2025 Draft

[NorthHawk]

As we know the most pressing need is IOL for this team going into the draft.
Since nothing was done in FA (as usual) we now have to draft for need. However, history isn't on our side for Schneider filling the massive hole in the middle of the OL that has been festering for about a decade.
I suspect we will wait until day3 to try to find a player or two that can help but OL and specifically IOL are a valued commodity for 31 of the teams in the NFL and the best will be gone by R3 or 4.
My guess based on past actions is JS will wait until our Comp pick in R3 to start looking at Guards and Centers, meanwhile we will have stocked up on backup CBs, Safeties and others not critical to improving this team.

This is the drafting history of JS regarding IOL as he has preferred to wait until either the last minute of FA or cuts of backups from other teams to fill the roles in the IOL on a never ending continuum of players barely able to produce at the NFL level.

2011 James Carpenter (OT moved to G) R1
2011 John Moffitt G R3

2012 J.R. Sweezy (DT conversion) R7

2013 Ryan Seymour G R7

2014 Justin Britt (OT conversion) R2
2014 Garrett Scott (medical issue never played) R6

2015 Terry Pool G R4
2015 Mark Glowinski G R4

2016 Germain Ifedi (OT Conversion) R1
2016 Rees Odhiambo G R3
2016 Joey Hunt C R6

2017 Ethan Pocic C R2 (only played a few games at C - moved to G then was released now starting C in Cleveland)

2018 None

2019 Phil Haynes R4

2020 Damien Lewis G R3

2021 None

2022 None

2023 Anthony Bradford G R4
2023 Olusegun Oluwatimi C R5

2024 Cristian Haynes G R3
2024 Sataoa Laumea T/G R6

So in 14 previous drafts he has only drafted 4 Guards early - all in R3 and only 1 Center before R3. So on an chronically underperforming OL the IOL has been largely ignored for 14 drafts.
5 selections out of 126 players selected were IOL which works out to slightly less than 4%. Only 1 player out of 46 selections during JS tenure was selected in R1 or R2 (Pocic in 2017).
Of these players selected, only Damien Lewis has played a good stretch of games for us at a reasonable level - then he wasn't re-signed because he was deemed too expensive (now his salary is near average for a solid starting Guard).

I keep reading and hearing people say we are going to select IOL early this year. History tells us that's quite unlikely and we will see another crop of future Pro Bowlers and All Pro's being passed by early in the hope we magically hit on a mid to late round pick.

I'm not expecting that to change and I suspect those that are will be sorely disappointed as I have been the last 10 or so drafts.
I hope I'm wrong otherwise we will be in the same spot next year with a QB scrambling for his life and probably throwing too many INT's.

[Aseahawkfan]

The chances are low for a high quality guard to be drafted.

[c_hawkbob]

The chances are low for a high quality guard to be drafted.

Oh I disagree, I think our chances of drafting a guard (or tackle to play guard) with our fist pick are better than any other position. I'd say guard 40%, WR 30% and the field 30%.

[Aseahawkfan]

Oh I disagree, I think our chances of drafting a guard (or tackle to play guard) with our fist pick are better than any other position. I'd say guard 40%, WR 30% and the field 30%.

Tackle to replace our RT with the knee problem I could see.

Quality guard early? I'm skeptical, but would be happy if we did.

[NorthHawk]

In 14 drafts he's never drafted a Guard before R3 and 1 Center in R2 so history isn't on the side of taking one before R3. As well none of the OTs selected that moved to G succeeded in the transition in Seattle. Some went elsewhere and had serviceable careers. The rest of the IOL have been a collection of misfits, players on their last year getting one more payday, and former 1st round OT selections giving it one more try this time at G. Center has been an abject disaster.

[c_hawkbob]

In 14 drafts he's never drafted a Guard before R3 and 1 Center in R2 so history isn't on the side of taking one before R3. As well none of the OTs selected that moved to G succeeded in the transition in Seattle. Some went elsewhere and had serviceable careers. The rest of the IOL have been a collection of misfits, players on their last year getting one more payday, and former 1st round OT selections giving it one more try this time at G. Center has been an abject disaster.

I know, Schneider knows, Coach Mac likely knows, every 12 in the world knows. Which is exactly why I give it a 40% of happening this time.

[NorthHawk]

I just don't think it's in him to do that. I hope he's seen the light, but his consistent devaluing of the IOL says volumes about his view of Guards and Centers.

Here are the picks we have this year:

Round 1: No. 18
Round 2: No. 50
Round 2: No. 52 (from Steelers)
Round 3: No. 82
Round 3: No. 92 (from Lions through Jets and Raiders)
Round 4: No. 137 (Compensatory Selection)
Round 5: No. 172 (Compensatory Selection)
Round 5: No. 175 (Compensatory Selection)
Round 7: No. 223 (from Saints through Eagles and Steelers)
Round 7: No. 234

[River Dog]

Yeah, I don't see us taking a guard or center at #18, not necessarily because JS devalues offensive linemen, rather that they don't often go that high. We have two picks in the 2nd round, at #50 and #52. I would guess that we'll use one of those on an IOL.

[Stream Hawk]

It will be quite problematic if no IOL are drafted before round 3. No excuses this time, John.

[Oly]

It will be quite problematic if no IOL are drafted before round 3. No excuses this time, John.

This is where I am. I don't want them reaching for need at #18; they need to pick the BPA. But in the second, with two picks, it's hard to believe that there won't be a guard graded in the same range as the other players available. I'd be okay with center in theory, but I think there will be better value for guards than centers in Round 2.

[River Dog]

It will be quite problematic if no IOL are drafted before round 3. No excuses this time, John.

This is where I am. I don't want them reaching for need at #18; they need to pick the BPA. But in the second, with two picks, it's hard to believe that there won't be a guard graded in the same range as the other players available. I'd be okay with center in theory, but I think there will be better value for guards than centers in Round 2.

Make that three of us (at least). I'm off the bandwagon if he doesn't pick up a guard and/or center before Round 3.

[Aseahawkfan]

I would really like some great LBs or at least one. It's real hard to have a great defense without great LBs.

[jshawaii22]

Most of the national draft gurus have 2 IOL's in their top 20 draft boards, so it wouldn't surprise me if we do draft one. What I don't see this year are any position specific centers. I'm also in agreement that it's not in JS's blood to draft IOL (guards/centers) in the first two rounds. We'll see.

[c_hawkbob]

Most of the national draft gurus have 2 IOL's in their top 20 draft boards, so it wouldn't surprise me if we do draft one. What I don't see this year are any position specific centers. I'm also in agreement that it's not in JS's blood to draft IOL (guards/centers) in the first two rounds. We'll see.

Naw, best center this draft is a 3rd rounder.

[NorthHawk]

Add in the expected drafting of a Fullback as well.

From ProFootballRumors.com

The Seahawks will deviate from their usual approach by adding a fullback, it appears. Importing Klint Kubiak‘s offense will mean a likely fullback inclusion, as Schneider said (via The Athletic’s Michael-Shawn Dugar) the team is looking to add one via the draft or free agency. While the likes of Mack Strong and John L. Williams once thrived in Seattle, the team has not used a fullback regularly in many years. Kubiak’s offense, derived from his father’s attack, does make use of the niche position, however.

Why we didn't add the 49ers FB is a mystery. He's a proven commodity and has played for Kubiak in the same system that we will use but we seemingly didn't even make a play for him.

[c_hawkbob]

Add in the expected drafting of a Fullback as well.

From ProFootballRumors.com

The Seahawks will deviate from their usual approach by adding a fullback, it appears. Importing Klint Kubiak‘s offense will mean a likely fullback inclusion, as Schneider said (via The Athletic’s Michael-Shawn Dugar) the team is looking to add one via the draft or free agency. While the likes of Mack Strong and John L. Williams once thrived in Seattle, the team has not used a fullback regularly in many years. Kubiak’s offense, derived from his father’s attack, does make use of the niche position, however.

Why we didn't add the 49ers FB is a mystery. He's a proven commodity and has played for Kubiak in the same system that we will use but we seemingly didn't even make a play for him.

Brant Kuithe, an undersized TE out of Utah is probably the best FB prospect this year and he's a 7th rounder or UDFA prospect.

[NorthHawk]

Possibly but maybe not. That's the thing about the draft - it's just projecting potential. It would have been cheap to get SF's FB as he re-signed with them and we absolutely know he works in this system.

So now we go into this draft needing IOL x 2, WR, TE, LB, FB and might select a QB if their guy falls to us in the 2nd. Not a good use of FA to set up the draft for filling the remaining holes or selecting BPA when there's a pressing need and when they had a pot load of Cap Space. And if we want the better players we will have to get it done by pick 92 barring a miracle as late round picks rarely turn out to be additions that noticeably upgrade the talent.

[4XPIPS]

My prediction is; we are going to take the best available edge or CB at 18. As much as we have needs elsewhere, the best player at best rated positions will always get drafted first pick. As for Guard, we are drafting that till round 4 and on.

Edge's that are most likely available at 18
James Pearce Jr Tennessee
Shemar Stewart Texas A&M
Mykel Williams Georgia

CB's that are most likely available at 18
Jahdae Barron Texas
Will Johnson Michigan(familiar with Coach Mac)

[govandals]

BPA at #18, just get an impact player. If BPA and positional need align (Zabel?), then great. If not, just get a true impact player. I'm sure they'll take one guard in round 2/3 and if they don't, that just means Kubiak and Benton like our young guys lot more than we do.

I felt a little frustrated, as we all did, that they didn't do more in FA to fix the o-line. Evidently, there just wasn't much out there. JS's comment on the radio of paying $100,000 for a pinto summed it up well.

[River Dog]

I felt a little frustrated, as we all did, that they didn't do more in FA to fix the o-line. Evidently, there just wasn't much out there. JS's comment on the radio of paying $100,000 for a pinto summed it up well.

If this were the only offseason where the market for OL was weak, then I could have some sympathy for JS. But this isn't the first time that we headed into the offseason with major problems on the offensive line, and JS fixed it by shopping in the bargain basement.

I've been very patient with JS, given him the benefit of the doubt about this annual dismissal of the importance of the offensive line. This is his second season operating outside Pete's shadow, and at some point, we have to start holding him accountable.

[NorthHawk]

For years we've been hoping that the OL coaches could just 'Coach em up' and the results have been less than required.
We simply need an infusion of high end talent on the IOL. It's true that there are a few guys that look like they could really help, but as the old saying goes history is the best indicator of future actions and they haven't been successful to any degree
in the IOL.

I keep saying that I hope I'm wrong and Schneider has had an epiphany of sorts but his comments about Guards and his draft/FA/player retention history really shows his true thoughts about those positions. So I don't expect things to be much different this year.

[Oly]

I've been critical of how JS has handled the line in previous years, but not this year. It seemed to me even when the offseason began that beyond Fries, none of the FA guards were worth signing. Same with Dalman at center. It appears that Dalman was never an option because he had his heart set on Chicago (and they paid him), and the Vikings continued being one of the more baffling front offices by signing Fries long term, to big money, without a physical. The only thing JS could have done to make me think even less of his ability to fix the line would have been to match the Vikings' ridiculous offer. I can't point to anything he's done wrong this offseason with respect to the line. Maybe if they're done with big money free agents he could extend Cross and/or Lucas now to have cap hits accrue this year. But that's a maybe because it depends on the price. They're certainly not extend-at-any-cost players.

On the draft: I said earlier that I wanted to see IOL by the end of Round 2, but I think there are good players that may be there at 3 (like Chase Lundt), so I'll just say I will be okay as long as they draft IOL by the end of Day 2.

[Irish Greg 2.0]

Add in the expected drafting of a Fullback as well.

From ProFootballRumors.com

The Seahawks will deviate from their usual approach by adding a fullback, it appears. Importing Klint Kubiak‘s offense will mean a likely fullback inclusion, as Schneider said (via The Athletic’s Michael-Shawn Dugar) the team is looking to add one via the draft or free agency. While the likes of Mack Strong and John L. Williams once thrived in Seattle, the team has not used a fullback regularly in many years. Kubiak’s offense, derived from his father’s attack, does make use of the niche position, however.

Why we didn't add the 49ers FB is a mystery. He's a proven commodity and has played for Kubiak in the same system that we will use but we seemingly didn't even make a play for him.

He wanted to stay in SF, that's all.

[Aseahawkfan]

What QBs are possible for Schneider to take? John on his weekly show says this is not a bad QB class. That leads me to believe he is looking at drafting a QB, even if a late round developmental prospect.

[c_hawkbob]

What QBs are possible for Schneider to take? John on his weekly show says this is not a bad QB class. That leads me to believe he is looking at drafting a QB, even if a late round developmental prospect.

Jaxon Dart is the third best (some say second) QB in the draft and I've seen him projected anywhere from 9th to late second round. I could see us taking him if he falls to the second, or we might even get froggy and jump back up to the end of the first to get the extra year on him.

Tyler Shough might even be a better QB if he could stay healthy and wasn't 25 years old, he might be a candidate for a mid round pick.

[Oly]

I want to know how much of Will Howard is the QB we saw in the playoffs vs. his earlier career. Playoffs Howard might be QB1 in this draft. Earlier Howard might be Day 3.

I'm also curious how much of Bad Ewers was just the injury, which plagued him most of the year.

It's such a weird QB class for me, and I'll just have to trust the FO if/when they pick someone.

[Aseahawkfan]

When John thinks the QB class is not as bad as some think and even mentions it, it definitely his subtle way of saying he's looking and likely has a prospect in mind. Who that prospect is I cannot say, but someone is on his radar. If that someone is there, I think he drafts a QB.

[4XPIPS]

So I was listening to a podcast and they had Daniel Jeremiah on as a guest, who is a former NFL scout and who currently writes for the NFL. Now I am not saying what Daniel Jeremiah is elaborating is gold, and nor am I am huge fan of his, but it's quite interesting hearing his perspective on how the successful NFL teams draft better than the ones that still draft incorrectly. Incorrectly, would be owner influence, ie Jerry Jones, or just drafting based on need, ie reaching for a position of need.

How good GM's and organizations like the Packers, Steelers, Eagles continue to find talent is base on drafting the best players at the highest valued position. You can never have enough of top talent at higher rated positions, even if you have top talent there already. At higher demand position you are more than likely to lose a top talent in free agency, so it's always best to be heavy with rookies under their draft contract at that position to fill the spot when you lose your top player in FA.

So from his point of view, top teams will never draft based on need. That is mistake #1, if all 31 teams know you are desperate for a certain position, that is always leveraged against you. Good teams approach the draft with a board of players they value at the higher rated positions, and then have a roster of players they prefer at the lower rated positions, but will hardly reach for them. So based on his ranking, this is how good teams approach the draft base on highest rated positions.

1) Quarterback: Goes with out saying. This is a tricky one as all QBs are the most overreached position in the draft. It's obviously the most important position in the draft, but can easily be over reached, and the success rate for drafting QBs early is extremely low. That is why good teams that have a need at QB will most likely scout QBs they prefer early in the draft, and later in the draft. QB is the highest rated position, but if you get it wrong it can set a franchise back a few years.

2) Tackle: After quarterback, left tackles are a premium in the NFL. On average there are 10 potential starters in each draft at tackle, but only 1 or 2 of them go on and become cornerstone tackles for their respective teams. A lot of tackles can moved from left to right, and sometimes kicked down to the IOL depending on what college they played for. Not all tackles are created equal, so at times there maybe only 2 or 3 solid tackles in the entire draft that fit your scheme.

3) Edge Rusher/OLB: All good teams can never have enough top tier edge rushers on their teams, and they love to rotate them in for maximum damage. Any player that can wreck an opponents passing game has high value.

4) Cornerback: Shutdown corners are extremely rare, and those who have the footwork to pace with top WRs in the game are very hard to find. If a top talented cornerback comes out of college, you will usually see them picked in the top 10 all the time.

After this, the rest of the positions are usually not targeted in the first round, because they aren't valued high enough. Again this is based on how the good teams approach the draft each year.

It's an interesting perspective, but I do agree that the crappy organizations like the Jets, Jags, Raiders... always seem to take a player that would appear to be reach.

[NorthHawk]

The difference between them and us is they still draft well in those non critical areas like G and C.
JS hasn’t done that in 14 years and now it’s a priority so to be better we have to draft for need.

[4XPIPS]

The difference between them and us is they still draft well in those non critical areas like G and C.
JS hasn’t done that in 14 years and now it’s a priority so to be better we have to draft for need.

That maybe a scouting issue under John. Maybe we aren't good at scouting IOL as we should. Maybe it's a case where we draft a player that we just can't coach up right too. Who knows, but we have been firing away at IOL and the majority of them end up being regulated to backups.

Just looking at the last 2 drafts

Anthony Bradford Seems to be a dud
Olusegun Oluwatimi Isn't starting material

Cristian Haynes -Should have been a starter being in R3, but has been quoted to be weak on strength at point of snap.
2024 Sataoa Laumea T/G R6 Probably the only viable starter we have, not blowing anyone's socks off, but I think there is potential here to be a decent starter, but no where near a top talent in the league.

Maybe we should steal a scout from he Packers or Eagles and learn from how they evaluate their players.

[NorthHawk]

A major part of the job is getting the scouting staff in order and he’s not done that in 14 years OR his instructions to them didn’t emphasize the importance of getting it right. In any event it’s been a dismal failure during his tenure.

I suspect it has been his attitude towards the IOL as his comments, trades, and FA signings haven’t ever come close to being adequate for building a solid squad.

[River Dog]

It will be interesting to see how JS approaches this draft. As a rule, we go into drafts needing more picks which has resulted in us trading down. But this year, we have 10 picks, including 5 in the top 100. Is there any chance of us moving up in this draft or putting one or two of them in the bank by swapping them for a pick or picks in 2026?

[Oly]

It will be interesting to see how JS approaches this draft. As a rule, we go into drafts needing more picks which has resulted in us trading down. But this year, we have 10 picks, including 5 in the top 100. Is there any chance of us moving up in this draft or putting one or two of them in the bank by swapping them for a pick or picks in 2026?

Yeah, it feels like you either move up to get one of the few legit 1st round talents or you trade back to get more Day 2 picks where the meat of this draft is. Unless they get a R1 pick next year from a non-contender, I'd rather not see them bank picks.

[River Dog]

It will be interesting to see how JS approaches this draft. As a rule, we go into drafts needing more picks which has resulted in us trading down. But this year, we have 10 picks, including 5 in the top 100. Is there any chance of us moving up in this draft or putting one or two of them in the bank by swapping them for a pick or picks in 2026?

Yeah, it feels like you either move up to get one of the few legit 1st round talents or you trade back to get more Day 2 picks where the meat of this draft is. Unless they get a R1 pick next year from a non-contender, I'd rather not see them bank picks.

We already have 4 out of the 64 picks on Day 2 (2nd and 3rd rounds). Not sure why we'd need more than those we already have.

Speaking of putting picks in the bank, I'll always remember when Tim Ruskell, the GM everyone loved to hate due mainly to the Steve Hutchinson debacle, traded a 2009 2nd round pick, the 37th overall, to the Broncos for their 2010 first round pick. Ruskell and Jim Mora were canned at the end of the 2009 season and JR inherited that banked pick, the #13 overall, and used it to draft Earl Thomas and set up the LOB run.

[Oly]

We already have 4 out of the 64 picks on Day 2 (2nd and 3rd rounds). Not sure why we'd need more than those we already have.

Because we have more than four holes. I think we could expect at least two IOL starters, a solid TE (there is a huge dropoff after the first four), a potential QBotF, a S to groom as a starter, and at least one DL. I'm not a huge draftnik, but it seems to me that there are more potential starters on Day 2 than usual, and the Hawks definitely need more quality players.

Speaking of putting picks in the bank, I'll always remember when Tim Ruskell, the GM everyone loved to hate due mainly to the Steve Hutchinson debacle, traded a 2009 2nd round pick, the 37th overall, to the Broncos for their 2010 first round pick. Ruskell and Jim Mora were canned at the end of the 2009 season and JR inherited that banked pick, the #13 overall, and used it to draft Earl Thomas and set up the LOB run.

Good point. That's why I thought getting a pick from a non-contender would be a good idea. But I'd value a pick in the middle of R2 this year over a 1st from the Chiefs/Eagles/Lions/etc. next year.

[River Dog]

We already have 4 out of the 64 picks on Day 2 (2nd and 3rd rounds). Not sure why we'd need more than those we already have.

Because we have more than four holes. I think we could expect at least two IOL starters, a solid TE (there is a huge dropoff after the first four), a potential QBotF, a S to groom as a starter, and at least one DL. I'm not a huge draftnik, but it seems to me that there are more potential starters on Day 2 than usual, and the Hawks definitely need more quality players.

That's assuming that we have 4 quality players identified and that they'll all fall between #50 and #92. That's a lot of picks bunched into a pretty tight group.

Speaking of putting picks in the bank, I'll always remember when Tim Ruskell, the GM everyone loved to hate due mainly to the Steve Hutchinson debacle, traded a 2009 2nd round pick, the 37th overall, to the Broncos for their 2010 first round pick. Ruskell and Jim Mora were canned at the end of the 2009 season and JR inherited that banked pick, the #13 overall, and used it to draft Earl Thomas and set up the LOB run.

Good point. That's why I thought getting a pick from a non-contender would be a good idea. But I'd value a pick in the middle of R2 this year over a 1st from the Chiefs/Eagles/Lions/etc. next year.

Yeah, it would be nice to pick up a #1 from someone like the Giants or Browns. But I wouldn't discard the idea of trading a #2 for a perennial contender's #1, either. All things considered equal, it would still be a big move up, from no higher than the #50 overall to no lower than the #32. That's not a bad swap, especially considering that it's not a given that those teams will be drafting in the bottom 10 next year. If there's not a slam dunk at #50, why not trade with the Eagles for their #1 in 2026?

Keep in mind that we're currently sitting on the #50 and #52 overall picks. If we see a great player available at #50, he only has to drop past one team, currently the Broncos, in order for us to get him at #52. Given how close those two picks are, don't be shocked if we trade one of them.

[4XPIPS]

Has there ever been a time we have traded up into the 1st round to get a player? I can't recall us ever doing so. My last memory of the Hawk's draft is when we selected Dan McGwire, but prior to that I was probably too young and dumb to remember any selections.

[River Dog]

Has there ever been a time we have traded up into the 1st round to get a player? I can't recall us ever doing so. My last memory of the Hawk's draft is when we selected Dan McGwire, but prior to that I was probably too young and dumb to remember any selections.

Nope. We never have.

The thing about the McGuire pick was that our head coach at the time, Chuck Knox, wanted to draft Bret Favre but that the team owner, Ken Behring, overruled him and insisted that we select Dan McGuire out of San Diego State, who wasn't projected to go near that high but that was a favorite of our native Southern California team owner. That's one of the reasons why I liked Paul Allen so much, because he didn't interfere with on the field football decisions. He gave his HC/GM complete autonomy.

We've had mixed results in trading first round picks. We traded a first-round pick to the Cards for QB Kelly Stouffer, who was a huge bust, and we all remember the Jamal Adams trade. Those are two of the biggest boners we've ever pulled as a team. But then there's the Joey Galloway trade where we traded a malcontent star WR for two first round picks, one of which we used to draft a league MVP in Shaun Alexander.

[Aseahawkfan]

Nope. We never have.

The thing about the McGuire pick was that our head coach at the time, Chuck Knox, wanted to draft Bret Favre but that the team owner, Ken Behring, overruled him and insisted that we select Dan McGuire out of San Diego State, who wasn't projected to go near that high but that was a favorite of our native Southern California team owner. That's one of the reasons why I liked Paul Allen so much, because he didn't interfere with on the field football decisions. He gave his HC/GM complete autonomy.

We've had mixed results in trading first round picks. We traded a first-round pick to the Cards for QB Kelly Stouffer, who was a huge bust, and we all remember the Jamal Adams trade. Those are two of the biggest boners we've ever pulled as a team. But then there's the Joey Galloway trade where we traded a malcontent star WR for two first round picks, one of which we used to draft a league MVP in Shaun Alexander.

The Russell to Denver trade was obviously a great trade as well. Be nice if we can do something good with it before the players drafted leave or are on their second contracts and very expensive. Always sucks when you make an amazing trade, draft fairly well, and then still do nothing.

[4XPIPS]

Nope. We never have.

The thing about the McGuire pick was that our head coach at the time, Chuck Knox, wanted to draft Bret Favre but that the team owner, Ken Behring, overruled him and insisted that we select Dan McGuire out of San Diego State, who wasn't projected to go near that high but that was a favorite of our native Southern California team owner. That's one of the reasons why I liked Paul Allen so much, because he didn't interfere with on the field football decisions. He gave his HC/GM complete autonomy.

We've had mixed results in trading first round picks. We traded a first-round pick to the Cards for QB Kelly Stouffer, who was a huge bust, and we all remember the Jamal Adams trade. Those are two of the biggest boners we've ever pulled as a team. But then there's the Joey Galloway trade where we traded a malcontent star WR for two first round picks, one of which we used to draft a league MVP in Shaun Alexander.

Didn't we fleece the Bears into giving us 1st round pick for RIck Mirer? I think Randy Mueller was the GM at the time.