Potential Sam Howell trade?

Scout

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2021
Messages
1,988
Reaction score
2,349
Yes, the Offensive plan remains concerning after FA. However I have been trying to be patient waiting for the draft. So if they don’t draft any legit IOL *early then let the bitching continue. There’s a chance we land Warren/Loveland both blue chip TE potential at 18.
Right. that is what I am doing as well to see what the draft tells us which direction they are going on offense. But a lot of players are on rookie contracts on offense already so I am not sure adding more rookie contracts on offense is going to be the silver bullet many people are hoping it to be.
 

Rat

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
11,370
Reaction score
6,498
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
No it's not a mistake. You can't go into the year with no back up. We also had a cap crunch so JS did what he needed to do, to go into last year with a competent back up on a cheap rookie deal.
It's not that complicated and the price was hardly prohibitive.
Now with all the changeover and Lock on a cheap deal himself Howell is on the trade block. Talk about making a mountain out of a mole hill. Good gravy.
BTW, if you're going to be this dramatic, would you mind pointing to where in the post you quoted I actually referred to the trade as a "mistake"? My whole point was that IF Schneider actually makes him available, that I believe it signals he thinks the trade was a mistake.

I'm not convinced yet that Howell has even been made available. I think it's just as likely that these reports are teams trying to connect dots and hoping to lowball us (not that he would probably bring much in compensation anyway). If we're "listening" to offers, that's nothing new. Schneider always does that.

Committing to Lock as the primary backup this early doesn't make much sense to me. Typically with a backup, you either go with the established veteran who has proven they can step in and at least manage the ship (ie Andy Dalton or Tyrod Taylor), or you go with the young development quarterback with upside who might even be able to challenge for the starting job eventually if things go right (ie Howell last year). Lock is neither of those things. I could see this being like when we had Geno and Paxton Lynch battling for the backup job behind Russ. If Howell gets moved soon, that may signal there are plans to bring a rookie into the mix.
 

Natethegreat

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
3,197
Reaction score
1,355
Sorry, carry on with the hand wringing. I myself find it absurd but you do you.
 

CouchLogic

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 15, 2022
Messages
1,068
Reaction score
1,404
Meh, the compensation is moot at this point. Worrying about late round draft picks or missing out on the chance to get a player that would have rode the bench or got cut seems futile and pointless.

Trade him for a sack lunch if you must, or don't. Doesn't matter either way.
200
 

warden

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
3,049
Reaction score
1,438
What people forget about Howell is he had a salary cap hit of 1.1 million last year. Would be 1.3 million this year. We needed a back up QB last year and had no money so this is what we came up with. So no it wasn’t a bad deal. 1.1 million for a back up quarterback with starting experience is pretty much unheard of

We sign Lock. Awesome let’s have some open competition for the spot. Nothing wrong with that

If we can get something for Howell great but it is not the end of the world if comes to training camp for us this year
 

nwHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
4,326
Reaction score
1,656
Better to get the best fit for this team, then to worry about wasting 1 Million dollars. This team has pissed away more money in the past on less important positions.
 

gabel

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
150
Reaction score
41

Not sure why any team would trade for Howell when you most likely could get him for free. In the last John Schneider show, Schneider implied that Howell should have been more prepared. Not exactly a glowing endorsement.
 

toffee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Messages
13,384
Reaction score
9,109
Location
SoCal Desert
Not sure why any team would trade for Howell when you most likely could get him for free. In the last John Schneider show, Schneider implied that Howell should have been more prepared. Not exactly a glowing endorsement.

When Howell couldn't out compete Geno, a career backup also known as geNO, Howell's stock dropped.
 

Hawkpower

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
3,796
Reaction score
1,258
Location
Phoenix az
Not sure why any team would trade for Howell when you most likely could get him for free. In the last John Schneider show, Schneider implied that Howell should have been more prepared. Not exactly a glowing endorsement.

Other teams probably haven't knee-jerked their feelings about Howell like we have here at .Net over his one appearance last year

He probably has the exact same value (to the NFL) that he did last Spring. Seen as a back up that has some experience and a tad bit of upside
 

Hawkamaniac

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2022
Messages
79
Reaction score
131
Two #1s for a safety that can’t cover is a terrible trade … moving down a few picks for a cheap backup QB with youth, upside (at least as perceived at the time), and starting experience is something else.

Snarky comment aside, none of us know how the team had any of these players graded last season. It’s highly possible the front office had 20 players with very similar scores grouped together, and therefore believed moving down effectively cost nothing.

If we had drafted Tyrice Knight at 78 we’d still be feeling pretty good about him, no?
 
Last edited:

Maulbert

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
9,217
Reaction score
2,427
Location
In the basement of Reynholm Industries
Two #1s and two #2s for a safety that can’t cover is a terrible trade … moving down a few picks for a cheap backup QB with youth, upside (at least as perceived at the time), and starting experience is something else.

Snarky comment aside, none of us know how the team had any of these players graded last season. It’s highly possible the front office had 20 players with very similar scores grouped together, and therefore believed moving down effectively cost nothing.

If we had drafted Tyrice Knight at 78 we’d still be feeling pretty good about him, no?
They didn't give up any 2nd rounders for Adams. Just two 1st rounders.
 

Rat

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
11,370
Reaction score
6,498
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
In addition to the two first rounders for Adams, we gave up a '21 third and Bradley McDougal. We got a '22 fourth back though.

That '21 third was traded to Minnesota, who used it on OG Wyatt Davis, who was cut after one season and is no longer in the league. Vikings probably aren't complaining though, since that was a pick they got in a first-round trade-down from #14 to #23 (our original pick that we gave the Jets) which they used on LT Christian Darrisaw, who is one of league's best offensive linemen.

We used that '22 fourth rounder on Coby Bryant.
 

Hawkamaniac

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2022
Messages
79
Reaction score
131
Two #1s and two #2s for a safety that can’t cover is a terrible trade … moving down a few picks for a cheap backup QB with youth, upside (at least as perceived at the time), and starting experience is something else.

Snarky comment aside, none of us know how the team had any of these players graded last season. It’s highly possible the front office had 20 players with very similar scores grouped together, and therefore believed moving down effectively cost nothing.

If we had drafted Tyrice Knight at 78 we’d still be feeling pretty good about him, no?

They didn't give up any 2nd rounders for Adams. Just two 1st rounders.
You sir, are correct. I conflated the Jamaal Adams and Russell Wilson trades 🤦😂
 

seabowl

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
5,381
Reaction score
2,601
I think it’s complete horseshit that John Schneider says the Seahawks have received trade requests for Sam Howell. He’s just trying to stir up interest in a player that nobody is interested in.
 

Rat

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
11,370
Reaction score
6,498
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
I think it’s complete horseshit that John Schneider says the Seahawks have received trade requests for Sam Howell. He’s just trying to stir up interest in a player that nobody is interested in.
Has Schneider said anything?
 

Latest posts

Top