Scottemojo
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2009
- Messages
- 14,663
- Reaction score
- 1
First off, how many pundits were calling this a weak DT class just weeks ago? Now it is being proclaimed as quite deep. But there are valid reasons to think Seattle is not interested in rookie growing pains at that position.
In the time since Pete took over, Seattle has not spent high draft capital at a few positions, one of those being DT. Instead, Seattle has signed a variety of experienced free agents. Some of them were journeymen, some were pricy free agents, some were patchwork, and some were our own, with Mebane and Red both being allowed to hit free agency, get offers from other teams, then being re-signed for pricy deals. Pete does not over or under value the position. Bruce Irvin stands out as the single rookie expected to contribute much on the defensive line. Contrast him with experienced players like Branch, McDonald via trade, Jones, Siaalvi, Clemons via trade, and i forget the name of a couple of others like the 3-4 DE malcontent trade with San Francisco in 2010. Point being, Pete wants more experienced players at DT.
I think Starks will be a no go. Starks is going to get his last bite at free agency this year, and 9 years is a lot of miles on a DT who won't want a one year deal. I think Melton is also a no go. A bit undersized, his game is all about speed and stunts. So far, we have not seen Seattle do much of that on first and 2nd down, and I can't see them signing a pass rush DT for what Melton will command. Besides, I am going to be very surprised if the Bears let Melton go easily.
I keep going back to Dorsey and Bryant. Dorsey was labeled a bust in KC, he simply isn't. 5 years in the league for Dorsey, 4 for Bryant. That is our niche, 2nd deals. DTs are high wear items, I would expect the contracts to be team friendly after only two or three years. Dorsey is a touch above Branch in talents, IMO, and Bryant is a bit more athletic than either Branch or Dorsey.
Will Seattle select a DT in the first three rounds? It would be a first, wouldn't it?
In the time since Pete took over, Seattle has not spent high draft capital at a few positions, one of those being DT. Instead, Seattle has signed a variety of experienced free agents. Some of them were journeymen, some were pricy free agents, some were patchwork, and some were our own, with Mebane and Red both being allowed to hit free agency, get offers from other teams, then being re-signed for pricy deals. Pete does not over or under value the position. Bruce Irvin stands out as the single rookie expected to contribute much on the defensive line. Contrast him with experienced players like Branch, McDonald via trade, Jones, Siaalvi, Clemons via trade, and i forget the name of a couple of others like the 3-4 DE malcontent trade with San Francisco in 2010. Point being, Pete wants more experienced players at DT.
I think Starks will be a no go. Starks is going to get his last bite at free agency this year, and 9 years is a lot of miles on a DT who won't want a one year deal. I think Melton is also a no go. A bit undersized, his game is all about speed and stunts. So far, we have not seen Seattle do much of that on first and 2nd down, and I can't see them signing a pass rush DT for what Melton will command. Besides, I am going to be very surprised if the Bears let Melton go easily.
I keep going back to Dorsey and Bryant. Dorsey was labeled a bust in KC, he simply isn't. 5 years in the league for Dorsey, 4 for Bryant. That is our niche, 2nd deals. DTs are high wear items, I would expect the contracts to be team friendly after only two or three years. Dorsey is a touch above Branch in talents, IMO, and Bryant is a bit more athletic than either Branch or Dorsey.
Will Seattle select a DT in the first three rounds? It would be a first, wouldn't it?