Ken, THANKS for the incisive analysis. I'm one of the few who hoped the Hawk "new broom" swept DK out for even more choice draft picks. DK's a uniquely elite athlete, but not a team-first guy or good reciever-mind like Lockett or Baldwin. Paraphrasing Crash Davis to Nuke Laloosh in Bull Durham: DK is "a million-dollar body attached to a 5-cent brain". Your article sets my hope for DK to have a great year that Seattle leverages for decent 2023 draft picks.
Should Seattle extend DK, I hope they add a disincentive for DK's penchant for unique but stupid unsportsmanlike conduct penalties. Never happen, I know!
Your article will keep me from wasting time on the barrage of "whither DK" posts and talks.
Thanks for the info Kenneth, that has smoothed my troubled brow. Let’s hope they get the deal done quick, as the longer this lingers the worse the angst will get - more than Wagner or Wilson, the thought of DK in another team’s uniform makes me so very sad.
I so appreciate your analysis, Kenneth. I agree that teams have overwhelming leverage. That said, not anywhere close to the leverage they once had, when they owned players like indentured servants. In other words, Metcalf will get an insane amount of money and soon. The Seahawks can't avoid it because those same rules which favor teams overall require a tagged player to be paid well. Given the negatives for the team to tag Metcalf, they'll want to avoid it. So, in other words, we can expect to see DK get a contract of roughly 25 million bucks a year for four years with a good chunk of it guaranteed. Not a lot of drama but that won't stop all the outlets from writing about it as if there were.
I think there is a remote chance Seattle trades DK. It would have to account for the fact that the receiving team is going to be better as a result of his addition. So I'm thinking maybe for a couple of first round picks. Is anyone desperate enough to trade two firsts for DK?
From our team's point of view, I wouldn't advocate that trade. I'd rather sign DK. But if it's clear he's unhappy or wants out, I might change my mind. Every move is a calculated risk. Who knows when or if we find another great receiver. At the same time, an unhappy player in the locker can be a major drag, particularly on a team trying to rebuild.
For sure! DK Metcalf can be all unhappy he wants (he doesn't seem unhappy, he's just doing due diligence) it really does not matter. He can't sit out. He has no leverage. I could just as easily, if I'm the Seahawks, wait it out and trade him in 2023. If Metcalf missed the entire season, the Seahawks would still get a better return in 2023 than right now. Perhaps a better return because he avoided injury for a whole year. Not interested in trading for two late first round picks. Would rather have one top-10 pick actually.
I get the feeling we'll sign him and things will be fine. But for an offer of 2 firsts, I'd have to think about it. On one hand, imagine having three 1sts in next years draft and 2 the following. That's a ton of capital to build a team with. On the other hand, you'd think it would be coming from a good team that feels they're a star player away; so therefore likely low picks. All of this talk makes the Jamal Adams trade look worse and worse.
True, but the NFL is unpredictable. When we traded for Adams, both the Hawks and the Jets (man, that sounds the gangs from "West Side Story"; I think it was the sharks and the jets) thought we'd be paying a couple of late round 1sts. All it takes is a key injury or two for a late first round pick to become a #10.
Me too. Even so, I wasn't a big fan of the trade at first. Then I got talked into it. I can see the logic now. Two late round firsts for the kind of player one can typically only get at the top of the draft, who proved himself pro bowl caliber and is really young. There have been times when his play seemed to vindicate John and Pete. The fact that he played like the energizer bunny on steroids. His sack total that first year.
What can be said? Hindsight is always 20-20. Maybe his play in future years will make the trade look more defensible (pun intentional).
It’s amusing to hear rumors of a free agent being willing to give a hometown discount. The player must be nonplussed: “I have to negotiate from a position of weakness and you want me to give even more?! Seriously?! Anyway, this isn’t my hometown.” I suppose there is a premium that some players are willing to pay in order to stay put, but it would be for their own reasons.
Metcalf’s “hold out.” When you have career earnings of <4M and you’re in line for a contract worth 20-25M/yr, why would you take even the slightest risk of an injury?
Ken, THANKS for the incisive analysis. I'm one of the few who hoped the Hawk "new broom" swept DK out for even more choice draft picks. DK's a uniquely elite athlete, but not a team-first guy or good reciever-mind like Lockett or Baldwin. Paraphrasing Crash Davis to Nuke Laloosh in Bull Durham: DK is "a million-dollar body attached to a 5-cent brain". Your article sets my hope for DK to have a great year that Seattle leverages for decent 2023 draft picks.
Should Seattle extend DK, I hope they add a disincentive for DK's penchant for unique but stupid unsportsmanlike conduct penalties. Never happen, I know!
Your article will keep me from wasting time on the barrage of "whither DK" posts and talks.
Thanks again,
Mike A.
Thanks for lowering my stress level about this a bit. My first thought yesterday was “oh crap”.
Now it’s more….(yawn).
Thanks for the info Kenneth, that has smoothed my troubled brow. Let’s hope they get the deal done quick, as the longer this lingers the worse the angst will get - more than Wagner or Wilson, the thought of DK in another team’s uniform makes me so very sad.
I consider DK in another uniform VERY unlikely!
I so appreciate your analysis, Kenneth. I agree that teams have overwhelming leverage. That said, not anywhere close to the leverage they once had, when they owned players like indentured servants. In other words, Metcalf will get an insane amount of money and soon. The Seahawks can't avoid it because those same rules which favor teams overall require a tagged player to be paid well. Given the negatives for the team to tag Metcalf, they'll want to avoid it. So, in other words, we can expect to see DK get a contract of roughly 25 million bucks a year for four years with a good chunk of it guaranteed. Not a lot of drama but that won't stop all the outlets from writing about it as if there were.
I think there is a remote chance Seattle trades DK. It would have to account for the fact that the receiving team is going to be better as a result of his addition. So I'm thinking maybe for a couple of first round picks. Is anyone desperate enough to trade two firsts for DK?
From our team's point of view, I wouldn't advocate that trade. I'd rather sign DK. But if it's clear he's unhappy or wants out, I might change my mind. Every move is a calculated risk. Who knows when or if we find another great receiver. At the same time, an unhappy player in the locker can be a major drag, particularly on a team trying to rebuild.
For sure! DK Metcalf can be all unhappy he wants (he doesn't seem unhappy, he's just doing due diligence) it really does not matter. He can't sit out. He has no leverage. I could just as easily, if I'm the Seahawks, wait it out and trade him in 2023. If Metcalf missed the entire season, the Seahawks would still get a better return in 2023 than right now. Perhaps a better return because he avoided injury for a whole year. Not interested in trading for two late first round picks. Would rather have one top-10 pick actually.
You once again make a really good point. I'd rather have a top 10 pick too.
I get the feeling we'll sign him and things will be fine. But for an offer of 2 firsts, I'd have to think about it. On one hand, imagine having three 1sts in next years draft and 2 the following. That's a ton of capital to build a team with. On the other hand, you'd think it would be coming from a good team that feels they're a star player away; so therefore likely low picks. All of this talk makes the Jamal Adams trade look worse and worse.
True, but the NFL is unpredictable. When we traded for Adams, both the Hawks and the Jets (man, that sounds the gangs from "West Side Story"; I think it was the sharks and the jets) thought we'd be paying a couple of late round 1sts. All it takes is a key injury or two for a late first round pick to become a #10.
I know I thought that at the time. Never would have dreamed that second 1st would be in the top 10.
Me too. Even so, I wasn't a big fan of the trade at first. Then I got talked into it. I can see the logic now. Two late round firsts for the kind of player one can typically only get at the top of the draft, who proved himself pro bowl caliber and is really young. There have been times when his play seemed to vindicate John and Pete. The fact that he played like the energizer bunny on steroids. His sack total that first year.
What can be said? Hindsight is always 20-20. Maybe his play in future years will make the trade look more defensible (pun intentional).
Every now and then there is talk about some player signing a “team-friendly contract.” In the NFL, *every* contract is team-friendly.
Great saying!
It’s amusing to hear rumors of a free agent being willing to give a hometown discount. The player must be nonplussed: “I have to negotiate from a position of weakness and you want me to give even more?! Seriously?! Anyway, this isn’t my hometown.” I suppose there is a premium that some players are willing to pay in order to stay put, but it would be for their own reasons.
The only time there is a hometown discount is when it relates to state tax income.
Yep...seen this movie before.
Can't say I recall a player ever even winning one of these moves. Marshawn, Kam, Earl... they always come back. With less money.
Don’t you think that this a matter of avoiding the risk of injury?
Not sure I know the context of your question.
Metcalf’s “hold out.” When you have career earnings of <4M and you’re in line for a contract worth 20-25M/yr, why would you take even the slightest risk of an injury?
This stage of offseason team activities are non-contact, so I don't think he has to worry about that.