Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 8:20 am
  • massari wrote:Stalking me again breh?


    You.... posted a hilariously bad post in a public forum, but yeah, I'm 'stalking you breh' :lol: :lol: :lol:

    massari wrote:Look at it this way. Would you rather have Penny in the 1st and a guy like Dorance Armstrong/ Holton Hill in the 3rd or would you rather have a guy like Rasheem Green/Landry/Mo Hurst/Oliver/Josh Jackson/Corbett ect ect in the 2nd and a RB like Kalen Ballage/John Kelly/CJ Anderson+2019 2nd round pick?


    Oddly enough they got Green. Even better, massari the best GM yet to be christened as such is getting up in arms at passing over ...
    - Holton Hill (a guy I liked) that went undrafted
    - Dorance Armstrong .. a guy that went in the 4th, so literally nothing changed from not magically trading down
    - Maurice Hurst .. a guy that was clearly not on the Seahawks board in the end, probably because of his heart condition.. and a guy that went in R5 where the Seahawks had 3 picks.
    - Josh Jackson .. a corner that would never have been selected because he didn't fit any size requirement - how you do not know what they look for in CB's by now is anyone's guess.
    - Kalen Ballage - LOLLLL
    - John Kelly (another guy I liked) .. would actually have liked this, buttt he also went in Round 6. Again, clearly the Seahawks didn't give him a lot of love
    - CJ Anderson - just LULZ.

    massari wrote:No shit Penny is considered better at this point than RB's like Ballage/Kelly ect, but it's a hell of a lot easier finding RB's later than pass rushers, corners and OL. AND they'd of gotten a 2nd rounder next year.

    Hopefully Schneider didn't turn down an even bigger off than what the Ravens gave up to the Eagles.


    Wow it's crazy how you've yet to be hired by an NFL front office. Truly.
    ImTheScientist wrote:This guy is the closest thing to beast mode we will ever see. You got a glimpse of that yesterday. He was instantly my favorite player when they signed him. Give the dude a chance and don't overreact or overthink preseason. Go Hawks. Lacy will rush for 1,100 and 10TDs. Bend the knee.
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 11358
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 10:00 am
  • *cough, cough* settling for Jerramy Stevens *cough*
    purpleneer
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 301
    Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:19 pm
    Location: The Green Lantern (almost)


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 10:37 am
  • The Seahawks did trade down to 27. But if you had listened to Pete and John talk pre draft that was the plan all along. There may not have been anyone willing to make a reasonable trade for 27, we don't know. They also said that they were shrinking their draft board down to a very few players that they considered "their" type players. Penny obviously was one of them and a couple other teams as well since AZ was going to take him if we didn't and another team called and wanted to trade for him right after we took him. That should tell you something.

    To answer your question though Seattle addressed the OL at the middle of last year via M. Brown LT, this offseason via DJ Fluker who will play LG or RG, via the draft in Jones and still have a stable of young guys who will be better, throw in a completely new coaching staff and I see big changes for the better.

    They also have addressed CB in that they have Griffin, Coleman, Thorpe, Elliot, Tyson they brought in Dontae Johnson, resigned B. Maxwell and drafted Tre Flowers.

    And then the DL, not sure how we didn't address that either. We have F. Clark, Quitton Jefferson, Naz Jones, Dion Jordon, Jarran Reed, Marcus Smith, signed Brandon Jackson, and Shamar Stephen and then drafted S. Griffin (who can rush passer), and Rasheem Green, plus UDFA Poona Ford.

    I'd say we are pretty set at all of those positions and then some. Really RB was a huge need and we got a gamer who is also one of the best return men as well. Bonus!!
    Schadie001
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 717
    Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:32 pm


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 10:44 am
  • massari wrote:
    EDIT: What is it that separates him from the other RB's that could've been had in rounds 2-4?


    1. We did trade down already once

    2. Pete explained Penny in great detail. He's EXACTLY the big, physical, durable, punishing back that catches and blocks well............and he's fast as hell.

    My only contention with Penny is he better be our bell cow 20-25 carry a game back, or else yes we wasted a 1st round pick. You draft a RB in the 1st round, he better be more than just a dude thrown into your RBBC group.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12742
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 12:15 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    My only contention with Penny is he better be our bell cow 20-25 carry a game back, or else yes we wasted a 1st round pick. You draft a RB in the 1st round, he better be more than just a dude thrown into your RBBC group.

    Do you feel the same way about the Patriots and Sony Michel?
    purpleneer
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 301
    Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:19 pm
    Location: The Green Lantern (almost)


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 12:33 pm
  • purpleneer wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    My only contention with Penny is he better be our bell cow 20-25 carry a game back, or else yes we wasted a 1st round pick. You draft a RB in the 1st round, he better be more than just a dude thrown into your RBBC group.

    Do you feel the same way about the Patriots and Sony Michel?


    No because the Pats had two first rounders, and three picks in the top 54..........so if I'm a Pats fan I'm fine with the Michel pick.

    So IMO a bad comparison, draft wise and offense wise. Pete wants our offense to be smash mouth run based, while the Pats use a stable of backs depending on the scheme and offensive playcalling week to week.

    That's not us, this pick is VITAL for a team rebuilding desperately needing to get the offense going, AND that didn't have a 2nd round pick.

    So no, if Penny's just going to split carries and play special teams? Not 1st round worthy, your first round pick EVERY year needs to be an impact every down type of player.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12742
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 1:25 pm
  • DJrmb wrote:Image

    Penny also led the draft class in elusive rating – PFF’s rushing metric that attempts to distil what a back did independent of the blocking that was given to him by looking at broken tackles and yards after contact. Penny broke 80 tackles on the ground last season and two more as a receiver. That figure was by far the most of anybody in this draft class, more than 20 clear of the rest of the field.

    https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/draft-san-diego-state-rb-rashaad-penny-a-first-round-talent

    With the above stats think about our offensive line last year. Now, it should start to become clear why Penny was the best fit for Seattle in the FO's eyes to immediately improve the running game.

    ^ This ^ AND to add, if Solari can Coach up the O-Line to do just a smidge better, Penny could potentially have an even better chance to break for a few more big runs.
    I liked the pick, and was ecstatic when his name was called....Same with Flowers & Griffin. :irishdrinkers:
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6399
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 8:26 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    purpleneer wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    My only contention with Penny is he better be our bell cow 20-25 carry a game back, or else yes we wasted a 1st round pick. You draft a RB in the 1st round, he better be more than just a dude thrown into your RBBC group.

    Do you feel the same way about the Patriots and Sony Michel?


    No because the Pats had two first rounders, and three picks in the top 54..........so if I'm a Pats fan I'm fine with the Michel pick.

    So IMO a bad comparison, draft wise and offense wise. Pete wants our offense to be smash mouth run based, while the Pats use a stable of backs depending on the scheme and offensive playcalling week to week.

    That's not us, this pick is VITAL for a team rebuilding desperately needing to get the offense going, AND that didn't have a 2nd round pick.

    So no, if Penny's just going to split carries and play special teams? Not 1st round worthy, your first round pick EVERY year needs to be an impact every down type of player.

    Ok then. I'll just accept that methods matter to you more than winning.
    purpleneer
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 301
    Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:19 pm
    Location: The Green Lantern (almost)


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 9:17 pm
  • Well unlike other teams Pete plays guys that earn the position no matter the draft pick status or whether they are F.A. pickups or undrafted. Keeps high level guys hungry and gives us depth showing F.A. and UDFA they can play if they work.

    Carson and Penny have different styles, I am of the mind of having a guy that's a starter and plays, but having a guy that can come in and play be it for injury or a breather to keep both fresh is a bonus. Turbin just wasn't that guy for us, maybe Carson and or Penny can be. If we can get a 20 to ten split plus Prosise and or McKissic in on plays that give different looks a defense isn't going to take plays off and or know what's coming since they all can perform a function as a receiver and or a RB.
    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: 23964
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 11:03 pm
  • BullHawk33 wrote:Everyone thinks it is so easy to move down in the draft and get good value. That is flawed thinking. Deals may appear in one pick and disappear the next. Just because one deal was made to trade down didn't mean that the Seahawks could have received the same deal.

    The answer is simple, John took Penny because he felt his value was higher than the options he had to trade out of that spot.

    A die-hard cards fan told me that he would have hated if we drafted Will Hernandez and then pulled Ballage in the later rounds and this is my response.


    In a world where we hadn't given away the 2nd and 3rd rounder already, I think they would have felt comfortable taking Hernandez and maneuvering for their 2nd or 3rd RB choice. That said, they didn't have those picks and my bet is that Michel , Chubb , and Kerryon weren't even on their board due to injury concerns, Guice's character concerns probably dropped him off as well and at that point , the running back board starts looking pretty grim. Ballage has always struck me as Christine Michael 2.0, workout warrior, height/ weight/speed God, without a real feel for the game. So why wouldn't we pick Penny?
    "When you're running at me like that and I'm running at you...It's gonna be a nasty scene" BAMBAM!!
    User avatar
    tooshort
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1110
    Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 8:46 pm
    Location: Enjoying a life sentence in the Clink.


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Thu May 10, 2018 11:12 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    massari wrote:
    EDIT: What is it that separates him from the other RB's that could've been had in rounds 2-4?


    1. We did trade down already once

    2. Pete explained Penny in great detail. He's EXACTLY the big, physical, durable, punishing back that catches and blocks well............and he's fast as hell.

    My only contention with Penny is he better be our bell cow 20-25 carry a game back, or else yes we wasted a 1st round pick. You draft a RB in the 1st round, he better be more than just a dude thrown into your RBBC group.


    Yes he is a bell cow back. The more carries you give him the better he will be.

    To answer the first persons question what separates him from the RB's in rounds 2 - 4? Well for one he is way faster than those guys. For 2 he is bigger and stronger and more stocky than most. For 3 he was hugely more productive than those guys. For 4 he catches so well they thought at one time of putting him at WR at San Diego State. I can't say the same for the others. For 5 he is an all world return man at KR/PR. The others do not have this skill level to the degree that he does.
    SanDiego49er
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 225
    Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:21 am


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Fri May 11, 2018 7:40 am
  • SanDiego49er wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    massari wrote:
    EDIT: What is it that separates him from the other RB's that could've been had in rounds 2-4?


    1. We did trade down already once

    2. Pete explained Penny in great detail. He's EXACTLY the big, physical, durable, punishing back that catches and blocks well............and he's fast as hell.

    My only contention with Penny is he better be our bell cow 20-25 carry a game back, or else yes we wasted a 1st round pick. You draft a RB in the 1st round, he better be more than just a dude thrown into your RBBC group.


    Yes he is a bell cow back. The more carries you give him the better he will be.

    To answer the first persons question what separates him from the RB's in rounds 2 - 4? Well for one he is way faster than those guys. For 2 he is bigger and stronger and more stocky than most. For 3 he was hugely more productive than those guys. For 4 he catches so well they thought at one time of putting him at WR at San Diego State. I can't say the same for the others. For 5 he is an all world return man at KR/PR. The others do not have this skill level to the degree that he does.


    I know he is a bell cow back, he was one of the biggest workhorses in all of college football last year.

    But WILL we use him as a workhourse is my concern. Because all Pete's said is Penny's going to play special teams and share carries...........and I know it's early and Pete isn't going to just hand him the job.

    But my point is valid, if you draft a RB in the first round, he better damn well end up being your pro bowl caliber bell cow back for a while, or else IMO it's a wasted 1st round pick.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12742
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Sun May 13, 2018 9:04 am

Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Tue May 15, 2018 11:12 am
  • nice blog thanks for sharing.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    ++ You can call me a homer, but I am not the only one ++
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    toffee
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 743
    Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 7:44 pm


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Tue May 15, 2018 10:00 pm
  • Hasselbeck wrote:You.... posted a hilariously bad post in a public forum, but yeah, I'm 'stalking you breh' :lol: :lol: :lol:

    Oddly enough they got Green. Even better, massari the best GM yet to be christened as such is getting up in arms at passing over ...
    - Holton Hill (a guy I liked) that went undrafted
    - Dorance Armstrong .. a guy that went in the 4th, so literally nothing changed from not magically trading down
    - Maurice Hurst .. a guy that was clearly not on the Seahawks board in the end, probably because of his heart condition.. and a guy that went in R5 where the Seahawks had 3 picks.
    - Josh Jackson .. a corner that would never have been selected because he didn't fit any size requirement - how you do not know what they look for in CB's by now is anyone's guess.
    - Kalen Ballage - LOLLLL
    - John Kelly (another guy I liked) .. would actually have liked this, buttt he also went in Round 6. Again, clearly the Seahawks didn't give him a lot of love
    - CJ Anderson - just LULZ.

    Wow it's crazy how you've yet to be hired by an NFL front office. Truly.


    Along with Minkah Fitzpatrick, Josh Jackson is considered to be the best Ball Hawk in the draft and when you consider hand size and wingspan, he virtually has identical length to Shaquill Griffin.

    Other than that, I don't even know where to start
    Image
    massari
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1255
    Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:58 am


Re: Why Didn't the Seahawks Trade Down?
Tue May 15, 2018 10:55 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    SanDiego49er wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    massari wrote:
    EDIT: What is it that separates him from the other RB's that could've been had in rounds 2-4?


    1. We did trade down already once

    2. Pete explained Penny in great detail. He's EXACTLY the big, physical, durable, punishing back that catches and blocks well............and he's fast as hell.

    My only contention with Penny is he better be our bell cow 20-25 carry a game back, or else yes we wasted a 1st round pick. You draft a RB in the 1st round, he better be more than just a dude thrown into your RBBC group.


    Yes he is a bell cow back. The more carries you give him the better he will be.

    To answer the first persons question what separates him from the RB's in rounds 2 - 4? Well for one he is way faster than those guys. For 2 he is bigger and stronger and more stocky than most. For 3 he was hugely more productive than those guys. For 4 he catches so well they thought at one time of putting him at WR at San Diego State. I can't say the same for the others. For 5 he is an all world return man at KR/PR. The others do not have this skill level to the degree that he does.


    I know he is a bell cow back, he was one of the biggest workhorses in all of college football last year.

    But WILL we use him as a workhourse is my concern. Because all Pete's said is Penny's going to play special teams and share carries...........and I know it's early and Pete isn't going to just hand him the job.

    But my point is valid, if you draft a RB in the first round, he better damn well end up being your pro bowl caliber bell cow back for a while, or else IMO it's a wasted 1st round pick.


    I think he will be very good for you. You should use him a lot. Penny tends to get better the more you give him the ball. He is a 25, 30, 35 carries a game guy. That's how he is best used. In there he will get some explosive home run long runs. You can't give Penny the ball 12 times a game and expect big things. He should be used with a lot of carries. A few of those will be breakaway long runs. But lots of carries is how to best utilize him. With the occasional throw out of the backfield. You can even line him up wide or use him in the slot on 3rd downs. I've seen him used like that and he is good at it. How much you want to use him as a return man is up to you. You could use him like that in big games or the playoffs. You may not want to wear him out or get him injured using him on too many returns. He is great at that but it may make sense to put some limits on his returns.
    SanDiego49er
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 225
    Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:21 am


Previous


It is currently Sat Aug 18, 2018 7:26 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online