Marshawn Lynch trade: What have we learnt?

October 5th, 2010 | Written by Rob Staton

Marshawn Lynch brings 'beast mode' to Seattle

The Seahawks acquired Marshawn Lynch via trade today in a deal that will cost a 2011 4th round pick and a conditional 2012 draft choice. So how does this leave the 2012 draft following another big trade? Seattle still possesses it’s own selections in rounds one, two, five and seven. The third round pick was spent on Charlie Whitehurst and the sixth rounder on Kentwan Balmer. In addition, the Seahawks acquired a conditional pick from Baltimore for Josh Wilson which could rise to a fourth round selection. The Lawrence Jackson trade brought in a 6th round choice from Detroit to replace the one spent on Balmer. Seattle also gained a conditional 2011 pick for Seneca Wallace after he was traded to Cleveland in March. The deals involving Rob Sims and Darryl Tapp brought in 2010 draft picks that have already been used. Tyler Polumbus was traded to Seattle for what is believed to be a late round pick in 2012.

A lot to take in then right? It just goes to show how busy the Seahawks have been since Pete Carroll and John Schneider arrived in Seattle. Simply put, the Seahawks may end up with a full quota of picks (rounds 1-7) aside from the third rounder spent on Whitehurst. The worst case scenario would likely mean owning two fifth round choices instead of a 4th and a 5th, depending on the Josh Wilson deal. Seattle may also gain a compensatory pick for losing Nate Burleson in free agency. Taking that into consideration, spending a fourth round pick on a running back that is 24 years old and has been to Pro Bowls could be deemed a risk worth taking. 

But what else have we learnt here? For starters, this is a regime not afraid to make deals. Some trades have worked (moving Tapp for Chris Clemons appears to be a master stroke, Seattle even got a 4th rounder out of the deal) whilst others haven’t (moves for Kevin Vickerson and LenDale White – both since cut). Whilst the front office continue to piece together the team’s identity, I suspect they’ll keep making moves. It’s a pro-active approach. Some teams wouldn’t dream of coughing up draft picks – and Seattle’s value in the 2010 draft late on proves the potential is there to get starting caliber players in the later rounds. However – the Seahawks cannot afford not to be pro-active. Drafts alone will not a great team make and it makes greater sense to invest in younger talent that has stalled rather than invest huge sums of money in ageing veterans during free agency like the previous regime.

The move for Lynch also stresses the importance Pete Carroll and his staff have placed on the running back position. Is this an attempt to find a quality runner without spending the big money in round one? Or is this a sign that perhaps if given the opportunity, they may well consider investing in a stud like Mark Ingram next year?

It’s interesting also that they feel better quality at running back was needed rather than solving other issues within the game plan. Perhaps if Lynch fails to generate a productive ground game, it’ll only stress the Seahawks’ need to stretch the field a little more – either by improving at receiver or by using/signing a quarterback who can get the ball downfield. Whilst ever the offense is relying on short-range passes of no more than 10-15 yards maximum, opposition defenses will only have a short area to cover – making it very difficult to create running room whoever carries the rock.

The Lynch trade could indirectly open up debate as to what the Seahawks need to do next April and what prospects they may target.

5 Responses to “Marshawn Lynch trade: What have we learnt?”

  1. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Kraig Oman, Rob Staton. Rob Staton said: List of remaining Seahawks 2011 draft picks and thoughts on what we learnt from Marshawn Lynch trade: http://seahawksdraftblog.com/?p=369 […]

  2. 1sthill says:

    With the aquisition of Marshawn Lynch I don’t see us using a 1st or 2nd round pick on a RB in next years draft. Like you said, Lynch is a Pro Bowl player and is a work horse that can take 20+ carries a game. Using a 1st or 2nd round pick next year on RB would be a luxury pick. The Panthers proved that may not be the best way of using your resoures; they kind of did that when they draft Jonathan Stewart in the 1st round when they already had DeAnelo Williams whom was drafted in the 1st round two years before selecting Stewart. If Mark Ingram is there for us to select with our 1st rounder then I’m of the opinion that we should trade down; I’m sure we would find a lot of trade partners trying to land Ingram.

    I think pass rushing DE, QB, WR, OL, & 3-technique DT (if Mebane is not re-signed) need to be our focus in the first two rounds of the draft. This should be a great draft to land a CB, but I’m undecided if we really need to target a CB in rounds 1 or 2. Our CB’s are a victim of our lack of a pass rush (at least on the road).

    • Rob says:

      The DE issue is one I’m going to explore in an article tomorrow. Right now, Chris Clemons is second in the NFC for sacks (four in four games). Red Bryant has been a revelation at five technique. Whilst the pass rush has been very good at Qwest and not so good on the road, I do wonder if part of the issue is (again) a lack of offensive production keeping the DE’s fresh.

      Drafting a DE in round one has been very difficult for teams in recent years, with a high bust rate. If Clemons records 10+ sacks this year, you’d have to say that drafting a DE in round one might not be necessary. There aren’t many ideal options – I watched DaQuan Bowers today and I like his potential but not ‘that’ early. Robert Quinn could be a very early pick. Kerrigan is a work horse type. I like Beal. None impressed me as much as Derrick Morgan or JPP last year. As I said, more on this tomorrow.

      I think corner is a need unless they do believe Thurmond is a long term option. Lewis has been one of the biggest plus points the last two weeks and it’ll be interesting to see if he gets more game time. It’s a good year for corner’s and I really like Janoris Jenkins and Patrick Peterson. Right now (IMHO) Seattle’s biggest needs are on offense – QB being the greatest hole to fill. We need a long term solution at QB. We need that investment in one guy who the offense can be built around. It doesn’t need to be a top ten pick… but there needs to be a clearer direction after this season.

  3. Patrick says:

    I agree with you on the topic of DE. Immediately when we read that our pass rush is lacking it seems to make sense to grab a DE, however I have to say Clemons and Bryant have really done their part. I like Clemons a lot and am very proud of how much production he has given. While he’s not perfect, I think if we take a chance on a new LEO it could be from a middle round. It makes me wonder though, could DT be a bigger position of need? Even so, I agree that QB should be our primary focus right now.

    I think the Lynch signing was an incredibly smart move. Although I’ve never been a huge fan of Lynch, I think he is going to help us tremendously. After all, at only 24 he is still young and he is also going to return to the zone blocking scheme he ran so effectively at California. I think this was an excellent move because it could lead to an efficient running game which would help whichever QB we have lined up. Let’s say we drafted Ryan Mallett. The thought of seeing Mallett and Lynch to me just screams toughness. Even if we grabbed Jake Locker or even if Whitehurst proved his part, it still has plenty of potential. We’ve come a long way since Hasselbeck was handing off to Shaun Alexander.

  4. akki says:

    We’re upgrading RB out of our many offensive needs because that’s what’s available. RB is the easiest position for any team to change/replace/add in the midst of a season because the skills translate most across systems. Given Schneider’s upbringing under Thompson, the Seahawks weren’t going to make a star RB acquisition through free agency anyway, so they were likely to use a pick on one next year. This just burns the draft pick for the player earlier. While I don’t think Lynch has demonstrated his 1st round draft value, he sure sounds good for a 4th and change.

    Next year is still QB #1 and DE #2 for me based on what we have now. But that may change by draft time since there are so many players on the last years or their deals. I’m not as worried about CB as I’m a believer in improving DB play. If you have to cover guys 35 yards downfield with a rush that can get to the qb in 4 seconds, and you have to cover guys only 30 yards downfield if you can get to the qb in 3.7 seconds, then finding a way to compact the zones you have to cover will do much more than adding a 1st round CB to the team, IMO.