Seahawks Insider

Morning links: Hawks headline busy offseason

Post by Eric Williams on April 3, 2010 at 7:45 am with 78 Comments »
April 3, 2010 7:45 am

No matter what your opinion is about the way the Seahawks handled the firing of Jim Mora and the hiring of Pete Carroll, Seattle has definitely jumped back on the radar nationally.

Don Banks of Sports Illustrated reviews the league’s busy offseason, awarding Seattle the headline hire for a coach with Pete Carroll now on board, and the biggest, boldest move for the Charlie Whitehurst trade.


“There aren’t too many entirely blank slates in the NFL, but the Seahawks acquired one in quarterback Charlie Whitehurst earlier this month. The former Chargers No. 3 has never thrown a regular-season pass during his four NFL seasons, and he comes to Seattle in the pole position to eventually replace longtime starter Matt Hasselbeck. Watching how the Seahawks’ bet unfolds the next two years will make for some of the best theater in the league.”

Maybe we should take the Seahawks’ brass at their word when they say there is still a possibility the draft a quarterback in the first round. Perhaps the Seahawks might be laying in the weeds waiting to snap up Notre Dame QB Jimmy Clausen. Here’s what one NFL scout had to say about Clausen to Mike Silver of Yahoo Sports.

“He might be the most accurate thrower in the draft,” said a personnel executive for one AFC team. “I mean, he’s pinpoint accurate. He’d be a great West Coast [Offense] guy.”

Clausen’s agent has talked to the Seahawks, but he’s reportedly not schedule to visit Seattle. But that all could be part of this poker game as we get closer to draft day.

ESPN’s Brock Huard and Mike Salk talk to Texas quarterback Colt McCoy about his draft prospects in this audio link.

Fox Sport’s mock draft muncher now has Seattle selecting Clausen at No. 6 and Clemson running back C.J. Spiller at No.14.

Rob Rang, senior analyst with, says scouts and front office executives that he has talked to say that even though Tennessee safety Eric Berry is likely one of the top five players in the draft, he likely will not be drafted that high because teams do not want to give a safety top five money.

Morning links
Leave a comment Comments → 78
  1. Soggybuc says:

    If you read down the Silver article a bit he has a link to Kyle Turleys newest video. pretty good stuff and worth a watch.

  2. My worst draft nightmare is Clausen at #6 and Spiller at #14.

  3. Soggy… I liked it!!! … Thx for the note….

  4. seahawk44 says:

    One question about Fox Sports mock draft muncher ……Where is Eric Berry ?

  5. You’re right, seahawk44… no team selecting Eric Berry! LOL!!

  6. They have Clausen on there twice, in the 6 & 9 slots…..

  7. seahawkswhopray says:

    Notre Dame? That’s a Catholic School isn’t it? The Seahawks should definately steer clear of any players from that and other Catholic Universities. I don’t think you can separate people who attend those schools from the fact that the heads of that church think it’s OK to fondle young boys IMO. We should steer clear of any associations with that school IMO, including it’s athletes. The Seahawks have done a great job of cleaning up the Team’s image. Why start to sully it now?

    I also echo the sentiments of many of the people who’ve posted on this blog concerning Brandon Marshall. I think he is a horrible human being and should be in jail for almost killing that poor girl. Didn’t he break her arm or something? I’ve also heard that he was involved in that whole Michael Vick situation.

    Stay true to the values of your fans Seahawks.

  8. That’s because he was selected the most on all the mock drafts added to the list.

  9. Dukeshire says:

    Well, I guess you’re in favor of cutting John Carlson then.

    I can’t imgine the Seahawks drafting Clausen. They would really consider having 3 QBs on the roster each making at least $5 mil a year? I can’t imagine.

  10. Any mock draft that has seahawks taking Clausen at #6 and Spiller at #14.leaving out a OT at #6 or a DE are out of there F%#$ing mind!!
    When someone has Seattle picking someone like aQB first they are not thinking what Seattle needs.

  11. Boycotting Notre Dame is a great idea. Hey, maybe we should boycott Catholic Charities as well! In fact, why stop there?! Let’s boycott girlscout cookies because the girls wear little Catholic looking skirts. While we’re at it, let’s Boycott Indiana altogether, and make the Colts move to LA.

  12. Scharroll (the Schneider-Carroll Super Mutant General Coaching Manager)

    Think that Whitey is the real deal at QB, and so does Norv Turner. That’s good enough for me to be confident skip QB in the early rounds and maybe find a raw prospect later, if at all since we still have Teel.

  13. seahawkswhopray I agree with you regarding Marshall, I love the guy as a player on the field on sundays, but other than that he is not or good person, or just really really stupid (possibly both) But I’m just going to ignore the rest of the post. (still don’t want Clausen though)

  14. If Eric Berry is available at 6, the Hawk’s will not pass up the chance. Won’t happen. I don’t care who else is available. The guy is a game changer on the defensive side of the ball. A player that the opposing offenses will have to account for on every play. IMHO the only other player to trump Berry would be Suh and he won’t be there.

    Spiller at 14 would be a good fit and will give PC that exciting pick that would keep fans watching the tube and filling the stands. Line players on either side of the ball in the first round are not exciting. PC needs to create some excitement.

    I don’t understand the talk of a defensive end in the first round. They are collecting so many of them in free agent signings,trades and the use of our 1st rounder last year that a DE makes no sense until the later rounds.

    OL can easily be filled with our 60th and even way into the 4th round. This draft is deep in OL and especially the kind that Gibbs looks for.

    QB? Not in the first round. Won’t happen. They couldl use a 4th or 5th for a more mobile guy that will fit the offense better than Teel. The coaching staff and front office made it very clear that they are ready to put all their eggs in Whitehurst’s and Hasselbeck’s baskets. Any talk of the Hawk’s drafting a QB in the 1st round is a smoke screen.

  15. seahawkswhopray – what “values”? you mean getting DUIs (lofa)? passing out in the middle of intersections (leroy)? domestic violence cases (locklear)?

    and do you feel this way about john carlson? i believe he used to catch passes from and block for both brady quinn and jimmy clausen at NOTRE DAME.

    “values” don’t win games, good football players do, regardless of their “values”

    i certainly hope that both your log-in alias and your post are just a couple of bad jokes.

  16. seahawkswhopray- Stay away from Catholics? You just disqualified literally almost one-third of the world’s population. Great idea! Would you like to gang up on gays or Jews next. Keep your fanatical and ignorant beliefs to yourself and not on this blog.

  17. dstoker32 says:

    I agree that you take Berry at #6 if he is still there, but I’m not sold on drafting Spiller at #14. I think he is a tremendous athlete but I just don’t think he is that valuable to the Hawks. I prefer getting a bigger back later in the draft and getting rid of Jones. I think the priority of the draft should be solidifying both the offensive and defensive lines. I have no problem with the Hawks using their first round picks on lineman as long as they aren’t reaching for the players they take. I also wouldn’t mind see them trade down in the first round and recoup some picks in the later rounds.

  18. HugeMellons says:

    Great thing about Pete is he has a way of turning head cases into highly productive football players.

    Don’t discount Pete’s relationship with Clausen. There’s no way you’d tip your hand and bring him in for an interview when the kid’s parents are on your speed dial and have been for the better part of the past decade.

    I’ve thought all along that either Clausen or Tebow is headed to Seattle and netiher would surprise me.

    Further, Matt Hasselbeck will not be the opening day starter, and will probably be in Jacksonville.

    Clausen and Spiller was my thought from the jump. More than anything, this team needs playmakers. The line under Gibbs needs one acquisition, but it can be had deeper in the draft.

    Those that think it’s LT at 6 or bust are still ruled mentally by Greg Knapp’s utter futility as a football coach.

    The line needs one addition, not an overhaul, but the rest of the offense has a complete dearth of playmaking ability.

  19. HugeMellons says:

    Spiller has the potential to be the next LaDanian Tomlinson.

    Forsett has the potential to be the next Darren Sproles.

    Considering we’ve already raided San Diego’s pantry for the dude to hand off to them, I would be pretty darn happy if we had all three starting come opening day.

  20. Dukeshire says:

    Forsett and Sproles are not the same type of runner, no offense. Sproles is a so called dart and dash type, he is much quicker that Forse. Forsett runs much bigger that he is. I’ve yet to see him go down on first contact. In addition, Forsett is probably 2″ taller and 15 lbs heavier. If you’re going to compare LT with Spiller then maybe a better comparison for Sproles would be McCluster.

  21. IdahoVandalHawk says:

    Mellons: I can’t see Tebow in Seattle, unless he falls all the way to end of the 2nd round and it would be a huge reach to draft him at 14. You really think Matt is gone? My heart would be sad, but my head says that might the right choice.

    Can someone explain a little better the kind of offense that Jeremy Bates is going to run? Is it a dink and dunk west coast style where the WR’s are expected to get make plays after the catch? If so, I think Matt has a few years left in him to run that offense. I think he very good in that kind of situation. However, I’ve never felt that Matt was very good at pushing the ball down field with the intermediate and deep throws. In fact, I think he has a terrible deep ball. So If Bates runs more of that style an offense I can totally see the coaches wanting to move Matt on and get Whitehurst into the action.

  22. Dukeshire says:

    The one thing I like about Bates is that he seems to be flexible. While in Denver, with Cutler and Marshall he aired it out. At USC with a freshman QB and no real established running game he called a far more conservative game. There is a really good piece from the Chicago Tribune (I believe) around the time the Bears and Cuter were lobbing for him but I can’t find it now. I’ll keep looking but in the mean time, this gives some idea.

  23. Duke…I share your thoughts about the qb salaries…. Give a third qb that kind of $$$ ???? Not with all the other needs….

    Anyone heard any updates on the Sims scenario???

    HugeM…. “The line needs one addition, not an overhaul, but…. ”

    ??? One addition? Someone has to play LT and LG if Lock moves over to RT…. yes?? IMOHA, Hopefully we upgrade on Spencer too…

  24. Soggybuc says:

    I’m still thinking Beadles is going to be the target for our LG spot. he’s a heady,smart,athletic player that is viewed as a tad undersized. in other words exactly what Gibbs looks for in his lineman.

    Hard to get a read on what the Scharrol(good one Audible) is really going to do at LT. obsfucation seems to a good skill with those two. Brown out of USC might be higher on the radar than people think. height/weight wise he’s right in the ballpark with the first round “projections”. but his other measurable are off the chart. wing span like a 747 and hands big enough to engulf Barry Bonds massive noggin. dont be suprised.

  25. Eric,
    Meant to post this when the subject was brought up recently–I do appreciate the links that you post. I don’t have time to search everywhere, and also like deciding if I want to read an item or not. Thanks for your work.

  26. We should be able to pick up both Beadles and Husky defensive end Daniel Te’o-Nesheim with our two 4th round picks. That would be my dream scenario for the 4th right now.

  27. Tarcat88 says:

    Thanks soggybuc, I’m not a country fan but that was pretty cool.

    I wasn’t on the Clausen band wagon, but if McShay doesn’t like him then I do. McShay is an idiot. I don’t have any preconceived ideas about this draft. We could go in a lot of different directions early: Williams, Spiller, Clausen, Berry, etc. and I’m looking forward to seeing just what the plan is as it unfolds during the draft.

  28. Competition at every spot can work great in college, where you can keep 2 players for every starting and backup spot on the roster, but for NFL you’re limited to 80/75/53 players. Once the teams down to 53 how do you get them to continue competing?

  29. Dukeshire says:

    That’s true, but the same principle’s apply. If a player knows the threat of being cut or losing their job is real, that’s one place to start. As we all know the contracts aren’t guaranteed. I think that when we talk about “character” it extends beyond staying out of the police blotter. Working your ass and keep working once you get the contract or establish yourself factors equally.

  30. IdahoVandalHawk –

    Being one of the weakest teams in the NFL, Hawks coaching staff redesigned and are rebuilding Hawks five component systems to compete vs 13 other NFL teams this upcoming season (rush offense, pass offense, run defense, pass defense, and special teams,) and into the future, just like Mora/Knapp/Bradley/Dehaven, et al, tried to do last offseason. Also. like last offseason, Hawks coaching staff said they determined that to be successful, they must be able to run the ball, and that it’s Bate’s first priority in his WCO, just as it was Knapp’s. Keys to run-offense success is quickness/speed/strength of RBs, quickness/unity/intelligence/attitude of OL, and how well the one cut and go RBs and the ZBing OL can be melded into a self-correcting, adaptive, intelligent running machine.

    Early on, Bate’s said his offense will be 4 yds, 4 yds, 4 yds (and a cloud of rubber pellets), and he also said he would run the same offense here that he ran in Denver under Shannahan. DEN’s ’08 RB carries (316) were 3rd fewest in the NFL, while DEN’s OL run-blocking performance was ranked 1st, while their pass-blocking ranked 4th. Cutler threw the ball 630 times for 4,530 yds & 25 TDs, 18 ints, 62.9 C%. That was nearly 2 passes to every RB run, not the 50-50 split Bates mentioned. In addition to the RB carries, Cutler ran 57 times for 200 yds & 2 TDs.

    Bate’s ’08 DEN OL:
    LT Ryan Clady, 6-6/316, 22 yo rookie, started all 16 games
    LG Ben Hamilton, 6-4/283, 31 yo 6 yrs exp, started all 16 games
    C Casey Wiegman, 6-2/285, 35 yo 11 yrs exp, started all 16 games
    RG Chris Kuper, 6-4/302, 26 yo 2 yrs exp, started all 16 games
    RT Ryan Harris, 6-5/299, 23 yo 1 yr exp, started all 16 games

    DEN’s RBs:
    Peyton Hillis, 6-1/240, 22 yo rookie, 68 rushes for 343 yards, 5 td, & 14 catches for 179 yards and 1 td.
    Selvin Young, 5-11/215, 25 yo, 1 yr exp, 61 rushes for 303 yards, 1 td, & 3 catches for 16 yards and 0 td.

    DEN’s WRs:
    B.Marshall, 6-4/229, 24 yo, 2 yrs exp, 104 catches for 1,265 yards, 6 td, & 2 rushes for -4 yards and 0 td.
    E.Royal, 5-10/182, 22 yo rookie, 91 catches for 980 yards, 5 td, & 11 rushes for 109 yards and 0 td.

    DEN’s TEs:
    D.Graham, 6-3/257, 30 yo, 6 yrs exp, 32 catches for 389 yards, 4 td.
    T.Scheffler, 6-5/255, 25 yo, 2 yrs exp, 40 catches for 645 yards, 3 td, & 1 rush for -1 yards and 0 td.

    DEN went 8-8 in ’08, mostly because their D ranked next to last – 31st vs pass, 29th vs run. In ’09 under McDaniels, their offense dropped to 18th while their defense rose to 7th, and they went 8-8 again.

  31. PS: Cutler’s average “Air Yards” per attempt – the average (per attempt) distance downfield his passes travel (in ’08) before they are caught was 4.3 yds. Matt Hasselbecks average Air Yards in ’08 was 3.7 yds. He’ll need to improve that and probably will if the OL improves and Hawks land B.Marshall.

  32. IdahoVandalHawk says:

    kim008: Great stuff – thanks. I remember hating the Broncos and their O-line because of all the cut blocks they used to do. I wonder if the Hawks will be doing the same stuff I used to hate……

  33. If we get Clausen and Spiller in round one, then trade our 2nd for Marshall are we not better? What if we trade next year’s 1st for Marshall and draft the best OL or DE available at 60 are we not better?

    If Forse and Spiller split carries with Forse on 3rd downs and Spiller returning Kicks, doesn’t that combo at RB beat what we have with Jones and Forse?

    IF and that’s a BIG IF the Skins pass on Clausen we have to go get him. IMO Whitehurst was not brought here to be the “future” as some think. He is the fallback plan if/when Hass goes down assuming Clausen is off the board at 6. Now the Hawks can keep both picks and hope for Clausen to get past the Skins, but insured the position should he be gone. Pete would be pissed to miss out on this guy twice though.

    I think that is the “plan” with regards to Whitehurst anyway. I think the team is blowing smoke up Hass’s you know what so we can get some value in a trade IF we draft Clausen.

    Approach Clausen on tape and stop hating on him for being a So Cal kid with the matching attitude and look. He was the most talented and overhyped HS QB a few years ago and that turns people off, ok. But watch him play, look at what he makes out of a bad O-line and ONE playmaker. He got it done from under center in a pro offense, his tape is astounding. He is dead accurate in the pocket and he can move when he needs to. I think he is the safest bet at QB since Eli Manning. I hate ND, and I hate Rick Mirer – he isn’t Rick Mirer though, he’s Jimmy Clausen.

  34. SAC_94: Clausen has marginal arm strength, and questionable leadership skills. He may not go in the top ten picks.

  35. bird_spit says:

    I could see PC and S trade Hass and 60th for BM. If they have reasonable assurance in picking up a top rated R-QB, as much as I like Hass, we are rebuilding. Denver could use Hass.

  36. MattandCindy says:

    Here’s the thing about getting a QB in the 1st round. Don’t you guys remember??? Whitehurst has NO guaranteed money in his contract. If we don’t like what we see in pre-season, training camp, even OTA’s….then he’d be shown the door. That doesn’t necessarily mean we WILL draft a QB in round 1, but it pretty much kills the idea of saying we WON’T.

    Besides, it’s Petey…..ANYTHING could happen.

  37. Tarcat88 says:

    The only reason people question his leadership is because of McShay. Clausen was voted by his teammates to be team captain. That should say enough about his leadership.

    You guys are kidding yourselves if you think we’ll trade Hass. Not going to happen. He may not be the starter at the end of the season, but he will win the starting job at the beginning. The only way we start Whitehurst or a rook is if Hass is injured. (Which could very well be early if we don’t improve our O-line).

  38. The reason
    Berry is a slobbernocker
    Ball Hawk?
    Prove it
    He doesn’t measure up to the high draft of the past
    yet I would not be unhappy selecting him

  39. Macabrevity says:

    First a reaction to all the Clausen comments out there;

    Here are the unbelievable stats from his junior year:
    68% comp – 8.76 ypa – 28 TD – 4 INT- 161.43 RAT

    I honestly don’t know how anyone can question his arm strength, when watching tape. He can make all the throws. Also, people who question his attitude should read comments from his teammates. Golden Tate was so ticked off after hearing Todd McShay criticize him that he almost lost it in an interview. His teammates believe in him, despite the press somehow souring on him.

    Secondly, a reaction to some Whitehurst comments in this thread;
    We cannot assume that Whitehurst is anything more than a gamble. Schneider had the hots for him since his GB days, and now he finally has his chance to draft the Clemson QB in the 2nd round (more or less). Whitehurst is coming in like a pro-ready rookie, likely as insurance for an injury plagued Matt Hasselbeck. If PC does tap a QB like Clausen in the 1st round, it’ll mean he has a trade in the works to send Matt packing. Even if Matt wasn’t traded, in todays NFL, there is some logic in stockpiling QBs. This season you can see the kind of trade value they have. Take a look at Philly. Having 3 QBs making a combined 15-20 million for the next year or 2 wouldn’t kill us, and would keep options open in the future.

    One thing that cannot be said is that Whitehurst somehow has Norv Turner’s stamp of approval as a starter. He wasn’t a starter, and they never saw him as anything more than a 3rd stringer who was pushing Billy Volek. San Diego’s FO was laughing all the way to the bank on this deal if you read the SD papers.

    Lastly, my opinion on Matty H.
    He’s in a contract year. Like all big name players in contract years, he is going to unload this year statistically, if given half the chance. He’s not over the hill in QB years. He’s just a bit traumatized from a consistent lack of pass protection. I’m predicting he has a real bounce back year, and makes everyone in Seattle look at Whitehurst for what he is. A clipboard holder.

  40. Dukeshire says:

    MattandCindy – They gave next year’s third and lost 40 spots in the second this year. That tells me anyway, that they aren’t cutting Whitehurst after preseason, let alone OTAs regardless of guaranteed money. If they ‘Hawks were concerned that they wouldn’t get Clausen or Bradford, they could have made this deal on on draft day after they knew for sure. But the fact they made it over a month prior, tells me that they have no interest in either one. And now that they have CW, I don’t see them reevaluating their plan and taking Clausen, even if he’s there.

  41. Dukeshire says:

    Macabrevity – “Take a look at Philly. Having 3 QBs making a combined 15-20 million for the next year or 2 wouldn’t kill us, and would keep options open in the future.”

    Philly is a playoff team already. Seattle isn’t afforded the same luxury of tying up that kind of money in QBs when they need some much help across the board. If, like the Eagles, they were virtually complete on offense (never mind needs on D) then perhaps addressing Matt’s future by drafting a QB in the first, along with CW might be reasonable. But I don’t see how they can afford to (draft day trade aside) select Clausen and pass on a S, DE, DT or LT at 6.

  42. Let’s see now….The Lion’s want Sims…. The Lion’s also want to trade out of the #2 spot in the draft…. Is Sims, plus our 14th pick, worth the #2 and say a 4th or 5th??? We get Suh…and the other pick??? Hmmmmm…. Even our 6th & Sims??? To get a ‘can’t miss’ cornerstone like Suh… Hmmmm….

  43. Duke –

    I’ve followed Rang’s drafts for awhile, and he’s had either very good luck or he has very good insights into who the Hawks are going to pick, and what their needs are, etc. I don’t remember an early round where he hasn’t been spot on. Even though A.Gibbs is here, and Berry is still available, Rang has Hawks taking the Sooners’ LT T.Williams 6-5/315, 4.81-40 @ #6, and RDE D.Morgan 6-3/266, 4.77-40 @ #14.

    Williams’ll do nicely, but D.Morgan is gonna take awhile before he can add much pressure on the QB, though he could be successful vs the outside run from the start. Losing Tapp, Redding, and maybe Kerney isn’t gonna help the DE position, nor the DB position unless Curry can start getting to the QB from PC’s elephant(?)

    I’m wondering if PC & JS want to keep Babs @ FS and Adams @ SS? This draft is not deep in SS talent and there’s lotsa teams needing SSs. Is Ty Law a future blue-clad SS? Lawyer Milloy? Wonder if moving the Ump outta the D backfield might not help Babs alot?

  44. MattandCindy says:

    I absolutely agree, Duke. I just wanted to point out that the Hawk’s wouldn’t lose any $ if they decided against ol’ Charlie. It’s not something I would look forward to, but it’s not something I can completely discount.

    P.S.- Why are you so smart, Duke? I think your a robot, but Cindy says no.

  45. What’s the reasoning why D. Morgan is “gonna take awhile before he can add much pressure on the QB?” I think he’s going to be good and you may be right that it’s going to take him a year or two to hit full stride with respect to getting to the QB but that’s the case with almost every DL who has ever been drafted; they get better in year 2 and even better in year 3 and by years 4-5-6-7 they are in their prime. Morgan will be no exception. But you can say this about CB, OL, WR, too (among others). I think of Unger last year. Although I wasn’t overly impressed with him last year… I could tell this is a guy who is going to definitely part of the solution, not the problem, moving forward. But I happen to think Morgan will provide more than adequate pressure right off the bat and if we take him, that’s a premier position (rush DE) that we’ll be filling a void (along with needing a LT). In the NFL you need to protect your own QB and get to their QB. That’s a relatively simple formula (we all know it’s more complicated that that) to success and that’s why our trenches need reinforcements.

  46. Macabrevity:

    Clausen is not a bad player.
    But Todd McShay is hardly the only person questioning Clausen’s leadership, arm strength or whether he will/should be a top ten pick. Listen closely to what Mike Mayok, Charlie Casserly or Daniel Jeremiah say about him. None of them consider him a top ten pick.

    The “Draft Experts” who do have Clausen going in the top ten picks tend to be those of the internet “Draft Guru” variety. Those people who’ve actually been involved in scouting or making a pick for an NFL team usually have him rated much lower. IMO if it wasn’t for Mel Kiper Jr. campaigning so shamelessly for Clausen you would be hard pressed to find anyone who would consider him a top ten pick.

    Again, I’m not saying he is a bad person or a bad player. IMO some people just think he is a much better player than he is.

    Set aside the leadership question for a moment. Your talking about a guy who does not have elite arm strength, size or accuracy. Hard to consider a QB a top ten pick when he does not “Wow” you in any of those areas.

    The draft and Clausen’s subsequent playing career will ultimately render the verdict on this discussion. But as far as the Seahawks are concerned it may be a bit of a Catch 22. If he slips to us at #6 it means that both the Redskins and his former coach at Notre Damed passed on him. That most likely means he is not viewed as a “Franchise Quarterback” and we don’t want him. If he is worthy of the pick at #6 he will most likely be gone before he gets to us.

    The Whitehurst trade notwithstanding, IMO the biggest indicator that we will not draft Clausen if he is there at #6 is the quote from Pete Carrol concerning why Clausen chose Notre Dame over USC.

    Carrol said that Clausen chose Notre Dame because he was “AFRAID” to compete with Mark Sanchez. Knowing what little I know about Carrol and the importance that he places on the desire to compete and prove oneself every day, that’s about as damning a comment as you could hear coming from him.

  47. Dukeshire says:

    Agreed Bobby. For a team that’s in rebuilding mode, a player with Morgan’s upside makes perfect sense. They are in a position to allow him the year or two that is typically necessary for DEs to play, before having a significant impact. (And there’s no guarantee he won’t have that impact immediately, either.) A team that is missing just one piece, like a stronger rush from DE, FA may be a better approach. But if teams in need of great, young talent started avoiding them because there is a potential learning curve of a year or two or three, the draft would cease to exist as we know it. The worse the team, the more important drafting with an eye a few years down the road becomes.

  48. “Your” should be “You’re” in that last post. My fingers got ahead of my brain.

  49. The question I have about Morgan is, is he worth the number six overall pick? I love the guy, but at number six? I don’t think he will be there at fourteen, unless the teams that needs help at DE have Pierre-Paul ranked higher, so do you take a Morgan at six, and then maybe a guy like Charles Brown at fourteen, both are players that I love, positions of need, fits our systems, but it might be a reach for both players.

  50. MattandCindy says:

    Where’s Audible? Hellooooooooooo??? He’s like a crazy science teacher who makes me laugh and learn….in a good way.

  51. BobbyK –

    You’re absolutely right, that’s what I was trying to say.

    Just like LoJac it’ll take Morgan a coupla years to see the 12+-sack performances he had in ’09. Hawks’ll need all the QB pressure they can get on D (sans Tapp, Redding and Kerney.) QB pressure comes in 3 shades: sacks, hits and hurries. There’s also batted passes, outside run stopping, tackles for loss, tackles and assists, and fumble recoveries. On the negative side there’s also missed tackles.

    Sacks: Hawks got 15 sacks from their DEs last season. LoJac and Kerney each got 5, Tapp & Redding each got 2, and Reed got 1. Wouldn’t take too much to improve. Kerney isn’t likely to improve too much, though LoJac should, Tapp and Redding are gone and Reed could make the team spotting Curry as the elephant – and could also improve his sacks. Hawks’ll need 9 more sacks from somewhere to keep even, or more if Kerney retires. LBs may improve total sacks with PC’s 4-3 under.

    Hits: DEs got 41 last season. Tapp led the team with 15, followed by Kerney (and Curry) with 10 (each), Redding had 8, LoJac 6, and Reed 2. Tapp and Redding are gone and don’t really expect Kerney back either, so that leaves LoJac and Reed on the OL to improve alot. Hope the elephant improves this number. Hawks are starting this season in the hole here.

    Hurries: Kerney led the team’s DEs with 19, followed by Redding with 15, Tapp with 13, LoJac with 11 and Reed with 4. Jared Allen and Ray Edwards each had near the same number of QB pressures as the total of all of Hawks DEs. I’m hoping PCs D schemes for the front 7 (plus the addition of Morgan and maybe another DT) will make the kinda pressure needed to take some off the Hawks DBs.

    Rookie RDE pass-pressure stats seem to revert to something like their college freshman stats, usually not so good. Morgan’s initial pass-rush burst off the snap has been inconsistent some, but he’s young and has already shown lotsa improvement. He’s got size/frame and instincts to make a very good to great DE in 2-3 years. Hope Hawks get him @ #14.

  52. JacDG:

    What about the Williams/Graham OL/DE combo?

  53. OLT Charles Brown seems like a perfect fit for Gibbs system but #14 seems a bit early to take him and he won’t be there at #60. I wonder if he will be there when San Diego picks at #40.

    I bet Seattle gets one or two of these guys:

    OG Mitch Petrus-Marshal Newhouse-Shawn Lauvao-Cord Howard

    Center Ted Larsen-Jeff Byers-Eric Olsen

  54. Williams/Graham OL/DE combo would be very nice, but I don’t think any of them would be there at #14.
    I am willing to pick Brown at #14 because he is almost perfect for Gibbs, so he might be in the top three LT on the Seahawks draft board, and it depends on the run on LT’s if we don’t pick one at #6, and four maybe even five LT’s are drafted before our second pick, I think it’s okay (and I do like Charles Brown a lot)
    But if our picks were at #10 and #20-32 I think both Morgan and Brown could have been Seahawks.

  55. Dukeshire says:

    I don’t see Graham going before 14 and perhaps not until 20+. He’s a straight up stud, but who would take him before 14? That said, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe Morgan will be there at 14 either. I must admit, I’d be fairly disappointed with Graham at 14, not knowing how it will develop, but I think they could do better at that spot. That would make me question why they traded Tapp, actually.

  56. Macabrevity says:

    Hey Dukeshire…

    Here’s one for you on Graham, has me a little stumped;

    Morgan is probably the consensus #1 DE, and will likely be the first pure DE off the board.

    Morgan was manhandled by Iowa OT Bryan Bulaga.

    Graham absolutely smoked Bulaga on a consistent basis, and somehow lands on most big boards after Morgan.

    My question is….why isn’t player evaluation this simple? Why not push Graham ahead of Morgan just based on how they fared against a common (and premiere) OT?

  57. Rang’s pre-draft work has been reasonably accurate to past actual drafts. Rang’s outfit ‘NFLDraftScout’ provides CBS Sports with team needs, and player rankings – per position and overall. Needs are given with the larger the number the larger the need.

    Hawks needs (per NFLDraftScout/CBS Sports): 10 – OT/CB, 9 – DE/FS, 8 – RB/WR/OG, 7 – DT, 6 – SS, 5 – C, 3 – QB/TE, 2 – OLB, 0 – ILB/K/P.

    Need Rating Description
    0-2 Current starter(s) are solid. Team’s unlikely to draft player at that position.
    3-5 Position needs depth.
    6-8 Position needs starter.
    9-10 Biggest position of need.

    Hawks OT need = LT to replace Walt, CB need = taller/larger starter to replace Wilson for press coverage (Lucas or Tru?), DE need = replace Tapp (Kerney/Redding?), FS need = starter to replace Babs, RB need (per Bates) = later round short yardage back (not starter), WR need = #1 WR to replace Nate, OG need = ZBing LG to replace Sims (or RG?), DT need = more productive 3-tech, SS need = starter to replace Grant, and C need = better backup than Vallos.

    Hawks FAs FB Griffith, and CB Lucas haven’t been signed by anybody yet?

    A big draft rule is not to reach for a need, but try to align BPA at the pick with the higher need. Better to have an early pick backup than to reach. Trading picks is not just to get more picks when needed, but to land where the needed player should be taken for salary reasons, etc. Where there is a widespread position need accross the league it helps a team to pick that position earlier than later, and vice-versa. If not many teams need a position but the talent pool at that position is large, a team’s pick for that need can be delayed till later, often a good UDFA under those conditions will do. Also, A.Gibbs OL guys might be available later (or UDFA) since his ZBing player needs are so different than those of usual man-blockers.

    Hawks currently have 9 picks, making the ‘need’ cutoff at taking a starter for the SS position. Maybe Hawks get 10 picks if someone signs or trades for Sims prior to the draft, making a pick for center depth available. However, Hawks may still be in the running for B.Marshall, which may reduce Hawks picks by 1 or 2.

    6. LT T.Williams
    14. DE D.Morgan
    60 & 104 trade to DEN for Marshall, or –
    60. CB/FS A.Owusu-Ansah
    104. WR Mardy Gilyard
    127. OG Zane Beadles
    139. DT Linval Joseph
    176. SS Myron Rolle
    213. RB LeGarrette Blount
    245. FS Nick Polk

  58. That’s funny Matt…I used to be a crazy science teacher! lol

    Norv Turner thinks that Whitey is the real deal and so does Sharroll (Schneider / Carroll). It makes no sense to draft a QB with a high draft pick unless Whitey proves them wrong.

    I think Spencer would have been on the trading block already if Gibbs didn’t think they could work with him, it’s pretty likely Carroll and Gibbs have talked to him and maybe got him convinced that he’s a guard and not a center.

    So, we have Center, RG, and RT squared away. I’m not sure where Willis fits into the picture but we may use him as depth or possibly at LG. That means we’re going to draft a LT at #6 or #14 and probably 2-3 more linemen for depth later in the draft. Gibbs’ teams have drafted as many as five linemen on one year.

    You can bank on a DT or DE with the other #1 pick, and I think S at #60 depending on who’s on the board.

    If we draft another QB it’s going to be a guy later in the draft and that all depends on how they like Teel.

    I think there’s a possibility that we deal Matt for a 3rd rounder on draft day because he’s injury prone, older, and would do better on a team like Minnesota who already has playoff caliber team.

    This is an undisputable fact: ALL QBs are a gamble. Not some…not most…ALL. Whitehurst, as was pointed out earlier is a pro ready rookie. He is still being endorsed by Turners After the trade….and we know the power that be belieive he has all the tools. Grabbing Whitehurst was a brilliant move because snagging him frees us to focus our limited resources elsewhere. Gosh, I love the draft!!!

    The chances are about 50% that a QB like Bradford, Clauson, or anybody else will bust. And, then you’re out millions in guaranteed money, etc.

  59. Dukeshire says:

    Before I answer, let’s presume your presumptions are correct; Morgan was manhandled by Iowa OT Bryan Bulaga and Graham absolutely smoked Bulaga on a consistent basis (I don’t have the desire to assemble an argument that refutes either claim, regardless how misleading both are.) What you are asking is if A<B and BA. Well, if I were drafting either Morgan or Graham to face only Bulaga at the next level I may indeed be tempted to take Graham. The fact of the matter however, is that these things don’t exist in vacuums. There is a context to their play and the situations they will be entering and schemes they came from and will be required to adapt to and the inherent talent that lies within both players. In other words, if I were say the Packers, running a 3-4, I would prefer Graham over Morgan as he appears to better suited to adapt to coverage and the quickness and versatility necessary to fit in that scheme. I prefer Morgan for the ‘Hawks as he seems to be stouter against the run and is assignment correct and whose talent and developing skills are better suited to a 4-3 (traditional DE) and sealing the edge and pressuring the QB than Graham. If we weren’t dealing with people and all the variables that come with that, this would indeed be as simple as a formula but unfortunately, that is not the case. Drafting is more art than science regardless how many numbers and statistics one can attach to a given player. This is my answer.

  60. “Morgan was manhandled by Iowa OT Bryan Bulaga.”

    Go back and watch the game. They weren’t lined up on each other for most of the time. The Iowa run game was dominant on that night. The GaTech defense got owned in the run game, but Morgan played the run well. He got penetration. Just b/c his teammates sucked against the run, doesn’t mean he did. And when was the last time you saw good pressure on a QB who had a great run game and coming off a play-action fake?

  61. I do not think we can completely ignore getting a receiver. If we don’t get Marshall, we have Housh, Mr always injured (Deion Branch) and Deon Butler, plus Obomanu and some. Housh is solid, Branch is always hurt and Butler is still somewhat of a question mark. Bottom of the second round should or might have three very interesting receivers, Brandon LaFell, Carlton Mitchell and especially Eric Decker. BUT there could be up to four safety’s as well, FS Nate Allen and Morgan Burnett might be taken, but Chad and Reshad Jones should be there. There aren’t really a lot of people in this years draft that I hope we steer clear of, nor are there many players that I “hate”. So no matter what, I think, I will be pleased with the outcome, the good thing about sucking so hard, is that draft and free agency becomes a little bit more interesting.

  62. Dukeshire says:

    I have no idea what happened here; “What you are asking is if A<B and BA." It should read; if A<B and BA. In any case…

  63. Dukeshire says:

    It did it again. That is a glitch in this format. One more time;

  64. Dukeshire says:

    That’s 3 times, I give up.

  65. Yeah, and if you take the derivative of A of B of X + 15, and divide by 0, we’ll win the Superbowl next year with Tim Tebow at QB.

  66. Dukeshire says:

    If it would post the way I’m writing it, it makes sense in context of Macabrevity’s question to me. Oh well.

  67. Try this:

    If B > A and C > B Then C > A

    in other words:

    If Bulaga is better than Morgan
    And Graham is better than Bulaga
    Then Graham must be better than Morgan

  68. Dukeshire says:

    “In other words”, lol. Thanks.

  69. It looks like the Redskins may not take a QB now after trading for McNabb. I’m going to be so depressed if Clausen is there at #6 and we take him.

  70. Dukeshire says:

    Looks like McNabb has been traded to the Redskins. Well, if Carroll and Schneider want Calusen, he’ll be there.

  71. That move means there’s now less chance to get Suh or McCoy :(

  72. Dukeshire says:

    I think more importantly (if only because Suh and McCoy would likely be gone anyway) is that there will be one less o lineman to choose from.

  73. Dukeshire says:

    In the division? I don’t get that.

  74. I’ve always had Clausen at the bottom of the top ten (Bills, Jaguars) So I’ve always thought that Okung was a Redskin if McCoy or Suh didn’t fall to #4. This means Kansas probably will take either Bulaga, Williams or Berry. But the chance of Redskins taking Clausen and either Suh or McCoy slipping to us has given me some hope the past few weeks.. Guess I’ll keep on dreaming.

  75. They must think he sucks and actually want to face him twice per season.

  76. Dukeshire says:

    Well, Jason Campbell needs a new home I guess.

  77. “60 & 104 trade to DEN for Marshall, ”

    that does have a logical ring to it.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0