SI's Seahawk Off-Season Report Card: A-
- Thread starter hawknation2015
- Start date
HawkFan72
Active member
The Graham trade produced some mixed responses on this board, but it is pretty safe to say that it has been universally praised in the media.
NJSeahawk
Active member
Nice read, thanks for the link.
Overseasfan
New member
The Hawks managed to improve a team that was already the best in the NFL. That's a pretty good off-season to me. With GB staying stagnant and Dallas even losing an important part of their offense, I think there is a huge chance for us to make the Superbowl for the third time in a row.
MontanaHawk05
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 1, 2009
- Messages
- 17,914
- Reaction score
- 458
I don't see how anyone projects us as anything but the #1 spot. We've been to consecutive Super Bowls without any true gamebreaker at WR/TE. Now we have Jimmy Frickin' Graham.
Popeyejones
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2013
- Messages
- 5,525
- Reaction score
- 0
Definitely makes sense because of the addition of Graham, but I think this offseason for Seattle is still TBD, mostly because the success of this off-season will largely be determined by what end up happening with Wilson and Wagner.
They also siphoned even more from their O-Line and and invested draft capital in getting Graham (in addition to his salary), and poured a ton of draft capital into Tyler Lockett, and those things will also have to pan out for that grade to stick.
As over right now though, with TBD not being determined, A- sounds about right.
They also siphoned even more from their O-Line and and invested draft capital in getting Graham (in addition to his salary), and poured a ton of draft capital into Tyler Lockett, and those things will also have to pan out for that grade to stick.
As over right now though, with TBD not being determined, A- sounds about right.
Sports Hernia
Well-known member
Meh, I try not to put much stock in these things good or bad. The so called "experts" opinions on these things has zero effect on actual results. Interesting at times to look at but that's about it.
Seahawkfan80
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 11,219
- Reaction score
- 616
Uh oh,.,,does that mean we won the offseason??? Dont offseason winners kinda not do well during the season??? :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :stirthepot:
Popeyejones":3vfgws7c said:
I don't disagree with that. It's amazing too that the sheer gift/advantage of a 1st round talent for/on a 5th year option will not have been used to the advantage of JS and Co. even once under the new CBA.
RichNhansom
Active member
- Joined
- May 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,256
- Reaction score
- 5
I would like to know what held us back from an A+.
Maybe not getting Wilson and Wagner locked up but that is really the only thing I can think of.
Maybe not getting Wilson and Wagner locked up but that is really the only thing I can think of.
OP
OP
hawknation2015
New member
RichNhansom":2anli7o5 said:
Carry Williams is at least a slight downgrade over Maxwell, until he proves otherwise. Not that we had any choice given the outrageous salary the Eagles gave Maxwell.
We could have added an experienced starter at center or guard, or at least drafted a center with experience snapping the ball.
Other than that, I think this off-season was pretty close to an 'A' grade.
Graham is probably one of the Top 10 big receivers in league history.
Lockett is a dynamic play maker and returner.
Clark is a good athlete who was one of the college football's best run stoppers.
The three offensive linemen they drafted are all excellent athletes.
Locking up Cliff Avril last December was an underrated move.
Yup, things are looking mighty fine for the Seahawks this season.
kearly
New member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 15,975
- Reaction score
- 0
Seattle had one of their better drafts I thought. The Graham trade was a little risky given Graham's durability and the unknown of how he will fit the offense, but on paper it was a very good deal for Seattle. Rubin was also a bit of a gamble with bargain potential.
On the other hand, they also lost some good players in FA/Trade (Unger, Williams, Maxwell, etc) and have (so far) failed to ink Wilson and Wagner to extensions. There is still a decent shot that Wagner will receive an extension before next offseason. KJ Wright got his extension in December last year. With Wilson I've resigned myself to a Walter Jones contract battle 2.0.
I would say that "A-" feels pretty fair. We'll look back and say "A+" in a few years if the draft picks can translate their college performances to the pros.
On the other hand, they also lost some good players in FA/Trade (Unger, Williams, Maxwell, etc) and have (so far) failed to ink Wilson and Wagner to extensions. There is still a decent shot that Wagner will receive an extension before next offseason. KJ Wright got his extension in December last year. With Wilson I've resigned myself to a Walter Jones contract battle 2.0.
I would say that "A-" feels pretty fair. We'll look back and say "A+" in a few years if the draft picks can translate their college performances to the pros.
Popeyejones
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2013
- Messages
- 5,525
- Reaction score
- 0
Reasons why I'd drop the Seahawks from an "A" to an "A-" (remember that is a VERY small drop, so don't get upset please!)
In descending order:
1) Wagner and WIlson deals are both still question marks.
2) The Seahawks again gave up a first round pick to aquire a very well-compensated vet. I'm just generally opposed to giving up picks (and particularly high ones under the new CBA) for well-compensated talent, although JS clearly doesn't share my opinion on that one.
3) The hawks pilfered from their O-line to get Graham and didn't address their O-line (which was already a need) until day three.
4) The Hawks gave up a lot of draft capital (a 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th) to move up in the 3rd for Lockett, which is only noteworthy given that their primary need was a KR/PR. He can of course match this value by contributing to the passing game, but he was projected as a 3rd or 4th due to his return ability, that's what J.S. cited about him, and that's a lot for a return man. More generally I just think it's bad strategy to trade this many mid-round picks for one pick.
5) I know everyone disagrees with me but I think the Hawks overpaid for Cary Williams at the top of the FA market.
6) I thought JS handled the media condemnation of the Clark pick very poorly, which surprised me. He had to have known in advance that criticism for the selection would be coming, and I'm seriously surprised he wasn't also planned with a more adroit way to address it. (e.g. talk of "second chances", "overall character", "holding him accountable while still believing in him" was a no brainer; why he didn't go this route I don't know. It was a mistake).
Again though, before people get pissed off and start nitpicking these six things, I'm 1) just stating opiions, and 2) all six of them collectively are explaining a really miniscule drop from "A" to "A-". FWIW I'd personally put them closer to "B" though (with my own 9ers obviously an "F" :lol: )
In descending order:
1) Wagner and WIlson deals are both still question marks.
2) The Seahawks again gave up a first round pick to aquire a very well-compensated vet. I'm just generally opposed to giving up picks (and particularly high ones under the new CBA) for well-compensated talent, although JS clearly doesn't share my opinion on that one.
3) The hawks pilfered from their O-line to get Graham and didn't address their O-line (which was already a need) until day three.
4) The Hawks gave up a lot of draft capital (a 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th) to move up in the 3rd for Lockett, which is only noteworthy given that their primary need was a KR/PR. He can of course match this value by contributing to the passing game, but he was projected as a 3rd or 4th due to his return ability, that's what J.S. cited about him, and that's a lot for a return man. More generally I just think it's bad strategy to trade this many mid-round picks for one pick.
5) I know everyone disagrees with me but I think the Hawks overpaid for Cary Williams at the top of the FA market.
6) I thought JS handled the media condemnation of the Clark pick very poorly, which surprised me. He had to have known in advance that criticism for the selection would be coming, and I'm seriously surprised he wasn't also planned with a more adroit way to address it. (e.g. talk of "second chances", "overall character", "holding him accountable while still believing in him" was a no brainer; why he didn't go this route I don't know. It was a mistake).
Again though, before people get pissed off and start nitpicking these six things, I'm 1) just stating opiions, and 2) all six of them collectively are explaining a really miniscule drop from "A" to "A-". FWIW I'd personally put them closer to "B" though (with my own 9ers obviously an "F" :lol: )
OP
OP
hawknation2015
New member
Popeyejones":1ju3qa45 said:
How do you define "very well-compensated"? Graham's APY with the Seahawks is only $9 million, which I consider a bargain for one of the best receivers in the league. Is Torrey Smith very well-compensated with $8 million APY?
I would MUCH rather have Jimmy Graham than Torrey Smith and Arik Armstead (combined APY of $10.5 million).
hawknation2015":1oyffu0k said:
I 100% agree with that! Graham at $9 million vs Torrey Smith for $8 is highway robbery IMHO. But giving up a 1st and Max does balance the scales. How much? Who knows. I still think the scales of getting the #31 overall player on the top 100 far outweigh the #31 pick in the draft in the short term, and since it's a year to year league and the Hawks have no reason not to be in win now mode, it's hard to truly fault them. Then there's Max. Following an All-Pro year in 2012, he was abused by a rookie in his first game in Star Lotulelei, and has battled injuries since. But, he was healthy for the Divisional Playoffs and Star was out. With a new starter at center and a healthy Lotulelei and Shaq Thompson, do the Hawks equal 8/8 on third down and 3 TD passes on 3rd down even with Graham? Maybe so, I honestly don't know. I truly respect the A- ranking as it's just a talking point anyway, but I think it's only fair to say it's TBD as well.
Popeyejones":1e0ndcgg said:
I'd agree with everything you said except #2 and #6 (and 6 isn't all that big of a deal, which you already said).
A 1st round for Graham is a steal with his salary where it's at. I get what you're saying, that draft capital is worth more as you can lock up talent for cheaper, but the caveat is that you're not guaranteed that said pick will pan out. Or, it might pan out, but in a couple of years. There's uncertainty with a draft pick, whereas there isn't much (if any) uncertainty about Jimmy Graham. Tell me one GM that wouldn't have given a low 1st round pick for Graham. I bet you couldn't find one, at least one that's still employed as a GM. Because basically, that's what that trade was: Graham for a 1st and Unger for a 4th. While Unger for a 4th seems like a great deal for NO, Unger has been missing more and more games every year. It's a matter of time, and Center has proven to be a position you don't have to invest a lot of draft capital into to get production.
As for #6, and the Frank Clark deal, the Seahawks had a few different avenues they could've pursued. Yours was one, the other was more of the Patriots way, to be honest. It was basically "we vetted Frank. Moving on". They very briefly addressed it and dropped it. They didn't pander to the media with all the "feel good, second chance" type of hyperbole we normally hear, which is because the media likes to spout it. And guess what ? 2 weeks later it was a dead issue. It's been a very dull offseason and we've heard nothing about Frank Clark for well over a month. Which is exactly what the Seahawks FO wanted.
Hawks46":1olioniy said:
I'm not going to argue any of that but considering what they gave up for Lockett they may as well not have even had that 4th for Max at all. Far be it for me to question their draft genius, but Bill Barnwell at Grantland had a piece which stated the draft capital given up to get Lockett equalled the #27 pick in the draft, and they got Lockett at 69.
Popeyejones
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2013
- Messages
- 5,525
- Reaction score
- 0
Hawks46":3uu6ns2d said:
He's right now the highest paid TE in the league over the next 3 years. I think he's deserving of that, but he's a top paid TE this year and the top paid TE over the remaining life of his deal.
As for other teams that wouldn't make that deal, we don't know, but I think it's pretty clear that the Saints didn't get a better offer, as if they had there's no reason they wouldn't have taken it.
All that said, absolutely right that you know what you're getting with him which is never true of a draft pick. Spending draft capital for already well compensated talent in trade is a matter of perspective of course and comes down to the player in question, so yeah, I think we probably just have different preferences/hunches about the best way to do it.
Hawks46":3uu6ns2d said:
Again, probably just a matter of perspective. I think the "feel good" stuff (which by its nature is an admission of him having done wrong) would have resulted in a few days of criticism in the local media, whereas the full-throated defense backfired and the possible inadequacy of that vetting and the details of what occured in the face of JS's possible minimization of it became a national sport media story for a couple weeks.
OP
OP
hawknation2015
New member
Popeyejones":2d8bmk2d said:He's right now the highest paid TE in the league over the next 3 years. I think he's deserving of that, but he's a top paid TE this year and the top paid TE over the remaining life of his deal.
As for other teams that wouldn't make that deal, we don't know, but I think it's pretty clear that the Saints didn't get a better offer, as if they had there's no reason they wouldn't have taken it.
All that said, absolutely right that you know what you're getting with him which is never true of a draft pick. Spending draft capital for already well compensated talent in trade is a matter of perspective of course and comes down to the player in question, so yeah, I think we probably just have different preferences/hunches about the best way to do it.
You are misstating the facts, Popeye.
Graham's APY over the next three years is only $9 million with zero risk, i.e. dead money, if he gets hurt.
Julius Thomas's APY is $9.2 million. And Rob Gronkowski's APY is a little over $9 million.
Most teams would MUCH rather have Jimmy Graham than Torrey Smith/Arik Amstead ($10.5 million APY).
Popeyejones
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2013
- Messages
- 5,525
- Reaction score
- 0
hawknation2015":2sfy26pf said:
I have no idea what your motivation is, but per usual you're just making stuff up.
Graham's APY over the next three is 9, Thomas' is 8.6, and Gronkowski's is 7.4.
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seah ... my-graham/
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/jacksonville ... us-thomas/
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-england- ... ronkowski/
Do you just lie about stuff as a subtle form of trolling because you know I'll waste my time by correcting you? I don't get it.
hawknation2015":2sfy26pf said:
I know you always throw this stuff into the bottom of your responses to me to try to get under my skin or something, but it's always so wildly off-topic and desperate that I just find it bizarre. The time spent figuring out the right combination of salary for a 9ers draft pick and FA acquisition that's totally unrelated to the topic I'm discussing (trading picks for players) could have been much better spent.
Similar threads
