I've got a feeling

[Sonichound16]

I don't know why but I just have a feeling that the Hawks are going to package some picks to get another 1st rounder. We have a decent amount of depth already and with 10 picks to play with I would go quality over quantity. If you can lock up 2 first round guys for that extra year and there is someone starts to fall that they are targeting, then I can see that happening. I don't really have any idea what that would take though. I am sure some of you on this forum know the trade values of the picks. This seems like such a weird draft to me though. Guys are spread all over and mock drafted from pick 7-8 all the way down to bottom of the first round. Definitely excited to see how it all pans out.

 

[RehireMora]

For so many reasons, that would be the smartest move the Hawks could make! They don't need 10 new starters and they won't get 10 new starters in the draft...but 3 or 4? It's possible and the lower the pick, the better chances of success

 

[GemCity]

I feel a reach coming on…

 

[Seahawker]

Just a guess but 50 & 52 might get us to the mid to high twenties.
I would prefer packaging a 2nd & 3rd to move up in the 2nd.
I've wondered the same thing, I could also see them using lower picks to move up in the 4th, 5th.

 

[Chapow]

I feel a reach coming on…

There will certainly be people calling it a reach the second the pick is announced regardless of who they pick and where they pick that player.

Also, as was already mentioned, there are a whole bunch of guys in this draft that could go anywhere from 10 all the way to 40.

As is always the case, calling a pick a reach because they took a guy at 18 that you think could have been had at 28 is just armchair GM-ing at it's dumbest and most arrogant. (that is a general "you". not directed specifically at you).

 

[Kamcussionator]

There are only about 10 Blue Chip players in this draft. There's a reason you see the same player mocked from 10 to 40. It's because the second tier is really deep. So you don't want to trade UP in this draft because unless you get into the top 10, you're essentially giving up two B+ players for another B+ player.

It would be better to trade down from 18 to get two similar quality players -- a two for one. The problem is every other team in the league knows this too, so it will be hard to find trade partners on draft day.

 

[Scout]

Unless a team is crazy about a falling player like Sanders or Tet. Or even there is a crazy run on QBs like the 2024 draft which also had a run on offensive players.

 

[GemCity]

There will certainly be people calling it a reach the second the pick is announced regardless of who they pick and where they pick that player.

Also, as was already mentioned, there are a whole bunch of guys in this draft that could go anywhere from 10 all the way to 40.

As is always the case, calling a pick a reach because they took a guy at 18 that you think could have been had at 28 is just armchair GM-ing at it's dumbest and most arrogant. (that is a general "you". not directed specifically at you).

Imo, we haven’t had a good old fashioned reach in a couple of drafts. Hindsight not included.

There certainly have been reaches in the past. LJ Collier was a crazy reach…by many definitions.

It just feels like we’re ‘due’ lol.

 

[James in PA]

The 12s after John doesn't use the first pick on an offensive lineman:



The 12s if John trades up to early in the 2nd to select Zabel:

 

[Sol Duc]

I agree, I also think there will be all sorts of trades across the board.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

The 12s after John doesn't use the first pick on an offensive lineman:
View attachment 70974


The 12s if John trades up to early in the 2nd to select Zabel:
View attachment 70975

He ain't gonna do that when starter-quality ZBS guards are routinely available in the 3rd round and later.

 

[Azvacar]

I don't know why but I just have a feeling that the Hawks are going to package some picks to get another 1st rounder. We have a decent amount of depth already and with 10 picks to play with I would go quality over quantity. If you can lock up 2 first round guys for that extra year and there is someone starts to fall that they are targeting, then I can see that happening. I don't really have any idea what that would take though. I am sure some of you on this forum know the trade values of the picks. This seems like such a weird draft to me though. Guys are spread all over and mock drafted from pick 7-8 all the way down to bottom of the first round. Definitely excited to see how it all pans out.

I dont think Picks... move them up.. they need a player too if you ask me...

And what... based on value how much do they give up to move up maybe 6 spots? and for what better pick than they would at 18

You say you have a feeling... but for who and why?

 

[Azvacar]

He ain't gonna do that when starter-quality ZBS guards are routinely available in the 3rd round and later.

Yeah... literally not sure what moving up X picks would net you really..... to be honest? For our NEEDS? and BPA?

 

[Sonichound16]

I dont think Picks... move them up.. they need a player too if you ask me...

And what... based on value how much do they give up to move up maybe 6 spots? and for what better pick than they would at 18

You say you have a feeling... but for who and why?

That's the thing...I don't know who...just got this feeling that someone they want may slide a bit and they pull the trigger. It could be at a number of positions...OL, WR, TE, LB, DB, CB.. am I missing anything. Point is...we are pretty deep and have the opportunity to identify players that they think will make an impact instead of just drafting filler players that will compete for a spot. I would rather have 2-3 impact players than keep all of our picks and end up with 1 impact player and the rest trying to beat someone out for a spot.

 

[chris98251]

Without depth you lose, we seen that, you need to be three deep in as many places as possible, many picks do this. How many times have we went into the shitter once the front-line guys went down after we had some success and players got snapped up from our depth. Next man up can't be a OTSFA all the time, they were on the street for a reason. Why Sherm, Doug, Kam all got a shot here, they started as depth.

 

[pittpnthrs]

I feel a reach coming on…

Crud, so do I.

 

[Shane Falco]

I feel a reach coming on…

 

[Sonichound16]

Without depth you lose, we seen that, you need to be three deep in as many places as possible, many picks do this. How many times have we went into the shitter once the front-line guys went down after we had some success and players got snapped up from our depth. Next man up can't be a OTSFA all the time, they were on the street for a reason. Why Sherm, Doug, Kam all got a shot here, they started as depth.

I think we are pretty deep at most positions though. This draft is the opportunity to ID a few guys you want to go after and then add depth with the remaining picks.

 

[Sonichound16]

I am thinking we take the Hawks highest ranked player with their first pick at CB, LB, Oline or WR and then trade up into the late first or early second to grab someone that has fallen from one of those positions. #50 and #52 are just outside what is considered the sweet spot of the draft.

 

[onanygivensunday]

They don't need 10 new starters and they won't get 10 new starters in the draft...but 3 or 4? It's possible and the lower the pick, the better chances of success

Historically, a highly successful draft is 2 starters... a virtual gold mine would be 3.

For our roster, those could be a WR (or DB, not both), a Guard and a Center.

At least, that's the way that I see it.