Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

"Holdout" news of Earl Thomas

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:52 pm
  • IndyHawk wrote:
    massari wrote:LB Jaylon Smith straight up for ET. Do you do it?

    God no...
    The guy has drop foot from nerve damage..
    You give up an OL with a pick instead.

    I don't know, he's risky but maybe worth it.


    I don't think they'd give up an OL like Martin, Frederick or Smith. Maybe La'el Collins+2nd for ET...

    I'd be interested in taking a chance on DE/OLB Randy Gregory as part of some sort of package as well...
    massari
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1122
    Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:58 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Thu Feb 01, 2018 6:49 pm
  • massari wrote:LB Jaylon Smith straight up for ET. Do you do it?

    LOL, oh wait, you’re serious??? The guy has a serious case of drop foot, and a lot of *allas fans don’t want him on the field period. For me talks would “start” with Zach Martin plus high draft picks. I’d still rather re-up ET though.
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24044
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Thu Feb 01, 2018 6:54 pm
  • massari wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:
    massari wrote:LB Jaylon Smith straight up for ET. Do you do it?

    God no...
    The guy has drop foot from nerve damage..
    You give up an OL with a pick instead.

    I don't know, he's risky but maybe worth it.


    I don't think they'd give up an OL like Martin, Frederick or Smith. Maybe La'el Collins+2nd for ET...

    I'd be interested in taking a chance on DE/OLB Randy Gregory as part of some sort of package as well...

    No Martin plus goodies, Then no deal. They don’t want to give up top OL then they don’t get the best FS in the league.
    Seattle doesn’t HAVE TO deal ET. JS’s job isnt to make the *allas Cowboys better, it’s to make the Hawks better.
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24044
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Thu Feb 01, 2018 7:41 pm
  • massari wrote:LB Jaylon Smith straight up for ET. Do you do it?

    Yes, but only if it is the best offer out there.
    I am of the opinion that Earl should be moved for the best offer, regardless of what the offer is. In 2011 and 2012 when you could see this team had a shot to be something special, you could see that they were building something, a big part of that was the mentality of the players and the culture of the team. They were hungry and there seemed to be a brotherhood, particularly on the defensive side. That has been lost. It started with Bennett constantly complaining about his contract, then the signing of Williams, talks about Irvin's contract, and Kam's holdout. Last year we had Sherman's antics, and now we have Earl openly talking about playing elsewhere and an apparent conflict with Wags. Pete cleaned house with the coaches; now it is time to clear out any players who no longer have that fire and no longer fit a winning team culture. Rebuild the culture first so that the new guys who come in, draft and free agent, are coming into a winning environment.
    Sun Tzu
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 80
    Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:45 am
    Location: Idaho


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 5:21 am
  • Where is this Jaylon Smith thing coming from?

    Pretending it's real, where would Jaylon Smith play?

    After the Hawks trade ET3 for Jaylon Smith are they gonna get rid of KJ Wright or Bobby Wagner, because Smith definitely doesn't play SAM.

    Do you guys even Seahawk?

    ;) :2thumbs:
    User avatar
    Popeyejones
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4625
    Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:58 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 6:15 am
  • Popeyejones wrote:Where is this Jaylon Smith thing coming from?

    Pretending it's real, where would Jaylon Smith play?

    After the Hawks trade ET3 for Jaylon Smith are they gonna get rid of KJ Wright or Bobby Wagner, because Smith definitely doesn't play SAM.

    Do you guys even Seahawk?

    ;) :2thumbs:

    You notice that I said, only if it is the best offer, and commented at this point I trade him away regardless of the return. It clears cap (so the return is actually Smith plus free agent/s), and begins to repair team culture. Read first, respond second.
    I could go into a half dozen points as to why the second comment is narrow minded but I'll leave it at 3. First, linebacker is currently the biggest depth issue for Seattle (anyone notice some special teams weaknesses this year?). Second, when Jaylon Smith came out he was considered a potential SAM if he gained some size/strength. Third, KJ has and can play SAM, and, as he slows down, moving him to SAM and reducing his snap count is not necessarily a bad thing (if Tical were still around I'd get a lecture on KJ's cover skills from the WILL right about now), particularly if it allows you to get your best 11 football players on the field.
    Sun Tzu
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 80
    Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:45 am
    Location: Idaho


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 7:30 am
  • It would be an utterly stupid move by the FO to make a trade like that.

    But I suppose I wouldn't put it past them.

    The idea of trading for a linebacker, in spite of our challenges with having an adequate SAM is probably one of the most ridiculous uses of trade capital I can imagine.

    We have very specific challenges being able to scout or develop certain kinds of players. LB is not one of those. We haven't found an adequate SAM because we really are not drafting to fill the slot, but we have a pretty solid success rate with LBs in the draft if we put reasonable draft slots to fill them.

    Leave aside the idiocy of trading a HOF safety in his prime.

    Our ability to draft effective players at certain positions is well documented. Oddly enough, some of those positions are massive weaknesses on this team. If you wanted to trade for anyone, you trade for that.

    Trading for almost any LB would be moronic by the Seahawks. Only thing worse would be trading for a DB.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2567
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:52 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    oldhawkfan wrote:Unless he has a no trade clause, Earl has no say if or where he could be traded.


    True, but if it's a team Earl doesn't want to sign a long term deal with, then that diminished his trade value for us.

    Best case scenario is he's happy with the team he's traded to, and they agree upon an extension. That means a higher or more picks for us..........cause if we trade him to Cleveland then he's going to just play out his deal and leave.


    Not all front offices are great at maximizing their leverage, meaning that even if what you say about Earl playing one year there is true, it doesn't necessarily follow that we fail to get all or most of what we want out of a deal. I 100% agree that if Earl is demonstrative about disliking the team, that it would be the centerpiece of the negotiation strategy of that team. On the other hand, I give you...the Cleveland Browns.

    Secondly, sports history is littered with players who had a preferred destination, and who overcame that preference because of the stupid money waved in their face. Smart organizations try not to be held hostage and wave stupid money, but again I give you...the Cleveland Browns.

    Finally, if a team is a preferred destination, and knows it, they have incentive to *not* give up a king's ransom in trade, since they have the option of waiting for free agency. They may pay a penalty in a bidding war, or they may not depending upon how strong the players prefers them, but they may decide a few mil overpay is worth it to avoid sacrificing players and/or draft picks.
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:08 pm
  • hawk45 wrote:
    Finally, if a team is a preferred destination, and knows it, they have incentive to *not* give up a king's ransom in trade, since they have the option of waiting for free agency. They may pay a penalty in a bidding war, or they may not depending upon how strong the players prefers them, but they may decide a few mil overpay is worth it to avoid sacrificing players and/or draft picks.


    For sure, and I said this earlier in this thread. Earl already tipped his hand quite loudly that Dallas is his preferred destination.

    Obviously $$$$ talks, so if another couple teams show him the cash with a massive extension, I'm sure he'd change his tune.

    But yes, the less teams obviously the less leverage our FO has with trying to maximize Earl's trade value.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13021
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:10 pm
  • Popeyejones wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Popeyejones wrote:
    Do people think the Broncos should trade Von Miller because he's getting older and slowing down? How about the Falcons and Julio Jones?.


    I bet if you went to Bronco and Falcon fan sites, there would absolutely be people saying this.

    Every player, even the best players in the league get to the point in their career where their team has to determine whether their salary justifies their play, and potential for injury.


    I think we'd probably have to go to Broncos and Falcons fan sites to find out (and neither of us care enough to do so), but personally I'd be really surprised if there were a bunch of Bronco and Falcons fans arguing that their teams should trade Miller or Jones, and that's even with their higher salaries.

    And of course totally agreed that everyone gets to a point in their career where a team has to question if their play justifies their salary, I just in no way think that someone's age 28 season is when people start making that calculation. I think we'd be hard pressed to come up with an age that isn't 28 that's generally thought of as being squarely in the heart of a player's prime.

    And there aren't many examples of multiple All Pros right in their primes that are getting cast off or traded. In the last 10-15 years literally the only one I can think of is Ndamukong Suh. Maybe there's one or two more? It just doesn't happen. When you have an All Pro in his prime you hang on to him, and pay him what he's worth to do so.


    Yeah, Popeye's take seems to me to best represent conventional thinking WRT all-pros at age 28, and IMO it's really not even a close argument. 30 and up is a much different story.

    Yes, Belichick might be one who would do it differently, but Belichick also has the ability to remake his team on both sides of the ball seemingly overnight to fit next week's opponent. He seems to have the ability with Brady to win with or without a dominant defense. I don't believe that Pete can win without a top-tier defense, and I don't believe Pete wants to win without a top-tier defense. So we'd have to believe that Pete either doesn't think Earl plays a pivotal role, or that Pete is completely swayed by Earl's injury history.

    Earl has missed games, but he had a shoulder injury he recovered from to play at 100%, and a broken leg he recovered from quickly to play at 100%. He looked better than ever this year. Pete just watched a player play the best FS in the league and have a year up there with his best at age 28. Pete is looking at 2 risks, the same risks every team looks at when facing these situations (and the reason why trading all-pros under 30 doesn't happen much):

    1) The risk that 28-year-old Earl can't perform that well due to injury/other for another few years
    2) The risk that even with a draft pick or two he cannot add enough value to the team the offset the loss of his all-pro

    Now it depends on how high the picks and what the upcoming draft class looks like, but if a first and second rounder turn into merely solid starters and at least one doesn't turn into a field-tilter (is by far the likeliest scenario) I know which door I'm rooting for.
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:17 pm
  • Popeyejones wrote:
    Don't mean to be argumentative, but I don't think it's even remotely the same thing.

    Think about it this way, someone says "They think I'm worth 10 million a year and I think I'm worth 15 million a year, ..."

    Then either branch out to:

    #1: "...I want the 15 million a year because I think I'm worth that and at the end of the day me and my family come first."

    #2: "...I want the 15 million a year because 10 million a year isn't enough for my children to be able to eat."


    #1 is an incredibly logical end to that sentence. We can dislike it or like it, but it makes sense.

    #2 is an incredibly stupid end to that sentence that is worthy of ridicule.

    Seriously, they're not even remotely the same thing, and pretending that they are (or even worse, pretending that he said #2 when he said #1) is, IMO, really unfair to him.


    "Me and my family come first" <> "I have to protect my family" IMO. The former is easily interpreted as a desire to maximize income for his family and is disconnected from any notion that his family is in jeopardy. The latter is quite firmly suggestive that there is some jeopardy to his family if his pile of gold isn't as large as it could be.

    The implicit jeopardy is what people react to negatively. Both the "feed" formulation and the "protect" formulation center on jeopardy.

    I think you framed the "protect" statement in a way more friendly to your argument, but IMO the court should uphold a ruling of semantics here :)
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:26 pm
  • hawk45 wrote:
    Yes, Belichick might be one who would do it differently, but Belichick also has the ability to remake his team on both sides of the ball seemingly overnight to fit next week's opponent. He seems to have the ability with Brady to win with or without a dominant defense. I don't believe that Pete can win without a top-tier defense, and I don't believe Pete wants to win without a top-tier defense. So we'd have to believe that Pete either doesn't think Earl plays a pivotal role, or that Pete is completely swayed by Earl's injury history..


    Maybe I'm in the minority now, but I still think Pete and John could build another championship defense like Belichick reloads year after year.

    Pete's a defensive genius, and his system has worked for going on 30 years in college and the pros, no reason to think he couldn't reload given the right players and get back to dominating on defense.

    IMO the downfall of the defense has been paying aging vets with massive new contracts INSTEAD of trading them at their max value and reloading through the draft.

    This is the main reason I think we need to trade Earl if we can get a bundle of picks, so we don't continue down the same ineffective road to trying to rebuild. Maybe Earl would stay healthy, but his style of play vs injury history tells me he's not going to be able to stay healthy and be worthy of 15M+ a year for the next 4-5 years.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13021
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:36 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:Pete's a defensive genius, and his system has worked for going on 30 years in college and the pros, no reason to think he couldn't reload given the right players and get back to dominating on defense.

    IMO the downfall of the defense has been paying aging vets with massive new contracts INSTEAD of trading them at their max value and reloading through the draft.

    This is the main reason I think we need to trade Earl if we can get a bundle of picks, so we don't continue down the same ineffective road to trying to rebuild. Maybe Earl would stay healthy, but his style of play vs injury history tells me he's not going to be able to stay healthy and be worthy of 15M+ a year for the next 4-5 years.


    Pete's a defensive genius, but of a much different flavor than Belichick.

    Belichick is a schematic chameleon, and that type of genius lends itself towards players being fungible.

    Pete has a very specific style of play he is after on both sides of the ball. He is much more inflexible. Pete relies on being able to find players to fit his style. We are on the leading edge here of putting to the test whether he can replace his cornerstone players. Earl is arguable the very best defensive player at a very important position, and he was acquired in the first place with a high first in a draft where an Earl Thomas happened to be available.

    I think an aging defense has played a part in a declining defense, but I don't agree Earl can be lumped in with Kam, Bennett, and Avril. And I'm not certain Sherm can either. Those two players I think the calculus is much different in terms of being able to offset their loss with a couple of draft picks.
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:47 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    hawk45 wrote:
    Yes, Belichick might be one who would do it differently, but Belichick also has the ability to remake his team on both sides of the ball seemingly overnight to fit next week's opponent. He seems to have the ability with Brady to win with or without a dominant defense. I don't believe that Pete can win without a top-tier defense, and I don't believe Pete wants to win without a top-tier defense. So we'd have to believe that Pete either doesn't think Earl plays a pivotal role, or that Pete is completely swayed by Earl's injury history..


    Maybe I'm in the minority now, but I still think Pete and John could build another championship defense like Belichick reloads year after year.

    Pete's a defensive genius, and his system has worked for going on 30 years in college and the pros, no reason to think he couldn't reload given the right players and get back to dominating on defense.

    IMO the downfall of the defense has been paying aging vets with massive new contracts INSTEAD of trading them at their max value and reloading through the draft.

    This is the main reason I think we need to trade Earl if we can get a bundle of picks, so we don't continue down the same ineffective road to trying to rebuild. Maybe Earl would stay healthy, but his style of play vs injury history tells me he's not going to be able to stay healthy and be worthy of 15M+ a year for the next 4-5 years.

    Agree with all of this, with one exception, I think high character vets who will add value beyond what they bring to the field and contribute to a winning culture should be kept (Teddy Bruschi, Rodney Harrison).
    Sun Tzu
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 80
    Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:45 am
    Location: Idaho


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:54 pm
  • Earl is not "in his prime."

    He's pushing up on 30. For an NFL safety that's firmly middle-aged. Add to that he has some hard miles/hits on that frame of his and he's likely looking at a few more seasons at best if he can avoid serious injury - compounded by diminished ability.

    They all know this. If an NFL player moves past 30 still able to produce at a high level that's a truly special breed of athlete for that sport. He's going to try and get some $$$ on a 3-year deal for a team that gives him a credible shot at a SB.

    He doesn't feel that is the Seahawks.

    Sadly, he's probably right.
    semiahmoo
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1421
    Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 12:10 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:54 pm
  • Sun Tzu wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    hawk45 wrote:
    Yes, Belichick might be one who would do it differently, but Belichick also has the ability to remake his team on both sides of the ball seemingly overnight to fit next week's opponent. He seems to have the ability with Brady to win with or without a dominant defense. I don't believe that Pete can win without a top-tier defense, and I don't believe Pete wants to win without a top-tier defense. So we'd have to believe that Pete either doesn't think Earl plays a pivotal role, or that Pete is completely swayed by Earl's injury history..


    Maybe I'm in the minority now, but I still think Pete and John could build another championship defense like Belichick reloads year after year.

    Pete's a defensive genius, and his system has worked for going on 30 years in college and the pros, no reason to think he couldn't reload given the right players and get back to dominating on defense.

    IMO the downfall of the defense has been paying aging vets with massive new contracts INSTEAD of trading them at their max value and reloading through the draft.

    This is the main reason I think we need to trade Earl if we can get a bundle of picks, so we don't continue down the same ineffective road to trying to rebuild. Maybe Earl would stay healthy, but his style of play vs injury history tells me he's not going to be able to stay healthy and be worthy of 15M+ a year for the next 4-5 years.

    Agree with all of this, with one exception, I think high character vets who will add value beyond what they bring to the field and contribute to a winning culture should be kept (Teddy Bruschi, Rodney Harrison).


    Ooh, this I actually disagree with and would fully support jettisoning the player.

    With respect to creating a culture and attitude on defense it's my opinion Pete matches Belichick in that he is able to do this regardless of players (at last when he drafts them and doesn't trade for a Cary Williams). Although I will agree that since we're still on the first wave of core players this hasn't been tested exhaustively.

    Unless we count Red Bryant? Do we count Red?
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:59 pm
  • hawk45 wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:Pete's a defensive genius, and his system has worked for going on 30 years in college and the pros, no reason to think he couldn't reload given the right players and get back to dominating on defense.

    IMO the downfall of the defense has been paying aging vets with massive new contracts INSTEAD of trading them at their max value and reloading through the draft.

    This is the main reason I think we need to trade Earl if we can get a bundle of picks, so we don't continue down the same ineffective road to trying to rebuild. Maybe Earl would stay healthy, but his style of play vs injury history tells me he's not going to be able to stay healthy and be worthy of 15M+ a year for the next 4-5 years.


    Pete's a defensive genius, but of a much different flavor than Belichick.

    Belichick is a schematic chameleon, and that type of genius lends itself towards players being fungible.

    Pete has a very specific style of play he is after on both sides of the ball. He is much more inflexible. Pete relies on being able to find players to fit his style. We are on the leading edge here of putting to the test whether he can replace his cornerstone players. Earl is arguable the very best defensive player at a very important position, and he was acquired in the first place with a high first in a draft where an Earl Thomas happened to be available.

    I think an aging defense has played a part in a declining defense, but I don't agree Earl can be lumped in with Kam, Bennett, and Avril. And I'm not certain Sherm can either. Those two players I think the calculus is much different in terms of being able to offset their loss with a couple of draft picks.

    The notion that Pete is inflexible in his defensive scheme is a myth. He has continuously adapted to his personnel. He has found ways to adjust his scheme to take advantage of hybrid or tweener players. Belichick's changes have been less frequent and larger; therefore, the average fan is able to see the change. Pete's changes are continuous and much more subtle; therefore, the average fan doesn't realize the change has been made.
    Sun Tzu
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 80
    Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:45 am
    Location: Idaho


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:59 pm
  • hawk45 wrote:
    I think an aging defense has played a part in a declining defense, but I don't agree Earl can be lumped in with Kam, Bennett, and Avril. And I'm not certain Sherm can either. Those two players I think the calculus is much different in terms of being able to offset their loss with a couple of draft picks.


    Not yet he isn't, but he's on his way with his injury history.

    I guess my point is, if we're rebuilding/reloading? Then lets do it right................enough already of hanging out in this go for broke trading draft picks hanging onto aging vets hoping they stay healthy and regain their form AND paying them a ridiculous salary eating up vital cap space.

    Which is what we've been doing the past 3 years. If it takes a year or two to get the right young talent? I'm OK with that, but Earl is worth 2-3 draft picks I'd imagine. Keeping him greatly hamstrings our drafts what with already giving away top picks for Richardson and Brown.

    So as hard as it is for me to say, Earl is the one player that allows us to get those picks back and go young and nasty on the defense once again.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13021
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:11 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:Not yet he isn't, but he's on his way with his injury history.

    I guess my point is, if we're rebuilding/reloading? Then lets do it right................enough already of hanging out in this go for broke trading draft picks hanging onto aging vets hoping they stay healthy and regain their form AND paying them a ridiculous salary eating up vital cap space.

    Which is what we've been doing the past 3 years. If it takes a year or two to get the right young talent? I'm OK with that, but Earl is worth 2-3 draft picks I'd imagine. Keeping him greatly hamstrings our drafts what with already giving away top picks for Richardson and Brown.

    So as hard as it is for me to say, Earl is the one player that allows us to get those picks back and go young and nasty on the defense once again.


    Do you think that with 2 draft picks, say, the odds are on our side to hit on at least one game-changer and thus offset the loss of Earl?

    Or are you thinking that even if we only ended up with 2 starters that is better than what we are getting from Earl given his injury history?

    Not rhetorical questions, just trying to understand where you sit.
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:19 pm
  • hawk45 wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:Not yet he isn't, but he's on his way with his injury history.

    I guess my point is, if we're rebuilding/reloading? Then lets do it right................enough already of hanging out in this go for broke trading draft picks hanging onto aging vets hoping they stay healthy and regain their form AND paying them a ridiculous salary eating up vital cap space.

    Which is what we've been doing the past 3 years. If it takes a year or two to get the right young talent? I'm OK with that, but Earl is worth 2-3 draft picks I'd imagine. Keeping him greatly hamstrings our drafts what with already giving away top picks for Richardson and Brown.

    So as hard as it is for me to say, Earl is the one player that allows us to get those picks back and go young and nasty on the defense once again.


    Do you think that with 2 draft picks, say, the odds are on our side to hit on at least one game-changer and thus offset the loss of Earl?

    Or are you thinking that even if we only ended up with 2 starters that is better than what we are getting from Earl given his injury history?

    Not rhetorical questions, just trying to understand where you sit.


    Like I said, I still trust John and Pete. They loaded up our defense with what, one first rounder pick with Earl? The rest were later draft picks.

    No reason for me to think they can't do it again...........and yeah of course it's a gamble. But it's one I'm willing to give our FO the benefit of the doubt.

    Rather than cling onto Earl as he ages and maybe plays at 70-80% of his prime soaking up 15M a year. Because that doesn't guarantee anything either, other than make it REALLY hard to reload all over the rest of the defense AND the offense with very limited draft picks the next two years.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13021
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:36 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:Like I said, I still trust John and Pete. They loaded up our defense with what, one first rounder pick with Earl? The rest were later draft picks.

    No reason for me to think they can't do it again...........and yeah of course it's a gamble. But it's one I'm willing to give our FO the benefit of the doubt.

    Rather than cling onto Earl as he ages and maybe plays at 70-80% of his prime soaking up 15M a year. Because that doesn't guarantee anything either, other than make it REALLY hard to reload all over the rest of the defense AND the offense with very limited draft picks the next two years.


    Okay.

    I don't rate the odds of Earl being diminished quite as highly, and I also believe that certain players transcend to where more than just acumen is required to get them, luck and timing are required as well.

    Now as you said, Pete and John originally built the team with lower round draft picks. In that case, I look at the two safeties chosen in the last draft, and it doesn't do much for my serenity around the idea that they can replace Earl's production quickly enough to be within Russell's window.

    They did identify McDougald in FA though, and IMO McDougald's very adequate replacement of Kam is a huge reason folks are entertaining this notion with Earl.
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:59 pm
  • hawk45 wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:Not yet he isn't, but he's on his way with his injury history.

    I guess my point is, if we're rebuilding/reloading? Then lets do it right................enough already of hanging out in this go for broke trading draft picks hanging onto aging vets hoping they stay healthy and regain their form AND paying them a ridiculous salary eating up vital cap space.

    Which is what we've been doing the past 3 years. If it takes a year or two to get the right young talent? I'm OK with that, but Earl is worth 2-3 draft picks I'd imagine. Keeping him greatly hamstrings our drafts what with already giving away top picks for Richardson and Brown.

    So as hard as it is for me to say, Earl is the one player that allows us to get those picks back and go young and nasty on the defense once again.


    Do you think that with 2 draft picks, say, the odds are on our side to hit on at least one game-changer and thus offset the loss of Earl?

    Or are you thinking that even if we only ended up with 2 starters that is better than what we are getting from Earl given his injury history?

    Not rhetorical questions, just trying to understand where you sit.

    Are you taking the player(s) who could be signed using the freed cap space into account? In addition to draft picks we would get cap space.
    Not a rhetorical questions, trying to understand how much of the picture is being considered.
    Last edited by Sun Tzu on Fri Feb 02, 2018 5:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Sun Tzu
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 80
    Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:45 am
    Location: Idaho


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 3:13 pm
  • Sun Tzu wrote:Are you taking the player(s) who could be signed using the freed cap space into account? You do realize that in addition to draft picks we would get cap space right?
    Not a rhetorical questions, trying to understand how much of the picture you are considering.


    I...was not, no, and thanks for the snark-free correction.

    Now, a like-for-like replacement for Earl who is as young as Earl and approaches his greatness is out of the question unless we're talking about shelling out Earl money of course. BUT...I agree with what I think you are implying which is that adding the money for Pete and John to survey the FA landscape and try to add defensive talent *somewhere* - even if not at FS - makes things look better for offsetting losing Earl.

    I would still be on the side that even with that I stay with the all-pro in his prime vs. the pu-pu surprise platter that is draft and FA, but I can't ignore your point that we'd be talking 3-5 players here. That's...a haul.
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 3:48 pm
  • Except the guy making the FA decisions with that newly freed cap space is the same guy that gives Joekel a giant contract and Lacey a giant contract.

    It doesn't help to free up cap space if your FO is horrific at evaluating FA talent or negotiating deals to bring them in.

    So of the 3-5 players we would supposedly get, most of them would be average to terrible and we will have overpaid for them. In the meantime losing one of our key players that literally wins games for us.

    We would be gambling that our HOF player that *might* get injured so we trade him is still less value than 3+ players that based on all the track record would not end up producing much anyway. Because a best case scenario is someone like Graham, and we couldn't even integrate him until several years later.

    Our FA track record is abysmal. The low cost, high ceiling ones are tolerable but to expect to get new players in FA that can make a difference in year 1? Laughable.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2567
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:04 pm
  • TwistedHusky wrote:Except the guy making the FA decisions with that newly freed cap space is the same guy that gives Joekel a giant contract and Lacey a giant contract.

    It doesn't help to free up cap space if your FO is horrific at evaluating FA talent or negotiating deals to bring them in.

    So of the 3-5 players we would supposedly get, most of them would be average to terrible and we will have overpaid for them. In the meantime losing one of our key players that literally wins games for us.

    We would be gambling that our HOF player that *might* get injured so we trade him is still less value than 3+ players that based on all the track record would not end up producing much anyway. Because a best case scenario is someone like Graham, and we couldn't even integrate him until several years later.

    Our FA track record is abysmal. The low cost, high ceiling ones are tolerable but to expect to get new players in FA that can make a difference in year 1? Laughable.


    Being honest, the McDougald signing plays a big part in how I evaluate their ability to replenish the safety position in FA. I come down on your side, but I don't count the FO out necessarily. If this were offense I'd be singing a much different tune, I have much less faith on the offensive side, and OL in particular.
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:07 pm
  • Sun Tzu wrote:The notion that Pete is inflexible in his defensive scheme is a myth. He has continuously adapted to his personnel. He has found ways to adjust his scheme to take advantage of hybrid or tweener players. Belichick's changes have been less frequent and larger; therefore, the average fan is able to see the change. Pete's changes are continuous and much more subtle; therefore, the average fan doesn't realize the change has been made.


    You could be right. Certainly with Browner and a youthful Sherm we played much more press, and have evolved as the situation changed.

    I wouldn't say Pete is as flexible game to game as Belichick, but since we're talking about him adapting to roster turnover in the offseason and that is the thrust of your post, hat tip to you for a well-made point.
    hawk45
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8320
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:55 pm
  • hawk45 wrote:
    Sun Tzu wrote:Are you taking the player(s) who could be signed using the freed cap space into account? You do realize that in addition to draft picks we would get cap space right?
    Not a rhetorical questions, trying to understand how much of the picture you are considering.


    I...was not, no, and thanks for the snark-free correction.

    Now, a like-for-like replacement for Earl who is as young as Earl and approaches his greatness is out of the question unless we're talking about shelling out Earl money of course. BUT...I agree with what I think you are implying which is that adding the money for Pete and John to survey the FA landscape and try to add defensive talent *somewhere* - even if not at FS - makes things look better for offsetting losing Earl.

    I would still be on the side that even with that I stay with the all-pro in his prime vs. the pu-pu surprise platter that is draft and FA, but I can't ignore your point that we'd be talking 3-5 players here. That's...a haul.

    I think this gets us to the place where this whole conversation about Earl should be.
    Earlier in this thread, some posters were arguing over whether or not Earl is a great player. In one corner we have those with rose colored glasses incapable of acknowledging that it is actually possible for the defense to return to dominance without Earl; in the other corner we have those with foggy glasses who contend that Earl is no longer a great player (it's possible that some may have allowed their anger over his actions off the field to impact their assessment of his performance on the field). I think both sides are allowing emotion to override logic.
    Three options, let Earl play-out the contract (he says he will holdout if the Hawks go this route), trade him, or sign Earl to an extension. Which of the 3 is most likely to contribute to wins over 1, 3, and 5 year periods? Does it depend on what Earl is demanding in an extension, $$ and years? How much cap can you have tied up in one defensive player and still have top end talent elsewhere on the defense, and a competent OL (surprising to me that the same posters who complain about spending too little on the OL, and the disparity between offense and defense spending are some of the ones saying pay him)? Is he even willing to sign an extension? If an extension is either too expensive or refused outright by Earl, do you let him play-out the contract (I am assuming he is true to his word and holds out) or do you trade him?
    From my perspective letting Earl play-out the contract is not an option. The other two options are more of a toss up. For me a logical tipping point is the cap figure. If the extension reduces Earl's 2018 cap hit then it makes sense to keep him, otherwise I don't think it does.
    Of course, all that said, I am for trading Earl regardless, because I strongly believe in the value of a teams culture.
    Sun Tzu
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 80
    Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:45 am
    Location: Idaho


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Sun Feb 04, 2018 8:27 pm
  • Popeyejones wrote:Where is this Jaylon Smith thing coming from?

    Me. I read about his foot getting better and said he's "feeling elite again" after his strong finish to the season, so threw out a Jaylon for Earl to see what people thought.

    Popeyejones wrote:Pretending it's real, where would Jaylon Smith play?

    After the Hawks trade ET3 for Jaylon Smith are they gonna get rid of KJ Wright or Bobby Wagner, because Smith definitely doesn't play SAM.

    Do you guys even Seahawk?


    Jaylon is said to be best suited for WILL but as Sun Tzu said can play SAM and provide much needed LB depth and be the eventual replacement for KJ.
    massari
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1122
    Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:58 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Sun Feb 04, 2018 8:33 pm
  • Sun Tzu wrote:KJ has and can play SAM, and, as he slows down, moving him to SAM and reducing his snap count is not necessarily a bad thing, particularly if it allows you to get your best 11 football players on the field.

    Interesting
    massari
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1122
    Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:58 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:21 am
  • hawk45 wrote:
    TwistedHusky wrote:Except the guy making the FA decisions with that newly freed cap space is the same guy that gives Joekel a giant contract and Lacey a giant contract.

    It doesn't help to free up cap space if your FO is horrific at evaluating FA talent or negotiating deals to bring them in.

    So of the 3-5 players we would supposedly get, most of them would be average to terrible and we will have overpaid for them. In the meantime losing one of our key players that literally wins games for us.

    We would be gambling that our HOF player that *might* get injured so we trade him is still less value than 3+ players that based on all the track record would not end up producing much anyway. Because a best case scenario is someone like Graham, and we couldn't even integrate him until several years later.

    Our FA track record is abysmal. The low cost, high ceiling ones are tolerable but to expect to get new players in FA that can make a difference in year 1? Laughable.


    Being honest, the McDougald signing plays a big part in how I evaluate their ability to replenish the safety position in FA. I come down on your side, but I don't count the FO out necessarily. If this were offense I'd be singing a much different tune, I have much less faith on the offensive side, and OL in particular.


    FA/Trades weren't all that bad. We got Duane Brown on offense, which is one hell of an upgrade over what we had out there. He's still a good player, hopefully it was just the Cable effect making him look worse down the stretch as well as the ankle sprain. The other offensive moves were busts: Lacy and Joeckel. Tobin is a question mark I guess but he looked pretty awful when he had to come in at LT during the Cardinals game in AZ.

    Defensive ones were solid. Sheldon was pretty good, though definitely not as good as hoped/advertised. Coleman was a steal, McDougald was a fantastic value, and Dion Jordan and Marcus Smith were nice pieces. Even Freeney contributed a bit with us, although it ended up being for naught. Maxie was a solid pickup too. I really don't think the LBs we brought in worked well. I think Wilhoite was okay, but Garvin and Alexander were not good.

    Overall pretty dang good on the defensive side and pretty awful on the offensive side.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1645
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Tue Feb 06, 2018 12:44 pm
  • hawk45 wrote:"Me and my family come first" <> "I have to protect my family" IMO. The former is easily interpreted as a desire to maximize income for his family and is disconnected from any notion that his family is in jeopardy. The latter is quite firmly suggestive that there is some jeopardy to his family if his pile of gold isn't as large as it could be.

    The implicit jeopardy is what people react to negatively. Both the "feed" formulation and the "protect" formulation center on jeopardy.

    I think you framed the "protect" statement in a way more friendly to your argument, but IMO the court should uphold a ruling of semantics here :)



    :lol: :lol:

    :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs:

    Just as a point of clarification, he never said "protect my family". His exact quote which is being misquoted was:

    "I just gotta protect myself. At the end of the day, me and my family, that's the first thing."

    And you're right that I really don't read "protect" in that sentence as implying the "imminent danger" usage of the word. He's not saying he's in imminent danger.

    Rather, he's talking about a contract, and "protect" is being used in the contractual sense of the word (i.e. a contract "protecting" both parties).

    The takeaway from that sentence, which MAKES A LOT OF SENSE in my opinion (whereas the imminent danger interpretation doesn't make any sense) is he's saying that he wants a contract with long-term guarantees and one that pays him at a fair market value (i.e. he wants the protection of an extension, and doesn't want to do a team discount).

    The "end of the day, me and my family, that's the first thing" addendum to thought was simply clarifying that he's not interested in doing management favors or taking a team friendly deal -- i.e. me and my family are the negotiating party where my interests lie.

    People can of course like that or not or find it in poor taste for him to come and say that or not, but turning it into "I need 15 million a year instead of 10 million a year because my kid's are starving at 10 million" just lacks a factual basis in reality, IMO.
    User avatar
    Popeyejones
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4625
    Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:58 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Tue Feb 06, 2018 1:23 pm
  • Sun Tzu wrote: In one corner we have those with rose colored glasses incapable of acknowledging that it is actually possible for the defense to return to dominance without Earl; in the other corner we have those with foggy glasses who contend that Earl is no longer a great player (it's possible that some may have allowed their anger over his actions off the field to impact their assessment of his performance on the field).


    It's not this black and white for me.

    It's about the money, it's ALWAYS about the money. I don't think anyone doesn't think Earl is still not a great player, the question is he worth 15+M a year, and a 4-5 year extension.

    Most importantly if we're going to try to rebuild this defense to greatness, which may take a year or two, do we want to spend that kind of cap space on Earl, when his play is more than likely going to continue to diminish and he's going to continue to get hurt?

    For me the answer is no. If we're going to rebuild the defense, we need the picks Earl could get us, especially if it's another 1st rounder.

    This is all hard for me to say btw. I love Earl, he and Kam are my favorite Hawks. But I don't want us to have another 2-3 seasons being in this limbo of having half the roster as over the hill vets soaking up 75% of our cap space on and off the disabled list, and the other half fill ins and hopeful 1st and 2nd year players.

    Do it right, if you're gonna rebuild, then rebuild.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13021
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Tue Feb 06, 2018 3:58 pm
  • massari wrote:
    Popeyejones wrote:Where is this Jaylon Smith thing coming from?

    Me. I read about his foot getting better and said he's "feeling elite again" after his strong finish to the season, so threw out a Jaylon for Earl to see what people thought.

    Popeyejones wrote:Pretending it's real, where would Jaylon Smith play?

    After the Hawks trade ET3 for Jaylon Smith are they gonna get rid of KJ Wright or Bobby Wagner, because Smith definitely doesn't play SAM.

    Do you guys even Seahawk?


    Jaylon is said to be best suited for WILL but as Sun Tzu said can play SAM and provide much needed LB depth and be the eventual replacement for KJ.

    Of course he’s going to say that. The guy had problems changing directions last year.
    To trade the best FS for a guy still recovering from “drop foot” is beyond silly. Maybe we should give them Russ for Sean “one concussion away from retirement” Lee as well? We’d really be set at linebacker then. :sarcasm_off:
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24044
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Wed Feb 07, 2018 12:18 am
  • Sports Hernia wrote:
    massari wrote:
    Popeyejones wrote:Where is this Jaylon Smith thing coming from?

    Me. I read about his foot getting better and said he's "feeling elite again" after his strong finish to the season, so threw out a Jaylon for Earl to see what people thought.

    Popeyejones wrote:Pretending it's real, where would Jaylon Smith play?

    After the Hawks trade ET3 for Jaylon Smith are they gonna get rid of KJ Wright or Bobby Wagner, because Smith definitely doesn't play SAM.

    Do you guys even Seahawk?


    Jaylon is said to be best suited for WILL but as Sun Tzu said can play SAM and provide much needed LB depth and be the eventual replacement for KJ.

    Of course he’s going to say that. The guy had problems changing directions last year.
    To trade the best FS for a guy still recovering from “drop foot” is beyond silly. Maybe we should give them Russ for Sean “one concussion away from retirement” Lee as well? We’d really be set at linebacker then. :sarcasm_off:

    BTW I'm fairly sure I wouldn't trade ET for Smith, was just seeing what people thought of him. That's all.

    Also, they're not getting Martin+high picks for him and it's doubtful the Cowboys trade Martin straight up for ET.
    massari
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1122
    Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:58 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:32 am
  • massari wrote:
    Sports Hernia wrote:
    massari wrote:
    Popeyejones wrote:Where is this Jaylon Smith thing coming from?

    Me. I read about his foot getting better and said he's "feeling elite again" after his strong finish to the season, so threw out a Jaylon for Earl to see what people thought.

    Popeyejones wrote:Pretending it's real, where would Jaylon Smith play?

    After the Hawks trade ET3 for Jaylon Smith are they gonna get rid of KJ Wright or Bobby Wagner, because Smith definitely doesn't play SAM.

    Do you guys even Seahawk?


    Jaylon is said to be best suited for WILL but as Sun Tzu said can play SAM and provide much needed LB depth and be the eventual replacement for KJ.

    Of course he’s going to say that. The guy had problems changing directions last year.
    To trade the best FS for a guy still recovering from “drop foot” is beyond silly. Maybe we should give them Russ for Sean “one concussion away from retirement” Lee as well? We’d really be set at linebacker then. :sarcasm_off:

    BTW I'm fairly sure I wouldn't trade ET for Smith, was just seeing what people thought of him. That's all.

    Also, they're not getting Martin+high picks for him and it's doubtful the Cowboys trade Martin straight up for ET.

    Then no deal. When you have a proven commodity that is the best in the game at his position and are considering trading him you get YOUR PRICE, regardless if the otherside thinks it’s fair, and regardless if it’s going to hurt the otherside. If *allas wants him bad they’d have no problem trading Martin + high pick(s). If they don’t, you lock him up and let Earl go play in *allas when he’s 36 or 37.

    Deal from a position of strength not weakness.
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24044
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Wed Feb 07, 2018 7:43 am
  • semiahmoo wrote:Earl is not "in his prime."

    He's pushing up on 30. For an NFL safety that's firmly middle-aged. Add to that he has some hard miles/hits on that frame of his and he's likely looking at a few more seasons at best if he can avoid serious injury - compounded by diminished ability.

    They all know this. If an NFL player moves past 30 still able to produce at a high level that's a truly special breed of athlete for that sport. He's going to try and get some $$$ on a 3-year deal for a team that gives him a credible shot at a SB.

    He doesn't feel that is the Seahawks.

    Sadly, he's probably right.


    Eric Weddle at 33 is still one of the best safeties in the league and has been named to the pro bowl in 3 of last 4 seasons.

    Ed Reed was probably also about 33/34 before he started to decline.

    There is no reason to trade Thomas 6 years before then on the assumption that he "might" decline.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3311
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:32 am
  • But what happens if the FO decides they don't want or require Earl's services anymore and he holds out until week 7 (I think it's week 7).

    If they don't want to resign him, and you know he will hold out for nearly half the season, as much as it would suck I'd be on board with accepting whatever the best offer is for him. Even if, on the face of it, it looks like daylight robbery.
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 2097
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Wed Feb 07, 2018 10:55 am
  • original poster wrote:But what happens if the FO decides they don't want or require Earl's services anymore and he holds out until week 7 (I think it's week 7).

    If they don't want to resign him, and you know he will hold out for nearly half the season, as much as it would suck I'd be on board with accepting whatever the best offer is for him. Even if, on the face of it, it looks like daylight robbery.

    That’s a risk I’m willing to take. Earl is a fierce competitor, it will kill him to not be out there. You can also threaten to franchise him for 2 years if he threatens to hold out. I think a long term deal can be reached and lower than the 15 mil a year number that has been thrown around here.
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24044
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Wed Feb 07, 2018 11:48 am
  • Sports Hernia wrote:
    original poster wrote:But what happens if the FO decides they don't want or require Earl's services anymore and he holds out until week 7 (I think it's week 7).

    If they don't want to resign him, and you know he will hold out for nearly half the season, as much as it would suck I'd be on board with accepting whatever the best offer is for him. Even if, on the face of it, it looks like daylight robbery.

    That’s a risk I’m willing to take. Earl is a fierce competitor, it will kill him to not be out there. You can also threaten to franchise him for 2 years if he threatens to hold out. I think a long term deal can be reached and lower than the 15 mil a year number that has been thrown around here.


    Ok...a question from someone in the audience...you seahawkfan..."if we franchise him for the first year, can he hold out for some games? If we decide not to franchise him the second year, What do you think his worth would be at that time with one more year under his belt? thanks."

    :2thumbs:
    R.I.P. Queen.
    User avatar
    Seahawkfan80
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7420
    Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 12:20 pm
    Location: A little ways from Boise.


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Wed Feb 07, 2018 12:25 pm
  • He can hold out for the first 7 weeks of the season, still accure the year but obviously not receive his game money.

    When you say his worth in the second year, do you mean to him from a contract stand point or to the team from a trade stand point? Fairly sure you mean the former as he obviously would be an URFA after the first tagged year.
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 2097
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:07 pm
  • original poster wrote:He can hold out for the first 7 weeks of the season, still accure the year but obviously not receive his game money.

    When you say his worth in the second year, do you mean to him from a contract stand point or to the team from a trade stand point? Fairly sure you mean the former as he obviously would be an URFA after the first tagged year.


    You got it. Thank you. Had a bug last night...made my sleep a little bit rough. His reality worth would be determined by what he does in production for the tagged or hold out season. Just wondered if he would be worth a second..but that again would be determined by his actions on the field during next season.

    Thanks.
    R.I.P. Queen.
    User avatar
    Seahawkfan80
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7420
    Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 12:20 pm
    Location: A little ways from Boise.


Re: "Holdout" news of Earl Thomas
Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:31 pm
  • Seahawkfan80 wrote:
    Sports Hernia wrote:
    original poster wrote:But what happens if the FO decides they don't want or require Earl's services anymore and he holds out until week 7 (I think it's week 7).

    If they don't want to resign him, and you know he will hold out for nearly half the season, as much as it would suck I'd be on board with accepting whatever the best offer is for him. Even if, on the face of it, it looks like daylight robbery.

    That’s a risk I’m willing to take. Earl is a fierce competitor, it will kill him to not be out there. You can also threaten to franchise him for 2 years if he threatens to hold out. I think a long term deal can be reached and lower than the 15 mil a year number that has been thrown around here.


    Ok...a question from someone in the audience...you seahawkfan..."if we franchise him for the first year, can he hold out for some games? If we decide not to franchise him the second year, What do you think his worth would be at that time with one more year under his belt? thanks."

    :2thumbs:

    I think the hold out thing is just talk. If He wants to miss 7 game checks, he’s giving away money he’ll never get back.
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24044
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Previous


It is currently Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:56 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online