Mike Evans would you?

Discuss your thoughts about anything draft related. Mocks, College and Pro. Knock yourselves out!!! RATING: PG-13
Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:43 am
  • Scottemojo wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:That is a good problem to have, right?

    Definitely. But I was pointing that out because kearly said he would rather have Evans over Gordon (all things considering) because we would have Evans for 5 years at a relatively low cost.

    Well, Gordon would be asking for a new deal after this year, so there is that. With the tag option, though, we would control Evans for 5 years.

    Ha very true, you guys are right.
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1675
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:50 am
  • Scottemojo wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:That is a good problem to have, right?

    Definitely. But I was pointing that out because kearly said he would rather have Evans over Gordon (all things considering) because we would have Evans for 5 years at a relatively low cost.

    Well, Gordon would be asking for a new deal after this year, so there is that. With the tag option, though, we would control Evans for 5 years.



    Gordon is also 1 failed test away from a 1 year vacation from the NFL.
    [size=50]“Give me your Loud, your Proud,
    Your Jacked Up masses yearning to Scream free,
    The Winning refuse of your Sea Town shore.
    Send these, the Passionate, Loyal, to me:
    I lift my 12 Flag beside the Lombardi.”

    ― Emma Lazarus (If she was a 12) By BraHn
    [/size]
    Brahn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 739
    Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:06 am


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:54 am
  • I mentioned this in another thread but I'll post it here too. I don't think its likely but it may be possible that we are open to trading Sherman with his impending contract negotiations. There is no way we just replace Sherman like we did with Browner because Sherman is a far better cover corner and an elite playmaker. However Pete and Schneider know how to spot talent and Carrol is incredible in his ability to put together a good secondary. I don't think our defense would significantly drop off should Sherman be traded and with the upcoming contracts we have on this team we might be willing to trade with a team like the Lions at 10 who has big needs at corner.
    This also happens to be about the right spot to pick up Evans if we could pry their first and third from them I could see us doing it. It would give us 5 years of a cost controlled star who would pair up so extremely well with Wilson and free up the cash to keep Earl Thomas, Bennet, Wilson, and maybe even sign a guy like Jarred Allen or Greg Hardy.
    I love Sherman I really do, he adds that fire and determination that defines this team. He is an elite playmaking DB but when looking at the big picture should they get the right offer I think its not out of the question.
    Natethegreat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 710
    Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 7:21 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:59 am
  • Trade two times all pro (League's best at his position) so that we can get a guy who is all potential and haven't proven anything yet. I am a huge Mike Evans fan but really? Trade Sherman? wow!
    Richard Sherman to Skip Bayless: "I'm tired of your ignorant pollution!"

    Follow me on twitter: @seahawks_fan12
    User avatar
    SeahawksFanForever
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1993
    Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:11 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:10 am
  • SeahawksFanForever wrote:Trade two times all pro (League's best at his position) so that we can get a guy who is all potential and haven't proven anything yet. I am a huge Mike Evans fan but really? Trade Sherman? wow!

    I hear you but look at Petes' history of putting together strong secondaries. He is able to do it with defensive philosophy and ability to spot the kind of players that work in it. This ability has not gone away. As good as Sherman is I don't know if we can afford to pay him and Thomas and Wilson and Kam and Bennet and Lynch and Percy and Miller and Maxwell. Well you get the idea.
    Sherman has the kind of value to get that big package that would get us a star in Evans (for a cost controlled 5 years) and another possible player in the third maybe(hello Wilson).
    I'm not saying its likely but I bet they would do it if the right offer comes along.
    Natethegreat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 710
    Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 7:21 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:15 am
  • Natethegreat wrote:
    SeahawksFanForever wrote:Trade two times all pro (League's best at his position) so that we can get a guy who is all potential and haven't proven anything yet. I am a huge Mike Evans fan but really? Trade Sherman? wow!

    I hear you but look at Petes' history of putting together strong secondaries. He is able to do it with defensive philosophy and ability to spot the kind of players that work in it. This ability has not gone away. As good as Sherman is I don't know if we can afford to pay him and Thomas and Wilson and Kam and Bennet and Lynch and Percy and Miller and Maxwell. Well you get the idea.
    Sherman has the kind of value to get that big package that would get us a star in Evans (for a cost controlled 5 years) and another possible player in the third maybe(hello Wilson).
    I'm not saying its likely but I bet they would do it if the right offer comes along.

    I get what you're saying. It's not as far fetched as some want to make it seem. Heck Revis just got traded last off season.

    But what PC and JS have said is that they will identify the core of this team, and they will keep that core together. We can't and won't pay everyone, but we will pay to keep the core group of players that really make this go. I believe Sherm is part of that core.
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1675
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:17 am
  • kearly wrote:
    Attyla the Hawk wrote:I would not wish to make a similarly costly trade up for Evans -- that's way too much stock in a position that doesn't coincide with our core identity. It's an ancillary piece. We've committed to Harvin and I think we have to stand on that.

    This is a team that is already on the mountaintop. The challenge for this team is now to maintain quality across the board. To add talents so that we don't have to extend players who are good, but not great. This is a team built on breadth of talent. Good players everywhere and several rows deep.

    Trading up really moves away from what we are as a team. It's quality built on players who don't leave us salivating with anticipation. Guys who we kind of shrug and go 'guess we'll see what he looks like in August'.


    During that late season 4-game stretch when Seattle was without Rice and Harvin and facing good defenses that stopped respecting our WRs, Seattle averaged just 16 points a game on offense, and Wilson's passer rating was in the low 80s. Seattle's offense struggled to move the ball in their two home playoff games as well, relying on turnovers and big plays to reach 23 points in both games. At home.

    I really don't want to be in a situation where Seattle is one injury away from being highly vulnerable on offense, especially when that lynchpin player is maybe the biggest injury risk on the team. To me, getting another weapon is not a luxury. It is a need.

    As far as trading up, JS compared the Percy move to trading up last year, and he's right for doing so. So I wouldn't say it's out of character. Seattle has shown many times that they are capable of making bold moves to get a guy they think it a centerpiece player, whether that is in the draft, FA, or trade.

    Percy cost a ton, the cash aspect alone is probably as big a burden as the picks were. So if Seattle traded a ton of picks for Evans and paid him $3.5 million a year on his slotted deal, it's basically like doing the Percy trade all over again. Right now this team needs Percy insurance. Doesn't have to be another player just like Percy, but it does need to be a player that scares defenses deep.

    Maybe Seattle gets Brandon Coleman at #64 and there isn't any need to move up. But if you've watched Evans, you know this guy is going to be a STAR. Not "maybe a good player." The extra cost to get a very likely star at a position of dire need makes a lot of sense to me, especially since Seattle doesn't really have many needs elsewhere and usually does all their damage with late picks anyway.


    Sign me up. Can you imagine this offense with Evans, Harvin, and Wilson? That would cover up a lot of offensive line shortcomings (and, hey, maybe Bailey and Bowie are the answers). This mature team doesn't need as many draft picks as it used to, and the staff is the best in the NFL at finding gold late, in UDFA, value FA, the CFL, and off the street. Assuming they'd still do the Harvin trade if they had to do it again, and I bet they would, why not move up for Evans? When the move is there, you make it.
    formido
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 481
    Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:41 pm
    Location: Ventura, CA


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:22 am
  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Natethegreat wrote:
    SeahawksFanForever wrote:Trade two times all pro (League's best at his position) so that we can get a guy who is all potential and haven't proven anything yet. I am a huge Mike Evans fan but really? Trade Sherman? wow!

    I hear you but look at Petes' history of putting together strong secondaries. He is able to do it with defensive philosophy and ability to spot the kind of players that work in it. This ability has not gone away. As good as Sherman is I don't know if we can afford to pay him and Thomas and Wilson and Kam and Bennet and Lynch and Percy and Miller and Maxwell. Well you get the idea.
    Sherman has the kind of value to get that big package that would get us a star in Evans (for a cost controlled 5 years) and another possible player in the third maybe(hello Wilson).
    I'm not saying its likely but I bet they would do it if the right offer comes along.

    I get what you're saying. It's not as far fetched as some want to make it seem. Heck Revis just got traded last off season.

    But what PC and JS have said is that they will identify the core of this team, and they will keep that core together. We can't and won't pay everyone, but we will pay to keep the core group of players that really make this go. I believe Sherm is part of that core.

    That is the one reason I think it is unlikely and I have absolutely no problem hanging on to a guy like Sherman even though he is going to cost a ton. I guess it would depend on how much he wants from the Seahawks. If its 12 mill per year or over I bet they might consider it though.
    Natethegreat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 710
    Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 7:21 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:00 am
  • So what would it seriously take to move up and take evans this years one next years one are a give but would it take a third one or would one possible 2 2s be enough?
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:35 am
  • Scottemojo wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:That is a good problem to have, right?

    Definitely. But I was pointing that out because kearly said he would rather have Evans over Gordon (all things considering) because we would have Evans for 5 years at a relatively low cost.

    Well, Gordon would be asking for a new deal after this year, so there is that. With the tag option, though, we would control Evans for 5 years.

    Make that 6 years.

    My understanding is 1st round draft choices are signed to a 5-year contract with the team holding the option on the 5th year.

    Adding in the franchise tag possibility gets you to 6 years.
    your Superbowl XLVIII Champion Seattle Seahawks.. how sweet is that!!
    User avatar
    onanygivensunday
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3106
    Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 8:59 am


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:47 am
  • I'd love to have Evans but I think our draft picks are going to hold even more importance these next few years when we have to start replenishing the roster for the guys we won't be able to afford. I'm completely in favor of drafting a WR this year, just not trading up giving up a boat load to do so.. especially for Evans who IMO could crack the Top 10 of the draft when it's all said and done.

    If by some miracle he starts slipping, and a trade that WOULDNT break their backs compensation wise came about .. then sure I can see that.. I just dont see such a scenario happening.
    February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 5140
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 12:20 pm
  • Perhaps I just have a massive man crush on Evans, but I don't see another player in the draft that could impact the Hawks as much as Evans. The guy is exactly what this offense needs to be more self sufficient and less reliant on the defense. Obviously A full season of Harvin makes us better, but Evans out there as well? Fuggetaboutit! That kid is going to be a star in this league.

    So, clearly I'm in the "go get 'em" camp, but I'm not sure who is going to let go of their top 10-12 pick with all the talent up there. The carrot would have to be substantial, so I doubt it happens.
    User avatar
    Kakaww
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 226
    Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:38 pm
    Location: Lynnwood, Wa


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 12:36 pm
  • Kakaww wrote:Perhaps I just have a massive man crush on Evans, but I don't see another player in the draft that could impact the Hawks as much as Evans. The guy is exactly what this offense needs to be more self sufficient and less reliant on the defense. Obviously A full season of Harvin makes us better, but Evans out there as well? Fuggetaboutit! That kid is going to be a star in this league.

    So, clearly I'm in the "go get 'em" camp, but I'm not sure who is going to let go of their top 10-12 pick with all the talent up there. The carrot would have to be substantial, so I doubt it happens.


    Would have to agree would love it to happen but don't think its going to.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:26 pm
  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:That is a good problem to have, right?

    Definitely. But I was pointing that out because kearly said he would rather have Evans over Gordon (all things considering) because we would have Evans for 5 years at a relatively low cost.


    You still get 5 cheap years no matter what. You can accelerate the money from his extension into the last two years but it's not like those last two years stop being a bargain. If years 4 and 5 go up in price, it only means years 6,7,8 will go down in price.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11227
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:31 pm
  • Scottemojo wrote:Well, Gordon would be asking for a new deal after this year, so there is that. With the tag option, though, we would control Evans for 5 years.


    That fifth contract year that 1st round picks get is a pretty significant part of the equation, IMO. Even if they let him walk without franchising or extending, it's still five low cost years.
    Last edited by kearly on Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11227
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:39 pm
  • Hasselbeck wrote:I'd love to have Evans but I think our draft picks are going to hold even more importance these next few years when we have to start replenishing the roster for the guys we won't be able to afford. I'm completely in favor of drafting a WR this year, just not trading up giving up a boat load to do so.. especially for Evans who IMO could crack the Top 10 of the draft when it's all said and done.


    Would you trade Bruce Irvin, Christine Michael, and James Carpenter for Mike Evans? Those are our two most recent 1st rounders, and our most recent 2nd rounder. Obviously, we wouldn't trade those players, but I do think that group gives a fairly decent idea of what you'd be giving up. If we traded away the #32, #64, and a future 1st.

    Personally, I'm fine with it. Seattle can kill a draft just fine while missing a handful of early picks. Their draft production in the 14-74 draft pick range has been middling anyway.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11227
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:46 pm
  • kearly wrote:
    Hasselbeck wrote:I'd love to have Evans but I think our draft picks are going to hold even more importance these next few years when we have to start replenishing the roster for the guys we won't be able to afford. I'm completely in favor of drafting a WR this year, just not trading up giving up a boat load to do so.. especially for Evans who IMO could crack the Top 10 of the draft when it's all said and done.


    Would you trade Bruce Irvin, Christine Michael, and James Carpenter for Mike Evans? Those are our two most recent 1st rounders, and our most recent 2nd rounder. Obviously, we wouldn't trade those players, but I do think that group gives a fairly decent idea of what you'd be giving up. If we traded away the #32, #64, and a future 1st.

    Personally, I'm fine with it. Seattle can kill a draft just fine while missing a handful of early picks. Their draft production in the 14-74 draft pick range has been middling anyway.


    If that is all it would take to move up I would be all for it but I think it could be 3 1sts honestly.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Tue Feb 25, 2014 11:45 pm
  • I don't think he is Julio Jones caliber. But he looks liek he could be in the elite tier of WR's if put in the right situation. Besides his mesuarables I think that fact that he played with a QB who got out of the pocket and made big plays on the fly makes me think he'd be a great fit. I don't think he would slip past 13 and to get up that high, we'd have to give our 1st, 2nd and next years first. might even take more than that. Considering we could probably get Kelvin Benjamin in the mid 20's that would only take our 2nd or next years 1st.
    Image
    User avatar
    Wenhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2181
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:15 am
  • Watching Evans' highlights, he sure padded manziels stats. Jump ball after jump ball, often on some real ugly throws.

    I know they were mutually beneficial to each other but geez. Manziel and Evans won't get away with that too often in the NFL.
    User avatar
    Smellyman
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 990
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:58 pm
    Location: Taipei


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:35 am
  • Wenhawk wrote:I don't think he is Julio Jones caliber. But he looks liek he could be in the elite tier of WR's if put in the right situation. Besides his mesuarables I think that fact that he played with a QB who got out of the pocket and made big plays on the fly makes me think he'd be a great fit. I don't think he would slip past 13 and to get up that high, we'd have to give our 1st, 2nd and next years first. might even take more than that. Considering we could probably get Kelvin Benjamin in the mid 20's that would only take our 2nd or next years 1st.


    Not impressed with KB at all honestly he has major drop issues sure he made the game winning catch in the bcs but he also made a bunch of drops before that. Evans doesn't seem to have that issue at all.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Feb 26, 2014 7:25 am
  • I was trying to find someone to compare KB to. Does anyone else think Mike Williams is pretty fair? Similar size and stature, both catch well with hands and highpoint the ball well.
    Image
    User avatar
    Wenhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2181
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Feb 26, 2014 7:34 am
  • Wenhawk wrote:I was trying to find someone to compare KB to. Does anyone else think Mike Williams is pretty fair? Similar size and stature, both catch well with hands and highpoint the ball well.


    He had a drop rate of just under 10% that is not the mark of someone who catches well rofl.



    I can find a highlight video of some amazing drops for cripes sake.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Feb 26, 2014 7:40 am
  • I was meaning he catches with his hands vs body. Many WRs can't snatch it out of the air with their hands and use their body to cradle it . From what I have seen multiple time KB using his size and hops to get up and grab it. Evans is very good at that as well but difference between moving into the top 10 vs mid 20 ' s is huge. On a team that doesn't rely on the pass do much we really on need the threat of a bug jump ball Wr to open the field. Neither Evans or KB would get over 50 catches on this team but is 4 or 5 extra drops worth an extra 1st round pick?
    Image
    User avatar
    Wenhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2181
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Feb 26, 2014 8:16 am
  • Here is the thing how many more seasons does lynch have honestly its quite possible the hawks could be transitioning to not necessarily an air raid O but one more emphasizing the talents of Russell Wilson. Also I think an extra first round pick is worth it to have the Red Zone massive target that you know is going to catch it on the last play of the game vs the one who might drop it. Remember how many TDs were dropped on the last drive against the cards it was like 7 or something absurd in Russ's rookie year. How nice would it be to have that giant target with great hands.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:08 am
  • kearly wrote:You still get 5 cheap years no matter what. You can accelerate the money from his extension into the last two years but it's not like those last two years stop being a bargain. If years 4 and 5 go up in price, it only means years 6,7,8 will go down in price.


    :229031_confused2: I wish I understood this stuff more
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1675
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:15 am
  • I really want this to happen now I just keep imagining a 3 receiver set of Evans 1 DB 2 Percy slot; who the hell do you cover because whoever you double the other 2 are going to burn you.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Thu Feb 27, 2014 10:17 pm
  • Latest Daniel Jerimiah mock has Evans going 9th overall.

    I think his combine just solidified Evans going Top 10.. I'm just worried the 49ers wouldn't be interested in trading up for him since they have a boat load of picks.
    February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 5140
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:42 am
  • randomation wrote:
    Wenhawk wrote:I was trying to find someone to compare KB to. Does anyone else think Mike Williams is pretty fair? Similar size and stature, both catch well with hands and highpoint the ball well.


    He had a drop rate of just under 10% that is not the mark of someone who catches well rofl.



    I can find a highlight video of some amazing drops for cripes sake.


    Wes Wellkers drop rate was 9% this year.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2550
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:50 am
  • With how little we throw the ball, you gotta catch the ball. A lot of those look like straight up trying to get up field before he has the ball, that can be coached up. I just don't see how he's a better prospect than Matthews, Coleman, or even ASJ when it comes to pass catchers
    Image
    3elieve
    User avatar
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 19215
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:24 am
  • K____ _______n
    K____ _______n

    Hint: 1 is a prospect. The other is a former Seahawk.

    They have similarities.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15451
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:28 am
  • Throwdown wrote:With how little we throw the ball, you gotta catch the ball. A lot of those look like straight up trying to get up field before he has the ball, that can be coached up. I just don't see how he's a better prospect than Matthews, Coleman, or even ASJ when it comes to pass catchers


    Matthews needs to be more consistent in catching the ball. I would say he's average -- maybe even a shade under average at that. He makes a LOT of catches, some of really spectacular variety. But he had a good number of drops and I'd say most of the ones I saw were just on him.

    Generally, I don't necessarily ding prospects for consistency issues. I look for the ability to flash good hands occasionally, and a genuine tendency to try to catch the ball with the hands in the correct position. Matthews, when he does drop them, it's just not securing balls in his hands. He isn't a body catcher. It's much harder to convert a body catcher (like Coleman) into a consistent hand catcher than it is to just get better at hand catching.

    Consistency comes with work. The NCAA is just too restrictive with their practice limits to really work on that. Unless you are just naturally great at catching the ball, it's going to be an issue. Those things are correctable. In general, I like the basis from where Matthews starts in terms of catching the ball correctly. With the body of work and the catches he does make, he clearly doesn't have hands of stone.

    Coleman is a guy I've long had a nagging concern with. He doesn't pluck the ball out of the air with his hands with regularity. He also looks a little awkward when he does catch balls (a liability shared by Benjamin). Balls tend to just eat him up like a tricky grounder to a utility infielder. He didn't improve his tracking of the ball in the air in my estimation, nor did he really grow in his catching skills. By all accounts I've heard -- he is a very willing worker. But the results this year has been really disappointing to me.

    I don't think it's all on the knee. I'm just talking ball skills. He just doesn't appear to have developed this year in that regard. I would have liked to see him flash improvement in that area.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 730
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Fri Feb 28, 2014 10:43 am
  • ImTheScientist wrote:
    randomation wrote:
    Wenhawk wrote:I was trying to find someone to compare KB to. Does anyone else think Mike Williams is pretty fair? Similar size and stature, both catch well with hands and highpoint the ball well.


    He had a drop rate of just under 10% that is not the mark of someone who catches well rofl.



    I can find a highlight video of some amazing drops for cripes sake.


    Wes Wellkers drop rate was 9% this year.


    Its not just the rate its how he drops them he makes some incredibly acrobatic catches but he also drops a lot of easy ones he doesn't secure the ball he turns to go up field before its secure and body catches a lot he only catches away from his body on difficult catches. Which yeah its great he wins 50/50s but he drops a lot of easy balls.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Mon Mar 03, 2014 1:08 pm
  • kearly wrote:
    Hasselbeck wrote:I'd love to have Evans but I think our draft picks are going to hold even more importance these next few years when we have to start replenishing the roster for the guys we won't be able to afford. I'm completely in favor of drafting a WR this year, just not trading up giving up a boat load to do so.. especially for Evans who IMO could crack the Top 10 of the draft when it's all said and done.


    Would you trade Bruce Irvin, Christine Michael, and James Carpenter for Mike Evans? Those are our two most recent 1st rounders, and our most recent 2nd rounder. Obviously, we wouldn't trade those players, but I do think that group gives a fairly decent idea of what you'd be giving up. If we traded away the #32, #64, and a future 1st.

    Personally, I'm fine with it. Seattle can kill a draft just fine while missing a handful of early picks. Their draft production in the 14-74 draft pick range has been middling anyway.


    I hate to say it, but I would trade Bruce Irvin, Christine Michael, and James Carpenter IN A HEARTBEAT RIGHT NOW THIS SECOND for Mike Evans. Similarly, I would trade our 1st, 2nd, and next years 1st to get it done as well. In a heartbeat.

    If, say, Tennessee at #9 would take the players, we could draft Evans at #9. And still have our #32 & 64 to draft a G, OLB, or RB. If they wanted the picks, we would gain Evans and lose the conundrum of how to get a big WR with either the 32 or 64, &/or waiting until next year to try again. It would be basically the Percy Harvin trade once more, except this time for Evans.

    If we came out of this draft with Mike Evans, and a bunch of 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and UDFA guys to bolster our youth and depth... I would be ecstatic.

    Think about it.
    Last edited by kigenzun on Mon Mar 03, 2014 1:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    kigenzun
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 392
    Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:37 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Mon Mar 03, 2014 1:13 pm
  • kigenzun wrote:
    kearly wrote:
    Hasselbeck wrote:I'd love to have Evans but I think our draft picks are going to hold even more importance these next few years when we have to start replenishing the roster for the guys we won't be able to afford. I'm completely in favor of drafting a WR this year, just not trading up giving up a boat load to do so.. especially for Evans who IMO could crack the Top 10 of the draft when it's all said and done.


    Would you trade Bruce Irvin, Christine Michael, and James Carpenter for Mike Evans? Those are our two most recent 1st rounders, and our most recent 2nd rounder. Obviously, we wouldn't trade those players, but I do think that group gives a fairly decent idea of what you'd be giving up. If we traded away the #32, #64, and a future 1st.

    Personally, I'm fine with it. Seattle can kill a draft just fine while missing a handful of early picks. Their draft production in the 14-74 draft pick range has been middling anyway.


    I hate to say it, but I would trade Bruce Irvin, Christine Michael, and James Carpenter IN A HEARTBEAT RIGHT NOW THIS SECOND for Mike Evans. Similarly, I would trade our 1st, 2nd, and next years 1st to get it done as well. In a heartbeat.

    If, say, Tennessee at #9 would take the players, we could draft Evans at #9. And still have our #32 & 64 to draft a G, OLB, or RB. If they wanted the picks, we would gain Evans and lose the conundrum of how to get a big WR with either the 32 or 64, or wait until next year to try again. It would be basically the Percy Harvin trade all over again, except this time for Evans.

    If we came out of this draft with Mike Evans, and a bunch of 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and UDFA guys to bolster our youth and depth... I would be ecstatic.

    Think about it.


    Agreed much easier for Russ to let go of a fast pass with someone like Evans since he can easily put it up where only Evans will get it. Having a receiver like Evans would actually be greatly helpful to the line since you can just get the ball off so much faster with a target like him. Evans made Manziel look much better then he is honestly watching his mad scrambles half the time he just tosses the ball in Evans direction and prays and Evans makes an incredible play on it make the catch.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Mon Mar 03, 2014 2:06 pm
  • If that's the cost for trading up for Evans (2 first rounders and a second rounder), then I'd have to ask:

    Would it be worth signing Jimmy Graham away from New Orleans? Particularly as he's now a non exclusive franchise tag player.

    Obviously, the Evans cost would be less on the cap. And he's younger (21 v. 27).

    If you're looking at a special player capable of creating a mismatch -- I don't think you can arrive at a more suitable player for that aim than Graham. Matchup nightmare at the TE position.

    We'd be rolling over Miller's contract for that and having to cut elsewhere too. But by how much? I mean Miller is due 7m. Any first round pick is going to command close to 1m. We're probably talking maybe a less than 2m at that point. But Evans' ceiling I'm not sure is equal to Graham's current ability. I don't see Evans being the gold standard at his position (particularly for Seattle). And you're not going to get a better big red zone target than Graham. If you want a guy to get the jump ball -- Graham does that better than anyone in the league.

    You'd be trading youth and cheap 1st round contracts for a sure thing. Also, I'm not convinced you'd be getting similar production as New Orleans' style of play is different from ours. But I can't help but wonder what kind of offense we could roll out there, with Harvin and Graham lined up next to each other. And I can't help but think that Graham could exploit the middle of the field and open up that portion of the field where Wilson tends to struggle comparatively speaking.

    It's pretty clear, our window of opportunity is right now. And it's also looking like it'll be around for awhile. Graham is just entering his prime and we would likely be getting him for his entire prime of his career. In a trade up scenario, if it's going to cost more in draft picks to get Evans -- then I have to wonder if a lesser cost in terms of picks would be worth exploring at the expense of cap space. If we're trading two late first round picks for that kind of quality -- it could be an alternative worth exploring.

    Obviously we can't keep trading away 1st round talent. But as noted even last year -- the expected quality of those picks is very suspect. Harvin was worth 3 picks. I have to think Graham is similarly worth those picks relative to what we should expect to get at #32.

    I guess I'd just as soon get Graham and draft Coleman later. Rather than just have Evans and Miller. And remember, we could just as well execute a sign and trade with NO. I'm sure they will require 2 first round picks. But possibly we manage to recoup a third rounder in the deal for future considerations? I'd rather have a 3rd rounder this year than say next year.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 730
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Mon Mar 03, 2014 2:26 pm
  • Would rather have evans then "I'm Jimmy" to be completely honest. Also I can see Luke developing into a version of Jimmy that can actually block if he can work on his hands vertical tight end threat will be covered.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Mon Mar 03, 2014 2:36 pm
  • Obviously I'm a huge Evans fan but I disagree with your assessment that Evans top end won't be as good as Graham. In fact Graham is overrated imo. Soft and easily knocked off his game. I would much prefer a younger cheaper higher upside(imo) Evans than Graham. Its all moot anyway. There is no way we can afford to sign him in the first place.
    Natethegreat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 710
    Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 7:21 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Sat Mar 08, 2014 5:12 pm
  • I wonder if Detroit would be open to trading their first pick(#10) for Percy Harvin and Jeron Johnson. It would give them another explosive playmaker at a position of need for them (receiver) plus fill another big hole at safety.
    On our part we would open up the cap space we need to keep Bennet, Tate, and possibly Breno, plus get Thomas and Sherman extended. Not to mention we would have an excellent shot at getting Evans as I don't see him going before ten and we get to keep out first pick.
    Natethegreat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 710
    Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 7:21 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Sat Mar 08, 2014 11:18 pm
  • After seeing what Percy did in a single game I don't really want him playing for anyone else honestly I would rather trade away this year and next years first and something else and get Evans put Percy in the slot ADB at the 2 and Evans at the 1.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Sun Mar 09, 2014 4:17 am
  • I hate Kelvin Benjamin as a receiver. Over. Rated.
    I enjoy ruining threads by making them about personal attacks and then commenting about how personal attacks make the other person's argument invalid.

    :les:
    User avatar
    SonicHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8047
    Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Mar 12, 2014 11:42 am
  • With the expected loss of Tate, I'd favor trading up slightly for OBJ. Size notwithstanding, I am more bullish on Beckham than Evans. Although I concede Evans fills a much harder role to fill. Beckham to me is more electrifying and would be a near ideal approximation to what Tate provided including punt return ability. The cost should be far less to move up for Beckham. Particularly given the talent depth in this years' draft.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 730
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Mar 12, 2014 1:21 pm
  • What would the actual cost be?
    32 & 64 ?
    32 & 128 ?
    32 & the Matt Flynn pick from the Raiders ?
    32 & a pick from next year ?

    And how far do you figure we would have to move up to get OBJ... #20? #25?
    User avatar
    kigenzun
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 392
    Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:37 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Mar 12, 2014 2:00 pm
  • kigenzun wrote:What would the actual cost be?
    32 & 64 ?
    32 & 128 ?
    32 & the Matt Flynn pick from the Raiders ?
    32 & a pick from next year ?

    And how far do you figure we would have to move up to get OBJ... #20? #25?


    I'd expect to have to move up to that range of 20-25 for OBJ. That typically is a first and third type deal. We'd have to get creative of sorts. Probably 1st and 2nd for their 1st and 3rd.

    For Evans. Probably moving to around 8-10 overall. St. Louis went 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th for a 1st and 3rd. Could be a 1st, 2nd, 4th and another choice for a 1st and 5th/6th. Perhaps even more since we'd be moving WAY up further than StL did. StL's move was similar to Atlanta's. That was a 1st, 2nd, 4th and following years' 1st and 4th for just the one 1st. That's likely more the cost we'd be looking at. We'd be trading our day 1 and 2 picks this year, our day 1 picks next year and the first picks of day 3 in both years.

    Honestly, it's a Julio Jones type of trade up. Possible partners being the Lions/Bills/Titans. Teams we don't have a lot of history with. The Lions may well be a suitor, as their needs are definitely DB related and they could still get studs at 32 overall. Bills are looking OT most likely and would miss out on a LT. Titans could be holding out for a QB. Figure the Lions would get it done.

    If he slid some however, then the Giants would make sense. They need a lot of trench upgrades. They could really fix that OL with 3 picks in the top 2 rounds. Cost should go down considerably. But I'd expect to lose 1st, 2nd and 4th this year at minimum. Probably a 2nd in 2015.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 730
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Mar 12, 2014 5:33 pm
  • Attyla the Hawk wrote:
    kigenzun wrote:What would the actual cost be?
    32 & 64 ?
    32 & 128 ?
    32 & the Matt Flynn pick from the Raiders ?
    32 & a pick from next year ?

    And how far do you figure we would have to move up to get OBJ... #20? #25?


    I'd expect to have to move up to that range of 20-25 for OBJ. That typically is a first and third type deal. We'd have to get creative of sorts. Probably 1st and 2nd for their 1st and 3rd.

    For Evans. Probably moving to around 8-10 overall. St. Louis went 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th for a 1st and 3rd. Could be a 1st, 2nd, 4th and another choice for a 1st and 5th/6th. Perhaps even more since we'd be moving WAY up further than StL did. StL's move was similar to Atlanta's. That was a 1st, 2nd, 4th and following years' 1st and 4th for just the one 1st. That's likely more the cost we'd be looking at. We'd be trading our day 1 and 2 picks this year, our day 1 picks next year and the first picks of day 3 in both years.

    Honestly, it's a Julio Jones type of trade up. Possible partners being the Lions/Bills/Titans. Teams we don't have a lot of history with. The Lions may well be a suitor, as their needs are definitely DB related and they could still get studs at 32 overall. Bills are looking OT most likely and would miss out on a LT. Titans could be holding out for a QB. Figure the Lions would get it done.

    If he slid some however, then the Giants would make sense. They need a lot of trench upgrades. They could really fix that OL with 3 picks in the top 2 rounds. Cost should go down considerably. But I'd expect to lose 1st, 2nd and 4th this year at minimum. Probably a 2nd in 2015.


    The Lions might be a possible partner now that they picked up Tate to fill their receiver hole I expected them to take Evans before that.
    randomation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 262
    Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:35 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:24 pm
  • randomation wrote:
    Attyla the Hawk wrote:
    kigenzun wrote:What would the actual cost be?
    32 & 64 ?
    32 & 128 ?
    32 & the Matt Flynn pick from the Raiders ?
    32 & a pick from next year ?

    And how far do you figure we would have to move up to get OBJ... #20? #25?


    I'd expect to have to move up to that range of 20-25 for OBJ. That typically is a first and third type deal. We'd have to get creative of sorts. Probably 1st and 2nd for their 1st and 3rd.

    For Evans. Probably moving to around 8-10 overall. St. Louis went 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th for a 1st and 3rd. Could be a 1st, 2nd, 4th and another choice for a 1st and 5th/6th. Perhaps even more since we'd be moving WAY up further than StL did. StL's move was similar to Atlanta's. That was a 1st, 2nd, 4th and following years' 1st and 4th for just the one 1st. That's likely more the cost we'd be looking at. We'd be trading our day 1 and 2 picks this year, our day 1 picks next year and the first picks of day 3 in both years.

    Honestly, it's a Julio Jones type of trade up. Possible partners being the Lions/Bills/Titans. Teams we don't have a lot of history with. The Lions may well be a suitor, as their needs are definitely DB related and they could still get studs at 32 overall. Bills are looking OT most likely and would miss out on a LT. Titans could be holding out for a QB. Figure the Lions would get it done.

    If he slid some however, then the Giants would make sense. They need a lot of trench upgrades. They could really fix that OL with 3 picks in the top 2 rounds. Cost should go down considerably. But I'd expect to lose 1st, 2nd and 4th this year at minimum. Probably a 2nd in 2015.


    The Lions might be a possible partner now that they picked up Tate to fill their receiver hole I expected them to take Evans before that.


    Exactly. Now they are free to fill their other major need: DB. And they can do that well even from the 32 spot. Which would simply mean we'd need to add enough value with extra picks to offset not getting Gilbert or Dennard, but still getting a Verrett or Roby or Fuller.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 730
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Fri Mar 14, 2014 8:13 am
  • Depending on the cost, of course. Evans would fill a need.
    Opinion has caused more trouble on this little earth than plagues or earthquakes.
    -Voltaire
    User avatar
    HawkMeat
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 401
    Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 6:56 am
    Location: Kidnap County


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:14 pm
  • I'd definitely consider it. Probably not if it takes the capital needed to move up into the top 10, but if he starts to slide down into the teens...
    User avatar
    ErikG803
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 978
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:53 pm


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Sun Mar 16, 2014 10:02 pm
  • Dude signed with Cash Money Sports...really?
    User avatar
    -The Glove-
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7207
    Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:46 pm
  • If Kelvin Benjamin was already a complete receiver with his size and ability in the redzone, then we wouldn't even be talking about him as a late round guy. He'd be at the top of the draft and would therefore be an afterthought here. Talking about his drops is like missing the forrest for the trees. What CAN he do? What's special about his measurables? What positives has he shown on tape? IMO, there's a lot there to like. Yes, there are things to nitpick, but those little things largely seem like coachable issues to me.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3921
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


Re: Mike Evans would you?
Fri Apr 04, 2014 3:54 pm
  • Bills traded for Mike Williams so this increases the odds that Evans fall to the teens IMO. Please trade up.
    Image
    User avatar
    oasis
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 458
    Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:01 am


PreviousNext


It is currently Fri Oct 24, 2014 7:05 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE NCAA FOOTBALL & PRO DRAFT FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests