Earl Thomas

[BigBill1945]

I was listening to Brock and Salk this morning. They were talking about a possible trade with Earl. Their point was that we do not have many players that they can get much for at this time. Earl has 2 years left on his contract and he could get first rounder and maybe a 3rd or 4th rounder or two second rounders for him. In another year he is going to ask for a lot more and we cannot give it to him for one reason or another he will be gone. They feel that perhaps we need to rebuild. We have a first round and no 2nd or 3rd rounder this year. This is not good for a team that is trying to retool. I am not sure what to think about this. Some of it makes sense but some of it makes no sense at all. I am torn. What say you all? We have to find a way to retool our team as they are getting older. I think Bennett will be gone but Richard will be here. I saw our projected pick at #18 and it is a DB. Hmmm.

 

[Uncle Si]

I think that valuation may not be realistic.

If it was you certainly consider it.

 

[Cyrus12]

If we could get a first rder and more I say do it. I don't think his value is that high except for maybe hawks fans. He will probably be here one more year

 

[jammerhawk]

We all have beliefs as to the trade values of certain players. Remember a trade involves an agreement between both parties as to value. I don't know that Earl could command such a high trade value, maybe , maybe not. Certianly he is a regular Pro Bowl candidate and a great player, but any team acquiring him would need to be able to fit his contract and likely an expensive renewal under their cap. That latter problem reduces his trade value.

 

[Trrrroy]

He's a HOF caliber safety in the prime of his career with twi years left in his contract. Trading him would be a mistake, IMO. This team was a few missed fieldgoals from another 10 or 11 win season, and that was with no running game and a plethora of injuries on the defensive side if the ball. This idea that we need to rebuild after one bad season is silly to me.

 

[Uncle Si]

He's a HOF caliber safety in the prime of his career with twi years left in his contract. Trading him would be a mistake, IMO. This team was a few missed fieldgoals from another 10 or 11 win season, and that was with no running game and a plethora of injuries on the defensive side if the ball. This idea that we need to rebuild after one bad season is silly to me.

I think ET is still a fantastic safety, probably one of the top 5 in the league.

However, I'd disagree he in his prime. I'd also disagree that the team doesn't need to "rebuild" to an extent. No, the team doesn't need an overhaul, but it certainly needs investment in a handful of areas and is low on resources (cap space and draft capital) to address it.



Would an ET trade provide enough to cover some of those areas? I don't think so. Not because he's so good.. i just don't see his value to other teams as being high enough to make the trade worth it.

 

[Bigpumpkin]

Earl is so vital to this team that it would be unwise to trade him.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Just remember that Pete wins because he has great players and gives them the freedom to make plays.

He has a spotty record in bringing in coordinators or Asst coaches, all the way back to USC.

He never was great with tactics or strategy. Sometimes adequate but not really great.

But he does have a tremendous background in being able to recognize and develop talent.

The question you ask is whether removing our great players can be offset by bringing in new great players? So far, they haven't been very good at finding great players since Scott left.

So is trading one of the great players we have for a draft pick that we would probably screw up anyway a great plan?

It certainly does not make us better. And at some point as Pete runs out of the ability to out-athlete the other team, a lot of those close wins will turn to losses.

 

[Steve2222]

He's a HOF caliber safety in the prime of his career with twi years left in his contract. Trading him would be a mistake, IMO. This team was a few missed fieldgoals from another 10 or 11 win season, and that was with no running game and a plethora of injuries on the defensive side if the ball. This idea that we need to rebuild after one bad season is silly to me.

I think ET is still a fantastic safety, probably one of the top 5 in the league.

However, I'd disagree he in his prime. I'd also disagree that the team doesn't need to "rebuild" to an extent. No, the team doesn't need an overhaul, but it certainly needs investment in a handful of areas and is low on resources (cap space and draft capital) to address it.



Would an ET trade provide enough to cover some of those areas? I don't think so. Not because he's so good.. i just don't see his value to other teams as being high enough to make the trade worth it.

Earl Thomas turns 29 in May and he doesn’t play one of the most physically demanding positions. Yes, he for sure is still in his prime.

 

[Sports Hernia]

I was listening to Brock and Salk this morning. They were talking about a possible trade with Earl. Their point was that we do not have many players that they can get much for at this time. Earl has 2 years left on his contract and he could get first rounder and maybe a 3rd or 4th rounder or two second rounders for him. In another year he is going to ask for a lot more and we cannot give it to him for one reason or another he will be gone. They feel that perhaps we need to rebuild. We have a first round and no 2nd or 3rd rounder this year. This is not good for a team that is trying to retool. I am not sure what to think about this. Some of it makes sense but some of it makes no sense at all. I am torn. What say you all? We have to find a way to retool our team as they are getting older. I think Bennett will be gone but Richard will be here. I saw our projected pick at #18 and it is a DB. Hmmm.

Must be a slow news day for Brock and Salk.
Dumb idea!
Next.

 

[Chapow]

Earl Thomas turns 29 in May and he doesn’t play one of the most physically demanding positions. Yes, he for sure is still in his prime.

Agreed. He could play another 5-6 years as long as injuries don't derail his career.

I don't like the idea of trading a great player for a draft pick. That seems like trading a million dollars for a small chance at a million dollars, but you're far more likely to end up with $100k than another million.

 

[TreeRon]

Just like Sherman last year, they won't trade him unless they get what they think he's worth. If they want a 1 or, say a 2 and a 3, or whatever and no one else wants to pay that price he'll be here next year.

 

[toffee]

Trade him to Cleveland, they got picks and sure could overpay to get a star.

 

[Grahamhawker]

Just remember that Pete wins because he has great players and gives them the freedom to make plays.


So is trading one of the great players we have for a draft pick that we would probably screw up anyway a great plan?

This is the most pertinent question.

 

[lobohawk]

When I heard them discuss this, it was more along the lines that Hawks might have to trade him .. not that it was desired. Lack of draft capital and a potentially big expense for Earl going forward being the thought. Salk loves him, but he also seems to get energized by offseason action (e.g. see his views on the Mariners).

Prefer they keep him.

 

[seahawks08]

As a player when you get older, your speed diminishes unless you are super human. In this case being a Top Safety does help cover to keep things in front of you and the veteran presence, but how much speed would he still retain to bring a turnover kind of situation by beating a receiver after the ball is thrown should be the discussion. Do we have anyone in the team to replace him now, absolutely not, do we need to draft someone who can become his calibre of a player within the next one or two years, definitely yes. We want to get younger at some point and we also need to bring back the speed. Every position in a team has a value as compared to the league, how much that value translates to his skills would be something I wouldn't know.

 

[NFSeahawks]

I never understand why proven players get undervalued as far as possible trades. In my mind Earl deserve a first round pick in return, for you taking a chance at getting a player even somewhat like him. His skill drop off hasn't even been seen much with his injury. Or two second-round picks which might even be more tempting.

 

[WmHBonney]

Trade ET for a draft pick or two that we turn into Malik McDowell?
HARD PASS.

 

[King Dog]

Yeah, I don't trust our FO to draft a suitable replacement. Pass

 

[Uncle Si]

He's a HOF caliber safety in the prime of his career with twi years left in his contract. Trading him would be a mistake, IMO. This team was a few missed fieldgoals from another 10 or 11 win season, and that was with no running game and a plethora of injuries on the defensive side if the ball. This idea that we need to rebuild after one bad season is silly to me.

I think ET is still a fantastic safety, probably one of the top 5 in the league.

However, I'd disagree he in his prime. I'd also disagree that the team doesn't need to "rebuild" to an extent. No, the team doesn't need an overhaul, but it certainly needs investment in a handful of areas and is low on resources (cap space and draft capital) to address it.



Would an ET trade provide enough to cover some of those areas? I don't think so. Not because he's so good.. i just don't see his value to other teams as being high enough to make the trade worth it.

Earl Thomas turns 29 in May and he doesn’t play one of the most physically demanding positions. Yes, he for sure is still in his prime.

He's also been injured a handful of times.

I love ET as a player and wouldn't be thrilled with the trade. My point is whether he's worth the high draft picks to some other team.