Geno Trade Value?

[Parallax]

Next years qb class is pretty much unanimously considered significantly worse than this one from top to bottom.

If it was even closer to as strong as this one I'd have an entirely different opinion, but unfortunately we don't.

I don't agree with the scouting department portion though, it's still john and his boys up there, and him having full power can either be amazing or terrifying, we don't know who made what choices with Pete in charge so who knows....

I will say if Schneider and crew need to develop the scouting department, it's going to take longer than a year lol

We don't know what was Pete and what was John but there's a lot of circumstantial evidence. We retained the guy I was hoping to retain.

 

[bigcc]

Don't know but, at UW, Grubb was OC and coached QBs.

Doesn't take away from the quoted portion of geno learning an entirely new scheme.

 

[Parallax]

Doesn't take away from the quoted portion of geno learning an entirely new scheme.

I'm totally with you on that. I'm one of the guys advocating for the Hawks to move on.

 

[bigcc]

We don't know what was Pete and what was John but there's a lot of circumstantial evidence. We retained the guy I was hoping to retain.

What circumstantial evidence? I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that they know who conducted good/bad contracts, draft picks, trades etc.

I think its most likely that they both had a healthy share of good/poor decisions, but I don't know.

I DO know that stuff (conspiracy theories) like carroll begrudgingly accepting lock and acting against him, then begrudgingly resigning him, only to bench him, doesn't make logical sense if he has the power to overrule Schneider on bad trades and draft picks.

He had the power or he didn't, people don't get to selectively pick out what helps their argument.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Agree with alot of what you are saying, but while Geno was with the team for years and still could t run our full playbook, Geno isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. So now we are going to have a completely different offensive scheme & playbook. Why would we slow our offense down with watching Geno struggle through a new playbook for a season, when it could just as easily be spent on a cheaper vet competing with our Rookie QBOTF? Geno as our starting QB is NOT winning us a SB next year, at best we make the playoffs, getting our teeth kicked in the 1st round, then drafting around #20? Then still stuck with Geno because you have no chance to move up again for a QBOTF? Geno is a scab we need to rip off, and move on!

Is there a source on the "couldn't run the full playbook" claim? I don't really see any indication that he was unable to run the scheme. In fact, he did his best work in year 2 of Waldron's tenure with an obviously overhauled offensive approach after ridding ourselves of Wilson.

Moreover, Grubb's playcalling in college and his elevation of Penix seems highly synergistic with Geno's playstyle. Geno is an accurate passer who can get the ball out mostly on-time and Grubb dialed up a lot of single-read hitters that Penix feasted on. I don't see how this doesn't mesh well with Geno Smith.

We shouldn't tear down every facet of the team for a bit of cap space, especially not a quarterback who has mostly overperformed his very reasonable contract.

While doubts may exist about Geno's capability in terms of "putting the team on his back" and carrying them to the big game, they should still be endeavoring to start strong and be as competitive as possible in year 1. Losing begets losing, and winning begets winning.

So yeah, try to find the QB of tomorrow and all that jazz obviously given Geno's age and non-viability as an option for the long haul, but I see very little reason to tear everything down and be worse in the name of "rebuilding."

Cheaper vets will be cheaper because they're significantly worse than Geno Smith. This includes Drew Lock.

 

[Parallax]

What circumstantial evidence? I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that they know who conducted good/bad contracts, draft picks, trades etc.

I think its most likely that they both had a healthy share of good/poor decisions, but I don't know.

I DO know that stuff (conspiracy theories) like carroll begrudgingly accepting lock and acting against him, then begrudgingly resigning him, only to bench him, doesn't make logical sense if he has the power to overrule Schneider on bad trades and draft picks.

He had the power or he didn't, people don't get to selectively pick out what helps their argument.

I'm not going to go back and forth with you over this. I could site things I've read and heard from those I consider credible but I really don't enjoy that sort of exercise. I don't have an investment in your agreement. You're welcome to believe whatever you want.

 

[Titus Pullo]

Here we go again with the Geno talk..... Just be patient for four more days.

If Geno isn't cut by Thursday, he'll probably be here for the entire year.

 

[WarHawks]

Waiting on pins and needles. I can see the argument for and against, as long as for is only for a year while they develop a new qb. Going with Geno for more than a year is like investing in horse barns in the 1920's. Makes no sense for a franchise that just overhauled its entire coaching staff, and who just watched their division rival get taken down in the owl by an elite qb, which Geno obviously is not.

 

[BASF]

Agree with alot of what you are saying, but while Geno was with the team for years and still could t run our full playbook, Geno isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. So now we are going to have a completely different offensive scheme & playbook. Why would we slow our offense down with watching Geno struggle through a new playbook for a season, when it could just as easily be spent on a cheaper vet competing with our Rookie QBOTF? Geno as our starting QB is NOT winning us a SB next year, at best we make the playoffs, getting our teeth kicked in the 1st round, then drafting around #20? Then still stuck with Geno because you have no chance to move up again for a QBOTF? Geno is a scab we need to rip off, and move on!

Your whole gimmick for the past two years has been anti-Geno, now you have graduated to openly insulting him. I have seen this claim from you enough times that you are going to have to back it up with some kind of evidence. It seems like absolute supposition on your part. We all do it from time to time, such as my supposition that Creed Humphrey told the Seahawks he did not want to play for them. I at least prefaced it as supposition. You are stating that Shane Waldron (he who runs too many of the same plays when down and distance dictates thus allowing DBs to jump routes) had to dumb down the playbook for Geno as though it is fact. We saw his full playbook game one of his tenure that Me3 refused to run after that game. There is solid evidence for that as our QB went directly back to doing what he always did, then after the loss in game two, in his press conference when questioned about not taking the open underneath throws to first downs as his coach wanted, he stated, "I know how to win, and we have done a lot of it." That is actual evidence that a player was not able to run the playbook.

Please bring some kind of evidence to this dumbing down of the playbook or at least present it as supposition.

 

[Sonichound16]

So my son, brother and I were talking last night about whether it would be better to cut Geno and sign Russell to the league min after the Broncos cut him or stick with Geno. If it is a possibility, Russ under a min contract would be way better than Geno at his current #. Plus I would be able to wear my Wilson jersey again. What do you guys think?

 

[Maelstrom787]

So my son, brother and I were talking last night about whether it would be better to cut Geno and sign Russell to the league min after the Broncos cut him or stick with Geno. If it is a possibility, Russ under a min contract would be way better than Geno at his current #. Plus I would be able to wear my Wilson jersey again. What do you guys think?

My thought is "why would anyone want to invite this absolute media circus during year 1 of a new regime?"

Also, why would anyone want to hamstring themselves into having to implement the single type of disjointed, unreliable offense that Russell Wilson is capable of running?

If Sean Payton's offensive scheming wasn't enough to maximize Russell into being worth all of the fluffing and rigamarole required to prevent him and Mark Rodgers from assaulting the teams reputation in the media, why would we want to invite this for any price? They'd have to PAY us picks and money to take him back at this point.

 

[hawkfan68]

So my son, brother and I were talking last night about whether it would be better to cut Geno and sign Russell to the league min after the Broncos cut him or stick with Geno. If it is a possibility, Russ under a min contract would be way better than Geno at his current #. Plus I would be able to wear my Wilson jersey again. What do you guys think?

It's a good thought but Russ is not going to play for minimum contract.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Also, a note on the cap -

2024 space is of little meaning right now for the future outlook of the team. We're in a very good cap outlook for 2025 and after regardless of Geno's contract.

The only benefit to cutting Geno would be the modest flexibility cutting him provides this year, and the dead cap makes it even less worth it than it seems.

 

[Donn2390]

My thought is "why would anyone want to invite this absolute media circus during year 1 of a new regime?"

Also, why would anyone want to hamstring themselves into having to implement the single type of disjointed, unreliable offense that Russell Wilson is capable of running?

If Sean Payton's offensive scheming wasn't enough to maximize Russell into being worth all of the fluffing and rigamarole required to prevent him and Mark Rodgers from assaulting the teams reputation in the media, why would we want to invite this for any price? They'd have to PAY us picks and money to take him back at this point.

/\
This, plus Geno is a better QB than Russ..!! Who's to say Geno won't excell under a new coaching staff? He has been very good, and definately hamstrung by his OL and the defense. Perhaps once those faults are corrected, Gman might become a Super Star.
No one gave him a chance two years ago and he excelled, no one is giving him a chance next year and he very well make them eat crow again.. He proved the doubters wrong before, whos to say he won't do it again. He is the perfect guy to let the rook sit behind for a year or two.
Bring Russ back only if they need a janitor...

 

[bigcc]

So my son, brother and I were talking last night about whether it would be better to cut Geno and sign Russell to the league min after the Broncos cut him or stick with Geno. If it is a possibility, Russ under a min contract would be way better than Geno at his current #. Plus I would be able to wear my Wilson jersey again. What do you guys think?

That would be a monumentally stupid decision unless russ is signing for vet minimum

And even then it's still pretty stupid, for a multitude of reasons.

 

[bigcc]

Also, a note on the cap -

2024 space is of little meaning right now for the future outlook of the team. We're in a very good cap outlook for 2025 and after regardless of Geno's contract.

The only benefit to cutting Geno would be the modest flexibility cutting him provides this year, and the dead cap makes it even less worth it than it seems.

We're paying the dead cap regardless of what happens, so all that really matters is the amount saved.

As it stands, we'd save 22.5 million this second by cutting him (plus potential 25 the year after, though that's eaten into the moment we sign someone for 2+ years).

That 22.5 becomes 9.8 on Friday, which becomes 0.2 on 3/17.

These are cut numbers, not trade to be clear. So luckily the cut discussion will be over by the end of Thursday for practical reasons.

That being said, I "kind" of agree with you about 24/25 cap, but if we're keeping geno that means we're trying to compete NOW, which means 24 cap absolutely matters....

Lot of guys to resign, especially if we're in win now. And if we're in win now cutting any big names isn't really an option.

Cap aside, cutting geno allows his replacement a full year of experience in our scheme for when we're back to winning now, it allows us to sign/resign players who will be in it for long enough (like leonard williams).

I don't personally believe in this one since I don't like the idea of tanking until you're mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, but there's obviously the idea of higher draft picks now as we transition from geno, instead of later when we transition from geno.

I'm ok with keeping geno, but I'd prefer cutting him. I don't think he has any value given his age, I don't think any team is going to pay 22.5 mil this year for 34 year old geno whose been throwing to our wr's.

After 3/17 that 22.5 becomes 12.9 saved due to a 9.6 million roster bonus. So his value goes up, but we lose almost half the incentive to trade him.

It may hurt, it's not fair, but cutting him is the right move.

 

[Maelstrom787]

We're paying the dead cap regardless of what happens, so all that really matters is the amount saved.

I "kind" of agree with you about 24/25 cap, but if we're keeping geno that means we're trying to compete NOW, which means 24 cap absolutely matters....

Lot of guys to resign, especially if we're in win now. And if we're in win now cutting any big names isn't really an option.

Cap aside, cutting geno allows his replacement a full year of experience in our scheme for when we're back to winning now, it allows us to sign/resign players who will be in it for long enough (like leonard williams).

I don't personally believe in this one since I don't like the idea of tanking until you're mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, but there's obviously the idea of higher draft picks now as we transition from geno, instead of later when we transition from geno.

I think it'd be ideal to have the new guy learn on the bench regardless if we're considering guys like Penix, Nix, or McCarthy. I particularly don't see day 1 snaps for any of those guys.

Ideally we have a developmental guy second on the depth chart in any scenario, I'd think. I just want to win in the meantime, and I think Geno can win with the appropriate support. Wins more than loses anyway without the support, tbh.

I'm still a big believer in the gap year. Mahomes benefitted greatly, for instance.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Reading between the lines a bit here, but this really doesn't sound like they're prioritizing overhauling the QB position immediately. Sounds like they're trying to support it better.

 

[Chawker]

If Seattle wants to move away from Geno, and I'm sure they do, Geno's trade value isn't very high. I'd take a forth round pick and I would be smiling. The more likly case is he will be cut before friday.

Cheers

 

[bigcc]

/\
This, plus Geno is a better QB than Russ..!! Who's to say Geno won't excell under a new coaching staff? He has been very good, and definately hamstrung by his OL and the defense. Perhaps once those faults are corrected, Gman might become a Super Star.
No one gave him a chance two years ago and he excelled, no one is giving him a chance next year and he very well make them eat crow again.. He proved the doubters wrong before, whos to say he won't do it again. He is the perfect guy to let the rook sit behind for a year or two.
Bring Russ back only if they need a janitor...

He's 34 this year dude hes not going to suddenly get better.

We know who and what geno is, and it's not changing.

We're getting a slightly above average QB, who is exponentially more likely to go downhill than suddenly blow up.