McGruff":1a0rnq1p said:
I do get the feeling that after 2013 they made a significant shift in their thinking. During that time Pete was having conversations with a woman named Angela Duckworth about a book project called "Grit" and they'd just spent draft captial on guys like Christine Michael, Tharold Simon and Michael Bowie . . . good athletes with prototype size, but questionable passion for the game. After that Schnieder mentioned something about learning from their mistakes and they started talking about drafting "overcomers" . . . people who had to fight the odds to get to the top.
I could not agree more. I remember when JS admitted to a change in draft strategy before the 2014 draft, talking about wanting guys who love the game and making that a bigger draft priority.
I think this mostly came as a response not to Michael or Simon (who play hard and seem to love the game), but to Percy. Percy is the ultimate example of a talented athlete that doesn't really love the game the right way. He showed Pete what a REAL clubhouse cancer looks like. It could be argued, based on how much or how little stock you put in the Tate rumors, that Percy was the reason we let Tate go for Peanuts. Percy didn't just hurt himself, he hurt the team and maybe have cost us other players beyond himself.
From 2010-2013 I felt like I had my finger on the pulse of this team. Seattle was identifying the best prospects I found (Irvin, Wilson, Okung, Tate, Lane to name a few), and then identifying other prospects I had no idea about who were just as good or better. There are certain players you just know will be stars if they go to the right team (Bobby Wagner, Kam Chancellor, etc), and Seattle was really good at getting those players. Everything they did made complete sense to me (other than the CBJ trade).
In 2014 and again in 2016, it felt like some other team did the drafting for Seattle. It's too early to judge 2016 so I'll leave that draft out of it, but in 2014 even at the time it first happened I felt like Seattle drafted a bunch of camp bodies and hype jobs.
When Seattle had success in 2015, it was because they got back to drafting explosive athletes with awesome tape just like they had from 2010-2013 again.
Obviously, Seattle struck out in 2013 but a lot of that is really just bad luck. Imagine if Harvin, Michael, Simon and Bailey had simply played to their talent level, they would have made that draft by themselves. I think Seattle over-reacted to that 2013 offseason and took things too far in the opposite direction afterwards, which is why we've only had a couple of cornerstone players come out of the draft after 2012.
Then again, I also need to humble myself and remember that the team itself is changing, so naturally the drafting might change with it. Seattle is becoming a more finesse team, so perhaps those finesse type of picks that wouldn't have worked in 2010 might work in 2016.
Funny thing is, I don't see a lot of grit in this draft class, other than Jarran Reed in interviews. Other than 1st pick Germain Ifedi and UDFA Brandin Bryant, I didn't see a lot of nastiness or ass-kicker mentality. I think the whole personality thing is overblown, especially after the first round. For every Johnny Football and Percy Harvin you have a Honey Badger and Marshawn Lynch, etc. On the whole, taking a chance on talent is a chance worth taking, which is exactly what got Seattle to such a high place to begin with.
They've basically drafted for athletic players with dominant tape in five of their seven drafts, with the exception of 2014 and 2016. In those five drafts Seattle has done very very well, with the exception of 2013. Who am I to say they are stupid, but from my layman's perspective it seems like 4/5 is a pretty successful methodology.
As far as JS's comments about the 2016 draft before and after. Part of me understands his excitement. His UDFA haul was pretty impressive, so from his point of view it probably feels like he got 20+ draft picks this year. I get the impression that Seattle doesn't always get their man in UDFA but in 2016 they appeared to get a ton of players they were targeting at the gun of UDFA.
The other part of me is skeptical. Remember the scout saying that KPL was Navarro Bowman 2.0? Or that Luke Willson was the player Seattle planned their draft around? Remember Tom Cable praising Mike Person and Drew Nowak? JS was asked his favorite pick in the 2012 draft right after it happened. He named Russell W... oh wait no, he named Greg Scruggs. It's funny because the best players Seattle has drafted rarely got these kinds of gushing reviews from the FO post-draft. I think a lot of this kind of talk is as much about these guys talking themselves into the decisions they've made as much as anything else.
