The Two 1st-Rounders in 2010
Let's assume for the sake of argument that Seattle finishes 6-10 and Denver finishes 9-7. That implies draft positions of maybe 10th overall and say 19th overall.
Given that we are springing leaks all over the boat, why not try to trade one of them down for quantity in the 2nd and 3rd rounds? This presumes that a ton of quality juniors come out this year to avoid a sharply lower rookie pay scale in 2011, such that a 2nd or 3rd this year is a little more talented than that in a typical year.
27 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It depends on who's available at that certain pick.
And how much another team is willing to give up to move to your pick.
Yep, we'll have to wait for context to crystalize before we say anything
very little in the way of movement is out of the question. I think we most strongly ought to consider packaging them together to move up. Not advocating, yet, and it sounds a bit myopic of me, partly because of the depth of the draft, but the difference a marquee QB makes is perhaps more dramatic than any other single aspect of a football team, personnel or otherwise.
We may have a top 10 pick and Bradford falls that far because Locker rises up past him, or we may not. Who knows. Clausen’s probably 1st overall. This draft figures to be deep, I recognize that, but I don’t want to end up with the JP Losman of this draft. I don’t want the best of the rest while a handful of other teams possibly including BOTH STL and SF take the Eli, Rivers and Roethlisberger of the draft. Myopic? Might just be necessary to see it that way.
So movement either way, we have to consider. Up to 7 positions are open for consideration for the first round. The other positions are out of the question, but that’s about it. Free agency comes before the draft, let’s not forget.
Just to up my myopic factor here
Buffalo had 2 picks in the 2004 first round. Not a completely applicable parallel to our situation because they traded up to take Dallas’ slot, to take Losman. They traded a 2005 1st, and their 2nd and 5th. Value charts be damned, the makret value for picks has rapid, minor fluctuations during a draft. So not completely parallel.
But taking the finalized capital spent, the 13th & the 22nd, they walked away with Lee Evans (13th) and Losman (22nd). Roethlisberger was 11th. Buffalo isn’t the organization Pittsburgh is and probably wouldn’t simply have 2 Super Bowls if they’d have traded up in any way. But you can practically guarantee Pittsburgh wouldn’t. And either we’d have one or Indianapolis would have back-to-backs.
Point is simply, the inexact consensus from this very premature point before the draft has a pronounced separation growing between the very top QBs and the other two or three expected 1st rounders. let’s say we come away with two good cogs, a tackle and offensive skill position player (RB or WR). One of them nears elite status, the other pretty good.
To a fair extent, wouldn’t the success or failure of the team still be more strongly correlated to our QB’s play than the success of the two cogs who would support whoever it would be and enable whoever it would be to be better? So if the prospects are slim that one of the QBs we really like will drop, we ought to consider moving up.
by jacobstevens on Nov 18, 2009 10:37 AM PST up reply actions
My preference would be to trade up, actually
The Seahawks have a lot of needs but also lack true elite talent. They need a franchise QB. They need someone with Aaron Curry’s level of talent who plays 10 feet closer to the snap. Those players usually get taken in the first 7 picks or so. My WAG is that Seattle will end up with the 9th and 25th picks. If trading both of those got us Suh or Bradford, I’d make that deal. Ruskell hasn’t done much with mid/late 20’s picks anyway.
And I definitely wouldn’t trade down, at least not with the first pick. Suh, G. McCoy and Bradford may not last to the Seahawks pick, but what about Derrick Morgan, Jimmy Clausen, Eric Berry, or Carlos Dunlap? Its around pick 10 where you see the first big dropoff in talent. The Seahawks drafted Trufant and Hutch in a similar area of the draft.
I can't agree or disagree.
We don’t know what pick we’ll have. What if we have pick 5? What if we have pick 12 and Bradford or Berry falls to us?
I'd avoid Berry
Safety is not an impact position and not worth upper first round money. If theoretically he’s picked at #12, he’d get $12-13 million guaranteed. Berry has big trouble defending the run and is more of a playmaker than a consistent, well rounded defender. Also, he’s a free safety, and the team already has essentially two free safeties in Grant and Babineaux.
Bradford, I’d jizz in my pants if he was still there for us at #12.
Agreed on Berry.
Safety seems like one of those nonessential positions that can be improved easily through free agency or the later rounds of the draft. Rather have a stud DL any day.
I kind of agree,
but tell the impact position argument to Polamalu, Ed Reed, and Bob Sanders and their respective teams. I think they’d disagree.
And, to support RedWolf75,
he could have been had for essentially a vet minimum contract.
Also, TroyP, Ed Reed and Bob Sanders are fantastic— when they’re on the field. All three have been awful banged up lately…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 20, 2009 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
Big Albert. No question.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 20, 2009 3:35 PM PST up reply actions
Just to clarify, I listed Berry as an example of the type of talent that could be available
I wasn’t necessarily endorsing the pick.
Hutch was 17th
and I think Clausen goes first overall, but I agree with you.
by jacobstevens on Nov 19, 2009 11:35 AM PST up reply actions
Here are some points to consider:
The rest of the season will tell us a lot about our needs. If Willis, Sims, Locklear, and Unger all look long for the team after the season then we might be chalking the o-line probs this year up to injury and sticking with a lot of these guys. Then you make our annual free agent splurge an O-linema nand don’t really need to draft one high. Walt coming back isn’t an impossibility either. It is not a great o-line class this year anyways.
While it seems like we have a lot of holes, I think the problem with the team right now is more the lack of GREAT players. We won’t send a player to the pro-bowl this year and no one is really even close.
What we do with Tapp will also matter a lot because if Tapp leaves in FA and Kerney is cut then we will need to take a DE very high. Derrick Morgan is a nice choice, great player.
We also should be taking a QB with our own pick.He won’t have to start in year one with Hasselbeck in the last year of his contract, but will get an opportunity to win the #2 QB job from Seneca and start when Matt inevitably gets hurt..
I will offer my two cents with a very obscure Sim City Reference...
I absolutely love the Simulation games…. always have.
This Seattle Seahawks team over the last few years reminds me of the “beginning of the end” of a custom built city in the game. You lay your grids, zone for industry, maybe employ a couple of cheats, and watch the city grow. Eventually you get to that point when you realize that the city you’ve built isn’t able to support itself…. and a problem occurs. Could be the first fire, or a riot, but “something” happens. At that moment you place another firehouse, or police station to bridge the “gap” in the coverage…. then, something else happens, followed by another budget deficit.
What ends up happening, is you end up chasing your tail. As you toggle between detailed and widescreen views you start to notice all the differences in your older zones that are looking very dilapidated, and the newer zones you threw stop gaps into. No matter what you do at this point, your population ALWAYS dwindles, and pulling out of it is nearly impossible.
I see the Seahawks in this situation right now. It appears like most of our “zones” are ALL getting to that critical mass simultaneously. If we were playing “Sim-Seahawks”, it would be that point of the game when the annoying little advisors begin popping up and warning you about all the impending dangers.
With this in mind, I wouldn’t at all mind seeing the Seahawks stockpile 2nd’s and 3rd’s and 4th’s all day long. It could be the fastest, safest way to plug all those holes that are emerging (DL/DE, RB, CB, QB, OL?) with quality players.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 18, 2009 8:55 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
For me - Trade up to get the QB we want if there.
Trade down and get extra picks if he isn’t.
Don’t just sit with both 1st rounders.
abender20 hates freedom.
I can't imagine trading up, unless it's for an elite QB
Assuming we can keep Tapp, and that Forsett can be the lightning in a thunder n’ lightning combo, we still need:
- the thunder part of that RB combo. Forsett won’t last the whole season carrying it 20 times a game, not at his size.
- a new left tackle. Time is a relentless enemy of us all, and it’s time we retire Walt’s number and give him a rousing send-off, replete with a sturdy oak rocking chair.
- an elite DE with the chops to rush the passer, like Patrick Kerney used to do, before he disappeared from view.
- a tall, rangy CB who can match up with Fitzgerald/Boldin/Crabtree, who we will be seeing 6 times per year for at least the next several years.
- a new QB with enough arm strength to make all the throws, and enough accuracy to move the chains through the air. Oh, and someone who isn’t rattled by a defender who comes within 10 feet of him would be nice.
That doesn’t even account for other needs along the OL. I’m optimistically assuming that Sims, Spencer, Willis and Locklear can hold down the other forts.
With all of those pressing needs, I just don’t see how we can afford to trade up in the 1st round (which will no doubt require both 1st rounders to do), thus leaving us with one elite guy, one 2nd round pick and no 3rd round pick. Unless the guy we can get is a QB of the future who looks like Matt Ryan or Philip Rivers, I wouldn’t use up all that dry powder. But again, this is based on the premise that a 2nd or 3rd rounder in 2010 is really a little more valuable than in any other year, simply due to a higher supply of quality candidates. I’d rather keep the first 1st rounder, and try to deal the other one down out of the 1st round for multiple 2nd and 3rds.
are we including Crabtree with Fitzgerald and Boldin now?
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
"I never met a llama I didn't like." - TJ Duckett
All I want for Christmas is Joe Haden, Eric Berry, and Nandamukong Suh in Seahawks blue.
by Wayward Llama on Nov 19, 2009 7:55 PM PST up reply actions
Crabtree is a $40 million airport with a 30 cent control tower
Maybe this is non-consensus thinking, but I think Crabtree is destined to be a major playmaker in this league….crappy control tower or not.
by sideshow bob on Nov 20, 2009 6:48 AM PST up reply actions
I think we have too many needs
to package our picks and move up. I’d be happy with a 10th and a 25th. Two good first-round talents.
And we don’t/can’t fix everything in one draft, so draft positions of need this year and follow it up with free agency and the draft next year
The draft is the foundation, or backbone of the team going forward
Few rookies make a big impact on wins/losses. A few QB’s have recently been an exception, but I wouldn’t count on that. Many more have struggled to make a positive impact 2-3 years later. I look at the draft as the future backbone of the team, 2-3 years down the road. For that reason, I’m a big proponent of drafting best available player vs. reaching to fill current needs. If we need an elite DT now, let’s go sign Seymour, but NOT package 2 picks to trade up for anyone. The best “value” in the draft is late first and 2nd-3rd rounds, so if there is a group of say 6 players that are all on the board with about the same grade and we can trade down from 20-25 for a 3rd round pick, I’m all for it. If a stud linebacker drops to us at 20, we’d be crazy to pass him up even though we’re pretty stocked at that position.

by 























