Post Draft Thoughts

[NorthHawk]

So I've been thinking a little about this draft and in all it's a solid but not spectacular draft with some big disappointments.
It seemed to me that with the trade in the 1st round with GB falling through it messed up what might have been a much different
draft for Schneider. We might have been able to trade down twice and still got Brooks. That could have set us up to also get a top
RB or dominating Tackle. But that's the way things go sometimes. We missed out on a top tier RB, WR, and OT where the draft
was deepest and it leaves us thin at RB and OT.

The draft selections
To me, this draft has a boom or bust quality about it even though it seems solid. We could have a couple of future Pro Bowlers or
we could have a couple of washouts. It's that kind of a haul.
Brooks increases speed and is a very good tackler at LB. We need that.
Taylor in the right situation can get pressure off the edge where we lacked talent. I think they might add Griffen from FA as well.
Lewis looks to be the heir to Fluker. He's a strong man at G and may be a plug and play type considering the competition he faced
in college.
Robinson could be a steal if he gets the right coaching. He's already attended some training sessions prior to the draft from Cliff
Avril so he might have already improved from college. He could have had a much worse off season coach than Cliff.
Dallas might go either way. In some clips he looks like a smaller Marshawn, but he isn't anywhere as physical or strong. He is a good
pass blocker for a RB, so he might get some chances on 3rd downs.
Parkinson can learn from Olsen how to be a pro and hopefully develop some great work habits. He needs to put on some weight and
learn how to block.
Swain might end up on ST at least at first and I don't know where Sullivan fits in. It's been said they see him at WR.

Where does that leave us?
We still need some help at RT and a future LT. RB might be a little thin again this year.
We need to decide who is going to play Center. Will it be someone on the roster or will they look into FA?
We are real young on the DL especially at the Edge position and still need another DT to fill out the rotation.
Nickel CB is going to be interesting. Do they go with Amadi or do the put Dunbar at one CB and Flowers on
the other then put Griffin as NCB? Pete said they are looking at options for the Nickel.
We seem to be OK at Safety but getting Blair on the field more is probably a priority.

Your thoughts?

[RiverDog]

As always, our drafts leave me scratching my head, but there wasn't that "WTF" moment when we take an Irvin, Carpenter, or Penny, all players I felt were drafted way ahead of where they normally would have fallen. Basically, I'm good with our top 3 picks.

The more I look at it, the more I'm liking the selection of Damien Lewis. He's built like a brick chit house and is reportedly a very good pass blocker. PFF had him as not surrendering a single sack last season. I read an interview on him and came away impressed as he said all the right things, sounds like he's going to be a good locker room guy.

I'm not sure about the TE we drafted. The initial reports I read indicated that he was a good run blocker, but now I'm seeing comments where he was marginal at best. His lanky frame puts him more into the Jimmy Graham category than it does the Zach Miller mold.

So we'll see. Hopefully we'll have some football to watch this season.

[obiken]

I liked the Drafting of Lewis and said so at the time. The TE out of Stanford I liked at 6-7, he is a big end zone target. Our 1st round pick is another reach and a project, we needed a pass rusher now. The rest are not worth mentioning. I reiterate again I just dont see Pete being able to build a good offense, but no doubt he is not the only one. Niners and the Cards just got a whole lot better. Hopkins is going to be a nightmare for us to cover 2X a year. The bigger question for us all, are we going to even have football this year?

[TriCitySam]

Generally, I'm OK with the draft. I too like Lewis, when I watched him play he looked really solid. I know people don't get Brooks, but at the time I thought he's a guy that can do what Kendricks did. We were a better D with him in there, and this kid is called an A+ run defender - and were were a D- run defense. So I'm hopeful he gets a lot of playing time. And, I see potential in Parkinson (he was on my 3-deep). David Shaw is very high on him, and as Shaw said, he is a size/athletic match up problem. And Pete found two guys that really fit his Leo mold. We'll see.

[trents]

Marcus Golden, who had 10 sacks for the Giants last season and was their best defensive player, now available as an UFA.

[mykc14]

Marcus Golden, who had 10 sacks for the Giants last season and was their best defensive player, now available as an UFA.

Yeah I like Golden, but I would think he is plan C or D at this point. He is more of a LEO and we already have 3 on our Roster at this point (IRVIN, Mayowa, and Taylor). If we could get him on the cheap he would be a good addition, though. To me we are weak in 2 spots. We need that 5-Tech DE and DT depth. Thankfully there is a game-changing, prototypical 5-Tech Free-Agent out there right now, so sign him (or Everson Griffen to a lesser degree) and we are in great shape there. We are very thin on the DL and need a decent rotational body there (or two), Maybe Mebane?? If we do get that game changing 5-Tech we could be looking at a starting lineup of Clowney-Reed-Ford-Irvin (hopefully Taylor eventually). That offers a pretty good group overall. I think Golden would be better than Irvin, but hopefully you can get 1 more good year out of Irvin... if not Irvin it’s probably Mayowa. This is why I really wanted us to sign Fowler could you imagine Clowney and Fowler as our starting DE’s?? Hopefully Taylor turns out to be a good one!!

[mykc14]

As far as the draft goes I really like our first 3 picks. I think Brooks will fit nicely into that Will role until B-Wags retires and then he will be an excellent Mike. He might be able to play Sam a bit, but that would probably be a waste of his skill set. Taylor seems to check off every box for a LEO for us, hopefully his game translates. He was one of the top pass-rushers in this class, although it was a weak class. Lewis looks like a steal and I wouldn’t be shocked to see him starting at RG next year. I think Robinson has some potential, but he just didn’t produce in college like his athletic profile would suggest and that’s always worrisome. The RB out of Miami is intriguing. Seems like a good compliment to Carson and could play on 3rd-down for us. I don’t love anybody after that in this class though. The TE our of Stanford might be able to be a Red-zone mid-match for us, but I don’t see him turning into an in-line TE.

[RiverDog]

As far as the draft goes I really like our first 3 picks. I think Brooks will fit nicely into that Will role until B-Wags retires and then he will be an excellent Mike. He might be able to play Sam a bit, but that would probably be a waste of his skill set. Taylor seems to check off every box for a LEO for us, hopefully his game translates. He was one of the top pass-rushers in this class, although it was a weak class. Lewis looks like a steal and I wouldn’t be shocked to see him starting at RG next year. I think Robinson has some potential, but he just didn’t produce in college like his athletic profile would suggest and that’s always worrisome. The RB out of Miami is intriguing. Seems like a good compliment to Carson and could play on 3rd-down for us. I don’t love anybody after that in this class though. The TE our of Stanford might be able to be a Red-zone mid-match for us, but I don’t see him turning into an in-line TE.

I'm glad you think highly about Lewis as IMO he could be the steal of the draft and could not only start, but be a significant upgrade. The problem is that the position is pretty low value and we really didn't have a glaring need, but if he works out, it will allow Finney to switch to center and compete with Hunt.

[NorthHawk]

I'm not sure it wasn't a position of need unless you consider they already had 18 OL under contract.
I think than any time you can upgrade a position (and it's just speculation at this point) for lesser money
it becomes a need. If he works out, he's also a longer term solution.

[RiverDog]

I'm not sure it wasn't a position of need unless you consider they already had 18 OL under contract.
I think than any time you can upgrade a position (and it's just speculation at this point) for lesser money
it becomes a need. If he works out, he's also a longer term solution.

We had both starting guards and a couple of backups, like Pocic and Jamarco Jones, under club control prior to the draft. Relative to other positions, you can't really consider it a position of need, at least not an immediate need.

[NorthHawk]

I have a different view of a need. Volume doesn't equate to quality.
I think if a player is not a perennial Pro Bowl candidate, then if that position can be upgraded, it becomes a need.
It might not be as much as another position, but if a player you ranked much higher falls to you in a position that
can be upgraded you do it.

[RiverDog]

I have a different view of a need. Volume doesn't equate to quality.
I think if a player is not a perennial Pro Bowl candidate, then if that position can be upgraded, it becomes a need.
It might not be as much as another position, but if a player you ranked much higher falls to you in a position that
can be upgraded you do it.

I'm not arguing with the wisdom of selecting Lewis in the 3rd, to the contrary, I think it's a brilliant selection. I am simply saying that relative to our other needs, ie defensive end, running back, cornerback, etc, that it was not a position that we had a huge unfilled gap at. Offensive guard had to rank way down on the priority list.

[NorthHawk]

Was it really down on the priority list? They threw a lot of journeymen at that position, so maybe they
thought it was a concern. If he's as good as we suspect, it should fix that problem for a long time.
As well, were there other top players of a greater need available when we selected Lewis? I can't remember...

[RiverDog]

Was it really down on the priority list? They threw a lot of journeymen at that position, so maybe they
thought it was a concern. If he's as good as we suspect, it should fix that problem for a long time.
As well, were there other top players of a greater need available when we selected Lewis? I can't remember...

The discussion was about the position, not players available.

I really don't know what the rub with you is about my stance. I've stated repeatedly that I feel this is a good pick, both from a BPA standpoint AND position as I think Lewis has the potential to start and provide us with an immediate upgrade this season (Lewis is reportedly a very good pass blocker, which Fluker wasn't). But with two starters that have started for multiple NFL teams under contract and reportedly healthy, there wasn't the same need at guard as there was at, for example, DE or RB.

[NorthHawk]

The discussion as I saw it was about need and needs relative to other positions.
My pov is the guys they have aren't really that good as evidenced by them not being able to keep a job.
Our team added a bunch, so there is some evidence that our FO thought it is a priority. Therefor, the pick
fit both need and value - and maybe even priority.

[RiverDog]

The discussion as I saw it was about need and needs relative to other positions.
My pov is the guys they have aren't really that good as evidenced by them not being able to keep a job.
Our team added a bunch, so there is some evidence that our FO thought it is a priority. Therefor, the pick
fit both need and value - and maybe even priority.

In the free agency/salary cap era, it's hard to tell nowadays why players don't keep their jobs, whether it's due strictly to on the fiend performance or if money factors into the decision.

I've always thought of drafting philosophy as being a balancing act between BPA and position need. In this case, taking an offensive guard with a 2nd day pick was driven more by BPA than it was position need.

Can we agree on that?

[Aseahawkfan]

My buddy is excited about this draft. He's a hardcore Seahawks fan to the bone. He feels like the reason we drafted these guys is the backgrounds as well as the talent. I guess a few of them come from real hard backgrounds with parents dying and having to step up to take care of their families combined with a real physical, banging style of gritty play we like. I always like those guys who want to lay it on the line to win and get the job done.

[Hawktawk]

I'm totally behind the curve as I've spent some time working out of a travel trailer at my new golf course. The first round kid made me think of a faster bigger Kam Chancellor. I know he's a Mike but he runs 4.5 and tackles like a mack truck. Second in the FBS in tackles for a loss at 20. He's not replacing bWags obviously but he's starting somewhere so?How was he in coverage? Is PC that crazy or is it me? The rest of the guys I gotta study up more on although it sounds solid with lots of guys from blue chip programs.

[RiverDog]

I'm totally behind the curve as I've spent some time working out of a travel trailer at my new golf course. The first round kid made me think of a faster bigger Kam Chancellor. I know he's a Mike but he runs 4.5 and tackles like a mack truck. Second in the FBS in tackles for a loss at 20. He's not replacing bWags obviously but he's starting somewhere so?How was he in coverage? Is PC that crazy or is it me? The rest of the guys I gotta study up more on although it sounds solid with lots of guys from blue chip programs.

Glad to see you back, my friend!

Jordy Brooks isn't a Mike. He has the versatility to play inside, but he's projected to compete at one of the OLB spots, probably the weak side.

[obiken]

River, explain to me how a leader and thumper like Troy Dye, Oregon, fell to 3rd round. Started all 4 years for us and never had a bad game, 6-3 235. I dont get it.

[NorthHawk]

River, explain to me how a leader and thumper like Troy Dye, Oregon, fell to 3rd round. Started all 4 years for us and never had a bad game, 6-3 235. I dont get it.

If I may butt in, drafting is not an exact science. It's why there are something like 15 UFA's in the HoF.
I've always said the draft is about selecting potential. There are no sure things.

[RiverDog]

River, explain to me how a leader and thumper like Troy Dye, Oregon, fell to 3rd round. Started all 4 years for us and never had a bad game, 6-3 235. I dont get it.

I don't follow Oregon football as closely as you do, nor am I a draft guru like some of the others here in the forum are, but I'll venture an opinion.

The Pac 12 sucks, and has sucked for a number of years. The real power in college football is in the southeast, or specifically, the SEC. For the 14th consecutive year, the SEC led all conferences in the number of players taken with 63 selections. 15, or nearly half of the first round picks came from the SEC. 9 of those selections came in the top 16.

In the meantime, the Pac 12 had a conference low of 3 players taken in the first round. LSU (5) and Alabama (4) each had more players drafted in the first round than in the entire Pac-12.

So it's very possible that even if your guy Dye was a legitimate first rounder, the fact that he played against such relatively poor competition could very well account for his sliding down the draft ladder.

[obiken]

True, plus this last year he played with a cast on his hand after the Husky game. I think he will be a good player. No question the SEC has become what Miami was from 89-2002.

[RiverDog]

No question the SEC has become what Miami was from 89-2002.

And it coincides with a downturn in the quality of football played in the Pac 12. One of the measures is the number of players drafted in the NFL, including those drafted in the first round. The last two seasons, the Pac 12 has had just 3 players taken in the first round, which his the lowest number since they re-aligned the conference and added Utah and Colorado.

Since we're on the topic, here's the overall draft breakdown by college conference:

SEC -- 63
Big Ten -- 48
Pac-12 -- 32
ACC -- 27
Big 12 -- 21
AAC -- 17
Conference USA -- 10
Mountain West -- 10
Independent -- 9
Sun Belt -- 7
FCS -- 6
Division II/III -- 3
MAC--2

And by team:

LSU -- 14
Michigan -- 10
Ohio State -- 10
Alabama -- 9
Clemson -- 7
Florida -- 7
Georgia -- 7
Utah -- 7
Auburn -- 6
Notre Dame -- 6
Minnesota -- 5
Mississippi State -- 5
Iowa -- 5
Penn State -- 5
TCU -- 5
Baylor -- 4
Miami (FL) -- 4
Oklahoma -- 4
Oregon -- 4
South Carolina -- 4
Temple -- 4
Wisconsin -- 4
Boise State -- 3
Cal -- 3
Louisiana -- 3
Memphis -- 3
Oregon State -- 3
Texas -- 3
UCLA -- 3

[NorthHawk]

I'm surprised the PAC12 was 3rd on the list.
With Oregon being the first team from the PAC12 at around 15, wouldn't it suggest there is a lot of talent in that division but
it's spread thinly throughout? Or might this just be an odd year?

[c_hawkbob]

Back to our draft, this was an interesting read on our first round pick and why we took him where we did:

One NFL source told ESPN that he heard after the fact from at least five teams that said Brooks -- not Oklahoma's Kenneth Murray or LSU's Patrick Queen -- was their top-rated linebacker. The same source said multiple teams believe the Ravens, who took Queen at No. 28 with Murray off the board, would have taken Brooks had Seattle not chosen him one pick before. At least one team said it wanted to trade up into the bottom of the first round for Brooks, according to the source.
So while Seattle's pick was surprising to observers, it wasn't to the rest of the NFL.

https://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seaha ... s-surprise

[NorthHawk]

It seems every year some, if not most of us get seduced by the media evaluations then are somewhat disappointed
that we pass over players in favor of others. There is solid reasoning for the pick and Taylor, too so they might end
up being very good selections.

[RiverDog]

I'm surprised the PAC12 was 3rd on the list.
With Oregon being the first team from the PAC12 at around 15, wouldn't it suggest there is a lot of talent in that division but
it's spread thinly throughout? Or might this just be an odd year?

I'm a little confused by your question. Around 15? You mean ranked 15th in the nation? The preseason polls I've seen have Oregon ranked in the top 10. Why would one team's ranking suggest that there's a lot of talent in the division?

[NorthHawk]

I counted down from the top beginning with LSU and they are tied at 4 and 4 starts at around 15th on the list.
However the PAC 12 was 3rd out of the conferences.
It just seems that the PAC 12 should be lower unless the talent in the league is spread thinly throughout the teams.
I wouldn't expect a 1 to 1 correlation, but I would have thought it would have been a closer range.

[mykc14]

I'm a little confused by your question. Around 15? You mean ranked 15th in the nation? The preseason polls I've seen have Oregon ranked in the top 10. Why would one team's ranking suggest that there's a lot of talent in the division?

He’s talking about them being 15th on the list you posted above...

[govandals]

The fact that Troy Dye played in the Pac-12 had nothing to do with where he was drafted. Logan Wilson played in the Mountain West and was chosen 50-60 picks before Dye. I forget where Khalil Mack was drafted (top 5? top 10?) and he played in the Mid-American conference.

I watched a little film on Dye last night. Really good player, there is a lot to like, however he is a 230 lb MIKE with a long, lean frame. That doesn't translate at the next level, He's not in the mold of a classic middle linebacker. When linemen get ahold of him, he cannot disengage, and gets swallowed up easily. He will need to put on 10-15lbs, and get stronger without losing any speed. I've read he tried to gain weight but was unable to keep it on. Maybe Minnesota moves him to the outside?

Lance Zierlein projected him a 4th rounder.

[RiverDog]

I counted down from the top beginning with LSU and they are tied at 4 and 4 starts at around 15th on the list.
However the PAC 12 was 3rd out of the conferences.
It just seems that the PAC 12 should be lower unless the talent in the league is spread thinly throughout the teams.
I wouldn't expect a 1 to 1 correlation, but I would have thought it would have been a closer range.

OK, I'm beginning to get the drift now. Your use of the word "division" confused me a little, thinking that you were referring to the Pac 12 North division that Oregon is in.

[Hawktawk]

Maybe it's just my imagination but Pac 12 football teams seem light in the loafers when they go up against a good SEC team. Witness the Huskies a couple years ago in the playoff. A quick TD then they might as well have got on the bus it was so ugly. Right now its a lackluster conference

[RiverDog]

Maybe it's just my imagination but Pac 12 football teams seem light in the loafers when they go up against a good SEC team. Witness the Huskies a couple years ago in the playoff. A quick TD then they might as well have got on the bus it was so ugly. Right now its a lackluster conference

Yup. Top to bottom, they're horrible, and it all started when Pete left USC.

[NorthHawk]

I just saw the Sports Center Draft Grades Special and to my surprise they thought
Deejay Dallas was a very good pick. Everyone had something positive to say about him.
I’ll have to do some more research on him.

[TriCitySam]

Read an article in The Athletic, where they asked several NFL executives to comment on each teams draft. On Seattle's draft the comment was:

“Those two guys will be playing for a long time,” an evaluator said. “I liked Jordyn Brooks a lot. It felt a little early, but three years from now, people will not be looking at those guys as reaches. Darrell Taylor has natural rush tools and is a legit dude. That guy is going to develop into a legitimate rusher.”

And there were several reports that teams right behind Seattle wanted Brooks.....I'll keep my faith and hope it works out.