Seahawks trade for Terrelle Pryor

[Anthony!]

I think people tend to ignore the fact that if these next 2 seasons go how we all want them to then Russell is probably going to become the highest paid player in the history of this league. And if you consider the fact that we're about to make Sherm the highest paid corner in the league and Earl the highest paid safety in the league then there's a possibility that RW is going to be playing somewhere else in 2016. I know, I hate the idea as much as you do, but it's still a possibility. Probably a good idea to have a contingency plan.

It would be the biggest mistake the FO would make, and the end to our winning till we find another Franchise QB

Well it's fine that you think that but I for one am glad that this FO is willing to look at every option when they make decisions. I'm glad they're bring in TP for whatever they're bringing him in for because hell, you never know.

Its not what I think, it is pretty much a fact, you have a Franchise QB, you keep him, if you give him up without a franchise QB to replace him you will struggle until you find a new one. Look at the NFL history you can count on 1 hand the number of teams who let a franchise QB go, without a franchise QB to replace him and still won. Pryor is not a Franchise QB, RW is.

 

[pcbball12]

Its not what I think, it is pretty much a fact, you have a Franchise QB, you keep him, if you give him up without a franchise QB to replace him you will struggle until you find a new one. Look at the NFL history you can count on 1 hand the number of teams who let a franchise QB go, without a franchise QB to replace him and still won. Pryor is not a Franchise QB, RW is

How did you, or anyone, come to the conclusion that because we traded the 32nd pick in the 7th round all of a sudden they think he may be able to replace RW and are willing to let RW walk? That is just an absurd line of thinking in my opinion and a huge overreaction to a low cost trade to aquire a top of the line athlete. There is plenty of room in their cap (especially with a much higher cap as expected) to include paying Sherm, Earl, and RW. I know David Hsu has done a ton of cap models with this as has hawkblogger (as can anyone if they want to go to overthecap.com). This is nothing more than bringing in a talented athlete to compete for the developmental QB role and possibly add something as an offensive weapon if he buys into it. They will pay Russ and anyone that is freaking out that they won't (especially freaking out about it because they sent a 7th to Oakland) needs to get that thought out of their mind.

SF paid a 7th for Gabbert (who is only a QB and does not have upside as an athlete or to change positions). Do you think they plan on him replacing Kaep? Absolutely not. They paid draft capital to get Mccoy last year so he could be their backup. Do you think they planned on him ever being their starter? No.

 

[Mick063]

Considering the Forty Niners are likely the biggest obstacle for a repeat.......

I think a guy that can approximate Kaepernick on the scout team for two (likely three) games is well worth the last pick in the draft. A pick not much different than signing an unrestricted rookie, which Seattle has been rather successful at (Baldwin, Kearse).

Further, if a rash of injury happens at the QB position, I think Seattle could do a lost worse for an emergency QB (ie. Gabbert).

Good move I say. I like seeing the roster filled with explosive playmakers.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

I think people tend to ignore the fact that if these next 2 seasons go how we all want them to then Russell is probably going to become the highest paid player in the history of this league. And if you consider the fact that we're about to make Sherm the highest paid corner in the league and Earl the highest paid safety in the league then there's a possibility that RW is going to be playing somewhere else in 2016. I know, I hate the idea as much as you do, but it's still a possibility. Probably a good idea to have a contingency plan.

It would be the biggest mistake the FO would make, and the end to our winning till we find another Franchise QB

Well it's fine that you think that but I for one am glad that this FO is willing to look at every option when they make decisions. I'm glad they're bring in TP for whatever they're bringing him in for because hell, you never know.

Its not what I think, it is pretty much a fact, you have a Franchise QB, you keep him, if you give him up without a franchise QB to replace him you will struggle until you find a new one. Look at the NFL history you can count on 1 hand the number of teams who let a franchise QB go, without a franchise QB to replace him and still won. Pryor is not a Franchise QB, RW is.

Well it's fine that you think that too.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Hey, have you coined TP! TP! TP! yet for our new star?

With some assistance from HoustonHawk82 yes, yes I did.

Jesus, I almost never skip reading posts in a thread, but I did on this page and totally missed that you had in fact done it higher up on this page, lol. SMH.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

Hey, have you coined TP! TP! TP! yet for our new star?

With some assistance from HoustonHawk82 yes, yes I did.

Jesus, I almost never skip reading posts in a thread, but I did on this page and totally missed that you had in fact done it higher up on this page, lol. SMH.

You should have known better, especially with all this resistance from Anthony! I'm honestly about 2 posts away from a TP! avatar. I might fabricate a QB controversy just to see if I can cause a meltdown.

 

[Maxman186]

Hey, have you coined TP! TP! TP! yet for our new star?

With some assistance from HoustonHawk82 yes, yes I did.

Jesus, I almost never skip reading posts in a thread, but I did on this page and totally missed that you had in fact done it higher up on this page, lol. SMH.

You should have known better, especially with all this resistance from Anthony! I'm honestly about 2 posts away from a TP! avatar. I might fabricate a QB controversy just to see if I can cause a meltdown.

Don't worry i'm on it

 

[RolandDeschain]

You should have known better, especially with all this resistance from Anthony! I'm honestly about 2 posts away from a TP! avatar. I might fabricate a QB controversy just to see if I can cause a meltdown.

You're right. I should have. I have no defense. If you start a thread to create a QB controversy, I'll throw some gas on it.

 

[HawkFan72]

Did anyone catch Baldwins interview on 710 today?

He was in Schneiders office when it went down, and it sounds like Pryor is in the QB competition with TJack.

Hopefully negotiating his extension?

 

[theascension]

And if he signs with the Niners, we're doing them a favor as well. Giving away a draft pick in order to hand them a more developed backup for Kaepernick with insider information on how our offense functions.

The Niners already know all our 'tricks'.. that's why our last 2 games have been close. It's mainly talent v.s talent with us just barely inching over with more talent and less mistakes. That really doesn't matter at all. We're not Peyton Manning, we play predictable offensive football it wins football games.

 

[plyka]

If Jackson and Pryor were equal talents, then it wouldn't be a bad move to trade a 7th Round pick to make Jackson seven years younger and then sign him to a cap-friendly longterm deal.

Unfortunately, from what I have seen, Jackson and Pryor are not equal talents.

If that's true (and the comparison IMHO is BJ vs Pryor at least this year), then we cut him and move on. He wouldn't be the first or last 7th round pick that doesn't work out. This is a fishing expedition, and given Pryor's athleticism, it seems worth at least a kick of the tires (which is all a 7th rounder really is).

For every team, except the Seahawks, that may be true. However, we took Michael Bowie last year with the 36th pick in the 7th Round.

The year before that, the Seahawks took J.R. Sweezy and Greg Scruggs with their 7th Round picks.

And the year before that, they took Super Bowl MVP Malcolm Smith with their 7th Round pick.

For other teams, a 7th Rounder is a waste of time. For the Seahawks, it is an opportunity cost. In one of the deepest drafts in some time, that could mean a lot. The only way to justify it is to believe they will be able to sign pretty much any undrafted free agent they want this year . . . so why draft them in the 7th Round, when you can convince them to sign as a free agent? That logic appeals to me, a little.

You know this, I know this and PC and JS know this...and yet they still traded the 7th for Pryor. What does that mean? It means the people whom you praised SO highly for their decision making just made one --they thought that Pryor was so talented that they prefer him over who they would be able to get through the draft.

What sense does it make to tout their decision making in picking up players, then disagree with that decision making when they make a decision?

 

[RolandDeschain]

It's a 7th-rounder, and a hell of a late one at that; why are people even concerned?

 

[Zebulon Dak]

Don't worry i'm on it

You're doing THE LORD's work, friend.

 

[hawknation2014]

If Jackson and Pryor were equal talents, then it wouldn't be a bad move to trade a 7th Round pick to make Jackson seven years younger and then sign him to a cap-friendly longterm deal.

Unfortunately, from what I have seen, Jackson and Pryor are not equal talents.

If that's true (and the comparison IMHO is BJ vs Pryor at least this year), then we cut him and move on. He wouldn't be the first or last 7th round pick that doesn't work out. This is a fishing expedition, and given Pryor's athleticism, it seems worth at least a kick of the tires (which is all a 7th rounder really is).

For every team, except the Seahawks, that may be true. However, we took Michael Bowie last year with the 36th pick in the 7th Round.

The year before that, the Seahawks took J.R. Sweezy and Greg Scruggs with their 7th Round picks.

And the year before that, they took Super Bowl MVP Malcolm Smith with their 7th Round pick.

For other teams, a 7th Rounder is a waste of time. For the Seahawks, it is an opportunity cost. In one of the deepest drafts in some time, that could mean a lot. The only way to justify it is to believe they will be able to sign pretty much any undrafted free agent they want this year . . . so why draft them in the 7th Round, when you can convince them to sign as a free agent? That logic appeals to me, a little.

You know this, I know this and PC and JS know this...and yet they still traded the 7th for Pryor. What does that mean? It means the people whom you praised SO highly for their decision making just made one --they thought that Pryor was so talented that they prefer him over who they would be able to get through the draft.

What sense does it make to tout their decision making in picking up players, then disagree with that decision making when they make a decision?

It makes sense because no one is infallible. Being talented at picking under the radar players in the 7th Round does not make them INCAPABLE of executing a poor trade.

 

[godawg]

My friend here in SLO is a die-hard yet knowledgeable Raiders fan who says he can't believe how boneheaded his team was for trading Pryor. "That man has serious talent."

 

[-The Glove-]

My God, people... A 7th rounder for a rare athlete? Really? Some of you think we're going to let RW go because of it?

 

[-The Glove-]

If Jackson and Pryor were equal talents, then it wouldn't be a bad move to trade a 7th Round pick to make Jackson seven years younger and then sign him to a cap-friendly longterm deal.

Unfortunately, from what I have seen, Jackson and Pryor are not equal talents.

If that's true (and the comparison IMHO is BJ vs Pryor at least this year), then we cut him and move on. He wouldn't be the first or last 7th round pick that doesn't work out. This is a fishing expedition, and given Pryor's athleticism, it seems worth at least a kick of the tires (which is all a 7th rounder really is).

For every team, except the Seahawks, that may be true. However, we took Michael Bowie last year with the 36th pick in the 7th Round.

The year before that, the Seahawks took J.R. Sweezy and Greg Scruggs with their 7th Round picks.

And the year before that, they took Super Bowl MVP Malcolm Smith with their 7th Round pick.

For other teams, a 7th Rounder is a waste of time. For the Seahawks, it is an opportunity cost. In one of the deepest drafts in some time, that could mean a lot. The only way to justify it is to believe they will be able to sign pretty much any undrafted free agent they want this year . . . so why draft them in the 7th Round, when you can convince them to sign as a free agent? That logic appeals to me, a little.

You know this, I know this and PC and JS know this...and yet they still traded the 7th for Pryor. What does that mean? It means the people whom you praised SO highly for their decision making just made one --they thought that Pryor was so talented that they prefer him over who they would be able to get through the draft.

What sense does it make to tout their decision making in picking up players, then disagree with that decision making when they make a decision?

It makes sense because no one is infallible. Being talented at picking under the radar players in the 7th Round does not make them INCAPABLE of executing a poor trade.

That's a given. Remember Whitehurst? But how about you let it play out before you decide it is a poor trade

 

[hawknation2014]

It makes sense because no one is infallible. Being talented at picking under the radar players in the 7th Round does not make them INCAPABLE of executing a poor trade.

That's a given. Remember Whitehurst? But how about you let it play out before you decide it is a poor trade

It's interesting fodder to discuss the potential benefits and losses of trades without the benefit of hindsight.

I haven't said this is necessarily a poor trade; it's a decent trade with some minimal downside and some potential benefit.

 

[Geologic]

If Jackson and Pryor were equal talents, then it wouldn't be a bad move to trade a 7th Round pick to make Jackson seven years younger and then sign him to a cap-friendly longterm deal.

Unfortunately, from what I have seen, Jackson and Pryor are not equal talents.

If that's true (and the comparison IMHO is BJ vs Pryor at least this year), then we cut him and move on. He wouldn't be the first or last 7th round pick that doesn't work out. This is a fishing expedition, and given Pryor's athleticism, it seems worth at least a kick of the tires (which is all a 7th rounder really is).

For every team, except the Seahawks, that may be true. However, we took Michael Bowie last year with the 36th pick in the 7th Round.

The year before that, the Seahawks took J.R. Sweezy and Greg Scruggs with their 7th Round picks.

And the year before that, they took Super Bowl MVP Malcolm Smith with their 7th Round pick.

For other teams, a 7th Rounder is a waste of time. For the Seahawks, it is an opportunity cost. In one of the deepest drafts in some time, that could mean a lot. The only way to justify it is to believe they will be able to sign pretty much any undrafted free agent they want this year . . . so why draft them in the 7th Round, when you can convince them to sign as a free agent? That logic appeals to me, a little.

Are people forgetting we wasted a 4th round pick on a WR, Chris Harper to be exact, who we cut before he could make the active roster? A 7th round pick on someone who's this athletically gifted is not a bad idea.

 

[Blitzer88]

I'm very interested to see how this whole thing plays out.