Trade Kearse Discussion

[jdblack]

Most of the anti-Kearse sentiment is because we have tantalizing, NEW WRs that we want to see more of. Every target Kearse takes is one that we almost don't need to watch (at least in pre-season) because we already know what he's about.

What has happened when Richardson and Mathews get targets? What will happen when Lockett gets targets? Those are really exciting plays, and we subconsciously or consciously feel robbed when we are watching Kearse instead. Kearse targets are lost opportunities for Wilson to improve his trust with receivers who are probably better than Kearse. And we're paying 2.5M for those lost opportunities.

 

[Northwest Seahawk]

Seattle would be lucky to get a fourth round pick for Kearse.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

I think a Kearse trade or cut was tangent to adding Evan Mathis. Now thats a no go there is really no need to jettison his contract off the books.

The Best 5 WRs right now:

1. Baldwin
2. Lockett
3. Kearse
4. Matthews
5. Daniels (based more on versatility)

If Richardson was never injured, I dont think Kearse would have been offered the tender in the first place and the Seahawks would have let the market dictate his worth or they would have moved on, took back the tender after obtaining Lockett unless Kearse took less money.

 

[cacksman]

This thread should be renamed "why fans are not GM of the Seahawks"

Kearse is staying. Cary Williams is staying. Lets just move on.

So what surprise cut do you see this team making this year?

If not Kearse, then who? I'm not saying I know, but you seem to.

 

[cacksman]

I just parsed this thread, but we're tripping over 2.5M? I don't know. If Kearse is good enough to make the team he will make it, if he's not, he won't.

I haven't seen anyone in preseason that looks to be competing for Kearse's job yet though. Looks like a lock.

It is not that simple. I believe it was Schneider that said in an interview recently that the 53 man roster is never the best 53 players. A ton of things go into these decisions, such as years under club control, # of players that can serve specific roles, and obviously salary.

If JS is confident he can get 90% of the production from Norwood at 25% of the price, and the team could use the cap space (we could), then I could totally see Kearse being let go/traded for a conditional pick.

 

[NewJerseyHawk]

I'll play along.

A) Jimmy Graham makes Kearse better, avoiding having the play more snaps than he needs to in the slot.

B) Tyler Lockett is already a better player and a starter, but realistically, he is already a better WR than both Baldwin and Kearse.

C) Kearse can catch punts and return kickoffs, he is just not as good as Lockett as either.

D) if you fast forward to November, which player would you rather risk on kickoff returns....Kearse or Lockett....my answer would be Kearse, since Lockett provides a speed element that is lacking on the roster.

E) Kearse is more valuable to Seattle than he is to other rosters BUT, is he better than Cole Beasley (#3 WR) or Riley Cooper (Eagles) or whomever the #3 WR is on the Packers, Panthers, Saints or even Lions...YES he is a better #3 than most of those teams have.

The key is Kearse is affordable, reliable in more than one area of special teams and he is more trust worthy and durable than Norwood or Paul Richardson....Does anyone honestly think Norwood or Richardson at 166 pounds and off an ACL is more reliable than Kearse??

If one argued Kearse or Chris Matthews, I'd be more inclined to have a discussion....if you wanted to state the Lockette strictly focused on playing WR is better than Kearse, you might have an argument there as well.

At the same time, Lockette, Norwood or Richardson are not as good as Kearse is today, period and I think he's a #3 asked to do #2 WR things in our offense.

Tyler Lockette will be our #2 by Thanksgiving after Graham is established as Option #1.....Baldwin and Matthews can battle for #3 and Kearse #3A or #4 with Lockette.

I'd rather discuss real concerns like is Tye Smith going to cover Cole Beasley as our 3rd CB.....

 

[cacksman]

I'll play along.

A) Jimmy Graham makes Kearse better, avoiding having the play more snaps than he needs to in the slot.

Graham makes literally everyone on the team better

B) Tyler Lockett is already a better player and a starter, but realistically, he is already a better WR than both Baldwin and Kearse.

What

C) Kearse can catch punts and return kickoffs, he is just not as good as Lockett as either.

Agreed on the 2nd part.

D) if you fast forward to November, which player would you rather risk on kickoff returns....Kearse or Lockett....my answer would be Kearse, since Lockett provides a speed element that is lacking on the roster.

Lockett and it's not even close. That's kinda the EXACT thing he was drafted to do. Do you think Pete is scared of putting talented players on special teams? HINT: he's not. If you had been paying attention at all the last few years you'd know this.

E) Kearse is more valuable to Seattle than he is to other rosters BUT, is he better than Cole Beasley (#3 WR) or Riley Cooper (Eagles) or whomever the #3 WR is on the Packers, Panthers, Saints or even Lions...YES he is a better #3 than most of those teams have.

You cherry picked the teams that have had injuries/trades in the offseason to prove a point that has nothing to do with the topic. Their roster has nothing to do with what's best for the Seahawks.

The key is Kearse is affordable, reliable in more than one area of special teams and he is more trust worthy and durable than Norwood or Paul Richardson....Does anyone honestly think Norwood or Richardson at 166 pounds and off an ACL is more reliable than Kearse??

The argument is that he isn't worth his contract, relative to his competition. Richardson is not even close to 166 pounds, and here's where I start to feel stupid even responding to you.

If one argued Kearse or Chris Matthews, I'd be more inclined to have a discussion....if you wanted to state the Lockette strictly focused on playing WR is better than Kearse, you might have an argument there as well.
I don't need to name every single argument against Kearse, there are plenty.

At the same time, Lockette, Norwood or Richardson are not as good as Kearse is today, period and I think he's a #3 asked to do #2 WR things in our offense.

Tyler Lockette will be our #2 by Thanksgiving after Graham is established as Option #1.....Baldwin and Matthews can battle for #3 and Kearse #3A or #4 with Lockette.

What are you even saying? Baldwin and Matthews battling for a spot? I've just wasted 5 minutes of my life.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Why are so many people obsessed with trading away Kearse? He has a small salary, and aside from him all of our wide receivers are unknowns. Kearse is a known quantity that makes some mistakes, but is capable of having huge games. Aside from him we have Matthews who has only had significant playing time in one game, sure he did good, but was that just a one off thing? Richardson, whom many have been anointing, yet is still an unknown that was working against #3 or 4 DB's, Tyler Lockett, another young receiver that has never even played in the NFL yet, Ricardo Lockette, and various others. Aside from Baldwin we have NOBODY that is a known quantity in our receivers.

Kearse has his blunders, but he is a good deep ball specialist, and one of our only wide receivers that is able to high point the ball. Wilson also has good chemistry with Kearse. Given the amount of money that we would save, or the draft picks we would get from trading him, it wouldn't be worth it.

 

[Threedee]

I will say this about Kearse (or rather, I will post this list on his behalf):

-4th & 7
-Overtime
-Leg Catch (which would have set us up for victory if not for Bevell)

 

[Sports Hernia]

This thread should be renamed "why fans are not GM of the Seahawks"

Kearse is staying. Cary Williams is staying. Lets just move on.

So what surprise cut do you see this team making this year?

If not Kearse, then who? I'm not saying I know, but you seem to.

Norwood.

 

[Threedee]

Norwood and Matthews are potentially more valuable than Kearse because they are big-bodied receivers, which complete our needs on the field (pass catching TE, slot receiver, deep threat, ST threat, etc.), but they both need to prove themselves.

We still haven't seen anything from Norwood, although many would argue that Matthews is a proven commodity from limited appearances in major games.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Norwood and Matthews are potentially more valuable than Kearse because they are big-bodied receivers, which complete our needs on the field (pass catching TE, slot receiver, deep threat, ST threat, etc.), but they both need to prove themselves.

We still haven't seen anything from Norwood, although many would argue that Matthews is a proven commodity from limited appearances in major games.

Norwood seems really average to me. Would rather roll the dice on Matthews, who could mold into quite a weapon. I feel like you can find a Kevin Norwood on the waiver wire any time of the season.

I also don't think he'd be a surprise cut. He is absolutely buried on the depth chart right now, and smells like Chris Harper 2.0

 

[Hasselbeck]

D) if you fast forward to November, which player would you rather risk on kickoff returns....Kearse or Lockett....my answer would be Kearse, since Lockett provides a speed element that is lacking on the roster.

I'd rather discuss real concerns like is Tye Smith going to cover Cole Beasley as our 3rd CB.....

Outside of preseason, I can't recall a time we used Jermaine Kearse on returns. Its obvious that Lockett will have that job all year. That's what he was drafted to do. Antonio Brown is arguably the best WR in football and he still returns punts.. so I mean, Lockett will be capable of doing both.

As for the Tye Smith thing.. umm.. I'm trying to figure out why he's going to be the nickel corner? Will Blackmon is going to handle that until Lane is healthy. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Tye is only active if someone gets hurt (probably Simon since he seems to have a problem staying healthy). Top 4 DB's right now are Sherm, Cary, Blackmon, Simon .. and then Burley, Smith, and everyone else is kind of lumped together.

 

[Hasselbeck]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/NFL/status/635953351545487361[/tweet]

There's a potential trade partner. Don't get me wrong I don't hate either Kearse or Baldwin. But in the end, NFL is a business.

I've listed out some reasons for and against trading Kearse.

Reasons for:
1) Packers need a playmaker
2) We need cap room.
3) Kam is holding out. Bennett is thinking about it.
4) Our #1 receiver is really Jimmy Graham.
5) We're a run oriented team.
6) We're thinking of added some additional OL help

Reasons against:
1) Kearse is really consistent
2) Good rapport w/ Russ
3) Nice hometown story
4) Proven commodity w/ playoff experience

There's no reason to trade him to our biggest hurdle at a 3rd consecutive shot at Lombardi. This is so ridiculous I can't even grasp why you'd suggest such a thing. Point number 3 is absurd. Not only do you openly want to ship Kearse to play in a passing offense with the best QB in football.. you then want to cave on Kam AND Bennett.

Jermaine may not morph into a Golden Tate like WR outside of Seattle, but he would definitely bolster the Packers WR corps when they took a big blow by losing Jordy Nelson. Why do you think JS shipped Percy to the Jets last year for peanuts? (I don't think the lack of interest in him was what it was played out to be..) He didn't want any part of Percy haunting him down the road in the playoffs or in a pivotal game.

 

[TwistedHusky]

At some point, we are going to lose Kearse.

Then we are going to notice a lot of things we missed about the guy. Catching balls in traffic for one.

They did the same crap while Tate was here. Sure he was "easily replaceable". Well his being replaced meant we lost the SB. Because there is no way we lose the SB with Tate on that team.

We probably play better in the GB game too and so half our secondary does not have to half kill themselves trying to keep us in that game. Which means we don't end up having to play the SB with key people injured.

Yeah you can play what ifs all day but Tate was a guy that won us games, kept us in games and opened other guys up.

Kearse is a guy that makes contested catches, the kind of catches that become important in the playoffs.

Oh and he barely costs anything and would have little trade value because his strengths perfectly match Hawk play, but wouldn't work as well on many teams.

So we would end up trading a WR we would then miss, for the trade equivalent of a half a sandwich.

No.

Not even sure what people's problem is, Kearse has been productive and made some of the most important catches in Seahawk history.

 

[Rob12]

Norwood and Matthews are potentially more valuable than Kearse because they are big-bodied receivers, which complete our needs on the field (pass catching TE, slot receiver, deep threat, ST threat, etc.), but they both need to prove themselves.

We still haven't seen anything from Norwood, although many would argue that Matthews is a proven commodity from limited appearances in major games.

Kevin Norwood has done nothing in this league. Absolutely nothing. He's been buried on the depth chart in the preseason. He's nearly six months older than Jermaine Kearse, who has proven himself to at least have a very trusting on field relationship with our franchise quarterback, and has made some absolutely clutch catches. Also Norwood has Kearse by less than an inch and is 10 pounds lighter. I know you said potentially, but there's no way that I would rather have an older Kevin Norwood on this roster than Jermaine Kearse.

Kearse's drop rate is respectable. He's not a No. 2 receiver. But I am excited as hell to see what he can bring this year with guys Jimmy Graham and Tyler Lockett in the offense.

 

[dutchcoug]

At this point Kearse has 1 year left with the team, and have a feeling this is his last with the Seahawks. This thread is people undervaluing him because of his average skill set and drops and people overvaluing him because he's made some catches in big games (as well as some UW bias). End of the day, we tendered him for a reason and he won't be traded and the chances of him being cut are extremely low. Norwood has shown nothing that would make me want him to take a roster spot over Kearse. But unless Kearse shows more consistency and improves on the drops, he won't be back next year.