Signing or Trade ?

[SoulfishHawk]

That's your opinion, and you have a right to it.
Also, you WANTED Adams and Diggs to stay? Not really much else needs to be said after that comment.

 

[QWERTY]

That's your opinion, and you have a right to it.
Also, you WANTED Adams and Diggs to stay? Not really much else needs to be said after that comment.

Of course I wanted them to stay. But I would put Adams as LB not as Safety.

Diggs and Love played decently well against the Eagles and other teams.

The Seahawks still could had made the playoffs next season with a few changes. Getting their whole D back and with Nwosu, then as I said then re-signing Williams, would make the D a contender.

 

[GeekHawk]

I mentioned (in another thread) that I thought we re-structured Geno in order to be able to afford the whole hit of cutting Jamal in this year and be ready to take the hit of getting rid of Geno next year if it comes to that. Then the cap got increased, and I was certain we were going to do this. It doesn't necessarily mean we're 'planning to tank', and it's not like we're taking cap hits to get rid of productive stars here or anything.

 

[DarkVictory23]

I mentioned (in another thread) that I thought we re-structured Geno in order to be able to afford the whole hit of cutting Jamal in this year and be ready to take the hit of getting rid of Geno next year if it comes to that. Then the cap got increased, and I was certain we were going to do this. It doesn't necessarily mean we're 'planning to tank', and it's not like we're taking cap hits to get rid of productive stars here or anything.

I don't know why some folks think we're tanking based on this. Nothing the Seahawks have done (so far) suggests tanking.

• If we were tanking, Geno would have been gone. He's obviously too old to be the long-term future at QB and there wasn't any financial downside to cutting him prior to his guaranteed money kicking in. His value is literally next year/maybe year after if he plays well next year.
• We've already been reported to be in talks with Williams with regards to attempting to re-sign. He's going to be 30. No reason to even enter talks with the guy if we're tanking next season.
• Not designating Adams as a post-June 1st cut signals to me that they're trying to sign some free agents this year, not later.
• The other two guys cut are the type of players you let go if you're trying to make a more competitive roster now. Who cares if Dissly or Diggs played out their contracts in 2024 if all you care about is cap space in 2025? They were going to be UFA in 2025. I think the hate on Diggs is overblown on this board, but the fact is his contract was wildly out of touch with his value and that's a similar issue with Dissly.

Now, what they do when free agency opens and/or during the draft could completely upend this line of thinking, but it looks to me like they're trying to win next year which is pretty exciting for me as a fan.

 

[onanygivensunday]

With Pete gone, can I still say.. I'm P&J'ed for next year?

Cuz I am.

 

[QWERTY]

I don't know why some folks think we're tanking based on this. Nothing the Seahawks have done (so far) suggests tanking.

• If we were tanking, Geno would have been gone. He's obviously too old to be the long-term future at QB and there wasn't any financial downside to cutting him prior to his guaranteed money kicking in. His value is literally next year/maybe year after if he plays well next year.
• We've already been reported to be in talks with Williams with regards to attempting to re-sign. He's going to be 30. No reason to even enter talks with the guy if we're tanking next season.
• Not designating Adams as a post-June 1st cut signals to me that they're trying to sign some free agents this year, not later.
• The other two guys cut are the type of players you let go if you're trying to make a more competitive roster now. Who cares if Dissly or Diggs played out their contracts in 2024 if all you care about is cap space in 2025? They were going to be UFA in 2025. I think the hate on Diggs is overblown on this board, but the fact is his contract was wildly out of touch with his value and that's a similar issue with Dissly.

Now, what they do when free agency opens and/or during the draft could completely upend this line of thinking, but it looks to me like they're trying to win next year which is pretty exciting for me as a fan.

1. Geno could be traded, and there are many teams that would like him. In no order Cards, Falcons, Panthers, Browns, Broncos, Raiders, Dolphins, Vikings, Patriots, Giants, Titans, Commanders.

Yes he can be signed for cheap like 8mill per year, or 9mill. But there's no way he would accept an low ball offer.

 

[DarkVictory23]

1. Geno could be traded, and there are many teams that would like him. In no order Cards, Falcons, Panthers, Browns, Broncos, Raiders, Dolphins, Vikings, Patriots, Giants, Titans, Commanders.

Yes he can be signed for cheap like 8mill per year, or 9mill. But there's no way he would accept an low ball offer.

Geno CAN be traded but that hasn't happened, which is why I said nothing we've done so far looks like tanking.

And this is a terrible year to try and get good compensation for Geno because of all the free agents and QB heavy draft that is happening. On top of that, the Seahawks have reportedly already committed to Geno being on the team next season which indicates that unless they do get some crazy offer (which as I just laid out is pretty unlikely) they plan to keep him.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Come on Dark. If you're gonna' talk about tanking, you need to ask the expert, Fade.

 

[sutz]

Do we know which ones, if any, were designated as post Jun 1 cuts?

 

[Kamcussionator]

Do we know which ones, if any, were designated as post Jun 1 cuts?

They are all released outright. Cap hit all comes this year.

My feeling is they are going to focus on the transition this year: install the new systems, learn the players, and clear cap for next year. The always comPETE guy has left the building so we can say 'rebuild' again...

 

[BASF]

I can not understand how anyone could watch the low effort from Adams and Diggs (who played hard in spots, but not on a consistent basis) and believe that this is not an addition by subtraction with their releases. It is possible, however unlikely, that neither of them respected the defense Hurtt put together and were not giving their full effort. But, you can not keep players around who dog it too much or it infects other players. Didn't it seem like that happened last season as effort seemed to be waning against better teams?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Effort wasn't the issue with Adams. Diggs, on the other hand, looked like he didn't even care much of the time.
And both of them played like sh**. Dueces

 

[Titus Pullo]

Monday thru Friday is going to be crazy.

 

[Chawker]

God sign the Queen !

 

[QWERTY]

God sign the Queen !

About 40mill in cap.

And you want to sign the Queen which would cost around 18-20mill. With all the empty holes that they have.

Loss 2 Guards, 1 Center, 3 Tight Ends.
Loss: 3 LB's 2 Safety. 1 DT.

Even with Queen in this roster, he isn't doing anything.

 

[flv2]

Out of curiosity is there a clear and obvious prospect in the 2025 Draft that a team might intentionally tank for? I don't follow college football. Luck was 1 back in the day and Williams sort of was this year. The only broad tank for a non #1 position I can think of was the Eagles when they took Hurts out of their final game and moved up from #9 to #6 with a loss.

 

[Fade]

About 40mill in cap.

And you want to sign the Queen which would cost around 18-20mill. With all the empty holes that they have.

Loss 2 Guards, 1 Center, 3 Tight Ends.
Loss: 3 LB's 2 Safety. 1 DT.

Even with Queen in this roster, he isn't doing anything.

That's not how big contracts are structured in the NFL.

Yr 1 the cap hits come in low. They don't go by APY in year 1.

Queen as an example, would come in at about $6M, give or take a million in year 1. On a long term deal.

The way it works with the big contracts is they sign a monster signing bonus.

Say, for $20M in Queen's case for this hypothetical, then a low base to go with it. say $2M.

Queen would get $22M in year 1, but the signing bonus is prorated up to 5 years.

20÷5 = 4M + 2M base = $6M cap hit in 2024. Even if they pay him $20M+ APY over the length of the contract his cap hit will be low in yr 1 of the deal.

When teams are looking at high priced Free Agents, they aren't worried about the short-term cost, but the long-term, when the numbers balloon.

 

[getnasty]

Patrick Queen without Roquan Smith was not good. That's not to say he wouldn't be good now but seems like a bit of a risk. At the same time MM will know what he's all about.

 

[flv2]

That's not how big contracts are structured in the NFL.

Yr 1 the cap hits come in low. They don't go by APY in year 1.

Queen as an example, would come in at about $6M, give or take a million in year 1. On a long term deal.

The way it works with the big contracts is they sign a monster signing bonus.

Say, for $20M in Queen's case for this hypothetical, then a low base to go with it. say $2M.

Queen would get $22M in year 1, but the signing bonus is prorated up to 5 years.

20÷5 = 4M + 2M base = $6M cap hit in 2024. Even if they pay him $20M+ APY over the length of the contract his cap hit will be low in yr 1 of the deal.

When teams are looking at high priced Free Agents, they aren't worried about the short-term cost, but the long-term, when the numbers balloon.

Teams are, (or should be), looking at what will be the true total cost at every cut/trade point. Cap shenanigans are just a mechanism for maximising cap space and flexibility.