Would the Seahawks trade up in round two?

Last year we spent a fair bit of time debating whether the Seahawks would trade up in round two — their first pick in the 2015 draft. Mario Edwards Jr and Dorial Green-Beckham were discussed as possible targets.

In the end they moved up in round three instead to take Tyler Lockett. Could we see a similar move this year?

Even if the Seahawks are able to finalise a deal with Russell Okung (or Donald Penn, or Kelvin Beachum), the offensive line still looks like a priority. All three veterans appear destined to sign short term contracts — so it would make sense for the Seahawks to draft a player at #26 that can play left guard initially before eventually converting back to tackle.

Jack Conklin, Taylor Decker, Germain Ifedi, Jason Spriggs and Shon Coleman are all well suited to play inside. Le’Raven Clark is a bit of a wildcard too.

The range to draft any of the above is pretty limited to round one. If you miss out — good luck finding another tackle later on. It would make sense to invest in the O-line at #26 and address other needs later.

The defensive tackle depth in this class is well advertised. We’ve also discussed how it’s heavily weighted towards run stuffers and not pass rushers. The Seahawks should be able to find a solid rotational run stuffer on day three to add to their stable. If they want an interior pass rusher — they might have to be bold.

It’s hard to judge how far the Seahawks would need to move up to target a specific player. They have two third round picks at #91 and #97. They can only deal #91 because the rule on trading compensatory picks doesn’t kick in until 2017.

Can they jump 10-15 spots using a third rounder?

According to this chart it could move them up from #56 to around #42.

It would be an expensive move — one that many will oppose. Afford me the opportunity to make the case for why it might appeal:

1. Having two late third round picks this year gives the Seahawks a fall-back to still select in that range. The compensatory pick is really a ‘bonus’.

2. The Seahawks were aggressive to move up for Tyler Lockett — a player that filled a crucial need at receiver and returner. Does anyone think back to the compensation required to land him? Or do you think about him scoring touchdowns in 2016?

3. If you can land a genuine impact player in the 40’s — would that be a better use of one third round pick than hoping to land an extra player later on that might not have the same impact?

4. The #91 pick is, in essence, similar to a high fourth rounder. That’s not a range where the Seahawks have had much fortune (especially when drafting receivers).

So who could they move up for?

I’d make the case for Florida’s Jonathan Bullard.

Personally he reminds me of Mario Edwards Jr — one of the players we talked about a year ago. He went #35 overall to Oakland.

At the combine Bullard ran a 4.93 at 6-3 and 285lbs, jumped a 32 inch vertical and had a 1.66 ten-yard split. His SLA score put him sixth among defensive linemen.

Edwards Jr ran a 4.84 at 6-3 and 279lbs with a 32.5 inch vertical. The similarities are pretty clear. Even their length is virtually the same (Bullard has 33.5 inch arms, Edwards Jr 33 inches).

More than anything his high intensity style of play, his grit and physicality will likely appeal to the Seahawks. He says he returned to Florida in 2015 to prove a point after an average mid-round grade from the draft committee. He ended up having the best season of his college career.

It’s that kind of chip on his shoulder that seems to get the Seahawks going.

So what does he do well?

He’s very good at timing the snap count and winning with get-off. That might not be quite as easy to do at the next level — but you see excellent anticipation show up consistently on tape. He’s pretty one-dimensional in how he wins (power or shooting the gap) and doesn’t offer a lot of variation (occasional rip move) but if he sees a crease he’ll generally exploit it.

You’re not talking about a quick-twitch Sheldon Richardson or Aaron Donald. It’s often forgotten how freaky Richardson was at Missouri amid all the character issues with the Jets. Bullard is different — but he does impact games from the interior. His motor never stops and he’s an absolute grinder. He’ll take on a double team and fight to the whistle, he’ll pursue a ball-carrier until it’s over.

He needs to develop better counters but that could come if he adds extra weight/power. He’s not a brilliant run defender and that could limit his ability to play early downs. That’s not why you bring him in though — he’s your Clinton McDonald/Jordan Hill.

In terms of character and personality he’s an ‘A’ grade there. He’s dedicated to football, level-headed and won’t be an issue off the field.

Bullard is generally regarded as a high second round prospect. Others have him in the second or third round range such as Scouts Inc. I’ve been projecting him to Indianapolis at #48 and that might be the range you have to get into to take him.

Finding a way to add a long, athletic offensive tackle and an impact interior pass-rusher is arguably the key to this draft for the Seahawks. Trading up in the second round might be the way to do it.

Example projection

#26 — Germain Ifedi (T, Texas A&M)
Comes in to start at either right tackle or guard

#46 — Jonathan Bullard (DT, Florida)
Trade up ten spots with the Lions using the #91 pick

#97 — Connor McGovern (C, Missouri)
Add competition to the center position

Do these three players have more impact than the four you get if you stay put at #56?

With needs filled at cornerback (retaining Jeremy Lane) and receiver (retaining Jermaine Kearse) — your picks on day three could be used to add another run stuffer and a linebacker. Could Travis Feeney last into day three if concerns over his shoulder injuries linger?

There are counters to a plan like this. What if Bullard goes earlier than projected here? If the Seahawks cannot retain Okung or replace him — do they need four picks in rounds 1-3 to bolster their O-line sufficiently?

Even so — keep in mind the possibility of an aggressive move in round two.


  1. J2MED

    Last year we traded up, so I can definitely see something similar happen.

  2. Volume12

    Quality over quantity is what I always say.

    Bullard would make sense for a trade up. Also has that ‘Seahawky’ background too. Raised by his grandma, lost her this year or last, and says he plays the game for her.

    Not expecting every rookie selection to make this team anyways. 5-6 of them and the yearly 2-3 UDFAs.

    The comp to Mario Edwards jr., one of my favorite rookies last year, is eerily similar.

    • cha

      That’s a fair point V12. This is not year one of the PC era where nearly every roster spot was up for grabs and they made hundreds of roster moves.

      Realistically there are not enough roster spots to support the draft picks they currently hold & 1 or 2 UDFA’s that inevitably work their way into the conversation. It’s fun but frustrating when other teams pick up a Hawk castoff and they do well.

      If there is a talent that makes enough of a difference that moving up 20 spots costs a 3rd rounder it’s not like there would be an empty roster spot that would hurt us later.

    • CHawk Talker Eric

      The comp to Edwards is pretty encouraging. I remember knocking Edwards a bit for lack of consistency, taking plays off or not playing through the whistle, slacker reputation. There’s nothing like that about Bullard. Gotta think he’d be a better get than Edwards.

      • Naks8

        If we can get an impact player it is well worth it. Just like you said, not all draft picks will make the team.

    • SeventiesHawksFan

      I’d be very happy with that kind of trade up. OT and DT are the two obvious priorities. And maybe an LB too to replace Irvin’s first and second down SAM role.

      And if a player is identified who fits what they’re looking for at DT and we have to trade picks to get him, then yes go get him.

      Bullard sounds like an excellent pick. Sure it would be nice to have ‘super fast twitch’ at DT, but we’ve already seen that that’s only necessary on passing downs for the team’s philosophy and scheme to be effective.

    • seahawks509

      Why stop what’s been working? We’ve always valued quantity more. Especially in a somewhat deep DL and OL class. We have positions we need to add to and trading up only hinders our ability to fill those needs. I wouldn’t mind trading down at 26 if a LB or OL we like isn’t there.

      • Robert

        Usually, but not always. That sacrificed a lot of quality (mid round picks) quantity for Lockett.

      • Volume12

        1 elite player is better than 2-3 average or good players.

        HC Jeff Fisher has suscribed to the latter his whole career, and it’s gotten him 7 winning seasons in 20 years of coaching or something like that?

  3. CHawk Talker Eric

    One of the things I love about SDB – the sheer unpredictability of your posts.

    We’ve been back and forth on Bullard for a while. No denying his effort and character are tops. He also has the ability to impact a game. But he’s a bit one-dimensional, and he seems to be at or near his ceiling (which is still fairly high).

    But more importantly, does he fit well with what SEA are looking for from a Clint McDonald type? By that I mean, isn’t he at his best operating from the 5T or even 5-wide, rather than inside? Admittedly haven’t studied him enough to know the answer.

    BTW I have Bullard going to ATL at 50.

    • Volume12

      He’s definetly different than Clint McDonald was, but with so few interior pass rushers this year, he would make sense.

      I do think he’s more 5-tech, but a lot of the ways he wins are MosesBread esque.

      A ‘NASCAR package’ of Clark, Bullard, Bennett, and Avril could be scary good.

      • C-Dog

        Good move throwing out the comp to Bennett. When Bennett kicks inside, he wins a lot of his battles against much bigger men with anticipation, hence the occasional offsides penalties we have to live with. But I’ve liked Bullard’s game because of this.

        Also, when he’s clearly beaten his man, and gets home, he brings some thumber attitude along with his tackling. I think he’s DE/DT. With Clark shedding pounds to either play more leo or possibly even SAM, I think now perhaps this is the type they should target. Get that run stuffer later down the road.

        • Jujus

          Clark is not playing Leo ffs.

          • Jujus

            Oops meant he is playing Leo not Sam.

            • C-Dog

              Yeah, I going to say, don’t think we know that yet. Very possibly not, but he does have some linebacker in his background from college. It wouldn’t shock me if they try to Bruce Irving 2.0 him.

              • Jujus

                Bruce had burst and 1 move speed.

                Clark has burst with strength, and actually has pass rushing moves. He isn’t a lb mold. We predicted him being a hawk from the Leo mold and imagine if his split was good at 270 what it will be at 250a

                • SeventiesHawksFan

                  I’m hope him shedding pounds doesn’t mean his bull rush power will be diminished. He had plenty of burst to begin with. A certain amount of bulk is required for power, even if it’s not muscle weight. I’m sure they have a plan and know what they’re doing so this is just thinking aloud.

                  • C-Dog

                    He said on his twitter account that the weight loss is to increase his burst and flexibility. I think that either means LEO or SAM. With al the Bennett type ends in this draft, Seattle would have better luck landing those type of rushers than pure edge. My hunch is that Frank is slimming to either take over Bruce’s right end role in the nickel, or to potentially take over at SAM. His days as a Bennett type are probably done.

    • franks

      I never know what’s getting covered next coming here in the a.m. is like opening xmas presents. No one covers the hawks from this many angles.

      Sometimes you don’t need to know every trick, you just need your bread and butter. Bullard has his bread and butter, he times the snap and hammers into the backfield.

      I’d be really happy with those picks. What then?

      4-Fahn Cooper RT.
      5-DJ Reader, DT.
      6-David Morgan II TE. Most dominant college run-blocking TE in 2 years. Might have to take him r5.
      7-Alex Lewis LT. Run first Cable-type.
      7-Halapoulivaati Vaitai, OT. Cable-LG.

      • Catharsis50

        I would love to get a run blocking tight end.

        • troy

          I actually like it a lot! If proposing such a move up to grab Bullard Im intrigued by the idea to strongly consider the possibility of similar action to obtain Charles Tapper or Keanu Neal. FWIW(not much I know) I would probably put Glasgow just ahead of McGovern. And perhaps the draft options play out something like this…

          #26 — Germain Ifedi OR Shon Coleman

          #46 — Charles Tapper OR Keanu Neal
          Trade up ten spots with the Lions using the #91 pick

          #97 — Graham Glasgow OR Christian Westerman

          – Miles Killebrew
          – Jihad Ward

          – Travis Feeney
          – Fahn Cooper OR Adam Bisnowaty

          – Mike Thomas
          – Keith Marshall

          – Rashard Robinson
          – Connor Wujciak
          RD 7
          – Marquez North
          – DJ Foster

          – RB Keith Marshall
          – CB Daniel Davie
          – RB Brandon Burks
          – WR/QB Trevone Boykin
          – DE Alex McCalister
          – LB Stephen Weatherly
          – RB Kenneth Farrow
          – OT Jordan Swindle
          – CB LeShaun Sims

          • franks

            Robinsons a great fit and this is the range “they” expect him to go…. but I don’t know, seems too good to be true in the 6th or 7th or even in the fifth, to me. He’s a really good, really long corner prefect for this system and everyone’s copying Pete right now.

  4. POB

    Thoughts on trading back in Rd 1 & up in Rd 2 to end up w/something like Le’Raven Clark and Bullard/Tapper? How big of a gap do you see b/t LRC and Ifedi?

    • Dlk1

      Or alternately, someone they have rated highly is there at 26 ( Henry/Ogbah) forcing a stronger move up into the top of round 2 to nab a tackle (clark?). Then,

      (3) McGovern
      (4) Willie Henry

    • H M Abdou

      I’m no expert, but I think I’d rather have Ifedi. They’re both projects, but Ifedi seems more polished and ready to play.

  5. Nathan_12thMan

    You are right that while pre-draft we might freak out about draft picks used to trade up, at the end of the day if the player produces (like Tyler did) we don’t think about it. We just think about how great of a pick he was, not what we could have gotten with the picks we traded away to get him.

    I don’t think i’d really have a problem with this if the Hawks did it. At the end of the day I will just be standing and clapping if the Hawks actually pay high priority attention to the O-line and get a OT in the 1st and get a G/C in the 3rd. It is scary to imagine them not making OL a priority and doing that.

    I definitely don’t have a problem with this scenario assuming the DT produces. If he produces like McDonald did, how we hope he does, then that is great. In that case we are getting pass rush pressure up the middle while we also have Bennett, Avril and Clark rushing the passer. Lethal group. Obviously if he is our next 2015 Jordan Hill (unproductive) then what a bummer.

  6. southpaw360

    I would love a trade up to target another OL. Draft Ifedi at 26 and Coleman if he is available later on. I would even trade another pick next year to move up further this year. Trade our 2nd and 3rd this year plus another pick next year to move up to the low 30’s. I would be stoked with those 2 picks and I think most fans would be as well. Gilliam, Coleman/Ifedi, Lewis, Glowinski and Coleman/Ifedi. I would love that outcome.

    • Naks8

      That would look good for year 2, but in year 1 I would rather see only one of those guys have to start and have a veteran fill in play either lg or tackle

  7. Greg Haugsven

    Always an interesting debate. One you never really know until draft day. Either way it’s fun talking about it.

  8. cha

    I’m on board with the OT idea at 26 but I tend to go with a high-upside gamble in the 2nd.

    Bullard would work. I’d support a trade up for Braxton Miller. I think he could do all kinds of interesting things in Year one, even as he learns the WR position.

    • David

      Would have loved this idea before they re-signed Kearse but now with Baldwin, Lockett, Richardson and Kearse at WR, guessing any additional roster spots slotted to WR will be strictly ST guys (which is why I was against re-signing Kearse, would have preferred to sign a veteran OL guy and use a higher draft pick on a high-upside WR who they can bring along slowly as opposed to sign Kearse and draft an OL guy who has to step in a start immediately).

      Unless of course they turn Miller into a pass-catching RB/Percy Harvin type guy.

  9. bobbyk

    One of the (GA) coaches at Florida is a former student of mine. He says that he’s going to root for whichever team takes Bullard. He loves him for the person he is and his leading by example (i.e. work ethic). When the Seahawks talk about “grit,” they couldn’t draft a better player in this draft than Bullard. There may be a few other players who have this same level of it, but take it from one of his coaches at Florida… nobody is going to outwork Bullard. The Gators have some great players, but none have the respect of their coaches to the degree Bullard does. That speaks volumes, imo. I would be perfectly fine with him as a situational pass rushing threat. He could also stuff the run from DE in early downs later in his career (perhaps even now). I’d be thrilled to get him.

    • JT

      Great insight, and not surprising to hear given how much he’s improved. That drive, work ethic, and great athleticism makes me believe he has some upside as pass rusher, especially when theoretically moved inside in nickel situations for Seattle. I totally agree that he could be an impact run defender from day 1 at the DE position on base downs, and lowering Avril’s snaps by doing so could help keep him fresh (he seemed to wear down as the season wore on last year). He’s a perfect fit for Seattle and a first round talent imo.

    • Bjammin

      Wonder what he thinks about Neal?

  10. CharlieTheUnicorn

    I can see Seattle trading back a bit with the #26 pick, if 3-4 of their targeted OL are all available. Then with the new draft picks, they could move around in the 3rd or 4th round and grab exactly what they want.

    The guy which has grown on me, due to the 1.59s 40 yard split is Emmanuel Ogbah with #26. He has the SPARQ and athleticism you would want if you are PC or JS. He would fit part of what they lost with Irvin moving on to greener pastures.

    So, let’s say Seattle drafts the DE that I mentioned, then I could see them packaging their second and third + a little more in 2017 to get back into the upper 15 picks of the second round to grab an impact OL prospect. One of these guys would still be available: Jack Conklin, Taylor Decker, Germain Ifedi, Jason Spriggs, Shon Coleman and Le’Raven Clark.

  11. Hawksince77

    As mentioned above, trading some picks to get their guy makes sense. Times are different than a few drafts ago, when JS was all about quantity to build the team. Now they can be more selective, and they have plenty of picks to work with.

    Having said that, I am surprised you see a situational pass rusher as a target. It looks like the second round is prime territory for LB, with the likes of Perry, Fackrell and perhaps Deion Jones available. If they really liked one of these guys and thought they had to trade up to get him, that would seem to be a good move, given one of these guys might feel a major need at LB.

    Right now, outside of JPL and Morgan, there really isn’t a natural LB on the roster. Pinkins is a converted safety, and Clark and Marsh defensive linemen. Not that they can’t be converted – perhaps they can. But drafting a top prospect at the position may make the most sense.

    Unless they think they can get Feeley later (which is likely). That might change the equation.

    • CHawk Talker Eric

      That’s a decent either-or scenario ’77. SEA likely can draft Feeney at 56, but not Bullard. Between the 2 options – Feeney for 56, or Bullard for 56 + 91 – which would you take?

      I’m intentionally omitting Jones (likely to be gone before 56), Fackrell (just not excited enough about him) and even Perry (who Lance Ziering describes as “playing through a straw”).

      Personally, I’d probably trade up for Bullard, but mostly because of Fennel’s injury history.

      • Hawksince77

        I’d trade up for Jones, if Perry and Fackrell are not all that, but Jones an excellent LB (if that’s truly the case).

      • Hawksince77

        And I think Feeney more like a 4/5 round option, not second.

        • franks

          Agreed, with the injuries and the fact that ullad spends a lot more time in the pocket.

          • franks


        • CHawk Talker Eric

          That’s possible but if it wasn’t for his shoulder, he’d be this year’s Jaquiski Tartt rising into the early part of R2.

    • pqlqi

      can play MLB
      Wagner, Coyle, KJ Wright, Morgan

      can play WIL
      KJ Wright, KPL, Morgan, Pinkins, Coyle

      can play SAM
      KJ Wright, Marsh, Clark, Avril, KPL

      They have pretty interchangeable parts. I think it more likely that they get a developmental or small school SPARQ athlete in the mid-late rounds rather than spend 2 early picks to move up and get a guy who is not liekly to play this season.

      • franks

        That’s what I’m thinking too. The guys we have should be ok for one or two downs, or at least it shouldn’t be a huge priority.

      • Hawksince77

        You may be right, but that is an uninspiring list of potential starters. At LB, only Wagner and Wright are legitimate, in that they have proven themselves. Everyone else is either projecting from another position (Clark, Marsh, Pinkins) or has been there and yet to start effectively (Morgan, Coyle, KPL).

        Obtaining a proven talent (Deion Jones, specifically) in the second round might be a great use of the pick.

  12. Del tre

    I really enjoyed the article it was well thought out thanks rob

  13. Clayton

    Is it possible for them to trade down in round 1 and get Ifedi at a lower spot?

    • Jon

      If they are set on drafting Ifedi I would not trade back, but if they could go for Ifedi, Coleman, Spriggs, or others and they have 5 guys on the board that they are good with any of them, then you trade back.

    • pqlqi

      on about half of my fanspeak mock drafts, Ifedi, Conklin, Briggs, Coleman, and Clark are available at 26. If all of them are available, and if the Hawks are drafting OL with that first pick, I have to believe they’d move back.

  14. C-Dog

    Can’t put my finger on who they would go after, but I feel the potential of Trader John starting to emerge and the possibility that look to acquire the next Clinton McDonald the way they got Clinton McDonald, which was by way of trade.

    Outside of Rankins, Bullard, Hargrave, Washington, I don’t see a lot of options in this draft for inside rush. Washington I’m starting to feel less convinced about, pulled his hammy or something in his pro day, doesn’t come across high character, either.

    Maybe the upside of Billings or Willie Henry. Maybe Tapper adding back some bulk. Maybe Kaufusi, or Judon learning to play inside like they tried with Clark. Maybe Blair. Kind of a lot of maybes and possiblies.

    Nkemdiche I have a hard time buying that they would touch with an early pick, he’s almost entirely off my board. Darius Latham just got a DUI the other day, not smart at all.

    I know he didn’t put up wowing number at the combine, I kind of go back to Austin Johnson, and wonder with his relentlessness over a center on 3rd downs would be effective. At worst you probably got a great kid to take over 1 tech in a year, if they bring in a low cost vet. Definitely has a nose for the ball, Pete would probably like that.

    I keep liking Hargrave more and more. If Perry isn’t there at 56, Bullard is gone, Kelly and Martin are gone, Derrick Henry isn’t sitting there, I’d be happy if they took Hargrave there. I remember John Schnieder saying when they drafted Hill that they would have been happy taking him in R2, if Michael wasn’t there. Who’s to say they wouldn’t be happy with a productive inside rush kid like Hargrave, if they don’t trade for one?

  15. Dawgma

    It’s almost always a bad mood e to trade two (or more) picks for one. You’re gambling that you’re more certain that one player will turn out than that the two you still select will yield one solid player.

    Scouting is just not that precise, and trade ups are basically betting on you (erroneous) assumption that you’ll beat the house, that you’re more likely to get an ‘impact player’ in one pick than in two.

    You are not, generally speaking. No may later who ‘you’ are.

    • franks

      Probably depends who you are. It worked out well for No-E last year. Trading back for PRich with Bitonio available didn’t work out that well.

      Not sure I’d bet on John beating the house in the early rounds.

      • C-Dog

        For that matter, really, most of the draft is a crap shoot to some degree. If they are dtermined to take a tackle at 26, and they feel Bullard is going to make the most impact on their defense getting their rush back to where it needs to be, by all means, swing for the fences, trade up and get him.

        I’m going to say his few blemishes are severely outweighed by his positives. I’ve always liked him. Who knows what they think, and if they feel they can add a player later who can offer something similar enough that they can be patient, but if they deal up for him, wouldn’t disappoint me at all. If they can’t add Glasgow in R3, maybe they pick up Dahl in later rounds.

        • franks

          Dahl’s starting to look lie a bargain.

          I’m all for moving up for Bullard, if they’re convinced he’s their guy but their are a lot of good fits for us with that third rounder.

          • C-Dog

            If they took Dahl beyond R3, I think that’s a steel. If they are looking at Ted Larson in free agency, can’t really convince me that Larson is better than Dahl.

            To be honest, I’m so hell bent on them improving the inside rush, if they took Bullard at 26, I’d be pretty ridiculously happy with that. I think they go OL at 26, though.

            • franks

              But Ted Larsen can definitely play center, doesn’t cost a draft pick or have the rookie floor.

              If Pet and John saw Bullard as a fist oundr and pickked him 26, I’d be pumped. Then the situation with the tackles, having missed out on COleman/Ifedi/Spriggs, comes up. I think we’re better off signing a starting T no matter who we draft in R1.

  16. red

    I think we might want to trade up for a OT at 46 if Ifedi or Coleman fall a little.

    26. C Kelly Alabama
    46 OT Coleman
    97 DT Day/Collins

    • Trevor

      Would love those first two picks and well worth the trade up!

    • Sea Mode

      Ok, but the problem is you would somehow have to “know” at 26 that Coleman or Ifedi for sure is going to fall that far, otherwise you risk missing out completely on a tackle. This is exactly why most of us tend to project OT in R1, because there is no way to be sure they will fall.

      • red

        Some of this depends on free agency if we sign Okung or Penn I dont think it will be 2-3 year contract. If we sign Beachum who is younger than maybe we look at G/DT/DE at 46 in a trade up.

    • reggieregg

      I love this except I think you may have to draft Coleman and kelly in reverse….either way I’d love those 2 guys….and you still get a guy like Sheldon day great move

      • red

        I think Ifedi and Sprngs will likely be gone before 40 but i get the impression Coleman will be there at 46. I think he might even be available at 56. Kelly will be gone before 46 most likely.

  17. Steve Nelsen

    Studies have shown that you are more likely to find starters and pro-bowlers by using more picks than by trading up. JS has traded up twice, one hit with Lockett, one miss with Jesse Williams.

    I wonder if a similar scenario might be to use 26 on an impact defender like Ogbah and then trade up in the second to get our OL. Out of Ifedi, Spriggs, Decker, Conklin, Coleman and Clark, there is a chance Coleman or Clark could slide into range at 46.

  18. Josh

    Anyone see Chad Reuters 4 round mock at nfl.com? Pretty good haul to be honest.

    Sheldon Rankins
    Michael Thomas
    Nick martin
    Christian Westerman
    Dadi Nicholas

    Really solid mock.

    • EranUngar

      What i find interesting are the following:

      38. Jacksonville Jaguars: Ryan Kelly, C, Alabama
      40. New York Giants: Keanu Neal, S, Florida
      41. Chicago Bears: Jason Spriggs, OT, Indiana
      49. Buffalo Bills: A’Shawn Robinson, DT, Alabama
      62. Carolina Panthers: Shon Coleman, OT, Auburn
      72. Chicago Bears: Jonathan Bullard, DE, Florida
      88. Green Bay Packers: Sheldon Day, DT, Notre Dame
      89. Pittsburgh Steelers: Germain Ifedi, OT, Texas A&M
      90. Seattle Seahawks: Nick Martin, C, Notre Dame
      112. New Orleans Saints: Connor McGovern, OG, Missouri
      119. Houston Texans: Adolphus Washington, DT, Ohio State

      I like 4-7 round mocks because they give you some idea of who will be available later than expected….

      • Rob Staton

        ….according to one man.

        • EranUngar

          It is just one mock. However, as we approach the draft and as you look at more and more of those, you get a picture. It is not a sure thing but “common opinion” plays a part in the draft too.

          If most of the respected draft pundits predict that both Ifedi & Coleman are there when we pick at 56, it’s highly likely that at lease one of them will actually be there.

          It’s way to early for that but in a month – those mocks will provide valuable strategic information.

          • Rob Staton

            Chad Reuter’s mock doesn’t represent common opinion though. Some of his picks are way out there.

            I don’t know anyone who has Ifedi and Coleman both dropping to #56. Most now acknowledge Ifedi as a late first round talent.

            • oz

              Coleman is loosing traction. So is Clark.

      • RWIII

        EU: Print a copy of this mock draft. Save it for actual mock draft. Then compare the two.

      • franks

        I think he’s right on for McGovern and Kelly.

        • franks

          Nevermind I read the numbers wrong, way off on McG IMO

      • franks

        Way off on all those guys really. Ashawn Rob going top 20, Neal R1, I don’t see any of that but maybe someone takes an early shot at Day

    • RWIII

      It depends on how bad you want Bullard. To be honest my eyes have been opened to Bullard. The guy had 18 tackles for a loss as a Senior for the Florida Gators.

    • franks

      That;d be nice but like most of the mocks, how realistic is it? Rankins and Martin won’t be there at those picks, Thomas maybe, Westerman rated by most in the late second/early third.

      • EranUngar

        Personally, I think he way off on most of the above names and many others. There are others who publish more reliable mocks imo.

        I am just saying that keeping track of those mocks is valuable. JS has made a killing by correctly evaluating who goes where and navigating the draft accordingly. If we are to try and anticipate his moves, knowing what others mock can be very helpful.

        Ifedi at 89 is clearly a mistake but what if Coleman drops beyond the 2nd round? Maybe picking him at 56 brings more overall value than picking Ifedi at 26?

        We’ll know more as we get closer to the draft…

  19. nichansen01

    I like this scenario IF we sign a defensive end (Schofield, Clemons) and move Frank Clark to SAM. Clark began his career at Michigan as an outside linebacker, if we continues slimming down he could be a starter at the position. Also, having Frank Clark at SAM is getting our best players on the field at the same time.

    Frank Clark, Bobby Wagner, KJ Wright
    Ciff Avril, Ahtyba Rubin, Jonathan Bullard, Michael Bennet

    Bullard might be more of an end, but that is still a deadly front 7. Bring in a nose tackle on day three, sign Clemons, and you are set.

    Eric Pinkins, Brock Coyle, Kevin Pierre-Louis
    Cassius Marsh, Jordan Hill, DJ Reader (Round 4), Chris Clemons (AJ Francis)

  20. CHawk Talker Eric

    @AaronWilson_NFL: Al Woods to Titans on three-year deal, per his agency, @_SportsTrust

    • Volume12

      Wasn’t Al Woods on the Titans before?

      Any updates on DT Cam Thomas?

      • C-Dog

        Yeah, Woods has been a Titan for a while. Bummer, I kind of liked him a bit better than Thomas. They might take a look at another Titan Sammy Hill.

  21. Nate

    I would much rather take Emanual Ogbah if he was available in the first personally.

    • Rob Staton

      Ogbah coming in for a small percentage of snaps behind Avril and Bennett…

      Or fixing the O-line?

  22. CC

    I’d definitely trade up to get Bullard. I like him – and he showed well at the combine. If we could get these 3 guys, I’d be quite content.

    • oz

      I’m on board…

  23. The Hawk is Howling

    Connor Mcgregor plays center? No way that dude is a featherweight, I like Irish people so I’m down with him in the 3rd. I bet he is already predicting which round he will knock out a GM and be taken in.

    • EranUngar

      6-4, 306, Unger size and ridiculously strong….

    • ZacScratchFever

      Those weight cuts are ridiculous

  24. Trevor

    I think everyone would agree with the way our roster is constructed we have a legitimate 3 year championship window where all our star players are under contract.

    On the flip side the Browns are in complete rebuild mode and are talking about getting Kaep as QB then drafting a guy to develop behind him and use the 2nd overall pick on a position player like Ramsey.

    So something to think about given the teams situations and JS big trade background.

    -We trade our 1st round pick 2016, 2nd and 4th round comp in 2017 to Browns
    -In return we get Joe Thomas and the Browns 2nd round pick in 2016

    The Browns would have two first rounders they could use the 2nd overall on Ramsey or Bosa and our 26th on the QB they want to develop behind Kap.

    We get a top 3 LT for the next 3years of our Championship window. We could then draft Ryan Kelly with the 2nd round pick #32 we get from the Browns and draft Josh Garnett with our 2nd round pick.

    How does this OL sound for the 2016,2017,2018 season?

    Joe Thomas (LT), Josh Garnett (LG) Ryan Kelly (C) Glowinski (RG) Gilliam (RT)

    I think it could end up being one of the best OL in the NFL and Thomas and Garnett on the left side would bring back visions of past glory in Big Walt/Hutch.

    Just something to dream about on a Saturday AM.

    • Rob Staton

      Not a fan of a Thomas trade personally. He’s 32 this year so it’s an extreme short term move. You won’t get a Joe Thomas at 26 but you can get a good lineman at a good price.

    • Wall UP

      I think in the long haul that may be a steep price to pay. You may be able to get 2 starting players for a similar trade option. Thomas is an elite LT, but the cap and the picks may sway the Hawks against such a trade. 2017 comp picks changes the hold strategy of making trades now. I like your thinking.

      • Miles

        Who else do the Browns have that we would like? Trying to think of one … Joe Haden would not be available. The trade would probably look something like Thomas and a 7th, for a 2nd rd. pick and Justin Britt.

        The thing about singing Okung is that for the Seahawks, it will almost have to be a short-term deal. I don’t think we want to pay Okung $9m+ for four seasons or more. We want to limit the investment to one or two years. Joe Thomas would be about the same duration except he won’t miss any games if at all. It would be the same for a Donald Penn or Beachum.

    • Steele

      Re: Joe Thomas (LT), Josh Garnett (LG) Ryan Kelly (C) Glowinski (RG) Gilliam (RT).

      Trevor, something along these lines is also what I am hoping for.

    • franks

      That would be a power move. If Garnett doesn’t make it to the back of R2 there’s other guys like Landon Turner or Tretola in the third that would be fine between Thomas and Kelly.

      Too bad we wiffed on Percy or there’d be a better chance for a big move like this.

      • franks

        Although Coleman or Ifedi would do more to keep that window open a few more years.

  25. Javiosullivan

    I’ve been saying for a long time that I would love Seattle draft Bullard. In my opinion, Bullard is a 1rd selection but because of the situation we have in the OL I prefer an OT in the first round. And if we get Bullard in 40-50 range would be a luxury.

    If our first two selections we get two players like Coleman and Bullard, no matter the order (Coleman 1-Bullard 2; Bullard 1-Coleman 2), would be an excellent draft.

    Great article Rob. A few months ago Rob was skeptical about Bullard. I like that you’ve seen some tape and finally you like.

    Projection mock draft (5 rounds).

    #35. Shon Coleman, OT Auburn. (Trade back)

    #45. Jonathan Bullard, DT Florida. (Trade up)

    #97. Travis Feeney, OLB Washington.

    #124. Joe Dahl, OL Washington State.

    #171. D.J. Reader, DT Clemson.

    • Wall UP

      I like the trade scenarios’ of going down and up with the 1st two picks. This draft may present risk with rewards options that may fall in the 35-45 range due to off field or health issues.

    • Rob Staton

      I always liked Bullard — but accept he is what he is. He isn’t Sheldon Richardson and that’s fine.

    • Trevor

      If we came out of the draft with those 5 players I think you would have to be happy as a Hawks fan.

      • RealRhino2

        I would hate it, myself. Coleman and Bullard are fine. Feeney I think people are irrationally falling in love with. I think Dahl is a great technician who is probably too light in the pants to offer much on the inside right away, and we lose a chance at grabbing, for example, a Collins, Perkins or Prosise in addition to those first guys by dealing away the pick. Not a fan.

        Normally I like the concept, but I don’t like this execution. Think this is the year I prefer to stay put, with DL depth being what it is.

    • Jarhead

      This would be too good to be true. That would make me very happy though

  26. Wall UP

    Rob, based upon health and off the field issues what are some 1st Rd talent that could possibly slip into the 35-45 range?
    Also, looking @ Denver’s need for a QB, do think they might move up in earlier Rds to get one or wait for Cook to fall them? I had Cook going to Dallas with their 2nd pick. Dallas may keep an eye on Denver and may be a trading partner with the Hawks @ 26.

    I presented this a month ago, but it seems more likely since Denver is in search of a QB. Sanchez is not the answer for their franchise, nor is Cook right now. But, he could become one under tutelage of seasoned vet or a Hall of Famer like Elway. If Elway doesn’t like Cooks deep ball, or lack thereof, he just might move up and then Dallas may not be a partner to trade with

    • RWIII

      I don’t see Cook anything but a backup.

      • Miles

        Cook will be at least three or four years away from being a starter at least.

    • bigDhawk

      Elway is a FO exec. He’s not tutoring anybody how to play QB. If Denver wants to rebuild, they need look no further at QB than Tim Tebow.

      Seriously. Why not.

      Elway finally learned from us that defense wins championships. He might as well learn that a dominant run game coupled with safe QB play wins championships too. Tebow can do that. He’s won more playoff games than Brock Osweiler.

    • Rob Staton

      Wall Up — I’m not convinced anyone will want to trade back into R1 for a QB. The options aren’t great. Any team wanting that QB would have to fear Green Bay at #27 which is unlikely to be a QB landing spot.

  27. RWIII

    2016 NFL Draft. If I was looking at the Hawks needs. I would be interested in three offensive lineman. Two defensive lineman, a running back and a linebacker. At a minimum .

    • Alex

      I saw your post after I posed mine below. Totally agree with you. At least 3 OL.
      By the way, if Cable was responsible for picking Britt and some of the other guys who’ve been cut (like Terry Poole), don’t we need a different guy drafting the OL? Maybe he’s a great coach but he’s a lousy talent evaluator.

  28. Chris


    Chad Reuters latest 4 round mock: Rankins (1), Micheal Thomas (2, Germain Ifedi was still on his board well into the 3rd round), Nick Martin (3), Christian Westerman (3C), Dadi Nicholas (4). Sets up an impressive draft at that point. Sure I’d take Thomas, but with Kearse back that’s more of a luxury.

    • Steele

      Reuters’ mock is an embarrassment of riches. I like it a lot. If it went exactly that way, I’d be all for it. Rankins, hell yes. I believe the interior of the o-line needs to be the focus. Not sure if Martin falls to rd. 3. Like Westerman. Michael Thomas is exactly the kind of WR who would add a missing dimension. Dadi Nicholas has flaws but I think he can be trained into a good one.

      Provided they land a starting LT in the offseason, love it.

  29. Alex

    Don’t we need to spend 3 picks on the OL? First, a replacement for Okung (even if he signs a “prove it” deal for 1 year, we will need to be ready for his departure next year. Second, a replacement for the Glowinski back-up spot (since he’ll be moving into Sweezy’s spot). Third, a long-term solution at Center. And, now that I think about it, it would nice to replace Justin Britt because he sucks (IMHO). I don’t really understand how we can spend a lot of draft capital on LB and DL when there are so many obvious holes on the OL.

  30. Josh

    I’ve been messing around with fanspeak way too much. This is how I’d like the draft to go.

    26: R1P26

    Doesn’t have to be Ifedi here. But I do want a tackle for our 1st pick. I’d include Coleman, Sprigs, Decker also as possible options.

    56: R2P25

    I want Tapper on this team. I tuned into an OU game at the end of the season to watch Striker, who Rob was touting heavily. Tapper was jumping off the screen at me. Then when he blew up the combine I knew I wanted him on the DL.

    90: R3P27

    I feel this is a great place to grab a guard in this draft. Other options include Glasgow, Dahl, Kirkland, Tretola.

    98: R3P35

    The depth at DT makes this a great spot to grab a DT. I also considered Hargrave here.

    125: R4P26

    Has extreme athleticism and could pair well at WILL with Wright moving back to SAM.

    172: R5P33

    I think we draft a safety this year. I saw a few Simmons games and he seems like he really jumps off the screen. Also extremely athletic.

    215: R6P37

    Dominated at Illinois State. Shows great breakaway speed and power.

    223: R7P4

    One of the most productive players at any level of college. Recently broke FCS records held by Jared Allen

    245: R7P26

    Great athlete who maximized his touches in Tennessee’s offense.

    • CHawk Talker Eric

      That’s a pretty fantastic draft. And pretty realistic too, except for Simmons, who is probably a R2 pick.

      • TurnagainTide

        Tony Pauline has Simmons as a UDFA…

    • Jake

      I wouldn’t mind drafting any of these players, regardless of which pick they’d need to use for each. I wholeheartedly agree about wanting to find a way to get Tapper on the team, but I could see needing to get into the 40-50 range to draft him like Rob suggested about Bullard. I wonder if that’s something they would be willing to consider with Frank Clark already on the roster. I hate to see an athlete like that pass us by though.

    • CHawk Talker Eric

      I can’t find Tapper’s SLA. He’s not on the list. Neither is Fackrell.

      • Jake

        He may not have participated in all the combine drills. I think Fackrell or another OLB is a pretty likely scenario for round 2. Wish it was April already

        • CHawk Talker Eric

          I just checked and he did everything but the agility drills (3C and SS).

          But just to compare with Ogbah:

          Ogbah – 6’4″ 273lbs, 4.63/2.68/1.58 40yd, 35.5″ VJ, 121″ BJ, 20 reps BP
          Tapper – 6’3″ 271lbs, 4.59/2.68/1.59 40yd, 34.0″ VJ, 119″ BJ, 23 reps BP

          • Greg Haugsven

            Looks good to me as week Josh. That draft simulator can get very addictive. But I like the picks.

          • Jake

            Looks like Clark was 6’3” 271lbs, 4.79 40 yd (pretty sure the ten yard split was elite but didn’t see it at first glance), 38.5” VJ, 118” BJ and a bunch of elite times in the shuttles. No team can have too much pass rush, I just wonder if Tapper would be too close to the same type of player as Clark for them to spend an early pick

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      New and improved mock draft v749.3

      Round 1 (1) GERMAIN IFEDI, OT/OG
      Round 2 (1) TRAVIS FEENEY, LB
      Round 3 (2) C.J. PROCISE, RB / DEVON CAJUSTE, WR
      Round 4 (1) DAK PRESCOTT, QB
      Round 5 (1) JAMES BRADBERRY, CB

    • C-Dog

      Great looking draft. I think pretty realistic in terms of position targets and where they could be drafted. If their first 5 players are those guys, wow.

      I think North is going to go a lot higher in what is a down year at WR.

  31. Alex

    How do you plan to fill the holes in our OL?

    • Josh

      Are you referencing the mock I posted? If so the OL would look like this.

      Ifedi/Mcgovern/Lewis/Glowinski/Gilliam. I think a solid OL. If we bring back Okung move Ifedi to LG.

      • Greg Haugsven

        Problem there is you have 2 rookies on the left side which could be a recipe for disaster. Ifedi playing left guard with Okung/ Beacham at LT and maybe McGovern battling Lewis at center?

        • 75franks

          or it could be a recipe for a sweet o line. rookies can be successful.

          • GeoffU

            Not the ones we draft, haha

  32. Jarhead

    While wanting no part of Ifedi, if Spriggs or Coleman were available thrn I would be all for this. In fact, if we were to buck trends and take an early chance on Kelly (preferrably Martin regardless of legth/sparq standards), I would be happy with that also if we were able to trade up for a young DT to pair with Rubin. I know most of the blog is all for Ifedi, but this feels like 2012 to me. I think that Seattle is going to do something that no one else is expecting. Something head scratching. In years like this, maybe we should be looking at players are predicted to be mid round selections. Like Irvin, Richardson, Michael, and Britt- all players expected to go later than we selected them. We all have our favorites but this feels like one of those “Bruce Irvin?!” type years

    • Josh

      I prefer Coleman to be honest but Ifedi just seems like a guy they like and a few rumors have mentioned their interest in him.

    • Miles

      I think this is a good thought. I could definitely see them trading back, immediately losing out on Ifedi and Spriggs, then with Coleman on the board drafting Jihad Ward. Seems to make sense – he is very very athletic for his size and a unique player. I could totally see them doing that.

      On the other hand, I can totally see them really needing a tackle. Especially if reports are to be believed (by Mike Silver) that he is close to signing with Detroit. If that happens it basically forces their hand or else walk into 2016 with a pretty concerning offensive line. If they do keep Okung, we could have our best OL since Walt/Hutch era if we go Ifedi in round one though.

    • CHawk Talker Eric

      Have to disagree with you about Irvin being an unexpected, head scratching pick. Firstly, PC made it very clear that off season they were looking to boost the pass rush. Irvin was one of, if not the best, pure pass rushers in that class.

      Second, SEA weren’t the only team interested in taking him. NFL.com’s Gregg Rosenthal reported that NYJ/Rex Ryan were planning to select Irvin at 16, the pick after SEA’s. And they weren’t the only other team looking at him. Here’s a quote from the article (link below):

      “Irvin also was believed to be on the short list of candidates to be drafted in Chicago, Green Bay and San Francisco. One general manager called Irvin the “hottest player in the draft.”


      • Jarhead

        Before the draft, and be honest, were ANY of us expecting Bruce Irvin to be name called that day? You mention a lot of things that happened after the fact that non insiders would not have known. Nobody outside of true insiders expected Irvin to go that high before that night of the draft. We expected a pass rusher- but no one expected it to be Irvin. I am talking about prior to the draft, before all that insider info becomes public knowledge

        • Hawksince77

          I had Irvin as the most likely player drafted by Seattle that year, with Wilson third (part of the armchair GM contest on Field Gulls). However, you are absolutely correct – nobody had him going in the first. I had him going in the second round, and people thought that was too early (although I did nail Wilson in the third).

      • franks

        Pre-draft, Irvin was seen as a 3rd/4rd rounder here and at Fieldgulls. That pick had everyone scratching their heads, nobody thought we’d pick him that early.

      • ZacScratchFever

        To me this is just a reminder that when it comes to assigning draft value we might be way off. I remember the article Rob posted saying Irvin was the best pass rusher in the draft. But then over time everyone kept assigning him a 3/4 round value so it just became accepted. Sure its hindsight, but is the top pass rusher ever going to get out of round 1 in any year? I also remember the article where Rob said that was one of the biggest lessons he’s learned since starting this site: trust your own assessments and don’t let the stale common opinion sway you. The opinions of a 100 pundits don’t really matter. Today draft value of players still seems to be all over the place. 2 Mocks have us drafting the same guy in round 1 as we do in round 4. Of course you’d rather get him as a 4th rounder but he’s not both, he’s one or the other. If you really like a guy, you have to believe that another team does as well so you take him when he’s available.

    • Hawksince77

      The out-of-left-field pick I am pondering is one that Rob insists will never happen: a CB named William Jackson.

      Rob has referred to silent authority that this will never be a Seattle pick, and he may be right. Or it may be that JS wants everyone to think exactly that so nobody is tempted to trade up prior to Seattle to take Jackson.

      The other unexpected pick (although one sanctioned here by Rob) is the possibility of drafting Henry in the first. The argument is similar as the one for Jackson: both exceptional athletic talents at their positions.

      The third possibility would be Tapper. While most see him as a second round talent, he might just push the pass-rushing button for Seattle.

      Having said all that, it’s tough to escape the logic of investing in an OT in the first. It will be tough later in the draft to get a good OT, and regardless of what they do at the position (unless they trade their first for Thomas) the value is hard to pass up, and if I had to put up real money right now, it would be an OT in round one.

      • Rob Staton

        The re-signing of Lane just increases the likelihood they will not be drafting a CB in round one.

        It’d be incredible to do that and not address the O-line. And I speak as someone who likes William Jackson a lot. We know it won’t happen though.

  33. EranUngar

    Here is a nice piece about Butler – I can certainly see him worth a trade up:


    There is something in his burst that reminds me of Bennett.

  34. WALL UP

    Most draft selections are based upon the outcome of FA loses and pickups. Assuming that Okung or his replacement is signed, this a possible outcome based on Pauline’s and similar rankings. I realize there are risk involved, but the rewards extremely high. Things would change if the tackle position is unsettled. Then OL/OL for 1st & 2nd Rds with no trade up.

    (1) 26. Robert Nkemdiche DT (3Tech)
    (2t) 42. Shon Coleman RT/LG/LT Trade 56 & 2017&18 3rd Rd picks for Miami’s 42 pick
    (3) 90. Javon Hargrave DT
    (3c) 97. CJ Prosise RB
    (4) 125. Jack Allen C
    (4c)171. Travis Freeny OLB
    (5c)215. Avery Young OT/OG
    (7t) 223. Marquez North WR
    (7) 245. Joel Heath DT/DE

    • WALL UP

      (5c)171. Travis Freeny OLB
      (6c)215. Avery Young OT/OG

      Got the Rds for the comp pick wrong, obviously.

      • Greg Haugsven

        Give up 2 3rd round picks? Myself that’s a little to rich for my blood.

        • WALL UP

          It could be a 2018 4th or 5th instead of a 3rd. It would have to e enticing enough for Miami to be a trade partner and give up the possibility of taking Coleman themselves.

    • Steve Nelsen

      If they want Nkemdiche, they can get him at 56 and Coleman at 26 without trading up in the 2nd. Nkemdiche is off so many boards, he will slide well out of the first.

    • Jake

      I assume the team will bring in a veteran to play the 3rd down RB role, but I’ve still been drafting Prosise every time I do one of these mocks.

  35. CharlieTheUnicorn

    Martavis Bryant suspended for 1 year, PED violation apparently.
    Huge blow for Steelers. They might go WR in 1st round now…….

    • bobbyk

      Hopefully now people will quit complaining that we didn’t draft him.

      • lil'stink

        Exactly. There were reasons why he fell as far as he did, this being one of them. He didn’t start smoking weed after he was drafted, there were rumors well before then.

        • Volume12

          Seattle did their honework on him, and passed for a reason.

          • David

            Steelers will be fine at WR. They still have Sammie Coates who didn’t even see the field last year because they were so deep.

  36. pqlqi

    Fanspeak draft….
    26: R1P26
    Conklin, Spriggs and Ifedi were off the board, as was Ogbah. Darron Lee was still there, but a chance at the best RB in the draft? Gives a solid 1-2 punch in the backfield, insurance against injury, and less wear an tear on each RB going forward.

    56: R2P25
    Gilliam and Clark to battle out for LT, loser moves to RT.

    90: R3P27
    Is there a better backup for RW? Club control for 4 years at a reasonable price.

    98: R3P35
    Surprised he was still here. Stalwart run defense to replace Mebane.

    125: R4P26
    3rd highest SPARQ, 6th best SLA. Fundamentally good and punishing tackler than coverage.

    172: R5P33
    33″ arms, 2nd highest SLA, perfect PC CB

    215: R6P37
    Swing tackle, compete for RT, #15 in SLA, just above average athleticism for NFL is a good value this late in draft.

    223: R7P4
    It’s seems to be working for us. Lets keep going to the Dawg Pound. Returner to decrease injury risk to Lockett.

    245: R7P26
    top 3 SLA/SPARQ. Compete for WIL this season, long term outlook WIL vs SAM, has the frame to put on 30 lbs and develop into Leo

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      After the pro day … Elliot is going top 10 imo.

    • Kyle

      If Lee is still on the board in this scenario I’d take him over Elliot. No brainier for me.

      • Jake


      • reggieregg

        Darron Lee please!

  37. CharlieTheUnicorn

    New and improved mock draft v749.3

    Round 1 (1) GERMAIN IFEDI, OT/OG
    Round 2 (1) TRAVIS FEENEY, LB
    Round 3 (2) C.J. PROCISE, RB / DEVON CAJUSTE, WR
    Round 4 (1) DAK PRESCOTT, QB
    Round 5 (1) JAMES BRADBERRY, CB

    • CharlieTheUnicorn

      The 4th round QB was due to some info John Clayton reported on his show this morning. Seattle needs to find a suitable back-up, that can be cost controlled for the next 3-4 years. Adding youth and upside to the position.

      • WALL UP

        Think UDFA the back up QB spot.

      • southpaw360

        Just curious what did he say? Seahawks are looking at a QB in round 4?

    • Steele

      Charlie, how does this board add to the interior o-line? Ifedi is a T. They need C and G along with T.

      • Volume12

        Ifedi can play LG. He’s not strictly a tackle. And if they lose Okung, they need a tackle anyways.

        • Jarhead

          But Ifedi’s athletic upside is his only real draw. Drafting him that high to play guard, even for a couple of seasons would be like buying a Ford F-350 HD to deliver pizzas. Seems like a waste of the potential of which you would be buying. And then when the time comes, you STILL don’t know if he can even play tackle and you have another Carpenter situation. But at least with Carpenter he failed at T before moving to G. So little time was wasted before they knew if he could what they drafted him to do. We need a solid plug and play Day 1 contributor for this line.

          • Volume12

            Guys like him don’t grow on trees.

            Why wouldn’t he be plug and play?

            Again, Okung might not be back, a RT is becoming just as important in today’s game as a LT.

            • C-Dog

              I would say the answer to that would be most certainly be plug and play. If they can plug and play Justin Britt, they can certainly plug and play Ifedi. My hope is at LG, with either Okung or Penn at LT.

              • Jarhead

                Britt is the farthest thing from plug and play. Wow… Travis Frederick, Joel Bitonio, Zach Martin, the Pouncey brothers, DJ Fluker- these guys are plug and play. I think there are a few guys capable of that in this draft, ie Nick Martin, Ryan Kelly, Jack Conklin, even Shon Coleman. I firmly believe that the Hawks are going to go with someone none of us expect and who some may consider overdrafted, but that is their pattern and history. They know who they want. But I would rather have one of Neal, Kelly, Martin, or Coleman.

            • Jarhead

              He is a physical specimen with middling tape. There are at least one or two players just like him every year. I would say his technique on film is certainly not plug and play. And his ability to ascend to a quality NFL lineman is suspect. There are players who would not cost a 1st who could be just as capable at G. That is plug and play. A solid G, or T convert if the Hawks prefer, who is tasked to play G and he stays at G. Not a potential future T who is just auditioning and will play G until a spot opens up. If they try him at T, at least they are giving him a chance to prove it. Although I feel there are a couple of guys who are better actual football players who may not have all the physical stats on paper that will be sitting there at 26.

  38. Steele

    Akiem Hicks is likely to sign with the Lions. I think he is one of the better DT options out there. And still young.

    • C-Dog

      He’s a good one, IMO. Was probably going to be way of Seattle’s price range. I think they are probably looking solely for low rent deals.

  39. CHawk Talker Eric

    @MikeSilver: Free agent OT Russell Okung is still high on Lions… but he is now headed to Pittsburgh for a Steelers visit. Also NYG, SF, Seattle in mix

    @bcondotta: From what I’ve heard, Russell Okung has wrapped up Detroit visit with no signing imminent anywhere right now.

    @PSchrags: Russell Okung compensation will be closely monitored. Has no “agent”. Being advised by NFLPA’s Mark Levin. 0 percent agent fee. @NFLonFOX

    • Tien

      Hopefully, all these meetings mean that Okung is not finding the market as generous as he’d hope and that might consider coming back to the Hawks on a short term deal to test FA again later.

  40. CHawk Talker Eric

    @JosinaAnderson: Just got off the phone with free agent OT Kelvin Beachum. He told me he’s traveling Sunday for a visit with the #Jaguars Monday.

    @ShielKapadia: Previous report had him visiting Seahawks Monday. Instead, it’s Jacksonville.

    • CHawk Talker Eric


      @JosinaAnderson: Beachum told me, at this time, his next stop is Jacksonville. He will evaluate situation after that.

      Hmm. Sounds like SEA may not be in the mix for him now.

      • southpaw360

        I bet he doesn’t get out of Jacksonville without a contact.

        • C-Dog

          I would guess that as well.

  41. CHawk Talker Eric

    Jordan Jenkins ran a 1.58 10-split (on his way to a 4.8 40). He also jumped 36.5″ vertical and 121″ broad. At 6’3″ 259lbs with 34.5″ arms and 11.25″ hands. He’s never been a pass rusher the way Irvin was. But he averaged about 10 TFL and 5 sacks per season during his college career, and has enough athleticism and size (sadly no SLA due to hamstring injury and no agility drills) to make an intriguing OTTO prospect to replace Irvin. Could be a R2 target.

    • Wall UP

      Good read on Jenkins. With Clark down to 257, he mirrors what Jenkins might bring. That 1.58 is enticing though. But, with Clark filling the role Jenkins would offer. Freeny with a 4.5 40 & 6-4 currently 230, with room to grow, tracking TEs on crossing and seam routes offers more flexibility. Also, possibly in a later Rds 4 or 5.

      I had Jenkins in my earlier 2nd Rd slot until I saw the news about Clark. Both Freeny and Clark could fill what Irving would bring along with Marsh or Morgan.

    • Wall UP

      It looks like Pittsburgh will target Will Fuller to replace Bryant’s down field speed with their 1st pick. He lost a lot of money when getting a second contract.

      • Volume12

        Sammie Coates is probabl next in line to fill that role.

        Pittsburgh usually go LB, OL. or S.

        IIRC, they won’t take a WR in the 1st.

        • WALL UP

          Sammie doesn’t provide that deep threat that came from Bryant. Fuller’s speed might push their hand. The Steelers will take a big hit without that deep threat.

          • Rob Staton

            The Steelers have consistently drafted receivers outside of the first round. They are extremely firm and consistent in the positions they draft early.

            It’s almost certain they won’t draft a WR in round one for those reasons — they’re much more likely to wait or just utilise Sammie Coates as V12 suggested. Let’s also not forget they just re-signed Darius Hewyard-Bey and have the best receiver in the NFL plus Markus Wheaton too.

  42. Trevor

    Why not just fix the OL in the draft and let them grow together and gel as a unit.

    Rd #1 Conklin, Ifedi, Coleman
    Rd#2 Garnett or Martin
    Rd#3 McGovern, Glasgow, Westerman
    Rd #3 Comp LB or DT
    Rd#4 LB or DT

    • 75franks

      agreed this is the perfect draft to do so we could have agreat line for years to come that would make me happy

      • Greg Haugsven

        It would be great for the future for sure. But what about this season, most importantly the first half.

        • Greg Haugsven

          You could draft that way and still have lewis play center this year, have the rookie play left or right tackle and have a 1 year stop gap play left guard ( Mathis for ex).
          2016 line could be:

          LT Conklin/Ifedi/Coleman
          LG Mathis
          C Lewis
          RG Glow
          RT Gilliam

          Then in 2017:

          LT Conklin/Ifedi/Coleman
          LG Garnett
          C Martin/ Glasgow
          RG Glow
          RT Gilliam

          Or even swap the tackles.

          • WALL UP

            The only potential LTs in that group are Coleman and perhaps Gilliam. But, it would probably be too much to ask of them to protect Russell’s blindside right away. They would need time to adjust to the speed. Okung or, if he can’t be resigned, Beacham provide better odds of keeping Russell clean.

    • franks

      I like the plan, but not sure Ganett or Martin drop to the end of R2 or McGovern or Westerman to the end of R3. We’ve gotta remember our R2 and R3 could just as easily be a 3 and a 4.

  43. Wall UP

    Keeping Okung would be a safer route to keep Russell upright. Competition @ LT/RT/C is what will be more beneficial for the OL’s progress.

    • Volume12

      Here’s what I don’t get.

      We talk about O-lineman that should be available, and he’s a reach, can’t play, can’t do this, doesn’t do this.

      Rob will present a different scenario and then they HAVE to upgrade the O-line. We can’t keep the O-line we had last year.

      We need the perfect prospect. An O-lineman that has the right blend of athleticism and technique. Who? Where are these guys? Pickng at 26, your getting 2nd round talent.

      Which is it?

      • franks

        I don’t get it man. Are you saying Clark is the needed upgrade to Okung?

        • Volume12

          My point is this.

          Many fans have already decided who Seattle should draft with their 1st selection when it comes to the O-line. Any alternate scenario is unacceptable.

          1-2 games of tape don’t make a prospect. Your looking for uniqueness, skill sets, an overall body of work, and character or grit.

          • franks

            Right on I agree with you.

            For me it’s hard to imagine any rookie except for maybe Coleman, starting outside on week one. I’d be solid with Penn or Beachum. Okung and Coleman and neck-and-neck for third choice. If we sign a LT I’m on the Ifedi train. Don’t see any other viable options for this year and this year is important.

            • franks

              if we don’t move up for Conklin or Decker I mean.

      • Jarhead

        I think technique, tape, and toughness is much more important that athleticism. I would much rather have a solid blocker who is nasty and tough as nails than a sparq god with 73″ arms and a 1.2 10 yard split but the guy can’t block a doorway. There will still be plenty of technicians with toughness at 26, who may lack the length and sparq of other available players, but they can do their assignment and make the blocks they are asked without needing a year or two to be coached up. I think a lot of people overestimate things like length and sparq in OL that don’t always correlate with a solid blocker. Other positions yeah, but OL, not so much

      • Wall UP

        According to JS, regardless of what is offered from various blogs, there intent is to keep as many of their own guys and make improvements where needed.

        Judging from their latest offers, they would like to keep Okung. If not, they appear to have a veteran in the wings to fill that void. Gilliam playing LT would be a bit much ask of a 1st yr starter at a new LT position, as it would be for any of the available rookie OTs of this draft.

        The way I see it, those rookie prospects either @ the 1st &, or 2nd Rd will provide a competitive option at both RT & LG. Center position would have competition from a later Rd 4-6. Then you add other veteran help to both guard positions.

        But, optimum way to describe those additions it would be for competition. They like their guys, competition will bring better results for all positions. Okung is a necessary part, barring the injuries that fail him. He’s still 27 yrs old! He will provide leadership to a young OL group and keep Russell upright from the blindside. If they can’t keep him, Beacham would be a viable option, not a rookie.

        Ifedi could compete to plug and play at RT/LG right away. As would Coleman, with the caveat that he could eventually play LT. For that reason, Coleman would be my choice despite the 3yr age difference. They may play themselves out of the ability for the Hawks to give them a 2nd contract anyway, as possibly the case with Okung.

        So ultimately, the rookie prospects and added vets are intended push the remaining returnees or replace them via COMPETITION. What the draft offers will determine the outcome.

    • bigDhawk

      My opposition to retaining Okung is well documented here. But there is ONE scenario which I would like to see him back, and that is IF we commit more to a short, tempo passing offense that was the night and day difference in our success (and ADB’s success) the second half of last season. In a predominately quick pass attack Okung would be a great LT, and might even stay healthy for a whole season.

      But unfortunately, that is not likely to happen and will will probably revert to our old run/run/long-developing-play-action-bomb/punt ways, in which case I’m all for Okung moving on and us plugging in Gilliam or whoever would end up playing half the season for his always-injured self, anyway.

      • Wall UP

        What you’ve seen the 2nd half of the season is what you will get. Still a run first offense. But, a dynamic passing attack. Resulting in a top four offense in the league. They have adjusted their passing attack to for quicker releases.

        If the OL can give Russell enough time, watch out! PPro should be a contributing for factor in their selections. Ifedi does exhibit good PPro at RT & LG. Coleman as well potentially at both RT & LT and at LG. The difference being that Coleman appears to be a better drive blocker. Too bad you can’t draft both.

      • franks

        So frustrating to watch thi guy bevel continue not to notice what works and doesn’t work. I don’t see why we can’t work in some quick passes with the runs on a REGULAR EVERY WEEK BASIS. And hold off on the long bombs until later in the game if we build some momentum.

        • Rob Staton

          The Seahawks set franchise records for passing last season.

          Why would they change anything?

          • franks

            Most of the yards coincided with the rise of short passing game for that stretch against the weak defenses. Passing game inconsistent from game to game over the course of the season. Decent-to-high likelihood we’ll return to pass-pass-drop back and wait.

            • Rob Staton

              The Seahawks never adopted a shorter passing game. That has been denied several times by Carroll.

              They didn’t change anything. They simple executed better — particularly on the O-line. That was the big change. That’s what the identified.

              This offense as it performed last year was record breaking. It was a pillar of consistency after the bye week — the best thing about the Seahawks. Changing anything would be bizarre.

              • franks

                Carroll doesn’t exactly call a spade a spade at press conferences. I saw the short passes with my own two eyes, not sure how you can deny that.

                • Rob Staton

                  I’ll never understand why people think there was this huge sea-change in the Seahawks approach to the passing game. They maintained their identity completely. The same old offense. Run the ball and take shots.

                  Wilson did a much better job converting third downs mainly because he was afforded the opportunity to do so. The O-line play improving after the bye was the major shot in the arm.

                  Maybe the stark contrast between the two halves of the season lulled people into thinking there was a change. As Carroll noted multiple times — they simply executed better.

                  And I also never understand why people try to over complicate what Carroll says. He’s always to the point and honest. He’s never ‘lied’ to the fans. When he doesn’t want to say something he simply doesn’t say it and moves the topic along. When he speaks he speaks the truth.

                  • franks

                    Never said he was lying. Pete really doesn’t have to answer to the press, they’re just getting soundbites. The answers are on the field.

                  • Robert

                    Pete also said they emphasized Russ getting rid of the ball faster to help the Oline.

                    • Rob Staton

                      Faster for Russell Wilson could mean actually throwing it after a drop instead of scrambling and extending plays.

                      No QB holds on to the ball longer than Wilson. The change — and getting it out faster — was more about trusting the protection and delivering the ball as intended. Not any kind of shift to a short passing game. They simply executed better in the second half of 2015.

            • franks

              Excuse me “run-run-drop-back”

    • John_s

      Lookinf at the contract that Bobby Massie got from Chicago, I really wish Seattle signed him. He go 3/18. Only 1.5 mil signing bony and a bunch of roster bonuses. If they cut him after a year it’s only 1 mil dead cap.

      He’s a run blocker who has some probs in pass pro but the dude is Breno mean and would’ve brought that attitude to the line.

      Yeah we would’ve lost a comp pick but then it takes the stress out of drafting an olineman in the first couple rounds.

  44. reggieregg

    Who are the defensive tackles that should be available for our 3rd pick and 3rd rnd. comp?

    • reggieregg

      Better yet what is the best tool to find it myself?

      • Wall UP

        The best method is film. “Film don’t lie”. Compare their measurables and see where others have stacked your picks. Whatever you pick the odds are the Hawks will someone that fits their needs,THEIR GUYS. :- )

      • Volume12

        The best tool is to watch games. Live action when the bullets are flying, the overall flow.

        Trust your eyes. Look for traits that translate to the next level.

      • CharlieTheUnicorn

        I take a look at Walterfootball, CBPSports, ourlads, optimumdrafting and NFLdraft scout
        of course, always visit the SPARQ site when considering CB, LB, OL and the like.

        • franks

          Thanks optimumscouting and ourlads are new to me

    • Steve Nelsen

      Hard to say. Some analysts are saying that their are 30 DTs with 3rd-round or better grades. Different teams are looking for different things but I think that number is high. Still what it means is that this is likely to be one of those drafts where teams draft a DT in the 4th or 5th that they say they had a 3rd-round grade on.

    • reggieregg

      It’s just really hard to say what each teams strategy in the draft will be I mean if 3 teams decide to double dip on the DTs that list can get short quick….thanks fellas!

  45. Volume12

    J’Marcus Webb as a swing tackle?

    • Wall UP

      I here you. It’s beginning to look that way, isn’t it. Well, he does play guard as well. My preference would be Beachum if the price continues to escalate with Okung. Both have injuries and 26 & 27yrs old respectively.

      Whomever is willing to budge with a multi year contract will win the prize. I don’t think the Hawks bite on anything over 2, maybe 3yrs. My hunch he goes to Detroit. Beachum back to the Steelers, and Webb becomes a Hawk. That would leave a big hole @ LT. You would then need draft a good blkg TE adept at chip blkg to help Gilliam or hopefully Coleman in keeping Russell clean. Also, bring back Coleman as well to help out.

      Webb plays both OG & OT, that helps.

© 2024 Seahawks Draft Blog

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑