Are the Seahawks heading for BPA heaven?

November 12th, 2012 | Written by Rob Staton

The Seahawks are generating a serious Ozzie Newsome vibe...

Only a few teams are truly in a position to draft the absolute best player available. After all – what if the best player is a quarterback and you already own a franchise signal caller? That’s an extreme example, but the good teams in the NFL frequently find themselves with a much wider pool of players to choose from because they don’t have glaring needs to fill.

Here’s a list of Baltimore’s recent first round picks dating back to 2006:

Haloti Ngata, Ben Grubbs, Joe Flacco, Michael Oher, Jimmy Smith.

Only one of those players (Ngata) was a top fifteen pick. The Ravens traded down (and then back up) to take Flacco at #18. In 2010 and 2012 GM Ozzie Newsome traded out of the first round before drafting Sergio Kindle and Courtney Upshaw respectively. They’ve also been able to find key offensive contributors in round two, such as Ray Rice and Torrey Smith.

As you can see, the Ravens do a good job in the draft.

Out of all the picks, Flacco is the most aggressive, ‘need-filling’ selection. The Ravens had to get a quarterback in 2008 and made the necessary moves to get it done. The rest of the picks were pretty simple – they were the best players on the board regardless of need. Baltimore’s had a great defense for a generation and for the most part a pretty good offense. And without needing to constantly reach to fill glaring holes in round one, they’ve been able to re-stock using the draft.

The Seahawks haven’t had that luxury for some time now and definitely not since Pete Carroll and John Schneider arrived in Seattle. In their first three drafts with the team they had to identify glaring needs, draft accordingly and build up the roster. They had no choice.

In 2010 the Seahawks knew they were going to lose Walter Jones to retirement, creating a huge need at left tackle. They took Russell Okung with the 6th overall choice. Many expected Okung to be the first tackle off the board and a top-five shoe-in (Trent Williams was drafted by Washington at #4) and clearly the Seahawks felt this was a good match of need vs talent. Even so, they were prioritising. They couldn’t afford to go into the season with Sean Locklear as their best option at tackle. They needed to use the draft to fill a need. With Okung available as a sensible option, it probably ended up being a bit of a no-brainer in the Seahawks war room. Even more so once Eric Berry was drafted at #5 by Kansas City – as free safety was clearly another target need in round one.

With a second pick at #14 courtesy of Josh McDaniels, they were eventually able to fill that need. Pete Carroll made safety a priority. A big priority. You better believe he was willing to take Berry at #6 had the Chiefs passed. Although not ideal LEO candidates, both Jean-Pierre Paul and Derrick Morgan were both on the board at #14 and the Seahawks were desperate for a pass rusher after Patrick Kerney’s retirement. No dice – Carroll wanted a safety and Thomas was highly rated. This was another case where need fit with an available talent. Seattle identified two key problems they wanted to solve and drafted accordingly.

One of the missions in season one was to establish a running game, but it never happened. Despite trading for Marshawn Lynch the Seahawks had possession of the #31 ranked rushing offense. It appeared to be the biggest disappointment of the 2010 season for Carroll and he made improving the ground attack a priority. Out went offensive coordinator Jeremy Bates, in came Darrell Bevell and O-line guru Tom Cable. And with Cable clearly having a big say in how they were going to right this ship, Seattle drafted two offensive lineman with their first two picks in the 2011 draft. James Carpenter was the first round choice – a major shock to many at the time. The front office clearly identified Carpenter as a worthy addition, but this was another case of the Seahawks chasing a need. Repairing the line was a huge priority, which is why John Moffitt followed in round three.

Low and behold, the run game improved significantly in 2011 and attentions turned elsewhere. Despite owning a young, vibrant defense – the Seahawks just weren’t creating enough pressure. Chris Clemons made double digit sacks for the second consecutive year, but nobody else on the roster was helping out. Only ten teams had less sacks than the Seahawks. The team zoned in on the pass rushing class of the 2012 draft and were always destined to take a defensive lineman. Despite talk of Mark Barron and Luke Kuechly, this front office was always likely to draft a pass rusher in round one. As it happens, they had their pick of the group when they found themselves on the clock. And they took Bruce Irvin. For the third draft in a row, the front office identified a glaring need and addressed the issue.

Something else happened in April and maybe it was a little unexpected? We now know the Seahawks managed to fill the greatest need of all during the 2012 draft – finding a young quarterback with ‘franchise’ potential.

That accomplishment probably puts Carroll and Schneider ahead of schedule. I think there’s a pretty good chance they were expecting this to be a four draft plan and that they would look to use the 2013 draft to find a quarterback. I also think they would’ve been pretty aggressive in doing so. As much as John Schneider and Pete Carroll admired Russell Wilson, I’m not sure in the build up to the 2012 draft they were completely convinced they would be able to find their long term option at quarterback in round three. Schneider worked in a Green Bay front office that always drafted quarterbacks, without the absolute expectation they would become quality starters. They were essentially buying plenty of raffle tickets. In Seattle, we were seeing the same plan. And the Seahawks might have won the big prize with their first ticket.

I guess the franchise was due some fortune.

Had they not been able to draft Wilson – or had he not enjoyed the success we’ve seen so far – what could’ve happened? Having built up the defense and running game, they were in position to make a run at a quarterback in 2013. That’s assuming Matt Flynn didn’t step in and eliminate the need in the same way Wilson has. Instead, Wilson has shown he could be the future of the Seahawks franchise. And it means that final glaring need – the quarterback – has theoretically been addressed a year in advance.

With a 6-4 record going into the bye week, Seattle is in a strong position to claim at least a wildcard spot. That would give them the #21 pick in next years draft as a worst case scenario (worst record among playoff teams + first round exit). This team is good enough to go deeper into round one, even if it’s unlikely to earn the #31 or #32 pick by reaching the Super Bowl. Either way, it seems likely it’ll be a later first round pick than 2010 and 2012.

Perhaps for the first time in a while, the Seahawks will be in the ‘Baltimore Ravens’ position? Rather than needing to identify one glaring need that must be addressed at all costs, they can perhaps afford to broaden their horizons. They will still likely consider the teams greater needs – at this stage probably DT, LB and WR. But what if that excellent guard or tackle falls? Or that pass rusher who was expected to go in the top-15? Or that cornerback that would look really good on this roster?

That’s the fortunate position the Seahawks are approaching. And when you can start stocking up on talent for depth rather than feeling like you have to draft for need, that’s when you become a contender.

34 Responses to “Are the Seahawks heading for BPA heaven?”

  1. Brandon says:

    I agree that Seattle didn’t seem to anoint Wilson right away, but between him and Flynn, it does seem like they were determined not to be shoehorned into a QB pick in 2013. Really did a great job of covering all their bases.

  2. Alex says:

    I actually believe this is a draft deep enough for a top 3 Tech to fall to the Seahawks in the 20s. In my mind it can be like the 2010 draft where need, value, and BPA would all align. These players are normally only able to be picked up within the top 15 picks. Look at the top 3 Techs in the past- Warren Sapp, Cortez Kennedy, Kevin Williams- they’re all picked early. With the advent of a increasingly pass happy league since 2004 (5 Yard PI more harshly enforced -> higher QB Rating/old Passing Records broken), a pass rushing 3 tech has only gotten more valuable. The last draft with good DTs was 2010 with Suh/McCoy (2 best DT prospects in the last 5-10 years) and those two were gone within the top 6 picks.

    It’s possible to draft a Geno Atkins in the 5th round, which I remembered Rob vouched for, but you have to be damn lucky.

    I’m in favor of delaying WLB and WR to R2/R3 because it’s possible to find great prospects at those two positions in those rounds. Not so with DT.

    If there are truly no options left, then BPA at WR/WLB hopefully. But if we’re picking WLB, he better be a damn good pass rusher (Matthews mold). WLB are rarely worth a 1st round pick (bad value) unless they’re Lawrence Taylor-esque.

    For WRs, the incredibly high bust rate worries me. I don’t have the data in front of me, but I always remember that WRs have the highest bust rate while CBs have the highest success rate. What really stood out to me was that unless the WR was elite and a “sure thing” like a Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, AJ Green, Larry Fitz, they’re a very risky decision because of how long they develop (3 years). That’s why aside from the elite, most top WRs in R1-R3 have little difference after 3 years. Unless it’s Brandon Coleman, I’m really hesitant on buying a WR with R1.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      I like your idea of taking a top NT in the first round, but since the defensive depth is so great it probably wouldn’t kill us to pick a WR first round and NT second round. Either way we would come out ahead. In some ways I think of NT like offensive line, the best ones are the players who aren’t injured.

      I don’t think it takes 3 years for a receiver to develop anymore. College teams are passing a lot – some of them much more than the Hawks. Given a pro style offense or just a lot of passing, these receivers are coming into the pros with experience. The real question is abilities. We need someone who has good hands and can get open. If receivers have those two skills they will be useful from day one. Otherwise it won’t matter how long they are on the practice squad.

      As it stands now we can use Rice, Tate and Baldwin as receivers. Miller and ? as TE receivers. And both running backs have good hands, with Turbin maybe being a little better than Lynch. We have a couple other receivers we are trying and others we like on the practice squad. The reality is that the first three receivers are the only ones that have proven themselves. The rest will probably all be gone as we upgrade that position with better draft picks.

  3. South_Seahawk says:

    Nice Article.

    I think that this is the point where Pete and John would love to be in. You look at the best teams in the league year in and year out and this is what they are doing. Year after year Green Bay, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and the Giants seem to be graded positively in the draft. I believe that this is because they always pick the best player available.

  4. Darnell says:

    Rob, Great piece. Not to nitpick, as I am not sure how long you have been following, but Ngata was a huge, definite need (and a damn fortunate case of that perfect BPA/Need match) with Ray Lewis struggling bigtime at the time without a great big man in front of him.

    I agree with the above as well, BPA could very well be an interior pass rusher and in that case it would be a nice add.

    I still love Robert Woods and I don’t buy that the lack of great measurables will keep this guy from being a great player. I’d take him all day over Blackmom or Crabtree. #1 WRs can come in ‘merely adequate’ packaging like Reggie Wayne or Greg Jennings do when they are naturals – Woods is a natural. If hes there you take him. A year ago he was in the top 5-10 of a lot of mocks, I just don’t see the regression that a lot of people do.

  5. Hawksince77 says:

    At first I was thinking position exclusions for Seattle might be QB, LT and FS.

    But then I reconsidered. If another Earl Thomas type player was available, PC could draft him and get him on the field in all their nickle/dime packages, and have a back-up for Earl.

    If a top LT fell to them, they could take the player and put him on the right. Now you have your swing tackle and back-up to Okung.

    Both of these situations are highly unlikely, as the players in question would have to be truly elite to make it worth spending a first round pick.

    But now I am down to QB. And then I ask myself: what does PC do if Barkley is on the board when Seattle picks?

    • Rob Staton says:

      It’s a great question and one I continue to wrestle with. Carroll and Barkley are tight. I’m pretty convinced that they would’ve gone after Barkley next April if the question marks remained at quarterback. Barkley also has a lot of ties to Seattle. But with Wilson looking as good as he is, investing in a first round QB now would merely create an avoidable drama. People asking why spend a R1 pick to sit on the bench, people second guessing every bad game from RW and suggesting MB could come into the team. If Barkley was on the board when the Seahawks pick – I think Carroll would have to grit his teeth a little before passing. But he’d have to pass if Wilson continues to play the way he is.

      • Hawksince77 says:

        Exactly my take. Assuming Wilson continues to develop, drafting Barkley would risk setting the franchise back and cause unnecessary stress on everyone involved.

        But it’s an unlikely scenario. Barkley will probably be long gone by the time PC picks, and he will be under zero pressure to trade up to get him.

        So probably a moot concern, all things considered.

        • adog says:

          if they cut ties with Flynn…all of a sudden QB…regardless of RW’s performance…is a need. I see the upcoming draft and BPA this way…if they keep Sydney Rice, Z.Miller, A. Branch and Flynn, then they can draft BPA, if they let one of those guys go, i would expect them to favor that position in this draft. This might a good year to grab a qb at the back end of round 1…or once again in round 3 thru 5. I just don’t see Barkley falling past 12…the Ponder line. However i could see the Seahawks taking a flier on a qb like Landry Jones or Tyler Wilson…two qb’s who sort of underachieved this year…hurt their stock.

          • Hawksince77 says:

            Agreed. I wouldn’t be surprised if they draft a QB and keep Flynn. But I also wouldn’t be surprised if they trade Flynn (a discussion we have already had – Rob thinks there won’t be much of a market, I think there might be) and then invest some draft capital in another QB.

            Several reasons for this. For one, PC always wants genuine competition, and a hot rookie (as long as it’s not somebody like Barkley) would be just the thing.

            Secondly, something can always happen to the starter: gets hooked on drugs, hit by a bus, or hurt in a game, and PC wants options.

            Thirdly, even if Wilson does well and they keep Flynn, they can always use competition for the Portis position.

            My prediction is this: Wilson does well enough to be considered the long term starter. Flynn gets traded, and Seattle drafts a QB. They also might sign a FA QB so that they have four guys going into camp next year. They think Portis can genuinely compete for the back-up role, but leave it open until the final cuts prior to next season.

            In the end, Wilson is the 2013 starter with Portis the number 2, and the drafted QB on the practice squad.

            I don’t think Flynn will be happy as the back-up next year, and will clammer for a trade. PC will either respect Flynn’s request, and/or not want a sour attitude on the team, so will attempt to move him to a place where he can genuinely compete to start.

            Portis is still around, and that tells me (along with PC’s comments on the subject) that they like his potential, and if he’s not ready to be the back-up next year, you gotta wonder when he ever would be.

            That’s my take, anyway.

    • Michael says:

      Let’s not forget that trading out of their first rounder will probably be an option. If Barkley is still on the board in the 20′s I could really see a high picking team trading back into the first round to get him. Remember Cleveland with the Joe Thomas pick high and then trading to get in position for a falling Brady Quinn? personally I don’t think Barkley makes it out of the top ten, but if he does and the hawks could pull a move like this I would be very pleased.

  6. Colin says:

    I really want them to go receiver or 3 tech DT. Might even be happy with another DE.

  7. MJ says:

    Good read Rob.

    I think this is the first year we truly see BPA. I really think that means we see Jonathan Cooper or Jake Matthews in Round 1 because I can see both those guys being available. Don’t get me wrong, I am not advocating for another 1st rounder on the O-line, but those guys are very talented and it would be hard to argue their value.

    I think we see R2 and R3 specifically going towards a WIL and a combo of TE/WR. R2 seems like a sweet spot for LBers.

    I have said this before, but I really believe that the Hawks should target RB Eddie Lacy. I like Turbin, but he’s nowhere near Lynch and is definitely not a tone setter. If Lynch ever got hurt, I think we would see a massive hit across the board as Lynch is the guy that epitomizes this team’s mentality. I really do believe that Eddie Lacy has that kind of potential and is a punishing player. Sure, could be overkill, but the importance of this run game is paramount. Additionally, Lynch is getting to the point where we could potentially see a big drop off in the next 2 years. Just a thought, as I’d rather be overly prepared than hoping Turbin becomes a different RB.

    • CFR says:

      Following the BPA approach, I can think of a great low cost and low risk move that would significantly increase one of our strongest positions. It involves draft picks, but doesn’t involve actually using them. While watching the Saints game this week, I couldn’t help but be heavily impressed with Chris Ivory. He reminds me a lot of Lynch (particularly on this run: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/0ap2000000093769/RB-Ivory-56-yd-run-TD) and I would love for them to trade for him after the season. He’s 4th on the depth chart and could probably be had for a 4th/5th rounder.

      Echoing what MJ has said, I’m not knocking Turbin. I just doubt his ability to be a feature back in the case of an injury, although he has done an excellent job in his limited role this season. I think that Chris Ivory is way better than any back that could be had in rounds 4 or 5 and already has NFL experience, despite being extremely young (just 24 years old). Also, it’s not like he would be there just for insurance, rotting away on the bench or inactives list. This rushing attack is currently great. Adding Ivory would make it downright lethal. The ideal would be Lynch getting 20 carries, Ivory getting 10 and Turbin getting 5-10. Opposing LBs wouldn’t know their own names by the time the 4th quarter comes around and the game is on the line.

      • MJ says:

        Exactly my thoughts.

        I really like Turbin, but he’s just not the same as Lynch. I think he can be a successful lead running back in the NFL, but the Seahawks are really predicated on attitude. That’s not saying that Turbin is soft (not one bit), but he doesn’t have the same punishing style.

        Great idea with Ivory. Never even thought of that. I mentioned Lacy because I believe he has a chance to be great, and will be cost controlled for years to come. Either way, I think it’s important to have another guy who mirrors Lynch, even if he is only used sparingly at the beginning. Don’t know what it is about Lacy, but I just think he’s the perfect combination of power/burst/elusiveness and he won’t be a high draft pick because he won’t test like crazy and the fact that TJ Yeldon is his running mate, who might just be the next Adrian Peterson.

  8. Sam Jaffe says:

    Rob,
    I think you are making the mistake of assuming the future will be the same as the past. What has marked the Carroll/Schneider drafting strategy is that there are no rules that can’t be broken. The rule that says a promising player that flops in his senior season isn’t worth a first round pick? Behold Bruce Irvin. The rule that says you never draft a right tackle with a first round pick? Behold James Carpenter. The rule that you don’t invest resources into scouting undrafted free agents? How about Jeron Johnson and Doug Baldwin?

    Thus when you try to make assumptions about how the Seahawks will draft in the future based on patterns that have emerged in the past, I suggest that your attempt will fail because there are no patterns. They won’t draft for need because there are no absolute need spots anymore. So you are correct in guessing that they will draft BPA this year, but I disagree on your definition of BPA. I would say that they’ve always drafted BPA–it’s easy when your roster is full of holes that need to be filled. What’s different about the Seahawks drafting style is that they don’t follow any of the “rules” that draftniks and other front offices believe should be followed.

    So here’s my guess about where they will go next: instead of simply going with a pure BPA approach, I think that Schneider and Carroll will be drafting for the holes that have yet to appear. In other words, they will be drafting to replace future free agents. The biggest problem with creating a roster of superstars out of late draft picks (Sherman, Chancellor, Wright, Wilson) and underappreciated free agents (Browner, Clemons, Branch, Jason Jones) is that they are all, by their nature, underpaid. Underpaid players are great for 2012. But there will definitely be holdouts in 2013 (I anticipate that either Browner or Sherman–or both–will hold out the entire preseason next year). And 2014 will see a flood of free agents that will be impossible to dam.

    Therefore, I think that the most likely first round pick in next year’s draft will be a cornerback that fits the Seahawk’s mold. I think there’s no way that Seattle can pay Sherman and Browner $10 million/year each, which is what the open market will provide for them. By drafting a corner, the Seahawks can (1) prepare for one of their departures, and (2) increase negotiating leverage during the holdout period.

    Drafting a cornerback goes against the draftnik goal of forever improving a team through the draft. It supplants it with trying to tread water through the draft. It’s distasteful to the fans and to the players. But it’s how a good GM builds a dynasty (look at how well the Steelers have pursued this strategy over the decades).

    The main reason to think that Schneider and Carroll won’t do this is because they haven’t shown any propensity towards this strategy in the past. It doesn’t fit into any of the patterns that they have established in their drafting history. Unless, that is, that you don’t see any patterns in the first place.

    • Fudwamper says:

      I agree somewhat sam, as Rob has said in the past there is a mold that they draft from. They take the best player at the position of need available that has a trait that they want at that position., Wagner- speed, Irvin-quickness, Wilson-”The Tilt”, Earl-Range, ect.

      I very much agree they will be looking for the replacements. Interior DT, Strong side DE, WR. To some extent they have been doing that with the O-line,.

      I can very much see them taking that KR, PR, WR weapon. It places a special talent in ST, and gives time to become a WR. Also frees up a roster spot for development. Same could be said with a first round 3 tech.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I don’t see the assumption here. Carroll and Schneider have been VERY honest about their intentions in the draft, and they can afford to be given how much they still think outside of the box. In 2012 they made it clear they wanted to improve the pass rush. The year before, the offensive line/running game. They were a little more secretive in year one with two early picks (understandable), but I was told by a trusted source that FS/LT was the goal before the draft (which is why I had a Berry/Davis double header in my mock at #6 and #14). So we’ve been able to see clearly how they’ve tried to build up the team piece by piece. My definition of BPA is simply ‘the best player on the board’. As I mentioned at the start, most teams never truly invest in ‘BPA’ because you won’t take a QB if you already have a franchise player in that position. You say the Seahawks have always gone BPA but I would argue it’s always been a question of targeting the BPA at a position of real need. And that might change going forward, becoming pure BPA (eg taking a corner in round one as you propose in 2013).

      A case in point – I really liked James Carpenter. Not many people did, but he stuck out at Alabama and I could stomach the RT pick in round one because they selected a player I personally rated very highly. But nobody is going to talk me into believing he was BPA in 2011. I would argue the BPA at that point was Jimmy Smith, followed by Cam Jordan and Mark Ingram. And the Seahawks went offensive line, weeks after Carroll professed his desire to improve the run game and O-line as a #1 priority. And there’s evidence to back that up in the appointment of Cable and taking of Moffit in round three – the Seahawks went all in on the offensive line that year. They identified a player they felt would be available in that part of R1 in the position they wanted to draft. That’s not BPA, that’s drafting for need. It doesn’t have to be a dirty way of looking at it – teams draft for need. Doesn’t mean they ‘reached’, just means they drafted for need. It happens with a lot of rebuilding teams. Almost all of them.

      I suspect that the team has now moved on from having to identify need and can draft for whatever position grades the highest. I don’t disagree with them potentially taking a corner and I’m not sure what a ‘draftnik goal’ even is. I’d happily see Dee Milliner taken, or a Jonathan Banks. I could see it. And that’s really the point of the piece. I could also see them going DT, WR, OT, OG, DE, LB. The only positions I don’t think they’ll go with are QB and RB. And that would be a shift in draft philosophy for me. A chance to let the draft play out and see who’s there. To truly go BPA without having to worry about a specific unit on the roster.

      • A. Simmons says:

        I agree with Rob. We talked about this a while back. I posted saying you find out what the draft focus will be during Pete’s end of year press conference. If the pattern continues, the only way they go BPA is if Carroll says nothing at the press conference. If during the end of the year press conference Carroll says “We’re going to be looking to upgrade the defensive line” or “We wanted a TD maker”, you can bet we’re going D-line or receiver in round one or two.

    • Darnell says:

      Sherman can’t holdout that soon into his rookie deal. Not eligible for renegotiation.

      • Rob Staton says:

        Darnell is right, it’d be a worthless exercise for Sherman to hold out. He isn’t a free agent until 2015 and cannot sign a new deal until 2014. So holding out in 2013 would make no sense. He’d be holding out against a team physically unable to offer him an improved deal.

  9. Clayton says:

    Rob, does the BPA approach consider whether the player fits the system? An example that illustrates my point might be Geno Smith. I might be in the minority on this one, but I have a feeling that he might fall into the second round or later. The reason is because I think teams will have concerns on whether or not he can play in a pro-style offense. The Redskins have tailored their offense to RGIII by running Baylor’s plays to make him somewhat successful at times, but I find it hard to see a team replicate West Virginia’s offense because it is so unique. With that, my prediction for Seattle’s pick next year will be CJ Mosley. Other than him being an explosive playmaker that flies around, I think he’ll fit the system, and also provide versatility where he could play the Will and the Mike.

    • MJ says:

      Just to comment on your first question, I think they obviously have a system they’d like to fit, but I think they value unique qualities over system specific traits. That said, I think they will target someone in R1 with a rare trait or perhaps plays a lesser valuable position, but is too damn good to pass up (Matthews or Cooper). With this in mind, I am in agreement with Rob, I could see Cordarrelle Patterson really intriguing them in the 20s. Day 1 he’d be the best weapon on the team.

      Good call with Mosley. I think he and Ogletree are the only LBers they would consider in R1 for different reasons obviously. Ogletree adds an athletic dimension that is potentially unparalleled in the NFL, while Mosley is just a technician with no weaknesses. Elite instincts.

      I am really excited about R1 next year. Total crap shoot.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Absolutely scheme matters – clearly the team isn’t going to draft a non-scheme fit. So even then BPA becomes a little diluted. But they might be prepared to be less strict with it. Irvin is the perfect LEO according to Pete Carroll. They might be more prepared to take an orthodox defensive end if he’s BPA, even if it’s not a perfect scheme fit. And I can definitely see Mosley as an option.

      • Snoop Dogg says:

        Rob – What about Dion Jordan? IF he is fast enough for WLB/pass rusher/nickleback (does this in college)

        • Rob Staton says:

          I see him as a pure pass rusher, probably in the 3-4. Although he’s playing some LB at Oregon, I’m not totally convinced he’ll do it at the next level. I think in Seattle he’d have to play the edge. Is he a scheme fit? As me after I see his 10-yard split at the combine.

  10. CFR says:

    I don’t think it’s been said but the thing I’m most excited for for this draft is the lack of doubt. The past two drafts have left me with my face buried in my hands on draft day. Obviously, I have come to recognize that just because Schneider and Carroll go off the radar with their picks doesn’t mean that they’re bad ones (quite the contrary). At this point, they could draft a punter in round one and I’d still have complete faith in them (especially if the punter can pull of fakes like the Rams’ kicker did on Sunday). They’ve earned our respect as fans by looking outside the (media-saturated) box and found some great players, so kudos to them and hopefully they keep it going this year!

  11. Michael says:

    Rob,

    Totally off topic, but I just saw that the Falcons cut Ray Edwards. The Seahawks don’t really have a third edge rusher so if Clemons or Bruce were to go down it seems like that would be a huge blow (watching Big Red try to pass rush is painful).

    Edwards hasn’t done much since he left the comfort of Jared Allen’s shadow, but could he be a consideration for the Seahawks to add some depth? Is he really as bad as he has been in ATL, and do you know if that is why he was cut?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I seem to remember the Seahawks showing some interest there before his move to Atlanta, although I may be wrong. It might’ve been pure speculation. He fits the bill but it depends what his situation might be. He was very average in Atlanta. And if he’s coming to be the third rusher in Seattle, I’m not sure who you cut to accommodate him.

      • Michael says:

        Evan Moore has looked pretty worthless… seems like using an O-Lineman in our three TE sets would be about the same, pass catching wise.

        • A. Simmons says:

          You ain’t kidding. Evan Moore has been completley worthless. His best play so far was a PI against the Jets. That kid has no fight in him. No aggression to go get the ball. He’s a tall, lanky finesse player with bad hands. Unless he suddenly turns it around, I don’t see him on the team next year.

  12. James says:

    Rob, this is a good point you raise, because this is probably as close as an NFL team will come to genuinely drafting the BPA. Like others, I don’t believe the Seahawks will draft a QB in round one, even if Barkley is there. And with Lynch and Turbin, a round one RB is highly unlikely. They would probably trade down if Barkley falls to their draft slot. But any other position is a possibility. Since the Seahawks are ready to make their run, the two positions that would provide the most immediate boost would be DL and WR. We all sort of expect the Seahawks to go to those two positions in the first two rounds. However, an elite talent at CB, S, OLB or OL would add a big boost….probably another elite CB most of all.