Seahawks Face the Bad Part of a Good Problem (Part 3: Trading Talent for Talent)
by John Morgan on Sep 4, 2009 4:09 PM PDT
76 comments
The final method for dealing with Seattle's 10 roster-worthy defensive linemen is to trade one. I won't go roster nutter and start conjuring elaborate trade scenarios, but I will analyze who they might trade, their likely value on the open market, what position Seattle might target in return and if Seattle could "win" any likely trade scenario.
Before we get any further, let us remove one name from the pool: Nick Reed. This is an obvious exclusion if you think about it. Reed is a SoCal kid, but a Duck by trade. He is an in-the-pads Northwesterner now that wants to be a Seahawks, is wanted by the Seahawks and is adored by the fans. He has dominated the preseason with his skills, talent and instincts. He defines a certain type of Tim Ruskell pick. A type of Ruskell pick that has been very good to Ruskell; a type that include Lofa Tatupu, Darryl Tapp, Josh Wilson and Brandon Mebane. These smaller guys that have mastered the art of football carry a stigma throughout their careers. That is the other major reason Reed is unmovable: He won't net much. No matter how he dominated the preseason, his size and tools still make him a seventh-rounder. And that's what Seattle would likely get back if they tried to move him.
The players Seattle could trade are Baraka Atkins and Michael Bennett. Both have top pro tools and talent. Atkins was an underachiever at Miami that performed agility drills better than he played football. Ruskell selected him because the tools were there and Ruskell thought the desire was there to work towards fulfilling them. He hasn't shown up like Bennett, but he is bigger, better built, more well-rounded to defend pass and run, and has a regular season résumé. He is also only a little more than a year older than Bennett. Atkins is quiet where as Bennett is loud. The plays between the plays, the plays that allow the big plays, is where Atkins is more stable and trustworthy than Bennett. Last year against the Pats, he showed a little big play potential, too.
Bennett is the possible-superstar young stud that has, as I said after Seattle's first preseason game, been "the most dominant player at any position," has "lived in the backfield," and "played at another level than his competition" throughout the preseason. His draft position no longer matters. Scouts know Bennett has middle-round tools or better, and if he had been a third round pick, he would be the talk of the preseason and tapped as an emerging star. Bennett dropped because he wasn't productive at Texas A&M and that supported his reputation as an immature underachiever. Seattle bought into the potential and is reaping the rewards.
Bennett and Atkins can both net a mid-round pick. Teams overvalue the draft sometimes. For what they've already shown, both players are worth something like a third-round pick. In reality, a fifth-round pick is probably their market value. That's not a great return and doesn't help Seattle in 2009. Ruskell has mostly worked from a larger plan, but the heat is on this season and he knows he is making decisions that will soon determine his employment.
The other option is to target a player that is in a similar situation on another team: A player that complements Seattle, but is superfluous on his team's roster. This is Seattle's best chance to "win" a trade. The player acquired would most likely be an offensive lineman or cornerback. Seattle is thin enough at both to consider the positions a need. Don't think that narrow though. If Seattle moves one of Atkins or Bennett, what it will want most is talent. If that talent is at another position, like, say, running back, Ruskell's history argues that will not stop him from making that move. The team could swap talent, not fix its immediate needs, but then make another move to shore up the offensive line or secondary. Who that trade partner is and who Seattle would target in a trade is beyond my knowledge, but it sure makes for an interesting 24 hours.
0 recs |
76 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
How about a (Strong) Safety?
Chiefs shopping Bernard Pollard (age 24):
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=3700
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Sep 4, 2009 4:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
As long as we don't let him near Matt
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
by ninjasocks on Sep 4, 2009 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmmm...
No doubt that on paper a move that shifts Grant over to his more natural FS and putting a guy like Pollard at SS certainly looks better than what we have now, but at this current point in time, and the coaches apparent approval of Russell, do you really think we would alter our starting lineup like that? Or would this just be a depth move with the potential for Pollard to crack the starting lineup if/when Russell starts to stink it up again?
by Catoblepas on Sep 4, 2009 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+Pollard -Russell
=Upgrade.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Sep 4, 2009 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That might be how we see it...
but we don’t run the team. Do the coaches see it that way? I have serious doubts.
by Catoblepas on Sep 4, 2009 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bennett's value
I guess I’m a little shocked at your appraisal of his possible worth, John. You seriously believe we could get more in some kind of trade with another team using him as a bargaining chip than we would if we were to instead try and shop Reed?
I would think we’d get more bites on Reed based on the amount of 3-4 teams out there that might see big potential in Reed as a weakside rush LB. He’s flashed some of that ability in preseason, and surprisingly appears to have better change of direction skills than what scouts said.
by Catoblepas on Sep 4, 2009 4:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
As much fun as it is to watch Reed
He isn’t facing much stronger competition than the competition he dominated at Oregon. He has excelled in the preseason, but the concerns about how he would match against pro competition remain. I think it’s obvious from TV, but if not, I can tell you up close the disparity between an NFL regular and Reed’s total size—frame, height and weight—is significant.
This time last year we were in awe of Justin Forsett. The two are cut from the same cloth. Players that have proven they can dominate lower competition, but may never succeed against elite talent. Bennett, on the other hand, has a pro body, but a non-drafted free agent’s resume. When a guy like him starts dominating, teams line around the block to get a piece.
by John Morgan on Sep 4, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's another way to look at it
(And I love baseball analogies because baseball is so quantifiable)
Reed is the junk-baller dominating AAA.
Bennett is the flame thrower that’s strikeout rate just jumped through the roof.
by John Morgan on Sep 4, 2009 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love baseball analogies too
Even though I follow football a lot more and care about it a lot more, I often have to resort to making analogies in baseball terms because its just so much easier.
by kearly on Sep 4, 2009 11:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
From my perspective
I can clearly see that Reed is not being matched up against the league’s best, but neither is Bennett. And while I have no choice but to agree that M.B.‘s physical attributes stand out over a guy like Reed’s, I also understand that Reed is the overachiever and Bennett has been labeled as the lazy underachiever. Bennett’s going forward in the right direction now, and the lights are clearly on, but how much of that is derived from the simple fact that a fire was lit under his ass by going undrafted?
For Reed this is just the usual: “You’re too small kid”. And as usual he goes on about his way of debunking that theory.
I still say that they compare too closely in terms of commodity.
by Catoblepas on Sep 4, 2009 5:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reed would be the guy I roll the dice with as a D-coordinator
He’s made plays as a both a pass defender and pass rusher. The weakest part of his game is standing up to the power running game. If I were D-coordinator I’d tell him he has to get bigger and stronger if he wants to be a starter, but I’d give him a job and work him into my defense as a situational weapon against the pass. If he can learn to read Pro Qbs and make interceptions as well as affect the QB, what a weapon he would be.
Guys like Belichek love guys like Reed. If we cut him, I wouldn’t be surprised to see New England go after him or any team that wanted a versatile pass defender.
by ASeahawkfan on Sep 5, 2009 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Teams are going to value talent more than preseason production
Bennett has both the physical ability and the production whereas Reed, right now, is essentially a practice warrior to other teams.
by Nate Dogg on Sep 4, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have nothing against Bennett
I love what I’ve seen from him thus far, and I expect him to make the team. However, from my experience it is players like Bennett that sparkle and then fade, and it’s players like Reed that simply maintain a level of consistency. Bennett’s got incentive to prove something in the likeness of a guy that’s going into the last year of his contract and needs to make a big splash. Reed is the type of player that’s wired differently, and for the most part will probably always feel that he’s got to prove something.
by Catoblepas on Sep 4, 2009 5:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know about that
If all Reed had done in the preseason was get 4.5 sacks, I’d agree with you. But he has an interception and two passes defensed as well as 14 tackles. That shows a bit more versatility than a standard DE. If you watch the film, that drop back for an interception was a great read on Reed’s part. He seems to have a very complete game. His biggest weakness is being blocked out of run plays. So I doubt he starts unless he can prove he can shed or evade blockers and get to the runner. Wouldn’t surprise me if he found a way to do that too.
Reed’s instincts and football intelligence standout as big as Bennett’s physical ability. I’m pretty surprised by how well-rounded Reed’s game is. I’d be real surprised if he gets cut. Some guys can just play football and Reed seems like one of them.
And yeah, it was against lower competition. But a ton of guys with greater physical potential aren’t doing much against lower competition.
by ASeahawkfan on Sep 5, 2009 12:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As I stated in the other thread:
I think we could be looking at Bennett as a low-cost replacement next year for Redding, who’s playing on a 1-year deal.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Sep 4, 2009 4:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That is quite possible
That is one of many options. Another would be Lawrence Jackson waking the fuck up and playing like the 1st round selection that we thought we were getting. Bennett could also continue to be groomed as a 3-tech in the event that we lose Mebane (not really what we want). They say he’s 280 lbs. now, so stack on another 10 – 15 in the offseason next year. Either way, M.B. looks to be the versatile player they want as that hybrid DE/DT.
by Catoblepas on Sep 4, 2009 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
According to Adam Schefter via Seahawk Addicts
Branch and Bennett are on the bubble. Then John Clayton said Branch wouldn’t be traded but could be possibly trading material.
Beverly Hills 90210.......Denver Broncos 7.
by SSreporters on Sep 4, 2009 5:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Would anyone want to give Aaron Francisco a shot?
Arizona cut him and they’ve gone down to 53 players. Tyler Palko, Tim Castille, and Leonard Pope are notables that were chopped.
Beverly Hills 90210.......Denver Broncos 7.
by SSreporters on Sep 4, 2009 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Seahawks would have to be crazy to trade/cut Branch
…. unless perhaps it is straight up for another WR.
It might save some cash, but doing so would make Burleson a #2 WR and Butler a starter. Plus it makes the team paper thin at WR. Even before last year, the Seahawks were averaging about 2 WR a season with significant injuries. Keeping 4+ starting capable WR is a must.
by kearly on Sep 4, 2009 11:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the more likely scenario is Branch restructuring his contract.
But I seriously doubt that he will be traded or cut.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2009 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
especially after last year.
Besides. TR is in full “win now” mode. Why trade away a proven weapon?
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Sep 5, 2009 2:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There actually is a rumor floating around...
.. that the F.O. has asked Branch to restructure, or hit the bricks.
by Catoblepas on Sep 5, 2009 6:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Care to cite a link or a source that backs that up?
by BrianL on Sep 5, 2009 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's pretty much fact, cos I also heard it from the brother of guy's twin uncle's pet laboerdor retriever I used to know who knows stuff about being in the know
by B.B.Finnegan on Sep 5, 2009 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Clearly my brother's sister's cousin's friend is a solid enough source.
Duh.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Sep 5, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice catch
Key quotes:
Seattle pres Tim Ruskell to me just now on Deion Branch/cut rumor: "Put it to bed. That is so silly. There’s no way he’ll be cut.’’
Sea runs too much 3-wide to whack Branch. Ruskell also says entire draft class will be kept at cutdown.
So that seems to mean that they’ll keep Reed, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that they’ll keep Bennett. Our draft class included the following guys:
Curry, Unger, Butler, Teel, Greene, Reed and Morrah. I can’t see us keeping either Greene or Morrah on the 53-man roster, especially over Bennett. I wonder what’s going to happen.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
by ninjasocks on Sep 5, 2009 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm very curious about what's going to happen to Bennett, too.
I’m keeping my eyes peeled.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2009 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This comment was supposed to reply to a comment farther down
SBN messed it up. Damn you, Markos Moulitsas!
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
by ninjasocks on Sep 5, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That seems strange
Maybe he means that anyone cut would be signed to the practice squad. It doesn’t really read that way, but it would make a lot more sense.
by Mind of no mind on Sep 5, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
Anyone in AZ’s secondary aside from Adiran Wilson or Rodgers-Cromartie is probably not worth the time. Francisco has always struck me as more of a special teams guy. Wasn’t Francisco one of the three Cardinals defenders that Rothlisberger threw the ball through for that game winning TD catch to Santonio Holmes?
by Catoblepas on Sep 4, 2009 6:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
He was also the guy who played a small contribution in exposing the awfulness that is the QB play of Rex Grossman.
All in all he’s not that good but from what I remember he was much better on ST than at safety.
Beverly Hills 90210.......Denver Broncos 7.
by SSreporters on Sep 4, 2009 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like keeping the young "finds", Reed and Bennett
Trade Terrill for an OT prospect
by diehard82 on Sep 4, 2009 6:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why wouldn't Lojack also be a trade option?
and why in the world would we want to trade Michael Bennett? No way.
by Stevo's on Sep 4, 2009 10:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lojack hasn't shown anything yet
You’d be selling low.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
by ninjasocks on Sep 4, 2009 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the perfect time to trade a busted prospect
Is during that tiny window when you realize it just before everyone else does. Kind of like how the Seahawks somehow suckered the Bears into giving a 1st round pick for Rick Mirer.
Its too early to label Jackson a bust, but I think JM’s Vernon Ghoulston comparison is pretty apt. Quite honestly, if someone offered a 3rd round pick for Jackson, I’d probably take it at this point. If they offered a 2nd round pick, I’d do cartwheels.
I also think trading Bennett is crazy unless we’re talking about a very generous offer. Already, Bennett is probably the most disruptive DT on this team not named Brandon Mebane. If the team decides to revert Mebane back to the 1 in the future, Bennett could make a helluva pairing. And even without starting, he’s a very nice guy to have in the rotation. A 2nd string rotation of Bennett/Bryant could end up being just as good as Cole/Mebane. Bryant is dirt cheap and just an incredibly valuable player to the Seahawks if he keeps this up.
If the Seahawks trade anybody, they should trade Atkins or LoJack.
And I know they won’t, but they really should just save themselves the headache and cut Terrill.
by kearly on Sep 4, 2009 11:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a little early to declare him a busted prospect isn't it?
by BrianL on Sep 5, 2009 12:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes but that was my point
1st round picks have like a (guessing) 40-50% bust rate on average. Jackson was horrible last year and looked horrible for sustainable reasons. He lacked NFL caliber pass rush skills. At this point, I would probably up Jackson’s bust chance to 60-80%. If he’s still in the same place he is right now this time next year, I’d up that chance to 95%.
In other words, Jackson isn’t a bust yet but he probably will be. I’m not demanding that we trade him, just saying that if someone offers me a 2nd or 3rd round pick for a guy with a 20-40% chance of justifying his first round status, I’d take that deal.
by kearly on Sep 5, 2009 12:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whoops
It was Doug Farrar not John Morgan who made the Ghoulston comparison.
by kearly on Sep 5, 2009 1:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Atkins is the same.
Both players have tools and potential. Both slow to develop skills. I just don’t see why Atkins would be a trade option but LoJack would not be.
by Stevo's on Sep 5, 2009 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because
A 1st round pick at DE has more potential: both perceived and real in most cases than a 4th round DE.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Sep 5, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
right
and so the 1st rounder should be as good or better bait for a trade as the 4th rounder.
by Stevo's on Sep 5, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt Ruskell trades Jackson.
1) we won’t get the value he should command
2) ego
not necessarily in that order.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Sep 5, 2009 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Giving up on Jackson after one season would be shortsighted.
by John Morgan on Sep 5, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to mention stupid.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Sep 6, 2009 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some of the predicting in this article seems outrageous
Once again I’ll wait to see how accurate this is. I like that Bennett and Reed were standouts. Be great to find some 7th rounders and beyond that can play at a high enough level to play in the pros.
Atkins has never impressed me. I think you can find players of his quality every year in every draft. Physical potential capable of playing at the pro level is not uncommon in any draft.
Reed is the one guy that stands above and beyond . You don’t often find rookies in that 7th round that can seemingly do it all. If he can continue to improve his strength and get up to NFL speed, he could be a very effective tool for a smart defensive coordinator. It’s harder to teach instincts than it is find gifted physical specimens. We’ve seen a ton of physical specimens wash out of the league because of lack of instincts and football intelligence. And we’ve seen a ton of less physically gifted guys scrape out of a NFL career because of instincts and football intelligence. I think Reed falls into the latter category and has a real chane to excel at the NFL level if well-coached and used properly.
I’d keep Bennett over Terrill. I like a little risk and I can’t imagine the loss of “One Game a Year” Terrill causing this defense to miss a beat. Bennett’s ceiling is much higher than Terrill’s. Since Terrill only seems to show up big one game a year and to be average to below average the rest of the year, I think Bennett could probably match that.
by ASeahawkfan on Sep 5, 2009 12:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I might be getting myself into trouble with this opinion
But I am going to say, in all honesty, I think your drinking some serious Seahawks flavored Kool-Aid here John.
Now, I can’t say I have a clue as to the abilities of either of these guys (which maybe means I’m ignorant to their situation, but also probably says something about them). However, to suggest that any UDFA would be worth a 3rd round pick without even stepping onto the field is frankly, absurd. Kory Sheets, an UDFA RB for the Niners, has looked outstanding in the preseason. I think he’s third in the NFL in rushing yards. But if the Niners were to trade him I sincerely doubt they’d get more than a 6th or 7th rounder.
None of these UDFA’s have proven they can produce in games that count or against actual starters. The fact that they went undrafted 5 months ago means that teams don’t think too highly of them and they certainly aren’t willing to give up much for them. Guys who went in the 3rd round this year include Shon Greene, Jarron GIlbert, Michael Johnson, Rashad Johnson, Coffee, and Butler, and I am sure that none of those teams values Bennett or Atkins anywhere near what they do those guys.
So I’m assuming Tashard Choice is a target you’d be interested in based on the picture. But he’s worth a lot more than either of those guys. The Cowboys could wait it out and get one of them for free in a day or two if they wanted. And you say that Choice is buried on the depth chart but the Cowboys knew that when they picked him in the 3rd round, it’s not like they don’t value him. He ended up starting last year so it’s obvious he can be a factor. And if I may say so, he looked a lot better than Julius Jones in the same scheme (just showing the relative value of Choice). At this point I doubt the Cowboys would trade Choice for anything less than a 2nd rounder, let alone a guy worth a 5th rounder.
I just think if you think UDFA’s who haven’t played a down in the NFL have any value your about to be sorely disappointed in a day or two, but we’ll see.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 5, 2009 2:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
You're in trouble man.
I was struggling with it, but one thing really made sense to me. Projected draft position. If Bennett’s projected position was in the 4th round as a DE, then seeing him be awesome and saying his actual value should be a 3rd(just based on potential) is not that hard for me to swallow. He dropped, and when a guy drops a round or two, sometimes GM’s start avoiding that player, thinking other GM’s know something they don’t about him. Unlike Reed who was projected late because of “too-small” concerns (similar to Colston, who was “too-slow” to play WR, and projected to play TE with no TE experience) Bennett had the NFL-level body and skills, dropped out for other reasons.
Bennett was put at DT just to see if he could have any versatility and be a more valuable backup, he completely dominated the 2nd and 3rd stringers he played against. Not for one or two flashy plays, but consistently. He seems to be on his way to working into a rotation with the starters, and his value to us should be high, as we are seeing serious signs of a legit player. If the Saints were offered a trade for Colston right after preseason, what would have been worthy of consideration? No team would have offered for a 7th rounder what Colston was actually worth, so it was unlikely a trade would have taken place.
Same here, Bennett’s trade value is unlikely to be better than a 5th in John’s estimation, a deal that does not make sense to the Seahawks. If you believe that is market value, then his thoughts on only trading him for other talent or keeping him also make sense.
by cashless on Sep 5, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree that "Bennett’s projected position was in the 4th round as a DE"
Before the draft, we don’t know what the “projected draft position” is. Only NFL scouts and GMs know that. The mock drafts we see are journalists guessing and predicting. Those are not the same as projections by the 32 NFL teams, who – we learned on draft day – had Bennett rated as a guy who was a step below the 7 rounds of players drafted. No one knew they were wrong until now.
by Stevo's on Sep 5, 2009 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
not that this discounts your other good points, cashless
I just think we buy into mock drafts and projections too much without knowing the insiders’ view of things.
by Stevo's on Sep 5, 2009 9:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
That was not really my point or belief, otherwise maybe I’d be on Crabtree’s side of his holdout, and I certainly am not.
More that his tools (to borrow from a recent discussion) are NFL-worthy, and that it was widely believed he would be drafted in the middle to late rounds of the draft. In an article he said that there were several teams that called him to say he would be their pick next, only to see them draft a different player.
by cashless on Sep 5, 2009 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the difference is what has happened after the draft
Crabtree still hasn’t shown anything to be valued more then his selection and he can’t until he plays. Bennett, however, has had the preseason and training camp to show that he’s worth more then going undrafted, upping his value.
by B.B.Finnegan on Sep 5, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
Like i said, I don’t know the history of either of these guys beyond their draft position. I just have a real hard time buying that anyone who not a single team wanted in the draft could be worth a 3rd rounder because of a few preseason games. I’m don’t think that domintating backups raises someon’es value that much that quickly, but like you said if he is good he probably won’t be traded anyways.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 5, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And he only says one of those UDFA's has any value.
Atkins was picked in the 4th round three or so years ago.
by cashless on Sep 5, 2009 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can't recall Atkins or Lo-Jack dominating 2nd and 3rd stringers
like Bennett and Reed. I sure hope they turn out to be more than Seahawk fan’s pipe dreams. They sure look good. I hope they validate our belief in them like Forsett has done. Forsett just keeps on getting better. He’s almost like a poor man’s Reggie Bush right now, might even be a better runner but worse receiver than Bush.
If Reed and Bennett can do better than Terrill, Atkins, or Lo-Jack, we have some real nice depth at a position of need.
by ASeahawkfan on Sep 5, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we are all with you on Bennett and Reed. Here's hoping.
and many UDFAs end up being good NFL starters – eventually. But let’s remember that those guys usually take a few years to develop before they are ready to contribute much.
by Stevo's on Sep 5, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
Although considering he hasn’t done much in those years, I’m not sure is value would be any higher.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 5, 2009 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sheets has not looked outstanding.
He has five runs of negative yards in 29 attempts. Busting a couple semi-long runs against second string competition is not outstanding. It’s very run of the mill.
by John Morgan on Sep 5, 2009 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dominic Rhodes just cut
does he have anything left?
by Stevo's on Sep 5, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I think he does.
But cost vs. need may not be a good match. I just don’t see us signing him unless Jones was out injured or something similar.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Sep 5, 2009 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We don't need another runningback.
Especially a “bleh”-ish one like Rhodes.
Andrew Raycroft for backup? Does not compute.
by Woodinville_12thMan on Sep 5, 2009 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pehaps
I think he has looked really good when he has played though. It’s not like Bennett or Atkins is playing against starters either are they?
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 5, 2009 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What?
Kory Sheets, an UDFA RB for the Niners, has looked outstanding in the preseason. I think he’s third in the NFL in rushing yards
Think about that statement and tell me how that makes sense in an argument.
Beverly Hills 90210.......Denver Broncos 7.
by SSreporters on Sep 5, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Marcus Mason led the league in preseason rushing last year.
And was cut. Then cut again by Baltimore.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Sep 5, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm confused
What doesn’t make sense about that?
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 5, 2009 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How is it drinking the Kool-aid when you admit to ignorance?
When the UDFA like Bennett has shown that his worth quite exceeds his worth as an UDFA, I’d say that it’s quite feasible that he’d be traded for draft picks. Also, keep in mind that John said:
His draft position no longer matters. Scouts know Bennett has middle-round tools or better…
and
For what they’ve already shown, both players are worth something like a third-round pick. In reality, a fifth-round pick is probably their market value.
It seems to me that you read only the 3rd-round pick part and couldn’t get past that.
By your general logic, Tom Brady, were he ever traded, should never be traded for anything more than a 6th round pick, or that Alex Smith should be traded traded for nothing less than a first. We both know that’s not true because of the value they actually have as a player to their teams, so I don’t see why that cannot be applied to a UDFA, even if he hasn’t played a regular season down in the NFL.
P.S. Mack Strong was a UDFA, and he was very, very valuable, even during his rookie year.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No I read that that part
It’s just that John still said he truly thinks their worth a 3rd rounder. I understand he might have shown that he can live up to his tools, but I’d think he has to show that in actual regular season games before he has actual trade value. Tom Brady has obviously proven himself so his value goes way up, whereas Smith has done the opposite. I didn’t mean that UDFA’s are never good, just that you won’t trade them for much until they have proven they can play.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 5, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except that the UDFA has proven that he is worth more than his UDFA status heading into the league.
That, in turn, creates trade value.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2009 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We will not get much in a trade before all the teams have to cut down to 52
If other teams are looking to fill gaping holes it would make sense for them not to trade, but to wait until everyone has cut down to 52. That way they would have a chance of signing a cut player without giving up talent or draft picks. Come Monday or Tuesday teams will be less of a chance of free alternative and I would imagine teams would be willing to give up more to fill their needs.
by biggiestylez on Sep 5, 2009 10:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Peter King tweets...
that Ruskell has told him the Hawks will keep their entire draft class, and will not cut Branch.
by Hawkdawg on Sep 5, 2009 11:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That clears Reed
but Bennet’s still on the bubble. I wouldn’t think we’d keep Greene or Morrah on the 53 though? He must be including practice squad?
by B.B.Finnegan on Sep 5, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Morrah showed nothing
He should be on the PS.
I’d keep Bennett.
Thanks for the snoop, Hawkdawg.
Beverly Hills 90210.......Denver Broncos 7.
by SSreporters on Sep 5, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
James Harrison was also an UDFA
Amazingly, the Steeler payed him based on NFL performance rather than the order in which he was picked.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
by ninjasocks on Sep 5, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was replying to a comment farther up. SBN messed up.
The thing that’s weird about the comment that they’ll keep the whole draft class is that it means keeping both Greene and Morrah on the 53 while maybe letting Bennett go. Greene and Morrah seem like PS guys while Bennett might get not make it past waivers.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
by ninjasocks on Sep 5, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks to John Morgan
I just need to stop for a minute, thank John Morgan for this great blog, and marvel at how GREAT it is that we have all this info at our fingertips as we wait for final roster cuts.
I don’t know if the young guys here can appreciate how great this is. Back when I first moved to Seattle in 1989, I had been a Dolphins fan for many years, and to follow my team I used to have the public library order the Miami Herald so I could go there at 9 AM every Saturday morning and pour through a stack of newspapers looking for every little tidbit of information on my team and players in training camp. Everything I knew about the Seahawks back then came from John Clayton writing in the TNT. You could subscribe to a team’s fanzine, but it would come in the mail once a month full of old information.
Today we have instant access to a network of beat writers like Sando, Clayton, Farnsworth, Williams, and on top of that we have awesome analysis and opinion online from guys like John Morgan – who pours a stream of great content out here for us all to dig into and discuss.
And on top of that, for the first time I’ll be watching all the Seahawks away games this year in HD.
Man, is this a great country or what?
by Stevo's on Sep 5, 2009 12:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
