| Author |
Message |
|
hawkfan68
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE.  Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:02 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:10 am
Posts: 2663
Location: Sammamish, WA
|
AF_Hawk wrote: I don't like it, I think the Seahawks gave up way too much for him. Hopefully he turns out to be great but my initial thoughts are that I don't like it (not him but what what the Hawks had to give up for him).
I think this also means that Charlie may be the starter, even though the FO will state that Hass still is, they will say "Charlie will challenge for the starting spot". Maybe Whitehurst pushes Hasselbeck, which he hasn't had since 2004. A QB behind him that can push him to be at his best.
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
AF_Hawk
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:03 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
Posts: 1340
Location: Marysville, WA
|
hawkfan68 wrote: AF_Hawk wrote: I don't like it, I think the Seahawks gave up way too much for him. Hopefully he turns out to be great but my initial thoughts are that I don't like it (not him but what what the Hawks had to give up for him).
I think this also means that Charlie may be the starter, even though the FO will state that Hass still is, they will say "Charlie will challenge for the starting spot". Maybe Whitehurst pushes Hasselbeck, which he hasn't had since 2004. A QB behind him that can push him to be at his best. I'm all for that, but either way I think the Hawks gave up too much to not have him start. But let me just say I will definitely give him a chance before I jump too far into anything. _________________  
Last edited by AF_Hawk on Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SeaTown81
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:03 pm |
|
| * NET Alumni * |
 |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am
Posts: 4065
Location: Seattle, WA
|
AbsolutNET wrote: This is less than we gave up for Hass, no? Not exactly. That trade was Hass for a 3rd rounder and swapping of 1st rounders. The Hawks dropped from 10 to 17 and gave up their 3rd that year (pick 72). The trade essentially ended up Hass & pick 17 (Steve Hutchinson) for pick 10 (Jamal Reynolds) and pick 72 (Torrance Marshall). So actually, it's somewhat comparable. But to me dropping 20 spots in the 2nd round is worse than dropping 7 spots in the 1st round. Add to that the fact that you're trading a future 3rd, which is going to hit you doubly a year from now (I HATE TRADING FUTURE PICKS). I'd take the Hass trade over this one. Not to mention the fact that Holmgren knew a lot more about what he was trading for. That, and the fact that Hass actually looked quite good in preseason. _________________ LET'S RALLY TO BUILD A NEW HOME
FOR THE SEATTLE SUPERSONICS!SonicsArena.com | #SonicsArena Like on Facebook & follow on Twitter to show support! http://www.facebook.com/sonicsarenahttp://www.twitter.com/sonicsarena
Last edited by SeaTown81 on Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
TheHawkster
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:04 pm |
|
| * NET Bad Ass * |
 |
|
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:00 am
Posts: 1572
Location: Puyallup
|
|
If the Hawks dont the 1st round QB's in the draft this year, its alot less risk than spending it on #6 or #14 and $30 million.
_________________
GET YOUR EAR PLUGS READY!!!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
nanomoz
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:05 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
Posts: 4219
Location: UT
|
hawkfan68 wrote: nanomoz wrote: If we trade Sims, I hope we net a third, doesn't Cleveland have a bunch of them? Sims was a 4th round pick. That's what the Hawks would receive if he signed elsewhere and the Hawks didn't match. Sims had a good year (last year) but I doubt anyone would give anything higher than a 4th rounder for him. Der. I knew that. No way we'll get more than a 4th. In fact, after looking at the Tapp trade, we'll probably get a 6th (Tapp was a 2nd round tender).
_________________
“We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hawkfan68
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:06 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:10 am
Posts: 2663
Location: Sammamish, WA
|
Mckinja wrote: I don't think you can count either Smith or Leinart out yet. Smith is only 25 and made some strides last season. Leinart has been playing behind Warner his entire career. Both could still pan out. You can't count them out because they are still young. However, both Leinart and Smith had opportunities to grab the starting spot and failed to do so.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
twisted_steel2
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:06 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:41 am
Posts: 3816
Location: South End
|
Wizofwest wrote: I guess it seems to be a fair deal. Just appears we got completely pilfered at first look. I don't think I understand the, next year a 3 round.... equals a 4th round today deal, but that seems to hinge on us getting better or worse. Not so matter of fact.
He better breakout like Schaub did. He isn't 23, he will be 28 when the season starts. True he isn't 23, but he's young enough that if he does work out and become a legitimate starter, he buys the organization time(4-6 years maybe) to find another young QB to groom. Schneider is already on record as saying his philosophy is drafting lower round QB's every year, some will work out, some will be traded. It buys them time to start this system, I just think when they got here, they were like, "Whoa, Hass is about done, Seneca is not going to work, and who is this Teel guy?" Maybe in 5 years, teams will be trading for our backup QB's that we groom. Maybe CW is that bridge we need.
_________________
You're the new Oakland Raiders; class-less and dirty (with trash-talking players, and an unapologetic head coach), no respect for the game, with a stadium filled with obnoxious/rude fans dressed up in corny Halloween costumes/flare. -49er fan
Last edited by twisted_steel2 on Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Snohomie
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:07 pm |
|
| * NET Draft Guru * |
|
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:06 pm
Posts: 3515
Location: Bellingham, WA
|
hawkfan68 wrote: Mckinja wrote: I don't think you can count either Smith or Leinart out yet. Smith is only 25 and made some strides last season. Leinart has been playing behind Warner his entire career. Both could still pan out. You can't count them out because they are still young. However, both Leinart and Smith had opportunities to grab the starting spot and failed to do so. And both of them are going into 2010 as starters... Pretty sure both are younger than Whitehurst, too, for that matter.
_________________
Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
v1rotv2
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:07 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:32 am
Posts: 3062
Location: Black Diamond, WA.
|
|
Grading this move either way is premature. If Whitehurst is a bust then it was a bad deal. If he is successful it will be a brilliant move. I do know that no QB that will be picked in the first round has thrown a pass in the NFL and would have cost us a ton.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hawksmode
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:11 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:31 am
Posts: 1083
Location: Washington
|
The FO..( whoever made the decision ) has to look like idiots right now to the rest of the league ( and most of us ).  $10 mil for an unproven player? But...if they were to get Claussen, they would have paid an unproven rookie closer to $30 mil. So we could look at it like that and this is an uncapped year. I think swapping the 2nd round pick ( which is close to a 1st ) makes me mad the most...and then a 3rd next year ( which will be in the top 5 of the 3rd round ) NICE  I do not agree with one move they have done this offseason. ( so far )  Tapp was one thing...but this gets a big 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Barthawk
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:13 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:17 am
Posts: 2039
Location: San Antonio, TX by way of Kalispell, MT
|
|
they gave Hass more money than that BTW (and that was 9 years ago with a cap in place)... that being said, I still don't like it..
_________________
_____________________
Where can I find Seahawks98.com???
|
|
| |
|
|
|
bighawk
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:13 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 11:44 am
Posts: 555
|
msnbc.com says that Pete and John has been watching a lot of his film. So they have been doing there homework and i am sure they talked to Norv Turner about him. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MontanaHawk05
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:14 pm |
|
| * 17Power Blogger * |
 |
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 9788
|
v1rotv2 wrote: Grading this move either way is premature. If Whitehurst is a bust then it was a bad deal. If he is successful it will be a brilliant move. I do know that no QB that will be picked in the first round has thrown a pass in the NFL and would have cost us a ton. I am forced to agree that a "wait and see" approach is needed, mostly because this is a QB we're talking about. But hoo boy, I'm gonna miss that #40. _________________ GO HAWKS!!! Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!Follow me on Twitter at @17power
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MontanaHawk05
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:15 pm |
|
| * 17Power Blogger * |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 9788
|
bighawk wrote: msnbc.com says that Pete and John has been watching a lot of his film. So they have been doing there homework and i am sure they talked to Norv Turner about him. Mora watched a lot of film on Colin Cole, too. _________________ GO HAWKS!!! Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!Follow me on Twitter at @17power
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seanhawk
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:17 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:04 pm
Posts: 1351
|
MontanaHawk05 wrote: That was actually the third time! Sheesh Einstein, can't you do simple arithmetic?  Arithmetic? What the hell? Are you posting from a 'Little House on the Prairie' episode?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AbsolutNET
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:18 pm |
|
| * NET X's & O's Guru * |
 |
|
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:24 am
Posts: 6862
Location: PNW
|
SeaTown81 wrote: AbsolutNET wrote: This is less than we gave up for Hass, no? Not exactly. That trade was Hass for a 3rd rounder and swapping of 1st rounders. The Hawks dropped from 10 to 17 and gave up their 3rd that year (pick 72). The trade essentially ended up Hass & pick 17 (Steve Hutchinson) for pick 10 (Jamal Reynolds) and pick 72 (Torrance Marshall). So actually, it's somewhat comparable. But to me dropping 20 spots in the 2nd round is worse than dropping 7 spots in the 1st round. Add to that the fact that you're trading a future 3rd, which is going to hit you doubly a year from now (I HATE TRADING FUTURE PICKS). I'd take the Hass trade over this one. Not to mention the fact that Holmgren knew a lot more about what he was trading for. That, and the fact that Hass actually looked quite good in preseason. Yeah you make good points, but like i said earlier, we have to make a move at some point, we still have 3 picks in 2 rounds and now we can use all 3 picks to go somewhere other than QB. Assuming Whitehurst is our starter, anyway. But I cant imagine he wont be _________________ 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SeaTown81
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:18 pm |
|
| * NET Alumni * |
|
|
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am
Posts: 4065
Location: Seattle, WA
|
|
I would've been cool with swapping 2nd's OR trading next year's 3. And you can throw in some later round crap. But both just seems like overkill. Even had they only given up one, it still would've been a risk due to Whitehurst's unproven nature. SD jobbed the Hawks on this one.
I just really do not know what the FO is thinking right now. The Brandon Marshall talk to start off FA really made it seem like they wanted to get better now. But every single move since then has been thinking they are in hard core rebuild mode.
_________________ LET'S RALLY TO BUILD A NEW HOME
FOR THE SEATTLE SUPERSONICS!SonicsArena.com | #SonicsArena Like on Facebook & follow on Twitter to show support! http://www.facebook.com/sonicsarenahttp://www.twitter.com/sonicsarena
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hawksmode
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:19 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:31 am
Posts: 1083
Location: Washington
|
bighawk wrote: msnbc.com says that Pete and John has been watching a lot of his film. So they have been doing there homework and i am sure they talked to Norv Turner about him. practice film? preseason film? or the film Rudy? ( my anger is not directed at you btw  )
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AbsolutNET
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:20 pm |
|
| * NET X's & O's Guru * |
|
|
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:24 am
Posts: 6862
Location: PNW
|
|
The other option probably would have been giving up this years 4th and next years 3rd, so something along those lines. I am happy we got him and managed to keep 3 picks in the first two rounds. 20 spots is a long way, but we did get our next QB and didnt have to spend a #6 overall for it. Now we can focus on filling 3 additional spots.
_________________
|
|
| |
|
|
|
seedhawk
|
Post subject: Re: Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE. Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:21 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:51 am
Posts: 2257
|
|
Well, the reported salary is one thing, however, swapping seconds and a next years third, hmmmmmmm. The swap is really not that onerous to me as this years draft is deep because of all the juniors who declared. Giving a 3rd next year is really like a 4th as next years draft will be watered down as there wont be as many good seniors. In effect we gave up just about what we did when we selected Greene. Correct?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests |
| |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
