Let me preface this "analysis" with a few points:
1. I almost never watch games anymore. Out of market, family life, wife who doesn't like football, etc. all adds up to me at best following the games online and reading out them after.
2. I watched almost none of the draft. Between teaching Thursday, End Game Friday, and running errands today, I saw almost none of it (but I did get to see the Hawks pick on Thursday).
3. Given these two things, I figure I'm just as qualified as, if not more than, the talking heads on TV.
So, here we go:
* I was surprised at the spread of picks. I expected the team to focus on DL with a few other positions sprinkled in, like WR and DB. But to see 2 linebackers, 2 WRs, 2 safeties, and a running back in the group? Certainly curious. Seemed almost like they were drafting for depth than to fill needs.
* I actually like the idea of drafting multiple people at the same position as I think it breeds competition (see the Redskins with Heath Shuler and Gus Ferrotte or Dallas with Troy Aikman and Steve Walsh).
* I have two "rules" on drafts and that is that you should always take an offensive lineman and you should always take a linebacker. Starting with 4 picks (and then five), I didn't think the Hawks would have the space to do that with their other needs. But they managed to do it.
* I think the Seahawks draft strategy is going to run into a potential wall. The draft a bunch of lower round players, then see who you can develop makes some sense. But it only makes sense if you have time to benefit from that development. With free agency and a highly paid QB, there may just not be the time to receive a payoff from developing the players. You may get one, maybe two good years out of them before they bolt for higher pay elsewhere. It might be beneficial to focus on drafting fewer players, but earlier, in the hopes of getting people likely to get on the field right away and contribute. Don't get me wrong, I'm not really second guessing the approach as John and Pete have done a wonderful job so far. But I do think *geniuses* are only truly geniuses if they are able to adapt to a changing landscape.
* The RB pick is probably the most head scratcher for me. Once you're in 6th round territory, I don't think it matters a whole lot but it seemed a strange position to use draft capital. A backup QB probably would have made more sense than an at-best 3rd string RB (of course Paxton Lynch is there but the fact I keep forgetting Paxton Lynch is there probably tells you enough).
* This wasn't the year to do it, given the lack of draft picks to start with, but I would love to see the Seahawks trade current year picks for future picks. I remember reading a story about a guy who traded a paper clip for a house. Of course it wasn't directly a paper clip for a house, but he started by trading the paper clip for something a little bit better, like a pen. And he just worked up from there, slightly winning the trade each time. I think the Seahawks should try something similar where they trade a 7th round pick this year (yes they didn't have one, and I don't necessarily think they have to start with a 7th, this is just an illustration) for 6th round pick next year. Then next year they trade that 6th round pick for a 5th round pick the following year, and on like that. Obviously you need a trading partner to do such things, but one of the benefits of having stability in coaching, management, and ownership (there's stability for now, at least) is that you can play the long game more than some other franchises can. They should take advantage of that.
1. I almost never watch games anymore. Out of market, family life, wife who doesn't like football, etc. all adds up to me at best following the games online and reading out them after.
2. I watched almost none of the draft. Between teaching Thursday, End Game Friday, and running errands today, I saw almost none of it (but I did get to see the Hawks pick on Thursday).
3. Given these two things, I figure I'm just as qualified as, if not more than, the talking heads on TV.
So, here we go:
* I was surprised at the spread of picks. I expected the team to focus on DL with a few other positions sprinkled in, like WR and DB. But to see 2 linebackers, 2 WRs, 2 safeties, and a running back in the group? Certainly curious. Seemed almost like they were drafting for depth than to fill needs.
* I actually like the idea of drafting multiple people at the same position as I think it breeds competition (see the Redskins with Heath Shuler and Gus Ferrotte or Dallas with Troy Aikman and Steve Walsh).
* I have two "rules" on drafts and that is that you should always take an offensive lineman and you should always take a linebacker. Starting with 4 picks (and then five), I didn't think the Hawks would have the space to do that with their other needs. But they managed to do it.
* I think the Seahawks draft strategy is going to run into a potential wall. The draft a bunch of lower round players, then see who you can develop makes some sense. But it only makes sense if you have time to benefit from that development. With free agency and a highly paid QB, there may just not be the time to receive a payoff from developing the players. You may get one, maybe two good years out of them before they bolt for higher pay elsewhere. It might be beneficial to focus on drafting fewer players, but earlier, in the hopes of getting people likely to get on the field right away and contribute. Don't get me wrong, I'm not really second guessing the approach as John and Pete have done a wonderful job so far. But I do think *geniuses* are only truly geniuses if they are able to adapt to a changing landscape.
* The RB pick is probably the most head scratcher for me. Once you're in 6th round territory, I don't think it matters a whole lot but it seemed a strange position to use draft capital. A backup QB probably would have made more sense than an at-best 3rd string RB (of course Paxton Lynch is there but the fact I keep forgetting Paxton Lynch is there probably tells you enough).
* This wasn't the year to do it, given the lack of draft picks to start with, but I would love to see the Seahawks trade current year picks for future picks. I remember reading a story about a guy who traded a paper clip for a house. Of course it wasn't directly a paper clip for a house, but he started by trading the paper clip for something a little bit better, like a pen. And he just worked up from there, slightly winning the trade each time. I think the Seahawks should try something similar where they trade a 7th round pick this year (yes they didn't have one, and I don't necessarily think they have to start with a 7th, this is just an illustration) for 6th round pick next year. Then next year they trade that 6th round pick for a 5th round pick the following year, and on like that. Obviously you need a trading partner to do such things, but one of the benefits of having stability in coaching, management, and ownership (there's stability for now, at least) is that you can play the long game more than some other franchises can. They should take advantage of that.