Pick #69, Tyler Lockett, WR/KR/Gunner, KSU

[Sports Hernia]

Tyler Lockett says "I want to go to a team that wants me"

Seahawks say "How about we trade our 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th for you"

They believe this kid is special and I do too. Watch this and tell me you are not a beliver

[youtube]194XtiyhN2I[/youtube]
https://youtu.be/194XtiyhN2I

He is going to love it here! :th2thumbs:

 

[DavidSeven]

Oh, and let's stop repeating this "we gave up four picks" nonsense. We swapped third round picks. We gave up THREE additional picks. Math isn't that hard.

I know most people don't really care about this but you're actually wrong on this part. We gave up 4 picks for their 1; what sets our third round pick apart from the rest of the picks we gave up that that one specific pick is that one we swapped? Just because it's in the same round as the pick we got? Doesn't really make sense to use that language based on consistency and during times that trades are made with picks made exclusively from other rounds as the acquiring pick.

Prior trade the Seahawks had 11 picks; after the trade they had 8 picks. Do the math. They didn't give up four picks. They significantly improved their third round draft position in exchange for three later round picks. To say they gave up four picks for Tyler Lockett is extremely misleading.

We gave up 3 additional picks to move up. That is a separate transaction.

We used 4 picks to draft the player (for ease, let's just say we used our original 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th to get him).

 

[therealjohncarlson]

Oh, and let's stop repeating this "we gave up four picks" nonsense. We swapped third round picks. We gave up THREE additional picks. Math isn't that hard.

I know most people don't really care about this but you're actually wrong on this part. We gave up 4 picks for their 1; what sets our third round pick apart from the rest of the picks we gave up that that one specific pick is that one we swapped? Just because it's in the same round as the pick we got? Doesn't really make sense to use that language based on consistency and during times that trades are made with picks made exclusively from other rounds as the acquiring pick.

Prior trade the Seahawks had 11 picks; after the trade they had 8 picks. Do the math. They didn't give up four picks. They significantly improved their third round draft position in exchange for three later round picks. To say they gave up four picks for Tyler Lockett is extremely misleading.

You are referring to the net outcome of our picks. Refer to the last sentence of my post which you cut out. But we still traded 4 for 1 at the end of the day. You are arbitrarily saying our 3rd round pick was the one we swapped

 

[TXHawk]

Oh, and let's stop repeating this "we gave up four picks" nonsense. We swapped third round picks. We gave up THREE additional picks. Math isn't that hard.

I know most people don't really care about this but you're actually wrong on this part. We gave up 4 picks for their 1; what sets our third round pick apart from the rest of the picks we gave up that that one specific pick is that one we swapped? Just because it's in the same round as the pick we got? Doesn't really make sense to use that language based on consistency and during times that trades are made with picks made exclusively from other rounds as the acquiring pick.

Prior trade the Seahawks had 11 picks; after the trade they had 8 picks. Do the math. They didn't give up four picks. They significantly improved their third round draft position in exchange for three later round picks. To say they gave up four picks for Tyler Lockett is extremely misleading.

We gave up 3 additional picks to move up. That is a separate transaction.

We used 4 picks to draft the player (for ease, let's just say we used our original 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th to get him).

Every team uses one pick to draft a player whether they trade or not so that's not how the cost of trades are described when talking about how many picks are given up to move up. The Seahawks surrendered the opportunity to draft three additional players in later rounds so that is the cost of the trade, not four picks.

 

[DavidSeven]

Every team uses one pick to draft a player whether they trade or not so that's not how trades are described when talking about how many picks are given up to move up. The Seahawks surrendered the opportunity to draft three additional players in later rounds so that is the cost of the trade, not four picks.

Did we use ZERO picks to draft Clark? No, we used ONE pick. Thus, we used four on Lockett. You have to count the pick that was actually used to take the player. So, every ADDITIONAL pick we used to move up for Lockett is in ADDITION to the one we used to take him.

 

[TXHawk]

Every team uses one pick to draft a player whether they trade or not so that's not how trades are described when talking about how many picks are given up to move up. The Seahawks surrendered the opportunity to draft three additional players in later rounds so that is the cost of the trade, not four picks.

Did we use ZERO picks to draft Clark? No, we used ONE pick. Thus, we used four on Lockett. You have to count the pick that was actually used to take the player. So, every ADDITIONAL pick we used to move up for Lockett is in ADDITION to the one we used to take him.

We didn't use four picks to draft Lockett, we used one pick. The COST of the trade to move up in the third round to have the opportunity to draft Lockett was three later round picks. That was the cost that Schneider and Carroll weighed in making the decision to pull the trigger on it and that's the way that reasonable people should describe the cost of the trade because that IS the true cost of the trade. They decided that they would rather have Lockett than someone later in the round they valued less and the cost of that was the opportunity to draft three additional players.

 

[DavidSeven]

Every team uses one pick to draft a player whether they trade or not so that's not how trades are described when talking about how many picks are given up to move up. The Seahawks surrendered the opportunity to draft three additional players in later rounds so that is the cost of the trade, not four picks.

Did we use ZERO picks to draft Clark? No, we used ONE pick. Thus, we used four on Lockett. You have to count the pick that was actually used to take the player. So, every ADDITIONAL pick we used to move up for Lockett is in ADDITION to the one we used to take him.

We didn't use four picks to draft Lockett, we used one pick. The COST of the trade to move up in the third round to have the opportunity to draft Lockett was three later round picks. That was the cost that Schneider and Carroll weighed in making the decision to pull the trigger on it and that's the way that reasonable people should describe the cost of the trade because that IS the true cost of the trade. They decided that they would rather have Lockett than someone later in the round they valued less and the cost of that was the opportunity to draft three additional players.

If the Redskins had drafted Lockett first, we would have sent four picks to them to acquire him.

We started with 11 picks. Subtract 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th picks. That's 7 left to use on other players. It took us 4 picks to acquire Lockett.

We traded 1 pick for Jimmy Graham. We used 1 pick to draft Clark. If you believe those first two statements are true, then we used 4 picks on Lockett.

 

[MrThortan]

It cost us 3 picks to swap 3rds and we spent that 3rd to draft a player. So it cost a total of 4 picks to draft Lockett.

4 picks equals 4 players, we drafted 1 and lost 3. So we gave up 3 players to draft 1. So it cost us 3 players to move up and draft Lockett.

Dam you engrish... yous confuse me!

 

[onanygivensunday]

I'm still confused... did we spend four picks or three picks? :roll:

 

[TXHawk]

Every team uses one pick to draft a player whether they trade or not so that's not how trades are described when talking about how many picks are given up to move up. The Seahawks surrendered the opportunity to draft three additional players in later rounds so that is the cost of the trade, not four picks.

Did we use ZERO picks to draft Clark? No, we used ONE pick. Thus, we used four on Lockett. You have to count the pick that was actually used to take the player. So, every ADDITIONAL pick we used to move up for Lockett is in ADDITION to the one we used to take him.

We didn't use four picks to draft Lockett, we used one pick. The COST of the trade to move up in the third round to have the opportunity to draft Lockett was three later round picks. That was the cost that Schneider and Carroll weighed in making the decision to pull the trigger on it and that's the way that reasonable people should describe the cost of the trade because that IS the true cost of the trade. They decided that they would rather have Lockett than someone later in the round they valued less and the cost of that was the opportunity to draft three additional players.

If the Redskins had drafted Lockett first, we would have sent four picks to them to acquire him.

We started with 11 picks. Subtract 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th picks. That's 7 left to use on other players. It took us 4 picks to acquire Lockett.

We traded 1 pick for Jimmy Graham. We used 1 pick to draft Clark. If you believe those first two statements are true, then we used 4 picks on Lockett.

We gave up two players to acquire Graham (Unger and the 31st pick). We gave up three players to acquire Lockett, not four. We still would have had a 3rd round pick, it just wouldn't have been Lockett. We gave up no one to acquire Clark.

No one in the NFL uses your metric to describe the cost of move up trades since every selection always costs one draft pick, trade or no trade. The trade cost is calculated by the number and position of draft picks surrendered in exchange for moving up to a more favorable position. It didn't cost the Seahawks four picks to move up, it cost them three, so they have eight total picks rather than eleven.

 

[Rocket]

Say what you want about his size

I believe this team has pretty much wore out that comment forever with a recent pick.
He doesn't fit all the qualifications for a PERFECT WR/KR/PR, but he's damn good at most of 'em.

As to PC/JS, they do this for a living and make loads of cash doing it.
Nobody posting here gets paid to eval & pick players.
That ought to tell the naysayers something. But it won't.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Say what you want about his size

I believe this team has pretty much wore out that comment forever with a recent pick.
He doesn't fit all the qualifications for a PERFECT WR/KR/PR, but he's damn good at most of 'em.

As to PC/JS, they do this for a living and make loads of cash doing it.
Nobody posting here gets paid to eval & pick players.
That ought to tell the naysayers something. But it won't.

but sadly their track record with wide receivers has been less than stellar.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Say what you want about his size

I believe this team has pretty much wore out that comment forever with a recent pick.
He doesn't fit all the qualifications for a PERFECT WR/KR/PR, but he's damn good at most of 'em.

As to PC/JS, they do this for a living and make loads of cash doing it.
Nobody posting here gets paid to eval & pick players.
That ought to tell the naysayers something. But it won't.

but sadly their track record with wide receivers has been less than stellar.

Doug's been consistent, Golden Tate was great for us especially on a run first team. Sidney was great when healthy. Zach Miller was nails for us when he was actually thrown the ball to instead of blocking. We like to spread the ball so much so one target doesn't get a boatload of receptions. This team probably blocks more for the run than get passes. that's just how our system is.

 

[Rocket]

Hooey.
AngryDoug is tier 1, the system keeps the numbers low.
Look what Tate did on a throwing team.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Say what you want about his size

I believe this team has pretty much wore out that comment forever with a recent pick.
He doesn't fit all the qualifications for a PERFECT WR/KR/PR, but he's damn good at most of 'em.

As to PC/JS, they do this for a living and make loads of cash doing it.
Nobody posting here gets paid to eval & pick players.
That ought to tell the naysayers something. But it won't.

but sadly their track record with wide receivers has been less than stellar.

Doug's been consistent, Golden Tate was great for us especially on a run first team. Sidney was great when healthy. Zach Miller was nails for us when he was actually thrown the ball to instead of blocking. We like to spread the ball so much so one target doesn't get a boatload of receptions. This team probably blocks more for the run than get passes. that's just how our system is.

Sidney Rice was not healthy very often, Zach Miller is a TE, and he was mostly a blocker, Golden Tate was let go in place of Percy Harvin, and Baldwin was a UDFA that should be playing as a slot receiver. That is NOT a good record, especially since only one of those players is still on this team. Zach Miller, and Sidney Rice were also established players before they came to the Seahawks.

In the actual draft we have only found one player that really produced for us and that was Golden Tate. Ultimately we decided to keep Percy Harvin over Golden Tate. Baldwin was also a good find, but really he should be playing in the slot right now, not on the outside. Ultimately our FO has had way more failures than successes when it comes to receivers.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Say what you want about his size

I believe this team has pretty much wore out that comment forever with a recent pick.
He doesn't fit all the qualifications for a PERFECT WR/KR/PR, but he's damn good at most of 'em.

As to PC/JS, they do this for a living and make loads of cash doing it.
Nobody posting here gets paid to eval & pick players.
That ought to tell the naysayers something. But it won't.

We don't pay you???? Check must have gotten lost in the mail broski, sorry about that.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Seahawks/status/594649453367201792[/tweet]

 

[FortWorthSeahawk]

I'm still confused... did we spend four picks or three picks? :roll:

THERE ARE....FOUR PICKS!

 

[LTH]

Did they over pay? it really doesnt matter if they got the players they wanted...

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Did they over pay? it really doesnt matter if they got the players they wanted...

Well, I've heard a lot of pundits had him as the second-best receiver in the draft, and Pete was shocked he was still available when we traded up to take him. Sounds to me like he was borderline first round material.