Why the Seahawks have dropped the ball on D.K. Metcalf

There’s no justification for the D.K. Metcalf situation that is developing

I’ve long struggled with Seattle’s approach to contract negotiations.

Their modus operandi is to refuse to do anything before the draft — often kicking the can down the road.

I’m sure the team would argue the merits for such an approach. Yet it’s not abundantly clear to outsiders why they do what they do.

Waiting on negotiations has seemingly ended up costing them money and talent.

Seattle could’ve negotiated hard with Frank Clark after the 2017 season — preempting his breakout season in 2018. The Vikings did just that with Danielle Hunter — giving him a contract worth $14.4m a year in June 2018 after a seven-sack season the year before (his first as a true starter).

Hunter had accumulated 19.5 sacks in 2016 and 2017 and Minnesota had the good sense to recognise his talent and project ahead.

Clark had 19 sacks in the same two-year span so he was on a similar trajectory. Yet Seattle, despite being gifted a starting point in negotiations, didn’t act. They let Clark go into a contract year. He registered 13 sacks in 2018.

They were forced to use the franchise tag to retain him — worth $17.1m. Pete Carroll then spoke at the combine about not imagining life without ‘Franky’ in Seattle.

Yet when Demarcus Lawrence signed a new contract worth $21m a year in Dallas, they were caught off guard. Suddenly the defensive end market had been re-set. Now they were having to negotiate from $21m instead of $17.1m or $14.4m. They decided to trade Clark to Kansas City.

Whatever your view on Clark’s time with the Chiefs — it’s indisputable that losing him and failing to replace him properly set the Seahawks back. They spent three years trying to cobble together a pass rush, failing badly to find anyone who could offer Clark’s impact. Rather than adding and building, they were replacing.

You could argue this is hindsight, admittedly. Although I don’t think it’s so much of a stretch to anticipate the way things were going. Clark wasn’t some raw, untested talent and had as many sacks as Hunter when he signed his deal. The franchise tag provided protection but at a greater cost to the $14.4m that was the benchmark for negotiations. And with the way NFL salaries were starting to climb — a deal in the +$20m range for someone like Lawrence wasn’t exactly unpredictable — especially because he’d already been franchise tagged twice and the Cowboys had no choice but to pay him aggressively or trade him.

The Seahawks haven’t fallen into this trap with other players. They skilfully handled Tyler Lockett’s negotiations — paying him a little bit more than people expected at the time, before benefitting from getting ahead of a market explosion on both occasions.

Yet they have fallen foul with other players, not just Clark.

It’s baffling why they allowed the Jamal Adams trade to be concluded without a new deal agreed. They ceded all leverage to Adams the minute they paid New York a kings ransom to acquire him.

Having committed so much to bring him in, a contract extension was always inevitable. So why wait? It speaks to the desperation Seattle had at the time to bring someone (anyone) in to bolster what looked like a pretty horrendous defense prior to the 2020 season.

‘Just get the trade done’ appears to have been the mentality, not getting the right price arranged or fixing a contract for Adams.

They then watched Arizona re-set the market with Budda Baker. Then Justin Simmons re-set it again.

By the time they’d actually got round to having serious talks — Adams was holding out of training camp and his realistic price range was far beyond what it realistically would’ve been had they agreed a contract upon completion of a trade.

Baker blew up the safety market exactly a month after the Adams trade was completed. He earns $14.75m a year. By waiting 12 months, the Seahawks ended up forking out a $17.6m a year deal to Adams — a contract that feels like a lead weight around Seattle’s neck at this point and one, with hindsight, they’d probably rather live without.

They badly misjudged and mishandled the Adams contract situation.

This brings us on to D.K. Metcalf.

For most of this year Metcalf has spoken very positively about his future in Seattle. He even appeared at voluntary OTA’s. However — reportedly he’s skipping minicamp this week and is unauthorised to do so. He’s essentially holding out.

It speaks to a situation that seemingly could’ve been handled better.

Ever since Christian Kirk signed his obscene contract in Jacksonville, the receiver market has exploded. Several players have received whopping extensions — including Chris Godwin ($20m), Mike Williams ($20m), D.J. Moore ($20m), Stefon Diggs ($24m), A.J. Brown ($25m), Davante Adams ($28m) and Tyreek Hill ($30m).

The numbers in brackets are recorded average salary amounts per Spotrac.

It’s been well established for some time what Seattle was going to have to pay Metcalf to keep him. They’ve known the situation for ages.

So what are they waiting for?

Metcalf is well within his rights to expect a similar amount to good friend A.J. Brown — $25m a year — if not more.

So what’s the delay? Why isn’t this done?

Presumably, if they didn’t want to pay market value, they would’ve dealt Metcalf prior to the draft and moved on?

They now face the prospect of Deebo Samuel (who is attending San Francisco’s minicamp) having an about-turn and extending his contract with the 49ers to further promote the receiver market. Cooper Kupp is also talking to the Rams about an improved contract.

(Edit — Kupp has signed a three-year extension worth $80m)

And if they wait until next off-season to negotiate with Metcalf on the franchise tag, they face the prospect of Justin Jefferson re-setting the market again.

It just seems like an avoidable drama is brewing. This really should’ve been sorted pre-draft. Sit down with Metcalf, thrash things out based on the clearly established receiver market — then make a call. Either do a deal or trade him.

The fact Metcalf has been so upbeat about his future in Seattle, only to now be holding out of minicamp, feels like a turn for the worse has occurred. It suggests he’s become frustrated with talks and wants to make a point.

Unless the Seahawks get this sorted — it’s likely he’ll not be involved in training camp either. And then they face the prospect of a protracted saga that dominates (and distracts) during camp, just as we saw with Adams a year ago.

The Seahawks and Metcalf had all the information they needed to get this done weeks ago, just before or after the draft. Why it’s still not sorted is a mystery and frankly, a disappointing faux pas for the team when they need to be trying to move forward without distraction into a new era.

There’s simply no justification for this not being sorted. If you weren’t willing to pay Metcalf what the market dictates, he should’ve been dealt. Just as Marquise and A.J. Brown both were during the draft.

You committed to Metcalf by holding onto him. Now you simply have to pay him. You have no choice.

If you enjoy the content on Seahawks Draft Blog, please consider supporting us via Patreon (click the tab below)…

Become a Patron!

117 Comments

  1. L80

    Hi Rob, I hope your vacation was the best ever.

    I totally agree on the Seahawks and their wait and see approach. It breeds situations that nobody wants. It’s the nature of pro sports in the modern era. If you have a star player you pay them.

    It’s been proven by the Seahawks especially that waiting, causes ill will and costs more money as well. So why wait??…If you were’t going to trade him before or during the draft, then why not make it a top priority to get a deal done before it ends up costing money and trust issues?.

    It’s actually frustrating that they can’t get it right.

  2. brendon light

    He’s Baaaaaaaaaack!!!

  3. Hawk Finn

    I just can’t understand how a FO can be so visionary in some regards, and so short-sighted in others – especially the ones that should be chip shots.

    • Tyler A Jorgensen

      Curious where they’re “so visionary” at this point in the evaluation.

      • Group Captain Mandrake

        I’m not sure they were ever “visionary.” Strong run game and good D is not exactly ground breaking. I suppose the closest they ever got was picking the players they wanted to fit their scheme regardless of what anyone else thought.

  4. Big Boi

    To be honest, there is no reason to even discuss the franchise tag because it can’t be used this year. But anyone who thinks he’s going to play out his contract this year after his draft-mates received extensions just isn’t looking at it from DK’s standpoint.
    We haven’t seen a true holdout in a while because of the fines. This is that one time that paying the fines makes sense just because the disparity in what he’s being paid and what he will be paid is so large.
    There are two other reasons to not play until paid. The first is injury, of course. This gets to be a tired narrative, to be honest, just because the risk of a season-ending injury nowadays is nothing like it was 10-20 years ago given the advances in surgical techniques. But the second one is very real and that is a possible drop-off in production. DK will never say it, and likely will never believe it, but his agent does know that a change in QB could dramatically hurt his numbers and thus his negotiating leverage. DK’s peak value is right now. Even if he has a lights-out year and blows past his previous numbers, his value is not going to be that much higher than current. But if he has a bad year, especially if his emotions start to show again, his value could plummet.
    As such, there is just no reason whatsoever to play until he’s paid. The fines are a drop in the bucket at this point.

    • Big Boi

      Also, don’t expect any sort of hometown discount in spite of what DK says. He just watched his team purposefully torpedo his future value by seemingly committing to a run-first offense. Even if he plays as well as he possibly can, his numbers are going to drop next year and that’s because of the front office. He’s going to get every penny he possibly can.

      • Jed Simon

        “(DK Metcalf) just watched his team purposefully torpedo his future value. . .”

        Is that so? Hmmm, I’ve long heard of the Seahawks’ reputation as “a first class organization,” and how they’ve repeatedly done right by a number of their key players, coaches, and staff over the years (evidently even doing right by non-key personnel, too — remember Garrett Scott?), so this is baffling news you bring, Big Boi.

        After all, to “purposefully torpedo” a player’s future value is to sabotage said player’s career intentionally. Recognize that this is your claim, BB. What villains PCJS must be, if you’re correct, and what a perplexing change of course with respect to team-building this would truly represent. You must wonder what the Hawks’ next act of nefariously underhanded anti-player malice might be. . .

        . . .As for me, I prefer Rob’s measure: that this is an act of mismanagement, not malice.

  5. Big Boi

    One more thing that worries me because I agree with the idea that this deal should have been done or he should have been traded weeks ago.
    I’ve researched Jody Allen and the Foundation as much as google will allow (which ain’t much) and I can find literally nothing about her net worth. Is she worth $10 billion or $10 million. She’s the CEO of Vulcan but what does that mean? Is that a $3 million salary or $30 million. Is there any reason at all to believe that she’s a billionaire just because her brother was, since he supposedly put all of his money in the trust? If so, does she have the liquidity to put DK’s guaranteed money into escrow? Would she even use her own money? I wouldn’t use my own cash to sign a player when I’m legally required to sell the team eventually, and I’m not even going to get money from the sale itself.
    If she won’t put the money into escrow, can she use the Trust’s money to put into escrow? Based on what I’ve read about the trust and it’s fiduciary responsibility to maximize every penny of Paul’s estate in order to be given away, I would suspect the trust would not allow her to take out $50 million dollars to put into escrow for DK’s contract, especially since the trust will likely not be the owner of the team by the time the money is being paid, so it would be a sunk cost that would not be retrievable at the sale point (in other words, DK’s contract is not going to increase the value of the team). So I do think we have to ask the question of whether we can even pay that contract right now.

    • Bmseattle

      If the above scenario is true, this should have been communicated to Pete/John, and they should have traded him.

    • Blitzy the Clown

      The Paul Allen Trust owns the Seahawks. Jody is the Chair of that trust, but she’s not the owner. Her net worth is irrelevant.

    • DAWGFan

      If I remember the terms correct the trust dictates the teams(both the Trailblazers and the Seahawks) must be sold, but there is no drop dead date as to when that has to happen. I have heard/read reports that Jody Allen is a big time football fan and a mildly observant basketball fan, so she may want to and be able to hold on longer to the Seahawks.

      It is no secret that Jeff Bezos wants to be part of the league and will pay nearly any price to purchase the Seahawks, in particular. A recent rumor of him being interested in having the first franchise in England is from what I have been told is an absolute fabrication and he much prefers to own the team he has followed for decades. This is likely another reason why he never attempted to look into purchasing either the Panthers or currently the Broncos.

  6. Big Boi

    Oh gosh, forgot one last thing. Sell the team. I know Brock’s report about having to pay the city hundreds of millions of dollars. Rob Walton increased his bid $165 million to buy the Broncos. Any new owner will be willing to pay the fine to the city and in fact it could be looked at as a very favorable thing, giving the city a lot of money just for the honor of owning the team. We need to have a captain and Jody ain’t it as I do think she might be hamstrung for the reasons I laid out above.

    • Big Mike

      Good points and questions about the situation with Jody and the trust.
      If she is hamstrung then Pete and John should well know it and in that case should’ve traded DK before the draft. I can’t believe she wouldn’t sit down with them and explain the financials so they could proceed with roster construction accordingly. But I do have to wonder if she didn’t or if this is simply a matter of PCJS not learning from past mistakes.

      • AL

        I wonder what DK could bring in 2023 draft capital ?

        • Rob Staton

          I would suggest his value will not increase over the next 12 months if Geno Smith is throwing him the ball

        • cha

          If they decide to trade him this year and don’t get a Jamal Adams style return, this will be a disaster.

          • Wut

            You want to trade DK for another safety?

            • cha

              No. The other way around.

              Two future firsts and a third.

      • Blitzy the Clown

        The Paul Allen Trust is legally empowered and financially capable of acting as owner of the Seahawks in all aspects, including salary guarantees. If it wasn’t, the League wouldn’t allow it to own the team.

        That’s not the reason why DK doesn’t have an extension.

        • Big Boi

          It is legally empowered of acting as owner but it also has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize the ultimate value of the trust itself to eventually be completely disbursed as donations. So while on one hand the “owner” would be okay with putting $50 million dollars into escrow, is the trust allowed to use its own money in that way know that it won’t get value from that money? Surely there must be a limit of how much money the trust is allowed to use for activities that will not or may not increase the long-term value of the trust. For example, you are not going to see the trust making contract decisions like Stan Kroenke, end of story. No way they could throw around money when the trust is legally required to sell the team. I think the trust is empowered to act within the confines of the cap in the same way that other cash-poor teams do but is not empowered to be ultra-aggressive. If the owner of the team is the trust and the trust has to first and foremost protect and maximize its assets then there are two competing forces at play.
          Regarding the idea that the league wouldn’t allow it to own the team, I don’t think the league has a say at this time if it’s true about the “poison pill” in the stadium contract between Paul and the city. I highly doubt the league can force a sale if that sale would trigger a clause that costs the team hundreds of millions of dollars.

          • cha

            No.

            The team very recently forked over massive capital and then handed Jamal Adams $38million guaranteed. They handed Tyler Lockett $37m. They just guaranteed Quandre Diggs $27m.

            The draft class they just had guaranteed another big chunk of cash.

            The 2023 draft class will guarantee even more, with either 2 first round picks or 1 very high first round pick.

            These aren’t the moves a team that is shedding obligations makes.

            Not signing DK has nothing to do with the ownership structure. It’s just poor strategic thinking.

            • Big Boi

              Yes, they gave Quandre and extension but they also did not seem to be very aggressive in free agency like in the past, signing more bargain players than anything. The Lockett and Adams deals would have required less than $30 million in escrow and the contracts will be nearly done by the time the team is sold. Now that the sale is within the next couple years, I feel like this team is operating very differently than in the past. You can’t tell me that the trust has some sort of limit on how much money it can spend on the team. The trust is bound by all sorts of rules.
              And the draft class contracts are highly regulated and just the cost of doing business. Those contracts are all done in the confines of the cap without crazy high one-time payouts.

              • cha

                There are a metric ton of assumptions in that post.

                I prefer facts.

                There is simply no way the ownership structure moves the needle on a DK contract.

                • Big Boi

                  Fair enough. I guess we just go with the John Schneider is incompetent narrative. There really would not be another logical explanation as we all know darn well that DK is not going to play on his current contract given the current environment and his agent.

                  • cha

                    The podcast he did with Tomas Dimitroff that got released recently was extremely confusing.

                    It sounded like he was talking about Percy Harvin. “Traded for a guy and gave him a top contract…we’ll never do that again.”

                    But if I am getting the timeline correct, he was at that moment negotiating with Jamal Adams.

          • Blitzy the Clown

            I don’t think anyone is claiming that a trust is as responsive an NFL owner as a living person. Certainly not me. Also, even if Paul Allen were still alive, he was a very different owner than Stan Kroenke.

            Anyway, about the Paul Allen Trust – I say this as a lawyer with a fair amount of trusts and estates experience – the trusts that most of us deal with, that we set up for the benefit of our family and loved ones, they’re nothing like a philanthropic trust of a billionaire.

            Making assumptions about what the Paul Allen trust can spend its billions on, and limits on how much and long-term value, etc, etc…none of that means anything in the context of a billionaire philanthropic trust, which primary purpose is to eventually distribute almost the entire trust corpus to charitable beneficiaries.

            I don’t know what the specific management provisions of the Paul Allen Trust are as I’ve never seen them. But if they’re like any of the large-dollar philanthropic trusts I have seen, their primary directive is to preserve the value of the trust assets until they can be liquidated and the proceeds distributed to the charitable beneficiaries.

            And I don’t think it’s a credible argument that allocating some tens of millions to guarantee the salary of a star player of an asset worth $3.5 billion is somehow not preserving that asset’s value. It’s certainly not the reason why the Seahawks haven’t extended DK.

            • cha

              100%

            • Big Boi

              Sorry to keep beating this drum but I feel like we’re talking past each other.

              This statement:
              “their primary directive is to preserve the value of the trust assets until they can be liquidated and the proceeds distributed to the charitable beneficiaries”

              And this statement:
              “allocating some tens of millions to guarantee the salary of a star player of an asset worth $3.5 billion is somehow not preserving that asset’s value”

              are actually completely contradictory. Spending money on an asset, no matter what percentage that money represents of the value of the asset, violates the fiduciary responsibility of the trust. I have no doubt there has to be some sort of brake, some sort of protective mechanism, which would prohibit here from using too much money if she can’t prove it improves or retains the value of the asset. Any amount of money spent on this contract does not change the value of the franchise.

              You must agree that there has to be some sort of arbitrary spending limit. There has to be. So what is that number? $50 million? $500 million? You act like I’m being ludicrous but I’m just pointing out that there must be some sort of protective mechanism to prevent her from doing something that could be construed as “throwing away money”. And my point is that this limit effectively could make the franchise cash-poor.

            • Big Boi

              Also, it’s a little flippant to assume that this amount of money is meaningless to the fund. $50 million is 1.5% of the value of the franchise. While you might be able to argue an elite QB minimally improves the value of the franchise, a WR does nothing. So if you pay $50 million right now into escrow and then sell tomorrow, you’re getting only 98.5% of the value of the asset compared to not spending $50 million right now. Now maybe the trust is okay with getting less than full value, but is there a limit to that? That’s what I’m trying to point out.

              • cha

                Big Boi I think you’re making a mountain out of a molehill and talking about possibilities that are simply not logical.

                The Seahawks are actively involved in negotiations with DK. They’ve seen what other WRs are asking and receiving. If there is some mandate in place that they cannot exceed x, they’d have sold him off in the trade market already. We may not like their tactics and personnel handling but if the writing was on the wall, even they’d know it.

                Also,

                -the Seahawks won’t ‘pay $50m now and sell tomorrow’.

                -you presented it from a financial standpoint as the Seahawks throwing $50m into the fire. They do actually get something in return. Your 98.5% valuation number doesn’t exist in the framework of team valuation.

                -the amount guaranteed left on DK’s contract by the time the sale is completed will be a drop in the bucket. The new team will happily spend $50m between simple administrative costs, and severance to staff they decide not to retain so they can bring in the team they want.

                You’re simply grasping onto things that don’t have a real foundation.

    • Tomas

      Wishful thinking on my part, but … perhaps better for Jody to have “traded” Pete and John? Big Boi has raised some very interesting points.

  7. Big Mike

    Welcome back Rob! Hope the vaca was top notch.

  8. AL

    Welcome back Rob, hope you enjoyed your break/vacation!

    Aaron Donald is getting paid like a quarterback.

    The Los Angeles Rams defensive tackle agreed to a reworked contract Monday that is expected to pay him an average salary of more than $31.6 million per season through 2024, according to a league source. The deal marks the first time in NFL history that a defensive player has broken the $30 million plateau for average salary.

    Do the Rams print their own money??

    • Big Boi

      I think you’re seeing the advantage of having an owner with plenty of available cash. The pain will come eventually when the salary cap hits all kick in, but by then a lot of these players will be past their peak and they’ll be in rebuild anyway.
      Cha asked on another thread why the Broncos didn’t already have a contract with Russ at the time of the trade and it’s because literally they don’t have the cash. They do now and I imagine the contract will be done by training camp.
      Are we cash-poor? Only time will tell. I could be completely wrong and Jody can use as much cash as she wants. But if she can, why hasn’t she?

      • Big Mike

        My guess, as it has been all along with her, is that she simply doesn’t do business that way. I believe Pete and likely John will stay until their contracts expire. I think she’s very averse to paying people to not be part of the franchise. It’s why she didn’t fire Neil Olshey from the Blazers until she was able to do so with cause and thus not have to pay him the remainder of his contract. I feel it’s also the reason Russ was traded and Pete remains. My guess is once she knew the situation with them was untenable, she chose to stay with Carroll rather than eat 3 years of his contract AND gave to pay RW upwards if 50 per.
        I can’t prove any of this but her actions support my gut feeling.

        • Big Mike

          Meant as a reply to the post by Tomas above.
          Stinking cell phones

          • Tomas

            Sounds very possible, Big Mike.

  9. Forrest

    Welcome back, Rob! Hope you and the family had a great vacation.

    I think the Seahawks were spoiled by the Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril deals they fell into. DK has never been paid, so they think they can wait and eventually he’ll lower his price (like they tried with Frank Clark, Clowney, Adams). They may also wish to keep him this year, hoping his numbers will drop and they can get a discount. If they don’t drop, they can extend him mid season or get more in a trade next year. Finally, they may (falsely) believe they can play out contracts and use the franchise tag for a year or two (Adams, etc.). While this is the way the CBA was designed (to avoid holdouts), it hasn’t worked out that way. don’t agree with their approach, but completely agree with your assessment and how it creates negative feelings.

  10. Ashish

    Welcome back Rob.

  11. Mick

    Great to have you back, Rob. I don’t think it was an accident that we drafted two WRs. We’re trying to push the deal for Metcalf down and if he won’t fall for it, chances are we’ll trade him for player(s) + future picks. I think it’s terrible business and I think someone should be held accountable for this way of running the franchise.

  12. Ashish

    Well articulated about hawks giving contract to the player. They did well with Tyler even when i heard lot in media that they paid more to someone like Tyler but it looks way better now.
    Not giving contract to DK is that means they are not confident where he fits in the scheme? or do they want to pay him top WR when they are planning to run more?
    On another note, i read somewhere top 5 players in Seahawks who can be traded DK and Adams were on the list.

    • Big Mike

      Considering Adams’ lack of production/questionable at best on field performance and injury history, the only way he’d be tradable is if Seattle ate a hefty chunk of his contract.

      • Ashish

        If we are getting back some draft capital this might be year to do it. Maybe new defense coaches will take a look at Adams this year if he plays well we can get better deal next year or a good player on roaster.

        • Roy Batty

          An Adams trade after this year would incur a $21.33 million dead cap hit. If traded before June 1st, they eat it all in 2023, just like they’re eating Russ’s dead cap this year.

          I doubt Adams goes anywhere until 2024, and even then, he’s gonna cost them $14.22 million to play somewhere else.

          So, in a nutshell, get used to seeing his smarmy smile for a few more years.

          Fireable offense, the trade was. Fireable.

          • Ashish

            Thanks Roy i guess we can just pray he is half worth what we paid.

          • Big Mike

            Ditto from me on the “thanks Roy”.
            100% fireable

  13. cha

    Hmmm…

    Ian Rapoport
    @RapSheet
    ·
    5h
    The #Seahawks restructured former #Broncos DT Shelby Harris’ contract to create $3,260,588 in cap room, source said.

    • Rob Staton

      Intrigued to know why they’re doing this

    • Big Mike

      Speculation as to why they wanted to free up cash folks?

      • cha

        My guesses in order of likelihood

        1-I had guessed in my piece that they would absorb an extra $3m or so this year on a DK extension. That’s the most likely in my opinion.

        2-this is similar to the Diggs/Brown deals. They restructured and didn’t use the cap because there was no reason to…but this provides flexiblity.

        3-they’re cutting Gabe Jackson loose and will benefit $0 in 2022 but they would like options to trade for/bring someone else in.

        4-there’s some Jamal Adams option money that is murky. They might have activated an option and need some cap money to pay.

        5-there’s a free agent they’re specifically negotiating with and they couldn’t make the deal work without some manuevering.

        • Big Mike

          I wondered if it had to do with a DK extension and if so, how.

        • tripwire tactician

          Why would they cut Gabe Jackson if they save nothing? Even if he was a backup going forward, wouldn’t it make sense to keep him as a backup guard?

          • Rob Staton

            If they trade him for a bag of footballs they save $6m.

    • Ross

      Man, i hope this isn’t for Mayfield

    • TomLPDX

      OverTheCap says we have ~17M in cap space right now. Did they also add any additional (dead) years to his contract?

  14. Dubb

    Welcome back. I know you could not include all of times JC and PC let the market reset on them; but the Bobby Wagner 2nd contract could have been a lot less until they let CJ Mosley reset the market.

  15. TomLPDX

    Good to have you back safe and sound Rob. Hope you and the family had a blast!

    • cha

      Agree. If for no other reason than Seahawks discourse needs all the common sense it can get its hands on (looking at you, MSD…)

      • Big Mike

        MSD?

        • Ace

          MSD = Michael-Shawn-Dugar

          • Big Mike

            Ok thanks.
            I don’t do twatter.

            • TomLPDX

              He’s The Athletic Seahawks beat writer as well. Has some good articles and not so good articles but overall he is ok.

  16. JLemere

    DK probably wants to be the highest paid, but the organization is only willing to commit to Lockett’s contract with maybe a little wiggle room up to $20 million APY (which is what the franchise tag would approximately be for next year according to OTC)

  17. DAWGFan

    Hope you had a nice vacation with the family.

    In a fairly recent interview with Greg Cosell mentioned that every team who signed these huge contract extension for a WR will regret doing so long before the contracts end. His reasoning is that college WR’s are so much more polished than even 5 years ago, there is an abundance of talented players coming out every year, and that it will be fairly easy to plug and play from the college ranks. He also mentioned that he sees the position becoming similar to that of a RB and it will be rare for huge 2nd contracts to be given to WR after their first contract expire. Though he did also say he did not see teams shying away from taking a WR early as they have done regarding RB’s.

    What are you thoughts on his overall take of the future of the position?

  18. Gross MaToast

    Well, it’s about time. Where are the articles? Where is the chat? There are none because Rob’s on “vacation,” “spending quality with his family,” “relaxing”, “recharging the batteries,” spinning in a freaking teacup ride or on some flying elephant. Do the Rams’ writers spin around in freaking teacup rides? Is that what they’re doing in preparation for going back-to-back? I don’t know. Maybe.

    Anyway, glad you’re here and agree this is a return to questionable front office decision making and I wouldn’t be surprised if DK is traded before camp begins.

    • TomLPDX

      Dude, have you never done the teacup ride! Or the Small World ride (true story: I got stuck in the Small World ride for an hour while a thunderstorm went over head at DW…Never again will I take that ride!)

      • Gross MaToast

        Dear, god.

        There’s two kinds of people – those who have been through It’s A Small World, and normal people. I used to fear death…now… it’s another trip through the It’s A Small World hellscape…and having to sit through another Natalie Merchant concert.

        • Big Mike

          Um, I hope she was worth a Natalie Merchant concert.

          • Gross MaToast

            Well, there was an strictly enforced adaptation of the Natalie Merchant Scale going forward – I’m not proud of it. Like A Small World, Natalie’s life-altering.

            For those who enjoy Natalie Merchant, she seems like a lovely, very talented woman and I applaud her.

            • TomLPDX

              Just watch Natalie on youtube, that way you can turn it off when you get enough. (full disclosure, I am a Natalie fan, up to a point).

              • Gross MaToast

                I think it’s the spinning. Lots of spinning in place. Like teacups – wait…I think I see a theme developing in my dislikes…interesting.

                • TomLPDX

                  HaHa, I could visualize it. Scary!!!

        • TomLPDX

          When you go to DW with small children, you HAVE to do the Small World ride…whether you like it or not. One of the Dad duties and IS required! That’s why you can take them to Space Mountain afterwards.

          • Group Captain Mandrake

            When we went to Disneyland with our boys when they were much younger, we went on the Thunder Mountain Railroad rollercoaster at least 10 times in a row. All things considered, they much preferred Legoland.

  19. TomLPDX

    Just watched the Geno/Drew pressers. Really like Drew! I think he will be a team favorite and if he plays well, a fan favorite. I’ll post a youtube link once they are available.

  20. uptop

    Great timing Rob, now Kupp just got a huge extension.

  21. Rick Schermerhorn

    Dump anybody that cries for more. What does he get now? Under 2 million a year or less
    An 8 million dollar paycheck would be good enough.hell I’ll never make 70,000 the rest of my life
    I’ve got the answer. Get John Ross on this team. Then josh Allen and if that’s not enough I’d say convince Usain Bolt to play football in Seattle
    John Ross on one side Usain Bolt on the other side then throw it to 20 touchdown Tyler locket

    • Spencer Duncan

      What is going on in this post

      • Hawk Finn

        It actually makes perfect sense if you throw on a red cap and angrily yell it aloud

  22. Rick Schermerhorn

    Put down that phone Lisa (Bart) and get back to work

  23. V

    https://twitter.com/MikeDugar/status/1534717325747683328?s=20&t=sk5PDyxLnctvoOWR10TIIg

    “Lock doesn’t have that advantage, outside of three years with tight end Noah Fant. But through a handful of offseason practices, there’s an obvious rapport between Lock and a few of his receivers. One of the most notable has been Cody Thompson, someone I highlighted Tuesday as an early offseason standout. Thompson was among a handful of pass catchers Lock linked up with in Dallas to get some early reps in a couple weeks before reporting to organized team activities in April (Lock declined to name the other participants). Even though Thompson may be a long shot to make the roster, any edge Lock can find may help with the job.”

    “The defense jumped on the offense right out of the gate. Cornerback Sidney Jones broke up Smith’s first pass, intended for Lockett. Then he blanketed Lockett on a deep ball the next snap (the ball was slightly overthrown). Marquise Goodwin dropped a would-be touchdown on the next play. Lock tried to go deep on his first pass, but rookie Tariq Woolen outran the receiver on what was ultimately an overthrown, incomplete pass. Neither quarterback got into much of a rhythm.”

    “Then came the errant throws. Smith several plays later fired a laser over the middle in the direction of receiver Aaron Fuller that practically hit safety Josh Jones in the stomach. Fortunately for Smith, Jones dropped the interception. Four plays into Lock’s next turn at the helm, he put too much air on an out-breaking route intended for receiver Penny Hart and nickel Ugo Amadi read it like a book for what would have been a pick-six in a real game. While both quarterbacks made turnover-worthy mistakes, Lock’s resulted in an actual turnover, one that would have likely put six points on the board for the opponent.”

    • Big Mike

      That last paragraph is ominous. Accuracy issues…………ugh!

  24. samprassultanofswat

    The situation with Metcalf just BLOWS my mind. Why haven’t they sign Metcalf to a new deal if they didn’t want to trade him? This makes no sense at all.

    BTW: To me the Rams situation is even a bigger head scratcher. Where do the Rams get all this salary cap money?

    • Simo

      I want to know the same thing about the Rams. Are they operating under a different salary cap than everyone else? How can they afford a $40+m QB, a $25+m WR, a $30m DT, and still fill out a competitive team? The Packers and Chiefs punted on Adams and Hill because they couldn’t/wouldn’t pay the QB and WR both top money.

      • Roy Batty

        Roster bonuses and other language.

        Spreading the dollar amount over a number of years allows them to keep adding more and more large contracts. They draft and recruit good FA’s, too. They’re used to plug the holes on the cheap.

        And for everyone thinking “kicking the can will hurt them in a few years”, not really. The cap will balloon just in time for them to keep doing what they’ve been doing.

        Also, they’re in LA. Contrary to what some media outlets claim, people still love living in SoCal. Especially rich, young people who live in affluent neighborhoods, like your average football star.

        • Roy Batty

          One last thing, their owner is at the top of the league in net worth. He can afford to put money in escrow to cover the guaranteed amount. Many teams cannot do that.

          • Group Captain Mandrake

            Can you imagine how deep Silent Stan’s pockets are? He owns the Rams, Avalanche, Nuggets, Rapids and Arsenal. That’s quite a sports portfolio.

    • cha

      Thousands of words could be written on this. I’ll try to boil it down a little.

      1-They get max value from their top players.
      Ramsey takes the top WRs and cuts a portion of the field out. Donald can be triple teamed and still cause problems. Kupp’s route chart is insane. Stafford is at his deadliest when he can take chances and be aggressive and it works brilliantly because the defense has got his back. When they invest in a top asset they nearly always get a fantastic return.

      2-They don’t waste resources on replaceable or upgradable players.
      Jared Goff. John Johnson. Gerald Everett. Todd Gurley. Janoris Jenkins. Rodney McLeoud. Trumaine Johnson. Sammy Watkins. Cory Littleton. Brandin Cooks. Marcus Peters. Robert Woods. Michael Brockers.

      The Rams are ruthless letting players go, cutting them or trading them away. They’ve brilliantly kept the middle class part of their roster not too expensive. They have a handful of top priorities and then plug rookies and cheap veterans in around them and their coaching staff makes it work. The scouting department has a seemingly endless supply of third, fourth and fifth round comp picks and they mine those picks as well as anyone.

      They’ve cobbled together a fantastic offensive line from mid round picks, other team’s castoffs and a great free agent splurge on a left tackle.

      There’s also a secret sauce that they’ve made work: By trading nearly all their first round picks for top, top players, they don’t constantly have $10-15m of cap on the roster being taken up by players who everyone is wondering ‘when will this guy develop into a star and start contributing?’ That money can be reinvested in those top players and the return is tremendous.

      3-They play the salary cap float game at a brilliant level.
      $10m this year is 4.80% of the cap.
      $10m next year is 4.44% of the cap.
      $10m in 2024 is 3.06% of the cap.

      Every time they push money out, they actually gain value. It’s not just pushing the bills out to avoid a rainy day. The same money hits the cap with less and less impact each year. Whatever percentage the salary cap goes up by, that is a net gain for them. It’s almost better than an interest-free loan. With the NFL’s income fixed by TV contracts, the risk from an accounting perspective is very low.

      They also have an owner who constantly writes checks to fund the enterprise. Every single year they convert some players’ salary to bonus to gain flexibility and get under the cap. When they do, that means Kroenke is writing a big check for those bonuses.

      He’s traded cash flow for the ability to retain top talent and acquire new talent.

      • Big Mike

        Thanks cha. Great breakdown

      • Chase

        What prevents owners from converting a majority of a player’s contract into a roster bonus? Seems kind of pay-to-win in my opinion.

        • cha

          Cash flow and risk.

          Some just do not conduct their business that way. Paying the bulk of a contract for future performance is a way to go for some, very much not so for others. For some, the idea of paying a player far ahead and then not getting a star return on the field is an unacceptable proposition. For others, the idea of paying a player up front and then watching him end up playing for another team turns their stomach.

          And risk – when you restructure a player by converting salary to bonus, you’re frequently converting non-guaranteed salary to guaranteed cap hit that way. You greatly restrict your options with the player if things go south quickly. The point is you darn well better like that player and feel he brings value for the next 2-3 seasons, because you’re tied to him.

          The Seahawks had multiple opps to do that with RW but didn’t because the dead cap hit would be restrictive if he wanted a trade – a distinct possibility which proved to be true. Instead of the $26m dead cap this year they’d have a $34m or $40m dead cap.

      • Mike

        The rams obviously have done a good job, but they have made plenty of mistakes with large extensions such as Todd Gurley, Jared Goff, and Bradin Cooks.

        Trading a second and third round pick for half a year of Von miller was such a ballsy gamble. This paid off for them. That probably would have been a hard pill to swallow if they didnt win the superbowl, I guess it doesnt really matter since they dont have fans

        • Big Mike

          “The rams obviously have done a good job, but they have made plenty of mistakes with large extensions such as Todd Gurley, Jared Goff, and Bradin Cooks.”

          Absolutely. All teams make mistakes. Also note that they moved on from all of those players. Still waiting for Seattle to do the same with the peacock (like they did with Percy).

          • Rob Staton

            Made mistakes, rectified the mistakes and won a Super Bowl

  25. Neal

    It always takes forever but inevitably, someone says what I’ve been saying for years. JS is a lame, overrated GM. He blames the market for his mistakes. Well, the market is what GMs around the league sets the market at, and he’s supposed to be a GM. Think about that. We have no say in the cost of our gas and cell phones and groceries. The price we pay is what the market is. But when you’re one of the people in control of setting the market and you never do anything until AFTER your colleagues have reset the market, you’re lame. You let your fellow GM get advantages for their teams by signing their guys first, creating good chemistry for their team, and then forcing you to pay even more for your guys. LAME. JS should’ve been fired a long time ago, definitely after the Jamal Adams trade. BEFORE that trade I said he should be fired if he makes that trade. Clearly Jody Allen spoke with him after last season, even babysat him in the draft room to make sure he doesn’t bungle things yet again … why not just move on?

  26. Neal

    All of you defending JS because you think DK is asking for too much, remember that the point of this article is NOT to say we should pay DK whatever he’s asking for. The point is that a good GM will know when to pull the trigger — if DK will only settle for more than we’d pay him, then trade him already. The problem with JS is he waits for other GMs to reset the market, then can’t pay his players, then waits for their value to go down to either get less than he could have or lets them leave for nothing at all (see DJ Reed, who I said we should have given a multi-year extension after his first year with the team)

    • Ashish

      JS is not learning from his mistakes – NJ screwed the LB market and JS has to give more money to Bobby. Not sure when John will learn to sign his star players. I agree he should have trade or sign DK else we will have a player who will not practice and then will get contract before start of the season unprepared. Have this happening all the time.

  27. Joshua Smith

    Random thought but what if the Hawks don’t want to fully commit to DK because they want the option to trade him next year? I think the Hawks will surprise us and be good enough to potentially win 6-7-8 games again .And i believe this year, more so than past years, will be a lopsided year in terms of top teams vs bottom teams and the Hawks will be stuck in the low middle .. They may want to keep as much ammunition available to them as possible to move up to get “their guy” at QB if needed. I’m not suggesting this as a viable scenario. I’m just trying to figure out why they are dragging their heels. If they didn’t want to pay DK boatloads of money then they should have traded him before this draft. If they wanted to keep him then they should have paid him the first chance they got. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER THAN WAITING.This.isnt a the type of player you wait on or play hardball with because “we still have the franchise tag”. You either pay him or you don’t.
    It’s just so confusing & frustrating how the Hawks get themselves into these positions…unnecessarily so…

    • Rob Staton

      Random thought but what if the Hawks don’t want to fully commit to DK because they want the option to trade him next year?

      Not sure why they wouldn’t have already dealt him in this instance

      • Joshua Smith

        Agreed. That’s what is so odd about this. What I was implying is that they WANT to keep him but he may ask for too much money.
        Maybe (before the WR contracts escalated ridiculously) John thought it would be more advantageous to wait..Worst case (if they fail to resign him) they can franchise and use him as part of a deal to move up the draft to get their guy at QB.
        None of this (trading Wilson, do/don’t resign DK, having a great draft to start a rebuild, etc.) will mean anything if we can’t get a QB. Whether it’s the draft or signing/trading for a veteran to lead a young team.
        Unless Drew Lock completely surprises us next year is going to be the most defining year for this teams future.

        • Rob Staton

          But if they want to keep him but not at the amount he is demanding, they should’ve dealt him.

          They knew the situation. Knew the market.

          No excuse for not resolving this by now.

          Are we seriously saying that virtually every other leading receiver in the league is capable of doing a contract this off-season other than Seattle and DK?

          Should’ve been sorted one way or another pre-draft. And having kept him, the contract should’ve been done shortly after the draft.

  28. UkAlex6674

    We’re not privy to the discussions between DK and the FO. Could it be DK is waiting – maybe knew Kupp was getting the bag – to see what else the market brings?

    • Rob Staton

      Would make little sense not to attend minicamp at all if he was just ‘waiting’.

      Why blow $100k when you can just say ‘rehabbing’ and show up but not take part?

      • Big Mike

        Furthermore, Kupp wasn’t going to radically reset the market after Hill and Brown already had. DK isn’t waiting, John is and it’s already cost Seattle money or the player himself (if he ends up “needing” to be traded).

  29. Gary Bowden

    This isn’t an attempt to justify the inaction (I think they should have wrapped this up long ago), but there may be more going on here than what’s discussed above. DK’s agent, Tory Dandy, also represents Deebo Samuel. Perhaps he prefers to settle DK’s contract first and then negotiate the more complicated mix of matters surrounding Deebo’s contract. If that’s the case, Dandy may not be happy with the slow pace that the Hawks deal with these matters and want to light a fire under them to get the contract done. .

    • Rob Staton

      That merely emphasises how much this should’ve been done by now

      • Ashish

        Probably wants to pay max to DK 🙂

  30. Roy Batty

    Well, the dumpster fire is beginning to smolder.

    Contract talks now on hold, per Pete.

    • AW

      Pete did not say contract talks were on hold. Gregg Bell creating clicks by saying talks are on hold. You can listen to Pete’s answer about talks at link below.

      https://youtu.be/Lo2CBvWJ7nA?t=110?t=116

      • Big Mike

        Pete also said this about the DK “negotiations”:

        “We’ve been through this before, you know. And it’s a challenging tie. We’ve had so many high profile guys go through this process and how’s that worked out for us?”.

        Well Pete, considering the Frank Clark situation as Rob mentioned, the Wagner situation as Ashish mentioned above, the Clowney situation, etc. my opinion is “not great”.

        He also said:

        And John (Schneider) is on this and he’s as experienced as you can get handling this stuff”.

        Um yeah Pete, that’s what we’re worried about here.

        • Rob Staton

          The Seahawks appear to be retaining their hubris.

          Which is a shame. It felt for a second like they had been humbled when they talked about the defense at the end of the season and embraced that something had to give with Wilson.

          • cha

            I hated that little jab about ‘this is their (the players’) first try at this and they need to work through it but we’ve been through it a bunch of times.’

            Isn’t that what an agent is for? To guide them through it?

            Was there no realizing that DK would be an ideal extension target as soon as halfway through his rookie season? And the team had practically two full seasons to lay the groundwork for this?

            The “yeah, yeah, quit bugging me about it…” responses they gave to the press about a DK extension between the combine and the draft were all the more infuriating given DK’s holdout.

      • d

        sounds to me like they’re not going forward with the extension until he gets the medical ok in two weeks. he very specifically mentioned the medical assessment in two weeks time. maybe bs but probably a decent factor before you commit millions to a player.

  31. Seattle Murphy

    An insightful take. Thank you

  32. Bankhawk

    Rob, so, so great to have you back-here’s to hoping the holiday turned out just as the family had wished!
    And to whatever powers rule the affairs of men-please let the DK thing be resolved post haste!

  33. bk matty

    I dont believe Bezos can buy Seahawks, or any team for that matter. Broadcast partner owning a franchise is against league rules. He would have to leave Amazon.

© 2024 Seahawks Draft Blog

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑