Why Derrick Henry could become interesting to Seattle

If someone asked me the question, “Do you think the Seahawks will draft Derrick Henry?” — my answer would be ‘no’. I think he’s very unlikely to last until pick #56 meaning they’d have to take him in round one.

I’m not convinced the Seahawks have the cap room to fully address their self-confessed off-season priorities (OL, DL). The likely options at #26 on the O-line and D-line will appeal one way or another. I think Alex Collins or Paul Perkins would present better value in rounds 2-3.

That said, Bucky Brooks had something interesting to say about Henry today:

“He’s an explosive athlete having been around him in High School. I know he’s going to be a guy that clocks extreme times — probably a 4.4 in the forty and a 42-inch vertical.”

Henry is 6-3 and 242lbs. If he runs in the 4.4’s and jumps a 42-inch vertical he might be the only human being on the planet capable of that achievement.

The Seahawks drafted Christine Michael in 2013 with a second round pick after a super-human combine performance. Michael is 5-10 and 220lbs and ran a 4.54 and jumped a 43-inch vertical. For Henry to get into that range weighing 22lbs more would be quite incredible.

They’d have to be interested. Even if they didn’t take him.

Such a performance would make Henry a rare case. A truly unique, explosive athlete. We know how much the Seahawks love difference making athleticism. And while Thomas Rawls is a fantastic, dynamic player for the Seahawks — creating a relatively cheap one-two punch with Henry could keep them atop the rushing rankings in the post-Marshawn Lynch era.

Breshad Perriman, the #26 pick in 2015, had a cap hit of $1.5m in his rookie year. It rises to $2.7m in year four. Getting Henry at such a price alongside Rawls would give Seattle the kind of bang-for-their-buck they previously got from Russell Wilson’s rookie deal.

The Seahawks don’t just like difference-making athleticism. They love production too. Henry did it all in High School and went on to win the Heisman and a National Championship with Alabama.

That’s not to say Henry doesn’t have issues. He’s top-heavy with long legs. Too often in college a glancing blow knocked him off balance and ended the run. He’s not a yards-after-contact specialist despite his size. He’s a totally unique player — built like a tank with the breakaway speed of a cheetah.

Give him a crease and it’s over. Give him an athletic, tough, physical O-line and he could be a superstar.

I’m not suggesting the Seahawks should or will draft Henry in round one if Brooks’ prediction is accurate. If they lose Russell Okung and J.R. Sweezy in free agency they’ll need to plug holes in the O-line before anything else. They’d probably need to rebuild the line with veterans and/or feel good about the mid-round depth. To be fair, there are some nice options (Tretola, Glasgow, Dahl).

A lot of people responded with terrified gasps when I projected Alex Collins to the Seahawks in round two yesterday. I understand the lack of interest in taking a running back early. This thread, like the one yesterday, is considering a scenario based on what we know about Pete Carroll’s Seahawks. After all, Todd Gurley was the #1 player on their draft board a year ago. We’ll consider many different scenarios between now and the draft.

Let me finish with this thought. Remember the mock last week where I asked you guys to give me a name for #26? In that projection all of the top tackles were off the board. So was Sheldon Rankins. If such a scenario occurs they’re going to have to draft someone if they can’t move down. History tells us it’s likely to be a unique, SPARQy athlete with production. An impact player.

If Henry runs a 4.4 and jumps a 42-inch vertical — it’ll catch Seattle’s eye. It might even push him into the top-20 (and another player closer to the Seahawks).


  1. Nathan

    I know this might rankle some people, but the more I think about it, the more I think 1 year is going to be a short amount of time/draft picks to fill the holes created by this years departures.

    Rebuild O line, find 2 D tackles, fill a hole at linebacker, maybe cornerback, add a running back, it seems like a large task.

    Do we need to be taking a longer term view?

    • vrtkolman

      You don’t need a perfect team to win the Superbowl. Denver won with no offense and Carolina went 15-1 with garbage wide receivers and a completely patchwork secondary minus Norman.

    • Rob Staton

      Fair question to ask.

      Plus, if a good draft = three starters from the class… they might only fill three pure needs at best.

      Probably why PC stressed they want to keep as many of the existing group as possible.

      • Volume12

        Nathan, why do you think they’re loading up on WRs and CBs right now.

        You can’t fill every need in a draft. It goes back to my rant yesterday. It’s wishful thinking and misplaced expectations.

        Getting 2-3 starters is a homerun. This isn’t a very good draft class overall.

        • CHawk Talker Eric

          They also added another RB. They will continue to churn talent wherever, whenever and however they can.

        • SeventiesHawksFan

          Agreed. Two starting OL and a year one starting caliber DL player is a LOT of pressure to place on a single draft. I hope they can get one quality OL starter and a situational DL player for this year out of their first four picks.

          A second RB; a second OL player who could start but probably needs a year before he’s ready; and an additional LB who can assume a starting role a year from now would make this draft a ‘home run’ type of draft to me. All of which is quite doable.

          One thing I did like about Rob’s draft scenario yesterday was that we’d have very high confidence that both players are starting caliber players if we have to press them into those roles.

          • Ground_Hawks

            It may be naive, but I would hope that is the goal with every move a FO makes for their team; draft or free-agency. It may not be realistic but like what was written on a fridge magnet that I once saw, “shoot for the stars, because even if you fall short you might still land on the moon.”

            • Nathan

              I’m sure they are, I’m more addressing some of the fan expectation of ‘we just need this, this and this’ and we’ll be back in the super bowl.

      • sdcoug

        I think you also want to consider the FO has consistently drafted ahead of need and has a few ‘redshirts’ returning. If you add Glowinski, Hill, Simon, Richardson (and even C Michael) etc to the mix…it appears slightly less daunting

        • Volume12


          Have faith in the guys drafted a year ahead of time.

          • Attyla the Hawk

            It’s worth mentioning that Pete was pretty effusive with his praise of the redshirt/depth talent already on the roster.

            I do expect that a lot of the holes that we can project on this roster will be filled with guys that are kind of forgotten from 2014/15.

            • LantermanC

              It’s also fair to say he did that with the CBs behind Maxwell, Lane, and Sherman a few years ago, and I don’t think any of them other than Simon (Sort of) contribute.

              • Robert

                What’s your point? That none of our young CBs are going to emerge and contribute?

          • Naks8

            Agreed. A lot of players need time to get stronger, learn the schemes and get used to the speed of the game. Not everyone is an instant star in year 1. If we draft a offensive skill position guy this year, I would want him to at least contribute on special teams, hopefully as a starter at either punt or kick return

        • Bassmanoz

          Not to mention Jesse Williams. Man, I hope he gets a chance to make the 53 this year. Dude has already conquered so much and could be a good backup DT at least.

  2. icb12

    I can’t even fathom a man that big running 4.4 and having a 42″ vertical. That would be absolutely mind boggling.

    • Michael M.

      Can you fathom a 6’5″ 239 lbs. man running a 4.35 and jumping 42 1/2″? Because that shit happened less than a decade ago… Minds were in fact boggled.

      • Volume12


        And he forever changed how teams go about building their WR core.

        • matt

          Megatron is the freakiest WR I’ve ever seen.

          • matt

            * was

            • John_s

              Calvin Johnson and Randy Moss are the freakiest skill players to ever set foot on the field.

              I still shake my head at Drafting Anthony Simmons over Moss. I really wanted to see Joey Galloway and a Randy Moss lined up for the Seahawks

              • Radman

                I’m going to just go ahead and assume those numbers are rumor milled BS for Henry. I’d be quite shocked if he got below a 4.5 and jumped that high.

      • Darnell

        I hate to think of what football would look like without PEDs. This sport is so entertaining.

  3. vrtkolman

    You lost me with “he’s not a yards after contact specialist”. I don’t think I would consider him at all to be honest, unless he fell all the way to the end of the third. His style screams Robert Turbin to me.

    • Volume12

      He’s much better than Turbin. When this guy gets up to full speed, he’s a homerun hitter. You think guys in the NFL want to tackle this runawawy freight train?

      Seattle scouted ‘Bama ALOT this year.

      • vrtkolman

        Oh I agree with you there, but him going down on first contact scares me especially with what our O line is right now.

        • Rob Staton

          Obviously for this scenario to play out, they would’ve made some FA moves to improve the OL.

        • matt

          Henry doesn’t break as many tackles as you’d expect from a RB his size. He does usually fall forward, with his 6’3″ frame, getting an extra yard or 2. That extra yardage adds up.

        • SeventiesHawksFan

          I worry most about how long it takes him to get up to speed and his long frame has future injury history written all over it. And if there is ANY kind of injury issue that slows Henry down, then he is probably done. Lots of explosive potential, but he does not get up to speed quickly.

          Rawl’s ability to hit holes and openings faster arguably improved our run game this year. It’s not an accident that Rawls had so many big yardage games this year that would eclipse the yard totals of Lynch’s best games, which is NOT a deciding factor in who is ‘better’. Lynch could make something out of nothing through breaking tackles in a way that few runners ever could. I’m not sure that Henry can do that either. He’s clearly very dangerous once he’s in the second level and up to speed though.

          • SeventiesHawksFan

            Along this line of thought about Rawls ability to burst through the open crease and get into the second level, he seems to have that rare ability to show patience for the crease to open and then get through it quickly.

            Christine Michael might never see the opening, because he runs to the wrong spot or takes an extra step, nor wait for it develop, even if could explode through it once hole is there.

            I don’t know enough about Henry if he either has the patience and timing to arrive at the right time, nor the short yardage burst to get through at the critical moment.

            • SeventiesHawksFan

              One other thought about both Rawls and Lynch is that when they burst through the opening, both ‘run strong’ at the point of contact. Arm tackles and weak contact don’t bring them down when they are running through the crease. And they are always pushing the pile and falling forward.

              I’m not sure if Henry is that type of runner either. CM seemed to be more so at the end of this year, but not on the level of Lynch and Rawls.

              All of this really makes me like the Collins pick more and more, since what I saw on tape made me think he’s more a Seahawky type ball carrier.

              • Volume12

                You’ll never find another Lynch.

                Henry shares some qualities, but is different too.

                • SeventiesHawksFan

                  Oh I agree. There is no Lynch clone out there. Was just reading through the essential qualities that will make a feature back most successful in our system. And then asking if Henry really possesses those.

      • Ukhawk

        Shaun Alexander was pretty good and of a YAC guy

    • Rob Staton

      I don’t think he’s Turbin. Henry has unreal breakaway speed and the ability to make chunk plays time and time again. What he isn’t is Marshawn Lynch, hitting a pile and driving it forward. You want him to be because of the size. But he isn’t. But he does have some other very intriguing qualities.

      • matt

        Henry is a great pass blocker, has natural hands, true 3 down back, a huge homerun hitter, among some of his qualities.

        The thing I like the most about Henry is that he thrived when everyone in the stadium knew he was going to get the ball. He was regularly getting first downs late in games against 8-9 man fronts. Crucial carries that win and clinch games. Watching him wear teams out and finishing games with incredible 35+ carry, 200+ yard, 2+td performances during Alabama’s championship stretch run was very impressive. It won him the Heisman.

  4. Volume12

    Rob, man

    You stole my mock draft 1st overall selection for Seattle. Great minds think alike. Ha!

    I was gonna surprise everyone, and wath them b**ch and moan in agony.

    He fits man. Freak athlete, he’ll destroy the combine, has the production, and is ideally suite to be a no 2 RB.

    I think this OL class is masively overrated anyways.

    Here’s his HS SPARQ score. Anyone that tells me they wouldn’t be attracted to this, don’t know our boys.

    4.50 40, 41.9″ iinch vertical, 4.12 short shuttle, 350 lb bench press, 440 lb back squat, 44. 5 PB (powerball throw), total SPARQ score? 147.97! Oh my gawd! Jeezuz grab the wheel!

    • Volume12

      OT class is overrated.

      • Poweroflogic

        What’s also overrated is blind BPA! A wonderful aspirational principle of drafting, but one that can also be inappropriately applied as rigid dogma (fortunately not by John Schneider).

        The hawks may conclude BPA is a QB. So what. They will not go into the next season with Britt and company, or more undrafted TE/DL converts, having correctly diagnosed a vital weak link in the 2015 roster which was a direct and leading causal factor in a season of periodic general offensive underperformance and specific costly losses including the playoff loss.

        The Panthers first half smack down, not long after the Rams reminder of a problem that plagued us the first half of the season, left a sting that will not be quickly forgotten. Racking up the most amazing roster depth in the league on paper at positions of tertiary need (QB) or secondary need (RB) would be cold comfort, and hard to justify to your owner or fan base, when the losses start racking up again next season because you did not push conventional wisdom to seriously address primary needs. By the way, it goes without saying that the primary need of OL is pretty closely bound up with the secondary need of RB depth when it comes to solidifying the running game that the Seahawks prize so dearly.

        If they have to ‘over’-pay for Okung, ‘over’-draft to replace Britt, or violate any other preconceived notion of ‘value’ cherished by others, this FO will do so to remedy the most glaring, conspicuous and gaping holes in the roster. One thing I appreciate about the Seahawks FO is the decisive action they take when they identify a need. Trade a probowl center and 1st round pick for an expensive redzone monster to address a glaring need? No problem. Overpay a discarded CB to fill a very worrisome roster hole (at the start of the season at least)? No problem either. Decisive action does not always turn out rosy but at least they try.

        The vast majority of high draft picks taken by the Seahawks, including Christine Michael, had concrete medium- or short-term need very much in mind in addition to some estimate of abstract player value at the position. Lockett may turn out to be the best receiver drafted last year but hindsight is 20/20: would he have been drafted there if he wasn’t a monster kick-returner and that wasn’t a major need?

        I will eat my shorts if the hawks draft a RB in the first round, and be almost as shocked if they draft one in the second, unless the FO makes radical moves with big contracts (involving heavy back loading or surprising new player cuts) that would prove even MORE shocking to the prevailing common sense than if the hawks ‘over’drafted to fill their needs. They will take seriously the need for another RB but this will be prioritized accordingly: no multi-million dollar Forte signing and no 1st round draft pick.

        • Volume12

          So, they should draft another Justin Britt to appease the fan base?

          You don’t have to take your no 1 need with your 1st pick. If the value or fit isn’t there, move on, and come back and fill it.

          • mishima

            Coming around to this. Makes no sense to draft a tackle-convert with our first pick; would prefer just moving Britt back to RT and bringing in a FA LG.

            If we come away with something like Henry, Le’Raven Clark (or Ifedi), Glasgow, Blair III, I’d be cool with that.

            That said, will pull a dick move and suggest trading Kam for an additional second. Too many holes and not enough cap space; thinking an additional $9 million would also come in handy.

          • Poweroflogic

            NO, drafting ‘another Britt’ could in no way, shape or form be taken to be the message of the post above. But you knew that. And if ‘winning’ = ‘appeasing’ the fan base or whomever then I’m all for appeasement.

            I do agree you don’t necessarily need to address your #1 need with your #1 pick if it doesn’t make sense. But if you have 5+ core starters to replace with no reliable depth to rely upon, you don’t have the luxury of spending your #1 or #2 pick on a #7 or #8 (or later) priority.

            Fortunately, the Hawks don’t appease draftniks nor blindly follow the false religion of BPA!

            • Volume12

              That’s just it though.

              Another RB is a need.

              • Ulsterman

                I agree totally with poweroflogic. Rawls will get 90% of carries in games bar injury. Christine Michael is there to get 5 to 10 carries.A running back in first two rounds would be a total luxury pick and unlike before they have too many holes in their roster to do that. The last time they did it with Michael it proved to be a wasted pick as he sat on the bench most of the time. The seahawks just don’t really use a 1-2 punch at running back.
                You can make an argument about insurance for injuries but couldn’t you make the same one at free safety or cornerback. The difference is it’s easier to pick up a running back from a practice squad or wherever. They still also have Bryce Brown on the roster who’s had 100+ yards in NFL games.
                Really hope they don’t go running back before round 4 or 5 – there’ll still be good ones available.

                • Volume12

                  You guys keep targeting positions based on round.

                  That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

                  What’s it matter if they go RB in round one or two and still find O-lineman?

                  Taking an O-lineman or DT early guarantees nothing.

                  • Rob Staton

                    I think this is the thing that has surprised me the most over the last couple of days.

                    Project OL/DL in round one and two with a RB in round three and most people give a thumbs up. Put the RB in round two (or in this case, R1) and move one of the OL/DL needs to round three and it’s met with a much more negative response.

                    Yet ultimately what you’re doing is two things: 1. Looking at a possible scenario, not suggesting it would or should happen, but merely considering it. 2. Not fighting the board and finding a way to fill all three needs with the best possible player. Not reaching — using the value available to help replenish the roster.

                    We also need to be prepared for a scenario where the top OL are off the board at #56 and the top DL are also gone and might not provide much value at #56 either. It might make more sense, based on the class available, to wait until R3 for a DL or OL. I wouldn’t be shocked if their first two picks were Deion Jones and Alex Collins — a LB and a RB — two players who fit what they like and fill needs. Not because they chose those guys over Taylor Decker and Sheldon Rankins. But because Taylor Decker and Sheldon Rankins weren’t available.

                    And if they go for the OL in free agency, it’ll be a sign that they’re trying to solve that need before the draft even begins. Taking their big need off the table.

                  • Volume12

                    Rob, I could not agree more my man.

                    I wanted to talk to you about this without offending people, but just couldn’t find the space to do it.

                    Baffles me to be quite honest.

                    And this nitpicking over what a guy isn’t or doesn’t d or his size is too small, frustrates the ish outta me and I can only imagine how you feel about

                    Maybe your next post should be titled ‘Don’t fight the damn board!’

                    BTW, I can absolutely see a scenario and would almost bet on it where a run on the top O-lineman and Sheldon Rankins will happen right in front of our face.

                    As you said though, the value and depth at both positions are good enough to not feel pressured. I can’t see them leaving the FA period without addressing at least one of the holes on the O-line either.

                    Deion Jones is one of my sleeper picks as our 1st round pick. Love everything about him.

                  • Volume12

                    Or at 56 either I meant to say. In regards to the value on both lines.

                    As we were discussing earlier, with this particular crop of O-lineman, it makes total sense inm mind.

                  • ulsterman

                    What I would argue is that if there’s one position where you can pick up quality in later rounds or even undrafted it’s running back.
                    I understand the argument of not reaching on someone like britt just to fill a need but don’t think that will be the case this year – think there will be good options in first three rounds at positions of greater need than rb

                  • Naks8

                    I agree with what ulsterman said below. Unless you draft a gurley or ap, feels like you can get pretty good value in udfa or late rounds. Look at Kansas City. They had a first round stud with jamaal Charles, but when he got injured (every year), they just plug him in with spencer ware/charcadrick west (udfa)/kniles davis. Thomas Rawls came from the bargain bin too. Bishop Sankey was a high draft pick and hasn’t panned out yet. Just saying that it seems you can find comparable rbs in late rounds or udfa without reaching. Unless you believe Alex Collins or Derrick Henry are the next big thing

                    • Rob Staton

                      It’s very easy to make a case using a small sample size. Let’s also consider the top four running backs in the NFL statistically in 2015 were all first round picks. Seattle’s best three running backs in franchise history (Warner, Alexander, Lynch) were all first rounders. You can make any case you want. In the same way you can point to Brady and Wilson and say you don’t need to go early on a QB, or that Richard Sherman or Josh Norman show you can find a great cornerback later in the draft.

                  • Poweroflogic

                    Not only is RB not a top 5 priority, not only can you find good RBs later in the draft, but you can find good RBs in FA at 1/2 or less the cost of OL. For a team THAT ALREADY HAS ITS #1 RB the position does not have the value.

                    I think everyone appreciates the ‘consideration’ type posts — thought provoking and discussion stimulating. Without them there might be one post a week! But no one should take it personally when people write that the Seahawks shouldn’t and won’t do anything like it, even in the worst case scenario. There is nothing wrong with that response.

                    In all likelihood, in the worst case OT/DT/DE scenario, the Hawks trade down, trade up, or take a OG/OC/LB/WR/CB/etc., all of which are positions in which the team may need a starter in the next year or two.

                    The Seahawks will not ‘fight the board’, they will fill their core positions of need within the logic of the board, but their needs are prioritized. Another RB is important, but so is a long snapper! Obviously the former is much more important than the latter but the point is simple: every position is important when viewed in isolation but the Seahawks like every other team will RANK needs, draft value and free agency value in some complex manner. Another RB is simply too far down the list of needs, too far behind several other needs (not just one or two) which have come to fundamentally make or break game outcomes.

                    The Hawks will neither fight the board nor obey some abstract logic of BPA that is independent of team needs.

                    • Rob Staton

                      I would counter a couple of things here Poweroflogic…

                      — I would urge all fans not to view the running back position in Seattle as ‘Rawls is the #1 and that is that’. The Seahawks are not like every team in the league. The running game is integral — the core identity of the team. And it’s why since Pete Carroll came to this team they have done everything and anything to find talent at RB. Trading for White, trading for Washington, trading for Lynch, drafting Turbin, drafting Ware. They drafted Christine Michael in round two when they had Marshawn Lynch and Robert Turbin. If they’re willing to spend what was their first pick in the 2013 draft on a RB when they still had Lynch and Turbin as the clear #1 and #2 — we shouldn’t be ruling out the idea that they’ll add a partner for Rawls to create a 1-2 punch in the post-Lynch era.

                      — I would also urge people to avoid taking a position of “the Seahawks shouldn’t and won’t do anything like it”. Because that’s exactly what people would’ve said if in 2011 we’d suddenly projected James Carpenter at #25, or Bruce Irvin at #15, or Russell Wilson being the franchise QB to be weeks after they signed Matt Flynn, or traded for Percy Harvin, or traded for Jimmy Graham. Even in 2014 nobody was talking about Paul Richardson because a lot of people — myself included — fully expected them to go after a big receiver and not another sudden, speedy athlete. The one common theme is they love to take difference making athleticism early or unique traits. And while Henry to the Seahawks isn’t something I’ve mocked once since the end of the season — I don’t see any reason to rule it out if, as the article discusses, he runs a 4.4 and jumps a 42 inch vertical at 240lbs. Because that’s exactly the type of move this team would make.

                  • Poweroflogic

                    These are very credible arguments in isolation although I personally don’t find them persuasive in the grand scheme of things. Carroll/Schneider have not demonstrated a tendency to seek out running back by committee and in any event there is evidence now that Michael can provide that #2 punch and serve as backup RB1. They will most certainly provide a third option to compete for that #2 punch/backup role, but not by allocating a big draft pick or big money.

                    What they have now is manna from heaven at the RB position: a fresh, solidly-built RB#1 who performed at the highest level on a consistent basis in his first year. Having discovered this treasure, and in the face of desperate needs elsewhere, I don’t think they invest heavily in another RB. The Christine Michael pick was a different situation. Lynch was not 22 years old and Michael was chosen to be groomed as Lynch’s successor. He was part of a long term plan to meet a concrete need at the key RB position. He was not a a mere luxury pick or competition at a stacked position. It obviously didn’t turn out but that’s another story. I don’t see Harvin, Graham or most of the other examples as truly shocking to the extent that they defied the logic of need. In fact the redzone threat was a primary need you were beating the drum heavily for well before the trade!

                    There are other angles to respond to your point about the special emphasis the hawks place on the run game (which is not disputed). There are many elements to the running game and the hawks already have the key ingredient: a legitimate RB#1. What they don’t have is a semi-legitimate offensive line which can EITHER consistently block for their runner or consistently protect the passer to set up the run. With a credible OL the defense will have to respect the run and pass, which proved lethal this year. Arguably that will have an even greater impact for the run game than a heavy investment in the #2 punch, with the ‘side benefit’ of protecting your QB and solidifying the passing game which we know can be relied upon heavily in a pinch.

                    The balance between need and value is the mystery to unlock, but it must be recognized that the Seahawks are much needier this year than the last two years (at least). I don’t want to make too strained an analogy but Wilson’s rookie year, like Rawls’, was manna from heaven too. Despite the importance of the position and the known risk of regression the Hawks did not shore up the position with expensive insurance. Instead they knew they had their #1 and they milked the advantages of redeploying cap space and draft capital to other priorities. I suggest in this ‘time of need’ they will do the same at RB.

                    Taking this analogy to the logical extreme: couldn’t many the same considerations for adding RB2/3 in the first/second round this year be applied to the hypothetical of adding a QB2 in the first/second round, in the event someone of interest to the Hawks fell to them and they had to take him at #26?

                    No one will argue the QB position isn’t a top priority. No one should deny that Wilson’s season is put in some jeopardy almost every play: with a porous offensive line, a lingering propensity to hang onto the ball, and of course the designed and spontaneous QB runs into defenses that don’t always respect the slide or the rules (Hi to any Rams fans reading this!). How many starting QBs went down this year? For the Cowboys, inadequate insurance at the QB position could have meant the difference between a playoff run and the #4 draft pick. And so on.

                    Truth is, the Hawks won’t take a QB in the first, probably not even if there was a tantalizing prospect. They are prepared to ‘make do’ in that worst case scenario. Similarly they know Rawls COULD go down again, and in that eventuality Michael MAY revert to old habits, but they know they can’t afford to maximally prepare for every remote contingency given the limited resources available.

                    In virtually no scenario does it make sense to draft RB in the first round or pay a free agent RB multi-millions to cover for a potential double failure at the RB position. Not when they absolutely must replace starters at positions which are costing them games NOW without contingencies. They will add a RB but they will not “over” invest draft capital or cap space given the current list of priorities.

                    There is an unlikely scenario in which the Hawks aggressively and maximally allocate cap space this offseason, with back loaded contracts, to sign both UFAs and FAs to fill holes at core positions with proven players before the draft. Only then would they have the luxury of something MORE like BPA, but still not truly BPA untied to concrete needs. We know the Hawks have tried to do this in the past but the cold hard math is not favorable. At most, they can cover some key positions while leaving a gamble at others (e.g. Gilliam at LT). But in this case, I believe they would use draft capital very aggressively as insurance for any gambles at starting positions that cost the team conspicuously and dearly last year.

    • Ground_Hawks

      Great numbers! Where did you find them? Thanks

      • Volume12

        High school SPARQ scores.

        Watch out for NC RB Elijah Hood next year too. His SPARQ rivals Henry and he’s 20 lbs lighter and 5 inches shorter.

        • CHawk Talker Eric

          These numbers are more recent – from ‘Bama spring testing 2015:

          Henry ran the 40-yard dash in 4.50 seconds at 6-foot-3, 242 pounds. Henry also did 440 pounds on the bench press, squatted 500 pounds, recorded a 35-inch vertical jump and had one of the best power cleans on the team (345 pounds).

          • Volume12

            So, pretty close.

            Of course the HS #’s will change, because their bodies do. He got stronger.

            • CHawk Talker Eric

              Mos def. Plus that was spring testing. You can bet he’s training as hard as he can to blow up the Combine. He’s got that drive to be the best.

              • Volume12

                Yes, another thing I like about him.

          • Ground_Hawks

            Wow! That’s incredible. If his numbers post this high come combine time then I wouldn’t be surprised to see him go in the 1st.

  5. rowdy

    That would be insane for a man his size. Watching the video I never realized how effective his stiff arm is. It’s effortless and doesn’t effect his stride much at all.i wouldn’t call him a receiving back by any means but if he can be capable he wouldn’t be a bad 3rd down back and could easily play fb. Not saying I would do this but as rob said in this scenario with those numbers, and I remember years ago people saying he is a power house in the weight room, they doubt would find a place for him. The guy is a gazelle in a Lions body.

  6. stretchjohnsen

    Rob, I agree with you that the Seahawks are likely to select a RB sometime in this year’s draft. While OL and DL are clearly priorities, PCJS will not ignore adding value to skill positions of RB and WR. I tend to think it would be best to pick a RB in the late 3rd round, and WR in 4 or 5. Perhaps something like this:
    26: DT–V. Butler or K. Clark
    56: OL–N. Martin
    90: OL–Tretola or Dahl
    98: RB–J. Howard or P. Perkins
    125: DB–E. Murray
    172: WR– Michael Thomas (Southern Miss.)
    215: Edge- T. Feeney or R. Blair
    225: OL–A. Lewis
    245 –??

    One thing is for sure, when we wake up on May 1, each of us will be proven at least partially wrong.
    Thanks again for initiating spirited debate.

  7. CHawk Talker Eric

    I posted this comment about Henry back in December. I stand by it now:

    Wait til the Combine when he tests out like a Roman god. I’m not saying his “NFR” will set records necessarily. But he’s a freak of nature for sure. Some team will find his athleticism irresistible.

    • matt

      Word. Remember saying back than that I’d be surprised if he didn’t get drafted in day 1. Henry is a stud we on the blog have been overlooking lately.

      • matt

        Myself included.

  8. bobbyk

    I think the more people ponder the idea that it’s dangerous to go into 2016 with only Thomas Rawls as a certainty, that it’s not a bad idea to make sure we have another RB to share the load. Guys like Beast Mode don’t grow on trees in terms of him taking almost all of the snaps.

    The same can be said of WR. Right now, the first two WRs are awesome for ’16. If PRich can come back healthy, that will be huge. Also, “the Jimmy” is going to get his fair share of targets whether lining up at TE or outside. I just think of all the times that we have sets where it’s more than just Baldwin/Lockett on the field and so much can be exploited if Wilson had another weapon to match up against some terrible CBs. Granted, Graham will be back, but we have pretty bad depth after our main guys.

    Someone wrote a good piece (I think it was Seahawks fan blog on field gulls) about the myth of the #1 WR. What I took from it is that I’d rather have four decent WRs as opposed to a Megatron, a decent #2 WR, with the rest of the receivers as clowns. Personally, I like PRich as a #3 but the quality depth at WR terrifies me (especially with his injury history).

    Make no mistake, I am not saying that a RB or third/fourth WR is more important than a starting left tackle or left guard. That’s not the case (although a #2 RB is obviously more important than a #4 WR).

    Somehow and someway, we know they are going to improve both lines of scrimmage. They are going to improve a few other areas that we currently don’t view as big of a need as either line, too, which means don’t be overly surprised if we take something early we may not think is our #1 need at the time.

    • Volume12

      This OT class is massively overrated.

      The guys in the mid rounds will end up being better starters other than Decker and Tunsil.

      • bobbyk

        But in the mock Rob had the other day, Whitehair and Martin were still available. They are guys who would come in and make an impact from day one.

        You can look at it this way, if you were going OL/RB in the first two rounds, would you rather have Conklin/Collins or Henry/Tretola? That’s kind of what it comes down to. That’s why I don’t want people to be bent out of shape if they don’t take a certain player at #26. Let the draft (and free agency) play out.

        If we go into the draft with our biggest need still at LG, I’m not going to get mad if it doesn’t get addressed at #26. It will get addressed.

        • CHawk Talker Eric

          Henry/Tretola all day long.

          I’m with V12 in thinking Conklin just isn’t a good enough athlete for R1. He’s a good football player, and that’s important, but he’s really limited as an athlete. Also, even if he’s ‘better’ than Tretola, not sure by how much. Probably not enough to affect wins-losses.

          Collins is a fine RB prospect. I’d be very satisfied having him join Rawls and Michael. But Henry is on another level entirely.

        • Volume12

          Whitehair and Martin aren’t OT’s.

          Remember what kind of prospects we target early on.

          Freak athletes, Henry checks that off. Insane production, Henry checks that off. 28 TDs!? You kidding me? And something about their personlity or character. Whether it’s an insane work ethic, incredibly vocal or outspoken, intimidation factor, or as PC says, ‘just a really cool guy.’

          • bobbyk

            Next you’re going to tell me Tretola isn’t a cornerback.

            • Volume12

              He’s not. Neither is Glasgow. J/k.

              • Jujus

                He is a backup an though!

                • Jujus

                  Qb* not an stupid phone.

              • bobbyk


          • matt

            “Remember what kind of prospects we target early on.”

            In the 6 drafts JS/PC have conducted we’ve drafted 2 OT’s in the first, 1 in 2 rd. All 3 draftees were started day 1. Spent 1 2nd rounder on a RB. We know what CM has done. Henry is a freak athlete, so I get the intrigue-I’m very intrigued too. History has shown that taking an OT early, who’s average athletically, than a freaky athletic RB. Not saying it couldn’t happen, just pointing out our draft history/patterns.

            • Volume12

              They weren’t losing the guy they built this team around either.

              James Carpenter wasn’t an average athlete. Nor Okung.

              • matt

                True Okung and Carp are good athlete’s, but not sparq freaks. Britt is an average athlete.

                Rawls has shown me enough to say he’s a building block. In the 7 games Rawls started he had 132 carries 668 yards 5.06 ypc 7 td’s. He topped Lynch’s career game high in yards not once, but twice. His YPC was higher(5.6 to 4.8) than Todd Gurley’s.

                • Volume12

                  I’m with ya there.

                  I’m as big a fan of Rawls as the next guy, but in order for him to become ‘the’ guy, he has to prove he can handle a heavy workload and more than 9-10 games.

                  Henry is a perfect no. 2 back.

                  Even last year with Lynch, Turbin, and C-mike they had a RB graded as their no.1. Had Gurley been there, they woulda run to the podium.

                  Ya gotta add someone other than Rawls and a suspect C-mike.

                  • Volume12

                    And your right, they weren’t freaks, but very athletic.

                  • goatweed

                    If the Hawks take Henry, they will have a backfield similar to the Giants 2011:

                    Henry = Brandon Jacobs
                    Rawls = Ahmad Bradshaw

                    One way to make bad OLine look mediocre is to have quick hitting run plays.

      • Rob Staton

        I’m not sure it’s overrated per se — but there’s certainly a chance some of the more athletic projects available in the middle rounds and beyond could have better careers than some of the bigger names.

        • Volume12

          That’s more like it.

          As I said man, your much more eloquent than I.

  9. Nathan_12thMan

    I completely agree with your overall recognition of the front offices philosophy and drafting history. The ideal situation at #26 is to either have one of the 1st round grade O-linemen or D-linemen fall to you and you grab him (Rankins, Coleman, etc). But if that doesn’t happen then you trade down. But if you can’t find a good trading partner, we will most likely draft the most SPARQ’y high producing impact player on the board.

    Rawls needs to prove he can stay healthy and produce at a high level (like he did in ’15) like Marshawn did over the course of his career. He needs to prove that before you feel comfortable having guys like Turbo behind him (mediocre). Right now though you can’t bet on that, unless there is a projected UDFA RB that Pete/John loves (like the did Rawls) or a guy they really like (like they did Rod Smith) you gotta spend a pick on a RB.

    We need a 3rd down back, we need a high ceiling back, a potential RB1, someone who can step up and be productive if something were to happen to Rawls and CMike just wasn’t cutting it. Now I really liked CMike in ’15 and if he can keep playing like that then he could become a talented RB1 if Rawls went down, but again you can’t bet the house on CMike not being ’12-’14 CMike yet.

    All of this is why I have really loved the idea of us grabbing a RB in the 3rd or 4th round. A guy like Paul Perkins. Especially if we can trade down out of the 1st round (assuming the top O/D-line are off the board). Then we can grab 6 guys in the top 6 guys in rounds 2, 3, and 4. That allows us to grab 2 O-linemen, 1-D-linemen, a RB and ____ (LB? CB? WR? all depends on many factors).

    I really really really hope that is how this draft plays out because it makes a TON of sense and it has the potential to be another home run draft.

  10. Nathan

    Would we need to implement a bit of east west running with Henry?

    • Michael M.

      The Bevell-Bubble-Screen-Extravaganza returns!!

      (Let’s hope not…)

      • Volume12

        Tunnel screens, but whatever.

        Their just a quick way to jump start the offense. High percentage throws to get RW in rhytm, which is wht he is.

    • Nathan

      I personally think CM could be devastating on those outside runs, but I don’t think they trust him to catch the ball.

  11. CHawk Talker Eric

    For a zbs team, SEA run a fair number of plays from power formation, with RW under center and Truckafoo at FB. Henry would look good in that set.

    He’s a true tilt-the-field athlete with the potential to score every time he touches the ball. I can imagine how effective he would be for SEA in the late 2nd and 4th qtrs, after Rawls has worn down opposing defenses.

    • bobbyk

      Truckafoo. Love it. lol

      I was at both Minnesota games this year and “Truckafoo” was the only player to come back to the stands after the game and sign an autograph for a guy who was wearing his jersey. That guy didn’t stop smiling.

      The truck is a FA though.

      • Volume12

        That’s ok. We got Brandon Cottom. Everyone worried about a 3rd TE, makes me laugh BTW, here he is.

        He’s our future FB/TE.

        • bobbyk

          If we don’t take a back-up long snapper with our first round pick, I’m going to be so mad!

      • CHawk Talker Eric

        Yes but I think he’s less than $2M APY which means Davis Hsu already accounted for him in the $18M cap space.

        He’s also capable of rotating on DL.

        • Nathan_12thMan

          All the FB’s have diverse value. Coleman is a good FB, has RB/receiving RB college experience and is a core (key) ST player. Tukuafu is a good FB, a ST player and in a emergency can play D-line (no college RB experience, no college pass catching experience).

          Brandon Cottom is 23 years old, 6’2 and 262 pounds. He was the third-ranked SPARQ athlete at fullback. He is younger than Coleman, has no legal issues, is bigger, is a better pass catcher, is signed to the roster for ’16 and would be cheaper ($135k less). Cottom is significantly younger than Tukuafu (23 vs 32), is roughly the same size, is cheaper ($315k less), is a better pass catcher, is on the roster for ’16, etc.

          As for D-line depth, well we don’t know how the 90 man or 53 man roster will be, but if we are STILL that thin at D-line that when we need D-line depth we need to go to Tukuafu then we have a problem. I hope for us to have Rubin, Mebane? Hill, ’16 Draft Pick, then some depth guys…guys on the P-squad and signed to Futures now, UDFA’s, and hopefully Jesse Williams on the 90 in camp. Then after we cut down to 53 we will have solid talent at DT that doesn’t require us to keep Tuku just for his DT skillset.

          Also I bet Tuku wouldn’t get signed anywhere else, so even if we cut him he will stick around on the ghost roster, ready to sign and play for us when/if we needed him to. Same with Coleman.

          So as you can see, I am onboard the Cottom train until I see/hear evidence that makes me anxious about being on said train (not a good FB, doesn’t look good in camp, etc).

          • CHawk Talker Eric

            I’m cool with Cottom

    • Volume12

      Nailed it.

      A true tilt the field athlete.

      Wastch the ‘Congo freak’ Sterphane Nembot kill the combine too. He is so damn nasty. This guy plays pissed off and wants to murder the oppossition.

      • CHawk Talker Eric

        Stephane Nembot may be one of those mid round OLers that turn out to be better than Decker or Stanley. He’s one reason why I don’t see SEA going the DL-OL convert route this year (unless they pick up someone in UDFA).

    • Steele

      Chawk, I don’t think Henry is a threat every time he touches the ball. He is as likely to tiptoe and fall at the calves of his blockers. Give him 5 yds of space and another 50 yds of open field, sure he can do something. He just can’t do so much on his own. No moves, no lateral.

      On the other hands, other backs actually can threaten when they touch the ball. If they must go for a back, go for someone else.

  12. Ground_Hawks

    Fieldgulls has an article up about the cap increasing to “at least 155 mil.” Is this something new, or already known? If it’s new then how does that help the Seahawks off season issues? I mean obviously more cap space is great, but who else could/should they keep or sign?

    • Rob Staton

      It was expected to be $154m I think.

      • Ground_Hawks

        Thanks Rob!

    • Volume12

      They should keep either Okung or Sweezy, Kearse, ‘Bane or Rubin, and either Lane or Irvin.

      I know they love Rubin, but would it shock us if they rolled the dice, let him walk, and found another gem?

      • Ground_Hawks

        I think that keeping Rubin would be awesome, and if it means letting Kearse walk then that would be OK with me. Nothing against the guy, but if someone offers him something in the range of 6-7 mil I can’t see it being realistic to re-sign him. With Lane or Irvin I think Lane is the bigger priority because of his familiarity with PC’s secondary scheme.

        As for Okung and Sweezy it comes down to who provides the better deal. With Okung’s shoulder injury I have my doubts about his ability to be ready by September, and also what he will potentially command on the market. Sweezy is serviceable, but if he can be had on the cheap, for his position, then I would understand resigning him.

        Thanks for the input!

        • Volume12

          Oh yeah, Kearse ain’t worth that much.

          And you could be right. Lane might be the priority. It’s hard to say, because I can see Bruce Irvin getting a huge dealor taking a homeown discount.

          I can see Lane being the priority, but getting a big time deal. IMO Oakland is gonna go hard at Lane.

          • CHawk Talker Eric

            OAK and JAX both have a lot of room under the cap, they’re both part of PC’s defensive coaching tree, and they both covet players like Lane and Irvin. It will be hard to keep either.

            • Volume12

              Good point.

            • Ground_Hawks

              I hadn’t considered that, but do really think that Lane would get a Byron Maxwell offer for Sea to compete with?

              • Volume12

                Maybe not as much, but close.

                Seattle started this trend, now they have to deal with the monster they created.

                • CHawk Talker Eric

                  That’s the price of success. Once you know how to spin gold people wanna poach from yer pile.

                  I think Lane gets offered at least $6M APY. He’s versatile, truly capable of playing inside/outside. He has ST value and he proved he’s fully healed from SB49.

        • Ground_Hawks

          I should also emphasize that I think Mebane, Rubin, and Lane are the three free-agents that I’m most concerned with keeping.

          • bobbyk

            For as much as we link Lane and Irvin to the Raiders and Jags (and Falcons), there’s every reason that each team would be interested in bringing Mebane, too. It’s not like we’re going to get him back on a deal near the minimum. There’s guys like Norton out there who know his worth.

            It’s got me to thinking… worse case scenario is bringing back Kevin Williams for a year while a mid/late round DT redshirts a year. There’s no way anyone is going to give him anything significant and we all know the significant role he played when Mebane went down two years ago. Saints fans were joking about him (saying that he’s a 100 years old but was the only decent DL they had this past season) in a good way. There’s no way he’d command anything much more than the veteran minimum anymore and he still wants to play another year. We could do a lot worse on the interior DL than getting him for a cheap price.

            • Poweroflogic

              I was sad to see Williams go — such a warrior. In retrospect however you can see what Rubin offers over Williams.

              In terms of Williams being discussed in connection with Mebane leaving, my recollection is that Williams was not excited at all about filling in for the NT position when Mebane went down, but did so because ‘duty called’. He had not played the position extensively in Minnesota, and I don’t know if he played it in New Orleans where they went to a different backup for NT.

          • Rob Staton

            I think the Seahawks agree with you.

            • Coleslaw

              I’d welcome him back with open arms at vet minimum, he definetely can still be a good piece to a line, if we lose mebane I could see us getting him back.

  13. Tom Page

    Henry reminds me of Eric Dickerson, for those younger people, watch a few YouTube videos. The problem with tall RBs is leg injuries. If Henry could stay healthy, he could be elite. I would totally support this, we need more player makers on offense.

    • Volume12

      This guy got like 40 some odd carries in HS too. Durability is a non issue.

      Rawls got hurt, Doug Martin, LeSean McCoy. That doesn’t mean anything.

      I think Derrick Henry is gona be similar to Bo Jackson, without shredding his hip.

      • bobbyk

        If he’s good, I’m in!

  14. Nick

    Think of this backfield:

    Russell Wilson

    That backfield would be a nightmare to prepare for. Teams would have to wonder what type of Hawks team they’d see. Nascar package with Russ and Rawls or the smash mouth package with Russ & Henry. I’m not sure if the Hawks would change their “identity” that much, but it’s certainly something I could envisage Pete doing. Another trick up his sleeve.

    • Colin

      If they don’t upgrade the offensive line it won’t matter much. I expect this offseason to be focused on
      1.) Upgrading offensive line
      2.) Adding interior pass rush
      3.) Adding to the secondary

      Those are priorities IMO. Another running back wouldn’t hurt either.

      • Nick

        I agree Colin, those are the objectives. However we have heard multiple times from the Seahawks (especially Tom Cable) that they are unsatisfied with the quality of o- lineman coming out of college. They really feel like they need to “train them up” at the next level. This suggests a couple of things:

        They are willing to give prospects more time to develop. Right now we have Glowinski, Bailey and Sol on the bench. My guess is at least one of them (Glow) makes it into the starting rotation this year. Assuming we lose Okung and Sweezy, this means we’ll have two positions to fill. If all of the good o-line are out by #26, why wouldn’t you draft for a game changing, bruising running back? We’ve just lost an important part of our identity with Beast Mode retiring. Drafting Henry in the first round gives them an instant boost at an important position while still also allowing to upgrade the o-line in Rd 2, 3, 4.

        As for adding interior pass rush, I think unless a quick twitch athlete like Rankins drops to us we’ll hope to upgrade the DT later on in the draft. It’s a notoriously deep D line class.

        And as for the secondary? I agree, this is a sleeper need for the Seahawks. But I think they’ll make a priority to resign Lane (a sentiment Rob has held) and hope that they can count on Simon/SJB/Farmer to play some ball. Will that be sufficient? Probably not, they’ll draft a CB later on (Rd 5-7) if I had to guess.

      • Michael M.

        “2) Adding interior pass rush”

        I keep seeing people mention this as a big off-season priority, but I’m not sure I agree. This is a weird one for the ‘Hawks. On paper you’re right, and of course Pete Carroll would love to upgrade that area, but Pete would love to upgrade every single area. I’m not sure we have any real evidence that Pete prioritizes this that highly.

        I know you can reference that snippet from Bill Walsh talking about the ideal 3-T, but I just haven’t seen that play out in Seattle. Kinda like how they say that they would like to draft a QB every year, and yet have only ever selected one. Seems to me like they are happy to plug in a cheap veteran run stopper on 1st and 2nd down and then play a combination of role players (Jordan Hill, Clinton McDonald) and outside/inside guys (Bennett, Clark) on obvious passing downs. Sure, if Geno Atkins or Aaron Donald falls in their lap they would be thrilled, but I haven’t seen anything to make me think that this is #2 on their list.

        Thoughts anyone?

        • CHawk Talker Eric

          Rob stated it well in his article – under PC, SEA never had, nor have they relied on, an interior pass rush from the base front. The difference between the SB teams of 2013/2014 vs 2015 was no Clint McDonald and no Jordan Hill, both rotational DTs who made their contributions as part of NASCAR packages in obvious passing situations.

          SEA still have Hill. He may yet return to his late 2014 form. They also have Frank Clark. And they have the 2016 Draft.

          • Volume12

            I think they’ll do what they do. Take another Jordan Hill, Jaye Howard or whoever inthe mid rounds.

            They might like to take a QB every year, but if the talent and fit aren’t there, then it makes no sense.

            Because if it don’t make dollars, it don’t make…..?

        • lil'stink

          Getting a 3 down DT who can also rush the passer is a tough player to find, so it may not be a priority simply because it isn’t going to happen. Getting that situational interior pass rusher is a different story. McDonald was so good down the stretch and into SB 48, and Hill simply hasn’t been able to fill his shoes on a consistent basis, and it has showed.

          Looking back at many of our losses the last 2 years there seem to be so many examples of the opposing QB being able to avoid our edge rushers by simply stepping up in the pocket and making a huge play. I think our lack of interior pass rush has been a huge weakness the last couple of years. Being able to find a guy like McDonald in FA or the draft could have a synergistic effect on the whole defense.

  15. Colin

    I’d take Henry at 26 in a heartbeat over Shaq Lawson.

    • Steele

      There are better options than both.

  16. Nick

    Also on a siden ote, while watching tape of Henry I saw more tape of Jarrad Davis at LB for Florida. My goodness. If the Seahawks land him I will be so happy. He plays with such incredible intensity. Round one next year?

    • Volume12

      Yup. He’s the next LaVonte David IMO.

      He’s a 2017 man crush of mine. Along with RBs Royce Freeman, Elijah Hood, and BC DE/LEO Harold Landry.

  17. footballnerd

    If the cap goes up all teams have more money to spend which means the price of free agents, including Seattle’s, goes up. Right? So why would the cap increase help seaatle keep its players?

    • Michael M.

      I would think it helps a little with certain deals. Despite what the individual player might push for, teams will still try to point to other player’s deals that were done under the previous cap number as a baseline for negotiations.

      • CHawk Talker Eric

        Player salaries always lag behind cap increases. It’s a built-in way of mortgaging the future for today.

  18. RealRhino2


    Tell me something: what does it matter how big he is, if he doesn’t run like a big back? My point is that normally, the “and” (e.g., a WR who runs a 4.3 AND is 6-3, 220) is used to denote some additional value/quality the player has. With our hypothetical WR, for example, it’s not just that he’s super fast, it’s that he’s super fast AND should be physical enough to box out CBs and win contested balls down the field, not get pushed off his line, etc.

    With Henry, if his size doesn’t give you the added benefits that are usually present with a player of larger than normal size (tough runner, sheds tacklers, wears down defenders, etc.), then it is of no added value. So who cares?

    • CHawk Talker Eric

      It’s a little inaccurate to say Henry isn’t a tough runner.

      Sure, he’s not great in close quarters as he accelerates. He doesn’t power his legs through arm tackles the way you’d think someone his size/strength would. But once he finds a crease and hits his stride, he’s very difficult to bring down.

      Also, he does always seem to fall forward upon contact.

    • Michael M.

      Fair point there.

      One thing teams will probably consider an “AND” is durability. As hard as it is to predict durability, bigger is almost always better through the eyes of NFL evaluators.

      Let’s put it this way: If you throw an extra 20 lbs. of muscle onto Jamal Charles, that doesn’t turn him into Adrian Peterson… But it might turn him into a Jamal Charles that isn’t going under the knife every other off-season.

      • RealRhino2

        That’s a good point I hadn’t considered. Honestly, I just watched the highlight clip to see if it showed him being jolted from the front and powering through AND to try to visualize whether some of the runs where he is getting past the linebacker level would have the same result in the NFL.

        I’d like to see more runs where he takes a direct shot to see how he reacts.

        And I know it’s pure speculation, but I feel like quite a few of the runs in the highlights he would have at least been hit by an NFL LB. His high center of gravity makes his cuts sooooo slow.

  19. cover-2

    I get the intrigue with Henry, but I want no part of Henry. Dude is soft and runs with no heart, same as Shawn Alexander. He doesn’t have that dog in him like Lynch & Rawls.

    • Michael M.

      I get what you’re saying from a style standpoint. Beast Mode is more fun to watch than Shaun Alexander because he has “that dog in him”. But there’s nothing that says differing styles can’t be equally effective.

      I know he had a great line, but let’s not forget that Shaun Alexander did have a five year run of 1175+ yards and 14+ TD’s, capped by an MVP year in which he broke the rushing TD record. You can’t just throw any old back behind that line and get that. Marion Barber ran pretty damn hard. Who’s career would you rather have between the two?

      Totally understandable if you pass on Henry because of your personal standpoint on running style, but let’s not dismiss that it is possible to be effective without that “dog”.

      • Volume12

        Ain’t nothing soft about a guy that gets the ll 35+ times in 5 or 6 games, and shreds the NFL’s minor league.

        Now, if it where earlier in the year, could see that.

        But after watching this guy for 14 games this year, wow!

      • cover-2

        Yeah a different style can still get the job done, but I prefer my teams RB to be physical, impose my will on you, make you want to tap out, kind of RB.

        Shawn was amazing but at the same time frustrating when he would go down so easily or run out of bounds.

    • rowdy

      Shawn did like 15+ tds 5 years in a row he might of been soft but he was a production machine and a top 3 back in the league

      • bobbyk

        Look at the OL he had. Has Lynch had Jones or Hutch? No way $haun would have had those numbers without all the Pro Bowlers who blocked for him. In ’05 alone, he also had one of the best blocking FBs (Strong), a great run blocking TE (Hannam) and one of the biggest and best run blocking WRs (Joe). Imagine Lynch with an OL that actually blocked.

        • Volume12

          I’m sory, but guys that play the position of having all 11 defenders trying to tackle you on every handoff aren’t soft.

          Guys like Eddie Lacy, who pull themselves outta games because their fat and overweight are.

          • cover-2

            Soft as in he doesn’t fight for extra yards once he receives contact, too easily goes down.

            But yes, he is durable and can carry the rock 25 + times a game which is definitely worth something.

            • Volume12

              This guy will impose his will on you.

              Wait until a good RB coach gets this guy to lower his shoulder and teach him the nuances of the position.

    • Steele

      Agree with cover-2. Henry is soft. He reminds me of LeGarrette Blount crossed with Ron Dayne, who was softer than he should have been. Backs who are big and soft infuriate me. Those who do not make use of their size and weight, who don’t cut or shift.

      Let’s also keep in mind that the o-line is not exactly reliable as it currently is.

      A guy named Marshawn Lynch had difficulty running behind it. A soft Derrick Henry would be stopped cold behind the line.

      • Matt

        Anyone saying Derrick Henry is soft is misinformed. The guy strapped Alabama on his back and carried them to a title. Anyone who can wear down a defense with 35+ carries 200+ yards 2+ tds cannot be considered soft. Like I said above the thing I like most about Henry is his ability to gain the needed yardage when everyone in the stadium knows that he’s going to get the ball. Getting first downs against 8-9 man fronts to win/clinch games.

      • rowdy

        Rawls goes down a lot behind the line too but when he gets past the line he explodes. Are oline was playing great when Rawls came in. He wasn’t facing 2 to 3 linemen in his face like Lynch was in 5he beginning.

  20. Greg haugsven

    Here is an easy question to chew on. Do you want the Hawks to go offense or defense in round 1? And why?

    • Volume12

      It’s not easy.

      Depends on value, fit, and who’s on the board.

      I’m not sure anyone will come close to the type of athleticism, production, work ethic, and character that Derrick Henry brings to the table.

    • Michael M.

      Defense. Because I like winning Superbowls.

      • CHawk Talker Eric

        Odds are the impact players available at 26 will be offense. Guys like Henry or Fuller.

        That and OL is PC’s #1 priority.

    • bobbyk

      That’s a hard question right now because free agency hasn’t happened yet. If we resign Lane and so something crazy like sign Oliver Vernon, while not doing anything significant for the offense… then the choice is easy… you go offense.

      If they resign Okung and splurge on Wisniewski and Brandon Brooks and have no money to do anything else, then the choice is an easy, “defense.”

      It’s so hard right now not knowing who they will have signed by late April. All we could talk about at this time last year was finding a TE like overspending on J. Thomas or drafting a Max Williams… but once the off-season began… all that prior talk about targeting a TE was worthless.

      • Volume12

        Grest point. FA and the combine will shake things up.

        • Greg haugsven

          I agree with FA. It’s just a broad question. You have a rough idea who might be around at 26.

          • Greg haugsven

            I had a dream last night it was Nkemdiche. He is alot like Frank Clark. Sparq monster with off field issues and not a ton of college production. But lots of upside.

            • Ignorant

              Actually Frank Clark was top 5 both in pass rushing and run stuffing per PFF. He just didn’t rack up sacks/TFL. But he was definitely one of the most disruptive and active college DL the year he was drafted. He wasn’t/isn’t that good in finishing plays, and that’s about that.

      • Yesh

        I’ve flirted with the idea of signing Vernon on a 1yr “prove it” deal, reports coming out of South Beach all but assure that won’t happen. Per the Miami Herald he’s looking at anywhere between $13-$15 mill/yr.


        • Steele

          Too bad. That also jacks up the price on everyone else.

          • Greg haugsven

            That’s what makes the draft so important. These salaries are sky rocketing and the rookie salaries stay pretty low.

        • bobbyk

          Imagine how Michael Bennett is going to feel after a guy like him getting that many millions.

  21. RockNRowland

    I think Henry would be a an interesting choice. In fact, he might be the player that other teams with high 2nd round picks MAY want to trade up for. That’s usually a quarterback, but I could see Dallas or SF wanting to jump up to get Henry AND get the benefit of a 5th year option.

    • Attyla the Hawk

      Worth noting that the 5th year option for a rb is likely to be considerably lower

  22. Volume12

    Hey Charlie, thought you might like this.

    ‘Teams love the game film of Rees Odhiambo/OL/Boise State but medical exams are key…’ Tony Pauline

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      I like him. Just seems like a type of player Seattle would like….

  23. Zach

    Check out film on Sean Davis from Maryland. He seems to check every box for a Seahawks corner..Great size (6-1, 33-inch arms), Freak athlete (haven’t seen many number but you can tell from his film that he could very well have an outstanding SPARQ score), ultra-competitive (rave reviews from his coaches), AND he hits like Bam Bam Kam everytime he has the chance to make the tackle. He seems like a talent that could be a fast riser eventually but if he’s there in the 3rd, and maybe even the 2nd, I think the Hawks should absolutely take a look at this guy.

  24. Coleslaw

    I’m not sold on Henry. If he’s that big/strong/fast he should not go down on first contact often. I know “his breakaway speed” but how many timea did Turbin burst through the LOS to fall down immediately? Without vision, balance and patience RBs turn into busts extremely fast.

    • Volume12

      He’s a field tilter man. Unique athlete. Productive.

      Turbin got taken down because of his footing. Henry is completely different. He’s a long strider.

      Pound Rawls up inside wear down the defense, bring in Henry and good luck stopping that. He’s also a good pass protector and has good hands.

      • Volume12

        Maybe I’m wrong, but this is who I see.

        Le’Veon Bell with Jamaal Charles like speed and skill set.

        • CHawk Talker Eric

          Call me crazy but I see some Jim Brown in Henry – at least in terms of physical superiority. Let’s not downplay the fact that ‘Bama rode Henry to a championship, mainly between the tackles too. And did so going through the SEC, the NFL’s ‘minor league’ as you put it.

          His quiet, subdued personal demeanor is at odds with the superhero wattage of his athleticism and IMO contributes to his ‘soft’ reputation. All he did was blast through some of the finest defenses in CFB on his way to a Heisman and championship.

          The 1-2 punch of Rawls and Henry could be spectacular.

          • Coleslaw

            Long strides does not help the ability to break tackles, it actually makes it harder to break tackles, He’s good, yeah no doubt. But I would take smarter players over physical freaks any day, baldwin, sherm, rawls, fred jackson, all very good players because of their football IQ l, not necessarily their physical abilities.

            • Coleslaw

              Long striders notoriously have bad balance because a small little hit while they’re mid stride takes them straight to the ground.

          • purpleneer

            Just because he had the ball in his hands for so much of that success doesn’t mean he carried the team. Jim Brown feels like a major stretch.

      • Steele

        A guy who goes down that easily is not a field tilter.

        • Volume12

          ‘A guy that goes down easily is not a field tilter.’

          Your missing the point. Field tilting speed, athleticism, and a mismatch at the 2nd level=field tilter.

          • Rob Staton

            I’d define field tilter as someone who make game defining plays. Chunk plays.

            If Henry has three runs stuffed for no gain and then hits a 60-yard TD… that’s tilting the field.

            • Steele

              But that is also the definition of inconsistency.

              • Rob Staton

                If you really believe that Steele your expectations are completely unrealistic. That’s just called running the ball. A running back getting stuffed a few times and then breaking one off is football. Not inconsistency.

      • rowdy

        His stiff arm is very active and his long arms really help avoid contact. He could the hardest player to bring down in the open field with his change of direction, speed and stiff arm.

        • Coleslaw

          I just don’t see him as a good fit I guess.

          • rowdy

            I don’t think any one here sees the hawks drafting him to be fair, but he preforms at the combine like rob talked about it will increase the likelihood

  25. nichansen01

    Please, please no.

  26. southpaw360

    I know this isn’t the right spot to pose this but here it goes. Sorry, if I’m wrong in doing it.

    The Seahawks have the deepest roster in the NFL in my opinion. They cut good players every year after training camp. I’ve always wondered why they don’t trade a 6th round pick or whatever for a 5th in 3 years. Trade a pick and ask for a round up in 2 years/3 years. I know our window is open but not all of these picks are making this team. I’m tired of watching other teams poach players. Trading now picks for future picks would keep our championship window open significantly longer. I know as long as RW is healthy our window is open.

    • Coleslaw

      I think they would rather just use those picks to trade up if they see someone they want, like Lockett. It’s a good idea but I don’t think they like waiting until the end of each round to pick, if they see them as throw away picks then i think they would rather just trade up

    • bobbyk

      I don’t think our overall roster is as good as you think it is. We’ve got some guys who, quite frankly, aren’t overly good. Nobody would want Sokoli but we keep him on the roster all year. Our DBs were so depleted, we were the ones trading a pick (for Seisay). We have limited pass rush depth (as most everyone). You guys might think our bottom tier WRs on the active roster are “good,” but I don’t (if they were, other teams wouldn’t have let them start the season on our practice squad). We’ve got a guy like Britt who probably shouldn’t even be on an active NFL roster starting for us (maybe overreaction, but he’s bad). Will Tukuafu isn’t a very good fullback. He’s not bad, but he’s not good. I realize he’s versatile, but he isn’t any good (DL) at what he’s versatile at.

      Don’t get me wrong, I love this team and our locked up core, imo, is the best situation in the NFL. No team can possibly be stacked at every spot. We’re as stacked as they come (minus OL). However, make no mistake, this roster could most definitely be better and Carroll and Schneider have even said so. I think they went into the draft last year thinking that they had a stacked roster and there’s no way most of those picks would make the team because of it. I think this year they realize there are plenty of places they could improve down on the depth chart.

      I don’t think they are interested in the scenario for a pick in 2-3 years. I don’t think most GMs think that way because they know if they don’t win now they aren’t going to be around when it comes time to use those picks.

      Lets say the Jags offered a 2nd round pick in 2018 to move up from their early 2nd rounder this year to our #26 pick. I doubt Carroll/Schneider would do it even if it’s for the best long-term interest of this franchise. Carroll may be more willing to do it if he gets signed to a 5-year extension or something, but I don’t see Schneider being interested in it. In his perfect world, he’d be the GM for the Packers by the time he could use that pick. Heck, it’s even in his contract that he can leave to become the Packers GM (his home – we all love home) if it were ever offered and he accepted. He may love Seattle and wouldn’t leave here for 30 other NFL jobs, but there’s one in Green Bay he’d leave for.

      Fans care more about the long-term interest of franchises than the guys in front offices do, imo. We would too if our jobs in the “here and now” were dependent on wins and losses.

      I look at a team like the Giants. Their GM knows for a fact that they have to win this year or he’s fired. This leads to him going into the draft taking the player(s) who will help out in 2016 the most and not necessarily the player(s) who is better long-term. That’s what we’d do if we were in his exact situation, too. Sad but true.

      • southpaw360

        I see some of your points but you made one for me as well. If a GM feels they will lose their job they have nothing to lose by trading future picks. Maybe the roster isn’t as deep as I think but I definitely see the positive in trading for “futures.” Even if the future is just next year.

        • bobbyk

          I agree 100%. I like the idea of trading for “future” picks. Even though our guys are secure in their jobs, I don’t see them doing it one bit. We would take a bit of a hit in the here and now and I don’t see us willing to do that (although me and you would). For example, if Jacksonville offered their #2 in 2018 and their 2nd rounder this year for our #26, I’d do it. Sure, it would hurt this year, but I feel the player they could get early in the 2nd wouldn’t be too much different than who we may get at #26. However, I’d ooze with happiness at the thought of having an extra 2nd rounder in a few years. We’d take a bit of a hit now, but the reward in two years would be huge.

  27. Steele

    Alex Collins raised my eyebrow. Derrick Henry terrifies me. In my opinion, absolutely not. He is a big back who runs high, has not shiftiness in traffic. Similar to LeGarrette Blount in that he is big but not really a power back, and needs open space and a lane in order to get moving.

    I don’t care what his measurables are. The film is what it is. I don’t like him.

    • Steele

      So overrated. Not only is Collins better, but so is just about everyone. Perkins, Jonathan Williams, Kenneth Dixon, etc. etc. If they go for a back, they don’t have to use rd. 1-2 to get a good one. They could drop all the way into undrafted free agency and land someone. Keith Marshall, for instance, is currently forgotten and if healthy, rd. 1-2 potential.

      • Steele

        Actually, he doesn’t so much remind me of Ron Dayne as Brandon Jacobs. I am getting my big, soft Giants mixed up. Jacobs and LeG Blount.

        And the CBS/Zierlein summary is not encouraging:

        “Henry needs some space to get moving. He’s not nearly as powerful running east to west.

        “Long legs and taller torso aren’t ideal for the position, lacking shifty moves to make defenders miss. He struggles to consistently create on his own with choppy feet when forced to redirect, requiring a runway to get started.

        “He also lacks ideal balance for the position, sporting a top-heavy frame and long legs which make it easier for defenders to tackle him low.”

    • SeventiesHawksFan

      Long strider. Does not get up to speed fast enough. A big target for an NFL LB to locate. I like him as a 5th round tight end haha. Joking of course.

    • Trevor

      I agree Steele. I was not a fan of Collins in Rd #2 and Henry for me in Rd #1 would be a worst case scenario pick. I cannot think of player in the top 100 prospects that I would like less than Henry.

    • SeventiesHawksFan

      I suspect all those college LB’s either not arriving on time or not wrapping him up on tape are tackles at the NFL level. In the NFL the LB’s will meet him at the hole that he didn’t get to fast enough. And then take him down at that spot. Get him into the second level and yeah he’ll get yards. But I don’t like this pick because I don’t he gets there often enough.

  28. Steele

    Regarding the updated salary cap, how much over the Davis Hsu $18M will the Seahawks now have to play with?

    • Poweroflogic

      Latest NFL salary cap figure of $155m+ is $1m above the figure used by Davis, but in the case of the Hawks Willson’s new salary bump erases this.

      Jason Drake at Field Gulls has been doing some breakdowns and his numbers seem a bit more generous than Davis’s. For one thing, if Lynch is designated a post-June 1 cut then that adds $2.5m in cap space this year. With this, Drake estimates $24.4m cap space before RFAs/ERFAs are signed.

      I have not seen any detailed analysis of what it would cost to sign the likely RFA/ERFA targets: Davis used a $5m cap budget but others suggest it would be less since most of these players will not get much more than min salary. Either way the formal cap left over for UFAs/FAs should be closer to ~$20m+.

      Finally, it has also been raised here recently that the Seahawks are in a good position to modestly back load some contracts this offseason, because 2017 cap space increases substantially more than anticipated new needs that year. The real upper limit for contracts in 2016 is therefore probably effectively more like $24-25m+ worth of player salaries (APY), with lower cap hits this year, and for each player salary taken on you have to remember to deduct 500k for replacing a min salary player.

      This is all to say the Seahawks have more room than most assume. They certainly could fit the big 4 I would like to see back: Okung, Lane, Mebane and Rubin. Or without Okung and/or Lane they could make at least one substantial move in FA.

      • EranUngar

        Nice work, matches my privet calculation to the dollar.

        The only possible meaningful change could happen later due to possible complications with Graham’s recovery. PC and JS are 100% confident he will be there with us for the 2016 season but if his recovery does not match their expectations and considering he is signed for two year at 19M, they may need to restructure his contract or even cut him if the return value on those 19M is greatly diminished.

        I hope it won’t be needed and it would take several months (4-6) before they can even evaluate it.

      • RWIII

        If the Hawks take a Defensive tackle in the draft they might pass on Mebane. To me the top two priorities are Jeremy Lane and Rubin. Also no is talking about DeShawn Shead. Shead has been extremely valueable. Shead knows the system. If the Hawks can’ resign Mebane,q John Schneider has had better luck finding defensive tackles in free agency than cornerbacks. Cary Williams has proven that you can’t just come in here and learn a new technique when you have been playing it another way your whole career. However with defensive tackles Seattle has found in free agency that you can plug and play defensive tackles. Do I want to let Brandon Mebane go? No wa? But we all know that you can’t keep everyone. And Seattle does need to start getting younger At defensive tackle.

    • Rob Staton


  29. bigDhawk

    There is NO way Henry jumps a 42″ vert with those skinny, long chicken legs. I’m quite confident his combine measurables will confirm they type of player he appears to be physically and appears to be on video. He reminds me all the world of Shawn Alexander and Henry will require an OL to run through like Alexander had to experience similar success. Rawls can have success behind the line we have now. We found Rawls in UDFA last year. We can find another Rawls in UDFA again for depth. If we’re forced to make a pick on a SPARQ hero at 26 I’d take Oakman all day over Henry.

    • rowdy

      The same could be said for any position on the team

      • bigDhawk

        No, I think the UDFA argument applies especially to the RB position.

        • rowdy

          Most of wr are udfa are late oline men have done better the high round oline men. Are whole defensive line is fa are dbs are 5th round or later. Why even pick in the first 2 rounds?

          • bigDhawk

            Finding good starting RBs late in the draft and UDFA is a lot easier than other positions. You understand what I’m talking about.

          • Robert

            Maybe we should just keep trading down until we parlay a couple dozen 5th round picks! Actually, i guess this is the opposite of parlaying!

    • rowdy

      And Henry produced Oakman didnt

      • bigDhawk

        So what if Henry produced in college. Melvin Gordon produced in college. How’s that working out?

        The point of this exercise was to look out of the box at how we might pick at 26 if forced to do so through an inability to trade back and with all of our top OL options gone. In that scenario Rob suggests we go most SPARQy player available and puts Henry that spot. I’m merely suggesting that if that’s the criteria, Oakman will test out as twice the SPARQ specimen that Henry will, at a position much harder to hit on late in the draft. That’s my out of the box alternative.

        • rowdy

          Fair enough but it’s been well documented that they like sparqy players with great college production with high picks and oakman is considered a major under achiever.

          • bigDhawk

            And I would argue that Henry is a major over achiever that owes his production to the great Alabama OL he played behind. He does not create for himself and will need a similarly great OL in the NFL to continue his success. That’s not us.

            No one is suggesting that Oakman was a productive college player or that we target him early. But in this hypothetical exercise, if Oakman lives up to his physical potential he has a much higher ceiling than the best Henry has to offer.

            • Volume12

              What does have skinny legs have anything to do with a vertical jump?

              How many bean poles in the Nba jump outta the gym?

        • Rob Staton

          The big difference between Oakman and Henry — and it’s significant for the Seahawks — is production.

          As noted in a piece a few days ago — they have gone after SPARQy athletes, but only ones with major production. They haven’t drafted any underachievers with one exception — Christine Michael. And even he did a ton more than Oakman in college.

          Henry delivered on his promise, won a Heisman. Oakman consistently played within himself for three years and was frankly awful in 2015. That’s why Henry is a much more likely proposition than Oakman.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      So he is a perfect fit for Seattle… who I think will grab him in the second round.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn

        oops for Cowboys 😛

        • Volume12

          Keith Marshall has 1-2 rd potential. Since when?

          He can’t stay healthy.

  30. CharlieTheUnicorn

    As they say, round #2 is the wildcard pick for Seattle… it can literally go almost any direction. Simply trying to figure out offense or defense is hard enough.. but when you start breaking out position groupings it is like solving a rubik’s cube in 10 seconds.

    I feel safe in saying that Seattle will not draft a QB, P, K at this point…. but almost any other player of value drops in their lap… they might just take them.

    • SeventiesHawksFan

      You can rule out TE, Safety, and probably Corner as well. Defensive back is a developmental player for us in particular; the next time we pick one of those early, it probably means we in search of an Earl Thomas successor. I think the likeliest positions remain OL, DL and possibly WR. I agree we most likely find a young RB later. LB would be another possibility.

  31. CharlieTheUnicorn

    The pick of Henry would scare me… not because of his “softness” or anything like that. I simply think he has burned a heck of a lot of tread on his tires in college. He was expected to tote the rock 20-40 times per game…. game after game. He might not even make it to a second deal, due to his body breaking down. I think he would be way too big of risk, when you could take a “safer” RB in the draft in the second round.

    I do like this out of the box thinking however. You just never know what the sly devil’s in Seahawks HQ will really do…. in the 2016 draft.

    • Volume12

      He played a year and a half of CFB. It’s not like he has 4 years of 30-40 carries a game. And even then, that doesn’t mean he’ll wear down quickly.

      It says to me that he can handle a heavy workload, teams knew he was getting the ball, and still couldn’t stop him.

      • purpleneer

        Yeah. Doing it for a year isn’t a big concern, and Ray Rice showed even a lot more doesn’t have to mean he’s used up.
        I’d stay away from Derrick Henry because I don’t think his production will translate to the next level, especially if he’s not in an ideal situation with a great line.

  32. Coleslaw

    IMO Henry wouldn’t be doing anything CMike can’t do.

    • Coleslaw

      Christine hasn’t really had very many chances, but his breakaway speed and suddenness is top notch, i expect him to win the edge a lot for us if we keep him

      • bobbyk

        If CMike were good, he wouldn’t have been released by two different teams this past season. Not everyone who tests well, plays well. Not every who plays well, tested well. Three years into his careers, it’s pretty apparent that CMike isn’t going to be who the Seahawks drafted him to be (or they wouldn’t have traded him for a 7th round pick). RB is supposed to be one of the easiest positions to come into the NFL and make an impact. If we were talking about a QB, that would be another matter. I’d be more willing to give him some experience, but I am not comfortable going into 2016 with only Rawls and CMike. I love me some Rawls, but his depth (CMike) does concern me. I’m not totally writing him off, I’m just saying he hasn’t made me feel good enough to want to have to depend on him so heavily this upcoming season.

        • Coleslaw

          I don’t think talent was ever the problem, he acted like a douche before we traded him, his experiences humbled him and he’s more focused now, he tries hard not to fumble now. I think he realized he was about to lose his shot and that scared him, I’d bet he doesn’t let that happen again anytime soon.

    • Rob Staton

      Here’s the thing though — Michael was cut three times in 2015, had no trust in Seattle, was in the doghouse at A&M and all but kicked off the team.

      It’s a nice thought that it’s suddenly clicked for him — but I’m almost certain the Seahawks will not be entering camp without Michael needing to fight for his spot on the roster.

      • Coleslaw

        You can tell he’s changed, he’s serious now, nothing is ever a given on this team and I’m sure they add another RB regardless.

        • Rob Staton

          Has he changed? Or did he just play fairly well to end the season?

          The only time we’ll be able to say he’s changed with any certainty is during the 2016 season.

  33. Nathan

    Silly question, but given how enamored we are with the idea of an athletic D lineman with speed, Is Sokoli not an option?

    • bigDhawk

      That thought had occurred to me as well. If Truckafool can play both ways, Sokoli surely can.

      • bobbyk

        Everyone knew his measurements last year and nobody took him before the Seahawks did in the 6th round. Nobody wanted him on the DL and nobody other than the Seahawks wanted him for the OL. At least well into the 6th round, that is.

  34. Baldwin

    After reading the article/comments, I’m clearly in the minority here, but I would cringe at taking the next ‘stud’ Alabama RB in the 1st or even 2nd regardless of SPARQ score. Ingram, Lacy, Yeldon and Richardson all looked great running behind that Bama OL but haven’t warranted their draft status. Not one. You can say Lacy had a good rook year and Ingram had a good contract year but what else? It would be fair to say the jury is out on Yeldon with a bad OL but that’s not very inspiring track record.

    Much like Florida and Houston before them producing draft bust system QBs, Alabama is producing system RBs. I think that’s fair. Do all 4 of the Bama RBs have a career average greater than say the league average of 4.0 ypc? Maybe if you dismiss Richardsons 3.3 career average as an outlier then maybe their .3 ypc above league average.

    Specifically to Henry, that kid went down at first contact so many times and that’s what he will get in SEA running behind Britt/Lewis and possibly no Okung especially if we spend our draft capital him rather than OL.

    I fully realize that Rob is trying to be thought provoking and I appreciate the intellectual inquisitiveness (very boring otherwise) but Henry at 26 would be a mistake just like CLE, GB, NO and some JAX fans feel.

    Bama hasn’t produced a great back since Alexander 🙂

    And IIRC, Christine Michael was a borderline 1st rounder, SPARQ stud, who fell to the 2nd and then we picked him.

    • david ess

      Well give him some time and I think Eddy Lacy could be next Bama back that could be great. just needs to watch the LBs. otherwise hes pretty solid.

      • Volume12

        And not weigh 250-260 lbs.

        • david ess

          That’s what I was reffering to when I said LBs haha sorry I guess I should just say pounds as LBs could be perceived as linebackers haha

    • Jeremy

      Cal quarterbacks had the same knock a few years ago. Products of Jeff Tedford’s system. That may have been part of the reason that Aaron Rodgers dropped. Players need to be evaluated for their particular skill set and team fit, not necessarily on the success and/or failures of other players playing with completely different rosters.

      • purpleneer

        “Players need to be evaluated for their particular skill set and team fit, not necessarily on the success and/or failures of other players playing with completely different rosters”
        Very true, but there’s more than a little evidence that RBs in particular shouldn’t be judged heavily based on college production. This goes beyond Alabama. “system players” might be a misnomer, but there’s a history of giving a back too much credit for his production, at least regarding projection to the next level.

    • manthony

      Thank you Baldwin!
      I scrolled past 150 comments and didn’t see nothing mentioned about ‘Bama Backs’ and perceived potential.
      The track record on them are not pretty. I dont think we need a Trent Richardson, nor a Derick Henry.

      • Rob Staton

        We can’t judge all Alabama running backs by the same criteria. How many of the previous ‘Bama backs’ ran a 4.4 and jumped a 42 inch vertical? If Henry achieves that, and it’s still an ‘if’, he’ll have far surpassed the physical potential of Ingram, Richardson and co.

        • manthony

          That is fair, I’m just worried we dont address the oline properly, it might not make the strides needed. I am all for giving Glo a shot and parting with Sweezy. I think we should keep okung. And that leaves us addressing LG and C. Hopefully we can address one of those needs in FA, otherwise idk, I know we got guys with potential on the roster already, just concerned, worried, nervous. Dont mind me.

  35. Ed

    BR (Before Russell), everyone thought the Hawks should take a QB with 1st rd picks. I was glad they never did and built the team first. I feel the same way about a RB early. Too many other needs (OL and DL), build from within before you get pieces that would not improve those needs.

    • SeventiesHawksFan

      I agree completely with this sentiment. I only want them taking an RB with their second pick this year if they have identified and special, generational type talent. We need to get back to being imposing bullies on the field again. That’s not going to happen if the interior of our line is getting knocked back and run over on critical downs.

  36. Volume12

    Just me, or does anyone else kind of get the feeling that no matter who Seattle takes, the majority of fans will hate it?

    Too much of what a guy can’t do or what or a guy isn’t. Picking out every little inadequate detail.

    • EranUngar


      At this stage of the off season with so many unknown variables, a plurality of opinions and views is very reasonable. It is, in fact, one of the main reasons we like being here so much.

      Since many of us formulate for ourselves a direction and players we think should be picked, we are quick to point out the down side of other options suggested. At times, those are the exact reasons that made us chose an alternate rout. (I.E. – If we do not see a RB as a reasonable first pick, we’ll find ample reasons why this or that RB should not be picked)

      As answers to those valiables come in (combine & pro day stats, FA moves etc.), we’ll probally narrow the veriaety of options we see as probable or favorable. It happens every year.

      When we finally get to the draft we’ll zoom on the “Bitonio” we feel gret about just to have them do something totally different. We do it every year.

      It took me weeks to shift from “Frank the wife(gf) beater???” to – OMG this guy has all pro written all over him. I’m sure it will happen again this year.

    • SeventiesHawksFan

      Depends on if we do Paul Richardson followed by Britt type of draft. That was the only draft that had me truly worried that both players had bust potential, especially Britt.

      P Rich made only limited sense to me as well with his drop rate and he can’t block, isn’t tall, and is so slight in his build. And is he really going to beat NFL corners the way he would burn college corners? Just seem so non-Seahawky and more Percy Harvin type wishful thinking. And the way P Rich was used was seldom to take the top off the defense. P Rich seems another Carpenter and Irvin early round pick, where significant draft capital is used for a particular purpose in mind . . . and then that player is shifted to a different role when the reality of who he is shows up on the field.

      The C Mike pick I understood, even if I wanted them to go another direction. Marshawn had back problems, remember. And the running game is that important.

      I loved the Frank Clark pick and the was at least encouraged by the possibility that Lockette could be Tate-lite. I don’t think the Front Office had any idea he’d be as good as he’s turned out this quickly.

      A massive project like LaRaven Clark taken with an early pick would have me disappointed and worried as well, unless they sign a stop gap veteran on a two year deal while he develops, which he’ll need.

      I’d be pretty happy with most of the players Rob has projected, other than Henry. Which I don’t think our front office will go anywhere near him. They have a body type that they like for RB. And he’s not it.

    • Steele

      There is just as much “whatever Seattle does is great”, and “JSPC is always right” among fans. What we are doing in here is sifting through as much of the ” inadequate detail” as possible.

      • Volume12

        You guys are missing my point.

        It’s almost like we should only talk about certain prospects or the idea of not going OL-DL, or DL-OL is appallng or something.

        Every time Rob brings up a prospect, the 1st thing is to point out the negative or what he can’t do or isn’t.

  37. Volume12

    I think Rob summed him up perfectly.

    A totally unique back. Built like a tank, but moves like a cheetah.

    • Coleslaw

      A tank made of aluminum

      • Volume12

        Is that like a paper airplane or something?

  38. Radman

    I came into the draft talk season really wanted them to go early and often on the O line. But, looking at the free agent class for the interior O line, and considering some of the cap numbers, I’m now more in line with signing 2 or even 3 middle of the pack FA guards/Centers/RTs. There is a handful of guys in the 26-28 years old/4 years experience in the league, who, with good contracts could make an affordable 4 year core to the interior O line through Russell’s contract. My needle is leaning that way- experience but still young- low ceiling but high floor (just kind of league average not boom or bust types) who can get the game plan implemented. And spend the early picks on the elite athlete/game changers. So…say for example, the Hawks signed Jeff Allen and Osemele to 4 year 16M contracts (just looking at what similar players got), I’d be totally cool with Henry or Fuller or whomever in round 1 instead of O line. (I’m of the thinking that Okung comes back, and Gilliam stays at RT for 1 more year).

    • Volume12

      Trading up for a guy like Taylor Decker makes more sense than adding 3-4 FAs. They wouldn’t have anything left to keep anyone, and they’d waste comp picks for next year.

      • EranUngar

        I’ll actually be fine with trading up for Decker if they believe he is that cornerstone they need to have.

        3-4 FAs does sound totally contradicting to their building philosophy as far as the OL is concerned. However, considering the need for “consistency” as expressed by PC, 1-2 solid FAs that will anchor this line and allow 3 young players to mature around them while providing a safe environment for 3 young players to grow behind them to be the next man up sounds like a possible plan.

        They did something similar with Bennett and Avril and can certainly afford to invest 10-12M(APY) in the OL if they chose to go that way.

        • Rad Man

          it might seem contradictory in some light, but they did bring in Gallery and as you note, it fits with some things stated by PC. I think they could find a way to bring in 8-10M in 2 or 3 FA under the right conditions, and I’m of the opinion it might be a smart move.

  39. david ess

    The thing that kind of worries me about Henry that I don’t know fits our scheme is that he isn’t real elusive. honestly his running style reminds me of kaepernick. He’s a long strider and is almost unstoppable once he gets in the open field but just like kaepernick he doesn’t have the elusiveness that I think the hawks almost covet. he gets taken down too easily. besides the long run he had against Clemson (60+ I believe) I didn’t really see much I liked. often taken down near the LOS.

    • Radman

      Henry would be a rather significant departure from the ht/wt dimensions they’ve had at RB. Lynch, Turbin, Michael, Rawls all fall into rather tight size parameters. Rawls is shorter but fire hydrant like at 5’9″ and around 210. Michael and Turbo 5’10 and 220. Lynch 5’11 and 215. Ware was 220-230 lbs but 5’10 (and drafted to play FB, which he resisted).

      There is some research showing 5’10 220 is ideal ht/wt for injuries based on large studies. Maybe Schneider follows that, or maybe he just has a body type he likes.

      But what’s interesting is at 6’3″/240 (let’s say he sheds a couple of pounds for the combine…), he is the exact same body mass index as Lynch.

      • Radman

        I think he’d make a really nice H back, hybrid FB/TE of player. A kind of Jordan Reed build (6’2″ 240), but out of the backfield rather than on the LOS. Interesting piece you could have on the field at the same time as Rawls and Jimmy, in theory.

      • david ess

        I would be content with him in mid rounds but not with the first pick haha

        But to be totally honest almost any pick PC/JS make I always find the good qualities and tend to like them. Just hope they don’t do the whole “hold off on protection and lets go skill position” haha

    • Steele

      What does, fails to do, at the LOS and in tight spaces is the issue. He does not have good lateral east-west movement, doesn’t make sharp cuts. Isn’t sudden or quick.

  40. Volume12

    Rob, you like Boise St OL Rees Odhiambo?

    Looks like a 2nd-3rd round tale ththat could be had on the cheap.

  41. swisshawk

    If Alex Mack voids his contract in Clevland does he count as a normal UFA or as a released player against the comp-pick-formula?

    • Rob Staton

      Normal FA.

  42. Wall UP

    Jordan Howard would be a better type of back for the Hawks more so than Henry. He looks for contact with a vengeance, rather being big enough to absorb it. Either case, injuries are a common feature without elusiveness. Howard will continue to have the next injury hanging over his head. Without that elusive trait Henry will get pounded in the NFL.

    As a compliment back to Rawls and C Mike, who has earned returning, would be a 3rd dn back athletic enough to catch out of the backfield, and big enough to blk a blitzing LB. Prosise fits that criteria. He could be available at the 125th 4th Rd pick.

    • Rob Staton

      Michael’s earned the chance to return. He hasn’t yet earned the chance to be part of the 2016 roster and needs to be pushed.

      The appeal with Henry is that he’s potentially a unique athlete. We know the Seahawks love that (and their running game). He won’t be that interesting if he runs in the 4.6’s and has a 32 inch vertical. If he cracks 4.4 or even a 4.50 and jumps a 42 inch vertical, they’re going to be interested. Doesn’t mean they’ll take him. But he becomes interesting.

      • Wall UP

        I admit, the interest is there. But, they won’t bite @ 26. If OL & DL options are not available after a trade dn in the early 2nd Rd, I can see the interest. I think Dallas is written all over him. Now if Elliott slides to 26, that presents another dilemma. Do they trade with Dallas, since we know he’s dying to run behind that line, or do we keep him?

        • Rob Staton

          “They won’t bite @ 26”

          You don’t know that, Wall Up.

          If someone had suggested a year ago they trade a first rounder for Jimmy Graham, someone else would’ve said it won’t happen.

          • Wall UP

            We’ll see. I ‘doubt’ that they pick Henry @ 26. The Hawks may pick Elliott @ 26, if he’s there, or they may trade it to Dallas for 2nd & 3rd for their 1st @ 26 & a 4th this year and 5th next year. We’ll have to wait & see. That’s what is so appealing about the draft.

            • Rob Staton

              No point ruling anything out or doubting anything at this stage. We have no idea. Haven’t even started free agency yet. Rest assured though if a 240lbs monster runs a 4.4 and jumps a 42 the Seahawks are going to sit up.

              • Wall UP

                Agreed. Based on what I’ve seen with Henry and their needs “there’s a chance”. I bet ‘squatty’ has a better chance to play center than Henry in the backfield with Rawls. : – )

                • Rob Staton

                  Is that based on their long history of not drafting stunning athletes and going for undersized center’s?

                  I know you’re only joking by the way — but I do sense people are unwilling to open their minds to anything other than O-line/D-line talk at the moment, which is a bit of a shame.

                  • Wall UP

                    Hey, I’m with you on different concepts. I just think Coleman is going to be there for the taking and JS may just still trade dn and get more value. He may get Coleman with that pick, or Henry if the value is there.

                    My point being, if their value for their guy is not at 26, they can use it for more than their guys. JS has his board in place. The Combine is just for minor tweaks and adjustments. I have full faith in their FO.

          • Wall UP

            Jimmy was a multi-Pro Bowler. Henry has yet to put any cleats in the ground as a Pro. We’ll see. He is interesting fodder though. It does get the conversations going.

            • Rob Staton

              Nobody’s comparing Graham vs Henry. The point was — people would’ve ruled out a Graham trade this time a year ago. So ruling out the possibility they’ll draft a 240lbs guy if he runs a 4.4 and jumps a 42 is a real stretch.

              • Wall UP

                How’s the weather on the other side of the pond?

                • Rob Staton

                  Freezing cold at the moment… bring on the spring!

                  • Wall UP

                    We’re getting close! Draft is almost here! This is the fun part of the year.

  43. EranUngar

    I know this is a different topic altogether but i have a question:

    Tretola is mentioned quite a lot here as a possible LG. Vadal Alexander on the other hand is rarely mentioned. Why is that?

    • Rob Staton

      Tretola plays with his hair on fire, active and mobile, loves to get to the second level, decent combo blocker, very physical at the POA. Only downside is arm length. Praised by the coaches at Arkansas as their top guy.

      Alexander is an average player. Doesn’t often finish blocks, doesn’t play with anywhere near the same level of intensity. Doesn’t drive people off the ball, rather just holds position.

      • EranUngar

        Thank you Rob, consider me educated. (Note to self – stop watching highlight clips)

        Alexander’s size and 34 inch arms seemed perfect for that LG spot but after your clarification he is a no starter.

        • Rob Staton

          When I saw the measurements at the Senior Bowl I felt obliged to go back and watch Alexander again — and was thoroughly underwhelmed. He and the LT at LSU Hawkins were so average. LSU vs Alabama tape was a horror show and a glimpse at how they’ll handle NFL D-linemen.

          • Steele

            Good to know your thoughts on V Alexander. He is another one who is given a relatively high projection.

  44. Coleslaw

    To me Henry’s size is just unnecessary because he doesn’t use it to his advantage, he relies on speed and I don’t see that translating to the NFL very well unless he plays behind a good line.

    • Wall UP

      Marshawn had that rare combination of brute force and elusiveness. That equated to his success over the years. Henry will have success only behind Dallas’s OL as a shield from all the pounding he’s doing to have to endure.

    • Rob Staton

      It’s not accurate to say he doesn’t use his size to his advantage. He doesn’t batter people for an extra yard or two. But that’s not the only way to use size to your advantage.

      People seem very sure of their views today. On Henry, on what the Seahawks will or won’t do. Keep an open mind, people.

    • SeventiesHawksFan

      What I see with my amateur eyes with tape on Henry is college level line backers who can’t take down his size or they arrive late, because Alabama’s blocking is superior.

      Then I imagine the NFL. NFL linebackers who will be where Henry is on time. Henry is going to be late to some holes because his not sudden and takes longer to get up to speed. Advantage goes WAY UP to the defense at the first level and LOS.

      And those same NFL linebackers will have zero difficulty taking Henry down at that spot. He’s the same weight as a zillion other power backs. Only he’s not a power back.

      Should Henry get past the LOS and into space though, then it’s a different story. He’s up to speed. He will be able to outrun defenders.

      I like him in a hybrid Third Down RB / sometimes TE type role myself, assuming he can run and catch a 3 to 7 yard route well enough. And the occasional 10-plus yarder. But that’s a Luke Wilson 4th round or later type pick.

      • Coleslaw

        I’ve never liked Henry. I think he’s overrated and will not have a long career in the NFL. Trent Richardson 2.0. I’m saying what I see, and that’s exactly what I saw with Turbin, big, fast, but he lacks what I believe to be an integral part of a RB’s duties, staying upright.

  45. Trevor

    Rob love most of your ideas for the Hawks and think you are a great elevator of talent but I cannot think of a pick I would like less than Derrick Henry in Rd #1. I am sure he will be a Sparq freak and was productive running behind a physically dominant power run blocking line in Alabama.

    For me he is not the type of back who would thrive in our zone blocking scheme that has relied on our RBs gaining significant yards after contact. When I watch him I see a one cut runner with great size and speed that is a home run threat but goes down in first contact in most cases. When he gets a lane and gets to the 3rd level then he is unstoppable.

    He was very productive there is no disputing this but the majority of his yards came on long runs. He carried the ball a ton and there were a lot of short or no gains then he breaks one. To me the comparison to Turbin is a little unfair. He is certainly bigger and faster but he looks like that type of runner and I just don’t see him as a productive lead back in our system.

    Also unless you believe Rawls can’t come back healthy the idea of spending a 1st or 2nd Rd. pick on an RB just does not make sense to me when there will be good options in the mid rounds for guys who can contribute and be a rotational 2nd or 3rd RB.

    If we do go RB early then I think Elliot is the only legit 3 down first round prospect. Then guys like Collins, Dixon in Rd #3 would be my choice over Henry.

    • Rob Staton

      Important to remember here — I’m not projecting Henry to Seattle. I’m suggesting if he runs a 4.4 and jumps 42 inches they’ll almost certainly show interest. The objective of the blog is not to narrow down options and cling to 1-2 players. That’s a sure fire way to be disappointed come April when they pick someone else. It’s to open horizons, discuss many different prospects and scenarios and debate them.

      I would equally urge people not to focus on positions and rounds. It’s about finding value and filling needs. Taking a worse player at #26 because the feeling is they ‘should’ go after another position is a good way to fail. If the depth is there to get good OL/DL in rounds 2-4… there are lots of options in round one. Including Henry, Deion Jones and others.

      • Trevor

        Valid points for sure. Love Deion Jones by the way and think he would be a great fit.

      • EranUngar

        Rob, you have touch a very crucial point – “It’s about finding value…”

        I would like to add something to that statement The draft is not an independent competition who’s value stands on its own (I am not saying you think it is…). The draft is a one of the tools used to improve your team. That “improvement” has one purpose – win football games (Now and in the future).

        Hence, “value” is not just draft related, “value” has to be measured by how much does it help your team win football games. I’m not saying there is a reliable method of measuring it but it should be the leading factor in making your picks.

        Sometimes, the pick (or picks) that will best enhance your team’s chances of winning those games is addressing a need or improving on your clear weaker points. Sometimes, due to who’s there when you pick and who will there later, your best pick is not “addressing a need” but a player that will bring “value” elsewhere that will have a bigger effect on your chances to win games. Sometimes, finding that player that will turn a very good unit into an elite unit, may have a better overall effect that will outweigh upgrading a poor unit into a solid one.

        I am not saying this because i believe Henry specifically is that player at 26 but i fully agree that picks outside the OL or any other perceived need could end up improving our winning chances on a given pick.

        Those picks are the hardest to predict and i value your thinking by putting this option for us to think about and understand.

        For me personally, those picks that seem to stray from the commonly perceived needs for a certain pick are the most interesting and telling. While those picks can end up a bust just like any other pick, when they do work out as(or better) than planned, they will shape the identity of the team.

        It’s almost too easy to point to drafting a certain undersized QB on the 3rd round when we just signed a high profile FA to compete with our solid QB, but other such picks helped shape this team for better or worse. Drafting a Kam size safety or the longer CBs has now become the norm but was a deviation from the norm way back then. The Sweezy project or the C-Mike picks drew their attention. Even trading for Lockett was such a pick.

        I would love to have an out of the blue pick again. Whatever it is, no matter the round or player or position, those are the ones to watch for.

  46. John_s

    The size, upright running style and possibly speed reminds me of Chris Warren. He was a pile pusher but he wore teams down. By mid 3rd quarter his 4,5 yard runs turned in to 20 yard runs

    • Steele

      Chris Warren was considerably smoother and had far greater moves than Henry.

  47. RWIII

    Kevin Dodd. There is NO WAY Kevin Dodd will be on the board. When the Hawks are on the board in the 2nd round(56th overall pick). Kevin Dodd is a FAST Riser. He is ACTAULLY compared to Micheal Bennett. In a three-game stretch to end the season, against North Carolina in the ACC Championship Game, Oklahoma in the first round of the playoffs and Alabama in the national championship game, he had five sacks.

    What would you think of John Schneider taking Dodd for Seattle in the first round?

    • Rob Staton

      I don’t see the comparison to Bennett personally. For the Seahawks to consider him he’ll need to run a 10-yard split in the 1.5’s.

  48. Kyle


    If we are talking about athletic freaks, look at terron be khan, Odell’s cousin. This man is a monster. Check him out and tell me what you all think about him and where he could go.

    • Cysco

      For those wondering, he played RB. He’s 5’11 230lbs

      Hell, i’d take a flier on him in the late rounds. Apparently he has his vertical up to 46-in (a combine record) has his 40 at 4.5 flat and did 42 reps of the bench press (would obliterate the RB record at the combine)

      crazy stuff.

  49. RWIII

    NFL.com(Lance Zierlein) is comparing Kevin Dodd to Michael Bennett.

    • Rob Staton

      Don’t like the comp, personally. But then someone gets compared to Michael Bennett every year.

  50. Nathan

    Had a listen to the Kiper and Mcshay podcast yesterday.

    It was rubbish.

    Kiper got asked to name the pash rushers who could rise in the draft, and just rattled off a bunch of names and their sack numbers, no insights, no comment on their actual skills.

    Dodd is a perfect example of the sack numbers being misleading.

    • bobbyk

      And Bullard.

  51. Clayton

    How does Derrick Henry compare with Leonard Fournette? If RB is one of Seattle’s priorities, do you think Fournette might be worth waiting for?

    • Rob Staton

      Fournette could be a generational talent. If they want to wait for him, I think they’ll need to be picking in the top-five in 2017. He could be the #1 pick.

  52. Michael(CLT)

    This site is such fun. Go spurs!

© 2024 Seahawks Draft Blog

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑