Quantcast
Register
A password will be e-mailed to you.

2016 Free Agent Big Board

The big board ranks players, based on a variety of criteria, to determine which make the most sense for the Seahawks to pursue in free agency.

I ranked about 60 players last year, and found it a useful reference once free agency started. This year, I ranked 116 players, and am doing it position-by-position. Below, you will find the aggregate big board, which mixes all the positions based on overall score, and a set of tabs that should allow you to isolate specific position groups.

Scoring Factors

ImpactHow much can the player impact the Seahawks in 2016?
Longevity – How much can the player impact the Seahawks over the next 3+ years?
Scheme fitHow well does the player fit how Seattle plays, and what they ask of that position?
Need How much do the Seahawks need to add a player that possesses these talents? This may differ by position. For example, the Seahawks need a left tackle more than center.
Affordability – What are the chances the Seahawks can afford this player?
Risk How likely is this player to earn the contract they would command? This takes into account confidence in a player’s performance, injury, off-field, and other things that could impact that question. A higher score means more risk.

 

The Formula:

(impact * 2) + (longevity * 2) + (scheme fit * 2) + (need * 1.5) + (affordability * 5.5) – (risk*5) = Score

 

The Big Board

Last Updated: March 2nd, 7AM PT
2016FreeAgentBigBoard

 

Position-By-Position

15 Responses

  1. barrymjones

    Cool analysis! Can you do a postmortem later in the year so we can see how predictive it was?

  2. Bill Alvstad

    Thanks Brian. This takes a tremendous amount of time and thought, and I appreciate it. One player number kind of surprised me a bit and that was Matt Forte. I realize he just turned 30 years old, but I have always thought he would be a good scheme fit here in Seattle, and I would not be surprised if the Seahawks don’t take a look at a veteran presence that Forte would bring to the RB group. Plus the guy can still bang hard and fights for extra yards. Worth a visit.

    • hawkblogger

      Hey Bill,

      A lot of that is because I have a strong distaste for any free agent dollars spent on running backs, especially any over the age of 26. Keep in mind, I came out against re-signing Marshawn last year when he was 28. :)

      Thanks for reading.
      Brian

    • Raymond

      Forte a better receiver than runner at this point. Too expensive and Seattle isn’t giving him 100 catches

  3. J Bohnen

    Wow! Love this! I’m printing this out to track how the Seahawks fare compared to this system.

  4. David Young

    Ditto,ditto,ditto.Brilliant Brian,thanks for the hard work.

  5. Jason Heck

    Hi Brian, awesome list! Where does Alex Mack fit, if anywhere now that he’s opted out of the Browns contract?

    My recollection is that you felt he would be beyond our reach financially.

      • Jason Heck

        Crap, failed by command+F, sorry for the stupid question.

    • Raymond

      Not only out of reach financially but also the loss of picks to sign him

  6. Just Me

    Your articles are more football-educational than any other writer’s. Mostly because of what you’ve said, I’ve become convinced that free agency is the place to look for an O Line, and the draft for other positions.

    We’ve got to get Osemele, even if we end up paying him a million more than we want to. We can pick up a tackle relatively cheap, as you’ve got Beatty and Bushrod’s affordability listed as 9 and 8.5. Osemele and one of those tackles and we’ve turned our greatest weakness into a great strength, even if we end up losing either Okung or Sweezy.

    We can afford it somehow. It’s all a matter of priorities. Last year we saw just how much better Wilson plays when his line plays above average. Historically great!

  7. Cam

    Love this analysis, though there are a few players I don’t agree with, Browner being the primary one. He’s useless & I’d have his impact much lower (i.e. 2 at best) & his risk higher.

    Not sure I’d have Sweezy that high either. Won’t shed any tears if he goes. Mack is more affordable than many of us think imo.

    Keep up the excellent work good sir.

  8. t

    Correct me if im wrong, but is that exact formula used to land your final score?

    Some numbers seamed of to me, so i did a quick calculation of the top 5 using your formula:
    =(A1*2)+(B1*2)+(C1*2)+(D1*1,5)+(E1*5,5)-(F1*5)

    9,5
    9
    9
    9
    3
    3
    70

    4
    4
    9
    8
    8
    3
    75

    6,5
    8
    8
    8
    6
    4
    70

    7
    8
    9
    5
    6
    4
    68,5

    6
    9
    9
    8
    6
    4
    73

    Other than that, I like the work put into this and that the cap situation is taken in to account. Hence high affordability number. I think however that need should have more significance, but maybe you adressed it at a later point from when you posted that formula?

  9. atyler2011

    Great work, Brian. Of course, no list is perfect, but this is pretty close. I understand that you take in the account of all factors into your analysis, however, at the end when you’ve made a decision to bring back something that you’ve already experienced, and very sure that thing is not going to get any better, then what is the point? What is that Einstein’s clique again? J. R. Sweezy? Seriously?

  10. Eli

    The only way this could be better is if you faded those already taken in FA – would be more useful as a live guide.

    Maybe highlight or bold those who have been linked to the Hawks too from sources you consider reputable?