Evan Mathis Released

[massari]

I can't see us finding the room to sign him, but I would love it if we did.

They could save $3 million by cutting Tony McDaniel -- the downside would be the hit to our run defense, as neither Hill nor Rubin are very strong against the run.

$5.5 million can be found by releasing Brandon Mebane, but that would really compound the problems for our run defense, thrusting Rubin into the starting rotation. I wouldn't like this at all.

They would save another $5 million by cutting Russell Okung -- Bailey would have to play LT, which would be problematic.

It would probably be necessary to cut at least one of the above players and probably two. And Mathis is 33 years old and coming off an injury-plagued season. Giving up Okung for Mathis might not be an overall positive for the line.

Would you be willing to cut Kearse(2.35)? Kearse+McDaniel for Mathis?

 

[Tical21]

If we kick the Wilson/Wagner deal down the road, we can give this guy whatever he wants on a 1-year deal.

 

[Largent80]

Kick rocks Mathis. No way do the Hawks even need him anyway.

 

[hawknation2015]

I can't see us finding the room to sign him, but I would love it if we did.

They could save $3 million by cutting Tony McDaniel -- the downside would be the hit to our run defense, as neither Hill nor Rubin are very strong against the run.

$5.5 million can be found by releasing Brandon Mebane, but that would really compound the problems for our run defense, thrusting Rubin into the starting rotation. I wouldn't like this at all.

They would save another $5 million by cutting Russell Okung -- Bailey would have to play LT, which would be problematic.

It would probably be necessary to cut at least one of the above players and probably two. And Mathis is 33 years old and coming off an injury-plagued season. Giving up Okung for Mathis might not be an overall positive for the line.

Would you be willing to cut Kearse(2.35)? Kearse+McDaniel for Mathis?

Yeah, I would love that, especially on a one-year prove it deal. I just don't know how much Mathis wants ($6+ million) and whether he would settle for a short-term deal. We need as much flexibility as we can get to extend Wilson and Wagner. It's hard to see happening, but man, would that be great for our OL.

 

[kearly]

Seems like a big upgrade over Bailey or a rookie at LG. If Seattle can get him for one year they could let him go next season and potentially get a late comp pick. I just wonder if he fits Cable and can run block well enough. If he does, it's worth a phone call, IMO.

 

[kearly]

Would you be willing to cut Kearse(2.35)? Kearse+McDaniel for Mathis?

That won't be necessary. Seattle's long term cap outlook is far more forgiving than most think. And in the short term, Seattle has roughly $10 mil to play with right now. They will probably use it towards signing bonuses for Wilson / Wagner, but if they spend some of that money on Mathis then there are workarounds for getting Wilson and Wagner their guaranteed dough.

 

[Seafan]

I love to see greedy players lose out. Just like the center from Oakland. Not happy with the contract. Bye. He'll be lucky to get half that somewhere else. Why would the Hawks be remotely interested?

 

[hawknation2015]

I love to see greedy players lose out. Just like the center from Oakland. Not happy with the contract. Bye. He'll be lucky to get half that somewhere else. Why would the Hawks be remotely interested?

Even remotely interested? Seriously?

Evan Mathis is one of the finest athletes in the game. One of only six players in the NFL considered "Three Sigma Athletes," meaning their SPARQ rating is at least three standard deviations higher the average player at their position.

The other five?

1. J.J. Watt
2. Lane Johnson
3. Calvin Johnson
4. Byron Jones -- a rookie CB, drafted in the First Round by the Cowboys, who set the world record for the broad jump at the combine.
5. Kristjan Sokoli -- our rookie Sixth Round center.

His explosiveness off the ball is as good as it gets for an interior linemen, and he is easily the best ZBS run blocker in the game.

 

[kearly]

I just heard something interesting from John Clayton on Brock and Salk this morning.

Apparently, Mathis had been battling with the Eagles FO for two years to get a new contract, and during this time, he was warned to drop it or he'd be traded. He wouldn't drop it, so the Eagles tried like hell to trade him, but couldn't find a single suitor to take him.

That suggests to me that Mathis is probably not going to be getting $5.5+ million offers. If he has no market, it should be interesting to see what happens.

 

[dontbelikethat]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/OmarKelly/status/609484119265808384[/tweet]

 

[Seafan]

The Hawks have three players who can play LG whose salaries combined are less than what Mathis is asking.

The Hawks roster model doesn't include paying old guards a lot of money. The only reason I can see the Hawks signing this guy is if he takes less than 3 million for one year (not going to happen) and they want to start a rookie at center. He'd be a good addition to help with the line calls for the potential rookie starter. I think the Hawks are content with the line they have now and Cable has never shied away from starting rookies. They want to develop these young guys and bringing in Mathis would not only take a roster spot but slow down development of someone else.

I think he goes to the Giants or possibly the Saints if he's willing to take less money.

 

[massari]

The Hawks have three players who can play LG whose salaries combined are less than what Mathis is asking.

The Hawks roster model doesn't include paying old guards a lot of money. The only reason I can see the Hawks signing this guy is if he takes less than 3 million for one year (not going to happen) and they want to start a rookie at center. He'd be a good addition to help with the line calls for the potential rookie starter. I think the Hawks are content with the line they have now and Cable has never shied away from starting rookies. They want to develop these young guys and bringing in Mathis would not only take a roster spot but slow down development of someone else.

I think he goes to the Giants or possibly the Saints if he's willing to take less money.

Isn't this sort of like saying "The Hawks have three players who can play TE whose salaries combined are less than what Graham is making"?

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

5m for an OG of Mathis' quality is downright stealing.

It's worth the addition money wise. And while there were no takers for his 5.5m/6m contract for 2015/16 -- we have to account for the asking price in terms of picks too.

That contract was also 2 years and I'm not familiar with how the terms were structured. So that could have been an extra disincentive to make a move.

Honestly, I tend to think the Eagles situation is a bit toxic for many players. I wouldn't necessarily peg his moves based on greed. He could just as easily just want out of the organization. Kelly definitely wants his guys and appears to make the work environment pretty hostile to those that aren't his guys. Mathis could be the latest in a long line of players from the old regime that suffers from that petty bias.

Mathis is a quality talent. He'd be a significant upgrade in 2015 versus every player we have on this roster that would be asked to play LG. Honestly, he's probably our best OL the day he signs. So 5m is a pretty paltry spend for that kind of short term commitment. Scheme fit and quality are a neat match in this case.

 

[netskier]

You convinced me.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

5m for an OG of Mathis' quality is downright stealing.

It's worth the addition money wise. And while there were no takers for his 5.5m/6m contract for 2015/16 -- we have to account for the asking price in terms of picks too.

That contract was also 2 years and I'm not familiar with how the terms were structured. So that could have been an extra disincentive to make a move.

Honestly, I tend to think the Eagles situation is a bit toxic for many players. I wouldn't necessarily peg his moves based on greed. He could just as easily just want out of the organization. Kelly definitely wants his guys and appears to make the work environment pretty hostile to those that aren't his guys. Mathis could be the latest in a long line of players from the old regime that suffers from that petty bias.

Mathis is a quality talent. He'd be a significant upgrade in 2015 versus every player we have on this roster that would be asked to play LG. Honestly, he's probably our best OL the day he signs. So 5m is a pretty paltry spend for that kind of short term commitment. Scheme fit and quality are a neat match in this case.

Not a chance in hell we sign him unless.....

1. Wilson and his agent stop playing games and start getting realistic.

2. We actually give a damn about the OL and try something above dumpster diving for Blackbeard's treasure.

3. Get rid of Tom Cable.

Which do you figure happens first? I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious.

 

[hawknation2015]

5m for an OG of Mathis' quality is downright stealing.

It's worth the addition money wise. And while there were no takers for his 5.5m/6m contract for 2015/16 -- we have to account for the asking price in terms of picks too.

That contract was also 2 years and I'm not familiar with how the terms were structured. So that could have been an extra disincentive to make a move.

Honestly, I tend to think the Eagles situation is a bit toxic for many players. I wouldn't necessarily peg his moves based on greed. He could just as easily just want out of the organization. Kelly definitely wants his guys and appears to make the work environment pretty hostile to those that aren't his guys. Mathis could be the latest in a long line of players from the old regime that suffers from that petty bias.

Mathis is a quality talent. He'd be a significant upgrade in 2015 versus every player we have on this roster that would be asked to play LG. Honestly, he's probably our best OL the day he signs. So 5m is a pretty paltry spend for that kind of short term commitment. Scheme fit and quality are a neat match in this case.

Not a chance in hell we sign him unless.....

1. Wilson and his agent stop playing games and start getting realistic.

2. We actually give a damn about the OL and try something above dumpster diving for Blackbeard's treasure.

3. Get rid of Tom Cable.

Which do you figure happens first? I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious.

Huh? Why would we have to get rid of Tom Cable? Mathis is the prototypical Tom Cable linemen . . . exceptional athlete and hard nosed, ZBS run blocker.

We really need to start requiring people to use the word "because," don't you think?

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

5m for an OG of Mathis' quality is downright stealing.

It's worth the addition money wise. And while there were no takers for his 5.5m/6m contract for 2015/16 -- we have to account for the asking price in terms of picks too.

That contract was also 2 years and I'm not familiar with how the terms were structured. So that could have been an extra disincentive to make a move.

Honestly, I tend to think the Eagles situation is a bit toxic for many players. I wouldn't necessarily peg his moves based on greed. He could just as easily just want out of the organization. Kelly definitely wants his guys and appears to make the work environment pretty hostile to those that aren't his guys. Mathis could be the latest in a long line of players from the old regime that suffers from that petty bias.

Mathis is a quality talent. He'd be a significant upgrade in 2015 versus every player we have on this roster that would be asked to play LG. Honestly, he's probably our best OL the day he signs. So 5m is a pretty paltry spend for that kind of short term commitment. Scheme fit and quality are a neat match in this case.

Not a chance in hell we sign him unless.....

1. Wilson and his agent stop playing games and start getting realistic.

2. We actually give a damn about the OL and try something above dumpster diving for Blackbeard's treasure.

3. Get rid of Tom Cable.

Which do you figure happens first? I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious.

Out of order:

3. Mathis would be a pretty prototypical Cable player. Although maybe not as it pertains to the LG position. Mathis is an All pro (currently) zone blocking LG. From a scheme fit, he's about as perfect of a free agent one could hope to get on the open market.

It's worth noting, that when we were short on OL depth one of the first guys we added was Robert Gallery. Obviously he and Cable had a history. His skill set doesn't/didn't come close to that of Mathis. Currently, I'd see our OL depth as similar although not as dire as 2011. We have a severe shortage of experienced OL options. And while we have Bailey at LG, we have to assume that Okung will not be healthy for some stretch of this season. Bailey was the alpha option last year as his back up.

Mathis, would at the very least, allow our 3-4 rookies develop at a more acceptable pace. While actually improving the starting 5 instead of being merely a placeholder as Gallery was.

2. No question on this one. Although I don't see it as we don't give a damn. I see it as Seattle making the conscious decision to keep the roster spend very lean in this group, so as to allocate that cap space for other positions. Our DB/LB/DL spend is huge as of now. Our RB spend is probably two to up to five times what other teams spend. These aren't bad contracts. Just that you can't 'give a damn' spend wise with all of our positions. Somewhere teams have to accept spending less money. For Seattle, that's the OL.

1. I'm not sure Wilson's contract really is likely to impact our ability to make this kind of move. There are plenty of ways to spread spending around. There is also the reality that a lot of dead money on this year's books won't be there in 2016. Cap increase and loss of big dead money hit means plenty of available cash next year if the team wanted to lighten the cap hit blow on extensions this year in order to accomodate adding Mathis.

Ultimately, I would say it's unlikely we add Mathis, for the fact that we're trying to keep costs down in the OL department. But his is a uniquely good fit for Seattle in all ways other than age and cost. His play is still at the highest level in the league. For a position group that at least in 2015 is going to go through some rough patches due to inexperience. He could be well worth the price to hedge against a backslide of quality particularly in the middle of a championship run.

 

[Throwdown]

The Hawks have three players who can play LG whose salaries combined are less than what Mathis is asking.

The Hawks roster model doesn't include paying old guards a lot of money. The only reason I can see the Hawks signing this guy is if he takes less than 3 million for one year (not going to happen) and they want to start a rookie at center. He'd be a good addition to help with the line calls for the potential rookie starter. I think the Hawks are content with the line they have now and Cable has never shied away from starting rookies. They want to develop these young guys and bringing in Mathis would not only take a roster spot but slow down development of someone else.

I think he goes to the Giants or possibly the Saints if he's willing to take less money.

Isn't this sort of like saying "The Hawks have three players who can play TE whose salaries combined are less than what Graham is making"?

Seahawks aren't scared to go after players they feel are special no matter the cost.

What about Mathis makes him "special"?

 

[Hawks46]

The Hawks have three players who can play LG whose salaries combined are less than what Mathis is asking.

The Hawks roster model doesn't include paying old guards a lot of money. The only reason I can see the Hawks signing this guy is if he takes less than 3 million for one year (not going to happen) and they want to start a rookie at center. He'd be a good addition to help with the line calls for the potential rookie starter. I think the Hawks are content with the line they have now and Cable has never shied away from starting rookies. They want to develop these young guys and bringing in Mathis would not only take a roster spot but slow down development of someone else.

I think he goes to the Giants or possibly the Saints if he's willing to take less money.

Isn't this sort of like saying "The Hawks have three players who can play TE whose salaries combined are less than what Graham is making"?

Seahawks aren't scared to go after players they feel are special no matter the cost.

What about Mathis makes him "special"?

He's he best ZBS lineman in the game.

At 33, he'd be the 2nd best athlete on our OL after Sokoli (even better than Sweezy), and that's an OL that has been specifically drafted/selected for their athleticism. In other words, you don't see guys like this often.

The only thing I'd have an issue with is some injury concern from last year. I wonder if we could get him at that 5 mil/year mark if there wasn't a lot of guaranteed money. Sure, there are some small concerns about this hampering the development of younger players but this could also force Bailey to backup LT where he could work his ass off to replace Okung if big Russ want's too much money.

 

[Marvin49]

http://www.ninersnation.com/2015/6/15/8 ... ins-chiefs

49ers among 'main teams' rumored to be looking at Evan Mathis, per John Clayton

Would make a lot of sense since they are incorporating Zone-Blocking. Also would mediate the loss of Iupati a bit. They've got $$$ to spend after the retirements of Justin Smith, Pat Willis, and Anthony Davis.