How TEF helps explain the Justin Britt pick in 2014

April 5th, 2016 | Written by Rob Staton

The Seahawks took Justin Britt in the second round of the 2014 draft

John Schneider spoke to ESPN 710’s Brock and Salk show today. He had this to say about the offensive line class in the draft:

“It’s a good group. It’s better than it has been in several years. There doesn’t appear to be as many drop-offs, if you will. I remember talking to you guys about Justin Britt. We felt like we needed to take Justin right where we did because there was a huge shelf there, a big drop-off. This one looks pretty consistent all the way through at this point.”

Yesterday we revealed a new equation called the ‘Trench Explosion Formula’ (TEF). It combines a prospects vertical jump, broad jump and bench press to create a rating that directly compares to Seattle’s self-confessed ideals for the O-line.

The formula is explained in great detail here. It paints a pretty clear picture on Seattle’s O-line/draft philosophy.

The Seahawks have not drafted an offensive lineman since 2012 that has graded below their cumulative ideal using TEF. Justin Britt in 2014 had the lowest grade and even he scored a perfectly ideal 3.00 using the formula.

In yesterday’s piece I suggested the Seahawks reached for Britt because he was the last player on their board in the round 2-4 range that matched their physical ideal. Today we have the proof — and it backs up what Schneider told ESPN 710 today.

Only four offensive tackles were drafted between Seattle’s selection of Britt in round two and Garrett Scott, who they drafted in round six:

#64 Justin Britt 3.00
#66 Morgan Moses: 2.69
#67 Billy Turner: 2.83
#140 Cameron Fleming: 2.45
#149 Kevin Pamphile: 2.96
#199 Garrett Scott: 3.27

Remember, anything at 3.00 or above matches Seattle’s cumulative ideal for explosive offensive linemen. They haven’t drafted any player with a sub-3.00 since 2012.

This 2014 sample doesn’t look at all like a coincidence. The Seahawks were willing to reach for Britt because he matched their performance ideals in the explosive tests (vertical, broad, jump). No other offensive linemen available at the end of the second round got close to that level.

If nothing else, it proves we’re onto something with our new formula.

Ultimately, had they missed out on Britt — there’s a very strong chance they wouldn’t have drafted a tackle in 2014 until Scott in round six. They had a gaping hole at right tackle and needed to get one.

Reaching for Britt looks like a classic example of what Pete Carroll often refers to. They draft for their team — not everyone else in the NFL. The Seahawks clearly want explosive offensive linemen and they have a standard they appear to be sticking to. TEF shows Britt was explosive in comparison to Seattle’s self-confessed ideal. Moses, Turner, Fleming and Pamphile were not.

When Schneider talks about a ‘big shelf’ in 2014 and how this draft is different — it likely means they can add guys who fit their proposed criteria without needing to panic and fear missing out altogether.

In the first round they can consider the likes of Jason Spriggs and potentially Germain Ifedi and Shon Coleman. Later on they’ll have the option to target Connor McGovern, Joe Haeg, Joe Dahl and Alex Redmond. They should be able to draft two players they really like in rounds 1-4, without ever feeling like they have to reach.

We talked more about TEF in this weeks podcast. Don’t forget to check it out:

239 Responses to “How TEF helps explain the Justin Britt pick in 2014”

  1. Nick says:

    I wonder if Coleman and Clark are off the table because they don’t know their TEF (or equivalent) score.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Prospects usually do junior testing and they likely have some intel on how they’d perform without seeing it for sure.

      The biggest reason I don’t think they’ll draft Shon Coleman (who I love as a prospect) is the injury stuff. I think they’re going to focus a lot on durability and Coleman currently has a MCL issue. Clark has the makings of a TEF freak.

    • JT says:

      Clark’s pro day – 9’1″ broad, 31″ vert, 20 BP reps = 2.74.
      Coleman might test later this month

      • Nick says:

        Wow. That’s well below the 3.00 floor.

        • JT says:

          It’s not thaaaat far below. I’m by no means hoping they take Clark, but it’s possible if he’s there on day 2. The formula is missing any left-tackle types with extreme length and size ideals, as the Hawks haven’t drafted any since Okung. Of course, Okung himself tested at a 3.39 (largely due to bench press – his broad jump was subpar compared to recent Hawks OL’s)

          • Nick says:

            Excellent points.

            To me, it seems like its Spriggs or Ifedi. And if neither are available, try to trade back/take best DL prospect available.

            • JT says:

              Completely agree, although it’s pretty likely that at least 1 of those 2 are available. Depending on Coleman’s medical eval, he would be a potential target on a trade back.

              Fingers crossed for Chris Jones if they’re forced to go DT in the late first.

              • Scraps says:

                But Chris Jones has a TEF of 2.75…. at DT, too, so he’s way down there.

                • JT says:

                  We can’t really apply TEF to the defensive tackles as a draft predictor with any level of certainty. Rob has shown that the formula is an excellent predictor of who the Hawks will draft on the OL, but we know the Hawks value burst and quickness on the interior pretty highly as well (think Rankins, Dominique Easley). There simply isn’t enough data because the Hawks haven’t drafted many interior DL’s in recent years.

                  I love Jones because he has the best tape of all the DT’s in this draft (particularly as a pass rusher), and he his combo of size/length/athleticism and power is extremely rare.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    The Seahawks seem to like agility on the D-line. Hill (R3) and Howard (R4) both ran good short shuttle’s in the 4.45-4.55 range. Hill, for what it’s worth, also tested well according to TEF and gained an explosive score beyond 3.00. So I think explosion is important but they’ll also look for quickness.

                    I wouldn’t expect them to draft Chris Jones. He tested well below the explosive 3.00 marker and his short shuttle is slower than Hill/Howard at 4.62. Plus there are mental/attitude concerns too. He basically admitted he mailed in his 2014 season, he never achieved the great expectations of his recruiting hype and just recently he made a bonehead decision to drive on a suspended license.

                    I’ve read a few quotes from anonymous scouts basically suggesting he thinks he knows everything already. I just can’t see him in Seattle or going as early as some seem to think he will.

                  • JT says:

                    Pauline pegged him for the first after his pro day, and his updates this late in the season are fairly on point. I agree that it’s unlikely the Hawks draft him, just think he would be by far the best player available.
                    IMO – he’s a top 10 talent and those mental/attitude concerns will drive him to the R1/2 turn.

                  • Robert says:

                    We have not drafted a lot of DL to create a large sample size of data. But we can add other acquired players like Avril, Bennett, Clemons, Rhubin, McDaniels etc. Together with drafted players, we can get a good feel for what they like at different positions across the DL. Even the many years with Mebane at 1T tells us they liked his ability to anchor and gobble up double teams, which kept Wagz clean and allowed him to make plays.

                • RealRhino2 says:

                  Yeah! Jones is my guy! I take him R1 and figure out the OL later.

                  I’ve been on record as doubting the validity of most of this formula-based scouting, but I will say that if it has any validity at all, that probably decreases as you get closer to the interior of the line (i.e., more useful for tackles than for guards, more useful for guards than for centers, etc.).

                  I see Jones as a disruptive interior force on the DL. That’s what shows up on tape.

                  We can grab a RT later.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    I really don’t understand the clamour for Chris Jones.

                    His 2015 tape is pretty good but it was hardly like watching the second dawn of Ndamukong Suh.

                    He’s also much, much less explosive than even the Willie Henry’s of this draft class. He mailed in his 2014 season (his admittance) and he’s liable to make daft decisions (driving on a suspended license).

                  • Volume12 says:

                    Seattle will take a ‘try hard’ prospect over an under-acheiver.

                  • JT says:

                    Not Suh level, but still better than anyone else this year except for perhaps Buckner. He tested average or better for an interior DL at every single athletic test, at 6’6″, 310, 7’1″ wingspan. The athleticism (burst, explosion & quickness) he shows on tape when combined with his outstanding frame and power make for a very good prospect. PFF has him as a borderline top 5 talent in this draft, and they’ve watched a lot more tape of him than even you Rob.
                    https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2016/03/30/draft-why-we-should-all-pay-more-attention-to-dt-prospect-chris-jones/

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    “but still better than anyone else this year except for perhaps Buckner.”

                    Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree there…

                    “PFF has him as a borderline top 5 talent in this draft, and they’ve watched a lot more tape of him than even you Rob.”

                    Even if I’d watched the same amount of tape as PFF, it doesn’t make them right or me wrong. Or vice versa. Their grades are an opinion. Here’s another one — Tony Pauline has Chris Jones in round four: http://www.draftinsider.net/rankings/2016/DT

                    I’ll trust Tony over PFF, personally.

                  • RealRhino2 says:

                    Maybe the next effort in retrospective scouting should be figuring out how players who are dinged for lack of motor turn out.

                    In reading up on OL w/r/t this TEF idea, noted that Trent Williams was dinged for not trying.

                    Anyway, I’m so high on Jones for the reasons you can see in the link. Every so often, he just throws 300-lb. guys to the ground and runs past them, a la Reggie White. He’s quick enough to knife between the guard and center, and when he does, no guard or center is strong enough to ride him outside.

                  • JT says:

                    Everyone has to trust their own eyes watching the tape, and use the best sources they can to help bolster their own evaluation. That’s why I love this blog Rob – you offer great analysis and apply it to the Hawks.

                    However, Pauline’s rankings on draftinsider are outdated. His rankings are also based more on what he hears from teams for draft range rather than his own study of tape.

                    After the combine he moved Jones up to R1: “I’m told defensive tackle Chris Jones had an outstanding positional workout and was described as “looking like a first-rounder.”

                    As for PFF vs Pauline and other reporters out there, I would trust the source that watches every snap 5x over, with at least one of those views coming from ex-NFL assistant coach.

                  • JT says:

                    Pauline’s rankings on draftinsider were last updated Feb. 17th – before the combine

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    Very little about Chris Jones’ combine would give him a boost in Pauline’s rankings.

                    If he felt he was a fourth rounder before the combine, his performance in Indy if anything totally vindicates his projection.

                    Pauline’s rankings were also published before his run in with the law recently.

                  • JT says:

                    His performance which puts him at about 95th %tile in SLA?

                    Again, Pauline is more reporter than scout, and his latest reports after Jones’ pro day are that teams are looking at Jones as a first round pick.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    There’s no reason to diminish Pauline’s grade. Tony is a draft insider (the best) so a fourth round grade might be more indicative of the NFL feeling (pro scouts) which, if anything, gives it even more weight than if it was his mere opinion.

                    The first two words in SLA are size and length and nobody would deny Jones’ size or length. But he didn’t test well in the explosive drills and his agility was weaker than many others. He also has significant question marks over his attitude. It’ll be a major upset (I genuinely mean that) if he is drafted by Seattle.

                  • JT says:

                    I’m not diminishing Pauline’s grade. I’m saying that it’s as a 1st rounder, not a 4th, at this point in the draft process.

                    He tested average or better – in every single athletic test – despite having a superior size/length combo to the rest of the class.

                    It’s unlikely they draft him, but we also have no idea what teams think about his head/IQ, we can only see the tape. IMO he would be the best prospect on the board at 26 in terms of tape/measurables. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    You firstly said Pauline’s grade was outdated and then said he’s more of a reporter than a scout. I think it’s fair to say you’ve been diminishing it. I’ve personally found him to be spot on with both his eye for talent and his sources. If he says a fourth rounder it’s not to be ignored or brushed to one side, even if he goes earlier than that.

                    He did not test average of better in every test at the combine. He jumped an awful 24.5 inch vertical. Germain Ifedi, who weighs 14lbs more, jumped 32.5 inches. His short shuttle was ho-hum. Superior size/length combo — let’s not go OTT here. He’s tall (6-6) but he has 34.5 inch arms and he weighs 310lbs. That’s big but not out of the ordinary. Shawn Oakman has great size too but it doesn’t make him a great prospect.

                    I think this discussion on Jones has kind of run its course — there’s a lot of other things to debate. We will indeed have to agree to disagree because quite frankly I think it’d be a shocker of a pick at #26.

                  • Timothy says:

                    What do you guys think about Nile Lawrence-Stample as our NT in the later rounds if they really want Ahtyba as 3-tech? Or Javon Hargrave as our 3-tech, really explosive guy and pass rush, and move Ahtyba Rubin to our NT since he’s more run stuffer than pass rusher? Either way, I like both of them.

                  • JT says:

                    Edited

                    RS — I think the conversation on Jones has run its course — I think we both acknowledged that.

                  • JT says:

                    Tim, really like Hargrave too. He’d be more of a nickel pass rusher to start until he learns the Hawks’ required gap discipline in the run game. Once he did, he would be the perfect short, squatty, powerful 1T that Pete loves (like Mebane).

                  • JT says:

                    I wanted to clear up a couple things – Pauline is on record reporting that Jones is considered a first rounder now after his pro day….

                    Jones jumped 29.5″ in the vertical at his pro day, making all his test results average or better to go with his elite frame…

                    Jones not only had great height and arm length, he also has very bulky/broad shoulders. It’s why he measured at a 7’1″ wingspan, higher than any DL at the combine (including Oakman), and even longer than Ifedi. His broad shoulders and elite length allow him to play with more power than his explosion/BP numbers suggest, which can be seen on tape.

          • Rob Staton says:

            A 2.74 puts Clark in the bottom end of O-liners in this class. He hasn’t done the agility tests and might do well there — but in terms of explosive athleticism he is lacking. And that seems to be what Seattle looks for.

        • LantermanC says:

          I wouldn’t say it’s well below. If we’re just looking at ideals, he hits all but the BP and he has 36 inch arms, so if anything we give that more leeway. Arms are like leverage. Think of a bicep curl, you do it with short arms, not that hard, but longer arms, that weight is further out and is much harder to lift. That said, 20 is pretty far off, if he had something like 23 or 24 it’d be more explainable.

          • STTBM says:

            As Ive opined in earlier threads, Bench Press is likely the least important of three measurables in TEF, and IMO the Seahawks are likely weighing it that way in their version. I would bet they place more emphasis on Broad Jump and Vert–and likely Broad Jump is tilted the most.

            If this is true, then Clark is possibly on their board. Of course, he may be rated higher or lower than we think by Seattle. But I think its a reasonable bet that unless they’ve set a total floor for Bench (22 Reps, or some formula tied to reps divided by arm length, etc) which Clark has failed to reach, then he’s still on their board despite not scoring 3.00 on the TEF.

      • Rob Staton says:

        That would appear to make Clark a less likely option for Seattle at any point in the draft.

  2. JT says:

    Good follow-up post Rob. I’m with the group of fans that suspect JS traded down thinking he could get Bitonio with the early second round pick.

    With options available throughout the draft this year, 2 OL picks in the top 100 seems likely, and they could take a third OL on day 3 if someone else they really like falls. It will be nice to see them apply this strategy to some “early-round” values, as they have avoided that the past 4 years (with the exception of Britt, who they reached for out of desperation).

    • Rob Staton says:

      IMO — they fell in love with Richardson and wanted to take him whatever the scenario. I think they felt they could just go OT in round two knowing the worst case scenario was Justin Britt — and they felt comfortable with that. It gave them a chance to get two guys they really liked instead of just Bitonio and a receiver they weren’t keen on.

      • JT says:

        Possibly, although it’s also possible they initially traded back thinking Bitonio would be there. Then traded back a second time after Joel was picked, knowing they had a higher value on P-Rich than other teams.

        Btw, im excited to see what he can offer the Hawks this year. It’s always nice to add more dynamic weapons to the mix.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Carroll said after the Richardson pick they already had his name on the card for #32 until the trade with Minnesota went down. Like I said, however much they liked Bitonio (and I liked him a lot) Richardson-Britt is two guys they really like. Bitonio-receiver is one guy they really like and a guy they take because they have to.

          • JT says:

            I didn’t know that and I doubt Carroll would lie about it after the fact. It’s too bad they missed that opportunity, Bitonio is awesome.

            • ClevelandDuck says:

              To be fair, Bitonio was terrific his first year and middling his second year. Perhaps year two is partially attributable to the Browns’ tire fire, but the fact is that Browns’ line last year struggled last year, and Bitionio was a significant factor. I think, as a fan base, we may be overly critical of the Seahawks’ drafting for OL. It’s hard to reliably identify college prospects who will be league-average starters at any area of the draft. Britt is a disappointment, but we wouldn’t have been happy with Bitonio’s play last year either.

          • bobbyk says:

            I remember that.

        • Timothy says:

          I’m really excited to see one FULL season of Paul Richardson in the mix. Baldwin-Lockett-Richardson is one speedy combination! It’s funny how we never go for the big jump ball type of guys. Maybe it’s the preference of Russ? But the question is, “If Paul Richardson went down again, even if he played 3/4 of the season, would we trade him away because of injury issues?”

          • Tien says:

            If Richardson goes down again this year due to injury, what team would want to give us anything for an injury plagued player? For the record, I’m a Richardson fan and am hoping he stays healthy this year and becomes that deep threat Carroll & Schneider envisioned but if he goes down again, we’ll probably have to cut him.

          • JT says:

            We have tried to get bigger receivers, but haven’t been very successful with the limited resources used. the Hawks drafted Kris Durham in the 4th round, and signed Chris Matthews and Ricardo Lockette. They also got 6’7″ Jimmy Graham. I think if they draft a WR on day 3 this year, it will be a guy with good height/length.Some options include Ricardo Louis, Devon Cajuste, Marquez North, Charone Peake, Keyarris Garrett.

            PRich would unfortunately have no trade value after the season if he had another serious injury.

            • Timothy says:

              Have you seen Daniel Braverman? He’s like a Baldwin + Lockett combination. I know he’s another 5′ 10″ guy, but I wish we would draft him in the later rounds. I just love crafty and savvy route runners. But if we had to pick a taller guy, I would pick Keyarris Garrett. After reading this article: http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/03/16/keyarris-garrett-nfl-draft-tulsa-career-injury . Makes me want to pick him even more. He has that “got to prove the haters wrong” mentality just like Sherm and Baldwin.

            • HI Hawk says:

              I think body thickness (measured in weight) might be something they consider along with arm length of course, more than height for their potential outside WRs (Baldwin & Lockett are not outside red-line guys). Tate, Lockette, Kearse, Norwood, K. Smith, K. Williams, Matthews and a multitude of others are/were varying heights but all +205 lbs. Tate was the smallest and was probably drafted to be a Lockett type weapon originally, but he clearly proved height isn’t the only factor to consider at the red-line. After Tate, they seemed to settle on a more specified ideal at WR, identifying weight more than height as important. Their sweet spot seems to be about 5’11-6’2, 210-220 lbs. Richardson is a huge outlier, I’m only left to guess that his world class speed was enough of a mitigating factor. I highly doubt they’ll ever make that concession again with his fragility.

              • STTBM says:

                I have been frustrated for years with Seattle bringing in Big Tall guys, but it always seems they are slow and/or skinny. And they skinny guys 6′-2″ and taller just never seem to do much except get hurt in the NFL. We’ve had several guys like that, and they didnt really work out (Rice, that kid who went to Jax after we cut him and did nothing, and Matthews). Whats so wrong with a guy who is at least 220 if he’s above 6′-2″ and can run a 4.5 40?

                Incidentally, there are a couple guys not getting much press who fit the bill–Cajuste and Keyarris Garrett of Tulsa come to mind.

                I’d be really happy to see Seattle add one of these two in the Draft, even though WR isnt an immediate need. We dont have that big Red Zone threat physical WR with speed guy…and No, Graham doesnt count–he’s not done anything in the Red Zone for us, and he’s recovering from a huge injury so he cant be counted on.

              • STTBM says:

                Good point regarding Richardson.

                I think they look at Height/Weight/Speed and have some ratio. Probably look at arm length for WR’s too…

      • SeventiesHawksFan says:

        I still think that was such a busted draft. Richardson being so slight in his frame with injury history. And then they didn’t even use him as supposedly intended. Then Britt who had proved wanting and inadequate as a starter. Both had glaring question marks that came to fruition. We’d be in such a different spot with Bitonio and Bryant or Robinson currently on the roster.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Sure but that’s not really the point. The Seahawks saw things they really liked in both Richardson and Britt and believed they fit in with what they look for. So they had a chance to get two guys they really like instead of one (Bitonio, assuming they liked him).

          Personally I don’t think it’d make that much difference if they had Bitonio and Bryant. Bitonio would make one less position on the OL you need to fill (you’d still need to address it IMO) and Bryant will play even less snaps in 2016 (guaranteed) than Richardson did in either 2014 or 2015 because he’s suspended for having a major problem with weed.

          • amocat says:

            RE: M. Bryant “suspended for having a major problem with weed.” Why in the twenty-first century are we going after integral members of a multi-billion dollar industry merely for smoking pot? It should be treated just like alcohol. If it affects your job, if you show up messed up to practice or a game, yeah, you’re benched, or fired, or you gotta get some help. Sensible measures. Keeping a guy with Bryant’s potential out of the game for a year isn’t really helping anybody but the Ravens and Bengals.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Because having a major problem with weed has got him a full season’s suspension.

              Listen — I agree with you. But that’s why you don’t draft a guy like that within the current rules.

            • STTBM says:

              Because the owners are mostly Old White Men. And weed is a lower-class drug.

            • KingRajesh says:

              Because smoking weed is still a federal crime.

              • HI Hawk says:

                To the point where Bryant is – he has to have failed/missed a multitude of tests and that shows a complete disregard for his responsibilities.

                Old white men have nothing to do with this conversation.

                I believe marijuana should be legal, prostitution too – but I am not in charge of the world with complete all-encompassing power. They are currently crimes, so there is risk – he got caught.

                He’s broken that particular law at least 3 times over the past two years just to be in Stage 3 of the program in the first place (where you are subject to no-notice tests). A fourth failure/no-show results in a 10-game suspension. The fact that he is facing the year-long ban means he has no less than 5 failures/no-shows over the past two seasons. His agent claims they are mostly no-shows.

                • STTBM says:

                  It being illegal is not the reason for the length of suspension, but yes, he had to have failed tests at least three times to get the suspension he’s serving now.

                  Plenty of behaviors are illegal but dont result in a suspension of this length. The fact that Johnny Manziel was photographed with a rolled up bill in a restaurant bathroom yet wasnt tested is proof that the NFL owners and Goodell care only selectively about the Law.

                  The owners have the ability to stop testing for weed and to ignore it. They do not have to make testing for it a part of their program, or punish it as if it were a PED, but they choose to do so.

                  Despite the fact that they push many other far more addictive and debilitating drugs on players to help them play when hurt etc, despite marijuana’s ability to help with pain.

                  They do this because most of the owners are old white guys who hate weed with a passion, beyond all reason. They believe its a performance inhibitor and the class thing is also a part of it.

                  • HI Hawk says:

                    48 states and the federal government of the United States deem it illegal to use marijuana unless with a prescription (some states). My sister, my father, and my brother in law work in the private sector and have mandatory drug testing. I am in the US Air Force and we have extremely stringent random testing.

                    The first offense in the NFL is a small fine and no additional testing. It is a completely reasonable program in and of itself if you make a mistake. Bryant is his own reason for the length of the suspension – he failed at least FIVE tests. One test, no big deal, two tests – enrollment in phase 2 (more testing), 3 tests – 4 week suspension, 4 tests – enrollment in phase 3 (10 week suspension and random spot testing), 5 tests – full season suspension and rehab.

                    The first offense in the Air Force is dishonorable discharge and enrollment in a mandatory drug program.

                    Regardless of your political leanings, the NFL policy isn’t exactly overly harsh.

                    It has nothing to do with owners (old white men) and their specific beliefs. It has to do with the laws and an interest in keeping a clean image in order to appeal to a wider audience (many of which are old white men). They want the widest audience possible in order to maximize profits, it’s just good business to keep a clean image.

            • Hoberk Unce says:

              That’s not the issue with weed. First, the NFL is not going to take any polarizing position on any cultural or legal subject. They won’t take definitive action against domestic violence (Rice, Hardy), they certainly won’t want to advocate for drug legalization precisely because it’s divisive and potentially impacts revenue. Second, the league rules are what they are, and a player who smokes is jeopardizing a multi-million dollar career. So the weed becomes secondary to the choice the player makes. A person with those messed up priorities gets little sympathy from any professional organization. The union is definitely not going to have a guys back in the NFL environment. And third, it’s still a federal crime and players have to frequently cross state lines for work. Can you imagine the public affairs fiasco if a team flight lands and the DEA shakes down the plane and finds enough weed for possession with intent to distribute?

          • STTBM says:

            With respect, I really cant understand how the line and the team wouldnt be in a much better spot with Bitonio instead of Britt. Thats one fine player rather than an exceptionally poor one, and one less high draft pick needed to fill at that position that could be spent elsewhere. That is a big deal!

            Much as I was pissed at them for passing on Bryant, he’s suspended and according to his agent has major depression and anxiety issues. He woudlnt have done well in Seattle. I was wrong.

            But that draft will go down as probably the second best WR draft of all time, and Seattle spent a second round pick on a tiny bust of a WR who had already blown his knee out. Any way you slice it, they whiffed HUGE in the easiest draft for finding WR talent in more than two decades. They got cute when all they had to do was the obvious. You cant do that very often and remain a championship team. Seattle had better get their next couple drafts right.

            • Rob Staton says:

              It’s too early to say Richardson is a bust.

              They tried to get two players they really liked instead of one. I think that’s commendable personally.

              • dawgma says:

                Two seasons of basically zero impact is definitely not to early to say he’s a bust just because he could theoretically spend a healthy season as a contributing 4th WR (spoiler warning: he probably won’t) – and even then, spending that early pick on a pint sized WR that gives you one healthy season in three out of the most stacked WR draft in a generation is still terrible.

                Frankly I think it’s amazing he’s even still on the team now that TL has made him entirely obsolete, and he probably wouldn’t be if there were more than three actual NFL caliber WRs on the entire roster.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  I don’t understand this thirst to declare a prospect a ‘bust’ after two injury hit years.

                  Perhaps it’s a sign of the times. Instant gratification or else.

                  People probably called Golden Tate a bust after two years too.

                  • STTBM says:

                    People did, Rob, but I wasnt one of them.

                    The thing with Richardson is he hasnt shown he can be a deep threat–his average yards per reception is poor. He’s also failed to show that he can take a hit and keep on going the way our other little WR has (Lockett). Im not doubting Richardsons toughness, but I am doubting his durability. When Richardson gets hit hard, he’s just as likely to come up gimpy and drop it as catch it and bounce up like Lockett.

                    And unlike Tate, he hasnt had splash plays to show flashes of what he can do. With Tate, he didnt understand how to run routes and he made stupid mental mistakes because he was immature. But he showed his talent on kick and punt returns, and on some seriously cool YAC and deep routes. He also could really take a hit. Richardson has had few splash plays–many of his catches are on come-backs and other short routes, and he’s done nothing returning kicks and has little or no YAC.

                    They are totally different players.

                    Plus, as Ive noted, that was an awesome draft for WR’s and take a look at WR’s drafted AFTER Richardson:

                    Davante Adams
                    Cody Latimer (also looking bust thus far)
                    Allen Robinson (Allen Robinson!)
                    Jarvis Landry
                    Josh Huff
                    Donte Mocrief
                    John Brown
                    Jalen Saunders
                    Bruce Ellington
                    Martavis Bryant
                    Jared Abbredaris
                    Michael Campanaro
                    Jeff Janis

                    Quite a few who have not only outproduced RIchardson, but who seem to have a far higher ceiling.

                    Seattle, like most teams, counts on getting immediate production from high picks. And certainly by the second year expect them to be better than average players. You cant say that about Richardson, even discounting his injuries.

                    Seattle also counts on using guys up through their first four/five years while they are cheap. It does no good to spend a high pick on a guy and only get 1-2 years of decent production out of them before losing them on the FA market. But they chose a super skinny guy who had blown his knee once already, a guy whose biggest asset is his speed/agility and who had serious deficiencies in size and strength, over TONS of other athletes at his position.

                    To me, that pick is a bust even if RIchardson comes out and wins our fourth WR spot. The only way its not a bust is if he outplays Tyler Lockett or Jermaine Kearse and really takes off as a deep threat. I dont see either of those things happening.

                  • HI Hawk says:

                    Not a deep threat? He played one season so far, it was his rookie season (sample size matters). In college Richardson was unquestionably the best deep threat in the nation, and his testing numbers bear out his incredible potential to continue that trend into the NFL. Wilson has always been more of a jump ball/back shoulder thrower than a throw it out so they can go get it type of deep passer. They’re working on their timing as we debate this topic! How awesome is that?

                    Injury riddled “throughout his first two years”? He played in 15 games as a rookie, he was hurt in the playoffs on an very underthrown ball (it was a nasty situation as the DB fell backward and rolled up his legs). It is well documented that it takes AT LEAST a year to FULLY recover from an ACL tear – his was in January 2015, so yeah his 2015 season was lost, obviously.

                    Way too early to declare him a bust, he got one year of development and game-time. His ceiling is through the roof if he comes back strong from the ACL, which was 15 months ago now – so shouldn’t be an issue. His change of direction is at Lockett’s level (he’s 2-3 inches taller) in his route running, his deep speed is among the top-2 or 3 at the position, and his vertical is 38″. On his comeback routes, which were panned – he was so wide open Peyton Manning could have “zipped” it in there due to the threat of his deep speed.

                    It was swing for the fences pick and it’s way to early to tell how it will end up.

                    They probably missed on Allen Robinson (I was begging for Latimer or Robinson in Rd 1), but John Brown is tiny and Jarvis Landry hopes to be Doug Baldwin some day. The rest possess less upside and/or have been irrelevant. Bryant is relevant, but he’s about to be out of the NFL permanently.

                  • STTBM says:

                    Perhaps I am being too hard on Richardson, Rob and HIHawk. I was ticked off when they drafted him, and I havent seen anything onfield to change my mind. I just cant understand spending that much for a guy as slight as he is, who already had a major knee injury.

                    I did see a clip of him working out with Wilson running routes, and he looked ridiculously fast and agile. It remains to be seen if he can translate that onto the field on Sundays.

                  • David says:

                    I really don’t understand how/why people continue to insist Richardson is a ‘bust’. He basically missed one year due to an ACL, which is extremely common (is Dante Fowler a bust for tearing an ACL in his first practice and missing his first year)?

                    I have no doubt that Richardson will outplay Kearse this year (maybe not in the possession receiver role, but he will have his role as the deep threat as well as comeback guy do to cushion). Yes they started Prich slow in 2014 (remember they still had Harvin then and the offense revolved around getting Harvin the ball on jet sweeps and screens) and it wasn’t until they traded Harvin that Prich really started to get integrated into the offense and by the end of the year he was clearly outplaying Kearse both in terms of touches as well as effectiveness.

                    Besides his average per catch last year was 40 so… :)

      • STTBM says:

        And boy, were they wrong. While none of the tackles drafted after Britt have been a lot better than him, there were G’s who outplayed him. And Britt is now a G–and a pretty lousy one at that.

        And I for one would trade him for Moses and a late round pick any day of the week.

        Any way you slice it, this was a terrible pick by Seattle and is a fine example that their system for drafting O-linemen–whether its exactly like your TEF or something slightly different–isnt working all that well.

        • Rob Staton says:

          So we’re basing their judgement on one guy (Britt)?

          People keep saying their system isn’t working. As far as I can see, this appears to be an idea crafted since 2012 with one bust (Britt). Alternatively they got production out of a 7th round converted DL and two undrafted starters.

          So let’s have some perspective here.

          • dawgma says:

            Britt. Moffet. Carp. Sweez. Poole. Webb. Sewell. These are examples of their acquisition philosophy. Horrible, out of the league busts? No, not generally. Stellar, high quality core players? Not even close.

            The problem I have, and I think a lot of others do too, is that the absolute ceiling for their OL picks has been ‘slightly below average’ and the floor has been ‘crime against the game of football’ (ie, any time Britt faces a pass rusher with a pulse). It’s completely counter to the rest of their roster strategy and no, it’s not working particularly well. I mean sure, they’re willing to let guys walk and replace them on the cheap…but that’s because the guys they’re letting go aren’t all that good.

            • CHawk Talker Eric says:

              Good thing they’re trying to build a football team and not just 5 bubbas on the LOS.

              Wilson, Wagner, Sherman, Lockett, Rawls, Lane, Maxi, WT3 – are examples of their acquisition philosophy.

              4 straight playoff seasons, back-to-back NFC championships/Super Bowl appearances and one world championship – examples of the strength and effectiveness of their ROSTER-building philosophy,

              • STTBM says:

                I dont think they need to change their entire draft philosophy. I get that they arent putting as many high picks in the O-line as the D, and I agree with that. What I feel they need to do is get better at evaluating the linemen–stop whiffing on guys like Carp, Moffitt, Britt, etc. Make those picks count.

                Not every pick will work out, but looking at who they drafted, its almost like they were deliberately aiming for below-average guys. They just flubbed it. Thats why I say they need to adjust their evaluation process for linemen. I am not advocating spending first and second round picks every year until they have a Dallas-level line, rather that they find a way to make the picks they do use count.

            • Rob Staton says:

              I think the greater problem is people not appreciating a.) Seattle’s philosophy on offense and b.) the league-wide struggle to find good offensive linemen.

              The Seahawks’ identity on offense is to run the ball. They’ve ranked among the top five run blocking teams per Football Outsiders in the NFL since 2011. Can they do better in pass pro? Yes, but aside from the first half of 2016 — the pass pro has not been so bad to thoroughly damage this team. They made back-to-back Super Bowls after all — how many teams do that?

              Secondly, the league is struggling to find O-liners because defensive players are just that much more explosive/athletic. The Seahawks have, since 2012, tried to match up physically. That, to me, is a plan shrouded in common sense. And we won’t be able to sufficiently judge that plan until we see how Gilliam, Glowinski and others perform over the next few years — not just judging it based on Justin Britt.

              • STTBM says:

                But they havent ranked nearly as highly in actual run blocking by PFF. When you throw out Wilson’s busted pass play scrambles–to say nothing of his read-option keepers and Lynch’s and Rawls ridiculous YAC stats–the stats become far less impressive. If you analyze their actual blocking, you see that the line was well below average, and not that great in run blocking–certainly not top-5.

                They’ve won mostly in spite of that line, not because of it. And as you yourself have noted, they must improve that line a good bit or its not likely they win another SB. That line certainly cost them vs Minny and Carolina in the playoffs, and failed to help them put them game away all through the fourth quarter in the SB vs the Pats until the final drive.

                I give them credit for managing to win one SB with a mediocre line, and nearly winning another with a sub-mediocre line, but they miscalculated and it cost them bigtime. No, the line wasnt the only reason, but it was a big part of the whole, especially last season. That team was something less than the sum of its parts, rather than something greater, and thats why they didnt make it; they had the talent. The line threw things out of whack, and they didnt get the right mix to win.

                No one seems to be silly enough to think we need to build a line of Pro Bowlers across the board, but we need to do better with out picks than guys like Britt, Carp, Moffitt, etc. There is ample evidence that their way of rating O-linemen needs serious adjustment and isnt working.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  Personally I trust Football Outsiders a lot more than PFF

                  • STTBM says:

                    For me it depends on the position and how they measure success/failure.

                    PFF isnt always perfect–sometimes I think they miss the forest for the trees–but I generally prefer them to FO on individual players and position groups.

                  • Hoberk Unce says:

                    Couldn’t agree more. PFF admits in the fine print that a handful of guys who have never played or coached watch a bunch of game tape and grade each play based on what they think should have happened. FO is statistics based on outcomes. Maybe imperfect statistics, but not nearly as subjective as PFF’s method.

          • STTBM says:

            Perspective?

            Perspective is looking at who they have drafted and brought in, and checking out which of them even approached average. Okung was a top-6 pick in the draft who never lived up to that standard, even in his single healthy season (though he was very good that year). Not a single player has even been average in up to four seasons as a Hawk, and many are no longer on the team. Several were total busts, including Carpenter and Moffitt–and Britt can already be considered one since he failed utterly at RT and is even worse at LG.

            Last years guys havent played so we cant call them busts, and I have HIGH hopes for Glowinsky. Poole seems thus far to be a joke of a pick, a guy they could have got far later who has underachieved. Reports from Sports Journalists with inside scoop said last year that he showed little, even at the end of the year.

            Draftee’s:

            Poole, Glowinsky, Sokoli last year.

            Britt, Scott 2015. Scott a bust but hardly their fault, due to medical.

            Seymour, Smith, Bowie. Not a single guy on the team.

            Sweezy. Below average in pass pro, still inconsistent in run game. Got well overpaid by a team desperate to bring in a run blocker.

            Carp, Moffitt. Unmitigated busts in Seattle. Carp is ok now he’s out of the ZBS,

            Okung. (Pre-Cable).

            You obviously see things differently, and thats ok, but I just cant understand seeing these picks as anything other than abject failure. And they dont seem to be learning much from their mistakes, which is the worst part.

            And thats without looking at the productive players drafted after these guys by other teams.

            • STTBM says:

              Sorry, that came out reading far crankier than I meant it to Rob.

              I am not basing my thoughts on one player, he’s just an example, but that wasnt clear from my comment.

            • Coug1990 says:

              Seriously, go back and look at the capital, draft and free agents that other teams spend compared to the Sehawks. It is always way more. For a lot of teams, their overall offensives lines and production is not better and in most cases much worse.

              Carp was not a bust for late in the first round. You overestimate just how well late first round picks do.

              The Seahawks have a plan and it has worked fabulously.

              • STTBM says:

                Actually, Seattle spent the exact equivalent that Dallas did over pretty much the same period on the O-line. They simply achieved vastly different results. I have detailed this before on other blogs. Dallas did a very nice job at player evaluation, while Seattle generally failed miserably.

                Cowboys:

                2015: UDFA T/G LaEll Collins
                2014: First round, pick 16 T/G Zach Martin
                2013: First round, pick 31 C Travis Frederick, G Ronald Leary UDFA
                2011: First round, pick 9 T Tryon Smith (also G Arkin Rnd 4, C Nagy Rnd 7)
                2010: Sixth Round T Sam Young
                2009: Third round, pick 75 T Robert Brewster
                2007: Fourth round, pick 122 G Doug Free
                2007: Third round, pick 67 T James Marten

                Seattle w/Carrol:

                2015: Fourth, fifth, sixth round, Poole, Glowinsky, Sokoli
                2014: Second Round, pick 64 T/G Britt (Sixth round, T Garret Scott)
                2013: Sixth and Seventh round, Seymour and Bowie
                2012: Seventh round, G Sweezy
                2011: First round, pick 26 T/G James Carpenter
                2011: Third round, pick 75 G John Moffitt
                2010: First round, pick 6 T Russell Okung

                Before Carrol, but started for Carrol:
                2009: Second round, pick 49 C Max Unger

                (Seattle spent a fourth and seventh rounder on Wrotto and Vallos in ’07)

                Since 2010, Dallas spent Starters were taken with: Three first round picks (one pick 31 same value nearly as high second round), and USFA’s Leary and Collins.

                They spent a sixth on a guy who doesnt start, and Doug Free was a fourth rounder from 2007.

                Since 2010, Seattle invested in starters: Two first rounders (Pick 6 and pick 25) in Okung and Carpenter, one Second round pick (64) on Britt, a third rounder in Moffitt (Pick 75), and a Seventh on Sweezy. Unger was a holdover second round pick.

                While Dallas spent three first rounders on line picks, one was pick 31 (same as a second rounder) and was considered a big reach at the time, interestingly. Free is a holdover fourth rounder, and Collins/Leary were UDFA.

                Seattle’s lines were made using Two first rounders (similar to Dallas at picks 6 and 25), Two second rounders (holdover Unger, Britt), and a seventh rounder (Sweezy).

                Additionally, Seattle wasted a third round pick (75) on Moffitt, and spent other picks as well (two sixth and one seventh rounder, plus the three picks in 2014 in rounds 4-7).

                You can argue that Britt was really comparable to a third rounder at 64, same as you can argue Frederick was comparable to a second rounder.

                Really looking at it, Seattle spent about the same in Draft Capital as Dallas, they just didnt find players anywhere near as good as the Cowboys did. And Dallas finding Collins and Leary as UDFA really stings. Dallas only blew two high picks–third rounders on Brewster and Marten, while Seattle pretty much blew it in the First Round with Carp, the Third Round with Moffitt, and a low Second Rounder on Britt.

                Dallas was able to find one starter for years in the Fourth Round, and to pick up a starter and quality backup starter at G as UDFA’s. Seattle found one below average starter in the seventh, but blew three picks in the first three rounds on Carp, Moffit, Britt.

                And now, our highest pick on the line is history, the second round holdover (Unger) is gone, so is Sweezy. That leaves us with all that Draft Capital spent and lost, and FA find Lewis the potential starter at C, another UDFA at LT, Britt the bust at LG, a fifth rounder at RG, and another FA or a draft pick this year at RT.

                Seattle has really spent the Draft Capital on the line since 2010, it just didnt work out very well for them. Dallas didnt put everything they had into the line, they spent comparably to Seattle; they just hit on more guys, and that one First round pick–even late in the round–is a big difference when compared to spending two thirds or a second and whiffing.

          • ClevelandDuck says:

            Spot on. The criticism of the offensive line drafting has moved from skepticism to absurdity. It’s fair enough to argue that they should have spent higher draft slots, but other than Britt, we are talking limited draft capital with, at a minimum, Glowinski to show since 2012. And I am not convinced they’ve written off Poole or Sokoli yet. I regret that Scott didn’t have an opportunity to show, but last year’s fourth round picks are the only major investments. Otherwise, since 2012, you have Sweezy and a bunch of late 7th round lottery tickets.

            • Coug1990 says:

              Over the years, the Seahawks have not really spent a lot of capital on the OL. Look at Cleveland, they have. Dallas has.

              In six drafts, what high capital have they used? Two firsts, a second and a third? That’s it and they haven’t gone out and spent expensively in free agency.

              • STTBM says:

                Over the last six years, Seattle has spent nearly equal Draft Capital as Dallas–just with poorer results.

                Seattle really should have spent one more first/second rounder instead of a couple later round picks. And they should have nailed their picks like Dallas did.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  “And they should have nailed their picks like Dallas did.”

                  Errrr…..

                  ‘Memo to self, next time nail all of the draft picks’ — John Schneider.

                  C’mon man.

                  • STTBM says:

                    They whiffed on most of them is the problem. And that points to a continuing problem with their talent evaluation on O-linemen. While they arent the only team having trouble finding good linemen, its not like capable linemen werent taken after their picks. And some teams, like Dallas, nail their high picks with regularity. Seattle could, and should, do their best to emulate that. And if that means changing up how they do player eval on the line…then so be it.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          “…their system for drafting O-linemen…isnt working all that well

          I don’t understand this mentality. It’s as if the only position group that matters is OL. And if all the OLers aren’t pro bowlers or almost, they’re all crap.

          SEA went to the Super Bowl, and came within one play of back-to-back world championships, with a rookie Britt at RT for the entire season.

          What exactly isn’t working?

          • STTBM says:

            If they drafted other position groups the way they do the line–success rate per round–they would be a terrible team. They need to do a better job evaluating O-linemen, and that means adjusting how they do it.

            • Coug1990 says:

              By your logic, the Seahawks are horrible at acquiring QB’s. They used high draft capitol on Charlie Whitehurst. They gave good money to Matt Flynn. They acquired a back up talent to start in Tavaris Jackson.

              So, they must be a terrible team because they have struck out much worse in QB’s than OL.

              • STTBM says:

                They have been unsuccessful in looking for qb’s other than Wilson. They brought Jackson in, and he’s the best backup in the NFL IMO. I think they’ve done a good job there, Whitehurst and Daniels notwithstanding.

                You dont have to field more than one qb at a time, and we have two competent ones.

                But Seattle doesnt draft other position groups the way they do O-line, and that shows. They havent found a Sherm, Wright, Maxwell, Chancellor on the O-line from the fourth down. They havent even found a player comparable to Irvin with a first rounder except maybe Okung.

                DT is another spot Seattle has had trouble finding in the Draft, but they inherited Mebane and found FA replacements to shore that up so its been ok.

                Put another way, if Seattle could draft linemen even close to the way they draft other position groups, we’d be 16-0 every year, and always win the SB. They do a great job not counting the line.

                • Coug1990 says:

                  The Seahawks did not originally bring in Jackson to be the starter. Yes, he is a quality backup. Is he the best, perhaps. But, since he does not play….

                  Regarding our overall discussion, they hit on a great QB. They absolutely know what they are doing. Finding a franchise QB is hard and they are one of the only teams in the NFL to have one.

                  The Seahawks have had a successful offense going on four years now. They know what they are doing. Too bad you don’t see it as John, Pete and many other do.

            • Scraps says:

              Again, it’s not just the Seahawks that have trouble building an offensive line: it’s mostly the whole NFL. I’m not convinced that you have a better idea how to draft offensive linemen than the Seahawks do.

              • STTBM says:

                No one is arguing I have a better idea of how to draft linemen than Seattle does. But they have not done a very good job with the Draft Capital they have invested in the line since Carrol took over, and especially since Cable came on board.

                All I was saying is they need to adjust what they are doing. Doing the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.

    • RWIII says:

      Agree with JT.Two offensive lineman with their first four picks. With one of those two in either round one or two.Then on the third day take another offensive lineman. Maybe Sebastian Tretola in the 6th round. Tretola is a ROAD GRADER if there ever was one.

      • Rob Staton says:

        Tretola is also thoroughly unathletic and totally lacking in any explosive qualities.

        Being big and a road grader in college is one thing. The NFL is not the SEC.

        • RWIII says:

          Tretola is probably not going to be taking by Seahawks. However both Brock and Mel Kiper have said that Tretola might be the most physical guy in this draft. John Schneider has said he wants to be the bully. Tretola is the bully.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Being physical and thoroughly mediocre everywhere else won’t get him drafted.

            He tested appallingly. Tretola is the antithesis of what the Seahawks have drafted in the last few years.

            • ClevelandDuck says:

              Sweezy would be a star compared to what Tretola will be in the pros. There may be systems where he could be effective, but the ZBS would expose him profoundly, in my view. Indeed, finding tough, athletic, big men is the premise of the DL convert.

            • ulsterman says:

              He may be medicore as an athlete but not as a player, particularly as a run blocker

              • STTBM says:

                But run blocking in our ZBS is totally different than run blocking in a power-blocking scheme. Thats the point. The guy wont work in Seattle, in all likelihood.

                A fine example is FatCarp; dude was never very good in Seattle–even at LG, our least demanding position along the line, agility-wise. But in NY, he’s doing pretty damn well.

                Like Carp, dude just isnt athletic enough to fit in Seattle, no matter his ‘tude.

                • HI Hawk says:

                  Your recollection of “FatCarp” is a bit off. He was injured often and switched positions, he was rounding into his current status (solid starting LG) during his last two years in Seattle. He got into the second level pretty effectively after a couple of years, he wasn’t as unathletic as you make him out to be.

                  On a bigger scale, you’re also vastly overrating the year 1&2 production of a late-first round pick. This carries over into your Richardson argument a bit too. Late firsts are generally not first year superstars. I mean, only one or two rookies a year become immediate pro-bowlers. It takes time and coaching to become a great player at OL (and WR) for all but the immensely talented, future HoF-track, types. 10 years as a quality starting interior OL is worth every bit of the 25th overall pick in any draft, no matter who else was drafted after.

                  • STTBM says:

                    I wasnt expecting any WR drafted in that range to be a star Year One. But if you look at the list of WR’s drafted AFTER RIchardson, its pretty hard not to wonder WTH Seattle was thinking.

                    Richardson didnt even perform at an average level, and he showed severe limitations due to his slight frame, lack of durability, etc. And that was before his major injury.

                    Now he’s a scrawny, not particularly aggressive or physical WR with two major knee injuries.

                    Perhaps he will eventually be a contributor, even something of a deep threat. I just dont see him outperforming Kearse and Lockett, which means at the place he was drafted, in that historically loaded draft, he was a miss for Seattle.

                    As for Carp, he was still inconsistent in both pass pro and the run game, and far too slow-footed for our ZBS system.

                    Had he been a third round pick of the Jets, he’d be considered a pretty good find for them. But as a first rounder for us, he was a total flop.

              • Rob Staton says:

                In college, sure. What about the next step though when he’s getting blown up by vastly more explosive/athletic D-liners?

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        Ifedi in 1st and McGovern in 2nd makes the most sense to me, knowing the “Rob Equation for OL”.
        3rd round, take RB, take WR… take DL….. just get 2 OL you really like in first 2 rounds.. then draft for value after that point.

        • Robert says:

          After listening to JS describe this Draft as very deep with quality OL prospects top to bottom, I’d be surprised if they go Oline with our 2 top picks. Acftually, even if JS hadn’t said that, I would be surprised with an Oline double dip with our 2 top picks.

  3. Justin Britt…he is someone I have lost hope for in regards to development of technique. But who knows maybe SOMEthing will come of him? I project him to be a backup in 2016 (on the bench) and potentially off the team in 2017 ($900k cap saving if cut).

    Is it possible? Idk, maybe. LG was a new position for him, he was learning on the fly with a Center he’s basically never played with before, and I do believe he was injured for the first half of the season. But still…reading pre-draft profiles on him and where he was projected to go makes so much sense…basically a 5th rounder or lower. We took him in R2 (awful) then what’s worse we had him start right away, then be our worst O-linemen at LG the next year.

    Give me a R1 OT, McGovern and Dahl please. A team with Britt starting on their OL is a team that has not properly addressed its OL.

    • JT says:

      The good thing is that the OL should be at least as good as last season at 4/5 positions. We still have Lewis, Britt and Gilliam as starters, and I think Glow could easily perform at Sweezy’s level. Drafting someone who can compete for an OT job this year is imperative, as Webb is terrible with no upside. At least Gilliam improved as the year went on and has upside to improve.

      They will likely take 1-2 interior OL’s to come in and compete. If the line can be even halfway competent like it was in the second half of last season, the offense will explode with all the weapons around an MVP QB

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Let’s not give up on Britt quite yet. He was playing a new position and had several changes around him at both LT and C during the season, due to injury or ability. He is the LG going forward, unless they pick a OT/LG type in the draft…. then who knows how he fits on the OL. Maybe he would be the 6th man swing OT, which Seattle is in need of currently.

      • Lewis says:

        The important thing is creating competition at all spots in my book. If Britt gets challenged and wins, great. But as has been pointed out before, there wasn’t enough of that last year.

        • JT says:

          Exactly

        • Exactly. My hope is we can grab a OT (R1), a G/C (McGovern R3A) and it would be amazing if they could grab Dahl in R4.

          That way the OT (Ifedi) moves Webb over to LG where Britt & Sokoli are competing. Then with the addition of Dahl he competes for LG as well.

          I’d personally bet on Dahl winning and being the best of the group with the highest ceiling as well for development.

          My dream week 1 OL:

          LT: Gilliam – LG: Dahl – C: McGovern – RG: Glowinski – RT: Ifedi

          with Webb, Britt, Sokoli, Nowak, Lewis and Poole on the bench/P-squad (along with others).

          • Lewis says:

            I’m not in the camp of thinking we have to go OL first round, but I hope that if they choose not to, it’s because they think something special fell into reach. If the choice is between “solid o-line guy” and “solid d-line guy” my hope is they would go o-line or move back.

          • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

            They won’t carry 11 OL, so one or two guys have to go….. prob Nowak and Webb.

            • STTBM says:

              Just me, but Im thinking Webb is a far better prospect to stick than Sowell. Their contracts reflect that too.

        • dawgma says:

          He absolutely was challenged – he had to beat out Bailey, Poole, and Glow for that job.

          I’m not sure if ithat sad outocme reflects worse on the FO for bringing in players who were actually inferior performer to Britt, the coaching staff for failing to get anyone playing at a higher level than he was, or those players for failing to beat out one of the worst OL starters in the league. But there was competition.

          That Britt was somehow the BEST option is an indictment of everything about how our OL philosophy works.

          • STTBM says:

            Bailey surely didnt feel he was given an adequate chance to beat out Britt. Who knows? They never let Bowie compete at LG or RG even though it was obvious he was a mediocre at best RT, did better than Sweezy vs AZ in his one start at RG, and physically is Cable’s prototype LG candidate. They suspended fair competition and just gave the LG job to Carp, and you know Sweezy neither won the RG job nor deserved to keep it his first two years, they just made the decision to plug him in and stick with him.

            Those are some reasons many believe there wasnt enough fair competition on the line, and that there needs to be in the future.

            • Coug1990 says:

              You sure suppose a lot of things in there without anyone besides insiders having knowledge.

              • STTBM says:

                Carrol even admitted they werent opening up Sweezy’s job to competition after his rookie year. He said they made the decision to go forward with him at RG, and that was that. That answer was in direct response to a question on whether others would compete for RG.

                Given the insider info that was out there during the Carp and Bowie year(s), its obvious Carp got the same treatment at LG, and Bowie was only given a shot at RT. Who knows why? Probably had something to do with his bad attitude, which he was known for in college.

              • STTBM says:

                Bailey’s silly whining Twitter post about wanting to be anywhere but Seattle last season was indicative of dissatisfaction with riding the pine, which implies he didnt feel he was given a fair shot at LG.

                I couldnt really blame him for feeling ripped off, as Britt wasnt doing well at LG. But the weird thing is Bailey always looked better playing LT than LG to me. He just wasnt sudden enough…

                We dont know exactly what was going on, but again, from Bailey’s behavior you can easily interpret he wasnt happy and felt gyped.

                • Coug1990 says:

                  I could give you other reasons besides the one you think that could be equally plausible. Yes, he was satisfied with not starting. But, he could have mistakenly thought that he had the job with out having to compete. He could have thought he was winning the job. It could have been that after watching Britt, he thought he should have been starting over him. It could have been something happening in his personal life.

                  This is what I mean when I say you are supposing things that only he knows.

      • Naks8 says:

        I agree. It just takes some players time to develop, especially when they change positions mid camp. Sweezy really wasn’t that good until year 3/4 and even then he was inconsistent. Carpenter wasn’t all that good until year 4 too. I think Britt is just the guy people love to hate/blame. Kind of like Justin smoak. Because he was such a prized recruit people hated on him more than others when the Mariners failed. Even though lomo was no better all of last year.

        When giaccomini was here he was the guy people loved to hate because of all his penalties. Or carpenter the year after. If Britt sucks this year, then I’m willing to hate on him too because year 3 is a defining moment. Just think golden Tate too. He was garbage until year 3, now look at him

        • Jujus says:

          No. We hate Britt because he has so many sacks where he doesn’t even touch his man.

          • Robert says:

            And when he lunges and whiffs, he falls to the ground so slowly and unathletically. I hate the way Britt falls. It’s embarrassing!

            • David says:

              Watch Russell Wilsons pick 6 in the Panthers playoff game. That is why we hate Britt. Even if he can’t block, he can’t even use his body as an obstacle between himself and the QB. It’s pathetic and one of the reasons why the Hawks found themselves down 31-0 in a blink of an eye in that game.

        • STTBM says:

          But Tate had only played WR two years when we drafted him. And switching from RB to WR is a MUCH bigger deal than going from LT to RT to LG. Also, Tate played in an offense with Claussen at QB and a limited route tree–teams knew he didnt know how to run routes except basic ones that showcased his athelticism, and thats why he wasnt a first round pick.

          If Britt had been a fifth round pick, we’d still hate him. He’s not good. But I suppose we’d hate him less if he hadnt cost us a better player.

          • Coug1990 says:

            The difference between you and I is that I do not hate any of the players on the Seahawks. I do have my favorites and prefer some more than others, but “hate”? Not even close.

            • STTBM says:

              Hate is a strong word, and I borrowed it as it was part of this discussion thread. I dont hate Britt personally, but I hated the pick at the time (moreso now) and I really hate his performance. He’s flat awful.

    • RWIII says:

      I think Britt can be a solid backup.

  4. Volume12 says:

    Saw on the last piece that someone was highlighting SAM, EDGE, or OLB prospects.

    Keep an eye on Oregon’s Christian French.

    • JT says:

      that was me, never heard of him before now. How did he test at his pro day?

      • Volume12 says:

        IDK. I’ll look that up, but I got a hunch that Seattle likes him as an option.

      • TannerM says:

        Christian French:
        40: 4.75
        10: 1.69
        Vertical: 33″
        Broad: 9’10”
        Shuttle: 4.3
        3-cone: 7.28

        • JT says:

          Solid numbers considering his size, but probably not athletic enough to be considered for SAM. The Hawks particularly love their LBs to have a great broad jump, and probably require at least a 10″ foot broad.

        • Volume12 says:

          Just for reference, here’s Obum Gwachum’s.

          4.72 40
          2.76 20
          1.66 20
          36″ vert
          10’1″ broad jump
          4.28 SS
          7.28 3 cone

          Gwachum was a former receiver, French was a former TE.

          French is 6’5, 249 lbs., and Gwachum is 6’5, 246 lbs.

          • Volume12 says:

            *1.66 10

            French also had a 2.77 20.

            Can’t get much more similar than that.

          • JT says:

            Gwachum has an advantage in explosion, and more importantly, the Hawks viewed him as a full-time pass rusher at DE, not an LB

            • Volume12 says:

              Remember when me and Rob mentioned that Seahawks D-line coach Travis Jones worked out and ran the positional drills at Oregon’s pro day? Thought it might be for DT Alex Balducci and it still could.

              But, then I thought, if Balducci was a member of the Shrine Game, and he was, they woulda had all the access to Balducci they wanted.

              French is also a former 4 star recruit and some sites had him as a 5 star, something else Rob has mentioned that Seattle seems to or might like.

              Now, it doesn’t mean they’ll take/draft him, but they do have an interest in French, or are at least curious about him.

              How so? Christian French is a VMAC visitor.

            • Volume12 says:

              I wouldn’t exactly call 3 inches or .02 an advantage in anything.

              Never said he was ‘exactly’ like him, but how much more similar can you get?

              I think they saw Gwachum as an EDGE or hybrid. French may be too, or he may be more of a true Off-LOS LB.

              But, for a position that is only on the field for 2 downs, IMO Seattle will target an OLB somewhere on day 3 and let Mike Mo, Cash Marsh, a rookie, and whoever else battle it out.

              • Volume12 says:

                Let me rephrase that.

                3 inches in height or length, is an advantage, but when comparing apples to apples, different story.

              • JT says:

                Good points, still think his low broad jump would disqualify him, but anything’ possible. If nothing else, it indicates the team is considering drafting a SAM-type LB for competition.

  5. Scraps says:

    Maybe Schneider is trying to get the fans ready for a pick that’s not an offensive lineman or a defensive lineman, after signing Clemons, and apparently many offensive lineman that they like throughout the draft…

    • JT says:

      OL or DT seem highly likely for the first pick, but you never know with the Hawks. Either way, I doubt JS gives a rat’s behind about fan reaction to his picks.

      • Volume12 says:

        They either really do like ‘Bama RB Derrick Henry, or it’s a smokescreen and they want someone to move up and take him so they can move back.

        • Nick says:

          Dallas could definitely be a trade option. We move back to 34 and they’d still have the 39 pick.

          • Ghost Mutt says:

            Am I missing something? Why would they have the 39 pick?

            I agree on them being a good trade partner even without the 2nd rounder though, the likes of GB, Car, Den and Cle could all easily take Henry

      • Scraps says:

        JT, if as you say John Schneider doesn’t give a rat’s patootie about the fans’ reaction to his pick, why explain at all? I prefer the John Schneider who is confident in his picks, and explains to the fans as though they are intelligent. Maybe it’s wrong, of course, but you and I haven’t got access to Schneider’s thoughts, so I prefer the version that makes me happy.

    • Josh emmett says:

      I honestly thought the same thing when I heard the Schnieder comments about the draft being deep for the oline. Maybe Dline in the first but I’m not thinking oline so much anymore after hearing that. The Hawks haven’t been taking oliners high and the only reason they took Britt so high was a lack of overall talent for the oline in that draft and they absolutely needed a starting caliber olinemen because they didn’t think too highly of Bowie as the incumbent(obviously). I don’t think that’s the truth this year. I don’t think they absolutely need a tackle, guard, or center. They are going to look for value with their explosion formula and I wouldn’t be surprised to see them leave with only using a 3rd round comp pick on Dahl and getting someone like Joe Gore from Marshall who has a pretty good TEF/explosion score in the 6th. They still want to see what Poole and Sokoli can do, add Gore and Dahl and there will be a good competition. I’m not saying they won’t go oline early but I will believe it when I see it. Haha

  6. Trevor says:

    From a simple supply and demand standpoint I think it is more likely that the OL Rd #1 and DL Rd #2.

    Based on the info Rob has put forth the scenario that seems most likely to me.

    Rd#1 RT / LG Ifedi, Coleman Spriggs
    Rd#2 DL Bullard, Henry, Hargrave, Blair
    Rd#3 G/C Mcgovern, Dahl, Haeg
    Rd#3 Comp RB Ervin, Prosise

    • Rob Staton says:

      I would agree with this — but I’d include Kyler Fackrell. He tested explosively (3.07) despite only managing 15 bench reps. So he had to overcompensate in the broad and vertical big time. He also has size, length, speed (1.62 split). It’ll be interesting to see if ever does the agility tests. He’s an impact player in games.

      • Trevor says:

        Forgot about him. Yes he could be there in the 2nd for sure and the Hawks have been not shy to take a Utah St. guy early.

      • JT says:

        3.07 is very explosive for an OL and pretty good for an interior DL, but only average for EDGE players, particularly one who’s more of an LB. He could still improve on his TEF number at his pro day tomorrow though.

        • Rob Staton says:

          It’s not average when he tests brilliantly in the broad and vertical and the only test he struggled in was the bench press.

          The bench is not very important for a SAM/DE. The broad, vertical and 10-yard split, however…

          • JT says:

            Agreed, and I like his explosion and burst too. Just 3.00 shouldn’t be used as a marker for great explosion from an EDGE player. EDGE players have far less weight and will naturally have much more lower body explosion than OL’s on average.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Let me clarify here.

              I didn’t use TEF to say he was explosive. I said he still scored beyond 3.00 despite only 15 bench reps when the TEF formula says you need 27. So he had to make up those 12 missing reps to work within the structure of the formula and he still did it because his broad jump and vertical were very good.

              • bobbyk says:

                Well said (and understood). The fact that he could still put up that score with only 15 reps is pretty crazy/impressive. That’s like putting up a great time in the mile even though you waited about 10 seconds after everyone before starting the run.

      • Cysco says:

        FWIW, had Frackrell benched just average (27) his score would have come out to 3.52 (the same as sheldon rankins)

        I think there’s a hell of an athlete in Frackrell that could really benefit from a NFL weight training program.

        • STTBM says:

          I dont believe Seattle weights Bench Press as heavily as the other two measurables in TEF, as Ive said. But 27 is far more than an average BP for LB’s, especially ones as agile as Fackrell.

          Only 15 is concerning, but again, Bench can be brought up dramatically in a year or two, and far easier than BJ or Vert. Chris Clemons was much slimmer in the arms/chest when he came to Seattle; when he left, dude was a BEAST! I guarantee his BP reps would have blown away his College numbers the year he left us.

          For what its worth, I expect Fackrell to be high on Seattle’s Board.

          • Lewis says:

            I think the BP is only a concern if it indicates a lack of motivation. If the desire is there, that’s an easy fix.

    • Ground_Hawk says:

      The more I look at the OT prospects and the programs that they came out of, as far as drafting one in the 1st round, I think that Spriggs is the only one that I would take at 26. Indiana’s offensive program versus ranked teams, this year, is better than Auburn’s and much better than Texas A&M’s.

  7. Trevor says:

    If he is healthy I would really like to see the Hawks sign Wil Beatty to a short term prove it deal. He was a quality tackle when healthy and a very good run blocker. It would certainly provide a lot more competition and draft flexibility.

  8. Trevor says:

    Rob it will be interesting when we have a couple of drafts if any of the draft trends you have uncovered for the Hawks are transferred to the Jags, Falcons and Raiders who all have former Hawks coaches.

    If so you have to think Rankins could be in play for the Jags at #5 perhaps. I brought that idea up after the Senior Bowl and people thought I was crazy but given that they saw him first hand and how he tested I am not so sure the idea is crazy anymore. With Marks, Fowler and Jackson they would be getting some pressure on QBs up the middle.

    • Ground_Hawk says:

      He didn’t have nearly the production that, for example, Aaron Donald had during his senior year. I like Rankins’ potential, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he lasted into the 20’s.

      • Volume12 says:

        Possibly.

        But the only reason Donald lasted until the 14th pick, was size.

        If he was an inch or two taller, and 15-20 lbs heavier, more than likely woulda been a top 5-7 pick.

  9. Nathan says:

    Where is the 9.3 broad for Britt coming from.

    All sources I’ve been checking have him at 8.3

    mock draftable and nfldraftcout.com are running with these figures.

    Kevin Panphile(who went #196 in same draft and has longer arms) beats him on all 3 excersises(and everything else except the shourt shuttle)

  10. Ground_Hawk says:

    Insightful work Rob. Thanks, for all that you do in this community. It is definitely appreciated!

  11. Fijihawksfan says:

    So why didn’t they draft Garrett Scott ahead of Britt? His number was so much higher.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Frankly, it is a game of chicken. Where do Seattle see the rankings for a player and where does the rest of the league. They generally are uncanny at figuring out approximate pick range for players in a draft. Scott would be great value, according to their ideals, where he got picked….. this formula help explains the later round picks at OL.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Because they were able to draft Garrett Scott in round six.

      It’s not, also, about just identifying the most explosive players and putting them at the top of the draft. The purpose of the formula isn’t to say the most explosive OT’s will go earlier. It’s to determine who is and isn’t in contention for SEA.

    • jdtjohnson says:

      I think you are basing too much on the numbers and only the numbers. They obviously have to be able to play the game as well. The TEF numbers appear to be used to create a pool of players that match a set of criteria that the Seahawks find essential to the level of athleticism they deem is needed to play the position. Inside of that pool of players you then look at the players skill level, intelligence, coachability, off-field stuff etc and rank accordingly.

      Example

      Player A – high level football intelligence, very coachable, excellent technique, TEF = 3.12
      Player B – low level football intelligence, somewhat coachable, off-field issues, TEF = 3.45
      Player C – high level football intelligence, somewhat coachable, excellent technique, TEF = 2.67

      Based on this, I would think Seattle would rank the players as follows:

      1) Player A
      2) Player B
      NR) Player C

      The numbers are not intended to be the end all be all…just another metric used to create a pool of players to further investigate and rate.

      • jdtjohnson says:

        @fijihawksfan

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        This is essentially it… “The numbers are not intended to be the end all be all…just another metric used to create a pool of players to further investigate and rate.” You can focus on 200 players instead of 1000+…. I do wonder, if they run this same type of equation for HS players they have an eye on (4/5 star) guys when they come into college… and then see how they progress when they get to the combine/pro-days in 3-4 years. This could be very interesting indeed.

        • Lewis says:

          Exactly. It’s a screen to narrow in on the types of players they are interested in. Then the real work begins.

          • Josh emmett says:

            You don’t need to know how to play the position, that’s what cable is for! Haha, they do things differently and rely heavily on coaching especially with the oline. If Cable left I bet you would see a shift of philosophy there because you sure as hell saw one when he came in. They used to draft guys very high because they needed guys that could play well already. Now they use an approach of taking a ball of clay and molding them to be what they want. It’s definetely different because they look for run blockers when most teams boards are comprised of top end pass blockers. They will get the guys they want and coach them up. I think last year was a “heat check” for cable to see if he could literally turn nothing into a good group. Didn’t happen right way but Cable definetely set up some building blocks for the new wave of players coming in. I think Gilliam and Lewis will emerge as leaders this year and the line will do well.

            • STTBM says:

              I like Gilliam and Lewis, and I really hope Lewis starts this year–hopefully they learned well from trying out Nowak. Lewis may not be All Pro, but he’s a solid player and thats good enough. But I am really excited about Glowinsky. I think he’s going to miles better in Pass Pro than Sweezy, and more consistent overall. He may not make as many pancake runblocks as old Sweezebag, but I think he’ll be better across the board in short order.

              Really hoping to see at least two decent line prospects brought in to compete at LG and RT though. Im interested to see what Cable can do with Webb too.

  12. Ed says:

    Let’s hope:

    -3 QB’s go in the first 20
    -DE get overvalued (Dodd/Lawson/Ogbah/Spence) and go top 20
    -DT get overvalued (Robinson/Reed/Billings)
    -WR get overvalued (Treadwell/Fuller/Coleman)

    • Dingbatman says:

      You think Billings as a first round pick is overvalued? Seems like a beast.

    • 503Hawk says:

      You’ve got it Ed. That would help us tremendously, whether we wanted to stay put or move back.

    • rowdy says:

      Watching fuller on his pro day I seen a top 20 pick. His routes, speed, hands and his ability to change direction on a dime without losing speed were all impressive to me.

      • David says:

        Interestingly, Will Fuller is basically Paul Richardson comp-wise both in measurables and upside:

        Paul Richardson
        6-0 183
        40: 4.40
        10: 1.56
        Vert: 38
        20yd shuttle: 4.23
        Hand size: 8 3/4

        Will Fuller
        6-0 186
        40: 4.32
        10: 1.51
        Vert: 33 1/2
        20yd shuttle: 4.27
        Hand size: 8 1/4

        Yes Fuller tested faster in straight line speed but the consensus is that PRich also has blazing speed (reported to be hand timed at 4.29) and also probably a better route runner than Fuller at this point in his career while also having no evidence of the concentration drops thus far as a Seahawk that somewhat plagued Fuller at ND. I feel like their skill set is comparable and they probably are the same type of receiver

        • rowdy says:

          Concentration drops were a knock on Richardson too

          • David says:

            Perhaps that was his knock in college but I challenge you to find one drop on tape in the 2014 season. Pretty sure on 40-something passes thrown he has not dropped once since arriving in the NFL.

  13. Ignorant says:

    Matt Judon TEF: 3.34 according to my calculation (109 inch BJ, 35 inch vert, 30 BP); 275 LBs.

    • Ignorant says:

      Very interesting prospect. Is he worth a 3rd rounder?

      • C-Dog says:

        I think he is.

        • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

          The ooint would be … could you grab this guy in the 5th, instead of the 3rd. This would be better value for the franchise, to get a guy later in the draft with the measurables they like.

          • Volume12 says:

            I’ve heard that Judon is a strange cat. Like there’s something off-putting about him.

            • Volume12 says:

              *read, not heard

              • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

                Percy Harvin is not exactly normal, but they had him for over a year in the system. Marshawn Lynch is not exactly normal, but he worked out just fine. I wouldn’t read too much into it tbh, it takes all types to play championship caliber football.

            • Steele says:

              A lot of strange cats are in the NFL. Including on the Hawks roster.

      • RWIII says:

        I think Judon is worth a third round pick. The guy lead the Nation in sacks. I understand it was at a small school but Judon was a man among boys.

  14. Nathan says:

    Justin Houston 3.9

    Khalil Mack 3.86

    • Huso Sturgeone says:

      Michael Bennett: 2.85

      • STTBM says:

        Again, I would say Bennett would blow his Combine numbers out of the water these days. But he is an interesting outlier.

        • RealRhino2 says:

          Is he? And are you saying that a person can just become explosive if they feel like trying to be?

          Usually when the results don’t prove the hypothesis we don’t first assume the variables must have changed since we measured them….

          • JakeB says:

            If you look at the difference between his combine numbers and his pro day, he improved his vert by 5.5″ and his 40 by like 3-tenths of a second, but sat on his broad jump. Apparently he was nursing a hamstring issue at the time, and didn’t run any shuttles. Rob has already suggested that the shuttles may be more important to the Seahawks for D-linemen. Maybe the Hawks had knowledge of his junior testing.

          • STTBM says:

            Bennett has shown burst and strength he flat didnt have his rookie year. He showed a lot in preseason that year, but he’s had more than 6 years to get bigger and stronger, and to learn tricks to maximize his quickness.

            As for his combine numbers, I would bet he’s improved his bench the most. Thats an easy one to improve, and most players increase their strength after hitting the NFL.

            Agility and explosion doesnt seem to improve as much as fast, but if youre a special athlete–like Bennett–it can happen.

            No one knew Watt was going to become what he is, not even the Texans.

          • STTBM says:

            No, I just think Bennett has become a much more explosive and strong athlete than he was coming out of college. Some players peak in college, some after, and he’s one I think is surely peaking long after college.

  15. JamesP says:

    Hey Rob. Off topic but could I make a couple of requests for future blog topics? Your writing this year has been better than ever, and the level of detail you’ve gone into is staggering. It’s been really fascinating to take a deep dive into the options at 26, particularly on OL. Thank you for all your hard work.

    My observation is that you’ve spent more time this year on the first round pick, and more time discussing one position group. I’m sure this is intentional as OL is such an overwhelming need. But could you do a couple of posts on day 2 or 3 targets at positions other than OL? I’m thinking day 3 Corners, Safeties, OLBs, TEs etc

    It’s be great to get your views on some likely Hawks targets in those draft areas. Keep up the good work, best Hawks site around!

    • Rob Staton says:

      Hi James — if you check the archives we’ve gone into detail on some round 3-7 possibilities. Most of the focus is R1-2 but the info on R3-7 is in there.

      • JamesP says:

        You know what your readership is like though – we want more, more, more! I’ll check it out.

  16. Kenny Sloth says:

    Rob can we get a post on defensive backs? I’ve seen Eli Apple falling to us. Is there a db you see as an upgrade at any of outside cb, nickle (either big 5, or a slot coverage guy), or backup at either safety spot?

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Arms were under 32″ I thought, so off the board for Seattle

    • JT says:

      Kenny, here’s the CBs in this draft who meet the Seahawks length requirements (32″ arms, 77.5″ wingspan):
      DeAndre Elliott
      Deiondre’ Hall
      James Bradberry
      Daryl Worley
      Artie Burns
      Brandon Williams

      Williams likely didn’t test explosively enough, and Burns will go too early for the Hawks to consider. I also left out Jalen Ramsey for obvious reasons. That essentially leaves the 4 top names on the list (among those who have measurements listed).

      That said, it’s unlikely they draft a CB this year unless Pete falls in love with one of those late round guys. They have Sherman and Lane as two locked in quality starters long term. At the very worst, they still have Shead to start in nickel packages this year. They also have awesome depth behind those guys in last year’s 5th rounder Tye Smith, Tharold Simon returning from injury, and a couple extremely long SPARQ freaks in Stanley Jean-Baptiste & Mohammed Seisey. It’s going to be quite the competition in camp for roster spots at CB, and it’s possible one of the young players beats out Shead to start out the outside (allowing Lane to shift over to slot CB). Of course, one of them will need to step up if and when Lane inevitably gets injured.

      • Trevor says:

        My guess if we take a CB it will be Hall, Worley or Bradbury in the 4th round. But given the amount of development guys already on the roster I think they may pass unless one of the guys they really like falls to the 5th round.

      • J says:

        Keep an eye on Eric Rawls out of Kentucky State.

        6’1, 195, 33.5 arms, 80.4 wingspan.

        4.56 forty, 35.5 inch vert (15th), 10’5 broad (6th), 4.22 shuttle, 6.78 three cone (3rd).

        At FAU pro day. Parentheses are where he would’ve been at combine.

        Hopefully would do as well as last year’s Rawls.

        • J says:

          Also like FAU safety Sharrod Nesman.

          5’11, 206, 32 inch arms, 37 vert (5th), 4 56 fyd (6th),10’8 broad (3rd), 3.99 SS (2nd), 6.78 TC (2nd).

      • Volume12 says:

        No Rashard Robinson?

        Seattle likes their ‘damaged goods.’

        Bradberry is interesting. Seattle has drafted small school corners that where at the combine.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m not convinced they’ll target CB until day three if at all. DeAndre Elliott one I like for them.

      • Kenny Sloth says:

        I doubt we take a corner at all. Not a great class. Who do we anticipate the primary backup is for FS? Our projected #3 corner? I think it’d behoove Carroll to find some competition in this class

        • KingRajesh says:

          We also have TEN CBs (without counting Shead) already on the roster. A late pick for CB probably won’t make the team and will get poached from our practice squad.

        • TannerM says:

          For a back-up to Thomas, might I suggest one DJ Hunter out of Marshall. The two actually aren’t that different athletically:
          Thomas (best numbers of both combine and pro day)
          40: 4.37
          10: 1.49
          Vert: 32″
          Broad: 9’5″
          BP: 21

          Hunter:
          40: 4.38
          10: 1.45
          Vert: 39.5
          Broad: 10’10”
          BP: 14

          It did seem like Hunter played closer to the line, though.

  17. Jeff M. says:

    If broad jump plays such a big role (as Rob has pointed out) what do we make of the huge discrepancy in Britt’s combine (8’4″) and pro-day (9’3″) jumps? It seems like he would have been completely off the Seahawks board based on combine numbers, but what goes on to make a guy jump a foot further at his pro-day? Was the combine number too low for some reason or was the pro-day too high, or is he just a guy with huge variance in explosiveness (and if so should that have raised concern)?

    • STTBM says:

      That is an interesting question. Seattle must have assumed it was simply a bad day for Britt at the combine. Perhaps he didnt take the test seriously enough and didnt train for it, then found out after his sad performance at the combine how important it was, and then worked hard on improving it?

      I didnt think it was possible to up your B Jump that far that fast. What the hell do I know?!

      • Sea Mode says:

        Maybe, or just had a bad day or maybe was missing something key in his technique for the BJ and was able to correct it for his pro day.

        Either way, given that the Hawks say they ultimately look for what a player CAN do, I would think they will always stick with the best numbers a prospect puts up, whether that be combine, pro day, or private workout.

        • Volume12 says:

          Says to me that Seattle puts just as much value as they do at the combine. Actually, probably even moreso.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Must’ve been a bad broad jump performance at the combine or maybe he was carrying an injury.

      Hard to ‘over perform’ in a broad jump and it’s not like there’s a ‘fast track’ impact. Easy to take the broad jump at his pro day on face value.

  18. MoondustV says:

    Anyway Britt really really sucks on the field. SPARQ and the new formula can only reflect a very small part of scrimmage line battle. Communication, fouls, reaction speed, you name it. I don’t want to see Justin Britt in a SEA uniform again.

  19. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    I was re reading the article about the TEF equation.

    Why not compare apples to apples, so for example Jason Spriggs broad jumped 9’7″ or 115″
    So it would be something like the following:

    Combine
    Vert 31.5″
    Broad 115″
    Bench 31
    (Arm Length 34.25 ) I mention this below***

    Total 177.5 (211.75)

    So perhaps, anyone over 170 would fit the build… and this would give the Broad Jump added weight in the equation, without adding in more variables or fancy fractions or multipliers. Simple, but effective.
    If you wanted to make it more complicated, then you could simply add in arm length, then anyone over the threshold of 200 points would be someone to check out.

    • Cysco says:

      because simply adding all the numbers together gives disproportionate value to the broad jump. (simply because that number is so much bigger than the others) Also, you’re not dealing with the same metric for each score. The first two are dealing with inches, the last one is dealing with reps of a bench press.

      Rob is correct in that you must create a result for each category then combine those results to come up with a single score

  20. Eric S says:

    I’m curious how the recent OL free agent acquisitions tested in terms of TEF.

    Does anyone have testing info for Webb or Sowell? Are the Hawks looking at the same ideals for free agents as they are for draft picks?

    Perhaps I missed it in an earlier column. If so I apologize.

    • Rob Staton says:

      They didn’t test well in TEF. However, I think veteran NFL linemen are likely to be judged differently. You have NFL tape and experience with these guys, you have an idea how they handle themselves physically. You aren’t projecting how a rookie will take to the challenge of the pro’s.

      • Lewis says:

        Precisely. This is the equivalent of looking at high school gpa after someone has been in the workforce for 5 years.

        • Eric S says:

          Well…. I understand the sentiment but I’m not sure I buy the analogy.

          TEF should still give us a good feel for ceiling on any free agent O lineman. I mean, if he’s not an explosive athlete he’s unlikely to become one just by virtue of being in the NFL. I could see a little improvement based on training, but much of it would be strength and technique. Not my area of expertise, so I may be wrong.

          The contract dollars are telling us Sowell will be competing to make the 53 man roster, and Webb will be competing to start at RT or LG. So they must really like something about him, probably some combination of grit, attitude, nastiness, and technique.

          Seattle liked Giacomini at RT, and he wasn’t the most athletic guy (would like to see his TEF number just to know) but he had some of those nasty/grit characteristics that Schneider has mentioned he wants to get back to in the trenches.

  21. Sea Mode says:

    J’Marcus Webb TEF… 2.25

    Pro Day:
    Vertical: 26 inches
    Broad: 8-5
    Bench: 17 reps

    wah, wah, wahhhh…

    Ok, he is 6’7″, 330lbs., and that was 6 years ago, but still. He must have REALLY turned a corner like JS said for the Hawks to have gone anywhere near him.

    (P.S. Hope I didn’t mess up the calculations. If someone could set up a TEF Calculator online or in a downloadable datasheet it would be much appreciated.)

    • Rob Staton says:

      The difference between Webb and the rookies is they don’t have to project how Webb will handle the NFL because he’s already played in the league. So a TEF rating is pretty obsolete at this point.

      Rookie with zero NFL exposure are very different because you’re making a projection.

    • LantermanC says:

      Not to toot my own horn, but in the last post’s comments, I posted a TEF calculator which showed J’Marcus Webb’s low TEF score.

      “Seen a lot of “what does this player score” questions:
      It’s an easy enough equation, but for the lazy, here’s a google doc where you put in: VJ, BJ, and BP.

      http://tinyurl.com/hr4fkvb

      Just input the numbers into the white. And the light green box will have the score. Note: BJ is in inches.

      One thing I noticed is that Justin Britt Scores a 2.3 or something from his NFL Combine, but upped all his numbers substantially at his pro day to score a 3.0.

      http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=91853&draftyear=2014&genpos=OT

      I also noted the Britt thing, but of course Rob said it much better.

      “That reminds me, back when we drafted Britt, we admittedly reached a bit on Britt in Round 2 because he was the “last guy” we felt comfortable with that we felt could play tackle. I wonder if TEF confirms this (If there are only 6 guys we’re comfortable with in this draft, maybe there were only a small number in 20014 as well). Scores seem to back that up.

      #35 Bitonio has a 3.02 score.
      #44 C Kouandjio 2.36
      #59 Mewhort 2.7
      #64 Britt 3.0
      #66 Moses 2.64 assuming 27 bench
      #67 B Turner 2.83
      #95 M Schofield 2.41 assuming 27 bench
      #140 C. Fleming 2.45
      #149 K Pamphile 2.96
      #199 Garrett Scott 3.28”

      On a separate note, I wonder if we look back and look at “success” versus TEF score, if there is a correlation. As others have noted, if there is a 3.0 TEF and a 3.5 TEF score player, it doesn’t mean the Seahawks will take the 3.5 TEF player, however, by using their criteria, they are basically saying, if you look at 100% of the pool of players, only x% will succeed, but if you limit the pool to the best athletes by these 3 metrics, so 10% (or some number lower than 100%) of the pool of players, y% will be successful (y>x). That would of course depend on what you consider a success.
      Years ago I did a draft analysis on success by draft position and school size (majors versus small school), and found no difference in success prediction, however Success = starts or pro bowls. That formula would have considered Britt and his ~30 starts a success, whereas many Seahawks fans would argue about that.

  22. Volume12 says:

    Tom Cable down at Texas A&M running the drills and working out O-lineman Germain Ifedi and Mike Matthews.

    • Volume12 says:

      At the same time, we heard this the past 2 years ago.

      Ran the Tennessee O-line drills in 2014 didn’t take James or Richardson.

      Ran the Florida St O-line drills in 2015 didn’t take Matias or Jackson.

      Makes me wonder if they couldn’t hang with what TC was having them do.

  23. Scott says:

    5 straight broad jump, TEF, O-line measurables blogs is killing me Rob…. But i still love ya buddy. Keep up the good work! GO HAWKS

  24. 503Hawk says:

    Woe! Anybody see the Blogger Draft over on SB Nation? Danny Kelly selected J. Bullard at 26. Here are some players that were still available: DT S. Rankins (whaaaa!), DT J. Reed, LB J. Smith, LB L. Floyd, QB P. Lynch.
    Wouldn’t that be a crazy scenario.

  25. Martin says:

    Rob, you and other local media often refer to the Hawks “drafting for their team” or “building their own draft board”. What exactly does this mean? Don’t all teams build their own board and draft for their team? I’m missing something . Lol.

  26. Mylegacy says:

    Rob

    I wonder how Glowinski and Sokoli impact the teams thinking about this Draft? They intrigue me. Glow glowed in very short usage last year and I wonder if he and Sokoli are actually near to being NFL ready. It seems like they’re behind a wall and we can only wonder and guess and dream on what we have.

    In your opinion, how long does an excellent physical talent – like they both are – have to grow behind the Cable Curtain before they are ready for prime time?