Bullseye, you are wrong about the Percy Harvin trade. Only the Redskins and Colts do not have first round picks this year. They traded last year's first for him.

 

I read Earl Thomas is the only defensive back on the roster who was selected in the first round.

---

Bullseye, you are wrong about the Percy Harvin trade. Only the Redskins and Colts do not have first round picks this year. They traded last year's first for him.

 

I read Earl Thomas is the only defensive back on the roster who was selected in the first round.

 

 

JW,

 

This is the relevant portion of my original post...

 

 

"...Many people have argued against the use of free agency and trades for players in building a championship team, yet Seattle signed guys like Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Matt Flynn  and Marshawn Lynch as free agents, and traded a first round pick in exchange for Percy Harvin."

 

My question to you is simple.

 

Where in the text highlighted above did I indicate the Seahawks traded a 2014 draft choice for Percy Harvin, or a draft pick THIS YEAR for Harvin?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

 

( SMH at the lamebrain trying to turn this into some weird BAP platform. )

 

But isn't it worth it just so we get to watch Bullseye calmly beat him like a rented mule?

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Many, including TMD, have argued that it is now impossible for a defensive, ball control team to win the Super Bowl any longer, yet Seattle, a defense first, run the ball team dominated all year and won the big one.

 

I have argued that the best teams of all time (those who won multiple Super Bowls within a short period) have tended to place a heavy early round emphasis on skill players.  This runs counter to those who maintain building through the trenches is the only way to truly win.  It's too soon to say whether Seattle will win multiple Super Bowls.  Nevertheless, looking at them at this early part, Seattle seems to buck both trends.   Going back to 2009, Seattle spent three first round picks on linemen (Okung, Carpenter, Irvin), and three first round picks on non linemen (Curry, Thomas, and this year's first on Harvin).

 

I don't know if this is mathematically correct, but I believe I heard 6 of the last 7 Super Bowls, the team with the better defense won.

 

I agree with just about all you've said.

 

And to add to that, Carroll is rooted in college football.  With his last stint at USC, he was able to carry over elements of college and have them work in the pros.. which is rarely successful.

 

How has he made it work?  It would seem to me the emphasis on youth, speed, and a hard hitting, challenge the receiver defense is the key.  With so many timing routes etc. with modern offenses, he takes the fight to them.  Bumping and jamming knocks WRs out of place and puts them off target in their timed routes.  A relentless pass rush takes the QB off the spot, and the combination of the two spells doom for offenses even with skirts on the QBs and rules advantages for the WRs.

 

On offense, you impose your will.  Be capable of running when you need to, want to... and also be able to throw on your own terms as well (keep downs manageable and make teams pay for cheating the line.)

 

I couldn't help watching them but to think... the ability to impose their will offensively and wreak havoc on defense reminded me a little of the dominance of the 90s Cowboys.  Who, were also led by a college coach who brought in weapons on offense and had a speedy, attacking defense.

 

Youth, speed, and challenging the opposing offense seem to be the new formula for success.

 

We can have that, too.  Though, it's likely to take the same four years as it did Seattle.  Maybe a little longer, since Carroll started with more than we did.  Keep drafting well and adding key free agents and I don't see any reason why we can't emulate that success.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

A correction to OP. Lynch wasn't signed as a free agent, we traded for him (2011 4th and 2012 5th round picks). For me one of the best trades of all time.

 

 

Not that I am knocking Seattle's drafting, but this presumes they didn't reach for any of their picks.

 

They drafted a T out of Alabama in the first round-James Carpenter.  After struggling at RT, they eventually moved him inside to G.  While there are definitely some that are worth first round picks, I'm not sure, as a general rule, taking guards in the first round is not a good thing.  If they drafted him with the idea he had the bulk and the athleticism to be a RT, and they have shifted him inside to G, that likely means they reached on the pick. 

 

Furthermore, they took Richard Sherman in the 5th round in 2011, more than a full round after they drafted WR Kris Durham, who is no longer on the team.  If Sherman is among the top 2-3 CBs in the NFL and great value at 5, then taking a WR over him who is no longer on the team has to represent a reach to some degree.

 

I agree Carpenter was a reach.

 

He was drafted as a RT, but is too slow for outside pass rushers, so we moved him to guard. We selected him, because he is a good run blocker (which is important in our system) and pre-draft they also mentioned, he played all positions but center at Alabama and our OL coach Tom Cable liked his versatility (Cable is known for rotating players and try to play them at more positions during practice). Carp was his personal pick, but didn't work out as planned so far. He struggles in pass protection and also has problems with weight and injuries. Now he is part of "rotation" at LG. 2014 is his last contract year, I doubt we will keep him after that.

 

I didn't like Carpenter pick at draft time and he still didn't convinced me. But Carroll&Co. wanted to adress OL problems in 2011 draft so we take Carpenter and then John Moffitt (he has retired meanwhile) in 3rd round. I wanted QB (Dalton or Kaep) in that draft, but today I'm happy, Carroll and Schneider didn't go that way. I still believe we could use that #25 pick better, but no way I complain about 2011 draft, as we get Wright, Sherm, Maxwell and Malcolm Smith in rounds 4-7.

 

Bullseye, you are wrong about the Percy Harvin trade. Only the Redskins and Colts do not have first round picks this year. They traded last year's first for him.

 

I read Earl Thomas is the only defensive back on the roster who was selected in the first round.

 

More than that, Thomas is only defensive player on our roster, selected in the first round. But he is certainly the most important player.

 

 

You are right about Harvin. We traded 2013 1st and 2014 3rd and 7th round picks for him.

---

A correction to OP. Lynch wasn't signed as a free agent, we traded for him (2011 4th and 2012 5th round picks). For me one of the best trades of all time.

 

 


 

I agree Carpenter was a reach.

 

He was drafted as a RT, but is too slow for outside pass rushers, so we moved him to guard. We selected him, because he is a good run blocker (which is important in our system) and pre-draft they also mentioned, he played all positions but center at Alabama and our OL coach Tom Cable liked his versatility (Cable is known for rotating players and try to play them at more positions during practice). Carp was his personal pick, but didn't work out as planned so far. He struggles in pass protection and also has problems with weight and injuries. Now he is part of "rotation" at LG. 2014 is his last contract year, I doubt we will keep him after that.

 

I didn't like Carpenter pick at draft time and he still didn't convinced me. But Carroll&Co. wanted to adress OL problems in 2011 draft so we take Carpenter and then John Moffitt (he has retired meanwhile) in 3rd round. I wanted QB (Dalton or Kaep) in that draft, but today I'm happy, Carroll and Schneider didn't go that way. I still believe we could use that #25 pick better, but no way I complain about 2011 draft, as we get Wright, Sherm, Maxwell and Malcolm Smith in rounds 4-7.

 


 

More than that, Thomas is only defensive player on our roster, selected in the first round. But he is certainly the most important player.

 

 

You are right about Harvin. We traded 2013 1st and 2014 3rd and 7th round picks for him.

I stand corrected on Lynch, but never did I assert Seattle traded any picks this year for Harvin.


My larger point regarding Seattle remains.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

When you spend draft after draft reaching for guys and signing cast-offs in free agency like Henne you never get anywhere. The Jaguars need to follow the seahawks lead and always take the guy that makes sense, not the guy they think they need to fill a roster spot with.

 

Bullseye touched on it, but I'll further point out the irony of your statement.

 

For the past 3 years, Seattle HAS been accused of reaching on draft day, including their QB who many thought would have gone undrafted.  Bruce Irvin was considered the biggest reach of his draft - with the possible exception of Bryan Anger.

 

If we follow the Seahawks lead, our team will be filled with a bunch of unknowns and a few moderately priced, high motor team-oriented veterans (Paul Pozlusny, anyone?).  With any luck, that will include a few unexpected "reaches" on draft day, including, perhaps, one at QB.

 

On a personal note directed to the OP, do you remember the "Why Pittsburgh wins" topic a few years ago?  The 2 teams that played in the NFC championship are very indicative of the Pittsburgh route to greatness.  Defense still wins championships, and while you can't have a bad QB, you don't need a great one.  Better-than-average will do, even though that's still a pretty hard thing to come by.

---

On a personal note directed to the OP, do you remember the "Why Pittsburgh wins" topic a few years ago? The 2 teams that played in the NFC championship are very indicative of the Pittsburgh route to greatness. Defense still wins championships, and while you can't have a bad QB, you don't need a great one. Better-than-average will do, even though that's still a pretty hard thing to come by.

^^ excellent post. I agree,, my sentiment exactly.

---

...
 

On a personal note directed to the OP, do you remember the "Why Pittsburgh wins" topic a few years ago?  The 2 teams that played in the NFC championship are very indicative of the Pittsburgh route to greatness.  Defense still wins championships, and while you can't have a bad QB, you don't need a great one.  Better-than-average will do, even though that's still a pretty hard thing to come by.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you here anonymous... well, I am but it's more semantics than anything. The grammar in that bolded sentence above is kind of glaring. Is it really hard to come by a "better than average" Quarterback? Mathematics tells us that 16 Quarterback's out there have achieved such a ranking. This bangs home a point though, it's very tough to find an effective Quarterback; when you find one, keep him!

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

The Seahawks did a fantastic job of building their roster, finding great late round/UDFA gems, and getting Avril/Bennett on amazingly cheap FA deals (so cheap that Dwight Freeney called collusion even: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/02...75424.html )

 

However, if they don't find that outlier QB they won't win the Super Bowl. In fact, they tried multiple times and failed before they got super lucky with Wilson. They traded for Whitehurt, signed Tarvaris Jackson, and gave Matt Flynn a big FA deal. The idea that they 'built up the roster and then went for the QB' is patently false. They tried over and over and failed, got lucky, and then won the Super Bowl in short order after finding a franchise QB. Sometimes luck is just what it takes. 

---

The Seahawks did a fantastic job of building their roster, finding great late round/UDFA gems, and getting Avril/Bennett on amazingly cheap FA deals (so cheap that Dwight Freeney called collusion even: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/02...75424.html )

 

However, if they don't find that outlier QB they won't win the Super Bowl. In fact, they tried multiple times and failed before they got super lucky with Wilson. They traded for Whitehurt, signed Tarvaris Jackson, and gave Matt Flynn a big FA deal. The idea that they 'built up the roster and then went for the QB' is patently false. They tried over and over and failed, got lucky, and then won the Super Bowl in short order after finding a franchise QB. Sometimes luck is just what it takes. 

 

I would amend this to state that no matter what approach you take, you're still going to need some luck.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

I would amend this to state that no matter what approach you take, you're still going to need some luck.

Sure, even a top 10 QB pick is still only a 50/50 proposition historically. But that's still dramatically higher than a third round or later one.

---

Sure, even a top 10 QB pick is still only a 50/50 proposition historically. But that's still dramatically higher than a third round or later one.

 

That's not what I meant. In order for a team to win a title, luck will always have to be on your side in one way or another.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

My point is the draft is about value. When you get poor value out of your picks like the Jaguars have constantly done you lose consistently. When you get good value out of your picks like Seattle has (Sherman and Wilson are exceptional examples of it) you win consistently.


You can call it BAP, you can call it not reaching, you can call it whatever you want.


Also, I respect how you always keep it so impersonal and eschew insults in favor of content, nyc4jags.

The draft is about securing talent. Just because walmart has great value cheese on sale for 50 cents doesn't make it good.

---

The draft is about securing talent. Just because walmart has great value cheese on sale for 50 cents doesn't make it good.

 

That's about the most ignorant analogy I've ever heard of.

 

Value means selecting a guy where he's graded to be taken, and not before.  It's a lot like you taking Geno at #2 just because you slobbered over his jock, when you could have instead picked him with your second rounder.  Taking him at #2 would have been poor value.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

That's about the most ignorant analogy I've ever heard of.

 

Value means selecting a guy where he's graded to be taken, and not before.  It's a lot like you taking Geno at #2 just because you slobbered over his jock, when you could have instead picked him with your second rounder.  Taking him at #2 would have been poor value.

Dude, you really need to stop using the Geno as your strawman. 99% of QBs with franchise potential traits rise past whatever you think their 'grade' is. Geno didn't because he went nuclear on his draft stock predraft like no other QBs do (actually McCarron is trying to now, but he doesn't have franchise potential so it doesn't matter). Geno refused interviews, he acted like an arrogant entitled diva during the ones he did do, he constantly texted and tweeted during official interviews, etc. Then he threatened to leave the draft after the first day and fired his agent because he wasn't a first rounder.

 

He was a clear first rounder with on the field evaluations (and for the most part played like one during the season), but in the era of political correctness and public relations a guy often described as "Kobe on a football field" in regards to his attitude is going to rub people the wrong way...especially when he hadn't done anything at the NFL level to prove it. 

---

That's about the most ignorant analogy I've ever heard of.

 

Value means selecting a guy where he's graded to be taken, and not before.  It's a lot like you taking Geno at #2 just because you slobbered over his jock, when you could have instead picked him with your second rounder.  Taking him at #2 would have been poor value.

 

You have to be the most pathetic poster on this message board. Having another one of your little [BAD WORD REMOVED] fits? You act like every teams value players the same way. So when you say "value means selecting a guy where he's graded to be taken" what exactly do you mean? Are you saying the players viewed by the Jaguars and the Seahawks have the same grade? Obviously, they do not, because Seattle didn't bother with Bryan Anger or Rod Isaac. Also, Geno was a consensus top 10 pick by hundreds of analysts. You act like I am the only person who wanted him. He was certainly better than your boy Gabbert. 

---

I think Seattle can do well with so many UDFA because they have stars in key positions that make everybody better.


QB Wilson

CB Sherman

SS Kam

FS Thomas

DE Bryant

DE Clemons

MLB Wagner

OLB Wright

---

I can agree, but all of those "stars" you mentioned except Thomas (1st) and Wagner (2nd) were selected in 3rd round or lower. 

 

 

I stand corrected on Lynch, but never did I assert Seattle traded any picks this year for Harvin.


My larger point regarding Seattle remains.

 

I know.

 

 

For the past 3 years, Seattle HAS been accused of reaching on draft day, including their QB who many thought would have gone undrafted.  Bruce Irvin was considered the biggest reach of his draft - with the possible exception of Bryan Anger.

 

Russell Wilson posted this on his twitter a couple of days ago...

 

“@DangeRussWilson: The 2012 @seahawks draft class. They graded us an F. Now we r World Champs!  https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bfv5OryCcAAjHh-.jpg

 

 

Maybe the so called "draftniks" means F as Fantastic. I don't care about draft grades anymore.

 

 

 

The Seahawks did a fantastic job of building their roster, finding great late round/UDFA gems, and getting Avril/Bennett on amazingly cheap FA deals (so cheap that Dwight Freeney called collusion even: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/02...75424.html )

 

However, if they don't find that outlier QB they won't win the Super Bowl. In fact, they tried multiple times and failed before they got super lucky with Wilson. They traded for Whitehurt, signed Tarvaris Jackson, and gave Matt Flynn a big FA deal. The idea that they 'built up the roster and then went for the QB' is patently false. They tried over and over and failed, got lucky, and then won the Super Bowl in short order after finding a franchise QB. Sometimes luck is just what it takes. 

 

You're right. But I believe, if you work hard and try to find luck, you'll finally found it. 31 other teams have two or three chances to "get lucky" with Wilson, but didn't take it. I know not all of the teams need him, but probably 20 or so would gladly take him over their current starter.

---

 

You're right. But I believe, if you work hard and try to find luck, you'll finally found it. 31 other teams have two or three chances to "get lucky" with Wilson, but didn't take it. I know not all of the teams need him, but probably 20 or so would gladly take him over their current starter.

I do agree with the first part, with how many different times they tried they were bound to find a suitable guy at some point I suppose.

 

However, the fact that every team passed on him 2 or 3 times proves that Wilson mostly was luck. If any team (even the Seahawks) thought he was a future franchise QB anywhere near the level he has proven to be, he would have been taken much, much earlier obviously.

---