Two 1st round picks for Russell Wilson in '16 and '17 or '17 and '18

[Discuss Thrower]

Clayton on show seems to hint that SEA would be open to non-exclusive Tag for RW in 2016- seems surprising but SEA will study all avenues

— DAVIS HSU (@DavisHsuSeattle) June 20, 2015

Do you sign the offer sheet if the Seahawks non-exclusively tag Russell Wilson?

Pole cumming.

[Hootie]

I guess you just grossly overrated 1st round picks, then

Seattle, everyone's POSTER CHILD FRANCHISE, trades 1st round picks away like they're candy

[Hootie]

seriously

outside of the first 5 picks (and even then, who knows) ... tell me who you'd rather have in this draft than Jimmy Graham?

First round picks are like a coin flip ... 50% of the time, they'll be good starters at an affordable roster price. Of that 50% of the time, 20% of the time they'll be borderline pro bowlers and 5-10% all-pros. The other side of the coin? Busts.

You take our franchise history and our two best 1st round picks (Gonzalez, Thomas) ... which are two EPIC hits and two hall of famers ... and I still think I'd trade their careers, both of them, for 1 Russell Wilson. Personally, 100% certain. But I can see how some are more 50/50 on that one.

For Luck? Be real. Would you trade DT's established career and Tony G's established career, pretend you can have those two careers all over again from the start, together at the same time ... or would you take Andrew Luck?

It's a no brainer. It's Luck.

So think about that when you consider the "value" of 2 first round picks.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

I guess you just grossly overrated 1st round picks, then

Seattle, everyone's POSTER CHILD FRANCHISE, trades 1st round picks away like they're candy

Overrating draft picks is incredibly common. Like EVERYONE thinks that every first round pick is giving up on the next Randy Moss or JJ Watt...

A draft pick is something that gives you the POTENTIAL to get a good player. A good player is an ACTUAL good player. Sure, you need to adjust for the salary cap issue of a vet versus a pick, but you also need to understand that MANY draft picks, incluidng first round picks, are misses, or get decent-not-great players.

For a team like the Chiefs, with so many other good pieces in place but missing a seriously above-average QB, giving up two firsts for Wilson is pretty much a no-brainer. I wouldn't say that if it was Tom Brady, unless you guys think you're on the cusp NOW, given Brady's age, but Wilson is what? 25?

[RunKC]

Seattle had 2 great drafts and star in another one.

The last 2 drafts since then have been complete and utter garbage. They haven't seen much of anything from the 2013/2014 classes.

They aren't the poster boys. If there is one franchise you want to replicate, it's the GB Packers, who taught Schneider.

Only one player on that team wasn't drafted by them. Insane.

[Hootie]

Realistically, who in their god damn right mind (and this is a very realistic scenario with 2 1st round picks for Wilson) wouldn't trade Glenn Dorsey and Branden Albert (EVEN AT THE TIME OF THEM BEING PROSPECTS RATHER THAN KNOWING WHAT THEY TURNED INTO) for Russell Wilson?

And we're talking a top 5 pick, and a top 15 pick.

Keep in mind, Wilson probably, at best, gets Seattle #20 and #20 the following year

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by RunKC

Seattle had 2 great drafts and star in another one.

The last 2 drafts since then have been complete and utter garbage. They haven't seen much of anything from the 2013/2014 classes.

They aren't the poster boys. If there is one franchise you want to replicate, it's the GB Packers, who taught Schneider.

Only one player on that team wasn't drafted by them. Insane.

would you like me to dispel this myth, too? Or no? Your choice.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

I guess you just grossly overrated 1st round picks, then

Seattle, everyone's POSTER CHILD FRANCHISE, trades 1st round picks away like they're candy

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

seriously

outside of the first 5 picks (and even then, who knows) ... tell me who you'd rather have in this draft than Jimmy Graham?

First round picks are like a coin flip ... 50% of the time, they'll be good starters at an affordable roster price. Of that 50% of the time, 20% of the time they'll be borderline pro bowlers and 5-10% all-pros. The other side of the coin? Busts.

You take our franchise history and our two best 1st round picks (Gonzalez, Thomas) ... which are two EPIC hits and two hall of famers ... and I still think I'd trade their careers, both of them, for 1 Russell Wilson. Personally, 100% certain. But I can see how some are more 50/50 on that one.

For Luck? Be real. Would you trade DT's established career and Tony G's established career, pretend you can have those two careers all over again from the start, together at the same time ... or would you take Andrew Luck?

It's a no brainer. It's Luck.

So think about that when you consider the "value" of 2 first round picks.

And Belichick has built the Patriots by, in part, constantly moving back and getting extra picks, so he can hit on more players JUST because he has more picks. Everyone misses. Everyone misses alot -- like 50% or whatever, but 50% of 10 picks is a higher number than 50% of 7 picks (duh).

Patriots and Ravens also abuse the shit out of the compensation pick system for losing free agents for the same reason.

[dls6501]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

I guess you just grossly overrated 1st round picks, then

Seattle, everyone's POSTER CHILD FRANCHISE, trades 1st round picks away like they're candy

Pretty sure that would be New England not Seattle.

Just watch. In a couple years when Seattle cant afford to keep everyone, they will be wishing they hadn't traded their draft picks when they replace stars they cant afford with players that shouldn't be starters.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

would you like me to dispel this myth, too? Or no? Your choice.

Oh this will be good

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

Realistically, who in their god damn right mind (and this is a very realistic scenario with 2 1st round picks for Wilson) wouldn't trade Glenn Dorsey and Branden Albert (EVEN AT THE TIME OF THEM BEING PROSPECTS RATHER THAN KNOWING WHAT THEY TURNED INTO) for Russell Wilson?

And we're talking a top 5 pick, and a top 15 pick.

Keep in mind, Wilson probably, at best, gets Seattle #20 and #20 the following year

Well, worse than that, if Wilson does what is expected, right. Hopefully (for you guys) 20 and 32.

[Hootie]

I'd give our next two 1sts for 2 years of Tom freaking Brady in a heartbeat. Heartbeat.

Let alone Russell Wilson, who is 25.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by dls6501

Wilson is an obvious upgrade from Alex Smith, however I wouldn't give up two first rounders for him.

They are both cut from the same cloth. Game managers who are heavily reliant on their defense to succeed. Wilson just happens to make 1 or 2 more plays a game than Alex. Otherwise they are very similar players. Neither are players I would give giant contracts to or would choose to lead my team.

Wilson is young and will get better though....so at least there is that.

I really don't get the game manager label for Wilson. He MAKES plays. That vaunted defense let Wilson down against the Falcons in the postseason after he took the lead with under a minute remaining. That vaunted defense let Brady shred them in the 4th quarter last year.

How in the world someone wouldn't want Wilson to lead their team, especially a team like KC who hasn't won a playoff game in 20 years, is beyond me.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

I'd give our next two 1sts for 2 years of Tom freaking Brady in a heartbeat. Heartbeat.

Let alone Russell Wilson, who is 25.

I'd give our next 3 1st round picks for Wilson right now.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by dls6501

Pretty sure that would be New England not Seattle.

Just watch. In a couple years when Seattle cant afford to keep everyone, they will be wishing they hadn't traded their draft picks when they replace stars they cant afford with players that shouldn't be starters.

They won a super bowl and were one horrible call away from being repeat champs. It's laughable to say "just watch in a few years when they decline." In the meantime they will have enjoyed as much success in 5 years than KC has had in 50.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

I'd give our next two 1sts for 2 years of Tom freaking Brady in a heartbeat. Heartbeat.

Let alone Russell Wilson, who is 25.

Wilson is 26 and will be 27 in November