Under Carroll & Schneider, Seahawks draft for the offense

Since 2010, Seattle’s early picks have been consistently invested in the teams offense

Given Pete Carroll is a defensive minded coach, it’s not surprising that the Seahawks have been overwhelmingly offensive-minded in the first two rounds of the draft since 2010.

You often see examples of this. A defensive coach knows what he wants. He’ll back himself to produce a capable unit. The Seahawks found stars at cornerback, linebacker and safety shopping in day three. They fit key free agents into the defensive line. They’ve crafted the #1 defense in the NFL without investing a lot of draft stock.

Carroll’s expertise isn’t offense — although it’s very much his vision on that side of the ball too. By means of compensation it appears they’ve focused the draft to build the offense. Just look at the ratio in the first two rounds since Carroll’s arrival:

First round picks

2010 — LT, FS
2011 — RT
2012 — DE
2013 — WR (Harvin)
2014 — WR (after trading down)
2015 — TE (Graham)

Ratio: 5:2 to the offense

Second round picks

2010 — WR
2011 — G (after trading down)
2012 — LB
2013 — RB
2014 — RT

Ratio: 4:1 to the offense

They’ve spent three times as many first and second round picks on the offense compared to the defense. If you included the third round it’d be even more significant. Seattle invested their 2011 third rounder in quarterback Charlie Whitehurst, their 2012 pick in Russell Wilson and their 2014 pick was used in the Percy Harvin trade. So far they’ve only spent one third rounder on a defender — Jordan Hill in 2013. They didn’t own a third round pick in 2010 because the previous regime used it to draft Deon Butler.

I’m not big on trends because you have to judge every class on its merits. You also have to judge shifting needs, injuries, free agent signings and more. So much goes into impacting what you do in a draft. Yet it’s somewhat interesting that Seattle has focused so much stock on the offense.

That isn’t about to change either.

They’ve already spent their 2015 first rounder on Jimmy Graham. They’re likely to focus on the offensive line and wide receiver in this class. All signs point to the #63 pick being used either on a receiver or the top offensive lineman on their board. It also remains a distinct possibility that they’ll move up to target a specific wide out should the right player fall into range.

The Seahawks also maintain the #1 defense in the NFL and haven’t lost any significant parts this off-season. Replacing O’Brien Schofield is achievable on day three (he had two sacks in 2014). The addition of Cary Williams allows them to target cornerbacks between rounds 4-7 (where they’ve had so much success before). Signing Ahtyba Rubin takes some of the pressure off drafting depth in the interior D-line.

On offense the needs are much stronger. They have to find competition to start at guard and center. Luckily this is a rich draft for both positions and they should have no issue addressing those needs, even if they wait until the fourth round. They need a kick return specialist who can double up as a role player on offense — essentially filling the shoes of the largely ineffective Bryan Walters.

They also need a receiver who can grow and develop with Russell Wilson over the next 5-6 years. Jermaine Kearse could be gone in a year, while Doug Baldwin is only contracted until the end of the 2016 season. Paul Richardson’s future is in doubt after a second serious knee injury in his career. Kevin Norwood and Chris Matthews are still in the ‘prove it’ category. It would make a lot of sense to target a dynamic receiver who can contribute in 2015 while growing into a preferred and reliable target over time.

Let’s also remember — Jimmy Graham is 29 in November. He should be able to play to a high standard for at least another 2-3 years but it’s possible he’s not a long term addition. Is he another Tony Gonzalez? Or will that 6-7 frame start to gradually break down in his early 30’s like a lot of other tight ends?

Does Wilson need ‘his guy’? Does he need someone he can have a real chemistry with? Maybe, maybe not. It’s inevitable though that he faces greater pressure as an eventual $100m quarterback. That pressure will only grow with further responsibility — something he has to expect when Marshawn Lynch retires. It doesn’t mean Seattle will suddenly start throwing more. They might have to make more of the times they do throw, however, with Lynch no longer wearing out defenses.

When they’ve got their O-liners (the fourth round still looks like a sweet spot there) they can look at the gems on defense. A possible pass rusher for the edge and inside. A corner. They will probably consider adding a safety (although Dion Bailey showed promise last year). This will fill out the depth.

Essentially there’s not a great deal the Seahawks can do to improve defensively. Even though they ranked 5th overall on offense (according to Football Outsiders), there are still obvious potential improvements. The high ranking was based around a prolific run attack. Reaching the #1 spot on offense and defense is achievable next year if they can improve the passing game.

If you doubt whether the Seahawks will consider drafting a specialist kick returner — consider the #19 ranking on special teams. That was a considerable drop from 2014 (#5). Part of it was injuries hitting the depth. Part of it was the total lack of even a moderate kick-return threat. Walters was a fair catch specialist (only half joking). Adding a legit return man and gaining a little more fortune with injuries presents the greatest possible opportunity for improvement in 2015. The Seahawks could prioritize this area given it’s such a fixable issue.

I sense there’s still room for a ‘luxury’ pick. And by luxury what I really mean is ‘planning wisely ahead’. A player who won’t contribute much this year but potentially has a vital impact in 2016. Although the Seahawks have generally attacked needs early in each of the PCJS drafts, they showed in 2013 with the addition of Christine Michael two things:

1) They know how difficult it’s going to be to replace Marshawn Lynch and are being especially prepared for that eventuality

2) They have no issue drafting a possible ‘running back of the future’ early

If they see a running back they like, if the value fits, if it means being particularly prepared one year before Robert Turbin is a free agent and Lynch possibly quits, I think they’ll be willing to take that step. The stars possibly don’t align to make this a reality. It certainly can’t be ruled out, however, just because football rhetoric in 2015 undermines the role of a great running back. Seattle’s offense will always be focused on the run. That’s not the case for most other teams.

If you missed it, here’s my most recent seven-round Seahawks mock draft.


  1. Josh

    I’m just going to go on record saying I wish you had Terry Blount’s job.

    Interesting article though. I’ve wondered why they struggle to draft for offense. This article ahows its much worse than I thought given then high draft capital invested.

    • LikwidIce

      Hear, hear! (Blount’s job)

      • CHawk Talker Eric

        Eh, let Blount keep his job under the evil ESPN empire.

        Just as long as Rob get paid like him.

        • Tien

          Agreed. Blount’s writing is boring and uninspired but no different than the other ESPN beat writers. I’m just glad we have this blog as the clear alternative!

          • CharlieTheUnicorn

            Sando was the best. But I’m biased. Blount lives on the East coast, so it is understandable he doesn’t have good insight and connections to the team.

            Blounts picks for each round for Seattle made me laugh, repeatedly.

            • Matt

              Agree- I miss Sando covering the Hawks. The only thing I didn’t like about him was that he’s, admittedly, not a scout.

            • Coug1990

              Actually, Blount lives in Gig Harbor. He has lived in Gig Harbor for around 9-10 years now. That is why ESPN chose him to be Sando’s replacement. He was a beat writer for the Houston Oilers before they moved to Tennessee.

              • CharlieTheUnicorn

                I can forgive him .. if he still lived on the East Coast… but living in the PCNW and being so unconnected to the team.. SMH. He might be great at NASCAR…. Seahawks, not so much

                and then, there is change.org petition to get him swapped out.

                • Coug1990

                  I think his biggest problem is that he followed Mike Sando. I have read other ESPN beat writers and I think they are more in the line of how Blount reports. Sando was special and that is why he was promoted. Sando’s are rare and following him was an impossible job. If Blount gets removed, don’t expect much better.

                  • CharlieTheUnicorn

                    Could have Williamson, that guy is horrible…. so I have to visit here to get information 🙂

        • rowdy

          Sense espn switched their layout I haven’t been on, I always find the info before they put it out anyways and generally don’t like the articles. I’m not an insider so I can’t read sando articles anyway and I hate the new layout.

    • Matt

      There’s no question at all that Rob does a far superior job compared to Terry Blount! Blount has as much insight as a casual fan and I doubt he does any real scouting. He should go back to NASCAR! I, like others, am very thankful for Rob’s informative, well thought out site!

    • JeffC

      It is interesting how many bloggers got mainstream jobs after getting “known” for their work. I remember Mike Florio started profootballtalk.com and it got big where it was bought out and now he’s a regular on Sunday night football. Jason Churchill got hired by ESPN after talking baseball as “diamondgenius” on scout.com and starting his own blog. And Dave Cameron has built up quite a bit of fame for himself. Hawkblogger is a regular on sportstalk radio. I have no doubt Rob would also be a regular if he lived in the states and could be interviewed during prime time hours.

  2. williambryan

    It all makes so much sense that I’m left thinking the team will draft a punter at 63 just to prove that no one can figure them out. Seriously though, the Stars do seem more aligned than ever that we know what we SHOULD expect. It will be fun to see if that’s the case (including he idea of a luxury pick)

  3. CHawk Talker Eric

    Could it be the first 2 picks are luxury ones?

    I can’t shake this certainty they’re targeting Davis in R3. That’s one luxury pick.

    If you consider DL a luxury pick, I can see them taking Jarrett or Preston Scott at 63. That’s two.

    The third and so far unspoken possibility (aside from trading up for DGB or taking BPA at 63) is they have a target they know will be available so they trade down 10 or so spots for an extra 2015 R5 or 2016 R4.

    • mrpeapants

      im on board for the Jarrett pick. the pass rush was not special last year.

      • rowdy

        I’m not sure Jarrett pass rush will be deemed great enough for 63 with Bennett marsh and hill signed for a couple years. If they see him as a 3 down player in the future I can see them taking him. I definitely can see them going dline early with depth dropping off more then the other positions in the mid rounds.

  4. TatupuTime

    I can’t see the them leaving the draft without a kick return ace. It’s just too important to Carroll to let the return game lag like it did last year. I expect them to take the guy they like in the 4th, but wouldn’t surprise me if they took him before to make sure they got him.

    • Robert

      I totally agree that PC values the return game…probably more than most other HC’s. I believe he reasons that just a 20 yard punt return or 35 yard KO return is a big shift in field position AND infuses the team with energy and momentum, which is HUGE! The special teams defense was mediocre last year compared to previous years, as well. So I think special teams, red zone O and 3rd down conversions will all be the big points of emphasis on improvement this year. And you know they have a very detailed and well thought out plan!

    • CC

      You know that field position is a big deal – short fields – so I agree that someone who can both be the KR and PR would be ideal.

      With Walters gone, there is an opening for someone to be the returner and the 5th receiver, Lockette is fine as a gunner, but in theory, you could find someone who be a returner and a gunner.

      I know Blackmon returned punts previously, but depth at DB may not make that a good idea.

      • Jake

        I really think Ty Montgomery is a Seahawk come May 1st. Not sure what round, but I doubt the Seahawks will get out of day 2 without him.

        • CC

          There are several guys including Ty that could help in the return game – I would just like to see one of them drafted.

      • rowdy

        You just described Devin smith and for those reasons and prich hurt I can see him being the pick. He won’t be there at 63 and I don’t think they trade up for him but he would fit if he drops that far.

  5. pqlqi

    Seems to me like our lack of a return game had more to do with terrible blocking and less to do with the ability of the returners. Walters was only superior to Thomas and Baldwin in that he had the patience to take fair catch after fair catch as he was supposed to. Even on kick returns, our returners often faced 2 or 3 defenders as they approached the 10 yard line – ofttimes it was a mistake to bring the kick out, but just as often, blocking broke down after the returner committed to leaving the endzone.

    • Rik

      Walters made fair catches even when he had room to run, though, and when he did run he looked like he was stuck in mud. He got chased down so easily, it was ridiculous. Our offense and defense both suffered from our absolute inability to flip the field on special teams. I’m not disagreeing that blocking was part of the issue, but I have to think that blockers were getting frustrated with our poor returners, too.

      • rowdy

        To me he always seemed to run right into the pile and never tried to run around players and find lanes, he just ran straight.

    • Ross

      I’m not going to suggest Walters was secretly a pro bowl return specialist last season, but I do think he gets a worse rap than he deserves. He’s pretty shify and can make guys miss. He makes good decisions and has great ball security. He’s not particularly fast though. The terrible blocking just emphasised his lack of burst. Tate is good because he gets moving in a hurry. We definitely need a proper replacement.

      • Robert

        And Tate could just wiggle and nearly always make that first guy miss. That is a critical requisite to any punt return success.

      • Matt M.

        Walters rarely made anybody miss. Starting field position suffered greatly as a result last season. If you’re looking for areas that can be improved dramatically, kickoff and punt returner are possibly the best ones to target on the team.

        As Rob points out, PCJS have had more success drafting for defense than drafting for offense. I wonder if this is a broader trend in the NFL–are draft picks spent on offensive players more likely to not pan out than defensive picks? Or is it more attributable to the defensive speciality of Coach Pete?

        • purpleneer

          I’m not going to say improving the return game isn’t something to look at, but it’s not as much of detriment if you are better on third down. Moving the chains just one time can easily make up any lack in the return game. There were far too many possessions that ended with 1 first down or less; even a modest jump in the rate of converting 3rd downs will make a big difference.
          Also, it seemed clear to me that punt returns were approached extra conservatively, and it made sense. Adding to the effect of the injury losses to the unit (and it’s continuity) was the memory of getting burned on the fake by the Rams when the defense should have stayed on the field. NFL coaches punt too often and sometimes it makes sense to be satisfied that they’re giving you the ball.

          • Robert

            I am pretty pumped about the prospects of improving our 3rd down conversions and red zone efficiency. With the addition of Graham, the potential of Wilsson and Matthews display in 49, it is clear the Seahawks want to feature big targets that are open on every play. Even when tightly covered, they have the big bodies to screen out defenders and the enormous catch radius to win contested balls. Just a small improvement in these two areas should have a massive impact on our running game and overall offense.

      • pqlqi

        I’m certainly not making the argument that Walters was good, or good enough. But, there’s an argument to be made, like with RBs, that if you pass a certain skill/athleticism level and make good decisions, and you have good blockers, that should be enough. I think Walters passes that basic test, but the blocking didn’t. Obviously Tate and Antonio Brown and DeSean Jackson are on a different plane, but Walters was passable. At the same time, he’s gone, and it’s both good and bad. Earl made terrible decisions with terrible blocking. I like Baldwin as a kick returner, but he also looked out of place catching punts in the preseason – didn’t track the ball well, took too long to get moving.

        Now we are probably looking at Blackmon playing the PR role.

        • rowdy

          I agree with what your saying. The blocking was poor on punts and kickoffs. That’s one reason I’m not a fan of Montgomery, his blocking on returns was top notch. He’s obviously a great returner but I don’t think he’s as elite as his numbers suggest.

    • Robert

      I agree the blocking was sub-par. Even Percy was struggling to do much.

  6. CC

    BTW – Chris Matthews and Ricardo are on their way to Hawaii!

    • Robert

      Thanks for the update. I was bummed when I heard Matthews was in Seattle playing catch in the rain with BJ!

      • CC

        I was happy to hear this – if Matthews can somehow get himself in play for the 4th or 5th receiver, that would be great.

        • Steele1324

          This offense must stop being Baldwin #1, Kearse #2 and Lockette #3. It just doesn’t work that well.

          Matthews #4 or #5? Matthews should be competing for a #1, as should McNeil, as should anybody who isn’t injured. The entire team should be in Hawaii. And the coaches should not have any delusions that what they were doing was enough.

          This just makes me wish for the likes of DGB or another tall WR even more.

          • Old but Slow

            For when, 2016?

          • CC

            I’d love for Matthews or McNeil to step up and be a factor. Lockette is a good gunner, but there are likely younger, cheaper and guys just as fast to take his place. Kearse may not be back, so you have to replace him.

            • Phil

              Lockette just signed for $660,000 . Oh well, at least he is cheap. And, a good gunner.

            • williambryan

              Who is this McNeil?? I haven’t heard of him before…

              • rowdy

                Signed him early this offseason. Came from arena league, 6-4 with good speed and puts on a high pointing clinic everywhere he’s been. He’s basically what mathews was last year.

  7. no frickin clue

    I am going to dress up like Bryan Walters for Halloween. The costume consists of me raising my hand over my head and not moving forward to collect candy.

    (can we please draft Ty Montgomery to replace this guy?)

    • Robert


    • JMac

      Ty Montgomery is slow under NFLs standards – mark my words! Mario Alford is where it’s at!

      • rowdy

        If where drafting a pure returner I would take Alford in the 6th over Montgomery in the 4th

        • Rik

          Alford is fast and shifty, but he’s also very small. I have questions about his durability and strength. I like Montgomery better because he is very strong and has a lot of potential as a YAC wideout.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      The two most annoying names on the blog…. DGB and Montgomery

      • Jake

        Why are they annoying?

    • Matt

      No fricken clue- hahaha!

      • David M2

        I’m going as Darrell Blount for Halloween. That will be me standing on the sidelines making horrible play calls and then I’ll follow it up with a shitty article.

        Next year, I’ll go as Superman. That will be me simply doing the best I can do to dress like and impersonate Rob (I better start working on the English accent).

  8. bobbyk

    I did a 2,000+ word mock draft for the Hawks and I disagree about pick #63 and what it “has” to be. I’ll share it when it’s up. As anything, it’s fun for debate but nobody can really say they are right until May Day.

    • CC

      Especially with Seattle! I know some people have predicted a pick or 2 during the drafts, but I can say that besides Russell Okung, I haven’t predicted one Seahawk draft choice in 4 years. Now, I have picked guys that Seattle was supposedly interested in – Easley – but did I have Bobby Wagner or Sherm or KPL?

      Funny – I had a dream this morning that Pete and I had lunch and talked about the draft – and liked some of my choices… yes, it was a nice dream!

      • Robert

        Rob nailed the Christine Michael pick!

        • Josh

          Tharold Simon was a common pick too.

          • rowdy

            KPL was to because his sparq score

            • bobbyk

              The only picks I have ever been right about are Tate and Moffitt.

  9. Matt

    Clear and informative synopsis on the Hawks draft needs. I’m coming around to the idea of drafting a RB and it’s possible it could come with one of our first 2 picks-although I hope we wait until at least round 4, if at all. With 11(!) picks we can afford some luxury along with filling needs and gambling on upside. The one thing that wasn’t mentioned in the article is that we haven’t addressed the back up QB spot. Rob-Is BJ Daniels going to step in is TJack coming back or do we draft a QB?

  10. Therick05

    The Seahawks biggest needs, IMO, are WR, OL, DL, CB. They signed Williams and Blackmon (CB), Rubin (DT) and will likely sign either Myers or Wis (OC), after May 12, and Pete trusts Bailey and Lewis.

    They have not improved the WR position at Free Agency (Graham is TE), so i think they will get a WR at 63 or higher (DGB, Strong), then they will take a DE/DT at the third round and take a OL and CB, at the 4th round. Se are left with 2 picks in 5th round (OL and Returner), 3 picks in the 6th round (DE/DT, S, LB) and 1 in 7th (OL). The perfect scenario would be : 2nd DGB/Strong/Perriman – 3rd Frank Clark/Grady Jarrett/Kikaha – 4th Mitch Morse and Steve Nelson – 5th BJ Finney, Montgomery – 6th Nunez-Roches/Sokoli, i dont know,dont know too – 7th Antoine Everett. What you guys think?

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      A rumor last week was that Seattle wants to draft Sokoli, for OL

      • Steele1324

        Sokoli is Seahawky, no matter what position they want him for.

      • Attyla the Hawk

        Seems like he’d be a great LT project. Super athletic with 34+ inch arms.

        Might be his better position at the next level.

  11. Nate

    Reading Zach Whitman’s SPARQ rankings, I think trading up for a rb was a stupid thought like I had before. Malcolm Brown from Texas can be had late rounds. Also, Davis Tull is a freaky good pass rusher who might just be tall enough for DE. He’s the kinda guy u wanna make sure to get before others. I’m still more sold on Coates as a legit #1 WR over DGB, if he’s there. I think Jaquiski Tartt could be a Kam Chancellor on our team, as well as Ron Fields (cb) a Richard Sherman. Hrasu (spelling?) Glowinski, John Miller, B.J. Finny could replace Unger. Can’t get a guess on what rd Josh Shaw will go, but would be a upgrade over Shead probably.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      Tull and Shaw are SPARQ gods. I would not complain if they somehow ended up on the Seahawks team.

      • Steele1324

        Tull is an example of a SPARQ god who will be overdrafted based on his workout. His film is unimpressive

        Undersized, didn’t dominate inferior competition. I do not see a dominant pass rusher at all.

        • David M2

          Plus his arms are very short.

    • peter

      I’m not sure about either play but if the teams taking chances its hard for me to see a difference between Coates and Conley.

      I like tartt and for the kam role im pretty bug on Clayton gaethers (?) Shaw was an idiot but I hope he falls and the Seahawks pick him up.

      • peter

        Nice auto correct!

      • Steele1324

        The difference is, Conley can catch.

        • peter

          I’m in the Conley boat….its just strange to me that Coates still generates high levels of interest not here, well here….but on national draft boards and Conley is this forgotten player.

          Conleys sparq obviously is off the charts plus his college stats while not amazing are basically the same as Coates.

          • Steele1324

            Coates has some spectacular to him. Can’t deny it. It is just a matter of whether that can be harnessed consistently. One of the main reasons for interest is that I think he is a candidate to slip, or was before his pro day. If he is there when the Hawks are on the clock? Hm.

            Do you take him, knowing you get Kearse-style spectacular but inconsistent plays, similar mind-numbing drops, with much more speed?

            Are Coates’ faults fixable? It didn’t help that Nick Marshall was his QB, either.

            Conley, on the other hand, looks a little stiff around the edges, somehow not entirely smooth. He could be even better than he is. I think his faults are definitely fixable.

            • bobbyk

              Please give me some Conley in the draft!

  12. Jeff M.

    I sure hope that Christine Michael is a lesson learned for PC/JS, not a model for the future. Spending a top pick on a RBotF was a poor decision not just in hindsight but ex ante a bad value.

    RBs provide almost all of their positive value on the rookie deal. They peak early and can contribute right away as rookies, then decline fast and have the shortest careers of any position. And even the ones that break that trend then get overpaid when they hit FA. Just look at two of the most talented and productive backs in the league in McCoy and Murray this offseason. Neither the Eagles or the Cowboys wanted to retain their guy at market prices on second contracts.

    So why if a guy’s only going to have 3-4 of positive value would we want to waste 1-2 of them sitting him on the bench (like we’ve already done with Michael, who now with Lynch’s extension is likely to leave in FA never having seen the field)? You should only spend any real draft capital on a RB (there are always capable backup or RBBC guys in late rounds/UDFA) if there’s an immediate path to significant playing time in years 1-2 (the ones where he has the most value).

    This is in stark contrast to a position like QB or OT, where guys take time to develop and then play forever, generating much of their value in the second or third contract. You can have a Rodgers behind Favre or a Rivers behind Brees and end up with it as a very successful pick. But how much on field value did the Chargers get out of having Turner behind Tomlinson or the Texans out of Tate behind Foster (or other guys who sat behind a star then left in FA)?

    Out of all the positions they could target with the first couple of picks (immediate needs at G, C, WR; future needs at OT, DT, DE, CB), RB would be about the most disappointing.

    • peter

      I agree with this with one addendum if the RB could offer immediate return duties then looking to the future and playing now would be a good pick.

      Christine Michael if not go the Percy deal would be the most wasted pick made thus far. If the team drafts Davis and sits him in the third I will be pretty bothered. Mostly because they will have wasted a second and got nothing out of it because they couldn’t see bad pass pro and bad RB form on tape and if Davis or anyone goes as a RB in third it also means they are carrying or are likely to carry 4 on the active roster or again have cut Michael after drafting him for no reason.

      • Nichansen01

        I really doubt that the Hawks will draft Mike Davis, especially when there are so many more appealing options at the end of round three for running back, Javoris “Buck” Allen, Josh Robinson, etc…
        I think it is more likely that we draft a guard, center or offensive tackle at the end of round three, if Ali Marpet or Hronnis Grasu end upfalling there the Hawks will definetly take one of them over a running back.

    • Robert

      The Seahawks drafted CM for the same reason we buy hazard insurance on our homes. If you need it, you better have it or you’re screwed. If I don’t have a house fire this year, I will buy another policy next year. Then I will have insurance for that part of the timeline….

      • Jeff M.

        That’s a bad insurance policy, though. In your analogy it’s like paying the full replacement value of your home each year in premiums.

        You don’t draft an insurance policy RB in the 2nd; you draft one in the 6th. Or you bring in 2-3 UDFAs (CJ Anderson and Khiry Robinson both went undrafted in 2013), let them fight it out in camp/preseason, and keep one on the PS and the others on the “shadow roster.” If Lynch goes down week 1 and you don’t have Michael, you roll with Turbin plus your low-cost insurance guy (a la a Spencer Ware or Demetrius Bronson) plus a street FA veteran (currently includes Pierre Thomas, Ahmad Bradshaw, Steven Jackson, Knowshon Moreno, Chris Johnson, etc.). Or you trade a 7th for a guy on the bottom of someone else’s depth chart.

        There are so many cheap ways to get an effective RB if you end up needing one. The Patriots have picked LeGarette Blount up twice, once in trade for a 7th and once off the waiver wire midseason. Do you think they’d rather have Christine Michael than Blount plus Jamie Collins (who they picked in the 2nd round the same year)? The Ravens had an absolute worst-case scenario at RB last year and ended up waiving their top two backs for off-field reasons. They got a Pro Bowl season out of 29 year old journeyman FA Justin Forsett on a one-year minimum salary deal. Do you think they wish they had spent an extra 2nd round pick at RB as insurance for Rice?

        • peter

          I agree with this sentiment. the insurance analogy almost works but its not insurance if lynch goes down and you roll Michael out who can’t pick up blitzes and Wilson gets destroyed or michael puts the ball on the ground giving it to the other team.

          Lets call it what it was. A mistake. No big deal. But if the RB coach says your form isn’t working after HS and college its probably not going to get better. And as a RB perhaps the easiest position to have an immediate impact, if you can’t take meaningful snaps from Turbin who is literally beating you with just preparation vs. The supposed physics gifts its not happening.

          • CHawk Talker Eric

            Which begs the question: if CMike’s form didn’t work in HS or college, why did SEA draft him so high?

            Either they’re pretty incompetent in evaluating RB talent, or maybe there’s a different reason for his lack of play.

            Something is wrong with CMike for sure. But I think it’s more about his attitude and work ethic than his running form.

            • peter

              I think its,work ethic first….but until we ever see Turbin or c mike let it rip there is no evidence to suggest that they are good at drafting Rb talent. Turbin’s finally coming together…

              We can agree Seattle has a system as wacky as it can be at times. But thus far they haven’t drafted that great at WR and the same people that picked Moffitt/carpenter and to some peoples dismay, Britt…and this draft we’re hoping those same people draft oline talent to upgrade the oline they built….seems dubious…with that I’m still not sure that RB is a position that they are that great at scouting…yet. some teams just aren’t that strong in some areas

            • AlaskaHawk

              I agree with JeffM that you shouldn’t draft high round running backs until you need them. You lose too much value by sitting them behind Marshawn Lynch. Their rookie salary ticks away until finally we have a need and then they want pro money. It just doesn’t make sense.

              What lessons are there to learn from CMike? Seahawks seem to be looking for that game changing, tackle breaking, burst of speed running back. But then they sit him because (maybe???) he can’t block and doesn’t protect the ball as well as others.

              Why not go for the 6th round to UDFA running back that can block, protect the ball and catch the ball? In those rounds you are giving up speed. So he won’t be scoring any long touchdowns, instead you have a grind it out back that is good for 5 or 6 yards a carry. Is that so bad??? There will be a few excellent backs in that range, backs like Josh Robinson, that run a 4.5+. But they are still good backs that protect the ball, and that seems to be given a premium by PC.

        • Robert

          Good points. When the Seahawks re-signed Alexander, I thought it was a big mistake and lamented we were not more like the Patriots: obtain a cheap RB and they will thrive in the scheme that focuses on great execution as a team. The insurance analogy post is dumb…I’m just struggling to let go of CM and this vision I have concocted of lightening in a bottle being released on our opponents.

  13. Nichansen01


    I would like to know what your opinion on this is:

    Trade our natural 4th round pick and Christine Michaels for Cordarelle Patterson. Look at it this way, the pic other wise spent on a potentially average kick/punt returner such as Mongomery, Alford, Bell etc… is spent on a player who is a gifted return specialist with the potential to be the best special teams player in the league. Not a horrible wide out either, he had trouble learning new routes last season but he has had to adjust to new offenses three years in a row.
    He also is a decent runner to, he ran all over St. Louis in week 1 last year, reminds me a bit of beast mode when he runs. Minnesota would be getting rid of a player they are frustrated with due to wide out talent reasons (not for attitude reasons, the case with Havin) and gaining a draft pick and a young talented back who just didn’t fit on a team that already had beast mode and turbo. Running back, if Adrian Peterson gets traded, will also be a huge, huge need for them. Seattle gets a type of player who they would propabaly try to draft an inferior version of anyways, one that would instantly spark up the return game, and loses a player who does nothing to advance the efforts of winning and takes up a roster spot. Imagine the Hawks with a player who has the potential to be the top kick/punt returner in the league, it’s another thing for the opposing team to worry about, upon facing the leagues top defense, most elusive quarterback and a top three running back and tight end.

    Another thing I would like to add, I am a fan of trading up for Dorial Green-Beckhem. I know a lot of poeple respectfully disagree with this viewpoint but he really has cleaned up his act since transferring to Oklahahoma, and unlike any of the later round prospects, has the potential to be an elite big-play making receiver in a year or twos time, and will undoubtedly contribute to and improve the Hawks offense in 2015. The question is, would trading up ruin the improvement of our O-line? I don’t think so, I think without the draft we could reforge the line just with Patrick Lewis and Alvin Bailey as the missing links and have a functioning line that is just as good or even better than last season, Gary Gilliam and Nate Isles could also contribute more. Yet, great guys can be found in later rounds of the draft, Mitch Morse, Shaq Mason, Rob Crisp, etc…
    Another thing is that Kristjan Sokoli from Buffalo university is a SPARQ defensive linemen who, rumor has it, the Hawks could potentially convert to guard or offensive tackle, like they did with J.R Sweezy

    As far as improving the pass rush, Cassius Marsh being healthy will be huge and I beleive that a later round propect such as Shaquille Mason can help to. I feel optimistic about corner back with Tharold Simon, Marcus Burley and Jeremy Lane stepping up to be great players soon, and I think that Cary Williams will be better than he was in Kelly’s system, possibly playing better than Byron Maxwell next year. Will Blackmon is a player I don’t hear a lot about, he played back up most of his career but he does return punts and kicks, did the Hawks sign him with this in mind?

    Just my thoughts


    • David

      the thing with the CB’s position is that Tharold simon has the potential but does he have the work ethic. he could be really good. still needs work but could possibly battle C. Williams for a starting spot but we will see yet. SB kind of turned me off of him a bit. and Lane might be playing his last year with the hawks as he is due for a new contract I believe at the end of this season. he is a really good slot corner and the only thing I could see bringing down his price might be the injury history. he was out part of the first half of the year with I believe a hamstring or groin injury and well of course the SB. he could be had but I find it very unlikely as someone could overpay for him and the hawks not biting.

      I do like the idea of a C-mike and 4th for Patterson deal. I could see it happening with the uncertainty of Peterson but who knows. I’ve heard that trade idea being throw around though. very interesting.

      • Nichansen01

        Remeber he was playing in the Super Bowl and in the divisional round playoff game with a dislocated shoulder, that he hurt in week 16 in Arizona. I beleive that or really impacted his play down the stretch.

        In suspect that the Hawks would resign Jeremy Lane next year, after all he’s not a a big name and he has been injured most of his career. He’s a corner Seattle needs and despite being a Seahawk, teams will see that he was gone most of the past two seasons, and assume that he is injury prone, probably offering less than Seattle would.

        • David ess

          Have to also consider and may be even put lane in the Thurmond category. Which Thurmond was injured often or suspended and signed elsewhere for more then what Seattle reportedly offered. Someone will offer more then Seattle and that’s just because Seattle will have to be careful with their cap as they will be strapped after the Wilson, Wagner, and possibly Sweezy deals.

          Players play with injuries all the time. Sherman with his elbow, earl with his shoulder, Kam with his ankle I believe it was. Simon got worked after lane went down shoulder or not. Hope he can comeback And prove to be a good backup though. Don’t see him beating out Cary Williams but def. possible.

      • Willyeye

        In Simon’s defense, I just wanted to point out that Simon suffered a dislocated shoulder in Week 16. I heard it was much worse than Earl’s, and even after that Week 16 game, Carroll said Simon would be out for the rest of the season. And suddenly, when Maxwell gets a flu before the Panther’s divisional round game, Simon is playing RCB in the playoffs. It’s one thing for Earl or Sherm to play through an injury, but for someone with less experience like Simon, it probably was a bad idea to let him play in the SB. He should never have been on the active roster. Burley would have been a better choice. Simon had surgery on 2-24-15…hopefully he makes it back in time for the season opener.

    • Rik

      I think a 4th and C-Mike for Patterson is overpaying for someone who is a good returner but a lousy WR. We could get Montgomery, who was a great college KR/PR, in the late 4th round on a cheap rookie contract. Or we could get another great college returner with blazing speed, Corey Grant, in the 6th or 7th.

      • CHawk Talker Eric

        Agree. Patterson is a late R1 pick who hasn’t done a thing in the League. CMike is a mid R2 pick who hasn’t done a thing in the League. Trade straight player-for-player or don’t trade at all.

        • purpleneer

          Mid 2nd? Ummm…

  14. Steele1324

    We have been discussing the need for the # WR “The Man” for a while now, and I think that remains the top need along with OL and C.

    The question is, do the Seahawks see it that way? Are they so comfortable with with Baldwin and his “poop” that they would entertain beginning the season with him outside again? Do they think Jimmy Graham solves the tall target problem, and that they can ignore it now? Matthews demoted again? No big target in the draft? These are possibilities to ponder, at least.

    They did not make much of an effort in free agency to sign a veteran #1 WR or trade for one. Wouldn’t they have done that if they thought the need was urgent?

    • Robert

      They probably make a FA WR move if they don’t land Graham???

    • Old but Slow

      I do not believe that any WR that we can get in the 2d round will be a starter this coming season. Even a big talent like Green-Beckham will need to learn a lot before he can start.

      • Steele1324

        A new starting X WR is what the offense is lacking.

        • Jake

          Graham is the new #1 receiver – why get caught up in nomenclature? Graham is target #1, Baldwin is target #2, targets #3-#6 have yet to be determined. No matter who gets drafted, I wouldn’t expect them to supplant Graham or Baldwin in terms of targets and playing time, so this new “#1 guy” or “X WR” is not going to save the season. Graham is going to line up outside over half the time for the Seahawks, he was out wide over 60% of his snaps in NO. He is going to eat up a ton of “X WR” snaps which will decrease the Seahawks need for that position.

          • Robert

            For me, he’s a huge WR if he is being defended by a CB. But if he is defended by the SS or LB, he’s impacting the defensive scheme like a TE.

        • Ho Lee Chit

          Who was that X receiver in the New Orleans offense last year? They had the one of the most prolific passing attacks in the NFL.

          • Steele1324

            The Saints leading receivers were Marques Colston and Kenny Stills. They also had Brandin Cooks, Robert Meacham and a bunch of others.

            Jimmy Graham was not the leading receiver on that team. Nor do I think he should be categorized as one. He is a TE/hybrid, a weapon, but the wide receiver duties need to be separated. I think it should be the same for the Hawks.

            The Hawks do not have a Colston. The taller lengthy target. That is the Sidney Rice role of 2013, and that is why I want to see a starting X receiver back on the roster. We don’t know if Matthews is their Colston, so they need another similar type.

            The Kenny Stills role—slot—is Baldwin’s job to lose. Taking a Dorsett / Lockett/Mario Alford in this draft is duplicating some of that, plus extra speed capable of outside and return ability.

    • john_s

      I don’t believe that they felt that acquiring a veteran WR and paying that WR top dollar was wise use of their cap space. The WR’s available were either old (Andre Johnson) have issues (Brandon Marshall) weren’t available (Larry Fitzfgerald re-worked contract with AZ) not worth the money (Dwayne Bowe)

      With Jimmy Graham, you had a couple of certains. 1) He’s a big target that you’re looking for who 2) He tilts the field 3) Since he was acquired via trade, if he doesn’t work out after year 1, there’s no dead money if they cut bait

      • Steele1324

        This is all true, but there are plays that Jimmy Graham will never make, that WRs are meant to execute. Jimmy is not going to solve all of the problems. Jimmy Graham plus only Baldwin and Kearse again? I don’t think that’s enough.

  15. Steele1324

    Especially if they decide not to target OL at the top of the draft, Shaq Mason should be a consideration in the middle rounds at OG or C. Only 6-1, but possibly the best drive blocker in this draft.


    • Steele1324

      And also Max Garcia. Brennan Carroll should have a good idea of what he’s capable of. He also comes across as a smart, sparky character:


    • john_s

      I love Mason, been beating his drum for a while now.

      • Jake

        Love me some Shaq Mason! He could be really special in a scheme like Seattle’s.

        • john_s

          I agree. He’s not the prototype, but like Steele said, he’s the best drive blocker in the draft. His pro day numbers would have had him ranked at the top tier of O linemen at the combine.

          I think he’s perfect future center.

          • CC

            Count me on the Shaq bandwagon! The GT offense is enough like Seattle that those guys understand the importance of the running game. That is why I like Smelter and Waller as a WR option.

            • Steele1324

              I have Grasu at the top of my C board in rd. 2. Shaq somewhere in rd. 4-5. In between, Morse/Gallik/Finney. Do we like Shaq as much as the others? If C can be put off as long as possible, rd.3-4 can concentrate on things like WR.

  16. Steele1324

    Whoever WR Ed Williams is, he got an VMAC invite


    6-2 195.

    • Rik

      He was a transfer from Toledo. I found an article that said he had a good pro day, but I can’t find any of the stats. He had a good senior year with 53 receptions for 946 yds with 7 TD’s.

  17. EranUngar

    While we are looking for the best talent to answer our current needs we should pay attention to the ticking 20 million dollar time bomb under our feet.

    Since it’s too long to post here i posted it at fieldgulls.


    It should affect our draft plan this year.

    • john_s

      I don’t think it’s as dire as they make it out to be AND this is all that we knew about and have talked about at length. We all assume that Mebane, McDaniels will not be here in ’16. Rubin is just a one year flyer. So that’s 12 mil off the top right there. Baldwin is a free agent after ’16 so he’s a candidate to get extended before the ’16 season to reduce his cap #. Okung is a guy who has always been 50/50 on if he returns based on his injury history. I think if he’s not extended this year the team lets him walk and lets another team pay him top LT money so that’s 7.5 off the hypothetical 20 million time bomb. Kearse, you’re letting walk if you are going to pay him 2 mil in 16. So basically there’s your 20 mil right there. Then there’s the question on if Marshawn even returns in ’16 which would save cap dollars. The Salary Cap itself has been adjusted each year higher than predicted. There’s a good chance that the cap could be 2-5 million higher than they project.

      Yes, the Seahawks will be tight against the cap but that’s been a given ever since Wilson took the reigns at QB.

      Is this draft important? Yes and that has been known since last year.

      This article is nothing new, just a re-hash of old talking points.

    • Cysco

      $20mil is not a big deal to figure out.

      The cap will go up again. Probably another 8-million, though some “insiders” are projecting a much higher bump next year. Perhaps into the mid $150’s. So your $20mil time bomb is actually a 12mil one or less. I can’t imagine PCJS are too stressed about the possibility of being over the cap going into next offseason.

      • peter

        I dont know why people get so worried about the Wilson contract…besides the cap going up it seems to me that Green Bay has been paying Rodgers a ton of money and they keep on resigning their guys and wisely letting go of players that aren’t cutting it.

        I guess I’m in the camp that thinks that maybe Wilson will get paid and frankly not much will change. Mebane and lynch will be gone but lynch will have to set sail anyways. Irvin maybe doesn’t get resigned. Avrils contract comes up, as does Bennet but both would need replacements regardless of contracts. It seems Wagner perhaps, Wright to a degree, Thomas sort of, and Sherm are the only possible heavy contracts that will have long term cap implications alongside Wilsons.

      • EranUngar

        My calculations were based on 155M cap.

        I hope they are not stressed about it because they dedicate part of their draft plan to prepare the next men up.

        • Nichansen01

          With a free agency signing after the end of next season for a defensive lineman, one drafted this year, and two drafted next year, I think Seattle can patch up the defensive line pretty quickly if Rubin, Mebane, Williams and McDaniel depart. I think that Jesse Williams and Jordan Hill wil be the future nucleus of our line while we bring new guys in. Okung can be replaced by a left tackle we draft this year. Add another weapon for Wilson in free agency. Lynch leaves, Michael will be off the team and Turbin might not be resigned, making running back a top need. Have a rookie drafted in 2016 compete with a back drafted in this coming draft, possibly have them share snaps with Demetrius Bronson.
          As far as wide receiver, I feel like one will be drafted this year, but if Lockette leaves, Baldwin leaves and Kearse leaves I feel that a FA signing would be more valuable than drafting another WR. But I highly doubt that we don’t resign Baldwin. Then the receiving corp in 2016 would be Matthews, Baldwin, Norwood, Richardson, 2015 draftee and 2016 FA.
          That makes draft needs for 2016 (assuming we have 8 picks)

          1.RB (Trade up for Ellington?)
          2. DL
          3. DE
          3. OLB
          4. DE
          5. DL
          6. OT
          7. DL

        • john_s

          Schneider has said in interviews that when he plans he plans for not just this year or the next, but for 3 years out and he has multiple models for every situation. None of this is unexpected. JS and PC have got this covered.

          • EranUngar

            I totally agree with you John.

            My post was not meant to criticize JS or PC.

            It was meant to broaden our view regarding what are the “needs” of this team from this draft beyond the OL and WR we keep looking for.

          • Robert

            Well that’s reassuring. I just assumed JS was kinda like my wife with the debit card at the Mall, right before Christmas….

            • Robert

              That looks kinda snarky…I was trying to be funny.

    • Steele1324

      EranU, great article. You’re right, they are facing a looming cap nightmare. (And that is why I believe that if the goal is winning Super Bowls, they had better do it now with the existing cast, because there is no guarantee they will “win forever” if they lose more guys. If not for injuries, bad luck, and some stupid play calling, they should have finished off the Patriots. How many more chances will there be?)

      You have just reinforced that there are actually more needs than draft picks.

      I think the DT position is being addressed. JSPC has stockpiled D linemen, and I see them doing even more of that. OL is, as we know, going to be an emphasis in this draft.

      You’re right, CB has to be shored up, more than some think. I am not a fan of Cary Williams (Kris Richard is), very leery of Tharold Simon. We don’t how Lane is going to be, and Burley is just okay.

      I am a bit less concerned about RB, because I think it is easier to find good backs every year than other positions.

  18. Nichansen01

    I’m sure the Hawks will try really hard to resign Bruce Irvin and Bobby Wagner, I wouldn’t worry about those two players leaving.

    • peter

      Wagner I think is a definite. Bruce is weird because he keeps getting better which is great but he has age against him for his next contract as far as,how long and guaranteed years.

      • Steele1324

        Those are two players they SHOULD try hard to resign.

        • AlaskaHawk

          Except we will then be paying three linebackers in the 25 million per year range.

      • Madmark

        We’ll find out about Irving soon. Seattle has to make up their mind on his 5th year option as a 1st round draft pick by May 3rd this year

  19. Zorn is King

    I’m pretty sure that the cmike story was really unquantifiable. One day the inside story on keeping Marshawn focused will come out. And having a young talented back pushing him will be an unsung part of the narrative.
    Lastly, I wouldn’t discount the Hawks actually grabbing a QB. If Wilson goes down, as constructed now, the season’s over.. Which is a shame considering Lynch, the D, and a reasonable QB actually had a puncher’s chance in any game they play.

    A decent developmental QB wouldn’t hurt, not only for a capable backup, but in that same way that the Patriot’s continually develop talent at the position that they then deal for an asset.

    I love Hundley. You should too.
    Any chance, Seahawk heads?

    • john_s

      i don’t think Hundley is going to be available, but at the same time I don’t think you would spend a 2nd day pick on a QB. I could see interest in Shane Carden or Bryce Petty or Garrett Grayson. The problem is that you’re not going to find a player who has the all around ability of Russell. You’re going to either find a passer or a runner.

      I think the best option is already on the team and that’s BJ Daniels. IMO he should be the backup for the next 3-5 years.

      • Zorn is King

        I’ve seen Hundley being picked in the 1st to the 5th.. And I love Daniels in theory: but know so little about him. Seems to get moved around a lot.
        Whomever it is, they have to be a good placeholder, and increase in trade value over time.
        I’m not sure we have that now.

        • CHawk Talker Eric

          I don’t know of too many backup/developmental QB prospects who have had trade value in the past.

          I guess Steve DeBerg is an exception – he was drafted way late by DAL then traded like 3 times, each for a R4 pick (sometimes pick + player).

          Trent Dilfer is another – SEA trade him to CLE in 2005 for a R4 pick. CLE eventually traded him to SF in exchange for QB Ken Dorsey and an undisclosed pick.

          Usually, the only backup QBs with trade value are aging veterans with previous starting experience.

          • Zorn is King

            Farve. Flynn. Cassel. Even Mallet. There are others.

            • Robert


              • CHawk Talker Eric

                Not sure Hasselbeck counts either. He was Holmgren’s developmental prospect in GB. SEA didn’t so much trade for him as Holmgren brought him over. Besides which Hasselbeck was part of a multi-pick trade.

                • Robert

                  I thought we were listing backup QB’s that were traded for Draft capital. I thought the Seahawks traded Draft capital to Green Bay for MH???

            • peter

              Wasn’t Flynn a FA?

              • CHawk Talker Eric

                You beat me to it. Flynn was a FA. Although Zorn could’ve been referring to the R5 pick SEA got for him when they traded with OAK. Not sure that counts since SEA didn’t acquire him as a developmental prospect, but GB did so who’s to say?

                Favre doesn’t count – he was never drafted to be a developmental back up, regardless of Jerry Glanville’s opinion.

                Cassel is another outlier. The only QB to start in the NFL, but never in college. It’s pretty rare when a true developmental QB prospect becomes trade worthy. It usually only happens when the starter goes out with an injury – either for a game like Rodgers in 2011-2012 when Flynn put up franchise record single-game passing stats – or for a season like Tom Brady in 2008-09 and Cassel led NE to an 11-5 season and 2nd place in the AFC East.

                I hope no such opportunity presents itself for SEA’s backup QB.

                • Robert

                  Yeah, if that is the path we have to trudge to acquire a 3rd round Draft pick for our backup QB, I’ll pass and raise my glass of orange juice to RW’s health!

              • Madmark

                yes and next year we traded him to Oakland

    • Phil

      I like Hundley as a read-option backup, but I think he is a luxury pick for the Seahawks. I vote to resign TJack.

      • Zorn is King


        “Several Seahawks coaches were present.”
        Granted, it was for all UCLA players.. But it looks and feels like a fit to me.

        • peter

          Seems about right fir Seattle to burn a 2nd round pick on a backup QB for a probowler they got in the third!

          Actually I have no problem with Hundley if he falls to any pick in the fourth or later. I also like Shane carden out of ecu. But if Wilson goes down the train goes off the rails regardless of who is back there

          • Steele1324

            If they go for a QB anywhere above rd. 5, they will throw away their chances of landing the top OL and WRs. They may not have as much room for luxury picks as they think, especially given what EranUnger just wrote about the future cap problem.

            Do the wheels come off with BJ Daniels back there?

            • Zorn is King

              I like Hundley as the Seahawks version of Kirk Cousins or Ryan Mallet. Someone who if they develop a certain way, can be traded for a much higher value.

            • peter

              Yep. I mean realistically who even in the league besides the absolute obvious qbs does the train not come off the tracks?

              I like Eran’ ideas but if that’s how the draft is constructed looking ahead to a contract logjam then no position is of any more worth then the next. Meaning have mediocre recievers and fixing that is no more or less necessary then watching out for aging dtackles with contracts that dont match production.

              I guess for me since Seattle picks so late in round 2 and three I am fine picking any position as lob as its a player that can play this year in any roster spot. The top oline and wr are gone by those picks anyways that the team is looking at the best of the rest (to me) so contributors (to me) is what’s needed. Is hroniss Grasu going to improve the center position so much in a team wide positive over a penetrating 1tech? That’s how I’m trying to frame it for myself.

  20. Ed

    Expired contracts (of players with significant role)







    Assuming resigning of Wilson/Wagner/Irvin/Sweezy

    Lynch could be (probably) gone next year as well. We need to come out of this draft with at least 2 starters and 5 possible starters

    Starters WR/OL
    Push to start OL
    Rotational and push to start DT/OL/CB/DE/KR

  21. Jim Kelly

    Hey, Rob.

    A comment over at Field Gulls asked about a late round flyer on Adrian Coxson (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHVMS95q9gY)

    Have you heard anything about Coxson?

    The comment was by robert.loeder.

    Go Hawks.

    • Steele1324

      Adrian Coxson is one of the several sleepers who look very intriguing. 6-1 217.


    • Rik

      He’s got a nice double move on tape.

    • Robert

      I didn’t post it here because somebody else already did. He was highly regarded coming out of high school and chose Florida among many options. When his father became ill, he transferred to Maryland to be close to home. The NCAA made him sit out a year. Then, Maryland replaced the entire coaching staff. So he left for a small, local college. This back story indicates a possible opportunity to draft a kid with amazing talents that likely would have been a 1st round talent had he stayed at Florida. His father recently died of the complications from diabetes. Similar to RW, that is a rough row to hoe and somehow keep it all together with classes and world class athletics. There is a lot to like about this kid. On the football field, the suddenness in his footwork combined with his ridiculous speed to create separation in his routes looks like it will serve him well at the next level!

  22. Steele1324

    We know the Hawks need a punt and kick returner or one of each. The debate is whether that can be addressed more or less expensively, with a high or low pick, or even UDFA.

    Putting that one aside, I continue to see the main WR question to be how to bring back what was lost with Sidney Rice and Golden Tate. Two missing WR pieces, a taller X WR and a savvy Z type who runs great routes. Not necessarily instant TD makers, but consistent chunk plays that result in steady, sure marches downfield to scores.

    We know Baldin is the y slot WR. Kearse is more like a #5 utility type, shouldn’t be a starter.

    Who on the existing roster replaces Rice? Matthews is a question mark. Norwood?

    Who is the Golden Tate? McNeil? Don’t know yet.

    To me, this is two open job openings.

  23. Steele1324

    After more study, I am warming up to Ty Montgomery. This very detailed analysis helps:


    Perhaps the knock on his receiving is overblown. He is pretty technically gifted, runs crisp routes, catches with his hands. He gets open. Excellent YAC. We know he is fast. He is strong, built like a RB. He seems to be able to play all the WR positions, and great on option type gadget plays.

    As a one-stop answer for returning, and a WR who is just a little technique work away from being excellent, I’d be ok with him.

    • CHawk Talker Eric

      Draft Montgomery? or

      Trade CMike to MIN for Cordarrelle Patterson and use the R4 pick on a RB to replace CMike?

      • Rik

        Montgomery has upside at WR whereas Patterson is a returner only. Too many stories about his inability to run routes and learn plays. I say draft Montgomery in the 4th. The second and third can be used on OL/DL.

© 2024 Seahawks Draft Blog

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑