Who would you let go, Chancellor, Sherman or Thomas

[HawkWow]

Bennett. This is a passing league.

Yeah but, the team that just won the SB was a running team.

Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them are bad. Pete didn't coin that phrase, but he wishes he did.

 

[The Outfield]

I refuse to select one of the available options.

 

[seedhawk]

Seedhawk, Tical, such hyperbole. DavidSeven is saying Sherman is one of only like 4 or 5 guys on the entire team that you HAVE to sign. He's also said that after the (inflated with non-guaranteed dollars) Revis contract, the next highest paid corner is closer to 10 mil, so he thinks we can get Sherman for 12 in an *extension*. I've never seen him say he wants Sherman for 20mil.

Earl is not the only elite player on the defense. Sherman is right there with him.

Not to speak for 7, but I guarantee his position is that if you had to lose Wagner, Wright, Irvin, he'd live with it. But Wilson, Okung, Earl, Sherman, that is the core you must retain. In fact I think he's said that explicitly but that's being ignored somehow.

And also, LMAO at including Irvin in that list.

Hyperbole huh? So let's do some quick math here. If we extend Sherm for 12, and If we get Earl for say 8, throw in Kams 5, that is 1/5 of the cap for 3 guys. Now for hyperboles sake let's extend the arguement shall we.

Wilson is due soon, so, do we lock him for say 16? Now you have 41M in 4 guys. Shall we add in our LT at say 7M, (what he currently makes), and a Leo at 9M, (what Clem gets now). Hey, successfull long term money management. 57M for 6 guys. Econ 101, not hyperbole.

 

[DavidSeven]

I'm starting to like DavidSeven's philosophy. Let's just pay them all big money. That ought to work. Then we'll pay Wagner, Okung, Wright, Wilson, Irvin, and all the rest of our great young players.

Sorry, but we're not going to have the opportunity to choose to keep everybody. That decision has been made for us by the folks that decided some time back to implement this thing called the salary cap. It was designed specifically so that great teams couldn't accumulate too much talent. We're going to have to let some awesome young players go. The good news is that too many of them aren't going to have to go this year. The better news is that Schneider seems to be great at finding replacements. Let's enjoy our damn Super Bowl, and enjoy having all these great players while we have them, win another one next year, and do the best we can to keep a few of them in the process.

Would truly be fun stuff if DavidSeven posted HIS list of "elite" players on our team and just how much they could/should get paid.

Sigh.

I've already listed the "elite" players that are MUST SIGNS in multiple threads. If you're worried about losing the likes of Bruce Irvin or even KJ Wright because you spent money on Sherman, then well... you're not doing this right IMO. All of Seattle's linebackers are the same thing and comparable prospects are easily identifiable in any draft -- if you fit the desired speed/size profile, we'll coach you up. Pete Carroll has been churning out excellent linebackers since college by following this method. Those guys are replaceable until one becomes elite at their position like ET and Sherm.

Anyway, Davis Hsu is a Seahawks cap expert, and he agrees with what I said throughout the day. Go check out his Twitter timeline from this morning. Field Gulls is also on board.

Edit: hawk45's last response is on the money.

 

[chris98251]

Left off the list is Lynch and Breno, Lynch has a new contract but Breno as much as Lynch is the attitude of our offense, he has improved greatly from last season. Lynch and Breno are the indentity of this offense just as much as Wilson is the Orchestrator. My biggest issue is Lynch's trust in guys who step in for those he does trust and has confidence in. Much like when Coleman came in for MRob, Lynch did not look the same. It's become apparent that Breno is also a Lynch guy based on Lynch giving him footballs after he scores etc.

 

[DavidSeven]

Hyperbole huh? So let's do some quick math here. If we extend Sherm for 12, and If we get Earl for say 8, throw in Kams 5, that is 1/5 of the cap for 3 guys. Now for hyperboles sake let's extend the arguement shall we.

Wilson is due soon, so, do we lock him for say 16? Now you have 41M in 4 guys. Shall we add in our LT at say 7M, (what he currently makes), and a Leo at 9M, (what Clem gets now). Hey, successfull long term money management. 57M for 6 guys. Econ 101, not hyperbole.

Successful NFL teams are built like capitalistic economies. The wealth is concentrated among a small percentage of the population. If you go with a communistic approach, you have a bunch of stupid contracts handed to mid-tier guys and no elite players. You're the Washington Redskins. You're the Dallas Cowboys. You're NOT the Patriots. You're NOT the Packers. I don't blame you for thinking this way -- it's the way most GMs think. It's also why most GMs fail. They don't trust their own drafting/player development to fill the void for the merely "good" players that are released.

 

[seedhawk]

Hyperbole huh? So let's do some quick math here. If we extend Sherm for 12, and If we get Earl for say 8, throw in Kams 5, that is 1/5 of the cap for 3 guys. Now for hyperboles sake let's extend the arguement shall we.

Wilson is due soon, so, do we lock him for say 16? Now you have 41M in 4 guys. Shall we add in our LT at say 7M, (what he currently makes), and a Leo at 9M, (what Clem gets now). Hey, successfull long term money management. 57M for 6 guys. Econ 101, not hyperbole.

Successful NFL teams are built like capitalistic economies. The wealth is concentrated among a small percentage of the population. If you go with a communistic approach, you have a bunch of stupid contracts handed to mid-tier guys and no elite players. You're the Washington Redskins. You're the Dallas Cowboys. You're NOT the Patriots. You're NOT the Packers. I don't blame you for thinking this way -- it's the way most GMs think. It's also why most GMs fail. They don't trust their own drafting/player development to fill the void for the merely "good" players that are released.

Well OK then, help us out here. Post you're list of "must sign" guys, and at what value they will require. Then we all can extrapolate just what the rest of the roster will look like.

 

[Lady Talon]

I like how our LBs get no credit for the LOB's success. Make no mistake our secondary benefits from our stellar LB play. Name me a better LB corps in both the run and short pass.

San Fran, equal or better?

Anyone else hold a candle to them?

 

[hawk45]

Talon ITA that our LBs were big contributors. I just feel that we can replace/reload the really good players, we've shown that. I don't put Sherman in the "really good" category is our difference here. I think he belongs with Earl in that special category of must-sign guys that we cannot replace.

Not at 20 mil, but if 12 mil is the price tag I take it.

 

[Sac]

Red Bryant for Strong Safety!

 

[DavidSeven]

Hyperbole huh? So let's do some quick math here. If we extend Sherm for 12, and If we get Earl for say 8, throw in Kams 5, that is 1/5 of the cap for 3 guys. Now for hyperboles sake let's extend the arguement shall we.

Wilson is due soon, so, do we lock him for say 16? Now you have 41M in 4 guys. Shall we add in our LT at say 7M, (what he currently makes), and a Leo at 9M, (what Clem gets now). Hey, successfull long term money management. 57M for 6 guys. Econ 101, not hyperbole.

Successful NFL teams are built like capitalistic economies. The wealth is concentrated among a small percentage of the population. If you go with a communistic approach, you have a bunch of stupid contracts handed to mid-tier guys and no elite players. You're the Washington Redskins. You're the Dallas Cowboys. You're NOT the Patriots. You're NOT the Packers. I don't blame you for thinking this way -- it's the way most GMs think. It's also why most GMs fail. They don't trust their own drafting/player development to fill the void for the merely "good" players that are released.

Well OK then, help us out here. Post you're list of "must sign" guys, and at what value they will require. Then we all can extrapolate just what the rest of the roster will look like.

Wilson, Sherman, Thomas, Harvin, Lynch, and Kam. Okung is borderline, but only because a decent LT is so damn rare. He's locked up through 2015. Harvin and Lynch are also locked up. Playing with absolute numbers is an exercise in futility because contracts are structured/restructured to manipulate the cap hits in any given year. I agree that those 6-7 players will take up a huge portion of the cap. So what? You still have room to sign mid-tier guys where absolutely necessary and you fill in the rest with guys on minimum deals or rookie contracts. Plus, Lynch is probably retiring within two years, and C-Mike (RB of the future) will still be on his rookie deal.

Assuming the team maintains its success at drafting/developing players, can you imagine a scenario where a team with Russell Wilson, Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas, Percy Harvin, Marshawn Lynch, Kam Chancellor, and Russell Okung wins anything less than 10 games, even if they're surrounding by rookies and scrubs?! The elite players on your team define your success, not the Bruce Irvins and Golden Tates and Josh Wilsons and Daryl Tapps of the world.

 

[Lady Talon]

Talon ITA that our LBs were big contributors. I just feel that we can replace/reload the really good players, we've shown that. I don't put Sherman in the "really good" category is our difference here. I think he belongs with Earl in that special category of must-sign guys that we cannot replace.

Not at 20 mil, but if 12 mil is the price tag I take it.

If we keep all of our special defensive players, when does RW get more recognized special players besides Percy Harvin (who we thoroughly enjoyed for 50 plays or so this entire year) and a Lynch that is past his best years?

He's gonna take a hometown discount to get creamed year in and out? Running a no name offense and expected to keep working miracles while we lock up the all time greatest perfect D? There's going to come a point where he won't be able to run such an offense, and he'll be the one taking the crap from the national media and fans over it.

 

[seedhawk]

Well, you responded with HALF of what I asked, so I will do it for you. Right now Lynch is 7M, so is Okung, Harvin is right at 10, Kam is 5. If we get Wilson for 16, Thomas for 8 and Sherm for 12, thats 65M for 7 guys. Great guys also but still only 7.

So, David, look at our roster and our model and make it work. You now have about 60M for 46 guys.

 

[DavidSeven]

Well, you responded with HALF of what I asked, so I will do it for you. Right now Lynch is 7M, so is Okung, Harvin is right at 10, Kam is 5. If we get Wilson for 16, Thomas for 8 and Sherm for 12, thats 65M for 7 guys. Great guys also but still only 7.

So, David, look at our roster and our model and make it work. You now have about 60M for 46 guys.

I actually responded to this in my original post. Playing with absolute numbers is pointless. Deals are structured/restructured to manipulate cap hits. Sherm/Thomas could take a cap hit of $4m each next year, and then Lynch might retire or move on the next year and the NFL cap goes up another $5-10 million when you take a harsher hit. In that year, you extend Wilson for a low year-one cap number. By the time Wilson's number goes up, you have flexibility with Harvin/Kam and Lynch is definitely gone. In the meantime, three years have lapsed and entirely new superstars have emerged who are still on their rookie deals. Rinse and repeat.

 

[Davehawk]

I don't think people know how to play this game.

 

[seedhawk]

Well, you responded with HALF of what I asked, so I will do it for you. Right now Lynch is 7M, so is Okung, Harvin is right at 10, Kam is 5. If we get Wilson for 16, Thomas for 8 and Sherm for 12, thats 65M for 7 guys. Great guys also but still only 7.

So, David, look at our roster and our model and make it work. You now have about 60M for 46 guys.

I actually responded to this in my original post. Playing with absolute numbers is pointless. Deals are structured/restructured to manipulate cap hits. Sherm/Thomas could take a cap hit of $4m each next year, and then Lynch might retire or move on the next year and the NFL cap goes up another $5-10 million when you take a harsher hit. In that year, you extend Wilson for a low year-one cap number. By the time Wilson's number goes up, you have flexibility with Harvin/Kam and Lynch is definitely gone. In the meantime, three years have lapsed and entirely new superstars have emerged who are still on their rookie deals. Rinse and repeat.

So guru David, how much has the cap itself increased under the new CBA? Not much! Less than 3M. What has increased however, if the % of the cap teams MUST pay out in salaries, so jackweed owners like Cincy's Brown can't pay out 70M and put the other 50M in their pocket.

What you propose makes us a mirror image of both GB and NE, You know, make the dance and fail. Difference is, if WE played in the AFCE or NFCN, it would work, but, we have SF, SL and AZ to contend with.

 

[seedhawk]

To hell with it! I can't change you're mind and you will not change mine. How bout we revisit this after free agency and the draft and see just exactly what moves PC and JS made?

 

[DavidSeven]

Well, you responded with HALF of what I asked, so I will do it for you. Right now Lynch is 7M, so is Okung, Harvin is right at 10, Kam is 5. If we get Wilson for 16, Thomas for 8 and Sherm for 12, thats 65M for 7 guys. Great guys also but still only 7.

So, David, look at our roster and our model and make it work. You now have about 60M for 46 guys.

I actually responded to this in my original post. Playing with absolute numbers is pointless. Deals are structured/restructured to manipulate cap hits. Sherm/Thomas could take a cap hit of $4m each next year, and then Lynch might retire or move on the next year and the NFL cap goes up another $5-10 million when you take a harsher hit. In that year, you extend Wilson for a low year-one cap number. By the time Wilson's number goes up, you have flexibility with Harvin/Kam and Lynch is definitely gone. In the meantime, three years have lapsed and entirely new superstars have emerged who are still on their rookie deals. Rinse and repeat.

So guru David, how much has the cap itself increased under the new CBA? Not much! Less than 3M. What has increased however, if the % of the cap teams MUST pay out in salaries, so jackweed owners like Cincy's Brown can't pay out 70M and put the other 50M in their pocket.

What you propose makes us a mirror image of both GB and NE, You know, make the dance and fail. Difference is, if WE played in the AFCE or NFCN, it would work, but, we have SF, SL and AZ to contend with.

I'm no guru, which is why I won't pretend to know the exact figures. I said the cap would go up by $5-10m in the next TWO years, which is true. The bump from the CBS Thursday Night deal will factor into the 2015 salary cap and is projected to be a much bigger jump than the $3 million jump from last year (salary cap is tied to NFL revenues). That's when you take the big hits for Sherman/Thomas. The NFCN has been tough for years, and GB has consistently been competitive as long as Rodgers was healthy. Baltimore has also followed this approach, and they had a ton of success over a 5-year run despite being in a brutally tough division.

A general point about Revis's contract (not directed at anyone in particular): it's not worth $16m/yr. It's a baloney contract. $0 guaranteed. There's approximately 0% chance he sees that salary in Year 3 at age 30. Assuming they actually pay him $16m this year (which is a BIG assumption), they will force him to take a massive pay cut or cut him in Year 3. He will end up averaging something like $11-13 million over that three year period and that's with NO extension/hometown discount.

 

[HawkWow]

I pick Kam and Earl. Sherman is what he says he is, the greatest corner in the game, but I'd rather not combine the highest paid safety combo in the League with one of the highest paid corners. Safeties are the enablers in our defense that lets the whole unit play better. Sink around $30m into our secondary and watch our offense struggle to make league par every year after Wilson gets paid (Super Bowl, multiple Pro Bowl, his stats, even a hometown discount will be big).

I love Sherm but I love my Seahawks infinitely more. The team should 1) make sure Sherm isn't picked up by one of our NFC rivals. 2) get some value out of him while we are at the top of the game and need cheap talent. Shop him this year, I'll bet Gus Bradley will take a long hard look at paying Sherm and swapping the #3 pick for our #32. Everyone is happy. #3 pick is in the running for Jadaveon Clowney or Sammy Watkins, or schneider can turn that pick into almost double the picks we have right now and reload through the draft.

Is Maxwell better than Sherman at this point? No, however he is close enough, and usually stuck with the best WR the other team can offer because everyone throws away from Sherm. And no, Earl doesn't cheat towards Maxwell, he cheated towards Browner because everyone knew his coverage skills sucked. Maxwell's play made our already #1 pass defense better to the point of best of all time comparisons. He isn't some scrub.

You are to this board what Earl is to our secondary. I appreciate your willingness to blaze your own path. It's refreshing.

At the risk of provoking further aghast, I wonder just what Sherm's trade value really would be right now (?).

Could we get 2 1s?

Would Jax swap picks with us?

Watkins is definitely a game changer. The offensive jewel of this draft, but if Harvin can stay healthy, I'm very excited about our current group, especially as a run first team. Yes, I know, Harvin is definitely a big IF.

Clowney spooks me and I'd hate to be the team that rewards him for nixing Spurrier's natty dreams. Even though I'm no fan of Spurrier's, Clowney's head is as big as a VW and he appears to be lazy. Hard to say what money will do to him.

IF we could swap with Jax, and Matthews is gone, I'd take Auburn's Greg Robinson. Ultimately Robinson will be a pro-bowl LT. No question, but other than center, he can play across the line. This guy is the 2nd coming of Hutch...but bigger, faster and just as nasty.

We need to better protect Wilson. Especially with the pass rushers in the NFCW. Robinson can do that and is a mauler in the run game. With a healthy Okung and Unger...our line would be comparable to our 05 line while having the rest of our draft (-3rd) to find another corner, TE, etc.

Imagine Lynch, Turbin / Michael running behind that line.. and the subsequent benefits to our passing attack? We'd be eating so much clock, scoring so many points, that I seriously believe we wouldn't feel any drop off in our secondary, all while preserving our franchise QB.

Right now, I almost feel like we are pretending to be a power running team. Alexander would have been lucky to break 800 yds behind our current line. I sincerely believe shoring up the OL supersedes everything else. So would I trade Sherm (and his future contract) for a guy that could do that?

I think I would and trust that Pete can keep producing DBs.

IIRC, as good as our secondary was, it was our inability to pressure the QB that kept us out of the NFCCG last year. The addition of Avril and Bennett was huge this year and re-signing Bennett is crucial to our continued success.

Protect Wilson
Run the ball
Stop the run
Pressure the QB.

You don't need the best secondary ever assembled if you can do those 4 things.

 

[Jazzhawk]

Didn't vote. Not gonna lose any of them.