Would the Seahawks really trade for Darrelle Revis?

January 25th, 2013 | Written by Rob Staton

Why not?

Knee injury or no knee injury, you’re going to show interest in Darrelle Revis if he’s available. We’re talking about one of the premier defensive players in the league. He’s only 27-years-old. Saying you wouldn’t be interested in Revis is like saying you wouldn’t be interested in J.J. Watt or Calvin Johnson after an ACL injury. You do your homework, check the price tag and review the situation.

That doesn’t mean you ultimately make the deal, but the Seahawks are absolutely 100% right to keep their finger on the pulse here. Even if they have one of the best corners in the NFL already on their roster.

According to Mike Freeman at CBS Sports, Seattle, Denver and San Francisco are the teams ‘highly interested’ in doing a deal with the New York Jets:

The possibility of a Revis trade, first reported by CBS Sports’ Jason La Canfora, is no longer just a possibility, according to a variety of sources. The Jets are strongly leaning toward the trade and teams are considering giving up significant capital to get him.

“There’s a Revis gold rush forming,” said a general manager.

Some people will love the idea of the Seahawks being interested in Revis, others will say it’s unnecessary. I would say the right position to take is bang in the middle. Test the water, seek out the value. See what happens. Play it by ear. The worst case scenario is you walk away without making a trade. It’s glorified window shopping.

If the right deal comes along, why wouldn’t you pull the trigger? You can never have too many great corners. With the greatest respect to Brandon Browner, a cornerback tandem of Revis and Richard Sherman would be a partnership for the ages. Revis has been shutting down the leagues best receivers since 2007. He was a superstar. The knee injury is a concern, but if Adrian Peterson can return to dominate the league again, why not Revis?

The Seahawks have improved so quickly under Pete Carroll and John Schneider in part because they’ve refused to shut doors. When Randy Moss became available, they had a look. They spoke to Brandon Marshall in 2010. They traded for Marshawn Lynch when most of the league was put off by perceived character concerns. A 5-10 quarterback wasn’t considered too short to succeed. Not every idea leads to a deal being done, but why not keep your options open? Why wouldn’t they monitor the Revis situation?

Improving the pass rush is the main priority this off-season, but how often does a player of Revis’ quality become available? Not very often.

It makes sense to look into this, especially with the Jets reportedly so determined to arrange a trade. They’ll lose the player for nothing in twelve months, can’t use the franchise tag and don’t have the cap room to offer a huge extension. They’re handcuffed. They’re trying to get whatever they can. Cut their losses and run. It’s such a serious issue they’re supposedly willing to take a cap hit of $9m.

New York’s desire for a trade and the need to pay Revis a handsome new contract might help drive the price down. That’s not to say the Jets are going to give him away, but there could be some value to be had for a team willing to pay what he wants.

I’d even argue trading the #25 pick outright should be a consideration. The injury makes it a gamble, but what are the chances you’ll get a player of Revis’ quality with that draft choice? That’s not to say you definitely pull the trigger, but you at least consider it.

This is a team ready to challenge for a Super Bowl. Adding a guy like Revis and working on the pass rush with the rest of your draft picks makes an already solid defense even stronger. It’d be an expensive, calculated roll of the dice. But who knows? You might throw a seven.

So what do you reckon?

229 Responses to “Would the Seahawks really trade for Darrelle Revis?”

  1. Zach says:

    Darrelle Revis? Yes please, especially if it means SF doesn’t get him. Give them Flynn and our #25 pick. My only question is what would revis want for the next 3 years.

    • Rob Staton says:

      He’d want about $9m per year I think. Champ Bailey is paid $8m in base salary in Denver and he’s the highest earning corner in the NFL. He gets about $3m more in bonuses. Asomugha gets $11m straight up in base. It’d be an expensive deal but you could front load it to avoid clashing with some of the re-signings required on the horizon. The Seahawks have a cheap roster at the moment that will get expensive as time goes by. It’s just whether the Seahawks want to break up the chemistry of the four starters while also paying one player a massive premium salary. They can do the salary. It’s just whether they think it’s worth potentially pissing off the current starters while also setting a very expensive market for Sherman and Thomas when their contracts come up for renewal.

      • Chris says:

        So let me get this straight …

        We’re arguing about whether it’s better to use the #1 on a top CB like Xavier (if we really want a corner this bad …), pay him next to nothing, and also have a ton of money to sign one of these DTs that we really need, plus some money left over to provide some depth or a starter at nickel corner/linebacker …

        or

        sign a 27 yr old coming off a major injury at perhaps the strongest position on the team?

        Yeah, no way this one could blow up in our faces.

        Unless Flynn going to NY is a major part of this deal, I don’t know what could make me less happy than this sort of trade. The opportunity cost is too high.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I suppose the counter to this is Revis has been among the top 2-3 defensive players in the NFL since 2007 — maybe even #1. Putting him alongside Sherman could potentially set up Seattle’s secondary as one of the greatest ever to play the game.

          On the other hand, Xavier Rhodes is an untested rookie.

          • Chris says:

            This would be a trade for a 1 year superbowl window only.

            After paying him and rolling almost nothing into next year, we’d start roughly 12-13 million over our cap the following year. I think this is something, that due to the rollover rules, people just aren’t understanding.

            There’s a reason this team seems to want to roll over 10 million each year. And if we stop doing this our caps in the future will be FAR less than it was this year, which means after the Revis signing the team would be forced to do nothing but cut salary and let players go over the next few years.

            • Rob Staton says:

              I don’t see how you’ve come to the conclusion this would be a trade for a one year window or that Seattle would be $12-13m over the cap the following year. For starters, Matt Flynn — even if he isn’t gone this off-season, he will be next year. That’s a significant saving. Then there’s the fact Zach Miller’s contract is $4m cheaper in 2014. Red Bryant and Marshawn Lynch’s contracts are $2m cheaper in 2014 compared to 2013. I’m not convinced Chris Clemons sees the $7.5m he’s due in 2014. Leon Washington is due $2.5m in 2014 – does he make it that far? So as you can see, there are areas where the Seahawks are making plenty of savings in 2014. That’s just a sample size. If you front load a contract to Revis with big gains in 2013 and 2014, then by 2015 he could be on as little as $7m per year at a time when you need to re-sign most of they key young players.

              And look at New England. They’re paying Tom Brady $22m a year. They just re-signed Gronk, they have Wilfork and are paying Welker on the franchise tag. You can have superstars in the NFL.

              • Chris says:

                Well, that’ll help the situation for sure. But there are also some very large signings coming up in the future as well. Will the decays in everyone’s contracts make up for the pay jumps of ET, Kam, Sherm, KJ, Okung, Tate, etc? Like I said, next year will be okay, but what about the next?

                And don’t forget some of those folks that may be seeing their contracts decay may also need to be replaced themselves. We’re already talking about FA replacements for Clemmons. He may not get his 7.5M, but someone else might. What happens if Lynch goes down in the next couple years? etc

                “And look at New England. They’re paying Tom Brady $22m a year. They just re-signed Gronk, they have Wilfork and are paying Welker on the franchise tag. You can have superstars in the NFL.”

                They drafted Brady, Gronk and Wilfork. They didn’t have to pay them AND give up major draft capital. You can have superstars and pay them like superstars, but it’s far better if you drafted them in the first place. Paying them AND giving up a 1st round pick (or more) is nothing to sneeze at.

                • RW3 says:

                  I’m sorry, not to be mean or anything, but how does drafting and paying any different than trading for a guy and paying him, or just signing him as a free agent? There are a lot of IFs in your statements. What IF Russel Wilson goes down in preseason next year? What IF Earl Thomas gets in a freak car accident? Things HAPPEN and there is nothing you can do about it. If you have the opportunity to have arguably the BEST defensive player in the league, why not go and get him? I will be VERY upset if he goes to SF and all they gave up was a first for him. No one wants to face that guy twice (maybe even 3 times) a year. These big boys up front will benefit from a secondary like this in the form of coverage sacks.

                  • Chris says:

                    Under current rules, drafting a player means you are paying them, on average (as some picks are busts while some are very good) beneath market value for the life of their first contract. Although RW is not a representative example, his contract is a good example of the principle. If RW was being paid true market value it would mean 10+ million that could not be spent in other areas, thus weakening the team in exchange for paying him his true value. 1st rounders, after the new agreement, are being paid below true market value, thus freeing up dollars for true free agents or resigning players. When you trade a below market value contract (by giving up a 1st rounder or any draft pick for that matter) for a true market value contract (which is what Revis will likely be paid), it arguably will make a team worse overall. Particularly if it is a team’s usual practice (which is why the trade for draft picks and paying market value trades usually turn up as something teams regret).

                    My IFs are not to say any one of those things would happen, but to take into account the idea that if there are 8 or 9 bad things that might happen, a team needs to account for the statistical likelihood that perhaps one or 2 of them will actually occur.

                    The likelihood that any given Seahawk player will be significantly injured or miss significant playing time is very low. But the likelihood that, as a group, a few of them will be injured or miss significant time is very high. The fact of unforseen injuries, and players that perform well below expectations, are something I assume most GMs account for.

                • A. Simmons says:

                  I don’t know how much of a raise Okung is getting. He is one of the last rookies on the old rookie pay scale. He’s already making about 10 million a year. What is the market value of a starting LT right now?

                • Jericho says:

                  “They drafted Brady, Gronk and Wilfork. They didn’t have to pay them AND give up major draft capital.”

                  So they drafted them without actually spending draft picks? Damn.

              • A. Simmons says:

                I think this is like you said: “glorified window shopping.” And possibly driving the price up in case San Fran makes a legitimate run at Revis.

                If we’re going to spend 11 to 12 million, I’d rather spend it on Henry Melton or some other DT stud. Could you imagine if we landed Henry Melton in free agency if we’re going to spend that kind of dough? That would be awesome.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  There’s no harm in looking… that’s really the point of the article. I’m in favor of adding Revis if the price is right and JS and PC will now if it’s right. If not… you move on. But a deal can be done if they want to do it.

                  • Coug1990 says:

                    There is nothing wrong with looking. John and Pete would not be doing a good job if they did not look at all possibilities. The only negative that I see is having to pay him. Yes, you can mitigate some of that by front loading a contract, but over time he will take up cap space that they will need to sign their own.

                    Yet, I would think that the Seahawks have two assets that might be attractive to the Jets: Brandon Browner and Matt Flynn. It gives the Jets a good replacement for Revis which is attractive. Plus, with Flynn, he can compete for the starting QB job with Sanchez and Idzik saw the benefit of competition close up with the Seahawks this year.

          • A. Simmons says:

            All I think of when I think of “greatest secondaries” is the Raiders and Eagles. The best defensive teams to win Super Bowls spend their money on the front four. The front four make a defense elite. Pass rush makes a defense elite. The Giants shut down the most prolific passing attack in history with an elite pass rush to win a Super Bowl. Their CBs were just ok. The 85′ Bears are one of the greatest defenses in history because they had the most ferocious front seven in history. The Steel Curtain is known for its front four. The Purple People Eaters were fueled by their front four. The Baltimore Ravens 2000 spectacular defense was fueled by their front seven. The best defenses in Seattle history were also dependent on their defensive line. I don’t want to spend more money on a CB. The Legion of Boom is good enough as they are. I want the focus to be on the front four this year. The front four make a defense elite. That’s what will put us over the top. Not Revis.

            • SunPathPaul says:

              They can do both IMO. Not saying Revis is a lock, or a necessity either. He and Sherman would be scary together for sure…

              I still wonder why, with the 4th best D, we pretty much only feel drawn to upgrading the D line. It needs to be addressed, but I still believe after getting lucky on RW, we should think more about outscoring our opponents! Add a TE and 2 WR, and our Defense would be even better next year!! Why? Because now that RW is in motion, he could put Seattle ahead every game if it was the focus. Then our D wouldn’t have to face last minute anything…

              • Colin says:

                Because the pressure we didn’t get all year came back to haunt us against Atlanta. We did everything else neccessary. No pass rush lost us games against DET, MIA, AZ and then ATL. The offense was a scoring machine over the last 10 games of the season. It’s not as big of a priority as the Defensive Line.

  2. ptp says:

    “and San Francisco are the teams ‘highly interested’”

    That alone should be a reason to ‘get interested’ in this deal. SF with Revis? No f’ing thank you.

    • Turp says:

      We should be interested just to drive up the price for SF…far as I’m concerned…drive it to insanity

      • SunPathPaul says:

        With Idzik on the inside as GM for the Jets, and Flynn as an easy addition to their horrible QB team, they would be smart to work with us! We have 3 extra picks…if we had Revis, still under contract for a year, and added Starks and Osi, the cheaper DT/DE if needed, with our 7 Draft picks left and Russell Wilson, let’s go get that SuperBowl!!!

    • Rock says:

      SF is up against the cap limit. They have 14 draft picks coming in that will all want a signing bonus. They need to unload Alex Smith and his $9 million. If they do that they still may not be able to afford Revis. It could be they are in it to drive up the price for us. I doubt the Jets want Smith’s contract.

  3. Caleb says:

    Not so sure about this one. Until last night, it was a pretty even consensus that 3-tech was our prime need. Why not go out and spend that on Melton, if you are going to spend? From a cost-benefit impact analysis, i think a premiere 3-tech has got to win over. We have had problems rushing the pass, not defending the pass. It doesn’t matter how good a CB is, if you give the QB enough time, he is going to get it in there somehow.

    Now, unless PC/JS have locked on to some later round talent to be an impact at 3 tech and are therefore willing to part with our first pick, then no, this makes no sense.

    Also, keep in mind, that we have our own existing corps of young players who will be receiving hefty pay increases within two years. Okung, Thomas, Sherman, Chancellor, Wright…

    • Rob Staton says:

      Melton may not hit the market, he could be tagged.

      • Bryan C says:

        Chicago paper this afternoon said it is more likely they work out a long term deal with Melton prior to free agency opening.

        • SunPathPaul says:

          Get Revis and go for the SuperBowl Now!!!

          PC/JS can make the pass rush better without a #1 pick. Plus with GREAT outside coverage, maybe Browner in the slot in nickel, our pass rush WILL increase because the QB has no one open to throw to!

          We would have better ability to blitz, so our LB core could be added to in the draft differently. This would be a MAJOR shift to the D. Browner was good, but Revis is Great like Sherman. Our D could swag, like no other in history with Earl Thomas back there! Man… Legion of Boom BOOM!!!

          If this happens, PCJS will find other FA/draftees to fill the DT/DE spots… Let’s just not forget to at least add 1 WR and 1 TE for RW! LOL

          GO HAWKS!!!

          • Turp says:

            Browner will never play in the slot. Too inflexible in the hips. He is an outside corner, through and through.

          • Cade says:

            This Revis move makes no sense to me on multiple fronts.

            Bad secondary + Revis = net gain of say 10 points.
            Best Secondary + Revis = net gain of say 5 points.
            Not that much value comparitively.

            Trading for Revis we lose combination of young players and or draft picks. That is for Revis for one year. Then the following year we have to sign him if we want to keep him and his supposed asking price is 16 mill per year. That means we cant afford pieces of our team if we want to keep him. As a result we lose more guys to FA.

            Why did we do all of this? Just to gain an unnecessary upgrade in our secondary for a few years or longer if we dump other key pieces of the team.

            This is essentially a short term solution because we cant afford to pay everyone after Wilson, Wagner, Sherm, ET, Tate… etc .. need new contracts.

            Its not even a short term solution to a major need. I think it also potentially causes some disjointed chemistry in the Legion of boom. We dont need a new hot shot coming in and messing up the swagger we got going.

            This year with our current players we had a chance at a super bowl run. Upcoming season we will be even stronger with us not losing significant pieces, the draft, FA and off season development of our very young team. We will be significantly better next year and we really dont need to go messing up the long term plans of this team to upgrade an already great Secondary.

            We dont need it to win a lombardi and I personally think this team gets a 3 tech and we will win the Superb Owl.

          • Chris says:

            The Browner issue itself is another major reason not to do this.

            A Revis signing drastically decreases Browner’s value on this team, as there’s no way he could play in the slot. We’d be forced to trade Browner or relegate a borderline pro bowl CB to the bench.

          • A. Simmons says:

            We are not a CB away from a Super Bowl. That’s ridiculous.One player does not make a Super Bowl team, especially a CB. Our secondary is already a strength. We had arguably the best secondary in the league last year. Chicago had the best CB tandem. Neither of us went to the Super Bowl. Who went to the Super Bowl? Baltimore and San Francisco. Does either team have the best CBs in the league? When was the last team to win a Super Bowl in the salary cap era that invested huge sums of money in the CB position?

    • glor says:

      No offense or anything, but why do people keep talking about Okung getting a pay increase? The dude is making 10mil a year right now, exactly how much more should he be making considering he has made it through one entire season without missing significant playing time?

  4. Attyla the Hawk says:

    It’s an upgrade in quality. It’s also an upgrade in age, as Browner is older than Revis.

    Brandon simply doesn’t have the skill that Revis has. Darrelle’s style and quality fit exactly what we want from our corners.

    You don’t get the opportunity to get an all pro talent approaching his prime for a #25 pick. We have a great secondary. Adding Revis pushes us into the greatest of all time stratosphere.

    If all it costs is a #25, you make that deal.

    • Zach says:

      I really doubt Revis will cost only a late first round pick. Who here wouldn’t trade Browner for Revis? How about giving them Browner, Flynn and our 2nd and 4th pick?

      • Rob Staton says:

        I suspect if he goes, it’ll be for a late first round pick. The Niners will probably pay that if the knee is cleared.

      • Michael says:

        Gotta agree with Zach. I think at the end of the day, the Jets get more than just a low 1st rounder for him. I just pray that he stays in the AFC.

        The scary thing is how well the ‘Niners match up with the Jets in a trade. They have more overall picks (although lower), and no other major defensive needs. If QB’s do get involved, I’m pretty sure Alex Smith trumps Matt Flynn.

        I don’t even want to imagine Revis playing for my most hated rival, so I am just gonna hope that Denver is willing to give up the moon. In light of Champ Bailey’s age and struggles in their one and only playoff game, combined with the much smaller window of expected top tier QB play, it would make a lot of sense.

    • Turp says:

      - Assuming he’s the same player now before tearing his ACL. Lots of assumptions for me before you trade that pick. I’m sure our FO will do the legwork required however.

      • SunPathPaul says:

        I agree w Zach, if cleared medically he is worth our 25th, Flynn, and Browner if needed. Then they easily can justify the trade, even if Flynn stays a backup, and they have Browner to fill Revis’ hole.

        Albeit Rob, would Browner play the nickel CB / slot position as good as CB? Better than Trufant?

        I really want Trufant replaced…he was good, but is now one of the weak links- even statistically bad!

        Would Browner work in the slot / Nickel CB position, or better to trade him on for Revis if doable?

    • Chris says:

      The opportunity cost here is no where near just a #25 pick.

      You need to include the other players we won’t be able to sign, or resign. The enormous amount of coin it’d take to resign him will have a much larger negative effect on the team than the 1st rounder.

      All for the bump up from Browner (who is competent and a perfect fit for our defense).

      A horrible, potentially team-crippling trade.

      • Rob Staton says:

        To put salary cost into context here… Zach Miller is due an $11m salary in 2013. That’s exactly the same about as the highest paid cornerback in the NFL was earning this year (Champ Bailey). I’d argue Miller’s salary isn’t crippling the team. Revis, realistically, cannot expect much more than that. Admittedly Miller earns $7m and $6m in 2014 and 2015. However, I think Revis most likely gets $12-14m in 2013-14 and then reverts back to a salary of around $7m for 2015-16 or 2015-17. So I don’t think cost wise taking on Revis is a problem. The issue is the injury and whether he can get back to 100% like Adrian Peterson post-ACL… and what the compensation would have to be to New York.

        • Chris says:

          Miller’s salary is ridiculous. I have no idea why the Seahawks did that. They should’ve front loaded it like crazy when the team was still mediocre, not shoot themselves in the kneecaps right when the team was suppose to be getting good.

          That said, look at the rollover rules. If we could suck Miller out of the team and replace him with Revis then I might agree with you, but with two of them (and Rice’s salary) the salary cap implications for next year are huge. Things do not work at all like people think they do. There is no longer a “cap” number that is fixed. It is different every year. If the Seahawks roll any less than 13 million into next year, their cap number next year will decrease. Spending all the way up to our cap means next year we need $13 million of payroll cuts, as that is how much lower the cap number will be.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Miller’s contract drops dramatically next year and if you see my other reply a moment ago, there are several players with salaries that decrease in 2014. Seattle can afford Revis, really the key here isn’t the finances. It’s whether or not you do the deal fresh off an injury and what kind of compensation will be required.

            If New England can afford to re-sign Gronk to a $53m deal, pay Tom Brady $22m a year and Vince Wilfork $8m, $10m and $12m per year over the next three years… plus carry Welker on the franchise tag this year (and still maybe re-sign him) the Seahawks can afford Revis. But as noted, affording him isn’t the main concern. The compensation and his ACL injury is.

            • Chris says:

              Affording him is as much a concern as anything.

              We likely need a replacement for Clemmons. We all know we need a DT. We could use another WR. Another stud linebacker would fit on the team. Hell, we could use a real guard and maybe RT among other things.

              Affording him is a concern because it means every dollar that goes to him is a dollar that can’t be used in another position, and since other positions are a bigger need they should also have higher marginal improvements for each dollar spent.

              • Colin says:

                What you are confusing, Chris, is that the value of spending on Revis isn’t the same as spending on a DT or other position. Adding Revis is a huge value add. Sure, it doesn’t help the pass rush, but it makes a great secondary even better.

                Spending the #25 pick on a DT does not necessarily constitute better value than trading it for Revis.

                • Chris says:

                  Maybe another way to look at it is, suppose we used the #25 pick on a DT or DE AND then spent $15 million the DT or DE position (or perhaps both).

                  The price of a Revis is nearly equivalent to completely revamping the defensive line, which nearly all of us have identified as the true problem with the defense.

                  • Colin says:

                    That’s only true if Revis were to get the money he desires, which he isn’t going to get right now. I can assure you the Jets will have to eat some of his current salary in order to trade him. No team is going to imburse the Jets with good draft stock AND eat his current salary AND give him a new deal. Not going to happen.

                    I’m not interested in obtaining Revis. I’d rather we make a big push for Henry Melton.

              • Rob Staton says:

                We’ve been through this now. We’re going round in circles here. Affording the contract is not a problem. It’s the other issues — health/compensation — that are the sticking points on whether they could/should do a deal.

          • A. Simmons says:

            Contracts are set up to be staggered. You should judge a contract over its life, not during a single year.

  5. Wes says:

    Would it be more than a 1 year rental? How can a team afford both Revis and Sherman? They may end up being the highest and second highest paid CB’s in the league in their next contracts. That does not seem like a good way to manage the salary cap…

    • Rob Staton says:

      If they’re good enough to warrant the deals then it makes sense. There are two ways of looking at it IMO…

      One – you can front load the Revis contract so they the cumulative cost of Revis + Sherman is extremely cost effective. You overpay Revis in the first two years of a new deal (let’s say four years) and the final two years he gets modest pay. That coincides with when you’d have to pay Sherman. So you’d never be paying both players elite, top end money at the same time. And in 2013 + 2014, you have the two best corners in the NFL for the cost of one great corner.

      Two – if you pay Revis X amount, you set the market for Sherman if he continues to dominate. So it might make life tougher if you want to re-sign him. But re-signing Sherman on his current performance level will be very tough anyway.

      • glor says:

        There are 32 teams, if we don’t pay them, someone else will.. Us paying Revis has no bearing on if we are going to have to pay the rest of the guys.

  6. RW3 says:

    Just imagine both Sherman and Revis (if he is what he used to be) lined up on opposite sides of the field. This would allow you to move Chancellor up in the box on a lot of plays and leave Thomas in center field to go over the top if someone tries to hit you deep. What quarterback would want to throw against these guys? Even that half second of hesitation in the thought process can equal a sack, pick, or over/underthrown ball. As long as you aren’t hey diddle diddle, I’ll allow the opposing quarterback to have to check down to his RB. IF it only costs our 25th pick, I don’t see how you can’t be seriously considering that. Browner isn’t getting any younger and now you want have to sign him to an extension. Considering Revis comes out guns blazing, it’s a win-win.

  7. Jeremy says:

    If it ends up being just late 1st rounder hawks have a slightly better pick than the 49ers

    • Michael says:

      If it came down to that, would SF really just say, “oh well I guess since they are at 25 and we’re at 31 there is nothing we can do”?? I don’t see it. If it came down to those 2 teams, wouldn’t a bidding war drive the price way up? At that point you’re not only getting the player, but keeping him away from your biggest rival at the same time.

      • SunPathPaul says:

        This is gonna be the b-tch of it all! They have 14 picks, and less obvious needs…
        I don’t wan to burn the house down, but with Revis-Sherman, we get to the Superbowl I believe. This year. None of these guys have that. That would be a huge motivator, and possibly a synergy building process. They might be ‘slightly’ more flexible to keep the team persona together, and to go for that Dynasty! Not just 1, but 2, 3, 4 rings!!!

        Let’s sell them on that!

  8. Zach says:

    Starting in 2015 about how much per year will these players require to keep on our team?

    1. Wilson ~ 10 mil
    2. Sherman ~ 10 mil
    3. Okung ~ 8 mil
    4. Thomas ~ 7 mil
    5. Wagner ~ 5 mil
    6. Unger ~ 5 mil
    7. Irvin ~ 5 mil

    I think we could replace Browner with Revis and like Rob says top load the contract but I still think we should sign Melton first and then talk about Revis. Melton would be our 3rd 10 million dollar player assuming Okung and Thomas won’t cost as much.

    • Alex says:

      Assuming that those include non-guaranteed money as well, those are conservative. If those are base salary, then those are about right.

      Wilson will definitely get more than 10 million. The elite tier of Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady are worth around 20 million. I imagine the next tier of QBs is roughly around 15 million dollar a year (market set by Matt Schaub this past off season). Assuming Wilson maintains his current level of play and doesn’t improve at all, he’ll still be in the 15 million dollar range. If he evolves over the next 2 years into a true elite, he’ll be north of 20 million.

      The market for a good corner is pretty much in the 10 million dollar range (again, factoring in non-guaranteed). Jonathon Joseph, Brandon Carr, and Cortland Finnegan all got just under 10 million.

  9. Hawksince77 says:

    Okay, here’s my radical, likely unrealistic suggestion that I haven’t yet read:

    Seattle trades Flynn and a pick (the lower the better) for Revis AND Sanchez.

    Taking Sanchez enhances the deal in a couple of ways: first, it takes some of the cap hit off of the Jets, so that actually gets considered as FAVORING the Jets, requiring less of a draft pick going to the Jets. Seattle has the cap space this year to eat Sanchez’s salary, and plus, they need a back-up QB anyway, so the real cost is the difference between what Sanchez costs and what the back up would.

    The Jets get a starting QB in Flynn, so that’s good for them. Seattle gets a 1-year rental of Revis, or better yet, get a longer-term contract negotiated prior to the trade.

    Revis/Sherman are the starting CBs. On passing downs, Revis bumps inside and Browner plays outside, solving Seattle’s issue at nickel corner.

    In this scenario, Seattle keeps it’s first round pick, maybe its second. It all depends on how valuable it is for the Jets to dump Sanchez and the financial anchor he represents.

    • Zach says:

      The Jets will want our #25 pick at least.

      • Hawksince77 says:

        So you think it will take taking Sanchez off their hands, handing over Flynn AND a first round pick to land Revis?

        It really doesn’t matter what the Jets WANT, unless they are willing to keep Revis. The terms of any deal will be framed by the market and what other teams are willing to offer.

        San Francisco can offer Alex Smith, so that sucks. Denver doesn’t have a QB to trade, so that’s good.

        Anyway, Seattle has two advantages in negotiations: they have a QB worthy of starting (some of us think, anyway, and Idzik will know how to value him, one way or the other (he being the second advantage Seattle has).

        As Rob points out, absolutely appropriate to throw the Seahawk ring in the hat and see what it costs to make a deal. If the Jets and/or Revis want to much, JS won’t do it, and that’s good as well.

    • Rock says:

      Actually, I think that is a good trade. Sanchez only has one more year guaranteed. I would expect the Hawks would still try and move him after they acquire him. Perhaps, they eat the cap hit for the Jets and send him on his way to his next team with a contract that is no longer guaranteed. One thing we have is Paul Allen’s money and a little cap space.

      • Michael says:

        let’s not forget that unspent cap space this year does have value next year. I wouldn’t be a huge fan of wasting that on Mark Sanchez.

    • Chris says:

      Seattle doesn’t any where near the cap space for this.

      We could do it for 1 year maybe, but the next year because of the rollover rules (when we roll over nothing the next year) we’d actually end up roughly 13 million over our cap with some enormous signings on the horizon.

      Our cap right now is around 133 million specifically because of 13 million rolled over from last year (which adds to the 120 million base). If we bump up our salary to 133 million and eat up the cap space, there will be no rollover, and next year’s cap will be 120 million. That won’t be fun …

      • Rob Staton says:

        Cap room isn’t an issue. The team has $18m spare this season and can generate even more by moving on Matt Flynn. In future years big salaries such as Zach Miller ($11m in 2013) and Sidney Rice ($10m the rest of the way per year) come off the books. Plus any deal for Revis will be front loaded when a lot of Seattle’s key young players are still forced to play on rookie contracts. Financially it is completely feasible — as it will be for several teams. That’s not the problem. It’s whether or not you want to pay a first round pick for a player coming off an ACL. No ACL injury and nearly every team in the NFL would be looking into this.

        • Chris says:

          Our $18m to spare is only a function of our cap being at 133m roughly (of which we’re spending 115m apparently, with JJones, Branch, etc, off the books).

          If we get a long-term deal for Revis which pays him $15m this year (just picking a number) and sign no other players whatsoever, we’ll be at 130m spending and 3 under this next year’s cap. This means 3 million will be rolled over and next year our cap will be about 123m (unless they’ve moved up the 120m base amount, which I don’t think they are yet). Therefore we’ll start off the year 7 million over our cap. Hopefully some contract decay will take care of that, but we’ll also have players to start signing (not to mention no DTs this year, or probably next year either).

          I’m not a capologist, so if my numbers aren’t correct, someone please correct me. But as far as I’ve read that is exactly how it works.

          • PatrickH says:

            I think your calculation is roughly correct. To accomodate Revis for more than one year, the Hawks may have to cut players like Red Bryant and Leon Washington in 2014, which I believe can be done without adding more negative impact on the cap. That said, without rollover it’s hard to see how the team can find cap room to pay Russell Wilson in 2 years. As set by Drew Brees and Matt Schaub, the market for elite QB is now 15-20 million per year, closer to 20 million/year if the Hawks get to the Superbowl in the next 2 year.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Bryant’s contract reduces in 2014 anyway so he takes up a lot less cap and Washington will probably be cut in 2014 Revis or no Revis. A 33-year-old Chris Clemons earning $7.5m would be the one to look at, but the contract was structured to have a get-out at that stage anyway.

          • Rob Staton says:

            I’ve been through this already a few times now. There are saving down the line where players’ salary decreases and others won’t make it. Affording to do this is not the problem.

            • Cade says:

              Can we do this and still upgrade our 3 tech without hitting gold in the draft after first rd?

              Can we afford a good enough FA 3 tech?

  10. Madmark says:

    I realize he s a shutdown corner, but i don’t want him. 1st he’s been in a disfunctional under achieving llocker room and i don’t even want a chance that this would affect our locker room. 2nd i believe we’ll be needing that money to go other places like the defensive line.

    • Zach says:

      We really must address our D-line first. We also can’t assume Revis will come back as strong as AP.

      • Matt Gibson says:

        We add Revis and our Dline will automatically play better. Jones being hurt was really tough. He comes back we will be set

    • glor says:

      And there is where my hesitation comes in. From what I have seen, yes he is a great corner, but he is also a great pain in the ass. Holding out, etc etc

      I don’t really want to deal with a pre-Madonna like that, who in effect could be a really corrupting influence on our current locker room (ie, encouraging others that the way he does his business is the right way, etc)

  11. Matt Gibson says:

    I would absolutely tarde for Revis in a heart beat. I don’t care if that means giving rid of our 1st. I have even heard rumors we could offer them Flynn and Browner? That would be an awesome trade. Give us maybe arguably the best secondary ever.

    • Michael says:

      If we could do it for Flynn/Browner straigt up I would be all over it, but do you really think that would be close to enough? Are the Niners really just gonna sit back and let that happen when they have Alex Smith just stitting there?

      • Matt Gibson says:

        I probably doubt it. But they do really need a QB and Browner is still a top CB. So they could. We may have to add some picks in as well. Honeslty I wouldn’t hesitate to give up a 1st for him.

    • Cade says:

      Best IF we upgrade our nickle CB

  12. Darnell says:

    Guessing the Hawks interest will be an effort to price him out of the division.

    Revis is great, but I don’t know his game weel enough, does he bring the physicality that the Hawks like to have on the corners?

  13. cliff says:

    You have to remember extending Okung and ET isn’t going to cost as much as you think since they have larger rookie contracts. Extending Sherm will cost us 10 mill a year extra. KJ won’t cost a ton Tate won’t cost much either.
    We need to fix our pass rush but if you do front load Revis at 15 mill a year for the first two years on a 4 year deal like you said.. sounds crazy

    I could see Denver going crazy for him though. San Fran worries me with 14 picks though..

    • cliff says:

      I also wanted to point out in the draft that the Saints are switching to a 3-4 and while Richardson still could be a 5 tech they already have Cam Jordan and most likely would need a stout NT such as Jenkins from Georgia. A lot of rebuilding teams could be looking to trade back and accumulate picks too so a trade may not be as expensive.

  14. david says:

    You guys are underestimating Revis’s value. Its going to take more than a first round pick and Flynn to get Revis.

    • Rob Staton says:

      We’ll see about that. New York aren’t going to get too cute here, knowing they’ll get nothing next year. A first round pick in the 2013 draft would sound very tempting if I was in the Jets camp.

    • Turp says:

      Never underestimate the impact of salary on a team that is crippled by it’s current situation with the salary cap.

      • Turp says:

        *and that Revis is gone in a year anyway…better to get something for him now. Idzik is smart.

        • Michael says:

          I agree with David that it will take more than that considering the number of teams likely to be involved. Just for fun though…

          Which would you rather have if you’re the Jets?

          - Matt Flynn + 25th overall pick
          - Alex Smith + 31st/32nd overall pick

          • Zach says:

            I think everyone knows that Alex Smith would be just an average QB without that SF O-line. I think it would come down to that #25 pick more than anything.

            • Michael says:

              The 49ers line is good, but it is MUCH better at run blocking than they are at pass protection. Of course you could argue that a good run game offers some level of QB protection too… That said the Niners were in the bottom third of the league in sacks allowed in the regular season, and only gave up 6 fewer than NYJ.

              That Jets line has some pretty good players on it (i.e. Ferguson, Mangold). If they were to add say Warmack to the left side, I think they would be good – very good in pass pro, assuming Smith plays smarter than Sanchez (how could he not?).

        • SunPathPaul says:

          Idzik is smart, and either we nab Revis, or we work with Idzik to push the price up like someone said so SF doesn’t get him. It feels like he is coming to Seattle though…

          “Marty Mornhinweg has been hired as the Jets’ offensive coordinator, and he’s from Andy Reid’s coaching tree, which means a quarterback like Flynn might be right up his alley.” — O’Neil

          Maybe this connection adds to the allure of Flynn… Maybe not.
          But if the Jets get our 25th 1st rounder and Flynn, that would make for a possible quick turn around.
          They could add a weapon for their middling offense to go with Flynn…

          I would like to see next years record with a full time Russell Wilson, and a Sherman-Revis CB group…
          OUCH!

          Superbowl baby! ! !

      • Rock says:

        They did not bring Idzik in to ride out their cap situation. He will attack the problem by moving guys off the roster any way he can. They cannot re-sign their own free agents and have no room for their draft picks. That is how desperate their situation is now. The Jets are desperate sellers right now. They need to clear $20 million in cap space.

    • glor says:

      for one year of service? I think not.

  15. Michael (CLT) says:

    This feels a lot like an Eagles play. Just say “No”. Reward the players you have. Keep the chemistry you have. Pay the guys that have won with you now and are invested in the program. Adrian Peterson is the exception, not the norm. Buyer beware.

  16. Rob Staton says:

    Apparently Revis is looking for $16m a year. Good luck with that, Darrelle.

    That’s why this is such a complicated situation. If Revis’ demands are so huge and because you can’t franchise him, the price will be impacted in a big way. The Jets are in no mans land. Revis holds all the cards.

    • Michael says:

      Rob, do you think that being able to negotiate a contract with Revis prior to the trade will be a “must have” for the team that gets him?

  17. JS says:

    Revis would certainly help in the slot. I would imagine that he would slide inside when in nickel, and bring in Browner or Maxwell or Lane on the outside. Covering the slot was one of the few weaknesses on this D, and although it’s not a top need it would still be an upgrade on an already awesome unit.

    • Michael (CLT) says:

      I agree Revis may be headed towards slot duty in the next 24 months. At 16M a year, I’d say let San Fran make that mistake. Seattle will gladly take Iupati off there hands when they cannot afford him and Revis.

      Build from within. Compete with the dude that have a chip. Revis is a diva. Diva’s come to die in Seattle.

      • SunPathPaul says:

        That’s a good point… Divas do suck a bit, but if that equals a SuperBowl for Seattle, I’m in!!

        • Michael (CLT) says:

          I think we all need to remember that the 2012 D was #1 in points allowed.

          Perhaps a focus on the weak spots (3T and LEO) would provide more value. Browner, for all his perceived warts, was a big part of the success of the secondary. You have good young talent, and can certainly draft more young talent for the draft.

          Carroll has proven that he excels in “coaching up” the secondary. So, continue to buy low and win big.

          Go for Any of the big name DL/DE that fit if your going to pay 16M a year.

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      No.

  18. Michael says:

    It sucks that a few days after losing our salary cap guru, a potential salary cap conundrum presents itself…

  19. Zach says:

    Rob ~ If we say no to Revis and Melton stays with Chicago do you think it would be smart to pick up Cliff Averill and Randy Starks? I think we could afford both those guys for the next 3 years.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m a big advocate of signing Starks if possible. Avril… I guess it depends. If they’re writing off Clemons then maybe. But you can’t start Clemons and Avril. Both LEO’s. And if you’re paying two guys like that, what do you do with Irvin? I think they’ll likely target an interior pass rusher such as Starks and then draft another pass rusher in rounds 1 or 2… a ‘unique’ guy who can play one or two different positions.

      • Michael (CLT) says:

        On a side note, I must admit I am intrigued by Greg Scruggs. I wonder what he can become with a full year to prepare. He showed flashes of good rush instincts with power enough to hold the point on 3rd down.

        I like Okafor because he reminds me of Clemons. Great motor, decent hand work, can go inside or out, can set the edge (generally), and seems to love the game.

        I would suggest “love of the game” be an important criteria for a Seahawk draft. Or a massive chip :) Okafur seems to have “love of the game”.

        • Zach says:

          Scruggs impressed me a bit as well. Wasn’t he a seventh rounder?

          • Michael (CLT) says:

            Yup. He was so thankful to make the team, and seemingly outplayed Howard.

            I had meant to tie back to Rob’s “unique” guy quote when mentioning him.

            I really would like to see another LEO. I just don’t see Clemons back in 2013.

    • SunPathPaul says:

      Avril and Starks, Osi and Starks… with Sherman / Revis, our defense would improve no matter what, barring massive injuries! Let’s get that on board.

      And grab a few WR/TE options for RW!

      • Zach says:

        I just get the feeling Chicago won’t let Melton go. They won’t be paying Urlacher over 9 mil again next year and will probably give that money every year to Melton and pick up a stud LB in the draft.

        • SunPathPaul says:

          Starting to feel that way…they will be letting Urlacher go like Zach said, and why not keep a really good player!

          So if we mark off Melton, we have Starks, Ellis and Bryant possible?

          • Zach says:

            If we can’t get Melton or Starks….then what? Do we make a move on Floyd, or a big move for Richardson?

            • Kenny Sloth says:

              Screw Floyd.

              There. I said it.

              He’s a total tweener. Maybe I’m misusing that term, but from what I’ve seen on tape. I don’t want him on the Seahawks team.

              I’m gonna just not post this comment! Go back and watch more tape :D
              (Posts comment anyway)

  20. Michael says:

    Off topic a bit. I was having a conversation with some family members the other day about the most valuable “non-QB” in the league was and I thought it would be interesting to get some opinions. A few years ago Revis would have been near, if not at the very top of that list. After knee surgery and a few more miles on his body, I wonder where on that list he would be now.

    Basically the question boils down to this: If you were building a team and you had your pick of any Non-QB player in a league wide draft style talent redistribution, who would you take with that #1 pick?

    My Brother-in-law chose Calvin Johnson
    My Sister chose Adrian Peterson (she’s more of a fantasy football fan…)
    I chose J.J.Watt

    Who would you chose?

    • Zach says:

      Tough to choose outside of a QB. AP would be hard to resist.

      • SunPathPaul says:

        CJ sounds good, but it depends on what QB you have to decide if he is a better choice than AP.
        Even I could turn around and hand off to that crazy man!! Prob go with AP…no score, no win!

        • Michael says:

          The shelf life of running backs is the one thing that scared me away from AP.

          • Trudy Beekman says:

            CJ is probably the most valuable non-qb. Fully developed WR in his prime, and will be for another 5 years or more. AP might be the worst option as he probably has a year or two left before a severe drop off. BTW, the whole AP situation sounds real fishy to me. Potentially career ending injury that he came back from ahead of schedule to go on and have the best season of his career, and fall only 9 yards short of the best year in the history of the NFL? All at an age where RB’s are seeing their production fall off anyway? Hmmmmmm…….

            • Kenny Sloth says:

              You’re not Thomas Beekers are you?
              That’d be weird. Nice screen name if it is.
              Nice real name if it isn’t.
              Also, you’re right on all counts. If it counts.

              I would go Earl Thomas because I like his range so much. I want to run 46′s so bad. Which is why I love the Seahawks. I drew up a defense in math class a year before Pete Carroll got here and thought it was just absolutely magnificent. I like how much single high we play.

              This could be potentially crazy awkward.

      • Kenny Sloth says:

        Haha

      • Rugby Lock says:

        AP for me…. that dude is just a different cut of steak right there…

  21. Zach says:

    Rob, how much does Melton benefit from Peppers? Would he even be the same player on our team?

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      I think it’s different for interior guys.. like. A mediocre outside guy benefits from a great inside
      guy (cliff avri/suh) than a mediocre inside guy would from a great outside guy. But I do think Tillman should be sending Melton and Peppers thank you notes that say; “Thanks for the interceptions, love, Peanut”

      Also, Melton would pretty much have exclusively one on one matchups in our defense.

    • Connor Jackson says:

      I wonder the same thing.

  22. MJ says:

    This isn’t meant to be an over reaction…but what about putting Bruce Irvin in the mix for a trade? I know the Jets liked him and still need pass rush. We obviously need pass rush, but I think it’s rather clear that Irvin doesn’t look like a full time Leo?

    Maybe Irvin, Flynn, #25 for Revis & 4th or 5th?

  23. Colin says:

    If the Jets want the #25 for Revis, I think they should HEAVILY consider it. Unless the front office is convinced a true impact player is available at 25, this would be a good deal. He’s still fairly young and is a helluva player. His play didn’t drop off after his contract dispute 3 years ago, so I’m not too concerned about that.

  24. Zach says:

    What if we signed a FA stud O-lineman for the right side. Hey, if we can’t get much better on the D-line we might as well give Wilson more time to score more. I really hope we keep Jones too, he will be invaluable if we can’t get Melton or Starks.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Pass protection hasn’t been an issue apart from two games against two teams that blitzed like crazy. Seattle still won on both occasions without Wilson turning it over. As Russell gets more and more experienced, teams are going to scared silly about blitzing him. Breno is the unquestioned starter now and the right guard position is being kept for Sweezy. They clearly like him enough to fast track him into that role. It’ll be interesting to see that position develop.

  25. Nolan says:

    The problem with trading for revis is the opportunity costs not the actual cost. Our 1st and filler is excellent value for Revis who is no doubt one of if not the best corner in The NFL, but getting him most likley means we don’t bring in a new three tech of signifigance, revis contract eats the money you could offer Milton or Starks or the Radiers guy. We were already talking about trading up to get the three tech we want in the draft ( Richardson, Floyd, or Star) now were trying to fill out three tech hole in the 2nd round. Not to mention we still have holes at Will LB, WR, TE. Plus how good can you be at one position Sherman and browner are already a great corner duo. How much better are they going to be with revis. I say no deal unless it is a no brainer

    • Phil says:

      I agree. PC has correctly identified the weakness in this team — the pass rush, or the lack thereof. I’d rather see us spend the $$ and the draft “capital” we have addressing this issue instead of investing more in an already exceptional defensive backfield.

      Sure, continue talking with the Jets — if nothing else it might cause the 49ers to do something really stupid.

  26. PatrickH says:

    If Revis asks for and insists on $16 million per year, then only 3 teams (Bengals, Browns, and Tampa Bay Bucs) have the cap room to afford him.

    • Michael says:

      I don’t think he could get $16MM a year even if he weren’t coming off seson ending knee surgery.

      • Rob Staton says:

        He won’t get that much, I suspect that’s his agent setting the market. $12m makes him the highest paid corner in the league.

        • Zach says:

          Will teams really offer 12m to a guy who just had surgery? Seems like too much of a risk for the Hawks.

          • Rob Staton says:

            It depends on the medical checks. If he’s cleared then yes teams will probably offer that. If Champ Bailey is getting $11m, someone will pay Revis $12m. And if you get the pre-injury Revis he’s worth every penny. He’s a superstar.

            • Nolan says:

              12 mill leaves the hawks with 6 mill in cap maybe less if you are front loading…. 6 mil isn’t much to fill our other needs.

  27. Zach says:

    Side note….What happened with James Carpenter? We picked this O-lineman in the first round in 2011. Talk about a bust.

    • Rob Staton says:

      He’s two years into his career, that’s a little premature to label him a bust. He’s started 16 games despite a serious knee injury and looked excellent at guard this season. He’s younger than Russell Wilson so let’s give him a chance before writing him off.

      • Turp says:

        Agree, he dominated at LG when healthy. Powerful run blocker. I’m looking forward to a healthy year from him.

      • Michael says:

        It was right around this time last year that people were saying the exact same thing about Russell Okung. Now that he has finally been able to stay on the field for a full season, the guy is in the Pro-bowl. Was he a bust at #6 overall?

        Now of course he hasn’t been on the field enough, and you can label the guy “injury prone” if you want, but just like Okung, Carpenter didn’t miss a single game in College at ‘Bama or the CC he played at before. I have heard ESPN’s John Clayton talk on several occasions about guys bodies adjusting to the NFL, and he asserts that just because you don’t make the healthiest transition to the pros doesn’t necessarily mean you are “injury prone”.

        And sure, you can use the argument that he has already been moved off the position we drafted him for, but so what? We got him at #25 overall! If he turns into a Pro-bowl caliber LG, that is well worth it. DeCastro went a spot ahead of that, and there are 2 more guards in this draft that will go higher than that. Please give Carpenter a full healthy season at guard before you call that pick a sucess or failure.

  28. Zach says:

    So what do you guys think of the Matt Thomas signing?

  29. Michael says:

    Rob, How would you like to replace Marcus Trufant as the nickle CB with his little brother Desmond? He is getting good reviews at the Senior bowl so far, and I’m sure Pete has a great idea what kind of kid he is given his relationship with Sarkisian and of course a member of the family.

    How far would he have to fall for it to be a good value pick for the ‘Hawks?

  30. Colin says:

    The more tape I watch of Sylvester Williams, the more I begin to believe he a guy we need to keep an eye on. He’s got a pretty good series of pass rush moves, and at times he gets off the ball like it is nobodys business. On the same hand though, there are times he is seemingly invisible. Slight concerne there. Watched a number of his games and at times he’ll go long stretches and make zero impact…. and then all of a sudden he appears and he is a monster.

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      Right on all counts, except he only really has a swim move. Sswim/club

      • Colin says:

        Still gets off the ball insanely quick though. I prefer him to Sharriff Floyd. Floyd is just the ever dangerous “super potential” that usually translates to a bust.

        • Kenny Sloth says:

          You’re right. I’d much prefer Williams to Floyd.

          I am NOT a fan of Floyd. He reeks of bust. Sometimes you just gotta go with your gut. And my gut tells me to steer clear of that gator. I do like Matt Elam their safety and Jelani Jenkins their linebacker. Jenkins is like the poor mans Alec Ogletree.

  31. stuart says:

    I just read a mock by SI 1.0. They had us drafting OT Flucker from Alabama but what intriqed me was they had SF choosing DT Williams also from Alabama. They used “relentless motor” describing him and that he would be their long term replacement for Justin Smith.

    What are your thoughts on him if Dt Floyd and DT Williams of NC are also gone?

    • Rob Staton says:

      He’s not a great pass rusher which puts me off Jesse Williams and I do think he fits best in a 3-4 at defensive end.

      The Fluker pick is a travesty and shows they didn’t do a great deal of research before making that projection.

  32. stuart says:

    Jesse Williams that’s his name. In this weeks mock you had him going 26 and at 25 the Hawks chose Floyd.

  33. Clayton Russell says:

    Revis to Seattle, I hope not. Revis gets burned just as much as Champ Bailey only difference is when Revis gets burned he disappears from the cameras view. Seattles’ secondary is fine adding Revis when a more pressing need is DT/DE/OLB and WR does not make sense especially if it waste money and a pick on him.

  34. CSN says:

    Rob, here’s an out-of-the-box thought: say Revis is traded for Seattle’s first round pick. What do you think about moving Browner to the WILL?

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      I hope this is a joke, not necessarily because it’d be stupid if it were serious, but because this is just so intrinsically pleasing. I got such a swell chuckle from this. Like the kind from the bottom of your diaphragm, y’know?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’d rather keep Browner at corner to be fair — good affordable depth plus you can move Revis to the slot for some snaps.

      • bjammin says:

        Could he play safety in a pinch, maybe as a back up or in certain packages? Hard hitting tackler.

  35. Ben2 says:

    Have to admit I only read about 1/2 of the comment thread when I got curious and looked at the Seahawks 1st round draft history to reminisce. Scanned back until 2003 (Tru) and every every player taken (except ET and arguably Okung) is so much worse talent-wise than Revis that the loss of capital (cap & draft) is outweighed. Cut some guys making dough that only contribute in a narrow fashion like Leon and replace with a 4th round pick…Best secondary EVER! Somehow solve the pass rush and it could be a generational defense! Legion of BOOOOOM! Go hawks!

  36. Ben2 says:

    Sorry….in chronological order : Irvin, Carp , Okung & Thomas, a linebacker (I hate u Ruskell!!!), Jackson, traded for Branch, Jennings, Spencer, Tubbs….how’s many of these guys would you prefer over Revis? But I do understand the fear that we could turn into the Eagles…

  37. Kenny Sloth says:

    Who’s Darrell Revis?

    just kidding. I think I’m funny. It kind of pissed me off when I saw how many comments this thread had. I’m down with the trade. But I wanna swap first rounders. Flynn, Browner, first and second for Revis and their first.

    What scares me is that San Fran has a better backup QB.. and more draft capital… if I were New York I’d probably be more interested in what San Fran was offering. What if they would be willing to part with like. Navarro Bowman? How could Idzik pass that up?

    • bjammin says:

      They aren’t parting with Navarro Bowman. No chance.

    • Rock says:

      San Fran lacks the cap space to take on Revis. Smith may not be that attractive to the Jets because his contract is more expensive and for only one year. Idzik probably wants to maintain a good working relationship with his Seattle buddies. I doubt he wants to start his new job by delivering Revis to the Niners,

  38. Kenny Sloth says:

    Ugh. Why can’t we just switch to a 3-4!? It’d make our hobbies as talent and match evaluators significantly easier. I hate trying to look for 3-techs!!!

  39. I think the hangup for me is Revis’ asking price. He wants $16 million per year. He might not get that much, but I really doubt he’d sign a deal for less before testing free agency in 2014. And the current clause in his contract prevents him from being franchised. If we traded a 1st for Revis and then he left us in free agency the next season, obviously that trade would be a disaster.

    The Seahawks would pretty much have to sign Revis to an extension for a big trade to be worth it, but that puts all the leverage in Revis’ camp. If Seattle wanted to keep him out of free agency, they will probably have to give him what he wants. To me, a $16 million dent in your cap space over many years is worth at least another 1st rounder in consideration, probably more. So even trading one first for Revis is going to feel like trading two or three firsts when you factor the financial impact over a long period of time. I’m guess Sherman wouldn’t be thrilled being the 2nd best paid corner on the team either.

    If you could get Revis for a 2nd round pick packaged with some good low cost players of Idzik’s choosing, and Revis were willing to sign for a reasonable extension (maybe $12 million per), I’d do it. But I don’t know if that is realistic. It probably isn’t.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think $16m is the agent setting the bar. That’s $5m more than the highest paid corner received in 2012, and he’s coming off an ACL injury. You’d have to have the framework for a deal worked out before completing the trade, that much is clear. But it’s in New York’s interest to allow interested parties to talk to the player’s representatives to get anything done. I think a more realistic contract would be $12-13m per year health permitting for the first two years, with an average of over $10m per year over 4-5 years.

      • John_s says:

        http://m.nypost.com/p/sports/jets/revis_wants_to_run_dash_N7JtAAmUowI7BwNng58MAP

        This article says Revis wants a mega contract…….a 100 million mega contract

        Whatever you pay Revis you HAVE to pay Sherm the same if not more.

        I don’t think a team can afford to pay their starting corners a combined 22-26 million a year combined

        • Rob Staton says:

          Well, you don’t ‘have’ to pay Sherman the same. Plus Sherman doesn’t have any franchise tag restrictions either.

          And the contract talk is inevitable. The Jets have essentially announced they’re willing to do a deal. Now the agent is trying to set the bar for the market. It’s not in his interest to say anything but ‘we want a mega deal’.

          • John_s says:

            Sherman believes and very rightfully so that he’s is the premier CB in the NFL and he has the numbers to back it up.

            IMO if you add Revis and pay him handsomely Sherman’s belief and convictions are so strong that he will not settle for being the 2nd highest paid CB on the team

            I believe your correct that Sherm will be paid regardless either through the franchise tag or a new long term deal but adding Revis to the team draws a line in the sand on what you Sherm in a long term deal.

            • Michael says:

              If there is even a chance this affects our ability to keep Sherman, I want no part of it. If I had to pick one right now I would easily take Sherman over Revis. Bigger, younger, cheaper, and home-grown. Luckily we don’t have to pick one because we already have the best CB in the game; Richard Sherman.

      • Rock says:

        No team will take on Revis without him signing him to a new contract. This is a smart move by Idzik. He is forcing that contract off his books at a time when Revis’ negotiating position is low due to injury. He could cut him with little cap hit. The new deal will be heavily incentive laden. If he is hurt he will not get paid. Despite his talent, I do not see many teams that will be willing to take on the risk and cost of Revis. Only a team on the cusp of the SB with cap space would probably be interested.

  40. A. Simmons says:

    Wish someone would offer us a great DT for our first round pick. Do the Jets have any pass rushing TDs we can trade for to help them get their cap in order and pick up more draft picks?

  41. adog says:

    Trading for Revis will not happen. JS would never make such an idiotic move. Say what you want to say about Browner, he’s more than serviceable. Not only the cost of Revis’ salary, but his also his new deal if the Seahawks plan on having him around. And add in the ACL injury, who knows what we would get. If he came back 100 percent, even then i think it would be a bad move. I don’t think you make other positions weaker in depth and talent to make your strongest position stronger. It’s a fan boy fantasy. Maybe he fits at nickel corner, but that is far from what it will cost to get him.

    • Rob Staton says:

      It’s not ‘fan boy’ fantasy when New York are very much looking to make a trade. We’re talking about one of the premier defensive players in the NFL. I’m not 100% in favor of a deal, but to call it an ‘idiotic’ move is a little over the top. You don’t often get a chance to add an elite player to your roster and the team would be right to investigate the situation.

      • adog says:

        my apologies…”idiotic” is not the right word for this blog, but i feel like the move would set back PC\JS’s momentum quite a bit. I just don’t see them making it. Maybe the niners will call their bluff or overpay alla the Cards and Kolb. I expect them to put most if not all their chips into the pass rush for the second year in a row. I think they will sign a top 5 free agent DL and trade up to draft one in round one…i’m thinking it might be one of these three… the guy from Florida…Greene? i think, Star. L from Utah, or Ansah from BYU.

  42. Brandon O. says:

    Of course we should be interested. It’d be irresponsible if we weren’t. Maybe the asking price isn’t as steep as we’re all anticipating. Or maybe we just drive up the cost for the 49ers. Either way, we need to test the waters.

    I personally don’t think we should do it. PCJS built the BEST secondary in the NFL in just a couple short years, with former a CFL player and 4th and 5th round picks. And for all we know, Jeremy Lane is the answer to our nickel CB woes.

    If we want to add to our secondary, I think we should draft Tyrann Matheiu in the 3rd round. Sure, it could be a risk. But isn’t giving up a 1st and a proven commodity (Browner/Flynn) for player coming off of ACL surgery and wanting $16 million a risk too? A much more expensive risk at that? I think Matheiu could solve our nickel problems and replace Leon, while only costing a day 3 pick.

    Revis is an expensive luxury. We already have two top ten corners. I don’t think Revis’ cost is equal to his value. Especially on a team so adept at finding overlooked talent.

    • Rob Staton says:

      This is a very reasoned approach — accepting that the team has to look into this, while also believing it wouldn’t be the right move to make.

      • Hawksince77 says:

        The only thought I would add is PC’s continuous desire to improve no matter what the position or the player. He said at one point he would replace ET if he had the opportunity (the idea being if a FS came along better than ET he’d acquire him and start him over ET) – and then he laughed at the absurd unlikeliness of the possibility.

        But the point stands. Sometimes you make big improvements, sometimes incremental. Revis would probably be an incremental improvement at corner, but a big improvement at the slot corner if he slid inside on passing downs with Browner on the outside.

        So it’s going to come down to price: what will it cost the Seahawks to take advantage of this rare opportunity.

        Something similar happened last year with Manning, and they made an effort.

        I seriously doubt they ever over-pay for these guys. They didn’t with Marshall, or Williams. The smart thing will happen, one way or the other.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Exactly. If this deal happens it’s because PC and JS pulled it off. If it doesn’t happen, the team moves on. But they’re right to look into it.

  43. SES says:

    Intriguing possibilities! Who wouldn’t want a healthy Revis on their team. A lot of questions need to be answered though. His health first and foremost, followed by the cost of compensation, then you have salary costs to consider.
    That being said, the “Legion of Boom” is overrated and could use an up grade.

    • Michael says:

      overrated? How is the secondary that held opposing QB’s to a 71.8 passer rating overrated?

      • SES says:

        “Over rated” by these facts: FS Although Earl is a fantastic center fielder, as far as open field tackling he is second tier to the likes of Palamalu. SS Cam is as intimidating DB as there is in the league but has difficulties in coverage. (Actually I think he would make a great WILL LB). CB Haven’t seen a corner as good as Sherman in quite awhile. (The best of the “Legion of Boom”). Browner is playing much better than last year, but watch him on wide angle film, he is lost if he can’t jam the receiver. There you have it. Pretty good secondary, but not what homers think.

        • Colin says:

          They are the best secondary in the NFL. Period. That is not being a homer, that is a fact. 3 of the 4 have made the Pro Bowl and the other, Richard Sherman, was named an All-Pro.

          Pretty sure calling them the best secondary is not a stretch at all. You should watch them sometime.

          • SES says:

            I watch them every week. I’m not denying they are very good, I’m trying to make the point that there is obvious room for improvement. Thomas is arguably the best young FS in the league, but it doesn’t mean he doesn’t have weaknesses that teams look to exploit. (Getting pancaked against ATL for example). You will never see Browner make another Pro Bowl, and who can deny Cam’s coverage issues against the Redskins & Atlanta. Just watch the TAPES with an objective eye.

  44. Frank says:

    I agree that Revis is that damb good. With the SB window open I would be very intereasted in this deal. I think Sherman might be a little better player than Revis looking foward. No one has played the big recievers like Sherman has but the smaller quicker players tend to rack up yards. Revis would shut down any one under 6′.

    I would hate to lose Browner, so many huge recievers in NFC west. I just think looking forward Revis can’t take being second fiddle to Sherman. We would have the two best defencive players in the NFL.

    I would caution thought anyone remember THE DRIVE. Elway was unstoppable, because of no pass rush, even with the best corner back tandem of all time. Lets get that Three tech solved this year and a Clemon type guy as cheap as possible. lol

    Wr is how I would use our 1st rounder pick if the board fits. Yes, I said Sherman is the best player in the league on defence.

    • SunPathPaul says:

      I agree that a WR/TE with our first pick might make the team overall better than if we added Revis.

      We need D-line help for sure, but FA is the place to fix that IMO…

      With RW as our new leader, why not get 3 new targets (2WR/1TE) for him, cheaply through the draft, that he can lead/teach/grow with in Seattle.

      Ertz, Wheaton, Dobson, Reed, Fauria, Hopkins, Hunter, Kelce, Austin, etc….so much talent that could make our passing game move up from 27th to say midway at 15th!!! What a change in the outcome of games…

      Let’s score more w RWilson, and our D playing with a lead, and whatever we add in FA and the Draft, and we could go 16-0!!

      • Colin says:

        I think you could go without adding a ton of weapons, and we’ll still be around 15th next year. Russ won’t be held back early on like he was this year.

        The other thing to remember is this will forever be, as long as Pete is coach, a run first and play tough defense style of team. To this point 2/3 of their draft picks have been on defense, and I would expect more of the same.

        Add a stud pass rushing DT, and you may not have a solid way to beat this team.

        • SunPathPaul says:

          Firstly, Seattle’s passing yards per game were 27th! Below 200 yards avg. per game.

          And YES, they opened up the offense with RW, and look what happened!!? We went 7-1!!

          That is exactly my point! CONTINUE that opening process with RW by giving him more weapons.
          As you stated PC’s team is always going to be a run first, strong defensive centered team, but that is also a killer drawback if PC doesn’t shift his vision, due to the miracle that is RW, he will be missing out on a huge potential with his team. They will trust him more, and IMO I think they should use the motion of RW and the pocket, to open up the run game. If you watch the games, they come out and try and run when the other team is hyped up at the start of a game- knowing we feature Lynch, and we usually do 2 runs, 1 pass- and then PUNT! We went 3 and out in our last 4 games I think. Staring slow on offense due to some silly belief of what your team is, versus what it really is, killed us.

          Imagine that Atlanta game if we came out, first play should ALWAYS be play action off Lynch! Why?
          Because the D is so amped up at the start of games, and running right at that is foolish. If we had opened that game with a TD or FG, it would have been completely different.

          So I understand that PC/JS have a vision of their team…but JUST a rush first, play good D team, is not IMO a full vision of what we have, or our true potential!

          • Colin says:

            They opted to take it slow with Russell until they felt he could shoulder an adequate load. There’s a big difference between being unable to throw and choosing not to.

            Yes, Seattle opened up the passing game late in the year, but it didn’t translate to more yards. It translated to more QUALITY yards. They threw the ball to score and get in position early and then settled down.

            Being ranked 27th didn’t mean squat (to me anyway) about their ability to throw. It’s overrated. They won 11 games (and should have won more) with a very conservative start to their season, and that’s all that should matter.

            • SunPathPaul says:

              I’m not saying Colin that our avg passing yards means that much, save the fact that we can do better through this whole next season since RW is now fully engaged…and we kept OC Bevell.

              I very much agree that our D needs some new blood, esp with the pass rush, but I don’t want to focus so much on just one side of the ball… If our offense was measuring as powerful as our defense, then I think we would be better prepared to win our first SuperBowl…

              We had Lynch and an excellent running game, and now have adde RW…The Man can throw!
              I just want as much balance between run and pass, as I do between Offense and Defense…

              • Colin says:

                I agree. But the reason we lost the big games we did was our inability to pressure QB’s when it came down to crunch time. Not an inability to throw/score.

                That’s why pass rush is priority and adding weapons is 2nd.

                • SunPathPaul says:

                  They are both equally important. You can say we lost in Atlanta due to lack of pass rush, and I would say we lost because the offense scored ZERO in the first half!!! Regardless of the FG we passed on, if we had offensive power to score in that half, that game goes another way…

                  YES YES YES if we had had a pass rush with :26 seconds left, we are moving on…

                  …but alas if that lead is 10 points… who cares what they do with :26 seconds…

                  • Colin says:

                    You’re still ignoring the point that the defense gave up a lead in the waning moments of the 4th quarter of 4 games due directly to a lack of pass rush.

                    Right now, for this team, they are not equally important. Pass rush is priority number one.

                  • SunPathPaul says:

                    I’m not ignoring the pass rush… I admit it is a need! I prefer to work at that thru FA, and use R1-2 picks for offense… We shall see…

                    PC will prob go DT/DE R1…Ansah is playing really well in the senior bowl now…

                    I agree w you on pass rush, can you allow that more offense can also help?

                  • Colin says:

                    Yes the offense can stand to be upgraded. Absolutely. But the pass rush was our achilles heel and It. Must. Be. Upgraded. Pronto.

                    Draft, FA, trade, whatever. Get it done.

                  • Madmark says:

                    they lost in the last 26 seconds because they went to a preventive defense with a 1 point lead. My football coach told me once good defense attack never defend hehe

                  • Colin says:

                    In fairness, Madmark, they did blitz on both plays, so I wouldn’t say they got too preventive. Trufant dropped too shallow on the first completion and left Douglas with too much room.

  45. Tomahawk says:

    I agree with Sun Path. Getting inexpensive offensive weapons through the draft is the way to go with D tackle getting the free agent dollars.

    Rob, which WR/TE draft combo do you prefer:

    Hopkins and Kelce
    or
    Ertz and Weaton

    I honestly can’t lean one way or the other, but I sure hope we end up with at least one of those four players.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I prefer Ertz/Wheaton, really rate both players. Wheaton is a R1 talent who goes later.

      • SunPathPaul says:

        Rob… if we take Ertz in R1, do you see any possible way that Wheaton, Hopkins or Hunter make it to our R2 pick? It seems unlikely to me that they fall that far… I see a major run on WR in R2 possible with all the depth at that position…

        If those are gone, and we had TE Ertz, what other WR might be still available in 3,4,5,6 that you still like?

        Aaron Dobson maybe? Cobi Hamilton? Brandon Kaufman is 6-4… Kenny Stills? Marquisse Wilson??

        What value do you see at WR past the 2nd?? Thx!

        • Rob Staton says:

          I think 1-2 of those WR’s will be there in round two. Can they make it to SEA’s pick? Wheaton or Hunter maybe. But I agree there could be a run on WR’s.

          Out of all the WR’s with mid/late value I like Chris Harper at Kansas State. Hamilton has some skills. Steadman Bailey another player I like and Marcus Davis at VT. There’s some value there.

  46. Madmark says:

    We didn’t panic when we was looking for our greatest need at QB so lets not panic now. I dont want to see an era where we feel we have to get that big FA to fill a spot we think we really need and i say that because its never really worked out for us. For example I am so glad we didnt get Peyton Manning or Mario Williams with those huge contracts and I’m thinking PC/JS are glad they didnt pull the trigger on those. We should have made it to the NFC Championship but it wasn’t because of coverage it was because of a non existant pass rush.
    I liked the the pickup of Jason Jones last season for 1 year but i don’t believe he’s worth 4 million this year as a situational pass rusher that money could be used to lure Randy Starks to our team. I’d resign Alan Branch, but i wouldn’t give him a Red Bryant contract then I’d use a 2nd round pick for another lineman. That would plug 3 into tech 3 position to compete for it.
    I love what Leroy Hill and Marcus Trufant( especially since he from the same city as myself) but i think time has caught up with both of them. With that said i would look from the 3rd round on for my Will linebacker and another CB. I think this would cover the defensive side of the ball.
    I think this is the year we go out and get that play maker with our first round pick. After reading the last article about Zach Ertzs I’m all up on trading up to get him. He would add to the blocking game for the run and present a threat down field for the passing attack. I’ve had high hopes for Anthony McCoy but watching the number of balls he drops I just think we need someone to help Miller out. I was set on WR but the Tight End makes way more sense to me. We however need more WR depth also and with the class thats coming out there no reason we can’t 1 or 2 in the latter rounds
    I never saw Bruce Irving as a number 1 pick and i still don’t there was just to much coaching necessary. I believe he can play the Leo position but to me he’ll have to prove it this year. Clemens came out of nowhere and it s a shame what happened to him because i m not sure he’ll be back next year if at all.
    The core of this team is here but now is not the time to go crazy with big FA deals. We went far into the playoffs and that was having the offense slowly progressing thru the year. We just need to tweek the roster a little and I believe we’ll be there making a run next year.
    My question to you Rob is what kind of contract would you think Randy Starks would want?
    How much stock would we have to give up to get a Zach Ertz in the 1st round?

  47. Snoop Dogg says:

    Rob! I think personally that we simply need to upgrade the talent across the Defensive line, both with run-stuffing and pass-rushing. I think we take as many Brandon Williams, Jonathan Jenkins, Sharrif Floyds, and Sheldon Richardsons as we can! At the risk of overkill, I think our defensive line is the largest thing holding our team back, because of how good our linebackers and secondary players are.

    Revis is awesome! But I am not sure the team could handle paying for three perennial All-Pro players in the same secondary.

  48. Madmarkus says:

    So sorry i get to writing and i forget to ask questions.
    Hey Rob what kind of contract would you think it would take to get Randy Starks here?
    I think we have to trade up for Zach Ertiz? but how far up and what do you think it would cost us?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Starks might command a contract similar to Alan Branch’s given he’s pushing 30. Perhaps a little bigger than that, but you’re not talking mega bucks. Ertz is an interesting one because I don’t think Chicago can get a left tackle at #20. So if they target a Jake Long for example, that could mean they go TE at #20. They could also go guard, but Ertz would be better value unless Warmack or Cooper are still on the board.

  49. PatrickH says:

    Somewhat off-topic, but I just watched the Senior Bowl on NFL network, and there were a couple of series where the North team put Kawann Short of Purdue at the 3-tech spot. I don’t know how many tackles he had or whether he got any sacks, but he seemed to penetrate into the backfield a lot from that position – disrupting the run plays and putting pressure on the South QB during the pass plays. Could he be an option for the Seahawks at #25? (I noticed Rob put him in the second round in the last mock draft.)

    BTW, the North coaches put Sylvester Williams at the 1-tech spot mostly, and he played well there. Perhaps that’s the better position for him?

    • SunPathPaul says:

      Kawann was kicking butt!

      …and what about DE Ansah!! He was killing it big time! In the backfield, chasing RB’s down from behind!

      Is Ansah a good DE choice for us Rob? Did you like his play today? Looked powerful…(albeit a Senior bowl)

      Many mocks have us taking him at 25…if we had Starks with him, are we good?

      • PatrickH says:

        Ansah was awesome, made a few big plays including a forced fumble via strip-sack of Glennon.

        I found Kawann Short intriguing because I personally haven’t heard of him before. After the game, I searched the Internet and found out that he also performed well in practices during the whole week. Here’s a quote from Bucky Brooks of NFL.com: “Scouts have been raving about Short’s potential as a three-technique in a one-gap scheme after watching him terrorize opponents with his combination of quickness and agility in drills. The former Purdue standout has shown rare lateral quickness for a pass rusher his size (6-3, 315), and scouts definitely are intrigued by his ability to disrupt plays with his athleticism.” From Thomas Melton: “I have questions about Kawann Short’s motor but there’s no denying his talent and his power. Very hard to move off the ball.”

        So what I have gathered so far is that Kawann Short has the talent to be a good 3-tech DT but may have motivational issues, sort of this year’s 3-tech version of Quinton Coples. Anyway, very interesting.

      • Rob Staton says:

        I like certain aspects of his game… not a great edge rusher. Very good run defense and raw athleticism makes him intriguing. His best position might be the 5-tech. I’m not sure he lasts to #25. If he’s there though, he could be the guy.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Just written a Senior Bowl write-up — new article on the homepage. Features thoughts on Kawann Short.