The Seattle Seahawks are a perplexing football team.

It seems to have become a yearly cycle. The team will start off slow (namely a bad/close loss or two), go on a small winning streak, lose another game or two against a bad team, and then go to the playoffs. A playoff berth is a playoff berth, but in the wake of their loss to the Dallas Cowboys, the Seahawks have some free agent decisions to make and an aging franchise quarterback…

Should the Seattle Seahawks break the franchise’s tendency to not be a major player in the market and trade for Antonio Brown?

There’s a case to be made.

Argument #1: Russell Wilson isn’t getting any younger

Fact: Russell Wilson is 30 years old.

Also Fact: Russell Wilson has been sacked 337 times in his seven-year career.

To put that in perspective, Tom Brady has been sacked 538 times in his career (including postseason). Brady has been playing for 18 seasons, and 65 of those sacks have come in the postseason. Subtract those and Russell Wilson is only 136 off the mark 11 years sooner.

Wilson has experienced continued success in his career (seven straight seasons of 3,000 passing yards, and 11 interceptions is his career-high in a season). However, he was also sacked a career-high 51 times this past season. His yards per game have also decreased the past three seasons (2016 – 263.7, 2017 – 248.9, 2018 – 215.5).

On top of that, Wilson’s receiving corps isn’t exactly great…

Argument #2: Seattle’s receiving corps isn’t great…

Seattle’s leading receiver this past season was Tyler Lockett, their #2 (#1) receiver, with 965 yards and 10 (receiving) touchdowns.

Their second-leading receiver was Doug Baldwin, their #1 (#2?) receiver, with 618 yards and five touchdowns; only appearing in 13 games.

Seattle’s third-leading receiver was a seventh-round pick out of East Central (OK). Their fourth-leading receiver was a TE, and their fifth was a back-up RB.

Yes, Antonio Brown is the same age as Wilson and Baldwin (30), but he has a proven track record on the field and would open Seattle’s offense up.

If Seattle wants to capitalize on whatever is left of their championship window, they need sure things, not fliers.

Speaking of fliers…

Argument #3: Antonio Brown is a proven commodity

If the Seahawks were to trade for Brown, they know what they’d be getting – literally. Spotrac released an article that does a great breakdown of the Steelers’ options if they do decide to trade him with financial implications, which you can find here, but I’ll give you the Cliffnotes version.

If Brown does get traded, it’s really the Steelers’ decision to make when it happens.

Per the NFL’s CBA, the Steelers would have to pay the remainder of his roster bonus ($2.5 million) if they were to trade him before March 17.

The Steelers would have a larger cap hit (even if they split the dead cap hit over two years) if they trade him after March 17.

If the Steelers don’t trade him before March 17, then they almost assuredly would trade him after June 1 (and something the “receiving” team would push for as well), which would allow them to spread out the dead cap hit over three seasons in decreasing increments.

If the Seahawks were his landing spot prior to March 17, the Seahawks would have to pay more money over the remainder of Brown’s contract, less if the trade was after March 17.

The Seahawks would also be getting a player who:

With the exception of his rookie season, has finished below 1,000 receiving yards just once in his career.

Has topped 1,500 receiving yards three times in his career, including a career-high 1,834 in 2015.

Has finished with 100+ receptions the past six seasons.

Is coming off a career-high 15 receiving touchdowns.

Is only a season removed from averaging 109.5 receiving yards per game.

In the NFL’s ever-changing landscape, Brown is as sure of a thing as there is in the league.

Argument #4: The Seahawks have cap space

Fans know by now that just because a team has cap space doesn’t mean the team will use it, draw marquee free agents, and/or should spend it… but the Seahawks are projected to have the seventh-most cap space this offseason, checking in at a cool $60 million.

Now, this next part may admittedly seem like a stretch, but it’s notable.

According to Spotrac, in the 2020 offseason, the Seattle Seahawks are projected to have the 10th-most cap space among all NFL teams… at nearly $99 million dollars. In 2021 (the year Brown’s contract expires), the Seahawks are projected to have the third-most cap space, with $156+ million.

Now, obviously, the Seahawks won’t have that much cap space when those offseasons roll around. Draft classes will need to be signed, whatever (likely) contract K.J. Wright receives this offseason should be factored in… but the Seahawks don’t really have a lot of expensive, long-term commitments.

Seattle’s leader in rushing and total yards? The most he’ll make on his current contract is just a shade over $750K… in 2020.

Tyler Lockett and Doug Baldwin will make a combined $22 million or so in 2020. That’s not a bad deal for some of the best receivers in the league.

Russell Wilson and Bobby Wagner will both be free agents in 2020. They’ll assuredly get extensions from the Seahawks, but even if they set records with their deals, the Seahawks should still be flush with cap space to get another solid free agent or two in addition to having Brown on their roster.

Not a bad way for Pete Carroll to ride off into the sunset.

Counterargument #1: Blockbuster trades don’t happen… often

I could’ve just ended the article there, but, like any other rumored Brown destination, there are real counterarguments to be made; with the most obvious being…

NFL teams don’t just trade their stars.

Marcus Peters was traded to the Rams last offseason. However, like Brown’s situation, it was rumored to be more of a locker room issue than talent.

Amari Cooper and Khalil Mack were traded to the Cowboys and Bears (respectively) for…. some reason, but again, it’s rare for a team to trade two young stars; although the Raiders’ return was better than people give Gruden and Co. credit for.

Anyways…

It’s rare for two teams to trade anything of value on both sides (i.e. the Colts and Jets swapping picks last year), but when one of the league’s best receivers becomes available, a hat should be thrown in the ring, especially when there’s a chance.

Counterargument #2: The Seahawks don’t have a ton of draft capital

If the Steelers do move Brown this offseason, they’re likely looking to retool as quickly as possible to squeeze whatever is left out of Roethlisberger’s career, while also building for the future. Seattle can’t exactly provide that.

The Seahawks don’t have a second, sixth, or seventh round pick in this year’s draft due to previous trades. A sixth and seventh may not seem like much, but guys like Tom Brady, Shannon Sharpe, Jason Kelce, Donald Driver and (you guessed it!) Antonio Brown have been found in those rounds, so it’s not like it’s a total crapshoot.

In addition, the Seahawks would like to use to the remaining draft picks to improve holes on their ros …EARL THOMAS…ter. They may not be so keen on giving up a first and third rounder in this year’s draft in addition to another first and/or second round pick in next year’s draft.

If talks do ever materialize, this could be a big sticking point.

Counterargument #3: Antonio Brown is 30 years old

As mentioned already, the Seahawks already have one 30-year-old receiver and quarterback on their roster. Do the Seahawks really want to make their core up of 30+ year olds ?

The upcoming draft isn’t exactly deep on quarterback prospects. What it does have is some enticing receiving prospects.

One of A.J. Brown, Marquise Brown, or N’Keal Harry would likely be available when the Seahawks are on the clock for pick #21 in the first round. If they go offensive line (it’s past dead horse at this point, but please Seattle, keep Wilson upright), “lower-tier” prospects like J.J. Arcega-Whiteside or Riley Ridley could slip.

As much as we love to soak up all the draft coverage and sifting through thousands of mock drafts, no analyst predicts the draft correctly. It’s a glorified crapshoot.

The “Legion of Boom” may be over in Seattle, but business could be boomin’ again soon.

Do you think it’s a plausible scenario, or am I nuts? Let me know in the comments below, or @ me on Twitter!

@_Mason_Jar