Pete Carroll speaks to Shaquem Griffin, part of a draft class that deserves more credit
Not everyone has been overly positive about Seattle’s 2018 draft…
Mel Kiper — C+
“I could practically hear the Seattle fans in Dallas wondering why the Seahawks waited so long to address the O-line.”
Andy Benoit — C
“Drafting a running back is an odd way to kick off your massive rebuilding project on defense.”
Chad Reuter — C
“No corners or receivers selected puts Seattle in a hole at those spots after the draft.”
Pete Prisco — D+
“I was not a big fan of trading up to take a punter (Michael Dickson) in the fifth round.”
The consensus outside of Seattle is the Seahawks had a bad draft. The perception is they failed to address three vital areas:
1. They didn’t spend another high pick on the offensive line
2. They didn’t draft a cornerback early
3. They didn’t draft any weapons for Russell Wilson
It’s easy to dispel all three complaints.
1. They didn’t spend another high pick on the offensive line
Here are the recent high draft picks they’ve spent on the offensive line:
2014 2nd round pick — Justin Britt
2016 1st round pick — Germain Ifedi
2016 3rd round pick — Rees Odhiambo
2017 2nd round pick — Ethan Pocic
2018 3rd round pick + 2019 2nd round pick — Duane Brown
The Seahawks have used more draft stock on their offensive line than any other team in the league bar Dallas. And so far, that hasn’t been a solution.
They actually need to develop some of these players.
For example, had they spent the #18 or #27 pick on a left guard this year, that likely would’ve meant benching Ethan Pocic or cutting recent signing D.J. Fluker. Pocic was named to the all-rookie team in 2017 despite playing less than a full season. Fluker, with vital experience in new O-line coach Mike Solari’s scheme, has an extremely team-friendly cap hit of $1.36m in 2018.
Trying to actually develop Pocic is a better proposition than replacing him with the 2018 version. Replacing Fluker feels like a poor use of resources.
You could argue, why not draft a tackle instead to replace Germain Ifedi? It’s a fair argument to make, although this wasn’t a good draft class for tackles. It was a far better draft for interior offensive linemen. The chances of finding a solution were limited. The Seahawks also like George Fant a lot and he’s set to compete with Ifedi to start at right tackle.
No right minded individual would argue the Seahawks O-line doesn’t need major work. It does. But that doesn’t necessarily mean more youth, inexperience and repeating the same plan that hasn’t worked so far.
The addition of Solari to replace Tom Cable is the key here. A fresh approach, a new voice, a scheme tweak or two. Perhaps simplifying things for certain individuals and allowing them to best utilise their physical talents.
The Seahawks aren’t short of highly drafted, high-upside players. What they’re short of is consistency, proper communication, execution and guidance.
It’s time to develop the players they’ve already invested in.
And a final point on this — if the complaint is they didn’t spend a high pick on the offensive line this year, well, they did. They spent their third rounder on Duane Brown (plus their second rounder in 2019).
2. They didn’t draft a cornerback early
It’s strange that this is still a ‘thing’. Pete Carroll has been in charge of the Seahawks for eight years. He’s spent one early pick on a defensive back (Earl Thomas).
Here are the players they’ve brought in and developed without spending high picks:
Shaquill Griffin — R3
Walter Thurmond — R4
Kam Chancellor — R5
Richard Sherman — R5
Byron Maxwell — R6
Jeremy Lane — R6
Brandon Browner — CFL
DeShawn Shead — UDFA
Justin Coleman — trade with the Patriots
Bradley McDougald — FA
Carroll has a proven track record of defensive back success that, for some reason, goes mostly unnoticed. Suddenly Richard Sherman is cut and the Seahawks have to change their ways. They have to spend their first pick on a corner.
Why?
Especially considering they re-signed Byron Maxwell during the draft.
This is one of the big benefits of Seattle’s scheme. They’re able to draft a profile, teach their technique and find success. The scheme doesn’t call for a big investment in the cornerback position, as highlighted by Michael Lombardi a year ago:
“I think Seattle really thought twice about paying Richard Sherman. They felt they had to when they won the Super Bowl. Now their cap’s kind of a mess and they need to fix it so I think the reason they need to fix it is because they put all that money in the corner position in a defense where, we feel you can draft players that fit that scheme.
“… the scheme in Seattle allows you to find corners, especially size/speed corners, of which there’s a bundle of them in this draft, that can play deep third of the defense, they’ll tackle and they can play within the scheme.”
They haven’t needed Patrick Peterson playing across from Darrelle Revis. The creation and success of the Legion of Boom is evidence of that.
It would’ve been more surprising if the Seahawks had spent an early pick on a corner. It would’ve been a major change in their approach to the position. Instead, they drafted a defensive back with size and length in the fifth round in Tre Flowers. Just like they’ve been doing for the last eight years.
If you know the Seahawks, you know how they handle their business at corner.
3. They didn’t draft any weapons for Russell Wilson
The Seahawks lost ten touchdowns when Jimmy Graham signed with the Packers. They lost six more when Paul Richardson joined the Redskins.
In response they drafted a blocking tight end and signed Arizona’s Jaron Brown.
How on earth are they going to replace the lost touchdowns?
Well, it might not be as difficult as it seems. And it all comes down to the running game.
While Graham was prolific in the red zone, his production mostly filled a significant void. Seattle’s running backs only scored ONE touchdown in 2017. They had four rushing touchdowns in total — three from Russell Wilson and one from J.D. McKissic.
Even the Miami Dolphins, who also scored four rushing touchdowns, had three from Kenyon Drake.
Graham’s production didn’t compliment the running game — it replaced it. It had to in 2017 — but it doesn’t have to be that way going forward.
If the running backs can start to produce at even a modest level, the lost touchdowns will be replaced.
Let’s propose a solution to replace the ten scores:
Jimmy Graham -10 touchdowns
Rashaad Penny & Chris Carson +6 touchdowns
Will Dissly & Ed Dickson +4 touchdowns
It’s not unrealistic to think Penny and Carson will manage six scores between them. It’s quite a modest total. It’s also realistic that Dissly and Dickson could combine for four touchdowns.
If the Seahawks can fix their running game — they could/should be able to actually top the lost production from Jimmy Graham.
Here are the stats from 2011-14:
2011 — 15 rushing touchdowns
2012 — 16 rushing touchdowns
2013 — 14 rushing touchdowns
2014 — 20 rushing touchdowns
2017 — 4 rushing touchdowns
If they can get back to the relatively modest 2013 total of 14 rushing touchdowns, that will be an improvement of ten scores. Exactly the amount they need to replace Graham’s production. Considering they’ve spent the off-season focusing on fixing the run, you’d hope that was achievable.
As for Richardson’s six touchdowns — Jaron Brown actually scored four for Arizona in 2017. A repeat of that production would get you almost there. Tyler Lockett should also be set for a boost an extra year on from his severe broken leg. He only scored two touchdowns in 2017 but had six as a rookie.
It’s also emerged they’re meeting with an old friend. Brandon Marshall nearly joined the Seahawks in 2010. Now he’s once again reportedly visiting the team.
Should they have drafted a receiver? Bob McGinn quoted one personnel man as saying:
“This is the worst wide-receiver draft I’ve seen in my life”
And really, it’s about more than just replacing ‘production’ and ‘stats’ this year.
It’s about culture.
In 2017 they scored 38 offensive touchdowns. They might score less in 2018 and be a more competitive team.
They lost their identity. It’s been MIA for two straight seasons.
When Jim Mora was the coach in 2009 the lack of culture, identity and a clear plan was a major issue. What were they trying to do? Who were they trying to be?
It was a stark contract to the Holmgren years.
Pete Carroll immediately rectified this. As soon as he took the job in Seattle he set out his vision, called on the players to ‘buy in’ and created the clearest identity imaginable.
That laser-sharp focus took the Seahawks to their first Super Bowl Championship.
They lost their way. They lost a focal point of that identity — the running game.
And for all the laboured hand-wringing about the importance of running the ball these days and the value of running backs, the Seahawks were at their best when they ran the ball well to compliment their defense.
It created a bully-mentality. The Seahawks were physical, in your face. They intimidated teams.
Bigger, faster, stronger.
There are different ways to win in football. There’s no ‘right or wrong’ way of setting up your team. The key is to know what you want to be, then make it a reality.
If you want to throw the ball 50 times a game that’s fine. Build your roster around that approach.
If you want to run the ball and play defense, that’s just an alternative.
Seattle set themselves up to be the run and defense team — then had to try and be the passing team when the running game collapsed.
That was the problem. They couldn’t be true to their vision. They lost their identity, the culture, the toughness.
They weren’t bigger, faster and stronger any more. They were just broken.
Fixing that aspect was the key to everything moving forward. And that’s what they’ve done with this draft. They’ve added a running back they saw as the second best to Saquon Barkley. They added the best blocking tight end in the draft. They have a new O-line coach and offensive coordinator. They signed Ed Dickson and D.J. Fluker.
This was all set up to fix the running game as a priority. As it happens, they were also able to add a pass rusher and improve their special teams.
They pretty much ticked off every ‘need’ box along the way, especially if you include Duane Brown as part of this draft class (and you should).
That doesn’t mean this draft will necessarily move the needle for the Seahawks to improve on 9-7. That’s not the argument. I’m not sure, with one pick at #18 and nothing else until #120, they had the ability to achieve that. They didn’t have multiple early picks like the Colts or Giants.
The point is, this class (along with their work in free agency) should help regain their culture and identity. They’ll be able to return to the highly competitive atmosphere that fostered the initial Super Bowl charge.
They’ll be Pete Carroll’s Seahawks again.
And if they can run the ball better, if Russell Wilson continues to perform at a high level, with Bobby Wagner, Earl Thomas, Frank Clark and others on defense — they can be competitive in 2018.
It might only be a more palatable 9-10 win season rather than a Championship year. But at least they’d be heading back in the right direction.
This draft class helped turn the corner. And for that reason, it deserves praise and not criticism.
(Not that the critics will bother the Seahawks. If anything, this is exactly the type of reaction they wanted. Keep that fire burning).
You can now support Seahawks Draft Blog via Patreon by clicking the tab below.
Become a Patron!
