Could we get anything good for Boykin from:

[Laloosh]

Can't lie; as soon as I saw the OP, I asked myself "how far does this thread make it before Sioux posts about Tarvaris?"

You're killin me, Smalls.

I thought it was a marvelous post by SNDavidson, Laloosh.

You know me. I'm just yankin yer chain, man.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Excellent idea. A lot of you just want to keep Boykin to develop him and trade him for a pick. Why not just do it now and bring back Tarvaris. We get a more reliable backup and a draft pick to boot.

Not sure if serious...

Not sure if serious either, but definitely trolling about it. Probably a TJ sock puppet of some kind. Maybe his brother.

And the snide name calling begins ... stay mature, please.

 

[volsunghawk]

While I think Tarvaris has gotten a worse rap than he deserves on this board, I don't see him as an option in Seattle any longer. He's 33 years old with 9 years in the league. His veteran minimum is loads more than the team would pay for Boykin, and if Carroll and Schneider want to develop a backup who will be able to step in for Wilson AND have trade value down the line, you have to go with the younger player. Boykin represents potential while Jackson represents a safety net. And you can't just keep playing it safe at the backup QB position just because Russell is in his prime years and our SB window is open. Otherwise, you'll never take the opportunity to develop younger QB talent until it's too late.

Also, Boykin may be able to replicate more of Wilson's athleticism and improvisation than Jackson could, meaning less of a philosophical shift for the O-line and the offense in general should Wilson go down with an injury.

 

[Hawkstorian]

In the "Bold Prediction" thread, I said something to the effect there would be multiple threads about how much we would get for Boykin in a trade. I just didn't think they'd start so soon.

 

[Siouxhawk]

In the "Bold Prediction" thread, I said something to the effect there would be multiple threads about how much we would get for Boykin in a trade. I just didn't think they'd start so soon.

Thanks Hawkstorian, this is the question I'm asking: Since we're going to use that backup spot to cultivate draft picks as Russell isn't going anywhere anytime soon, do we propose/accept an offer of, say, a 4th or 5th round pick for Boykin at this juncture? This may be the year where a rash of injuries to the QB position makes that feasible. Who knows what his value will be in the future?

 

[Ad Hawk]

In the "Bold Prediction" thread, I said something to the effect there would be multiple threads about how much we would get for Boykin in a trade. I just didn't think they'd start so soon.

Thanks Hawkstorian, this is the question I'm asking: Since we're going to use that backup spot to cultivate draft picks as Russell isn't going anywhere anytime soon, do we propose/accept an offer of, say, a 4th or 5th round pick for Boykin at this juncture? This may be the year where a rash of injuries to the QB position makes that feasible. Who knows what his value will be in the future?

The one problem with this line of reasoning is that it removes a player from our scheme who fits well and provides us our own insurance against injury. That's the purpose of a BUQB. Why would we shop a player who means more to us than to others? And since there's really nobody better (and cheaper, with more upside, etc.) on the open market with which to replace him--your arguments about TJ's continuing upside not withstanding--and thus there would be no reason to trade him.

A future draft pick won't secure a BUQB for us this year and into the near future who is both insurance and trainable for a good price. Schneider is already fantastic at getting more picks from comps and trades, plus the UDFA haul we seem to get every year.

And why exactly do we want to help other teams with their QB problems? Hmmm...

 

[Hawkstorian]

My thought was always that if Boykin had to play this year, and did well there could be a market for him next off-season. But no way you trade your backup QB at this point considering the fact that we have no real alternative.

 

[XxXdragonXxX]

We're not getting anything for a UDFA who has looked pretty good in a few preseason games. If we're going to trade him it will be a couple seasons down the road when he actually has a market.

And if TJack were worth a damn he'd be on a team right now, there are several who have lost starting QBs to injury and are in need of backups or replacement starters, yet there TJack sits, untouched. And I have a feeling that if teams were rushing to get him, he'd freeze up and take a sack on 4th down with the game on the line anyway.

 

[Anonymous]

I'll bite...

How about Boykin, a 2nd, and a 5th for #28?

We wouldn't have any cash left to hookup Bennett, but...

 

[SNDavidson]

This is bananas. If T-Jack is this good why don't the Vikings sign him?

As UDFA the salary of Boykin is obviously the better value than t jack on a longer and defined time frame.

Good point. There is value in paying a gifted athlete with upside a lot less money. Sounds like everyone thinks he needs some more grooming before having any value.

 

[bigskydoc]

If we assume Boykin is worth anything north of being cut out right, why would we trade him to a team who is very likely to be our competition for a playoff spot?

If we assume Boykin is not worth anything but being cut out right, why would he have survived the first cut?

Over the next three years, Boykin comes with a cap hit of 1.62 million. With 10 years accrued experience, T Jack comes with a 3 year cap hit of 3 million. 1.38 million more. Neither are taking us to the Superb Owl if Russ goes down mid-season. No way are we giving up 1.38 million of cap space in a situation like this.

 

[Siouxhawk]

If we assume Boykin is worth anything north of being cut out right, why would we trade him to a team who is very likely to be our competition for a playoff spot?

If we assume Boykin is not worth anything but being cut out right, why would he have survived the first cut?

Over the next three years, Boykin comes with a cap hit of 1.62 million. With 10 years accrued experience, T Jack comes with a 3 year cap hit of 3 million. 1.38 million more. Neither are taking us to the Superb Owl if Russ goes down mid-season. No way are we giving up 1.38 million of cap space in a situation like this.

I guess bigsky, that extra $1.3 million has more to do with how comfortable Pete feels with Boykin as his backup compared to Tarvaris. If he feels he can get the same service out of Trevone, why not save a few bucks. But if he likes the savvy veteran leadership that Tarvaris provides, that $1.3 million cap hit is nothing.

As far as trading Boykin today, what kind of compensation would be needed? Many are missing the point, I think, that if the endgame is to eventually trade Boykin, why not do it now if the price were right? God forbid he becomes our starter, so why not take the compensation now if it were offered?

 

[Ad Hawk]

As far as trading Boykin today, what kind of compensation would be needed? Many are missing the point, I think, that if the endgame is to eventually trade Boykin, why not do it now if the price were right? God forbid he becomes our starter, so why not take the compensation now if it were offered?

God forbid anyone other than RW be the starter. True, that. But that is equally true for TJ as for Boykin.

Your "if" about the endgame needs to be considered less a realistic scenario and is rather just your personal dream. Proof that this is Pete's plan is severely lacking. You can play the if game all you want, but evidence is strongly against your position. Why keep pushing it?

As for TJ being savvy, that's hyperbole, at this point. Average stats from years ago+age+few recent nfl reps doesn't=savvy.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Excellent idea. A lot of you just want to keep Boykin to develop him and trade him for a pick. Why not just do it now and bring back Tarvaris. We get a more reliable backup and a draft pick to boot.

Great idea aside from the fact the Vikings are not going to trade for an UDFA to be QB and that Tarvaris is done, sure.

 

[Siouxhawk]

As far as trading Boykin today, what kind of compensation would be needed? Many are missing the point, I think, that if the endgame is to eventually trade Boykin, why not do it now if the price were right? God forbid he becomes our starter, so why not take the compensation now if it were offered?

God forbid anyone other than RW be the starter. True, that. But that is equally true for TJ as for Boykin.

Your "if" about the endgame needs to be considered less a realistic scenario and is rather just your personal dream. Proof that this is Pete's plan is severely lacking. You can play the if game all you want, but evidence is strongly against your position. Why keep pushing it?

As for TJ being savvy, that's hyperbole, at this point. Average stats from years ago+age+few recent nfl reps doesn't=savvy.

Of course it's the endgame put in motion -- what else could it be? Are you advocating that Boykin be the backup for the next 5 years? I'm under the impression that we're modeling this strategy after the Patriots, who developed a backup QB and then traded him 3 or 4 years down the road. Are you saying you'd like to see Boykin be our long-term backup. That could be a noble idea, but it doesn't allay my fears and apprehension for this year.

 

[McGruff]

As far as trading Boykin today, what kind of compensation would be needed? Many are missing the point, I think, that if the endgame is to eventually trade Boykin, why not do it now if the price were right? God forbid he becomes our starter, so why not take the compensation now if it were offered?

That's the drema Madden scenario, and one that used to be "somewhat" common under Mike Holmgren in Green Bay. It still happens, but very rarely.

Most quality backups do one of two things . . . they linger in free agency for prolonged periods of time, or they re-sign with the team that groomed them. Very few get traded, and rarely do those trades work out.

 

[scutterhawk]

Excellent idea. A lot of you just want to keep Boykin to develop him and trade him for a pick. Why not just do it now and bring back Tarvaris. We get a more reliable backup and a draft pick to boot.

The T-Jack boat has sailed my friend. I want Boykin because he has very similar traits to Russ, very little in the game plan has to be changed vs a "statue type" like T-Jack. If Russ got hurt (heaven forbid) you'd don't have to change the offense much.

I disagree on 2 points. Because Tarvaris has been around the team for 4 of the past 5 years, the team is more familiar to him and his style than they are Tavone's. He knows the beat and rhythm of our system as well as Russ. Our receivers and backs have taken hundreds of passes and handoffs from him. No drawbacks there.
And I beg to differ in the labeling of him as a statue. Sure, he's not as fleet a foot as he was when he was 23, but he can still move pretty well and deliver a pass on the run if needed.
Biggest perk is getting that draft pick, right? Russ hates being pulled from games, so it's not like Boykin's value is going to escalate much as he won't really get much for showcasing reps going forward. With so many pivotal QBs ailing, this may be the best opportunity in the next 3 years to make such a deal. If a team offered a 4th for him, wouldn't you do it?

4th round draft pick?!?, not only no, but hell no, I don't know of any FOURTH round Quarterbacks on the horizon that offers up what we already have in place right now. (bird in the hand?), AND, Boykin is tooled up physically to play the backup roll, and the Mental aspect of the position?, he has Russell Wilson to learn, and develop from; It's a win, win situation.
Look, getting Russell Wilson in the THIRD round was an extraordinary stroke of luck/genius, and you're of the belief that we can find a decent replacement in the 4th?
Many 1st, 2nd, & 3rd round players turn out to be busts, at almost ANY position, so finding a developmental Quarterbacks in the 4th round is a mega leap of faith.

 

[bigskydoc]

Excellent idea. A lot of you just want to keep Boykin to develop him and trade him for a pick. Why not just do it now and bring back Tarvaris. We get a more reliable backup and a draft pick to boot.

Because Boykin needs to actually be developed before he is worthy of a pick. 32 teams passed him over a total of 253 times in the draft, including several teams in need of starting and backup caliber quarterbacks. Only one of those teams has any real idea about what he is capable of and what he brings to the table, all others essentially have the same draft grade on him that they had on him in April.

What could we get in trade for Boykin now? A 7th at best, and probably a conditional 7th at that.

Unless they are planning on cutting him anyway, there is no way the Hawks are trading him. If they are planning on cutting him, the only conceivable reason they had to keep him last Saturday was to try to fool other teams into thinking he is worth a trade. I just don't see this org behaving that way

 

[Siouxhawk]

Excellent idea. A lot of you just want to keep Boykin to develop him and trade him for a pick. Why not just do it now and bring back Tarvaris. We get a more reliable backup and a draft pick to boot.

Because Boykin needs to actually be developed before he is worthy of a pick. 32 teams passed him over a total of 253 times in the draft, including several teams in need of starting and backup caliber quarterbacks. Only one of those teams has any real idea about what he is capable of and what he brings to the table, all others essentially have the same draft grade on him that they had on him in April.

What could we get in trade for Boykin now? A 7th at best, and probably a conditional 7th at that.

Unless they are planning on cutting him anyway, there is no way the Hawks are trading him. If they are planning on cutting him, the only conceivable reason they had to keep him last Saturday was to try to fool other teams into thinking he is worth a trade. I just don't see this org behaving that way

So if no team is willing to give up a measly 7th round pick for him and he needs to develop, why not just stash him on the practice squad and bring in a veteran backup? If a team snatched him off of our practice squad to be their backup, we get a conditional pick, right? We've been down this road before with Josh Portis, B.J. Daniels and Terrelle Pryor. Is Boykin so much better than those guys?

 

[mrt144]

Excellent idea. A lot of you just want to keep Boykin to develop him and trade him for a pick. Why not just do it now and bring back Tarvaris. We get a more reliable backup and a draft pick to boot.

Because Boykin needs to actually be developed before he is worthy of a pick. 32 teams passed him over a total of 253 times in the draft, including several teams in need of starting and backup caliber quarterbacks. Only one of those teams has any real idea about what he is capable of and what he brings to the table, all others essentially have the same draft grade on him that they had on him in April.

What could we get in trade for Boykin now? A 7th at best, and probably a conditional 7th at that.

Unless they are planning on cutting him anyway, there is no way the Hawks are trading him. If they are planning on cutting him, the only conceivable reason they had to keep him last Saturday was to try to fool other teams into thinking he is worth a trade. I just don't see this org behaving that way

So if no team is willing to give up a measly 7th round pick for him and he needs to develop, why not just stash him on the practice squad and bring in a veteran backup? If a team snatched him off of our practice squad to be their backup, we get a conditional pick, right? We've been down this road before with Josh Portis, B.J. Daniels and Terrelle Pryor. Is Boykin so much better than those guys?

Yes?