Whitehurst - Traded to Seattle (1 Viewer)

[ImTheScientist]

Well I guess Im in the minority here but I like it. I like getting a young QB that has been in the NFL for a few years and now he has a chance to go get his own team. He has a veteran in front of him but with Hass's injury issues lately he could be in soon. Im not a big fan of taking a QB in the first rd, so now I hope we get RB/O line in the first. We (SEA/SD)switched 2nds this year ..big whoopie we have 2 first and got a 4th rd from Phi for Tapp so I like it

I agree with you. You don't have to pay a Claussen or Bradford HUGE money not knowing if they will pan out. Focus on the team around the QB and if CW works out then great, if he doesn't then you didn't lose nearly as much as you would have if you drafted a QB w/ the 6th pick. I don't see how you can judge a trade as harshly as everyone here is when everything in the trade is an unknown. This is one of those deals that will likely take 2 years to see what the results were....good or bad. I would much rather gamble on CW then a QB at #6. If you miss on a QB at that pick your franchise is screwed for a long time.

 

[massraider]

Man, and all the Browns could get for Quinn was a box of pencil shavings and a wooden nickel?

 

[TS Garp]

Wow...love this deal for the Chargers.

 

[Tau837]

Wow...love this deal for the Chargers.

 

[cstu]

At first glance this looks horrible for Seattle. I know nothing about Whitehurst. I guess time will tell, but I have a bad feeling about this....

If it means anything, the Chargers saw enough to use a 3rd round pick on him when they already had a Pro Bowl QB.

Yeah, just saw that. He has good size. Reviewed his college numbers and they aren't that impressive, but I don't know what kind of offense Clemson ran in the early/mid 00's. Don't know what kind of talent he had surrounding him either. I just don't know jack about this guy. I hope Carroll and John Schneider do.The only thing I definitely like about this is that Seattle likely won't draft a QB at 6 or 14 and that's good.

Believe me, your impression echoes that of most Chargers fans when he was drafted. There must be something there to make multiple teams go out of their way to get him.

 

[Donnybrook]

Some interesting information of Charlie Whitehurst including college stats, preseason stats and college highlight video in the following link.

http://www.ninersnation.com/2010/3/15/1372...nd-the-nfc-west

He looks good on the highlight video but then again who doesn't. The college TD to Interception ratio is pretty scary. Statistically he stunk in 2004. Anybody know why?

My tinfoil hat theory is that Seattle releases Hasslebeck and drafts a QB this year but they don't want to throw the rookie to the wolves. Is Whitehurst the future or a Chris Redman type of stop gap? The two year contract IMO points to the latter.

 

[Warhogs]

This move supports the win now theory. I believe there was a topic out there not too long ago on how Carroll was being asked to win right away. That would support not developing a QB. I wonder now if they end up trading down in round 1 and possibly still working a deal to trade a later first to Denver for Marshall?

 

[cstu]

Some interesting information of Charlie Whitehurst including college stats, preseason stats and college highlight video in the following link.

http://www.ninersnation.com/2010/3/15/1372...nd-the-nfc-west

He looks good on the highlight video but then again who doesn't. The college TD to Interception ratio is pretty scary. Statistically he stunk in 2004. Anybody know why?

My tinfoil hat theory is that Seattle releases Hasslebeck and drafts a QB this year but they don't want to throw the rookie to the wolves. Is Whitehurst the future or a Chris Redman type of stop gap? The two year contract IMO points to the latter.

I have no reason to believe that they won't keep Hass and pray he stays healthy. If later in the year the Seahawks are out of it then they'll see what they have in Whitehurst before drafting a QB in 2011.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I think people are making a big deal about nothing. So what if Seattle paid a 3rd rounder in 2011...how many 3rd rounders really pan out in the NFL? Look at the last 5-10 years of draft classes, far more busts than keepers IMHO.

So they trade down in the 2nd round. Seattle still has 2 1st round picks, high ones too, and they still have a 2nd rounder, plus they picked up some much needed depth for their QB stable. Hass is old, might be gone, they are going in a new direction.

It could blow up in Seattle's face but I think the 2 yr/$10 million deal is pretty cheap and perhaps they are going QB in the draft anyways and so Whitehurst is simply a stop gap or will have to handily win out the QB spot in camp. Either way I think Seattle gains felxibility with this pick and it allows them more freedom with their early picks in the draft.

It's not really a bad trade for Seattle IMO...it can go away in 2 years as well. If Whitehurst takes off they will look like geniuses. If he doesn't tjhey really didn't mtg the farm here.

 

[cacksman]

According to the draft value chart, the deal equals about the the last pick in the 2nd round.

Not nearly as bad as some are making it out to be. Better an unproven player than a player that has proven to suck(Quinn, Anderson, Carr, etc).

Kind of disappointed that Seattle won't be drafting Clausen now but if Clausen didn't pan out and we drafted him, that would have been terrible for the teams future. If Whitehurst doesn't pan out, we just lose out on a late 2nd round pick. There are many of those types that don't end up being good starters and it doesn't handicap the team for years.

This now allows Seattle to focus on an OT and a playmaker with the first two picks. Perhaps Berry at 6 and LT and 14.

 

[MAC_32]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.

Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

 

[finito]

Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

By swapping 2nds and giving a 3rd? That's just a silly comment. This move won't make or break the team.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

???As a Charger fan I like the deal.From a Hawk poitn of view, they get a young QB who learned under Rivers and Norv. And now yout dont have to spend a high pick on Jimmy Clausen. You can be flexible and truly go BPA. I think Whitehurst starts for them right away and the Hasslebeck era is over.

 

[Arch Stanton]

According to the draft value chart, the deal equals about the the last pick in the 2nd round.Not nearly as bad as some are making it out to be. Better an unproven player than a player that has proven to suck(Quinn, Anderson, Carr, etc). Kind of disappointed that Seattle won't be drafting Clausen now but if Clausen didn't pan out and we drafted him, that would have been terrible for the teams future. If Whitehurst doesn't pan out, we just lose out on a late 2nd round pick. There are many of those types that don't end up being good starters and it doesn't handicap the team for years.This now allows Seattle to focus on an OT and a playmaker with the first two picks. Perhaps Berry at 6 and LT and 14.

Drafting a QB high this year would be the dumbest move they could make. Hass won't survive behind the line if they don't take OL high and they'd just end up sending a rookie out behind a crappy OL and they'll have spent $20 mil on another Akili Smith. Way too many holes to take a QB this year.

 

[duckhook]

This is just a terrible trade for Seattle. A high 2nd and 3rd next year for a low 2nd and Whitehurst. This is Whitehurst I remind you. He sucked in college and hasn't played a snap in 4 years.

I wonder why they didn't go after Campbell with the same offer to the Skins. They might have taken less than the 1st round tender and Campbell offers a lot more than Whitehurst.

 

[Sabertooth]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

???As a Charger fan I like the deal.From a Hawk poitn of view, they get a young QB who learned under Rivers and Norv. And now yout dont have to spend a high pick on Jimmy Clausen. You can be flexible and truly go BPA. I think Whitehurst starts for them right away and the Hasslebeck era is over.

This is where I am at with it as well. Whitehurst could be the next Hasselbach. He learned for years under Holmgren and Favre before being traded. The Hawks fleeced the Packers in that deal, effectively trading Jamal Reynolds for Hass and Hutch.

 

[MAC_32]

Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

By swapping 2nds and giving a 3rd? That's just a silly comment. This move won't make or break the team.

This year will be part Hass and likely part Whitehurst, unless Whitehurst plays enough this year to not warrant another look he will probably be the guy in 2011. The Hawks will realize their mistake at that point, clean house, and re-build in 2012, hoping to be a contender again in 2013.Maybe Whitehurst has changed since he was in school but I wouldn't bet on it, he's not any good.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

This is just a terrible trade for Seattle. A high 2nd and 3rd next year for a low 2nd and Whitehurst. This is Whitehurst I remind you. He sucked in college and hasn't played a snap in 4 years.

I wonder why they didn't go after Campbell with the same offer to the Skins. They might have taken less than the 1st round tender and Campbell offers a lot more than Whitehurst.

 

[ChargersOH]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.

Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

???As a Charger fan I like the deal.

From a Hawk poitn of view, they get a young QB who learned under Rivers and Norv. And now yout dont have to spend a high pick on Jimmy Clausen. You can be flexible and truly go BPA.

I think Whitehurst starts for them right away and the Hasslebeck era is over.

I think it's a win/win/ The Hawks get a promising young QB who is better groomed than a Bradford or Clausen, without wasting a first round pick. The Chargers get a bit more draft power, but it's not a huge upgrade.

I'd guess Carroll wants to focus his draft around D, but that's just pure speculation.

 

[Mr. Bojangles]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

What a clueless statement. Set them back from what? This team won 9 games over the past two years.

 

[everydayj]

Well I guess Im in the minority here but I like it. I like getting a young QB that has been in the NFL for a few years and now he has a chance to go get his own team. He has a veteran in front of him but with Hass's injury issues lately he could be in soon. Im not a big fan of taking a QB in the first rd, so now I hope we get RB/O line in the first. We (SEA/SD)switched 2nds this year ..big whoopie we have 2 first and got a 4th rd from Phi for Tapp so I like it

 

[rascal]

If Seattle can get fleeced for a second round draft pick for a 3rd string QB I have to think the rumors of Marshall for the 6th overall are legit.

 

[MAC_32]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

What a clueless statement. Set them back from what? This team won 9 games over the past two years.

Set them back, continue to suck, whatever. Instead of focusing on my point I think you guys are poking and prodding at my grammar, if you're going to disagree with my take that the Hawks are going to suck for the next 3 years then lets go there, k?

 

[The High Priest]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

What a clueless statement. Set them back from what? This team won 9 games over the past two years.

Set them back, continue to suck, whatever. Instead of focusing on my point I think you guys are poking and prodding at my grammar, if you're going to disagree with my take that the Hawks are going to suck for the next 3 years then lets go there, k?

Hmmm well how in your opinion are the moves bad. They have 2 first...still have a 2nd rd, and got an extra 4th(via phi from Tapp trade) They can look to rb/oline , they have a vet qb and if Whitehurst doesn pan out then we waste next years 3rd...have a stronger core and dont waste 4 years finding out we picked the wrong QB in the first....I could be wrong..I could be a dilusional Hawlk fan but...doesnt seem like the franchice killing move alot seem to be claiming.

 

[Christo]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

What a clueless statement. Set them back from what? This team won 9 games over the past two years.

Set them back, continue to suck, whatever. Instead of focusing on my point I think you guys are poking and prodding at my grammar, if you're going to disagree with my take that the Hawks are going to suck for the next 3 years then lets go there, k?

It's a message board where we communicate via the written word. If you want posters to address your point, you should put together a group of words that actually convey your point.To address your point, this particular transaction may not benefit the Seahawks in the end but it probably will not harm them either. Whitehurst was good enough that the Chargers kept him around for 4 years. Plenty of 2nd and 3rd round picks never last that long.Much more goes into a team sucking over a three year period than one transaction involving the swap of 2nd round picks and a future 3rd round pick for a backup QB. Do you have any facts which support your conclusion?

 

[MAC_32]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

What a clueless statement. Set them back from what? This team won 9 games over the past two years.

Set them back, continue to suck, whatever. Instead of focusing on my point I think you guys are poking and prodding at my grammar, if you're going to disagree with my take that the Hawks are going to suck for the next 3 years then lets go there, k?

Hmmm well how in your opinion are the moves bad. They have 2 first...still have a 2nd rd, and got an extra 4th(via phi from Tapp trade) They can look to rb/oline , they have a vet qb and if Whitehurst doesn pan out then we waste next years 3rd...have a stronger core and dont waste 4 years finding out we picked the wrong QB in the first....I could be wrong..I could be a dilusional Hawlk fan but...doesnt seem like the franchice killing move alot seem to be claiming.

The moves are bad because Whitehurst is not a good QB, he wasn't coming out of school and he's done nothing to change that since. Unless he sees the field early this year and shows how not good he is it will be 2011 before they realize the error, 2012 before it's fixed, and (likely) 2013 before whoever is brought in to fix it is able to fix it.Could something have changed and he improved? Yes, anything's possible, but no one has any idea outside of the Charger organization and even then they don't really know. Betting on it would not be a good bet though.If I were a Hawk fan I'd just hope he sees the field early in 2010 so you know if you have something going into 2011 or not, if you don't know that is very bad for 2011 planning.

 

[Instinctive]

Mel Kiper wa just on ESPN and he thinks they lost basically nothing and gained a pretty good shot at a starting NFL QB

 

[MAC_32]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

What a clueless statement. Set them back from what? This team won 9 games over the past two years.

Set them back, continue to suck, whatever. Instead of focusing on my point I think you guys are poking and prodding at my grammar, if you're going to disagree with my take that the Hawks are going to suck for the next 3 years then lets go there, k?

It's a message board where we communicate via the written word. If you want posters to address your point, you should put together a group of words that actually convey your point.To address your point, this particular transaction may not benefit the Seahawks in the end but it probably will not harm them either. Whitehurst was good enough that the Chargers kept him around for 4 years. Plenty of 2nd and 3rd round picks never last that long.Much more goes into a team sucking over a three year period than one transaction involving the swap of 2nd round picks and a future 3rd round pick for a backup QB. Do you have any facts which support your conclusion?

Yes - teams with bad QB's are usually below average football teams, especially when the supporting talent is as weak as Seattle's.

 

[Gr00vus]

Yes - teams with bad QB's are usually below average football teams, especially when the supporting talent is as weak as Seattle's.

Now they have more latitude to obtain some "supporting talent" by not having to spend 1st round picks or 1st round money on a QB. If they take upgrades on the OL and/or the offensive skill positions with their early picks in this draft, and Whitehurst somehow proves completely that he's not the guy, they can always draft another QB next year - maybe from a better rookie talent pool - and have better players around him when he gets there.

 

[Christo]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

What a clueless statement. Set them back from what? This team won 9 games over the past two years.

Set them back, continue to suck, whatever. Instead of focusing on my point I think you guys are poking and prodding at my grammar, if you're going to disagree with my take that the Hawks are going to suck for the next 3 years then lets go there, k?

Hmmm well how in your opinion are the moves bad. They have 2 first...still have a 2nd rd, and got an extra 4th(via phi from Tapp trade) They can look to rb/oline , they have a vet qb and if Whitehurst doesn pan out then we waste next years 3rd...have a stronger core and dont waste 4 years finding out we picked the wrong QB in the first....I could be wrong..I could be a dilusional Hawlk fan but...doesnt seem like the franchice killing move alot seem to be claiming.

The moves are bad because Whitehurst is not a good QB, he wasn't coming out of school and he's done nothing to change that since.

You have no way to know this unless you are on the Chargers' staff.

 

[MAC_32]

You have no way to know this unless you are on the Chargers' staff.

Who from the Chargers staff is on the Seahawks staff?

 

[Sabertooth]

You have no way to know this unless you are on the Chargers' staff.

Who from the Chargers staff is on the Seahawks staff?

Charlie Whitehurst

 

[Christo]

You have no way to know this unless you are on the Chargers' staff.

Who from the Chargers staff is on the Seahawks staff?

How is this relevant to your claim?You're trying to make another point that you don't quite know how to put into words, aren't you?

 

[Marauder]

Pat Kirwin made an interesting point on Sirius NFL Radio. If Seattle is planning on making an offer to somebody with a second round tender (Pierre Thomas or Melvin Bullitt for example), then trading down in the second round doesn't cost them anything. This trade essentially becomes Whitehurst for next year's third (from Seattle's point of view).

 

[massraider]

Pat Kirwin made an interesting point on Sirius NFL Radio. If Seattle is planning on making an offer to somebody with a second round tender (Pierre Thomas or Melvin Bullitt for example), then trading down in the second round doesn't cost them anything. This trade essentially becomes Whitehurst for next year's third (from Seattle's point of view).

I believe if you make a RFA a tender, your pick has to be at least equal to your original slot. I am not 100% on this, but I think the above scenario is impossible.

 

[identikit]

Pat Kirwin made an interesting point on Sirius NFL Radio. If Seattle is planning on making an offer to somebody with a second round tender (Pierre Thomas or Melvin Bullitt for example), then trading down in the second round doesn't cost them anything. This trade essentially becomes Whitehurst for next year's third (from Seattle's point of view).

I believe if you make a RFA a tender, your pick has to be at least equal to your original slot. I am not 100% on this, but I think the above scenario is impossible.

This sounds correct.

 

[Marauder]

Pat Kirwin made an interesting point on Sirius NFL Radio. If Seattle is planning on making an offer to somebody with a second round tender (Pierre Thomas or Melvin Bullitt for example), then trading down in the second round doesn't cost them anything. This trade essentially becomes Whitehurst for next year's third (from Seattle's point of view).

I believe if you make a RFA a tender, your pick has to be at least equal to your original slot. I am not 100% on this, but I think the above scenario is impossible.

Link?

 

[The High Priest]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

What a clueless statement. Set them back from what? This team won 9 games over the past two years.

Set them back, continue to suck, whatever. Instead of focusing on my point I think you guys are poking and prodding at my grammar, if you're going to disagree with my take that the Hawks are going to suck for the next 3 years then lets go there, k?

Hmmm well how in your opinion are the moves bad. They have 2 first...still have a 2nd rd, and got an extra 4th(via phi from Tapp trade) They can look to rb/oline , they have a vet qb and if Whitehurst doesn pan out then we waste next years 3rd...have a stronger core and dont waste 4 years finding out we picked the wrong QB in the first....I could be wrong..I could be a dilusional Hawlk fan but...doesnt seem like the franchice killing move alot seem to be claiming.

The moves are bad because Whitehurst is not a good QB, he wasn't coming out of school and he's done nothing to change that since. Unless he sees the field early this year and shows how not good he is it will be 2011 before they realize the error, 2012 before it's fixed, and (likely) 2013 before whoever is brought in to fix it is able to fix it.Could something have changed and he improved? Yes, anything's possible, but no one has any idea outside of the Charger organization and even then they don't really know. Betting on it would not be a good bet though.If I were a Hawk fan I'd just hope he sees the field early in 2010 so you know if you have something going into 2011 or not, if you don't know that is very bad for 2011 planning.

Fair enough, I have never seen Charlie W play so I dont know what to expect he could be complete poo. If he does turn out a bust, we just loose a 3rd

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Pat Kirwin made an interesting point on Sirius NFL Radio. If Seattle is planning on making an offer to somebody with a second round tender (Pierre Thomas or Melvin Bullitt for example), then trading down in the second round doesn't cost them anything. This trade essentially becomes Whitehurst for next year's third (from Seattle's point of view).

I believe if you make a RFA a tender, your pick has to be at least equal to your original slot. I am not 100% on this, but I think the above scenario is impossible.

Link?

"To clarify, if the Seattle Seahawks submit an offer sheet to Broncos receiver Brandon Marshall — and there's still plenty of "if" about that — they would do so knowing they would be forced to surrender their original first-round draft pick to the Broncos.The Seahawks' original pick is No. 6 overall in the upcoming draft. They also have the No. 14 overall pick, which they received in a trade from the Broncos last year that involved Alphonso Smith."

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_14525679?source=bb

 

[MG345]

Like a handful of people have posted, I think most people are over reacting to this trade. The essentially gave up a late second round pick. If Whitehurst pans out, that is a steal for a QB. If he doesn't pan out, they aren't leveraging their future to do it. I think this is an indication of two things: not wanting to invest top dollar into a rookie, and not them not thinking Hasselbeck is a fit in their new offense (which he isn't).

The risk is minimal and the reward could be huge. I mean coming from a group of fantasy football guys, you would think you guys would understand that concept. And for anyone that says Whitehurst is a bum, what are you basing that on? We haven't seen a lick of him outside of some meaningless preseason games. He is a complete unknown. But he does have the physical tools that they are looking for, and rather try to shoe horn older players into their new system they are trying to get guys that fit from the start.

If I was San Diego, I would be ecstatic because the guy would have never seen the field for them. But as a Seahawks' fan, I am optimistic that Whitehurst can be the bridge between franchise QBs at worst, and at best may be the next franchise guy himself. Looking at it that way, it is a win/win.

 

[Marauder]

Pat Kirwin made an interesting point on Sirius NFL Radio. If Seattle is planning on making an offer to somebody with a second round tender (Pierre Thomas or Melvin Bullitt for example), then trading down in the second round doesn't cost them anything. This trade essentially becomes Whitehurst for next year's third (from Seattle's point of view).

I believe if you make a RFA a tender, your pick has to be at least equal to your original slot. I am not 100% on this, but I think the above scenario is impossible.

Link?

"To clarify, if the Seattle Seahawks submit an offer sheet to Broncos receiver Brandon Marshall — and there's still plenty of "if" about that — they would do so knowing they would be forced to surrender their original first-round draft pick to the Broncos.The Seahawks' original pick is No. 6 overall in the upcoming draft. They also have the No. 14 overall pick, which they received in a trade from the Broncos last year that involved Alphonso Smith."

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_14525679?source=bb

That doesn't answer the question. That is a situation where they still have their own pick.

 

[Sebowski]

For the record I think Whitehurst is terrible, but I agree that people (especially Adam Shefter. League wide ramifications? Give me a break...) is making way too big a deal out of this trade.

What I don't get is only giving Whitehurst a two year deal. I still see Hass as a lock to start this year. That gives Charlie a one year deal to start in 2011 and hold all the leverage if he succeeds. I owuld think an affordable longer term deal would have been one of the attractions to get this unproven guy.

 

[Chase Stuart]

On my draft value chart, Seattle moving from #40 to #60, along with giving up a 3rd rounder next year, is roughly equal to the 77th pick. From 1990 to 2000, there were 231 players drafted between pick 67 and pick 87. Only 129 of those players were their team's main starter for even one season; the median number of games played was 62. So you can expect, on average, to get a decent depth pick for what Seattle gave up. To me, that doesn't seem like much for a team to risk for a possible QB of the future, especially when there are no good FA QBs available on the market.

 

[MG345]

For the record I think Whitehurst is terrible, but I agree that people (especially Adam Shefter. League wide ramifications? Give me a break...) is making way too big a deal out of this trade. What I don't get is only giving Whitehurst a two year deal. I still see Hass as a lock to start this year. That gives Charlie a one year deal to start in 2011 and hold all the leverage if he succeeds. I owuld think an affordable longer term deal would have been one of the attractions to get this unproven guy.

There are a lot of people in the Seattle area speculating that Hass could be traded before the year starts. And for what it is worth, even if Hass is a lock to start (which he isn't) there is pretty damn good chance he doesn't finish the year. The two year deal essentially is testing the waters, if Whitehurst proves to be a good QB, no reason they don't sign him long term. If he winds up being a bust, they don't have any ties to him past that point. Not really that big of a mystery.

 

[Cassius]

Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

lol

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

For the record I think Whitehurst is terrible, but I agree that people (especially Adam Shefter. League wide ramifications? Give me a break...) is making way too big a deal out of this trade. What I don't get is only giving Whitehurst a two year deal. I still see Hass as a lock to start this year. That gives Charlie a one year deal to start in 2011 and hold all the leverage if he succeeds. I owuld think an affordable longer term deal would have been one of the attractions to get this unproven guy.

The Seahawks would have likely preferred to lock Whitehurst into a longer-term deal, but they were bidding against the Cardinals, so the Seahawks couldn't just unilaterally set whatever terms they preferred.I think it's a good deal for both teams. The Chargers, obviously, are happy to get more compensation for Whitehurst (late second value) than they did for Brees (late third).The Seahawks, for their part, get a guy with excellent tools and much more experience than anyone in this year's college draft. (Not only has Whitehurst been in the NFL for several years studying under Norv and Rivers, but he started 40 games at Clemson -- more college starts than Bradford or Clausen.)You can't tell anything from a QB's performance during the preseason. But you can tell that the Chargers thought highly of Whitehurst because they kept him as a third QB when injury problems made them desperate for roster space at other positions. It wouldn't surprise me to see Whitehurst start in Seattle and do well. If not, the Seahawks can draft a QB next season. In the meantime, they can shore up their offensive and defensive lines. They need a left tackle before they spend a top ten pick on a quarterback.

 

[ImTheScientist]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

Mel Kiper wa just on ESPN and he thinks they lost basically nothing and gained a pretty good shot at a starting NFL QB

Mel Kiper >>>>> This MAC_32 fool.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

So, let me get this right. Seattle gives up a third AND swaps 2nds move back 20 spots to get a guy that was only tendered at a third. Then you give him 5mil a year even though he couldn't beat out Bill Volek to hold the clipboad om gameday. Maybe this is why other teams wouldn't give Pete Carroll full control.

Carroll swings.......Strike One

 

[Sebowski]

For the record I think Whitehurst is terrible, but I agree that people (especially Adam Shefter. League wide ramifications? Give me a break...) is making way too big a deal out of this trade. What I don't get is only giving Whitehurst a two year deal. I still see Hass as a lock to start this year. That gives Charlie a one year deal to start in 2011 and hold all the leverage if he succeeds. I owuld think an affordable longer term deal would have been one of the attractions to get this unproven guy.

There are a lot of people in the Seattle area speculating that Hass could be traded before the year starts. And for what it is worth, even if Hass is a lock to start (which he isn't) there is pretty damn good chance he doesn't finish the year. The two year deal essentially is testing the waters, if Whitehurst proves to be a good QB, no reason they don't sign him long term. If he winds up being a bust, they don't have any ties to him past that point. Not really that big of a mystery.

That would make more sense. Who is in the market for a 35 year old QB though? Bills? I guess the Vikings would be a good match if Favre retires.

 

[PewterFan]

On my draft value chart, Seattle moving from #40 to #60, along with giving up a 3rd rounder next year, is roughly equal to the 77th pick. From 1990 to 2000, there were 231 players drafted between pick 67 and pick 87. Only 129 of those players were their team's main starter for even one season; the median number of games played was 62. So you can expect, on average, to get a decent depth pick for what Seattle gave up. To me, that doesn't seem like much for a team to risk for a possible QB of the future, especially when there are no good FA QBs available on the market.

I was going to say the exact same thing, but you beat me to it.