nanomoz":1o02htsq said:
Rob Staton's case for trading Jamal Adams is logical, and his points are strong.
It won't happen, probably. And the idea will be unpopular with many (though, most arguments against it that I've seen lean on fallacies of sunk costs):
http://seahawksdraftblog.com/why-the-se ... amal-adams
Extremely well written article, and Stanton makes a very compelling case for Trading Jamal.
My thought for several months now has been that they would probably trade Wagner and use that money to extend Adams. But after reading Stanton's article, I tend to agree with his take that if we can recoup a 1st rounder this year, like say the #18 pick from Miami that Stanton referenced, and then maybe a 2nd or 3rd next year, I would take that.
As Stanton said, that would not only allow us to draft two cheap and cost-controlled players, but free up a lot of cap space to fill some of our other holes, particularly on the OL. The more I think about this, the more I like it.
I'm a big Marquise Blair fan, and absolutely loved what I saw from him this past season before he got hurt. I believe Blair and Adams have very similar skillsets. Both fast, instinctive, intense, passionate, hard-hitting safeties that can make plays all over the field. If you replaced Adams with Blair and utilized the exact same schemes, (this is discussed in the Hugh Millen video attached to the Stanton article but mentions Ryan Neal instead of Blair), my sense is that we would see similar results to what Adams gave us. Not saying Blair is on the same level with Adams, but I think the difference would be negligible, and not worth the 18-20 million we would have to pay Adams.
From my perspective, this makes a lot of sense.