Today provided more questions than answers on WR's

More questions than answers regarding this WR group after today. Also included are some thoughts on the DL group tomorrow.

LINK: http://seahawksdraftblog.com/combine-su ... -receivers

Let me know what you think.

First of all — how good is this receiver class? I mean, really?

There’s a heck of a lot of depth — enough to extend into the second round before a considerable drop in talent. That’s one major positive to come out of the day.

The other was Odell Beckham Jr — who put on a clinic during the Group 1 receiver drills.

He ran an official 4.43 and looked impressive in every session. He’s always been a top-20 talent. Go and watch the Mississippi State tape from 2013 if you have any doubts.

Yet his performance today provided a rare moment of clarity.

Here’s what we can say with some certainty. Sammy Watkins, Mike Evans and Beckham Jr all deserve to be top-20 picks.

Can we agree on that?

In terms of the rest — well, we could see 8-9 receivers go in the first round. That’d be a new record.

Or we could see as little as four — an underwhelming suggestion given how many people are praising this receiver class.

In many cases, there are plenty of question marks.

Click to expand...

Why is this draft so deep with no real #1 and a lot of depth ar certain groups but no real locks?

I read it and mostly agree with you except Adams is 6'1 you downgraded him to 6 feet even. He plays like a guy who's 6'3. His college numbers can't be dismissed he's just a solid all around WR. If someone wants to quibble about an 1/8th of an inch go ahead . That said there are other WR's i hope are there for us Bryant being one of them.

I think if anything, this combine created a bit more clarity. Only if we end up resigning Tate.

The big WR prospects we covet for our X receiver really kind of crystallized themselves. The candidates I'd see for that pick:

M. Bryant
B. Coleman
D. Street
J. Matthews

These guys are all 6'3" or better. All of these players tested much better than expected. Bryant is a bit of a paradox. Obviously amongst this group his athleticism stands out significantly. But his tape is so Magoo. It's hard for me to ignore Clemson fans' low opinion of him as they watched him more in depth than any of us. Is he the kind of poor inconsistent performer who was often times invisible and a non factor despite getting single coverage all the time? Or is he the electric prospect who came on VERY late in the year who has seemingly limitless potential.

Coleman and Matthews should both really impress in the interview process. They should stand out from the others in that regard.

Coleman's production is going to turn a lot of amateur draftnik opinions sour. Matthews doesn't have that at all, being the all time best WR in SEC history -- on a club where he commanded the defensive focus each and every week. To steal a line, Matthews is the one of these four with a definitive 'pissed off for greatness' attitude. Will his testing numbers and attitude be enough to vault him to the top of the line when there is some question to his athletic explosiveness on tape. I'm guessing the combine will direct most of us to look at his tape much more closely.

General Manager":23cqgvt0 said:

I read it and mostly agree with you except Adams is 6'1 you downgraded him to 6 feet even. He plays like a guy who's 6'3. His college numbers can't be dismissed he's just a solid all around WR. If someone wants to quibble about an 1/8th of an inch go ahead . That said there are other WR's i hope are there for us Bryant being one of them.

Click to expand...

Adams was 6007. He is a solid all around WR. But he doesn't have the height or reach (32 5/8) to compensate. Good leaping ability, but that doesn't translate to the same kind of size that basic height does. Particularly in length/stretch metrics. It doesn't apply when stretching for vertical routes or out routes. That hurts him a lot, as those types of routes are the X bread and butter. He's a more athletic Jermaine Kearse. But he is really missing the size component Seattle has established as their floor.

It's not quibbling over an eighth of an inch. At 6010 I'd consider him too small at that. We're talking about over 2 inches and add a couple inches on top of that for reach.

That's a lot of size to concede. I would not consider him an X receiver. And he didn't play that in college either. It's not like it's a real revelation that he isn't ideal for a split end role.

If we lose Tate -- ok I am with you entirely. I think he'd tear it up at Tate's position. Even be an eventual upgrade. If it comes to that, where we lose Tate, then we have to open up the full gamut of prospects and Adams would feature prominently there.

Attyla the Hawk":3ksld320 said:

I think if anything, this combine created a bit more clarity. Only if we end up resigning Tate.

The big WR prospects we covet for our X receiver really kind of crystallized themselves. The candidates I'd see for that pick:

M. Bryant
B. Coleman
D. Street
J. Matthews

These guys are all 6'3" or better. All of these players tested much better than expected. Bryant is a bit of a paradox. Obviously amongst this group his athleticism stands out significantly. But his tape is so Magoo. It's hard for me to ignore Clemson fans' low opinion of him as they watched him more in depth than any of us. Is he the kind of poor inconsistent performer who was often times invisible and a non factor despite getting single coverage all the time? Or is he the electric prospect who came on VERY late in the year who has seemingly limitless potential.

Coleman and Matthews should both really impress in the interview process. They should stand out from the others in that regard.

Coleman's production is going to turn a lot of amateur draftnik opinions sour. Matthews doesn't have that at all, being the all time best WR in SEC history -- on a club where he commanded the defensive focus each and every week. To steal a line, Matthews is the one of these four with a definitive 'pissed off for greatness' attitude. Will his testing numbers and attitude be enough to vault him to the top of the line when there is some question to his athletic explosiveness on tape. I'm guessing the combine will direct most of us to look at his tape much more closely.

General Manager":3ksld320 said:

I read it and mostly agree with you except Adams is 6'1 you downgraded him to 6 feet even. He plays like a guy who's 6'3. His college numbers can't be dismissed he's just a solid all around WR. If someone wants to quibble about an 1/8th of an inch go ahead . That said there are other WR's i hope are there for us Bryant being one of them.

Click to expand...

Adams was 6007. He is a solid all around WR. But he doesn't have the height or reach (32 5/8) to compensate. Good leaping ability, but that doesn't translate to the same kind of size that basic height does. Particularly in length/stretch metrics. It doesn't apply when stretching for vertical routes or out routes. That hurts him a lot, as those types of routes are the X bread and butter. He's a more athletic Jermaine Kearse. But he is really missing the size component Seattle has established as their floor.

Click to expand...

I'd add Moncrief to your list and your analysis doesn't square with taking Tate in the second round clearly there interested in more than height. Yes 6 and 7/8ths that's one 1/8th from 6'1 I'm calling him 6'1 because for all practical purposes he is. Adams would not be my first choice but depending on who's there he's still on my list of best available at WR.

If we don't re-sign Tate, I'd love to go out and grab Beckham. He crushed the combine.

General Manager":333djlzv said:

I'd add Moncrief to your list and your analysis doesn't square with taking Tate in the second round clearly there interested in more than height. Yes 6 and 7/8ths that's one 1/8th from 6'1 I'm calling him 6'1 because for all practical purposes he is. Adams would not be my first choice but depending on who's there he's still on my list of best available at WR.

Click to expand...

Moncrief could be there as well. I kind of doubt it but he tested well.

I don't understand the comment regarding Tate. We took Tate, when we had pretty much no talent anywhere. It looks like you're saying we took a sub 6'3" Tate in round 2, so we should consider it now. If that's the case, I think you're missing the point entirely.

This FO grades relative to what we have. Adams would be graded as a Z. So his value delta would be relative to Tate. Which probably isn't an immediate improvement and may not even be an eventual one. Tate does so many other things great. And he's a talented WR in his own right.

If we didn't have Tate, I'd agree with you, we would consider a smaller WR. And I'd be equally high on Adams at that point, although not as high on him as other prospects (OBJ). But I don't agree at all that we would consider Adams an X. Any more than we have Tate play the X -- EVER. Adams is nothing like any prospect we've acquired for X role/position, even if it's been for a drive by/looksie variety acquisition.

General Manager":75u3vsd7 said:

I read it and mostly agree with you except Adams is 6'1 you downgraded him to 6 feet even.

Click to expand...

Adams is 6007.

So if you want to generously round that up, feel free. But he's in between 6-0 and 6-1.

I thought Bryant helped himself a ton. His measurables and draft stock reminds me of Stephen Hill, who went mid-2nd round in 2012.

kearly":21qc06wx said:

I thought Bryant helped himself a ton. His measurables and draft stock reminds me of Stephen Hill, who went mid-2nd round in 2012.

Click to expand...

Kearly, is that comparison meant to be a deterrent to us getting to hyped about drafting the dude?

General Manager":3oe3gd0c said:

I read it and mostly agree with you except Adams is 6'1 you downgraded him to 6 feet even. He plays like a guy who's 6'3. His college numbers can't be dismissed he's just a solid all around WR. If someone wants to quibble about an 1/8th of an inch go ahead . That said there are other WR's i hope are there for us Bryant being one of them.

Click to expand...

Adams is not 6'1" so please stop with that. His combine showed he is just average. I would compare him to James Jones. In adition to thatthe level of competition he faced was questionable.

I understand you love him but its blinding you from the truth.

Hawkalypse":3qtdk7mk said:

kearly":3qtdk7mk said:

I thought Bryant helped himself a ton. His measurables and draft stock reminds me of Stephen Hill, who went mid-2nd round in 2012.

Click to expand...

Kearly, is that comparison meant to be a deterrent to us getting to hyped about drafting the dude?

Click to expand...

I can't speak for him, but I think the parallel is there. Stephen Hill had similar "OMG" testing numbers. Bryant is going to stand on his own merit. But it's important to look at everything in context. Does Bryant play like his numbers suggest? The thing is, he could well have just flipped the light switch on and the last month of his college career could be the precursor to NFL greatness.

Lot's of guys with questionable tape have wowed at test time. Some end up great. Some end up like Hill. Obviously there is a heightened risk with Bryant as there would be for any guy with his lack of track record.

We could have said the same things about Walter Jones. Monster test scores but had very limited quality tape. He didn't turn out too shabby.

The risk is greater. Have to factor that in. And that risk is all relative too. If you're a high risk prospect amidst a bunch of JAGs, then that risk is less than if you take a Hill, only to pass on a TY Hilton or Alshon Jeffery.

In this class, if you take Bryant and he's a turd, then that bust is relative to all the other guys you probably should have drafted instead. You don't want to be the team that drafted Todd Blackledge, leaving 2 HOF QBs on the board. Imagine if we took Carpenter only to leave Joe Thomas for some team 4 picks later. Missing on Bryant at 32 would be like taking a punter instead of Russell Wilson.

I want to see if a guy can get off a line against press coverage and then how he runs his routes, speed is great but it's no good if you don't get off at the start, size is great, but if you can't run good routes a CB is going to own you.

Koren Robinson, David Terrell are my thoughts on this in a bust situation.

The WRs realistically falling to us that I got excited for:
1. OBJ at pick 32 (at a very underrated #32 pick; I don't care if he is shorter or is very similar in skillset to Tate. To me OBJ was the best WR not named Watkins and Evans. He may possibly fall to us because there are so many good receivers this year, and he is relatively short).
2. Marquis Lee at pick 32 (he seemed alot more dynamic on his tape, than he did at the combine. I would be stoked to get him at 32...very doubtful).
2. Coleman at pick 64.
3. Matthews at pick 64.

Cooks was a combine stud, but I'd rather have OBJ.

CALIHAWK1":15k7sevo said:

Why is this draft so deep with no real #1 and a lot of depth ar certain groups but no real locks?

Click to expand...

I could be mistaken, but it seems like last Year, the NFL went hyper heavy in the passing game for most teams, and the College systems seemed to man up so's to supplying all 32 teams with plenty of choices.
Of course there will be better break out players that will separate themselves from the glutted pack, once they are paired up with their Quarterbacks in the League, and learn to adapt to the speed of the other players around them.

HunnyBadger":e8obe0z9 said:

The WRs realistically falling to us that I got excited for:
1. OBJ at pick 32 (at a very underrated #32 pick; I don't care if he is shorter or is very similar in skillset to Tate. To me OBJ was the best WR not named Watkins and Evans. He may possibly fall to us because there are so many good receivers this year, and he is relatively short).

Click to expand...

I'd actually be ok with this pick. Especially if we were to sign Tate to a contract where releasing him early wouldn't hurt.

If OBJ is there at 32, then there really isn't a difference making talent in his class at any position there. Although the problem is of course that you're not playing him hardly at all in year 1.

Receivers are notorious for needing more time to acquire the receiving skills necessary to excel at this level. Tate, if he signs in the 6m range is a contract that to me is simply too expensive for a good/not great player. That cap money would be precious when we have to resign Wilson and are looking at extending Wagner at the same time. If we push Sherman to 2014, then Tate can't be here too. There just isn't the money to keep them all. OBJ would give us a cheaper rookie deal player with similar pedigree to Tate. From a talent continuity standpoint, it would be a move that makes sense.

But for 2014, it'd be pretty much a wasted pick. A scenario this team could well absorb.

I honestly expect us to go OL in R1. So much talent at WR, it's kind of easy to think Seattle will wait to see who's there at the end of R2 and roll with that. WR is the group that has the R2 through R4 talent in spades. I'd start looking at the non headliners of this group.

Jeez, people need to chill out about 6007 being 6'1"... yeah, teams and everyone else does round up, look up 5'10 5/8 Russell Wilson, who is listed about everywhere at 5'11... maybe some people mistakenly think the 7 is .7 or 7/10

theENGLISHseahawk":d8d8ka75 said:

General Manager":d8d8ka75 said:

I read it and mostly agree with you except Adams is 6'1 you downgraded him to 6 feet even.

Click to expand...

Adams is 6007.

So if you want to generously round that up, feel free. But he's in between 6-0 and 6-1.

Click to expand...

You do realize the difference between 7/8th's and 8/8 of an inch don't you.

General Manager":27knwmeh said:

theENGLISHseahawk":27knwmeh said:

General Manager":27knwmeh said:

I read it and mostly agree with you except Adams is 6'1 you downgraded him to 6 feet even.

Click to expand...

Adams is 6007.

So if you want to generously round that up, feel free. But he's in between 6-0 and 6-1.

Click to expand...

You do realize the difference between 7/8th's and 8/8 of an inch don't you.

Click to expand...

This.

Oh and it is about 3mm.

SomersetHawk":20jf7i5c said:

General Manager":20jf7i5c said:

theENGLISHseahawk":20jf7i5c said:

General Manager":20jf7i5c said:

I read it and mostly agree with you except Adams is 6'1 you downgraded him to 6 feet even.

Click to expand...

Adams is 6007.

So if you want to generously round that up, feel free. But he's in between 6-0 and 6-1.

Click to expand...

You do realize the difference between 7/8th's and 8/8 of an inch don't you.

Click to expand...

This.

Oh and it is about 3mm.

Click to expand...

That's why the combine and everyone else has him listed at 6'1.