Seahawks interested in Jimmy Smith?

March 22nd, 2011 | Written by Rob Staton

Tony Pauline is reporting interest from the Seahawks in talented Colorado cornerback Jimmy Smith:

“Last week we posted that sources had told us several teams removed Colorado cornerback Jimmy Smith from their draft boards due to character concerns.  Over the weekend separate, independent sources again confirmed this.  That said we’ve also been alerted that the Seattle Seahawks still highly rate the cornerback and would consider taking him in round one.”

Smith is a top ten talent on the field, yet talk of character concerns continue to linger. The Seahawks would be wise to roll the dice on his huge talent if he makes it to #25. In my last mock draft I looked at the possibility that Smith could still be an early draft pick – Tennessee have ignored character concerns in the past when drafting in round one and they’re in desperate need of a corner. While some may assume the #8 overall pick is too early (especially with the Titans need at quarterback) I still think it’s a potential landing spot. There’s a papers width between Patrick Peterson and Jimmy Smith as this year’s top cornerback, even though Peterson has received a much greater press. Both are incredibly talented players.

It would be an upset if the character concerns dropped Smith to #25 even despite all the negative publicity. If it was to happen, only one of the top quarterbacks remaining on the board should prevent the Colorado prospect landing in Seattle.

15 Responses to “Seahawks interested in Jimmy Smith?”

  1. McDavis says:

    I’m obviously a big fan of Smith from the tape I’ve seen and have said a few times that, in my opinion, landing Smith at #25 and trading up to grab Mallett or Locker in the early 2nd (although perhaps unlikely) is the absolute dream Seahawks draft scenario. However, I’ve also read in a few different places that although most scouts agree that Smith’s upside is higher than a guy like Amukamara, along with the off the field issues, Smith’s inconsistency in games is also a concern. Because I haven’t viewed tape from every Colorado game (nor do I plan to find and watch it all), Rob, I was wondering if you have any comment on that potential issue?

    • Rob says:

      It’s an argument I’ve read – most notably from Mike Mayock – but not one I’ve witnessed personally. I didn’t think Smith was as bad against Georgia as Mayock has suggested. He was world class against Oklahoma. Consistency is something that will be tested during a 16-game season, but Smith has huge potential. You have to be sure though that the talent is reliable, it’s no good being great one week and sloppy the next. As I say though, that’s not the impression I’ve had from Smith.

      • ChavaC says:

        Is it even possible for a guy who gets thrown at 11 times a season to be to called inconstant? I have watched very little of the tape but it seems like that would be a difficult conclusion to come to.

  2. Rob says:

    Hi Rob,

    I just saw that updated his mock draft. He had Jimmy Smith in round 1 and Marvin Austin in round 2. I’m not sure if I like the picks 100%, mostly because of the character concerns with both players. However I feel both players would be steals given the talent they both possess. What do you think? Also will you be doing a round 2 mock?


    • Rob says:

      Hi Rob,

      I think that would be a good one-two punch. I’d give it an A+ if they already had a long term starting QB. If it’s really impossible to get at the top QB’s this year, that would be a nice consolation. I’m considering a second round mock tomorrow to go alongside the updated first round projection. Stay tuned.

  3. Cliff says:

    If we were to pick Jimmy Smith in the first, trading up in the 2nd to get a QB would be fairly costly considering there would be about 8 teams that need a QB, most of them picking at the top of the 2nd with only Mallet, Locker, Dalton, Ponder and Kapernick available with a supposed 2nd round grade. Trying to keep draft capital this year might be tough or we’d have to give up some 2012 draft picks. Maybe our #56 + a 2012 3rd round could do the trick depending on who we trade with but more likely we’d have to include our 4th round pick as well.

    • Matt says:

      If Mallett or Locker were available in the second round, I’d trade the rest of our draft picks for them. Every pick past the second round is very hit or miss anyways. If you have a chance at a huge upside QB, go for it. Granted, that means we passed on them at 25 which i would not be thrilled with.

      I’d rather avoid Dalton and Ponder. Hopefully the Cards and 49ers target those guys so we don’t have to be worried about either of those teams for the foreseeable future. It’s somewhat laughable to me that people think Dalton and Ponder are anything but career backups with the ceiling/upside of game managing QB who will not carry your team.

      • plyka says:

        That’s a bad trade off in my opinion. The 3rd-later rounds is where the GM makes his money. That’s how you load up on talent at extremely cheap prices. There are TONS of available players with ridiculous talent levels in the later rounds. They may be hit and miss, but so are the first few rounds. Or else the Seahawks would have hit gold with Rick Mirer as the 2nd overall pick.

        You want a lot of draft picks, ones in the later rounds are VERY underrated in my opinion. The best bet is to get a QB with the 1st round pick. Locker or Mallet, one will be available. I’m the coordinator on the Mallet hype train, so he would be my #1, and i’m not that high on wonderlic locker but i’d still take him…of course, i would take Kolb with the 1st round pick over all of them.

        • Matt says:

          Obviously I wouldn’t want to lose all those picks, but in that scenario, would you give up 2 through 7 minus a third and our extra 5th if that got you let’s say Jimmy Smith and Mallett/Locker? Or instead of Smith, Liuget or Wilkerson or Pouncey? This is basically what his scenario would be. And your not losing a second because you are getting a high second in return.

          I think the idea of making your money in the later rounds is more of a myth than anything. GMs make their money by hitting more often than not in the top 2 rounds and more importantly are able to identify and pick a QB. Late rounds are the lottery.

          • Matt says:

            Belichick actually has a poor record after round 2. Brandon Adams has a great write up about the myth of “trading down.” A vast majority of starters and pro bowlers come from the first and second round. The media skews the idea of all these late round gems simply because it’s a good underdog story. In reality, it’s a tiny percentage that become impact players. If I could guarantee a possible franchise QB and a probable impact CB or D Lineman, I’d gladly give up my later round picks to secure them.

          • ChavaC says:

            Normally I would agree with consolidating picks into higher ones, especially when Pete wheels and deals enough depth from FA, but I think this is one year where we’re going to need those picks. For one, I’m under the impression PC is still very much in touch with the talent in this draft from his days recruiting at USC. If he’s ever going to pull that gem out of the 6/7th round, I think this year is as good as any. Also, with FA on the fence right now, we aren’t going to be able to bring in guys on a weekly basis to cover our gaps in depth. Any other year though, my value of the 4th/5th/6th/7th rounds is not too high, and I sorta believe that after the third the talent you get out of the draft starts to mimic the guys you can get from FA.

  4. Jim Kelly says:

    From what I’ve seen of Jimmy Smith (This blog is 90% of that), he looks like he would be a good pick.

    Just going off of this video, Smith looks like a steal at #25. He was fluid, had instincts for the ball, and was consistently jumping routes in a positive manner. Blaine Gabbert had a tendency to not look off the defensive backs. That could have been a huge factor in Smith’s success in this game, but Smith’s abilities didn’t seem to be hampered when Gabbert was looking the defenders off.

    Smith’s talents are unmistakable. They’ve shown through, even when he was thrown off by play action. I loved how Smith would stay in his lane, and keep outside containment. On the fake field goal, he wasn’t able to do so. Mizzou was able to get an easy touchdown because of that. He appears to be a willing tackler, and looked like he was having fun hitting people.

    He did take a couple of plays off. Kinda. When the running back was pushing the pile, Smith stood there. Smith was in position to stop the runner, if he broke through, but I would’ve preferred if Smith would have hit the pile, stopping the running back’s forward momentum. All in all, Smith’s negatives look like they could be helped with coaching and maturity, both on and off the field. His positive attributes look to greatly outweigh his negative ones. I’d be happy if the Hawks drafted him.

    I agree with ChavaC when they mention Pete Carroll’s relationship with players that were recruited while Carroll was at USC. I also feel that each year he is proportionally less attuned with those same players. Carroll is smart enough to know that, not only is he less in touch with those college players, but that he will keep in touch with his former assistants to help him sift through data on players he didn’t recruit. If Pete Carroll is really smart, he’ll get in contact with the programs at WSU, UO, and OSU, and develop a working relationship with those programs. Because there are four teams, from the championship bowl series, in the Northwest, he could do what other NFL coaches have done, and mentor those programs. Not only would Carroll get information on the players in their programs, but on players that those same programs faced.

    I don’t like giving up too many late round picks for a higher round pick. You have to look no further than New Orleans and the Ricky Williams trade to understand why that isn’t a good idea. No I don’t mind the Seahawks giving up picks to move up, just as long as they don’t give up too much. Dallas gave up three picks, and swapped first round picks to draft Tony Dorsett. That wasn’t too much, especially when you factor in Dorsett making the Hall of Fame, for a draft that lasted 12 rounds. Giving up one or two late round picks, and then swapping picks in the same round would be an acceptable price to pay for a long time starter, let alone a Hall of Famer, in a seven round draft.

    Another reason I don’t want to give up late round picks is because there is no collective bargaining agreement in place. As it stands now, the Seahawks won’t be able to sign undrafted free agents until a new CBA is in place. If the Hawks were to trade away all of the lower picks that they now have, that would leave them with, say two picks, and there compensatory picks. In a normal year, they could sign extra free agents, but not so this year. Losing those late round picks could hurt the Hawks greatly this year.

    To everyone that read my comment, which turned into an article within an article, thanks.

  5. Rob says:

    Personally I’m with Matt. If you’re sat in round two and Mallett is still there, you do what it takes to get him. Securing a one-two punch of Smith and Mallett would be remarkable. You look to the draft to provide starters and you would have a decent chance there of securing two key positions with two really talented players. Of course, I see next to no chance of Smith being there at #25 or Mallett being there in round two.

  6. Nick says:

    If Jimmy Smith is a top-ten talent, this is an awfully weak draft pool.