Article: Could Ivory be headed to Seattle? (Speculation)

[Subzero717]

Ivory runs in a man blocking scheme with Jets.

 

[Fade]

He is an obvious fit style wise. Salary Cap & Compensatory Pick wise, it makes no sense. When it comes to Free Agents going forward it will only be players that get cut off of other teams because those players don't factor into the Compensatory Pick formula. The only position group the Seahawks would possibly make an exception would be D-Line & for this year O-Line.

I think you're seriously overestimating Pete and John's emphasis on compensatory picks. They have never shied away from trading picks or signing free agents when the cap space is there. Just look at Cary Williams last year for an example. I think Ivory makes sense for the right price, but I don't think the comp picks are a driving factor.

Cary Williams is my example. He was cut by the Eagles, so he didn't factor into the Compensatory Formula.
Rubin was cut by the Browns.

 

[Hawkscanner]

Back in 2013, I threw out the name of Michael Bennett as someone I believed the Seahawks could have serious interest in. The notion drew very little attention from posters back then as well.

All I know is that Schneider has been very clear in the past that in terms of free agency that he and his staff will be "everywhere and in on everything."

Schneider was on with Brock and Salk back on 1/22 and laughed off the whole idea that the Seahawks wouldn't be a player in free agency this offseason ...

Schneider: "... We attack the offseason -- we're going to attack it the same way we always have. Obviously, we know what are deficiencies are and we're going to try to compensate for those deficiencies as we go. But we're not going to go crazy in one area and panic just because we're struggling there. We're going to be smart, we're going to be aggressive -- no, I was driving Ben in to school this morning and I heard John Clayton on so I -- we were going to have an unrestricted free agent meeting, but I guess we don't need to have them anymore. Because we're going to be completely out of free agency [heavy sarcasm in his voice]. No, when you see that -- when we talk about being aggressive and being in every deal it's basically knowing what the Jones' are doing out there and being able to stay in deals. That's how we got guys like Ahtyba Rubin, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett -- that's how we acquired those guys a little bit later on, just by being aggressive and staying in deals. Now, we walk away from, shoot I would say about 70% of them -- maybe 80% -- right? So, it's just being able to really concentrate on our immediate and then looking toward the future as we kinda come around the corner after the draft and everything -- and kind of reassess where we're at. But, as I said of those 17 unrestricted free agents and 7 restricted free agents -- there's definitely guys we're cut out for as we're real excited about it."

Source:
http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=9998706&p=1007&n=Brock and Salk

What Schneider said there pretty much sums up my thoughts on how they plan to attack free agency. And that is, I believe that first and foremost they'll look to re-sign those free agents of ours that they envision as key.

Then as far as outside free agents are concerned, I believe they WILL be aggressive in terms of keeping dialogue going with those players whom they envision could fill a real need for them ... but won't really look to sign any until later on in the free agency period ... or perhaps even after the draft. Basically, I believe Schneider and the Seahawks are going to do what they've always done -- look for bargain basement deals.

Keeping that in mind, as I've looked through the names of potential free agents the Seahawks could possibly be interested in, a couple of names stood out to me. One was Chris Ivory, as I believe the Seahawks would love to have an aggressive punishing style runner to platoon with Rawls (I don't know that I buy the whole potential tension in the locker room argument). The other name that intrigued me was Nick Fairley, as he's another whom I believe could still have a lot of upside, but won't break the bank.

When looking at potential free agents this offseason, those are the lenses I believe we need to be looking through -- diamonds in the rough who might be able to be had at zirconium prices.

 

[massari]

Do they sign Christine Michael for around the vet minimum or Ivory at 5M while supposedly losing a comp pick?

Sounds like an easy choice to me.

First of all, teams in general just don't value RB's the way that they used to. There's no way he's getting $5M/season ... and if some team happens to do so -- I'd say good luck and wish them all the best on that one.

The following is a list of all free agent signings from last year (as of June 22nd, 2015). You can see for yourself that in general the contracts handed out weren't all that rich ...
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/3/10/8150357/nfl-free-agent-signings-tracker-2015-rumors

There were only a handful of contracts that were signed this past year in that $4 Million and up range -- none of which really worked out for those teams.

So no, I don't see Chris Ivory pulling down that kind of money. If he does, I'm happy for him -- I just don't see it.

Where I'm coming from on this ... is on the bargain basement end of things (which is where I see this guy). He started off well ... but then faded as the season went on and the carries mounted. He strikes me as a player who could still be available late in to the free agent period (or possibly even after the draft) ... and if he is, that's when the Hawks should start kicking the tires. That's where I'm coming from.

Realistically Ivory will get about 4M APY with a chance someone overpays and gives him 5M. He'll likely get a contract similar to what Frank Gore got at 32 years old.

When has big contracts not working out persuaded other teams from doing the same? Has this happened before?

 

[HawkFan72]

Do they sign Christine Michael for around the vet minimum or Ivory at 5M while supposedly losing a comp pick?

Sounds like an easy choice to me.

Especially since the Seahawks already showed they could win games with Michael as their lead back.

Bringing back Michael as the backup to Rawls is a no-brainer.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Do they sign Christine Michael for around the vet minimum or Ivory at 5M while supposedly losing a comp pick?

Sounds like an easy choice to me.

Especially since the Seahawks already showed they could win games with Michael as their lead back.

Bringing back Michael as the backup to Rawls is a no-brainer.

What you guys are not taking into account with Ivory that Scanner has, is running style. Pete loves pounders and Ivory fits the bill and compliments Thomas. But he won't be signed for 5 mil. They'll hang around like JS said and see what breaks their way. If Ivory could be had for 2 per, they'd quite possibly do it. The longer he goes without signing when FA starts, the better shot the Hawks have of getting him.