| 09 March 2010
Sorry for the delay on this, I've been meaning to get to it but kept posting crap on twitter instead of putting together paragraphs. Mea culpa. So, here are a few thoughts on Marshall and his potential costs... Shall we?
Point One: Brandon Marshall is a top 4 receiving talent in the NFL. I would argue top 3, but considering what Calvin Johnson has done with the Lions behind him, we'll call them 3A and 3B. His phenomenal talent has strangely become a backburner issue in the media discussion, I think largely because we take that fact for granted. It is not every day that you can get a Top 4 player at any position, but especially one of dire need. That leads me to...
Point Two: Wide receiver is a position of dire need for the Seahawks. Not only did we lose Nate Burleson, but the best WR on our team is approaching his mid-30s and was unimpressive last year. The best way to get true value out of Houshmandzadeh is to bring in someone better to pull the double teams. Look at Housh's production in Cincinnati with OchoCinco, and imagine him with a better talent across the field. Bringing in Marshall would also give the team a better ability to analyze Deon Butler and see the things he can do. Look for Bates to use him in the same way he used Eddie Royal in 2008, again, across from Marshall.
Point Three: Brandon Marshall is an absolute headcase. At least, he has been. We've been trained over the last few years not to even consider these guys, they were never going to be an option for Ruskell. There's a new sheriff in town, and it's a guy who has worked directly with troubled men and teens for much of the last ten years, someone who has seen the pain that Marshall's been through. Now, Marshall has still been a complete idiot, there is no excuse for his behavior, but it's clear that he was traumatized by Williams' shooting. He might deserve another shot, if the price is right...
Point Four: What's the price? This is the key question. I want to break it down into a few possibilities... follow me?
- 2nd Round Pick + 4th Round Pick -- This is a possibility, and it's hard to argue that its too much to ask for a player of Marshall's caliber. I would argue, though, that this is more expensive than some of the other options. The Seahawks have a LOT of needs right now, and those needs must be filled with starters. While generally you will find a starter between the first three rounds, there are plenty of 4th Rd picks who start in certain positions: offensive line, safety, and longer-term, anyone. Obviously we'll expect the #40 to start. So, you potentially cede two starters for one, when you need about 8.
- #14 Pick - This would allow Denver to get their original pick back, which they would be happy to take I would imagine (especially as no one else is thinking about presenting an offer sheet right now). They would in essence be trading A. Smith for B. Marshall, but they get an extra year of service out of Marshall. Not a bad trade for either team, really.
- #6 Pick - The Seahawks sign Marshall to an offer sheet, Denver does not match. They get our #6, we get their #1 WR. Everyone seems up in arms about this possibility, and while I don't like it, it's not as bad a deal as some might think. After all, how many were in favor of us taking Michael Crabtree at #4 last year? The difference is that Marshall is proven, Crabtree was not. Still, I think this is unlikely and would be a bit disappointed if this was the route we went.
- Swap Picks - Check out the Trade Value Chart generally used by the NFL. Lets value Marshall as the #16 pick -- that assumes that the "average" NFL team signs him to an offer sheet and the Broncos take that compensation. That is worth 1,000 points of draft value. The Seahawks #6 pick is worth 1,600, Broncos #11 is worth 1,250; we just made up 350 points. Then we trade the 14th pick for the 2nd round Broncos pick, a net gain to the Broncos of 650 points. Add those up and we get... whoa, 1,000 points exactly. Believe it or not, when I started writing this, I didn't realize how perfect it would work out, but there you have it. In this scenario, we give up 0 draft picks and take the 11th, 40th and 45th picks in the 2010 NFL draft.
There are a thousand ways this could go, of course, so this is by no means a comprehensive list. But it's intriguing, no?
My bottom line is this: the Seahawks NEED a playmaker. They need a WR. They need speed, size, and durability in the key offensive positions. Yes, the line must be built. Yes, a QB needs to come in. Yes, the defense is need of tweaking -- defensive end, safeties, possibly a DT -- but without any explosion on offense, we'll continue to be mediocre. In 2005, we had Alexander and a great line. In 2010, we could have Marshall and a good line. Behind a good run-blocking line, Forsett could be great (anyone could, potentially).
We need TALENT on offense desperately. Time to stop plugging holes in the life raft and upgrade to a better boat. Is Marshall the answer? At the right price, I think you have to acknowledge that he may be. It's still a risk though, it's always a risk. Unlike recent (read: Ruskell) risks -- Branch, Kerney, Houshmandzadeh, Grant -- this one is 25 and has undeniable production with no durability issues. Time to take that plunge, fellahs.
Comments (47)
...
written by halkboy15, March 09, 2010
written by halkboy15, March 09, 2010
Honestly I'd be more then happy to just give up our 6th pick for a proven young top 5 reciver let alone the best in the game.
I honestly dont think people understand what we would be getting, Clearly we would be adding a big-time wide reciever. A 6-foot-4, 230-pound athlete in his prime at 26 who has averaged 102 catches for 1,236 yards over the past three seasons. Also T.J. Houshmandzadeh calls Marshall the best receiver in the NFL, so it's fair to say he'd have his teammate's respect.
Yes I know he has major off season troubles. But look the Seahawks or whoever signs Marshall next will surely say they've done their homework and that he's a good man who has made some mistakes, but is maturing and ready to start fresh in a new environment. Besides he was very young back then.
Another thing is that, to be realistic the players that would most likley be there at 6 would probably be Clausen, Berry, Morgan, or maybe even a LT that the seahawks would like other then Okung. I dont want Clausen at 6 because I think we need to get a player that will have immediate impact with those big bucks, and we have more needs then berry at saftey and Not morgan.
My point is that I'm guessing Carroll figures he can help Marshall. And I'm certain he knows Marshall could help him as well, since winning football games requires having the most talented players possible. So we shall see...
I honestly dont think people understand what we would be getting, Clearly we would be adding a big-time wide reciever. A 6-foot-4, 230-pound athlete in his prime at 26 who has averaged 102 catches for 1,236 yards over the past three seasons. Also T.J. Houshmandzadeh calls Marshall the best receiver in the NFL, so it's fair to say he'd have his teammate's respect.
Yes I know he has major off season troubles. But look the Seahawks or whoever signs Marshall next will surely say they've done their homework and that he's a good man who has made some mistakes, but is maturing and ready to start fresh in a new environment. Besides he was very young back then.
Another thing is that, to be realistic the players that would most likley be there at 6 would probably be Clausen, Berry, Morgan, or maybe even a LT that the seahawks would like other then Okung. I dont want Clausen at 6 because I think we need to get a player that will have immediate impact with those big bucks, and we have more needs then berry at saftey and Not morgan.
My point is that I'm guessing Carroll figures he can help Marshall. And I'm certain he knows Marshall could help him as well, since winning football games requires having the most talented players possible. So we shall see...
-
- +1
-
-
halkboy15
written by halkfanforever, March 09, 2010
written by halkfanforever, March 09, 2010
Im with you all the way. We are fortunate to have Jeremy Bates and Jed Fisch who can possibly help Marshall with not just on the field off the field too.
Other news: Does anyone know anything about Mike Bell?
Other news: Does anyone know anything about Mike Bell?
-
- +0
-
-
Cut and paste there?
written by Doug H, March 09, 2010
written by Doug H, March 09, 2010
halkboy, did you just post this same thing on a different thread a few topics ago?
Regardless, you are correct with your assessment of Marshalls skill and physical abilities. I am also on the "bandwagon", and i believe the Hawks grab him, using a little a little bit of their "skills". Is his character the wrench in the deal? Perhaps it's the wrench that allows us to get him for a better deal.
Look guys, we haven't had a dominant player since shauna was in his prime. Brandon, huyomoma, and Butler will instantly create a deeply feared trio.
The catch is that we HAVE TO HAVE an upgrade on the O=line, or even superman won't have time to get open. And trust me, Marshall is as close to superman as you can get in the NFL. So I am so down with grabbing him, but they have GOT to draft a good lineman or TWO!
Regardless, you are correct with your assessment of Marshalls skill and physical abilities. I am also on the "bandwagon", and i believe the Hawks grab him, using a little a little bit of their "skills". Is his character the wrench in the deal? Perhaps it's the wrench that allows us to get him for a better deal.
Look guys, we haven't had a dominant player since shauna was in his prime. Brandon, huyomoma, and Butler will instantly create a deeply feared trio.
The catch is that we HAVE TO HAVE an upgrade on the O=line, or even superman won't have time to get open. And trust me, Marshall is as close to superman as you can get in the NFL. So I am so down with grabbing him, but they have GOT to draft a good lineman or TWO!
-
- +0
-
-
trade the 6th
written by johnthebaptist, March 09, 2010
written by johnthebaptist, March 09, 2010
If the Hawks were to get Marshall via tender it would have been done, duh
-
- +0
-
-
What we should do!
written by Gregorio, March 09, 2010
written by Gregorio, March 09, 2010
I want us to take Marshall....I think the best bet is sacrificing our #14 and taking Denvers 2nd round pick. I would commit the picks to drafing a O-Line first pick, DB and another Running Back for second rounds...
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by MontanaMike, March 09, 2010
written by MontanaMike, March 09, 2010
Like i've said before, we'd have the best 1-2 punch at wr.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by T.J., March 09, 2010
written by T.J., March 09, 2010
My problem with Marshall is the risk. His talent is a given, but so are his problems. His top 3(a) or (b) talent won't do any good if he gets himself suspended or if his personal issues become self-destructive. I am also of the belief that a WR is of secondary importance to QB and OL. Despite the incredible talents of Andre Johnson, Brandon Marshall, and Calvin Johnson, none have ever been to the playoffs.
I posted this on a previous thread, but are you realling willing to give up pick #6 for this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfMj7qNt6X8.
The whole argument for trading away a high pick is because he is a "proven" player, but his baggage makes him a lot more of an unknown than many of you are willing to acknowledge. If the FO can swing a trade for a the right price, OK, but I don't want to mortgage the future for a proven knucklehead with a history of bad behavior.
I posted this on a previous thread, but are you realling willing to give up pick #6 for this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfMj7qNt6X8.
The whole argument for trading away a high pick is because he is a "proven" player, but his baggage makes him a lot more of an unknown than many of you are willing to acknowledge. If the FO can swing a trade for a the right price, OK, but I don't want to mortgage the future for a proven knucklehead with a history of bad behavior.
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by Tom1700Hgygguhv, March 09, 2010
written by Tom1700Hgygguhv, March 09, 2010
We should be patient and wait, if no one else makes a play we have a better chance of getting a steal of a deal. This man would imrove our offense 100%
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by CWUJake, March 09, 2010
written by CWUJake, March 09, 2010
We absolutely need Marshall. I don't think anyone is factoring into account that Branch may only play in six games for us next year because he is always injured. That leaves you with Housh, Butler and Obomonu as your top three guys. How does that sound to you guys? Not great
-
- +1
-
-
The #6 Pick
written by SeahawksFanInNY, March 09, 2010
written by SeahawksFanInNY, March 09, 2010
A convoluted trade package that involves trading down from #6 isn't worth it. Not as long as there's still a good chance we can get Clausen with that pick.
Halkboy saying that he doesn't want Clausen because he wants a player who can make an immediate impact borders on the ridiculous. Stafford, Sanchez, Flacco, Ryan, Roethlisberger -- they all came in and made an immediate impact. Indeed, more of an impact than a DT or even a LT, because the QB is just that much more important.
Should Clausen not drop, then it's likely that either G. McCoy or at worst Eric Berry is there waiting for us as a consolation prize.
Halkboy saying that he doesn't want Clausen because he wants a player who can make an immediate impact borders on the ridiculous. Stafford, Sanchez, Flacco, Ryan, Roethlisberger -- they all came in and made an immediate impact. Indeed, more of an impact than a DT or even a LT, because the QB is just that much more important.
Should Clausen not drop, then it's likely that either G. McCoy or at worst Eric Berry is there waiting for us as a consolation prize.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Riggle, March 09, 2010
written by Riggle, March 09, 2010
I see the team needing 5 positions this off-season.
Many other positions could use upgrade, but I would not classify them as needs.
These are Left Tackle, Left Guard, Wide Receiver, Safety and Defensive End.
If we did Chris' option #1, we could address these needs as:
#6 pick - S - Eric Berry
#14 pick - LT - Bulaga or other
free agency - LG - Lilja
trade 2nd and 4th - WR - Marshall
I have no idea - DE - I have no idea
Many other positions could use upgrade, but I would not classify them as needs.
These are Left Tackle, Left Guard, Wide Receiver, Safety and Defensive End.
If we did Chris' option #1, we could address these needs as:
#6 pick - S - Eric Berry
#14 pick - LT - Bulaga or other
free agency - LG - Lilja
trade 2nd and 4th - WR - Marshall
I have no idea - DE - I have no idea
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Highlander, March 09, 2010
written by Highlander, March 09, 2010
Everyone is agreed about Marshall's talent. There seems to be a difference of opinion as to the risk of suspension or other behavior blow up.
No one could argue that if Marshall is suspended then he's of no value at all for that period of time.
Any rookie pick beats a suspended superstar.
The real question, at least to me, is how to assign a value to that risk.
In my opinion, that risk should preclude the Hawks from burning the 6 pick because we have so many needs, particularly on the O and D lines.
I will be very disappointed if the Hawks give up the 6 pick, and it is my opinion that the 14 pick is also too high a cost given the risk, but would accept that as a difference of opinion.
Of the options listed in the OP, I'd be happy with either the 4th or 1st option. I'd throw in the option of a 1st for the 2011 season and if necessarily something else, either a player or lower pick to balance out value if needed.
If the QB isn't standing for longer than 2 seconds then there isn't time to throw the ball more than quick slant routs...and those will be camped if that's all they do.
And if the running game isn't there then the defense can put extra people on your star.
And all that is dependant upon having a functioning O line.
No one could argue that if Marshall is suspended then he's of no value at all for that period of time.
Any rookie pick beats a suspended superstar.
The real question, at least to me, is how to assign a value to that risk.
In my opinion, that risk should preclude the Hawks from burning the 6 pick because we have so many needs, particularly on the O and D lines.
I will be very disappointed if the Hawks give up the 6 pick, and it is my opinion that the 14 pick is also too high a cost given the risk, but would accept that as a difference of opinion.
Of the options listed in the OP, I'd be happy with either the 4th or 1st option. I'd throw in the option of a 1st for the 2011 season and if necessarily something else, either a player or lower pick to balance out value if needed.
If the QB isn't standing for longer than 2 seconds then there isn't time to throw the ball more than quick slant routs...and those will be camped if that's all they do.
And if the running game isn't there then the defense can put extra people on your star.
And all that is dependant upon having a functioning O line.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by diehard82, March 09, 2010
written by diehard82, March 09, 2010
Rob, another option would be simply giving Denver our #6 and we get Marshall and their 3rd rounder (#80) plus their 3rd rounder in 2011. Costs more in terms of trade value chart by about 200 points plus deferal on the 2011 pick, but we stay whole on the number of picks, have one in each round, and don't retain a second expensive 1st rounder. Marshall will cost a ton to sign ($60MM) and once the CBA is back in place we'll have to balance the checkbook. While Denver is posturing about not wanting to negotiate, that deal is far superior to anything anyone else can offer. I would say keep Branch for the uncapped year for depth and plan to trade or release him after 2010, but that's expensive depth. The additional 3rd rounder next year will come in handy when trading in the draft for a QB.
-
- +0
-
-
Another thing to think about
written by Playstead, March 09, 2010
written by Playstead, March 09, 2010
While I love the thought of B. Marshall as a Seahawk, we're not just giving up picks for him, but also salary cap space. He's going to want a HUGE contract and it would sure be nice to spend most of that money "inside - out." It all starts with linemen.
I say do the deal if we can get him for our 2nd and maybe a 4th next year, but not one of our first round picks. It's still going to hurt (cap wise), but we still get our first round studs.
Also, I need to see more OL coming in for free agent visits. If we don't at least sign one starter -- expect another crappy year.
I say do the deal if we can get him for our 2nd and maybe a 4th next year, but not one of our first round picks. It's still going to hurt (cap wise), but we still get our first round studs.
Also, I need to see more OL coming in for free agent visits. If we don't at least sign one starter -- expect another crappy year.
-
- +0
-
-
#40 or Bust
written by Hojo, March 09, 2010
written by Hojo, March 09, 2010
Marshall the football player is a beast, too bad Marshall the human still has a lot of growing up to do. If he was mature I'd be all for trading a 1st rd pick for him, but he's far from it. #40 & Branch would be the most I'd pay for Marshall.
Let's face it, the Hawks aren't winning a super bowl anytime soon. Let's rebuild a sustainable winning team through the draft.
Let's face it, the Hawks aren't winning a super bowl anytime soon. Let's rebuild a sustainable winning team through the draft.
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by Riggle, March 09, 2010
written by Riggle, March 09, 2010
Playstead,
There is no salary cap.
This puts the Seahawks at an advantage because of the financial resources of the team's owner.
There is no salary cap.
This puts the Seahawks at an advantage because of the financial resources of the team's owner.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Jon B, March 09, 2010
written by Jon B, March 09, 2010
K, so here is my deal about not having the sixth pick. I do not know that I like Clausen at 6 but it will hopefully be the last time we see an elite QB in the draft for quite some time.
Having said this I think that #14 and player(s) for Marshal and 45 would be the best scenario, Even better than # 40 and players for Marshal.
I say this for one simple reason, we keep three Starting caliber draft picks and have an elite WR.
Also that #6 is worth more than a lot of people are giving it credit for. If the player we want does not happen to fall to us at 6 but we have a list of say 3 or four LT's (Bulaga, Brown, Okung, Davis, etc) and four or five others (Berry S, Dez Bryant WR, Spiller RB, Price DT, Thomas S, Haden CB, Morgan DE etc) that we really like we could trade back and pick up anywhere from 11-18 for 1st and Second rounders (more from us near the 11 say a 4th rounder, more comes to us as you approach 18 say the same for argument sake, a fourth rounder) according to the Point Value Chart this is realistic.
We could potentially come out of this with Marshal, one first rounder, likely a LT that we would be happy with, and possibly three 2nd round picks (Maybe a DT, RB, S if we were to tade 14 and player for 45 and Marshal, then trade back if we did not like anyone at 6.
Having said this I think that #14 and player(s) for Marshal and 45 would be the best scenario, Even better than # 40 and players for Marshal.
I say this for one simple reason, we keep three Starting caliber draft picks and have an elite WR.
Also that #6 is worth more than a lot of people are giving it credit for. If the player we want does not happen to fall to us at 6 but we have a list of say 3 or four LT's (Bulaga, Brown, Okung, Davis, etc) and four or five others (Berry S, Dez Bryant WR, Spiller RB, Price DT, Thomas S, Haden CB, Morgan DE etc) that we really like we could trade back and pick up anywhere from 11-18 for 1st and Second rounders (more from us near the 11 say a 4th rounder, more comes to us as you approach 18 say the same for argument sake, a fourth rounder) according to the Point Value Chart this is realistic.
We could potentially come out of this with Marshal, one first rounder, likely a LT that we would be happy with, and possibly three 2nd round picks (Maybe a DT, RB, S if we were to tade 14 and player for 45 and Marshal, then trade back if we did not like anyone at 6.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Jon B, March 09, 2010
written by Jon B, March 09, 2010
The scenario I listed above also helps us with what many people are concerned with. If we kept the 6th pick then traded back to get more picks we would be paying less money.
Lets remember teams often draft for starters in the first 2 or three rounds.
Showing that trading back from six has great value if we keep the pick out of the Marshal Trade.
Lets remember teams often draft for starters in the first 2 or three rounds.
Showing that trading back from six has great value if we keep the pick out of the Marshal Trade.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by dr, March 09, 2010
written by dr, March 09, 2010
I covet having Marshall, but can't help but wonder why no other teams are going for him? If You Can’t Spot The Sucker At The Poker Table…
…It’s probably you.
…It’s probably you.
-
- +0
-
-
No worries
written by Ken121, March 09, 2010
written by Ken121, March 09, 2010
Patients my fellow Seahawks, there are no other teams jumping in at signing Marshall. So the closer we get to the draft, Denver will have to blink. I mean think about it. Do you want a player that does not want to be there or are you going to make a deal. Marshall will just play out his final year and then he'll be an Unrestricted Free Agent next year, able to sign to the highest bidder. Denver will then get nothing in return.
-
- +0
-
-
Derek Anderson
written by Scotch on the Rocks, March 09, 2010
written by Scotch on the Rocks, March 09, 2010
Derek Anderson is scheduled to visit the Seahawks Thursday, according to ESPN North reporter James Walker
-
- +0
-
-
Lilja news?
written by Highlander, March 09, 2010
written by Highlander, March 09, 2010
Has there been anything solid about OG, Ryan Lilja?
this guy sounds like a perfect fit for the Hawks in a position of huge need.
Unless there is something that isn't out there info wise yet, why aren't they jetting this guy in and throwing a big party for him?
this guy sounds like a perfect fit for the Hawks in a position of huge need.
Unless there is something that isn't out there info wise yet, why aren't they jetting this guy in and throwing a big party for him?
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by plumpshady, March 10, 2010
written by plumpshady, March 10, 2010
I would give up this year's 40th pick and give him a contract similar to Housh. I would also write in a provision in the deal which states if he gets in any more trouble then he has to give back a portion of the signing bonus + game checks and the club has the right to nullify any guaranteed portion his deal altogether.
If that is not enough for Denver or Marshall then pass.
If that is not enough for Denver or Marshall then pass.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by NW Pride, March 10, 2010
written by NW Pride, March 10, 2010
Off the topic hear a little bit, but did anybody catch Mike Salk from ESPN give Seahawk Addicts a shout out today? It was pretty cool, and he had a whole segmant with what he thinks the Hawks should do to get BM, and by giving SA mad props you could tell he got his idea from Chris's 4th option. Maybe it happens a lot, and I miss it, but its pretty cool when you hear an ESPN big dog give the local boys some well deserved love. Love the site, and I love the different points of view.
-
- +0
-
-
....
written by Mind of no mind, March 10, 2010
written by Mind of no mind, March 10, 2010
NW Pride - It doesn't happen all the time, but I've heard Salk give props to ussmariner.com (and has the main blogger on from time to time), as well as lookoutlanding.com, and fieldgulls.com. This is also the second time I've heard of him talking about seahawkaddicts. Someone on here wrote a few months back about what the seahawks were trying to do with their front office structure and how it was similar to what many large corporations are doing, Salk talked a little about it and recomended that people go to the site to read it.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by jimt, March 10, 2010
written by jimt, March 10, 2010
Derek Anderson would be a servicable backup to Hass. w/starting experience. Not positive, but he would most likely be economical. Could still take a QB in the draft to compete for back up spot and to learn our system. Anderson is 6'6" and 230lbs with a "cannon" arm. Pretty good QB stats in 2007. From the NW, born in PDX and graduated from OSU....so the setting might be conducive for a re-emergence??? Just my thoughts.....
-
- +0
-
-
Why?
written by Flahawker, March 10, 2010
written by Flahawker, March 10, 2010
Why would the Seahawks pony up what the Broncos want when A) Marshall wants out of Denver and B) the Broncos want to get rid of Marhsall. You don't pay top dollar when you are holding the all the cards. The Seahawks would be nuts to give a 1st round pick for a guy they will have to pay a boatload of money to and who is one strike from being out of the NFL.
Yes, I know Marshall is a beast, a top five player at his position. Yes, I know the Hawks desperately need playmakers on offense. But the Hawks have the cards here. Hold tight and make Denver flinch.
I was listening to Brock and Salk yesterday and Salk actually had an interesting scenario in which the Hawks received Marshall. The Hawks should, as the Browns did last year, try and trade out of # 6. By trading out of # 6, the Hawks might be able to get a 3rd rounder in addition to the swap of 1sts. Or how about swapping picks: #6 and #11 in round one, picks #40 and #45 in round 2 and swapping players Branch and Marshall? So Seattle ends up with Marshall, pick #11 and pick #45. Denver gets Branch, pick #6 and pick #40.
Or how about Marshall, pick #11 and a 3rd rounder for Branch, pick #6 and pick #40?
Yes, I know Marshall is a beast, a top five player at his position. Yes, I know the Hawks desperately need playmakers on offense. But the Hawks have the cards here. Hold tight and make Denver flinch.
I was listening to Brock and Salk yesterday and Salk actually had an interesting scenario in which the Hawks received Marshall. The Hawks should, as the Browns did last year, try and trade out of # 6. By trading out of # 6, the Hawks might be able to get a 3rd rounder in addition to the swap of 1sts. Or how about swapping picks: #6 and #11 in round one, picks #40 and #45 in round 2 and swapping players Branch and Marshall? So Seattle ends up with Marshall, pick #11 and pick #45. Denver gets Branch, pick #6 and pick #40.
Or how about Marshall, pick #11 and a 3rd rounder for Branch, pick #6 and pick #40?
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by Cysco, March 10, 2010
written by Cysco, March 10, 2010
Derek Anderson. Why?
Well the Hawks need a back-up QB. Anderson has been one, and has had success as a starter in the past. Anderson would be a serviceable back-up to Hass. He's proven to have a quality arm. Unfortunately, his decision making is crap. Perhaps the staff believes they can work with him.
RE: Marshall
I don't see Seattle giving up #6. There's a very good chance that one of either Clausen or McCoy will be there at #6. A stud DE or a QB of the future is probably too much to give up.
Giving up #14 straight-up would be a legit option ONLY IF the staff believes they are going to be able to find our LT of the future at #40. A starting LT is an absolute must in the first three picks this draft. I've always assumed that LT is coming in at #14.
Obviously giving up #40 is the most desirable, though it'll have to be combined with another pick. Giving up #40 along with a future #3 or 4 is my ideal solution.
I'm not a fan of trading #6 and moving back into one of Denver's picks. That #6 is shaping up to be a good position to draft from. I would seriously hate to give up that pick and then see McCoy fall to there on draft day.
-=cysco
Well the Hawks need a back-up QB. Anderson has been one, and has had success as a starter in the past. Anderson would be a serviceable back-up to Hass. He's proven to have a quality arm. Unfortunately, his decision making is crap. Perhaps the staff believes they can work with him.
RE: Marshall
I don't see Seattle giving up #6. There's a very good chance that one of either Clausen or McCoy will be there at #6. A stud DE or a QB of the future is probably too much to give up.
Giving up #14 straight-up would be a legit option ONLY IF the staff believes they are going to be able to find our LT of the future at #40. A starting LT is an absolute must in the first three picks this draft. I've always assumed that LT is coming in at #14.
Obviously giving up #40 is the most desirable, though it'll have to be combined with another pick. Giving up #40 along with a future #3 or 4 is my ideal solution.
I'm not a fan of trading #6 and moving back into one of Denver's picks. That #6 is shaping up to be a good position to draft from. I would seriously hate to give up that pick and then see McCoy fall to there on draft day.
-=cysco
-
- +0
-
-
Potential trade....
written by Claude, March 10, 2010
written by Claude, March 10, 2010
Chris,
Why trade the #6 pick for Brandon Marshall, or two picks, such as the round two and four picks? Why not trade the #6 pick to, say, the New England Patriots, for their pick #22 in the first round and their picks # 44 and 53 in the second round? The draft value trade chart shows the #6 pick at a value of 1600 points, and the three NE picks at a value of 1610. Then, the Seahawks would get Marshall for the #22 pick, with him signing an offer sheet, and add two #2's in addition, and still have the #14 pick in the first round and their own #40 pick.
Draft Choice Trade Value Chart:
http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php
Why trade the #6 pick for Brandon Marshall, or two picks, such as the round two and four picks? Why not trade the #6 pick to, say, the New England Patriots, for their pick #22 in the first round and their picks # 44 and 53 in the second round? The draft value trade chart shows the #6 pick at a value of 1600 points, and the three NE picks at a value of 1610. Then, the Seahawks would get Marshall for the #22 pick, with him signing an offer sheet, and add two #2's in addition, and still have the #14 pick in the first round and their own #40 pick.
Draft Choice Trade Value Chart:
http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Diesel55, March 10, 2010
written by Diesel55, March 10, 2010
It appears that the Hawks have been calling Philly non-stop to try to trade for either McNabb or Kolb...
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by MontanaMike, March 10, 2010
written by MontanaMike, March 10, 2010
That's agood proposal. All swap picks only happen when the other team wants to do it. I would make them take branch too, especially if we got marshall. I'm split on this one, if he is reachable then he's worth it. If he's a cancer then we just f'd up by giving away our picks, there's no denying he's got immense talent.
-
- +0
-
-
NO!
written by B., March 10, 2010
written by B., March 10, 2010
Not worth either of our first three picks. Don't do it! The Hawk's will benefit from playing the waiting game on this one. Denver will lower their asking price.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by S.TTBM, March 10, 2010
written by S.TTBM, March 10, 2010
I have been all in favor of landing Marshall. However, his past domestic violence issues, with TWO different women, are enough to give me pause. I think Im going to take a wait and see approach. Im fine with whatever Seattle decides. Either way, I end up simply holding my breath.
With Lilja, the comparisons to Wahle scare me. Former good player dumped by thier team. There has to be some good reasons why Indy doesnt want Lilja anymore. Still, we have crap along the line. Wouldnt hurt to bring in some vets, especially a ZBS vet like Lilja.
And I mentioned the idea of swapping first second and/or third round picks with Denver for Marshall in comments awhile ago. Glad someone else thinks that might work!
With Lilja, the comparisons to Wahle scare me. Former good player dumped by thier team. There has to be some good reasons why Indy doesnt want Lilja anymore. Still, we have crap along the line. Wouldnt hurt to bring in some vets, especially a ZBS vet like Lilja.
And I mentioned the idea of swapping first second and/or third round picks with Denver for Marshall in comments awhile ago. Glad someone else thinks that might work!
-
- +0
-
-
Chris good write up and always………
written by CWEH, March 10, 2010
written by CWEH, March 10, 2010
……. You make some good arguments and I agree with most of your write up. However, I do not agree with your “analysis” of 2nd/4th round picks. Do second round players usually start? The answer is yes. Do 4th round players usually start? The answer is no, unless they are on a bad team. Here is a list of our 2nd and 4th round picks.
200920082007
Max Unger 2nd RoundJohn Carlson 2ndJosh Wilson 2nd
No 4thRed Bryant -4thBaraka Atkins -4h
200620052004
Darryl Tapp - 2ndLofa Tatupu - 2ndMichael Boulware -2nd
Rob Sims-4thRay Willis-4thNiko Koutouvides-4th
200320022001
Ken Hamlin -2ndMo Morris -2ndKen Lucas - 2nd
Seneca Wallace/Solmon bates-4thTerreal Bierria-4thOrlando Huff/ Curtis Fuller-4th
Only 2 of the 2nd round players are true starters and pro bowlers (Lofa and Carlson), the rest of the 2nd round picks are marginal to semi- good players. Our 4th round picks are low to average players that will never get to the pro bowl.
In my view, we would be giving up a potential none-pro bowl, but good player (2nd pick) and a low-to average player (4th pick) for a top ¾ WR. I think this deal makes sense and good for both teams. Let me be clear, I am against giving up either of our first round picks.
Marshall wants out of Denver, Denver does not want to keep him! This is a waiting game and the Hawks should not rush to out bid themselves. We don’t want to make the same mistake that we made with Branch. If we didn’t give up our 1st rounder for Branch, we could have picked Joe Staley with the 24th pick. Who is Joe Staley you ask? He was picked 28th overall in the 2007 draft by the 49ers. He is their starting tackle and because of his stats, he was giving a 6 year extension.
200920082007
Max Unger 2nd RoundJohn Carlson 2ndJosh Wilson 2nd
No 4thRed Bryant -4thBaraka Atkins -4h
200620052004
Darryl Tapp - 2ndLofa Tatupu - 2ndMichael Boulware -2nd
Rob Sims-4thRay Willis-4thNiko Koutouvides-4th
200320022001
Ken Hamlin -2ndMo Morris -2ndKen Lucas - 2nd
Seneca Wallace/Solmon bates-4thTerreal Bierria-4thOrlando Huff/ Curtis Fuller-4th
Only 2 of the 2nd round players are true starters and pro bowlers (Lofa and Carlson), the rest of the 2nd round picks are marginal to semi- good players. Our 4th round picks are low to average players that will never get to the pro bowl.
In my view, we would be giving up a potential none-pro bowl, but good player (2nd pick) and a low-to average player (4th pick) for a top ¾ WR. I think this deal makes sense and good for both teams. Let me be clear, I am against giving up either of our first round picks.
Marshall wants out of Denver, Denver does not want to keep him! This is a waiting game and the Hawks should not rush to out bid themselves. We don’t want to make the same mistake that we made with Branch. If we didn’t give up our 1st rounder for Branch, we could have picked Joe Staley with the 24th pick. Who is Joe Staley you ask? He was picked 28th overall in the 2007 draft by the 49ers. He is their starting tackle and because of his stats, he was giving a 6 year extension.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Torrez252, March 10, 2010
written by Torrez252, March 10, 2010
What is up with the front office. Everyday I see free agents that could've help this team sign elsewhere.Stop focusing on Marshall and sign some players to help this team.I've heard Paul Allen has all this money. He he don't invest some of it to quality players, or if someone don't light a fire under there @#?!. Then again will be near the bottom of the NFL.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by andymuhs, March 10, 2010
written by andymuhs, March 10, 2010
we are getting Marshall... we must and an LT and LG are a must too... other than that de and safety...Marshall is one of the most well rounded recievers of the last five years... as far as selling the farm to get him... Schneiders time to show his brilliance and Carrolls time to be inventive... Go Marshall and Go Hawks... perfect timing with Seneca gone, space for a new #15
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Justincredible, March 10, 2010
written by Justincredible, March 10, 2010
I agree with you Andy. If we got talent at the Guard and Tackle position and then got Marshall we would be a different team on offense. The Seahawks have not had a playmaker since I can remember who could truly take over a game if he wants to.
So bye adding a Guard, Tackle and Marshall to our offense this off season and on paper we look like NFC West contenders.
So bye adding a Guard, Tackle and Marshall to our offense this off season and on paper we look like NFC West contenders.
-
- +0
-
-
WR Bryant to Bengals
written by Highlander, March 10, 2010
written by Highlander, March 10, 2010
According to JOCKlife.com, a web site that shares an office with the agent of receiver Antonio Bryant, the veteran wideout has signed what is believed to be a four-year deal with the Bengals.
source: http://profootballtalk.nbcspor...umor-mill/
source: http://profootballtalk.nbcspor...umor-mill/
-
- +0
-
-
btw
written by Highlander, March 10, 2010
written by Highlander, March 10, 2010
BTW, I don't know how reliable that source is, but I thought I'd post it along with the link. If it's true then this is one more competitor for Marshall that is likely out of the picture.
I still wonder about the Patriots, however. Their first round pick is pretty low and they could use a WR with Moss being injured.
I still wonder about the Patriots, however. Their first round pick is pretty low and they could use a WR with Moss being injured.
-
- +0
-
-
It's simple...
written by Billy Showbiz, March 10, 2010
written by Billy Showbiz, March 10, 2010
If we need to give up our #6 pick for Marshall we should do it. Players like him do not come around very often.
Risk: He gets suspended. Well he's been suspended 3 games in the last two years and that has not stopped him from having huge numbers. Even if we only get 12 games out of him per year he'll still be at 85 catches and over 1000 yards and with those numbers we can win. I don't think that he gets suspended for that many games with Pete Carroll looking after him.
As for the price, if we draft a QB then we are looking at something like what Sanchez got last year 5-years, $50.5M base; $60M max ($28M guaranteed)maybe more. For Gholston at #6 overall in 2008 the Jets paid 5 years, $50 million ($21M guaranteed).
Consider the top paid WRs. Fitzgerald gets about $10 mil per year. Greg Jennings makes about $9 mil per year and had 26 mil guaranteed on his contract. Marshall is certainly worth more than Jennings so even with that contract we're getting Marshall below market value as Marshall is better than Jennings.
With any player who's had off the field issues like Marshall there will be some sort of clause in the contract that allows the Hawks to get some of their money back if he gets suspended for too long plus there is no cap so if he comes in and gets suspended for a long stretch we cut him, get some if not all of our bonus back (a la Ricky Williams) then move on. That being said it could be argued that we face more of a risk with a #6 rookie because there is no recourse if they bust or just become average players.
The biggest risk is that he becomes a "locker room distraction". Given that our team is filled with "character guys" I don't think that will be a problem. Add in the fact that Pete Carroll has a track record for working with guys like this and I think our risk is significantly diminished.
Do I want the Hawks to give up their #6 pick, of course not but if that is what it takes then we should do it. Regardless of the character issues, this guy is far less of a risk than any rookie.
Risk: He gets suspended. Well he's been suspended 3 games in the last two years and that has not stopped him from having huge numbers. Even if we only get 12 games out of him per year he'll still be at 85 catches and over 1000 yards and with those numbers we can win. I don't think that he gets suspended for that many games with Pete Carroll looking after him.
As for the price, if we draft a QB then we are looking at something like what Sanchez got last year 5-years, $50.5M base; $60M max ($28M guaranteed)maybe more. For Gholston at #6 overall in 2008 the Jets paid 5 years, $50 million ($21M guaranteed).
Consider the top paid WRs. Fitzgerald gets about $10 mil per year. Greg Jennings makes about $9 mil per year and had 26 mil guaranteed on his contract. Marshall is certainly worth more than Jennings so even with that contract we're getting Marshall below market value as Marshall is better than Jennings.
With any player who's had off the field issues like Marshall there will be some sort of clause in the contract that allows the Hawks to get some of their money back if he gets suspended for too long plus there is no cap so if he comes in and gets suspended for a long stretch we cut him, get some if not all of our bonus back (a la Ricky Williams) then move on. That being said it could be argued that we face more of a risk with a #6 rookie because there is no recourse if they bust or just become average players.
The biggest risk is that he becomes a "locker room distraction". Given that our team is filled with "character guys" I don't think that will be a problem. Add in the fact that Pete Carroll has a track record for working with guys like this and I think our risk is significantly diminished.
Do I want the Hawks to give up their #6 pick, of course not but if that is what it takes then we should do it. Regardless of the character issues, this guy is far less of a risk than any rookie.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by eddy98, March 10, 2010
written by eddy98, March 10, 2010
all those advocating for this women beater..how about this guy in the 2nd round?
http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/nfl-prospects-sex-offender-record-unearthed-28007
http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/nfl-prospects-sex-offender-record-unearthed-28007
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Craig Cobra, March 11, 2010
written by Craig Cobra, March 11, 2010
I agree with the comment- Marshall wants out of Denver and Denver wants him out. Wait before you jump.
I am surprised how everyone thinks he is such a prize. At what costs are we wanting this guy? Granted there is always hopes of maturing as R. Moss showed after leaving MN, but wishing for Marshall is a bit like wanting herpes.
I am surprised how everyone thinks he is such a prize. At what costs are we wanting this guy? Granted there is always hopes of maturing as R. Moss showed after leaving MN, but wishing for Marshall is a bit like wanting herpes.
-
- +0
-
-
I like the herpes comment but....
written by Billy Showbiz, March 11, 2010
written by Billy Showbiz, March 11, 2010
I think your analogy would be better if you said wanting Brandon Marshall is like wanting to bang Megan Fox without a condom even though you know she has a raging case of herpes.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Craig Cobra, March 11, 2010
written by Craig Cobra, March 11, 2010
A guy just can't himself, you know? How far past flaws are we willing to go? Sell our souls for the win. I apologize, syphilis would have been more accurate...it's something we'd have to live with for a long time and it quickly infects whatever it comes in contact with.
-
- +0
-
-
http://www.monclerwomens.com
written by xie560@sina.cn, November 27, 2010
written by xie560@sina.cn, November 27, 2010
Welcome to http://www.monclerwomens.com , Official online Wholesaler and Retailer of moncler coats the leading brand-moncler coats. We are Official Online Retailers of Moncler Jacket, we are glad that you spend your time to browse our selection of authentic moncler coats commodity, and also you can read our news, reviews and blogs. These boots are a must have among celebrities such as Kate Moss. We hope that you can write your reviews about our products on our site and find our collection of moncler coats news and information articles.
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
http://sportsradiointerviews.com/2010/03/08/nate-burleson-“they’ve-got-a-lot-of-pieces-to-the-puzzle-already-together-and-you-can-do-something-special-for-detroit-michigan”/