Friday, March 25, 2011

Ben Hamilton Falls on Ankle of Seahawks' Comp Picks

The Seahawks have been awarded only a 7th-round compensatory draft pick this year, per Brian McIntyre.

Whereas it was believed that the loss of WR Nate Burleson and DT Cory Redding might net Seattle a couple of higher picks, potentially as high as a fourth and sixth, fate found a way to bereave Seattle of both. Burleson's loss was cancelled out by the signing of G Ben Hamilton, while Redding was apparently removed from consideration entirely by a league rule that prevents the comp formula from being gamed by restructured contracts like Redding's - Seattle eliminated the last few years of his contract to make him a free agent after 2009.

And even then, the Seahawks' 7th-round pick appears to be a consolatory loophole.

My logical response is to heave a sigh and grudgingly admit that it makes sense. My self-indulgent emotional response is to grumble about Ben Hamilton, whose biggest contribution to Seattle's line was to fall on and injure Russell Okung's ankle. Hamilton was injury-prone and weakened to begin with, and only signed because of connections with an O-line coach who didn't even stick around until training camp. He didn't even play the whole season (although neither did his counter-balance in the equation, Burleson). Talk about adding insult to injury.

In the end, a fourth-round pick was unlikely to shake the Seahawks world anyway, and it was very possible that fourth would actually have been a fifth due to Burleson's contract being lower than reported and the time he lost to injury struggles. The greatest draft impact by far will still come from the first two picks. It was nice to have something to hope for during the offseason, though.

Back to the draft...


  1. Would've been nice though to have one at the bottom of fourth! Could've probably found some o~line depth. I've said it before and I'll probably say it again, Damn it Hamilton!

  2. Have to say that is the cleverest title for anything I've read in quite some time.

  3. From your article, you seem to agree that the production of both burleson and redding far exceeded the production of ben hamilton, so how can you "sigh and admit that it makes sense?" Even if we exclude Redding from that contract rule mumbojumbo, according to football outsiders, ben hamilton started 6 games and played in 7 whereas Burleson started and played in 14 games, recording 625 yards and six touchdowns. Burleson played 8 more games than Hamilton and was a productive member of his team as the number two to CJ, and all we get for that dropoff in talent is a 7th rounder? I would do something more than sigh.

  4. Hamilton didn't just cancel Burleson out mostly, he cancelled him out completely. The very reasons you mentioned are the only thing that gave us the pick to begin with.

    Redding, as I mentioned, was removed from the equation by a formula rule concerning restructured contracts. Basically, he was treated as a traded player and not as a cut and re-signed elsewhere player.

    And the formula uses salary and playing time to determine picks, not production. We could debate over whether that's fair, I suppose. But a lot of people seem to think that the formula itself screwed Seattle purposely; I'm just saying, from the formula's standpoint, it does make sense.

  5. that's clear. I did not realize that it was only based on the contract. You're right, it makes sense, albeit the fact that the formula itself is crap.

    Is it based on how much we offered Ben Hamilton, or only that we signed a free agent that started some games?

  6. I've read that salary is a heavier factor than playing time.

  7. If salary is more important than its no wonder that Carolina garnered 3 great picks for Peppers...