Seahawks Insider

Hawks pick up one compensatory pick

Post by Eric Williams on March 25, 2011 at 3:15 pm with 52 Comments »
March 26, 2011 8:32 am

The NFL announced 32 compensatory picks awarded to 23 teams this year, and the Seattle Seahawks received one compensatory pick in the seventh round, 241st overall, bringing the team’s total number of selections in this year’s draft to nine eight picks.

The Panthers received the highest compensatory pick, a third rounder.
The Seahawks lost receiver Nate Burleson, defensive lineman Cory Redding and linebacker Lance Laury in free agency, but picked up tight end Chris Baker and offensive linemen Ben Hamilton and Chester Pitts.

However, Burleson signed a five-year, $25 million deal with Detroit, so amount of contract also plays a role in determining compensatory picks.

The Seahawks were one of three teams (Oakland and New Orleans were the others) to receive a compensatory pick, even though they did not suffer a net loss of compensatory free agents last year.

According to the league’s collective bargaining agreement, a team losing more or better compensatory free agents than acquired in the previous year is eligible to receive compensatory draft picks.

Usually, the number of picks a team receives equals the net loss of compensatory free agents up to a maximum of four.

The Seahawks picked up one compensatory pick at the end of the seventh round, the No. 245 pick overall, last year.

Seattle received one compensatory pick in 2010 because they lost four players in free agency (Rocky Bernard, Maurice Morris, Leonard Weaver and Floyd Womack) and signed three players in free agency (Colin Cole, T.J. Houshmandzadeh and John Owens).

Seattle now has nine eight picks overall in this year’s draft (my bad, I missed this year’s seventh round pick Seattle traded to Philadelphia for offensive lineman Stacy Andrews), including one pick in the first round, one pick in the second round, none in the third, one in the fourth (from New England), two in the fifth, ( including one from Baltimore), one in the sixth (from Detroit) and three two in the seventh (including one from Cleveland).

NFL Draft
Leave a comment Comments → 52
  1. Dukeshire says:

    That’s about what I figured. It’s a shame none of the “pick-ups” will play a role in the teams’ future (possibly Pitts for ’11, but that’s not a certainty).

  2. That’s not about what I figured.

  3. Dukeshire says:

    You thought it would be much more, I presume.

    And that should have read “… will *not* play a role…” before.

  4. I’m disappointed. I hoped the Burleson contract would push up the compensation. Wishful thinking again.

  5. C’mon guys! We’re a Seattle team! We’re NOT east coast! “We” don’t have any value…… jeesch!

  6. I was hoping for a sixth or above, guess it’s better than nothing.. We have a bunch of picks this year, so I’ll just hope we put them to good use, which means trading around a bunch, but again, we have to many needs than whenever we pick, the best player available should play on a position of need.

  7. We have a bunch of picks this year?

  8. chuck_easton says:

    Nine picks and no 3rd rounder isn’t a bunch of picks. SF has 12 picks to our 9 and they have the 7th overall pick.

    While I wouldn’t trade last years playoff run for anything the downside of having such a late pick in each round is coming home to roost.

    But we all know a high pick doesn’t really guarantee anything but having to give an unproven kid a lot of money he may not deserve. Does it Mr. Curry?

  9. Dukeshire says:

    A little football news; ‘Hawks are going to workout Conte from Cal. I presume their interest in him is to see if he can slide to SS.

    It would be fun to keep track of all their private workouts and see of that group who they end up selecting and / or targeting after the draft.

  10. My bad, keep forgetting we don’t have a 3rd round pick.. Wishful thinking I guess..

  11. Soggybuc says:

    Interesting to see the number of lower round prospects they are “checking out”.
    makes me think they are working towards or already have a deal in place to move down for more picks.

  12. Dukeshire says:

    That could be. It was sure fun to watch Schneider trade around during last years’ draft. Also though, you need to be flexible and the deeper into the draft, the more important it becomes. This staff appears to be incredibly thorough, which is very refreshing.

  13. Dukeshire says:

    This is cool. I’m sure they’ll bring someone in to compete with him even if they do re-sign him.'d-give-Seahawks-a-discount/

  14. maddog12 says:

    I think Mare has played relatively well and deserves a shot. Thanks for the info.

  15. I am excited to see the draft again but 2 minor things scare me.

    1. Okung was not our #1 lineman on the board last year and we were lucky he is who feel to us.

    2. I am a little scared how they have evaluated QB’s. We spent a lot to get Charlie and then decided that he may or may not be the guy.

    I want solid linemen out of this draft and only if we get a guy we are SUPER high on at QB. I am willing to wait a season to see we can make the team better around someone – let Charlie (or Matt) play for another season

  16. xman – you’re exactly right! Trent, pile of crap, Williams was their #1 choice at LT over Okung last season. Thank goodness Washington saved us from taking Aaron Curry II. That would be a #4 overall pick in ’09 and a #6 overall pick in ’10 spent on millions and millions of worthlessness for two busts.

    I know we don’t have a bunch of picks (and a 3rd rounder). I was being sarcastic.

  17. Dukeshire says:

    Has Carroll / Schneider actually said Williams was their #1 choice? I have not read that but rather they antisipated Wash to take Okung and Williams to be available.

  18. Soggybuc says:

    If i remember it right most folks had TW graded as raw but very high potential as RO was more ready now but what you see is what you get.

  19. I remember that Seattle graded Trent Williams higher in the ZBS as did Washington and it was expected Washington would take Williams because he was a better fit in the ZBS.

    But I don’t know if Seattle thought Williams was better than Okung outside of the ZBS.

  20. look at what the team accomplished in the first 6 games last year. I think we can do alot IF we can:

    1. Keep our front line players together (resign/keep healthy)

    2. Add depth.

    look at what other teams around the NFL were able to do with injuries. but they had depth. Something the hawks did not have in certain positions.

    Can’t wait to see the draft come around which would only be topped but a new CBA and the hawks signing a top notch CB imo.

  21. OT
    Tacoma’s Ryan Moore and Kyle Stanley BOTH tied for 12TH Place in the Arnald Palmer Invitational Golf Tournament!

  22. OT
    Moore and Stanley earned $94,800.00 EACH!

  23. Dukeshire says:

    It seems a lot more like speculation that Williams was graded higher than Okung, to me. And it seems primarily driven by what Gibbs was thought to have wanted in a lineman. I could be wrong, but until I read something definitive, I’m not going to presume they “lucked” into Big Rus because Washington’s FO is a total mess. I’m going to look around and see what I can come up with from last year.

  24. If we can get 4-7 guys who can regularly contribute in some way, Off/Def/ST doesn’t matter. I will be really happy

    Hopefully 1 or 2 of these guys will be solid NFL players potential pro bowl players.

    I think that Okung and Thomas will be good enough to see some pro bowls but who knows how many or when.

    We have to increase the depth so we don’t go from a great run defense to one of the worst when we lose 1 or 2 guys. or frantically trying to find an OL guy that has been cut by other teams to fill a gap.

  25. bayareahawkfan says:

    I’m with Duke – I remember the F.O. Being ecstatic when Russ fell to them. So far all I can find to that effect is this:

    “I was scared to death because I know their line coach there very well, and he wanted this kid as bad or worse than I did,” Gibbs said. “And he didn’t get him. So we quickly texted and said, ‘Ha, ha,’ and all that good stuff. Now, we’re all in the same community and we all fit together so that’s just kind of the way it is.

    (earlier in the article Gibbs says he thinks both were “can’t miss” prospects, but I recall him effusively pumping his fist after getting okung immediately post-draft).

  26. Dukeshire says:

    Thanks Bay-area. Good find.

  27. SandpointHawk–Thanks for the link on the article about Stacy Andrews. It drove me crazy last year to watch them play Locklear at RT and Andrews struggle at RG. Though Locklear improved as the season wore on, minus a couple revert-games, Andrews did not–and the last time he played RT he was a Pro Bowler.

    Very interesting that Caroll says Andrews is a hard worker. Then why on Gods Green Earth was he a healthy scratch the last few games of the season?! Attitude?! I think my attitude would suck too if I was playing out of position and benched, then watched as the guy starting at my natural position sucked it up.

    Anyway, Ive been hoping we’d see Locklear cut and Andrews brought in to compete at RT this year. We dont have the luxury of drafting one now, as our need at RG and LG is huge, not to mention C, as Unger may not fit anywhere except as a backup. Im hoping we draft/;sign a starting LG, try Unger at C, and sign/draft a RG as well. Keeping Andrews around to see what he can do at his natural position makes sense to me.

  28. On last season, up until the Raiders game, where they kicked our ass and injured everyone and pretty much ruined our season, Caroll was looking like NFL coach of the year.

    The difference between teams like Green Bay–who were able to weather injury situations as bad or worse than ours–is the depth of talent of thier backups, not starter talent/skill. We were holding our own with a new offense and defense, beating good teams and improving, until that game and the injuries. (While GB’s starters are far better than ours in many cases, I thought our team well-coached for the most part, and able to hang with most teams player for player, until the Raiders debacle).

    I get tired of people saying injuries are no excuse for the losses. What?! Hell yes they are! Seattle had ZERO depth behind thier starters, and some holes even among thier starters. They could compete fine without injuries, but had little chance with guys like Deion Butler and Golden Tate at WR, the worst O-line in NFL history, and defensive scrap-heap pickups like Junior Siavii and Kentwan Balmer on defense. Not to mention the suddenly ancient and slow Marcus Trufant, and the up and down year of Kelly Jennings.

    Caroll did a fantastic job working with what he had, and even made tough decisions post-season, such as firing Jeremy Bates. Picking up guys like Raheem Brock, Chris Clemmons, Chris Baker, and Brandon Stokely pretty much saved our season. Not to mention drafting Okung, Thomas, Thurmond, and the rest who contributed little this year but still have LOADS of potential (Golden Tate, Dexter Davis, McCoy).

    I for one do not think the 4-2 start was a mirage. It fell apart, but losing 3/4 of your defensive line will decimate even the Ravens Defense. And lets face it, no matter how stoked we were about our 2nd ranked run D at that point, Seattle is no Baltimore.

    I fully expect Caroll to draft well again, filling holes with BPA. I expect them to once again take a risk on an injured guy with upside, and to look to small-school guys with big potential in the later rounds, rather than signing Ruskell Guys–big school slow and undersized guys who might contribute, but will never be stars. I also expect Caroll to sign some more FA like Brock, Stokely, etc from last season, once the NFL and the NFLPA pull thier heads out.

    And blaming Lynch for his 3.6 ypc average is just plain stupid. While he’s no Adrian Peterson, or even Rashard Mendenhall, he can be a top-15 back. IF he has adequate blocking. The thing I like about Lynch is that he doesnt need GREAT blocking (like AP), merely adequate blocking, as he makes his own holes and turns creases and small holes into big gains. Personally, I wasnt thrilled with the idea of Lynch coming here, what with his past idiocy. However, I think there isnt another back in the league that would have done better with his carries; he often turned what should have been 3-yard loss plays into a yard gain.

    I think we’re gonna be a good team and repeat in the playoffs this year. Course, thats if Hass comes back. And in 2012, if we plug some holes in FA and draft as well as I expect, we should be back on course as a very good team year in, year out. Where we were before Ruskell took control and began this downward spiral before the 2008 season.

  29. Palerydr says:

    Read between the lines about Stacy Andrews “we’ll see how that works out” To me that means he will have to compete for his job especially if they draft a RT in any round of the draft.

    @STTBM pretty windy post but I do take exception about your comments regarding ML. He has a hard time finding those creases you mention. Even though he was hit behind the line more often than not I watched as he picked the wrong hole more often than I would like to see. I don’t believe he has great vision as a RB. In fact I would say it’s poor. It’s been argued all season as to how bad this line was regardless a good back can still make plays IMO more often than ML. Does he need to be replaced? No, does he need to run the football better, Yes.

  30. Before getting too upset with Lynch’s rushing, please read He’s not as bad an RB as you might think. Let’s get him an honest-to-goodness FB and see what he can do with a lead block?

  31. Dukeshire says:

    I think I see were STTBM is coming from but I would argue that injuries are only partially responsible for the teams’ struggles. Before the Raider game, they suffered a 17 point losses in Denver and St. Louis and 455 passing yards in a win against San Diego. There were signs of trouble and issues brewing from the beginning. Then add the loss of key starters and the lack of quality depth behind them, coupled with marginal starting talent at several positions, and that adds up to a team that struggled most of the second half.

    Depth? No question it’s needed. But upgrades at most starting positions are a priority.

  32. Duke-
    There’s also an argument there btw Palerydr and STTBM, like Palerydr sez there’s holes made by the OL that ML doesn’t take advantage of, and STTBM sez that the OL didn’t give ML much as far as holes to run through(?) You watch the games and the OL with a microscope, you could say whether one or the other is truer(?) Also, in the huddle, doesn’t the called zone-running play tell the RB which gap he’s spoosed to hit? I mean aren’t the zone-blocking OLers at the called gap sposed to double-up on one DLer and then one of the two OLers is sposed to break off engagement with that DLer and go take out the LB where the RB’s sposed to go in the 2nd level? Or is that left up to the RB to decide as the play unfolds? Thanx -

  33. Dukeshire says:

    klm – Actually, zone blocking is just the opposite. In zone blocking, there is basically one of 3 categories; inside, outside and stretch. The ball carrier uses these as a landmark, so-to-speak, but there is no pre-determined hole as one would find in a man scheme. So, a ball carrier will have to show enough patience to see where the hole develops (based on where the one of three zones has been determined), and enough awareness to recognize it and the explosiveness to cut immediately into it and shoot up-field. (aka “one-cut”.)

    For the linemen, first and foremost, each has to determine if the are covered by a defender or left uncovered. If he is uncovered, he joins the lineman to his play-side (where the run has been called to go) and form a double-team on that defender. Once that defender has been contained, the doubling lineman may disengage and react to another defender coming into the “hole”, which may be in the second level. If the lineman in covered, he’s yours. In man schemes, there is a specific defender “assigned” to a specific offensive lineman and a different type of teamwork linemen would use.

    Understand, these are the very basics as far as concept and scheme. Add to that, most teams in the NFL use some sort of combination between zone and man, allowing more creativity.

    Regarding Lynch; I’d be lying if I said I didn’t see him miss holes occasionally. But I could say that about every back. My overall impression however, is that all the line shuffling Seattle had to do effected Lynch’s success more than any deficiency in his own game. With these zone blocking concepts, the linemen work so much as a team and have to develop such a strong a feel for what each is doing (a real “sixth sense” is needed between them. Not unlike musicians performing together) in order for it to be productive. Lynch’s production suffered as a result. On the other hand, Forsett was very productive behind the same revolving door so that does raise some concern. But Forse had all the OTAs and camp to become accustomed to the blocking concepts that Lynch had to pick up on the run. (Remember, not all ZBS are the same. And also, my belief is that at some point we are going to have to acknowledge Forsett is a very productive running-back, period.)

    Anyway, that’s my sense of it.

  34. @Klm I agree 100% we need a good FB to pave the way for whoever the RB is. I have already looked up the FA FB available but I can’t remember the names now. I think a guy to watch in the draft this year is Stanley Havili that played for Carrol at USC. He’s coming out this year and although undersized and not a road grader he does have the ability to catch the FB out of the Backfield. That is a skill that is pretty much required of a west coast offense FB.

    @Duke thx for the explanation. Do you coach football, go to clinics or something along those lines? Or just an uber geeky fan and I mean that in a good way. I agree Forsett is better than I give him credit for. He makes plays and that counts for alot no matter his size, skill etc.

  35. Dukeshire says:

    Palerydr – Lol. Uber geek fan (and no offense taken). Over the years (more intensely the past 2 or 3) have begun reading and collecting books on coaching football (older and more rare the better) simply because I I want to learn more about the game. I played in high school, but that was high school, if you know what I mean. I love the game and respect the players and coaches so much (even the ones I hate, lol) and the more I learn, the better I feel like I can understand it. (And I attended my first coaching clinic this year. It was part of the Nike Coach of the Year Clinic series. Mike Stoops, Les Miles, Robb Akey, Chip Kelly and Dennis Erickson spoke, earlier this month here in Portland. Unbelievable stuff.)

    Anyway, geek fan whose girlfriend is very tolerant.

    BTW, Farnsworth writes another great piece for the 35th anniversary team. This time on a Seahawk original, Dave Brown. Cool stuff.

  36. Dukeshire says:

    Chuck – If you’re around I’m hoping you can weigh in on this; typically, how long do arguments in front of the judge, in these type of cases, last? Since I can’t imagine this is a situation where anyone is called to the stand, I presume a day or two, at most. Then it’s simply up to Judge Nelson to deliberate?

    Or, since she has the grievance in front of her, will there be any statements or only clarifying questions from her? Curious about the protocol in these cases. Thanks…

  37. Dukeshire says:

    I hope the ‘Hawks are putting something like this together. 23 is a pretty strong turnout, IMO.

  38. chuck_easton says:


    On holidays with family but I can tell you that in a case like this usually both sides provide written briefs to the judge prior to the hearing date. Then on the 6th they each just argue their case. It tends to only last a day unless the judge has specific questions that go into the following day. She will then go away to consider her decision. Shell present her written decision within a week to ten days later.

  39. Dukeshire says:

    Thanks, and that’s what I presumed. Have a good vacation and I hope you’re billing all these hours you’ve given us here on the blog. lol

  40. I wonder what affect (if any) this will have on the case???

  41. Duke-
    Wonder how many Fins fans are buying memberships to that fitness place? I’d imagine if 23 members of Hawks were at one facility in Seattle the place’ld get mobbed in short order(?)

  42. Dukeshire says:

    klm – Lol, I thought about that too.

    xcman – That’s interesting. I didn’t realize that some of the retirement programs were funded by fines that the league levies against players.

  43. Paleryder–I stand by my assertion that Lynch is a pretty good back, playing under the the worst Offensive Line in NFL history. Ive been watching football for over 25 years, and the last 5 years Seattle’s line has gone from inneffective to bad to even worse. Ive never seen anything like it.

    Lynch missed some holes/creases, but he made his own far more often, when the line looked like a bunch of keystone cops. I think a lot of people are getting numb from watching horrific line play year after year; its gone on so long that it defies logic, and so some are beginning to blame everything BUT the line–its the backs, its the scheme, etc etc. Its everything combined, but the problem starts and ends with the terrible line play.

    We had a desperate need for a big, strong back with adequate quickness, and then we got Lynch. Now people are complaining he’s not an elite back. So? He is a pretty good player, and a great counter-point with Forsett. Lynch doesnt have the speed to be like AP or C Johnson or even Mendenhall, as Ive said. But he’s a very good back and we’re lucky to have him–and he came CHEAP. And however many holes he missed, far more often it was the inept line that led to his average being under 4 ypc.

    Add to that the fact that our ZBS, aside from not working AT ALL, was brand-new to Lynch, and he didnt have all of training camp to work with our line, and I think its understandable. In fact, I thought he did pretty damn good getting the yards he got, considering. Yeah, he missed some holes, but its easy to see the holes from TV or the stands, a lot harder to see them when youre running behind 6′-4″ dudes.

    Can Lynch run with more vision? You bet, and Im sure he will. Our line WILL improve this year, Lynch will have (hopefully) a full training camp with our line, and he will understand the ZBS better.

    As for being long-winded, guilty as charged. Its a failing of mine. But Im certainly not the only one here with verbal diarrhea!

  44. Duke–I agree, injuries certainly werent the only thing that derailed our season. Everything you mentioned played a role. The huge passing yards given up vs SD were in part due to putting up such a huge lead. While Bradley blew it with his Prevent-Zone, that wouldnt have happened in a closer game. I think we were a 9-7 or 10-6 team last year, without a couple key injuries–Mebane/Bryant/Cole, BMW.

    Pretty hard for anyone to come in and fix five years of Ruskell-itis in one offseason and draft. Its gonna take Caroll and company 2-4 years to do it. In the meantime, we allready beat the reigning SB Champs in a playoff game, so it sure could be worse!

  45. Dukeshire says:

    STTBM – For sure. The way I looked at them heading into last season was a team and roster that needed to be deconstructed. Sort of a one step backward in order to take 2 steps forward. Carroll did a great job of that, and had some success along the way. I would view last season as a success even without the playoffs and a great win against the Saints. (That’s not to say it was all good. There were some fundamental lapses and breakdowns that shouldn’t happen under any circumstances.) But yes, it’s going to take much more than one season to build a solid foundation and a genuine contender. But I’m confident it will happen.

  46. @STTMBM The worst offensive line in history doesn’t play on a team that has 7 wins and rushes for 167 yds in a playoff game. That’s an overblown comment. The line IS bad we do agree there. Lynch is an avg NFL back we disagree there. IMO he has limited vision, avg acceleration through the hole and poor breakaway speed = avg in my book. Note this is my opinion so take it for what it’s worth maybe a used stick of gum off the ground…It’s also my understanding that ML played with a ZBS at Cal. I will say that, as has already been pointed out by others, not all ZBS are the same. My hope is we get another block or two or three on both sides of the line this year and next so that we can legitamately compete for a SB for years to come after that.

  47. Duke-
    You’ve mentioned Hawks need better starters 1st and then better depth. Besides KJ who’s a FA, which non-FA starters might be better backups – or maybe oughta play on another team? Which FAs would you think JS oughta bring back?

  48. Just to echo what has been posted earlier, anyone that thinks that April 6th will roll around and things will immediately be crystal clear presumably doesn’t have much experience with the courts.

    It’s pretty much 100% that regardless of what she says, the “losing” party will appeal, and besides that, it’s very common for a judge in these situations to go away, spend a few days looking things over, possibly ask each side for some additional material, and spend a few days looking at that as well before making a decision. Often it can be two to three weeks. If a judge is feeling under pressure to make a quicker decision, and both sides send exhaustive materials well in advance of the hearing, a decision might be reached within three or four business days, but that’s lightning speed.

  49. Paleryder-I hear you. We can agree to disagree, no problem there! As for rushing for 167 yards, thats only one game, and the Saints were a) beat up and b) not prepared. Our line did pretty good that day. But take away one play–Lynch’s immortal run–and we ran for 90 yards, which was our average, and at the bottom of the league. That run could have happened to anyone, it was caused by a) lapses in concentration and technique and b) Beast Mode! Ha!

    Our line is atrocious. While they usually could pass block acceptably, they werent great. And the run blocking was some of the silliest, saddest bunch of keyston coppery I have ever witnessed. Its been like that that going on five years now.

    But I might have been guilty of a little hyperbole. Just a little. ;p

    And it would be great if Lynch was a little faster. Still, I think if we can field even a mediocre O-line, the combo of Forsett and Lynch will be pretty damn fine.

  50. SandpointHawk says:

    STTBM…welcome to the blog and feel free to wake us up out of this funk, nice to see some passion again…

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