Is Miami receiver Rishard Matthews a Seahawks target?

March 5th, 2016 | Written by Rob Staton

Omar Kelly hinted on Twitter yesterday that the Seahawks are interested in Rishard Matthews. A former seventh round pick from the 2012 draft, Matthews has had a fairly unremarkable career. Kelly suggests he could warrant as much as $5m a year on the open market.

It’d be a curious move, especially if Jermaine Kearse moves on for a similar amount. There’s a pretty clear reason why they might be interested though…

Not convinced by PFF’s grading system? Football Outsiders ranked Matthews as the 17th most effective receiver in the NFL in 2015. Kearse came in at #19. Doug Baldwin was #2, Tyler Lockett #15.

The Seahawks don’t throw as often as other teams. It’s not unrealistic to think they’d prefer efficient receivers over players that produced in pass-happy offenses.

If they’re determined to replace Kearse with a similar receiver, this could be one to monitor.

Or maybe interest would be indicative that the Seahawks are struggling to keep their own free agents?

If Irvin, Lane, Okung, Kearse and Sweezy all get overpaid (at least beyond a comfortable amount for Seattle) — there’s not much they can do. Every player has a price. The Seahawks have signed their core players to extensions long before they get anywhere near free agency. This current group, as good as they might be, were allowed to run their contracts down.

If the only pair they retain are Brandon Mebane and Ahtyba Rubin (and even they might move on) — they’ll have some money to spend (approximately $18m has been estimated). In the middle of a Championship window there’s little point holding onto it.

Matthews would take some pressure off the passing game with Jimmy Graham injured, Kearse departing and Paul Richardson having a suspect injury record. They might also have enough free money to bolster the offensive and defensive lines.

That’s assuming they lose virtually all of their valuable free agents.

That still seems unlikely. They might be willing to overpay for one of their own. Jeremy Lane’s talent, ability to start at outside corner or the slot and familiarity with Seattle’s technique could make him a priority.

Adding to this thought, the Seahawks chose not to tender two players today:

A.J. Francis, Cooper Helfet, Eric Pinkins, Mo Seisay, DeShawn Shead and Steven Terrell all received tenders. There’s no news yet on why Burley was excluded.

Seattle PI’s Stephen Cohen made a good point suggesting it could be a sign they’re confident in keeping Lane. Burley is purely a slot corner and Lane has played well moving inside.

It’s virtually pointless not tendering Burley if you’re the Seahawks. As an exclusive rights free agent the contract is not guaranteed and there’s no signing bonus. They could cut Burley at any point and it wouldn’t cost them a dime.

Even if they’ve chosen to move on without Burley — there’s little point not having the right to retain him.

If they’re going to keep Lane, how much will it cost? And how much will be left to spend?

Free agency is rarely dull with the Seahawks. Here’s the record:

2010 — Met with Brandon Marshall amid interest over a trade with Denver that never materialised, they also traded for Chris Clemons

2011 — Signed three big-names in Sidney Rice, Zach Miller and Robert Gallery while adding Tarvaris Jackson as the starting quarterback

2012 — Added Matt Flynn and Jason Jones, re-signed Marshawn Lynch and Red Bryant

2013 — Traded for Percy Harvin, signed Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril

2014 — Flirted with Jared Allen and Henry Melton but signed neither

2015 — Traded for Jimmy Graham

The Seahawks were tight against the cap in 2014 and probably would’ve signed Allen but for that fact.

If they find themselves with cash to spend next week — they’ll use it. That probably doesn’t mean a big splash on a top-tier free agent but they could be active in the second wave.

Matthews could be one of many targets if their own free agents move on en masse.

258 Responses to “Is Miami receiver Rishard Matthews a Seahawks target?”

  1. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Seems like insurance against Kearse leaving, as opposed to preferring Matthews. The efficiency stats are intriguing, but how do you quantify the QB-WR chemistry RW and Kearse have with each other and why would you tinker with that for an outsider FA? Unless of course you have no choice.

    SEA also tendered Lewis at the ‘original round’ level, the lowest they could.

    • Rob Staton says:

      “Unless of course you have no choice.”

      I think that’s the key…

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        Where is the report on Lewis? Been waiting for that.

      • matt says:

        “Unless of course you have no choice.”

        “I think that’s the key…”

        Lockett steps up into the #2 WR spot and makes us more explosive every down. He topped Kearse’s career high numbers as a rookie, and is destined for stardom. Paul Richardson is healthy and will be able to take part in all offseason training, with Russell and the WR’s, which is a big deal and it’s value should not be discounted. He’s being a bit overlooked by many of us on the blog. Yes injuries are a concern-some people take longer to completely heal. A WR core led by Baldwin, Lockett and PR is explosive and would have to be accounted for vertically. Assuming all 3 are healthy, replacing Kearse is basically adding a #4 WR. If we are going to spend $3 mil or more on a player surely it could be better spent elsewhere. A signing of Rishard Matthews, who I actually like quite a bit, seems like a spendy sideways move. IMO Smith and Williams both showed enough promise to be able to man the 4th and 5th WR positions. Both played special teams and looked every bit as good as Kearse did as a rookie. There’s other competition in place(Goodley, McNeil, Fuller) along with a potential draft pick, not to mention Jimmy Graham-whom I’m thinking will be ready for the second half of the season-at worst the last 4 games+playoffs.

        • Rob Staton says:

          And if Richardson can’t stay healthy and the other two guys don’t progress? You’re left with two receivers and you’re tight end likely on the PUP.

          Not saying they definitely sign Matthews or anything — but it’s pretty obvious why they might.

          • matt says:

            Fair points. I’m optimistic that PR will make a full recovery. There’s already been chatter that he’s working out. A leg injury oftentimes leads to a leg injury in the opposite leg, from compensating for the initial injury. We played it safe by shutting him down with a hamstring injury, with an eye towards the future. There’s no reason to think PR won’t be healthy for 2016.

            Matthews would be a nice fit in Seattle. JS will add more competition to the WR mix, he always does, just don’t see big money($3+ mil) being spent on a replacement for Kearse. Maybe I’m overvaluing Smith and Williams, but I think one or both could step up with the production Kearse had in his 2nd season- 22 REC. 346 YD. 4 TD 16 FD.

            An elite QB makes his teammates better. Peyton Manning showed this year in year out- Cheers to Peyton!- and we really saw Russell Wilson become elite last year. The time that Russell has spent with Smith and Williams helps build the timing and familiarity needed to contribute.

            • Volume12 says:

              P-Rich is healthy. He’s ready to go, and PC mentioned that getting him back is a ‘big deal for us.’

              Question remains though. Can he ‘stay’ healthy?

        • Madmark says:

          I have no clue if McNeil is a WR because they have worked him out as a CB.

    • mishima says:

      I think it’s also insurance against Angry Doug leaving, next year. Hopefully, they work out an extension, but they way FA is going..

  2. Trevor says:

    The Matthews rumor could be floated to put a little pressure on Kearse as well. Basically the team letting him know they are not going to sit on their hands as he shops the market.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Not sure they’d use Omar Kelly for that though…

      • Trevor says:

        Does it matter whom they use as long as their interest in an alternative receiver is known? I don’t know much about Omar Kelly to be honest.

        The other consideration is there are some hard feelings between Kearse and the team based on what PC/JS think he is worth and that is why Kearse has come out and said that is why he won’t be back. If he is gone for sure then looking at Matthews makes perfect sense but not at $5mil APY I hope.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Kelly’s a reporter in Miami who is close to a few of the players there. He made reference to Seattle during a Q&A session with Dolphins fans on Twitter. If they were going to plant a story — it probably would’ve been one of the big national guys (Schefter, La Canfora, Rapoport).

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        I thought that was a curious tweet by Schefter about Kearse.

        • Trevor says:

          I think Kearse is obviously upset by whatever the Hawks offered.

          • CHawk Talker Eric says:

            Or that they didn’t offer. Maybe they’re waiting to see where his market is.

            • Trevor says:

              Why would Kearse come out and say he won’t be back to the Hawks if that is the case. Look at Irvin we all know he won’t be back but he is saying all the right things.

              I can’t believe I said that Bruce Irvin saying all the right things.

              I cannot believe how much he has grown as a player and person since joining the Hawks. I always thought he was a bonehead but in the last year he has really grown on me and he is the one free agent along with Mebane whom I believe truly wants to remain a Seahawk and would take a discount.

              I know they can’t but really wish they could find a way to get Bruce done.

              • BCHawk says:

                Chatter like this before and during contract negotiations means nothing. It is about creating leverage. Kearse probably wants to stay here and is trying to get the best offer he can from the Hawks so his agent told him to let it be known that you’re are ready to go to another team.
                Irvin probably knows the Hawks are not going to pay him what he can get elsewhere so how does he get the best offer, he talks up how much he likes it in Seattle.
                Remember last year Bennett was talking about holding out and nothing from Kam. Camp starts and Kam holds out and Bennet reports.

            • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

              I think they said, we are going to let you go to FA to find your market. Once we know what the market is, we will extend you an offer, if it fits both your financial needs (Kearse) and Seattle’s.

    • Del tre says:

      i doubt they want to overpay to get kearse back, it’d be better to get a vet possession receiver, Kearse doesn’t have a ton of speed he is a mismatch for no one he just has a knack for getting lucky and catching russell wilsons dime throws. I’d rather see the cap space eaten up by a veteran guard

  3. Trevor says:

    I think we are going to see some crazy contracts on Wednesday with the amount of cap space some of these teams have available.

    • Michael M. says:

      If Malik Jackson gets anywhere close to that 15 million people are talking about, that will indeed be pretty crazy.

  4. nichansen01 says:

    If no one else… We need to at least resign Lane and Rubin. Mebane I am neutral with as he didn’t play too well this year at all… A cheap o-line veteran also seems like a good idea though.

    Matthews doesn’t bring much to the table for me. Yes, he is similar to Kearse, but he has had only one notable season…

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it speaks volumes of the Seahawks though. They aren’t necessarily looking for guys that produced in pass-friendly schemes. They’re looking for guys who are efficient when you throw at them. Considering they’re a run first team — they want to max out the times they do throw.

      • Trevor says:

        That narrows the list in the draft if they look at WRs in the mid to late rounds.

        • Trevor says:

          Do you know where we could find any stats on WR efficiency in College? I know Leonte Carroo was rated the most efficient by PFF but I am not sure about their ratings.

          • stretchjohnsen says:

            Take a look at Matt Harmon’s “Reception Perception.”
            I like Doctson (first round; and Mike Thomas (Southern Miss) in the 3rd or 4th round

        • That is why I (and I think Rob) are high on Marquez North (5th round pick in Rob’s mock). I will quote some articles:

          >But if there’s one thing Vol fans and scouts know it’s that North’s measurables (4.49 for Marquez North at 6’2″, 223lbs) stack up with just about any other receiver in the country. And he’s proved as much at the NFL combine this weekend.
          >North started out his impressive performance on Friday afternoon/evening when he turned in 17 reps of the 225 pound bench press. His output tied him for fifth-best among the over 40 wide receivers at the combine.
          >On Saturday, North continued his impressive performance by running a 4.49 40-yard dash on his first run and then clocking an official 4.48 run on his second attempt. His time was tied for ninth-best at his position, and he ran the same time as Oklahoma wide receiver Sterling Shepard. Both receivers were on the same field twice over the last two seasons when the Vols and Sooners faced each other in 2014 and 2015.
          >North then posted a 35 inch vertical jump, tying him with a handful of other receivers with the 15th-best vertical jump. North’s 10-foot 3-inch broad jump tied him for 13th-best at that event. North then completed the 3-cone drill in 6.9 seconds, giving him the 10th-best time among receivers. And his 20-yard shuttle time was his best performance of the day, as he finished tied for the fourth-best time in the drill by finishing it in 4.13 seconds.
          >Despite his lack of overall statistical success for the Vols in his three-year college career, North has always been a physical specimen. He always looked the part, and he had the physical tools to be a top-level performer. Injuries and other factors kept him from reaching his potential in college.
          >North has posted similar numbers at the combine as the aforementioned Shepard and Ohio State’s Braxton Miller, both phenomenal athletes who are expected to be drafted. North has similar physical characteristics of those two despite both Shepard and Miller having much better college careers.
          >Marquez North may not be drafted in the 2016 NFL Draft, but there’s a good chance he’ll still be taken on as an undrafted free agent to be looked at in an NFL camp. North has always had the tools to succeed, but he just needs to stay healthy to have success in the NFL.

          Source: http://www.rockytopinsider.com/2016/02/27/former-vol-wr-marquez-north-performs-well-at-nfl-combine/

          Here is another pretty good article: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2620421-tennessee-football-2016-nfl-combine-results-for-former-volunteers-stars

          What could his immediate impact in 2016 be? Who knows. Could he be a bust? Oh yeah. Could he live on IR? Yeah. But if we can’t pick a WR in the first 4 rounds (need a OT, LB/DE, OG/C, RB and DT before we need WR) then I hope we take a risk on a physical specimen with all the tools to be really good. He just needs to stay healthy and he could really be something.

          • Volume12 says:

            Don’t be surprised if they haven’t gone WR before or in the 4th, they wait until UDFA to address it.

            • I mean, didn’t I just say I hope they take a WR in the 5th (North)? So why would I be surprised if they take a WR lower than the 4th?

              Obviously with our needs those first 5 picks are critical and taking a WR in any of them would be pretty stupid.

              Starting OT can only be had in the 1st, Feeney might last longer than the 2nd but if we like him that might be the spot to take him, grabbing a OG/C like Glasgow/Dahl/McGovern is a 3rd round choice, grabbing a good RB is most likely a 3rd round choice, and then grabbing a DT is a 4th round choice most likely.

              Pushing O-line/D-line/RB/LB/DE for WR would be dump IMO.

              • Volume12 says:

                Because they never have taken a receiver after the 4th.

                Why would taking a receiver before any of those other poitions be stupid?

                • Because replacing Irvin is way more important than replacing Kearse, replacing Okung is way more important than replacing Kearse, because taking advantage of the quality OG/C’s in this years draft that are available in the 3rd round (where we have two picks) would be stupid. Because not taking a DT in the top 4 rounds means we most likely aren’t taking advantage of the talent and depth of the DT’s in this years class (unless there is a DT the FO loves in the 5th).

                  “We have never…………”

                  You mean in the SIX years JS has been our GM we haven’t done something? That is a long enough time for that to mean something, but not long enough for it to mean EVERYthing. Yes we can find jewels in UDFA and such, but every draft is entirely new, maybe there will be a WR version of Rawls the FO loves but instead of going in UDFA like Rawls did they will need to spend a 5th or 6th on him. So be it.

                  • Volume12 says:

                    I’m not arguing that WR is a big need, but your assigning positions to rounds.

                    And if they do take one after the 4th, great. Not gonna be mad at it. This would the year to do it. All I’m saying is, would it surprise us if they don’t go WR after round 4?

                    Could their draft model change? Sure. Absolutely. But, when they also come out and say ‘we aren’t going to change how we approach the draft,’ I tend to believe them.

          • Del tre says:

            I don’t know why you guys think he is a 4th rounder he sounds like a great pick but I bet the Hawks could get him I’m 6th or 7th or else udfa. I’m intrigued where you get the 4th round could you explain that to me? I agree with your analysis and as long as he isn’t on ir constantly he could be a good pick but why do you think round 4

            • Volume12 says:

              What do you mean where we get the 4th round?

              • Del tre says:

                why do you think north is a fourth round draft selection

                • Volume12 says:

                  I think he’s a 4th-5th round talent based on his size, athleticism, and skill set.

                  • Del tre says:

                    production and ability to stay healthy are key factors too though the 4th is a reach

                  • Volume12 says:

                    They’ll reach to get their guys if they want too.

                    Not saying that North is their guy, but the only thing that seperates for example, a 4th rounder to a 6th rounder, is one team’s opinion.

      • Jarhead says:

        Anybody know what kind of a blocker he is? That is a very understated part of Kearse’s value

        • At one time he used to be a really good blocker, if not our best blocking WR, but in 14 I believe, definitely 15 he has sucked at blocking. Ever bubble screen I see his effort looks mediocre and his impact as a blocker typically results in the screen being unsuccessful or minimally successful.

          Then there is the whole SB49 block on BB…in which he openly admits if he could do it again he’d put in more effort.

          :/

  5. Trevor says:

    The not tendering Burley makes no sense unless he is injured or something. Do you have any idea why they would not even if they plan to move on? At least bring him in as a training camp body.

    Could they have made an agreement with him that they would not tender him unless they could assure him a starting spot or something. It just seems odd for a guy who contributed at times.

    • Rob Staton says:

      It makes you wonder if Stephen Cohen has called it. Maybe they’re very confident in keeping Lane?

      • Trevor says:

        Still why not tender him even if that is the case as insurance there is no downside.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          Gives him a chance to move on to another team. Clearly they don’t want him, so why tie him up? Let him go try to make a career somewhere.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Hopefully there might be news of a Lane contract over the weekend.

          • Trevor says:

            Would love to see him and Rubin locked up this weekend prior to free agency.

          • Jarhead says:

            But do they make Lane the LCB full go? A la Maxwell after Browner departed? Or are we still looking to fill that outside spot via the draft or in house?

            • Volume12 says:

              Probably looking to fill that outside corner spit with an in-housr option, and make Lane the slot guy.

              A rookie isn’t gonna start outta the gate anyways.

              CB is probably the hardest position to scout and the hardest transition from the college game to the pros.

              • John_s says:

                I don’t get why people are pigeon holing Lane as just a slot CB. He came in as an outside CB, he played there his rookie and 2nd years. His 3rd year was his first real year at slot.

                He came back better than I thought he would last year and did an excellent job opposite Sherm.

                He’s a CB period. Doesn’t matter where he lines up and I wish people would quit labeling him as a slot CB

            • Rob Staton says:

              I think he does both. Outside and slot depending on the opponent. Some teams will have a tough outside guy you want to cover. But when they face a good slot receiver he can move inside and Shead can play outside.

              • Volume12 says:

                Good point.

              • Jarhead says:

                Well the way it is shaping up, it appears that it may be one of the most exciting competitions in TC and the preseason. It is pretty wide open as it is after Sherm and Lane

              • Is that under an assumption that Simon isn’t healthy so he didn’t win the CB2 job? Or you don’t think highly of Simon?

                I am a pretty big Simon fan. 44.4 QB rating when targeted in 2014 (his first year playing, coming off the bench mid-season to replace injured Maxy). With two years of studying and maturity under his belt my expectation is for him to enter camp 100% healthy and to earn that CB2 job. I think if he could stay healthy he has a CB1 talent ceiling.

                That is what I love about re-signing Lane. If Simon is healthy and earns the spot then he is CB2 and Lane is our NCB. Will he be overpaid for a NCB job? Sure, but worth it given his level of play and versatility (if Tharold got hurt he could slide right back over to CB2).

                In that situation our secondary is CB1 Sherman, CB2 Simon, NCB Lane, SS Chancellor, FS Earl with backup CB’s of Tye Smith and Deshawn Shead. Sweet. Not to mention the talent and potential on the roster in Seisay, SJB, Farmer, and hopefully a ’16 draft pick.

                That could be the best secondary we have had since Sherm, Maxy, Lane, Kam, Earl. Maybe even better given the experience the vets now have and Simon’s potential to be better than Maxwell was.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  I was just going off what happened last year.

                • Del tre says:

                  Dude honestly, I hate tharold simon, for the exact same reasons you lIke him. The kid just can’t stay healthy and when he is he can be such a liability. Now honestly I am a fan of him if he stays healthy b it he is the ultimate tease. It is even worse when you think about it he is the big physical corner the lob has missed since browner he could bring the boom back

        • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

          The down side is spending money on a player that is not in the future plans. Burley is good, but not great. So let’s not get too carried away. Seattle is being fair to the player, letting him find his market (or lack of one). It makes sense to the player and the Seahawks brass. I wouldn’t under estimate how this looks to potential FA that might want to come to Seattle. It shows Seattle treats their players with respect (like a man). Allows them to find the best possible deal in FA, instead of playing games.

          • Trevor says:

            Good point.

            • Volume12 says:

              To me it says that they’re comfortabe with the likes of Smith, Simon, SJB, Seisay, Farmer, Reed, and probably a draft pick, if a rookie CB makes the team.

              • lil'stink says:

                This is what I’m thinking, especially regarding Smith. The coaches saw him practice all year long; perhaps they liked what they saw and he was closing the gap on Burley by the end of the year?

                I still think they would have tendered Burley, though. I’m hoping this means what others have speculated that they are confident they can retain Lane.

    • Alicamousa says:

      I still wouldn’t mind keeping Burley around. He’s not top tier by any means, but he’s a comfortably better slot corner than Simon for example.

    • Steele says:

      Burley has been okay but not great. It appears that JSPC thinks so, too, and he is not worth even a small nod. That said, Burley’s exit would leave the slot CB position completely up in the air. Are they confident Lane will be retained somehow? At what cost? Is there anyone else on the roster who can defend the important slot position (which is one of the vulnerabilities of this defense)? Is there a Burley-like type in FA they can grab?

      With so many decisions appearing to be decided for them—keeping few of the free agents—the draft is more and more important. They will not only have to nail picks (starters) but will also have to be super aggressive with trading down and UDA for depth and insurance.

      • mishima says:

        Agree: They need to nail some early picks. After recent posts on Neal and Feeney, I questioned whether PCJS would play it a little more conservative this year. If both Martin and Feeney are there in the second, their selection will be telling.

        For different reasons, I agree with Rob that PCJS won’t change their philosophy. Like always, it will be interesting.

      • Del tre says:

        it speaks to their confidence in deshawn shead, tharold simon, tye smith and the other back ups

  6. Trevor says:

    If we sign Lane and Rubin.Then draft a DT like Chris Jones in Rd #2 and Freeney in Rd #3 our defense will be improved over last year as long as Kam and Lane are there and motivated starting Day #1

    • sdcoug says:

      Trev…i hate to be this guy, but in every post I’ve seen you call him Freeney. It’s Feeney, with no R. Just trying to help you out man hahaha.

    • Trevor says:

      Thanks I am the worst with the spelling of names.

    • Del tre says:

      pick up willie henry or Javon Hargrave. Chris jones is tall and big but his combine was a bit underwelming i could see hm getting blown off the line in the nfl

  7. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Cumberland WR Wendell Williams ran a 4.19 40yd and 45″ VJ at regional combine today.

    Oh my.

  8. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    The funny thing, he was with Ryan Tannehill when putting up these numbers.
    That QB is garbage and this WR makes him look good. Very intriguing. I also suspect a few other teams that are thin at WR might also see these numbers and drive his market up to the 3-4M / year level.

    How clutch is this WR, compared to Kearse? Has he shown up big in big games?

    • Hawksince77 says:

      He had his moments. Almost quit the team when they drafted a WR in the first round (can’t recall his name off the top of my head – was injured most of the year). Had his locker packed up and he was half way out the door, if I recall correctly.

    • Jeff M. says:

      This is a good point. If you take (passer rating on passes to a particular WR)-(QB’s overall passer rating) as a rough approximation of the WR’s contribution, Matthews (~36) leads that list over Baldwin (~32) and Watkins (~30).

  9. I think of it this way:

    IF we sign a FA WR then we don’t have confidence in rolling with WR1 Doug, WR2 Tyler, WR3 Paul, WR4 Kevin, WR5 Kasen, WR6 Draft pick/PSquad player.

    IF we don’t sign a FA WR and if we don’t draft one in the first 4 rounds then we are confident in Doug, Tyler, Paul, Kevin, Kasen, and the draft pick/Psquad player.

    There is reason to not be confident as you said; Paul has a history of injuries, and Kevin, Kasen and any draft pick/Psquad receiver have no NFL experience.

    Unless the FO feels strongly that Kasen and Kevin are closer to Norwood/Matthews busts than Doug/Kearse hits and they have no confidence in Paul staying healthy, then I hope we don’t sign any FA WR. Use the money we saved not paying Kearse or any FA WR for other more important positions.

    ——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–
    Priority one: re-sign JLane unless what he is asking for is ridiculous.

    Priority two: Figure out what we are going to do with Jimmy. Realistically when can he get healthy? Is it worth it to re-work his deal to low his cap hit but put dead money on the books?

    Priority three: sign a FA left guard to replace Britt.

    Priority four: decide whether to re-sign Bailey or cut Britt. I don’t think there is much reason having both if both are backups.

    Priority five: re-sign Rubin, and either re-sign Mebane or sign a FA DT that considering everything (price, age, production, ceiling, etc) is better than Mebane.

    Priority six: decide on extending Doug or not. Reason to extend Doug now; what if he has another great season in ’16 (1k yds, 8+ TD) and as a FA gets way bigger offers from teams with huge cap space cash. Reason not to extend Doug now; we’d be paying him after a season with 1k yds and 14 TD’s. Odds are he peaked and in 2016 he falls back down to earth with a 900 yrd 8 TD season. Hell he could even (god forbid) get hurt and the front office be able to use that to re-sign him for less had he not gotten hurt.

    Priority seven: Re-sign CMike. Having him as our RB2 is pretty important. I wonder if CMike will get signed to just a one year prove it deal or if the FO would consider a 2 or 3 year deal based on the quality of play and maturity they saw from him in 2015.

    ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

    To me a WR corp of WR1 Doug, WR2 Tyler, WR3 Paul, WR4 Kevin, WR5 Kasen, WR6 Draft pick, WR7 PSquad WR should be much more productive than 2015’s receiving corp of WR1 Doug, WR2 Kearse, WR3 Tyler (rookie), WR4 Matthews, WR5 Ricardo. I have 7 WR’s for 2016 because I believe we roll with just one FB (Cottom) in 2016 instead of two (Coleman/Tuku ’15). That extra spot could obviously be used for O-line or TE (Luke, Coop, TE3 assuming Jimmy on PUP or IR in ’16).

    Why role with 7 WR’s in 2016? Well if the O-line has been improved and is more consistent in pass pro than having some more weapons for Russ isn’t a bad thing. It is also smart because that PSquad player might not do much for the first 6-8 games, but maybe in those games he is getting his feet under himself, maybe he is getting used to NFL game speed, and then he starts producing, by week 12 he and Russ have put in the work, have built up a trust working together, he is running good routes, and if called upon (a receiver gets hurt or his matchup is ideal) he can step up and produce. But if you don’t do that, if you need a WR to step up after an injury opened up a spot week 12, odds are that PSquad player won’t do much.

    • Hawksince77 says:

      I agree with your assessment, and hope they don’t spend anything in FA at the position, indicating their comfort with the five guys you mention.

      Also, giving players like Kevin Smith and Kasen Williams the opportunity to succeed in Kearse’s absence provides continuing incentive (and reward) for the UW WR UDFA pool.

      This also leaves room on the roster to draft a North or (my favorite) Peake to develop into starting WRs, or even better.

      Finally, this approach fields three excellent and relatively seasoned WRs (Baldwin, Lockett, Richardson). Lockett and Richardson are both speedsters and playmakers with a full year behind them. Barring injury, in the new passing offense of Seattle (PC recently said they made changes last year that led to the offensive outpouring, and while they had to recreate it in 2016, they knew how to do it) these players should thrive.

      • Agreed.

        People say how do you replace Kearse? I say the issue is more about Jimmy’s production. Jimmy had 73 targets in ’15. If he is gone for all of 2016 then where do those go? We already know Luke doesn’t seem to be a consistent receiver who can week in and week out get into the game plan and get targeted 3-5 times a game.

        Kearse’s average production (550 yards, 3 TD’s) can be replaced at worst by Kevin, Kasen and PRich together in my opinion. Those three as a group should be able to put up 600 yards and 4 TD’s. If you then expect Doug to have 950+ yards and 8+ TD’s, and Tyler to have 800+ yards and 8+ TD’s and the draft pick/Psquad WR to have 100+ yards and maybe a TD.

        I think a mixture of the increased yardage by Tyler and the consistent and powerful running game (Rawls, CMike, Draft pick) should help us even out and replace Kearse’s production and some of Jimmy’s production.

        In that scenario as a threesome Kevin, Kasen and PRich are putting up 600 yards and 4 TD’s. But what if Kevin and Kasen are 200 yard 1 TD’s guys each but PRich is a 400 yard guy with 4 TD’s of his own? What if Kevin or Kasen or both are 300+ yard 2+ TD guys on their own? If Jimmy can come back at some point in ’16? We could be sitting VERY pretty at receiver even with Kearse gone.

        • Hawksince77 says:

          Yep – so draft a mid-late round WR, and an RB in say, the third round.

          That should do it for the skilled offensive players.

          Now, just get the offensive line right. That will make everything else on the offense go…

          • Landhawk says:

            With Kearse likely departing, I’d take Stanford WR Devon Cajuste in round 4 or 5. He can be the possession and red zone receiver. I think he’ll be better than Kearse for us.

            • SunPathPaul says:

              Looks like some think Devon Cajuste might be an H back, TE type…

              • Landhawk says:

                I haven’t seen that anywhere. He was in the wide receiver group at the combine and had the fourth highest sparq rating amongst all of them.

        • matt says:

          ” I say the issue is more about Jimmy’s production. Jimmy had 73 targets in ’15. If he is gone for all of 2016 then where do those go?”

          The offense took off when Graham went down. JG is a great weapon, but the offense is not tied to his production by any means.

          • No I know, but where do those targets go? Jimmy put up 600 yards and 2 TD’s, those targets and that production has to go somewhere.

            But as I detail in the post I think if the UDFA WR’s can produce, if PRich can stay healthy at least most of the season, if the draft pick can produce his first season at least a bit, and if Luke can step it up a bit, I think we should be fine.

  10. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    Danny Kelly mentioned potential “guys on the street” that might be looking for work.
    A name jumped out at me, WR Andre Johnson. We know he can block and can make clutch catches. Can you blame him for a down year in 2015 with that turrible Colts QB mess.

    If he would come in on the cheap, looking for a shot at a SB ring…… and we know he can be clutch and carry the load at WR. No speed anymore, but he can still jump and be a useful redzone threat.

    • Rob Staton says:

      He’d have to be very cheap because he looked well beyond his best in Indy.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        To be fair, it looked like the entire team was a dumpster fire.

        But point is taken. He looked unimpressive in Indy.

    • sdcoug says:

      I’ve actually been thinking about Johnson too, for the right money of course. And I disagree a bit with Rob, I think he looked ok in Indy but that was judging him as a #2. As our 3 he would be a nice option with a big body; don’t think his speed is much different than Kearse

      • Rob Staton says:

        Worth noting Andre Johnson is 35 this summer. How much has he really got left in the tank?

        His production was starting to decline in Houston before he was cut.

        • sdcoug says:

          No I agree, just think he would be a nice bridge player to buy a year or two. I’m not comfortable with our group as is. Graham worries me, Kearse appears gone, Preach hasn’t been able to stay on the field. You know the drill… I like Matthews actually and think he’d be more productive with a non-Tannehill qb.

          For what it’s worth…I don’t think its a matter of Miami not liking him as a WR. They are up against the cap and have bigger fish to fry. Landry, Stills and a high pick spent on DeVante Parker allows them to move on.

          • Del tre says:

            how does this wide receiver group worry you? It’s better than its been the past 2 years even without kearse, Bladwin and Lockett are a really good 1-2 punch and lockett was only a few yards behind kearse this year and that was jermaines career high, he also got more tds 6 to 5 did so with limited snaps last year. Kevin Williams looks like a more talented Jermaine Kearse that still needs time to develop, P rich presents more of a match up problem than kearse ever could, He also isn’t as injury prone as everyone is making him out to be the hamstring injury is common for people who are recovering from a knee injury

  11. Michael M. says:

    Kearse is the least athletic of our ‘starting’ receivers, and Rishard Matthews would be a downgrade even from that… This doesn’t make much sense to me. If you’re gonna lose Kearse, that money would be better spent elsewhere than plowing it right back into a receiver that doesn’t really fit the athletic profile the team would prefer.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Rishard Matthews’ forty time: 4.62
      Jermaine Kearse’s forty time: 4.58

      The point is not athletic profile. It’s about efficiency. Kearse was the fourth most efficient receiver in the NFL. Matthews was the fifth. That’s the point — and it’s a big one for a team that doesn’t throw as much as other teams.

      • Michael M. says:

        I get the efficiency thing. Just not crazy about spending that much money even to keep Kearse, let alone on an outsider that is likely a lateral move talent wise. I’d rather they spent that money elsewhere and go back to the same well that brought these guys into the league for the replacement (7th round, or UDFA)

        • Michael M. says:

          Just read this at profootballrumors.com: “suspicions of a $6MM pact being enough to land Mario Williams are accurate, according to an NFL source. ”

          If that’s true at all, and if he wanted to come here, I’d much rather do that than spend any money on Matthews.

          • franks says:

            “As a result of his underwhelming season, Adam Beasley of the Miami Herald predicts (via Twitter) that the Dolphins wouldn’t have to break the bank to secure Williams’ services. The writer guesses that the defensive lineman may end up with a contract with about $6MM in average annual value. Rapoport believes there will be several suitors for the Pro Bowler, and the writer wouldn’t be shocked if Williams ends up signing a one-year, “prove-it deal” if he doesn’t receive any lucrative long-term offers.”

            Beasley on Twitter: “Insiders don’t think the Dolphins would have to break the bank for Williams. He’s 31, coming off worst year of career. Maybe $6M APY.”

            Indeed the Dolphins already have Suh on a 100M contract so it’s hard to imagine they’re offering Williams that kind of money.

            • franks says:

              Also of note:

              -“The Bills never made guard Richie Incognito an extension offer during the season, according to Tyler Dunne of the Buffalo News, and they’ve since “lowballed” Incognito and have gone several-day stretches without contacting his agent. If that’s the case, it’s perhaps no wonder Incognito is reportedly frustrated with how the talks are proceeding.”

              -Panthers waived Nate Chandler.

  12. Spireite Seahawk says:

    Would anyone have a dabble on Richie Incognito in FA? He seems to be over his issues in Miami. The Bills seem kenn to keep him and I wonder what his value is.

    • Greg Haugsven says:

      Maybe Evan Mathis as well for 1 year while a draft pick develops.

    • Alicamousa says:

      With a young O’Line I’d be very wary of a guy like that. He’s got it as a player, whether I’d want him anywhere near some of the guys we’ve got… One good year in Buffalo is up against an entire career of being the worst guy out.

  13. smitty1547 says:

    I would take Richie in a minute, seemed everyone loved him but 1 guy. Hes mean tough and nasty we need.

    • Alicamousa says:

      He’s been one of the dirtiest players in the league since he entered. He’s trash.

      • Darnell says:

        Dirty yes. But a pro bowl caliber interior lineman. You win with nasty, and wherever he has gone his non-soft teammates have spoken highly of him.

        • Rob Staton says:

          This is the problem though isn’t Darnell? Referring to players as ‘non-soft’ because they didn’t sing the praises of Richie Incognito.

        • Steele says:

          This is not entirely true, Darnell. A lot of non-soft teammates did not approve of his behavior.

          • smitty1547 says:

            No body had a problem with him last year, pretty sure sitting out a year will humble most people with any smarts at all. replace Britt with him and we are so much better.

  14. Trevor says:

    Everything seems so quiet on the rumor front with the Hawks right now. This is usually when JS pull something out of left field and everyone goes he did Whatttt? I am sure something will happen next week none of us saw coming that will give us much more clarity on needs entering the draft.

    • Greg Haugsven says:

      I remember the Jimmy graham trade happened about 1245 last year right before free agency started.

      • SunPathPaul says:

        Martellus Bennett is in town posting interesting tweets!

        Maybe they get him as insurance for Graham with the idea that Jimmy will play more Wide Out, or that if he isn’t 100%, trade Jimmy!

        Someone would trade for Jimmy even if still not 100%.
        He is too rare, and some team would like to have him…

        This way JS covers ALL bases…

        • Volume12 says:

          Pairing Bennett with Graham would be awesome. A 2TE set with them?

          • Fatty Acid says:

            I like it. Rumors now have it the Bears are just going to cut Bennett now. Use that money to sign him, split Graham wide. Bennett can block, yes?

  15. John_s says:

    I would rather take Jordan Payton as a mid rounder than spend 4-6 mil on Matthews.

    Payton’s combine numbers are very similar to Kearse.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I understand why people don’t want to spend $4-6m on a smaller name receiver — but this is Seattle’s Championship window right now. And while Matthews wasn’t a 1000 yard, 10 TD guy — that’s not what the Seahawks really need. They need someone who can make a play on third down. A guy who can make a play most of the time he’s thrown to.

      According to the stats in the article — Matthews was one of the best in the league at that. And with Baldwin, Lockett and Kearse also among the best — that suggests the Seahawks are looking for guys who can just make a few key plays on limited targets.

      I was surprised when I read Omar Kelly’s report — but the numbers suggest he might actually be a guy the Seahawks look at. And Matthews probably provides an instant reliable target while Jordan Payton takes a year to become a functioning part of the team.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        Unless I missed something, if your going to spend 4-6 million on a FA receiver why not retain Kearse. Outside FA receivers very rarely workout.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I touched on this in the article.

          1. Kearse might be set to earn more than any of us expect and Matthews might be the cheaper alternative.

          2. They might be more inclined to search for a replacement for Kearse if nearly all of their own key FA’s move on, thus leaving a decent sum of money to spend in free agency.

          3. They clearly like effective receivers who make the most of their targets. Matthews does that, as does Baldwin, Lockett and Kearse. So it’d be one of the few opportunities (unlike Okung, Irvin, Lane if they leave) to replace one player with a very similar player.

          • Volume12 says:

            I think Matthews would be a solid addition. Not flashy or a splash signing, but a dependable, reliable target.

            For all we know, maybe they were gonna target him in UDFA, but didn’t get the opportunity since he was drafted. It was the same year Kearse came into the league.

            • Greg Haugsven says:

              I understand the thought process, where I get concerned is that adding receivers through free agency rarely works out. Just seems like a position that needs to be addressed through the draft. At least that’s my opinion. Very interesting Stat chart on him though.

          • sdcoug says:

            I know this doesn’t mean much, but I have two buddies who are lifelong Dolphin fans. Neither of them want to lose Mathews. Both deemed him as very solid and someone who will do well on a good team. As one stated, “catches almost everything in his area code.” Has also heard multiple teams will be pursuing him

          • bigDhawk says:

            Perhaps they view Matthews as a receiver that can not only make the circus catches in the clutch, like Kearse, but also consistently make the the routine chain-moving catches on third down, unlike Kearse.

        • Del tre says:

          or just save the money entirely knowing that kevin smith and kasen williams both have higher ceilings then spend it on someone who is actually worth it, besides if russell wilson has 3 or 4 seconds a play lockett and baldwin will be wide open

      • franks says:

        I’m all in, it makes sense. If everyone’s healthy we don’t need another WR but that might not happen. PRich and Graham the question marks. WR’s like we’ve seen with Tate take longer to grow into starters and we need offense now.

        Maybe Kearse isn’t leaving for financial reasons.

  16. Kip Earlywine says:

    The Seahawks are good for a few headscratching moves every offseason, Burley being non-tendered is one of those.

    I also think Seattle is making a mistake not locking up Kearse to a modest deal. 5/25 for what Kearse provides is solid value. If Kearse leaves for something like 3/12, it’s hard for me to justify it for multiple reasons.

    I’m guessing C-Mike will get non-tendered as well. That’s not really shocking, but I thought he easily played his way into next year’s training camp. But the coaches are probably tired of him, and only brought him back in an emergency. I don’t like it, but I get it.

    • Rob Staton says:

      They’ll do something none of us expect. They nearly always do.

      And if most of their own FA’s move on… leaving a nice sum of free cap room… it just increases that likelihood.

      Could be a trade for someone (DeMarco Murray, Martellus Bennett), could be a big name who makes it to the second wave of FA and is available at a cheaper price. Could be anything.

      Unless of course, they find a way to keep most of their own guys.

      • C-Dog says:

        This is pretty much the only thing I’m expecting, the unexpected.

        • Greg Haugsven says:

          I agree, we can talk about this until the cows ce home but we know they will go whatever direction we don’t think they will.

          • C-Dog says:

            Yeah, I know for myself, I’ve gone back and forth, and over again on who I think should be they might re-sign, and honestly, Irving, Okung, Sweezy, Lane, Rubin, Mebane, Kearse, etc.. I don’t know if any of these guys are a must. Shoot, for all I know, they throw a bunch of money at Kelechi Osemele, and that is their only signing until after the draft. If it were me, I would try to get deals done with Irving and Okung, but that’s just because I see them as the two most talented free agents, the rest can be replaced through the draft and free agency. For all we know, that’s what they are trying to do right now.

            I still think some kind of trade could happen we don’t see coming.

            • Volume12 says:

              If Ole Miss WR Laquan Treadwell is there, PC wouldn’t be able to resist. Seems to have vetted Treadwell pretty well.

              This team is gonna grab a weapon for RW either in FA, through a trade, or taken one earlir in the draft than expected.

              • Volume12 says:

                That’s my take on them do something expected.

                • Volume12 says:

                  *unexpected

                  • EranUngar says:

                    Unexpected?

                    4 weeks ago i commented here that if Treadwell is there at 26 they will take him. If they resign Okung, i still believe they will.

                    If Kearse can get 4-5M in the FA market, Baldwin should get twice as much. As much as they love him, they may have to prepare for next year.

                  • Volume12 says:

                    Again, I think they’d consider Treadwell if all the OT’s are gone and they don’t get a weapon for Russ in FA or a trade.

                    Unexpected is them taking making a move for a pass catching target. It doesn’t necessarily HAVE to be Treadwell.

                    I doubt they take a WR in the 1st. If, emphasize on if, it migt be him.

                    But, adding a guy like Bennett, Matthews, or whoever else makes much more sense to me.

            • Fatty Acid says:

              I know this is stupid..but people keep saying Irving, his name is Irvin!

            • franks says:

              Totally, there are no musts but Okung and Sweey, who you could argue must go.

              I could easily see them making a big signing like Osemele.

  17. KyleT says:

    Love this angle Rob. I like how you take news and rumors and spin them forward. I don’t always agree with the takes, but it makes me think through my own projected scenarios and gives me new ideas. Thanks for the good work!

    On not tendering certain players…is it possible we are reacting too soon? Maybe they will be tendered by the deadline. Anyone know what that is btw?

    • Rob Staton says:

      “On not tendering certain players…is it possible we are reacting too soon? Maybe they will be tendered by the deadline.”

      It’s certainly possible — although it’d be strange to do six of the eight exclusive rights free agents and not the other two — and then go back and do them. The Seahawks have no commitment to these guys after all — there’s no signing bonus and the contracts aren’t guaranteed. It wouldn’t cost them anything to tender Burley or Jesse Williams and then cut them immediately. Which suggests they have no intention of signing either because — why wouldn’t they just do it already?

      • KyleT says:

        I can’t explain it. Maybe there are other negotiations pending with some of these guys? Not even tendering Michael has me confused as he did everything they asked of him and he could still be cut later, so what would be the downside? I know that’s kind of your point, but…What about Alvin Bailey? Depth behind Okung is really bad without him in the mix…I have to believe there are more of these to be announced…

        • Rob Staton says:

          Michael wasn’t an exclusive rights FA. He was a restricted FA. So his tender would’ve included a certain level of higher salary (about $1.5m). I suspect they are interested in bringing Michael back but probably only for a minimal cost. So that likely means he tests free agency to see if there’s any other interest first or he just signs a one-year deal with the Hawks for less than the tender.

          Ditto Bailey. He’s a restricted FA. They probably don’t want to pay him what the tender says. If you don’t fear other teams signing them away (or if you’re not overly committed to them returning) there’s not really any reason to tender them.

          Burley’s salary as an ERFA would’ve been considerably cheaper (about $1m less than a RFA). So it makes little sense to just not tender him unless you have no desire to keep him.

          • Volume12 says:

            Is LB Mike Morgan an UFA or RFA?

          • EranUngar says:

            Rob,

            I can understand not wanting to set some imaginary bar for Bailey or C-Mike at 1.6M.

            I can’t understand not tendering Burley. He looked solid enough when he played and tendering him costs nothing. Even if he is kept as backup against injuries it should be worth it. At worst – We can trade him during the pre season games to a team suffering injuries at CB just like we traded for him when we faced those issues.

            He will probably be tendered before the deadline or even resigned for a team friendly 2-3 year contract.

            • Rob Staton says:

              If they were going to tender Burley they would’ve done it with the rest.

              There was no reason not to include him with the others.

            • franks says:

              It’s gotta be something beyond his play. He’s good enough to compete.

            • Robert says:

              Not offering a tender to Burley is a demonstration of how the FO feels about the stable of young, developing DB talent on the roster. I wonder how they feel about Pinkins and KPL? Free agency and Draft will provide the answer, but we can speculate.

              • franks says:

                Could be but Pete’s all about competition. The young talent haven’t won his job.

                • Robert says:

                  Not yet, but Burley doesn’t have a job with the Seahawks and was not invited to the 2016 competition. So it appears to me that Burley’s job has been awarded to the young talent who wins the competition.

  18. Steele says:

    Rishard Matthews does not impress me. Similar in Kearse in all of the wrong ways. Slow, not sudden, not tall (6-0). Nothing special. A JAG. Why replace Kearse with someone who is even slower at 4.6?

    They should be upgrading and diversifying their WR corps with taller/fast/tough/deep route and/or Sid Rice possession types.

    Matthews thinks he’s at least a #2 WR. Looks like a perennial #3 to me, a neither here-nor there type.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Steele — look at the article again.

      QB rating when throwing to the following receivers in the entire NFL:

      #1 Doug Baldwin
      #2 Tyler Lockett
      #3 Sammy Watkins
      #4 Jermaine Kearse
      #5 Rishard Matthews
      #6 A.J. Green

      People need to focus on the right things here. They might not sign Rishard Matthews — but if they do THAT right there is the reason why they do it. The Seahawks throw less than any team in the league. So when they throw it, they want receivers who max out their snaps.

      It’s no coincidence that three of the top five in the NFL last year were the Seahawks receivers. Getting the guy who was #5 on the list as a possible replacement for the guy at #4 is exactly the type of move we should expect this team to make.

      It’s nothing to do with the fact Matthews runs 0.04 seconds slower than Kearse (about the time it takes to blink) — and everything to do with the way Matthews handles his targets on a football field.

      • Volume12 says:

        It would also give them some flexibility in the draft.

        If a receiver is there that they like, take him. If not, do what they always do and grab a WR or two in UDFA. That way your not forcing, for lack of a better word, or asking a rookie wideout to be a heavy contributor in year one.

      • mishima says:

        How do Baldwin, Lockett, Kearse and Matthews rank in Wide Receiver Efficiency Rating (WRER)?

        • icb12 says:

          None of them are top 10 if you use WRER.

          Lockett for instance is 41st.

          Should be noted that because of the way WRER is calculated Seahawks Receivers won’t fare as well.
          WRER strongly favors guys who are true #1 Receivers because of using targets/total routes as a “separation” score. The top 10 list confirms that, #1 especially; being Alshon Jeffery. With a massive separation score (because there was no one else to throw to), but he had so-so hands, and not so great open field score, yet somehow has a total that is significantly higher than anyone else.

          WRER is interesting but easily misconstrued and a little faulty in my opinion.

          • mishima says:

            Agree. I was looking at it, last night, and saw same problems, namely over-valuing separation.

  19. line_hawk says:

    If they have money to spend, the one player I personally want is Chris Long. Let’s get some pass rush! we already have enough money tied to DBs, let’s not overpay Lane. If finding DBs is this teams advantage, they don’t need to spend >20% of cap on 4 DBs. The Cary Williams debacle as much a fault of Cary Williams was also exacerbated because of a lack of pass rush.

    • 503Hawk says:

      He has a great motor and would fit the Hawks’ locker room. But he is overrated and has been the beneficiary of playing w/ two future Hall of Famers.

      • line_hawk says:

        He has no doubt benefitted from that dline but I feel he would do great with Avril/Bennett. And he can hopefully be had for less than tier-1 FA money. Usually, FA d-linemen have done better after signing with the Hawks.

        watching Demarcus ware & Von Miller wreck the panthers oline in the Super Bowl makes you wonder if the Seahawks had a better pass rush, they beat the panthers.

        • Del tre says:

          they would have wrecked the panthers with interior d line pressure assuming they aren’t also playing the turf

      • Michael M. says:

        Who are the two future HOFers you’re referring to?

    • Rob Staton says:

      “we already have enough money tied to DBs”

      It’s the identity of the defense.

      And there’s a reason why Cary Williams was cut during the season — and the defense suddenly improved.

      • franks says:

        True it’s been the biggest part of PC’s success here and Lane and Co. kicked it back into gear after Williams. But he’s got a point that pass rush might do more for the secondary than anything. They weren’t making interceptions last year. Need to put more heat on the qb to improve the T.O. differential. (?) Are there any reports on Simon’s health?

      • line_hawk says:

        The defense got better once Williams was cut but there were still games when a lack of pass rush killed the Hawks (inspire of Lane being back). I am not saying don’t sign Lane. But, it needs to be a short prove it type deal. The front office has a bad record finding pass rushers in the draft, great record at finding DBs in the draft. In FA, they find great pass rushers; DBs not so much. It makes sense to go back to the well that gave you so much success.

        • franks says:

          Great point about where we’ve been finding our good pass rushers. I have a feeling we’ll go back to the well.

        • Del tre says:

          Bruce irvin has been solid, Frank Clark was a solid contributor in the small amount of snaps he played, Cassius marsh was ok not a pass rusher but sets the edge, i disagree with that sentiment completely the hawks just haven’t had to invest much draft capitol into d line early in the draft where most of the pass rush talent goes

  20. Greg Haugsven says:

    Here is a scenario I dreamt last night.
    Rd 1 Shon Coleman
    Rd 2
    Rd 3 Travis Feeny
    Rd 3 Jack Allen (just jeel like he has Seahawks qualities)
    Rd 4

    Would you want to go with a guy like Josh Garnett at 2 then maybe a DT at 4 or take the best DT at 2 then go guard maybe at 4 ( Tretola for ex)

    Thoughts?

    • C-Dog says:

      If it were me, I would probably look at best available player to add inside rush in R2 if someone was there. It might be a DE/DT type than a straight up DT, but if they took Coleman in R1, and Garnett in R2, I’d be pretty darn happy with that, as well.

    • rowdy says:

      Why not jaylon Smith in the second

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        It will be interesting to see how far he falls. If he is there and you take him that might open up the Feeny slot.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Can’t see Jack Allen in round three.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        I agree maybe not, I also don’t see spending $4-5 million on an outside free agent WR.

    • franks says:

      Definitely a DT in 2 and a G in 4. Just case it’s easier to find guards later, and lots of R2-3 DTs this year.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        I think I like the DT in round 2 as well. Round 4 for guard and maybe bring in a FA guard on short term.

  21. SunPathPaul says:

    Rob…I know the 2015 trade deadline ends during the season.

    I tried to look up online, can teams “Trade” players now???

    If so, is it after the Super Bowl or something that opens up trades again before the new league year???

    …since we traded for Jimmy right b4 FA opened, does that answer my question?

    • John_s says:

      Jimmy was traded after the new league year started

    • Rob Staton says:

      You can start trading players again when the new league year begins on the 9th March (same day as FA).

      Of course, deals can be revealed on Monday or Tuesday and finalised on Wednesday.

  22. EranUngar says:

    The table above poses an interesting question:

    All 3 Seahawks receivers are top 5 in that list. Is that an endorsement of their individual quality at their respective position or an effect of the Seahawks philosophy in the passing game.

    It has been pretty clear that the Seahawks put “protecting the football” over everything else. A part of the reason RW has been holding on the football longer than most QBs in past years was waiting till a receiver is clearly open and not risking anticipation throws etc. They also avoided throwing the 50/50 contested ball as much as possible even when they had the best jump ball catcher ion the NFL (Graham).

    Are those numbers a reflection on the Seahawks passing scheme and philosophy as much if not more than the quality of their WRs?

    If they are, do we really need to spend millions on Kearse or his replacement or just plug in the next guy with the best hands possible to catch those easy open passes?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Rishard Matthews didn’t play in Seattle’s offense though — he played in Miami’s shambolic passing game.

      So you can make that argument for Baldwin, Kearse and Lockett — but if anything the fact Matthews is on the list in spite of his offense is actually a glowing reference for signing him.

      I also think it’s a bit contradictory to suggest all the Seattle WR’s did was catch ‘wide open’ passes. Don’t you have to get open in the first place?

      • Trevor says:

        I agree Rob but the fact that we have 3 WRs in the top 5 of passing efficiency says a lot about the accuracy of our QB and Bevells game planning / scheme.

      • EranUngar says:

        Of-course you need to get open. I understand now that my comment can be read in different ways. I’ll try to elaborate.

        Our 3 receivers are very different in style of play and attributes and yet they all made it to the top of that list. I am wondering if it has to do with the way they used within our scheme.

        As much as i love Kearse and been on record here stating that he is more valuable than many here think, i will not put him in the top 5 of any WR category other than catching crucial TD passes in playoff games.

        Could it be that Bevell (with RW as the implementer) is actually not that bad at his work? Could it be that he understands what each of them brings to the table and sets a scheme that targets each of them efficiently? Could it be that it is the scheme that places them in a position to succeed?

        If we believe that Bevell can take 2 UDFAs and make them top 5 in efficiency when targeted then we should save those precious cap dollars this year and try to find a WR in the draft of elsewhere with enough basic capabilities for Bevell to work his magic?

        Or, in other words – If we can live without Kearse because of his cost, we should be able to live without Rishard.

        For me, one of the big reasons they will not pay 4M or more to another receiver is Baldwin’s reaction. If those guys get that kind of money, he should get at least twice as much….

    • Ignorant says:

      The high efficiency numbers reflect the fewer passing attempts we take, the quality of Russell Wilson, and the explosive, vertical offensive shots Seattle takes.

  23. Trevor says:

    Rob I was watching some tape on Keanu Neal last night and boy you are spot on. He is an impressive player and is going to be a real physical presence wherever he ends up. If he gets past the Steelers my biggest fear is he goes to the Cards. Neal and Matthieu at Safety would be a young version of Earl and Kam.

    Do you think the Cards will take him if he is there or they will go pass rushers as everyone predicts? I still think they are our biggest threat in NFC West next year.

  24. Ignorant says:

    I don’t think Seattle actually NEED to replace Jermaine Kearse. We got to the Super Bowl with Russell Wilson throwing to Baldwin as #1, Kearse as #2, Luke Willson as #3 and Lockette/P-Rich as #4. Our receiving corps is better than this even withou Kearse, Graham and Paul Richardson. Baldwin as #1, Lockett as #2, Luke Willson as #3 and Kevin Smith as #4.

    Sure, we can upgrade at #4, but this upgrade could come naturally by one year of Kevin Smith/Kasen Williams development, through Jimmy Graham rehab, through P-Rich rehab. The solutions and answers to Jermaine Kearse are already within the roster. I wouldn’t be opposed to drafting an athletic specimen WR in this Draft, since we have no idea how much Doug Baldwin is going to want for his contract (He’s miles ahead of Michael Crabtree and Crabtree gets 8.5m APY).

    • Rob Staton says:

      They wouldn’t be replacing the role of a fourth receiver though. They’d be replacing their #2. And with Graham out and Richardson snakebitten with injuries, this is certainly a move they could consider.

      • Nick says:

        Rob, don’t you think Lockett is our #2 at this point?

        • Rob Staton says:

          The Seahawks don’t really have a #1, #2 etc.

          People will say Doug Baldwin is their #1 and he plays a ton in the slot.

          They have role players.

      • Ignorant says:

        Point is, there’s no need to even replace Kearse. Seattle’s receiving group the way it is, is far from disfunctional. Baldwin and Lockett is a good enough 1/2 punch, and would look a lot like Baldwin and Tate in 2013 and this group would potentially look great if just Graham recovers well. I think they shouldn’t afford the risk of not being able to sign a competent OL or resign Lane, Mebane or Rubin to chase a replacement for Kearse (which could already be on the roster).

  25. Dan says:

    I mentioned this in a previous article but what about Jason Piere-Paul on a one-year deal? What do you think his asking price in the open market?

    • Darth12er says:

      From what I’ve read, there are multiple teams looking at him. I imagine his price will be relatively high.

  26. Ed says:

    Would rather see the spot filled in the draft than a FA. Get Miller or Shepard in the 2nd if you feel you need another weapon.

    1st Ifedi (OT)
    2nd Miller (WR)
    3rd Dahl (OG)
    3rd Prosise (RB)
    4th Day (DT)

    • franks says:

      Golden Tate was a second rounder and he worked out great, but he wasn’t much his first two years.

      The only rookie we have a shot at that I’d have confidence in now, is Fuller in the first.

      • John_s says:

        I have way more confidence in Josh Doctson instead of Fuller.

        People including myself thought Lockett was only going to be a contributor on special teams last years and he blew past those expectations.

        people are talking leraven Clark as a potential pick but he is multiple years away. I would much rather have Doctson in rd 1 who can at least be in the rotation and offer something the WR Corp is missing than Clark who is as raw as can be and is a long ways off from playing

      • Robert says:

        My observation is that WR prospects who relied heavily on athleticism in college take longer to transition to the NFL. On the other hand, college WRs who are competent route runners like Baldwin and Lockett are more likely to be productive as NFL rookies.

    • Rob Staton says:

      They might not feel like they can wait for a receiver to adapt to the pro’s and a new playbook. They’re in a Championship window after all.

      • rowdy says:

        If that was the case then it would be the same for the oline

        • Rob Staton says:

          They’ve shown a far greater willingness to start OL early over the years.

          Receiver is a very difficult position to master quickly. It’s testament to Tyler Lockett’s ability that he managed it so well and exciting to think about what he does next.

  27. 75franks says:

    I don’t want it to happen(although I think hes pretty good) but I got a feeling that we take Treadwell in the first. there must be some interest or why interview him. any thoughts?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Seahawks got interviews with 60 players (like every team). They interview these guys for a number of reasons — not always because they intend to draft them (or will have the opportunity to do so).

      • 75franks says:

        I hope your right its coleman r1 for me

        • Volume12 says:

          If Treadwell was sitting there and all the well ran dry on the OTs, IMO they’d consider it. And that’s only if they don’t get a weapon for RW in a trade or FA.

          Rob’s right. They interview a lot of guys. Now some of thos guys they’ll draft, but maybe PC vetted Treadwell due to the fact that an NFCW oppinet might grab.

    • Darth12er says:

      If I remember right, they didn’t interview Bruce Irvin at the combine.

      • Volume12 says:

        Might not of.

        Not every guy they draft is gonna be a VMAC visitor or interviewed at the combine, Senior Bowl, etc.

        Some will, some won’t.

  28. Trevor says:

    I think the Hawks really would prefer to keep Okung if at all possible but he is adamant abut testing the free agent market.

    If they follow thier normal pattern in free agency they will sign the piece they deem to be Core in Okung to a market deal $9-10 mil per then add a couple of veteran DTs . I would think Rubin and Mebane but definitely at least one of them. Then they will wait till the 2nd wave to try and add some veteran depth pieces cheaply.

    If they do an we don’t go OT in round #1 then I thought I would switch things up a run a FanSpeak mock basically taking the best player / fit for the team instead of focusing on DT/OT. Here is what I came up with.

    R1P26 CB WILLIAM JACKSON HOUSTON -Perfect fit opposite Sherm and a ball hawk. Potential to be a star and get a ton of picks. If Pete wants more turnovers this is the type of player they will target. I know they have never taken a CB early but if they can’t sign Lane and after the Carey Williams mess they might give it a shot.

    R2 56: G JOSHUA GARNETT STANFORD -Our LG from 2016 and next former Stanford star for the Hawks

    R3 90: C NICK MARTIN NOTRE DAME -Our starter at Center for the next 8-10 years

    R3 98: OLB TRAVIS FEENEY WASHINGTON -Perfect fit for our system and replacement for Bruce. Could have huge impact in 2016 if he can stay healthy

    R4125: DT ADOLPHUS WASHINGTON OHIO STATE -Poor combine and inconsistent but has talent as an interior pass rusher.

    R5172: QB CARDALE JONES OHIO STATE -Incredible Arm talent and a couple of years as under study for Russ may give him the time he needs to develop and mature. Could be a steal in the 5th round as he has elite talent. We need a backup QB.

    R6 215: OT FAHN COOPER OLE MISS – Our new swing OT who is solid and a need given Okungs injury history

    R7 223: DT DAVID ONYEMATA MANITOBA- Very raw but incredible upside. Ideal DT development prospect.

    R7 245: WR D.J. FOSTER ARIZONA STATE – Pefect 3rd down back to go along with Rawls and CMike.

    • franks says:

      This would be a nice draft if they resign Okung (ugggh). I don’t see Martin or Washington lasting that long though and Feeney might be a Day 3 guy, with his tape and his shoulders.

      Jackson would be the perfect fit opposite Sherm.

    • Hawksince77 says:

      As of this moment, William Jackson is my favorite first round option. Rob doesn’t agree – the Seahawks have never drafted a CB before the 4th (at least PC/JS) but I think this could be the year they do.

      Even if they re-sign Lane, Jackson would not be redundant. Also, we might expect Seattle to address the o-line in FA so that they are free to take the best player early in the draft.

      In that case (the o-line cared for) the second round could be Deion Jones or Feeney, providing a starter to replace Irvin.

      • franks says:

        77 I think it depends on Simon getting back. If he doesn’t, it’s a huge upgrade. If Lane doesn’t sign, it’s a need. I think Pete would pick a CB in R1 if he was the right guy. We did pass on Jimmie Smith that one year but physical tools aside, he wasn’t Seahawky, didn’t have that drive.

    • LantermanC says:

      While I love every pick, I think every pick here, other than William Jackson, could be gone be gone 20 picks before you have them listed here. If we got rid of Jackson and Garnett, and put in Ifedi, and slid everyone else up a pick, I’d still like this because we’d get 2 stud lineman, a freak LB, a DT, that when he’s on, Rob has described as the most disruptive interior D Lineman, high upside OT who can conceivably play LT, high upsiide QB, and then upside at the backend.

    • franks says:

      Do we have two 6’s or two 7’s?

      I’d like it if the hawks did this:

      Resign Rubin, Ryan, Michael and Lane.

      Draft

      R1 Coleman
      R2 Nkemdiche
      R3 trade to move up for Nkemdiche
      R3 Austin Johnson
      R4 Dahl
      R5 Shell
      R6 Nembot
      R6/7 QB Don’t care who
      R7 Foster sounds good if you can find a third down back so late. How come noone picks him sooner?

  29. lil'stink says:

    The Rishard Matthews story seems like a reporter just throwing something at the wall to see if it sticks.

    We have yet to extend Baldwin, so in this scenario Matthews would be our highest paid WR. And he might only be the #3 option, which is something he has publicly stated he has no interest in being.

    For a run heavy team I think you could do a lot worse than Baldwin and Lockett as your 1-2 receiver combo. For us to spend $5-6 million APY on a guy like Matthews almost seems like a hedge in case you don’t think you can keep Baldwin for some reason.

    • Rob Staton says:

      “We have yet to extend Baldwin, so in this scenario Matthews would be our highest paid WR. And he might only be the #3 option, which is something he has publicly stated he has no interest in being.”

      Why would the two be linked? With the cap room they’ll have for 2017, there’s every chance to extend Doug Baldwin’s contract after free agency is concluded. His cap hit in 2016 will almost certainly stay virtually the same (it’s how Seattle has structured all of their new deals) so they can do that deal whenever.

      As for Matthews — you can’t go into the season with just Baldwin and Lockett. They’re going to need to add someone at some stage — or hope Kevin Smith or Kasen Williams takes a giant leap. Swapping Kearse for a similar, extremely effective receiver (as highlighted in the piece) might not fit the fans ideal of a free agent addition — but it’s right down Seattle’s street.

      • Scraps says:

        We’re sorry, we can’t get our heads around someone who we considered briefly and dismissed.

        (Seriously, don’t you get tired of repeating your new stance when [sometimes] people get stuck and refuse to even consider that maybe they have an incomplete picture? I mean, if people read, contemplate, and end up disagreeing, sure; but lots of people, you can’t tell whether they’ve absorbed your thought at all, they just repeat themselves.)

        • Scraps says:

          (Not intending to disagree with you specifically, by the way, lil’stink.)

          • lil'stink says:

            That’s certainly ok if you disagree with me! I’ll certainly admit to when I’m wrong, and I’ve always been one to “agree to disagree”.

            I was just trying to make the point that I’m not sure how much faith I have in Kelly’s tweet, especially since it comes at a time when rumors and speculation run rampant. My comment certainly wasn’t directed at Rob being right or wrong. Just my 2 cents on the topic, and it’s certainly a point worth talking about so it’s worthy of Rob mentioning it.

            At the price he mentioned we would be paying Matthews $1-2 million more than we would likely offer Kearse. Perhaps Pete and John think he would be worth the extra money, and Matthews definitely seems like he could fill a void. IMHO it just seems a bit much for us to pay someone who projects to be a replacement for JK, but I wouldn’t necessarily be opposed to seeing Matthews in a Seahawk uniform for the right price.

        • Rob Staton says:

          The point of the blog IMO is to broaden horizons and open our minds to different possibilities. To consider a lot of things because the Seahawks constantly surprise.

          I think sometimes that message is lost a bit vs people thinking I’m voicing (or changing) opinion constantly.

  30. LLLOGOSSS says:

    I like the look of Matthews’ tape, but I certainly hope we don’t overpay for him. 5 mil. seems too rich for my blood, especially since I think our limit for Kearse should be around 4MM—and he has chemistry and experience here.

    Matthews seems to play faster than Jermaine, from what I’ve seen. The 40-times surprised me… Moves better and is more shifty after the catch with better yards after contact, too. However, as you’ve said, Rob, the Seahawks have “role players,” and I just don’t see Matthews replacing Jermaine’s “role” as the box-out, catch-radius, ISO, jump-ball receiver. Jermaine plays big; does Matthews? Or is Matthews another speed guy? In my opinion Baldwin, Lockett, and Richardson have very similar profiles—however different their game’s may be (speed, vs. elusiveness/route-running), none of them could be confused for a strong receiver who plays through contact, wins contested catches in traffic or in the air, and uses height/arm-length to their advantage. Kearse is that guy for us. That’s why I appreciate him—not for his numbers, but for his distinctive skill set/role.

    Not implying that you or Omar Kelly are wrong about their interest in Matthews, but from my perspective the player profile seems redundant with what we already have on the team. I know we’ve all been obsessed with that “big-receiver” we all figured Pete coveted (Rice, Mike Williams, interest in Vincent Jackson, Brandon Marshall, etc.), but it does seem like the Seahawks have loaded up on small, speed receivers in lieu of availability elsewhere. I just hope it doesn’t make us one-dimensional. Kearse brought a different look to the offense.

    Mathews for 3-4MM would be a great add, but I’m not sure how paying much more than that really helps this club the best.

  31. Volume12 says:

    Wow! Udub CB Kevin King is a freak! Dude is killing his junior pro day.

  32. reggieregg says:

    Matthews is a far better receiver than Kearse. He could double Kearse’s production! Watch them both play and tell me those 40 times aren’t irrelevant. Kearse has no moves no shiftiness. Matthews is an upgrade for sure!