Seahawks Insider

Morning links: Hawks probably won’t move up to Jags’ pick

Post by Eric Williams on April 23, 2012 at 7:20 am with 47 Comments »
April 23, 2012 7:21 am

In his weekly Monday Morning Quarterback, Peter King of Sports Illustrated shoots down the latest rumor making its way around the league that the Seattle Seahawks would be interested in moving up in the draft to Jacksonville’s No. 7 overall pick to select Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill.

King: I think it’s unlikely, and not just because the Seahawks just bought a quarterback, Matt Flynn, in free agency, last month.

Seattle doesn’t want to use up two of its three choices in the top 100 of a draft they like a lot for a quarterback they might be able to pick sitting at 12. Think of it: There’s one team that might take Tannehill between five and 11 — Miami at eight. Let’s say Seattle GM John Schneider feels there are multiple holes not at quarterback he needs to fill, and let’s say he had to throw in his third-round pick, 75th overall, to be able to draft Tannehill. That means, after taking a quarterback in free agency and budgeting $15.5 million over the next two years for Flynn, he’d have used the 12th and 75th picks to procure another quarterback. Knowing Schneider and his love of building the roster through the draft, I’m dubious. From what I heard over the weekend, the trade market up to seven is comatose, unless Jacksonville’s asking price is downright minuscule.

Danny O’Neil of the Seattle Times says a talented linebacker group in this year’s draft means the Seahawks could get good prospects in the later rounds.

John Boyle of the Everett Herald writes that linebacker is an obvious need for Seattle.

We continue our positional look at this year’s draft with Rob Rang, which includes a feature on Washington running back Chris Polk.

Jim Moore writing for the Kitsap Sun predicts the Seahawks will select South Carolina’s Melvin Ingram in the first round.

Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel quotes an anonymous scout that says Stanford tight end Coby Fleener might be the most overrated player in the draft.

Mike Florio of writes that according to a league source Miami owner Stephen Ross wants Tannehill.

Clare Farnsworth of writes that the best sixth round pick for Seattle is defensive end Michael Sinclair.

Morning links
Leave a comment Comments → 47
  1. RDPoulsbo says:

    I agree that the LB position is deep, so it doesn’t mean they have to go Kuechly at #12. They probably will get more production for the pick value by waiting until the 3rd or 4th and get a guy like Kendricks. The move to 3-4 defenses helps push down your 4-3 types, so it should work in Seattle’s favor. If Hightower is there and Curry isn’t in the 2nd, he’d be the BPA in an area of need, so I’d be fine going that route.

  2. Dukeshire says:

    Great day in the morning! I actually agree with King. First time for everything, I guess.

  3. I doubt Kendricks is there in the 4th, maybe not even in the 3rd.

    Another great option is Bobby Wagner in the 2nd.

  4. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Look who King thinks the Seahawks should pick ( in the first round ) in his 2012 mock draft. Lol.

  5. Dukeshire says:

    Kendricks is a little small for my liking. Not just that he may got lost in the scrum, but the injury concerns that tend to follow a “Lofa” type (size).

  6. Yeah, I have also read the too small comments about Kendricks. I guess with the size of our D-line, I don’t worry about MLB size as much as I used to. I expect Lofa would be more successful with this d-line group than the Seattle d-lines he played with ‘back in the day’.

    You gotta love Kendricks’ instincts and production tho.

    I think there are four top quality ILB / MLB guys available in rounds 1 – 3, I would be happy with any of them (Kuechly, Hightower, Wagner and Kendricks).

  7. Sarcasticus says:

    The tweet by Softy said the move (trading up with Jax) would be to draft Fletcher Cox. He says if we knew his source we would believe him. Well, I don’t believe it would happen, but it sure would be a bold move. The pass rush he produces from inside is really good.

    I do like Schneider talking up Tannehill. If any team wants him and he is available at 12, the Seahawks may be able to move down and pick up some good value.

  8. RDPoulsbo says:

    I think Kendricks would be there in the 3rd. He’s smallish, but good value for a guy who could very likely be a starter on a rookie contract for about 4-5 years. I wouldn’t expect him to be some 12 year Probowler. That route would free them to get a guy like Floyd or DeCasto in the 1st and Curry in the 2nd. OLB is even deeper, so they could find a starter in the 4th or 6th rounds.

    I never bought into the trade up buzz to begin with. Even King can see the flaw in the logic of such a move. It doesn’t even pass the smell test.

  9. Dukeshire says:

    … and then I read King’s mock. He says their taking Tannehill at 12, if he’s there (“Write it down”, he proclaims). And that they should take Barron, because they could play 3 safeties on every down except 1st. So, that means he wants to either A – transition Seattle into a zone or B – put Thomas a a nickel back, where teams could exploit a mis-match by getting TEs on him. Look, Thomas rotates down to cover the slot on occasion now, and he’s effective there. But running 3 safeties is a dramatic scheme shift that Seattle will not be undertaking. Where does King come up with this stuff?

  10. Hey, the Mark Barron / playing 3 safeties stuff is not so crazy.

    And with PC running the defence, you never know how he will want to fit it together. Really, who predicted Red Bryant to DE or that it would work? I remeber when that came out I was thinking it was a last chance for Red before he got cut.

  11. owenbytheway says:

    No, not Tannehill, they trade with the Jags for Fletcher Cox.

    Last week I figured the trade was for our first, third, and next year’s third.

    Now, it figures to be for our first and second this year.

    Many of the 2nd rounders that make sense are likely gone at #43,
    and then I’ve got a fall off until probably the 70’s.

    With Cox they got the only top rated pass rusher that is rising, rather than falling.

    PC and The Schneid crazy enough to do that?

    You betcha’.

    Puts the jags in a position to get their DE, WR, and LT in the first two rounds.

    Hawks can get a mid-round or late linebacker, WR, or whatever.

    Right now, they can get the premier guy by moving Cox to DE, or play #3, or #7. He is the deal for the PC defense to be the missing piece in he puzzle.

  12. RDPoulsbo says:

    Playing 3 safeties is a major change of scheme by any stretch of the imagination. There’s no team in the league who’d use that as a base package and survive, especially in the run heavy NFCW. That’s a sub-package for 3rd and 25, not a scheme that would get you the impact you’re looking for, especially with a 1st round pick. Besides, Thomas was made a 1st round pick for a reason. They wanted to go primarily to a Cover-1 and he’s the key to making the whole secondary work with guys like Sherman and Browner at CB in the first place.

    I think I just lost a couple IQ points reading that.

  13. I don’t think I read anyone suggesting 3 safeties as a base defence…..

    Most people will read the 3 safety idea and think exactly that – why would you spend a first round pick on a sub package player? Thats a fair thought, but a pash rushing end is also part of a sub package.

    I agree that we need a pass rusher much more than a 3rd safety.

    But the Hawks do use alot of extra DB’s – so its not that crazy of an idea. I think thats all that King was suggesting.

    We also ost Bigby – if we lose Chancellor or Thomas to injury, who would you rather step onthe field? Mark Barron or Jeron Johnson?

    Anyways – my point was and is – its not that crazy of a thought. I don’t think its going to happen, but its not a completly crazy thought.

  14. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I don’t believe anything I hear right now, (rumors, predictions, ect…), except for two things, and those two things are the first two picks!

    It’s also interesting to me that pretty much most of the mocks have DeCastro going to KC at 11, and Hightower going to the Stealers at 24.
    Is it kinda like they follow one mocks lead to create their own mock?

    I can’t wait for the real thing! Tic tic. Tic tic. Tic tic.

  15. Macabrevity says:

    Peter King says we’re not trading up… oh gawd, we’re mortgaging the future for Tannehill :(

  16. Dukeshire says:

    blocis – Moving Red to LDE actually fits into Carroll’s defensive philosophy, and the “under” front he’s used most of his career. It wasn’t just a desperate grasp. 3 safeties is basically what Seattle used in their Bandit package in ’10. So the notion to move to a zone coverage and away from the man they’ve been building here is absurd. Moreover, one doesn’t draft a player at 12 for depth. You take a player at 12 that will be a starter and contributor. Safety, and secondary in general, is the deepest position on this team.

  17. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I think this is interesting!

    Here are first-round picks from the last 10 years who made more than one Pro Bowl appearance:

    Quarterbacks: 6 of 30 = 20 percent

    Running Backs: 4 of 27 = 14.8 percent

    Wide Receivers: 4 of 37 = 10.8 percent

    Tight Ends: 1 of 13 = 7.6 percent

    Offensive Tackles: 5 of 37 = 13.5 percent

    Centers: 2 of 7 = 28.5 percent

    Guards: 3 of 7 = 42.8 percent

    Defensive Ends: 4 of 41 = 9.7 percent

    Defensive Tackles: 6 of 33 = 18.1 percent

    Linebackers: 8 of 32 = 25.0 percent

    Cornerbacks: 6 of 39 = 15.3 percent

    Safeties: 6 of 16 = 37.5 percent

    While the sample sizes aren’t huge for interior offensive linemen, those who have been good enough to warrant selection in the first round over the last 10 years have generally not disappointed. That’s a strong indicator for teams eyeing players at these positions with first-round grades this year such as Stanford guard David DeCastro, Georgia guard Cordy Glenn and Wisconsin center Peter Konz.

  18. HawkfaninMT says:

    I am warming up to a WR in the 2nd to replace BMW. I know it is a minority opinion here, but I see some Jordy nelson in Rueben Randle. If that comparison holds any water, he would be a great compliment to Rice and an awesome weapon for Flynn IMO.

    Biggest positional upgrade in the 1st (Decastro)
    Randle in the 2nd
    Irvin in the 3rd (future Leo)
    RB in the 4th (Turbin?, Wilson/Polk/Miller if they fall?)

  19. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    if decastro is there i see two choices one draft him two trade down with someone who does want him and draft someone else while picking up picks. i honestly don’t see a pick at 12 other than decastro we have to have, unles somehow cox falls to 12. i am betting on the trade down i think that is the teams bext option.

  20. tchristensen says:

    Trading your 1st and 2nd round picks to move up 5 places in the first round doesn’t sound like anything this FO is going to do. Their hell-bent on not mortgaging the future and that would be a good start. If anything, they trade down. Hawks are lucky to have John Schneider!

  21. Oh yeah, that’s why I don’t read Peter King. He’s got Shea McClellin and Mark Barron so deep in him that his kids can taste them. He reminds me of a pharmaceutical or big oil lobbyist.

  22. yakimahawk says:

    With our interior D-line why would we pick Fletcher Cox?

  23. With the exception of Suh, drafting DTs in the 1st round scares me to death (and, yes, I was scared when we drafted Tez, too, and that turned out fine). I think Poe is like Coples, talented but you don’t know what you’re going to get. The thing I hate about Poe is that his tape isn’t impressive. I don’t know how you can be bad in college and expect to be a top 10 pick in the NFL. Can it happen? Yes. But would you really want to gamble with a top pick like that? I wouldn’t. However, nobody knew about our interest in ET in ’10 or Carp in ’11, so the fact that Poe rumors are coming out leads me to think there’s no way they have interest in him.

    Georgia – Those are interesting stats.

  24. Not saying he was “bad.” Poor choice of words. Not dominant like you’d hope/expect from a 7th-12th overall pick.

  25. Shea McClellin is the real deal. He is the guy we will look back at in 3 years and say, “wow, he was a steal in the late first round” unless of course he goes earlier.

    Can someone PLEASE answer me this:

    Why didn’t DeCastro play Left Guard for the Cardinal? I don’t really see it discussed or brought up as a concern, so I’m not worried about it, but generally the better guard mans the left side. Last year the Cardinal wasn’t sure who would play LG until Kevin Danser stepped up in a big way in the preseason. I wonder why they wouldn’t have moved DeCastro over next to Martin on the left side?

    Does it concern anyone that DeCastro has only played right guard?

  26. Duke – I never said we will or should draft Barron. I only said that King laid down some reasons that had some merit, meaning the idea wasn’t ‘absurd’. You and I can both disagree that its the right thing to do, but the idea isn’t crazy.

    Its interesting to read some of the posts with comments about some of the sports writers….. I don’t really get it. I either agree with the article or I don’t. But for some reason some of you have developed preferences for the writers themselves. If you ‘dislike’ the writer you disagree with the article automatically.

    Complaining about sports writers is like complaining about the weather. Blah blah blah.

  27. chuck_easton says:


    Keep up the debate. You’ve even got me thinking “what if” and I am the most stubborn person (hey, I’m a lawyer, it’s genetic) against the DeCastro pick.

    I love the player, just don’t see how this solves our immediate need for pass rush.

  28. HawkfaninMT says:

    Easy answer Chuck… It doesn’t

  29. I could see the Jags taking a 4th round pick to swap number 7 with number 12.

  30. When we look back on the ’12 draft in 15 years we are all going to admit that DeCastro turned into one of the top 5-10 players. I firmly believe that (barring injury). As mentioned the other night, he’s the best prospect at his position, other than Suh at DT, that I have seen in recent memory (Luck wins out for player though simply due to the position).

    With that being said, I hope he goes to Buffalo or Kansas City so we don’t have to worry about it.

  31. If DeCastro goes at #12 then I think our only choice is to get to the back end of the 1st round to get one of the pass rushers. It’ll mean losing out on a pick though, but the pass rush situation will have been addressed.

  32. Dukeshire says:

    blocis – I know you weren’t advocating it, King was. And IMO, the notion is thoroughly absurd. It has no merit, from where I sit.

  33. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Carson- That’s a good question? I can’t really answer why DeCastro didn’t play LG other than to mke a WAG on it. Perhaps they figured he was such a good pulling Guard that he would be blocking on the left side most of the time anyways.

    He did play Center in highschool however and some say he knew the plays just as well as Luck did.

    I don’t think he would have much problem playing all three interior line positions.

  34. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Chuck- If Cox or Ingram slips to 12 than I will be less disappointed in not choosing DeCastro if he is still there. Because like you and about everyone else I know that we need to improve the pass rush most of all.

    If we decide to move down and pick a player like Hightower, ( who isn’t expected to go before the 24th pick by most so-called experts ), and also pick up an extra pick or two I would be fine with that.

    It’s just that Decastro has the it factor written all over him! Kinda like what we saw last year in Baldwin. He just gets it!

    He seems to be the type of player that you,( a no-nonsense type of guy like yourself), would want?

    Well, you told me to keep up the debate. Lol.

  35. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    the skinny on decastro is that he can play any interior position and RT in a pinch. he is incredibly smart and can draw up plays as well as luck can. if he is there at 12 you take him or find a trade partner who does want him later in the first. then you hope that the extra picks make up for the brain fart of a mistake for letting the best interior lineman in 10 years go elsewhere.

    interesting fact hutch was an 17 th pick i believe. how many of the 15 teams that picked before the hawks feel regret for not picking him? the only team i think that is safe is the chargers with LT great pick. no other player in this draft not even LT has made more probowls, no that is an impact player.

    i will say it again other than fletcher cox i don’t see a D-Line pick worth a 12 not even ingram . so if decastro or cox are not there i will hope for a trade back.

  36. I like Fletcher Cox and think he is the best interior pass rusher available…..

    Still, with our current roster, I have a hard time going D tackle at 12. Its just not a position of need (its the same argument against selecting Mark Barron at 12).

    I am in the Ingram, Mercilus, Decastro, Kuechly camps at #12.

  37. Dukeshire says:

    If Seattle does target Coples at 12, I’d prefer they look at Ronnell Lewis in the second than Kendricks. Of course than means Wright moves to Mike, but he may be better value at Sam in the second round than Ingram in the first. Just a thought as we get closer…

  38. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    ok i am surfing the mocks and seeing a lot of guys having us taking TE in the second? really?

    also i noticed that i felt a lot better when decastro was off the board with the hawks pick. so gotta say that i hope he is gone if we don’t take him. because the thought of him going to cardinals or cowboys makes me sick

  39. owenbytheway says:

    Why do y’all keep insisting Cox is only a DT?

    Yeah, he played that position last year out of necessity.

    Go bact to his junior year.

    Try Mayock or Boylhart, as two examples of Cox as a DE.

    We will use him where they did, as a 5 technique.

  40. HawkfaninMT says:

    @ hawkfaninOK: What TE are they projecting? I think Allen would be an impactful pick up for the hawks. IMo he is the best all around TE in this draft. Seems like everyone is looking for the next Gronk, and while Allen isn’t that, I could see a comparison to Gates. I would take that in a heart beat!

  41. HeinieHunter says:

    I really like DeCastro if he drops to twelve. Protect Flynn and open holes for Lynch. Keep the offense on the field, control time of possession, and improve field position. Fix pass rush in next rounds. DeCastro is long term Pro Bowler and the most unlikely BUST in the draft.

  42. Yes, it would be hard to go wrong with DeCastro, and we need help on offense. If we do take Decastro, relax, and have confidence that Scneider and Carroll will have an answer for pass rush either in a trade or in later rounds.

  43. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    hawkfaninmt, allen out of clemson i believe, reguardless in the second? as soon as i saw him i read up a bit he is more of a project.

  44. tribfan1 says:

    They will let the players come to them. The Hawks will not trade up.

  45. edstang45 says:

    Changed my mind again!!!! Although Castro would make me smile at 12, I think we go defense with the first 2 picks….If I was da boss we would take Kuechly (sp) LB with first pick, and then at #2 Chandler Jones DE with the 2nd…

  46. kinger12 says:

    Welshie and The Situation both took a while to get rolling with the O-Line but they were pretty stout towards the end of the season once the assignments and footwork came together. That said upgrading to DeCastro on the left side would bring the line back to the days of Jones/Hutch/Gray that whole left side would be wicked.
    That said if we dont take DeCastro – it has to be Kuechly to bolster that LB corp…

    Welshie = McQuistan
    The Situation = Breno

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