2024 Season Thread

[flyerhawk]

If in some alternate universe I was to read the English language and not draw the conclusion that by saying a team should not draft a receiver early and the given example of a 5th rounder was not to give the impression that you meant that the fifth round was where you were implying a receiver should be targeted, the fact remains that Schneider has drafted 1 receiver in the first round the entire time he's been here. 1 in 15 years and that one is having one of the best receiving seasons in team history with a real good chance of breaking the team season receptions record and an outside chance at the team receiving yards record. He drafted 6 more on day 2 and hit on 4 of them, 2 of which were among the best in team history as well. That's 3 receivers among the best Seattle have ever had (an argument can be made that it's gonna end as #2, 3 & 4 on the all-time Seahawks receiver list when their careers are over) out of 7 total. How many did he hit on after round 3? 0. None of the 10 receivers taken by Schneider after round 3 have made any impact outside role players.

Now, you have a lot of rules of how to draft a great team that seem to fly in the face of how the NFL thinks. Kansas City, as an example, have drafted a receiver in the first 3 rounds in 4 of the last 5 drafts. It's almost as if they feel the position is important.

In fairness, although I completely agree with your point, Doug Baldwin is Top 5-6 WR of all time and he was a UDFA.

 

[flyerhawk]

Thats a hugely ridiculous leap. Nacua is one example and its likely there will be many more with the way the league has changed and the college game has changed to benefit Qbs and Wrs

This revolves around the idea that we HAVE TO take Wr in round 1 if we lose metcalf and lockett. I disagree with that take.

Is he going to win us a superbowl? Because we won a superbowl with two guys who weren't even drafted.

Kansas city invests heavily in their OL and DL and they have for a while now. If schneider can do that first then go ahead draft Wrs in round one.
But until they do invest in the OL and stop signing shitty players for almost nothing, drafting Wrs high is a pointless exercise

I don't think anyone is saying we HAVE to take a WR with our 1st round pick if we lose Metcalf and Lockett. What most of us ARE saying is that we will need to prioritize finding other good WRs and can't rely on day 2 picks to be productive.

In the last 10 years there have been 167 players drafted in the 4th round or later. 3 of them could be considered Pro Bowl level players. Nacua, Aman St. Brown, and Tyrek Hill. Of the remaining 164, 5 more of them could be considered consistent starter level players. Darius Slayton, Jauan Jennings, Marcus Scandling Valdez, Gabe Davis, and Hunter Renfrow.



That's it. 8 players out of 167 have any sort of meaningful careers. Maybe I missed 2 or 3 and it 10 players. That is a 6% hit rate of finding a player could be even a starter.

Now in truth, there are not many positions, if any, that have much of a hit rate in the later rounds. Which is why drafting on day 3 is usually considered a crap shoot and more about volume than drafting prowess.

The best draft strategy, and the one that has been working for us the past few seasons, is BPA for positions of need. If the best player available to us in the 1st round is a wide receiver, you take a wide receiver. You don't reach for a player and hope that they will be worth the pick.

I DO agree with you that the team needs to focus more on building up the trenches. I DON'T agree with you that we need a bit monster NT in the 1st round. Now if Mason Graham falls to us, I would be MORE than thrilled if we take him, although he's more of a 3 technique than true NT. And I would be fine with someone like Booker.

To be honest, I would be surprised if we drafted a WR in the 1st round because I don't really see any WRs worth taking especially of McMillan and Egbuka are drafted before we pick.

 

[blstoker]

Thats a hugely ridiculous leap. Nacua is one example and its likely there will be many more with the way the league has changed and the college game has changed to benefit Qbs and Wr

No, that's how the written word works. People cannot reach into your mind and draw the information out and see exactly what you meant, only what you wrote. You're history of posting here for over a decade would indicate that your intent was exactly what you wrote - if you want a different idea taken by what you were saying then write what you mean.

This revolves around the idea that we HAVE TO take Wr in round 1 if we lose metcalf and lockett. I disagree with that take.

By the time I came into this conversation, and many times since, you had made it clear you thought that early picks were anything 1-3. So, you can move the goalpost all you want.

TIs he going to win us a superbowl? Because we won a superbowl with two guys who weren't even drafted.

Different offensive philosophy and I doubt we'll see just 430 attempts all season again. Not only that, but our top receiver that year was a second round pick, not undrafted. Throwing to another undrafted WR cost the Seahawks the very next Super Bowl.

Kansas city invests heavily in their OL and DL and they have for a while now. If schneider can do that first then go ahead draft Wrs in round one.
But until they do invest in the OL and stop signing shitty players for almost nothing, drafting Wrs high is a pointless exercise

Yeah, but not as much as they have their WRs. You wanna know what KC hasn't invested in their OL, a first-round pick. The DL has 1, but the other 3 who play even close to half their snaps are a 2nd, 5th and undrafted.

 

[MrS]

I don't think anyone is saying we HAVE to take a WR with our 1st round pick if we lose Metcalf and Lockett. What most of us ARE saying is that we will need to prioritize finding other good WRs and can't rely on day 2 picks to be productive.

screamin12th said we would have to, if dk and lockett are gone.

In the last 10 years there have been 167 players drafted in the 4th round or later. 3 of them could be considered Pro Bowl level players. Nacua, Aman St. Brown, and Tyrek Hill. Of the remaining 164, 5 more of them could be considered consistent starter level players. Darius Slayton, Jauan Jennings, Marcus Scandling Valdez, Gabe Davis, and Hunter Renfrow.

we won the superbowl with jermaine kearse and doug baldwin, both went undrafted. you can find production at WR in multiple ways that dont require high draft picks.

The best draft strategy, and the one that has been working for us the past few seasons, is BPA for positions of need. If the best player available to us in the 1st round is a wide receiver, you take a wide receiver. You don't reach for a player and hope that they will be worth the pick.

i dont think that is the strategy at all, the strategy appears to be build the team outside in. otherwise they would have drafted jalen carter.

I DO agree with you that the team needs to focus more on building up the trenches. I DON'T agree with you that we need a bit monster NT in the 1st round. Now if Mason Graham falls to us, I would be MORE than thrilled if we take him, although he's more of a 3 technique than true NT. And I would be fine with someone like Booker.

we are running a 3-4 without a NT and good teams are still running on us at will despite the studs we have on the DL. NT is a need way before WR is and there are two that will likely go in round one which is somewhat rare.

To be honest, I would be surprised if we drafted a WR in the 1st round because I don't really see any WRs worth taking especially of McMillan and Egbuka are drafted before we pick.

probably round 2 then, they have a tendency to overdraft skill positions in that round.

 

[blstoker]

In fairness, although I completely agree with your point, Doug Baldwin is Top 5-6 WR of all time and he was a UDFA.

In fairness, an undrafted beating the odds isn't investing a late round pick. As much as we love Baldwin, it's even harder to hit on undrafted players, but it does happen occassionally.

 

[MrS]

No, that's how the written word works. People cannot reach into your mind and draw the information out and see exactly what you meant, only what you wrote. You're history of posting here for over a decade would indicate that your intent was exactly what you wrote - if you want a different idea taken by what you were saying then write what you mean.

read into it whatever you want, you are reaching though.

By the time I came into this conversation, and many times since, you had made it clear you thought that early picks were anything 1-3. So, you can move the goalpost all you want.

Im for trading metcalf if it means we use the resources on OL
I dont trust schneider to do that though, he will use our first or second to draft another WR

You dont need to draft WRs high, nacua was a 5th round pick.

I dont care if we trade Metcalf and cut lockett, we should stay very far away from taking a WR before round 3.

please do tell me where in here i made it so clear we should not draft a WR in round 3.

Different offensive philosophy and I doubt we'll see just 430 attempts all season again. Not only that, but our top receiver that year was a second round pick, not undrafted. Throwing to another undrafted WR cost the Seahawks the very next Super Bowl.

we dont make the superbowl without doug baldwin. tate may have had more yards but baldwin was the better WR. and we dont even make the second superbowl without undrafted kearse. point being, you dont have to spend a lot of resources to find production at WR.
if you prefer throwing away our high draft picks on WR when we cant block and cant run the ball, thats fine but we arent going to win anything with that approach.

Yeah, but not as much as they have their WRs. You wanna know what KC hasn't invested in their OL, a first-round pick. The DL has 1, but the other 3 who play even close to half their snaps are a 2nd, 5th and undrafted.

i posted this somewhere, but KC has spent 70-80 million on three of their OL, one of which was a 2nd round pick creed humphrey. the chiefs pay their OL when they deserve it.
meanwhile schneider traded an all pro C for a fucking TE. he DOES NOT value the interior of the OL. even if he did draft a good C or G, he would not spend the money to keep him. and thats why he needs be fired

 

[blstoker]

we dont make the superbowl without doug baldwin. tate may have had more yards but baldwin was the better WR. and we dont even make the second superbowl without undrafted kearse. point being, you dont have to spend a lot of resources to find production at WR.
if you prefer throwing away our high draft picks on WR when we cant block and cant run the ball, thats fine but we arent going to win anything with that approach.

Well, to be fair, we make the Super Bowl with any number of recievers, as the focal point of the offense was Marshawn Lynch, not Doug Baldwin. There's also a good chance the Seahawks don't need a miracle to get into the second Super Bowl without Kearse as well, so that's not much of an argument.

Unlike you, I don't require certain positions be taken at certain times, in most cases (K, P, LS are notable exceptions). If the BPA is a receiver, then so be it. Schneider has taken OL/DL in 7 of his 12 first round draft picks since getting to Seattle, and in most cases you find reason to complain about that. 23 picks in the first 3 rounds. Seattle's had 45 of those picks and over half of them have been on the lines. Schneider invested more draft capital into those positions that anything.

 

[flyerhawk]

screamin12th said we would have to, if dk and lockett are gone.

He can speak for himself but I don't recall him saying that. I think we were talking Day 1 and Day 2 picks.

we won the superbowl with jermaine kearse and doug baldwin, both went undrafted. you can find production at WR in multiple ways that dont require high draft picks.

You can cherrypick these kinds of points till we are blue in the face. That same team also had a 6th rounder and 7th rounder starting on the offensive line. And you skipped over Golden Tate who was a 2nd rounder.

i dont think that is the strategy at all, the strategy appears to be build the team outside in. otherwise they would have drafted jalen carter.

You are obsessed with that one pick. I wanted Jalen Carter as well. But it's also clear that he had red flags which is why he dropped to 10 despite him being viewed as arguably the best non-QB in the draft. Arguing that the team has a specific strategy based on not draft one specific player seems a little ridiculous, especially when the team drafted a guy that plays the same position the next year with their 1st pick.

You are also ignoring the players that the team has actually drafted in the 1st 2 days of drafting over the past 3 seasons.

we are running a 3-4 without a NT and good teams are still running on us at will despite the studs we have on the DL. NT is a need way before WR is and there are two that will likely go in round one which is somewhat rare.

probably round 2 then, they have a tendency to overdraft skill positions in that round.

Neither Grant or Graham are 3-4 NTs. Maybe Harmon is but I doubt it. But I think you are completely off the mark here. True 3-4 NTs are space fillers that rarely get drafted early. Further, the Seahawks defense doesn't play a real 3-4, at least not consistently. You can really only call their defense a 3-4 if you think that Mafe, Nwosu, and Hall are actual linebackers.


Hankins is their only true 3-4 NTs and he plays about 35% of the snaps.

 

[flyerhawk]

In fairness, an undrafted beating the odds isn't investing a late round pick. As much as we love Baldwin, it's even harder to hit on undrafted players, but it does happen occassionally.

Oh absolutely. And I think that we should remind ourselves that Pete had unique insight to a lot of those players in the 2010-2012 drafts.

 

[MrS]

He can speak for himself but I don't recall him saying that. I think we were talking Day 1 and Day 2 picks.

its literally what he said

to be fair he would have to as the only WR most likely left would be JSN.

You can cherrypick these kinds of points till we are blue in the face. That same team also had a 6th rounder and 7th rounder starting on the offensive line. And you skipped over Golden Tate who was a 2nd rounder.

championship are not won on the backs of 1st round receivers.

You are obsessed with that one pick. I wanted Jalen Carter as well. But it's also clear that he had red flags which is why he dropped to 10 despite him being viewed as arguably the best non-QB in the draft. Arguing that the team has a specific strategy based on not draft one specific player seems a little ridiculous, especially when the team drafted a guy that plays the same position the next year with their 1st pick.

because that pick says so much about how schneider has built this team over the last 15 years.

You are also ignoring the players that the team has actually drafted in the 1st 2 days of drafting over the past 3 seasons.

who specifically are you talking about here?

Neither Grant or Graham are 3-4 NTs. Maybe Harmon is but I doubt it. But I think you are completely off the mark here. True 3-4 NTs are space fillers that rarely get drafted early. Further, the Seahawks defense doesn't play a real 3-4, at least not consistently. You can really only call their defense a 3-4 if you think that Mafe, Nwosu, and Hall are actual linebackers.

grant is a nose tackle, 6'3 340lbs. he is bigger thank hankins according to his wiki.
the other is deonte walker but he is on the tall side and is not as good as grant.

Hankins is their only true 3-4 NTs and he plays about 35% of the snaps.

if we had a NT that wasnt ancient maybe we would see more true 3-4 formations

 

[flyerhawk]

championship are not won on the backs of 1st round receivers.

Championships are won by having the best players on the field. Look the recent Titans. They had good offensive and defensive lines. But they trade away AJ Brown and their entire offensive stumbles heavily and the team suffers.

because that pick says so much about how schneider has built this team over the last 15 years.

who specifically are you talking about here?

Byron Murpthy 1st round pick
Derrick Hall 2nd round pick
Boye Mafe 2nd round pick
Charles Cross 1st round pick
Christian Haynes 3rd round pick
Abe Lucas 3rd round pick

So 6 of their 10 Day 1 and 2 picks the past 3 years were linemen. In that same time frame they have taken 1 corner, 1 WR, and 2 RBs in the first 3 rounds.

grant is a nose tackle, 6'3 340lbs. he is bigger thank hankins according to his wiki.
the other is deonte walker but he is on the tall side and is not as good as grant.

if we had a NT that wasnt ancient maybe we would see more true 3-4 formations

He never seemed that big on the field as I watched a lot of Michigan games. I would be fine with getting him but I would personally prefer we get some interior OL help.

 

[Screamin12th]

So 6 of their 10 Day 1 and 2 picks the past 3 years were linemen. In that same time frame they have taken 1 corner, 1 WR, and 2 RBs in the first 3 rounds.

This is why the Hawks DL is the 2nd highest paid group on the team. After this offseason it will jump to #1.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

Keep DK and that keeps us with a solid wr combo plus allows the FO to concentrate on other position of need. Round 1 o-line/QB

 

[Screamin12th]

Keep DK and that keeps us with a solid wr combo plus allows the FO to concentrate on other position of need. Round 1 o-line/QB

The cap situation makes this hard with out a massive restructuring. I believe they are around 8 million or so over the cap for 2025 and thats not a full roster worth of players.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

The cap situation makes this hard with out a massive restructuring. I believe they are around 8 million or so over the cap for 2025 and thats not a full roster worth of players.

Cap is going up next year so Hawks will get roughly anywhere 6.5mil to 19.5mil. Let's hope for the higher amount.

 

[Anointed One]

Cap is going up next year so Hawks will get roughly anywhere 6.5mil to 19.5mil. Let's hope for the higher amount.

Salary's go up as well, which is why the cap goes up each year... It doesn't necessarily mean we get extra money to spend... The agents know the cap is going up as well, so they will make sure that it gets spent by the owners...

 

[blstoker]

Cap is going up next year so Hawks will get roughly anywhere 6.5mil to 19.5mil. Let's hope for the higher amount.

While the cap goes up, it is estimated that Seattle will still be over the cap. Current cap - 255M. Estimated 273M next year. Seahawks current cap number $286M next year.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

Salary's go up as well, which is why the cap goes up each year... It doesn't necessarily mean we get extra money to spend... The agents know the cap is going up as well, so they will make sure that it gets spent by the owners...

That's also true.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

While the cap goes up, it is estimated that Seattle will still be over the cap. Current cap - 255M. Estimated 273M next year. Seahawks current cap number $286M next year.

That's with Geno off the books?

 

[blstoker]

That's with Geno off the books?

Until Geno's off the books, Geno's not off the books.