First round mock draft with trades

Could Phillip Dorsett be a first round target for several teams picking late in the second?

Just for fun.

#1 Tampa Bay Buccaneers — Jameis Winston (QB, Florida State)
A foregone conclusion for some time, Winston will be trusted to get the most out of a potent arsenal of receiving options. The question is — will the Buccs trade back into round one to get an offensive tackle to protect their new quarterback?

#2 TRADE Cleveland Browns — Marcus Mariota (QB, Oregon)
The Browns have been chasing a franchise quarterback for some time. They spent first round picks on Brandon Weeden (2012) and Johnny Manziel (2014). They’re still trying to fill this void. They have the ammunition to move up with two first round picks. The Titans collect the #12 and #19 picks plus a mid-round selection and a conditional 2016 pick based on Mariota’s performance as a rookie.

#3 Jacksonville Jaguars — Amari Cooper (WR, Alabama)
Some teams will grade Cooper as one of the top two prospects in the draft alongside Leonard Williams. He’s a very natural receiver with the technical qualities and grit to have an immediate impact. He offers Blake Bortles a true #1 receiver. The Jags had the sixth best pass rush in the NFL last year. They can manufacture pressure. They need to help their young quarterback.

#4 Oakland Raiders — Leonard Williams (DE, USC)
The Raiders would like Cooper in this projection but he’s off the board. Williams remains. They take him as the best player available with the intention of going receiver in round two. They could even trade back into the first to get their guy.

#5 TRADE Miami Dolphins — Kevin White (WR, West Virginia)
The Dolphins reportedly want to make a splash. They can get a receiver at #14 but they won’t get one of the top two. The Redskins are said to be looking to move down. They luck out and get a deal similar to Sammy Watkins trade a year ago. The Dolphins — in win-now mode — give up their 2016 first rounder to jump above the Jets.

#6 New York Jets — Dante Fowler Jr (DE, Florida)
They would’ve liked a shot at the top two receivers but fall back on Fowler Jr. The defense is pretty set in New York — solid up the middle, talented at corner. They just need an edge rusher. Fowler Jr is the missing piece for a formidable unit.

#7 Chicago Bears — Randy Gregory (DE, Nebraska)
There are definite similarities between Gregory and Aldon Smith. Both were quite green entering the league with major upside potential. Vic Fangio worked wonders with Smith and might see a similar project with Gregory. They need a true 3-4 linebacker.

#8 Atlanta Falcons — Vic Beasley (DE, Clemson)
The Falcons watch the receivers and quarterbacks go early and smile. They know they’ll get a nice defensive option here. Beasley is a dynamo off the edge with elite burst and athleticism. He’s stronger than you’d expect for his size. A pure stud.

#9 New York Giants — Arik Armstead (DE, Oregon)
The Giants love size and length. Armstead can line up inside and out — playing some three-tech and some edge too. He’s a really versatile compliment to the other players on New York’s defensive line.

#10 St. Louis Rams — Brandon Scherff (T, Iowa)
Whether they play him at guard or tackle this makes a lot of sense. The Rams need to make the O-line their priority and could even use their second round pick to make a further addition. Would they even consider moving back into the first for the right player? It’s time for St. Louis to deliver and be a bit more aggressive.

#11 Minnesota Vikings — Trae Waynes (CB, Michigan State)
The Bengals drafted multiple first round corners for Mike Zimmer and the Vikings could use a similar approach. Waynes is a nice fit for the scheme — he’s physical, long and fast.

#12 Tennesee Titans — Bud Dupree (LB, Kentucky)
They traded down to this spot from #2, possibly with the intention of revamping their defense. Dick LeBeau is on board and this is going to be a rebuild based on the Steelers. Dupree is athletic, tough and would be an ideal fit at linebacker in that scheme.

#13 New Orleans — Danny Shelton (DT, Washington)
Some of the over-the-top hype on Shelton has died down. He’s still a solid addition, especially for a team prioritizing defense. The Saints lack a hard-nosed, mobile nose tackle for their 3-4 scheme.

#14 Washington Redskins — Byron Jones (CB, Connecticut)
Jones is an incredible athlete and the tape isn’t bad either. Don’t be shocked if a team falls in love and drafts him in the top-15.

#15 San Francisco 49ers — Devante Parker (WR, Louisville)
They brought in Torrey Smith but need to keep adding players for Colin Kaepernick. They can’t rely on Anquan Boldin forever and Vernon Davis is nearing the end. Parker’s length, consistency and speed will appeal.

#16 Houston Texans — La’el Collins (T, LSU)
They can use him at right tackle or guard. A very versatile, talented lineman who doesn’t always drive people off the line but has enough overall quality and upside to go in the top-20. He looked great at the combine.

#17 San Diego Chargers — Todd Gurley (RB, Georgia)
Somebody has to bite in round one. The Chargers need a playmaker and while Gurley probably starts the year on the PUP list he’s a legit top-10 talent without the knee injury.

#18 Kansas City Chiefs — Breshad Perriman (WR, UCF)
His stock is rising and it looks like he’s going to go in round one. The Chiefs signed Jeremy Maclin but could double-dip to fully solve their problem at receiver.

#19 Tennessee Titans — Marcus Peters (CB, Washington)
Their second pick acquired from the Cleveland Browns. Tennessee has a need at corner and Peters’ physical style, ability to play the ball and penchant for turnovers will appeal to a team that has to face Andrew Luck twice a year.

#20 TRADE Carolina Panthers — D.J. Humphries (T, Florida)
The Panthers move up and swap picks with Philadelphia for the price of a mid-round pick. The Eagles know they can get their guy at #25 and the Panthers want to jump ahead of Cincinnati to get the player best suited in this class to play left tackle.

#21 Cincinnati Bengals — Ereck Flowers (T, Miami)
The Bengals might prefer Flowers to Humphries anyway. He’s extremely underrated. Technique wise he isn’t orthodox with a slightly odd kick-slide but he’s a punishing blocker with great size and loves to drive defenders off the line.

#22 Pittsburgh Steelers — Landon Collins (S, Alabama)
This would be a great pick for the Steelers. Collins is the best safety in a weak class. For that reason he could easily land in the top-15. Troy Polamalu is coming close to the end. Collins has a similar attitude to the game with terrific range.

#23 TRADE Baltimore Ravens — Eli Harold (DE, Virginia)
Harold just seems like a Ravens type of player. Intense, incredibly athletic, great leadership qualities. He could easily be a top-tier pass rusher in a couple of years. The Ravens flip picks with Detroit to get ahead of Arizona, giving up a modest outlay (mid-rounder). The two teams have previous (Haloti Ngata trade) and the Ravens did trade up for Michael Oher in 2009.

#24 Arizona Cardinals — Jalen Collins (CB, LSU)
They need an edge rusher but the Ravens have taken Harold off the board. They could fall back on Shane Ray. However, they also have a need at corner. Collins provides too much value here.

#25 Philadelphia Eagles — Nelson Agholor (WR, USC)
The Eagles moved down knowing they could still land Agholor here. They acquire an extra pick in the process. He replaces Jeremy Maclin, providing speed, good hands and underrated big-play ability.

#26 TRADE Jacksonville Jaguars — Melvin Gordon (RB, Wisconsin)
The Lions trade down into the top-end of the second frame. They know the options will be good on the O-line and at defensive tackle. The Jaguars give up a 4th rounder to jump ahead of the Dallas Cowboys to select Melvin Gordon. They need a feature runner. Imagine how explosive that Jaguars offense could be with Amari Cooper, Melvin Gordon and Julius Thomas supporting Blake Bortles.

#27 Dallas Cowboys — Malcom Brown (DT, Texas)
With Gordon off the board this becomes an easy pick for the Cowboys. They take Brown to improve their interior pass rush. They can wait until the second or third round to get another running back with Gordon off the board.

#28 TRADE Tampa Bay Buccaneers — Cedric Ogbuehi (T, Texas A&M)
There’s a bit of buzz this week with Mel Kiper and Lance Zierlein both quoting sources claiming Ogbuehi will go in the first round. We’ll run with it for now. The player says he’ll be ready for training camp despite an ACL injury at the end of the season. He needs to get stronger but he has the mobility and supreme length to play left tackle for a long time. The Broncos move down for an extra fourth.

#29 Indianapolis Colts — Andrus Peat (T, Stanford)
He’s a really odd shape — bottom heavy without definition. That could be a concern for teams as he doesn’t really look the part of a left tackle. On tape, however, he’s a very natural blind side blocker. The type Indy needs.

#30 TRADE Oakland Raiders — Phillip Dorsett (WR, Miami)
The Raiders wanted to sign Randall Cobb. Dorsett isn’t an identical comparison but they share similar traits (safe hands, extremely fast, know how to get open). The Packers probably want to move down before taking the top inside linebacker on their board. Reggie McKenzie knows enough people in Green Bay’s front office to make this happen for a modest outlay.

#31 New Orleans — Shane Ray (DE, Missouri)
The issue for Shane Ray is I suspect many teams will like him — they just won’t love him. He’s undersized and had a disappointing workout at the Missouri pro-day. He might slip a little as teams address bigger needs and debate what his best fit is.

#32 New England Patriots — Eric Rowe (CB, Utah)
The Pats watched their two starting corners walk away in free agency. Rowe is big and athletic. They need to address this position early or risk missing out altogether.

The players dropping into round two

T.J. Clemmings (T, Pittsburgh)
I wanted to fit him in somewhere. There’s just too much upside to ignore. However, if the likes of Cedric Ogbuehi are being rated in the first round again — someone has to fall out. It’s unlikely to be Andrus Peat. Clemmings needs time and that works against him. He looked very raw at the Senior Bowl.

Eddie Goldman (DT, Florida State)
Another player that deserves to go in the first round based on upside. Defensive tackle isn’t a position you see drafted too early too often unless a player really stands out. Goldman is a very good run stopper and flashes enough pass rush ability. Is he a game-changer or just a really good player? And are there enough teams with vital needs at defensive tackle?

What it would mean for the Seahawks

Six receivers are off the board. The likes of Jaelen Strong, Devin Smith, Dorial-Green Beckham, Tyler Lockett and Sammie Coates remain. There are enough options left to make a trade-up possible. A lot of the teams needing a receiver have already addressed the position. At least a couple of good options are likely to remain on the board beyond the #50 pick. That’s the range where the Seahawks can consider using one of their fourth rounders to move up.

With the likes of T.J. Clemmings, Cam Erving and Jake Fisher lasting into round two it also increases the chance of Ty Sambrailo lasting until pick #63. Earlier today Adam Caplan put out the following Tweet:

Caplan also suggested the Seahawks were in the running to sign Charles Tillman before he signed a one-year deal with the Panthers today.


  1. Greg haugsven

    All this draft talk just gets me pumped up…I feel like a kid waiting for Christmas, and its still so far away.

    • Matt

      20 more days!

  2. Greg haugsven

    You just wonder if Schneider will give up a draft pick to trade up…he’s such a draft pick horder

    • Rob Staton

      I think more than anything he understands value. Where to find his guys. When to make a move. He’s the GM that has now traded away two first round picks after all. That’s easy to forget. I think for the right player, for the right value, he’ll concede a pick. Especially when he has 11 to play with.

      • Colin

        I’d be pretty surprised if we don’t see a trade up. The Hawks do need to replenish depth, but 11 rookies aren’t making this roster.

        • Hawksince77

          We should consider this the basic question for the 2015 Seahawks: will they trade up into the second round? We seem fairly split on the question. There are those in the ‘the more picks the better’ camp, and those in the ’11 is already plenty so let’s spend them’ camp.

          And then a few of us in the ‘you can never have enough picks’ and expect Seattle to trade their first pick in order to gain another mid-round pick, for an even dozen.

          • CharlieTheUnicorn

            I’m in the camp, that Seattle might trade up into the 3rd round, if possible. I do not see them trading up in the second. The “value” of taking the #2 OG in round #2 vs the #4 OG in round #3, doesn’t justify the picks that would have to be given up.

            • Ben2

              The trade up would be for a WR not a guard as discussed in previous articles by Rob

              • CharlieTheUnicorn

                The principle is the same, no matter the position. There is not a WR that is a “game changer” on the Seattle offense…. outside the top 3 guys.

                • Ben2

                  I’m confused – do you mean a WR that is not top3 in the draft that is a game changer? Because you said on the Seahawks roster (which there isn’t a game changer in their roster.) I don’t think we need a game changer-those are extremely rare in the nfl- we need to upgrade vs our roster. If the FO thinks they can do that with a trade up for a guy like Devin smith or J. Strong in lieu of a Kearse or whoever them in for it

                  • CharlieTheUnicorn

                    only the top 3 WR in the draft… something got left out of that post lol

                  • Jake

                    I think he’s saying that outside Cooper, White, and Parker there is no guarantee you’ll find a player that’s better than Kearse, so pick two or more and see who pans out.

                    Basically, I agree because in my mind there is no real evidence that Strong, Smith, Dorsett, Lockett, or DGB are any more likely to succeed than say McBride, Bell, Waller, Smelter, Mongomery, Lippett, etc. The more we get the better the odds we find a stud in this deep WR class.

                  • Ben2

                    I guess is what I’m saying is that if JS & Pere Carrol feel that there is a wide out on the board in the 50s that is better (and that there is a “cliff” in talent after this area) I think it would be a good idea to trade up. We can STILL use another pick on a wideout later on or UDFA….a “mild@ trade up for a WR doesn’t preclude taking another wideout later. We would still have 10 picks

          • rowdy

            I’m in the camp that wants to see a trade for picks next

            • Jon

              As am I. Would love to see the addition of a couple picks in rounds 3-5 in ’16.
              Something to remember about trade value of next years picks that I have heard multiple times and it seems to be a legitimate claim based on past trades, is that a pick from next year is valued at around 1 round less ‘points’. (Ex. Patriots traded #89 in 2009 to some team for their second rounder which ended up in the 40s range in 2010. The Browns did this type of trade a couple of times in a recent draft. They picked up a third and fourth for a mid 4th and mid 5th.) Sorry for the vague specifics, but the point remains that it happens where teams give up future picks for little value by the ‘points’ system half dozen or so times in any given draft. Id love to see the Hawks take advantage.

              • CharlieTheUnicorn

                A round 3 in 2015 is worth roughly a round 2 in 2016

              • CharlieTheUnicorn

                Also, there are most likely 3 comp picks in the 2016 draft. A 3rd, 5th and 7th… at least according to people in the know.

                • Jon

                  OTC gives us a 3 for Maxwell, 5 for Carp, 6 for Smith, and 7 for Schofield.

        • Greg Haugsven

          I agree 11 draft picks are not making the roster…but when it comes to draft picks its not about them making the team. draft picks are like lottery tickets, the more you have the better chance you have to get a winner.Its about percentages.

          • Jake

            Absolutely how I feel about it. More picks gives the team flexibility and lets them get more of “their guys” in the mid/late rounds.

          • Phil

            Greg — if “draft picks are like lottery tickets, the more you have the better chance you have to get a winner”, are you suggesting that the Seahawks should trade all of their picks in rounds 2-6, just so they can accumulate a larger number of picks in round 7? If you follow your logic, this seems to be you land …

            • Phil

              should be “where you land”

              • Jake

                Everything in moderation Phil. But if you ask me, unless there’s a guy you’re really in love with, I’d take 2x 4th round picks instead of 1x 3rd round pick all day, every day. 7th round is a tougher place to play than say the 4th/5th round because at some point all the guys you like are gone.

                • AlaskaHawk

                  Even though the Seahawks had pretty good luck with late round players and UDFA players, that was when they were starting from ground zero. Now the team is established and is trying to fill a few spots. Like maybe 5 starter spots. When you look at the stats – the chance of a player in the 5th round or later becoming a starter is less then 1 in 5. So even though it is great to have a lot of picks, the higher picks have a much greater chance of becoming starters and contributing. For a first round player a team would expect a great performance out of the top 15 and a starter in the rest. And about 60% of those players are successful vs the 20% or worse in the late rounds.

                  • Jake

                    I don’t think you can use statistics across 32 different teams and countless differing philosophies to identify anyone’s talent acquisition abilities – let alone the GM who draft analysts now give a pass to, because they freely admit he keeps proving them wrong. The Cleveland Browns have picked terrible players throughout the draft, so have other teams – their picks muddy the waters of what a pick is “worth”. I just think that the Seahawks aren’t playing the same game in the draft, so historical references to where a player is drafted become a small data point to calculate the likelihood of success for a Seahawks draftee. For example, I don’t think anyone in the Seahawks brain-trust thought Bruce Irvin was a better player than Bobby Wagner or Russell Wilson, but they already knew they could burn the 1st rounder on him since Wagner and Wilson would be available later. That’s what I’m getting at, there are studs in the middle rounds – JS has a unique ability to find them. I want him to have more of that currency, not less.

                • RealRhino2

                  Interesting take. I admit I was fascinated by the idea posited on the last post’s comments section:
                  1. Earlier draft picks are better;
                  2. More draft picks is better.

                  Given that it usually takes giving up earlier draft picks to get more draft picks, these two ideas (said to be working in concert) seem to be at odds.

                  So I wondered: what is a draft pick in each round “worth”, really? Please note that I understand the limitations of my quick-and-dirty research, small sample size, flawed proxies, etc., etc.

                  Short version of conclusions from 2008 and 2009 drafts (the similarity of outcomes and limits on my free times made me stop there; you can go on if you’d like).

                  1. If you are looking to draft a “star” player (think, say, Brian Orakpo level and up, not just the elite of the elite), you better draft in the first two rounds. That’s it. There are outliers, of course (we have several on our own team), but if we are talking about draft picks as lottery tickets, the analogy is apt. From 2009, 31% of 1sts were “stars”, 22% of 2nds were. By the third round, it was 9%. The same percentages basically hold true for 2008.

                  2. “Starters” are only in the first three rounds, usually. Again, outliers exist. But the odds say that 70% of 1sts become long-term starters, 40-50% of 2nds, 35% of 3rds, and just 10-20% of 4ths. Rounds 5-7 it’s a 0-10% chance.

                  3. Rounds 4-7 are for depth and special teams.

                  “Starter” = at least a 3-year starter. “Star” was more subjective. I just went down’s Career AV numbers until guys weren’t passing the eye test any more, then counted guys up to that point.

                  So if you are talking trade value, for example, and just looking at these guys as “worth” the likelihood of their becoming a Starter (i.e., a 1st-round pick is worth .7 of a Starter, a 2nd is worth .45 of a Starter, etc.), then two 2nds is better than a 1st. A 1st is worth about two 3rds, a 2nd is worth about 2-3 4ths, and so on. But while having 2 third-round picks gives you an equal chance of getting a Starter as one 1st, it decreases your chances quite a bit of finding a star player, so it’s not strictly a straight trade.

                  • Matt

                    “there are studs in the middle rounds – JS has a unique ability to find them. I want him to have more of that currency, not less.” jake

                    I understand where you’re coming from and believe JS is a firm believer in that philosophy. We are ripe with “currency” where we stand right now. I’m not sure we’ll trade up, but if we do you can be sure JS/PC love that player. I highly doubt we trade down for more 2015 draft capitol-11 picks is more than enough to work the “lottery” angle. Honestly how many 53 man roster spots are even open for competition where we don’t have capable young players already waiting in the wings? 6-10 maybe? PC has basically said we are not done in FA too. We are just waiting until May 12 where UFA signings don’t affect comp picks.

          • Ben2

            But lots of guys need a year of development – you trust your coaches to build them up to a degree. That said, that’s why there’s a point where the goal is better potential/athletes/upside/PLAYERS under team control. This makes gut mean trading UP for the right guy(s)

      • Madmark

        Phillip Dorsett was the only on I would have traded up for. After his pro day that dream has been wipeout. Its probably an OL now.

        • RealRhino2

          Alaska —

          Disagree strongly. By and large there AREN’T studs in the middle rounds, and it is very premature to say that Schneider has any special talent at picking them out. And way too small a sample size.

          In the drafts I’ve looked at to check this issue, maybe 1 out of 9 guys taken in the 4th through 6 rounds becomes a decent starter for more than a year or two. In ’10 and ’11 Schneider picked 9 guys in those rounds, and three of them were big hits: Kam, KJ, and Sherm. So 1 in 3 instead of 1 in 9. But in the next two years he picked 10 guys in those rounds and not one of them has hit or looks like a decent multi-year starter. Luke Willson has a chance, maybe. So now it’s 3 of 19, overall a little less than 1 in 6. Looking a lot like regression to the mean.

          There are plenty of useful role players to be found in the middle rounds, but very few starters or studs.

          • Hawksince77

            Where was Lane draft? Simon? Sweezy? Marsh? Bailey? Coleman? Helphet? Jesse Williams? Anthony McCoy? Piere-Lewis? Norwood? Scruggs? Turbin? All in rounds 4-7, if memory serves, and all starters or potential starters still on the roster.

            Not to mention the starting UDFAs like Baldwin, Kearse, Lockett and Matthews.

            Stars have yet to emerge, but the signs are there for several of these guys.

            Regardless, there is plenty of room on the roster to add more talent and compete for starting jobs, spots on the final 53, and the practice squad.

            • Meat

              We have waited for several of these guys to emerge. Sweeny imo is the only one. The rest I truly hope so, but there is little indication several of them will be starters like sweezy, but more of a role player position. Which is important, but let’s not jump the gun on some of those guys, and suggest they will be stars.. It is likely some of them will be gone like RB position and replaced next year (Turbin ). There is just as many players drafted in the late rounds (especially db’s, WR, and FBs) that didn’t make the team the first or second season.

              Because there were just as many late round picks that did not pan out too in the past few years. I am under the sentiment you don’t just scrape the barrel looking for gems all the time as some suggested. The higher the pick the more likely you get good player or role player, and good scouting should help with those finds (and luck).

              • Meat

                I would include Baldwin as a good starter, but we could have a different view of what a star player would be, and teams only get a few typically.

              • Phil

                Meat – good points! The draft is not a lottery in which every ticket has an equal chance to win. Citing an extreme example, the picks (tickets) at the top of the draft have a greater chance of being winners than those at the bottom.

            • purpleneer

              Those points disagree with each other. If there was any level of confidence in getting substantial stardom from that group, there couldn’t also be “plenty of room on the roster to add talent.” The roster limits certainly don’t help with allowing a team to develop the next generation without sacrificing the present during their early stages. The practice squad can be raided and the gameday roster just doesn’t have room for more than a couple guys who aren’t contributing unless you’re not serious about winning in the present.
              I generally love moving down and having extra picks in rounds 2-4, but every draft and every roster are different. No sane person could argue that it didn’t work out for the better to trade up for Tez or for Lofa. One too many tradedowns caused Holmgren to settle for Jerramy Stevens and might have been the difference in his tenure ending without a title.

              • Hawksince77

                ‘Those points disagree with each other. If there was any level of confidence in getting substantial stardom from that group, there couldn’t also be “plenty of room on the roster to add talent.”’

                From the Seahawks website, it appears that there is plenty of room to improve (although I saw names that I thought were no longer on the roster, but you will get the point):

                Mister Alexander – LB
                RaShaun Allen – TE
                R. J. Archer – QB
                Dion Bailey – FS
                Will Blackmon – CB
                Demitrius Bronson – RB
                CJ Davis – G
                Garry Gilliam – OT
                Luke Ingram – LB
                Nate Isles – G
                Brendan Kelly – LB
                Patrick Lewis – C
                Douglas McNeil – WR
                Drew Novak – G
                David King – DE
                Keavon Milton – G
                Will Patrick – DE
                Mike Taylor – LB
                Mike Zimmer – FB

                I don’t know if any of these players are future stars, or even still on the roster, but there are 90 spots to fill going into camp, and I didn’t even include the Locketts and Kearses that could ultimately be improved upon.

                • purpleneer

                  I love depth and competition, but to act like 90 is a particularly relevant number is folly. The gameday roster is roughly half that and there are just 11 on the field at a time. The quality on the field on gameday is what matters for winning titles, not the 80th or 90th guy at the start of camp. Not all of the culling requires in-camp competition; there really are lots of ways to differentiate players before bringing them in.

            • realrhino2

              All of those guys are either backups, close to useless, or role players. We have to stop looking through Seahawk blue-tinted glasses at our own players and potential draftees.

              I’m not saying you can’t frequently get useful guys in the middle rounds in the draft; I’m saying that’s usually about all you get. Not studs, not above-average starters. And if your team is mostly those guys, you are going to be bad. I would happily trade all of our picks in the 5th, 6th and 7th for an extra 3rd and a 4th.

              • pqlqi

                “I would happily trade all of our picks in the 5th, 6th and 7th for an extra 3rd and a 4th.”

                Let’s look at the 2008 draft.
                The most games started by any player drafted in 2008 was 112. Only 8 players have started at least 100 games, 51 players have started at least 60 games, and 84 players have started at least 36 games.

                I’ll use a GS of 30 as a cutoff for calling a draft pick worthy of the term starter.
                I’ll use a GS of 60 as a cutoff for calling a pick worthy of the term quality player.
                I find AV fairly inconsistent but Cliff Avril and Jonathan Stewart have AVs of 36 and Dom Rodgers Cromartie is at 35, beyond that are recognizable names, but not that are notable as above average players. Let’s use AV of 35 to call a player a star, which is to say someone who likely got a “big” second contract.

                1st round 31 picks
                25/31 were starters
                19 were quality starters
                13 were stars

                2nd round 32 picks
                20/32 were starters
                11 were quality starters
                7 were stars

                From here south, there is a big dropoff…

                3rd round 36 picks
                13/36 were starters
                8 were quality starters
                5 were stars

                4th round 36 picks
                6/36 were starters
                5 were quality starters
                1 was a star

                5th round 31 picks
                9/31 were starters
                2 were quality starters
                2 were stars

                6th round 41 picks
                9/41 were starters
                5 were quality starters
                2 were stars

                7th round 45 picks
                4/45 were starters
                1 was quality starters (Cary Williams, a new Seahawk)
                0 were stars

                let’s exclude round 7, it’s nearly devoid of talent and we don’t even expect the Seahawks to make any headway there (even though they have significant contributors from round 7 and UDFA).

                in round 3-4, you have 72 picks, 19 starters, 13 quality starters, and 6 stars
                26.4% starter rate
                18.1% quality starter rate
                8.3% star rate

                in rounds 5-6, you have 72 picks, 18 starters, 7 quality starters, 4 stars
                25%% starter rate
                9.7% quality starter rate
                5.6% star rate

                for 2 picks in rounds 3/4 (vs. 5 picks in 5/6), you would expect:
                SUCCESS RATES:
                2 stars 0.7% (vs. 2.6%, plus 0.2% chance of 3 or more)
                1 star 15.2% (vs. 22.2%)
                2 quality starters 6.6% (vs. 6.9%, plus 0.9% chance of 3 or more)
                1 quality starter 29.6% (vs. 32.2%)

                FAILURE RATES:
                no stars 84.1% (vs. 75.0%)
                no quality starters 67.1% (vs. 60.0%)
                no starters 54.1% (vs. 23.7%)

                With 5 picks in round 5-6, the Seahawks have significantly superior odds of drafting stars and quality starters, and have far less chance of striking out.

                These probabilities are league averages though, and it’s a big (and likely inaccurate) assumption to make that the Seahawks are not better at the combination of drafting plus developing talent.

                • realrhino2

                  Now run it for 2009:

                  Rounds 3-4:
                  72 picks, 23 starters, 11 quality starters, 8 stars

                  Rounds 5-6:
                  73 picks, 7 starters, 2 quality starters, 0 stars

                  I used approximately the same cutoffs. About 50 guys had more than 55 starts, so I used that for “quality starter.” About 85 guys had 30 or more starts, so I used that for “starter”. Used an AV of 30 for “star,” since beyond that you had guys I’d frankly never heard of, in most cases.

                  So in 2009, having two picks in Rds. 3-4 would have been better than having five picks in Rds. 5-6. I found 2008 to have an unusual number of good 6th-rounders, as I remember.

  3. Steele1324

    In this scenario, I see no reason to trade up for Strong/DGB/Lockett/Coates/D Smith.. In my opinion, all five have negatives that deter from a pick that high. If any of them fall, think about it, but I still prefer Lippett, Bell, Conley later. And there are also others.

    If Erving, Fischer or Clemmings fall into view, think about them for sure. Each a worthwhile investment. Otherwise, I’d be very comfortable taking Sambrailo or Grasu, then moving on to the real sweet spot.

    • Rob Staton

      Personally I find it very hard to imagine Lippett, Bell or Conley having an impact. All are projects in their own right. I’m not convinced Lippett with that frame ever makes it. Conley has the best chance but for all the athletic qualities he offers he pretty much needs to learn how to play the position properly.

      I understand people’s concern over some of the names listed here. But we’re talking about impact players IMO. Guys who can contribute in year one. In DGB’s case with the upside of being frighteningly good, with Smith the opportunity to be a terrific deep threat or Strong just the way he makes spectacular contested grabs. The options in the later rounds are nice but they’re on a totally different grading scale IMO and that’s why I think they’ll ultimately consider moving up for the right guy at the right price.

      • Steele1324

        Rob, we disagree on this WR class. I see impact throughout the draft and in UDFA. Bell may be the most technically gifted and disciplined WR of this year. He is NFL ready, an ideal #2. A guy who, unlike many bigger names (who I believe are overrated), does not rely on natural talent alone.

        • Hawksince77

          You may be right about Bell, but I doubt he beats Baldwin, Kearse, Matthews and Norwood for a starting role. Maybe he does, but that would be something special.

          As he spends more time in the system, I can see him advance to the #2 role, but begins 2015 (if drafted and makes the team) in the 4 or 5 spot on the depth chart.

          • Steele1324

            I think Kearse is so inconsistent, he deserves to be on the bubble. Matthews would have a different role. Baldwin and Norwood, and McNeil should compete with no guarantees. And there is also PRich.

            Matthews and McNeil aside, I keep in mind what EranUnger wrote in his article, that the corps of Baldwin/Norwood/PRich/Kearse never looked dominant when they had the opportunity. Was the problem RW’s lack of height, O-line, or the WRs just not being that great? Or some of all?

            I’m looking at all of the prospects I can, with an emphasis on just a bit more height (at least 6-0).

            I just checked Rannell Hall, for instance.


            A slashing, super intense player. Another one with measurables that are not top echelon, but he is a baller, and a deadly return man, too. I think guys like him are underrated and have major chips, and with dedication, they will make it in the NFL. Prefer this to the big names who expect to be stars and bust out.

            • arias

              Why would Matthews have a different role? The Seahawks seem to use the receivers in their 3 wide sets interchangeably. Sure, Baldwin plays well out of the slot but he is hardly used there exclusively, far from it. The team likes to change things up often enough to give defenses different looks. Matthews was fantastic when used in the 3 wide sets as the Z receiver who they had running deep routes in the SB. I’m really hoping he can win a spot as a regular starter when they play their Zebra personnel, but my guess is that they’re not going to drastically redesign the offense for him either. If he wins a spot among the top 3 on the depth chart he’ll play interchangeably with the others in the Z, X and Y.

            • Jacob

              YES!!! Thank you! I’ve been waiting for someone else to say Kearse is too inconsistent. I feel that Norwood (given a chance) will be a better WR than Kearse. I will say this about Kearse, when he makes a mistake (or a drop(s)), he seems to make up for it later in the game but I don’t think that’ll be good for him in the long run. To me, Norwood seems ready to break out….I hope. As for Matthews, I sure hope he continues to build on the Super Bowl performance. I hope he has the hunger to do so too. He should be in Russell’s hip pocket. Those two could be dangerous if he has the drive that Russ does.

          • CC

            Bell would have a chance to make the team as a returner.

            • drewjov11

              People keep overstating Bell’s impact. He is NOT technically sound all the time. His hand placement is a joke on occasion. People overstate his blocking because he earholed a few people. He is skinny, and not strong, and his technique isn’t great either. NFL corners won’t go down so easily. The effort is there, so that’s a good place to start. But seriously, he drops passes, doesn’t always get his hands in the proper position to catch low balls, and on the seahawks he would be another decent receiver who isn’t going to turn into a true number one.

          • JohnnyJohnson

            Kearse, Norwood, and PRich (based on injury) are all fully capable of being beet out for their jobs, not to mention Mathews who may or may not end up being better then any big bodied WRs in this draft. ADB is the only top tier guy in the WR room.

            Bell has legit potential, work ethic, speed, etc… A possible PRich replacement really. Also, Tre McBride to replace Kearse/Norwood.

            Lots of later round speed, small bodied receivers too, with some KR/PR potential. Lots of good options.

            We need more depth and could find some special talent throughout. OL, SS, DL, WR/KR/PR, RB/KR/PR, CB all need depth.

            On RB though – CMichael would be an elite top 2 RB in this years draft. Watch his highlights. Speed, size, strength combo, non-existent in this draft! Watch his NFL highlights, no-one in this class except Gurley has his potential. Abdullah only one close to having his combine numbers and is 20lbs lighter and much shorter, doesn’t have the tackle breaking, smash-mouth ability of CMike.

        • Rob Staton

          I think there’s a danger of Bell being slightly overrated. Decent prospect, but there’s a reason he’ll go later than a lot of these WR’s we’re talking about.

          • Matt

            Rob- I’m a fan of Bell’s and think he’s a highish upside 4th round WR. Where do you rank him?

            • Rob Staton


      • Hawksince77

        Interesting that you expect their second round pick to be an immediate impact player. Historically, that’s rare for WR’s, especially after the top tier is gone.

        In other words, I think all of the WR prospects that will be available for Seattle will be projects, and will unlikely have much of a 2015 impact. Both Bell on Conley (my two favorites) were always going to require development, and we wouldn’t expect much right away.

        Same goes for the players you listed. I doubt they make much of a first impact, regardless of who drafts them.

        Point is this: if you insist (are convinced) that Seattle expects to get immediate impact from their first pick, it has to be on the offensive line. Like Britt last year, they could take a guy they like at 63 (or trade up) and plan on starting that player at guard or center.

        I can’t think of another position for that to be the case. It just seems unlikely that any of the rookies can be projected to to beat an incumbent as a starter.

        In other words, based on the current roster, and their draft position, I think it unlikely that they plan on drafting a starter with their first pick. Instead, they can get a good crop of talent to compete for the back-up positions, and develop into starters/stars in the coming year or two.

        As for the offensive line, such prospects can be had in the mid-rounds, so the top two picks can target future impact players, likely at WR, potentially in the secondary or RB.

        As for the one possible exception, DGB, based on your own argument, if he falls into the mid-second round, there is probably a good reason. If that happens, though, and Seattle trades up to draft him, I will be very excited, because that may be the only option (to your point) of getting a genuine star right out the gate.

        • AlaskaHawk

          I totally agree with what you are saying Hawk. Any receiver chosen will have to win a spot on the starting team, and the way PC worked it last year they probably won’t even be playing till the second half of the season.

          With the offensive line we have two spots to fill, and those spots are critical to the performance of the team. Now maybe we can find players in the mid rounds. But we can also fill them in the 2 and 3rd round, and if they turn out to be great run and pass blocking animals that are even more successful then the last line, I wouldn’t complain about the Seahawks taking them. We all scratched our head about Britt in the 2 nd round last year, though it did make sense when you realize that their was a drop in talent. The same could be said about this year.

          The other position that would be an immediate upgrade is kick returner. I think we could end up with two out of the draft, probably a wide receiver or running back in the mid to late rounds.

          So I think arguements could be made either way, but if you want a starter who will have an immediate impact, it would be offensive line or kick returner.

          • David M2

            Alaska, did you see me followup reply to your question on Rob’s last post?

            • AlaskaHawk

              No I didnt. There are too many threads to follow. Welcome to the blog!

        • Rob Staton

          “Interesting that you expect their second round pick to be an immediate impact player. Historically, that’s rare for WR’s, especially after the top tier is gone.”

          Historically though a lot of first round WR’s struggled to make an impact. With the changing face of college football, the spread being incorporated into the NFL and the physicality being diminished in the secondary — receivers are flourishing now. Look at all the rookie WR’s who played well last year — and not just in round one.

          I don’t expect any receiver to be a 1000 yard guy in Seattle’s scheme next year. But I do think a rookie WR drafted in round two can have an impact, make some key plays and contribute in a not insignificant way. There’s a lot of talent in there. And in the case of DGB — he has the potential to be a superstar with the right guidance. The biggest question with him is whether he’ll be chased out of camp by the LOB. He needs to be able to deal with press coverage.

      • Robert

        I think Conley’s speed will demand a cushion like PRich enjoyed. That will create space and opportunities underneath. And deep routes will force Safety help clearing out space for other targets. Conley is a smart, high character guy who will likely transition to the pro game quickly. I think he can contribute in the rotation immediately. I hope some combination of Norwood, Matthews, McNeil and draftee(s) emerge and displace Curse, who we could then trade for a 6th (or a case of Gatorade) and unload his 2M salary??? Don’t get me wrong…I love the local kid…except for the 3rd down drop in 49. I just think it is a critical time for the Seahawks to start making CAP saving moves by replacing non-core players with young, cheap players who have greater upside.

        • hawkfaninMT

          Is Kearse’ salary guaranteed? Not sure how that works with RFAs. Once they sign the contract is it guaranteed, or do they have to make the roster?

      • EranUngar

        Regarding making an impact and contributing in year one,

        Making an impact on a roster that the made the last 2 SBs with minimal lose goes way beyond just being a starter and racking up stats. Let me give examples:

        A future Tackle that can step in for Okung next year and free 7-8M cap space will have a big impact on contracts signed this year and plans for the future.

        A DT that can replace Mebane next year and clear over 5M cap space, or LB that can step in for Irvin/K.J. next year – see above.

        A tall WR that can high point a challenged catch will have a big impact even if he doesn’t have over 30 catches. He will help Graham avoid some size and will help clearing some size out of the box. If he has potential upside to grow into a valid WR1 in a year or two i’d say it is all the impact i want.

        As much as we’d like a day 1 starter at WR1, we kinda already got that guy with our first round pick. Impact on a roster that is going for it’s 3rd SB in a raw comes in different shapes and sizes then it is for JAC or OAK…

        • Phil

          Eran – good points. In a nutshell, our draftees can make impacts either through their play on the field, or more strategically, by ultimately replacing aging veterans and the high cap hits that their contracts carry. The ideal guys will do both.

          Although picking a WR at #63 (or earlier in the 2nd round) is what most appeals to me, I can concede that finding players who have the talent to ultimately replace Okung/Mebane could have just as big an impact as finding a player to replace one of our WRs.

  4. matt509

    This mock is crazy. If you were to do this on any other site you would get booed like no other. The crazy thing is, they all make sense. Congrats man. You’re one of the best.

    I’ll admit that I don’t agree with some, but I can’t help but notice I wouldn’t be shocked to see it all happen.

    • Rob Staton

      I like that review. “On any other site you would get booed like no other” 🙂

      • CharlieTheUnicorn

        Like the Jets fans booing their pick at the draft in NYC every year. I guess it will be Bears fans this year 😉

        • bigDhawk

          Speaking of the Bears, I agree with Clayton that Shelton doesn’t get past them at 7.

          • matt509

            They pass only if Fowler or Beasley is there.


          • CharlieTheUnicorn

            I have a suspicion the Bears will trade up to get him. Trade with the Redskins specifically. They want Shelton, they need Shelton….. makes too much sense.

  5. CHawk Talker Eric

    For some reason my mind’s eye always pictures Cooper in silver and black (even though I think they’ll take Leonard Williams)

    Curious if you think the difference between Cooper and White is worth more than the difference between White and whomever might be available @35 such that OAK doesn’t take White at 4?

    Shelton to NO seems perfect. I’m sure Rob Ryan would love to build a defense around him.

    I’ve also read about Ogbuehi rising back into R1 consideration, but it was linked to CAR taking him at 25.

    If CAR doesn’t trade with PHI, I could see JAX doing that – trading from 36 to 25 for Gordon. Although nothing is certain, I’d expect Agholor to be available at 36.

    • Rob Staton

      For me Cooper is #1, White is a close second but there’s a gap. Then there’s quite a drop off. A lot of people love Devante Parker. I like him. Not love. And I think there’s a bit of ‘fools gold’ about Breshad Perriman. Yet I can see teams scrambling to get after these four WR’s.

      • Ben2

        Yeah I read a comp article on fieldgulls the other day on Perriman and its was scary….lots of busts. I know each player needs to be judged on their own merits, but Perriman seems like one of those combine/workout warriors that bust out of the league….Stephen Hill (jets 2nd rounder a few yrs back) jumps to mind.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn

        I see Parker going to the Vikings.. pair him up with his old QB from college. Another great move by the Vikings.. get some firepower on the offense. Now, if they can get AP to stick around….. could be a very dangerous team.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      I do not see a team trading back into the 1st round, unless it is for a QB…. Bills and Jets come to mind. The CBA and being able to have a 5 year contract might influence some moves as well, of 1st round picks.

      I see zero reason to trade into the 1st round for a RB. There are too many of them to be had in the draft for this to make any rational sense from a need or value perspective. . .

      WR is very tricky to predict imo, due to some high reward / high risk guys in the draft…. I’m talking about DGB specifically. He would scare the daylights out of me if I was a GM, betting my continued employment on him.

      Lastly, if Mariota does indeed tumble down the draft…. the chance for wacky traded will go up 1000%. I do not see him falling like”some” are predicting at ESPN/ … I think it would be ridiculous to pass on him, if your team needs a QB. This comment is specifically targeted at the RAMS, BROWNS and JETS.

      • Ben2

        The Bucs did it for the Muscle Hampster a few yrs ago. I could see it happening, ie a trade up for a back like Gordon or Gurley if they fall into that mid to late 20s range

      • CHawk Talker Eric

        The distinction between the bottom of R1 and the top half of R2 has blurred in recent years. The overall talent pool keeps increasing. Special players (true first rounders) are still rare enough, but depending on the position and team, it makes sense to move up.

        JAX needs a #1 RB the way SEA needs a #1 WR (JAX also needs a #1 WR a la Cooper which is why they could take him at 3). Gurley is the top RB prospect and likely will be the first one off the board. Gordon is the only other RB in the draft worthy of a (late) R1 pick. If JAX wants him, they need to jump ahead of the likes of ARI at 24, DAL at 27, IND at 29 and NE at 31 because each needs a RB and Gordon would be a good value pick in that range.

        • Ben2

          Yep, exactly.

  6. Flycaster5

    Rob – love the site. Where do you anticipate Tre McBride slotting in, and do you still see him as a viable Seahawks target?

    • Rob Staton

      Absolutely. High character, incredibly athletic, plays above his size. Bit of an overachiever. I think the issue is for me he’s a mid third rounder. I have a hard time justifying him at #63. And in the late third he’s gone IMO. So you’d almost have to create a scenario where you draft him. Move down in the third or move up from the end of day two. Either way it just seems a little convoluted. I mean, are you going to go to all that effort to draft a receiver who is interesting but far from a sure thing coming out of William & Mary? I’m not sure. I think it’s ultimately more likely they target a receiver in round two after a small trade up and then see what’s available on day three — because they’ll need a kick returner at some point too.

      • Steele1324

        Rob, you’re right. It would be a bit convoluted. I like McBride a lot, wouldn’t mind seeing him taken, but at the same time, no one thing stands out about his game, and he is a bit undersized. How much upside does he have? How much impact does he offer?

        • Therick05

          In me opinion, McBride will be there at 95, so if we pick a OL at 63, we could pick him, he is a good returner and is good at 50/50 balls. if we pick DGB or other top receiver at the second round, we could take an OL at the third, and pick McBride at the pick we got from NO, with and DL and CB with other two picks at ter 4th round.

        • Trevor

          I feel the same way about Mcbride. like his game and he seems like a great kid. I think he will be a solid pro and contribute but I think his upside might be limited particularly in a system like ours.

          I am praying someone beat out Kearse for a roster spot. I know he had made some clutch catches but he never gets separation and has so many drops. He is a good special teams guy but I just dont see how is is worth $2.3 annually.

          • Ben2

            Yeah….I’ll have some fond Kearse memories when he’s gone but I think he can totally be upgraded and should be (cheaper to have someone on a rookie deal too). Strong would offer some of the same strengths with more upside. His skill set (jump balls) matches RW’s style….so even though he lacks separation skills maybe he’s the rd 2 trade up target ?

            • Therick05

              If Strong falls to 2nd round, and we pick, that would be a HUGE steal.

              • Steele1324

                I doubt he will fall that far. Too much hype.

          • Dawgma

            You’re delusional if you think Kearse is in danger of not making the roster. He’s fine for what he is, he’s just been asked to punch out of his weight class the last couple years.

            • Jon

              Your ‘dilusional’ for thinking he is completely safe. 2.3 m cap hit. Horrible hands with a few good grabs. Inconsiistent. I think if we pick a WR in a trade up and Matthews continues to improve this offseason, it is entirely possible that Kearse is a late round trade candidate after camp. If he is #5 on the depth chart behind rookie, Baldwin, Matthews, (and a healthy Richardson), as well as being an absolute goner in 2016. Why coould a combination of a rookie (Waller, Bell, Conley, Montgomery, etc) Ricardo Lockette and Norwood not work out even better then keeping him around and loosing a player at years end.

              Speaking of Norwood, I don’t know why I hear so many people talk about him being a failure. He made the team and caught 9 balls. That is while sitting behind Baldwin, Kearse, Harvin, Richardson, and others. Fact is he stayed on the roster. So what if he was not utilized every game because the Seahawks started with 7 WR on the roster last year. It is not that I think he was/is/will be great, but I certainly see as much or more potential than Kearse had after one year.

              • Jon

                I think its telling that of all WR’s Seattle has taken in the 4th round specifically Norwood made the roster and the others (Durham and Harper) didn’t manage that.

              • Steele1324

                I have a feeling—a bad one—that JSPC/Bevell would rather stick with a known quantity than change. Or they wouldn’t have tossed Kearse the money he just got. They have some confidence in him, even though there is a contingency if someone supplants him. If it were me, I wouldn’t have bothered with him.

                • Donald

                  It has to do with Richardson not able to play for most of the year. I like Kearse, and he provides stability in the system, and clutch catches when needed.

                  • Jake

                    Kearse gets way too much flak around here. He’s a solid pro WR, a GREAT 4th WR/core ST guy who was thrust into a starting role (due to headcases/injuries). He has stepped up HUGE in the biggest moments in Seahawks history, yet he is crucified for one true drop (NFCCG). His “drop” along the sideline in the Super Bowl would have been a highlight reel catch, the only reason it counts as a drop is because usually Kearse makes that catch look routine.

                  • goatweed

                    I love Kearse but he is mediocre at quite a few things:

                    Crisp routes
                    Slant routes
                    and Blocking

                    He doesn’t drop many catchable balls and he gives great effort on each play (besides game winning SB plays). He is a suitable 3rd/4th option and that leaves a hole in the Hawks roster for 1st/2nd option.

                  • Jon

                    I dont think its about giving Kearse Flak for drops. I didn’t even mention that actually. The bigger problem is he is a #4 WR and I think it is quite possible that when Richardson comes back he goes as low as number five on the WR depth. Sure Im giving Matthews credit that he may not deserve, and Richardsons health is still to be determined. The only reason they put a second round tender on him is likely because they could simply not afford to loose him, at least not before they know who else they have on the team next year. Its not that he is bad for what he is, but I think instead he is average for what he is (a #4 WR on Special teams) and he only has one relatively expensive year on his contract. My main points are that he is not as ‘safe’ as some might assume.

                    Really I probably would not have posted above if not for the nature of Dawgma’s post saying that someone is delusional for what they have a right to think. I feel that this blog is great because the quality conversation of the community and I also feel that there should be no space for name calling.

            • Trevor

              I am delusional I guess. I like Kearse fine enough as a 5th receiver, special teams guy but not at 2.3 million if we are up against the cap. I would be shocked if we draft 2 rookies if Kearse is on the roster at 2.3 mil per year. I think he will either get or sign at a lower #.

              • Beanhawk

                He won’t make 2.3 million this season. He will likely be restructured to bring his salary down (2.3 million is just the 2nd round tender amount) as they did with Jeron Johnson last year.

                • AlaskaHawk

                  If someone offered a second round draft pick would the Seahawks turn around and pick another receiver? I think they would, especially if DGB is available.

                  • cha

                    Would be an interesting discussion to have, given the apparent de-valuing of the WR position due to the strength of the 2014 WR draft class and the perceived strength of the 2015 class.

                    Is Kearse better than any current unsigned FAs AND any WR the team would get in the 2nd round? It’s hard to argue he is.

                  • Matt

                    That’s basically the point on putting a 2nd round tender on Kearse. No team would give up a 2nd to get him. Thus he’s under our control with no bargaining room to speak of. Same exact thing as Johnson last offseason. Kearse won’t make $2.3 next year either. Shrewd win win move by JS.

        • Rob Staton

          I think he’s typically the type of player Seattle would love to target in round four. I think he’s a really nice prospect. But you have to stick to your guns. And I think he’s going to go in a range that will be too rich for the Seahawks.

      • Phil

        As a guy who has attended some William & Mary games in the past 2 years, and has watched almost all of their games on TV, I think Rob has done a good job of describing McBride. My impressions of his upside are that he could be another Baldwin, but he’s unlikely to be another Tate. I don’t think there is anything particularly unique about him or his play. He’s certainly not the tallest, or the fastest, and he has not been targeted as often as some other receivers. He somehow is thought of as a good returner. There is no doubt that he’s an improvement over Wolters, but he has only returned 11 punts in his career at W & M, and has zero TDs as either a punt returner or kickoff returner.

  7. Steele1324

    A bit off the subject, but I have tried to determine why CB Tray Walker merited a VMAC visit. Okay, he has super long arms, a Seahawk body type, good measurables (would have wound up around eighth among CBs if he had gone to the combine).

    The way to see Walker is through Texas Southern film—entire games are on YouTube, many of them boring.

    In this game vs. Grambling, Walker doesn’t do much. Seems to play a lot of off coverage, not much press. Stands around lazily. He loses his cool in this game also.

    His highlight reel shows him doing good high point INTs, good open field tackling.

    I wanted to see much more intensity. As a developmental, I can see the Hawks being interested but not bowled over with him at this point.

  8. Trevor

    I think the Miami / Washington trade you propose is one that could definitely happen. Since we are not picking a few trades will make it it interesting.

  9. Brandon Stumpel

    Hey Rob, great article as always.
    I was wondering if I could get your thoughts on Mark Glowinski–OT from WVU—
    Maybe a 6th round pick? He’s seems to have great athletic ability.

    • Steele1324

      Glowinski is a SPARQ freak. Definitely interesting. Think of a line with Marpet and Glowinski.

    • Rob Staton

      Very athletic and very much a possibility in that range. One definitely to monitor.

  10. Trevor

    Rob I really hope your mock does not play out. I was really hoping Agholor or Dorsett would slide into the mid 2nd round so we would have a shot at one of them. For me they are the only 2 prospects rated in the 2nd round who could be a starting WR and Kick Returner Day #1 and improve both spots.

    If they are not an option then like I have said before the only two guys in the 2nd-4th round range with #1reciever potential are Waller and Conely. Physically they both have all the ability to be #1 receivers. They just need to refine their route running etc.

    Maybe #63 Marpet #95 Waller #110 Conely

    Then take find a kick return specialist in the later rounds .

    • Therick05

      I have a feeling that Seattle will pick one of this four: Tre McBride, Kenny Bell, Darren Waller and Chris Conley, because they are late rounds prospects and have high SPARQ numbers.

      • Trevor

        I hope they can get at lease one of them.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn

        Bell and Waller are my picks….. both in 4th round.

        • Therick05

          Mine os McBride and Waller.

          • Steele1324

            I go back and forth with this four, and as you guys know, I have a special fondness for Lippett in the mix as a two-way option.

            Bell/Waller/Conley/Lippett—would it be unrealistic to take three of them? Would it be insufficient to land just one?

            • Jake

              Not in my opinion Steele…

              I think taking three WR (3rd – McBride or Conley, 4th – Bell, 7th – Smelter would be my 3) would be a great move because you just can’t count on one guy to both remain healthy and reach their potential. Then I’d really like them to double dip at developmental CB with 4th – Lippett and 5th – Marshall. That would leave the Hawks with still six more picks to address both lines (offensive and defensive), running back and/or maybe linebacker.

              • Trevor

                Jake I like that idea as well particularly Lippett and Marshall at CB I just dont know if Lippett will last till the 4th.

                • Jake

                  Yeah, the grading is tough, because we don’t even know what the Seahawks are going to do – let alone what Jerry Jones, David Caldwell, etc (x32) are going to do. But basically, I like McBride (WR) more than I like Lippett (CB) and I feel that Tray Walker (CB) in the 6th is better than the WR options in that area – so I’d risk missing out on Lippett and go with McBride if that’s how it turns out.

                • Steele1324

                  Jake, yes, I like the idea of multiple WRs. Grabbing Lippett and Marshall both would put a lot of x-factor on the field. Lippett is projected as a rd. 3.

    • Rob Staton

      DGB has the potential to be a #1 I’d say.

      • Phil

        I agree that of all the receivers who are possibly available at #63, DGB has the highest upside.

        I keep coming back to Lockett as an alternate — chiefly because of his return skills. I think he’d make an immediate impact on the return game, and I think he’d be productive catching bubble screens, running jet sweeps. Someone said he’s Harvin-lite and I think that’s a pretty good comparison. He’s certainly less risky than DGB.

        • AlaskaHawk

          I agree that DGB is the best choice to contribute because of his size and abilities. Wish he wasn’t such a crap shoot for attitude and ability to avoid off field trouble.

  11. CharlieTheUnicorn

    The Patriots pick is intriguing, I was thinking they might go for CB Byron Jones, but Rowe is also rising fast up the draft boards. Flexibility to play CB or S. Both guys will be gone by the mid of second round…..

    • CHawk Talker Eric

      I think they’d take Gordon if he’s still on the board.

  12. Rik

    Field Gulls had an interesting write-up on Tevin Coleman. Dominating runner on a bad Indiana team. He played the second half of the season with a broken bone in his foot, but still put up 2000 yards for the season and had one 300 yard game. He has a chip on his shoulder, too, which I like. I followed him all season, and he never had an off game, even against Ohio State. My question is this: what could he do on a run-first team with good blocking? Any chance that PCJS see potential gold in a Hoosier?

    • David ess

      I’ve heard he has the same issue as C-mike in that he doesn’t switch hands while rushing. Can’t confirm just what I remember hearing a while back.

      • Steele1324

        Coleman is the new McFadden. Not my favorite style of runner.

  13. Trevor

    I love the Graham trade and next year your offense particularly in the Red Zone should be drastically improved.

    I have to say though it is going to suck watching guys we have been talking about and hoping to see Hawks uniforms go off the board one by one till we get to #63. I will be so happy when we get to Day #3 when Schiender should control the day with 9 picks.

    • AlaskaHawk

      The first day of draft will feel like it is Christmas and we are stuck working at the store.

      • Jake

        I think JS likes having the ammunition to pick his gems. His history as a scout probably gives him a (possibly false) confidence that he can find a guy just as good as Amari Cooper in the 5th round who no one else noticed. But, I think watching Jimmy Graham highlights and playing Madden with Graham sporting #88 in Seahawks blue during the first round will have to suffice.

        Besides, I’m really curious what Jacksonville is going to do – I have fully adopted them as my #2 team over the past few years. I didn’t like the Bortles pick last year, I thought they should have built the team around the QB a bit more first and looked for a QB this year or next year. Mariota would have been ideal, but now it’s sink or swim with Bortles. I won’t pull for the Falcons, since they’re in the NFC – but I am interested in how DQ goes about building that defense from scratch (they have a #1 CB, but otherwise they have next to nothing).

        • goatweed

          JS will go and get a receiver that he likes in the second. He picked Golden Tate who matured into good/great receiver. JS also picked Paul Richardson who had a decent year considering the Percy stupidity and having to work into an anemic passing offense.

          I doubt that he is confused that he can match a top WR pick production (year 1) in the 5th round. He is looking for players who can make the team first and foremost and then hopefully mature into a good/great WR option in years to come.

          Baldwin is a great get in UDFA.

          • Jake

            I think his favorites are sort of random actually. Per an interview he did last year, Luke Willson was one of his favorite picks ever (5th round) and of course he name checked Russell Wilson too (3rd round). Richardson certainly was a guy he really loved (2nd round), but I wouldn’t assume 2nd round is some sort of sweet spot for WRs for the Hawks in general just because he’s drafted 2 WR in that round. He’s drafted 3 WRs in the 4th as well. I think it all depends on where the player he has deemed worthy of a Seahawks pick is valued. I don’t think the Seahawks draft board is all that inclusive or big, I think they have some pretty specific targets going into the draft and they’ll move around the draft to go get those targets at the right value (for them).

            • Matt

              You’re right jake. We have a track history of taking WR’s in the 2nd and 4th rounds. To little surprise the 2nd rounders have fared way better than the 4th rounders. Tate is missed, Richardson was showing flashes before he tore up his knee. Durham and Harper didn’t make it out of the preseason, while Norwood hasn’t done anything inspiring and has little to no special teams value. I’m holding out hope on Norwood now that hes healthy and can get to work with Russell and co. The other 2 WRs were complete wastes. JS comes from the Ron Wolf school at GB. Look at the GB WR core-Nelson, Cobb, Adams- all 3 were 2nd round picks.

          • Phil

            Goatweed – some fans are unaware or have forgotten that Tate won the Biletnikoff (sp?) award as college football’s best receiver after his last season at Notre Dame. I don’t think he was as big a development project as most of the receivers who are likely to be at #63 this year.

      • williambryan

        This is probably the best comment in this sites history lol

  14. Matt

    Really like the trades in this mock. They all make sense. If the Jags left day one with Cooper and Gordon it would be a major coup!

    Fowler to NYJ would be a perfect fit. Their D, with Bowles at the helm, could be real tough.

  15. Jeremy

    Heard an interview with Bell on NFL Network today. Guy just screams Seahawks. Must have mentioned the word “compete” 15+ times, loves to block, plays gunner on punt coverage, returns kicks, and was supremely confident. I could see him taking Lockette’s spot as special teams demon with a shot to become something more.

    • Steele1324

      Here is a great interview with Afro Thunder Bell by Turron Davenport

      • Steele1324

        He sounds as cerebral as Russell Wilson. Studies.

        • Matt

          Just listened to the above interview(thanks Steele!) while watching 4 of his game tapes. Really like what Bell has to say. He seems to have the personality and approach of a player that we target. Nice production on limited targets, came from a blocking team and is a very willing blocker, going to compete and try to win a job at every facet of the game, versatile athlete who will contribute on multiple special team units.

          ” I could see him taking Lockette’s spot as special teams demon with a shot to become something more.” Jeremy

          Completely agree. That “something more” you mention is an upgrade to Kearse as our #2 WR. They have similar games-both willing to do whatever helps the team win. Their hands are inconsistent, dropping some easy ones, while making the occasional circus catch. The drops are concerning, no doubt. Bell is the better athlete across the board and a better deep threat. He also can return kicks-added bonus. He’d be a great get in the 4th round and can improve our WR core from day one, and could become a cheaper and more athletic WR than Kearse as our #2 WR in 2016-possibly 2015.

  16. Steele1324

    Something tells me Conley and Byron Jones, and other big SPARQ winners, will jump a round or two by draft time.

    • Jon

      I think they literally did ‘jump’ a couple of rounds at the combine.

      • Steele1324

        Doubt B Jones lasts in to rd. 2. If the Hawks love Conley, they may have to move on him at the top. Not a good scenario, but very possible.

    • rowdy

      Absolutely but I think conley has a low floor.

  17. Guy

    I’ve been sold on Bell ever since I heard JS elude that Graham can’t block. I think that the team misses Tate’s consistent blocking downfield. As far as I can tell, Bell is the best blocker in this class of WR’s. He can return kicks and really fights for and hangs on to the ball. He just seems like such a competitor.
    Rob, love your efforts.
    Do you have any favorites for players that would fill the Mebane roll. I like what I see out of Kaleb Eulls (Mississippi State.) But I’m a newbie, so I’d like your take on him and others.

    • Rob Staton

      I like Grady Jarrett but expect he’ll be gone. Derick Lott has some appeal later on. I like Henry Anderson as a three. Plus Rakeem Nunez-Roches.

  18. Donald

    Other team’s GM’s are seeing Seattle’s success with SPARQ and will focus on that as well. It is a copycat league. Therefore, I see Conley gone by #63. Seattle needs to trade up to mid 2nd RD to nab him. 4.35 is too good to pass up.

    • Jake

      We said that last year too, then JS proceeded to draft a lot of the SPARQiest players anyway. KPL and Garrett Scott in particular were way above their peers at their respective positions. Gilliam was a UDFA, but he was right behind Scott.

    • Rob Staton

      I think it would be a shocking set of events if he does that early. Major upside but basically has to learn the position from scratch. There’s almost no technique to his game, it’s all athleticism. A longer term project with the chance to make it.

    • rowdy

      That being said a lot of the time the highest sparq and fastest players usually aren’t starters. I also think that some positions athleticism doesn’t help you as much and wr is one of them. CB can rely on athleticism s lot more then receivers can.

  19. JC

    Interesting from Jason La Canfora:
    “On the depth of first-round talent: In a good year there might be 22-24 players who have true first-round grades. This year I’ve had execs tell me they can’t get to 20 in some cases, and some teams struggle to find 16 kids who truly merit first-round grades.”

    Fits what Schneider said and fits the idea that first round grades assume a 24-ish team league.

  20. mrpeapants

    does anyone think they’ll trade up for defense? maybe jarret or Harold if they drop? the pass rush ranked 20th last year. hill seems to be injury prone and marsh didn’t show me anything last year.

    • Steele1324

      Harold would have to drop well into rd.2 to get into range, and I think that is unlikely. Would love Harold in a Hawks uniform, but it looks like a pipe dream at this point. I don’t see other great edge rushers after rd.1, except for Frank Clark types later in the draft. Lorenzo Mauldin in rd. 3-4, Marcus Hardison rd. 3 for an inside rusher.

  21. Matt

    Off topic comment: Rob, do you think the Seahawks would consider Ameer Adbullah? I know he doesn’t fit their RB archetype. But I don’t think PCJS are so dogmatic that they wouldn’t draft him if they feel he is exceptional. I find him interesting because he is a different type of threat than the other RBs on the roster, is a good receiver, and could contribute immediately as a returner. I would feel good about the pick in the 3rd and great in the early 4th, but guessing Abdullah will go in the 2nd, right? Where do you think Abdullah will be drafted?

    Love the blog!

    • williambryan

      I am very interested to see what happens after Lynch leaves (though I’ll thoroughly enjoy him while he’s still here) because of how Carroll used his running game at USC. He always had a good mixture of power and speed, with a tandem system. Maybe that supports the idea of taking a top tier RB and keeping 4 of them on the roster. Of course I still believe that CMike can be everything we need so…

    • Steele1324

      Abdullah is undersized, has a very rough running style, but is quick and has ST abilities. I see him as a change of pacer, not a lead back. Rd 2-3 is my guess—which is not good, because that is also where I think the Hawks need to focus on their top O-line picks, and possibly WR.

      If you are an Abdullah fan, I will bang the drums again for WR Kenny Bell. Bell’s vicious blocking carved out a lot of open field for Abdullah, and Bell relished it. Just think of what Bell could do for Marshawn Lynch’s running game.

      Bell makes everyone around him better. It is not a cliche in his case. Really love players like that.

      • rowdy

        I agree completely, I would take bell above lockett in fact. End of the third the earliest though. Abdullah is small, fumbles and isn’t good at pass blocking. I believe that’s the 3 things they care most about for a rb.

    • JC

      in terms of roster construction, if they want to add a bigger WR and to accommodate the existing WR group and the need for a return guy, there’s some logic picking Abdullah. That said, there could be room for 2 WRs with the reality that Richardson may not be available until November, if at all in 2015.

    • Matt

      Different Matt here. Abdullah’s fumbling issues are very real and cannot be ignored. Yes he’s an explosive runner with great elusiveness and runs harder than I’d expect from a RB of his size. He has very small hands with a history of putting the ball on the ground too much for me to want him on the Hawks. IMO That said he’s probably going to be taken in the 2-mid 3rd round. Gio Bernard type runner who could really thrive in a RBC.

    • Rob Staton

      I think they would consider him if they see unique traits and qualities. Abdullah is a fantastic competitor. We shouldn’t count anyone out based purely on size (see: R. Wilson). However, I do wonder if he’s capable of a feature role at the next level. I’m not totally convinced they’ll believe he can realistically replace Lynch. He’s good, but is he good enough?

      • Steele1324

        I see Abdullah in a Darren Sproles/Shane Vereen kind of role.

      • rowdy

        To me a smaller rb is like a cb with sub 32 inch arms on this team. They don’t draft them, I love his film but the things he’s bad at are the things they look for.

        • Hawksince77

          Witness Josh Wilson and Justin Forsett.

  22. Steele1324

    This article on sleepers

    mentions WR Dezmin Lewis and CB Tye Smith. I see a lot of potential with both of them. I believe Smith has the arm length for the Hawks. To me, he looks better than Tray Walker. Dez Lewis has a nice outside game, 4.4 speed. Bobby Ingram and the Ravens have already expressed an interest in Lewis.

  23. AlaskaHawk

    One thing I find interesting is just how different the various draft boards are from the mid first round on. One board I was looking at had listed the following wide receivers as going:
    #4 Kevin White to Oakland
    #5 Amari Cooper to Washington
    #14 DeVante Parker to Miami
    #15 Jaelen Strong to San Francisco (darn you SF)
    #16 Dorial Green-Beckham to Houston

    That would be a really strong run on receivers early in the draft. They don’t have any other receivers off the boards in the last half of the first.

    Second Round:
    #39 Breshad Perriman to Chicago
    #42 Maxx Williams to Atlanta
    #49 Sammie Coates to Kansas City
    #52 Devin Smith to Philidelphia
    #53 Tyler Lockett to Cincinnati (slot)
    #57 Phillip Dorsett to Carolina
    #58 Nelson Agholor to Baltimore
    #64 Rashad Greene to New England

    Looking at that list, it might be worthwhile to move up in the second round for Smith or Agholor in the 6′ and 200# range, or for a small speedy guy like Dorsett who ran a 4.33 / 40. I would prefer to find the small speedy guys later in the draft. Also whoever is best at kick returns would be a bonus.

    Or how about if Rashad Greene falls to the Seahawks. He is too skinny to hold up, but maybe with some weight training.

    • Ed

      Moving up 10 spots wouldn’t be that bad to get either Lockett/Dorsett/Agholor, but probably won’t trade up. If draft falls like that:

      63 Edwards (DL)
      95 Grasu (C)
      112 Conley (WR)
      130 Marpet (G)
      134 Waller (WR)

      • Therick05

        Grasu wont fall to 95 and Marpet wont fall to 130, IMO

        My mock draft would be:

        -Ty Sambrailo OT -> 2nd rd

        – Tre McBride WR-> 3rd rd

        – Ifo Ekpre-Olomu CB. 4th rd
        -Rakeem Nunez-Roches DT 4th rd
        -Mitch Morse OG 4th rd

        -DeAndre Smelter WR 5th rd
        -Shaquille Riddick DE. 5th rd

        -Tevin McDonald S. 6th rd
        – Terrance Plummer ILB 6th rd
        – Tray Walker CB. 6th rd

        – Antoine Everett OG 7th rd

        What you guys think?

        • CHawk Talker Eric

          It’s possible both Grasu and Marpet are gone by 95.

          I wonder if Ifo will last until R4. He’s good value in that range if he does, but I’m not sure if I don’t prefer Steve Nelson in R5-R6.

          Not the biggest fan of Nunez-Roches, especially in R4. I’d much prefer Hardison in R3 or Gabe Wright in R4.

          I’m predicting Tray Walker rises dramatically between now and draft day. If SEA want him, they’ll probably have to spend their late R4 to do it.

          • Therick05

            It’s possible both Grasu and Marpet are gone by 63

            In my mind, Ifo will be a late 3rd rd, early 4th rd. i like Steve Nelson, but i still prefer Ifo.

            IMO, Rochez will be the best DT available at rd 4, Wright will be gone by 95.

            Even if Tray Walker rises, he will be a 5th round pick.

          • Steele1324

            Ifo does not fit the Seahawks litmus test for physical. Undersized, short arms. As I posted in a section above, I am not enamored of Tray Walker. He does have the Hawks prototype long arms and length, but seems to lack intensity, leaves 13 yards of cushion, stands around a lot.

            Between Walker, Tye Smith, Swag Roberts, Adrian Amos, etc. I don’t think Walker is that much better.

            However, Walker has visited many teams. I don’t know if his agent’s hustling is the force that made that happen, or if scouts love him. Or both.

            • Matt

              I really like what little I’ve seen from Roberts.The athleticism is there. His physicality would fit right in on the LOB. Can really lay the boom as a CB. Read somewhere he was 2nd in the nation in PBU’s.

        • AlaskaHawk

          Considering Russell Wilson’s strengths in lob passes to taller receivers, you have to take a flyer on 6’5″ tall Waller in the late rounds (5th or later). He would be a project but is the right size for that. He might even be a convert to tight end.

          • Therick05

            I was between Smelter and Waller, TBH, after thinking again, youre right, we need big targets, and besides DGB, Waller is the best big WR. (Im using Devin Funchess as Tight End)

            • AlaskaHawk

              Maybe both Smelter and Waller. Keep whichever one has the best preseason.

              • Rob Staton

                Smelter unlikely to be ready for pre-season (ACL).

            • Steele1324

              I think any good WR with height above 6-0/6-1 with jumps allows RW to play that game, although taller +mismatch is even better. That is why I like Conley, Waller, Dez Lewis and, yes, Lippett. And there are others.

              Deontay Greenberry is a late round/UDFA sleeper. Extremely productive playmaker. Big (6-3), physical, is knocked for lacking finesse and speed (but he is 4.4-4.5), will need work.


              In this interview, he talks about familiarity with Earl Thomas, having practiced against Sherman and Browner. So the LOB knows him.


              Guys like and Rannell Hall will get ignored because of their numbers, but when I look at their film, they make plays.

              • Phil

                Steele – I agree with your point about receivers with jumps. Tate was not a tall receiver, but he had jumps, and maybe even more importantly, he was willing to fight for the contested pass. RW could be confident that either Tate would catch the ball, or he’d make sure the defender didn’t. That was my main criticism of PRich last year. He didn’t seem like he was physical at the catch point — I guess his body type (long and lean) should have been a hint that maybe he wasn’t going to be a battler.

          • Trevor

            I agree on Waller but there is no way he makes it to the 5th round.

            • david

              It honestly depends on how much teams believe in his ability to improve. he has a limited route tree and wasn’t asked of much in the way of receiving in that GT triple option offense. He could easily make it to the 5th in my eyes based on that and how much teams believe he wants to improve. hes a physical freak but that doesn’t always translate (Stephen Hill, Darius Heyward-Bey, Justin Blackmon) we will see though. I like him for his size and well he did catch all of his 26 passes last season.

              • Steele1324

                A team is going to go for a physical freak like Waller earlier than we probably think. Starting in rd. 2, I’m guessing. He is an instant matchup nightmare. And that does not bode well for the Hawks landing him, unless they move early.

                • CharlieTheUnicorn

                  This is a guy who the Ravens would like to acquire. A big target.

        • rowdy

          I really like Mcbride but his lack of separation is concerning. I think he will be over drafted and I don’t the hawks could spend their first or second pick on him.

          • Matt

            I tend to agree Rowdy. His combine #’s seem better than his game tape show. McBride’s hands are undeniably top notch though. Gotta love that! If we don’t get a WR on day 2 McBride,among a few others, on day 3 would make happy.

      • Rob Staton

        I wouldn’t rule out a move up. JS brought up on second round receivers. If he sees one he likes he can afford to lose one pick. They’d still pick 10 times.

      • Trevor

        Ed I don’t think all these guys will be available as slotted but if we got those 5 players I think everyone would should be incredibly happy. They are all players I really like who I think would not only make the team but have a real impact and be starters within a year.

      • Madmark

        Conley and Waller remind me to much of Kris Druham. If you haven’t heard about him then you know why.

        • Matt

          Especially Waller. He’s really stiff and hasn’t proven he can run any route other than a go and a curl. Intriguing size/speed but without any polish. Do we want a 3 year project that has little to no special teams value taking up a roster spot?

  24. Trevor

    The more I think about it if Dorsett is on the board in the Mid 2nd then we definitely should move up to take him!

    1. He instantly solves our punt and kick return issues.

    2. He gives us the Burner we don’t have no to take a top off the defense. Think about our passing game with Matthews as our big wide target, Balwin in the slot, Graham working the middle / seam. The Safetys have to come up to respect Graham then Dorsett in single coverage deep would be a thing of beauty.

    With a true burner to take the top off the defense there are simply too many options for the defense to focus on.

    If he is gone then Agholor is the only other WR I would trade up for as he is a great kick returner and will start at WR day #1

    If both Dorsett and Agholor are gone then IMO we take 3 WRs who all have incredible upside 3rd RD Waller, 4th Rd Conely, 6th/7th Smelter.

    • Therick05

      I agree on trading up for Agholor, but taking Dorsett just dont make sense, since we have PRich, i know he is injured, but using a 2nd round pick again on the same type of receiver we targeted last year is not the best option.

      • Steele1324

        It would seem obvious that a burner would add to the offense. Speed is always welcome.

        However, I will play devil’s advocate on this point specifically for the Hawks. Before his injury, PRich was a burner (40 times between 4. 28 and 4.4). Doug is not slow (4.4). Did that speed result in consistent downfield TDs? Not really. Dorsett is smaller and less physical than PRich, runs about as fast. Why would Dorsett do any better than PRich did?

        I am coming around to EvanUnger’s point that, for RW specifically, height might be more important than speed. The combination of sufficient height AND speed is ideal.

        • Therick05

          Thats what i mean, what we really need is that BIG receiver who can catch 50/50 balls and is a matchup nightmare for DBs.

          • Phil

            tall, fast, big hands, long arms, Eagle Scout, and ….. most importantly ….. overlooked by every other team before pick #63. Maybe we have set our expectations a little high. But, we can always hope ….. or trade up.

        • rowdy

          I think it’s just to high of a pick for the role he would have. Bell in the 4th would be a better pick with a lot higher floor.

        • Robert

          The 2 times I recall RW throwing a bomb to PRich, they were both underthrown and broken up by the defender while PRich had to gear down and try to make a play on a 50-50 ball. The 2nd play resulted in the knee injury. PRich did make a lot of hay underneath by taking advantage of the generous cushion DB’s gave him because of his speed. I like Conley because he has good size, long arms, big hands and great hops. He is fast enough to blow by the defense, which will result in a generous cushion to make plays underneath. And that will allow him to contribute in the WR rotation during his rookie year while he hones his craft. He is also smart while demonstrating high character and extraordinary work ethic. His splash plays on his highlight reel are phenomenal!

    • Rob Staton

      Three receivers might be a bit much.

      I suspect one of the reasons they’ll go early, once, (IMO) is the great lack (still) or a player Wilson can grow with over the course of his imminent new contract. A true game changer. That is why I come back to guys like DGB. Someone with the potential to be the man. Ultimately that is what Seattle lacks at WR — not depth. If you get the #1 then the Baldwin’s, Kearse’s, Richardson’s (when healthy) etc become what they should be — great #2’s, #3’s and #4’s. Seattle doesn’t need two guys fighting to be the #3 or #4 wide out. They need a guy who further draws coverage. Combine that with Graham, the already established running game and Wilson’s brilliance and the offense can become legitimately as effective as the league leading defense.

      • Trevor

        I agree completely Rob and that is why I mentioned Conely and Waller. Both have size, speed combination unlike anyone currently on our roster and have the potential to be #1 receivers at least from a physical standpoint. When you are picking starting at 63 that is really all you can ask for.

        DGB is long gone before the mid second round if his character issues check out. If not then yes he is a great option. My question is this. If he fell to the 50’s and we traded up to get him would you not be wondering why he fell so far? I know I would be more than a little concerned.

        • Rob Staton

          Someone will take him after pick #50. And while yes it is a concern that he will fall that far (potentially) some team is going to take a chance on working out the talent. Seattle one of the few teams in the league (along with 3-4 others) that would be a good home for a prospect like this.

          Conley and Waller both have size but for me you’re looking 2-3 years down the line to get anything out of the pick.

    • Madmark

      Dorsett is definitely that guy Seattle has been looking for. The speedy, big play maker that can stretch the field vertically. I’m not saying Paul Richardson is a bust yet but this guy has showed he is a playmaker and the best version of what Seattle is looking for. I’m hoping the Saints get cute and wait till pick 44 for him instead of 31. If so I’m on the phone to Dan Quinn saying hey will give our 63, 112, and our 181 pick we got from the Jets for Percy Harvin. For some reason its feels right using the pick for our failure with Harvin to the guy we’ve been looking for so long to get. Some more mumble jumbo. If I take walt’s mock at 31 and draft tech’s 57 they add up to 88 divide in have is 44 which is the saints pick and Atlanta’s is 42. I not so sure they may not use next year pick to get him. If they want him at 31 well isn’t that where we been pretty much sitting at the last couple of years. I looked at Justin Britts NFL rookie profile and they really reach for him because that was who they wanted and I think they really want a Phillip Dorsett. It would be totally out of the box and unexpected and Seattle never traded up this much to get a player. If it doesn’t happen I’ve prepared another draft for day 2 if he;s already gone.

      • Steele1324

        But Madmark, Dorsett is not physical. He struggles with bigger defenders and press. His route running leaves much to be desired. Once he is open, if he is open (and if his legs are healthy), then sure, “see ya”. I don’t think Dorsett is a vertical outside guy. He, Agholor, Lockett, etc. are slot. We already have Baldwin and PRich. Slots are great complementary pieces, important, but—they are not your #1 X WR. Are we overdoing this quest for the Harvin type?

        As Rob says, they need “The Man”. Tough to find that this time around, without a rd. 1 pick.

        • Steele1324

          Also, Ricardo Lockette. 4.3. So PRich-Lockette-Baldwin was fast. Didn’t do a whole lot for the offense last season. So again, it’s the other things—not speed—that is missing.

          • Madmark

            I guarantee Ricardo doesn’t run 4.3 anymore. You need to look at Dorsett stats from last year.
            10TDs/36 that’s close to 1/3 TDs to receptions. 871 yards for a 24.2. He was still recuperating from a torn mcl that he got the year before last year. the year before that he had 85 catches. If your a receiver on this team 35 to 50 catches a year is great and if you score 10 TDs and 24.2 yards average your golden. On top of that it opens the running game and the middle for graham. You burn them once and they won’t be so eager to stack the line of scrimmage anymore.

            • Matt

              “On top of that it opens the running game and the middle for graham. You burn them once and they won’t be so eager to stack the line of scrimmage anymore.” Madmark

              Exactly why getting a deep threat would help us. It opens the rest of our offense up-even if they don’t put up big numbers they help the team.

            • Robert

              Young Dorsett might edge Lockette in the 40, but my money is on Lockette all day and twice on Sundays in a longer race where the taller man has that extra gear. But Lockette doesn’t stretch the field for us and neither did PRich. And that is very disappointing. I’ll leave it at that before I plunge into another rant on Bevil….

        • Old but Slow

          It is also true that PRichardson was a great big play receiver in college, and was only beginning to find his way when he got injured. I don’t see how Dorsett would necessarily be an upgrade.

          • Trevor

            PRich is hurt and will be on the PUP he may be back in 2016 but who really knows after a 2nd ACL.

            You cant compare Balwin and Dorsett speed wise. Dorset is unarguably the fastest WR in the draft. He is not physical but is incredibly sudden and gets great separation.

            He is also the best kick and punt returner in the draft along with Agholor. So you basically kill 2 birds with one stone.

            I agree DGB may have the potential to be a true #1 but if his character issues pass the mustard with teams I don’t even think he is in the discussion and will go to the 49ers or Chiefs in the 1st or Jacksonville in the 2nd if they go defense in the 1st. The only way DGB gets into the mid second is if he is off almost everyone’s board because of the character issues and if that is the case why risk it.

            Rob I come back your initial blog posting on DGB when we still had a first round pick. You said if his character concerns are legit he could fall to us and then why would we take the risk. If they were not a big deal then he would be gone. The same still holds true for me and even more so now that we don’t pick in the 1st.

        • Matt

          “I don’t think Dorsett is a vertical outside guy. He, Agholor, Lockett, etc. are slot. We already have Baldwin and PRich. Slots are great complementary pieces, important, but—they are not your #1 X WR.” Steele

          I’m not clear on what your requirements are for a true X WR. 6’2″+ 215+lbs Dez, AJ, Demarious, Julio, and Calvin Johnson are obvious and all went high. Here’s a profile for you:

          5’10” 186 lbs. 4.57-40. 13 reps. 33.5″ vert. 8’9″ broad. 4.18 SS. 6.98 3C.

          Doesn’t look very special at all on paper. Destined for to be in the slot…if not on the streets as a UDFA. The player is Antonio Brown. He’s pretty damn good. My point is you can’t rely on paper all the time. There are a number of immeasureable traits that go into making or breaking players. Not everybody fits into boxes. Baldwin is better suited in the slot, as you said, but he does well on the outside too. I believe Agholor is better suited outside but could produce out of the slot too. Lockett reminds me a lot of Randall Cobb-another guy who’s better suited for the slot. Cobb can get it done on the outside too, as I believe Lockett can. IMO

          • CharlieTheUnicorn

            Antonio Brown’s success will pump up the smaller WR stock. No one (GMs) wants to be the guy who passed on the next A. Brown in the middle rounds of the draft.

          • Madmark

            Your stats for Dorsett if those are it our wrong 5’10” 185Ibs, 4.33-40( and he stumble at the start). 13 reps, 37″vj,122″bj,6.7 3-cone, 4.11 20yard shuttle. What’s really impressive to me is he had his Pro Day and didn’t stand on anything and performed everything again.
            Pro Day 4.29 and 4.27-40, 38″vj, 129″bj, 6.85-3cone, 4.03 20yd shuttle. The head coach for the Saints was heard stating that was the guy they wanted. The question will they take him at 31 or 44. T.Y.Hilton and Golden Tate were the same size and they play both position so you can’t say he’s just a slot receiver. If I thought that was true I wouldn’t be so high on him.

            • Matt

              Madmark- Did you read my entire post? The combine #’s were Antonio Brown’s not Dorsett’s. I too thought it was cool that Dorsett performed all the drills again at his pro day. Shows how confident he is in himself and his supreme athleticism.

            • Steele1324

              I think it is worth discussing what it means to be a #1 WR. It is not just size and measurables. It is about playmaking and leadership. Think of all the #1 WRs who didn’t or don’t have blazing speed. Jerry Rice. Michael Irvin. Anquan Boldin. Andre Johnson. But they still got open and won games. The Hawks need that kind of guy.

              But the more important issue is about what kind of WR fits Russell Wilson and this offense. And for many reasons, and I again refer you to the piece by EvanUnger, Russ seems unable to make use of speedy smurfs. Not because of the receivers but because of RW himself:

              It would be a different issue if the QB were Tom Brady. A taller QB can throw downward darts at smurfs. Russ can hit smurfs if he has open lanes. Otherwise, he needs taller targets to meet passes that he loops upward. If we add more speedy smurfs like Dorsett or Lockett, I’m not sure how much that adds. If they are defended by taller defenders, Russ has to throw over both his linemen as well as the defenders and hit the smurfs beyond both. Which is difficult.

              Just give me a great playmaker with some height, who can play outside and inside.

              • Matt

                “Russ seems unable to make use of speedy smurfs. Not because of the receivers but because of RW himself”

                All 5’10” of Doug Baldwin led us in receptions and yards last year. I understand your opinion, but do not fully agree. Graham is the ultimate jump ball artist in the game. He’ll draw extra attention to help our smurfs get open. Other than the possibility of getting DGB I don’t think we have a chance at getting a true #1 WR talent in this draft. We can get a deep threat and/or a #2 upside type WR. There are quite a few WR’s that could improve our WR core in this draft. The list is long on those who could upgrade Lockette and Walters.

                • Steele1324

                  Matt, you may be right but I think there are potential #1s, guys who may be on the cusp of becoming good enough. If the goal is instant starter, it will be tough. On the other hand, I like the ones who simply have untapped upside.

                  In terms of Dorsett

                  I can see that he has such instant acceleration that he is dangerous at all times. He is so fast, that defenders have to respect him. His speed also means he gets away with routes that are not polished. When defenders do get a bead on him, he can be physically taken down.

                  So the investment in him is for that instant acceleration. Worth it? Instant TDs? Possibly.

                  • Matt

                    Jacory Harris was a terrible, inaccurate and a poor decision making QB!haha In Dorsett I see less of Tavon Austin and more of TY Hilton-who was little more than a deep threat early in his career. An explosive deep threat. Dorsett’s speed, agility and acceleration are all elite-impressive. I think Dorsett is out of our, responsible, reach at this point. I’ve been banging the table for Lockett for months now, and that’s not going to stop. I know you’re not much of a fan, but you can’t deny that he knows how to get open and is a big time KR/PR.


                    Note that Lockett is lined up outside on 2014 1st rounder Verrett most of the game. 58 seconds into the tape Lockett completely ruins Verrett for a long TD. That’s how a true technition gets wide open. Combine times are cool and everything but there’s a lot more to it than that. There’s numerous other clips from draftbreakdown I could share that show similar route running prowess, but this one is especially sweet with it being on Verrett.

                • EranUngar

                  No Matt, i beg to differ. Graham will draw the attention of the taller DBs leaving the faster shorter DBs to cover the rest of the WRs.

                  Playing the smurfs around Graham plays into the hands of the defense and allows them to distribute their man power easily.

                  Adding a tall/big target to Graham is the better way to use the attention Graham will get. How many teams in the NFL have a 2nd tall corner to challenge a 6-5 receiver after their tallest corner is attached to Graham???

                  The tall X/Z receiver is a must for a team with Graham. The smurfs can play the slot and work under the LBs.

                  • Steele1324

                    EranUnger is right. What I’ve been saying for a long time. Get the X/Z with height and speed.

                  • Matt

                    I understand your point of view on needing another jump ball artist to go with Graham. To an extent I agree, but it’s not nearly this simple. I could go a long convoluted rant here…I’ll try not to. haha Jump ball passes are often dangerous throws that risk getting intercepted. Unless Russell has confidence in his target to either come down with the pass or nobody does-he rarely makes the throw. It seemed like Wilson took less chances down field after Tate left. They had confidence in each other that if RW threw it up that Tate wouldn’t allow the ball to get picked. It takes some time to work get that connection. Tate is a big time deep threat/jump ball artist , among many of his strengths. All 5’10” of him. You don’t have to be tall to be a jump ball type-although it does help. It takes more than height, speed, long arms and good hands to be a reliable WR. Yes these are desirable traits, but they’re not all there is to it to earn the trust of a QB. Look at Ricardo Lockette a 6’2″ WR with tremendous vertical speed, good bulk, long arms with decent hands. He’s not a good WR by any stretch of the imagination. He lacks the immeasureables that make a great WR. Durham 6’5″ 4.4 speed-failed pick. Ok I said I wouldn’t rant too much. 🙂

          • SunPathPaul

            After rewatching Tyler Lockett’s videos, he is a PLAYMAKER.

            That is what we need…all this talk about height and smurfs is ridiculous. Antonio Brown is a supposed ‘smurf’, yet he was the WR leader last year. It’s about ability to make plays, and make them when they count! Tyler Lockett does that! He does it VERY well!

            He would be an instant upgrade at KR/PR, and he is great at getting open with a scrambling QB!
            That’s what we need! Someone to pair with siZe mismatch Graham, and knows HOW to get open and come back to the ball…he does this in spades! I truly feel Tyler Lockett should be our first pick. Regardless of if we have to trade up or not…he is worth it!

        • bigDhawk

          Yeah, I don’t quite get all the ‘Seattle loves Dorsett’ talk. For all the speed he supposedly has it never really jumps off the tape. He’s not bad, but neither do I go ‘ wow, we gotta have this guy’ when I watch him play. sure, he would be an upgrade in the return game but not enough to trade to picks to move up for him.

          The use of speed as a weapon in the passing game requires timing and precision, and that is not Wilson’s passing game. Height as a weapon in the passing game requires only the ability to catch the ball at a higher point than the defender. Wilson will be much better served with receivers that can play above the rim and haul down his improvised alley-oops, if I may mix my sports metaphors. YAC for this kind of receiving attack should be a secondary concern. Just catch the ball 10 feet in the air, 20 yards down field. Our ‘YAC’ will come in the form of Wilson run options around the edge when they inevitably drop off the LOS, back into zone coverage to help over the top.

          And complicated route schemes required for a high-speed, timing-based attack be gone. Just give me lots of receivers that can go way up over the defense and bring down the ball wherever thay are at. Do this a few times per drive, then let Beastmode run it in from the 10 yard line for the TD, or a quick post-up to Graham. Everyone talks about speed in terms of horizontal separation. But I think Wilson would do much better with receivers that can get vertical separation instead.

          • Steele1324

            I hear you, bigDHawk. Other offenses with QBs like Brady, Manning, and Roethlisberger are better suited to the smurf/YAC/timing.

            As for Dorsett, I’m with you on that,too. I do see unusual, almost instant acceleration with him—if and when he is open. He is the kind of player Al Davis used to drool (literally) over. Let’s remember that Jacoby Ford was small and lightining fast, too. He made some big plays for the Raiders from time to time, but never developed into a consistent force.

          • Robert

            Agreed…with the right WR, vertical separation is available on EVERY play!

        • Phil

          Steele – I would love to pick a true #1 at 63, but the quality of #2s, #3s, etc. looks like it will be better there. Do we want a guy who might become a #1, or do we want a guy who looks like less of a project, but is “only” a #2 or #3? That is what I’m wrestling with.

          • Steele1324

            Yes, Phil, that is a tough one. But those appear to be the two choices we face, neither one ideal. That is what you get after rd. 1.

            The problem is, the Hawks already have “only #2-3s” in Baldwin/Kearse/Norwood/PRich. Taking anyone too similar doesn’t add much, does it.

            Matthews and McNeil break the mold. I think they have to keep going in that direction. No more duplication!!!

      • Therick05

        Trading with Atlanta would be a Nice spot for DGB, if he falls to 2nd round.

      • Phil

        Madmark – I’m not sure that Dorsett is the guy — but it intrigues me, knowing that Brennan Carroll ought to be really familiar with Dorsett from being with him at Miami. If he’s available from, say, pick 50 on, maybe Carroll wil be influenced by his son, either thumbs up or thumbs down.

        • CharlieTheUnicorn

          Nice point. If anyone knows the guy, he should know everything and then some about him.

  25. Steele1324

    A reminder that the Hawks already have a deep threat on the roster in Doug McNeil

    6-4 208 4.4 40yd. Gets vertical fast. Good hands. High points/jump balls. Arena football experience=lots of red zone type experience and short field quickness.

    • David ess

      I can see him replacing lockette. He’s 26 turns 27 this year. He will be a camp body and possibly On PS. I Have him almost in the same boat as Chris Matthews.

      • Matt

        “I Have him almost in the same boat as Chris Matthews.” david

        Agreed. McNeil is a no risk tall, somewhat athletic project. Looking forward to seeing what he can do come preseason!

        • EranUngar

          Yes Matt, I’d like to see what he can do too. It connects to some of your remarks earlier.

          Tate was high ball artist without the size for it. Lockett and Durham were sparq demons, both had size and speed but no high ball skills at all. Even Willson has size and speed but will not come down with a contested high catch.

          I believe that Matthews at the SB surprised the seahawks. He was put on the field to force an issue and make NE react either by safety attention or by shifting BB over. They didn’t so they went to him and it worked. Still, they didn’t change anything and we did it again….

          Long story short, we need a high ball artist. McBride shows those skills with his basketball background but i’m not sure it will work in the NFL. I keep calling for another tall high ball catcher to be added to the mix. I do not see myself qualified to pick that guy but after the Lockett and Durham experience i am weary of tall and fast WRs that are available in later rounds. There is a reason they are not picked in the first round. It’s not their size or speed so what’s left? I’m always afraid it’s their ability to come down with the contest catch. Without it, being tall is just a number that won’t translate to the field.

          • Phil

            Eran .. forgive me, but I have trouble deciding who you are referring to sometimes. Lockette is the wr on the Seahawks roster. Lockett is a wr in the draft.

    • rowdy

      I just want to discredit him for small school and tbe competition he played but he puts on a high pointing clinic everywhere he’s been. He could make things happen.

      • SunPathPaul

        Im glad you put up that link, I’d only seen his AFL stuff. I think we might have something here.
        If he can contribute just 2-3 plays like this a game, then his stat line by years end might be something like this: 38 catches, 532, 17 per catch…

        At 6’4″ he would be a great addition on the field with Jimmy Graham. Mismatch heaven…

        Then imagine if Chris Matthews impresses, or we get Funchess or Waller, Dezmin Lewis, etc.

        All of a sudden we haves some ‘trees’ to work with on the field on game day!

        • CharlieTheUnicorn

          Think of a basketball analogy. RW is the point guard, distributing the ball to the shooting guard, small forward, power forward and center…. all of which can score. Talk about options and flexibility. Oh, I forgot the 6th man, Beast mode.

  26. Steele1324

    Compare DGB

    with Waller

    DGB is a more finished product. Neither is a finished route runner, neither fully utilizes their talent, Waller is much more raw. Moves like a tight end. Both can get you similar jump balls.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      The main thing(s) would be character concerns and which round they are drafted….. one has less risk / better value in my opinion; Waller. I’m confident this is a debate many scouts and GMs are having about DGB. If his character issues were no existent, he would be a low 1st round pick.

      • Steele1324

        Waller has freakish size but not much else right now. Straight ahead-ness, predictable. That worries me. Little in terms of routes, shiftiness, quickness. He’ll get the mismatch, the jump balls, the high points just by being on the field but will take a long time to become a Vjax.

  27. Steele1324

    Rob, what about trading up so that there are two rd.2 picks? Things seem to be piling up in rd. 2.

    • Jeff M.

      Not really possible without hollowing out our whole draft Ricky Williams-style (probably our 3rd, two 4ths, and a 5th just to get back to the late 2nd) or offering high future picks (which I don’t think this FO will do).

    • Rob Staton

      Very unlikely. Moving up 10-12 spots at the expense of losing a fourth is one thing. Trading your third, fourth and fifth to get back into the second — plus more — would be reckless. You’re only moving up from #63 because the options drop off at the back end of the round and you can get a better option for the sake of a small move up. There’s really little value in having two late second rounders.

  28. Old but Slow

    For the most part, I would suggest that folks temper their enthusiasm of players you see on tapes, and remember that those same players will not be able to do the same things against NFL level players. All of the players that we will be able to get at pick 63 and beyond will likely need some develop time. We got our sure starter in this draft when we traded for Graham. There is not another starter, likely, in this draft. Maybe some that will be regulars, as they develop, but I would not hope to see one of our draft picks take over a position, unless it was LG, where we have a clear opening. That is not a negative position, as I believe that we will be stronger if we continue to develop functional depth, and relieve the team from salary concerns.

    • EranUngar

      I’m old and slow too but i do not agree with your view regarding a starter WR.

      I have said it many times lately, having Graham on board changes the outlook of this offense. I will be very disappointed if Kearse and Baldwin are our starting wide receivers next year. The attention Graham will get should be complemented by a tall WR that can win the contested high ball. He does not have to be a complete WR1. He could be slow or very limited route wise. He may need time to develop into a proper NFL WR but he should be able to come down with the high ball over a shorter corner.
      IMO that is a crucial chess piece that will enable us to use Graham properly and open the running game against a depleted box.

      This WR could be someone already on the roster (Matthews/McNiel) or someone picked in the draft to be that guy (Conley/Waller etc.). I trust the FO to know if that guy is already here or if they need to go and get him. If they are not comfortable with the guys we have to play that role then the guy they pick will see a lot of playtime because there is position for him to play. He is the guy that forces defenses to shift a bigger guy outside to cover or forces safety attention. He takes defenses out of their comfort zone and makes them play catchup. If he catches more then a ball or two a game, that’s a bonus.

      • Rik

        I agree with you about the need for at least one other competitive, tall receiver. I do think we will potentially trade up, but only for DGB. I really like Agholor, but I don’t think we trade up for him. If DGB is gone by the mid-50’s, then I think we wait patiently for value to drop in our laps. That may be Agholor or Lockett, good (potentially great) receivers who are accomplished returners. If they’re gone, then we go OL and grab a day 1 contributor. In this scenario, we find our tall receiver in rounds 3-4. I like the focus on value with an appreciation for special skills, which is not to say that I’m always thrilled with PCJS’s actual picks. They do have way more info to go on than I do. That said, this site is very educational – I learn more about interesting prospects every day.

        • AlaskaHawk

          I see it as our two tall tight ends, Willson and Graham, along with wide receiver Matthews. If we can pick up just one more tall wide receiver, then fill in the other spots with normal size receivers and a few speedy smurfs, the Seahawks would be a really well rounded team that also plays to RWs strengths. DGB is worth a pick in the second.

          • Steele1324

            I’m with EranUnger. It is tactically smart to emphasize size and height, and the X and Z WR. I think Matthews and McNeil stand good chances,but why stop there.

            Go ahead and get another smurf, but this smurf must have charactertistics beyond Baldwin and PRich, or you are duplicating. There are few besides Dorsett’s pure speed with anything significant to justify high picks.

            Alaska, I put the TEs in a separate category, with Graham a hybrid TE/WR. So the WR picture, in my opinion, should be in addition to the TEs, not instead of.

            My board of taller WRs within reach includes DGB, Lippett (rd.3-4), Conley (2-3) (I’m afraid he goes rd. 2), Dezmin Lewis (4), Bell (not super tall but has other superior skill, rd 4). I am less excited about Waller, who seems to lack agility and quickness but (rd. 4).

            Vince Mayle is underrated, glides as well as DGB

            Then we get into low round-UDFA. I like Greenberry and Smelter. And there are others that are getting even less attention:

            Nigel King

            Cam Worthy

            Kasen Williams

            Kenny Cook

            There are serious ballers here. All use their size well on the outside, have sufficient speed, good hands.

      • purpleneer

        Many fans are incredibly overvaluing jump ball ability. It’s nice to have the tool, but it should never be more than a marginal part of an offense. The way for the Hawks to improve on offense is to get better at moving the chains consistently (namely when behind schedule), and that will come with higher percentage passes that result from separation.

      • CHawk Talker Eric

        While it sure doesn’t hurt, height alone doesn’t make a #1WR. The ability to get open and make the catch does. To wit, the following list of WRs 6′ or under, any one of which would instantly be #1 on SEA’s roster compared to the current corps:

        OBJ (R1-12)
        Antonio Brown (R6-195)
        Randall Cobb (R2-64)
        Victor Cruz – when healthy (UDFA)
        Pierre Garcon (R6-205)
        Ty Hilton (R3-92)
        DeSean Jackson (R2-49)
        Greg Jennings (R2-52)
        Jeremy Maclin (R1-19)
        Roddy White (R1-27)

        A #1WR doesn’t even need to draw a double team all the time. He just needs to make the play each time it comes his way. Note that of these 10 WRs, only 3 were R1 picks, 3 were low/no pick, and 4 were in the low R2/R3 range.

        In this year’s draft, it’s easy to see Amari Cooper will be a #1WR even though he’s “only” 6’1″. That’s why he’ll be the first WR taken. Of the prospects likely to fall within striking distance, there’s one or maybe two others out of – Agholor, DGB, Smith, Dorsett or Lockett – who could become their team’s #1WR.

        For all those who will cry there’s no way someone like Lockett could ever be a #1WR, keep in mind there are only a handful of tall, true nightmare-mismatch #1WRs the likes of:

        Calvin Johnson (R1-2)
        Larry Fitzgerald (R1-3),
        Julio Jones (R1-6)
        Demaryius Thomas (R1-22)
        A.J. Green (R1-4)
        Dez Bryant (R1-24)

        Each one cost a R1 pick. SEA simply doesn’t have this kind of draft capital. Their best hope of landing an impact WR this year will be in the 40-63 range. Not all are worth moving up for – I wouldn’t advocate moving up for Smith, Dorsett or Lockett – but they are a good value pick at 63. DGB or Agholor would be worth one of SEA’s 3 R4 picks to move up and get. I would add Strong to the list but I’m not sure he lasts that long; also would add Funchess but he’s kind of redundant with Graham.

        Height + athleticism is intriguing, but there are reasons why Waller and Conley aren’t rated as highly as the others listed above, and why they won’t go until later in the draft. They may represent good value vs. risk at that point, but it’s just not reasonable to expect them to make an impact, let alone the active roster, simply because they’re tall athletes.

        • Jon

          So, What of Brandon Marshal, and Vincent Jackson. There are many others recently ala Andre Johnson who is on the down hill slide as well as Mike Evans who is on the rise.

          Their are a couple of issues with your comment.
          1) It ignores the reality that 80% + of WR selections are 6’1″ or under and therefore you must expect some good and hopefully higher numbers of raw numeric talent than to their 6’3″ + counterpart.
          2) A WR being a #1 in Fantasy does not legitimize them as a #1 outside WR. (Was Cruz, Jennings, Garcon, Maclin ever a true #1 or were they productive in their system) (Is TY Hilton, Jackson, Brown, Cobb a true #1 or are they just so good at #2 that they are considered #1 because we feel guilty calling them a #1. That concept is surely a bit muddled) (OBJ is, and White was at one point what you are talking about, but then you have to realize that they were first round picks.

          • CHawk Talker Eric

            I thought about Marshall and Vjax. Marshall has the talent and measurables to be a true #1 WR, and he’s flashed, but that’s it. You’re right about VJax and Mike Evans – one was and the other will be a true #1 WR – but neither are right now. Maybe they would be on different teams.

            Andre Johnson kind of proves my point – 6’3″ WR supplanted by 6’1″ DeAndre Hopkins. Height is nice but not necessary to be a team’s #1 WR.

            I don’t buy the #s argument that there less taller WRs in the NFL because there are less taller WR prospects available to draft. This is the NFL. There are only 256 total draft picks, plus a handful of UDFAs per team. Not to mention WR is just one of numerous position groups. There are only 160 or so WRs in the entire League. If height conferred as much of an advantage as is being argued, there would be mostly tall WRs in the NFL. Tall athletic WRs don’t necessarily dominate even at the collegiate level. If they did, Waller and Conley would be R1 prospects.

            I don’t play Fantasy football so I’m not 100% sure what you mean by being #1 in that. But I think I get your point, and it’s basically what I’m saying – there are only a handful of true #1 WRs who are a mismatch threat no matter where they line up or whom they draw in coverage. They are primarily tall and athletic but there are several smaller ones – OBJ and Sammy Watkins for example. Regardless, each was a R1 pick.

            Guys like Jennings, Maclin, Hilton, etc. are productive enough that they’re as close to #1 material as SEA could hope to get in this draft. Any would instantly be #1 in SEA’s current WR corps. They were primarily R2-R3 picks, but even the ones that went R6 and later aren’t tall.

            My original point was simply to caution against placing too much emphasis on height – or any one particular attribute/measurable/criterion – in evaluating WR prospects. Chances are SEA won’t find a true #1 WR in this draft. I’d argue they’ll be lucky to draft a WR who can make a meaningful contribution this year. I think any of DGB, Agholor, Smith, Dorsett or Lockett are capable of making a contribution and at least one of them is likely to be available to SEA at 63. DGB is capable of becoming a true #1 WR, so for me he’s worth trading for if he’s within striking distance. Agholor may not have the physical tools to be a true #1 WR, but he’s very much in the vein of Jennings/Maclin/Hilton/etc. – capable of high production and also worthy of a trade up.

            In the end, the most important thing to me about any WR prospect SEA may take is that he be able to get open and catch the ball on a consistent basis. I don’t really care if he’s 6’5″ (DGB) or 5’10” (Dorsett).

            • Hawksince77

              I think you laid this out very well, and would echo several of your points with nothing to disagree with.

              If you are drafting Waller/Conley based on measurable and limited/decent tape, you need to plan on developing them with the risk they may never reach a level to contribute. That being the case, you don’t pay a premium: you draft them in rounds 4-6, if at all.

              The odds of drafting an immediate impact WR in this draft is highly unlikely.

            • Jon

              Interesting you bring up Hopkins in this post. You did not list him before. And He would not have supplanted an under thirty year old Andre Johnson. I had said Johnson was a true #1. For me, Jennings has never been much without Rodgers.

              Also your dismissing Marshal because he has flashed but that is it. When, until he was over 30 did he have a season that he did not catch near 100 balls besides when he didn’t have a QB. You seem to have a double standard in your evaluation. How did Garcon, Jennings, Cruz, and a present day White make your list but you take out several Big WR that have historically and presently been more effective and more daunting to cover as a defense.

              Besides that I agree. Not just any tall WR is going to be our #1 or else we would not be looking to draft a #1. I also really like Agholor, Smith, Dorsett (who will likely be gone round one).

  29. drewjov11

    DGB’s off the field stuff is extremely risky, especially when you are justifying trading up to make him your first pick. I think people have kind of glossed over his issues to the point that it’s ok to take him so long as its not in the first round. He’s a time bomb. Steer clear.

    • Rob Staton

      I don’t think it’s a case of glossing over the issues. After all, we’ve spent a lot of time debating them on this blog over multiple articles. But the reality is we’re talking about a late second rounder here and possibly a fourth rounder to take a chance on a player with incredible upside. It’s not much of a gamble. If it doesn’t work out, well it’s a second and a fourth. It’s not the RGIII trade. His upside is far greater than pretty much any other option in the late second.

      My biggest concern is the way he handles press, not so much the character stuff.

      • Steele1324

        Would we be able to handle a draft that brings in DGB and Frank Clark? Effective on the field for sure.

        • rowdy

          I wouldn’t oppose it but like my comment below about dgb and intent, clack seemed to show intent to harm and is a bigger risk imo but that’s why he’s a 5th rd pick at this point.

    • rowdy

      I think “time bomb” is unfair. While is issue are serious to me there understandable. 90% of the us could have weed charges on them. The DV charge is serious but is it case of a teenager in love or a guy who beats women? Did he throw her down the stairs or did he push her out his face and she fell? I’m not trying to justify his actions just express a teenager in love is unstable and I don’t think you can say he was trying to hurt anyone. People compare him to rice and hardy which is way off base to me. Their in the late 20s and absolutely meant to cause harm. He was kid with a questionable childhood left on his own for the first time.

    • therick05

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

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

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

      The chances of picking are slim, but SEA cant pass on him if the opportunity comes.

  30. realrhino2

    When I read the comments sometimes I leave half-convinced that every draft-eligible player will be gone by #63! By the time we hit draft day I think some of these comments will have Byron Jones and Ali Marpet somehow going BEFORE the #1 pick. 😉

    Guys should be there for us at 63. Just take a look at the mock drafts. Every year, about 10 of the guys the “experts” have going by the end of Round 2 are still there at the real end of Round 2. Still, agree with Rob. If there is a game-changer in the 50s still on the board — for me, it’d have to be DGB, a CB, or a DL — I think we should deal a 4th to go get them. If not, I’d like to see us try to get an extra pick in the 3rd using the 4ths and 5ths. Early 2nd and mid-3rd seems to be where there seem to be talent drop-offs, to me.

    • rowdy

      Very true, I think a trade up for d line is just as likely as it is for wr. When you talk about the depth of wr and oline they could easily deem a dline prospect in the 2nd way better then in th 4th, apposed to slightly better for wr and oline.

    • Madmark

      We need 4 OL. We lost Garret Scott(medical was probably suppose to be LG) Schilling (retired), Ungar(trade), and Carpenter. The only way we don’t do 4 OL is if we grab a Center in FA.

  31. Steele1324

    Anthony Spencer signed with the Saints. Cross that option off the list.

  32. CharlieTheUnicorn

    The beautiful part about the Seahawks draft in 2015, anything is possible. OL early, you got it. WR early, you got it. RB early, you got it. LB early, you got it. Any one of these would be smart and sound moves. There are probably 20 guys that have been mentioned as potential targets at #63. Exciting.

    • Hawksince77

      Agee once you add CB/Safety to the list of possibilities.

  33. Misfit74

    I think the Jags would take Ajayi over Gordon, perhaps after a move back. Gordon just doesn’t seem like the type of sustaining runner I perceive Jacksonville going for. Maybe even Yeldon in round 2 instead. Gordon is being over-sized, which isn’t to say he won’t fit a team well. He just isn’t everything I want in a 1st-round RB.

    I also think that hat team manufacturing pressure is partially due to a lack of a dominant LEO, which they c9uod take over Cooper. Part of that may depend on how they view Robinson and /or Justin Blackmon as potential #1 WRs.

    I love the trades included, particularly CAR moving up to solve their LT spot, and MIA for K. White.

© 2024 Seahawks Draft Blog

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑