OL Movement

[Sun Tzu]

Coming out of the FA signings, we have to draft for needs. The NEED to draft would be IOL, and LB, if we don't address those needs, we can't match the winning record of 2023.

No! Good GMs do not draft for need. There are many other options for rounding out the roster and filling in weak spots. Passing on the BPA and throwing draft selections at needs is what perennial losers do. Not only is it poor roster building from a long-term perspective, but it is also a poor way to address a need since predicting the performance of a rookie player is impossible. Therefore, relying on a rookie to address a need is foolish.

Prior to the draft, we have a couple of weak spots. However, these are weak spots, not empty spots. We do have veterans who can fill the role, just not at the level we would like to see.

We have options other than drafting for need. We may be fortunate and have the BPA lineup with a need, adding a rookie to the competition at those spots. If we do have obvious weak spots, UDFAs at those positions are more likely to see the Hawks as a favorable opportunity to make a roster. We have the inevitable cuts that occur every year between the draft and the start of the season. Teams will look to trade once spring training starts and there are clear areas that they will have solid players unable to make the final roster.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

I didn’t know Seahawks retained Raiqwon Oniell and McClendon Curtis… if Lucas is healthy what if the starting 5 was

LT: Cross, (Fant), O’Neill
LG: Curtis, Anchrum
OC: Olu Olu, Harris
RG: Lucas, Bradford
RT: Fant, Forsythe

On Lucas, I don’t know which knee is the issue but whatever side that causes less stress on that knee is what guard position he goes to. But if it’s been a chronic thing then maybe that’s a big reason why he’s stayed on the right side this whole time when he has the ability to play LT.

Playing guard might pro-long Lucas’s career as he won’t be left on an island as much having to mirror step with speedy pass-rushers. And playing inside it won’t hurt him as much if he loses a little of his quickness and athleticism in terms of getting bigger and stronger and he’ll get much more help with the center being able to help out as opposed to having to dedicate a TE.

And you can also manage Lucas by platooning him with Bradford.

Fant is quality enough to start at RT for the time being and the draft is deep enough where you can draft an heir apparent at the position and get a quality starter.

If Seahawks can trade down twice into the late first/early 2nd range while also utilizing those extra picks to trade up and possibly using guys like Walker and Woolen as trade chips if need be. I think the best case scenario at least for the Oline is ending up with something like a Roger Rosengarten in the late 2nd/early 3rd possibly mid 3rd/early 4th who might need a developmental year or two to build up his body and get bigger and stronger while maximizing his skill set being only 21, I think he came into college around 270, 280 and is only 300-310 pounds at 6’6. Rosengarten seems to also have a similar athletic and length profile to Lucas as NFL draft buzz list their comparison at 82% with Lucas testing more agile.

Then grabbing someone who can start right away like Cooper Beebe for LG with your late first/early 2nd pick.

2 deep OL:
LT: Cross, Forsythe
LG: Beebe, Curtis or Anchrum
OC: Olu Olu or Harris
RG: Lucas, Bradford
RT: Fant, Rosengarten

 

[toffee]

No! Good GMs do not draft for need. There are many other options for rounding out the roster and filling in weak spots. Passing on the BPA and throwing draft selections at needs is what perennial losers do. Not only is it poor roster building from a long-term perspective, but it is also a poor way to address a need since predicting the performance of a rookie player is impossible. Therefore, relying on a rookie to address a need is foolish.

Prior to the draft, we have a couple of weak spots. However, these are weak spots, not empty spots. We do have veterans who can fill the role, just not at the level we would like to see.

We have options other than drafting for need. We may be fortunate and have the BPA lineup with a need, adding a rookie to the competition at those spots. If we do have obvious weak spots, UDFAs at those positions are more likely to see the Hawks as a favorable opportunity to make a roster. We have the inevitable cuts that occur every year between the draft and the start of the season. Teams will look to trade once spring training starts and there are clear areas that they will have solid players unable to make the final roster.

You are RIGHT, good GMs do not draft for need. However, we do not have the luxury of not drafting for need in this year. We don't have a starting LG, and a sophomore RG that didn't play well in his rookie year. We have two centers, both of questionable capabilities.

 

[nwHawk]

It would be interesting to see Lucas play next to Cross at LG. Not sure how it would go long term, but there are several RT prospects near the top of the draft.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Swing tackle was the big concern for me, and they got it handled in beautiful fashion with Fant. That's a hell of an insurance policy for either spot, and I expect he'll play quite a bit of RT this year unfortunately.

We're sitting fairly pretty but thin going into the draft. There's going to be legit competition at both guard spots when all is said and done. We're counting on Olu.

I think young and cheap is the way to go for this line, though, quite honestly. Outside of tackle, at least. We made a point to hire an OC who has background mainly as an OL coach and an eye for OL talent. We should lean on that to churn through young guys, draft prospects, and minimum free agents. Let his eye for talent and his record of development shine through there.

OL performance is more about continuity, coaching, fundamentals, and offensive scheme than it is raw talent. You can find a LOT of raw talent in the NFL for cheap at the OL spot. The money can be put to better use at more premium spots and go to locking down our line's bookends, in my opinion.

I expect we'll be taking a guard or two, probably one in the third or early fourth like a Christian Mahogany, Mason McCormick, or Zak Zinter.

 

[bileever]

I think the Seahawks determined that they wanted to move on from Evan Brown, and I don't disagree with that. We need a little more than bottom fourth play from the center. Still, given how little Arizona paid to get him ($2 million), it seems like it might have been prudent to keep him as a backup center/guard.

As for Damien Lewis, I would have liked to keep him, but not for $53 million over 4 years. Not for a guy who graded out at #37, and was even worse as a run blocker, which is supposed to be his forte. Carolina has clearly lost its mind by paying over $150 million for two guards this off season. (They gave Robert Hunt $100 million over 5 years, but at least he's good.)

I don't know how much Jake Curhan is getting from the Bears, but it would have been nice to keep him. I agree that George Fant is better than Curhan, but Fant is also older.

I don't think we're done rebuilding the O-line. It was definitely the weak link on the offense last year. We can't afford to get worse, or even stay the same, at those positions this year.

 

[HawkRiderFan]

Re. Fant, what always bugged me about him leaving was it felt like the Hawks had to take their lumps as he learned how to play tackles. Then once it was time for that development to pay off he was gone. I guess there was no choice with him coming off injury but Duane Brown coming in the meantime (if I have my years right)

 

[AgentDib]

Re. Fant, what always bugged me about him leaving was it felt like the Hawks had to take their lumps as he learned how to play tackles. Then once it was time for that development to pay off he was gone. I guess there was no choice with him coming off injury but Duane Brown coming in the meantime (if I have my years right)

That is a fair concern, and one of the problems with drafting players who need a ton of development. By the time they are contributing the rookie contract is running out and you've lost a bunch of the value. The potential upside is that those players haven't yet made much money, so if the staff believes in them then you should be able to work out a team friendly extension for the second contract by dangling upfront guaranteed money.

As far as Fant goes, I think that was just really bad luck. He's missed one season in his career and it was the one where we were counting on him being our starting LT.

 

[nanomoz]

I have a sneaking suspicion that McClendon Curtis will have a chance to win a guard spot. He was protected on the active roster all season despite not playing. John has got to be high on him.

 

[toffee]

Re. Fant, what always bugged me about him leaving was it felt like the Hawks had to take their lumps as he learned how to play tackles. Then once it was time for that development to pay off he was gone. I guess there was no choice with him coming off injury but Duane Brown coming in the meantime (if I have my years right)

Fant could also play RT ....

 

[JayhawkMike]

it is shocking if anyone is shocked by a GM that has ignored the OLine fora decade . . . Uhhh . . . Ignoring the oline yet again. Nice little Locked on Seahawks segment yesterday about

 

[Jville]

I have a sneaking suspicion that McClendon Curtis will have a chance to win a guard spot. He was protected on the active roster all season despite not playing. John has got to be high on him.

Forgot about that 210k signing bonus by the Raiders.

John Schneider jumped at signing McClendon when the Raiders exposed him to favors while trying to move him to their practice squad.

Thanks for the link. Looking forward to seeing Curtis in the pre season and getting a better idea as to how physical and how well he can fit in.

 

[Chuckwow]

Like many of you, I flat out live for the draft. It's much bigger for me than even the SB (if we're not in it). This one will be epic and there's going to be several different runs on several different position groups. QBs, WRS, OL, CBs...so near impossible trying to determine who will fall into our laps. This is a draft where we can land a future pro-bowler at 16 (imo). But (imo) it's also a draft where we can land two studs in exchange for that 16.

This deep into March, typically, I'd have something of a strategy in place by now. But I can't make up my mind on whether we should trade down, or even out, at this point. TBH, I've kind of given up. But I do so with a feeling of confidence. Two things I want for sure: I want us to run the ball and I want us to stop the run. So go get whoever it is that will make that happen and I will be stoked with this '24 draft.

 

[DirectMessage]

Like many of you, I flat out live for the draft. It's much bigger for me than even the SB (if we're not in it). This one will be epic and there's going to be several different runs on several different position groups. QBs, WRS, OL, CBs...so near impossible trying to determine who will fall into our laps. This is a draft where we can land a future pro-bowler at 16 (imo). But (imo) it's also a draft where we can land two studs in exchange for that 16.

This deep into March, typically, I'd have something of a strategy in place by now. But I can't make up my mind on whether we should trade down, or even out, at this point. TBH, I've kind of given up. But I do so with a feeling of confidence. Two things I want for sure: I want us to run the ball and I want us to stop the run. So go get whoever it is that will make that happen and I will be stoked with this '24 draft.

Since this is a deep draft, I wouldn't mind if they traded down for the first 4 rounds. Pick up some extra draft capital.

 

[oldhawkfan]

Like many of you, I flat out live for the draft. It's much bigger for me than even the SB (if we're not in it). This one will be epic and there's going to be several different runs on several different position groups. QBs, WRS, OL, CBs...so near impossible trying to determine who will fall into our laps. This is a draft where we can land a future pro-bowler at 16 (imo). But (imo) it's also a draft where we can land two studs in exchange for that 16.

This deep into March, typically, I'd have something of a strategy in place by now. But I can't make up my mind on whether we should trade down, or even out, at this point. TBH, I've kind of given up. But I do so with a feeling of confidence. Two things I want for sure: I want us to run the ball and I want us to stop the run. So go get whoever it is that will make that happen and I will be stoked with this '24 draft.

Totally agree. This is gonna be a fun draft.
During the PC era it was fairly easy to predict what they would do, but not necessarily who they would draft. I think that’s what’s making this into an exciting draft to watch. This is where the JS/MM era really begins.

 

[haroldseattle]

Since this is a deep draft, I wouldn't mind if they traded down for the first 4 rounds. Pick up some extra draft capital.

Not a draft nerd but from what I hear the meat is day two (course day 1) then drops off steeply.

 

[Hawkinaz]

Hawks have the worst IOL in the league and HAS to be improve we shall see how things look after camp cuts and the draft, hopefully the coaches can work some magic

 

[haroldseattle]

No! Good GMs do not draft for need. There are many other options for rounding out the roster and filling in weak spots. Passing on the BPA and throwing draft selections at needs is what perennial losers do. Not only is it poor roster building from a long-term perspective, but it is also a poor way to address a need since predicting the performance of a rookie player is impossible. Therefore, relying on a rookie to address a need is foolish.

Prior to the draft, we have a couple of weak spots. However, these are weak spots, not empty spots. We do have veterans who can fill the role, just not at the level we would like to see.

We have options other than drafting for need. We may be fortunate and have the BPA lineup with a need, adding a rookie to the competition at those spots. If we do have obvious weak spots, UDFAs at those positions are more likely to see the Hawks as a favorable opportunity to make a roster. We have the inevitable cuts that occur every year between the draft and the start of the season. Teams will look to trade once spring training starts and there are clear areas that they will have solid players unable to make the final roster.

Got to have some way to build a roster, you can't have zero OL or zero DL so no matter the yada yada teams are drafting and signing FA's for need. Of course you don't want to pass on a Aaron Donald because you have a decent player at the position and could use a RG or safety but lets quit pretending roster construction isn't important, In some ways your only as good as your weakest link so in fact fixing the weakest link has some priory, as long as your not passing on a true stud to fix it.

 

[DirectMessage]

Not a draft nerd but from what I hear the meat is day two (course day 1) then drops off steeply.

Yeah I was thinking trade down our 1st and get a 2nd. Trade down some spots in the 2nd and try and get a 3rd or 4th round, etc. Probably not realistic, but who knows. Trade DK for a haul before he declines.

 

[morgulon1]

I have a few of them:

21 OT JC Latham Alabama
21 OT Kingsley Suamataia BYU
21 OT Olumuyiwa Fashanu Penn State
21 OT Amarius Mims Georgia (22 in October)
22 OT Graham Barton Duke
23 OT Troy Fautanu Washington (24 in October)

23 OG Layden Robinson Texas A&M
23 OG Cooper Beebe Kansas State
23 OG Zak Zinter Michigan
23 OG Christian Mahogany Boston College (24 in October)

21 OC Jackson Powers-Johnson Oregon
22 OC Sedrick Van Pran Georgia (23 October)
23 OC Beaux Limmer Arkansas
23 OC Drake Nugent Michigan

If they took the center from Oregon Ducks , do they slide Oluwatami (sp?)
To guard ? Would that also signal to
Olu that they've given up on him being
a starting center for the Seahawks ?

I think I see teams take college tackles
and convert them into guards .

Thoughts ?