Seven round Seahawks mock draft

March 22nd, 2016 | Written by Rob Staton

Tyler Ervin could be the guy they can’t leave the draft without

I’ve chosen two scenarios for rounds one and two. One that will satisfy those wanting the #26 to be spent on an offensive lineman — and one that will satisfy those wanting to see a pass rusher.

Round 1
Germain Ifedi (T, Texas A&M) or Jonathan Bullard (DE, Florida)
Ifedi is huge (6-6, 324lbs, 36 inch arms) but he’s also a dynamic athlete (second best vertical among O-liners at the combine) and he looks like the Hulk. He’s ranked #1 by SLA among offensive linemen and physically he’s in the 97th percentile for NFL lineman. Mock Draftable also compares him to Kelechi Osemele. A pick like this would allow the Seahawks to look at Ifedi and J’Marcus Webb at tackle and guard and make a decision on who starts where during camp. Starting Ifedi at left guard would give Tom Cable an athletic mauler. He’s a cheaper alternative to Osemele.

I suspect the Seahawks would like to add another DE who can kick inside on third down. That’s the ideal role for Bullard. PFF ranked him as the #1 interior run defender in college football for 2015. He impressed athletically at the combine with a decent three-cone (7.31) and vertical (32 inches). He also has good size (6-3, 285lbs, 33.5 inch arms, 10 inch hands) and has the right attitude for this team. Bullard returned to Florida in 2015 because he wanted to prove he was a better player than the mid-round grade he received from the draft committee.

Round 2
Connor McGovern (T, Missouri) or Bronson Kaufusi (DE, BYU)
If the Seahawks take a pass rusher in round one — this surely has to be an O-line pick? McGovern played left tackle for Missouri, following in the footsteps of back-to-back second round picks Justin Britt and Mitch Morse. McGovern is closer to Morse athletically — he’s ranked #4 among linemen by SLA and in the 87th percentile. He had the best vertical at the combine (33 inches) and excelled in the three cone and short shuttle too. He’s incredibly powerful and can squat 690lbs five times. The Seahawks love grit, physicality, athleticism and tackle experience on their O-line. McGovern could line up at guard or center and act as a tackle in an emergency.

As noted above, I’ve got a hunch the Seahawks want a D-end in base formations who can kick inside. Frank Clark was originally posted for that role but he’s now losing weight. They might reach a little bit for BYU’s Bronson Kaufusi. He’s 6-6 and 285lbs but managed a stunning 4.25 short shuttle and an impressive 7.03 in the three-cone. He had 11 sacks in 2015. He matches Seattle’s ideals for athleticism, size and production. You want to see him chewing glass a little bit more but that aside he can move along the line and is a day two athlete for sure. He’s the #3 SLA prospect for defensive linemen and in the 96th percentile.

Utah State’s Kyler Fackrell is smaller but could be another option. He’s more akin to Shea McClellin — who visited Seattle before signing with the Patriots. Maybe the #56 pick could be used in a possible trade, similar to the Arizona’s deal for Chandler Jones?

Round 3
Tyler Ervin (RB, San Jose State)
Everything about Ervin screams Seahawks. He’s a dynamic athlete (4.41 forty, 10-10 broad and 39 inch vertical), he has tremendous production (1601 yards, 13 touchdowns in 2015), he’s a team captain and he’s understated. On tape he runs hard despite a 5-10, 192lbs frame and he doesn’t shirk running between the tackles. He has that gliding speed the Seahawks love when he finds a crease and he goes through the gears to max-out gains. He carried his team on his back. Lance Dunbar recently visited Seattle and it hints at the incorporation of a pass-catching back moving forward. Don’t sleep on Ervin’s ability to be another Brian Westbrook. This pick would be the #90 overall selection — Westbrook is a former #91 overall pick by the Eagles. Ervin leaps off the tape and his combine workout was silky smooth. He might be the guy they feel they can’t leave the draft without.

Round 3 comp pick
Graham Glasgow (C, Michigan)
Whatever they do in rounds 1-2 — a second offensive lineman in round three seems likely. Again it’s likely to be someone that can compete at a couple of different spots. Glasgow in this instance has played center and guard for Michigan. His coach Jim Harbaugh suggested he deserved a first round grade before the Shrine Game. He’s a really tough, tone-setting lineman. He’s a no-nonsense type. He’s almost identical in size to Max Unger (6-6, 307lbs) and he performed well in the three-cone and short shuttle. He’s #10 for SLA just ahead of Christian Westerman who could be another option for the Seahawks. Glasgow has previously had issues with alcohol but he’s worked to address that — even moving in with his grandmother. He’s had to battle a bit and succeeded — the Seahawks tend to like that. Plus he’ll hit you in the chest.

Round 4
Devon Cajuste (WR, Stanford)
This has been a range where the Seahawks have taken receivers in the past (Kris Durham, Chris Harper, Kevin Norwood). They lack a big, athletic target following Chris Matthews’ departure and Ricardo Lockette sadly might not play again. Cajuste is extremely close to Doug Baldwin and would fit in immediately. He’s pushing 6-4 and 234lbs but he’s explosive — recording a 36 inch vertical and a 10-3 broad jump. He also has length (33 inch arms) and big hands (11 inches). He’s the #1 SLA receiver and he’s in the 91st percentile compared to the rest of the NFL. His production isn’t great but neither was Kris Durham’s. He did make some clutch catches in a run-first offense. The Seahawks don’t need him to post 1000 yards — they just need him to play a role, block and make the most of the few targets he gets. That’s what he does well — especially the blocking bit.

Round 5
DeAndre Elliott (CB, Colorado State)
The Seahawks nearly always take a cornerback in this range. That player needs to have +32 inch arms and be a certain height. Elliot is 6-0 and 188lbs with exactly 32 inch arms. He ran a 4.55 at the combine which is similar to Richard Sherman. He did post an explosive 41 inch vertical, a 10-5 broad jump and an incredible 3.93 short shuttle. He’s the #5 SLA cornerback and in the 85th percentile. Physically he’s the type of corner they can work with. He had two interceptions in 2015.

Round 6
Joel Heath (DT, Michigan State)
Heath is a natural leader and a great character. Could he be Seattle’s latest O-line convert? He’s currently 6-5 and 293lbs with 34.5 inch arms. He matched Connor McGovern’s vertical jump of 33 inches and his 4.52 short shuttle would’ve been fourth among O-liners. Given his high character and willingness to adapt in the past (he started at defensive end but added 30lbs to kick inside) he could be primed for a move to the O-line. Mock Draftable says he compares physically to Cam Erving — a first rounder last year who similarly moved from defense to offense at Florida State.

Round 7
Keenan Reynolds (QB, Navy)
The Seahawks could draft Reynolds based on his athletic profile and see how he fits in. That could be at receiver or running back. He had a terrific college career — finishing 5th in the Heisman voting and breaking a FBS record for 88 career running touchdowns.

Round 7
Alex Balducci (DT, Oregon)
The Seahawks took an interest in Balducci at the Shrine Game. Seahawks coaches were also heavily involved in his pro-day workout recently. He could be another camp body for the D-line competition.

293 Responses to “Seven round Seahawks mock draft”

  1. badjujus says:

    Rob Have you looked at Tanner Mcevoy Wisconsin as a Safety/OLB hybrid.

    Unique atheltic profile ex running QB/WR/Safety

    from his proday:
    “Tanner McEvoy performed well in the events that he participated in: 33.5″ on the vertical jump, a 6.89 three cone and a 4.25 pro agility are all encouraging”
    “As he wasn’t invited to the combine, pro day was his best chance to show a larger amount of teams what he can do. He said after the workouts were concluded that he was likely suffering from some knee tendinitis. While he caught the ball well, his 40 time would have likely been an impressive one for a person of his size.”

      • Richard aka DesertSeahawk says:

        I asked if Rob had looked at McEvoy previously and I’m also hoping he’ll get a chance to receive a Rob nod. But I know there are a lot of kids out there to look at.

      • D-OZ says:

        Just watched tape on McEvoy. I like him a lot. You can bet he is on JS/PC radar coming from Wisconsin. He can play a lot of positions S/TE/QB/WR/ and maybe even some corner. 5th round or higher?

        • H M Abdou says:

          I don’t know. Very few of those swiss army knife type of players turn out to be good (Edelman for example). Usually what you get is similar to what you get when you buy a TV with a built-in DVD player: substandard TV function and substandard DVD function.

          If Pete and John draft him maybe late round or sign him UDFA, then it’s a good move.

  2. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Love this draft (the Ifedi-Kaufusi version). The ONLY thing I would change is Justin Zimmer in R6 or later.

    • C-Dog says:

      I’m with you, CHawk Talker

      Ifedi and Kaufusi all the way.

    • H M Abdou says:

      Yes, I agree with everything you said, CHawk. Personally I’d exchange Kaufusi for an interior d-line player, preferably one who might be available at pick 56, is good vs the run, and provides a pass rush (Clark from UCLA, maybe?).

      I also am intrigued by Justin Zimmer. I like athletic o-linemen like Sokoli and Glowinski. Maybe Zimmer can be a d-line convert to o-line?

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        If Kenny Clark is available at 56, I’d probably take him over Kaufusi as well. I watched a lot of UCLA last year (every year), and Clark is a player that goes from utterly obscure to outright overwhelming in one game. At times he’s simply unblockable. And other times, he’s a total non factor. Then again he did face a lot of double teams.

  3. Volume12 says:

    Funny, I just asked about Jonathan Bullard as a 1st round pick.

    Absolutely agree about Ervin. Could be a ‘must have.’

    • SeventiesHawksFan says:

      Sounds like Ervin could be our Edelman plus change up and situational RB.

    • lil'stink says:

      I know it’s easy to get over-hyped about certain guys this time of year (I certainly do it all the time), but Bullard looks like he could be such an amazing fit on this team. He’s the one guy I would take at #26 over an OL, and I would probably take him over any of the OL likely to be around at that position.

      He looks to be a very good run stopper who could slide inside on passing downs. Imagine Avril-Bullard-Bennett-Clark coming at the opposing QB on 3rd and long.

    • D-OZ says:

      #90 is too soon for Irvin.

  4. HawkPower12 says:

    Great draft choices. I really do hope we use #26 on Oline.
    …and draft 2 more guys. I wouldn’t mind:
    1 Ofedi
    2 McGovern
    Early 3 Glasgow…

    We wouldn’t need Olinemen for years…We all ready pay the LEAST in the NFL on Oline. So the draft is the way to keep that price down!

    Cajuste sounds perfect, especially being close with Doug…

  5. Coleslaw says:

    What about linebacker

    • Volume12 says:

      You checked out N. Illinois LB Perez Ford?

      I know Seattle met with him. One of my sleepers. As is Tulane’s Royce LaFrance.

      • Rik says:

        I like Jatavis Brown out of Akron as a late-round pick. MAC defensive player of the year with a 4.47 40 yard dash in the regional combine and 10.5 sacks last year.

      • Coleslaw says:

        Nice I’ll check them out soon, haven’t had much time to watch tape recently, thanks

  6. TJ says:

    I like these scenarios – I would love to see Glasgow in round 3, and do like the idea of adding versatile athlete in the late rounds, but correct me if I’m wrong, would Reynolds not have a 4 year service commitment since he is at the Naval Academy?

    • D says:

      I’ve wondered the same thing. It seems odd that he’d do all the pre-draft stuff if that were the case. Maybe the Navy gives him an exemption for special circumstances.

      • icb12 says:

        They can get an early release after 24 months of service. Sometimes.

        There are a lot of different situations though. Some guys get released after 3 to pursue pro sports. I believe there has even been one full waiver given, with the clause that if the player didn’t make the team he would have to go to active duty.

    • sdcoug says:

      I believe this is particular to the individual service branch. The Military Academy (Army) had a baseball player not too long ago that was allowed to play. In lieu of a direct 5 year active-duty tour, he served more or less in a recruiting/ambasador role. The publicity can be of great value to a respective branch and the DOD

    • reggieregg says:

      There’s a guy on the Pats currently fulfilling his naval commitment and playing at the same time.

      • phil says:

        Reggie – I think you are referring to Eric Kettani, a RB at Navy. He has served 2 years of active duty and recently won a release to join the Pats. He still owes the USN two years which he could work off in the reserves.

    • phil says:

      Speaking of the Naval Academy, how about Chris Swain who ran a 4.67 at 6’1″ and 245 #s at the USNA’s pro day? He played FB in their option offense and looks like he would be a great short yardage guy.

  7. Ed says:

    Think 3 or first 4 OL is pushing it. I agree the Hawks need the help and all the talent they can get, but this draft doesn’t fill the DL needs (early enough).

    If Bullard in 1st, really like getting your LG and C for the future.

    If Ifedi in 1st, prefer to go DL in 2nd or 3rd and still get McGovern or Glasgow

  8. AlaskaHawk says:

    Lots of good choices there. If Seahawks can pick up two early round offensive linemen and a couple late to UDFA practice squad guys, then they can play Joel Heath as a defensive tackle.

    As far as cornerback Elliot goes, how are his hands? Can he catch interceptions or are they hands of stone? That isn’t a deal breaker, most of the time the cb just batts the ball away.

    • reggieregg says:

      He had the absolute worst hands at the combine. We need playmaker and Elliott is not one.

  9. Darnell says:

    If Joe Dahl is there in the 4th-5th I might lean towards grabbing him, 3 oline draft picks really isn’t overkill with this team right now.

    Might like another Lber like Jatavis Brown, Stephen Weatherly, or Cassanova McKinzie.

    I could be crazy, but late, I might even roll the dice and gamble on Duke Williams (love the player, not sure how serious the issues are). and maybe even Vernon Adams – showcase him with the 1st string (after RW leaves the game) in the preseason and then flip him to a team that could buy into him as another RW.

    • Volume12 says:

      Finally some tape up of Vandy’s Stephen Weatherly, and he reminds ne so much of Obum Gwachum, not as raw, but still similar.

    • Doz says:

      I don’t think the Hawks are going to come out of this draft without Dahl. You can take that to the BANK!!!

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      I’d greatly prefer Adams to Reynolds, but I don’t really trust myself as an Oregon fan. Anyone have an objective comparison?

    • amocat says:

      Re: 3 Oline picks:

      The Hawks took 3 Oliners last year, when they thought they were just replacing one starter.
      So three wouldn’t be surprising this year at all, really.

  10. Nathan_12thMan says:

    Love the mock, would LOVE to see it go that way. I am unfamiliar with the WR so I’ll have to look him up, but given what you wrote…if he could “click” in the NFL with that body and those numbers then he’d be a huge get.

    What is interesting is…okay so say we go for Ifedi in R1, is the assumption we go DE/DT in R2? I mean I really really want McGovern, but I also really want Glasgow…we can’t get all three and not get a DE/DT in this draft right? I mean not only do we need a NT given the loss of Mebane, but on 3rd down with Frank losing weight and moving to RDE, we need competition with Jordan Hill to be that inside DT pass rusher.

    Would be perfect if we could trade down out of the 1st and with our highest 2nd rounder get Ifedi still, then use our original R2 pick McGovern then with our earliest R3 pick we grab the DT/DE we like most, then Ervin, then Glasgow all in R3. But I bet that is a pipe dream.

    Just really feel if we came away from this draft with Ifedi, McGovern and Glasgow…add those guys to what we got; Gilliam & Glow…that could be (+ maybe Soko at LG) our long term starting OL for Russ to be behind from ages 28-32+ years old. Talk about talent, youth, low cost, cohesion, consistency…everything we are dying to have.

    But on the flip side we need a NT, we need a 3rd down back (I’d love to see us grab Ervin). And of course, grabbing a WR, a CB nowadays are a must each year.

    Behind the OL my biggest curiosity is what priority players do the Seahawks want to target in UDFA? Is there a star or real quality WR they will target and get? A RB? A TE? A LB? A D-linemen? So many potential options. Don’t get me wrong I think Rawls level players are rare…but we have gotten Kearse, Baldwin, Shead, Gilliam, Rod Smith, Rawls all in UDFA.

    • Volume12 says:

      I agree about UDFAs.

      It really just depends on what positions they select in the draft. A RB does look like a target though.

      And if they don’t take a WR in the 4th round, IMO, they’ll make that a priority in UDFA too.

      • Kenny Sloth says:

        Probably pick up 2 OL an LB and an S maybe a camp RB???

        Can’t imagine them not picking up a WR in the mid rounds. Especially with all the underrated talent at the spot. People forget about all the exceptional playmakers out wide this year it seems. There’ll be some strong fallers for sure.

        • Volume12 says:

          Possible.

          They could take a QB in UDFA too, and not select one.

          • Kenny Sloth says:

            There are gonna be a good bunch of Qbs go undrafted. That’s probably the way they go. They do seem to sign one every year.

            • Volume12 says:

              Yup.

              Of course they’ll take a bunch of positions, but as you said, they take a QB every year.

              They hit on a WR in UDFA every year too.

              Those would be the priority UDFAs if I had to guess.

  11. Willyeye says:

    Trade down 1st round pick #26 to Raiders for 2nd round pick #44 and 3rd round pick #75.

    2nd round Pick #44- DE/DT Jonathan Bullard; alternates…T Jason Spriggs, T Germain Ifedi
    2nd round Pick #56- T Germain Ifedi; alternates…C Ryan Kelly, C Nick Martin, DT Bronson Kaufusi,
    3rd round Pick #75- C Ryan Kelly; alternates…RB Kenneth Dixon, DT Javon Hargrave
    3rd round Pick #90- OLB Kyler Fackrell; alternates…T Joe Haeg, T Le’Raven Clark
    3rd round Pick #97- G Connor McGovern; alternates…OLB Deion Jones, G Joshua Garnett
    4th round Pick #124- CB Jonathan Jones; alternates…G Graham Glasgow, G Joe Dahl, OLB Travis Feeney, RB Tyler Ervin
    5th round Pick #171- RB Keith Marshall; alternates…TE Tanner McEvoy, DE Alex McCalister, FS Justin Simmons
    6th round Pick #215- FB Dan Vitale; alternates…FS Keanu Neal, DE Stephen Weatherly
    7th round Pick #225- WR Ricardo Louis; alternates…WR Devon Cajuste, DT Connor Wujciak
    7th round Pick #247- S Derrick Kindred; alternates…DE Dean Lowry, DT Joel Heath
    UDFA- ILB B.J. Goodson, OLB Devonte Bond

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’d be surprised if Bullard, Spriggs and Ifedi last until #44, let alone Ifedi, Kelly and Martin lasting until #56. Kelly in round three??

      • mishima says:

        I think we’ll be lucky if Ifedi is there at 26.

        • Willyeye says:

          Ifedi rankings: CBSSports- #41; NFL.com- #48; NFLDraftScout- 2nd round; WalterFootball- #58; NFLDraftGeek- #56; Drafttek- #56. There are plenty of “experts” that are ranking Ifedi the #9 or #10 Tackle. Many sites have 6 or more of the following ranked above Ifedi: Tunsil, Stanley, Conklin, Decker, Coleman, Spriggs, Hawkins, Theus, Murphy and Clark.

          I do think Ifedi is a good fit for the Seahawks…in fact, he is mocked to the Seahawks at #26 by a lot of draft “experts”. I just don’t see 7 or 8 Tackles going in the 1st round, especially if the Seahawks trade down to #44. There are a lot of teams that need improvement in their run D, and there are a lot of GOOD DT’s that will be going in the 1st round. Other teams have other needs. It’s just my opinion, but I highly doubt that any other team will pick Ifedi before #26. And honestly, I don’t think that Ifedi is worth a #26 pick…I don’t think he’s NFL-ready…I can’t see spending a #26 pick on a prospect that probably won’t start for at least one season. On the other hand, I think he’d be worth a #44 pick.

      • Willyeye says:

        I’m all about value picks. Most mock drafts don’t include Ryan Kelly in the 1st round. Not every “expert” has Kelly as the top-ranked Center. I guess the chances that he’d last into the 3rd round are pretty slim, but that’s why I have alternates in my scenario. So, if you look at my list, if Bullard, Spriggs, and Ifedi were all gone by pick #44, I suppose Ryan Kelly would be the next man up. I’d be perfectly happy if they pick Kelly at #44.

        I want JS to pick an ACTUAL Center. The Center is the QB of the O-Line. He needs to not only be able to snap the ball and block, but most importantly, he needs to be smart. A smart Center can make the rest of the O-Line look and play a lot better. Nowak and Lewis are not terrible snappers or blockers…I think both of them lack the smart aspect, and the most likely reason for this is simply lack of experience at playing the position in a game setting. A guy like Sokoli will be in his 4th season before he can even start an NFL game at Center. No projects this year. We need guys with actual experience playing O-Line.

        I believe the Seahawks are actually in a much better position with the O-Line than they were last year at this time. If they can draft a REAL Center to likely replace Lewis, a REAL LG to likely replace Britt, and a REAL Tackle, this line could be set for a number of years. Gilliam, McGovern, Kelly, Glowinski and Webb would be a HUGE upgrade over last year’s hodgepodge. Maybe with some real competition, another guy might even step up and make that starting lineup. Get it sorted out by preseason, and I think they’ll be adequate by Week 1.

    • Dingbatman says:

      Keanu Neal round 6????

      • amocat says:

        Yes yes, and once that time machine is ready we’ll go back in time and take Aaron Donald in the 4th….

        • Willyeye says:

          Look, you don’t have to be a smarta$$ about it :) Aaron Donald was the #13 overall pick. As a prospect, he was ranked as the top DT and mocked to be picked around #13. If you want to get technical, the Rams also picked that bust Greg Robinson in 2014 with their #2 overall pick. I bet if they could use your time machine, they’d go back and pick Odell Beckham with their #2 overall pick.

          I hated the Britt pick…when I saw they picked a 5th round ranked prospect in round 2, I wanted to throw my beer at my 80. I would much rather they take a different approach…try to get good value for your picks…what a novel idea: pick a prospect where they are a good value, not take a guy like Neal at pick #26. My point was simply that if Vitale was not available at pick #215 in the 6th round, then take Neal if he happens to still be on the board. If not, take the next guy. My list has LOTS of options…it’s not a bad list.

          The reality is, if someone takes Neal in the 1st thru 3rd rounds, they overpaid for him…it will be their loss.

      • Willyeye says:

        Yeah, so according to CBS Sports, Neal is the 229th ranked prospect…6th-7th round. Draftsite.com has him in the 5th round. NFLdraftscout.com has him as a 6-7th rounder. Not saying that he’ll be available, but his rankings are all over the place…I only have him as an alternate anyway…I personally see him as the #10 Safety in a pretty weak Safety class. I personally wouldn’t give up higher than a 5th round pick for him.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Those rankings are thoroughly ridiculous.

          Neal is going in the top-40. Book it.

          • Willyeye says:

            Before I say anything, I wanted to make sure and thank you for what you do. I respect your opinions more than anyone else who analyzes the Seahawks drafts.

            I guess when you come down to it, rankings do not dictate where prospects are picked anyway. The draft is really nothing more than a popularity/beauty contest. There are teams EVERY year that have horrible drafts…they don’t even end up with one decent player. There are 1st round picks that bust. There are UDFA’s like Rawls that show just how wrong most analysts are. My point wasn’t to say that these few draft sites were correct, only that Neal’s rankings are all over the place. There’s no reason to think that Neal will 100% for sure succeed in the NFL regardless of where he’s drafted. There are just far too many variables. This is probably why I hope the Hawks trade down this year…JS seemingly doesn’t really care too much for 1st round picks either.

            Look at all the hype that went along with Manziel in 2014. The Browns had 2- 1st round picks (#8 DB Gilbert; #22 Manziel), both of them busts. Then with their 2nd round pick at #35, they got Bitonio. They might as well just have picked Bitonio at #8. But realistically, draft picks are more or less just gambling. Nobody really knows how things will play out. If I was to make a prediction, I’d say that Neal will go between #40 and #60. And I hope that the Hawks don’t surprise everyone and waste a pick on him :)

            • CHawk Talker Eric says:

              If anything in this comment were actually true, professional football would be no more predictable than a game of Roulette.

              32 teams, including SEA, passed on Rawls. He went undrafted. Everyone was wrong about him. Even SEA, despite giving him a shot in UDFA.

              “I guess when you come down to it, rankings do not dictate where prospects are picked anyway. The draft is really nothing more than a popularity/beauty contest.”

              This statement is backwards. Rankings are nothing more than a popularity contest, which is why they don’t dictate where prospects are picked.

              Prospect rankings are the product of people NOT currently employed by a professional football team. Some are reasonably informed, but many, many (most) others have no real clue about this stuff.

              And if CLE is the basis of your argument for how the NFL works…oh boy.

              • Willyeye says:

                If anything in your comment were true, then every NFL team would have a perfect draft every year. You seem to think that just because a guy is employed by a professional football team, that they are NEVER wrong. Guys like Mike Mayock and Rob Rang have a tough job…it’s not an easy process to pick the best 300 or so prospects and be somewhat correct at a lot of it. You act as if teams never pick guys that would be in the 1st round mocks of these guys. Teams do pick prospects on these guys’ lists.

                CLE is an example of professionals that probably paid more attention to media mock drafts than they should have. Where did I EVER say that “CLE is the basis of your argument for how the NFL works”? I could give you dozens of examples from every team that missed on picks in recent years…you’re going to be condescending just because I chose the Browns to use for an example of my point? Thanks a lot!!!

            • badjujus says:

              Willeye you post ridiculous and unrealistic mocks. Get over it. There is no chance in hell your scenario pans out anywhere close to it.

              Obviously we appreciate robs insight because were here, so listen to him and stop spouting off garbage rankings from cbs. all your doing is making yourself look a fool.

              • Willyeye says:

                Look, there’s no reason to be rude. I just posted a list of players that I’d like to see the Seahawks pick from. It’s not a 7 round mock, where I tried to predict the Seahawks picks. It’s simply a list of prospects I like.

                And Rob is awesome, but he’s also not perfect…trying to predict all 7 rounds for the Hawks is not easy. Look at last year. Rob was pretty sure that the Hawks would take Morse, and they’d also get Ty Montgomery. Morse was gone early, so there goes that scenario. You can find my posts last year all over FG and Seahawks.net saying that the Hawks were going to get Tyler Lockett. Obviously Rob is a million times better at this stuff than I am, but nobody’s perfect. And BTW, if you actually took the time to read what I said, you’d see that I NEVER said CBS knows what they’re talking about. It was used as an example of what’s out there. Nobody, not even Rob, is 100% correct on every prediction every year.

                Sorry, but your criticism of me is ridiculous, and if you think everything I say is unrealistic, then you’re the FOOL. You get over it!!!

    • Ben2 says:

      Neal in the 6th? No.

  12. Volume12 says:

    CHAWK, Montana St OT John Weidenaar worked out for and met with Seahawks.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      I saw that. Mentioned it in the previous post.

      Weidenaar had a decent pro day – 6’7″ 290lbs

      5.18 40yd, 29″ VJ, 110″ BJ, 4.55 SS, 7.28 3C, 22 BP.

  13. nichansen01 says:

    Linebacker needs to be a selection at some point, even if that somepoint is in the later rounds. Montese Overton, Stephen Weatherly, Travis Feeney, someone like that in round 4, over Cajuste in my opion. KJ Wright was drafted in round 4, for the record. Durham, Norwood and Harper were all busts.

  14. SeventiesHawksFan says:

    I think they’ll take at least one LB before round 5 too.

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      It really depends on how they view their guys. Could be KPL at Will and KJ at Sam. I know they love KJ at all three spots.

      Talks of Dansby signing with Seattle doesn’t bode too kindly for our depth. John Schneider also tabbed Mike Morgan as the primary depth at Sam in an interview recently, I believe.

  15. nichansen01 says:

    I also am not a fan of drafting a corner… Depth at corner is good, in the fifth round I would prefer another lineman, defensive or offensive.

    Corners
    Sherman
    Shead
    Lane
    (Tye) Smith
    Simon
    Burley
    Seisey
    Farmer
    Stanley Jean Baptiste
    Reed
    Mcneil
    (Robert) Smith

    Is corner really a need?

    • Rob Staton says:

      They’ve consistently added corners even when the depth has been there. I suspect that will continue.

      The options on the DL and OL will be weak in the 5th. A pick in that range is a flier anyway — might as well shoot for athleticism.

      • Unless there is a corner (or multiple) they really like in UDFA, I agree, drafting a corner low should be a yearly priority for this FO. They are our life blood, they are what Pete seems to do best.

        • Naks8 says:

          Agreed. Corner is one of those positions that they draft a guy every year so they can mold him in year 1 then plug and play in year 2-4

          • Volume12 says:

            I definetly think a corner will have a tough time making this team, but they’ve drafted one every year.

            Might even convert a WR.

            • AlaskaHawk says:

              The counter argument is that they won’t be a starter and you can’t put them on the practice squad as every one else steals Seahawks defensive secondary off the squad. I was frustrated at losing players to other teams last year.

              • Volume12 says:

                If they don’t make the team, they don’t make the team.

                You hope all your draft picks will, but the reality is, 2-3 of their selections won’t even make the team.

                • D-OZ says:

                  I think safety is more of a need than corner. I really like some of the prospect’s this year.

                  • Naks8 says:

                    Why not draft a corner? We haven’t really found someone to start opposite Sherman. Lane is serviceable but best in the slot. We still have no idea how good seisay/farmer/Jean-baptiste/smith are. If we draft someone then maybe they’ll be the next Sherman or maxwell.

            • Kenny Sloth says:

              A convert would stick to the PS for sure.

      • EranUngar says:

        Rob,

        Didn’t they already add Seisey using a 2016 pick?

        If they are fine with the talent they have behind Sherman and Lane, Seisey could be this year’s CB pick…

        • Rob Staton says:

          He could be.

          But we also know Pete loves to keep adding here.

        • Ground_Hawk says:

          This is what I have been thinking about too. Seisey being traded from Detroit at the beginning of the season gives him roughly a year of experience in PC’s DB system already, so I would not be surprised if they did not draft a DB this year; unless it was someone they believed they could not leave the draft without. Seisey has experience in the system that a rookie would not have until later in the season, or even as late as the 2017 season.

      • Brashmouse says:

        John Schneider explained his draft strategy a few years ago that they look to fill holes 1-2 years before they are present and try to draft best talent available. They are also looking for special players that do something extraordinarily well.

        Based on that I think corner and especially safety is an area of need as SImon, Burley, Shead, Lane, Sherman, Thomas, and Chancellor all will be in the last year of their contract or expired and they have proven they will not give large contracts to players on the back side of 30. Win forever means fill the need before it is pressing and core turnover happens as players age.

        • Rob Staton says:

          He also said they will look to draft a QB every year.

          Number of QB’s drafted since 2010 — One.

          It’s hard to win forever if you can’t win right now. They have to (and will) prioritise their glaring needs in this draft.

    • mishima says:

      Instead of CB, hoping they take WRs in later rounds.

      • seaspunj says:

        Drafting a corner will always be part of the Seahawks M.O. IMOP getting so many diamonds in the rough and coaching them up seem necessary to reload and let Browner, Maxwell and others go.

        I love how the Seahawks stick to their internal draft specifications and rarely deviate from them.

        The db list you gave while true is long it makes sense to me they pick at least a DB.

        As much as I want that elusive tall WR like Megatron it almost would be wasted with the heavy run first mindset the Seahawks have. Plus we havnt fully unleashed Jimmy Graham

        This draft I hope we draft 3 OL 2 DL 1 LB 1RB 1 DB the rest I trust JS/PC to do their magic in UDFA

        Even with RB I have a feeling we hit and bring on an UDFA and bring in another RB to compete. I can’t believe how many UDFA seem to make the team every year and impress.

  16. RWIII says:

    Rob: Either you read my mind or I read your mind. Because I have been thinking either Germain Ifedi or Jonathan Bullard in the first round. I love both those guys. They are both perfect for the Seahawks. There is probably no way the Hawks could draft one and then later move in the 2nd round to draft the other.

    Also: I see you drafted a receiver in the 4th round and you didn’t take a linebacker in the entire draft. Just curious about that.

    One last thing: I will also have to do more reading on Bronson Kaufusi.

  17. Nate says:

    What is the opinion on Whitehair at 26? He’s my new favorite, based off size, hybrid ability.
    Would he still be around?
    I think he can play LT and LG, LG first year, with Sokoli getting a fair shot at OC this season.
    Worst case hedge a Dahl or Glasgow against Soko.
    Britt is backup material, we need to move on from him!

  18. Adam says:

    Surely we take a linebacker at some point.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Not necessarily. Just today JS mentioned Morgan/Marsh are competing there with Clark providing the Irvin rusher in nickel.

      Karlos Dansby is also an option.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        KPL as well, maybe.

        • Greg Haugsven says:

          Here is an off topic Rob and others question. Recently when I click to reply it automatically takes me to my name where I start to type my reply. I then have to erase it the start over in the main box. Anyone have similar issue?

          • matt says:

            Yeah, but you don’t have to erase what you wrote. Copy and paste it in the comment part.

            • Greg Haugsven says:

              I usually catch it earlier enough where it’s not a big deal. Just wondering if it happened to others, it could just be my dumb ass.

      • Adam says:

        I appreciate that there are options to start to cover Irvin’s place, but also feel we’ve lost a bit of depth in that area. Dansby would be interesting on a year deal or something.

  19. Greg Haugsven says:

    I like it, as much as I would love to see Bullard here I just think we have to go Tackle at 26. He isn’t going to last until 56. We would probably have to trade up to get him and Ifedi.

  20. Mike L says:

    My vote would be for Bullard at #26. Bennett & Avril aren’t getting any younger..and we need to deepen the DL rotation if we hope to keep them playing at a high level over the next couple of years.

    • Rob Staton says:

      They’re not getting any younger — but the window is now. Hard to win with the existing O-line.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        It’s also easier to get Dline talent later than O tackle.

        • unitas77 says:

          Hawks have also been able to supplement d-line through free agency (Bennet, Avril, Rubin, K. Williams). Not been as good on o-line, but Giacomini and Mcquistan were free agents and now Webb and Vowell unproven.

      • RWIII says:

        A player like Bullard doesn’t grow on trees.

        Denver’s offensive line was not very good. Rob: you have been telling us that Seattle may already have their starting Offensive Tackles on the roster. If the Hawks did take Bullard I am sure that Schneider would still have a plan at Left Tackle.

        However: I would be okay with either Bullard/Ifedi.

    • Greg Haugsven says:

      It’s a tough call Mike. I think I could go either way. We’re pretty young on offense but need better talent. That being said the Dline is getting long in the tooth.

  21. RWIII says:

    Between Ifedi and Bullard I would probably take Bullard. The Hawks have a greater need at Offensive Tackle. If he is still on the board, the Hawks have to look, long and hard at Bullard. Bullard can play any where on the defensive line. In either the 4-3 or a 3-4. Bullard is very similiar to Bennett. Bullard gets great penetration. Bullard had 18 TACKLES FOR LOSS. Bullard gives MAIXIMUN effort on every play. Bullard almost like a Michael Bennett clone.

    In the second round I would go Connor McGovern or best pass rusher (Defensive End/Defensive Tackle) on the board. Depending on who the Hawks took in the first round.

    In the third round I would highly interested in a linebacker. Unless the Hawks sign Karlos Dansby. Also starting to warming up to Tyler Ervin. I don’t think Ervin is the “Head Case” that Christine Michael is. However this is some solid mid-round running backs.

  22. Greg Haugsven says:

    How is Ervin in pass pro? I’ve seen him play a little and he is very electric? I haven’t seen him pass protect. He’d be great for screens on third down but you have to block sometime. Would he be to small for that? Not afguring about the possible selection cause I like it, just playing devils advocate.

  23. matt says:

    Watched 3 game tapes of both Ifedi and Coleman today. Coleman can stick at OT. Has natural quick feet and shocks defenders with his punch. Ifedi looks more like a LG. He gets out on his kick slide very well, but it leaves him susceptable to the inside move-and is quick to blantantly hold when beaten. Like Ifedi, Spriggs and Coleman at #26, with Coleman being the easy choice if he’s there.

    • Trevor says:

      Agree completely Matt. Coleman has the best chance to be a LT of the group IMO. But Ifedi can be a pro bowl level guard. Depends where they place the value I guess.

    • Jarhead says:

      That is an unpopukar opinion around these parts, unfortunately. I would also much rather have Coleman, Kelly or Martin in the 1st, and Westerman or Whitehair in the 2nd. I just don’t want any part of Ifedi or McGovern. There are just other players who I think will be better in the NFL.

      • Steele says:

        Agree with Jar. “I would also much rather have Coleman, Kelly or Martin in the 1st”.

        As for Kaufusi, he’s tall but awkward, a bit clumsy. Maybe he evolves into the next Ted Hendricks, but that is not a bet I would make.

      • Rob Staton says:

        I love Shon Coleman as a player. It’s not unpopular at all.

        But we’re projecting what the Seahawks might do — and history suggests they might prefer Ifedi.

        • Kenny Sloth says:

          I believe Ifedi could be the first elite RT in the league~

          • Kenny Sloth says:

            It seems the majority opinion is to move him inside, but I like him at Tackle. Great footspeed and length.

            That’s not to say he wouldn’t succeed Inside, I agree that he’d be very good! Webb has played his best football at guard and I just think unless Cable really wants to start with a fresh slate he could keep them all in their natural spots and have a lot of competition.

            • Kenny Sloth says:

              Does Ifedi compete with Sowell and Gilliam at LT?
              Or with Britt for a spot at LG?
              Or does he play RG? Sweezy has been key for us with his athleticism. That’s why he got the big bucks/.

  24. KingRajesh says:

    Instead of Heath, is there another DT that we could pick up there that would play DT and rush?

    If we go O-line heavy at the beginning, we’re going to need to find pass rushers and DTs in the back part of the draft to play roles.

  25. dave crockett says:

    That’s a good look Rob.
    I like it.

  26. matt says:

    I like Bullard a lot. Not sure he’s an every down DL for Seattle though. Think he has more value for a 3-4 team, where he can play DE and drop inside on passing downs. See him as more of an inside pass rusher on passing downs in our defense, which we need. The first round seems too early for a rotational DT.

  27. Forty20 says:

    Do you think Shon Coleman could be there for us at #56? It gives us the same flexibility with Webb that the Ifedi pick would and it enables us to take Bullard at #26 and then pad the interior O-line through rounds 3-5 with the likes of Glasgow and Dahl.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think he goes in the top-40.

      • Forty20 says:

        Dang, was hoping he might slide enough due to his heavily restricted effort at the combine and his absence from the Auburn pro-day.

      • EranUngar says:

        I beg to differ Rob,

        After checking many mocks, i am now certain that Coleman will not be picked before 56. He will probably last till the 3rd round.

          • Tien says:

            I don’t think age in of itself would drop a guy with talent like Coleman out of the first round. I do agree that the medical concerns may scare some teams off but I also think that if Coleman is someone the Hawks really like (and I really like him as our first pick!), it’s too risky to wait until the 2nd round. If he’s someone we definitely want, take him if he’s there at #26…IMO, of course!:)

          • reggieregg says:

            Watch any game tape of Shon Coleman and tell me he’s not a first round talent!

  28. bobbyk says:

    When they drafted Irvin, the original plan consisted of him only playing in obvious pass rushing situations as a rookie (he was supposed to eventually take over at Leo for Clem). That’s it.

    However, third downs are extremely important and they won’t hesitate to take a situational guy like Bullard if they feel that he can/will make a difference in ’16 “only” in obvious passing situations.

    Down the road, they probably feel like Bullard can be like Bennett and play a lot more (outside early downs and move inside on 3rd downs), just as they expected Irvin’s role to increase greatly after his rookie year.

    Make no mistake, if a first round pick “only” contributes on third downs his rookie year… that is still a player making a significant impact.

    Bullard at #26 would guarantee an OL in the second no matter what (and another OL with a 3rd rounder).

    One thing I wonder is every year we think we have the Seahawks pegged for what they will do and every year they mostly surprise us with who. I thought they would go DL with their first pick last year, but didn’t think it’d be Frank Clark. Who is it going to be this year? When they take that guy, we’re all going to sit her and say, “We should have known because it was so obvious.”

    • lil'stink says:

      Bullard looks like an every down player IMHO, depending on the scheme. We talk about him in terms of his potential as an interior rusher but his run stopping skills are just as impressive.

  29. Steele says:

    http://www.fieldgulls.com/2016/3/22/11285492/john-schneider-lays-out-projected-offensive-line-bruce-irvin

    Maybe the o-line is already set. Gilliam/Sowell-Britt-Lewis-Glow-Webb. Maybe post-Irvin is set: Morgan/Marsh and Frank Clark on passing downs. (Shrug.) If this is the case, the draft is BPA. (Shrug.)

    • Rob Staton says:

      The O-line definitely isn’t set. They’ll take two OL early and there will be a competition.

      • Kenny Sloth says:

        John Schneider is praising his team for being ready to compete if there was no draft this year.

      • EranUngar says:

        The OL is “set” per the Seahawks standard operating procedure.

        The methodology is to set your roster fully ahead of the draft as if there is no draft and then to draft to improve what you already have.

        This is how JS operates.

        Will that be the actual starting OL on day one? probably not. This is the OL we have today. Draft picks, players on the roster, UDFAs and whoever else they find will all compete to win a plce on that line. Sweezy won a job over Moffit, Britt won a job over Bowie and Winstrom at RT and later over Bailey at LG, Nowak won a job over Lewis and JP.

        They probably hope that players will come (by draft and otherwise) and win some of those spots by that line is set right now. In their mind this is the line they have and if no one wins over them it will be a line they can work with.

  30. TurnagainTide says:

    I like all the players you listed as the potential options for the first three picks…Idefi has a ton of potential. Love watching Ervin. My sister & brother-in-law went to BYU so I’ve followed their team over the past few years and Kafusi is a play maker…very underrated pass rusher compared to the rest of this class from what I’ve seen of him over the past few years.

    I would love to see TJ Green get drafted as the 3rd round comp pick to attempt to convert him into a corner but I realize that’s high for where we usually draft our CB projects.

    Rob, have you watched Jeff Driskel much? I think they may try to draft and groom a QB this year behind Russ. Do you think Driskel could be an option in the 4th? I know Pete has said it would be nice to have a QB that could do some of the same things as Russ, and Driskel is very athletic so I’m just filling in the blank…It would be interesting to read your thoughts on potential backup QB options in the middle or late rounds of this draft since we currently don’t have a backup on our roster.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Driskel isn’t a bad developmental QB. They’ve only drafted one QB (Wilson) so I’m not sure they’ll do it this year. But he and Dak Prescott are probably worth considering.

  31. Volume12 says:

    Tony Pauline says that Seattle has shown interest in former UCLA OL Torian White.

  32. GoHawks5151 says:

    Per Tony Pauline, Seahawks one of 3 teams looking in to former UCLA OT Torian White. Was dismissed from team for Sexual Misconduct before last year. Played last season at Hampton. 6’6″, 306lbs and touted as an future NFL tackle while at UCLA. Only regarded as a late rounder or UDFA this draft. Despite obvious physical tools and a need for Offensive lineman does Seattle really wasn’t to go through this stuff again defending a player from a complicated sexual misconduct situation?

    • Volume12 says:

      NE likes him too. And we all know about the Aaron Hernandez ordeal.

      If they do their homework on him and feel comfortable enough about it, which might be the case, then sure.

      He’s a talented player, and probably woulda been a mid round pick had he stayed at UCLA.

      I get that as fans, we’re all invested in them, but at the same time, their goal is to win football games.

      • Coug1990 says:

        Did a quick search of him and only see that he was dismissed from UCLA or articles from when he was arrested. Nothing about what happened afterward regarding if he was guilty or plead to a lesser charge. It must have been resolved somewhat, as he played at Hampton.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          There were 2 separate sexual misconduct incidents that led to his dismissal. I don’t think either resulted in criminal action against him though.

  33. Hey Rob, what is your philosophy on drafting OL vs DL in regards to this specific draft for us? By that I mean, if you had to pick between Ifedi, McGovern, Ervin and Glasgow or Bullard, McGovern, Ervin and Glasgow, which way would you go?

    To me, while I understand how critical pass rush is to the game of football, how potentially big our need is for interior pass rush like we got from ’14 Hill, ’13 McDaniel and such…I just can’t help shaking the feeling that long term it is better to go OL.

    Why? Because OL is what we are trying to build. If we don’t get a OT at 26 (Ifedi), we are stuck with Webb at RT, and Britt at LG for 2016. That means in 2017 yet again we will have new players on the OL. Gilliam and Glowinski will be the only O-linemen who played the previous year for us.

    If we can build this O-line in 2016:

    LT: Gilliam
    LG: Webb
    C: McGovern
    RG: Glow
    RT: Ifedi

    we can have 4 of our 5 starting OL spots locked up long term with quality starters (cheap, athletic, talented, under long term club control) while Russ is in his peak years as a QB (28-33 y/o). Compare that to this OL:

    LT: Gilliam
    LG: Britt
    C: Lewis
    RG: Glow
    RT: Webb

    We’d be wanting to replace LG, C and RT in 2017. Over 50% of our OL being rebuilt yet again. So is Bullard at 26 worth it?

    (The potential cake and eat it to for me is if we grab a DE/DT like Kaufusi in R2, we’d miss McGovern but we could grab Glasgow who could beat Lewis to start at Center. This allows us to look like this in ’16: Gilliam – Webb – Glasgow – Glow – Ifedi…that OL looks good and we’d be able to acquire a R2 DE/DT talent)

    • Rob Staton says:

      It really depends on the team intel on where guys go. Does Bullard drop into R2 and can you go up and get him? Where is McGovern likely to go? It’s hard for me to project without that info what I’d prefer to do.

      I’d personally like to see the O-line given some love but then I like the idea of an impact defensive player. Ultimately I don’t think there’s a right or wrong way. They’ll address both needs one way or the other.

      • Thanks for the response Rob. I agree with you for the most part. To me OL needs to be given more love. With this draft alone we can lock up 4 of our 5 OL spots long term with young, cheap, long term club controlled talent and that is huge given our SB window and Russell’s peak playing age is between now and 4 years from now.

        I’d rather us bet on Hill and guys on our roster and a mid or low round draft pick on the DL to rush the passer than I would us bet on Britt, Lewis and Webb. However if we get Bullard I will be happy, seems like a high quality D-linemen.

        • EranUngar says:

          Nathan,

          If DEN was directing resources into a long term club controlled OL talent and just skipping on building the more fearsome D they could assemble, who wins SB50?

          There is no question that the OL needs that talent. The question is what would get us that championship, OL or D?

          • That isn’t a applicable way to look at things IMO. That doesn’t apply to us. I can just as easily swap it around on you and say if the Panthers had invested in their OL then they wouldn’t have gotten wrecked by the Denver DL and maybe Cam could have made better decisions, gotten sacked less, turned over the ball less, and won it.

            That 20/20 hindsight that doesn’t even really apply to us is useless. By going OL instead of DL our DL wouldn’t drop off the map. For all we know the DL we draft in R2 could be a rookie who makes no impact and Jordan Hill could play all 16 games and have a 6 sack season. I am saying it is better IMO to go heavy OL to get all the pieces to build our OL this off-season…so we got 4 of the 5 spots filled with young, talented, cheap players that will be Russell’s OL for the next 4+ years, and next season we can draft or acquire a D-linemen to improve our interior DL pass rush.

  34. Madmark says:

    26 Connor McGovern OL Missiouri
    56 Deon Jones OLB LSU
    90 Austin Johnson DT Penn St.
    97 Joe Haeg OL North Dakota St.
    124 Tyler Ervin RB San Jose St.
    171 Deandre Elliott CB Colorado ST.
    215 Rees Odhlambo OL Boise St.
    225 Nile Lawence Stample DT Florida
    247 Andy Janoviche FB Nebraska
    well I have have something on paper to go on. There’s no way McGovern makes it to 56 he’s number 4 on that list of yours Rob. You can try him out at C or RT but I beat he would make a Stud LG. If I can’t get a trade I believe they take him anyway. The 2nd round is quite easy to see since Seattle loves it’s speed. To be quite honest the first 2 players I have up are the 2 I don’t want to leave this draft without.

    • H M Abdou says:

      I also like McGovern, but you took him WAY too early (26?). The only other player in your mock that I’d like to see the Hawks draft is Tyler Ervin, and I’d actually try to see if I can get him earlier than where you have him listed. I don’t think Ervin will be available any later than round 3.

      Other than McGovern and Ervin, I want none of the players you have listed (sorry). But I do give you credit for listing a full mock, it’s not that easy to do.

      • matt says:

        A bit harsh Abdou. Deon Jones is a very talented LB with 4.4 speed, Austin Johnson is an active NT, flip Ervin with Haeg and it’s a pretty good draft.

    • Nate says:

      I love the Rees Odhiambo pick Madmark.
      Gem/sleeper that I think would be awesome for the Hawks at LG/LT.

  35. James says:

    We have watched John & Pete long enough now to be fairly certain that they build their DTs from free agency. I believe this is because it is nearly impossible to find an elite pass rush DT like Donald or Atkins, and the other R1 DT types are no better than the Tuba Rubin/Sealver Siliga guys they are adept at finding at the right price. For this reason, I would be shocked if the R1 pick is not an OT.

    I have not seen a mock in some time that shows an OT being picked between the Colts (everyone says Decker) and the Seahawks. It is virtually unanimous among the draftniks that Seattle will have their pick of Ifedi, Spriggs, Clark and Coleman. I think it will be Spriggs, because a zone-blocking left OT (Spriggs) is much more difficult to find than a right OT/left OG type (Ifedi or Clark). It is rare for a left OT prospect like Spriggs to fall into late R1 where the Seahawks always pick, so they will pounce on him.

    • James says:

      As others have indicated above, I would be totally OK with the Seahawks going R1 OT (Spriggs, Ifedit or Clark), R2 OG (McGovern) and R3 C (Glasgow), then go DL with the other R3 pick. We must build a solid OL for Russ, and we are solid at the other positions and can build with a few of John’s late round buried treasure.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        The more I think the more I like Springs as well. He is more of a left tackle which let’s Gilliam stay where he is. Mcgovern could be your center so you may or may not need Glasgow at that point.

    • RWIII says:

      Jason Springs has to be a consideration. He was charged with ONLY two sacks in 431 pass attempts. He played in a Zone-blocking scheme. He is a former tight end who has maintained his athleticism while h
      Getting bigger /stronger.

  36. CC says:

    I would be extremely happy with this draft! McGovern, and Heath are all guys I would love Seattle to draft. Ifedi, if he is the highest rated tackle is fine at 26. I might not take Ervin in the 3rd and take a RB lower, but overall this would be fantastic.

  37. J Boy says:

    The three players that I would love to leave the draft with are Willie Henry, Tyler Ervin, and either Sean Davis or Karl Joseph (athletic, versatile chess pieces in the secondary).

    Rob- how would you say that Ifedi compares to Carpenter when he was coming out of college? I never actually watched any college tape on Carp.

  38. mishima says:

    Love this mock. Great work Rob, esp. 2 alt scenario.

    Same top 4, except I take Clark if he’s there in the second.

    • H M Abdou says:

      Clark from UCLA? He’s interesting to me as well. I like the fact that he’s a good pass rusher IN ADDITION to being a good run player. Not looking for 1-dimensional guys, because more and more, teams are passing on first down.

  39. Pauld says:

    I would be happy with this draft. Would love to Hawks to use 3 of their top 4 picks on Olineman. Remember Pete after the Carolina game just shaking his head and saying we need to get more competition on the line? Wouldn’t mind if it Coleman, Conkin, Spriggs…..whoever our brain trust is special. We just need more talent.

    Seems like Gilliam has a bead on the left tacke position, Britt at LG, Lewis at C, Monica Glowinski at RG maybe Webb at RT. In Rob’s scenario, Ifeldi would likely consign Britt to the versatile back up role (together with Sowell). And you would think McGovern would have a chance to unseat Lewis. If you can squat almost 700 lbs, you might hold up against the intense interior pressure from the likes of the Rams and Carolina. Or Glasgow may steal the job and you would have depth/competition all around.

    One thing that makes me curious is when Pete talks about Sokali at center. Seems like he profiles as an athletic, pulling guard – they were able to sucessfully convert an ex-dlineman like Sweezy. Why would they give him trickiest position to learn after the Nowak disaster?

  40. Forrest says:

    Cajuste and Ervin are must gets in my opinion. I would prefer OL then DL in rounds 1-2, but Bullard is definitely tempting if he’s at 26. I would be happy with either version of this draft. Great mock.

  41. Saxon says:

    Bullard with the first and trade up in the mid 40s to target Coleman swapping our 2nd and tradeable 3rd. Coleman could credibly start at LT as a rookie allowing Gilliam to remain at RT for continuity. Take McGovern or Nick Martin with the compensatory 3rd. These moves would solve our trench warfare problems for a while.

  42. Cameron says:

    For me Tyler Ervin is a nice player but the 3rd round is a round or two too soon. Kaufusi is OK – he is a big man without speed or any technical proficiency. I would prefer Charles Tapper – who at 270 can add a few pounds and be your inside/outside pass rusher. I think he’ll be gone before the 56th pick.

    Willie Henry could be a Jonathan Bullard light. I re-watched the Michigan St. tape and he really was dominant. He had two sacks rushing from the interior and then late in the game he got past the RT (not Conklin) rushing from a wide 9 to force a couple of incompletions. All this at 303 lbs!

    http://draftbreakdown.com/video/willie-henry-vs-michigan-state-2015/ – go to the 7:00 mark and prepare to be impressed. In the last 5 minutes of that game Henry and two sacks and two hurries! Dominant. I would target Henry in the 3rd round and would consider asking him to cut weight and play at 285 (which would be the same weight as Bullard).

    DeAndre Elliot has interesting measurables, but I sure would like to see a game tape or two. My 5th round CB choice would be James Bradberry. Bradberry ticks all the boxes for a boundry DB and his game tape is impressive.

    http://draftbreakdown.com/players/james-bradberry/

    Can’t argue with Cajuste. He’s just a good football player and a great athlete. He offers a physicality lacking in our WR core. I would love to see Russ throw him some back shoulders in the endzone.

    I agree with others arguing for a later round OL player. I could see Seattle targeting a Joe Thuney or Joe Dahl in the 5th/6th round range.

    My dream draft scenario would be.

    1st – Idefi
    2nd – McGovern
    3rd – Willie Henry
    3rd – LB or DL
    4th – Tyler Ervin or similar
    5th James Bradberry
    6th – Joe Thuney
    7th – Fullback
    7th – Freaky deaky athletic edge prospect

  43. HOUSE says:

    I’ll be completely honest… I LOVE this draft… I personally am hoping for a combo of Ifedi, McGovern and Ervin in our 1st 3 rds. I do trust our FO and these guys SCREAM Seahawk!!!

    Sprinkle a DL in there by the 4th rd and I can’t wait for the competition!!!

  44. AlaskaHawk says:

    I was watching the tape of Tyler Ervin and saw he was tackled several times by Auburns Justin Garrett. Any idea what round he would go in? He played a good game.

  45. EranUngar says:

    Picking Devon Cajuste, a WR with little production, in the 4th, with some similarity to Durham, is the definition of a wasted pick.

    Give me Keyarris Garrett – Tulsa instead and i’ll be very happy.

    If we learn from history – Never pick a WR in the 4th EVER AGAIN…

    • Rob Staton says:

      You’re missing the point focusing on production.

      • EranUngar says:

        I do not think so.

        If there is anything that the spread offense and college football is great at, it is boosting the production numbers of WRs. Many of the high production WRs are far from NFL ready and show poor route running, mediocre hands etc. They just benefit from college level of play.

        However, when a WR with outstanding physical attributes fails to make his mark in college, he will most likely be a wasted pick in the NFL.

        Am I missing the points about his outstanding SLA or our need for a bigger receiver? I don’t think so.

        His SLA would sound great at HB or TE or even LB. He will not be picked for those roles because he doesn’t know how to play them well enough to be picked at the 4th.

        ” Below average athlete for the position. Missing burst off the line and lacks second gear to generate push upfield to threaten cornerbacks. Cornerbacks will sit on his routes. Separation against NFL cornerbacks will be a struggle. Not a threat after the catch. Might not offer much special teams value.” – Zierlein

        His production numbers as WR prove he doesn’t know how to play WR well enough to be picked at the 4th.

        • Kenny Sloth says:

          I was going to retort on Cajuste, but after watching some tape I actually prefer to agree with you about Keyarris Garrett.

          Shows his hands at the last second. Just wins the football. PCJS like ultra-production at WR. I don’t dislike Cajuste, but Garrett had some great battles in 2015, but two seasons of injury preceded this nigh 1600 yard season.
          ” there were moments in 2015 in which Garrett brought back memories of a young Randy Moss.”
          –Rob Rang

        • Rob Staton says:

          You’re still missing the point Eran. Emphatically even.

          Stanford don’t throw the ball much at all. Michael Rector was their leading receiver for yardage and he had 559 yards in 2015. Their offense is similar to Seattle’s. Run the ball, max out targets.

          Forget spread offenses and production and focus on what the SEAHAWKS do. They want their receivers to max out their targets and run block. The two things Cajuste specialises in. It was his role at Stanford and it’d be his role in Seattle.

          His SLA score was not projected for TE/HB. It was projected in comparison to NFL receivers. He’s in the 90th percentile compared to NFL receivers. You also have no basis to claim he doesn’t know how to play WR well enough. Again, you’re not considering his role at Stanford and what his role would be in Seattle.

          As for Zierlein’s review — I stopped reading after the first sentence when he said he wasn’t athletic.

          • EranUngar says:

            SLA combines size and athletic performance. The guy is big. His 4.62 40 may be nice for his size but it is SLOW for a receiver. Winning challenged ball due to his size is also a good trait for a team that throws those kind of passes. The Seahawks did not throw those passes to Graham, they will certainly not throw them to Cajuste.

            We do not pick a WR in the 4th just to run block.

            Keyarris -= 6-3, 34.5 arms, 220pnds, 4.53 40, 14 REPS, 36.5 vert, 128.0 broad.
            Cajuste -= 6-4, 33.0 arms, 234pnds, 4.62 40, 12 REPS, 36.0 vert, 123.0 board.

            I honestly fail to see how those points make Cajuste our 4th round pick.

            • Rob Staton says:

              It combines size AND athleticism. Not JUST size. SLA ranks Cajuste #1 for size/athleticism in the draft at WR and says he’s better physically than 90% of the NFL’s receivers. Not sure why you keep arguing against that.

              His short area agility absolutely smashed Keyaris Garrett — check the three cone and short shuttle and his ten yard split (initial burst to create separation) was also better.

              So yeah — he’s athletic enough and fits the offense perfectly.

              • RealRhino2 says:

                Why are we talking about SLA?

                • Rob Staton says:

                  Because the Seahawks pay a lot of attention to athletic traits and ideals.

                  • RealRhino2 says:

                    But we are talking about SLA as if it is meaningful or has been proved to be so, whether on a macro level (i.e., it has some predictive value for all players) or a micro level (i.e., it has some predictive value for the Seahawks’ picks).

                    I don’t think either is true.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    Why are we?

                    All we’re doing is using it as a tool that emphasises the best size/speed/length combinations. It’s not a difficult science for someone to calculate. It’s not about determining that the best SLA prospects have great careers — it’s about identifying those with certain athletic traits and ideals the Seahawks like for the purpose of a mock draft.

                  • Jarhead says:

                    I know Rob and I have discussed this at length ^^^^^ and really should be the grain of thought with which all suggested picks should be taken. This is not a predictive model to determine who will be the best football players, even for our team. It is a tool to narrow down who the Seahawks may select, given they highly emphasize this. I think it is a often flawed model and has yielded some great successes and some colossal failures, but it is their tried and true method and should be weighed greatly when attempting to guess who the Seahawks may pick. IE- I think Germain Ifedi has no shot in the NFL as an effective blocker (he lunges, he is a grabber, his hands always seem to be on the outside of the defender’s frame, he seems like he will be a walking false start/holding penalty, he doesn’t finish blocks) BUT his SLA profile fits perfectly fits what SEA looks for in a G/T. So I am quite realistic (and fearful) that we could get stuck with this guy for the next 4 years at the cost of a 1st Rd pick.

              • Jarhead says:

                Does he though Rob? That is quite a leap- especially when you consider that we have never once been able to incorporate this type of big bodied receiver into our offence since Pete Carroll got here. Mike Williams had a small amount of impact that was quite limited, but since then there hasn’t been one big bodied receiver who has been effective in our offense. So to say that he fits the offense perfectly is a conjecture. It would be a first for this team if they were able to take this type of receiver and incorporate him into the offence effectively.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  You’ve missed the point.

                  He maxes out his targets, he run blocks and he’s very athletic.

                  That’s why he fits the offense. It’s nothing to do with size.

            • CHawk Talker Eric says:

              Strap 15lbs on Keyarris and his SLA drops considerably. He won’t jump 36.5″ vert or 128″ broad. Not even close. And say bye-bye to a sub 4.6 40yd.

              • RealRhino2 says:

                Who cares? He does what he does. Would he be any better a receiver is he were heavier?

                • CHawk Talker Eric says:

                  I guess that entire metrics industry is a big waste of time. Thanks for clearing that up RR2

                  • RealRhino2 says:

                    You’re welcome. A few things:

                    1. Maybe it is primarily a big waste of time.

                    2. Even if it’s not, my problem with these kinds of discussions is the lack of critical inquiry and the failure to distinguish between useful athletic traits and non-useful athletic traits on a position-by-position basis.

                    To take your somewhat snarky response to Eran above as an example, discussing the weight difference between Garrett and Cajuste is largely pointless. it’s great if the goal is to find the better *athlete*, almost useless if the goal is to find the better *receiver*. For a receiver, being faster is much more important than being heavier, particularly when both are already tall. When both are running against a safety who runs a 4.6 forty, Garrett will get open, Cajuste will not, all other things being equal. It won’t matter that some metric saying a 234-lb person running a 4.62 is actually a better athlete than a 217-lb person running a 4.53.

                    There are countless examples where the metrics often cited as gospel don’t help. Derrick Henry runs amazingly fast for a 247-lb guy, and he’s tall, so I’m sure SLA loves him. But his height, which might make him a better “athlete”, actually makes him a *worse* running back for the NFL, because his long legs and high center of gravity makes him less shifty in tight spaces and easier to bring down. Hand size for various positions, 40 times for various positions, etc.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    But who has ever argued that Henry is a likely pick for the Seahawks?

                    This is the key here. We’re using SLA for the positions it matters. Namely the O-line.

            • CHawk Talker Eric says:

              From CBSSports – Devon Cajuste “emerged as one of Stanford’s most reliable wide receivers since, setting career highs in 2014 with 34 catches (for 557 yards) and six touchdowns and following that up with 27 grabs for 383 yards and three more scores as a senior – second (to fellow senior Michael Rector) among Cardinal wideouts.

              While Cajuste lacks the eye-popping numbers of other receivers across the country, it is important to keep in mind that Stanford’s offense was built around Heisman Trophy finalist running back Christian McCaffrey, who besides rushing for 2,019 yards also led the Cardinal in both receptions (45) and receiving yards (645) in 2015.

              Cajuste’s combination of size and athleticism makes him a potential mismatch in the NFL.”

            • matt says:

              If we’re looking at taking a WR in the 4th Cajuste and Garrett are 2 big bodied targets that fit the mold of a Hawks WR. Could see either of them competing for the 5th WR spot. Special teams skills, kick off and punt coverage, are a big part of making the roster. Do Cajuste or Garrett experience playing special teams? I feel very comfortable with our WR core with Baldwin, Lockett, Kearse, PR, Smith, Williams in the fold. It’ll be hard for a rookie to earn a roster spot.

        • badjujus says:

          CAujste would have been amazing if hogan had actually threw him the ball 50% of the time he was wide open.

    • East Side Stevie says:

      Keyarris Garret now thats what im talking about. He attended my high school, all sport star athlete! Great job on finding that player EranUngar.

      • EranUngar says:

        Thanks Stevie,

        He is my 2016 3rd day target. I mentioned him here a month ago but got no love so i kept it to myself. There is something very special about that kid. A bit of a Brandon Marshal lite.

        • Volume12 says:

          It’s almost like size, length, and athleticism actually matter to Seattle.

          Pass on Garrett. Stiff as a board, all 9 routes, doesn’t stay down the seam he goes toward the sideline.

  46. Sea Mode says:

    Great write-up, Rob. I do like the Bullard/McGovern option. Targeting Bullard first may also allow us to trade down and still get him early R2 while picking up extra draft ammo if the opportunity arises.

    Some attribute Bullard’s success to being able to jump the college snap and say that won’t work in the NFL. But he’s just got a knack for getting into the backfield that reminds you of Bennett. Learning from Bennett about play recognition, I think he will really thrive at the next level too and could eventually replace Bennett for us.

    Probably been linked here before, but in case anyone missed it here is a Jan. article comparing him to Bennett and including some nice gifs:
    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2611283-2016-nfl-draft-jonathan-bullard-could-be-next-michael-bennett

    I thought the big knock on him (as you mentioned in an earlier article about possibly trading up for him in R2) was that he would get moved around in the run game, so it surprised me in a good way to see that rank vs. run from PFF. And like you said then, that would not be his main role anyway.

    Above all, it’s the motor and intangibles the Hawks will absolutely love in this guy. When to athleticism, size, and production you add versatility, motor, and intangibles there is a chance to be great.

    A couple cool quotes from his o-line coach who worked him into the interior position he was asked to switch to his senior year:
    “It’s always great to coach a veteran,” Rumph said, “but it’s also good to coach a guy who’s really good on the football field and still is humble enough to take coaching, to work hard and bust his butt to be the best every day. That’s rewarding for me every day.”

    “He’s just a hard worker, a student of the game, a great guy on and off the field. You’re not going to have to worry about the phone ringing at night or reading something on the ticker. He’s that kind of guy. He can babysit my kids.”

    And I just found a really awesome article published yesterday with quotes from Bullard himself explaining how he got a chip on his shoulder last year and turned that into motivation:
    http://www.tampabay.com/sports/college/nfl-draft-decision-paying-off-for-floridas-jonathan-bullard/2270335

    • H M Abdou says:

      I’ve been touting Rankins and Nkemdiche but I might be starting to warm up to this Bullard guy. I’m going to gather more info on him, but he does sound like he would be a good no-nonsense contributor. And as you suggested, Sea Mode, probably he can be had early in round 2, so a trade down is in play for the Hawks.

  47. ItsAboutTheDefense says:

    Round 0ne: Emmanuel Ogbah
    Round Two: Johnathon Bullard (trade up if necessary)
    Round Three: Carl Nassib
    Round Three (comp): Chris Jones (or Nkemdiche,who will slide)

    Add Dynamic Players to the Defense!
    Russell Wilson is the most Unconventional, Successful Quarterback in the NFL. Why would he need a Conventional O-Line?
    Pick whoever you want for O-Line, AFTER you set up your D!

    • Rob Staton says:

      So which ones of Avril, Bennett and Clark are you benching for these guys?

      • David M2 says:

        Rob,

        I don’t believe his screen name allows him to pick offensive players before round 7, if at all…

        More news to follow as screen name inhibited drafting details emerge.

      • H M Abdou says:

        Hahahaha, Rob! Good point!

        First of all, there is simply NO WAY that Chris Jones or Nkemdiche will be available in round 3. I personally think there’s a good chance both go in the first round, they’re both extremely high-upside players.

        The other players you named: Ogbah, Bullard, Nassib.. are very good players and worth consideration for Pete and John. But at 26 even I, who has been promoting the idea of taking an interior rusher/run stuffer, would say that o-line is the most sensible position to address. I’d most likely take Ifedi at 26, as Rob has suggested for the Seahawks.

      • ItsAboutTheDefense says:

        Plenty of snaps available on the D-Line for whomever emerges from what would be a truly fierce preseason competition.
        Anyone who finds a spot is playing at the top of his game!

        Actually. it’s the roster spots occupied by Marsh, Hill, Dobbs, et al., that would be threatened by these picks. And we’ve done RedShirt years for good young players before….
        Having any of these guys in situational roles would also maintain their awareness of scheme and style should injuries occur among the Starters.
        Competition that includes guys that could start is the only legit competition. And the continuing company of those guys during the season is chemistry we’ve lacked on the Defense since we won the Super Bowl.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          You think it’s better to spend your R1 pick on a rotational/situational DT who would see maybe 25-30% of defensive snaps, vs a starting OLer who would see virtually 100% of offensive snaps???

          • matt says:

            That’s my thought exactly CHAWK. While the pass rusher may be able to flash and make some big plays, an OL starter impacts the game every offensive snap.

            JS/PC orchestrate their roster with an eye looking at the next few years. They left holes on the roster by letting Okung, Mebane, Irvin, Sweezy etc walk. It’s not a coincidence that the strengths of this draft include OT early, this DT class is incredibly loaded with run stoppers with some pass rushers, and high quality depth at OG/C into the 3rd. Irvin’s production, or lack thereof, is not something to worry about replacing. Clark slides into the edge rushing role Irvin left. That looks like a slight upgrade to me. With 4 picks in the top 100 if we can get one good OLineman and an interior pass rusher to get 5+ sacks the draft will be a success in my mind. This is a modest wish list that should be easy to fulfill. This team is not far away from another Super Bowl appearance.

            • CHawk Talker Eric says:

              “Clark slides into the edge rushing role Irvin left. That looks like a slight upgrade to me.”

              PC agrees with you:
              “Frank Clark is going to really help us. We think he is going to be a premier rusher, he showed that last year. So losing Bruce as an outside guy on the right side really opens up the opportunity for Frank to step up and do some good things for us.”

  48. Dingbatman says:

    Rob. This blog is the best! You’ve finally convinced me on the O/L at #26 and I’ve moved on from my dream adding Keanu Neal to the Legion of Boom.

    One position I’ve not seen much written about is fullback. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the team move on from Coleman and I’ve not heard whether they’ve resigned Tuku. Given their commitment to the run game I could see this spot being more of a need than either CB or WR(assuming the injury rehabs are all going well). Any thoughts on how they might address this? I love the idea of a Dan Vitale as another option for RW but can he actually block for a running back? What round do you see him going?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Vitale is more of an athlete than a football player IMO.

      I think there’s a good chance they’ll add a full back and then re-sign Tukuafu. Might be a priority UDFA type deal.

    • Madmark says:

      I like a Andy Janoviche FB Nebraska, this guy is a special teams warrior with 13 tackles last year.

    • Mike L says:

      I’ll throw Derek Watt’s (JJ’s little bro) name into the mix for a late round fb prospect. 4.69 40, 33.5 vertical,4.19 pro agility….good hands..great blocker..can line up as TE or FB…would also be awesome on special teams.

  49. hawkfaninMT says:

    We looked at consistency of catching when there were rumors about Rishard Mathews to the Hawks making the rounds…

    What WRs fit that bill? Did I miss a post about this? Or can anyone point out this information?

    • H M Abdou says:

      Well, I’m assuming that WR won’t be addressed very early in this draft (if at all). They might be looking at some late-round guys with upside.

      Much easier to find good WR’s, CB’s, and other smaller positions late in the draft. There are fewer bigger guys who are worth considering (O and D lines) in the later rounds.

      That’s known as the Andy Reid drafting philosophy (draft for the trenches early). It makes some sense.

  50. calgaryhawk says:

    Rob, I’m one of those crazy people that believe the Seahawks just might do the unexpected and go a completely different way in the draft. With this draft being knee deep in quality O lineman prospects and Seattle’s success in the mid rounds, JS just might go against conventional thinking. I could see the Seahawks going with something like Derrick Henry in the first round (keeping with a true run first philosophy). Even though Seattle already has Rawls. Michaels, and Cameron Marshall (CFL) signed, they are all somewhat the same style of runners. At worst, Henry would be that big back for third downs.
    In the second round, maybe LB Jaylon Smith. They would have to sit on him for a year, but he had the talent before his injury to develop into a probowl player. Risk with the potential of great rewards. After the second round, now the Seahawks get going on the O line. 3a- maybe someone like OT Le’Raven Clark, maybe won’t start right away, but could be the best of the bunch by year 3 or 4. 3b- maybe someone like C/G Max Tuerk. still recovering from injury, but a very good zone blocking fit even if he needs more weight.

    • Rob Staton says:

      It’s an interesting take calgary. That said, they’ve generally addressed key needs early in the draft. The ‘surprise’ element of Seattle’s picks are usually the players taken not the positions. I think it’d be a surprise to see them neglect the O-line until round three. Not with the serious needs there.

      • H M Abdou says:

        Yup, I was thinking the same thing, Rob. O-line is probably the most sensible choice at 26. The ONLY position I would like to see them addressing instead of o-line at 26 is DT, and that is ONLY if a potentially dominant guy like a Rankins or Nkemdiche is there.

      • J says:

        We think OL is currently a serious need. The team may think Webb is a starting quality RT and focus on picking up competition for Britt and Lewis.

    • Steele says:

      I suspect the same thing as Calgary. JSPC might go completely against expectations.

  51. Trevor says:

    Rob since Kam is going to be back for certain and we are not trading for Joe Thomas I agree OL at 26 makes the most sense. Either Ifedi or Coleman would be ideal. Either guy could play LG or RT in year #1 and be an upgrade with the potential in a year or two to be very special. Time to add some talent to the OL.

    The one caveat would be if Sheldon Rankins were to drop as he is the one interior dirruptor in this draft who could come in and play significant snaps and contribute day #1 in a spot that defense has lacked (penetrating 3 tech) he is also stout against the run and has good gap discipline which Pete would want. I think he is a top 10 talent so this is incredibly likely but I keep seeing him mocked to us so I thought I would throw it out there.

    • H M Abdou says:

      If Rankins is available at 26 I personally would take him over an o-lineman, there are just a handful of interior guys in this draft who offer not only the pass rush, but good run defense also.

      It’s funny because I think the fact that the Seahawks have more needs this draft than in previous drafts could help them in terms of flexibility with their picks and finding the best value.

  52. Dylan says:

    #Mizzou OG Connor McGovern now talking with scouts from the Seahawks.

  53. Naks8 says:

    I like the cajuste pick. Seems like the Hawks like to draft wrs from running teams that have to make the most of their opportunities. A big guy like that will be a nice addition and change up from what we have

    • H M Abdou says:

      Naks8 that’s a very good and interesting point about the Seahawks being drawn to WRs from run-first offenses. Typically those guys also have a blue-collar mentality and don’t mind blocking to help the ground game.

      • Naks8 says:

        And it was mentioned before about Rishard Matthews on how these types of receivers have high completion/efficiency ratings. I wonder how cajuste ranks on these.

    • Steele says:

      I am intrigued by Cajuste as well.

      There are some other WRs projected in the low mid-late rounds who look promising. Keyarris Garrett, Rashard Higgins, Marquez North. Like Cajuste, these guys have some size.

  54. RWIII says:

    Rob: I have been reading about Jason Spriggs. Spriggs is a natural left tackle.

    Strengths: “Spriggs has the size and well-distributed musculature NFL scouts are looking for, as well as impressive initial quickness, lateral agility and balance. The length and athleticism combination makes Spriggs well-suited to pass protecting in Indiana’s up-tempo spread offense and in run blocking at the second level.
    Steady run and pass blocker. Has enough set-up quickness and lateral mobility to beat rushers around the corner, showing smooth body control and natural athleticism in space. Has the temperament needed to match up vs. fierce pass rushers. Rather than maul defenders at the point of attack, Spriggs relies on his quickness and agility.

    He showed the quickness and balance at Senior Bowl practices that scouts have appreciated about his game in the past, while also flashing some nastiness, looking to pancake opponents when he could.”

  55. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Hey V12 remember when Thomas Duarte got some buzz about being a really athletic TE in the vein of Jordan Reed? And I told you I think Thomas Duarte and Devon Cajuste are really similar?

    Duarte – 6’2″ 231lbs, 4.72/2.73/1.72 40yd, 33.5″ VJ, 118″ BJ, 4.24 SS, 6.97 3C, 12 BP
    Cajuste – 6’4″ 234lbs, 4.62/2.70/1.60 40yd, 36.0″ VJ, 123″ BJ, 4.20 SS, 6.49 3C, 12 BP

    • Volume12 says:

      Yeah, Cajustes’ numbers are definetly impressive.

      I think the best move or flex TE that actually comps to Jordan Reed is Cal’s Stephen Anderson.

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        @NFLDrafter: Speaking of Cal’s Pro Day, TE Stephen Anderson tested in the 83rd SPARQ percentile, good for best among TE’s in the 2016 NFL Draft class.

        @NFLDraftInsider: Stanford WR Devon Cajuste at 6’4 235lbs told me he has no problem bulking up a bit and playing a hybrid TE/WR role at the next level

  56. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    @Edwerderespn: Source says #Saints HC Sean Payton has agreed to 5-year contract extension worth slightly more than $45M. He was making $8.5M per year

  57. Ukhawk says:

    Love the sentiment of the mock draft, getting lots of OL/DL but wondering about a few variations on the theme in terms of personnel….

    Based on Pauline’s rankings (now dated so may not be reality but will give the jist):
    1) Gotta go OT, assuming win forever continues it maybe our last/best shot for a while in terms of reloading with quality at the spot….
    Pick 1 => Ifedi/Coleman/Decker/etc > Bullard
    2) Skip Kaufusi. If going big DE, get one who plays to his size and would be a Bullard clone in many respects. Alternatively, a DE comparable to Kaufusi can be had ~5th = Nassib.
    Pick 2 => Tapper.
    3a) Pick 3 => Ervin
    3b) Pauline ranks these guys 4th/3rd rd but they could have moved up, not sure if 2nd is too high for One of them in the current mock. (If both are now 2nd rounders, I’d personally grab one of the 2 or Martin in the 2nd and get Nassib later rather than take Tapper)
    Pick 4 => McGovern/Garnett
    4) Sorry but much bigger need areas than WR so Cajuste goes. Need to replace Bane much more urgently, forget Heath in the 6h…
    Pick 5 => Hargrave

  58. Cysco says:

    So Prisco posted his latest mock
    http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/pete-prisco/25526480/priscos-nfl-mock-draft-50-ravens-snag-their-next-great-linebacker

    He has Jason Spriggs falling to Seattle. If that were to play out would “we” favor Ifedi over Spriggs?

    • mishima says:

      All day long. Not a fan of Spriggs, at all.

      • RWIII says:

        Mishima: Please explain to me why you are not a fan of Spriggs.

        • Steve Nelsen says:

          Spriggs is better pass blocker than run blocker. Seattle has historically preferred exceptional run blockers. The biggest question about Spriggs is whether he has the functional strength to be a successful NFL lineman.

          Gilliam is similar to Spriggs in this respect. So Seattle may be less strict about run-blocking ability for their left tackles than the other four positions.

          • lil'stink says:

            Spriggs seems like a guy who might get too much of a boost with his combine workout. I guess the question is if you saw a first round pick on his tape. I haven’t watched much of him, tbh. If our front office didn’t have him as being a first rounder pre-combine I would be surprised if we did after.

            Ifedi seems like more of a guy the coaches would like (given their historical preferences) at RT, as well as what they would want at LG if need be.

          • mishima says:

            Exactly this.

        • Trevor says:

          Spriggs gets no push what so ever in the run game. I think he is the least attractive option of all the OL prospects being talked about for the Hawks in Rd #1.

  59. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Pete Carroll on Justin Britt remaining at left guard:

    “He gives us flexibility in that he can play both spots, If we need him to play tackle he can play tackle. But I think he is just going to continue grow as a guard. He did a nice job in the running game. He needs to improve in pass protection, principles and stuff. But we are counting on him to really come through for us. We think those guards give us a really secure spot with big upside.”

    • Jake says:

      I know they’re still going to add to the OL through the draft, but it seemed like Pete’s comments today indicated they feel pretty good about where they are to take the best player available. Also said ‘we’ll see what happens in the draft’ with regards to the SAM spot specifically.

      • Steele says:

        Pete loves everyone, to the final second that a guy fails and needs to go. I take his optimistic comments with a grain of salt.

        That said, they may indeed be very happy with what they’ve got and may not believe they need to add much. Webb and Sowell, done. Then BPA the draft, and if there are o-lineman in the mix, fine, but they will just go down their board BPA and not worry about positions.

    • Trevor says:

      My one wish this off season is to make sure we do not see Britt on the OL next year.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        Please no Britt at left guard.

        • Naks8 says:

          Britt played like a rookie last year. He struggled and flashed at times. But really he was a rookie since we changed him to guard mid training camp. I would like to see how he does this year in camp before throwing him to the garbage bin. Players tend to improve so year 3 might be a big jump for him. You could say golden Tate was almost labeled a bust after his first two years. Now look at him. I feel people are too quick to dismiss players. Think about college football; some guys are great as true freshman while others come into their own as redshirt juniors. Development takes time and maybe our best lg or rt is already on the team. Not saying he is, but like corner it takes some time to learn our line technique

  60. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    @DavisHsuSeattle: Seahawks are all up on MCGOVERN- makes sense- position versatile, SPARQ, leader, Mizzou Made

    • lil'stink says:

      Starting to wonder if he will even be there at #56. He’s might have a Mitch Morse-like rise in the draft.

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        Agreed.

        • Volume12 says:

          This is flat-out shocking!

          With TC and Gary Pinkel’s relationship, why would Seattle bd interested in a guy like McGovern that came from Mizzou and ticks every box they look for?

          :-)

  61. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    @NFLDraftInsider: @NFLDraftInsider Justin Simmons ran a 4.50 at BC Pro Day paired with a 40 inch vert. Kid can ball!

    • lil'stink says:

      Seems like he could be a great ball hawk with good overall instincts. Some people were knocking him on his average athleticism pre-combine. Doesn’t seem to be the case.

      I know he wouldn’t be a great pick for us but I like the idea of him and ET3 together on passing downs.

    • Trevor says:

      I like him a lot. I did not realize he was that athletic.

  62. GotHawkBlockedorlackthereof says:

    I think Bullard will be the pick at 26, unless he’s not there. Then either McCalister or Weatherly later on.
    Pete mentioned GG at LT (Sowell backup), Britt at LG, Lewis/4Soko at C (hopefully Soko wins) Glow at RG and Webb/Poole duke it our for RT.
    I would like to see McGovern (C/G), Rees Odhiambo (LT/LG) Keenan Reynolds (Qb/RB) drafted as our depth.

  63. SeaWard says:

    Rob – What round do you see Hassan Ridgeway going and would the Hawks have any interest in his run stopping skill set?

  64. EranUngar says:

    Re Justine Britt –

    “As for left guard, incumbent Justin Britt slots in there still. “He gives us flexibility in that he can play both spots,” said Carroll, “if we need him to play tackle he can play tackle. But I think he is just going to continue grow as a guard. He did a nice job in the running game. He needs to improve in pass protection, principles and stuff. But we are counting on him to really come through for us. We think those guards (Glowinski and Britt) give us a really secure spot with big upside.”

    As I mentioned before here and elsewhere – The desperate need here to replace Britt (and others) because we can’t win with that line is not shared by the FO.

    • Rob Staton says:

      And you seriously think those words from Carroll mean anything??

      What’s he going to say? ‘The guy sucks, we would’ve cut him if he wasn’t the only left guard on the roster.’

      • Steele says:

        JSPC’s words never mean anything! But they are more likely to err on the side of optimism. They are generally and genuinely more likely to stick with guys until there are problems far beyond fixing. And even then, they will wish they could keep the guy(s).

        Where JSPC “loves” their guys, Belichick and NE “dislike” their guys, jettison them early to get value back for them, often vicitimizing teams. The painful example of Deion Branch, for instance.

        They initiated the deal dumping Chandler Jones.

        http://www.patspulpit.com/2016/3/23/11289900/cardinals-head-coach-raves-about-jonathan-cooper-says-patriots

        They may have fleeced the Cards.

        • Rob Staton says:

          They said the O-line was a priority before they lost Okung and Sweezy.

          Praising Britt is par for the course — he’s going to be on the roster whatever happens, so giving him the feeling he’s not competing for anything would go against everything they preach.

          The reality is — they’re adding to this group in the draft. Aggressively. And there’s every chance Britt won’t be a starter in 2016.

        • lil'stink says:

          I’m sure the Cards know Jones might just be a one year rental. Seems they are going all in to win the SB this year, let 2017 bring what it may.

  65. RWIII says:

    Rob: I agree that Ifedi is more athletic and maybe more talented. However, what I read about Spriggs is that Spriggs is better suited to play left tackle. He only gave up two sacks all year. Spriggs also will benefit a zone blocking team. Spriggs is also a converted tight-end. Gary Giilliam is also a former tight-end.

  66. RWIII says:

    Ok: Thanks Rob.

  67. Eastolyfan says:

    Here is a mock w/ trade down w/ Cleveland (they’re moving up for a qb in late first). We get 2nd (44) and 4th (99).

    2 (44) de.dt. Jonathan Bullard, Florida
    2 (56) ot.og. Connor McGovern, Missouri
    3 (90) c. Christian Westerman, Arizona State
    3 (97) olb. Deion Jones, Louisiana State
    4 (99) rb. Tyler Ervin, Western Kentucky
    4 (124) te. Tyler Higbee, Western Kentucky
    5 (171) cb. D. J. White, Georgia Tech
    6 (215) ot. Alex Lewis, Nebraska
    7 (225) wr. Devon Cajuste, Stanford (like him but think we can get him later)
    7 (247) dt. Antwaun Woods, USC
    fa fb. Devon Johnson, Marshall (WV)