Our rookie draft class dilemma...

[Johnny]

Ah, Seahawks fans. Declaring the draft a complete bust after 2 games. Never change.

In which we had no 1st rd pick no less.

Our 1st rd pick was Percy Harvin.

 

[Jazzhawk]

I know we are now trying to manufacture things to bitch about, but 2 games in, in an already stacked roster, these kinds of threads are just so short-sighted and ill-conceived. Very disappointing.

 

[drdevin]

In future drafts, a change in mindset might prove more beneficial. I'd like to see the Hawks move up and grab more players in the 2-4 rds. and then settle for whatever they can get with UDFA's. Having more 2-4th rd. draft picks no longer costs much and they should have a greater likelihood of contributing to the team. No need in collecting a volume of players when we don't have spots for them anyways. 3-5 players making the team right now seems realistic and unless we strike out badly (unlikely with our staff), I'd rather have what they consider a 2nd rd grade lineman then a 6th rder who we got after the draft.

 

[Johnny]

I know we are now trying to manufacture things to bitch about, but 2 games in, in an already stacked roster, these kinds of threads are just so short-sighted and ill-conceived. Very disappointing.

Agreed, We have some talented guys from this rookie class that we can groom this year and in the offseason and maybe they make an impact next year...

I would be more worried if the FAs we signed in the offseason weren't making an impact, but they are.

 

[The Radish]

I'm so pissed we are going to have to do another complete rebuild. This team is useless, has already given up 10 points in only 2 games.

Oh woe is me, what are we going to do????

:141847_bnono:

:sarcasm_on: I hope

 

[davidonmi]

The only disappointment has been the DT's, outside of that who in this draft class had a legit path to playing time?

 

[DavidSeven]

Our roster was already absolutely stacked to begin with. We covered our deficiencies in FA with experienced players. This thread doesn't have much use unless you can go through the draft and name players who were available after pick 56 who would be playing ahead of our starters or key contributors.

The Michael pick was always about the future, not the present. I have no problem with letting him wait in the wings as he works on improving the little things that define a complete NFL running back.

 

[Basis4day]

Ah, Seahawks fans. Declaring the draft a complete bust after 2 games. Never change.

In which we had no 1st rd pick no less.

Our 1st rd pick was Percy Harvin.

You're missing the point. We traded our first rd pick for him. I don't include him for purposes of evaluating the contributions of the draft class as a whole. It seems silly to me to criticize the draft class after two games (which we won) because of a lack of contributions by players picked 62 and higher on a team with so many vested players on both sides of the ball.

 

[bellingerga]

This is a terrific problem to have.

 

[kf3339]

I think in retrospect that this may end up being a very useful draft for potentially a different reason. The fact that so many are not playing (injured,IR, Inactive) just means that they will be fresh and ready to go next off season to work on their game. It's almost like having a new draft class just waiting for us since they aren't going to be major contributors this year.

So in a way it sets up two options for PC and JS next spring. Do they re-sign Bennett (yes) and restructure Rice, or let him go! Do they restructure Red or Miller? What about the O-line (McQuistan, Giacomini). Are they cap casualties, or just restructure to stay on a dominant team? What are we going to do with Tate and Badlwin? A lot of moves to consider.

But another option also may change our draft strategy for next spring. We may see PC and JS packages picks to move up in the first for a dominant TE or WR. We may also see us package latter round picks to move more draft capital into rounds 2-3 for better talent. Or we could see us trade for higher 2015 picks if the right deal comes around.

Just having a draft class that may contribute so little this year just opens up many options for next year. This will be fun to watch!

 

[Hawks46]

Look at our starting 22. It's hard to find a more complete, physical, athletic, and talented starting 22 in the entire league.

It's going to be hard for a rookie to crack that.

Here's the thing: we don't really need Michael to contribute. Even if Lynch goes down, Turbin is a very good backup.

Hill will make some impact when he gets to play.

Simon, well I honestly think this kid will benefit from sitting for a year. He doesn't seem to have the best character and work ethic, and being in this environment for a year might change that. It might also put a fire under his butt that he has to work hard to beat out Lane or Maxwell, and that the job won't just be given to him. We can hide him on IR and that helps next year's depth. Thing is: we don't need him now.

Willson actually make a couple of good seals on the outside edge and made some run blocks Sunday. That was his weakness, and they have him working on it. He's also gaining more familiarity with the offense, so when he does run routes, Wilson can trust him. When he shows up, it's going to be in a big way.

The condensed version: none of these guys were really needed badly when drafted. It would be nice to see progression out of Willson in case Miller goes down, but maybe he's there and just is invisible behind Miller. We're just drafting to churn the bottom of our roster and improve depth at this point, and garner experience for guys that might have to replace salary cap casualties. We can afford to take higher risks for higher rewards.

I also think we're going to be seeing a lot of our rookies and younger guys this game when we're up by 30 points in the middle of the 3rd quarter.

 

[HawkWow]

The Michael pick was always about the future, not the present. I have no problem with letting him wait in the wings as he works on improving the little things that define a complete NFL running back.

That was certainly the mindset behind drafting Michael (that and BPA), but my concern is that I think Pete's idea of the future was / is 2014.

Before you raise your crossbows, understand no fan loves Lynch more than I. But I don't see this (ruthless!) FO paying Lynch the money his current deal commands with Michael and Turbin in the wings, making peanuts (in comparison).

I think the diabolical duo of PC and JS had designs on seeking a trade this off-season for ML in anticipation of Turbin spelling Michael in 2014 (they likely plan on getting Harvin a few carries as well). I sincerely hope Michael has a better grip on the fundamentals of football prior to that time...IF that is their plan. I also hope there is not more to this story (re: Michael).

 

[Laloosh]

I'll take your word for it. I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground but using a 2nd round pick on a guy you don't plan to use anytime soon just seems, well... weird.

:|

 

[DavidSeven]

I'll take your word for it. I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground but using a 2nd round pick on a guy you don't plan to use anytime soon just seems, well... weird.

:|

The Packers used a first round pick on Aaron Rodgers and benched him for three seasons.

Bad pick?

 

[Laloosh]

I'll take your word for it. I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground but using a 2nd round pick on a guy you don't plan to use anytime soon just seems, well... weird.

:|

The Packers used a first round pick on Aaron Rodgers and benched him for three seasons.

Bad pick?

I think that's a bad comparison. Quarterback, really?

 

[niveky]

I know that there have been a few sort of boneheaded moves by Pete and John, but they have overwhelmingly developed a very powerful roster. Many sit here and moan and worry about the caliber of play from a few positions, or nit pick about some of our new backups, but the total roster turnover and the very calculated and in depth analysis of this roster and the development of the defense and offense has been a beautiful thing to behold. The crazy thing is that our Coach/GM tandem has really outdone themselves in getting this team stocked up with star and quality players.

The problem now is that while a few years ago the Seahawks had a lot of back up players that were high effort and were in that process of weeding out baseline talent as the team started turning through every player available and now they have a lot of very talented players even way down the depth chart in a lot of positions. Don't get too used to new players breaking the lineup of the roster as it is now. Almost all the way across the board this roster is strong position by position.


I'm not saying they aren't still trying to find and maximize talent, making the most of each pick and free agent acquisitions, but it has come to a point when the talent on the field is just all around better than the backups almost position for position and the Seahawks are now able to further develop the skills of what they believe are some talented players they got in the draft, which will only be a good thing for this team. They will probably still find diamonds in the rough if they keep at it personnel wise like they have since Pete and John have been paired up here, but the success of the team doesn't totally hinge on bringing in new players now. They are at the point where they will keep as many of their impact players as possible every year and will be reloading for the future and the present as they analyze the roster year by year.

 

[therealjohncarlson]

I'll take your word for it. I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground but using a 2nd round pick on a guy you don't plan to use anytime soon just seems, well... weird.

:|

The Packers used a first round pick on Aaron Rodgers and benched him for three seasons.

Bad pick?

You have to look at his overarching point, and not get caught in the details. If the return on your draft investment eventually gives you a superstar, who cares if traditional wisdom told you it was too high to draft a guy who wouldn't play all that much to start out with?

 

[DavidSeven]

I'll take your word for it. I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground but using a 2nd round pick on a guy you don't plan to use anytime soon just seems, well... weird.

:|

The Packers used a first round pick on Aaron Rodgers and benched him for three seasons.

Bad pick?

You have to look at his overarching point, and not get caught in the details. If the return on your draft investment eventually gives you a superstar, who cares if traditional wisdom told you it was too high to draft a guy who wouldn't play all that much to start out with?

Isn't that actually my overarching point?

 

[DavidSeven]

I'll take your word for it. I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground but using a 2nd round pick on a guy you don't plan to use anytime soon just seems, well... weird.

:|

The Packers used a first round pick on Aaron Rodgers and benched him for three seasons.

Bad pick?

I think that's a bad comparison. Quarterback, really?

What difference does the position make? Packers banked on Rodgers eventually being a superstar and used him as Favre insurance to start out. I'm sure the Seahawks see the same thing in Michael.

FWIW, Shaun Alexander got very few meaningful touches his rookie season as well, and he was taken in the first round.

 

[Laloosh]

Hey, I hope he turns out to be a HoF player. Just question the logic of using our first pick on him if he's going to sit on the shelf all year. Am I completely out of my mind for even questioning it?