Everyone is acting as if this is a high risk move. It's the opposite. I've been trumpeting all over the internet for the Seahawks to do exactly this. Get a few lower risk prospects and have them battle it out. Whitehurst is low risk, compared to investing a first round pick for a shaky prospect like Clausen. There is no cap this year. If he stinks it up, cut him and the Seahawks have lost nothing more than a mansion or two for Paul Allen's heirs.

Whitehurst for starter.

If we did receive a 3rd round pick this year, that is huge. That turns this deal from getting robbed (petty theft in my opinion) to robbing San Diego. Let's wait and see what the real deal is.

I agree with just about all of this. Well said. I'm interested to see how Whitehurst improves with a year under Matt.

Most Seahawks fans were prepared to throw the 6th overall pick and $30+ million guaranteed at Jimmy Clausen or Sam Bradford a week ago and THIS is overpaying? Give me a break.

all the pissing and moaning going on here and we dont even know the details of this deal yet.
come on guys, lets have some faith.

Maybe I should have read your post before I posted. Oops.

He may work out he may night.There were some solid prospects available at 40.This kid better be the real deal.Possible draft picks that we could have had at 40.Mays,McCoy,Mathews,Best the list goes on and on.The costs of two first rounders will be hefty.But damn i was looking forward to the talent available at 40.Are you guys confident in this crew.I want to be but not sure about this one.Why does this team always trade away third round picks.

Did you even read the post? It's possible that we trade 3rd round picks also. They receive our next seasons for their 2010. That's a fair trade in my eyes.

Hawksmack,

Taking Colt McCoy at 40 would have been worse than giving up #6 for Whitehurst.

I'm liking the fact we got Whitehurst but I'm really hoping it didn't cost us next years third.

People, incuding me, are bitching about this deal as it is being reported... Exchange of second rounders (esp #40 in this draft) and giving '11 third rounder for a QB who has not ever seen the field in the regular season.. that is how nearly every outlet has it going down... Now if there is a third coming back.. that is completely different.

Just looked at whitehurst college stats.Please explain to me how this makes us better.He has never thrown a pass as a pro yet.And threw 17 int in two years at Clemeson.WTF

cause if we do then this trade is LEGIT

about this signing, it means that there is a lower chance we draft Clausen

hopefully we can get berry or okung at 6, and trade 14, branch and hill for marshall and the ponies 3rd, hopefully it turns out that way

Agreed - Carroll & Schnieder are tearing the thing apart and rebuilding in the way that they see fit. I have read it many times on this blog that the moves that we have seen appear to be chess moves, each one setting up the next. This might be just another move in a bigger game that we as outsiders don't see. Perhaps the plan is to trade Hasselbeck if he can be traded for a 2nd or 3rd, and another young QB will be drafted this year or perhaps next year to compete with Whitehurst. Maybe the next move is already in the works, but Carroll & Schnieder haven't sent press releases stating their intentions. Lets wait to see how this plays out before getting too upset. If Whitehurst becomes a solid, even if unspectacular starter, this will be a good deal

I said this on a earlier post, a team can't "kind of rebuild." Either they do or they don't. I also don't see this as a 1-year rebuild. I think they have said "out with the old" and are planning a massive rebuild that will take multiple seasons to complete. To my knowledge, no dynasty has ever been built in one off-season. It took the Cowboys several years to assemble the pieces of Aikman, Irvin, Smith, etc. It took Holmgren 5 years to assemble Hasselbeck, Alexander, Jones, Hutch, etc. and get them all playing on the same page. Not saying PC & JS will achieve that level of success, but I do think they deserve time from us to complete their plan.

We won't be back in the Super Bowl this year or probably next, so how many building block type players do we have now who are young enough that they will be entering their prime for a future Super Bowl run? Not many, maybe Curry, Carlson, Unger, and.... ??? If we add best available player with each pick this year (that could be Berry, Okung, McCoy, or some other potential pro-bowl caliber impact player), do the same next year with what might turn out to be a pretty high pick, and be smart with free agency, we might look back at this off-season as the start of the next great era in Seahawk football. The Carroll/Schneider plan might require a step back before it can move forward, so get yourselves mentally prepared.

what he said ^

All rookies are unproven, Matt Schaub was unproven swapping positions in the 2nd round for this guy if he does produce looks like a decent deal

im on the whitehurst train, heading straight to pete-carrol-is-amazing-ville. if you watch his college video, he has a lightning fast release, a power arm, speed, SIZE, and when the pass rush gets close, he senses it and throws the damn ball, whether its off balance or not, and they're good throws to boot, im starting to like this guy (and pete) but i swear, if we get rid of hawthorne i will have to go become a fan of the jets or something (or whatever team gets him)

heey, i just got an idea, jets sign marshall, we send 2nd rnd pick, hawthorne, and 4th rnd pick to da jetsfor marshall? sounds good to me, that way my two fav teams get great deals and hawthorne starts for a superbowl contending team

The Seahawks now have a much better possibility of having the quarterback of the future, with basically no downside. If he's not, no big deal. On to the next prospect.

Why would the jets have any need for Hawthorne? They have two very talented ILB's for their 3-4 in David Harris and Bart Scott.

Just straight up trade Hawthorne, a fourth and next years second for Marshall. Denver may go for that, and Marshall is definitly worth it IMO. He is top three WR in the league next to the two Johnsons.

Can anyone link me to a good video of Whitehurst? I'd like to take a look at this lightning-quick release I keep hearing about, but all I can find on Youtube is grainy video where you can't really see anything.

I mentioned La Canfora said earlier today that it might not be finalized until tomorrow, and it states that in this article. It also states that a third rounder in 2011 will come from Seattle in the trade. We'll have to wait and see, but this seems to be what most are reporting...even seen it on ESPN's web site.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d816fffa8&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Very nice write-up Chris. You laid it out well and I especially liked what you had to say about the third-string quarterback issue.

At Clemson I saw him throw a watermelon 70 yards! Bro's the man!

I'm sure this is a situation where you have one QB who is obviously talented, he was a third round pick after all, but didn't fit their teams system. I'm sure Carroll and Bates know about Whitehurst going back to college and view him as a perfect fit for our offense.

Look at Brees, Schaub, Hasselbeck or Brady. Do you think they would have success in different systems? I personally don't. Like Whithurst they all were taken outside of round 1, where QBs drop significantly in terms of success, but they all play in rigid systems that help mask their deficancies as players.

People use "system QB" or "system player" like its a derogatory term, but you can argue that greats like Favre and Montana were products of Walsh/Holmgren's west coast system. If Whitehurst fits Bates' system, this shouldn't be a problem, it could be a perfect match.

Our staff wouldn't make such a risky move if they didn't think this was a match made in heaven. Lets at least adopt a wait and see stance; after all the potential payoff is huge.

I haven't read the other comments, so this may have been said already, but; The signing of Whitehurst certainly frees up the draft this year. We have Whitehurst and Teel competing to be the heir apparent. I believe that there's a good chance that one of those guys will be "the man." I would suspect that the new O-Coordinator liked something about Whitehurst.

Now the draft can be about creating an environment that will be conducive to a successful QB. How about a left tackle, or a pass rushing DE, or a running back, or.....

Thanks for bringing us all back down to earth!

Re Whitehurst being stuck behind Volek:
Imagine if someone said "Mike Teel sucks! He couldn't even beat out Seneca Wallace for the #2 spot! His coach never put him in the game during the real season; that should tell you something!"

"He was drafted in 2006, Norv Turner took over the Chargers in 2007. The fact that a third string quarterback survived a new regime speaks something to that quarterback, really. "

_----- Mike Teel survived a new regime too.... just saying.

Just read some blogs down in San Diego. They are happy about their picks, but they also had nothing bad to say about Charlie. In fact one writer said, "Go win a Super Bowl Charlie". I think they really liked the guy, just didn't really have a need for him.

Ingram
Teel has not survived the new regime yet as he was drafted by mora and we are not into next season. I like the idea of competition and hope that we get this years third and they get next. In my opinion if this is the case we got Whitehurst on top of what would have been a fair deal. Next years third is like this years 4th or 5th.

Did you say we are swapping third round picks.Study up son.We gave up a 2011 third rounder.Thats why I said we always trade away third rounders and it BS.

Well PC & JS obviously see a lot in this guy... and prefer him over Clausen.. I have to respect that..

With no 3rd this yr.. they didn't want to give up a second next yr so they elected to swap seconds as the extra compesation..

OK.. I give in.. Let's see what our new QB is capable of this season, and in the future... I still hate giving up that #40.. but if Charlie does pan out (and obviously PC & Co believe he will), it will actually be worth it..

Sorry for my initial knee jerk reaction..

Hawksmack
Did you read the article.
The initial report came across that we are giving a third next year. Further reporting suggested that we may also get a third this year.
If it is that way this is what it looks like
Seattle gives up 40 and 2011 3rd
Chargers give #60 and #91 this year.

If it is this way I like it because we basically traded this years pick 40 for 60 and 91 a good trade for both teams as we need picks and only loose slight value in the trade.

Then we trade next years 3rd for whitehurst. Good deal considering they wanted a third this year.

Obviously the total trade has not been close to confirmed as there are conflicting reports.

Your all entitled too your opinion but when did evryone turn into an nfl scout? "Hes a 3rd stringer he must suck" pretty bad scouting report if you ask me, why dont you just let pete scout,evaluate and do his thing and criticize him sometime in 2013 on one of these moves IF they dont work out. Patience would be appreciated bandwagoners

Nothing's official yet. So we don't know if we are only sending SD next year's 3rd round pick, or if we are getting SD's 3rd round pick in return.

So if the trade value chart is right the #40 pick is worth 500 points and the 60th pick is worth 300 pts. Oddly enough a mid 3rd round pick is roughly 200pts. So that should be enough to cover the tender for Whitehurst. Why throw in a 3rd round pick on top? Makes zero sense. They better be getting a 3rd round pick back or we got screwed.

If we swapped 2nds this year and received this year's 3rd from SD in exchange for our 2011 3rd to get Whitehurst, I believe that we made a good deal. The key for me will be to get this year's 3rd from SD. With a later 2nd round pick, our chances at Earl Thomas pretty much goes into the tanker - even a chance at Iupati is gone. Of course we can always use our 6 for McCoy/Suh (one can dream). Trade back at 14 for a later 1st rounder and a late second or early 3rd. With the later 1st rounder, we can get Iupati or a nice LT pick up. Now with potentially 2 - 2nd rounders or 2 - 3rd rounders, we can build more pieces to the puzzle. If we can get a 3rd for Sims, man, we'd be able to pick all kinds of good value in the mid rounds to fill our holes.

How would this draft look to you guys?

#6: McCoy
Trade 14 for early 20s and a 3rd - pick: Iupati or best remaining LT with the 2nd of our 1st rounders.
#60: Best available safety
2nd 3rd rounder: Best available running back
3rd - 3rd rounder: Best available corner
4th: Best available receiver
etc....

Say we got this years third rounder out of the deal and I hope we did.
We still have the Sims story out ther and hope the Browns sign his offer sheet and we get #102
Our draft looks like this

6 Mccoy DT
14 Charles Brown
60 Morgan Burnett SS or Damien Williams WR
91 from Chargers Best RB
101 Best OG
102 from Browns Best DB or WR depending on who we take at 60
124 from Eagles best OL

This is the end of the 4th round and I count 7 picks.
I really hope we get that third rounder from San Diego and get the Browns to sign an offer sheet on Sims.

You forgot to subtract for the third round pick being in 2011. If you run the exact numbers, they match up as an even trade-exactly.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/...id=5003763

The original tweet by Clayton is what is in Sando's writeup... I am pretty sure that the ESPN ticker accidentally put 'Chargers' 3rd round 2011 pick where it should have put 'Seahawks'

this 2010 3rd rounder from SD is wishful thinking. Bummer, if so. That makes the trade a fleece, in my view, at this stage. Might still turn out fine, but it isn't fine on paper without that third.

First of all, I explained in the last article why we couldn't just sign him outright for a third rounder but it was way at the last and by that time everyone had switched to this one.

The reason we had to do a deal something like what went down was that we didn't have the 3rd rounder to make an offer with on San Diego's tender this year. That means we couldn't sign him and see if San Diego matched. The NFL rules say that if you don't have a qualifying pick to offer, you can't make an offer and that pick has to be a current year pick. Same rule that says if we sign Marshall to an offer sheet, our 6th pick is the one we have to tender if the offer is accpeted and Denver doesn't match. That's why Marshall will have to be some kind of a trade deal too. We had to initiate a trade to get Whitehearst. We traded the value of a current year 4th round pick according to Clayton and moved down 20 spots in the second round. Maybe a little more overall than our third round pick would have been this year (remember, it would have been a high 3rd rounder). If next year's third rounder is much lower in the round, it becomes not much of a difference at all instead of the "far more" than what our third rounder this year would have been theory.

Here's a little story for you. There was a coach who came into an organization a few years back and didn't like the current QB situation. After trying out various players, he turned to his old team and made a deal to give a kid a shot who was a low round pick and was called Mr. August because he had only seen a handful of regular season plays in his first three years in the league and was currently the team's place kicker's holder. He spent his first year on the practice squad wondering if he would be able to stick in the league at all. He had only thrown 29 passes in his first three years. Almost all of his experience was in the pre-season and in three years he had failed to unseat the starting QB making him a career backup candidate. Also he was 26 years old and time was running out for him.

This coach whom you all by now know was Holmgren had to outbid Miami for Hasselbeck's services and the Dolphins were offering their first rounder (#26). Holmgren swapped number 1's with the Packers trading out of the top 10 down to 17 and threw in a current year 3rd rounder. Hasselbeck and Whitehurst are very similar in where they were at in their careers before coming to Seattle. Both were/are older QB's who had very little experience before coming to Seattle. Both were not known areound the league to be any kind of great QB prospect but they had new head coaches who knew about them and thought they had the potential to succeed here in Seattle. Both head coaches are considered to be good talent evaluators. Both QB's have similar measurables.

Seattle has apparently swapped second round picks moving down 20 spots with San Diego and is giving up a third next year (which is of lessor value in this years points). That's not as much as trading down 10 spots in the first round from the number 10 pick to 17. That's out of the blue chip players as a general rule and usually there's a much smaller difference in second round players from top to bottom. Having said that, I will point out that we fleeced the league when we took Hutch with that pick which was of course one of the great if not the greatest steals in the 2001 draft.

The point is, having seen that very scenario played out here in Seattle with the current QB who will go down as the best QB in Seahawk history, how can so many fans be so outraged at the deal Carroll put together in nabbing Whitehurst under almost identical circumstances. Do you dissenters think Holmgren was so much better a talent evaluator that he could see Hass's potential yet if Whitehurst works out, Carroll just got lucky and therefore made a terrible deal? I think either Carrol or someone int he organization who he trusts greatly has some inside knowledge on Whitehurst like Holmgren did by being around Hasselbeck for a year when he was on the practice squad.

Hasselbeck worked out pretty well to put it mildly so why aren't we embracing another QB who has the measurables, has shown some very good skills like his arm strength and quick release, and is very possible just needing some coaching up and game experience to blossom. As I pointed out, Hass was benched his first season here in favor of Dilfer. When he came back after Difler got injured, he never looked back andthe rest is history.
That QB came to his new team and was benched in his first season.

Is everyone so sure lighting can't strike twice int he same place and in the same manner?

I'm pretty sure I saw the thing on ESPN and if so it was just worded in a confusing way that made it look like the Seahawks were getting a 2010 3rd rounder. I had to go back and reread it a couple times to make sure I was reading it right, but the Seahawks aren't getting a third back as far as I could tell.

There's a reason why other teams such as Arizona were in the sweep-stakes to pick up Whitehurst, they obviously see something in this guy thats worthy of giving up draft picks. For a guy to stay a consistent 3rd stringer behind basically two starting quarterbacks should tell you that the Chargers wanted to hang on to this guy. Think of how many 3rd stringers are swapped around, how many 3rd stringers have the Seahawks had as a "3rd QB" over the past 4 years? Aside from it, the Chargers know their QB's and know who has the potential to flourish in the system. To be honest im glad it was a backup from the Chargers whom always seem to pick the right QB's rather than a backup from a team like Lions, Bucs, or even the niners whom are never known for producing the right QB's.

For the Hawks and other teams to be interested in giving up picks to acquire a 3rd QB should tell you how intriguing Whitehurst is. I'm sure he would have been a 2nd string back-up for any other team besides the Chargers. Also, Carrol and Schneider needed to bring in a developmental QB and I'm sure we will even draft a rookie QB to groom and develop. Remember Schneider comes from the Packers, a team that relies on drafting QB's year after year regardless of the fact they have had Favre and Rodgers. Their philosophy is that a good young QB always has trade value, so draft lots of the them. I'm happy with picking up Whitehurst we need a couple developmental QB's.

Now, that I have had a few Widmer Hefeweizens and some serious thought over the happenings of the day, I feel that I can except this trade and go with it. I actually was thinking about some of the teams that pay huge money for 1st round QB's and I'm actually satisfied that we won't have to now. I have been reading a lot of reports on how we have paid tons of money to a unproven QB and how ridiculous that is. I was one of those guys saying this today, but if we acquired Sam Bradford with the #6 pick no one in their right mind would be saying that we are ridiculous for paying an unproven QB a 6yr 70-80 million dollar contract. Why? Because it's the draft, that's what's expected. So, when you really think about it, this Charlie Whitehurst is the 1st round unproven QB who actually has 4 seasons under his belt learned from a pretty good offensive guru in the NFL. In reality we haven't paid him squat compared to what we would pay for Bradford or Clausen. I'm more relaxed now knowing that this could be a great thing. 1st round picks are worth a lot. So when you see the value of what we gave up to get Charlie, it's nothing compared what most give up for a 1st rounder. Also, I don't think Pete and John are done yet. I still think that they will get Brandon Marshall for our newest QB Charlie Whitehurst. Charlie is going to need someone like Brandon, immensely!

You know that Taco Bell commercial where they lure you in to the fact that fourth meal is necessary? Well, I had my fourth meal and... now, I have fifteenth shit!

Good night!

Hasselbeck was 25 and Holmgren had worked directly with him. Whitehurst will be 28 by week 1 and neither Bates or Carroll have any direct experience with him. I think both of those are a big, big difference.

Hass was born in Sept of 75. That would make him 26 in Sept of 2001. We traded for him in 2001. He was 26. Am I using "funny" math? I think that's right. Matt spent his first season on the PS for Green Bay and that's when Holmgren "knew" him. My point is that you don't know where or how Carroll or Schneider or Bates might know Whitehurst but I'll bet there's more than a casual aquaintence there somewhere because they were sure enough to keep working this deal until it paid off.

You have to admit there's an uncanny resemblence between the way Matt arrived and the way Charlie is arriving. Both QB's had little game experience coming to Seattle. Both were acquired by a similar trade. Both had shown flashes of brillance before coming here but had never had a real chance to showcase themselves. They're similar in stature with a very similar skill set starting out. I find it looking a lot like deja vu.

Sorry for my lack of specifics - still a two year difference as of week 1.

Hasselbeck showed flashes of brilliance in preseason - I agree. When has Whitehurst? He hasn't even been good in preseason if you review his #'s.

Actually, on paper it works out an as an even swap, using the numbers the NFL uses to value draft trades, if we are giving them the 2011 3rd.

says that Hasselbeck cost us 580 point or the equivalent to pick # 33 (first 2nd rounder)(going down from 10 to 17 plus pick # 72) whereas Withehurst cost us 270 point or the equivalent to pick # 64 (last 2nd rounder), so there is quite a difference there.
I believe we cannot judge this trade at this time. The cost for withehurst is very relative and it will depend of the outcome. If he turns out to be a probowler it will be a steal of a trade for us, if he turns out to be only an adequate starting QB it will be a very good trade still, if he only becomes a backup QB it will be an even to not so good trade and if he turns out to be a bum, then we can say it was not a good trade.
The way I see it there is much more upside than downside to this trade, but I do agree that the fact that he is so unproven and with apparently little first hand contact with him makes it a bit riskier than the Hasselbeck trade.

I have never seen anyone confirm that the Seahawks are receiving a 3rd round pick in this draft. So i would have to presume that this trade is as stands with us giving up a 3rd rounder + moving down 20 spots in the 2nd round for a 3rd string QB who has never thrown a pass in the NFL.

I'm sorry, but i don't understand the move. I could have been okay with this trade if it was for a QB who has played and been successful, like McNabb, but for a guy who hasn't seen action other than preseason and who wasn't all that impressive even then? How can they justify this? Whitehurst had no value for the Chargers. He was a 3rd string QB who was due a raise, and in exchange for shipping, they get to move up 20 spots, in addition to getting a 3rd round pick next year. Bad, Bad trade... Bavasi Bad. A huge overpay for mediocre talent.