The Rookie Class

User avatar
Donn Beach
Posts: 13261
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: The Rookie Class

Post by Donn Beach » Wed Jan 18, 2023 10:48 am

From his making an all rookie team
.
To call Woolen a steal would be an understatement. The fifth-round pick is a ballhawk, netting six interceptions, tied for the NFL lead, with 16 passes defended. The 6-4 corner possesses the size and length to lock up wideouts. Perhaps more impressive is his closing speed with the ball in the air. Quarterbacks think they have a window, and Woolen slams it shut. A perfect fit in Seattle's defense, the rookie allowed just a 49.8 passer rating against, the lowest among all corners with least 200 coverage snaps, per Next Gen Stats

User avatar
douche
Posts: 2065
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2019 6:41 pm

Re: The Rookie Class

Post by douche » Wed Jan 18, 2023 9:07 pm

From ESPN:

1. Seattle Seahawks

The Seahawks came out of the 2022 draft with four starters and some useful depth on top of that. Their best rookie was fifth-round pick Tariq Woolen, who tied for the NFL lead with six interceptions. He finished with 16 passes defended and allowed a completion rate of just 47% in coverage. Left tackle Charles Cross and right tackle Abraham Lucas started 17 and 16 games, respectively. Cross was eighth at his position in SIS total points, while Lucas ranked 13th at his position.

The fourth starter was running back Kenneth Walker III. Walker had over 1,000 rushing yards with 10 rushing touchdowns, but advanced stats were less impressed by his performance because he combined a few highlight runs with a lot of runs where he got stuffed for minimal gains. He finished 41st out of 42 qualifying running backs in success rate and also had very little receiving value.

If you count nickelback as a starter -- and you should in the modern NFL -- the Seahawks also got a lot of value out of fourth-round pick Coby Bryant, who allowed a moderate 7.5 yards per target. In addition, edge rusher Boye Mafe started three games and racked up three sacks.

draft.png
draft.png (57.51 KiB) Viewed 404 times

User avatar
Donn Beach
Posts: 13261
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: The Rookie Class

Post by Donn Beach » Wed Jan 25, 2023 10:59 am

Aaron Schantz creator of DVOA thinks Walker is the overrated rookie

.“The question about running backs is not what are their totals, but what do they get compared to what another running back would get if they had the same opportunities with the same blocking in the same scheme,” Schatz said. “And the fact is that Walker was not very good at success rate. He had a few highlight runs and then a lot of runs where he got stuffed for minimal gains. And the yardage and the touchdowns is mostly just a factor of the fact that he got so much play and so much play near the goal line. So I’m still not a fan of taking running backs early in the draft. I think Walker is a nice player and all but I don’t think he’s a stud or anything like that. He had a nice rookie year mostly because he had the opportunity to have a nice rookie year. As opposed to someone like Tariq Woolen, who really stood out as far as their performance and stats as how much better they were than what you’d consider a replacement level player at the position.”
Thinks Tyrod Taylor is a comp for Geno
It was interesting early on trying to figure out whether this was for real or not,” Schatz said. “And the best sort of equivalent that I came up with historically, and this is not going to sound impressive to Seahawks fans, is Tyrod Taylor. Tyrod Taylor when he went from Baltimore to Buffalo and became the starter had a couple of years where he was a top-10 quarterback by advanced stats. I realize nobody was ever a big Tyrod Taylor fan, but he had a couple of really good years. And that’s what Geno sort of reminded me of. Geno kind of calmed down a bit after the first five games, the deep ball wasn’t quite hitting as much after that… (but) I think what you ended up with was Geno Smith looking at the end of the year like he was probably an average NFL starter, which is a lot better than what you thought you had before the season. You just don’t want to overpay for that if you bring him back.”

Michael K.
Posts: 11343
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: The Rookie Class

Post by Michael K. » Wed Jan 25, 2023 3:16 pm

The debate on RBs early in the draft is a good one. First off, you DON'T draft guys like Penny and C Mike early in the draft if you are the Seahawks. Why? Because they had Lynch and Turbin and Carson and Davis on those teams. You don't use a first or a second on a guy who's going to spend most or all of his first season as a third stringer that doesn't even contribute on Special Teams! Not to mention those picks caused them to pass on guys at positions of greater need. But? They needed Walker and they knew it. If you look at the guys making the biggest impact at RB, there are some that were early picks and some that weren't. It's kind of like QB, you could find a guy to make your case, either way. So, making a flat out definitive "you never do this..." statement like that is stupid. The Browns shouldn't use an early pick on a RB, it would be laughable. YET? What Seattle did when they took C Mike and Penny is very similar to if the Browns used a first or second on a back. So, even THIS team has done it three times recently, and one of those times? It was the right move....so hard to say you NEVER should do it.

It would be interesting to look back and see who they might have been able to get. But I disagree with this guy about Walker, and I did when we got criticized for taking him last Spring too. This time, it was the right move based on the roster and the player. Getting the best RB in college football to go to this offense with a VERY injury prone starter and no one else of real value on the roster? Dallas is OK, but when we had Turbin and Davis we had a guy we figured could step in for a game or two if the starter got hurt. I didn't feel that way going in about Dallas. He did have a decent year, but he had to because Penny was once again shelved.

auroraave
Posts: 1748
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 9:35 pm
Location: Beverly Hills, Ca.

Re: The Rookie Class

Post by auroraave » Wed Jan 25, 2023 4:31 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Wed Jan 25, 2023 3:16 pm
The debate on RBs early in the draft is a good one. First off, you DON'T draft guys like Penny and C Mike early in the draft if you are the Seahawks. Why? Because they had Lynch and Turbin and Carson and Davis on those teams. You don't use a first or a second on a guy who's going to spend most or all of his first season as a third stringer that doesn't even contribute on Special Teams! Not to mention those picks caused them to pass on guys at positions of greater need. But? They needed Walker and they knew it. If you look at the guys making the biggest impact at RB, there are some that were early picks and some that weren't. It's kind of like QB, you could find a guy to make your case, either way. So, making a flat out definitive "you never do this..." statement like that is stupid. The Browns shouldn't use an early pick on a RB, it would be laughable. YET? What Seattle did when they took C Mike and Penny is very similar to if the Browns used a first or second on a back. So, even THIS team has done it three times recently, and one of those times? It was the right move....so hard to say you NEVER should do it.

It would be interesting to look back and see who they might have been able to get. But I disagree with this guy about Walker, and I did when we got criticized for taking him last Spring too. This time, it was the right move based on the roster and the player. Getting the best RB in college football to go to this offense with a VERY injury prone starter and no one else of real value on the roster? Dallas is OK, but when we had Turbin and Davis we had a guy we figured could step in for a game or two if the starter got hurt. I didn't feel that way going in about Dallas. He did have a decent year, but he had to because Penny was once again shelved.
Rashaad Penny was seattle's first pick because RB was seattle's biggest need - you are forgetting context here - ALL of sesttle's RB's went down the previous year leaving Wilson as the teams leading rusher. That is nnot sustainable on any team. there was no indication any of those injured RB's would/could come back to the team, let alone at 100%. THAT is why Seattle selected college football's leading rusher with thier first pick. Ignoring the RB room would have been insane - it was literally the team's number one need. YOu may not feel that way, and it's that's convenient for you because want to hate the pick - but it was 100% the right pick. Your greatest position of need - taking the top back at that spot - is not a bad draft pick. If Penny never got injured you would be praising it. Players getting injured is how it goes. Doing hindsight drafting is still not an option for any franchise as far as I know.

I'll say it again - RB was the NUMBER ONE NEED for Seattle in that draft - because the entire RB room went out injured that year leaving the team with potentially nothing. NO ONE knew if Carson would make it back when they picked Penny - NO ONE. You can praise chubb or anyone else - but that is hindsight - and again - your assumption that if seattle had taken chubb and he would have flourished is nonsense- there is no way to prove that. You can make the same case that he probably would've gotten injured. Both are false assumptions.

You cannot ignore context and use hindsight drafting skills to embolden your position. That simply doesn't work.

If Seattle drafted Chubb and he had Penny's injuries (rememebr - Penny had NO injury history in college - another reason Seattle took him)- what would you be saying about that pick today? ALso, let's say Penny was killing it in Dallas. Would you be lamenting how they could've had Penny instead of the oft-injured Chubb?

A 'run heavy offense' with all the RB's injured - and you think they had other positions of greater need? Seriously?

User avatar
Sibelius Hindemith
Posts: 11259
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 3:09 am
Location: Seattle

Re: The Rookie Class

Post by Sibelius Hindemith » Wed Jan 25, 2023 5:04 pm

RB was a high need, but they had needs at positions that are harder to fill, like OT, Edge, and CB. I guess you could say the same thing for last draft as well, but i think Walker was a more physical RB in college than Penny and that was a big plus.

Michael K.
Posts: 11343
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: The Rookie Class

Post by Michael K. » Wed Jan 25, 2023 9:02 pm

auroraave wrote:
Wed Jan 25, 2023 4:31 pm

Rashaad Penny was seattle's first pick because RB was seattle's biggest need - you are forgetting context here - ALL of sesttle's RB's went down the previous year leaving Wilson as the teams leading rusher. That is nnot sustainable on any team. there was no indication any of those injured RB's would/could come back to the team, let alone at 100%. THAT is why Seattle selected college football's leading rusher with thier first pick. Ignoring the RB room would have been insane - it was literally the team's number one need. YOu may not feel that way, and it's that's convenient for you because want to hate the pick - but it was 100% the right pick. Your greatest position of need - taking the top back at that spot - is not a bad draft pick. If Penny never got injured you would be praising it. Players getting injured is how it goes. Doing hindsight drafting is still not an option for any franchise as far as I know.

I'll say it again - RB was the NUMBER ONE NEED for Seattle in that draft - because the entire RB room went out injured that year leaving the team with potentially nothing. NO ONE knew if Carson would make it back when they picked Penny - NO ONE. You can praise chubb or anyone else - but that is hindsight - and again - your assumption that if seattle had taken chubb and he would have flourished is nonsense- there is no way to prove that. You can make the same case that he probably would've gotten injured. Both are false assumptions.
You love to use whats and ifs. What we know is Chubb has NOT been hurt, and Penny has. Chubb played at Georgia and Penny at SD State. Most had Chubb rated higher. What we KNOW is that Carson was coming back and they still had Mike Davis. What we KNOW is that Penny was third string and helped very little as a rookie, on a team that had Super Bowl Asperations. What you THINK is RB was their greatest need, and it's crap. If you want to properly point to hindsight and what ifs, you should focus on how weak that draft was. But they did pass on 7 future Pro Bowlers for a guy to play third fiddle to Mike fucking Davis.
auroraave wrote:
Wed Jan 25, 2023 4:31 pm
You cannot ignore context and use hindsight drafting skills to embolden your position. That simply doesn't work.

If Seattle drafted Chubb and he had Penny's injuries (rememebr - Penny had NO injury history in college - another reason Seattle took him)- what would you be saying about that pick today? ALso, let's say Penny was killing it in Dallas. Would you be lamenting how they could've had Penny instead of the oft-injured Chubb?
Again, que the what ifs. Dude, please live in the real world. Your response is silly. Believing if we drafted someone else they would have gotten hurt just like Penny did is dumb, and if true, we shouldn't ever draft a RB ever since Procise was the same fucking way. Complete straw man.
auroraave wrote:
Wed Jan 25, 2023 4:31 pm
A 'run heavy offense' with all the RB's injured - and you think they had other positions of greater need? Seriously?
They also needed O Lineman. The secondary was showing signs of age and the year before our leading receiver had less than 1,000 yards and our number two less than 700. The Number 3? David fucking Moore. So, draft Penny instead of Courtland Sutton or Christian Kirk? Dallas fucking Goedert!

RB was Aurora Ave's biggest need, it was not SEATTLE'S biggest need. And you say that shit because it fits your narrative. Carson and Davis accounted for just under 1,700 yards the year before. Low and behold, they again took a team with many other needs and drafted a shiny new offensive toy they wouldn't play with because they didn't need it. In the next two seasons Chris Carson played 27 games, and you want to pretend he was on his way to the Old Folks Home.

That was not a good draft, but a BIG reason it wasn't is because guys like Penny went way to early. There were O Lineman that would have helped, WRs that would have helped and a stud TE that would have helped. Not to mention a guy that is now the best RB in the game. And EVEN IF RB was their biggest need, the completely whiffed in the evaluation portion of this. You liked Penny, so you chose to ignore that. He didn't play the same competition as Chubb and he is flat out not as good. Watch the two play dude. I realize you hate the NFL and don't watch anymore, but before you go on and on again about this, watch the two guys play the game. Chubb is head and shoulders better, and NOT only because he actually steps on the field.

Pharmabro
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:32 am

Re: The Rookie Class

Post by Pharmabro » Sun Jan 29, 2023 6:34 am

2022 Hawk Draft picks: 9, 41, 42, 72, 109, 153,158,229,233

2023 Hawk draft picks: #5, 20, 37, 51, 83, 121, 151,154, 195

Better draft picks all across the board

Picks better4, 21, 5, 21, 26, 32, 7, 75, 38

Needs
D = DT, Edge, LB, S

O= C, G, RB, WR

4 picks in top 51`4 more in the top 154

Another great draft and this team will be players for deep runs. Along with a few key FAs. Hell yes!

Post Reply