Chances Hawks trade their first round pick to move down?

[ElvisInBlue]

This is an unusual draft. It looks to be insanely deep in 2nd tier talent (typically mid 1st & top 2nd round talent) vs 1st tier (typically top 10-15 1st round).

Depending on who‘s draft ratings you believe, the 1st tier could be as shallow as 5 with many experts seeing a drop between 7-9.

In this draft 2nd tier talent, on the other hand, looks to run completely through R2 and solidly into R3.

If the top 8 picks go toward the tier 1 talent, there’s a strong argument for dropping down for as many picks as you can get in R1-3.

The Hawks have plenty of needs so it’s really all about positional priority and the GM art form of predicting a run on a position of priority.

For example the tier 2 pool runs into the 3rd, however, many teams needs dictate a higher demand for Edge than Linebacker. In that scenario you’re going to need a pick in the 15-25 range to get a true tier 2 Edge.

TL;DR: Unless a team or two picks against projected ranking in the top 8, value says the Hawks should trade down.

 

[AgentDib]

Agreed, this draft is very shallow at the top but deep through the middle rounds. There isn't going to be a prospect available at #9 who is anywhere near a sure thing and trading down is the obvious move if we can find a deal, especially when you add in how many needs we have.

Finding that deal may not be easy, but it's the job and that's where we need the FO to come through. It's not good enough just to say after the fact that they couldn't find a trading partner, particularly if there is anybody else who moves down.

 

[nanomoz]

If Jermaine Johnson or Thibodeaux are there, I hope they run to the podium. Otherwise, yeah getting another third makes sense if they can move into the teens.

 

[FrodosFinger]

They probably have 5 dudes that could fall into place at 9 on the big board. I'm just hoping they stack the trenches. Jermaine Johnson is the guy I want overall but I doubt he'll be available at 9. I could see them trading back and acquiring more picks

 

[Sgt. Largent]

They probably have 5 dudes that could fall into place at 9 on the big board. I'm just hoping they stack the trenches. Jermaine Johnson is the guy I want overall but I doubt he'll be available at 9. I could see them trading back and acquiring more picks

This draft is deep, but we also get hurt at #9 with the fact there isn't the usual 3-4 top prospect QB's that usually all go in the top 10-15.

Which makes other great prospects available at #9. Which is why I think you're right, all the edge rushers and top 2-3 cornerbacks probably won't be there at 9, again like they usually would be if there was more than 1 QB that might go high in Willis.

 

[Rat]

I keep seeing reports that it might not be completely out of the realm off possibility that Evan Neal falls to the bottom part of the top 10. If he's there and we trade down to pick up an extra third or something, I'm going to be pissed.

 

[Cyrus12]

Any chance they shock the world and trade up??

 

[AgentDib]

I wouldn't be upset if we stayed put to draft Neal but he seems better suited to power than zone stretch. His agility is good for his size but not great overall. He made up for it in college with technique but was still beaten by speed from time to time. A fair number of analysts think that he'll end up moving inside in the NFL.

Normally I'd view Neal's very high potential at guard as a strong floor as a prospect, but we spent Ifedi's entire contract trying to force him at tackle. Cross may not have the same upside in the run game, but he has a much higher floor at LT as an extremely athletic pass protecting specialist.

Any chance they shock the world and trade up??

Hutchinson is the only prospect I'd be okay with that for, and there have been rumors today about the Jaguars taking a tackle.

 

[Own The West]

This is an unusual draft. It looks to be insanely deep in 2nd tier talent (typically mid 1st & top 2nd round talent) vs 1st tier (typically top 10-15 1st round).

Depending on who‘s draft ratings you believe, the 1st tier could be as shallow as 5 with many experts seeing a drop between 7-9.

In this draft 2nd tier talent, on the other hand, looks to run completely through R2 and solidly into R3.

If the top 8 picks go toward the tier 1 talent, there’s a strong argument for dropping down for as many picks as you can get in R1-3.

The Hawks have plenty of needs so it’s really all about positional priority and the GM art form of predicting a run on a position of priority.

For example the tier 2 pool runs into the 3rd, however, many teams needs dictate a higher demand for Edge than Linebacker. In that scenario you’re going to need a pick in the 15-25 range to get a true tier 2 Edge.

TL;DR: Unless a team or two picks against projected ranking in the top 8, value says the Hawks should trade down.

I'm with you on this all the way. #9 is at the shelf of top tier talent. Unless people jump us for QBs, it's quite likely the #9 pick will have the same promise as the 10th to 20th, and 21st will have the same value as the 22nd-40th.

I keep seeing Stingley or QBs getting mocked to us. None of these QBs are necessarily first rounders, let alone top 10; and the only 1st rounders we've had playing DB for us were Thomas and now Adams. We're not first round shoppers when it comes to DBs.

Unless one of the premier edge or OTs fall to us, we're trading down.

 

[MesquiteHawk]

LMAO!!! Classic. With your approval, I may want this as my sig during draft comments.

Use it as you will!

 

[Lagartixa]

I keep seeing Stingley or QBs getting mocked to us. None of these QBs are necessarily first rounders, let alone top 10; and the only 1st rounders we've had playing DB for us were Thomas and now Adams. We're not first round shoppers when it comes to DBs.

Yeah, I see a lot of people talking about Gardner and Stingley, both in the national media and here on .NET, but the PC/JS Seahawks have never drafted a CB earlier than Shaquill Griffin at pick #90, the 26th pick in the third round.

 

[JayhawkMike]

Every year. LOL. “All the guaranteed good talent will be off the board one pick before we pick”

I swear if we drafted first overall these same people would bitch that that years draft was historically bad.

it’s not the draft. It’s not the draft position it’s the PEOPLE making the awful draft choices.

 

[toffee]

They likely would if who they wanted was drafted before the 9th. However, I don't really know how the trade works in such a tight time frame, if the team picking 8th took their guy, they only have a 10 minutes to find a trade partner, negotiate etc. and that's for 1st round. 7 minutes for 2nd.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

It would be pretty cool to be in that draft room. I've always wondered how it works with upcoming picks, who you have on stand by etc. And how quickly something can happen. I'm assuming they are allowed to make calls that say "if you don't pick x player, we are going to take him"
Also, some of the GM's are probably a lot tighter than others. Some might hate each other, we don't really know.

 

[sutz]

They likely would if who they wanted was drafted before the 9th. However, I don't really know how the trade works in such a tight time frame, if the team picking 8th took their guy, they only have a 10 minutes to find a trade partner, negotiate etc. and that's for 1st round. 7 minutes for 2nd.

I always assume they have potential deals in their back pocket, where they tell a suitor that "If our guy isn't there, we'd be willing to do (insert potential deal here). That way, you already have something available if that scenario happens. I imagine that kind of stuff gets set up in the days before the draft, not just on draft day.

Seems like there could be several good picks available at #9, though. If more than one are still on the board, they could drop a couple of spots and still get one. Somehow, I don't think they trade out of the top 10-12 or so.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

They likely would if who they wanted was drafted before the 9th. However, I don't really know how the trade works in such a tight time frame, if the team picking 8th took their guy, they only have a 10 minutes to find a trade partner, negotiate etc. and that's for 1st round. 7 minutes for 2nd.

Every team in the first round maps out a dozen different scenarios depending on their position and players they've targeted as potential picks.

Meaning I'm sure Pete and John have a priority list of:

1. If <insert name of player(s)> is available at nine, we stay put and draft him.
2. If <insert name of player(s)> aren't there at nine, we move onto our next available players we're willing to drop down <insert number of picks to drop down and still assure that player(s) are still there.>

In your "no time" scenario. John and Pete will know by pick 6 or 7 that there's a likelihood that their guy won't be there, so they're already making phone calls with teams in case their guy is selected.

Bottom line, it's all fluid and prepared enough to account for EVERY scenario to unfold.

 

[K.J WRIGHT]

Any chance they shock the world and trade up??

I think they move up and take Malik Willis.

 

[Appyhawk]

I think they will use #9 pick. This is the second time they have been picking in the top 10 since they took over the Seahawks. I think they will go with OL or DL there, leaning more toward OL.

My gut feeling is telling me there's a higher chance they trade up from their 2nd round picks into the first round if there is someone like say Ridder or Corral still available late in the 1st rd.

I hope you are right on, hawkfan68. But it doesn't seem like our staff buys into my "quality over quantity" theory. Seems like they don't understand that when you have more apples in the barrel most of those under the ones on top get crushed. They are too stuck on gloating over their spectacular string of hits in lower rounds during the early part of their tenure.

 

[TwistedHusky]

The Seahawk philosophy has generally been to maximize opportunities for star players over the opportunity to fill a need or the ability to get someone to contribute right away.

They do this by getting as many 'spins of the wheel' as possible.

If you assume that we are rebuilding, your mission is to pack the team with potential stars - regardless of position. So in that case, yes you want more draft picks - not 'better' ones. (Because you draft for upside not ability/existing value)

If you assume we are trying to compete, then you need to fill holes and need to use that draft slot to get the best possible player you can in areas of need.

So whether we trade down or not will be a good indicator of whether we are doing a rebuild or actually think we can run with this roster.

 

[James in PA]

I have a feeling there are like 5-6 players they would love to get at #9. Chances are, those players will all be gone by 9. So, I predict another trade down. I'd be fine with that as long as a guy like Sauce or Thibodeaux isn't still available.