Everyone agrees that top pick salaries are out of whack, and owning a top pick in the draft is more a hindrance than help. Case in point, if Detroit had offered Denver the #1 pick for Cutler, Denver would have said “no thanks”.  At least McShay and Bayless agree on that point, which doesn't make it fact, but certainly it would be understandable.  Bottom line is, nobody wants the huge salary that comes with that pick. 

Which of these two scenarios do you think would be best for Seattle?

1.  Keep #4 pick and pay Crabtree, Sanchez, Curry, Monroe, Stafford or Smith $10-12MM/yr over 6-7 years (2008 #4 Darren McFadden $60MM over 6 years)
2.  Trade the #4 pick for a bargain price, say for the Redskins #13 and 5th rounder this year plus 3rd round pick next year. The skins only have 4 picks this year, 1st, 3rd, 5th and 6th, so they really can’t afford to give up much this year. Based on the trade value chart this sucks for Seattle. However, real world, it would allow us to sign Moreno, Wells, Jenkins, Oher or Cushing for about $3MM/yr for 5 years (2008 #13 Jonathan Stewart $14MM over 5 years), AND get a 5th that can be used to trade up in the 3rd or 4th for players we are targeting AND bank an extra 3rd round pick next year when we’ll be more in the zone for a QB.

I’d do option 2 all day long. Trade Value Chart be damned.  What do you think?