Draft Insider Tony Pauline speaks to Seahawks Draft Blog

March 18th, 2015 | Written by Rob Staton

This week I had a chance to speak to Draft Insider.net’s Tony Pauline. Recently he’s been providing Pro-Day information for WalterFootball.com — you can keep up to date with everything on the circuit by clicking here.

He’s also a recommended follow on Twitter (@TonyPauline).

You can hear the interview via AudioBoom above. Here’s a brief synopsis of what we discussed:

— Tony thinks the addition of Jimmy Graham will be a positive move for the Seahawks — he’s not quite as complimentary about the move from a New Orleans standpoint.

— The Seahawks are interested in Ty Sambrailo but he hasn’t had a good off-season so far. He was unimpressive at the Senior Bowl and combine. He had a chance to go in the late first round but now could provide “excellent value” in the late second. Tony doesn’t believe he’ll be on the board in the late third round.

— Ali Marpet has done “a tremendous job” over the last few weeks boosting his draft stock. Originally considered a priority UDFA, he could now go in the second or third round. Tony believes he can play either guard spot, right tackle or center. That will appeal to Seattle.

— When asked to name alternative center prospects the Seahawks might target, Tony suggests Oregon’s Hronnis Grasu in the third round, Andy Gallik in the third or fourth round range or Max Garcia as a later round option.

— What about Dorial Green-Beckham? It wouldn’t be a shock if he goes in the first round or the third round. Tony says he “wouldn’t touch him in the top-50 picks”. He expects a rush on receivers in round one and that could impact DGB’s stock. It’s not out of the question he’s still on the board late in round two.

— Kansas State’s Tyler Lockett could be a second round option for the Seahawks (something we’ve discussed a lot, along with Sambrailo). He’s a productive kick returner and as Tony explains, he’d offer a needed downfield threat to the offense.

— Zach Hodges has not left a positive impression on teams this off-season. Tony says he’s come across as “aloof” and questions have been asked about his love for the game.

219 Responses to “Draft Insider Tony Pauline speaks to Seahawks Draft Blog”

  1. Volume 12 says:

    Just from reading the bullet points first, I have to say that Tony hasn’t really told us anything that you haven’t Rob.

    Funny that we very briefly discussed Florida C Max Garcia, and Mr. Pauline brings him up as an option later in the draft for Seattle.

    If Lockett, Sambrailo, and a couple of others are off the board before the 63rd selection, and DGB is sitting there, would you take him Rob? I know I would, but curious as to your thoughts.

    • rowdy says:

      I would be all over DGB in the second if that happens. I’ve read he had good interviews and was accountable for his mistakes. I know it’s easy to say the right things but a lot of people dont. At the end of the second he’s to big of a steal to pass on.

      • Martin says:

        No way on DGB. I will pass on him and take D. Waller. I’d even take Conley who I’m not very high on (workout worrier IMO) before DGB.

    • Rob Staton says:

      If I’m picking from those three, DGB is third on my list. A distant third.

      The bullet points are just a brief synopsis. I’d highly recommend listening to the audio. Tony one of the best around.

  2. rowdy says:

    Hardy getting 11+ mil? 2 questions, how do you pay that much for him and how does dallas afford him?

    • Rob Staton says:

      It’s incentive laden. He has to be available and he has to be performing. It’s the ultimate prove-it deal and takes into account the likelihood of a suspension.

      • rowdy says:

        That makes a lot of sense. They had to of made the deal banking on him being suspend a good amount of games then. If he reaches the full insensitive they will be screwed next year again cap wise.

  3. drewjov11 says:

    Salary is league minimum with a ton of incentives built in. Nothing guaranteed, really. That’s the only way to get that done with their cap situation.

    • Trevor says:

      So incentives don’t count against the Cap?

      • rowdy says:

        Incentives count the next year on the cap not on the year you sign the contract.

        • Trevor says:

          So if he maxes out his incentives it is a huge cap hit for them next year. Kind of just defers the pain. They are going to be tight against it next year trying to sign Dez to a long term deal.

          Hardy is a huge boost to the Cowboys D this year though. It is petty clear the Packers, Cowboys, Ariz and Stl are going to be our main competition in 2015 with Washington as a dark horse but more likely 2016 for them after Mclaughlin has a couple of drafts

          • rowdy says:

            I believe if the incentive boost was achieved the year before the cap hit would count for the current year but sense he didn’t play last year all incentives would count next year. Basically if he had 10 sacks last year and got a incentive for 10 on his new contract that would count against this year’s cap but if he didn’t get the 10 the team would gain that cap space back next year.

            • John_s says:

              I don’t know how exactly it works but there’s Likely To Be Earned Incentive vs Not Likely To Be Earned Incentive.

              Likely to be earned would count to the cap the year the incentive takes place

              Not likely to be earned would count to the cap the year after.

        • jj says:

          incentives that are expected to be made count against the current year cap, and incentives that are unlikely to be made are not counted, until after they are achieved. I am not sure what happens if unexpected incentives are made, but with the rolling cap, small change likely doesn’t matter. Precedent on trying to cheat the salary cap would suggest that a team trying to circumvent the salary cap rules by using incentives would be heavily punished.

  4. Trevor says:

    Thanks for the clip from Pauline. Nice to get a perspective from someone who is not a Hawks supporter.

    Seem like you guys share a similar train of thought in most cases.

    Glad to hear I am not the only one who thought Sambrailo really struggled this offseason. With so many quality Offensive line options in the mid rounds I really hope we pass on him. I think he has bust written all over him. I am as doubtful about him as I was positive about Joel Bitonio last year.

    • lil'stink says:

      Marpet is certainly starting to look like a potentially better choice over Sambrailo. Everyone mentions his lack of core strength and short arms.

      • Rob Staton says:

        Sambrailo’s arms I believe no shorter than Britt’s a year ago.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        Yet Marpet’s arms are longer than Sambrailo’s. Marpet did score 9th in the broad and 11th in vert. From a testing perspective, Marpet excels. His vert is his lowest relative score in any drill. He’s consistently in the top 10 in all categories. Not sure if that’s exactly indicative of a guy with poor core strength.

        Relative scores at the Combine:

        10y split: 1st
        40y: 1st
        Bench: 5th
        SS: 2nd
        3 cone: 2nd
        Broad: 9th
        Vert: 11th

        It’s hard to not really love that kind of broad athleticism. Fast, quick feet, strong (if undeveloped) upper frame. and good agility and hip/leg strength.

        Compare to Sambrailo:

        10y split: 17th
        40y: 29th
        Bench: 24th
        SS: 6th
        3 cone: 5th
        Broad: 23rd
        Vert: 19th

        Obviously drills don’t mean everything. But if you see a better raw athletic talent perform better than a division one talent and consider the advantage in athleticism — it certainly on the face of it would seem one is a better prospect than another.

        At this point, I’m finding myself trying to find out what is specifically special about Sambrailo that I would ignore the testing/Senior Bowl performance differences and deem him a better prospect on tape. I’m not seeing that. I’m more seeing a guy who is agile, but generally weak. And not a guy who gets out in space and really gets good blocks either. He doesn’t seem to be terrifically talented at blocking while on the move. He can move and does so well. But he just doesn’t get locked onto a guy well at all. More of an ole/shield kind of blocker.

        • Rob Staton says:

          It needs to be said that arm length not as big an issue at guard. The Seahawks did draft Britt in round two to play right tackle and his arms are half an inch longer than Sambrailo’s.

          • Volume 12 says:

            Yeah, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen, for example, a Zach Whitman piece where he points out that Seattle has a certain physical attribute they like for O-lineman.

            CBs it’s 32′ inch arms, DTs it’s 33′ inch arms, DE-LEOs it’s 32′ inch arms, but I can’t recall anything specific like that in regards to the offensive line.

            • Rob Staton says:

              They’ve basically drafted everything for the OL — long/short arms, massive/modest, insane athleticism/JAG. I think more than anything Cable looks for players with a certain attitude who he believes can be coached up.

              • Volume 12 says:

                I agree. I was actually agreeing with your point Rob. I should have clarified that.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  I know V12 — was simply continuing the discussion.

                • Volume 12 says:

                  It’s why I like Max Garcia, Hroniss Gras, Andy Gallik, Dillon Day, and even BJ Finney. They all have leadership qualities and as you said, ‘a coachable attitude.’

                  IDK about Day having leadership qualities, but definitely the attitude and coach ability.

            • hawkfaninMT says:

              Another trend that I have noticed is a connection to success as a High School wrestler. Any prospects have wrestling backgrounds?

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            Totally agreed.

            It’s merely one aspect. Obviously that deficit limits his function if we’re talking about versatility. If we’re talking about Sambrailo only as an OG, without the ability to play OT due to short arm length — that restricts his value.

            I agree, Seattle probably will go with a project OT late in day 3. Someone with more attractive length. If I had to guess, Seattle probably sees both Marpet and Sambrailo as similar in terms of OG fit. With either possibly a backup RT candidate.

            • Volume 12 says:

              Yup, I don’t buy for one second that arm length matters much to Seattle for the offensive line, unlike other positions. Well, at least for guards.

              • Steele1324 says:

                I think arms should be a factor for blockers, too. If their feet are not great, short arms don’t stop big rushers from getting through and around.

              • Attyla the Hawk says:

                I think we’re all kind of in agreement: Length = tackles. Lack of it = OG/OC

                Taking that, and judging by the roster:

                OT: Okung/Britt/Bailey/Gilliam
                OG/OC: Sweezy/Lewis
                depth/inactives: Isles/Davis/Milton/Wheeler

                Bailey has redundancy. But he’s also slated to be the starting LG as it stands now. Gilliam is an unknown but obviously was important enough to remain an active player in all but one game. Have to assume he will figure in the mix strongly as swing tackle this year.

                Seattle does (or has) looked for length at LT. Garrett Scott/Okung/Bailey/Carpenter all have 34+ inch arms. Britt and Bowie seem to be the floor in terms of lenght at 33.5. Giacomini had only 32 1/8″ arm length. Obviously circumstances (lack of talent on roster) precipitated that move. Seattle has opted for length at tackle in the draft with every pick. They may not have specifically said so. But the evidence certainly points to it.

                I’m guessing we’re going OG day 1 starter/OC day 1 competitor and project tackle in terms of order. I would expect, that Seattle would prefer that OG to have some length so as to provide additional value as OT depth. But not necessarily so.

                Getting a very good guard, would allow for Bailey to continue on as OT/OG depth. A position of extreme value for Seattle given the injury history the last two years. That position has played near starter snap levels.

                I can’t shake the feeling though, that this draft is going to be with an eye towards possibly allowing Okung to walk in ’16. His salary now is about half of the entire OL investment. It’s not hard to see that our defensive spend cap wise is going to be financed so to speak by a cheap OL unit. Since it’s been financed up to this point by cheap OL/cheap QB/cheap WR spend. We will lose cheap QB spend in ’16. Also losing it by way of TE/WR spend. Especially if we retain Kearse. Either the OL spend will have to be reduced, or our defensive spend will have to be curtailed (or both).

                • Volume 12 says:

                  Could not agree more.

                  I think the OL spend will be reduced since this is a defensive team first and foremost. As long as PC is at the helm that is.

        • jj says:

          As far as athleticism goes, I find it impressive that Sambrailo was a competitive freestyle skier in highschool. That comes with agility, core flexibility, and fancy feet. Rob can tell you if those show up on tape

    • Madmark says:

      Sambralio wouldn’t be drafted to play OT but instead he would be moved to G because of his quick feet. Poole is another OT who would need to move inside to be a G. I know Carpenter was drafted as a RT but it was my opinion that he was always a guard to begin with and that’s were he’s at now. I think you wouldn’t go wrong on Sambralio or Poole as a 4th RD comp pick as long as their brought in to play the Guard position. Marpet for me ticks all the boxes for me. Superb athlete and could have that small school chip on his shoulder to prove himself. The more I looked at Laurence Gibson the more I like him as a T. He was a late 5th RD comp pick in Rob’s March 4th draft. Anyway if your looking for OL starter and depth I believe this is a very good year to stockup and give Cable at least 3 guys if not 4. We still have Bailey for 2 more years and he’s showed he can play anywhere on that OL. What a grab he was UDFA from a very, very bad Arkansas team. I don’t think it’s to much Draft capital for a Marpet at 63, Sambralio 127+, and a Gibson 159+. Hell throw in a Crisp in the 7th rd.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        If we judge by the project additions of last year (Scott/Gilliam) at tackle, I’d have to very much agree on Lawrence Gibson. I would not be shocked in the least if we take him in the 5th as our project OT selection.

        Sweezy at OG kind of hints at the kind of raw/eye popping athleticism they want.

        Britt is somewhat of a different type. Obviously he was selected early (although it’s easy to read by the narrative post draft that we took him earlier than we would have preferred). His background does seem unique.

        It seems, that when we are forced to fill a day 1 spot, we sacrifice athleticism (Moffitt, Britt and to a lesser extent Carpenter). This draft is kind of cool, in that there are a lot of really good athletic options that should also be of that day 1 starter type caliber. It probably feels like Christmas day for Cable — there should be plenty of prospects to choose from.

        I’d surmise that Seattle may not overly value athleticism at the OC position with whomever they take. That position feels like a Britt kind of choice Get a guy you believe can contribute right away/athleticism be damned. But for OG, I think they may see it as getting a Sweezy kind of athletic guy who also can play almost immediately.

  5. JS says:

    Really Like Hroniss Grasu to replace Unger, could start right away. I think we should draft him, then sign Wisniewski to play guard. Then we can focus on depth at other positions (CB,WR,S,OT and DL) with our remaining picks.

  6. Volume 12 says:

    One guy he brought up that still interests me even with all of his off-field BS is Michigan’s DL Frank Clark. He’s from an area of South Central LA known as ‘The Jungle,’ and it’s not an excuse, but I wonder if that atmosphere is responsible for what he’s done.

    But besides that, he’s a freaky/unique kind of D-lineman. I’d take a shot on this guy in the 6th round with our comp pick, he’s 6’3, 272, and ran a 4.64 and 4.68, but I can’t find any of his other measurables.

    • Trevor says:

      He is a freak but unless the charges are bogus why bother with a project when there is so much other talent out there without the legal/ character issues.

      • Volume 12 says:

        For one they always take and aren’t afraid of projects late in the draft. Second it’s a 6th round comp pick, and not every selection will make this team anyways. And third, Clark might just be the most talented player at that point in the draft.

    • Rob Staton says:

      38.5 inch vert for Clark.

      • Volume 12 says:

        Wow! My favorite DTs currently are Buffalo DT Kristjan Sokoli, and Idaho DT Quayshawne Buckley, and Frank Clark is right there, although he’s more of an edge player, but does have the versatility and frame to play inside as well.

  7. Attyla the Hawk says:

    If measurables mean anything, then Sambrailo isn’t in Marpet’s class. Marpet is superior in virtually every facet: Arm length, 10y/40y time. Punked him on the bench. Better vert and almost a full foot on the Broad. SS and 3 cones also significantly better.

    Senior bowl performance was again decidedly better for Marpet than Sambrailo. Marpet can’t really do anything about his lesser competition at division 3. But when it came to playing against some of the best that division 1 had to offer, he stood out compared to his division 1 peers.

    Sambrailo has quick feet. There is no denying that much. That can’t really be taught and it’s an advantage for him. Sambrailo as an unfinished prospect — has significant tools to work with and can be a much better pro if he can get stronger in the lower body.

    Marpet — nobody really knows about him on the outside. He doesn’t have film available. We only get to see how he held up in practice in Mobile and how he’s tested in drills. Tony mentions a guy who doesn’t look maxed out in his frame. I’m guessing there is room for improvement there as well. When the rubber met the road against tougher competition, he excelled.

    Seattle is such a good team in developing talent. I kind of value fundamental play more than most. So when Tony mentions how he’s fundamentally sound — that indicates to me a guy who understands and learns what he’s taught. Which indicates to me a guy who will drink from the fire hose of training camp instruction and apply it better than others.

    If I couple that trait, with the obvious athletic prowess of Marpet as a prospect — I would consider him a better moldable prospect at the next level. Someone who has elite athleticism virtually identical to the caliber of Bitonio — but a guy who also absorbs instruction well and applies it quickly.

    I’m more bullish on Marpet, because he excelled going against top tier division 1 talent despite his handicap of playing in division 3. I actually think this is more amazing, than I feel his level of competition should be a worry. If he can make that massive leap in competition so seemingly effortless — I’d consider the leap in competition to the pros would be something he could confidently handle.

    • UKHawkDavid says:

      I’m on board with Marpet. I watched a few Colorado State games during the season with the specific purpose of watching Sambrailo and I was left “meh”. If he’s there in the 3rd round and we haven’t drafted OL yet, sure; good value. But with Marpet, I’d be willing to spend pick 63. My preference would be to trade down from pick 63 to early third (picking up a 2016 3rd round pick or 2015 5th round pick) and get Marpet there.

      It seems to be tricky nailing down his likely draft range due to the Division III ‘issue’ which could lead to an over-reach OR play into our hands…

      Thanks for all your insight Attyla.

    • OZ says:

      Love me some Ali !!!!!

  8. CC says:

    If we go C at 63, I could see some of these guys fitting in – but wonder if they will draft an OL that high. I see more of a mid or lower rounds for their O line choices. Shaq Mason is a C or G GT; John Miller – Louisville; Terry Poole – SDS; Adam Shead – OK or Jon Feliciano – Miami.

    • Volume 12 says:

      Its more than likely they will. The O-line is the glaring weakness on this team as of right now, and Seattle does fill needs in the draft early on. Last year they needed a WR, the receiver position was the deepest in last year’s draft, they took P-Rich, this year they need at least 1 offensive lineman and it’s the deepest position group this year.

      Of course they could go always go BPA, which wouldn’t surprise me either, but I’d assume Patrick Lewis is the starter at C, and that at some point during the draft, they’ll probably target a C to compete with him. IMO there will be some very good O-lineman on the board at then end of round 2, unlike last year.

      • CC says:

        If a WR who is a PR/KR guy available like Dorsett, Agholor or Lockette at 63 that might be the one exception for me – to draft a center. I keep thinking that even though we resigned Lem back, Patrick Lewis was the back up – we certainly need depth on the o-line, but a guy who can change the field in the return game might be worth the 2nd round pick.

        • Rob Staton says:

          If Lockett is there at #63 I think the Seahawks will be very fortunate and may well run to the podium. I suspect they will be enamored with Lockett. It’s just whether they believe there are bigger needs/priorities. But it’s a great OL draft so they might back Cable in rounds 3-5 and take Lockett at #63 if he’s there.

          • Volume 12 says:

            I can’t figure out what’s not to like about K-St WR Tyler Lockett. Yeah he has small hands and short arms, and drops some passes, but besides Kevin White, DeVante Parker, and Amari Cooper, who doesn’t?

            I actually think the short arms and small hands and the skill set he possesses is quite unique. He runs complex routes from the outside, competes for jump balls, and gives subtle moves to open up the defenders hips and shake free, Follows his blockers in the return game showing patience. He doesn’t run great routes from the slot, but in that aspect Seattle could use him in the Percy Harbin role.

            And that character of his, competitive, film rat, is so ‘Seahawky.’ IMO he’s the next Randall Cobb.

            • Rob Staton says:

              I like the fact that unlike a lot of smaller receivers he is thick in the lower body — therefore powerful and explosive. Like you say he has fantastic character. He’s explosive, can make big plays, knows how to get open, was clearly the best player on K-State’s offense last year.

              For me he’s good enough that he could’ve been the target with the first pick if they’d moved down to about #40. If they’d signed Julius Thomas in FA instead of dealing for Graham I think there’s every chance Lockett could’ve been their first selection.

              • Volume 12 says:

                Great point about his lower body.

                As much as I like Mario Alford with a comp pick in the 4th or 5th, he doesn’t have Lockett’s thickness in the legs or backside. But I do think Alford is a really good option for that type of receiver, if they wait or miss out on Lockett.

                What was Antwan Godley’s pro day numbers?

                • Rob Staton says:

                  60-yard Shuttle: 11.98
                  3-Cone: 7.15
                  Shuttle: 4.41
                  40-yard Dash: DNP
                  Vertical: 35″
                  Broad Jump: 10’7″

                • CC says:

                  I looked at Godley too – but he seems a bit inconsistent and I wonder if he has the grit that Seattle looks for. That is why Lockette could be a guy they like too – typical chip on shoulder coming from K-State – and son of a NFL player. He gets it.

                  • Volume 12 says:

                    CC, he is inconsistent and is definitely a project. He’s one of the more unique WRs in this class however.

                    As for grit? He has it in spades. His back-story is very ‘Seahawky,’ and he describes himself as ‘a dog out on the field.’

              • Ben2 says:

                I like Lockette a lot too. I’d like to sign Wisenewski to alleviate the pressure to move Decisively in the draft to get an interior o-lineman -maybe freeing us up to trade up in the 2nd to get Lockette. Lockette seems perfect for our roster….he improves our return game/field position and would give us a vertical threat so we can stretch the field vertically and free up Grahm underneath and take defenders off the LOS for Beast

            • Steele1324 says:

              What’s not to like about Lockett is that I think there are WRs who are equal or better, who have more potential to be #1 outside WRs than Lockett, who is slot and STs. You can find them lower. I do not see Lockett as a game changer, but just a complementary piece.

              With Lockett, I think you get Baldwin but better. They need something other than more Baldwins!! especially at a rich place like #63. There are more important needs at that spot.

              • Steele1324 says:

                Lockett’s hands are not great.

              • Attyla the Hawk says:

                There is also the notion that you don’t necessarily have to have a WR doing punt return duties.

                Kaelin Clay would be a suitable player for that role. He’s almost assuredly a UDFA candidate. But could easily be had with a 7th round pick.

                Lockett would be a good dual purpose pick. But obviously at the expense of other very talented alternatives both at WR and at OL. Seattle doesn’t have to simply take him because of his ST ability.

                One thing Seattle wants, is variety in their OL group. They’ve stated that many times about new players bringing some uniqueness to their corps. Lockett is pretty much a clone of Baldwin/Richardson as it pertains to WR type. Speaking from a WR group as a whole perspective, I’d expect Seattle would prefer someone to upgrade Kearse, Matthews or Lockette in terms of receiver type.

                I’d expect someone like Coates/DGB if they should fall, or McBride or possibly Funchess to be more likely candidates at 63 based on receiver type. Bigger WRs to more match up profile wise with Kearse or Matthews.

                Seattle definitely scratched the big target itch with Graham. But I get the sense that they would like to have a complementary big target at WR to work alongside Graham.

                I can definitely see them throwing away the mold so to speak to add Lockett and just go 3 smurfs and a giant. Lockett, despite his size, is very gifted at getting open, whether it’s underneath or in the intermediate routes. Not much of a red line threat. But if you presume he now takes the Walters roster void — you still have Kearse/Matthews to provide red line action.

                Lockett is amazing at sinking his hips and stopping on a dime and working back to the ball on outs/curls. He gets down so far and quick, it looks like he’s nearly touching his hind end on the turf. He is a guy not unlike Perriman and Justin Hardy who are very gifted at running the 8 to 12 yard patterns. Seattle doesn’t have those kinds of players and it shows in our mediocre to poor 3rd down conversion rates.

                Given that he’d occupy an otherwise ‘wasted’ roster spot — I can easily see Seattle just saying to heck with it, he’s special let’s take him. It won’t reduce our current abilities as far as red line threat. Something that Kearse — despite his limitations — is still very very good at. And putting Graham/Lockett and Kearse on one side can really put stress on defenses in the 5-15 yard range, with the threat of going deep at the same time.

                It wouldn’t help as much in the red zone. But in terms of maintaining possession and keeping the chains moving — it certainly would do that.

                • Steele1324 says:

                  Attyla, yes, I don’t think it’s necessary to lock onto WRs who can also return, and yes, Kaelin Clay would be fine in UDFA. Rannell Hall and JJ Nelson and others as well. McBride, of course, is WR and both PK and KR.

                  I just don’t think any special teams issue is something worth anything higher than a rd. 6 or lower.

            • rowdy says:

              For me he’s not an outside receiver, not physical enough and gets beat by press and struggles from the slot. He’s a great returner no doubt and would be a great addition in that aspect. If he did better at braking arm tackles I would on your side but he struggles to brake finger tackles imo. He would be great in the harvin role but that just a gimmick role imo and takes away from the identity of the offense.

              • Steele1324 says:

                There is a lot tape of Lockett getting ovewhelmed by bigger corners. The same problem with Dorsett. Why not find a happy medium: enough speed and quickness, but a little more size and strength to win those battles?

                • Steele1324 says:

                  McBride is both a punt and kick returner, and I think a better all-around WR. Why not him instead of Lockett?

                  • Volume 12 says:

                    I think Rob’s discussed him and brought him to our attention pretty thoroughly.

                  • rowdy says:

                    I agree he would be the better pick and better prospect. I don’t lockett but wouldn’t want him before the end of the 3rd

          • Hawksince77 says:

            Yes, I found it interesting how high Tony was on Lockett. Head and shoulders above any other return prospect in the draft, if memory serves.

            It seems that he could also supplement the offense with elements they experimented with Harvin. Not your go-to-guy, but a valuable change-up coming out of the back-field in jet sweeps, or on the edge with the bubble screens, or as a unique (for Seattle) talent in the passing game.

            If he lasts until 63…

        • Volume 12 says:

          Oh absolutely. I could see that too. I just think it’s going to come down to who’s on the board with more talent and a quicker upgrade. A LG or a WR/R?

          And as Tony Pauline said, you kind of get the feeling that WRs will be over drafted, not leaving much separation in talent say from what’s available at the end of round 3 or early round 4 with NO’s pick.

          I actually like C Patrick Lewis, and I do think they’ll target a C, but IDK about that early. One thing on LJP. RW isn’t a fan of taking snaps from him underneath C, because he said, and I quote ‘He has a stinky a**.’ LOL. I’m dead serious.

          • sdcoug says:

            V12, several days ago (in the Hardy/DGB post) there was quite a string on Lockett. The common sentiment from many was that 63 was too early for lockett and we might be better served taking a Montgomery late. I was advocating Lockett (especially considering the return skills).

            Did I misinterpret your previous thoughts, or has your opinion shifted? I don’t mean this to read in a confrontational manner at all…I’m just curious, as I personally think Lockett is a baller.

            • Steele1324 says:

              Besides the enthusiasm here, what indicates that the Hawks are hot on Lockett?

              • Rob Staton says:

                I don’t believe there is any indication. It’s more a case of him ticking a lot of different boxes — fantastic character and attitude, very competitive, knows how to get open, is sudden to get into his breaks and he’s a day one kick/punt returner.

                • rowdy says:

                  I’m not as high on him as you are but he does rank high on everything you listed and that’s why I wouldn’t hate the pick I just think there will be better options at 63 even at wr

              • Attyla the Hawk says:

                Seattle is really good at keeping their intentions close to the vest.

                We tend to have educated guesses regarding who Seattle ultimately targets. And usually we get a bit of a surprise come April. But we’re getting closer to nailing down the traits they tend to really like.

                Seattle seems to have a pretty unconventional methodology for prospects. And that method seems to be continually evolving. A blend of athleticism and attitude seems to be the method du jour.

            • Volume 12 says:

              Coug, I actually started liking Lockett during the Senior bowl game itself. He was one of the more, if not the, most impressive player. If they want a guy purely for return ability than your better off taking one later on, but if you want a guy who isn’t a project and is a WR with return ability than take one earlier.

              I’m not going to jump in on a conversation about if 63 is too early, but the 3rd round or something is better. If that’s their guy they’ll take him regardless of what fans think or want. I didn’t think I had anything to add to the ‘convo’ personally.

              As I always say. I’ll be the first to eat crow or concede a point, but I have liked Lockett for a couple months now. It’s in the archives, for what it’s worth.

              Didn’t take it as confrontational at all. Thanks for the question.

              • Old but Slow says:

                Lockett is impressive, and I want to see a return guy But, what really struck me about him in his videos, is how many times he gets wide open. It almost seemed Largent-like in his ability to make the DB take the wrong direction. That is a rare talent, and can trump all of the measurables.

                • Robert says:

                  I believe Lockett is high on our board. He is great at selling his fakes and uses excellent quickness and footwork to get open. That elite skillset translates to explosive plays. He is also a great return specialist. We all know how much Pete values the return game and explosive plays. Lockett would be a great fit for our current needs!

                • CC says:

                  The return game was lacking last year – we got nothing out of it and I would expect that Pete wants to find someone who can change the field – but of course, who is it.

                  The other guy that they might look at besides McBride – who I like too – is Kenny Bell. If you go OL at 63 you can look at one of these guys at 95 or whatever it is.

                • Attyla the Hawk says:

                  Very well put. I would agree with that. Although he isn’t super great at running routes — yet. He is extremely great at breaking suddenly and his change of direction is great. He does tend to wait on the ball a bit and body catches more than he should. Sacrificing some of the advantages of his cutting ability.

                  If he should acquire route running skills (setting up CBs/working their hips) akin to say a Jared Abbrederis — then you really do have a Steve Largent clone. Except with better burst/quickness. And significantly inferior hands. Largent’s hands were freakishly amazing.

                  He has awesome tools. He already can get open almost on command. He can still improve — which is very VERY tantalizing at the next level. Because he should be a functional day 1 contributor out of the box already.

  9. George says:

    What about B.J. Finney? Don’t know a lot about him minus he has a wrestling background, which Seattle values.

    • Volume 12 says:

      He’ s a good one.

      I suspect one reason Seattle was willing to cut bait with Max Unger, regardless of the Jimmy Graham trade, is due to the fact that the C position is actually quite deep and talented this year.

      • Rob Staton says:

        Nailed it. Loads of good C’s to be had in the middle rounds this year.

      • CC says:

        Great point V12 – they will be drafting OL but I wouldn’t mind signing Wisneiski to get a veteran presence. Russell was the most pressured QB – and I know some of it was his own doing, but if he goes down, it will be a long season. I suspect he’ll also work on getting the ball out quicker too.

        • Attyla the Hawk says:

          Looking at the roster, I’m not seeing where a spendy veteran is going to make a lot of sense.

          Seattle has 10 on the roster. 3 of them are likely inactives. Assume we add 2 in the draft plus a project.

          OT: Okung/Britt
          OG: Draftee/Sweezy
          OC: Lewis

          Depth: Gilliam/Bailey/(Isles or Milton)/Draftee OC

          That’s 9 OL there. Add the 10th for the project OL pick and that’s your 10.

    • Steele1324 says:

      Finney is solid in-phone-booth but seems to struggle at second level. Stout, squat dude who doesn’t move fluidly, and has short arms. Excellent character, however, good mental approach. And yes, a wrestler.

      • Steele1324 says:

        Finney and Gallik appear to be competitors at C who might go around the same part of the draft. I think both would be fine. Gallik seems more athletic.

        I have not seen anyone talk much about Rob Havenstein. He is the kind of guy the Patriots would go for. Glorified journeyman solid type.

  10. Donald says:

    What they need to do is package some picks and get another 2nd rd pick. With WR and OL being a priority, and not picking until #63 at the end of 2nd rd, they could use another higher 2nd rd pick.

    There are still several weeks to go before the draft, and these diamonds in the rough will be found by other teams.

    • realrhino2 says:

      I’m with you, depending on who is still available. Looked at past drafts, and it *looks* like the 4th we got from the Saints could get us up to the middle of the 2nd (i.e., our #63 + #107 to move up 10-15 spots). If we could move up there to get a legit option at starter at OG/C or WR, I’d be up for that. I mean, we are talking about Marpet and Sambraillo, two guys who are both projects. Would you give up a 4th to make that Cameron Erving, instead? I would.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        No, I’m comfortable with either Marpet or Sambrailo plus another player instead of Erving.

        • Coug1990 says:

          I am with you Attyla. I want JS to have more swings at bat, not batting higher in the order. There is a difference between 2nd round, 3rd round and 4th round picks, but it is not as much as people think. Especially in this draft with a lot of depth in two areas that the Seahawks need, OL and WR.

          I would rather JS draft two lineman by the fourth round than trade draft capitol for one player. There is no such thing as a sure thing.

          • RealRhino2 says:

            It depends, for me, on who is available. If there is a guy sitting there at #55 that we think should have gone in the 1st and will probably be gone at #63, a real potential pro bowl type player, then trade up. For me, that’s probably one of the guys with first round talent but 3rd round character, or a guy at a non-premium position but who is a great fit for us.

            But you also have to consider, IMO, the position. I guess I was thinking about OL. It’s kind of like having two QBs (“If you have two, you have none”). Having two below average OL (i.e., 4th-round talents) means you have nothing, because a weak link on the line can ruin your whole line. Only takes one guy to get through to blow up the play. One above average OL is worth 20 below average OL. Whereas if we are talking WR, a below average WR (Kearse?) can still be useful in spots, while trading him for an above-average WR doesn’t gain you much. Plus, you have to consider starting immediately vs. developing. Marpet may ultimately be as good as, say, Erving, but if one needs to develop while the other is ready to go, I would move up.

            • Attyla the Hawk says:

              “But you also have to consider, IMO, the position. I guess I was thinking about OL. It’s kind of like having two QBs (“If you have two, you have none”). Having two below average OL (i.e., 4th-round talents) means you have nothing, because a weak link on the line can ruin your whole line. Only takes one guy to get through to blow up the play. One above average OL is worth 20 below average OL. ”

              When you’re a team who is losing 5-6 players every year, you have to replace them.

              I understand the position argument. Obviously there is just one QB. But there are 5 OL. It’s not difficult to scheme around a point of deficiency.

              This notion really fails to appreciate the ability to develop players. It may be true, that on April, you may be choosing between one player who could start that day, versus two players that need some time. But by September, you may have one promising rookie (but still a rookie), versus two guys who you can limp along during a rookie starting campaign. By year two, you may be looking at one above average OL, versus two average OL, with the possibility that one of those is above average.

              It’s very easy for us as fans to fall in love with guys at the top of the order. Because they look on the hoof like they can help contribute right away. But the stark reality is, championship rosters are built on day three. Not on days one and two. Teams that are good year in and year out, have two almost universal traits:

              1. They have a franchise QB
              2. They get quality deep into the draft.

              Seattle is a development model organization. They need more prospects who look like they’re below average on draft day. Guys they can turn into average or above average players in bulk. Because attrition happens. Teams that reload the best, stay atop the league.

              Seattle is really not ever going to fall for the ‘only enough spots on our roster’ mentality. Because every year there is going to be 5 or more vacancies. That’s in addition to positions that might be upgraded. Any team at the top of the heap needs to get about 6 players in each draft to contribute. If they fall short, they need to add UFA talent to fill in the gaps.

              Bad teams have to spend on more expensive UFA talent because they don’t just have depth holes. They have starter/talent holes.

  11. drewjov11 says:

    Find a way to get some physically gifted and tough interior linemen and solve this weakness for years to come. I’m getting sick of watching Russell being chased around all game. Get that extra second and get the kid from duke and Marpet and let them battle it out for the left guard spot. Eventually, Marpet takes over at center perhaps. They both have that killer instinct and are big and physical kids. I can’t stress this enough. Games are won or lost on the lines. Don’t mess around.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Drew — unfortunately I think you might be left disappointed whoever Seattle drafts. A lot of the Russell being chased stuff is by design. Seattle sets out to be the best scrambling team in the league. Because of that he becomes incredibly difficult to block for. They aren’t an orthodox drop back and pass team. For starters, he needs to buy time to find throwing lanes due to his height. That comes with its own pitfalls. While someone like Peyton Manning is very easy to block for (snap, throw, complete), Wilson is the total opposite. There will always be an element of Wilson running for his life and they kind of want that. When he breaks contain he’s at his most dangerous.

      Also — I think the ‘games won or lost on the lines’ stuff is classic football rhetoric but essentially not true. Football games are won by quarterbacks these days. Increasingly, with more mobile QB’s entering the league, it’s QB’s, WR’s, TE’s and CB’s. If you can break contain you nullify even the most potent pass rush. Several QB winners in recent years have had prolific, elite QB’s throwing or running behind sub standard lines. The Pats don’t have a great O-line or pass rush, but they had an elite QB in 2014, a brilliant TE and two fantastic corners and a great safety. Seattle has been built on the secondary, the running game (Lynch) and Wilson’s playmaking. New Orleans with Brees, Green Bay with Rodgers, Manning with the Colts, Eli and the Giants, Big Ben and the Steelers. All had a combination of prolific passing games, great defense and average or below average offensive lines.

      • drewjov11 says:

        Respectfully, I have to slightly disagree with you. There are many examples of linemen getting whipped before a play has a chance to develop. They aren’t intentionally causin him to get pressured because of throwing lanes. They are supposed to do a better job than that at least holding a block longer. He’s exposed to too many hits and no coach in the league is going to voluntarily risk their best player. Our line has been less than spectacular. How can you say that is rhetoric? We win games by running the ball and pressuring qbs. Without winning at the line of scrimmage on defense we don’t usually win. The Broncos were owned at the LOS against us and look what happened. Winning games and win in championships are two very different things. I know that the league has changed a lot, but ask the Giants who overwhelmed Brady in the super bowl. We run the ball and we stuff the run and Rush the passer. We have been to two straight Super Bowls, and won one. The one we lost was partly because of injuries to our pass rush. If you can protect your star player and blow open holes for the gane’s top running back, you don’t need to use so much read option and expose your qb to unnecessary hits.

        • AlaskaHawk says:

          Just count the number of times a DE runs past the Seahawks tackles without breaking stride, or the number of times the guards get knocked on their butts. It is pretty obvious sometimes. I am glad the offense is finally getting some new players, though unger wouldn’t have been my first choice to lose.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        “I think the ‘games won or lost on the lines’ stuff is classic football rhetoric but essentially not true. ”

        On the offensive side of the ball, I think Seattle (and NE) has proven this to be patently true.

        Having top tier OL corps, is like having a #1 receiver. Not a lot of success in the postseason. Having passable OL groups, but excelling at other areas has shown to be the template for success at the highest levels in the NFL for many years now.

        • Bruce M. says:

          I think it is less true of the offensive line than it is of the defensive line. If “great defense” wins championships, then great defensive lines are required.

          With the OL, a great QB can compensate, somewhat. That said, what is pretty telling with the Hawk offensive line is average time to pressure. It’s all well and good to say that the Hawk offense is in part premised on Russell breaking contain and making plays, but unless the OL is literally letting guys leak through off the snap in the style of a screen on a regular basis, our time to pressure stinks. Our guards get beat by stunts or pure quickness too often, and Britt is a freaking turnstile on the edge. It is far too often that a DE literally runs by him off the snap without being touched!

          We can still play the scramble game even if our OL pass blocks better. In fact, we can actually alternate some more rhythm passing into that mix, even with Russell’s height. All that will do is make us, and our QB, more of a threat.

          • joel says:

            Seahawks are and have been a run-first offense. This may change somewhat when Lynch moves on, but there’s a reason that Seattle was the #1 rushing offense in 2014 with Lynch leading the league in rushing touchdowns and Wilson the 16th best rusher of all players in the league (he beat many starting RBs): Seattle focuses on run blocking first, pass blocking second. Even if Seattle were to grab four offensive linemen in the draft (they won’t), all would be selected for run blocking first and pass blocking second.

            Britt was a rookie last season and played like it, but his run blocking wasn’t bad. Very few offensive linemen walk into the NFL, start the entire regular season, and grade out well. And let’s not forget that this offensive line has to be three of the best defensive pass rushes in the NFL six times a season.

    • j says:

      The thing about OL in our system – you have to (a) know the system and (b) know your teammates. Which is why it is going to be tough for a guy to come in and replace Bailey – who has been with the team for two years already, or even Lewis who has starting experience from last year. Anyone picked is likely will start out as a backup. So why draft early?

      • Ho Lee Chit says:

        A WR isn’t going to start early, either. Why draft one of those early? Anyone who has actually played the game knows that size up front matters. It mattered in high school, in college and in the pros. Ask Dallas how much a good line matters to their success. Why are big guys like Suh so valuable? They manhandle offensive linemen. Without a good offensive line you cannot gain yards in the running game, are forced to pass, can’t get the ball off and get your QB hurt. Without a good defensive line you cannot pressure the QB or defend in the secondary. As they say, “It all starts up front.” You draft quality linemen early because your guys need to be better than their guys.

        • j says:

          Why isn’t a WR going to start early? A number of guys we could take at 63 are likely better than Kearse, Lockette, Matthews. Hell, a number of guys we could take at 95 would be an upgrade to everyone but Baldwin.

          Second – I never said OL doesn’t matter. Didn’t say we don’t need size up front, either. But given that OL need time to acclimate to our system, it just doesn’t make sense to pay for polish. The OL who go early do so because they are ready to be immediate contributors. Meanwhile, there are guys available in the mid-rounds who are just as athletically gifted, but need work in technique, need to add weight, etc. Those are the guys we should target.

          Ideally we would draft OL a year ahead, let them sit on the bench, develop chemistry with the rest of the OL, learn the system, and plug them in as veterans of our system.

          • CC says:

            I wouldn’t doubt if we draft 2 WRs this year – one who will be a returner who would see the field.

          • joel says:

            Most wide receivers are not starter-worthy their first year. 2014’s draft class was simply an aberration, having far more to do with the depth of the 2014 class than anything else. It’s just a historical fact. Takes time and hard work to learn routes, learn blocking assignments, learn NFL defenses, learn your QB’s preferences, etc.

  12. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    I would not be against trading the #1 pick from 2016 for a 2nd round pick in 2015…. pick #33-45 range.
    Why would I say that? Because I think there are some outstanding prospects in the early / mid 2nd round… that could really improve the OL or DL that will be available around this time.

    A team such as the Raiders/Falcons could use more 1st round picks and perhaps a swap of some lower round picks (4th or 5th range).

    This is a year the Seahawks have to land around 5-6 players on the 53 man roster. They need to hit and hit big.

    • rowdy says:

      If anything we need to trade for more picks next year. We’re bound to trade down this year and could easily hack 13 picks this year .

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        Trade down from #63? Jeez can we just make one quality pick? One player that can start from day one?

        • rowdy says:

          I hope they don’t trade down from 63 but I know they will trade down a couple times in the lower rounds

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            Honestly, they haven’t shown much willingness to trade down in day 3. Most of the trades have been R1/R2.

            • rowdy says:

              That is true but they will trade and they don’t trade up much. They traded up for jesse williams and I can’t think of another time they did. Something to look into.

        • j says:

          Like Richard Sherman? Kam Chancellor? KJ Wright? Doug Baldwin? Like that kind of quality?

          If there is no one we like at 63 I say go for it. Pick up an extra pick next year. Pick up an extra pick this year and use it to trade up into the third. Something like that.

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            I think more likely, there will be several guys we like at 63. But expect to see one or two of them 5-10 spots down the line.

        • Rob Staton says:

          What if you’re taking a player who would be available at #70 anyway?

          • AlaskaHawk says:

            I would think that the only way you can safely move down for a player that you really want is if that player is rated a round below where you are picking. In most cases the GM will have a list of players they would pick in each round. Given a whole list of players, if they are available then you my as well start picking. What could you possibly gain by moving down from #63, maybe a little bump in the third or fourth round?

            To take a real time example, Moarpit is rated around our pick. If you really want him as a guard/center and he is still available you pick him. If you wait and he is gone then you didn’t really want him that bad. Probably because he is on your list with 4 other guard/centers, and you have 12 other picks at other positions you could make anyway. With 11 picks though, why get cute?

            I just want a solid starter. Can you really say we have starters based on last years first two picks? Richardson looked good but had a light frame and is now injured. Britt “the matador” is questionable as a long term tackle. What did trading down really get us but two questionable starters? As someone said earlier, PC can find starters in the 5 th round though the miss rate will be a lot higher. Even though our first round picks haven’t all performed the best, they at least hung in there as starters for four years.

            • AlaskaHawk says:

              Meant to say “Ali Marpet”

            • Volume 12 says:

              ‘What did trading down really get us but 2 questionable starters?’

              It got us DE Cassius Marsh who’s a perfect fit for this system/locker room and will be a fantastic 3rd pass rusher, all the while becoming a fan favorite. It got us KPL too, who’s going to be a STs stud and a ‘speed demon’ at the WILL and SAM LB spots.

              Way too early to tell if Britt is questionable going forward. IMO he’ll be just fine. And P-Rich while I understand the injury concerns, I think will continue to get better, he’ll give us that deep threat, but he might be a guy that only plays 10-12 games a year. I think that’s fine, because RW spreads the ball around anyways and will utilize a plethora of weapons.

  13. Beanhawk says:

    Rob, I just wanted to jump on here and say thank you for the podcast. I love the format, and I enjoy listening while I do things around the house. I also appreciate that you just jump right in with the discussion. One really annoying thing about many sports podcasts is that they spend the first 5-10 minutes doing chitter chatter.

    I enjoyed your discussion with the esteemed Tony Pauline, and I am sure there are others you may have lined up. That said, I would certainly welcome solo podcasts as well. Thanks again; wonderful discussion.

  14. Clayton says:

    Rob,
    Is there a chance that Seattle drafts Cedric Ogbuehi at 63 and Britt moves inside?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it’s unlikely. Britt can move inside but then you’d be looking at yet another change at RT and even less continuity on the OL. You’d be changing three positions instead of two. Plus Ogbuehi might have to start the year on the PUP. For me he’s a redshirt candidate due to the ACL he picked up at the end of the season.

      • Clayton says:

        I was thinking that he would be good insurance in case Seattle lets Russell Okung walk in 2016. Hard to find a good tackle with a late pick.

        • Rob Staton says:

          That’s a very interesting angle. He has the length and size to play left tackle for sure. He flashed serious potential on the right side in 2013 but struggled on the left in 2014. Can he be coached up to act as a cheap left tackle for three years in Seattle? It’s something maybe we should consider. You probably don’t get anything out of him in year one but if you’re preparing to accept you might have to let Okung walk, it’s a transition plan that at least makes some sense. But I think in round two they’ll ultimately look to bring in an impact player, with the intention of extending Okung down the line or replacing him in the 2016 draft.

          • Old but Slow says:

            There is a good chance that any offensive linemen we draft will start off as backups. My projection would have Lewis start the season at center while a draft pick learns, and probably the same at LG behind either Bailey or Isles.

            With this kind of thinking, even if Ogbuehi was not immediately available, by the time he was really needed he could be healthy and have had time with the coaches and training staff.

            He was a likely first rounder before the injury, and I love that his arms are 35 7/8″.

            • Rob Staton says:

              I wouldn’t rule out Bailey and Lewis starting… but given they threw Okung, Carpenter, Britt, Moffitt and even Sweezy in at the deep end, I suspect they’ll draft two new starters for the O-line. But that doesn’t rule out an early pick on Ogbuehi. He’s a player we can look into more.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      I think Seattle may be thinking along those lines. But I don’t see it being that early.

      If Ogbuehi is available in late R4 — I can see that. He’s a PUP candidate who will likely miss the first year. His stock is also deflated. I expect we’ll seek a legitimate contributor in R2/3. And possibly R4 as well. Ogbuehi may not even be on our board — but if he is, I can see us taking an early day 3 flyer on him.

      Honestly though, I see Seattle coveting those R4/5 picks too much. They really see a lot of talent we don’t see and are genuinely excited for some of the more exotic prospects than the typical ‘faller’ picks. I would not be the least surprised that our LB/CB prospect comes in R5/R6 and is one most of us barely have heard of. Usually SPARQ prospects that test well.

  15. Steele1324 says:

    As I mentioned on another page, I am not surprised that people are questioning Zack Hodges. A Harvard philosophy major does not look at life and existence the way most people do. Imagine someone with a skeptical mind versed in Socrates being grilled by team psychologists and scouts, who are taken aback when the guy fires back with unusual ideas. I would imagine someone like this would have far greater interests than football.

  16. Ross says:

    I really enjoyed the interview Rob, I think you got a lot of great stuff out of Tony Pauline and it’s great to hear him echo a lot of the thoughts you’ve shared on the blog the few weeks and months.

    One of the interesting things he mentioned was Hroniss Grasu being a good fit because of his athleticism and zone blocking experience, but in pass blocking, not just run blocking. It makes complete sense because Russell Wilson doesn’t stand still in the pocket a lot. He needs linemen who can move laterally. Like you say Rob, we don’t seem to have strict parameters for offensive line prospects besides run blocking potential. I would be interested to look at which centers and guards have some ZBS experience and quick feet.

    Also, I didn’t think this draft was deep for pass rushers, I thought it was more top heavy. Apparently not. This is good news obviously. This could be a draft loaded in the middle rounds with talent at exactly the positions we need (cornerback doesn’t count, Seattle seem to conjure starters from thin air). Schneider has known this clearly known all along, hence the pile of mid round picks. I wouldn’t be surprised if we ended up without a second round pick either.

  17. Jon O says:

    Frank Clark is NOT from L.A. He is from Cleveland. He went to Glenville High School playing under Ted Ginn Sr. He was not a highly recruited kid and became the first Glenville player to go to Michigan over Ohio State since Shawn Crable. Frank does come from a tough background with bad influences. He was ‘strongly encouraged’ to steal laptops as a Freshman for his bad influences to re-sell. He was suspended for the incident. Seemingly out of trouble and away from bad influences had a domestic violence incident with his girlfriend in late October and was kicked off the team. I have actually met and personally spoken with Frank and I was proud of his maturation. His incident with his girlfriend was a blemish that he didn’t need. I will be rooting for him to be drafted on day 3 of the draft.

  18. Madmark says:

    Ali Marpet falls into a Russel Wilson category for me. He’s done everything he can but there’s that one thing he can’t change and that’s the level of competition he played against. Its a lot like Russel Wilson doing everything he could but not being able to change his height. He might need some time but I think Marpet would pay big in Tom Cables ZBS scheme. Since 2012 Cable has made due with late round talent and other teams backups. Its time to give him some talent to work with, especially in a deep OL draft.

    • Ho Lee Chit says:

      I agree. It seems likely we load up on linemen on both sides of the ball. The offensive line may be easier since the D linemen will be pretty well picked over by the time we are on the clock. Marpet looks like a future All Pro to me. I see him starting at guard and perhaps moving to center in his second year. We can get by with Patrick Lewis, whom I also like, for a year.

  19. David Ess says:

    thought this was interesting. you’d think they would but where would you draft him?

    I'm told the Seahawks are "very likely" to take a quarterback in this draft to backup Russell Wilson.— Benjamin Allbright (@AllbrightNFL) March 19, 2015

    • j says:

      Thought so.

      In all likelihood it will be in the mid rounds – around round 4 or after. This is an exceedingly weak QB class and there is no one I would draft in the top three rounds that will be there in the top three rounds.

      Unless . . . trade up for Mariota?

    • j says:

      Wonder if we will want someone with mobility like Wilson, or will we look for someone more like Tarvaris Jackson?

      Also, if true, significant for BJ Daniels as well. Move to full-time WR in the works?

      • CC says:

        I wonder if BJD is being set up to be the KR/PR? He’s certainly athletic, just not sure if he can do that.

    • Jeff M. says:

      Yeah, that’s not too surprising. I don’t think they’d be talking about using BJ Daniels at punt returner if they thought he was the guy at backup QB. And I know Pete has mentioned wanting T-Jack back but no movement there so far–it seems possible they’ve told him it would have to be a vet min deal to save cap and he may be waiting around to see if he gets better offers (he could even probably wait into the season and get picked up as an emergency starter for someone once injuries set in).

      As extensions kick in it would certainly be handy to have the backup QB locked up long-term on a cheap rookie deal but I haven’t looked at late-round prospects this year at all to know who we might target.

    • Ho Lee Chit says:

      ” I’m told the Seahawks are “very likely” to take a quarterback in this draft to backup Russell Wilson.— Benjamin Allbright (@AllbrightNFL) March 19, 2015

      Told by who? A radio talk show host in Denver hardly qualifies as an insider. We know PCJS never reveal their plans.

      • j says:

        It makes sense though. That we would draft a QB. Seems like we are moving on from Daniels at QB, and there has seemingly been no rush to resign TJack. Who is going to be the backup QB if we don’t draft one – Kam?

        Probably a mid or late rounder – round 4 is the earliest I could see us taking one, and that might be a bit high.

        • Steele1324 says:

          I think a QB anywhere above rd.7 is a waste. There are too many higher priority needs to do that.

          • j says:

            If Russell Wilson gets hurt, who do you want replacing him? Right now the backup is Kam Chancellor. Sign a good backup vet will take 2-4 mil per year and we need cap space.

            I know that argument can be made for any player – i.e. if Justin Britt goes down, who do you want replacing him. But QB is so singularly important to a winning football team, it is really important to have a solid backup.

            Like I said, I don’t think we go too high. Maybe round 5 or 6 at the earliest.

            • peter says:

              Fair points about cap space but who to take? Blake Sims? Possible. Bryce petty decent but from an entirely different system. The thing with Wilson going down and that thought process is who would run the system?

      • Coug1990 says:

        In listening to ESPN Seattle, they just said TJack is visiting the Dolphins right now. TJack has also said he would not mind backing up Bridgewater in Minnesota. So, it does seem plausible that he might not be back.

  20. Jon O says:

    Hey Rob on Frank… When Michigan signed him the assumption was he would play TE (recruited as an athlete). However once fall practice began it was obvious his temperament on the field was to attack and better suited for defense.

    Frank is a physical player with very long arms. He plays with power and while he is one of the more athletic DE in the draft his speed doesn’t always show up on film. That being said, he went through 2 different d-line coaches at Michigan. There is still plenty of upside and potential.

    I think his best position is strong-side DE in NFL. Best case scenario is Everson Griffen.

    • Rik says:

      Where is he predicted to go on draft day? Seems like he might be a real diamond in the rough for the Seahawks. It’d be fun to see what he could do on a dline with Bennet, Avril, and Hill. He had really go 40 times for his size. Better than most of the tight ends.

      • Volume 12 says:

        He could go undrafted due to his off-field incidents. But his talent alone is probably worth a 3rd round pick, 4th round at least.

        I’d agree that strong-side DE is his best position. He could dip inside on occasion as well.

        He’s a physical freak, that is highly intense and plays ‘pissed off.’ I’d take him in the 6th round all day long, possibly even 5th.

  21. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    In regards to the draft a QB talk, Nick Marshall, CB/QB/ATH, Auburn Height: 6-1. Weight: 207. 40 Time: 4.54.
    “Technically”, he is a QB.. but most likely play CB in NFL. I would take a swing at him in the 6th onward….

    So, the Denver guy might have gotten the story half right.

    • Volume 12 says:

      I’d say he’s a little more than half right. Sent QB coach Carl Smith to workout QB Bryce Petty at Baylor’s pro day, interviewed Alabama QB Blake Sims at the combine, the writing is on the wall. They want a back-up QB.

      • Old but Slow says:

        I can’t point to examples, but it seems that the team usually has a QB in the draft somewhere. Never hurts to take a shot. Usually, at college level the best athletes are often quarterbacks.

  22. rowdy says:

    Rob, Attyla mentioned that they don’t usually trade down with the lower picks and made me think about them trading up and how often the have. I can only remember the jesse williams trade “or Simon depending on how you look at it” how many times have they traded up.

  23. Volume 12 says:

    Thinking out loud here, but I wonder what Seahawks HB coaches thought about Jay Ajayi while attending his pro day?

    I have no idea what his arm length is, but Boise St CB Cleshawn Page’s numbers would have put him in the top 5 out of the corners that attended the combine.

    • Steele1324 says:

      The RB clamor sure has died down since Lynch signed, and they traded out of rd. 1. Not sure they will go for a RB at all. Like Ajayi, though.

      • Old but Slow says:

        Maybe someone like Tyler Varga (Yale) in the 7th? No big risk, but a good all around running back, who can cut, run, block, and catch.

  24. Volume 12 says:

    Rob, what do you think of WR Tony Lippett? He sure plays bigger than 6’2.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Always made plays when I watched them last season but the feeling is he’ll switch to corner. Hard to project how that plays out.

      • Steele1324 says:

        I have been rethinking two guys since the combine. One of them is Tony Lippett.

        Lippett has prototypical WR size, similar to Michael Irvin. He is, like Irvin, not super fast at 4.5 or 4.6. Bigtime playmaker, still evolving, major upside. Yes, he can also play corner, but he is a hell of a receiver, and I would be comfortable with the Hawks taking him. I think he is underrated. I see no reason to give up on him as a potential #1 WR.

        Kikaha is the other one I am coming back around to. What he does well—pass rush—he does better than anyone in this draft, and he has a natural instinct for it that cannot be taught. That is worth a rd. 3.

        • Steele1324 says:

          I am thinking that what the Hawks need to do, at a minimum, is two WRs to replicate Sidney Rice and Golden Tate. Rice was 6-4/202lb/4.5 40, Tate was 5-10/195/4.4 40.

          The question I keep asking is, are there guys on the roster already? Matthews, Norwood, McNeil will get their shots. So how many more prospects do you want to draft and throw into thix mix?

          And on defense, replicate the D line depth of 2013. Then, the same question, how many more?

        • Rob Staton says:

          Problem with Kikaha — lacks length and burst to play the LEO. Not a scheme fit. The endearing thing is he’s a pass rush specialist. The injury issues and lack of top athleticism could see him available much later than the third. I’ve seen it suggested he could last into UDFA due to health concerns.

          • Volume 12 says:

            As have I. While he is a great pass rusher, not a fit for what Seattle does.

            Yes, it would be nice to replace or find a Sidney Rice and Golden Tate type of receiver, and it’s ideal to have different body types in your WRs, but if the talent is in small receivers for example, then that’s what you take. Don’t fight for the board. Take the most talented player regardless of size.

  25. Robert says:

    One of my off season fantasies is that Gilliam is working his ass off and adding 20 pounds of muscle along with functional strength gains. I want him to take over RT with his nimble feet, long arms and ridiculous SPARQ. Britt would make a fine LG road grader!

    • Trevor says:

      I think Gilliam has great potential and could very well be who they have in mind if they don’t re-sign Okung. I do think they will try to sign Okung if he can stay healthy this year however. So hard to find a quality left tackle that when you have one you pretty much have to try and keep him.

  26. OZ says:

    Like JS says. We like players who can do other things. Lippitt plays corner too. I personally like him a lot. He’s got grit.

    • OZ says:

      I think the Hawks really like Nick Marshal in that regard.

      • OZ says:

        JS/PC value players with grit.who can finish,can do other things and have that SPARQ. Ali Marpet has that also. These are the type of players we should be looking at.

        • OZ says:

          Two other players I like at DT are Xavier Cooper and Marcus Hardison who are kind of flying under the radar right now. Cooper’s got an interesting back story.

          • peter says:

            I like both of those players. A lot. My only concern with cooper is arm length. Seattle has a policy of of only selecting DT with 33 inch arms and his were measured @ 31.5. Then again Seattle has up to now and minus or in done a pretty lousy job of selecting DLine talent, mostly for health reasons…but maybe its time to broaden the search parameters.

            • Coug1990 says:

              I believe it is only a matter of time until JS/PC hit big on a DL. They do know what good DL look like, as they have hit on several underrated players in free agency. Look at it this way, they didn’t hit on acquiring a QB (Whitehurst, Jackson and Flynn) until they did.

            • CHawk Talker Eric says:

              I didn’t know about his arm length. I had been thinking that if SEA goes DL early, it’d be for either Cooper or Diggy.

              • peter says:

                Yeah, chawk…i get stoked about a prospect then fire up NFL.com’s site about draft profiles, the get bummed that they don’t have some measurable…like cooper who I think looks really good on tape

            • peter says:

              Minus Irvin….should be above

  27. Trevor says:

    As for a backup QB I think Jackson makes the most sense given our other needs in the draft or keep Daniels but the talk of him at WR means that might be out.

    One guy I was trying to do some more research on was South Alabama QB Brandon Bridge. He is a Canadian kid who only started one year but had an amazing skill set with a big arm, good speed and great size at 6′ 5. He is incredibly raw but seems like a good kid and has improved dramatically in the last year. Might me someone to consider in the late rounds.

    Has anyone checked out Bridge and what are your thoughts. I am Canadian so a little biased.

  28. peter says:

    The only QB id like to see Seattle draft is Shane carden. Out of ECU. Incredibly smart, hard working overlooked QB out of high school. Similar-ish size to Wilson and literally the only thing that matters to me in a back up…he was one of the most accurate, best td to int rate qbs in his career. Not necessarily the best and some dudes play in gimmicky stat improving systems but ecu runs a fairly pro system and he is very good with his decision making.

    This year to me is a waste land for qbs. There’s mo one I would consider before the 6th. And after the top two its going to be a real crap shoot with Hundley, Grayson, perhaps petty in that mix. Teams that need a QB this year I feel will still mostly be needing one this time next year.

    As far as Marshall he a Cb for the LOB to me. If you’re considering him as a QB go ahead and pencil him in in the 7th or udfa. He’s not bad but when a guy knows he’s not playing QB at the next level that tells you all you need to know. Plus he’s built out of the Seattle corner factory mold.

    • Volume 12 says:

      Interesting. I never really thought about Shane Carden as a back-up for Seattle. He could be a steal. Very ‘Seahawky’ personality. Reminds me of a more athletic version of Matt Hasslebach, Or is it the shaved/bald heads?

      I really like Alabama QB Blake Sims in the 7th or UDFA. He has great versatility and still has a ton of upside. If Baylor QB Bryce Petty falls into the 4th or 5th round, doubtful, watch out for him.

      ‘Plus he’s built out of the Seattle corner factory mold.’ Love this. Nick Marshall is my favorite corner in this class. Love everything about him. I also really like UNLV CB Tajh Hasson, Marshall CB Darryl ‘Swag’ Roberts, and Boise St CB Cleshawn Page. Hassan and Page are both from LA, and all 3 of them are freak athletes that would make exciting developmental nickel/slot CBs.

      I can’t find the arm length on those 3 however. Draft Marshall, and then use a 6th, 7th, or priority UDFA selection on Hassan, Page, or Roberts, and stash them on IR for a year. And before we know it, the CB depth is replenished.

  29. Angus MacDonald says:

    I must admit that I have been thinking along the same lines as Clayton in that Cedric Ogbuehi could very well be a first pick target for the Seahawks. I wouldn’t even be surprised to see them bundle some picks to move up and get him. After the draft table melt down last year when Dominique Easley was drafted by New England, it’s easy to see that Seattle is willing to sit on a draft pick while he gets healthy. Especially if he is talented. Ogbuehi was generally projected to be a #12 to #20 range 1st draft pick before his injury. With better post surgery care and rehab, this type of injury is not as career threatening as it was years ago.

    Really though, I just wanted to get your opinion on my dark horse, late round mock draft pick for Seattle– WR DeAndre Smelter. He has good size with OK speed and my lord, huge hands.( he too is going to sit a while as he recovers fron injury).

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’d be very surprised if Seattle moved up for anyone in round two. Mid round picks so valuable this year.

      Smelter likely ends up in UDFA due to the injury. It’s hard for a receiver to work into the playbook while recovering. He probably gets stashed on IR somewhere or has to wait a year for his chance.

      • j says:

        If we move at all, it would be a move down. Then use the extra pick gained to move up for an extra fourth or third.

    • Trevor says:

      I love Smelter too as an UDFA to stash away for a year. I think he has tremendous upside as he was baseball player who just started focusing on football. He will be worth the wait IMO

      • Steele1324 says:

        Smelter is a great UDFA pick. Another potential #1 WR if and when he gets healthy. A team would have to afford red shirting him. Are the Hawks in that position?

  30. David M2 says:

    Akeem King from San Jose State posted some pretty gaudy numbers from his pro day –

    safety Akeem King, a self-described “late bloomer,” had a strong day. The 6-1, 215-pounder, who became a starter as a senior, was clocked as fast as 4.35 in the 40, leaped 37½ inches and had 20 bench press reps

    Any word on his measureables Rob?

    • drewjov11 says:

      Those numbers, if accurate, are elite level stuff. I’ve never even heard of the kid.

      • drewjov11 says:

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=N01WpkSKKpM

        He looks really good as a potential prospect. Played some corner and was a gunner as well. Lots to like there.

        • David M2 says:

          I really like the number he wore

        • EranUngar says:

          At 6-3, 215 he could be our next Kam at safety.

          nice pick.

          • David M2 says:

            The Plot Thickens:

            AT SAN JOSÉ STATE: Completed four seasons with the Spartans… Originally signed as a wide receiver hopeful but moved to the defensive side of the ball in 2011… Played in 33 games with his 12 career starting assignments coming as a senior… Named to the 2013 Academic All-Mountain and 2012 Academic All-WAC teams… A three-time San José State University Scholar-Athlete… One of 10 Spartans honored in 2012 on National Student-Athlete Day by the National Consortium for Academics & Sports… Accepted an invitation to play in the 2015 Medal of Honor All-Star Football Game in Charleston, South Carolina.

            He started off as a wide receiver

            • Volume 12 says:

              Nice eye David. I noticed his pro day numbers yesterday when I was checking out Travis Raciti’s pro day numbers. Raciti was disappointing, but your right. Akeem King jumped out.

    • Rob Staton says:

      That’s impressive for sure.

  31. drewjov11 says:

    I always get a kick out of the videos that list the players at 2-3 inches taller than they actually are. But from that limited sample size, he looks like someone who has the tools to play and be versatile. We definitely need some backup safety/corner help.

  32. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Interesting and persistent tweemor (tweet + rumor) floating around that SD might want to trade Rivers (plus draft pick) to TEN in exchange for the #2 pick (presumably for Mariotta to replace Rivers).

    Aren’t these pre-draft weeks fun?

    Welcome to Speculationville. Population: us.

    • peter says:

      Old whisenhut loves himself veteran qbs and sort of disdains rookies. That’s one of the few rumors that makes sense.

  33. drewjov11 says:

    Rivers put it out there that he may want to play out his deal and test the market. San Diego is not winning a title anytime soon and are getting older. It may not be such a crazy idea, assuming they love marriota.

  34. Bernardo De Biase says:

    I’ve been giving some thoughts about the favorite players around here, our positional needs, and I’ve came up with this idea:

    For some reason I think Seattle might be better off having 2 middle thirds than one late second and one late third.

    I think either of OLers Ty Sambrailo/Ali Marpet or LEO/OLB Hau’oli Kikaha will be available at the 70-75 range, and those options fill a position of need: young/developing offensive linemen, and a player that can give leverage on Bruce Irvin contract extension by being options of depth at LEO and blitzing SAM.

    On the other hand, I think the best WR fit for the Hawks is Tre McBride, because of his all-around game (play outside, on the slot, return kicks/punts, very athletic and polished) and I’m afraid he won’t be available at 95. I think a pick in the 80/85 range should be able to land him.

    So I guess, we are much safer of filling positions of need is to turn our 63 and 95 picks into something like 70-75 and 80-85.

    Any thoughts? Is that in PCJS realm of possibilities?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it’s unlikely they’ll move up in the third — you’d be loathe to lose a 4th or a 5th this year. But I could definitely see them moving down from #63 to acquire an extra pick or two. The Seahawks have drafted more players than any other team since PCJS took control. I expect we’ll see them pull further away in 2015.

      • Bernardo De Biase says:

        I was thinking more of a three way deal. Trade 63 for 70-75 + an early sixth or a late 5th, then trade the same early 6th along 95, for 80-85 pick.

      • Bernardo De Biase says:

        I got a lot of love for him too, I think he’s definitely a keeper, growing into an all-around playmaker and potentially an every down LB, but if someone overpay him, it’d hard to keep given Seattle’s tough Cap situation after giving Bennett, Wagner, Chancellor, Sherman and Thomas their money. If Cary Williams turn into a quality player for us, and Simon/Burley/rookie can’t improve to a starting quality CB, would you see the Seahawks cutting him for Irvin?

    • peter says:

      I like the thought process. But I’ve got a lot of love for Irvin’s game and think if you’re looking for leverage against his contract they’ll probably need someone a bit more of an athletic freak who at 28 is STILL improving his game.

      I know a lot of huskies fans like kikaha…but I think third round is,a bit high for him.

      • Steele1324 says:

        It would be wise to leverage Irvin, but hard to replicate his total game. There might be peers around the NFL, but don’t see many in this draft, certainly not below rd. 2. Kikaha does, I think, have a pass rush instinct that is as good, but the rest of his game is far short. That ability alone might be worth a rd.3, depending on the team.

      • Bernardo De Biase says:

        Please, I didn’t answer you in the right spot. See answer above.

        • peter says:

          To answer you about Williams Irvin would always have age on his side…but I can see the potential dilemma for sure.

      • j says:

        I’m not sure there will be a Bruce Irvin contract extension. People forget his age when he was first drafted. (24 turning 25).

        We let him play out this year, we pick up the fifth year option, and then he is in his age 30 season. Any extension would pay him, probably a salary in line with the best LBs in the league, for his age 30-33 years.

        It’d be better strategy to draft his replacement in next years draft.

  35. Steele1324 says:

    Tony Lippett update. His pro day went well, lowered his 40 time to 4.46-4.5 range (down from 4.6 at the combine). He worked at both WR and corner.

    http://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/michigan-state/spartans/2015/03/18/michigan-state-pro-day/24995323/

    I think he has great potential at either position. I hope JS is noticing.

    • Trevor says:

      I hope they are too. Between Lippet and Marshall as convert prospects I would take Lippet. He played some corner already for the Spartans and looked solid. He has the length and speed to be Shermesque IMO. I think Mashall is a good prospect too but Lippet would be my choice if he lasts till the 5th.

    • j says:

      A lot of times “lowering their 40” just means it was hand timed instead of laser timed. Can be a difference of up to a tenth of a second.

      I’d guess he ran the 40 at the exact same speed. Just measured differently.

  36. Steele1324 says:

    Dion Bailey is one of many practice squadders who I think we should keep our eyes on. Remember how ridiculous he was at USC?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guPH0PzzZPU

    He went undrafted because he was a tweener SS/LB.

    They have three NTs on the squad–Justin Renfrow, Julius Warmsley, Jimmy Staten and two OGs, Nate Isles and Drew Nowak.

    Will these guys step up or remain camp fodder?

  37. […] Ali Marpet (Hobart) Prototype size for the center position and just looks made for the role. It’s hard to judge him in terms of small-school tape at left tackle but you can’t help but be impressed with his combination of size and athleticism. Tony Pauline spoke very highly of him in yesterday’s podcast. […]

  38. […] #63 I still believe Colorado State’s Ty Sambrailo makes a ton of sense. When I spoke to Tony Pauline last week he insisted he won’t be available in round three and would provide terrific value in the late […]

  39. […] I spoke to Tony Pauline a couple of weeks ago he said Sambrailo would be good value in the late second. In a non-direct way he inferred there’s a chance he won’t be there at #63. While many […]