Will the Seahawks trade up from #63?

March 30th, 2015 | Written by Rob Staton

Will John Schneider and Pete Carroll be aggressive to target an impact player in round two?

Yesterday I started writing the first draft of a two-round mock. It’ll be on the blog some time this week, with a seven-round Seahawks projection to follow.

How good are the options at #63? Well, it depends. There are one or two nice options that we’ve talked about. Ty Sambrailo would be a good fit moving inside to guard or even center. He’s mobile with good footwork, has the kind of size to replace James Carpenter and he’s well suited to the ZBS. Tyler Lockett has the production, grit, kick return skills and ability to consistently get open that should appeal.

What if neither player is available? It’s a topic we haven’t really talked about.

When I spoke to Tony Pauline a couple of weeks ago he said Sambrailo would be good value in the late second. In a non-direct way he inferred there’s a chance he won’t be there at #63. While many other projections have Sambrailo available in the third or even fourth round, Pauline had him as a late first rounder before a substandard off-season. He doesn’t see a drop into the third.

Lockett also has enough appeal to be gone by #63. Unlike Sambrailo his stock is trending upwards. He had a terrific Senior Bowl and matched it with a good combine. With all the records he broke at Kansas State, the bloodlines, the character. With an expected rush on receivers in round two he could be long gone by Seattle’s pick.

In the mock I started to put together yesterday both were off the board. The alternatives weren’t great and the value just wasn’t there. Sure, there were options. Some of them risky. We’ll get into those when I publish the mock. It does raise the question of a move up the board.

I don’t think we should expect any major, bold moves. The value in the middle rounds is still very good, particularly at Seattle’s positions of need. They can add to the interior offensive line, receiver and possibly corner and the D-line. They have some holes to fill too — especially at guard and center. You’re not going to give away picks to go chasing one player. The Seahawks made their big move when they traded Jimmy Graham.

If they’re going to consider moving up it’s probably going to be a small jump to target a specific player. It could even be a Sambrailo or Lockett. It could be one of the other receivers. Yes it’s a rich class, but if you can get an impact player to finally round off the passing game — would you make a deal? While the Seahawks are never going to be a pass happy offense, there’s going to come a time when Marshawn Lynch is no longer there and greater responsibility will be on the teams $100m quarterback. Russell Wilson has never had a bevy of upper echelon targets. He’s been given a group of plucky overachievers.

With Jermaine Kearse a free agent in 2016 and no certainty over the future of Paul Richardson, adding another receiver he can grow with over the next 4-6 years could be just as vital as finding a starting center or guard.

What receivers could you go up for? Devin Smith, Dorial Green-Beckham, Phillip Dorsett, Nelson Agholor, Tyler Lockett. It really depends what you’re looking to add to the offense.

This is where the offensive line depth in this draft becomes a big bonus. You can find a center in the middle rounds — whether it’s Ali Marpet, B.J. Finney, Hronnis Grasu, Andy Gallik or a convert like Mitch Morse or Terry Poole. There are others too. Ditto at guard. You can fill these holes with a third and fourth round pick in this draft. The possibility of adding Chris Myers (as discussed here) or another veteran center also takes some of the pressure off. A rookie could still win the job as we saw with Justin Britt going head-to-head with Eric Winston last year. At least you have the option of a proven commodity like Myers and won’t feel you have to force things in the draft.

So what kind of compensation would you be willing to forfeit?

With eleven total picks and six between rounds 3-5, you can afford to lose one of the fourth rounders. You’ve got an early selection in that round from New Orleans, your own pick at the back end and then a compensatory selection that can’t be dealt. If you negotiate with teams about moving up 6-12 spots they’ll want the early fourth rounder.

In the 2014 draft Philadelphia traded from #54 to #42 with Tennessee for the price of a late fourth round pick. Funnily enough this was to target a receiver (Jordan Matthews). It’s unclear whether Seattle can get that type of value for the price of a fourth rounder — jumping twelve spots is a bit of a gift. Yet the options in that #50-55 range could be a lot more appealing than the options at #63.

With the draft trade chart fairly prehistoric these days, the Seahawks could point to a recent precedent for a move like this. And with the perceived value available in the middle rounds this year — a team like Buffalo at #50, Philly at #52 and Carolina at #57 could be a target area. All three teams are likely to consider adding to their interior offensive line in the draft. Acquiring an extra fourth rounder could be intriguing. It’s probably why the Seahawks wouldn’t deal their late third round pick — allowing them to make a trade like this and still ‘jump the queue’ so to speak.

It’d create a situation where essentially you gave up the #31 pick and Max Unger for Jimmy Graham and the opportunity to draft a possible impact player in round two. It’s not a bad deal overall, especially if you adequately replace Unger with a cheaper longer term solution (albeit with a possible shorter term veteran fix). You still get to pick twice in the fourth. A move like this could go some way to making the offense in Seattle almost as scary as the historically good defense.

188 Responses to “Will the Seahawks trade up from #63?”

  1. CC says:

    Rob, who would you like to trade up for? One of the better O line guys or one of the higher rated WR/returners? As much as i like the idea of Tyler Lockett, someone like Kenny Bell in the 4th could likely be just as effective. While the O line draft is deep, there does seem to be a lot of good lineman that will be available rounds 4-6. Maybe if one of the better tackles starts to slip, you trade up for them.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I wouldn’t want to trade up in the second for an O-liner unless one of the better options falls. For me if you’re talking about a 12-spot jump maximum you’re looking at the receivers listed in the piece. The it’s down to what you feel you need or who you like. Do you want the productive downfield threat (Devin Smith) a spark plug in open space and a guy who gets open (Dorsett) a troubled player with the potential to be a #1 game changer (DGB) or a high character, technically gifted production machine who returns kicks (Lockett)? Those are probably the options. And then you focus on the O-line in rounds 3-4.

      • CC says:

        Thanks Rob!

        WR who tilts the field is one I could see a trade up for – or if there was DE pass rusher who fit the scheme.

      • rowdy says:

        I would also put agholor in that list

        • Steele1324 says:

          Rowdy, I don’t see Agholor as being a player who tilts the field. Polished, productive, yes, but he and many other WRs at the top of this draft are slightly overrated, in my opinion.

          • rowdy says:

            I agree but of the receivers mentioned dgb is the only one with the potential to tilt the field at the next level. Dorsett, smith and lockett have great abilities but agholor is the most well rounded receiver of the bunch with the least flaws to his game. DGB if he clears the interviews would be the only one I would trade up for personal and I’m not sure I would do that. Other then him I think agholor would be the more productive wr on this team.

          • Ben2 says:

            Agree Steele-no upside. You want upside with your draft picks….

      • Carl says:

        I would move up for Devin Smith, I think he is probably gone by 45 though, and I don’t think we will move up that far.

    • mattk says:

      Jake Fisher might has worked himself into the first round conversation, but if he falls into the 2nd round I’d keep an eye on him. He’d be a plug and play starter at guard and a great insurance pick at left tackle heading into always Okung’s contract year.

      At receiver, I would only trade up for a player who gives Seattle a special attirubute they currently lack or cannot find with the 2nd round pick. To me there’s only two who fit that category: DGB and Perriman.

      It’s possible they could fall in love with a Dorsett, Smith, or Agholor, but those are each in a similar mold of each other (and Paul Richardson) and are also similar to guys like McBride and Lockette who will most likely be there at #63 and even into the 3rd round. They would probably end up better being patient and landing whoever falls to them instead of spending draft capital trading up.

      • RealRhino2 says:

        Agree with this. So unlikely, given that it’d have to be a small number of guys in a small window (there at, say, #50, but won’t get to #63) at a small number of positions that would make a difference. Would only do it for DT, DE, OT, WR and CB. Of the WR, I wouldn’t do it for any of the smurfs or PR/KR guys because they seem so fungible. No Dorsett? Okay, Lockett. No Lockett? Okay, Agholor. Or McBride. Or Bell. Or Alford. Only do it for a *potential* star like DGB, maybe a true deep threat (Devin Smith?).

        Of the others, I’ve seen guys like Fisher, Ogbuehi, Byron Jones, and Carl Davis mocked in that range (50-60). Would they be worth it?

        • rowdy says:

          I think Jones or fisher could be but I don’t think they trade down without a major player falling. Now that major player could only be a major player on their board so who knows. I believe Yolo is the only player pc/js have ever traded up for so chances are it doesn’t happen.

  2. Misfit74 says:

    I think this is the year the team finally trades up if the player they want is within range. Trading up specifically for receiver makes the most sense to me.

    In past years the front office was quoted in saying they didn’t think highly of that previous wide receiver class. Maybe this is the class they’re ready to make their move.

  3. MoondustV says:

    I like the idea of trading up, because SEA needs quality over quantity in #1 WR and LEO. O-Line… if Chris Myers signs, only 2 guys are needed(1 starting guy).

    • Steele1324 says:

      Not so sure about that, Moondust. Myers is 33. You don’t want a guy like that holding a roster spot, when you have (or should have) your center for the future ready within a season or less. Myers is not stellar in pass protection, neither is Wisniewski. Don’t want that deficiency in the way, either.

      • MoondustV says:

        Yep, but in fact Dominic Raiola, Center in Detroit, had done pretty well when he was 33… Last year he was already 36 and still played in 1,112 snaps. I don’t like writing old Centers off. And I don’t like the idea of drafting a center in early rds.

        • Greg Haugsven says:

          I agree that Leo, WR, and OL are the three biggest areas of need. You could argue that the order of need would be OL, WR, then Leo but the order it would be best to draft is probably reversed. Good edge rushers are harder to find later in the draft. I still think Hunter is a good option at 63 if he is still there. Then maybe a WR then the fourth round is OL time.

        • Jake says:

          It helps that unlike Wisniewski, Myers was cut – so he would have no impact on 2016 compensatory picks.

      • arias says:

        I think you’re overvaluing the need for centers to be great pass protectors. You don’t want a sieve but not being a standout pass protector is fine so long as you’re an elite run blocker. Run blocking is where centers distinguish themselves. Myers was an elite run blocker last year and was instrumental opening up holes between the tackles for Arian Foster to pile up the yards. He was incredibly consistent too, bringing it nearly every game and you never had to worry about him being injured.

        Centers don’t need to be elite in pass protection which is why so few of them are, even the best. Because they’re rarely going to be matched up against the other team’s best pass rusher and have the assistance of a guard that can help on their blocks in the rare cases they do. They also have built in advantages of being able to get an instant jump at the snap because they’re the ones snapping the ball. So what that Myers is 33? As players age the first thing they lose is their speed, but their strength can be maintained at a high level for years afterwards, and even improved upon than their earlier years. We saw this firsthand from the 34 year old KWill last season when he subbed in from Mebane. He was still able to use his superior strength to leverage a center and guard to contain him on run plays as a nose tackle in spite of no longer having the speed to rush the passer out of the 3 technique.

        Myers is at most just a little behind Unger as a pass protector and it’s not like there’s anyone available that would be a great pass protecting center in free agency or the draft who’d be able to start right away. In a year with championship aspirations, Myers and his elite run blocking capabilities and familiarity with the ZBS could be the final piece to stabilizing offensive line woes plagued by constant injuries and flux to put them over the top.

    • Steve Nelsen says:

      Statistics show that quantity=quality in the long-term. The teams that trade back and have more draft picks are more likely to find starters and pro-bowlers than teams that trade up.

      But, it isn’t purely volume that works for Seattle. The current list of active GMs who have drafted the highest percentage of pro-bowl players has John Schneider ranked #3.

      He knows what works and he isn’t likely to change.

  4. Trevor says:

    Rob I think the only guys I would be willing to move up 10-2 spots for would be Agholor or Dorsett. Both have the potential to be dynamic receivers and are the 2 top kick/ punt returners in the draft. If we got one of those two players I think it would be worth the move up as they could have a significant impact starting day #1

    • Misfit74 says:

      If a guy like DGB, Perriman, Strong, or Coates falls I think a big receiver has to be considered. I also like Lockett, McBride, and Hardy but moving up for those types of guys less likely. I like those guys to varying degrees. Coates’ hands scare me a bit, while Hardy has absolute stick-um hands.

      • Rik says:

        I like the others (and Jake Fisher as mentioned above) but not Coates. He had a really hard time tracking the ball on downfield throws at the combine. Plus the drops.

        • SunPathPaul says:

          After watching Justin Hardy on film for the first time today, I now want to get him over Lockett.

          He has 10″ hands and is a big bigger for the next level. He just seems to make plays.

          And when we draft now we know we have Jimmy Graham to affect coverage. His presence with Lynch and RW will make every other WR better. I think Hardy could be there in R3 for us…

          If Seattle likes Dorsett or Lockett more, they could be easy R2 targets at #63, or with a trade up for Dorsett most likely…

          I feel our first 3 picks…2R, 3R, early 4Th round from the Saints needs to become a WR playmaker…
          Whomever they choose: Lockett, Dorsett, McBride, Conley, Bell, Waller…

          Today I also watched Devin Funchess again. If anyone falls into the late 2nd round, he might be a great target to trade up for. He ran faster at his pro day, and to match Jimmy Graham with Devin Funchess could be a serious problem for other teams.

          I also just love his name…he is a big “chess piece” to create mismatches…and his name is-

          FUN-chess…a fun chess piece along our other weapons. Do we trade up to add a second TALL WR/TE weapon to pair with Jimmy Graham and RW???

  5. bobbyk says:

    I don’t like the idea of trading up one single bit. Personally, I think Shaq Mason is going to be a better guard than Sambrailo. Not saying Sambrailo is bad at all. To the contrary, I think he’s going to be a fine guard. When I watch Mason, I see someone more powerful than any other guard prospects who may be available to the Hawks (who we all know love running the ball). I also see someone who has shown me nothing about him being a bad pass blocker. In fact, I think he looks good at it. Granted, this is Georgia Tech but still I think you can get a good feeling about a guy from limited tape, too.

    I think Mason is going to be available with our Saints pick so the idea of trading our #63 pick AND a pick that could have been used on a Mason… for either Lockett or Sambrailo worries me (especially when I think Mason will be better than Sambrailo in the first place).

    The idea of trading up is fun for discussion, but the thought of trading a 3rd/4th round pick in a draft where this area looks good almost seems like lunacy.

    • bobbyk says:

      Also, if anyone buys Seahawks stuff online, please make sure that if you buy from nfl.com that you come to this site first and then click the nfl.com link on the upper right hand corner of the page. I think Rob gets small kickbacks from each sale where the link is and we are making out like bandits with all of the awesome free content that he provides us. It’s the least we can do as a group who appreciates this blog.

    • DoubleJ says:

      I agree 100%

      I’d maybe make an exception for a truly talented defensive player like a LEO or a prototype press corner who fell into the middle of the 2nd round (don’t even know who those players would be) — but definitely not for WR or O line.

      On O line especially I’d rather have this front office take multiple shots rather than just one — this isn’t an area they have been lights out in the draft, so let’s keep the multiple bullets and have one of their shots here come through…

    • Rob Staton says:

      “for either Lockett or Sambrailo worries me (especially when I think Mason will be better than Sambrailo in the first place)”

      It doesn’t have to be those two players though, Bobby. We’ve looked at that pair as options for #63. When you’re talking about a move up 5-10 spots it brings different options into play.

    • Hawksince77 says:

      Like Bobby, I don’t like the prospect of trading up either. It goes against the core drafting philosophy of the Seahawks. If they don’t like who will be there at 63, they are far more likely to trade down and add picks, not trade them away. As has been stated on this site several times, this draft is rich in the middle rounds and light at the top.

      Besides, there are so few sure things that makes it worth spending the draft capital, even modestly. They are far better off selecting 11 (or more) players they like and evaluating who has the talent, the will, the work ethic to become exceptional.

      Also, I am all aboard the Kenny Bell train (thanks to whoever posted those two film-study links – those were great). Using a 4th or 5th round on players like that is what I expect the Seahawks to do. Bell is just one example. I am certain there are dozens more at various positions that can be had in the middle-to-late rounds, a potential treasure trove of talent, and I don’t see the Seahawks giving up any opportunity to bring those guys into the program.

      Finally, this draft is uber important for the next few years. They need to find the next Sherman/Kam/Wilson (at other positions, likely) in order to preserve their talent base, given the cost that these players are going to cost in coming years (especially Wilson). I would even assert that this draft could/should be more focused on the future and not next year necessarily. Getting Graham was for 2015. This draft class for the following few years. If that is the case, they can’t have too many picks.

      • Rob Staton says:

        “It goes against the core drafting philosophy of the Seahawks”

        I don’t really agree with this. They’ve traded many picks for players and moved up once in the draft to target a specific player in 2013.

        • Hawksince77 says:

          I think there is a big difference between trading picks for proven players and using multiple picks for one unproven player in the draft.

          Trading draft picks for Lynch/Harvin/Graham is simply a different element of risk (although how they could miss on Harvin is beyond me – what with Bevel and Rice on the team. They had to know…)

          Replenishing the roster with young, cheap and potentially excellent players requires perhaps ~3 picks each. The trouble is, you don’t know going into the draft which of the ~3 will translate into a quality starting player, or even a perennial backup.

          If that math is correct, the Seahawks can expect to walk away with 2-4 long-term starters out of this draft. Using multiple picks for one player reduces those odds, and pushes that number closer to 2, where trading down and adding picks trends the odds closer to the 4.

          That’s what I meant by their drafting philosophy.

          • Hawksince77 says:

            BTW, how did that one exception turn out? The trading up, I mean.

            Sure, there are players you might prefer, but unless it’s pure need and few other options (neither case applies to the Seahawks this year) I just don’t see it. Not one player mentioned worth the cost of two picks for reasons many have already stated.

            The one exception may be on defense – CB/Safety/DE – in that there may be a limited number of players in the draft that rate a ‘must have’ by PC/JS, but I don’t know who that might be. I am only acknowledging the possibility, as I don’t see one on offense.

            • arias says:

              They got Tharold Simon for him so I guess it depends on what you think of him as a player. Given that he’s on the team and had 5 regular season starts and plenty of playing time outside of that he’s already way outperformed his draft position and, in my opinion, justified that trade up.

              Of course trading up in the 6th round is a lot different than trading up in the 2nd. The value of the draft capital given up makes it a really different set of circumstances.

              • Hawksince77 says:

                Was a sincere question as to the trading up example as I didn’t know who it was. Getting Simon in the 6th seems well worth it, given the potential. He may be the next Maxwell, who knows.

    • CC says:

      I like Mason too – and he’s played center too. Versatility is something that Cable loves.

  6. Steele1324 says:

    I don’t think they need to move up at all. For Sambrailo, perhaps justifiable, but I think they could get away with someone else without moving up. If you’re looking for OT/OGs, Morse, Gibson, etc. Marpet may be there. The centers should be where they are without trading up, unless Grasu’s stock improves, but you can still get Gallik, Finney, Morse, etc.

    I am completely against trading up JUST FOR LOCKETT!!!! A pretty good slot receiver who isn’t that special and not unique at all, with questionable hands? No, wouldn’t reach for him. Or, for that matter, Dorsett, who is fast (when healthy) but not physical. Devin Smith hasn’t shown the ability to run great routes. DGB is freakish, but full of baggage, along with short arms.

    I like Agholor, but he doesn’t have much more upside.

    I will strenuously maintain that you can find that quick slot WR playmaker with return skills lower down. McBride, a more polished WR, can do it. Kenny Bell, a tremendous receiver with more toughness and more technique than any other WR, is a great return guy as well. Conley also has it all.

    Drop down lower for your return guy, and you can target Mario Alford, JJ Nelson, Kaelin Clay, Donatella Luckett, Rannell Hall, and that is not even counting the secondary guys and RBs who might be returners. Return ability is not worth a high draft pick, period.

    The only reason to trade up is if they want a surefire pass rusher or cornerback, none of which are available after early rd. 2. And they would have to trade up pretty significantly for that.

    • Steele1324 says:

      I want to say again that Lockett may be good but not unique or special. Comparable to many others in this draft. And his SPARQ measurables are only middle of the pack—he isn’t a faster or quicker athlete than Bell or Conley.

  7. lil'stink says:

    I might be in the minority here but I don’t think there is a receiver worth trading up for. I also wouldn’t take Lockett at #63. We might start throwing the ball more next year, but I still wouldn’t be surprised if Wilson has under 500 throwing attempts next year. And Graham is going to account for a lot of those targets. I just wonder if the value is there to warrant trading up for a WR for this team, especially considering there could be some interesting receivers in the later rounds.

    Guys like Erving or Fisher might be worth a look at trading up if they fall to the 40’s, which probably isn’t very likely. There certainly seem to be some decent interior line prospects in this draft as well, so if we play are cards right we could get 1 or 2 potential impact players without trading up.

    The one position I would consider trading up for would be the d-line, especially someone who could be a LEO or weak side pass rusher. Not sure how many guys could fit the bill in this draft, though. It again comes down to the value the player gives us for what we give up. Is Preston Smith worth trading up for? Will some of the guys expected to go in the first drop to the second?

    Only one month to go. Woohoo!

    • Steele1324 says:

      I am also very concerned about the lack of good edge LEO rushers in this draft, the only certainties are in rd. 1. Eli Harold may be worth moving up for, but I don’t see him getting past the top of rd. 2 Preston Smith is somewhat of a tweener inside/outside closer to the Michael Bennett type, when what I think they need is another Irvin.

      After the guys at the top, there is a huge dropoff, to a long list in the middle rounds of DEs and hybrids who frankly can’t pass rush: Orchard, Hunter, Odiguzuwa. And meh types like Zadarius Smith, Lorenzo Mauldin, Markus Golden. Kikaha is a great pass rusher, but not much else, and who knows if he falls badly.

    • Phil says:

      “We might start throwing the ball more next year, but I still wouldn’t be surprised if Wilson has under 500 throwing attempts next year.”

      As Rob pointed out, the day is coming where this team doesn’t have the Beast. While we might find a guy who can gain as many rushing yards as him, I think we can more than offset his production by giving more weapons to RW. So, An increased reliance on the passing game is coming, IMHO. And, I’d like to see more competition for the WRs on the roster. It doesn’t necessarily mean we trade up, but if our guy is there and it doesn’t cost too much draft capital to move up and get him, do it.

      • Jake says:

        I think the day this team doesn’t have the Beast is the day the carries get split amongst the remaining backs, not the day they start throwing it more. I think they’ve determined its less expensive to run the ball better than anyone else than it is to throw the ball at around league average. One gamebreaking WR seems to be enough for this team to flourish as an offense and it seems to be the way they want the roster built. They had the 90% solution with Tate, but thought Harvin was an upgrade. That flamed out, so in comes Jimmy Graham – who should dominate with all the attention the running game gets.

        Just from a draft capital perspective: The Seahawks have spent a 1st & 7th (Harvin) in 2013, a 2nd (Richardson), 3rd (Harvin), and 4th (Norwood) in 2014 and a 1st (Graham) in 2015 on the receiver position already. The position is CLEARLY a priority, but it has also cost some prime draft picks with not a lot to show for it so far (Graham should change that). I just don’t see the WR position taking up the 1st and 2nd picks in the 2015 draft (not to mention the *4th rounder* it would cost for the move up the draft. At least not with the other needs on the roster.

  8. Ross says:

    So I started this comment by suggesting that a trade up would, in my mind, only be necessary if there’s a specific receiver we want to target, because there’s no way all twelve of the top receivers go in the first two rounds and we find ourselves reaching.

    Then I went back to last year’s drafted on a hunch, and counted twelve receivers gone before the Seahawks took Justin Britt at the bottom of the second. I don’t think that happens two years in a row, simply because there shouldn’t be twelve more teams looking for an impact rookie receiver, but I do think it means we won’t be left with a glut of options if we stay where we are right now.

    That’s assuming that we even want one of the top receivers. It’s a definite need and the value is there in rounds one and two, but Paul Richardson wasn’t taken with our first pick last year to merely be a depth player. With Graham on board, there’s a good argument to be made that we have more pressing areas of need that require an impact player sooner than receiver. Maybe we should be looking at Cameron Erving or Jake Fisher, or even Eli Harold or Preston Smith. What if Todd Gurley starts slipping into the twenties? There should still be some value at receiver later on in the draft, there’s also a pretty good chance we do end up with some good options in round three.

    To be honest, I don’t know if it’s the best idea to miss out on almost two whole rounds of talent, regardless of the position we target. I think having one less fourth round pick is worth it if we can get a legitimate top level talent. Schneider should be able to trade down later anyway.

    • Steele1324 says:

      Ross, you are not the only one who views Graham as a receiver. Sure, he will used like one, but I just do not think he should be considered like a #1 WR. He’s a separate weapon.

      They are still in need of finding their starting X and Z receiver, either in this draft, or already existing on the roster (Matthews, Norwood, McNeil? PRich?). Baldwin will be the Y, unless he is supplanted by a new guy, and who knows what Kearse’s role will be.

      How many WRs should be drafted? Depends on plans for Matthews/Norwood/McNeil/PRich, in my opinion. I think they need at least 2, possibly 3, and sort things out in camp.

      • Rik says:

        I agree – Graham is a very talented TE. We need a good receiver corps so defenses can’t focus all their attention on Graham. That would defeat the purpose of getting him in the first place. No offense to ADB, but he’s not a #1 WR. We need a talented athlete capable of achieving separation, a player who can be counted on to consistently win in one-on-one coverage. I liked what I saw of Matthews in the SB, but why wasn’t he on the field all year? Maybe he’s the #2 and ADB is the starter in the slot.

      • Ross says:

        Graham is difficult to categorize. He has the skill set to be a #1 receiver, but there seems to be a hesitance to label him like that because he doesn’t strictly play that position all the time or physically fit the mold. Regardless of whether he lines up out wide two thirds of the time like he did in New Orleans or stays in line more, we should all agree that he’s far and away the best receiver on this team. His addition should lessen the immediate need to draft a receiver. I think, as a result, a legitimate argument could be made that we should prioritize other positions with our early picks. Specifically, we may be better off moving up for an impact defensive or offensive linemen, or even to steal a first round talent that’s fallen below their range of value.

        It’s quite possible that this is my bias toward my favorite prospects like Gurley and Harold speaking, but nonetheless, I think it’s worth discussing. If Todd Gurley is still available on the second day, for example, or Preston Smith slips into the mid fifties, I’d be quite happy to trade a fourth round pick to go up and get one of them.

      • Misfit74 says:

        This.

        Graham is a hybrid TE/WR and that means we do still need a viable starting Spilt End and Flanker. Landing at least one of those this draft is critical. It’s important to consider that some of the speed/return guys fans are talking about can’t all play those positions are many are probably slot players. This is another reason why a quality receiver with size might be more important.

        • Jake says:

          I totally disagree. I look at Graham as a stud receiver, not an X, a Z, a Y TE, a move TE – none of it because he can be all of those things. By label, Baldwin is a slot receiver, so is Tate really (or undersized X), maybe even Kearse should be considered a slot receiver since he struggles to get off the press. The guys move all over the field though, Sidney Rice is no slot by label (he’s the definition of an X) – but he lined up inside quite often while Baldwin would be out wide. They line up in all of those spots throughout a game, so worrying about labels is pretty pointless at the end of the day. Graham is a game changing receiver no matter where he lines up, he is the 1st round pick, so it would be quite an investment in one position over the past three drafts if they were to target a receiver in round 2.

  9. Rik says:

    I was reading a Cleveland Browns draft site earlier today (I grew up in Ohio and have to keep up with the endless drama of the worst managed team in the NFL), and I was struck by the fact that Browns fans are talking about many of the same players we are. Marpet is consistently mentioned as a 2nd or 3rd round pick, and Sokoli is discussed as a possibility in the 5th or 6th round. Others as well, including many of the receivers we talk about. I’m beginning to think that some of the players that we’re talking about as late 2nd or 3rd round picks simply won’t be on the board for the Seahawks. Though I am sure that PCJS have a long list of sleepers that I’ve never heard of.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      My mock for Seattle last year… had 4 guys that the Browns eventually grabbed in the 2014 draft. I need a job with the Browns. 🙂

  10. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    If I were the Seahawks, I would only trade up for a guy who could play every down. A CB or OL would be the only logical picks to me… and in all honesty, I can only project them moving up in the second, to grab an OL of their choosing. The OL must be special, for the to burn some draft capitol.

    Who would warrant a move up to grab….. OC/OG Ali Marpet, if they have hot intel another team will pick him before they pick. OT Jake Fisher seem like a logical choice in the second round as well, if available. The only other guys I could reasonably see them taking would be C Grasu and C Dismukes. These guys could play and start for 16+ games / 1000+ snaps right out of the gate.

    I, frankly, do not see the value of taking a WR in the second, due to the limited number of snaps or plays they might be involved with…. a guy only playing 10-15 plays a game (200 per season)… simply doesn’t seem like a good value on the draft capitol invested. A WR in 3rd or 4th round is the sweet spot imo.

    • Old but Slow says:

      As I mentioned a few days ago, I am wary of Dismukes because of his small hands (8 7/8 inches), when as a center he is handling the ball every snap.

    • rowdy says:

      Cory williams 6 mil says hi haha. I’m not the biggest fan of his but he has to be the starter right now. I don’t see a rookie beating him out, at least not in the beginning of the season

      • Hawksince77 says:

        Hopefully Simon wins the job.

        • Jake says:

          Yeah, I’m hoping for a quick recovery for Simon. I really hope seeing how its all worked out for Maxwell and practicing as a starter helps motivate him a bit more. I feel totally comfortable with Williams starting, but I think Simon just has more to offer as a playmaker.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        Seattle has never believed in your pay determining playtime… if a rookie is better, he will play.

      • arias says:

        He’s guaranteed a roster spot since the money on his contract was guaranteed but he’s not guaranteed to start if he gets outplayed.

        But I admit the likelihood of him getting outplayed by a rookie picked in the 2nd round is pretty slim.

  11. Cysco says:

    After the Graham trade I found myself wondering, “why the 4th rounder coming back?”

    I mean, I suppose NO could have been so sold on getting the second to the last pick in the first round, but if you’re a rebuilding team like NO, wouldn’t you rather take Seattle’s second rounder instead and hold onto your 4th?

    That’s what makes me wonder if Seattle may have been the one pushing the 1st rounder in negotiations. I think they put more value on their second and mid-round picks than their first and insisted NO take the 1st and make up the difference with another pick.

    If that’s the case, and seattle put that much value on their 2nd, then they must be pretty certain a player they like is going to be there. It also means that they would have been really enamored with getting that additional 4th.

    If the above went through seattle’s mind during negotiations for graham, then I just can’t see them going against that logic and moving back up into the 2nd and relinquishing one of their 4th’s. If that were the case, they might as well have just given NO their second and kept the 1st.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Perhaps Seattle is looking to trade their original 2nd and original 4th… and move up 10 spots…. then grab who they want in the 2nd and retain a pick that was midway through the 4th… out of all the wheeling and dealing, plus a “safety net” at the end of the 4th with the comp pick… BPA.

    • Ross says:

      I don’t see it, to be honest. Right now, we’re picking at the very end of the second and early in the fourth. Say we traded that second rounder for Jimmy Graham and so didn’t receiver a fourth rounder. Instead, we’d have a late first rounder. I believe Schneider was always going to trade down into the second round. That inevitable trade would net us an earlier second rounder than we have now, and a comparable fourth or fifth round pick to the one we got from the Saints. We’d end up in a better situation in terms of positioning than we’re in now.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      I’m confused. Are you suggesting that NO preferred to trade Graham for SEA’s R2 pick instead of trading Graham and their R4 for SEA’s R1 and it was SEA that pushed NO to accept the R1 instead?

      • RealRhino2 says:

        I believe that’s what he’s suggesting. On its face it’s hard to believe that. It would mean Seattle would have traded back from #31 to #63 for just an extra 4th. No team would do that, IMO.

        Right here in this entry we are talking about moving up 10-12 spots in the 2nd round MAYBE for the cost of that same 4th-round pick, so no team is going to be able to move up 32 spots in a higher round for the same price.

  12. bobbyk says:

    The thing that really kills me with respect to the cap is the contract that Sheard signed with New England. They got a steal. I wish there’s someway we could have gotten him to solve our Leo problem. Oh well, it’s not like the Pats haven’t taken their lumps, too. They did lose Revis and that’s going to hurt them… big time.

    • Steele1324 says:

      Unfortunately, the Pats will find a way to reload and restock. Count on a deep threat WR or two. They have Sheard and may add another pass rusher. They might even land a CB like Marcus Peters. I am certain that the Hawks and Pats will fight it out again. I hope JS and PC realize that they had better prepare for that, starting now.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        I see it being Colts / Seahawks in SB 50 right now. Patriots defense has lost a ton of depth and the CB situation is especially alarming form their perspective.

      • Jake says:

        Well, assuming Chancellor, Thomas, and Sherman aren’t all injured going into the game – I think JS feels totally safe with the roster he has against a Patriots team without Revis and Browner. The Seahawks were the better team on Feb. 1, even with a hobbled secondary. Chancellor’s inability to patrol the middle of the field was the biggest problem, but a healthy Chancellor would erase most of those crossing routes. I would welcome any AFC team in the Super Bowl, the Seahawks will enter the game with the more talented roster – so JS has done his job.

  13. CC says:

    Sandmeyer was on the air earlier talking about the possibility of offering next year’s 1 for a chance to move up to way higher in the 2nd round – and that may not be a bad idea. For whatever reason we haven’t picked in the 1st for 3 years in a row – and it sounds like Seattle often believes there aren’t 32 players they believe are first rounders.

    Something to consider.

    • Ross says:

      I’m not sure I understand the situation. So, would we be giving up our low second this year, and our low first next year, for their high second this year? That doesn’t seem like a fair deal to me. Maybe I’m just misunderstanding what you mean. I’d want something else substantial in return in this situation.

      I could see us trading our first next year for their second and maybe their third, and we would keep our second this year.

      • j says:

        First next year for a mid-second and a fourth sounds fair to me.

        Only thing is that would foreclose on other options – if we trade the first now we can’t trade it later.

        We should do ok in the comp picks next year as well – Maxwell (3rd) Carpenter (5th?) maybe OB (7th).

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think that’s unlikely. Trading future first rounders is a tough sell because you never know how high that pick is going to be. Especially when all you’re doing is moving up in the second round.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      JS would have to be a seer to know now that there wouldn’t be 32 R1 prospects or what the draft board will look like next season.

      Just look at WAS to see how trading future R1 picks works out.

  14. FargoHawk says:

    Thoughts on Kenny Bell? He’s built a little but like Richardson but seems to play tougher and he has KR and PR experience. I think he could have good value in the 4th or 5th round.

    • CC says:

      I like Kenny Bell a lot – he has some return ability, caught the ball well – tape looks good, as does his combine numbers. He knows what the NFL is all about – since his father played. If Lockett or Agholor isn’t available at either 63 or 95, Bell would be my next choice for that type of receiver. Grabbing in the 4th seems like a good spot.

      • SunPathPaul says:

        Kenny Bell is a darn good blocker, so it seems he fits right in! I’m starting to like him more and more.

        • CC says:

          For me, he fits into that grit that Seattle likes.

          I think playing for a team where he didn’t get a lot of attention plays into the whole chip on their shoulder thing too.

  15. MoondustV says:

    My draft priority list:
    1.WR SEA still needs reinforcements in starting X and Z players, unless you put Jimmy in outwide or trust Jermaine Curse…
    2.OG Maybe more urgent need, but there’re too many busts in O-Line players drafted in 1st rd.
    3.LEO
    4.C
    5.CB

    Since there’ll be a big drop from rd2 to rd4 in pass rushers, and the depth of CB is poor this year, I only want to spend 4th-5th picks, and I hope SEA can successfully land Chris Myers.

    • Jake says:

      OG – bust? Who? Seattle doesn’t even have a 1st round pick, so it isn’t possible. Offensive line are actually one of the safer early round picks. Even Carpenter wasn’t a bust, he was disappointing as a RT – but he was a solid LG – so the pick wasn’t wasted at least. Early round WR on the other hand… busts galore and there is no fall back position for them, except maybe as a return specialist (Ginn Jr., for example).

      • MoondustV says:

        I never thought that Carpenter is solid. Maybe we have different evaluating methods.

        • Jake says:

          #1 rush offense with a revolving door at C. He’s a mauler, he was effective if not pretty. He may never live up to being a 1st round pick, but 1st round WRs have been busting for years…

  16. David M2 says:

    Rob great write-up,

    V-12, missing you over here buddy. I’m hoping your new charger arrives swiftly and without hardship this week.

    Meanwhile, I’m lobbying for Cliff Avril’s nickname to be ‘The Viper’. I think ‘Black Santa and The Viper’ has a nice ring to it. And one day telling my children stories about the both of them would be totally awesome!

    On a more serious note, Rob do you think if the Hawks may trade up, do you think that they would trade up as high as to the mid 40’s if D. Smith or Dorsett are available?

  17. j says:

    Hope the WR this year goes like TE a couple years ago. SF trades up to steal DGB from under our noses in the second – we grab Waller in the fifth and laugh all the way to the bank. Waller has his flaws but he is better than DGB. Neither one is polished, but Waller has better hands, is bigger, stronger and faster. They both have character concerns. (Think Waller had a suspension for marijuana).

    The main argument is we already have Jimmy Graham – but what’s wrong with having two?

    • Jake says:

      Nothing, but Waller – much like Willson was – is a projection of what he might be. There is no guarantee with any of these guys. That’s why I don’t like the idea of giving up mid-round picks to acquire an earlier 2nd. I would rather draft TWO WRs from this group (McBride, Waller, Montgomery, Bell, Smelter) than ONE from this group (Lockett, DGB, Agholor).

  18. Darnell says:

    I think if needed you could also play with the idea of shipping the 2016 3rd. As they have a 2016 3rd coming as Maxwell comp.

  19. jason says:

    Of the players we were targeting at 31 who do think is likely to drop that we may be able to move up 10-12 spots to grab. Reason I ask I did a fan speak draft and Maxx Williams was available with our 2nd round pick. He was 28th rated player on board. Thoughs?

    • CC says:

      IMO I would guess one of the O line guys. I think there is going to be a few more CBs drafted higher than expected in our copy cat league. Everyone is looking for the next Richard Sherman. Also, a few more of the WRs based on their 40 times may drop a few OL guys.

      • manthony says:

        Yeah ive done all the 7 round boards at fanspeak and a lot of em had maxx going in the later part of the second. I noticed too, that there was a guy who we liked at 31 available at 63 in each of em, sambrilio, jake fisher, jalen collins, agholor,devin smith, even got dj humphries in round 2(!?) using fanspeaks board

  20. Steele1324 says:

    If anything, why shouldn’t the Hawks trade down, not up? If their scouting has uncovered gems in low rounds and UDFA, they won’t have to reach for anything. They may be confident enough to use the draft for best-player-available more than need.

    JSPC has insinuated already that they will “have fun” with this draft. Maybe I’m wrong, but that doesn’t strike me as the sound of guys who are afraid of missing out on anything, needing to go through the trouble of finding willing partners for trades back up.

    • goatweed says:

      Maybe a jump up to take a corner/safety/Leo?

      Doesn’t make sense to jump up for WR/OL cause it seems to be a deep class for those position groups.

      Other teams will likely pick based on availability in the first. Top 3 at each position group would be long gone by 2nd round. Then there would be a run on WR/OL. The Hawks could jump up into mid 2nd to pick a player they rated as a 1st round talent who slipped between availability pick and the scramble pick.

      • Rob Staton says:

        “Doesn’t make sense to jump up for WR/OL cause it seems to be a deep class for those position groups.”

        Just a hunch, but IMO if they move up it’s to target a specific receiver.

        • Jake says:

          This gives me heartburn, Rob. You are generally very plugged into the position need or targeted position groups, so I worry that JS is entering Matt Millen levels of overemphasizing the need for a WR.

          Another receiver? How much draft capital have they already wasted on the position? Now they want to burn a 2nd and 4th for ONE receiver who may or may not pan out. It seems asinine to keep going to the well on early draft picks when their best successes have come from FA (Rice, Miller, BMW, Matthews) and UDFA (Baldwin, Kearse, Lockette). Look at all the draft capital spent at WR and receiving TE since 2013… Its staggering how much has been spent and how little those players have actually contributed.
          2013: 1st, 7th (Harvin)
          2014: 2nd (Richardson, was originally 1st round pick), 3rd (Harvin), 4th (Norwood)
          2015: 1st (Graham), 2nd (*target WR*), 4th (*target WR*).

          * – IF they do use a 4th to move up for a targeted WR.

          • 'bout that action says:

            Just because we have had some bad luck in the past doesn’t mean we should give up all together. it is still a priority as far as needs go.

            • Jake says:

              I’m just suggesting we use the routes that have worked instead of the draft. Besides, I think Matthews is going to be an impact player this year and Baldwin, Kearse, and Norwood are going to continue to improve.

    • UKHawkDavid says:

      Agreed. I could see us trading pick 63 for a 2015 round 3 and a 2016 round 3.

  21. AlaskaHawk says:

    I find it ironic that people say there is no value at the end of the first then turn around and say we should trade up in the second. Those first round picks are valuable. Maybe someday Seattle will quit trading them away.

    • Ross says:

      It’s not that there’s no value, it’s that there’s very little to no change in value from the bottom of the first round to the middle of the second this year, so if you’re sitting at 31 and you don’t need to reach to fill needs, you can gain picks without losing out on talented players by trading down.

      The difference this year, and the reason why you see people advocating a move up in the second, is that we’re completely missing out on the top sixty players in the draft. That is a significant number of prospects to miss out on.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        Oh I get it. And I love, love Graham. I’m just tired of Seahawks not getting a pick in the first round. At least we would get a starter out of it. And even though the picks may be the same quality for the next ten spots , at least they can choose who they want instead of who is available.

        • realrhino2 says:

          It would be more interesting, at least! I’ve just tried to accept it. The part that’s hard for me, though, is some fans acting like a pick at the back end of the 2nd is just as good as a pick at the back end of the 1st. It’s not. The Seahawks obviously felt the difference wasn’t worth passing up Graham, but that’s not the same as saying they felt they were EQUALLY valuable.

          You can’t win by just accumulating “value” at the lower levels.

  22. Jeff M. says:

    The old pick trade value chart is a little out of date, but it’s still worth looking at to get a basic sense of the cost (the teams still seem to follow it at least some of the time despite exceptions).

    Options for moving up per the chart:

    #63 + #95 ~ #50
    #63 + #112 ~ #55
    #63 + #130 ~ #59

    Maybe you get a little higher than that but that’s basically what each pick would give you. To get an idea of the value, here are guys at/just below each pick on NFL Draft Scout:

    #50 – Danielle Hunter, Carl Davis, Laken Tomlinson
    #55 – Byron Jones, Devin Smith
    #59 – Hroniss Grasu
    #63 – Devin Funchess
    #95 – Marcus Hardison, Justin Hardy, Cedric Ogbuehi
    #112 – Dezmin Lewis, Eric Rowe
    #130 – Tyler Kroft, Mitch Morse, Kenny Bell

    So, would we give up a Hardy or Ogbuehi (our late 3rd–I know this isn’t an option Rob mentioned, but wanted to be thorough) to go get Davis or Tomlinson? Seems very unlikely.

    How about giving up Rowe (Saints 4th) to get Jones or Smith? Possible, but it would take the right guy falling in the 2nd round.

    Trading Morse or Bell (our own 4th) to get Grasu? I think if “our guy” is there they would go get him earlier than this (especially if you can just stay at #63 and grab Sambrailo or Marpet).

    So if it happens I think it would have to be with the Saints pick, but it would have to really be a guy they thought was special still on the board past the middle of the 2nd.

    • OZ says:

      Rowe will be a rapid riser on most draft boards. He is getting 2nd round consideration already.

    • SunPathPaul says:

      I would love to see Devin Funchess fall to #63 and we take him. Who better to teach him how to box out and rebound-high point the ball than Jimmy Freaking Graham??

      I looked into it, and I’m excited again because his poor 4.70- 40 at the combine was bested at his pro day.

      If we didn’t have Jimmy Graham I would be less interested, but since we do have JG think about it- Devin is never going to get a top DB covering him with Jimmy on the field. That should aid in Devin Funchess’ production in his first year. He can do the simple things and just focus on making plays…

      If we could ALSO get Justin Hardy with our 3rd round pick, we would be very dangerous!!!

      Imagine defending this on game day:

      1) Russell Wilson and Marshawn Lynch as the running 1-2 punch… (who has the ball?)
      2) Jimmy Graham at 6-7/265/4.56 and Devin Funchess at 6-4/232/4.6
      3) Doug Baldwin 5-10/189/4.48 and Justin Hardy 5’10″/192/4.56
      4) Kevin Norwood 6-2/200/4.48 and Paul Richardson 5-11/186/4.3

      This would be a stacked and powerfully effective WR corp… Throw in Luke Willson and McCoy/Helfet, there are weapons to frustrate the other defense all day long, and twice on Sunday’s!

      Then throw in whomever makes it in the preseason out of our other guys:

      Chris Matthews -6-5/218/4.5, Douglas McNeil 6-3/200/4.46, Jermaine Kearse 6-1/209/4.46,
      Kevin Smith 5-11/214/4.54, and David Gilreath 5-9/170/4.42…

      With this depth, taking 2 WR’s to add spark and value would be my choice…Give me Funchess and Hardy!

  23. j says:

    I actually think we will trade down from 63 to the middle third.

    If there is a trade up it will be from the late rounds into the mid-rounds. Like the Tharold Simon deal.

    I predict we will stockpile those round 4-6 picks. That is where the sweet spot is.

    • j says:

      WR: Waller, Conley, Alford, Diggs, Bell, Hardy, even Mayle would all be in that round 4-6 spot, 3rd at the earliest.
      OL: Morse, Mason, Crisp, Galik, Finney, Garcia
      DL: Clark, Wright, Nunez-Roches, Sokoli, Lott, Chikillo, Trial, Riddick.

      We could walk away with eight of these guys. (3 4th, 2 5th, 3 6th). More if we trade down from 63.

      • j says:

        Plus who we nab in the third.

      • CC says:

        Great list of players there – I really hope some or most of them are available!

      • Steele1324 says:

        I like many of the same names as you, j. Except for Chickallo, who isn’t much of a pass rusher, and Trail, who is an experiment.

        What’s not on your list is CB. CB and Leo—if you are looking for immediate starters—seem to be rd. 1 to high rd. 2 and that’s it. Clark is a possibly rd. 3, the way things are going.

    • Rob Staton says:

      They’ve already stockpiled picks in that range.

      • UKHawkDavid says:

        I agree that we have already stockpiled enough but what about trading down for a 2015 round 3 and a 2016 round 3? Rob, how is the class of 2016 measuring up with 2015?

        • Rob Staton says:

          It looks like a decent class at the top, but it’s too early to consider how that plays into round three. I think in order to gain an extra third rounder you’d have to drop quite considerably.

    • MoondustV says:

      Remember the 11 picks in 2013? Quantity doesn’t necessarily mean quality, especially when teams cut the picked player in training camp.

      • Colin says:

        The 2013 roster was absolutely loaded in terms of depth and quality. The Seahawks will have a bit more flexibility to keep guys this year.

  24. EranUngar says:

    Rob,

    I am not too sure that any of the WRs mentioned are worth trading up for. I think we can get a KR/PR smaller guy later and the more I think about it the more I believe we should be looking for SIZE over SPEED.

    Taking advantage of speed requires accuracy and timing. Timing has not been a strength in this offense. Between the protection issues, RW’s size, the scrambling, holding the ball till a WR is absolutely open etc. I don’t see us making great use of speed and timing. Looking at PRich’s season only strengthens my view on it.

    Then there is the Matthews display in the SB. He doesn’t do much but at 6-5 he can abuse a 5-10 corner in single cover. Until NE shifted BB over him it seemed unstoppable. With Graham drawing the taller DBs, having other large targets to abuse the smaller CBs sounds like a better plan that does not require RW to be on time with his pass. Having a Graham, Baldwin, Matthews and a Conely/Waller on the field together sounds like a perfect size mismatch for us.

    Other then the need for a KR/PR guy I would rather see more size. Baldwin and PRich (when he returns) are enough speed for me.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think we should be looking for special qualities. Unique qualities. That can be a bigger or smaller receiver. There are one or two options in round two that will appeal, big and small.

      • rowdy says:

        Rob, I agree with the special qualities aspect. My question is with agholor, he might not have an elite quality but I think his above average abilities in almost all aspects of the position could be a special quality to go after. Do you think his well rounded abilities could put him on par with someone with one or two elite abilities and average in others in the eyes of pc/js

        • Steele1324 says:

          Rowdy and Rob, it is only worth trading up for special and unique. The only WRs I think fit that description are Kevin White and DeVante Parker, the two clear X/Z WRs in this draft, long gone in rd. 1. I really don’t see anyone else worth reaching for, especially not Lockett, whose slot qualities can be gotten in several others at and below where the Hawks are.Agholor, also a slot, is not worth a reach, in my opinion. Good, but what you see is about what you get. Dorsett would be overwhelmed by big defenders, and he has injury issues.

          This “well rounded/above avg on most/not elite in any one” quality applies not only to Agholor but I think also McBride, who should be available. I think Bell has truly special skills that are worth extra attention, and Conley is a potential #1 WR. Waller’s physicals are special and unique, but only if you develop him for a while. I love Tony Lippett, who, like Bell, is simply a baller, who offers more than it appears, and Lippett is a CB conversion possibility if he doesn’t work out as a WR. But I don’t see why not.

          I think the WRs way down the board into UDFA would be perfectly workable. Smelter could be a high round WR if not for injuries. You could do a lot with Rannell Hall, Isaac Blakeney, Kenny Cook, Greenberry etc. etc.

          So I really don’t see WRs worth the move up. CBs and Leos, perhaps.

          • SunPathPaul says:

            I agree we don’t need to trade up most likely in R2 for a weapon…

            We have kind of discounted this guy cause he ran a 4.70-40 at the combine, but at his pro day it was closer to 4.5…

            I’d like at #63 Devin Funchess to be available, and to take him and have Jimmy Graham tutor him up on the game…imagine both on the field at once- PC’s “Twin Towers”! With Lynch and RW, Baldwin/Norwood and P.Rich- Ouch!

            Then draft another WR later like you mention. Kenny Bell, Chris Conley, Tre McBride in the 4th…

            • AlaskaHawk says:

              Matthews and Graham will be the go to tall receivers next year. Don’t sleep on Matthews, he was rookie of the year in the CFL. Funchess would be okay as a #3 tall guy.

          • bobbyk says:

            Waller is special and unique and we won’t have to trade up for his rights (or perhaps draft right away either). You can’t coach someone to be closer to 7 feet tall than a 6-footer (he’s a shade over 6-6) and to run a 4.46 at almost 240 pounds. Add that to the fact that he caught every catchable ball last year.

            I’m not sure how you can get more special or more unique than Darren Waller in the early/mid part of the draft.

            • arias says:

              I’d love if they took a shot at Waller, but they’d be doing so while recognizing he won’t be able to contribute much this year, if it all, so I’d rather see him taken as the second WR that they stash and develop for the future.

          • Robert says:

            I like Conley’s upside. He is almost 6’3″ with nearly 34″ arms and incredible hops. He ran a 4.35 at the combine despite not appearing that fast on film. But he’ll get there. Average production stats playing across from Amari Cooper on a run heavy Georgia team. He’s a smart, high character guy, who takes on extraordinary projects for the fun of it. He has the upside to run by anyone AND play in the clouds!
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4fbcN54bOQ

    • arias says:

      lol that Matthews “didn’t do much” but stand there and be tall.

      Luke Willson should have just stood there in the red zone and caught passes all season for us all season.

      • Jake says:

        His body control on all of his targets was picture perfect. Even the incomplete pass vs. Browner, he did a great job to compete for a ball despite Browner being in the better position. That is REPEATABLE. He can do that to any CB 6’1 or shorter which is probably about 95% of the CBs in the game. I’m not suggesting he will be a sure-fire pro bowl WR in 2015, but he will be an impact player for the Seahawks – you can count on that.

        • arias says:

          Yeah I think you mistook my sarcasm. In no way was I trying to imply Chris Matthews just ‘stood there’. He demonstrated some outstanding abilities for a big man. Like you mentioned, great body control, ability to create vertical separation and high point the ball, and make contested catches.

          And even though he’s not known for his straight line speed, he also showed the ability to be used on deep routes. I thought he was sensational really. He was also not at all what you’d call ‘raw’. He’s not some rookie that needs lots of polishing to get into game playing form. He’s ready now. The CFL work obviously helped with that. He’s got some things he needs to correct but shouldn’t be a problem with more experience, but he had the polish of a guy who had already been in the league a few years and had developed.

          I’m psyched at his potential.

          If it were just height, then Luke Willson should have been the answer to all our problems last year.

          • Jake says:

            Yeah, I wasn’t trying to call you out or anything, just seemed like the right place to discuss Matthews and his potential impact on the season and maybe the draft.

  25. Old but Slow says:

    If we trade up it should be for a corner like Alex Carter, otherwise lets stay with what we have because the draft has a bunch of talent beyond the first couple of rounds. A good bunch of offensive linemen, some quick returner type wide outs, and maybe someone who can make a good thin crust pizza. What?

    • Steele1324 says:

      It is a shame that there isn’t more available film on Carter. It seems to me that he has the right basic frame but hasn’t done anything special with it, but he will be overdrafted because of his frame.

      • arias says:

        His measurables weren’t THAT bad. Slower 3 cone time than you’d like to see from a cornerback but an elite short shuttle makes up for that. He stacks up in other areas as well so I’m not sure why you’d say teams would overdraft him only based on his frame.

        Teams are going to overdraft players based on their frame, no doubt that’s true. But I’m sure NFL teams have all the tape on Carter they could want to make a sound decision on all the other aspects of his game. He has all the qualities that we like to look for in cornerbacks, playing the press well and he’s good at tracking the ball. His flaws all appear the type that can be overcome. If he’s drafted high, and I think he will be, I think it’s because a team will see those things he did well against high quality competition then imagine the possibilities if he could get his flaws corrected with the frame he’s got.

  26. Trevor says:

    Rob since we are going to get a 3rd round Comp pick for Maxwell next year could we use our 3rd rounder next year to trade up.

    If we packaged our 2nd (63) our 3rd rounder 2016 and our 6th rounder from the Jets how many spots could we move up?

    • Rob Staton says:

      You could probably get into the top third of round two. However, you would lose the opportunity to jump the queue if there’s a cluster of O-liners expected to go in round three. I think you need the third rounder to target an interior guard or center you like.

  27. Wil says:

    I do not think they will need to trade up in the second for Dorsett or Lockett , but perhaps trade up in the 3rd . Having a tall WR and a couple tall TEs to push-back on tall physical DBs and considering Walters was the best PR we could muster on the team last year I woud look to get D or L as a Hester/Austin type WR . CONSIDER our DEFENSE FORCING alot of PUNTS . 7.7 yds avg PR needs to be UPGRADED. You know Pete likes versatility

    • Steele1324 says:

      I think there is too much of a focus on 1. PR/KR and 2. Harvin types.

      The return problem can be solved without reaching or trading up in the draft. There should be lots of returners. I think the Hawks need the X and Z WR situation resolved, not so much the Ys.

      • Jeff M. says:

        Agreed. There’s no reason to trade up for or spend a high pick on a return specialist.

        Hester was only taken in the 2nd because they thought he’d contribute at CB. Even as maybe the greatest returner ever he’s a bust at that spot in the draft. Trindon Holliday was a 6th. Leon Washington was a 4th (and again, expected to do more at RB). Darren Sproles was a 4th (same). Josh Cribbs was a UDFA.

        The only way we would spend a 2nd or 3rd on a returner is if that guy is being drafted for his expected contributions on offense or defense, with the return value simply an added bonus. If you’re just looking to upgrade the return game there will be guys to do that late in the draft or as cheap FA pickups.

      • Misfit74 says:

        Good point!

        It doesn’t have to be WR/RET player early. Teams often draft strict returners later or pick them up as UDFAs. This further solves the issue of smaller returner – type receiver also playing the slot, which is common. That’s where Baldwin plays.

  28. ANIX says:

    I like Darren Waller alot…as a 4th 5th rounder…thoughts!?!

    • Steele1324 says:

      I don’t think Waller gets past rd. 4. The entire NFL is looking for freaks, and he is one. I would not be surprised if someone took him in rd. 3 just to get him.

      Is he the next V-Jax? Possibly, but he needs a lot of work. There are more technical receivers. For the Hawks, they already have Matthews. Do you want another tall freak? How many on the roster?

  29. Steele1324 says:

    Now if the Hawks absolutely must have Grasu or Sambrailo (or DJ Williams), then they might have to trade up to make sure of it. So the question might be whether either is a must have. Both look likely to go around the same spot. Marpet, not sure what he is, or where he will go.

    Is there is big dropoff from Grasu to Gallik/Finney/Morse/Mason?

    • Ross says:

      Cameron Erving is absolutely the best center in the draft. Gallik and Grasu are tied in second place. Personally, I prefer Grasu because he’s pretty much just Max Unger without a beard. I do think there’s a drop off from them to the next tier, but I don’t think it’s huge. It’s the difference between drafting a legitimate day one starter, and drafting a guy you believe will win the pre-season position battle. Russell Okung was the former, our left tackle from the second the draft card was handed in, and Justin Britt was the latter, the guy you want to work out but aren’t completely sold on and so push with a veteran like Eric Winston.

      There are a some guards and even tackles who are worth consideration though. Ali Marpet, for example. Lots of people think he would make a really good center because of his size and athleticism. A guy like Grasu is more of a technician and doesn’t have as much athletic upside, but he should be able to acclimate to the system fairly easily thanks to his experience in a similar one, and so start immediately.

      • Steele1324 says:

        I agree, Ross. I think the Myers visit has to be related to the issue of starting centers in the draft. Namely that after Grasu, there is a question mark. They might be setting up to make do with Myers and Lewis in the shorter term.

        So what are the chances that they would manage to get both Grasu and Sambrailo at the top? Tough one.

        • arias says:

          Really? I think it’s about shoring up the center position so that the guy they do draft to groom to play center can get his feet wet by playing guard before being thrown into having all the center responsibilities as a rookie.

          That’s how Unger developed when he started at guard for all but the last 3 games of his rookie season (and played really well there) before making the switch with 3 games left.

          By shoring up the center position you can have him get acclimated by playing him along with Bailey competing for the starting spot at left guard. If he shows promise in camp you can even start him there and keep Bailey as the jack of all trades versatile backup who can play spot duty. We don’t even know if Bailey can be depended on to start 16 games yet. We do know he can play multiple positions quite competently so if the camp competition is close they could decide to keep him in that role.

          • Jake says:

            Sorry, but Unger was an abject failure as a guard. I love the guy as a person and player and he was a very good center, but his year at guard was scary. It looked like his lack of strength was going to be his undoing at the pro level. Many fans were scared that the 2nd round pick was a complete bust during his rookie year. He was manhandled by just about every DT he faced as a rookie. At center, he immediately assuaged our fears as he returned to his Oregon form.

            • arias says:

              What? You can’t be serious. His run blocking was relatively terrible yes. But in pass protection starting 13 games as the right guard he gave up 14 QB pressures with just one sack. That’s 1.07 pressures a game. For a rookie even that’s outstanding!

              Compare that to Sweezy’s 33 pressures in 16 reg season games this year that included giving up 4 sacks and averaging 2.06 pressures a game. Or Carpenter’s 18 pressures in 13 starts this year, for 1.38 pressures a game.

              If you’re talking about as a pass protector you can call him an abject failure but that makes our two starting guards this past year worse than abject failures since they both played worse pass blocking as our starters this year than Unger did in his rookie year as a guard.

              • Jake says:

                Did you watch the games? He was terrible. He got rag-dolled all over the field. Pass protection statistics for ALL of Russell Wilson’s linemen are going to be TERRIBLE. He is the most pressured quarterback in the NFL, largely because he holds the ball longer than any quarterback in the NFL by a wide margin. Compare that to say… Matt Hasselbeck running the WCO like a boss. Timing and rhythm kept pressure off the QB as much as the offensive line. Beyond all that, who’s lamenting the loss of Carpenter as a great loss? Who’s touting Sweezy as great and a future All-Pro? Sweezy is an excellent run-blocker who basically tries to get in the way of pass-rushers, but he is not lacking in the strength department. Carpenter was a run-blocker first and foremost as well and also strong as a bull. Unger looked like he lacked the strength to develop into anything resembling a starting quality interior offensive lineman during his rookie year. That was the concern, and it wasn’t just me.

                • arias says:

                  I’m not disputing how bad I think Carp or Sweezy are in pass protection, they really are terrible. Sweezy more so than Carp. I had concerns with Unger too primarily being how was he supposed to transition to center considering how poorly he looked as a run blocker. It’s true that Hass was pretty quick with his release and Russ takes the longest to get rid of the ball. So if you don’t think that’s a fair comparison I’ll make another one.

                  Marshal Yanda, considered one of the best guards in the NFL and a multiple time first team All Pro, gave up 16 QB pressures this year so one a game. Kyle Long, Zane Beadles, TJ Lang, all considered among the top guards in the league gave up 15,17,and 17 pressures over 16 games averaging 0.93, 1.06, and 1.06 pressures given a game.

                  Unger averaged 1.07 a game over 13 games at RG.

                  He played as well as a rookie as you would expect top guards with years of experience to play protecting the QB.

                  I think a couple poor performances early in the season might be coloring any conclusions you might have drawn about his pass protection abilities as a guard. He gave up 3 pressures against Arizona and 4 against Chicago when they played early. But he only gave up more than one pressure only once the rest of the way when he gave up 2 against Minnesota. The coaches saw enough to move him to center. If he were that poor a pass protector as you appear to think I can’t see them doing that.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        Keep in mind, Grasu has some injury concerns coming out of college. This might hurt his draft stock and potentially hurt his long term ability to play in the NFL.

  30. Dawgma says:

    I feel like if they trade up, it won’t be for OL or WR, the two deepest position groups in the draft. I still feel like we need to add youth and depth in the interior DL, we need a third pass rusher, and we could use starter quality CBs at nickel and outsidein.

    Looking at those positions, edge rushers are very top-heavy, the interior DL looks pretty sparse, and the list of acceptable CBs is short and most of them will go before we ever pick. There seem to be very few mid to late round options that have the athleticism and measurable the front office seems to look for in late round picks. The Lbs also look like a pretty sad group; I’m not sure there’s a single one with the kind of speed we insist on we’ll have a shot at.

  31. Steele1324 says:

    A couple of Clemson guys worth a look. One is WR Titus Davis. The other is Tavaris Barnes-edge rusher/Leo
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tr1rYIg5F0Y
    Barnes is a real sleeper.

    • Rik says:

      Good tape on Barnes. He seems to have a good motor, runs across and downfield to make plays. He doesn’t look super fast but he’s got some good moves at the line of scrimmage. Good find.

      • OZ says:

        Barnes has very good footwork and hand use. He reminds me of a big Micheal Jackson who used to play for the Hawks and Huskies. It appears he has some coverage skills also. His speed seems adequate with minimal wasted motion. I like the way he plays a lot. A moveable chess piece.

  32. BrianH says:

    Rob, you had Jaelen Strong going at #44 last week to the Browns. I know you mentioned you might be able to get 10-12 spot in the 4th. Would it be giving up a little more (i.e. a 2016 pick) to trade up 5-ish more to get someone like Strong? I only asked because SB Nation did this piece on him: http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/3/31/8261387/2015-nfl-draft-jaelen-strong-scouting-report-breakdown

    I am clearly no expert but the clips showed him making great redzone, sideline and middle of the field catches. Would the Hawks value that kind of player?

  33. Bernardo De Biase says:

    Unless Seahawks see a great value at LEO position, I wouldn’t trade up in the 2nd. In fact, I like trade down 10-15 spots from 63 and trade up 10-15 from 95 is my dream move. Take Marpet and McBride (who Seahawks apparently is interested since they attended William & Mary pro day).

    McBride’s skillset and production on run-heavy system is far more appealing in my opinion than Lockett’s big school pedigree and skillset. Specially for the Seahawks.

    • Steele1324 says:

      Bernardo, wouldn’t mind that scenario at all. I do like McBride, and Kenny Bell, for the some of the same reasons. I think Bell might even bring more than McBride, even more of an attack mentality and fierce blocking. But neither of them are burners. Perhaps Conley is.

      • Jake says:

        I want three of these WRs (McBride, Montgomery, Bell, Waller, Conley, Smelter, Diggs) to come in and compete it out for the roster. I think your suggested trade down could make it possible too, so good suggestion.

  34. David ess says:

    Ty Montgomery is doing a predraft visit with the Hawks. Hell of a returner. Poor WR. Nice mid round pick up if he’s there.

    • Steele1324 says:

      I see no reason to spend a mid-round pick on a great returner who can’t play WR, when you can find WRs who can do it all. Or cheaper low round and UDFA special teamers.

      • David Ess says:

        now when i say mid round i mean 4th or 5th. you get him as a returner and 6th WR. hes explosive and who else you gonna get? he was a PR/KR last year and was the best in the country (statistically)

        • Jake says:

          Bryan Walters says hi… With 11 picks, one of them can be a return specialist with some potential to be a 4th/5th WR or maybe a CB convert with his size.

  35. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    Defensive lineman Antonio Smith has been released by the Raiders. Here is a guy who could come in for very little money and provide a pass rush element to the DL. He was bad at run defense, but actually pretty decent at pass rush. Definitely would be in the 1.5 and under type of deal… worth a shot imo.

    • David ess says:

      Was excited about that as well. But he’s already in talks with Houston to comeback according to rappoport I believe.

  36. RealRhino2 says:

    For fun, ran the draft simulator pretending to be the teams Rob mentioned as possible trade partners in the blog entry (Buffalo, Philly, Carolina) to see who might be available at those spots (per CBS Sports rankings).

    At #50 and #52, these guys were still on the board: Agholor, Abdullah, D. Hunter, C. Davis, Tomlinson, B. Jones, Sambrailo, Grasu, M. Edwards, G. Jarrett, Funchess

    At #57, D. Hunter, Davis and Tomlinson were off the board.

    At #63, Sambraillo, Agholor, Grasu, Edwards, and Jarrett were off the board.

    Just an example of the kinds of guys we are talking about. If this were the draft we’d still have the pick of Abdullah, B. Jones and Funchess at 63, but would have to move up for any of those others.

    • Steele1324 says:

      RealRhino, that is useful. Of all of these names, I think the only ones critical to the Seahawks are Sambrailo and Grasu. B. Jones would be nice. Are they must-haves? That determines whether a trade up is necessary.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

        Byron Jones will be long gone. His combine + pro day inflated his stock into low 1st round now.
        Ameer Abdullah should also be gone by #63. He has too many qualities teams are looking for in a RB. Above average rusher and pass catcher. If Seattle drafted him, I would be stoked, however his fit is… not obvious.
        Funchess proday should work him back towards the top of the second round now, due to lack of quality TEs in draft.

        So, that leaves C Marpet, OT Sambrailo, OG Tomlinson, OG Jackson and OC Grasu as the most likely targets for Seattle.
        Which guy is worth a trade up in the 2nd and which is worth standing pat or potentially over drafting as a 3rd round prospect (similar to Britt in 2014 draft). The guy I keep coming up with due to probable draft position, need and upside… Ali Marpet. (I know that Jackson has been linked to Cable at a Pro-day today)

  37. David ess says:

    Ugh Hate this…Getting so excited for the draft. 31 days and 32 till the Hawks pick haha.

  38. Madmark says:

    Rob you wrote an article a couple months back before the trade of Unger for Graham. In that article you talk about how Tony Pauline mention 2 OL Seattle was showing interest in. Those 2 were Sambrailo and Poole. You also mentioned that Tony Pauline helps Walter football website out. Since the FA and the trade Seattle made I have watch certain players on Walter’s mock draft along with a few other sites to try to get that feel of were some players I mention will go. You see I read there scout report, watch tape if available, and then make my evaluation. In one draft I got the player right but I sure didn’t see him going in the 1st round. That player was Bruce Irving who I mocked for the 3rd round. Moving up there are only 2 players I would do that for and they are Carl Davis DT Iowa and Marcus Petersen CB Washington. These 2 I think will be there in the 50 to 55 Range. Lockett could also be there but I wouldn’t move up for him even thou I think KR/PR is a definite need. When your other article was written we just needed a LG and both those guys mention would do better going inside especially Poole a juco transfer and more like a practice squad guy in need of some coaching. now if I go by walter’s mock:
    Ty Sambrailo 146 was as high as 127
    Terry Poole not even listed at end of the 5th RD
    I guess what I’m saying is if Tony Pauline works with Walter’s why is Sambrailo listed in the middle of the 5th RD? No matter what the answer is I of course have my own Ideas and now that we need a center I know 3 picks are going for OL. Its just that time to restock with players to move forward for the next 3 to 4 years. The line currently has 1-1st, 1-2nd and 1-7th rd draft picks that we took. The rest are UDFA’s or other team cast off. With everything I’ve gibbered about so far I like to see
    Ali Marpet 96 but I just don’t see him there, the perfect block of clay for Cable to mold for center.
    Ty Sambrailo 112 move him inside to guard and his agility would allow him to start but will he be gone
    Terry Poole 170 or 180 definitely a move to guard and some coaching to see what happens.
    We’ll be fine if push come to shove with Okung, Bailey, Lewis, Sweezy, and Britt. Hell I think we already see that line up. What ever happens it Cables time to remake this OL at least for the next 3 years cause I don’t see Lynch leaving till he;s done in 3 years.

  39. […] identity, this is about putting better talent around Wilson (your future +$100m quarterback). We discussed the possibility of a second round trade in more detail here. In my second round mock this week, Dorial Green-Beckham, Tyler Lockett and Sammie Coates were in […]