Official 2025 Draft Talk Thread

[Sharkonabicycle]

Hate taking WR round 1, if None of the OL are there should be a DL

Agreed, should be... or EDGE. D Law isn't getting younger, Nwosu if he's injured this season again is likely gone next, Mafe/Hall are coming up on contracts (nothing stopping them from going free agency btw), Reed is 33, Williams is 31, Murphy is playing NT non-stop (which he needs to stop doing)... we have burrowed time on EDGE/DL.

If we do DL/EDGE in the 1st and do like an OL/WR in the 2nd I'm good with that. You're addressing the trenches and core position with your 1st. That's fine.

If we do WR/S/CB/TE in the 1st, and then do not go OL/OL back to back in the 2nd along with DL/EDGE in the 3rd, it's going to be hard to grade this draft anything but below a C.

 

[flyerhawk]

Hate taking WR round 1, if None of the OL are there should be a DL

You think we should always take linemen with the first pick no matter what.

 

[flyerhawk]

Agreed, should be... or EDGE. D Law isn't getting younger, Nwosu if he's injured this season again is likely gone next, Mafe/Hall are coming up on contracts (nothing stopping them from going free agency btw), Reed is 33, Williams is 31, Murphy is playing NT non-stop (which he needs to stop doing)... we have holes on EDGE/DL.

If we do DL/EDGE in the 1st and do like an OL/WR in the 2nd I'm good with that.

If we do WR/S/CB/TE in the 1st, and then do not go OL/OL back to back in the 2nd, it's going to be hard to grade this draft anything but below a C.

With our first pick I'm more or less fine with them taking a WR, OL, DL, or TE provided it is one of Loveland or Warren.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

With our first pick I'm more or less fine with them taking a WR, OL, DL, or TE provided it is one of Loveland or Warren.

As said I'd be fine with Warren (conditional on back to back OL picks in the 2nd, maybe DL for one but another OL in the 3rd).

Loveland at 18? Meh. He's coming off an injury.. he's got better size metrics than Warren, but meh. I don't know a ton about him other than he's a Michigan guy. Why would you be okay with him at 18? He compares similarly on NFL.com to previous 3rd round prospects and isn't a great blocker. We have him in Noah Fant already (and the cap to pay Fant this year)? Why? Seems like a luxury pick, which I don't think we're in a place to afford. Give me the WR at that point since they're now a top 3 highest paid position.

I'm fine with BPA in the 1st and whatever position that means if that's the route we want to go. Again I have issues with Emmanwori because I think we're perfectly fine there, and Love/Bryant should be resigned anyway and Seattle's safety situation was FAR better than Baltimore when they drafted Hamilton.

But, the OL has to be addressed immediately after, and this draft is not HORRIBLE for IOL.. no reason to ignore it until the 4th and then sign some busted ass 35 year old to play LG while taking a guy in the 4th.

I think even if we go OL/OL in the 2nd... the only 1st round pick I'll lose my shit with, is if we draft a safety... it will be worse than my Witherspoon meltdown. You've got a borderline elite safety and above average safety in his first year that are nowhere near 30. You don't need another fuckin' safety with a 1st rounder. And if they let Bryant walk I'll be pissed.

 

[MrS]

You think we should always take linemen with the first pick no matter what.

Always unless the OL and DL are complete

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I'm pretty high on Golden... I would be pumped if this was our draft... Stock piling on legit OL gives me goosebumps...

Seems like he's a solid player, I like him a lot, but there are other WRs Seahawks could get that would fit nicely without burning pick 18. Higgins, Tre Harris, Bech are a few I like and there are others you could find with out using a first or second on.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Matt Miller released a full mock..

18 - Matthew Golden WR Texas
50 Tate Ratledge G Georgia
52 Jared Wilson C Georgia
82. Josiah Stewart ED Michigan
92 Ozzy Trapilo OT Boston College
137 Jamere Caldwell DT Oregon
172 Dillon Gabriel QB Oregon
175 Za Frazier CB UTSA
223 Jalin Conyers TE Texas Tech
234 Nick Martin LB OK St

Gotta say, I wouldn't be too upset with this draft. 3 offensive linemen in the first 5 picks would show a legal of aggression I would be happily surprised to see from JS.

It's not terrible, I like both Ratledge and Wilson but I see them as developmental pieces for the OL neither are plug and play type which at least one is what is needed IMO. Don't see how a skill player helps if the QB gets buried under a pile of pass rushers, so I'm all for using pick 18 on a IOL that can start immediately, but I have my doubts JS is willing to pull the trigger that early, using both seconds on IOL is the next best move I guess and a upgrade from where JS usually drafts IOL. Hoping for the best for this draft and bracing for the worst.

 

[flyerhawk]

It's not terrible, I like both Ratledge and Wilson but I see them as developmental pieces for the OL neither are plug and play type which at least one is what is needed IMO. Don't see how a skill player helps if the QB gets buried under a pile of pass rushers, so I'm all for using pick 18 on a IOL that can start immediately, but I have my doubts JS is willing to pull the trigger that early, using both seconds on IOL is the next best move I guess and a upgrade from where JS usually drafts IOL. Hoping for the best for this draft and bracing for the worst.

I would prefer an OL with our 1st pick but using both 2nds on OL is fine with me as well.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I would prefer an OL with our 1st pick but using both 2nds on OL is fine with me as well.

Better then what JS normally does for sure, but feel the Seahawks need a starter at LG right now and no obvious easy answer on the roster. Seahawks have a bunch of young developmental types at IOL and while more is better I guess, I sure would like them to draft a more plug and play type with pick 18 for IOL over simply adding more development types for coaching staff to try to turn into start worthy players....eventually....hopefully.

 

[flyerhawk]

Better then what JS normally does for sure, but feel the Seahawks need a starter at LG right now and no obvious easy answer on the roster. Seahawks have a bunch of young developmental types at IOL and while more is better I guess, I sure would like them to draft a more plug and play type with pick 18 for IOL over simply adding more development types for coaching staff to try to turn into start worthy players....eventually....hopefully.

Oh I'm not happy at all about JS simply ignoring LG. I think it is a huge mistake. But I would be pleasantly surprised if spent 3 of the top 5 picks on OL.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

What you guys think about Josh Conerly Jr. Oregon, who a left tackle type? Looks like a good fit for zone blocking, not sure if he could play guard but why not let him try. Don't hear much hype about the player but some think he will be great in wide zone scheme and a future LT.

 

[Anointed One]

With our first pick I'm more or less fine with them taking a WR, OL, DL, or TE provided it is one of Loveland or Warren.

If we only had 2 or 3 picks in the top 100, I wouldn't be as excited if we took a WR with our 1st rounder... But since we have 5 in the top 100, I feel comfortable in doing so knowing we can still fill a few of our big needs with the OL... I don't want to reach for a OL just for the sake of need with our 1:18...

 

[Screamin12th]

Doesnt matter how many Olineman you draft when you dont hit on them. Seahawks have drafted 25 Olineman with 15 in the first 4 rounds ( 11 in the first 3 rounds ) with JS as the GM, it's just most are not good. In what world does throwing even MORE resources at the position mean better results?

THEY CAN NOT IDENTIFY GOOD OLINE TALENT!


I do not trust them when it comes to drafting Olineman, NOT ONE BIT. They need to go out and steal some from other teams that are proven capable. Be it through FA or Trades.

DK and Geno could have returned proven Olineman to us. I would gladly give up the draft picks we got for 2 STARTERS.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

If we only had 2 or 3 picks in the top 100, I wouldn't be as excited if we took a WR with our 1st rounder... But since we have 5 in the top 100, I feel comfortable in doing so knowing we can still fill a few of our big needs with the OL... I don't want to reach for a OL just for the sake of need with our 1:18...

IDK if "just for the sake of need" is how I would put it, but team construction does matter. How efficient can the offense be if the OL doesn't vastly improve? The Seahawks OL was ranked near the bottom of the league in 2024 (any where from 28th to 31st ). Need a difference maker for the IOL and one will be available with the 18th pick, without being a reach, at pick 50 and later maybe or maybe not. There will be a very good outside type of receiver available later in the draft and with JSN and Kupp, WR or TE just isn't a big enough priority to use the 18th pick on. Nor is Golden so good that a team should never pass on him. Most see him as a nice WR2 in the pro's.

 

[Screamin12th]

Booker is the HIGHEST rated Guard in this draft at #36 so drafting him in the first at 18 is a reach. The next are
#41, #49, #59, #77, #108, #122 and #125 just for the top 8 Guards. Which one of those is worthy of a 1st round pick? none.

There are a few Tackles worth the 18th pick so if they want to replace Lucas thats an option. The Meat for this draft is 2nd and 3rd rounds even the early 4th for Guards.

Banks and Campbell ( OT ) could be solid #18 picks to replace Abe Lucas and that bum knee. But if someone like Tyler Warren, McMillian or Emmanwori are there would you skip them? Thats a hard call. If Matthew Golden is there i would skip him for Banks or Campbell 100% but would have a hard time doing that for those other three.

 

[flyerhawk]

Booker is the HIGHEST rated Guard in this draft at #36 so drafting him in the first at 18 is a reach. The next are
#41, #49, #59, #77, #108, #122 and #125 just for the top 8 Guards. Which one of those is worthy of a 1st round pick? none.

There are a few Tackles worth the 18th pick so if they want to replace Lucas thats an option. The Meat for this draft is 2nd and 3rd rounds for Guards.

Or if you plan to swing a tackle to LG

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Or if you plan to swing a tackle to LG

Pretty standard now a days to draft a college tackle and move him to guard, if your in need of a guard.

 

[Screamin12th]

Hell why not just put a DT at guard then lol, you cant just assume players will be as good as they were in their natural position. THIS has been one of the Hawks BIGGEST issues when drafting lineman.

Tackles work off one shoulder and so their eyes hands and foot work have been trained for that Guards on the other hand have to work off both, they have to be fast on rotations and stunt pick up AND have agility to pull if that is called for them in your scheme. Typically Tackles are not the ones you want pulling and if you put them in at guard thats what you will have.

With the way the college game has changed olineman are not as readly able to flip flop at a high level as before. Not unless you got a guy that played a TON of both Guard and Tackle in college.

 

[MrS]

Hell why not just put a DT at guard then lol, you cant just assume players will be as good as they were in their natural position. THIS has been one of the Hawks BIGGEST issues when drafting lineman.

Screamin= tom cable confirmed

 

[Screamin12th]

I just see ZERO reason to draft someone that rated high as a Tackle to play Guard. It makes ZERO sense. Throw fooking Cross in at Guard then if you think it's that easy and draft one of these top Tackles. But that it, its not THAT easy.