Author: Kip Earlywine (Page 12 of 13)

Believe it or not, this guy isn't a kicker

Posted by Kip Earlywine

In high school geography (or middle school, if you grew up outside the U.S.), you probably learned about “rain shadows.”  A rain shadow refers to a situation where elevated land like a mountain range blocks incoming moisture to a stretch of land beyond it.  Eastern Washington/Oregon, as well as Nevada, Idaho, and Utah are examples of this phenomenon.  Well, after the threat of a lockout caused a lot of talented underclassmen to declare early in 2010, we felt the “rain shadow” effect in 2011, especially in the later rounds.  Last year, several players I had previewed as options at #60 were still on the board in the 4th, 5th, and 6th rounds.  This year, of all the players I mentioned as possibilities at #57, a big fat zero were still on the board at the start of today.

So obviously, my expectations were tempered.  Here is a quick soundbite/impression for each pick.

Continue reading

Three years from now, the Seahawks could be the Ravens of the NFC

Posted by Kip Earlywine

Eighteen months ago, around the time when Tim Ruskell stepped down from his GM duties here, Rob repeatedly emphasized a certain talking point.  That thought being, what undermined Tim Ruskell’s efforts here in Seattle was a lack of an overall plan.  Ruskell had an “ok” system for evaluating college talent and was a major player in free agency every year.  I’m not a Tim Ruskell apologist, in fact, I was calling for his head half a year before it became popular, but Tim Ruskell was hardly a “Bavasian” dumbass.  Without Tim Ruskell, Seattle is probably still without a Superbowl berth.  Generally, I thought Tim Ruskell accomplished his goals every offseason, and was mostly undermined by a draft strategy that while intelligent, had the downside of targeting the type of “safe, low upside” players who almost never become playmakers.  (In five years of drafting, only one Ruskell draftee made the pro-bowl:  Lofa Tatupu.)

But after seeing the last two drafts by John Schneider and company, I think I get what Rob was talking about.  In a much thinner draft crop than last year with far worse draft ammunition, Seattle only had two picks that were in the area of the draft where finding a starter is considered likely, and they spent both of those picks on the offensive line.  And lets not forget, in the last calendar year, this team has also spent a very high pick on a franchise left tackle, signed not one but two high profile O-line coaches, traded for a former 1st round running back with a pro-bowl appearance, traded for Leon Washington, and traded for Stacey Andrews, who was once a franchise tagged right tackle.

Its abundantly clear that Pete Carroll wants a power running game and he wants it as soon as possible.  This reflects his (now uncommon) philosophy of building a run-first team.

Continue reading

So easy even a caveman can do it

Posted by Kip Earlywine

Before anyone over-reacts to how the Seahawks draft has gone so far, lets remember two things:

(1)  Seattle picked near the end of each round this year and only had 1 pick in rounds 3-4 at the start of this thing.  If you whipped out the NFL draft chart and added up the total points we started with, we’d probably be bottom five this year in terms of total draft stock.  As such, we needed luck on our side if we wanted another draft that pundits would fawn over.

(2)  Those lucky breaks didn’t happen.  Holy hell has the draft board not fallen our way this year.  Cameron Jordan going right in front of us at #24.  Rodney Hudson was taken two picks before ours at #55.  Between our newly acquired mid-3rd rounder and our early 4th, four DTs have left the board:  Casey, Nevis, Ellis, and Fua.  Even Ryan Mallett was taken right in front of us at #74, although its pretty unlikely Seattle would have taken Mallett at #75 anyway.

Other than possibly Mark Ingram, an obvious pick didn’t exist at #25.  There was no obvious value pick at #57 and I absolutely think Seattle did the right thing moving down to pick up an extra mid-4th.  Pretty much every offensive and defensive lineman they would have considered at #57 was still there at #75.  An obvious move but a great one nonetheless.  Seattle got lemons this year, and is making lemonade as best they can.

Continue reading

Surprising, disappointing, but ultimately sensible

Posted by Kip Earlywine

Wow.  I just don’t know what to say.  After waiting what felt like 5 minutes for Goodell to read the Seahawks card after they handed it in and hearing the result, I sat in stunned silence for about a minute, and then I told my brother and father, who I was watching the draft with, “it could be worse.”  I started to wonder when was the last time I was so unpleasantly surprised by a Seahawks first round pick.  I thought back to Lawrence Jackson, but even then, Jackson was a fringe first round prospect and not considered as much of a reach.  Plus, Rob Rang had predicted Seattle would take Jackson on the eve of the draft, so it wasn’t totally out of the blue.  (More after the jump).

Continue reading

^ My official guess for Seattle's first pick.

Posted by Kip Earlywine

If you haven’t seen it yet, be sure to check out Rob’s final mock draft write-up as well as his recap of the most likely options Seattle could consider at #25 and later in the draft.

On the eve of the draft, like Rob did earlier today, I’d like to get some thoughts out there about a few players I think will be or should be highly considered in days one and two of the draft.  You can see the rest after the jump.

Continue reading

Tom Cable kind of looks like a mountain man version of Goldfinger

Posted by Kip Earlywine

Unlike last year when I found an investigative piece on Alex Gibbs and broke it down for the Seahawks in the 2010 draft, there really isn’t that much information out there about Tom Cable’s offensive line evaluation philosophy.  Further, I really can’t say with 100% certainty that offensive linemen acquired by Oakland where players of Cable’s liking, or moreso that of obsessive compulsive owner Al Davis.  Cable is a reputed disciple of sorts to Alex Gibbs, so some of the things Gibbs mentions in the article linked above may also apply to Cable.*   To get a better idea of the kind of players he could be looking at, I wanted to see if there are any commonalities in some of the players who played under Cable in Oakland.  I’m sure that in Seattle at least, the front office will value Cable’s opinion, and supposedly, the offensive line will be one of the major points of interest for our franchise this draft and offseason.

*I can tell you right now though, without even finishing this article, that size is not one of those commonalities.  Cable likes bigger lineman and that’s well known.

Let me get started by pointing out that by all accounts I could find, Oakland hasn’t had a great offensive line in Cable’s time with the team, not even last year when the Raiders sported a top ten offense.  I don’t think that is a blow against Tom Cable’s reputation to evaluate talent though, because Oakland didn’t really get serious about adding to the offensive line until just last season.  Cable joined the Raiders in 2007, and for those three drafts before 2010 the Raiders had only drafted one offensive lineman: Mario Henderson at the very end of the 3rd round in 2007.  People thought Tim Ruskell ignored the offensive line, but he was far more vigilant in that area than Al Davis was during Cable’s tenure.

Some notable players who played for Cable in Oakland:  Khalif Barnes, Robert Gallery, Samson Satele, Jared Veldheer, Bruce Campbell, Langston Walker, Cooper Carlisle, Mario Henderson and Daniel Loper.  That’s not an exhaustive list, but it covers most if not all of the lineman who played for Cable in 2010 and includes lineman acquired by Oakland during Cable’s tenure there.

Khalif Barnes is a former Washington Husky.  I remember watching him many years ago and remember hearing a lot of praise for him in the press, and while I appreciated his effort and quality, I remember thinking he was just okay and not all that great.  I was surprised to see the Jaguars select him in the 1st round, and bitterly disappointed to later hear statistical analysis that rated him among the worst left tackles in the NFL a few years ago.  Barnes was signed by Oakland two years back.  He’s suited up for 22 games since then, starting in 5.  He has played both tackle and guard.  He’s 6’5″, 325 lbs- prototypical size for a tackle in any offense.  He is still with the Raiders to my knowledge.

Robert Gallery is a former epic bust (short arms) at left tackle who was drafted 2nd overall.  He’s since moved to guard, where his arms have been less of an issue.  Cable was not present when the Raiders drafted Gallery, but I bring him up because Cable deserves credit for diagnosing Gallery correctly and turning him from a terrible tackle into a pretty good guard.  Gallery is 6’7″, 325 lbs…. extremely tall for a guard.

Samson Satele was drafted by the Miami Dolphins with the 60th overall pick in 2007- Cable’s first year with the team as offensive line coach (Cable became head coach in 2008).  Satele started all 16 games as a rookie and made the all rookie team.  By the sound of it, you’d think Satele was a promising player, and yet the Dolphins traded Satele just two years after drafting him for a 6th rounder and a swapping 4th rounders.  Cable was head coach when the deal happened and probably had a hand in that trade.  In 4 years, Satele has an impressive 59 starts out of 64 possible.  He’s currently a free agent.  Satele was briefly benched for Veldheer at center for just 1 game before getting his job back for the rest of the year.  Satele is 6’3″, 300 lbs.

Jared Veldheer was a behemoth tackle prospect from a division II school.  Some of you might remember him as he was a popular prospect among Seahawks fans.  I was never a big fan of his, because his height was way too much for an Alex Gibbs tackle, much less a guard, and he had short arms which foretold a very awkward future in the NFL.  Based on height and arms, you could say he was a similar prospect to Robert Gallery.  Veldheer played quite a bit of left tackle last year as a rookie, and reviews I read for him said he was “ok” but would need to move to right tackle or inside long term.  In an eyebrow raising move, Cable benched Satele at center in favor of Veldheer.  That move lasted only 1 game, probably because Cable realized just how insane the idea of a center as tall as Veldheer is.  Veldheer is 6’8″, 315 lbs.

Bruce Campbell was one of my favorite offensive line prospects from last year, and had the pick been mine to make, I would have rushed to the podium for him at #60.  He has some issues to work out, and his health risk was high, but purely in terms of measurables, he was at least arguably the best prospect in the whole draft.  No other offensive lineman, perhaps no other player period, dominated the 2010 NFL combine the way Campbell did.  It was impressive enough that many believed (including myself) that Al Davis could make Campbell a top 10 pick.  Well, they did draft him, in the 4th round, and from what I’ve read about Campbell’s 2010 season, he has a very bright future ahead of him, but at right guard instead of left tackle.  Campbell is 6’6″, 315 lbs.

Langston Walker is an astonishingly massive tackle who was drafted by Oakland in 2002, then later left after signing a $25 million contract with the Bills, then returned after the Bills waived Walker two years later, apparently for contract reasons.  Walker played fairly well for Buffalo at right tackle, but Buffalo believed they could find better value elsewhere.  A free agent, Oakland snatched Walker up on a 1 year deal in 2009 and signed him to a contract extension in 2010.  Reports about his 2nd stint in Oakland have been fairly positive.  Walker is 6’8″, 365 lbs.

Some of you might remember Cooper Carlisle.  Back in 2007, Seattle was known to be in the market for a guard like Kris Dielman, and Carlisle, a veteran free agent guard out of Denver, was seen as a solid backup plan.  Though Carlisle was in contact with Seahawks fans and seemed more than happy to come here, Tim Ruskell never extended the olive branch.  Which is just as well, because Carlisle signed with Oakland not long after Cable had arrived there, and Carlisle basically became late-career Chris Gray 2.0:  a guy that almost never missed a start, but consistency played at a fringe NFL level and made a living getting pushed into the backfield.  Carlisle is currently a free agent and may have played his last NFL snap.  Carlisle is 6’5″, 295 lbs.

Mario Henderson weighed an unbelievable 375 lbs. as a freshman… in high school!  He began his football career the next year.  Henderson has since slimmed down considerably, to 300, which is very light for a man of his build.  Henderson was the aforementioned only offensive line draft choice given to Tom Cable in Oakland before 2010.  Henderson basically sat out his rookie season, but in the 3 years since, he’s had 28 starts, mostly at tackle, which isn’t bad for a mid round pick.  Last month, Henderson did his Raider thing and was busted for carrying a concealed firearm.  Henderson is 6’8″, 300 lbs.

Daniel Loper was drafted as a tackle by the Titans in the 5th round, and somehow managed to stick around for the full 4 years of his rookie contract without ever making a single start.  He was eventually signed by the Raiders in 2010, Cable’s last season with the team.  Loper started only 4 games at guard for the Raiders, but from what I’ve read, he appears to have a future with them.  Loper is 6’6″, 320 lbs.

Tom Cable had one year in the NFL before Oakland, coaching the Falcons’ offensive line in 2006.  The Falcon’s drafted one lineman that year, Quinn Ojinnaka in the 5th round.  Ojinnaka is 6’5″, 295 lbs.

Summary:

Having looked over this list of players, and assuming for the sake of argument that Tom Cable played at least a small role in acquiring or developing each one of them, there is one feature that really stands out:  height.  With the exception of Satele, every lineman on this list is at least 6’5″, and there are a very high number of lineman with listed heights of 6’7″ and 6’8″.  Another thing that stood out to me is how lightweight some of those players were.  The taller players are more naturally disposed to have higher weight, so whenever you see a guy listed at 6’8″, 300 lbs. like Mario Henderson, its a pretty safe bet that the guy doesn’t look like a butterball.  Langston Walker, who is the same height and plays the same position, weighs 65 lbs. more than Henderson does.  6’6″ is usually considered fringe height in the NFL, especially by Alex Gibbs.  If you are taller than that, its no longer a positive because it effects your versatility since guards and centers need to be short enough for the quarterback to see over.   And yet 6 of these 10 players measure 6’6″ or above.

Low weight is another common feature.  With the exception of Walker, who was signed on a 1 year deal as a free agent when Cable was there and had previous ties to Al Davis, the heaviest lineman on this list is 325 lbs, which is close to prototypical weight for a player who’s 6’5″ and above.  300 lbs. is often considered a minimum weight for most evaluators when it comes to being an NFL lineman, and yet 4 of the 10 players on this list weigh 300 lbs or less, which is even more amazing considering how tall these players are.

When Alex Gibbs was briefly running the show here, it was expected that he’d favor Max Unger over Chris Spencer since Unger had the look of a pure zone blocking center.  But as it turns out, Gibbs was true to his word about never playing a center over 6’3″ (Unger is 6’5″, Spencer is 6’3″).  Gibbs endorsed Spencer so emphatically that I assumed it was a smoke screen.  But as it turned out, Spencer was really his favorite at center and he started there all year long, having a very solid season.  Since then, Seattle has shown nothing but apathy towards retaining free agent Chris Spencer and at this rate I doubt he’ll be back with the team.  Why would they do that?  Well, even though I’m not personally a fan of this idea, the only logical explanation is that they really like Max Unger and think he’s the future at center.  And looking at this list of players, its very easy to see why.  Unger is 6’5″, and the history of 6’5″ centers is both short and bleak.  But that’s not a deterrent for Cable, who last year briefly started a center 3 inches taller than that.  Unger is also a light 305 lbs for his height, and perhaps more than any other player on the entire Seahawks roster, he fits Cable’s profile of tall but skinny.

Though I personally believe Spencer to be a pretty good center and Unger to be (in limited looks) a pretty bad one who gets pushed back way too much, I think it would be a massive upset at this point if Unger isn’t the team’s starting center from day one next season.

Possible 2011 draft targets?

Tackles:

Anthony Castonzo.  Castonzo is generally considered the 2nd best tackle prospect in the entire draft after Tyron Smith, and probably won’t reach the #25 pick.  But if he does, regardless about how Rob or I feel about the guy (I have no opinion), he will be viewed as a value pick if the Seahawks take him #25.  The Seahawks have named offensive line as a major priority so taking a tackle at #25 is certainly in play whether any of us like it or not.  Castonzo fits Cable’s size preference perfectly.  He’s 6’7″, 313 lbs.

Gabe Carimi. Carimi is more of a road grader type and Rob hasn’t made it much of a secret that he has huge reservations about this guy.  Still, Seattle is hoping to upgrade the running game and needs a right tackle, and Wisconsin has a very good track record with NFL offensive lineman, and strictly along those criteria, you can expect Seattle to be a big fan of his.  Oh and guess what?  He’s 6’7″, 314.  If you’re not a fan of Carimi, it might be best to prepare yourself a little bit.

Derrick Sherrod. If Seattle takes a tackle with its first pick, Sherrod gets my vote.  He’s more capable of playing the left side in a pinch than the two guys above and is a really solid all-around prospect.  He’s 6’6″, 311 lbs.

Nate Solder. I am not the biggest fan of Nate Solder (I wouldn’t touch him with a 10 foot pole), but I bet you Tom Cable is.  Every time I saw Solder play he looked completely, embarrassingly hopeless in pass protection but was a steamroller in the running game- a much more extreme version of Gabe Carimi.  If Solder is there at #25 and a high profile quarterback is not, I would almost guarantee the Seahawks select him.  Solder is 6’8″, 307 lbs.

Joseph Barksdale. Barksdale has long been a favorite of mine.  Barksdale’s listed height and weight (6’5″, 325 lbs.) is comparable to that of Khalif Barnes, Daniel Loper, and Robert Gallery.  Barksdale previously fit the mold of the tall-skinny lineman in 2009, weighing in right around 300 lbs. before adding a ton of weight last year.  I don’t think Seattle will draft Barksdale though, because as good as he is, he’s more of a finesse player who’s strength is technique and pass protection.  Everything I’ve seen so far leads me to believe Seattle will pursue road-grader types.  I expect Barksdale to go in round 3 or 4.

Guard/Tackle hybrids:

Lee Ziemba. We already know Seattle is interested in this guy.  He fits the parameters too.  6’6″, 317 lbs.  Mid rounder.

Derek Hall. 6’5″, 307.  Played for an outstanding Stanford line.  Late rounder.

Derek Newton. Newton is tall (6’5″), skinny-ish (314) , and has short arms (33″), something Cable is forgiving of.  He’s also a very good athlete.  Late rounder.

There are quite a few more players I could list in this category, but they are likely to be undrafted.

Guards:

Mike Pouncey. 6’5″, 303.  A spinning, car leaping slam dunk if he’s there at #25 (I doubt it).  Top 15-20 pick.

Clint Boling. A highly regarded 2nd round guard who’s been known to interest the Raiders among other teams.  6’5″, 310 lbs.  Second rounder.

Marcus Cannon. Cannon has been scratched off Seattle’s board, but its not because of his profile.  He was recently diagnosed with cancer, and though it is believed to be non-life threating, it will require chemotherapy and several months of rehabilitation.  This could and probably will knock Cannon down every team’s boards substantially, and don’t be surprised if the Seahawks change their minds in the final rounds should Cannon still be there.  He could make sense as a late round flier and turn into a huge bargain if he recovers.  6’6″, 348 lbs.  Draft stock unknown.

Orlando Franklin. Franklin looks just “ok” to me, and I wouldn’t feel that great about taking him until the 4th or 5th round.  But still, he’s experienced and can probably eat up a lot of starts in the NFL.  6’6″, 319 lbs.  Round 2-4 prospect.

Zach Hurd. 6’7″, 316 lbs.  Experienced and decorated starter with solid athleticism.  Late rounder.

Centers:

Kristofer O’Dowd. O’Dowd played for Pete Carroll at USC and has received a lot of fanfare from draftniks last year.  He had a horrible senior bowl though, and is probably a mid to late rounder at this stage.  6’4″, 304 lbs.

I don’t think Seattle will draft a center before the late rounds, if at all.  I suspect they have high hopes, misguided or not, for Max Unger and its also possible that the team re-signs Chris Spencer or pursues free agent center Sam Satele.  O’Dowd is the only center with a decent shot of getting drafted by Seattle in my view, unless you think of Mike Pouncey as a center.

Probably the riskiest deserving first round pick possible

Posted by Kip Earlywine

Can you believe the draft begins this Thursday?  There isn’t much time left, so I figured now would be a good time to talk about which positions are the safest bets in the first round.  Here is a chart, though a couple years old, that tracks the success rate by position both by being a long term starter and also by becoming a star player.  It covers data from 1997 to 2008.

Excluding kickers (heh), the safest positions for finding a long term starter are center (100%), guard (100%), safety (91%), linebacker (83%), defensive tackle (83%), defensive end (79%) and tackle (73%).

The worst positions for finding at least a long term starter are quarterback (44%), wide receiver (49%), tight end (50%), cornerback (56%), and running back (57%).

Finding a franchise quarterback is the single most difficult and important task for an NFL front office.  Even though a 44% rate is the worst among every position, that 44% rate far exceeds the rate of any round thereafter.

Considering this, you would expect quarterback to finish very low in terms of finding stars, but just the opposite:  25% of this group go on to become franchise quarterbacks.  Or to look at it another way, for every 8 first round quarterbacks that start long term, 5 are star players.  That’s the highest rate among successful starters at any position.

So what are the best positions when considering both starter potential and the odds of becoming a star?  Guard, safety, linebacker top the list, with defensive end being an honorable mention.

The worst?  Tight end and cornerback stand out quite a bit.  Corner is tied for 3rd worst for percentage of star players and is 4th worst for overall ability to produce a starter.  What’s even more alarming about the corner statistic is how many successful corners come out of the top half of the first round.  As Mel Kiper recently cited, 21 of the last 24 corners taken in the top half of the first round have been at least somewhat successful.  That’s amazing, and it really paints a grim picture for corners who are taken later in the first.

I think that jives with this year’s draft as well.  Patrick Peterson is a top 10 lock and about as close to can’t miss as it gets.  He’s this year’s Joe Haden or Darrelle Revis.  Prince Amukamara?  He’s pretty much bombed drills at the combine and sorely lacks some of the most basic athletic qualities to play the position at the NFL level.  Maybe he’s still drafted as a corner, but if he is, it will be later in the first and it would be a very risky proposition to keep him at corner.  Then you have Jimmy Smith, who has all the physical talent to be a top 10 pick but has a rap-sheet and work-ethic reminiscent of infamous flame-out Maurice Clarett.  Considering the innate risk of the cornerback position coupled with that, I would nominate Smith as the riskiest first round prospect- that is unless you consider Andy Dalton or Christian Ponder worthy 1st round guys.  (I don’t).

So its with this in consideration that I have very mixed feelings about Seattle drafting Jimmy Smith.  If Seattle selects Smith 25th overall, though I wouldn’t pull the trigger myself, I would support their decision and I wouldn’t hate the pick.  Finding good starting corners is almost as hard as finding good starting quarterbacks, and in later rounds it gets even harder.  Seattle badly needs quality at the corner position and putting off addressing the issue will have consequences.  Smith has the base of talent to be just like those highly successful corners taken earlier, its just an issue of being motivated and staying on the straight and narrow.  If anyone can do that, Pete Carroll can.

On the other hand, if Smith busts especially for off the field reasons, its going to look very obvious in retrospect won’t it?  Smith has two felonies in his past, displayed (to my eye) a regular habit of cruising by in games, and didn’t work out for at least two weeks before the combine, presumably because he didn’t care about being his best.  I don’t care too much about him lying in interviews, the other stuff is what concerns me more because of the behavior patterns it indicates.  I don’t mind rooting for degenerates like Randy Moss or Brandon Marshall, because at least they bring it on Sundays and compete Monday through Friday like champions.  With Smith, I’m not so much worried about him getting arrested with enough guns for a Mexican standoff in his pickup truck or getting stabbed by his wife, as much as I am worried about him just not caring enough to reach his potential.

If Mike Pouncey is there at #25, (I highly doubt it), then he would be the best pick in my view.  Not just because we desperately need help at guard, and not just because he’s the twin brother of a highly successful NFL interior lineman, but because guard (usually a position addressed where we are picking) is the safest pick in the first round and also one of the best for finding a star player.

Similarly evaluating risk/reward for Locker/Kaepernick is probably another post in itself.  For now I’d say that I’d endorse either at #25, though with Kaepernick admittedly I’d cringe a little bit after thinking of him as a late 2nd rounder for so long.

If nothing else, I'd like Seattle's next quarterback to make skipping fist pumps and invisible championship belts

Posted by Kip Earlywine

We don’t spend a lot of time talking about other NFL franchises here, but today I’d like to talk a little about John Schneider’s roots as a GM.  Seemingly every time Mr. Schneider talks draft, he makes a reference to his time in Green Bay and the roster creation system he learned there under Ted Thompson.  Even off the camera, our source has told us that Seattle won’t be trading up to draft a quarterback “unless Aaron Rodgers re-enters the draft.”  Its not hard to figure out the original source of that quote.

When the Packers selected Aaron Rodgers, they were in a very similar situation.  Brett Favre was the exact same age (within a month) that Matthew Hasselbeck is right now, and the Packers were fresh off a playoff appearance.  They picked 24th. Hasselbeck is a free agent who may have played his final snap here, and Favre is a future HoF who still had gas in the tank, but simply in terms of being “in the zone” for a new quarterback, both teams compared well.

Rob Staton and Brandon Adams from 17power have long expressed a belief that none of the “big four” quarterbacks will escape the top 16 picks.  Then again, Aaron Rodgers was considered a top 10 lock, and he became one of the more surprising prospects to fall in recent memory.  If one of those “big four” quarterbacks reaches the 25th pick somehow, we could see history repeat itself.

Here is a video from NFL.com about the Packer’s draft strategy.

In my opinion, John Schneider was hired by Seattle for two primary reasons: his chemistry in interviews with Pete Carroll and his background with a proven and highly successful NFL front office.  I suspect reason #1 was the bigger part of the decision, but its reason #2 that will reap the rewards for this franchise in the long haul.  Since John Schneider frequently talks about bringing the Packers philosophy here to Seattle, I found the video linked above to be pretty interesting.

“19 of 22 Superbowl starters were either drafted by the Packers or undrafted free agents signed by the Packers.”

Building through the draft is a cliche uttered by just about every fan and front office alike, but Green Bay is one of the very best in the business at living by this mantra.  In fairness, that statistic is somewhat inflated by a high number of injuries forcing depth players into starting roles, since this wasn’t opening day after all.  It was the final game of the season when teams tend to be the least healthy.  However you look at it, the bottom line is that Green Bay found success by using a highly disciplined and organized approach to the draft.  A lot of the things we hear about the Packers in the video are things you could say about every front office, which to me points out the value of going the extra mile.

“They have an all-inclusive process… they want people with strong opinions… they want scouts who are evaluators, not just information gatherers… evaluators comes first, and one man makes the decision at the end of the day.”

For all I know, these same seemingly bland features could be true of every NFL front office.  However, there was one part of this quote that really caught my ear; the part about wanting evaluators not just information gatherers.  Quite often I read scouting reports that rattle off a list of components for a player while missing the point completely- what specific team and what system would this player be best served playing for?  What do Steve Young, Brett Favre, Jake Plummer, and Michael Vick all have in common?  They were talented quarterbacks who didn’t reach their potential until they landed on a second team that was a better fit for their skills.

A good scouting report should include these kind of details.  Its not enough to ask yourself if a player has a bright future or not.  Does he have a bright future for you?  We can already confirm that John Schneider uses this method when scouting.  In the latest example, our source mentioned to us that the front office loves Stephen Paea, but isn’t going to draft him.  It seems silly to not draft a player you really like right?  Well not if he’s an awkward fit for the defense and wouldn’t reach that potential you like so much.  Paea is in my view a pure 4-3 one tech, very similar to Brandon Mebane.  Unfortunately, that just isn’t a position that exists in the LEO defense, so like Mebane, Paea’s immense talent would go to waste if we drafted him at #25.

This seems like a contrast with Tim Ruskell’s regime, where he had a bit more of a grab-bag approach.  He simply took players he liked, without considering chemistry or scheme.  That’s how we ended up with guys like Brian Russell undermining our secondary, and picks like Deon Butler that were very hard to make sense of.  Butler was a very good college player, and in some ways was a 2nd rounder on paper (outstanding character, hands, production, route running and sub- 4.4 speed).  That’s why Tim Ruskell paid quite a bit to move up to get him, in Ruskell’s eyes Butler was probably a worthy 2nd rounder pick who fell into the 3rd.  But what Ruskell didn’t consider was that Butler’s very small size would undermine his game as both a slot receiver and a deep threat, especially for a team that lacked a #1 wide-receiver.   That’s why Butler lasted as long as he did, he was a great college receiver who sadly just didn’t have a niche in the NFL.

Tim Ruskell took a guy like Aaron Curry 4th overall because of outstanding athleticism, character, and work-ethic, but didn’t consider the needs of the roster or how a player like Curry wouldn’t come even close to filling the pass rushing shadow left by a departed Julian Peterson.  Lawrence Jackson and Kelly Jennings were the same thing, players who passed the criteria but would never be vital components of a defense or fit into a grand scheme of things.

Not every pick John Schneider made last year followed his own rules.  Golden Tate, much like Deon Butler, is a talented guy that probably doesn’t have a role in an NFL offense, unless the team gets very creative.  Last year they didn’t use Tate to his strengths (his running back type qualities) and instead had him run post and fade routes deep, with predictably bad results.  With the exception of Tate though, just about every pick Seattle made last year was a good fit, even a player like EJ Wilson who failed to stick but was a fit for the 5 technique.  I completely expect this trend to continue in this years draft, and its why I’ve long suspected privately that Seattle probably wouldn’t pursue Ryan Mallett but would be seriously interested in Jake Locker or Colin Kaepernick (or Christian Ponder if the arm had checked out, which apparently it didn’t).

“…seventeen days there together, all the scouts are in the room, and they look at about three games on every single player (emphasis his) that any scout in that room has rated draft-able and some of their top free agents… it gives each scout a chance to look at his grades and compare it to what prospects from other sections of the country look like, and that helps them adjust their grades when they go to their final evaluation in the Spring.  I think they are one of the few teams that does it for that amount of time.”

Again, this is probably something that I’m guessing many other front offices do as well.  The only real difference here is the impressive amount of due diligence and time spent with this process.  Charley Casserly states his belief that this is an unusually high amount of time and resources spent reviewing prospects.  Scouting is well known to be a flawed and subjective “science,” so spending that extra time could pay dividends by ironing out some creases in the evaluation process.  We don’t know for a fact that Seattle uses this method, but the talk about Kaepernick gaining “unanimous approval” would hint at such a process.  And for what its worth, Schneider’s regime probably has one of the highest work ethics in the NFL, if judged from the number of roster moves they’ve made and how many trade avenues they sought over the last year.

“…remain [humble] with leadership, Ted Thompson does a great job with that.  He operates under the radar because he doesn’t have a big ego, but the rest of the league respects him because of his ability to evaluate players.”

Without watching John Schneider work the war room, there really isn’t anyway of knowing if he’s an ego-maniac or a humble listener who values the opinions of others.  John Schneider brought Ted Thompson’s system to Seattle, and we can only hope that he shares Thompson’s traits as well.  The key to making a great decision is by considering as many opinions and as much information as possible.  Its what made Thompson one of the best GMs in the NFL, and hopefully John Schneider will follow that example, if he isn’t already.

Little kid Brett Favre wore #10 and played for the Hawks. I rest my case.

Posted by Kip Earlywine

The other day I was reading SB nation’s Seahawks blog Fieldgulls, and a certain article caught my eye, site-author Danny Kelly’s interview with veteran NFL scout Dave Razzano, who’s not currently active but has worked in the NFL as far back as the 1980s.  I’ll get this out of the way and mention that you might not agree with everything Mr. Razzano says, including his obvious man-crush on Nate Davis, his dismissive words for Ryan Mallett and his opinion that Russell Okung isn’t very athletic and is better served at right tackle.  But sometimes even a person you disagree with has the capability of providing unique and interesting insights from time to time.  Here is what Razzano had to say about how he looks at Jake Locker, known to be a high profile target for the Seahawks should he reach #25:

Jake Locker, to me, is a Brett Favre clone and the same things people say about Locker they said about Favre coming out of S Mississippi. Poor accuracy, can’t read defenses etc. Not shocked when I checked out favre’s total college stats vs Locker and they were identical Favre in college….55 td 35 int 53.2% completion. Locker…53 td 35 int 53.6 completion percentage. This is why you can’t put emphasis on the stat sheet. Most of the stats is the team you are on and the system. Joe Montana did not have overly impressive stats coming out of Notre Dame. When you studied him closely he made plays when team needed them most..Had “winner” written all over him, just like Locker does today.

I wasn’t even 10 years old when Favre played his final college snap, and I barely watched college football.  When I did, I sure as hell wasn’t watching Southern Mississippi games, and as such I can provide zero insight into how a young Jake Locker would compare to a young Brett Favre.  However, like anyone not living in a cave the last 20 years, I know plenty about Brett Favre, NFL quarterback.  And considering that, I’m surprised I didn’t make this connection on my own, since, you know, Brett Favre is one of the most famous and over-exposed NFL players in the history of Earth.

Brett Favre is 6’2″, 222 lbs.  Locker is 6’2.5″, 231 lbs.  Locker raised concerns among some for scoring only a 20 on the wonderlic test.  Brett Favre scored a 22.  Both were the star attractions of their college teams with very little supporting talent.  Both are exceptionally mobile quarterbacks at their best on the move (I’ve read Favre ran a 4.60 forty coming out of college), and both have strong right arms with similar mechanics.  And while Locker could very well be drafted 10th or 12th, if he gets past Minnesota, he’ll likely slip to the late 1st or early 2nd round, the place where most analysts believe he “should” be selected.  Brett Favre himself was picked near the very beginning of round 2 (#33 overall).  Though Favre was famous for not missing games, he took a beating and constantly played hurt.  So did Locker at Washington.  Favre sat his first season in the league and didn’t become a starter until his 2nd year.  Similarly, Locker is a guy you probably would wait a year before pressing into action.  And then of course you have the incredible statistical similarities Razzano mentions.  I don’t put a ton of stock into college stats, but that is a remarkably close comparison.

Already, we’ve got a pretty stunning list of similarities between the two, but the biggest similarity of them all is the mentality both players share.  Locker doesn’t slide.  He lowers the shoulder and powers through.  Though Sarkisian reigned in Locker somewhat in 2009 and especially in 2010 by specifically coaching him to throw the ball away more, you could always tell that Locker’s preference was to force passes into tight windows, completely trusting his incredible arm.  As it turns out, the “wilder” version of Jake Locker seen in 2009 was a lot better than the “safer” version we saw in 2010.  My initial diagnosis of Locker was that he’d go to a tightly controlled environment and continue his progress at being a safer quarterback, very similar to when Mike Shanahan salvaged Jake Plummer by beating those gunslinger habits out of him.  But I’m now beginning to wonder if playing it safe with Locker does his talent injustice.  Brett Favre is one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, and he’s also the NFL’s all time interception leader.  Perhaps like Favre, Locker could loosen up his game somewhat at the expense of suffering more interceptions, with a tradeoff in yardage and touchdowns that makes up for it and then some.

I guess its worth wondering what type of approach Seattle would take to Locker.  The connection Carroll shares with Steve Sarkisian is impossible to ignore, and judging by the highly structured offense the team played Charlie Whitehurst in during week 17, it would suggest a similar “simplify and limit mistakes” approach could be in play for a young, learning quarterback.  Darrell Bevell’s resume reads to me like that of a mousy “yes-man” offensive coordinator, and though he answers to Pete Carroll, make no mistake, he’ll be the one drawing up the plays and building this offense.  Given Bevell’s experience and success with Brett Favre in Minnesota, its possible that Locker could be given the same leeway to make plays as Favre was afforded.

Obviously, Brett Favre represents an absolute best case scenario for Jake Locker, but if Locker becomes a Seahawk, the comparison is a lot of fun to think about.  And of course, if the Redskins or Vikings feel this way about Locker, then you can probably forget about him lasting to #25, even if they don’t select him 10th or 12th.  If Locker reaches #24, you better believe the Saints will be fielding some interesting calls, particularly Washington who would have no other choice but to offer future picks.  Why was it that Tampa Bay dealt a late round pick just to move up a mere two spots for Josh Freeman, knowing that the team in front of them wasn’t a serious threat?  Because they were wise enough to know how obvious of a landing spot they were, and it was very possible a team behind them could leap up and screw them out of a future franchise quarterback.  So for almost no cost at all, Tampa eliminated that possibility, in what was probably the single most intelligent trade of that entire draft.  If Locker is there at #23, Seattle should take a page from Tampa’s draft playbook and make a move.

The quarterback situation Seattle faces entering this draft is eerily similar to the one they faced in 1991, fresh off of parting ways with Seattle’s other great quarterback, Dave Krieg.  Seattle needed a new quarterback, and was willing to spend a 1st round pick on the position.  This isn’t a comparison I’d personally make, but a lot of people have compared Ryan Mallett to another 6’7″ quarterback who went in the mid-1st round that year:  Dan McGwire.  Then coach Chuck Knox, as well as the majority of the scouting department, furiously protested the selection of McGwire and had their hearts set on a different, more mobile quarterback.  But Ken Behring had his heart set on Mark McGwire’s little brother, and the rest is history.  That other quarterback Knox and company wanted so badly?  Brett Favre.

Edit 4/24:  Razzano is interviewed my Michael Silver, its worth a read.  Like the Seahawks, Razzano is a huge fan of Colin Kaepernick but likes Jake Locker even more.

The highlights haven't even started yet and I'm already entertained

Posted by Kip Earlywine

Highlights:

Strengths:

• Highly mobile with excellent acceleration and top speed
• Good running instincts
• Excellent pocket awareness
• Evasive both inside the pocket and outside it
• Gaudy career total statistics
• Accuracy took a big step forward in 2010 (65%)
• Low Interception totals
• Lightning fast arm speed (throws 95 mph and was drafted as a pitcher)
• Showed some capability of checking more than one read
• Mechanics improved as the season went on
• Very nice zip on passes short, middle and deep
• Great leadership, intangibles, coach-ability, character, hard-worker
• Ideal “wholesome” face of the franchise just like Jake Locker
• Some big time individual performances against quality competition
• Tons of college level experience
• Playmaker with speed that rivals or even exceeds Newton and Locker
• Remarkably durable in college (just one injury: ankle in ’08)
• Very high ceiling

Weaknesses:

• Worrisome “hitch” in his throwing motion, though in some games it wasn’t there (!)
• Sometimes struggles with touch on short throws
• Played in a “Pistol” offense, not much under-center experience
• Only checks 2nd read as a last resort, panics and takes off too much and too early
• Won’t get to run for 1000 yards a year in the pros
• Weak overall competition (WAC conference)
• Skinny Frame, needs to add some bulk… I worry about durability at the next level
• Comically bad ball security (holds the ball almost like “shake weights” when running)
• Runs with high center of gravity
• Needs to learn a lot; not likely to contribute immediately

Impressions:

Its not surprising to me our front office has a glimmer in the eye for quarterback Colin Kaepernick.  Kaepernick reminds me a lot of emerging phenom Josh Freeman, just in a skinnier body.  Both are guys who build their game off of running the ball to open up the pass, and throw well on the move.  The thing that makes Freeman a special talent is his sometimes ridiculous ability to sense and avoid pressure in the pocket, and though Kaepernick isn’t playing against the same caliber of opponents, that same trait is there, and it will serve him well in the NFL.  Pete Carroll saw Freeman work his magic against the Seahawks last season.  I wouldn’t doubt if he had called up John Schneider right after that game and said “I want a quarterback like that.”  Then again, who wouldn’t?

Colin Kaepernick can be a quarterback like that.  But it would probably take a least a couple years for him to reach that level.  He needs to learn the pro-style offense, and he needs to be more disciplined on making reads, running the ball less, staying calm under pressure and holding the ball properly when he does run.  You could say a lot of those same things about Jake Locker, except Locker doesn’t need to add weight and looks closer to being ready in my opinion. So in a way, you could say that Kaepernick is somewhat of a poor-man’s Jake Locker.  I’d be a little surprised if Kaepernick leaves the board before Locker does.

I recently read on Seahawks.net that “Seattle Seahawks” is an anagram for “Weak-ass athletes.”  I decided to take a look at “Colin Kaepernick” and see what anagrams it produced, and would you believe it, one of the results was “Inane Locker pick.”  Anagrams are such jerks.