Updated mock draft: 23rd February

February 23rd, 2011 | Written by Rob Staton

To see the latest mock draft click here

I wanted to post a mock draft before the combine officially gets under way tomorrow (work outs begin on Saturday). I’ll make an update next Wednesday when it’s all finished. I suspect that a great deal won’t change but there are several prospects who can help or hinder their stock.

Robert Quinn is one of those guys. He’s getting a good press at the moment largely because Mike Mayock is talking up his 2009 tape (which admittedly is impressive). However, he hasn’t played for a year. A striking performance will pump his stock back towards the top ten range, but anything less than that and the concerns may surface. I suggested a fall in last week’s mock and that’s still a possibility.

There’s an opportunity for prospects like Ryan Williams or Mikel LeShoure to push themselves up the board by running strongly. Several pass rushers can impress with a good work out. Perhaps the player I’ve highlighted the most on this blog is Colorado cornerback Jimmy Smith – he can confirm a top 10-15 grade over the next few days.

So what about the Seahawks pick this week? It’s changed again as we continue to review different options. More on that in a moment.

I was going to post a second round projection here but opted against it. I looked across the picks and just felt it was too convoluted. Trying to project the order of the top 64 prospects is like trying to pick the lottery numbers. You end up basing judgements entirely on needs. It doesn’t mean there won’t be a second round compilation in future, but I don’t want to put something out there I didn’t feel was worthy at this stage.

However, here are some of the prospects (in no particular order) that I considered would be off the board before #57:

Ryan Mallett, Muhammed Wilkerson, Mikel LeShoure, Ryan Williams, Quinton Carter, Rahim Moore, Martez Wilson, Titus Young, Drake Nevis, Rashad Carmichael, Jonathan Baldwin, Derek Sherrod, Aaron Williams, Jarvis Jenkins, Dontay Moch, Cortez Allen, Rodney Hudson, Christian Ballard, Davon House and Ben Ijalana.

I was undecided on a handful of prospects. Obviously some of these names will rise or fall and others will come into contention. What I take out of this is the 22-32 range in round one isn’t a great deal stronger (if at all) than a good half of round two.

So what about this week’s pick at #25…

Jabal Sheard isn’t even someone I’ve had in round one before. I’ve long viewed him as a very solid round two pick having enjoyed an impressive 2010 season on a largely disappointing Pittsburgh team.

For me there are two areas of strength in the bottom end of round one: defensive end/pass rusher and offensive tackle. We could see the 21-32 region dominated by those two positions. I remain unconvinced that right tackle will be a serious consideration for the Seahawks at #25, but clearly improving their interior offensive line would be welcome should a prospect like Mike Pouncey last until #25 (which I think is highly unlikely).

Out of the prospects potentially available that could be drafted, my favorite offensive tackle would be Derek Sherrod. Anthony Castonzo is a finesse player who I’m not convinced would suite the right hand side of the line. His struggles with leverage don’t translate to a dominating run blocker. Gabe Carimi is limited in that I don’t feel confident he could play left tackle well enough should Russell Okung suffer further injuries. Sherrod could work as a credible run blocker and has the lateral speed/agility to play the blind side if required.

It’s still a luxury for a position that doesn’t contain a high end value, watches the quarterbacks front view, gets a lot of tight end support and isn’t generally drafted that often in the first round.

We’ve long discussed whether the team will value LEO pass rushers highly enough to draft one in round one. Seattle found production from Chris Clemons and Raheem Brock in 2010, although most of their pressure (and sacks) came when the defense used a blitz package. Not relying on the blitz to create pressure will significantly boost the team’s defensive production.

I still think bolstering the interior (NT, 3-tech) and left end (5-tech) positions will help create better one-on-one match ups on the edge for the LEO, but I cannot rule out the team falling for a talented pass rusher if they stay at #25.

Sheard looks bigger than his size suggests (6-4, 260lbs). He’s capable of holding up against the run – an under rated quality for the smaller LEO right end. You’re not going to see the blistering speed of a Robert Quinn off the edge, but Sheard has a much greater repertoire of moves and he’s a notch faster than the likes of Brooks Reed and Ryan Kerrigan.

I chose Sheard instead of Justin Houston for that greater ability against the run and due to Houston’s reliance on edge speed. He’s a better technician and that will help as a rookie coming up against assured veteran lineman. Houston can’t be ignored here – he has a good skill set for the 4-3 scheme and he’s got the size and quicks for the LEO. His run defense and inability to mix things up could count against him, but he should find a home in round one.

Is it a wildcard? Sure. I like Sheard enough to put him in this bracket. Can he run well enough at the combine to justify this level of faith? We’ll find out on Monday when the defensive lineman and linebackers run through drills.

It’s still a chore to have the Seahawks passing on Ryan Mallett, someone who I believe deserves a lot more credit than he’s getting. Out of this quarterback class, he’s probably the most ready to start from day one and in fairness I think that would still be the case even if Andrew Luck had declared.

However, we all know the character concerns by now and how different teams react to them. When I look at the ‘all-in’ slogan of this regime and the way it’s being set up – can I see Mallett as the focal point of the Pete Carroll era? It doesn’t seem like a logical fit. Maybe I’ll be wrong there – part of me hopes that I am because I rate the guy higher than most.

33 Responses to “Updated mock draft: 23rd February”

  1. Hawks46 says:

    not disagreeing with the pick, English.

    I’m not sure I have LEO end being a 1st round need for us right now, since Clemons was more than just servicable.

    The only issue I’d have is that I think we could ge Sheard with our pick in the 2nd.

    I still see CB as our biggest need, but a good FA option (Asomugha) or lack of a decent option with that pick could lead us elsewhere.

    What about that kid from Texas (CB)? I’ve seen some 1st round grades on him.

    • Rob says:

      I’ve never been convinced Sheard will be there at #57. He’s always been an early second rounder for me. Generally I agree that LEO isn’t a vital need, but the board dictates a little bit what they can or can’t do. John Morgan wrote an excellent piece which highlighted nearly all of Clemons sacks’ came via a blitz package. He plays a position designed so it will create a certain level of production – which is why both he and Brock had career years statistically. Morgan raised the point though – does pure sacks = consistent pressure? Our pass defense was still poor and we weren’t relentlessly attacking opposition QB’s. There are lots of capable 4-3/LEO ends at the bottom of round one, so I’m loathe to rule it out. Finding someone who gets consistent pressure every week and sacks will be to Seattle’s credit.

      I’m not sold on Williams as a R1 pick. Not enough pure ball skills, only a so-so 2010 season for Texas. Not elite in anything, just a solid player. I have a mid/late second round grade on him. He can boost his stock this week.

  2. tompage says:

    Interesting piece Rob. Based on what I know, it seems like they would take Kerrigan over Sheard, but you make a case why he is the choice. I think it is more likely to see one of the other defense line positions being picked: 5-tech, 3-tech, and nose guard. Pass rush guys are always over valued, and Clemons and Brock did a good job last year. I think you can get better value picking one of the other defensive line positions.

    • Rob says:

      Kerrigan’s edge speed isn’t nearly good enough to play the LEO for me. Relentless, high energy player but a limited athlete.

  3. John says:

    Rob, What do you think about Greg Little or Ras-I Dowling as round two prospects? I think Little has a chance to be a bit of a steal in this draft as well as Dowling. I do not think either will be available when we pick in the 4th round.

    • Rob says:

      Both interesting guys in that Dowling has the injury problems and Little the suspension. I had Dowling in that late second/early third range before the injury. Little is in that similar range. Options at #57? Perhaps, but hard to judge how much of an impact the injuries/suspension will have.

  4. Ben says:

    Wow. I’m feeling pretty good about my Sheard suggestion a couple posts ago.

    Here’s my shot at some suggestions for 57 ruling out the guys you think would be gone…

    CBs: Johnny Patrick or Brandon Burton?

    DTs: You really think Paea could fall so far? Where’s Marvin Austin at for you? Kendrick Ellis intrigues me but that might be too early.

    OG: John Moffitt?

    • Rob says:

      Two very solid suggestions at CB, Ben. I think Paea’s problem is the more I’ve watched him, the more I’ve struggled to place him on a team. He’s essentially an under sized nose tackle, who won’t likely work out as a 3-4 DE. I don’t see him as a three-tech. His market may be restricted to teams like Indianapolis who value lighter lineman.

      Marvin Austin has always been a third round grade for me and the suspsension takes that down a notch. I’m not convinced he’ll go in round two.

      Moffitt is a bit over rated, I think he’s just a guy really.

  5. schnrb02 says:

    I just got done reading an article on the Seahawks website about John Schneider. Here is a section from that article:

    “The draft picks are just …” he continued before pausing. “If you trade a draft pick away, it hurts. I just hate giving up draft picks.”
    Just as he loves acquiring them. The more picks, obviously, the better.
    “Valuing the picks, I truly do,” he said. “Quite frankly, I love moving back.”
    Because trading down is a way to get more picks. And this could be one of those drafts where the talent pool from No. 24 through No. 40 could be equal, as far as the players’ draft grades. So trading back could be a possibility for the Seahawks – depending on which players are available when it’s time to make the 25th pick and what another team might be willing to give up to move into that spot.

    Sounds pretty interesting to me. I hope that some team is going to want that #25 pick and give up an early 2nd and 3rd round pick for it. I wouldn’t mind seeing the Seahawks also trade the 57th pick for early picks in rounds 3 and 4. With the early 2nd rounder I would select Leonard Hankerson (WR, Miami). With one of the early 3rd rounders I would select Jurrell Casey (DT, USC) to fill the void at the 3-tech position when Mebane gets signed and moves back to his more successful position at the 1-tech spot. With the other 3rd round I would pick John Moffitt (OG, Wisconsin). Moffitt would be valuable since he can play all 3 interior positions. With the 4th rounders I would pick James Carpenter (OT Alabama) and Jalil Brown (CB, Colorado). I think by drafting this way we can fill many of the Seahawks positions of need and add depth to our roster.

    • Alex says:

      I would absolutely hate that draft.

      At this point, some of the names being thrown around are Phil Taylor, Locker, Mallet, Ligiuet, Pouncey, Wilkerson. If we pass on those players to draft a Leonard Hankerson or Jurrell Casey…, I don’t know what to do. For starters, yes, the WR position can be upgraded, but you’re talking about the position that BUSTS the most and one that doesn’t see proper development until 3 years later. Further, WR isn’t even the strength of this draft. DL and CB is. If it WR was a crucial need, then maybe, but WR again isn’t the greatest need either. In terms of BPA and Need, WR doesn’t fit either criteria.

      Jurrell Casey on the other hand is being dissed for lower body strength. Scout Inc in particular notes some of the reasons why he is one of the 3 most overrated players. Plus, if you have a chance at Taylor who can play 1 tech or 5 tech or even Liuget or Wilkerson at 3 tech, you DON’T pick Casey. All 3 prospects are far superior to Casey. Heck, I would even take Marvin Austin over Casey and I’m not the biggest fan of Austin.

      I won’t comment on the other picks, but the first 2 picks are absolutely disgusting.

      Alex
      Alex

      • schnrb02 says:

        Hi Alex,

        Thanks for your reply to my post. I respect your opinion however the names you are putting out like Taylor, Locker, Mallet, Liuget, and Pouncey probably wont even be available to us. If your worried about Hankerson being a bust I suggest you look at more than his game tape before you call him a bust. He had a great Senior Bowl, is a good route runner, extremely large hands, and has been personally coached by Cris Carter! I think he has tons of upside and some think he could be the next Andre Johnson. I would take a chance at that, wouldn’t you? As for the Jurrell Casey pick, I picked him because he would be the BAP at that point in my draft scenario. Here is an analysis from CBS NFL DRAFT about Casey:

        Strength: Good lower-body strength to hold up to drive blocking. Has the sand in his pants to anchor, even showing the ability to hold up to the double-team. Good upper-body strength to slide off blocks and drag down runners.

        So is CBS NFL DRAFT or Scout Inc. right? I dont know but by looking at his game tape I think he would be a steal. I think that he could last that long too, because so many teams are switching to a 3-4 defense where Casey would not be a good fit. Also you said you would take Austin over Casey. I agree Austin has better measurables but I think that is it. Here is a little something about Austin from CBS NFL DRAFT:

        Austin’s 2009 season was his last at UNC — he was suspended for the entire 2010 season after an NCAA investigation found that he’d accepted improper gifts from an agent. Though several North Carolina players were implicated in the scandal, including senior wide receiver Greg Little and junior defensive end Robert Quinn, Austin was the only Tar Heel actually kicked off the team.

        Intangibles: Suspended for the entire 2010 season after an NCAA investigation found that he’d accepted gifts from an agent. Characterized by those close to the team as “talented, but selfish.” Highly touted prep prospect that was rated the No. 1 at his position and top 10 overall by most recruiting experts.

        Austin is not the type of player I would want in my locker room. I am glad you did not comment on my other choices because then I would have to write a whole lot more. I would like to state again that I respect your opinion, however I would suggest you do your homework before you start calling someone’s selections “disgusting”.

        • Alex says:

          It’s not just Scout inc. Scout inc merely confirmed what I saw on tape. There are multiple tapes of Jurrell Casey out there and the one impressive one is the 09 Stanford game. That aside though, I rarely find good tapes of him. Furthermore, I consistently watch the Pac 10, so I automatically do actually do some homework. As a person who consistently watches the Pac 10, Casey is highly inconsistent and not someone who “jumps” out. I would certainly rate him lower than last year’s Brian Price and look at the impact he had this year. Again, if you have the choice of Liuget, Taylor, or even Wilkerson, there is no reason to pass them for Casey.

          The reason I suggested Austin over Casey is because of measurable and potential. Pete Carroll for one is a person who chooses high potential over a safer pick. We saw that last year when he rolled the dice with Walter Thurmmond (2nd round talent who fell due to injury) in the 4th round, trading away picks for Leon Washington (nasty leg injury) and Lendale White, Anthony McCoy (3rd round talent) in the 6th round, etc.

          As for intangibles, I don’t rate that as high as others assuming he can play. The only thing that would REALLY concern me is work ethic. He can be as selfish as he wants, but he has to work hard and be coachable. The one exception to the rule may be QB as they’re the face of the franchise and the leader of a team. As such, if a QB is described as a jackass and not respected by his team, the team won’t function. A DT is another matter.

          As for gifts, I care little about that. That means little. Quinn was also out for the whole year and he is a likely top 10 selection. Why? He’s that good. In the case of Austin, he fell further because he didn’t have everything together yet and people were projecting him in the top 15 based on the projected development.

          I don’t care how good Wilkerson is on tape. WRs have the highest bust rate PERIOD. The reason is because WRs have the toughest time translating in the NFL. Most WRs don’t become the true product until year 3. Rodney White, Andre Johnson, and even Fitz all took roughly 2-3 years. During this developmental period, a lot can go wrong.

          Unless, it’s about as close to a can’t miss as you can get like AJ Green, I’m not selecting WR in the 1st round (or in our case, our first pick if he trade down). Wrap this around your head. WR in the 1st round has a success rate at roughly 30% while CBs a rate nearly DOUBLE that at 60%. All the while, the CB void is a greater one than the WR position.

          One final note about Wilkerson. If he was so great as to be compared to Andre Johnson (who I like because the Texans are my second team), don’t you think he would be rated in the 1st round? Andre Johnson was selected with the 2ND pick. If not the 1st round, at least over Julio Jones who I greatly worry over due to his inconsistent hands (the most important aspect of a WR).

          WR bust rates aside, I once again assert that WR is not the greatest need either. While I do agree with Rob in some sense that we need a person to vertically stretch the field, it’s far from the biggest weakness (at least compared to future QB, CB to replace Jennings, DL depth). Not only is it not the greatest need, it’s not even the strength of the draft. It’s a mismatch in both BPA based on strength of draft and Need.

          So yes, I stand by my comment. That draft would be disgusting because regardless of how the other picks work out, the most important picks (the first two) are bad. And I do watch plenty of game tapes and form my opinions off them. For example, I have my opinion of Da Quan Bowers based on the Florida State tape, Maryland tape, and the Bowl game they played this year. It’s a pretty unique report and has been confirmed by only one other scouting report that I’ve seen.

          Alex

          • schnrb02 says:

            Seriously Alex,

            I am not trying to convince you to like my picks. I simply selected a few players, and you decided to respond to it. All I did was try to defend them. My whole point was supposed to be that we trade our 25th pick for picks in rounds 2 and 3. I was hoping to get more picks and fill holes and add depth. As of now, I already changed my scenario and picks. I hope you can wrap that around your head! If you want to be a jerk about this then I can play that game too. In your last reply, you should look more carefully. “Wilkerson” is not a receiver from Miami. I think you mean Leonard Hankerson (WR Miami)! How can you critique a player when you can’t even get his name right? I don’t think Muhammad Wilkerson would make a great receiver either. We can agree on that. It might take him more than three years to develop though. LEONARD HANKERSON is also not in the first round because he does not run in the 4.40′s like Johnson did. Which is why he is in the 2nd round. Lastly, for being a Texans fan, you sure do not know your best player very well. Andre Johnson was selected with the 3RD, not 2ND pick, in the 2003 draft. If you are going to put information out for people to read then I suggest you get it right. Honestly, if you watch games the way you write, I cannot take anything you write seriously. I would suggest you stop relying to this because your just embarrassing yourself. Alex, I am done with this. Best wishes.

        • Alex says:

          This is getting old and this post is over 4 days old; however, good job not arguing anything substantial. At least the first post had some substance in them.

          What did you do in the second post? You A) talked about how Johnson was picked 3rd and not 2nd B) did some minor name correction C) whined about my tape analysis ability.

          What did I give you?
          A) Response to issues about character concerns.
          B) Some tape information.
          C) How WRs have REALLY high bust rates unless it’s top 5 caliber (e.g. AJ Green, Calvin Johnson, Larry Litz, or Andre Johnson) and that I wouldn’t spend my first pick on a WR.

          Well, in response
          A) Big deal, I don’t care if Johnson was 2nd or 3rd. As a Texans fan, I just remember he was either 2 or 3 and the GREATER point is that he was a top 5 pick or a “safe” WR pick which is the exception to the “no WR in the 1st round” rule.
          B) I don’t care if I got the name correct. You knew who I was talking about and I knew who you were talking about. It doesn’t take much energy to notice Leonard as I’m pretty sure there is only one player in the top 40 who has that first name. More importantly, both of us agreed on one key point- it takes 3 years to develop WRs.
          That aside though, Leonard from what I’ve seen from the combine had some drop issues and he didn’t exactly blow away either with his 4.4 time.
          C) Hey, at least I do tape analysis. I don’t follow the mass. For example, Da Quan Bowers as the best “pure pass rusher” in this class? BS. If you want a scouting report from tape, I will give you one. How about Da Quan Bowers?

          Speed off snap- Good, but not great. This does affect his pass rush ability to a degree.

          Strength- elite as a defensive end. In part helped by his sheer raw size. That said, he is not strong enough to play the 3 tech and his effectiveness is noticeably reduced when he does so. He also has trouble fighting through double teams.

          Pass rush- decent, but has major issues disengaging. If he is smoother and is able to disengage more often, he would be able to pressure the QB more. Not as smooth as a Dwight Freeney (Robert Quinn is the better comparison). Sack # overrated. Even so, he has major potential to be a Julius Peppers or Mario Williams in terms of pass rush because of his strength.

          Run Stopping ability- Great gap discipline. He handles his gap extremely well. As good as an DE or 5 tech at run stopping.

          Moves: Not a lot of moves right now. Does occasionally flash the spin and swim moves, but he mostly uses the bull rush and relies on his strength. The limited repertoire may be a key reason why he gets locked up so often.

          Projection: 4-3 or 3-4 end. Ideally in a 4-3. Currently, because of his run stopping ability, he is actually better as a 5 tech, but with improved moves and disengaging ability, he can be a 1st class pass rusher.

          He overall still needs some work and is still a prospect in terms of moves and pass rush despite his 15+ sacks. If you want to see how he is now and what he needs to be in terms of pass rush, look at Daquan Bowers vs. Florida State and Robert Quinn vs. Anthony Costanzo. Ironically, Robert Quinn is some ways the opposite of Daquan Bowers. Quinn has the moves, but doesn’t bull rush enough because he doesn’t have the physical talent of Bowers. Likewise, Bowers is better at run stopping due his physical abilities while Quinn is merely average. Quinn has less sacks, but generates more QB pressure than Bowers. Quinn easily sheds the blocks while Bowers’ greatest weakness is disengaging.

      • plyka says:

        I think you’re underrating Casey. The only reason people are down on him is his frame and size (fat) i believe. A guy like Luiget has more of an NFL body. But Casey is a better football player than a guy like Luiget. Casey is quick and agile for such a fatty. If he loses a bit of the weight, his speed and agility would increase even more. But most importantly, Casey is a football player. You can tell just by watching him. I think a guy like Luiget gets overvalued because he fits the prototypical size/frame requirements, but doesn’t have that football player sense about him.

        PS: what i mean by “football player” is the intangible quality.

    • Rob says:

      Hi schnrb02,

      I saw the article but I think it’s a stock GM answer. Let’s not forget this regime has traded and manipulated picks for Charlie Whitehurst, Marshawn Lynch, Leon Washington and Lendale White. They traded late rounders for Stacey Andrews and Tyler Polumbus. They seriously looked at ways to bring in Brandon Marshall and Vincent Jackson. I don’t see evidence of this ‘picks at all costs’ ideology. Like every team I suspect they will review any trade offers, but I don’t take much out of the article.

  6. Bill Bobaggins says:

    Hi Rob,

    I am wondering what you think of Greg Romeus being a fit for the Hawks. He seemed to have top 10 talent before his injury last year. I really like this kid and think that he might fall into the 3rd (or maybe later), giving the Hawks a chance to trade into the 3rd for him.

    I’d love to hear what your thoughts on him are.

    Bill

    • Rob says:

      I was always underwhelmed by Romeus to be honest, Bill. He’s not a particularly explosive player and being out with injury for nearly a whole year might limit him further. People always wondered if Jabal Sheard benefitted from Romeus – but it may have been the other way round considering Sheard’s production in 2010. I graded Romeus at the bottom end of round two or early round three as a left end in a 4-3. He hasn’t got the burst or edge speed you usually associate with a LEO, he’s more of a stout guy with decent size who can tie up an end across from a better pass rusher.

  7. Matt says:

    I like the Sheard pick, but I would much prefer Phil Taylor (I know you are mixing it up, but it is a talking point). However, looking at what might be available, only further reinforces the idea that I believe we will trade up in this draft. Outside of the last handful of picks in round 1, only Taylor is a guy that brings anything special and/or above average for that matter.

    Now, I know people are clamouring to move down, but this is one of the poorest drafts in recent memory outside of the top 20-25. I mean looking at the end of your first round (which I don’t disagree with those guys), we are talking about LATE 2nd maybe even 3rd round values with guys like Costanzo, Reed, Kerrigan in any other year. All 3 are nice players, but they bring nothing remotely special to the table. Torrey Smith is another nice player, but would CLEARLY be a 2nd rounder any other year.

    I understand the want to build depth and accumulate picks, but if the value is not there, you don’t move down to simply move down. I mean, outside of a few guys who might slip, there are literally average guys with average tools who I would bet good money would never become difference makers in the NFL. I’d much rather lose our first and second rounder to get a future QB or a stud CB or DL. Outside of maybe Mallett, Baldwin (round 1 if he times well), and Hudson, there are very few players who pique my interest in round 2.

  8. Hawk970 says:

    I’d rather have Brandon Harris. CB is a BIG weakness for Seattle.

    Trufant’s starting to lose his agility, Jennings’ contract is up for renewal, and Thurmond is a couple years away from starting. So many times last year our team couldn’t get off the field. Clemons and Brock showed promise, and Davis is the next in line. I understand pass rush is key to affecting a quarterback’s game, but so many times out CB’s were outright beat.

    If Mebane isn’t retained, then I’d look at guys like Taylor, Wilkerson, and Liuget.

    • Rob says:

      Harris concerns me a lot after that Sun Bowl performance. It was a shock. He needs to repair his stock and I felt uncomfortable keeping him in round one this week. That was the pick I liked the least.

  9. plyka says:

    I wonder what the opportunity is to trade up and get a Cam Newton? If he falls to the top 10 or so, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to attempt a trade with the Cowboys for instance, to pick up Newton. His draft hype is high, so it’s not very likely, but it would be nice.

    • Rob says:

      I think he’ll go first overall.

      • Jamie says:

        If Carolina does take Cam Newton first overall, what do try do with Claussen? They would essentially be giving up in year two on a second round pick. Do you think they trade him? Would you give up our 4th round pick for him?

        • Rob says:

          I think they would start Clausen and work on Newton. At the moment Clausen’s stock is non existent – they’d be lucky to get a 6th rounder. If they want to move him on he needs to start and showing something/anything. I really cannot stress enough how limited Clausen is as a quarterback. He’s a bad fit schematically for Seattle and I can’t see any move in that direction.

  10. Jim Q. says:

    Nice mock. I appreciate your changing of the Seahawks pick every week as things play out up to draft days. It’s good to discuss the different options.
    I have a couple of general questions.

    (1) Given the previous managements (Tim R.) desire to only draft good character, large schools only, multi-year starters, etc. one would have to assume the Hawks removed a lot of players from their big board during those times, likely at the cost of not getting BPA’s.

    Now we have Pete Carroll’s “must buy in scenerio” that potentially could remove players from their big board. Some scouting reports mention player traits that are negative in that regard but a lot of them don’t and will be dependant on the investigation/interview process and the combine. So, how do you think the “must buy in” mantra will effect the Seahawks upcoming draft?

    (2) I’ve looked around online and have as yet been unable to get a good definition of the “futures contract” that is appearantly being used to get around the CBA’s no FA signing restrictions. Can you define the futures contracts that we are starting to see be used by a few clubs?

    • Rob says:

      Hi Jim,

      It’s hard to distinguish after just one draft. It’s nowhere near as restrictive as Ruskell’s policy. It probably impacts different positions at different levels. A guy like Earl Thomas didn’t scream ‘leader, going to buy in’ etc – he was just a really talented football player. He’s a free safety though. With regard to the QB position – it could be different. They need to be committed to the cause and be the guy who defines that philosophy. That doesn’t mean drafting a workaholic saint, but I think they will have a very keyed in approach to what they want at QB – more so than other positions.

      Future’s contracts essentially allow you to sign players on other teams practise squads in a very similar way to a permanent waivers. It’s a way of keeping fringe players in the mix and keeping all options open for those guys. I think every team gets so many of those contracts. It’s not really a way of getting around the CBA issues as it’s always been part of the off season.

  11. Ben says:

    I know you don’t project trades in your mock but as another option other than trading down, I was wondering what you thought of trading the 25th for a 2012 first. Assuming we can find a team willing and that team isn’t a perennial playoff contender, it’s unlikely we’ll be picking any worse than 25th next year.

    This would make the most sense IMO if we don’t want Mallett and aren’t convinced by any mid-round QBs. Next year’s QB class looks like a stark contrast to this year’s class with a lot of top end talent (Luck and Barkley) and not much depth after that, although it’s too early to say for sure. Anyway, having two first round picks would make us an intriguing trade partner for any team picking in the top 10 with their QB position already filled.

    • Rob says:

      It’s wishful thinking.

    • Alex says:

      further, there is NO guarantee that Barkely is going to come out. Barkley would miss out on a bowl game (potentially Rose) if he were to leave early. Hey, if Luck came back after winning the Orange Bowl, I can definitely see the motivation to go to the 13 draft for Barkley. Plus, it’s nicer to be the #1 pick in the 13 draft than say the #3-5 pick in the 12 draft.

      Alex