Scottemojo wrote:Kip, I think there is a pretty big difference between best player at a position of need, and best player at the biggest need. First draft was the former, 2nd draft was the latter. At least for the first 2 picks.
In the first draft, half the team was a pressing need, true. But Alex Gibbs came here on the condition that we draft a franchise tackle in the 1st round, and Pete made a huge deal about finding his centerfielder that offseason (hence the rampant Taylor Mays rumors). It would have been very hard to find a safety that can do what Earl does at the #60 pick. So barring an unexpected drop by Bradford, Suh, McCoy, I think Seattle was pretty locked in at T/S with the #6 pick while hoping to get the other at #14. 2010 was, IMO, in the latter category.
In the second draft, yes. It was the latter category for sure.
The third draft was latter category as well. Their top three prospects in 2012 were all guys that would have upgraded their biggest problem areas (fast LB, pass rush), though one of those picks (Barron) would have done so indirectly.
Fourth draft, Harvin. But JS did say that if he kept the pick, it wouldn't have been used on a WR. He also said that DT was the teams only pressing need, and he took Hill a bit earlier than many thought he should have. I can only speculate, but my guess is they sprint to the podium for Datone Jones at #25. Highly athletic, upward trajectory, peaking at the right time, good interviewer- a "buy in" type dude, high upside, SoCal / Pac-12 connection, and in need of coaching up. He was PC/JS to a tee. Though Jones was such a good value there, you could viably argue BPA.