WR Percy Harvin traded to Seahawks

[Bobs My Uncle]

Because of what they paid for the privilege of paying too much money for Harvin...

Now, sometimes you have to be willing to take a bad deal in order to improve your team, and this may end up being one of those times. The deal itself is still a bad one, though.

Paying too much for a player can't be properly determined until said player actually plays a down.

Suppose that Harvin posts gaudy #'s and is an instrumental factor in allowing the Seahawks to win the next SB. Would you then consider Harvin to be too costly?

 

[condon84]

With the cap room and picks they're giving up for Harvin, they could have had a high level free agent and a first round rookie.

High level free agents cost money. And the draft is a crapshoot. Harvin can play the slot, or as an outside receiver. But the fact that he can also come out of the backfield as a RB is going to put a lot of stress on defenses especially if they adapt the option offenses that the Redskins and Niners are running.

 

[patsinthesnow]

Bad trade, are you guys serious? This is the most legit option offense the NFL has seen with Wilson, Beastmode, and Harvin. Top 5 offense and top 5 defense.

 

[YearbookCurfew]

Seattle keeps taking the Viking players. First Jackson then Rice, and now Harvin.

 

[condon84]

It's not just who, but how much.

For example, let's say a team convinced the Patriots to give up GRONK.

The sheer magnitude of what they would have to cough up to get BB to do that right now would destroy any value they might get from him.

I don't understand your point.

 

[Marqui]

At this moment (without knowing how well Harvin will produce), I'm going to have to give the nod to the Vikings. That is a really high price to pay for the Seahawks to be able to negotiate a new deal with Harvin...

True, I forgot that Harvin's contract is up. I still like the acquisition for them though.

 

[Sciz]

High level free agents cost money.

And Harvin is getting just as much money as one of those high level free agents. He reportedly wanted $16M a year, so I think he's definitely getting more than $10M a year. And assuming they take a lower cap hit in the first year like most teams do with contracts, he's going to be hitting the big money in his contract right as the Seahawks want to resign Wilson, Sherman, Thomas, and Chancellor. It's a very win-now move that leaves them without a top draft pick and more than likely without one of their top secondary players long term.

If I were in charge, I would have much preferred to get Greg Jennings on a three year deal, meaning his contract would be off the books when all of those other players would be hitting the big-money years of their new deals. And they'd still have a first round pick. Jennings isn't nearly as versatile as Harvin, but I think the extra first round pick would more than make up for the difference.

 

[BradyBranch39]

I really really really dislike this trade for the Seahawks, especially since this is going to affect their ability to sign all of Chancellor, Thomas, and Sherman over the next two seasons.

I wouldn't go quite that far, but giving up those 3 picks AND the high-$$ he's going to get is too much by quite a bit. Wiilson-Harvin will be scary together though.

And here's a handy graphic of Ponder's WRs.

 

[Deus Irae]

Paying too much for a player can't be properly determined until said player actually plays a down.

It can be determined the moment the contract is signed.

Suppose that Harvin posts gaudy #'s and is an instrumental factor in allowing the Seahawks to win the next SB. Would you then consider Harvin to be too costly?

As I noted, and you seem to have ignored:

sometimes you have to be willing to take a bad deal in order to improve your team

 

[condon84]

And Harvin is getting just as much money as one of those high level free agents. He reportedly wanted $16M a year, so I think he's definitely getting more than $10M a year. And assuming they take a lower cap hit in the first year like most teams do with contracts, he's going to be hitting the big money in his contract right as the Seahawks want to resign Wilson, Sherman, Thomas, and Chancellor. It's a very win-now move that leaves them without a top draft pick and more than likely without one of their top secondary players long term.

If I were in charge, I would have much preferred to get Greg Jennings on a three year deal, meaning his contract would be off the books when all of those other players would be hitting the big-money years of their new deals. And they'd still have a first round pick. Jennings isn't nearly as versatile as Harvin, but I think the extra first round pick would more than make up for the difference.

I'm sure the Seahawks brain trust thought about doing the scenario you outlined but decided to pull the trigger on this trade anyways. Harvin is a more dynamic player than Jennings and they obviously thought that the price they paid (draft picks and salary) are worth it.

IMO, out of the 4 players you mentioned that would need new deals in the coming years, Wilson and Thomas IMO are no-brainers. Sherman is going to command a ridiculous contract in the Revis level. Not sure that's worth it.

 

[BradyBranch39]

Seattle keeps taking the Viking players. First Jackson then Rice, and now Harvin.

not to mention the Hutchinson-Burleson Caper.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I don't understand your point.

My point: yes, Harvin is a "proven" player—not, of course, that that guarantees you he will ever catch even one pass as a Seahawk—but it's possible, nevertheless, that the Seahawks will have given up too much to get him.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

It can be determined the moment the contract is signed.

There are two different issues here: I'd agree that the "inherent logic" of a trade/signing can be determined at the moment it's finalized.

But there's also an "ultimate value" to the trade which can't be determined for a while.

As an example, few people here complained about Afailius Thomas getting twice as much as Welker. But, as it turns out, the Pats would have been better off just giving Welker Afailius' contract.

 

[Joey007]

Datone Jones now slips to 29 and the Patriots go back to a 3-4 which suits the LBs much more. Armstead, Wilfork and Jones up front.

Doesn't have a whole lot to do with the topic, but this sounds interesting.

 

[Joey007]

not to mention the Hutchinson-Burleson Caper.

And I thought Kansas City was taking all of our guys a few years ago.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

It can be determined the moment the contract is signed.

The value of the player can't be determined until we know what production he brings to the table.

You didn't answer my ? Suppose Harvin posts gaudy #'s and is a major contributor to a Seahawks SB win next season .... will you consider the trade to be a bad deal for the Seahawks?

 

[mgteich]

No one would ever make a deal if we had to wait to see the production in a year or two. We're dealing with value and expectation. Harvin has a certain value in the nil. The draft picks have a certain value. Harvin would be expected to add a certain value to the hawks who need to improve to be able to compete for their division.

And if Harvin is injured in camp, will this be a terrible deal for the hawks?

With free agents, we have a record, and the likelihood of production and fit.

Harvin is what Seattle needs. Seattle is willing to pay two ten million a year receivers. They weren't going to come close to Harvin where they picked.

One could argue that we might have made a similar deal for Harvin. Perhaps we were outbid.

To suggest that they should have signed a free agents presumes that they wanted one of the free agents as much as Harvin and could outbid Miami and others to get their man.

The value of the player can't be determined until we know what production he brings to the table.

You didn't answer my ? Suppose Harvin posts gaudy #'s and is a major contributor to a Seahawks SB win next season .... will you consider the trade to be a bad deal for the Seahawks?

 

[Deus Irae]

The value of the player can't be determined until we know what production he brings to the table.

Nonsense. The value of the player is determined by the market modified by the specifics of the player. There is no need, at all, to wait on his future production.

You didn't answer my ? Suppose Harvin posts gaudy #'s and is a major contributor to a Seahawks SB win next season .... will you consider the trade to be a bad deal for the Seahawks?

I did answer it. Twice

 

[Brady6]

Harvin to 'Hawks

Jay Glazer ?@JayGlazer
The Seahawks and Vikings have agreed to a trade that send Harvin to Seattle for draft picks, pending Harvin passing a physical

Wouldn't be surprised to see Rice get cut..

 

[Brady6]

Harvin to 'Hawks

I'm sure the Seahawks brain trust thought about doing the scenario you outlined but decided to pull the trigger on this trade anyways. Harvin is a more dynamic player than Jennings and they obviously thought that the price they paid (draft picks and salary) are worth it.

IMO, out of the 4 players you mentioned that would need new deals in the coming years, Wilson and Thomas IMO are no-brainers. Sherman is going to command a ridiculous contract in the Revis level. Not sure that's worth it.

Cannot wait for the Sherman show to start holding out and demanding ridiculous money. It is going to be fun to watch.