Russell Okung back to Seahawks? (Speculation)

[seahawkfreak]

Lineman that have back issues that make them miss 11 games I think it was that are paid to push and lift on the move 300 or 600 pounds of man flesh isn't a good bet.

Totally agreed. That's a tough situation.

That said, if he's out there post draft just lingering around, I would sign him for the vet minimum if for no other reason than to maybe imbue Gilliam and Fant with his unique brand of edginess. Gilliam in particular could afford a nasty influence. Even if Breno ultimately serves no value other than a camp body.

In that respect, it'd merely be win/win. Either he shakes the odds and is healthy enough (or good enough) to play and makes the team. Or he's not. And we cut him, absolving the cap hit and costing us nothing. And for 6+ weeks, maybe a needed bit of him rubs off on the guys that do make the team.

He'd be a guy I would advise we keep an eye on come late May/early June. Definitely after the deadline for qualifying for comp picks. Seattle has kicked tires with the likes of Eric Winston and Jahri Evans at this time too. So we do have a history of just this sort of thing. Breno probably offers more than either of those two did.

Well said Attyla, this speaks to the point I was trying to make. In free agency every player has issues, that's why they hit free agency. Free agency is all about risk versus reward. Of course going after Breno in the early part of FA and offering him a deal with guaranteed money is dumb... duh... but bringing him in like you mentioned, late, on a minimum deal with no guarantees offers nothing but potential upside for Seattle. In that scenario there is no or very little risk and moderate chance at some reward.

This is the same point some of us are trying to make with Okung. The risk of bringing in Okung is so low that it just makes sense. Not every move is for some super star top 5 starter. Sometimes you have to just stop the bleeding until you can address something longer term. Okung seems to provide a perfect opportunity to do that. Wherever he signs it's going to be for a short term deal with very little guaranteed money (very low risk) and that is in a market that is starving for bodies at his position. Seattle is lucky to have this opportunity in my opinion. After all, that's how John and Pete initially built this team. They set the transactions record because they were bringing in huge volumes of these low risk type of players and trying them and seeing if they stick. It's a proven method, why deviate from it now?

Who has John and Pete brought in that has been recently injured or a suspect history of it? Maybe there is but I cant find or think of anyone. The Seahawks set the transaction record when the team had very few core players. There was a lot more money to play with then.

 

[DJrmb]

Lineman that have back issues that make them miss 11 games I think it was that are paid to push and lift on the move 300 or 600 pounds of man flesh isn't a good bet.

Totally agreed. That's a tough situation.

That said, if he's out there post draft just lingering around, I would sign him for the vet minimum if for no other reason than to maybe imbue Gilliam and Fant with his unique brand of edginess. Gilliam in particular could afford a nasty influence. Even if Breno ultimately serves no value other than a camp body.

In that respect, it'd merely be win/win. Either he shakes the odds and is healthy enough (or good enough) to play and makes the team. Or he's not. And we cut him, absolving the cap hit and costing us nothing. And for 6+ weeks, maybe a needed bit of him rubs off on the guys that do make the team.

He'd be a guy I would advise we keep an eye on come late May/early June. Definitely after the deadline for qualifying for comp picks. Seattle has kicked tires with the likes of Eric Winston and Jahri Evans at this time too. So we do have a history of just this sort of thing. Breno probably offers more than either of those two did.

Well said Attyla, this speaks to the point I was trying to make. In free agency every player has issues, that's why they hit free agency. Free agency is all about risk versus reward. Of course going after Breno in the early part of FA and offering him a deal with guaranteed money is dumb... duh... but bringing him in like you mentioned, late, on a minimum deal with no guarantees offers nothing but potential upside for Seattle. In that scenario there is no or very little risk and moderate chance at some reward.

This is the same point some of us are trying to make with Okung. The risk of bringing in Okung is so low that it just makes sense. Not every move is for some super star top 5 starter. Sometimes you have to just stop the bleeding until you can address something longer term. Okung seems to provide a perfect opportunity to do that. Wherever he signs it's going to be for a short term deal with very little guaranteed money (very low risk) and that is in a market that is starving for bodies at his position. Seattle is lucky to have this opportunity in my opinion. After all, that's how John and Pete initially built this team. They set the transactions record because they were bringing in huge volumes of these low risk type of players and trying them and seeing if they stick. It's a proven method, why deviate from it now?

Who has John and Pete brought in that has been recently injured or a suspect history of it? Maybe there is but I cant find or think of anyone. The Seahawks set the transaction record when the team had very few core players. There was a lot more money to play with then.

The point isn't about bringing in injured players, it's about bringing in players that are low risk of effecting the cap long term if they don't work out. They can be low risk for varying reasons. That can be an injured player, but it can also be players cut from other teams that need to be coached up or players with off field issues. It's about bringing in low risk players to try to find the 1 or 2 that can overcome whatever issue originally made other teams pass on them, and realize their potential. That doesn't only mean young guys that have the potential to be stars, but aging vets that you know could be an average player for you at a position of weakness to stop the bleeding as well (Like they did with Kevin Williams for 1 year).

Recent examples of this being:

They've been looking for Corners to replace Maxwell by picking up all kinds of guys. The most recent being Perrish Cox. They've also brought in Mohammed Seisay, Stanley Jean-Baptiste, Traded for Neiko Thorpe and Dewey McDonald, signed DeAndre Elliott. All of these are low risk players that they could cut at any time. They all have reasons they weren't starting for other teams but Seattle brought them in to see if they could be polished into a starter or at least a role player.

If you're strictly talking about injured guys (again not the point I was making but they can be low risk options as well) then there's Brandon Browner who was coming off a torn MCL who they brought in as a low risk guy to see if he could fit in somewhere. They also drafted Jesse Williams who dropped in the draft (and was taken off some teams boards completely) because of a knee injury. Will Tukuafu was also a guy that they brought in after being waived/injured by the 49ers to try out at FB. Kasen Williams is a guy they continue to keep around, he went undrafted because many teams didn't think he'd ever recover from the nasty leg injury he suffered in college. Sealver Siliga was a guy they had brought in to look at after being injured in New England and not having his RFA tender picked up by them. in 2016 they finally stopped bringing back Anthony McCoy after all his injuries but before that they kept signing him and bringing him back...

 

[Largent80]

Getting Okung would be like getting back together with your ex.

There were good times, but the bad times outnumber them and they want your money.

That analogy might work,

if it was just a booty call and then you kick her out after you're done...

We kinda already did that. And his booty was SLOW......So, taking him back a 2nd time is a recipe for disaster. And DUMB.

 

[DJrmb]

Getting Okung would be like getting back together with your ex.

There were good times, but the bad times outnumber them and they want your money.

That analogy might work,

if it was just a booty call and then you kick her out after you're done...

We kinda already did that. And his booty was SLOW......So, taking him back a 2nd time is a recipe for disaster. And DUMB.

So then who would you bring in? Or are you thinking Fant and Odhiambo are starting caliber tackles ready for a full season protecting Russell and opening running lanes?

 

[Largent80]

Getting Okung would be like getting back together with your ex.

There were good times, but the bad times outnumber them and they want your money.

That analogy might work,

if it was just a booty call and then you kick her out after you're done...

We kinda already did that. And his booty was SLOW......So, taking him back a 2nd time is a recipe for disaster. And DUMB.

So then who would you bring in? Or are you thinking Fant and Odhiambo are starting caliber tackles ready for a full season protecting Russell and opening running lanes?

Yes.

 

[mikeak]

This is the same point some of us are trying to make with Okung. The risk of bringing in Okung is so low that it just makes sense. Not every move is for some super star top 5 starter. Sometimes you have to just stop the bleeding until you can address something longer term. Okung seems to provide a perfect opportunity to do that. Wherever he signs it's going to be for a short term deal with very little guaranteed money

Why do you think this?

He played all 16 games for Denver

http://www.nfl.com/player/russellokung/ ... areerstats

He is 29 years so still got several years left - in fact probably one good 3-4 year contract so he should not be signing for a year

Sure the team didn't have a great year but that definitely tied into their starting QB situation

I think he gets a 3-4 year contract over $5M per year with about $10M guaranteed

The problem he had was that he had signed a contract that had ZERO guaranteed money after this past season and yet if he stayed on this year it would have triggered a $48 million contract with over $20 million guaranteed.

Not going forward with that option is far far away from a short term with very little guaranteed money

 

[DJrmb]

This is the same point some of us are trying to make with Okung. The risk of bringing in Okung is so low that it just makes sense. Not every move is for some super star top 5 starter. Sometimes you have to just stop the bleeding until you can address something longer term. Okung seems to provide a perfect opportunity to do that. Wherever he signs it's going to be for a short term deal with very little guaranteed money

Why do you think this?

He played all 16 games for Denver

http://www.nfl.com/player/russellokung/ ... areerstats

He is 29 years so still got several years left - in fact probably one good 3-4 year contract so he should not be signing for a year

Sure the team didn't have a great year but that definitely tied into their starting QB situation

I think he gets a 3-4 year contract over $5M per year with about $10M guaranteed

The problem he had was that he had signed a contract that had ZERO guaranteed money after this past season and yet if he stayed on this year it would have triggered a $48 million contract with over $20 million guaranteed.

Not going forward with that option is far far away from a short term with very little guaranteed money

There are a few reasons why I believe Okung will sign a fairly low risk low guaranteed deal.

1. Okung played 16 games last year yes, but was inconsistent and committed quite a few penalties. He didn't have a great year meaning teams will still have questions on him. Probably didn't help being 1st year in a new system but he didn't play at a pro bowl level or anything so there's an unknown there.

2. His history of injuries is still a concern for any long term deal.

3. the recent additions of Beachum and Clady to the mix along with Wagner, Reiff, and Whitworth gives teams a few more options. Brandon Albert plays into this as well whether he's released or not he takes yet another team out of the market for a Tackle

4. Okung has already shown that he's willing to "bet on himself" and sign a prove it type deal with the contract he took in Denver.

5. John Clayton typically has a very good feel on Free Agency and player values from year to year and he has stated multiple times that he believes Okung will get a 1 year prove it deal for 5m.

I don't know if I completely agree with Clayton on him only getting 1 year. I put a lot of stock in Clayton when it comes to FA as that is a specialty of his but I personally see someone willing to give Okung a 2-3 year deal, but still very low risk for the team. Something like 2 years 12M or 3 years 18M. If some team comes in and offers him 3-4 years and 10M+ guaranteed then yeah, you walk away.

 

[mikeak]

This is why I come here. You disagree on something or have a different take. You respectfully add information to the picture of why you think something and some of it you interpret differently.

Example - item 5 - didn't know Clayton's input on this

Example - item 1 - I value the 16 games more than past history you point out that others will still look at injury history before

One of us may be right but doesn't mean we didn't have good thoughts on why we believe it and on we go. Much nicer tone and information than some of the other posts...... so thanks for the thoughtful post with your reasoning

 

[DJrmb]

This is why I come here. You disagree on something or have a different take. You respectfully add information to the picture of why you think something and some of it you interpret differently.

Example - item 5 - didn't know Clayton's input on this

Example - item 1 - I value the 16 games more than past history you point out that others will still look at injury history before

One of us may be right but doesn't mean we didn't have good thoughts on why we believe it and on we go. Much nicer tone and information than some of the other posts...... so thanks for the thoughtful post with your reasoning

Yeah man, I love when I can talk with someone who sees things different than me and learn from a different perspective. I love this team and I have my own opinions and thoughts on how to make it the best it can possibly be but I by no means think I have all the answers nor am I foolish enough to think I can't have thoughts that are completely wrong. I fully expect to be off my rocker with some of my thoughts and opinions and then to at times nail a few here and there.

Thanks for your input and thoughts man. Either way it goes, I hope it ends up being the exact right move by Pete and John to push open that SB window a little more. :irishdrinkers:

 

[TheHawkster]

You'd think that playing on field turf would help someone with bad ankles....... I mean it's a solid, consistent surface and all.
I'll take Joe average tackle that can stay on the field.

 

[hawknation2017]

It would be pretty sweet to get a 3rd round comp pick for Okung and then get him back the very next year. We're not getting any significant comp picks in 2018 anyway.

 

[Rob12]

Still not opposed to this happening if we can bring him back on a team friendly deal. Doubt it happens though.

 

[mikeak]

It would be pretty sweet to get a 3rd round comp pick for Okung and then get him back the very next year. We're not getting any significant comp picks in 2018 anyway.

Lol that is a really good point. If we sign him to a one year deal and he has a great year and we get another comp pick that would be even better

On a serious note if used right you could overpay a bit for FA that wants to prove something on a one year deal knowing if it works out you get comp picks. Also if the right guys are there you have a year like this where you should target more FAs knowing that you can mortgage a bit for the upcoming years when you will expect comp picks to help fill your roster.

 

[Cyrus12]

Not sure why everyone wants to see the guys who were good 5 years ago back on the team??? Okung is passed it and unless he signed a low cap hit number it wont happen. If it does happen expect to see his name associated to an ankle injury by week 1. PASS

 

[nash72]

Not sure why everyone wants to see the guys who were good 5 years ago back on the team???

Because our current crop of Oline players are so awful, that practically anything would be an upgrade and that includes Okung.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

That analogy might work,

if it was just a booty call and then you kick her out after you're done...

We kinda already did that. And his booty was SLOW......So, taking him back a 2nd time is a recipe for disaster. And DUMB.

So then who would you bring in? Or are you thinking Fant and Odhiambo are starting caliber tackles ready for a full season protecting Russell and opening running lanes?

Yes.

2016 gave us no reason to trust them. At best, they're as unproven as draft picks, and that's assuming that they'll improve after a full offseason of work. At worst, they...won't.