JSeahawks wrote:I hope we pass on that Harvard fullback just for the fact that his name will cause spelling nightmares all over .net

That's what nicknames are for. Nobody in the fan base has time to type Juszczyk, by the next morning he would be Ju, Jus, KJ, Juice, etc.

Hoping you're spot on with the Sinkfield prediction. He's got the kind of speed that could really be the final piece to the WR corps, a piece that's needed IMO.

I like how you put Cooper Taylor's position as CB, first.

Brandon Browner better watch his back!

Most of you probably don't know about Quinn sharp, but the guy is a fantastic athlete and player. he can punt as well as kick, has a cannon for a leg and his directional punts are very good. I like him for his versatility. And because he's a Cowboy.

For those saying RB wouldn't happen in the 2nd:

-We only have two RBs right now, three if you count Robinson. Most teams carry 4 or 5. Seattle is adding a RB, and in this mock I actually have us adding two since the team will want depth for Robinson.

-Seattle is very picky with running backs. They want big backs with speed, athleticism and power with good tape. Seattle was very fortunate to get a back with those criteria in the 4th round last year. I had us taking Michael in the 4th last week because I thought he was under the radar. I was very wrong. He's looking like a near-lock in round 2 now. And for good reason. He has monster upside. If Seattle passes on Michael, there aren't a ton of mid round options that fit our criteria, and the ones that do wouldn't have a fraction of Michael's upside.

-If we draft a TE in round 2, he's replacing the 3rd TE. If we draft an OT he'd be the 3rd OT in 2013. If we draft a LB in round 2, he'd barely see the field as Seattle is going very, very nickle heavy in 2013. RB is no more/less of a need than TE, OT, or LB is. DT is the only spot where I think there's much of a case of it being a true need- but what if the Seahawks view McDaniel as an Alan Branch type? If they do, DT isn't much of a need at all.

-Is Turbin really the future bell-cow back for us? I think Turbin is great, but when I watch him closely I get Maurice Morris vibes. Lynch probably isn't going to fall off the cliff tomorrow but it needs to be said, he has a lot of miles on those tires and his decline, when it does occur, will probably be swift and unexpected. Shaun fell off his career cliff immediately after his MVP season, and it wasn't just because of Hutch leaving. I think RB could be a sneaky need in this draft.

-I would argue that Seattle doesn't have any clear needs this year that stand out above the others- they can just draft the best player at a variety of positions that makes the most long term sense. Christine Michael has top 10 overall pick type athleticism. You can't say that about any other prospect at #56, period. The closest being maybe Menelik Watson, and Watson is extremely risky. Seattle drafts based on atleticism first, and they aren't pigeonholed into drafting certain areas early. I think they will probably just draft the best athlete at #56 (even Denard Robinson wouldn't shock me).

Christine Michael is the best athlete that's likely to be available, and it's not even that close, so he's the pick I went with. I also think Menelik Watson, Brandon Williams, John Jenkins and even Stefan Charles could draw serious consideration as well as they are uncommon athletes.

Kearly, do you think Christine Michael gets past GB at #55?

GB has shown very strong interest in two of the players on the Hawks draft board - Michaels and Quessenberry.

SDHawk wrote:Kearly, do you think Christine Michael gets past GB at #55?

GB has shown very strong interest in two of the players on the Hawks draft board - Michaels and Quessenberry.

Good point. Green Bay needs a running back pretty badly and they have favored power backs in the past.

I expect the Hawks to take a RB at some point. Michael, Jonathan Franklin or Latavius Murray would be great pickups. IMO, Murray may end up being one of the steals of the draft and perhaps the only one of the 3 that will be available to the Hawks 3rd round and beyond. Michael ran a 4.54. Franklin 4.49. Murray 4.38. Murray is a BIG, FAST, STRONG back. 6-3 / 223. He excels catching the ball out of the backfield as well. I wouldn't be opposed to the Hawks drafting Marcus Lattimore if he's there at 56. I think the Hawks might be a team that could afford to give him more time to rehab and even stash him on IR for a year. I know there are still needs... but, depends on what value is left when it's time to select.

I'm interested to see where LB Jayson DiManche ends up. I can't remember who originally posted about that player (Scottemojo?) Another intriguing LB prospect is Ty Powell.

Nice call Kearly.

Blam...spot on!

Damn man, nailed it. Impressive

peachesenregalia wrote:I won't cheer for a dude named Christine. I just won't.

Oh really?

T-Sizzle wrote:

Missing_Clink wrote:

hidn wrote:I like Christine Michael, but I really don't want to see the Seahawks take a RB in the second.

We know from PC that in the USC days he often had a stable of star running backs, and unfortunately Marshawn isn't going to be able to run over everyone forever. From everything I've heard, Michael is absolutely elite in terms of athleticism for a big back. And if you saw those tweets when he visited, he would LOVE to be a seahawk. I can understand not wanting to take a RB that high, but personally I would be very happy if we got Michael.

Don't worry, the guy who said he would never cheer for a guy named Christine and other .net guys who pre draft said they didn't like him would become his biggest fan the second we drafted him.

I expected better, kearly.

Impressive Kip.

Did you enter the real rob report jersey give away for guessing the first rounder?

HawkGA wrote:RB? Really?

Yes, really.

You nailed it kearly. Excellent work.
When we traded down I wasn't sure he'd get past GB, but sure enough... they went for Lacy instead.
Right on man! What a steal to get Christine Michael at 62!

kearly wrote:For those saying RB wouldn't happen in the 2nd:

-We only have two RBs right now, three if you count Robinson. Most teams carry 4 or 5. Seattle is adding a RB, and in this mock I actually have us adding two since the team will want depth for Robinson.

-Seattle is very picky with running backs. They want big backs with speed, athleticism and power with good tape. Seattle was very fortunate to get a back with those criteria in the 4th round last year. I had us taking Michael in the 4th last week because I thought he was under the radar. I was very wrong. He's looking like a near-lock in round 2 now. And for good reason. He has monster upside. If Seattle passes on Michael, there aren't a ton of mid round options that fit our criteria, and the ones that do wouldn't have a fraction of Michael's upside.

-If we draft a TE in round 2, he's replacing the 3rd TE. If we draft an OT he'd be the 3rd OT in 2013. If we draft a LB in round 2, he'd barely see the field as Seattle is going very, very nickle heavy in 2013. RB is no more/less of a need than TE, OT, or LB is. DT is the only spot where I think there's much of a case of it being a true need- but what if the Seahawks view McDaniel as an Alan Branch type? If they do, DT isn't much of a need at all.

-Is Turbin really the future bell-cow back for us? I think Turbin is great, but when I watch him closely I get Maurice Morris vibes. Lynch probably isn't going to fall off the cliff tomorrow but it needs to be said, he has a lot of miles on those tires and his decline, when it does occur, will probably be swift and unexpected. Shaun fell off his career cliff immediately after his MVP season, and it wasn't just because of Hutch leaving. I think RB could be a sneaky need in this draft.

-I would argue that Seattle doesn't have any clear needs this year that stand out above the others- they can just draft the best player at a variety of positions that makes the most long term sense. Christine Michael has top 10 overall pick type athleticism. You can't say that about any other prospect at #56, period. The closest being maybe Menelik Watson, and Watson is extremely risky. Seattle drafts based on atleticism first, and they aren't pigeonholed into drafting certain areas early. I think they will probably just draft the best athlete at #56 (even Denard Robinson wouldn't shock me).

Christine Michael is the best athlete that's likely to be available, and it's not even that close, so he's the pick I went with. I also think Menelik Watson, Brandon Williams, John Jenkins and even Stefan Charles could draw serious consideration as well as they are uncommon athletes.

Damn! Awesome stuff man. Way to stand behind your pick.

lukerguy wrote:Impressive Kip.

Did you enter the real rob report jersey give away for guessing the first rounder?

You mean the first pick? No I didn't. I hadn't heard about that.

bigtrain21 wrote:Damn! Awesome stuff man. Way to stand behind your pick.

I don't know Kearly, you had us taking him with the 56 pick, seems the trade really messed you up. Great insight, I learned more about him today reading your comments prior to the draft. Good job.

Damn Kip, I think you ought to apply for a draft analyst job with ESPN or NFLN. You rock!!

You got the first one right...

Batted .100 overall.

I batted .300 last year and mentioned 60% of the players taken on the blog.

This year I batted just .100 and only mentioned 45% of the players taken on the blog, though I knew of Luke Willson and stupidly didn't mention him. Seattle went waaaay off the radar this year. Reminds me a lot of what they did in 2011.

Kearly its not important to me if you predict them all right or all wrong. I appreciate all the research you do and share it with us all here.This year i had almost no time to watch or read much about the prospects so it made me appreciate the effort you,Rob and other posters made to share knowledge and opinions.hats off to all the posters who put in the hours and shared ideas.Who is right or wrong is irrelevant to me.

justafan wrote:Kearly its not important to me if you predict them all right or all wrong. I appreciate all the research you do and share it with us all here.This year i had almost no time to watch or read much about the prospects so it made me appreciate the effort you,Rob and other posters made to share knowledge and opinions.hats off to all the posters who put in the hours and shared ideas.Who is right or wrong is irrelevant to me.

Yep. Cheers fellas!

ASJ is probably my favorite NCAA player. If healthy (and on the field), I think this year will be the year he puts the final touches on his game. If I'm correct, and Price is protected(!) and gives us what he's capable of, I think ASJ will go between 10-15. It would cost us a fortune to move up that high. As much as I'd love to keep him in Seattle, I don't know that with the weapons we currently have, that it would make sense to move up. I do think we will have to address the position in this draft, though.

As an aside; Everyone wants to hate on Jerramy Stevens (and do so with good reason). But I personally think Stevens was better (at UDub) than the great ASJ. Anyone agree or am I totally off base?

On Clowney: Like USC, I used to hate the Raiders. Like USC, I now almost feel sorry for the Raiders. It's no longer fun, or sporting, rooting against them. I am hopeful they have found their QB in Wilson or Flynn so they can grab Clowney. I know Davis would have wanted him. I can't recall a more dominant, disruptive (Raider) since the great John Matuszak.

Thanks for these threads, Kearly. I especially appreciate the film clips (and insight) on players I'm often unfamilar with. Great stuff.

EDIT: I previously posted this in the wrong thread but it belongs in this one. I really am interested in learning whether I am alone in thinking Stevens was the better TE at UDub (and to offer props for Kearly's hard work).

I apologise for my error.