| 28 August 2009
Every year, the preseason and training camp shake out a little differently than you might expect. No one came into the preseason really expecting--hoping, sure--that Nick Reed would be second in the preseason in sacks or that Michael Bennett would be fifth. That's fun times, but can be a bit misleading. Still, the guys you don't expect to show up do, and in a big way, and the guys you do expect to show up... well, they don't always.
So far this offseason, I've called a few people trade bait: Deion Branch (who is too expensive and already the backup flanker in the base package), Kelly Jennings (who could be great and maintains some upside, but hasn't proven up to snuff), Craig Terrill (who Bennett could replace, albeit with some dropoff), and of course the second kicker. The more I see from Terrill and his interactions with the team, the less I think he might get moved. Dave Wyman tosses one more name in the ring though, and it is a compelling name: Lawrence Jackson.
Jackson was the Seahawks' first round pick just one year ago, but he has not shown up in the way that we expected him to. Mora said just the other day that he is not a "dynamic player," that he would be brought in as insurance against the run, sure, but we are no longer viewing him as a pass-rush threat. Jackson is big and, we thought, mean, but he was moderately injured all last year and again battling some nagging stuff this year. Is that enough to decrease his trade value, sure, but not by much.
The real question is not what is Jackson's value to our team, but what is the value to our team relative to the value of another? We are not going to unload Jackson for a first round pick and, in hindsight, maybe he was the wrong guy to take with ours last year. The Seahawks like what Jackson can bring, but he simply has not yet brought it. He was brought in as a hybrid DT-DE, but after showing little promise in either spot we went out and traded for Cory Redding. Michael Bennett also fits the mold and has been more impressive in the preseason than Jackson ever was, even against second teamers. There are talks that Jackson would end up being inactive come week one if he remains on the roster, so why keep him?
If the Seahawks could trade Jackson for a decent CB or safety (though I would hope we will look at Michael Huff if he is cut by the Raiders, pretty please?), or some solid depth at offensive tackle. Despite Jackson's disappointing performance thus far for the Seahawks, there are schemes out there he could fit and there are a lot of teams who will look at him and his history at USC and say, "I can make him a star." Will Ruskell pick up the phone?
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
