Trading DOWN

[JMR]

A post June 1st cut for Kearse would save money this year but it would move all of his remaining bonus money cap hit to 2018. Unless we are desperate to get additional money this year it would be an unwise move.

The $1.8M is going to be there next year anyway, unless we cut him now and suck down all the remaining SB proration. We are on the hook for a $3.6M cap hit with him no matter what in some shape or form over the next 2 seasons, no getting around it.

Because of this Kearse will be on the team. Once his bonus money is secured against the cap this year (by making the opening day roster?) only then would he be fair game to be cut loose.

What you are saying here is exactly what the post-1 June cut would do. Of the remaining $3.6M cap commitment, $1.8M goes to 2017 and $1.8M to 2018. We don't get relief for 2018 by keeping him on the team this year.

It only costs an additional $366,000 for him to stay with the team this year instead of cutting him.

Well, sort of...unless we decide to split that $3.6M in half, and then the team will have $2.2M of cap space that they wouldn't otherwise have. That could be enough to pay a rookie replacement and leave enough left for a backup QB if that's what they want to do.

So I totally disagree it would be "unwise" to cut Kearse this year after 1 June. This is not a case where there is 3 or 4 years of big $ SB proration in jeopardy of getting pulled forward as bow wave of a cap hit. There are benefits for either decision, and I can see it going either way right now.

 

[jakedog56]

It depends on management plans of course. If they have a specific target to spend the extra money on this year then maybe it is a consideration but if not then moving the extra money to add to next year's cap hit seems unwise.
Generally speaking without any inside knowledge it seems wiser to split the remaining bonus money cap hit over 2 years instead of pushing it all back onto 2018. We will need cap space then also.

 

[JMR]

Generally speaking without any inside knowledge it seems wiser to split the remaining bonus money cap hit over 2 years instead of pushing it all back onto 2018. We will need cap space then also.

Exactly, so you're coming on board with the positives of a post 1-June cut then? Because splitting the remaining bonus money over the next 2 years **IS** what a post-1 June cut would do.

I think we all agree that Kearse is not playing here in 2018 for the projected amount on his current contract, right? I barely think he's good enough to use $4M on this year, let alone $6.8M in 2018.

If that is true, this will go 1 of 3 ways:

1. Kearse is cut *now* and all of the remaining guaranteed money ($3.6M) is brought forward. This would save $366k against this year's cap and get Kearse totally off the books for 2018. This is the only way to keep him from counting against the cap next year. Total cap commitment from this point forward = $3.6M.

2. Kearse plays here in 2017 but then is cut prior to 2018. This makes him count $4M against the 2017 cap and $1.8M against the 2018 cap (a $5M savings). Total cap commitment = $5.8M.

3. Kearse is a post-1 June cut with team election to split remaining cap hit. This counts $1.8M against the 2017 cap (a $2.2M savings) and $1.8M against the 2018 cap (a $5M savings, the exact same amount of savings in #2). Without team election to split, cap hit = #1 above. Total cap commitment = $3.6M.

What it boils down to is whether you think Kearse's value is enough to pay $2.2M for as compared to what a guy like David Moore offers for a much lesser price. I am not sure it is, and that's why I'll be the least surprised guy in the room if #3 happens. Like I've said previously, with $2.2M more cap space that you get from cutting Kearse, you could sign his replacement and a backup QB (or another role player). In order of decreasing probability, I say it's 3-2-1. The coaches reportedly have an affinity for Kearse, but that only gets you so far.

 

[jakedog56]

Which makes sense but the article I was reading stated the opposite. It was linked through espn or cbssports (I forget which) so I just assumed it was correct.

Anyway, I hopefully stand corrected. After Kearse's year last year I wouldn't mind seeing him replaced.

 

[JMR]

Which makes sense but the article I was reading stated the opposite. It was linked through espn or cbssports (I forget which) so I just assumed it was correct.

Anyway, I hopefully stand corrected. After Kearse's year last year I wouldn't mind seeing him replaced.

Someone posted a part from the article I think you're talking about. It didn't say anything different than what I've said:

But given the way Kearse's contract is structured, cutting him wouldn't give the Seahawks much cap relief. They'd save only $366,666 by releasing him.

They could bump that number up to $2.2 million by using a post-June 1 designation on Kearse. But that would defer $1.8M of his remaining cap charge to next offseason.

Bottom line: neither option is ideal.

But there's also the issue of pure cash charge. Kearse is due $2.2 million in base salary for 2017. If the Seahawks simply determine that the other wide receivers are better options than Kearse and replace his roster spot with a rookie, they could save roughly $1.735 million in cash.

That bottom part is the thing that will drive the decision on what happens with Kearse. The part about deferring $1.8M to 2018, well....that is already part of the cap number if he is on the team in '17.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Looking at the cap next year and those who contracts are up, looks like next off season could be a busy one for the FO. Just on offense

Justin Britt
Luke Joeckel

Jimmy Graham
Luke Willson

Eddie Lacy
Thomas Rawls

Paul Richardson

On defense

Kam Chancellor
Deshawn Shead
Bradley McDougald
Demetrius McCray

Kevin Pierre-Louis
Dion Jordan

With under 39 mil to work with, not including things like the draft, injury reserve fund, and all the minor players that have contracts up ( lots of those)

 

[jakedog56]

Different article than I read. It stated that we can cut him at some point and move both bonus years to 2018 season. It specified that it would free up money this year but cost us double next year. Possibly an incorrect statement or interpetation.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Different article than I read. It stated that we can cut him at some point and move both bonus years to 2018 season. It specified that it would free up money this year but cost us double next year. Possibly an incorrect statement or interpetation.

Right now Seahawks owe Kearse 3.6 mil no matter what. Eat it now or you can split it into two years

This season Kearse makes 4 mil, next if he's keep that goes up to 6.8 no way the Seahawks are paying him that. If they keep Kearse this season only, then it's 4 mil this year plus 1.8 next year ( so actually paying him 5.8 for playing this year only).

Yeah JMR convinced me. Kearse is going to be toast come June.

 

[Screamin12th]

i will put it this way, if Kearse is not a post June cut then i am proven right on the whole Cable thing and the team showing to much loyalty in players and coaches on this team even when they SUCK ASS!

Some times no matter how hard it is you HAVE TO MOVE ON!

 

[HaroldSeattle]

i will put it this way, if Kearse is not a post June cut then i am proven right on the whole Cable thing and the team showing to much loyalty in players and coaches on this team even when they SUCK ASS!

No not really.

 

[Screamin12th]

No not really.

Your opinion, i stand by what i said what was it 10 months ago? a year? some times this team is loyal to a fault and because of it they have retarded the growth of the team.

I like Kearse but he isn't a top 5 WR on this team yet he gets playing time like a top 3.

I like Cable because he is a hard nosed OL Coach that use to teach the zone blocking scheme as good as anyone but his time has passed.

there was a Article on NFL.com durning last season and it showed the Hawks OL success in the zone and man scheme ( they used a lot of Man scheme blocking last year something like 20%) and the man scheme did better. Made me think that either Cables Zone scheme is so out dated it needs redone or the people we have are better suited for Man.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Your opinion, i stand by what i said what was it 10 months ago? a year? some times this team is loyal to a fault and because of it they have retarded the growth of the team.

IDK, seems like they've hired good coaches and haven't tried to undermine any of them. So many have gone on to jobs that were promotions, actually too many, it's been one more obstacle to over come. In the meantime the Seahawks have been a perennial playoff team in a era where the NFL purposely makes that hard to do. You should be glad your not a Browns fan and appreciate what is in front of you. Doesn't mean you have to be happy about every little move or non move, but you should give them kudos for accomplishing what they have and likely what they will.

 

[Screamin12th]

IDK, seems like they've hired good coaches and haven't tried to undermine any of them. So many have gone on to jobs that were promotions, actually too many, it's been one more obstacle to over come. In the meantime the Seahawks have been a perennial playoff team in a era where the NFL purposely makes that hard to do. You should be glad your not a Browns fan and appreciate what is in front of you. Doesn't mean you have to be happy about every little move or non move, but you should give them kudos for accomplishing what they have and likely what they will.

I wasn't happy with Kris Richards getting the DC job because i felt it would hurt the growth of any new CB and the whole D would regress a little instead of continuing to move forward because by making KR the DC they would lose Norton JR. Lets see Seattle signed Kris Richards as the DC Feb 2, 2015 and Ken Norton Jr become Oaklands DC Feb 6th, 2015. Sorry but Norton was the better option between him and Richards. I think the fact that the LoB wanted him to be the DC so bad they fogged/clouded up the whole situation and loyalty to the players took over.

Be honest who do you think would have made the better defensive coach for the Hawks Ken Norton Jr or Kris Richards? be honest here. Norton Jr was that hardnosed DC that would have kept them on the same path as Quinn in my eyes. The defense is a little softer than it use to be there is no hiding that. I felt the fact they hired Kris over Norton Jr really undermind him and hurt him so he moved on.

in my eyes
Norton>Cable>Kris
i know thats apples to oranges ( they do not coach the same thing, well Norton and Kris do )

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I wasn't happy with Kris Richards getting the DC job because i felt it would hurt the growth of any new CB and the whole D would regress a little instead of continuing to move forward because by making KR the DC they would lose Norton JR. Lets see Seattle signed Kris Richards as the DC Feb 2, 2015 and Ken Norton Jr become Oaklands DC Feb 6th, 2015. Sorry but Norton was the better option between him and Richards. I think the fact that the LoB wanted him to be the DC so bad they fogged/clouded up the whole situation and loyalty to the players took over.

Be honest who do you think would have made the better defensive coach for the Hawks Ken Norton Jr or Kris Richards? be honest here. Norton Jr was that hardnosed DC that would have kept them on the same path as Quinn in my eyes. The defense is a little softer than it use to be there is no hiding that. I felt the fact they hired Kris over Norton Jr really undermind him and hurt him so he moved on.

TBH thought Norton was the perfect choice for D.C., but you know these things are hard to judge for us. Also pretty sure at times if the Seahawks had a do over they might done a thing or two differently. We don't walk in their shoes. Overall they've done well.

 

[Screamin12th]

TBH thought Norton was the perfect choice for D.C., but you know these things are hard to judge for us. Also pretty sure at times if the Seahawks had a do over they might done a thing or two differently. We don't walk in their shoes. Overall they've done well.

i agree they have done pretty well replacing people as far as coaches go, i just feel they could have done better. I think every fan out there knew Norton was the better option for DC yet it didn't happen. I also feel every fan out there knows we has better options than Kearse but .... Would suck to see Kearse leave i wont kid about that. I supported him greatly and wanted him on the Hawks team but his time has passed and so has Cables, a LONG time ago lol

The good news is i see a LOT of talent on this Oline, we should have one of the better olines in Hawks history but will it happen? ( i did not say best i said one of the better ) wont be on par with the 2000-2006 oline or the 80's oline ( 82-88 was it ? )

 

[HaroldSeattle]

i agree they have done pretty well replacing people as far as coaches go, i just feel they could have done better. I think every fan out there knew Norton was the better option for DC yet it didn't happen. I also feel every fan out there knows we has better options than Kearse but .... Would suck to see Kearse leave i wont kid about that. I supported him greatly and wanted him on the Hawks team but his time has passed and so has Cables, a LONG time ago lol

The good news is i see a LOT of talent on this Oline, we should have one of the better olines in Hawks history but will it happen? ( i did not say best i said one of the better ) wont be on par with the 2000-2006 oline or the 80's oline ( 82-88 was it ? )

As far as the Oline goes, gots some real upside, but low ceilings also. A whole lot of if, as in if Joeckel can play up to where he was drafted for example.

 

[Screamin12th]

As far as the Oline goes, gots some real upside, but low ceilings also. A whole lot of if, as in if Joeckel can play up to where he was drafted for example.

the floor is much higher on these guys than what we have had and lets not sugar coat anything these Olines have been playing at their floor level for YEARS now.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

the floor is much higher on these guys than what we have had and lets not sugar coat anything these Olines have been playing at their floor level for YEARS now.

IDK, certainly did last couple of years. A lot of it was just unfortunate timing, like looking for OL in 2011 when it was a bad draft for OL. Last few years, pretty tough to find a gem at OL picking near the end of round.

 

[Screamin12th]

it's no secret Seattle hasn't had to many "good" olines in their history that's for sure. One thing different about this team though is they win despite having one of the worst Olines in the NFL. I day dream about how good this team would be with a top 10 Oline. They would have 5 Superbowl wins in my mind since 2012 if they had a top 10 oline every year lol

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

it's no secret Seattle hasn't had to many "good" olines in their history that's for sure. One thing different about this team though is they win despite having one of the worst Olines in the NFL. I day dream about how good this team would be with a top 10 Oline. They would have 5 Superbowl wins in my mind since 2012 if they had a top 10 oline every year lol

I'll take top 15. I'm not selfish.