Free Agency thread

57reasons
Posts: 1582
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 4:19 am
Location: 98118

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by 57reasons » Sat Mar 18, 2023 5:14 pm

SeattleAddict wrote:
Fri Mar 17, 2023 12:48 am
57reasons wrote:
Fri Mar 17, 2023 12:21 am
SeattleAddict wrote:
Fri Mar 17, 2023 12:09 am


$4 million is a pretty good salary for a backup. Seems to indicate they're not targeting QB at #5.
Wishful thinking maybe??

let me edit that for you:
...Seems to indicate *I'm* not targeting QB at #5.
explain your logic? The Seahawks now have two QBs under contract at not-cheap rates. If the plan was to take a QB at #5, what would be the point of signing both guys, knowing they'd have to cut one? Or, do you believe they'll carry 3 on the active roster, like it was 1985?

I never said it's impossible that if their guy dropped to 5 they go ahead and take him, but if the PLAN was to go QB, then it doesn't make much sense to sign two veteran QBs prior to the draft.
I agree with you in thinking they've overpaid Lock as the backup, without knowing the details (is it all salary/no incentives?) That said i doubt it deters them from taking a franchise QB if indeed they think they have one. John's track record of valuing physical traits over proven college production, as evidenced by his interest in Mahomes and Josh Allen while Russell was already established (vs. other QB prospects taken higher) leads me to believe he might value both Levis and Richardson worthy of picking at 5. Each of them have traits in spades, and one may well be available after Young and Stroud presumably go in the top 2. As i understand Geno's deal could be gotten out of after only one year without too much consequence, and certainly after two. Drew's is only one year. As for carrying 3 QBs, ask John Lynch if he's sorry he kept Brock Purdy last year behind Trey Lance and Jimmy G.

SeattleAddict
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:25 pm

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by SeattleAddict » Sat Mar 18, 2023 7:11 pm

57reasons wrote:
Sat Mar 18, 2023 5:14 pm

I agree with you in thinking they've overpaid Lock as the backup, without knowing the details (is it all salary/no incentives?) That said i doubt it deters them from taking a franchise QB if indeed they think they have one. John's track record of valuing physical traits over proven college production, as evidenced by his interest in Mahomes and Josh Allen while Russell was already established (vs. other QB prospects taken higher) leads me to believe he might value both Levis and Richardson worthy of picking at 5. Each of them have traits in spades, and one may well be available after Young and Stroud presumably go in the top 2. As i understand Geno's deal could be gotten out of after only one year without too much consequence, and certainly after two. Drew's is only one year. As for carrying 3 QBs, ask John Lynch if he's sorry he kept Brock Purdy last year behind Trey Lance and Jimmy G.
Lock's contract had incentives that could bump it up to 7.5million, so safe to say it's not just a vet minimum deal. That $4 million looks to be sunk cost.

As for Purdy, you can't just stick a #5 overall pick on the practice squad. He is guaranteed a roster spot, which means either you carry 3 QBs which nobody in the NFL does any more, or you have to cut Lock or Geno, while still paying them.

I fully expect them to draft a QB later, but it's clearly not the plan to do so at #5.

User avatar
Sexymarinersfan
Posts: 8258
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 11:34 pm
Location: Ft. Worth Texas
Contact:

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by Sexymarinersfan » Sat Mar 18, 2023 7:28 pm

SeattleAddict wrote:
Sat Mar 18, 2023 7:11 pm
57reasons wrote:
Sat Mar 18, 2023 5:14 pm

I agree with you in thinking they've overpaid Lock as the backup, without knowing the details (is it all salary/no incentives?) That said i doubt it deters them from taking a franchise QB if indeed they think they have one. John's track record of valuing physical traits over proven college production, as evidenced by his interest in Mahomes and Josh Allen while Russell was already established (vs. other QB prospects taken higher) leads me to believe he might value both Levis and Richardson worthy of picking at 5. Each of them have traits in spades, and one may well be available after Young and Stroud presumably go in the top 2. As i understand Geno's deal could be gotten out of after only one year without too much consequence, and certainly after two. Drew's is only one year. As for carrying 3 QBs, ask John Lynch if he's sorry he kept Brock Purdy last year behind Trey Lance and Jimmy G.
Lock's contract had incentives that could bump it up to 7.5million, so safe to say it's not just a vet minimum deal. That $4 million looks to be sunk cost.

As for Purdy, you can't just stick a #5 overall pick on the practice squad. He is guaranteed a roster spot, which means either you carry 3 QBs which nobody in the NFL does any more, or you have to cut Lock or Geno, while still paying them.

I fully expect them to draft a QB later, but it's clearly not the plan to do so at #5.
Kansas City did with Alex Smith, Pat Mahomes, and Tyler Bray, so that's a crock of shit! Just because YOU don't want them to draft a QB doesn't mean it's illogical to not carry 3 QB's anymore in today's NFL. And it's obviously the plan if Schneider see's a guy he really likes to take at #5. I guarantee you, If John Schneider's QB is there at 5, he'll take him. Regardless of Lock.

SeattleAddict
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:25 pm

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by SeattleAddict » Sat Mar 18, 2023 11:26 pm

Sexymarinersfan wrote:
Sat Mar 18, 2023 7:28 pm


Kansas City did with Alex Smith, Pat Mahomes, and Tyler Bray, so that's a crock of shit! Just because YOU don't want them to draft a QB doesn't mean it's illogical to not carry 3 QB's anymore in today's NFL. And it's obviously the plan if Schneider see's a guy he really likes to take at #5. I guarantee you, If John Schneider's QB is there at 5, he'll take him. Regardless of Lock.
The ONE example you can find is Tyler Bray, an UDFA on a rookie deal that was injured the entire time in the league, and Alex Smith, who was at the very end of his career in which he was constantly the place holder?? KC was clearly looking for a new QB, and had two already under contract. They didn't sign two free agents, so it isn't comparable.

It's true that I do NOT want the Seahawks to draft a QB at 5, mainly because I think there are only 2 QBs worthy being in the top 5 and neither will be there, but that has nothing to do with the obvious logic that if Plan A was to draft a QB, they wouldn't sign Lock to a $4 million deal before the draft. If they love a guy they think is the best available and he drops to 5, they might just take him, but it is NOT PLAN A. Frankly, it's not even Plan B... which would be to trade back.

User avatar
Bil522
Posts: 2118
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 12:52 am

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by Bil522 » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:18 am

SeattleAddict wrote:
Sat Mar 18, 2023 11:26 pm
Sexymarinersfan wrote:
Sat Mar 18, 2023 7:28 pm


Kansas City did with Alex Smith, Pat Mahomes, and Tyler Bray, so that's a crock of shit! Just because YOU don't want them to draft a QB doesn't mean it's illogical to not carry 3 QB's anymore in today's NFL. And it's obviously the plan if Schneider see's a guy he really likes to take at #5. I guarantee you, If John Schneider's QB is there at 5, he'll take him. Regardless of Lock.
The ONE example you can find is Tyler Bray, an UDFA on a rookie deal that was injured the entire time in the league, and Alex Smith, who was at the very end of his career in which he was constantly the place holder?? KC was clearly looking for a new QB, and had two already under contract. They didn't sign two free agents, so it isn't comparable.

It's true that I do NOT want the Seahawks to draft a QB at 5, mainly because I think there are only 2 QBs worthy being in the top 5 and neither will be there, but that has nothing to do with the obvious logic that if Plan A was to draft a QB, they wouldn't sign Lock to a $4 million deal before the draft. If they love a guy they think is the best available and he drops to 5, they might just take him, but it is NOT PLAN A. Frankly, it's not even Plan B... which would be to trade back.
I love how you re-write Alex Smith's career to fit your narrative. KC drafted Mahomes because they were planning ahead because they did not wanto pay $20mill to Smith going into his age 34 season. Smith was a Pro Bowler, who threw for over 4000 yards, during the 2017 season. That is exactly what the Seahawks are thinking about right now. Now whether they get a QB this year or next doesn't matter, the fact is a new one is coming.

That being said, after hearing how jazzed JS was to keep Lock, maybe he is the future QB.

SeattleAddict
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:25 pm

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by SeattleAddict » Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:32 am

Bil522 wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:18 am

I love how you re-write Alex Smith's career to fit your narrative.
I don't think I did. I loved Alex Smith and always thought he was underrated. He had a long and very solid career, but everywhere he went his teams were constantly trying to upgrade him. He was never "the guy" for his team, not for the 49ers, not for the Chiefs, not for where ever he went after that.

Michael K.
Posts: 11345
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by Michael K. » Sun Mar 19, 2023 1:55 am

Bil522 wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:18 am

I love how you re-write Alex Smith's career to fit your narrative. KC drafted Mahomes because they were planning ahead because they did not wanto pay $20mill to Smith going into his age 34 season. Smith was a Pro Bowler, who threw for over 4000 yards, during the 2017 season. That is exactly what the Seahawks are thinking about right now. Now whether they get a QB this year or next doesn't matter, the fact is a new one is coming.

That being said, after hearing how jazzed JS was to keep Lock, maybe he is the future QB.
For the Love of God, can someone please show me how KC just spent money on not one but TWO fucking Free Agent QBs and then drafted Mahomes? Since you can't please, again, for the love of God, stop. Could we draft a QB and cut Lock? Sure, but why the fuck would they have signed him if the plan was to use their top five pick on a QB!? This is NOT the KC Chiefs with Alex Smith. And Pat Mahomes was a college fucking STANDOUT compared to Richardson.

User avatar
Cascade Kid
Posts: 874
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2021 2:11 am

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by Cascade Kid » Sun Mar 19, 2023 3:23 am

Pete has said drafting QB is still in play after signing Geno, and I don't think signing Lock changes anything. I don't know what's so difficult to fathom. Both of the current QBs are not signed to long-term deals and Geno's is structured to be very Team friendly if the Team decides to release him after one year. Locks would still be backup, but I'm sure he'd also be expendable too under the right circumstances.

If the future QB of the franchise is available at #5, they will draft him. Pete and John will not walk away just because they had already signed two guys to short term deals.

SeattleAddict
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:25 pm

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by SeattleAddict » Sun Mar 19, 2023 5:03 am

Cascade Kid wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2023 3:23 am
Pete has said drafting QB is still in play after signing Geno, and I don't think signing Lock changes anything. I don't know what's so difficult to fathom. Both of the current QBs are not signed to long-term deals and Geno's is structured to be very Team friendly if the Team decides to release him after one year. Locks would still be backup, but I'm sure he'd also be expendable too under the right circumstances.

If the future QB of the franchise is available at #5, they will draft him. Pete and John will not walk away just because they had already signed two guys to short term deals.
I don't understand what is tripping you guys up. OF COURSE it's possible that if the right guy falls into their lap, they COULD take a QB. All I'm saying is that is NOT THE PLAN. It could happen, yes... but signing Lock indicates that it is not the option they plan on. If there even is a QB they would want, they clearly don't think they will be available at 5.

If drafting a QB at 5 WAS the plan, why sign Lock at all?? He's obviously more than camp fodder, and $4 million is an actual investment - that's enough money to sign a decent MLB or G.

User avatar
Donn Beach
Posts: 13261
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: Free Agency thread

Post by Donn Beach » Sun Mar 19, 2023 6:58 am

Sure, maybe they draft a QB at five, but Lock is more than just a backup QB, he is an investment, a development project. You could argue it indicates they like Lock as the QB of the future.

In just a practical sense who gets the reps behind Geno? One would assume Lock. They didn't give him $4.5 mil to be a 3rd string QB did they? So where does the number five pick QB fit in? It really doesn't make sense for either of them to be third string. There isn't going to be enough footballs to go around.

Post Reply