What kind of receiver does Seattle need?

April 11th, 2015 | Written by Rob Staton

Kenny Bell could be an option — but he’s more of a specialist

Nebraska receiver Kenny Bell is popular within this community and for good reason. He’s a 4.38-4.42 runner with great character. You see flashes of real tenacity in his play. I think his blocking ability is slightly overstated but he’s certainly willing. He’s competitive, wins the contested ball and ticks all the character boxes.

I also think he’s a good example of a ‘specialist’ receiver.

Bell, essentially, is a role player. He’s more of a straight line runner. He won a lot of 1v1 battles in college due to the threat of his speed. He was afforded a decent cushion and it opened up the comeback or the back shoulder for the quarterback. There was the occasional deep shot too and he made some vital plays. At the next level his speed will be less of a factor against biggest, faster, more physical players. He will be challenged at the LOS — consistently. He’s going to need more of a counter, he’s going to need to develop several ways to get open. He’s 6-1 and sub-200lbs. He’s skinny.

The Seahawks have maximized players like this. Ricardo Lockette drifts in and out a season. He was the key target on a successful downfield bomb against Denver in week three. He was also the beneficiary of Seattle’s read-option ‘pop-pass’ in week one. In the biggest play of the biggest game of the season — they were throwing at Lockette. Yet he’s never been a consistent feature, despite his fantastic size/speed combination.

Bell’s role in Seattle would probably be similar. And that’s fine. If you draft him later on and are realistic with your expectations, there’s nothing wrong with drafting Kenny Bell. He could theoretically replace the soon-to-be 29-year-old Lockette. This piece isn’t an argument against Seattle drafting Bell because he does carry the kind of characteristics the Seahawks admire. It’s an argument against this type of receiver being the missing link alone.

Instead of a younger, cheaper, skinnier Lockette — they need someone who can be more than a role player.

I’m not sure the addition of Jimmy Graham is the last attempt by this team to dramatically improve the passing game. And that’s why I think there’s a realistic chance they move up in round two.

Doug Baldwin is contracted until the end of the 2016 season. Jermaine Kearse is set to play under a restricted free agent tender. Paul Richardson is recovering from the second serious knee injury of his career. There are long-term question marks about your three key receivers on the roster. The likes of Kevin Norwood and Chris Matthews have a chance to develop their roles going forward — but they’ve got to prove it. Are they likely to develop into legit game changers? They both turn 26 this year.

Receiver is quietly a long term need. There are no assurances over Richardson’s return. Kearse could be gone next year and Baldwin will probably want to test free agency in 2017 (his contract was set up to make it a possibility during his prime). Chemistry between receiver and quarterback cannot be underestimated. It makes sense to try and bring in a player who can work with Russell Wilson and establish a partnership that lasts over the next 5-7 years.

And not just any player, either.

While the Seahawks have reached two Super Bowls mainly using the core of Baldwin and Kearse (they did have Golden Tate in 2013) it’s also one of the few positions on a loaded roster where you can make a genuine case for dramatic improvement. Just because Seattle has won with a bunch of overachievers doesn’t mean they can’t be even better with established difference makers. They’ve been trying ever since Pete Carroll arrived to add a dynamic target — Brandon Marshall, Vincent Jackson, Sidney Rice, Percy Harvin. Now they have Jimmy Graham. Why stop there?

Imagine the offense with a game-changer on the outside to go alongside with Graham working the inside? It wouldn’t even be a luxury. Seattle has a franchise quarterback, the number one defense in the NFL and a number of key stars signed up for the long haul. They trust Tom Cable to put together a functioning offensive line and the depth is there in the later rounds this year to find starters on day three. Receiver is one of the few areas of the team they can upgrade.

Yes — Matthews could be the guy. I’m not sure you can assume that’ll happen based on one game. At the very least it would make sense to proceed as if he won’t be the answer, while letting him compete to fill the role. Let’s see if he can win the job, not just hand it to him because of one game (even if it was the Super Bowl).

Taking all this into account, I suspect the Seahawks will at least leave the door open for the potential to move up and target one of the top 5-9 receivers in a great group. As of today, I see it playing out one of three ways in round two:

1. Trade up using a fourth round pick (as Philadelphia did last year) to target a specific impact receiver

2. Stay at #63 and assess the remaining options at receiver

3. Take the best offensive lineman on the board

Trading up isn’t as simple as just having the intention to do it. You’ve got to find a willing trade partner and agree to a deal. The right player has to fall to a certain point. A few things have to land for this to become a possibility.

There’s every chance the right deal doesn’t materialize or the right player doesn’t fall. That’s the draft — and it’s why taking a player like Ty Sambrailo (for example) is still a distinct possibility at pick #63.

If the right receiver is within your grasp though — why not be the aggressor for once? You’ve got eleven picks. You didn’t lose a pick in the Graham trade, you just swapped a first for a fourth. Whether you pick ten times or eleven times, you’re going to have the opportunity to fill a few needs. Whether it’s Mitch Morse, Terry Poole or another — you will find attractive O-line options in the middle rounds.

So what is the ‘right’ kind of receiver?

Again it comes back to the earlier talk about Kenny Bell being more of a ‘specialist’. The Seahawks have used a few players like that. What if you can get someone who can be that consistent force on the outside? Someone who is either the true #1 or someone who just finds a way to consistently make big plays in the way Golden Tate did? This isn’t just about size and speed (although that would help). It’s about finding a true difference maker, whatever the skill set. Nelson Agholor and Phillip Dorsett could just as easily fill that role as a big receiver. I just happen to think they’ll both be long gone by the early second round.

The player most likely to fill the role remains Dorial Green-Beckham.

Are you ever truly gambling on a player towards the end of the second round? Perhaps. It’s still a reasonably high pick. What isn’t a gamble in that range? Let’s look at Seattle’s recent history in round two:

2010 — Golden Tate
2011 — traded out, took John Moffitt
2012 — Bobby Wagner
2013 — Christine Michael
2014 — Paul Richardson & Justin Britt

They went with what constitutes a ‘safe pick’ in football rhetoric — a meat-and-potatoes guard in 2011. Moffitt is out of the league. They’ve genuinely benefited from the Tate and Wagner picks and yet haven’t suffered after taking a chance on Michael.

The Seahawks will draft from a position of strength for the next few years. There will always be a need or two (this year is a good example of that) and they will need to replace certain players who are sacrificed to keep the core together. Yet while ever that core remains, they will feel good about their chances of contending. Very few teams can take the kind of chances Seattle can afford right now.

The big thing is not to add a disruptive force to the locker room or anything that will further impact team chemistry.

Personally I don’t think DGB is that kind of player. He didn’t have a stable upbringing and some of the things he was accused of during his time in Missouri are troubling. He also kept his nose clean during his year in Oklahoma and you wonder if moving away helped. Did the Mizzou exit act as a wake-up call?

I suspect Green-Beckham is a bigger risk to himself rather than Seattle’s locker room (or anyone else’s for that matter). Will he let himself down? Will he let the team down? Those are the questions to ask — not whether he’s another Percy Harvin-style disruptive enigma. I think we can say with some confidence that he isn’t.

Tony Pauline told us he wouldn’t take DGB in the top-50 and I think a lot of younger, less competitive teams will take that stance. The key contenders with veteran locker rooms will consider drafting him, albeit outside of the top-50 picks. There are too many established teams from #50-#63 for Green-Beckham to last until the Seahawks. If you want him, you probably have to move up a bit.

What is the worst case and best case scenario for such a move?

Best case
You draft a player who looked like a world beater in high-school with limitless potential. You could end up with a genuine #1 receiver to compliment Jimmy Graham. You can still find good offensive linemen in the middle rounds in this draft.

Worst case
Green-Beckham gets into trouble, the decision to draft him is criticized and you wasted a second round pick plus a fourth to move up on a player who already had red flags attached.

Can the Seahawks risk the worst case scenario trying to make the best case a reality? Again, they’re one of the few who can. They’re not scared to be criticized either — that much is clear.

For me the off-field concerns with DGB don’t sit well but the risk factor (at least in terms of expense) is less severe in round two. He’d take up a cap hit of less than a million dollars in his first two years, never going higher than around $1.2m during his first contract. Financially it’s a not a concern. It’s a high pick but as the Moffitt situation showed — even when you go the ‘safe’ route it can backfire.

Sometimes taking a chance does pay off. It certainly did for Seattle with Marshawn Lynch and for Dallas with Dez Bryant.

Look at the draft last year. Martavis Bryant fell to the fourth round due to character concerns. Would he last until the fourth round in a re-draft? I think we know the answer. Sometimes you have to be willing to take a calculated risk. Is the second round too early for that? It’s debatable.

I’d go as far to say the character concerns come a distant second to DGB’s issues against press coverage. He’s too easily re-routed, he doesn’t always play up to his size. He dominates and frustrates in equal measure. You could easily see his will destroyed during his first camp against the LOB. Or, alternatively, he could grow and mature in the face of that challenge. That’s probably what the Seahawks are trying to work out as they edge closer to the draft.

The thing is — he’s 6-5 and 237lbs while running in the 4.4’s. He could probably drop 10lbs and go faster, while not suffering any negative impact to his game. When he gets into full stride he has that gliding effect — a rare quality for a big receiver like this. He has surprising mobility in the open field plus a genuine ability to take the top off a defense. That’s so rare for a player of this size. If he can get stronger and become more physical — watch out. The potential is limitless.

Kenny Bell or Tre McBride or Stefon Diggs or Justin Hardy later in the draft might be able to come in and contribute in a smaller way, possibly eventually replacing one of the existing role players. Imagine this offense though with not just one dynamic game changer — but a pair of size/speed dynamo’s to go with a thriving running attack and a prolific quarterback?

You’re not likely to find that in any of the names mentioned above. The middle rounds could be saved for the offensive line — the options are good and it’ll be a nice sweet spot for tackle converts moving inside with plus athleticism. Even if the Seahawks go with a Ty Sambrailo at #63, it would make sense to still utilize the O-line value in rounds 4-5.

It’s often said Seattle don’t need special receivers because they don’t throw as much. On the contrary — they actually need to be better than average. If you’re throwing less, the margin for error is smaller. You need to max out the opportunities. Some of Seattle’s more agonizing defeats in recent years came as a consequence of bad receiver play.

Role players will always have a part to play in Seattle’s offense and the likes of Bell could be drafted for that reason. But the Seahawks can genuinely improve at receiver — and become a very scary team indeed — by finding ‘the man’. Their #1.

260 Responses to “What kind of receiver does Seattle need?”

  1. therick05 says:

    man i want DGB in our team so much, he and a returner in late rounds (McBride, Mongomery, Bell) would solve our WR problems, and Russ loves big receivers, putting him with Graham would make defenses crazy. But we have two problems:

    -will him fall to second round? specifically to the 40s, where we can trade.

    -His off field problems, but i trust in PCJS.

    The chances of picking are slim, but SEA cant pass on him if the opportunity comes.
    i see him getting 10 TDs, and Graham 12 TDs, picking him is my dream scenario, how you said Rob, its worth.

    Reply

  2. Forrest says:

    What if Jaelen Strong dropped past #50 (that’s a big what if, I know), would he be worth the trade up? He’s probably the only WR I would be willing for them to trade up to pick. Sitting pretty with the picks they have seems best to me.

    Also, I really like Bell, but I’m inclined to agree with you that he would be more of a specialist than a #1 threat. What about a late round Dezmin Lewis or Vince Mayle? Lewis for example is 6’4″ and fast(ish), and Mayle is local…

  3. j says:

    I wouldn’t mind DGB at 63, but I wouldn’t trade up for him either. In fact I’d be more comfortable if we traded down and got him in the early/mid third. He’s one of the more overhyped players in the draft, and round 3 is where he belongs, IMO.

    If we are taking a chance why not Waller a round later? Bigger, faster, longer, can jump higher. About the same in terms of needing development, less of a character risk. All around superior to DGB.

    • Steele1324 says:

      Waller is raw, technically very deficient. He is not superior to DGB. Waller might make some of the same kinds of big target plays, but not as well, and would be a non-factor over long stretches, at least initially. He needs a year or two of development.

      • Dawgma says:

        And DGB isn’t raw? He please. He’s played less than two college seasons and generally didn’t look great when he wasn’t playing bottom feeders. He’s an absolute project.

        • Matt says:

          DGB is somewhat of a project-playing only 2 years of college ball. He came from a smaller HS where he was the #1 recruit in the nation. His route running was basically go deep and make a play. He improved immensely from year 1 to 2 at Mizzou. There’s no reason to think he hasn’t improved practicing with Oklahoma all last season. DGB just has the “it” factor going for him. He makes plays innately. While he’s not very polished coming into the draft he will make some plays day 1. That’s part of why he’s so enticing-that he doesn’t really have experience, yet is able to make big time plays. The upside with DGB is all pro status.

        • Steele1324 says:

          DGB is certainly a project, but he is still far more technically sound than Waller. Watch their film. Waller is athletic for his size, but right now, he’s just big. He can develop, but it will take longer.

    • mattk says:

      jmo, but they aren’t even close in skill sets. Waller’s combine measurements might be better but there’s a reason DGB had double the production as a Sophomore than Waller had as a Senior.

      DGB shows a natural play making ability whereas Waller looks stiff and plays slower than his combine numbers. I think he’d be a great move tightend and is exactly where I expect him to be played at the next level.

      • Dawgma says:

        Yeah, there is a reason alright. Waller played for Georgia Tech and it’s triple optionn.

        • mattk says:

          Or he’s not that good and couldn’t come close to outplaying Smelter despite him only playing two years of college football.

    • Ben2 says:

      DGB has better body control

  4. CC says:

    It is hard to see that Seattle can get a viable #1 receiver at 63 – even trading up a few spots probably won’t get you one either. I thought Agholor might have a chance to drop, but I think he’ll go in the first round now. I’m not sold that DGB is a #! regardless of where he is drafted.

    Last year they let Tate go – who might have been the closest thing to a #1 for this offense, and didn’t draft one. Instead, they drafted PRich. I think they need a returner who can add some speed and vertical ability. There are several of those guys in this draft. McBride, Bell, Conley, Lockett, Montgomery are all guys who likely could contribute – all are younger, cheaper, and could likely play as a gunner and returner on special teams. I’d take any of them over DGB.

    • therick05 says:

      Seattle NEEDS a big target even with Graham, im not saying we dont need a returner like Bell and McBride, we have plenty of options in late rounds, but what is lacking in this team a number 1 WR, like DGB will everything goes well, the guys you mentioned are slot receiver and we dont need that as much as a top receiver.

      • williambryan says:

        I could see this offense, post lynch, developing into something that looks like the saints offense (with jimmy graham). DGB would be a Colston type, Paul Richardson is Devery Henderson, a committee type backfield…

    • sdcoug says:

      They let Tate go cause they thought they had their #1 (Harvin), and with his huge contract needed Tate’s money elsewhere. It’s not a matter of thinking they could get by without one. And most of the guys you mentioned can still be had later on in addition to a WR at 63…it’s not a mutually exclusive situation. If DGB fell within striking distance, it would be a unique opportunity to add a talent that we normally wouldn’t be in a position to grab. And as Rob very well detailed…we are one of the teams who are well-suited to take that shot.

      • Beanhawk says:

        well said.

      • CC says:

        Percy, while dynamic, couldn’t really be described as a #1 receiver. I realize they made a choice, to go with Percy over Tate.

        While I understand everyone’s position, I don’t think DGB is a #1 receiver. A guy doesn’t have to be 6’5″ to be a #1 receiver -and just because he is tall, doesn’t mean that he has the mindset to be involved in every play, block and be a decoy.

        I don’t believe there will be a #1 receiver available at 63 – so that is why I’d look at taking a returner, playmaker at 63 if available.

        • Steele1324 says:

          No, a guy doesn’t have to be 6-5 to be a #1 WR. But to be #1 in the Hawks offense, and (most importantly) the right kind of target for our undersized Russell Wilson with quirky mechanics, I think we do need height/jump ball/higher on the rim/red zone.

          If you surrounded RW with smurfs running 4.2 40s, he might still struggle to make use of them. To keep defenses guessing, you need both big and smurf. So the debate here is whether the roster already has enough big (Matthews) or slot (Baldwin, PRich, Kearse kind of), and what is or is not redundant.

          I think it would be expensive and unnecessary to use a higher draft pick purely for ST. There are game changing return guys gotten for much lower.

  5. Screeching Hawk says:

    I’m starting to think Rob has a good point on us trying to get DGB. Like other people writing on this wonderful blog a taller reciever who can get that perfectly placed high throw might be our best first pick or first reciever pick. That type of throw seems to be what Russell has been really good at especially since joining our team. Sidney Rice was the perfect target Russell’s rookie year so finding someone comparabe would be ideal.I can’t be the only one who thinks Sherman could be utilized as a reciever especially for those jump balls in the endzone. Obviously there is a reason, maybe because he would become a target for opposing defense trying to take him out of the game. Any thought’s, my fellow Hawks?

    • Phil says:

      Are you saying that you would move him from the defense, or just have him play a few plays at WR? If the former, I think he’s a proven pro bowl DB, and his absence at DB would more be a bigger detriment to the team than his presence on the offense. If the latter, I’m looking for a WR who is going to tilt the field, and I don’t think a part-time Sherman is the answer — but that’s just my opinion.

  6. NeilJ says:

    Change of attitude.
    Sorry I can’t provide a link to it but I read a few weeks ago at another source which had an NFL scout explaining that DGB had had a change in attitude. He said, “big brother moved in, kicked his ass and has him toeing the line now”. Again sorry for no source but I think he may be a safer pick now due to some better structure in his life.

    • Meat says:

      Or it is talk to help his stock. No way of knowing, and this late in the game it shouldn’t impact much.

  7. Steele1324 says:

    I am, and remain, a huge Kenny Bell fan—despite the fact that he is not a #1 X outside receiver. He is an ideal #2 Y or Z type who does the things that result in winning. NFL comparisons: Marvin Jones, Kenny Stills, John Taylor of the old 49ers. Bell is just a football player any team would want to have. Does Bell replicate Baldin, Kearse or Lockette? Somewhat, but I think he brings other dimensions that none of these three have. Lockette especially is nothing special besides speed and special teams.

    In terms of what the Hawks need as a top priority in a WR, I am with EranUnger. It is the tall X or Z WR with good hands, catch radius, jump ball, sideline awareness, strength. I think Matthews and McNeil will compete for these roles.

    Devante Parker and Jaelen Strong are rd. 1, neither will be available.

    Amusing, Rob, that you have come back around to DGB. I am, too, with reluctance. But he is the type the team needs.

    Conley is my next choice for the job. Rd. 2 to secure him. I don’t think he lasts into rd. 4.

    Lippett. Still love the potential for a 2-way option. He will make plays as a tall WR. Get him for cornerback at least. Rd. 3-4.

    And later, consider these tall targets:

    Vince Mayle- I really think he is underrated. Rd. 4-5
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WofMzfz8Cps

    Dezmin Lewis Rd. The Ravens like him. 4-5
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOwQZRAtdNk

    Nigel King- UDFA sleeper
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1T9j86Ufo

    Cam Worthy-UDFA sleeper
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7APQnlbjHxY

    Kasen Williams-UDFA sleeper
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82BSEkIcd_o

    Kenny Cook-UDFA sleeper
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3ig-0a4_Xc

    • Rob Staton says:

      “Amusing, Rob, that you have come back around to DGB. I am, too, with reluctance.”

      I was never against it in round two. In the first I thought there were better, less riskier options. A late second after you’ve already brought in Jimmy Graham? Different story.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Vince Mayle is going to get drafted, he has some upside and potential. He started to break out this previous season, but languished on the Cougars offense. He might be under the radar nationally, but I guarantee the NFCW teams are checking him out. He is currently ranked as a round 5 draft prospect.
      Kasen Williams is that diamond in the rough. When he was 100% healthy, he looked like a #1 type of WR and was going to be a big deal coming into the NFL. Health concerns are the issue, but he has looked better and better as the offseason progressed, getting rave reviews (according to the local radio pundits). He has even worked with Seahawks WRs in the offseason. If you are looking for a “HR” threat late in the draft, take the shot on him.
      Dez Lewis is now considered a 3-4 round prospect. Stock is on the rise.
      Cam Worthy has a foot injury which might not be fully ready to go by training camp. Worth keeping an eye on him as a long term project. Might be a medical redshirt type of guy in 2015.
      Kenny Cook is a very intriguing prospect. Great size and good speed. Level of competition he faced might be an issue. He has been training hard and showing improvement when he had his proday. His back story screams Seahawks type of guy.

      • Matt says:

        Kasen Williams could be our next UDFA WR breakthrough. Agree that he had the look of a #1 WR before the knee injury. Was a shell of himself all season until the bowl game. Hope he gets back to his old self in the NFL.

  8. franks says:

    Great post Rob. Baldwin, Kearse, the others, these guys are a great supporting cast but there isn’t a leader. I could see Graham step into that role and be our WR1, effectively, and if Mathews or Norwood could step up to the serving option, or offense would take s huge steel forward from last year. But if we had Graham and a number 1, assuming we fix the OL and pass rush, this team would play at another level.

    All we’d need more would be an o.c.

    Not sure if I’m reading the same thing from Pauline as you are. It sounds to me like a risk averse team would let him fall past 50, but I bet there are staffs that would take him in the 40s for sure, and maybe the 30s. Like New England and Baltimore. It might take more than a fourth to trade up for DGB.

    • franks says:

      Cell phone typos: serving= second, steel= step

    • Steele1324 says:

      Frank, I don’t think Graham is a #1 WR and shouldn’t really be utilized that way. Matthews and Doug McNeil have a chance to be, Norwood is a backup of some kind. Baldwin, Kearse frankly are borderline. Ideally, the entire WR corps should be replaced, with perhaps only Baldwin remaining.

      • franks says:

        I meant more that he would get the bulk of the targets, be our primary option, if we don’t find a second guy like him who’s really good. Mathews might make something happen, Mcneil might need time, and Baldwin and Kearse are fantastic third and fourth receivers i.m.o. The problem is they’re lining up as the 1 and 2 with guys like Walters and lockette, who I’m fine with as a number 6, on the field with them.

      • lil'stink says:

        Matthews and McNeil are 25 and 26 years old, respectively, and neither has a regular season catch in the NFL. I think the odds are pretty slim for either of them to become a #1 type receiver. Baldwin doesn’t get the credit he deserves; saying he is borderline is a head scratcher quite frankly.

      • pqlqi says:

        Saying that Baldwin is a borderline player goes a long way in discrediting the value of your opinion on WR quality – or at least tells everyone that your assessment is not based on film analysis at all.

        Baldwin is one of the top 3 small slot WRs in the league, except that we played him most of the year at the X.

        His technique, while in the slot, in the Super Bowl was impeccable – if Wilson had trusted Baldwin, it would’ve been 6 easy receptions. Re-watch the game with attention on Baldwin, and the way he creates contact with Revis 2 steps shy of the stem of his route, and then he uses his leverage (often Baldwin’s shoulder on Revis’ chest) on Revis both to push Revis further downfield and to help Baldwin slow his momentum and make his change of direction. It’s technical perfection, and he’s absolutely abusing a top 3 corner.

        His TD against Revis was the ultimate dick-move by a WR, running your route with a rounded break so that you drive Revis into the backjudge is phenomenal work, and left him 10 yards open.

        There is no way he is a borderline player. I’m shocked he’s not making 6 million a year playing in Denver or NE.

        • Steele1324 says:

          Baldwin is indeed borderline—-as a #1 WR. He is not suited for that role, did the best he could with it. He belongs in the slot, as supporting cast. That is what I call borderline.

  9. Ukhawk says:

    I think u are right on the money, couldn’t agree more but….(wait for it)

    IMO our best option is DGB. He is the only potential 2nd rounder who has all the tools to become a genuine #1 and we should not pass on that given our need. The argument of why is all perfectly laid out above.

    HOWEVER, I think the fly in the ointment is that he won’t be there. I think he is gaining momentum and he will be long gone. Many draftniks and experts think he goes in the first. Daniel Jeramiah has him at 24 in his top 50 players; so do many other “experts”. I get the feeling this is a case just like last year, where you sensed the Hawks wanted the Florida DT, Dominique Easley , but he was gone I think u are right on the money, couldn’t agree more but….(wait for it)

    IMO our best option is DGB. He has the tools to become a genuine #1 and we shops not pass on that given our need. The argument of why is all perfectly laid out above.

    HOWEVER, I think the fly in the ointment is that he won’t be there. I think he is gaining momentum and he will be long gone. Many draftniks and experts think he goes in the first. Daniel Jeramiah has him at 24 in his top 50 players; so do many others. I get the feeling this is a case just like last year, where you sensed the Hawks wanted the Florida DT, , but he is gone before we can pick. This may be actually worse because we don’t have the ammo to move up that far as opposed to last year. before we could pick. This may be actually worse because we don’t have the ammo to move up far enough this year to get our man as opposed to last year in the case of Easley.

    So the next question becomes who is the next best choice after DGB at WR (and what round)? Furthermore, if a true potential #1 isn’t there what is the backup plan because I see that as entirely more likely.

    Rob, great job because as usual you’ve hit the nail on the head just before the draft. But I challenge everyone to think about the next best alternative because the rest of the league isn’t sleeping on DGB either and so an alternative may the more likely outcome.

    • franks says:

      Next best choice, realistically, I’m thinking Dorsett. Different type of receiver than dgb. Can Dorsett be a number 1?

      • Ukhawk says:

        Think Dorsett is gone too. Maybe even if we look to trade up

        • franks says:

          Yeah you might be right. I’d guess that between DGB,Dorsett and Strong, one of them falls within trading reach, but I’m not sure Dorsett’s worth it, or Strong. DGB to me is the only guy who’s definitely worth it, so I think he commands a premium here. I think you give up more than a r4, when’s three next time a guy like this falls in range, for a second round pick and second round salary, I’m hoping we make a real move to get him and not just hope he falls like Easley.

          Anyone remember when we passed on Randy Moss at 15? DGB in the mid second looks like a similar pick, just in terms of being too obvious not to do.

          • Steele1324 says:

            Between Dorsett and Strong, I’d take Strong. He has the size, and the kind of taller X receiver game that is missing. Strong needs to work on many things, but for that X role, he fits. Won’t be in range, unless we’re very lucky.

        • Meat says:

          He is a player I’d rather see them trade up for

    • therick05 says:

      Breshad Perriman, Devin Funchess, or even Sammie Coates

      • Ukhawk says:

        Love Perriman as much or more than DGB but he is long gone too. The other two I’m not so sure. Personally think the fallback is Lockett then Conley, Waller, McBride later on.

        • therick05 says:

          Perriman, DGB, Agholor or Smith. One of this four will be available at 40s or 50s and if we trade up for one of them, im okay with it. But we still have to pick another receiver at late rounds so:

          If we pick Agholor, Smith or Perriman:
          Pick Waller at the end of 5th rounde.

          If we pick DGB:
          Pick McBride or conley or Bell at 4th round.

          • Matt says:

            Devin Smith and Tyler Lockett are the other WR’s I’d be willing to trade up for other than DGB. Both would play immediate roles WR-maybe not starting,but making some splash plays. Both have special teams versatility, with Lockett being one of,if not the, best KR/PR’s in the draft.

            • Steele1324 says:

              With Devin Smith and T. Lockett, you are duplicating Baldwin. Same with Agholor. Dorsett, same again, with a speed element that is almost (almost) worth it. I would take a tall X receiver over any of them. You can get your KR/PR anywhere else, no need to invest a high pick for that.

    • Steele1324 says:

      UkHawk, I provided a list of other tall targets above. Check them out.

  10. redzone086 says:

    Good points in this article but as devils advocate couldn’t we say that upgrading the oline would have as much benefit as a receiver? If the other teams defense has to stack the box the the crossing routes open up and the out side receivers see more one on one coverage, especially with Jimmy Graham? We could argue that rotational linemen that are fresh and of good quality keep the pressure on the opposing offense? What makes a number 1 receiver the ideal upgrade over any other position that changes the dynamic of how other teams approach the Hawks? I’m not saying I have the answer again where the Hawks draft points to the fact that the odds are just as against finding a probowler at any position. I say the DGB does offer the most up side to the equation and it’s a similar move to the one on Michaels so it makes sense as well.

    • franks says:

      For me the difference is, an OL in the mid rounds can fit a need, but a receiver in round four the shooting for the moon. I dint think we need competition for Norwood and co. We need someone better than them.

    • therick05 says:

      OL has good value in late rounds with guys like Josue Matias, Mitch Morse, BJ Finney, Reese Dismukes.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        But OL also has good value at #63 and is critically important to a solid running game and protecting are soon to be 20+ million dollar QB. The only receiver that would change my mind is a tall one like DGB.

      • pqlqi says:

        There’s a good bet that the top 3 or 4 centers are off the board by the middle of the 3rd round (counting Cam Erving as a C).

    • GeoffU says:

      The other teams defense has been stacking the box for the past four years…

      Fact is, our receivers can’t beat their one on ones. Finally we have someone who can in Graham, but at TE and he’ll probably get doubled. That may open up a few running lanes, but the one on ones will still be there with the receivers not getting open. How much more potent would we be with a real threat on the outside? Lynch, Graham, a #1: that’s dynasty era Cowboys/49ers, that’s what Pete wants this offense to be.

      • franks says:

        That’s right Geoff, dynasties are built with impact players. DGB if he’s ready would take pressure off Graham and I think he’d give Mathews or Norwood opportunities on the other side, too, and Kearse and DB start finding creases with the defense keyed elsewhere. Everything would be easier for Russell and the defense because guys would be open and they’d score.

    • Rik says:

      I’m going to second the comment above. Our receivers had opportunities all year to win one-on-ones and they couldn’t do it. Aside from Graham (and Matthews in the SB), we don’t have a receiver who can win against single coverage consistently. And teams with great passing games have at least one receiver who can beat single coverage with separation every single time. Teams trying to defend the Seahawks are screwed if we get a #1 WR. Do you double Graham and the #1 WR? Or do you stack the box? Answer: it doesn’t matter, because Wilson will find the weak point and make you pay. That’s the team I want to see next season.

      • Steele1324 says:

        And why haven’t the WRs beaten single coverage? That should be what JSPC and Bevell should be lock-focusing on. You can’t say Baldwin, PRich and Lockette aren’t fast, but they couldn’t separate consistently.

        There are many reasons, as EvanUnger has pointed out. RW’s style of quarterbacking is a big one: he needs tall targets. As well as smurfs who are better than Baldwin and PRich.

        We need to retrieve some of everything that was lost from 2013—Sid Rice was a tall target with skill. Tate was a smurf who had talent, and played bigger than his size. Harvin, when he was rational, was an X-factor.

        • franks says:

          In 2013 the wrs fit their roles better. DB was the slot guy, Tate was a great split end, and Kearse was making plays in the clutch. Rice was sometimes available and in those times we knew who was playing the Z.

          • Steele1324 says:

            Yes. DB needs to go back to the slot where he belongs. Kearse, if he remains in the plan, should go back to his old role. Bring in new Tate and Rice type starters, and yes, get a return specialist for cheap, and that will do.

            • Phil says:

              Steele – what you are describing (with Graham too) could be a big improvement over 2014. Even if we mortgaged the farm, and traded up using next year’s #1, etc., I don’t think we can move up far enough to get a true #1 wr in this draft. What concerns me is that we may never have a high enough pick, because I think we will be picking at #31 or #32 for quite awhile.

  11. Ukhawk says:

    Sorry, composing on an IPhone isn’t easy …try again…

    I think u are right on the money, couldn’t agree more but….(wait for it)

    IMO our best option is DGB. He has the tools to become a genuine #1 and we shops not pass on that given our need. The argument of why is all perfectly laid out above.

    HOWEVER, I think the fly in the ointment is that he won’t be there. I think he is gaining momentum and he will be long gone. Many draftniks and experts think he goes in the first. Daniel Jeramiah has him at 24 in his top 50 players; so do many others. I get the feeling this is a case just like last year, where you sensed the Hawks wanted the Florida DT, , but he is gone before we can pick. This may be actually worse because we don’t have the ammo to move up that far as opposed to last year. before we could pick. This may be actually worse because we don’t have the ammo to move up far enough this year to get our man as opposed to last year in the case of Easley.

    So the next question becomes who is the next best choice after DGB at WR (and what round)? Furthermore, if a true potential #1 isn’t there, what is the backup plan because I see that as entirely more likely.

    Rob, great job because as usual you’ve hit the nail on the head just before the draft. But I challenge everyone to think about the next best alternative because the rest of the league isn’t sleeping on DGB either and so an alternative may the more likely outcome.

  12. Screeching Hawk says:

    Aso the three best kick returners after Agholar in my preference are Montgomery and Diggs. Still would be happy with Conley and Waller after DBG for the tall wr.

    • pqlqi says:

      To me, Montgomery looks uninspiring on most of his returns. I think his return numbers are from phenomenal special teams play around him rather than exeptional talent. Sure he went for lots of yards, but he rarely made more than one tackler miss, he does not look evasive in traffic, he goes down with slight contact (worse than Turbin’s tape in college for sure), and he doesn’t have long speed to run away from the last guy. At least that’s what I see.

  13. Ukhawk says:

    I’m giving up on composing.

    But case in point to my poorly worded argument:
    http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/25143384/nfl-draft-notebook-why-you-can-pencil-in-the-patriots-to-take-a-receiver-early

    This would be a kick in the nuts again by the Pats if they stole DGB too

    • therick05 says:

      IMO, they wil lgo with DT or CB.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Patriots need to fix that defense. They had a lot of losses in the secondary. They might also need a RB. The DL lost an important leader and I’m not totally convinced the collection of guys they have will be as good as last year.

      • Steele1324 says:

        Pats will find their corner. Someone like Byron Jones. They have a shot at Marcus Peters. They are not as limited as the Hawks in terms of physique type. Belichick wasted a big chunk of his previous drafts on smurf CBs with swivelly hips. They already have a prospect in Malcolm Butler, they like Dennard and Arrington. Not Revis and Browner, but they’re fine.

        They do not need a RB and always get away with a committee. Jonas Gray is good, Blount will be there. I could see them going for a Vereen utility type.

  14. bobbyk says:

    I have been a Nebraska fan since I was a little kid in the late-1970s. With that being said, I agree with Rob that Kenny Bell is going to be a guy who simply plays a role based on what I have seen from him these past years. And, yes, he may very well play it at a high level. However, I don’t see the love for him that so many others do. The only way he ever makes a Pro Bowl is if he’s on one of those teams that throws it like crazy to the point where players get inflated numbers. That’s a best case scenario. I simply don’t think he’s as good as many of you and that’s okay. The future will judge who was right and wrong but I don’t have this “can’t miss” feeling about him being overly good.

    The DGB argument is good, Rob. I haven’t fully bought in yet (I like lots of 4th round picks), but you have me leaning closer. 🙂

    • Hawksince77 says:

      For those of us advocating Bell, I never considered him as anything more than Rob has suggested, and see his upside as competing for Kearse’s job (likely sometime after 2015) and worse case (if he makes the team) as a competent 4th or 5th WR that can contribute effectively when called upon.

      That being the case, it’s about value and potential, so drafting Bell in the 4th or 5th round makes sense (if my assessment is accurate). In other words, he isn’t expected (by me, anyway) to be some kind of savior at the position, or ever compete for the #1 WR on the roster. That’s possible, I suppose, but not reasonable to expect, IMO.

      • Steele1324 says:

        You don’t take Bell expecting a Pro Bowl type, although he could surprise. Bell is the ideal teammate, the ideal #2 WR, and a tough, smart football player regardless of position, who does little things to help a team win. Consider he comes out of a run-heavy offense, and he contributed greatly to its success, and enjoyed doing it. He still make an impact in a more limited passing game. He’d have put up even bigger numbers anywhere else.

        Bell would compete against and eventually replace Kearse and Baldwin.

      • bobbyk says:

        Fair enough. With minimal expectations, I think Bell is going to be very good. I was thinking for the people who think he’s going to be really good – I see disappointment.

  15. rowdy says:

    Your argument for bell are the same reasons I don’t want lockett in the second. I see him as a role player and more of a gimmick role player like harvin that seemed to hurt our offense.

    • Steele1324 says:

      Bell is not a gimmick. He is a great unselfish football player, the opposite of Harvin. It is true that the #1 WR is more of a priority than a fantastic role player, which is what Bell would be. But a team that can use a player like that will be fortunate to have him.

      • rowdy says:

        I was calling lockett a gimmick player maybe not in college but that’s what I see him being in the nfl. I think bell would be a solid role player and a great fit on this team. The argument I agreed with was that their both role players.

  16. rowdy says:

    I talked dgb in the last thread about how his off field stuff aren’t as bad as some people make them out to be. 90% of people in the us could have weed charges. The dv is serious but not to the level of rice or hardy. A teenager in love is unstable and emotional. I don’t think you can look at dgb dv charge and say he tried to hurt someone, where it’s obvious rice and hardy intent was to harm and in their late 20s as opposed to a teenager. I’m not trying to justify what he did but I remember being that age and arguing with a girl and the emotions where hard to deal with. I never put my hands on a girl but I was raised with parents who are still married and never argued.

  17. Donald says:

    Don’t want DGB in the first 4 rounds. He is too much of a risk, especially drafting someone with history of MJ abuse in a legalized state.

    The early rounds are for drafting players who are “sure things”,who will start and make an impact. The risky players should be taken in the mid to late rounds with less to lose.

    There are two types of WR that the Hawks need: 1) speedy, elusive Punt and Kickoff Returner typers and 2) the tall sure handed type. I would be happy if we drafted Agholor or Devin Smith, and Conley.

    Since all three are either 1st or second rd picks, I would take Conley 2nd rd, and Super Mario Alford in the 4th for returning kicks.

    • rowdy says:

      Conley is probably the most raw wr in the draft. You would risk are first pick on a player that might not know what he’s doing for 3 years? Agholor and smith are more then deserving though.

      • Dawgma says:

        Conley’s also one of maybe two or three receivers with the physical tools to develop into a #1 we could even poe tally get a shot at. I agree he’s a project, but I doubt he’s a second round pick and with Graham on the roster he’d have time to learn. I’d be okay with it as early as the 4 Rd pick we got from NO, maybe even the th I’d rounder.

        Also, he’s nowhere near as raw as Coates or the small school SPARQ freaks, who are realistically the only other guys who hit the physical parameters of a #1 we’ll even have a chance at.

        • rowdy says:

          I have no problem with him in the 4th but 2nd is too high. The top sparq scores from wr last year didn’t contribute much. The best one was mccrief (spelling?) From ind. Last year was arguably the best class ever for wr. Historically the most athletic wr on a team is usually a bubble playet. I think if he becomes the player you hope for his rookie deal would be up. The second or 3rd is to high for a player like that

          • Matt says:

            Pagano flat said he expects big things from Moncreif next season. It’s going to happen as their #3WR behind Hilton and Johnson. Mark it down.

            • rowdy says:

              That’s one out of 10 and he was the 8th ranked sparq player. Pete said he expected great things from cmike last year to. Any coach would say that but he also was saying only as a number 3. Out of the top 10 sparq receivers last year the best one is projected at a #3 at best. Thats out of a draft that produced 10+ #1 or 2 receivers. The odds aren’t good.

    • JMac says:

      Agree on Mario later. Good article Rob!

      Also like the questions about who else as potential #1 – Agholor gone at 63, what about Waller, Smelter, Funchess, big white boy Gavin Lutman.

  18. ontoic says:

    I have an admission: I didn’t read the previous posts very thoroughly before writing this. I accept any condemnation that attends this admission.

    We need a punt returner, period. I am tired of fair catches when there is a 10+ yards cushion between the returner and the defense. I miss the quasi-suicidal days of Joe Jarzynka, a legendary Husky returner, who would take a step back after determining where the ball would land and then catch it in stride, running forward regardless of how many beasts were bearing down on him. He was about 5’8″ and 180 lbs soaking wet, but he would rarely fair-catch the ball. I want someone to catch the ball and run with it. I want some excitement. I want someone who will shift field-position after our defense has done its job.

    A lot of the receivers Rob talks about could be that guy if they would only show the courage and focus of good old Joe Jarzynka. Maybe there are some other Huskies who remember the held breath as Joe caught the live ball among the monsters on punt coverage and made us gasp as he shifted field position!

  19. 12thManderson says:

    I personally think Anyone who thinks DGB slips past the Rams 2nd Round pick is absolutely clueless. Once the first round is over, which picks 31 & 32 are NO & NE. There are a TON of teams who Will take that flier, and that starting line begins at the end of the 1st. Brees just lost his BIG MAN and Brady probably would like to make one more run with a “Moss or Thompkins” type. Now if we could get an Agholor or a Lockett at the end of round 2, I truly wouldn’t be upset in the least. The draft has alot of Big Man recievers later to be had. Starting in the 4th with Conley and Waller, to the 5th in Dez Lewis, DeAndre Smelter, or Greenberry, and then finally to Infinity and Beyond with Jordan Taylor, Austin Hill, and Jordan Leslie. Alot of Big talent late with alot of other needs high, if Big is truly in the crosshairs.

    My personal ALL Hopefully Mock with no trades (yea right) goes.
    2nd: Eric Rowe CB/S, Agholor, or Lockett
    3rd: Mitch Morse OL, Versatile with Britt connection
    4th: Steven Nelson CB, preferably Nickel Corner
    4th: Chris Conley WR, Let’s Contort an Catch Stuff
    4th: Davis Tull/ Ha’oli Kikaha, We NEED 1 True Pass Rush Specialist
    5th: BJ Finney/Shaq Mason OL, Hold It Down
    5th: Ben Heeney LB, Coverage man with a Nose that Knows to find the ball
    5th: Adrian Amos/Ladarius Gunter CB/S, If No Rowe in the 1st we still need secondary depth and versatility
    6th: Terry “Swampster” Williams DT, Gap Filling Phenom
    6th: Rakeem Nunez Rochester DT, Round 6, where we hit our Next back to back DT tandem. (See Jordan Hill and Jesse Williams)
    7th: Blake Sims QB (IF no TJack) or David Andrew C, ZBS fit

    • Rob Staton says:

      “I personally think Anyone who thinks DGB slips past the Rams 2nd Round pick is absolutely clueless”

      Please, let’s refrain from calling people “clueless” like any of us know what is going to happen.

      It’s very unlikely Agholor and Eric Rowe are there in the late second. We don’t have to resort to calling people “clueless” though to point that out.

      • 12thManderson says:

        I could have Definitely chosen a better word than clueless, obviously you’re not clueless Rob, hence the hundreds of comments every article, plus invested time. I should read aloud what post before posting sometimes i can come off pompous or arrogant and even contradictory without trying, but what do expect from a 26 year old, you know. You say we don’t know what will happen. You see it unlikely Rowe and Nelson fall, I see it unlikely DGB falls. Yup they Could fall far enough to trade up, if that’s the case it becomes a personal value rating, but someone is going to slip. Which is the idea of your article and commeng thread, followed in response with some poor wording

      • OZ says:

        Both Agholor and Rowe are projected to go in the 1st. on various sites.

        • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

          Rowe is on the rise….. rumors all over the place a late 1st round team will grab him. Patriots, Saints and others need quality CB or S play.. so this makes some sense. Might be a bit of an overdraft, but that is their problem.

  20. Ho Lee Chit says:

    It is possible to find a serviceable WR in this draft. It is probably not possible to find a tall, impact, No.1 WR with our pick at #63. I doubt we will even try. The odds are very much against it. Here are a few facts to consider:

    We just spent our No. 1 pick on a pass catching TE. We are going to be using the two TE set a lot more with Jimmy Graham. The WR’s will see fewer targets. We already have several developmental WR’s.

    The experts all agree the starting quality center and guard talent will run out by the end of round 3. Our running attack last year was weakest on the left side. We have put up with this for a couple years. Allowing Carpenter and Unger to leave and not replacing either in FA is a sure sign the Hawks will address the O Line in the draft.

    Paul Richardson and Golden Tate were 2nd round picks and neither was an impact player their first year. With Richardson hurt, Baldwin is our only healthy possession receiver.

    The average Seahawk yardage per attempt was 7.7 yards in 2014. The Seahawks were 6th in this category. Not bad. We don’t need more deep threats. We need a higher completion percentage, which lends itself to shorter, high percentage passes.

    RW is at his best when he is outside the pocket. Baldwin is his favorite target because no one else comes back for the ball or gets separation.

    This is a run first offense. Unless we fix the offensive line Marshawn will be bottled up and the entire offense will stall. RW will be running for his life and taking a lot of sacks.

    The draft is deep at WR, especially possession receivers. We need a guy that can also return kicks. Our kick return game needs help and the 5th WR needs to provide it. Tall, long-striders do not make very good kick returners.

    If we want a big guy they are available late, too. Hence, I mocked Tyrell Williams to the Hawks in round 6 below and it isn’t necessary to mortgage the draft to get him. I would expect a draft more like this:
    R2.31 Ali Marpet OG/OC
    R3.31 Jacquiski Tartt SS
    R4.13 Phillip Dorsett WR/KR
    R4.31 Donovan Smith OG
    R4.35 Taiwan Jones ILB
    R5.31 Christian Covington DT
    R5.34 Nick Boyle TE
    R6.5 Greg Mancz OC
    R6.33 Tyrell Williams WR
    R6.38 Frank Clark DE
    R7.31 Desmond Harrison OT

    • bobbyk says:

      “We don’t need more deep threats.”

      Huh? Teams stacked the box to stop Marshawn Lynch. That’s why we were able to hit on many of the big plays. It certainly wasn’t because we have legitimate deep threats that burned people deep with all things being equal. If we actually did have a real deep threat, I think we’d be nearly unstoppable.

      Make no mistake, no GM in the NFL looks at the Seahawks roster and thinks we have a credibile “deep threat” who strikes fear into opposing defenses. Lynch strikes fear so they use their resources to stop him at all costs (or as best they can). This opens things up for a very averagely talented group to put up “deep” statistics that make them look better than they are.

      • 12thManderson says:

        The fact that you have Phillip Dorsett falling that far AND only One secondary player being mocked to us AND he’s High Selection STRONG Safety makes your mock kind of irrelevant, but then you have us drafting a TE too….? So with JG, Willson, Coop, McCoy, and Allen on the roster, and all having true system familiarity. I don’t see us wasting away one of our higher value picks on posirion room thats already pretty packed. The only TE worth drafting this year is Jeff Heuerman (who would be also available where you have Boyle mocked), ONLY because he’s an A++ Blocker and was underused and misused as a receiving threat, even though he also has a nice, untapped upside there as well. He is the True Zach Miller of this year’s crop. Boyle has a skill set for blocking but he’s not the most athletic or sure handed to warrant a selection, when we have legitimate needs elsewhere, especially from Rd 5 and up. I couldn’t agree more that we will have a strong, wide array of OL being drafted this year

      • Ho Lee Chit says:

        With Marshawn on the roster any ”real deep threats” would certainly be under rated by the fans just as Golden Tate was. Statistically, our receivers caught more deep balls than New England. Our yards per catch is a very respectable 11.3. As I explained above, the deep ball is not the problem. The problem is deep balls are low percentage passes that kill drives. We need more short and intermediate passes to boost RW’s pass completion percentage to 70%. Only New Orleans approached that benchmark and Brees did it because his favorite receivers were the sure handed Jimmy Graham and the smurf Kenny Stills.

    • Rik says:

      I don’t think there’s any way Dorsett lasts to the 4th round or Clark lasts to the 6th. I’d like both players, but I think Dorsett is gone in the 2nd and Clark in the 4th.

    • Mattk says:

      “The experts all agree the starting quality center and guard talent will run out by the end of round 3. Our running attack last year was weakest on the left side. We have put up with this for a couple years. Allowing Carpenter and Unger to leave and not replacing either in FA is a sure sign the Hawks will address the O Line in the draft.”

      There’s lots of love in the scouting community throughout the mid rounds on Oline including the 4th and 5th rounds.

      I agree they are planning on addressing Oline in the draft, but imo letting Carp walk and trading Unger tells me as much as they like the talent in the draft, they also really like the talent on their roster and might need one starter on the line through the draft but can rely on one of their backups at LG or C to start.

    • Rob Staton says:

      “The experts all agree the starting quality center and guard talent will run out by the end of round 3.”

      I’ve not seen any experts voice this opinion. If they have, I would totally disagree.

      • OZ says:

        When P-Rich was healthy and playing well Lynch had some of his best rushing totals. What does that tell you?

        • Matt says:

          P-Rich was coming along nicely-building the trust of Russell. We missed him dearly in the SB. Our draft focus and dialogue on this site would be different if P-Rich hadn’t torn up his ACL…again. sigh

  21. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    I grow weary of all the focus on DGB. There are many other exciting 2nd/3rd round prospects worthy of articles and discussions, that could be logical fits for Seattle, without wacky trades or outlandish reaches.

    • ontoic says:

      Agreed. He seems to lack fluidity for his size. I don’t understand the hype, except for size/speed; and I am not sold on size/speed without natural fluidity and grace that accompanies true athleticism.

      • Dawgma says:

        Yeah. He doesn’t excite me at all.

      • Mattk says:

        Lack fluidity for his size? What receiver at 6’5″ and 235lbs are you comparing him to that moves better than he does? I mean, every “big” scouting expert has him in their scouting reports as someone who plays like a smaller receiver.

        • Steele1324 says:

          DGB has a lot of fludity for his size. That is among his strengths. What he lacks is short area quickness (but he’s a big guy), doesn’t fully play up to his size vs. aggressive defenders, has shorter arms than ideal (but long enough), and lacks a little top end speed. But 4.4/4.5 ain’t bad.

          He and other tall WRs like Waller (and some others) provide the same things, just being on the field: jump balls, red zone, mismatches that cause defenses problems.

          I encourage you to scroll to the list I posted above and consider the many tall WR options.

        • ontoic says:

          What I should have written is “lacks fluidity AT his size.” I just worry about separation from NFL cornerbacks who are going to be big and strong. I don’t see Green-Beckham as a huge upgrade from Matthews. My opinion, as ill-informed as it may be, comes from a small sample size comparison of college footage of Matthews and Beckham.

          I am not sure that we aren’t better off with a 5’11” – 6’2″ receiver with a little better tendency to separate from opposing cornerbacks with something more than mere straight-line speed. DGB is a freak from a size-speed standpoint; but I’d like more of a route-technician (assuming that label is the key to getting separation on routes) as a higher draft pick at receiver.

          • Bruce M. says:

            I think DGB is big enough that he might grow to be one of those players who gets “separation” largely because of his size. Matthews showed tantalizing hints of this ability in the Super Bowl.

            In fact, if THAT player comes back next year, DGB becomes more of a luxury, in my view. Of course, Graham, the Super Bowl Matthews and DGB, throw in Baldwin and a speed guy….and that could be fun to watch.

            • Steele1324 says:

              Even if Matthews busts out as a star, having yet another taller (not necessarily gigantic) playmaker—in addition to Jimmy Graham—causes huge mismatch nightmares for defenses.

          • pqlqi says:

            DGB is 3 inches taller than Dez Bryant, 10 lbs heavier than Dez Bryant, and runs the 40, short shuttle, and 3 cone better than Dez Bryant. He jumps 4.5 inches shorter than Dez in the vert (but at 3 inches taller it’s only a 1.5″ difference) and is a foot less than Dez in the broad jump.

            He’s pretty damn athletic at his size – he dwarfs Dez Bryant physically, and he is faster/quicker. But then again, Dez isn’t very athletic at his size.

            • Matt says:

              “Dez isn’t very athletic at his size.”

              Umm what? He didn’t test very well, but make no mistake Dez is a big time athlete with prototypical size. Top 5 WR in the NFL no doubt. Top TD maker over the last 3 years.

            • David M2 says:

              DGB has also been listed at 237 lbs. which is a little over his weight he played at in college. If you take off 20 lbs you’ll probably add an extra 2″-3″ onto his vert. Technique could also ad another inch or two. Both athletes seem fairly evenly matched up with DGB possibly even having a slight edge.

              Just saying it would be interesting to see DGB retest at a lower weight.

    • JMac says:

      He could go either way. Good thought process in the article though.

    • CC says:

      Exactly!

  22. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    1st – Traded
    2nd – Tre Jackson, OG, Florida State (DT) Height: 6-4. Weight: 330. 40 Time: 5.49.
    Mauler, but able to pass block. He makes a ton of sense for Seattle to grab. Instant starter at LG.

    3rd – Davis Tull, OLB, Tennessee-Chattanooga Height 6-2. Weight: 246. Projected 40 Time: 4.59.
    SPARQ warrior. Great size and speed. A guy who could be as good or better than as KJ Wright.

    4th (1) Kenny Bell, WR/KR, Nebraska Height: 6-1. Weight: 197. 40 Time: 4.37.
    Ability to KR, makes tough catches and has decent yards after catch. Knock on him: a tad slight.

    4th (2) Justin Cox, CB, Mississippi State (FS) Height: 6-1 Weight: 191. 40 Time: 4.36
    They need 1 more CB and he has size and speed. Depth pick at worst, starter at best.

    4th (3) Darren Waller, WR, Georgia Tech (TE) Height: 6-6. Weight: 238. 40 Time: 4.46.
    Size and decent speed. He can play WR or TE position. Wilson, Graham and Waller would be formidable.

    5th (1) Mark Glowinski, OG, West Virginia (OT) Height: 6-4. Weight 307. 40 Time 5.20.
    SPARQ superstar. Mauling type of player. Projects as a LG or RT in NFL according to scouts. Depth pick.

    5th (2) Derrick Lott, DE/DT, Tennessee-Chattanooga Height 6’4″. Weight: 314. 40 Time 4.99.
    Good size and speed. Flexibility by being able to play at DT or DE.

    6th (1) Laurence Gibsen, OT, Virginia Tech (OG) Height: 6-6. Weight: 305. 40 Time: 5.04.
    SPARQ superstar for OL. Need depth at OT and can possibly play either LT, LG or RT.

    6th (2) Corey Grant, RB/KR, Auburn Height 5-9. Weight: 201. 40 Time: 4.30.
    Need a KR and some speed in RB position. Tough runner.

    6th (3) Edmund Robinson, OLB/ILB, Newberry Height 6-3. Weight: 245. 40 Time 4.61.
    He is outstanding in coverage and Seattle needs some LB depth. Good size and speed.

    7th (1) Blake Sims, QB, Alabama (RB/WR/KR/ATH) Height: 5-11. Weight: 218. 40 Time: 4.43.
    They will draft a QB, since they didn’t take one already… Sims would have great value late.

    • franks says:

      I like your o line picks, especially Glowinsky in R5 but everyone else gets cut or buried on the depth chart. Wouldn’t you rather trade a couple of them to get someone who will not only play but has the potential to transform our offense?

      • franks says:

        I mean don’t get me wrong they’re good players but it’s upgrading KJ Weight really what will take us to the next level? Unstoppable should be what we’re after.

        • AlaskaHawk says:

          What would you do Franks? We need some starters and then quality backups for all positions.

          • franks says:

            If DGB falls to the second, I’m moving into the high 40s or earlier for him. 2 or 3 guards/centers in rounds 4-6, an edge rusher like Clark or Riddick, 2015-Byron-Maxwell in 6th and take a swing on Rob Crisp late if he’s there and the picks weren’t ask traded. Kick returner somewhere, probably just one.

            The competition to warm the bench is sufficient! SB caliber bench: Check, now need sb-level edge rush rotation, wr1, interior line, late round corner depth given the injury histories. Taking weaknesses and making them strengths at every chance or trying to.

    • JMac says:

      I like this mock. Put up something better Frank. Seattle uses value – they don’t reach.

      • peter says:

        I like a lot of this mock but lb in the 3rd seems a bit much. Sure they need depth but you have three starters on contract plus kpl and coyle.

        Jmac- respectfully Seattle mixes both value and reaching. Irvin, Britt come to mind. Rob has done a great job of laying out the possible,reasoning for the Britt pick in that they did have to reach due to the lack of a third round pick.

        • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

          only reason I took LB, this guy jumps off the SPARQ chart and he has athleticism at a place of need long term… LB. I want a LB that could step in and play from day one if asked to.. due to injury or trade. I could see RB, but this guy has high upside potential. Needed a replacement for Smith, you got one in spades.

          • peter says:

            No i get it and Tull seems more like a great pick. In the beginning do you suppose the team tries him with his hand in the dirt as a replacement for schofield? Or tries to rotate him in like smith as you mentioned above.

            • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

              It appears, in college, he played on the line mostly. He is more of speed rusher. He showed some power and had some dip to him to go inside or outside of a blocker. He definitely reminded me of LB Schofield on some plays. He always seemed to be around the QB or ball carrier, affecting the direction or the timing of multiple plays. Created decent amounts of disruption at the line of scrimmage and in the backfield.. He is pretty good at diagnosing plays and can play the pass or rush equally effectively. Normally sets a decent edge, when the rush comes right at him, causing the RB to bounce outside. I didn’t see him drop much into coverage much from the tape on utube I watched. So, I’m thinking of him as a back-up pass-rusher initially, with the ability to fill in for Irvin if there was an injury(provided he can play in space). What he can blossom into is anyone’s guess. I think the high side is similar to KJ Wright – Probowler level of play.

        • JohnnyJohnson says:

          Yes but in both of those examples – Irvin, and Britt they had traded down and acquired more pics prior to choosing both Britt and Irvin, so it wasn’t a trade up – which is how I was mainly using the word reach here – to get anything, just that they valued those players more then some other teams might. If that makes sense…

    • Ho Lee Chit says:

      I like your choice of Tre Jackson, Charlie. I have run the Fanspeak simulator dozens of times and occasionally Jackson slides to #63. That first pick probably comes down to him or Marpet. Tull and Cox are good ones, too.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        That is my read on it….. Jackson is their 1a) choice at 63, but if he is gone, Marpet might be their 1b) choice. I’m sure there are other guys that make sense on their draft board at other positions… but I’m 75% sure they will go OL in 2nd round, why not go with one of the top guards in the draft.

  23. Greg haugsven says:

    Rob, I know this is off topic but what’s your thoughts on Shaq Riddick in maybe the fourth or fifth for a Leo project? The more I read and on this guy the more I like. Tape isn’t that good but I haven’t seen a lot. Had good Seahawk measureables.

  24. Adog says:

    One guy who is under the radar is demaryie Nelson a 5th year h-back/te from Arizona state. A good special teamed and is listed as playing some de also. I think Seattle might take a udfa flier on him. As for wr…I doubt they have sincere interest in beckham, but maybe they grab a big reciever in the 5th. I could see them trading up for Devon smith out of Ohio state…he seems to be a doppelgänger of golden Tate. I think with this front office the free agent signings of the d linemen is a sign that they will adress this position in the draft. If it’s really about competition…why not make it as fierce as possible?

  25. Ben2 says:

    What about 2 twin towers and a speedster:
    2nd -trade up for J.Strong in 2nd if he drops into 50s or grab Funchess with 63
    3rd- lockette
    Rest of picks oline, Dline, DB….
    There’s gonna be a mismatch somewhere with 2 guys with plus size and one with plus speed to stretch vertical and he could return kicks. Plenty of oline depth to n the draft and you know they’ll kick the tires on a veteran or on the interior of the oline.

    • Ben2 says:

      DGB has plus size too and could be inserted into the J.Strong spot if PC feels like he’s coachable

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      I’m thinking Funchess is gone mid 2nd round. His proday helped him with a good 40 time and overall workout.

    • CC says:

      Funchess reminds me of Kelvin Benjamin. But I think I’d take Waller, maybe earlier than projected – with the Saints 4th rounder if available.

      I’ve liked Waller since seeing him play last fall. For me, he has as good a chance as DGB to be a solid receiver, and he knows how to run block!

  26. Matt says:

    Thanks for the article Rob! Your opinion is greatly respected, and with many of our debates in the previous article it’s good to read your clear opinion. I’m sold on trading up for DGB if he falls. All Pro potential oozes out of his pores, while the shadow of Josh Gordon chases him. I was surprised you didn’t mention Devin Smith in the article, as you were singing his praises a few months ago. Smith has some rough edges to smooth out, but man can he make big plays! I’m willing to trade up for him too. Lockett is one of my favorites who seems to really get how to play the game.

    “This piece isn’t an argument against Seattle drafting Bell because he does carry the kind of characteristics the Seahawks admire. It’s an argument against this type of receiver being the missing link alone.” Rob

    I think we’re on the same page regarding Bell. He can replace Lockette day 1, and between him and Norwood I think we’ll have a cheaper replacement for Kearse in 2016. Agreed that Bell(or his type of WR) is not the missing link. I do think he would improve our WR core from the bottom up. That one goal line INT Russell threw vs NE(I think y’all know which painful play) we had both Baldwin and Kearse(respectfully) setting picks on opposite sides of the field, for Walters and Lockette (disrespectfully). We know what happened. Walters and Lockette need to be upgraded desperately. Yes I’m all in on trading up for a #1 type WR. I also feel we need to upgrade the bottom of our WR core.

  27. Hawksince77 says:

    One comment/question about DGB. Do we have any sense about his love for the game (or lack thereof)? The part of character that JS has emphasized in recent draft years, looking for prospects with passion and commitment to the game and their craft. Do we have any indication how they would view DGB in this regard?

    To me, that is more important for his professional future than the specific transgressions in his past. The right man will change himself and create a different future for himself. The wrong man (Josh Gordon, say) will do otherwise. Do we know where DGB stands?

    • Rob Staton says:

      “One comment/question about DGB. Do we have any sense about his love for the game (or lack thereof)?”

      I suspect this is what the Seahawks have been trying to work out over the last few weeks as they’ve tracked him.

      • Hawksince77 says:

        That’s the one variable that ranks high on the list for the Seahawks that we have the most difficulty determining. And that goes for any of the players we discuss. Perhaps we can judge from the public information about DGB’s past, but we can’t get into JS’s head to see how he processes that information, or information from sources we don’t have access to.

        On the other end of the spectrum, we are all impressed by Conley’s character, his creativity (his Star Wars film), his intelligence, etc., but don’t we have to wonder how football fits into his life? What if football for him is a distant third in importance in his life? We all assume because he played in college and is coming out for the draft that football is his foremost passion, but for a guy like Conley, he may have alternative priorities that compete with his attention for the game. Who knows?

        • Robert says:

          I am a big fan of Conley, but that is my main concern, as well. If he decides to commit and focus on mastering his craft and maximizing his tremendous potential, he will be great and he will get there quickly! In the short term, I think he could contribute significantly to the WR rotation because he will be given a lot of cushion like PRich was. DB’s have to respect that speed and it creates a lot of opportunities underneath. And Bevell should be able to scheme deep routes that force the Safety over, which would create opportunities for teammates. I was disappointed they did not do that much with PRich….

    • rowdy says:

      From what I read his teammates love him and doesn’t lack passion but relies on his athleticism to much and that’s stunted his growth.

      • Bruce M. says:

        One of the most important signs of “passion” is intensity, consistency and duration of effort at practice. The Hawks clearly believe this.

        If he is relying too much on his athleticism, then I’d be concerned he isn’t busting it at practice and training. It’s easy to be intense at games, with an audience of literally millions. But how hard do you work when nobody is watching? That’s passion as much or more than anything else, and that plus athleticism translates to great players.

    • OZ says:

      One of the biggest prerequisites with the front office is the want players who finish. Does DGB fit that mold?

  28. warner28 says:

    I’d grab DGB without even thinking twice. Even trading up to get him. Worth the gamble.

  29. Steele1324 says:

    A super sleeper edge rusher Alec May, DE/OLB:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKotIyJEJE4

    UDFA

    • OZ says:

      I like him. He reminds me of Kelsey. Good eyes and instincts. Great hand use and is relentless. Speed looks good and is a finisher. can also cover. Whats not to like? (small school)?

    • Ukhawk says:

      Great shout. He’d be superb for develonig to replace either KJ or Bruce at some point

  30. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    I think I’ve heard the craziest rumor earlier tonight on a twitter feed. Seahawks are looking at drafting DT Kristjan Sokoli on the 3rd day of the draft, to play OG.

    I’m not buying it, maybe to play DT… but OL… Perhaps this is Sweezy 2.0….
    just seems to crazy to believe…. right? LOL

    • rowdy says:

      Or maybe just crazy enough?

    • peter says:

      That actually makes a ton of sense. They could chance it with bailey or see,how quickly sokoli picks it up. Youd have a pretty serious mailer at the LG and could use earlier picks on something else. Or try it out and,still have a DT for positional battles.

    • Ho Lee Chit says:

      I could see that. The kid has a work ethic. He wants it more than most.

    • Matt says:

      That’s not crazy at all, especially when we’re talking about the Hawks. If Cable thinks he can work his magic on Sokoli then we should go for it! Sweezy has worked out just fine. Sokoli stacks up very well physically:

      Sokoli- 4.86 40. 31 reps. 38″ vert. 9’11” broad. 4.36 SS. 7.25 3C-6’5″ 290 lbs.(can’t find his arm length)
      Jake Fisher- 5.01 40. 25 reps. 32.5″vert. DNP broad. 4.33 SS. 7.25 3C-6’6″ 306 lbs. 33 3/4″ arms
      Marpet- 4.98 40. 30 reps. 30.5″ vert. 9′ broad. 4.47 SS. 7.33 3C-6’4″ 307 lbs. 33 3/8″ arms
      Sweezy- 5.01 40. 21 reps. 36″ vert. 9’5″ broad. 4.41 SS. 7.40 3C. 6’5″ 298lbs. 34″ arms

        • Matt says:

          Thanks Bruce M. Great length! Sokoli doesn’t have to be thrown into the fire like Sweezy was in 2012. If he wins the LG job then great, but Alvin Bailey isn’t too bad of a LG-where our roster sits at the moment. Also Sweezy’s contract is up after 2015…

      • arias says:

        Remember how terrible Sweezy was his rookie year?

        I just can’t stomach that sort of performance again from a guy who has never played the position.

        Remember the Divisional playoffs in 2012 against Atlanta when Lynch had 46 yards and 2.88 YPC? All the TFL’s he had are squarely on Sweezy. He was the hole that kept giving … to Atlanta.

        I see no reason the team has to suffer like that again.

        • Hawksince77 says:

          The difference may be that he wouldn’t have to start at the position, allowing some time for growth. As a late-round addition, perhaps worth it.

        • AlaskaHawk says:

          In some ways it is saying my staff can’t find an offensive linemen they like. It is hard to believe there aren’t anyvoffensive linemen they could pick.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      I saw something similar a week or two ago about Tavaris Barnes DE Clemson.

  31. MoondustV says:

    Real starting players in X and Z… SEA just simply doesn’t have enough. Chris Matthews can bully some 6′ players, but can he do that again and again next season?
    Yep, Sometimes I’d like to drop the entire WR cast except Baldwin.

    • Hawksince77 says:

      They don’t need to be dropped – just improved upon. We need ‘good’ or better options at WR 1, 2, and 3. What we have is ‘average’ (IMO) at best.

      IMO, Baldwin is an excellent #3 and would thrive with ‘good’ WRs on the outside, but he is closer to average as the #1. New England had their best CB shadow Baldwin during the SB, making it clear how they ranked him as a receiving threat.

      Maybe some combination of Matthews, Norwood and PRich evolves to becoming ‘good’ outside WRs, but we don’t know. To Rob’s point, drafting DGB provides a decent chance of adding that top WR talent and making the rest of the roster at the position even better. If he becomes the clear #1, with Baldwin the clear #3, then the odds of fielding a good #2 among the candidates greatly improves. One of Matthews/Norwood/PRich/McNeil (even Kearse) might serve as an above average #2, providing Seattle a legitimately dangerous starting WR line up to complement what they have at TE and RB.

  32. Nate says:

    I would love to see us draft Waller and UDFA Smelter from GT, so that can move up and draft rb for future, Ajayi!

    • Jeff M. says:

      RB is probably the single position that makes the *least* sense to draft for the future. RB’s are typically able to contribute right away as rookies without needing a transitional redshirt year (so you can just wait until you actually need one to draft him) and late-round picks frequently outperform the more-hyped guys at the top of the draft. Then they have really short careers on average and it’s generally a bad idea to re-sign them to a second contract, so you just end up wasting their rookie deal (the only time they actually have positive value).

      You only want to do a “redshirt” year for a position that takes time to develop and that you want to keep long-term (like QB, OT, WR, DB). If we draft a RB high and Lynch plays this season and the next, we’ll just end up wasting another pick like we did on Christine Michael, who likely ends up leaving in FA having hardly seen the field (just like Ben Tate did in Houston, Michael Turner in SD, lots of other young backs sitting behind stars).

      • Nate says:

        You are probably right.
        I just think Ajayi is called beast mode Jr. for a reason.
        Just don’t like the idea of drop off after Lynch retires.
        While we are talking about replacements, it would be funny to instead draft the C from Oregon who is compared to Unger. Although Schneider seems to want a fa C.

      • Rob Staton says:

        And if Lynch retires and with Turbin a free agent, a RB pick for 2016 could equally be one of the wisest moves this team makes.

        The last thing you want to do is to ‘need’ to find one next year, especially if there’s one you really like in this class. You don’t want to handcuff yourself in that way — or at worst ‘settle’ for someone to replace Lynch. I know people don’t like the idea, but drafting a RB from this strong class to stash for next year makes a ton of sense. It’s better to address a problem one year early than a year too late.

        • Matt says:

          Rob- I understand the reasoning behind taking a RB in the draft. The thing is if Lynch retires there’s every reason to think Turbin would be retained. The cap space would be there to give him a modest deal-he’d be lucky to get $3 mil/year on the open market. Russell and Turbo are pals too, can’t forget that-even in this cruel business. I agree with Jeff M on this one. In 3 weeks we’ll find out!

          • Rob Staton says:

            Here’s the thing though Matt — you can either pay Turbin $3m a year on an extension or you can bring in a possible upgrade for about $600K. That’s the choice here. If you see a back you like in this class it makes sense to draft them even if it’s just to replace Turbin in 2016. You don’t force a RB pick, you just take a guy if one you like is there and in range. I think there’s a good chance there will be in R3.

            • Matt says:

              Gotcha. I wouldn’t be too upset if we drafted a RB. There are some good looking RB’s in the middle rounds. Think it’s more of an issue that’s better to address next offseason. That’s just how I’d like to see it play out. There’s a chance I’m wrong. It’s been known to happen from time to time. haha

        • Hawksince77 says:

          Rob, this is the one option that I think even more likely in a trading up scenario than DGB. While it would be an interesting option to draft DGB if things fall right, the odds of that happening are just so small for reasons everyone has already pointed out. If his character checks out, he gets drafted too early to consider. If he falls, it’s for a good reason.

          That being the case, for all the reasons you provide, trading up into the second for an RB they like might be the play. You haven’t (as far as I know) evaluated a draft where a Seahawks-type RB fell into range, but that might be an interesting exercise, just to think through who that might be.

          We have already discussed making a dramatic move up the board for Gurley. Using next year’s first might make sense, for all the reasons you state (not being hand-cuffed in 2016 needing a RB, for instance). Given that Gurley wouldn’t play in 2015 anyway, using a 2016 1st round pick might made sense.

          But I am sure there are other options in this draft (other than Davis, unless that is still your favorite option for the Seahawks).

          • Rob Staton says:

            I hate the idea of trading future firsts. You never know what’s going to happen down the line. If Wilson gets injured week one you might end up trading a top-15 pick away. So I’m typically against conceding such highly valued future stock.

            As for the RB’s — I think it’s very unlikely they trade up for one, even if I think they’ll take one earlier than people think. I think they’ll let the draft come to them in terms of that position. The end of round three seems like a sweet spot. And I think DGB being in range is possibly more likely than we maybe imagined a few weeks ago.

            • Hawksince77 says:

              If you’re right, and DGB falls into range, and Seattle makes the move up to get him, we may be witnessing another historic draft by the Seahawks (getting Graham and DGB in the same draft, plus the remaining haul) and the would be exciting for us fans.

              I just can’t let myself anticipate the possibility, though, and get excited before the fact. To me, the two most exciting players in the draft are Gurley and DGB – both risks, both potentially elite. If either one could be obtained, that would be awesome. But just so terribly unlikely, IMO.

              JS/PC have made bold moves: Harvin, Rice, Graham, Miller, for instance. Count Lynch (although that was far less bold and far more shrewd). But nothing in the draft. Their home runs were either predictable (Thomas) or brilliantly un-predicted (Wilson, Sherman, Kam, etc.)

              We have yet to see them target an elite/exciting prospect and make a dramatic move to draft him. Perhaps this is the year, with the state of the roster and a plethora of picks. But the far more likely scenario is one we have seen over and over again: trade down, add picks, take potential talent in rounds 3-6. Less exciting as we scratch our collective heads when they pick players we never considered in any round (PRich, Britt, Irvin, etc.) Potentially boring for us, yet ultimately effective for maintaining the roster year in and year out.

      • MattK says:

        My thoughts exactly.

        Simply put, we can’t address every possible “need” a year in advance when there’s real needs to fix now. Especially not at RB where it’s one of the easiest positions to replace.

        • Bruce M. says:

          It’s easy for most teams. Less easy for the Hawks, given who they have now and the offense they like to run.

  33. Jeff M. says:

    Taking a look at the FO top-32 DYAR wideouts (so the guys who produce like #1s whether they’re described that way or not), you certainly see some traditional #1 types (Dez Bryant, Julio Jones, Demariyus Thomas in top 8, Megatron at 16, etc.). You also see a lot of guys who could be described as specialist/role player/undersized, from Antonio Brown at 1, Emanuel Sanders at 3, and Randall Cobb at 4 down to Eddie Royal at 28, Julian Edelman at 31, and Doug Baldwin at 32.

    In fact, most of the guys get their value in one “role” or another, whether as undersized deep-ball threats (DeSean Jackson, T.Y. Hilton, Mike Wallace), shifty slot guys (Cobb, Edelman, etc.), or #2s on high-volume offenses (Kenny Stills, Terrance Williams, Golden Tate, Sanders, Royal). They also come from all parts of the draft (top of 1st round, mid-rounds, 7th/UDFA).

    With Jimmy Graham likely to serve as our #1 WR in all but name (our “base” set will probably be 12 personnel with him split wide and one of Willson/McCoy tight to the formation) and Doug Baldwin proven to produce like a mid-to-low-end #1 (he was 13th in DYAR in 2013 on fewer targets, with Tate attracting some defensive attention), we just need value added in whatever role. That might look like a big outside WR to compete with Kearse/Norwood/Matthews but it might also look like another small/speedy Paul Richardson type, or a less-SPARQy underneath hands/route-running possession weapon, or something we haven’t even considered.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Let’s not mistake a specialist role description for just meaning a lack of size. There’s nothing one dimensional about Brown, Sanders or Cobb. Even Eddie Royal has a rounded game albeit he’s a pretty unspectacular player. That’s not the point. It’s whether Bell is anything more than a run downfield guy or hope he’s gifted soft coverage so the speed works. Is he another Lockette? I think the answer is probably yes. But that doesn’t mean a different smaller receiver with a rounded skill set can’t develop into a major role player.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        If you can play, no matter the size, you can play. Steve Smith is not exactly “large”, but he plays with great effort and has under rated hands. He has made a long career out of his abilities. So, let’s not toss out the small guys, because they are “too small”. This is the number one reason I love Dorsett, he is very fast and has very good hands.

        Long story short, I agree with Rob.

  34. EranUngar says:

    Ok rob, I’ll play…

    IF DGB is there to begin with and IF this FO did their homework on the guy and feel that the risks are manageable and go get him, I will not be banging my head on the wall. When you ignore the character and off the field risks etc., the guy has the size and ball catching qualities I’d like to see on this team. I’m not the guy that needs to do the homework on those and I trust this FO if they feel ok with him.

    Having said that, the point about trading up for the guy is not just calculating player quality and potential versus draft capital spent. The issue is also the alternatives available for that draft capital. No pick at the second half of the 2nd round is a sure thing. With this rather deep WR class, if we dedicate the 2nd and 4th round picks to get two WRs, who will that pair be? Is it not more likely that out of those 2 guys we’ll find that future core player we are looking for?

    Let’s take some names that were mentioned here and bundle them together –

    If we are hell bent on finding our future tall WR1, maybe getting BOTH Conley and Waller, both raw but with potential, will ensure the end result more then just one DGB?

    If we want to explore more then just WR1 and would like to add PR/KR to the mix we could go McBride/Bell and Waller/Conley for one DGB.

    I’m not sure the DGB trade up is a clear winner when matched with a 2 for 1 deal.

    The one attribute that I see with DGB and worry about with the likes of Waller and Conley is that he is a good ball catcher. At the end of round two you need to give up on some of the attributes you’d want at the top of round one. The two attributes that I’d like to have no matter what are size(tall) and a big reliable contested catch radius. (I.E. body control, high pointing, great hands, snatching the ball away from the body, securing the catch even when contested)

    I think DGB leads those other guys when it comes to a reliable catch radius.

    • EranUngar says:

      As for the general concept of using late round picks to move up with your high rounds picks, I posted the results of the JSPC era to see how the value of higher picks compares with lower picks.

      The results are interesting 🙂

      http://www.fieldgulls.com/2015/4/12/8392555/to-trade-up-or-not-to-trade-up

    • Rob Staton says:

      If it’s DGB or Conley/Waller I’ll take a chance on DGB every single time. Conley basically needs to learn the position from scratch while Waller is a 3-4 year project IMO the same way Vincent Jackson was. Both very athletic players but also both major projects. DGB isn’t the finished article but I think he’s well ahead of the other two.

      • EranUngar says:

        Rob, you missed my point. It’s clear that DGB is ahead of either Waller or Conley. It’s also clear that any of the 3 could be a bust due to on field or off field issue, injuries etc…

        However, are you sure that having both of them, Conley and Waller to work with, will not give you a better solution starting 2016 then gambling it all on DGB?

        • Rob Staton says:

          I didn’t miss the point Eran — I tried to answer it. For me yes, having DGB would provide a much better solution for an instant and long term impact than having Conley and Waller.

          I also think only one really good receiver needs to be taken from this class. They don’t really need depth at WR — only one rookie is probably going to make the cut. They will add a kick return specialist down the road to fill the Walters role. But really they only need one rookie pure WR — so you might as well swing for the fences.

          • EranUngar says:

            Ok, my mistake, sorry…

            IMO, with PRich starting on the PUP list, the only safe roster spots are Baldwin and Kearse. Everybody else will compete for their place. I agree that if we get that one WR1 type we’ll be happy with it.

            • Steele1324 says:

              How safe is Kearse? Not very. They could cut him loose if there are better options. That makes this coming camp for WRs interesting.

              • Robert says:

                I agree. Kearse better be working hard this off season…and I think he is! Norwood, Matthews and Mcneil will create good competition.

      • Robert says:

        From scratch??? Conley has a lot more experience actually playing WR the last few years than DGB. From scratch seems like an exaggeration. I appreciate DGB’s effortless movement and long strides.There is a lot to like about his play and potential. But I think Conley can contribute year 1 like PRich because DB’s must respect their speed and give them a large cushion, which creates opportunities underneath. Conley also has good size, long arms, great hops and big hands with good demonstration of high pointing and plucking the ball. He consistently demonstrates good understanding and awareness to find soft spots in zone defenses. His smarts, character and work ethic are off the charts! His splash plays demonstrate sensational upside. I am surprised you dismiss him when I see so much that I like from this prospect???

        • Rob Staton says:

          The issue with Conley is not a lack of experience. He can be incredibly awkward to watch. Now, that’s not to say he isn’t talented (physically and technically) and there are occasions where he makes ‘wow’ plays and that’s a positive. Yet his route running, body control, understanding of the Georgia offense (looked WAY off to me) and general demeanor smacked of an athlete slightly winging it rather than a polished receiver. The greater experience actually works against him. He’s a four year player and a senior. He should be looking much more comfortable and natural out there in 2014. Instead he still looks like he’s working it all out. That’s scary. Much more so than DGB who with limited experience looked far from the finished article but looked a lot more comfortable in year two at Mizzou than Conley did in year four at Georgia.

          It’s not a case of ‘dismissing’ him. There’s a reason, however, that insane athletes playing at the University of Georgia go practically unnoticed until they arrive at the combine. This isn’t writing him off, it’s stating what I believe to be true — that’s he’s a major project. And when I see how slowly he’s come along at Georgia, you have to wonder how determined he is to be great. Has he really pushed himself? Or is he happy to be the guy with the insane work out who did just enough in college against inferior athletes?

          If you watched the tape without the combine numbers — I think people would be a lot less hyped about Conley’s pro-prospects. That’s the impact of the combine.

          • Robert says:

            On the player development side, I think that challenging him to play at 100% is a major point of emphasis. If he did that consistently, his tremendous potential would be on display more often. And like most non first rounders, he needs to work on running precise routes and selling the fakes. Thank you for the reply and the awesome site, articles, community!!!

          • Hawksince77 says:

            Thanks for this, I really enjoyed it.

            Unlike Waller, Conley’s speed shows up on the field, along with his ability to make the tough catch in traffic. We also witnessed some of his blocking, a requirement from a predominately running team (in college and with the Seahawks, should be be drafted).

            To my untrained eye, he looked the part of a potential #1 WR. So I am back to a previous position I held concerning the draft: Seattle trades back into the 3rd, and select Conley with their first pick. This appears more likely given the probability that DGB will be drafted out of range.

            • Robert says:

              I agree. I think most of the uber athletic WR prospects that crash and burn lack some combination of intelligence, character and work ethic. Conley has all 3 of those in abundance.

            • Steele1324 says:

              I continue to like Conley. But I think he will go earlier. possibly as high as rd. 2 because of his great numbers.

              I have a terrible feeling the way the draft is shaping up, the entire board has shifted up. If so, the Hawks will miss out on someone we want them to get.

              • Rob Staton says:

                If we’d have looked at Conley pre-combine and suggested a second round grade, I think most people would’ve reacted very negatively to that. He had a great combine, but I feel some perspective is required. If he goes that early a team is basically pulling an Al Davis. I like him, but I’m not totally convinced he’s what SEA needs.

                • CHawk Talker Eric says:

                  If we had looked at Conley pre-combine, most of us would’ve asked, “who?”

                  In what way do you think the board has shifted Steele?

                  • Steele1324 says:

                    I just have a feeling that a good number of Seahawky types have gotten a lot of attention lately (Sambrailo, etc), and the SPARQ winners are going to be overdrafted. Thus, the board moves up.

                    Conley of course catches our attention because of the combine, but he still has a lot of potential.

                    I am always leery of highlight reels. Rob, you have watched more actual game film than many of us, you don’t like his route running. Here, I see him making the kind of plays a good x or z WR should make.

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmPVipftmes

                • Hawksince77 says:

                  Rob,

                  I don’t see Conley as a value pick at 63, but trading down into the 3rd and then selecting him, perhaps.

                  However, I thought Irvin was a second round pick at best, more likely a third, and Seattle took him in the first and apologized to nobody for it.

                  If (and this is a big if) Seattle really likes Conley, they may draft him where they think they need to, including at 63, depending on how they judge the field.

                  For me, a similar argument can be made for Conley that you made for DGB. If Conley is judged to have the potential to be a genuine #1 WR, even if it takes a year or two to fully achieve that potential, wouldn’t the investment be worth it?

                  It doesn’t appear that any true #1 WR prospect will be readily available for the Seahawks. If getting one remains a priority, they need to look to developmental candidates.

                  Alternatively, they decide that Graham fulfills that role, and they go a different direction.

  35. Mike says:

    What is the value of our 2016 3rd round pick? How far could we move up in the second round with a package of #63, 4th (N.O), and our 3rd in 2016? With the 3rd we should get for Maxwell it makes this pick expendable. I’m all in on DGB.

    • Rob Staton says:

      A 2016 third would basically carry the same value as a 2015 fourth. So you could possibly move up 20 pick I think, maybe a little earlier, to do that deal. I’m never a big fan of trading away future picks though.

  36. Zorn is King says:

    I’d like opinions on veteran receivers we could nab with the third round pick. V Jax? V Cruz? Just grasping here.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m not sure they’ve got the cap room to do a deal like that.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Victor Cruz is coming off a nasty injury. He has too big of deal to be moved. NYG are desperate to unload him for anything, instead of cutting him. No way do I want to see him Salsa dancing at the Clink 8 games a year.

      Vincent Jackson might be had, but he is in the same boat. Way too big of deal to absorb. If he was cut and a street FA, then maybe. I’ve never been in love with him, so no big deal to me personally.

  37. Ukhawk says:

    Mayock has 8 WRs with 1st round grades now in this order.. White, Cooper, Parker, Perriman, Aglohor, DGB, Dorsett, Strong

  38. Ed says:

    11 teams really need early WR

    Dolphins/Jets/Browns/Jaguars/Chiefs/Raiders/Eagles/Redskins/Vikings/Rams/49ers

    11 top WR (for the most part)

    Cooper/White/Parker/Strong/Perriman/Green-Becham/Coates/Agholor/Smith/Dorsett/Green

    Top 5 remaining

    Lockett/Funchess/McBride/Hardy/Lippett

    I think Funchess would be the pick (if we stayed at WR). Him and JG tearing up the middle of the field and corners of the endzone, yes please.

    However, I think if that’s how the draft fell, I would rather go Sambrillo or Grasu at 63 and Marpert in the 3rd, then take Conley and Waller in 4th

    Rob, How would you feel sending a 4th to Chicago or TB for Marshall or VJack?

    • John_s says:

      I don’t understand why so many people are in love with Conley and Waller. Yes, Conpey had amazing combine numbers but the tape and production doesn’t match the combine numbers. Waller he’s big yes, but smaller CB’s routinely rerouted him and he didn’t play up to his size.

      I would much rather have Hardy to McBride than those two in the 4th if available

    • drewjov11 says:

      Marshall has already been traded to the jets. I don’t think they can make that trade work. Also, as Rob stated above, the cap hit would be too large.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Seattle needs a WR, but what price do you pay to get one? I sure as heck will not trade “cheap” draft capitol for an “expensive” WR. This is how you get upside down in the CAP….. please see the Saints CAP mess…. I’m all for drafting ANY WR, before trading away picks for a WR on another team.

    • Rob Staton says:

      They don’t have the cap room to bring in a veteran. You’d be paying $6-8m minimum. That’s basically all of the first year salary increase for Wagner & Wilson on their new deals.

      • Steele1324 says:

        The available free agent WRs are Hakeem Nicks, Greg Jennings, Reggie Wayne. Not good.

        Is there a veteran WR #1 type who can be gotten with another Jimmy Graham kind of trade? The answer is probably “not a chance in hell”. But did we think Jimmy Graham was possible?

  39. Cameron says:

    Rob, one player I haven’t heard you mention lately is Devin Smith. Have you soured on him or do you think he’ll be long gone by the middle of the 2nd?

    He’s not what I would call a well rounded receiver by any means, and may fill that ‘specialist’ description you ascribed to Kenny Bell, but then again I would say the same stuff about Golden Tate coming out of ND.

    The thing is, Devin Smith wins where Russell Wilson wins – on the deep red-line balls. I think about all the over the shoulder, back shoulder, you name it throws that Jermaine Kearse dropped or alligator armed, and wonder what this offense could do with a guy who can consistently make those plays.

    What about Devin Smith?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Smith remains a personal favorite. Fantastic downfield pass catcher, makes chunk plays. Really technically adept. Really good at the red line like you say. I think he goes in the top-45.

      • Steele1324 says:

        I have serious questions about Dev Smith’s route running. He does the deep ball well. The rest of it needs a lot of development.

  40. MT12thMan says:

    2nd round: Dorial Green-Beckham WR. Trade up using 63rd and 112th

    3rd round: Gabe Wright DT

    4th round 130th: Ifo Ekpre-Olomu CB

    4th round 134th: Mitch Morse OG

    5th round 167th: Shaquille Mason C

    5th round 170th: Shaquille Riddick DE

    6th round 180th: Ryan Russell DE

    6th round 209th: Nick Marshall CB

    6th round 214th: Antwan Goodley or Mario Alford KR/WR

    7th round 248th: Rob Crisp OT

    What do you guys think of this. I like the idea of double dipping on DE although its not really a glaring need. You can never have too many pass rushers. Both Russell and Riddick are very much projects, but they have alot of upside.
    Ekpre-Olomu isn’t the Seahawk type of corner, but he also has the intangibles and playmaking ability to overlook some of that
    I really like Mason at center. He’s got a nasty streak and looked good at the position during senior bowl practices

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      The gem of this mock is…. pick #130 Ifo Ekpre-Olomu CB. He was projected to go low 1st round, before his knee injury last CFB season. If he can get back to form, he would be an outstanding slot CB…. which Seattle is coincidentally thin at until Lane comes back (if he does) from his set of horrific injuries.

      • Steele1324 says:

        I would love for the Hawks to entertain many CB options like this, but if the size and arm length measurements are semi- set in stone, smaller corners like Ekpre-Olomu are not considerations.

        • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

          They need a CB who has good area quickness and can change overall direction quickly. They have plenty of guys that can play outside, but they need a guy who can cover slot WRs or RBs out of the backfield.

          • MT12thMan says:

            I am by no means trying to guess what the Seahawks will do with their draft picks. I agree, it is unlikely that they will pick Ekpre-Olomu, but I would sure like to see it happen. I think he would fill an area of need on the team and could be a potential steal

            • Steele1324 says:

              I really like Senquez Golson’s game. Tremendous ball hawk. But at 5-9, he is going to be limited. I doubt he’ll get a look from the Hawks. A team that could use a tiny and super aggressive slot defender would have a steal with him.

              I’d love to sic him on Edelman.

          • Robert says:

            Check out this prospect with insane physicals, athleticism and ball skills https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU-H3R4rTUA

            • Steele1324 says:

              Darryl “Swag” Roberts is one of my favorite sleeper cornerbacks. But we need his arm length measurement.

              • Steele1324 says:

                Tony Lippett.

                As a corner, he looks so much like Richard Sherman, it’s scary.

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaFe7rcJxOU

                And he is an underrated receiver with length.

                Tracks balls as well as anyone.

                Imagine taking him in rd. 3 as a corner but with potential as a genuine 2-way. Have him develop under Kris Richard. You’d have a young Sherman opposite Sherman. A nightmare. Works as a receiver, too? That’s gravy.

  41. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    There’s a certain myopic tunnel vision that can creep up around draft time. It comes from focusing on a prospect’s measurables too much, usually due to a lack of other valuable information like game film. With nothing else to study, physical metrics and Combine workout performances become overly important, giving us a distorted view of a prospect’s true worth, causing us to think he’ll go earlier than he really will. This is further reinforced by focusing solely on a particular position group because it places an artificial draft premium on the position.

    The reality is that the other 31 teams don’t share SEA’s scouting perspectives or drafting agenda. With respect to WR, there’s bound to be some consensus and overlap, but this is a really deep WR class with 2 wide talent plateaus around the R2 and R4 marks (separated by a fairly steep talent cliff), not to mention many teams have many other needs.

    Rob’s post posited 3 scenarios for SEA in R2, 2 involving a WR pick. There are as many as 8 WRs with a R1 grade – a bit optimistic IMO, but whatever – the point is this is a deep class near the top (but strangely not AT the top), regardless of R1 vs R2 grading.

    I took a look back at the last 10 drafts – specifically the WR position and the number of WRs taken in the first 2 rounds – to see if there was anything in the data that might offer something useful. In the past decade, there have been 3 drafts with 10+ WRs taken in the first 2 rounds.

    11 in 2005 (R1 – 6)
    10 in 2008 (R1 – 0) and
    12 in 2014 (R1 – 5)

    2007 (R1 – 6) and 2012 (R1 – 4) were close with 9 each. So in half of the last 10 drafts, there’s been a “run” on WR early with 9 or more being taken by the end of R2. But on the other hand there’s never been any back-to-back drafts with double digit WR picks; even though the 2007-2008 drafts are close, there weren’t ANY R1 WR picks in 2008 so I’m not sure how typical it is…

    Last year was historical for WRs. This year is almost as deep. Maybe it’s “virtually” as deep aka “for all intents and purposes”. By my count there are 12 WRs worthy of a R1/R2 pick. Cooper, White and Parker are R1 locks. Which, if any, among Strong, Perriman, DGB, Agholor, Smith, Dorsett, Funchess, Lockett or Coates will also go in R1? How many of the rest will make it to 63? Any of them offer value at 63.

    For me, only 2 of them are worth trading up to get – DGB or Agholor. Agholor probably won’t ever be a true #1. But he can be a true #2 the way Golden Tate is in DET (BTW I think Agholor can be better than Tate). Agholor has added value as a PR.

    DGB is the only legit #1 WR prospect who might possibly be available to SEA in R2. I’ve seen enough boards, blogs, tweets, talk shows, etc. to know that DGB would have been a top 3 WR prospect and likely a top 15 pick this year but for his off field issues, which more than anything from a football perspective, prevented him from further developing and demonstrating his receiving prowess in 2014.

    We discussed DGB back when SEA had a R1 pick, and many of us concluded that he’ll be gone long before 31 if his off field concerns aren’t that big of a deal, and if they are we wouldn’t want him anyway. That was when we still had a R1 pick. Funny how time can temper one’s perspective. Off field issues or not, I just don’t see DGB lasting until 63. He may not make it past NE at 32.

    Then again, I’ve read that at least 2 teams, PHI and HOU, have taken him off their boards entirely. There are probably a couple of others who won’t consider him that early, if at all. It is possible he slips into the early R2. If he does, and SEA want him, I would think they’d have to trade with (or ahead of) CLE at 43. If CLE trades up for Mariota, they’ll be pressed to spend their next highest pick on a WR. I’m not sure they’d go for DGB after Gordon, but they might. Regardless, there’s a gauntlet of WR needy teams right after CLE – NO @44, MIN @45, SF @46, MIA @47 and KC @49. Any of them could go WR in R1, but one will probably take a WR in R2 and DGB will be the top prospect available. I agree with Rob that DGB’s biggest red flag now isn’t what he did back in 2013. It’s whether or not he can stand up to NFL caliber corners, if he can handle practicing against the LOB every day.

    Incidentally, looking back over the last 10 drafts, there have been only 6 WRs drafted R4 or later who have made any kind of significant contribution to their respective teams – Doug Baldwin (2011, UDFA), Riley Cooper (2010, R5#159), Antonio Brown (2010, R6#195), Victor Cruz (2010, UDFA), Pierre Garcon (2008, R6#205), Brandon Marshall (2006, R4#119). It’s highly unlikely SEA will find their future #1 among any of the R4 or later WR prospects this year.

    • therick05 says:

      I agree with trading with CLE, DGB wont get to the 50s, we could use our 63 plus the pick from NO plus 2016 3rd (we will have one compesatory pick from Maxwell in that round).

      The only team that i think could take DGB in 1st round is BAL, but they could pick Perriman or Strong or even a CB. At the 2nd round, he might get picked by STL,and he will get picked by either MIA, SF, MIN or KC,if hes there. Thats why, IMO, we must trade to the 40s for DGB.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        KC is the one that screams…. DGB to me. They need play making WRs and need some size and speed outside. If that is true, then I do not see Seattle making a trade up of 15 or so picks….

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          KC definitely needs WR help, but if his previous drafts are any indication, Andy Reid likes his WRs on the smaller, quicker side. Think DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin types. I think they’d be most interested in Parker in R1, or Agholor, Dorsett or Smith in R2. Word is that PHI intends on taking Agholor at 25 (or trading back into the top of R2 then taking him).

          To me NO seems the most obvious spot for DGB – to replace (as much as possible) what they lost in Graham. MIN and SF also seem likely takers.

          Sadly, I think it’s too expensive for SEA to move up far enough to have a realistic shot at DGB.

  42. Steele1324 says:

    After more thought, I think Devin Funchess needs to be put back on the list of possibilities.

    I have been back and forth on him, but he is the kind of big target we are talking about. He is your future Kelvin Benjamin. He offers the catch radius/jump/red zone/matchup nightmare. Good big hands. All of the same kinds of plays we would expect DGB to make, if not as smooth as DGB, but with none of the off field problems either. Much more polished and ready than Waller. Funchess has the potential to be more physically imposing than either DGB or Waller.

    Had issues with his speed, but he posted a 4.5 in his pro day. So he is more like a move tight end. Is that such a bad thing?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryBOWI0eNbk

    If DGB is off the board, why not Funchess, who should be available without trading up?

    A triple towers attack of Graham+ DGB/Funchess+Matthews? How would you stop that?

  43. Madmark says:

    The draft is a lot like march madness and picking the right teams. It isn’t easy especially when the teams themselves aren’t sure if their player will be at the spot they like. So in my opinion which is what the draft is all about I feel I can contribute by posting my mock and some reasons for why I thinking this way. Some may see the same, Some may hate it completely, and some might like a few options but not all of it. Regardless its simply more information to process when you come up with your own mock. So when you read my mock tell me what like and dislike. On the dislikes tell me who you change. I’ve been living in a big mans world for 35 years . Believe me I can take a difference of opinion on a mock draft without even blinking an eye.
    We talk about a lot of the Receiver lately. I’m just one of those guys that doesn’t like DGB but that’s me. It’s my opinion that Seattle was looking at Dorsett all this time and they would be willing to trade up for him. I think after Miami pro day it was clear that he would move into the back part of the 1st round. Could you imagine Dronk, Edlemen, and Dorsett which wouldn’t be to much different than a Graham, Baldwin, Willson(inline), and Dorsett. Who have you seen come out of college with big play ability to carry a 24.2 yard average. Who can tell if Seattle does the unthinkable which they are capable of doing they could use a draft pick next year if this is the guy they want. They are not immune to go and reach for who they like. I doubt seriously this is likely and I mean likely.
    So here’s my scenario this week. Seattle will their OL and DL early because its what other teams would do. Imagine Seattle doing the convenient draft that no one would expect and why not. If WR are flying off the shelf early that means better OL and DL prospects will be on the board.
    31 Jimmy Graham
    63 Ali Marpet C Holbart: Why not. Cable says he can make any lineman better well here a great prospect to prove it.
    95 Marcus Hardison 3-tech Arizona St.: Been looking at 3-tech for a few years now and after searching so long I think I can fairly see one when it appears.
    112 Daryl Williams LG Oklahoma: I like this guy in the guard spot and I just can’t shake the feeling that he’s suppose to be a Seahawk but not at the ROT spot but its nice that I could use him their in a pinch if I had to. I know rob I get a Carpenter and I’m alright if I get the uninjured one that should have been playing LG from the start besides he’s 4th not a 1st round pick this time.
    130 Tyler Davidson 1-tech Fresno St.: Williams isn’t back, Mebane and McDaniel have 1 year. This is the big middle man who is quite athletically gift for a big man.
    134 Sequen Golson CB Ole Miss: This is the First and only player I haven’t changed in all my drafts.
    167 Mario Alford WR/PR/KR West Virginia: To me he’s poor man version of a Dorsett but he could start right away as return specialist with blazing speed had good production playing opposite of Kevin White.
    170 Jamon Brown OL Louisville: Tackle/Guard it would be Cables pick and where he like to plug him in. At this point I’m bringing in talent for depth and coaching for a year.
    181 Shaquille Riddick DE/OLB West Virginia: They did it once but this time he’s not a Nu. 1.
    209 Alana Fua OLB/SS B.Y.U.: This is another guy that hasn’t change in my draft.
    214Thomas Rawl RB Central Michigan:
    248 Rob Crisp or any Offensive Lineman. There areat least 400 players out there that I don’t know about but I’m sure it should be another OL. you pick it.

    • purpleneer says:

      I can’t get behind this at all. Top 4 picks all linemen and 4 OL total? Alford late as the only receiver? The Hawks have too much room to make a difference at WR to wait that long and there is enough to support the idea of getting OL after WR, especially with a positional run.There is also little to gain by going with much volume on OL; numbers like that aren’t necessary, even if you give up on the developmental guys already around. There have been enough losses in the secondary to say a 4th OL should be well behind a 2nd DB, especially with preferences limiting the choices.
      As to specific players, a 2nd round pick is the opposite of how to prove development skills and it’s hard understand consistent, strong support for a player while repeatedly getting his name that wrong.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        I would support this type of drafting if it gave the Seahawks an offensive line that would play together for the next 4 years. We have had no continuity on the offensive line, and we all know that putting the same players together over a season is key to offensive line performance. Your picks are well spread out over the entire draft, so I like them.

        Defensively I expect them to make a high pick for 3 tech. So that doesn’t come as a surprise. Might be second round, might be third or fourth, just have to see who is available.

        I love , love , love the flyer on smurf Mario Alford. Just about anyone would be an upgrade at kick returns, and he could spell Baldwin.

  44. Steele1324 says:

    In looking for more tall target options, I was intrigued by Rory “Busta” Anderson is a hybrid/move TE with vertical speed. 6-5 244.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQj1k13IJKE

    UDFA.

  45. bigDhawk says:

    Isaac Blakeney – 6-6, 230ish, ran a 4.62 at his Duke pro day, same as Kelvin Benjamin. Him, Waller…any tall body except DGB. For thise concerned the Waller/Blakeney types will take time to develop, DGB will take just as long, maybe longer because he has mental hurdles to overcome in addition to the the physical learning curve common to all rookies.

    • Rob Staton says:

      DGB much more of a natural WR talent though. He can have an early impact. There’s a reason why he gets a first round grade and Blakeney/Waller are later round or UDFA types.

  46. Zorn is King says:

    With this new info, it seems trams will be scrambling to put together their aerial attack, and Ariel defense, which is fine as Seattle continues to hone its against the grain defense and run game.
    This also makes it seem unlikely that much more will be accomplished this off season than a) improving the red zone passing game with Graham, and 2) bolstering the O line.

    Next year though, with a similar draft stock, it’ll be fun to see of seattle trades up for a legit #1 receiver.

    Any thoughts on who that could be in 2016?

  47. fish jump says:

    dgb cant jump and will be project to start with
    im lookin at cris conely and tre mcbride…both way better check the numbers

    • Rob Staton says:

      Vertical jumps:

      Amari Cooper: 33 inches
      Dorial Green-Beckham: 33.5 inches

      The two players you mentioned were both way better at the combine. The combine.