Winfield agreed in principle - 1 year
- Thread starter mikeak
- Start date
- Status
DavidSeven
New member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2013
- Messages
- 5,742
- Reaction score
- 0
seahawksTopGear":2ty180je said:
The thing that's not really dawning on you is that Seattle could whiff on all ten of these picks and still have the most loaded roster on paper in the NFL. The draft is a bowl of cherries at this point.
volsunghawk
New member
vonstout":2dv2py8y said:
No offense intended, but I think this is an excellent example of how we often overvalue our own players and undervalue other teams' players.
Harvin was on a blistering pace early last season and is one of the game's top playmakers when healthy. That's not 2nd or 3rd round pick territory. And when Minnesota actually started shopping him, multiple teams were interested, hence the price increased. I wouldn't be surprised of the rumors about Harvin's trade value dropping were started by the Vikes themselves to get suitors into the game.
As for Flynn, he was never worth what many folks here believed he was. Even teams with decision makers familiar with Flynn seemed lukewarm on him. The Raiders (headed by ex GB front office guy, Reggie McKenzie) gave up a couple of future lower round picks, and Flynn's OC in GB wasn't willing to give Flynn a starting caliber offer (or starting guarantee).
DavidSeven
New member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2013
- Messages
- 5,742
- Reaction score
- 0
volsunghawk":19q5nebr said:
Also, Idzik and Bradley went to QB desperate teams and neither made a serious play for Flynn. Says a lot. Market for him was dead, and honestly, I think the team was more eager to unload him than they let on (for both cap and possibly QB room issues).
We got Winfield and two fifths in exchange for trading away Flynn. Can't complain about that haul.
Killa Kam
New member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2011
- Messages
- 570
- Reaction score
- 0
seahawksTopGear":1mam2qs1 said:
I don't get how anybody who follows the Hawks can say this after the way PC/JS have drafted after the first round. Look at the guys they've drafted;
Russell Wilson, Bobby Wagner, Sherman, Chancellor, KJ Wright, Golden Tate, Moffitt, Jeremy Lane, Sweezy, WT3
The number of picks and how high you get picked means nothing when your not good at drafting. Niners first round receiver last year had zero catches, they've done a great job drafting in the last decade but thats proof you never really know what exactly caliber players your getting until the game is played. I wouldn't judge the draft positions until you see what the picks actually become
seahawksTopGear
New member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2012
- Messages
- 195
- Reaction score
- 0
ErikG803":2hi8n5oi said:
It is not the only reason. The Seahawks had one of the worst draft capital in the NFL even with ten picks.
If you took all of the draft picks the Seahawks had and plugged them into this chart http://www.drafttek.com/tradechart.html you would end up with one of the lowest aggregate number for any team, let alone SF, Rams and AZ which actually have fairly high draft aggregate numbers.
Signings like Winfield and having people wanting to come here for less than other teams are willing to pay them are crucial for the Seahawks in the next few years.
drdiags
New member
djb28":1luku2hk said:
If they had been involved in allowing or making a low end move work for the Vikings org, then they can pound sand. It wasn't the players who came off as dips. It was Wilf and Spielman (Childress is gone, Frasier probably didn't have a voice).
seahawksTopGear
New member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2012
- Messages
- 195
- Reaction score
- 0
Russ Willstrong":xwit8ec3 said:
I agree, Percy Harvin was a steal for the Seahawks. Not only because his salary is nowhere near as high as people feared but because it easily saved us three to four million dollars on free agent signings this off season.
No way we get the haul we do this off season for the price we did without the Harvin trade.
To the person saying that the value of the pick position has nothing to do with the value of the player picked. I agree that John and Pete have been turning low picks into gold. What I am trying to say is that I hope they do that this draft too, they have less to work with than the competition.
It's not about "draft pick value," it's about what you do with those picks.... simple as that. And Pete and John, every year they have been here, have proven they can do A LOT with those picks, regardless of round. So I don't buy into this draft "value" nonsense. We have just as good of chance at putting together a good draft as San Francisco, or any other team with good draft "value," based on who we have at the helm. Late round "luck" or "magic" is no longer luck or magic if it happens every year. At this point it becomes skill.
SalishHawkFan
New member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2009
- Messages
- 5,872
- Reaction score
- 0
And it's going to be hard to evaluate how good a draft this year will have been either right after or years later, because no matter who they draft, it's going to be really hard for any rookies to break into this team. Doesn't mean the draft was bad, just means the team is so stocked up with talent.
chris98251
Well-known member
They picks we have made that EXPERTS said were reaches or had issues that have been to the pro bowl or are league leaders in stat catagories is enough of a reason to give our front office the kudos for knowing what kind of player fits with what they want to do. Player rankings based on a set defined criteria made by experts that make a living off of hyping themsleves and not in the NFL are just that Hype.
RichNhansom
Active member
- Joined
- May 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,256
- Reaction score
- 5
vonstout":3791m5md said:
Kind of a Debbie downer type mentality. Based on your thought process we should have let Harvin go to another team so we could keep the 25th pick, 7th and next years 3rd, essentially comparable to trading up to the #20 spot. So would you rather have the 20th pick in this draft or Harvin?
Draft value charts are meaningless in your analysis. It doesn't mean we would be a better team if we had the 1st and 7th or even the 20th pick unless you become a better team because of it and not only is there no guarantee of that but a strong likelihood we would not.
How would you feel if we didn't make the deal and the Niners traded for Harvin and to follow that up we trade up to 20 and grab a guy who sees limited playing time and becomes just a rotational player like many #20 picks do?
You have a very good idea of what you get with Harvin and the draft only provides hope that a player will become that impactful (is that a word?) but realistically an extremely low number actually do. It is very possible that Harvin's career from here forward is more productive than any player coming out of this draft at all. Isn't that worth the 20th pick?
vonstout":2he5p4z7 said:
With no disrespect to you (I like your avatar), I can only assume your friends are coming off a long, hard winter and have yet to mentally thaw. An easy way to evaluate the worth of the 24 yr old Harvin would be to first consider what it would take to move from pick 25 to the #1 spot in this draft. I have little doubt Harvin would be the 1st player selected in 2013 and there is no way we could have moved from 25 to 1 for our 1st and 2 3rds.
It would likely take 2 1sts and a 3rd (or more) to do so. Considering Harvin was a player of need for us...if you use the Jimmy Johnson value guide, it is more likely that we actually underpaid for his services. Of course, time will be the judge of that.
I too have Viking friends ( I like Purple) and they also spew such madness. But you don't have to dig too deep to see that they are resentful and felt burned by Harvin. I understand their frustration and would likely be saying the same if I were them.
hawk45
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2009
- Messages
- 10,009
- Reaction score
- 16
seahawksTopGear":3i4aszlf said:
This would worry me if the team wasn't both extremely young and extremely complete. You're going to have years where you don't have a sackful of draft picks to burn, especially when you (rightfully) perceive that your window is now and so are a little more active in free agency.
You pretty much cannot ask for more in terms of positioning when you have youth, aren't killing your cap, are hitting the jackpot on all your late round draft picks, and are coming off a playoff run. Who gives a rat's behind if we don't have the best "draft capital" this year. It's part of a deliberate plan. Let's go get the trophy before we worry about reloading here.
The Niners have a lot of draft capital, that's great, they need it a lot more than we do because their core players are a lot older than ours.
vonstout
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2013
- Messages
- 538
- Reaction score
- 77
I'm obviously not explaining myself well.
First off, I am thrilled with getting Harvin. He's one of my PPR keepers and I think he can be even better in Seattle. But even though he is a great talent, he was a cancer in the locker room. They put him on IR because of his attitude, not his ankle. He hasn't been a very mature guy in the NFL. I'm sure you hear a lot of NFC west news that I don't hear. Likewise, being in southern Wisconsin, I hear all NFC North stuff. My point is, lots of NFL radio and TV shows talked about what it would take to get Harvin in a trade. That's the "rumor" I was referring to. He also was said to be wanting Megatron type money. I'm sure SF wanted Harvin. He is the type of WR that kills the Hawks. My point was that I was surprised we had to give up as much as we did. Getting that much for a player that said he didn't want to play in Minn any more was a surprise. They ended up with Greg Jennings (UFA), our picks, + some cap space for Harvin.
I was also surprised that the Vikes didn't ask for Flynn as part of the deal. I agree Flynn wasn't wanted anywhere in the league. We obviously didn't want him either. That being the case, our front office has to be questioned for giving him the deal they did.
First off, I am thrilled with getting Harvin. He's one of my PPR keepers and I think he can be even better in Seattle. But even though he is a great talent, he was a cancer in the locker room. They put him on IR because of his attitude, not his ankle. He hasn't been a very mature guy in the NFL. I'm sure you hear a lot of NFC west news that I don't hear. Likewise, being in southern Wisconsin, I hear all NFC North stuff. My point is, lots of NFL radio and TV shows talked about what it would take to get Harvin in a trade. That's the "rumor" I was referring to. He also was said to be wanting Megatron type money. I'm sure SF wanted Harvin. He is the type of WR that kills the Hawks. My point was that I was surprised we had to give up as much as we did. Getting that much for a player that said he didn't want to play in Minn any more was a surprise. They ended up with Greg Jennings (UFA), our picks, + some cap space for Harvin.
I was also surprised that the Vikes didn't ask for Flynn as part of the deal. I agree Flynn wasn't wanted anywhere in the league. We obviously didn't want him either. That being the case, our front office has to be questioned for giving him the deal they did.
- Status
