Who Will Be There At #5?

[BASF]

I really don't know much about Bresee beyond what I've seen in scouting profiles, etc, but it seems he's pretty gifted physically. One profile lists his main strength as "Amazing physical attributes with elite power and agility for his size" and he made Bruce Feldman's "Freaks List" of superior athletes. His 4.7 40 is 98%ile. I see his motor mentioned as a strength as well. His production numbers post acl though: 10GM/15TT/5.5TFL/3.5SK seem like a huge concern. I don't know enough about the situation to begin to explain all of that. The big unknown is how much of a risk does this make him?

I'd argue Collier had a more average physical ranking (40 in the 4.9s) with no single attribute being really exceptional. These tidbits stand out regarding his profile: "Wowed with his motor and pass-rushing moves at the Senior Bowl" and "Tough, high-motor player who attacks the offensive line". His senior stats: 1GM/42TT/11.5TFL/6.0SK. So Collier did show motor and production; he has sucked because for whatever reason his college game pretty much failed to transfer.

The two ultimately seem like very different players. I think we can agree that another "miss" in the 1st like Collier would be a huge set-back to team needs.

Collier seems to be the Aaron Curry type, where his goal was to make the NFL and when he did, he was fine with not having the goals of being the best player he can be.

 

[HawkRiderFan]

No link cause it was from a Ringer podcast, but they did a top 10 mock yesterday and had Murphy gong to the Hawks. This comment was either funny or sad if you are Hawks fan "Murphy is what the Seahawks thought Collier was"

 

[Lords of Scythia]

The Seahawks are too smart to go into the draft with an agenda. They'll just take the best DL available at 5--which may be Carter. Would it be the end of the world if it was Murphy? The lower the pick, the harder it gets to predict what we'll do, because the quality just drops. Our own 1 we very may well trade back, though I wish we'd go LB, if we take a DL at the 5, or go DL if we do something else at the 5.

 

[getnasty]

I certainly wouldn't turn down Anderson and we should draft BPA at #5. However, is OLB really the huge need that some here think? It feels like a luxury pick.

Nwosu started and played well in all 17 games and should be back as a starter next season.

On the other side, we'll have two second round picks on rookie contracts competing for the job. Taylor had 3 TFL & 4 QB hits through week 12 and then 5 TFL & 9 QB hits over just the last 6 games. I was ready to write him off after week 12 like many, but that's a viewpoint that should be constantly open to new information and his upward trend is both surprising and very encouraging. Taylor reminds me a little of 2021 Crosby who was a liability against the run but then worked himself over the off-season to be a tremendously well rounded player this year.

Boye Mafe also looked good, albeit in small sample sizes, and we did just spend the #40 pick on him so he'll be a much larger part of the plan next year. Lastly, we will get Alton Robinson back who can also kick between OLB and 5 tech DE (6'3" 259lbs).

DE/DT on the other hand clearly needs a lot of help. Poona is a UFA and not likely to return. We may take the 2023 out in Woods contract (3.75m cap savings) due to him turning 36. At DE we have Bryan Mone and Myles Adams as supplemental pieces but not really building blocks. QJeff and Collier were somewhat both disappointing. We do have Harris, but even that is a bit of a question mark as we could move on for the 9m savings if we invested heavily at the position in the draft. We could use a rookie 1 tech, 3 tech, 4i tech and 5 tech so I wouldn't mind two or three of our early picks going here.

Hopefully Tyreke Smith factors in to the future too.

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

Draft valuation all over the place per usual. Jalen Carter could be there still. Trade down for multiple players even. I'd love 3 Tariq Woolens and a pick next year for #5. The more picks, the more likely we hit.

My preference is 2 monster DL in first round. Carter and Sweat.

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

I want either Jack Campbell or Trenton Simpson at some poiint.

 

[Atradees]

Changed my mind. I see Carter falling. Should go star QB cause they are cheap for 5 years.,

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

I'm leaning towards Tyree Wilson. Better not draft a WR at 20 if JM Schmitz is still available. Karl Brooks in 2nd and another BPA among our needs, preferably.

 

[Bear-Hawk]

Seahawks will draft a DE.

 

[Appyhawk]

If 3 of the first four picks go QB, which is a possibility, we're going to get a game changing type player for the DLine. That suits me just fine. If only two of the first four go QB we have a FO debate to worry about. If we trade down from #5 to get more lower tier guys I'm going back to horseracing full time.

 

[Ozzy]

The Seahawks are too smart to go into the draft with an agenda. They'll just take the best DL available at 5--which may be Carter. Would it be the end of the world if it was Murphy? The lower the pick, the harder it gets to predict what we'll do, because the quality just drops. Our own 1 we very may well trade back, though I wish we'd go LB, if we take a DL at the 5, or go DL if we do something else at the 5.

This is the thought process that landed you collier: you can’t pick top 5 and take the best left over at a position of need. You have to take a difference maker and a blue chip guy if you can almost anywhere and use your later picks for that kind of stuff.

 

[GGotskill]

This is the thought process that landed you collier: you can’t pick top 5 and take the best left over at a position of need.

Collier was a top 5 pick? News to me.

You have to take a difference maker and a blue chip guy if you can almost anywhere and use your later picks for that kind of stuff.

This doesn't mesh with having a top 5 pick. Sounds like you might be comparing Hawks late 1st round tactics vs their early 1st round tactics.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Um, Collier was the 29th pick in the draft.

 

[Ozzy]

Collier was a top 5 pick? News to me.



This doesn't mesh with having a top 5 pick. Sounds like you might be comparing Hawks late 1st round tactics vs their early 1st round tactics.

I never said Collier was a top 5 pick. I said the thought process of just taking a player at a position of need is faulty when picking that high. They settled for the 8th DL on the board because they got desperate and wanted to fill a need. I wouldn't settle for Breese just because he plays DT if I have a blue chip or elite guy at another position.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Come on. The choices at #5 are WAY higher quality than the choices in the late 20's that they were picking at for several years.

 

[Ozzy]

Come on. The choices at #5 are WAY higher quality than the choices in the late 20's that they were picking at for several years.

You're not getting it. The point is when you pick that high you typically take best player available. Pete/John have talked about this. Most teams don't default to a position of need that early, they tend to go with your draft grades. This is even compounded by the fact that Seattle has another pick at 20. No one is saying Breese is Collier, I'm highlighting how teams, including Seattle, typically think in that range.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Fair enough.

 

[Ozzy]

Fair enough.

To be fair I probably worded my argument wrong in the beginning.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

They are in a great spot no doubt. Esp. if a team wants to trade up for a QB. They could get some good return on a trade down. I'm still wanting them to draft D Line, but trading down a few spots could work too.

 

[GGotskill]

I never said Collier was a top 5 pick.I said the thought process of just taking a player at a position of need is faulty when picking that high.

Comparing the two just seems like reaching, big time. Two completely different thought processes.

They settled for the 8th DL on the board because they got desperate and wanted to fill a need. I wouldn't settle for Breese just because he plays DT if I have a blue chip or elite guy at another position.

That's not what anyone is saying from what I can see, creating a bit of a strawman argument, no?