Drafting for immediate needs

Year of The Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2012
Messages
1,322
Reaction score
245
Location
Idaho
I am curious how many players drafted every year come in and make a sizable contribution to there team first year. I know there are some every year but IMHO don't the majority take a season or two to develop (of the ones who actually make it)? It seems like everyone looks at the draft to fix immediate needs for there team. Many look at people we drafted last year and if they were not pro bowl calibre then lets move on. Its like a broken record. We need the draft more for long term team building than immediate needs. What do you al think?
 

fenderbender123

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
12,116
Reaction score
2,372
We need to draft more Richard Shermans, Bobby Wagners, and Russell Wilsons with the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th round picks we get each year.

Not sure why they usually decide to draft players who aren't as good as them with those picks we get each year.
 

Largent80

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
36,653
Reaction score
5
Location
The Tex-ASS
fenderbender123":11np11ue said:
We need to draft more Richard Shermans, Bobby Wagners, and Russell Wilsons with the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th round picks we get each year.

Not sure why they usually decide to draft players who aren't as good as them with those picks we get each year.

If you would have used material like this you may have won the comedy competition. #30,000.
 

fenderbender123

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
12,116
Reaction score
2,372
pmedic920":13bbcdru said:
^^^^^^

Wow, 30K :{)

And he used it in response to me! Granted, it was a back-handed comment, but I'm still flattered.
 

Attyla the Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Messages
2,559
Reaction score
47
fenderbender123":ckuuh1o9 said:
We need to draft more Richard Shermans, Bobby Wagners, and Russell Wilsons with the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th round picks we get each year.

Not sure why they usually decide to draft players who aren't as good as them with those picks we get each year.

Probably because there aren't that many players as good as them in most years at those spots.

Also it's worth noting that was the last time we missed the playoffs. Our selection range was much better.
 

Basis4day

Active member
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
5,924
Reaction score
0
Players like Sherman, Wilson, Wright and Kam were diamonds in the rough whose later played was not reflected in their draft status. The talent in front of them was also not great. So when you're trying to fill so many holes on the team like we were between 2010 and 2012 these truly great players were able shine because they were able to supplant the not so great players in front of them on the depth chart.

Recently the defense has been loaded and the great players are entrenched on the depth chart. There are only so many roster spots and reps for new players and they simply aren't going to get the same reps that young players got from 2010-2012.
 

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,468
Reaction score
1,240
Location
Bothell
This sort of roster speculation is a fun off-season activity that you can easily do yourself.

We have a 46 man active roster that will likely consist of 2 QB, 4 RB, 5 WR, 7 OL, 3 TE, 8 DL, 7 LB, 7 DB, 3 ST. There are also 7 additional roster slots for inactives that will depend on injuries but are often 1 WR, 2 OL, 1 DL and 3 DBs. Finally, there will also be 10 practice squad slots in 2016. A nuance this season could include the 6th WR being active over the 3rd TE depending on ST contributions and Graham's injury status. We've also included the 10th OL at times when the injury bug has loomed large at the expense of a DB.

Put our existing roster into buckets as above and you can see for yourself where you think we have room to add competition and where we may get long-term contributors vs. immediate needs. Personally, I mark projected active in blue, inactive in green and practice squad in green as below.

VGFtQn4

Don't go by my coding but make your own and then you'll have your own opinion about where we have ample room to add competition and where the competition is already very tight for roster spots.

With my coloring we have a lot of needs. Vet QB for the active roster, vet/udfa FB for the active roster, vet/rookie third down RB for the active roster, rookie WR to compete at the edge of the active roster, multiple rookie OL, rookie DT(s), rookie LB to compete, rookie DB project(s) for inactive roster/practice squad.
 

fenderbender123

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
12,116
Reaction score
2,372
Sorry guys. I forgot to use the sarcasm emoticon. I don't like using it though because it ruins the point of using sarcasm.
 

Basis4day

Active member
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
5,924
Reaction score
0
fenderbender123":2xhfbgik said:
Sorry guys. I forgot to use the sarcasm emoticon. I don't like using it though because it ruins the point of using sarcasm.

Deadpan sarcasm is my favorite kind.
 

400WattHPSHawk

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
2,269
Reaction score
0
Location
Central Washington
Basis4day":vbhszdwj said:
fenderbender123":vbhszdwj said:
Sorry guys. I forgot to use the sarcasm emoticon. I don't like using it though because it ruins the point of using sarcasm.

Deadpan sarcasm is my favorite kind.

Everyday. I despise using those little yellow bastards. No offense to little yellow bastards.
 

fenderbender123

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
12,116
Reaction score
2,372
The only time I'm going to use the sarcasm emoticon is when I'm actually not saying something sarcastic. That way, the sarcasm emoticon will make it sarcastic. It'll totally throw people off.
 

gmor

Active member
Joined
Apr 26, 2011
Messages
246
Reaction score
27
Location
Oak Harbor, WA
Drafting for immediate needs means that the player has better odds of getting some playing time to develop. It's not necessarily the best for the team in the long haul.
 

TwistedHusky

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
6,887
Reaction score
1,054
Sounds like some are calling for a more coordinated effort to assure our draft picks are made to fill immediate holes in the roster.

That is not what made the Seahawks great.

The Seahawks don't draft Wilson when they have Flynn by that logic.

The Seahawks draft with the goal of getting the best chance at getting a very good to GREAT player. Not drafting to fill a hole or drafting to get the best chance someone sticks.

I ran the data a while ago but I think it is close, generally 1 in 3 to 1 in 4 draft picks work out and turn into high quality players. That assumes 1-2 years on-field play. Our 1st round does not hit as often as some of the better teams in the league, but our 3rd, 4th and 5th round picks do.

Last year, we actually had a substantially above the mean # of picks work out for us, so maybe that has changed - but generally even the 1st round pick isn't guarantee you get a keeper. What you do know, is the keepers tend to not just be productive but exceptional performers.

I don't see any reason to change what is working, unless you feel that the holes being created through attrition/loss are so significant we have to rely on the draft to fill them immediately. The danger is that by leaving the draft process that gave us advantages, we start focusing more on factors the typical team does (% makes a roster spot) and consequently get a more typical draft.

I don't believe the success is all due to a tremendous development program. We clearly find people that are worth the risk, take the risk on them, and when they work out we benefit. Leaving the risk off the table means walking away from a lot of that reward too.
 

sutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
29,163
Reaction score
5,185
Location
Kent, WA
FA is for "immediate needs." The draft is to get the best players possible for the team. Obviously, nothing is 100% perfect, but just going out and saying, "I need the best Center in the draft" is kind of a losing strategy from the get-go. There are 25 teams drafting ahead of us this year looking at all of the same players.

I'm fine with how the team has been doing in the draft, mainly because my expectations aren't really high, even though they have made some, what look like in retrospect, brilliant picks. The problem is, since our success with Sherman and Kam, other teams have learned to stop automatically disqualifying tall corners, and grabbing them before us. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

At least I haven't yet seen the usual "let's trade our whole draft away so we can draft #1" posts. :34853_doh:
 

bjornanderson21

New member
Joined
Mar 4, 2014
Messages
885
Reaction score
0
Year of The Hawk":248ki1xs said:
I am curious how many players drafted every year come in and make a sizable contribution to there team first year. I know there are some every year but IMHO don't the majority take a season or two to develop (of the ones who actually make it)? It seems like everyone looks at the draft to fix immediate needs for there team. Many look at people we drafted last year and if they were not pro bowl calibre then lets move on. Its like a broken record. We need the draft more for long term team building than immediate needs. What do you al think?
Teams average about 2 year 1 starters per draft, with the rest providing depth.

With holes on OL, DL, and LB as well as needed depth it would be a disappointment to not immediately fix 2 of those holes through the draft.
 

bjornanderson21

New member
Joined
Mar 4, 2014
Messages
885
Reaction score
0
TwistedHusky":e20peyka said:
Sounds like some are calling for a more coordinated effort to assure our draft picks are made to fill immediate holes in the roster.

That is not what made the Seahawks great.

The Seahawks don't draft Wilson when they have Flynn by that logic.

The Seahawks draft with the goal of getting the best chance at getting a very good to GREAT player. Not drafting to fill a hole or drafting to get the best chance someone sticks.

I ran the data a while ago but I think it is close, generally 1 in 3 to 1 in 4 draft picks work out and turn into high quality players. That assumes 1-2 years on-field play. Our 1st round does not hit as often as some of the better teams in the league, but our 3rd, 4th and 5th round picks do.

Last year, we actually had a substantially above the mean # of picks work out for us, so maybe that has changed - but generally even the 1st round pick isn't guarantee you get a keeper. What you do know, is the keepers tend to not just be productive but exceptional performers.

I don't see any reason to change what is working, unless you feel that the holes being created through attrition/loss are so significant we have to rely on the draft to fill them immediately. The danger is that by leaving the draft process that gave us advantages, we start focusing more on factors the typical team does (% makes a roster spot) and consequently get a more typical draft.

I don't believe the success is all due to a tremendous development program. We clearly find people that are worth the risk, take the risk on them, and when they work out we benefit. Leaving the risk off the table means walking away from a lot of that reward too.

How do you know the Flynn signing wasn't a hedge in case they missed out on Wilson whom they had already been eyeing? Flynn also had very little NFL experience, so while he was definitely viewed as a valid QB option he didn't have the job locked up or anything.

Team's don't want to miss out on a potential pro-bowler just because they don't have a "need" at the position, but at the same time you only have so many ways to fill a hole: FA (including UDFA), draft, and trades.

See the gaping holes we have on OL. The choice was between overpaying Sweezy/Okung/FA or filling 1 or 2 spots in the draft. They chose not to overpay a FA which means if they don't fix the OL in the draft then our only other chance is to sign a vet after cutdowns or trade for one.

If the Hawks don't draft OL because they were always #2 available on their big board when it's time to pick, that would be a mistake and a failure.

If a team has ZERO holes, it can afford to draft purely on BPA. When a team DOES have holes they need to incorporate that into their strategy otherwise they risk putting a terrible unit on the field.

With our cap situation we really can't afford NOT to draft for needs this year.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,523
Reaction score
1,522
Location
Roy Wa.
bjornanderson21":2c1w26sv said:
TwistedHusky":2c1w26sv said:
Sounds like some are calling for a more coordinated effort to assure our draft picks are made to fill immediate holes in the roster.

That is not what made the Seahawks great.

The Seahawks don't draft Wilson when they have Flynn by that logic.

The Seahawks draft with the goal of getting the best chance at getting a very good to GREAT player. Not drafting to fill a hole or drafting to get the best chance someone sticks.

I ran the data a while ago but I think it is close, generally 1 in 3 to 1 in 4 draft picks work out and turn into high quality players. That assumes 1-2 years on-field play. Our 1st round does not hit as often as some of the better teams in the league, but our 3rd, 4th and 5th round picks do.

Last year, we actually had a substantially above the mean # of picks work out for us, so maybe that has changed - but generally even the 1st round pick isn't guarantee you get a keeper. What you do know, is the keepers tend to not just be productive but exceptional performers.

I don't see any reason to change what is working, unless you feel that the holes being created through attrition/loss are so significant we have to rely on the draft to fill them immediately. The danger is that by leaving the draft process that gave us advantages, we start focusing more on factors the typical team does (% makes a roster spot) and consequently get a more typical draft.

I don't believe the success is all due to a tremendous development program. We clearly find people that are worth the risk, take the risk on them, and when they work out we benefit. Leaving the risk off the table means walking away from a lot of that reward too.

How do you know the Flynn signing wasn't a hedge in case they missed out on Wilson whom they had already been eyeing? Flynn also had very little NFL experience, so while he was definitely viewed as a valid QB option he didn't have the job locked up or anything.

Team's don't want to miss out on a potential pro-bowler just because they don't have a "need" at the position, but at the same time you only have so many ways to fill a hole: FA (including UDFA), draft, and trades.

See the gaping holes we have on OL. The choice was between overpaying Sweezy/Okung/FA or filling 1 or 2 spots in the draft. They chose not to overpay a FA which means if they don't fix the OL in the draft then our only other chance is to sign a vet after cutdowns or trade for one.

If the Hawks don't draft OL because they were always #2 available on their big board when it's time to pick, that would be a mistake and a failure.

If a team has ZERO holes, it can afford to draft purely on BPA. When a team DOES have holes they need to incorporate that into their strategy otherwise they risk putting a terrible unit on the field.

With our cap situation we really can't afford NOT to draft for needs this year.


That would be why we signed free agents and will pick up cuts, targeting a need handcuffs you, you rate your players, you rate your weakness and if your number one player is available for a number 2 weakness you take him if your other players ranked for your number one is already gone, you don't take a lower ranked player just to fill a need you deem as number one.
 

Overseasfan

New member
Joined
May 13, 2015
Messages
1,167
Reaction score
0
Location
The Netherlands
It's best to just take the best players with your picks bit some positions simply have to be drafted. If anything we at least have to draft an OG and a LB imo.
 

pehawk

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
1,738
In recent history need drafting gave us; Tubbs, Koren, Jerramy, McIntosh. We saw a regime which followed a rube mentality, using the draft as the finger in the dyke (giggle). It didn't work.

But, fret not. The 2016 class will have more blue shirts than red. Hawks need an infusion of young, cheap talent. This draft will have some immediate contributors.
 
Top