Is the Harvin trade the 2nd worst trade in decades?

The only worse deal that I can think of that is worse is the one that gave the Cowboys all those draft picks when they traded Walker.

One could argue the Harvin deal lost us:

Tate
Clemons
Red
McDaniel (Or McDonald, I always confuse those two)
Not counting the draft picks we could have used.

And it completely derailed a team that was looking like a lock to go back to the SB.

It would make me feel better if we could find great trades that backfired spectacularly worse than this one.

What are some really bad trades besides that one? Or does this one rank up there in the top ten of bad idea trades?

(bad draft picks don't count, or forgetting to sign people to FA contracts, just trades - but trades that lead to bad draft picks or bad FA signings are obviously fair game)

It obviously stings less if I can come up with worse deals than this one.

The Harvin trade to the jets wasn't

Roy Williams trade was about the same, and the Joey Galloway trade was pretty bad for Dallas, but great for us. Also the trade of an entire draft + next years 1st and 3rd for Ricky Williams...that was really bad.

Rick Mirer trade to the Bears? They were absolutely robbed.

Harvin trade might be one of the worst Hawk trades, but not even close to one of worst trades ever.

i agree , But not the Harvin to the Jets trade . Im talking about the Vikings Trading Percy Harvin to the Seahawks trade. The one that cost us 3 picks and a whole bunch of money


I LOVE THE TRADE WE JUST MADE WITH THE JETS.

EastCoastHawksFan":554xepsr said:

i agree , But not the Harvin to the Jets trade . Im talking about the Vikings Trading Percy Harvin to the Seahawks trade. The one that cost us 3 picks and a whole bunch of money


I LOVE THE TRADE WE JUST MADE WITH THE JETS.

Click to expand...

It was a bad trade, sure. But not one of the worst in decades. Harvin made some great plays in most of the 6 games he played here. But there are bad trades every year (Robert Griffin?). If the Seahawks had not won the Super Bowl, it may belong on the list, but that buys the team some leeway. Whether or not they would have won without Harvin, the fact remains that he did contribute a lot to that Super Bowl win. The fact remains that they DID win with Percy Harvin. So that takes the sting off the trade, whether it is warranted or not.

Short answer to OP's question: no.

The Walker trade occurred in the '89 season, so everything in the "decades" since defined are game. Trades OP apparently omitted for consideration:

1. Saints trade eight draft picks for Ricky Williams draft position. Eight.
2. Rams trade Jerome Bettis and a 3rd rounder to Pittsburgh for 2nd and 4th round picks.
3. Chargers trade 1st rounds, a 2nd round, Eric Metcalf, and Patrick Sap for Ryan Leaf.
4. Bears trade 1st round to Seahawks for Rick Mirer.
5. Raiders trade Randy Moss to New England for a 4th rounder.
6. Cowboys trade 1st, 3rd, and 6th round picks for Roy Williams from Detroit.
7. Falcons trade Brett Favre to Green Bay for a 1st round pick.
8. Dolphins trade Wes Welker to New England for 2nd and 7th round picks.

And it's starting to become pretty evident that the trade Washington made to draft RGIII was historically bad.

Without Harvin I think the Saints playoff game could have been a loss potentially. Seattle scored 13 points in the first half with Harvin occupying the defense, when he left Seattle's offense struggled mightily the rest of the way and barely held on to win.

I think a lot of the players Seattle let go were decisions based on their value to Seattle. For example, the Seahawks kept McDaniel and Bennett. They even made a run at Jared Allen, who was not cheap to acquire.

Really the only FA departure that hurt us was McDonald. But most of McDonald's sacks came early last season during a hot streak, and in his last 16 games (including Tampa) he's only had 2 sacks. He's a good player and I lobbied to keep him, but last year was clearly a career year for him and I doubt he'd be thriving here while better pass rushers like Avril and Bennett are struggling so badly.

The picks hurt, but we don't know what they would have done with the picks.

The money aspect hurts less. Seattle lost $18 million total over 3 years. Or to put it another way, that's less than 5% of our cap space per year.

It was a bad trade, but hardly a catastrophe.

It's probably in the top 20 worst trade busts, but at least we're out of it. I don't think it'll impact us in the extremely long term like a lot of the REALLY bad trades have.

What price are you willing to pay for having one guy who albeit might be a game changer but is poison in the locker room. I would rather take my chances without him. It is too bad but it was the right thing to do. I do not believe Harvin would have made a great difference today. We killed ourselves with poor special teams and penalties. Penalties have killed us all season. It cost us 3 TDs by Harvin in one game alone.

We won the Lombardi.

So you have to include that in the trade. Best. Trade. Ever.

bmorepunk":1zo3ue9o said:

Short answer to OP's question: no.

The Walker trade occurred in the '89 season, so everything in the "decades" since defined are game. Trades OP apparently omitted for consideration:

1. Saints trade eight draft picks for Ricky Williams draft position. Eight.
2. Rams trade Jerome Bettis and a 3rd rounder to Pittsburgh for 2nd and 4th round picks.
3. Chargers trade 1st rounds, a 2nd round, Eric Metcalf, and Patrick Sap for Ryan Leaf.
4. Bears trade 1st round to Seahawks for Rick Mirer.
5. Raiders trade Randy Moss to New England for a 4th rounder.
6. Cowboys trade 1st, 3rd, and 6th round picks for Roy Williams from Detroit.
7. Falcons trade Brett Favre to Green Bay for a 1st round pick.
8. Dolphins trade Wes Welker to New England for 2nd and 7th round picks.

And it's starting to become pretty evident that the trade Washington made to draft RGIII was historically bad.

Click to expand...

That list is incomplete without the Rams > Skins deal. Thus far, it's looking top 3. Edit: whoops my bad. Didn't see it at the bottom of your post.

kearly":3mdzl90p said:

Without Harvin I think the Saints playoff game could have been a loss potentially. Seattle scored 13 points in the first half with Harvin occupying the defense, when he left Seattle's offense struggled mightily the rest of the way and barely held on to win.

I think a lot of the players Seattle let go were decisions based on their value to Seattle. For example, the Seahawks kept McDaniel and Bennett. They even made a run at Jared Allen, who was not cheap to acquire.

Really the only FA departure that hurt us was McDonald. But most of McDonald's sacks came early last season during a hot streak, and in his last 16 games (including Tampa) he's only had 2 sacks. He's a good player and I lobbied to keep him, but last year was clearly a career year for him and I doubt he'd be thriving here while better pass rushers like Avril and Bennett are struggling so badly.

The picks hurt, but we don't know what they would have done with the picks.

The money aspect hurts less. Seattle lost $18 million total over 3 years. Or to put it another way, that's less than 5% of our cap space per year.

It was a bad trade, but hardly a catastrophe.

Click to expand...

Good post but as outsiders, we have no way of knowing whether the associated fall out is catastrophic or not. What we do know is it was a terribly reckless trade. Perhaps even cataclysmic. We don't know.

Though I do whole-heartedly agree we have no idea what we would have done with that 1, 3 and 7. Kicker, punter, LT?