Seahawks Pinch Pennies With Rob Sims; May Regret It
by John Morgan on Mar 4, 2010 11:15 AM PST
Email
Print
Seahawks.com (they get all the scoops!) is reporting that Seattle has offered Ben Obomanu, Rob Sims, Chris Spencer and Darryl Tapp original round tenders. Spencer and Tapp are first round and second round picks respectively, and original round tenders should be enough to protect either. However, don't be surprised if New England, with three second round picks, and a need for a pass rush specialist, doesn't inquire about Tapp. They are in win now mode, have four picks in the first two rounds, an additional first round pick in 2011, and a solid history of trading draft picks for undervalued players. Nevertheless, the Tapp and Spencer tenders do not irk me, much.
The Rob Sims tender seems quite foolish. Sims was a fourth round selection made good and would demand only a fourth round pick to acquire. While Brian Burke did not review offensive linemen specifically, he did look at all players and their success by draft order. Players selected in Sims range, he was selected 128th overall, average a hair more than one season as their team's primary starter. Their chance of reaching the Pro Bowl is insignificant enough that he did not even list it. Sims has now started two seasons, lost one he would have started if not for a pectoral tear, and though probably not a Pro Bowl player, is at least above average for his position. If I were a general manager for another team, I would trade a fourth round pick for Sims in a heartbeat.
Will it happen? That is the part I do not know. Perhaps Pete Carroll and John Schneider have a better read of the market than I do, and know that Sims will not be pursued. They admit they don't, but let's try to be sanguine here. If that is the case, consider me disappointed. Sims easily exceeds the value of a fourth round selection, and for any team that wants to turn a modestly valuable draft pick into an above average starter in his prime, Seattle has dangled Sims likely to their own loss. The Bears, for instance, would be foolish not to inquire.
114 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Isn't this more a matter of letting the "market" establish value? I thought Seattle gets the
opportunity to match or beat any offer a tendered player receives.
Well, then they would likely overspend on a player they do not have to commit to
and the other team could simply poison pill the player away anyway.
I suspect management didn't want to commit to new contracts without knowing if a CBA
would be in place. Hopefully, they see Simms’ value, or at least the difficulty/cost of replacing him, and get a deal signed.
If they let Tapp go, does that tip there hand about who/what they are going after in the draft?
by Trojan Knight on Mar 4, 2010 11:42 AM PST up reply actions
Sims. It's in the headline.
The option is not whether to sign Sims to a contract or sign him to an original round tender, it’s whether to offer an original round tender or a tender that might actually protect him from being signed by another team.
And if the team loses Tapp, it will be forced to draft a starter capable end unless it really entertains starting Kerney.
I didn't read it that way and its your house, be whatever you want.
by Trojan Knight on Mar 4, 2010 12:10 PM PST up reply actions
It does that to the best of us.
Yesterday I strangled a chipmunk. I blame the tubes.
inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
Or they are preparing to go after Peppers.
I just puked in my mouth.
by DJ C-Raig on Mar 4, 2010 11:56 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
I can't imagine Peppers having any interest in Seattle.
That is, unless Seattle ruins their future salary cap for him.
Which is what I'm afraid of.
Peppers wants a contender, that much is obvious, but if Paul Allen Operation: Dumbo Dropped a metric shit ton of money on his house…I don’t know.
by DJ C-Raig on Mar 4, 2010 12:00 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I would not be surprised
Allen seems intent on spending his wad as fast as possible.
It is what it is...
Although I can see a low tender on Rob if they don't think he fits the zone scheme well and may not keep him anyway
It seems very odd that they were all blanketly tendered the same round they were drafted in. As if no thought was really put into it.
Perhaps they want the picks
This is a deep draft. Sims, as has been stated on this blog many times, is not a good fit for ZBS. Jeff Byers of So. Cal is slotted as a 4th round prospect who is identified as a great ZBS fit.
Perhaps Seattle is willing to get draft picks in a strong draft and, in earnest, start over. If line play is about consistency, having Rob Sims for one more year makes no sense, and teams just may bite for a 4th rounder. And that 4th rounder just might get us a starter for years to come.
I like the concept.
It is what it is...
Sims is a good fit for ZBS
Willis is not.
by DJ C-Raig on Mar 4, 2010 12:04 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Perhaps. Sims has good strength and does a nice job shading
But his ability at the second level and overall athletic ability seem to be lacking when compared to Locklear, Spencer, Unger.
Still, a 4th rounder for Sims would be a steal. Sims will be gone next year.
It is what it is...
Well, if I remember right, he played in a ZBS as a left tackle in Ohio State
and so though he might not be the prototype, it does seem like being particular to a fault.
It is interesting how much, on a personal level, I want Seattle to purge
Perhaps a bit insane on my part. I am no expert for sure.
It is what it is...
It's one thing to purge, and I can even understand that angle as teams often have boom and bust cycles.
But there’s not much to be gained from dropping cheap, young starters.
Yes. If this becomes like the Michael Benett (sp?) experience
I will be sad. I guess I value picks too much. I may have become more interested in the future than the present.
It is what it is...
Michael Bennett was completely unproven.
Rob Sims has proven to be a very capable starter. Letting him go is a complete waste.
6/14/40. Sweet.
He's referring to the problem
where there was no real reason to risk (and subsequently lose) Bennett.
Now with more lemon bars!
Eh, I can understand that feeling
There just doesn’t seem to be any reason to purge Sims beyond saving money.
by DJ C-Raig on Mar 4, 2010 12:20 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Byers health is a major concern I would think
the guy is good when healthy, but its been an issue for him all throughout college.
[DELETED ZOMG NO POLITICS]
But I guess the main idea was
that there might be someone in the 4th who could replace Sims
[DELETED ZOMG NO POLITICS]
It's a hybrid, right?
Vince Wilfork let them run plenty of 3 man fronts. With him getting older and more expensive they started transitioning to a 4-3 last season. Tapp seems like a perfect fit for them as an elephant, rush backer or down lineman.
When you see teams tendering Guards with 1st and also 1st and 3rd round tenders...
Doesn’t make much sense. What tenders did we have available to use on Sims specifically? I know we Franchised Mare, but I’m not sure what flexibility the team has with regard to Sims. Losing arguably our best offensive lineman would be terribly disappointing.
Then again:
maybe this would entice a team into signing him. Our thinking could be that would could (attempt to) replace him with a better ZBS/Gibbs type player, a better fit with the pick acquired.
If Seattle was interested in trading Sims, it would still benefit from offering him a more valuable tender.
Because it would give them leverage in negotiations. As of now, a team would approach Seattle and the most the Seahawks could ask for is a fourth round pick.
Okay, one more angle.
Sims finds his worth to the league outside of Seattle and we match the offer at a price lower than what he would get in straight up asking for an extension from us? A clever way to drive his price down? Hmm. I might be reaching now… :(
I agree with this assertion
It may not play out that way, but it is worth a try. And Gibbs may think he can land a better athlete in the 4th round this year.
Seattle is basically letting Sims set the market. Nothing wrong in that. Capitalism at its finest.
It is what it is...
Perhaps you are right.
If Jahri Evans gets a first round tender, maybe Sims is worth a 2nd.
It is what it is...
Jahri Evans
Is one easily one of the best guards in the NFL. So I’m not exactly sure what you mean by that.
Exactly
If Evans being great draws a 1st round tender, then maybe, Sims is a good guard and would draw demand. Thus satisfying a 2nd round tender.
I’m not as high on Sims as others. I would be shocked if the market today would draw out a 4th round pick, let alone a 3rd rounder or more.
If Gibbs’ can make guards from garbage men, and if line play is about consistency, and if Sims will really break the bank in 2011, then let him go and get something for it.
However, I do not work in football professionally for a reason.
It is what it is...
Okay, now I get it a little more
the emphasis was on the maybe, because Jahri is obviously worth the 1st & 3rd round tender relative to other players at his position, but relative to other positions on a football team, not so much. That makes a lot more sense.
I'm not sure that makes sense either
Seattle might not want to lock up Sims because Gibbs might want to put him through the paces before they commit. This would not be the free agent market that drives down a player’s value either. It’s starved for talent and uncapped.
I am pretty surprised that Sims tender was so low.
Maybe this means that had this been a normal year under the CBA that Sims would not have been resigned and allowed to walk away for nothing. They might have put the 4th rounder on him to entice a team to sign him so they can make sure they get a free pick for a guy they didn’t want anyways. Although it would still make sense to put a higher tender on him and and try and trade him, but just today Sando was saying that the Cardinals might have to settle for a 3rd round pick for Boldin, so maybe we’re overvaluing Sims.
by Mind of no mind on Mar 4, 2010 12:24 PM PST reply actions
Overvaluing his value to others
Or to ourselves?
by DJ C-Raig on Mar 4, 2010 12:34 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Both.
I don’t necessarily believe that, but the Seahawks’ decision here tells me that they may believe that. That might be an improper conclusion on my part, but I can’t think of any other explaination. I just hope that they’re right. How funny (and sad) would it be if he had good success on another team while we stuggle to replace him? This FO would pretty much be starting off the same way Ruskell started his tenure.
by Mind of no mind on Mar 4, 2010 4:25 PM PST up reply actions
Teams can be crazy about their draft picks
and it wouldn’t surprise me if Seattle retains Sims, but his value is much more than that of a fourth round pick.
As for Boldin, his injury history and age hurt his value, as do his contract demands. Still, it seems foolish to think that Boldin is worth less than something that can be acquired by trading back a first round pick.
So Brandon Frye was not tendered.
That’s a market test I can get behind. Wait and see what other tackles we might sign, sign him if we still need a body, and then go into the draft.
Sims, though, that is disappointing. Disappointing.
I agree with John M
This really concerns me and i wonder what we are doing. Maybe just maybe they are taking the chance another team signs him and we are planning to match (Hutch?) or work out a trade for a 3rd rounder maybe from the Bears. Remember their new man in charge is Ruskell who drafted Sims. I believe the difference from the original round tender and a 2nd round were only 600K which is not much for our best OL in 2009 so this is a surprise. I do think if we lose Tapp for a 2nd rounder I can live with that in this deep draft no problem. In the 2nd we could easily grab a good WR (Williams) or safety (Allen) with any pick we get from losing Tapp. We do have good depth at DE to be honest although I like Tapp’s potential under PC
I would rather trade Trufant than lose Sims.
by DJ C-Raig on Mar 4, 2010 1:34 PM PST via mobile reply actions
I wouldn't go that far.
But yes I feared that Seattle would give up Sims and right now these aren’t encouraging signs with such a low tender offer.
The Seattle Seahawks offense is driving......right into a brick wall at the end of the tunnel.
I think Trufant will be bad (exiting peak anyway) before we're good
So we should get what we can out of him now by trading him to a finished team. Sims is young and a starter and should be peaking when we’re good again. Just my opinion, who knows? We could win the SB next year.
You make a really good point
Trufant is about to exit his prime and his value will never be higher, so if we don’t think we can be competitive while he’s still good, now would be the time to trade indeed.
I dunno about his value peaking.
He was rusty when he came back and drew too many flags this season. I can easily see his value increasing over the next year if he returns to form.
Obviously what happened here is Sims was supposed to get the first round tender and Spencer switched the paper work around.
SPENCERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!
Another team won't just give up a fourth rounder
It would give up a fourth rounder AND pay full fair market value for Sims. That makes it less of a steal right there. And although that’s easier to do in an uncapped year, most owners presumably aren’t rushing out to bust the budget through the roof.
Is there any discussion out there of what kind of shenanigans teams are planning on for when the cap does come back? Are we going to see long-term contracts allocating a bajillion dollars to 2010 and league-minimum salaries to 2011 and beyond?
by Suburban Shocker on Mar 4, 2010 2:56 PM PST reply actions
That's the way I would write all new contracts
Provided I wanted to guarantee the money
by Trojan Knight on Mar 4, 2010 3:16 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
OK, but
… whatever you are comfortable guaranteeing, stuff as much as you can into the first year. There could be a competitive advantage to this because I don’t think every owner is rushing to pay out big money this year.
by Suburban Shocker on Mar 4, 2010 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
Seahawks may emerge as destination for DE Julius Peppers
http://blogs.suntimes.com/bears/2010/03/seahawks_could_be_favorite_to.html
The Chicago Sun-Times thinks the ‘Hawks are emerging as a major challenger to the Bears as a bidder for Peppers’ services.
I’d give my opinion on this but I’d probably get banned for thinking.
by A'Seahawks_Warriors on Mar 4, 2010 3:09 PM PST reply actions
Much better to take passive aggressive snipes.
by John Morgan on Mar 4, 2010 3:21 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
Yeah that came out of nowhere. I thought he was done doing that after that random outburst he had in October.
The Seattle Seahawks offense is driving......right into a brick wall at the end of the tunnel.
God I hope not.
Can we please not be the new Arizona.
Give me your tired, your overpaid, your easily snapped bones huddling on the sidelines yearning for earlier days.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
"I never met a llama I didn't like." - TJ Duckett
by Wayward Llama on Mar 4, 2010 3:28 PM PST up reply actions
Uh, Arizona went to the Superbowl the last two seasons.
You may want to rephrase that.
by Trojan Knight on Mar 4, 2010 5:23 PM PST up reply actions
Arizona is historically where players go to pasture.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
"I never met a llama I didn't like." - TJ Duckett
by Wayward Llama on Mar 4, 2010 9:04 PM PST up reply actions
I don't recall a lot of old free agent names going to Arizona.
That team up in the northwest on the other hand….
by jacobstevens on Mar 4, 2010 10:02 PM PST up reply actions
Peppers is freakish
But I wouldn’t do it.
Hilarious last line, though.
The Seattle Seahawks offense is driving......right into a brick wall at the end of the tunnel.
If it's anything like any of the other articles I read, the reasoning is idiocy.
The reasoning being “Paul Allen is batshit rich, so Seattle is a naturally a top contender to land him.”
Right. Pretty brilliant.
Why would Peppers EVER want to join the Hawks? And why would Carroll and co want a 30 year old DE that’ll want upwards of $20 million a year?
This borders on insane.
6/14/40. Sweet.
I am ambivalent about Peppers.
He is getting old, would by hyper expensive, but his athleticism is unique so it would be very difficult to project his future.
But is it more probable that his production does start to decline starting this year?
The Seattle Seahawks offense is driving......right into a brick wall at the end of the tunnel.
That and ...
he’s on a team with an under-achieving interior line. Whatever two players were assigned to Tapp/Kerney last year will undoubtly now be assigned to Peppers.
No doubt Peppers will play better than Tapp in that kind of situation, but I wouldn’t expect Peppers to be his dominant self as a Seahawk (assuming status quo at DT).
6/14/40. Sweet.
To clarify
Two players that were applied to double team ONE defensive end (which was common last year, considering Cole was commonly single blocked).
6/14/40. Sweet.
What does everyone think Paul Allen learned from his free spending days with the Blazers?
The late 90’s/early 2000 Blazers had the most expensive roster(s) in NBA history and failed to make it past the Western Conference Finals. To give an idea of how much Allen spent, the NBA had a soft cap of $40 million in 2003, and the Blazers payroll was a staggering $105 million. The Knicks had the second highest payroll at $93 million, followed by the Mavs at $72 milllion.
The question is…Did the failures of those high priced Blazers teams leave Paul Allen snakebit when it comes to trying to buy a championship?
Hey, you can buy a championship
Just ask the Boston Celtics.
Besides, you’re comparing apples to oranges. The way you build a team in the NFL is vastly different than how you go about building a team in the NBA. There’s hardly room an an NBA roster to let guys sit and develop like you can in the NFL, and since you only need three great pieces to win an NBA championship, it’s not that hard to buy it.
If the firing of Jim Mora and Pete Carroll’s contract have taught us anything, it’s that Paul Allen doesn’t mind dropping some serious cash to do what he thinks is best for the Seahawks.
Trader Bob approached free agency in both leagues the same way.
And I know Allen isn’t afraid to spend money.
I just wonder if his experience with throwing money around on high priced veterans in Portland and watching the Redskins dominate the off-season every year only to fail in the regular season has soured him on players like Peppers.
The Chiefs blog says the Chiefs are interested in Burleson.
http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2010/3/4/1356971/report-seahawks-wr-nate-burleson
The Seattle Seahawks offense is driving......right into a brick wall at the end of the tunnel.
It says in that article the Lions are interested as well
Detroit Sealions.
The Seattle Seahawks offense is driving......right into a brick wall at the end of the tunnel.
Ugh. Did not want to come across that news. I hope he stays.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Mar 4, 2010 7:05 PM PST up reply actions
I try not to guess too much at the strategy, since I don't have a clue
but on face value it says Carroll and company don’t value Sims as much as most participants on this site do. If they wanted to keep him, they would have made a higher tender.
Occam's razor. They probably don't.
But we’re big, they’re little. We’re smart, they’re dumb. We’re right, they’re wrong!
by jacobstevens on Mar 4, 2010 10:04 PM PST up reply actions
Thoughts from anyone on RFAs from other teams that we could look at?
Atogwe could be worth looking at, and he’s been tendered at the lowest level. I think there’s a good chance another team will make him an offer and it will be interesting to see what value (if any) the market sets for him.
by Badical Turbo Radness on Mar 4, 2010 7:04 PM PST reply actions
How about Brandon Marshall?
He’s only got a 1st round tender on him, and we happen to have two picks in the first round this year, one of which happened to belong to the Broncos. A franchise QB or LT and Brandon Marshall as our two first round picks wouldn’t be bad at all.
It's important to understand Seattle will have the option of matching any offer to Sims
Any other team that is interested picking up Sims would have to be willing to offer him more money than the ‘Hawks are willing to pay him, PLUS a fourth round pick. That would be quite a disparity in value, especially considering Paul Allen’s deep pockets. If another team does indeed value him that high, netting a fourth round pick for him instead of losing him outright as an unrestricted free agent next year makes complete sense.
If Seattle is actually interested in resigning Sims, tendering him at a low enough level that he actually gets an offer that we have an opportunity to match this year (which may be lower given a draft pick is involved) is much more preferred to tendering him at a higher level and prolonging contract talks until next year. I’m not sure how well it would go if we were faced with making a decision to sign Sims to a contract before he hits free agency unrestricted, especially if his agent thinks he can get a larger contract than Seattle is willing to pay.
The same goes for Tapp. I’d rather get contracts discussed and decided this year, especially with it being uncapped. This is THE year to get contracts done with teams having the ability to frontload money. Anyone that we lose to a mid-round tender will end up being valued by another team MUCH higher than we value them, and we would get nothing as compensation if they are able to hit the market unrestricted.
Kampman to Seattle rumors being floated now.
Wistrom
Kerney
Kampman
I sense a trend.
If this is all we can muster in free agency, I'm going to be pissed.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
"I never met a llama I didn't like." - TJ Duckett
by Wayward Llama on Mar 5, 2010 5:45 AM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
Related FanShots on Field Gulls
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
