Seahawks face offseason decisions, but are they really that difficult?

The Seattle Seahawks may lose starters on both sides of the ball to free agency this year, but is too much being made of it?

The consternation, hand-wringing and genuine concern has already begun. The biggest topic on local sports radio in Seattle this week has been “What are the Seahawks going to do about all their free agents?” National reporters and opposing fans have pegged the Hawks as salary-cap strapped and facing huge challenges in maintaining their talented roster this spring.

But seriously, what’s the big deal?

We’ve been here before, of course. Last year the concern was centered on how much it would strap the team financially to hand out big contract extensions to Russell Wilson and Bobby Wagner. Would the benefits of keeping them happy outweigh the potential downside of having them take up so much of our salary cap space? And on a smaller scale, losing starters like CB Byron Maxwell and G James Carpenter had some fans in a near-panic as well.

More from Seattle Seahawks News

• 4 prospects Seahawks could reach for at No. 20 in 2023 NFL Draft
• Seattle Seahawks Mock Draft: Post-first wave of free agency 
• Seahawks podcast: A review of the first week of free agency
• 4 experiments the Seattle Seahawks could cut short in 2023
• 3 pros and cons of Seattle Seahawks drafting Anthony Richardson

The questions are understandable: “How ever will we replace these guys? What are we going to do?!?!?!” Familiarity breeds comfort, while the unknown is downright scary. We see it every year in the draft. Whenever the Seahawks draft an unfamiliar name a great portion of the fan base freaks out, immediately assuming they’ve made a mistake. It’s a simple yet common phenomenon, if we don’t know who they are we assume they aren’t any good. We see it every year in baseball, where most prospects are mysteries to us. They traded Carson Smith for WHO?!?!?!?!?!

But here’s why you shouldn’t worry…… because Pete Carroll and John Schneider aren’t worrying. They’ve planned for this, in fact it’s part of their overall team-building philosophy. They’ve been very open, on the record, since the day they started rebuilding this franchise that the plan was to get it to the point where A) the roster was going to be so talented that it would be hard for rookie draft picks to make the squad each year and B) talented free agents would sometimes have to be allowed to walk, in the interest of keeping the roster young and the salary cap under control.

But here’s the other reason, are any of the impending unrestricted free agents irreplaceable? I submit that the answer to that is a resounding no. In fact, opportunities exist to upgrade their positions, or at least find suitable replacements at a much more reasonable cost. Let’s look at a few of them up close:

LT Russell Okung is a decent LT in his prime. And being decent, and playing left tackle, is akin to being an average left-handed pitcher. You get paid. In Russell’s case, he may have more value on the open market than he does in Seattle. The Seahawks have had to live with Okung’s constant injury issues and inconsistent play. Other LT-needy teams may be willing to throw more money at Okung than the Hawks are willing to pay, especially when a potential replacement already exists on the roster. Gary Gilliam had a mostly solid, sometimes outstanding season as the full-time RT. His forte is pass protection, and in fact he’s a superior athlete to Okung. He is also set to make $600,000 in 2016. Moving him to LT could be in the plans. Even if it’s not, the Hawks could conceivably get a starting-caliber left tackle with the 26th pick in the draft.

G J.R. Sweezy has been a Tom Cable favorite since he was drafted in the 7th round and converted from DL to OL back in 2012.  He’s a tenacious mauler in the run game but at times still a liability in pass protection. Starting guards get paid big money in the league these days, and Sweezy is only 26. Mark Glowinski was drafted in the 4th round last year, is projected by some as a long-term starter in the NFL, and played well when subbing for a concussed Sweezy in the week #17 game in Arizona. He could step right in as the starter in 2016, at a cost of $525,000.

OLB Bruce Irvin is an enigma. He’s a multi-talented athlete, capable of rushing the passer or covering a TE (even the occasional WR) 40 yards down the field. But here’s the problem with Irvin, he’s never become the impact player he was projected to be when the Hawks took him in the first round in 2012. 22 Sacks in 4 years does not a superstar make. Like Okung, other teams may be willing to pay him more than the Seahawks. Reports this week have him on the record as saying he would take a “hometown discount” but it’s one thing for a player to say that after the emotion of a roller-coaster season, it’s quite another when agents get involved and offers start coming in. The problem here is there’s no one on the roster who looks ready to take over for Bruce full time. However, starting OLB’s can be found in middle-tier free agency or the draft.

DT’s Brandon Mebane and Ahtyba Rubin. They’re both UFA’s but at different stages of their careers. Still, both would be big-time “additions” if they could be brought back. Rubin may get some serious play on the market as he is a valuable commodity; a run-stuffer on the right side of 30. He should be a priority for Seattle to try and sign, even if he’s on the relatively expensive side. Mebane is a career Seahawk and should remain so. He made $5.7 million last year, but at age 31 could agree to come back at a reduced salary.

Those are just the free agents. Then you have the situations of Marshawn Lynch and Kam Chancellor. Opinions vary and emotions fly in regards to what to do about these two. But this is my piece, so I get to give you my take…..

1. Lynch is gone. Period. As Keith pointed out today John Clayton said as much on his radio appearance this afternoon. And to me it all makes so much sense there really shouldn’t even be a debate. He’s about to turn 30, has taken a physical beating (while handing out the same to would-be tacklers), and is making top-end running back money. The Seahawks can save $6.5 million by cutting or trading him. That’s a significant amount of money. And releasing Beast Mode might also accomplish something else; it would clear the air of his sometimes-exhausting antics and the required kid-glove treatment he demands. Moving on from Lynch would do more than free up money, it would signal a clear shift to the leadership of Wilson as this roster continues to evolve and move forward.
2. Chancellor’s situation is a bit more complex. He’s a clubhouse leader, but how much of that was compromised by his decision to hold out this year, contributing greatly to the teams’s 0-2 start? He’s been a Pro Bowl player, but didn’t have his best season when he did hit the field in 2015. And when he missed games this year due to an injured tailbone, Kelcie McCray played well in his place. Trading Kam would save the team $4.1 million against the cap. McCray will make $675,000. It would also give the team an opportunity to send a message to the locker room. Michael Bennett expressed dissatisfaction with his salary last off season as well, but reported to camp on time and had his best season on the field. It’s feasible to think Seattle will reward Bennett financially. If they also cut ties with Chancellor, it could potentially be a positive influence in any future contract battles.

Think I’m oversimplifying things? Perhaps I am, but it’s to make a point; winning teams face these challenges every year, it comes with the territory. The good ones, the ones who can keep winning and contending over a long period of time despite losing good players every year, are the ones who make these decisions properly. To do so, you must obviously draft and develop talent consistently so suitable (and affordable) replacements are on hand. Secondly, you have to sometimes let good players leave that you would otherwise like to keep if there were no salary restrictions. The key is to let these players go too soon rather than too late. No one does this better than the New England Patriots. Players such as Richard Seymour, Darrelle Revis, Vince Wilfork and Logan Mankins were shipped out or allowed to walk away when it became clear that keeping them would be a detriment to the organizations overall attempts to control payroll.

I get it, fans get emotionally involved with their teams. They love “their guys” and want to see each and every one of them stick around for their entire careers. But nothing in the NFL is worse than having an aging roster. Right now Seattle has 29 players under contract who appeared in games in 2016, at a total cost of $124 million. The league’s salary cap is expected to rise to over $150 million this year, possibly as high as $153.4 million. If the Seahawks can free up some more salary cap money, they’ll be able to afford to fortify the offensive line (the unquestioned biggest off season need) while also addressing needs in other areas.

I’m not saying they should cut ties with all of the aforementioned players, only that doing so may be the most prudent move.

Next: Seahawks will draft 26th in first round

Making moves likethese are necessary for the Seahawks to create a consistently talented and youthful roster, while also giving themselves enough cap flexibility to make a major move (trade of free agent signing) if they believe it can put them over the top. Retaining everyone, at whatever cost, might appease much of the fan base, but it would significantly shorten what could be…..and should be…. an extended window of championship contention.