Whitehurst Underrated?

Thanks for posting this Steve. It reflects my thoughts on this move very well.

I'm pretty hopeful. Time will tell.

That's been my point all along. Hass 2.0?
Instead of paying high dollars to an unknown potiential, we can spend our picks on an outstanding group and address many needs. We still have a month to go untill draft and i smell something in the air.
I'd rather take a 4 year #3 qb who sits behind behind a good qb and doesn't get the brutal injuries while learning a system and learns the curve, so we have an inexpierienced qb who has more potential than Seneca Wallace. Hey it could be worse, we could've gotten Brady Quinn.

Hopefully Whitehurst really pushes Matt or the starting job. I know Matt is a very competitive guy, but hes held the starting posistion for years without anyone to push him since 2001. Whoever wins will be better for the compitition, but we have to get a better supporting cast to help them to be in a posistion to succed.

The Front office and Carrol know they have to win soon,They needed a QB,Wallace was not it , they did not know how the draft would go so they went out and got this guy.Great move,now lets get some more pieces to the puzzle like OL. GO HAWKS

Way to dig out a good article, Steve. It just goes to show that several people, not just a few in our organization, feel that Whitehurst has an upside to justify being a starter.

This article led me to start thinking about other items that are of interest coming out of college that makes for easy comparison. I found some Wonderlic scores for quarterbacks coming out of the 2006 draft. It surprising how many names I actually recognize that are either starters or have started at one point.

2006 QB scores
Welcome all,

I haven't been able to obtain too many scores from the '06 Combine, though I did recently receive an email from Montana State's CoSIDA Academic All-American Travis Lulay who related his Combine score of 37. The following is an excerpt from wonderlic.blogspot.com.

The '06 class' scores (mostly from college workout days) are as follows:

Travis Lulay, 37
Matt Leinart, 35
Charlie Whitehurst, 33
Josh Betts, 33
Jay Cutler, 26
Kellen Clemens, 26
Brodie Croyle, 24
Bruce Eugene, 21
DJ Shockley, 19
Reggie McNeal, 19
Bruce Gradkowski, 19
Tarvaris Jackson, 19
Erik Meyer, 18
Vince Young, 16

Encouraging piece, I hope it's accurate. I can't wait to see him throwing some passes. I guess the bottom line is, hope springs eternal.

Great to see optimism istead of the sky is falling.

I think he will challenge hass. For the job, but I think hass will get the start simply because he has starting experience. Charlie is the future QB for the seahawks like it or not.....Now that we've got our franchise QB lets get out there and get him some weapons! Get him surrounded by playmakers, give him the best chance to succeed!

Montana Mike,
"We still have a month to go untill draft and i smell something in the air."

Did you fart, cause I don't smell anything in the air?

Just kidding, I actually do like this because it frees us up a ton the rest of this off season. I smell Brandon Marshal or CJ Spill. I smell a top flight Safety or DT at #6. And I smell a ZBS fitting OT at #60 or earlier.
That's what I smell.
Or at least something like it because they would all be first day starters and huge impact for the hawks.

Yeah, last week we were dying for something to be done.

First off, I know we need O-line help more than anything. However, I think the idea of having possibly the two best playmakers in the NFL is too much to pass.

I Really think we are going to trade down BEFORE the draft. I'm guessing with Buffalo.

We then use the two second rounder, or a second and third, depending on what we get, to go after Brandon Marshall and pick up CJ Spiller at 9.

Could you imagine? CJ Spiller, Brandon marshall.

Long term, this may wind up being a steal for Seattle. But until Whitehurst proves himself, it'll be scored as a heck of a coup for Smith and the Chargers. Especially if San Diego lands itself a blue-chip player at No. 40 in April.

"Your words, not mine," Smith said after listening to my instant analysis of the trade. But he was laughing when he said it, and I think I know why.

This is the most telling part of this article. Smith knows he got the best of this trade.

I don't understand why people are still complaining. Montana Mike said it right. Last week we were wondering why our new FO was going so slow, now I have heard complaining from a few people about every single move they have made.
IMO the Tapp trade was not a bad deal. People claim he is the best DE on our team and that it opened another hole. Well he was Nocked out of starting role by Jackson basically from Jackson's first day and that was Holmy's call. He may have more QB hits but the one who actually gets the sack is better than the hit.
Whitehurst could be our starting QB this or next year. Holmy gave up more to get Hass and nobody complains about that anymore.
We have picked up several players that will compete and at least improve the depth of our team. Our starters will come from the draft. I would put money on it that we will have either 3 or 4 starting Rookies in 2010, plus Whitehurst will at least improve the QB position through competition if he does not start.
Our team will look completely different by 2011 and that sounds good to me compared to keeping our 4-12 and 5-11 team together.

Of course San Diego gets the best of this trade. They win with any team giving decent draft picks for Whitehurst at all, since the alternative in San Diego was for him to back up for another year and then leave as an unrestricted free agent in 2011. Credit them for having respected guys in Norv Turner and John Ramsdell on their staff developing a qb in what essentially amounts to printing money.

I prefer to think of getting Whitehurst in draft terms. You can't get Bradford and it might be difficult to get Clausen* and you can easily argue for Whitehurst to be the 3rd guy over Tebow and McCoy. And in most people's eyes, we reached to make our selection (I do agree somewhat though I don't have a really strong feeling about it). You count back at the times the analysts say we reached, and it still could go either way. It could end up like Tatupu, it could end up like Stevens, though that's pretty unlikely.

* Is it me, or does everyone who loves the Whitehurst deal also really dislike Clausen as a solution?

Of course the chargers got the best of this trade, they got value out of a 3rd string QB, but that doesnt mean we got shafted. We needed a backup/future starting QB and they happened to have a 3rd stringer with a lot of potential. Im much happier with this deal than any of the other QB deals that had been discussed. Sure Kolb would have been nice but the price Philly was demanding made it unrealistic.

sorry man i didnt mean to copy what you said i started typing before yours posted

Of course the chargers got the best of this trade

The Chargers got third round value in exchange for a third round draft pick who has shown obvious improvement (obvious to those who have watched him, that is) since he came into the league. I don't see the obvious advantage to the Chargers.

The Chargers got very good value for Whitehurst. He was a promising 3rd stringer who never would have been used because their starter is a pro-bowler.

The Hawks "gave up" a fair amount, but if Carroll is the judge of tallant that most think he is, then we got a QB without using any of our 1st round picks. Even though we moved down 20 picks in the 2nd round, there will be a lot of talant available at #60.

Good deal all around. Even if Whitehurst turns out to be a bust, Teel may not be. If they both bust, than we'll have another chance to pick up a QB with a high 1st round pick in a year or two.

The advantage for the chargers is this. They moved up in the 2nd round and got a pick next year for a guy that would not have started or even played for them. That does not mean we got screwed over, it means that they were benefited for someone that meant little overall to them.

The Hawks got the advantage of not loosing a pick until next years draft and not being tied down and needing to pick a QB in this years draft when we have so many other needs. Now we have a year to see if Whitehurst or Teel are our starting QB of the future before we end up having to take a QB early next year.

Both sides have the advantage. Ours may be more risky than the chargers but the reward could also be much greater.

LouieLouie
Wow we are thinking on the same wave length. That is crazy. I posted my comment and checked to see if anyone else had written anything. We even broke it out basically the same. I did not take what you had to say as I did not know you said it.
How about that.

The obvious advantage for the Chargers is that Whitehurst was a 3rd stringer, they didnt need him and he never played. Yes he has alot of potential and i dont think it was a bad trade for the Hawks but anytime you can get a 3rd rounder and move up in the 2nd round for a player you dont need or use thats an advantage.

I love that Sando never sugar-coats mistakes made by the hawks:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/15843/chargers-seattle-drove-not-so-hard-bargain

In Sando's analysis of this very Don Banks article, he writes:

"Anyone purchasing, say, a vehicle knows better than to walk onto the lot and pay the listed price without at least trying to get a better deal."

and

"The trade for Whitehurst was more like a blind auction than a straight sale"

and

"the Seahawks wanted Whitehurst badly and they didn't want to take any chances."

It has also been already posted on that the Banks article states that smith sounded like the "cat who ate the canary", epscially considering the fact that whitehurt would have been a free agent next year. And that he was laughing when Don Banks suggested the hawks got fleeced.

As someone who negotiates for a living (lawyer), the idea of accepting the first offer thrown your way, unless you know it is an over-the-moon steal, is ludicrous. Giving up more than whitehurst's tender certainly does not qualify as one of those offers, obviously. The hawks rookie management, in my estimation, blew it when they decided their hearts were so set on whitehurst that they apparently couldn't even bluff that they were totally willing to walk away from the deal. If there were no negotiations, lets just say they better pray whitehurst works out because that could be career ending.

But that doesn't mean the Chargers got the best of the trade. The Chargers got something of more value to them and gave up something of less value to them, but that's exactly what the Seahawks did too. If the Seahawks' analysis is correct and Whitehurst is starting caliber, then the Seahawks got *much* more value than they gave up. They've got a starting QB, plus they can use the first round pick most people expected them to have to use for a starting QB to get another impact player.

We had to up the ante or he'd be a Tard.

You are right about the hawks eventually getting much more value if Whitehurst pans out im just saying from the Chargers stand point they basically got something for nothing, they are set at QB and the only real value Whitehurst had to them was in a trade.

...would obviously prefer going to Seattle over Arizona, as in Seattle it's just a matter of time before he starts (if he doesn't beat Matt straight out) whereas he would be working against Leinert for years.

they basically got something for nothing

No they didn't. If one of their first two QBs go down, they are going to be in a much shakier position without Whitehurst. They got something they needed more for something they needed less. Just like the Seahawks did.

Whitehurst will be 28 years old opening day. He has already been in the league for four years without starting. Hasselbeck will be 35 shortly and will not be a Seahawk in 2011. These things are about as close to facts as you can get.

There is absolutely no benefit to Hasselbeck being our starter this season. UNLESS...you think, with Hasselbeck, Seattle is a serious Super Bowl threat. If Hasselbeck plays and Seattle goes 9-7 and wins the West and loses at some point in the playoffs, we have learned nothing. Even worse, Seattle goes 7-9 or 8-8 and miss the playoffs but Hasselbeck plays out the season because we are in the hunt. If Whitehurst doesn't start or play significant time this season we are then left with a 29-year old QB with 5 years of bench experience and only one year left on his contract. We then head into next years draft without knowing what we have in Whitehurst and wondering if we need to draft a QB.

In my humble opinion, its time for Hasselbeck to be traded for whatever the FO can get or he has to accept the backup role and be willing to tutor Whitehurst. The only reason I see Carroll sitting Whitehurst is because he either wants to protect himself in year 1 from looking foolish if Whitehurst stinks or if Whitehurst is just not ready at any point this season. Even if Hasselbeck has a great pre-season I just don't see the benefits of him starting outweighing the benefits gained from giving Whitehurst the reigns right now.

If Whitehurst turns out to be a multi-year starter for the 'Hawks, the Chargers got the short end of this deal. They invested many years in him and got close to their original draft value in return. The 'Hawks benefit from the Chargers training.
If Whitehurst does not turn out to be a starter, then the Hawks end up cutting a David Greene again.
Obviously the 'Hawks' FO felt that they would not be able to get a better value in the draft.
Time will tell on this move.

We can probably sit here and argue our point to each all day and it isnt going to matter, but atleast we agree that this was a good move for the Hawks.

jjhsix
I agree, the only downside to Whitehurst versus Hass is that this year we may loose one or 2 more games but Hass would not get us to a Super Bowl this year.
I would be a more happy fan at 6-10 with Whitehurst than at 8-8 with Hass. Neither leads to the playoffs and Whitehurst playing the entire season shows us whether we need to draft a QB while giving us good players besides QB in this years draft.
What do you guys think we could get for hass, maybe a third rounder?

JJHSX great point about Hasselbeck. I think you're right about not starting him... We need to get any value for him that we can at this point, trade him away, move Teel to #2 and draft a 3rd stringer (any chance Tebow will be avail at 60?).

We could get a 2nd rounder for Hass. Heck, Holmgren would be kicking himself for going after Delhomme if Hass is available.

I say we flat out name Whitehurst the starter and either have Matt flat out beat him for the job, or trade Matt if he isn't that much better than Whitehurst.

I can't believe I just suggested that as Matt has been my favorite player since he came in. But we have to realise that Matt's time is drawing to a close, and while it would be perfect to see him retire as a Hawk, it may not work out that way.

I have no issue with Whitehurst the player his contract or the FO's choice to go for a QB in FA vs. draft. My biggest problem with this whole deal is the lack of business sense this new regime showed. As previously posted their negotiation was non-existent. They paid double the asking price and from what I read didn't even try to lower the price. In fact, Whitehurst wanted to go to Seattle so I would argue they should of had to pay less than the tender. Chargers were in a position to keep Whitehurst or get a little something for him. It wasn't up to them as to where Whitehurst was going. If Whitehurst lead the Hawks to the SB in a year or two I would still argue the FO got worked and overpayed (based on todays value)

It is early but this lack of finesse does not give me a warm fuzzy about their strategy going into the draft.

Also, we really don't need Hasselbeck around to "mentor" Whitehurst. Carroll has been doing this for QB's for 10 years... Sanchez, Leinart, Barkley etc and they are turning out just fine.

Coughawk
I understand your point, However, we are not Seahawk insiders we are Seahawk fans. We do not know what negotiations or lack of such took place. The article has one quote that says that the chargers liked what they were getting, and guess what, the hawks did to.
No one of us should be stating anything as fact, because we do not know what happened even by reading all the articles in the world about this trade, we will never know what exactly was said and discussed between our FO and the Chargers FO.

For those of you who insist that the Chargers got the best end of the trade, have you stopped to think that this may be a win-win? Stop with the pessimism. Would you have felt better if the front office had done nothing about the QB situation? Would you have felt any better if we had to use a 1st or 2nd round pick in the draft for a QB with even more questions and less NFL experience? In Whitehurst, I believe we are getting a potential franchise guy long term, and a quality back up short term. For those complaining that we gave up too much, you have to give up value to get value. Its called a trade-off. I was in favor of using a high pick on a QB this year because it is such an important position. This allows us to use that #6 pick on someone like Okung, Berry, or someone else who will hopefully become a core player on the team for many year, AND to get a QB with as much upside as the big name, big money QBs available in the draft.

The FO now has this season to kick the tires, see exactly what they have in Whitehurst, and either decide that he is indeed the future, or realize that he isn't, in which we can target QB in next year's draft. Plus, his 2-year deal will make it easy to let him walk after 2 seasons with no cap penalty. This is a win-win for both teams.

"In Sando's analysis of this very Don Banks article, he writes:

"Anyone purchasing, say, a vehicle knows better than to walk onto the lot and pay the listed price without at least trying to get a better deal."



Or you could change perspective on the analogy... Say you are buying a car, except the dealer you are at is instead Barrett Jackson and you have a chance to get that classic rare, high quality, almost show quality ready car. You have the money, only problem is, you aren't the only one bidding. You may have to pay more than reserve and whatever you hoped for, because it's a rare car and you have competition at the auction. Oh, and the seller? Well, he just smiles as the auctioneer keeps bumping.

this is something that we need to all realize while we discuss things like this trade.

"Chargers general manager A.J. Smith revealed that the gap in San Diego between the experienced Volek at No. 2 and Whitehurst at No. 3 wasn't as large as most assumed."

Smith said this after the trade was done. At this point he has no need to play up Whitehurst anymore. This is more important to me than the fact that at some point during the interview Smith laughed. Big deal if he wants to cry, laugh, smile, frown.

... you think Whitehurst is Barrett Jackson quality? I was thinking Honda preowned backlot.

We won't know who got the best end of this trade for quite a while. If Whitehurst becomes a pro bowler than we did. If he flounders than the Chargers did. The problem with the trade was mentioned a number of times... we gave up more than San Diego was originally asking (as TheRealist said). I understand sometimes you really want something... but there had to be some wiggle room... get a 4th rounder thrown in next year or something. That would at least get the value into this years 3rd round. We didn't negoiate well, or maybe at all, and that is the problem. I'm glad to have Whitehurst, I just don't like giving up that much more than the original asking price.

Kind of a funny snark, even though its classless.

Yes, I think a QB of his caliber in a thin FA market and draft year, makes him somewhat rare. Throw in, a competitor and you have an escalation of value.

Look at what the Bears gave for Cutler, and lets see what Charlie does in his first starting year. That will let you know if the escalation of value, ended up in a decent purchase from the auction.

abides. I bet he is better in a hot tub then Leinart.

I agree with those that say our negotiation skills are not very good. I think this was a great acquisition as far as team building....really brilliant. However, it is apparent that John Schneider has some lessons to learn as far as getting a little extra value. Even if we would have made next years pick conditional, or say grab a 5th rounder this year, it would have shown a counter offer.

F.O. Strength: Talent Evaluation
F.O. Weakness: Negotiations

Lets hope they do better!

In my humble opinion, its time for Hasselbeck to be traded

Then instead of nothing to lose by acquiring Whitehurst, the Seahawks will have everything to lose.

Keep them both I say. If Whitehurst doesn't pan out, there's another very good QB, who could stay good for two or three more years, easy. I'm with the FO. I prefer competition. May the best guy win. If the best guy get's hurt, the most important position on your team is still fine with the second guy.

It is not time to trade Hasselback. That's ridiculous. They now have 2 great options and maybe by year end, Teel will make it 3. You have to have that in the NFL. If they were making more money maybe you look to fix it but not at what they are making right now. The position is well covered, no reason to put all your eggs in one basket and trade away your best option at this point to win games next year.

I am hoping that some more of our FA players get picked up soon. We need at least one more person taken from our roster than we pick up in FA. right now we have signed 2 more than have been removed.
If we end up getting say 5 FAs and 6 are taken from us by the way compensatory picks work we would probably get a 4th round comp pick in next years draft because Burly signed 5 mill a year and will be a starter.
I know it is completely of topic but I would like to get a 4th rounder in next years draft than pick up all of the trash that nobody but us wants in FA right now.

As someone who negotiates for a living (lawyer), the idea of accepting the first offer thrown your way, unless you know it is an over-the-moon steal, is ludicrous. Giving up more than whitehurst's tender certainly does not qualify as one of those offers, obviously. The hawks rookie management, in my estimation, blew it when they decided their hearts were so set on whitehurst that they apparently couldn't even bluff that they were totally willing to walk away from the deal.

You might also come to the conclusion that Carroll & Co. knew that it was either WhiteHurst or be stuck with Anderson at that point since Kolb was way too expensive and there was lots of uncertaintly that they could get anyone out of the draft and there was no one left to pursue outside the draft of any value to the Hawks.

Walking away from the deal for even a second in a bluff could have easily resulted in the Cardinals making their deal and then we'd have been left with signing Anderson or no one. Sometimes the real risk you're taking in negotations like this is that you'll be the one left holding an empty bag which in this case could have set the Hawks back another year or stuck them with a known loser like Anderson which is also a set back.

How do you know that Pete Carroll didn't himself believe that this was an "over-the-moon steal" considering that we didn't have a third to sign Whitehurst with anyway? It's been established that with the next year pick being rated in value as a 4th round pick this year, the Seahawks gave up just about exactly what their very high 3rd round pick would have been worth this year. How did we overpay? We paid the going rate but had to do it in different currency since we didn't have the right denominations in the legal tender of the deal (2010 3rd round picks).

The Realist also pointed out in his comment that Sando said:

"Anyone purchasing, say, a vehicle knows better than to walk onto the lot and pay the listed price without at least trying to get a better deal."

That certainly holds true unless there's a guy standing at the edge of the lot with cash in hand ready to make a deal on the car you want if you don't make your deal there and then. As one who has negotatiated many used car and as well as music equipment deals over my lifetime, I can tell you that tactic only works reliably when you're the only valid potential buyer and can afford to let the deal simmer for a bit while you let the seller consider the alternative of not making a sale at all versus taking a lower offer. Any experienced seller will reject out of hand a lower offer for his goods when there are poeple lined up ready to pay what he's asking. It would be stupid not to.

We paid more for Hasselbeck because Holmgren knew something of his value but I'm betting that somewhere in our organization there's someone who knows some inside information on Whitehurst. Other teams knew that he was being kept off the field because of the circumstances of playing behind two very good QB's who didn't get hurt to allow him to rise to the starting position from the 3rd QB slot and that he was considered a good talent.

The only thing lacking in Matt's game is his ability to throw downfield with accuracy to make big plays. Whitehurst has the look of Matt Hasselbeck of nine years ago but with a better arm. If he can grow into the position like Matt did, we have done exactly what most have been clamoring for which was to find a QB without spending a very high draft pick on an unknown QB. It seems to have upset some fans that it wasn't someone they knew well or had considered. Pete pulled one out of the woodwork and that seems to annoy some people even after finding out that other teams around the league also knew that Whitehurst was a good prospect and that San Diego valued him highly too. Some people even complain when they get exactly what they asked for.

Evoxx - Perhaps trading Hasselbeck is not necessary but I can't think of any reason that Whitehurst should not start this season? What's to gain by starting Hasselbeck - a couple more wins (maybe)? I think the gain from starting Whitehurst significantly outweigh the benefits of starting Matt.

Well said BillT,
But it is not going to make anyone change there mind so the can be upset all they want. And Ill be excited to see what happens with what we have done.

to all of the R. Sims trade talk? I thought they told him to stay away from workouts because a trade was coming. Anybody with an update?

Rob Sims just said that he is on vacation right now. I doubt anything will be done until mid or end of next week, if anything at all. My personal belief is that Holmgren wants him but is low balling the Hawks. Negotiations are on... There was also an article, I can't find it anywhere now, stating that Sims was asked to not participate because he is not signing his RFA tender... As soon as anyone from SA finds out, we will let you know.

Love what you said man! I miss your articles... Please write some more!

We now have 3 good QB's and can draft better now.
Quit yer bitchin and start rejoicing!

I did not like this trade at first but the more I have thought about the, I am actually excited about it and think this was a wise move and hopefully time will show that!

I think we should start Matt and have Whitehurst in relief, and by seasons end he'll get significant playing time and then we start seeing what we have in Teel. Only then will we know where we are at qb.

Who cares "who won" the trade??? Chargers got what they wanted, some value for a guy they just arent in a position to use, and we got what, after all is said and done, what we needed. I think this trade WILL be Hass 2.0. Im excited as hell. This is coming from a HUGE Hass fan btw....if Hass goes to a new team, they will become my 2nd favorite team, period. I smell B Marshall, they will want to compliment this move with the guy to make Whitehurst look even that much better imo. GO HAWKS

There's no comparing Whitehurst to Cutler. Cutler was a proven starter with a canon when Chicago went after him (first round pick as well, best of the class if you ask me). Whitehurst was third round and hasn't tossed the rock, in game, once. Actually, I think Cutler and Rodgers are the best QB's out there right now.

Whitehurst? He's a backlot Honda. I say Honda because they're middle of the road and have the potential to go a long way. I say backlot because no one has seen him yet.

Barret Jackson? We're talking classic talent... Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees... even more so Brett Favre.

Whitehurst to Cutler, only the seasons they have w/ the new teams once both start. Cutler had a terrible year and unless he sees a 180, that trade could potentially turn into a huge laugh. Just the opposite situation on whitehurst, we aren't breaking the bank, even though his price was escalated.

Re, his future, only time will tell.

Auctions cars under 50k. Even under 20k. Point was to flip the sale analogy of a car lot around to an auction, with bidders and value.

Muscle cars under 40k, sell often. It as my bone to throw to Charlie, who likes muscle cars. Maybe I'll meet him somday and offer a ride in my 64 GTO 389 tri power.

I agree with you about Cutler having a bad year last year... I think you're about to see his best year yet, however. However, that's all speculation.

That car argument was pretty funny

I like Whitehurst's potential, I like his size - there isn't much to go on as youtube only has a crappy old clemson game. I don't like that he is turning 28 and I don't like that next year he will be 29 - without possibly starting one game. I think that if he's gonna be the 'Hawks new starter, we got to get him some playing time this year.

Agree 100%

I understand many of the arguments in favor of this deal, but the one that really proves elusive in terms of my comprehension is the idea that we did not overpay compared to what the tender was.

It is convenient to dismiss losing next year's third round pick as some throwaway bonus because it wont matter for a while, and that it is a 4th round pick now. But when you really think about it, that is not the case. Who would like it if the Hawks had a third round pick this year? I would. I know we traded it to get Unger who is good, but the reality is that a third round pick is valuable, and it would be great to have one this year, and next year, we will wish we had one as well.

And BillT, you cannot suggest we got a steal when we paid more than the original tender. That is impossible. If we had traded next year's third only I think that would be fair. A third round pick for a third round tender. Throw in a 7th this year if you want. Anyways, clearly I have a Field Gullian point of view.

, you cannot suggest we got a steal when we paid more than the original tender.

So far no has said it's a steal. So far the only talk along those lines is if he turns out to be a good starting QB. What people are saying is that if you crunch the numbers, if you look at the trade with the trade value numbers used by the entire NFL, the Seahawks got a third round pick and gave up a third round pick in value. This is extremely simple, so I know you understand it. If you don't believe it, get a trade chart and add it up yourself.

Now if you want to make it a bad trade then make up numbers of your own, like giving next year's third more value than the NFL does, you can make the trade into anything you want. But don't pretend you don't understand what's going on.

I don't care which of the two (Hasselbeck or Whitehurst) start, as long as it's the that gives the team the best chance at winning.
Since I don't coach the team, and I won't have the data to make that decision. I'll leave it to PC at his staff.
I'm glad they have choices.

Hello fellow Hawk fans. I was really down about this trade at the beginning. Not so much that we picked up Charlie Whitehurst, but that we gave up so much. After some thought, I think I've come to terms with the deal. If we'd had a 3rd round selection, we probably only give that up. But because we did not have a 3rd round, we were at the mercy of Smith and the Chargers. They had to agree to a proposal of compensation. Of course, their asking price would be high and even higher depending on the size of the offer sheet that we provided Whitehurst. The Chargers applied a 3rd round tender for about 1.5 million. The Seahawks up'd it to $4 million per year with additional incentives. Knowing that the Hawks valued him that much, the Chargers had to play hardball and demand much more for him. If we really wanted him, we would have to give in. My guess is, the Chargers probably asked for much more than what we actually ended up giving them. All in all, I am ok with us paying what we did. I am higher on this kid than I was on Claussen or Bradford, so lets move on with our potential future QB. Lets accept that PC and John Schneider know something about this guy - similar to how Holmgren knew something about Hass a few years back.

Go Hawks and make the best use of whatever picks we will end up with come draft day.

If, in the event of a lockout, what happens to draft picks owed to other teams? An easy example of this is Seattle owing San Diego our third round pick for the 2011 draft. I assume it wouldn't be a lost cause and that compensation would be provided in due course. Would our debt then move forward to the next draft?

You can "crunch the numbers" until pigs fly, but a third round pick is still a third round pick. After this year, the numbers will magically shoot right back up. This is what you might call a "big picture" kind of view. Another big picture hope would be that whitehurst turns out to be good and everyone is happy. Lets hope. Also, BillT did suggest that Carrol may think the deal was a steal, which I disagree with.

Anyways, enough, at this point all fans like me can do it hope and hope that charlie turns out good

i fail to see the science in the trade value chart

It puts a numerical value to how NFL teams actually value draft position, including how they actually value picks in upcoming years.

Now, if you disagree with the chart, that's fine, but then you're not just disagreeing with the recent Whitehurst trade, you're disagreeing with every draft trade ever made based upon the chart.

you haters still playin checkers

wow so dissapointed our new front office couldnt get a little more creative and move up 6 spots for a third and just go ahead and hold on to the 40th pick ,we could of got a pro bowler with that 40 pick

The chart gives teams a way of trying to put equal value together in trade situations. Otherwise, teams would get screwed and did before they started using the chart hence it's inception and wide use by all teams today. How else would you figure out how to even up a trade between two teams?

No matter what anyone thinks of this trade, it allows the Seahawks to get a QB who has been in the league for a little while rather than take a flyer on a completely unproven QB. We don't have to worry about Bradford's injury concerns. Whitehurst has been through 4 training camps and played a little bit as well as played in 4 preseasons and doesn't seem to be injury prone. You don't have to worry about Clausen's personality or whether he can play at the NFL level at all. Whitehurst can play at the NFL level we just don't know how good he'll get yet and he's got a great work ethic and personality which has already been proven at SD. Best of all, we still have our first two picks intact in which to claim a couple of elite impact players out of this draft to build the team around. If that's not a great job of setting the team up for success so far knowing how much we needed a valid option at QB besides Hass, tell me what is.

I want one of you guys who think this wasn't a good trade or that we gave up too much to please tell me how you would have secured Seattle's potential QB of the future and who it would have been. You guys criticize, criticize, criticize but offer no viable alternate solution.

I've always lived by the rule that if you're going to offer criticism about how someone handled a situation, you should always pair that with an alternate solution to the problem at hand that could have been done. Maybe your crtiicism will be viewed as right on considering your solution but if you don't have any solution to offer, how do you justify attacking the guy who had to make the decision and saying that he didn't do a good job? Unpalitable as his solution might be to you, if you can't come up with any (viable) alternate one, maybe it's because there wasn't any other solution to be had other than to just let the thing go to hell in a handbasket (no experienced QB after Hass gets hurt in this case).

For those of you who think we already have a QB good for 3 or 4 more years, you're living in an illusion of your own making. Hass will be done this year or sooner if he gets injured again. He's shown himself to not be a very consistently effective QB for a couple of years now anyway. Face it, age and serious injury has caught up with him. Not all QB's can play until they're 40. Actually, only a very small percentage of them do it but after one does, eveyone wants to apply that possibility to their QB. Has has taken too many big shots and has screwed up his back and frame. He's not going to make it much past this year and even if he does, it's highly unlikely that it'll be here in Seattle if he does. Carroll wants a younger QB who can grow with the team and for good reason. Get used to that notion.

I'm going to point out again that when Ruskell was run out of town, many of you guys said that he played it too safe and acquired players who were unlikely to fail rather than trying to find players who would play better than expected even if the risk was greater. I heard over and over that you hated Ruskell's playing it safe and that's why the team was soft. Some of you also seriously advocated that they gut the team and start over after TR and Mora left. Now enter Pete Carroll and he's doing some of both of those options. Still there was lot's of anguish when he got rid of Tapp. Talk of trading Sims has drawn some fan's ire. Now he takes a chance on having lightning strike twice and goes for the "Hasselbeck II" trade which may very well work out as "Hass II" and we have to dance around the NFL rules a bit and use the trade chart to get the deal done and even though we may have scored our QB of the future for a mere third rounder and taking a bit of a lessor player in the second round this season, I hear guys saying that this will be a bad trade (at the time) even if Charlie works out. Was that because you didn't know enough to value Whitehurst properly and you're pissed that Carroll did. WOW!

Some of you need to calm down and hold back your criticism until there's really something to bitch about. Right now everything's lip service.

Like I said, We've assembled some of the best minds in football....They know what they're doing. Whitehurst was being sought after by many teams and we beat them out.... He's going to be lighting a fire under hasslebeck, and will take over eventually or be traded for picks. This is a good thing people.

It's not huge news, but the cardinals also lost WR Jerheme Urban. I know he wasn't the greatest wide receiver, but it always seemed like he made big catches, when the game was on the line.

Like I've said before I have no real beef with this trade. Personally, I would have preferred they attempt to trade for Jason Campbell (but that's an argument for another day).

However, I will have a real problem if Hasselbeck is the starting QB in September. Seattle is not winning the Super Bowl this season - can anyone seriously disagree with that? If Hasselbeck leads this team to the playoffs (possible) and they achieve anything less than a Super Bowl then we achieve very little and enter 2011 with a 29-year old who we know nothing (or very little about) and the same question - do we need to draft a QB? Some will argue that he will play late in the season - this assumes that Seattle is out of it, Hasselbeck is injured or plays poorly. Why not start Whitehurst from day 1? I think if he isn't starting week 1 then Carroll is simply afraid to risk exposing a flawed QB assessment he made. I agree with an earlier comment that I would prefer a 6-10 season with Whitehurst over an 8-8 season with Hasselbeck.

Depressed hawk fan, excellent post and points. I believe the signing of Whitehurst signal PC lack of faith in the present QB draft class. I don't see a QB taken by the hawks until maybe the 4th rd. I think you will see many of the veteran player stepping up their games this year because it is obvious that PC is not going to tolernate poor performance. Branch, Kerney, Sims, Lockler, etc. beware you can be replaced. In the back of my mind I'd love to see PC make a playoff team out of player thought to be no worth it or not big named.

Realist, A third round pick in next year's Draft is not valued as a 3rd round pick but a 4th. Considering this year's Draft is considered the Strongest draft in the last 10 yrs. other than QB it was an equitable trade. Of course, any draft pick can be a star or a bust. I know John Schneider a little bit and one thing he's not is unprepared or likely to make uninformed decisions. Scouts get One Pro Day to see Bradford since his injury. They have a heck of a lot more intel on Whitehurst you can count on that. Lets not forget we probably wouldn't have a shot at the two top QBs anyway and might trade back and pickup additional choices in this rich Draft so a 3rd is not a 3rd IMHO

We all just have to take a wait and see approach because it obviously is confusing the masses. I think it was smart not to draft a QB this year anyway, with all the questions surrounding Tebows new mechanics, Bradfords shoulder and lack of workout time, McCoys injury and some pretty bad combine workouts, from what I watched, from a majority of the class. I liked Pike but he needs to bulk up and speed up his delivery but other than that nobody really impressed me this year. so Whitehurst is a good trad, If Hass leaves next year, gets hurt, or gets traded, then we Draft Locker next year.

http://profootballtalk.nbcspor...liners-51/

DE Vonnie Holliday and WR Sean Morey are coming for a visit this week.

WR Sean Morey made the 2009 Pro Bowl team for his special teams work with the Arizona Cardinals. He was apart of the 05 super bowl champions steelers.

DE Vonnie Holliday played with the Denver Broncos this year, had limited minutes, he was the 19th overall pick in the draft.

They are both ageing, both of them are 34 years old. Im guessing if they sign they will be apart of the special teams.

Interesting article

http://sea.scout.com/2/955752.html

..it's highly unlikely that it'll be here in Seattle if he does. Carroll wants a younger QB who can grow with the team and for good reason. Get used to that notion.

Sure he wants a younger QB, or two, but if you look at a common model, NFL teams get the younger QBs while they are assembling a team, then when all the pieces are in place they acquire a once-great, inexpensive, aging veteran QB who sometimes outplays the young guys, gets the job, and leads them to the Super Bowl. I'll never forget Jim Plunkett doing exactly that, and of course we've all seen Kurt Warner do it.

So I think it would be a mistake to get rid of Hasselbeck, unless he won't re-sign for a reasonable amount. He has shown no sign of decline that can't be attributed to the rest of the offense collapsing around him. He has proven his back has healed, as it held up strong despite the severest of poundings last season. He's the ultimate insurance policy. There's no reason to get rid of him.

Hawkboy 15 thanks for the link I find that very interesting.This is going to be a way different team next year.

Underrated is probably the last word that applies. The fact that he has never cracked third string in the NFL yet still commanded a somewhat hefty price indicates he is well-regarded, at least by some.

It's real simple, yes we traded for a 3rd string QB. One that both the Hawks and Cards were interested in, we swaped 2nd round picks for him. I would rather do this than pay for a rookie QB with no experience with way more $$$ going his way. At least he has NFL experience even as a backup.now we get a actual #2 with potential as possible starter if not this year than next. I think Hass will start but next year is up in the air. Teel is nothing more than a 3rd string. Better to have someone like Whitehurst who has something to prove and push Hass for the starting job. I like this deal and welcome Whitehurst with open arms and a open mind.

Hey I am pleased that we have a new man behind Matt. Wallace was not coming in when Matt was hurt and making it tough on the coaches as who should stay in. Matt once said that in Green Bay he was always ready to go in when needed. I don't think you can say that about Wallace, he didn't impress or take advantage of his oportunities. I do not understand the people that liked him as a quarterback, including Holmy. Matt is a stud an will beat out Whithurst for a year or two, but if Matt gets hurt again, Whithurst gets a chance to impress and better be ready to play like a stud, not a dud. When was the last time we had a pleasant surprise when Matt got hurt? Never with Wallace! Last time was with Dilfer. So its a positive move to make the team better, and if Whithurst can really play we win big.

BillT,

I disagree with almost everything you've posted here. The Hawks accepted the sticker price and over-paid in this trade as the Chargers would have done the deal for less. It's not a criticism, it's the truth. An alternative? They had a million alternatives they could have suggested including later picks from this year or next years draft as well as players. For all we know a third and a seventh would have gotten it done but we'll never know.

That being said, I don't disagree with acquiring Whitehurst. He's a good asset that hopefully will earn a starting spot or push Matt to have a great year this year. And if Matt wins the starting spot this year and doesn't have any major injuries, bring him back. There is no reason to pull a Green Bay and chase him out until he's beaten out on the field.

Ruskell was not run out of town. He walked out on the team when they refused to extend him on his schedule.

It wasn't a bad loss because Ruskell lacked the ability to consistently find fiery competitors on the field. His methodology of grading players clearly had holes. I didn't think Ruskell was that bad his first few years but looking back at this body of work, he was not good at the most important part of the job. Here's hoping Schneider will run circles around him in this regard.

Maybe Schneider will start stockpiling 3-4 round picks and the overpay will be a small blip on the rear view but as of now, it has me questioning his creativity and negotiating skills. I don't expect him to ripoff other teams, but I'd like him to get win-win deals and not get stuck overpaying in the future. He needs to spend more time with Zduriencik.

Word! I wholly agree with you on the low bar Matt has created and the average fan's acceptance of it.

I'm not saying thisd was good or bad trade. That will be determined ocne Whitehurst gets on the field. However, for you to definitively state that the Chargers would have done a Whitehurts deal for less is foolish. You have no idea what AJ Smith would have or would not have taken. Therefore, save your biased opinion.

the Chargers would have done the deal for less.

Not sure why anyone keeps saying this when it is so obviously false. Are you forgetting the Cardinals wanted him, were willing to give up this years third round pick (worth 240), offered him a contract, and Whitehurst chose between the two?

How in the hell could they have gotten him for less when the Cardinals offer was about the same as the Seahawks??

The Brandon Marshall rumors are starting to heat up again. I've found four different articles talking about a possible trade to Seattle.

Possible trade ammo include:

Pick 14 (PLease NO!)
Pick 60 with a fourth rounder and a lineman
4th rounder
Chris Spencer
Rob Sims

Word! I wholly agree with you on the low bar Matt has created and the average fan's acceptance of it.

Hate to break it to you, but those "average fan's" who think Hasselbeck is still good? Those are actually the sophisticated football fans who don't make the newbie blunder of not understanding quarterback play in football. Newbs and casual fans (and fans who just plain can't learn) watch football and blame the QB for all the passing game failures, because that's what it looks like superficially.

Wiser fans understand the complexities of quarterback play and how quarterbacks deserve much less credit and blame than it looks. Wiser fans just shake their heads when the newbs yell at the QB during games. Wiser fans understand why three completely different coaching staffs have named Hasselbeck the Seahawks starter.

Recordblender,
Would be helpful if you could point us to the articles you discovered on Marshall trade rumors.
Thanks in advance.

I don't really care for the universal disagreement you posted after me. I disagree with you a lot too buddy. Like your misguided love still showing for Ruskell. Dude, he was going out the door. He left early because he knew he was going down! GET OVER THE LOSER. Also I'll argrue my point about Wallace anytime. He was not a gamer and a winer. He did not come in and make us not care when Matt came back. That is what you need in all your backups and if you dont have that you have the wrong personal. If a starter goes down you want someone steping up to fill the hole not what has been happening on the team. Listening to Pete, thats the way he feels which I love. The price we paid is what it took to get it done, you were not in the loop to know what it took to get it done! You are on the sideline yelling at the quarterback. Please Bill stop trying to tell us Ruskel was not going to get fired, you have said it plenty, I an many others don't agree and think your dead wrong and now that the points are made lets put it in the past. I wish we didn't have to pay as much, but that was the price, I like the gamble on his upside.

JohnnyB

It's not necessarily a problem that the Seahawks overpaid. Tatupu and Carlson were both fine players to acquire by overpaying and perhaps Whitehurst will prove to be just as valuable. The Seahawks may be a stronger organization because of those three but it does not mean that Ruskell and Schneider should not be held accountable for paying too much. Great organizations find these kinds of players without overpaying. Over the long haul, when you add up the overage paid in those deals, it could have meant a very solid starter or two. In a competitive league that can mean the difference between good and great.

I think you got Billt and evoxx mixed up. The message posted after your 'Wallace' post was written by evoxx and addressed to Billt.

Or maybe I got it wrong and you are referring to something else.

Here's the link that hawkboy posted about the Sims/Spencer trade for Marshall:

http://sea.scout.com/2/955752.html

There are many 'wise' fans who believe Hasselbeck can no longer play at a high level within the league. He is slower, has lost significant arm strength, and has become a less-than-average player on the field.

That's not just my opinion, because the last thing I would do is hold myself above anybody in their judgment of something like football.

To annoint yourself as the 'wise' fan given your assessment of Hasselbeck is actually kind of funny.

And as far as three coaching staffs selecting him as the starter, I count two, and one of them was an idiot and no longer with the team. We'll see who starts at the QB postion this coming fall, and there is a damn good chance it won't be Hasselbeck.

...continued to play J Jones with a sub-4 yard per carry average when Forsett was averaging over 5.

Now in Mora's defense, he only had Wallace and Teel, and the fact is, Hasselbeck was the better option - ion 2009.

I seriously doubt he will be in 2010.

the government could be controlling your Healthcare and Higher Education........Oh wait.

This whole competition thing is good for the team.I think there is little doubt Hasselbeck wipes up the field with Whitehurst.He is a better #2 then Wallace and the team future maybe?Hasselbeck is still the right now guy.Whitehurste will have to learn the west coast offense.I think Matt is going to Rock and Roll.

Johny B average fans know a limp noodle when they see one. Matt has nothing on his throws over 10 yards, if that doesnt change he's done here.

I like the Whitehurst trade, but I really wish we would have waited until after the draft. That way we could take Clausen if he was still there at 6.

I predict Matt will be the day 1 starter, but Pete won't hesitate to bench him if the team continues to struggle.

get on a different board Coughawk

Agree.
Get on a different board Coughawk. Not appropriate for a Seattle football forum.
There are places for it, just not here.

Clausen at 6 would have (assuming it still won't, which is anybody's guess) required a Sanchez-type 6 yr 50million (28million guaranteed) deal. It would have created a quarterback controversy because you can't pay that much to a backup and it would have meant that one of the better OTs that could have been drafted at 6 didn't happen and the O-line may be as bad as last year.

6 needs to go to Okung. If he is gone, try to move back a few spots and take one of the other OTs while picking up a pick and lowering the salary required to sign him. For the ZBS, whomever Gibbs likes the best should be fine, maybe one or both of the faster guys like T. Williams and B. Campbell.

DustyBob,

Dude, I don't lknow where your animosity comes from concerning me but I didn't write anything like you attributed to me so maybe you should carefully check your facts before firing both barrels next time. I am totally aboard with Pete Carroll and Co. and left the Ruskell situation alone a long time ago. Apparently, you haven't been keeping up with current events and what I've been saying lately.

For this time, I have to believe that you are quite misguided my young Padawan so I forgive you just this once but don't let it fester happen again.

well i hate to sound like this,but matt hasslebeck no tom brady he not a savior for any franchise and if you are hopeing that whitehurst is going to be like him we are in for alot more losing seasons than winning ones.Lets face it we need a mobile qb and if thats whitehurst GLORY BE TO GOD!!!Its time for some consistency at qb, someone who dont sack themselves(you watch the film)hassleback and down is what we call him on the east coast,he can lose a game in a blink of an eye .He never run the ball in critical situations ,he rather throw interceptions Cmon man you watch the games as well as i.....Cmon man

1 question. If he is the future, why just a 2 year contract? If he takes over for Hass after next year that will only give him 1 more year under contract.

magarren,

I think you have to look at this situation for just what it is. There aren't many viable options for the Seahawks right now to get a QB to groom to take Hass's place. You've got the two so called "franchise" QB's coming out this year who are most likely to be gone when Seattle drafts and you've got Kolb who would be as expensive or more so than the two aforementioned rookies and then you've got Charlie Whitehurst. Whitehurst has shown enough and has enough upside for Carroll to have taken a flyer on him to see if he could work out.

y take on it is that Carroll and Schneider don't want to be stupid about it and just annoint Charlie as the second coming of Matt Hasselbeck and therefore have given him a two year deal in which to prove himself. That's a deal that could be done with if Charlie doesn't work out without hurting the club too much and if he does impress, could be extended into a bona fied starting QB's contract. I agree that the two year deal shows that Carroll and Co. aren't convinced yet that Whitehurst's the guy but they've played it about as well as anyone could to have a good shot at finding out without hamstringing the club if he doesn't work out.

We can always franchise him if he turns out to be that good.

Okay, I admit it. We should have drafted Sanchez. I'd give up Curry for Sanchez right now in a heartbeat... so would Carroll.

Drafting a QB at 6 will not create a QB controversy. Everyone would know that Clausen would be the eventual starter, especially since Matt only has 1 more year on his contract.

Just because you draft a QB in the first does not mean you have to start him. In fact until recently (Ryan, Flacco, Stafford and Sanchez) most QBs sat at least half a season before starting. Thats how it worked with other first round guys like Rivers, Rodgers, Palmer, QB Sexual Assulter, and Eli Manning and they have all turned out alright.

Why a 2 year contract? Because they can. Whitehurst knows that if he could beat out Matt and have a pro bowl year on either or both of those years, his market goes up. If the Seahawks could, they'd sign all players year by year or 2 year deals. They'd have saved a lot on Kerney if it had only been a 2 year deal. More often than not, long term deals don't work out well for the team, especially on high end draft choices.

I have a feeling that Curry will have a break out year with good coaching and motivating.
It's hard to motivate your players after you've just thrown them under the bus.

I agree MontanaMike. I believe that Curry did not get the coaching he needed last year. Rookies often need a year to mentally digest the pro game.
Plus, I suspect that Carroll will design strategies to players' strengths rather than whatever was happening last year.

If we play our cards right we can take back the west rather quickly. I view the 49er's running backs as much better but they sorely lack depth at qb.

Taking away the 49er's passing game allows us to focus on stopping their rush. This is possible, since most teams other than Seattle were able to do it.
A weak NFC West gives us a chance. And I'm not so sure the Cardinals are that relevant anymore.

Okay, I admit it. We should have drafted Sanchez

That 67 quarterback rating really impressed you, eh?

Johny B average fans know a limp noodle when they see one. Matt has nothing on his throws over 10 yards,

So you quit watching the games after the game Hasselbeck came back from his shoulder injury and you missed him throwing strong again at the end of the season. "If I don't see it, it doesn't exist!"

I like the Whitehurst trade, but I really wish we would have waited until after the draft. That way we could take Clausen if he was still there at 6.

If we would have waited until after the draft, Whitehurst would be an Arizona Cardinal right now.

To annoint yourself as the 'wise' fan given your assessment of Hasselbeck is actually kind of funny.

My assessment of Hasselbeck is that I can't properly assess him without overhead game tape like the coaches have. Any good coach or scout will tell you that. That makes me wise and people who pronounce him done as unwise.

So unlike you I'm reserving judgement on him but leaning toward thinking he's got a lot left becasue if Hasselbeck had really shown what you think he's shown, he would already have been cut or traded by Carroll/Schneider. They would not study all the film and then call themselves lucky for having him, and proclaim him the starter.

That 67 quarterback rating really impressed you, eh?

A 22/23 year old kid that sat in the pocket, took big hits, got back up and won two playoff games, his first year in the NFL, impressed me. His accuracy and rating will only get better...

Blah you have a good point about Sanchez having huge upside and as a franchise qb. Still, i'm not in the least bit sorry we got Curry, he needs time and coaching and he will shine.

Sanchez played worse than Rick Mirer his rookie year. Mirer looked really good for a couple years too. We all thought he would "only get better". And Mirer wasnt playing on a team that offered the number 1 rushing attack and defense in the NFL to back him up either.

Sanchez is still a question mark. Curry will be fine. And perhaps Whitehurst will be a good qb for us. I still think its obvious Seattle could have gotten him cheaper. They panicked and folded, holding decent cards.

Whitehurst looks a lot like Catholic Jesus too. Just sayin...

I hope Hass has a great year, and we sign him to another couple years. And Im rooting for WHitehurst too. It would be nice to have a qb who can throw 35 yards...

Dude, That was a total gash on my part, Thought I read remarks by you and as Hawksince77 pointed out I was reading comment by evoxx. My apolgy's.

Dustybob,

I realize that. That's why I put the smily face on it. I've done that one before myself (went off on someone not resposible for my angst).

Water under the bridge. Boogie on Seahawks!

BillT and JohnnyB

Both of you said that the Seahawks had to accept the Chargers first offer of run the risk of the Arizona Cardinals stepping in to sign him at the cost of just a 3rd round pick. Unless you two know something that the rest of us don't, that is not really the case.

For one thing, Derek Anderson signed a contract with the Cardinals on Wed March 17, while reports that the Seahawks had traded for Whitehurst did not surface until the afternoon of Thurs March 18. That doesn't mean that they weren't related, but it does make it seem like the Seahawks were really the only remaining team with interest in Whitehurst at the time of the trade.

Secondly, I believe there were reports out before March 17 to the effect that Seattle was willing to offer Whitehurst more money that Arizona and/or Whitehurst had made it known he would prefer to play for the Seahawks. This again suggests that any competition between the Cardinals and Seahawks to woo him was over and done with well before the Seahawks accepted the Chargers trade offer.

Just the fact that Whitehurst wouldn't sign a contract offer from the Cardinals pretty much proves that Seattle was in control of the situation and could offer the Chargers whatever they felt was the least compensation they would accept, without any significant risk that another team would grab him.

Hello! Anybody out there?

Oh well, I guess this thread is dead. I was hoping to get some answers.

For one thing, Derek Anderson signed a contract with the Cardinals on Wed March 17, while reports that the Seahawks had traded for Whitehurst did not surface until the afternoon of Thurs March 18.

It's not completely clear how it all went down. I'm checking with my source. What we do know is that the Seahawks and Cardinals both had offers in to the Chargers, Whitehurst chose the Seahawks, then the Cardinals signed Anderson, then the Whitehurst trade was announce.

I believe, according to NFL rules, the Chargers would have had to sign Whitehurst before they could commence with any trade talks with another team.

I've never heard of any NFL team ever get in trouble for any talks of any kind with another team. They get in trouble talking to individuals who are under contract.

Anybody know How much of Whitehursts contract is Guaranteed?

Whitehurst was a restricted free agent. This means the Chargers had the right to match any offers he was free to sign with other clubs. However, Seattle could not sign him because they did not have their own 3rd rounder which is what he was tendered at. This did not prevent Seattle from coming to terms with him prior to negotiating with the Chargers.

After Whitehurst came to terms with Seattle and informed Arizona of his decision, the Cardinals signed Anderson. This was because Arizona knew Seattle would be able to complete the trade with the Chargers.

This did not mean Seattle had to accept the Chargers first offer. They could have held out for days or weeks if necessary putting their potential deal at risk but at that point the Cardinals were out of the picture.

Older blog posts on a San Diego site from before any of the news that Seattle and Arizona was interested, said that the Chargers would be thrilled not to match any offer because they would net a 3rd rounder out of it. I believe their GM's remarks since the trade prove this to be correct. They were thrilled to have exceeded expectations.

This is why Seattle overpaid, it has nothing to do with the trade value chart versus the Cardinals.

Thank you, evoxx. That's the way I understood it too. The local media should be probing for some kind of explanation from Schneider as to why they excepted what was clearly a lopsided offer when they were the only team that apparently was willing to throw big bucks at Whitehurst. Basically the swapping of 2nd round picks with possibly a low round pick thrown in by Seattle should have been enough. That 3rd round pick next year could easily end up being a 70 or better overall pick.

They were thrilled to have exceeded expectations.

If the Seahawks finish the season smack in the middle of the league, what they gave up will be worth the very last pick in the 2nd round. Big thrill to get one pick better than the third round.

No, what they were really thrilled about was just being able to get some decent value for a player who they likely will not use next season and who would then be a UFA and they would get nothing for.

Haahaha, go ahead and believe that. I'm sure at this time next year when people are talking about how much we could use the high 3rd round pick to fill one of the many "holes" on the team, and how little Charlie Whitehurst contributed to the team in 2010, you won't have much to say about it.

Believe what? I'm not believing anything. The facts are that the trade value of what we gave up was worth exactly the last pick in round two. The facts are that any team who has a player they probably won't use and who will become a UFA in one season would be thrilled get the draft value they used to get him.

And it would be silly to judge Whitehurst based just upon what he contributes in 2010.

Jack Merridew wrote: "The local media should be probing for some kind of explanation from Schneider as to why they excepted what was clearly a lopsided offer when they were the only team that apparently was willing to throw big bucks at Whitehurst."

I have thought about this and I'm not sure they would ever be completely candid. My first theory is that they were afraid of someone catching wind of their interest and jumping into the fray, maybe Holmgren or Shanahan. A second theory is based on what I've heard from John Clayton, that they felt that the talent dropoff rate in the draft and among remaining free agents and players available in trade was so bad that they did not want to get stuck looking for the next best alternative. A third and theory is that their blueprint for building the team for the future started with addressing the quarterback position and there are so many other problems they wanted to mark that one off the list and move on. I know Schneider is no rookie at this so my best guess is that all of those factors came into play with making them willing to overpay. As far as amount over-paid its not that bad, I just fear if they do it over and over, we'll be in a situation similar to Ruskell where he went quality over quantity, giving up picks to move up and then not netting enough Pro Bowlers overall for his body of work and leaving the Seahawks far short of greatness.

I'm hoping this situation turns out to be like the kicker that past few years. By having the highly touted replacement sitting on the bench, Mare has been near perfect. I don't think Hasselback is done and it would be nice to see him have a career year, even if they don't sign him to another contract.

Believe what? I'm not believing anything. The facts are that the trade value of what we gave up was worth exactly the last pick in round two. The facts are that any team who has a player they probably won't use and who will become a UFA in one season would be thrilled get the draft value they used to get him.

We don't know exactly what the value in terms of draft points that the Seahawks gave up is worth yet. That 1) they will finish in the middle of the pack next season, 2) next year's 3rd round pick is worth one round less than this year's, and 3) San Diego's FO would be thrilled just to get back something equivalent to what Whitehurst cost them (17th pick in 3rd round of 2006 draft), are all beliefs (I believe).

My own beliefs are as follows:
1) The Seahawks will be one of the 5 worst teams in the league next year
2) a 2011 draft pick is not worth much (if any) less than a 2010 one at the same spot
3) San Diego's FO may have been satisfied to receive a mid 3rd round pick for Whitehurst, but they were thrilled to get what I believe is equivalent to a mid 2nd round draft pick (evident in the GM's comments afterward about having his first offer accepted by the Seahawks).

Of course, even if you do downgrade next year's 3rd rounder, it still means the Seahawks gave up the equivalent of a late 2nd round draft pick, which is clearly worth more than the 81st overall pick that was used to draft Whitehurst in the first place. And given that the Chargers' had no reason to expect anything better than what they tendered him at...

n i like this web

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.