Is something else brewing in Seattle?

July 27th, 2020 | Written by Rob Staton

‘Snacks’ Harrison remains a free agent

Yesterday the Seahawks cut a number of players, including Branden Jackson and Joey Hunt. Those two moves saved $4.2m. According to Spotrac, the Seahawks now have nearly $20m in available cap space.

This is actually more like $8-12m because the Seahawks still haven’t signed most of their rookies and they have to save millions for injured reserve and a practise squad.

Nevertheless, there’s a bit more room to spend now with several areas needing to be addressed.

So is something on the cards?

The answer seems to be yes, with one caveat.

It was revealed last week that the 2021 cap will not drop below $175m. That would still be a considerable reduction from the $198.2m this year. With coronavirus still at large and no sign of fans being allowed back in stadiums en masse any time soon, the chances are that the $175m figure could become a reality.

Several teams are in bother. Eight are already above the $175m threshold. The Seahawks are in a relatively healthy position. They are $39,203,489 in the black according to OTC if the cap was set at $175m. That doesn’t include Jamal Adams’ $9m though and it’s worth noting that a lot of players in Seattle are on short term contracts.

Although many people have celebrated Seattle’s use of two firsts and a third round pick on Jamal Adams (mainly because of the talent being acquired but also because Seattle’s recent draft history is patchy) — it’s worth remembering that a first round pick is your most valuable asset in terms of acquiring further assets. Fans might not like the constant trading down but it does, at times, provide you with a cost-effective way to fill out a roster.

Seattle will only pick once in the first three rounds next year. And while they’ll have about $30m to spend in free agency, here’s the long list of free agents who will need to be re-signed or replaced in the next off-season:

Shaquill Griffin
Chris Carson
K.J. Wright
Greg Olsen
Bruce Irvin
Quinton Dunbar
Poona Ford (RFA)
Jacob Hollister
Benson Mayowa
Mike Iupati
Cedric Ogbuehi
David Moore
Luke Willson
Geno Smith
Neiko Thorpe
Nick Bellore
Ethan Pocic
Bryan Mone (ERFA)
Phillip Dorsett
Lano Hill

There are others too who currently constitute camp competition for this year, so I haven’t listed them.

That’s a significant portion of the roster. The $30m available will also reduce considerably if they decide to retain the likes of Griffin and Carson. And while the 2020 draft class will be trusted to step into the shoes of some of the departing players, the Seahawks face a bit of a depth dilemma next year if the cap drops to $175m.

They won’t be alone of course. The entire league will be facing a similar struggle. The players might find a much weaker market as a consequence and it could make for one of the weirdest and most unpredictable free agency periods ever. The point is though — the Seahawks might want to carry over some cap space into next year for insurance purposes.

The counter to that is obviously they might also be determined to be ‘all-in’ for 2020 — and the Jamal Adams trade would suggest this is a team aggressively trying to win now with one eye (rather than two) on the future.

The most obvious moves to make to further improve the team are on the defensive line. It’s a safe bet that they’ll sign a defensive tackle at some point. They could probably do with a couple in all honesty. The depth behind Jarran Reed and Poona Ford is particularly weak and runs the risk of undermining the teams investment at linebacker. Whether it’s Snacks Harrison, Brandon Mebane or Timmy Jernigan — the Seahawks need to make at least one signing to bolster their interior.

That seems inevitable.

The other two question marks are clearly pass rush and receiver. The Seahawks still likely don’t have the money available to sign Jadeveon Clowney (especially considering they need to add other players too). The only realistic ways to make it work are for Clowney to feel unusually charitable and take a team-friendly one-year deal worth about $6-7m (unlikely). Or they can sign him to a long term contract with a low year-one cap hit (also unlikely, because the Seahawks like the rest of the league seem to have concerns about his longevity).

The alternative is Everson Griffen although it’s unclear what kind of contract he’s seeking or why he’s seemingly been so impacted by the Clowney stalemate. The fact he hasn’t signed anywhere is surprising and there’s been little info as to why other than he needed to wait for the Clowney situation to play out.

The mutual interest between Griffen and Seattle has been reported and is no surprise given the relationship between player and Pete Carroll. The question will surely come down to cost and whether the Seahawks can make it work.

The ideal situation would be to find a way to add both and go into the 2020 season with the teams best depth on the defensive line since 2013. People are too willing to forget how vital that depth was to the Super Bowl run. The fact is the Seahawks want to rush with four and it’s very difficult for this scheme to operate with a mediocre defensive front.

With regards to signing both — unfortunately that ship probably sailed in March. The much more likely scenario is that Seattle will add a defensive tackle and anything left could be creatively used to add a receiver and another pass rusher.

Getting another wide out is likely given the availability of Josh Gordon and the endless flirting with Antonio Brown.

It also feels increasingly important for the quarterback. Russell Wilson has been more active and outspoken this year. Whether it was the plea to add ‘superstars’ at the Pro Bowl or the public workout with Brown to the more subtle (but actually not so subtle) messaging offered through his media friends or social media.

Wilson is a tactical liker. He only follows 69 accounts on Twitter and none of them are Seahawks media people or writers. Yet he still manages a way to ‘like’ certain tweets (while knowing that people will, ultimately, report that he’s ‘liked’ them). A good example was when he liked my own tweet about Jonathan Taylor’s interest in playing for the Seahawks. This week, he also liked Corbin Smith’s tweet about re-signing Jadeveon Clowney.

Wilson is never going to come out and criticise the franchise but he’s seemingly been a bit more ‘pro-active’, shall we say, in trying to encourage some action. We all know that he’s addicted to winning (see: son’s name). I suspect he felt a bit agitated with the off-season and perhaps a little impatient. We’ll see, with time ticking down to training camp, whether the Seahawks can make a few extra moves to reassure their star player and give the team a much better chance to compete.

It does feel like something is brewing. As noted yesterday, they can only really justify the massive investment in Jamal Adams if they follow it up by finally fixing a D-line that PFF ranked as the worst in the league.

If you missed my ‘Jamal Adams trade’ podcast with Brandan, check it out below:

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

Become a Patron!

272 Responses to “Is something else brewing in Seattle?”

  1. Sorry if this was allready posted…

    “We haven’t drafted above 25 for what—10 years?” Pete Carroll told me Saturday night. Almost. Seattle took Bruce Irvin 15th overall in 2012, but it was 2010 when the Seahawks got Russell Okung sixth and Earl Thomas 14th in the first round. Otherwise, they haven’t picked earlier than 25th overall in the past 10 years.

    “So we haven’t had a shot at a top-10 pick in a while, and we haven’t had a shot at a top safety in the draft since Earl. This was an extraordinary opportunity for us. Jamal’s a legitimate impact player, in the style we love.”

    • BobbyK says:

      The Seahawks had the #18 pick a couple of years ago (then they traded it to the Packers for a late-twenties pick).

      • Whit21 says:

        1 slot away from Derwin james… shame.

        • Rob Staton says:

          That was never going to happen. Said it once, said it a million times.

          They had four picks in 2018. They were 100% trading down from #18. They’d clearly settled on tapping into the RB class. We’ve been all over this so many times.

  2. Georgia Hawk says:

    Im still shaking my head at the cost. After all the train robberies JS has managed to pull off, was this REALLY necessary of a cost? Don’t get me wrong, I love having Adams and think he is going to make a difference. However, you could make the argument that Adams is now the best pass rusher on the team…

    There has to be more to this somewhere…

    • Rob Staton says:

      This is where I’m at too. Love Jamal Adams the player but I’m not willing to switch off my brain to the cost, which was incredibly high and warrants a conversation (instead of having your fan credentials or mental health challenged, as many have ignorantly resorted to on social media). To quote an unnamed GM via Peter King today: “I wouldn’t trade two ones for a safety. Particularly when you’ve got to pay the safety a lot of money. I like what the Jets did.”

      That doesn’t mean Adams won’t be great for Seattle. I understand and appreciate the points about Seattle and their scheme and how valuable Kam Chancellor was in the role Adams will play. But what use is spending the house for a safety if you have completely neglected your D-line? It’s not a mediocre D-line. It’s the worst in the league, according to PFF. It makes the Adams trade seem like an indulgence rather than a ‘final piece’. Let’s imagine a scenario where they didn’t trade Frank Clark and instead kept him — then traded for (and kept) Jadeveon Clowney. Now imagine a pass rush duo of Clark + Clowney, supported by Jamal Adams and Quandre Diggs at safety and talent at linebacker. This trade would look completely different. It’d be the final piece of the puzzle.

      Instead, they have Adams and Diggs and the linebackers playing behind a line with no depth and mediocre talent.

      They may well add in the coming days as the article suggests but they are limited in what they can do having spent $56m on not a lot in March. Instead of Clark they have Collier. Instead of Clowney it’s Mayowa or Green. And that needs to be challenged and critiqued regardless of what happens in the next few days (however much people want to slag me off for being willing to talk about it). How they got to this point and what it says about the franchise is a discussion we should have, rather than simply being good subjects and not questioning the dear leader(s).

      The other issue, of course, is how they address incoming issues without their key draft stock for two years. Because they’re going to need a solution at left tackle sooner or later. That might not be an issue people want to discuss now. In a year or two, when you don’t have the stock to acquire a left tackle or draft a good one and you’re left to start the next Bradley Sowell or Rees Odhiambo protecting Wilson’s blindside — you might want to return to this trade or their inability or unwillingness to draft a LT for the future in the 2020 draft when there were options available (and they instead drafted a WILL of the future).

      • Georgia Hawk says:

        Im with ya. I think this trade is something they just couldn’t stay away from, like an addict being offered a hit. Pete loves his secondary, and Adams is arguably the best in the biz right now. Having a stout secondary is great, but doesnt do much if the QB can sit in the pocket untouched for 4 sec every snap. Bobby is the best MLB in the game, unquestioned now that Keuchly is retired, but he had his worst year last year because he couldnt stay clean. Now the line is far worse, how is that going to help Wagner and KJ get to the ball?

        Id say you are right on point with the needs coming due in a few years and now no picks to fill them. The ONLY silver lining I see…well….maybe its more of a muddled gray lining that looks sorta silvery if you hit it with the right light…is they have shown zero ability to actually draft and develop quality T on their own. So I won’t count that as a total loss. Might have to dip into FA for a middle of the pack guy and overpay him to pick up when Brown is gone.

        • Mike says:

          “We cant draft well” isn’t a defensible position. It’s typically a fire-able position. If “consistent refinements” yield diminishing results, it’s time to question the approach & philosophy.

          Don’t get me wrong, I’ve been a staunch supporter and defender of JS/PC for years. Im not saying I don’t like their brand of football. But I’ve been told how excited they are about {insert redemption project on prove it deal here}, or {insert rookie who will take a big step forward here}, to know how often they become superstars in reality. Rarely.

          I’ve also seen us win when we had both a good defensive line and an offensive line. And fall short when we vent talent from either of the lines.

          On the bright side, we finally have actual football news (not rumors) to discuss for the first time in a while.

          • AlaskaHawk says:

            As far as I can tell, JS and PC lost their draft touch when they picked Malick McDowell. They have had a defensive line curse ever since. Maybe they should sacrifice a goat at mid-field.

            But seriously, if the cap is getting reduced then that makes those cheap first round draft picks with five years of control even more important. So what if they aren’t in the top ten, they are still better than being in the second or third round. Lets see, that’s two picks with a total of 10 years of control. How many years do they have Adams for?

            • BobbyK says:

              Their 2013 draft is one of the worst in franchise history.

              • Group Captain Mandrake says:

                To be fair, it was a horrible draft so it wasn’t just the Seahawks that had a bad one. Why they insisted on signing players from that draft and then keeping them on the roster, I will never understand.

      • Big Mike says:

        You know Rob, if you stayed off the cesspool that is social media you’d not have to deal with the B.S. Probably not possible considering you do a blog and all I suppose.
        Fanboys are everywhere and blind support is not only part of sports, but politics and industry as well. Try taking it with a grain of salt and hang in there man.

    • Steve Nelsen says:

      Think of the cost this way:
      1. Would you use a #6 overall 1st round pick on a strong safety? If you say “no,” then this trade will never make sense to you.
      2. But if you said “yes” or “maybe” the trading 2 late 1st round picks in the future to move up to #6 overall is good trade value per the draft charts and you aren’t getting a draft prospect, you are getting a proven all-pro.

      • GoHawksDani says:

        This is a very valid point.
        If this would’ve been a pick trade then lets say:
        #23 (760) + #87 (155) + next year’s R1 (lets say that is #23 also, as future picks are devalued lets make it 500) + McDougald (hard to put a point to it, but for the sake of it we can say he equals to the previous R3 pick)
        for #6 (1600) and an R4 (70 for example).

        We gave up around 1570 for 1670. That seems like an equal trade

        • mishima says:

          If evaluating trades were as simple as basic math.

          • Kelly says:

            Is it not? Isn’t that why there is the draft chart? Sure some players over or underperform their draft position but you can’t take that into consideration when taking trading picks.

            • mishima says:

              Draft charts approximate the value of picks, not established players.

              You would never assign Russell Wilson a value of 215.

              It’s nonsense.

              • Steve Nelsen says:

                That is not the point Mishima. In fact, the point is the exact opposite. If you would consider trading 2 late 1st round picks for the #6 overall based on the draft chart, the point is getting a proven all-pro still on his rookie contract instead of an unproven prospect is even better value.

                • mishima says:

                  A proper reply requires more time than I have.

                  IMO, draft charts should only be used to approximate the value of the picks before selection.

                  Once the pick is made, trade value is determined by the quality of the pick/player.

                  They traded for Jamal Adams not the 6th pick of the 2017 NFL draft.

                  • Steve Nelsen says:

                    Yes. I agree with you Mishima.

                    Please consider this when you reply because I value your thoughts. I don’t mean this to sound like a challenge. “If it is fair value for the #6 pick, then wouldn’t it be more than fair value if the player chosen proves to be an All-Pro a year later?” I tried to get some data about how often a drafted player becomes a Bust, backup, starter, pro-bowler or all-pro and create an adjusted draft value for a young proven all-pro compared to an unproven rookie but it is beyond my skills but that is the point I am trying to lead to. Adams isn’t unproven. He is an established all-pro talent at a very young age. His objective “value” based on whatever standard you use, should be higher than a #6 overall pick.

                    I understand positions like Rob’s that a strong safety is not worth 2 1st-rounders but as I said in my first post, if you think that using a #6 overall pick for a strong safety could be reasonable, then the “value” equation in this trade is not “completely unjustifiable” as some have posted. That analysis just seems to lead to a weak conclusion that drafting any position with the #6 besides a QB or LT or other “premier position” is a waste even if the player becomes an All-Pro while he is still on his rookie deal.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    I haven’t made the argument about the position and two first round picks.

                    I compared the trade to other recent trades for other players, while noting it was more expensive or similar than deals for more premium positions (Mack, Tunsil etc). I’ve suggested it feels like a panic move late in a disappointing off-season. I’ve questioned what it says for their Marquise Blair pick a a year ago and his future.

                    I haven’t said anything about the strong safety position.

                  • mishima says:

                    All good and I respect your opinion.

                    I have no problem with the position that Jamal Adams is worth 2 first-round picks, but I wouldn’t make that determination using draft value charts.

                    When judging the trade, I would look at positional value, ability in free agency / draft to address positional need, existing contract, future expectations, character, etc. In short, what’s the market for an elite strong safety with 2 years left on contract?

                    IMO, we overpaid. (Would give 2 firsts, a third and your starting SS for La’el Collins?)

                    Thought experiment to illustrate the limitations of draft value charts. Before the 2019 draft, most thought it would take 1000 value to have a shot at DK Metcalf. He went at a pick valued around 270. What’s he worth post draft? Post rookie season? Etc. Once drafted, you can’t assign a previous draft value to determine equivalencies.

        • Bigsteviej says:

          It doesn’t take into account the fact that in your scenario they’re getting a guy on a four plus one year rookie deal. Here, they’re getting a guy who’s made it clear that he wants a new deal now, and he wants to be the highest paid safety in the league. So it’s not an apples to apples comparison.

      • Chris says:

        Extremely poor, but extremely common type of analysis.

        The largest cost in these types of trades is often not the draft capital but the opportunity cost of paying the player. If Adams ultimately receives a fair market salary from the Seahawks, that money could have been used to pay a nearly equivalent talent in free agency, without giving up nearly the draft capital (except for effects on compensation picks). So a better representation of the decision is “Would you rather have Adams OR a player with the same market value as Adams AND 2 1st round picks?” and not “Would you rather have Adams OR 2 1st round picks?”.

    • Cortez Kennedy says:

      Not to mention that like every elite safety not named Eddie Robinson is going to need a new contract around the same time. He is going to be EXPENSIVE.

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        Why are you and Chris and bigsteviej complaining about the cost? The guy is still playing on his rookie deal? If he gets paid in a year or two because he is an All-Pro isn’t that a good thing?

        The Seahawks paid Kam top dollar because they value strong safety. Some other teams with other schemes don’t. I’m trying to put some data into the “he’s a good player but Seattle overpaid” subjective opinion discussion or the even more tired “he’s a good player but he isn’t a defensive lineman” discussion that seems to have taken over everywhere.

        It would be cool if there was a draft pick value chart for veteran players. But, since Adams is still on his rookie contract, I thought that would be a commonly understood objective frame of reference to start a discussion.

  3. Cysco says:

    I think Rob nailed it in this article with free agency this coming year. I think that’s Seattle’s strategy for next offseason – Take advantage of the likely massive number of players that will be available. In some respects having draft picks next year would be a detriment to that since you have to pay them. Perhaps Seattle sees an opportunity to spend that rookie salary money next year on players that have NFL experience already. No first and third round pick next year? There’s what, $4-5m you can spend in free agency?

    In a normal year, that first round pick is really important to setting up you offseason, next year will not be normal. The team that wins the offseason next year will likely be the one who is best prepared to take advantage of free agency.

  4. Tree says:

    The price was steep for JA. But we did not trade this year’s first round pick as part of the package to get him, which means we have both Brooks and JA THIS year. Also, there is no way we are getting an all pro next year by drafting at the first round, so we are way better off next year as well. We will of course lose some guys but many listed won’t be a huge loss (some won’t make the team this year) and we have already drafted some potential replacements. This seems like a two year window where both lines will essentially be intact in terms of the young core (we may need to replace Brown but I think Jones is serviceable) and extend Shaq or Dunbar (or develop someone else) if he stays out of jail and of course we will need to draft well and find value free agents like we often do. The you can’t pay that much for a safety critique seems like a national media take often critiqued on this blog. We have seen how important an elite safety is to this scheme. We have been able to get serviceable CBs in rounds 3-5 or even a UDFA, but not at safety party because are scheme (although Sherman certainly helped!). Also, the recent cuts show the Hawks are not stupid (again, signing guys you can cut until you see how your team shakes out in the draft and as others are signed is smarter than not signing anyone) and will be shrewd when they have to be. They will continue to add. Even the naysayers have to start getting excited for the next two years at least.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Raising legitimate concerns about the off-season doesn’t make you a ‘naysayer.

      The frequency with which people have sought to undermine those daring to challenge the Seahawks’ front office is disappointing. Imagine if, instead of writing detailed articles, I just said the off-season sucked and if you disagree you’re just a bunch of fanboys?

      • Mike says:

        It may just a be a sign of the times Rob. People want a positive distraction right now. JA is the only exciting addition we’ve had in terms of talent since Clowney.

        That said, this blog has always been about depth of analysis. The criticism and mixed feelings are valid, even if it contradicts what some people want to hear and hope for.

        But every year there’s at least one big surprise we dont predict. So maybe this will work out. Maybe there will be pressure and TFLs that we just get pleasantly surprised with. It certainly would defy my expectations though.

        Overall, it seems they’ve injected lots of speed, saavy, instincts, and tackling skill to the defense. That counts for something. Given the NFC west has been running deceptive schemes, breaking contain, and running a track meet on us..that speed on defense may damper the opposing offenses strengths. Even good d-lines weren’t doing a good job of containing shannahan, kyler murray, or mcvay. Realistically, we were never going to go from terrible to elite on the dline this year..though everyone expected more.

        We were high on isaiah simmons as a do it all guy that could change the defense. JA is in the same mould, but proven and experienced. He will change the defense for the better. The real question, is will it change it enough to win this year?

      • Tree says:

        Love your blog and providing a forum for discussion even if I disagree with what you or anyone else posts. My point is even if you don’t like the trade for the long-term (legit take when u pay this steep of a price) or how the hawks have gone about the offseason (not aggressively adding to the pass rush at the start of FA and instead focusing on revamping line, adding depth and quickness on edges), you have to be excited about the next two years and we are way better off than if we had not made this trade during this time.

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        On the other hand, Rob it sometimes seems that if a commenter offers an opinion that the Seahawks did something right, they are dismissed as a fanboy.

        I miss the time when we could have polite intelligent discussions on both sides of an issue or question and bring in new ideas based on objective data like TEF and SPARQ and Seahawky measureables.

        I get bored with “here is my opinion and all other opinions are wrong” passing as analysis.

        • Rob Staton says:

          That’s total nonsense Steve. That’s an insulting and ridiculous appraisal of this place.

          Just look over the last few days. There have been plenty of people praising the trade, unchallenged.

          Generally if people make fair arguments that aren’t easily disputed they won’t go unchallenged.

          Points that deserve challenging will be.

        • cha says:

          The Seahawks entered this season in a position they hadn’t been in, in years. Superstars locked down, a good amount of cap room, a full raft of draft picks, and a clear, definable need that is holding them back from real contention.

          I suspect if they’d knocked it out of the park, the conversation would be flipped. Everyone trying to be a downer would be calling Rob an overly optimistic fanboy (without presenting much objective points for discussion) because he wrote positively about the team’s moves.

          Instead, the reality is the organization seems as rudderless and subject to whims and tide as much as they’ve ever been in the PC JS era.

          But either way, it should be noted that NONE of it is Rob’s doing. He’s just writing from a place of analysis and honesty.

  5. CL says:

    John Gilbert commented on fieldgulls, that the savings are 2.133M each, so 4.266M in total.

    But because of the rule of 51, they are replaced by 2 players with 750K cap hits, which puts us at a net saving of 2.766M.

    Is this correct?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Not really. Because as soon as you add anyone else to the roster, those 750k salaries come off the books again. So theoretically it is correct at the moment but they don’t ‘lose’ 2x750k because those two players are only on the roster temporarily.

  6. Sea Mode says:

    Well, thank goodness at least we had the sense to do that:

    Tom Pelissero
    @TomPelissero
    ·3h

    Before the #Seahawks finalized their blockbuster trade for safety Jamal Adams, the sides agreed he’d play 2020 on his existing rookie contract, per source. So Adams will make about $3.59 million this season in Seattle and no promises thereafter. He’s due $9.86M in 2021.

    • LLLOGOSSS says:

      I’m torn about this. Doesn’t this tactic now place us in danger of losing all leverage? This is where the Rams are with Jalen Ramsey, and I think we’ve all celebrated their upcoming calamity. They bet the house on a player who has very little commitment to them. I like our policy not to extend before the last year of the deal, but that just provides more reasons not to do this trade, unfortunately.

      Theoretically, we have Adams under contract for two seasons and can franchise him thereafter, but with the way he treated the Jets organization I’m guessing we do not want to go down that road. Scorched earth usually — usually — diminishes trade value, considerably, as it backs franchises into corners with their players. We may find that another team isn’t willing to give up two 1sts to take a safety off our hands who is holding out and calling out the coach and GM.

      • Zach says:

        Here is the other side. He’s already a 2x all-pro at 24 years old. You were going to pay at the top of the market regardless. It’s not like a 3x all-pro makes that much more than a 2x all-pro.

        So the question is, what will the top of the market be. Historically, the nfl salary cap has been rising meteorically leading to higher and higher salaries. It’s likely that trend won’t continue and the effects of COVID will push the NFL cap down. Since teams gave guaranteed money under the assumption of a rising cap, veterans with out guarantees already in their contract will have an abnormally soft market.

        I think Adams will be the highest paid safety in the league, I just don’t think he can reset the market quite the way he want’s to (right now).

        The seahawks will not necessarily have alot less leverage next season than now. And the risk is significantly less, so why not see what happens.

  7. cha says:

    Thanks for the writeup Rob. If the Hawks want to make another splashy decision they’ll definitely have to tread carefully.

    To me it underscores how ass-backwards this offseason has been. If they addressed the pass rush in free agency, they have so many more options and a daring move to trade the farm for Adams seems so much more plausible.

    They’d have the pass rush addressed.

    They wouldn’t have to trade up for Taylor, costing them a 3rd. They could have drafted a C-E-H weapon or Jonathan Taylor (or just stuck with Brooks) and still drafted bookend tackles. One to compete for the RT job immediately and another to backup Brown and take over in a year or two.

    Then a daring move to upgrade the defense with a BAMF safety makes so much more sense.

    • Simo says:

      Valid points Cha, but maybe things still shake out well in the end, proving there’s more than one way to build a contender. If they can somehow get Clowney back (or Griffen as a consolation prize), add a DT, and bring Gordon back won’t we all feel like they addressed their needs pretty well, while also adding an all-pro player?

      I agree its not how any of us saw things going in early March, but PC/JS have always done things differently than most fans or football critics saw coming.

      Just find a way to add these key positions even if they have to cut a couple more guys, and I’ll definitely feel a lot better about their chances! We’ll face 2021 down the road!

      • cha says:

        For sure, but they’re back to scrambling at the OT position and now they don’t have 2 first round picks to address it or trade down for more picks. So again, instead of having a viable succession plan they’ll end up having to pay in the trade market for a LT when Brown retires.

  8. Sea Mode says:

    Per Breer:

    The teams, I’m told, have been discussing a trade for about a month and a half, so there’s been a pretty fair understanding on what it might take to get it done. But Seahawks GM John Schneider, I’m told, wanted clarity on the future of the cap, given all the unknowns ahead, and so the NFL and NFLPA striking their deal on Friday really became the trigger to make a hypothetical a reality.

    Over the last 24 hours, Schneider talked to Jets GM Joe Douglas, and Douglas spoke with Adams’s agent Kevin Conner (basically confirming signing Adams would be impossible), and it wound up getting done.

    https://www.si.com/nfl/2020/07/27/bill-obrien-texans-rookies-facility-jamal-adams-trade

    It was never a question of his availability, which everyone has known about even since last year’s trade deadline. The hold-up was on our end as JS was waiting for cap details before pulling the trigger.

    So maybe, giving JS the benefit of the doubt, Adams was the target all along. And maybe, just maybe, this clarity now on the cap will be what they were waiting for to finally up their offer to Clowney after it became clear he wasn’t interested in whatever they had been willing to offer initially?

    • mishima says:

      I was thinking this, last night.

      With cap uncertainty, their approach to free agency and willingness to overpay for Adams makes more sense.

      What they do with the remaining cap space will be telling. Clowney, Snacks, Gordon would not surprise.

  9. Denver Hawker says:

    It’s interesting that JS wanted future cap clarity before trading for Adams. That means he knows he’ll be going in to at least one reduced cap season with no cheap way to fill roster spots (via the draft).

    It’s too early to speculate what their pending FAs will cost to keep.

    Also, the LT issue is an interesting one. That position seems like a long-term crap shoot in the draft. Takes guys years to develop to take on top edge rushers and even the R1 talents are inconsistent at being sure bets. I like the strategy to acquire vets via trade but now they can’t effectively do that.

  10. Logan Lynch says:

    Late to the party, but I’ve come to terms with the deal. I don’t love it, but I don’t hate it either especially since the 2021 draft will possibly be jacked up due to COVID. I also didn’t want them to get rid of Blair either, which makes me happy.

    Not that it really means anything, but has Diggs always been listed at SS on the team roster? Adams, Diggs, and Hill are listed at SS with Blair, Amadi, and Miller at FS. I know they want their safeties to be somewhat interchangeable, so it probably means nothing. Back when Adams was mentioned originally, I said how fun it would be to see him, Blair, and Diggs on the field at the same time. Jim Nagy mentioned the possibility too. I’m excited to see how this plays out.

    • mishima says:

      Went from bargaining, skipped depression, at acceptance.

      But the move raises the question: Do I still trust Carroll to build a championship roster?

      Still a fan, but have my doubts.

  11. Gaux Hawks says:

    Price tag for Brandon Mebane… veteran minimum?

  12. JLemere says:

    Cowherd on his show believes that Pete Carroll has too much power. You think RW will build a case against PC when PC’s contract expires at the end of the 2021 season.

    • mishima says:

      Prior to signing his last contract, I’m sure Wilson asked for and received assurances that they would surround him with better talent.

      Gave him another rebuilt OL, Olsen and Dorsett.

      IMO, writing is on the wall. My bet: Carroll retires and/or Wilson pulls a Brady.

      • Davido says:

        I respect your bet but can we go easy on this for second?
        Russ has never said a negative word about Pete nor is there any sign that Russ is unhappy. Everything we have is him saying that he would love to acquire more superstars while he was playing with them at the probowl.
        Hell, he just got Jamal Adams. If he ain’t a superstar in this league who is?

        • mishima says:

          Me going easy: I sense Wilson is frustrated.

        • JLemere says:

          RW doesn’t need to say a negative word, Cowherd is doing that for him.

          • Davido says:

            That’s a theory of Rob. Even though the thinking is plausible there is 0% proof of it.
            Can we also not forget what Colin Cowherd’s job is? He makes a living of having ridiculous takes.
            Let’s not get mad during this (dissapointing) offseason and start some “Brady hates Belichick” bullshit based on some reading between the lines.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Well of course it’s a theory. Surely you don’t expect phone records or a secret recording to validate it?

              Everything said about Cowherd and Wilson was steeped in logic and was incredibly reasonable. Shouting ‘Cowherd though’ in response ain’t a counter.

              • Davido says:

                Well it is a counter but there is no need to argue. I don’t think your theory is crap or that it can’t be true. It’s just not enough for me to buy into some sort of “Russ hates Pete” drama. When there is absolutely 0 indication from anyone directly involved in this.

                • mishima says:

                  Straw man: No one has said Russ hates Pete.

                  • Davido says:

                    It’s an exaggeration for sure. You didn’t say that he hates him. But from my understanding you have said that Russ is so uncomfortable playing under Pete that he want’s him to retire or he will leave. Which is probably as close to Russ hating anyone as it gets.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  Literally nobody has said Wilson hates Pete. Not even close to the argument.

  13. GoHawksDani says:

    The amount of content you pushing out is crazy! Thanks!

    As for FAs, I think these are the ones need to retain or swap for a different player:
    Shaquill Griffin, Greg Olsen, Bruce Irvin, Quinton Dunbar, Poona Ford (RFA), Jacob Hollister, Cedric Ogbuehi (maybe Jones could fill RT, but we need at least OT depth), Luke Willson, Geno Smith, Neiko Thorpe, Nick Bellore, Bryan Mone (ERFA), Phillip Dorsett (we might have WR4 already on the roster but missing WR3), Lano Hill (Diggs, Adams starters, Blair big nickel/backup, but we might need a bit more depth)

    And these are already “replaced”:
    Chris Carson (Penny, Hyde, Homer, Dallas…unless Penny steps up big and remain healthy we might need to get another back, but that’s not that hard because the devaluation of the position)
    K.J. Wright (Brooks or Barton)
    Benson Mayowa (hopefully Taylor or Robinson can be at least as good as Mayowa will be)
    Mike Iupati (maybe we need to add depth but I hope between Finney, Pocic, Lewis, Haynes, and Simmons we can find 2 starting OG)
    Ethan Pocic (same as Iupati, just Pocic is a backup mostly)
    David Moore (I hope Ursua/Swain/Thompson/Sullivan can fill WR4 after Lockett, Metcalf, Dorsett)

    Positions that will be really thin:
    CB, TE, DT

    Ton of CBs will enter the market. Not sure how many could be better than Griffin though. I would like Awuzie or Kevin King. Breeland is an option too I think. Gareon Conley, PJ Williams, Rasul Douglas could be in play too.
    I’d like to keep Griffin and add another from this list.

    TE has some interesting names..but Kittle is like 100% re-signed by the niners. Hunter Henry is likely cost too much. Geralt Everett might be cheaper and OK. But apart from these guys most others are either old or backup caliber. So TE seems thin in FA.

    As for DT, I’d like to keep Poona, but need another addition. Ogunjobi and Collins are the biggest contributors probably (based on last year), but Rankins, Mario Edwards will also be FAs among others. It might not be that hard to get a backup/rotational/run stuffer, but other than that you only have 3-4 guys.

    So I’d do this:
    Keep Griffin, Ford, Dorsett (if he plays well), Hollister, Geno.
    Get Awuzie, Williams or Douglas (nCB or fight out with Flowers for CB2)
    Get one of the previously mentioned DTs (who’s the best fit/or the cheapest of them)
    Try to keep Carson for the right price but DO NOT overpay
    Draft RT and TE in either R2, R4 or R5. For RT go for low floor, high ceiling gamble (otherwise you won’t have a chance to draft a starter caliber RT in R2 or R4)
    Fill the spots with remaining picks and cheaper players.

    That seems the only option for me. There’ll be some solid DEs entering FA, but we won’t have money for them. And we can’t create much more money (we can cut/trade Finney and Shell but that’s about it. Other guys that we can cut only bring under a million in space). We cannot really trade players either. All the value players are either cornerstone guys, or cornerstone guys AND would create a ton of dead cap.

    Too bad we won’t have bigger cap space. If a lot of club will be in trouble that might make the new contracts smaller and some better player might become cap causalities

  14. Rob4q says:

    Current DT on the Seahawks roster and their experience:

    Josh Avery, 6’3″, 322 lbs – Rookie
    Demarcus Christmas, 6’3″, 301 lbs – 2nd year
    Poona Ford, 5’10”, 310 lbs – 3rd year
    Cedrick Lattimore, 6’3″, 300 lbs – Rookie
    Bryan Mone, 6’3″, 366 lbs – 2nd year
    Jarran Reed, 6’3″, 306 lbs – 5th year

    That’s a pretty young group with almost no NFL experience behind Poona and Jarran…they have to sign a vet!

  15. Ashish says:

    Rob, I like this article, thank you. If we sign a good D-Line ( DT or DE) before season starts, does that make Hawks a lot better team and improve chances in many folds compare to now? Will Adams trade make more exciting and meaning full ?
    I understand with Adams trade Seahawks has shown an intend which was lacking in this off-season. We will know in future how this trade workout. Signing one or two players now with some cap space, make hawks better.
    I also understand we don’t have even average pass rush, but have we improved significant in middle area where Kittle/Debo/RAMS scheme eat our lunch?

  16. Trevor says:

    The more I think about the trade the more I like it. Would anyone have batted an eye if we had traded this years #1 and next years #1 to move up and draft Isiah Simmons. I don’t think so. In fact I think we would have been pretty excited. Adams is a similar type player who has proven he can play at a Pro bowl level and he is not even 25 yet. He is younger than LJ Collier.

    Instead we add Brooks this year and give up the (2) #1s in years when there is great uncertainty and the likelihood a college football season is pretty grim. Sounds reasonable to me.

    As Rob has said several times if they add a quality DT and Pass rusher before the start of the season this trade makes a ton of sense and is a great move. If they don’t there will be a lot more questions than answers.

  17. MountainGump says:

    I don’t believe the Seahawks will attempt to sign older veterans on the DL that have already made millions in their careers, as many of these wealthy players have very little disincentive to opt-out at any point during the season if COVID fears escalate among the NFL players. There may be a few veterans (ie. Bruce Irvin) that opt-out now during the 7-day opt-out period and accept their meager $150k stipend. But many of those studs who already have built substantial wealth could simply walk away from their 2020 contracts at any time during the season if they feel like their livelihood and family’s health is on the line–particularly parents of young childrem. The most valuable players to NFL FOs right now are the 23-25 year old proven difference-making starters with experience that have not yet made their millions–like JA–that need to play in 2020-2021 to reach their financial goals. So we should expect the Seahawks to trade to capitalize on DL opportunities even if they involve further future draft capital. If any of you currently run businesses, divisions. or work-teams, then you know how hard it is to hire and develop young talent remotely via Zoom. It is not really difficult to manage existing employees virtually, but it is very hard to train and acclimate newbies remotely. And in a bear market, if the NFL salary cap continues to decline, then the value of draft capital relative to trade capital is much lower than the past 10 years and the value of short term non-guaranteed contracts is likewise way higher. If the Seahawks indeed possess this view already, then why try to sign Clowney, Griffen, Mebane, Snacks et al? And why not expect further trades for guys like Adams in key positions of need? Maybe JS/PC are currently working similar trades for DL now. This is the potential windfall I mentioned yesterday. The key is to get these trades done now (after the 2021 cap has been set), but before the rest of the market grasps the right strategy.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’ll tell you why…

      Their D-line, currently, is shite.

    • McZ says:

      So, a 30yr old player facing a 0.01% chance of catchng a tougher case of Covid-19 will stop trying to earn millions of dollars by doing what they love? There is no indication of that becoming the general trend, IMO.

      Actually, the teams are still able to watch tape, they can call coaches and there is no reason Combine cannot be repeated, possibly with a bit more presence. It will still be a crapshoot, but I’ll tell you what… you don’t want to go to a crapshoot without maneuvering space.

      If Adams elevates this D is up for proof.

  18. Ty the Guy says:

    Rob,

    I disagree with your thinking that the Blair pick was a waste. What we saw from him last year was some potential, but also some work needed. I liked B-MAC, but was OK with us giving Blair a shot at a starting role, mostly because I thought we lacked physicality in the secondary. When a player like Adams becomes available (and the price is definitely debatable), you throw you current plans aside. Now Blair provides depth and potential for Adams or Diggs to play some slot or in the box in a Big Nickel package perhaps?

    Looking back, help with the OL or DL would have been nice, but to call the Blair pick a waste is unfair to the front office. If we are now able to add Clowney or Griffin, and/or a depth DT, I believe this defense will be a Top 10 if not Top 5 unit. You mentioned the depth of the SB run, at the beginning of the year people were saying that DL was awful too. Maybe Adams will solidify the secondary, allow for an extra second of pass rush and make PCJS look really good.

    • Rob Staton says:

      It’s a waste if he doesn’t start.

      You don’t draft that high for depth.

      • Big Mike says:

        100% agree. Then there’s Collier

      • Ty the Guy says:

        The acquisition of Jamal Adams does not indicate a writing off of Blair.

        An elite talent was available, the Hawks paid a lot to get him. To me this says they believe Adams total effect will be worth more than what was given up for him. Yes, this does mean that if they don’t make a SB run with Adams then the trade is a failure. They could have just signed Clowney or traded for Ngakue or Chris Jones. But at this point, Rob you are correct in saying this, they needed to do SOMETHING.

        I believe Blair could start for a few teams out there. As it sits hopefully he can contribute on special teams and act as insurance for Diggs/Adams. I understand the argument that it would be better to have a developing offensive lineman or a second year DE instead, but calling him a waste of a pick seems unfair IMO.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Well if Blair never plays and is a backup then that’s a write off for a high pick.

          And if you draft a safety and then feel obliged to trade for two more in the subsequent 12 months that doesn’t say much for the guy you drafted.

          • GerryG says:

            I agree, but I also think that we will be lucky to get 10 healthy games out of Diggs, so having 3 safeties will probably be beneficial this season. Doesn’t mean I think the investment into the position over the last year (like LB) is smart team building.

  19. mishima says:

    How is Blair (R2, #47) not a wasted pick?

    If he learns the playbook, you might get a serviceable backup for a couple years.

    That the FO traded for Diggs and Adams suggests they agree with Rob.

    • mishima says:

      Meant as reply to Ty.

    • Henry Taylor says:

      Or he could play FS and Diggs can play in the slot.

      It’s not unreasonable to question is place in the team going forward, but I also don’t think it’s unreasonable to think he still has plenty of opportunities to get on the field.

      • Rob Staton says:

        IMO it’d be a waste to play Diggs in the slot.

        He looked exceptional at safety last year.

      • ZHawk says:

        The ideal situation for Blair would be if the Seahawks plan to use Adams heavily as a dime linebacker and/or big nickel and bring Blair in as the SS. At least half of Adams’ snaps this past season were in the box where he excels, so this isn’t out of the question.

        Additionally, having drafted a first round linebacker that excelled at blitzing in college, and then trading for a top-tier safety that also happens to be the best blitzing safety in the league might imply a potential scheme change for the Seahawks that includes more blitzes. Of course this creates more questions around how we plan to use our abundance of linebackers and Ugo Amadi, but if Carroll and Norton want to create more pressure on passing downs, this is certainly one option.

        • Davido says:

          I have said that before in another post. I don’t see Blair as the traditional Kam type. He is just so different physically. You don’t want to put a sub 200 pounds DB in the box.
          Now Adams can play the “Kam position” which would have never been Blair’s task anyways. They have to get more creative to put Blair on the field anyways. The addition of Adams didn’t change that.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Then it was a wasted pick.

            You don’t draft top 50 players who don’t ‘fit’ the role they were drafted for, only to a year later be left in a state where you have to ‘find’ or manufacture a role for them.

            It’s a damning indictment on their decision making that they spent two high picks in 2019 and have spent the last year essentially trying to add better players at each position, using picks and money.

  20. Big Mike says:

    Cowherd basically just said a lot of the things Rob has said, that the price was way too high and that the trade reeks of desperation. Maybe someone will post a link to the comments since I’m lazy.
    Regardless, he also said he feels Pete has too much power and these decisions are his. ALL the decisions in Seattle are ultimately his Colin. Always have been. The day he was announced as the HC and VP of Ops, we were told that he had ultimate authority. That’s whyI’ve never understtod people complaing about John doing such and such. He does nothing without Pete’s final approval.

  21. Rob Staton says:

    Dunbar is on the commissioners exempt list.

    Might be cut soon then.

    • Murphy says:

      How much cap space would that free up? I haven’t said it in a while but your content has been top notch through this surreal off season.

    • Gaux Hawks says:

      pffff…almost forgot we in the year two thousand and twenty.

    • Denver Hawker says:

      Would an assumption be that he won’t be removed until the case is handled? And if so, that likely wouldn’t be in 2020 so they might as well cut him?

    • McZ says:

      Another fifth rounder wasted.

    • Elmer says:

      They don’t have to cut him, if he’s on the exempt list he isn’t on the active roster, right? That would explain why yesterday’s cut-down from 90 players was only 9 people.

      If he’s on the exempt list does his salary still count against the cap? If so, cutting him would increase space under the cap, important if another move or two is in the works. However, they might highly value Dunbar’s skills and might be hesitant to cut him. (?)

  22. HOUSE says:

    The moves yesterday are definitely a precursor of something coming. What that is has gotta be some help on the DL. I am still in the belief that unless something drastic happens (restructuring of a contract or Clowney taking pennies) that Harrison and/or Griffen might be the moves. I’m also just waiting for Josh Gordon to get reinstated by the NFL and I think he’s a better chance of returning than getting AB in the fold.

    Regarding the list of impending FAs, one thing I see throughout that list is depth and hedge guys. With the exception of Griffin, Carson, Poona and Wright, none of those guys are home-grown Seahawks and they were all brought in at some point to compete. I think that the Seahawks core remains primarily intact, but depth and continuity will be key to keeping the team competitive.

    I also agree with Rob that next year’s draft will be extremely interesting. I get the feeling that in order to fill the roster out, we’ll be looking at a ton of UDFAs or veterans that will have to take less money due to the shrunken salary cap.

    • HOUSE says:

      Just saw 2 reports:

      Wilson is pushing HARD for AB
      &
      Everson Griffen is narrowing his list of teams and the GB Packers are one of the favorites

      • Rob Staton says:

        Where’s the Wilson report from?

          • Jordan says:

            To me this really shows the competitor Wilson is. I think he wants to be the guy. He wants to be the best and thought of ahead of Mahomes. Wilson has the talent and has been voted/viewed in the same tier with Mahomes from many GMs/insiders. AB (know he is crazy but assuming hes still in great shape) would be like adding a Tyreek hill type of talent. Even if he has slowed down AB will be a top 12 receiver in the league… I know it is risky but with the Adams move it shows were all in for now… AB is worth it since we’ve already committed to the present.

            • GerryG says:

              I’m going to preface this with saying how much I love Russ, but vouching for a complete pos like AB makes Wilson’s good guy, aww shucks, high moral compass a little suspect. Look at all the crap Brown has been caught up in with kids and gfs, assaults. No way you let that guy date your daughter, but sure, let him come play on my team if it will get me another W.

  23. Happy Hawk says:

    The Dunbar cut will get them down to 80 on the roster so they must have known it was coming makes sense. With his $4m in cap space does that take us over the $20 mark? If so they can sign a DT for a vet min and still approach Clowney with a substantial long term deal with a smaller cap hit this year. Stop screwing around and get this done considering he knows the defensive system and zero preseason to get acclimated. it makes too much sense for both sides.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Another $4m would take them to between $12-16m I think.

    • HAWKTALKER#1 says:

      We have waited this long, let’s be patient and do the right thing. Cutting Dunbar may be a little hasty as well. We should let that play out as he could be a huge addition to the team in the position we need some help. Not sure how we wait so long during the off-season And then come up with a position of hurry up hurry up. SMH

      • Denver Hawker says:

        The commissioners list hasn’t been used lightly historically and is often viewed as an incentive for the team to cut the player. I think it’s fair to assume the NFL has reviewed the case and doesn’t like what they see. It’s also fair to assume the Hawks have discussed the issues and parameters for removal with the NFL.

        There is simply no reason to keep him if the parameters don’t permit his removal from the list soon. If otherwise, they’ll keep him a bit and see what happens. I saw Baker is appealing the decision and assume Dunbar will do the same.

  24. Jordan says:

    Is Dunbar cut? Or is he going on the exempt list? How does the exempt list impact our cap space?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Dunbar isn’t cut yet. Being on the list means he can’t play until the NFL decides which likely isn’t until the case is resolved. In the meantime he counts against the cap.

      • Hoggs41 says:

        If they arent going to let him play until this case gets finished that could be all season. I could really see them just moving on from him if the league is going to hold his $3.4m cap hit hostage from us.

        • Largent80 says:

          If the Dunbar fiasco is relying on a court case, the best thing Seattle could do is cut his ass immediately. This will go on until nobody knows. It sucks but, cut bait now and use that money.

      • Jordan says:

        Thanks Rob and everyone else for the info. Man, I hope we can make some signings soon….

        Clowney, Griffen, Snacks, Britt (return?) all sound great to me.

      • GerryG says:

        Not cutting him just furthers the questions of the teams somewhat delusional outlook. Reminds me of having zero backup plan for Clowney, or planning on continuity for the OL errr, wait, sign career backups & reclamation projects.

  25. Hoggs41 says:

    At this point I would just rather sign Griffen, Snacks, and Gordon (if he gets reinstated) and start the season.

  26. TomLPDX says:

    Chance Warmack just opted out for the season. $750K cap according to OTC

  27. HOUSE says:

    Chance Warmack sitting out the season…

    • Sea Mode says:

      Me sitting here wondering if we could volunteer KJ Wright to sit out the season and save on his $10m cap hit without having to look like the bad guys and cut him…

      • Bradhawk says:

        I believe KJ’s contract was designed to be an attractive 2019 contract & a no big deal to release him 2020 contract. We should trade him or renegotiate a new contract for this year because the $$ cap issue is too important next year, every $$ is going to count & we have too many players we need to resign next year.

    • Denver Hawker says:

      How many other guys who think there’s a chance they’re cut decide to collect a check and opt out instead?

    • HOUSE says:

      It would be for $$$ and not wins…

      • Bradhawk says:

        Got to be honest I like the player market tanking it works to the Seahawks advantage because all our players are on short deals & we have cap space. Next year will be a mess for half of the NFL because half the teams are already over the cap. What kind of market will there be for $20 million a year players? If I’m Schneider I’m taking another shot at Clowney because so far it’s looking like Clowney made a huge huge mistake blocking that trade with Miami last year. Seattle is definitely in a much better position now to go after Clowney than they’ve been in the past with 18 million cap space. Schneider hasn’t even taken advantage of the new rule this year that allows 2 million of a players cap hit to not count against the cap or it might be 1.25 million for 2 players = 2.5 million. We haven’t really signed a player to a big multi year maybe Schneider uses that new bonus cap reduction on a 3 to 4 year Clowney contract.

      • Big Mike says:

        So then he won’t do it since he wants to go to a contender
        .
        .
        .
        .
        (sarcasm off)

  28. Ashish says:

    Hope we sign good DT and DE in few days. Suddenly there is some transactions happening. Finger crossed.

  29. Rob Staton says:

    https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/07/27/does-the-jamal-adams-trade-signal-an-eventual-shift-back-to-a-defensive-focus-in-seattle/

    “Is Adams’ arrival, then, a sign of a future premised on balance between the units, or a reversion to the days of a suffocating defense and a run-based offense that was good enough, but hardly high-octane?

    The answer possibly hinges on the wants and wishes of Wilson. A sense continues to gurgle around the league that he’s never, and never has been, truly enamored with the way the Seattle offense uses him. Before he signed his latest four-year extension in 2019, rumors abounded that he’d like to continue his career elsewhere. And so it makes sense to at least wonder whether the Seahawks are contemplating a not-too-distant future that entails dramatically reducing the salary commitment at the quarterback position from $35 million per year, avoiding the next squeeze play from a baseball agent with only one NFL client (which gives Mark Rodgers freedom to drive an ultra-hard bargain with no consequence to his broader practice) that could drive to commitment to $45 million per year or more, and finding a young quarterback who can be groomed into being good enough to thrive, with a revolving door of power running backs and a defense that constantly positions the offense to score points.”

    You can choose to buy into this or not but there’s a lot of this doing the rounds at the moment.

    • TomLPDX says:

      I saw that, and my first reaction is that they need to balance. How often does an NFL team get a legit franchise QB that can carry the team? If Russ played this well in 2013/14 as he does today, things would have been a lot different. Bobby isn’t getting any younger and my thought is that Jamal is the heir apparent to rebuild and strengthen the defense to balance both sides of the ball.

      This is Florio doing his devils advocate shtick, and we all know how he loves to stir the pot. It is a legit question but I give Pete and John a little more credit than that.

      • Rob Staton says:

        He does like to stir the pot. But it’d be wrong to ignore a comment like this: “A sense continues to gurgle around the league that he’s never, and never has been, truly enamored with the way the Seattle offense uses him. Before he signed his latest four-year extension in 2019, rumors abounded that he’d like to continue his career elsewhere.”

        • TomLPDX says:

          I’m definitely not ignoring it, and why I said it was a legit question. I just think that Pete (it’s his team afterall) is smarter than that. I’ve have heard Pete say over and over how much he wants a balanced offense, not a run heavy or pass heavy one. I have always believed that. Time will tell I guess but I want Russ to retire a Seahawk at 45!

          • Rob Staton says:

            I think the negotiation last year was fractious and challenging for all concerned but when push came to shove, neither was ready to part. I think all were prepared for it. You don’t see Adam Schefter go on ESPN and volunteer an entire segment about a trade without there being something in it. But I don’t think Wilson or Seattle wanted that, yet, and they came to an agreement at the 11th hour.

            But I think some of the reasons why a parting was possible still exist and in two years, especially if the Seahawks are not matching Wilson’s intense ambition, I think we might be returning to this conversation.

            And I do think the future of the ownership will play a part in all of this.

            • TomLPDX says:

              For ownership…how so? I don’t see Jody as a hands on owner at all. are you thinking they sell to someone like Bezos and he takes a more active role as an owner? I’d like to know more about your thoughts on that.

              I applauded Russ for forcing the issue on the last contract. Get it done or we’re done for the year. It worked out for all concerned. He does have power within the organization, but only as much as the head brass will be willing to concede.

              • Rob Staton says:

                I think the lack of a hands on owner is either a problem now or could develop into one and I think the franchise will eventually need some proper leadership and vision in the form of a new owner.

    • mishima says:

      Buying.

    • cha says:

      Maybe a tactical leak by the team?

      “you want superstars, here’s your superstar right here…”

    • Davido says:

      While im critical with all this. I have to admit that this is adding up now. Something to keep an eye on for sure.
      Would still suprise me if Russ would come up with all this right after having an MVP level season.

  30. John_s says:

    For all the talk in the Seahawksphere of not giving Russ weapons….

    Top 100
    96 – Chris Carson
    81 – DK Metcalf
    65 – Tyler Lockett

    How many other teams have a 2 WRs and a RB in the top 100?

    • Gaux Hawks says:

      …then add dorsett (and gordon?), olsen, dissly, hyde and penny

    • pdway says:

      if folks stay healthy – this is a deep and solid skill position group, best we’ve had since the marshawn/tate/baldwin years.

    • John_s says:

      I think Ursua will step up too.

      A 4 WR set of DK and Gordon On the outside and Lock and Ursua on the inside would be nasty

    • Bradhawk says:

      I don’t believe RW is dissatisfied, to me that’s speculation. Wilson & Lockett had the best completion % in the league & a run focused team should extend RW’s career. Furthermore Seattle has rebuilt the offensive line at this point it’s just speculation that Seattle built another crappy O Line. If Seattle gets both Clowney & Antonio Brown at some point this season Seattle will have the most top 100 players in the league.

  31. Jordan says:

    Rob, serious question but how valuable is this years first rounder anyway? Like how much more valuable is it then a second rounder? College football may not be played or will be significantly reduced. Much of the scouting will likely be based on referrals or old tape. Perhaps the difference between a late 1st and 2nd isnt that great this year… I am glad that we at least kept our 2nd for this year.

    Thoughts?

    • Hoggs41 says:

      Could be part of there thinking? We will also save the $2.2m in cap space. I dont mind the two firsts, I just dont like giving up the third.

    • Rob Staton says:

      It’s as valuable as any other R1 pick.

      It’s your best asset. For trades, for trading down, for picks. Who knows where it will be? The 2011 Colts didn’t anticipate earning the top pick.

      I’ve made the case for being willing to trade it away several times this year but that doesn’t mean the R1 was any less valuable.

  32. pdway says:

    Clowney comes in at #41 on the NFL best players list . . .and Ndamkung Suh had a good line about him in the highlight clip, ‘you feel him out on the field’ – – and that’s what you notice if you watch all the Hawks games, and don’t just look at the sack numbers. He is a presence out there. Really the only one we had last year.

    Can the hawks management please stop mucking about, and bring peace to this Blog – – – just make the Clowney deal happen.

    • LLLOGOSSS says:

      +1

      4 years, $65 mil, 40 gtd — are we really saying Jadaveon Clowney is not worth that? If you’d said we could have him for that at the beginning of the offseason I’d have told you we were about to win the offseason.

      • Hoggs41 says:

        Clowney wanted like 4 years $88 million. I think we offered him around 4 for $74 and he said no.

      • Bradhawk says:

        +2 but Schneider has a long history of doing something we would never expect! So I wouldn’t rule out something happening on offense minus C, OT, RB & TE. Some teams might decide to release some good players soon because of the 2021 salary cap. Finney is a good guard, Pocic & Jones can start for a game in a bind but you never know maybe they find a bargain priced veteran RG.

      • Bradhawk says:

        LLLOGOSSS now I’m gonna dream every night we get Clowney on that contract, I absolutely love that contract.

  33. Chris says:

    One thing that has becoming abundantly clear about Schneider is that he has, and probably never will, figure out that giving up serious draft capital just to pay someone their fair market wage will almost always be a losing proposition. Trades for the Grahams, Harvins, and Adams of the world will on average cost wins over time.

    And for those that say they can’t draft in the first round, that seems to be true … but they could always trade down for equivalent value in later rounds where they’ve historically been more successful. And something else they haven’t been able to do? Make successful blockbuster trades.

    • Bradhawk says:

      I really think we are in a win now mode for the next 4 years, the 2020 Seahawk rookie class will be peaking in 2023. It should be pretty easy for the Seahawk scouting department to figure out what they are missing out on in the late part of round 1 in 2021. The Seahawks should be able to trade into the late part of round 1 in 2022 using their 2023 1st round draft pick, same goes for 2023 with their 2024 1st round draft pick. Both Pete & RW are in the last chance to win mode & if they win Schneider will benefit greatly and be able to move on to a new organization with a monster contract when Pete retires. Seattle is in a unique position with an aging coach, peaking QB, and flexible cap situation which is an advantage over half the league which includes top NFC teams.

    • HOUSE says:

      A trade down out of the first isn’t always guaranteed. You can’t bank on always “trading back” as a strategy. While I will say Adams came at a hefty price, the likelihood of finding a 24 y/o proven Pro Bowl safety isn’t something I would ever bet on being available in the mid/late-20s where the Hawks have consistently drafted.

      While not all trades work out, I’d say Marshawn Lynch, Duane Brown and JaDaveon Clowney did well. We have made some moves out of desperation that didn’t pan out and I can only hope this one will.

      • Jordan says:

        All-pro safety and leadership intangibles as well!

      • Bradhawk says:

        No such thing as it being too expensive to win the Super Bowl, Percy Harvin secured the Super Bowl blowout against Denver. Harvin made the legion of boom & the Carroll defense look real real good in the Super Bowl, securing the defense status as one of the all time greats.

  34. Ishmael says:

    I’ve been having a think about this, mainly built around the idea that while I find Carroll and Schneider frustrating in a lot of ways, they aren’t dumb. There has to be a reason to their decision making.

    For me, this goes back to the Wilson contract – and how we’ve only seen one team maintain any real level of success while paying a QB big money in the last decade plus: New England.

    The way New England have built their team has been QB, elite secondary, strong running game, and middle-class veterans who don’t need their hands held. I think stars and scrubs worked for Seattle when Wilson meant you could pay everyone and really on your big dogs to look after the weaker end of the roster, but as soon as you pay Wilson and the stars have to go you need to balance your roster differently.

    Reckon Carroll and Schneider are backing themselves in to develop corners so they don’t need to pay them, and then relying on an elite back-7 to lock things down and force some pressure sacks. We’ve all been saying for the last two years that the Hawks get burned by outside zone runs and move tight ends, they haven’t had enough speed around the box. Adams *should* be a bit of a matchup piece in there.

    I still think it’s a grotesque overpay, really can’t believe that they had to, or needed to, pay it. But this is the best method to the madness thinking I’ve been able to come up with. The Pats survived without Chandler Jones, can Seattle do the same without Clark/Clowney?

    Anyone got anything else?

    • Gohawks5151 says:

      I’d like to believe that but Bellichick is so dynamic and sweeping in his defensive adjustments week to week. Pete hardly changes what the Seahawks do. Maybe they thought they would get the secondary figured out this year and with a low cap, a good team reputation and some money to spend they can get a Avril/Bennett type deal from someone next March. Or just sign Clowney…

  35. Sea Mode says:

    Garoppolo at #43?? Maybe I won’t trust this list as much as I am accustomed to…

    Even Rapoport tagged it with the politically correct “interesting” label. 😂

    https://mobile.twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1287942911938760704

  36. Henry Taylor says:

    Can Dunbar opt out of the season despite being on the commissioners exempt list?

    Would be ideal for the team and for him if he could collect that 150k and then come back next year (if he’s not in jail) as opposed to getting cut and making no money.

  37. Sea Mode says:

    Brian Murphy
    @knbrmurph
    ·6m

    [John] Lynch on Jamal Adams to SEA: “No, not frustrated or upset. I love that with every guy up, that we’re involved. I try to be truthful: We’re talking about Kittle, we’re trying to save room for him. We feel good about our guys, Ward and Tartt.” (1/2)

    Brian Murphy
    @knbrmurph
    ·
    6m
    Lynch on Adams, (2/2): “Look at the Seattle trade capital they had to give up. So, it just wasn’t a reality. Of course, there was interest. But was it a reality? No.”

  38. Sea Mode says:

    For those advocating that we sign him:

    Tom Pelissero
    @TomPelissero
    ·7m

    Veteran DT Damon “Snacks” Harrison has options as a free agent, but with a newborn at home and other family concerns, he’s still gathering info to make an educated decision on whether he’ll play in 2020, per source. One of the top defenders still available.

  39. cha says:

    Wow, thank goodness the Seahawks struck gold on Metcalf. The 2019 draft looks like a disaster so far.

    (keep in mind I qualified that with “so far”. I’d love to be proven wrong)

    1-LJ Collier. Hurt last year and when he got on the field made no impact. Desperately hoping he can provide any impact this year.

    2-Marquise Blair. Seahawks drafted him and then immediately traded for Diggs. Now they’ve traded for Adams. Stuck behind two players. Sure he’ll rotate in but a 2nd round pick should be slated for a bigger role than this. What does it say about Blair that the Hawks traded for 2 safeties after seeing him play?

    2-DK Metcalf. Best high pick in a while. Needs to keep working but has insane physical potential.

    3-Cody Barton. Seahawks traded up for him and watched him get stiff armed by 2 QB’s his rookie season. They then signed Bruce Irvin, kept KJ Wright and spent their 2020 first round pick on Brooks. What does that say about Barton? A trade up and 3rd round pick spent on possibly a career backup and special teams guy?

    4-Gary Jennings. Made the 53 and then cut.

    4-Phil Haynes. Hurt most of the year, showed some decent potential in the game he played. Competing with Iupati for the LG spot.

    4-Ugo Amadi. See Blair. Drafted him and then traded for 2 safeties. So, is he the nickel then? Is he big enough to handle that role when run support is needed? Or are we looking at another backup and special teams guy?

    5-Ben Burr-Kurven. See Barton. Does he even make the roster this year? Special teamer.

    6-Travis Homer. Kick returner and last resort when all the RB’s went down. The Seahawks drafted Deejay Dallas and there’s a fair amount of talk he has more potential than Homer.

    6-Demarcus Christmas. Incomplete. Hurt all year.

    7-John Ursua. Traded up to get him but he was a roster stash almost the entire year. Inactive most games. Had a nice catch in the big Niner game that almost won it. With the Hawks bringing David Moore back, collecting TE’s like crazy and talking about Gordon and maybe AB, he really needs to show something this year to win a spot.

    • Denver Hawker says:

      All these assessments are fair with the central theme being we need to see more development from the class and those guys are now buried on the roster.

      I recall a quote from either Pete or John saying they look to draft for need 2-3 years out and don’t rely on rookies to make much impact. Player development is key for this approach to work, but hard to see that happening with less camp time, and less playing time.

    • Rob Staton says:

      It really is incredible that of their top four picks last year they’ve now used high picks and trades to replace Blair and Barton and we’ve spent a whole off-season talking about ways to make sure Collier isn’t a starter.

      • cha says:

        I don’t want to tell you what to write Rob but I think an article exploring this draft a year later would be a fascinating read.

        What happened? Scouting department blew it? Coaches couldn’t effectively get these guys schemed up? Or the FO got enamored with the guys they traded for and decided not to display any patience? What organizational blind spots are there?

        Is this the same thing as Penny saying he had to quit eating fast food and take his diet more seriously well after he was drafted?

        • UkAlex6674 says:

          Are we really talking about the failings of a draft before any downs have even been played?

        • pdway says:

          It’s not an unfair assessment – but let’s give Collier at least one more chance. Maybe the injury was worse that we thought . . .

          Blair is the headscratcher. He popped when he was out there. Looked fast/athletic and clearly a big hitter. Is our system so complex that he couldn’t grasp it? I don’t quite get it.

    • Gaux Hawks says:

      well done, cha… but now i’m hiding under my couch again.

  40. Burner says:

    Lots of players opting out of the season now means those teams will suddenly have a lot more cap.

    If we are going after Griffen, Snacks etc we better do it quick or we will soon be priced out.

  41. dcd2 says:

    Yep. The rub, is that the guys they are taking are the wrong guys.

    To me it looks like the way that they want to build the team hasn’t actually changed. They wanted an impact/pro-bowl/field general Safety. They missed on Abrams and settled for Blair. That appears to be a mistake that they are ready to move on from. Blair may still fill a role, and even develop into a good player, but he’s not what they were hoping for when they drafted him.

    Barton is a similar story. They wanted a fast LB who could protect the edge and cover sideline to sideline. Barton had those fantastic 3-cone and short shuttle times, but he’s looking like a miss. Again, he might develop into a good player, but he’s more Beta than BAMF.

    Collier, we have discussed plenty.

    So we drafted Collier – DE, Blair – S & Barton – LB with 3 of our first picks ONE YEAR AGO. This year we drafted Brooks – LB, Taylor – DE at #1 & #2. Then went out and spent two future #1’s (plus) for Adams – S.

    No matter how you slice it, that is a boatload of capital spent on S, LB & DE and the only guy we’re sure about right now is Adams. He comes with the caveat that he wants to make $20M starting next year and has shown that he won’t be shy about airing his grievances or critiquing his own team/FO.

    I agree that it is an indictment of the decision making in regards to drafting. For that double-edged-sword of a reason, I’m actually ok with giving what they gave for Adams. Collier, Penny, MacDowell, Ifedi, Frank Clark, Paul Richardson, Christine Michael… those are our last 7 ‘first’ picks. Only Clark has lived up to billing and was a major gamble considering his off-field situation.

    If I concede that the drafting has been rubbish, then I have to take the next step and admit that whomever we would have taken in the next two drafts would have been less than great chances to be pro-bowlers (1 in 7 odds?).

    Now, we’re clearing cap space for something. Please let it be Clowney and a DT. (Gordon too, but he won’t eat into the cap)

    • dcd2 says:

      My bad. This was a reply to Rob’s comment way up the thread.

      • mishima says:

        Agree.

        They have to trade for talent because they’re missing in the draft and free agency.

        Rarely works.

    • BC_Hawk says:

      Hear Hear! Nicely worded; these are my sentiments exactly. We basically re-did our 2019 draft bc NONE of the picks have shown they are ready to start, or even be option #2s.

      I do like the Jamal pick up, but the price was steep in addition to the collateral given up for Blair last year. As has been beat to death in the past, I would have loved for the Seahawks to address OL in the draft this year, and used FA to fill the defensive line issues. LBer could of waited until next year (once KJ retires/is not resigned).

      • Bradhawk says:

        If what your saying is true they would have traded Collier, Barton, & Blair during the draft. It makes no sense to keep those guys if what your saying is true. Collier got hurt & as a rookie he was not better than our starters. Barton played a position he never played before as a rookie your expectations of him were to high. Blair is the big hitter at FS we have been looking for playing him at SS will always be a risk due to his body size. Jets needed a good SS they are set at FS if Blair was a strong SS candidate that Seattle thought was miss they would have traded Blair to the Jets.

        • dcd2 says:

          That’s not really how things go though. Who would be willing to give up anything for those guys? Who would be our depth if we dealt them all?

          As you say, Collier was hurt quite a bit, so who knows what we have? Barton and Blair are still solid special teamer’s and depth. They just don’t look like ‘the answer’ at their respective positions.

          They are all cost controlled for at least 3 years as well. You don’t just dump those guys for 6th/7th rounders. You also can’t say if the Jets were even interested in Blair (enough to say that we would have just traded Blair instead). BMac also freed up cap that Blair wouldn’t have.

        • cha says:

          Trading Collier, Barton and Blair a year after drafting them would hit the Seahawks cap $6m. Trading them wasn’t and isn’t an option at this point.

          • TomLPDX says:

            Plus you have to give them more than their rookie year to prove themselves. Not everyone is a #1 draft pick and these guys need to learn and adjust to the pro level.

            Collier was really hampered last year with the injury, Cody was thrown in the deep end and I believe was playing tentatively. BBK never really even got a chance because of the depth of the LBs so his opportunity was to be a big part of special teams. As for Blair, he had moments…all these guys had moments, just like Ursua and Ugo had good moments. With the abbreviated offseason it won’t help. They need to come out of the gate fast, but I sure as heck haven’t given up on any one of them.

            If you are expecting dazzling performance from any of our rooks this year you will be sadly disappointed. I DO expect them to have their moments though and to watch them grow.

            • cha says:

              Those are reasonable points about Barton. But they traded up for him, and the very next year drafted a guy for the same LB spot. That’s what I’m getting at – is the process flawed somehow?

              They traded up for him, he was the star of rookie camp (DK was flashy but the coaches were raving about Barton), he got reps with the starters early in training camp, PC and Norton were raving about his ability to pick up positions and the playbook. Condotta did a whole piece in the Times about how he is fitting in with the veterans nicely with praise from the coaching staff.

              How do you go from that to playing poorly in the regular season and the Hawks using their next year first round pick on a LB?

              • TomLPDX says:

                I think Cody just needs to learn to release the beast (the Kraken! sorry, couldn’t resist) and be more aggressive. When Rodgers stiff armed him during that play I saw hesitation on Cody’s part and my immediate thought was that he was trying to not get called for a penalty and Rodgers made him pay for it. Now, the play against McCaffrey was different, that was McC doing a textbook stiff arm and waylaid Cody big time. Learn from both of them Cody.

                As for Brooks…was he brought in to take over for SAM or WIL? Cody was brought in to back up Bobby, not KJ or Kendricks, at least that is my understanding considering how thin we were in 2018. I actually see Brooks as KJ’s future replacement. Curious to know what you think about that?

                • cha says:

                  I’ll defer to smarter people than me. But Barton played MLB in college and earned a lot of raves from the Seahawks staff playing there in camp when Wagner was present but not practicing due to his contract negotiation. My simplest solution is to think of him as Wagner’s replacement. But, having just signed Bobby to an extension is that the wisest use of Barton? I suppose a 3rd round pick for a backup heir apparent MLB isn’t the worst use of resources.

  42. Hoggs41 says:

    Just found out that Snacks has a newborn at home so it looks like he may not even play this upcoming season.

  43. Clowney at #41 is a well deserve recognition for an elite season by him.

  44. Steve Nelsen says:

    Mishima I can’t reply in our original thread for some reason but maybe a more simplified approach to what I am talking about using for valuing a veteran would be a concept like “projected DVOA.” Is there anything like that already out there somewhere?

    You could compare the projected DVOA for a draft pick by using the existing data for how often they bust, backup, start, become pro-bowlers and become all-pros. I know that data is out there and it is sorted by draft position (1st round, 2nd round, etc.) and it is probably sorted by pick. Then, you would have to estimate the “projected DVOA” of the veteran player by estimating the length of his career and future quality of his play. That is the part that I am not sure exists.

    I’m not sure DVOA accounts for salary but this approach would account for comparative ages of players so a 31-year old all-pro wouldn’t have the same projected DVOA value as a 24-year old all-pro.

    • mishima says:

      You could, but at some point you would run up against the limits of analytics: too many variables.

      Trade value will still be, in part subjective. With the same info/data, Pete Carroll and John Lynch will differ on Jamal Adams’ value.

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        Yes. But in the past this site has developed metrics to help understand the way PCJS evaluates players/opportunities. We know Seattle won’t draft this CB because of his arm length. We know Seattle is likely to consider this OL because of his explosiveness/TEF. Given the frequency with which PCJS has traded draft picks, including 1st-rounders, for veteran players, I think a metric for comparing picks to players might lead to new insight into how Seattle thinks. I think PCJS believes that there is a disconnect between how draft picks are valued and how players are valued that creates an opportunity to exploit.

        That is what feels missing in this situation; some metric for comparing the value of a draft pick to the vale of a player.

        It is easy to compare the relative value of draft picks and say what Seattle gave up is the potential equivalent to a #10-13 pick. Is that too much for a 24-year-old All-Pro? My gut feeling based on analysis of past drafts (for all teams, not just Seattle) is that Seattle got an absolute steal in terms of relative value. If I remember correctly, only about 1/2 of 1st-round picks even become starters.

  45. Georgia Hawk says:

    Something that has been rolling around in my head for a little while:

    Knowing what we know now about Kam, his ability, his value to the franchise, his play, the memorable plays he created, and overall value to the Hawks SB team, would this have been too high a price to pay for Kam…regardless of his position as a SS? Would you have given 2 firsts to get Kam, knowing what he would bring to the team, regardless of traditional position value? Would you have drafted him 6th overall?

    I think part of the mysticism of Kam was his draft position and the overall value we got from it. But in all honesty, I would answer yes to every question above. I would have drafted him 6th overall, and would have given 2 firsts to get him…knowing what we know now.

    To me that thought makes this trade a little more palatable. Not because I think Adams is/will be Kam 2.0. but because the possibility exists that he might. He could be everything Kam was to this team and more, given time.

    I realize they are two different players, styles, etc. Its the other things Kam brought to the team that I think could really turn this trade to our favor. How about that Carolina game where he literally jumped the snap on the FG twice in a row, the hit on Vernon Davis, the hit on Thomas in the SB, any number of other iconic Kam plays. The guy was arguably the heart of the team, and when he went down….so did a lot of the bite on the Defense.

    There are still HUGE questions on the DL and where pressure will come from. Still have to resign him to a longer contract, and still have to see him play in the Blue and Grey. But the idea of what he COULD bring to the team does make this a little more palatable in my mind.

    Sorry for the rambling thought, its been bouncing around in my head for a day…

    • Bradhawk says:

      Kam had limitations in pass coverage, just ask Greg Olsen he exploited it big time. Jamal Adams sky is the limit when working with Pete Carroll to improve his pass coverage & interception skills.

      • Georgia Hawk says:

        I dont disagree at all. Kam was an incomplete player, but he was the heart and soul of the team. I think Adams is the type of guy that can be that as well.

        • Bradhawk says:

          Many GM’s think Adams is the second best defensive player in the league right now, we’re going to find out if it’s true. If it is true we’re going to end up trade 2 picks in the 28-32 range which is a bargain for Adams. However if we end up giving a top ten pick 1st round pick the trade will be a disaster even if Adams plays great but gets hurt.

  46. Stephen Pitell says:

    Thanks Rob, I love all the content even though I don’t always agree 100% with what you say.

    My take on the Jamal Adams trade is that the trade was INCREDIBLY CHEAP. Hear me out, please. I believe everyone is valuing the cost of this trade as though it was done BEFORE the draft, instead of AFTER the draft. Let’s examine this trade as if it was just draft picks. As though the Jets owned the pick 1.6 and we own the 1.24 pick and we call up the Jets and say we are interested in their pick 1.6, and what do they want for it besides our 1.24. So 1.6 is valued at 1600 points and 1.24 is valued at 740 points and 3.24 is worth 150 points which equals a total of 890 points, and a 2021 first round pick is devalued one rounds value for coming in the following year so we are talking 340 points for a 2.24 pick. So the total now becomes 890 plus 340 = 1230 points.

    So the trade of 1.6 (1600 points) and our 1.24, 3.24 and 2.24 (discounted for one year out) equals 1230 points so we are still 360 points less than the value of 1.6 that the Jets own.

    We also give them McDougald who we have to ask: Is he worth a mid to late second round pick in trade? No, that trade would favor the Hawks. McDougald is an over 30 average safety, and would unlikely to command such a trade.

    And let’s not forget that the Jet’s, in this scenario, only own a lottery pick of 1.6 to pick a player that may or may not result in an above draft value pick. In the actual case, we know that pick resulted in an ABOVE average use of that pick and is trading that player (Adams) and is trading it for FUTURE lottery chances that may or may not result in above value pick.

    Also don’t forget that this scenario assumes the picks are traded before the draft so both teams would get to use those draft picks in the same year, but that is not what happened. In the real case we get the use of Adams this year, but the picks we traded for Adams cannot be used until the following year which downgrades the draft value QUITE A BIT.

    I know the Jets lacked leverage in this trade and so from their perspective they got the best they could for Adams, but that doesn’t change the fact that we got a very very cheap trade based upon the draft value chart. Very cheap.

    • Rob Staton says:

      The issue is you’re projecting where the Seahawks will pick for the next two years. And you might be right, it might be about #24. But as recent as 2017 they finished 9-7 and picked in the teens. Last year they won an obscene number of close games. And an injury to Wilson could propel their pick into the top 10.

      Aside from that, Adams is a great player but they have already invested a lot at safety. And they have areas where their stock could’ve been used instead such as DL. In the future, how do they now seriously replace Duane Brown? And as noted recently, they have a ton of players on short term contracts and now minimal draft stock to aid their depth.

      So there are a lot of things to consider when dissecting this trade.

      • mishima says:

        Glad I refreshed.

        To add:

        No one knows what will happen this season. They could finish 3-7 or 12-4.

        Next year will depend on how well they replace departing talent with fewer picks and less cap space.

        IMO, it’s just as likely that we gave up 2 picks in the teens as 2 picks in the late twenties.

      • SteveLargent80 says:

        To be fair, the 2017 season was marred by injuries to the running backs, Kam, Sherm and Blair Walsh, resulting in Russell Wilson leading the team in rushing and accounting for all but one TD. Completely agree with you about the complexity of the trade, there is a lot to consider

        • Rob Staton says:

          I never commented on why they picked that early in 2017, only that it happened.

          Are we saying a spate of injuries couldn’t happen again??

    • BC_Hawk says:

      I disagree on the word “Cheap”; we paid a hefty price, but received arguably the best SS in the league in return. Given that I respect his talent level, I am “OK” with the trade….but hella excited to see him on the field!

      I think you undervalue McD; he is a no-nonsense above average safety, that can flip in between SS and FS if required. I think we too often base value on malcontent players, and set value there. McD would of secured a 5th or 6th round pick to a team looking for a viable/flexible starter for a year or two. He never says nothing negative, is a pillar in the community, and a team first player. All that stacks up to increase value vs. the malcontents that often get shipped.

      As such, in my opinion, it was a “Fair” trade both ways. On paper, the Jets won….but I have a feeling we the fans will win once we get a chance to watch Jamal every week. The question becomes if the FO can address DL in the next couple of weeks…

      • mishima says:

        I liked McDougald, thought he was good in coverage, solid defending the run. However, I think he played too soft to play strong safety for Carroll’s defense.

        Adams is Pete’s dream safety.

        • BC_Hawk says:

          Agreed! His best role was the role he was brought in to be originally after Tampa Bay; a backup flip safety. He was acquired so as to have a viable replacement for when Kam or Earl got injuried; the hawks git burned the year before, and they didn’t want for it to happen again. If he were cheaper and not a required part of trade (I think Jets wanted him), he would have a been wicked depth behind Diggs and Jamal.

  47. Bradhawk says:

    Don’t forget it would have been a disaster if Adams had gone to SF.

    • TomLPDX says:

      From the comments made by John Lynch, SF was never in the Jamal trade. They have their own issues to deal with (Kittle) first.

      • All I see is 12s says:

        Lynch is a snake and nothing he says should be taken at face value

        • TomLPDX says:

          Wow! I have never thought that about Lynch. Ever.

        • Simo says:

          Don’t believe Lynch is a snake or a dishonest man/GM, but he’s like the majority of the other GM’s in all of sports. There’s no way he would tell a media member his exact thoughts on SF’s interest in Jamal Adams. Of course he would have loved to acquire Adams (which GM wouldn’t), but he’s still going to talk up his current safeties and make it sound like they were never in any serious negotiations with NY.

          With their defensive line and linebacker talent, they don’t need an all world secondary anyway! They just need to be decent. I think SF was very interested, its just that the price got beyond what they were willing to pay!

          • pdway says:

            right – of course he can’t say he was interested in getting Adams – and also maintain good relationships w the Safeties he’s got lining up in ’20.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Everything Lynch said is very plausible. They can’t afford Adams, they want to pay Kittle.

            That says it all.

            No need to call a good man a ‘snake’ just because he’s San Fran’s GM.

            • All I see is 12s says:

              On the contrary, being associated with the 49ers a perfectly plausible reason to call someone that.… LOL
              But I’m petty. And I still remember when he took the gm job there were plenty of reports of how irked Pete Carroll specifically was that he had shared so much of his thoughts on teambuilding and game planning to Lynch while he was member of the broadcast team.

              If I further recall, this is one of the reasons they left them on hold for long periods of time during trade proposals during the 2017 draft
              So I’m not taking it back….ssssssssnake!

  48. I think Diggs could opt out of this season…he has few months old daughter, and few times he spoke how he is “afraid” will it be safe to play football during corona…this is just my feeling…if i should place.a bet which seahawk will opt out i would say Diggs without second thought…

    • Gohawks5151 says:

      Russ also said he was afraid and has a few days old baby. Why not him?

      • TomLPDX says:

        They both have legitimate reasons to be concerned and if they opt-out, that is their right. I hope they don’t but won’t hold it against them (or anyone) that does.

        • Kingdome1976 says:

          99.6% of people under the age of 80 don’t die from the virus. Let’s get over this fear young people.

      • pdway says:

        If a marquee guy like RW opts out – – feels like it really is the beginning of the end of the ’20 season.

  49. James C says:

    I personally only think it will take one star player opting out and we may see the dominoes fall. Would take a lot of guts for someone like RW to opt out, but I for one would applaud him for the decision.

    • Jordan says:

      Why? You could argue that the positive impact these players have on society is enormous. Their sacrifice just like many first responders and front liners are critical for the functioning and well being of society. Obviously there are tiers to it. However, id argue that sports plays an enormous role in our society with keeping people happy and entertained.

      I would understand if you meant you would empathize and understand his decision. I dont know why it has be applauded. Many other professionals have to work during this time and dont even have the luxury to opt out.

      • James C says:

        Yes you chose better words – empathize and understand. I meant more I would applaud his courage to make that difficult decision..

        • Jordan says:

          Gotcha. Yeah, that decision could be viewed as courageous.

          For me, Wilson playing this year and leading the Hawks during this crisis is also very courageous. I am happy that he has been vocal about leading player safety concerns and working with NFL-NFLPA on negotiations. Hoping that Sports can continue being something that brings people together, especially during these times.

    • Denver Hawker says:

      Do contracts ‘toll’ for players opting out? I had thought it’s designed as a pause on the contract. Meaning, if a player has 2 years left on their contract and opted out this season, they still have 2 years left. And the money paid out 350/150 is actually a loan against that contract.

      Can’t see many high paid players who are also expecting another bite at free agency risking the money to opt out, but tough to put a price on health of you and your family I suppose if they are high risk.

      • Rob4q says:

        From NFL.com:

        To be designated a voluntary opt-out, a player must be under contract or subject to a tender. The player’s contract will toll and all provisions of that contract for the tolled year will be applicable the following season; however, he will not receive an accrued season. The player will be eligible for a stipend of $150,000 to be treated as a salary advance against his tolled contract; an undrafted free agent, however, is not eligible for the stipend.

        • Rob4q says:

          Sorry, missed the last part about the ‘high risk opt out’:

          To be designated a higher-risk opt-out, a player must have a diagnosis reflected in their medical records of at least one of the following factors, which are based upon a modified list of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) risk factors list: cancer; chronic kidney disease; COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease); immunocompromised state from solid organ transplant; serious heart conditions, such as heart failure, coronary artery disease, or cardiomyopathies; sickle cell disease; type 2 diabetes mellitus; asthma; cerebrovascular disease; cystic fibrosis; hypertension or high blood pressure; immunocompromised state from blood or bone marrow transplant, immune deficiencies, HIV, use of corticosteroids, or use of other immune weakening medicines; neurologic conditions, such as dementia; liver disease; or pulmonary fibrosis.

          It is not mandatory for a “higher risk” player to opt out. A higher-risk opt-out will receive an accrued season toward free agency and all benefits and minimum salary credit for a credited season and is also eligible for a stipend of $350,000, which will not constitute a salary advance.

  50. Kingdome1976 says:

    I know we don’t like discussing letting JS go but is there a point where we can logically and calmly discuss this issue? I suppose there is no point on this forum though.

    • Big Mike says:

      Why would you let JS go when all decisions are ultimately Pete Carroll’s?

    • Bradhawk says:

      The overall consensus among NFL owners & GM’s is John Schneider is one the best GM’s in the league. As a fan that attends many Seahawk fan club events I can’t recall anyone wanting to let John Schneider go. We have the second best record in the NFL under his guidance & last year despite all the injuries Seahawks had a good year had we been healthy there’s no reason to believe we wouldn’t have made the Super Bowl. Are you suggesting we replace John Schneider with someone who has not drafted as many pro bowlers as he has?

      • Bradhawk says:

        Are you suggesting we replace John Schneider with someone who has not drafted as many Pro Bowlers as John? Replace John with a GM with who has a worse win loss record? John drafted 2 Pro Bowl CB’s, 2 Pro Bowl Safeties, 1 Pro Bowl QB, 1 ProBowl MLB, 1 Pro Bowl DE, & 2 WR’s who are about to make the Pro Bowl.

    • Davido says:

      Could you add any arguments so we can start a discussion?
      Which issue are you talking about?
      What makes you think that we should get a different GM?

  51. Nick says:

    Excellent read from Matty Brown:

    “Ultimately, this is about putting the health of people above the need to play football. Sports, football included, are morally uplifting and would provide unity in these increasingly divided times. But at what cost? Current NFL storylines do not suggest football can be played without numerous infections. The matter-of-fact acceptance is horrifying. Even if your favorite player manages to survive COVID-19 and avoid any lasting effects, he is still likely to transmit the virus.”

    https://www.si.com/nfl/seahawks/news/nfl-amid-covid-19-what-are-we-doing-here

    • Ghost Mutt says:

      I’m getting jittery at all of these opt outs.

      Surely they talked to Russ before agreeing to the trade, right? There’s no way they traded a first rounder without being certain Russ was going to play?

      • Henry Taylor says:

        I think there’s virtually zero chance Russ, along with the significant majority of top players, opt out of the season.

        • Nick says:

          Sure, maybe not by choice. But there’s a very real possibility that a high profile player gets COVID and forces them to stop playing and get well.

      • Nick says:

        I feel those jitters. The US has absolutely bungled its response to this crisis. And it does not look like it’s going to get any better. Tragic.

    • GerryG says:

      Agree with Matty. It is irresponsible and ignorant to think they can pull this off. Baseball made it 2 days before 1/3 of a team caught it.

      If we were in a country that had this thing under control, maybe it works. The bubble isolation method seems the only plausible way.

      • Rob Staton says:

        But let me make this point again — the Premier League and Championship restarted training when England was still in lockdown. They completed their seasons comfortably with minimal positive tests and no bubble — despite a lot of early concerns from players and talk of some opting out.

        It’s not improbable the NFL will be able to do the same for a league that won’t start for another 6-8 weeks and could still be delayed by a month to ease concerns.

        • Nick says:

          Rob, I fear you overestimate America’s ability to deal with this crisis in a rational and coherent way. We’re at 150k dead after less than six months of the virus. We aren’t even in full lockdown now…

          • Rob Staton says:

            I’m really not. The way I’ve always seen it — it was virtually impossible for America to contain this properly. Too many states with different ideas/rules. Too many people making decisions. Massive population. The impossible task.

            But ultimately like every country, we have to manage what we can, install protocols and find a way to live with the virus. Because it’s not going anywhere. And as I’ve said before, NFL players have the privilege millions and billions don’t to get paid $150,000 not to play and stay at home for a whole year or carry on working with non-stop testing and extremely managed environments.

            • Nick says:

              Yeah, I think this is a true and super rational take. It falls apart, however, when multiple players and coaches (or family members) end up dying from the virus during the season. Which is a very real possibility.

              At what point do you decide then that this sport is a luxury at the given moment?

              • Rob Staton says:

                Nick you could get the disease buying groceries, walking a dog or any other way imaginable where you leave your house. This is life now. I’m sorry but it is. If the objective is nobody works because there’s a chance you get Covid and die, then does that mean only a select handful of people continue to work while the rest of us stay at home indefinitely for a year, two years, three years — however long it takes to create a vaccine? There wouldn’t be a world worth living for. There’d be nothing left.

                If we determine sport isn’t important enough for people to work, what do the thousands of people who will be directly impacted by that do? The employees on basic salaries who get laid off? The industries and businesses who rely on the massive sports industry who go out of business? How do they survive? How do they feed their families?

                And for what? To make sure football players don’t work at all like most of the rest of us? Even though they have the opportunity, unlike the rest of us, to opt out and still earn $150,000? To be tested three times a week? To work in an environment that will have strict protocols?

                As I said in another reply. A manager at a Premier League football club, when I asked him if he was concerned about returning, said it was the safest job in the country because they will be tested constantly and looked after in a way most normal people won’t be.

                Any of us can die from this having gone to work. Most of us aren’t doctors and nurses either and do jobs that, as with sport, seem fairly trivial but ultimately if we all just packed in indefinitely might lead to despair, poverty and an end of life in itself.

                And a final point here — this is a horrible disease that we are going to have to learn to live with. But I believe the death rate per infected person is not high, thankfully, and that we can plan to manage it and live with it. Ultimately we have no other choice.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I don’t like this take from Matty. I saw it a lot before the Premier League restarted and to me it felt basic then and does now.

      The simple fact is the league has set up a plausible plan for those who wish to opt out and anyone can. There will be non-stop testing. There will be millions invested in helping the teams deal with this. Everything will be done to try and help the players continue to do their jobs.

      Meanwhile, billions of people will have to go back to work without any of these reassurances.

      It’s not a case of ‘it’s just a game why bother’. When the Premier League returned I interviewed a manager and he said this is the safest job to return to due to the testing, the protocols and everything else that the common man or woman who will be expected to return to work will not get.

      The fact is we have to learn to live with this disease and manager it properly. I’m not getting into the politics of your country or ours and I don’t want to do that here either. But we all have to go back to work and learn to live with this and manage this because it’s not going anywhere. It’s not. We can all sit at home for 3 years and it’ll still be here.

      • GerryG says:

        Rob, I fully agree with your this is the new world we live in, and we have learn how to deal with it outlook. I’ve said the same thing to my team at work, and family at home. We have managed to travel drivable distances, avoid public spaces, and enjoy outdoors recreation. We can’t just spend the rest of our lives hiding.

        That said, I’m a little annoyed at the multi billion $ sports leagues getting tested everyday, getting results in no time, while others in the country have to wait 5-7 days (or in the case of my family, 17 days and counting, and no record of us taking it). So I can see where Matty is coming from.

        I’m really glad Premier league has managed successfully, but the stupidity and ignorance of the people in this country are astounding me on a daily basis. Our case rate, positive test rate is on par with undeveloped 3rd world countries, or worse. I’m skeptical this country can pull it off. I really hope MLB, NFL, and NBA can make it work.

  52. Todd says:

    Seen lots of people comparing the J. Adams trade with the Minkah Fitzpatrick trade. It’s worth considering what each team thought they were giving/getting when each trade was made.

    The Steelers were 0 and 2 and just lost Big Ben for the year when the trade happened. The Dolphins getting the Steelers 2020 1st rd pick likely expected that pick to be top 10, with a shot at it becoming the #1 overall pick. For an 0-2 team who just lost their franchise QB for the year, likelihood at overall #1 is what, 15-20% ? Dolphins must have been crazy disappointed to only get #18.

    The Jets on the other hand, expect their two 1st round picks from the Seahawks to be each around pick 20-30. Very low probability of top 10, knock on wood. 0-5% chance at a #1 overall pick, even with 2 shots.

    Without hindsight, I’d say the more rebuilding teams would take that Steelers 1st rd pick, than the Seahawks 2 1st rd picks, even if the 2021 Draft was normal, which it won’t be.

    • Rob Staton says:

      The main thing I took away from your comment Todd was that if people expected Pittsburgh’s 2020 pick to be more valuable than it eventually was… who’s to say Seattle’s picks in 2021 and 2022 won’t be more valuable than anyone expects currently?

      • Todd says:

        If teams are run with any sense in 2020 they have data scientists modeling what those future picks are likely worth, based on the most current data, with margins of error. If those people argue strongly enough for their models, they at least influence the smart GMs.

        • Rob Staton says:

          You can have all the ‘models’ in the world.

          They all go straight down the toilet if Wilson misses any games over the next two years, or even if the Seahawks can’t fix their league worst (per PFF) defensive line.

  53. JLemere says:

    Well Emmanuel Ellerbee has been waived with an injury designation. Roster trimmings continue, but still nothing for the D-Line…

  54. […] A week ago I wrote an article asking whether another move was on the cards following the Jackson and…. The answer, categorically, was no. Nothing happened. It won’t be a big surprise if Hunt follows suit and similarly re-joins for a discounted price. […]