Seahawks 2018 offseason thread

[seahawksfan234]

If they split the difference and end up at $13M, I think I could live with that. Especially if the alternative is losing out on both him and Suh. I feel it's very important to guard against losing Avril, MB, and Richardson from the DL all at once.

I'm comfortable with Naz Jones and Jarran Reed manning the interior for the Seahawks personally. Reed was somewhat disappointing his rookie year but really stepped up in 2017 IMO. Jones also had flashes.

As I said in another thread, Richardson overall played above average in 2017 with room to improve (his first year in a 4-3), but $15m a year is a lot to give someone who is merely "above average."

Something like 4 years $50m (depending on guaranteed money) I think would be fair, but still is a lot to give him.

 

[seahawksfan234]

Now I heard this is all BS. Nobody knows what the Seahawks offered and supposedly Sheldon is shooting for 20 million, but that might be BS also. If not, good bye Sheldon, we barely got to know you.

He may have taken too many hits to the head if he thinks he's going to approach anything near $20m per year. Fletcher Cox is currently the highest paid 4-3 DT in the NFL on a per year basis at $17m per year. Short and Dareus are the only two other players at that position making more than $15m a year. Even at his best, Richardson is not a top 3 DT.

 

[seahawksfan234]

IDK hard to get much for a one year rental whose 29 years old and will be expecting a fat contract to extend.
Nothing wrong with aiming high though.

I agree, but Earl Thomas really is an impact player who recovered well from his injury. I think a 1st round pick is definitely where negotiations need to start though.

 

[Warden]

Just googled it and think your wrong.

NFL 101: How early player exits impact the cap

Retirements
Teams can end a contract at any time, but so can players. In a player's case, though, the only way they can do this is by retiring. In the end, though, the math looks pretty much the same as if the player had been cut -- and the June 1 rule applies here, too.

For instance, if our player from the example above had retired instead of being cut, his money would account the same way as if he had been cut by the team. If he files his retirement paperwork on or after June 1, the money counts as if he was cut on or after June 1

Which means the signing bonus portion is still pro rated for the life of the original contract. Dead money

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Which means the signing bonus portion is still pro rated for the life of the original contract. Dead money

Go to over the cap and see what the cap hit is if he’s cut. It is over 14 million. The link said retire = being cut as far as cap hit.

 

[Warden]

Go to over the cap and see what the cap hit is if he’s cut. It is over 14 million. The link said retire = being cut as far as cap hit.

you are right but you are also wrong.

If cut or a player retires the signing bonus is still pro rated over the years from the original contract dead money

Now in Kam's position, There was a date in his contract where the 2018 portion of his contract becomes fully guaranteed. That date has passed. It was sometime in February. So if we cut him we will see absolutely no savings from this years salary. Add that to this years pro rated signing bonus it could be around 14 mil I guess. There is a reason why the Seahawks didn't make a move on this date. It could be good news on the health front or other language in the contract that protects them if Kam can't play and retires.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

you are right but you are also wrong.

If cut or a player retires the signing bonus is still pro rated over the years from the original contract dead money

Now in Kam's position, There was a date in his contract where the 2018 portion of his contract becomes fully guaranteed. That date has passed. It was sometime in February. So if we cut him we will see absolutely no savings from this years salary. Add that to this years pro rated signing bonus it could be around 14 mil I guess. There is a reason why the Seahawks didn't make a move on this date. It could be good news on the health front or other language in the contract that protects them if Kam can't play and retires.

Can you supply a link to back your opinion? Because this far I've seen nothing to support your opinion other then you repeating your opinion. Don't get me wrong, I could be mistaken, just haven't seen anything officil to make me think that is so.

 

[Warden]

Can you supply a link to back your opinion? Because this far I've seen nothing to support your opinion other then you repeating your opinion. Don't get me wrong, I could be mistaken, just haven't seen anything officil to make me think that is so.

I listen to the radio a lot. there was the big what will the Seahawks do with Kam on this date. The date passed so his salary for 2018 became fully guaranteed. Players get cut all the time, and the signing bonus is not all due on the cap hit at once. Cut a player too early then you could be sitting on dead money for years. Now it used to be that if you traded a player that all the pro rated signing bonus was due at one time meaning very few trades happened. I am wondering if that changed in the last CBA because trades are happening more frequently

It is all about the language in the contract, below is a copy and paste of a Bob Condotta article

Whatever the case, the reality remains that Chancellor is unlikely to play for the Seahawks again, while similarly remaining unlikely to retire anytime soon.

The reason for the latter is that his contract calls for him to receive $12 million in injury guarantees over the next two seasons and no one figures he’d give that up willingly, which he would do if he retired.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

@blstoker clear this up for us.

 

[JMR]

I am pretty sure teams can go after signing bonus money on players who retire. They could have with Lynch but chose not to. In Kam's case, he has $7.5M of SB proration left, and I think the team can get that relieved off the cap hit if he has to retire.

EDIT: so my prediction on Kam is if he retires, the cap hit is $14.3M - $7.5M (if they go after this SB money) = $6.8M. Or in other words, all we get nailed with is his fully guaranteed base salary for 2018. Again, this is if the team goes after what remains of his $10M signing bonus from a year ago.

 

[JMR]

I'm comfortable with Naz Jones and Jarran Reed manning the interior for the Seahawks personally. Reed was somewhat disappointing his rookie year but really stepped up in 2017 IMO. Jones also had flashes.

As I said in another thread, Richardson overall played above average in 2017 with room to improve (his first year in a 4-3), but $15m a year is a lot to give someone who is merely "above average."

Something like 4 years $50m (depending on guaranteed money) I think would be fair, but still is a lot to give him.

I just think you cannot have only 2 guys to play the middle. The DL seems to work the best -- at least in Seattle over the last half dozen years -- when you have 6 or 7 guys who are rotating in and keeping everyone as fresh as possible. I think they were really putting that together a year ago but then the injuries ruined it.

Players who don't really have measurable "production" like yards, catches, and TDs are a lot tougher to assess. Bobby Wagner had maybe his best season last year, and I don't think it was just a coincidence that it came with Richardson in front of him.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I am pretty sure teams can go after signing bonus money on players who retire. They could have with Lynch but chose not to. In Kam's case, he has $7.5M of SB proration left, and I think the team can get that relieved off the cap hit if he has to retire.

EDIT: so my prediction on Kam is if he retires, the cap hit is $14.3M - $7.5M (if they go after this SB money) = $6.8M. Or in other words, all we get nailed with is his fully guaranteed base salary for 2018. Again, this is if the team goes after what remains of his $10M signing bonus from a year ago.

So why would he retire? I’m a little confused about the cap implications because I remember that the Seahawks could have went after Lynch bonus money, but didn’t. Which fly’s in the face of the link I provided about retirement. In any case I don’t expect either Avril or Kam to retire, they’ll collect their money. I know I would in their shoes.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I just think you cannot have only 2 guys to play the middle. The DL seems to work the best -- at least in Seattle over the last half dozen years -- when you have 6 or 7 guys who are rotating in and keeping everyone as fresh as possible. I think they were really putting that together a year ago but then the injuries ruined it.

Players who don't really have measurable "production" like yards, catches, and TDs are a lot tougher to assess. Bobby Wagner had maybe his best season last year, and I don't think it was just a coincidence that it came with Richardson in front of him.

Think the Seahawks can’t afford Richardson. Going have to go with home grown for this season. Next season , who knows, tons of cap space and a full slate of draft picks plus comp picks.

 

[JMR]

So why would he retire? I’m a little confused about the cap implications because I remember that the Seahawks could have went after Lynch bonus money, but didn’t. Which fly’s in the face of the link I provided about retirement. In any case I don’t expect either Avril or Kam to retire, they’ll collect their money. I know I would in their shoes.

The contract situations between Avril and Kam are completely different. Avril is likely going to be cut, and the Hawks will save $7.1M against the cap when that happens.

Kam shouldnt retire. He should wait as long as possible before either having to report for camp and/or reach some type of injury settlement. I am not sure how the injury settlement thing works.

But yes, the team absolutely could have went after Lynch for SB money. I am assuming they chose not to because it wasn't a whole lot, and other vets were watching and probably concluded the organization did right by the player.

 

[JMR]

Think the Seahawks can’t afford Richardson. Going have to go with home grown for this season. Next season , who knows, tons of cap space and a full slate of draft picks plus comp picks.

The team freed up $17M in cap space but cutting Sherm & Lane and trading MB. They can dislodge another $7M by cutting Avril. If they want to shell out the money for Richardson, they can do it.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

The team freed up $17M in cap space but cutting Sherm & Lane and trading MB. They can dislodge another $7M by cutting Avril. If they want to shell out the money for Richardson, they can do it.

According to OTC they have less then 20 mil which is chicken feed. Perhaps they are not up to date?

 

[JMR]

According to OTC they have less then 20 mil which is chicken feed. Perhaps they are not up to date?

I heard Clayton say $30M yesterday, and that is w/o Avril's looming release.

 

[seahawksfan234]

I just think you cannot have only 2 guys to play the middle. The DL seems to work the best -- at least in Seattle over the last half dozen years -- when you have 6 or 7 guys who are rotating in and keeping everyone as fresh as possible. I think they were really putting that together a year ago but then the injuries ruined it.

Players who don't really have measurable "production" like yards, catches, and TDs are a lot tougher to assess. Bobby Wagner had maybe his best season last year, and I don't think it was just a coincidence that it came with Richardson in front of him.

Those are all valuable points. I just find it hard to justify paying Richardson $15m per year. By PFF's grading system, he graded as roughly the 30th best interior defender out of roughly 110 or 120 guys with enough snaps to qualify. I do think he's an above average 4-3 DT, but you pay someone $15m per year if they're an elite player, which I don't see Richardson as.

Also I have reservations about giving a guy who loves to party a huge contract. Richardson strikes me as the type of guy who could mail it in once the ink dries. That's obviously a periphery concern, but even disregarding that fact there are a lot of concerns about giving Richardson that huge of a contract.

I don't have a source for this yet, but a friend of mine in a group chat told me that Star Lotulelei got 5 years $50m with like $25m guaranteed from the Bills. If the Hawks really did offer Sheldon Richardson $11m per year, that seems to be a fair offer.

 

[seahawksfan234]

I heard Clayton say $30M yesterday, and that is w/o Avril's looming release.

Seattle Seahawks Salary Cap | Over the Cap

That may have been before the Mingo signing/some of the restricted free agents that the Seahawks gave contracts to.

 

[JMR]

Seattle Seahawks Salary Cap | Over the Cap

That may have been before the Mingo signing/some of the restricted free agents that the Seahawks gave contracts to.

Yep, that probably cut into the 30. 20 sounds closer then, with another $7M probably coming when Avril is cut.