UPDATE: Seahawks traded for Percy Harvin

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • kearly wrote:Not to sound harsh, but I think a few people are being naive with regards to value/money. Sure, Seattle can keep their essential players even with the Harvin investment. I made the same argument in my Revis thread. However, there is no escaping the fact that this acquisition will cost Seattle multiple players. 3 players from the draft alone, and 2-3 more from the financial side too. It's basically a "blockbuster" trade a bit like when the Knicks traded for Carmello or the M's traded for Erik Bedard. I think Harvin will work out better than those deals did, but I don't think we should just downplay the cost to justify liking the move.

    In trying to put faces on this trade (take this with a grain of salt), we basically acquired Harvin in exchange for something that might resemble this: Datone Jones (1st round), Kenny Stills (7th round), D'Anthony Thomas (3rd round next year), Kam Chancellor (maybe $7 million a year), Jason Jones (maybe $5 million a year). It doesn't have to be those names, but it would be a comparable package of talent.

    Additionally, the damage from this trade may possibly compound if Seattle feels they must work back into the first round this year for a pass rusher, just like how the Deon Butler trade kept coming back to bite us in the ass for years due to a draft domino effect (not having a 3rd in 2010 forced us to overpay for CW, the lack of a 3rd rounder the following year from the CW trade forced Seattle to trade down which contributed to a very weak start to that 2011 Seahawks draft).

    Reworking contracts is never a given, btw. Look at how many players refused pay cuts in recent weeks and were let go as a result. If you approach Rice, Miller, or Bryant about reworking their deals, you better have a backup plan for their positions, because the odds are pretty good that they wouldn't accept a pay cut and you'll have to get rid of them.

    I know you hear this a lot, Kip, but I am grateful that you're a member of this community. You bring balance to the force.

    The reflexive "In Schneider I Trust" stuff echoes the "In Ruskell I Trust" mantra that dominated this board a few years ago. Pete and John are clearly better than Ruskell and have done some wonderful things, but they make their share of mistakes too. I understand fans wanting to be excited and Harvin is a nice player, but the Seahawks overpaid. More productive players with fewer red flags have been acquired for less. Teams overpay when they think they are a piece or two away from a championship, and perhaps the Seahawks are. But, if you follow sports at all, you have seen teams across all the major leagues try this impatient approach with usually deleterious results.

    If Harvin stays healthy he will certainly be a dynamic player. Bevell is probably already adding plays to exploit his many gifts and, in conjunction with Wilson, we may see plays and formations never previously attempted in the NFL. But, there is also a significant probability that some of his injury issues resurface or that his attitude problems are irreparable. In which case the theoretical five players in Kearly's post will deserve some retroactive consideration. To me, 5 good players is better than 1 great player, unless that one player is so incredibly special and durable and reliable that his presence tilts the field. I can maybe think of couple dozen players that could do that and, at this point, Harvin isn't one of them.
    "It was so loud Derrick Coleman heard it."
    User avatar
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 500
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:44 pm


  • Yeah I'm Canadian (ie. the country that doesn't owe 4 trillion dollars to China). We're hella good with money yo.

    Guys, I think it's time to transition the thinking away from the draft a little bit. At least get away from scouring the mid rounds for those oh so awesome diamonds in teh rough we've become so accustomed to finding. Pete himself said it's going to be very hard for rookies to crack the line-up going forward on account of the fact that this team has very few holes now. In light of that, what is the point of stockpiling 15 draft picks if only 1 or 2 of them are goign to stick? I said this early in the regime's tenure; as they build the team, it looks like the plan is to trade their valuable early picks back to stockpile mid round picks to fill out the roster with role players. As the roster gets filled out, the plan will likely flip to packaging up those mid round picks and moving them for early picks to move up and obtain playmakers.

    At 24 y/o (remember, last year's 1st round pick Bruce Irvin was 24) trading what we traded for Harvin is damn near the equivalent of moving up a few spots in the first round to draft the best playmaker available. If there was three or four playmakers in the first round of the actual draft they had their eye on, there is zero guarantee they get their guy (and there is zero evidence that guy will produce in the NFL). By trading the picks for the player, they are guaranteed to get their man and that man is a very well known comodity. If they are so inclined, they still have plenty of ammo to move up into the early 2nd round to draft a dude like Kawaan Short.

    If all we do this season is get Percey Harvin and Kawaan Short, I'd be happy as hell with this off season. If through the magic of John Schneider we also manage to bring in another candidate to play Will, I'll be even happier.

    Now everyone go out and get some poutine!
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11305
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • Thunderhawk wrote:The reflexive "In Schneider I Trust" stuff echoes the "In Ruskell I Trust" mantra that dominated this board a few years ago. Pete and John are clearly better than Ruskell and have done some wonderful things, but they make their share of mistakes too. I understand fans wanting to be excited and Harvin is a nice player, but the Seahawks overpaid. More productive players with fewer red flags have been acquired for less. Teams overpay when they think they are a piece or two away from a championship, and perhaps the Seahawks are. But, if you follow sports at all, you have seen teams across all the major leagues try this impatient approach with usually deleterious results.



    Except there were a large number of us on this board and others that hated the Ruskell approach to things. The mistakes PC/JS have made are growing pains, nothing near the magnitude Ruskell made even in his first two years of running the team. This approach is not impatient, it is called striking when the iron is hot, big difference. As for overpaying for Harvin, that remains to be seen. There is nothing as it stands right now that can tell us one way or the other if we overpaid. If Harvin is the next stepping stone to a long line of winning seasons and possibly a SB, no one will have cared what picks we gave up for him or what contract he signed. Some people are wringing their hands now, over what will happen 2-3 years down the road. And like I said above, there is nothing this front office has shown me, that makes me think they will put themselves hard up against a wall regardless.
    Last edited by HawksFTW on Tue Mar 12, 2013 11:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
    cboom wrote:Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.
    User avatar
    HawksFTW
    * NET E-Knight *
     
    Posts: 4157
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am


  • Thunderhawk wrote: To me, 5 good players is better than 1 great player, unless that one player is so incredibly special and durable and reliable that his presence tilts the field. I can maybe think of couple dozen players that could do that and, at this point, Harvin isn't one of them.


    And this is really where thie disconnect lies. I DO think that Harvin tilts the field in the same dramatic fashion that guys like Russell Wilson and Earl Thomas do.

    But whereas Russell and Earl are cornerstones, Percy is a wildcard. The team is already filled to the top with "good" players. We already have a "good" offense. We don't need 5 more "good" players from the draft. Harvin has the ability to be the difference maker that pushes us over the top. Harvin has the ability to make us great. We already have lots of role players, we need difference makers and I'd gladly trade a truck full of role players for one guy like that.
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11305
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • Well said Can.

    And your point kind of ties into Thunder's post before yours.

    To me, 5 good players is better than 1 great player


    What if 2 or 3 of those players aren't starting because other good players are in front of them in the depth chart? What if the roster is packed with good players?

    I might take the 1 great player to tilt the field.
    So you think you can tell Heaven from Hell, blue skies from pain. Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail? A smile from a veil?
    User avatar
    twisted_steel2
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5344
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:41 am
    Location: Ballard


  • To me, 5 good players is better than 1 great player


    What if you back up that 1 great player with 4 other good players? Theres nothing saying you cant have Great and Good players together.
    Image
    User avatar
    AbsolutNET
    * NET X's & O's Guru *
     
    Posts: 8715
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:24 am
    Location: PNW


  • twisted_steel2 wrote:Well said Can.

    And your point kind of ties into Thunder's post before yours.

    To me, 5 good players is better than 1 great player


    What if 2 or 3 of those players aren't starting because other good players are in front of them in the depth chart? What if the roster is packed with good players?

    I might take the 1 great player to tilt the field.


    And to tie into the posts on this page, at a certain point you will have to pay those 3-5 "good" players their second/third contracts as well. In today's NFL is nearly impossible to pay everyone, and at a certain point you hit the law of diminishing returns. Good players on good teams get overpaid on a regular basis, so there is no point in saying 1 great player will ultimately cost more than 5 good players.
    cboom wrote:Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.
    User avatar
    HawksFTW
    * NET E-Knight *
     
    Posts: 4157
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am


  • CANHawk wrote:Yeah I'm Canadian (ie. the country that doesn't owe 4 trillion dollars to China). We're hella good with money yo.

    Guys, I think it's time to transition the thinking away from the draft a little bit. At least get away from scouring the mid rounds for those oh so awesome diamonds in teh rough we've become so accustomed to finding. Pete himself said it's going to be very hard for rookies to crack the line-up going forward on account of the fact that this team has very few holes now. In light of that, what is the point of stockpiling 15 draft picks if only 1 or 2 of them are goign to stick? I said this early in the regime's tenure; as they build the team, it looks like the plan is to trade their valuable early picks back to stockpile mid round picks to fill out the roster with role players. As the roster gets filled out, the plan will likely flip to packaging up those mid round picks and moving them for early picks to move up and obtain playmakers.

    At 24 y/o (remember, last year's 1st round pick Bruce Irvin was 24) trading what we traded for Harvin is damn near the equivalent of moving up a few spots in the first round to draft the best playmaker available. If there was three or four playmakers in the first round of the actual draft they had their eye on, there is zero guarantee they get their guy (and there is zero evidence that guy will produce in the NFL). By trading the picks for the player, they are guaranteed to get their man and that man is a very well known comodity. If they are so inclined, they still have plenty of ammo to move up into the early 2nd round to draft a dude like Kawaan Short.

    If all we do this season is get Percey Harvin and Kawaan Short, I'd be happy as hell with this off season. If through the magic of John Schneider we also manage to bring in another candidate to play Will, I'll be even happier.

    Now everyone go out and get some poutine!


    Excellent post.

    I'll add that, you've gotta give in order to get and the best type of trade is one that works for both organizations. That's how you keep healthy business relationships with teams running. This has the potential to be a win-win type deal for both teams, which is ideally what everyone wants.

    Now, let's go get some damn poutine!
    Talkin Seahawks All Day, All Night @ my blog Seafense! http://seafense.blogspot.com/
    User avatar
    NYCoug
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1399
    Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:45 pm


  • Thunderhawk wrote: To me, 5 good players is better than 1 great player, unless that one player is so incredibly special and durable and reliable that his presence tilts the field. I can maybe think of couple dozen players that could do that and, at this point, Harvin isn't one of them.


    You can only have 11 on the field at once though, and when you already have 11 good players on the field, adding another 5 good players doesn't do anything except cover you if someone gets injured.

    And we already have 53 good players

    That means instead of maybe replacing Ben Obomanu or Jermaine Kearse with Percy Harvin, you're replacing players like Winston Guy, Byron Maxwell, Malcolm Smith and the previously mentioned 2 with players who'll fill a similar role but are maybe a little better.

    It's nice to have players like Matt Flynn available when we need them. But if we win the Superbowl next year, it's not going to be because we've got guys like Matt Flynn and Jermaine Kearse to come in for a series or two and the opposition don't, it'll be because we've got guys like Russell Wilson and Percy Harvin that wins the game for you.

    THAT SAID, I'm not sure Percy Harvin tilts the field either, it's the 5 good v 1 great argument I'm disagreeing with. But if he IS that player that tilts the field, I'd rather 1 of him than 5 decent players
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2429
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • It's official, the Harvin trade is going to be phenomenal!

    "RT @PriscoCBS
    I would not want Percy Harvin on my team. Ever."

    WOO!
    February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 4852
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm


  • Thunderhawk wrote:
    kearly wrote:Not to sound harsh, but I think a few people are being naive with regards to value/money. Sure, Seattle can keep their essential players even with the Harvin investment. I made the same argument in my Revis thread. However, there is no escaping the fact that this acquisition will cost Seattle multiple players. 3 players from the draft alone, and 2-3 more from the financial side too. It's basically a "blockbuster" trade a bit like when the Knicks traded for Carmello or the M's traded for Erik Bedard. I think Harvin will work out better than those deals did, but I don't think we should just downplay the cost to justify liking the move.

    In trying to put faces on this trade (take this with a grain of salt), we basically acquired Harvin in exchange for something that might resemble this: Datone Jones (1st round), Kenny Stills (7th round), D'Anthony Thomas (3rd round next year), Kam Chancellor (maybe $7 million a year), Jason Jones (maybe $5 million a year). It doesn't have to be those names, but it would be a comparable package of talent.

    Additionally, the damage from this trade may possibly compound if Seattle feels they must work back into the first round this year for a pass rusher, just like how the Deon Butler trade kept coming back to bite us in the ass for years due to a draft domino effect (not having a 3rd in 2010 forced us to overpay for CW, the lack of a 3rd rounder the following year from the CW trade forced Seattle to trade down which contributed to a very weak start to that 2011 Seahawks draft).

    Reworking contracts is never a given, btw. Look at how many players refused pay cuts in recent weeks and were let go as a result. If you approach Rice, Miller, or Bryant about reworking their deals, you better have a backup plan for their positions, because the odds are pretty good that they wouldn't accept a pay cut and you'll have to get rid of them.

    I know you hear this a lot, Kip, but I am grateful that you're a member of this community. You bring balance to the force.

    The reflexive "In Schneider I Trust" stuff echoes the "In Ruskell I Trust" mantra that dominated this board a few years ago. Pete and John are clearly better than Ruskell and have done some wonderful things, but they make their share of mistakes too. I understand fans wanting to be excited and Harvin is a nice player, but the Seahawks overpaid. More productive players with fewer red flags have been acquired for less. Teams overpay when they think they are a piece or two away from a championship, and perhaps the Seahawks are. But, if you follow sports at all, you have seen teams across all the major leagues try this impatient approach with usually deleterious results.

    If Harvin stays healthy he will certainly be a dynamic player. Bevell is probably already adding plays to exploit his many gifts and, in conjunction with Wilson, we may see plays and formations never previously attempted in the NFL. But, there is also a significant probability that some of his injury issues resurface or that his attitude problems are irreparable. In which case the theoretical five players in Kearly's post will deserve some retroactive consideration. To me, 5 good players is better than 1 great player, unless that one player is so incredibly special and durable and reliable that his presence tilts the field. I can maybe think of couple dozen players that could do that and, at this point, Harvin isn't one of them.


    I concur with Thunderhawk. Instead of moving up in the first round to get Austin (who has been described as possibly the "next" Percy Harvin), we went out an got Percy Harvin. I like this move, but I hope we get a second round pick when we trade Flynn to make the loss of a third not hurt as bad.
    User avatar
    aawolf
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 444
    Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 7:04 am


  • I like this trade a little bit better today than I did yesterday, but I'm still skeptical. One of the things I'm starting to like though is Harvin's versatility saves you a roster spot on special teams and RB that you can use elsewhere. You can keep one less RB and don't need a kickoff returner specialist like we had for Leon, and use those spots for an extra D-lineman or 3rd string QB to develop.
    CalgaryHawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 147
    Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 8:54 am


  • THere is a point in the development of a franchise where 5 good players is better than one. We've been there the last 5 years.

    And then there is a point in the development of a franchise where the base has been built, the depth is solid, and one great player can make the diffference between 10 wins and 14. between a playoff appearance and a Superbowl appearance.

    I think we've at that point.
    <A>
    <IMG></A>
    User avatar
    McGruff
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 1577
    Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am
    Location: Elma, WA


  • McGruff wrote:THere is a point in the development of a franchise where 5 good players is better than one. We've been there the last 5 years.

    And then there is a point in the development of a franchise where the base has been built, the depth is solid, and one great player can make the diffference between 10 wins and 14. between a playoff appearance and a Superbowl appearance.

    I think we've at that point.


    This... This is what we need to get used to.

    Last season has shown that the Seahawks are beyond the developmental stage.
    vant
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 81
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:40 pm


  • Hey gang after 27 pages I think its time to lock this one and we will start another. Many are not reading all the background anyway.

    :les:
    Image
    On to week two. Week one was not a fluke!
    User avatar
    The Radish
    * NET Radish *
     
    Posts: 18655
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 pm
    Location: Spokane, Wa.


Previous


It is currently Thu Sep 18, 2014 9:52 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information