*** Official 2013 Seattle Seahawks **** (1 Viewer)

[Faust]

Closer look at Pete Carroll's roster claim

By Mike Sando | ESPN.com

Seattle Seahawks coach Pete Carroll cited interesting evidence Monday regarding the team's roster strength. Even the team's castoffs are highly valued around the NFL, he said, and a check of the waiver wire would confirm it.

Was this true? If so, what might it mean? I'll offer some thoughts on that. First, though, let's consider what Carroll said during his interview with 710ESPN Seattle.

"We have had more players claimed [off waivers] than any other team in the NFL over the last three years by a pretty good number," Carroll said. "That is a statement of who you have on your team and that is including the first year, when nobody wanted our guys. There will be teams that wanted our guys coming off this roster, too. We will have a very, very difficult time organizing the 53 this year."

Jason Vida of ESPN Stats & Information confirmed Carroll's information regarding waiver claims. A league-high 25 players waived by Seattle since 2010 were subsequently awarded to other teams. Other players were claimed but never awarded because the claiming team had placed a higher priority on other players it was seeking within the same waiver cycle.

So, Carroll was right. But was he correct in tying the league-leading number to overall roster strength? That question is tougher to answer.

In looking at the chart, we do not necessarily see high correlation between players awarded and perceived overall roster strength.

San Francisco and Baltimore rank below Oakland in this category, for example. The 49ers' roster has been as strong or stronger than the Seahawks' roster, by most accounts, but Seattle holds a 25-6 lead in released players awarded to other teams on waivers. Is that meaningful? Would anyone rank the St. Louis Rams, with 18 waived players awarded to other teams, over the 49ers in overall roster strength since 2010?

Of course, having a waived player claimed by another team and awarded to that team could in some cases reflect a personnel mistake. Last year, for example, the Seahawks kept veteran corner Marcus Trufant on their roster at the expense of Phillip Adams, who wound up contributing to the Oakland Raiders. Good move?

The 25 former Seattle players awarded to other teams since 2010 did not go on to stardom elsewhere. And there were actually more Seattle castoffs awarded to other teams in 2010 (10), when the team was rebuilding, than there were in 2011 (four), 2012 (eight) or to this point in 2013 (three).

The overall number (25) indeed marks a dramatic increase from the three seasons before Carroll and general manager John Schneider arrived in Seattle. The number was five over that span. But the team's priorities obviously changed when the front office and coaching staff turned over simultaneously after the 2009 season.

The bottom line: The Seahawks have made an unusually high number of overall roster moves in the past few seasons. They have continually churned their roster. A team waiving players more frequently should have a higher total number of players awarded to other teams via waiver claims. This could explain why the Seahawks and even the Rams rank higher in the chart than the 49ers or Ravens. San Francisco and Baltimore were ahead of these teams in the roster building process, so they did not churn as vigorously. As a team gets better, the number of released players awarded to others via waivers could fall even as the roster decisions become more difficult.

 

[Hooper31]

I guess we know this heading into training camp. It was going to be tough for all the draft picks to make this roster. Throw in a few stellar undrafted free agents and it gets even tougher. Bailey, Lotulelei, and Brooks have impressed.

My guess at draft picks that make the roster:

2nd RB Michael

3rd DT Hill

5th DT Williams

5th TE Wilson

6th FB Ware

My guess at draft picks that don't:

4th WR Harper (ouch)

5th DB Simon

No idea on Seymour, Powell, Smith and Bowie. Practice squad perhaps?

I think its going to be tough to fill out the 53 man roster without cutting at least two vets. Maybe McQuistan and Robinson. Losing Robinson in the locker room could hurt. If you're interested in these sort of details I would recommend following Davis Hsu on twitter.

 

[Tau837]

I guess we know this heading into training camp. It was going to be tough for all the draft picks to make this roster. Throw in a few stellar undrafted free agents and it gets even tougher. Bailey, Lotulelei, and Brooks have impressed.

My guess at draft picks that make the roster:

2nd RB Michael

3rd DT Hill

5th DT Williams

5th TE Wilson

6th FB Ware

My guess at draft picks that don't:

4th WR Harper (ouch)

5th DB Simon

No idea on Seymour, Powell, Smith and Bowie. Practice squad perhaps?

I think its going to be tough to fill out the 53 man roster without cutting at least two vets. Maybe McQuistan and Robinson. Losing Robinson in the locker room could hurt. If you're interested in these sort of details I would recommend following Davis Hsu on twitter.

I assume you are counting on Rice, Tate, Baldwin, and Kearse making the roster at WR. Are you expecting Williams to make it over Harper? I don't see that.

 

[Hooper31]

Are you expecting Williams to make it over Harper? I don't see that.

I don't see how the coaching staff keeps their credibility in the locker room if they cut Williams to keep Harper. They've been very consistent over the past three years in this regard.

 

[EBF]

Harper getting cut seems like a possibility, but I'll be somewhat surprised if it happens.

Some recent quote from Pete Carroll:

http://www.fieldgulls.com/seahawks-notes/2013/8/13/4619016/notes-on-seahawks-training-camp-from-pat-kirwin-tim-ryans-sirius

On Chris Harper "He's gotten better and better every day. He runs great routes, very strong hands. He's Anquan Boldin-like."

On Chris Harper: "Real complete, blocking catching... we wanted him because he's very physical, and he is that. We comp'ed him to Anquan Boldin in our evaluation and that's why we fell in love with him. Gonna be in play - all preseason and we'll see how far he can take it."

Williams is clearly ahead of him on the depth chart at the moment, but Williams is also 27 and entering his fourth season in the league. To answer your question about how the staff could justify keeping the rook, it's simple. Depth charts are based on the here and now. Roster decisions involve future considerations as well. If you project the rookie to eventually become a better player than the veteran, you would probably keep him instead. For the same reason that you aren't going to cut Justin Hunter from your dynasty team to make room for Nate Burleson. It's not just about who's better today.

The pre-draft evaluations and long term potential will factor into the equation. That's why the Cardinals kept Andre Roberts as a rookie even though he had a terrible training camp by all accounts.

 

[Hooper31]

To answer your question about how the staff could justify keeping the rook, it's simple. Depth charts are based on the here and now. Roster decisions involve future considerations as well. If you project the rookie to eventually become a better player than the veteran, you would probably keep him instead. For the same reason that you aren't going to cut Justin Hunter from your dynasty team to make room for Nate Burleson. It's not just about who's better today.The pre-draft evaluations and long term potential will factor into the equation. That's why the Cardinals kept Andre Roberts as a rookie even though he had a terrible training camp by all accounts.

I don't disagree with your logic here. I think it holds true for most teams. However, this is Pete Carroll. He's been very consistent in building his roster keeping and playing the better players in all cases. He played Big Mike Williams for a single year while he was the best WR on the roster. It might not have been the best thing for the younger receivers development, but he did it.

Also, this is a team that's built to win over the next two years. They're going to have problems with the cap in 2015 and several veterans won't be with the team past 2014. Davis Hsu does a marvelous job on Fieldgulls and twitter detailing the specifics of the Seattle cap scenarios if you're interested in specifics. IMO if Harper doesn't help them to win this year or next he's not going to make the roster this year. Like I said above, Seattle fans were talking about this before the draft. How are these rookies going to find spots on this roster? They're loaded, specifically on defense. I think many teams are going to be picking up players that are released from Seattle before week one of the regular season.

 

[EBF]

To answer your question about how the staff could justify keeping the rook, it's simple. Depth charts are based on the here and now. Roster decisions involve future considerations as well. If you project the rookie to eventually become a better player than the veteran, you would probably keep him instead. For the same reason that you aren't going to cut Justin Hunter from your dynasty team to make room for Nate Burleson. It's not just about who's better today.The pre-draft evaluations and long term potential will factor into the equation. That's why the Cardinals kept Andre Roberts as a rookie even though he had a terrible training camp by all accounts.

I don't disagree with your logic here. I think it holds true for most teams. However, this is Pete Carroll. He's been very consistent in building his roster keeping and playing the better players in all cases. He played Big Mike Williams for a single year while he was the best WR on the roster. It might not have been the best thing for the younger receivers development, but he did it.

Also, this is a team that's built to win over the next two years. They're going to have problems with the cap in 2015 and several veterans won't be with the team past 2014. Davis Hsu does a marvelous job on Fieldgulls and twitter detailing the specifics of the Seattle cap scenarios if you're interested in specifics. IMO if Harper doesn't help them to win this year or next he's not going to make the roster this year. Like I said above, Seattle fans were talking about this before the draft. How are these rookies going to find spots on this roster? They're loaded, specifically on defense. I think many teams are going to be picking up players that are released from Seattle before week one of the regular season.

Not sure how much Williams is really going to help them though. Even with Harvin and Rice out, he's at best the #3 receiver and more likely the #4 behind Kearse.

Do you cut your fourth round pick in his rookie season to make room for a guy who will play sparingly? If it comes down to that decision, I'm not sure you do.

I could see them keeping 6 WRs to start the season and then dumping Williams if Rice gets back to full fitness. I see Rice/Williams as pretty redundant from a skill set standpoint, with Rice being a better and more accomplished version of the same thing.

 

[Hooper31]

I could see them keeping 6 WRs to start the season and then dumping Williams if Rice gets back to full fitness. I see Rice/Williams as pretty redundant from a skill set standpoint, with Rice being a better and more accomplished version of the same thing.

The problem here is that they have too much talent in other positions groups all over the team. Keeping six WRs means potentially keeping only 4/5 RBs or CBs. Too many CBs that are worthy of starting for other NFL teams. Too many RBs that are worthy of being on rosters for other NFL teams. They are going to have to make some very tough decisions with regard to a few of their veterans (Michael Robinson and Paul McQuistan I think will be the toughest calls). They've also got some tough calls at the OG position. Will Carpenter be ready to go? Ugh. Glad I don't have to make these decisions.

 

[Tau837]

I'm with EBF here.

 

[Inspiration]

To answer your question about how the staff could justify keeping the rook, it's simple. Depth charts are based on the here and now. Roster decisions involve future considerations as well. If you project the rookie to eventually become a better player than the veteran, you would probably keep him instead. For the same reason that you aren't going to cut Justin Hunter from your dynasty team to make room for Nate Burleson. It's not just about who's better today.
The pre-draft evaluations and long term potential will factor into the equation. That's why the Cardinals kept Andre Roberts as a rookie even though he had a terrible training camp by all accounts.

I don't disagree with your logic here. I think it holds true for most teams. However, this is Pete Carroll. He's been very consistent in building his roster keeping and playing the better players in all cases. He played Big Mike Williams for a single year while he was the best WR on the roster. It might not have been the best thing for the younger receivers development, but he did it.

Also, this is a team that's built to win over the next two years. They're going to have problems with the cap in 2015 and several veterans won't be with the team past 2014. Davis Hsu does a marvelous job on Fieldgulls and twitter detailing the specifics of the Seattle cap scenarios if you're interested in specifics. IMO if Harper doesn't help them to win this year or next he's not going to make the roster this year. Like I said above, Seattle fans were talking about this before the draft. How are these rookies going to find spots on this roster? They're loaded, specifically on defense. I think many teams are going to be picking up players that are released from Seattle before week one of the regular season.

To be fair, the bolded is an argument for keeping Harper, given that he is under team control at league minimum salaries until 2017.

Everything I've read indicates that Williams has locked up a roster spot. At this point Harper is competing against guys like Spencer Ware, Michael Robinson and Michael Bowie rather than other WRs.

 

[JetMaxx]

Practice squad

 

[Hooper31]

Practice squad

I might be wrong on this, but i think he would have to make it through waivers first. Pretty sure he would get jabbed by some other team.

 

[EBF]

I could see them keeping 6 WRs to start the season and then dumping Williams if Rice gets back to full fitness. I see Rice/Williams as pretty redundant from a skill set standpoint, with Rice being a better and more accomplished version of the same thing.

The problem here is that they have too much talent in other positions groups all over the team. Keeping six WRs means potentially keeping only 4/5 RBs or CBs. Too many CBs that are worthy of starting for other NFL teams. Too many RBs that are worthy of being on rosters for other NFL teams. They are going to have to make some very tough decisions with regard to a few of their veterans (Michael Robinson and Paul McQuistan I think will be the toughest calls). They've also got some tough calls at the OG position. Will Carpenter be ready to go? Ugh. Glad I don't have to make these decisions.

Yea, it will be interesting to see what they do. If I'm Seattle I try to get whatever I can for Turbin. He's not going to play ahead of Lynch and I think Michael will soon be better if he isn't already. Ware might even be as good or better. Shifting Turbin would free up a roster spot and solve the RB dilemma.

 

[Tau837]

Practice squad

I might be wrong on this, but i think he would have to make it through waivers first. Pretty sure he would get jabbed by some other team.

As a Chargers fan, I'd hope they would claim Harper.

 

[Inspiration]

I could see them keeping 6 WRs to start the season and then dumping Williams if Rice gets back to full fitness. I see Rice/Williams as pretty redundant from a skill set standpoint, with Rice being a better and more accomplished version of the same thing.

The problem here is that they have too much talent in other positions groups all over the team. Keeping six WRs means potentially keeping only 4/5 RBs or CBs. Too many CBs that are worthy of starting for other NFL teams. Too many RBs that are worthy of being on rosters for other NFL teams. They are going to have to make some very tough decisions with regard to a few of their veterans (Michael Robinson and Paul McQuistan I think will be the toughest calls). They've also got some tough calls at the OG position. Will Carpenter be ready to go? Ugh. Glad I don't have to make these decisions.

Yea, it will be interesting to see what they do. If I'm Seattle I try to get whatever I can for Turbin. He's not going to play ahead of Lynch and I think Michael will soon be better if he isn't already. Ware might even be as good or better. Shifting Turbin would free up a roster spot and solve the RB dilemma.

Turbin may be the Seahawks' best back in the passing game (he spelled Lynch extensively on passing downs last year). He may not be a great fantasy asset, but he's a valuable NFL player. I can't imagine that Seattle would move him.

I mentioned this in the preseason observation thread, but I still think there's a strong chance at least one of Harper, Ware or Bowie winds up on IR in the next few weeks, rendering this discussion irrelevant. Every year teams stash "project" players on IR with seemingly minor injuries in order to retain their rights. Victor Cruz might the most notable recent example of this (the Giants placed him on IR in 2010 with a relatively minor hamstring injury; the NFL actually reviewed the case but ultimately upheld the decision).

 

[ex-ghost]

Harper injury to IR?

 

[Hooper31]

I mentioned this in the preseason observation thread, but I still think there's a strong chance at least one of Harper, Ware or Bowie winds up on IR in the next few weeks, rendering this discussion irrelevant. Every year teams stash "project" players on IR with seemingly minor injuries in order to retain their rights. Victor Cruz might the most notable recent example of this (the Giants placed him on IR in 2010 with a relatively minor hamstring injury; the NFL actually reviewed the case but ultimately upheld the decision).

This seems complete plausible. Does the NFL crack down on teams attempting to do this, or do they just look the other way?

 

[Sabertooth]

Love to see Harper get his chance with the 49ers.

 

[ImTheScientist]

2-0

Just watched the game.... pretty impressive performance by the Hawks! You can easily see they have more depth than any team in the NFL. I also like what Quinn is doing with the defense, much more aggressive.

 

[seahawk 17]

I guess we know this heading into training camp. It was going to be tough for all the draft picks to make this roster. Throw in a few stellar undrafted free agents and it gets even tougher. Bailey, Lotulelei, and Brooks have impressed.

My guess at draft picks that make the roster:

2nd RB Michael

3rd DT Hill

5th DT Williams

5th TE Wilson

6th FB Ware

My guess at draft picks that don't:

4th WR Harper (ouch)

5th DB Simon

No idea on Seymour, Powell, Smith and Bowie. Practice squad perhaps?

I think its going to be tough to fill out the 53 man roster without cutting at least two vets. Maybe McQuistan and Robinson. Losing Robinson in the locker room could hurt. If you're interested in these sort of details I would recommend following Davis Hsu on twitter.

I can't imagine that they cut Robinson, even though the rumblings are getting louder.

 

[seahawk 17]

2-0

Just watched the game.... pretty impressive performance by the Hawks! You can easily see they have more depth than any team in the NFL. I also like what Quinn is doing with the defense, much more aggressive.

Glad to see Quinn blitzing more and being aggressive. I hated how passive Bradley was as a DC.

 

[Hooper31]

I can't imagine that they cut Robinson, even though the rumblings are getting louder.

If you haven't gone through the excersice of attempting to get it down to 53 yet I suggest you give it a try. Seattle is going to have to release several players that will hurt. This is why I keep thinking that Harper doesn't make it.

 

[Inspiration]

I mentioned this in the preseason observation thread, but I still think there's a strong chance at least one of Harper, Ware or Bowie winds up on IR in the next few weeks, rendering this discussion irrelevant. Every year teams stash "project" players on IR with seemingly minor injuries in order to retain their rights. Victor Cruz might the most notable recent example of this (the Giants placed him on IR in 2010 with a relatively minor hamstring injury; the NFL actually reviewed the case but ultimately upheld the decision).

This seems complete plausible. Does the NFL crack down on teams attempting to do this, or do they just look the other way?

The rules state that an injury with a "recovery time" of 6 weeks or greater is eligible for injured reserve. Teams can easily argue that, even if the player could return to the field in much less than 6 weeks, the injury could continue to linger well beyond point (as was the case with the Cruz hamstring injury I mentioned in the prior post).

 

[Sabertooth]

2-0

Just watched the game.... pretty impressive performance by the Hawks! You can easily see they have more depth than any team in the NFL. I also like what Quinn is doing with the defense, much more aggressive.

Let's just see if they can win the division first. I have a feeling you are dooming them to an 8-8 season with your false bravado.

 

[ImTheScientist]

2-0

Just watched the game.... pretty impressive performance by the Hawks! You can easily see they have more depth than any team in the NFL. I also like what Quinn is doing with the defense, much more aggressive.

Let's just see if they can win the division first. I have a feeling you are dooming them to an 8-8 season with your false bravado.

lol....says the guy that cried for weeks after the Hawks beat GB last year.

 

[Ghost Rider]

2-0

Just watched the game.... pretty impressive performance by the Hawks! You can easily see they have more depth than any team in the NFL. I also like what Quinn is doing with the defense, much more aggressive.

Let's just see if they can win the division first. I have a feeling you are dooming them to an 8-8 season with your false bravado.

lol....says the guy that cried for weeks after the Hawks beat GB last year.

lol..says the guy who crawled into a hole and refused to man up after the Seahawks lost to the Falcons in the playoffs last year.

 

[Sabertooth]

2-0

Just watched the game.... pretty impressive performance by the Hawks! You can easily see they have more depth than any team in the NFL. I also like what Quinn is doing with the defense, much more aggressive.

Let's just see if they can win the division first. I have a feeling you are dooming them to an 8-8 season with your false bravado.

lol....says the guy that cried for weeks after the Hawks beat GB last year.

2-0

Just watched the game.... pretty impressive performance by the Hawks! You can easily see they have more depth than any team in the NFL. I also like what Quinn is doing with the defense, much more aggressive.

Let's just see if they can win the division first. I have a feeling you are dooming them to an 8-8 season with your false bravado.

lol....says the guy that cried for weeks after the Hawks beat GB last year.

lol..says the guy who crawled into a hole and refused to man up after the Seahawks lost to the Falcons in the playoffs last year.

 

[ImTheScientist]

I have to say I am really happy about the group of undrafted FA guys brought in. Its a shame we can't keep them all.

 

[mad sweeney]

2-0

Just watched the game.... pretty impressive performance by the Hawks! You can easily see they have more depth than any team in the NFL. I also like what Quinn is doing with the defense, much more aggressive.

Let's just see if they can win the division first. I have a feeling you are dooming them to an 8-8 season with your false bravado.

lol....says the guy that cried for weeks after the Hawks beat GB last year.

lol..says the guy who crawled into a hole and refused to man up after the Seahawks lost to the Falcons in the playoffs last year.

says all the other Seahawks fans.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I'm looking forward to them having Lynch, Turbin and now Christine Michael running the ball. This gives them a ton of flexibility in playcalling and also allows them to rest guys longer than they normally would. Wilson IMO will only get better, so the playaction is going to continue to work because they are going to be able to run the ball down teams throats. This is not a team others want to get behind, great secondary and great running game.

 

[ImTheScientist]

In minor news John Moffitt was just traded for Brian Sanford......

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000231815/article/john-moffitt-acquired-by-browns-in-trade-with-seahawks

Means they really like the Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp, and Mcquistan imo (not that Bowie and Bailey will play G although Bowie did Saturday). Keeping dudes around. Don't know much about Sandford....probably going to get cut.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I'm looking forward to them having Lynch, Turbin and now Christine Michael running the ball. This gives them a ton of flexibility in playcalling and also allows them to rest guys longer than they normally would. Wilson IMO will only get better, so the playaction is going to continue to work because they are going to be able to run the ball down teams throats. This is not a team others want to get behind, great secondary and great running game.

Yep, I think most would agree, hyperbole aside from certain persons, that the Seahawks will be a tough out this year. And a major force in the NFC. I think Seattle, GB and Atlanta will be fighting it out for the top spot (I think SF will fall back a bit, but still be a wild card team). NO and Washington will also be tough. And I won't be surprised if the Giants, Bears, Rams or Bucs are in the mix as well.

 

[seahawk 17]

In minor news John Moffitt was just traded for Brian Sanford......

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000231815/article/john-moffitt-acquired-by-browns-in-trade-with-seahawks

Means they really like the Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp, and Mcquistan imo (not that Bowie and Bailey will play G although Bowie did Saturday). Keeping dudes around. Don't know much about Sandford....probably going to get cut.

This trade makes no sense. Giving up depth and in return getting nothing back.

 

[ImTheScientist]

In minor news John Moffitt was just traded for Brian Sanford......

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000231815/article/john-moffitt-acquired-by-browns-in-trade-with-seahawks

Means they really like the Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp, and Mcquistan imo (not that Bowie and Bailey will play G although Bowie did Saturday). Keeping dudes around. Don't know much about Sandford....probably going to get cut.

This trade makes no sense. Giving up depth and in return getting nothing back.

Im guessing it means they were going to cut Moffitt anyways and wanted to kick the tires on a guy that fits their scheme. Best case he makes the team, worst case you cut him...just like you would have done with Moffitt. They have depth in Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp and Mcquistan. They need more Dline depth considering they will be missing a few guys when the season starts.

 

[sho nuff]

I'm looking forward to them having Lynch, Turbin and now Christine Michael running the ball. This gives them a ton of flexibility in playcalling and also allows them to rest guys longer than they normally would. Wilson IMO will only get better, so the playaction is going to continue to work because they are going to be able to run the ball down teams throats. This is not a team others want to get behind, great secondary and great running game.

Yep, I think most would agree, hyperbole aside from certain persons, that the Seahawks will be a tough out this year. And a major force in the NFC. I think Seattle, GB and Atlanta will be fighting it out for the top spot (I think SF will fall back a bit, but still be a wild card team). NO and Washington will also be tough. And I won't be surprised if the Giants, Bears, Rams or Bucs are in the mix as well.

The NFC is completely loaded this year.

 

[Hooper31]

In minor news John Moffitt was just traded for Brian Sanford......

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000231815/article/john-moffitt-acquired-by-browns-in-trade-with-seahawks

Means they really like the Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp, and Mcquistan imo (not that Bowie and Bailey will play G although Bowie did Saturday). Keeping dudes around. Don't know much about Sandford....probably going to get cut.

This trade makes no sense. Giving up depth and in return getting nothing back.

Im guessing it means they were going to cut Moffitt anyways and wanted to kick the tires on a guy that fits their scheme. Best case he makes the team, worst case you cut him...just like you would have done with Moffitt. They have depth in Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp and Mcquistan. They need more Dline depth considering they will be missing a few guys when the season starts.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[proninja]

In minor news John Moffitt was just traded for Brian Sanford......

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000231815/article/john-moffitt-acquired-by-browns-in-trade-with-seahawks

Means they really like the Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp, and Mcquistan imo (not that Bowie and Bailey will play G although Bowie did Saturday). Keeping dudes around. Don't know much about Sandford....probably going to get cut.

This trade makes no sense. Giving up depth and in return getting nothing back.

Im guessing it means they were going to cut Moffitt anyways and wanted to kick the tires on a guy that fits their scheme. Best case he makes the team, worst case you cut him...just like you would have done with Moffitt. They have depth in Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp and Mcquistan. They need more Dline depth considering they will be missing a few guys when the season starts.

My thoughts exactly.

Pretty obvious this was the case, imo

 

[seahawk 17]

In minor news John Moffitt was just traded for Brian Sanford......

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000231815/article/john-moffitt-acquired-by-browns-in-trade-with-seahawks

Means they really like the Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp, and Mcquistan imo (not that Bowie and Bailey will play G although Bowie did Saturday). Keeping dudes around. Don't know much about Sandford....probably going to get cut.

This trade makes no sense. Giving up depth and in return getting nothing back.

Im guessing it means they were going to cut Moffitt anyways and wanted to kick the tires on a guy that fits their scheme. Best case he makes the team, worst case you cut him...just like you would have done with Moffitt. They have depth in Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp and Mcquistan. They need more Dline depth considering they will be missing a few guys when the season starts.

My thoughts exactly.

Pretty obvious this was the case, imo

What I should of said, was drafting player's in the 3rd round, and dumping them for players that most likely will be cut is not acceptable.

 

[Hooper31]

What I should of said, was drafting player's in the 3rd round, and dumping them for players that most likely will be cut is not acceptable.

I disagree. Expecting that every draft pick will be a success is not acceptable. Further, if you're not happy with the Seahawks drafts over the past several years you're setting up a standard that can never be met.

 

[Sabertooth]

Once you get to a point where you have a solid roster top to bottom, all top picks don't just have a free spot. I think some fans are looking at this the wrong way. Look at it from a positive perspective that a guy with third round ability just can't cut the mustard for a team that has the cupboards loaded.

It'd be much easier to make the roster on a team like Jacksonville than a team like Seattle. That's a good problem to have.

 

[seahawk 17]

What I should of said, was drafting player's in the 3rd round, and dumping them for players that most likely will be cut is not acceptable.

I disagree. Expecting that every draft pick will be a success is not acceptable. Further, if you're not happy with the Seahawks drafts over the past several years you're setting up a standard that can never be met.

I am happy with PC and JS. I think they have done a great job drafting for the most part, and they have found great value in the later rounds. They have taken Seattle from nobody's to SB contenders in 3 seasons. The depth that Seattle has, especially on defense is incredible. I am a happy camper.

With all that being said, I am not going to turn a blind eye to the fact that Carpenter seems like an injury risk. I don't know how good Irvin is when he is off PEDS, Moffit is gone, and Harper is probably not going to make the team.

I would rather have our 5-7 round picks washing out vs players picked 1-4.

 

[ImTheScientist]

In minor news John Moffitt was just traded for Brian Sanford......

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000231815/article/john-moffitt-acquired-by-browns-in-trade-with-seahawks

Means they really like the Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp, and Mcquistan imo (not that Bowie and Bailey will play G although Bowie did Saturday). Keeping dudes around. Don't know much about Sandford....probably going to get cut.

This trade makes no sense. Giving up depth and in return getting nothing back.

Im guessing it means they were going to cut Moffitt anyways and wanted to kick the tires on a guy that fits their scheme. Best case he makes the team, worst case you cut him...just like you would have done with Moffitt. They have depth in Bowie, Bailey, Sweezy, Carp and Mcquistan. They need more Dline depth considering they will be missing a few guys when the season starts.

My thoughts exactly.

Pretty obvious this was the case, imo

What I should of said, was drafting player's in the 3rd round, and dumping them for players that most likely will be cut is not acceptable.

Draft slot or position doesn't matter with the Hawks. Its all about performance. If a 7th round converted DT to OG beats out the 3rd round OG .... comPETE. If a 3rd round QB beats out the QB you pay millions for.... comPETE.

People get drafted on potential, people have long careers based on performance.

 

[ImTheScientist]

With all that being said, I am not going to turn a blind eye to the fact that Carpenter seems like an injury risk. I don't know how good Irvin is when he is off PEDS, Moffit is gone, and Harper is probably not going to make the team.

I would rather have our 5-7 round picks washing out vs players picked 1-4.

You should evaluate other teams drafts. Hawks have been the best over the last 3 years.

 

[The Kerminator]

With all that being said, I am not going to turn a blind eye to the fact that Carpenter seems like an injury risk. I don't know how good Irvin is when he is off PEDS, Moffit is gone, and Harper is probably not going to make the team.

I would rather have our 5-7 round picks washing out vs players picked 1-4.

You should evaluate other teams drafts. Hawks have been the best over the last 3 years.

Gotta link?

 

[seahawk 17]

According to Nate Ulrich of the Akron Beacon Journal, the Cleveland Browns voided the trade of offensive lineman John Moffitt in exchange for defensive lineman Brian Sanford because Moffitt failed his physical with the Browns.

So now Moffitt’s rights returns to the Seahawks, and Sanford goes back to Cleveland. Moffitt had major knee surgery two years ago, and also had elbow surgery a year ago.

The Seahawks wasted little time, sending Moffitt to Denver for defensive tackle Sealver Sealver Siliga, according to the Denver Broncos’ website.

The Seahawks have not confirmed this report.

At 6-3 and 325 pounds, Siliga was an undrafted rookie free agent out of Utah who spent time his rookie season on Denver’s practice squad in 2011, and played in one game for the Broncos in 2012.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/seahawks/2013/08/20/moffitt-trade-to-cleveland-voided-due-to-health-issues-hes-headed-to-denver-instead/#storylink=cpy

 

[ImTheScientist]

With all that being said, I am not going to turn a blind eye to the fact that Carpenter seems like an injury risk. I don't know how good Irvin is when he is off PEDS, Moffit is gone, and Harper is probably not going to make the team.

I would rather have our 5-7 round picks washing out vs players picked 1-4.

You should evaluate other teams drafts. Hawks have been the best over the last 3 years.

Gotta link?

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/tracker

Start there and look back the last 3 years.

 

[proninja]

What I should of said, was drafting player's in the 3rd round, and dumping them for players that most likely will be cut is not acceptable.

I completely disagree. The draft is, and always will be, an inexact science. Nobody will hit on every player.

What is not acceptable is being unwilling to part with a player who doesn't help your team simply because of the draft capital you used to acquire said player. Bravo to PCJS for holding onto the best player regardless of how they acquired them. Even more bravo for them finding guys late and UDFA who can displace a 3rd round pick.

 

[Tau837]

What I should of said, was drafting player's in the 3rd round, and dumping them for players that most likely will be cut is not acceptable.

I completely disagree. The draft is, and always will be, an inexact science. Nobody will hit on every player.

What is not acceptable is being unwilling to part with a player who doesn't help your team simply because of the draft capital you used to acquire said player. Bravo to PCJS for holding onto the best player regardless of how they acquired them. Even more bravo for them finding guys late and UDFA who can displace a 3rd round pick.

Surprised anyone would disagree with this.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

What I should of said, was drafting player's in the 3rd round, and dumping them for players that most likely will be cut is not acceptable.

I completely disagree. The draft is, and always will be, an inexact science. Nobody will hit on every player.

What is not acceptable is being unwilling to part with a player who doesn't help your team simply because of the draft capital you used to acquire said player. Bravo to PCJS for holding onto the best player regardless of how they acquired them. Even more bravo for them finding guys late and UDFA who can displace a 3rd round pick.

Surprised anyone would disagree with this.

I'm not. Most people don't understand the concept of sunk cost.

 

[Hooper31]

With all that being said, I am not going to turn a blind eye to the fact that Carpenter seems like an injury risk. I don't know how good Irvin is when he is off PEDS, Moffit is gone, and Harper is probably not going to make the team.

I would rather have our 5-7 round picks washing out vs players picked 1-4.

You should evaluate other teams drafts. Hawks have been the best over the last 3 years.

Gotta link?

8 players from the past three drafts have made the pro-bowl or been first team all-pro after being drafted in the 5th round or later. Seattle is the only team to have multiple (3). The other five players are all from different teams. This was posted on twitter by a few different people. Davis Hsu or Danny Kelly I think. I will try to find a link if you must have it. It might have been 4th round and later as well.

EDIT: Found it. It was from Derek Stephens (draft scout with CBSSports.com)

# of Pro-bowlers or all-pro players drafted between rounds 3-5, over last 3 drafts: 8. Tm. Breakdown: SEA - 3; SF,NE,NO,CIN,KC - 1 ea.

I was wrong about the rounds. The three Seattle players were Chancellor, Wilson, and Sherman.