New two-round mock draft

[kearly]

I think I just got a bad game of Conklin before.

I'm watching him vs. Oregon right now and he's looking pretty good.

[youtube]cUrV2cgedtY[/youtube]

He doesn't have the ability to move like Sweezy or Britt, but his core strength is excellent and he plays really smart. Good cut blocker too. If Cable is willing to go back to a slow LG, Conklin would be an excellent fit since he is so strong against the bull rush which is pretty big for our interior if Russell is to be a pocket passer. He plays for a Big 10 school too which gives him better NFL prep. I get the 1st round talk now.

I'm a fan of his now. The core strength and balance he plays with has me sold. Still not sure if Cable would go for it though, he's really tough to figure out.

 

[SeatownJay]

Why not Nick Martin in the first any more?

I would like to see them go 1-2 (though when I say 1, I think they try to trade out of the first and have two seconds) with the offensive line with a little center guard combo where you're more likely to be able to pick up immediate starters with early draft picks as opposed to tackles.

He has Nick Martin at #29 to Arizona.

 

[Hawks46]

I'd be meh on this pick in the 2nd unless like you are surmising, the board just doesn't fall our way.

It's not that the pick wouldn't be worth it. It's that we don't need to spend a 2nd rounder at a position where Rawls is slated to come back healthy. We got enough of a sample size from him, against a variety of different (and good) run defenses to know that he's the real deal. He should honestly get better.

What we saw of Michael shows us that he can actually carry a team's offense (at least the RB portion of it and create balance) if needed. He's the perfect 2nd RB in that he's so explosive, he can break long runs. If he backs up Rawls, we can expect to see him with a YPC north of 5.0 or so.

I'm not saying Collins isn't worth it, I'm just saying it's hard for me to believe there isn't value at OL, OLB, CB, SS, WR, or DT there. We have a lot larger needs than this (and a lot of them). Our 2nd rounder for a RB busted,then came back to us mentally "right" and things clicked. Our slated starter is an UDFA. We drafted Ware, what, in the 2nd ? And he's looking pretty good for KC. We can get good RB value much lower than this is all I'm saying.

So the short of it is that I don't like the position pick there, not the player.

 

[Hawks46]

I also didn't think about it, but Forte is going to be on the open market.

He shouldn't cost too much (although more than a rookie), so it would depend on our cap space and his price, but if he took a value deal to come to a contender, I could see him being an ideal #2 RB.

Maybe only a 1 or 2 year deal, but it would be enough to see what we have in Michael long term and let Rawls get seasoned and learn from one of the better veteran RB's in the league.

 

[seahawkfreak]

Why not Nick Martin in the first any more?

I would like to see them go 1-2 (though when I say 1, I think they try to trade out of the first and have two seconds) with the offensive line with a little center guard combo where you're more likely to be able to pick up immediate starters with early draft picks as opposed to tackles.

He has Nick Martin at #29 to Arizona.

We should nab him before them

 

[HawkGA]

Why not Nick Martin in the first any more?

I would like to see them go 1-2 (though when I say 1, I think they try to trade out of the first and have two seconds) with the offensive line with a little center guard combo where you're more likely to be able to pick up immediate starters with early draft picks as opposed to tackles.

He has Nick Martin at #29 to Arizona.

I meant why not to the Seahawks in the first, not why not first round in general.

 

[Alexander]

Why not Nick Martin in the first any more?

I would like to see them go 1-2 (though when I say 1, I think they try to trade out of the first and have two seconds) with the offensive line with a little center guard combo where you're more likely to be able to pick up immediate starters with early draft picks as opposed to tackles.

He has Nick Martin at #29 to Arizona.

I meant why not to the Seahawks in the first, not why not first round in general.

Rob likes to mix things up week-to-week to show the different possibilities that might happen. IMO this is a great approach since you don't know exactly how the draft board is going to fall, and you also don't know with 100% certainty who the Hawks will take. I'd imagine he still thinks Nick Martin is a good possibility to be taken by the Seahawks at #26 (though I'm sure he'll chime in if I'm wrong).

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

Why not Nick Martin in the first any more?

I do about 30 of these mocks and like to mix it up, just to consider different options.

I'm a huge Nick Martin fan BTW. But he's not the only option for SEA.

 

[firebee]

Why not Nick Martin in the first any more?

I would like to see them go 1-2 (though when I say 1, I think they try to trade out of the first and have two seconds) with the offensive line with a little center guard combo where you're more likely to be able to pick up immediate starters with early draft picks as opposed to tackles.

He has Nick Martin at #29 to Arizona.

I meant why not to the Seahawks in the first, not why not first round in general.

Rob likes to mix things up week-to-week to show the different possibilities that might happen. IMO this is a great approach since you don't know exactly how the draft board is going to fall, and you also don't know with 100% certainty who the Hawks will take. I'd imagine he still thinks Nick Martin is a good possibility to be taken by the Seahawks at #26 (though I'm sure he'll chime in if I'm wrong).

I think we'd be more likely to take Ryan Kelly... Him and Nick Martin are about the same physically and skillwise, but Kelly has one major advantage over Martin... Lane Kiffin... He's been playing in Kiffin's offensive system at Alabama, which means he's probably a lot more familiar with the terminology and schemes we use here, seeing how Lane Kiffin came up with Tom Cable and Carroll. When you're looking at taking a Center in the 1st, you likely want them to start and if they're already familiar with your system due to coaching, that Center is going to have the edge over other Centers that have the same skillset and physical ability.

 

[massari]

I hate taking RB's this early when you don't actually need one.

Would be a nice luxury to have but I'm sure there's gotta be some great OL/DL/OLB/CB/WR available this early.

Rawls+Michael+FA+UDFA(s) should be good enough going into training camp.

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

I think we'd be more likely to take Ryan Kelly... Him and Nick Martin are about the same physically and skillwise, but Kelly has one major advantage over Martin... Lane Kiffin... He's been playing in Kiffin's offensive system at Alabama, which means he's probably a lot more familiar with the terminology and schemes we use here, seeing how Lane Kiffin came up with Tom Cable and Carroll. When you're looking at taking a Center in the 1st, you likely want them to start and if they're already familiar with your system due to coaching, that Center is going to have the edge over other Centers that have the same skillset and physical ability.

Kiffin uses majority spread concepts at Bama. He was brought in by Saban to create an offense that ultimately compete with the big scorers in college. They work to their talent and used Henry well, but there's a lot of spread there too. Both players will face the usual challenges. And Zack Martin, Nick's brother, made an easy transition to the NFL.

I hate taking RB's this early when you don't actually need one.

Would be a nice luxury to have but I'm sure there's gotta be some great OL/DL/OLB/CB/WR available this early.

Rawls+Michael+FA+UDFA(s) should be good enough going into training camp.

You'd be one injury to Rawls away from the core identity of your team relying on: Rawls+Michael+FA+UDFA(s)

Seattle values the run too much for that.

 

[purpleneer]

Maybe I am biased by Seattle's recent pursuit of athleticism inside, but I've yet to see a game cutup of Conklin that impressed me. He didn't look like much of an athlete, and I didn't see any "wow" plays. But with OL there is more development required today than ever before so it's hard to even know how much game tape even matters for them.

Which makes it that much more of a shame that development opportunities have been reduced so much in recent years. Some of it is even basically by choice due to lack of patience with coaches. Too many decisions on coaches, and therefore by coaches, are made for small benefits in the short-term and sacrifice the big picture. Bad play at QB and OL is the direct result of short-term thinking exacerbating the loss of development opportunity when the need for it has increased.

 

[kearly]

Watching Collins a bit more, I think the best comparison for him is Eddy Lacy if Lacy were put under orders to never use his arms. Seriously, Collins never uses his arms to stiff arm or break tackles or stagger himself against a defender. His armless running is like that of a kick returner.

But yes, if you could coach Collins into using his arms when he runs like most RBs, I think he'd be like Eddie Lacy with 25 fewer pounds of bad weight, and maybe a little less thump. And like Lacy, his top gear will disappoint people at the combine. He looks like a 4.60+ runner.

Regarding Henry (brought up at SDB yesterday), no way would Seattle take him in the 1st. In the 2nd, it becomes a possibility if their grade on him is very high. Personally, I really loved Henry at first, but watching him more I noticed that he is an extremely linear runner in the mold of Robert Turbin. Cable's style of running game requires RBs to create more than a lot of other systems do. I think if Seattle does draft a RB, it will be a Thomas Rawls / Justin Forsett / Miles Gaskin type of RB who can feel holes before they open up.

If the team wants a "power" back on the depth chart, they could just stick with Bryce Brown who looked pretty good in power running situations last year.

I would be surprised if Michael and Brown aren't with the team in August to compete for the roster. I think whoever Seattle adds at RB will be competing with them, not replacing them outright. So a high pick at RB feels very unlikely to me. Back in 2013 I called the Christine Michael pick when nobody else in the world thought Seattle would take a RB that early, but the circumstances today are very different than 2013. Seattle has their clear successor at RB, and the #2 and #3 RB spots seem secured as well. Seattle could add NO running backs and be just fine, so if they do add someone I would expect it to happen in the mid-rounds or later, barring a value that is so good they can't say no. Henry in the 1st wouldn't be that value, although maybe Elliot could be.

 

[Hawks46]

We also have that Cottam kid that is a FB/HB hybrid that weighs 255 or so and runs like a halfway decent RB.

I get that if we don't get a solid 3rd guy we're one injury away from being in a bit of trouble theory, but a couple thins stand out to me:

Michael showed he can carry an offense in a starting RB role. Not carry it like Lynch or even Rawls was doing, but being a starting caliber RB that can create offensive balance.

I get adding depth, but not with the 2nd pick. I'm honestly not sure what team goes 3 deep in any position in fear of injury. Fans fear injury, coaches and FO have to deal with it and move on. Rawls' injury was a bit odd in that he just got rolled up by a few guys. Beast did the same thing; kept fighting even though it was done. Most people coach you to go down at that point to avoid fumbles and injury, but everyone appreciates the few you break when you don't quit.

I'm not sure it constitutes an injury concern for Rawls yet.

 

[kearly]

You'd be one injury to Rawls away from the core identity of your team relying on: Rawls+Michael+FA+UDFA(s)

Seattle values the run too much for that.

I think Michael morphed into DeAngelo Williams 2.0 down the stretch last season. Just a really steady back who puts up good numbers without needing big plays to raise his averages. I don't know how the FO feels, but I personally feel that it would not be easy to upgrade over Michael's performance as a #2 RB last year. The only RB in the draft I would see as a clear upgrade over Michael for our system is Elliot.

Thomas Rawls plays so out of his skull that I hold my breath every snap for fear of injury. But is it a rational fear? Rawls had been injury free in college. At 5'9", 215 pounds, he's not really that small. He's 2 inches taller and 10 pounds heavier than Maurice Jones-Drew. He's bigger than Ray Rice too. And the injury he had last season had nothing to do with his size. Most players would have broken their ankle in that situation.

So I kind of see the positional value of the #2 RB as being maybe not as high as some think for Seattle, and I see the value of Michael as a #2 RB higher than some might think.

Last thought. The reason for Rawls success is that he has outstanding chemistry with the system and with the personnel who run it. That's not really something that could be determined by watching a player's college games behind a different system with different lineman. Therefore, if you want to find another RB with similar instant chemistry, your best bet is to shotgun approach the issue by bringing in as many RBs as you can and hoping one of the next twenty RBs can gel like Rawls did.

So rather than draft 1 RB early, I think it would make more sense to add multiple RBs late or in UDFA and throw them into the competition to see what happens. Identifying the kind of RB that can succeed in Cable's system is very hard to do, and they only found Rawls thanks to some dumb luck and a willingness to give roster fringe guys real opportunities.

 

[kearly]

We also have that Cottam kid that is a FB/HB hybrid that weighs 255 or so and runs like a halfway decent RB.

I get that if we don't get a solid 3rd guy we're one injury away from being in a bit of trouble theory, but a couple thins stand out to me:

Michael showed he can carry an offense in a starting RB role. Not carry it like Lynch or even Rawls was doing, but being a starting caliber RB that can create offensive balance.

I get adding depth, but not with the 2nd pick. I'm honestly not sure what team goes 3 deep in any position in fear of injury. Fans fear injury, coaches and FO have to deal with it and move on. Rawls' injury was a bit odd in that he just got rolled up by a few guys. Beast did the same thing; kept fighting even though it was done. Most people coach you to go down at that point to avoid fumbles and injury, but everyone appreciates the few you break when you don't quit.

I'm not sure it constitutes an injury concern for Rawls yet.

Totally agree.

 

[chet380]

Collins looks great at the LOS and shedding tacklers, but he gets run down in the open field -- predicting 4.65 at the combine.

Would LOVE Doctson in Rd 2.

 

[kearly]

I was looking up RBs with comparable size to Rawls and this was who came the closest in the current NFL:

Thomas Rawls: 5'9" 215
Frank Gore: 5'9" 217

I just thought that was interesting.

 

[McGruff]

Collins looks great at the LOS and shedding tacklers, but he gets run down in the open field -- predicting 4.65 at the combine.

Would LOVE Doctson in Rd 2.

Doctson is probably my favorite receiver in this draft. A real jump ball threat with excellent speed.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

Really seems like the kind of year that we give the WR position a rest. At least until day 3.

Given the # of WRs we're carrying and the fact we're now 3 deep at WR and have invested heavily andd repeatedly in that position already. That investment means neglecting other areas. I kind of think it's not in the cards to be getting WR early.

Maybe we opt for a guy that drops by our comp 3rd. Maybe if we really like one of the second tier guys:

Boyd
Cooper
Shepard
Wilson
Higgins

and he happens to fall. I still think we're looking for help elsewhere though.