Who's Your Pick At #5

Who's Your Pick At #5

Poll ended at Wed Apr 26, 2023 6:20 pm

QB Bryce Young
0
No votes
DT Jalen Carter
9
33%
Edge/OLB Will Anderson Jr
6
22%
QB Will Levis
0
No votes
QB CJ Stroud
1
4%
QB Anthony Richardson
5
19%
CB Devon Witherspoon
0
No votes
Edge/OLB Tyree Wilson
3
11%
Edge/DE Myles Murphy
0
No votes
Trade Down (Please feel free to write-in your TD pick)
3
11%
 
Total votes: 27

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

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by auroraave » Sat Mar 25, 2023 9:03 pm

D-train wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 6:49 pm
auroraave wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 5:58 pm
D-train wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 4:19 pm


btw advocating drafting for need over BPA is quite the antiquated take..... :P
It may be antiquated - but it makes the most sense - the secondary isn't the problem - it's the 7 in front of them - including a badly depleted LB corp. Upgrading those areas would immediately make the secondary better. I am sure that kid is great - but ignoring seattle greatest needs to project this pick seems wildly lazy. Not to mention the COST we would have tied up in one position group. It just doesn't make sense to me.

That said, they probably go get him , in which case, i will have to eat crow and buy his jersey - in which case I will look for a two-for one deal and send you one too :P

I think Seattle is posturing and wants to trade back. more chips, more options, more flexibility, less cap intrusive. Theoretically they could spread those chips out over this and the next draft - accumulating more depth than stars is what I see them thinking.
Yeah I would think Carter is at least equal to him so the tie breaker would be need.
I have no problem with them taking a corner - I expect them to - but not at 5 - it is simply putting too much $$$ into the secondary - which is not the teams weakness, IMO. They concentrated on that last year - it just wouldn't make sense with a #5 pick - financially. You have to upgrade the front seven or you are fucked. I expect several picks in that area - I am fine with the kid from georgia with all those 'red flags' - I don't care about those - every single pick is a risk - no one is perfect - these are kids - I accept the risk. I still think they want to trade back - but if no one bites, they go all in on the dline. They simply HAVE to upgrade the interior.

Gonna be really intersting to see where richardson goes - I wouldn't have a problem with them taking him - at 20. Tucking him away for a year or two would be an insane asset for the future - as the traditional pocket passers are becoming the thing of the past - his skill set is the future of the league, IMO.

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

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by douche » Sat Mar 25, 2023 9:59 pm

auroraave wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 5:58 pm
I think Seattle is posturing and wants to trade back. more chips, more options, more flexibility, less cap intrusive. Theoretically they could spread those chips out over this and the next draft - accumulating more depth than stars is what I see them thinking.
My thoughts, exactly.

User avatar
ddraig
Posts: 5190
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 1:17 am

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by ddraig » Sun Mar 26, 2023 2:34 am

I'd still like to see us load up on defense. Three of our four draft choices, hopefully, will be for defense. You win with defense. Maybe pick up an O-Lineman with one of the first four picks. RB's and WR's are a dime a dozen. And we have a QB for another two or three years.

HawkandMariner88
Posts: 622
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 10:33 pm

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by HawkandMariner88 » Sun Mar 26, 2023 10:36 am

If Arizona is willing to trade back with us then yes. I just hope they trade back period but especially past us. Shit I'd even go LB (Campbell or Sanders), Nose Tackle in the 2nd (Mazi Smith, Coburn, Ika, Benton, Brooks). Outside chance at TE but not likely.

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 67888
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by D-train » Sun Mar 26, 2023 11:21 am

auroraave wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 9:03 pm
D-train wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 6:49 pm
auroraave wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 5:58 pm


It may be antiquated - but it makes the most sense - the secondary isn't the problem - it's the 7 in front of them - including a badly depleted LB corp. Upgrading those areas would immediately make the secondary better. I am sure that kid is great - but ignoring seattle greatest needs to project this pick seems wildly lazy. Not to mention the COST we would have tied up in one position group. It just doesn't make sense to me.

That said, they probably go get him , in which case, i will have to eat crow and buy his jersey - in which case I will look for a two-for one deal and send you one too :P

I think Seattle is posturing and wants to trade back. more chips, more options, more flexibility, less cap intrusive. Theoretically they could spread those chips out over this and the next draft - accumulating more depth than stars is what I see them thinking.
Yeah I would think Carter is at least equal to him so the tie breaker would be need.
I have no problem with them taking a corner - I expect them to - but not at 5 - it is simply putting too much $$$ into the secondary - which is not the teams weakness, IMO. They concentrated on that last year - it just wouldn't make sense with a #5 pick - financially. You have to upgrade the front seven or you are fucked. I expect several picks in that area - I am fine with the kid from georgia with all those 'red flags' - I don't care about those - every single pick is a risk - no one is perfect - these are kids - I accept the risk. I still think they want to trade back - but if no one bites, they go all in on the dline. They simply HAVE to upgrade the interior.

Gonna be really intersting to see where richardson goes - I wouldn't have a problem with them taking him - at 20. Tucking him away for a year or two would be an insane asset for the future - as the traditional pocket passers are becoming the thing of the past - his skill set is the future of the league, IMO.
They did sign Jones and Reed but still need more on the D Line
dline.JPG
dline.JPG (29.34 KiB) Viewed 232 times
dt

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 67888
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by D-train » Sun Mar 26, 2023 11:24 am

douche wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 9:59 pm
auroraave wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 5:58 pm
I think Seattle is posturing and wants to trade back. more chips, more options, more flexibility, less cap intrusive. Theoretically they could spread those chips out over this and the next draft - accumulating more depth than stars is what I see them thinking.
My thoughts, exactly.
When you have the 5th and 20th pick you need at least a couple stars otherwise you just have a basket full of mediocre guys that will never get you to the SB.
dt

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

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by auroraave » Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:46 pm

D-train wrote:
Sun Mar 26, 2023 11:24 am
douche wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 9:59 pm
auroraave wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2023 5:58 pm
I think Seattle is posturing and wants to trade back. more chips, more options, more flexibility, less cap intrusive. Theoretically they could spread those chips out over this and the next draft - accumulating more depth than stars is what I see them thinking.
My thoughts, exactly.
When you have the 5th and 20th pick you need at least a couple stars otherwise you just have a basket full of mediocre guys that will never get you to the SB.
You're not understanding the concept. By drafting outside the top ten you are taking a lower cap hit. By acquiring more picks you are increasing the talent pool/competition to draw from. Theoretically you can improve more roster spots and create an overall higher floor, talent-wise, for the whole roster. You also have a more affordable roster with money more evenly distributed. These are critical moves because the biggest problem in the NFL is a season that is too long - resulting in injury attrition decimating teams. If you have a higher floor you likely have an overall better roster - and more affordable - and more likely to overcome season killing injuries. These are moves for the long game. You don't need stars - you need players that can get on the field and play - Seattle proved last year the over valuation of "stars" when they shipped out the 'star" quarterback. Stars are nice for marketing and you always want the best talant, but when those stars get injured the next man up may be a huge drop off - this theory makes the drop off lesser. The team with the best roster at the end of the season usually prevails. It's not about having a 3-4 "99" level players whose back ups are 75s. It's about having a complete roster of 89/90's. You can disagree with that theory, that's fine, but the league is about attrition - this angle makes sense because it looks to offset that. It's the future of the league, IMO. Geno is literally the test subject. This also losers the risk of concentrating assets in 'stars' who can get injured and the fall off hampering the team.

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

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by Michael K. » Sun Mar 26, 2023 4:54 pm

auroraave wrote:
Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:46 pm

You're not understanding the concept. By drafting outside the top ten you are taking a lower cap hit. By acquiring more picks you are increasing the talent pool/competition to draw from. Theoretically you can improve more roster spots and create an overall higher floor, talent-wise, for the whole roster. You also have a more affordable roster with money more evenly distributed. These are critical moves because the biggest problem in the NFL is a season that is too long - resulting in injury attrition decimating teams. If you have a higher floor you likely have an overall better roster - and more affordable - and more likely to overcome season killing injuries. These are moves for the long game. You don't need stars - you need players that can get on the field and play - Seattle proved last year the over valuation of "stars" when they shipped out the 'star" quarterback. Stars are nice for marketing and you always want the best talant, but when those stars get injured the next man up may be a huge drop off - this theory makes the drop off lesser. The team with the best roster at the end of the season usually prevails. It's not about having a 3-4 "99" level players whose back ups are 75s. It's about having a complete roster of 89/90's. You can disagree with that theory, that's fine, but the league is about attrition - this angle makes sense because it looks to offset that. It's the future of the league, IMO. Geno is literally the test subject. This also losers the risk of concentrating assets in 'stars' who can get injured and the fall off hampering the team.
Aren't you the one always telling us the 49ers are so good because of all the high first round picks they accumulated from when they sucked? So, now? The goal should be to get one of those picks and not use it?

Trading back in this draft is only worth it if they stay in the Top 10. Not going to pretend I have disected the entire talent pool here, but I ususally buy into what Brock Huard says and what he hears. He has over and over this off season said this draft has 8 maybe 10 real studs. We have a shot at one. I am not in for trading away from those guys to acquire more Tedrick Thompson's and Mike Tyson's the way we used to do. Stay inside the top 8 or 10 and THEN maybe add a middle rounder? OK. But your worry over the salary cap, IMO, is misguided. No one worries about the salary cap anymore. It is going to explode here real soon based on the new TV deal.

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

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by auroraave » Sun Mar 26, 2023 6:26 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Sun Mar 26, 2023 4:54 pm
auroraave wrote:
Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:46 pm

You're not understanding the concept. By drafting outside the top ten you are taking a lower cap hit. By acquiring more picks you are increasing the talent pool/competition to draw from. Theoretically you can improve more roster spots and create an overall higher floor, talent-wise, for the whole roster. You also have a more affordable roster with money more evenly distributed. These are critical moves because the biggest problem in the NFL is a season that is too long - resulting in injury attrition decimating teams. If you have a higher floor you likely have an overall better roster - and more affordable - and more likely to overcome season killing injuries. These are moves for the long game. You don't need stars - you need players that can get on the field and play - Seattle proved last year the over valuation of "stars" when they shipped out the 'star" quarterback. Stars are nice for marketing and you always want the best talant, but when those stars get injured the next man up may be a huge drop off - this theory makes the drop off lesser. The team with the best roster at the end of the season usually prevails. It's not about having a 3-4 "99" level players whose back ups are 75s. It's about having a complete roster of 89/90's. You can disagree with that theory, that's fine, but the league is about attrition - this angle makes sense because it looks to offset that. It's the future of the league, IMO. Geno is literally the test subject. This also losers the risk of concentrating assets in 'stars' who can get injured and the fall off hampering the team.
Aren't you the one always telling us the 49ers are so good because of all the high first round picks they accumulated from when they sucked? So, now? The goal should be to get one of those picks and not use it?

Trading back in this draft is only worth it if they stay in the Top 10. Not going to pretend I have disected the entire talent pool here, but I ususally buy into what Brock Huard says and what he hears. He has over and over this off season said this draft has 8 maybe 10 real studs. We have a shot at one. I am not in for trading away from those guys to acquire more Tedrick Thompson's and Mike Tyson's the way we used to do. Stay inside the top 8 or 10 and THEN maybe add a middle rounder? OK. But your worry over the salary cap, IMO, is misguided. No one worries about the salary cap anymore. It is going to explode here real soon based on the new TV deal.

The niners built a monster roster off of top end drafting because they were bad for years while the seahawks were constantly having winning seasons - you are skipping all context to what I have said. What LITERALLY derailed the 9ers run last year? Injuries TO STAR PLAYERS. Meaning? The depth behind them was a major drop off. You just proved my point. What I am suggesting is Seattle may be looking at a an alternative style of roster building with a minimum of top end investments in lieu of a higher overall talent average across the roster. I don't know how else to explain it. The league is about attrition and dealing with attrition - I have said this a thousand times on here - this is a logical way to address that. Really not sure how this isn't obvious. You do realize that the NFL's biggest infusion of recent cash in NOT the tv contracts - it's corporate sponsorships - the top ones being Draft Kings (gambling) and Phizer. I assume you altready know this... right? There will not likely be more monster TV deals coming up - the emergence of streaming and the recession make it risky. ESPN is already on life support.

SeattleAddict
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:25 pm

Re: Who's Your Pick At #5

Post by SeattleAddict » Sun Mar 26, 2023 7:53 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Sun Mar 26, 2023 4:54 pm

Trading back in this draft is only worth it if they stay in the Top 10. Not going to pretend I have disected the entire talent pool here, but I ususally buy into what Brock Huard says and what he hears. He has over and over this off season said this draft has 8 maybe 10 real studs. We have a shot at one.
I agree in principle, but the Seahawks are in a unique position this year where the high-cost skill positions are pretty well covered. QB, RB, WR, CB, S, OT all have good starters, and those are the positions that usually dominate the top 10. There are only two players in positions of need that are really in the top 10, probably even the top 15. The best players at positions we NEED - IDL, C, G, MLB(not so much any more) are generally taken around the top of the 2nd round, give or take.

So in this particular case, it might make the most sense to pick up a couple extra picks in the late first to mid second if those two guys I mentioned earlier are gone. You'd still get studs, just not at the expensive positions. JMS/Wypler/Torrence, Bresee/Ika, Dexter/Foskey, Simpson/Sanders/Campbell, Addison/Johnston for example.

On the flip side, they've unexpectedly addressed some of the glaring issues in free agency, meaning they might not need 10 picks, so might even trade up.

as for the cost savings, the cap hit for the #5 pick is expected to be about 6m, for the #10 4m, #15 3m, then there is minimal difference after that, with the last pick in the first round is about 2.2m.

Post Reply