Would You do this DK trade?

[Sgt. Largent]

MSN

www.msn.com

I would in a heart beat!

I don't know why if the Packers didn't want to pay Adams, arguably the best receiver in the entire league and plays amazingly well with Rodgers......they'd want to not only give up draft capital, but then have to turn around and pay DK the same sort of contract next year?

So I'm confused.

 

[AROS]

That's one big ass cup of absolutely not.

 

[Appyhawk]

I do not subscribe to the idea that rebuilding requires sweeping all your best assets off the shelf. A more prudent effort would be to bolster your weaknesses while retaining your best performers. It would kill me to see the Seahawks return to expansion team status.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I do not subscribe to the idea that rebuilding requires sweeping all your best assets off the shelf. A more prudent effort would be to bolster your weaknesses while retaining your best performers. It would kill me to see the Seahawks return to expansion team status.

It's also a very hard pill to swallow paying your two WR's north of 40M per year on a team who's coach is running around the facility high fiving everyone that he gets to go back to his three yards and a cloud of dust offensive philosophy.

 

[Appyhawk]

I don't believe 3 yards and a cloud of dust accurately describes Pete's offensive philosophy. I think balance is known to be the key to success for both passing and running. At least I would hope so. This is football, not rugby.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I don't believe 3 yards and a cloud of dust accurately describes Pete's offensive philosophy. I think balance is known to be the key to success for both passing and running. At least I would hope so. This is football, not rugby.

Doesn't change the validity of my point.

Tying up 40M+ of your cap in two WR's when you're a run first "balanced" offense with a bottom 10 QB doesn't make a lot of sense.

Nor would DK probably be excited about staying here blocking 60% of the time, even if he is making 25M+ per year.

 

[scutterhawk]

Great idea, send your best players to some team that would make them instantly better, & maybe even put them over the top? T'would Be Stupid.
DK, Lockett, Fant & a damned good Running Attack are some key pieces that Lock is going to need, if he's going to succeed here in Seattle.

 

[AubHawk71]

"We need to run the ball more."

 

[nanomoz]

Doesn't change the validity of my point.

Tying up 40M+ of your cap in two WR's when you're a run first "balanced" offense with a bottom 10 QB doesn't make a lot of sense.

Nor would DK probably be excited about staying here blocking 60% of the time, even if he is making 25M+ per year.

No does tying up $30 mil. of your cap in safeties when you keep saying (for like four+ years) you want to prioritize the pass rush.

Trying to attribute an actual plan to some of their moves is what philosophers call a categorical error. It's akin to, to quote David Z. Albert, "asking the marital status of the number five."

 

[HawkFreak]

I agree with those that have said NO WAY.
The team will need every available weapon on O.
Plus why would Pete trade away the type of receiver that he has always wanted?
Did I say no way they should trade DK!

Here's my chant...
Trade DK?
NO Way!
Not Today!

 

[Hyak]

I love the "their giving everything away line". They got a haul for Wilson, who was not going to sign a 4th contract extension here, and cut a declining MLB making 20 M a year.

 

[chris98251]

People bitch about paying guys, DK is just getting to his prime years in age and production, look around the league, they are getting paid, we spent 8 years looking for a DK type receiver, wasting draft picks on guys that could not cut it. Think about that cost as well.

 

[Hawknballs]

DK going to be able to go up and get 50/50 balls is what's going to make a run-first offense lethal.

Heck no.

 

[flv2]

You trade for player contracts, not the player. Metcalf may be unwilling to play out the final year of a rookie contract for just $3.986M, so his trade value is difficult to gauge. Either way he's not a fit for an Aaron Rodgers offense.

 

[Chapow]

MSN

www.msn.com

I would in a heart beat!

Hell no.

1 low first round pick for DK is absurd.

 

[HawkRiderFan]

As some point don't you have to keep your elite talent and pay them vs just trading off everyone? The opposite is the Patriot way but is that Patriot way or the Tom Brady way?

 

[Sports Hernia]

"We need to run the ball more."

Disagree. Need more first downs being made period. Doesn’t matter if they come via the ground or air. First downs extend the drive and milk the clock.

 

[hgwellz12]

As some point don't you have to keep your elite talent and pay them vs just trading off everyone? The opposite is the Patriot way but is that Patriot way or the Tom Brady way?

100%. Even from just a pure business standpoint, getting rid of star skill position athletes is just an objectively absurd idea. Unless you're in the beginning stages of a complete tear down of the team. There's a fine line, but, generally speaking, owners/coaches/GM's should consider themselves blessed to have a few players that deserve top 5 contracts. ESPECIALLY if you're just gonna blow those savings on over the hill 1yr rentals.

 

[Chawker]

I'd trade DK for only one player and that DH from Tennessee.But Tennessee would have to throw in a draft pick, just to make up the difference in there pay.

 

[m0ng0]

I would absolutely trade him, Just not for that deal