Sando weighs in on Seahawks interest in DT - Easley

GoHawks · May 13, 2014

Mike Sando, ESPN.com ‏@SandoESPN 7m
Don't think #Seahawks were going to take the DT at 32. They were eager to move back. Said so repeatedly before draft.

NorthDallas40oz · May 13, 2014

GoHawks":3fh1kw46 said:
Mike Sando, ESPN.com ‏@SandoESPN 7m
Don't think #Seahawks were going to take the DT at 32. They were eager to move back. Said so repeatedly before draft.

Agree with Sando on this. I believe if there was any disappointment from the Hawks that Easley got taken by the Pats, it wasn't because they had eyes for him with their first pick, but rather that they were hoping he'd make it to #64, which for a long time seemed very plausible.

Timmahawk · May 13, 2014

NorthDallas40oz":2g3g3wbv said:
GoHawks":2g3g3wbv said:

Mike Sando, ESPN.com ‏@SandoESPN 7m
Don't think #Seahawks were going to take the DT at 32. They were eager to move back. Said so repeatedly before draft.

Click to expand...

Agree with Sando on this. I believe if there was any disappointment from the Hawks that Easley got taken by the Pats, it wasn't because they had eyes for him with their first pick, but rather that they were hoping he'd make it to #64, which for a long time seemed very plausible.

Or they wanted him at 40 or 45 and Richardson at 64.

jlwaters1 · May 13, 2014

Danny O'Neill on the Brock and Danny stated yesterday that he "knew for a fact that the reaction on the team cam before their 1st pick had nothing to do with Easley going off the board." He didn't go into anymore detail, but was quite adamant that about that and that the card in New York that was filled out in case they needed to use it was for PAUL RICHARDSON, JS confirmed that. So I'm with Sando on that, I don't believe that was true.

NorthDallas40oz · May 13, 2014

Timmahawk":1o49qyoe said:
NorthDallas40oz":1o49qyoe said:

GoHawks":1o49qyoe said:

Mike Sando, ESPN.com ‏@SandoESPN 7m
Don't think #Seahawks were going to take the DT at 32. They were eager to move back. Said so repeatedly before draft.

Click to expand...

Agree with Sando on this. I believe if there was any disappointment from the Hawks that Easley got taken by the Pats, it wasn't because they had eyes for him with their first pick, but rather that they were hoping he'd make it to #64, which for a long time seemed very plausible.

Click to expand...

Or they wanted him at 40 or 45 and Richardson at 64.

I highly doubt that. If they truly thought they could get Richardson at 64 they never would have taken him at 45. And JS has said repeatedly that they were very nervously sweating out the picks leading up to 45 in hopes that Richardson wouldn't get taken, and that they nearly had a heart attack when Philly traded up to 44 (and indeed took a WR, fortunately it wasn't Richardson).

HansGruber · May 13, 2014

You could also use JS's interview on the second day of the draft as evidence of it being untrue. Since he came right out and said they weren't targeting Easley or any other specific player. All he ever said, before and after the first day of the draft, was that the Seahawks wanted to trade down for more picks.

Sarlacc83 · May 13, 2014

Anyone who thinks the Hawks were disappointed in not getting a player should read Jared Stranger's article on the draft clues. The Hawks got who they wanted. If they were disappointed, I'm guessing it's because they couldn't get a pick in the third round.

NorthDallas40oz · May 13, 2014

HansGruber":79etxvaz said:
You could also use JS's interview on the second day of the draft as evidence of it being untrue. Since he came right out and said they weren't targeting Easley or any other specific player. All he ever said, before and after the first day of the draft, was that the Seahawks wanted to trade down for more picks.

Yep, and that Richardson was their #1 target, and that they felt confident that they could move down and still get him, though they would have been prepared to take him at 32 if a fair trade-down scenario didn't come about. Easley would have been no better than an option at 64 (or perhaps even lower if they'd traded down from that slot too). I think the Pats really reached on Easley at 29, but that's neither here nor there.

Timmahawk · May 13, 2014

jlwaters1":3ufa4p99 said:
Danny O'Neill on the Brock and Danny stated yesterday that he "knew for a fact that the reaction on the team cam before their 1st pick had nothing to do with Easley going off the board." He didn't go into anymore detail, but was quite adamant that about that and that the card in New York that was filled out in case they needed to use it was for PAUL RICHARDSON, JS confirmed that. So I'm with Sando on that, I don't believe that was true.

Also - wouldn't they have already known who was picked before Goodell made the announcement? As soon as a pick is in, every team is notified, not when the pick is made on TV.

At this point in the draft, I'm pretty sure there was a big delay between the time the pick was in and when the announcement was made.

Hawkfan77 · May 13, 2014

I think it was just a lazy link. Since Easley played at Florida and Quinn coached there so the Hawks must have wanted him...

I didn't buy it. It's like when Carroll first got hired here, every USC was linked to the hawks in mock drafts because Carroll "obviously wanted his guys" and we all know that just wasn't true. Heck. Carroll coached Mays but we took Earl.

hawknation2014 · May 13, 2014

John Schneider was interviewed today on 710 ESPN, and he said Paul Richardson was the No. 1 player on their board at 32, but they thought they could move down to add more picks while still keeping Richardson. They held their collective breaths hoping no one would take Richardson in the meantime.

bbsplitter · May 13, 2014

I think one scenario that might be possible is they had a conditional trade set up with another team who was willing to trade up for pick #32, who really wanted Easley. And it was a really good deal for the seahawks, but once he was picked the trade fell through, and they had to go with the Vikings deal.

CalgaryHawk · May 13, 2014

bbsplitter":34tjizjb said:
I think one scenario that might be possible is they had a conditional trade set up with another team who was willing to trade up for pick #32, who really wanted Easley. And it was a really good deal for the seahawks, but once he was picked the trade fell through, and they had to go with the Vikings deal.

This explanation makes the most sense to me. Perhaps that team had promised them a 3rd rounder this year or even a 1st rounder next year.

GoHawks · May 13, 2014

bbsplitter":3otpbzhv said:
I think one scenario that might be possible is they had a conditional trade set up with another team who was willing to trade up for pick #32, who really wanted Easley. And it was a really good deal for the seahawks, but once he was picked the trade fell through, and they had to go with the Vikings deal.

I think we have a winner !

kearly · May 13, 2014

I think Easley is a DT version of Dion Jordan, with knee injury history to boot.

I am glad we ended up with a 4.33 forty WR and a bunch of extra picks.

HansGruber · May 13, 2014

hawknation2014":344ibjs0 said:
John Schneider was interviewed today on 710 ESPN, and he said Paul Richardson was the No. 1 player on their board at 32, but they thought they could move down to add more picks while still keeping Richardson. They held their collective breaths hoping no one would take Richardson in the meantime.

Which tells me all I need to know about Richardson. If Carroll and Schneider were that sold on the guy, I'm excited to see what he can do for us. I think he'll end up being a dynamic playmaker for us, and he'll probably replace Harvin on the roster when he signs his extension.

theENGLISHseahawk · May 13, 2014

I don't really get why this is had so much attention.

Some national guys (Rapoport, La Canfora) reported Seattle liked Easley. Now he's a Pat. It's nearly a week ago.

Who cares whether they liked him or not?

My guess is they probably did (although they will have liked a lot of players) but knew all along he wouldn't get past the Pats. If they knew who they were getting in round four (and by Carroll's clues, they pretty much knew who they were getting in each round) -- they almost certainly knew Easley wasn't going to make it to #32 anyway, so never get it that much thought.

mikeak · May 13, 2014

theENGLISHseahawk":26hdlxg6 said:
I don't really get why this is had so much attention.

Some national guys (Rapoport, La Canfora) reported Seattle liked Easley. Now he's a Pat. It's nearly a week ago.

Who cares whether they liked him or not?

My guess is they probably did (although they will have liked a lot of players) but knew all along he wouldn't get past the Pats. If they knew who they were getting in round four (and by Carroll's clues, they pretty much knew who they were getting in each round) -- they almost certainly knew Easley wasn't going to make it to #32 anyway, so never get it that much thought.

I don't care as much about Easly as I care about the fact that they really really wanted Richardson. If they really wanted Easly and settled for Richardson then that is interesting just from their evaluation of Richardson standpoint

Not sure if that makes sense or I just made 5 circles in my argument

theENGLISHseahawk · May 13, 2014

If I had to guess... they probably liked a lot of guys who they knew wouldn't be on the board at #32. Easley possibly falls into that category. Of the players they knew they could probably get, they clearly really liked Richardson.

jlwaters1 · May 13, 2014

Timmahawk":32fqu0ey said:
jlwaters1":32fqu0ey said:

Danny O'Neill on the Brock and Danny stated yesterday that he "knew for a fact that the reaction on the team cam before their 1st pick had nothing to do with Easley going off the board." He didn't go into anymore detail, but was quite adamant that about that and that the card in New York that was filled out in case they needed to use it was for PAUL RICHARDSON, JS confirmed that. So I'm with Sando on that, I don't believe that was true.

Click to expand...

Also - wouldn't they have already known who was picked before Goodell made the announcement? As soon as a pick is in, every team is notified, not when the pick is made on TV.

At this point in the draft, I'm pretty sure there was a big delay between the time the pick was in and when the announcement was made.

I'm pretty sure the next team on the clock is notified, but all the rest have to wait until it's announced by the commish that's what Mayock said at the beginning of the draft.

Sando weighs in on Seahawks interest in DT - Easley

Member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Active member

New member

New member

Active member

New member

Member

Member

Member

New member

New member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Similar threads