Why I think Seattle will not go DT in the first round.

Discuss your thoughts about anything draft related. Mocks, College and Pro. Knock yourselves out!!! RATING: PG-13
  • The way many of the mock drafts are lining up... I'm not really seeing a player worth taking other than at WR at #25. We all know that things can change up a bit where players are projected after the combine. There's always risers and fallers. And, we know that Free Agency may sort some things out.
    I wonder how possible it would be to trade down and get out of the 1st round? With a team that only needs a few pieces, it might be more benefical to package picks to get closer to the front of mid-rounds / day 2, early day 3. Would it be helpful, financially, for the Hawks to not have to commit to a 1st rounder - especially if they're likely not going to be a starter? Wouldn't that, then, allow JS to get an early start on getting current key players that are due new contracts?
    I would still like to see an offensive game-changer like Tavon Austin to pair with Wilson for years to come. Austin has the potential to be a special player. Another receiver that sounds like he is rising up boards is Quinton Patton (La Tech). That guy sort of reminds me of Cliff Branch for some reason. There are some saying he may end up in the late 1st round. He does have the ability to separate. Not elite speed, but excellent game speed. Perhaps Terrance Williams might make the most sense, though, if available at #25 with the combination of Height and speed, I guess.

    Excited to see the new pieces added and how they fit in to this Championship caliber team.
    World Champion
    Image
    Seattle Seahawks
    User avatar
    TeamoftheCentury
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 977
    Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:54 am
    Location: Orlando, FL


  • If you believe what JS says, then Seattle did not even rule out safety in round 1 last year. I imagine that this year John Schneider will once again have a diverse draft board in round 1. It will probably have pass rushing DEs on it. It will probably have pass rushing DTs on it. It will probably have versatile fast linebackers on it. It may possibly have WR/TE on it. And given that it had a safety on it last year, it may still have safety on it this year (Kenny Vaccaro).

    So I think proclaiming that DT won't be an option at #25 kind of misses the point. If Seattle loves a DT, and he's there, of course he'd be considered. Maybe that guy is Richardson, maybe it's Short, maybe it's a Williams. Or maybe it's a player out of left field.

    I don't really want Seattle to draft a DT in round 1, but you maybe have noticed that Seattle's system for drafting has not worked terribly well in round 1 the last couple years. Not to rip Carpenter or Irvin- but those were not great years to address those positions in round 1, yet Seattle did it anyway. Seattle passed on better players to select Carpenter, and they passed on better players to select Irvin, all because areas of highest need receive significant added consideration. If anything, that points to DT not only being a possibility, but probably even the strongest possibility, regardless of whether it is a good DT group or not.
    Last edited by kearly on Sun Feb 10, 2013 9:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11564
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • Good group depends on who's eyes your viewing from also, JS and PC view guys a bit different then people that create mocks as it has shown the last few years.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 11667
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Yup, and their draft board has proven to be fairly unique. They might view Sylvester Williams higher than Sheldon Richardson for all we know.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11564
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • kearly wrote:If you believe what JS says, then Seattle did not even rule out safety in round 1 last year. I imagine that this year John Schneider will once again have a diverse draft board in round 1. It will probably have pass rushing DEs on it. It will probably have pass rushing DTs on it. It will probably have versatile fast linebackers on it. It may possibly have WR/TE on it. And given that it had a safety on it last year, it may still have safety on it this year (Kenny Vaccaro).

    So I think proclaiming that DT won't be an option at #25 kind of misses the point. If Seattle loves a DT, and he's there, of course he'd be considered. Maybe that guy is Richardson, maybe it's Short, maybe it's a Williams. Or maybe it's a player out of left field.

    I don't really want Seattle to draft a DT in round 1, but you maybe have noticed that Seattle's system for drafting has not worked terribly well in round 1 the last couple years. Not to rip Carpenter or Irvin- but those were not great years to address those positions in round 1, yet Seattle did it anyway. Seattle passed on better players to select Carpenter, and they passed on better players to select Irvin, all because areas of highest need receive significant added consideration. If anything, that points to DT not only being a possibility, but probably even the strongest possibility, regardless of whether it is a good DT group or not.

    Well, I didn't title the thread "Why I think Seattle will NEVER go DT in the first round."
    I think these guys have a few positions they won't take in the first round unless the talent is outstanding for that position. Receiver and DT I would put in that category, simply because they have shown a tendency to look at free agents first at those positions. It isn't because of value either, it is because they don't like to take first rounders who probably won't contribute right away, and with few exceptions receivers and defensive tackles seem to struggle that first season. Thus, a seeming bias towards free agents. Where value kicks in is the draftee measured against the depth of his class. You mention Richardson, an outstanding player. If he is there at 25 I imagine Schneider would be all over that pick, and this thread will look pretty dumb. I think we both suspect Richardson will be long gone. So yeah, me saying they don't like to take DTs in the first round is a bit thick.

    You mention Carpenter and Irvin, but you have to take into account that in addition to filling a need with those picks, they tried to trade back instead of taking Carpenter, and they did trade back with Irvin. They almost traded back a second time with Irvin. The Carpenter pick was Cable's first year, and I am pretty sure Cable looked at the 2010 squad and told Pete there was just no chance that group could be made to work, we have to fix this Effer now. Not enough nasty. I see the first three rounds of 2011 as somewhat desperate, especially with the Whitehurst 3rd round pick being absent. IF you haven't noticed, Cable gets what Cable wants. Even Sweezy was a Cable thing.

    You mention Irvin, which is interesting to me. like or hate the pick, I think Irvin supports my stance. First DE off the board was Irvin, in a weak class. His unique skill, pure speed, matched a Seattle unique need. Will a DT at 25 match the same way? I kind of doubt it.

    Although, the more I think about it, I could see Seattle taking a guy like Ansah at 25 just to be a pass rushing 3rd round DT, like Jones was, just because his unique skill matches Seattle's need.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 12018
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Sorry for the long response time. I was on a business trip and posting a message on an android longer than 15 words long was agony- it's like typing with your toes.

    Scottemojo wrote:I think these guys have a few positions they won't take in the first round unless the talent is outstanding for that position. Receiver and DT I would put in that category, simply because they have shown a tendency to look at free agents first at those positions. It isn't because of value either, it is because they don't like to take first rounders who probably won't contribute right away, and with few exceptions receivers and defensive tackles seem to struggle that first season. Thus, a seeming bias towards free agents. Where value kicks in is the draftee measured against the depth of his class. You mention Richardson, an outstanding player. If he is there at 25 I imagine Schneider would be all over that pick, and this thread will look pretty dumb. I think we both suspect Richardson will be long gone. So yeah, me saying they don't like to take DTs in the first round is a bit thick.


    Well, for all we know, they might grade Kawann Short or Sly Williams higher than Sheldon Richardson. Which isn't as insane as you might think- I've seen one NFL source that recently had Williams as his #2 DT (behind Lotulelei). It's very possible the Seahawks might like the value at #25 whether Richardson is there or not.

    Scottemojo wrote:You mention Carpenter and Irvin, but you have to take into account that in addition to filling a need with those picks, they tried to trade back instead of taking Carpenter, and they did trade back with Irvin. They almost traded back a second time with Irvin. The Carpenter pick was Cable's first year, and I am pretty sure Cable looked at the 2010 squad and told Pete there was just no chance that group could be made to work, we have to fix this Effer now. Not enough nasty. I see the first three rounds of 2011 as somewhat desperate, especially with the Whitehurst 3rd round pick being absent. IF you haven't noticed, Cable gets what Cable wants. Even Sweezy was a Cable thing.


    I think the reason we've seen the team go DL in free agency is because average to above average defensive lineman are more common and carry less value league wide than an average to above average offensive lineman. Alan Branch and Jason Jones hit FA and get contracts under $10 million. Ben Grubbs hits FA and gets a $36 million contract. And then you have ridiculous contracts like the ones given for Derrick Dockery, Kris Dielman, Jahri Evans, etc.

    While megastar DL tend to get megabucks, the middle of the road DL are often FA bargains. The reason Seattle went after guys like Clemons, Brock, Hargrove, Branch, and Jones wasn't out of disdain for inexperience- it was because Schneider is a moneyball type GM and those were all moneyball type acquisitions, where the quality of the player exceeded the price tag.

    Who knows? Maybe the moneyball trend will continue and Seattle will sign Desmond Bryant to a smaller contract than his talent probably deserves. That would be nice. But until that happens, I don't really see any reason to rule out DT in round 1.

    As far as trading back- first of all- Seattle was missing picks in both of those years. It's hard to look like a late round genius when you only have 6 picks to work with. Everyone knew that trading down was a huge priority for JS long before the draft happened. Carpenter had nothing to do with that. In the case of Irvin, I think they traded down because they felt Irvin would be safe for 3 selections, and they got a pretty generous offer from Philly to make the move.

    Scottemojo wrote:You mention Irvin, which is interesting to me. like or hate the pick, I think Irvin supports my stance. First DE off the board was Irvin, in a weak class. His unique skill, pure speed, matched a Seattle unique need. Will a DT at 25 match the same way? I kind of doubt it.


    I don't think a player needs to fit Seattle's profile perfectly to be worthy of a 1st round pick. Tom Cable has a history of drafting or otherwise developing tall, lightweight lineman. Carpenter was not especially tall and was nowhere near lightweight.

    Additionally, I am not quite sure what Seattle's "ideal" 3-tech looks like. Do you? My guess is that they view 3-tech as a platoon much like LDE. On rushing downs they seem to prefer a beefy type (Mebane in 2010, Branch in 2011 and 2012) and on 3rd downs they switch to a pass rush specialist (Terrill in 2010, Hargrove in 2011, Jones in 2012). I am pretty sure they drafted Jaye Howard in the hopes that he could unseat Jones as a specialist, but that hasn't happened because they want to play their specialists on rush downs occasionally and Howard is abysmal against the run.

    I think the 3-tech need is overblown, personally. Anyone that thinks we must fix our pass rush with a DT and doesn't propose a trade for JJ Watt or Geno Atkins should probably be checked into a madhouse. It'd be like the Mariners trying to add more runs to their offense through third base or catcher when you have a guy at first base hitting .189. 3-tech isn't even the biggest problem on our D-line. It was a slightly above average area last season on a line that saw struggles from Red Bryant and Bruce Irvin, and has a bleak future from Chris Clemons unless you believe AP has rendered ACL's magically irrelevant.
    Last edited by kearly on Wed Feb 13, 2013 8:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11564
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • We have seen them reach in the first round and it really hasn't worked out well. BPA this year.
    User avatar
    General Manager
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2260
    Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:04 pm


  • General Manager wrote:We have seen them reach in the first round and it really hasn't worked out well. BPA this year.


    In John Schneider's mind they are always drafting by BPA. It's not like there is one magical draft board that determines who BPA is, as much as Mel Kiper would like to believe it.

    I can't comment on Carpenter, but Seattle had a very high grade on Bruce Irvin. He was supposedly one of three favorites, with the other two going in the top 10 picks (and one of them winning DROY).
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11564
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • I understand your thinking on this Scottemojo.

    But keep in mind that what we (or Kiper) may deem the 5th best, First-round DT may indeed be at the top (or damn near) of Pete's draft board.
    "it'd be a newborn deer" - pehawk
    User avatar
    Hawk Strap
    * Handsome *
     
    Posts: 3148
    Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:37 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


  • The defense will only get better, even if Pete Carroll has to bring in 100 new players to fill the DE/DT or OT position. My thoughts are that Seattle needs another playmaker, either a big/fast WR or a bigger, hands type TE. Hopefully one or both will be available in the first two rounds. Another possibility is a 2d round pick for QB Flynn. Three picks in the first round would really be a luxury.
    hawkstalker
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 8
    Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:56 pm
    Location: Salem, Or


  • chris98251 wrote:Osi is a pain in the ass, thinks he's worth the sun and moon, Freeney would at least keep his mouth shut and play. Both are out of the expense range we would want for a rent a player.


    And you know this.... how? Oh right, you don't.
    User avatar
    cacksman
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 585
    Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 11:17 am


  • kearly wrote:
    General Manager wrote:We have seen them reach in the first round and it really hasn't worked out well. BPA this year.


    In John Schneider's mind they are always drafting by BPA. It's not like there is one magical draft board that determines who BPA is, as much as Mel Kiper would like to believe it.

    I can't comment on Carpenter, but Seattle had a very high grade on Bruce Irvin. He was supposedly one of three favorites, with the other two going in the top 10 picks (and one of them winning DROY).


    I agree with the point you made but lets not pretend that Carp and Irvin were not a reach because most if not all the pro scouts gave them a lower grade than where they were drafted. That's what a reach is.
    User avatar
    General Manager
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2260
    Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:04 pm


  • There were at least 7 teams that had a first round grade on Irvin- including the Jets who held the very next pick. Rex Ryan looked visibly upset when Irvin was selected.

    In the case of Carpenter, there were three teams that would have drafted Carpenter immediately after Seattle had they passed- Chicago, Pittsburgh and Green Bay. There were some teams with very good drafting track records that had both those players on their 1st round board.

    I'm not saying that either pick was a great value, but I think reach is perhaps too strong a word because it implies they could have gotten those players later, which is demonstrably untrue. That said, I agree with the spirit of what you mean- those weren't huge draft steals by any stretch of the imagination. Where I disagree is the idea that Pete or John felt that their methodology was a mistake. Schneider has a system and he stays true to it- even if it sometimes means taking an underwhelming value in round 1 to address a major need.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11564
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • General Manager wrote:We have seen them reach in the first round and it really hasn't worked out well. BPA this year.


    Okung - not a reach

    Thomas - not a reach

    Carpenter - not a reach (I wasn't the only one who had him in round one, was #23 in my final mock to Philly)

    Irvin - we should've known better as fans and with hindsight not a reach
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8317
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • Pete said that it would be tough this year to add 10 players that "stick" and that was a good problem. Then I heard him say that we needed to beef up the D line with a player then he corrected himself mid sentence and said maybe several players kind of jokingly (but maybe not). I also have heard him a John say they truly covet players that "tilt" the field.

    IMO if the FO feels we get the same pieces back that we started with this year (top 5 D) and our offense starts where it left off then maybe a DT isn't in the plan for R1. Maybe we can get that player that truly tilts the field instead? All speculation but it would not hurt my feelings if we went with something other than DT with the first pick. In fact put me down for what the OP suggests.
    travlinhawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 441
    Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 5:46 pm


  • @Kip. I think this team has two 3 techniques in mind. A two gapping two down runs stuffer, and a pass rush 3 tech. Part of the reason I like Bryant so much is my belief that he can be both.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 12018
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am




It is currently Sun Dec 21, 2014 10:44 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE NCAA FOOTBALL & PRO DRAFT FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online