Stream Hawk wrote:Edit. I guess this was already in the Bob draft thread.
Wow, I got first chance here at this an hour later? I think this is a great Pick at 16. Clearly we couldn’t move back and we actually drafted someone I had heard of . The fact that we could use d tackle help that has all-pro potential ceiling. Nice work!
Oly wrote:I'm a big fan of the pick. I would have preferred OL, but with the new medical concerns with Fautanu's knee and Mims only starting 8 games in college, I don't think any OL on the board was as good of a player as Murphy. Lots of people say that Turner was clearly the better prospect than Murphy, but I put DT behind only QB in terms of importance (with LT the clear third) so I'd say that the player + position combo puts Murphy as the best player on the board for the Hawks. And it was a need.
When I see Murphy's highlights, it's clear that he either demands a double team or bull rushes a center into the backfield. He doesn't have the pass rush to be a Donald-level disruptive force, but paired with Williams, I can easily see that DT pairing becoming one of the best in the league by next season.
NorthHawk wrote:I hope JS will try to upgrade the interior of the OL, but I’m not holding my breath.
He has a history of neglect with that part of the team.
jshawaii22 wrote:I think Denver, LV Raiders and Seattle all had their eyes on trading up for Penix but Atlanta screwed the pooch. Of course, we had no draft capital to trade. I doubt Murphy was our first choice. However, with the first 14 picks being offensive players, and he was rated as one of the top 3 defensive players on the board, I'm OK and wish we got Penix, but it is what it is.
Knowing JS and that he may of had a lot more control of the prior drafts then we thought (which isn't necessary a good thing) I'm thrilled he didn't reach. We also still have DK, who I think was our biggest trade piece.
But was that JS's thing or Pete's? That's one of the things I'm looking for, if we break a past trend in this draft.
NorthHawk wrote:He may have been one of those players who they really wanted but didn't expect to be available without a trade up so when he was still on the board, they couldn't justify trading down.
RD regarding the IOL:
River_Dog wrote: But was that JS's thing or Pete's? That's one of the things I'm looking for, if we break a past trend in this draft.
NorthHawk wrote:JS said earlier that he thinks Guards (and presumably Centers, too given that revolving door since trading away Unger) were over drafted and over paid.
But we did draft Christian Haynes who looks like he could be a starter with our 2nd choice, so maybe the 81st pick is low enough for him. If Haynes plays well enough for a 2nd contract and JS is still here we will see if he still believes in that philosophy.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:Damien Lewis was drafted 69th overall to play guard.
I think the last two drafts already shows a departure from past draft strategy. Every linemen drafted in the last two drafts were selected to play the same position in the nfl as they did in college. Makes me think they aren’t misjudging the talent and aren’t drafting to switch positions. Hopefully that’s the case.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:I think the last two drafts already shows a departure from past draft strategy. Every linemen drafted in the last two drafts were selected to play the same position in the nfl as they did in college. Makes me think they aren’t misjudging the talent and aren’t drafting to switch positions. Hopefully that’s the case.
River_Dog wrote:Nice call. I stand corrected.
NorthHawk wrote:I think we started off great but slowly slid into nowhere land on the 3rd day.
The TE pick might be OK. Michigan didn't use him a lot in the pass game but he looks like a good blocker but the others seem like they are projects and to me cast an aura of the old 'We know better than everyone else - just watch us' that we saw in the bad draft days.
But maybe it's the new coaches seeing things that are much different from what I've been accustomed to seeing and without a definitive statement that Olu is the starting Center, it's a big worry for me.
NorthHawk wrote:The OL often take a few years to develop properly but JS has a history of not re-signing or extending IOL even if they are very good players like when they traded away Unger for a pass catching TE in an Offense that didn't throw to the TEs very much.
Have the Seahawks ever re-signed an Interior Lineman after drafting them under Schneider? I can't think of any.
NorthHawk wrote:I think so but did we re-sign him after he was playing G/C or was it after the OT experiment failed?
Users browsing this forum: NorthHawk and 0 guests