Another possible reach??

[Seahawkfan80]

The answer is that the FO doesn't do that. They just have a different grading scale than most other teams. I believe Fade pointed out what they look for, and what their approach is. They draft based on need. It is exactly why we took Penny the year before, and McDowell before that. In this draft there was a huge run on DE's and the Seahawks pegged that as their top priority (rightfully so). I personally don't think that Collier was their second, or perhaps even third choice. He just happened to be what was available at the moment. They traded down because Collier was graded as a second round prospect in their books.

Personally I really think they needed to go Savage here. He was the best player available at that spot, and he played a position that was arguably our second biggest need. Our safety position was one held together by bubble gum and duct tape. Quite frankly I was a little shocked when he wasn't the choice there. They ultimately went with what they deemed to be the biggest position of need.

That is how we ended up with Penny as well. Pete wanted to establish a running game and identified RB as the biggest priority. Carson played well but he had a big history of injuries, plus a particularly bad injury that year. Penny was identified as the one due a combination of his high SPARQ scores and durability. I think the reason why they decided against the likes of Chubs and Michel was due to injury concerns. They wanted a "sure thing" after the McDowell fiasco.

Carroll and company seem to believe that they can coach just about anyone up as well. Take them and mold them to their liking. There seems to be an emphasis on SPARQ numbers and just overall athleticism in many cases. They are great at finding guys late in the draft, but their early drafting is just about as horrid as I've seen. Some of the worst first round drafting in the business.

Carroll and company seem to favor volume above all else. They absolutely love those late round picks.

Is it really that horrid given where they've been drafting in the first round in the last 6 years? No top fifteen picks in ages.

We seem to view the lower first round as opportunity to garner more picks rather than a chance to get a great player. WE've been goos at getting more picks and that's produced some good results.

But I would have to see the outcomes of every teams first round picks to establish that we are terrible. Seems outside of the top 15 lots of players flame out.

I agree with this last statement. There are a lot of first rounders that dont make it on their team. Didnt we get 4 first rounders from other teams that did not excel enough to stay or be starters on their team? They being first rounders from 5 to 9 years ago?

Great post.

The draft is a crapshoot, but the Seahawks are exceptionally bad in the first round, I don’t get why you guys are refuting that. There have been a lot of rookies taken in the first round near our original drafting spots in the last few years that are some of the best in the business at the moment. These players also happened to be at a position of need as well. There is no denying that the Seahawks have consistently been bad at first round drafting. Even our trades have not been very good. Percy Harvin, and Graham were duds.

It is a crapshoot plus. I believe they are also looking at what they are gonna be looking at in the future for the players that are taken in the first round. Money is not a biggy, but the amount of time to get that person up to speed in the playing atmosphere. Britt was put in 3 positions to possibly learn his starting job as Center. I think it was a learning curve they were expecting. The future draft picks...are they gonna have the 2 years to acclimate to the game, or are they gonna be thrown into the fire day one and bust? I think they are holding off on slamming these guys in the fire so they have a chance to acclimate to the speed of the game. Practice is one thing, actual play time on the field with experience personnel is something totally different. Especially if there is a different team with their different coach and coaching philosophy. Teams will scheme for the opponent in some cases and change and adapt to different situations. I think that is where we see the metal of the coaching. Rookies will not be able to adapt as quickly if they have not been in that situation away from training camp.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Most often people just get mad if they don't pick the player that THEY want. And I'm sure many fan bases are the same way.

 

[rcaido]

The answer is that the FO doesn't do that. They just have a different grading scale than most other teams. I believe Fade pointed out what they look for, and what their approach is. They draft based on need. It is exactly why we took Penny the year before, and McDowell before that. In this draft there was a huge run on DE's and the Seahawks pegged that as their top priority (rightfully so). I personally don't think that Collier was their second, or perhaps even third choice. He just happened to be what was available at the moment. They traded down because Collier was graded as a second round prospect in their books.

Personally I really think they needed to go Savage here. He was the best player available at that spot, and he played a position that was arguably our second biggest need. Our safety position was one held together by bubble gum and duct tape. Quite frankly I was a little shocked when he wasn't the choice there. They ultimately went with what they deemed to be the biggest position of need.

That is how we ended up with Penny as well. Pete wanted to establish a running game and identified RB as the biggest priority. Carson played well but he had a big history of injuries, plus a particularly bad injury that year. Penny was identified as the one due a combination of his high SPARQ scores and durability. I think the reason why they decided against the likes of Chubs and Michel was due to injury concerns. They wanted a "sure thing" after the McDowell fiasco.

Carroll and company seem to believe that they can coach just about anyone up as well. Take them and mold them to their liking. There seems to be an emphasis on SPARQ numbers and just overall athleticism in many cases. They are great at finding guys late in the draft, but their early drafting is just about as horrid as I've seen. Some of the worst first round drafting in the business.

Carroll and company seem to favor volume above all else. They absolutely love those late round picks.

Is it really that horrid given where they've been drafting in the first round in the last 6 years? No top fifteen picks in ages.

We seem to view the lower first round as opportunity to garner more picks rather than a chance to get a great player. WE've been goos at getting more picks and that's produced some good results.

But I would have to see the outcomes of every teams first round picks to establish that we are terrible. Seems outside of the top 15 lots of players flame out.

I agree with this last statement. There are a lot of first rounders that dont make it on their team. Didnt we get 4 first rounders from other teams that did not excel enough to stay or be starters on their team? They being first rounders from 5 to 9 years ago?

Great post.

The draft is a crapshoot, but the Seahawks are exceptionally bad in the first round, I don’t get why you guys are refuting that. There have been a lot of rookies taken in the first round near our original drafting spots in the last few years that are some of the best in the business at the moment. These players also happened to be at a position of need as well. There is no denying that the Seahawks have consistently been bad at first round drafting. Even our trades have not been very good. Percy Harvin, and Graham were duds.

Since 2010

2010 Russell Okung
Earl Thomas
2011 James Carpenter
2012 Bruce Irvin
2013 No pick
2014 No Pick
2015 No Pick
2016 Germain Ifedi
2017 No pick
2018 Rashaad Penny
2019 L.J. Collier

Almost half the time we didn't have a 1st round pick, the other half we got Russell Okung Pro Bowler, Earl Thomas HOF, James Carpenter Veteran starter, & Bruce Irvin had a very decent career.

Ifedi sucks, we dont know about Penny if he is a bust or Collier. I think its a bit silly to say Seahawks are horrible 1st round draft picks. Im sure if you compare it with other teams, its probably same results if not worse. Seahawks has been picking pretty much last since Wilson arrival.

 

[DJrmb]

Is it really that horrid given where they've been drafting in the first round in the last 6 years? No top fifteen picks in ages.

We seem to view the lower first round as opportunity to garner more picks rather than a chance to get a great player. WE've been goos at getting more picks and that's produced some good results.

But I would have to see the outcomes of every teams first round picks to establish that we are terrible. Seems outside of the top 15 lots of players flame out.

I agree with this last statement. There are a lot of first rounders that dont make it on their team. Didnt we get 4 first rounders from other teams that did not excel enough to stay or be starters on their team? They being first rounders from 5 to 9 years ago?

Great post.

The draft is a crapshoot, but the Seahawks are exceptionally bad in the first round, I don’t get why you guys are refuting that. There have been a lot of rookies taken in the first round near our original drafting spots in the last few years that are some of the best in the business at the moment. These players also happened to be at a position of need as well. There is no denying that the Seahawks have consistently been bad at first round drafting. Even our trades have not been very good. Percy Harvin, and Graham were duds.

Since 2010

2010 Russell Okung
Earl Thomas
2011 James Carpenter
2012 Bruce Irvin
2013 No pick
2014 No Pick
2015 No Pick
2016 Germain Ifedi
2017 No pick
2018 Rashaad Penny
2019 L.J. Collier

Almost half the time we didn't have a 1st round pick, the other half we got Russell Okung Pro Bowler, Earl Thomas HOF, James Carpenter Veteran starter, & Bruce Irvin had a very decent career.

Ifedi sucks, we dont know about Penny if he is a bust or Collier. I think its a bit silly to say Seahawks are horrible 1st round draft picks. Im sure if you compare it with other teams, its probably same results if not worse. Seahawks has been picking pretty much last since Wilson arrival.

You beat me to it rcaido, and I agree with you. The Seahawks have not been as horrible at the top of the draft as the narrative by some here. Fans tend to over value draft picks in general. A 1st round pick should be expected to be a starter (or a regular part of a rotation depending on the team/position) by about their 2nd or 3rd year. Too many people want to label guys "busts" either too soon before they get to adjust to the NFL or because they have a misconceived perception of what should be expected from a 1st round pick. A 1st round pick that is an average starter in the NFL is not a bust. We need to stop expecting pro bowl players from every 1st or 2nd round pick. That doesn't mean we don't hope for that, but expecting it is flawed. At least that is my opinion, which I believe is much closer to how most NFL front offices think.

If you include the 1st and 2nd round which I think we can agree would be considered "the top of the draft" they brought in 7 pro bowl caliber players (depending on how you view Reed) 2 of which are HOF candidates over that 9 year period (18 total picks). That doesn't include solid veteran contributors like Carpenter, Irvin, or PRich which you'd bring their hit rate to 10 out of 18 picks or over 55%. We also shouldn't include guys like Collier, DK, Blair, Pocic, and Penny who we can't draw a conclusion on yet. Take those picks out and they're at 10 of 13 picks as solid contributors with 5 that could be (DK already is looking like another) or in other-words a 76.9% hit rate over that time. You guys all admit the draft is a crap-shoot, I'd say 76.9% win rate is pretty damn high for craps.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Is it really that horrid given where they've been drafting in the first round in the last 6 years? No top fifteen picks in ages.

We seem to view the lower first round as opportunity to garner more picks rather than a chance to get a great player. WE've been goos at getting more picks and that's produced some good results.

But I would have to see the outcomes of every teams first round picks to establish that we are terrible. Seems outside of the top 15 lots of players flame out.

I agree with this last statement. There are a lot of first rounders that dont make it on their team. Didnt we get 4 first rounders from other teams that did not excel enough to stay or be starters on their team? They being first rounders from 5 to 9 years ago?

Great post.

The draft is a crapshoot, but the Seahawks are exceptionally bad in the first round, I don’t get why you guys are refuting that. There have been a lot of rookies taken in the first round near our original drafting spots in the last few years that are some of the best in the business at the moment. These players also happened to be at a position of need as well. There is no denying that the Seahawks have consistently been bad at first round drafting. Even our trades have not been very good. Percy Harvin, and Graham were duds.

Since 2010

2010 Russell Okung
Earl Thomas
2011 James Carpenter
2012 Bruce Irvin
2013 No pick
2014 No Pick
2015 No Pick
2016 Germain Ifedi
2017 No pick
2018 Rashaad Penny
2019 L.J. Collier

Almost half the time we didn't have a 1st round pick, the other half we got Russell Okung Pro Bowler, Earl Thomas HOF, James Carpenter Veteran starter, & Bruce Irvin had a very decent career.

Ifedi sucks, we dont know about Penny if he is a bust or Collier. I think its a bit silly to say Seahawks are horrible 1st round draft picks. Im sure if you compare it with other teams, its probably same results if not worse. Seahawks has been picking pretty much last since Wilson arrival.

Is that list supposed to make your case for your argument? First off outside of 2010 where we had two first rounders and really high draft picks our history there looks absolutely dismal. Carpenter and Irvin were are biggest successes. Carpenter wasn't great on the Seahawks, and had his best years with the Jets sort of like Glowinski, and Irvin was decent role player. He wasn't a difference maker.

Those three no-picks were the result of bad trades for Percy Harvin and Jimmy Graham. Jimmy was a poor fit, and Harvin only played a few downs for us, plus splintered the locker room. In 2017 we traded out of the first to select McDowell. This one hurt because we passed on Ramcyzk, Budda Baker, and T.J Watt. Even Lamp is looking good for the Chargers after his injury. Ifedi is not a good RT, though the players taken around where he was are about the same skill level or worse. Raashad Penny the jury is still out on, but thus far he looks underwhelming --- especially compared to the RBs taken after him. We also passed on two 1000 yard receivers in Moore, and Ridley and a decent SS in Terrell Edmunds. We also passed on a really good guard in Will Hernandez, a position that has been filled by journeymen and players past their primes for the last few years. Penny may still work out, but as you can see our first round drafting has been horrid ever since Irvin. Even Carpenter and Irvin were nothing to write home about.

I don't see how anyone can argue that our first round drafting has been anything other than underwhelming, and it isn't because there are no players there at that particular spot. In some cases it was even at positions of need on the team. We're really missing on these first rounders all too frequently. I don't get why people are trying to refute that.

Now, Collier and Penny may find success, it's too early to write the books on them --- but my point is we're not good in the first round. Maybe Penny and Collier can change that --- but as of now our past results here are dismal.

 

[Fade]

A couple of observations.

1) How do you know who was on their draft board? I trust (most) of what you post, but am curious where you get that information?

2) Even a second rounder (ie Bobby Wagner) should not be a healthy scratch after getting his first taste of action.

3) The point of the post is the pattern we are seeing, and Collier is looking at this point to follow it early on. But yes, of course the jury is still out.

4) If they pick by need, why does it appear they do not need him, or is he just plain underwhelming?

NO...I'm not saying bust to those extremists ready to pounce.....I'm saying he was picked too high...even as a 2nd IMO.

Pretty much agree with the rest. Good post!

Okay here you go.

1) JS said it was quite the drop off at the position after Collier, and lines up with how they have done things in the past.
How Schneider lines up his horizontal board.

An example what it looks like.
https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/assets/441..._Gulls_2014_Draft_Horizontal_Matrix_FINAL.pdf

This is what JS is refering to when their is a run at a position. They're weren't a lot of names (DEs) still on his horizontal board when JS selected in the 1st.

2) Collier missed pretty much all of training camp after suffering a major ankle sprain. He isn't going to be much of a
factor this year. Jefferson & Clowney are swallowing up all of his reps.

3) The pattern is real. All I did was try to help people understand why it keeps happening.

4) DE was a huge need at the time, they didn't have Ziggy or Clowney, and they had just traded Clark. The starting DEs at the time of the draft were Jefferson & Marsh. Collier isn't a pass rush specialist either. He was drafted because Pete is in a division with McVay & Shanny, and stopping the run is paramount. But right now they have Clowney & Jefferson this year to fill that role.

 

[Mad Dog]

The answer is that the FO doesn't do that. They just have a different grading scale than most other teams. I believe Fade pointed out what they look for, and what their approach is. They draft based on need. It is exactly why we took Penny the year before, and McDowell before that. In this draft there was a huge run on DE's and the Seahawks pegged that as their top priority (rightfully so). I personally don't think that Collier was their second, or perhaps even third choice. He just happened to be what was available at the moment. They traded down because Collier was graded as a second round prospect in their books.

Personally I really think they needed to go Savage here. He was the best player available at that spot, and he played a position that was arguably our second biggest need. Our safety position was one held together by bubble gum and duct tape. Quite frankly I was a little shocked when he wasn't the choice there. They ultimately went with what they deemed to be the biggest position of need.

That is how we ended up with Penny as well. Pete wanted to establish a running game and identified RB as the biggest priority. Carson played well but he had a big history of injuries, plus a particularly bad injury that year. Penny was identified as the one due a combination of his high SPARQ scores and durability. I think the reason why they decided against the likes of Chubs and Michel was due to injury concerns. They wanted a "sure thing" after the McDowell fiasco.

Carroll and company seem to believe that they can coach just about anyone up as well. Take them and mold them to their liking. There seems to be an emphasis on SPARQ numbers and just overall athleticism in many cases. They are great at finding guys late in the draft, but their early drafting is just about as horrid as I've seen. Some of the worst first round drafting in the business.

Carroll and company seem to favor volume above all else. They absolutely love those late round picks.

Is it really that horrid given where they've been drafting in the first round in the last 6 years? No top fifteen picks in ages.

We seem to view the lower first round as opportunity to garner more picks rather than a chance to get a great player. WE've been goos at getting more picks and that's produced some good results.

But I would have to see the outcomes of every teams first round picks to establish that we are terrible. Seems outside of the top 15 lots of players flame out.

I agree with this last statement. There are a lot of first rounders that dont make it on their team. Didnt we get 4 first rounders from other teams that did not excel enough to stay or be starters on their team? They being first rounders from 5 to 9 years ago?

Great post.

The draft is a crapshoot, but the Seahawks are exceptionally bad in the first round, I don’t get why you guys are refuting that. There have been a lot of rookies taken in the first round near our original drafting spots in the last few years that are some of the best in the business at the moment. These players also happened to be at a position of need as well. There is no denying that the Seahawks have consistently been bad at first round drafting. Even our trades have not been very good. Percy Harvin, and Graham were duds.

You mean like those players like Paxton Lynch, Robert Nkemdiche, Vernon Butler, Josh Garnett, Artie Burns that were drafted immediately ahead of Ifedi?

We needed a Tackle that year and the next tackle taken was Jason Spriggs in the second round and he's a backup.

You can cherry pick all you want but the truth is most teams only get a couple solid starters out of any draft and get a pro bowler every 2-3 drafts.

The Niners have a great DL right now because they spent 3 top 5 picks on DL in the last 4 years. The Seahawks haven't had a top 5 pick since 2009 (Aaron Curry, ugggh). SF has had 3 in the last 4 years.

It's a lot easier to get great players with top 15 picks every year. But in order to win consistently you have to learn to find value in later rounds and stock a roster with good players, not just a few probowlers and a bunch of JAG's. That means drafting well all through the draft and stockpiling picks. And taking UDFA seriously. Otherwise you go through the cycle of sucking for a few years to get high picks then turning it around. Rams and Niners follow that model. We just stay good year in and year out.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Is it really that horrid given where they've been drafting in the first round in the last 6 years? No top fifteen picks in ages.

We seem to view the lower first round as opportunity to garner more picks rather than a chance to get a great player. WE've been goos at getting more picks and that's produced some good results.

But I would have to see the outcomes of every teams first round picks to establish that we are terrible. Seems outside of the top 15 lots of players flame out.

I agree with this last statement. There are a lot of first rounders that dont make it on their team. Didnt we get 4 first rounders from other teams that did not excel enough to stay or be starters on their team? They being first rounders from 5 to 9 years ago?

Great post.

The draft is a crapshoot, but the Seahawks are exceptionally bad in the first round, I don’t get why you guys are refuting that. There have been a lot of rookies taken in the first round near our original drafting spots in the last few years that are some of the best in the business at the moment. These players also happened to be at a position of need as well. There is no denying that the Seahawks have consistently been bad at first round drafting. Even our trades have not been very good. Percy Harvin, and Graham were duds.

You mean like those players like Paxton Lynch, Robert Nkemdiche, Vernon Butler, Josh Garnett, Artie Burns that were drafted immediately ahead of Ifedi?

We needed a Tackle that year and the next tackle taken was Jason Spriggs in the second round and he's a backup.

You can cherry pick all you want but the truth is most teams only get a couple solid starters out of any draft and get a pro bowler every 2-3 drafts.

The Niners have a great DL right now because they spent 3 top 5 picks on DL in the last 4 years. The Seahawks haven't had a top 5 pick since 2009 (Aaron Curry, ugggh). SF has had 3 in the last 4 years.

It's a lot easier to get great players with top 15 picks every year. But in order to win consistently you have to learn to find value in later rounds and stock a roster with good players, not just a few probowlers and a bunch of JAG's. That means drafting well all through the draft and stockpiling picks. And taking UDFA seriously. Otherwise you go through the cycle of sucking for a few years to get high picks then turning it around. Rams and Niners follow that model. We just stay good year in and year out.

I actually mentioned that particular year. Most of the players in that year were not very good, or just meh like Ifedi or straight up bust. Most years though there were players at positions of need that we decided to ignore. Players that were considered by many analyst to be the best on the board. We've even passed by players that are now some of the best at their respective positions. There has been a lot of talent that we've passed up in the bottom half of the first round. The fact of the matter is we're not getting good value out of our first round picks. I don't see how their drafting in the first is defensible between the questionable trades for Harvin, Graham and a slew of poor picks across the board.

 

[chris98251]

Pete has shown a tendency to ease guys into playing, not playing and getting his feet on the ground in spot duty has been what Pete does no matter where they get drafted.

 

[rcaido]

I agree with this last statement. There are a lot of first rounders that dont make it on their team. Didnt we get 4 first rounders from other teams that did not excel enough to stay or be starters on their team? They being first rounders from 5 to 9 years ago?

Great post.

The draft is a crapshoot, but the Seahawks are exceptionally bad in the first round, I don’t get why you guys are refuting that. There have been a lot of rookies taken in the first round near our original drafting spots in the last few years that are some of the best in the business at the moment. These players also happened to be at a position of need as well. There is no denying that the Seahawks have consistently been bad at first round drafting. Even our trades have not been very good. Percy Harvin, and Graham were duds.

Since 2010

2010 Russell Okung
Earl Thomas
2011 James Carpenter
2012 Bruce Irvin
2013 No pick
2014 No Pick
2015 No Pick
2016 Germain Ifedi
2017 No pick
2018 Rashaad Penny
2019 L.J. Collier

Almost half the time we didn't have a 1st round pick, the other half we got Russell Okung Pro Bowler, Earl Thomas HOF, James Carpenter Veteran starter, & Bruce Irvin had a very decent career.

Ifedi sucks, we dont know about Penny if he is a bust or Collier. I think its a bit silly to say Seahawks are horrible 1st round draft picks. Im sure if you compare it with other teams, its probably same results if not worse. Seahawks has been picking pretty much last since Wilson arrival.

Is that list supposed to make your case for your argument? First off outside of 2010 where we had two first rounders and really high draft picks our history there looks absolutely dismal. Carpenter and Irvin were are biggest successes. Carpenter wasn't great on the Seahawks, and had his best years with the Jets sort of like Glowinski, and Irvin was decent role player. He wasn't a difference maker.

Those three no-picks were the result of bad trades for Percy Harvin and Jimmy Graham. Jimmy was a poor fit, and Harvin only played a few downs for us, plus splintered the locker room. In 2017 we traded out of the first to select McDowell. This one hurt because we passed on Ramcyzk, Budda Baker, and T.J Watt. Even Lamp is looking good for the Chargers after his injury. Ifedi is not a good RT, though the players taken around where he was are about the same skill level or worse. Raashad Penny the jury is still out on, but thus far he looks underwhelming --- especially compared to the RBs taken after him. We also passed on two 1000 yard receivers in Moore, and Ridley and a decent SS in Terrell Edmunds. We also passed on a really good guard in Will Hernandez, a position that has been filled by journeymen and players past their primes for the last few years. Penny may still work out, but as you can see our first round drafting has been horrid ever since Irvin. Even Carpenter and Irvin were nothing to write home about.

I don't see how anyone can argue that our first round drafting has been anything other than underwhelming, and it isn't because there are no players there at that particular spot. In some cases it was even at positions of need on the team. We're really missing on these first rounders all too frequently. I don't get why people are trying to refute that.

Now, Collier and Penny may find success, it's too early to write the books on them --- but my point is we're not good in the first round. Maybe Penny and Collier can change that --- but as of now our past results here are dismal.

Why would you include the years we didn't make a pick in the 1st round :?

Like you said the year Ifedi got pick no one really stands out at all that we could have gotten better. So in reality there were no bad picks in the 1st round by Carol era. As for trading down for Mcdowell, you do know we got Chris Carson w/ that trade back right?

 

[King Dog]

Yes, I'm concerned that our two top draft picks aren't always active on game day. Swing and a huge miss at this point. Still early though.

 

[Spin Doctor]

The draft is a crapshoot, but the Seahawks are exceptionally bad in the first round, I don’t get why you guys are refuting that. There have been a lot of rookies taken in the first round near our original drafting spots in the last few years that are some of the best in the business at the moment. These players also happened to be at a position of need as well. There is no denying that the Seahawks have consistently been bad at first round drafting. Even our trades have not been very good. Percy Harvin, and Graham were duds.

Since 2010

2010 Russell Okung
Earl Thomas
2011 James Carpenter
2012 Bruce Irvin
2013 No pick
2014 No Pick
2015 No Pick
2016 Germain Ifedi
2017 No pick
2018 Rashaad Penny
2019 L.J. Collier

Almost half the time we didn't have a 1st round pick, the other half we got Russell Okung Pro Bowler, Earl Thomas HOF, James Carpenter Veteran starter, & Bruce Irvin had a very decent career.

Ifedi sucks, we dont know about Penny if he is a bust or Collier. I think its a bit silly to say Seahawks are horrible 1st round draft picks. Im sure if you compare it with other teams, its probably same results if not worse. Seahawks has been picking pretty much last since Wilson arrival.

Is that list supposed to make your case for your argument? First off outside of 2010 where we had two first rounders and really high draft picks our history there looks absolutely dismal. Carpenter and Irvin were are biggest successes. Carpenter wasn't great on the Seahawks, and had his best years with the Jets sort of like Glowinski, and Irvin was decent role player. He wasn't a difference maker.

Those three no-picks were the result of bad trades for Percy Harvin and Jimmy Graham. Jimmy was a poor fit, and Harvin only played a few downs for us, plus splintered the locker room. In 2017 we traded out of the first to select McDowell. This one hurt because we passed on Ramcyzk, Budda Baker, and T.J Watt. Even Lamp is looking good for the Chargers after his injury. Ifedi is not a good RT, though the players taken around where he was are about the same skill level or worse. Raashad Penny the jury is still out on, but thus far he looks underwhelming --- especially compared to the RBs taken after him. We also passed on two 1000 yard receivers in Moore, and Ridley and a decent SS in Terrell Edmunds. We also passed on a really good guard in Will Hernandez, a position that has been filled by journeymen and players past their primes for the last few years. Penny may still work out, but as you can see our first round drafting has been horrid ever since Irvin. Even Carpenter and Irvin were nothing to write home about.

I don't see how anyone can argue that our first round drafting has been anything other than underwhelming, and it isn't because there are no players there at that particular spot. In some cases it was even at positions of need on the team. We're really missing on these first rounders all too frequently. I don't get why people are trying to refute that.

Now, Collier and Penny may find success, it's too early to write the books on them --- but my point is we're not good in the first round. Maybe Penny and Collier can change that --- but as of now our past results here are dismal.

Why would you include the years we didn't make a pick in the 1st round :?

Like you said the year Ifedi got pick no one really stands out at all that we could have gotten better. So in reality there were no bad picks in the 1st round by Carol era. As for trading down for Mcdowell, you do know we got Chris Carson w/ that trade back right?

Those trades were effectively first round picks. They absolutely have to be talked about especially since they affected our draft strategy and capital that we had to work with. We can't have a discussion about the draft without those trades. They are also part of the unraveling of the Seattle Seahawk's domination. It would be remiss to not include those. McDowell also has to be included in the conversation since we traded out of the first round for him. We effectively whiffed on four years with those trades. Even Carpenter and Irvin are journeyman level players, not exactly world beaters, one of which had most of his impact away from the 'Hawks.

As far as McDowell getting us Carson, we still could have easily got him given that he was a 7th round draft pick. What we did pass on is some very good receivers, pass rushers, O-Lineman and defenders, one of which was an all-pro defender at a position of need. The pick of McDowell came with a HUGE opportunity cost.

Penny and Collier can't really be evaluated yet, though thus far many of their peers on both of the draft classes are handily out performing them. They can still turn it around -- we really can't anything definitively about them given that they are fresh meat. They could come online in one or two years, or just fizzle out, so objectively there isn't much to say about a Collier or Penny. I personally don't like them, but that is me.

I especially don't like Penny because of the opportunity cost. Lots of good players taken around where Penny was taken, combined with a REALLY deep RB class -- though I can understand why they did it with the slew of injuries to RB that we had in 2017. If nothing else he was the most durable back in the draft.

 

[TwistedHusky]

I cannot believe I am defending the FO on drafts but here it is.

This is an unfair topic.

Yes I wanted Savage. No I don't even understand what this team saw in Collier. And I thought Savage was far more important to us, instead we passed and got Blair.

We literally handed the guy we needed for this defense to Green Bay, and he is shining over there. Fine.

But, you cannot just evaluate 1st round picks in a vacuum. The value of a 1st is the ability to contribute immediately. But an overall draft strategy has to be evaluated in aggregate.

Year 1, how many A players, B players, C players etc.
Year 2, same question
Year 3?

If at the end of year 3, we are above the NFL average - the strategy is a winner. How many of these players would be 1st round picks if we redid the draft? What about 2nd? etc. It sure looks like Lockett is producing like a #1 would, whereas a #1 like Ross isn't. Carson certainly produces like a #1 as a #7 though.

We probably have the same hit rate, just more lower level picks to hit with. So we have a few misses in the 1st but some good hits in the 4th or 5th. Evaluating our picks in aggregate with the UDFAs it does not seem we are starved for talent, Poona at least looks like a 2nd in retrospect.

Our draft is primarily about upside whereas most drafts are focused in maximizing the ability to contribute immediately even if you have to sacrifice some upside. We are OK getting 2 or 3 spins at the wheel vs 1, knowing only 1 of 3 will likely pan out. In a weird way, that is lower risk because the 1 spin is probably a 70% chance of panning out.

I could be wrong. We could be hitting at a lower rate than NFL teams now. But I see a # of our very good to great players coming from lower rounds so it does not look like we are behind the curve. The only problem with this strategy is that it is very hard to fill gaps with, because you don't know where the hits will come from. And apparently, our track record of this working to fill the OL is not tremendous.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Since 2010

2010 Russell Okung
Earl Thomas
2011 James Carpenter
2012 Bruce Irvin
2013 No pick
2014 No Pick
2015 No Pick
2016 Germain Ifedi
2017 No pick
2018 Rashaad Penny
2019 L.J. Collier .

I'm in no way defending our terrible first round picks, I'm the one saying to give up two first rounders to the Jags for Ramsey now.

But I do want to shine a little outside perspective on how every successful team in the NFL that's constantly drafting at the bottom end of the draft fares in the first round. Here are the Patriots first round picks since 2011, supposedly the smartest franchise with player personnel in the history of the league.

2019 - N'Keal Harry, hurt and on IR
2018 - Wynn and Michel - Wynn's hurt and Michel isn't even close to as effective as he was last year
2017 - No pick
2016 - No pick
2015 - Malcom Brown, 5th year option was declined and signed with Saints
2014 - Easley - out of football
2013 - No pick
2012 - Jones and Hightower, both very good players, Jones gone
2011 - Nate Solder, playing for Giants


Moral of the story is it's very hard to find quality at the bottom of the first round, which is why Pete and John routinely trade out of the first round, or trade down to the bottom of the first.

There's a reason these players aren't in the top 15, they all have either physical or personal reasons they're not sure fire prospects...........so our hit rate isn't worse or better than most teams routinely picking at the bottom of the draft.

btw, good problem to have, because it means we're successful.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Great points. This team is almost always picking in the late 20's, not exactly a guarantee of a great pick.

 

[Mick063]

The rook has missed a lot of time. He is behind schedule, not necessarily a reach.

Reed took more than a season to get his game going and Seattle was lucky that he slipped down the draft board. He was commonly included in first round mocks. He really started to come on in the second half of his second year.

Reed is an example where the second round did pay off for JS.

So my answer to the OP is that we need to allow LJ to develop at about the same pace that Reed did.

Before the season, I thought Jacob Martin and Rasheem Green were due for breakout seasons with the departure of Clark. Of course Martin left in the Clowney deal and one can argue that Green has shown flashes when given the opportunity. The team is playing Green in critical situations, down the stretch in the fourth quarter when the game is on the line (Less so with Ansah back). That says a lot about what the staff thinks of him and I don't think Green has disappointed at all. Further, he is probably taking snaps away from LJ which is more about Green developing nicely as opposed to suggesting that LJ was a reach.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

The league is full of guys who don't do much as a rookie, for various reasons. Some guys are injured off and on, others may be next up in the rotation. But to already talk about a guy being a reach or a bust after 5 games? Seems way to premature, but people seem to love to pounce on rookies and the front office.

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

Carroll had mentioned Collier’s injury set him back significantly in terms of his development.

I’m starting to think Carroll lied about that to save face.

Collier does not seem as good as they hoped he would be and they are extremely disappointed.

Another bust. Smh.

 

[jammerhawk]

Realistically this whole thread is far too soon to have a genuine clue about what the player can do.

A reach? Maybe, but let me vote 3 years from now.

Until then it’s total speculation based upon an injury reduced initial impression.

That’s all I have to say after reading pages of intelligent commentary.

 

[West TX Hawk]

Pete has shown a tendency to ease guys into playing, not playing and getting his feet on the ground in spot duty has been what Pete does no matter where they get drafted.

While this is true in cases like Clark (whom Carroll later regretted not playing more his rookie year) we've also seen several recent examples of talented rookies given the opportunity to contribute immediately. Just a few notables of guys not taken in the 1st:

Metcalf
Poona (played 11 games as a rookie)
Carson (starter 1st 4 games '17 before his injury)
Flowers
Shaquill

Not to mention obvious ones like Wilson, Baldwin, Wags, KJ etc.

If a rookie has enough ability, is adapting to the pro game and is showcasing enough talent daily in practice, Pete has shown he will play them.

Being healthy scratches, while certainly not dispositive cases of their future, are not a great sign at this point either for Collier or Blair.