#6 and #14 and the O-line

[biju]

Hmm... What would you guys think about drafting Golden Tate, WR Notre Dame if he fell to us in the second round? He could become a Desean Jackson type weapon for us. Of course being able to drop back for that long would require a revamped O-line, but we haven't had an explosive playmaker in quite some time.. Imagine Housh, Butler, and Tate.. running game with Forsett would be adequate enough

You're going to have to excuse me if I'm wrong, but isn't Tate just a slightly taller version of Deon Butler, as in a speedster (and not quite as fast if I remember correctly) with good hands? Maybe he's got a little more weight on him as I think Butler might be 180 soaking wet. I don't watch enough college ball to know if there's another huge difference between the two.

If so, I would be more inclined to try to retain Burleson who does a reasonably good job at stretching the field, keep Housh as a possession receiver and make Butler our slant guy. When we go 4-wide we should be thinking Obomanu (or if we draft a *quality* QB put Seneca out there).

Not that it should shock you guys at this point that I believe this, but I'm pretty sure Knapp completely misused Butler this year. Maybe it's because he was easing him into his "scheme" (if you can call if that) or maybe it was because Deon didn't know the playbook well enough (probably a smart move since he'll learn a new one in 2010), but for me it seems like he's an ideal fit for a "Welker" role with quick slants and the occasional "sluggo" if the nickel is playing like he's going to try to jump the route (or we've set it up).

As a complete side note, I haven't bought into this media hype that we *need* a playmaker. We have playmakers on this team but with Sims proving incapable of blocking the A gap we end up with no time to showcase our talented WR corps. I believe Sims is actually a decent LG but this zone blocking has him confused as to his assignment.

If we *are* going to draft a playmaker I would hope it would actually be with the #14 pick and C.J. Spiller. Normally I'm not a big fan of speedy RBs and tend to like the bigger and more bruising backs like LeGarrette Blount (who I've heard is projecting into the 6th round right now) or even Jonathan Dwyer (a bigger bet as he would certainly need to be taken with that 2nd...if he gets there) but I've watched enough video to believe he can be a "Chris Johnson light" without becoming "the next Reggie Bush". I'm not interested in Jahvid Best at all. He might be faster, but he goes down on first contact.

But the Spiller draft would need to come only if we already had signed a franchise LT and passable LG from FA (which I don't know if there *are* any of either this year) or we drafted someone like Okung, Davis, or Bruce Campbell (or maybe it's Trent Williams; one of them is a natural RT and not the one I want). Given this year's class of T makes me cry just a little more that we didn't go Eugene Monroe with that #4 pick...

[seahawks506]

You're probably right, we need to use Butler better and Tate would be just a luxury. I was thinking Tate would be the deep guy, PR/KR with Forsett, and maybe even a wildcat here or there.. but there are issues more important than that. Now if Dwyer could fall to us in the second round, that would be great.. a big physical back to compliment a speedy back like Forsett. Again that would be a luxury and he wouldnt be nearly as effective with the current O-line. As for Eugene Monroe and our #4 pick.. let's just hope Curry develops into the player we hoped he would become

[biju]

1. STL: I suspect they'll need to go QB here, even though Suh would be a safer pick for them.
2. DET: Once the Rams go Clausen Detroit should literally run up to the podium a la the Redskins and select Suh.
3. TBB: Here's where things get murky immediately. It would make sense for them to grab an LT here but there's reason to think that Eric Berry makes more sense.
4. WAS: Who's guessing that Jason Campbell has seen his last days in WAS? They *could* go QB here but I'm not sure. They had O-line woes this year and it would make more sense to go with the next LT on their board.
5. KCC: Is this where I'm hoping the Chiefs take Gerald McCoy or a WR, but I think that's wishful thinking on my part.

That leaves us with the possibility of getting Okung down at #6. Regardless I think we need to go LT...

Well it has been nearly two months since I first analyzed this and things have changed a little. Notably:

1. Sam Bradford is healthy by most accounts. This will likely put him at the top of the QB draft boards.
2. Gerald McCoy has been grading out as strong as Suh in many respects and should be now *expected* to be gone before the Seahawks' first pick.
3. The Rams have openly said the first pick is between Bradford, Clausen, Suh and McCoy. Maybe this is obvious, but this IS the Rams here. (The Rams haven't selected a first round QB since 1967 if my memory serves.)
4. Clausen is suddenly not getting as strong of grades as I expected him to and is potentially slipping down the 1st round (meaning the Rams aren't likely to select him).
5. Okung had a very beastly combine and is clearly a top 5 prospect.
6. Joe Haden has been rumored to have *NOT* had a very good combine.
7. Redskins LT Chris Samuels is expected to retire soon, leaving a huge hole at LT in Washington.
8. The Bucs are letting Antonio Bryant walk, leaving them with Clayton, Stovall and Stroughter as their top 3 WRs.
9. Dez Bryant has been rumored to have had bad interviews with 3 teams during the combine, although it's worth noting that this is exactly the kind of "gossip" that teams put out there to get a player to fall.

Having said all of that, here's what I think is going to happen, depending on who the Rams take:

Code: Select all

#  Team       Pick               Pick
-- --------   ----------------   -----------------
1. Rams       Bradford           Suh/McCoy
2. Lions      Suh/McCoy          McCoy/Suh
3. Bucs       McCoy/Suh          Bryant or Berry
4. Redskins   Okung or Clausen   Okung or Bradford
5. Chiefs     Berry              Berry or Okung

How do I feel about that? Good. I think the Seahawks' board looks like this through 6: Suh, McCoy, Bradford, Clausen, Okung and Berry.

There's little chance IMO that the Seahawks take a WR or RB this early. As a matter of fact, I think it would be pretty bad to take a WR and have a rookie potentially change QBs during their first two years. As for RB, if we're going to take one in the draft I've got to think it will be if someone falls to us at #40. Otherwise, it makes more sense to grab our foundation (O-line) unless Gibbs thinks we already have the guys we need.

[biju]

I've been reading a lot about how many "journalists" believe the Seahawks should take a top tier DE in the draft, or that they should make a play for one of the DEs in free agency (who did include Julius Peppers and Kyle Vanden Bosch, and still has Aaron Kampman). But in truth, we are already sitting on the future of our DEs with Darryl Tapp and Lawrence Jackson.

A great article found over on fieldgulls.com explains that DEs enter their prime at age 27 and it "normally" takes a little time for DEs to truly bloom in the NFL. (It's worth mentioning that there are freaks like Julius Peppers--we're not going to focus on that here.)

Here's a sack chart by season (and age as it turns out):

Code: Select all

Season  KVB   AK    DT    LJ
------  ----  ----  ----  ----
1st     1     1     3     2
2nd     4     2     7     5
3rd     INJ   4     6     
4th     0     7     3     
5th*    12.5  15.5 

You should be able to figure out the initials: Kyle Vanden Bosch, Aaron Kampman, Darryl Tapp and Lawrence Jackson. The "*" denotes when these players did/will turn either 27 at the start of the season or turn 27 during the season. (For clarity, I only put half sacks in on the 5th season.) It's also worth mentioning that those 5th seasons from both vets were never repeated--they continued to have lower sack totals through the rest of their careers.

In other words, it would be a bad move to acquire a veteran DE; all they would do is block the development of our young DEs who appear to be on the path to success.

If you haven't already made your way over to fieldgulls.com you really should. And you don't have to feel bad about "cheating" on the Cafe because there isn't any fantasy related material there--just pure Seahawks football.

[biju]

It looks like Schneider and Carroll have a plan at least. But part of me is wondering if we just traded Tapp to acquire another 4th rounder *just* so we could trade for Charlie Whitehurst.

I think I'd rather have Tapp through 27 and *then* trade the guy for a 1st rounder instead...

[Nfl Fan]

... or a 2nd and 4th for Marshall ...

[biju]

... or a 2nd and 4th for Marshall ...

Well, here's my concern: they are working too hard to try to fill through the draft to coincide with our "needs". For example:

1. Deon Grant gets cut. It isn't coincidence that Eric Berry is likely to be the highest rated player on the board when we pick at 6.

2. Darryl Tapp is traded. That 14 spot is looking right for Jason Pierre-Paul or Everson Griffen.

3. We trade Seneca Wallace off (for nearly nothing), acquire Charlie Whitehurst for a lot, and trade down 20 spots in the 2nd. Is it possible they are trying to position themselves for a late 2nd QB?

The other idea is that the Broncos might be asking for a 2nd round pick for Marshall and we figured we'd get value twice from that 2nd round pick if we used it as trade leverage and then got Marshall anyway. (If this were the case I'd be very happy about the move, and not a little bummed by it.)

At any rate, the Seahawks are starting to make moves, but I have this feeling that we're getting fleeced by more experienced GMs right now. It doesn't seem like we're negotiating well; we give away players for cheap while getting players at a huge cost. I saw what Brady Quinn went for and what we got Whitehurst for and thought "Is Charlie considered *that* much better?"

Maybe they are behind the scenes thinking they are robbing people, but right now it looks like we're selling low and buying high. Not the ideal situation...

[Nfl Fan]

Biju, my thoughts exactly.

I haven't brought myself to reading it, but Colin Cowherd was lambasting the Seahawks this morning. Move down 20 spots and give a 3rd round pick in 2011 to overpay an unproven quarterback. WOW! What a deal.

Nfl Fan = Not impressed.

Unless they have some other deal that includes Whitehurst, and/or they know something about the guy beyond his 4 NFL snaps, I just don't get it.

[Nfl Fan]

Hmmm. I read something yesterday that may make this make more sence. If we were to sign a RFA with a 2nd round tender, it doesn't matter where that pick lands (at 40 or 60). So in essence, if we were to do such a thing, all he really costs us is a 2011 3rd rounder. Not to mention, our GM 'likes his swagger'.

And since they'll all be on strike in 2011 anyway...

[biju]

Hmmm. I read something yesterday that may make this make more sence. If we were to sign a RFA with a 2nd round tender, it doesn't matter where that pick lands (at 40 or 60). So in essence, if we were to do such a thing, all he really costs us is a 2011 3rd rounder. Not to mention, our GM 'likes his swagger'.

And since they'll all be on strike in 2011 anyway...

Sure, but who are we targeting with that 2nd rounder that is worth it? Maybe Pierre Thomas? I don't know, I'm not in love with him but he does seem to fit.

I'm more of the mind that we have a target for someone who has a 3rd round grade and moving down into the lower 2nd will allows us to grab him before anyone else and for cheaper than with that high 2nd.

At any rate, I like that Schneider is very confident in the pick but that still doesn't mean we should have overpaid by that much. I don't like that we've lost our 3rd rounder two years in a row now..