Official Draft pick position watch thread

[D-train]

So what does Jake Heaps advise RW to do this week. How does he "Coach him up"

[trharder]

Trading back makes perfect sense for a number of reasons. As the game changes and injuries are arguably the number one problem for every team anymore, and this will only worsen with the elimination of preseason for those completely unecessary 17th and 18th games, which is more valuable to a team, star players (expensive) that are at risk of injury and the loss of that asset, or having greater roster depth?

I think that is the future of the league. That's what people need to start thinking about. In the NFC West alone, 75% of the starting QB's are gone. SF, AZ and LA are all on 3rd and 4th string QB's. The risk of losing a high end pick is a reality. So, why not consider quantity over quality? Two players can potentially exceed the production of one. It's a strategy to consider when you look at the direction of the league and realize attrition is really the biggest problem. Look at Denver.

I see the point you are making and am open to it. But that was what Schneider was doing for years where it seemed like
the Seahawks had bad drafts. When a team is looking at a pick this high, there's the hope you are going to draft the next Aaron Donald.
Popular opinion is Schneider nailed the 2022 draft. We will see if that narrative holds as this rookie class comes back next year, but
I think most fan's opinions on what to do will depend on how much confidence they have in Schneider.

[SeattleAddict]

trading back makes sense when you want to accumulate picks, like a couple years ago when we started with 3 picks and JS somehow ended up with 8 or whatever it was . Consider this, though - the Seahawks have NINE draft picks in the upcoming draft, two firsts, two seconds, and two fifths. That's a lot of good draft capital. I don't think they'll be trading back much, to be honest. If anything, I think they might trade up... although there could be a combination of trades up and down with the mid-rounders, I definitely don't think they're moving out of that top 5 pick. The other one? I could see them trading that for a 1st next year and a 2nd this year or something of that nature.

[auroraave]

Trading back makes perfect sense for a number of reasons. As the game changes and injuries are arguably the number one problem for every team anymore, and this will only worsen with the elimination of preseason for those completely unecessary 17th and 18th games, which is more valuable to a team, star players (expensive) that are at risk of injury and the loss of that asset, or having greater roster depth?

I think that is the future of the league. That's what people need to start thinking about. In the NFC West alone, 75% of the starting QB's are gone. SF, AZ and LA are all on 3rd and 4th string QB's. The risk of losing a high end pick is a reality. So, why not consider quantity over quality? Two players can potentially exceed the production of one. It's a strategy to consider when you look at the direction of the league and realize attrition is really the biggest problem. Look at Denver.

I see the point you are making and am open to it. But that was what Schneider was doing for years where it seemed like
the Seahawks had bad drafts. When a team is looking at a pick this high, there's the hope you are going to draft the next Aaron Donald.
Popular opinion is Schneider nailed the 2022 draft. We will see if that narrative holds as this rookie class comes back next year, but
I think most fan's opinions on what to do will depend on how much confidence they have in Schneider.

Schneider was doing that because they didn't have high end draft capitol and the bottom of the first is generally the least coveted area. This is different. Seattle was aslo drafting with the theory that they were competing for a title and the roster was mostly complete. This is entirely different. I am not saying they should trade back and get more, but roster attrition is real - and I question the value of single players over having depth. Sure, it's nice to have a "99" player, but if you trade back a bit and get two "90-93" players - losing one "90-93" covers itself in the risk area because of the second "90-93" added for depth - ut you lose that "99" to injury and you have nothing. Look at SF - they lose their two 2 QB's and it's the last player drafted crushing it - and on the cheap.

Yeah, you want monster impact players - but what does it matter if they are injured? It is only getting worse and that trend will continue until the NFL is a flag football league. I see no path around it. No one on this forum would ever complain about Penny, McDowell or Adams if it wasn't for injury. Play that scenario forward. Seattle drafts Will Anderson, he gets injured. You think this forum will be "aw, that's okay...."? No, this place will melt down with all the hand wringing and "how could they have not known this would happen?" 100% that is what would happen. The reality is teams may need to be more concerned with quantity over the potential quality of a top pick. The risk/reward seems to be changing. How many top 10 picks are sitting on the sidelines right now just gobbling up cap space? It's something to consider going forward.

[Bil522]

trading back makes sense when you want to accumulate picks, like a couple years ago when we started with 3 picks and JS somehow ended up with 8 or whatever it was . Consider this, though - the Seahawks have NINE draft picks in the upcoming draft, two firsts, two seconds, and two fifths. That's a lot of good draft capital. I don't think they'll be trading back much, to be honest. If anything, I think they might trade up... although there could be a combination of trades up and down with the mid-rounders, I definitely don't think they're moving out of that top 5 pick. The other one? I could see them trading that for a 1st next year and a 2nd this year or something of that nature.

I have heard this draft has about 5 game changing players and then 50 really good players and then fodder. We should get one of the game changers. My hope is for Anderson but I think he will be gone in the first 2 picks. I think we will get Carter or Mayer or Tuipulotu with the 1st pick. As for the 2nd pick, that has a 99.8% chance of being traded.

[SeattleAddict]

I have heard this draft has about 5 game changing players and then 50 really good players and then fodder. We should get one of the game changers. My hope is for Anderson but I think he will be gone in the first 2 picks. I think we will get Carter or Mayer or Tuipulotu with the 1st pick. As for the 2nd pick, that has a 99.8% chance of being traded.

Every draft looks like that. Why would you think Tuipulotu goes that high?? He has like a 4th round grade. Mayer might rise up the ranks, but if they spend a #3 overall on a TE I'll lose my mind. Even if he's Antonio Gates, the impact he'd make on the Seahawks would be so minimal. A pick that high has to be lineman or QB.

[Michael K.]

Trading back makes perfect sense for a number of reasons. As the game changes and injuries are arguably the number one problem for every team anymore, and this will only worsen with the elimination of preseason for those completely unecessary 17th and 18th games, which is more valuable to a team, star players (expensive) that are at risk of injury and the loss of that asset, or having greater roster depth?

I think that is the future of the league. That's what people need to start thinking about. In the NFC West alone, 75% of the starting QB's are gone. SF, AZ and LA are all on 3rd and 4th string QB's. The risk of losing a high end pick is a reality. So, why not consider quantity over quality? Two players can potentially exceed the production of one. It's a strategy to consider when you look at the direction of the league and realize attrition is really the biggest problem. Look at Denver.

I see the point you are making and am open to it. But that was what Schneider was doing for years where it seemed like
the Seahawks had bad drafts. When a team is looking at a pick this high, there's the hope you are going to draft the next Aaron Donald.
Popular opinion is Schneider nailed the 2022 draft. We will see if that narrative holds as this rookie class comes back next year, but
I think most fan's opinions on what to do will depend on how much confidence they have in Schneider.

Schneider was doing that because they didn't have high end draft capitol and the bottom of the first is generally the least coveted area. This is different. Seattle was aslo drafting with the theory that they were competing for a title and the roster was mostly complete. This is entirely different. I am not saying they should trade back and get more, but roster attrition is real - and I question the value of single players over having depth. Sure, it's nice to have a "99" player, but if you trade back a bit and get two "90-93" players - losing one "90-93" covers itself in the risk area because of the second "90-93" added for depth - ut you lose that "99" to injury and you have nothing. Look at SF - they lose their two 2 QB's and it's the last player drafted crushing it - and on the cheap.

Yeah, you want monster impact players - but what does it matter if they are injured? It is only getting worse and that trend will continue until the NFL is a flag football league. I see no path around it. No one on this forum would ever complain about Penny, McDowell or Adams if it wasn't for injury. Play that scenario forward. Seattle drafts Will Anderson, he gets injured. You think this forum will be "aw, that's okay...."? No, this place will melt down with all the hand wringing and "how could they have not known this would happen?" 100% that is what would happen. The reality is teams may need to be more concerned with quantity over the potential quality of a top pick. The risk/reward seems to be changing. How many top 10 picks are sitting on the sidelines right now just gobbling up cap space? It's something to consider going forward.

So, load up on average to below average talent because you are afraid if you draft a game changer he'll get hurt? WTF? Name the team competing for the playoffs right now that has done anything remotely similar to that?

[Sibelius Hindemith]

My prediction is the Cards and either the Rams or the Colts slide ahead of us in the draft order and John trades the #5 for something like the 11th and 43rd picks.

[SeattleAddict]

My prediction is the Cards and either the Rams or the Colts slide ahead of us in the draft order and John trades the #5 for something like the 11th and 43rd picks.

The Broncos would have to beat the Chiefs and Chargers and the Rams lose twice. Even if the Broncos managed to win one, the Colts would have to lose all three against the Chargers, Texans and Giants. I think they win at least one of those.

Now if the Broncos maybe beat the Chargers, the stupid Cardinals might slip into the #3 spot, but that'd be the only likely issue.

Worst case is #4 pick unless something crazy happens (which is entirely possible, of course, just not likely).

[Pharmabro]

So if we are eliminated from the playoffs and Denver is tied with the Rams for the 3rd overall pick going into the last week of the season vs. the Rams should we see what Drew Lock can do or play all the starters the full game?

https://www.tankathon.com/nfl

I took a look and Seattle down to #12 with the three-game losing streak. the funny thing is without looking over who plays who is that that pick could fall between #6 and #32 should the Hawks make the playoffs and win the Superbowl. Ant currently they have us taking a QB at 3 CJ Stroud. No thanks we will take Jalan Carter or Wil Anderson if they are available.