Would you rather have Seattle's roster or Arizona's?

[DJrmb]

I heard them debating this on the radio today and thought it might be an interesting topic. Maybe not, maybe it will be a one sided landslide with everyone in agreement, but maybe someone can make a decent argument for Arizona?

So the question that a Seattle radio host asked the Arizona radio hosts was who has the better roster, Seattle or Arizona? The Arizona guys agreed that the only reason anyone would argue Seattle is because of the QB situation (Prime Russell vs aging Carson).

What I am curious to see is do you really agree with that. Is QB the only reason someone would choose Seattle's roster over Arizona's? What if you take the QB position out of the discussion, does Arizona have more talent and a better roster then Seattle without considering QB? What position groups does Arizona have better players than Seattle (DL,OL,RB,LB,DB,WR,TE,ST)?

 

[Seymour]

 

[HawkFan72]

We may all be biased, but I don't even see how this is a debate. Arizona's roster is aging or on the decline for the most part at key positions. They have a few advantages at certain spots (RB, O-line), but we saw how far that got them last year. Seattle has its flaws, but still has a good couple years of contention left with the current roster.

 

[Uncle Si]

Better question might be who from AZ's roster (Maybe one player from each side of the ball) would you take as a direct placement for the Seahawk that currently plays there?

 

[Seahwkgal]

Better question might be who from AZ's roster (Maybe one player from each side of the ball) would you take as a direct placement for the Seahawk that currently plays there?

I would take David Johnson for Jimmy Graham in a heartbeat. Note that I really do think Graham is a stud but our OC does not use him right.

 

[kf3339]

Better question might be who from AZ's roster (Maybe one player from each side of the ball) would you take as a direct placement for the Seahawk that currently plays there?

I would take David Johnson for Jimmy Graham in a heartbeat. Note that I really do think Graham is a stud but our OC does not use him right.

I would do the same with Campbell for Rubin. I would even throw in a backup OL in the deal! :lol:

 

[Popeyejones]

QB - Seahawks
RB - Cardinals
OL - Cardinals
WR - Cardinals
TE - Seahawks
DL - Seahawks
LB - Seahawks
CB - Draw
S - Seahawks (although slightly -- Seahawks are #1 and Cards are #2 in the NFL probably).

 

[iigakusei]

I would guess Arizona is going to lose a lot of players in free agency - have to take that into account too.

 

[DJrmb]

QB - Seahawks
RB - Cardinals
OL - Cardinals
WR - Cardinals
TE - Seahawks
DL - Seahawks
LB - Seahawks
CB - Draw
S - Seahawks (although slightly -- Seahawks are #1 and Cards are #2 in the NFL probably).

I pretty much completely agree with this other than the DL/LB area. I think depending on where you put Chandler Jones and Markus Golden they edge Seattle out in one of the areas. They had 24.5 sacks last year between the two of them and they're both only 26 years old still...

WR is also a really tough one for me. They have the obvious HoF player in Fitzgerald who is still playing great but if we're talking long term I'm going Seattle. This is probably Fitzgerald's last year based off his own words. Seattle is in the better position here 2018 and beyond.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

The talent of the QB affects the rest of the roster. It's pretty hard to consider the roster without him.

That said, I'd probably follow Popeyejones' list, with the exception of DL. Arizona has us completely outmatched there.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

QB - Seahawks
RB - Cardinals
OL - Cardinals
WR - Cardinals
TE - Seahawks
DL - Seahawks
LB - Seahawks
CB - Draw
S - Seahawks (although slightly -- Seahawks are #1 and Cards are #2 in the NFL probably).

Pretty close to how I see it.

One could make the case for a draw. Outside of Fitzgerald, it's kind of trashy. And we have to account for age here. Kearse is trashy too. But he's likely to be downgraded to WR3 and possible WR4. At worst, if you account for age and depth it's a draw IMO. But if it's a lean to AZ, it's only because of Fitz.

DL is just a slight lean to Seattle. Golden and Jones are studs. Honestly, these units are very close. I like Seattle's depth more. Ability to defend the run better. But Clark/Avril/Bennett are really quite close to Jones/Golden/Campbell.

CB I'd go Seattle. Arizona's 2nd CB is the NFL equivalent of Defense against the Dark Arts teacher. Arizona probably played 3 guys in that position last year that none of which would have even made our roster. Shead or Lane would have manned that position with ease. Obviously at the #1 corner, it's as close as you could want. Kind of a down year in general for Sherman -- but in terms of QB rating still better than Peterson's career best. And still better in regards to TDs allowed. And receptions. A bad year for Sherman is still better than Peterson.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... ds-at-no-1

Although it's really do you like Ferrari's or Bentley's. Any comparison feels like you're picking nits. If one wanted to make the case for them being peers, I could live with that.

All that said, the original question was which roster would you want. And for that, the entire cap structure is paramount. In this case, there is absolutely no question whatsover that Seattle's roster is superior. Arizona is ripe for losing maybe as many as 8 qualifying UFAs this offseason. Even after resigning and/or franchising 4-5 of their own. And they've mortgaged their future cap spend already this year and in future years. They don't really have any cap flexibility at all and are living on cap credit for years.

Seattle is incredibly healthy cap wise. With almost no dead money to speak of. Virtually no dead money risk in 2017. And whose guaranteed monies are all locked up in 2017-18 players all under the age of 30. Young core guys who are almost assuredly not at risk for being cap casualties.

Arizona's roster is going to look really different next year. And Arizona has really struggled to succeed in drafting for depth for several years. They've not stocked a lot of picks and what they have taken is not very good. This is the year that will really begin to hurt.

 

[Maulbert]

S - Seahawks (although slightly -- Seahawks are #1 and Cards are #2 in the NFL probably).

When ET is healthy, it's not close. When ET is hurt, Arizona is better.

Just look at how much worse the Hawks played without him this year. Earl is the best safety in the league. Period.

 

[RussB]

Seattle is a decent o line away from another championship. Arizona still has carson choker.

 

[Popeyejones]

WR -- Outside of Fitzgerald, it's kind of trashy. And we have to account for age here. Kearse is trashy too. But he's likely to be downgraded to WR3 and possible WR4. At worst, if you account for age and depth it's a draw IMO. But if it's a lean to AZ, it's only because of Fitz.

Yeah, it's a close one for me too. Taking everything into consideration I think Brown and Nelson > Kearse and Lockett, although Baldwin probably has thet edge over Fitz for me at this point.

DL is just a slight lean to Seattle. Golden and Jones are studs. Honestly, these units are very close. I like Seattle's depth more. Ability to defend the run better. But Clark/Avril/Bennett are really quite close to Jones/Golden/Campbell.

This is a little less close than WR for me, mostly because I like Bennett > Campbell, Avril > Jones (save for age), Clark > Golden, and the Reed's ceiling over anyone else the Cards have (I liked the value of the Nkemdiche pick at the time, but if he's out of the NFL before finishing his rookie deal I wouldn't be at all surprised) .

CB I'd go Seattle. Arizona's 2nd CB is the NFL equivalent of Defense against the Dark Arts teacher. Arizona probably played 3 guys in that position last year that none of which would have even made our roster. Shead or Lane would have manned that position with ease. Obviously at the #1 corner, it's as close as you could want. Kind of a down year in general for Sherman -- but in terms of QB rating still better than Peterson's career best. And still better in regards to TDs allowed. And receptions. A bad year for Sherman is still better than Peterson.

Yep. Another close one. I think I'm less high on Shead and Lane then you are, and went Zona because Peterson allows the Cards defense to be multiple and to shade away from him, whereas Sherman's amazing ability is much more scheme dependent IMO (really a perfect match of player and scheme).

All that said, the original question was which roster would you want. And for that, the entire cap structure is paramount. In this case, there is absolutely no question whatsover that Seattle's roster is superior.

Totally agreed.

 

[Tical21]

My first thought was that I would take Seattle in a landslide, but it is closer than what I thought. Obviously, they get huge bonus points because of David Johnson and Iupati. We probably have our biggest advantage at LB and TE. I still think we have the best roster in football, but how they were 7-9 with that roster is pretty embarrassing.

 

[sdog1981]

The funny thing is this. Most the key pieces of this Arizona roster is going to be free agents in March. Both DEs and Two of the three safeties will also be free agents. The cardinals rosters is going to look completely different by April.

 

[DJrmb]

The funny thing is this. Most the key pieces of this Arizona roster is going to be free agents in March. Both DEs and Two of the three safeties will also be free agents. The cardinals rosters is going to look completely different by April.

I originally thought the same as you. However, after looking into it a little bit more Arizona is not in as bad a cap situation as I had thought. They still will probably lose a starter or two but they have the money to bring a lot of them back.

They're currently sitting at about 35M in cap space if I'm reading this correctly:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/arizona-cardinals/cap/

It's possible that if they can get a long term deal worked out with Chandler Jones instead of tagging him and if they restructure a few contracts like Fitzgerald and Carson that they could potentially resign all of their starters...

 

[sdog1981]

The funny thing is this. Most the key pieces of this Arizona roster is going to be free agents in March. Both DEs and Two of the three safeties will also be free agents. The cardinals rosters is going to look completely different by April.

I originally thought the same as you. However, after looking into it a little bit more Arizona is not in as bad a cap situation as I had thought. They still will probably lose a starter or two but they have the money to bring a lot of them back.

They're currently sitting at about 35M in cap space if I'm reading this correctly:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/arizona-cardinals/cap/

It's possible that if they can get a long term deal worked out with Chandler Jones instead of tagging him and if they restructure a few contracts like Fitzgerald and Carson that they could potentially resign all of their starters...

They only have 30 players under contract. They will need to add 23 more that makes that 35 million vanish real fast.

 

[DJrmb]

The funny thing is this. Most the key pieces of this Arizona roster is going to be free agents in March. Both DEs and Two of the three safeties will also be free agents. The cardinals rosters is going to look completely different by April.

I originally thought the same as you. However, after looking into it a little bit more Arizona is not in as bad a cap situation as I had thought. They still will probably lose a starter or two but they have the money to bring a lot of them back.

They're currently sitting at about 35M in cap space if I'm reading this correctly:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/arizona-cardinals/cap/

It's possible that if they can get a long term deal worked out with Chandler Jones instead of tagging him and if they restructure a few contracts like Fitzgerald and Carson that they could potentially resign all of their starters...

They only have 30 players under contract. They will need to add 23 more that makes that 35 million vanish real fast.

Very true. I will be interested to see just how many of their starters they are able to keep.

The biggest loss will be Campbell I think. If they are able to find a way to keep Campbell with Jones and Jefferson I will be impressed but not completely shocked.

 

[sdog1981]

The funny thing is this. Most the key pieces of this Arizona roster is going to be free agents in March. Both DEs and Two of the three safeties will also be free agents. The cardinals rosters is going to look completely different by April.

I originally thought the same as you. However, after looking into it a little bit more Arizona is not in as bad a cap situation as I had thought. They still will probably lose a starter or two but they have the money to bring a lot of them back.

They're currently sitting at about 35M in cap space if I'm reading this correctly:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/arizona-cardinals/cap/

It's possible that if they can get a long term deal worked out with Chandler Jones instead of tagging him and if they restructure a few contracts like Fitzgerald and Carson that they could potentially resign all of their starters...

They only have 30 players under contract. They will need to add 23 more that makes that 35 million vanish real fast.

Very true. I will be interested to see just how many of their starters they are able to keep.

The biggest loss will be Campbell I think. If they are able to find a way to keep Campbell with Jones and Jefferson I will be impressed but not completely shocked.

They would need to pull off the Seahawks triple of Jones, Alexander, Hasselbeck. Not saying that it has never happened just saying that is is hard.

Side note. Remember when the Seahawks front office did nothing during the season to make sure those three were not free agents at the same time.