Bruce Irvin

[briwas101]

Your point is meaningless unless you have a better use of that pick in mind. Thus my post. If it was such a poor use of that pick, what should they have done instead?

In a vacuum Irvin may not have lived up to what you expect in a first round pick. But we don't live in a vacuum. In the context of his draft class he actually may have been the best use of the #15 overall pick.

Bringing up Aaron Curry is a pure D distraction from the topic. Aaron Curry was a bust. And whether or not the 2009 draft was a bad draft there are a whole bunch of players who have proven to be FAR superior to Curry:

Andre Smith, Eugene Monroe, B.J. Raji, Michael Crabtree, Knowshon Moreno, Brian Orakpo, Brian Cushing, Jeremy Maclin. Even the guys who proved to be big dissapointments (Sanchez, Ayers, Malcom Jenkins, Heyward-Bey) are far superior players to Curry just by virtue of managing to stay in the league.

If you can't even play Monday Morning QB and come up with a clearly superior use of that pick with hindsight on your side, you have no point.

Here's a better use: trade back.

Face it, the Hawks have done better in the 3rd round and later than they have in the first 2 rounds.

The hawks should not have drafted ANYONE at #15. We should have acquired more picks.

They either overrated Irvin or they stubbornly refused to trade back with no one of value currently on the board.

Honestly though, the Irvin pick isn't bad enough to deserve a lot of criticism. He will never be a good DE so its a failure in that regard but he has at least earned what playing time at LB that he gets and that means something on a defense as good as ours. There have been plenty of mid 1st rounders who have done worse.

PS. With the new rookie wage scale, players like Irvin no longer hurt the team other than opportunity cost. If Irvin was making $6m then we'd have a reason to be mad. He isn't hurting the cap or the team right now.

[kalibane]

Do you have any evidence that another trade partner existed (they had already traded down once) or are you just assuming that if they wanted to trade down it automatically is an option?

[jshawaii22]

Geezzz guys, bringing up Curry is really a waste of good brain food. Woulda, shoulda, coulda... but we didn't and that's the bottom line.

He was the absolute highest rated player on damn near everyone's draft board that day. The same can't be said for Bruce. I remember breathing a sign of relief when KC drafted their loser that day ahead of us, after winning a coin flip from us for the spot.

Let it rest. Hindsite sometimes becomes tunnel vision, you're just in different tunnels right now.
JMHO

[briwas101]

Do you have any evidence that another trade partner existed (they had already traded down once) or are you just assuming that if they wanted to trade down it automatically is an option?

Yes it is an assumption, but it is an assumption that is right 99% of the time.

Teams ALMOST ALWAYS (like every single pick) have a potential trade partner, its a matter of pulling the trigger. It was either the Carp or Irvin pick where they even came out and said they had offers but they didn't like the "value".

So pete and john already admitted to not making trades back in the first round despite having offers. It is totally fair to judge their decision not to trade back.

Does it make sense to turn down trade offers because of "low value" and then turn around and use the pick on a player with "low value" ?

Like I said in my first post, the Irvin pick is hardly a bad pick, but we most likely WOULD have gotten better value by trading back and picking up more picks. It is because of this that the argument about other 1st rounders failing holds no water. Pete and John did not have to hold onto their pick but they did.

So instead of asking who else we would have drafted at #15, the question should be "who would we draft at end of round 1 AND in rounds 2/3/4/5/6/7 with whatever picks we add through that trade?"

Irvin is no bust, but keeping the pick and using it on him was most likely less advantageous than trading the pick. People like to point out that the Jets were interested in Irvin too. So what? If the jets wanted him isn't that a red flag because the Jets step on their own dick about as much as any team?

[RiverDog]

It isn't an "argument" it's someone stubbornly holding a position because it's the same position he continues to regurgitate over the last several years. Limited snaps in the SB proves what exactly? Nothing? OK then.

You said that Irvin "seldom comes off the field." 17 out of 69 snaps in the SB proves that your statement was false, as does all the other games where he's on the field for less than half the defensive snaps.

FYI I was not comparing Irvin to Curry. I was comparing the flawed arguments that were made....and I was front and center making them...that attempted to rationalize a bad use of a top half of the draft selection.

And excuse me if I regurgitate the same argument that I've been doing for the last couple of years. If nothing else, at least I'm consistent. But it has required very little stubbornness on my part to maintain it, as unlike my argument about Carpenter being a bad pick (I'm backing off that one, at least for now), I haven't seen hardly anything that would cause me to back off it.

Monday was a good start, though. Hopefully that continues.


With the new rookie wage scale, players like Irvin no longer hurt the team other than opportunity cost. If Irvin was making $6m then we'd have a reason to be mad. He isn't hurting the cap or the team right now.

Good point. But it still doesn't make the selection any better, just that it didn't hurt us financially like the Curry pick did. But it is an excellent example of why that part of the new CBA is perhaps the best thing that came out of it.

[obiken]

I agree HT, I never liked Hillary and I never will.

[monkey]

Here's a better use: trade back.

Face it, the Hawks have done better in the 3rd round and later than they have in the first 2 rounds.

The hawks should not have drafted ANYONE at #15. We should have acquired more picks.

But Pete didn't want more picks, he wanted Irvin. He didn't want to run the risk of missing the guy who he valued MORE than whatever he could have gotten from trading back...what about this are you not getting?
Do you honestly think it never occurred to John and Pete to trade back??? They do it all the time for crying out loud. They're seemingly always trying to get more players...but Irvin was someone they REALLY wanted, because of his unique abilities and speed.

You can say that John and Pete were wrong, and that they overvalued Irvin...that's fine...I'm going to go out on a limb and side with them on this one until proven otherwise.

[savvyman]

From reading the latest articles about Irvin the coaches seem very pleased with his development over the past 12 months and point to the fact that Smith is not being rotated in now as evidence that Irvin has grasped the responsibilities of the linebacking position.

[HumanCockroach]

RD, please don't place " " around things I didn't say. One of my pet peeves, I said "sometimes" not seldom, and if you can't judge the position accurately, that has little to do with me, the coaches or those that do. This isn't a. "Nice start" as he has been doing it for a little over a year, he has indeed played well, exceeding what one should expect from a player that has never played the position. There is plenty of evidence to back off your position, refusing to see it, doesn't lend much credence to your position.

Personally I am looking at the BODY of the work, not two games as you continue to do. Irvin played more snaps than Smith ( and that is with being injured/ suspended) and continues to do so. Using your own formula, I could be claiming that Smith is a waste of space on this roster and should be released ( you know because against Washington he garnered 0 total defensive snaps, so he is worthless right?) Continue to ignore games like St.Louis, and Carolina and numerous other incredibly good games if you feel it strengthens your original erroneous judgement of the pick. I simply don't care if you can't accurately judge the play of that position. The coaches obviously can, and have, hence the reason Irvin continues to start, play, and play well, while Smith sits on the bench.I have little doubt that should they see a need to play Irvin less and Smith more ( ie a pass happy team like the one you continue to cling to in Denver) they will make the best choice for the teams success ( just like they do at every other position, that for some reason you neglect to continually harp on).

Irvin plays the run better than Smith, Smith plays the pass better than Irvin, why is that so hard to see, I haven't the least, but I see no need to help you along either.

[kalibane]

Yes it is an assumption, but it is an assumption that is right 99% of the time.

No sir. This is one of the poorest assumptions that fans make. There is no 99% probability that you can trade down. Teams know how important draft choices are now. If there isn't a player another team "has to have" they aren't trading up just for the hell of it. There is a much higher probability that there was no one to trade with. If you have no evidence that they turned down a trade this is not a viable alternative.

[Zorn76]

Bruce Irvin has been OK. He's going in the right direction.

Pete knew he was a project of sorts when he drafted him, and that's what he's turned out to be, more or less. But he's making progress, and there's enough upside to give him the benefit of the doubt for now

When I look at players like Bruce, or anybody else on the team who is not a cornerstone piece, the question remains - Can we do better? That's always gotta be asked in these cases, IMO.

So while I like the progress overall, his upside doesn't translate to being a lock long term. He's trending upward, but Carroll won't hesitate to continue to challenge him.

There's any number of cases like this on the roster.

The OL remains the biggest question mark out there. Point is, you keep bringing in prospects until you get the results you want. Team chemistry and an allowance of time for players to gel is a sound approach, but first you have to have pieces in place that are worth gelling to begin with.

This is what I like about Pete. He doesn't change for change's sake, there's a purpose to his tinkering.

[Seahawks4Ever]

I have to admit that I have been more impressed with Bruce's play this season that Michael Smith. Smith seems to still be basking in his SB MVP and decided he only had to show up this year.

I am very glad to be wrong about Irvin and that he is FINALLY making a contribution. Hey, if PC is going to sing his praises and tell everybody that it was Irvin and his play that was the key against Washington I am going to take his word for it.

I just want steady production from the guy, that's all. If B.I. is playing well that means our defense is playing well and I always want our defense to play well!

[HumanCockroach]

http://www.seahawks.com/team/depth-chart.html

Updated depth chart to clarify any confusion about where Irvin sits on this team. ( as the one that was listed was from pre season, when Irvin was still returning from hip surgery)

[NorthHawk]

I have to admit that I have been more impressed with Bruce's play this season that Michael Smith. Smith seems to still be basking in his SB MVP and decided he only had to show up this year.

I am very glad to be wrong about Irvin and that he is FINALLY making a contribution. Hey, if PC is going to sing his praises and tell everybody that it was Irvin and his play that was the key against Washington I am going to take his word for it.

I just want steady production from the guy, that's all. If B.I. is playing well that means our defense is playing well and I always want our defense to play well!

I agree with the steady production comment. Any pick that plays consistently is a bonus and although we all want our first picks to be All Pro players, the reality is a player that can start through his first contract, and beyond is a very good pick.

We'll see if Irvin continues to play well enough to be re-signed after his rookie contract is over.

[HumanCockroach]

"Yes it is an assumption, but it is an assumption that is right 99% of the time."

LMFAO

[obiken]

The jury is still out sadly for us Irvin haters! It doesn't matter at this point. He's a good backup as long as he doesn't screw up again.

[HumanCockroach]

Yup, let's cut all the guys that have screwed up!! Down with them all. ROTFLMFAO.

The "jury" will always be out, it's the same with guys that hate Harvin, it does not matter what they do on the field, there will be a small group of people that feel they know best, didn't like the pick, and need a whipping boy. Just the way it is, and the way it will always be.

[HumanCockroach]

Just going to leave this here for people to paruse..... should I be asking for "apolgies" now? or is there a time frame I have to wait?? LOL.

Damn fine couple of weeks for the starting LB named Irvin, and a nice diverse, ever expanding stat sheet to go with it. Hold on folks, it is going to "grow" the more comfortable he becomes with a position he is still learning.

[monkey]

I have to admit that I have been more impressed with Bruce's play this season that Michael Smith. Smith seems to still be basking in his SB MVP and decided he only had to show up this year.

I am very glad to be wrong about Irvin and that he is FINALLY making a contribution. Hey, if PC is going to sing his praises and tell everybody that it was Irvin and his play that was the key against Washington I am going to take his word for it.

I just want steady production from the guy, that's all. If B.I. is playing well that means our defense is playing well and I always want our defense to play well!

Malcolm Smith has never been a good tackler, he wasn't in college either, and right now his tackling is flat out ATROCIOUS!!!
That, and the fact that Irvin is playing the run better and better every week, and is making BIG strides against the pass as well, is really why Smith continues to lose time to Irvin.
While I like Malcolm Smith just fine for what he is (a backup LBer who is best used as a sort of third down specialist), the truth is Bruce Irvin has a much, much, MUCH higher upside, which he's just still beginning to scratch.
In the end, when we lose Smith next offseason, the loss won't be felt at all as Kevin Pierre-Lewis will easily take his place, and likely be a huge upgrade, while Irvin will continue to get better and better.

[Seahawks4Ever]

Big Bruce is really coming in to his own and is having that break out year he needed. He has been all over the field this season making plays and is quickly becoming one of our most feared weapons. It hasn't happened over night, but the young man has obviously put in the work to make himself better. His first two seasons he was yo yo'ed back and forth between DE and OLB but now that they have settled him in at OLB he is blossoming. He can rush the pass as well as drop in to coverage, he sets the edge and makes the tackle for little to no gain. He keeps this up and he just might find him self in the Pro Bowl and be mentioned along with guys like DeMarcus Ware and a few others. I once said he wouldn't get that big pay day at the end of this season, I was wrong, he will be paid this off season and I hope we will be able to keep him.

[obiken]

Not too proud to say it Monk but it looks like your right. His sometimes it takes 3 or 4 years for some guys to get it. He is in the top 5 as far as LB speed in the NFL. WE all can only hope.