Studying the Seahawks’ draft trends: Production + Athleticism

February 9th, 2016 | Written by Rob Staton

The Seahawks have only drafted elite athletes on defense in the early rounds — such as Frank Clark (1.58 ten-yard split at the combine)

Every now and again it’s worth reviewing Seattle’s draft trends in the Pete Carroll era. You only have to look at their first and second round history to work out the kind of prospect they like to take early:

2010: Russell Okung, Earl Thomas, Golden Tate
2011: James Carpenter
2012: Bruce Irvin, Bobby Wagner
2013: Percy Harvin (trade), Christine Michael
2014: Paul Richardson, Justin Britt
2015: Jimmy Graham (trade), Frank Clark

With the exception of the offensive linemen, every player listed above is a fantastic athlete. Speed, explosive talent.

They also produced on the field in college:

2010 — Earl Thomas had eight interceptions in his final season at Texas
2010 — Golden Tate won the Biletnikoff
2011 — James Carpenter was arguably the best run blocking tackle in college
2012 — Bruce Irvin had 22.5 sacks in two seasons at West Virginia
2012 — Bobby Wagner had four sacks as a senior and 478 (!!!) career tackles
2014 — Paul Richardson had 1343 and 10 touchdowns in his final year at Colorado
2015 — Frank Clark’s tape was actually really good with many splash plays

You could also include last years third round pick Tyler Lockett. He had 2777 yards and 22 touchdowns in his final two seasons at Kansas State.

It doesn’t guarantee anything but it’d be silly to ignore this information. Six drafts is quite a body of evidence.

Here are the takeaways I can see:

— They’ve never taken a none-elite athlete on defense in the first or second round

— They don’t seem to be quite as concerned about athleticism on the offensive line and arguably prefer size ideals, physical toughness and the mentality to mesh with Tom Cable’s way of doing things

— They generally don’t draft underachievers and the two players who did fall short of expectations in college (Christine Michael & Frank Clark) were two of the biggest SPARQ freaks to ever grace the combine

— Carroll and Schneider’s Seahawks have picked between #25-32 in four of their six drafts — and on three occasions traded the pick (so if they don’t like the value available, they’re going to do something about it)

How do we use this information to project what they might do?

We know they want to produce a consistently performing offensive line
Pete Carroll stated this was the key priority in his end-of-season press conference. The draft history suggests if they want to take an O-liner at #26 it doesn’t necessarily have to be a freak of nature. They’ve taken productive, gritty, physical offensive linemen that excel in the run game. Players that fit Tom Cable’s preferred style and not necessarily raw, athletic players with a high ceiling. The two offensive linemen they drafted earliest in 2014 and 2015 (Justin Britt, Terry Poole) were not big-time athletes. That said, they recently started to look for upside (Sweezy, Sokoli, Gilliam) albeit in the later rounds. They don’t appear to be handcuffed to a certain level of athleticism though, rather than a mental/physical ‘type’.

We know they’d like to add a pass rusher
What was the big difference between 2015 and the two previous seasons? They lacked the production of Clinton McDonald (2013) and Jordan Hill (2014). Finding someone who can get 5-8 sacks in a rotation might be the priority. They could also look to add another edge rusher if Bruce Irvin departs in free agency.

What kind of defensive prospects are we talking about?
If they’re going to take an interior or edge rusher early they need to be explosive and athletic. Sheldon Rankins is explosive and that’s probably why, according to Tony Pauline, the Seahawks gave him a first round grade. An edge rusher is going to need to produce a fantastic ten-yard split or excel in the vertical/broad/three-cone at the combine. The previous six drafts tell us speed, explosion and production is the key here. Anything else would be a significant detachment from what they’ve done so far.

Who are some of the players to keep an eye on?
We’ll know more after the combine of course. I’ve compiled a new mock draft (to be published tomorrow) with many attractive options off the board before the 20th pick. In the past, that has provoked the Seahawks to trade.

If a high ceiling isn’t entirely necessary on the O-line, the likes of Shon Coleman, Cody Whitehair, Nick Martin and Ryan Kelly aren’t going to stand out in Indianapolis but could be options. Coleman would address the tackle or left guard position. Whitehair, Martin and Kelly play center. All have the potential to solidify one key position and help provide some consistency in the trenches.

If they’re intent on shifting towards major upside, I suppose we have to bring up the name of Texas Tech left tackle Le’Raven Clark.

Watching his tape is like watching your Grandpa trying to work an iPad. He’s technically deficient in pretty much every way imaginable. And yet his athletic profile is elite — +36 inch arms, 6-5, 312lbs. He’s a freak.

Lance Zierlein offers this quote from an anonymous NFC personnel director:

“He’s going to end up being big time in our league. He’s got elite foot quickness, he’s long and he’s smart. He’ll keep getting better once he gets to a pro offense and away from that stuff Texas Tech does and he’ll become one of the top five tackles in our league.”

Zierlein also notes, “Left tackles with his potential in pass protection carry first round value.” As bad as Clark is technically, Tom Cable has stated he believes every college lineman enters the league needing to start from scratch. If the Seahawks want to shoot for the stars at left/right tackle — Clark might be a scary, exciting, concerning, potentially genius decision.

If consistency and not pure upside is the order of the day — adding a player with decent physical skills who simply gets the job done might be preferable. The likes of Coleman, Whitehair, Martin and Kelly are a picture of consistency and physicality.

On defense we have to assume the likes of Noah Spence and Sheldon Rankins will not reach the #26 pick. Both shone at the Senior Bowl. Mississippi State’s Chris Jones could be a wild card. He was once the #2 recruit in the nation. He has fantastic length and size (6-6, 308lbs) and generally does a good job controlling his gap, working vs the run and occasionally providing a dynamic pass rush.

Had Jones delivered on his massive potential in college he’d probably be a top-15 pick. The fact that he didn’t is why he could be available in rounds 2-3. The trends tell us the Seahawks will only seriously consider a perceived underachiever early if he’s a SPARQ freak. We’ll need to see what Jones does at the combine.

Seattle’s preference to emphasise gap discipline and stoutness vs the run in base perhaps makes it unlikely they’ll use their first pick on a defensive tackle unless it’s someone of Rankins’ quality. If they do want to find a player who can contribute in the same way as Clinton McDonald, they might find better value waiting until rounds 2-4. There’s abnormal depth in this class on the D-line and the highest pick they’ve used on a DT so far is the third rounder spent on Jordan Hill in 2013. If they’re bringing in a defensive impact player who doesn’t start in base — how likely are they to spend a first round pick? Some of the options in rounds 2-4 are Adolphus Washington, Jihad Ward, Willie Henry, Ronald Blair III and Darius Latham.

One player who could come into focus is LSU’s Deion Jones. He’s a possible outside linebacker replacement for Bruce Irvin. He’s not a pass rusher — but he needs to be mentioned here. Jones has an opportunity to really excel at the combine. He’s an outstanding athlete — and that’s what the Seahawks love at linebacker (see: Irvin, Wagner, Pierre-Louis).

He could easily run in the 4.4’s at 6-1 and 219lbs. He doesn’t get overmatched at that size and plays with great discipline in the run game. His ability to be a key special teamer could also have some value.

Did he produce at LSU in 2015? Five sacks at linebacker, one interception (returned for a touchdown) and 99 total tackles.

Jones isn’t a defensive or offensive lineman but he’s the type of player the Seahawks have taken early in recent years. They’ll also need to replace Irvin in all likelihood. Mike Florio suggested today he’ll get a contract offer in free agency worth $10m APY. Keep that in mind, even if it’s not a top priority. Like Chris Jones and Le’Raven Clark, Deion Jones could come into play if they trade down.

This is a difficult class to find SPARQy edge rushers in range at #26. Clemson duo Kevin Dodd and Shaq Lawson might not be athletic enough for the Seahawks. Leonard Floyd might be but he’s been a disappointing edge rusher for two years and hasn’t produced.

Cliff Avril ran a 1.50 ten yard split at his combine. Bruce Irvin managed a 1.55. Frank Clark had a 1.58. Anything in the 1.5’s is elite. That’s the type of edge speed the Seahawks are attracted to and it’s what we need to look for at the combine.

Utah State’s Kyler Fackrell is going to be a really interesting player to follow in Indianapolis and he’s possibly Seattle’s best shot if you want an outside rusher to be drafted in round one.

He looks like a good athlete. How good though? Can he top Clay Matthews’ 4.67 forty yard dash and 35.5 inch vertical? At USC’s pro-day Matthews ran a 1.49 ten-yard split and a 4.59 forty on a fast track. Fackrell needs to crack the 1.5’s in the split.

On tape he’s superb. A true splash-play specialist constantly impacting plays. PFF had this to say about his 2015 season:

At +34.4 he is our highest graded 3-4 OLB, with the highest grade as a pass rusher, against the run, and sixth-highest in coverage just for good measure.

The Seahawks use 3-4 personnel in a 4-3 so don’t be put off by his tag as a 3-4 OLB. He ticks the production box for sure. The big question is whether he’s athletic enough for the Seahawks to be considered early. Clay Matthews lasted until the #26 pick despite proving he was very athletic. Perhaps the same happens to Fackrell?

Will they trade down?
Carroll and Schneider have traded 75% of their picks when selecting between #25-32. If the value isn’t there, they’ll probably move down again (with limited cap space they’re unlikely to pull another Harvin or Graham trade).

I like to compare my own mock drafts to those in the draft media to see if I’m ruling out possible options for the Seahawks. I was equally pleased and alarmed to see how similar tomorrow’s mock draft was to Daniel Jeremiah’s. Noah Spence was available to the Seahawks (this was a pre-Senior Bowl mock by Jeremiah) but apart from that only Andrew Billings, Cody Whitehair and Kyler Fackrell were available that I had off the board at #26.

That doesn’t mean there weren’t some good options available in round one in both projections. It does suggest, however, that the ‘genuine’ first round talent in this class might run dry quickly. And if that happens — they’ve shown a consistent willingness to trade and hunt for better value.

They might think #26 is too early for a Chris Jones, Deion Jones, Le’Raven Clark (the athletic trio) or Cody Whitehair, Nick Martin, Ryan Kelly, Shon Coleman (the physical & consistent quartet). Can they move down into the 30’s?

Their desire to move down will be influenced by their ability to fill certain needs. In 2011 when they owned the #25 pick — the three top offensive tackles were off the board by #22. They selected James Carpenter without moving down, possibly because they didn’t want to miss out altogether.

Note the following tweet:

If they see replacing Russell Okung as an absolute priority — and with Tunsil, Decker, Stanley and Conklin likely to be off the board by #26 — how much of a risk do they want to take?

Alternatively if they know they can get their guys later on they’ve shown they’re willing to manipulate the draft in their favour. That’s exactly what they did when trading down and drafting Paul Richardson in 2014.

So what happens?

The information in this piece and study of the draft class suggests the Seahawks are possibly going to do one of four things:

1. Pick their favourite offensive lineman and just feel good about addressing the self-confessed top priority, even if the player isn’t a top athlete

2. Make a somewhat surprising high-upside pick on the O-line such as Le’Raven Clark that leaves people gasping

3. Take an elite athlete who plays defense

4. Trade down

291 Responses to “Studying the Seahawks’ draft trends: Production + Athleticism”

  1. Ely says:

    La’Raven Clark stirs up horrible memories of picking Aaron Curry.

    • Volume12 says:

      How so? No one is saying that Le’Raven Clark is the safest prospect in the draft.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think they are very different to be fair. Curry was seen as the ultimate ‘safe’ pick. Le’Raven Clark is anything but safe — he’s as big a boom or bust player in the draft.

      I hate Clark’s tape. But we can’t deny the Seahawks like to coach up their guys on the O-line. And his frame/athleticism is different level. Not my personal favourite choice but feel obliged to bring it up in this piece.

      • bobbyk says:

        Another thing too, but Clark plays a position of utmost importance at LT, whereas Curry played SAM. That’s one of the “least important” starting positions there is. You’re only as good as your weakest link and that’s why Cary Williams got cut and we can’t go into another season with a starting guard combination of Sweezy and Britt again (although to many, guard is about as unimportant to most NFLers as is a SAM). However, as has been documented here, guard may be more important for a team like the Seahawks since Wilson is a little height challenged.

      • Ely says:

        Rob I thought you had the same thoughts on Curry. Perhaps I’m thinking of someone else but was it not you that said you yelled at the screen with the Curry pick? I know the pundits widely believed he was a cant miss though. My point was simply that instincts, technique and grit will usually trump tremendous athletic qualities. Curry had decent tape but he played for Wake Forrest if I’m not mistaken. Hardly the crème of the crop. Maybe instincts isn’t as important at an o-line position as technique which can certainly be coached up. I’m just not sure this is the time you take a swing like that in the first round.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I did shout ‘NOOOOOOOO’ at my laptop watching the Curry pick. But it was more a case of him being a thoroughly average player and not a franchise player (that you’d hope to get at #4).

          • Miles says:

            I remember I really liked the Aaron Curry picked at the time, but that was before I found Seahawks Draft Blog. This site definitely filled in my lack of information.

            The trouble with the Curry pick is that it was made with the belief in mind that we were still a playoff-caliber team. The thought was that we didn’t need a playmaker, that we were already solid. We just saw a hole on our team and saw that Aaron Curry was the most coveted OLB in the draft, so we took him. In retrospect it seems like a really simple and shallow way to view the draft much less the #4 pick. It didn’t seem like BPA or position value were taken into consideration at all.

            You had Michael Crabtree sitting there who could have really become the focal point of our offense. It could have even extended Matt Hasselbeck’s career in Seattle. But instead we overpaid for an aging WR2 (Housh) and continued to be a middling offense. When Aaron Curry didn’t pan out, we had a bad offense. That’s a bad recipe.

            They say everything happens for a reason. I don’t really believe that, but all those horrible decisions led to cleaning up the organization and got us Pete Carroll. Would that have happened without Tim Ruskell forcing Paul Allen’s hand? It could have been the best thing that happened to the Seahawks.

  2. Volume12 says:

    Great piece Rob.

    I still can’t figure out why people are opposed to getting high upside, long, explosive athletes.

    • Rob Staton says:

      If you can coach those guys up — they’re the ones who become special.

      • Volume12 says:

        Exactly.

        And we all know how much PC and his staff love to/enjoy coaching guys up. They’re more patient than most.

      • BHarKnows says:

        But when you look at the names you listed up top, only about half have turned into truly special. Others have been contributors but not a generational player. If they get coached up they have been great. It is far from a guarantee that it works out.

        • BHarKnows says:

          I also feel like sometimes they are too patient with players. They get a little cute thinking about how great someone could be as opposed to what another guy already is.

          • Volume12 says:

            Nothing about the draft is a guarantee.

            Your also trying to find guys that are worthy of that 2nd contract. Not guys who’s talent will be tapped out by then.

            Seattle has one of the most organic rosters in the league. Only 3 starters, MosesBread, Avril, and Jimmy, weren’t drafted by this team.

            • Volume12 says:

              Oops. Actually 4 with ‘Tuba’ at 3-tech, and MosesBread was drafted/UDFA by Seattle, just not PC/JS.

              And I shoulda said, that 2nd contract is more important than the 1st one.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Sure, but how many first round picks taken in the 20’s work out? Usually an average athlete becomes an average NFL player. The SPARQy, high upside players with production don’t last long. If you want to give yourself a chance to get a great player, that’s usually the type to target — even if people see it as a perceived reach.

          The fact Seattle found production from Thomas, Tate, Irvin and Wagner is quite a hit rate already. And it’s too early to judge Clark.

    • Steele says:

      I don’t think I’m alone in opposing athletes who are inexperienced and raw playing their designated positions, who take too long to learn. That is, if we are talking about having to field starters within a year. I don’t mind development if a team has the luxury of a long time horizon, and starting units that don’t require rookies to deliver. The Hawks don’t have that luxury. Because I think they frankly did a mediocre job in the past two offseasons shoring up their depth. Now they are forced to scramble.

  3. Rik says:

    Do you think there’s any chance Darron Lee makes it to pick #26? I think he’ll show that elite level of athleticism at the combine that Seattle looks for.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it’s very, very doubtful. A terrific player with a superb combination of athleticism, smarts and production. Top-15 for me.

      • Steele says:

        Lee and Nkemdiche are two top guys that I would be excited to see fall to the Hawks, as unlikely as either case appears.

        Lee is one of the few LBs who would take the sting out of losing Irvin.

        • C-Dog says:

          I kinda think Nkemdiche could realistically fall to 26, especially if some of the other junior DTs SPARQ up at the combine. He’s coming in with some weird off field baggage, and some on field issues, as well, in terms of consistency, maybe even effort.

          • Miles says:

            Based on how trench guys have fallen in recent drafts due to off-field issues (Randy Gregory, La’el Collins, arguably Frank Clark), I think it’s not a stretch to say Nkemdiche could fall to the Hawks in the 2nd.

  4. Hoberk Unce says:

    I hope they apply the college production requirement to a first round OT pick. The lack of mid-round tackle talent will likely cause a run on the position, since teams picking in the mid second or lower are going to miss out. I don’t think my blood pressure can handle another Britt reach or Bitonio non-pick. Personally, I’m keeping my fingers crossed for Coleman.

  5. Attyla the Hawk says:

    Recall Rob, that John desperately tried to trade out of the #25 pick in 2011. But failed due to what he said was poor return value.

    • Rob Staton says:

      A little birdie told me they would’ve considered Colin Kaepernick had they been able to trade down into the top of round two. Not sure how true it is. Same person said they were focusing on OT ideally first and that came true.

      • Volume12 says:

        Wasn’t there interest, rumored, in QB Andy Dalton too that year too?

        • Rob Staton says:

          I’ve seen it suggested. The info I had nudged my way (may or may not be true) was they wanted to go OT first. And if they traded down, Kaepernick was the guy they were looking at.

          • Cameron says:

            I wonder who our head coach and GM would be right now had they drafted Kaepernick

            • Miles says:

              Remember that this staff is the same one that traded significant capital for Charlie Whitehurst. I don’t really know what they saw in Whitehurst but they certainly saw potential. That’s how draft picks are viewed. For example, no one would have been able to predict who would have been better between Kaepernick and Wilson. They both had careers in the NFL starting in 2012 and we didn’t know which one was better until the end of the 2014 season.

              Kaepernick is more of a system player than Wilson, in my view. He could be viewed as either a tremendous success or failure based on the coach he’s playing for. That’s how far apart his ceiling and floor are.

  6. Therick05 says:

    Rob, have you watched Ryan Kelly yet? There is only one video of him on DraftBreakdown but go look for Alabama LT Cam Robinson, he is on the tape, and there is 5 more videos there, IIRC. Anyway, HE IS A MONSTER, Henry runs behind him all the time and he doesn’t miss many blocks, punishes defenders and has not given up a sack in 2 YEARS. Now I’m between him, Rankins (if he drops) and Shon Coleman for my favorite prospect SEA can pick in RD1.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      Kelly is awesome.

      But you have to see the draft as a whole. If you take Kelly in R1, what kind of OT/DL are you getting in R2 and R3.

      If Kelly/Martin both go top 50 — there are still good prospects on the board at C. Trying to project value throughout the top 100 is kind of key. The difference between Kelly at R1 and Allen in R3 might be small. Whereas the difference between Coleman at OT in R1 versus some generic Terry Poole type OT in R3 might be enormous.

      If I had to choose between coming away with:

      Kelly/Haeg in R1/3

      and

      Coleman/Allen in R1/3

      I think I’d go the latter. Even though I may consider Kelly far better than Allen.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m doing it today, just about to get into it. I’ve got a ton of Alabama saved on my TV.

      • Volume12 says:

        Ha! I do the same thing.

        Save a bunh of games, and then go back and watch ’em during draft season.

        • Baldwin says:

          Very smart write up, Rob. Summarizes history/trends well and they’re tough to ignore after 6 years of data.

          That said, I could see a scenario where PC/JS would be happy with either Martin or Kelly when we’re on the clock in the 2nd. They’ve had a history of waiting out position groups to see the latest they can draft a keeper. And Martin/Kelly might be 1a and 1b.

  7. Attyla the Hawk says:

    I think this could be the first year in a long time (since Okung?) that an OT we value drops to our first pick.

    It’s hard to really generalize about what this FO would consider when picking OL. Really just about all of our picks have been reactionary moves based on players that we were considered coveting being picked before us.

    Doesn’t mean they wouldn’t move back. But I think if there is an OT they want and he slips — I think we probably do what we did when Earl Thomas fell to us. That pick we had already agreed to trade and we pulled it off the table to get him.

    • Volume12 says:

      Michigan ST OL Jack Conklin.

      This guy ticks off so many of the ‘Seahawky’ boxes on the checklist. I’ll be very surprised if TC doesn’t like this guy. Ohio St is full of net level players, and in the 4th quarter against them, Conklin was a grown a** man. Just dominated.

      They like someone on this team, and IMO Conklin will go later than he’s projected. I’m not convinced many teams will see him as a LT. But, he’s the perfect RT/LG type Seattle has gone after.

      • nichansen01 says:

        I would be enthralled if Conklin fell to us. He seems like just the kind of player the Seahawks like at right tackle.

        • Volume12 says:

          Right?

          IDK if he’ll necessarily be on the board when Seattle selects, but I do think he goes later than projected.

          Conklin and Shon Coleman are probably the 2 most likely to fall a bit.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Jon Ledyard and Tony Pauline both a bit down on Conklin today. Pauline saying he’ll go in the bottom third of round one and wasn’t overly positive. He might actually fall into range.

            Length will be key for him. He’s a good run blocker and we know SEA loves that. Could be a very good left guard for this team.

            • Coleslaw says:

              I’d be so happy, he just looks like a safe bet.

            • C-Dog says:

              Conklin be a great pick for LG. I think Coleman would be an absolute beast there as well. That’s why I’m shifting back to earlier feelings I had about re-signing Okung. Keeps some continuity on the line, allows one of there big college tackles to be the starting guard next to him.

              • bobbyk says:

                Who will line up at left tackle for the month or two Okung is injured? That’s my main problem. By signing Okung, you know darn well that he’s going to need a “starter” backup because he’ll miss games. He’s like the Engergizer bunny missing games every year. You just know it’s going to happen. You just don’t know how many games he’ll miss. He would have missed the NFC Championship Game and Super Bowl with that new injury had the Hawks kept winning.

                • C-Dog says:

                  He will miss a few games. That’s why I like the idea of a guy like Coleman who could slide to LT for a game or two, if need be. I get the injury concerns about Okung, but I think the most significant time he’s missed in a season was 2013, which was a Super Bowl year. If not, re-signing Okung, then I’d consider replacing him with another veteran LT, and keep Coleman/Conklin at LG. IMO, it looks feels that is the spot on the OL that vitally needs an upgrade.

          • matt says:

            “Conklin and Shon Coleman are probably the 2 most likely to fall a bit.” V12

            Agreed, and when one of them does we take him. Either would be a day 1 starter at RT or LG. Both show the willingness and ability to punish defenders. The level of talent drops off big time after the top OT’s-Tunsil, Conklin, Stanley, Conklin, Coleman and Spriggs. Taking an OT at #26 makes a lot of sense.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        I think the combine will be huge for Conklin. There is a concern that he won’t test particularly well.

        Should be high on the grit component that we like. Demeanor would fit. But if he’s an average kind of athlete I would consider him doubtful.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Worth noting how average Carpenter, Moffitt and Britt were in terms of athletes though.

          They might consider him if he fits their mental/physical profile for OL/Cable.

          • Volume12 says:

            LG or RT depending on his length.

            The thing about this year’s OL and DL class is compensation. At least for me. Meaning, not many OT’s that are gritty and uber athletic. Then there’s good athletes that lack technique and grit/toughness.

            And then on the DL there’s really good athletes that lack big time production. And big time producers that aren’t necessaily SPARQ-y or pass rushing types.

            If they wanna get back to being the baddest on the block, Conklin fits to a ‘tee.’

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            “Worth noting how average Carpenter, Moffitt and Britt were in terms of athletes though.”

            This is true.

            I’d also raise a different angle. Seattle absolutely HAD to get OL in 2011. I mean they didn’t even have enough players on the roster to field 9 guys. It wasn’t mere need. It was dire need.

            Carp/Moffitt were meh. But every draft being unique — what were the alternatives? Carimi or Sherrod? I could get on board with thinking we are predisposed to average athletes with grit if we opted for those instead of better available athletes.

            I kind of think we threw good money after bad in that situation. When we were probably better off just getting street UFAs to bridge a lean year.

            Britt — I think that was yet another example of us getting cute. Maybe not reading the landscape right that year. Britt was yet another desperation move.

            If anything, I think the consistent lesson to be learned here is to stop drafting OL because you have to. The critical shortages of options have largely been of our own making. And honestly, I think that’s exactly what John was alluding to when he talked about not reaching for need and letting a better player go and doubling up the error.

            I see the picks we did make as more a byproduct of not having good athletes available when we were able or willing to commit the pick.

            If this draft falls out kind of like we expect, and we yet again allow other good OL/OT prospects get selected because we covet something else — then I’d definitely concede that point.

            Pete basically has put it out there, just like 2011, that we need to address the OL. This draft should have those athletes available that weren’t in the offing in 2011.

            • purpleneer says:

              “If anything, I think the consistent lesson to be learned here is to stop drafting OL because you have to”
              This here is probably the biggest reason teams blow a draft and bad teams do it over and over. Particularly at QB, if you’re picking a guy because you feel you have to, that’s a pretty good indicator of a probable bad pick.
              The Hawks kinda hurt themselves by having that feeling, then also putting it off a round with their Paul Richardson tunnel vision. It’s also why Whitehurst, Jackson and Flynn were brought in; to avoid that feeling and likely mistake at QB in the draft.

            • troy says:

              No but we could have had Muhammad Wilkerson instead of reaching for Carpenter. Or instead of drafting Moffit and Carpenter packaged the 25th and 75th pick to move up and grab C Mike Pouncey. There were much better options, even if desperate they could have gained more value for those picks than the capital in which the received from those two.

              • Rob Staton says:

                And, in fairness, every other team in the league could’ve drafted Richard Sherman and Kam Chancellor before the 5th round and Russell Wilson before the third.

                They could’ve also properly diagnosed Michael Bennett’s value on the open market.

                Etc etc

          • Robert says:

            Seems weird to me how Cable raves about the superior athleticism of his low Draft capital DT conversion projects. But when they do invest high to mid-round Draft capital, they take the clunky athlete with grit. I’m hoping they break that suspect trend and invest high AND mid-round Draft capital on experienced Olinemen with good athleticism. Russ is so nimble that he can still make a play if a rusher gets through. But we need Gs that can win most of the time and SLOW the rushers down the rest of the time. The frequency of unimpeded rushers up the middle was inexcusable. Britt, the former wrestler with grit often blocking nothing but air is ridiculous! Please, Pete…veto this trend and select prospects with the quick feet to stay in front of rushers. Guru Cable said he can even teach a garbage man to run block.

            • Steele says:

              Hah. Unfortunately, Pete doesn’t veto his assistants and coordinators. He loves them and everything they do, at all times.

            • Attyla the Hawk says:

              “Seems weird to me how Cable raves about the superior athleticism of his low Draft capital DT conversion projects. But when they do invest high to mid-round Draft capital, they take the clunky athlete with grit.”

              The inference here, is that they passed on available superior athletes and opted for inferior ones with grit. I’d definitely encourage users that believe that we did that to provide the prospects we should have taken that were available when we made these clunky grit picks. That would definitely force me to reexamine my take on it.

              I contend this didn’t happen. That the ones they did pick were because there weren’t better athletic options. The guys I saw available at the time we made our picks didn’t strike me as better options.

              Rather, I think we picked from an already depleted pool OR a very empty pool to start with.

              • Robert says:

                I’m not gonna bite on that hook and go research previous Draft boards. But the pass protection of Britt and Sweezy was abysmal. And it’s hard to imagine there wasn’t a path that would have led to better pass protection for Russ to work his magic. I typically look at the past to guide my current decisions to create a better future. So my hope is that the FA is reassessing their objectives in Oline play because Russ has emerged as an elite quick release pocket passer when given ~2 seconds. And the Beast has retired. So hopefully better pass protection up the middle is a higher priority and the criteria of desirable prospects is evolving.

                • Attyla the Hawk says:

                  Yeah I’ve made mention of that a few times. Team is evolving in focus — doesn’t it make sense to retool the OL to match the new reality of this team?

                  Not to mention, is it more difficult to turn good pass protectors into adequate run blockers v. good run blockers into adequate pass protectors.

          • bobbyk says:

            Very true. I wonder if they are learning their lesson though? They can’t keep making the same mistakes over and over with respect to the OL, can they?

  8. Volume12 says:

    I’m also beginning to think that with such a deep DT class, Seattle will capitalize on that.

    Let everyone go draft, and think their getting interior pass rushers, while we sit back and pounce on the next Jordan Hill, Jaye Howard, Tyrone Crawford, Malik Jackson, etc. in the 3rd (maybe even 4th) round.

    I’ve been so back and forth on this, but after reading this particular piece, draft trends and draft model, I’m pretty set on this route as far as getting the best value and best fit for a rotational DT.

    • Nick says:

      Vol12, this is my thinking as well. Unless Rankins (or someone with top 15 talent like that) drops into #26, then I think we go with Oline. The need is too great and as Rob pointed out, after the top 5 Tackles get off the board, it gets dicey.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      I’m generally of this thinking also.

      I personally have Hargrave as the very top interior pass rusher. His arm length will be a bit substandard for us. However on tape and in the Shrine/Senior Bowls it seemed to be a complete non factor, as he was able to routinely rip/swim through interior gaps.

      To me he has that ‘it’ factor that can translate well as an interior kind of guy. Interested to see how he performs at the combine. His stock pre combine is kind of scattered. From a 50-100 kind of pattern.

      • Volume12 says:

        But yet, Ohio St’s DT Aolphus Washington would fit perfectly in Seattle’s scheme.

        I’d take this guy in a heartbeat in the 2nd round.

        • C-Dog says:

          I would be perfectly fine with this approach, when everything is said and done, it probably will be their approach. Adding Hargrave, or Washington makes a ton of sense. That said, I’m on a major Austin Jackson kick right now, and I’m not sure I can see straight.

          Now, thanks to Rob and V12, I only see 6-4, 320 lbs of #99 swimming through the line, blowing up Todd Gurley for a 3 yard loss, and then in the next play nearly taking the head off of (insert Rams QB here) when he tries to avoid Bennett by side stepping in the pocket for a short dump off.

          But yeah, history shows Hawks will pull the deal on an athletically limited OL if he’s an absolute need, and I think that’s likely the case this year.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Washington was superb in some of the Senior Bowl drills. Probably #2 behind Sheldon Rankins for quick twitch pass rush.

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            In the game itself, he seemed to again disappear. Washington is kind of an enigma. Great on the hoof. Checks the physical requirements.

            But his production was just terrible. It pales seriously even compared to Billings who is a NT/1T. Billings being a 19 year old force of nature facing double teams constantly outproduced Washington pretty handily. For a pass rush guy it’s positively awful.

            Consider that Hargrave (admittedly against inferior competition) essentially produced in one game Washington’s entire 2015 production from a TFL/Sack standpoint.

            You look at Washington and you see a guy who looks like he should dominate. Yet you see the games and production and you see a guy who is almost a complete non factor. So very much unlike Frank Clark’s tape which showed a wildly disruptive player even on plays that produced no stat value. And even though we don’t consider Clark’s production to be necessarily on par with our standard 1st picks — consider their final two seasons (where Clark was at DL)

            Clark: 22 games, 25.5 TFL, 9 sacks
            Washington: 25 games, 17.5 TFL, 8.5 sacks.

            Production wise, Washington is even a step down from Clark. On tape they aren’t in the same galaxy. Clark being a guy we picked up at the end of R2. I could see us considering Washington at the end of R2. But I think the tape and the production certainly indicate he’s be a lesser pick by a pretty good margin.

            Honestly if feels very much like Washington and Chris Jones are 1 and 1a exhibits of guys that look fantastic, but produce very very little. Clark in his final year almost produced Chris Jones’ entire college career. If production means anything at all to Seattle, then Washington/Jones are R3 candidates only.

            I think the bottom line we see here with all of these options we will have — is that there isn’t a guy that ticks all the boxes. There are a LOT of guys who tick most of the boxes. This might be a draft where we see which boxes carry more weight for us in the early rounds.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Production certainly matters — but I would also argue that Washington’s ability to force splash plays won’t show on the stat sheet. And he stood out in several games for Ohio State last season.

              And the player Seattle needs is that 30-35% of the snaps type who can come in and have a Clinton McDonald style impact. Washington for me is that type.

              • C-Dog says:

                Yeah, that’s what I saw in Washington. A disruptor.

                Speaking on which, I’ve been checking out Darius Latham more online, a player way off my radar. There’s an, in-depth, well broken down report that came out recently that really raised my eyebrows.

                Quick Twitch is mentioned, a few times, which is interesting for a long big man. Seems like pass rush was a big focus area of improvement he showed through last season. High football IQ. Violent hands, athletic ability to spin and stunt.

                http://nfldraftreport.sportsblog.com/posts/10753843/indiana-s-latham-ready-to-tackle-nfl-dream.html

                Seems like a very Seahawks-y DL to me.

                • Volume12 says:

                  He absolutely is. One to monito for sure.

                  Rob touched on why I’m such a fan of Washington.

                  Billings for me enfs up on the ground too much for a guy of his build and reported strength. Plus, when was the last time a 19 year old D-lineman came in and was a difference maker?

                • Rob Staton says:

                  To me Latham looks like a player with incredible potential but he’s just scratching the surface at the moment. If a team can develop him he could be outstanding.

            • Volume12 says:

              DT Jordan Hill was extremely productive and was a 3rd round pick. IDK where all this ‘they take raw athletes in the 3rd’ is coming from.

              Those Clark and Washington numbers look comparable to my eye. They play 2 different positions, Washington has 30 pounds on him, he wasn’t asked or schemed to be purely a pass rusher, and Washington is gonna be SPARQ’d up IMO.

              • purpleneer says:

                Clark: 22 games, 25.5 TFL, 9 sacks
                Washington: 25 games, 17.5 TFL, 8.5 sacks.

                I gotta disagree on those looking comparable (in a vacuum). It’s 8 more TFLs for Clark in 3 fewer games.
                That’s pretty much semantics though, I’m a guy that knows numbers can be deceiving either way. Washington playing on the interior more should make numbers more difficult to achieve. I think too many equate production and performance, when they often differ.
                If it was easier, I would use film for at least 80-90% of my opinion on guys, but I’m way behind on that.

                • purpleneer says:

                  Following up here. I just watched Adolphus’s film against MSU and was not impressed. He made a couple plays beating a weak guard 1-on-1, but for the most part his technique, pad level, hand use and awareness were all poor. Joey Bosa also looked overhyped to me, as he got handled with single blocks far more than some would lead you to believe and he was pretty undisciplined. Still a solid top 5 or so guy, but now I’m comfortable saying that Tunsil is the only player I like as a potential #1. Of course, after Tunsil this draft is lacking on guys who normally be top-5, so I think the first half of round 1 could be more in flux than we’ve seen lately.
                  Also watched again for a look at Conklin and Allen. I’d be decently comfortable with Conklin and Allen was okay, but didn’t excite me.

    • matt says:

      Regardless of what happens to Mebane and Rubin I think we’ll take a DT by the end of round 4. Hill is on the last year of his rookie deal, while Bane and Rube aren’t getting any younger. Restock the position before our cupboard runs bare. There’s just too much talent to be had not to partake in.

  9. Greg haugsven says:

    Was this post up for a few minutes yesterday? I think I read it. All interesting questions. It’s always a mystery when your drafting late in the round.

  10. UkHawkDavid says:

    Lots of familiar names (I think I recognise all of them thanks to SDB!) signed to Reserves/Futures contracts – I found this interesting and hope you do too. Just thought this might be of interest to keep an eye on over the next few months:
    OT Rob Crisp, DB Durell Eskridge, TE Harold Spears, C Reese Dismukes, OG David Yankey, LB Jeff Luc, OT Justin Renfrow, OT Tyrus Thompson, DT Christian Ringo, OT Laurence Gibson, DT Jimmy Staten, LB Zack Hodges, DE Julius Warmsley, OT Keavon Milton, OT Sean Hickey, C B.J. Finney, DT Derrick Lott, OG Josue Matias, LB Lynden Trail.

  11. Nathan says:

    Anyone know Aaron Donalds 20 yard split, what’s on Wikipedia seems like a typo:

    See below:

    JJ Watt 1.64 2.71 4.84
    Donald 1.59 3.21 4.68

    Surely that’s not possible.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I believe that is correct on Donald.

      He was a stunning athlete. Should’ve gone higher than he did. Ditto Odel Beckham Jr. Not revisionist history — it was obvious how good both were pre-draft.

      And the Detroit Lions passed on both for Eric Ebron…

      • Nathan says:

        How did Watt catch him by 20, only to lose to him again, they don’t seem to match up.

        The 3.21 20 split would indicate a loss of form, or a stumble after 10, how would he possibly right with the next 20?

        I putting them all in excel in and ranking to see who stands out and why.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        There is a reason they are the Lions……

        I was sold on A. Donald when I heard a predraft quote by Schneider talking about A. Donald being one the best prospects he has seen in a very long time. He said Seattle would draft him if they could…. sadly, the Rams drafted him.

  12. bobbyk says:

    Rob,

    Are you cooling just a bit on Shon Coleman or do you think he has the potential to come in and start at LT from day one? Or are you liking the upside Clark provides more? Or a bit of both?

    • Kyle says:

      I am not Rob by any means, but I believe he still like Coleman over Clark… Anyone with a brain should. But I am on the belief that Clark will be there round 3, and I would be all for grabbing him with one of our 3rd round picks. He just has to much upside to not take a flier on eventually, and that’s the 3rd round for me. I don’t think we need to look at rbs this year. we can sign an udfa or a vet to a min contract for a year if we have to. Next year is when I hope they pull the trigger on a RB, but even then I would love a pass rusher from next years group. 17 looks like the year of years so far.

      • Volume12 says:

        I disagree about RBs this year. Do they need to take one early? No. Could they? Sure.

        They’ve proven how much they want 3 good backs.

        They could take one this year and next. With the RB and DEs being so deep in talent next year, you can find instant impact guys at both positions into the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

        L’ville’s DE/OLB Trevon Young is very, very ‘Seahawky.’ Watch out for him and Oregon’s RB ‘Rolls’ Royce Freeman next year.

        • Nathan says:

          I think a running back before the 4th for us would be a luxury pick, and not really one we can afford at the moment.

          All the mock drafts seem to have the run on RB’s starting the 3rd, receivers too.

          • matt says:

            RB is kind of a wild card position for us going into the draft. Could take a RB as early as round 3, or waiting for the UDFA’s and/or cheap FA’s. Personally I don’t want to see us use high capital on RB this year, with the 2017 RB class looking monumental. On the other hand if we got a Booker or Perkins in round 3 I’d be excited about it. See I’m torn. haha

            • HI Hawk says:

              I think going after a UDFA this year makes the most sense. They could likely recruit the best UDFA RB by simply pointing to Rawls’ success and to the fact that Beast Mode retired.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Not cooling at all on Coleman. I think he’s the best tackle I watched in college football in 2015.

      I hate Clark’s tape and he was equally awful at the Senior Bowl. I bring him up because, ultimately, my opinion counts for nought. And Clark is the type of player I can see them considering. Massive upside. Ideal size and length. Great foot-speed. They have shown a willingness to coach guys up on the OL. As much as I dislike his tape I have to acknowledge his upside and Seattle’s comfort with developing unique athletes.

  13. bobbyk says:

    The thought of Tom Cable having input on the #26 pick scares the heck out of me.

    At this point, I’m thinking that we’re either going to take Fackrell (b/c he seems to have to best pass rush potential that Carroll alluded to wanting to get perhaps in the draft) or going OL all the way.

    With Cable picking, I’m scared that we will take an OL but it won’t be the best one available.

    If we do go OT in the first round, I could still see us going OL in round two, as we’ll still need interior help on the line no matter what.

    I see the draft going most like one of these three scenarios:

    1. DE
    2. OL

    or

    1. OL
    2. OLB

    or

    1. OL
    2. OL

    I think we’ll get on the DT train with one of those third round picks in any of these scenarios. Too much uncertainty there even if we resign Rubin and Mebane with their ages and Jordan Hill heading into free agency next off-season.

    • Ground_Hawks says:

      I have doubts about TC’s abilities as a talent evaluator also, but from what I have read he has not had higher than round three to work with (Britt was a reach). It could be that he has not been given the most promising of draft value to really make an impact.

      Your positional mocks are how I see it going also, but if they have a DT they like at 57 (right?) then I could see them taking him.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think they’re going to emphasise the trenches which possibly means OL/DL or DL/OL. Maybe even OL/OL.

      But with the depth on the DL overall, the depth on the interior OL in the middle rounds and the sheer quality of WR/RB in 2-4, could see other positions muscling their way in.

    • Steele says:

      If Fackrell is the best edge pass rusher in rd. 1, then it’s not a great rd. 1. I don’t love or hate what I see on his film. I don’t think he’s a rd. 1. Nor do I think he is the kind of player who would provide the pass rush that will be lost with Irvin.

      A disappointing draft for edge rushers. They’d be better off going for speed “not really pass rusher” guys like Darron Lee or Striker, and changing the scheme to more blitzing.

      At this rate, there are better options in free agency. If they are willing to spend. They’d have to pull off what NE did with Sheard.

      • bobbyk says:

        Losing out on Sheard made me sick last year.

        If we get Fackrell and he becomes a good edge rusher, like I think he can under Carroll, then I don’t personally really care if it’s a bad edge rusher draft for everyone else (minus the team early that takes Spence). If that makes sense.

        • Greg haugsven says:

          Who we be the DE in scenario 1 bobbyk? Spence is probably gone daddy gone

        • Steele says:

          I just don’t see anything special from Fackrell. He flashes occasionally but disappears as well. A lot of the edge guys this time have a similar “just okay”/JAG look. I’m not even that excited about Bosa or Myles Jack.

  14. Sam Jaffe says:

    The one scenario that’s not discussed above is trading up. The Seahawks have never done it in the first round before, and I agree that it’s unlikely, but not impossible. If someone like Rankins or Decker or Spence got to ~22 and a trade partner was willing to ask for a light compensation (fifth rounder or so–which has happened in the past–see Mike Holmgren’s first draft and a trade down with the Cowboys for a fifth rounder), it might be tempting. Just because Schneider/Carroll haven’t done it in six years doesn’t mean they never will.

    • Nathan says:

      We don’t have a 5th rounder to trade at the moment.

      I’m not sure this is the draft to be trading up in.

      • Rob Staton says:

        The Seahawks will get a 5th round comp pick (it can’t be traded though).

        • 12thManderson says:

          That comp 5th rounder is the very reason I see a trade out. We’ll gain that 5th back at higher value and the same talent should be available.

          • Miles says:

            John Schneider has said before that trading up (I think 6 picks) in the first round requires about a 3rd round pick. I could still see the Seahawks making that move if they saw Sheldon Rankins sitting there. I don’t see a team trading back in the 1st for a mid-to-late rounder. We also can’t trade a fifth because we don’t have one to trade. We have a 4th, but it won’t be enough unless a team really doesn’t like their options.

    • bobbyk says:

      They proved with Lockett last year that they’ll trade a bunch of picks to move up if the guy they wanted is there. Although they aren’t likely to move up, they definitely could.

      One difference between them moving up this year vs. last year where they traded 4 total picks for 1 pick (Lockett) was that there wasn’t as many holes on the team. There was a lot of talk here about all their picks and no way some would make the team no matter what.

      This year is different in terms of them having more needs like a few OL, potentially a few DL, an OLB, their customary 5th round CB, and you can even put a RB somewhere in the 3rd-4th round range and possibly a WR, too (if Kearse leaves).

      Literally, they could use all of their day two picks on OL/DL, which is fine… but then RB, WR, OLB, etc. need to get addressed, too. This tells me they can’t afford to trade too far up in the first round if they want to want to enhance both lines of scrimmage properly because then there won’t be room for quality picks at any of the other positions.

      One thing I wouldn’t discount either is a TE later in the draft because Graham could come back and not be the way he was (which would mean they won’t pay him what he’s scheduled to make in 2017) and with Willson also set for FA after next season, there could be nobody ready for TE in ’17 (they always like to look ahead, too).

  15. Miller says:

    Rob
    I must say this is my favorite web site. Multiple times a day I check back to see what’s new, including comments from your loyal followers. I appreciate that we Seahawk fans can come to a legitimate, informative and professional site to read and comment without having to skip over the juvenile locker room language. Keep up the great work!

    One of many long time loyal followers

  16. Therick05 says:

    To Rob and everyone- what is your opinion on Kenny Clark?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Good, solid run stopper. Very strong. Not much of a pass rusher.

    • Volume12 says:

      Good production, a bit hit and miss, I think he’ll surprise people with his athleticism, more of a nose or 1-tech. Has the potential to develop some pass rushing at the next level.

      • 12thManderson says:

        I will definitely be in the minority on Clark. My opinions are only predicated on the Seahawks, not other teams and their fits. He has athleticism, I’ll give him that.
        -His Stance looks like a Lady squatting in the woods. He sits so low that if he wasn’t so athletic, he would get blown into the next CBA.
        -His decision making vs the run looks more like a guessing game than good vision.
        -Finally with all of his athleticism, I guess I just expect more out of his pass rush. I think he’s a solid run stuffer Because of his stance. Starting out that low gives his opposition time to release out of their stance, usually stalemating with him at the line. He’s definitely strong enough to hold that position, but by that time the back already has his handle, then it’s decision and reaction time.

        • RealRhino2 says:

          Agree. I was just going to ask for opinions about his stance. It seems it would prevent him from ever being anything but a plugger in the middle. How are you going to fire off the ball from a low squat?

  17. Steele says:

    Pete says he wants a better o-line next season, but like every other statement out of JSPC, there are no specifics. How do we know Cable simply won’t develop the existing guys—and not much else? Major acquisitions would be tantamount to declaring his great conversion experiment a failure after one year.

    • Volume12 says:

      What if his existing guys are depth?

      Everyone thinks Seattle should just hand a guy like Mark Glowinski the starting RG job. When the best way to upgrade this O-line is through depth and compeition.

      If Soko and Glow end up as backups, so be it. It just upgrades Seattle line and depth.

      • Steele says:

        That makes sense, V12.

        • Miles says:

          What if they think Sokoli can be a starter this year? I have to say that when I watched him in preseason last year, I didn’t see much wrong with his play. Someone correct me if I’m wrong.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      My take:

      When Pete specifies a position where something needs improving — he does it.

      I would fully expect the following:

      1. Continue to develop the depth we have.
      2. Let UFAs walk. Unger and Giacomini were the only guys we resigned. And Breno’s contract was very modest.
      3. Add quality talent that despite the learning curve can be ready to start day 1.

      I think Seattle needs to goose their development treadmill. Normally the year two and three development players are the guys we rely on to start. For us, that’s the 2013 and 2014 classes.

      Those returns as follows

      2013:

      Ryan Seymour
      Jared Smith
      Michael Bowie
      Alvin Bailey

      2014:

      Justin Britt
      Garrett Scott
      Garry Gilliam
      Drew Nowak
      Patrick Lewis

      Basically we have a hole in our dev treadmill. We still have Bailey/Britt/Gilliam. But Gilliam is the only guy that looks like he’s going to stick.

      2015 looks like it has the best development guys in Glowinski and Sokoli. Poole looks a total non factor. We have a lot of misses in that 13/14 period. Which from a development standpoint means today we have a need. If just one more of those prospects pans out — we’re sitting pretty. In 2015 we added several pieces and they’ve not turned into starter quality yet.

      Right now, we need to add some guys in the mix who can play at Britt/Gilliam 2015 levels on day 1. That’ll give us four avenues to improve the OL:

      1. Britt/Gilliam continue to get better
      2. Glow/Sokoli improve to the equal of Britt
      3. Add some journeyman OL veteran help as a bridge.
      4. New draftees emerge from TC already as good as Britt.

      I’m using Britt as a measuring stick because frankly we don’t know how UFA will shake out. If Sweezy leaves — Glow is that guy and we don’t know if he’s ready for the gig full time. If Okung leaves, we don’t know if Gilliam can shift or is even ready to do so. But at minimum we have an actual hole at OT in our 3 deep. And if we don’t get a day 1 guy, that means Bailey is a starter. Which gives me the heebie jeebies.

      Seattle needs to add that fourth option. Because options 1 and 2 are just complete unknowns.

      Right now this discussion is incredibly tentative. Where the OL rates draft wise is going to depend entirely on who we resign, or which OL vets we bring in.

      It’s a numbers thing. We need 7 OL in the rotation. With 2 or 3 development guys.

      We have:

      Gilliam
      Britt
      Lewis
      Bailey (control anyway)

      That’s it in terms of guys that have known starter quality. Obviously we are three short here.

      Dev guys:

      Sokoli
      Glowinski

      Glowinski was clearly drafted last year to succeed Sweezy. We identified that exact scenario well before last year’s draft and nailed his pick to us. Leaving Glow here since his starter quality is unknown.

      So as it stands now, we need 3 guys for the active roster and two of those guys at starter grade. Resigning guys reduces that.

      OT hole:

      It’s obvious we need a starter grade OT, by UFA/resigning or draft. Just looking at the numbers tells us so. We’ll know before the end of march if it’s draft.

      LG improvement:

      Britt, if he’s relegated to the #6/7 position has value. He’s played both OG/OT. For a backup, I’m comfortable with him as a swing dude. Need to add an OG to compete with Sokoli if he’s not ready. That OG needs to be able to do the job day 1.

      OC improvement:

      Lewis is a standby. Good/not great. Has value. Knows the system. Not a total liability. He goes down and it’s Nowak. Not good. Adding an OC in the draft has value and merit based on the state of the existing roster. Add to that the fact this draft is unusually strong at OC, the needs and opportunities intersect nicely.

  18. Naks8 says:

    First round also seems to be players that are either instant starters or plays heavily in the rotation. Laraven seems like a bit of a stretch because he doesn’t seem game ready this year.

  19. Volume12 says:

    LSU CB Rashard Robinson is probably gonna be this year’s Frank Clark.

    Would Seattle take this guy before round 4?

    • Trevor says:

      Talent wise for sure Vol. He is 6-2 long arms and fast. Said to run 4.3s-4.4s

      If he checks out in interviews he will be a Day#2 pick I think. If not for the off field stuff a likely 1st rounder.

    • matt says:

      I don’t think Seattle would take on such a project like Robinson before round 4. Same goes for Clark. When day 3 hits bring on the raw high upside players, who are at least a year away from contributing.

  20. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    Rob, I think you have already answered the question of who they will pick, if he is available… if they happen to go defense in the first round. Kyle Fackrell. HE can play the run and is above average in pass coverage. He would slip right into a “void” in the LB group at OLB.

    I do not put much stock in PFF, too subjective…. however, “At +34.4 he is our highest graded 3-4 OLB, with the highest grade as a pass rusher, against the run, and sixth-highest in coverage just for good measure.” might show what makes him an extremely special player and of great interest to Seattle in the bottom of the first round.

    Perhaps, they go Fackrell in the first then center in the second/guard in the third. Better value overall and would be a smaller reach, than if you flip flopped it and took a center in the first, that could still be found in the middle of the second or lower.

    I would think, if any team thinks it can “reclaim” a tackle with the tools, but not the technique…. it would be Seattle. So, I guess if Seattle went Le’Raven Clark in the second, no-one would be shocked. That would be good value, if he panned out and played/started 6+ years at LT/RT in the NFL. I personally would rather have a top center or guard with the pick…..

    • bobbyk says:

      I’ve been thinking about that with Fackrell as well, although I doubt they see him replacing the current Bruce Irvin role as much as Fackrell taking on the role they originally drafted Irvin for.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        Irvin was drafted as a DE, but became a LB…. this guy would be a LB from the get-go… and would be an upgrade in the LB group. Unique size and speed…. that is a Seahawk pick waiting to happen.

        • bobbyk says:

          I disagree. I think he’d do what Irvin was originally drafted to do (replace Clem more than playing SAM). We saw Clem drop into coverage every once in a blue moon. As I’ve watched Fackrell many times in the limited tape we have of him, he doesn’t look like he’d make a great SAM in terms of dropping back into coverage consistently, but moving forward most of the time I think he could be tremendous as an attacking edge rusher much of the time. I could be wrong and you could be right, I just don’t think so at this time. One thing I wouldn’t like about him at SAM is his awareness in a zone. That scares me a little. I think he could maybe be okay at it, but think there are other guys who could/would do it much better (who wouldn’t cost as high of a pick either). Good topic of debate though. Thanks.

    • rowdy says:

      I disagree about fackrell as a olb, his coverage skills look bad to me and his decisions making dropping back look worse. I see him only replacing Avril ad a pure edge rusher. From the tape I seen he’s caught flat footed in coverage and he’ll be abused in the nfl if he’s caught doing that.

      • Steele says:

        I don’t see anything special about Fackrell. Not good in coverage, okay but not great setting edge, an occasional flash on pass rush, but no special explosiveness, speed or moves, gets stood up a lot.

        With a lot of work, he could develop into a watered down Rob Ninkovich. That is a rotational type, not a star, and not worth a rd. 1 or 2 pick.

        It’s so frustrating looking at this crop of edge rushers. All I can do is hope they go against their usual pattern, and make a free agent or trade splash for an established veteran comparable or better than Irvin. Or just pay Irvin.

        • Steele says:

          I forgot that Aldon Smith is suspended through November 2016. So he would be a non-factor for a whole season for any team that bothers with him.

    • Rob Staton says:

      The issue with Fackrell is he has to be athletic. If he doesn’t run in the 1.5’s for his split or test well at the combine — he’s unlikely to be their pick.

      • 12thManderson says:

        I still hold high hope for KPL & Pinkins, YEAH I SAID PINKINS!! Warrior, to Corner, to Safety, finally to SAM in last season’s camp and preseason. While i wasnt impressed in preseason. Maybe with a Full offseason, his growth for the position could show up. He needed get bigger, study more scheme and fits for the position, and God if he could work at blitzing (not necessarily off the edge, but with delays or stunts). He could fill Bruce’s roll to an extent, and do it with better coverage, but with similar speed… Optimistic

    • Ignorant says:

      Given Bennett and Avril’s age, the Seahawks are past the point of drafting for value but also for continuity. We can’t just be hopeless if Avril gets injuried or stop performing as our main speed rusher. Cassius Marsh with his stellar ST play is demanding his way through the rotation, but, he definitely won’t be enough to take on the role if Avril goes down for whatever reason. Similar draft decision to what the Broncos did last season w/ Shane Ray.

      We haven’t had anyone to supplant Clemons in this defense for a while (both as the extra speed rusher and a LEO prototype), and this guy is the closest thing. Assuming he measures 6’4″-6’5″, 250-255 lbs, 4.60-4.65, and 1.55-1.59 10y split, I would want this guy at #26, unless one of those monster DTs or a top5 OT falls to #26.

  21. I really love your articles and mocks Rob, keep it up (please don’t stop lol).

    I am curious what your hit/miss rate with past Seahawk drafts is though. It would probably be worth an article at some point that summarizes your success rate, not because I want to hold against you being wrong, but I think this should be done for everyone involved in pre-draft speculation/mocks/etc, especially with the national guys. It’s all well and good to write this: http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/richard-sherman?id=2495507 but the author should be listed, because DAMN he/she is wrong (or them). So much speculation on so many things going on with the NFL and very very very little accountability and upfront discussion on their accuracy record.

    I’d love to see the last mock drafts you made right before the NFL Draft (when the real picks got made by John Schneider). Would be interesting to see if you have been right, when you are wrong how off you are, etc. Though I am totally aware that there are SOOOO many variables going on even a day before the Draft that it is really hard to pick correctly in a mock draft.

    ————————————–

    Besides all that, I am intrigued by your comments on Le’Raven Clark. It is always enticing to go for the physical monster who has an All-Pro talent ceiling but damn it is scary to think about busting on OT when you could have potentially gotten someone like Coleman who isn’t as physically perfect but would have been good, who knows maybe a Pro-Bowler. Even if he developed into a really good OT it is also scary to think about him really struggling his first year and Russ paying the price for that.

    We are in our golden age SB window right now, and that needs to be taken into account in all things. Pete, John, Russ, our core group we’ve got signed for the next few years…this is potentially the multiple SB era, and we gotta capitalize. For that reason I feel like if Coleman is there and JS is wanting a OT we should go with the safer pick.

    • Tien says:

      I agree with you about Clark. He’s worth a risk in the later rounds but if the Seahawks pick him in R1, I’d be really bummed. Even if he develops into an All-Pro in 3 or 4 years, who are we going to play at T and use as upgrades at the G positions to improve our OL? We’re legit contenders for the SB in the next two or three years so we need to draft players who can help us now/soon rather than the future. For me, unless a Top 15 defensive talent falls to us, if Coleman is there, we snap him up and if not, let’s hope for Martin or Kelley, if Rob gives us the thumbs up after his analysis.

    • Trevor says:

      Clark would the the perfect pick fo our 3rd Rd Comp Selection as we will likely get a 3rd round comp again in 2017 for Okung.

      I think he will go a lot earlier than most people predict though likely in the 2nd. Can you imagine a team like Washington getting him and Bill Callahan coaching him up. Could be scary with that physical talent. I think that is where he goes to the Redskins in the 2nd.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        Seattle might get a 3rd round pick for Irvin, but Okung is going to get a 1 year deal for 4M.. due to his injury and recovery time… keeping him out of FA until approximately June. He is also self representing, which could be problematic as well, for his FA stock and landing a big money deal.

        • matt says:

          It’s too early to tell how much Okung is going to command on the open market. A 1 year $4 mil deal has to be the absolute floor that he could get. Before the injury we were all saying $8-10 mil per year, and lets face it that’s what a healthy Okung is worth on the open market. If teams believe that Okung will be a full go by July, and there’s no reason at this time to think he won’t, then he could get the big deal he’s looking for.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I have had some hits and some misses. I don’t want to do an article because it makes it really about me — but my biggest miss was Von Miller (who I was lukewarm about). Had some nice hits too. A lot of the players I liked over the years were drafted by Pittsburgh and Baltimore weirdly.

      • Sorry I specifically mean’t the Seahawks, but I get what you are saying about the article being about you. But I am a fan of writers keeping their readers informed on their hit/miss record every once in a while.

        • Rob Staton says:

          On the Seahawks I mocked Eric Berry and Charlie Brown in 2010. Thought they would go left tackle and safety but got the wrong guys. In fairness had Berry been off the board in my 2010 mock I might’ve got both picks right. Alas…

          In 2011 I projected Colin Kaepernick at #25. Obviously incorrect. That said — James Carpenter was a blog favourite and I had mocked him to Seattle in round two pre-draft. Carpenter’s run blocking at Alabama for Mark Ingram was, in fairness, sensational.

          2012 — was a big fan of Courtney Upshaw. Again, got it wrong. I would justify somewhat by saying I didn’t have enough info on what they liked to do in the early rounds. Their desire for extreme athleticism wasn’t abundantly clear pre-2012 after taking Okung, Carpenter and Moffitt early in the previous two drafts. That said, the first piece I wrote about after the 2011 draft was about Bruce Irvin being the ideal LEO for 2012 and I had Bobby Wagner graded in round one.

          2013 — said Christine Michael or Jesse Williams in round two. They drafted both eventually. Happy.

          2014 — never imagined they would take Paul Richardson because we focused way too much on big receivers instead. I mocked them next to Joel Bitonio. Sad face.

          2015 — Mocked them with Mitch Morse. Think he could’ve easily been their pick but for the Chiefs taking him.

  22. Coleslaw says:

    They might consider a receiver over a defender at #26, seems like some really good talent could be there

    • I highly doubt this. We have SUCH stronger needs elsewhere, and if we are that needy at WR they could most likely just re-sign Kearse and feel good about Doug-Tyler-Kearse-Paul-Kevin-Kasen-PSquad.

      Pete and John both specifically called out the line of scrimmage (both sides) and the desire (through FA and the draft) and that our focus will be getting better there, getting back to being the big bully on O-line and D-line.

      So taking a WR with our 1st? I just don’t see it. I also don’t want it. I don’t care if that WR is a guaranteed next Dez/Julio/A.Brown, I would rather our O-line get upgraded and Russ have consistently good pass pro no matter the opposing pass rush and our O-line run block very well for our RB’s.

      If I had to choose between a few Kearse type players and Tyler with a good O-line (pass pro & run blocking) or the O-line we have + Julio and Dez and Tyler and Doug I’d choose the O-line. I feel like Russ has proven with pass pro he can destroy defenses even when throwing to guys like Kearse. I’d rather Russ be standing in the pocket waiting for a WR to get open than be scrambling for his life then try to take a shot to his elite WR’s.

      • Coleslaw says:

        Lol if you pass on them you fail..

        • Coleslaw says:

          Rob, what do you think about Fuller or Coleman or maybe Braxton at 26?

          • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

            Coleman is rising, he will not be around at 26. I read somewhere that Fuller is being compared to a poor mans DeSean Jackson. If a team actually thinks this, he will be gone before 26 as well.

            The good news, that means some other quality players will be available. :)

            • Coleslaw says:

              Oh yeah, i had sort of an epiphany and realized that we are moat likely going to get a stud no matter if it’s an O lineman or a linebacker, D lineman, receiver or safety, hell maybe we draft Zeke Elliot if he’s there haha, im and pumped!

          • Rob Staton says:

            I like all three but can’t see it happening. Too many needs elsewhere.

        • Having elite WR’s doesn’t mean jack if QB2 is throwing to them, why him? Cause QB1 (Russell) got hurt due to the awful pass protection he was getting forcing him to scramble and run and be off-time with the receivers routes being run.

          I will take a good O-line with good WR’s over a bad O-line with elite WR’s any day of the week for as long as we have Russell Wilson. And hell that is only if you assume Doug and Tyler aren’t elite which I believe they are.

          • Coleslaw says:

            It’s only one pick, what’s the difference in getting a defender and a receiver? You can draft o linemen later on and that seems like a real possibilty. If Russ really does have a clean pocket every play next year and we lose Kearse, we could get another Lockett and still draft heavy on the o line.

            • If the option is between D-line and WR…what do you think we need more? What do you think would make a bigger impact? You realize we are going to be trying to stop Todd Gurley, David Johnson, and Carlos Hyde for the next 4 years? You realize that we are going to be pass rushing against one of the best passers in the NFL (Palmer)?

              We don’t need a WR that badly. We are one of the best (if not the best) organizations at finding legit WR talent in UDFA. We have two elite WR’s, a elite receiving TE, a potentially really good WR (Paul), and potentially two promising talented UDFA WR’s (Kevin & Kasen).

              We have succeed without Percy, without Rice, without Golden, we have found talent like Tyler in the 3rd round, talent like Kearse and Doug in UDFA…

              Our needs are significantly strong on the LOS than some WR that will most likely not have a big impact in his first year and by the time he is potentially a big deal we are in the red hot phases of Tyler, Doug and potentially JImmy’s pass catching careers. No, no WR in the 1st round. We need to replace Irvin, we need to most likely replace Okung, we need to replace Sweezy, we need to add talent to the D-line and secondary. All WAY bigger needs than WR.

              • Coleslaw says:

                Would you rather them reach for a DT and it be a disappointment or have a receiver who could be a part of the offense when Russ takes the next step. It’s pretty well known that the receivers at the end of round 1 are going to better than the DTs.

          • Steele says:

            If they go BPA, anything is possible. Including a top receiver. And if so, it would not be the first time they take chances assuming (unwisely) they can address needs lower down.

      • Steele says:

        Kasem-Kevin-PRich is not impressive. All expendable. Kearse is, well, Kearse. Doug and Lockett are similar. There isn’t a number one type in this mix, no deep threats, no tall WRs. They are lacking in diversity.

        Sure, this is the Seahawks, and they may not need it. To me, it’s nothing to feel too good about.

        • Volume12 says:

          You don’t feel good about Baldwin and Lockett?

          2 late round/UDFA WRs I think Seattle will like, Udub’s Jaydon Mickens and Cal’s Bryce Treggs.

        • Ignorant says:

          2015 Baldwin/Lockett is good/great 1-2 punch. Combined for 1700 yards and 20 TDs. It’s better than 2013 Tate/Baldwin, and have still untapped potential (known as Lockett was integrated in offense midway through the season). Jermaine Kearse, Jimmy Graham, Paul Richardson and Luke Wilson are all in the jam for #3-4 type of targets. It’s safe to say every single one of them is more than capable of netting 500-600 and 5-6 TDs we need, even with the issues of Graham and Richardson coming off serious injuries. It’s not that big of a pressing need, specially putting into perspective the need of another edge rusher (with Irvin’s imminent departure), inside pass rush and most of all, interior pass protection.

          The extra punch at pass catching could be easily obtained with a 4th or 5th rounder pass catching HB or a 4th rounder and beyond WR. There’s no need of taking WR early, unless someone really special falls to #56.

          • Coleslaw says:

            Why not have another lockett/baldwin,Graham is a TE, an elite slot receiver with Jimmy Balwin and Lockett would undoubtedly be a great thing for Russel to have. Depth is good all over the board for our needs.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’d be surprised if they did that. Decent depth at WR and too many needs in the OL and DL.

      • Coleslaw says:

        Free agency hasn’t happened yet and Schneider doesn’t want to go into the draft with pressure to pick a certain need, like the Britt pick, I think they use FA to keep their draft options open.

        • Rob Staton says:

          They’ve spent a first, second and third rounder on targets for RW in the last three drafts and they’ve admitted their priority is to improve the O-line and get a pass rusher. They’ve also said their priority in FA is to keep their own. None of this indicates a spending spree to solve the issues in the trenches and then take a WR in round one in fairness.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        I have to wonder if a guy like Michael Thomas (So. Miss) isn’t a guy we target R5/R6.

        I do think we add a WR somewhere. Thomas to me seems more of a Kearse mirror. Production and tape is very good. No real juice to speak of buzz wise.

        To me, he’s kind of my Glowinski/KPL pick for this draft as it stands before the combine. If he tests very well, I think he doesn’t last end of R5. If he doesn’t, I think he could.

        Seems a lot of guys that might interest Seattle in that R5/6 range:

        Charone Peake
        Paul McRoberts
        Michael Thomas
        Cayleb Jones
        Geronimo Allison

        Also, while I asked Rob where he thought Duke Williams fit (he felt UDFA at best), I have to wonder aloud is he’s not a surprise late round flyer. Seattle hasn’t been scared off by red flags before — I think mostly because they do more diligence and also have a great understanding of which kinds of people are good people who just made mistakes. If they feel D’haquille is that kind of player then he’s an incredibly explosive talent with size. Seattle admittedly passed on big receivers in the draft because they didn’t have the mix of speed and size. Williams displayed that blend.

        There look to be a lot of day 3 guys that would interest us at WR. Not worried at all if they don’t target one in days 1 and 2.

        • purpleneer says:

          I really liked what I saw from Thomas in the bowl game

        • HI Hawk says:

          I still like Duke Williams. He’s no worse off the field than DGB was last year or Frank Clark was, or Marcus Peters. If they’re open to a guy like that (and the league in general is) why would Williams fall from a R1 prospect as a Junior to UDFA after getting booted from his team as a Senior? He punched other men at a bar, I don’t think that’s anywhere near worthy of a drop of that magnitude. I think someone will take him before R4 is over (at worst), hopefully it’s the Seahawks.

  23. kevin mullen says:

    Saw a lot of Cover2 this past year that we haven’t seen in years past, I’m wondering if there’s something more to this (KRichard putting his stamp) with the fact that there were more WLB & MLB blitzes as well.

    This is just speculation but I can see Kam shifting down to Bruce’s LB spot, us drafting a SS with better coverage skills, so we can do more Cover2 with blitz packages.

  24. TurnagainTide says:

    I really like watching Kevin Dodd – he reminds me of Michael Bennett. Having two Michael Bennets on the same D line would be really cool to see.

    I know it’s not likely he falls to the Seahawks but I doubt they would pass on Robert Nkemdiche if he were available. He might be the La’Raven Clark of the DTs in this class since the production didn’t come close to matching his physical abilities.

    • Steele says:

      What I see as the knock on Dodd is that he wasn’t lined up against the best offensive linemen of the teams they faced, and his production should be questioned because of that.

      • TurnagainTide says:

        I realize that the evaluation is harder because there more uncertainty on how Dodd will translate to the NFL but remember Frank Clark lined up on that side most of the time too and didn’t have the numbers Dodd did. Also, watching the game film it appeared to me that Dodd got double teamed more than Lawson did, yet he still found ways to make an impact.

        • HI Hawk says:

          Dodd was Bennett like in the CFB Playoffs. If all you watched were those two games, you’d think he should be the #1 overall pick in a landslide. That said, I actually haven’t watched a ton of Clemson, so I’m very interested to see what people who study the tape saw over the course of his career.

  25. KD says:

    While running Fanspeak’s draft simulator, they projected the Seahawks comp picks as 98th (3-35), 172 (5-33) and 215 (6-37) which lines up with what Danny Kelly reported from OverTheCap.

    • Trevor says:

      I just tried that simulator it is kind of fun. Not sure how accurate it is because it seems like you can have some pretty amazing drafts. A lot of the guys we talk about here for the Seahawks don’t seem to be rated as high on there. Still fun though.

      • KD says:

        Plus it does what Rob does with mocks; it mixes up every draft and presents different possibilities every time. Fanspeak allows the use of different big boards, so it’s interesting to see how different boards make the draft shake out. It’s a little bit like asking 100 people to guess the number of marbles in a bowl. No one person is right, but just as many people overestimate as underestimate, so the cumulative average is closer to the actual number which is why draft simulators are so interesting to me. You get a sense of the general range in which a typical prospect will fall and more often than not, cumulative wisdom is right.

  26. J says:

    If we are talking about elite athletes on defense that list starts with Dadi Nicolas. Don’t know why there isn’t more talk of him at 26.

    • Steele says:

      I think Dadi has potential, but also inconsistency. The combine is of course going to distort things, but I don’t see him as a first rounder. A low rd2 or lower. I prefer the Hawks taking a Dadi in the mid rounds to Fackrell in the first round.

      • Volume12 says:

        Dadi Nicolas is not a 1st round pick.

        • J says:

          Bruce Irvin is not a first round pick.

          My point being the Seahawks are well known for respecting the consensus and never doing anything unexpected.

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            Irvin had almost as much production in 2 seasons as Nicolas did in 4.

            Not the same player. By production or tape.

      • sdcoug says:

        Also reported from senior bowl he was absolutely lost all week during practices

      • J says:

        Started playing football in his senior year of high school. Even then he was a two sport player with basketball being the second. Lots of reason to respect him to be a lot better of a pro then an amateur

        • Volume12 says:

          I like Dadi Nicolas and his upside, but comparing him to Bruce Irvin is ridiculous.

          He had 2.5 sacks this year, and his tape isn’t anywhere close to Irvin’s.

          I’d take him on day 3, but nowhere near a 1st round pick.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Nicolas is strictly a late round flier IMO and personally — I’d let someone else take on that challenge.

            Tape is bad. Didn’t look good in Mobile. And there’s that dumb incident with the referee.

  27. Steve Nelsen says:

    Rob, this is a really nice analysis of past Seattle drafts. I love reading this blog and feel like I learn something with every new topic.

    I am looking forward to the combine and seeing whose performance shakes up our predictions. If there is a DE/LB in the 1.5s at 26, that guy would be at the top of the list. That seems unlikely so the next most probable scenario is a trade out to add a pick (maybe a 4th).

    How the free agents play out will also shake up the draft. Schneider prefers to go in with no glaring needs so his options are open.

    If Seattle signs Okung for 1 year, that would give them a year to work with Clark. A “potential top-5 player” at LT is not something we are going to get many shots at in the future as long as we are drafting at the back end of round 1.

  28. rowdy says:

    I’ve seen a lot of people on board with Clark in the 3rd and even with his up side I just can’t see it. To high for a player that probably will take 2 to 3 years just to see the field but then again sweezy started as a rookie so I don’t know lol

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      To me, Clark isn’t even as good a prospect as Garrett Scott was who we took in R6.

      Length aside, I don’t think that forces our hand.

      Consider in 2015, we passed on similar lengthy dudes 35+” arm length:

      TJ Clemmings
      Trenton Brown
      Lawrence Gibson
      Corey Robinson
      Daryl Williams

      Or 2014:

      Antonio Richardson
      Morgan Moses
      Lucas Cornelius
      Kadeem Edwards

      Or 2013:

      Travis Bond
      Jamaal Johnson-Webb
      Nick Becton
      Rogers Gaines

      Length is nice. But we’ve let a lot of these long guys pass off the boards — even totally out of the draft. So length to me is really not a reason we’ll forgive bad tape. The precedent is firmly against us taking Clark.

      • Volume12 says:

        Clemmins had a knee injury that scared teams off, Gibson was a VMAC visitor, Trenton Brown was too big at 6’8, 350 lbs., and for all we know, they tried to trade up and get Darryl Williams.

        2014, Richardson had injury concerns, Morgan Moses was rumored to ge lazy work ethic wise, and are any of those guys from 2013 still in the league.

        Clark has more than length.

  29. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    You guys got me thinking, maybe Seattle won’t go OL in the first round.
    Pretty much everyone thinks they will…. so what if we go…

    Round 1 (1) KYLER FACKRELL, OLB
    Round 2 (1) MILES KILLEBREW, SS/OLB
    Round 3 (2) GRAHAM GLASGOW, OG / CHRISTIAN WESTERMAN LG/C
    Round 4 (1) FAHN COOPER, OT
    Round 5 (1) JAMES BRADBERRY, CB
    Round 6 (1) DREW KASER, P
    Round 7 (2) TERRENCE SMITH, OLB/ILB / D’HAQUILLE WILLIAMS, WR

    You bring in Killebrew to play SS, swap Chancellor over to OLB and bring in Fackrell to pass rush.
    I’m not entirely sure how this would hold up vs the run, but there would be plenty of speed to cover TEs and WRs in the base defense. I confess, I think they will draft a DT, but this is for the sake of going “out of the box”.

  30. ivotuk says:

    I love Sheldon Rankins and would die happy if he fell to 26. But my next guy is Vernon Butler from LA Tech. He is an absolute beast, and I believe, very comparable to Sheldon Rankins, just a little bigger.

    Butler moves very well for a big man, has power to stack up a player, then throw him to the side for the tackle. He can jump over players to make a tackle, and chase down players like Tuba does. Well worth a first round pick.

    And if Sheldon Day is there in the 2nd, grab him! Gary Gilliam can play LT. Besides, I have a feeling that Okung is going to be forced to come back here on a 1 year, 4 million dollar prove it deal. It’s better for him to sign back here because he can look good in this offense instead of learning a new one, no income tax, and because he’s representing himself, JS would take care of him.

    And if we don’t get Unger back for a year, a good Center should be available in the 3rd round. Glasgow might fall, and there was a guy i was watching in the Senior Bowl practice that looked pretty good, Have to go back and get his name.

    I don’t want an OT in the first because passing on Rankins or Butler for an average OT would be senseless.

    And I don’t see all the hype for Taylor Decker. He’s a lumbering giant that does the same thing every play. He bodies up to the player with his chest, locks on and pushes. He completely whiffs on some players, and gets lost at the second level. I saw him fall over a couple of times while lunging for a block. ANd at other times a head fake would leave him grabbing for air. I firmly believe that Urban Meyer strictly limits Decker’s game plan to things that he is good at, which isn’t much. Please, oh please don’t draft this guy. At least Le’Raven has upside.

    LA Tech has a very good ILB, Nick Thomason. 6’1″ 243# that knifes through the line and is on the FB/RB/QB before they know what is happening. He needs to wrap up better but I would be happy to see him come on board in the 7th.

  31. Volume12 says:

    NFL Draft bites says there might be friction between Tom Cable and the orginization.

    Also says OL JR Sweezy is being tied to the NY Jets.

    FA OL Kelechi Osemele is rumored to be the Colts top priority.

    And that the Seahawks may be linked to FA C Stefan Wisniewski.

    I’m wondering if amy of this is true, or if we should read into it.

    • Volume12 says:

      Said that ‘Hawks want veteran presence on O-line,’ which I think is something we all know.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I can see them wanting a veteran presence on the OL. It’s just a case of who and how much?

      Still think Alex Mack could be a possibility. Or one of the guards. But how do they fit the money in?

      Veteran presence might just be Loadholt.

      • Trevor says:

        Would love to see us get Mack and then get Coleman and Clark in the draft. But I think that is a pipe dream given the cap space we have. I thought it was a viable option wehn I believed we had $31 mil but if we only have $18 mil then Wisnewski and Loadholt seem like a much more realistic plan.

      • Poweroflogic says:

        In terms of fitting the money in, based on some discussion in the last thread, the oft-cited figure of 18m may not be the most useful number to frame predictions about spending this offseason.

        Yes, 18m is the hard limit for 2016 cap hits of new significant contracts. But the Hawk’s spending power increases greatly in 2017 without a corresponding increase in needs, allowing them to carefully and sensibly back load contracts this offseason.

        Just going off some hypothetical numbers EranUngar used, it seems like the Seahawks could sign/resign players worth a maximum of something more like 21m-22m APY, and still do it responsibly given the 2 year horizon.

        • Rob Staton says:

          It’s still only an extra $3-4m though.

          And that’s without taking into account any pay rises you might want to dish out.

          • Poweroflogic says:

            Yes, it’s not huge but it does allow at least one more player to be added or a higher level signing than you might otherwise considered.

            The ~22m figure actually does incorporate the cost of an extension to Baldwin and a couple more predictable bumps in salaries over the next two years.

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        How are comp picks affected if Mack opts out of his contract? Will signing him cost a comp pick like if his contract expired or would it not cost a comp pick like if he was waived?

        • Rob Staton says:

          Yes — he’d be a free agent. He’d need to be cut to not count against comp picks. Not sure it’ll be a difference maker though if they really like him.

    • Beanhawk says:

      Of course the Jets are interested in Sweezy. I am pretty sure that if JR leaves the Hawks he is contractually obligated by the league to join the Jets. It’s in the bylaws somewhere there.

    • Trevor says:

      Wisnewski makes a lot of sense as it would be a reasonable deal and he can play Guard as well if needed. Would not be my first choice but definitely an upgrade. If Jacksonville goes hard after Mack again then they would not need Wisnewski back.

      What was the source of tension between Cable and the organization? Are they not letting him draft his own guys anymore? One can only hope.

      • bobbyk says:

        That was my first thought as well, Trevor. Cable has had plenty of autonomy with his OL picks and I could most definitely see friction with the organization wanting to be more involved in helping him pick players who are actually good.

    • HI Hawk says:

      All I’ve ever heard from PC and company is huge praise for Tom Cable, that seems unlikely.

      Follow the leader and you of course get NY Jets for J.R. First Breno, then Carpenter, now JR? I think its way to easy to connect the dots on the Jets rumors.

      Wisniewski was there for the taking last year and they didn’t bite, but he did come in for a visit so they have the info they need on him. Speculation most likely due to his visit last year and Seattle’s perceived need of a starting caliber center.

  32. Steele says:

    I’m intrigued by the idea of Nick Perry as an additional OLB edge rusher in free agency. He’s been injured quite a bit, but when healthy, he has played well for GB, and he’s healthy now. Pete Carroll recruited him for USC, obviously knows him well. I think he would come much cheaper than Irvin. I think he’d be a solid (not spectacular) option. For spectacular, I’d look to William Hayes, O. Vernon, Tamba Hali. Mario Williams might be out in Buffalo. Recall that Seattle pursued him in 2012.

    • Volume12 says:

      Pass on Mrio Williams. He’s not the player he once was. He really gave the Bills very little.

      I just think with a lack of really good EDGE prospects in this year’s draft, these guys are gonna have teams scrambling for them.

      Whereas the C class is pretty strong, which could drive down the pice of a guy like Stefan Wisniewski.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Perry really average IMO. Not a great athlete. Can’t see it personally.

      • Steele says:

        Perry is not a wow kind of proposition. But as a cheaper short term stopgap rotational, I wouldn’t mind it. I think it is a bad idea to leave the pass rush hole left by Irvin to KPL or a rookie “not really a pass rusher” type. Marsh and Clark are more inside/outside.

    • Nathan says:

      Someone like the Giants, who have money to spend and are desperate for pressure on the QB, will offer too much for williams, for us to be in play.

  33. Volume12 says:

    Rob, could Oklahoma’s DL Charles Tapper could still be play?

    Classic under-sized prospect, that goes hard, strong/powerul, athletic, one gaping 3-tech in a 4-3. Has has overcome a lot in his life.

    I’m wondering if Illinois’ Jihad Ward is better suited for a 5-tech role in a 3-4?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Like both. Could be.

    • Trevor says:

      Eithe guys would be a great addition to our DL rotation IMO. I think you will have to take Ward in the 2nd if you want him though and Tapper likely in the 3rd -4th.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      I like both. I think both probably factor in our board in the 70-95 overall range.

      Kind of see them as ‘pocket of talent’ candidates. Not guys we specifically target. But in a pool of guys that we might consider in R2/R3 if the draft shakes a certain way.

  34. EranUngar says:

    Rob, I am not sure that 6 years, 10 draft picks and 2 trades for an NFL superstar are a great sample to base our assumptions over. In the first 3 drafts we were a losing team rebuilding its roster almost from scratch, in the last 3 years we were a top contender with a stocked roster.

    However, if we do base this discussion on history and if we take PCs statement literally – “If consistency and not pure upside is the order of the day”, than we need to accept the following:

    Looking for consistency implies that they are happy with some of the OL play and want to have it constantly. That is not a statement indicating major overhaul of too many positions. It is certainly not – we have to change our OL drastically. Consistency is rarely a trait you associate with a rookie offensive lineman. A vet usually brings consistency over upside etc.

    When you look at the players they did get for the OL using their top picks in the past – Those players are not “can be great some day”. They are the closest they could find to be able to play on day one. Most of them did just that. It supports picks like Martin, Coleman, Kelly as you said.

    We put a lot of value on statements regarding OL needs and almost ignore a clear statement regarding addressing pass rush specifically in the draft. The Seahawks usually live up to those kind of statements.

    Considering that 2017 is supposed to be a golden draft for edge rushers and this draft is DT deep, I tend to believe that they will not fight the board and go for a DT in the first 2 rounds.

    LB replacing Irvin is also a key need that should be addressed before day 3.

    Re – trading back – A small trade back to the top of the 2nd + our 4th round pick could net us a pick in the top of the 2nd and an additional pick at the top of the 3rd. 5 picks in rounds 2-3 should enable us to get LB, DT, 2 solid OL picks and a WR/CB pick depending on Kearse/Lane status.

    Trade up? – If Rankins is still there after 20, maybe….

    • Rob Staton says:

      “Rob, I am not sure that 6 years, 10 draft picks and 2 trades for an NFL superstar are a great sample to base our assumptions over”

      We don’t need a decade to work this out. The evidence is pretty straight forward and consistent.

      • EranUngar says:

        Sure we do. The draft strategy rebuilding a team is more BPA and less need oriented. The decisions they made at first are not indicative to how they drafted since the 2013 draft.

        The sade part is that once the team became a sb contender after the 2012 season, thier draft record over the next two year (Harvin, Michael, P-Rich, Britt) was pretty underwhelming. Last year was different, to our mutual joy.

        What did we do differently last year? With 2 key offensive linemen departing (Carp & Ungar), we did not run to draft their immediate replacements on the top of the draft or rushed to replace Maxi. We picked special players at positions that did not look like our top position of need. Those picks, Clark-DE and Lockett-WR proved to be the highlight of the draft class (together with Rawls)

        Could that be what JS was referring to when he talked about a double-whammy when drafting for need?

        • Rob Staton says:

          The mindset doesn’t change just because they aren’t rebuilding a team anymore.

          Were they rebuilding in 2013, 2014 and 2015 where the trends continue from their early desire for certain types of player? Not at all.

          The trends are there for all to see. Not sure why you need more evidence. They have their way of doing things. They aren’t changing now.

          • Volume12 says:

            How where Clark and Lockett not need picks though?

            And they wanted an O-lineman early. Morse, Marpet, Sambrailo were gone.

            Rob, could not agree more. Why would they chane now? They like what they like, and killing 4 drafts in 6 years, plus hitting on how many UDFAs, and making good, signings in FA is a great track record IMO.

            • lil'stink says:

              The team is where we are today because of how the front office has done things. Of course, one could argue that we didn’t make the SB this year because of how they have done things the last few years. I think it’s totally fair to question sticking to the same plan when you are maintaining a championship window as opposed to when you are rebuilding the team. Not that the plan needs to be scrapped, but perhaps modified. This includes free agency as well, of course.

              I think that once again passing on a talented offensive lineman in favor of someone who might be a more explosive athlete or have a bit of a higher draft grade at a position that is less of a need would be a mistake. I suspect that we either bring in some veteran OL help this year in free agency or we re-sign Sweezy and/or Okung, with the former being the preferred option. Even with as good as this years draft looks for OL you obviously don’t want to put all your eggs in one basket.

              I think to keep doing the same thing year after year and expect a different result isn’t the best plan, especially when the identity and strengths/weaknesses of the team are an evolving process.

            • Steele says:

              Lockett was a clear need pick. They said they wanted a special teams returner, they went aggresively for him. Clark. They “had to have a pass rusher”, they went aggressively for him. I have to wonder even if Morse/Marpet/Sambrailo were available, Cable would still have said, “nah” and gone for, well, what he got.

              Bottom line, I think it’s hard to predict.

              I was not a fan of the last draft, and still think they could have done it differently.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        Agreed with Rob.

        Actually, being able to prognosticate what Seattle may like is getting easier. From a pattern recognition standpoint, Seattle definitely has strong and consistent tendencies.

        It’s not always who they pick. But also who they don’t.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      “We put a lot of value on statements regarding OL needs and almost ignore a clear statement regarding addressing pass rush specifically in the draft. ”

      PC clearly identified 2 priority areas of improvement – OL and pass rush. How is improving the pass rush a clearer statement than improving the OL? Moreover, PC talked about improving consistency on the OL, not maintaining it. The 2015 OL reached a peak of consistency in weeks 13-15 (against mediocre defenses), only to regress in week 16 and the playoffs. It’s fair to say that in order to improve OL consistency, SEA will need to improve the OL.

      Also, the last time PC identified pass rush as a priority (2012), they didn’t draft a DT. They drafted a LEO/LB and a MIKE, and passed on DTs like Cox and Brockers.

      • Rob Staton says:

        To add to Eric’s point, I also think it’s fair to say we’re covering the pass rush thing. For the last week all I’ve done is put up articles about defensive linemen.

      • Volume12 says:

        They did draft a DT that year, but he wasn’t a priority, so I totally get what your saying and agree 100%.

  35. Nathan says:

    People are misconstruing PC’s comments regarding pass rush.

    Like it’s been implied that it’s a team weakness that needs urgent attention.

    It’s not.

    His comment was along of the lines of ‘we’re always look for someone who can go maul the quarterback’

    Meaning that the search never ends, even if they leading the league in sacks. IE, you can never have enough pass rushers.

    • Trevor says:

      What is it they say about play makers on offense and pass rushers on defense “You can never have enough”

  36. Trevor says:

    I just did a couple of virtual Mok drafts on Fan Speak using the 3 different big boards (Fan Speak, CBS, Matt Miller) and it was interesting to see what players might be available. I know those big boards are not very accurate but still a fun exercise to see what options there might be. Once the combine is over and they are updated will be fun to go back and try again.

    Draft #1 Fan Speak Big Board
    26: R1P26 CB ELI APPLE OHIO STATE
    56: R2P25 C NICK MARTIN NOTRE DAME
    90: R3P27 OT LE’RAVEN CLARK TEXAS TECH
    98: R3P35 OLB VICTOR OCHI STONY BROOK
    125: R4P26 DT MALIEK COLLINS NEBRASKA
    172: R5P33 RB KENNETH DIXON LOUISIANA TECH
    215: R6P37 WR PAUL MCROBERTS SOUTHEAST MISSOURI STATE
    223: R7P4 DE RONALD BLAIR APPALACHIAN STATE
    245: R7P26 OT FAHN COOPER OLE MISS

    Draft #2 Matt Miller (My favorite I think)
    26: R1P26 DT SHELDON RANKINS LOUISVILLE
    56: R2P25 C NICK MARTIN NOTRE DAME
    90: R3P27 OLB ERIC STRIKER OKLAHOMA
    98: R3P35 WR LEONTE CARROO RUTGERS
    125: R4P26 OT JOE DAHL WASHINGTON STATE
    172: R5P33 RB KENNETH DIXON LOUISIANA TECH
    215: R6P37 OT FAHN COOPER OLE MISS
    223: R7P4 DE RONALD BLAIR APPALACHIAN STATE
    245: R7P26 DT JAVON HARGRAVE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE

    Draft #3 (CBS Big Board)
    26: R1P26 OLB NOAH SPENCE EASTERN KENTUCKY
    56: R2P25 DT CHRIS JONES MISSISSIPPI STATE
    90: R3P27 C NICK MARTIN NOTRE DAME
    98: R3P35 WR BRAXTON MILLER OHIO STATE
    125: R4P26 OG JOE DAHL WASHINGTON STATE
    172: R5P33 OLB VICTOR OCHI STONY BROOK
    215: R6P37 CB JAMES BRADBERRY SAMFORD
    223: R7P4 DT JIHAD WARD ILLINOIS
    245: R7P26 P DREW KASER TEXAS A&M

    • Ignorant says:

      Any of those three drafts would be comparable to our 2012 Draft. The last two are specially wet dreams.

    • EranUngar says:

      Its not fair.

      YES, that second draft is unbelievable. I’d be dancing in the streets for hours if it comes to close to something like that.

      A shame Rankins will be long gone at 26, Martin at 56 and Dahl at 125 probably gone too :(

      • Trevor says:

        Yeah those virtual mocks are kind of neat I think the players available will likely me more accurate after the combine. But is fun because you watch / target a guy and then watch as he goes off the board then have to change to another guy kind of like a real draft.

    • John_s says:

      The CBS board… A playmaker on defense (Spence) a playmaker on offense (Miller) and two good o linemen. And a high upside guy in Jones. Love it

    • Steele says:

      Love version #3.

  37. Ignorant says:

    Amazing read from blogging the boys.

    http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2016/1/22/10813994/nfl-draft-2016-finding-playmaking-defensive-tackles

    Javon Hargrave stands out. I wouldn’t be shocked if a guy as productive as he is is taken rd 3.

    • bobbyk says:

      I watched some of him last weekend and I really liked what I saw. I like him better than most of the supposedly better DTs. If we wanted pass rush up the gut, he’s the rookie for ’16 (assuming the elite DTs will be gone by #26).

      Do you guys think there’s a chance he could be there when we pick in the third round or is he a guy we’d better take in the second round (assuming Carroll wants him and his short arms)?

      • Trevor says:

        Love his tape too though but he has shorter arms and we know how strict the Hawks are on with arm length at different positions.

        • Volume12 says:

          A lot to like about Hargrave. He’s a good player and is exciting.

          My concern? The arm length too. I can’t help but think of DT Grady Jarrett, and his stubby,little arms were actually longer.

          • Attyla the Hawk says:

            Jarrett wasn’t a pass rusher even in college.

            Hargrave in one game bettered Jarrett’s 4 year career in sacks.

            Arm length is a concern. And yet he’s wildly productive. I think the real crux of the matter is — can you see that absence of length on tape? Does it manifest itself in issues that you’d associate with that lack of length. Seattle likes measurables. Because if you have two prospects of equal talent the one with better measurables can ultimately do more things and has a higher ceiling.

            What if a player is talented in other ways? What if two prospects aren’t of equal talent.

            We love measurables. We love production. We love unique quality.

            To me, Hargrave has #2 and #3 by the truckload. He is the kind of player by what I’ve seen that can transcend a liability in measurables.

            I see his lack of length very much like I saw Wilson’s liability to get passes batted down. In theory, Wilson should have had a problem with that. But yet on tape and by production — he didn’t. He adapted in different ways to make that liability a non factor.

            And that’s what I see with Hargrave. He shouldn’t be able to do what he does. And yet he still beats guys as if you’d never know he’s deficient from the ideal.

            • CHawk Talker Eric says:

              Arm length means less in college. It’ll be different when practically every OLer he faces has a 3, 4 or even 5 inch reach advantage. Also, under JS/PC, SEA have never drafted a DT prospect with arms that short.

              But there’s no denying Hargrave’s production. If not for his stubby arms (and small school pedigree), would there be any question about his appeal to SEA? He’s as tough to block as any DT in this draft (notwithstanding the level of competition), and arm length is less important for a 1 gap scheme.

            • purpleneer says:

              I’m with you here. And for all this talk of him having short arms, does anybody know an actual measurement? I can’t find anything.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      I have for a couple weeks felt like Seattle would take Hargrave at R2.

      I would be left to wonder aloud. Given that Seattle very frequently (always?) picks a surprise reach pick as it’s first pick in the draft (’11 Carpenter, ’12 Irvin, ’13 Michael, ’14 Richardson, ’15 Clark).

      Would Hargrave at tail end of R1 even be a complete shock?

      I suppose it’d be easy to look at that list and say (measurables all yes). But given:

      1. We know Seattle can’t have enough pass rushers.
      2. Seattle has 2 ways to improve pass rush. From the base 1T or rotational DT (McDonald/Hill role)

      We value pass rush. Clearly more than we do the OL.

      If I’m Pete/John and I’m predisposed to drafting unpredictably and I have a guy who “has the highest Production ratio I’ve recorded over the five years in which I’ve been compiling these numbers.”, does it almost feel like this could actually be that ‘WTF’ pick we lead every draft off with?

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        Meant to add, that Hargrave is about as pure a rotational DT pass rusher as there is in this draft (and my top interior rusher by miles). Seems there are two players who fit the criteria to improve pass rush at the two positions we can do it. Billings and Hargrave.

        As I mentioned in another article. If we were to come out of the draft with

        Billings
        Hargrave
        Westerman
        Kelly

        with our top 4 selections I’d soil myself. Twice for good measure.

        • Volume12 says:

          I like Hargrave. I agree that he is kind of unique. I’d be excited if Seattle took him.

          But, I could see them passing on him due to his lack of length.

          The reason I bring up Grady Jarrett is because he was being touted as a penetrating, under sized 3-tech, whether he is or isn’t.

          • Volume12 says:

            Him being selected in the 1st would shock me if he tests as a marginal athlete or average SPARQ score.

            • Trevor says:

              Hargrave is a nice player with upside but I would be shocked if he went in the first 2 rounds. There are so many quality DTs in this class with length and production with a lot less risk.

              He has better production and tape than Chris Jones but if I had the choice in Rd #2 I would take Jones all day long.

              • Steele says:

                Hargrave impresses me. In the small amount of film available, he seems to show more technique and penetration than a lot of guys, including the more popular names. I’m all for him.

    • Steele says:

      Keep your eyes on David Onyemata. A sleeper up in Canada, became a standout. Didn’t know anything about football, learned on the job. Good character.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        Yeah, I kind of think he could be in the R7/UDFA group for us.

        Looked ridiculously athletic and disruptive in the Shrine game. Thinking he could be in the late round pool of ends along with Ronald Blair.

      • Trevor says:

        As a Canadian I would love if the Hawks picked Onyemata. In a year or two I think he is going to be outstanding. He is very similar to Aikem Hicks who also came out of Canada and was very raw with great upside. I believe Onyemata could have a very similar development path.

  38. DaleR says:

    Rob, I’ve read that having elite guard/center/guard with average tackles is a direction that teams with mobile QBs and a desire for a strong inside running game are considering. It would give Russell the time to step up in the pocket and we’ve had big problems with short yardage situations. Carolina seems to have headed this direction but it didn’t work so well in the Superbowl. Given the price and scarcity of quality tackles what do you think of this approach?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it certainly makes sense to become tougher in the interior. That would be a huge benefit. Adding two athletic tackles that can handle a speed rush to compliment would be ideal.

      • Trevor says:

        That would be a dream scenario. Hard to get 5 really quality OL in today’s NFL with cap etc. You almost have to invest some early draft capital and get lucky on a developmental guy or two.

        How many teams can you think of that have 5 rel sold o-lineman? Maybe Cincy last year and Dallas.

    • vrtkolman says:

      Yeah I was going to bring up the Superbowl. It worked all year for Carolina and then became a huge liability in the playoffs. I guess the only obvious answer is to have 5 quality players on the O line.

    • RealRhino2 says:

      This touches on what I was thinking about posting. Just heard Mike Florio repeat what we’ve been hearing every day since the Superbowl: we (purportedly) learned that having a great pass rush is important and that a great pass rush will defeat an offense every time.

      I think everybody has been thinking about this backwards. What we *should* have learned is that you can’t rely on mediocre OTs to block great DEs all game long by themselves. We should be asking how to shore up the OL rather than reaching for edge rush projects (both would be nice, but as we know, one is slightly easier to find).

      It’s the lesson that changed college football. When there is scarcity of a resource, it’s a fool’s game to hope you are just smarter than everybody else at finding it, rather than working around it.

      • Volume12 says:

        That’s a good point. Both Carolina and Denver’s O-line were atrocious pass blocking wise that game.

        Guys like Von Miller, I don’t think you can ever stop him or shut him down, but a good, solid O-line can ‘slow’ him down and negate some of the things he does.

        • RealRhino2 says:

          Not to mention, as Hugh Millen said even before the game, you had to wonder what Carolina was goin g to do to help Rimmers. Millen and Holmgren both assumed they would have a RB in to chip him or a TE to help, and a lot (most?) of the time they did nothing. Maybe they just thought having a big QB was enough, I don’t know.

          And the other lesson we learned is what Rob was talking about a week ago, as the Broncos interior OL was just good enough to allow them to make plays, even with a mummy at QB and Short and Star L. at DT.

          Luckily it should be easier to find good OL than to find another Von Miller. Focus on that.

          • EranUngar says:

            Green dog blitzing killed the help.

            Car typically used blocking help inside. Sometime its RB/HB and sometimes TE, even a receiver at times.

            Denver recognized that tendency and played a lot of Man + green dog blitzing.

            When playing man rather than zone, the guys responsible to cover that extra blocker if he goes downfield blitzed immediately once they recognized that their man was helping with the blocks. It forced those “helpers” to move and counter the extra blitzer and left Miller and Ware against the Tackles without help.

      • Ed says:

        Yep. Everyone keeps saying the same thing. A bigger thing is Cam has always been easy to fluster. He is not a great passer. A lot of the dropped passes everyone keeps talking about, are because he only throws one speed (hard and fast). Carolina never adjusted anything during that game. Not many Cam runs, no chips by Olson, no quick passes. I’m very glad of the end result, but it was as much Carolina lack of change than it was Denver pass rush.

        • cha says:

          Seemed like a terrible, terrible game plan on offense by Shula & Rivera. The Bronco pass rush battered and rattled Tom Brady so hard in AFCCG that maybe clutchiest QB in NFL history was looking over his shoulder the whole game. The domination was so thorough, NE’s OL coach was fired after patching together dozens of OL combinations during the year. Did they not think Denver’s pass rush would need to be accounted and game-planned for?

          • Steele says:

            NE’s o-line problems were largely injury-related. Losing their starting LT Nate Solder for the year in Oct., RT Vollmer gimpy, they were forced to patchwork. Even so, the Pats were still just a few plays from beating Denver and its vaunted defense. Their linemen are not without talent, except for possibly Marcus Cannon. Who might be better with a change of scenery. Them bringing back their o-line guru Dante Scarnecchia is a good move on their part.

            As for the Panthers, they did try to chip and bring in extra blockers. But Cam is a bad QB, the scheme is lacking, and Shula called a terrible game. If Cam fell on the ball, and marched them to a desperation TD, we would be talking about The Drive instead of Von Miller and Manning’s “greatness”.

    • Ignorant says:

      Denver Broncos 15 are in the same echelon defensively as Ravens 00, Bucs 02, Pitt 08 and Seahawks 13 (no order). That kind of defensive greatness is just impossible to stop, and really difficult to mantain through time. Yes, the Broncos exposed Panther’s weakness at T? Yes. But that OL was leaking all over the place, and even inside with Jackson and Wolfe, just like the best and most consistent defense ever in 2013 was just unable to move the ball in the big game.

      Against that pass rush, only a strong game of short yardage and a flawless performance of a QB on quicker/shorter routes.

  39. David says:

    Rob, just want you to know that this blog is what gets me through the offseason. Fantastic stuff here and I look forward to reading daily. Everything you do here is much appreciated.

  40. Trevor says:

    Still pissed about Dallas getting Lael Collins as a UDFA. No team needed him more than us. Not sure if all teams just agreed not to draft him (collusion by the way) or if the agent threats scared them off but you have to think he would have been worth a 7th rd gamble. I mean they drafted a convicted domestic violence offender in the 2nd round. Maybe the optics of drafting both guys scared them off. Boy he would have looked nice as our LG instead of Britt this past year and for the future.

  41. Trevor says:

    Rob this question is completely off topic but I am fascinated with the Leicester City Football story. Is there a salary cap of any sort in the EPL? What would their payroll be vs the likes of Man City and Chelsea? Do really think they have a shot?

  42. Steve Nelsen says:

    Rob,

    Where do you see Jaylon Smith at in the draft as of today?

    One scenario I am watching is the possibility of Smith sliding to 26. Three weeks ago that seemed almost impossible. It is still unlikely. But, most teams ahead of Seattle have immediate needs that can be addressed this year. There are not many teams/coaches/GMs drafting before 26 that have the luxury to use a 1st-round pick on a player that is unlikely to play in 2016.

    As linebackers such as Darron Lee get a chance to show what they can do at the combine and in workouts, they have the chance to pass Smith because they can help immediately.

  43. Josh says:

    Just saw SI’s Chris Burkes latest 2 round mock has the Hawks taking Apple and Jones. I certainly wouldn’t complain over that.

    • Ukhawk says:

      Not bad but Burkes draft is appalling

      Hawks pass on Rankins?!

      No OLS Coleman & Martin or WR Fuller in the 1st 2 rounds?!

    • Trevor says:

      I would be happy with those picks for sure but based on need Rankins might be the better choice in Rd #1 or Coleman. Both were on the board still. Apple is a great pick that would be hard to argue with though.

  44. LantermanC says:

    Hey Rob,

    Kyle Crabbs on Twitter said “It appears as though I’m growing a thirst for Jerell Adams. Feels like the strongest TE class in last 3 years.”

    Any TEs you think the Seahawks would have interest in?

    • Steve Nelsen says:

      One TE I am interested in as a late-round pick is LaQuan McGowan out of Baylor. He is over 400 lbs. He could fill the blocking role of Anthony McCoy.

      Is he mobile enough to be a monster fullback replacement for Tukuafu?

      Can he be a right tackle or maybe a replacement for Alvin Bailey?

  45. Volume12 says:

    Combine list is out. A ton of interesting prospects.

    SD St OL Darrell Greene. Very ‘Seahawky.’ Really good looking LG candidate.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      Didn’t we mention him before? If not, we should have. If SEA likes Poole, they should love Greene.

  46. Ed says:

    Assuming no FA are kept and none are brought in, I think we can all agree on the top 4 needs.

    OC
    OG/OT
    DT
    DE

    I just hope they don’t reach, like with Britt. The Hawks need a OG, OC, OT, DT and DE. Should be plenty of guys at 26 that would help a lot (more likely OL).

  47. Steve Nelsen says:

    Nate Liss at Field Gulls mocked WR Corey Coleman to Seattle.

    WR is not a need but Coleman as a replacement for Kearse would certainly add some top-end speed to the receiving corps.

    If I build on Rob’s earlier post about players who will almost certainly be drafted before 26, I can come up with 17 as of today. Only 1 is a WR. Would Seattle consider this position at 26 if the best player available at 26 is a WR?

    Here is my list of 17:
    OT Laremy Tunsil
    QB Jared Goff
    QB Paxton Lynch
    DE Joey Bosa
    QB Carson Wentz
    DE DeForest Buckner
    LB Myles Jack
    OT Ronnie Stanley
    CB Jalen Ramsey
    CB Vernon Hargreaves
    LB Darron Lee
    LB Jaylon Smith
    DT Sheldon Rankins
    DE Noah Spence
    CB Eli Apple
    LB Reggie Ragland
    WR Laquon Treadwell

    • Volume12 says:

      I personally don’t see WR as a need. Some depth or whatever, sure.

      However, Coleman is a unique, explosive, freak athlete with the production to match. Overcame adversity early in his life. Has that box checked too. I wouldn’t be mad at it.

      But, if he puts up the numbers he’s rumored too, I don’t think he gets outta the top 15.

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        I feel the same. It isn’t a need but if he is there and they take him, I would say, “good pick.” and start imagining the offense with those 3 WRS and a healthy Graham. Seattle would just need to keep Wilson upright.

        But, if they keep Okung, Seattle could improve their O-Line by just adding a LG in round 3. And maybe a center too.

  48. Rick says:

    While we are waiting for the draft, I would find it helpful to have you do a quick analysis of the potential of the 18 guys they just signed to the roster (the futures contracts. Do any of them have the potential to be meaningful parts of the 53 man roster next year?

    • LikwidIce says:

      While on the topic of future articles.

      I’ve been lurking on this blog for 3 seasons now. Now my interest in finding the next Seahawk has come to a boil. Instead of just reading about other people’s finds; I want to find my own. I wouldn’t mind a article on how you scout prospects. Which resources are the best to use? What kinds of things are you looking for? How do you keep track of all the players you’ve researched and how you sort/classify them? If this article came to be, I would appreciate the more senior blog members to contribute also. It would be nice to have some kind of a beginner scout compendium on how-to.

  49. Volume12 says:

    Seahawks sign CFL WR Jeff Fuller, or have a deal in place. He’s 6’4, 223 lbs., 4.53 40, and 33 1/2″ inch arms.

    Had crazy production at Texas A&M.

    Here’s our new Chris Matthews.

    • Miles says:

      He passes the eye test better than Chris Mathews did initially, and he looks more capable on tape. The two are so similar, so I’m trying to find attributes that distinguish Fuller.

      • Miles says:

        Fuller runs a slightly faster 40 and jumps two inches farther on the broad jump, but has disadvantages of 1.5 inches on the vertical jump, .05 seconds on the 10yd split, and is .2 slower on the 3-cone.

  50. Baldwin says:

    Anyone have an opinion on Jayron Kearse SS Clemson? 6′ 5″ 230. What about him as a LB conversion to replace Irvin? We love conversions and his experience in coverage would help with one of our biggest deficiencies last year; covering TEs.

    If you had 6′ 4″ Wright on one side and the 6′ 5″ Kearse on the other side of the LB corps with Wags mopping up the middle, I could see that being fairly intimidating and regaining some of the nasty/fear JS talked about in his post season presser.

    While I like Deion Jones, I just don’t think at 6′ 1″ 220, he fits the nasty/fear image JS talked about regaining.