Seahawks possibly trding Irvin to ATL draft ramifications

[McGruff]

I hate to say it, because I love Bruce and what he has done for the team, the sacrifices he has made to his own personal pride and passion to become the complete player the team asked him to be . . . but as a player he is worth a mid round draft pick and nothing more. He's not an elite OLB. He's never been to a probowl or even sniffed consideration for one. He's a good player at a relatively unimportant position, and won't get us a premium pick. Keep in mind as well that JS often gets fleeced in draft trades. He's not a hard bargainer and loves picks at any cost.

I would be shocked if it is anything more than a swap of 2nd round picks.

 

[penihawk]

LOL! We aren't going to #8 with Irvin as the bait. If this is true its a way to get to the upper part of rd 2 to get a player they covet and get a jump on a inevitable situation with Irvin down the road. I just hope the player they covet isn't Irvin's replacement. How disappointing would that be?

 

[TheWebHead]

The possibility of this trade happening may depend on if Vic Beasley is available for ATL at #8, if not then an Irvin trade could be a contingency plan for the Falcons, if a player the Seahawks want can be gotten at #42... so there's no upside to do anything but deny the trade talk unless those levers turn.

or it could just be BS, or misdirection so Falcons can make other teams think they may not pick a guy like Beasley and not try to jump the Falcons ahead of the 8th pick.

 

[Largent80]

Ha.....I called this way before this even came out with a gut feeling........viewtopic.php?f=18&t=110198

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

I hate to say it, because I love Bruce and what he has done for the team, the sacrifices he has made to his own personal pride and passion to become the complete player the team asked him to be . . . but as a player he is worth a mid round draft pick and nothing more. He's not an elite OLB. He's never been to a probowl or even sniffed consideration for one. He's a good player at a relatively unimportant position, and won't get us a premium pick. Keep in mind as well that JS often gets fleeced in draft trades. He's not a hard bargainer and loves picks at any cost.

I would be shocked if it is anything more than a swap of 2nd round picks.

While I don't think this is happening and the only reason it makes any sense (at this point) is the connection with Dan Quinn. But, Irvin is worth more to the Hawks than they can get in draft compensation. I would not be in favor of such a trade. But, if there's anything to it, I hope the Hawks are in the position of having the leverage (ATL wanting Irvin more than the Hawks wanting draft capital.)

That said, while Irvin may not yet have the accolades you're speaking of, he's most definitely a player on the rise in that regard. It wouldn't surprise me to see Irvin in contention for Pro Bowls (if they don't do away with them). Pass Rushers are considerably important, especially with the rules being changed to give advantage to the receivers. It's more important than ever to get to the QB.

So, I'll disagree on this one and say that Bruce Irvin plays one of the most important positions in the seasons ahead. I think NFL teams know that full well and are even going into this draft prioritizing pass rush specialists with that in mind. But, I do agree that he's probably not enough to get a premium pick. I can't see any such trade involving Atlanta's 1st rounder. But, if it is... it had better be for Kevin White and not DGB going up that high. I just don't think Seattle is interested in getting back into the first round. They're in a better position staying out of the first round.

It's not worth giving up Bruce Irvin just to swap 2nd round picks. Had better involve more than that.

 

[LickMyNuts]

Bruce Irvin has

16.5 sacks
3 forced fumbles
3 interceptions

in 3 years...

 

[Hasselbeck]

Bruce Irvin has

16.5 sacks
3 forced fumbles
3 interceptions

in 3 years...

And he's 28. :!:

People forget how old he was entering the draft.

There's no way in hell Bruce Irvin can fetch a 1st rounder.. so we can cut that theory out now :lol:

To me.. it feels like a deal on the table where the Seahawks are saying "If ____ is at 42, we'll kick over 63 and Irvin for that pick." You can fill in the blank to your choosing (I believe it's either DGB or an OL they are eyeing that could slip a bit)

One thing is for certain though. If they just flat out trade him for a pick.. the Seahawks WILL move up at some point in this draft.. and it's very likely happening Friday. Because there is no way this team will draft 12 players this weekend. The math just doesn't fit.

 

[Largent80]

My feeling was that they are NOT going to be able to sit there and watch 62 players leave. Regardless of how many are on their board. With that many picks, they will be making a deal, and that is why I singled out Irvin early yesterday.

 

[Willyeye]

I think that perhaps Dan Quinn wants Irvin really bad. If that's the case, maybe the Hawks could move up 21 spots in the 2nd round and give a 3rd or 4th round pick to ATL for 2016. I don't get the feeling that they want to lose picks in this draft.

 

[Scottemojo]

Bruce Irvin has

16.5 sacks
3 forced fumbles
3 interceptions

in 3 years...

And he's 28. :!:

People forget how old he was entering the draft.

There's no way in hell Bruce Irvin can fetch a 1st rounder.. so we can cut that theory out now :lol:

To me.. it feels like a deal on the table where the Seahawks are saying "If ____ is at 42, we'll kick over 63 and Irvin for that pick." You can fill in the blank to your choosing (I believe it's either DGB or an OL they are eyeing that could slip a bit)

One thing is for certain though. If they just flat out trade him for a pick.. the Seahawks WILL move up at some point in this draft.. and it's very likely happening Friday. Because there is no way this team will draft 12 players this weekend. The math just doesn't fit.

There is one thing I don't understand about that.
Every year, when you add UDFA signings to drafted players, there are near 20. So why is 12 an untenable number of draftees? An extra year of team control for 3 or 4 extra draftees, a slightly higher quality talent pool for a handful of the 20 or so 2015 prospects who will come to camp...educate me on why 11 or 12 picks would be so bad.

 

[McGruff]

Here is no good reason not to stockpile as manu picks as possible. Play the odds.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Bruce Irvin has

16.5 sacks
3 forced fumbles
3 interceptions

in 3 years...

And he's 28. :!:

People forget how old he was entering the draft.

There's no way in hell Bruce Irvin can fetch a 1st rounder.. so we can cut that theory out now :lol:

To me.. it feels like a deal on the table where the Seahawks are saying "If ____ is at 42, we'll kick over 63 and Irvin for that pick." You can fill in the blank to your choosing (I believe it's either DGB or an OL they are eyeing that could slip a bit)

One thing is for certain though. If they just flat out trade him for a pick.. the Seahawks WILL move up at some point in this draft.. and it's very likely happening Friday. Because there is no way this team will draft 12 players this weekend. The math just doesn't fit.

There is one thing I don't understand about that.
Every year, when you add UDFA signings to drafted players, there are near 20. So why is 12 an untenable number of draftees? An extra year of team control for 3 or 4 extra draftees, a slightly higher quality talent pool for a handful of the 20 or so 2015 prospects who will come to camp...educate me on why 11 or 12 picks would be so bad.

How many holes does this team really have right now?
- Interior line
- DL depth
- WR
- Secondary depth

.. That's really it to me? Do you really need 12 picks to address all those needs? Why take 2 or 3 guys that may be ok, that you have to either cut present players to fit on the roster or hope you can hide them on the practice squad.. when you can move up for the 1 guy you really covet.

11 or 12 picks would be great if we were the Jaguars. This team is stacked .. and the UDFA adds another element to this, considering they usually find a couple UDFA's that stick around and actually perform better than some draft picks.

 

[McGruff]

I would rather have 11 or 12 shots at filling 6 holes than 7 shots at filling 6 holes.

 

[Willyeye]

Bruce Irvin has

16.5 sacks
3 forced fumbles
3 interceptions

in 3 years...

And he's 28. :!:

People forget how old he was entering the draft.

There's no way in hell Bruce Irvin can fetch a 1st rounder.. so we can cut that theory out now :lol:

To me.. it feels like a deal on the table where the Seahawks are saying "If ____ is at 42, we'll kick over 63 and Irvin for that pick." You can fill in the blank to your choosing (I believe it's either DGB or an OL they are eyeing that could slip a bit)

One thing is for certain though. If they just flat out trade him for a pick.. the Seahawks WILL move up at some point in this draft.. and it's very likely happening Friday. Because there is no way this team will draft 12 players this weekend. The math just doesn't fit.

There is one thing I don't understand about that.
Every year, when you add UDFA signings to drafted players, there are near 20. So why is 12 an untenable number of draftees? An extra year of team control for 3 or 4 extra draftees, a slightly higher quality talent pool for a handful of the 20 or so 2015 prospects who will come to camp...educate me on why 11 or 12 picks would be so bad.

How many holes does this team really have right now?
- Interior line
- DL depth
- WR
- Secondary depth

.. That's really it to me? Do you really need 12 picks to address all those needs? Why take 2 or 3 guys that may be ok, that you have to either cut present players to fit on the roster or hope you can hide them on the practice squad.. when you can move up for the 1 guy you really covet.

11 or 12 picks would be great if we were the Jaguars. This team is stacked .. and the UDFA adds another element to this, considering they usually find a couple UDFA's that stick around and actually perform better than some draft picks.

You forgot to mention KR/PR. I can't watch a Bryan Walters' type of fiasco again for another season.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I would rather have 11 or 12 shots at filling 6 holes than 7 shots at filling 6 holes.

Never advocated trading almost half the draft.. but what makes more sense.. 9 picks, with one of those being a player that could make a major impact (a WR, interior lineman, etc) .. or 12.. where most of those players don't see the field, a la 2013.

Also.. it is entirely possible JS moves up in the 2nd, then in the mid rounds does his usual move back + scoop up an extra pick or two trick. So they could still wind up with double digit picks AND move up.

I just think a move up is inevitable at this point. Too many signs pointing in that direction.

You forgot to mention KR/PR. I can't watch a Bryan Walters' type of fiasco again for another season.

I don't see KR/PR as a NEED.. more as a .. yeah we could definitely improve in that category. But I also think that we are drafting 2 WR's and that 2nd WR is going to be expected to be a guy that can handle return duty.

 

[Scottemojo]

Bruce Irvin has

16.5 sacks
3 forced fumbles
3 interceptions

in 3 years...

And he's 28. :!:

People forget how old he was entering the draft.

There's no way in hell Bruce Irvin can fetch a 1st rounder.. so we can cut that theory out now :lol:

To me.. it feels like a deal on the table where the Seahawks are saying "If ____ is at 42, we'll kick over 63 and Irvin for that pick." You can fill in the blank to your choosing (I believe it's either DGB or an OL they are eyeing that could slip a bit)

One thing is for certain though. If they just flat out trade him for a pick.. the Seahawks WILL move up at some point in this draft.. and it's very likely happening Friday. Because there is no way this team will draft 12 players this weekend. The math just doesn't fit.

There is one thing I don't understand about that.
Every year, when you add UDFA signings to drafted players, there are near 20. So why is 12 an untenable number of draftees? An extra year of team control for 3 or 4 extra draftees, a slightly higher quality talent pool for a handful of the 20 or so 2015 prospects who will come to camp...educate me on why 11 or 12 picks would be so bad.

How many holes does this team really have right now?
- Interior line
- DL depth
- WR
- Secondary depth

.. That's really it to me? Do you really need 12 picks to address all those needs? Why take 2 or 3 guys that may be ok, that you have to either cut present players to fit on the roster or hope you can hide them on the practice squad.. when you can move up for the 1 guy you really covet.

11 or 12 picks would be great if we were the Jaguars. This team is stacked .. and the UDFA adds another element to this, considering they usually find a couple UDFA's that stick around and actually perform better than some draft picks.

Oh, I understand that part, making this roster will be tough. Which only makes draftees more important, any agent worth his salt will be telling his udfa that very thing. Which is why Seattle had to resort to recruiting by pointing out how many of their UDFAs get picked up by another team.

I will be surprised if they draft less than 9. Maybe roll a pick or two to next year. Moving up may happen, but it seems to go against John's nature for the most part.

 

[Largent80]

Here is the thing regarding WR. Very few rookies have impact seasons. Look at Tate for example, and almost every other WR that has ever started as a rookie.

DBG didn't even play last year yet people are all in love with what he did in college 2 years ago, simply because he is physically put together. Expecting much of an impact right away isn't being realistic.

 

[Scottemojo]

Here is the thing regarding WR. Very few rookies have impact seasons. Look at Tate for example, and almost every other WR that has ever started as a rookie.

DBG didn't even play last year yet people are all in love with what he did in college 2 years ago, simply because he is physically put together. Expecting much of an impact right away isn't being realistic.

Calvin Johnson's first year was for 756 yards and 4 TDs. So yeah, immediate impact from even an outlier body type doesn't happen often. Explosive rookie WRs are rare.

 

[Scottemojo]

I wanted to add this to my discussion with Hasselbeck: while the current roster is not full of holes, there are some salaries to replace in 2016. One of my favorite things about JS is that he will be looking to 2016 in the current draft. Last year he tried that shotgun approach with Gilliam and Scott. It didn't work out, but there is no doubt in my mind that potentially replacing Okung's salary was behind it. And that was with 2 years left on Okung's deal.

So when you add contracts you might try to eliminate to the list of roster holes, that number of picks becomes a bit more tenable.

 

[McG]

No way is Irvin enough to jump back into the first round. Though it's obvious that they are in fact fishing and hoping to net DBG in my opinion.

He wasn't a first rounder when we picked him to begin with. No way that his play on the field and his contract due to be up soon is he worth a #1 now. That is the beauty of draft picks and why they are so coveted, long-term commitment at a reasonable price. It would be more like Irvin, 3rd, 4th, and a 7th or Irvin, 2nd, 4th, 6th or something of that nature. That is way too much for an unproven player, unless it's a top 5 or top 10 pick.