Does Macdonald keep Geno?

[SoulfishHawk]

Damn, it really IS the silly season. Someone actually said the Hawks should trade for Trey Lance
Now THAT'S how you start a work week

 

[Titus Pullo]

Bottom line...If the Seahawks field the same team as last year, they will have approximately 3 million dollars in cap space.

Now what?

 

[bigcc]

So much bad analysis it's not worth picking apart.

Translation: reading is hard

 

[bigcc]

Smith is due $22.5M in 2024. That is the important figure.

Good point, stuff like how much of it is guaranteed, and when it BECOMES guaranteed isn't important.

After 2/16 trading becomes the only real option because of his 12.7 salary getting guaranteed. Cutting him doesn't get that back.

He gets a 9.6 roster bonus on 3/17 if he's still on the seahawks. Trading him doesn't get that back.

You suggested trading him if we liked our 1st round qb sometime after April if we want to cut costs.

Good shit bro, why save the 9.6 trading him before 3/17? He gets another 10 mil bonus the same time next year, but I'm sure his value will have gone up with another year of age and the fact that whoever trades for him then would be doing it for one year, why bother?

So much stupid analysis I couldn't help taking it apart

 

[bigcc]

Bottom line...If the Seahawks field the same team as last year, they will have approximately 3 million dollars in cap space.

Now what?

They'd have negative money in cap space actually, and that's before paying the draft picks.

Also, it'd be the same team that's in the red, minus leonard, Bobby, Lewis, Brooks, Taylor, along with 4-5 other starters/heavy rotation players that are free agents.

There's a LOT of room to be had cutting/renegotiating/extending certain guys, but it was terrible cap management to reach this point.

 

[Parallax]

They'd have negative money in cap space actually, and that's before paying the draft picks.

Also, it'd be the same team that's in the red, minus leonard, Bobby, Lewis, Brooks, Taylor, along with 4-5 other starters/heavy rotation players that are free agents.

There's a LOT of room to be had cutting/renegotiating/extending certain guys, but it was terrible cap management to reach this point.

Word. One of the big reasons Pete deserved to be fired.

 

[gmor]

For one season, yes. I think we take a QB in the draft and have him behind Geno for the year. Pretty common take across Seattle radio today as well. Just seems to make sense.

Take a QB in the draft and keep Lock instead would free up quite a bit of money. I thought DL looked good when given the chance. Geno didn't look good with the occasional chance he got as a back up. Just a possibility.

 

[Ozzy]

They'd have negative money in cap space actually, and that's before paying the draft picks.

Also, it'd be the same team that's in the red, minus leonard, Bobby, Lewis, Brooks, Taylor, along with 4-5 other starters/heavy rotation players that are free agents.

There's a LOT of room to be had cutting/renegotiating/extending certain guys, but it was terrible cap management to reach this point.

Which is why when multiple people on here were if Macdonald doesn’t win 10 games it was a mistake to cut Pete argument is flawed. You cannot assume Oete was going to win 9-10 games with the current cap situation.

 

[bigcc]

Word. One of the big reasons Pete deserved to be fired.

100 percent

That being said, Schneider certainly isn't above blame.

It's easy to rag on Pete, especially now that he's no longer here, Pete certainly had the final say but I highly doubt he was involved much in the numbers/general structure that got us here

 

[Parallax]

100 percent

That being said, Schneider certainly isn't above blame.

It's easy to rag on Pete, especially now that he's no longer here, Pete certainly had the final say but I highly doubt he was involved much in the numbers/general structure that got us here

I'm giving Schneider the benefit of the doubt. If we continue to see boneheaded moves, I'll reassess. But so far so good.

 

[bigcc]

Take a QB in the draft and keep Lock instead would free up quite a bit of money. I thought DL looked good when given the chance. Geno didn't look good with the occasional chance he got as a back up. Just a possibility.

Meh
Play the qb we draft. He's not going to the Panthers or commanders

He'll be throwing to dk/lockett/jsn and a rb unit with a lot of potential.
Rookies can come in and play well, not to mention the value in nfl game experience.

We know who lock is, and he'll cost more, wouldn't mind drafting two QB's honestly. 4-5 years of the one of if not the lowest paid qb room is a good way to mend cap woes.

If whoever lock backs up gets hurt, he might help in comp pick calculations too.

 

[bigcc]

I'm giving Schneider the benefit of the doubt. If we continue to see boneheaded moves, I'll reassess. But so far so good.

We'll find out sooner than later lol. Going to be a busy offseason. I also find it difficult to give too much credit because Macdonald/Johnson were quite obviously the guys. I won't hold it against Schneider if Macdonald doesn't work out for the same reason.

I'm much more interested in how he manages getting the cap back to a reasonable place, and the draft with full control of each.

 

[flv2]

Good point, stuff like how much of it is guaranteed, and when it BECOMES guaranteed isn't important.

After 2/16 trading becomes the only real option because of his 12.7 salary getting guaranteed. Cutting him doesn't get that back.

He gets a 9.6 roster bonus on 3/17 if he's still on the seahawks. Trading him doesn't get that back.

You suggested trading him if we liked our 1st round qb sometime after April if we want to cut costs.

Good shit bro, why save the 9.6 trading him before 3/17? He gets another 10 mil bonus the same time next year, but I'm sure his value will have gone up with another year of age and the fact that whoever trades for him then would be doing it for one year, why bother?

So much stupid analysis I couldn't help taking it apart

Still wrong.

You pick up the guarantees on a 1 year $22.5M QB contract because that's the guy you're choosing to be your QB for the next year. That's it! Don't want him? Release him.

Sure, there's a very slim chance, (<5%), that the Seahawks don't want Smith but another team has contacted them and is willing to trade a pick for him. However, you don't even consider it unless your fall-back position is to keep him as a starter. You don't put yourself in a $22.5M hole to get a low pick that if it had a monetary value would be worth maybe $2.5M.

Maybe the Seahawks will pick a 1st round QB, and if so maybe they'll want the rookie to start. There's a huge amount of maybe and if in there but in that unlikely scenario they'll probably try to trade Smith. Worst case the trade compensation value won't match the roster bonus value, making it a small loss.

Do you get it now? I doubt it because you're too damn busy trying to show everyone how smart you are.

 

[bigcc]

Still wrong.

You pick up the guarantees on a 1 year $22.5M QB contract because that's the guy you're choosing to be your QB for the next year. That's it! Don't want him? Release him.

Sure, there's a very slim chance, (<5%), that the Seahawks don't want Smith but another team has contacted them and is willing to trade a pick for him. However, you don't even consider it unless your fall-back position is to keep him as a starter. You don't put yourself in a $22.5M hole to get a low pick that if it had a monetary value would be worth maybe $2.5M.

Maybe the Seahawks will pick a 1st round QB, and if so maybe they'll want the rookie to start. There's a huge amount of maybe and if in there but in that unlikely scenario they'll probably try to trade Smith. Worst case the trade compensation value won't match the roster bonus value, making it a small loss.

Do you get it now? I doubt it because you're too damn busy trying to show everyone how smart you are.

Zzzz

The entire reason for trading geno would be the cap savings....not whatever slim pickings we got in return.

We pay geno 22.5 if he stays here. If he were traded or cut tomorrow (which I'm also fine with as it's more likely than someone trading for him), either he doesn't get the 22.5 or the other team pays him.

THE 22.5 ISN'T GUARANTEED... Yet, that's the entire point I've been trying to make, how the hell does not paying geno 22.5 mil put us in a hole?

Don't need to show anyone anything because it's not some brilliant revelation, you're just being too thick to get it.

 

[Parallax]

We'll find out sooner than later lol. Going to be a busy offseason. I also find it difficult to give too much credit because Macdonald/Johnson were quite obviously the guys. I won't hold it against Schneider if Macdonald doesn't work out for the same reason.

I'm much more interested in how he manages getting the cap back to a reasonable place, and the draft with full control of each.

Exactly what I'm thinking CC.

 

[Parallax]

We know who lock is, and he'll cost more, wouldn't mind drafting two QB's honestly. 4-5 years of the one of if not the lowest paid qb room is a good way to mend cap woes.

I don't feel like I know who Lock is. If he had a year to develop, maybe I'd get tired of giving him chances, the way I have with Geno. I know he drove Denver fans crazy, the way he'd show potential and then let them down again and again.

I wouldn't mind taking two QBs but if we did, I think we'd need a third on the roster, a veteran for stability. Doesn't have to be Lock but we insisted on his inclusion in the Wilson trade because Schneider thought he saw something, at least at the time.

Rumor has it that Carroll made the decision to start Geno over Drew without ever giving him a chance, without even discussing it with the rest of the front office, and that some of those guys were not tickled. I can totally believe it. Kept thinking, "What the point of insisting he be part of the trade?". Maybe John's now seen enough to move on but I don't feel that I have. Of course he's privy to way more info.

With Wilson, it made sense to only have two QBs on the roster. If ever there was a time to consider having three, it's now. If we got one guy on day one or two and then picked up another on day three, maybe both are too valuable to slip onto the practice squad and stay there. Meanwhile, it's still good to have a vet.

 

[bigcc]

I don't feel like I know who Lock is. If he had a year to develop, maybe I'd get tired of giving him chances, the way I have with Geno. I know he drove Denver fans crazy, the way he'd show potential and then let them down again and again.

I wouldn't mind taking two QBs but if we did, I think we'd need a third on the roster, a veteran for stability. Doesn't have to be Lock but we insisted on his inclusion in the Wilson trade because Schneider thought he saw something, at least at the time.

Rumor has it that Carroll made the decision to start Geno over Drew without ever giving him a chance, without even discussing it with the rest of the front office, and that some of those guys were not tickled. I can totally believe it. Kept thinking, "What the point of insisting he be part of the trade?". Maybe John's now seen enough to move on but I don't feel that I have. Of course he's privy to way more info.

With Wilson, it made sense to only have two QBs on the roster. If ever there was a time to consider having three, it's now. If we got one guy on day one or two and then picked up another on day three, maybe both are too valuable to slip onto the practice squad and stay there. Meanwhile, it's still good to have a vet.

I was under the impression lock was included BECAUSE he wasn't comfortable giving geno the job yet and wanted them to compete. Say what you want about geno, but he was quite clearly the better choice.

I'm definitely not opposed to a cheap older vet, but lock not turning 28 until November makes me think he'll be paid more than the 3-4 mil I'd want to pay. At most. I have no problem keeping lock if we still draft a qb, and let them battle at that 3-4 mil.

 

[Appyhawk]

I would like to see us be able to draft a QB we like this year, and then another one next year (who I already picked out two years ago). I think Geno has shown us the best he has. Lock has shown some good and some not so good, which IMO makes the two of them on par. Geno is better in some cases, and Lock is better in some situations. If I'm going the lose one of them them Geno is that one. Especially if that means we keep Williams.

 

[DarkVictory23]

bigcc, appreciated your write up on how Geno's contract was structured. Overall though, I think you're too hung up on the cap. The point of cap space is to be used to get players.

Yes, if our plan was to field last year's team next year exactly as their contracts are currently structured, we'd be in trouble. But we don't want to do that, so we aren't really.

I don't feel like I know who Lock is. If he had a year to develop, maybe I'd get tired of giving him chances, the way I have with Geno. I know he drove Denver fans crazy, the way he'd show potential and then let them down again and again.

I wouldn't mind taking two QBs but if we did, I think we'd need a third on the roster, a veteran for stability. Doesn't have to be Lock but we insisted on his inclusion in the Wilson trade because Schneider thought he saw something, at least at the time.

Rumor has it that Carroll made the decision to start Geno over Drew without ever giving him a chance, without even discussing it with the rest of the front office, and that some of those guys were not tickled. I can totally believe it. Kept thinking, "What the point of insisting he be part of the trade?". Maybe John's now seen enough to move on but I don't feel that I have. Of course he's privy to way more info.

With Wilson, it made sense to only have two QBs on the roster. If ever there was a time to consider having three, it's now. If we got one guy on day one or two and then picked up another on day three, maybe both are too valuable to slip onto the practice squad and stay there. Meanwhile, it's still good to have a vet.

The bolded is what I find absolutely crazy. What in the world do you mean you are you tired of giving Geno chances? What chances? Dude has a winning record as a Seahawks starter, was just outside of being a top 5 QB last year, took us to the playoffs his first chance, on the verge of the playoffs on his second, and did so with what level of support this season? This is such a weird take.

Also, where does this 'rumor' about Pete not giving Drew a chance come from? Who is saying that?

Drew was a backup in 2021, just like Geno. Geno was a good backup in 2021. Drew was a bad backup in 2021. Unless we were absolutely planning on tanking (which neither John or Pete indicated they thought we were doing), why would anyone have been dead set on starting Drew Lock?

 

[Parallax]

I was under the impression lock was included BECAUSE he wasn't comfortable giving geno the job yet and wanted them to compete. Say what you want about geno, but he was quite clearly the better choice.

I'm definitely not opposed to a cheap older vet, but lock not turning 28 until November makes me think he'll be paid more than the 3-4 mil I'd want to pay. At most. I have no problem keeping lock if we still draft a qb, and let them battle at that 3-4 mil.

People say this all the time. Smart people whom I respect, such as you. But I don't see it. Never once did I think it was smart to go with Geno. He at times surprised me with a good performance or two. But he was not consistent and his limitations were clear. He was the definition of low ceiling, high floor. Lock was high ceiling, low floor. I'd have much preferred the latter because I was in patient franchise building mode rather than brainless "win now always" mode, which pretty much equals "mediocrity today, mediocrity tomorrow, mediocrity forevah!!!!"