Seattle Seahawks do not have to hold a fire sale this offseason

The Seattle Seahawks will almost certainly make some cuts this offseason that will hurt. But they’re far from the point of being forced to hold a fire sale. Some of the ludicrous trade proposals floating in the interwebs seem to be unaware of that basic fact.

The Seahawks are going to make some tough choices this offseason, just like every team. Last year we saw the departure of K.J. Wright and Shaquill Griffin, among others. The season before that Jadeveon Clowney left for a bigger contract than the Hawks were willing to pay out. It’s going to happen again this offseason. It’s the nature of the business. If you want to improve your weaknesses, you have to balance your roster as best as you can. And that, at times, can mean making painful cuts.

Seattle has to upgrade the offensive line. They’ve made some strides, yes, but there’s still work to be done. Pro Football Focus rated the Seahawks O-line 25th in the league. Their strength was definitely run-blocking. Russell Wilson showed he still has a lot of magic left in the last two games of the season, but getting pressured on 37 percent of your dropbacks isn’t exactly a formula for success.

There’s certainly no shortage of potential fixes on the free agent market. Our own Almar Reyes has a stellar list of candidates to upgrade the O-line. Jake Lupino has his own thoughts on a trio of free agents who could improve the ‘Hawks offensive line, too.

Yeah… the Seahawks actually do have cap space

Here’s the thing, 12s. I read about the Seahawks, just as you do. I flip through a lot of websites for news and opinions, same as you. All too often, we see some, shall we say, creative ideas regarding trades involving some of the Seaawks top stars. Typically Russell Wilson is the target, as we all know. This despite that Wilson has said about 37 million times that he wants to finish his career in Seattle. Yes, that’s his cap number this year; how about that?

Speaking of cap numbers and potential trades, the latest trade that’s been floated would send Bobby Wagner to the Chargers. Like so many of these stories, the story focuses almost entirely on what the trade partner would get, not what Seattle would receive in return. In this instance, the writer proposed that the Hawks would send Wagner for a mid-round pick, as his contract ($20.3 million) limits his appeal.

Ummm…if he’s going to have such a huge impact on the team’s success, then he’s worth the money. And if he’s worth the money, then he’s worth more than a mid-round pick. Yes, the Hawks would at least get something for him, rather than just cut him; I get that.

Here’s the comical aspect of this particular story: the writer stated that the Chargers could afford the deal as they are among the teams with the most cap space. That’s true; San Diego sits third in the league at $56.3 million under the cap. For some reason, they also state that Seattle is already over the cap.

Yeah…that’s not exactly right. The Seahawks rank eighth in the league in cap space at $34.8 million. Do the Chargers have more? Yes, over $20 million more, and you don’t even have to be mathy to figure that out. Moving Wagner would save over $16 million more.

But to write that the Seahawks are already over the cap, implying that they have to move Wagner for a box of day-old donuts is simply wrong. Abysmally wrong. The Cowboys are $21 million over; the Packers $50 million over, and the Saints are almost $76 million over the cap. You can look for fire sales in those cities.

There will be cuts because that $35 million isn’t enough. I purposely didn’t cite the article, quote it, or link to it. My purpose isn’t to ridicule any particular site or writer. I mean, I’ve certainly made my share of mistakes. Just a reminder, 12s, that a lot of people are writing a lot of opinion pieces about what could happen or what should happen. But as for specific moves, it would help if the article has the basic facts right first.