When should the Seahawks turn to Christian Haynes?

Week 2 'Question Everything' on Seahawks G troubles, DK Metcalf's restructure, and what to do with Dre'Mont Jones : Seaside Joe 2020

The Seahawks had a troubling first game from their non-Charles Cross or Connor Williams offensive line, but did that come as a surprise to Mike Macdonald, Ryan Grubb, or Scott Huff? Probably not and that’s why I don’t expect Seattle to make any changes to their offensive line for at least a couple more weeks (at the absolute soonest) and that’s only if it gets worse.

If you could read John Schneider’s mind during the Broncos game, I doubt you’d hear the thought, “Oh, I thought Laken Tomlinson would be good!”

I mean, yes, to some degree Schneider expected the players he’s acquired to be good. However, sometimes signing an offensive lineman who is “good” is no different than the Raiders signing Gardner Minshew because he’s “good”. Schneider knew why Tomlinson had been released by the Jets and why he was willing to sign with Seattle for a million dollars. (“A million dollars” sounds so much more exciting when you win it on Survivor compared it to being disrespectful on the free agent market.)

Starters of all skill level and position have really good games and really bad games, which are dispersed very randomly over the course of a season. The lucky players sometimes stack their good games in the beginning of the year, while the unlucky ones have to spend the first week explaining why “they’re actually just terrible now.”

Every week I’ll send out an email to Super Joes subscribers to gather mailbag questions to answer after the latest Seahawks game. That’s what we’re doing this morning and as we can imagine, the topic of the offensive line and how to make it better was a popular topic of conversation this week. If you want to join the mailbag thread, you can upgrade to Super Joes any time.

Chuck Turtleman: I saw that DK restructured his contract this morning. Are we freeing up money for a player trade or is this just 9.5M freed up for a current player extension?

Just to reiterate for the top for everyone, a restructure doesn’t mean DK gave any money back, it doesn’t mean that he’s been extended, and it honestly doesn’t mean anything other than “The Seahawks are moving money around”. In most cases, teams don’t even need permission to do a restructure because it’s not taking anything away from the player. Here is what Jason Fitzgerald wrote at OvertheCap about it:

Prior to the start of the regular season the Seahawks created $9.5 million in cap room by converting $11.875 million of WR’s D.K. Metcalf’s salary into a signing bonus. Prior to the restructure the Seahawks had around $4 million in cap room and this move gives them the breathing room to make any moves necessary during the course of the regular season.

This restructure was a departure from the Seahawks norms as they added three void years to the contract to maximize the salary cap savings. Generally, Seattle does not do this as they normally will max out at one void year. Metcalf, whose 2025 salary cap number is now $31.87 million, will be entering the final year of his contract in 2025 and the addition of these void years is probably an indication that Seattle knows that Metcalf will likely be extended next season

I’ll add Rusty’s question in here before answering.

Rusty: I’m with Chuck on this. Let’s say John Schneider calls you to get your opinion on what to do now that DK’s contract has been restructured. The team now has just north of 13 million in cap space. What’s your move?

It’s tough to speculate because I could give my opinion and then something immediately happens after that proves me wrong. However, what I don’t think the Seahawks intended to do by restructuring Metcalf was to solve some problem that they had in Week 1. And fans shouldn’t want a front office that is that reactive to Week 1.

The Seahawks needed cap space in order to operate through the season (they were near the bottom of the league in cap space prior to this) and for sure to be prepared in case they do see a good trade opportunity in October. It makes no sense to wait to restructure Metcalf if you’re going to do it anyway because every week you wait is less money you save. If the Seahawks had waited until they actually needed the cap space, they could have wasted millions of dollars in opportunity to make a move.

As exciting as the prospect of “a move” is, there isn’t one to make yet. The Seahawks are going to continue to trust the players they chose out of training camp for the time being and other teams aren’t in a rush to give away players that they chose out of training camp either.

As to what the money means for DK Metcalf’s future, it doesn’t mean anything. Seattle wanted cap space now and that’s the only reason they did it. If they need to trade Metcalf next year, they still can. If they want to extend him, they can. The dead cap on his deal goes up, but that’s not a big deal. The Seahawks restructured Quandre Diggs last year, it didn’t change anything about his future.

The part about adding three void years is probably just because Seattle is already projected to be over the cap in 2025 and therefore they are spreading it out as much as possible.

zezinhom400: Is there a free-agent fix out there for our OL? This question requires your inimitable salary cap savvy bc we need two (at least) solutions: a right tackle and a guard. I do realize you've proven 100 times over we won't invest in guards and centers, but, sure feels like a RT and at least one guard are what's going to hold this team back. Maybe just Bakhtiari at RG solves the whole thing as Conner builds back his strength and quickness, would be delighted with just that move

You also made a great list of options on the market between tackles and guards, I’m sorry I had to cut it down for space.

At this particular time of year the issue isn’t really about Seattle’s lack of urgency at guard and tackle. The time for building rosters is over. Everyone on the market is considered worse at this stage of his career than most players on NFL rosters. I can’t speak to what degree David Bakhtiari could help the Seahawks, but he hasn’t played very many games in the last three years so I can’t imagine that he’s going to be in shape to play for anybody any time soon.

I know that the situation feels very dire right now, and it’s not even just the fact that it has only been one game, although it has only been one game. It’s that we have to give some benefit of the doubt to Seattle’s coach and trust after going through the entire offseason, OTAs, training camp, and preseason, that if they had felt the situation was dire, the changes would have already been made.

Why should we trust that? They signed Connor Williams during training camp because they felt they didn’t have a starting center on the roster. They traded Michael Jackson, Darrell Taylor, and Nick Harris, it’s not that they were afraid to go back on any commitments. They acquired Trevis Gipson when Uchenna Nwosu got injured, there wasn’t hesitation to address a deficiency.

The Seahawks will make adjustments in the coming weeks and if those adjustments don’t work, then they will make personnel changes. But I don’t think that any coaches were surprised on Sunday about where the weaknesses would be. If they aren’t surprised, then why would they react to it?

Cold Steel and Sunshine: How did Laken Tomlinson and Anthony Bradford beat out Christian Haynes? If people say he was the best pure guard prospect and our guards can’t block a three year old in pass protection, what gives? Is Haynes not as good as advertised i.e. did we not get what we thought we were getting?

I can’t speak to the comparison between the guards, but it’s apparent that the coaches don’t think he’s ready yet. Richard Sherman didn’t start the first six games of his career and then Pete brought him in and it immediately felt like, “Wow, why wasn’t he deemed ready?” There’s a long list of good Seahawks who didn’t start right away. Perhaps Macdonald makes a change soon but I haven’t questioned why Haynes isn’t starting or been worried about it.

If Haynes needs to learn a couple more things because right now he’d look as bad as the current starters at guard, then I would not want the Seahawks to rush him in and ruin his confidence. We’ve seen the reaction to Tomlinson and Bradford having one bad game, I don’t think Haynes would get any slack if he has one bad game, so I think yes, please avoid risking the rookie having a bad game until it’s absolutely necessary.

If you’re asking whether or not Haynes should be better than either of these guards at the start of his career as a third round pick, I go back to the Sherman example. I guess I would have expected him to win the job, but then he could get the start in Week 5 and be amazing.

Eduardo: Interested on a deeper dive on our OLBs Mafe and Hall. Without Uchenna, they seem to have stepped up recoding a sack each though they were both a product of running Nix out of bounds after his scrambles. Still, I'll take it! It looked like Hall and Mafe also set the edge successfully, but can't say for sure and can't speak to Dre'mont Jones' performance either. Thoughts?

One more Q was related to this:

Grant: What are we going to do with Dre Jones? He seems like perhaps the biggest waste of money on the roster right now. What's his role once Uchenna is back healthy? Does he have any trade value this season, or is he more likely a cap casualty at the end of the year? Based on his contract, what are the likely outcomes for this season and beyond?

Jones being a “waste of money” isn’t really consequential to the present because that money is already spent and there are no cap savings related to a mid-season move. Jones has trade value in the sense that a lot of teams would gladly take him off Seattle’s hands, but they wouldn’t be willing to give up an asset that’s going to help the Seahawks very much. Jones wouldn’t cost his next team any cap space money this year because Seattle restructured his contract in June, so he could basically end up anywhere. However, just because there would be a lot of interested teams, there wouldn’t be a bidding war; just the fact that Seahawks fans want to get rid of Jones after one game tells you that there isn’t a sense that he’s helping football teams right now. There’s no benefit to trading Jones unless he’s actively hurting the defense because a) no cost savings and b) not good trade offers.

Will they trade him? I doubt it. Seattle is already down one edge rusher and I wouldn’t trust that Uchenna Nwosu’s going to be healthy for the rest of the season even after he comes back. Macdonald played Jones more than he played Derick Hall on Sunday, so I wouldn’t even speculate about parting ways with Jones until his snaps start to go down; that usually precedes a move.

The only reason I wouldn’t completely shut down the idea is that Macdonald did not pick Jones, so he could end up feeling like Jones doesn’t fit what he wants to do and then asks John Schneider what their options are if Macdonald decides to bench Jones.

On Mafe, here are some quotes about his game by Ollie Connolly on the PFF NFL Show:

“Where he has improved is turning the corner. He still has jolting speed off the snap. I think there are still some technical deficiencies there. A lot of it is still just getting by on feel and athleticism. Still not finishing as much as you’d want. Given the body type and who he could be (a true three-way rusher knifing inside) the one thing that’s missing for me still is the true speed to power. I think most of that comes down to technique…

For me it’s mostly about, you have to time up your hands and your feet, that’s how you generate power. You can’t just go with one or the other, and with (Mafe) he is just not always in sync. It’s actually something that’s really easy and correctable and coachable…You can correct this in like 10 weeks and get a player who can be really productive, I think it’s just more time with him.”

I think Connolly’s points are definitely trying to pump the brakes on the “8 or 9 pressures” that Mafe had in Week 1, which is smart. I think any Seahawks fan would be elated to hear that Mafe’s weaknesses are his coachable while his strengths (rare size+athleticism) are not. Just seeing the progress Charles Cross may have made this year, it’s a reminder that Mafe could be good now, but great later.

Scott M: AJ Barner looks good, he's big, cerebral, good body control. Any chance you think we got a good project there?

On any performances related to Week 1, including Barner or Derick Hall or Mafe or Tomlinson or Bradford, etc., I can’t say that I’ve learned that much. Until we get second, third, fourth, or even a 17th data point of more games to go off of, it’s too soon to say anything of value other than facts.

It’s a fact that A.J. Barner played a lot more snaps than anyone had predicted he would play. It’s a fact that Seattle is going to get back Pharaoh Brown soon and probably take a lot of those snaps away from Barner when he returns.

An opinion would be that the Seahawks intend to have Noah Fant and Brown play the majority of the tight end snaps this season and that Ryan Grubb doesn’t have many plays drawn up for a third tight end who only blocks, and if that’s true maybe we’re waiting until 2025 to find out what Seattle has in Barner. Outside of QB, tight end and linebacker could be the two hardest positions to play in the NFL, so there’s some benefit to letting him train behind those two this season.