Seattle acquired running back Daryl Hobbs from New Orleans on…
Seattle acquired running back Daryl Hobbs from New Orleans on September 30, 1997, for a conditional draft choice that became the 204th pick in 1998. The Seahawks bought inexpensive backfield depth without surrendering meaningful capital. Hobbs did not develop into a major Seattle contributor, so the practical benefit remained limited despite the low acquisition cost.
New Orleans Saints Received
- pick 1998 seventh round pick (204th overall, Andy McCullough )
Seattle Seahawks Received
- player Daryl Hobbs
Trade Analysis
The Exchange
Seattle acquired running back Daryl Hobbs from New Orleans on September 30, 1997, for a conditional draft choice. The return eventually became a seventh-round selection, No. 204 overall, associated with Andy McCullough. Contemporary reporting placed the move in the context of Hobbs’ strained situation with the Saints, giving New Orleans an incentive to recover something rather than simply carry an unhappy player.
Seattle’s Return
For the Seahawks, this was a low-cost depth gamble. A seventh-round pick carries little guaranteed value, so acquiring an NFL running back with experience was reasonable if the coaching staff believed a change of setting could help. Hobbs did not become a major long-term part of Seattle’s offense, which prevents the deal from rating as a meaningful win even though the purchase price was small.
New Orleans’ Return
The Saints converted a player they were prepared to move into a real draft asset. That is better than losing the roster spot for nothing, especially when the relationship had become difficult. Still, a seventh-round return has a limited ceiling, and the pick did not produce a clearly superior long-term Saints result. New Orleans handled the exit efficiently without creating major surplus value.
Value in Hindsight
The important context is scale. Seattle risked very little and received only limited production. New Orleans gained modest draft flexibility and no transformational downstream player. Neither club sacrificed premium capital, and neither club found a long-term answer through the exchange. Once the low stakes and low realized production are considered together, the outcomes sit close enough that a winner would overstate the difference.
Final Verdict
Even Trade. Both teams receive a C. Seattle made a defensible low-cost attempt to add backfield depth, while New Orleans salvaged a seventh-round choice from a player it wanted to move. The deal solved short-term roster issues but did not deliver enough sustained football value on either side to justify a higher grade or a clear winner.