Playing Devil's advocate

by Tyopiod on Mar 18, 2010 3:13 PM PDT

All of the questionable moves Carroll and Schneider have made this week have plenty of people are reminiscing about the good old days when Ruskell was our GM. I'm gonna save judging this offseason activity until the draft, but so far I don't like where this team seems to be heading. But how much of this is really fault on our FO's part?

First, we have the Tapp trade. Considering he may have had the potential to be one of the cornerstones for our defense for years to come, I have no doubt that he was undersold for Clemons and a fourth rounder. But I've read that Clemons is considered more explosive than Tapp, and the move was probably made because because Carroll believes he can get more production out of Lo-Jack than any of our coaches have so far.

Also, I haven't heard anything to make me believe this, but is it possible Tapp just wanted out of Seattle? If Tapp wasn't going to be in Seattle much longer anyway, then another DE and a fourth rounder isn't bad value for him; more than any other team was going to offer apparently.

As far as the Whitehurst trade goes, maybe the team really likes what they see in him. The price was steeper than it should have been, at least it immediately upgrades our QB situation.

Then we have underwhelming free agent signings like Ganther and Chris Baker. We all know the market for free agents isn't very good this season, so I think it's a good sign that the team is being proactive at least.

These may not be the strongest arguments, but it isn't easy playing the Devil's advocate.

Thoughts?

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Now you did it,

You’ll be hanging on a flagpost in the town square by sundown.

On a more serious note; the truth, as in most situations, probably lies somewhere in between the two sides.

by ColumbiaRob on Mar 18, 2010 3:18 PM PDT reply actions

I think the eagles got Tapp for a fair price with their extention.

He said on the radio that he’ll be starting, and ESPN is reporting that his contract could pay up to $15 million over 3 years. It’s possible that while Carroll could make good use of him on the team, it wasn’t a big enough roll to justify an average of $5 million a year. And if Tapp knew he could get that kind of money from another team, it’s unlikely he was going to sign here for much less.

So I can agree that it’s possible that Tapp just wouldn’t fit on this team under Carroll for what he’d be paid. But it doesn’t change the fact that he was worth more in trade than what we got. I really hope the team exhausted all other avenues for a trade before settling on this one.

by Mind of no mind on Mar 18, 2010 3:33 PM PDT reply actions

Up to $5 million a year if he hits all his incentives, I'm sure

and if he hits all his incentives, he will be an absolute bargain at $5 million a year. Seattle did not move Tapp because they can’t afford him.

by John Morgan on Mar 18, 2010 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions

Depends on the incentives I would think

If it’s games started and they have a rash of injuries, he could luck into a lot of money without really earning it via performance. I think he’s the type of player who gives high effort though, so I think he’ll be at least as effective as he was here.

by ColumbiaRob on Mar 18, 2010 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm also thinking about Tapps willingness to sign. I can see why Tapp might want to leave.

I think Tapp is a good enough player that he could hit plenty of the incentives on a team that is going to use him properly, and that will allow him to make a good amount of money. If the Seahawks offered him the same contract with the same incentives, but don’t plan to put him in a position to reach those incentives, then I can’t see him signing that contract. So the only way I could see him resigning is if we offered him the same contract with easier to reach incentives, or just straight up guarantee him more money.

Even then, I’m not sure he’d resign. Being only 25 and on a 3 year contract, he has a good chance in Philly for realizing his potential and earning a really big long term contract when this one is up, if they don’t extend it before then. Seattle might not offer that same opportunity. I think the fact that he says that Philly told him already that he’s going to start is a big reason why they got a deal done.

I’m speculating, but I don’t think it’s that far fetched that some of these things factored into the trade.

by Mind of no mind on Mar 18, 2010 11:39 PM PDT up reply actions

But none of it changes the fact that we got screwed on compensation.

I read today that Philly was strongly considering taking him with their next pick if we didn’t draft him first, so they must think he’s worth a second round pick. I don’t get why a 28 year old QB who’s never played a snap can appreciate in value from a 3rd round pick to a late 2nd round pick (by Sando’s formula), and a 25 year old DE who has started 32 games and shown a lot of potential heading into his prime can depreciate from a 2nd round pick into a 4th round pick + spare part. I hate thinking about this.

by Mind of no mind on Mar 18, 2010 11:39 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Ditto. Rec'd for agreement.

Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.

by Tyler Jorgensen on Mar 19, 2010 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions

Seems valid

This does make some sense. The choice seemed to be.

Keep him and have faith that he would do something good next year, then try to sign him to a big contract or let him walk.

Extend him and hope a guy from a previous regime becomes a stud. (We know previous regime guys just aren’t attractive to new regimes unless they’ve proven themselves)

Trade him and get something for him.

I think we feel shafted because it was only a 4th round, but I’m going to assume they didn’t say no to other 2nd round picks because they like dealing with Philly.

by Justise on Mar 18, 2010 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm just wondering who Carroll is saving money for.

There aren’t many FAs I can imagine having much of an impact on the team.

by Tyopiod on Mar 18, 2010 4:23 PM PDT reply actions

It's always easier to spend other people's money.

Who knows, maybe the owner needs the money to battle his health problems, and to donate it to some sort of foundation?

At any rate, we don’t know how much money is “available.” There are many layers to the way players are picked up during free agency.

by Chirp on Mar 18, 2010 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions

The 6, the 14, and perhaps Marshall.

It’s also possible we extend Mebane and Spencer soon.

by Misfit74 on Mar 19, 2010 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions

I don't like it

I don’t like where this team is heading, I have lost all confidence in the coach and GM. Whitehurst maybe a good QB, but Seattle paid way too much for an unknown, unproven QB.

Seneca Wallace has proven in the past several years that he has much more value and skills as a QB than Whitehurst, and Seattle only got a 7th round pick for him. Why would Seattle give up a 3rd round pick for Whitehurst who hasn’t proven anything!!!!!!

by blazerbill on Mar 21, 2010 1:30 AM PDT reply actions

I am not sure we can say that Seneca has proven that he has more value and skills than Whitehurst

Simply because of Whitehurst’s almost non-existent sample size.

Pete Carroll and John Schneider apparently know a lot more about Whitehurst than we do, especially Schneider, becausehe scouted him for Green Bay when Whitehurst came out of college. Looking at Whitehurst’s college highlights, I think he definitely has the skills to succeed in the pro’s.

We’ll see.

Talents that I covet:

Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes

by Carl Shinyama on Mar 21, 2010 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions