Talking point: Seahawks taking a big man at #25?

February 7th, 2013 | Written by Rob Staton

Georgia's John Jenkins is a 358lbs monster

On Tuesday a couple of people touted the idea of drafting a big defensive tackle with the 25th pick. Essentially, not an orthodox three technique.

JW commented: “I understand the speed issue, but if you can’t find a pure 3-tech, getting a wide body with good push who will consistently command a double team, and if your 1-tech and 5-tech also demand respect, that pocket is going to be sloppy and the Leo is going to have some shots. I’m not sure how much Branch commanded a double team. I wonder if there’s a paucity of 3-techs and it’s not solved in the draft, the hawks brass might think hard about going to a wide-9 and double three alignment more often in order to get more isolation shots. Their LBs are quick enough, Kam can handle the run, so it mitigates the run gashes somewhat. Might be worth revisiting the alignments in 3rd and long if they can’t satisfactorily address the personnel.”

For the last three years, the Seahawks have used quite a sizeable defensive line. Red Bryant has worked at the five technique despite weighing 323lbs. In 2010 Brandon Mebane (311lbs) started at the three with Colin Cole (328lbs) at the one. In 2011 they inserted Alan Branch (325lbs) into the three with Mebane moving across to replace Cole. That’s how it stayed for 2012.

We’ve talked a lot on this blog about drafting a pure three technique. By definition the 4-3 under utilises a natural pass rusher at the position, traditionally weighing around 285-305lbs. They line up next to the LEO and double up to create pressure on the weak side. Instead the Seahawks have used size at the three with mixed results so far.

My argument would be that the pass rush hasn’t been good enough during those three years, provoking a need for change. Total reliance has been placed on Chris Clemons for pressure and sacks and you can’t expect one guy to do it alone in base defense. Getting a natural three technique isn’t easy, but it could be crucial for the future success of this scheme.

On the other hand, perhaps Carroll believes the scheme isn’t the issue? Maybe he feels it’s the personnel? Perhaps a bigger body that can be more disruptive will be the order of the day?

If the second part is true, whether it’s likely to succeed or not, it opens up options we haven’t considered previously. A big space-eater like Johnathan Hankins might be in contention. He offered precious little in terms of pass rush for Ohio State and I’m not a big fan of his skill set. But he’s big, stout and has some athletic upside. ESPN’s Todd McShay gave him to Seattle in his updated mock draft today.

What about the massive John Jenkins at Georgia? He’s 6-3 and 358lbs — a monster of a defensive lineman. He moves well for his size even if he tires quickly (to be expected). Could he be used as a heavyweight powerhouse among the interior, capable of being more disruptive than Branch while also improving the teams run defense?

Could Jesse Williams come in to play? Alabama’s Australian import looks best suited to defensive end in a 3-4, but he played nose tackle in 2012. His main strength is run defense and he’s shown very little interior pass rush on tape. He’s also a baller who plays with intensity and attitude and while he does tend to get dinged up in a lot of games, he also had a big outing against LSU in a key ‘Bama victory this year.

None of these three players are pure pass rushers. Funnily enough of the three, the 358lbs Jenkins is probably the most disruptive. But if they did want to keep size inside, these guys would probably be on the radar.

Sylvester Williams and Kawann Short — who are bigger than the natural three techniques but offer more pass rush — could also come back into focus. Particularly Short — an underrated interior rusher. You just wonder about their upside and necessity to hit the ground running. Neither is a spectacular athlete with unique skills. Williams turns 25 this year, Short will be 24.

I still think this is a tough call. Carroll has highlighted the need to improve the pass rush and I’m not sure getting another big guy will solve that. Alan Branch didn’t do a terrible job and certainly the issues with run defense weren’t solely on him. If the objective is to keep the scheme and invest in an alternative to Jason Jones and find other nickel players, why not just re-sign Branch? Is John Jenkins going to be that much better? To the extent the pass rush greatly improves?

The Seahawks simply don’t collapse the pocket enough and more than anything they just need someone who can be in there to move the quarterback out of position, preferably into the waiting arms of the LEO. A big man can do this sometimes with a dynamic bull rush, but more often than not they lack the kind of explosive first step to shoot a gap or knife through. If it’s about combining size with pass rush — draft Kawann Short. He’s the player most likely to get into the backfield and he plays at a comparable weight to Mebane. I’m not sure Jenkins, Hankins or Williams will be enough of a difference maker in terms of improving the pass rush — the key issue highlighted by Carroll at the end of the season.

JW made a good point when he said, “I wonder if there’s a paucity of 3-techs and it’s not solved in the draft.” He’s absolutely right. There aren’t many great three techniques in the league. They’re like gold dust. There’s no exact science to it, but some of the best looking college three techniques just haven’t worked out in the NFL. It’s why I like Penn State’s Jordan Hill. I wouldn’t bank on him being the guy to get Seattle out of this pass rush dilemma, but I’d take a flier in the mid-to-late rounds regardless of what happens with the #25 pick.

The lack of choice and likelihood that Sheldon Richardson and Sharrif Floyd will go in the top-15 keeps pushing me towards free agency. Randy Starks isn’t just an ideal physical match for the three, he’s also an above average run stopper. As far as I’m concerned, that’s the guy this team needs to target. Sign him to a two-year deal and if Richardson, Floyd or whoever isn’t there… keep searching for that next mid-round gem like a Jordan Hill.

Yet I wouldn’t completely rule out a big man being drafted early. As we mentioned, they’ve used three big lineman so far under Carroll. There’s also the San Francisco 49ers factor to consider. The Seahawks need to stay one step ahead of their NFC West rivals. The Niners run the ball so effectively behind possibly the best offensive line in the NFL. Being big, strong and stout up front will be key for the Seahawks in future meeting against San Francisco. The best way to combat the likes of Mike Iupati, Joe Staley and Anthony Davis might be to introduce them to a 358lbs defensive tackle who moves like he weighs 310lbs.

Drafting a big tackle at #25 isn’t something we’ve discussed much so far and I’d be interested to hear what you make of it. I’ve included tape below of the big guys discussed in this piece.

115 Responses to “Talking point: Seahawks taking a big man at #25?”

  1. A. Simmons says:

    A big man is possible. Our primary division rival is the best power running team with the best offensive line in the league. The way you beat San Francisco is to control the line of scrimmage. If they can’t run, they are dead in the water. Frisco lost to teams with fairly strong defensive lines such as New York Giants, Minnesota Vikings, Seattle, and St. Louis. All of those teams featuring strong, versatile defensive lines that could stop the run (Seattle did at home). I could see them drafting a big body in the first. We used different personnel on pass rushing downs. That could continue. Pete does like to stop the run first and foremost to put teams in third and long.

    • Rob Staton says:

      He certainly does and I think that could be the heart of the scheme. Get to third and long, then bring in the specialists (Jones, Irvin etc). The problem was, the specialists didn’t really work out. So more than anything this could be finding an upgrade for Jason Jones in terms of ‘fixing’ the pass rush. They may re-sign Branch and look for another interior specialist. And look at completely different positions altogether in the draft.

      • Nate Dogg says:

        Jones worked, he just got hurt. His health isn’t something they likely want to depend on though.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Did it really work? I’m not totally convinced. Personally I thought he was average.

          • Nate Dogg says:

            He was excellent and had a big impact on Irvin. Irvin had 4.5 sacks through the Carolina game, 2.5 of which came off stunts with Jones. Didn’t seem the same after missing those two games in the middle of the season though, and then of course was shut down completely.

            • Rob Staton says:

              That was one game though. I think excellent is quite a positive review. I’m not sure we’ll see him back.

              • Nate Dogg says:

                Not just the one game, through the season to that point. Two of those sacks by Irvin was the Carolina game though, you’re right.

                I’ll hold firm on excellent up until the injuries. Really enjoyed his early season play. I’m with you on his chance to return though, team has some youth in Howard and Scruggs they can grow over a 1 year deal with a guy that hasn’t stayed reliably healthy.

                • Snoop Dogg says:

                  I agree with Rob. Jones will be looking for more money than we can afford to give with large money contracts coming up. Plus, is he really that better than a young, developing, and cheaper Greg Scruggs for that role?

                  • BCHawk says:

                    If I remember Carol’s pass rush comments correctly he said we needs to add a couple guys or something like that. I got the impression he was okay with the scheme but not with the depth of pass rushers. I would think that Jones would be on the list of guys we go after as long as his injury looks okay. We won’t over pay but I think we make him an offer. I don’t see another team giving him a big contract.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    But if the pass rush wasn’t good enough last season and knowing Jones’ injury history, why would you go back for more?

                  • BCHawk says:

                    The pass rush was not good enough when Jones and Clemens got injured. During the regular season we were middle of the pack in sacks which is not horrible given that sacks are not emphasized in the scheme. My point is that I don’t think that PC thinks we necessarily need a wholesale upgrade on the pass rush but we do need to add depth.
                    PC seems to give guys with injuries second and third chances. If Jones is putting in the work to rehab and they like his character I think he gets an at market offer for his services. If you are trying to add pass rushers letting Jones go does not help.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    The pass rush was a problem from weeks 1-17. I think we’re kidding ourselves if we think this is a problem that only materialised once Jones and Clemons got injured. It took an incredible half against Green Bay to only put Seattle in the middle of the pack. Speaks volumes.

        • Colin says:

          As much as we wanted him to work, I don’t think he was the factor we hoped for. I remember John Clayton saying the Seahawks would get 8-10 sacks out of him with Jones at DT….

      • A. Simmons says:

        It didn’t work when it counted. That is the reason the team is focusing on it now. It’s strange that we’re critcizing a defense ranked as highly as this defense was. It set a franchise record for points allowed. They came upt short at key times at the end of the game, that is what we’re focused on. The reason seems to be the lack of an effective pass rush. When the game was on the line, the opposing QB seemed to have all day to pick us apart. Not sure if that was personnel or we were outcalled on defense in the fourth quarter. Maybe a bit of both. Our pass rush and fourth quarter defense needs to be fixed to the point where we get home when we need to get home. I hope we can find the personnel to get that done.

      • Phil says:

        Rob – You hit the nail on the head, “Get to third and long, then bring in the specialists (Jones, Irvin etc). The problem was, the specialists didn’t really work out.”

        IMHO, the Seahawks lack of an effective pass rush can’t be fixed just by improving the rush from the base D. In both the Detroit game and the Atlanta playoff game, we couldn’t get to the opposing QB in obvious passing situations. That is, as you said, even our “specialists” couldn’t put pressure on when we had to do so. (Sure, in the Atlanta game, Clemons was on the bench which probably exacerbated an already bad situation.)

        So, we can’t fix our problems by just improving the pass rush from our base D. We need to get more pressure from the edge rushers as well as the interior linemen. This will be particularly obvious if Clemons can’t answer the bell. More so, we need to adjust our scheme on obvious passing downs — no more going to a 3-man rush and passively waiting for the opposing QB to pick out a target. We need to find some innovative blitz pacakages that will work with the personnel we have and those we pick up in FA and the draft.

  2. MJ says:

    Awesome read Rob. One of my favorites and I think you nailed it.

    I could see PC caring less about sacks, but much more about consistently putting the QB in an uncomfortable situation. To me, this screams Jesse Williams. Stout vs the run with the upside to just murder the pocket, even if he isn’t generating 8-10 sacks. The rarity of good 3 technique play reinforces this idea.

    Interesting idea and I think this could be a very likely scenario.

  3. David says:

    I was saying the same thing a while back about getting a big justin smith like player to demand double teams and collapse the pocket while the end or Leo rushes the QB, or even if we dont get the QB have him atleast pressured. i would really like a guy that can play all downs or most of them, so the 358 pounder concerns me if he cant play more then a down, without beind winded.

    how many snaps do you see Jenkins playing in a given series? is he someone that comes in everyonce in a while? because if it is, wouldnt that almost be bruce Irvin? just curious, id love to get him due to his large size, but his Stamina concerns me, where do you see him going? 1st? or could we get him later?

    And i dont know if we touched on this, but did you watch any of Jaye howards tape last year? or well the year before at Florida, im still banging the Howard Drum, i wonder if they get Jordan Hill in the mid round, signs a FA and use therest of their picks to fill those needs,.

    players id like to keep an eye on for the Hawks that are on the Roster

    OLB-Korey Toomner, Mike Morgan and Malcom Smith Morgan and Smith both came in and did a good job when they filled in for Hill, i felt more confident with Smith in then Hill, especially with his sideline to sideline play.

    DT-Jaye Howard and Greg Scruggs, Scruggs played well and should improive during the offseason, i think hed be a good Passrushing DT/DE. and i dont know Howards Skill but him being picked in the 4th shows they (Pete and John)saw something in him, so its interesting to me.

    OG- J.R Sweezy,he played with Moffit usually swapping reps with him. last offseason was more or less a learning year for Sweezy converting from D-line to O-line, i wonder how much he will improve this year with a full year of playing O-line under his belt. If he doesnt imrpove or they dont believe in him just yet, what are the chances Carpenter comes back and McQuistin moves to RG with Carpenter pairing with Okung on the left side, i think either way next year the O-line will be good to go, I know we havent talked O-line this year but ive seen on numerous sites people saying that we should get an O-line if they fall to us, while that prolly wouldnt be bad, i believe we should trade back to a team thats needing one, and if we have Flynny on the team still pkg him along with it and see what we can get.

    ive wirtten alot so i apologize for the Grammar and puncuation or lack there of.

    in the words of russell wilson “GO HAWKS”

  4. Sawker_Dawg says:

    Obviously at this point, we don’t know if we’ll be able to get Starks. I think getting him alleviates our need to draft a DT in R1 and like you say, he might be a better fit than our possible options at #25. I’m thinking though, that he will want a premium contract given his age means this might be his big pro contract and 2 years just does not seem to match what his recent production would get him via FA contract.

    If we don’t get Starks, I think we’ll draft someone like Short (if Floyd and Richardson are gone) over a big guy like the three mentioned. For arguments sake, lets say the Hawks have the option of re-sign Branch, draft Short or draft Jenkins. It seems that all would have similar impact for run D but not every run goes to the weakside so you minimize the impact of Jenkins. If they are in on downs that are not obvious passing downs and a pass is called, Short will provide the best impact by far.

    We need a DT that can rush the passer on passing plays all the time, not just the obvious 3rd and long. That is why I don’t see us re-signing Branch or drafting a big man. He does not provide enough consistent pass rush. Even if we replaced him with Short, I would think we’d still try and pick up another interior specialist a la Jason Jones.

  5. Bob says:

    I think resigning Branch is a good move regardless of who they draft at 25 since Branch can fill the 1 or 5 if the need arises such as an injury and they seemed really high on a DT that can play more than one position. I think Seattle’s strategy will be versatility if they are looking for a base DT that could set the edge at the 5 tech position, play the nose or 3 if needed in an injury situation, and provide some pass rush(not a ton, just enough for a QB to get rid of the ball in a 5-7 step drop). That is why I was hoping for Floyd(as well as his young age as a factor) to be available but that’s not likely; as he could play more than one position.

    Quinn also mentioned blitzing more from the LB spot, so short area quickness, strength against the outside run, and an ability to shoot gaps, even in a specialist role could be a target. Maybe not so much a coverage guy with speed but a 3-4 ILB or OLB/DE type that has short coverage stunting duties. I don’t know who that could be, he could maybe be rotational with Malcolm Smith on certain downs and distances. Maybe a wild card like Deon Jordan, sort of a big athlete with no true position.

    Irvin worked out fine for the role he was in and it’s still too early to give up on him as a future LEO, the tools are there and he is getting perhaps the best defensive line coach Seattle could have hired as their defensive coordinator. Perhaps just getting a young Jason Jones type of 3rd down interior pass rusher is a higher rated priority on their board. He doesn’t need to be a fierce run defender but have that quick first step and length like Jones had to get his arms up.

  6. JW says:

    thanks for the post, Rob. I appreciate your thoughts :)
    Very interesting stuff. Based on the video above, Jenkins looks like he’s living in the backfield, a lot. He doesn’t get any sacks but he’s collapsing the pocket- especially when he’s 1 on 1. He misses some arm tackles (and makes some others), and misses some sacks because of his lack of speed, but to my eye, on most of those plays he is winning the battle. He does have surprising burst on a few plays- often to the play before others. Last draft I thought PC/JS were going for Poe. That opinion rested on their intent to get the team bigger and stronger. Their interest in ‘unique’ physical attributes brings me back to Jenkins this year. The size mismatch in a 1 on 1 is appealing, he’s probably going to cause problems if you leave your LG out there alone on him, so an offense get a numbers problem pretty fast. You can also see him playing 2 of the other 3 D line positions as needed (rotational, injury, etc). How did this guy do against elite O lineman? I have concern about his weight, to be so big that young.

    I also appreciate your point about the 49ers. I hate their ability to physically control the line, and I like the PC/JS desire to do the same. I think this guy, while not ideal in the pass rush need, could add a lot. If we can take our eyes off of the sack stat and think about disrupting the passing game, while helping an offense get 1 dimensional, I can look at this and see a plausible fit from a few different angles.

    • Bob says:

      That’s my main concern, we need a DT that can play Bryant’s spot or Mebane and the 3 tech if someone is injured. Yes, the pass rush need to improve but we paid Bryant and Mebane and cutting them just to upgrade the pass rush isn’t likely in my opinion. Suppose we look for that smaller 3 tech to rush and play 3 downs, if Bryant is injured the team suddenly can’t stuff the run, even at the end of the season our bigs were getting pushed around too much in Atlanta and Washington, perhaps an upgrade in size for Bryant as well as rotational DT depth isn’t something to not write off completely in round 1-3 in addition to some more pass rushing front 7 players.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      The 49ers In the Superbowl didn’t start ripping off runs until after Ravens Ngata was hurt. He weighs in at 330 and is very active on the line. I like DT about that size or larger as long as they have high energy level through out the game.

  7. peter says:

    JW-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5qmC0zfxoM

    Forgive me if you have to cut and paste this instead of cliking the link. This is Jenkins during the SEC championship. FIrst play in the series, Jenkins is the man to run down the ball carrier. ABout a 1:36 in he drags a guy to get a sack against McCarron, then from about that point on Alabama, for my money the best O-line in the country last year double teams him the rest of the way.

    I get the concern about his weight and conditioning as well, yet I have yet to see a play where he takes off. Not one play. Even in the Jordan Reed highlights against A&M if he’s not in the play he’s just hanging around hands on his hip, and that’s a guy 100 pounds lighter not getting mauled every play.

    Every year we all have people we Bang the drum for and this year Jonathan Jenkins is the dude for me. Him in the first, Khaseem Greene (fingers crossed) in the second, and offensive help in three and four…

    • JW says:

      Interesting. Thank you. I think I’m right there with you on Jenkins. This kid plays hard and he wreaks havoc. I like that.

      I don’t know about O Line picks as you suggest, I think the only guy that would intrigue me at the O line position in round 3 would be Warford- because I do think that kid is really special, and that’s only if all the preferred WR options were gone. And I don’t think he’ll be there anyway. But going big on D in round 1, supplementing that with a speedy linebacker in round 2? Then grabbing a WR/Joker in 3? Yeah, I like that.

      I think this team is going to have to think hard about blitzing more creatively and more often next season, or as I mentioned in the comments Rob posted above, they have to think about going with some different alignments in obvious passing downs. I just have my doubts they’re going to find the personnel they need to run the 4-3U at the level they want all the time while staying true to PC’s rush 4 preference. Great coaches adapt, and he might have to do that.

      • Bob says:

        I like your thinking here as well (Peter and JW), big DT in round 1, fast WIL in round 2, and look for that jocker TE in round 3.

        It’s true that 3 tech DT seemed to be hard to rate and find but another type of defensive tackle that is hard to find is that true 350 lb monster nose tackle. It could work having Red and another giant nose two gaping with Mebane maybe rotating to stay fresh in both spots (3 and 1 or 0) while the LEO and a slightly undersized interior player just focus on rushing. Miami’s front 4 comes to mind with Wake as the speed DE rusher and Soliai as the monster nose along with Starks and another edge rusher in Odrik. I believe they sub out the nose(Soliai) and put in another speed edge rusher in Odrik’s place on passing downs. Seattle could move to a front like that but by bringing back Branch, you probably don’t need to draft Jenkins. If you don’t bring back Branch though and can’t get a Short or Richardson, then picking Jenkins and selecting Jordan Hill later could be a formidable line to deal with. You could still only pick up Starks in FA and have Bryant, Mebane, Jenkins, Irvin, and Scruggs rotating. It would be difficult to run against that and adding a blitzing LB to the equation you have the makings for a pretty solid front 7.

    • Nate Dogg says:

      That video has me more interested in Fluker than Jenkins.

      • D says:

        I agree, Fluker is dominant. I especially like how Jones who is suppose to be a speed specialist is neutralized by those long arms and then Jenkins who is a mammoth is getting driven back.

      • JW says:

        Fluker is impressive. I really like him as a talent.

      • peter says:

        Fluker’s the man to be sure….for me I pretty much doubt the Seahawks will draft an O-linemen in the first, and Fluker to me would and should go to a team picking much higher then the 25th spot.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      It’s funny, I see the same tape and see the exact opposite.

      That sack at 1:36 (against Warmack no less) was clearly a QB error. That was a pass that was supposed to be long gone and Warmack literally lets him go. He didn’t even bother to look as he went by. He certainly didn’t drag anyone with him. It was garbage clean up.

      I watch that tape as well as the Auburn tape, where I expected he’d look better, and I see a guy with almost no leg drive. Very bad pad level in all three videos. If you told me he wasn’t 295 with the way he gets almost zero movement, I’d think you were a liar.

      That said, I can’t imagine what John Jenkins could be if he could figure out leverage and could get some leg drive. I look at that tape, and the only time I ever see him more than 3 feet into the backfield, if is the OL is absorbing his outside rush or if the other team just makes a mistake. I don’t see a guy that lives in the backfield at all — in fact I see a guy that barely needs to be double teamed by a single guard.

      I get that he’s a ‘World Theory’ prospect. But he just looks like a guy that doesn’t do much of anything. I don’t see a guy as strong as 358 lbs should look. Either in the legs or in the upper body.

      We’ll just have to agree to disagree. I don’t see a disruptive force here at all. Especially considering the fact that there are probably 4 teammates around him that will be playing on sundays. He isn’t getting double teamed repeatedly and he’s not doing anything with his opportunities when he gets them.

      • Trudy Beekman says:

        Agree with this. Jenkins and Gaithers look pretty mediocre to me. Gaithers especially in the GT tape gets effectively cut block by the center about 10 times in a row, and doesn’t flash a moment of athleticism. It might have been more, but I had to stop watching. To me, neither of these guys are what we are after.

        Hankins is a bit of a different story, and I think is along the lines of what I had envisioned could be done with Lotulelei at the 3-tech, but I see him being the first NT after Lotulelei off the board, probably around where the Saints pick at 15. Jesse Williams didn’t wow me, just pretty solid at holding the point of attack against double teams, nothing that I think the Seahawks need.

        I’m all about the Kawann Short pick as I think he could be used at the 1 and 3, and again, that wingspan is so awesome. Not too hot on Sylvester Williams in the first either.

        I didn’t have the time to comment on the Khaseem Greene projections this week, but I can’t say I’m a big fan of him at 25. I think he’s a solid player and obviously has the production and character, but this is a guy that is going to play 60% of snaps in probably the least important position on this defense. I haven’t gotten too deep into WILL tape this year, but guys like Lavonte David (ideal WILL IMO) and Sean Spence were around in late 2-mid 3 last year. Undersized OLB aren’t at a premium, and there is also a pool of guys from the SS crowd that could convert that I’m sure already have WILL experience.

        If someone like Short isn’t available, or we’ve addressed DT in FA, I think Hopkins or a polished TE is the player that has the most impact this year. I don’t think there is another receiver in this draft that could come in year 1 and be as solid as Hopkins. His ceiling might not be AJ Green high, but it looks to be about Sidney Rice high … and I sure wouldn’t mind having two Sidney Rice’s going forward. I know you’ve covered him before, Rob, and I was kind of wishy-washy when I saw guys like Richardson, Floyd, Short, etc. being projected round 2 by the national pundits, but they former 2 are getting the recognition they deserve and look to be out of reach.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I haven’t checked the numbers from 2012, but that would mean playing nickel 40% of the time. That doesn’t seem realistic given how many more first and second downs you face in a season.

          • Trudy Beekman says:

            Ok, I thought I had read that WILL was only in 60% of snaps. Hill played 89% of snaps in 2011 season per RotoWorld.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Thanks for the 2011 info. I think I’d be pretty happy with 89% of a first round pick. Irvin didn’t play 89% after all.

            • Attyla the Hawk says:

              Hill played 50.1% of the defensive snaps in 2012.

              I wouldn’t be surprised if Hill played 89% in 2011. We had Wright as a rookie, and Hawthorne as a gimp. Hill was leaned on heavily that year.

              In 2012, Wright played 86.8% of the total defensive snaps. Wagner played 85.1%

        • Phil says:

          My thinking has switched from the inside of the D line to the outside. I think the biggest need for the Seahawks is to find a replacement for Clemons if he doesn’t recover quickly from his ACL injury. Without him, our pass rush is almost non-existant. Maybe Irvin’s skill set will dramatically improve over the off season, but I think that’s wishful thinking.

          If Clemons does quickly recover, it won’t hurt to have another guy competing with Irvin for playing time.

          • Trudy Beekman says:

            I agree that LEO could be a target in Round 1, but who? Mingo and Jarvis Jones are both ideal LEO’s IMO, but both should be gone before 25. If Jones isn’t gone, it will have everything to do with his spinal stenosis. I’m not sure that Ansah is an ideal fit at LEO. He looks more like a power 4-3 DE, and didn’t flash any of the speed/bend around the edge or any pass-rush moves other than a bull-rush IMO.

            So beyond Mingo and Jones, I haven’t seen anyone yet that looks like a potential LEO target, other than maybe Michael Buchannan. He’s not perfect for the LEO, and reminds me a bit of Andre Branch.

      • peter says:

        Let’s see….he gets doubled at:

        0:21, 0:33, 0:47, So that’s exactly half of the snaps at that point.

        Then at 1:20 he works the RG back into Mccarron

        Then you say tomato I say tomahto…at 1:36 he gets one on one with Warmack as Mccarron tries to work a 5 or maybe 7 step drop, drives Warmack back and maybe he does get let by after “war-daddy” gets smacked….

  8. DHawk says:

    When I watched the senior bowl practices I didn’t see a much difference between Jenkins and Montori Hughes (6047 328 with the same wingspan and maybe better speed). I would think that if Seattle wants to add another big body, they could pick up Hughes in the 3rd round.

    Rob, you mentioned that finding a great 3-tech is like finding gold dust, which I agree. And I think the closest thing I’ve seen to the historical prototype (Warren Sapp) in the past several drafts is Sheldon Richardson, which is why I doubt he falls past the mid-teens. However, sometimes finding a good, or even great 3-tech is a process of good analysis and good luck – and “good luck” in drafting is enhanced purely by the concept of numbers. The more picks (combined with thorough scouting and analysis) the better chance that a good player may emerge. To me, the first key to this concept is spending higher draft picks on elite talent or elite skills or elite production (and if the board falls right, maybe the player has more than one of those characteristics). This is why Khaseem Greene is probably a player Seattle is looking at in the first or second round (above average talent + above average skills + elite production). This approach appears in the first two rounds of every JS-PC draft, including James Carpenter (underrated production + above average athleticism + elite strength). It was even more obvious with Earl Thomas, Russell Okung, Bobby Wagner, etc.

    The second key to this concept is accumulating extra mid-to-late draft picks (4th-7th rounds) and using multiple picks in one draft or over several drafts at the same position or positional area. JS has stated that he would look at taking a QB in every draft because the position is so valuable. We have seen Schneider apply this already in areas such as defensive back, offensive line, and now – possibly at 3-tech. I think he’s already in the process of hunting out a good or great 3-tech in the mid to late rounds (especially if one isn’t available in the first round). The process started last year with Scruggs and Howard (I remember Schneider talking about Scruggs being one of his favorite picks last year because he felt like he was getting so much value in a 7th round pick – and based on contribution, so far, he has been right). If Scruggs adds 6-10 of muscle this offseason (gets up to 290-295), without losing speed or quickness, he may contribute even more next year.

    This brings me to a question. Knowing that one way to get a great 3-tech is to hit a home run on a high first round pick, but also knowing that another way to get a great 3-tech is to churn mid-to-late round picks (Atkins and Melton, as you have many times pointed out, we’re both 4th round picks), which would you rather have (assuming we re-sign Branch):

    1. Kawann Short (only “higher rated” 3-tech likely to be available at our pick) in the first round?

    Or

    2. Jordan Hill (6015 294) in the 3rd-4th round + Kaleb Ramsey (about 6-2 to 6-3 and 295) in the 4th-6th round to add to the Scruggs and Howard “churn for a great 3-tech?”

    Thanks, and also, this is a fantastic site for Seahawks fans and anyone who is a fan of the NFL Draft.

    • SunPathPaul says:

      Good write up DHawk! Now I understand just that much more about the Seahawks and PC/JS…

      I like the Jordan Hill idea a lot. I feel they are going to lean on exactly what you said…the great scouting to add to the “churn-pool” of potential talented players…

      I wonder which WR and TE’s would be good later picks for the Seahawks if they avoid them in R1-3…
      WR Kaufman 6-4 maybe? Courtney Gardner 6-3 WR? BJ Stewart 6-5 TE? hmmmm…

    • Rob Staton says:

      This is a fantastic post DHawk and a great question to finish. And I can completely see where you’re coming from with the suggestion that Schneider is almost hunting for that 3-tech in the mid rounds, sensing he can find the next Atkins hidden away from everyone else. To answer your question, I’d go for option number two. I’m a big fan of Jordan Hill and Kaleb Ramsey — if he can stay healthy — would be a tremendous pick. As much as I like Short, I’m not sold like I am with Sheldon Richardson that he’s what this team needs to solve this problem. And I do think if we keep looking, we can find that elusive 3-tech. We might all panic in free agency if they don’t make a splash at DT, we might panic even more if they then draft a guy like Khaseem Greene in round one. But the plan all along may be to keep looking, keep searching in those middle rounds.

      • DHawk says:

        Thanks for the response. I’m of the same thinking, I would rather take two “overlooked or sleeper” 3-Techs in the mid-to-late rounds every year for 2-3 years than use a first round pick on a 3-tech that wasn’t elite in 1-2 categories. There’s a tipping point for some positions (QB, 3-tech and rush DE for example) where the player is either above the line so to speak or below the line, and below the line means not able to fulfill the responsibility for the scheme to succeed…If you have an adequate RG or RT, or an adequate 1-tech, they can still do enough for the scheme and gameplan to work. But with 3-tech, they either provide a consistent pass rush against even good NFL guards or they don’t. There’s not a lot of in-between. A 3-tech that gets there part of the time, or is inconsistent getting there (Jason Jones right now, injury or no injury the only thing that matters is results), means that too much unpredictability is introduced into that area of the scheme and the gameplan has to adjust (i.e. more blitzes to compensate).

        I’ve noticed the past several years that, at first blush, the Seahawk’s drafts have seemed somewhat underwhelming when analyzed against the “national consensus” but have actually brought in several starters and a lot of “overlooked” (under-scouted, over-scrutinized for the wrong things, etc.) talent. After deeper review post-draft, I’ve found that the round 1-2 picks (and sometimes round 3) will have key elite qualities that strengthen the overall scheme – and the later round picks unearthed at least a few players, that upon more analysis, actually had special qualities. Schneider also plays a sheer numbers game with those later round picks to increase the probability of success. I know that Pete has said that it will be hard for 10 rookies to make the team, which is probably right. But when the dust settles, I won’t be surprised if Seattle still ends up drafting 8-10 players (after all trades) just to keep with the concept of higher probability with more picks. I think that JS-PC don’t care if only 6-7 out of 10 rookies make the team, they just care about bringing in alot of players and really working them for several months to see if they have unearthed a talent or not. I’m guessing that Schneider doesn’t see cutting a 4th, 6th and 7th round pick from one draft as a “big miss” if two 5th rounders and a second 7th rounder end up being above-average starters.

        I could see Schneider and Carroll being completely satisfied with something like Greene in the first, a WR or TE in the second, a Hill type 3-tech in the 3rd, a Ramsey type 3-tech in the 5th, and adding depth (and competition) at Leo, Nickel CB, WR and OT through the rest of the mid to late round picks. It might not be sexy to me, and it would probably be blasted by the national media, but when this draft is all said and done, I won’t be surprised if Schneider has brought in more key talent for key needs…..based on the prior 3 John Schneider drafts, the probabilities favor just that…

        • peter says:

          Awesome supposition! Not dissimilar to perhaps a large college program being able to bring in a ton of recruits.

    • Sawker_Dawg says:

      Great points DHawk. It seems that the first two picks (and one could argue the first three) of all PC/JS drafts were drafted to be starters. I realize our roster is deeper now with less starter holes to fill so once FA is over, I see us taking players with the R1 and R2 picks to be starters. That might seem obvious since the players drafted that high are thought of as being closer to starting. What I mean is that there might be an OT that provides a bigger upgrade over Breno, than say Short would over Branch (if we re-sign) or Howard or other DT’s on the roster. I think the draft is actually harder now for PC/JS because we don’t have too many obvious holes to fill and much of it will be trying to provide competition to current starters or even take over the starter role.

  9. nick says:

    Rob,
    I viewed your google chat the other day over at Fieldgulls, great stuff Tom Hardy.
    I know it is not JC/PC modus operandi to trade up but don’t you wish they would? Wouldn’t that be just as unpredictable as their previous drafts? Haven’t they hinted towards that in the past? I.E. (paraphrasing Carroll) “all our picks may not make the team this year” or years previous when JS talked about getting a qb and that he would trade up if he were the right guy.
    It just seems to me that with 10, potentially 12 draft picks and a dispensible starting caliber qb (Flynn) that this is the year they make a big move up the draft and get their 3 tech.
    If things continue to go how they went this year and we continue to be successfull then when will we ever get that highly touted 3 tech.
    I dont comment on your website often but the last time I did it was to ask you about your thoughts on Bruce Irvin prior to last years draft. I’m really into the draft process. I live in NYC and went to the drafts in 2009, 2010 to see Curry, Okung, Thomas get drafted. In hindsight it always seems that PC/JS have hinted about their intentions going into the draft. This year is no different. I have strong feelings that they trade up in this years draft to get that vaunted 3-tech. I see no reason they wouldn’t. Their overall team needs are at an all time low. We need a Will lb but PC/JS have shown the ability to draft those guys in later rounds.
    Thoughts?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’ve learnt never to rule anything out with this front office Nick. Could they trade up? For sure. I’m not sure whether they’d be willing to pull an Atlanta and use future first round picks, but perhaps using a third rounder to get up to #17 is possible. Dallas at #18 and NYG at #19 stand to look at interior pass rushers. In the unlikely event Sheldon Richardson dropped to #17, they could theoretically trade with Pittsburgh to get their guy. That kind of move I can see. Not necessarily the big bold move into the top ten.

  10. Hay stacker says:

    Rob, you said yesterday that there wasn’t really many trade options on our roster and the only real options I see are Flynn and Washington packaged together. The main question is would we put those two together with our second for someone else’s second or them and our third for someone’s second. How plausible is it to trade them plus picks for a second pick?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it’s going to be very difficult to trade Flynn in that range. Perhaps a move up in rounds 3-4 is possible depending on interest. But I do think we’ll struggle to get much value via trade.

  11. ChavaC says:

    I could see picking one of these guys to help out the ends, but what about the Jason Jones position? It seems like the big problem for most of the season was getting out of third and long situations, despite doing a good job of getting teams into them. I know it’s not the everydown production you could get from the 3 tech but you could call it narrowing in on our biggest deficiency in the pass rush. Do you see any tweener ends or quicker tackles that could viewed as potential upgrades over Jones?

    • Phil says:

      “Do you see any tweener ends or quicker tackles that could viewed as potential upgrades over Jones?”

      Check out Chris Jones from Bowling Green, but not if he costs a #1 or #2 pick.

  12. Recon_Hawk says:

    Great piece, Rob. I’m glad to see you’re at least open to the possibility off adding a big body at the 3-tech. I thought you’d be dead set on a 295 lb guy or no one at all, so props.

    Now, continuing on with this hypothetical. Let’s say we do draft one of the 3 big DTs you brought up. The pass-rush, in a sense, becomes even more important at other positions because we are filling the base DT with a limited pass rusher.

    Where do you see the next most important need is at in creating a pass-rush?

    The DE spot Irvin played last year? The Jason Jones role with another 270 lb mobile guy? How about the Clint McDonald position, with a 290-300 lb DT?

    Heck, maybe even a WLB who can blitz and pressure the QB?

    • Rob Staton says:

      If they go for size inside, I think they have to enhance the game plan from last year. Keep trying to put teams in third and long situations, but improve the execution defending those key downs. That to me makes the Jason Jones type position – the situational interior pass rusher – incredibly vital. That might mean looking at Datone Jones if available in round two. So for example, you could go John Jenkins at #25, Datone Jones at #56. I think Jones would be ideal for that type of role… he’s a bit of a tweener anyway but he can rush.

      A plan like this makes some sense. But then I suppose you could also form an argument that says re-sign Alan Branch, draft Jones at #56 anyway and then use the #25 pick perhaps for a linebacker like Khaseem Greene or a target for Wilson. After all, the Seahawks managed to get into favourable 3rd down situations on defense. They just couldn’t defend 3rd and long.

      • Phil says:

        Rob – I like the idea of a situational interior pass rusher and for that role, I like Jones. But, I’m thinking CHRIS Jones — not DATONE Jones. Still waiting for your thoughts on him ….

  13. Stuart says:

    We have heard that the new DC plans to open it up more and plans to blitz more often. In that case this has me thinking about OLB Jarvis Jones. We know that man is a terror when he rushes. With him rushing often this could change the entire look of our defense, QB PRESSURE…

    Then in R-3 and R-4 we draft DT Montori Hughes and DT J. Hill, the order depends on how PC/JS rate them. With this strategy we dont need to go after any expensive FA but we do re-sign DT Branch. In R-2 TE Reed would be great. This works for the team payroll, improve depths and keeps all our draft picks intact (12 picks) because we do need a QB late (Scott?) and also spend a late pick on that kicker from Florida.

    If Greene is a better fit than Jones then flip flop the players…

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m sceptical about the suggestion Dan Quinn is going to ‘open things up’. From what I understand that’s second hand info and I doubt Quinn has formulated a game plan in February. We also have to remember this is Pete Carroll’s defense and he’s shown in many years as a coach that he likes to try and create pressure with a front four. I really like Jarvis Jones as a prospect but I maintain if any team is going to show caution about his spinal stenosis, it’ll be PC’s Seahawks.

  14. SunPathPaul says:

    What do you guys think Sedrick Ellis would do for the Seahawks?

    He is a FA this year, and New Orleans might not can afford him…

    Would he fit well?? Better than Starks?

    • Michael says:

      I don’t think he is as good a player as Starks.

      • Hay stacker says:

        Plus ellis is 32 or 33. I don’t see Seattle trying him out. That’s alot of miles on a DT.

        • SunPathPaul says:

          He is only 27. Was a R1 pick, and was just curious…

          Rob- any ideas?? Would he collapse the pocket?

          • Hay stacker says:

            My bad, I got his age mixed up when looking at the list on cbssports

          • Colin says:

            Sedrick Ellis was a highly rated prospect coming out, that has since been a complete disappointment in New Orleans.

            • Michael says:

              It’s also worth noting that Ellis has underwhelmed in the very role we would want him for. I would much rather go Melton or Starks who are somewhat proven commodities, or Glen Dorsey who has failed as a 3-4 end, but could excel as a pass rushing 4-3 DT.

  15. Kenny Sloth says:

    Jonathon Jenkins probably won’t be available at 25. He probably will be overdrafted, but won’t be available for us.

    • Michael says:

      Just read the rest of the comments. Totally agree with you, as you can see a few posts down from here…

  16. Ed says:

    What about Dorsey for KC. Isn’t he a FA and that 3 technique (Sapp type). He couldn’t play in the 3-4, but his style seems to be what we are looking for.

  17. Kenny Sloth says:

    I thinkk the seahawks resign Jason Jones. He has extremely violent hands. Even when double teamed I remember seeing him driving his man/men back.

  18. Michael says:

    I don’t think Jonathan Jenkins makes it to #25. Teams switching to a 3-4 always seem to reach to get their NT and Jekinks looks like the one guy that will absolutely be able a NT. Remember what Dontari Poe’s combine performance did for his draft stock? If Jenkins has a decent showing in Indianapolis I think he comes off the board NLT #24 (Colts) since they haven’t really nailed down the middle since their conversion last year.

    I believe the Eagles and Saints will also be switching, and I’ve heard rumors that if Melton is not re-signed/franchised by the Bears, that they would consider making the switch as well. There are probably other teams that I don’t know about that consider NT a priority too.

    Dontari Poe, Phil Taylor, Vince Wilfork, B.J. Raji, Casey Hampton. None of those guys lasted past #21.

    • SunPathPaul says:

      Man I hope Chicago goes for that 3-4 and lets Melton walk! That could be our blessing waiting to happen!

      • Colin says:

        It’s certainly possible they could go that route, especially with Lance Briggs and Brian Urlacher about ready to hang em up.

  19. Darnell says:

    What this tells me is that regardless of need you just can’t opt for someone from this flawed class of DTs if Ertz or Hopkins is available. The grade on the latter two is going to be too high to justify.

  20. Hay stacker says:

    Here’s a hypothetical scenario. Let me know what you guys think. Seattle grabs micheal Johnson from the bengals to replace Clemons, since your set at DE, slide Irvin to WLB ( he has got the side to side speed, the only thing I’m not sure about is how good he would be in coverage) that way your freed up to take the BPA off our draft board. Our front 4 would be Bryant, mebane, DT from draft, then Johnson. Clemons could then rotate in and out off Jason jone’s position and Irvin is our WLB… Thoughts?

    • Michael says:

      Grabbing Michael Johnson would be nice, but probably not cheap. I don’t think Irvin to WIL is such a great idea for a few reasons:

      First I simply don’t think you want to put all of the extra responsibility on his plate since he doesn’t appear to be the most cerebral guy on the field. Then there is the issue of our current scheme, which calls for very little LB pass rushing, thus negating Irvin’s greatest strength. Finally, while it would in theory be filling the WLB hole, you would also be opening up a hole at Irvin’s current position as Red’s replacement on passing downs. I suppose you could ask Irvin to play 1st and 2nd down at WIL then put his hand in the ground on 3rd down, but then you end up leaving K.J. or a CB on the field in nickle which is mostly why the WIL is such a concern to begin with, not to mention that Irvin would be exhausted by the 4th quarter when you need him most.

      I really hope we go BPA at #25, but I don’t think they need to move Irvin to WIL to accommodate that.

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      Oof. No way, Michael Johnson is the next Ray Edwards. Consistent pressure up the middle by Geno Atkins. Clemons is WAAAY too small to play the Jones role. Irvin isn’t good enough in coverage to play WLB.

  21. Brian says:

    One thing to keep in mind: PC placing a priority on stopping the run first and putting the other team in third and long situations meant that Branch or any other space eating DT is acceptable on first and second down. While more penetration would of course be nice, filling a running lane and taking out blockers will tendon the paramount responsibility on downs one and two.

    It’s obvious passing downs, third down and end of game situations that a Jason Jones type player is coveted. Like Irvin that DT is situational and more for the 4 – 3 Under alignment.

    All this analysis about which DT should take this into account, with the first question being which kind of DT would you expect the Hawks to draft for? And if a viable penetrating / passing downs DT isn’t available at the 25 th spot, does anyone believe that JS / PC will use that pick to replace Branch? I think there’s no way in h*ll that that happens. At least not with a first pick. Picks for a first and secind down DT probably don’t start until round four at the earliest.

    Like last years WR class that JS / PC chose to pass on entirely, I think they’ll treat using a pick for a pass rush / third down DT the same way if they don’t like what’s available.

    Which is why I keep coming back to Starks in FA as a likely pick up. Which would be akin to when we signed Robert Gallery, who wasn’t cheap (and didn’t work out as intended) but it bought us time and the ability to use our picks in the draft to fill other areas of need.

  22. Brian says:

    Oh and there is no way that Irvin will be moved to WLB. Or that Kam gets moved there either. Irvin doesn’t play in space. And Kam is the very best option at SS on first and second down.

    What most aren’t giving Leroy Hill proper credit for is that he was an excellent first and secund down WLB last season. But he has lost a step for coverage and is useless in the nickel.

    The solution at WLB is a player who is FAST who can cover and be sent on the occasional blitz and get home. It’s probably something of a hybrid safety / LB / corner type player. That isn’t Irvin. And it’s isn’t Kam either.

    • Michael says:

      perhaps a former safety who is now playing linebacker… sound like anyone we may have heard of?

  23. OakHarborHawk says:

    I’m really liking Khaseem Greene and wouldn’t be too upset if they take him early, but would prefer if we could get him in the second by trading up. Can’t argue about a player who has a knack for creating turnovers. Another reason I would like them to take the honey badger if around in the 6th or 7th even if hes just going to be a special teamer and depth.

    I just don’t see PC/JS taking a DT in the first round if we’re not getting one of our top 3 rate DTs. I really wish we go BPA for whoever is going to fall since a lot of teams are going to be overdrafting QBs, Oline, NTs, and you’ll always have a few reaches. I wouldn’t mind overdrafting a WILL or a TE at #25 since you can get your guy like they did with Irvin last year.

    Whatever pick our made I have faith in PC/JS after the crazy turnaround this team has had in three years. If you told me we would be a Superbowl contender with one of the youngest teams in the league after the mess that Ruskell and Mora left I’d have laughed you out of the room. Go hawks.

    • Madmarkus says:

      For some reason felt like both Leroy Hill and Malcolm Smith with his injuries looks to me Khaseem Green fits the bill. The linebacker corp would be as young as the Secondary and in place for quite time.

  24. Zach says:

    Out of the “big” d tackles who do you like best Rob? Hankins seems to run hot and cold,Brandon Williams is raw,Jesse Williams is somewhat intriguing just seems like the type of dude who will land on a team and be a fixture for a long time,John Jenkins is really intriguing due to his size and his agility.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m not blown away by any of them to be honest. I like Williams but would like him even more if I was a Green Bay fan looking for a 5-tech. Jenkins is hot and cold. I thought the Alabama game was pretty ugly. Hankins doesn’t do anything for me.

    • Jeb says:

      Jenkins reminds me of Mt. Cody few years back, all hypes and went to SD with our original 2nd pick for Whitehurst that has never been heard of since. I think he will be there in 2nd rd if we choose to trade down or up for him. JS/PC had shown their ability to draft LB in the mid-rd so I don’t think K Green is our first pick either, 2nd maybe. Instead of aging DT from Miami, might as well pick up that young DT (forgot his name) from Raiders who is younger with more upside if we choose to pony up that kind of money. I expect Starks is going to cost at least 7~8 mil a year. Richard Seymour might be a better option than Starks too because we really don’t know how he will perform without big Paul Soliali play next to him. Soliali distroyed our OL in Miami games, Starks not so much.

  25. Christon says:

    I’d be more excited about drafting a RT at #25 than one of these guys…Common D.J. Fluker!

  26. peter says:

    Rob,

    Are there any DE’s that you may consider for your mock at 25? Last year it seemed everyone in their mom came to your site to argue their case for their preferred sack specialist…this year not yet…

    But in your last Mock you dropped as an example Dion Jordan to the 37th spot…..And Carrol/Schneider explicitly said improving the pass rush was the main focus.

    I like the dialog(ue) above abotu a big ol’ dude,a dn your pieces on even better big ol’ dudes, liek Floyd, Richardson, and I think Khaseem Greene is the pick even in the first round, so with that long run on sentence instead of a 3-tech should we keep our eyes out for a 4-3 end?

    • Rob Staton says:

      We’ve looked at some ends but I think it’ll be difficult to find a pure LEO at #25. Plus if you draft a LEO one year after Bruce Irvin, and start him ahead of Irvin, what does that say about last years pick? Jordan had only five sacks in 2012, Alex Okafor has violent hands and a decent frame, but he’s not a great speed rusher. I wouldn’t rule out a DE but I think it’ll be tough.

      • peter says:

        Thanks sir!

        I just reference Dion Jordan, since you had the piece about him way back in the last season, and honestly I thought I was looking at Lavasier Tunie playing end, and thought at the time…yikes this dude is going to get trucked by O-linemen in the NFL.

        I’m thinking about Irvin in fact at the LEO and someone to play in the spot Irvin occupied prior to Clemons getting hurt, sort of like the year the Hawks had Clemons and Brock playing?

  27. Hay stacker says:

    I just read that lions gm Mayhew doesn’t plan on using the franchise on any players. Hopefully that means we might be able to bring cliff auvril in and potentially sign him

    • SunPathPaul says:

      That’s good possible news. If Chicago goes to the 3-4 and releases Melton, we could possibly pick up BOTH!

      That would be one heck of a upgrade even BEFORE the draft… If Melton stays, Starks and Avril sounds good!

      • Hay stacker says:

        The only bad thing with auvril is; is his play enhanced because he’s playing along side suh who is constantly double teamed and auvril is 1vs1. So the question is how’s his play going to be with us since we don’t have a suh type DT that draws those dbl teams. Rob, what’s your thinking on auvril play on our D-line?

    • Rob Staton says:

      He turned down $10m a year before the 2012 season.

      • SunPathPaul says:

        Ok Rob, so he wants BIG bucks, but if they liked his pass rush, is there a double team DT even close to Suh that we could draft to make this work? Starks help here?

  28. Dobbs says:

    Of the 3 videos, it felt like Hankins was the best. He either drew double-teams or generally was able to get by his man when left in a 1 on 1 situation.

  29. SunPathPaul says:

    The Ravens have to sign Flacco, and that is pricey! He is prob going to make around 20 million a year. Ravens have to let go or trade some players to make this work… Here are their top 10-
    OLB Terrell Suggs — $13,020,000
    DT Haloti Ngata — $11,500,000
    WR Anquan Boldin — $7,531,250
    OG Marshal Yanda — $7,450,000
    RB Ray Rice — $5,750,000
    CB Lardarius Webb — $5,385,000
    OT Michael Oher — $4,955,000
    WR Jacoby Jones — $4,900,000
    FB Vonta Leach — $4,333,334
    LB Jameel McClain — $4,200,000
    TOTAL — $69,024,584

    Anyone on their we might target?? Haloti Ngata is 29 going into his 8th year as a DT.
    Would we want Haloti?? He is expensive, but does he fit for us?? Rob??

    What about Webb as a CB, or McClain as a LB? I’m at a loss of how this scheme shift occurs between teams I don’t know anything about…

    • Rob Staton says:

      There’s no way Baltimore will move Ngata.

      • Hay stacker says:

        What about oher? I know he wasn’t the LT they were hoping for and moved him to RT. im not sure how hes lived up to expectations for a RT. Rob, is there a chance they cut or trade him so they can get away from his salary and draft a cheaper RT so they can resign Flacco? I think he would be a better option for us at RT instead of giacomini just because I’m tired of brenos play killing penalties. What I don’t know is if he would match up with our scheme?

        • Rob Staton says:

          The Ravens don’t need to cut or trade anyone.

          • SunPathPaul says:

            Rob, I don’t think that is true. There are many reports of Ravens GM Ozzie Newsome saying he WON’T do what they did after their first SB, they won’t sell out to try and win a second SB in a row…caused that cost them long term with the salary cap. They are more so wanting to follow our lead and draft youth to keep their team competitive.

            Someone is gone here, is not 2-3 players JUST so they can sign Flacco… Now will any of them be someone we want, who knows?

            • Rob Staton says:

              The salary for the players tallied is less than the salary for Seattle’s comparative 10-11 high earners. Less by about $3m. And if Flacco becomes difficult to sign he gets franchised. This will be no problem at all. Tom Brady earns around $20m in 2013 and it’s not like New England are suddenly going to have a fire sale. And neither will Baltimore. It’s a bit Madden 13 esque to consider big high profile deals with the Super Bowl Champs.

            • Colin says:

              Bud they are $16 million under the cap… they are not pressing to move anybody.

  30. A. Simmons says:

    I hope we keep on bringing in guys like the New York Giants. The real key to a great pass rush is a bunch of quality pass rushers over a single great guy. If you have a single great guy, all the opponent does is rotate protection to stop him. If that happens, you’re back at square one. We should keep drafting pass rushers like QBs, so we have as many threats on the roster as possible.

    • SunPathPaul says:

      Great Idea Simmons…depth is a true winner…fresh legs on the field is a big help late in games…Plus 3 or great attackers versus 1 like you say, is SO much harder to protect against…

      I hope we get at least one experienced FA DT or DE, then draft a few more… Starks and Avril would be nice!

  31. SunPathPaul says:

    Rob, what do you think PC/JS would think about Chris Canty from the Giants. He is a 6-7, 317 lb 30 year old DT… Would a 1-2 year incentive based contract be feasible?? Just checking, as I don’t have the depth of knowledge of scheme, and whether he could fit with Seattle…