Friday draft notes: Seahawks status check pre-combine

February 23rd, 2018 | Written by Rob Staton

The Seahawks were not awarded any comp picks today.

Ian Rapoport is reporting they’re more likely to sign a new deal with Earl Thomas than trade him. He also suggests Richard Sherman isn’t healthy enough to deal. I don’t know about you but I’m ready to just know what’s going on one way or another. Ever since the 42-7 embarrassment against the Rams there’s been talk of major change to the defense. I still think that’s likely. The idea of just patching things up, trying to get through another season and having 8-10 players not practising every week is unappealing. Change feels inevitable — it’s the level of change that needs to be determined. And considering we’ve gone from minor speculation that Kansas City might be willing to trade Marcus Peters to a deal being done with the Rams in the space of about 48 hours, it’s starting to become pretty difficult to garner anything from the speculation.

— There are still key reasons why I think change of some kind is likely. The defense does need to get younger and cheaper. This hasn’t felt like the Seahawks of 2011-14 for a while now. The group of fiery players that were pissed off for greatness became, well, great. They got paid. And after the New England Super Bowl they arguably channelled their anger inwards rather than outwards. The running game has collapsed. They lost a lot of the intensity and identity that made them great and increasingly started to lean on Russell Wilson as the injuries piled up. Proper competition has to return. That upstart nature has to return. They’ve been trying for two years to be the bully again and it’s just not happening. If they want to get back to that it’s going to take more than the window dressing of 2016 and 2017. They can’t just keep rolling on, hoping the next iteration of Eddie Lacy will halt the decline of a team that has gone from 13 to 12 to 10 and then to 9 wins in the space of five years.

— If they do ultimately end up retaining Thomas, Sherman and players such as Michael Bennett, it’ll reinforce how likely it is they address the running game as a priority this off-season. They could bring in a hedge running back via free agency (eg Carlos Hyde) and consider the situation at safety (Bradley McDougald? Eric Reid?) before looking at the options at receiver. These moves could set them up to tap into the strength of the draft early (OL, RB, LB) and target a possible LEO edge rusher in the middle rounds (Kemoko Turay?).

— If they don’t acquire extra picks by moving veterans, trading down from #18 becomes a foregone conclusion. They’d have little choice, right? Picking once in the first four rounds seems unlikely. Trading down more than once could be an option too. Negotiating such a deal and still finding a way to come away with one of Billy Price, Isaiah Wynn or Ronald Jones II would be a win. It’s unclear how likely it is though.

— If they had their picks in rounds 2-3 you might be more inclined to think about defense in round one. Michigan’s Maurice Hurst, for example, is the type of dynamic interior pass rusher this team has really lacked. Instead they might end up trading down with a team like Atlanta so the Falcons can get Hurst.

— Having as many picks in rounds 2-3 as possible is critical this year (the area where the Seahawks currently have a bare cupboard). While the likes of Price, Wynn and Jones II are appealing first round options, if you only manage to acquire one third rounder you’ll be really limiting yourself. Ideally you take a running back in the top-75 (you’ll be kicking yourself BIG TIME if you don’t this year) and you want to hit OL/RB/LB as early as possible. Yet in the third round you might want to get Rutgers’ Turay to be your LEO or Stanford tight end Dalton Schultz to really bolster your run blocking.

— It’s only when you start to write all this down that you realise how much needs to be done and how little draft stock and cap room Seattle has to really address it all. They’re not in a bad position (and won’t be as long as they have the likes of Russell Wilson and Bobby Wagner) but certain decisions (and some mistakes) are starting to catch up with the Seahawks.

Big combine preview on the way Sunday or Monday. Keep an eye out for it.

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

Become a Patron!

Nike NFL Team Free Trainer v7 Collection Shoes

146 Responses to “Friday draft notes: Seahawks status check pre-combine”

  1. Trevor says:

    All great points Rob I agree 100% this team has to get younger and bring that attitude back. Keeping Sherm and ET seems like it is just prolonging thr enevitable at this point. The Rams and SF are young , aggressive and only getting better.

    • Rob Staton says:

      And that’s the problem for me. I have this real fear that the Seahawks are just going to be used as a platform for the other two to prove they mean business and are the real contenders in the NFC West. Heck, the Rams already made that point with 42-7. So joining them as a growing team and trying to do it better than they are, to me, seems better than just trying to get the last few dregs out of this older team.

      We have lost our attitude, swagger, running game, health and bullying physicality.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        Part of me wants them to improve as rapidly as possible. Part of me wants them to lay in their mess awhile until they quite trading away draft picks for free agents.

        The part that wants improvement always wins.

      • 602BeastMode says:

        I completely agree! We used to smack teams in the mouth. Every Sunday it seemed like we would see a Kam Bam hit. Now it’s a rare sight. I have faith in PCJC. They are gonna draft some hungry dogs this year.

      • EP says:

        Maybe it will take a bit of embarrassing before we get the swagger back. If we have another poorish seaosn and the 49ers and Rams have great seasons we’ll be written off and expectations will lower. I think that’s why this off-season is the year for dramatic change. Getting younger is a necessity at this point. I would suffer next year if it meant the returning players for 2019 had a fire in their bellys. Not just the young guys but Wilson and Wagner as well. Surely they will be desperate to return to the Super Bowl, they’re not used to losing. The last thing we can do is have a repeat of last season. Move on from Richardson and Graham. Maybe that will be symbolic of a step forward. They just didn’t work the way we expected. The key part from the run game fix is finding late round guys and making them great. Obviously that’s easier said than done but if we find another KJ, Sherm, Kam or Doug it won’t take long until we’re back at it. Late round guys tend to have the attitude the Seahawks covet. Get guys who are going to scrap for every yard and have something to prove.

      • LLLOGOSSS says:

        Who is more physical than Kam, Earl, and Sherman?

        • Rob Staton says:

          It’s not 2013 any more.

          • Patrick Toler says:

            I would still say Earl and Sherman are two of your 3 best defensive players. I think you want to build around your (still) best players. Move on from Avril, Bennett, KJ, Kam if you want.
            I recognize that some of your points about wanting to get younger and hungrier are very valid. But I think you should try to do so without moving on from your elite players.

            • Rob Staton says:

              How do you build around players who might not be here in a year though?

              Are you getting proper value for these ‘elite’ players if you let them walk in a year?

              And if you pay them, are you confident that they’ll remain elite and more importantly — healthy?

              Listen — it’s not an easy call at all. It’s a very tricky situation the Seahawks find themselves in — some of which is their own doing. But one way or another some tough decisions need to be made.

              • Elmer says:

                The other day you mentioned the word “ruthless” regarding the approach to the upcoming draft. Maybe the traded players won’t be the ones most speculated about and who are arguably past their primes (Thomas, Sherman, etc.). Maybe there will be surprising trades involving some players who are at or near their primes, and who can bring back a lot in return. That way of getting younger and cheaper (maybe not better in the short term though) would involve some really tough decisions to be made. I’m staying tuned…

              • Patrick Toler says:

                It’s absolutely not an easy call at all. And I believe that Earl has a very real chance of being traded, and that could work out in the end. But I think both players are likely to play at a high level until they are 32. So I would want to extend them both to contracts I could get out of in 2 and 3 years without crippling the cap.

                Maybe Earl is unreasonable in his demands and is going to hold out and/or you can get a haul for him. If that’s how it works out I’ll accept it.

                Maybe Sherman’s achilles isn’t recovering to the point where you feel comfortable giving him significant guaranteed money.That’s fine, but I don’t see the upside in moving on from him this year. You aren’t getting much for him in a trade. If he’s healthy next year and you can’t/don’t resign him, you may get more as a comp pick than you would in a trade this offseason. I keep going back to the way Pete gushed about Sherman as a mentor and example after the season when asked about Griffin.

                Ultimately I think Earl has a reasonable chance of being traded. Sherman will almost certainly be back. Either way it is a compelling offseason. I love the passionate debate on this site.

      • Eburgs says:

        Attitude, swagger, running game, health and bullying physicality pretty much all get fixed with just the run game I think. Health is a crapshoot. The defense is really not that far off when everyone is healthy, we also beat the Rams last year when the linebackers weren’t busted up.. I agree with adding depth but why get rid of good players just to make holes on the roster. We probably already have to deal with the loss of Kam and Avril, so we want to create two more holes in those position group by getting rid of earl and Bennett? Bennett didn’t play great last year but he had a legit injury and we don’t save much by cutting him. I can see the benefit of getting sherms huge salary off the books but he might be worth keeping too if he can come back from injury, he’s a special player.

        The run game cures all. Well we could use a kicker too. It should help the time of possession battle and in turn help our defense stay fresh. It gives us back the bullying physicality, attitude and all that. The defense is not the problem (losing Kam is a huge blow). We have a bunch of young studs on that side of the ball (reed, jones, Clark, griffin, Coleman, Wagner, earl and S Richardson if we keep him). The slowest guys on D (relative to their position) last year looked like Bennett, Sherm, Wright and Kam but They’re all still good players so I’m not sure you get better by getting rid of any of them.

        We needed a new run game coordinator/OL coach because whatever we were doing wasn’t working. Luckily we got one, hopefully he doesn’t suck too. We should have the talent on the OL considering the amount of resources we have put there. Maybe they are a young group that needs to grow and get better, maybe they suck and we need new guys, idk. Seems like our backs are not very good or can’t stay healthy so that’s somewhere where we can improve. Luckily that need matches up with the strength of the draft. We are also staring at a big hole at tight end if we do nothing. Luckily we can improve the run game by replacing Jimmy.

        I say keep the defense together (Hopefully he can but Kam and Avril probably can’t play and obvi you cut Lane). Listen to trade offers for Sherm because we could use some cash to sign Sheldon Richardson and/or maybe a free agent tight end that can block. Get a stud running back early in the draft after trading down to accumulate some picks. then Grab the best players available after that looking closely at OL, TE, LB, Edge. Oh and we need a kicker!

  2. Greg Haugsven says:

    I wonder if they might try and trade any future draft stock for draft stock this year? Or just bite the bullet and deal with it. They can now trade 2019 comp picks for 2018 draft picks. Maybe packahe the 3rd round comp pick for Sheldon and 4th for Jimmy for say an earlier to mid 3rd rounder this year. Just spit Ballin here.

    • peter says:

      I’m really hoping they don’t do that. that’s just good money after bad and frankly how they arrived at this place.

    • Gohawks5151 says:

      Agreed. Last year the Niners traded a 2018 2nd and 2017 7th for a very early 3rd (#67). I could see us using a 2019 comp 3rd and a 2018 5th to get in the same range. It doesn’t get rid of some of the problems it just pushes them out. However some big contracts coming off the books next year depending on what happens this year (Earl, Sherm, Bennet)

  3. 602BeastMode says:

    I think that trading down is a must. We have to get younger and hungrier. It’s just a shame that McDowell had that accident last year. If that didn’t happen we would have never traded for Richardson. The same with Fant. I also have been screaming for us to draft a tall WR. There are some talented tall WR’s in this years class. Make it happen Hawks!!!

    • C-Dog says:

      There’s how I’m looking at the whole of the Malik McDowell selection:

      Because of the that ATV accident, he might never play a down of professional football. Seattle may have traded their R2 pick and Jermaine Kearse for a one year rental on Sheldon Richardson, and a R3 comp pick in 2019.

      All this = a potentially disastrous decision to draft him, and if it becomes that, I seriously doubt JS will want to burn a high pick on a questionable character again.

      • drewdawg11 says:

        I feel like the entire offseason last year was one move after another that I despised. I’m actually still angry about it. The free agent signings, (Joeckel, Lacey), that everyone knew were terrible except JS. The awful decision to draft the guy who has shown a lack of maturity and work ethic, and he’s even less intelligent and reliable than we feared. I don’t even like several of their other picks and didn’t at the time, either. The way JS got conned into throwing in the third rounder when the Texans laughably failed Lane on his physical. This is the GM who drafted all of our stars, yet he’s also the guy who gets regularly bent over on trade acquisitions, (Harvin, Graham). This is his most important off-season moving forward. I am not confident anymore about the way they are running things and I want to be proven wrong.

        • AlaskaHawk says:

          I agree on the paid to much for other teams players part. I see no reason to give a first rounder when Seahawks are going to pay their entire bloated salary on top of it. We are helping the other team out because that player wouldnt’ be traded if they didn’t have a cap problem = so why give them a first rounder on top of it?

          At the time I heard people argue that there wasn’t anyone in the first round as good as the traded player. Well then do the typical Seahawks trade down and gather another second and third rounder.

  4. mishima says:

    JSPC need to take a look at New Orleans not Carolina.

  5. Gohawks5151 says:

    I’ve been thinking all offseason that Earl and Sherm are going to be the only holdovers. All the other names constantly in discussion get cut or work out a agreement (Kam). It makes sense as these 2 can help raise the next generation this year and yet have the flexibility to be retained or move on from them in a year. Sherm is a pro and wont dog the effort. Earl will ball when it is time too. I’m not sure about starting over and doing it better than the rest of the NFC west. Petes first rebuild took 3-4 years and required some resources we currently lack (2 1st rd pick). I know everyone wants to get a bunch of picks and “fix everything” but the timetable for the current guys in there prime cant wait that long. You can make a great case to stay flexible and refurbish rather than rebuild. Young doesn’t always mean better. Swagger doesn’t always lead to a culture change. Hungry doesn’t always lead to execution. The new guys still need to be lead by some vets.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      I agree. I looked up Earl Thomas stats and he is still playing at an elite level. My eye test says he is playing well. My only quibble is that I wish he would get more interceptions, I suspect is hands have been battered into meat sticks.

      I just don’t see a need to trade him for a second round pick. I think he is more useful guiding the defensive rebuild. Would I extend him? Based on past performance of Kam and Lynch – NO. It is unfortunate because Earl may be the exception that goes on to play another 5 or years. But I just can’t stomach another injury laden contract.

      My thoughts, pay him for his last year and then evaluate him at the end of the season.

      • Brandon says:

        What if Earl holds out, as he’s suggested he will?

        • AlaskaHawk says:

          That’s his decision. Don’t pay him till he comes back, let him finish the year and try out free agency.

      • Eburgs says:

        No one tries earl over the deep middle because they know what happens. He even gets to the sidelines to break passes/pick deep balls. He totally changes the way teams play. Watson did it successfully this past year but earl also got him back with a pick 6. He could have battered hands tho, seems to drop a bunch too.

    • Patrick Toler says:

      I agree 100%. Along with Bobby they are still your best defensive players. Get younger elsewhere.

  6. Matt says:

    I really, really hope I’m wrong – but the idea of keeping Sherm, Earl, and Bennett just screams the end of an era and the fact that PC doesn’t see himself staying here much longer. Simply put – I think this is a disaster scenario that will lead us to 7-9 wins, which is Purgatory in the NFL.

    The Rams got a LOT better today. The Seahawks really need to understand that they are quickly going to be the 3rd or 4th team in the NFC West, if they don’t act with some urgency and take some chances.

    Tough decisions have to be made. My gut feeling is that PC/JS aren’t going to make those tough calls. I hope I’m wrong.

    • Greg Haugsven says:

      Why do you say that keeping Sherman, Earl and Bennett would be the end of an era? I see the end of an era if they didnt retain them.

      • Matt says:

        I view the Seahawks as a style of play, not simply the players who play in the system. That’s really what I mean. The era, to me, was fast, physical, competitive, edgy. The Seahawks are no longer that. Just because those guys were once that way, doesn’t mean they are now. I don’t see a team full of guys clawing for every inch.

        2011-2014 saw a lot of turnover. But the common theme was a bad ass defense that got in your face and fought for every inch. It seems like the 2015-2018 Seahawks is “let’s see if those guys can get their edge back.” That’s really what I mean by the end of an era.

        Simply put, this is a different team. We had the worst run game last year and a defense that wasn’t very good. That’s not the Seahawks team I fell in love with. And, it seems to me, PC/JS don’t have the fortitude to make big changes.

        • Dale says:

          I agree with your analysis except for PC/PS not having the fortitude to make big changes. I don’t think many organizations with the success of the last five years would have blown up the coaching staff the way the Hawks have. You can’t move players if there’s no market and making big moves just for the sake of change is rarely a formula for success. I think there will be plenty of fireworks when the value presents itself.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I fear you might be right, Matt. Tough decisions do need to be made. If they just go into this season hoping to put a band aid on a few positions and delay the inevitable, all they will do is waste another year of Russell Wilson’s prime.

      We were a long, long, long way off being a contender in 2017. We were miserable to watch at times, we didn’t look anything like the 2011-2014 Seahawks and we had an army of injured players, many of which were struggling on but never practising or competing day to day. We’re expensive, we’ve made mistakes and now we’re facing the consequences.

      Change is needed or we’ll just be going through the motions, collectively getting a year older waiting for the inevitable. I don’t want 2018 to be one long, slow last dance.

      • Matt says:

        Exactly. Last year’s team had no chance to win a Super Bowl. There were way too many games last year where they flat out shouldn’t have even left the locker room. We have too many guys who are being paid for yesterday, not today. No team can survive that.

        • Eburgs says:

          What are you guys talking about?!?

          We beat the Eagles at the end of the year when they were better than when they won the Super Bowl (they had wentz). We also beat the Rams when we didn’t have both our starting linebackers out (our linebacker depth is terrible and needs to improve). We need to fix the run game. We need a kicker that won’t blow every game that gets put on his shoulders. Step away from the cliff. We weren’t exactly blowing teams out of the water in 2011-2014 but we could run on 3rd and 1 or at the goal line.

          • GerryG says:

            We lost the game to Rams when we didn’t have our LBs. We did beat them early in the year, but really should have lost; dropped winning TD pass.

            The Eagles game was the only complete performance of the season. You can’t hang your hat on one game.

    • Gohawks5151 says:

      A lot better? Just traded Peters for Johnsons position. They might lose Joyner too. Have to pay Donald. Might cut Quinn. A bit of recency bias. I think they even out a bit. We are not to far behind them. Tough decisions coming is right though…

      • Patrick Toler says:

        Agreed. They upgraded on position, but let’s see what happens with them this offseason. They had a good day today and have an opportunity to continue to help themselves, but have a lot of decisions left to make.

  7. DC says:

    First off, I think you do a great job here…

    That being said, you have got the biggest man-crush on Ronald Jones II that I’ve ever seen. You mention him in every article as if the Hawks would be out of their mind to pass on him at a given point. There is a mountain of evidence suggesting that taking a RB early is not a great idea.

    There are dozens of other RB’s out there that won’t cost what he would in draft capital. You keep saying that we have all of these other needs, so I’m just not seeing RJII as a remotely realistic possibility. The Pats are seemingly in the SB every year and do it with a mish-mash of random guys that make next to nothing.

    The biggest issue I have is that there is no way to get any value out of a pick like this. If you take a RB with an early pick, he’ll be making guaranteed money and likely be paid as top 10 at his position. Using that same pick on OL, DL, CB, etc will slot him in the outer 20-30 at his position. Meaning a RB has to be top 10 at his position to have any relative value, whereas those other positions need only be in the top 25 or so to provide relative value.

    Stop the Ronald Jones insanity!!
    & keep up the great work!

    • Rob Staton says:

      I only talk about him as much as Billy Price and Isaiah Wynn. And the reason being — that to me is the most likely direction Seattle goes in. Addressing their running game.

      Without wishing to sound dismissive (I really don’t want to but feel I have no choice these days) — I absolutely detest the newfound football rhetoric of ‘there are dozens of RB’s out there’ and ‘this or that team won with a random guy’. The Patriots also have Brady and Belichick. Philly won the Super Bowl with Nick Foles. Aaron Rodgers won his Super Bowl with one of the worst O-lines in recent memory. There are a million ways to win and no hard and fast reason. The Seahawks, funnily enough, won when they had a game changing running back. That’s what Jones II is.

      And that to me is the point with a pick. To draft a game changer. Someone who impacts your football team. I try to talk about players, possibilities, talent, potential. Not whether or not you have to draft a certain position in round one simply because the comparative value to the rest of the league fits better. That to me is a massive red herring because the Seahawks aren’t setting out to make sure their first pick slots into a cost value chart or a comparison to 30 random players for other teams. They’re setting out to draft a bad ass player who can help them win.

      So no, I won’t drop the ‘insanity’ on Ronald Jones II. I’ll continue to talk about him as a first round option. Just like Billy Price and Isaiah Wynn.

      • Trevor says:

        I think those are clearly the 3 best options of the Hawks make fixing the run game a priority as Pete has stated. Unless Edmunds or Vea on the board a trade back the picking one of those 3 makes so much sense.

      • DC says:

        Price and Wynn, I understand and am even on board with. Whether Pete and John do, who knows.

        I agree that they are always looking for difference makers. We mortgaged draft picks and players for guy like Percy Harvin and Jimmy G.

        They also are facing serious cap issues as you’ve mentioned, which aren’t helped by paying every position top 10 money. Granted, we aren’t going to save a tremendous amount of money by paying an RB $2.5M vs $4M. Aaron Donald made$3.25M last year, while Suh made $26M. To think that a team as cash strapped as we are isn’t thinking about a difference like that is hard to imagine.

        I watched a number of games that Jones played in this year. He’s special. Really a great RB. I think Adams from ND is also special, won’t cost as much and fits the “type” of RB that PCJS have liked. We could get him in the 4th or 5th probably. I just think that’s a more realistic scenario for this team. Who they take at RB is less the question than where they take an RB. I just don’t see us using one of our only (assuming trade down) early picks on that position.

        We could be without: Bennett, Avril, McDowell, Richardson, Kam, Sherm, ET next year. Not to mention our line has been hot garbage and we might have one TE going into next season that has about 200 career receiving yards. Our LB’s aren’t getting younger, and our WR’s aren’t exactly a position that requires no attention. I think the red herring, if there is one, is suggesting that PCJS will simply ignore relative value and cap considerations to draft a guy that they consider a playmaker.

        I hope you are taking this ‘debate’ as just that. I said the “insanity” thing tounge-in-cheek. I appreciate your opinion and response. Just hoping my arguments aren’t coming across as anything more than respectful back and forth.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Of course, I understand it’s a debate and you aren’t being disrespectful at all. I also hope it comes across that this isn’t personal on my behalf either — I just have a healthy disdain for the new conventional wisdom about running backs in the draft. A striking, slightly irksome rhetoric has been established. People are obsessed, it seems, with trying to pedal a mentality that you should never ever draft a RB early. And to me it’s pure ideology vs assessment. Which I can’t buy into and won’t buy into. I prefer to judge every player on his own merits. When it comes to the Seahawks, I then like to combine talent available with team needs. As a consequence we’ve talked a lot about Ronald Jones II. He’s a fantastic back, one of the best 10-15 players in the draft IMO — and the Seahawks need to bolster their running game. We’ve also spent a considerable amount of time on many other players. I’ve talked equally as much about Price and Wynn recently. But you admit you don’t have an issue with that — it’s only the mere mention of the running back. Because a growing number of people seem to see drafting a RB early in the same way they’d view being asked to put their hand into a box of tarantulas.

          For me Jones II is on a whole different level to Josh Adams. I think Jones II is the second coming of Jamaal Charles and all being well will enjoy a similar career. For me it’s Saquon Barkley then Jones II then the rest.

          We’ll have to agree to disagree on the ‘relative value’ point. I have seen zero evidence, none at all, that this is a point of contention for the Seahawks. You consider team needs, players available, potential, upside, character, scheme and culture fit. I simply cannot ever imagine a team then suddenly going, ‘well this guy ticks every box but if we draft him he’ll end up being the fifth highest paid running back so we better draft someone else to make sure they’re only the 25th best paid player at their position’. To me it’s just a new variation on the dynamic pedalled by certain members of Seahawks Twitter and the blogosphere who seem determined to engage in a never ending debate about the value of the RB position.

          • Patrick Toler says:

            Adams is pretty far down the RB list for me. Jones on the other hand is closer to Barkley than he is to the backs behind him (Chubb, Michell, Guice, Kelly). He is a truly special runner, as Rob noted above. Not as balanced as Barkley, but a better runner. The way he sets up defenders, exploades out of his cuts, and keeps his balance through contact is elite.

            If they do draft a RB in the mid rounds I hope it’s John Kelly. He is fantastic – Great feet, tough, quick, runs through tackles. He’s small but runs like a bowling ball. Good as a receiver and a decent pass blocker. Watch him and Guice back to back. Very similar players. If he lasts until the 4th round he’ll be the next back people cite when making the argument that you can get RBs outside of the first two days of the draft.

          • DC says:

            For what it’s worth, I don’t read anything except this and FieldGulls from time to time.

            I don’t disagree with your premise that drafting a great RB in the first round or two can be a good move. I think that the Hawks should have done it a couple of years ago however. When you have solid guys at most positions that are in their prime, but will need a big pay raise soon is one time to do it.

            We just have too many other needs right now, at positions that REQUIRE rookie contracts or lots of cap space to fill with good players. We have ONE pick in the first 3 rounds. Yes, we will trade down, maybe trade some other assets, etc., but we are not in a position to ignore all of these needs. Hell you could offer PIT a 1st rounder for Leveon Bell and they would take it. He’s a proven amazing RB that does everything you would ask and he can’t get a deal done.

            I guess I just don’t see why you’re so adamant about this guy. If he’s Jamaal part deux, we get a few 1000 yard seasons and a couple of injuries. What makes that so amazing?

            If we hit on a DL (per previous example) we are saving $20M+ in cap. If we hit on RJ, we are saving $2M, maybe. That has to factor in. Otherwise, Tampa Bay would be claiming Dynasty on the leg of Robert Agyuoyo.

            I also think that this time and every day up until the picks are in is subterfuge. If Pete says “we aren’t looking at linebackers”, it means “we want everyone to pass on LB’s, so that we can get one”. It’s naive to think that Pete is going to disclose our draft strategy to the world; months before we are on the clock.

      • Dale says:

        Ben Baldwin at Field Gulls authored the most convincing article I’ve read about drafting a running back in the first round. It’s not terribly long and it’s well worth the read.

        • DC says:

          #5 was my main point in a nutshell.

          I didn’t even mention attrition, but that is important. Just look at our backfield from last year. As far as I can recall our last “high” pick was Prosise and he can’t stay on the field.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I saw this article linked earlier. I have to be honest, I’ve well and truly had my fill of that particular subject from that section of Seahawks twitter. The anti running game crew.

          • Dale says:

            I don’t agree with the anti-running game sentiment, especially for this team. What I found interesting was the lack of performance gap between first round running backs and those taken later. That’s a ton of investment for a seemingly iffy return. Any rebuttal on that Rob?

            • Rob Staton says:

              My rebuttal is this — why doesn’t anyone ever do this analysis for every other position? Nick Foles won the Super Bowl against sixth round Tom Brady, third round Russell Wilson led the league in TD’s and the Vikings got to the NFC Championship fielding their third string quarterback who they pulled off the street. The Broncos recently won a Super Bowl playing with a combination of a useless Peyton Manning and Brock Osweiler. Let’s talk about the performance gap between a late first rounder like Aaron Rodgers and the way Blake Bortles, a top three pick, has performed. Or Drew Brees vs Jameis Winston. Or the impact of Garoppolo against a former top-10 QB like Blaine Gabbert.

              You can run through pretty much any positional group and analyse that some early round picks haven’t done as well as some later round picks. So any right minded front office will view things this way — always keep an open mind.

              Secondly, running back by definition is a position that produces some stats. And it’s a position that is also influenced by other units — such as the QB or OL. But when people credit QB’s or O-lines they rarely give them same consideration to the impact of the runner. Do people honestly think an opponent doesn’t spend all week game planning for Leonard Fournette? Or Zeke? Or Gurley? And the opportunities that creates for the QB? Look at Seattle vs Bortles. They dedicated everything to stopping Fournette and the run and Bortles played like Joe Montana under zero pressure.

              Look at Seattle. Marshawn Lynch never won a rushing title. Never came close really. Statistically he had some crappy games too. But what stat considers the impact he had on teams needing to focus on stopping him? What stat analyses how much he helped Wilson? Or set the tone and culture for the entire team? People conveniently like to reference that Seattle only paid a mid rounder for Lynch, ignoring that he originally cost a top-15 pick. And the people arguing against RB’s early are the people who would be fighting against selecting Lynch in round one if he was in the 2018 draft. Because that would be a great position to take wouldn’t it!

              This is why the analysis on running backs early is so mind numbingly frustrating. It’s analysis via Microsoft excel. And the moment you turn your back on a WHOLE position group based on ideology is the moment you rule out ever drafting someone like Marshawn. And I can’t tell you how much disdain I have for that nonsensical stance. It doesn’t mean you draft any old RB in round one just because. You’d only consider taking the really good ones early. Seahawks Twitter needs to give their head a shake for pedalling this as much as they do.

              • H says:

                + 1,000,000

              • peter says:

                Excellent rebuttal.

                I will add that about two months back I made a long post about the value of the early running back.

                I went back to Lynch’s draft year and moved forward and found that for running backs that had multiple years of top ten efficiency (leading in yards both air and ground because that’s what’s RB does afterall). And found that out of all the running backs that had more than one year of top ten performance a full 71% of them came in the first two rounds. The ones that didn’t were Gore, foster, Michael Turner and a few others.

                The point I was making was that it is actually harder to find a year over year great running back that comes late. Sure there’s first round busts. Of course. But it’s less likely that a team is going to find say Alfred Morris to carry the rock and then magically find Alex Collins the next year to sustain the load then they will in finding a early great running back and getting multiple high end seasons out of one player. ( btw I brought both of those backs up because they are heavily cited I the “late round RB,” debate. But Morris was literally not as good as people think he was and Collins has only one good season this far. )

                Which in conclusion comes down to identity as well. Seattle wants to run the rock, run out clock, and rotate the dline. Ben Baldwin’s stats though formulated well literally don’t inform on the decision making of a team that doesn’t do a West coast variant, and thinks right or wrong the best defense against the Aaron Donalds of the world is run, run, run some more and THEN take the back breaking deep shot.

              • Brett says:

                Best response ever. The goal of a first round pick is to find an unusual
                talent, period. Would you really pass up Barry Sanders just because there are ten Maurice Morris’s available in the 4th??? Or because your LB is getting a little older? Let’s all keep in mind that a running game is a dynamic situation and a great running back can actually cover up deficiencies of a poor O-line (Dammit, we saw it with our VERY OWN EYES not that long ago!!!)

              • SeaTown says:

                Excellent points Rob! I have actually stopped reading Seahawks Twitter, especially the one guy who thinks he’s a GM.

        • H says:

          I found that piece to be pretty dumb to be honest.
          Some good points are made but the crux of the article is that running backs and the running game do not matter.
          Anyone who watched seattle in 2012/13 compared to now should know thats absolutely moronic.
          Like Rob says judge each player on their own merits not past players of their position and draft range. History also tells us that short quarterbacks taken in round 3 have a low chance of being good players, and Russel turned out ok.

          • GerryG says:

            The crux of the article is diluting the stats out to make everything come back to the league average. YPC is an antiquated stat that doesn’t truly gauge the value of a running game.

            • peter says:

              I’m not doing the numbers but I wonder if median yards might be more effective. Or ypc but with runningbacks that had a minimum of 210 carries? Because both of those change the numbers greatly or could possible change the data sets.

              • GerryG says:

                You need to look at each run and it’s relationship to the game. It’s why I like the DVOA approach.

                A 1.5 yd run on 4th and 1 is a huge success.

                A 15 yd draw run on 3rd and 25 doesn’t mean squat.

                Even DVOA can’t gauge the value of throwing against 8 men in the box, ora DE that can’t crash in because of the read option.

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      Love this thread

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        Its been an interesting discussion here and with link to field gulls. We can circle around to blocking being important to running and blocking. Presumably with better offensive line you will do better in both categories. But you need five + blockers or more to be effective.

        I keep thinking about Alex Collins and whether he was given a fair shot by the Seahawks, and whether the difference in running yards can be summed up by performance of the Ravens offensive line vs our line.

        Collins was drafted in the 5th round, with a 2.2 million dollars for 4 years salary. Pretty cheap. HIs rookie season with the Seahawks he had 31carries for 125 yards and 11 receptions for 84 yards. In two playoff games he had 8 carries for 27 yards, and 3 catches for another 28.

        He gets traded the next season to the Ravens. He finished the 2017 season as their leading rusher with 973 yards and 6 touchdowns. In one game against the Steelers he had 166 all purpose yards.

        The big question is why did he flourish with the Ravens? I’ll go back to better blocking. And maybe more reps as a starting running back instead of fewer reps in running back by committee. By the way, his yards per carry is 4.6 , pretty close to average.

        • Rob Staton says:

          It’s not as simple as merely ‘better blocking’ Alaska. It’s so many things. Scheme, opportunity, commitment to the run. And others too.

        • Kenny Sloth says:

          Eh Collins was always more suited to a scheme like Roman’s power.

          I haven’t broken down any Ravens run footage, but I’m confident that would show in the film

          I dont like to make these kinds of assumptions, but Collins needs a lot of help to get that kind of production because he will never be a homerun hitter

  8. C-Dog says:

    My gut is saying that the Ian Rapoport thing likely shows that the team has put feelers out and hasn’t been liking what they offers are. If other GMs are sensing Seattle wants to get rid of a few star players for picks, naturally they aren’t going to offer much. Also, by not having any Day 2 picks, trading back for value might be even more difficult. If teams know your desperate for picks, they will smell that out, and offer less. Capitalism 101 when there is a heavy demand.

    If we believe what Gee Scott said yesterday, that Cliff Avril, Sheldon Richardson, Kam Chancellor, and Earl Thomas will not be back this year, that probably means Seattle eventually finds a trade partner for Earl, but it may not be much of a huge haul.

    I never believed they would get much of anything for Sherman (Notice Gee didn’t mention him), and if they don’t retain Richardson, then keeping Bennett another year probably makes sense.

    For folks who want the Huge Blocker buster deal to get younger, probably the best bet is trade Russell Wilson. Probably why Davis Hsu loves to beat that drum.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      I wouldn’t say trade Russell Wilson, even though he is the ONLY player that will garner a lot of draft picks. Probably two firsts and a second.

      • lil'stink says:

        Can’t even think about trading Wilson unless you have a competent backup, which we haven’t for the last few years. I’m kind of surprised they haven’t spent a day 3 flier on a QB.

        I’m probably in the minority when I say I have serious reservations about giving Wilson another extension, especially if it makes him the highest paid player in the league. So, in that sense, I’m not opposed to trading him. But we also don’t have the core that’s good enough to win without a good QB, so if you trade him it has to be for a Von Miller or Khalil Mack sort of talent in the draft.

        • peter says:

          von Miller etc. doesnt/don’t win games at the rate that a great qb does.

          why is everyone so obsessed with Wilson as the highest paid me qb? every qb is the highest paid qb until the day the very next qb gets paid.

          • lil'stink says:

            Just my 2 cents:

            -I think Wilson relies too much on his athleticism.

            -He will slow down eventually.

            -He will be 31 at the end of his current deal.

            I think he needs to evolve his play or he could have a big drop off in productivity during that 3rd contract. He still doesn’t seem to make plays or reads that someone with his experience should. Yes, he can be magical. But I think that magic might slow down as he gets older, which is when a complete mastery of the more cerebral aspects of the game is what will propel him further. I think he’s at his best when he can be more of a game manager and not be forced to carry the load. I think we will experience some diminishing returns if we make him the highest paid player in the league after the age of 31.

            • peter says:

              the only thing I’m willing to argue at this point about Wilson’s play is that Seattle needs to respect him and build him a line come he’ll or high water. Sure he gives a lot of his own sacks. But his line play has been absolutely miserable year to year.

              I see these arguments about making reads all the time. I have no access to all 22 but I do have access to game in game out breakdowns where Wilson is of course scrambling and players are not getting open.

              I think the passing game cuts both ways. I think there needs to be sure a new identity as per screens that work and maybe less of a reliance on the deep strike.

              However fans that bring up reads/the mental aspect need to address the mediocre receiving corps. When a player like Brady has a statistically great year or brees, and certainly Rodgers they all have multiple weapons around them. Brady over the past few years has had the likes of moss, welker, amendola, cooks….Wilson has had Baldwin. And two half good seasons with graham. One with decent yards and one with great tds. And that’s it. And one last thing about brady..He’s a statue so the team mixes in decent pass pro with weave after weave after almost illegal pick to get the ball out.

              Seattle has garbage pass pro, so so receivers, and PC who is obsessed with the deep ball.

              • AlaskaHawk says:

                And when is the last time Seahawks drafted high for an elite receiver to help Wilson?
                No I don’t call Richardson or Lockett elite. Useful yes, but not elite.

        • C-Dog says:

          I think there is a camp that thinks this way. I’m not in it. I think that you keep a top tier QB around as long as he can play, and I think RW is definitely a top tier QB.

        • LeoSharp says:

          One of the most efficient QB’s of all time in his prime. He’s the best of his generation and it’s not even close.

      • C-Dog says:

        Yeah. I’ve made it known fairly well my feelings on that. No way in hades am I trading RW. Not if the Browns offered their whole draft. It is extremely difficult getting a franchise QB, especially one as talented as him.

        I think maybe this trade the Rams pulled off might be a bit panic inducing. While I kind of think they still likey end up trading him, if Seattle doesn’t trade ET, and signs him to a third contract, that’s a heck of an athlete that is staying in Seattle for a while. Maybe trading back and getting a couple day two picks lands Nick Chubb and Darius Leonard, and that is enough for this team to battle through the division to get back into the playoffs.

        The thing I fear is that Seattle might view what these other teams in the division are doing and panic. I thought that’s what San Fran did toward the end of the Harbaugh era when Seattle started beating them. They went from a formidable team to a team that didn’t know want it wanted to be in a hurry.

        Another thing is, if we look at these coaching changes, that could signal they want to better coach up the talent they have already on the roster.

    • Del tre says:

      Why are they desperate for picks?
      LG, LB, RB and WR are this rosters only real positions of need. LG can be addressed in free agency, LB and RB are major strengths of this draft especially early, if the Hawks can trade back at 18 for a 3rd its conceivable that they could use a 5th and 7th to trade back up and take advantage of both early. Then they’ll still have the capitol in the draft to get one of those big receivers in the 5th.
      It feels like we are panicking as if the roster is suddenly devoid of talent, its not, and now we have coaches who will hopefully help the offense succeed leading to lees defensive snaps and less injuries

      • C-Dog says:

        Fair points.

        It’s speculation that they are desperate for picks. What the fans feel and the organization feels could be very different things.

      • DCD2 says:

        Sorry, but that is crazy. We need a LG, LB, RB, WR… plus D line, Rotational DT, and RE, CB, a safety (take your pick), TE, backup QB…. and depth. This also assumes that we have a (out of the ashes) good RT, RG.

        That’s 10 plus “needs” in a draft where we have ONE pick in the first 3 rounds. We can trade back. We can do a lot of things, but we can’t fill all of those needs in 2018. Our cap is legitimately awful. Adding a handful of rookies (most of which are day 3 picks) will not right this ship.

        I hate that I sound like “that guy”, but we need a lot of help to be legit contenders.

  9. lil'stink says:

    PC is under contract for 2 more years, and I doubt he has any intention of making drastic, rebuild-like changes to the roster. It’s obvious that some tough, gutsy decisions will need to be made. This roster got really old, really quick. But I don’t see them trying to trade ET3. I don’t see them letting Sheldon Richardson walk. I fear that Pete wanting to leave the league on a relevant note could be the (relative) downfall of this team. Is he willing to take a step back in order to take 2 (or three) steps forward at this point in his career? Choosing to take a step back is better than being forced to take a step back, which seems to be the case we could be in now.

  10. Heliopause says:

    Seems like if there is going to be a big teardown and rebuild it would be next offseason rather than this one, given the paucity of draft picks and how contracts are structured. If forced to guess I would say they will keep the band together on defense for one more go-round, hoping for better luck on the injury front. Meanwhile they’ll do whatever they can with the O-line and RBs given the limited resources and maybe make an unexpected dip into the WR free agent pool. Just wild guesses on my part.

    If the result is another 9-7 or worse then they certainly will be in prime position to go crazy next offseason.

    • Rob Staton says:

      The words ‘keep the band together’ and ‘one more go-round’ make me shudder to be honest.

      This team is regressing quickly.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        Its not all bad Rob. The defense has some young talent no matter who they lose.

        The offensive blocking might improve now that they finally got a change in coaching.

        What the heck, lets trade all this years picks for future picks! They will have double the normal number of picks next year plus all the comp picks. They could end up with 20+ picks. That will be awesome! (sarcasm font)

        • Rob Staton says:

          As I said in the article, as long as they have Russell Wilson and Bobby Wagner the Seahawks won’t be in a bad position. But they’re currently a long way off being a serious Super Bowl threat. They’re a shadow of their former selves currently. The 2017 season was a mess. The injuries, the slow starts, the non existent running game, the special teams. The first time they missed the playoffs since 2011 and deservedly so.

          They not only got old very quickly, they’ve lost their culture really. And nobody — nobody — fears Century Link any more. They lost four games at home and scraped by the Texans and Niners too. There is a LOT to do and I’d rather get on with it.

          • peter says:

            I agree with all of this. keeping the band together reminds me so much if the post ’05 era seahawks when fans just kept waiting for SA to get right again and soon we were glad to have koren Robinson back. those were some terrible years and I truly feel like next year after trading the 18th pick down to the mid second for a late third and yet another 5th rounder,…Seattle has a great chance of going 9-7 or worse next year as the band ages and ET3 gets injured again, perhaps Bennett misses some time, and if one of the only two good Lb’s get injured.

            • Sean-O says:

              It’s interesting you reference when they brought KRob back. If you believe reports, it sounds like a couple of ex-Hawks might be cap casualties: Bruce Irvin & James Carpenter. That would really be getting the band back together.

              It feels like SEA might be in that GB area as far as SB contenders go. I think as long as you have a stud QB along with a few key makers (combined on offense & defense) you should be in the mix.A couple of breaks here & there, stay healthy, some of the young guys step up & you never know.

        • DC says:

          What the heck is (maybe) right. We aren’t legitimate SB contenders. Let’s embrace the rebuild and salvage what we can.

          D Line of Reed, Naz, Clark and ___. Wags and KJ can hang on. Shaquille, McD, etc… Ya, the 2nd-ary needs work. WR’s are a bit better than avg.

          No one wants to believe that the ship has sailed, but it just may have. If we trade Earl and cut Bennett… We’ll have Earl’s trade pick, Kam off the books, Prich, Sheldon and Jimmy’s comp picks (3’s?). Work some other deals in between, and next year could be:


          Still have a decent group on D. Plus our 2018 moves, and a boatload of cap space.

      • Del tre says:

        Rob you have become a real pessimist this offseason. Keeping the band together doesn’t mean we aren’t starting new players. They have their front 4 of the future, they need a new linebacker and for someone to step up at strong safety. It won’t be so much the band getting back together as them still being there, while the younger guys handle most of the heavy lifting.
        Honestly the only defensive starters left will be KJ, Bobby, Earl, and Sherman. Even if Bennett is back he’s not starting, no sense with the youth on the DL.
        Kam will be there but he won’t get cleared to play, Avril is the same kind of deal. I don’t see regression, i see a team mixing vets in with youth the way most superbowl winning teams do.
        The real reworking needs to occur on the offensive side of the ball, that is the root of the defenses problems
        The defense didn’t get blown out 42-7 because they all the sudden suck or got old or lost their competitive edge, it was because without Bobby stopping the run and with no KJ the Rams could actually run the ball. And then adding to that (more than anyone seems to care to admit) our offense couldn’t stay on the field because they were rarely prepared. The Hawks need a left guard, a big wide receiver target (best draft in years for one of those) and a new fast linebacker that can play disciplined ball. Really progressing not regressing, especially considering that the run defense is fixable, and improbable if we give Bobby the help he needs.
        Regressing is a bad way to put it especially for a team dependant on player development, Shaq will get better, the Hawks coaching stsff is full of teachers so its not like the players are virtually static regarding their football ability.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I’m neither a pessimist or an optimist — I’m a realist. I hope that nearly 10 years of doing this blog backs that up. I’ve been both praising and critical of the Seahawks during that decade. If people want to come here and read forced positivity — I won’t do it. I want to call things as I see them. Sometimes I’m right, sometimes I’m wrong. But I’m always honest.

          • Del tre says:

            My mistake i would never mean to call you a clear cut pessimist or optimist or request forced optimism, rather i meant that it seems your perspective on this offseason and draft is much more pessimistic than previous seasons, but i think a lot of what youre saying regarding the defense is unwarranted/untrue especially when you take into consideration the offensive inadequacy. We both agree that the Hawks are going to target RB and LB, but we are looking at the roster very differently.
            Also you don’t need to prove a thing to me Rob, you see me on this site commenting everyday you have my full support, i actually greatly appreciate every response youve given to my comments and try to weigh what youre saying against my own perspective. So i apologize for calling you a pessimist, and have nothing but the utmost respect for the blog.

            • Del tre says:

              Also you’ve done nothing but respect my opinions, i certainly respect your opinions so i hope my comments don’t come off as abrasive, my writing style even academically is very authoritative, that probably bleeds over into this as well!

            • Kenny Sloth says:

              This is also the first offseason we’ve had such a miserable season some tempering of enthusiasm is to be expected

      • Heliopause says:

        If Rebuild is what it’s to be then so be it, I go back to ’76 and have seen a few. But if that’s what it is then let’s say the word. “REBUILD. Time for a Rebuild.”

        I’m guessing that’s a year off, but it’s just a guess on my part.

        • mishima says:

          Cap-wise, yes. Roster-wise, let’s get started.

          • Heliopause says:

            Here’s the thing; they have neither the draft nor cap capital to find the long-term replacements for the old guard THIS offseason. If you start getting rid of some these people THIS offseason you’re just cutting them for the sake of cutting them. It’s NEXT offseason that the capital to acquire significant amounts of new talent comes into play.

            Sure, they could start now by cutting Bennett and Sherman, trading Thomas for whatever they can get, etc. (by the way, I know that this is sacrilege, but if the team is rebuilding is there a good argument for keeping Duane Brown?) You’d improve your ability to bid on a couple of medium-priced free agents, maybe get an additional draft pick or two (big differences of opinion on what Thomas could bring). Your BIG influx of new talent will come NEXT offseason regardless, so you’d be setting yourself up for 6-10 for no real reason. That’s why my guess is that they’ll try to squeeze one more playoff run out of the current group.

            Another alternative would be to go big. In addition to the obvious cuts, and in addition to cutting Bennett and Sherman and trading Thomas, cut Wagner and Wright. Offer Russell Wilson to Cleveland for their two firsts. If rebuilding it is, have a little fun.

            • Chris says:

              Touching on your question about Brown; I think extending him will be a huge mistake. Let him play out his last year, then we’ll get a comp pick. But he’s older than we’d ideally like, we have someone waiting in the wings, and he’s going to expect BIG bucks.

  11. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    The biggest news not involving the Seahawks is the likely trade of Peters to the Rams.
    This opens up the possibility of them (RAMS) bringing back some KEY players, due to increased salary cap flexibility. This is bad news for the Seahawks chances in 2018. I’m not convinced that the Rams offense will stay at the same pace as last season, but the defense is being improved as we speak.

    • Del tre says:

      Unless its signing guys to 1 and 2 year deals they dont have the cap for that, they are certainly preparing for the future though because they have 2 guys that could very well take up 50 million in cap in Goff and Donald.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        Goff is going to get 30M / year at this rate… and Donald is a 20M/year player waiting to happen… Peters is a 15m / year CB as well….. they are more or less going all in on 2018. They probably think the contract window is open this year, but then they will get a severe squeeze starting 2019. I’m beginning to think they might have traded their 1st and some draft change for Peters…. would the 23rd pick be enough??

  12. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    The comp picks are in….. Dallas made out like a bandit.

    Would a 2nd, 4th, 5th and 6th round pick* be adequate for ET or should Seattle demand a 1st and 1 other pick (let’s say a 3rd** in this case) for a trade to commence?

    ***I’ll use Dallas picks for example***
    *#50, #137, #173 and #193
    **#19 and #81

  13. Dale says:

    I don’t understand the angst regarding the Seahawks. We’ve had tremendous success over the last five years. If the injury gods had been kinder, think McDowell and Fant, the big trades might not have occurred. Either way, the splashes they made with Richardson and Brown were gutsy moves. If we were sitting still the narrative would be “We’re counting on Kam returning and Cliff making a big impact next year”. Bevell would still be here along with Kris Richard and Tom Cable. Changes have begun but John Schneider has never been one to tip his hand. If we resign ET it will be because that was the best option not because PC/JS are afraid of change. I just don’t see how PC/JS have earned anything but our trust.

  14. Pran says:

    As much as we like to make over the defense where is the opportunity. 3 of the starters are injured. Kam and Avril should they retire, Sherman can’t be traded until the season starts due to injury. Who else? Walk Sheldon that’s one but they just burnt 2nd round pick. Bennett has no trade value, he is cheap can be a rotational player. bobby and kJ won’t be traded. Earl is the only left over piece That has good trade value but where is the replacement?

    It looks more and more major make over has to wait another season or at least mid season to see how the 2nd year players and rookies perform.

  15. Old but Slow says:

    It is difficult to know or guess what the team will do. We need to improve the running game and the offense in general. We have some very good elements to work with. Our defense was pretty good last season with terrible injuries, little support from the offense to give them relief, and they were still rated in the middle of the pack.

    An high priority will be to find players who can make our offense better. Running back, offensive guard, blocking TE, something like that.

    The big problem for this preseason, is our draft position. This (as always, it seems) is a good year to have day 2 picks. We have none. It is more than likely that we will have one or two when the day comes, by hook or by crook

    Don’t mean to drone on here, but what I am suggesting is that we may see some sacrifices from our defense in order to balance the team strengths.

    Earl is a fav, no doubt, and still has much to offer, but he also offers the best trade value we have outside of Russell and Wags. What makes it reasonable is that the defense is good enough to take an impact, with some recent picks and backups that, while not Earl, still contribute. If losing him gives draft value and a chance to improve the offense, then I can see the logic

    I have no clue what value we could get by trading Thomas, but it seems likely that we could get some valuable draft picks, some have suggested a first, others have said a 2d and 3d. I would hope for at least a first and a 3d, but I know nothing.

    My main point, though, is that we should consider giving up some of the strength of our defense to help the offense.

    • peter says:

      the big issue is how far can you trade down and get a player of value before you lose the script?

      Can they trade down to 26 and pick up a late third and get Wynn? And recent blog favorite SS Bates in the third? Can they find an answer in that scenario to a running game in the fifth round or later? Personally I see a pretty steep cliff from the top 8 runningbacks to the diamonds in the rough that are being brought up as of late. I get the enthusiasm for finding unique players but I’ve watched a bit of tape on about 25 players and honestly there’s a lot not to like.

      Although I love jones, chubb, michel, I could see the team making a case for guice, Kerryon Johnson and a few others and I would say “yep, I get it.”. But past those guys and this is just me I’m not to stoked by anyone.

      W/o trading Earl my preferred moved for Seattle is to sell the 18 pick to Cleveland and pick up 33, 65, and 104. I think that gets them a chance to get a good runningback, possibly a guard and perhaps a blocking TE which is a start. Or drop down to 26 freak everyone out and pick up Tim Settle and with their third pick Jaylen Samuels who I like as much as I liked David Johnson a few years back.

  16. mac says:

    I don’t get the `trade RW` narrative, he’s been playing more like Brees as of late. I hope the progression can continue and we can build a running game around him.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Trading Russell Wilson would be like the Packers trading Aaron Rodgers.

      It’d be completely crazy and do virtually nothing to aid the Seahawks.

      Re-load the defense and put an actual running game together and Seattle with Wilson are contenders.

      • Sea Mode says:

        +12 million

        Even just fixing the run game and letting some of the young guys we already have on defense would already make a huge difference.

        No run game = no bueno for both offense and defense.

      • C-Dog says:

        Yes to all of this.

  17. Millhouse-serbia says:

    Rob what do you think about CB Isaac Yiadom?

  18. Mike says:

    you make some excellent points. I certainly wouldn’t sign any of our vets (on D) to new contracts..but I wouldn’t rush any out the door either this offseason. The Hawks will have their hands full plugging the holes caused by Kam, Avril, Richardson departures, (and a possibly diminished Sherman)..without causing further damage. Lane would be the one guy under contract I would move on from early.

  19. Mike says:

    Not sure if this was mentioned here yet..but I heard the Bears released Josh Sitton (LG)…salary cap move. He’s 33…might be a good pick-up for the Hawks (depending on his salary demands). Sitton + rb at #18 may just fix the running game.

    • peter says:

      Every time I think of sitton I think of the green bay game where Seattle spotted them 4 ints and still one and then he had the fall to say green bay best out asses up and down the field and should have one…it was one of the funniest takes ever. No josh, if a team gives you tons of ints but still scores more than you did, you in fact didn’t best their asses.

      • Mike says:

        didn’t see anything regarding the int’s..but here is the quote I found..(talking about not being able to watch the game tape on the way home)..

        “I couldn’t watch it,” Sitton said. “I knew what happened. We kicked their [expletive] up front, and the whole game. We handled them all day. We should’ve won the game.”

        • peter says:

          the ints are me. I think if he would want to play here he’s one to consider. I just love that quote because when you look at the box score they didn’t “handle,” us. It was pretty even minus Russ and kearse clanking ints off of each other all game long.

          to be fair it must have been tough as he’ll for them to lose on an inside pick and if I’m not mistaken td from the punter.

          • Mike says:

            yeah the stats certainly don’t bear out GB “kicking their expletives all day” (Marshawn had 150 yards rushing..GB (team) 130…but they were up 2 td’s (on the road) with 10 mins left in the you can understand the frustration.

            I kind of like that attitude on my OL though..would love to hear a Hawk lineman talk about “kicking someones expletive” again..that’s what we want to get back to right.

            Kind of lost track of Sitton after he left don’t know how much is left in the tank…but wanted to throw out the possibility.

    • Aaron says: says Sitton is 31, even better! He’s a 4x pro bowler (last time was 2016) and 1x All Pro (2014). I’d pay him no more than 12 apy though, probably 8-10. Don’t think we’ll get him though with the guys we have and especially the deep draft in rounds 1-3 for a guard.

      • Mike says:

        interesting I haven’t seen official confirmation of Sitton’s release any where. I heard them talking about it on ESPN radio last week..and it sounded like it was a done deal. Maybe they were just speculating..

        • Mike says:

          I see it now. The Bears have a team option to pick up Sitton’s contract for $8 million this year…they have until March 9th to make that decision…”sources” are telling ESPN that they have decided not to exercise that option (effectively releasing him).

      • Del tre says:

        But they could find value that will make them a better team overall, left guard won’t fix our running backs lack of vision, they have 4 1st and second round picks invested on the OL, its time to grab a guy in free agency and focus on getting playmakers to keep the ball out of Russell’s hands

        • Greg Haugsven says:

          I agree on free agency for LG if possible, just not sure you need another 32 year old though.

          • Mike says:

            I kind of like the idea of a Brown/Sitton/Britt left side of the line. Glo/Pocic/Ifedi and Fant can battle it out on the right side. Draft R Jones at #18..teamed with you a pretty good upgrade to the running game i think.

  20. Ground_Hawk says:

    I’m expecting multiple trade backs from #18, but only out of necessity. We could end up seeing Seattle accept more day 3 picks than picks from rounds 2-3, and also a major emphasis on UDFA’s. There could end up being more like 18-20 rookies with the team after Rookie-camp, compared to last year’s 15. All of these moves would make sense for a team who is coming up tight against the cap, as well as having upcoming FA contracts, like Frank Clark’s, to consider.

  21. Coleslaw says:

    If we do dump all these vets I kind of hope we just go after Norwell, trade back for value at running back and pick up one of these blocking TEs. Resign a couple guys like McDougald and Richardson if he’s adorable and just roll into next year with that. Get Russell what he needs and save for the rebuild

    Also something I thought could be interesting which could fit into that is trading back for a 2019 2nd rounder. We could really go after defense next year.

    • Coleslaw says:

      Paul Richardson that is.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        I would be willing to bet there is less than a 10% chance we go after Norwell. They have rarely gone after high priced outside free agents. They look for more one year deals for prove it players that could turn into long term deals such as Avril and Bennett. Thats why I have always said that Justin Pugh could be a serious consideration as he has played pro bowl caliber LG but has had injury history which could make him available for one year. I could be a 1000 miles off but just throwing in my 2 cents.

        • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

          I would rather see Seattle go for a UDRFA kicker than pay anyone on the market now.
          There was scuttlebutt about Seabass coming to Seattle, but I do not see it. If you want young and hungry players, then you go all in on young and hungry….. underdogs!

        • Patrick Toler says:

          Norwell is young and (supposedly) elite. Those players don’t hit the market too often, so if you are going to give high priced free agency another chance he’d be the profile to go after. I agree though, it’s very unlikely they chase him. We are in the position where we need to be looking for value. I’m hoping the chatter about Oakland releasing Bruce Irvin comes to fruition. He would be a great fit and could be reasonable.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I think there’s about a 2% chance they go after Norwell. And that 2% represents a phone call provoking the reaction ‘how much!?!?!’.

  22. Volume12 says:

    The big thing we’re missing here. Will there even be an NFL in 2020? Sounds like they’re gonna go on strike. Ya’ll thought Vince McMahon was starting the XFL back up in that particular year for the hell of it?

    ‘Go all in again with Pete. He ain’t got much time left.’ Seems to be the m.o. Or, he just really wants to win with this group and to get them that 2nd ring they should all have.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think Pete is thinking and will be thinking more long term than that. This won’t be, I’m pretty certain, just one last (futile) hoorah.

      • Volume12 says:

        Seems like much more of a ‘cross that bridge when we get to it’ kinda guy to me.

        This doesnt have anything to do with Pete, but perhaps Gee Scott was fed a load of BS, this guy said that this guy said, or just assumed and it got all of us thinking in certain terms.

    • Ishmael says:

      They should go on strike. Player welfare is a complete disgrace, there are sweatshops that look after their employees better.

      I don’t know if it’s quite an all-in job. I think they went pretty far down that path last year and got burned, we’re probably in for a bit of a reset the next year or two. But as we’ve seen with the Saints, when you’ve got a quarterback you can turn things around in a hurry.