PDA

View Full Version : The Whitehurst Trade


superfly69
03-22-2010, 06:49 PM
Do you think Seattle gave up to much in the trade for Charlie Whitehurst? A swap of 2nd round picks and a 3rd in 2011 is a steep price for a 3rd sting QB, with no playing experience and an track record for inconsistency dating back to his days in college. It seemed like a lot to me.

summond822
03-22-2010, 09:55 PM
Yes, they gave up way too much for a third string QB with no game experience in the NFL. They should have waited until Anderson signed with Arizona then drove the price down to a 4th or 5th rounder.

XxXdragonXxX
03-22-2010, 10:35 PM
Yes, they gave up way too much for a third string QB with no game experience in the NFL. They should have waited until Anderson signed with Arizona then drove the price down to a 4th or 5th rounder.

Well supposedly the Cardinals signed Anderson because Whitehurst chose Seattle....so that wouldn't have worked.

superfly69
03-24-2010, 11:22 AM
I have heard that the Cards really wanted Whitehurst but he decided on Seattle instead.

Babylon
03-25-2010, 02:14 PM
I dont like the move but then again i'm holding out hope of getting Jake Locker in here. It can still happen of course and they could move Charlie at some point to recoup that future 3rd so we'll have to see.

The move im not looking forward to is the possibility of giving up a 1st for Marshall. I dont think you bring in bad character guys, too much of a gamble for a rebuilding team. Pete obviously wants to make some noise but should go steady with building through the draft. Seattle has 7 of the first 100 or so picks so rebuild that way.

gpngc
03-25-2010, 07:42 PM
They are definitely not giving up a first for Marshall. Maybe the second +, but if they were giving up the first it would have happened already.

KyleJames
03-31-2010, 10:56 PM
You never "like" giving up 20 spots and a future third rounder for a third string QB but look at the situation. Would you rather have Jimmy Clauson/Colt McCoy $15-40 mill? Would you rather Quinn or Anderson?

I hated it at first but stepping back and looking at it i really like it. He has a strong arm, is very mobile, will get experience if Matt gets hurt. (likely) He doesn't need to start right away but the chance to.

Most importantly He has more time in the NFL then a rookie and gets paid tens of millions less.

summond822
04-01-2010, 01:44 AM
He will also be leaving his prime as this team should be hitting it's stride assuming a 3-4 year rebuilding window. He's going to be 28 this year. He has maybe 5-6 years left before his skills start to deteriorate. Assuming that he actually becomes a decent QB, instead of having 4-5 year window where we have a chance to be successful, we have a 1-2 year window.

If we took McCoy it would've been in the second round, which pays much less than 15 million.

Ignoring the money part, he doesn't exactly inspire confidence in a fan. For one he couldn't even beat out an old journeyman in Volek to be the back up. Two his preseason stats against the back up defenses isn't very good.

Comp: 104
Att: 197
Comp.%: 52.6
Yards: 1031
TD's: 5
INT: 7
Sacked: 13
Fumb.: 6
QB Rating: 60.6

And remember, since he was third string those stats came against at most the second string defense. Still feeling good about this trade?

The only reason this trade got made is because Schneider liked him coming out of Clemson years ago. He's really developed since then...

Babylon
04-01-2010, 03:38 PM
You never "like" giving up 20 spots and a future third rounder for a third string QB but look at the situation. Would you rather have Jimmy Clauson/Colt McCoy $15-40 mill? Would you rather Quinn or Anderson?

I hated it at first but stepping back and looking at it i really like it. He has a strong arm, is very mobile, will get experience if Matt gets hurt. (likely) He doesn't need to start right away but the chance to.

Most importantly He has more time in the NFL then a rookie and gets paid tens of millions less.

I dont think the alternative would have to be Jimmy Clausen or Colt McCoy. Why couldnt the alternative be play Matt for another year and then draft a better QB next year in Locker or Mallett. Seems like Carroll was trying to make a bold move here, i dont like it.

He's most likely going to also bring in a basket case WR in either Dez Bryant or Brandon Marshall. I think the depth at WR is deep enough that he could trade down or get a nice receiver in the latter rounds.

summond822
04-01-2010, 08:26 PM
Here's something that I actually thought of today, which would be a sign of how much they actually like Clausen.

What if they traded for Whitehurst to prevent people from trading in front of them to grab Clausen? Seems like a lot to give up for a future back up, but you never know.

evenar
04-02-2010, 04:45 PM
That would have been the most ridiculous smoke screen ever, but as a Chargers fan ill take it!

summond822
04-02-2010, 05:19 PM
That would have been the most ridiculous smoke screen ever, but as a Chargers fan ill take it!

I have to agree with the bolded part, but I really have no idea how this front office works, except that Carroll makes the decisions and Schnieder writes the checks.

jballa838
04-03-2010, 12:31 PM
I'm withholding judgement until I see Whitehurst on the field... at this point I don't necessarily like it, but the Hawks front office must have done a lot of research before pulling the trigger on this one.

Babylon
04-03-2010, 02:17 PM
I'm withholding judgement until I see Whitehurst on the field... at this point I don't necessarily like it, but the Hawks front office must have done a lot of research before pulling the trigger on this one.

What were they researching preseason games?

jballa838
04-03-2010, 06:35 PM
What were they researching preseason games?
they had tape of him in college also, but yeah probably. Lets just say there is as much, if not more, tape available for Charlie Whitehurst than any QB in this draft.

EDIT: The tape just might not be as recent or good.