The annual bone-headed FO/FA move

[chris98251]

I once read that as a GM if you can hit on like 36 percent of your picks and deals your considered a success. Granted the better you are the harder it is to hit because many times your players don't move a tenured player off the roster. So 36 percent breaking down to a few players that make a impact a year.

Our team needed wholesale roster churn to get us on the right path, we jettisoned a huge amount of players and drafted and signed a large number that are impact players due to this. Schnieders ration decreases every year because it's hard to replace elite player unless you trade them or let a trickle effect of attrition happen.

It also means you need a plan and have to draft for a need and more targeted players to back fill making the picks and signings viewed much more under a microscope for success.

Drafts and FA's going forward people are going to know much more about our needs with a stable roster and make strategic moves to counter or jump ahead of us now. Makin John and Pete really having to play the poker and misdirection game a lot more to throw off the hounds.

 

[purpleneer]

Not sure if you did not bother to read the admittedly long explanations, if you just skimmed it and missed the meat, or just do not get it.

I will try to make this simpler. First off, I'm gonna flip you a little crap for saying this and then writing as much as you did. Just in fun though; my posts can also be like my soups, growing way beyond the original plan.

The FA process and the draft process have completely different objectives. But the nature of our signings in FA show that we seem to be using a very similar weighting/scoring system to id free agents vs draft picks. I have to really quibble with this statement. The are two methods that work together with one goal: to build a championship roster.

.

 

[Scottemojo]

very long, but did read

Lynch was and Graham were trades. You seem to treat their acquisition like free agent pickups, they were not.

Your original premise was bone headed moves. You have now expanded it to some sort of treatise on free agency being a different animal than the rest of their team building process.

You probably should have stuck with the original thought, boneheaded moves.

I personally don't think they have some separate philosophy for free agents or rookies or guys they trade for. I think it is way simpler than that.

They want players who compete. They occasionally get it wrong because humans can be really surprising creatures, both good and bad.
Cary Williams got freaked out by not fitting ON THE FIELD, and stopped competing. His last game he was not a press bail corner, he was a bail corner, and when it was clear he was more worried about getting beat deep every play than anything else, he got the mid game axe. Never saw the field again in Seattle. Not competing was the sin, though. As far as his acquisition, it was a terrible corner market, he had some pedigree, was a comparitive bargain, and fit their profile. I think they thought they could mold him in 2 months. THey were wrong. It happens. Blaming them for Kam feeling slighted is dumb, and anyone who does needs to watch less soap operas. Kam included.

Harvin was not acquired through some free agency method. First, he was a trade, not a signing, though the big contract made it feel like a free agent move. 2nd, that move is completely on Pete. Pete relied on his scouting and attempts to get Harvin to go to USC, not any reports of discord from Minnesota. Like many of us would do, he relied on first hand knowledge of a person over media reports. He was wrong.

But while discord was the reason Percy was traded for peanuts, Percy wasn't competing either. It wasn't as clear to see as what happened to Williams on the field in front of all our eyes, but I was watching the all 22 at the time, and there was a notable lack of effort from Percy that varied depending on his game involvement. The pressure on the OC to get him touches was compounded by him being a very unpolished route runner who starts taking plays off if he doesn't feel involved.
In less words, Percy was an entitled jerk, and the word entitled implies a lack of competing. Him being a total douchebag made it easier to let him go, but if you could ask Pete why it happened, I am certain he would spin it to Percy not competing is some way as the reason for the failed move. It was easily Pete's most boneheaded move because he relied on his own college scouting over real reports of a malcontent, but the actual results on the field were enough for even the most critical Seahawk fan to get why Pete wanted the guy.

My own long reply ends this way. I think every move should exist in a vacuum. examine it on it's own merits, and use competition as the 100 watt bulb for your examination. There is no real philosophy other than that. Overpaid free agents, bargain free agents, draftees, squeaky clean guys like Wilson and dirty rep guys like Percy and Frank Clark are here for one reason, Pete and the people he leads think they can compete in practice and on the field. When they stop thinking that, the guy is gone.

 

[Largent80]

Without typing walls of text it boils down to rolling the dice. They either come up boxcars, or snake eyes.

 

[King Dog]

I'm in the minority here, but I like the line heading into next season. I like Gilliam at LT and Glow adding immediate competence. Sokoli will be a factor as well. This group is going to grow and mature together, something we haven't seen under Pete.

Ewwwwwww :34853_doh:

 

[TwistedHusky]

Scott,

The bone-headed moves that cost us the most are are primarily high cost FAs from outside (ie not our own FAs).

The team has more talent than it did when trades for guys like Lynch, Avril and Bennett were necessary. We were not trying to aggregate talent to get into the window (which you can argue was happening giving the massive amount of roster moves we made during that period), we are trying to either stay in the window or give ourselves the best chance to win compete in the playoffs.

So instead of a group of moves where some work out and some do not, the FAs and trades (and I admittedly lump FAs and trades for high dollars players in the same category here because the failure factors and impacts are the same. Though often the trades are soon to be FAs, so...they are likely close anyway.

In both cases the factors to consider are:

1 - Can the experience the player has integrate into the existing team & culture? (ie will they fit?)

2 - Is the production obtained elsewhere going to be applicable in our system or are we paying for production elsewhere that we may never receive?

3 - Can the player contribute immediately? Does this contribution complement or edge out contributions from our existing pieces or pieces we have in waiting?

Additionally the costs of failure are the immediate impact on the salary cap and the resulting loss of cap room that can cost existing players as they hit their FA walls. You also have to consider the existing assets (both in players you trade or players you release to make salary room for the new addition).

So you have high cost, high uncertainty decisions that are made not in groups, like drafts, UDFAs and lower tier FAs (which you can afford to sign a handful to). This makes the cost of misses potentially resonate for years.

In my mind, because of the similarities high cost FAs and trades SHOULD be grouped into the same category. And while past roster moves like Lynch, Bennett & Avril worked out when we had plenty of holes up and down the line, less salary cap considerations to be constrained by, and other factors that made the hits more valuable and the misses less of an issue.....8M or 6M for an unproductive player NOW is simply not a risk this team can afford. So these types of moves are what I consider the "bone-headed" moves that are killing us.

To be fair, the biggest, smash my head against the wall factor that makes me call moves like this bone-headed are that the team consistently ignores red flags and pays full or inflated prices for guys that have a track record of bad habits/bad behavior that we feel won't follow us here. And it invariably does, but even so - high cost trades and FAs are bad risks that rarely pay off.

(I would also argue that if you honestly thought that nobody should have seen Kam getting upset by the signing of an outside FA that was materially worse than he was, you don't know or just are not applying basic organizational management. People naturally bristle when they see others rewarded more than they are for less work/productivity. Especially when those people are constantly being told how significant their contribution is. EVERYONE in the FO should have anticipated Kam's reaction and went right to Kam, Earl & Sherman with the issue so they could get a resolution everyone could live with. Whether you have authority is immaterial, you have to get buyin from the stakeholders.)

 

[bmorepunk]

I love this thread, a way to complain before there's anything to complain about.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Nothing to complain about?

Well that is super exciting. So the Seahawks are playing in a SB tomorrow after winning the SB last year? No?

Wait. We didn't win the SB last year?

Do you think last year not having Tate because we kept Harvin might have helped?

And we didn't get to the SB this year? You think that maybe if we hadn't peed away salary and losses on a piece of crap failing CB from another team that we might have had more wins enough not to have to travel in one week from playing in an icebox to playing in a swamp?

And maybe, just maybe having a starting center would have gotten us a few extra wins, or at least Rawls might have been healthy? (Remember it was that guy bulldozing through unblocked that got Rawls, forced him to turn around and then humped on his back - that injured him).

I highly doubt if we don't make those moves that we are squeaking into the 6th slot to get into the playoffs.

Just remember, that with all that went against us in Carolina, we lost by a TD.

Seems reasonable if the last big moves screwed us - to be wary they don't put it again.

 

[firebee]

very long, but did read

In less words, Percy was an entitled jerk, and the word entitled implies a lack of competing. Him being a total douchebag made it easier to let him go, but if you could ask Pete why it happened, I am certain he would spin it to Percy not competing is some way as the reason for the failed move. It was easily Pete's most boneheaded move because he relied on his own college scouting over real reports of a malcontent, but the actual results on the field were enough for even the most critical Seahawk fan to get why Pete wanted the guy.
.

Let's not put Percy entirely on PCs head. It wasn't just his own college scouting over the reports of a malcontent that led to Harvin coming to Seattle. Bevell was OC in Minnesota when Harvin was there and had 1st hand knowledge of what type of player Harvin was in the locker room and on the field. It's a guarantee that Bevell had a lot of input on acquiring Harvin and approved the move as well.

 

[Scottemojo]

Scott,

The bone-headed moves that cost us the most are are primarily high cost FAs from outside (ie not our own FAs).

The team has more talent than it did when trades for guys like Lynch, Avril and Bennett were necessary. We were not trying to aggregate talent to get into the window (which you can argue was happening giving the massive amount of roster moves we made during that period), we are trying to either stay in the window or give ourselves the best chance to win compete in the playoffs.

So instead of a group of moves where some work out and some do not, the FAs and trades (and I admittedly lump FAs and trades for high dollars players in the same category here because the failure factors and impacts are the same. Though often the trades are soon to be FAs, so...they are likely close anyway.

In both cases the factors to consider are:

1 - Can the experience the player has integrate into the existing team & culture? (ie will they fit?)

2 - Is the production obtained elsewhere going to be applicable in our system or are we paying for production elsewhere that we may never receive?

3 - Can the player contribute immediately? Does this contribution complement or edge out contributions from our existing pieces or pieces we have in waiting?

Additionally the costs of failure are the immediate impact on the salary cap and the resulting loss of cap room that can cost existing players as they hit their FA walls. You also have to consider the existing assets (both in players you trade or players you release to make salary room for the new addition).

So you have high cost, high uncertainty decisions that are made not in groups, like drafts, UDFAs and lower tier FAs (which you can afford to sign a handful to). This makes the cost of misses potentially resonate for years.

In my mind, because of the similarities high cost FAs and trades SHOULD be grouped into the same category. And while past roster moves like Lynch, Bennett & Avril worked out when we had plenty of holes up and down the line, less salary cap considerations to be constrained by, and other factors that made the hits more valuable and the misses less of an issue.....8M or 6M for an unproductive player NOW is simply not a risk this team can afford. So these types of moves are what I consider the "bone-headed" moves that are killing us.

To be fair, the biggest, smash my head against the wall factor that makes me call moves like this bone-headed are that the team consistently ignores red flags and pays full or inflated prices for guys that have a track record of bad habits/bad behavior that we feel won't follow us here. And it invariably does, but even so - high cost trades and FAs are bad risks that rarely pay off.

(I would also argue that if you honestly thought that nobody should have seen Kam getting upset by the signing of an outside FA that was materially worse than he was, you don't know or just are not applying basic organizational management. People naturally bristle when they see others rewarded more than they are for less work/productivity. Especially when those people are constantly being told how significant their contribution is. EVERYONE in the FO should have anticipated Kam's reaction and went right to Kam, Earl & Sherman with the issue so they could get a resolution everyone could live with. Whether you have authority is immaterial, you have to get buyin from the stakeholders.)

Once again, a lot of words.
Kam getting pissed is on Kam. He makes really good SS money, and if he can't see that, it is on him. The front office is not responsible for how he sees things. You trying to say it is doesn't make it true.

No matter what you say, trading for Lynch was a big ass risk, but you don't criticize it because that particular risk worked out. And trades will never be the same as free agent signings.

And the moves are not "killing us". Seattle is in the mix for the Lombardi every year right now. A half dozen of the 12 playoff teams of the 32 in the NFL have a legit shot at that trophy every year, and we were one of those 6 this year. In the cap era, that is damn good football. And damn good football planning.

 

[jammerhawk]

Exactly my point, Percy motivated and "happy" could be a geniuine force. Those who scouted the player saw it in spades, and so did we rarely. The team took a risk on his health and made a luxury pick, it could have been amazing if the player was not suffering from a personality disorder he'd mostly kept hidden, and he got paid b/c the team wanted him happy and motivated. However deep down though he was a malcontent, even when paid. He was a malcontent and when the true 'Percy' was revealed we saw Pete get rid of him as he was a genuine team cancer and only willing to play on 'Percy's' agenda. Blaming anyone but Percy is freaking rubbish, historical reconstructionism, blame game nonsense. Go ahead with it but you'll never convince me that Percy wasn't really the whole problem.

Bevell knew Percy to be a very exceptionally talented athlete, and he knew the player would potentially be special in Seattle, if he could be incorporated into his O, so did John and Pete, trouble is Percy only was interested in Percy and not joining any team but team Percy. Seattle for sure overpaid for what this head case delivered, however I do thank him for that XLVIII kickoff return that sealed the W, even though the team around Percy would have undoubtedly got it done without him. That was he only really legit contribution here. It was clearly apparent prior him leaving he was not 'all in' by any stretch, too many stories, too many questionable unavailable days, he was a malingerer, and I was glad to see him gone so the Percy questions would be over. It got tedious, will he play this week, what is he health status, blah, blah? He became a true 'whatever', an expensive distraction, he had to go and was gone as soon as he publicly put himself ahead of the team, the team shipped him out. C'ya! After that overdue severence the stories became public, he genuinely was a cancer. He was a head case and after the fact clearly trading for him was a mistake. That said does anyone remember those 3 consecutive Seahawks TDs that were all but one called back? He could be amazing. He did have a special ability to take over a game, trouble is he didn't often feel that 'Percy' needed to play. Imagine how frustrating that was to the coaches who could see his exceptional ability consistently unrealized. He certainly was confusing to me.

I'm sorry but blaming Pete, John, Bevell, or anyone else but Percy for his failure here blames the wrong guy. Percy will soon be out of the league, having burned his bridges behind him, he refuses to commit to being anything more than what he wants to be, but has the physical ability to be an OPOY but won't ever be because he is a head case. Too bad.

Making personnel mistakes is part of the deal for any front office, nothing ventured, nothing gained. I for one think nobody is perfect and for sure we all make mistakes. Percy was a mistake, but he could have been special. Certainly Cary Williams was a mistake but he did have potential. Frequently numerous draft picks don't work out, free agent acquisitions often don't pay off. You do need to try and keep on working it, and this FO is doing it better than it has ever been done here before. I like the attitude of occasionally going big and not going home, sometimes you need to swing for the fence. When Graham finally gets incorporated here we all will agree that trade was a smart move, one of many made by them. Already around the league the Hawks FO commends mad respect. It's hard to do well, and they are kicking rears doing it.

 

[kearly]

I'm in the minority here, but I like the line heading into next season. I like Gilliam at LT and Glow adding immediate competence. Sokoli will be a factor as well. This group is going to grow and mature together, something we haven't seen under Pete.

I don't even think the Seahawks FO knows who's going to be starting on the 2016 OL right now, so it's too early to like or dislike it.

Personally, I think they are going to blow it up. Britt is looking like a bust at this point. Okung and Sweezy might both be gone. I don't think Pete thinks very highly of Lewis or Nowak (he cut Nowak and then damned Lewis with faint praise). And Gilliam was one of the very worst tackles in the league last season by PFF's numbers (like all PFF grades, it is to be taken with a grain of salt). Sokoli is the Jameson Konz of the OL. And Glowinsky is... don't get me wrong I liked his college videos... a little over-hyped on these boards.

Not only is the line likely going to be overhauled, but it will probably be a 2-3 year project.

But that's okay, lots of great offenses have horrible OL. You can cover for a lot with the spread.

 

[TwistedHusky]

"Kam getting pissed is on Kam. He makes really good SS money, and if he can't see that, it is on him. The front office is not responsible for how he sees things. You trying to say it is doesn't make it true."

Yeah. No.

If you are in charge of people, it is your responsibility to understand how to deal with their concerns, their frustrations and their own needs - within the organization. To say that management should not need to anticipate human reactions to decisions they make is laughable at best. People with less authority submarine and sabotage deals ALL THE TIME. Just wishing it wouldn't happen won't change that.

Kam had every reason to be pissed.

He was the MVP of the SB in everything but votes. He was routinely compared to HOF safeties like Lott where those guys were saying he was better than they were.

His play at safety allowed him to shut down the middle of the field, almost remove the threat of some of the TEs, and still shut down the run game. And he was the hammer in the entire secondary that made the play so physical.

Couple that with strong safeties having one of the shortest career lengths of a defender in the NFL, and the new guy coming in and getting a better contact that a near HOF safety that tilts the field routinely, and yes he had every right to be livid.

While most teams have several other defensive players that are higher important/impact than SS, Kam was a linchpin of our defense.

I would have held out too.

Management should have seen it, they did not. Only a moron thinks that one of his star employees is going to be completely OK with seeing some scrub come in and get offered earning #s that beat what he/she offered that star.

(It should be noted that nobody on either camp has even suggested this is the reason Kam held out, but because the reaction is so standard - it became an obvious point of concern. So some of you are arguing the FO should not have forseen what everyone else BUT the FO considers an obvious reaction....)

That was foreseeable and a misstep by the FO in every sense of the word.

That decision and the trade of our center resulted in us not playing tomorrow. So if the FO can stay the hell out of signing guys from other teams for big contracts, whether after a trade or a FA deal...that would be great. Because they might have made a few good choices early, but they suck at it now.

The Big Signings are just turning into big failures, all over the place. Meanwhile those failures squandered one year of a SB window, and those are finite.

PS I think the Seahawks traded a 4th and 6th for Lynch in 2010. And then did not sign him to his first "big" deal until 2012. It was nowhere near the risk you are implying, I think he had already had his first 1000 yard season. Nothing like the deals we got stuck with for Harvin, Graham or CJ. So no...the Lynch trade isn't relevant. I am specifically calling out high cost deals, often above market, with big downside when they blow up.

 

[bjornanderson21]

Everyone is allowed a hiccup or two when you have draft classes like Lockett, Rawls, Clark, and trade a 5th for McCray your allowed some rope.

Cary Williams was one, but what was the second? Keeping Nowak?

Coming away with 2 starters in a draft is considered average.

Out of the last 3 drafts they have had 2 below-average drafts and 1 average draft.

They have been average or below for 3 years. That means only HALF of Schneider's drafts have been above average.

If you think last year's draft class excuses a boneheaded move then you have not been paying enough attention to the NFL.

 

[bjornanderson21]

What boned headed move have they made in the past that you are making such claim about. So far everything they have touched has turned to gold.

I saw Cary William might be the only one. But the great news is this team cuts bait so quickly.

DEAR LORD!

When will people stop pretending that getting rid of a bad player makes it all better?

He still took up cap space last year and played poorly and hurt the team.

Cutting him means Seattle is taking a dead cap hit in 2016 (supposedly $2.3m).


The Seahawks did not undo their mistake by getting rid of him. He still cost us last year and this year.

How many times do i have to explain to you guys that GOOD GMs are the ones who AVOID making the stupid deals in the first place.

Making moves that turn so bad so quickly is NOT what you want from a GM.

 

[chris98251]

What boned headed move have they made in the past that you are making such claim about. So far everything they have touched has turned to gold.

I saw Cary William might be the only one. But the great news is this team cuts bait so quickly.

DEAR LORD!

When will people stop pretending that getting rid of a bad player makes it all better?

He still took up cap space last year and played poorly and hurt the team.

Cutting him means Seattle is taking a dead cap hit in 2016 (supposedly $2.3m).


The Seahawks did not undo their mistake by getting rid of him. He still cost us last year and this year.

How many times do i have to explain to you guys that GOOD GMs are the ones who AVOID making the stupid deals in the first place.

Making moves that turn so bad so quickly is NOT what you want from a GM.

Being a good GM is not holding on to mistakes, show me a perfect GM that never makes mistakes or takes chances. I'll wait I know you have to have a list to show us.

 

[bjornanderson21]

Pete has been true to competition, for the most part.
and sometimes in a competition, the losers become pretty plain to see. calling them boneheaded feels overly critical to me.

Cary Williams for instance. Did it work? Nope. But then again, had they tried to take a veteran player who fit the CB profile they have here in Seattle and make him a cover 3 press corner before? Nope. And I doubt they will try it again. Doing it repeatedly will be boneheaded, doing it once is the learning process.

Though while here I am criticizing the use of the word boneheaded, I have called the lack of a solid plan at center "hubris" a bunch of times this year. Thinking Nowak could play from day one was to me as big a mistake as signing Harvin. One mistake threatened team chemistry off the field and was more than our playcaller could manage on the field, the other was dangerous to the health and evolution of our QB. In fact, by that standard, the Nowak decision was a bigger mistake than the Harvin deal.

But the front office moved on from both mistakes fairly quickly, and lightning fast by NFL standards. Which cannot be overstated as a very awesome thing. Admitting mistakes is one of the most common NFL hindrances to team progress.

I still am not a big fan of the Graham trade, but I understand it. The plan to have superior athletes at all positions on the line is one I still do not get. I get the theory, don't misunderstand me there, I just don't get the practical application. Good linemen communicate well, have intuition as a strength, good centers are a second set of eyes for the QB, and this plan to be uber athletic at the OL seems to ignore those qualities over a love of combine numbers and aggression. Which is why I call it hubris. If in two years Sokoli is kicking ass at center I will regret my words, but I really kind of doubt it happens.

In no universe is Nowak starting anywhere near as bad as the harvin trade.

Huge contract + valuable draft picks + almost 0 production + dividing the lockerroom has already made the Harvin trade the worst or second worst trade in NFL history.

Did nowak take up the draft picks Harvin did? Nope.

Did Nowak make like $20m to play a few games? Nope.

It can be debated who was worse on the field, especially with our offense changing to fit Harvin.

Did Nowak cause lockerroom problems? Nope.


They would need to trade away a 1st, 3rd and 7th or whatever, AND give Nowak the same contract as Harvin in order for them to be equal.

And you have the audacity to say Nowak was worse?

Percy cost us a perfect 19-0 season in 2013. If we had just signed a decent WR who actually played we would have gone 19-0 AND we would have been better positioned to win LAST YEAR because we would have had more cap space AND maybe one or two of those draft picks would have been used on good players.

But thanks for the laugh....nowak worse than harvin trade....that's classic

 

[bjornanderson21]

Exactly my point, Percy motivated and "happy" could be a geniuine force. Those who scouted the player saw it in spades, and so did we rarely. The team took a risk on his health and made a luxury pick, it could have been amazing if the player was not suffering from a personality disorder he'd mostly kept hidden, and he got paid b/c the team wanted him happy and motivated. However deep down though he was a malcontent, even when paid. He was a malcontent and when the true 'Percy' was revealed we saw Pete get rid of him as he was a genuine team cancer and only willing to play on 'Percy's' agenda. Blaming anyone but Percy is freaking rubbish, historical reconstructionism, blame game nonsense. Go ahead with it but you'll never convince me that Percy wasn't really the whole problem.

Bevell knew Percy to be a very exceptionally talented athlete, and he knew the player would potentially be special in Seattle, if he could be incorporated into his O, so did John and Pete, trouble is Percy only was interested in Percy and not joining any team but team Percy. Seattle for sure overpaid for what this head case delivered, however I do thank him for that XLVIII kickoff return that sealed the W, even though the team around Percy would have undoubtedly got it done without him. That was he only really legit contribution here. It was clearly apparent prior him leaving he was not 'all in' by any stretch, too many stories, too many questionable unavailable days, he was a malingerer, and I was glad to see him gone so the Percy questions would be over. It got tedious, will he play this week, what is he health status, blah, blah? He became a true 'whatever', an expensive distraction, he had to go and was gone as soon as he publicly put himself ahead of the team, the team shipped him out. C'ya! After that overdue severence the stories became public, he genuinely was a cancer. He was a head case and after the fact clearly trading for him was a mistake. That said does anyone remember those 3 consecutive Seahawks TDs that were all but one called back? He could be amazing. He did have a special ability to take over a game, trouble is he didn't often feel that 'Percy' needed to play. Imagine how frustrating that was to the coaches who could see his exceptional ability consistently unrealized. He certainly was confusing to me.

I'm sorry but blaming Pete, John, Bevell, or anyone else but Percy for his failure here blames the wrong guy. Percy will soon be out of the league, having burned his bridges behind him, he refuses to commit to being anything more than what he wants to be, but has the physical ability to be an OPOY but won't ever be because he is a head case. Too bad.

Making personnel mistakes is part of the deal for any front office, nothing ventured, nothing gained. I for one think nobody is perfect and for sure we all make mistakes. Percy was a mistake, but he could have been special. Certainly Cary Williams was a mistake but he did have potential. Frequently numerous draft picks don't work out, free agent acquisitions often don't pay off. You do need to try and keep on working it, and this FO is doing it better than it has ever been done here before. I like the attitude of occasionally going big and not going home, sometimes you need to swing for the fence. When Graham finally gets incorporated here we all will agree that trade was a smart move, one of many made by them. Already around the league the Hawks FO commends mad respect. It's hard to do well, and they are kicking rears doing it.

1. There is no such thing as a "luxury pick" in the NFL. It simply does not exist.

2. There is no such thing as a "luxury huge contract" in the NFL. It simply does not exist.

3. NONE OF THOSE THINGS EXIST!!!!


PS. Harvin's failures are not due to him "not being happy". He is not a WR. He is a RB who can only run to the outside and occasionally go on routes. He is an extremely incomplete player, like a LB who can't tackle, a CB who can't track a football, or an offensive lineman who can't block.

 

[bjornanderson21]

What boned headed move have they made in the past that you are making such claim about. So far everything they have touched has turned to gold.

I saw Cary William might be the only one. But the great news is this team cuts bait so quickly.

DEAR LORD!

When will people stop pretending that getting rid of a bad player makes it all better?

He still took up cap space last year and played poorly and hurt the team.

Cutting him means Seattle is taking a dead cap hit in 2016 (supposedly $2.3m).


The Seahawks did not undo their mistake by getting rid of him. He still cost us last year and this year.

How many times do i have to explain to you guys that GOOD GMs are the ones who AVOID making the stupid deals in the first place.

Making moves that turn so bad so quickly is NOT what you want from a GM.

Being a good GM is not holding on to mistakes, show me a perfect GM that never makes mistakes or takes chances. I'll wait I know you have to have a list to show us.

Of course every GM makes mistakes.

The key is avoiding stupid mistakes that are easily avoided.

Example: The Hawks had no real need for a RB when we drafted Michael. We had MUCH MUCH MUCH bigger needs, but not only did Schneider draft a position we didn't need, he REACHED on a position of very little need.

There was very little chance of that turning into a GOOD move. Schneider stacked the odds against himself and it was no surprise that it turned into a wasted pick.


As for Harvin, the day we made the trade i predicted:

1. He would play 0 games in 2013 (i was off by 1)
2. He wouldn't score any TDs (he ended up with 1 in 2014 when refs didnt see he stepped out twice)
3. He would be off the team before start of 2015 season.

Harvin clearly had injury issues which should have SERIOUSLY reduced his new salary. He was coming off his only good season (in a contract year...), and it was already painfully obvious that he was less of a WR and more of a RB due to his poor route running. Adding another RB essentially means sharing the rock with Lynch and that doesnt make us better. Then you add his HORRIBLE ATTITUDE and behavior problems since high school and it all adds up to STAYING AS FAR AWAY FROM HIM AS POSSIBLE.

Cary Williams was never good, and yet they paid him very well and that HAD TO upset some of the hawks who had been here a while and outperforming their deals.

Giving out bad contracts to players FROM OTHER TEAMS makes the Hawks look tone-deaf when it comes to their own players.

Every GM makes mistakes, but there are mistakes that good GMs don't really make, and Schneider makes too many of them.

 

[chris98251]

Of course every GM makes mistakes.

The key is avoiding stupid mistakes that are easily avoided.

Example: The Hawks had no real need for a RB when we drafted Michael. We had MUCH MUCH MUCH bigger needs, but not only did Schneider draft a position we didn't need, he REACHED on a position of very little need.

There was very little chance of that turning into a GOOD move. Schneider stacked the odds against himself and it was no surprise that it turned into a wasted pick.


As for Harvin, the day we made the trade i predicted:

1. He would play 0 games in 2013 (i was off by 1)
2. He wouldn't score any TDs
3. He would be off the team before start of 2015 season.

Harvin clearly had injury issues which should have SERIOUSLY reduced his new salary. He was coming off his only good season (in a contract year...), and it was already painfully obvious that he was less of a WR and more of a RB due to his poor route running. Adding another RB essentially means sharing the rock with Lynch and that doesnt make us better. Then you add his HORRIBLE ATTITUDE and behavior problems since high school and it all adds up to STAYING AS FAR AWAY FROM HIM AS POSSIBLE.

Cary Williams was never good, and yet they paid him very well and that HAD TO upset some of the hawks who had been here a while and outperforming their deals.

Giving out bad contracts to players FROM OTHER TEAMS makes the Hawks look tone-deaf when it comes to their own players.

Every GM makes mistakes, but there are mistakes that good GMs don't really make, and Schneider makes too many of them.

So Alexander was a wasted pick by your standards also because we had Watters, Lynch was a wasted trade also because he had character issues in Buffalo, Bennett was a waste as well because we already had Clemons and Bryant and two other DT's. Avril a wasted pick up as well since it was a duplicate need when we clearly need Lineman on the offense. Graham a wasted trade and too expensive when we already have Willson.

Schnider is clearly incompentent, my lord a GM that has managed to put a team together that has been in the playoffs every year and to two Super Bowls has no clue about talent whatsoever.

We clearly should bring in a better GM and a Coach that can win a Super Bowl every year, we are not meeting expectations and wasting everyones time by falling short of our goal.