Field Gulls: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: Sounder At Heart for Seattle Sounders Fans!

Seahawks Mock Draft 1.5

Regularly updated throughout the day.

Malcolm Jenkins:

"The meetings are easy. I could talk football all day...I know my defense and I know football." --Jenkins 2jenkins_medium

Tim Ruskell and James Mora have a shared philosophy: They want someone at four that contributes right away. Jenkins is an elite athlete. The kind that regularly stuns with his grace and body control. He's ridiculously smooth. He was the best corner prospect entering the combine and the best corner prospect exiting the combine - 40 time be damned. And no GM will care less about his 40 than Tim Ruskell. Ruskell cares about Thorpe Awards, All-Americas, college starts, college production and tape.

This pick assumes Seattle has given up on corner Kelly Jennings. Here might be why.

Ruskell knows when to cut bait. Before the 2008 season, Mike Holmgren announced an open competition for the second cornerback spot. It sounded like a stunt at the time, but, in retrospect, it may have been an admission that Jennings hadn't developed as they'd liked. Jennings, despite the slips and falls, is clearly a good, even very good cover corner. He proved so in 2007 and in far fewer snaps in 2008, Jennings again recorded 12 passes defended. That's a testament to his cover skills, but also an indication that teams stopped fearing him. Cover wasn't enough. Jennings failed to develop ball skills. Opponents knew they could pass at Jennings and the worst outcome was a pass defended. Jennings could rectify that. Add enough enough in the way of interception threat to keep his cover imposing. And if Seattle were in another spot, without a shot at the top overall corner prospect, it might lean on its impressive depth at the position, but, in this scenario, there is sufficient evidence that Jennings will not develop and a rare enough opportunity to add elite talent at the position that Seattle drafts Jenkins.

Seattle sees Josh Wilson at nickel. I'm fine with that. Jenkins would step in at the right cornerback spot, matched primarily against possession receivers, where his speed wouldn't matter as much, and where, should his speed not rate, he could stay as. More likely, Seattle would slowly transition Jenkins as Trufant ages, and as Trufant slips from top corner to steady corner, Jenkins will step into his own.

Star-divide

Patrick Chung:

Chung had exactly the combine he needed. He didn't blow anyone away and he didn't rocket into the first round, but he did put speed concerns behind him and he did show the kind of raw power to prove his fearsome tackling will translate into the pros. Seattle is interested in adding a strong safety. Jermaine Phillips presents a good model for the skills they're interested in: very active, strong against the run, and good, not great cover skills. That's Chung to a tee. Plus, he's got this going for him.

121884842535191900_medium

Games Started: 51

Conference: Pac 10

Considered a Team Leader:Yes

Production: 236 solo tackles, 148 assisted tackles, 9 interceptions, 17 passes defensed, 4 sacks and 3 forced fumbles.

More Tackles Than: Bob Sanders

More Interceptions Than: Troy Polamalu

Team Record: 35-16

Known Weaknesses: Size, Speed

Gritty Like: Sandpaper

Instantly Improves: Seattle's punt return unit and kickoff and punt coverage

Chung would be a huge addition to the run defense. Seattle has long needed a rover type that can cut off long runs and provide backside containment. Adding Chung would also be a huge addition to the pass defense. Current strong safety Deon Grant plays an exceptional deep zone. Seattle has squandered that skill. Drafting a competent strong safety moves Grant back to free safety. Brian Russell to Deon Grant is an exciting net improvement. Something like bottom five at position to top ten. That's the kind of move that maximizes existing talent and allows a bottom feeder defense to again dominate.

Cedric Peerman:

 

Count me among the few that think Seattle will upgrade at running back. Seattle's lightning, Julius Jones, didn't see the field too often and maybe it was favoritism or a character conflict with Mike Holmgren, or maybe Maurice Morris outplayed him. Whatever the case, Greg Knapp runs a two back system. Seattle needs two healthy starting-caliber running backs every game. Seattle could add another thunder, but I think it's more likely they attempt to upgrade their lightning.

Peerman is extremely talented. He's a studious guy and very religious. In fact, he's a ordained minister. He played in 41 games at Virginia. As a running back, Peerman is fast, elusive, powerful and, well, sometimes a highlight reel betters adjectives.

The knocks on Peerman are injuries and hand size. Both might be a little trumped up. Peerman suffered a Linsfranc injury in 2007. Lisfranc injuries can threaten a career depending on the severity, but given his production his senior season and his strong showing at the combine, that's probably not the case with Peerman.

Peerman's hands are just 7 7/8". Scouts are worried he will have fumble problems in the NFL. Peerman fumbled at the Senior Bowl and fumbled away a win against Miami last November. That fumble was his first lost fumble of his career. Fumbles happen so infrequently, I sometimes wonder if it's a meaningful stat. The sample size is tiny and the difference between a fumble and a tackle often a matter of fractions of a second. Which is to say, I'm just not too concerned about Peerman's fumble problems, and if that's what forces his stock into the second day, well awesome.

Tyronne Green

Seattle needs a starting capable offensive guard. He should be agile, quick, powerful, capable of working in a zone scheme, preferably from a major conference (SEC even better), coachable and productive. He doesn't have to be tall.

Tyronne Green is only 6'2" - with cleats on. Like Mansfield Wrotto, he's a bit raw. And like Wrotto, Green entered college as a defensive tackle. He didn't convert to guard until 2005. Scouts rave about his athleticism. He has 33 ¾" arms and 10 ¼" hands. Green busted his butt for coaches at the Senior Bowl and NFL Combine, is agile, quick, powerful, capable of working in a zone scheme, a starter at Auburn, and even has some non-competitive experience at center.

Curtis Painter

 

Painter has the arm strength and quick release, but his production over four seasons leaves something to be desired. Painter probably desired some kind of talent on his offensive line and a receiver worth throwing to. He's pure developmental prospect. All potential and little production at this point, but with their (presumed) faith in Matt Hasselbeck's health and in a draft without too many quarterbacks worth taking, Painter could be the latest Charlie Frye. The new David Greene. But bigger, stronger, with more potential and still not past due expiration date.

Joe Burnett

 

Might not fall this far. Strictly a kick and punt returner. Tenth ranked punt return average in college football in 2008.


0 recs  |  Comment 130 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Here's my problem with drafting a guy like Jenkins or Brown.

I’ve seen many mocks of them going as late as 20. And if this is the case, I feel like if there is a decent possibility of getting a guy for 1/3 the price, why would we pay full price?
That’s why I’d rather have Monroe or Crabtree, because at least I know that the latest these guys will fall is around pick #7 or so, because they’re too desirable in everyone’s eyes to drop below that.

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 12:16 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

It's not the case

any more than Carlson going in the fourth or Sam Baker in the third. Mock draft sites make their money with speculation and regular updates.

by John Morgan on Mar 3, 2009 12:30 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

True, but both those guys have question marks.

I don’t know why, but Kiper says that teams question Brown as a bust, and Jenkins is slow at a position where speed is needed. I know Ruskell likes ‘slow’ guys, but Tatupu’s position doesn’t really need speed. Ray Lewis ran a 4.8 I believe.

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 12:35 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Lots of guys.

Aaron Curry. The top 4 tackles, while not guaranteed to be pro bowlers, will probably all be serviceable starters at the very least. Beanie Wells will be a good running back barring injury.
It defines how you define bust? Is bust a reserve? Or is bust not living up to predictions?

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 12:40 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

The concept of a bust has everything to do with expectation, and the resources (money, draft picks) given up to acquire that player are a function of expectation.

You wouldn’t be upset if the QB your team picked in the 7th round never pans out, but you’d certainly be pissed over a Leaf/Harrington/Carr, right?

by abender20 on Mar 3, 2009 12:59 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, but is say... Trent Dilfer a bust?

He was the #5 overall pick, and he was a starter for several years, but was never even average.

Is Tubbs a bust? It’s a bit subjective.

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 1:02 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Dilfer had his success with the Ravens, who didn't spend the draft pick on him.

The Bucs may consider him a bust, but the Ravens and beyond would not.

by abender20 on Mar 3, 2009 1:04 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Rick Mier = Bust

Dilfer = Not a bust (to the Seahawks).

And I’m pretty sure I misspelled Mier’s name.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Dangit, I knew that....

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 4, 2009 11:54 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

So does this mean

that you no longer think Stafford will be there at #4, or that you don’t think Ruskell sees the need to find a replacement for Hasselbeck?

by The Ancient Mariner on Mar 3, 2009 12:17 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Mostly, it's just an iteration

With the evidence I have now, I thinking Seattle is targeting a player at four they think will contribute right away. It’s added two older guys through free agency and I also noted during the Houshmandzadeh press conference that a lot of emphasis was put on Hasselbeck. Housh mentioned that Seattle having Hasselbeck influenced his decision to sign. That could all be smoke, and a later mock might reflect the “we need a quarterback now” scenario.

by John Morgan on Mar 3, 2009 12:24 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

do you think that the signing of older players to contribute now means

that the team thinks the various injured players (Hass, the WR’s, Walter) are going to come back healthy, and that the Hawks have a shot at a playoff run?

by djafrot on Mar 3, 2009 12:31 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Hasselbeck yes

I don’t know about Jones, but I think the team adds a right tackle if it doesn’t retain Willis.

by John Morgan on Mar 3, 2009 12:46 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Is a Ebben Britton, Phil Loadholt, William Beatty type

a strong possibility in the second round since I don’t know how well those guys would be at LT, but seem adequate at RT? Or would it make more sense to take a tackle with our 1st rounder and play him at RT for now and LT later post-Walt?

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 12:54 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I've heard this suggestion many times.

My concern has always been about how easy/hard is it to simply switch sides?

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 1:49 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

He'll be here all week folks!

Try the veal!

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Is this going to be more then one round eventually?

Also, has Mora or Ruskell or anyone in the staff actually said that they see Wilson as a nickel CB?

by SPENCEMAN on Mar 3, 2009 12:29 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Use the subject line, please.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 2:32 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I use the subject line

I’m happy to, and will continue to, but why is it important?

by jacobstevens on Mar 3, 2009 2:45 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

So people can "hide" your comment if they feel it to be necessary.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 3:28 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Charles Woodson

Top speed not withstanding, he’s one a small handful of players whose athleticism absolutely pops off the screen. It’s entirely possible he’s considered the best corner in the NFL in five years.

by John Morgan on Mar 3, 2009 12:36 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Chris McAlister

Put up almost identical measurables & times to Jenkins at his combine. He was the 10th pick and had a career where he was 2x All-Pro & 3x Pro-Bowl. And for a 3-4 year window earlier this decade was considered one of the best CBs in the NFL. If Jenkins pans out like that, is that career worth the #4 pick? IMO, yeah.

I think lost in all the hoopla about the 40 time was just how well the rest of Jenkins’ combine went. He aced the other drills, especially the cone and 20yd, which show outstanding quickness & change-of-direction. In the right scheme – especially a cover-2 or one heavy on zone, his supposed lack of top speed is not going to be a huge liability, IMO.

I could easily see the team giving up on Jennings. One other thing to consider is that he was drafted for a completely different coaching staff, and at a time when a starting CB was a pretty glaring need. It’s possible that TR/Marshall weren’t on the same page of how he’d be used, or he was a compromise of “most ready” over “best fit”. The Jennings pick always confused me since he seemed like a poor fit in zone, especially for run support, which is something Ruskell really seems to value. Wilson may be short, but he’s compact and a beast in that area. So now that the GM and the coaching staff all share the same basic philosophies, they may value a guy like Jenkins who they see as a better fit in the scheme from here on out.

You have to take a loss on Jennings, but it’s possible to flip in to another team for a 5th to 6th round pick (the current market after the Sheppard trade) That’s making some semi-sweet lemonade out of lemons, IMO.

Also, looking at it from a caponomics standpoint and when it comes to long-term allocation of dollars across the roster, a quality CB is one of the few positions that justifies the type of contract the #4 will sign (QB, WR, DE, DE, DT, and OT are the others, IMO) The DT just isn’t there this draft and they rotate in our scheme anyway. The DE’s are borderline. The OT’s are there, but the FO has been coy with the whole “we like interchangible parts and value picks” act. So if the team sees Jenkins as a fairly low-risk pick … I can see them pulling the trigger for financial reasons as well.

Sorry, wen off on a lot of tangents for that post.

by jteckmann on Mar 3, 2009 1:05 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

excellent point about CB salaries and "low risk"

Jenkins looks pretty low risk to me and if the FO thinks he can step in right away, odds look very good like he’ll be a Seahawk.

by djafrot on Mar 3, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm confused also

a month ago I was certain Jenkins would be our pick at #4 and generated a FANPOST making the case for why. One important thing has happened from then to now, the combine. As pointed out by LantermanC above, his market value has slipped due not just to the 40, but other drills. I watched a lot of the combine on NFL.com and Deon Sanders and Mike Mayock said repeatedly that Jenkins was “killing himself” with poor performance in several drills. Is he worth a pick at #4? He is if someone else agrees that he’s worth the money and will draft him at #5, but if as Mayock suggests, that he’s fallen out of the top 20, I certainly hope we’ll at least try to get him for less money. I do still love the pick though, and for all the reasons pointed out previously think he could start immediately opposite Trufant. I also think it’s VERY interesting that people are willing to make the case that Crabtree’s 40 is unimportant because of all the game tape available on him, but aren’t willing to use the same argument for Jenkins. He may not have track star speed (notably shorter strides than the guys running 4.3’s) but is extremely quick and fluid allowing him to stay with all but the fastest WR’s on a go route.

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 12:35 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Actually

He was the best CB at the cone drill, and tied for 5th with Vontae Davis on the 20 yard shuttle.
I don’t question whether or not he’ll be a good CB against guys like Housh, Branch, Engram, etc, I question whether or not he’ll be able to guard the burners, and if he can’t, we’d need a damn good free safety, which we don’t have.

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 12:44 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

you know, now that I think about it

a corner that could shut down a possession receiver would be an absolute dream pick for me. Over the years 3rd and long has been absolutely murder for us as guys like TJ and Isaac Bruce and Fitz grab 13 yards on 3rd and 9.

John noted that we have Trufant to guard against the “speed” guys. Will the new defense have our corners locked onto players? I thought that the cover-2 had them set to sides of the field.

by djafrot on Mar 3, 2009 12:54 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Good point.

Most teams don’t have two burners, and those that do, usually don’t have two good ones. With Trufant guarding the speed guy, and with our soft bubble cover-2 or cloud, or whatever we’re calling it these days, perhaps Jenkins would be a good pick.
But as I said before, if the two guys we really wanted were Brown and Jenkins, wouldn’t you think that if we traded down for just a 5th rounder to the 10th pick that one of the two would still be there?

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 1:04 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, and I would love this.

Not only do we get a guy we like, but we get away from a monster contract as well.

I also wonder if the FO would consider a Sanchez at that point, too.

by djafrot on Mar 3, 2009 1:07 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't understand what everyone sees in Sanchez.

He’s an average college QB with not much experience. Just because he’s from USC doesn’t mean he’s the next Palmer/Leinart. Even if he is, they aren’t superstars.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 1:54 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

It's the measurables

I would be a little worried, though, if we drafted him, because of the lack of established performance that you mention. But, it’s the prototypical size, the complete package of tools, the windup and release, the accuracy — Stafford is inconsistent in accuracy, but at the combine Sanchez was just threading it, non-stop, casually in control. Strength, touch, footwork, the ability to throw without the optimal windup. A well-coached kid with all the physical tools and the seeming confidence and mental fortitude to be an NFL QB.

I’d like to know more about pocket movement, decision making, leadership, character (they made him take a rape class!), grace under pressure (does he panic?) — both blitz/free rush and Q4/playoff pressure — but it’s the typical measurables that an established, productive 4-year starter would typically have a couple of as weaknesses or spots to work on, that Sanchez appears to handle very well, and seemingly with ease. I’m still a little nervous about him, and if the sexual assault allegations alone keep Ruskell away, I’ll be OK, but he’s rightfully considered among the top prospects. Just has atypical question marks.

by jacobstevens on Mar 3, 2009 2:55 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I guess that is my thing.

He’s truly a “prospect” rather than a polished product. There are hundreds of guys out there that can make all the throws in practice.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 3:30 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know if that's true

It may be. But I think the difference is the NFL scouts watch him make the throws, and it’s not that he makes them, but how he makes them, and what all he can make, that makes them say he’s polished.

I’m not endorsing him for pick #4, per say. You have reservations, and I think that’s totally warranted, but he’s definitely first round material, it’s not just because he’s a Trojan. His hole is proven performance, whereas Stafford, who makes a good contrast, has proven performance and the strong arm but doesn’t throw as accurately, with as much touch, have as good footwork, etc.

by jacobstevens on Mar 3, 2009 4:08 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm loving this mock draft so far.

Our secondary is certainly not going to be our weakness with a draft like this.

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 1:40 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Ditto

All offseason I’ve been concerned with the O and just couldn’t see how the team could afford to pump more resources into the D.

But a draft with Jenkins & Chung (or just either of them by themselves) really makes me drool.

So the ’Hawks become known as a conservative, pound the rock team with a suffocating D that plays outdoors in the fog and rain? Yeah, I could definitely live with that.

by jteckmann on Mar 3, 2009 1:43 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Amen.

I grew up fascinated by offense, but the older I get the more I love watching shut down defenses at work.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 1:52 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I hear ya.

I think a lot of people are that way though. Two kids with a football can go out in the yard and pretend to be (insert name of WR and QB here), but it’s much more difficult to pretend to be someone on defense unless you played organized football growing up.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 1:56 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

We won't be pounding any rock unless we add an interior lineman.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 2:35 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

This sounds...

Dirty..

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 3:30 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Wow, I just reread that and agree.

But the point stands, I’d hate to pump even more resources into our D while our offense is in ruins. Pork Chop is a free agent too so we might have a catastrophe on our hands when it comes to the line.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 3:36 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

This draft would be awesome

So for it to happen, they better re-sign Willis and patch up the o-line. Pronto.

"It's just one big guy against another big guy, both teams know what's at stake. The one of them comes out on top and it feels good."
-Chris Collinsworth, Madden 09

by Wayward Llama on Mar 3, 2009 2:29 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

If this is our draft...

(and I hope that it is)

we will need to resign Willis.

by cro-mag! on Mar 3, 2009 1:53 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Don't know who that is, but I dig the name.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 1:56 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Oregon OT (left tackle)

Heard of Max Unger? He started left tackle for Oregon until Tupou showed up and Unger moved to Guard and Center. One of the reasons Unger is so highly prized and projected at top of second round is he can play center or guard, or tackle in a pinch. Tupou isn’t as versatile but very solid and athletic. Probably will be available for our early 3rd round pick, but not much longer. Here’s a link to NFL Draft Scouts profile.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1117001

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 2:09 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Sounds pretty good. Wouldn't be bad in the third.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 2:14 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Unger

will not fall to the 3rd.

by SoCalHawksFan on Mar 3, 2009 8:23 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Looks good to me.

My only concern is that he is a bit old, but not so old that he’s a Peria Jerry or something. I’d be pretty happy if we took him in the 3rd. That, with the first two picks would mean we addressed every possible weakness.

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 2:22 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think age is a real issue here.

Yes he’s a bit older than usual, but we’re not talking about a running back here.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 3, 2009 3:32 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I would adore this draft

1. Our Nickel secondary would be scary – Tru, Jenkins, Josh, Chung and Grant. Yes please .
2. Taking Chung would mean having to switch Grant, and therefore a clear bye-bye to Russell.
3. An increase in coverage sacks would obviously have a positive impact on the D-line.
Only thing is, I think we should take Jason Smith if he’s still there. Nearly all mocks have him going to the Rams at no.2, but without re-signing Willis (and maybe even if we do), the O-line needs quality and depth and needs it now.. I believe he is the best of a very good bunch of OTs this year.

by JamesMurphy on Mar 3, 2009 2:23 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

I agree about Smith

If he’s not taken in the top 3 I’ll be surprised. I’d love if he could play guard next to Walt and eventually slide out, leaving Locklear on the right side where he belongs. Screws up the Jenkins pick though.

I also think we still need a quality DT in this draft for depth.

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 2:32 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Correction

Now that I’ve thought about it for a minute, I’d prefer the Jenkins, Chung, Tupou trifecta to Smith, Chung and best available Corner in the 3rd. Not sure Smith offers much long-term potential vs. Tupou and Jenkins/Chung could impact immediately.

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 2:36 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm wary of Smith.

He wasn’t considered the best prospect at all before the combine.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 2:36 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Depende on what site you were reading

Early this year on my favorite draft site, walterfootball.com, he was ranked in the first round.

by germpod on Mar 3, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Obviously he was a first rounder.

But not the cream of the crop.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Need to remain flexible

If you only allow for people who were at the top of the list then we would only be looking at Andre Smith and Oher, which is obviously not the way to go. Jason Smith was a projected first rounder all year, he shot up boards (top 5 to 15) just off his play, and then further shot up after the combine. The combine sort of answered some questions about him: is he too small to play the position and does he lack strength? He had a reputation for being a very good pass blocker and having very good feet, and once the questions were answered in a big way, it showed he has the potential to be a “complete pakage”.

In a nutshell, he had a good combine which answered questions and backed up his good play.

by germpod on Mar 3, 2009 4:07 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Or you could say that his combine has enhanced his performance beyond his ability.

Not suggesting that it’s true, but a lot of guys have run a fast 40 or benched a lot and gone from late first to top 15. It’s always easier to weight the body of work that is freshest in your mind and closest to draft day. I’m not saying Jason Smith isn’t the top tackle, just that, I don’t think he was that much better than Monroe in the last month or two (or even Andre Smith and Oher) to leapfrog them so dramatically.

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 4:20 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I only want Chung if we don't get Jermaine

I think we need to address OT and OG on day 1 this year. Then RB, QB of the future, Safety of the future and WR of the future over the next 2.

by SPENCEMAN on Mar 3, 2009 2:30 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

3rd round is still 1st day

Andy Levitre looks really impressive to me, guard out of Oregon State. Possibly the 4th round pick for us. Fenuki Tupou, tackle out of Oregon, possible 3rd rounder.

by jacobstevens on Mar 3, 2009 3:02 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

How does Jenkins compare to, say, Shawn Springs?

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 2:37 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

As a prospect, I mean.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 2:37 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Too many 1st day picks for the secondary

But definitely take Patrick Chung.

Monroe, Crabtree, Jason Smith, Brown, Sanchez, Stafford, is my shortlist. Crabtree was on top until he decided to not run at all.

I think Patrick Chung is going to be awesome.

by jacobstevens on Mar 3, 2009 2:59 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Sounds like someone is daring to dream

I thought 13-3 had killed any chance of optimism from you.

by Nate Dogg on Mar 3, 2009 3:12 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

I haven't read everything about the draft because I only make the occassional visit,

but any chance we trade down a few picks? It doesn’t seem like we are too enamored with anyone and it could be a chance for us add an additional 2nd round pick while taking a lower 1st round pick that will satisfy our needs.

by Wilder. on Mar 3, 2009 4:09 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Recent history has shown that teams have little to no success trading out of a top 5 pick.

Most people certainly would be happy with doing so, but the likelihood is quite low.

by abender20 on Mar 3, 2009 4:11 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Would be great

but it’s not terribly easy, teams hesitate to trade up real far, very expensive. People have been speculating that Ruskell isn’t good at it, too. Don’ t know how warranted that is, just because he hasn’t in 4 drafts. Maybe he’s always confident he can find the right guy at the spot, dunno. Anyway, most of us would probably be happy if it happened.

by jacobstevens on Mar 3, 2009 4:13 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Felix Jones for LoJack I believe.

Not sure what we got out of it, a 3rd or 4th?

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 4:21 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

A fifth, I think.

Not as much as I thought we should have received.

by djafrot on Mar 3, 2009 4:22 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

We got thier 5th & 7th (= O. Schmitt & Coutu)

I remember debating this with some friends after the draft and the funny thing is, according to the “value chart”, which is probably outdated by now, but still a good point of reference:

On the trade down in the 1st round (which people generally disliked) Ruskell came out ahead. And on the trade up to nab Carlson (which everyone generally liked) he slightly overpaid.

But I remember that if you added up the total point value of the picks we traded away vs. the picks we received back, the ’Hawks came out ahead overall (our net gain was equivalent to a “theoretical” 5th or 6th round pick, IIRC)

by jteckmann on Mar 3, 2009 4:44 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Sorry, should have clarified

top 5 was the context. Trades happen, but it’s hard to trade out of the top, because it’s expensive to trade into it.

by jacobstevens on Mar 4, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

My All-Name Seahawks 2009 NFL Draft (silly, but possible)

1st round – Rey Maualuga (ILB)
2nd round – Fili Moala (DT)
3rd round – Mohamed Massaquoi (WR) (Fenuki Tupou (OT) a close second)
4th round – David Veikune (DE)
5th round – Glenn Coffee (RB)
6th round – Kaluka Maiava (OLB)
7th round – Everette Pedescleaux (DE/DT)

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 4:16 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Grad, actually

But I was strictly going for the names. It’s not my fault USC does a great job of recruiting from the Big Island.

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 5:28 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

USC tends to love going to back to its Samoan recruit base.

Most of them in the NFL came out of the NFL. Lofa, Deuce Lutui, Troy Polomalu, etc..

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 5:57 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm a USC fan and all

but I’d rather see the Seahawks pick players who make sense for them, not just guys who graduated from the same school as me.

You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.

by bluemax on Mar 3, 2009 6:35 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

For shame!

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 6:45 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know. I would like to see them draft somebody from Johns Hopkins

so that I can say that we do produce athletes. Even if it is the mr. irrevelant, I might be happier than if we drafted a player that made sense. I guess that is the result of going to a school devoid of athletic talent besides lacrosse.

by Built2Spill on Mar 3, 2009 7:33 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd blow my load if a Duke player got drafted by the Hawks

if it signified a return back to relevance in football for us

by SeaTownBlueDevil on Mar 3, 2009 8:09 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

We don't even have one Gator. =(

"It's just one big guy against another big guy, both teams know what's at stake. The one of them comes out on top and it feels good."
-Chris Collinsworth, Madden 09

by Wayward Llama on Mar 3, 2009 8:27 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh wow.

I didn’t realize he was rated so low.

My football knowledge is pretty minimal when it comes to ranking talent. But that’s why I have you guys.

;)

by Wilder. on Mar 3, 2009 4:45 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

aren't you kind of going against your own opinion on the RB situation, John?

A while ago you were saying that a combo of JJ/Duckett/Forsett would be not only cheap but sufficient?

And wouldn’t a drafting of a “lightning” mean bye-bye JJ? We can’t keep JJ/Duckett/Forsett/Peerman on the roster, unless we dump Duckett, and then where is our “thunder”?

I admit, I’m biased. I loved Jones last year in that I finally got to see a Seahawk running back break a tackle or two (particularly in the first game against SF), and I’d like to see him get a shot.

by djafrot on Mar 3, 2009 4:21 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Forsett

Why is Forsett being discounted? He hasn’t had any opportunities and seems like the lightning back we want.

by Justise on Mar 3, 2009 4:25 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I would think a Peerman signing would most endanger Forsett's spot, not Duckett's.

Given that Peerman would be a better “lightning” (by draft position, anyway) than Forsett, and Forsett barely made the team last season (he was released, signed by the Colts, and then reacquired after the Colts cut him). Duckett would still be the short yardage guy. That said, I’m not so sure keeping all 4 guys plus Runaway Beer Truck is impossible.

by sev79 on Mar 3, 2009 4:31 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't see why Seattle can't field four running backs.

I’m fine with Jones. I think Seattle will attempt to upgrade at the position.

by John Morgan on Mar 3, 2009 4:31 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

so we'd carry six backs?

Jones
Duckett
Forsett
Peerman (or…)
Schmitt
+another FB (no way we go into the season with just OSchmitt as FB)

Not unprecedented, but considering the injury questionmarks we have on the OL, DL, and at WR, it seems like this is a bit of waste of roster spots. If we draft a back, I’d think it would be a pounder/blocker type.

by djafrot on Mar 3, 2009 4:41 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I think it's a lock their going to draft a RB

With Morris gone, they need depth if nothing else for “when”, not “if” JJ goes down with some kind of injury. And I agree with you that it will probably be a speedy guy vs. a beer truck. I think their will be plenty of good choices in the mid rounds, although I have seen several mocks that rank Beenie 3rd among RB’s (behind Moreno and Brown) and falling into the 2nd round. What a coup if we could trade up from our #37 and nab Beenie.

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 5:36 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Beanie? No thanks.

Would much rather have Knowshon, Shonne Green, or LeSean McCoy.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 5:58 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Ruskell always has one pick in the first three that makes me scratch my head.

This one would be that one pick.
I’m fine with another RB, but as I’ve said, I’d prefer O-Line, DT, or Glen Coffee or Tyrell Sutton. Sutton just will not go down, man has unbelievable balance and agility.

7 7/8" seems tiny, but that’s because I’ve been seeing so many 10"
How does one measure hand size, wrist to middle finger tip?

by LantermanC on Mar 3, 2009 4:34 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

On the pie-in-the-sky trading down topic...

I know it’s historically unlikely, but note that Cincinnati has the 6th pick, Oakland has the 7th pick and Jacksonville has the 8th. Jacksonville would have to love to get Crabtree, they need a receiver even better than we did prior to signing TJ. Seattle might (might!) be able to entice Jacksonville to trade up to #4 to get Crabtree, particularly if they are afraid Oakland or Cincinnati would take him

Just a thought.

by sev79 on Mar 3, 2009 5:08 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

A very good thought

They’d have to give up their 2nd with us throwing them our 4th, or they’d have to give us their 3rd through 6th. Either way I’d love it.

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 5:25 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Regarding Painter

I saw a lot of throws off his back foot while moving (falling) backwards even when not being pressured. I’d say very raw. I admit I don’t know much about Painter. I’ve looked at late round QB prospects and he hasn’t been on my radar. Frankly, I like Pat White. A host of very successful QB’s were considered too short and proved pundits wrong. He also throws a very pretty pass.

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 6:02 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Seneca Wallace is still on the roster.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 6:12 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

ME!

But I’m a little old at 34, a little small at 145 lbs, and a little short at 5’11".

by djafrot on Mar 3, 2009 7:40 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Geez, you sound like my twin.

"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."

by Thingray on Mar 4, 2009 11:56 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I actually think White could make a good QB in the NFL

He is Michael Vick athletic with the ability to aim his throws.

NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!

by Scruffy Lefty on Mar 3, 2009 7:48 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed

As long as he is willing, like Seneca was, to contribute in other ways while he fills the #3 role and learns the system, I see no reason he couldn’t at least be given a fair shot to develop into our starter.

by diehard82 on Mar 3, 2009 8:08 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

A lot of those throws

looked like designed screens. I noticed them to, and figured they must have coached him to do that almost jump pass thing. It was nearly identical every time.

by scotthawk on Mar 4, 2009 12:54 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I thought Joe Burnett was an early second day prospect?

He’s a good returner, but I thought he was a solid CB also.

by SPENCEMAN on Mar 3, 2009 6:07 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

John, would you mind breaking this off after the first pick?

It swallowed the entire front page of Field Gulls.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Mar 3, 2009 7:21 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Question

Are we back in contention if our draft is something like this?

by aerozeppelin on Mar 3, 2009 8:34 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Assuming all five O-linemen don't get injured,

and Hass stays healthy, we’re in contention for a division title. Thats the only thing I think we’ll contend for though. We’re still a far cry away from a Super Bowl contender.

by SeaTownBlueDevil on Mar 3, 2009 8:58 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Also,

on the off chance Warner doesn’t re-sign with AZ, I think our team, if healthy, could conceivably be favored to win, as opposed to just contending.

by SeaTownBlueDevil on Mar 3, 2009 8:59 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

As others have mentioned

Beyond the fact that I think OT (specifically Jason Smith or Monroe) is the right pick at #4, Jenkins is definitely a reach there. I would definitely try to trade down if I was determined to pick him, because he does not deserve to be a top 5 pick in my opinion.

by Brendan Scolari on Mar 4, 2009 2:03 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

I agree

I think OT is the way to go unless we trade down. I like Jenkins and the idea of solidifying our secondary, but I really think for our team to compete this year and the next, which it seems like we are trying to do, we should get our offensive line going again if we do in fact stay at the 4th pick.

Let's go.

by J Hens on Mar 4, 2009 11:00 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Jenkins might be a nice find

If the Hawks have the opportunity to trade back 4-5 picks. Julius Jones needs to lose ten pounds, get his quickness back and perform like a fast back, not a fast back trying to be a power back. Know who you are JJ!

by Section 128 on Mar 4, 2009 11:58 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Thanks, Walter.
Start posting about the Seahawks »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Image_114_small
Scenes From a Marriage at Qwest Field
Small
Post Your Hawk: Week 9
6a00d8341c873353ef00e5528e99be8833-800wi_small
Wild speculation
Rainbow_small
Video Preview - Detroit Lions vs Seattle Seahawks
Small
Chris Spencer is the Betancourt of the Seahawks
Small
SBN Layout Upgrade
Dscn0146_small
The necessity of shutting Detroit out on Sunday
Jj_flag_detail1_small
Seahawks Fall Hard - Bitch Thread
Small
In defense of Tim Ruskell
Front_of_car_small
What's Bugging Me

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

Big Blue View
Lawrence Taylor arrested in South Florida
Gang Green Nation
Looking Ahead
Buffalo Rumblings
Dungy: Buffalo a 'dark horse' landing spot for Vick

Managers

Image_114_small Shrug

Jj_flag_detail1_small John Morgan

Editors

Rainbow_small Scruffy Lefty

Authors

Vp081-c_small Christian

Small BrianL

Small abender20

Small Doug Farrar

Dksbtwit_small Johnny Peel (DKSB)