Seahawks’ work out several prospects & Saturday links

March 26th, 2011 | Written by Rob Staton

Further information is coming through on the prospects Seattle will be meeting with in the weeks leading up to the draft. I’d recommend following Aaron Wilson on twitter, he regularly updates which teams are meeting with which players. Tony Pauline is another must follow for similar information.

California safety Chris Conte, Arkansas quarterback Ryan Mallett, Michigan State offensive tackle DJ Young and Boise State quarterback Mike Coughlin will work out for the Seahawks. Connecticut linebacker Lawrence Wilson recently met with the team although it’s unclear if he participated in a work out. Kenrick Ellis (DT, Hampton) has already performed for Seattle’s coaches and scouts. The Seahawks also recently attended the Montana State pro-day to watch offensive lineman Michael Person.


Pete Prisco says quarterback should be a target for Seattle: “They need to address this position early in the draft. A first-round pick on a quarterback is a possibility.”

Brandon Adams justifies why Seattle received a 7th round compensatory pick, rather than a higher selection: “My logical response is to heave a sigh and grudgingly admit that it makes sense.”

Wes Bunting has his latest batch of rumors: “One name who seems to be building a lot of traction is Illinois DT Corey Liuget. He’s said to be making his way up into the first half of round one and is a guy who the Rams are said to have a lot of interest in.”

Mike Mayock says Eastern Washington running back Taiwan Jones is a potential sleeper pick: “He’s a home-run hitter who can impact the return game and I think that you try to get him another 10 touches per game as a change-of-pace back.”

Todd McShay runs through his top defensive prospects:

6 Responses to “Seahawks’ work out several prospects & Saturday links”

  1. Cliff says:

    Looks like a lot of the guys visiting are free agents/possible 7th round picks minus Kenrick Ellis and Lawrence Wilson. Ellis is considered more of a NT isnt he? Would be nice if he fell to the 5th and could get his weight under control as he is massive. I love hearing about the hawks being interested in higher upside guys or players with a problem or two that can be corrected easily.
    Interesting to hear about Mike Coughlin too. I don’t think he’s highly rated but if he’s a priority undrafted FA why not use a 7th rounder on him? Or a 6th if he gain traction but since he never really played you think he’d go undrafted.

    • Rob says:

      Team’s generally bring the guys in they don’t have as much information on. You’ve called it right, Cliff – they’ll have a look at Coughlin and see if there’s anything there. It may be with a view to a 7th rounder or a priority UDFA, they may bring him in and realise he isn’t good enough. Due dilligence.

  2. Jules says:

    Hey Rob,

    Thanks as always for giving us Seahawk fans something to examine and ponder during that long period of nothingness between our playoff exit and the upcoming NFL Draft. I wanted to run a few ideas past you and get your take on it and feedback from the rest of the 12th Man. Here we go…


    With New England stockpiled with draft picks in the first three rounds of this draft do you think there might be any hope (yes I’m in fantasy land here but here me out) in them trading for a third pick in the first round, like Seattle’s #25 (worth 720 points by ESPN’s schedule) for New England’s 33rd (worth 580) and 60th (worth 300) picks in the 2nd round? We could throw in a late round pick to make the numbers work a bit better. The number 60 pick is almost a third rounder and with depth being available up front in this draft it would be amazing for Seattle to recoup another pick in the late 2nd early third of the draft. While I know that Belichick would appreciate the depth that draft picks provide, given their team strength’s I’m sure he also values quality and this would provide a rare opportunity.


    For Seattle it would provide three potential starters if the three picks in the 2nd round were used correctly allowing them to hopefully draft:

    A) the best guard available first,
    B) a contributing but not every down player for the defensive line, and
    C) potentially a corner to help push Walter Thurmond.

    That would be a win win scenario in my books. Further, it would be great to see Kam Chancellor develop into a starting safety with Milloy returning to help both young safeties develop. Not to mention that the cost to the franchise for 2nd round pick contracts would help the Seahawks manage their cap space more effectively for the next 3 to 5 years.

    Do you think Chancellor has the chance this year to be the starter or would that produce a drop in production compared to starting Milloy?


    Given that Paul Allen is the NFL’s richest owner, is it all conceivable that he’s told the front office to go out and spend to bring Asomugha? If my above scenario worked out, Allen could feel secure knowing that the cost of three 2 Round Draft picks is a lot more affordable down the road (at least the next 3 to 5 years). It would also be a show of faith to the Seattle faithful that he is serious about trying to win sooner rather than later.

    Do you think money would be enough to get him in the fold or do you think that at this point in his career he’d favor taking less to be on a Superbowl contender? Even if we brought in Asomugha do you think Seattle would still look to add a big corner in the draft so that Trufant’s role can be phased out in a year or so?

    I must admit that I waffle back and forth trying to figure out if the Seahawks have improved leverage heading into the draft with the ability to trade picks only and not players.

    Thanks for any of your thoughts on my comments. Sorry I have so many right now but I’m yearning to be excited about the Seahawks’ building an effective and dangerous team once again and long for some speed and excitement on offense again.

    • Rob says:

      Hi Jules, thanks for the message and the kind words about the blog – always really appreciated.

      I’m not sure about New England looking to acquire a third first round pick. I wouldn’t necessarily rule it out, but they are not a team commonly associated with trading away picks. If we’re discussing the positive benefit of Seattle owning the picks you listed, I’m not sure why New England wouldn’t feel the same way as opposed to moving into the #25 range.

      I think generally as fans of any NFL team, there’s always a desire to see your front office acquire more picks. It’s a thought process I don’t tend to agree with unless you’ve got the key components needed to be a perennial contender. If you’ve got a francise QB, some playmakers and a solid defense, trade away. Green Bay, New England, Pittsburgh etc can get away with that. Seattle, if anything, needs to be picking as high as possible to get the best possible talent at the positions they don’t have great talent for the long term. There’s no difference making defensive lineman on Seattle’s roster, game changing offensive playmaker or – most importantly – franchise quarterback for the long haul. Trading down means potential depth, but not necessarily better talent. I look at #25 and struggle to find a prospect I really like who is likely to be there. That will only get harder at #33 or lower. Even despite a lack of obvious candidates at #25, I still much prefer the guys I have in the 21-30 range than I do the 31-40. The bottom of the second round is really lacking in starter quality.

      You mention the positions we could acquire for – I think you can find a starting guard in round two, but then I think you can find that at #57 anyway. There’s enough depth in there with Watkins, Hudson, Franklin, Cannon – you can get a guy to start in 2011. The other two positions we’re essentially looking at a rotational cog defensive lineman and a corner. Realistically you could get one of those at #25, so for the sake of risking missing out on the guy top of your board to move down 8 spots you’re adding one extra player. By definition three is more helpful than two, but not if you’re talking about one significantly better player as being part of the two.

      If anything I’d rather the team be aggressive to fill the big needs (particularly at QB) and once you have them in place, we can start to consider depth building and quantity over quality. I don’t think one extra pick – even in round two or three – is necessarily worth moving down from #25 unless you have one guy at the top of your board… you’ll take him at #25 but know he’ll be there at #33. Even then – I’m not sure I’d take the risk he’ll still be there.

      On Chancellor, it’s hard to tell. He didn’t get a ton of playing time as a rookie. He’s really at a stage now where you expect he’ll play more in 2011 even if he’s not the bona fide starter. He had potential in college and he was a good pick up for Seattle. You hope he learnt a thing or two from Milloy. They may re-sign Milloy or bring in another veteran starter. Either way I suspect Chancellor will be given that extra time on the field and he needs to play well enough to earn more.

      Finally on Asomugha, I suspect Seattle will be among the interested parties at least initially. Let’s remember – the Seahawks admitted they would discuss a move for Randy Moss before deciding against it. There were other similar moves where they have a conversation and moved on. Brandon Marshall – Vincent Jackson – Kevin Kolb – they’ve been active. The key will be whether having had those discussions with Asomugha, do they see the value? The guy is going to get an insane contract. He’ll be 30-years-old in July. Is he still going to be great for 4+ years? What are other teams willing to pay? There are so many questions to be answered. Again, as fans we want to fill as many holes as possible but it has to be right. No doubt what so ever Seattle will be heavily involved in what happens with NA, but whether he actually signs a contract to play in the North West is a completely different matter.

  3. PatrickH says:

    Hi Rob,

    Besides QB, I wonder if the 3 tech position could be the focus of the 1st round pick. The 1 tech and 5 tech positions already have Colin Cole and Red Bryant in place, so draft picks for these positions are for depth. For the 3 tech, however, they could lose Mebane to free agency, and ideally in Carroll’s scheme the 3 tech player should be a better pass rusher than Mebane has been. I am interested in your opinion on this. Are Nick Fairley, Corey Liuget, and Marvin Austin the only potential 3 tech players worthy of 1st round pick? It seems like most of the DL talents in this year’s draft are better fit at 5 tech, 1 tech, or LEO.

    • Rob says:

      Dareus could play 3-technique but obviously he’ll be long gone. I think some teams will see WIlkerson as potentially being able to play 3-tech. Drake Nevis is a guy who may sneak into the back end of round one, but he’s under sized. As you mention you’ve then got Fairley and Liuget. Austin still troubles me because I was so under whelmed with the 2009 tape (3rd round grade) but then he shows up at the combine and it’s hard to ignore how athletic he was. Overall I’d say the depth is evenly split around the defensive line, but where Seattle picks (#25) you’re looking at LEO’s and one or two five-techniques as your best option unless you move up.