Seahawks Schedule Workout with Aaron Curry on March 26
by John Morgan on Mar 12, 2009 6:14 PM PDT
Email
PrintThe above is passed along from Doug Farrar, who just finished interviewing Aaron Curry. This makes sense for a three reasons I can think of.
1. Seattle must appear to be interested in every available top ten prospect. Don't be fooled for a second into thinking Seattle isn't interested in trading down. It must be interested, because should the situation be right and multiple players Seattle values approximately the same are still on the board at four, it would be foolish for Seattle not to. If any trading partner thinks it's safe that Seattle won't draft any player, Seattle loses leverage.
2. Julian Peterson's salary averages $8 million from 2010 through 2012. Peterson may age gracefully, but that's a lot to pay any 34 year old linebacker.
3. The team has yet to commit to a long term deal with Leroy Hill. Negotiations have dragged on. Seattle may be attempting to gain leverage or are simply preparing themselves should they not be able to sign Hill.
Personally, I hope it's "1". Curry, however spectacular, is not a huge net improvement over Seattle's existing talent and will cost more in total resources (cap space and draft pick) than Peterson or Hill. Nevertheless, move Curry back into the "possible" bracket.
93 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You could deal Hill if you draft Curry.
To me, Curry is the only slam dunk prospect in the draft.
Cogito Ergo Sum
We've had 3 "slam dunks" at LB for awhile
and we still finished 4-12 last season. Curry may indeed be great, and I always believe that value is more important than need when it comes to drafting, but why use the #4 to, conceivably, end up precisely where we are now?
Young body anyone?
We were 4 and 12 last year! Hardly a slam dunk at any position. All I’m saying is if your gonna give out a big contract at a position, it might as well be young talent. I also think he is the best player in the draft and wont be there at the number 4 pick. But if he is? Then you snatch him up.
Cogito Ergo Sum
We could have gone 0-16 but that wouldn't necessarily mean our linebackers weren't slam dunks.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't see how he is any more of a "slam dunk" than any other prospect
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Mar 12, 2009 11:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Great production at a BCS conference. Good interviews, good work etthic, no attitude or effort concerns.
No size concerns, no speed concerns, great combine numbers all around.
That's a pretty solid definition of safe
But I guess I should have been a bit clearer. All of the factors above are found in the majority of possible top ten picks (otherwise they wouldn’t be top ten) so is it the position that makes him so much more safe than Stafford, Orakpo, Crabtree, etc.? It’s starting to seem like people see him as an LB and call him “safe”, while they see Crabtree and say “We’ll, he may have solid numbers, ethic, physical and mental ability, but I just don’t know if it’ll translate”. I don’t understand it.
Curry is above average in every aspect, but...
He’s certainly not great in anything as he’s not even the best prospect in his class at anything beyond wrap-up tackling. Laurinaitis is the best coverage linebacker, Maualuga is best against the run, and Sintim is easily the best pass rusher. What makes Curry so great is that he’s so well-rounded, but he’s certainly no Ray Lewis. He’ll make a fantastic linebacker for someone though, and with how impatient and short-sighted fans are, if they want immediate results statistically, he should be the pick.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 13, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions
I think that's where people are confused.
Curry is great at a lot of things. He’s really fast and strong, and he seems to know where to be at the right time.
Crabtree would be safe IF
he didn’t play in an offense where numbers are a bit inflated, sort of like Hawaii. Also if he were a bit faster. But I personally consider him a top 5 ‘safe’ pick. He may not be Fitzgerald, but I think the chances of him not being a consistent 800 yard receiver is pretty low.
Your argument of, "not a huge net improvement over Seattle's existing talent and will cost more in total resources (cap space and draft pick)"
is EXACTLY why I was against Cutler in the lower thread.
Thank you for putting it in a concise statement of logic.
However, I still like the Curry idea in a 4-3/3-4 morphing next-evolution of defense scenario. Not that we have to manpower to fully do that, but the pick would be mighty interesting from that standpoint…
If Jay Cutler is the answer, I think it may be a trick question...
by Tyler Jorgensen on Mar 12, 2009 6:34 PM PDT reply actions
So I finally came around to the fact that
drafting Crabtree is still a possibility. Thus leaving Curry as the only guy we won’t draft. Then you go ahead and spring this on me. Now everyone is a possibility.
Personally, I think you’re overrating Hill and underrating Curry. I wouldn’t want to draft Curry just to have him sit on the bench though. We’d definitely have to trade Hill and get something in return. Like a respectable DT.
Raji has a workout with Denver on Friday
Which means they must be considering trading up cause they won’t even get a sniff of him with their pick at 15. (Bad mental picture) Hey, maybe a trade down with Denver is part of the aforementioned Cutler trade scenario.
There is no Cutler trade scenario.
We simply aren’t getting him.
As for Curry, I suppose entertaining him isn’t a bad idea for potentially enabling a trade-down, but I’m fairly certain we aren’t drafting him.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Holy Shit the lightbulb just went on!
Denver is trading with KC. They swap 3 for 15 and also swap QB’s. Since Cutler is considered the better of the two QB’s, KC drops down and Denver moves up to take Raji at 3. DT is Denvers greatest need, and KC really needs OT or DE much more than OLB, which is what they’d get stuck with (Curry) assuming Stafford and J. Smith go 1-2. At 15 they should have their choice of Oher, A. Smith or Tyson Jackson.
Raji would be such a ridiculous reach at 3.
Do it, Denver!
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it's a good idea to scout everyone.
If you really like a guy, you’ll know if he’s worth trading up (or down) for.
Denver is also working out other players.
Including Malcom Jenkins next Friday.
That is what teams do this time of year. If not a serious interest than the term ‘due diligence’ applies. I hope it applies to Curry, and scenario #1 is the only one I really like. I don’t care if JP is aging. He’s still fine for a year or two more and LBs are much easier to replace in later rounds or through FA. I’d much rather have QB, OT, or Crabtree with the 4th pick, since a stud DT worthy of a top-5 selection is not in this draft, nor a CB.
This may or may not be a poor year to have a top-5 pick, depending on how it plays out. I can’t help but think that G.McCoy would be our guy if he had declared. Also, no top-5 RB talents this year, either, though they are also a position that can be found in later rounds with success.
Imagine, if you will,
A front 7, in a 3 – 4, Tapp, Jackson, Kerney backed by Peterson, Tatupu, Hill, and Curry with Trufant and Wilson on the wings and Grant and Chung deep.
I’d cry if I were the quarterback looking to face that.
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
Tapp and Kerney as 3-4 ends? Jackson at NT?!
No!
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Now your talking. Hill, Peterson, Tatupu, Curry.
you could go Cole, or Mebane nose tackle.
Cogito Ergo Sum
I can't see any of those at 3-4 DE.
Look, Mora and Bradley use 4-3 defenses. They’ve said they’re fitting the scheme to the player’s strengths. Why entertain the scenario if it is guaranteed not to happen?
Yeah, this love for the recent reemergence of the 3-4 fad needs to stop.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Maybe we can make Tatupu the NT and Curry and Peterson the ends.
They would at least be as effective as this proposed d-line.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Nah, the hilarity of your proposed defensive line was enough to go around.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Personnel.
You can only work with what you have. I just think a 4-3 would free up the LB’s. More blitzing.
Cogito Ergo Sum
You must have missed Mora's presser.
I’m as much of a fan of blitzing as anyone, but Mora specifically stated he wants the front 4 alone to be constant pressure-cookers too.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:47 PM PDT up reply actions
They also have coined the term west-coast Defense.
jokingly as it may have been. I think with the defensive minds Mora has brought in, something will be changed. I doubt they will switch to a 3-4.
Cogito Ergo Sum
Well, yeah.
Which is why I don’t understand why there are suddenly many different scenarios of how our imaginary 3-4 would look like and our ‘godly’ linebackers despite almost all of them would be overmatched in the system.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions
How about creating a new look
1-6
Mebane, the beast that he is will take down the entire O-line with a single bark.
Then you have JP, Kerney, Curry, Tatupu, Jackson, and Hill, in that order, roam or blitz. The scheme is so dumb and confusing, opposing QBs will chortle to death and have so many delay of game penalties due to the raw ridiculousness of the WEST COAST DEFENSE!
Can we make it 2-5?
And then put Brian Russell up next to Mebane? I’m sure he’d be a brilliant pass rusher with his tackling skills.
Russell will rip through O-lines so fast that...
the NFL would probably make it illegal and pay Seattle to take him of the roster.
If life gives you lemons, keep the receipt
Not in a 3-4
ILB’s in a 3-4 regularly have to shed blocks and usually play in the 250lbs-260lbs range. Tatupu & Hill would both be swallowed alive and miscast in such a scheme (Remember Vilma going from stud to scrub when the Jets switched? Or Ray Lewis having his worst seasons when the Ravens ran 3-4 as their base?) Or just remember that both Julian Peterson and Patrick Kerney both had their worst seasons in a 3-4 and have specifically said they don’t think it’s their best fit?
The 3-4 is a non-starter not just because we lack the ideal DL talent, but because our LBs are a horrible fit for it as well
Hill Curry and Peterson wouldn't get swallowed.
and Tatupu is an eager tackler with great pre-snap instincts.
Cogito Ergo Sum
They would.
And while Tatupu is as smart as they come, it still doesn’t change that if there’s unblocked guard barreling at him full speed, there’s a good chance he’ll lose that battle. Hill also wouldn’t fit in well.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I personally think the headset messes with him
I wish they’d give it to Grant or JP
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Mar 14, 2009 2:24 AM PDT up reply actions
Then why was '08 a down year for him?
Because he was always caught in the scrum this year. That’s just a taste of what a 3-4 would do to him.
There’s a lot more to running a 3-4 than simply putting 4 LB’er out there and thinking you’re set.
No.
The ends could potentially be decent but John’s already pointed out that Cole is a washout on double-teams.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:17 PM PDT up reply actions
tears of joy?
We do not have the personnel for a 3-4. That DL in particular would be horrendous – even as an occasional 3-3 Nickel package.
Too much 3-4 kool-aid lately.
I hope we’re versatile for some different fronts and ‘3-4 looks’, but we don’t have the personnel for a true 3-4 (and we’ve been over this countless times on this site).
Doesn'
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Mar 12, 2009 11:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Doesn't a NT have to be pretty big and nasty?
Jackson is neither of those things. Last year he looked his most pathetic when moved inside.
And yeah, no edit button.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Mar 12, 2009 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Jackson isn't even a DT.
He’s a DE who can occasionally slide in to DT in pass-rushing situations. He simply isn’t a DT, let alone a gigantic run-stuffing, block-gobbling NT.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 13, 2009 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions
There is a reason
The reason we are looking at a bunch of players and positions is so the other teams will not have a clue as to who we may be drafting. Personally, I hope we are able to move down, My perfect draft would be: Lions – Stafford, Rams – Monroe, KC – Curry/Crabs.
This way we have all the others to trade down with. I am sure you know which ones they will be, but, trading down and getting Beatty or Meredith at OT is not a bad thing. Getting Mack or Unger, won’t be a bad thing. There are a lot of reasons in the 2-4th rounds to trade down.
Of course there is a possiblitiy of us drafting Crabs at #4, but, I think we would trade him before drafting him. Before the draft Everyone is posssible for us. After the 1st 3 picks, everybody else is possible. I don’t know why I need to explain this to you.
ok
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Already been said.
Seattle must appear to be interested in every available top ten prospect.
Conciseness, my good man.
Do we have to call him Crabs?
I just have an automatic aversion to Crabs as a name/title/nickname. Can we call him Tree or something?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 13, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions
I also think it's "1"
And definitely agree with your conclusion about the net gain not being worth the resources.
But … scenario 2 does make some level of sense as well. If the draft falls a certain way, Curry’s the BPA, and there’s no good trade offer to fall back, then you could swap out Curry for Peterson and ensure that you have an elite LB group for the next 5-6 seasons, rather than the next 2-3 (depending on how Peterson ages)
Of course, in reality, I think that if Curry is available at #4 – then that definitely means the trade offers will come pouring in.
I'm not entirely sure Curry will be better than Peterson.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Individually? No.
I’m a huge Peterson fan.
My point was you’ll have Curry for 6 years, Peterson for maybe 2-3 at most, before salary and/or age may force a cut.
I definitely don’t think it’s an ideal scenario – but if the team finds themselves stuck at #4 with limited options, then it starts to make sense.
Following the same logic
Monroe means parting ways with Jones, Crabtree with Branch, Curry with either Hill or Peterson. Follow the money.
Raji is the only top 5 guy
who won’t force (or allow) us to part ways with a high dollar guy on the roster. Net, Net, saves money, but you don’t get the immediate bang for your buck like you do by just adding Raji and keeping everyone else.
Raji shouldn't be a top 5 guy.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Why not?
His pro-day was yesterday and according to the NFL network coverage it went great.
Unlike Pat White, who despite promises he would run route tree’s last week, didn’t, and then said he didn’t only because nobody asked, but his coach started everything off saying he wouldn’t, so nobody asked, and many of the 25 teams left his pro-day feeling like they’d wasted the trip. It was very confusing.
One-year wonder, known to take snaps off.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Not to mention that he was pegged as a second-half first round pick until the Senior Bowl propelled him up.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Ahem. Isn't a top-5 guy.
At least on Ruskell’s board. Character red-flags, no? Of course, maybe the Eastcoast Sports Promotional Network is right. They’re the all-knowing. I am far from it.
Okay.
But in the short-term, I think the Curry hype has gotten to some ridiculous proportions. Peterson is one of those true freak of nature athletes who are exceptional in every facet of the game. I don’t see that with Curry, and I’ve seen a lot of Wake Forest. Just because he’s safe doesn’t mean he’s the next Lawrence Taylor, which is what you should be if you’re somehow in the running for the first overall pick in the draft as a LB.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Sure, but nothing jumps out as super-unbelievably-extraordinary-holyshit this guy is a future HoFer.
And that all depends on how much you weight the combine in the overall review of a prospect.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 12, 2009 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Robert Gallery was a beast at the combine too.
The combine means absolutely dick.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Mar 14, 2009 2:26 AM PDT up reply actions
If Jake Long or Walter Jones Jr. were in this draft they'd go #1
Everything is relative. I’ve heard that none of the OT’s are truly top 5 elite tackles prospects, just the best available in a draft that is pretty deep in OT’s, and just about everyone needs one or two. Curry isn’t Taylor or Peterson, but he’s one of the couple best prospects in this draft and you don’t know how good he will eventually be. If I were Detroit, in desparate need of upgrades all over, but especially OT and LB, I’d be taking Curry or J. Smith, not Stafford.
I think that will be the case
The draft “gurus” are all a bunch of queefs anyway. Kiper is only interested in making smark ass remarks and McShay couldn’t make an accurate prediction if he had Marty McFly to help him. In his latest mock, he has us taking Raji. Before, it was Curry (right after we tagged Hill).
If the Lions take Stafford, then they aren’t making any headway in the FO. I honestly think Culpepper can be decent again given time to train and run an offense. They can always take a qb in the 2nd or 3rd.
It's great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Mar 12, 2009 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions
There are no QB's in the second or third, it seems.
Though they (like we) would probably be better suited to wait until next year, anyhow.
I think Best Athlete available is also a feasible explanation.
Ruskell has done a good job in free agency of plugging some areas of need. I think this gives us allot of flexibility to go a number of directions in the draft.
Dont forget, Shaun Alexander and Hutch were draft day BBA’s that we really didn’t “need” at the time.
Those picks were made by Holmgren.
And while Ricky Watters was still effective, he was getting old. Hutch was BPA but also replaced the void left by Pete Kendall.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Mar 13, 2009 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Why must it be Hill who would be in the trading block?
I think it more likely that Julian Peterson would be trade bait. It would hurt Seattle more in cap space, but it’s more friendly to potential trade suitors.
Simply because Hill is in contract negotiations.
I would prefer keeping Hill, that hit he had on Marion Barber last year was awesome. He is one of the best hitters in the league.
Cogito Ergo Sum
Good hitter and even better tackler. I love him, too.
Now, if his coverage would improve he’d be elite. I think (and hope) we use him as a pass-rusher much more this season.
Kirwan (NFL.com) has us taking Stafford.
Yes mocks can be pretty lame, but this top-4 that I could see happening. What is up w/ Curry being drafted after Orakpo?
I think Orakpo will be like Terrell Suggs.
He’s a very good player, and his combine stats backed it up. He’s huge and fast, and proved himself against top competition.
Multiple knee injuries is a red flag though.
The Blazers should have taken Jordan ahead of Sam Bowie
They had Clyde Drexler, so they didn’t need another shooting guard. I think you take Curry if he’s on the board and you cannot trade the pick. The dude is obviously a special player and person. All three of our LB’s are one play away from a career or season ending injury. We had Ricky Watters in his prime when we drafted Shaun Alexander.
How awesome would it be to have Curry on the team this year terrorizing people on Special Teams and in spurts at LB and learning the NFL mental game from the other guys while pushing them for playing time?
if you want a dominant defense for the next five years, you do not pass on Curry.
Basketball =/= Football
One player in Football, with the possible exception of QB, can not have NEAR the impact that one player can have in Basketball. Jordon could single handily make a team competitive and maybe win it all. Barry Sanders could not. And there’s no way Mean Joe Green could have. Hell, look at Dan Marino. You can’t just pump a position and hope it wins it for you, you have to have a complete team.
actually, it's funny that you mention Sanders and Marino
Because the arrival of those two guys almost put their respective teams into contention. Marino threw a billion TD’s his first year and went to the Superbowl while Sanders’ Lions were pretty decent the whole time he was there and had a few playoff runs despite lousy OL’s and QB’s.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
Related FanShots on Field Gulls
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Peyton Manning’s face on all 32 NFL logos
- Todd Haley could be in for a bumpy ride in Pittsburgh
- Alex Smith caddied for Jim Harbaugh at AT&T Pro-Am
- Boston (in) Common: Kevin Youkilis set to marry Tom Brady’s sister
- Giants to be honored with commemorative NY license plate; some would rather see a 9/11 plate
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
