Geno Trade Value?

[xray]

Right now Smith is of value to the Hawks as a serviceable starter . Even if the Hawks land a QB in the draft , it's not a given that he takes the job from Smith . The question for me is ; what other teams would trade for Smith as their starter at this time ? He would be a good option for any team as a backup ; but starter ? Another ' fly in the ointment ' is...what to do with Drew Lock ?

 

[Ozzy]

It's rumored Fields is going to draw a second or a third. Geno would get much less than Seahawks fans think. I realize he's been better than Fields but teams would much rather see if their staff can make a guy like Fields a star.

 

[Parallax]

It's rumored Fields is going to draw a second or a third. Geno would get much less than Seahawks fans think. I realize he's been better than Fields but teams would much rather see if their staff can make a guy like Fields a star.

That's my thinking too. But then what teams do around QBs is often unpredictable. Just takes one GM to a deal make. I wouldn't get my hopes up that anyone would send a second or a third though. Maybe a 5th or 6th. Look at how the 9ers tried to market Garoppolo to no effect. I think the Cowboys traded a 4th for Lance.

 

[SeaWolv]

No. Trust your eyes.

Agree to disagree. I think you need to do both. It's easy to look like a world beater when playing against weak competition. That can mean a bad defense or a good defense having a bad game. It could also mean an offense having an unusually good game. To the eye test that QB might look fantastic but are they really? Can they consistently duplicate that effort?

As fans we don't have enough data on Lock to make a determination if he's really any good but the coaches do since they see him in practice everyday. Geno is more of a known quantity than Lock. There's a reason Lock isn't starting somewhere in the league and it's not because he hasn't had chances. If you're not beating Geno in practice you're not going to on game day either. Neither is clearly the QB of the future but Geno is the best option for the short term.

 

[bigcc]

It's rumored Fields is going to draw a second or a third. Geno would get much less than Seahawks fans think. I realize he's been better than Fields but teams would much rather see if their staff can make a guy like Fields a star.

Than SOME seahawks fans think....

I think he's untradeable, he's getting paid 9.6 million dollars by whatever team he's on on 3/17, why the **** would they trade for him before then, and the only reason to get rid of geno is money saved (22.5 million)

If we draft a qb and keep geno, we're literally just having the same discussion next year, and burning 2 years of a qb on a rookie contract would be a travesty

 

[bigcc]

Agree to disagree. I think you need to do both. It's easy to look like a world beater when playing against weak competition. That can mean a bad defense or a good defense having a bad game. It could also mean an offense having an unusually good game. To the eye test that QB might look fantastic but are they really? Can they consistently duplicate that effort?

As fans we don't have enough data on Lock to make a determination if he's really any good but the coaches do since they see him in practice everyday. Geno is more of a known quantity than Lock. There's a reason Lock isn't starting somewhere in the league and it's not because he hasn't had chances. If you're not beating Geno in practice you're not going to on game day either. Neither is clearly the QB of the future but Geno is the best option for the short term.

You're just rambling lol

The coaches literally have the same data we do dog, we have an entirely new staff lmao literally nobody on staff has seen him practice

And let me tell you, the 28 games and 23 starts of data available to everyone, doesn't look good.

Disagree about geno being the best option short term, why would we waste a year, two max, of development with a brand new coaching staff and scheme just for him to retire as we're rebuilding? Get a rookie some experience under the scheme so when the rest of the team replenishes he's ready to go and understands whatever nuances the OC wants

 

[Parallax]

Agree to disagree. I think you need to do both. It's easy to look like a world beater when playing against weak competition. That can mean a bad defense or a good defense having a bad game. It could also mean an offense having an unusually good game. To the eye test that QB might look fantastic but are they really? Can they consistently duplicate that effort?

As fans we don't have enough data on Lock to make a determination if he's really any good but the coaches do since they see him in practice everyday. Geno is more of a known quantity than Lock. There's a reason Lock isn't starting somewhere in the league and it's not because he hasn't had chances. If you're not beating Geno in practice you're not going to on game day either. Neither is clearly the QB of the future but Geno is the best option for the short term.

I agree in part. Yes, the coaches have more info. Both because they see him in practice and also because they have way more football knowledge than I. I don't know if that's true for you so I'm just speaking for myself.

On the other hand, it's not at all infrequent in sports that someone's talent is overlooked or he/she doesn't get fully developed because a coach didn't recognize the potential, or someone was ahead of him/her or the athlete was of the wrong color, etc. I'm old enough to remember when black guys didn't get the chance to play quarterback because they were believed to be incapable.

Lock had some chances with Denver. He didn't do well. He had tantalizing skills that would excite the fans and coaches but he'd make bad choice after bad choice, particularly under stress. But he also had some decent stretches where he performed well. Fangio chose Bridgewater over Lock. The Denver GM, George Paton, complimented Lock, for what it's worth, saying he took the demotion like a true pro.

A lot of Denver fans felt that Lock wasn't given the time or support he needed to develop. At the time of the Wilson trade, word was that the Seahawks insisted on Lock's inclusion. Schneider had scouted the guy and saw a lot of potential. Word was that Carroll made the decision to announce Smith as the starter without consultation with the front office and it upset people. I heard no specific reference to Schneider but he's not the only one in the front office.

I thought Lock would get a real chance in Seattle. A fresh start. A lot of people did. It didn't seem there was ever a real competition. Carroll began camp by stating that Geno was in front. Geno got all the reps with the starters. There was supposed to be an opportunity for Lock in week three but he contracted covid. He finally got a bit of a chance in week 4 but by then it was clear Geno had the job. Lock was pushing to overcome and all the worst tendencies arose to the surface. He played badly, threw interceptions.

Last year, Lock got to play in the preseason and looked great. Relaxed and poised, he had really good chemistry with the receivers. The last game was given to Geno and, for what it's worth, he didn't look nearly as good. I agree that that's not definitive because he was facing more starters.

When Lock was thrown in cold against San Francisco, he looked scared and played worse. Made a few good throws but overall I think it's fair to say he was clearly outmatched. Threw one short pass that was easily picked off. Against Philly, with a week to prepare with the first team guys, though still not pronounced the starter until just before game time, he looked shaky through most of the game. Didn't move the ball super well but he managed to avoid the sorts of mistakes he's been known for. Then, in the final drive, he looked great. I mean like a Russell Wilson final drive great.

After the game, Carroll immediately made clear that Geno was getting the job back and most fans fell in line. However, there were a contingent who, like me, felt that Lock should be given the chance. KJ Wright said that on his show too. KJ expressed concern that Carroll would lose the locker room if he put Geno back in. I don't know if there's any relationship but by the end of the season, Carroll complained about the guys not listening. It's possible the players felt that Lock deserved a real chance.

So much time has gone by, people now presume Lock just doesn't have what it takes. These things become self fulfilling prophecies. It's possible he'll never get there but I see no reason he shouldn't be given a real chance. I'd like to see Lock up against a rookie QB in camp and let the best man win. Then the Hawks would have two potential franchise guys in my mind. I've not relegated Lock to permanent backup status.

 

[bigcc]

I agree in part. Yes, the coaches have more info. Both because they see him in practice and also because they have way more football knowledge than I. I don't know if that's true for you so I'm just speaking for myself.

On the other hand, it's not at all infrequent in sports that someone's talent is overlooked or he/she doesn't get fully developed because a coach didn't recognize the potential, or someone was ahead of him/her or the athlete was of the wrong color, etc. I'm old enough to remember when black guys didn't get the chance to play quarterback because they were believed to be incapable.

Lock had some chances with Denver. He didn't do well. He had tantalizing skills that would excite the fans and coaches but he'd make bad choice after bad choice, particularly under stress. But he also had some decent stretches where he performed well. Fangio chose Bridgewater over Lock. The Denver GM, George Paton, complimented Lock, for what it's worth, saying he took the demotion like a true pro.

A lot of Denver fans felt that Lock wasn't given the time or support he needed to develop. At the time of the Wilson trade, word was that the Seahawks insisted on Lock's inclusion. Schneider had scouted the guy and saw a lot of potential. Word was that Carroll made the decision to announce Smith as the starter without consultation with the front office and it upset people. I heard no specific reference to Schneider but he's not the only one in the front office.

I thought Lock would get a real chance in Seattle. A fresh start. A lot of people did. It didn't seem there was ever a real competition. Carroll began camp by stating that Geno was in front. Geno got all the reps with the starters. There was supposed to be an opportunity for Lock in week three but he contracted covid. He finally got a bit of a chance in week 4 but by then it was clear Geno had the job. Lock was pushing to overcome and all the worst tendencies arose to the surface. He played badly, threw interceptions.

Last year, Lock got to play in the preseason and looked great. Relaxed and poised, he had really good chemistry with the receivers. The last game was given to Geno and, for what it's worth, he didn't look nearly as good. I agree that that's not definitive because he was facing more starters.

When Lock was thrown in cold against San Francisco, he looked scared and played worse. Made a few good throws but overall I think it's fair to say he was clearly outmatched. Threw one short pass that was easily picked off. Against Philly, with a week to prepare with the first team guys, though still not pronounced the starter until just before game time, he looked shaky through most of the game. Didn't move the ball super well but he managed to avoid the sorts of mistakes he's been known for. Then, in the final drive, he looked great. I mean like a Russell Wilson final drive great.

After the game, Carroll immediately made clear that Geno was getting the job back and most fans fell in line. However, there were a contingent who, like me, felt that Lock should be given the chance. KJ Wright said that on his show too. KJ expressed concern that Carroll would lose the locker room if he put Geno back in. I don't know if there's any relationship but by the end of the season, Carroll complained about the guys not listening. It's possible the players felt that Lock deserved a real chance.

So much time has gone by, people now presume Lock just doesn't have what it takes. These things become self fulfilling prophecies. It's possible he'll never get there but I see no reason he shouldn't be given a real chance. I'd like to see Lock up against a rookie QB in camp and let the best man win. Then the Hawks would have two potential franchise guys in my mind. I've not relegated Lock to permanent backup status.

Brother I appreciate your posts but you're really stretching with some of this.

You conveniently forgot to mention lock was 0-3 with 2 td 2 int, and when Bridgewater replaced him went 7-7 with 18/7, so it wasn't the surrounding casts fault, lock was playing like garbage. We've seen it since, this is who he is.

Carroll didn't trade for lock for giggles, just to bench him, resign him, and bench him. He liked him competing with geno in camp year one, didn't work out, but resigned him because he was a helpful backup with geno.

That's who lock is, mediocre for a backup qb, who seems like a good person and teammate.

He was a free agent, if he had so much talent why did he sign with Pete who apparently hates him for 1 year 4 million dollars?

Geno had won comeback player of the year, lock had nowhere else to go because nobody would have made him a starter

Period

 

[xray]

^
Why not give Lock a fair chance if he stays with the team ? Denver apparently sucks at developing QBs ; which includes Lock . In the 8 years since Manning retired , Denver has played 12 QBs . For some reason Denver can't find or develop QBs with much success . Maybe Lock wasn't a failure , as much as Denver was the failure . Lock should get a fair and even chance to compete against Smith or a QB draft pick if that's who's in camp . If he busts out , then so be it . imo

 

[SeaWolv]

You're just rambling lol

The coaches literally have the same data we do dog, we have an entirely new staff lmao literally nobody on staff has seen him practice

And let me tell you, the 28 games and 23 starts of data available to everyone, doesn't look good.

Disagree about geno being the best option short term, why would we waste a year, two max, of development with a brand new coaching staff and scheme just for him to retire as we're rebuilding? Get a rookie some experience under the scheme so when the rest of the team replenishes he's ready to go and understands whatever nuances the OC wants

There's no way we have the same data as the coaches. They don't let the us know how Lock performed in drills and scrimmages.

Whether the current coaches have seen our QB's practice or not I guarantee you there's lots of video available for them to see all they need to.

I'm assuming you're talking about Geno's performance with your 28 games and 23 starts doesn't look good comment. I don't think your numbers are correct and your assessment isn't either. Geno has a PFF grade of 82.9, was #16 in passing yards, #18 in comp % and #14 in yds/gm. That's better than "doesn't look good".

The reason that we take those 1-2 two years of development with Geno and any backups or potential rookie candidates is several fold. First, we get to see how Geno does with the new system as we do with everyone else also learning it. Secondly, we get to give any rookie QB draft pick time to learn the system as well plus acclimating to being a pro. Thirdly, we give the team at least a chance to compete. I'm sure lots of fans would prefer we just tank the season but I don't think the organization is ok with that, they still need to sell tickets.

 

[SeaWolv]

^
Why not give Lock a fair chance if he stays with the team ? Denver apparently sucks at developing QBs ; which includes Lock . In the 8 years since Manning retired , Denver has played 12 QBs . For some reason Denver can't find or develop QBs with much success . Maybe Lock wasn't a failure , as much as Denver was the failure . Lock should get a fair and even chance to compete against Smith or a QB draft pick if that's who's in camp . If he busts out , then so be it . imo

I don't disagree that Denver suck developing QB's but Lock has been here 2 years now, what makes you think he's better than Geno? There's a reason he's not starting.

 

[Seahawker]

I tried to convince myself that Geno's trade value was a 4th rounder but after his 3 INT Pro Bowl performance that opinion has dumped. Even with respectable top 12 stats, his age, lack of starts and dead $ involved make his trade value a conditional 5th at best.
I am in the QB camp of a one year deal cheap vet with wheels and a couple of promising rookies, carrying 3 QB's if the 3rd is worth a roster spot.
The first two years of this new regime should have no no big $ splash FA's while JS goes on his hyper two year roster churn until that mountain of dead $ is gone.
I like Geno But he's not the future.

 

[bigcc]

There's no way we have the same data as the coaches. They don't let the us know how Lock performed in drills and scrimmages.

Whether the current coaches have seen our QB's practice or not I guarantee you there's lots of video available for them to see all they need to.

I'm assuming you're talking about Geno's performance with your 28 games and 23 starts doesn't look good comment. I don't think your numbers are correct and your assessment isn't either. Geno has a PFF grade of 82.9, was #16 in passing yards, #18 in comp % and #14 in yds/gm. That's better than "doesn't look good".

The reason that we take those 1-2 two years of development with Geno and any backups or potential rookie candidates is several fold. First, we get to see how Geno does with the new system as we do with everyone else also learning it. Secondly, we get to give any rookie QB draft pick time to learn the system as well plus acclimating to being a pro. Thirdly, we give the team at least a chance to compete. I'm sure lots of fans would prefer we just tank the season but I don't think the organization is ok with that, they still need to sell tickets.

Good point, I'm sure the practices where they can't be touched are more representative than the games.

And no, I was talking about you saying we don't have enough film to judge lock.... We've seen who he is, and I don't want it. The whole thing was about lock, we also know who geno is lol, and he's a slightly above average QB. If he were cheaper this wouldn't be a discussion, me wanting to move on is a cap factor.

But bro, we don't need to "see how geno does"... If he did great, cool, we still need a qb when he retires after two years and 14-15 wins over 2 years.

Rookie QB's don't need to acclimate, the nfl is different now, you NEED to capitalize on rookie contracts at qb, I can't state this enough.

If you think starting a 1st round qb over a slightly above average 34 year old QB who went 9-8 (9-9 if playoffs included) is TANKING, I really don't know what to tell you

 

[knownone]

Rick Spielman said Geno's league-wide value was around a 2nd or 3rd round pick on his podcast a few weeks back. The idea was that most teams would view him as a lesser version of Matt Stafford with the Lions. They are similar in age and production at the time of the trade; Geno just doesn't have the long-term track record to garner the same value as Stafford.

Geno's criminally underrated on this board. Good player. Good contract. If Seattle were to trade him, they could almost certainly get decent value for him.

 

[bigcc]

Rick Spielman said Geno's league-wide value was around a 2nd or 3rd round pick on his podcast a few weeks back. The idea was that most teams would view him as a lesser version of Matt Stafford with the Lions. They are similar in age and production at the time of the trade; Geno just doesn't have the long-term track record to garner the same value as Stafford.

Geno's criminally underrated on this board. Good player. Good contract. If Seattle were to trade him, they could almost certainly get decent value for him.

If they trade him it would have to be before the 5th day of free agency, or we pay him 9.6 million dollars and the point of trading/cutting him is gone.

I don't care if genghis khan rode down from heaven on a beautiful steed and said word for word what you just said, we're not getting a 3rd let alone a 2nd.

Who was Stafford throwing to when traded? Who was geno throwing to last year?

 

[chris98251]

Good point, I'm sure the practices where they can't be touched are more representative than the games.

And no, I was talking about you saying we don't have enough film to judge lock.... We've seen who he is, and I don't want it. The whole thing was about lock, we also know who geno is lol, and he's a slightly above average QB. If he were cheaper this wouldn't be a discussion, me wanting to move on is a cap factor.

But bro, we don't need to "see how geno does"... If he did great, cool, we still need a qb when he retires after two years and 14-15 wins over 2 years.

Rookie QB's don't need to acclimate, the nfl is different now, you NEED to capitalize on rookie contracts at qb, I can't state this enough.

If you think starting a 1st round qb over a slightly above average 34 year old QB who went 9-8 (9-9 if playoffs included) is TANKING, I really don't know what to tell you

Don't know where you got this but acclimating and understanding a professional game, that it is now a job versus in School even if most don't attend classes, learning about having the kind of money these kids get, learning how to be a Pro, gaining respect from your teammates so you can lead them, learning the speed and how more complex defenses are and being able to lead them and learn queues, getting a NFL body. Love has been successful because he got all this, Packers were not sure till he took the field under duress but he came out on top, he was prepared. Stroud had a great QB coach, there was no pressure on him, people thought they were a few seasons away and hoped they didn't kill him like Carr while they worked on it, he had to earn the spot as well.

 

[bigcc]

Don't know where you got this but acclimating and understanding a professional game, that it is now a job versus in School even if most don't attend classes, learning about having the kind of money these kids get, learning how to be a Pro, gaining respect from your teammates so you can lead them, learning the speed and how more complex defenses are and being able to lead them and learn queues, getting a NFL body. Love has been successful because he got all this, Packers were not sure till he took the field under duress but he came out on top, he was prepared. Stroud had a great QB coach, there was no pressure on him, people thought they were a few seasons away and hoped they didn't kill him like Carr while they worked on it, he had to earn the spot as well.

I agree with you on a lot of that, besides the money part. Nil changed a lot of things, I saw penix in commercials like 30 times last year and sports are literally the only thing I watch with commercials, kids are going to practice in cars that cost 6 figures lol

That being said, if we keep geno and draft qb, he sits for a year, kind of a waste but I get it. I don't care about love, but if we sit qb two years, then we messed up either on the qb we chose or the decision to keep geno, AGAIN

 

[xray]

I don't disagree that Denver suck developing QB's but Lock has been here 2 years now, what makes you think he's better than Geno? There's a reason he's not starting.

I didn't say Lock was better than Smith . Who knows for sure ? It seemed that PC tagged Smith as the starter before taking a long hard look at Lock too . Lock was designated as the backup from the get go . Where was the " always compete " bs that PC preached ? The Hawks should at least give Lock the opportunity to fail . imo

 

[Parallax]

Rick Spielman said Geno's league-wide value was around a 2nd or 3rd round pick on his podcast a few weeks back. The idea was that most teams would view him as a lesser version of Matt Stafford with the Lions. They are similar in age and production at the time of the trade; Geno just doesn't have the long-term track record to garner the same value as Stafford.

Geno's criminally underrated on this board. Good player. Good contract. If Seattle were to trade him, they could almost certainly get decent value for him.

When the 9ers were trying to trade Garoppolo, their fans were claiming they'd get a 1st. Some expected more. A 1st and a 2nd. Even two 1sts.

I remain skeptical that Geno has much trade value. Hope I'm wrong and we trade him.

 

[knownone]

When the 9ers were trying to trade Garoppolo, their fans were claiming they'd get a 1st. Some expected more. A 1st and a 2nd. Even two 1sts.

I remain skeptical that Geno has much trade value. Hope I'm wrong and we trade him.

Rick Spielman is a former GM, though. Not a fan. So, I think he has a better sense of the market.