Eli Apple as our 1st pick. Thoughts?

Mel kiper currently has him falling to us. Personally I'd like the pick.

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... eli-apple/

Pete and John have never drafted a CB with an arm length of less than 32". Apple's arm length is 31 3/8". While I like the player I think they'll stick to their profile and pass on him.

Depends on what our options are at that point. If so, I would try to trade down. Many other areas that need help.

I would hate to take a CB in the first round when we have much bigger needs and PC/JS have proven adept at developing late round CBs.

Erebus":ot8vt72e said:

I would hate to take a CB in the first round when we have much bigger needs and PC/JS have proven adept at developing late round CBs.

Click to expand...

What starter do we have on the roster, to start opposite Sherm?

CPHawk":pma9b47k said:

Erebus":pma9b47k said:

I would hate to take a CB in the first round when we have much bigger needs and PC/JS have proven adept at developing late round CBs.

Click to expand...

What starter do we have on the roster, to start opposite Sherm?

Click to expand...

Jeremy Lane is the best CB to play opposite Sherman, and he's locked up here long term.

No. They won't draft a corner in the 1st.

They are interested in winning and have a formula Mel kiper has no idea about.

If he's there at 26, that might make for a very trade-able pick. That seems more likely than picking him IMHO. DB is not much of a position of need for the next couple of years. There should be some very train-able DBs available later in the draft.

Eli Apple has 5/8" shorter arms than Tye Smith but is an inch taller. They clearly do view arm length as an important metric but it is still just one metric out of dozens and I can't see a rational group viewing any one metric in a vacuum as a deal breaker. They drafted RW after all when he was there in the third due to failing a single metric.

We have the best corner in the league, Richard Sherman. For the spot opposite Richard and the nickel spot we have Lane and Shead, two starter caliber players. Behind them there's also Burley who is a serviceable nickel, Simon who can really contribute when healthy, Tye Smith who was kept on the active roster all year so Pete must like his upside and Baptiste looks to have a really high ceiling.

It would be a waste to use a firat rounder on a position where we already have so much talent.

I like William Jackson III better for us than Apple if we were to take a rd1 corner. I would love a cover corner opposite Sherm with speed,length & ball skills and leave Lane inside. I highly doubt they do this early but I wouldn't rule it out completely If they loved a guy.

I personally don't share the sentiment around here that the secondary group is loaded. Frankly in my mind it's only loaded with question marks after Lane & Shead (who I think is a more natural S). I sure hope this loaded with talent,ready to step up & stay healthy group exists or one injury to Sherman or Lane and we are in dire straits. Time will tell.

Lane gets hurt constantly, and Shead is serviceable but not great, he's a safety. A big reason our season went down the way it did last year, was because of the very mediocre play opposite Sherm. The safety's had to cheat over to help out, which gave teams more opportunities down the field. Anyone who thinks our second corner spot is good to go, is nuts.

I do see corner as one of our biggest needs. I also think William Jackson is probably a bit better fit for us. Apple has that unique name though that typically signifies a good corner.

Tical21":1pj2euzt said:

I do see corner as one of our biggest needs. I also think William Jackson is probably a bit better fit for us. Apple has that unique name though that typically signifies a good corner.

Click to expand...

True. Although Eric berry is a safety so I'm not sure if the fruit rule applies to cb's.

Personally, I think we have a lot of room to add competition at DB.

Sherman, Thomas, Chancellor, Lane, and Shead look like locks independent of short term health concerns. The remaining 5ish spots on the 53 man roster are currently up for grabs between Burley, Smith (Tye), Seisay, McCray, Simon, Reed, Terrell, Jean-Baptiste, Farmer, and Smith (Robert). We could easily get five solid players out of that group if our luck breaks well or a lot less than five if it doesn't and we have injuries and/or lack of development.

Planning for bad luck is the only reasonable course. The league is averaging eight IR'd players per season per team and only looking at the upside of our young players is just as bad as ignoring them entirely.

Consider a guy like Simon, who's been mostly injured and hasn't looked good when he has played. There are plenty of disclaimers to be made about that and reasons to hope he'll still be a big contributor but it would be foolhardy to pass up adding a guy who they really liked because of worry about Simon's roster slot.

CPHawk":ex84ik46 said:

Erebus":ex84ik46 said:

I would hate to take a CB in the first round when we have much bigger needs and PC/JS have proven adept at developing late round CBs.

Click to expand...

What starter do we have on the roster, to start opposite Sherm?

Click to expand...

Simon is the obvious answer if he's healthy. Lane can play outside. Shead can play outside. Seisay and Jean-Baptiste are interesting guys that may develop as options.

I think Apple will be a good player at the next level but unfortunately he doesn't have the measurables to play in our system.

Clayton agrees with most of the sentiment here:

While investing in another physically gifted player for the secondary might make sense on the surface, ESPN's John Clayton doesn't see it happening in the first round.

"I don't buy that happening," Clayton told "Brock and Salk" Wednesday. "For value, if he's the best athlete at a position that you could use (it makes sense, but) I don't know that necessarily is a position where you have needs now because not only did they get Jeremy Lane back, but they have four or five options that fit both the size dimensions that they like."

Clayton pointed to Tharold Simon, Stanley Jean-Baptiste and DeShawn Shead as viable options to pair with Richard Sherman on the outside, with Lane handling the slot.

"A lot of times what happens when you're putting together mock drafts, you figure you lose a player, or you think there's a need there, and the next thing you do is try to attach it," Clayton said. "(Apple) is 6-foot-1, that kind of fits the (Seahawks') dimensions, but no, I think it's going to be more of an offensive lineman."

Click to expand...

AgentDib":jaxua8nt said:

Eli Apple has 5/8" shorter arms than Tye Smith but is an inch taller. They clearly do view arm length as an important metric but it is still just one metric out of dozens and I can't see a rational group viewing any one metric in a vacuum as a deal breaker. They drafted RW after all when he was there in the third due to failing a single metric.

Click to expand...

I agree that it's pretty silly to let one metric be a deal breaker.

That said there is extremely strong evidence that Seattle does exactly that with arm length on corners, speed for LBs, and broad jump for OL. They've never drafted a corner with less than 32" arms, they have only drafted one OL with a broad jump under 9' (8'9" broad jumper John Moffitt, a pick they instantly regretted), and they've only drafted one LB who didn't run in the 4.4s or 4.5s. And that one exception, KJ Wright, is considered pretty fast for his size.

Basically, out of dozens of players drafted at those positions only two were minor exceptions and they came in the middle rounds when Seattle was basically picking the last player at a 'ledge' and both only missed the cutoff line just barely.

As far as Russell goes, I don't think he violated any kind of benchmark for Seattle. Seattle has since brought in three other QBs who were 6'0" or under: GJ Kinne, Keith Price, and BJ Daniels. It wasn't like targeting a midget QB like Wilson went against their religion or anything.

Anyway, I doubt Apple is on Seattle's radar but I agree with you that there is plenty of room for competition at corner and I wouldn't complain at all if Seattle drafted a good corner with an early pick.

I agree that jackson III fits us better. Watching his tape, I think he has L.O.B written all over him. I just don't believe he will be there at 26. I still think o line is the move here. Seeing how there will be a run on tackles, ryan kelly would be my choice. I know some would not like it, but he seems like a special center. They keep talking about cohesiveness on the line, and it all starts in the middle. Would love to have a perennial pro bowl center for the next decade, and he may be it.

My thoughts are:

1. I hope not.

2. He doesn't fit the measurable parameters the team seems to prefer.

3. The team has quite a few developmental candidates with some talent on the roster already.

4. An equivalent player may be available if needed in the late 3rd or after.

5. I doubt it.