Pick #35 Malik McDowell, DT, Michigan State

[bandiger]

very disappointed. We have much bigger needs in CB, OLine then DE...

No, Dline is getting older. Most of them gonna be out after next season sans Bennet and Clark.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Per the ESPN analysts: "McDowell was a vast underachiever at Michigan State". Well..... That's real encouraging :roll:

Mayock was more kind, and said he is a kind of player that works in Pete's system.
I'm a bit disappointed they didn't get King, Baker, or Robinson, but what the hell do I know.

This just serves to remind me of what they said about our 2012 Draft. Russell Wilson!?!?!?!?!?! FFFFFFFFFFAIL!

Eh, it worked out.

I'm confused, did we trade down a spot with the Jags? What did we get? Or just for fun?

Got their sixth rounder, so essentially almost a low fifth rounder. What a steal for moving back a single spot and not losing a guy we wanted.

 

[RockinHawks]

Robinson - gone
Ramczyk - gone
Lamp - gone

WTF?????

All of whom would have been 3rd rounders any other year. We got a top 10 talent and added picks by trading down. Pass rush helps the secondary. This pick is a solid, solid choice.

 

[Shaz]

Absolute garbage pick

 

[HawkFan72]

Seahawks likely would have taken him at 26. This is who Schneider was referencing yesterday.

According to LaCanfora, these were their Top 2 guys at 26 yesterday (if you believe Schneider when he says they didn't lost anybody by trading down).

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JasonLaCanfora/status/858102413638737922[/tweet]

 

[Steve2222]

I mean with McDowell, Reed, and Clark, the Seahawks have a bright future at DL. But man, their terrible OL is still pretty terrible at the current moment.

 

[Northwest Seahawk]

I think it's safe to say McDowell was high on there board.

 

[WindCityHawk]

I'm in. He and Clark could be the next generation after Bennett and Avril.

 

[NJlargent]

You really have to work at justifying this pick. Oh well makes for entertaining reading

 

[hawknation2017]

This is an interesting pick because I felt like Jefferson offered a lot of the same things as McDowell.

But I like that they are making the 3T interior pass rush a priority. It's a key for this scheme that has been lacking since 2013.

 

[Jeremy517]

Anyone who says that defensive line wasn't a position of need hasn't been paying attention.

Is the offensive line a position of need also? Of course. But say you have the top guy at one position of need rated a 90 and the top guy at another position of need a 70. If you ever take the 70 instead of the 90, you are making a colossal mistake, regardless of whether or not the 70 might play at a position of greater need.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

You really have to work at justifying this pick. Oh well makes for entertaining reading

We filled a critical need at pass-rushing DT with this pick in a draft that sucks for offensive line. We didn't overpay for another offensive line bust, and we helped a pass rush that wasn't fast enough to get to the quarterback and get off the field on third down last year. Remember how we were all bitching about time of possession last year? It's not a lot of work to justify trying to fix that glaring issue.

 

[six sigma]

He'll be converted to left tackle.

 

[Sox-n-Hawks]

This is an interesting pick because I felt like Jefferson offered a lot of the same things as McDowell.

Isn't competition at all positions part of Pete's philosophy?

 

[ivotuk]

Robinson - gone
Ramczyk - gone
Lamp - gone

WTF?????

All of whom would have been 3rd rounders any other year. We got a top 10 talent and added picks by trading down. Pass rush helps the secondary. This pick is a solid, solid choice.

THIS.

You guys screaming OLine are off by a long shot. We've got some great guys for this year and I guarantee the line ranking makes a jump this year. We will be at 16 or higher.

This guy is an elite talent who played Nose Tackle on a bad ankle.

One Scout had no idea about the guy and said "He takes plays off" and every other scout in the world parroted that comment.

Just look at what Mayock or Kiper says, and you will see it repeated by 75% of the "draft experts" out there.

This guy is a steal at #35, and we got 4 more picks as well.

 

[Rat]

You really have to work at justifying this pick. Oh well makes for entertaining reading

He's an elite talent. Doesn't need more justification than that.

 

[nash72]

Anyone who says that defensive line wasn't a position of need hasn't been paying attention.

Is the offensive line a position of need also? Of course. But say you have the top guy at one position of need rated a 90 and the top guy at another position of need a 70. If you ever take the 70 instead of the 90, you are making a colossal mistake, regardless of whether or not the 70 might play at a position of greater need.

We let 3 of the top 4 Olineman on the board go (our biggest and most crucial need) and drafted a guy that was ranked by most as a low 2nd to mid 3rd round pick.

 

[nash72]

You guys screaming OLine are off by a long shot. We've got some great guys for this year and I guarantee the line ranking makes a jump this year. We will be at 16 or higher.

16 or higher? Lol. I'll take that bet.

 

[NJlargent]

You really have to work at justifying this pick. Oh well makes for entertaining reading

We filled a critical need at pass-rushing DT with this pick in a draft that sucks for offensive line. We didn't overpay for another offensive line bust, and we helped a pass rush that wasn't fast enough to get to the quarterback and get off the field on third down last year. Remember how we were all bitching about time of possession last year? It's not a lot of work to justify trying to fix that glaring issue.

This is true and admittedly I am not a draft guru like many guys on this board which I mean in admiration. However, that being said, I did not see this guy being discussed much, if at all, on this board during the off-season

 

[Hawkpower]

Anyone who says that defensive line wasn't a position of need hasn't been paying attention.

Is the offensive line a position of need also? Of course. But say you have the top guy at one position of need rated a 90 and the top guy at another position of need a 70. If you ever take the 70 instead of the 90, you are making a colossal mistake, regardless of whether or not the 70 might play at a position of greater need.

We let 3 of the top 4 Olineman on the board go (our biggest and most crucial need) and drafted a guy that was ranked by most as a low 2nd to mid 3rd round pick.

Not because of his talent.