NFL mock draft: Combine update 1st March

March 1st, 2016 | Written by Rob Staton

Travis Feeney will rise after an explosive combine performance

This mock draft is a reaction to the combine and what I think will happen. All of my previous mocks represented a take on certain players (thus, Ronnie Stanley & Vernon Hargreaves falling). This is an attempt to guess how it might play out, regardless of my own views on a particular individual.

Round 1

#1 Tennessee — Laremy Tunsil (T, Ole Miss)
With Joey Bosa’s so-so combine, Tunsil is the big favourite to go #1 overall to bookend Taylor Lewan.

#2 Cleveland — Carson Wentz (QB, North Dakota State)
The NFL seems to be in love with Wentz. And while I still think there’s a chance Paxton Lynch ends up in Cleveland — there’s no reason to fight Wentz’s momentum.

#3 San Diego — Jaylen Ramsey (CB, Florida State)
He had a very good combine and with a combination of athleticism, technique and length — he’ll go in the top five.

#4 Dallas — Jared Goff (QB, California)
The Cowboys have to consider developing someone behind the perennially injured Tony Romo. Goff is perhaps best suited to Jason Garrett’s offense.

#5 Jacksonville — Myles Jack (LB, UCLA)
A rare athlete for the position, Jacksonville takes the best player available on defense.

#6 Baltimore — Joey Bosa (DE, Ohio State)
Bosa’s combine indicates he wins with agility rather than speed. He’d be a good fit working in Baltimore’s tough defense.

#7 San Francisco — Paxton Lynch (QB, Memphis)
The Niners might prefer to go in a different direction but Lynch is big, athletic and mobile.

#8 Miami — Ronnie Stanley (T, Notre Dame)
I’m not a big fan of Stanley but the Dolphins need a good pass-blocking left tackle.

#9 Tampa Bay — Vernon Hargreaves (CB, Florida)
He lacks length and explosive athleticism but admittedly he put on a technical clinic during drills.

#10 New York Giants — Darron Lee (LB, Ohio State)
What a performance at the combine — confirming he’s a legit top-15 talent. Lee is going to be great.

#11 Chicago — DeForest Buckner (DE, Oregon)
Buckner is an ideal fit to play DE in Vic Fangio’s scheme. This would be a good fit for the Bears.

#12 New Orleans — Sheldon Rankins (DT, Louisville)
Rankins played DE and DT at Louisville and could move around in New Orleans’ 3-4 scheme.

#13 Philadelphia — Jack Conklin (T, Michigan State)
He’s more athletic than anyone thought and could be a guard in 2016 before switching to right tackle when Lane Johnson replaces Jason Peters.

#14 Oakland — Ezekiel Elliott (RB, Ohio State)
It’s not a huge need but Elliott is a top player in this draft class.

#15 Los Angeles — Laquon Treadwell (WR, Ole Miss)
He’s not a burner but Treadwell looked so fluid during drills. A natural talent who will be a good possession receiver.

#16 Detroit — Jason Spriggs (T, Indiana)
Detroit fills arguably their biggest need with the athletic Spriggs.

#17 Atlanta — Leonard Floyd (LB, Georgia)
Floyd had a terrific combine. Dan Quinn adds another explosive athlete to his defense — his version of Bruce Irvin (who they’re unlikely to afford).

#18 Indianapolis — Taylor Decker (T, Ohio State)
Decker lost ground to Conklin and Spriggs at the combine but should still secure a place in the top-20.

#19 Buffalo — A’Shawn Robinson (DT, Alabama)
Not quite the performance we expected at the combine but Robinson is a 32-year-old grown man who is actually 20.

#20 New York Jets — Noah Spence (DE, Eastern Kentucky)
Whatever the reason for an average combine — Spence didn’t flash quick-twitch brilliance and will probably not go in the top-10.

#21 Washington — Reggie Ragland (LB, Alabama)
Scot McCloughan wants to be physical running the ball and stop the run on defense. Enter Reggie Ragland as a tone-setter on defense.

#22 Houston — Corey Coleman (WR, Baylor)
An explosive athlete who can compliment DeAndre Hopkins and whoever they bring in at quarterback.

#23 Minnesota — Derrick Henry (RB, Alabama)
How about a one-two punch with Adrian Peterson and Henry? Let’s not forget Peterson turns 31 this month.

#24 Cincinatti — Andrew Billings (DT, Baylor)
The Bengals fit Billings next to Geno Atkins — the perfect compliment.

#25 Pittsburgh — Keanu Neal (S, Florida)
What a player. A born leader who hits like a sledgehammer. He’d look really good in the AFC North. One of the best players in the draft.

#26 Seattle — Germain Ifedi (T, Texas A&M)
The Seahawks have to find an answer if Russell Okung moves on. They love length (36 inch arms), size (320lbs) and athleticism (top vertical jump among OL’s).

#27 Green Bay — Jarran Reed (DT, Alabama)
Physical, competitive run-defender. Green Bay needs more toughness and grit on defense.

#28 Kansas City — Eli Apple (CB, Ohio State)
A really good player and if he lasts into this range — he’ll be another cornerback steal for the Chiefs.

#29 Arizona — Kamalei Correa (LB, Boise State)
He had a very good combine and will interest the 3-4 teams as an OLB.

#30 Carolina — Emmanuel Ogbah (DE, Oklahoma State)
There are question marks about his effort but Ogbah ran an elite 1.5 split and has incredible length (35.5 inch arms) and production (13 sacks in 2015)

#31 Denver — Shon Coleman (T, Auburn)
Terrific, underrated player. The Broncos drafted 25-year-old rookie Sly Williams so won’t be put off Coleman’s age (24).

Round 2

#32 Cleveland — Shaq Lawson (DE, Clemson)
He can play DE or OLB for Cleveland in the 3-4.

#33 Tennessee — William Jackson (CB, Houston)
He had a fantastic combine and is knocking on the door for round one.

#34 Dallas — Mackensive Alexander (CB, Clemson)
The self-proclaimed best corner in the draft might have to wait a little while.

#35 San Diego — Ryan Kelly (C, Alabama)
He separated from the rest of the center’s with an excellent combine.

#36 Baltimore — Darian Thompson (S, Boise State)
Not a great combine but he was reportedly suffering with illness.

#37 San Francisco — Will Fuller (WR, Notre Dame)
We know how much Chip Kelly loves speed on offense.

#38 Miami — Kevin Dodd (DE, Clemson)
The Dolphins add another pass-rusher to their stable.

#39 Jacksonville — Charles Tapper (DE, Oklahoma)
One of the stars of the combine, boosting his stock by a full round.

#40 New York Giants — Vernon Butler (DT, Louisiana Tech)
A decent combine but others were better so he could last into round two.

#41 Chicago — Le’Raven Clark (T, Texas A&M)
Incredible upside gets him into the top-50.

#42 Tampa Bay — Kenny Clark (DT, UCLA)
He looked excellent during the combine drills. He’s a pure one-technique.

#43 Los Angeles — Robert Nkemdiche (DE, Ole Miss)
Jeff Fisher isn’t afraid of character issues. They also love to collect explosive D-liners.

#44 Oakland — Vonn Bell (S, Ohio State)
The Raiders need to add a safety and Bell is the best available.

#45 Los Angeles — Connor Cook (QB, Michigan State)
Cook is a quirky character but he can game-manage this roster effectively.

#46 Detroit — Michael Thomas (WR, Ohio State)
With Calvin Johnson set to retire — they’ll need a big target.

#47 New Orleans — Nick Martin (C, Notre Dame)
A terrific, solid top-50 player. He can play guard or center.

#48 Indianapolis — Jonathan Bullard (DE, Florida)
He had an impressive combine but this feels like his range. He’s best at DE in the 3-4.

#49 Buffalo — Kyler Fackrell (LB, Utah State)
An underrated pass-rusher and effective blitzer.

#50 Atlanta — Sterling Shepard (WR, Oklahoma)
Shepard put on a show at the combine to suggest he’s the next Tyler Lockett.

#51 New York Jets — Cody Whitehair (T, Kansas State)
He’ll kick inside to guard or center — two need positions for the Jets.

#52 Houston — Christian Hackenburg (QB, Penn State)
Is it too obvious? Hackenburg has the tools — he just isn’t accurate.

#53 Washington — Christian Westerman (G, Arizona State)
Athletic lineman. The type McGloughan will love. He can play center or guard.

#54 Minnesota — Joshua Garnett (G, Stanford)
Improving the O-line is a big need for the Vikings.

#55 Cincinnati — Josh Doctson (WR, TCU)
They might lose Marvin Jones and Doctson is an ideal replacement.

#56 Seattle — Travis Feeney (LB, Washington)
Pete Carroll wants to find a player to impact turnovers. Feeney is explosive, rangy and makes plays. He’d replace Bruce Irvin.

#57 Green Bay — Braxton Miller (WR, Ohio State)
The Packers like to draft and develop second round receivers.

#58 Pittsburgh — Chris Jones (DT, Mississippi State)
Adding another D-liner to their rotation up front makes sense.

#59 Kansas City — Austin Johnson (DT, Penn State)
Constantly active, intense defensive lineman with a non-stop motor.

#60 New England — Joshua Perry (LB, Ohio State)
I get the sense Bill Belichick will love Perry’s intensity and leadership.

#61 Arizona — Miles Killebrew (S, Southern Utah)
A player with major upside. They can develop him to to start at safety.

#62 Denver — Tyler Boyd (WR, Pittsburgh)
Terrific football player and a Mr. Reliable for whoever starts at quarterback.

63 Carolina — Charone Peake (WR, Clemson)
The Panthers can’t put enough talented receivers in front of Cam Newton.

Further thoughts on the Seahawks

The Ifedi pick is relatively straight forward. The Seahawks will need an answer at tackle if they lose Russell Okung (which seems increasingly likely). Garry Gilliam appears destined to switch to left tackle. Ifedi would play right tackle.

He fits their profile perfectly for the position — 6-6, 324lbs, 36 inch arms, a good 1.78 split and the best vertical jump (32.5 inches) in this years O-line class.

Physically he compares favourably to Greg Robinson, the #2 overall pick in 2014. Ifedi would give the Seahawks a tackle with an incredibly high ceiling at an affordable cost for the next four years.

Pete Carroll told Pat Kirwan at the combine that the Seahawks are looking to find players that can force turnovers on defense. We also know they like explosive athleticism and playmakers. Travis Feeney fits the bill perfectly.

At 6-4 and 230lbs he ran a 4.50 with an elite 1.59 split. He added a 40 inch vertical and a 10-10 in the broad jump. Feeney had eight sacks in 2015 and has the kind of character and personality the Seahawks like. He’s a competitor who impacts games.

The Seahawks will likely need to replace Bruce Irvin and while Feeney is lighter — they have started Malcolm Smith (6-0, 225lbs) and Mike Morgan (6-3, 235lbs) in that position.

After his combine display on Sunday, Feeney is unlikely to last until the late third round. If they want him they might have to take him at #56. He screams ‘Seahawks’.

These two picks also address the two biggest needs — O-line and pass rusher/defensive playmaker.

With two picks in round three they could target an interior offensive lineman (Connor McGovern? Joe Dahl? Graham Glasgow?) and take the best remaining defensive tackle. Willie Henry might still be on the board. I don’t think Javon Hargrave will be drafted until rounds 3-4. There’s a chance Sheldon Day, Ronald Blair III and Darius Latham could be available.

I also intend to look closer at Matt Judon from Grand Valley State. He’s 6-3 and 275lbs with 34 inch arms. He posted a 4.73 (1.66 split) and a 35 inch vertical. Penn State’s Anthony Vettel also tested well. The beauty of this defensive tackle class is there will be options in the late third and even the fourth round.

The depth at DT could also provide excellent value in free agency. If teams are looking at the draft to add a defensive tackle — it could open up the possibility of Seattle adding a couple of cheap veterans.

They could also consider adding a running back in round three. Notre Dame’s C.J. Prosise looks like the best fit at 6-0, 220lbs with 4.48 speed and a 35.5 inch vertical. He also has a lot of experience catching the ball out of the backfield.

519 Responses to “NFL mock draft: Combine update 1st March”

  1. Ty the Guy says:

    For a long time I discarded Ifedi due to injury concerns. The Hawks should not take an offensive lineman in the first round, unless he has the potential to play LT. With Ifedi’s physical tools being so rare at #26, it does seem like great value. As well as a small gamble, which seems to be the norm when we do pick in the first.

    Feeny has always stood out to me. Dude just makes plays. I was hoping we could find him in the later rounds, but after the combine he may go even sooner.

    Braxton Miller will look intriguing at the next pick. You can never have enough weapons.

    Rob, you got me on this one. I have no complaints with this mock. I feel that Eli Apple would fit nicely in the LOB, but that need doesn’t feel as urgent as LT.

    What RB can you see us targeting if we get past round 4 without one?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it’d be a hard sell on a RB. They might have a guy in mind who wasn’t at the combine. Could also add a veteran.

      • Ty the Guy says:

        I think Rawls was on the radar the whole time last year, but PCJS judged correctly that he’d go undrafted. I just wondered if you knew of a similar prospect who may fall due to character concerns.

        • Spireite Seahawk says:

          Maybe but personally I feel if they thought he was *that* good why risk him going elsewhere?

          • Ty the Guy says:

            PCJS are card counters man! They predetermine value and the way the board will shape out AND THEN they have the stones to stick with their gut. It has worked out better for them better than any other team during their reign.

            Believe me, I am the guy screaming at the TV when we pass up on guys I think would be great Seahawks. I don’t like gambling that a player will last until the next round. But you only get 6-10 picks a year. You have to make every one count.

            • Spireite Seahawk says:

              I dont disagree with your sentiments, I just think that if they were that sure they would have used the Tye Smith pick. UDFA has the inherent risk of a player not wanting to come just because something trivial like he doesnt like the city. If they knew no-one would want him even in UDFA then PCJS are truly soothsayers and I doff my cap further.

              Doesnt really matter I guess, he’s here and he’s good.

      • Spireite Seahawk says:

        Talking of RB FA, any thought on what Matt Forte might want and if he would be a realistic option? I feel we need to keep the pressure off Rawls.

        • Ty the Guy says:

          Agreed that Rawls needs a running mate. I’m still of the mindset that Christine Michael could fill that role if he has matured. (The kick in the ass of 3 teams cutting him should do it, if anything.)

          Forte might not have the market he is hoping for. I’d take him in a heartbeat for $3-4 mil/yr.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I thought he’d want too much SS but latest talk is around $3m. They might be interested at that rate.

          • Ben2 says:

            I’d love Forye at 3 mil! he might actually want to win for a change too!

            • reggieregg says:

              Oh yeah…. nobody has caught the ball out of the backfield better…. that would be a deadly combo. Hope Pats don’t get him!!

      • Cockney Hawk says:

        Hi Rob,

        Thanks for the sterling work a fellow Brit is doing with this Seahawks blog . Just wanted your take on a few possible outside the box picks for Seattle. Dan Vitale the Superback from Northwestern. He had a very good combine and I believe could be a great 3rd down back (great receiver) slash fullback, TE, special teams contributer, team captain and general swiss army knife player. Jatavis brown a 4.4 LB from Akron and Justin Zimmer from Ferris state these two small school players scream seahawks to me . Cheers CH

        • Rob Staton says:

          Hey CH,

          Like Zimmer a lot — possibly even as their latest DL-to-OL project. Brown I’ve not seen any of. Vitale makes a lot of sense based on what they seem to like to do. Could easily see him come in as a later rounder.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      Feeney has stood out. I just have to wonder, with our experience taking injury risks (Richardson, Thurmond, J. Williams etc.) that we may be more vigilant with injury concern players.

      Our history with getting damaged goods is not good. They’ve been some of our worst picks. We’ve lampooned the Richardson pick and in hindsight — it was a terrible decision. Particularly based on what kinds of guys we didn’t take. We fell in love with aspects of his game and ignored risk.

      Will we continue to do that? Well I’d probably say yes based on what we’ve come to know from Carroll. But it’s not merely foolish, but plain stupid when you do so at a draft position where even the ceiling of a player doesn’t merit the risk relative to the ceiling of the alternatives. Your day 1 and day 2 guys need to produce. Taking Richardson when your alternative is Morgan Moses is not in the same galaxy as taking Richardson when your alternatives are Bitonio/Allen Robinson.

      • badjujus says:

        Between the injury concerns and the lack of hype I really dont see how he wouldnt last to at least the 5th round. I dont understand how anyone could value him that high. I just dont understand.

        • Attyla the Hawk says:

          Hype: Doesn’t matter.
          Injury: Yep

          Do you recall the 2013 draft. We were discussing on here the SAM/WILL positions. Irvin wasn’t a LB yet. Leroy Hill was departing.

          We discussed and debated the merits of a LB that we figured would be long gone before we picked.

          Alex Ogletree seemed like the perfect WILL for us. Statistically, I’d compare the final two seasons:

          AO:

          2011: 7.5 TFL, 3.0 sacks
          2012: 11.5 TFL, 3.0 sacks

          TF:

          2014: 5.0 TFL, 1.0 sacks
          2015: 17.5 TFL, 8.0 sacks

          Production somewhat similar.

          Combine testing:

          AO: 4.70 40 | 1.60 10y | 33.5 V | 4.39 SS | 7.16 3C
          TF: 4.50 40 | 1.59 10y | 40.0 V | 4.42 SS | 7.20 3C

          Feeney is pretty similar if not actually better across the board. So why is Ogletree hyped as a mid R1 type? And Feeney a 5th rounder? Why is Jarvis Jones an R1 candidate with a pro day line of:

          JJ: 4.88 40 | 1.66 10y | 30.5 V | 4.71 SS | 7.46 3C

          If you go by hype — Feeney is an R5 guy. If you look at quality, athleticism and production — he’s a mid/late R1 player.

          Actually, I’m looking at the combine values going back to 2010. Here are the players with 4.5/ < 1.6 10Y with similar leaping ability:

          2015:

          Kwon Alexander

          2014:

          KPL
          Khalil Mack

          2013:

          none

          2012:

          none

          2011:

          Von Miller
          Martez Wilson

          2010:

          none

          Those are just crazy comps. Pro bowlers, All pros and soon to be pro bowlers.

          The reality is, Feeney is in a very elite stratosphere based on the testing. He should be a top 18 overall kind of player. I bet if he plays back east, he's up there in the top 8 overall.

          • MJ says:

            Glad somebody shares my thoughts on Feeney. I always thought he was a first round talent at UW. Quite frankly, I thought he was always better than Shaq Thompson.

            Feeney can impact the game in so many ways, and he is such a rare athlete for his size/dimensions (very long). I could see Carroll/Richard becoming giddy with Feeney and what he can do on the field.

            It’s bold, but I really do think Feeney has the ability to become a very high end defender in the NFL.

            • drewjov11 says:

              I’m a UW alumnus, and a lifelong fan. I’ve watched every one of his husky games, and he isn’t a perfect player. He’s had plenty of issues with taking bad angles, missing tackles while going for the big hit, and busted coverages. He’s also made a lot of splash plays and was a leader on the defense. Let’s not make him out to be an elite linebacker because of his physical talents. He’s still relatively new to the linebacker position. He was a safety coming in. He’s a guy who needs to alleviate fears about the shoulders, and I see him as a round three guy.

              • cheese22 says:

                Combine numbers, as well as in-season stats, are very overrated as far as judging a player’s abilities. Sometimes a guy doesn’t test real well but can just play the game, or vise versa. Otherwise we would just walk from the combine field to the banquet room next door and draft. Example: Russell Wilson. That is what separates a bad GM from a good one. Combine numbers are fun to look at but shouldn’t make your picks for you.

      • Ben2 says:

        Yeah, that one hurts….think of how much different our roster and this draft looks if we have Bitonio over Richardson. Heavy sigh…..I wasn’t happy at all – Robs man crush on Bitonio had rubbed off on me. As a seahawks fan something about having an awesome o-line appeals to me (probably the line w/Jones, Hutch, Tobek, Gray and oh what’s his name with the phantom hold in the super bowl) so I was sad when we passed on Bitonio. To beck and gray were pretty unathletic but they got the job done – lunch pail type guys. We need one of those guys as opposed to o-line converts that kinda develop….I think there are some lunch pail centers in this draft like 5 deep!

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      Marshaun Coprich

    • MisterNeutron says:

      Kenyan Drake. A fast, highly athletic, pass-catching back who could also return punts and kicks to give Lockett some relief. Due to his lack of production at Alabama and his broken leg in 2014, his stock is fairly low, but he looks to have fully recovered from that. On top of all that he has very little tread on the tires (or “tyres” if you’re Rob).

      • Magmatizer says:

        His athleticism is eye-popping, but I think the gripe that has been discussed with Drake is that he tries to do too much. He tends to try to bounce runs outside for big gains, for better or for worse. I would personally wait until at least round 5 to get him, but his speed could be very interesting for the Hawks.

    • icb12 says:

      Dy’Shawn Mobley- RB- EKU

  2. Attyla the Hawk says:

    I would agree, that Seattle would have interest in Feeney. His unique versatility and those testing numbers. Drool worthy

    Seattle is one of the better teams in the NFL at being able to predict where players will go in the draft. Given that, I tend to think Feeney will definitely be there at R3 and possibly R4. Probably not long after that though.

    Like the notion that we’re thinking of him. The only way we pick him at #56 though is if he’s one of those ‘can’t leave the draft without’ types. I’m not sure I see that.

    Definitely like projecting the possibility that Seattle will allow the DL depth to work for them in this draft. Especially in this instance having 15 DL off the board by the time 56 rolls around.

    I think you could be dead on that LB goes early. It’s a very lean draft there. And the athleticism of the DB group is surprisingly insane. For a lean group there are an obscene amount of 85th percentiles or better in this group. Seattle, if they go by formula will take a LB and DB in this class somewhere. LB options could severely force the picks similar to the Justin Britt pick.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Here’s why I think Feeney goes earlier than some might thing — there aren’t guys like him in this class. Nobody with that combination of 4.50 speed, length, 1.5 split and production/character.

      Guys like that tend to go very early. I think there’s a chance he doesn’t last until #56.

      What keeps him going that early would be a bad medical check at the combine. That aside, I think he’s destined to go round two or early third.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        Could well be. He’s a unique blend.

        The one thing that probably holds him back is that LBs that get taken early are pass rush specialists.

        Found it interesting this quote from MJ in November: http://seahawksdraftblog.com/instant-reaction-seahawks-beat-cowboys-13-12#comment-245626

        “I have no doubt that Travis Feeney will be a Seahawk. When he started to get time his RS FR year, he just played like a Seahawk.

        He’s a mid-late rounder who could shoot up a round or two when he blows up the combine (if invited). IMO, he could be an extremely effective 3rd down player in the NFL. He will have to grow into a base role, strictly due to his size.

        Mentioned below, but I do like him in the Bruce Irvin role. Not sure he will be as effective as a pass rusher, but I think he offers a unique skill on blitz packages. Not to mention, the length + athleticism just screams Seattle.”

        Here we are 5 months later and I can easily see this coming to pass. Medical will be the key.

        • badjujus says:

          I like Feeny and I think he will be a hawk. I just dont see how his archtype addresses our pass rush need, and I dont see how he is someone we cant leave the draft without.

          I really think the medical will knock him to the 5th.

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            Tough, Gritty. Chip on the shoulder.

            SPARQY. Fast. Sack production.

            Sub 1.6 10 yd.

            From a prospect standpoint, he checks all measureables. He doesn’t check the hype measurable I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but Seattle doesn’t have that on their checklists.

            He can be a can’t leave the draft without type based on merit, but also the fact that the LB class is pretty putrid. Seattle could take Feeney and he could end up easily being the Tyler Lockett of the LB class after year one. I don’t see any LB that he couldn’t be empirically better than in this draft.

            Also, Washington is kind of becoming what it was in the 80s/90s. A factory of R2/R3 prospects who end up playing way beyond their draft position. Feeney, if he were at Clemson or Florida State, would be in the R1 discussion.

            It’s all about injuries.

            • MJ says:

              Best analogy I’ve heard yet. He really could be the Lockett of this draft.

              A lot of reasons to talk yourself out of him as a prospect, that have nothing to do with Football or Athleticism. Pretty insane when you think about it.

              • Miles says:

                Too true. Also, he might have more value to the Seahawks because they have a good track record of developing LBs. With Feeney’s measurables they could turn him into Ryan Shazier 2.0 or something like that.

        • MJ says:

          My man-love for Feeney didn’t lead me astray!

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        Rob,

        There are a couple other guys in this class with length and elite splits that weren’t in your mock.
        Montese Overton
        Stephen Weatherly

        Where do you see them going in the draft?

    • Ty the Guy says:

      I hope you are right about Feeney lasting until R3. He looked great at the combine with his elite 1.59 split and had some major production when healthy at UW.

      Two shoulder surgeries though. I’d be interested to hear the evaluation on that. Shoulder issues remind me of a former Seashawks supplemental draft pick who had a promising career derailed by ongoing shoulder issues. Who might that be? Bo knows.

  3. Turnagaintide says:

    Very realistic and very well thought out mock Rob. Thanks.

    I take it that you don’t think Feeney’s shoulders issues will affect his draft status too much?

    What are your thoughts on TJ Green? He has blazing speed and length but he doesn’t hit like a safety IMO. He looks more like a Seahawky outside corner to me. You can teach that combination of speed and length – What range do you think he’ll go and would the Seahawks be interested for that price?

    • Rob Staton says:

      “I take it that you don’t think Feeney’s shoulders issues will affect his draft status too much?”

      It’s a concern but we don’t have the info so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.

      Liked Green’s workout. Think he gets trained at corner in the NFL.

      • Miles says:

        Also even if he does have legit shoulder issues the Seahawks will not be opposed to taking him. Look what they did with Walter Thurmond, for example. Took him in Round 4 and turned him into a starter by year 3. A lot of these picks, injuries or not, are going to be looking 2 or 3 years down the road even without an injury issue. They could look at Feeney the same way.

  4. unitas77 says:

    Rob have you looked at Temple DT Matt Ioannis. I think he tested fairly well and should be available in the middle to late rounds. One of the leaders that helped make Temple into a competitive football team.

  5. Seahawk in LA says:

    Thanks Rob for writing this blog–I am a huge fan of your intelligent, Seahawks-centric analysis. I always read but usually don’t post so wanted to say thanks now.

    Feeney definitely has some qualities the Seahawks value. Big question is the status of his shoulder. Do the results of medical exams come out at any point beyond rumors on Twitter and elsewhere?

    Almost surely not relevant to Seahawks, but aren’t you understating Bosa’s combine? Schefter tweeted a comparison to JJ Watt’s 2011 combine that showed Bosa compared favorably… isn’t that a great combine for Bosa? Or a misleading tweet from Schefter?

    • Dylan says:

      Misleading comparison which a few people have criticized Schefter for. Watt was about 25 lbs heavier putting up those similar numbers to Bosa.

      • Jake says:

        Plus didn’t he just omit the vertical jumps? That was the first thing I thought when I saw that comp. We’ve all seen JJ’s box jumps by now. I don’t think Bosa is pulling that off

        • Michael M. says:

          Anyone comparing Bosa to Watt either has an agenda or is simply fooling themselves. Bosa isn’t all that close to the player Watt was IMO. Sure you can cherry pick a few combine numbers if you want to get hits on twitter… You can make an awful lot of bad comps that way. Watch this:

          198 lbs. / 8 reps / 121″ Broad / 6.68 three cone / 4.48 forty = Kevin Norwood
          198 lbs. / 7 reps / 122″ Broad / 6.69 three cone / 4.43 forty = Odell Beckham Jr.

          Look! The stupid Seahawks traded away a player who “compares favorably” to OBJ!!

          Putting aside the eye test (which heavily favors Watt) for a second to talk strictly athletic performance – J.J. Watt at the time of his combine had 21 extra lbs, longer arms, bigger hands, 10 more reps on the bench, and jumped 5 inches higher in the vert. But sure, if you fail to mention any of that they’re basically the same guy.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Hey Seahawks in LA,

      Usually have to wait for rumours on Twitter unfortunately (or reports). Worth noting Watt’s numbers might be similar but he’s also 20lbs heavier.

  6. Austin Slater says:

    Rob would you be happy with this start? I know the premise of the mock was what you think would happen and I’m assuming you would also like this draft as well.

    I would be pumped about this start. Fills the two biggest needs and allows some freedom to get creative as the draft unfolds. Great article as usual.

  7. Bill Bobaggins says:

    Love Feeney. I’m a UW season ticket holder and am quite familiar with him. He’s a disruptor and is in on every play. His measurables would definitely put him much higher than he’ll go, if not for injury history/concerns. I think he’d be a really nice fit in the Hawks D.

    I was listening to Brock and Salk on 710 this morning and they’re suggesting that this might be the year that PCJS trade UP in the draft to go get a playmaker…something they’ve never done before. The player they’re talking about is Jalen Ramsey. While I’d LOVE to see him in a Hawks uniform, that move would most likely mean that they have to trade up from #26 to #3 to get him. That’s a huge move and costs a ton of draft capital this year and next. This is your Julio Jones/RGIII type of trade. While I’d be happy to see Jalen on the squad, I just don’t see something like this happening as there are too many holes to fill and this would be a luxury.

    Rob, thoughts on PCJS trading up this year? If so, any ideas on who they might target?

    • Ty the Guy says:

      This would indicate a move on from Chancellor, which I am NOT a fan of. UNLESS we are going to experiment with a 3 safety look. With Kam Bam roaming the middle. **chills**

      • EranUngar says:

        Kam Bam roaming the middle delivering those devastating hits……is something we havn’t seen since 2014….not sure we’ll ever see THAT KAM again….

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      What need to Ramsey fill?

      Is our secondary bad? Certainly we have enough cash allocated with it.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        I should add, that I’m not opposed to the idea.

        It’s just that I don’t see Ramsey as a need. A great player sure. But an odd choice to gut your draft future for.

        • rowdy says:

          I think he would be a cb here and he’s one of my favorite prospects in the draft but I would never make that trade

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      Brock and Salk need something to talk about, no matter how unlikely.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        Yeah, I think there’s a bit of that.

        Sometimes media types (particularly national types) just throw up crazy ideas shotgun style and then if one happens to stick, they replay/repost it like they are a sage. Hoping you’ll have forgotten the two thousand crazy prognostications that were never going to happen.

        • Ty the Guy says:

          I am not sure there is a player in round one that we would trade up for. Now if we are talking about trading up in round two then we might have something there. I feel there are a lot of borderline R1 guys who could be had. DT, OL, LB, CB, WR, and RB.

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            I could see Jack Conklin.

            Before the combine, he seemed like the kind of OL prospect we’d pick out of a catalog.

            After the combine, he’s virtually a perfect Seahawk OT.

            • Miles says:

              I heard someone say that the Raiders would have to trade their whole draft and a 2017 3rd to move up to 3 and get Ramsey. So imagine what the Seahawks would have to do. They probably don’t have enough resources in the whole franchise to make that happen!

    • icb12 says:

      Personally I think the reverse would be more likely.

      Consider Rob’s mock… if we are going after OL
      Rob has the hawks taking Ifedi, Denver taking Coleman at 31, and then not another OL going until 41, and that’s clark. Martin at 47, and whitehair at 51.

      That means that if we would be satisfied with either Ifedi, Coleman, or Clark as tackle prospects then trading back would make more sense. Gain some picks and still pick up guys you like a lot.

      Who would we trade up for? It’s not going to be a DB. Wouldn’t start anyway, so why take one in R1? A receiver? Which one? ,not a receiver in this draft worth trading up for. Rob has Fuller going 37-that’s trade back material.

      There is only one guy I could see them possibly going up to get and that is Rankins. But honestly, why sell your soul to move up that far for a Defensive guy when you already have the leagues best defense?

      If it’s me, I’m trading back. I take one of either Coleman, Ifedi, or Clark (in that order), and then I’m using the capital I got to move up to make sure I get Garnett. I really like Feeney, and he’s going to Rise, but I HAVE to fix the OL.

      Coleman, Garnett, I take Robert Booker R7/udfa for Center, Glowinski (hopefully), and Gilliam. Or flip flop Gilliam/Coleman.

      • icb12 says:

        And if they keep Okung (ideally).

        I would trade back, take Garnett with my first R2 Pick, Feeney with my Second.

        Okung, Garnett, Booker, Glowinski, Gilliam

        • Ty the Guy says:

          Whoa…. We just went through a season where the oline took it’s time gelling. I hope we don’t have to have too many new faces on the line. I feel Okung will be gone. Resign Sweezy. Draft the tackle and let him compete with Gilliam for the LT spot.

          Gilliam, Glowinski, Lewis, Sweezy, Ifedi

          • icb12 says:

            I understand your position; but me, personally, I want wholesale change.
            No matter what they do, it’s going to take time. If it is going to take time anyway we might as well get younger, get meaner, and get more talented IMO.

            Is your proposed lineup going to gel faster than the guys I picked?
            Gilliam hasn’t played the left side, Glow hasn’t played on the left that I can recall nor does he fit the seahawks ideals at LG, and a Rookie on the Right and a mediocre center.

            Or Coleman Who is a left tackle, Garnett who is a left Guard, and Booker who is a center. Plus Glow who is a right guard, and Gilliam who played the right side all year.

            Don’t get me wrong- I understand what you are saying. And if I’m being honest with myself, I see the Hawks more in line with you. That being said, you would have a hard time convincing me that your lineup would gel significantly faster than the one I proposed, or convincing me that the lineup you proposed is better overall.

            • Ty the Guy says:

              icb12,

              Ok, I’ve given it some thought. My conclusion is that there is a definite window of opportunity with the current roster and the most glaring weakness is the OL. That’s not to say that window can’t be extended, but we can be winning Lombardis right now. So the goal is to somehow put together the best group to perform right now, while building for the future.

              I am assuming that Okung is gone. I like Sweezy. He may not be a Pro Bowler, but he is a grinder. Britt has the tools, but looks like a matador at times. Gilliam has the athleticism, but not the experience. And Lewis might have looked so good, because Nowak looked so bad. You don’t know exactly what you have in Glowinksi or any of the others, but I like the make up.

              Ifedi has the upside and the athleticism to at least be able to fake it if the technique isn’t there. Coleman looks solid, I might actually prefer him to Ifedi, but I was going off of Rob’s mock. In your first scenario, we didn’t keep Okung or Sweezy. If that’s the case then my gelling comment means nothing, because we lost the two most experienced and solid vets. So I guess what I’m saying is that we see things the same way and it just depends upon who is signed back and who we get in the draft.

              I am not opposed to picking OL our first two picks, but that doesn’t always translate to much. (i.e. Carpenter/Moffitt) In a perfect world, where Okung and Sweezy sign team friendly deals, I’d like to draft two interior lineman and just let it all compete. But I don’t see that happening.

              • Ty the Guy says:

                Actually, I do want to build for the future. I believe you said wholesale change.

                Coleman/Ifedi, Britt, Nick Martin, Glowinski, Gilliam

                Or you could switch the tackles, move out Britt and go with that

    • Rob Staton says:

      Going up for Ramsey would probably cost three first round picks so it’s doubtful. The most they could realistically move up is about six slots. There isn’t really anyone I’d be that interested in.

      • Michael M. says:

        Rob, if you could give up one of our 3rd rounders (plus probably a day three pick or two) to swap 1st rounders with Atlanta with Conklin on the board (debatable), would that be worth it to you?

      • troy says:

        And if Rankins somehow made it to the #20th pick? Would you strongly consider the opportunty to move up and grab him Rob?

  8. C-Dog says:

    I would love the pick of Ifedi at 26, even if they kept Okung, and have him start right next to him at LG

    Been a huge Feeney fan for a long time. I think he’s a natural prospect to take over for Irving. Really glad to see him getting this kind of love. Hope those shoulders check out okay. If he’s not at 56, I would highly consider taking Prosise there.

    Matt Judon is really intriguing to me. Bronson Kaufusi as well, considering how well he showed up with the SPARQ and how BYU used him all over their front. Can’t stop liking Javon Hargrave a lot, though. Lots of interesting DL options to be had.

  9. cha says:

    “#52 Houston — Christian Hackenburg (QB, Penn State)
    Is it too obvious? Hackenburg has the tools — he just isn’t accurate.”

    There was the axiom for a long time that accuracy (or lack of) was something that would follow a QB from college to the pros. Is that still a general feeling or has that changed?

    • Bill Bobaggins says:

      “Yes.”

      – Jake Locker

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      That has not changed in principle.

      In effect though — it has somewhat. The proliferation of spread option/bubble screen artists has really forced evaluators to filter out the crap/easy passes and see if QBs can execute a real offense.

      This issue can be seen front and center in this draft and in recent ones. How will QBs make that adjustment to the pro game.

    • vrtkolman says:

      I would think accuracy is a tool.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      Well, if I apply the metric we use, I’d say he’s not anything close to 2nd round.

      Does he tilt the room? Can you see that on tape?

      I see a guy who at times looks like he’s the reason his teams lose almost single handedly. So I’d have to say he’s a late day 3 guy if at all.

      He could become something he isn’t. But he surely doesn’t look like he has ‘it’. Taking him just means you’re drafting a QB in a year or two.

  10. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    @MikeGarafolo: Dolphins offered around $12m per year for Olivier Vernon. Transition tag a tick higher. That’s their price for him. We’ll see who beats it.

    Not SEA.

    • vrtkolman says:

      Wow! Vernon is a good player but he hasn’t taken that next step to double digit sacks yet.

      • ClevelandHawk says:

        We’re going to be saying that a lot this off season. The number franchise and transition tags confirm what has been well rumored: there is a ton of money sloshing around and guys are going to be paid. I’m skeptical that we’ll see bargains anywhere, even defensive tackle. But for sure not for pass rushers, offensive line, wide receiver or quarterback. There is way too much money to bid on a very weak free agent class (especially now that much of the cream has been skimmed with tags).

    • Drew says:

      If he’s getting $12M, Bruce is easily getting $10M+

  11. vrtkolman says:

    Thanks for the mock Rob! I have to say the Mitchell Schwartz news has me concerned. If he’s looking for $8 million a year I don’t think there is anyway Okung doesn’t get $10+ million a year. I always had a slight hope he would resign for a year but I think that is down the drain now. From what I see the options to replace him are as follows:

    1. Garry Gilliam slides to LT. This worries me and opens up another hole at RT. Gilliam flashed at times last year, but he also looked really bad too. His tape in the 2nd Rams game against William Hayes was among the worst I’ve seen of any lineman all year. John and Pete want consistency and I don’t think he showed any at all last season.

    2. Hope to heck that Taylor Decker or Shon Coleman falls. I think with those two you could plug them right in at LT. There would be a learning curve but they could end up being as good as Okung (an average LT) by the end of the season. Perhaps this is the best scenario?

    3. Draft Ifedi or Clark in the 1st. I think that is the definition of fighting the board, much like what they did with Britt in 2014. They are settling for the 7th, 8th, or 9th best tackle with their first round pick. Plus I think both are projects, no way would they be ready to start next season.

    4. Plug in a veteran stop gap tackle. Carolina signed Michael Oher and made it work until the Superbowl exposed him. I’m not sure who could be cut between now and training camp. Maybe this and #3 would be a workable scenario?

    • Miles says:

      Yeah – the only hope with Okung is that teams get really scared off by his shoulder and then he falls right back into our lap. Even then we’d be getting a banged up LT, still not ideal.

      I have to disagree about Gilliam. I think he started off the year horrendously but experienced a marked improvement as the year went along. The whole line improved. One could argue that had our OL not fallen apart against CAR in the playoffs, the outlook on our big men could be outright positive.

      We were optimistic about Britt in 2014 too, but he doesn’t have quite the athleticism that Gilliam has to play tackle. Honestly, I think no matter which way you slice it Gilliam will be our starting LT in 2016. I am okay with that, because he is athletic and most adept at pass protecting. That’s what we need from our LT; we do not need him to mow guys over on running plays. Then, we can try to find a solid run-blocking RT again ala Breno Giacomini in either Conklin, Coleman or Ifedi. I think we should sign a guard to play LG like Jahri Evans or Richie Incognito. Sign a C like Wisniewski or draft one in the 2nd or 3rd round. I do not want Britt starting next year.

      I believe the Seahawks would like to address the interior OL in free agency so they can spend draft picks on mostly defensive players. A line like this could work in 2017:

      LT Gilliam
      LG Incognito
      C Lewis/Wisniewski
      RG Glowinski
      RT Coleman/Conklin/Ifedi

      • Coug1990 says:

        Plus, Gilliam was a first year starter that has only been playing the line two years before starting last year. I think people forget he was a TE until his senior year at Penn State. He will continue to get better and better with continued work in the weight room and experience.

      • Del tre says:

        I completely agree with the sentiment that they will fix the o line in free agency I don’t know if they sign wiswenski but I could definitely see them bringing Unger back honestly as soon as JS said the Hawks were fixing the o line the same way they always have I knew they would be fixing the lime with veterans and udfa along with their projects on the practice squad

    • MisterNeutron says:

      Gilliam doesn’t quite scare the crap outta me at LT, but that notion does create some anxiety. If the 2016 O-line starts out as badly as the 2015 version, I’ll be finding other things to do on my Sunday mornings or early afternoons. Russ the Ragdoll was painful and unwatchable.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Will need to see who else is cut — the FA options at tackle right now are scarily bad.

  12. Hawksince77 says:

    Rob,

    Under this scenario, lets say they re-sign Okung – who would you like in the first? C-Dog suggests that even keeping Okung Ifedi could still be the guy and start at LG, a notion you shot down earlier in the week, something I thought might be worth considering.

    As for the second round, several of my 2nd round favorites were gone, including Martin and Tapper. You even have my favorite mid-round WR Peake going late in the 2nd (boo!). Anyway, if Feeney doesn’t check out medically, Deion Jones is still available. In fact, he might be the better selection anyway, given the risk factor Feeney brings with him.

    If Feeney’s health doesn’t check out, who would you like in his place, given how this mock plays out?

    • Hawksince77 says:

      Should have provided my answers: if Okung signs, I would consider the CB Williams or DE Tapper.

      In the second, I would take Deion Jones, but I don’t have real strong feelings about that. There might be a better alternative.

    • vrtkolman says:

      Keeping Okung and drafting Ifedi would be ideal. Ifedi could start at LG right away and then transition to LT. The challenge of keeping Okung is very, very high but if they can make this work look out.

      • Hawksince77 says:

        In that scenario, Ifedi could be the backup RT and LT, with Britt the backup LG.

        • C-Dog says:

          I’m a big fan of having Ifedi at LG in this scenario. Move Britt back at RT and let him battle it out with Gilliam.

          • mishima says:

            Britt already lost. 😉

            • purpleneer says:

              Probably a moot point now, since Gilliam now has real NFL experience, but not exactly true. Gilliam at tackle beat out the other options at guard; more like Gilliam/Britt beat out Britt/Bailey.

    • Hawksince77 says:

      That’s William Jackson at CB.

    • J says:

      Even if we resign Okung we still need a strong backup. Okung is injury prone and Gilliam isn’t a sure thing.

      Good way to do that would be to draft a tackle and have him play guard.

      • cha says:

        I would think they would bring Bailey back

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        That is also the approach I prefer – fill multiple needs with one pick. Draft a lineman who can replace Britt at LG as a rookie and be a possible future replacement for Okung with a bit of coaching.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I didn’t shoot that suggestion down in the slightest. Not sure why you thought that.

      Ifedi can play LG. If they re-sign Okung they can look at other positions too. But keeping Okung seems like a pipe dream right now.

      As for round two — I’d take the best available DL if I’m trying to think what they’ll do. Personally I would also consider Braxton Miller.

      • Hawksince77 says:

        Perhaps I misunderstood the following comment. The context was in response to a post where I suggested that drafting Ifedi might still be done even if Okung was retained:

        “If they’re going Ifedi in R1 — or planning that as a possibility — Okung is a gonner.”

        I was surprised as you had posted elsewhere (like above) that Ifedi could play LG (perhaps the biggest need on the team).

        • Rob Staton says:

          I understand.

          However, as much as I think/know he’d be a good fit at LG, I suspect the idea of taking an OL with 36 inch arms and explosive athleticism for a 320lber would be to put him at tackle. For me Okung only stays if his market is as flat as a pancake. We’ll see what happens.

  13. sdcoug says:

    I like the Ifedi pick, but would much rather snag the upside and explosiveness of Braxton Miller in round 2. If Feeney (I’m a big fan), isn’t there is round 3 or later, so be it.

    Our pass-catching core is awfully close to being a huge question mark…Kearse FA, when and what will Graham look like upon return, Richardson with two serious knee injuries, Baldwin upcoming FA…and please don’t say the smith/williams traveling udfa show can’t be upgraded.

    • Bill Bobaggins says:

      I question how “explosive” Braxton Miller actually is. He didn’t exactly light up the combine.

      I agree with your assessment of our WR’s, but I do think that Williams has a ton of upside still. He really looked great in camp last year and was promoted to the roster at the tail end of the season. I think he’s much better than Kearse.

      • LantermanC says:

        I don’t

      • LantermanC says:

        I don’t question his explosiveness at all:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=199&v=EB6D46ycATc

        He’s a human highlight reel. I question his polish, but he definitely “tilts the field”. Reminds me a bit of Golden Tate to be honest.

        • Attyla the Hawk says:

          If we were to assume he is similar to Tate:

          Tate switched over to WR early in his collegiate career. But still took a full 2 years before really becoming an NFL quality receiver in year 3.

          If we took Miller and he was similar, we’re looking at a guy who is eating a roster spot until 2018. That’s a long time to operate with 52 guys. Especially when in the 2nd round you’re expecting a starter grade player.

          If he does go in the 2nd round, I hope it’s to a team that picks ahead of us.

          • Volume12 says:

            If your drafting Braxton Miller to be your go to guy or number 2, I get the concern.

            He’d be a really good fit in Seattle though as a 3 or 4. Someone they could bring along and do some cool things with.

            IMO, he’s a bigger, more polished and nuanced version of Tavon Austin. At least currently.

          • Coug1990 says:

            I don’t think you can extrapolate that since it took Tate two years, it would take Miller two years. They are two different people and one case does not mean it is a given. Tate’s biggest problem (perhaps) was that he was immature (Top Pot Donuts) and did not know what it took to be an NFL player.

            I am not saying to draft or not draft Miller, just that using Tate as an example is not that relevant.

          • purpleneer says:

            I think we overstate Golden Tate’s slowness of development a lot here and use it too much as an example of the timetable other will be on. Sure, he didn’t reach his potential in his first 2 years, but those involved not having an established QB and weren’t exactly eating a roster spot for no benefit.
            Everybody has their own schedule of development, including after changing positions. Didn’t Ken Lucas become a real contributor quickly after switching sides of the ball at the same time as his jump to the NFL? Even Sweezy was a regular pretty quickly (and everybody is figuring out that cohesiveness and overall understanding is important).

        • Bill Bobaggins says:

          LantermanC, you’re easily pleased if you think that 341 yards receiving and 3 TD’s consists of being a human highlight reel.

      • reggieregg says:

        Braxton Miller is a project…. I’d much rather have a Sheppard or peake. Somebody who already knows how to play receiver.

  14. AndrewP says:

    Rob- Love the Blog, love your insight, respect your opinions… Can’t get behind Feeney in RD2.

    We’re not talking about a guy with a string of bad luck or fluke-ish injuries. We’re talking about a guy with FOUR shoulder surgeries after playing in college, never mind the NFL. I can’t see how he even makes it through his first contract unless he gets real lucky

    RD 3, I’m ok with taking a Feeney. The only way I can get behind taking him in RD2 is if they make a killing in FA and gt a whole bunch of their guys back at discounted rates (Sweezey, Kearse, Lane).

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      Because I can sometimes get caught up in this too — here’s food for thought Andrew:

      The #1 draft rule according to Bill Walsh:

      “1) Describing the player by the round he should be taken.

      Walsh hated hearing a scout tell him a player was, for example, not a good second-rounder, but a great third-rounder. He always said the only time people talk about rounds is in draft preparation and on draft day. Never during any player’s career, Walsh would vent, does anyone say a player was picked in the right round. Yes: The day after the draft. After that, every player is graded on his playing performance, not his selection round. Walsh only cared about what a player would be able to do for his team.

      He thought “round talk” was the wrong way for a scout to measure his own abilities. It was not talent evaluation, but rather round prediction. When I was in Cleveland, we had a scout who would rarely say much before the draft. When asked a question before draft day, he was vague, unwilling to commit to an opinion, almost sheepish. He refused to extend himself, always playing it safe. However, once the draft was over, he instantly become a new man. He’d sit in the draft room, review every team’s pick and grade his work based on his round predictions, as if that was the true litmus test. I can still see him sitting there, looking like he just aced the exam. Walsh always told everyone: It never matters where we pick them, it only matters how they play. “

      • AndrewP says:

        I try to never get caught up in the ‘reach’ talk. My only problem with Feeney is his injuries. I don’t want a guy that has already had four shoulder surgeries that early qhen so many other needs will be present.

        • Attyla the Hawk says:

          Agreed.

          Although if the shoulders don’t check out. I don’t think he’s an R3 guy either. More like an R5+. Basically either he can play or he needs a redshirt year.

          There is too much quality depth in this draft in R3 to pass that up for a redshirt candidate.

          • AlaskaHawk says:

            I agree, with Freeney’s shoulder issues he could slide to the late rounds. A whole lot of potential does not beat shoulder injuries for a player who’s job is to tackle the opposing player.

            • Rob Staton says:

              We don’t know how teams are viewing the shoulder issues though. Rob Gronkowski was a risk to never play again at the end of his college career and went in round two. That worked out OK.

      • RealRhino2 says:

        Who is more valuable to the Seahawks: Russell Wilson or Bobby Wagner?

        Please don’t take offense, but I feel like we are all playing GM here, not scout. If we were playing scout, Walsh’s advice might be more appropriate. As a GM, I’d tell the scout the same thing: tell me if the guy can play and I’ll figure out what that’s worth in the draft. Because as a GM, you ABSOLUTELY have to rate guys by round.

        • HI Hawk says:

          I disagree with you. If they knew what Wilson would become they would have drafted him in the first round and risked losing Irvin. They were willing to risk losing him because they didn’t expect he’d be one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL. They just thought he could play a mean point guard for the run first offense Pete envisioned running. Getting out of the draft with your must haves is more important than picking them in the “correct” round.

          I fell into that trap last year with the Lockett trade. I thought they gave up too much for one guy. Well, I was dead wrong, not getting Lockett would have been disastrous. Who cares what notional players you lose when you hit a home run.

          I think William Jackson III’s a home run, I thought that after the Houston bowl game. I watched his other games after that. I was ready to draft him at 26 in December, before he backed up his play with a great combine. I didn’t care then and I don’t care now if he’s ” 3rd rounder “. He’d lock down the RCB position for 5 years and bring some much needed swagger back to the LOB. Pass defense returning to epically dominant? I value that as first round value.

          • RealRhino2 says:

            Your last sentence is perhaps the key one, but I’ll bury the lead and get back to it. First I want to talk about Wilson. I don’t believe they just thought he’d play like a typical 3rd-round QB and got lucky. Because Schneider has said many times they had him graded at the same level as Andrew Luck, and I feel extremely confident saying they — along with everybody else — viewed Luck as a 1st-round talent. What they did know/believe, however, was that Russell would *last* until the 3rd round, but Wagner wouldn’t. So they did exactly what I am talking about, which is to maximize the two picks by taking the guy in the 2nd that would have been gone by the 3rd, and taking the guy in the 3rd that would still be there, no matter how good each player was.

            Back to your last sentence. Your talking about a belief that the player will be exceptional. But unless he’s a punter or kicker, that’s virtually always a 1st-round guy, so that’s not really the scenario. But still, if you felt very confident that guy would be around in the 5th, I think it’d be a mistake to take him in the 1st because you are giving up on other 1st rounders that other people also believe in and will take. I’m not saying every pick has to be a game of high-stakes chicken, where you wait until the last minute for every guy, but reaching is a mistake.

            • purpleneer says:

              Yeah. They did expect him to be among the best. They were just also that certain that the rest of the league couldn’t see past his height.
              Assessing by where a guy is taken is way overdone, but it’s not without reason. The opportunity cost matters. It’s incredibly difficult to anticipate much about how late you can get a guy, but if you’re right, there’s real benefit to getting a guy as late as you can.

      • reggieregg says:

        EXACTLY… I think this draft is perfect for us to double dip and beef up both lines. OL DL OL DL do whatever you want 4 through 7. But make sure you get the guys you know are gonna comtribute. Regardless of round. The way the rookie contracts are set up the smartest thing to do is get the most out of these guys before their rookie contract is up. Not spend 2 or 3 years trying g to make their play match their measurables.

      • Coug1990 says:

        Sure, Bill Walsh thought that talking about “Describing the player by the round he should be taken” was a wrong way to think about this. But, most teams do just that. Players that are drafted and drafted high do get more reps/chances than lower round picks or UDFA’s on most teams. So, definitely it should be something that is considered when drafting.

        The Seahawks are somewhat unique in that they will give more chances than most teams. It is why the Seahawks put together a presentation to UDFA’s showing them how much success they have had with them.

  15. Drew says:

    Man, if JAX can get Myles Jack, that’d be huge for their defense. Plus with the reports of them being the landing spot for Bruce Irvin, combined with Donte Fowler coming back, they could overtake the AFC South and rule it.

    They got the offense, now they are just a couple pieces away on defense. They have the money to being to pay Bruce $10M+ a year and with his versatility, that defense would take a huge step forward.

  16. unitas77 says:

    How important is the Sam linebacker in the hawks D. He will only play 30% of the snaps, Wagner and Wright stay on the field in Nickel. Bruce Irvin was a pass rusher with elite measurables, that’s why he was valued middle of the first round. I don’t think Feeney is a special pass rusher, special athlete but not a special pass rusher. I think the hawks spend their early picks on other positions not sam linebacker.

    • Jake says:

      I think you kind of said it yourself. If he was a special pass rusher he might be a top 15 pick like Irvin was. 8 sacks isn’t exactly chopped liver though at #56. I don’t think it’s far fetched to consider him at that spot. I might be more comfortable in the 3rd with the injury concerns but there just aren’t many players with his measureables.

    • Rob Staton says:

      He could take all of Irvin’s snaps and they spent the #15 on him.

  17. D says:

    If Jaylon Smith drops into the 4-5 rd range could you see the Hawks spending a pick on him? You would probably still have to draft another LB to replace Irvin at some point (Feeney, Deion Jones, etc.) or rely on KPL or Mike Morgan. Is two picks too much draft capital to spend on LBs even if there is the potential to get a top 5 player at the position?

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      If he drops that far it’ll be because his knee is worse than everyone thought.

      • D says:

        Yeah that was the assumption. Sort of a Marcus Lattimore situation, probably equal chances of him never playing again or being an above average starter. If you decide to take that risk, do you have to draft another LB to hedge your bet? Obviously, this all depends quite a bit on what the medical checks reveal.

        • Drew says:

          I’d take a 5th round flier on him. Not a 4th.

          • Miles says:

            His injury is very similar to Lattimore’s. That means he will probably never play. I hope he just retires now to avoid all the painful rehab he’s gotta go through to get back.

            • reggieregg says:

              But didn’t Lattimore blow his acl out 2 times before that….I hope it’s not the same I want Jaylon Smith to be a Seahawk! I think they have to take that chance. We draft guys all the time with the intention of coaching them up hoping they will someday be as good as he already is!

    • Rob Staton says:

      Someone will take a chance D. Seattle might — they did with Jesse Williams in round five who had knee issues.

  18. Lewis says:

    Rob, I’m curious. Assuming Okung and Irvin are gone, but we have retained at least one of Rubin/Mebane. Putting yourself in JSPC’s collective shoes, who, of the players you have off the board at 26, would you choose over Ifedi, should they happen to drop to us?

  19. Dylan says:

    Mario Williams being released, good fit for the Hawks?

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      Expensive

    • Bill Bobaggins says:

      He’ll cost way too much and is getting too old. Pass.

    • lil'stink says:

      Bills fans don’t seem to be too disappointed by it. Never a good sign. He’d be a great fit as a rotational pass rusher, but I’m sure he’ll just go to the team that offers him the most $ instead of the best chance to win a ring.

    • badjujus says:

      Dont let these guys dissuade you. He is towards the end of his career, and the closest thing to a winner her was on was the TEXANs,

      He was getting PAID the past 4 years and on a crap team, So I really think theres a chance he might get a prove it style deal with incentives on a winner.

      He is a perfect leo candidate and would make a huge difference for the hawks.

      WE just cant pay him more then Mike B

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        He’s a former #1 overall pick, a 4-time pro-bowler, 1st team all pro, and former NFL Defensive Lineman of the Year.

        What sort of ‘prove it’ deal did you have in mind for him???

      • Bill Bobaggins says:

        He’s also 31. Sign him to a “prove it” kind of deal and then what? Sign him long term if he works out?

        This guy is going to go where the money is at this point. Put a mint in his bank account and walk off into the sunset.

        • Miles says:

          I think what badjujus mean is not a prove-it deal but an inexpensive playing-for-the-ring type deal. Chances are his next contract is his last anyway. It’s unlikely, but sometimes older players who have made boku dinero will take a heavy discount to try for a ring. See Antoine Winfield, Kevin Williams, (almost) Jared Allen.

          • badjujus says:

            The league pays for what have you done recently! His past success will not give him as much value as you think it would.

            • badjujus says:

              At this point a ring could make him HOF material or not, that is another possible implication of his decision.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      He could fit with the Seahawks.

      Seattle will have to wait on him and get him on a very modest deal. Similar to how we signed Kevin Williams in 2014. He’ll have to rot on the market.

      Won’t be a prove it deal. More like a ‘get a ring’ deal.

      I would say this — the UFA market for DTs should be really really cool. With this many rookies coming out — a lot of teams aren’t going to be keen on spending big except on younger pass rush types.

      There is definitely a plausible scenario where Williams could factor for us. Not likely. But not altogether improbable. The conditions seems favorable this year.

      • Dylan says:

        Exactly my thoughts Attyla. He is 31, that is basically a year older than Avril/Bennett. We aren’t talking about someone who is in the last twilight of their career. Ware, Allen, Peppers have had some success at even older ages and in the case of Ware worse injury history.

        He has proven production but was played out of position with Buffalo, fits as a 4-3 def end. If he is looking to prolong his career a little bit by getting into more of a rotation, win games, and compete for a ring, as well as play in a 4-3 scheme that he has already proven to be successful in, then Seattle seems like a good fit. Obviously he would have to prioritize all of those benefits I listed above over money because I don’t think the Hawks can or will pay him what others will offer, but I don’t see John doesn’t at least kick the tires on this.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I think he’s going to get a lot of money to start for a year or two for a 4-3 team.

          • Cockney Hawk says:

            I believe Seahawks wont over pay at DT. this draft is loaded with Rubins and Mebanes. However I think they resign one of they come cheap and draft one day 2/3. Look for them to kick the tyres on any free agent vet cuts looking for ring.

  20. CDub says:

    Last years draft class brought us Clark, Lockett, and Rawls. Pretty much knocked it out of the park with those players. There are some unproven players still (Sokoli, Glowinski) and it’s only been a year. I think their could have been some more successful picks and it seems like a good amount of the guys didn’t pan out, which is to be expected. PCJS tend to go off the beaten track with their choices. Sometimes it pans out, sometimes it doesn’t.

    Do you feel like they could have done better with picks such as Gwatchum, Murphy, Poole? Can anything be learned from this?

    • NathanM says:

      We learn that some picks take a year to develop an NFL skill set. It’s easy to write off a guy that didn’t play in his first year, but neither did Kam Chancellor, Jeremy Lane, Byron Maxwell, Garry Gilliam…

    • cha says:

      If I recall Gwacham was snapped up by the Saints right after the Hawks waived him and saw action in a few games for them this year. Pretty low probability that the Hawks would have carried him on their 53 man when they drafted him, they were probably hoping he’d slip through and be a PS for 2015.

      • Miles says:

        It would have been nice to keep Gwacham. Unique character guy and he looked really good in preseason. I think he’ll end up being like O’Brien Schofield. Good player we should have had but when you have Bennett, Avril and Clark, having any real regrets about not being able to hang onto a 7th round pass rusher is a little hindsight 20/20 and slightly greedy.

        • lil'stink says:

          Gwachum flashed a little bit for the Saints in the second half last year. The thing I don’t understand is why they chose a guy like Sokoli over him (or someone else). I really doubt anyone would have gone out and signed Soko. I would think he could have made it to the PS.

          • badjujus says:

            Sokoli is the unicorn of athletes. There has never been anyone in the nfl like him @ the OLine position.

            He has measurables of JJ watt + Richard shermans vert… at 300 some lbs… let that sink in…

            • Miles says:

              “The unicorn of athletes” haha, I like that.

              He is the NFL’s first 5-sigma athlete since the dawn of SPARQ.

          • Robert says:

            I wouldn’t count Sokali out. He is the most athletic oline prospect ever! He also came from a war torn country and has made it his divine mission to succeed in the NFL for his entire country!

            • Robert says:

              *Sokoli spell childless checker. My daughter put this stupid text app on my phone… Looks cool, but the spell checker is dumb and makes executive decisions.

          • Coug1990 says:

            I do not believe the Seahawks agreed with your assessment or else that is what they would have done. Don’t forget they waived fourth round pick Terry Poole and kept Sokoli.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      Actually no.

      If you look at the guys that didn’t play a down for us — just look at how many stuck with other clubs. It’s impressive.

      Seattle, if we’d drafted these guys in 2010 or even 2011 — probably keeps these guys. But this team is too loaded now. We already stash the premier projects.

      The reality is these guys that don’t stick with us — they’re still in the league. And some are getting second deals. They just can’t crack our 53.

      • Coug1990 says:

        Yes, I was about to make the same point. There are only so many spots on the roster that there are going to be cuts that neither the front office, nor the fans like. In the early years of JS/PC they may have been able to stash them on the practice squad. Not anymore.

  21. Nate Beezy says:

    Rob, what is your opinion of Rees Odhiambo in say Rd 2-4?
    “Plays with a lot of grit and toughness.” #Seahawky

  22. Miles says:

    I really hope Wentz doesn’t end up in Cleveland. I really like him as a player and I like that he comes from a college in the middle of nowhere. I really feel that Cleveland is a place where careers go to burn, especially for quarterbacks. Terrible organization.

    • MisterNeutron says:

      We’ll see how DePodesta and Hue Jackson can turn things around there. I’m not a Browns fan, but it’s been sad to see that city revive the franchise and then be so awful for nearly two decades.

  23. RWIII says:

    Rob: If Charles Tapper was still on the board at 56 do you think John Schneider would take Tapper over Feeney?

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      They’re both good prospects, but one fills a need more than the other (Feeney replacing Irvin).

    • Steve Nelsen says:

      I would take tapper over Feeney at 56 at hope to get Feeney in round 3.

      Tapper could be the future replacement for Avril. And we need more pass rush now.

      If Feeney isn’t there in Rd 3, you can find another WILL – maybe Overton.

      • Volume12 says:

        Tapper.

        So Tapper could play LEO, but Frank Clark is outta the question for some people? I don’t get it.

        • David says:

          Do we need more edge pressure? Bennett, Avril and then Clark (who has a year under his belt and tested just as good if not better than many of the edge guys did at last years combine) for sub-packages and rotation. I feel it was not edge pressure that was the issue, it was interior push, not to mention the fact that they had to use Bennet in the middle on 3rd downs due to lack of interior pass rushers.

  24. Trevor says:

    I have been a huge Freeney fan since the beginning of the year and think he would great fit as a replacement for Bruce but he is a HUGE risk as a 2nd rounder with multiple shoulder injuries and never really playing a college season without getting hurt much less an NFL 16 game schedule.

    Love the player but in the 2nd round it is too big a risk IMO. With the 3rd round comp perhaps as it is an extra pick but in the 2nd round we need a guy we know will contribute. Too much DL and Interior OL talent to take a flier on Freeney that early unless they are 100% with the medicals and I don’t know how they could be.

  25. RealRhino2 says:

    Rob, I love all the thought and effort you put into this stuff.

    I think I would be disappointed with Feeney in R2. Just too much risk, and so many other guys on the board with less risk and good talent. But what do I know?

    One thing I think is that unless we are talking about a project, we need to get it out of our head that we are getting a plug and play LT at #26. Even if Conklin and Decker fall, those are only *maybe* LTs. As in guys you could live with there and it wouldn’t be a disaster but ultimately you want to move them to RT. Think we need to accept that a tackle at #26 is going to be a RT, so we need to use FA to figure out LT.

    • Miles says:

      I think you have to live with the fact that you are probably not getting a top-10 NFL LT in 2016. The only real solution for me is to plug in Gilliam at LT because he looks the part. If Conklin is there it seems like a great choice. Worry about where to plug him in later, but he would be great at either LG or RT.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Gilliam will probably start at LT.

      The options in FA at tackle are horrendous. No answers there unfortunately.

  26. GoHawks5151 says:

    Rob,

    Its been stated by many that former fave of this site, Duke Williams from Auburn, pretty much cemented his spot a UDFA after combine. But beyond a mountain of character flags, he never seemed like a guy that was going to test well at the combine, kinda like Jarvis Landry (I know Landry improved his times at his pro day, but who doesn’t…). Always just seemed like a good football player. At this point does he offer the Seahawks (or any team) anything worthwhile?

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      As a non priority UDFA, absolutely.

      But only if they are convinced he’s matured. At UDFA value, he’s appropriate. Because you can cut him without implications if he hasn’t matured.

      I wouldn’t rate him a priority UDFA where you commit the large bonuses to lure a prospect to the team. There are undoubtedly some players more worthy of that bonus.

      Even if he were a priority UDFA — the cost is pretty minimal. Seattle is too good of a team in terms of providing opportunity to UDFA players that they won’t be in the mix for the best in that pool. I don’t see Williams as being the best in that pool.

  27. MisterNeutron says:

    A very sensible two-round mock. I do think that Seattle keeps their 1st round pick this time, but unless there’s a guy they just gotta have at #56 (see below), there is a decent chance they trade down a bit with that pick and get one or two more picks in addition to the end-of-second/early third. For example, Seattle’s 2nd is roughly equal to Tennessee’s 3rd, 5th, and 6th picks (all beginning-of-round picks), which would net the Hawks non-comp 5th and 6th round picks. There’s a lot that they could do with those; plenty of value should be available there. Another possibility: Seattle’s 2nd for Carolina’s 2nd and 4th. There would be other options too.

    Another reason to trade early into the 3rd, if they do indeed covet Feeney: I just think he’ll be available there. He had a very good college career and he’s super-athletic, but the combination of his shoulder injuries, the sports hernia, and him not having the most defined role in the NFL is enough to prevent him from rocketing up the boards that far.

    Also, Kenyan Drake should be on Seattle’s radar as a later-round back (hello early 5th round pick they got from TENN). Drake fully recovered from his 2014 broken leg as was clearly seen in 2015 and in the combine drills. Does Seattle need another bruiser at RB, or would they benefit more from a fast, super-athletic, pass-catching RB who could be the 2nd PR/KR option? Drake has little wear on his tires (tyres). He’d give Seattle another look at RB and could line up as a wide-out in a number of formations. I can picture him giving defenses fits on screens, quick passes, and reverses.

    • Volume12 says:

      I’m wondering about that too.

      Rawls is gonna need to be teamed with someone, and I can’t help but think a change of pace guy would fit perfectly with him.

      ND RB CJ Prosise seems ideal, but San Jose St RB Tyler Ervin is someone I’m gonna look into. I wanna see if Ervin runs and plays bigger than his size.

      Yes, I know his size specs aren’t in Seattle’s wheelhouse, but he might just be too dynamic. And he’s gonna put on more weight anyways at the next level.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Tennessee needs to rebuild the roster, no way they would give up picks (or a large number of picks). But perhaps they might be willing to swap their 4th and a 7th with Seattle for a minor trade of the 2nd back for a 3rd…. I would have to look at the draft pick trade value chart.

  28. reggieregg says:

    Rob….. how do the positions across the offensive line rank in order of importance to the Seahawks? Are we maybe overvaluing the LT spot because the rest of the NFL does? Imo even when okung was down and bailey and Gilliam were out at tackle all the pressure always seemed to come right up the middle. If we were to draft the gcg combo that we WANT and NEED we would not only be upgrading the position but also tilting the pay scale of having an above average line considering tackles usually get paid so much more. Cgc is more important than the tackles to me. Even Russ can’t avoid the 300 lb guy that’s only 5 ft away from him at the hike of the ball.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think they’re all pretty important given the 2015 performance.

      However, it’s evident you can find good interior O-lineman in rounds 2-5. That will certainly not be the case at tackle. If you want a tackle you have to go R1. If you want a center or guard you can wait and get good options. The thought of Bailey starting every week petrifies me.

      • reggieregg says:

        Agreed!

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        But if the guy inside of Bailey are solid, perhaps his play would improve. He would not have to worry if the guy on his left (TE) and right (LG) are doing their jobs.. that was some of the problems last year, lack of cohesion and guys whiffing on blocks, causing the RT or LT to pick up the wrong guy or block inside / out… allowing guys off the edge into the backfield.

        I would have concerns, but I also know he has had more than a few years in the system now and could probably do enough to keep RW clean. Can’t be worse than last year?!

  29. neil says:

    I have seen alot of talk on taking a pass rush linebacker, to replace Irvin, relatively early in the draft. I was under the Impression that job would fall to Frank Clark.

    • Bill Bobaggins says:

      Irvin and Clark are entirely different. Clark can’t play LB. When Irvin is asked to rush, he plays the LEO role and relies heavily on a speed rush. Clark is more of your Michael Bennett clone.

      • reggieregg says:

        Irvin could barely play lb the way the scheme is intended for him to play. Malcolm Smith balled out in that spot! Their in coverage way too much to be hung up on rush ability. We barely blitz.

      • neil says:

        I don’t know that Irvin and Clark are so different. They are both about 250 lbs and Irvin is not much of a cover guy.

    • Drew says:

      Frank Clark is not a LB, he’s a DE. He’s built in the mold of Michael Bennett and can rush from both DE and DT. He might be able to take some of Irvin’s snaps at DE, but for the Nascar package of Avril, Bennett, Clark, we still need another DE/OLB that can rush.

      • David says:

        I respectfully disagree, last year for much of the year the 3rd down sub-package was Irvin, Hill, Bennett and Avril, in that order. Clark can take Irvin’s snaps on the edge (athletically he is probably just as good if not better than a guy we can draft this year) and what we really need is an upgrade for Hill. Interior pressure guy, doesn’t have to be an edge guy.

    • reggieregg says:

      Oh what a group of linebackers we will have with Jaylon Smith. What pick do we have to use to get him?? Jaylon Smith should be a Seahawk!

  30. Scraps says:

    I think describing Romo as “perennially injured Tony Romo” is a bit of an exaggeration. Last year was last year, but the previous four seasons he started 16, 16, 15, and 15 games.

    Of course, he’s going to be 36 at the start of the season, so your point about “the Cowboys have to consider developing someone behind [Romo]” still stands.

    • sdcoug says:

      I’ve been saying for awhile I think it’s much more likely they take a Prescott in the 3rd than it is using the #4 on a QB. Romo is a good QB who also happens to have a big salary and dead money hit for several more years. They expect he will be there for awhile and also have big holes on their roster that just scream for a playmaker at #4

      • RealRhino2 says:

        Yes. IMO this draft has maybe six guys that are on a level by themselves: Tunsil, Ramsey, Bosa, Buckner, Jack, Elliott (that last one is mine alone, maybe).

        I don’t pass on one of those elite guys for a chance at a QB when I’ve already got a very good QB on the roster. Especially when literally every single elite player on the board after #1 is gone also fills a desperate need for my team (DE, LB, DB, RB). Cowboys are not taking a QB.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          Which one of those non-QB options you think would’ve made a difference in DAL making the playoffs this year?

          Would any of them have resulted in at least one victory without Romo in the game? Doubtful.

          DAL will take a QB.

          • RealRhino2 says:

            So we’re drafting a QB in R1, too? Because if Russell goes down, we’re sunk, too.

            How many of those guys? I don’t know. Maybe if Tunsil is there Romo doesn’t get hit at all and they are in the NFC title game. Maybe if Elliott is there they can actually run the ball and Romo isn’t dropping back so much and getting hit. Maybe if Bosa or Ramsey are there they are playing with the lead more and Romo doesn’t have to pass as much, etc., etc.

            But I know a lot of those guys can help Dallas THIS year if Romo stays healthy. I know they need to transition, but you are wasting your window if you take a backup at #4. No QB.

            • CHawk Talker Eric says:

              C’mon man. You’re comparing a team with a 36 year old QB who’s missed 24 games since 2010 and has undergone multiple back and shoulder surgeries, to one with a 27 year old QB who’s never missed a single play in his career.

              Do you really think SEA and DAL are in the same situation with respect to the QB position?

              Also, what would be your plan for DAL at QB beyond 2016? I mean, assuming your plan isn’t to ride the broken shoulder of an injured Romo to another wasted season and another top 5 draft pick.

              • sdcoug says:

                Yeah, cause zerooooo QBs have ever been culled from the ranks of round 2 or 3 or…

              • RealRhino2 says:

                No, they aren’t in the same position. But I think QB is different than other positions. I don’t think any of the R1 QBs this year are more likely to help Dallas win games next year than a decent (think Tarvaris Jackson-level) backup would be. And unlike other positions, unless the starter is injured, the backup contributes nothing.

                So if you are assuming Romo goes down in 2016, grabbing RGIII or Tarvaris Jackson or Chase Daniel is probably more likely to win you games than Goff or Lynch, for example. And if your concern is transitioning, grab Prescott in the 3rd or the kid from Liberty or take a flier on somebody else you like (Hackenburg, since you’d have time to straighten him out, if possible). See if they turn into something.

                • CHawk Talker Eric says:

                  Fair argument. But even if a RG3 or similar would be better in 2016 than any of the rookie prospects, what about beyond?

                  We agree there are maybe 5 or 6 true impact players in this draft, and none are a QB. But DAL is one big hit away from having no viable option at QB and tanking another season.

                  Maybe they kick the can down the road by signing a decent FA back up.

                  But… (a) there’s no guarantee 2017’s QB class will be any deeper, and (b) there’s no guarantee DAL will have as high a draft pick.

                  Good argument though.

                  • CHawk Talker Eric says:

                    I want to add that if the decision was mine, I’d sign a decent vet and draft Myles Jack at 4.

                    But I saw JJ/JG practically drool over Wentz at Senior Bowl. Wouldn’t surprise me if they trade with TEN to get him.

              • purpleneer says:

                It’s an exaggeration, but the point still stands. And it’s not like they couldn’t have gone a better route with the backup or replacement QB last year either. Teams have made playoffs with mediocre QBs and you can improve on Weeden without using a top-5 pick.
                I know we like to think Tarvaris Jackson is such a scrub, but he’s better than many want to admit and to me he makes a lot more sense than forcing a high pick. While it’s tough to find a franchise QB when you’re not picking high, it’s not like doing so makes it a sure thing.
                As far as planning for the future, picking a guy they like, just not nearly that high, makes sense as even the top guys will need time. The scarcity of good QBs leads to choices that actually worsen the issue, but good teams can avoid them. The bad teams force high picks on players who aren’t good enough, and they force guys into bad situations, running a bad teams before they ready for even a good situation. It’s tough as fans, but impatience has caused a good portion of the QB shortage in the league. The most damaging thing is to be wrong when you commit that much to a QB, much worse than passing on a good one.

  31. Winston says:

    Rob, what is your take on Rashard Robinson? He has the requisite arm length (32.25″), height (6’1″), but he only weighed in at 171 pounds. Got kicked off LSU for off field trouble and doesn’t have a large body of work. He certainly has the tools, but just needs to bulk up to at least 190 pounds. 190 pounds seems to be the low point for Seattle corners. For reference, Sherman is 195 pounds, Simon and Maxwell are 200+ pounds, but Jeremy Lane is at 190 pounds. Is it too much of a hope to have him be the Seahawks’ pick in the fourth round? Could replace Tharold Simon if he still can’t get on the field..

    • Volume12 says:

      Wasn’t CB Tye Smith like 170 and some odd pounds last year at this time?

    • Rob Staton says:

      He tested well enough to be in contention but must get bigger. He’s too slight. He could be a late round or UDFA candidate.

      • Winston says:

        Very true! I always hate the “Player X must get stronger” argument since all of these guys will have to inevitably get stronger to last in the NFL. Tunsil must get stronger to take the rigors of playing LT, Ramsey must get stronger, etc. But in Robinson’s case he has to gain about 20 pounds and not just the traditional way of gaining strength for the jump in competition. Lance Zuerlein has an unnamed SEC D-coordinator say that he “definitely hates school” so I’m wondering whether he would put the time in to be a pro like how you see Sherman, ET, etc. approach the game. They can influence those study habits, but they can’t make him love football!

    • Volume12 says:

      Seattle had 4 draft prospects on 710 ESPN Seattle/Spokane last year.

      RB Josh Robinson
      WR Tyler Lockett

      And 2 names that are ecscaping my mind right now.

  32. Volume12 says:

    Can’t wait for the pro days to start. Some big time combine snubs.

    2-3 of Seattle’s selections this year will be from guys that weren’t at the combine.

    Every year under PC/JS, the players drafted in the 1st four rounds have been combine guys.

    Looking forward to guys like Oregon DT Alex Balducci, Kentucky DT Cory Johnson, UVA DT David Dean just to mention a few.

    WRs Paul McRoberts, WR Jaydon Mickens, WR Jay Lee, WR Bryce Treggs, WR Devin Lucien.

    CB Daniel Davie, CB Arjen Colquhoun, LB Antwoine Williams, TE Gabe Hughes, LB Myke Tavarres,

  33. Zach says:

    Has anyone been able to find much film on Feeney?

  34. Volume12 says:

    I think Atlanta is gonna run to the podium for Clemson DE Shaq Lawson.

  35. I really like this mock and your reasoning. Assuming Feeney clears medical and we aren’t scared off by that (please god if we draft him let him stay healthy. Availability > Ability) I love the pick. Replacing Okung and replacing Irvin with our first two picks just makes sense, clean and simple.

    (Quick question, I assume by what you wrote that Feeney can pass rush as well? So he’d fully replace Irvin both as a LB and DE?)

    I completely agree that addressing O-line again in the 3rd with one of our picks is a must and a great place to do so. So much Center talent, some really good OG talent, and I believe some OT talent that we’d move inside (potential LG’s). It is rough because on one hand I’d love to get a real Center (Glasgow), or a awesome versatile C/OG like Dahl, but at the same time I am confident in Glow at RG, and I think Lewis is “solid” as Pete said at Center. After OT our biggest need is LG (replacing Britt).

    The ideal situation is to replace Britt with a FA, and that would be smart anyways because with a O-line of; Gilliam-_____-Lewis/Draft pick—-Glow—Draft Pick we’d have no vets on the line. I feel you want at least one. With the money saved not re-signing Okung and Irvin I feel buying a FA LG (Boone? Someone else?) would be very smart, and help us in the draft. Then with that 3rd round pick we can get a Glasgow or Dahl or McGovern who all have C/G versatility. You can have that pick compete with Glow (to push him) and with Lewis (most likely beating him and earning the job).

    From there your idea for a DT in the 3rd…I don’t dislike it. I’d obviously prefer for us to like someone just as much in the 4th. Obviously we agree in regards to the DT FA market being cheapened due to the strength of the DT draft class, which can allow us to re-sign Rubin, Mebane, and maybe others (especially during the preseason roster cut downs where a DT rookie might beat a vet DT which puts some quality vet DT’s on the street, available to pickup for cheap).

    Going DT in the 4th instead of the 3rd (assuming there is a DT our FO likes in the 4th just as much) allows us to attack a different position group with one of our 3rd round picks. We could go WR, RB, OL again, DE or some other position. That all depends on how the FO feels about the talent they expect to be in FA and the talent they expect to be available in UDFA along with the talent we have on our roster. Is there a priority UDFA WR (Marquez North) or RB that the FO will target hard and because of it not go after RB or WR in the draft? How does the FO feel about Kasen? Kevin? PRich? Would the FO rather use a draft pick for more pressing matters than RB and instead sign a FA like Turbin as our 3rd down back?

  36. Volume12 says:

    What do you guys think about replacing Ricardo Lockett with someone similar in size, athleticism, but a Ty Montgomery like skill set?

    • Steve Nelsen says:

      That would fill a couple needs. I expect that when we get news on Ricardo, it will be that he is retiring. I loved his hits as a ST gunner but he never turned into a reliable receiver.

    • Rik says:

      He was a special teams star, but when he went out other players stepped up and played well. Marsh and McCray in particular were great special teams players last year. I don’t don’t think he makes it back onto the active roster, even if he’s fully healed. He was always something of a liability as a receiver (very, very low reception numbers).

    • D says:

      Did you have someone particular in mind? The only player that comes to mind is Cordarrelle Patterson or maybe Tyler Boyd. Taller receiver but some shifty moves like a shorter guy.

      • Volume12 says:

        I do. Want a hint? He’s 6’2, 215 lbs., freak athlete. Comrs from a bigger and better school than ‘Rocket.’

        It’s not Boyd. Him and Hollywood Higgins are off my list. They tested in the 4th percentile.

        • Volume12 says:

          He a draft prospect. Here’s the hint… Taillights.

        • D says:

          Are you talking about replacing one Ricardo with another Ricardo? The guy from Auburn? He had some pretty impressive combine numbers. Didn’t he also catch that crazy ‘hail mary’ pass a few years ago?

          • Volume12 says:

            We have a winner!

            Yes he did.

            Have to see his agility numbers, but I’m high on him.

            • D says:

              I can’t recall seeing much of his tape. Does he have some YAC ability to him? There aren’t many guys that size with legit shiftyness.

              • Volume12 says:

                That’s why I want to see his agility numbers.

                • Volume12 says:

                  If Seattle doesn’t take a WR before or in round 4, I think they wait until UDFA to address it.

                  • David says:

                    The miracle at Jordan-Hare! One of the most spectacular catches I’ve ever seen in college football.

                    I’ve watched a lot of tape of Auburn. Louis def a special teams guy and a returner (I don’t see Lockett returning for much longer, he’s too important as a receiver). He’s got enough speed and agility to flank defenders wide, at least in college (him and Corey Grant were used the most frequently in the Auburn’s inverted veer speed sweep plays) which they basically faked every play.Sometimes it would be inside zone read with motion, other times Louis would get the ball and some of their most explosive running plays came on these.

                    Pros:
                    Has breakaway speed and acceleration. Played for a power running team so adequate blocker and knows what it’s like to play for a run-first team with limited catch opportunities.

                    Cons:
                    Probably somewhat of a project at WR. Played from the slot a lot in college and in 2013 was behind Sammie Coates at WR and in 2014 behind Coats and Duke Williams and didn’t really become a go-to guy until Williams got dismissed. Not necessarily a go up and get it guy like Coates was (every explosive pass I’ve seen to Louis he’s wide open, usually because Auburn runs so much that the defenses usually cheat on the run hard and play-action was deadly, at least when Nick Marshall was QB). Don’t see him make a ton of contested catches or use his body particularly effective.

            • Steve Nelsen says:

              Did he play ST or are you seeing him solely as a receiver?

  37. Bill Bobaggins says:

    I think for me, the question comes down to where you want to invest your ’16 draft capital. We saw at the beginning of last year an o-line that was a mess and the entire team suffered. After some tweaks and experience, they got it together and RW went bananas, moving into the MVP conversation.

    I really would hate to see the Hawks start next season in the same boat with a brand new o-line that needs half a season to find their groove together. PLEASE give RW some protection early on and this team can be really difficult to beat. Re-sign Okung, find an FA who can come in and compete and draft the best o-lineman you can at #26. Reinvest in that line at #56 if you have to. Just protect your greatest asset, RW. This guy can dominate this league with some protection, a good running game (I think Rawls is legit) and some decent WR’s. By the way, I think that Kearse is expendable and that Kasen Williams is actually much better.

    The flip side of this is investing in your very solid D. If Irvin walks for bigger $$ (although he’s stated that he’ll take a home town discount), you’ll have a decision to make and it’ll most likely have to come in the 1st round as this DE class drops off dramatically after the top few (albeit mediocre) DE’s.

    Bottom line, you have to protect that QB above all, in my opinion. Do everything you can to let this very special talent flourish.

    • Volume12 says:

      The only 2 positions that make sense in the 1st round are OT and DE. Even more so when you factor in that these are 2 positions getting the most $ other than QB’s.

      Spriggs, Decker, Conklin, Coleman, Ifedi, Clark, Lawson, Ogbah are the guys I got my eye on.

      But, if Okung leaves, and he’s probably going to, then you almost have to take an OT. Even if it means moving up to get your guy.

      I’ve been a fan of Germain Ifedi all year. I think he just ticks off every box, is incredibly versatile (LG, RT, LT), freakish length, massive upside, really good athlete, bloodlines, former 2-3 sport standout, good interview/locker room guy, tough.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        I don’t know… a CB or LB would also make some sense. If the right guy was sitting there, they would grab him. Heck, if the unthinkable happened and Elliot was sitting there, I seriously doubt Seattle would pass on the top RB in the draft at #26.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I’m not sure they’d take a corner. LB would have to be mighty explosive and there isn’t really one other than Feeney (not including Jack, Lee).

          I tend to agree with V12 — unless they keep Okung it’s looking like OT unless they’ve all gone somehow or DL.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m sure they’d love to do those things — but if Okung commands $10m APY you’re looking at almost no more money to spend. And with other guys they need to keep too it’s a dilemma for the Seahawks.

      • Poweroflogic says:

        At $10m APY for Okung, they could still have $10m+ left over for significant contracts this offseason. The math some have been using is not right.

        Is 10m for Okung worth it? Debateable perhaps, but I would give it at least 50/50 that the Seahawks have concluded they can less afford to lose Okung, than to “overpay” him.

        The market is what it is for LTs. Okung is the best Olineman they have and is the least replaceable of all their UFAs, and as noted they will have money left over to keep more UFAs. Without Okung, it’s simply hard to conceive of a realistic strategy of stabilizing an OL that the FO knows has become a major liability.

        Letting Okung go, they could bring in a couple FA vets to fill other positions on the line, but no matter what then you are left with Gillian/Bailey/Rookie at LT, which is a gamble with bad odds. After a year Gillian is barely good enough where he is. Britt will be riding pine or out the door.

        In the past, when the organization has confronted its leading weakness each offseason, the typical response from PC/JS has not been tepid or thrifty — it’s been downright overkill.

        • Rob Staton says:

          They will not have +$10m to spend if they sign Okung to a $10m APY deal. Not even close.

          Davis Hsu’s projection is accurate and estimates $18-19m for the seven FA’s set to earn +$2m APY.

          By all means believe keeping Okung is possible — but if any team offers anything like $10m APY he won’t be staying in Seattle. The best chance is the injury issue impacts his market and they get him on a one year deal for something like $5-6m.

          As for confronting their greatest weakness — spending a round one pick on a tackle would in a sense be doing that. And they clearly believe in Gilliam.

          • Poweroflogic says:

            No, the estimate of 18m is not ‘accurate’ in the sense that it is pure mathematical fact of what the Seahawks can spend on 2m+ salaries this offseason. It is a back of the envelope estimate based on several admittedly uncertain assumptions (eg. Ryan gets resigned; 5m cost of resigning RFAs/ERFAs; etc).

            Here is the starting point of an exact to the dollar breakdown from Jason Drake, which updates his earlier article on the subject. If you find mathematical error please let us know:

            http://www.fieldgulls.com/2016/2/23/11081186/nfl-salary-cap-seahawks-russell-okung-bruce-irvin-jermaine-kearse#361122155

            Even leaving aside the question of Lynch’s dead money – how it is spread over this year and next – the logic is the same. The Seahawks can easily sign $20m+ worth of UFA/FA APY salaries this offseason (in the $2m+ major contract category). They also have the reasonable option of spending MORE if they carefully back load contracts. Back loading actually has a rational basis this year, unlike most, because new needs in 2017 (Baldwin extension; Willson decision) are modest relative to the new cap space freed up that year.

            You may feel differently, but the Seahawks may deem Okung a core player and one that is particularly hard to replace without unacceptable risks, given what happened on the offensive line last year (ie. it cost them games and their playoff run). Resigning Okung at the going rate for LTs, with caps increasing 8%/year, IN ADDITION TO a first or second round pick on OL is a greater commitment to the leading team need than going on a whim and a prayer by starting a rookie at LT and moving your shaky TE-convert from RT to LT.

            I don’t know for certain what will happen because Okung’s price could go even higher. That’s why I say 50/50. But absolutely no one can say with certainty that the Seahawks will not consider resigning Okung at 8m+.

  38. Steve Nelsen says:

    One of the psychological effects that plays into mock drafts is the bias toward the best. If you feel Seattle needs a particular position, you have a natural tendency to want the best player at that position. Similarly, if you feel a player is good, you have a confidence bias for that player and will tend to mock his draft position higher because you tend to expect people to see what you see and evaluate it similarly. I hope these biases are affecting some of Rob’s 2nd round grades because he has a number of players going before 56 that I would love to have available for Seattle 🙂

    Pete Carroll has said that one of john Schneider’s gifts is being able to identify how the rest of the league will draft players that Seattle evaluates highly.

    Here are some players with unique abilities that I am trying to “place” in the draft:
    LB Stephen Weatherly 6-4, 267, 1.59 spilt, 34.5″ arms, 4.60
    LB Montese Overton 6-2, 223, 1.59 split, 4.61
    WR/H-back Devon Cajuste 6-4, 234, 33″ arms, 10.75″ hands, 4.62
    FB Dan Vitale 6-1, 239, 4.60 “Superback”
    TE LaQuan McGowan 6-7, 410

    • Dingbatman says:

      Just watched some Vitale highlights. Wow. Can he block as fullback or more of a tight end?

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        He is too small for TE. He could fill the Coleman FB role but not the Tukuafu jumbo FB role.

        I see him as a possible 3rd down back, pass blocking and catching balls out of the backfield, and a ST stud.

  39. Dan says:

    In the back of my head, I’m thinking “Bosa, Elliot, Treadwill, Spence??? These guys are going way too early in this mock!!” (Elliot, in my mind, should go after Henry, Treadwill is a non-explosive possession receiver, and Spence and Bosa just flopped at the combine)…

    But then I reminded myself that this mock is aiming towards nation-wide favorites. Not prospects that I personally am not a fan of. Good mock Rob.

    I do wonder though, how will the emphasis change in the coming months? These guys were favorites before the combine but give it a few weeks and people might be moving a player like Darren Lee up the boards.

    • RealRhino2 says:

      I actually think it will go the other way. Recency bias has us all drooling all over workout warriors, and as time goes by people will notice, oh yeah, they can’t play football. Rawls and Lockett both were rated as below the NFL average for their position, BTW.

      • Volume12 says:

        Everyone is a 1st or 2nd round pick right now. No different than after the Senior Bowl.

        Regarding Lockett and Rawls. You bring up a good point. The majority of Seattle’s picks will be spent on on big time athletes or SPARQy prospects, but, they always select a couple guys that aren’t.

        • matt says:

          SPRAQ ratings are a great tool to evaluate athleticism. It’s not a perfect system. Lockett scored as an average athlete because he’s lightweight, not because his test numbers were slow.

          • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

            It is a great indicator who GB will take late at WR however. Every SPARQ’d up guy I liked late (Janis, etc) they have scooped up.

  40. bobbyk says:

    There’s no way we can argue with an offensive tackle used on our first pick. There may be guys we think are better than Ifedi at tackle (Coleman) or on the OL itself (Martin, Whitehair, Garrett, etc.) but if they go OL… I don’t think anyone will complain too badly. The OL must be improved.

    The only somewhat bad part of going with Ifedi at #26 is the fact that if we were an expansion team and trying to get good… the best way to get good is to take the best players available. That’s how you build a team up. Once you stop building your team up is when the inevitable decline of band-aids begins (unless you get lucky that the player who take that isn’t your best available becomes the best).

    It’d be nice to get a Wisniewski and Loadholt (or Breno) potential combination (relatively low cost, yet solid production) going into the draft so we weren’t forced to do something specific with that #26 pick. If it happened to be an OL as BPA, then all the better because he could come in and play LG right off the bat (Coleman, Ifedi, Garrett, Whitehair…). With having those two third round picks, that gives us a little flexibility to go BPA if we shore up the OL a bit in FA (and still go OL in the 2nd and/or 3rd, too).

    Maybe we end up with this going into the draft:

    LT Gilliam
    LG (Breno)
    C (Wisniewski)
    RG Glowinski
    RT (Loadholt) or Britt… with the idea a player would be picked in the first three rounds to compete.

    That line is an improvement but it doesn’t prevent a couple of third round picks from having to come in and start right away if we go with two defensive BPA guys in the first two rounds. Just a thought.

    • Volume12 says:

      Seattle always goes BPA at a position of need with their first couple picks.

      BPA to them might not be the consensus.

  41. Coleslaw says:

    I don’t think the seahawks are going to take the 7th best tackle with their first pick.. That’s not their style.

    • Coleslaw says:

      I hope they don’t at least, that certainly would not help us be consistent and would ensure a rough start to the year.

    • Coleslaw says:

      Although I do like Feeney a lot and think he’s an ideal replacement for Irvin

    • Rob Staton says:

      1. What difference does it make if it’s the 7th best tackle (he isn’t by the way, he’s the 6th tackle off the board in this mock). The 6th best quarterback in 2012 was Russell Wilson. The 11th best receiver in the 2014 draft was Allen Robinson. You don’t judge a prospect based only on the number of players at their position already off the board.

      2. They drafted James Carpenter at #25 in 2011. It’s well within their style.

      3. You said, “I hope they don’t at least, that certainly would not help us be consistent and would ensure a rough start to the year” — as opposed to ignoring the position and moving Justin Britt back to tackle? Would that ensure a superior start to the year?

      • Coleslaw says:

        Didn’t say we would ignore the position, if they can get a more technically sound guy later in the draft, why not? They said they want consistency and Ifedi is almost as scary as throwing Leraven clark out there day 1.
        Shon Coleman is better than Ifedi, so yeah he is the 7th best tackle in the draft.
        James Carpenter was a better prospect than Ifedi, so I’d relate it more to picking a Britt.

        • Coleslaw says:

          Also, it might be wishful thinking but I’d rather have them overspend and lock up Okung than throw another project in our best lineman’s place.

        • Rob Staton says:

          “if they can get a more technically sound guy later in the draft, why not?”

          Who exactly? How many technically sound starting offensive tackles are they going to find later in the draft?

          “They said they want consistency and Ifedi is almost as scary as throwing Leraven clark out there day 1.”

          Ifedi is nowhere near as underdeveloped as LeRaven Clark.

          “James Carpenter was a better prospect than Ifedi, so I’d relate it more to picking a Britt.”

          Not in the slightest. Ifedi is on another level athletically to both prospects.

          “Also, it might be wishful thinking but I’d rather have them overspend and lock up Okung than throw another project in our best lineman’s place.”

          They don’t have the cap space to overspend on anyone unfortunately.

          • Coleslaw says:

            I don’t know who exactly, Ifedi will undoubtedly have a pretty rough transition to the pros. I’d rather they get someone who can be better day 1. I’d put a second round grade on Ifedi. At least Carpenter had something he excelled at. Tackle is going to be our make or break this year, I really can’t see Okung getting out the door if they were serious about not starting the year like they did this year. And if he does get out the door, we are in deep s***

            • Coleslaw says:

              I believe the see Okung as a core guy, I’d be so disappointed if he walked..

            • Rob Staton says:

              The Seahawks pick at #26. Whoever they take is probably going to have a second round grade.

              There’s nothing to suggest he’ll have any more of a tough transition than anyone else.

              And if you want someone who can be better day 1 — you’re not going to find that guy later in the draft.

              • Coleslaw says:

                I’d put money on a diamond in the rough being solid from the start, happens every year

                • Rob Staton says:

                  Who?

                  And why will that one diamond in the rough land in Seattle?

                  It’s too easy to say wait until the later rounds to address the biggest need without offering up some names.

                  • Coleslaw says:

                    I have no idea who, someone with a low ceiling so he’s overlooked but is already solid? Anybody like that?

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    That’s the point though. There are 6-7 guys who are going to go in the top-40. Good luck finding a starting tackle after that.

                • Attyla the Hawk says:

                  I would say that’s wishful thinking Coleslaw. I’ve indicated the number of tackles taken after 64 in parentheses.

                  Last year (11), about the only ‘diamond in the rough’ guy was Havenstein who was taken 57th overall last year. None after R2.

                  in 2014 (4) you have Cameron Fleming at 140. He isn’t a starter and is seen kind of similarly as Britt in New England. A JAG who needs to be upgraded.

                  In 2013 (10) you have Terron Armstead at 74. He is actually good. But wasn’t technically sound at all. He was Ifedi. An athletic but raw guy who sat for a year and in his second season blossomed.

                  You also had David Bakhtiari at 109 in Green Bay. They’ve kind of limped along with him and he’s proven to be a durable, if unremarkable starter.

                  There is also Jordan Mills at 163. Again not day one ready. A guy who probably is similar to Carpenter — he’ll get a second deal but probably not with his original team.

                  It may seem like there is always ‘some guy’. But if you look at it big picture, you’ll find that isn’t the case really at all. If we determine hit rate to be getting a guy worth a second deal — then the miss rate is pretty much close to 95% after round 2 going back 4 drafts (2 hits out of 35 selections)

                  There is a reality that I think you have to accept. OTs are taken early. And there aren’t very many that succeed beyond the early stages of the draft. Even project OTs that have the chops to make it tend to be taken in the top 64.

  42. Ukhawk says:

    Sorry to bang the drum but it’s festering…I see Coleman over Ifedi because

    1. Watced the shared matchups of Ifedi & Coleman on Draft Breakdown today. Auburn outgained TAMU on offense by >2x vs Ole Miss and Bama

    2 Coleman is much more a monster in the run game which is the Hawks MO. Moving guys off the LOS and always looking to get to the 2nd level. Yes he can improve. But Ifedi plays in a spread and is simply not an adept run blocker, does not often get to the 2nd level and rarely did TAMU run to his side.

    3. Coleman played LT, Ifedi didn’t and projects to Guard in the Pros. Yes he has measurables but he generally wins with size alone, often holds and seems to go for the draw rather than try to dominate. Coleman on the other hand is constantly nasty, consistently driving his man backwards and displays high effort every play.

    4 Coleman was PFF All-SEC Team for 2015, Ifedi wasn’t even 2nd team. PFF said “Tackles: Shon Coleman, Auburn (+15.7) and Dominick Jackson, Alabama (+18.2). Coleman earns the nod at left tackle, in part to Laremy Tunsil only playing 376 snaps, but he only gave up 11 pressures all season on 304 attempts. Jackson gave up 12 pressures of his own while leading the conference with a +12.2 run blocking grade.”

    Coleman please!

    • RWIII says:

      All things being equal I would take Coleman over Ifedi. But there are MEDICAL concerns with Coleman. Coleman has Seahawk written all over him. But his pass blocking skills are not fully developed. Don’t know if Coleman is ready to be thrown into the fire at Left Tackle right out the gate. And he does have medical concerns.

      • rowdy says:

        True but second Rd pick in this mock has way bigger injury concerns and neither would play Lt year one and I think Coleman is more nfl ready

      • Michael M. says:

        I think no matter which tackle we take at #26 (assuming we do) they would slot in at RT, and move Gilliam over to the blindside.

    • HI Hawk says:

      First off, either player is fine with me at #26 (or wherever we end up drafting). Ifedi can play RT or LG in this system, probably even RG with his athleticism (though I think Glowinski is the future RG). Coleman does bring value as a backup LT, which is no small thing – but whoever we draft is going to need to start at LG or RT. Gilliam is a better LT prospect than anyone we get in this draft without a doubt, so Okung’s replacement is on the roster. We’re actually looking to replace Britt or Gilliam.

      Regarding #4, I can’t take this source as anything more than a blind guess. My opinion has nothing to do with Coleman directly, but Dominick Jackson was awful. I am a huge Alabama fan and Jackson was the worst lineman on that team by a wide margin. Watch the guy play, he’s a liability even in his supposed strength, the run game, where he got beat by penetrating lineman a lot. Henry was asked to Marshawn his way back to the line of scrimmage quite a bit due to Jackson’s inadequacy. He was useless as a pass blocker completely. As a pass blocker he was worse than Britt, worse than a rookie Sweezy. This rating for Jackson by PFF really ruins them as a reliable source for offensive line play in my eyes, so Coleman being ranked high by them is irrelevant.

  43. RWIII says:

    Matt Judon: Is a REAL SLEEPER in this draft. Keep an eye on what this guy does. http://www.mlive.com/sports/2016/02/nfl_combines_go_well_for_grand.html

    • Volume12 says:

      He’s interesting. No doubt about it.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Very intriguing guy. Watched some tape today and he dominated at the level he played.

    • Cockney Hawk says:

      If you like him look up Justin Zimmer of Ferris State DT/DE 6.3 303lbs. Zimmer ran a 4.89 40 and had a 33 inch vert at Houston reg combine . (didnt get nfl combime invite). I would be interested to know his 10 yd split. There is also a you tube video of him doing 46 reps of 225 a couple of years ago.

  44. C-Dog says:

    Going off of Rob’s mock of Ifedi at 26, and Feeney at 56, Carroll’s resent comments of wanting to get the ball back, here’s what I see as a possibility with the other picks. I’m leaning towards the idea Seattle might retain Kearse, probably keeps Rubin and maybe Mebane or dapples in free agency for DT. Probably looks at free agency to add an OL vet. Okung is likely gone. As is Sweezy.

    26: R1P26
    OT GERMAIN IFEDI
    TEXAS A&M

    56: R2P25
    OLB TRAVIS FEENEY
    WASHINGTON

    90: R3P27
    C GRAHAM GLASGOW
    MICHIGAN

    98: R3P35
    DE BRONSON KAUFUSI
    BYU

    125: R4P26
    RB KEITH MARSHALL
    GEORGIA

    172: R5P33
    DT QUINTON JEFFERSON
    MARYLAND

    215: R6P37
    CB DARYL WORLEY
    WEST VIRGINIA

    223: R7P4
    QB JEFF DRISKEL
    LOUISIANA TECH

    245: R7P26
    S TEVIN CARTER
    UTAH

    I think they add some veteran help in free agency either in the second wave, possibly a couple vets. Maybe there is a chance they keep Okung. Ifedi can play tackle or guard. Glasgow can probably play center or guard. Both players had a nice combine and can potentially pay multiple spots. That’s huge, I think.

    Feeney can play in space, cover, and rush the passer. He said on the Ian Furness show on KJR 950 today that the player he models his game most after is Sean Taylor. Yeah, Baby. Love that.

    Kaufusi had a nice SPARQy combine for a guy his size. He’s becoming increasingly more of an interesting player for me. Probably naturally a 5 tech, but has played inside at 3 tech a bit at BYU, also linebacker. Versatile and active. Has nice length to swat away passes, block kicks, and moves well, can drop well in coverage from DE/DT. Nice sack numbers his senior year. Really like him as a 6-6 280 lb swiss army knife. His dad was the BYU DL coach, so probably knows football and playing the front 7 very well. Big, long, athletic. Seattle could be creative with him, something that could appeal.

    Keith Marshall showed well at the combine. Kind of stole the show. Could be well on the radar for Seattle.

    Quinton Jefferson adds an interior rush presence. Daryl Worley has good size, didn’t run a great 40, did better in the shuttles and had a nice vertical. Driskel sometimes gets mentioned as a Seahawks possibility, maybe this year they draft a QB. Carter is a thumber at safety they could look to develop.

  45. Misfit74 says:

    I’ll be stunned if Doctson isn’t the 3rd Wide Receiver drafted, at worst.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      imagine if the Panthers decide, hell with it, we need some legit WRs. They could end up with Doctson, Funchess and Benjamin as your top 3 WRs. They would need a bit of speed, but that could be a very very very good WR group. Now if Newton can throw over 60% completion rate….. back to the SB they would go.

  46. Nick says:

    What do people think about WR Keyarris Garrett? Interested to see if he’s on anyone’s radar.

    • RealRhino2 says:

      Can’t play football.

      • Lenny says:

        Leading the NCAA in receiving yards suggests otherwise. On tape he seems much more fast than quick. Long legs take time to build up to top speed. Seems like he could be a good deep threat.

        • Volume12 says:

          He can play football.

          A bit stiff, not a YAC guy, only ran 9/go routes.

          • EranUngar says:

            But he has such fantastic hands. Catches everything and can shield CB physically. Great blocker etc….

            • Volume12 says:

              He’s not bad by any means. I like the dude, but I’m not sure he’s sudden enough for Seattle.

              Tennessee WR Marquez North I think has the best blend of size, athletic traits, and skill set.

              • EranUngar says:

                Sudden or quick he is not. If he was, at his size with his body control and hands, He’d be a to 10 pick. He does know to use his advantages and could be a great option replacing Kearse if he is available on day 3.

              • EranUngar says:

                Keyarris Garrett – 6-3 220, 4.53 40yds, 36.5 vert, 10’07” broad.
                Bendon Marshall – 6-4 229, 4.56 40 yds, 37 vert, 10’00” broad.

                Both from smaller schools – Tulsa, South Florida. Great hands and body control etc. etc. etc.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      To me Garrett doesn’t have the ability to sink the hips and cut clean.

      What routes feature that ability? Digs, outs and comebacks.

      Want to know what percentage of those routes he ran in 2015?

      Digs: .016 of all routes run
      Outs: .000 of all routes run
      Comebacks: .000 of all routes run

      You’re talking about a receiver that can’t threaten in a broad range of ways. The fact that almost 40% of his routes run were slants, which is the easiest route to run in the entire tree is kind of damning.

      Garrett is an unpolished player who shows little ability to get ‘coached up’ based on his physical limitations. He runs rounded routes and demonstrates little ability to separate with crisp route running.

      I have no use for this dude even as a UDFA.

  47. LandofBoz says:

    I know it is grasping at straws but I believe Okung could want to stay in Seattle because of how involved in the Startup scene he is. Geekwire has had a few articles about him recently; he is an investor and entrepreneur himself.

    He is his own agent and there are few better places for his startup hobby than Seattle. Maybe he sticks around for a team friendly deal…

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think he’d love to stay here — but even to a millionaire if a team is offering $10m APY over multiple years and Seattle is offering $5m, it’s a straight forward decision.

      • LandofBoz says:

        Is that all we can afford? I knew it was bad but I was hoping it would be closer to $8mm apy. If that’s the case, so long Okung.

        • Rob Staton says:

          They have about $18-19m for the seven FA’s likely to earn +$2m APY. Okung, even at $8m takes up a large chunk and limits your ability to do other things. You might only be able to do Okung, Mebane and Rubin in that scenario. If Okung walks, you might be able to do Lane, Okung, Mebane, Kearse + another and then draft an OT.

          • LandofBoz says:

            With how poorly the receivers looked at the combine and the weak FA pool, is there even a chance we keep Kearse? I would much rather keep Okung and let Kearse + Lane walk.

            • C-Dog says:

              I kind of think they might make a push to keep Kearse. I thought Carroll intimated that they would try. I can see them trying to work out a deal with Okung, as well. They’ve quietly been stock piling on CBs on the roster, kind of makes me think they might be inclined to let Lane test the market. We shall see.

              • LandofBoz says:

                I think Kearse will be far too highly priced for us to bring him back. I could see him getting close to $5mm APY. No thank you.

    • Michael M. says:

      Very legit point from what little I know. I actually sat kitty corner to Okung at a restaurant in Ballard last month and as a fan naturally spent the entire time trying to eavesdrop on his conversation. Literally every word I head was business related, and I don’t mean NFL business. Dude knows what to do with his money. The city itself could very well be a selling point for him.

      Don’t forget about the other benefit that no one ever seems to mention; state income tax. I gotta believe that shit adds up when you’re making millions. Being in Washington State, the ‘Hawks don’t have one. Only 5 other teams in the league can say that (TX and FLA teams)

      Now since he’s gonna be crunching the numbers himself instead of just doing whatever his agent tells him in the name of “gettin’ paid!” maybe those things get considered a bit more. Combined with the positives of staying with the same well run organization, same teammates, a proven contender, Tom Cable (huge for some guys) and the fact that you don’t have to uproot your entire life, (which must be a pain in the ass no matter how rich you are) Maybe that’s enough to take a slight “discount”.

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        Unfortunately no income tax isn’t really a factor. Unless you live in CA or HI, state tax rates are less than 10%. That means for every $1M in APY another team offers Okung, staying with SEA would save him only $100K.

        • Michael M. says:

          A small factor yes, but a factor none the less. Wouldn’t come into play if the ‘Hawks offer wasn’t at least close, which I hope it is.

          • David says:

            Income tax is huge, I lived in Seattle and now live in NYC. In NYC not only do you pay state income tax but you also pay local (City) tax as well, so at the end of the day I pay ~50% in taxes whereas in Seattle it was probably in the 30’s. Although I believe since you are “working” out of state at away games they may still have to pay state income tax on half their games but I’m not sure of this.

    • reggieregg says:

      I think he just started a new one I can’t see him flying back and forth trying to stay involved. He even called it “his baby”. And honestly with him being from the old rookie contracts Seattle has already paid him enough to play for us forever….his first contract was outrageous….lol

  48. Rob Staton says:

    @LanceZierlein
    Today was my first day to go over all the combine results per position. Travis Feeney has some NFL guys talking right now.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      The shoulder / injury history is the only “real” reason his stock might drop. But he had an impressive combine overall. Perhaps he goes higher than the hawks 2nd round pick….. good for him.

      • ClevelandDuck says:

        Well, that and the fact that he is built like a greyhound. I love the guy’s athleticism and respect his desire, but we need to keep in mind that he may not have the sand to play the position. As a Clevelander, I see Barkevious Mingo when I watch Feeney. Mingo was a bit slower in the 40, but had better agility scores. He was also a dynamite college player who plays hard but just doesn’t have the strength to win in the NFL. Maybe that’s all down to the tire fire of the Browns, but he has failed to win time for three different coordinators in three different systems. It’s fun to look at Feeney as a local stud, but his profile has concerns. Even his ballyhooed combine numbers lack elite agility scores. He is straight-line fast but is well outside of the top performers in the three cone and short shuttle. (His 60-yard shuttle is top notch though.)

    • Trevor says:

      He has to have opened some eyes with that workout at the combine. Also when he has been healthy he has produced. Help his case that all the Huskies drafted last year had sold rookie campaigns.

      Really hope we get Freeny and he stays healthy. Him and Garnett are the two PNW guys I would love to see in a Hawks uniform.

    • Robert says:

      3 torn labrums on 2 shoulders! Scary…I wonder what it all means? Achilles heel of his anatomy? Just freaky bad luck?

    • Ukhawk says:

      I remember when the Seahawks drafted Bosworthband I thought they had a superstar – his shoulders were already messed up. That’s my recurring nightmare about Freeney

      So I thought, yes, in the later rounds but R2 no thanks

  49. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    Treadwell in the first and Cook in the second to the RAMS would be a very very solid draft for them. I keep thinking Cook will sneak his way into the bottom of the first round some way or some how…. Perhaps the Broncos, they might need a QB… if they keep playing chicken with Manning and Osweiller.

  50. Lenny J says:

    Germain Ifedi (T, Texas A&M) would be an absolute dumb choice at 26. I would prefer we take the BPA regardless of need. Why in Sam hell would you pick the 10th best tackle in the draft when you could have the #1 S or LB? I would rather fill needs in rounds 3,4,and 5, and FA. I think we have a great chance in landing a great impact player that’s not an OL in rd 1. Neal(S) and Lee(LB) come to mind. Or maybe perhaps a DT. Unless a miracle happens and a top 3 tackle falls to us at 26 I wouldn’t touch an OL until round 3. I guess all this will depend on who we bring back in FA.

    • Rob Staton says:

      So much to respond to here, so little time…

      Darron Lee went tenth overall. Ifedi isn’t the “tenth” best tackle in the draft. Who are the offensive tackles you intend to draft in the later rounds?

      Drafting an impact player won’t count for much if Russell Wilson is being protected by Justin Britt at right tackle again.

    • Michael M. says:

      This is just so completely the wrong way to think about the draft.

      You have to asses each player individually. Not in the context of their standing within the class. A couple years ago the Browns drafted their #1 CB in Justin Gilbert, then 4 picks later the Giants took a WR even though he was the 3rd one off the board.

      The Jags took the #1 punter ahead of the #6 QB…

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      Lets see how many pet peeves we can list:

      1. Nth best player versus best at another
      2. Can’t be good because past players at that school weren’t good

      Any others?

      • Jarhead says:

        That second one is way too much of a generalized blanket statement. Because you cannabsolutely follow trends from certain places at certain schools. They have same coaches and staff recruiting, coaching, and grooming them. They will most likely be similar players. Not identical, but similar. Your pet peeve is way too broad. And it is lazy. It isn’t just a player vs player evaluation process. Why do you think Alabama front 7 players, Iowa O Lineman, and Cal RBs all seem to be solid pros. It isn’t a coincidence. It is a factor that influences their potential. People are allowed to have an opinion that disagrees with your own. I love Rob’s work, but sometimes disagree with him. It is his blog, but he appreciates the debate

  51. coachmattson says:

    What are your thoughts on Mario Williams being released? Do you think he is an option for the Hawks? Would help our pass rushing need wouldn’t he? Go Hawks!

    • Rob Staton says:

      He’d definitely help and fit but I think a team is going to pay him a lot of money to play for them for two years.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        I’m thinking the Raiders or Jaguars give him a deal he CAN’T refuse.

        • Greg Haugsven says:

          He could see that 3 year $30 million deal that Ware and Peppers got I bet.

          • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

            That is probably fair. But he also was cut loose during one of the best DL drafts in many years….. so that could keep his value down more than we think.

  52. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    I think the most colossal mistake made prior to FA, by any team, the transition tag being placed on Olivier Vernon by the Dolphins. He is going to get a deal that they will not be able to match….. I mean, give him a 5 year / 60M type of deal… he is gone gone gone. Terrible blunder.

  53. Trevor says:

    The more I think about it the more I think the Hawks will focus on Okung, Rubin and Kearse in free agency. Pete and JS keep talking about keeping the core together as long as they can and Okung was pick #1 by JS if you remember.

    If they cannot sign Okung then I think the need to go OL early and sign Wisnewski to play Center.

    26: R1 OT SHON COLEMAN AUBURN
    56: R2 G JOSHUA GARNETT STANFORD
    90: R3 OLB TRAVIS FEENEY WASHINGTON
    98: R3 RB C.J. PROSISE NOTRE DAME
    125: R4 DT WILLIE HENRY MICHIGAN
    172: R5 DE MATT JUDON GRAND VALLEY STATE
    215: R6 WR MARQUEZ NORTH TENNESSEE
    223: R7 FB DAN VITALE NORTHWESTERN
    245: R7 DT DAVID ONYEMATA MANITOBA

    2016 OL
    LT Gilliam, LG Garnett, C Wisnewski or Lewis RG Glowinski, RT Coleman

    That is a young, athletic and physical OL that they could keep together for the next 3-4 years.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Vitale has a 2 knocks on him. Size and more importantly, he is not outstanding at any aspect of his game. In the NFL, you have to stand out at something. Blocking, catching, YAC, rushes in traffic, etc. He seems like a UDRFA to me.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        I like the draft Trev. Some good players there.

      • Trevor says:

        You maybe right I imagine there will take some SPARQ development project in the 7th but I really hope they look at Oneyemata. He is a Canadian kid with incredible athleticism who I think could be special.

        Actually in the 7th round replace Vitale with the kid from Ferris St. Justin Zimmer. He had incredible #s at the regional combine.

        • Attyla the Hawk says:

          Haven’t been able to find Oneyemata tape. And I’ve been looking.

          Simply could not resist focusing on him in the Shrine game. Just looked like a man amongst boys. He looked like he was just toying with his opponents like a cat playing with a hapless mouse. He and Hargrave were the best players on the field by a stunning margin.

          I can’t stump for him because I can’t see for myself. But if anyone can find anything on him please link.

          Those are three really compelling players to keep an eye on late in the draft and as the process moves along going forward.

          I like the Vitale tape. Seattle likes good movers and Vitale definitely fits that. Not sure we’re in the market for a FB/HB. But if so, could be a competitive player for our team.

    • icb12 says:

      You and I think a lot alike.
      Love it.

      I like Prosise, but I’m really liking Dyshawn Mobley right now for RB

      I think I’d pass on Wisnewski, and draft a Center. Got my eyes on Robert Booker, Missouri State. Be a 7th rounder, maybe UDFA. 2013 guy had 86 knockdown blocks, and carried a 98% assignment rating.
      At the very least he would be competition.

      • Volume12 says:

        Give me K-St FB Glenn Gronkowski over Vitale. More physical, more grit, more of a pro style FB and his SPARQ score is right up there with Vitale.

    • oz says:

      Nice looking draft.

  54. Landhawk says:

    It would be a coup to get Coleman and Garnett. I’d also like to get one of Martin (probably not realistic ), Westerman, Whitehair, Glasgow or Dahl. Also a DT, WR and RB.

  55. mishima says:

    Rob, is Ifedi a ‘Cable guy?’ My only concern is that he seems to play soft, a bit of a dancer.

    • Landhawk says:

      Let’s hope not. The “Cable” guy thing has not worked. Strictly speaking about the Carroll era, we have consistently had a poor OL. Since Wilson has been the QB, he’s been under siege much of the time. I don’t think there is another QB in the league who would’ve survived behind our line, much less stayed healthy! I wonder in some way if Russell’s mobility has hurt him in this regard. The FO knows how elusive he is, making it less of a priority to address the line in an expedient manner (even on a subconscious level). Now I know there is plenty of blame to share but it seems as though Cable has been given carte blanch with the OL to do as he sees fit. To me, his selection of personnel and this notion that he can switch defensive linemen to offense has not worked. The evidence is plain to see. It is beyond time to use a more cooperative approach with all OL decisions!

      We are in a tough spot with the salary cap space and we clearly have hard decisions upcoming in regards to Okung and Sweezy. We may have to find a way to keep Okung. A couple of FA o linemen will need to be brought in on short term deals. Then, please for the love of God draft some o linemen who have played there positions in college at a reasonably high level. Maybe we can have the good fortune to have Decker or Coleman on the board when our pick comes around. After that, how about Garnett or Martin? How about Whitehair, Westerman, Dahl or Glasgow?

      It is simply beyond time to get the OL fixed! We will have to mix and match with veterans ar first but if we take 3 good guys, as they learn and mature, we will be able to incorporate them into the line and have a good group to protect Wilson for years to come. We have to protect our most important player. It’s beyond time to do so. I know this is kind of a rant but I have been frustrated by this situation for years…thoughts?

      • I think you are quite wrong in a few areas. I’ll go through them;

        >Let’s hope not. The “Cable” guy thing has not worked.

        While I don’t think too highly of Sweezy (especially not for 2-3mil a year) Cable successfully converted a 7th round D-linemen to a starting O-linemen that will probably play until he is 33+ y/o as a Guard. Sweez has the potential to go somewhere else and succeed if they put a emphasis on pass pro technique development and surround him with a O-line that sticks together (so there is cohesion). I would also argue that Glowinski is exactly a “Cable guy” and he looked great in the game he played against good competition (Cards D-line). Now we don’t know how well he will play for 16 games but still…he looks very promising.

        >Carroll era, we have consistently had a poor OL.

        In run blocking we have been consistently high as a O-line in the PC era actually. Pass pro has always been a weakness but that kinda happens when your O-line coach puts such a strong emphasis on run blocking.

        >he FO knows how elusive he is, making it less of a priority to address the line in an expedient manner (even on a subconscious level).

        You aren’t wrong, and this mindset needs to be changed, however this mindset also allowed us to build one of the best defenses of all time, pay the core, and win a Superbowl (and go to another). So while I agree we need to address the O-line and be at least mediocre in pass-pro and good in run blocking, Russ does allow the FO to address needs elsewhere with that cap space and draft capital and we keep ending up deep in the playoffs or in the Superbowl.

        >Now I know there is plenty of blame to share but it seems as though Cable has been given carte blanch with the OL to do as he sees fit.

        I don’t really agree with this at all. Actually since the arguable failures of Cable’s picks (Moffitt, Carp) it seems the FO stopped giving him high draft capital, and they moved to this mentality of “well Tom you aren’t getting high picks” and he says “medium picks kinda suck given the level of technique coming out of college so I’ll convert D-linemen and a TE and find physical monsters and develop them myself” and we end up where we are. I think Tom has kinda been in the dog house a bit and the Britt pick sure as hell didn’t help, but they NEEDED a OT so of course he got to grab one high (where starting OT’s only are). He picked poorly.

        I think (and hope) we have learned from previous decisions and address our O-line with some fairly high picks (OT in 1st, C/G in the 3rd).

        >We are in a tough spot with the salary cap space and we clearly have hard decisions upcoming in regards to Okung and Sweezy. We may have to find a way to keep Okung. A couple of FA o linemen will need to be brought in on short term deals.

        I don’t really agree with this assessment of the situation at all. While re-signing Okung would be nice for the right price, odds are we price out and we gotta address OT in the 1st round (or if they don’t like that they find a RT in FA). Sweezy is a easy goodbye, he is alright for $650k a year but for $3mil a year? No way Jose. Goodbye. Especially considering Glow behind him looked really good in the game he played and Pete has talked multiple times about how much he liked Glow looking forward at next season. A couple FA O-linemen? Uhh no. Lewis is “solid” as Pete said, Glow will be a starter, Gilliam a starter…Britt at LG is where we need to upgrade and that is a position I say we go out and find a vet FA (Boone?) to bench Britt. Then in the 3rd round we can draft a Center like Glasgow to compete and beat Lewis or we can draft a very versatile Guard like Dahl who can most likely play Center well and beat Lewis and maybe even can play some OT in the NFL.

        That situation leaves us with this O-line: LT Gilliam, LG vet FA (Boone?), C Lewis? Draft pick?, RG Glow, RT 1st round pick or FA.

        >It is simply beyond time to get the OL fixed! We have to protect our most important player. It’s beyond time to do so.

        I do agree, I hope and pray we see a OT taken in the 1st and a G/C taken in the 3rd. I think we would all be pissed and scared to see the FO bring in a vet LG and kick Britt to RT, move Gilliam to LG and double down on Lewis at Center while doubling down on Sokoli being our future Center in 2017 and beyond. That is the majorly disappointing but totally possible way the Seahawks FO addresses the O-line. I am scared of that line. Britt needs to be on the bench.

        All we are asking is to draft a OT in the 1st to replacing our OT loss (Okung) and to draft a C/G (Dahl/Glasgow/McGovern) in the 3rd. That isn’t that crazy to ask for! Do that and bring in a veteran FA Left Guard and our O-line has the potential to be better week 1 than it was in the NFCCG last year. Give Gilliam/FA/Draft pick/Glow/Draft pick the full preseason to work together, build a cohesion as a group…let them start together week 1 with at least 8 weeks of preseason work together as a unit. Solidify the starting unit as quickly as possible. Don’t waste time having Britt compete with _____ or Bailey compete with _____ or Lewis compete with _____….have a solid/fast competition but then lock the starters in and start building cohesion.

      • Robert says:

        I’m frustrated too. I am hopping Pete drops the executive order and fixes this mess. Mediocre interior pass protection is the only way to slow down Russ. Why is Sweezy so cruddy at passpro? He is uber athletic and beefed up to 320 a year or two ago. My theory is Cable spends so much time practicing the ZBS choreography and rehearsing the requisite nuanced footwork that there is little time left for breaking down, teaching and rehearsing passpro. I can totally understand why Britt is cruddy in passpro, but Sweezy should be much better! Another thing I don’t like about Cable is the legend that he is the run blocking guru. Without the elite talents of Russ and Beast, it’s not hard for me to imagine our rushing stats would have been middling these last 4 seasons.
        Anyway, I’m hoping the young guys step up and we have a Championship off season because it would be dumb to waste another season in our window of opportunity.

  56. Dingbatman says:

    Does anybody know what portion of a contract usually goes to the agent? With Okung representing himself might that come into play?

    • Landhawk says:

      I believe it is 3 percent.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        The routine cut is between 3 and 5 %. Clayton said it is normally 3%. Okung picked the EXACT wrong year to represent himself. He will miss out of FA starting, due to injury/healing and will be chasing scarce dollars, when he is finally ready to be checked out medically with teams. I could see Seattle giving him a 4/8/12/16M type of deal over 4 years…. pack a few escalators in for playtime… everyone would be happy.

  57. Ground_Hawk says:

    Rob, why would the Seahawks pass on OT Coleman in the first? Is it because of the medical red flags (leukemia & knee surgery)? If so I can agree with your selection of Ifedi as being the best available OT, but if Ogbah is available he should be considered.
    If not for French’s shoulder issues I think that he would be a first rounder, so I get why you would put him in the second. However, I wouldn’t be surprised to see him fall to later rounds.

    • Ground_Hawk says:

      Wow… French’s… I meant Feeney’s. Sorry for the confusion.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m a huge fan of Coleman — and I think the Seahawks would be willing to draft him. I gave them Ifedi because his upside is arguably higher. He’s an insane athlete — and they’ve often gone for that. He’s also younger.

      Ogbah fascinates me. One of those guys who could be exceptional at the next level and a huge steal — but could easily flame out. They have to get into his heart. His motor is too hot and cold. But 1.5 split guys don’t grow on trees with his size and length.

  58. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    #22 Houston — Corey Coleman (WR, Baylor)
    An explosive athlete who can compliment DeAndre Hopkins and whoever they bring in at quarterback.

    My god. Imagine the FF #s that will be created by this offense!

  59. Coleslaw says:

    Is it just me or does Josh Doctson look like Randy Moss? Pretty big shoes to fill but in a lot of ways they are similar

  60. Ukhawk says:

    Couple of developing thoughts:

    With Clark, Ifedi & Coleman available at 26, do you get cute/creative and trade down. How far do u go and still get one, and what would we get?

    If you resign Okung, do u just go BPA instead? If so, who? (Interior OL, DT, DE, SS, LB, CB) ? Do u again trade down with so much depth or will everyone else want to as well?? Would JSPS ever go quality or quantity and try to pick just 6 guys in are 2-4?

    FA. I’m guessing they
    Conservatively bid up and let Okung + Irvin walk for 3rd-4th Rd Comp picks
    Resign both Mebane + Rubin at 3APY each ( deep class keeps price down)
    Kearse walks then JG, Baldwin and Lockett are starting WOs with Willson at TE
    Try to retain Lane at ??apy
    Let Sweezy take a bigger contract
    Sign no outside FAs who will result in comp pick reductions

    • Ukhawk says:

      *quality over quantity

    • Cockney Hawk says:

      The more I think about it I think the Seahawks are going to keep Okung. Its a major area of need and if they paid 7 million last year for Cary Williams to be our number 2 corner (area of need they felt last year) I cant see them balking at paying Okung 7-10 million. The Oline needs stability and the management have even said themselves. We can let Sweezy go, theres apparently a lot of interest and could get 4/5 mill a year (no thanks give to our left tackle instead) We have and can easily replace him with a glowinski or another day 2/3 pick (dahl , mcgoven, westerman, glasgow etc). With the injury and his interest to stay in Seattle maybe we can convince him to stay at least for a year. The grass isnt always greener for both the Seahawks and Okung. With Okung locked up JS could have some fun with the number 26 pick.

      • Rob Staton says:

        There are a few issues with Okung unfortunately. One — with Cordy Glenn getting the tag there’s actually a chance Okung gets offered more than $10m. He is without doubt the best option on the market.

        If they sign Okung at $10m — it really limits their ability to keep others with a few million to try and re-sign the other six FA vets. The injury side of things has to weigh on Seattle’s mind. Do they want to break the bank for Okung knowing it might be a waste if he misses more time?

        Plus Danny O’Neil suggested part of Okung’s injury issues might be down to SEA’s physically demanding scheme. That playing in a more pass-friendly offense could benefit him and keep him healthier. That could be another tempting reason to take an attractive offer elsewhere.

        The one thing working in SEA’s favour is the current injury Okung has. If teams are put off by that (I’m not sure they will be) then maybe they can get him back for one year. We’ll see.

        • C-Dog says:

          The ladder part of it has me thinking he could have a chilly market, and comes back on a short deal. Still makes the selection of Ifedi or Coleman ideal.

          • David says:

            “If they sign Okung at $10m — it really limits their ability to keep others with a few million to try and re-sign the other six FA vets. The injury side of things has to weigh on Seattle’s mind. Do they want to break the bank for Okung knowing it might be a waste if he misses more time?”

            I feel like you could say the exact same thing about paying Graham $9mm for this year. The logic is virtually identical.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think you can’t drop lower than #29. Denver and Carolina possibly destinations for a tackle.

      If they did re-sign Okung I think it opens up the possibility of going D-line or LB. In this mock the likes of Ogbah come in to play.

      Your FA prediction is almost identical to mine — however I sense they will bring in at least one veteran (possibly for the O-line, maybe D-line). Probably not first wave FA, more second or beyond. A value guy. Especially if the only two FA’s they keep are Mebane and Rubin — that would leave around $12m to spend. This could allow them to pump up the D-line depth with a couple of guys also on $3-4m.

      • Ukhawk says:

        Thx Rob

        All makes sense

        Be interesting to dig into the different scenarios

        As they resign guys it’ll certainly be easier as the puzzle gets filled in per JS

        I think they sign a vet DE/rush LB or LG. Wake, Long, Haynes et al maybe will come cheaper for s chance to get a ring

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        CAR interviewed Ifedi at Combine.

  61. EranUngar says:

    Rob, i have to admit that those picks make perfect sense. They address our key needs and we should be happy with them.

    However, since it’s a full 2 round mock i can’t help but look at the whole picture for our team.

    According to those picks, the plan for our OL looks like this:

    Gillian, ex TE playing for the first time at LT.
    An unpolished by physicaly gifted rookie from a spread offense college team playing at RT.
    Another rookie (Connor McGovern? Joe Dahl? Graham Glasgow?) on the inside and possible Glow starting for the first time at RG.

    It could be a start for a very solid future OL but i can’t say that it screams of Continuity cohesion or consistency on day one. I can’t even say it’s a step forwards from what we had in 2015.

    On the other side of the field we will be facing the following (according to your mock draft:

    Dan Quin’s ATL plus Leonard Floyd and possible Irvin.
    Buffalo plus A’Shawn Robinson and Kyler Fackrell.
    Sue’s Miami plus Kevin Dodd.
    NO plus Sheldon Rankins.
    TB plus Vernon Hargreaves and Kenny Clark.
    NE plus Joshua Perry.
    NYJ plus Noah Spence.
    GB plus Jarran Reed.

    And the cherries on top-
    ARI plus Kamalei Correa and Miles Killebrew twice.
    LA with Donald, Quin and now Robert Nkemdiche twice.
    CAR plus Emmanuel Ogbah.

    Is it just me or our 2016 OL is at best a work in progress and at worse a step back from 2015 and all our opponents just got scarrier on deffense? Do you see this new OL holding any better agains the RAMS, CAR, NYJ, MIA, ARI etc????

    This is not a criticism of your picks for us. It’s a depressing look at what we end up with and what we are about to face next year….

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m not sure what the alternative is Eran. Continuity will be hard to achieve with Okung and Sweezy likely moving on. They’re unlikely to spend $10m on an O-liner in FA so getting a guy in round one with at least the ceiling to be great might be the plan. I suspect they will sign one veteran O-line guy at least. Maybe two. If they’re able to sign a veteran left guard or center with a first round tackle — that would at least be trying to address the matter head on.

      And on what opponents they’ll have to face in 2016 — just remember those guys have to play Russell Wilson, Thomas Rawls, Doug Baldwin, Michael Bennett, Cliff Avril, Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas… 😉

      • EranUngar says:

        I wish i saw an easy viable alternative. I’d be posting it all over.

        Ther only possible direction i can see is offering Okung something like 4 years, 40M, 8M signing bonus, base 5M, 7M, 9M, 11M per year. The first year cap is 7M and if the last 2 years are not guarantied – he’ll earn them or be cut.

        That keeps both Tackles in place. Keep Lewis at C – he is solid and will help continuity at a key position. Draft Ifedi and start him at LG to start seasoning, try to keep Sweezy with a first year cap of 2.5-3M.

        We keep 4 players in their positions, add a high potential rookie and hope we can add another next year.

        It leaves 8M. That should cover Rubin, Mebane and Kearse at 10M APY combined with some signing bonuses.

        I do not know if it works but it could be a better OL on day 1.

        Just to be clear, i was far from throwing the towel on the whole team, just worried about the near future of the OL.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I think Lane, Rubin and Mebane will be the priority FA’s. Lane in particular. Will be nearly impossible to keep Lane if they sign Okung.

          • EranUngar says:

            Now you have challenged me to bring my crazy off season plan to the table. It’s a bit crazy but fun to think about. Here goes:

            Resign Irvin.

            Trade Irvine & Kam to the Jags for their 2rd round pic. (It’s a great bargain for Bradley)

            With the extra budget – sign Okung, Sweezy, Rubin, Mebane and Lane.

            Use 26 to get Neal as deathbacker and Jags 36 to get whoever is left out of the Coleman/Ifedi/Crark trio.

            Late 2nd – best DL or best OL according to who’s left. Late 3rd Dixon/Procsise and WR (Garrett)

            Day 3 – let JS work his magic, we already covered every possible need.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Re-sign Irvin and then trade him?

              You realise the cap charges would mean the Seahawks eating a huge chunk of dead money to make that deal. There wouldn’t be any extra budget.

              • EranUngar says:

                Not if they don’t give a signing bonus. I remember there is a way to trade the guarantied part as well. I.E. the new team takes the whole package other than the signing bonus and money already paid. That leaves no dead money. It’s as if he actually signed the contract with the new team.

                If i’m wrong about it, it’s a no go since Kam on his own is not worth a top 2nd rounder.

                • Nathan says:

                  Tell my why Irvin signs something with no bonus then?

                • Rob Staton says:

                  Irvin will not sign without a signing bonus, guarantees and the dead money that comes with it.

                  It’d also be incredibly sly of the Seahawks — hardly the best thing for the locker room atmosphere.

                  • EranUngar says:

                    I know guys, i know.

                    It’s my dream pipe plan to come up with a comprehensive plan. I’ve been trying to come up with something for a month and it always ends one high draft pick or one FA too short….

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            I agree on that point.

            Something to consider, is that this draft has a metric ton of really good testing CBs. Not all of them with the 32″ arm benchmark.

            Lane is a long corner. He’s also been deployed mostly in the slot. This is a position where length and size is not as critical as it is on the outside. You’re playing against smaller/quicker players where speed and change of direction is going to be paramount.

            I have to wonder if Seattle doesn’t dip into the CB pool for a guy suited specifically for the slot. We have a lot of long outside guys on the roster. Shead/Simon/Seisay plus guys on the PS.

            For the slot, we have Burley and Lane. I wonder if we look at guys not of our outside CB prototype. Especially given the supply conditions of this draft.

            Seattle wants cohesion (as opposed to continuity) on the OL. If faced with the prospect of keeping Lane and replacing Okung with an OT — or keeping Okung and replacing Lane with a slot corner, it seems that the draft as constituted today favors the latter.

            And honestly, I could see Seattle still going OT in the first and replacing Lane. Having that OT not be required to be day one ready, but maybe day 60 ready.

            We’ll find out in about 10 days. But I could definitely envision a scenario where we move on from Lane and keep Okung based on the quality of players in this draft that could replace either.

            • Rob Staton says:

              “Seattle wants cohesion (as opposed to continuity) on the OL. If faced with the prospect of keeping Lane and replacing Okung with an OT — or keeping Okung and replacing Lane with a slot corner, it seems that the draft as constituted today favors the latter.”

              I don’t entirely agree here. I think we had a perfect example last year on why it’s hard for cornerbacks to have an instant impact in Seattle. Their technique — even working inside — has to be right on. Any corner drafted this year likely faces the same fate as Tye Smith. That for me is why they’ll probably end up prioritising Lane in FA. A guy who can work outside or in slot — knows the scheme perfectly. The alternative seems to be Burley starting next year. Hmmm.

              On the other hand, you have a chance to replace Okung with a younger model with 36 inch arms, great athleticism and there’s a chance that player has a better health record going forward. Okung who has been good not great in Seattle. And you probably save money. Yes they’d need to train the guy up but I sense they’re more comfortable starting young OL’s.

              • Attyla the Hawk says:

                Good points. Hadn’t really considered the onboarding time for the secondary. Was just focused on that of the OL. Both out scheme and the general unpreparedness of rookies in general at the position.

                Neither seems a great option considering the learning curve expected for OL as well. Not only are they deemed to be starting at level zero in the NFL. But also the length of time it takes to learn our brand of ZBS.

                Both units take time to become adept at. Not sure if Tye Smith can do the slot. At least with Burley, he’s been in the system for over a year now.

                Regardless, it seems like a good draft to get a younger model at OT early (finally), and a very good draft to get a R4/R5 slot corner who may not meet the 32″ standard for the outside.

                It’s entirely possible that regardless of our FA resign strategy — we could see both position/roles addressed via the draft. The acceptable level of talent should be available for each.

    • Poweroflogic says:

      Which is exactly why I see it more likely they keep Okung for continuity, quality and leadership, and they accept the corresponding UFA losses at other positions.

      They install the best LG(OT) they can find, probably from the draft but possibly with cheap veteran competition. They roll with Glowinski who may prove an upgrade on Sweezy, in pass pro at least, even in his first year. And they add another OL draft pick, possibly at center, but otherwise prepare to roll with: 2015 line minus Britt plus competition.

      This is a more realistic prospect of continuity with improvement at OL.

      • Rob Staton says:

        Nobody doubts that they’d be interested in keeping Okung.

        But if teams start offering +$10m APY — it aint happening. That’s just football.

        • Poweroflogic says:

          Even at 10m there are credible arguments on both sides. What about 9m? 8m? There is no way after the embarrassment of last year’s OL that the Seahawks have some hard 10-15m budget cap on the offensive line.

          What is ‘just football’ is the hard reality that you cannot run your offensive line down year after year with a bargain basement budget and zero continuity — that strategy has reached it’s ultimate limit point and the front office seems to realize this.

          http://overthecap.com/position/left-tackle/

          Is 9m too much for a franchise LT previously signed at 8m APY, when the cap has increased some 25%++? We all know LTs are brutal nearly impossible to find and the Seahawks are not exactly batting 100% at offensive line picks. Even draft pick #1 guarantees you nothing at that position, as we have seen.

          The Seahawks paid not just the going rate but the top rate for several of their core players. The offensive line is the weak link in the chain right now. Will they pay the going rate, or even contemplate OVERPAYING (good luck defining the parameters of overpaying a LT) — for quality, continuity and leadership at the most difficult Oline position?

    • Ukhawk says:

      Ditto. What’s the alternative?

      I’d rather rebuild the lines than have to find a Top 5 QB, get 2 dominant pass rushers, try to assemble 3/4 of the LOB, find a pro bowl MLB, a RB to fill Beastmodes shoes, or probably the most efficient receiving core in the league. Glass pretty full

      • Ukhawk says:

        Meant for Eran

        • EranUngar says:

          No argument on those points. I actually started the off season saying that this offense will still be better than DEN even behind a horrendous line so we might as well just add a p[layer or two to the defense and make it as unbeatable as the one that won SB48 for us or the one that won SB50 for DEN.

          As a team we’ll be a contender one way or the other. As for the OL….we’ll just have to wait and see….

  62. Volume12 says:

    Rob, few more questions for ya.

    W. Virginia CB Darryl Worley. Seems like he’s a Seahawk type CB. What about that 40 though? He meets all the thresholds. What do ya think?

    NC St OL Joe Thuney. Have you watched him at all? Undersized, but he might be a nice ‘draft ad stash’ kind of prospect. Tough as nails.

    And Cal RB Daniel Lasco. Insane athletic traits. And I was wondering if you’ve watched his 2015 highlights? It’s not a normal highlight clp. Like a mashup of draft breakdown cuts. His burst is electric, great hands outta the backfield, and he is a tough runner between the tackles. Good vision too. He leaves his feet too much, but this kid can play.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Worley — 4.64 not ideal. It’s like 0.10 slower than Sherman. I think his length and overall athleticism will mean he’s OK for them.

      Thuney — didn’t really like the position drills he did but will check him out down the line.

      Lasco — watched a couple of games and wasn’t overly impressed to be honest.

      • Miles says:

        And what of Deiondre’ Hall, Rob? He has similar speed to Worley, but 34 3/8″ arms? That’s insane. If coached up, he will win every 50/50 ball.

        • Rob Staton says:

          He could be on the radar. He worked out pretty well too — looked smooth.

          • Miles says:

            I think of all the corners we could get, he’s most likely to be the next Richard Sherman. 37″ vert, arms as long as a corner’s can get, and a total trash talker. Small school player though, probably gets the Tye Smith treatment year one with our defense.

  63. Cockney Hawk says:

    Rob,

    Why is everyone sleeping on Penn State’s giant defensive end Carl Nassib? Round 2/3 projection. He measured 6-foot-6 and a half and weighed 277 pounds. While his 4.84 time in the 40-yard dash wasn’t terribly impressive, his 1.62 10-yard split was. Nassib benched 225 pounds 21 times with 34-inch arms and had a 28.5-vertical leap and a 9-6 broad jump. Vertical not good but I would rather have Nassib in the 3rd than throw a top 10 pick on Bosa. What do you think? CH

    • Rob Staton says:

      Nassib is tough to work out. On tape you do see flashes and 15.5 sacks can’t be sniffed at. Yet even despite that impressive split there’s just something holding me back from getting excited about him. I’m not sure what it is. Can he go speed-to-power at the next level? Can he win in other ways because rounding the edge at his size at the next level will be tough. Can he bull rush a tackle into the pocket? The split is the one thing he has going for him really and it makes him interesting. But it might only be enough to get him into round three.

      • EranUngar says:

        Rob, the kid never started a game in his life, high school or college till 2015. He was a total nobody till this year. This year could be hios top and we will never hear of him again or….

        It could be just the beginning of a very late bloomer that can become an amazing player.(i.e. if this is what he is able to do in his first year – the shy is the limit)

        • C-Dog says:

          I like him a lot, and think there is some upside there.

          Bronson Kaufusi, I like a bit more. Similar builds, Kaufusi is probably a bit more athletic and stronger. Love the fact he played all over the front line at BYU, 5 tech, 3 tech, 1 tech, and LB. Very active for a long man, can rush, swats a lot of passes, can drop in coverage. Their DL coach’s son, I think it’s safe to say he’d be a quick learner at the next level. Starting to think more and more he could be a Seattle DL candidate.

  64. Cockney Hawk says:

    Rob,

    With the possiblity of Jeremy Lane leaving if Gus Bradley with his cap room fancies another ex Seahawk in Jacksonville. Would the Seahawks consider Cyrus Jones 5-11 197. Before I hear hes not got 32 inch arms (31 3/8) he does have a few other seahawky qualities. Ex receiver, plays injured, press corner, and excellent against the run. But with the emergence of Tyler Lockett playing receiver and kearse a possible departure another return man would be a bonus. Cyrus is a great punt returner (4tds) and would be a good nickel corner for us. The guy just looks good on the tape Ive seen. cheers CH

    • Rob Staton says:

      Cyrus could be a good slot guy and I think arm length is less of an issue in that regard. However — they have got a couple of slot guys that they brought in already and a deep pool of young CB’s that Carroll was quick to praise at the end of the season. Jones might go a bit too early for the Hawks (R3?). If he lasted into day three he could be an option for the slot. I think day three will be the target range again for CB’s.

  65. Trevor says:

    Rob we discussed the small school DT prospect Justin Zimmer once before on here. He had incrdible #s at the regional combine that were as good or better than anyone his size at the main combine. Do you think he would be in consideration as a late round pick? He seemed to actually have some pass rush ability and be a football player not just an athelte at least on the hilight films.

  66. Cockney Hawk says:

    Rob, When is your next podcast – 3000 NFL draft with Kenneth Arthur ?

  67. Sea Mode says:

    Rob, just another thank you for the awesome combine coverage.

    If you are still taking suggestions for articles, I really liked the format you used a couple weeks ago in a piece on Adolphus Washington where you linked to the tape you watched and jotted down notes on a few plays, highlighting what to look for. (http://seahawksdraftblog.com/further-thoughts-on-adolphus-washington)

    As the combine results bring you to look again at tape on a few Seahawks prospects, would you mind jotting down these notes as you watch and posting them? It would help me at least learn what to look for on tape at the different positions.

    If it would take too much time or effort, don’t worry about it! Thanks.

  68. Trevor says:

    My favourite prospects in Rd#1 for Hawks (Free Agency could change everything)

    #1 Sheldon Rankins- I think he will be long gone unfortunately but I keep seeing him mocked to the Hawks and for good reason. He is the one player in the draft who could be a 3 down disruptive presence as a 3 tech DT for the Hawks. Put him in a Rotation with Rubin and Hill and we would be set at DT.

    #2 Shon Coleman – Rob was on him early and the 2nd best OT prospect in the draft after Tunsil. Long, athletic and nasty. Would be a steal at #26 and could start day #1 at RT or LG. The prefect storm where need and best player available might line up I hope.

    #3 Emanuel Ogbah- His motor is a bit inconsistent but if he has a passion for the game he could be a star. He has everything the Hawks look for in a pass rusher with good size, great length and elite speed. Would be an awesome addition to the pass rush rotation and eventual replacement for Avril. 2016 Nascar pakcage Avril, Bennet, Clark, Ogbah. Sounds scary to me.

    #4 William Jackson- PC/JS have never drafted a corner early but the only DB they ever took in Rd #1 (ET) has been a perennial All Pro. We saw last year with the failed Carey WIlliams experiment how important the spot opposite Sherm is. Pete Carrol said he wants play makers and more turnovers. Well Jackson is the prefect combo of height, arm length and speed to be a Hawks CB. He is also a ball hawk and I think he would excel opposite Sherm getting a ton of picks. If cannot re-sign Lane then I think he would be the rookie that could have the greatest impact in 2016 if the Hawks took him.

    #5 Corey Coleman- I don’t think we will even take a WR in this draft but if we did Coleman would be a huge upgrade to Jermaine Kearse and give us the best WR group in the league along with the Steelers. Think about Jimmy Graham, Luke Willson, Doug Baldwin, Tyler Locket, P Rich and Corey Coleman. I think the talk of the Seahawks pedestrian receivers would certainly be a thing of the past.

    #6 Germain Ifedi – See Robs post above

    #7 Jack Conklin – Would be a great RT in 2016 and really add to the Nasty on our OL. Not the length of Coleman or Ifedi but every bit the athlete and even nastier. As Rob has said he is an elite combo blocker which Cable would love.

    Any of these guys in Rd#1 and I am a happy Hawks fan. All depends on who they sign in free agency I think.

  69. Steve Nelsen says:

    As we prepare to go into free agency, I am reminded of a great series of articles written by Evan Hill on the topic of the cap. “Why everything you’ve heard about the Seahawks cap situation is most likely wrong.”

    The articles suggest that evaluation of a team’s salary cap should incorporate how much money a team has tied up in future guaranteed salaries. Not just how much cap space they have in the current year.

    Seattle has approximately $16 million in available cap space in 2016. That is about middle of the pack among NFL teams. But, they have much more cap space available next year and very little money tied up in future guarantees. If you take these factors into account, Seattle’s current cap situation is among the league’s best.

    Seattle has the flexibility to offer a player a contract with a lower first year-salary and more money in bonuses and future salaries. That would allow them to stretch this year’s $16 million further.

    Seattle also has the flexibility to restructure player contracts to move some money from 2016 salary into bonuses and add to the $16 million cap space for 2016. Young core players with big 2016 salaries are ideal for this type of move and Seattle has some possibilities in Wilson ($12 million), Sherman ($12 million) and Thomas ($8 million).

    We will see which players the FO feels they “need” to keep in order to challenge for a championship in 2016. But, whoever those players turn out to be, John Schneider has the ability to keep them within the Seahawks cap.

  70. Steve Nelsen says:

    Here is the URL for the first article in Evan’s series

    http://www.fieldgulls.com/seahawks-analysis/2015/8/27/9213799/seahawks-salary-cap-analysis-john-schneider-pete-carroll-nfl

    And here is the URL for the first in the series of articles that Evan references

    http://overthecap.com/introducing-commitment-index-part-1/

  71. Cockney Hawk says:

    We have talked about Matt Judon and Justin Zimmer as late/UDFA picks for the Seahawks already. Maybe we could have another to keep Sokoli company on that practice squad. Stephane Nembot the big Cameroon Tackle from Colorado. Stephane is 6.6 322, 345/8 arms with 103/4 hands. combine – 32 reps bench. Been told he could be a great prospect, not much experience as came over from Africa to the US to play BB but ended up playing defensive line instead. Then transfered to tackle. (does this sound familar) Nembot and Sokoli would an international feel to the future Seahawks Oline.

    • Trevor says:

      Definitely an interesting prospect with good size and length but really raw. Wonder what round he will go?

  72. Ukhawk says:

    Question for all u Okung re-signing supporters (yes I’m one at the right price)

    Would u rather have for the next few years best case:
    Rankins + Okung
    Or
    Wilkerson + Coleman/Ifedi/Clark

    Per above we have future cap to support another big deal player

    The 2 FAs will probably have the near same guaranteed money and apy

    • sdcoug says:

      Wilkerson was Franchised. So not only would you have to negotiate a healthy extension, but you’d also have to give up several high draft picks to make the trade.

      • C-Dog says:

        Yeah, my prediction is that Seattle doesn’t make any free agent moves until well into the second wave. Probably a OL vet or two, or a DL vet or two.

    • Cockney Hawk says:

      I would love to have Wilkerson but Jets just gave him the franchise tag. So if Wilkerson plays under the one-year franchise tender, he’ll make $15.7 million in 2016. Providing they cant sort out a longer contract. Okungs not getting anywhere near that on the open market.

      • C-Dog says:

        I don’t think they are going to sign any defensive lineman on a contract bigger than Bennett’s. No way. Strictly in the value market, and not doing to poke that bear.

    • Steve Nelsen says:

      I would prefer Rankins/Okung.

      I listened to Pete Carroll talk to John Clayton at the combine and read an article today refuting the NFL network reports that Seattle had talked to Bennett’s agent about an extension. The message from the FO is very clear; the first priority is their own 17 free agents, especially the unrestricted free agents. They aren’t going to worry about players already under contract (Bennett, Chancellor, Baldwin) or other team’s free agents until they have their own players figured out. “The priority is keeping the guys we have here together.”

      We can have fun imagining a big splash in free agency but it isn’t likely to happen.

      • cha says:

        It’s fun to speculate on big free agents to pursue but the Hawks are really in a very good position – they don’t have much cap room because they’ve signed & developed good players. The bulk of their cap is devoted to players on the roster who are producing.

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        My takeaway is that they will find a way to keep Okung. They know that if they lose him, then the O-Line in 2016 will need a lot of shuffling which goes against their stated goal of continuity and cohesion. They don’t want to risk wasting a season in their championship window over a couple million bucks. And Schneider historically likes to address pressing needs in FA so he can approach the draft with the most flexibility.

        Given the number of DTs in the draft and the likely soft FA market, I think that they find a way to keep both Rubin and Mebane for another couple years at a reasonable price. But, I think those deals get done later rather than sooner.

        Irvin is a wild card. He has the most potential to get a big FA offer and while his athleticism is unique, his production has been modest.

        Lane has flashed in limited playing time but his ability has been limited by his availability due to injuries. They also have a lot of potential replacements on the roster. The coaches have had positive things to say about Shead, Simon, Burley, Sesisay, Jean-Baptiste, Farmer and Smith.

        Sweezy is another wild card. If they still value his athleticism, toughness and leadership, then they could decide to keep him even though his development seems to have plateaued.

        • Steve Nelsen says:

          I forgot to mention Kearse. I don’t think his market with other teams will be very high. I think he gets priced as a #3 receiver and Seattle will re-sign him at that price.

    • Sea Mode says:

      Wilkerson was my dream signing for a while because I believe a penetrating DT would make the single most marked improvement to the current team. I think turnovers would be doubled next year from last season (in which they were below our average) if we could get pressure on the inside. This would 1) force QBs into hurried throws with pressure in their face or 2) force them to step out of the pocket into the edge rushers, providing opportunities for forced fumbles.

      Besides the huge price tag on Wilkerson (and now the franchise tag), something Rob commented on a while back helped me see that we could essentially reach the same kind of production at a much lower cost and without moving away from our awesome run defense on base downs. This would be achieved with a couple productive 3rd down and passing situation DTs.
      (Here’s the article where he explained it if you are interested: http://seahawksdraftblog.com/further-thoughts-on-adolphus-washington)

      I’m hoping, therefore, that we hold on to Rubin and Mebane (the deep draft class at DT should keep their price down), get Jordan Hill back healthy and draft another penetrating DT in case he doesn’t, perhaps Adolphus Washington if he lasts until our R3 pick.

  73. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Alex Mack is a FA.

    • Miles says:

      Prediction: We will not sign him.

      • Sea Mode says:

        I wouldn’t be so quick to discard the option.

        My reasoning is a Seahawks philosophy point: except for Hauschka, as of right now they have ZERO players in the 2m-5m range. Last season, there were only two (not on rookie deals): Rubin at 2.6m and Kearse at 2.3m (R2 tender).

        This seems to be a pretty firm strategy to, in a sense, force themselves to always do better than mid-tier talent. Or if they do accept such role players, to always make sure they are cheap (<2m) so that we can retain the top-tier talent.

        You can see this clearly in the table at Spotrac: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/cap/

        I think that now is the time to rework Baldwin and Bennett, and I hope they sign Lane (6m) and Rubin (3.5m- as an exception to the rule). But with the remaining 8m I think it is more likely they go for one top-tier player (like Mack) than 3 mid-tier players (Kearse, veteran FA, etc.)

        • Miles says:

          That’s a cool argument. Thanks for the insight.

          If they are firmly holding onto that philosophy (not signing guys $2-5m), then I would expect them to let Rubin go. They may be able to get Mebane back under $2m and then find a cheap 3-tech somewhere else or through the draft. The only problem here is that if they sign Mack, they won’t be able to sign anybody else.

          Maybe that’s okay? They are stacked with star players as it is. Those are the players they will be leaning on anyway. Perhaps adding one more star to the roster is more important than adding players for continuity sake. The draft is where teams find continuous success anyway and was the key to our Superbowl win.

          If they sign Mack, I suppose they could get Lane. That would leave them with about $4m in cap room, which they must save for IR and drafted players and RFAs. Those would be the only two players you sign. That means bye Okung, Kearse, Irvin, Mebane, Rubin, and/or a player you must cut to save room. But now that we don’t have many (any?) players who make between $2m and $5m, they really don’t have anyone to cut! They could ask Sherman or Thomas to re-arrange the money in their contracts. Or, they could backload the contracts of Lane and Mack. There are some options, but in order to fit Lane and Mack under the cap, you have to get creative and you probably have to let the vast majority of your FAs go. But hey, at least you’ll get some nice comp. picks.

          And that means we would need to draft well. But again, any franchise that wants to be successful MUST draft well. So maybe signing Mack is an optimal strategy.

          • Miles says:

            And this tweet (on Mack):

            Scott Enyeart
            @FieldGulls FWIW, Clayton said this morning the Hawks won’t do it, given cost and compensatory pick cost

            • Trevor says:

              If they let Okung sign elsewhere the Comp picks and cost would equal out.

              • Miles says:

                I don’t think so – If Okung signs elsewhere and Mack signs here – in the same money bracket – a 3rd or 4th rounder that could have been, would cancel out.

              • lil'stink says:

                I think the fact that comp picks can be traded next year changes things. I think it will only add value to something that our front office already holds in high regard. Potentially getting 4 comp picks for the 2017 draft would give us a ton of flexibility. Maybe even trade up in the draft for a true game changing sort of talent.

          • Sea Mode says:

            Miles, I believe the latest calculations are around $18m in cap space AFTER setting aside for draft picks, IR, rookie contracts, etc.

            We could also sign them to contracts with a lower first-year cap hit, since we will have quite a bit more room to make up for it next year.

            • Miles says:

              For real? Damn, that’s awesome. This whole time I thought that was before setting aside moneys.

              Yeah it’s possible. But you also have to consider we probably would lose a 4th round comp. for it. What Clayton said doesn’t make me feel good about a Mack signing.

        • Trevor says:

          Agree completely on Baldwin and Bennet. Lets get them done now. JS seems to always get a deal done early with his core pieces. That is why I think Okung and Irvin are gone unless the price is right.

          Can you imagine if Russ and Bobby Wagner where hitting the open market this off season?

        • reggieregg says:

          I see where your going with that. I like it can we get osemele under the same strategy?

  74. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Irvin’s agent think’s his market is around $9.5M APY.

    • Steve Nelsen says:

      The agents may have a bias toward inflating their client’s value.

      Davis Hsu did some analysis a month ago on projected 2016 cap hits for Seattle’s 7 UFAs. His numbers may be a bit out of date because the salary cap wasn’t set yet but he projected a $6 million 1st-year number for Irvin.

  75. AlaskaHawk says:

    Rob- Is this a record with over 400 messages?
    Great responses from everyone. Thanks for taking the time to feed us interesting analysis and your unique insights.

    • Miles says:

      Glad that not only is there a lot of volume of posts on this board but the posts are generally intelligible and fun to read. Not a lot of offensive remarks, as well. It’s really a cool thing that’s been made here.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think we’ve had 500-600 before. Maybe even more actually. The Super Bowls and the drafts have hit the high mark. Nice to see the community thriving though and I thank you guys for that.

  76. Jon says:

    Could we pick up a round three comp for both Irvin and Okung this year. I think Okung goes for more than Irvin at the rate LT’s are going for at this time and if Irvin rakes in nearly 10 m/y this could mean huge comp picks. If Okung does not get 9-10 m/y I would see him coming back cheap for 1 year to reset his market without a major injury putting the breaks on his value.

  77. Trevor says:

    With Alex Mack opting out and becoming a free agent here is the question. If you are going to spend $8-10 mil APY on a core player for your OL who would you prefer?

    Mack or Okung?

    • Trevor says:

      Keep in mind the Comp picks would cancel out because if we sign Okung we would not get one and if we sign Mack we loose the one we gain when Okung signs elsewhere.

    • Sea Mode says:

      Mack. Remember how our o-line, even if cheap, was better with the presence of a pro-bowl, veteran center calling the adjustments. He makes the whole interior better, whereas LT, though crucial, has less of an impact on the others.

      That, combined with Okung’s injury and the probability that a tackle prospect will be available at our R1pick, push me in favor of Mack.

      Please see my reasoning a few posts above on free agents and Mack as well.

      • Miles says:

        I am beginning to question whether a LT, though important, has more value than a RT. Aside from being the blind-side blocker, what does a LT do that a RT doesn’t? RTs have to block many of the same blockers and as we saw with Giacomini, are often asked to do a lot in the running game. Not to mention if the quarterback is left-handed, then they are the blindside blockers and the LT becomes theoretically less-important.

      • Sea Mode says:

        Yeah, you are right, losing possible R3 comp pick would stink and they have been very careful about that in the past. But Mack just might be the fastest way to gel the whole line like they say they want to.

        • Miles says:

          What is the bigger priority? Getting better in 2016 or in ’17, 18, and ’19. Ideally you’d like to do both. But if doing nothing on the OL means our offense can’t function in 2016, that’s more costly than a 3rd round pick.

          • Steve Nelsen says:

            Seattle set franchise records for offense last season with a line of Okung/Britt/Leiws/Sweezy/Gilliam.

            Granted a lot of that production was not due to the line and there is clearly a recognized need for improvement on the line by the coaches/FO. But, I think you could get better in 2016 just by replacing Britt at LG. You could add competition at C too and maybe get a potential replacement tackle for Okung.

            • Miles says:

              Agreed. I think at the end of this whole thing we might find out that we can’t get much better than how the Seahawks OL was playing down the stretch last year. I think that thought has been lost on fans. In today’s NFL, it’s really hard to get consistency out of your OL. Schneider himself said that 30 out of 32 teams have at least some holes on their o-line.

              So, maybe getting Okung and Sweezy back is the best thing we can do?

  78. Trevor says:

    Speaking of Okung. Everyone assumes he is going to get $10 mil + per year. I went through the list of teams and I don’t see a lot of teams where there is a good fit and a ton of cap space. Am I missing a team who would be a great fit? Oak is going to resign Donald Penn and the Jags are focusing on defense.

    Who are the likely suitors for Okung?

    • Miles says:

      How about St. Louis? They’ve been shaky on the offensive line and they have a lot of money to play with. They just freed up $25m in cap room after releasing Long, Laurinaitis and Cook. Greg Robinson has not been the fixture on the left side they were hoping for either.

      • Miles says:

        LA, I mean. 😛

        • Trevor says:

          Going to take a while to get used to saying that isnt it.

          • Miles says:

            Yes. Although I feel bad for StL fans, I think the move to LA will make for a more convenient rivalry. I have a ton of family in LA so room and board is taken care of if I want to go see the Hawks play down there.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think he’d be a great fit in Detroit — and Calvin Johnson’s retirement could free up some cash.

  79. Trevor says:

    Really hope they will sign Rubin before free agency begins. I thought we would have seen him locked up by now.

    If we don’t re-sign Mebane or Rubin what veteran option are out there? Perhaps Pot Roast?

    • Sea Mode says:

      Carroll’s praise for Rubin as the best 3-tech he has had makes me think they will make sure get it done, but who knows, maybe they actually are looking at a big name free agent and need to get that sorted out first.

      As good as he was for us this year, this draft looks really deep for run stuffers.

  80. reggieregg says:

    Okung has seen his best days. The seahawks don’t overpay mid level guys and okung is barely that. He played like trash over the first 8 games of the season even when every body else seemed to somewhat improve over the last half he still false started and held like he always does. He is no pillar of stability. Let him walk. Even of you resign him he won’t play at least 3 games.

    • Robert says:

      Crappy effort on his greatest blocking opportunity ever… The beast run right before the interception in XLIX.

  81. Cockney Hawk says:

    Could we get Alex Mack cheaper or for same price as Okung. Do we upgrade the interior at the expense of Okung. Thoughts

    • Cockney Hawk says:

      Add Jahri Evans or Incognito at LG. Would Mack take less to play for the Hawks and the same for Evans or Incognito. Would it be impossible to get a tandem of Evans or Incognito(3m) and Mack (6m) for the price of Okung (9m). Could they would they?

      • Miles says:

        I think getting Okung back and drafting Shon Coleman would fill potentially three needs:

        1) Okung fills the LT spot.

        2) Shon Coleman can go to LG.

        3) Shon Coleman can be the first swing tackle if Okung is hurt.

        So in essence if Okung is healthy, we play:

        Okung
        Coleman
        Lewis
        Sweezy/Glowinski
        Gilliam

        When Okung is inevitably hurt, we play:

        Coleman
        Bailey/Poole/Sokoli
        Lewis
        Sweezy/Glowinski
        Gilliam

        I like the idea of looking at Giacomini this offseason too. I think he’s the ideal RT for us. Gilliam could be a great backup T for us. That means our OL could look like this if we keep 9 OL.

        Okung
        Coleman
        Lewis
        Sweezy
        Giacomini
        Bailey
        Gilliam
        Sokoli
        Glowinski

        • reggieregg says:

          The fact that we know okung is inevitably going to be hurt furthers the let him go thoughts!

    • lil'stink says:

      Interior OL definitely needs to be upgraded, but ultimately I think Mack will be too expensive (at least for my preference). I’m starting to think the market for Okung will be softer than we have been thinking, although I would still be reluctant to bring him back.

      Patrick Lewis and Lemuel Jeanpierre are obviously not pro-bowl, game changing sort of talents. Lewis is a RFA, LJP is a UFA. Both players obviously have experience in our system, and I imagine both would be cheap to sign for next year. I say bring back one, or both, of them with the intention of drafting a center (either a natural center or center convert like Westerman, Dahl, etc). Let all 3 compete for the job in training camp. Whatever happens it can’t be nearly as bad as the mess that we had last year when Novak was starting.

      It would be nice to bring in a veteran for the OL in the $4 million APY range. Most likely an interior guy. Someone solid and dependable but won’t break the bank. Who that would be I’m honestly not sure, though.

      With all of our needs I think any big FA signing, without easing our cap hit in some way, will just leave us spread a little too thin going into the draft and beyond.

  82. Madmark says:

    Well Rob I still like your 1st Febuary draft mock. My thoughts we really need a Center for the next 4-8 years that will work with Russel Wilson and provide that leadership on that OL. Patrick Lewis is not that guy going into the future. Nick Martin was the perfect pick and he really sealed it with a great Senior Bowl. Lets face it, the NFC has some of the toughest interior DL in football. I also feel more comfortable with having a center who has the experience doing the shot gun snap. I like a Glowinski at RG and GG(Garry Gilliam) at RT spot. I remember due to this site Terry Poole played LT for San Diego St. and he was a JUCO transfer so he was very raw. I’m not sure about Bailey either at this point and time. The problem I have is what to do about LG and the LT spot if Okung leaves. You had Travis Freeney in the 5th or 6th round and that clearly isn’t likely to happen now. Sebastien Tretola will probably stay right where he’s at in the 4th arm length I think is a concern. I still think Connor McGovern if he drops would be a steal in the 5th round. Well done with my coffee. thanks for site so I can post from time to time.

  83. Soggyblogger says:

    This is the one I was waiting for. Thanks for your work, Rob.

    I keep thinking about your post where you talked about the need to improve the interior OL. Wilson and the Hawks have a unique situation where opponents are somewhat afraid to put too much emphasis on outside pressure on Wilson because of his ability to evade that rush, while he is in big trouble when pressure comes from the inside.

    That thinking is what makes me believe they will not sign Okung unless it is a cheap one year prove it deal. One could reason that if/when we lose Okung that argues more strongly for our need to draft a tackle in the early rounds. And while I won’t be surprised with our first round pick going for an OT, I tend to think they will have some pass rusher rated highly and wait for OL in later rounds.

    I know, I know….OT’s and especially LT’s cannot be found in the later rounds….except for Gilliam who you are more and more saying you expect to be playing LT next year. Oh, and Bailey, who I know you don’t like, but to my way of thinking, the Hawks played well when he replaced Okung. The drop off from Okung to Bailey hardly gets noticed. Is that for the aforementioned issue opponents have using speed rushes from the edge? And the Hawks actually reached the SB and &^%$#should have won it….with Britt the Horrible playing RT all year long. Certainly, Britt won’t have regressed, and he could possibly be moved back to RT, Gilliam to LT, Glowinski at RG, and a 2nd or 3rd round pick taking over at LG. Lewis, Sokoli, Wiesnewski, at Center.

    I know people here are throwing rotten eggs at me now, but it’s a fact that the Hawks went to the SB with Britt playing RT.

    • Robert says:

      I like to imagine Britt is working hours ass off this off season improving his foot speed acme technique. He very well might end up as our starting RT in 2016.

  84. smitty1547 says:

    I agree Elliot is a beast and could go top 15, just don’t see it to the raiders as they already have a great young back and so many other needs. Although you are not the only mock I have seen him going to the Raiders with.

    Also love Travis but round 2 is to much draft capital for such an injury prone player, let somebody else take that risk if he goes that high. Just means another great player available for us with out so much risk.

  85. Miles says:

    Rob, pretending injury issues are a non-factor, who is the better prospect pre-draft: Sheldon Rankins or Dominique Easley?

  86. franks says:

    There’s a nice group of players that could be available at 26.

    Shon Coleman
    Ifedi
    Spence after his workout
    Tapper (trading back?)
    Fuller
    Apple
    Willie Jackson
    Neal

    If Mebane or Rubin walks, Austin Johnson a nice option in the second.

    • franks says:

      or even if they don’t (walk).

      • Volume12 says:

        Austin Johnson is not a 2nd round pick.

        Went back looked at his numbers, awful. Yes, he has good tape, but that isn’t enough for Seattle. I’m beginning to question if this guy can perform under pressure.

        Wouldn’t shock me at all to see Seattle not draft a DT until round 4-5.

        • franks says:

          Wouldn’t shock me either but I don’t think it would be by design, more like a question of who falls to our picks. We are getting older at DT though even if Pete is happy with Mebane and Rubin and at a minimum we need someone else in the rotation.

          I would rather have someone who can play than someone who can run a 40 yard dash or bench 225 however many times. Coleman over Ifedi is becoming a no brainer to me the more I think about it. Austin Johnson looks like an animal out there. Don’t know if that’s enough or he falls past the second, but Rob did mock him in our range after the combine.

  87. […] The following players were available in McShay’s mock that were off the board in our projection yesterday: […]

  88. Volume12 says:

    People are gonna hate this…

    Seahawks had a formal interview with Texas Tech OL Le’Raven Clark.

  89. franks says:

    Alex Mack just voided his contract.

    I had a couple thoughts about the compensatory picks. Here’s the hypothetical: If Okung and Irvin sign elsewhere for 8-10, Lane for 6-7, Mebane and Rubin for 4 each, that would give us 2 thirds, a fourth and a fifth/sixth? Now if we signed Mack or Osemele for 6-7, we would then get 2 thirds and 2 fifth/sixths?

    If this happened if would happen before the draft and I wonder if we’d start thinking about trading next year’s picks for this year’s for the right opportunities. Only so many guys can make the roster in a given year. Next year the compensatory picks will be tradable, FWIW.

  90. bigDhawk says:

    #62 Denver — Tyler Boyd (WR, Pittsburgh)
    Terrific football player and a Mr. Reliable for whoever starts at quarterback.

    Tim Tebow.

    Seriously.

  91. […] round two they would need to add to the defense with an impact player. We projected Travis Feeney this week to replace Bruce Irvin and it’s an ideal fit if he checks…. Alternatively they could add the best available defensive lineman, linebacker or […]

  92. […] This week we mocked Germain Ifedi to the Seahawks at #26. Ifedi’s tape is far better than some people will have you believe, he’s a genuine physical freak of nature with incredible upside and athleticism. […]