HawkShack.com

It's been a fairly consistent pattern for us to acquire veteran WR talent via FA or trade, so I buy it and like the idea.

He would be the big body WR we need, so maybe there might be something to it.
I wonder what they would want in return - maybe Maxwell as he is going to be a FA anyway and the Bears need Defense?

I was one of the few endorsing a deal way back in his prime, at this point? Not sure, his salary is pretty big, and he is on the backside of his career. If I had to choose between him, and a Torrey Smith, or Cecil Shorts at a much lower cost, I might lean towards the latter ( especially since neither costs us additional draft picks).

He's a good blocker as a WR and with our Offense, he won't be the focal point, either which might mean he will be more effective with less opportunities.
I'd rather have Alshon Jeffery of any Bears recievers, but I doubt he's available.

Ugh.

I really hope this doesn't happen.

He's 30 yrs old, and is entering his 10th season in the league.

He's not worth ANY kind of big contract at this point in his career, and had another meltdown at some point in the Bears' locker room last season (no link, just remember hearing it on espn or nfln during the regular season). I admire the way he's handled himself overall recently, and I'm not making light of his personal issue(s), but he's past his prime, and isn't worth the risk.

Especially if we're talking a huge deal.

This would be a bad move, IMO, and I hope Pete and John look elsewhere to help our WR issues.

I disagree Z.

I hadn't heard the last season meltdown bit, and would have to check it out, but 30 ain't old for Marshall's style of play. He's plays WR like a Defensive Lineman, he's not a racehorse that has to be put out to pasture if he loses a half step.

The only thing I heard that might be considered a meltdown was simply a passionate speech to his team mates during the year and some other comments to the media (which I wouldn't consider a meltdown from what I read).
If there was some type of issue, I'd like a link to see for myself.

The only thing I heard was what North mentioned..... And some well deserved critisism towards Cutler and the offensive production, not in the realm of early career issues IMHO....

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/365 ... n-marshall

I'm not sure I want the Hawks paying between 8 and 10 million a yr. For an aged Marshall on the downward swing.

Isn't Maxwell a FA? I'm not sure they can "trade" his rights, as Seattle has none to him at this point.

I thought they had exclusive negotiation rights until March 4th.
Can't they trade those rights? I thought they could...
It would mean a deal with the Bears and Maxwell would have to be agreed to before the trade could be completed.

I am not sure if you can trade exclusive talking rights if there even are any with a UFA maybe it still can be done as he is under contract I think till March 9th, if I understand it right Hawks have to sign Maxwell to new contract and then trade him with that contract to the bears but I am not sure if Hawks had to do that sooner or if it still can be done. Other than that as I understand it he's free to go, talk, do what ever he wants as a UFA after march 10th. Pretty sure Quinn and him had a little talk in few months, I would not be surprised if he ends up in atlanta

Not sure exclusive rights to talk to Maxwell mean rights to the player, however, even IF that is the case, why in the world would Maxwell play ball?? It wouldn't make any sense for him to not test the FA market, if the Bears wanted him, he could sign with them as a FA, and not only that, other teams could push his market up, allowing him to make even more from the Bears. Baring Maxwell, WANTING to play for the Bears, none of this makes any sense from Maxwells end.

Unless they are willing to give him top dollar so as not have to compete against others who are interested.

HumanCockroach wrote:http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/3653/brandon-marshall

I'm not sure I want the Hawks paying between 8 and 10 million a yr. For an aged Marshall on the downward swing.

Neither do I.

Even if he's solid mentally, 8-10 mil/per is WAY too much for a guy entering his 10th yr in the league. And his best yrs are behind him, not in front.

This will go down as another dumb WR move if we bring him in at that cost. If he'd play for 3-4 mil per, then I (sort of) get it, but not between 8 & 10. Spend the money elsewhere.

I mean, at that cost couldn't we afford to keep Maxwell, who's a strong possibility of leaving because we may not be able to afford him now?

Would make zero sense to lose a guy like him for a WR like B.M., IMO.

Let somebody else overpay for Marshall.

Zorn76 wrote:Even if he's solid mentally, 8-10 mil/per is WAY too much for a guy entering his 10th yr in the league. And his best yrs are behind him, not in front.

This will go down as another dumb WR move if we bring him in at that cost. If he'd play for 3-4 mil per, then I (sort of) get it, but not between 8 & 10. Spend the money elsewhere.

I mean, at that cost couldn't we afford to keep Maxwell, who's a strong possibility of leaving because we may not be able to afford him now?

Would make zero sense to lose a guy like him for a WR like B.M., IMO.

Let somebody else overpay for Marshall.

I'm with Zorny on this one. I'd rather take a chance on someone like Chris Mathews than overpay for a veteran that has had some character red flags. We're going to have to do some shopping in the bargain basement.

I'm curious about the discussion of trading rights to Maxwell. I didn't think anyone could trade the right to bargain with a player, and even if they could, what's the advantage for the Bears? With Maxwell being a UFA in a month, it doesn't seem to be to be worth trading squat for anyway as it wouldn't hinder him from going to one of 30 other teams, or turn right around and head back to Seattle if he didn't like what was being offered by the Bears.

Chris Mathews overnight became a more interesting prospect, given what he did in the SB. Geez, the kid had an amazing game.

But we'd be wise to hedge our bets and bring in more WR talent through the draft. I like Kearse and Baldwin, but both of those guys need to be challenged, because we shouldn't be sold on them being the best we can do there. TE is another thing that needs to be looked at, since Miller's (health) future is questionable, at best.

All of our best players were picked in April, or were cost effective FA acquisitions. Big FA contracts typically come back to burn you. WR's can be found that would be budget friendly, and I hope that's what we find here coming up.

For a trade to work with Maxwell, they would have to make it conditional on getting a deal done. The advantage for them is they get exclusive access to bargain prior to FA. If Maxwell gets a good enough offer, he might forego FA just as if he were to sign an extension here.

I MUCH prefer the idea of signing a guy like Torrey Smith, Cecil Shorts or Nate Washington to paying that kind of cash for Marshall ( along with a pick/s).... Most here know how strongly I supported bringing Marshall to Seattle when leaving Denver and Miami, and yet here at that price, after that amount of time, I simply don't see it as anything more than paying for the priviledge to see if you can squeeze out another couple decent seasons from a guy who's better days are long past.

I agree with the desire to bring in a "big bodied" receiver, just don't believe Marshall is the right one, at that cost.

I had the thought of Marshall coming to the Seahawks about a month or two ago when he was on "Inside the NFL" talking about the strength of our team being that our Seahawks loved each other. I sensed from him that he not only respected the team, but admired what we had here so much that he probably wished he were a part of it. Hopefully, so much so as to be willing to take a pay cut in order to be part of something special. I kind of hope it works out, if he's willing to come in knowing that he's not going to be RW's sole-source receiver, that he'll need to block (apparently he does this anyway), and that he's going to have to compete for his spot ... not just feel entitled to it (he's smart, and I think he knows that Pete Carroll and John Schneider are not afraid to let prima donnas go).

With all this said, I would not dismiss Maxwell as our trading fodder for Marshall or any other Big-name receiver. I think our need for the fourth member of the Legion of Boom outweighs our need for a WR "playmaker." Byron Maxwell - and the prospective loss of him - is probably my #1 concern this offseason. This need is especially pronounced when we consider that Kam, Richard, and Earl will all be coming off some pretty significant injuries ... with the possibility that ET might miss some portion of the regular season. It is even moreso pronounced when the next guy up is Tharold Simon (he got better toward the end of the year, but still needs a lot of work). And yea ... as for the WRs, I like Chris Matthews a lot ... I know just one game, but I think there is a lot more where that came from ... so WR simply isn't the "great need" for the Seahawks that the rest of the country tries to tell us it is.

Anyway, I'd welcome Marshall to our team. I think he'd flourish here ... a place where he'd be enabled to be the best player he can be, and as part of a team. He has grown up a lot in the last couple years, and also has enough of an edge left on him to where I think he'd both mix in well with and compete with Baldwin, Kearse, and the rest of our scrappy bunch of WRs.

GO SEAHAWKS!!!

I'm the one who started the Maxwell idea for trade purposes, but it was just a discussion point with nothing to base it on.

I, too think Maxwell should be re-signed if at all possible, so I wonder what other trade options might there be for Marshall should they pursue him?

NorthHawk wrote:I'm the one who started the Maxwell idea for trade purposes, but it was just a discussion point with nothing to base it on.

I, too think Maxwell should be re-signed if at all possible, so I wonder what other trade options might there be for Marshall should they pursue him?

QB LOL, not sure what bears would be looking for. I think this year Hawks have all their draft pick maybe they are talking about one of those

depaashaas wrote:
QB LOL, not sure what bears would be looking for. I think this year Hawks have all their draft pick maybe they are talking about one of those

It almost certainly would be a draft pick. I actually like the idea. He is one year removed from 7 consecutive 1,000 yard seasons. He is a big bodied (6-4, 230) receiver PC has been looking for. Although his salary is high its not like we have to keep him on the roster for the length of the contract. If he were to have a bad year next season (I know I am getting WAY WAY ahead of myself) we could cut him and *only* have a 3 mil dollar cap hit, which can be spread over 2 years if we really wanted to. At the same time next off season we will have 7 mil coming off the books from Harvin so his cap hit won't be so bad. Again if he has a very good year he is well worth the 9 mil cap hit and if it doesn't work out it won't be some albatross of a contract hanging over our head for years to come.

And if Matthews works out, we might end up with twin towers at the Wideout position in the red zone at least.

HumanCockroach wrote:I MUCH prefer the idea of signing a guy like Torrey Smith, Cecil Shorts or Nate Washington to paying that kind of cash for Marshall ( along with a pick/s).... Most here know how strongly I supported bringing Marshall to Seattle when leaving Denver and Miami, and yet here at that price, after that amount of time, I simply don't see it as anything more than paying for the priviledge to see if you can squeeze out another couple decent seasons from a guy who's better days are long past.

I agree with the desire to bring in a "big bodied" receiver, just don't believe Marshall is the right one, at that cost.

I don't know if I would say 'long past.' In 2013 he had 100 catches 1300 yards and 12 TD's. 2012 he had 118 catches 1500 yards and 11 TD's. Those are damn impressive numbers. I agree he isn't going to be the same guy but he also didn't get old overnight. Remember last season he had some circumstances that led to a down year he played through some tough injuries and ended up missing 3 games with a punctured lung, which obviously hurt his production, but more than anything else he had JAY CUTLER, who was TERRIBLE last year throwing him passes. Again, not going to say he is the same guy he was in 2013, but he might be closer to that than you are giving him credit for.

See you say he had a "down" year because of Cutler, and IMO he only had the numbers you are ponting out because the Bears threw, and threw and threw, and when Jay was the QB those throws were unproportiately directed at one guy, Marshall.

Seattle doesn't ( and good lord I hope they don't change) throw the ball 40-55 times a game. So unless the "value" of that contract in your eyes encompasses LESS production than last season ( when he averaged 13 targets a game, I'm not sure what you are seeing?

Marshall "better" days are in the rearview mirror, and for 9 million dollars a year, in a running offense, I still don't like that amount of capital spent. If you do, I'm fine with that, and if the Hawks do, I can accept that as well, I hope I'm wrong if it plays out that way.

I look at any possible trade for Marshall this way.
Marshall is extremely competitive, and as such fits the Seahawks mold.
Marshall is one of the most physically dominant receivers int he game bar none, and is a receiver you can throw to over and over and over expecting good results.
He's unhappy in Chicago because of Cutler, and has made that public, which has probably lowered the cost it would take to obtain him via trade.
He's still young enough to be worth his one last large contract, and is easily as valuable as any first round pick would be if that were the cost. (Hopefully not though!)
He's not overly injury prone.
Really the only negative things that can be said about him come from personality issues, issues which seem to stem mostly from his competitive drive.

Personally I like the idea with the obvious caveat that, I like it so long as it doesn't become too expensive in terms of draft capital and salary cap space.

HumanCockroach wrote:See you say he had a "down" year because of Cutler, and IMO he only had the numbers you are ponting out because the Bears threw, and threw and threw, and when Jay was the QB those throws were unproportiately directed at one guy, Marshall.

Seattle doesn't ( and good lord I hope they don't change) throw the ball 40-55 times a game. So unless the "value" of that contract in your eyes encompasses LESS production than last season ( when he averaged 13 targets a game, I'm not sure what you are seeing?

Marshall "better" days are in the rearview mirror, and for 9 million dollars a year, in a running offense, I still don't like that amount of capital spent. If you do, I'm fine with that, and if the Hawks do, I can accept that as well, I hope I'm wrong if it plays out that way.

To me it comes down to if we want a #1 receiver or not. I believe that Marshall still has that ability. If the Hawks were to get him I do not doubt that his numbers would be close to what he achieved this year. I don't disagree with the idea that the Hawks aren't going to pass more than they do now, but that has nothing to do with Marshall's ability declining. If the Hawks were to sign any top flight receiver, or true #1 guy that more than likely isn't going to change. As far as his targets and production your numbers are a bit off. He only averaged 8 targets per game last year (105 targets in 13 games). As far as Culter targeting him more, that just isn't true as Jeffery had 145 targets (in 16 games). Heck even their TE, Bennett had 129 targets (in 16 games). I am not saying he is going to be some sort of savior for our franchise but if we are going to invest in a WR we could do a lot worse, especially when considering the relatively low risk (depending on what we trade to the Bears). A lot of people are wanting to us to sign Fitz, if he were to come available, and his numbers were almost identical to Marshal's last year (except for TD's where he had 2 to Marshall's 10). Fitz's contract would be every bit of Marshall's, probably with more of a financial risk.

Um, weren't you talking about his "successful" seasons, if so, you are way, way, way off...

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... fied/false

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... /year/2012

Do you think in Seattle he'll receive 165 targets? Much less the 194 he received the year prior? His targets last year were down ( of course they were, he missed 3 games and was injured in several he played in the beginning of the year). You are welcome to your opinion he is still a bonafide number 1 receiver. I simply don't in anyway agree with that assessment.

I have always supported attempting to get Marshall to Seattle, but that time for me, has passed. If we were talking about a true bonafide number 1 with tread left on the tires, I would change my position on that, or even a receiver that helps in more areas than simply the offensive side of the ball ( Cobb for instance) or one that is getting better, and hitting his prime ( Jeffries, Green, Bryant, etc) or even one that could pop, and costs little ( Smith, Shorts, etc) and is YOUNG.... Marshall IMHO doesn't fit any of those parameters, and to me feels like a trade for Boldin #2 with the added benefit of paying 10 million to do so.....

Just don't like the move. If Marshall was due under 6, I suppose I could get on board depending on the pick sacrificed ( notice Boldin cost basically nothing for SF to aquire) but that isn't the situation.

I look at it a different way.
There's no way his stats would show added value here as we aren't a prolific passing Offense. The stats (again) aren't particularly relevant.

The questions in my mind about getting him is can he make the BIG play when needed and does his size create a mismatch in the Red Zone that we can take advantage of?
As well, if Matthews does make it as a starter, will both big receivers give us a much better option on pass plays?

I think the answers to all 3 questions is yes, and can be for 3 or 4 years. He's not a speed guy, so losing a step as he gets older isn't an issue. The concern is whether he has the desire to play until he is 34 years old.

HumanCockroach wrote:Um, weren't you talking about his "successful" seasons, if so, you are way, way, way off...

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... fied/false

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... /year/2012

Do you think in Seattle he'll receive 165 targets? Much less the 194 he received the year prior? His targets last year were down ( of course they were, he missed 3 games and was injured in several he played in the beginning of the year). You are welcome to your opinion he is still a bonafide number 1 receiver. I simply don't in anyway agree with that assessment.

I have always supported attempting to get Marshall to Seattle, but that time for me, has passed. If we were talking about a true bonafide number 1 with tread left on the tires, I would change my position on that, or even a receiver that helps in more areas than simply the offensive side of the ball ( Cobb for instance) or one that is getting better, and hitting his prime ( Jeffries, Green, Bryant, etc) or even one that could pop, and costs little ( Smith, Shorts, etc) and is YOUNG.... Marshall IMHO doesn't fit any of those parameters, and to me feels like a trade for Boldin #2 with the added benefit of paying 10 million to do so.....

Just don't like the move. If Marshall was due under 6, I suppose I could get on board depending on the pick sacrificed ( notice Boldin cost basically nothing for SF to aquire) but that isn't the situation.

Yeah, I was talking about the season prior to 2014, I thought you were saying he was a getting 13 targets/game last year, but my point was more to the fact that you were saying Cutler was basically forcing it to him: "unproportiately directed at one guy, Marshall." The season in which he had 165 targets Jeffery had 150, which doesn't seem unproportunate to me. I was also using that season as an example that his best days aren't long long behind him. I do think he is a #1 and certainly would be our #1 option here in Seattle. I am not saying he is a top 10 WR (closer to 15-20 range) in the league, but he is a guy who teams have to account for, especially in the read zone. Of course he wouldn't get anywhere near 160 targets here, thats not the way our offense works. I also would love to get an up and coming guy like Green or Bryant but those guys aren't going to be 9 mil/year guys and they wouldn't get 160 targets in our offense either, but you would be paying them 15+/year (something I am not apposed to and if Dez somehow came available I would love if we were able to sign him). People keep mentioning the financial aspect but the reality his 9 mil/year salary isn't terrible for a guy who produces like him, even in a 'down' year he had 8 TD's, and if it didn't would out we could cut him next year with *only* a 3 mil cap hit.

NorthHawk wrote:I look at it a different way.
There's no way his stats would show added value here as we aren't a prolific passing Offense. The stats (again) aren't particularly relevant.

The questions in my mind about getting him is can he make the BIG play when needed and does his size create a mismatch in the Red Zone that we can take advantage of?
As well, if Matthews does make it as a starter, will both big receivers give us a much better option on pass plays?

I think the answers to all 3 questions is yes, and can be for 3 or 4 years. He's not a speed guy, so losing a step as he gets older isn't an issue. The concern is whether he has the desire to play until he is 34 years old.

I agree that he would be a weapon in the red zone. He has over 30 TD's in the last three seasons. If only Richarson were healthy. Marshall on one side, Richardson stretching the field and Baldwin working the slot would instantly improve our passing game.

HC,

Don't get me wrong. I agree with you that 9 mil/yr for Marshall is probably an overspend. I don't think he is the savior to our offense, but right now I think he is the best option available based on his contract structure, skill set, and age. His skill set is exactly what we need. There are other guys who could do the same thing at around the same price, possibly, but we don't know for sure if they are going to be available (a guy like Fitz). A guy like Smith, who I like, is almost certainly going to cost less on a per year scale but, depending on how the contract is structured, might handcuff us more financially as soon as the 2016 season. Also he is a speed guy who would fill a role that I think Richardson fits perfectly (I know there is no guarantee with him now based on his knee). I think Pete is still looking for that big bodied guy who is a constant threat in the red zone and Marshall is that. As far as the compensation I wouldn't want to give anything more than like a 5th for him.

I think any compensation would be more than a 5th round selection as our pick is pretty much a 6th.
That being said, JS likes to trade down for more picks so giving up a 4th or even a 3rd might not be bad should they get a bunch in the middle rounds.
Won't we also get some compensatory picks this year (non-tradeable) that could mitigate sending one to Chicago.

NorthHawk wrote:I think any compensation would be more than a 5th round selection as our pick is pretty much a 6th.
That being said, JS likes to trade down for more picks so giving up a 4th or even a 3rd might not be bad should they get a bunch in the middle rounds.
Won't we also get some compensatory picks this year (non-tradeable) that could mitigate sending one to Chicago.

Yeah, we certainly will get some compensatory picks (Tate,Browner, Breno, maybe McDonald). Good point about our 5th basically being a 6th I might be okay trading our 4th as we would still have at least one pick in the round (tate), but wouldn't want to go much higher. Also, lets hope the Jets are stupid enough to hold onto Harvin (I don't think there is anyway that will happen) so we can get their 4th.

Yeah, I was talking about the season prior to 2014, I thought you were saying he was a getting 13 targets/game last year, but my point was more to the fact that you were saying Cutler was basically forcing it to him: "unproportiately directed at one guy, Marshall." The season in which he had 165 targets Jeffery had 150, which doesn't seem unproportunate to me. I was also using

True, but look at who was throwing the ball to Jeffries at the end of that season. It was not Cutler, but Mcknown that boosted Jeffries stats at the end of the season, which was far more balanced ( and far more productive I might add) after Cutler was lost to injury. The last full season Cutler had Marshall to throw to was indeed 2012 during which Marshall received 194 targets.... Trust me, Cutler loves to throw to Marshall ( and this is a major reason that Chicago and Cutler suffers, and I'm not just talking out of my a** on this, ask a Bears fan if you don't believe me on that) the amount of targets when Cutler is on the field with Marshall and he is healthy are indeed severely skewed towards Marshall...

I don't see Seattle giving Marshall the targets he needs to be successful here, and I simply can't see paying the man 9 million dollars ( hell with that and the release of Mebane, the Hawks could indeed sign and retain a dominant player in his prime in Suh) to be a big decoy. Just don't see it. I do not see a receiver like Smith demanding a huge salary ( more in the Tate range) and I like his speed more, his youth, while still providing the desired size and strength. He is an excellent blocker, came from a run first offense, has excellent hands, has post season experience and is still young enough to IMPROVE moving forward....

Yes, Chicago was a train wreck and BM was on Inside the NFL each week to update America of the debacle. Seattle struggled to 3-3 and had a "Come to Jesus" following the KC defeat with very little fan fare. Imagine BM being a mouthpiece for what goes on inside Seattle's locker room............

How much a football player is worth is predicated upon how good a football player he is, not on how much different you expect his stat line to be in your system than the system he played in somewhere else. We can't tell him him "we're only going to pay you $5M because we're not going to trow to you 10 times a game". Particularly in our offense, catching the ball is not the sum total of a WR's job description and quite frankly, there's not another WR available that can do what we want a WR to do than Brandon.

NorthHawk wrote:I look at it a different way.
There's no way his stats would show added value here as we aren't a prolific passing Offense. The stats (again) aren't particularly relevant.

The questions in my mind about getting him is can he make the BIG play when needed and does his size create a mismatch in the Red Zone that we can take advantage of?

That's it right there.
Statistics don't win games, we're not going to suddenly become a passing team, and you could expect career lows for Marshall in this offense; but all of that has nothing to do with why we would want to bring him here.
It's about adding a skill set we currently lack. It's about creating a match up problem for defenses, in a way that we aren't currently able to do.

I, like most others am eagerly looking forward to Matthews second season, and what he could possibly do, but I am not EXPECTING big things from him...I'm hoping for them.
With Marshall, I would absolutely EXPECT big things, because he's delivered them his entire career. He's been a top ten receiver from day one, and he still is.
His numbers would drop, precipitously, but his ability to create mismatches would not, his ability to high point passes over the top of defenders, and to run precise routes and to use his physicality to create space and to make big catches in the red zone...those things would still be a part of his game, no matter what his numbers would be.

And I believe those top ten receiver days are in the past, and don't feel like Marshall could or would bring more to Seattle than a receiver like Smith, who has the same qualities Marshall does, has performed in an offense like Seattles, it younger, cheaper and doesn't cost a draft pick has played in the post season every year he has been in the league, including a SB.

Like I said I'm cool with all of your feelings on the matter, but mine don't jive with yours.

( on a side note I find it funny that many, took the opposite side on aquiring Marshall when he WAS in his prime, when Seattle WAS throwing the ball, WAS cheaper and more productive, yet now, I once again find myself on the "other" side once again.... LOL I guess when it comes to Marshall, I can't win... )