The "what I actually think will happen" mock draft

[McGruff]

Britt was not actually all that Sparqy.

Britt had about a 100 Sparq score.

Just to give a little context on how bad this draft is athletically, that would put him just under Jack Conklin right now in 16th place among OL.

In 2015 in would've put him in 8th place among OL.

All according to 3sigmaathlete.com

 

[kearly]

Took me a while to find it but yeah, Britt's pSPARQ was only 101.8. Which would be roughly 46th percentile (according to the 2015 chart). Still not a bad athlete, but it does show that Seattle would consider an average one.

Knowing that Britt was a mediocre athlete on top of everything else makes his selection in the 2nd round look all the more questionable.

 

[Hawkscanner]

The more that I look at who is projected to be available at #26 ... the more I'm drawn to Jason Spriggs. Crazy athleticism ... ran a 4.94 in the 40 ... 31 reps of 225 lbs ... 115" Broad Jump ... and a 4.44 second 20 yard shuttle. He ranks 4th on the SPARQ List for OL. I know that there are some concerns in terms of his pass protection and overall functional strength, but I believe those are things that the Seahawks should be able to work with and improve. While I think the Hawks could trade down some and still nab him, the problem is that you can't trade down too far ... because I'm not sure he makes it out of the 1st round.

Spriggs matches Cable's profile extremely well, but the reason I think Seattle avoids him, or at least views him as something other than a LT, is that he basically has the exact same strengths and weaknesses that Justin Britt had. In particular, both players struggle with recovery when a pass rusher makes a move on them. It's as much of a physical issue as anything else and I'm not sure it's possible to coach a player out of it. It remains a huge issue for Justin Britt, even at guard, after two years of coaching.

Pete Carroll recently talked up the OL, and essentially damned Britt with faint praise during it. As he should. Given Britt's well documented struggles and Pete's commentary, I think Seattle will be vary of drafting players with similar issues. But that's just my theory, I could be wrong.

That's an interesting point. I hadn't considered the Britt - Spriggs comparison, but there do seem to be some similarities there.

I had a wild thought yesterday that I'm going to expand upon and make a new thread, as I'd love to get others' thoughts on it. Here it is in a nutshell -- many of us (myself probably at the front of the line on this one) have been focusing on LT when it comes to the Offensive Line. However, what happens in the event that a good LT option (in the eyes of Schneider and Carroll) simply isn't available at #26? What then? And is that even the place to start? Where do good offensive lines start from? I'll expand on that more in the new thread.

 

[Largent80]

^^^^^ I think from the inside out. We lost a bunch of games without a true center.

 

[two dog]

Great work Kearly. Thank you.

Everything I've heard about Jonathan Bullard makes him seem worthy of Seattle's first round pick.
The player I feel they must have though, is Ryan Kelly. Not because of any athletic comparison
but because of the position he plays. It is vital, it seems to me, that we strengthen our OL up the middle

I say this though realizing that probably the biggest need is another defensive lineman who can
provide some inside pass rush. Bullard looks to be one of the best options to accomplish this.

The play that I personally want them to acquire somewhere in this draft is Vernon Adams.
Everyone seems to have a bone to pick with him regarding his size, his hand size, injury potential
and on ad infinitum. What I haven't heard though is that he can't play.

I have blind faith that Pete, JS an our scouts can again work their late round JuJu.

 

[Seafan]

If Ervin made it to the 5th round I'd be ecstatic. I hoped Frank Clark would fall too but didn't. I don't know if Ervin is on JS' radar but if he is I don't know how he gets past us in the 4th.

 

[QuahHawk]

If we could only have 1 of Bullard or Kelly with our first pick which position provides better alternatives? Basically if we trade back into the 40s with the hope we can then trade up in the 2nd. What happens if we only got one of our top two targets.

What is the drop off at picking a diffrent Center or pass rushing DT that would be available in the 50s?

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

If we could only have 1 of Bullard or Kelly with our first pick which position provides better alternatives? Basically if we trade back into the 40s with the hope we can then trade up in the 2nd. What happens if we only got one of our top two targets.

What is the drop off at picking a different Center or pass rushing DT that would be available in the 50s?

Good question and I'm sure kearly, McGruff or one of the other draftniks can answer properly. However, I'm going to throw out a guess that a C nearly as good as Kelly will be much easier to nab in round 2. The league puts such a premium on d-line that anyone capable of generating a pass rush seems to be gone by the end of round 1. Plus, interior o-line isn't drafted as heavily as are offensive tackles that pushes even the good ones down the board.

 

[QuahHawk]

I think Sheldon Day in the 3rd would be a decent fallback if we couldn't get Bullard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_M5BhEHYefA

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

Great read!

I think Seattle's methodology shifted after 2014. They will always value having lots of picks, but they will also value getting impact starters early in the draft, even if it costs them a little extra to do so.

Wild thought of the day:

Given the overall dearth of talent in this draft, if the FO doesn't see impact starters in the right spots this year, could they shift methodology again and move down to acquire more picks for next year?

For you draftniks, is there a hypothetical where you could see this making sense to Schneider & Carroll?

 

[TwilightError]

Thanks for a great read Kearly!

After the somewhat failure in Britt they drafted a SPARQ monster in Glowinski, who they seem to be content with as they let Sweezy go, so maybe you are right and they have shifted focus in that direction when it comes to OL.

After your hype, I really would like to see Kelly on the Seahawks. A quality C is a true need.

 

[Mtjhoyas]

This is something that I'm quite surprised the Seahawks haven't done, considering the security the FO/HC have. Personally, I love the idea of saying, "we are a bit in no man's land this year; so let's sacrifice a premium pick for a later round pick this year and a high round pick next year." Much easier said than done which leads me to what I think *could* happen.

OFF THE BOARD: Ryan Kelly, Jason Spriggs, Jonathan Bullard, all the realistic R1 QBs (I'd argue very realistic scenario)

Option 1: LB Jaylon Smith - If Medical re-checks go well, I think he is absolutely in play. Rare LB who can play in any defense, at any spot. Huge gamble but major, major upside. Sounds Seahawky, doesn't it?

Option 2: WR Corey Coleman - Athletic freak of nature. Looks like he'd fit in the WR room. Absolute luxury but could allow Baldwin to operate solely out of the slot. Yes, Baldwin can win on the outside but he's just so absurdly uncoverable from the slot. Coleman, Lockett, Baldwin, Graham, Rawls...have fun with that.

Option 3: S Karl Joseph - I could imagine a scenario where we are playing to Patriots in next year's Super Bowl. Joseph and Thomas are roaming the field together, interchangeable on who covers the slot. Chancellor can slide into a LBer role. The exploitation of NE slot/shifty WRs could be obliterated with that back end. Not to mention, Joseph plays like a Seahawk.

***All 3 options are extremely unlikely, but we know that Seattle can do some crazy things in the draft. I thought this was a fun scenario that's not too crazy.

Great read!

I think Seattle's methodology shifted after 2014. They will always value having lots of picks, but they will also value getting impact starters early in the draft, even if it costs them a little extra to do so.

Wild thought of the day:

Given the overall dearth of talent in this draft, if the FO doesn't see impact starters in the right spots this year, could they shift methodology again and move down to acquire more picks for next year?

For you draftniks, is there a hypothetical where you could see this making sense to Schneider & Carroll?

 

[bjornanderson21]

Actually the Hawks had a trade partner in 2011 but the Hawks rejected it because they felt they weren't getting enough value in the trade. I felt that was a mistake and still do.

 

[bjornanderson21]

Great read!

I think Seattle's methodology shifted after 2014. They will always value having lots of picks, but they will also value getting impact starters early in the draft, even if it costs them a little extra to do so.

Wild thought of the day:

Given the overall dearth of talent in this draft, if the FO doesn't see impact starters in the right spots this year, could they shift methodology again and move down to acquire more picks for next year?

For you draftniks, is there a hypothetical where you could see this making sense to Schneider & Carroll?

The Patriots rode that gravy train for a number of years. I think it's a no brainer.

I would announce to every other GM that every single one of my picks (besides 1st) is available to be traded for next year's pick one round earlier. Depending on the team's expected draft position there might need to be some extra adjustments made, but it's a smart move.

Then next year you start out ahead because of that trade, and that makes it even easier to make those same kind of trades again for the next year.

As you alluded to, making that kind of trade in a relatively weak draft class presents even better value because we presume next year's class will be better.

I always love trading back or trading for a better pick next year.

 

[kearly]

There were a lot of statements and rumors that Seattle was aggressively pursuing trades for future picks before and during the 2010 and 2011 drafts. As it turns out those kinds of deals require a lot of luck since there are far more teams looking to buy future picks than teams looking to sell them.

I'll have to redo this thread in a couple weeks. There's some information that's come to light that would change things here a bit.

 

[cheese22]

And that is what you'd call a teaser.

 

[chris98251]

That would be Ferguson retiring that may shake up how things may fall...............

 

[Davidess]

I would love this draft. even with the no namers there in the late rounders haha.

But I honestly don't see Kelly making it to the 2nd round. I doubt he gets past AZ in the 1st. They need a C and that seems to be their only weakness among their Offense. I could see those your round 1 and 2 picks swapping though (e.g Kelly @26 and the hawks moving up in the 2nd to get Bullard/Nkemdiche)

I really really hope we can get Kelly. I don't know if Ive ever wanted to get an Olineman more than now haha.