Monday, 4 January 2010

The history of 6th, 14th and 40th overall

We know the Seahawks will be picking 6th, 14th and 40th overall in the 2010 NFL Draft. The Seahawks famously took Walter Jones with the 6th overall pick in 1997. Let's have a look at who's been taken with those picks over the last five years. To be precise - four cornerbacks, three safety's (two of which are the Bullocks twins), two Pro Bowlers but no skill position players.

6th overall - Andre Smith (OT, Bengals)
14th overall - Malcolm Jenkins (CB, Saints)
40th overall - Ron Brace (DT, Patriots)

Andre Smith started one game as a rookie having endured an injury plagued first year in the NFL. Jenkins has been used at cornerback despite many tipping him to eventually transfer to safety - he has one pick for the year and two forced fumbles. Brace started his first game for New England against Buffalo last week. It's too soon to judge the '09 class, but there have to be concerns about Smith after all the injuries this season.

6th overall - Vernon Gholston (LB, Jets)
14th overall - Chris Williams (OT, Bears)
40th overall - Tracy Porter (CB, Saints)

Gholston has been a complete bust so far and even Rex Ryan's favorable system hasn't helped him to have an impact. Chris Williams took over as Chicago's left tackle this season from Orlando Pace and is very much viewed as the future blind side blocker for Jay Cutler. Porter was put on injured reserve as a rookie but has been a greater feature this season - collecting four picks. A mixed bag, but Williams has a lot of potential to have a very good career.

6th overall - LaRon Landry (S, Redskins)
14th overall - Darrelle Revis (CB, Jets)
40th overall - John Beck (QB, Dolphins)

Landry was a stud at LSU and has been largely succesful in the NFL. He has 250 total tackles, three sacks and three interceptions. Revis has developed into one of the top defensive backs in the league. He's been a revelation this season with six interceptions (14 in his career) and is part of the AFC Pro Bowl roster. Beck was an ill-fated pick by Cam Cameron and was released by the Dolphins in April this year. He's since linked up with Cameron again in Baltimore.

6th overall - Vernon Davis (TE, 49ers)
14th overall - Brodrick Bunkley (DT, Eagles)
40th overall - Daniel Bullocks (S, Detroit)

It's taken a while, but Davis appears to be reaching his potential under Mike Singletary. Named to the NFC Pro Bowl roster this year, he's recorded 965 yards and 13 TD's in 2009. In three years prior to that, he only recorded a total of 1132 yards and 9 TD's. Bunkley is a regular starter for Philly, but only has six sacks in four years. Bullocks only participated in one game this year - a pre-season win over Atlanta.

6th overall - Adam Jones (CB, Titans)
14th overall - Thomas Davis (LB, Carolia)
40th overall - Josh Bullocks (S, Saints)

Jones' (formerly known as 'Pacman') problems are well publicised. His latest 'comeback' was with the Winnipeg Blue Bombers in the CFL - until they came to their senses and cancelled the agreement. Undoubtedly talented, but a real waste of that talent. Davis started only seven games this season following a career year in 2008. Unlike is twin brother, Josh featured in four NFL games this season for Chicago having left New Orleans in the off season.

Further afield
The 2004 draft provided Kellen Winslow Jr (6th overall) and Tommie Harris (14th overall) - Seattle would love another Harris to be waiting in the mid teens this April. Jeremy Shockey went 14th overall in 2002 and Richard Seymour was the 6th overall selection in 2001. The Rams took Grant Wistrom and Torry Holt with the 6th overall picks in 1998 and 1999. Tim Ruskell and co. took Trent Dilfer 6th overall in 1994 for Tampa Bay.

Overall the Seahawks have picked 6th overall twice (Walter Jones '97, Jeff Bryant '82). There's only been one pick 14th overall previously when Seattle took Steve August in 1977.


Anonymous said...

Hey Rob,

I must say, I was personally very disappointed the Redskins could not hold off the Chargers' back-ups on Sunday. A Washington win I believe would have put us ahead of them (and giving us a better shot at Bradford, whom the Redskins are rumored to be very interested in, but it's also far too early to tell). Also, I wanted to ask about your review of Laron Landry. Every time I've seen him play, he seems very susceptible to big plays and double-moves. QB's look him off far too often. Though, I haven't seen him enough to make a great assessment, and I could just be being picky.

I was curious to hear who you think we should take with our two first round picks? Personally, I'd be fine with an OT and Mike Iupati (if he's there). I love Bradford (as I've mentioned many times), but I don't see him making it to 6 (though if he does, I pray they take him). I'm equally terrified of seeing Jimmy Clause holding a Seahawks jersey next to Roger Goodell come late April this year. I'd be okay with C.J. Spiller, one of the numerous talented D-lineman, or Joe Haden with either pick as well. Hope you had a good New Years.

Anonymous said...

PS - I have a google account now, I was previously posting as Chris (Seattle).

Anonymous said...

if the seahawks draft bradford they might as well hire stoops and leach to come coach the team, cuz thats the offense he runs.

Patrick said...

You know... I really have no idea what makes sense at pick #6.

Personally, I'm all for Sam Bradford. I think it would be very wise to grab a QB this year. I've heard complaints about how Bradford would do terrible behind our current O-line but I truly believe grabbing him now would be the best because he wouldn't have to start. Bradford reminds me a lot of Aaron Rodgers because his accuracy is quite amazing and really, look at what sitting did for Aaron Rodgers (and Philip Rivers for that matter). While Bradford is by far my #1 choice, I'm not sure he'll make it past the Redskins at #5 (Thanks a lot San Diego).

So, if Bradford is gone it seems like the next logical choice would be LT. The thing is, I'm not sure there's any LT that justifies a spot that high. I'm not sold on Russell Okung or Anthony Davis, and although I like Bruce Campbell I'm just not sure if #6 is the best spot for him given his injury issues in the past. Look at Andre Smith. Also, I'm a big fan of Jason Fox who very well could be available with pick #40.

So, if not LT maybe C.J. Spiller? I really don't think that we would select Spiller with #6 pick. I would not be upset with that selection, but I'm just not sure it makes sense. It you look at the teams picking between 6-14 I really think there's a good shot Spiller is still available at 14, and that would be a perfect position. I love Jahvid Best, but even I'll admit unless we trade back #14 is a bit too high.

Now, We could consider Dez Bryant. #6 is certainly not too high for the top WR but I mean really, if we passed on Crabtree last year I doubt we grab Bryant when this year we have much bigger needs than another reciever. I agree we need an offensive playmaker and Dez Bryant may fit that well, but I don't see how we could justify grabbing a WR when our RB core is much worse (For the record I love Forsett but really think he should be our #2 back and Julius Jones should be released)

So, if not an offensive position let's look at defense. I want to point out that I am really against grabbing a defensive playmaker. There are several reasons why I feel this way:

1. We have drafted defense in the first round for several years in a row now. During that 3 week span of ridiculous loses, our offense put up 24 points. It's absolutely ridiculous. The two players most people consider stars and the future of our offense are John Carlson and Max Unger. Are we just going to use every first round pick on a defensive player until one by one our positions are filled?

2. We selected Aaron Curry 4th overall last year. I am a big Aaron Curry fan and wear his jersey with pride. I think he showed enough flashes this year to show he is an amazing player (I just blame our coaches on him not breaking out). With that said, we picked the best defensive player in the draft last year, and it didn't do a thing for our team. Not a thing! One Defensive star will not completely turn our team around. Look at Brian Orakpo, another player I am very fond of. He has so far been a stud for the Washington Redskins. What was their record? 4-12.

3. Who would we pick? I think it's easy to assume Suh won't make it past the Lions. I definitely think the Buccaneers will grab Gerald McCoy, Eric Berry, or perhaps Derrick Morgan. If the Rams go with Suh, and Lions go with McCoy, there's a good chance none of these players will be available. What happens if the Draft happens just like Rob predicts and Suh, McCoy, and Morgan are gone? Do we reach considerably for Berry? Sure he is supposedly good, but a Safety? I really think with our current coaches he would be like Curry and wasted potential. The only real possibility seems like Joe Haden, and I could see that. I suppose the only question is whether or not #6 is too early for him?

So... as you can see it should be very, very interesting to see what happens with that #6 pick!

Rob Staton said...

Chris - happy new year, hope you had a good one. With regard to the Seahawks picks, there are numerous options but not necessarily the ones most fans will be hoping for. I'd find it hard to justify taking an offensive lineman 6th overall. Anthony Davis has Ryan Clady type potential but doesn't do enough at the second level. There's also concerns about his commitment - he entered camp at Rutgers over weight and was forced to work with the second team. I need to see more of Bruce Campbell - his injury issues concern me although reports suggest he has ideal size and athleticism for the position. Russell Okung is over rated. Bryan Bulaga is strictly a RT as is Trent Williams, whilst Charles Brown has huge potential but he's playing at 290lbs which is too small. I think consensus among Seahawks fans is to draft a tackle - but I'm not sure who you take at 6 on the offensive line.

Bradford I'm indifferent about. His accuracy interests me a lot, but he's coming from a spread offense and you cannot ignore those shoulder injuries. They weren't big hits that led to the problem. Mechanics weren't great last year (bit side arm, doesn't put body into throws) but on the small amount of evidence we had this year there was slight improvement. I'd work him out, do the homework. He's interesting - he warrants consideration. However - can you commit big money to him knowing the issues? That's the question everyone will ask in the top 10 looking for a QB.

I expect the top three DL's to be gone (Suh, McCoy, Morgan). If any of that trio fall - you race to the podium. Morgan fills a major hole as a relentless pass rush specialist off the edge. Realistically, they're not there - one of the OT's is probably gone and possibly Bradford to Washington. In that scenario, you're maybe looking at Joe Haden, Dez Bryant, CJ Spiller... possibly one of the OT's (Davis and Campbell maybe). Many will say Eric Berry - I'm not a fan of taking him in the top ten. I think his best position could be corner, I need convincing he warrants a top pick either way. Ryan Mallett is the X-Factor, he could be a top ten pick. If you're looking to invest in that position with a guy who has all the tools to be very good, Mallett may be your man. I'd seriously consider it.

Anonymous said...

Ya...I agree on the OT points you made. It seems like their are issues with all of them (though that seems to be the case with any high draft pick every year). Mallett worries me for the same reasons he worries you: accuracy. You have to be accurate and decisive in the NFL (the main reason I love Bradford, spread offense or not). I would also argue Bradford really only had one shoulder injury this year, and the second one was simply re-aggravating the previous one (which could be due to him coming back too soon). We will learn a lot about him before april as far as his ability to maintain good footwork while backing out under center. I love CJ Spiller, but 6 just seems high (but, if he becomes a Chris Johnson type playmaker, it's completely worth it). I like Berry a little more than you, but I agree on his tackling. I think that is something an NFL coach could teach him though. I'm sure we'll discuss it all more leading up to April. I'm looking forward to the Senior Bowl practices coming up. Talk with you more soon.

- Chris (Seattle)

Savage said...

At this point, and it is early with the Senior Bowl and combine we will see changes, the Hawks draft board should look like this:


I really think they've got to shoot for Morgan. If for some reason STL takes a QB, then he will fall baring another team trading up. DET would take Suh, KC runs a 3-4 and is not a fit for Morgan or McCoy, and TB would take McCoy. Then you'd think WSH would take Bradford/Clausen, plus they took Orakpo last year.

If Morgan is determined to be the guy. Then I would try to work out a deal with TB. I think they are a big sleeper for Dez Bryant and would perfer to take him at 6. They have no WR's and need to get Freeman a top target. If you could do a swap of firsts (4 for 6), plus kick in a 5th and a future 3rd or 4th, that may get it done.

If not, just sit on the 6th and take Haden. His strength is playing shut down man coverage, and could possibly close half of the field. Thans is a huge advantage to have. I also wouldn't be against trading back with a team in the 10-12 range to get a 3rd rounder back.

The Hawks really need help on offense, but unfortunately the top talent in this draft is on defense. I definately advocate taking the best talent and not reaching for a need. Really the Hawks have needs everywhere except maybe LB, so they really should just take the highest guy on their board.


Anonymous said...

I would not take a safety or RB in the top ten if I had any other options. The cost is too high and a RB will only last 5 years or so on average. A linemen is a much better investment on average. I think that positional value is important as is potential upside. Ruskell had a habit of picking super safe players with low floors and celings. I think we need to think "best upside" with our first three picks as we will not be turning this around anytime soon.

That said I would love Ryan Mallet as a QB (if avail) or Davis as OT. I even would go for a shot at Dunlap with the second pick if he is available. Lets make sure our foundation has good strong pieces then we can find a lesser CB or RB later in the draft.

Mike Kelly

Anonymous said...

Mike Kelly...

Completely agree with you. We need to start thinking about how good a player can potentially be, not how safe he is.

I'm really intrigued with guys like Bruce Campbell and Mike Iupati because they have athleticism and size you cannot teach. I'm not saying to turn into Al Davis but there needs to be a point where we make the decision that our staff is good enough to coach up guys who are blessed with rare gifts.

Let's be smart with these picks, but let's not play the safe game because it clearly has not worked. Let's create an identity and stick to our guns in that regard when it comes to drafting players that fit that system.

I'm all for collecting the "best talent available," but I want there to be a clear plan in place. I really don't think Ruskell ever had a clear vision of what he wanted this team to be. Let's hope the next GM has a plan and sticks to it.

Anonymous said...

I cannot believe all the mallet 1st rd love on this blog. The guy has been horrible this year. He has the tools, but not the head. I would take tebow over mallet because tebow has the inside, where is mallet has ryan leaf inside.

Rob Staton said...

Anonymous - I've broken down tape of Mallett four times. I may be touting him as being an outsider to go quite early - but I've also acknowledged his obvious flaws fairly often.

However, the NFL is a quarterbacks league. There's no runaway candidates to go in the top ten and QB's will go that early. Mallett has the size, tools, arm strength that teams look for. Clausen has poor mechanics, a low slingy release and he throws almost exclusively outside slants. Bradford has durability concerns and comes from a spread offense, he also has mechanical issues although not to the extent Clausen does. You mention Tebow - you'd have to systematically break down his mechanics unless you plan to use a very heavy version of the spread/wildcast. Mallett at least could start under center in a pro style offense without too many adjustments.

NFL teams wanting a quarterback will seriously consider Mallett for those reasons and he could go early because of it. I'm not saying it's right, I'm also not going to call him Ryan Leaf - Mallett has potential. In the Liberty Bowl I saw over thrown passes but I also saw a much better short distance accuracy and a lot of dropped catchable passes. With a good coordinator, I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility that he can have a Joe Flacco type impact on the league. It's usually about the situation you fall into - that plays a large part.

Savage said...


They way you come in here and bash every QB suggested, I am going to presume you are the same person. First Bradford, now Mallet.

My question to you would be where do you think the Hawks should go for a QB? Tebow is a joke if that is who you are suggesting. Everything you've killed Bradford for, you can double for Tebow. Spread offense, can't make reads, questionable arm strength, alawys out of the shotgun. He doesn't have the shoulder issue, but has had a bad concussion. To me the concussion is as worrisome as the shoulder these days. Then you can add a slow release, horrible footwork and bad accuracy. All things Bradford does extremely well. He'll take 3+ years and excellent coaching that the Hawks don't have now.

To say Mallet has been horrible this year is not very fair. He has had some accuracy issues, but it was against the top competition and did not receive much help from his WR's in those games. He is no way worth the 6th pick, but late first or early 2nd you would have to atleast consider him. You can't just write guys off like that. Thats part of what has gotten the Hawks into this mess. And questioning whether Mallet has it inside is a joke. Do you know that guy? Has he ever been in trouble or known as a jerk? I haven't seen anything that says that. If you have some evidence, I'd be happy to see it.

Hasselbeck cannot be counted on for the future, so something needs to be done QB wise. You cannot ignore the most important posistion in football. Maybe Bradford or Mallet turn out not to be the guy, but just writting them off like you have is no smart.

Anonymous said...

It may be a good contest to have your Blog fans guess the top ten draft picks and the top 3 Sehawk draft picks at some point. Winner can get special mention ont he Blog. Seems like we have a lot of "experts" with opinions (me included. :) I say put our money where our moth is and let history decide who knows what they are talking about.

As far as the draft, The Seahawks have needs in so many places we can go anywhere with our picks but I for one consider getting a CB or LB or Safety in the top ten when you have a terrible O and D line analogous to buying a fancy deck for your house when you foundation is cracked. To do anything with a QB or RB, we have to protect them and be able to block for them. I am not saying we should not draft a QB but we have to repair our line as the priority.

Mike Kelly

Rob Staton said...

Mike - it's not a bad idea. Might create an open article inviting people to post their projections and we'll maybe do it again before the draft - then have a look at what everyone noted down after April's event. Could be a bit of fun.

Anonymous said...


here are my thoughts on the qb's

mallet- leaf had all the looks of a qb, but not the mentallity (that is what i see of mallet).

bradford- too scrawny, small frame. won't be able to hold-up (especailly with our line)

tebow- long delivery yes. not prototypical offense yes. but the guy is a winner and works hard and pushes people around him to work hard

i would take clausen if we had to take a qb in 1st rd. prototype size. no injury history. reads defense pretty well. prototype offense. not strongest arm, but above average. can throw the deep ball.

i would not take mallet, bradford. i would take a chance on tebow in 2nd or 3rd. if pushed i would take clausen with #14

Mike Kelly said...

I feel just the opposite:

Tebow: Way too long to get the ball out of his hands. World class man with a great future in politics but would get killed in the NFL because just not good enough in a game where inches seperates great from bust.

Clausen: No real problems with him but do not like Notre Dame QBs (bad Memories of Rick Mirer.) Could be very good if can work on delivery.

Bradford: Too small I agree but super accurate. Men typically put on weight in their early to mid twenties. Get him on a weight program and let him learn the game for a year. Great accuracy will be a huge factor in pros.

Mallet: Bad decision making because has such a great arm. Same problems as many very good QBs (Farve, Hass, etc..) Get him with a good QB coach and get some WR that will fight for the ball and let him sling it.

I am not a scout or in any way qualified to make a professional read but if I make a mistake, I would rather make it on a guy with a golden arm.

Mike Kelly

Anonymous said...

From Texashawk,

Can you verify for me? One of my black belts just told me that Tebow has stated that he will spend the next 2 years on a mission religious retreat whether he is drafted or not. this could change things for the lookout of the draft.

Rob Staton said...

Texashawk - I've not seen anything to verify that. There's nothing on any of the national news websites. I'll keep an eye out for anything on this.

Anonymous said...

It cannot be stressed enough how the shotgun spread is horrible preperation for the nfl. they dont make pre snap reads and they look very accurate because they make high percentage throws. mccoy and bradfraud will fail, just like all the others. i just hope its not in seattle

Rob Staton said...

Article on the 'spread offense' from August '09:

Mike Kelly said...

The past does not equal the future. We need to be ahead of the next curve not twenty years behind it. I am not a fan of the spread offense but I guarantee it will be part of the NFL future if only because so many college QBs are good at it.

Twenty years ago Gregg Knapps run philosophy was a corner stone of how teams were built. But after the WCO and pass happy QBs of the last 10 years or so, a running back is often below the WR on the pecking order.

Mike Kelly

Anonymous said...

I have to disagree. I think elements of the spread are already in the NFL but I doubt it ever becomes a mainstay. Defenses are too fast, strong, disciplined, and well coached.

Monte Kiffin seemed to handle spread offenses pretty well at Tennessee with college players in his first year. Combine his expertise with NFL talent and I highly doubt teams could survive solely on the spread.

The main problem with the spread is that it makes teams one dimensional and hugely affects how you can utilize the run game. One dimensional can only get you so far in the NFL. It's all about balance and the spread greatly limits what you can do.

Onto a different topic, I'm really impressed with CB Kyle Wilson of Boise State. He's kind of a short guy but he's very physical and plays very fast. Not that I'm dying to have him on the Hawks, but it's nice to think he might actually be under consideration now that TR is gone.

Anonymous said...

Adding onto the poster above, gimmicky offenses can exploit lesser talent in college. We can't forget that for NFL players, football is how they make money. It's a job. There's more time, effort, and resources involved when preparing for the season and teams you will be facing.

A college kid has limited hours to practice and go over film, all the while balancing school work. Coaches abide by stricter rules in college and have to balance recruiting on top of coaching. Less time = less preparation.

Rob Staton said...

I've got the Boise State vs TCU game on record. I'll watch it through and do a full scout tomorrow - I'll watch Kyle Wilson and Jerry Hughes predominantly I imagine.

Anonymous said...

Mike Kelly, if by "spread" you mean Florida or Oregon style spread option, you will not see it in the nfl beyond a few trick plays. basically like miami with their wildcat. and how did they do? pat white really tore it up didn't he? if you mean shotgun spread, that is just another version of the run and shoot, its not ahead of any curve, its a rehash of old ideas. and both brady and warner have a strong background in qb fundamentals that bradfraud hasn't learned because stoops and leach run dumbed down systems that retard qb development. thats why real qbs will go to schools like usc, bc, uw, byu and tenn. i do not want the seahawks to be some laboratory for failed offensive experiments.

Anonymous said...

Awesome ideas
since reading your post I think it may be the same about related topics in in
[url=]avg free[/url]

Anonymous said...

At last, I found this post once again. You have few [url=]useful tips[/url] for my school project. Now, I won't forget to bookmark it. :)

Anonymous said...

Hey! Best topic, but will this really work?

hcg said...

Very interesting article. I Just though that you really know your topic very well to write this. Many of the benefits we derive from this topic. Thank you for sharing.