Our rookie draft class dilemma...

[sc85sis]

Pete is kind of used to shuffling guys every few years after doing so at USC.

 

[General Manager]

This is the last time we trade a number 1. I just don't see this FO doing it again, for a lot of reasons. Kearly's initial reaction looks justified at this point, Harvin will be back though that's when we can truly evaluate this trade.

 

[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.

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.

I was joking Sorry I didn't have the smiley face at the end.... I agree, We don't need anyone from this draft class to make a SB run, I say groom them and see what happens next 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?

Isn't that actually my overarching point?

Yes I agree with you. I meant to respond to the other guys comment

 

[HawkWow]

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.

That situation was similar, if not exact, to what we have now. SA came in to replace RW and got valuable playing time, though limited, in his rookie campaign. This benefitted the team immensely as a fired-up Watters ran like THE BEAST. SA's smooth running style complemented Watters perfectly.

That said, I'm with the OP in wanting to see similar competition between Michael and ML as soon as possible (but no sooner than plausible, of course).

 

[joeseahawks]

Lamichael James and Marcus Lattimore of the 49ers ... drafted and not playing !!!
I'm sure Lattimore/James will replace Gore once 100% Healthy again. ... at 1/4 of the price.

 

[Sports Hernia]

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.

Exactly!