Aseahawkfan wrote:I wouldn't trade Metcalf myself. Given JSN is good and Tyler has some years left, he is expendable for the right price. We are missing a 2nd round pick. I'm thinking John wants to ensure MacDonald has what he needs to implement his defense.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:The team needs LB, DL, and OL help (especially if Lucas can't get right) and are also looking for a QBotF, so I'm thinking they'll pull the trigger for the right offer. Hopefully it's just a one step back, two steps forward type of deal.
I would think a team that missed the playoffs but thinks it will compete soon would be ideal. The bears hold the no. 1 and no. 9 pick. Maybe they think Fields needs a legit target. Metcalf for No. 9 would be hard to turn down.
RiverDog wrote:If the Bears offered us the #9 overall for Metcalf, I'd jump on it like a chicken on a June bug. Coupled with our #16 overall, we'd have some firepower to move up and grab one of the top QB prospects.
But here's another thought: As you said, the Bears have the #1 overall pick in this year's draft and there's talk that they may move away from Fields, so how about a swap, Metcalf for Fields? I'm not necessarily advocating it, but it does suggest an interesting possibility.
c_hawkbob wrote:We just informed Geno that we're keeping him and his salary becomes guaranteed today. Macdonald has said it's a priority to keep our QB comfortable. We aren't going to trade away his best target. Besides, with Geno's guarantee being so (relatively) cap friendly for a starting QB I don't think we'll need DK's cap savings.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:Devil's advocate in me says that keeping Geno instead of cutting him means other teams have to offer a trade to get Geno. Geno has value as a starter in a league where there aren't 32 starting caliber QBs. Not saying they are aiming to trade him, just that they wanted to be prepared to entertain offers. Should none come, they are really no worse off.
My guess is both Geno and DK will be Seahawks this coming season.
c_hawkbob wrote:Actually I believe we've got $5m+ in cap room presently. After the post June 1 cuts we'll have a much clearer picture of our actual cap situation.
c_hawkbob wrote:Actually I believe we've got $5m+ in cap room presently. After the post June 1 cuts we'll have a much clearer picture of our actual cap situation.
NorthHawk wrote:OvertheCap and Spotrac disagree. One says we have $5M in Cap room and the other says we are $11M or something near that over. Regardless it's very tight.
Maybe trade Geno instead and cut Adams and Diggs to start the process of clearing Cap space.
c_hawkbob wrote:That's not even a rumor. That's a fan 'what if' fantasy trade scenario. Those will never go away with a talent like DK.
Oly wrote:The Hawks need more star playmakers, not fewer. RD, I know your views on WR value, but it's a passing league and unless you have a head coach who can ensure stability of scheming guys open, I think teams need elite pass catchers to be elite. If we had the luxury of having a star QB on the roster and money was tight, you obviously prioritize paying the QB over the WR (like NE did for years...although they did get Moss for a time). But unless you know that the draft pick gets you on the board to pick your favorite elite QB, I don't think trading star playmakers for draft potential is a good idea.
River_Dog wrote:So tell me how the Chiefs made out after they traded their star playmaker? Tyreek Hill was a helluva lot more of a playmaker than DK Metcalf.
Oly wrote:I think teams need elite pass catchers to be elite. If we had the luxury of having a star QB on the roster and money was tight, you obviously prioritize paying the QB over the WR.
River_Dog wrote:As I said above, we're going to need a QBOTF at some point. We can't just keep kicking the can down the road and expect to break out of this .500ish one-and-done mediocre teams that has defined our franchise for the past 8 years.
Oly wrote:But unless you know that the draft pick gets you on the board to pick your favorite elite QB, I don't think trading star playmakers for draft potential is a good idea.
River_Dog wrote:Even without Metcalf, we're still very strong at that position, with JSN, Jake Bobo, and a few more years of tread on the tires with Tyler Lockett. Metcalf is one of the few players on our roster that could fetch that kind of draft capital and would be the least painful to lose.
Oly wrote:The only way I think the Hawks would be justified in trading their best offensive weapon is if it gets an equal talent at the more important position: QB. If trading DK is needed to make that happen, then I'd be for it. Otherwise, I think he should stay. I can see the Hawks being good in 2-3 years, and pairing our QBOTF with DK (behind a solid OL) is the right way to build the offense.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:I also think they are really hoping they can make something out of Sam Howell. He's still a very young guy with some talent. QBOTF? That would be a hell of long shot to make, but I think they want to see what they've got.
NorthHawk wrote:They don’t have the Cap room to move him.
End of story.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests