Position of Need

Discuss your thoughts about anything draft related. Mocks, College and Pro. Knock yourselves out!!! LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13

Which is our biggest need

#3 DT
Nickle CB
#2 TE
#2 WR
No votes
Total votes : 30

Position of Need
Wed Apr 10, 2013 11:41 am
  • Between WLB, #3 DT, Nickle CB, #2 TE, #2 WR, RG/LG, and RT which is our biggest position of need. Which one of the positions do we go into the draft most deperate to make an upgrade at?
    User avatar
    NET Veteran
    Posts: 3221
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA

Re: Position of Need
Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:35 pm
  • Went with DT because I'm not so sure WLB is an actual need. But DT is the position that needs to be addressed in the draft not just because of 2013 but beyond
    "I don't give a crap WHAT you gotta pay, Kam is worth it and I don't want to lose a shot at another SB cuz you - a freaking BILLIONAIRE, are cheapskating Kam over a freaking $900,000.
    You cheapskate."
    SalishHawkFan SEP 13, 2015 1:47 PM
    User avatar
    NET Veteran
    Posts: 3290
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm

Re: Position of Need
Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:42 pm
  • My opinion on needs:
    LB - are they sold on Smith?
    OL (RT)

    I would just go for the best player available , we don't have any glaring needs so I didn't put them in a priority list. Most are depth needs
    User avatar
    NET Veteran
    Posts: 2018
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:40 pm

Re: Position of Need
Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:44 pm
  • I went with #2 TE. My thought was mainly what position do we need to fill this year as opposed to looking past this up coming season. Let's add more player makers at a position of need so we have a better chance at the Super Bowl. Get Zach Ertz or Galvin Escobar in the 2nd round and they should be able to contribute day 1 in the passing game.
    NET Veteran
    Posts: 867
    Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 11:47 am

Re: Position of Need
Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:50 pm
  • I don't know. I went 3rd DT but could have been WLB too and I'm fine taking any of those positions early except guard and WR. I think we need more depth recievers and a tackle is more of a need than guard, I think we have plenty of guard prospects and potential starters.

    Too be honest I view it more as what positions can we upgrade the most with whats available. We could probably go into the season and survive just fine with the roster we have now. So however value lines up go for it.
    User avatar
    NET Veteran
    Posts: 3043
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 12:13 pm

Re: Position of Need
Wed Apr 10, 2013 1:11 pm
  • I'd select none if it were an option.

    But I differentiate between need and upgradable. At this point, we could not add any rookies and our roster is in good shape.
    User avatar
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
    Posts: 2078
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm

Re: Position of Need
Wed Apr 10, 2013 1:57 pm
  • Why is guard on there? Why is offensive tackle not on there?

    Here is how I'd rank the needs (in order of importance):

    All-around 3-tech Defensive Tackle:

    Seattle lost Alan Branch but hasn't truly replaced him (McDaniels is a different type of player), much less upgraded on him. Seattle's pass rush on 1st and 2nd downs is still a problem unless they think Bennett can play every down without rotating.

    Tight End:

    Unless you believe in the B-ball player from Argentina, Seattle needs a 3rd TE. Zach Miller will be one of the first players approached about restructure next year, but they can't chance doing so until it's clear they have another #1 worthy TE.

    Offensive Tackle:

    Not really a true need, but McQuistan and Giacomini are 2014 free agents. This is a preemptive move. I think safety is a bigger need, but this is a stellar tackle class so going tackle early makes sense.

    Strong Safety:

    Winston Guy didn't live up to his potential last season, and Kam Chancellor looks pretty likely to be gone in 2014 at this point. Jeron Johnson is solid but lacks a high ceiling- he's kind of like the Malcolm Smith/Mike Morgan of our safety group.


    Mike Morgan and Malcolm Smith have impressed as fill ins. Both are probably NFL average players. Allen Bradford showed potential (albeit in just one preseason game). None of the top linebackers in the draft have the blistering speed Seattle wants. I think Seattle drafts a LB, but it won't be super early, unless they think Khaseem Greene is fast enough.

    Wide Receiver:

    Tate is a free agent next season. I'd hate to lose him, but given the money we have in the WR corps already, it's a real possibility. This is an awesome year for WRs in the mid rounds.

    Free Safety:

    Seattle needs a speedy backup for Earl. They could just sign Maragos back. They haven't yet- which makes me think they are looking at free safeties in this draft.

    Running Back:

    There's an opening at the #3 RB job. Seattle might just bring some camp bodies in to compete for the job kind of like they did last year for the #4 RB, but if a great player falls in the draft, we might see some action. A fullback hybrid (Vai Taua last year) might be a consideration.


    Seattle is always looking for corners.


    Seattle will add another QB, either from the draft or in UDFA.

    Defensive end:

    Seattle is pretty stacked at defensive end right now, but it's looking like a massive need just over the horizon. If a great value presents itself, I could see them grabbing a prospect and then figure out a way to stash him.
    User avatar
    * Mr Random Thought *
    Posts: 16083
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am

Re: Position of Need
Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:14 pm
  • kearly wrote:Why is guard on there? Why is offensive tackle not on there?

    I did list OT in the post but only could have 6 options. I think the fact we didn't have a player lock up the RG position and that LG will be a battle between Carp and McQuistin make me confident that the coaches would be willing to plug in someone else there. Giocamini has done a more than solid job. This year I don't see a 2nd or 3rd round rookie winning the RT starting spot but I could seem them winning the RG/LG spot, so that was my logic in choosing Guard on the list over RT.

    The argument for picking a player to fill in for a guy we might lose int he next few years isn't that strong. If you go there then WR seems lke the most logical because Tate could be gone, Rice is very expensive and I think with this draft class a 2nd or 3rd round WR could be more productive or at least present a bigger threat to defenses than Tate does standing as 5'10 WR without blazing speed.
    User avatar
    NET Veteran
    Posts: 3221
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA

It is currently Fri Jun 22, 2018 7:35 am

Please REGISTER to become a member


  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: drrew and 41 guests