Three O-line scenarios for the Seahawks

January 20th, 2016 | Written by Rob Staton

What does the future hold for Russell Okung?

This is going to be the biggest talking point of the off-season. Finding consistency on the O-line is the greatest priority for this team per Pete Carroll — and nobody is going to rush to dispute that.

It’s also a difficult and complex conundrum to solve with Russell Okung and J.R. Sweezy becoming free agents.

Brian Nemhauser has put together an excellent piece on Tom Cable that I’d recommend reading. I wanted to highlight one part in particular:

Letting Sweezy and Okung walk would probably make a lot of Seahawks fans happy. Be careful what you wish for. Continuity is a almost as important as talent when it comes to forging a good offensive line. Starting over at square one every offseason is not a great way to build a group that can dominate. It is a surefire way to begin the season with a struggling unit once again.

So much about line play, especially pass protection, has to do with communication and recognition. No two players on the Seahawks line this year had played a snap next to the either player that flanked them before this season started. That is about the worst-case scenario.

Consistency and continuity is the most underrated characteristic of an offensive line. Ploughing high picks or expensive free agents into an O-line isn’t a solution on its own. The Seahawks, for example, have spent as much on their O-line since Pete Carroll arrived in Seattle as any team in the league. Two first rounders (including a #6 pick), a second rounder, a third rounder and two fourth rounders last year. They also signed Robert Gallery in 2011.

People have called for that level of investment again — almost forgetting that the Seahawks have tried, in vain, to create a fantastic line using high picks in the draft.

Talent is important — but an O-line is at its best when five guys function as one. When they have the timing, understanding end execution down to a tee. When that happens — you can have success. Even if you aren’t fielding Zack Martin and Tyron Smith.

Changes up front (losing Unger, Giacomini, McQuistan, Carpenter) have prevented a cohesive unit coming together. And while it might sound attractive to simply replace Okung and Sweezy with picks or a big name free agent — it might just add to further growing pains in 2016.

At the same time, it’s not as simple as going out and re-signing Okung and Sweezy. They’re unlikely to overpay to keep either — and both players might have to enter free agency and talk to other teams to establish their true market. If the price goes beyond the Seahawks’ value — they probably move on. And who could blame them?

That doesn’t mean they’ll be easy to replace. Rookies don’t offer any guarantee to come in and play at a high level. They’re not able to replace Okung with another top-ten draft pick after all. Big name free agents don’t always pan out — and they have to be able to fit Seattle’s blocking scheme.

It’s also worth noting that one of the key free agents people want the Seahawks to sign — Alex Boone — was an undrafted free agent in 2009. You can find pieces for an O-line at any stage in the draft if you know what to look for. The Cowboys and their three first rounders up front are the exception and not the rule — and that supposed elite line in Dallas hasn’t prevented Tony Romo from missing considerable time through injury.

That said — if consistency and improved performance up front is the priority — are you going to start entrusting UDFA’s and late-round rookies to get you there? There’s also no guarantee a lineman taken at #26 will be any better than the guy they took at #25 in 2011 (James Carpenter).

So yeah, it’s a dilemma all right. And one they absolutely have to get right.

Here are three different scenarios, debating what might happen up front…

‘Evolution, not revolution’

Re-sign Okung ($7-8m APY as projected by John Clayton)
Re-sign Sweezy
Draft Cody Whitehair at #26
Draft a guard or center

The line didn’t play too badly in the second half of the year. It’s never going to be possible to shut out Aaron Donald if that is your expectation. This plan builds on what you’ve got while solidifying either the center position long term or replacing Justin Britt at left guard. Whitehair has been compared to Zack Martin. You could draft him and Graham Glasgow and let Glasgow compete with Patrick Lewis. Pete Carroll has expressed a desire to keep their players together. This would go along with that.

Projected O-line

LT — Russell Okung
LG — Cody Whitehair
C — Graham Glasgow or Patrick Lewis
RG — J.R. Sweezy
RT — Garry Gilliam

So what’s the problem?

It’ll be a challenge to keep Okung. He’s in a weird spot as a not-elite-but-still-pretty-good tackle in a league facing a left tackle crisis. He’s suffered a cluster of minor injuries in his career but nothing like a torn ACL. What is his market value? He probably needs to find out before the Seahawks can act.

This is arguably the best way to combine consistency with an upgrade. Therefore it’s arguably Seattle’s best way to achieve their #1 off-season priority. Yet all signs point to Okung moving on at the moment, leaving a big hole at tackle that would need to be addressed one way or another.

‘Blow it up and start again’

Let Russell Okung walk
Let J.R. Sweezy walk
Sign a veteran center (Alex Mack)
Draft a right tackle in the first round
Draft a guard in the middle rounds

This represents a major shift with possibly every position changing from 2015. Garry Gilliam moves to left tackle and is replaced on the right side by a rookie. You’re using the Okung/Sweezy money to put a new veteran at center and starting Mark Glowinski at right guard. By drafting a guard you’re also giving Justin Britt some competition. You’d possibly have to wait until the middle rounds to do so — with tackle being a high priority with Okung moving on.

Projected O-line

LT — Garry Gilliam
LG — Graham Glasgow or Justin Britt
C — Alex Mack
RG — Mark Glowinski
RT — Shon Coleman

So what’s the problem?

It’s a complete overhaul — and that could be a recipe for growing pains. If there’s one thing the Seahawks want to avoid it’s another six weeks of transition on their O-line. You’d be relying on Gilliam and a rookie to secure the tackle spots, Glowinski to prove his performance against Arizona wasn’t a flash in the pan and a rookie to upgrade the left guard spot. Alex Mack would also need to mesh with an incredibly young group of linemen as the richest (and oldest) member of the unit. There would be so many question marks here. Can Gilliam switch to the left? Can two rookies perform?

‘The bit of both scenario’

Let Russell Okung walk
Re-sign J.R. Sweezy
Use the Okung money to sign a veteran center or guard (Alex Mack or Alex Boone)
Draft a tackle early
Draft a center or guard

This plan keeps J.R. Sweezy and Garry Gilliam in the line-up. You’re adding a veteran interior O-liner to upgrade a big need area and using your first round pick to replace Okung. If you sign Mack, you’re looking at guards in the draft to compete with Justin Britt. If you sign Boone, perhaps you draft a Graham Glasgow to compete with Patrick Lewis? This would still be some considerable change but with fewer question marks.

Projected O-line

LT — Garry Gilliam
LG — Alex Boone or Graham Glasgow
C — Alex Mack or Graham Glasgow
RG — J.R. Sweezy
RT — Shon Coleman

So what’s the problem?

How motivated are the Seahawks to make a big splash on an outside free agent? Alex Boone is only 28 and could easily command $8m APY like Mike Iupati. You’d be asking him to play with two rookies, a raw left tackle and Sweezy. It seems like an ill-fit and defies what Pete Carroll said about keeping the team together. They haven’t made a big outside FA acquisition on the OL since Robert Gallery. Their willingness to just plug guys in at left guard (Carpenter, Bailey, Britt, McQuistan) also makes you wonder if center will be a bigger priority if they do bring in an outsider. It’s a shame Adam Bisnowaty seemingly didn’t declare — he could’ve been an ideal mid-round pick.

Other thoughts

It might be wrong to assume they’ll draft an offensive tackle in round one if Okung walks. After all, the starting right tackle in 2015 was an UDFA and we’re discussing whether he’ll switch to the blindside. Who ever heard of Breno Giacomini before the Seahawks made him a starter?

They might look at the interior with a Cody Whitehair type — or even draft a pass rusher or linebacker. There’s at least some chance their next starting right tackle is a long, SPARQ’d up mid-to-late rounder we’re not even discussing yet.

The tricky thing to work out is how do they find the balance between changes and simple improvement? Clearing out most of the existing line and starting again doesn’t seem very likely. Subtle additions with a sense of priority and increased competition appears to be the way forward. That’ll be hard to achieve if both Okung and Sweezy walk because you’re replacing as many as three or four fifths of your line.

My best guess? Sweezy re-signs, Okung gets a nice offer somewhere else. Gilliam moves to the left. They draft either Whitehair or a right tackle in the first round and use some middle round picks to add competition. There’s no reason to completely rule out the addition of a veteran center — especially if they save money on Okung.

Other notes

Graham Glasgow (C, Michigan) continues to shine at the Shrine practises…

Glasgow lined up at guard today. Pauline believes he’s improved his draft grade by two rounds this week, having previously listed him as a fifth round pick.

There are some slight concerns that will hurt him, despite a glowing reference from Jim Harbaugh. Glasgow had issues with drink in the past and was forced to live with his Grandmother as a solution. Teams will need to convince themselves he can move out of his comfort zone and remain focused on football.

He’s also not a major athlete and relies on power over quicks. The Seahawks tried to force the Drew Nowak project and kept Kristjan Sokoli on the roster. That suggests they want unique athleticism at the position. The problems on the O-line this year could force their hand to be adaptable and put that plan to one side. Glasgow arguably suits power vs the ZBS — but there’s enough second-level willingness to think he can fit either scheme.

Seattle’s willingness to draft Shrine Game stand-outs makes Glasgow one to monitor. With two late third round picks — that could be the range he leaves the board.

Kyler Fackrell is intriguing

With the likelihood of Bruce Irvin moving on to pastures new, the Seahawks are going to need to fill a hole at SAM linebacker.

Utah State’s Kyler Fackrell is certainly one to monitor.

I’ll do more on him in the coming days, but PFF rated him as the best under-the-radar pass rusher in college football:

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.

He missed most of the 2014 season with a serious knee injury before returning this season. He only had four sacks but PFF seems to like what he did (although some of their grades can be a little hard to fathom). He’s 6-5 and 250lbs.

Based on what I’ve watched so far he gets around the field, has some talent working the edge and getting off blocks. He occasionally whiffs in coverage against quicker receivers but he’s not a lost cause.

If he was available in round two, he could be an option for the Seahawks. Daniel Jeremiah has him as high as the #28 overall prospect in his rankings, stating: “Overall, this is a very athletic edge defender with the ability to make plays on all three downs.”

Take a look for yourselves:

I’m going to do a new mock draft tomorrow. There’s also a lot of new content on the blog in the last few days so make sure you head to the homepage and scroll down.

209 Responses to “Three O-line scenarios for the Seahawks”

  1. Ed says:

    I like the last scenario, minus Sweezy.

    Gilliam/Boone/Glasgow/Glowinski/Rookie

    That is a real young line, but other teams have shown youth can play well. Add to the fact that Glasgow/Boone/Glowinski won’t be learning how to be offensive linemen, I think it makes the most sense.

    • Volume12 says:

      That’s a pretty good O-line scenario too though.

      The only worry I have about Boone is his height. At 6’8, would he be too tall for TC at LG?

    • Only problem is Pete said he wants to keep continuity going, granted he said that is what he wants and he might not get it, but he wants that. The O-line you propose has 4 new players starting on the Line, and the 5th is moving from RT to LT.

      However I will say this: Assuming that rookie is a talented O-linemen who turns out to play as well if not better than Gilliam did in the second half of ’15, I would love that line. As you said they are young, and we would have years (at least 3 I think) of club control on all of them.

      I feel like with Sweezy and Britt on our line we can look good against bad and average pass rush defenses, but against good pass rush we struggle and against great pass rush we look awful (Rams, etc). With the O-line you propose I feel like we’d have the talent and athleticism to do better against those good and great pass rush defenses.

      Another good factor about your proposed O-line is it is only expensive at one position (LG), and it allows us to pull Britt off the line as a starter and develop him more and use him as our backup Swing-Tackle and backup LG (what Alvin Bailey has done for us). I don’t think he is as good as Bailey but still, Britt is versatile now and that is good.

      • KyleT says:

        Pete said he wanted consistency…that’s potentially very different from continuity 😛

        • Eh, in the context he gave he seem clearly to be talking about consistency of personnel which is the same as continuity of personnel.

          • KyleT says:

            Context was how could we improve, what personnel group. Pete’s answer was “figuring out how to be more consistent up front”.

            Definitely not hinting at keeping the Oline together, though that may be one thought, if they think they can squeeze more out of the existing group vs blowing it up.

            • When taking notes of Pete’s last presser this is what I wrote:

              Think the O-line is still a work in progress. Don’t think we have nailed it yet. This needs to be a really competitive spot again. Were gonna work really hard to build it up. We weren’t consistent enough for the course of the season. We found a real good rhythm but we can’t start and go through that again. We don’t want to experience that again if we can avoid it. Think that will be a real area of focus again. We’ll be talking about it, we have a couple UFA there and have to see how that works out. But we are young and athletic and we do like our guys. Does like that Glowinski got a chance to play. Gonna be exciting. A really important area for us of course.

              It comes off to me like “if we can avoid it we’d like to stay consistent upfront, we don’t want to blow it up and risk starting slow as a group again next season.” to me.

              • KyleT says:

                Ok, yeah I was referring to Pete’s answer on Brock and Salk. I do think his comment about seeing how their UFA situation works out is a way of hinting they may not be back.

        • Robert says:

          Good point! With the emergence of Russ as a deadly pocket passer, I predict Pete demands that Cable evolve to make passpro the highest priority. It’s ridiculous to start Britt because his slow feet and lack of athleticism make it impossible for him to stay in front of good Dlinemen. Continuity is very important, but nullified if you have glaring talent deficiencies at multiple positions. I hope they can create a great Oline of Gilliam, Sokoli, Nowak, Glowinski, 1sr rounder. I believe that line would have continuity challenges, but not at near the ridiculous level of futility from the 2015 group because this group has athletic talent. And with the exception of the rookie RT, they all have some time in the system and even some starts. I hope Gilliam, Sokoli, Nowak and Glowinski all have Championship offseasons and show up this summer ready for greatness!

          • Alex H says:

            I don’t know…

            This sounds eerily similar to the optimism most Hawks fans had of the O-line for the 2015 preseason. I swear, if you didn’t know better, you would have thought that we just spent our first four picks on the O-Line.

            I’ll stand by what I originally thought at the beginning of the 2015 season. Continuity and chemistry ARE more important than pure raw talent. I have a bad feeling that if we really do start Gilliam, Sokoli, Nowak, Glowinski, our O-line will probably be just as bad as it was at the beginning of the year.

            • Attyla the Hawk says:

              It’s definitely hard to separate natural organic homer enthusiasm from realistic expectation.

              I’m not an OL guru. But there are some things about this line that I think really pass the subjective eye test.

              1. Gilliam is a keeper. He was a development project who in his first year really looks like he belongs. I think most everyone should be legitimately excited for where he can ascend to.

              2. Sweezy should go. For value, he was great for us. But he’s a 4 year starter. And there is no legitimate reason why year in and year out he should have such glaring failures. Even if not all of them are his. All glowing mentions of him pretty much revolve around his run blocking.

              3. Lewis is ok. Should return as a part of the ‘consistency’ contingent. Although I’d say we definitely need a development OC this year to be able to insert into the lineup around 2017.

              4. Britt needs to be depth. He isn’t a rookie anymore. In fact he’s far from it having 2 years worth of starts under his belt. He looks to be the worst performer on the entire line. Honestly he looks like a #6 or #7 backup and his versatility having starts are OT and OG in both college and now in the NFL would provide value here.

              5. Okung. Should be retained if fiscally possible. He is almost assured to not play the entire year. The next LT needs to be groomed here. But retaining Okung definitely lengthens the learning curve that the understudy will have. Okung on the line will also provide good consistency. When healthy, Okung is an above average LT. That’s plenty good enough for the line to achieve.

              Quite honestly, I think this team is in transition here. Up to now, we’ve drafted run first prototypes in order to effect a run first team. The emergence of Wilson as at least a top 5 pocket passer in this league merits a sea change in philosophy for us. No new running back is going to supplant the value that Wilson provides from this point forward.

              Seattle modeled and drafted their current OL for one paradigm — probably because we didn’t have the passing talent to warrant a pass pro first OL lineup. Now we do.

              It’s also worth mentioning, that this OL isn’t a mauling/drive blocking elite unit. They are a ZBS unit who really at best just kind of get in the way of defenders enough that they can’t get a clean hit on a power back.

              I do think that this OL needs a very significant retooling. One that moves away from run blocking acumen to one that is much more sound in pass protection. That doesn’t mean we abandon our balance. But I think in terms of relative value, pass protection and the reduction of injury risk to one of the best QBs in the game trumps any misguided presumption that we can turn generic run blockers with little pass pro skills into good run blockers with barely adequate pass pro skills.

              Seattle is a good run team. But that efficacy is largely smoke and mirrors. It’s buffeted greatly by Wilson’s rush ability. If we look at rushing yards by just RBs, we’re barely top 10. I do believe the ‘good run blocker’ argument is grossly overblown.

              I think this is the perfect time to jettison the ‘run first, pass pro — maybe’ cadre of OL talent here. This team is going to live and die with Wilson remaining healthy and having time to work his magic. And given this, the performance of both OGs is absolutely not acceptable.

              • Alex H says:

                I can agree with point 2-5, not so sure about 1. I’m lower on Gilliam than most. I think he has the feet for the position, which is ironically the issue most tackles have. His problem is his core strength. I suspect that’s the reason he went undrafted otherwise there is utterly no reason for someone with that light of a feet to be undrafted at a premium position.

                The left tackle position is actually relatively easy to understand. You want someone with great girth or thick bone mass, a low center of gravity which usually means thick thighs and a wide butt (for stability), great mirroring ability, smarts to know who to block, long arms to keep defenders at bay, and light feet. The reason why LTs are so hard to find is because light feet and girth are usually not found together. The so called prototype shows up maybe once every few years. When they do show up, they are highly sought after. In the past, Walter Jones and Orlando Pace were the prototype. Today, Ryan Clady and Duane Brown are, but it’s too bad both had significant physical injuries that eroded their performance. Of the current elite LTs, Trent Williams is probably the closest to the prototype.

              • Tien says:

                Really good points Attyla and interesting perspective about a possible shift of emphasis in targeting OL talent.

            • Robert says:

              I personally had little optimism for Britt after the Denver pre-season game. He was so slow and unathletic that Von Miller made him lunge and fall on a run play.Britts fall to the earth was the most pathetic display of unathleticism I have ever seen. At this point, I only have hope, not optimism. And I think that while continuity is very important, you have to start with talent. I hope our 2016 Oline has the foot speed and athleticism to get in front of Dlinemen. We have to get better at eliminating free runners that wiggle left and blow right past our blockers without any resistance.

    • troy says:

      What about this possible scenario? Don’t have to over pay for any FAs and an upgrade/higher ceiling over the previous.

      LT — Shon Coleman
      LG — Mark Glowinski
      C — Graham Glasgow
      RG — Fahn Cooper
      RT — Garry Gilliam

      • Rob Staton says:

        They do like size at left guard. It’s telling they never considered Glo at LG in 2015. They kept him at RG even when Bailey struggled and Britt didn’t exactly blow anyone away. I’d be surprised if he ended up on the left.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        I think at worst, we have to consider keeping 3 in house players in that starting lineup. Whether that’s current starters or guys we had cooking on the bench this year. This scheme is admittedly difficult to pick up. Really if you get players this year, they won’t really be adequate until mid season unless they are just supremely talented to overcome other mistakes.

        Seattle can’t start the seasons like they did in 2014 and 2015. This division is now simply too good across the board to allow for us to abide by this ‘only have to finish well’ mantra. Putting 3 brand new faces in there in the hopes that they’ll be the future is misguided to me.

        Doesn’t mean we don’t add 3 new guys. But if they are the future then let them play in the future. Restrict the turnover some and let development continue. Allow the future investments already on the roster to mature a bit.

        I’d like to see Glow and Sokoli really give these positions a real run next OTA/TC. I just don’t think there are a lot of out of the box solutions for this issue.

    • RugbyLock says:

      So long as they settle on a starting Oline near the beginning of camp they might be able to lessen the growing pains at the beginning of the regular season.

  2. Volume12 says:

    Nice read.

    Definetly some intriguing options. Hard to say which one I like best honestly. But, gun to my head, I kind of like the idea of keeping Sweezy, shifting Gilliam to LT, drafting a RT, adding a C or G, and then let Sokoli,Poole, amd a bargain bin FA or UDFA battle it out at LG.

    Fackrell is intriguing. I believe me and CHAWK were discusding him early this year. Is he another Kyle Van Noy?

    Stony Brook LB Vic Ochi is a stud. He’s a little over 6’1, 244 lbs., and has 33.5″ arms. He’s continuing to dominate Shrine practices.

    • Volume12 says:

      And this Antwoine Williams from Georgia So is another intriguing LB. 6’3, 245, 32″ arms, and just flys around the field.

      • Volume12 says:

        The scoop: “The Ochi kid has something to him. I spoke with our regional scout who said that he was the dude in the locker room and that everyone was afraid of him –not afraid but listened to what he had to say. I wish he was taller but he’s got length, so I’m not worried about that.” — AFC executive on Stony Brook defensive end Victor Ochi

        The skinny: Ochi has been one of the most intriguing guys I’ve studied on film due to his outstanding strength and aggressiveness at the point of attack. Of all the players at the Shrine Game, Ochi has been one of the names mentioned most frequently. Ochi measured in a little taller than 6-foot-1, but he’s very powerful and has long arms (more than 33 inches) for his size, which will help him on the edge. Ultimately, Ochi’s draft value will be tied to the upside a team assigns his pass-rush ability.

        * * *

        • Attyla the Hawk says:

          It’s really an intriguing draft in the 50-125 range for upside pass rushers. I’d have to think that one of the 4 picks we have on days 1 and 2 is used for one of these guys.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      There are a plethora of intriguing prospects to replace Irvin.

      Kyler Fackrell, Victor Ochi, Eric Striker, Kamalei Correa, James Cowser, even guys like Bronson Kaufusi, Daeshon Hall, Alex McAlister, Travis Feeny, Yannick Ngakoue.

      Then there are the larger, but still highly athletic DE/DT hybrids like Charles Tapper, Ronald Blair, Aziz Shittu, DJ Pettway, Justin Zimmer.

      This should be a fun draft season.

      • Volume12 says:

        Absolutely.

        Hall returned to school though.

      • Attyla the Hawk says:

        Also, I wouldn’t discount the experiment to move Cassius Marsh to SAM. He’s a different kind of OLB — definitely doesn’t have the speed. But does have every bit the ability to set the edge. He can make plays in space (recall him cutting off AP in the Vikes game and tackling him 1 on 1 in space for a loss).

        Marsh isn’t going anywhere given his high quality on special teams. I would not be the least surprised if Marsh is an attractive inhouse plan B that merits Seattle really letting the draft fall to them aggressively.

      • rowdy says:

        Fackrell seemed to really struggle in coverage to me. He looked lost and caught flat footed a lot. Didn’t seem to anticipate the routes and don’t think he is seen him put his hand in the dirt once. Not sure he fits a position on this team.

        • matt says:

          Fackrell has some struggles in coverage. It’s the natural movement and pass rushing skills that intrigue me. He has great bend and plus athleticism. Remember Irvin was drafted as a pass rush specialist who got turned into a SAM. Fackrell isn’t the elite athlete Irvin is, but he’s no slouch. I do think he’d fit as a 3-4 OLB best though.

    • KyleT says:

      The only reason in my mind to keeping Sweezy would be to move Glow to LG. Glowinski with a year in our system should be in the mix in 2016. He may only be a slight upgrade over Sweezy or even on par performance, but you save money and have the hope he will get better with more playing time. It’s hard to get worse then Sweezy/Britt at the Guard position

  3. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    If Okung leaves and Gilliam moves to LT, you lose the primary reason for keeping Sweezy – continuity. That’s broken once you split them up. Both would be next to new people next year.

    • Volume12 says:

      Good point.

    • Attyla the Hawk says:

      I’m not sure that moving Gilliam to LT in 2016 is wise. We saw that Britt had significant learning lumps early on moving from RT to LG. And he’d played that position before. Gilliam looked good at RT. I’d like him to continue to develop and gain skill and confidence in a familiar role in 2016.

  4. Steele says:

    The idea of two good, seasoned veterans right in the middle, Boone and Mack, sounds to me like improved protection and reliability. They are not learning their jobs. Granted, chemistry is important, but so is individual talent and technique.

    This discussion is important. It really involves what time frame to choose. A more dramatic blow-it-up is, in my opinion, a better solution for long term success. Build a great o-line, don’t rush it.

    But if it is essential to get back to SB contention immediately, if you think the nucleus is aging and won’t be great (or replaced with equal talent) in the next 2-3 seasons, then you back into the less dramatic evolution models. It’s hard to say. I am not completely confident in the conversion projects, although I get that it is a cheaper approach.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it’ll be nearly impossible to sign Boone & Mack. Both players are likely to command around $8m APY. They need the room to keep some of their countless UFA’s.

      • rowdy says:

        My first thought every time I hear this (I hear it a lot) and my second is pc/js haven’t paid one fa oline men that let alone 2.

      • DC says:

        Damn inflation!

        Boone at $5-5.5M apy would be tempting but if he’s going as high as your guess that’s most likely well out of range for Seattle.

    • Nathan says:

      Clayton mentioned the possibility of letting guys walk to pocket the picks, and simply signing guys who are other teams cap cuts.

      Ryan Clady and Eugene Monroe were 2 examples he gave.

      • bobbyk says:

        That’s what we have been doing (letting guys walk and pocketing picks). That’s part of the reason, I believe, they went after Cary Williams. He didn’t cost anything in terms of draft compensation because he had been released by Philadelphia.

        That’s a good point though. I could easily see them signing a Monroe over resigning an Okung since Monroe will probably be cheaper. Either way, you’re getting an above average starting LT with some injury history concerns – especially given their ages.

        If anyone would trade a #1 pick, I think it’s Pete Carroll knowing of this window of opportunity. I think there’s a remote possibility they could offer a #1 for Joe Thomas. One of my biggest problems with that though is that having a great left tackle doesn’t guarantee a good line. I keep thinking back to the last years of Walter Jones (when he was still great) and how we still had a horrible OL for Hasselbeck – even though we had the best LT in the NFL.

        We still haven’t had a good guard left guard since Steve Hutchinson left. They have only been different degrees of crappy (and, yes, I hated James Carpenter).

      • Tien says:

        But isn’t the reason Eugene Monroe is available as a FA because the Ravens decided that he’s not very good? Clady’s been a great LT but has also missed even more games than Okung the last couple of seasons.

        Boone’s a good G but I’ve never gotten the impression that he’s been a dominant one and if Rob’s estimate is correct that he might command $8m/Y, that seems pretty high for just a good G.

        My ideal scenario is that we re-sign both Okung & Sweezy, mainly for the continuity of the line. The problem with letting Okung walk and shifting Gilliam over to LT is that we’re gambling 1) Gilliam will fulfill his potential and be effective there 2) We can draft Shon Coleman or someone else decent to play RT.

        Lots of unknown between now and the draft but my guess is that if the Hawks don’t think they can get either Okung or Coleman (or another tackle they’re just as high on in the draft), they’ll need to pay for a high-priced FA or two on the OL. Otherwise, I’m not sure how they can improve the OL if Okung walks.

        • Alex H says:

          This is my thinking. I prefer resigning Okung and Sweezy for continuity. The only scenario where I would be somewhat ok with Okung walking is if we can get Coleman in the draft. There are much less LTs than people believe. Personally, I don’t think Gilliam has what it takes for the LT position. His feet is good enough, but he is lacking in core strength. He won’t have trouble staying in front of people, but he can get bulldozed over. His run blocking is even worse.

          As for FA, there really aren’t any because viable LTs don’t generally hit the FA market. Monroe is hardly better and Clady is even more injury prone than Okung.

          • bobbyk says:

            I don’t believe in Gilliam at LT either. I think that’s another disaster waiting to happen. Heck, I don’t think he’s a very good RT either.

            I would be most comfortable if Okung came back at a reasonable price AND we were able to draft a legit LG who would also serve as our LT of the future. Shon Coleman.

            I’d have a lot more confidence in the group if this were to happen (or it was Eugene Monroe or some vet like that to be signed to keep LT warm until Coleman took over in ’17).

        • matt says:

          “That’s what we have been doing (letting guys walk and pocketing picks). That’s part of the reason, I believe, they went after Cary Williams.”

          Agreed. JS has said in the past that he specifically targets cap casualties because they don’t affect comp picks. It wouldn’t surprise me if that kind of thing happens at LT this year. Albert, Monroe and Clady could be potential cap casualties. They’re all about the same level of player as Okung, but more injury prone. I wouldn’t be opposed to securing one of these guys and getting a 3rd or 4th round comp pick by letting Okung walk.

          Tien- Monroe is under contract next season, but Baltimore is up against the cap. Monroe would save them $6.6 mil in cap space with $2.1 mil in dead money. With his spotty history in Baltimore he’s a prime cap casualty.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      This is what the Saints tried a few years back… paid 2 Guards big money to protect Drew Brees. It ended up not getting them to the promised land and put them into significant cap hell. Not to mention, they are STILL digging out from bad contracts on the Saints team.

      I can be pursueded that Mack might come to Seattle, but I see zero shot Boone shows up as well. Too much money… way too much money. If you are going to pay 8M, might as well keep Okung. Side-note, I would guess Boone might go across the bay and play for the Oakland/LA/San Antonio Raiders. They need quality OL help and are up and comers…. plus have mad cash to burn.

      • bobbyk says:

        If you look at the Saints cap situation, it’s not because they paid two guards. It’s because they have players like Brandon Browner (who is slow and over the hill) counting for over $6 million next year and still over $5 million if they cut him. Brees is awesome, but he’s scheduled to count $30 million next year.

        How many people here even know who Junior Galette is without doing a search? His cap hit is over $12 million. Those are better examples of why the Saints are in cap hell.

        At least with paying Jahri Evans good money is that he was one of the best guards in the NFL. Letting him walk at his peek at guard would have been almost as dumb as letting Hutch walk. He was one of the best guards for a long time and is still decent.

        • matt says:

          Analyzing the Saints cap makes me wonder how their GM still has a job. They have to do something with Drew Brees-restructure or cut. They’re in a very tight spot. Just makes me more thankful that JS/PC are running the show for the Hawks!

    • Ukhawk says:

      Unger if cut?

      • DC says:

        Sure at a bargain price. If nothing else it would be funny.

        We know our FO will be checking every scenario under the sun. UFAs, team cuts, trades, the draft, the recycle bin and the trash heap.

        Just today I looked back and got a little pissed off. We knew last off season that the team was stacked at every position group but the O line and that the O line was so bad that it might tank our season. We got too cute. Admittedly there was significant improvement but Carolina re taught us the valuable football lesson that winning the LOS often leads to winning the game. We won’t make the same mistake twice.

        • NathanM says:

          And yet Carolina didn’t put that line together with a ton of draft capital or big FA money. I think the lesson from Carolina is that you can create a reliable o-line without major investment and use scheme to cover any of their weaknesses.

  5. Kelly Orr says:

    Like the article and it’s a great breakdown of the options this team has going forward. I would be perfectly fine letting Okung and Sweezy walk.

    Okung because he cannot stay healthy and I just never see a mean streak out of him whatsoever. He just does not seem to have the edge to want to dominate other people and will occasionally get beat badly in Pass Pro.

    Sweezy can go because he just far to often whiffs in pass protection. Him and Britt both just have absolutely terrible pass blocking skills. All to often it seems a DT or DE is slapping their hands away which causes them to fall forward and run right past them.

    Oline I would like to see.

    LT-Draft/FA
    LG-Draft/FA (Britt as a backup)
    C-Lewis(Glasgow)
    RG-Glowinski- showed me more than enough in that Cardinals game to prove he is more consistent than Sweezy
    RT-Gilliam

    • Kelly Orr says:

      Also I thought Bailey did just as good of a job at LT as Okung has done. He could be our stop gap at LT for a year while we reinforce the interior of our line. I know Bailey was not happy about being in Seattle at some point at the beginning of this year and is a RFA so I am not sure he will come back or not. Could put a 2nd Round tender on him for 2.3 million. Not sure how an Original Round tender would work as far as compensation if someone signs him since he was an UDFA.

      • Alex H says:

        People are way overvaluing Bailey. His feet are simply too slow. I remember one game this year when Okung was taken out for an injury and in the next play, the opposing pass rusher blew right pass Bailey for a sack.

        Bailey has ok strength, great mirroring, but slow feet. He holds up fine against the slower, power rushers of the NFL. He gets absolutely chewed up against the Clay Matthews of the world.

      • Alex H says:

        Now that I think about it, I believe it was the Cowboys game. Okung was knocked out and in the next play, Greg Hardy blew up Bailey. It was more than one play. Hardy consistently applied pressure, had at least one sack, and had that really weird interception. All of that was done against Bailey.

        • Volume12 says:

          Pass protection is much more important in a LT than run blocking is.

          Gilliam has the foot speed for it. His core strength could be improved.

          We don’t need a top 10 LT to make this work.

          • Alex H says:

            I agree that pass pro is more important for a LT and that Gary is a better fit at LT, but I disagree about the core strength. That is the main reason he went undrained at a premium position. Teams just determined that he doesn’t have enough for the position. Girth and a low center of gravity are relatively natural and innate physical characteristic.

  6. Volume12 says:

    I think it’s safe to say, Seattle won’t be drafting a CB from the Shrine game this year. Every single one measured in under “32 arms and hort of the 83-84” inch wingspan.

    BTW, Seattle scouts looking/scoutng the West DTs yesterday, 2 names I forgot to mention. Manitoba’s David Onyemata and Stanford’s Aziz Shittu.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      I was about to mention Onyemata

      • Volume12 says:

        Shittu, Maddy, Onyemata, and ‘Poop’ Johnson all have at least 32″ inch arms, meeting Seattle’s arm length requirements for rookie DTs.

        David Dean and Alex Balducci did not.

        • C-Dog says:

          As much as I’m a Maddy guy, I think the fans and team would have a lot of fun if Shittu and Poop were on the roster. I know I would.

          • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

            nice one C-Dog

          • CHawk Talker Eric says:

            Don’t forget Chris Brown

            • Volume12 says:

              I like Maddy, Shittu, and Johnson.

              Johnson looks like an incredible athlete. There’s a clip of him making an interception that I’m not sure how many guys close to/or 300 pounds can make.

              Has a real MosesBread like personality too.

              • C-Dog says:

                I saw that clip the other day, pretty impressive.

                It’s interesting that Maddy measured 6-2 285 lbs, a little bit taller than listed in college, and with longer arms, that probably helps him out.

                I agree, I like all three of those guys as pass rush DT candidates. Happy the Hawks are scouting them out.

                • Volume12 says:

                  Maddy measured at 6’0. And in one game Cory Johnson had 19 tackles! That’s unbeleivable for a DT.

                  He’s in my Seahawk mock draft that I’ll post sometime next month.

                  • C-Dog says:

                    Interesting. Their website has Maddy listed at 6-2 283. I’m in for Poop, 6-3 300 lbs that can move is what they need.

                  • Volume12 says:

                    Team websites always list guys bigger than what they are. Happens every year.

                    ‘Poop’ measured in at a quarter over 6’2, and 294lbs. So really the same size as Clint McDonald.

                    From the JUCO ranks, described as ‘highly explosive, great hand technique that’s very advanced, high effort player with lots of energy that jumps in on every pile all over the field, and assignment sound.’

                    His interviews are hilarious. He’s extremely ‘Seahawky.’

        • matt says:

          Was really starting to like Anthony Zettel, but man 30.75″ t-rex arms at 6’4″?! Crossed off the list.

    • bigDhawk says:

      I like Shittu. He’s not a speed rusher but he is long and strong with good power, much like Frank Clark. Stanford is really producing some quality NFL prospects these days and Shittu is one I’m watching.

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        I agree. Makes me wonder if he could have a rookie season like Henry Anderson. Except at DE. And without the midway season-ending injury.

  7. Volume12 says:

    Rob, have you looked at Ole Miss OT Fahn Cooper? He’s 6’5, 305, and had the 2nd or 3rd longest arms of the O-line measured.

    You brougt up an interesting point about the possibility of one of Seattle’s potential future tackles being a long, athletic mid-rounder.

    From Tony Pauline-

    Fahn Cooper/OL/Mississippi: Add Cooper’s name to the growing list of offensive lineman who have impressed at Shrine practice. The versatile blocker lined up at right tackle but seems to have the footwork and athleticism required to protect the blind side.
    Fundamentally sound, easily moved about the field and showed little stiffness in his game. Cooper handled everyone he faced during one-on-one drills and full scrimmage.

  8. KyleT says:

    Rob, first off this is a fantastic piece outlining the dilemma the Seahawks face. It’s true that it’s easy to just call for the “blow it up” scenario, but that itself introduces many risks and the potential for a multi week learning process while we lose games that eventually cost us a division title.

    The tough thing about an Okung resign is that how do we pencil him in? You better have 3 pro ready tackles because he will almost certainly miss games again. Bailey is an RFA and that could be our solution, but it’s certainly not ideal.

    Even on the Sweezy part of this…Pete said he wanted to get more consistent up front. Nobody was more inconsistent on the line last year then Sweezy and Britt. Grading out as 2 of the worst guards in the NFL. And both had flashes of brilliance, but for Sweezy this is who he is. He has been a 4 year starter at this position. This is who he is: Inconsistent. One play he may pancake a guy, the next miss entirely.

    Personally, I would rather see us break continuity to bring in the right players for the system, either draft, promoting depth on the roster or FA. At least then you have hope that they put it together at some point.

    What if we go down the Evolution scenario and we are literally in the same place and having the same conversation a year from now? Okung playing 10 games, Sweezy being one of the worst guards in football?

    I will admit this is a tough one and will be fun to watch what PC and JS do this offseason. 2016 season hopes depend on it.

    • Darnell says:

      Do you have a citation for the Britt and Sweezy grades? You said it, but didn’t give an according to

      • KyleT says:

        2 things: PFF grades and eye test from watching a few games on the all-22. I’ve been watching Sweezy’s film for 4 years now…pretty obvious what he is.

        PFF grades while all over the place sometimes, tend to do a pretty good job rating the in the trenches positions, because it’s less difficult to determine what their assignment was from just watching the film.

        • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

          A great point was made during the Clayton segment on KIRO this afternoon. When most teams ran a man blocking scheme, it was easy to grade players. Now that the league has progressed to some variation of the ZBS…. unless you know the exact play call and blocking assignments…. you wouldn’t know who fouled up.

          Perfect example: The play where Britt “missed” the DT coming via the B gap…. was actually not his guy to pick up…. however, PFF graded him poorly for the play.

          I’m not saying Britt had a stellar game or Sweezy for that matter, but PFF grades are not the be all end all when it comes to OL productivity or ability. I think people get so wrapped up in advanced metrics, they forget to watch the game.

          • KyleT says:

            If you read my comment I indicated I’ve watched nearly 4 years of Sweezy film. There are times when their grades are dead wrong, but this isn’t the case on Sweezy/Britt. 95%+ of the ZBS run blocking plays are easy to discern who the assignment was. If anything they are easier once you understand the rules of the ZBS. Pass protection is harder, but I would bet these guys are among the worst just by run blocking assessment

            • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

              My beef with them is they had some ranking of the OL in the NFL, they rated the Seahawks as #29. I find it hard to believe they were the #29th OL overall, when they had production on the ground and via the air attacks. The first 8 games might have looked like the #29th line, but the last 8 regular season games they looked better overall than that.

              • KyleT says:

                But how much of the late season production was a factor of the quick passing game? You don’t need a good O-line to take a 3 step drop and release. Additionally, Rawls was pretty special and made up for some of our issues up front with his speed.

                I do think that they looked pretty good on some games down the stretch, but when they looked bad, they were really bad. That’s where Pete talks about consistency up front. It’s all technique, not talent or athleticism.

  9. neil says:

    I am for the ” bit of both” scenario. Maybe I am laboring under a misconception but I thought Sweezy graded out at the top of the O line. As far as I am concerned Okung has to go, he is not much use if he can’t stay on the field. Hopefully there will be a decent lineman we could pick up in free agency. Carroll has not had much success in drafting O linemen. IE; Carpenter, Moffitt etc.

    • KyleT says:

      Nope, Britt and Sweezy among the worst in the NFL at guard

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Moffitt didn’t have his priorities straight, but he was a very good prospect coming out of CFB. Drugs did him in…. more or less.

      Carpenter was decent, played well enough that Seattle won a SB with him in the OL. He now is on his second contract with the Jets and was a borderline ProBowl player. If you get that out of a draft pick, that is a success. He now is playing man scheme OL, instead of ZBS, which fits his physicality and abilities better.

  10. DC says:

    Seattle has to make decisions on our RFA OL as well. Bailey & Lewis were both UDFAs. Using the lowest tender gives the Seahawks the right to match any offer sheet without draft pick compensation if they let them walk. I would guess that both players are tendered at some level. That way no matter what else happens they have at least these guys on the roster if they so choose as a starting point to work from.

    LT Bailey
    LG Britt
    C Lewis
    RG Glowinski
    RT Gilliam
    Reserves Sokoli, Poole, Pericak

  11. Nemhauser: ” Continuity is ALMOST as important as talent…”. There is now almost unanimous agreement that improving the performance of the O Line is the top off season priority. Every player with the possible exception of Gilliam may be, or should be either gone next season, or replaced as a starter for below average performance. Any player brought in will compete with whoever is there, or is left, for a starting position. Unlike previous years, identified talent, whether proven talent as represented by seasoned veterans, or by the projected potential from the College ranks, should be the foremost factor, rather than the failed experiment of this season. The first opportunity to address this matter is by way of free agency and/or trade. Therefore, as a first step, one assumes that candidates are being vetted now by the front office and speculation is rife on this blog and elsewhere. If in fact, seasoned, veteran talent can now be investigated and pursued, as a first step, then what criteria are in play? Perhaps looking for a high level player who can help the Hawks win their division first, and their conference second, in order to secure home field advantage, and a bye… As has been pointed out, probably no one can stop Aaron Donald from blowing up the Hawks interior OL, but is there anything more important than coming to grips with this problem? Alex Mack or similar may be the best opportunity to shore up this vital area of vulnerability and it seems worth a strong effort to explore this first. A seasoned veteran, someone who has the experience and smarts to provide leadership to younger players seems a good way to raise the talent quotient up front. Bringing in one additional proven veteran would reinforce that approach, whether tackle or guard. Knowing that these positions were no longer an issue would clarify the draft picture significantly and free up the options at that later stage of roster revision. Timing seems important here, and to focus heavily upon all the manifest possibilities ultimately presented by the draft, while neglecting due diligence regarding the earlier opportunities presented by free agency and trades would seem unfortunate.

  12. cha says:

    Crying over spilled milk: I just have to wonder how different the discussion would be if Bowie and Bailey had been more dedicated / had better attitudes, and Garrett Scott hadn’t had his heart condition.

  13. Volume12 says:

    Seahawks signed LB Josh Shirley.

  14. Trevor says:

    Great breakdown Rob of the current situation we are facing with the OL. What do you think of the following.

    -Let Okung walk (injury concerns) I jurs don,t see him aging well. If you can get him in the 7mil APY then that is a different story. But I think he will want $9mil APY.
    -Let Sweezy walk just too inconsistent and has never been a good pass blocker
    -Tender as RFA Lewis and Bailey to keep for depth.

    #1 Priority Sign Alex Mack to sure up the interior of our line.

    #2 Draft Coleman or Whitehair in Rd #1

    #3 Draft Glasgow or Fahn Cooper in Rd #3 (Glasgow if we get Coleman, Cooper if we get Whitehair)

    This would leave you with the two following OL options. Both would be inexpensive, young and have the ability to be far superior in pass pro to last years unit.

    Option #1
    LT Coleman
    LG Glasgow
    C Mack
    RG Glowinski
    RT Gilliam

    Backups (Bailey, Lewis, Britt, Sokoli)

    Option #2

    LT Gilliam
    LG Whitehair
    C Mack
    RG Glowinski
    RT Phan Cooper or Bailey

    Backups (Bailey, Lewis, Sokoli, Britt)

    • Rob Staton says:

      Two scenarios I can certainly get behind.

      • Trevor says:

        For equal contracts whom would you prefer for the Seahawks Alex Mack or Okung?

        • C-Dog says:

          Considering the horrendous fits strong interior rushers gave us this year, I put my $ down on Mack if he’s available. The team already showed it could get by with Bailey at LT, if need be, probably no reason to think they probably can’t get by with Gilliam. If Russ is going to continue to ascend as a pocket thrower, gotta give him a pocket to work from. I wonder if they don’t go more the Saints method for the OL, and make the interior the biggest priority. Option 2 seems to be that.

    • Trevor says:

      Another advantage is you would also have this entire line under contract for the next 3 years for continuity (assuming you sign Mack to a 3yr deal)

      • Volume12 says:

        I gotta say Trev, option 1 and option 2 are both very appealing.

        Having a hard time deciding which one is better, because they’re pretty equal and exciting.

    • Darnell says:

      I like it, but aren’t Glasgow and Whitehair both just barely tipping 300lbs?

      Under Cable, LG has been a spot for bigger dudes than that, so should we not also be thinking about guys like Garnett and Tretola?

      • Volume12 says:

        Glasgow weighs 310 pounds. Official Shrine Game/practice weigh in.

        Wouldn’t be hard to add 5 pounds. 310 seems big enough.

        Both him and Whitehair have the svelte, lean mid-sections that TC likes too.

        • bobbyk says:

          Interesting. I like option 1 much better though, just because it seems many of you like Gilliam more than I do. I don’t think he’s very good at RT so I find it hard to have confidence in him at a tougher position and facing better pass rushers.

        • Darnell says:

          True.

          Not that I’m saying that it isn’t a profile that should be amended, just that Carpenter, Britt, Mcquistan, Bowie, Bailey have all manned that LG spot in recent years and have experience at OT and are heavier guys. It seems like TC has a type for that spot.

          • DC says:

            All 5 of those guys have disappointed, so as you are alluding to a profile change might be just what the doctor ordered.

            Maybe a quicker footed more agile guy that can give Russ half a second more & Russ getting the ball out a quarter second earlier.

          • Greg haugsven says:

            Big dudes! His name is Vadal Alexander from LSU. Dudes a house.

    • Bernardo De Biase says:

      I like the first better because it keeps Gilliam at RT. He’s still not very well established at RT and is just starting to showcase upside. He’s a RFA in 2017, it’s not wise to make moves that will shoot up his market value so early. I love Mack to Seahawks. C > LT for Russell WIlson.

    • Steve Nelsen says:

      Both of these scenarios fall into the blow it up model. One has 5 new players – or at least new to the position and the other has 4. I don’t think this is what Pete Carroll was talking about yesterday.

      Resigning Russell Okung seems to fit with the approach of consistency and development. he is better than average when he plays and you can keep Bailey as his backup. That also lets Gilliam continue to develop at RT for another year.

      Keep Lewis at center and let Sokoli/Nowak compete. They seem to like Sokoli and want to give him a shot so adding a FA center that would block him . The Lewis/competition approach seems more in line with what Carroll was saying.

      Glowinski is a natural RG so he replaces Sweezy. Pete seemed positive about Gowinski even though he had just the one start.

      Draft Coleman in the 1st or another OL who can compete with (and likely replace) Britt at LG.

      Draft another G/C to provide competition in the future and possibly start if Coleman moves to LT or if either Sokoli or Glowinski fails.

      LT: Okung/Bailey
      LG: Coleman/Britt
      C: Lewis/Sokoli/Nowak
      RG: Glowinski
      RT: Gilliam

      This scenario likely results in turnover at the 2 guard spots where improvement is most needed but consistency elsewhere. You only sign one FA so it doesn’t blow up the budget. That FA is internal so no big money to an outsider. You only need to use one of your top 4 picks on OL.. They kept Sokoli and Glowinski on the 53-man roster all year for a reason; they see both as potential starters.

  15. John_s says:

    Here’s my scenario and it will be a cheaper option I think.

    Sign Bobby Massie and a stopgap center to battle with Lewis. I understand resigning Sweezt because he’s a TC guy. So I assume he will be on the team. Draft Whitehair for LG.

    LT – Gilliam
    LG – Whitehair
    C – Lewis / Ben Jones / Stefan Wisniewski / Wendell from NE / Bernadeaux
    RG – Sweezy / Glo
    RT – Massie.

    Coming out of the draft Bobby Massie was considered one of the better athletes. He was also a guy who had a bit of a mean streak and had one of the longer arm lengths in the draft. He can be your new Giacomini and bring the touch nasty streak to the line.

  16. Cysco says:

    I just can’t see the Hawks spending top shelf money on a C or LG. I think it’s far more likely they sign someone like Stefen Wisniewski to come in and play C or LG. Someone in that 4m range, not 8+m. By all accounts Wisniewski had a solid year and started every game for Jacksonville. He’s a guy Seattle met with in the off-season last year.

    I would rather see them sign two solid guys with experience than one “all pro” I wouldn’t be shocked if you could get Kelechi Osemele and Wisniewski for pretty much the same cost as Mack. Granted this probably falls under the “blow it up” category but a line of:

    Gilliam/Osemele/Wisniewski/Glow/Coleman would be young, talented and pretty affordable. If you wanted to, you could throw sweezy in there instead of Glow if you’re comfortable having three players in that 3-5m a year range.

    • onrsry says:

      Osemele won’t get below 7 million/year. But i think he would be a great upgrade over Britt. Wisniewski not much better than Lewis.

  17. SeventiesHawksFan says:

    The combination of Okung and Sweezy being re-signed will be around $11 million per year. And our main O line problems have been with handling a dominant interior pass rush from defensive tackles. Retaining Okung doesn’t help us with that.

    We aren’t as suspect at handling pressure from the edge. And replacing Okung with Bailey in s playoff game illustrated how we are arguably not much worse.

    I expect the front office to draft a tackle. And move Gilliam to the left side. The cost savings of doing that will be at least $6 t $7 million per year over keeping Okung.

    I also believe that Sweezy will be allowed to walk. And Glowimski will take his place. Another cap saving move that will make us no worse.

    That leaves center and left guard. Which between the draft and free agency, we should be able to upgrade.

    • Ukhawk says:

      Agreed. But also means we need a RT too
      Cool thing is Coleman played a lot of right tackle on run plays.
      Get the feeling they value Okung despite his injury history

      • SeventiesHawksFan says:

        I think we’ll draft a tackle to play RT. And Gilliam will move to
        LT. Bailey will remain our back up tackle.

        If we are going to devote cap space to the O line, I believe it will be a free agent signing at center on s veteran who can make line and protection calls and keep everyone assignment correct. I don’t think we will sign Boone, who will be too expensive. A stop gap player in the $3 to $4 million per year while Sokoli develops seems more likely. Or they will just go with Lewis again, and then Sokoli replaces him when he’s finally ready.

        This means I also think they will draft a player for left guard in the third or fourth round.

        This is all in the context of leaving cap space free for retaining priority players. Cap space will be used to sign Rubin, Lane, extend Bennett and Baldwin, possibly re-sign Irvin (only for the right price) and possibly re-sign Kearse. Mebane will either be kept on a cap friendly deal with minimal guarantees for two more years as pretty much a first down only player. Or we will sign a mid level replacement for him.

  18. matt says:

    Great talking points here Rob!

    I’d like to see the scenario play out like this:

    LT: Okung
    LG: Britt/draft competition
    C: Lewis/Sokoli
    RG: Glowinski
    RT: Gilliam/draft competition

    It doesn’t seem likely that we’ll let both Okung and Sweezy walk, if we’re looking for consistency up front. Glowinski has been groomed as a RG and he sure looked ready in his only start. Britt’s spot at LG seems up for grabs. Thinking Lewis is kept around on the cheap, with Sokoli suiting up as a back up for all 3 interior spots. a la Lem.

    The draft competition listed could just be one player like a Glaskow, Whitehair, Cooper. If Britt is beaten out he could backup RG and RT, with Gilliam being able to bounce to LT if Okung goes down. If Gilliam is beaten out then he becomes the swing tackle. Finding a quality starter in the draft would really solidify us up front. Forming a solid, versatile and cheap unit.

    Starting Nowak at C was a major coaching error and should have either; never happened or been corrected earlier. This blunder really set the unit and season back. We had the players on the roster to have a decent unit from week 1 on. That’s why I’m not calling for major change. Glow slides in. RT/LG open for competition.

    • C-Dog says:

      I started wondering today if fans and media are out thinking this one a bit, and Okung ends up being the one they get a done with over Sweezy. If Glow is a natural RG, and they like Glow, maybe they are just a LG away from being a really solid line with the addition of someone like Whitehair.

      • Greg haugsven says:

        All could be a good option. Slide Glow in for Sweezy and give Britt some competition. I like Vadal Alexander as well to play LG. That’s dudes a beast.

  19. sdcoug says:

    I think the priorities need to start inside working out. C/G.

    Inside blows up, Russ has zero chance as we’ve seen over and over. But when a DE rounds the edge, it’s much more likely Russ escapes and the magic begins

  20. Greg haugsven says:

    How about building like New Orleans did for Brees. Concentrate more on the interior instead of the outside. When RW had a clean pocket inside he tore if up. Edge pressure he can escape but not inside pressure. Britt needs to go, he’s getting beat like he stole something.

  21. bobbyk says:

    Someone mentioned earlier that Pete isn’t going to draft someone in the first round if he’s not better than the person they are hoping to replace him with. With that being said, as our season ended, where were we absolutely the worst?

    Offensively, I think it’s pretty clear that Britt was our worst offensive starter.

    Defensively, I think he’d also like a guy who can play Leo like they had with Clem. Even though they kind of mixed and matched and then had Irvin rush in most passing situations, I think that’s the “pass rush” position that Pete had in mind when he talked about the need for pass rush help.

    Whether they replace Okung at LT with a Eugene Monroe or whatever, I think it’s safe to say that position would then kind of be about equal to this past year and that’s not going to get it done in terms of improving the OL. I see a big hole at LG that was perfectly displayed on the first play from scrimmage against Carolina on Sunday. I think Lewis would be much more effective if he had a big brute to his left. I do not believe Lewis was our weakest link on the OL after he took over. I think it was both of our guards. I’m all for a LG in the first two rounds and Glowinski at RG. I think that would be a big upgrade and financially, in terms of the salary cap, it would ensure that our guards were relatively inexpensive, too. That’s a pretty good combination – improved play and not spending much money to make it happen (although it will cost an “expensive” (i.e. high) draft pick.

    Even if they went with Bailey at LT… he’s proven that he’s not too much worse than Okung, but he’d be about $6 million or so cheaper.

    Lets just say they did this:

    LT Bailey (a little worse than Okung this past season)
    LG Coleman (26th pick – no doubt a gigantic improvement over Britt and eventual LT)
    C Lewis (better due to experience and improved play to his left)
    RG Glowinski (I like his skill set to be better and steadier than Sweezy anyway)
    RT Gilliam (will be better starting there from the get go in year three = improvement)

    Financially, aside from the fact that the team will have used its first round pick on Coleman, it would probably be the cheapest OL in football… yet it would give us the desired result of being, imo, a much better unit, too. Cheaper and more productive. That’s a good combination. Even if Eugene Monroe were LT, that would still be one of the cheapest (if not still) OLs in the NFL.

    Thoughts?

    • Alex H says:

      If we were to draft Coleman, I would rather throw him into the fire. In that scenario, I can live without Okung. If not, Okung should come back. Monroe gives a bit worse performance at relatively the 1-2 million dollar cheaper. If Okung does go and Coleman is unavailable, Monroe is my preferred replacement (Clady is even more injury prone).

      Bailey, no. I just don’t see how people believe he’s better in the the eyes of some or even remotely comparable. Whenever people rave about Bailey, I keep thinking of the Cowboys game this year when Okung went out. Greg Hardy was relatively neutralized until Bailey came in. After Bailey came in, Greg Hardy had at least a sack, several near sacks, consistent pressure, and an interception after a whiffed cut block by Bailey that was nearly returned for a TD. Bailey consistently struggled to get any sort of engagement on Hardy. The performance between Okung and Bailey was night and day.

      Bailey’s best game from my memory was the Arizona game in the 2014 season when he neutralized Alex Okafor. However, you have to realize that Okafor is more of a power rusher than a speed rusher. Bailey has proven his ability to handle those type as his core strength is sufficient and his feet is agile enough to keep up with those slower rushers. Against a Von Miller or Clay Matthews? You might as well keep a TE on the left side on every passing play for blocking help.

    • Ukhawk says:

      Like the ideas here but not completely there on the execution

      Not a big Bailey fan. Ok being bull rushed, big time loser vs speed hence moderate success vs Hardy.

      I personally get bipolar trying to solve the conundrum of continuity vs improving vs free agent resigning priority. Weirdly first think Coleman and Bailey should flip flop as Coleman would better handle the edge, then think Gilliam at LT and Coleman at RT (where he played a lot last year) which suits their strengths better. But then i remember Bailey sucked worse than Britt at RG … and so it goes round in my head.

      Agree Lewis is better with Glow and “A” another decent RG. But also think 1) there is a deep center class 2) Sokoli for competition, 3) maybe Unger is cut and reasonably resignable.

      Which still leaves RG as the unresolved issue, followed by 1 rookie tackle, one new LG, and a moderately successful RT changing to defend blindside, premium edge rushers….

      • Ukhawk says:

        My absolute preference/dream scenario is drafting Coleman.

        1) Still believe the premium OL position is LT and its the hardest to find

        2) While I believe Okung is a great player who has been a massive (if underrated for what the Hawks specifically ask him to do) reason we have gone to 2 SBs and led the league in rushing, signing him for 10APY for 4 seasons (see avg top 10 LT comps) would be a competitive disadvantage if he can be reasonably replaced by Coleman/Gilliam.

        3) It also becomes a massive advantage if we get draft compensation and free up $$ to sign other players/positions.

        4) More likely and cheaper to improve the interior of the line with FA and lower round draft picks.

        To me it alll hinges on Coleman much like it did on drafting Okung back at the start of the JSPS era

      • C-Dog says:

        Yeah, it always seemed to me that the best Bailey has ever played was LT. I think there was one game the season before last where he filled in at RT and was awful. After that first preseason game starting at LG, they started looking at Sokoli and Keavon Milton there before they radically shifted Britt to guard. He’s been serviceable at LT in a pinch, but I wonder if he’s a player they even elect to tender because if they are going to let Okung test the market, they have to be thinking Gilliam as the next LT, not Bailey. I heard on the radio at some point that Carroll stated his feeling that if Gilliam had more playing time at LT in College, he could have been a first round pick.

        • Alex H says:

          Bailey is just that. “Sevicable.” Nothing more, nothing less. He’s not a viable solution. He’s simply a ok backup.

    • KyleT says:

      I actually like this scenario a lot

    • May be premature to count on Coleman. He has now moved up to #5 rank at that position, and with time, may move higher and therefore out of range for the Hawks at #26 o’all.

  22. Ukhawk says:

    Uncertain who’s contract is up or not. Aren’t Lewis and a Bailey both free agents too?

  23. Greg haugsven says:

    Screw it! Let’s just trade our first round pick for Joe Thomas and get after it.

  24. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    Just for grins, CBS SPORTS now has Shon Coleman as the 25th rated player in the 2016 draft.

  25. DC says:

    The longer I ponder the O Line the stronger the feeling that Seattle is not going to pay big money to any FA Offensive Lineman from inside or outside.

    If we make a “big splash” FA signing I feel like it’s got to be a pass rusher and it’s got to infuriate half of the general population. Recently I was solely focused on an interior rusher. Malik Jackson was the target. Wilkerson was a pipe dream and others have mentioned a return of Jaye Howard. Those would all be great, some more possible than others but that wouldn’t kick over the hornets nest. So then I looked at the edge guys and I couldn’t get this rotational lineup out of my mind. I put aside “the judge”, hope for the best possible man as a Seahawk and added in the football talent…

    Greg Hardy, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Frank Clark.

    Those 4 would absolutely kill it and they would have the multiplier effect of keeping each other fresh through all 4 quarters. More pressure automatically makes your secondary’s job easier creating a positive feedback loop. He ain’t coming cheap, probably near the $10M apy range (2 year deal?). But if he’s working toward his best positive potential as a human being I see a Championship caliber group of pass rushers. Keep clogging the middle with cheap vet DTs, hope for Hill’s health, add a mid to late round rookie DT and then unleash the hounds on passing downs.

    That leaves $26M in cap space to get everything else done. It’s doable. Yes it would certainly stir the pot and yes it’s a risky move. The window is open right now!

    • Ukhawk says:

      Prefer Wilkerson to Hardy

      • DC says:

        So would I but I would guess Wilk commands a significantly higher price. Hardy’s red flags are what keeps his relative price down.

        • matt says:

          Hardy is a player I want nothing to do with. He’s a force at DE no doubt, but I just don’t want the headaches that follow him. He embodies the Raiders of old. Maybe he goes to Oakland…good fit there.

          • Volume12 says:

            I’d rather take a risk on one of the DEs from the Senior Bowl.

            You seen how big them boys are?

            IMO our pass rusher is going to come from the jr. class.

    • bigDhawk says:

      Just, no. He had 6 sacks all year for Dallas, and their entire locker room and coaching staff don’t want him back. He is a certifiable wacko and shouldabeen felon that belongs behind bars. We can do much better.

    • SeventiesHawksFan says:

      I believe Hardy will never be signed by our team. Frank Clark’s incident was properly looked into prior to picking him, but what Hardy did to another female is on another level. We aren’t going there.

      And we aren’t paying $10 mil for any new pass rusher anyway, which would also risk alienating Bennet completely after paying him nowhere close to that this season. There are so many reasons for why picking up Hardy will never happen.

    • C-Dog says:

      If Jaye Howard hits the market, I think it would be very wise for Seattle to take a look at their former 4th round pick. He developed into a really nice play for KC, and still has youth on his size. Plays the run and pass very well. Probably means either Rubin or Mebane doesn’t come back if they made a deal. I think KC has been talking extension with him though.

    • Trevor says:

      There is no player in the NFL I would not prefer to see the Hawks sign over Hardy. He is a lunatic who abuses women and is a cancer in the locker room. I don’t care how many sacks he gets. Hopefully the Cards take him and he implodes their locker room like he did in Dallas this year. or better yet hopefully no one signs him and the NFL finally send a message.

  26. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Speaking of Vadal Alexander

    @Alex_Kozora: RT Vadal Alexander might have the strength and length but his inability to fire off the ball is going to make that all moot.

  27. EranUngar says:

    A remark regarding cap costs for our and FA new OL contracts:

    As we stand today, we should have almost 50M cap space for 2017 (assuming Lynch is gone). With the constantly rising cap it should be even higher.

    It is very likely that players signing a 3-4 year contracts may not have their full APY as the cap hit on year one. I.E. – an 8M per year could be a 6M cap hit on year one. Signing bonus and back-loading contracts are very reasonable for our cap structure right now at the peak of our championship window. It may enable us to invest 15M (per year) in the OL with a 11-12M cap hit for 2016.

    It would boost the OL while keeping enough to resign most of the other candidates (Irvine, Kearse, Lane, Shead, Ryan etc..)

  28. Jeff M. says:

    You could write a similar three scenarios for replacing Irvin piece:
    1. Draft a SAM with some pass rush ability to plug into his spot
    2. Draft a WILL, move KJ back to base package SAM, and add a 3rd down pass rush specialist
    3. Draft a safety and go with a base 3 safety package with Kam permanently down in the box, mix in some DB blitz packages to pressure the QB

    I think there are interesting arguments in favor of each.

  29. bigDhawk says:

    The continuity argument only makes sense if we think there is significant upside that each individual player can bring to the OL unit as a whole. Otherwise, we have to ask ourselves, what exactly are we continuing?

    We have two topped-out, known quantities in Okung and Sweezy with notable flaws that are what they are and not getting better. The rest of the OL are middling at best with low ceilings. Because of this I’m an advocate for a complete reboot. Replace the whole thing with better players that can provide something worth continuing. Some might say better the devil you know than the one you don’t, but why put up with devils? Just do better. We can, and we need to, whatever that ends up looking like.

    Trade for Joe Thomas and sign Mack, then use your second and third round picks on a RT and guard respectively. Take your pick. Then make the RG position Glow’s job to lose in training camp. And one more thing about Glow – if he is the better RG between him and Sweezy which he most likely is, then shame on us for not making that switch sooner.

    • Yes. When the question is Continuity vs. Talent, it makes zero sense to stay with relentless mediocrity and sub part performance.Upgrade talent, THEN strive for continuity.

  30. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    From Wednesday’s Shrine practice field:

    @Brady_Fred: Travis Feeney, LB from Washington, has come away with two picks and a fumble today. Two might have gone for TDs in a real game.

  31. RealRhino2 says:

    To be the snarky internet guy: Link?

    In other words, you tell me that continuity is almost as/more important than talent, I say, “Link?” Prove it. That could just be something that coaches and fans say that isn’t really true, such as that some catchers call a better game than others, resulting in lower ERA for pitchers. If fans can figure out whose job it is to block which DL just by watching a few game tapes, these guys should be able to get it sorted out in a few weeks. If they can’t, or aren’t good at it (Britt, Sweezy, Gilliam), they just probably aren’t very good, period.

    I’m also not sold on the claim that the Seahawks have spent as much as any other team trying to fix the OL. Well, more accurately, I think they’ve “spent” as much, but I’m not sure they’ve “bought” as much. As I look at it, we spent two 1sts, a 2nd, a 3rd, and two 4ths (not counting the late picks or UDFA). Okung, Carpenter, Moffitt, Glowinski, Poole.

    But what have we actually “bought?” We’ve reached and overdrafted to the point where I don’t think it makes sense to say we threw a 2nd-rounder at the problem in Britt, for example. Or a 4th-rounder in Poole. Going back and looking at predraft projections from various sources, Carpenter (to a small extent), Britt and Poole were overdrafted. Britt was a 2nd-rounder only because we made him so. He was a 4th/5th talent. Poole should have been picked in the 6th or 7th. Moffitt was just a washout b/c of other things, not necessarily talent.

    So as I see it, in terms of what we’ve thrown at the problem, we used:
    1st rounder, Okung = Good return on investment. Some injury issues, but has mostly played well.
    1st rounder, Carpenter = Good return on investment. Not great, but good player who played well.
    3rd rounder, Moffitt = Washout, but not b/c of talent.
    4th-rounder, Glowinski = Looks good so far, could turn into good starter.
    5th-rounder, Britt = Crap.
    7th-rounder, Poole = Crap.

    So some would say we’ve spent high draft picks, that hasn’t worked. But I would say when we took highly rated players it’s worked fine. The model isn’t broken. It just doesn’t work when you take playrs 3 rounds early and then pretend you’ve taken steps to fix the problem.

    All of which is a longwinded way of saying we shouldn’t be afraid to spend high draft picks on the OL, we should maybe just stop listening to Cable so much and use those picks on guys that the other 31 teams are good, too. For me, resign Okung, plug in Glow at Sweezy’s spot, get a replacement LG and competition at C and RT (in that order) in the draft and FA.

    • Rob Staton says:

      If you want a link every time I assert an opinion on football — I’m going to keep letting you down.

      • RealRhino2 says:

        It’s a joke, Rob. I know you aren’t really going to provide a link. As I said, it’s just a snarky internet method of questioning whether there is any validity to an assertion that we all seem to accept as true.

        By the way, I meant to thank you and praise you for the post in the first place. Great food for thought.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      You got to remember that most football players only last 4-5 years. Based on that lifespan, we shouldn’t be talking about Okung or Carpenter or Moffitt as being additions to the line. That was past history in another life. If somehow they last longer it was a blessing. I just don’t think you can talk about them as additions to the line in the context of what is happening next year.

      • Volume12 says:

        Terry Poole looked fine to me at LG last training camp. Raw, sure. But, there’s a reason they stashed him.

        Way too early to write him off.

  32. bobbyk says:

    Take this for what it’s worth, but there are some rumors here in Minnesota that the Seahawks will go after Phil Loadholt in free agency in part because Bevell was here when he was drafted. Supposedly, Bevell has asked for it. Now, I can’t “prove” any of this and take it for what it’s worth but it definitely makes sense and I now can definitely see the Seahawks in the market for him. He’s coming off injury and won’t be a huge money guy. My main question is do they want him to continue his career at RT (Gilliam to LT) or would they see him as a gigantic (literally) upgrade at LG?

    • bobbyk says:

      Vikings are not going to pay him $5.4 million in ’16. He’ll be released if he doesn’t restructure.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Thanks for the heads up. It’s certainly a cost-effective option. And as you say, he could fit at left guard based on what they like. Interesting.

    • Trevor says:

      He would be an LG option for sure if he is cut and they can get him on a reasonable deal. Would be a huge upgrade to Britt in pass pro particularly.

      • Volume12 says:

        Intetesting for sure.

        The type of FA signing I could see Seattle make this year.

        With so many of our own to take care of this off-season, I’m not expecting any flashy or big deals.

        But, it wouldn’t shock me with PC/JS penchant for ‘swinging for the fences’ when it comes to off-season wheeling and dealing.

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        He could also continue to play RT if Okung walks and Gilliam moves to LT.

  33. Sam Jaffe says:

    I think Gilliam is exactly what Tom Cable would cook up in his kitchen if God allowed him to make his own Right Tackles. He’s long, athletic, relatively slim, tenacious and smart. Seattle has a different need at RT than other teams: because of Wilson’s pocket awareness, he rarely gets sacked on the blindside (it does happen, but much less than with other QB’s). Additionally, with his mobility, both tackles need to be able to block on those endless Russell-runs-around-in-circles-and-does-his-thing-and-then-throws-a-touchdown-pass plays. In other words, most teams require a standout left tackle and a mediocre grinder at right tackle. Seattle needs two above-average athletes at both tackle spots. Based on this, I would prefer to keep Gilliam at RT and draft a LT in the first round. The only reason a starter-capable LT prospect would fall to pick number 26 is that they are very good but not great. That’s exactly what Seattle needs at LT and would allow Gilliam to not have to learn an all new position. As for LG, just remember ABB (Anybody But Britt). People keep saying “He’s a second rounder, give him time to develop into his capabilities.” Everyone in the draft community thought picking him in the second was an enormous reach. He should have been a 6th or 7th rounder. And in hindsight, he wasn’t even worth that kind of pick. Seattle needs a new left guard, one way or another.

    • Trevor says:

      Really like this post Sam good points.

      A guy Vol12 pointer out yesterday Fhan Cooper has all the physical tools the Hawks seem to like in a Tackle. Athletic, really long arms and good feet. I had not watched any tape on him till Vol pointed him out but was really impressed and he is someone we might get in the 3rd / 4th round.

      If Coleman is gone in Round #1 then then might take an interior guy like Whitehair early and then get a guy like Cooper later.

  34. DaleR says:

    I hope Nowak is given a chance to win the left guard spot. It was obviously too much to ask him to make the line calls this early in his offensive line career. However, he is athletic, aggressive, and a hard worker. With Nowak at left guard and Glowinski on the right we have two guys who have played in the system. Draft a long term natural center but let Lewis start until the rookie is ready. The only truly new starter would be a tackle. We need the Okung and Sweezy money and I don’t know that a top tier left tackle is critical in this system. Draft a natural left tackle or get an underrated guy in free agency. Notice I said a natural tackle and center. I suspect an offensive lineman develops an o-line personality as they work thru high school and college. I wonder if converted d-liners have difficulty fitting in. Don’t know, just a thought. The Redskins had a great o-line known as the “Hogs”. They embraced the identity and were great because they became a unit that had each other’s back on and off the field. Why doesn’t our o-line have a name, a persona like “The Legion of Boom”? So far the only moniker they’ve had is “the weakest part of the team”, not good. Maybe it will take the fans to give them a name to live up to.

  35. Steve Nelsen says:

    Rob,

    I know Davis Hsu did some projections a while back about what he thought it would cost to resign the Seattle UFAs. Have there been any updates that you are aware of?

    Also, we know that the Seattle model has been letting free agents sign elsewhere to gain compensatory draft picks. Are you aware of any projections about what the Seattle UFAs would bring? I am thinking a 5th for Sweezy and if Okung gets an unexpectedly big offer from another team, then maybe a 3rd or 4th for Okung.

    • cha says:

      Not Rob here but If you look at OTC’s 2016 projections you can ballpark it a little

      http://overthecap.com/2016-compensatory-draft-picks-update-432015/

      I would think Okung & Irvin would bring 4th’s, with possibility to sneak into 3rd’s. Will help if FA’s keep getting resigned or franchised by their own teams (Derek Wolfe for instance).

      Sweezy probably would be similar to Carpenter. Prepare for a 6, maybe a 5.

      Although I don’t see a mega-monster FA in the mix this year, assuming Von Miller stays with Denver. (I reserve the right to be totally wrong on that one). That might shake things up a little.

      Of course that’s all counter balanced if the Hawks go out and sign a big ticket guy themselves.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Not to my knowledge but I’m sure Davis will dig into it again soon.

      I think you’d possibly be looking at fourth round comp picks for Okung and Irvin.

  36. Volume12 says:

    Shon Coleman, Ryan Kelly, and Taylor Decker all back out of the Senior Bowl.

    We’re missing a sleeper OT that’s going to climb like DJ Humphries last year, and JaWuan James the year before.

    There’s someone right under our nose we haven’t spotted yet.

    Who is it guys?

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      We may have already spotted some. I’ll be watching Willie Beavers and Joe Haeg to see how they perform against better competition. Also interested in Cole Toner.

      And I know Kyle Murphy isn’t the greatest athlete, but his technique is excellent. He’d be good value in R4 or later.

      • Volume12 says:

        All intriguing names for sure. Looking forward to seeing how they all play next week, as ya mentioned.

        Murphy might be a sneaky good athlete though.

        I’m wondering if Beavers could be a LG?

        And I wanna see how Spencer Drango looks outside of a spread offense.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          I’m more interested in Beavers as a RT, but IIRC he has the strong punch of a phone booth brawler. I wonder if he has that versatility.

          I know many are high on Drango but I’m not as much. I like his size and power, especially in run blocking. But he looks like he gets confused a lot, which will only get worse at the next level. In the same range of size and draft grade, I’d be more interested in Tretola.

    • Trevor says:

      You found him yesterday Vol. Cooper out of South Car!

      I am disappointed Coleman backed out of the Senior Bowl. I wonder why? Does he have an injury. Might be good for us as I thought the Senior Bowl would be his real coming out party.

      • Volume12 says:

        Could be an injury or not wanting to get hurt.

        I also wonder, and this is the conspiracy theorist in me talking, if these guys have been told or promised by certain teams they’ll select them early on.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          Not sure that makes much sense for Coleman. Why rely on a loose promise made a few months before the draft and sabotage a big opportunity to demonstrate your worth. These pre-combine, pre-draft events can have a big impact on a prospect’s future, and none is bigger or more important than the Senior Bowl.

          How many times in the last few days have you read a comment like, “(prospect x) really made some money this week” in reference to the fast risers?

          I’d guess an injury or wanting to rest before combine training begins. Regardless, it’s both frustrating because I looked forward to watching him, and relieving because if he did as well as I expect he could, he’d go long before SEA could get him. He probably will anyway.

  37. Clayton says:

    Wondering if there’s any chance Jack Conklin falls to Seattle? He’s not as athletic, but he’s tough and gritty. I thought he handled himself well against Joey Bosa.

  38. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    I just read Devin Funchess has a 20% catchable pass drop rate this year including the playoffs. Yikes.

  39. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    From PFF:

    Seahawks OLB K.J. Wright played 994 snaps; he missed just four tackles.
    Most NFL teams hope for one elite-level defensive player at each level (defensive line, linebacker, and secondary). Seattle nearly has two such players in each level. Smack in the middle of all these playmakers is Seattle’s most underrated and consistent defender—K.J. Wright.

    Wright is rock steady. While playing on 994 snaps, he missed only four tackles all season. He also led the team with 54 stops. Wright is very good against the run, and is elite in pass coverage. While names like Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor, and Earl Thomas grab headlines, Wright may be just as valuable to Seattle’s defensive success.

  40. franks says:

    I favor blowing it up, and to me that means more than just Sweezy and Okung. Okung was out most of the time anyway. Sweezy unfortunately was not. Britt might fit better as a guy you can go to if your starter gets hurt.

    If Gilliam can move to LT that will make Okung a lot easier to replace but it’s not a good idea if it costs us some wins. How steep will the learning curve be for him? And don’t just give him the job on cables recommendation, remember Novak who did cost us games imo, through no fault of his own.

    In this scenario, I’d say we pick a RT and LG in the first three rounds. Don’t think you need a first rounder for either of those unless a big talent falls. So we could take a CB or DE there. DE for me looks like a harder position to fill, for this staff.

  41. j says:

    We’ll sign a veteran to a minimum to midprice contract. Someone like Phil Loadholt, mentioned in the previous comment, would be ideal, but I wouldn’t rule out something like the Eric Winston deal from 2014. A vet-min type guy. We resign Lewis. Everyone else walks. Our line would go

    Non-elite vet – Glowinski/Sokolji – Lewis/Sokolji – Britt/Poole/Nowak – Gilliam

    If a good tackle falls to us at 26, we pick him, otherwise we pick up a mid-round tackle to compete at RT and maybe a swing guy in the late rounds. Fin.

  42. Steele says:

    When I think of o-lines, I cannot avoid thinking about the Patriots. Every season, they get production of out their linemen, including nobodies and walk-on plug-ins, and despite injuries across the lineup. This season, they have messed with 13 different lineups in 37 different combinations.

    The common denominator, besides coaching, is that every lineman knows how to play o-line (solid drafting), and each can play multiple positions. They are not conversion projects.

    Granted, it is a different offense, and Tom Brady is not Russell Wilson. However, it is a successful approach that is not hyper-expensive.

    Cable’s approach is higher risk. The team is now stuck with it for the time being. I would prefer they stop being so cute and just draft and acquire solid known quantity offensive linemen.

  43. RockNRowland says:

    Rob,

    One thing to consider is the Hawk’s tendency to trade their 1st rounds picks especially when they don’t have a 1st round pick grade on any remaining players on the board. I think that’s one motivation for them having traded 1st rounders for established players at a position of need (Harvin, Graham). Do you think it’s possible the Hawks might repeat this tactic?

    Also, can anyone point me to the draft value chart that would help determine what the #26 pick should bring back in additional picks? Another 2nd and a 3rd?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’d never rule anything out — but it’s hard to imagine which veteran they’d trade for and how they’d be able to afford another big acquisition. To move out of round one they might be able to net that — the trade chart is a bit outdated these days. It really depends. Some teams have moved back into the late first just for swapping fifth round picks.

  44. Charles says:

    Rob, What are your thoughts on Joe Dahl the OL from WSU?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Looked good in pass pro but think he kicks inside. Could be an option.

      • Ukhawk says:

        CBs look even more enticing in the mid rounds, look at where Fuller, Jackson and Hall rank?!:

        3 Kendall Fuller VT
        3-4 Will Redmond Mississippi State 4Sr
        4th William Jackson Houston 4Sr
        4th Keivarae Russell Notre Dame 4Sr
        4th Deiondre Hall Northern Iowa 4Sr

        And some of the safeties:
        3 Karl Joseph. West Virginia 4Sr
        4-5 Deandre Houston-Carson William & Mary 5Sr
        5th K.J. Dillon West Virginia 4Sr
        5-6 Miles Killebrew Southern Utah 5Sr
        6th Elijah Shumate Notre Dame 4Sr

  45. Ukhawk says:

    Rob. We gotta cover off some of Pauline’s rankings. They have me juiced in terms of our ability to replace certain positions in the to later rounds.
    OLB to maybe replace Irvin, I like this range on his rankings:
    2-3 Kyler Fracknell Utah State 5Sr
    3rd Dadi Nicholas Virginia Tech 5Sr
    3rd Eric Striker Oklahoma 4Sr
    3-4 James Cowser Southern Utah 5Sr
    4th Dominique Alexander Oklahoma 3Jr
    4th Deion Jones LSU 4Sr
    4-5 Victor Ochi Stony Brook 5Sr
    4-5 Yannick Ngakoue

  46. Ukhawk says:

    Should read ‘mid to later’

    DE, how bout:
    2nd Charles Tapper Oklahoma 4Sr
    3rd Noah Spence Eastern Kentucky 3Jr
    4th Shawn Oakman Baylor 5Sr
    5th Drew Ott Iowa 4Sr
    5-6 Carl Nassib Penn State 5Sr
    6th Anthony Zettel Penn State 5Sr
    FA Ronald Blair Appalachian St 5Sr

  47. Ukhawk says:

    DT to replace Mebane or Rube(ix cube)?

    2nd Jarran Reed Alabama 4Sr
    2-3 Adolphus Washington Ohio State 4Sr
    3rd Austin Johnson Penn State 4Jr
    3rd Vernon Butler Louisiana Tech 4S
    3-4 Maliek Collins Nebraska 3Jr
    3-4 Sheldon Rankins Louisville 4Sr
    4th Sheldon Day Notre Dame 4Sr
    4-5 Adam Gotsis Georgia Tech 4Sr
    5th Javon Hargrave South Carolina St

    Was concerned about losing some guys as free agents but we might actually get better?!

    I’ve got my personal favourites but wanted to list a few that have been bandied about.

  48. Ukhawk says:

    Would be pumped with Stricker (3rd), Rankins /Reed (4th / 2nd) and Blair (7th)