Full court shot: Who will Seattle pick in round 1?

ImTheScientist

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
3,724
Reaction score
63
SharkHawk":yw77pkos said:
I picked Tavon Austin, somebody mentioned he's a smurf. Here I am thinking "wait a second... what about Russell Wilson? What about Robert Turbin? Doug Baldwin? Golden Tate? Marshawn Lynch? Obo? Leon W? It seems like the majority of our offensive playmakers aside from Rice and Miller are small and fast. I think you go BIG and fast on defense (or just big), but on offense, being smaller may be a benefit. Look at how bad guys like Darren Sproles and Barry Sanders have made guys look.

I think I'd be worried about our smallish receivers if other teams had our DB's... but they don't. Most teams have DB's that are around 5'10"-5'11" range. So a guy like Austin isn't a big liability. He reminds me of a VERY fast Baldwin that gets tons of catches and YAC.

It just doesn't mesh with PC's philosophy. He wants big outside WRs and it seems we have Baldwin & probably Tate who would be better suited for the slot. Austin seems like a better version of both Tate & Baldwin... but

Q: is that really a need?
A: No.
 
OP
OP
kearly

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
T-Sizzle":no43zz2g said:
It just doesn't mesh with PC's philosophy. He wants big outside WRs and it seems we have Baldwin & probably Tate who would be better suited for the slot. Austin seems like a better version of both Tate & Baldwin... but

Q: is that really a need?
A: No.

Big WR isn't really a need either, so long as we have Rice/Edwards. Either way, I think a WR selection would be a bit of a luxury pick. Nothing wrong with looking at big WRs, but if JS really wanted that, then why did he poo-poo last year's WR class- one that was LOADED with giant WRs?

To be fair, the last draft didn't have a single WR that screamed surefire NFL superstar (Fitz, Megatron, etc), and this draft doesn't either. Most drafts don't. And unless you are getting a megastar WR, it's probably a good idea to not rely on that pick too much. Imagine how much trouble we'd be in if we had drafted Tate in the 1st round (he had a fringe 1st round grade before the draft) and then banked on him to be a #1? Imagine how much trouble Chicago might be in on offense if they had assumed Alshon Jeffery would singlehandedly turn their offense around? Or Arizona with Floyd or even Jacksonville with Blackmon?

I don't think Shark sees Austin as a surefire #1 or a guy that will make this offense elite- but he is a nifty player that fits an existing role in our offense and could provide solid, safe value.

So in that sense, drafting Austin seems completely sensible to me. Yeah, we don't exactly have a burning need for another short WR, but he would bring tremendous value to special teams and he'd likely be better than Doug Baldwin within a year or two as a #3 WR. I see Rice (if healthy) and Tate as long term fixtures, but Baldwin seems pretty shaky with so-so production and a body that is ridiculously injury prone (including college). So to me, Austin makes sense. I just think he's going to be a round two guy- though probably before our 2nd round pick.
 

hawksfan515

New member
Joined
Dec 10, 2010
Messages
5,369
Reaction score
0
Location
Battle Ground, Washington
kearly":32qv5xpc said:
T-Sizzle":32qv5xpc said:
It just doesn't mesh with PC's philosophy. He wants big outside WRs and it seems we have Baldwin & probably Tate who would be better suited for the slot. Austin seems like a better version of both Tate & Baldwin... but

Q: is that really a need?
A: No.

Big WR isn't really a need either, so long as we have Rice/Edwards. Either way, I think a WR selection would be a bit of a luxury pick. Nothing wrong with looking at big WRs, but if JS really wanted that, then why did he poo-poo last year's WR class- one that was LOADED with giant WRs.

To be fair, the last draft didn't have a single WR that screamed surefire NFL superstar (Fitz, Megatron, etc), and this draft doesn't either. Most drafts don't. And unless you are getting a megastar WR, it's probably a good idea to not rely on that pick too much. Imagine how much trouble we'd be in if we had drafted Tate in the 1st round (he had a fringe 1st round grade before the draft) and then banked on him to be a #1? Imagine how much trouble Chicago might be in on offense if they had assumed Alshon Jeffery would singlehandedly turn their offense around? Or Arizona with Floyd or even Jacksonville with Blackmon?

I don't think Shark sees Austin as a surefire #1 or a guy that will make this offense elite- but he is a nifty player that fits an existing role in our offense and could provide solid, safe value.

So in that sense, drafting Austin seems completely sensible to me. Yeah, we don't exactly have a burning need for another short WR, but he would bring tremendous value to special teams and he'd likely be better than Doug Baldwin within a year or two as a #3 WR. I see Rice (if healthy) and Tate as long term fixtures, but Baldwin seems pretty shaky with so-so production and a body that is ridiculously injury prone (including college). So to me, Austin makes sense. I just think he's going to be a round two guy- though probably before our 2nd round pick.

I still want defense! :lol:
 

cover-2

New member
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Messages
867
Reaction score
0
kearly":201sm9du said:
T-Sizzle":201sm9du said:
It just doesn't mesh with PC's philosophy. He wants big outside WRs and it seems we have Baldwin & probably Tate who would be better suited for the slot. Austin seems like a better version of both Tate & Baldwin... but

Q: is that really a need?
A: No.

Big WR isn't really a need either, so long as we have Rice/Edwards. Either way, I think a WR selection would be a bit of a luxury pick. Nothing wrong with looking at big WRs, but if JS really wanted that, then why did he poo-poo last year's WR class- one that was LOADED with giant WRs.

You can't really count Edwards, no way he is with us next year. Edwards gets little to no reps come gameday.
 

cover-2

New member
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Messages
867
Reaction score
0
Ogeltree for me if he is available. I was kind of suspect when English suggested taking him in the 1st round, but I have changed my tune after having taken a look at his game film. English was spot on when he compared Alec Ogeltree to former Seahawks LB Julian Peterson. Ogeltree looks like an incredibly athletic LB and a natural pass rusher when given the chance. For me the prospects I am most intrigued with are (DE/LB) Dion Jordan, (WR) Brandon Coleman, (LB/DE) Alec Ogeltree, (DT) Star Lotulelei (DT) Jonathan Jenkins.
 
OP
OP
kearly

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
cover-2":2d63hzo3 said:
You can't really count Edwards, no way he is with us next year. Edwards gets little to no reps come gameday.

Neither did Obomanu and he's stuck around forever. As long as Edwards remains humble and cheap, I see no reason why he can't stay. Although I suppose it's possible other teams snag him in free agency. Seattle received a lot of interest in Edwards at the deadline.

If Edwards does leave, Seattle could surf FA again for a cheap veteran WR with size to be a backup.

To be fair to your argument, there are some quality big WRs available. Mike Wallace plays big and will likely be a UFA. Patterson and Coleman are big WRs with great upside. Marquess Wilson has a chance to slide pretty far in the draft and become a potential steal.
 

BASF

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,764
Reaction score
2,332
Location
Tijuana/San Diego
If he responds well to the surgery, Brennan Williams. He is definitely a late first round prospect. The fact that he is said to be able to play both tackle spots with his intangibles, but is a true right tackle helps.
 

Latest posts

Top