contracts knowing that the extra future cost will be covered by the cap rise.

    In other wards – If we want to sign Clowney, Griffen + Campball or another high cost DT – we could structure two of those contracts without risking the future.

  33. GoHawksDani says:

    I’d like it. How much would it take to get him? I think around 13m fully GTD, 11m 6m GTD would do it. Maybe 13 (12), 11 (5), 12 (2).
    Sign Clowney for 25m APY max but heavily incentivized. Something like 4 years 80m base that can go up to 100m with incentives. 55m GTD, something like this: yearly base (max with incentives – GTD)
    13 (15 – 13), 20 (25 – 18), 23 (29 – 15), 26 (31 – 9)
    That would give us Griffen and Clowney for 26-28m in the first year
    I think we could sing one more UFA, I’d go for a DT or someone who can play inside well.
    We could shoot for Campbell, but I’d also like to have #27 pick, so I think Arik Armstead could be a legit target. He could get 4 years 20m APY but also with incentives and base could get a lot lower like 15m APY and 45 GTD
    Something like:
    9 (12 – 9), 17 (22 – 14), 17 (23 – 14), 17 (23 – 9)

    That would mean 35-38m for Armstead, Griffen, Clowney in first year. A bit high, but doable.
    Second year would be a bit more: between 48-58m (depending on the incentives, but afaik we’d need 58m and if they don’t hit the marks we could roll over the remaining cap)
    Third year would hurt the most with 52-63m, but if we’d really need we could cut Griffen with only 2m dead cap and saving 10m
    4th year would be only Armstead and Clowney: 43-54

    I think this is a reasonable CAP scenario, and if we’d draft Davis, it could be one of the best lines with Clowney- Davis – Armstead – Griffen.

    If Armstead is just too pricey we could keep Reed. I don’t think he’s a 10+ sack guy, but he’s better than last year, and could generate 4-6 sacks yearly.
    We could give him a short term prove it contract (15m 1 year or 10 and 14m 2 years) or a moderate long term one (4 years 12m base APY 15m with incentives 20m GTD)

  34. Sea Mode says:

    Good fact sheet on the proposed new CBA.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/DarrenHeitner/status/1230646875558219776

    Practice squad increase from 12 to 14.
    One more active offensive lineman. (Not quite sure what that means…)

    • Georgia Hawk says:

      Players (some) have already flat out said no. Apparently there’s not a lot to like from the player standpoint.

      • cha says:

        I’ve always wondered about how the players’ union really works.

        Top/star players probably have more freedom to speak out, with some cover of their massive contracts and popularity, while the average workaday players who aren’t as vocal constitute the bulk of the vote, so it’s hard to get a good feel for how the union as a whole thinks of the negotiations.

        So every time we hear 1 or 2 players railing about say the franchise tag, and everyone says just get a stronger CBA next time, sure. But that only effects 1% of the entire NFLPA. The middle class is where the “battle” is fought and won.

    • Sea Mode says:

      Here’s the explanation on the proposed new “extra OL” rule:

      Tom Pelissero
      @TomPelissero

      The extra offensive lineman rule under the proposed CBA would be similar to the old No. 3 QB rule, per source — basically, a reserve OL could be put into the game if another goes down and can’t return. Lets players come out if they need to without, say, forcing a TE to play OL.

      So not an extra active player, per se.

      • GerryG says:

        More active players is a good thing, I really like this rule.

        I think rosters should be bigger, with more allowed to be active

        • Sea Mode says:

          More details that I didn’t gather from the players’ fact sheet:

          Adam Schefter
          @AdamSchefter
          ·2m

          Regarding CBA players vote on today.

          Rosters would increase to 48 players from 46 on gameday, with overall rosters going to 55 from 53; practice squads would increase to 14 players in 2022, and 12 this year, up from 10.

          Teams would be allowed to bring back 3 players from IR.

  35. Sea Mode says:

    😍

    https://www.cover1.net/henry-ruggs-alabama-nfl-draft/

    The only reason I stopped talking about him so much and more about Raegor is because I believe Ruggs will be long gone by our pick.

    Has the backstory and intense competitive nature too. If only…

  36. McZ says:

    Very good news for us.

    And, as I think we haven’t talked about him, but Cameron Heyward IMO is an obvoious cut for the Steelers. He would clear 9m for only 3.5m dead cap, and is practically the only cuttable player.

    So…
    Griffen 12m apy
    Heyward 13m apy

    Davis 1st pick (you just
    Okwara 2nd pick (he will run in the 4.50s and is a learner)

    Would still be free and agile enough to let Clowney come to them. If not, Lawson for 8m is an option.