Have to say I'm torn.
Last year, plenty of us imagined trading the farm for Sheldon Richardson. And truth be told, he likely would have been worth that trade. The prospects where we were picking were very mundane. Ultimately we did trade it away -- for a difference maker who happened to be unavailable for almost the entire season. The value, at the time, was definitely in our favor. However the contract that followed really really hurt.
I would not wish to make a similarly costly trade up for Evans -- that's way too much stock in a position that doesn't coincide with our core identity. It's an ancillary piece. We've committed to Harvin and I think we have to stand on that.
Donald is a player, not unlike Richardson in terms of role fit. Richardson was the best pass rushing 3 tech. I would consider Donald to be a better player for that specific role, where Richardson doesn't have Donald's run fit liability. This is a defense first club. I can sit here imagining the awesome terror that Avril/Donald and Bennett could wreak on opposing offenses. So many rushers -- you'd have your choice of 1 on 1 matchups in that scenario.
And then I imagine what that kind of rush would do relative to our secondary. If they only have to cover for up to 2-3 seconds -- how stifling could our defense be? In terms of the whole, Donald could be a valuable piece of the puzzle.
This is a team that is already on the mountaintop. The challenge for this team is now to maintain quality across the board. To add talents so that we don't have to extend players who are good, but not great. This is a team built on breadth of talent. Good players everywhere and several rows deep.
Trading up really moves away from what we are as a team. It's quality built on players who don't leave us salivating with anticipation. Guys who we kind of shrug and go 'guess we'll see what he looks like in August'.
Seriously so many plausible scenarios are laid out before us. The team can go in any direction. Or multiple directions. I would say this: I wish we had a lot more picks, because in a deep draft I'm laying money on Seattle for getting the most productive players on day 2 and 3. Guys that don't excite in May but by the end of the year, you are hoping you can resign them when their time comes.
Natethegreat":155dap05 said:
randomation":155dap05 said:
Would likely take even more then the falcons traded for jones to move up to 10 or so and get evans and you really couldn't do it before the draft or else you could move up and have both evans and watkins off the board. Evans would be amazing but it would likely take literally the whole draft of picks and then some to get him.
The Falcons traded from the 27 spot up to the 6th. The Seahawks would trade from the thirty second pick to arguably the tenth pick with the Lions. Plus this is being touted as a very deep draft so someone might value later picks a little higher than normal. I don't think it would take more at all. In fact it might take less.
Agreed. There are a lot of teams in the early teens that have rather mundane needs. NYG/Pittsburgh/Baltimore. Those are all teams that really have needs that could be very adequately addressed at 32. Many of them projected to take players that now look generically available where we are picking.
I expect Donald's floor is pick 17 (Dallas) if he does make it that far, I don't see them passing on him. Their need for interior pass rush is very high.