Why the Seahawks should trade Jamal Adams

January 28th, 2021 | Written by Rob Staton

Simply put — Jamal Adams is not worth $18-20m a year

Jamal Adams is a really good player.

When healthy, he can be truly dynamic. Clearly he has a passion for the game. He’s a downfield attacking force.

But the Seahawks should seriously consider trading him and I’m going to explain why.

Try and be open minded even if you disagree.

There’s nothing in the bank

Here’s the reality for the Seahawks this off-season.

Their starting running back, cornerback, center, tight end and SAM linebacker are all out of contract.

A number of other players, including their second best defensive end, their second best tight end, their second best running back, the starting left guard and their number three receiver are also set to reach free agency.

Poona Ford, one of their top performers this season, is a restricted free agent and will likely receive a second round tender.

Only 47 players are contracted for 2021 including a whole bunch of fringe ‘futures contract’ players.

According to Over the Cap they currently possess $142,229 in effective cap space.

In the draft they have three or four picks. The fourth depends on whether or not they still owe the Jets a seventh rounder for Perry Nickerson. They only have one pick in the first three rounds.

You can’t operate with these resources.

They’re going to have to do something.

Extending contracts is one solution. Restructuring is another.

Giving Carlos Dunlap an extension to lower his 2021 cap hit is tricky. How many extra years do you want to commit to a soon-to-be 32-year-old? Assuming they’re not about to offer him a four-year deal, the more you lower his $14.1m cap hit, the bigger the problem you’ll face down the road.

Tyler Lockett is 29 this year and looking at the dreaded ‘third contract’. A three-year extension is reasonable but Lockett would surely expect a pay increase. He’s currently on $10.25m a year. Cooper Kupp earns $15.75m and Robert Woods $16.25m. He’s well within his rights to be in that range.

You can lower his cap hit this year potentially but at what cost in the future if his yearly average rises by $5-6m?

You don’t want to get into the habit of committing big money and extra years to ageing players.

Yet if you restructure other contracts instead you also create problems down the line. You’re lending on the credit card.

Admittedly they’re going to have to do a bit of this. They have no choice.

It shouldn’t be the only move though.

Seahawks fans love to mock Seattle’s recent record in the first round and use it to justify getting rid of their picks in the Adams trade. Here’s the truth. First round picks are your greatest resource. They are the gateway to acquiring cheap talent with great club control.

The fact that Seattle took Malik McDowell over T.J. Watt, Rashaad Penny over Nick Chubb or L.J. Collier over Deebo Samuel, A.J. Brown or D.K. Metcalf isn’t an argument for not having first round picks. It’s an argument for using them better.

The Seahawks only have three assets with a first round value. Russell Wilson, D.K. Metcalf and Jamal Adams.

I’m not sure anyone else would even net a second rounder.

Trading Adams creates $9m in cap space for 2021. It frees up about $18-20m in salary from 2022 onwards. It gets you back into the first round where you can fill out your draft board, build-up your roster and plug the numerous holes that exist.

No safety is worth $18-20m a year

We’ve seen what happens in these situations.

The Texans and Laremy Tunsil. The Rams and Jalen Ramsey.

When you trade multiple high picks for a player and don’t have a new contract ready to go, you cede all leverage when talks eventually begin.

Tunsil agreed a deal worth $22m a year. That was $6m more expensive than the next highest paid left tackle on $16m. The Texans either had to cave to Tunsil’s demands or risk losing a player they’d spent a fortune on in draft picks.

Ramsey signed a record contract for a cornerback worth $20m a year in LA. The previous highest paid corner was Darius Slay on $16.8m a year in Philadelphia. Again, the Rams had little choice but to accept Ramsey’s demands.

The current highest paid safety in the league is Budda Baker ($14.75m a year). Adams will expect, not unfairly, to smash that number.

He’s well within his rights to ask to match Ramsey’s $20m a year. He will argue he’s more than a safety. He’ll probably say he’s a playmaker. He broke the record for sacks by a defensive back, after all.

If $20m is the starting point in talks, what do you do if you’re the Seahawks? You might be able to get him down to $18m a year. Anything less seems unrealistic.

The team has no leverage.

If you don’t agree to a deal, what happens? It’s pie in the sky to think he will happily play for $9m this year on the fifth year of his rookie contract.

A holdout would be likely.

You can’t afford to go down that road. So the question is simple. Do you want to pay him in the $18-20m a year range or not?

I don’t think he’s worth that kind of money. Especially when you consider how much cumulative resource he will have taken up. Not only did he cost three draft picks (three cost-effective players) he’s also costing you the chance to add others in free agency.

Is Jamal Adams really worth five or six players on this roster?

Things can change quickly

Here’s a quote from Pete Carroll at the 2019 combine:

“Frankie will be with us, yeah… Frankie just turned 25. He’s still a very young football player. Made a huge step this year in terms of leadership, growth and maturity. It was so obvious. I was really proud of seeing that develop for Frank. He played great, too. Frank, he’s a very valuable football player.”

He was speaking about Frank Clark. Carroll made it clear. Clark “is a Seahawk” — another quote used.

The plan, at least initially, wasn’t to trade away their best pass rusher. A 25-year-old hitting his prime. A draft success story.

Things changed when Demarcus Lawrence signed his mega-deal with the Dallas Cowboys. Suddenly, the stakes were higher. Clark’s price rose and the Seahawks didn’t see value any more.

They couldn’t agree terms and eventually traded Clark to the Kansas City Chiefs.

The Seahawks may well intend to extend Jamal Adams’ contract this off-season. However, for the reasons listed above, it could be very expensive.

If he wants more than they’re willing to pay — the precedent is set. They’ll probably move him, just as they did with Clark.

That’s the right approach to take. Set a limit and stick to it.

At the absolute most Seattle’s limit should be fractionally higher than Budda Baker’s record setting contract. It’s just hard to imagine Jamal Adams accepting that.

The Seahawks have pooled their resources in the wrong areas

We all know what the Seahawks want to be. They tell us often enough.

So it’s strange how they’ve gone about constructing their roster.

Duane Brown aside, the offensive line has been built with cheap short-term contracts, rookies and projects.

They place great importance on the running game — but have struggled to truly ever replace Marshawn Lynch with a consistently good (and healthy) running back.

The Seahawks talk like they want to be a trenches team — yet the way they tried to fix the pass rush a year ago was confusing.

Instead they went into the 2020 season spending $25m of cap space on two veteran linebackers, having also used their top pick in the draft on a third linebacker. That was after trading up in the 2019 draft to select another linebacker in round three.

They spent a kings ransom to acquire Jamal Adams, a safety. That’s despite also trading for Quandre Diggs and his existing contract in Detroit and using a second round pick on Marquise Blair, while also paying to retain Bradley McDougald until the Adams deal.

They spent over $10m on two pass-catching tight ends in Greg Olsen and Jacob Hollister and then didn’t really feature either player in the passing game.

If you want to be the kind of team who turns up and punches the opponent in the nose — don’t you have to focus on the trenches?

Look at the way the Giants and Rams kicked Seattle’s arse. They did it on both sides of the line. It covered up for the fact that neither team had an ideal quarterback situation.

Isn’t it time to redress the balance a bit?

Instead of paying big money to Jamal Adams for the next few years, wouldn’t that money be better off going to Brandon Scherff? He was PFF’s #4 ranked guard this year (86.3) behind only Zack Martin, Quenton Nelson and Wyatt Teller.

If you want to seriously take on Aaron Donald two or three times a season — wouldn’t spending big on the interior line be a better use of resources?

Even if you don’t want to pay the likely $15m a year for Scherff — what about using it to make a move for Leonard Williams in free agency? He destroyed the Seahawks. He had 11.5 sacks in 2020. He could be your answer to Donald.

You could still improve your offensive line in the draft. You could tap into an exceptional looking interior O-line class.

Look at the scenarios and tell me which is better for this team? And be honest.

Jamal Adams and the #56 pick this year?

Or having a full quota of draft picks in 2021, perhaps some replenished stock in 2022, plus significant funds to use in free agency both this year and next.

And more importantly — a chance to get better in the trenches.

The pathway to future success is arguably more likely to be paved in the form of a great offensive and defensive line combo than splashy moves at safety.

Shouldn’t they be spending their money and picks up front?

Are you that worse off for taking a chance on Keanu Neal — a free agent projected to earn $5m a year according to PFF — or even starting Marquise Blair at safety? While having the extra money and picks to quickly improve your two lines?

Is he even a good fit in Seattle?

The 2020 season was a weird one for Adams. He was dealt to a new team who play a totally different scheme. He had to make the move during a global pandemic. He suffered a string of injuries during the season.

That said, I still question whether he is a great fit for this defensive scheme.

The Seahawks blitzed 33.5% of the time this season. That was a significant increase from 26.9% in 2019 and 18.4% in 2018.

The fact is — when Seattle had Frank Clark they felt much more comfortable rushing with four and blitzed almost half as much as they did in 2020. The results were slightly worse this year despite being far more aggressive:

2018
Blitz percentage — 18.4%
Sack percentage — 7.3%

2020
Blitz percentage — 33.5%
Sack percentage — 6.4%

I think they felt obliged to blitz a lot. Firstly — to cover for the fact the front four pressure simply wasn’t good enough until Carlos Dunlap’s arrival. Secondly — to justify Adams’ presence.

The Seahawks slowed things down in the last two or three games. In his first six games with the team he blitzed 63 times. His average of 10.5 blitzes per game was by far the most in the league.

His end of season rate was still high. He ended up blitzing 98 times in 12 games.

So while many people bring up his sack numbers to justify the trade, this is the reality:

— He blitzed 8.2 times per game

— He registered 0.8 sacks per game

As Hugh Millen explains in the video below, the Seahawks were scheming ways to create free runs to the quarterback — often using Bobby Wagner as a decoy:

Almost one sack per game sounds really good without context. The reality is different. You are taking someone out of coverage and manufacturing a situation where they can freely rush the passer, usually without resistance.

When a defensive end wins off the edge against a tackle — that’s a 1v1 victory. When a safety blitzes — the quarterback is going to have an opportunity to capitalise.

It’s a risk. Some schemes thrive on that risk/reward. The Seahawks have never been one of those teams. They’ve always sought a four-man rush enabling their players to stick to their jobs, execute and fly to the ball at the second level.

The fact is — seven out of eight times Jamal Adams is vacating the secondary and not getting home. What happens on those plays?

I would argue in a 3-4 scheme, which Adams played in as a Jet, it’s easier to be creative. You feature four linebackers for a start. Your two edge players have to be able to drop in coverage. Todd Bowles and Gregg Williams can show pressure from different looks. They constantly keep you guessing. They’ll show a blitzing ILB then have them back out at the last minute, only for the safety to come screaming downfield. You might bring a linebacker and the safety and have your two OLB’s drop.

There are so many combinations.

The scheme is designed to create confusion. You never know where the pressure is coming from.

In Seattle, they often telegraphed Adams’ pressure. Anyone watching could see when he was up at the line of scrimmage, he was likely going to blitz.

It’s not as easy for Carlos Dunlap or Benson Mayowa or LJ Collier to drop into coverage. They are not 3-4 OLB’s. This is not a scheme where pressure could be coming from anywhere at any time.

Adams’ PFF grade (64.2) ranked 45th among qualifying safety’s. His coverage grade was a concerning 53.1.

I don’t think this is indicative of a bad player. I suspect it’s indicative of a poor scheme fit.

Aren’t they essentially stuck with him now though?

Not at all.

Brandin Cooks has changed teams three times. The total outlay spent on him is three first round picks and a second round pick.

Certain players retain value.

Jamal Adams is only 25. He’s approaching his second contract.

He’s a good enough player that if the Seahawks decided to shop him, there would be takers.

Any of the Belichick-tree coaches would probably love him. Their scheme thrives on hybrid, aggressive safeties.

The Miami Dolphins have two first round picks this year — #3 and #18. If they believe in Tua Tagovailoa (which admittedly is debatable) — then they just need to keep adding talent.

They also have plenty of cap space.

Would they deal #18, knowing they also have the luxury of owning Houston’s pick in the top-five? They might even throw in another pick this year or next.

Sure — it’s a discount on what you paid the Jets. So be it. You use #18 to move down, accumulate picks and tap into this great O-line class. You use the money you saved to further improve in the trenches. You follow through on your commitment to your chosen identity.

New England, Tennessee, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Tampa Bay, the Giants. They’re all potential suitors. Cleveland needs a playmaker at the second level.

Increasingly I think the Adams trade was a highly aggressive, win-now move. An opportunity to see if he could come in and deliver the kind of major impact they’d been unable to acquire in free agency or the draft. The main motivation was to chase a title in 2020.

I suspect they knew they were investing in someone with retainable value and all options would remain on the table in the off-season.

The Seahawks have to make a big decision. They need to be honest with themselves.

There’s no room for pride. Equally, nobody should be too critical when a team takes a shot and misses. It’s OK to be both aggressive and then contemplative.

What the Seahawks don’t need right now is misplaced belief that Adams is in the same bracket as Aaron Donald when it comes to impact. Paying him like he is, after spending what they have in picks, would be doubling down on a misuse of resources.

If you want to be the kind of team the Seahawks want to be, you need to look to the first flush of the Carroll era for inspiration.

Between 2010 and 2012 Seattle used their top pick in the draft on an offensive or defensive lineman. They acquired Marshawn Lynch. They had the most expensive O-line in the league in 2013 when they won the Super Bowl.

They also had a cheap, young and aggressive defense.

You are paying $35m a year for a quarterback now. He is the heart of the team and will determine your ultimate success and failure. Give him a top-10 offensive line, an excellent running game and some weapons as a priority.

Invest in a good pass rush and find young, fast and aggressive players to feature at the second level.

Find a safety elsewhere. Either sign Keanu Neal or Malik Hooker or trust in Marquise Blair and/or Ugo Amadi.

It’s time to spend their resources on the trenches.

And that means, it’s time to think about trading Jamal Adams.

If you missed our podcast reacting to the hiring of Shane Waldren, check it out here:

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

Become a Patron!

215 Responses to “Why the Seahawks should trade Jamal Adams”

  1. no frickin clue says:

    Rob,

    I fully agree. The opportunity cost of keeping Adams is just way too high.

    Consider the alternative. Let’s say Adams starts negotiating through the media and the Hawks cave. A new 4-year deal for $72 million, with $40 million guaranteed. His cap number won’t be $9.8m anymore, it might be roughly 2x that level – and if you do something artificial to reduce his cap hit in 2021, it just means loading more of the cap hit into future years, all for a guy who missed time twice this season for a variety of injuries.

    So let’s say his cap hit in 2021 is $18m. Now you’re $17m over the effective cap, still only have one draft pick in the first two days of the draft, still haven’t signed KJ or Carson or Pocic, all of whom will get a pay boost somewhere. In the end, you’ll have a team that can’t follow Pete’s preferred identity as a run-first team, since it won’t have the talent in the backfield. That puts more pressure on Russ, who can’t function well behind an offensive line that is missing pieces in the interior, pieces we can’t get in free agency or the draft because we lack the wallet and we lack the draft capital.

    But hey, at least we can rush Jamal 10 times a game and get one sack highlight out of it.

    • drrew76 says:

      The coming TV rights deal likely means a lot of back loaded contracts across the league into the 2024 cap year. Whether that’s the smart move to make is certainly up for debate, but I’d bet there’s essentially zero chance Adams is on the Hawks in 2021 with an $18m cap number.

      I also don’t think you should get too hung up on the current $176m number that OTC is going with. There’s enough chatter about smoothing out the impending drop from the current $198m, that I think something will happen.

      That being said, those changes won’t solve all of the Seahawks’ issues, of which there are many, and it shouldn’t preclude them from thinking through Adams’ future and role.

  2. Sea Mode says:

    👏👏👏

    Best line of the article for me:

    There’s no room for pride. Equally, nobody should be too critical when a team takes a shot and misses. It’s OK to be both aggressive and then contemplative.

  3. Sea Mode says:

    Ok, now that Watson has officially requested a trade, play GM for a couple teams you think should make a serious run at him and what they might offer as the base package. You can leave out the mid-late round change.

    1. Miami: Tua + #3 + #50 + 2022 R1
    See if you can’t get Najee Harris at #18 (or trade for Jamal Adams… 🙂)

    2. NYJ: Darnold + #2 + #23 + 2021 R3
    Trade away the picks from Seattle and still have a full draft class with no lost capital from next year.

    3. Indy: #21 + #54 + 2022 R1 + R2
    Not sure they have enough picks to get it done, but you have to try.

    4. SF: Jimmy G. + #12 + 2022 R1 + R3
    They’ll probably turn down the above offer, so do you contemplate swapping Nick Bosa and JJ. Watt as part of the deal…?

    • Big Mike says:

      One of the teams you mentioned will not pursue Watson though and will instead pursue Stafford (Indy?).

    • Simo says:

      I really think only the Jets and the Phins have enough to get a Watson trade done! If either team is willing to ship a young QB back in addition to a really high pick and some other nice picks, they might be able to get a deal done.

      Although Watson’s 2021 cap hit is only $15.9m, it jumps to $40.4m in 2022, so any teams trying to acquire him will have to plan for that and be able to take on that hit.

  4. Sea Mode says:

    Amari Rodgers has the chip on his shoulder, overcoming adversity, NFL bloodlines, and should have a super high medical grade too:

    https://www.si.com/college/2019/09/26/clemson-amari-rodgers-return-acl-tear

    “He always feels like he’s overlooked and undersized”

    Read he has had problems with concentration drops. Will need to look into it, but so far he looks amazing. Oh, and did I mention he ran a 4.49 40yd and jumped 38″ vert. at 209 lbs. as a senior in high school…

  5. cha says:

    I’ll just drop this reminder from the summer

    Tom Pelissero
    @TomPelissero
    ·
    Jul 27, 2020
    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.

  6. Pran says:

    Buy High Sell Low..

    This is what we have seen with this regime. I would not keep my hopes up.

    • Jordan E says:

      Trading Adams, Wagner or Wilson are great examples of selling low

    • Submanjoe says:

      I had the same thought about buying high and selling low. And yet this team seems to operate precisely that way. It’s a disastrous way to operate and we have been seeing that play out for years now.

      • NolaHawk says:

        How was the Clark trade selling low?

        • Submanjoe says:

          Clark they did sell high. He is the only player they have sold high on. And yet it could be argued it was disastrous because he was the only real and developed Defensive End disruptor the team had and the loss of him devastated the pass rush. And has left them still trying to build their defensive line.

          Their problem is they go cheap too often, until they over pay. And that applies to trades and signings. Wagner, Bennet, Adams, Richardson, Graham, and on and on.

  7. cha says:

    A big, big factor in this years’ roster construction is where they missed in the 2020 draft.

    They could have had a WR ready to take over for Lockett on a rookie contract in 2022.

    They could have had a LT ready to take over for Brown in 2022.

    But they chose to gamble on Darrell Taylor.

    And now a Lockett extension, while it wouldn’t be a disaster I believe, will be expensive.

    And we’re hoping and praying Brown can have another year as good as 2020.

    • Rohan Raman says:

      At the time, I was exicited for the Darrell Taylor pick. And then I found out abut his injury.

      Why are the Hawks weirdly conservative in some places (O-Line) and needlessly agressive in others (trading up for a injured pass rusher)?

      • Rob Staton says:

        It’s when they get desperate and reactionary.

        Seattle’s best moves, 100%, have been capitalising on opportunities over the years. Not pushing the envelope.

  8. Jordan E says:

    Rob, I respectfully disagree with you on this one- though I do acknowledge the team should entertain the idea.

    1) Regarding cap space, there are teams far far far worse than the Seahawks in terms of the cap (e.g., N.O., Philly, Atlanta). Since both the NFL and players union are involved with establishing the cap, it does not make sense that the players union would favor a very low budget this year and then one potentially above 200 to even 220million next year. I strongly believe, that the cap this year will be somewhat of a loan for future years so that it will be inflated to around 190million if not more. It would make no sense for the union to agree to destroy the veteran contract market in the NFL this year- if they can avoid doing so. The very low cap numbers could be a ploy by the owners in the later negotiations of this.

    2) Yes Jamal would be very expensive. If no other team want’s to pay him that much, then how much can we get for him? I loved how you mentioned Bill B from N.E. He’d be a perfect guy to get this asset for very cheap and then make him a superstar player. Frank got a 1st rounder, primarily due to his position and the chiefs need. Jamal would likely get a 2nd rounder at best imo- and likely even less depending on how much he wants and others knowing the Seahawks lack trade leverage. He had only 1 year in the system and was injured most of it. If I’m pete (who likely will play just 5 more years), I’d keep him and instead figure out on how to improve his fit and game in the system.

    With that said, if another team offers a early-teens 1st for Jamal and does not low ball the team in negotiations, then I say go ahead. I highly doubt any competent GM would offer that though, knowing the situation in Seattle, and how we lack leverage. It is almost akin to OBJ with the Browns… He’s clearly not the best fit there but Browns are not gonna give him for nothing, given the enormous potential he has. I am confident that the coaching staff can better position Jamal to succeed with the team to better extent than the browns have with OBJ.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Regarding cap space, there are teams far far far worse than the Seahawks in terms of the cap (e.g., N.O., Philly, Atlanta). Since both the NFL and players union are involved with establishing the cap, it does not make sense that the players union would favor a very low budget this year and then one potentially above 200 to even 220million next year. I strongly believe, that the cap this year will be somewhat of a loan for future years so that it will be inflated to around 190million if not more. It would make no sense for the union to agree to destroy the veteran contract market in the NFL this year- if they can avoid doing so. The very low cap numbers could be a ploy by the owners in the later negotiations of this.

      I do think the NFL could and should look into a solution here. I don’t know how New Orleans can create $120m this off-season to avoid being over the cap. So what happens then?

      If the cap situation changes, and some form of relief is delivered, then I will adjust my thought process. But as of today, the Seahawks have $140k to spend. And while it’s true other teams are in bigger trouble — it won’t change the fact that as of today, they can’t even pay Poona Ford a RFA contract. Let alone replace numerous out of contract starters.

      Yes Jamal would be very expensive. If no other team want’s to pay him that much, then how much can we get for him? I loved how you mentioned Bill B from N.E. He’d be a perfect guy to get this asset for very cheap and then make him a superstar player. Frank got a 1st rounder, primarily due to his position and the chiefs need. Jamal would likely get a 2nd rounder at best imo- and likely even less depending on how much he wants and others knowing the Seahawks lack trade leverage.

      I don’t agree. Jamal Adams is a quality player. I just don’t think it’s best for Seattle to pay him $18-20m a year and I think they’re better off going in a different direction.

      New England has $58m to spend. Miami $23m. Cleveland $18m. Baltimore $14m. They have fewer holes to fill and could take on $9m this year and then a big extension. All teams where he’s a better fit and/or they are better placed to justify the investment.

      You won’t get two firsts, a third and a player again. But I would project a first and a third is very realistic.

      He had only 1 year in the system and was injured most of it. If I’m pete (who likely will play just 5 more years), I’d keep him and instead figure out on how to improve his fit and game in the system.

      I’m not paying $18-20m for a player to find out if we can improve his fit.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        I don’t think any team will pay $18 million and give up draft picks for Adams. That just won’t happen. If your going to use Budda Baker as the measuring stick at $15 million a year, I would say Budda is a better safety in coverage. Even if you call them even, in this cap environment nobody should expect to smash $15 million/year.

        I don’t think he will get a bigger payday out of any team. Especially when he hasn’t played enough in the backfield to develop better coverage skills. And with the cap situation deteriorating, why would any team pay that much for one player who’s best asset was realized by playing him out of position?.

        I do agree that they should trade him for draft picks, because the Seahawks have painted themselves into a corner. How can anyone approve of Pete and John’s drafting and cap management? It was ridiculous last year to watch them blow through two future #1 draft picks and a #3, and 50 million in cash. For what? Two starting players out of that whole mess? Or was it three?

        If it wasn’t for the long term coach/general manager contracts I would have thought they were sabotaging the team for the next coach.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I don’t think any team will pay $18 million and give up draft picks for Adams. That just won’t happen. If your going to use Budda Baker as the measuring stick at $15 million a year, I would say Budda is a better safety in coverage. Even if you call them even, in this cap environment nobody should expect to smash $15 million/year.

          I like Budda Baker as much as anyone else. But when Jamal Adams is in the right scheme fit, he is the better player. 100%.

          I don’t think he will get a bigger payday out of any team. Especially when he hasn’t played enough in the backfield to develop better coverage skills. And with the cap situation deteriorating, why would any team pay that much for one player who’s best asset was realized by playing him out of position?.

          Coverage won’t matter in the right scheme.

          How can anyone approve of Pete and John’s drafting and cap management?

          The answer to this is to not ever draft.

          The answer is to expect them to be better.

          • Ryan says:

            I don’t understand how this is supposed to work. We say “Player X isn’t worth $Y, and that’s what he’ll expect to get paid, so we should trade him.” If he isn’t worth $Y in the first place and that’s all he’ll settle for, why would another team trade for him at all?

            I get that he might be slightly more valuable to a team that wants to use him in different ways, or that has “extra” money to spend, but a 1st-round pick and 3-rd round pick seems more than “slight.”

            FWIW, I disagree that he’s a better player than Budda. How is he better? Budda’s better in coverage AND better in run support. Just because he’s bigger doesn’t mean he’s better. He’s bigger than Earl was, too, but Earl was better against the run as well.

            But I agree with your conclusions. He’s not worth setting the market. Come up with a number you can live with (no more than $15M) and stick to it. Trade him if he won’t take it. But hell, I’d try to get him to play on his last year to show what he can do when he’s heatlhy first, and probably shop him w/o even trying to extend him for all the reasons you gave.

            • Rob Staton says:

              I get that he might be slightly more valuable to a team that wants to use him in different ways, or that has “extra” money to spend, but a 1st-round pick and 3-rd round pick seems more than “slight.”

              I didn’t use the word ‘slight’. You did. I think he’s a lot more valuable to a team where he’s a better fit.

              FWIW, I disagree that he’s a better player than Budda. How is he better? Budda’s better in coverage AND better in run support. Just because he’s bigger doesn’t mean he’s better. He’s bigger than Earl was, too, but Earl was better against the run as well.

              They are different players. I think Adams in the right scheme is superior. I doubt anyone would spend two firsts and a third for Budda.

      • Jordan E says:

        Very fair points Rob. Yes, until the NFL actually says something about the cap there, at the moment, we have to consider the worse realistic outcome of it. Safer that way for building the team’s cap structure in the future.

        Agreed. 18-20m would be an overpay for Adams. He should really be closer to the 14-16m range but given the recent examples of Tunsil & Ramsey, Adams will have a lot of leverage in this situation. Looking at it now, the trade was not a good one for the Hawks, especially considering how they did it without agreeing to a contract.

  9. Sea Mode says:

    Reese’s Senior Bowl: WR vs. DB – DAY TWO (American)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljLJcb7zmWU&ab_channel=RivalsVideo

    Benjamin St.-Juste is my chosen one for Seahawks’ CB project, at least of those at the Senior Bowl. They even put him against Eskridge yesterday and he did better than everyone else considering he’s on an island and Eskridge is…well… Eskridge. (though he did have a couple drops yesterday) Nico Collins had a nice grab against him but it was well-contested.

    Melifonwu will be better at SS, I think. He plants and drives on the ball well when it’s in front of him, but doesn’t have the loose hips to turn and run.

  10. Sea Mode says:

    Um, how have we not noticed this yet?! The similarity is striking when you look at him run on the field:

    Kam Chancellor, S, Virginia Tech: 6032, 231, 33.00 arm, 76 1/2 wing, 9.5 hand
    Divine Deablo…, S, Virginia Tech: 6033, 226, 32.75 arm, 79 1/8 wing, 9.5 hand

    4 INT this season as a 5yr Sr.

    Now that could be how you replace Jamal Adams if you trade him…

    Divine Deablo II 2020 Highlights II Virginia Tech
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QR6a1hCEyEw&ab_channel=BichoProdz

    • Rohan Raman says:

      If I were scheneider and I trade adams, I might draft this dude off of his name alone. Forget the skills and need. Divine Deablo is one of the coolest names ever and I respect the fact that his family gave a kid such an absolutely badass name twice.

      • DriveByPoster says:

        Ha! Agreed! In fact I’d double-down on it & draft Amon-Ra St.Brown too!

      • GoHawksDani says:

        My exact thoughts 😀
        He seem to have a good feel for the ball, but also seemed a bit slow…maybe just in this clip or it’s the screen, but feels more of a 4.55 runner

    • dcd2 says:

      He looks like he covers about as well as Adams, that’s for sure. When I saw him in the 1v1’s he looked like a LB.

      Safety is a tough spot to be relying on a rookie, especially a mid-round rookie. Lano and TT were 3rd/4th rounders in 2017 and played like rookies for multiple years.

      Enticing as that profile is, I’d be much more on board with the $5M Keanu Neal at S, and drafting a CB that can learn a kick-step. Getting a comparable CB in FA would likely cost 2x.

      • Sea Mode says:

        He’s a SS, not a CB. He covers just about as well as one would have expected Kam to when lining up at CB.

        Just like several other of the safety types, they are all doing much better today in red zone/short area coverage than open field.

        https://twitter.com/BillyM_91/status/1354857236946935816

        • dcd2 says:

          He does remind of Kam. I watched it again (as much as I hated the video thanks to that edit) and went back to see how Kam looked out of Va Tech. Very similar, though I’d say Kam seemed a bit more smooth and savage. They both even wore #17, laid some hat and had a nose for the ball though.

          I wonder where he’ll go… day 3?

  11. cha says:

    I take your point Rob about extensions and pushing cap into future years. It’s not the optimum scenario.

    However – the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t. Especially with how the team blew through $50m of allowance money last year with very little to show for it. My trust in this FO is not at an all time high after that.

    I’d take the gamble on extending Lockett, Dunlap and even Brown. They’re proven, they fit the team beautifully and for the most part have been durable.

    I am much more comfortable kicking the can down the road over opening up major holes on the roster and then trusting this FO to address them properly.

    That said I’m in the pro-trade Adams camp. Oddly enough, that would not open a major hole on the roster.

    • Rob Staton says:

      My fear is that you end up with a repeat of the Kam and Bennett situations.

      A player who suddenly can’t play but with millions tied up on the cap for a long time — and a player you don’t want any more but have to pay to play somewhere else.

      • cha says:

        It’s a gamble to be sure. If they’d drafted better, shopped better in 2020, or not blew so much on Adams they’d have ready made talent, picks and cap room to work with.

        If they can get Dunlap and Brown to agree to have little or no guaranteed money on the back end of the deal (not a stretch since that is how their current deals are structured), they’ll only have to eat the bonus money if they decide to cut them loose before the extension runs its course.

        • Rob Staton says:

          It’s a gamble to be sure. If they’d drafted better, shopped better in 2020, or not blew so much on Adams they’d have ready made talent, picks and cap room to work with.

          Yep — their failure to properly draft and develop over the years has created an issue.

          If they can get Dunlap and Brown to agree to have little or no guaranteed money on the back end of the deal (not a stretch since that is how their current deals are structured)

          Hmmm… not sure they’ll go for that. It puts their future directly in the hands of the team. If they don’t sign then next year, they can be free agents and negotiate guaranteed deals.

          • cha says:

            It’s very possible.

            Robert Quinn’s age 30-34 and Mario Addison’s age 33-35 deals are structured that way.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Well, Quinn has two guaranteed seasons in Chicago at $6m and $15 cap hits. Then there’s an out where they can cut him and save $7m. But that would mean a $9m dead hit in 2022 for the Bears.

              Which is kind of the point for me, really. Let’s say you lower Dunlap’s salary this year. Are you paying him a more or less guaranteed $15-20m in 2022? In order to then get the out?

              That’s a huge risk to lower his cap hit.

              Plus both Quinn & Addison were FA’s. They weren’t sitting on $14m for 2021 already, being asked to co-operate.

              • cha says:

                I wouldn’t call it huge. But no question, it is a risk.

                The impact Dunlap has had on the pass rush, particularly Poona and Reed, and the continuing uncertainty with Taylor, and the future cap room that is coming in 2022 and 2023, I personally am OK with it.

  12. KHF says:

    “That’s the right approach to take. Set a limit and stick to it.”

    Fully agreed. And they’ve shown they know how to do that. You mentioned Frank Clark. Jadeveon Clowney is another example of assigning a value to a player and refusing to go above it.

    The simple fact is, as good as Adams is, he alone will not increase the team’s 2021 competitiveness as much as the three or four (or more – we all know how JS deals in the draft) players that could be acquired by dealing him.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      I’ll argue the other side for a moment. It’s a real risk to let Adams go because as we all know, the Seahawks have a hard time finding pass rushers. They spent 50 million last year and found one pass rusher. There is no guarantee that whatever players they find will do any better than Adams, even with 3 or 4 chances. Lets not forget that Adams was the best pass rusher on the team and a key player that saved the defense last year.

  13. SebA says:

    Love this, Rob. Really hope they take this line of business.

  14. Big Mike says:

    Been onboard with this approach for several months now. The holes that will be created by keeping him will possibly be cavernous.
    Rob said “And more importantly — a chance to get better in the trenches.” Bingo! You wanna run the football Pete, get better at o-line (and RB).

  15. Volume12 says:

    Alright. Think I’ve had my fill of over reacting to 1 v 1. This ain’t the NBA. I’m looking at movement and that’s about it.

    • Volume12 says:

      I do think USC DT Jay Tufele wont be the best NFL player from his own D-line. Gonna be able to get his teammate a round or 2 later and IMO he’ll go on to have the better career.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Look who’s covering him though.

      And that was one of three drops during that practise

      • Ky Swift says:

        I think Eskridge and Shi Smith have been the two most impressive wideouts during the week. I would also throw Felton from UCLA in that group. Wish we had more picks this year to ensure drafting a #3 wideout this year.

      • dcd2 says:

        I saw that too. He stone-handed multiple catches. Eskridge, Felton and Wallace have looked the best in the first couple of days at WR to me.

  16. AlaskaHawk says:

    I was just looking at the defensive players stats for 2020, trying to determine how they compare relative to each other. This table works pretty well https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sea/2020.htm

    Top 10 value based on combined tackles and interceptions:
    Wagner 138 0
    Wright 86 1
    Adams 83 0
    Diggs 64 5
    Griffin 63 3
    Reed 62 2
    Brooks 57 0
    Amadi 54 0
    Flowers 47 0
    Neal 44 2

    It’s no surprise that Bobby Wagner at middle linebacker is still getting the most tackles. He is so important to this team. Interception wise Diggs, Griffin, Reed and Neal earned their money.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      Should have put a dash in there. Time for some money ball. Interceptions divided by salary plus ten times the interception rate?
      Name-Comb Tackles-Interceptions
      Wagner 138 -0
      Wright 86 -1
      Adams 83- 0
      Diggs 64 -5
      Griffin 63 -3
      Reed 62 -2
      Brooks 57 -0
      Amadi 54 -0
      Flowers 47 -0
      Neal 44 -2

      • WildBill says:

        I wonder if Wagner’s tackles would look as good if they kept a “yards gained before tackle” stat.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        Do they keep a stat on yards after tackle? One caveat on the table above is that the stats favor linebackers and the secondary. Passes successfully defended or tipped would have been a good stat to add. Incidentally Poona Ford just missed the top 10 in combined tackles.

        If I were to look at defensive linemen I might measure sacks and tackles, and number of fumbles they caused. One stat I couldn’t find was passes deflected, which I think is a pretty important stat but wasn’t on the table I found.

        Anyway, I think it is pretty common to find the middle linebacker and the safeties as having the most tackles on a team. Which is why I don’t bitch about paying good wages to Bobby Wagner or Diggs. But the results are mixed on Adams, a lot of tackles but no interceptions. I really want this secondary to be ball hawks that fight for the interceptions the way Sherman used to.

        • WildBill says:

          I made the comment because I seem to remember Wagner making quite a few tackles downfield after the runner made the 1st down. Is it the tackler not being in the right place, or is it an indictment of the defensive players around him?

          There are stats tracking tackles for loss but I am not aware of any others.

          I was just trying to point out that the list of total tackles is sort of misleading as to their effectivity to the game.

  17. Few days ago someone asked me about my opinion what should seahawks do with Adams. And i didnt have right answer. Truth is that I dont know. I am 60-40% to keep him. So thats how much is this type of conversation welcome imo.

    Biggest reason why i think its not 80-20% or 90-10% to keep him is because of scheme fit and how much of Adams strenght Pete can use. And when we have that type of question mark then it is really tough to accept he will get 18-20mil apy.

    But here is why i am still 60-40% to keep him…

    Imo you need to have at least 2,3 blue chip players on both side of the ball if you want to win SB… And it isnt easy to find that type of players… Adams is defenetly blue chip player… About trade compensation we payed for him… If you ask me would i give two 1st plus 3rd… No i wouldnt… But only because those are(were) future picks and you never know how high those picks can be, especially in a division strong as NFC West… If i knew that would be two 24th pick, then yes i would give them…

    Pete values safeties much much more than other HCs… He strugled to find even one after Kam and Earl…He found one and he will be corner stone of his defense as long as Pete will be coaching… That is why i dont agree it was desperate move and all in move for 2020… Adams is only 25 and he has at least 5,6 good years in front of him… I also think Rob was to hard on him calling him blitzing safety who is bad in coverage…yes he was bad in coverage this year, but imo reason for that was combination of new team mates with limited time to practice togheter(covid ect) , new scheme, lot of injuries etc… I cant believe that Pete as DB guru would give two 1st for S who is bad at coverage… And also think Adams had above average coverage grade at PFF before Seattle…

    As i allready said things i am concered about are next… How much of Adams quality we can use in our scheme… I think even Pete didnt know that before season and he is still trying to find perfect role for him… Imo they overused him… To much blitzing.. That lead to to much injuries (you cant hit OL and TE to often and expect not to injure yourself) … Do i think Adams can be great in Kams role… Yes…do i think he is under used in that role…yes…do i think that if you use him only in that role two 1st round picks and 18-20mil are tooooo much… YES of course …

    So at the end i can say i am happy we have him, I think he is great player, blue chip all pro player, and i hope Pete will find way to use him best way to exploit Adams quality and to save him from injuries (so less blitzing than this year but not just in Kams box safety role)…

    • Rob Staton says:

      The Seahawks could’ve had three blue chippers at the end of R1, as noted in the article.

      It’s not that hard to hit on picks. They just need to stop making avoidable mistakes.

      • Karlo says:

        It is utterly unforgivable how badly management has mishandled its draft assets, might as well have flushed them down the toilet. For 2020 alone they could had so many other obvious and higher rated options who (SURPRISE) actually contributed significantly to their teams– rather than drafting Jordyn Brooks and Darrell Taylor

    • Volume12 says:

      I’m w/ ya all the way here. 💯 Needs to improve his ball skills.

  18. TheOtherJordan says:

    I agree 100% with this article. I’m going to reserve judgment until I see what John and Pete ultimately decide regarding Adams but I don’t have a good feeling. This can’t be dragged out. Have a number you’ll pay, if Adams is beyond that, move on. Don’t hesitate again like the Clowney situation. It will be disastrous for all involved. They have got to be decisive and I hope they trade Adams.

  19. Rohan Raman says:

    Slightly off-topic, but i wonder how much the new TV deals and legalized sports gambling are going to push up the cap. Could be that a 5-6 million cap rise would mean very little in the long-term.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      There has been some pushback on expensive stadiums subsidized by the taxpayers. But since the rich people run the league, I don’t expect that to stop.

      How about a 1% team tax on sports gambling? To be used on players salaries.

    • cha says:

      One analyst predicted the gambling revenue could top $600million.

      That works out to about a $9m raise in the salary cap.

      The big fish though are the next TV deals. They’re going to be huge.

  20. Mick says:

    Rob, I agree with you it would be the wise thing to do. But assuming they are not going to trade Adams, what do you think are the options to get the money to pay him? Don’t extend KJ (likely to happen anyways) and trade Bobby? This sounds suicidal to me, you only have Brooks behind who’s still wet and two players who haven’t proved anything, BBK and Barton. Trade Diggs? Hard to find a replacement and the cap hit isn’t that big. Trade J. Reed and go for a replacement in the draft or in free agency? Sounds doable, but risky. Duane Brown? He’s our anchor in the OL. The most reasonable solution seems to be to restructure Russ, Lockett and perhaps Dunlap.

    • Rob Staton says:

      But assuming they are not going to trade Adams, what do you think are the options to get the money to pay him?

      They can pay him. The new deal wouldn’t kick in until 2022.

      I just don’t think they should.

  21. icb12 says:

    Good Article.
    Haven’t read all the comments yet.
    But what is Diggs trade value? Anything? Do we extend him or trade him? His almost 8mil this year right?

    Could you get Keanu Neal AND Malik Hooker for that money?

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      Diggs had 64 combined tackles and 5 interceptions last year. He is worth the money.

      • icb12 says:

        No argument there. I really like Diggs. He’s absolutely worth it.

        He’s in the last year of his contract though I think? He’s going to want more too. Extension might not save as much as we’d hope.

        Tight against the cap, with barely any assets, the team needs to explore EVERY option.
        There’s only 2 things that should be off the table IMO. Trading DK. Trading Russ (Until yesterday this was still on the table for me-now I think with the new OC you see how that plays out)

    • John_s says:

      I dont understand the love for Malik Hooker. He’s oft injured who didn’t really perform to his draft status.

      2017: Torn ACL, MCL
      2018: Hip and foot injuries
      2019: Torn meniscus
      2020: Torn Achilles.

      • Rob Staton says:

        PFF’s projected salary for Hooker is $2m this year.

        Everyone accepts the injuries. I’d rather take a chance on him for $2m than spend $20m on another safety.

      • icb12 says:

        Simple. Money to talent ratio. You’re going to pay a #15 overall pick pennies. He’s talented. It hasn’t worked out. Maybe it will never work out. Or maybe it will. Really only 1 way to find out.

        Seahawks have a track record of taking chances like this. Dion Jordan, Luke Joeckel, Sheldon Richardson (not quite the same situation), Marcus Smith, Barkevious Mingo. Clowney (again- not quite the same)

        I fully recognize that none of those ^ worked out for the seahawks. I’m not arguing FOR the philosophy. I’m just saying it’s a money to talent thing.

  22. JJ says:

    What options does the NFL have with dealing with salary cap issues. League can’t function with a 3rd of the teams cash strapped.

  23. Andy Muhs - Hawks4Ever says:

    After over 5 years of following this site I had to finally post. Not a more reliable, educated and thorough site on Seahawks draft and future speculation out there. Field Gulls used to be good but definitely not anymore. 12th man rising is not even close. I’m actually surprised the Seahawks haven’t tried to hire you in someway Rob. I trust you more than Schneider in the current time
    Enough ass kissing, it seems the only way we are going to win a Super Bowl again is to make some tough decisions. Jamal has to go or this next few seasons are most likely a waste, great player in the right scheme (not ours). I also don’t see how paying Bobby $18mil plus gives us a chance at Super Bowl either, I hate the idea of cutting him but I look at the teams that made it furthest in the playoffs and only Tampa Bay has elite linebackers (they are going to lose one this offseason too)
    I agree with building O and D line, having an Offensive coordinator who knows how to get the best out of Russ and a cowbell linebacker. If we traded Bobby what could we get? Moving Brooks inside, resigning KJ and then signing another olb for cheaper could work (a little scary but what else do we do, also don’t want Barton starting). Without some cap space we are either not making playoffs or getting bounced early again most likely

    No disrespect to Jamal Adams but the thought of committing $18 mil a year to him gives me a ton of Seahawks created anxiety. Go Hawks and thank you for this blog, it’s nice to hear from people who tend to know wtf they are talking about!

    • ScandicHawk says:

      Damn, Andy, post more! Biggest problem on our d is Bobby at 18. Most worrying on Adams ain’t it, we’re gonna trade him if he doesn’t agree to JS’s terms, and rightly so. (as Rob’s been saying, see Frank, and Clowney re: market value) Love Wagner, Seahawk legend, but he couldn’t cover Eddie Lacey after 10 Dick’s Deluxes and a Monday scope on his knee. 18! As you say, KJ’s more valuable in the near future, move Brooks inside unless Bobby’s willing to take a big pay cut. (do they ever?) 18!

      Carlos D is key to the d signings over the next couple of years, he changed our d. Also, right behind him, and I know it’s unpopular, but hopefully Shaquill can be signed for under 6 or 7 at corner, we were a different team without him, like Dunlap. CB Dunbar, I mean after Buffalo, sign him for the minimum as insurance with health incentives and a no penalty cut option to see if he’s got something left with his knee. (But does he have a brain? Hopefully he doesn’t try to rob anybody in the offseason)

      Regards offense, we already have our third receiver in Lockett. There’s a reason he’s not running fly sweeps or returning kicks anymore, he’s lost a step and then some, so obvious. He’s a crafty veteran who understands our system and can find the seams, especially in a zone defense, so valuable as a three and a vet. But giving him a raise in a 3rd contract is right there with the stupidity of the Michael Bennett contract – don’t do it. We need a good young receiver to come in this draft that balances our O and gives Metcalf some breathing room. Something’s got to give with 4 picks.

      I think it’s Jamal. But Wilson would be interesting if you can get 3 firsts and pick Davis Mills out of Stanford. Love that guy. Potentially the next Andrew Luck with a shade of Joe Montana in him. I think that guy has the potential to be the best 2021 drafted quarterback after Lawrence.

      • Rob Staton says:

        I definitely think it’s time to explore the possibility of life after Bobby Wagner.

        The Seahawks need to be ruthless about where their resources need to be spent. And for me that’s OL/DL not LB/S.

        • BruceN says:

          It used to be that LB position was the least important part of a defense compared to the DL and CB. Couldn’t tell by how much Hawks have invested in it.

      • Andy Muhs -Hawks4Ever says:

        I plan on it. Love all the intelligent banter!

    • Andy Muhs - Hawks4Ever says:

      I will. Not a site online I enjoy more!

  24. L80 says:

    When the initial idea of getting Adams was proposed I was livid. On paper at the time we had what appeared to be a good secondary. My thinking was we didn’t need him, until the team completely screwed the pooch on the DL.

    So they get a dynamic safety and use him as a DL?…At that cost?……One of the worst moves since not taking Tony Dorsett……Now, they have to “pay the piper” and do so with a very limited ammo box.

    Trade his ass NOW !!!!!

  25. Andy Muhs - Hawks4Ever says:

    I mean it. I tell others about this site regularly. No problem!

  26. Pugs1 says:

    Rob, you make a compelling argument, and I guess it comes down to the compensation for me. If they can get a mid round first and a second or third next year it makes sense. I don’t think they should do it for anything less. Excellent well researched piece as always.

    I will disagree with your points about how they have drafted late in round one only because of injury being the great unknown. We would all like them to hit on every draft pick but we also know that’s not reality. Unfortunately the Seahawks have been a little snake bit in this area. You pointed out players who are better they could have taken. You may have liked all three better at the time. I won’t argue that all three are obviously better players now, but what none of us have the benefit of knowing is what McDowell would be doing if he never got on that ATV. Penny could have been a valuable piece to this offense without his serious knee injury. I also don’t think Collier is ever going to be great, but I do believe we would think better of him without a wasted rookie year started off by injury early in camp. Hopefully their luck will change real soon!

    • Rob Staton says:

      If they can get a mid round first and a second or third next year it makes sense. I don’t think they should do it for anything less.

      Agreed.

      We would all like them to hit on every draft pick but we also know that’s not reality.

      Of course. And I wouldn’t usually play the role of captain hindsight.

      Yet when I’ve spent weeks if not months talking about players like TJ Watt, Nick Chubb and others — saying they fit everything the Seahawks have historically looked for in the PCJS era — only to select lesser players… to me it warrants this kind of critique. We talked about these guys for Seattle and why they fit so much. They fought their character rules to select McDowell and I still don’t get the Penny pick over Chubb. They regret both now, because the right thing to do was staring them in the face.

      • JimQ says:

        Maybe the potential trade of Adams will end up being for a 1-st rounder & change + a player that doesn’t have a huge cap hit that could fill a current opening (DT, EDGE, CB, OL, RB?) or at least be an upgrade over an existing position player? If accomplished that could save one of the 4 draft picks that the Seahawks would have used on said position? Trades aren’t always just draft picks, sometimes decent surplus players may be available by trade too.

        I would think getting a fairly good player as well as draft picks may be easier for PC/JS to justify the trade and perhaps have some PR value as they would likely hype up in the media on the “great player” they got in addition to some additional draft capital, thus justifying their 1-year rental of Adams? At this time, it looks like there may be some pretty good players around the league that may be available due to cap restraints, so a player & draft picks may be a reasonable trade outcome? PC/JS will need to save face somehow.

      • Pugs1 says:

        With you on TJ 100%. The only things I could think of on Chubb was his knee injury and did they feel he was too much like Carson and the wanted a RB that brought something different to the table. I sure would love to be a fly on the wall when some of these decisions are made.

    • BobbyK says:

      The Seahawks get no benefit on Malik McDowell. He was a proven character risk and you deserve what you get with those guys. Sure, nobody could have predicted an ATV accident but those character concern people tend to have a lot more “bad luck” than high character players. Look at Malik McDowell when he was arrested in Atlanta. He’s a worthless punk. But the Seahawks knew that. He didn’t exactly win any humanitarian awards in college. There could not have been two more different players in the draft that year than TJ Watt and Malik McDowell in terms of real life character combined with football character. The Seahawks got cute and it cost them.

      • Pugs1 says:

        Wasn’t Frank Clark a character concern? He was productive and they traded him for a first and a second, and he hasn’t been in trouble since. They traded down a few times to a place they felt comfortable taking McDowell. The unfortunate and unpredictable part was that he never got on the field. The Atlanta incident maybe never happens if he’s a Seahawk. For all we know McDowell could be a dominant force on the DL or he could have washed out by now but we will never know because he never got on the field.

  27. Jarran Reed posted on IG that he is having surgery.

  28. SeattleLifer says:

    I couldn’t agree more that we need to invest in the trenches. Help an aging Russ, the running game, time for the receivers to run routes and on the other side be more effective at rushing 4 on defense helping every level behind them.

    Injuries to Adams are a bug concern for me. Between how he plays and his smaller stature he racked up a good number of injuries and what’s to say that doesn’t continue down the line? Sure this year could have been more bad luck and all but for me I see a player who fits the profile for injury prone if he continues to play the way he did this past season.

    Money is a problem going into the off-season and Rob you touched on one of my biggest concerns – misappropriation of funds. 3rd contracts for aging vets, mid guided spending on lesser players/projects/old guys in free agency, resigning mediocre in house talent to bigger contracts, spending too much in off positions like line backer. They need to prioritize and spend much more wisely than in the past 4-5 years. This team has a bunch of needs (backed up Rob by your spot on comment that we only have 3 tradeable players of 1st round talent and probably none after them that could net a 2nd rounder).

    Whenever I stop to really size it up I still can’t believe we gave up 2 firsts a 3rd and a viable starter for Adams, a blitzing strong safety who we knew we’d have to pay a historical contract to soon. Mind boggling, and for me it’s a no brainer to move him to recover some badly needed draft stock and try to do things the right way.

    Here’s to hoping wisdom rules and like the o-coordinator we end up being pleasantly surprised (and relieved) by Pete and John moving on from Adams.

    • Tim says:

      Total agreement.

      I never, ever thought that that level of draft capital was worth anything other than an attempt at either a franchise quarterback or an absolutely, totally elite defensive lineman. Aaron Donald or Jamaal Adams? JJ Watt in his prime, or Jamaal Adams? That kind of thing.

      Rob’s analysis of how Jamaal’s impact is best felt in a 3 – 4 system make total sense to me. Misdirection, with ends or OLB able to drop into coverage making up for the loss of safety makes absolute, complete sense. Adding a player whose sacks are driven in part from being a 5th pass rusher does not.

      Jamaal is certainly an exceptional player.

      The Seahawks lost in the playoffs this year because they got destroyed in the trenches. The direction where resources need to go is clear.

      • Roy Batty says:

        “The direction where resources need to go is clear.”

        That is the one statement that never quite makes it to Pete’s ears.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Pete’s the guy. The girl in blue is a philosophy to beat teams up in the trenches. The girl in red is a trade for a pass-catching tight end or a safety.

          Guy

          • Roy Batty says:

            Hahaha. Spot on.

            I always imagined Schneider sitting in the war room, working the phones, then turning to Pete and saying, “Pete, I have a Pro Bowl caliber RT and we’re ready to pull the trigger on.”

            Pete fires back, “Yeah, but look at that LB’s SPARQ!”

  29. cha says:

    Is there a link anywhere to the final PFF grades for 2020 for the Seahawks roster?

    • charlietheunicorn says:

      Behind the paywall, but the PFF site has the FA viewable right now.
      Some interesting names pop up….

  30. BobbyK says:

    I would love it if some team would give the Seahawks a mid-first round pick and change for Adams. If a team would throw in a 2nd rounder in 2023 – that’d be great, but I’d even settle for a 3rd rounder in ’23.

    If that trade looks like a rip-off on the surface, it’s not as bad as some might think. They would have gotten the use of Adams for an entire season. The reason you play is to win games and Adams greatly added to their talent level this past season. But in the long-term interests of this team, I see trading Adams as a no-brainer.

  31. Sea Mode says:

    Sources told Pauline last night that Watson prefers to play for the Miami Dolphins moving forward.

    https://www.profootballnetwork.com/following-deshaun-watson-trade-request-dolphins-top-preferred-landing-spots/

    • charlietheunicorn says:

      Dolphins are a QB away from being very dangerous in the playoffs.
      They are in a soft AFCE now, so they can get 10-12 wins without it being a huge struggle.

      • BobbyK says:

        The Dolphins may be close to trading something like Tunsil for Watson. LMFAO. Bill O’Moron sucks!

  32. Hoggs41 says:

    Personally I would prefer to trade Adams if we can get a first and a third. The max I would want to pay him is $16m per year. They did a good job of staying firm on Clowney and didnt budge.

    I could see a 2/$20 for Dunlap with a year 1 cap hit of $8 savings us $6.

    Shcerff has never played LG which is something to consider so someone who have to move.

    Leonard was a one hit wonder so that always scares me.

    Your right as something needs to happen. Lockett could be a trade option as well.

    Personally I hope we trade Adams more because I want our safeties getting picks not sacks.

    All that being said we do have a ton of cap space for next year.

    • Hoggs41 says:

      So many questions to answer and a lot of it might come to fruition this off season. One, can we pay Adams/Diggs $26-$28m combined and second, can we pay Lockett/Metcalf a combined $38m a year. Will be interesting story lines to follow.

      • Rob Staton says:

        Well Metcalf is going to be earning his rookie salary for two more years. So no, they’re not going to be determining whether they can pay those two $38m this off-season.

        • Hoggs41 says:

          I think you do. We know Metcalf will be around but will Lockett? If they are going to pay him $16m you are committing to both of them long term. DK will get paid next year not in two years.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Like I said, D.K. Metcalf’s rookie contract runs until 2022.

            Even if you extend Lockett, there are ways and means of overlapping. You’re never going to be paying them a combined $38m and they wouldn’t be making that call this year anyway.

            • Hoggs41 says:

              Of course you can overlap. Its more do you want to pay the same positions that much money. The Seahawks have always extended top talent a year before there contract ends so I see no reason why they would wait for DK. I would bet my house they extend DK next off season and not wait until 2023.

              • Rob Staton says:

                But if you’re overlapping you aren’t paying the same positions that much money! That’s the point.

                And it doesn’t matter if they extend DK next year or the year after. When you sign an extension, the Seahawks always tack years on. The big money would not kick in until 2023.

  33. Silly Billy says:

    Either way, I don’t see #33 and #54 on the same team in ’21.
    One of them gets paid, one of them gets traded. Both will be shopped, whoever gets the best offer goes.

    Obviously you’ll get better draft capital from Adams (mid first + change, which is still a loss considering sunk cost) but what if the market for Bobby is better than expected, and you get the opportunity to dump his contract?

    • James Cr. says:

      I honestly don’t think you would get more that a 4th round pick for Bobby (if that).

    • Brik says:

      This kinda makes me wonder if they were preparing for this going into the draft. Wagner is showing some signs of decline. Were they already considering getting Jamal Adams when the draft happened? Maybe there was more thinking going into the drafting of Jordyn Brooks than I thought. Preparing for the future.

      • Rob Staton says:

        I don’t think it was planned

        • Chris Wood says:

          I agree with Brik on the Brooks pick replacing Wagner and I view the Adams trade as gaining some swag and alpha mentality back on the defense.
          I don’t think it’s a coincidence they drafted a player that is almost a clone of Wagner. I think he was planned to replace him but we’ll see in a few months what they’re true intentions were.

      • Silly Billy says:

        I’m with you on this one Brik. they’ve drafted 3 MLBs in the last 2 drafts. It makes sense to at least try and move on from bobby’s contract.

        As a player, he’s worth a 2nd rounder. No one wants to give a 2nd rounder for that contract, though.
        But, I could see a scenario where a bad but cap-friendly team with a Rookie QB contract would want to revitalize their defense.

        If I were Jacksonville, I’d 100% be willing to give up an early 3rd for a HOF veteran presence.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Initially I was sceptical of Wagner’s stock and worth.

          But to teams with a lot of picks, lots of cap space, starting rebuilds and looking for consistency and leadership — he’s an ideal fit.

          And I think they would be willing to pay his salary for that.

          It’s just whether or not the Seahawks have it in them to embrace the prospect of moving on.

  34. New Guy says:

    Rob,

    With the new offensive coordinator, what do you see as the type of OL personnel are we likely to target in the draft and otherwise?
    Is Possic a good center for the new scheme?
    What about our new rookie RG? Is his type too heavy for the scheme? Do you think we’ll still go after the big, mauler type?

    Thanks

    .

  35. bmseattle says:

    Would you trade Adams for…
    2021 – 2nd & 3rd
    2022 – 2nd

    • Rob Staton says:

      Is it a top-35 pick this year?

      • bmseattle says:

        Yeah, it would need to be top of the round.
        I might go top 40.
        I just started thinking… what if we can’t get a 1st for him?
        Would two 2nds be enough?
        I think you’d still have to do it at that point, considering all the points you made in the article.

    • Big Mike says:

      I would. You need inexpensive talent on this team and that would mean 3 guys on rookie contracts which would still cost you less than Adams I do believe. Besides knowing JS, he’d trade down and get more picks (likely the 2 which he’d get a 4 for by moving well down in the round).

  36. cha says:

    Speaking of precarious positions, I’d really be interested to see what the Rams do to get under the cap.

    They’re $30m over right now, with no outright players they can cut for significant cap room pre or post June 1.

    They also are carrying a massive dead cap hit still on their quarterback, and all the things the team has been saying about him to the press haven’t been super confidence-building.

    And neither do they have a first round pick.

    It’s going to be restructure city in LA.

    • charlietheunicorn says:

      So old buddy old pal…. Goffy boy, can you restructure your deal to help us out of a pinch….. pretty please
      ~ Your new best friend Les Snead

      • Rohan Raman says:

        Goff: “Wait, weren’t you and Sean dissing me in the media like two days ago?”

        Les Snead: “Fake news.”

        • charlietheunicorn says:

          Nothing to see here, move along…. move along. ~ Les Snead

          • Big Mike says:

            (meanwhiloe Snead on the phone with another team)…..”we only want to trade him to you because of his cap hit. We still think he’s a top 10 NFL QB”.

  37. Rob Staton says:

    Just watched the full day of Senior Bowl day three on ESPNU via a YouTube stream.

    Firstly, well done ESPN for showing it.

    Secondly, it was so enjoyable to watch. And now that it’s over, I’m just thinking about how much I’m going to miss the combine this year.

  38. Ashish says:

    I agree 100% with idea trading Adams. With his current injuries will other teams interested? or just give low ball offer?
    I will love if we get Miami #1 and #3 this year and something next year draft (3rd or 4th) something you proposed earlier.

  39. bk matty says:

    problem is, you aint getting that much for Adams in his current state. Everyone knows the story, he will want a huge deal, why give up a 1st without locking him in.

    So is keeping him as a centerpiece of the defense and an other world playmaker at a high cost worth getting another 2nd round pick or a few later ones that we have shanked lately regardless?!

    It is definitely a very tough situation but personally I think you keep your talented youth when you have em and find ways to build around em. I would keep Adams.

    • Rob Staton says:

      you aint getting that much for Adams in his current state

      Jamal Adams carries a high value to a lot of teams that run a specific scheme.

      So is keeping him as a centerpiece of the defense and an other world playmaker

      I would hotly dispute he performed at the level of ‘other world playmaker’ in 2020. He was PFF’s 45th ranked safety. I don’t think he’s suited to Seattle’s defensive scheme.

      worth getting another 2nd round pick or a few later ones that we have shanked lately regardless?!

      This is the point I made in the piece. They ‘shanked’ the picks by making avoidable and predictable errors. They need to draft better, not less.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        I’m still bending my mind around the thought that he might not play in 2021 because he is only getting paid 10 million. That is just mind boggling. I see his value in the 12-15 million range. I don’t think he will get more from anyone. I could list the reasons why, but we have already talked about it.

        As a general rule of thumb, I don’t think anyone but a certified superstar should be making over 12 million/year on this team. Who qualifies for more? Russell Wilson and Metcalf. The rest are replaceable above 12 million. The most valuable player on this team is the punter and he makes a lot less.

  40. Bankhawk says:

    Just throwing this out there: would Dolphins side with Watson make B.B. more covetous of a chess-piece like Adams?
    I’m with you, Rob-we need to find a way to enhance our draft capital (preferably via some route that incorporates cap-savings as well, if possible) and short of Russ, DK, Duane-no name should be ‘off the table’.
    It was another really cool article, by the way and I’m enjoying (and sharing out) the interviews as well.
    I swear, man-your like a fine Bordeaux gaining character with each passing post!

    • Rob Staton says:

      Thank you.

      Châteauneuf-du-Pape is my wine of choice by the way

      • SeattleLifer says:

        Warmer year Bordeaux as weekend wines for me but with the tariffs and the chateaus greediness I’ve scaled back quite a ways – just too damn spendy. Was looking at some of the early 18’s on the shelf(I don’t do futures)and the sticker shock just keeps growing. I’ll be buying more WA wines to fill things out with better value and I usually even get to taste them first to know my kind(although Covid has nixed all of the ticketed tastings I’ve so enjoyed in the past so sadly now it’s just open tasting rooms).

        • Rob Staton says:

          I had a fantastic, rare Californian wine in September during a 10-year anniversary meal with my wife. Very expensive, but we were splashing out a bit for the occasion. Absolutely sensational.

          • SeattleLifer says:

            That’s awesome your wife and you got to experience a wine like that on your anniversary!(and congratulations by the way).

            A great wine is a thing of true beauty and makes for a great memory. Wine is a passion as big or possibly bigger than the Seahawks for me. So so much goes into making it, it lives and breathes and every year is different, just so much to get into and explore. And when you get to drink one that really captivates you there isn’t an experience like it.

      • Sea Mode says:

        Mmmm… I’d like to try that one. Similar tasting notes to my favorite, Chateaux d’Aiguilhe.

      • cha says:

        Now you’re talking

  41. RWIII says:

    Rob. Quick question. Drew Brees is probably going to retire. According to E.S P. N. Brees has a $36.2 million dollar cap hit for 2021. If Brees does retire do the Saints take a $36.2 charge against their salary cap?

  42. Frank says:

    There isn’t a single player on this team I would put beyond having a price tag, the question is how likely are you to find a buyer in the range? Addams would essentially have to net 2 first round picks or an all world offensive lineman that could play tackle until the time came to step in for Brown and change.
    Wilson would have to net you a top ten pick because obviously it would have to be used to replace him.(depleted value from bad contract, and an abundance of good QBs available).

    Wagner would hopefully pull a 2nd, but I doubt anyone wants to bail us out of a bad contract unless they are really desperate for a veteran voice to change a team culture. His replacement is already on the team although again his contract likely would prevent getting anywhere near his value in trade.

    Penny has had crap luck staying on the field, but has shown flashes when healthy. I wouldn’t be surprised if the team got a 2nd round pick for the next year after some team missed out in the draft.

    DK is a bit overrated in my book, but if someone offered a decent 1st round pick that could turn into a few picks I’d cash that before they had time to think it thru.

    That’s pretty much it for trade scenarios, Addams seems like the least likely to recoup the investment and make a net positive. Given his unique skill set as a safety/Linebacker hybrid the (direction the league is trending towards) tone setting mentality, and age I think the only way to make this a win for the Hawks realistically is to learn how to use him correctly, and build a defensive unit around his skill set. Trading Wilson, getting a top of the draft QB and having a few year window to splurge on talent in free agency seems like higher potential to closing the gap with the Chiefs.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Addams would essentially have to net 2 first round picks or an all world offensive lineman that could play tackle until the time came to step in for Brown and change.

      Why would you? I’d happily take a first rounder and change.

      Addams seems like the least likely to recoup the investment

      You’re not going to recoup it because they overpaid.

      • Big Mike says:

        They didn’t just overpay, they got fleeced. That’s what happens when you screw up your stated need for pass rush in the offseason and get very, very desperate.

      • Frank says:

        So he was a 6th overall pick around a draft trade value of 1600.
        Two first round picks around 27= 680 + 680.
        Add in a 2nd round pick about 320 + 1360 = 1680.
        I suppose to be fair you’d split the value into the years on the contract and come up with a per year value. Given the final year of a contract is almost always a resign year using 4 as base, you come up with 420. A team that knew they where going to resign him and had a plan in place to maintain team control might value him closer to his original value, but free agency has been none too kind to safety’s, but given the situation the Hawks are in with his contract and the state of the salary cap for most of the league it’s hard to imagine making a deal this year that wouldn’t just be getting absolutely fleeced again. Even to resign him, and trade him in a couple years seems like there a path to success but to move him this year seems like negotiating from such a point of weakness and desperation seems like bad resources management. Any product is worth what you can get for it, resign him and make him the core of your defense and you didn’t over pay; trade him and have rented his services for a single year for a first round pick and you get absolutely fleeced twice. Use him a couple years and move him for a first, still moderately okay value. Can you imagine moving Addams to get an LJ or Penny back? I see where your coming from, and you’ve made a valid points but I think it’s in the realm of a pipe dream. I simply don’t think any GM would do it and expect to keep their job. It might even be the right thing to do, depending on who the player or players you’d draft but doesn’t feel realistic.

        • Rob Staton says:

          But it’s not around #27 is it? We now know one of the picks is #23. And who knows what next years will be?

          Plus on top of this, you’re taking on $18-20m a year which you don’t do when you trade up in the draft. So it’s not a fair comp.

          Can you imagine moving Addams to get an LJ or Penny back?

          I wish people would stop saying this.

          The Seahawks don’t need to draft less they need to draft better. And if they can’t trust themselves to do that, then they should be out of a job.

          They could’ve had TJ Watt, Nick Chubb and AJ Brown. Easily. They all fit Seattle’s defined preferences. Avoidable mistakes can be rectified in future.

  43. Gohawks5151 says:

    https://mobile.twitter.com/MikeSilver/status/1354990526487904257

    Sorry I can’t link. Man we are raiding the Rams now. Hope theses guys are good

    • charlietheunicorn says:

      Might as well go ALL IN with the move.

    • cha says:

      Please Ken Norton, PLEASE take these guys out for a beer and ask them ‘how did you attack our defense so well?’

      You can’t seem to figure it out. Maybe they’ll share it with you.

    • Mick says:

      I think they can only try to even the score by signing KJ.

    • Sea Mode says:

      Albert Breer
      @AlbertBreer
      ·4h

      Waldron bringing his ex-Tufts teammate with him North—good move for the Seahawks getting guys from a system that marries run game and pass game well, with two coaches with specific expertise in each area.

      Russell Wilson should be happy.

    • pdway says:

      I’m taking this as another positive – Rams run game has been strong for years – and it’s also a sign that the Hawks are letting our new OC build out his team w his guys.

      Reason for optimism here….

  44. Rushless pass says:

    Patrick Jones and is absolutely getting bullied in drills!

  45. JC says:

    If you have a roster starved of assets worthy of a first round pick in return, you probably should keep those assets on your roster. All of these facts were known when the trade was executed. JS and PC would know that Adams would have some contract leverage due to the bounty paid, they knew he’d be a safety they’d disproportionately blitz, and they knew trading the picks they did would mean they’d be light on selections this and next offseason. If they knew these things when they made the trade, there is no point in throwing in the towel. Not having first round picks makes for a less relevant Seahawks Draft Blog, but it is what it is.

    • Mick says:

      Lol that’s a silly argument. Actually the current situation makes it interesting to mock: you can trade up, you can trade down for more picks, you can trade players for picks, you can stick to what you have and look for gems. I’m sure Rob’s last worry is that people will stop reading his blog if Adams stays.

    • Rob Staton says:

      If you have a roster starved of assets worthy of a first round pick in return, you probably should keep those assets on your roster.

      So how do you plan to replace or retain the starting center, cornerback, running back, SAM linebacker, left guard, tight end, #2 defensive end, Poona Ford and all of the other out of contract players? With $100,000 to spend and three or four draft picks?

      JS and PC would know that Adams would have some contract leverage due to the bounty paid

      And perhaps they also knew they could see the lay of the land in the off-season and make an educated decision on whether to pay him a record breaking contract?

      they knew he’d be a safety they’d disproportionately blitz

      That doesn’t mean they have to tie themselves to that, having seen first hand how it looks.

      and they knew trading the picks they did would mean they’d be light on selections this and next offseason

      And it doesn’t mean they aren’t now able to assess where the team is and decide that they’d be better off having the cheap resource that comes with the picks and extra cap room, to shift resources from positions like LB and S to the trenches.

      If they knew these things when they made the trade, there is no point in throwing in the towel.

      I don’t know why you’ve framed it like they’ve lost a boxing match. There’s nothing wrong with being aggressive, experiencing the results of that decision and then making a calculated and, in my opinion, correct move to go in a different direction. That’s not throwing in the towel, it’s just running a football team.

      Not having first round picks makes for a less relevant Seahawks Draft Blog, but it is what it is.

      On the contrary, this blog is getting more unique visitors now than at any other point in its 12 years of existence. It’s never been busier. And believe it or not, people don’t stop caring about the draft just because they don’t have a first round pick. We’ve been here twice before — 2013, 2015 — with no first round pick. People actually become more interested as the draft season develops in the mid/late round prospects. That’s where most of the intrigue lies — that and finding the hidden gems within a class, or the players set to rise.

      And while the name of the site is ‘Seahawks Draft Blog’ — for many, many years now this has been much more than a mere draft blog. It’s a comprehensive Seahawks blog that covers any and all topics.

      Thanks for allowing the mask to slip though with your passive aggressive remark — it enables us to approach any future posts you make with the full knowledge that you might be a bit of a twat.

  46. Rob just one question…

    If we dont take into acount trade compensation, Adams future salary, our situation with Salary Cap and limited draft resources this offseason…

    What do you think how high is Pete on Adams after one year of close look in his sistem? We know what Pete said, but we also know Pete almost never says what he really thinks…

    Do you think he exeeded his expectation, dissapointed him or was just what Pete thought he would be…

    • I think he is even better leader and person than Pete thought… He is as good of a player as Pete thought… But even after one year i think Pete is still not sure how much of Adams strenght he can utilize in his scheme, and final answer on that question (in Petes head) will be decision maker will they trade him or not…

      • Rob Staton says:

        I think he is even better leader and person than Pete thought

        Is he though? To me he’s very noisy and passionate but that’s not leadership. Kam Chancellor was quiet, reserved. And the best leader this team has probably ever had.

        • cha says:

          Adams’ leadership.

          Before the Buffalo game, one of the sideline reporters mentioned that Adams was teasing DK Metcalf that he wasn’t doing enough and needs to carry his weight.

          Think on that for just a second.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m not sure to be honest. That’s a difficult question to answer.

  47. Big Mike says:

    Another factor that Rob mentioned that hasn’t been discussed a whole lot on this thread is the injuries Adams has suffered. By using him in the fashion Seattle HAD to in order to generate some sort of, any sort of pass rush he missed 1/4 of the teams games due to injury and was rather ineffective in several others (including the WC game vs. LA) because he was hurt. Anyone in favor of keeping Adams ask yourself if you really are wanting to keep a player that may well only be healthy enough to be completely effective for 60% of the games he plays yet still is being paid around $18 mil per year.

    “The greatest ability is availability” – Tony Dungy

    • Big Mike says:

      And if your answer to the injury concerns is “blitz him less”, why are you willing to pay a guy with a 53.1 coverage grade and an overall rating as the 45th best Safety in the NFL 18 per to be a “standard” coverage type safety?

      • What was his coverage grade in first 3 seasons?

        • Big Mike says:

          How is that relevant when in those years he was not in the SEAHAWKS’ system.
          But OK, for the sake of argument, let’s say he was even a bit above average. Do you want to pay 18 per for a Safety that’s even a bit above average in coverage when you are totally up against the cap? And if you brought him in via trade to apply pressure on the QB, why would you pay 18 per to have him play coverage?
          Lastly, your post did not address the injury factor which may only be mitigated by playing him in coverage. It’s a vicious circle the Seahawks’ put themselves in the middle of by trading for a 220 lb. Safety to rush the passer.

          • Rohan Raman says:

            Other than his rookie year and this year, Jamal Adams has earned a top-10 safety grade in coverage and run defense.

            In the right system, there’s no question that he is an elite coverage safety, blitzer and run defender. The question is whether the Hawks’ system can be that system – as I believe you’ve noted. But make no mistake, Jamal Adams is the best safety in the league when healthy and playing in the right system.

          • If you read all the post above you would see that i allready adressed that problem.

        • James Cr. says:

          I remember reading somewhere it was really good – high seventies low eighties I think. Just going by memory though.

    • TomLPDX says:

      I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately myself. If this system leads to him getting hurt all the time and therefore unavailable, perhaps this is the wrong system for him to be in (stating the obvious).

      • Hoggs41 says:

        He really is the only player we can trade that gives us quality draft picks, opens up cap space with no dead money. If you can get a one and a three I think you just have to pull the trigger. Tough decision though.

    • Big Mike says:

      And those of you who want to keep him did not in any way address the injury risk he obviously carries in the Seattle system. If you feel like last year was an aberration, that’s fine I get that. I will ask you though, are you willing to risk 18 per that it was indeed merely an aberration? Because if it wasn’t yiour 18 per is missing a bunch of time and that hurts your team.

      The greatest ability is availability.

      • pdway says:

        I need to understand better how the seattle system makes him more susceptible to injury? that doesn’t really compute to me, football is football, and he’s active and a hitter, so seems like he’s going to find contact in any system, no?

        I know we blitzed him a ton early on, but as noted, that was at least somewhat situational, and went down once we had some semblance of a pass rush coming from the D-line.

        But am open to hearing more.

  48. JD says:

    Great article Rob. I agree with all points. My mind then moves to the next step of who would make this trade.
    Out of the teams you listed, here is what I’m thinking:
    New England: I feel like they want to figure out their QB situation before spending resources on a safety.
    Tennessee: I feel like they are probably happy with Vaccaro and Byard. I don’t know the contract situations though.
    Pittsburgh: Spent big on Minkah already and spent a first round pick on Terrell Edmunds. Potentially an option but they might be planning on resources for life after Big Ben.
    Baltimore: Maybe. I don’t have a gut feeling about them being in on this though.
    Tampa Bay: Wouldn’t having Winfield Jr take them out of contention? He would be a weapon with Bowles though no doubt.
    Giants: I’m thinking they are happy with Jabril Peppers but they could upgrade. They also have Logan Ryan and Xavier Mckinney so they have options.
    Browns: This is the most likely to me and it is one that I shared in a previous post as a potential destination.

    The Browns were starting Andrew Sendejo and Ronnie Harrison who were both cast off from previous teams. Huge upgrade potential despite also having Karl Joseph and Grant Delpit. Baker is still on his rookie deal and can front load Jamal and then backload Baker if the salary cap becomes an issue. They need a playmaker in their secondary to pair with Denzel Ward. Their defense would be legit. I could also see them interested in Bobby Wagner as their LB’s are average. I have a feeling they think they are a few pieces on defense away from the top of the AFC. Adams would help them against the speed of the top teams like the Chiefs and Ravens.

    For compensation, I think #26 overall in 2021 and a 2022 2nd could be fair on both sides.
    I would probably do it for even #26 and #89 in 2021 (as they have 89 and 91) just to fill out this year’s draft a little more.

    I’m still in shock of the compensation we gave up but this would recover at least some of the draft stock. If we do the second deal, then essentially the initial trade was for 1 year of Adams and a 2022 4th for a 2022 1st (because we got a 2021 1st and third in return to cancel out) and Bradley McDougald.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Cleveland and Miami are the two most likely options IMO.

      • JD says:

        I agree Miami is the other realistic option. If they make the Deshaun trade, what do you think potential comp for Adams would be?

      • SonGoku says:

        Rob, just hypothetically, if you could get #18 from Miami, would you consider to take Najee Harris or trade down, acquire some more picks and go with Williams?

  49. Hoggs41 says:

    Also our cap space is even worse than it looks. Right now OTC has us at about $2.8m with 47 players. When you add in 4 more at $660k (what he calls effective cap space) it takes you down to about $150k. Then you have to adjust Dickson’s salary from $992k to about $3.4m due to the PPE. That actually puts us about $2.2m or so in the negative.

    • BC_Hawk says:

      It is dire, but I think we need to see what the league and NFLPA do for 2021 before we start to speculate roster building based on having $100k. Given other teams have no way to get under realistically, something needs to be done. As discussed previously, maybe it is borrow cap increases from 2022 and 2023 to give a “inflationary” increase to the 2020 value. Who knows, but that is a big chip that needs to fall first.

      Though I agree upon initial review, it is hard to imagine paying jamal and Bobby a HUGE combined wage, I think we are missing the point that we do not have to pay them both if we do not want to. Assume Jamal gets a new contract this year or next, his 2021 hit will be 10mill or less. Bobby only has 3.8 mill in guarantees in 2022. As such, he will most likely get extended at a lower cap OR we can release him for a 3.8 mill penalty. At the end, Jamal was brought in to be the new alpha male, and PC/JS knew that they were never going to get the chance at a 1-15 1st rnd pick before 2023. As such, they paid big to get the guy they envisioned leading the Defense.

      • Rob Staton says:

        Or they took a chance on an impact player who they hadn’t been able to acquire during the off-season and now they will set a limit for an extension and if Adams wants more, move him on.

        • BC_Hawk says:

          I don’t think he was a replacement to fill the “impact player” on the DL; he was a replacement of the Alpha Male in 2022/2023, and given the chatter after he had been traded, JS had been in on it for awhile, but wanted to see how the whole covid scenario fleshed out before committing. Dunlap was that guy, I just think they felt that teams would get desperate to create cap carry forward for 2021, and it would have been a smorgasbord of Vet DL/DEs available at cutdowns in Sept. That didn’t happen, and we were left to suffer until the trade deadline (Bruce getting hurt and Taylor didn’t help the cause either).

          At the end of the day, we overpaid, and he wasn’t plug and play to our scheme. I personally think he is here to stay, so now the emphasis should be on creating scheme in the 4-3 that allows us to take advantage of him outside of telegraphed blitz that too often resulted in plays downfield. Much like the Offense, it would be refreshing to see PC bring in some new blood on the D staff in positional roles, as we all know KNJ isn’t going anywhere.

          • Rob Staton says:

            I said impact player, not D-line.

            I do think they wanted an alpha, I agree with that.

            But I don’t see any major scheme adjustments to accommodate one player, especially a player who might not be worthy of such special treatment.

        • BC_Hawk says:

          Potentially; wouldn’t rule that out. The real thing I think JS wishes he had a do over was BWags contract (his hands were tied though). In the long run, CJ Mosley may be the reason Bobby doesn’t retire as a Seahawk which is sad.

          • dcd2 says:

            Very good point. That Mosley deal was soooooo bad and such an overpay.

            We needed to deal with RW, Bobby, Clark and Reed that year IIRC. Clark was the one who had the trade value, and Mosely’s deal blew up the LB market. I doubt we could have got a 1st for Bobby, and he was the ‘leader’ on D.

            With hindsight, I wonder if JS would do it differently. We would have kept Clark and not added Collier, but still drafted Barton to be Bobby’s replacement.

            I’m not sure the end result would have been a better team, but IMO a better allocation of cap (DL>LB). Might have really hurt the locker room though.

            The situation was the same as it is now in some regards. We didn’t have any picks, we had a big chunk of cap tied up in a few players, and only one real asset to deal to address both issues. Of course we then went and paid Ziggy Ansah more than the Chiefs paid Clark in 2019. If we end up dealing Jamal, drafting a non-factor replacement with the pick and paying Kareem Jackson $10M, we’ll have ‘completed the circle’

    • cha says:

      I’m not mad at you Hoggs, but I’m so tired of hearing about how dire the Seahawks cap situation is.

      The Rams are $30m in the hole and will still find a way to sign or trade for some amazing impact player.

      Meanwhile the Seahawks will clutch their pearls about what they are going to do.

      • BC_Hawk says:

        I agree Curtis, non of my comments should be taken as being mad at the OPs. There is just SO much uncertainty with the CAP and COVID that the league needs to do something, or the majority of the teams will be in non-compliance.

        A good analogy is interest rates here is Canada; The bank of Canada will never raise the prime drastically, as they realize that will drive a Real Estate Market adjustment that will create negative equity positions on ALOT of there loans. This is further compounded by allowing home equity loans on property inflated values since purchase. Recipe for disaster.

  50. Happy Hawk says:

    Obviously it is within the rules to operate at $75-$120 million OVER the cap ( see Philly and New Orleans) so why can’t we? If not, and we can’t pay our talent then I am sensing people think we follow the Mariners model and trade everyone for prospects- reboot- and then rebuild at the top of the draft instead of languishing at the bottom of the draft and the top of the cap. The Niners, Rams, Cardinals, Jets, and Miami have tried this recently with varying degrees of success. Adams is the tip of the iceburg. He is only a $9m player next year ( fairly cheap) and is under contract but I agree with Rob waiting to move him seems problematic. In addition, Wagner, Wright, Lockett, Wilson, Dunlop, Reed, Ford, Brown, Diggs and others have draft value in varying degrees but value non the less. It is a scary and risky time for the Hawks. New offensive coaches, another early playoff exit, disgruntled QB, and no cap space indicates a possible major overhaul maybe in our future. Thanks Rob for this thought provoking post with lots to discuss and strategize.

  51. SimpleHawk says:

    This line in your article sums up why they can’t trade Adams “ An opportunity to see if he could come in and deliver the kind of major impact they’d been unable to acquire in free agency or the draft.”

    So trade Adams for a draft pick to get an impact player they were unable to acquire during the draft?

    When you realize 50% of 1st round draft picks aren’t starting four years later you realize why the trade was a bargain. Now ask Wilson to take a pay cut to help acquire a better OLine who makes $35 mill, not the impact player that costs $9 mill, draft a RB and let Carson go (he is hurt too often).

    • Rob Staton says:

      No, you’ve missed the point I was making.

      When I said they traded for him to get the impact player they couldn’t acquire in free agency or the draft… they could’ve done, they just whiffed.

      They were going into the season with no upgrade on defense. Their biggest move was to replace Clowney with Mayowa and bring back Bruce Irvin. That was appalling and they were desperate.

      It’s completely plausible to find impact, quality players in the draft.

      And Adams was in no way, shape or form a ‘bargain’. That’s silly.

      • SimpleHawk says:

        No one said it’s not “possible” to find impact players in the draft, but the chances of Schneider doing it with a late 1st round pick is slim. Players like Adams are available with a top 10 pick, finding one below that is rare and given Schneider’s first round history over the past five years, I’d say implausible.

        Trade was a bargain. Maybe not for a different GM, but a bargain for the Seahawks. A guaranteed impact player versus what we got the last 5 years.

        2016 – Ifedi
        2017 – none
        2018 – Penny
        2019 – Collier
        2020 – Brooks

        • Rob Staton says:

          You implied that is what I said. That is the point.

          And then you more or less say it yourself by trotting out the tired line of ‘the chances are slim’ of JS finding a quality player at the end of R1.

          Of course it isn’t slim. They have made bad choices but that comes with the territory.

          Unfortunately you’ve fallen into the trap so many do. As I’ve said in the piece and others. The Seahawks need to draft better not less. Look who they could’ve had instead of those names.

          And no, it’s not a bargain in the slightest.

  52. […] As noted in my article last week, there are many strands to this. I don’t think Adams is a great scheme fit. I think the sack numbers are manufactured and a bit of a mirage. I don’t think he (or any safety) warrants a contract worth $18-20m a year. […]