Sunday, 3 January 2010

Seahawks will pick 6th and 14th

With defeat to the Tennessee Titans today, Seattle own the 6th overall pick in the 2010 draft. But for a late San Diego touchdown against Washington, they would've been selecting 5th overall. The second first rounder is more complicated, but thanks to Louis for helping with the strength of schedule calculations - we believe Seattle will be picking 14th or 15th overall depending on whether the New York Jets win or lose against Cincinnati. A win for Sanchez and co. will give the Seahawks the 14th overall pick. Seattle also owns the 4oth overall pick (8th pick in round two).

Known draft order:

1. St. Louis (1-15)
2. Detroit (2-14)
3. Tampa Bay (3-13)
4. Washington (4-12)
5. Kansas City (4-12)
6. Seattle (5-11)
7. Cleveland (5-11)
8. Oakland (5-11)
9. Buffalo (6-10)
10. Jacksonville (7-9)
(Jags takes 10th outright if Bengals win, coin flip otherwise)
11. Denver via Chicago (7-9) (subject to coin flip)
12. Miami (7-9)
13. San Francisco (8-8)
14. Seattle via Denver (8-8)
(15th if Bengals win)
15. New York Giants (8-8) (coin flip with Tennessee for 16th if Bengals win)
16. SF via Carolina (8-8) (coin flip with Tennessee for 17th if Bengals win)
17. Tennessee (8-8) (possible two-tiered coin-flip with Giants and Carolina if Bengals win)
18. Pittsburgh (9-7) (19th if Bengals win)
19. Atlanta (9-7) (subject to coin flip) (20th if Bengals win)
20. Houston (9-7) (subject to coin flip) (21st and in playoffs if Bengals win)


Anonymous said...

I think the 2nd pick in the 14th, assuming the Jets win.

Jayce said...

That's good for us. Hopefully the FO see potential in Iupati and get him.

GJ Seahawks for making CJ work for his yards. Maybe we can pick up a CJ of our own.

Rob Staton said...

I don't think Denver can drop as low as 14th based on other teams being at 7-9 and Denver's strength of schedule. I'm pretty sure the lowest they can fall is 17th overall, but I will confirm asap.

Louis said...

Rob - There are 5 8-8 teams, the lowest will be picking 13th and the highest will be picking 17th.

So the HIGHEST the Broncos can pick is 17th. Best case for us would be 13th, but yes with their schedule im guessing they will be picking 16th or 17th

Rob Staton said...

I'm trying to work it out now. I think my initial projection was wrong because obviously Atlanta and Houston have a better record than Denver. It could be... could be... 13-15 range.

Louis said...

im calculating strenght of schedule right now for all 5 teams

Jayce said...

^That sounds really appealing for us. I wonder how things will turn out in the draft.

Chavac said...

Yah I looked it up earlier and it looked like 17th(assuming the jets win). The broncos have a pretty tough SOS.

Louis said...

Just calculated:

Broncos SOS: .527
if Baltimore wins today, it'll be .531, but if they lose its .527

more teams coming up...

Jayce said...

Rob, Redskins are 4-12 btw

Louis said...

Titans SOS: .535
but if Bengals win, then it'll be.539

Sorry on the post about Broncos i meant if BENGALS win today then it'll be .531, but no matter what the broncos will be picking BEFORE THE TITANS!


Anonymous said...

The Skins finished 4-12.

j.perezfilms said...

the raiders are not 6-10.

Louis said...

Giants SOS: .500

So Broncos will be picking AFTER the Giants, so broncos will be picking between 14th and 16th

Anonymous said...

Raiders finished 5-11.

Rob Staton said...

I copied and pasted the teams records from a forum. I suppose that's what you get for trying to save time... lol.

Louis said...


So Broncos will be picking either 15th or 16th

Louis said...

But if Jets win then it will be .539, so either way they will be picking AFTER the broncos



Rob Staton said...

Louis - thanks for providing the strength of schedule numbers. I've put a note of thanks in the article. Really appreciated.

Louis said...

However, if Jets lose then their SOS is .516 so...

If Jets WIN.

Seahawks pick 6th and 15th.

If Jets LOSE

Seahawks pick 6th and 16th.

PS: geez that was a lot of math lol

Louis said...

Being in that division really hurt the Broncos' SOS since they had to play Oakland(5-11) twice and KC (5-11) twice.

They also had to face Washington (4-12) and Cleveland (5-11), so even though at first look their schedule looks tough with teams like SD x2, Cin, Dallas, NE, Bal, Pitt, Philli, and the Colts, those bad teams really evened it out

Anonymous said...

6 morgan
15 okung
40 iupati/asomagah

we get best pass rusher, solid ot and solid og. all three should start next year. i wish we could trade back with one or both of our 1st rd picks and accumulate later picks and another 1st rd next year

E in F

Rob Staton said...

I'll be surprised if Iupati makes it out of round one. His worst case scenario (based only on the competition faced with Idaho) is that he'll fall into the late first round.

Dan said...


Does this change in draft order (assume 6/14) really change how the Seahawks look at the first round from your previous mock?

Is it realistic to think of one of these two scenarios:
6: Morgan
14: Iupati or Spiller


trade 6 and 38 for #2 and get Suh + (3rd or 4th (whatever makes the points reasonable)
14: Iupati or Spiller

Rob Staton said...

Hey Dan,

I think option two is unrealistic but option one is quite possible. I have Morgan going to Tampa Bay right now, but if he gets past that pick I think there's a very good chance he falls to #6. He would be a wise choice if available and an instant upgrade to the defensive line.

Spiller could go top ten. I have him in that bracket in terms of ability. But he could easily still be around in the mid teens. Iupati almost certainly will be.

Louis said...

I think whoever is our GM will have an extremely tough decision at #6.

Suh, McCoy and Morgan will all go in the top 5, so those will be out of reach.

After that, there really isnt the clear choice. #6 is way too early for a QB in this draft...same thing with OT in my opinion. I think no OT should go in the top 10 this year...or top 9 at least.

Dez Bryant most likely will not be picked by us because we have MANY more needs than WR.

The only picks that really make sense would be CB in Joe Haden or RB in Spiller, but i think picking them at #6 would be somewhat a stretch.

The best case scenario would be to trade the #6 and get a couple good picks for it because we have a lot of positions of need, but Im not sure if we could get 2 1st rounders for it.

I would be extremely happy with:
#6 = Spiller/Haden
#15 = Best OLinemen available

Anonymous said...

Put the calculators away. Hawks pick #7 and #14 end of story. It doesn't make any difference what happens in the Bengals/Jets game. I think it's hilarious how much misinformation there is about this on the internet. Spend 45 seconds with Google and this could all have been figured out.

Louis said...

At the end of the Seahawks game, there was no article on the internet about it. It makes sense that there is now though since it's been a few hours after the game.

Not sure why Denver picks before NYG though...must be some weird tiebreaker rule

Savage said...

We these picks, I am hoping to see a Morgan, Spiller, Fox draft for the first 2 rounds.

I have doubts Morgan makes it to 6, but if somehow McCoy falls to TB, its possible. It would only take STL taking a QB or DET taking an OL. Another wild card is TB taking Bryant. With Antonio Bryant likely out, they'll need a WR bad.

As for Spiller, I think thats the perfect range to take him. If he's gone, then Iupati is a great fall back.

In the 2nd, Fox is a good value and is not that much different than the OT's going in the 1st.

Anonymous said...


We pick 6, based on our strength of opponents is lower than cle and oak. 6 & 14

Anonymous said...

"Put the calculators away. Hawks pick #7 and #14 end of story. It doesn't make any difference what happens in the Bengals/Jets game. I think it's hilarious how much misinformation there is about this on the internet. Spend 45 seconds with Google and this could all have been figured out."

I think it's hilarious when somebody attempts to insult people and then looks like a total douchebag cause he's dead wrong. Seahawks pick #6

Anonymous said...

This scenerio would have never happened with Ruskell running the show, and its not that I want thugs on the team, but what about using Forsett as our outside guy, and pick up Oregon's LaGarret Blunt (sp) in the later rounds. He was on the verge of having a break out year before he made a stupid mistake, but maybe we get lucky by finding a diamond in the rough with a pounder running it up the gut without having to use a high pick on a running back. Just a thought, but not really sure where he is projected to go.

Charles said...
Lists the draft order currently and is updated after each week... they have something a little different...

# Team / W-L / Opp W-L %

1 St. Louis / 1-15 / .520
2 Detroit / 2-14 / .523
3 Tampa Bay / 3-13 / .555
4 Washington / 4-12 / .492
5 Kansas City / 4-12 / .516
6 Seattle / 5-11 / .477
7 Cleveland / 5-11 / .512
8 Oakland / 5-11 / .527
9 Buffalo / 6-10 / .516
10F Jacksonville / 7-9 / .496
10F Denver (from Chicago) / 7-9
/ .496
12 Miami / 7-9 / .559
13 San Francisco / 8-8 / .477
14 Seattle (from Denver)
/ 8-8 / .527
15 New York Giants / 8-8 / .535
16F Tennessee / 8-8 / .539
16F San Francisco (from Carolina) / 8-8 / .539
18 Pittsburgh / 9-7 / .488
19F Atlanta / 9-7 / .504
20F Houston / 9-7 / .504
21P New York Jets / 9-7 / .516
22P Baltimore / 9-7 / .523
23P Arizona / 10-6 / .445
24P Cincinnati / 10-6 / .492
25P New England / 10-6 / .516
26P Green Bay / 11-5 / .441
27P Philadelphia / 11-5 / .484
28P Dallas / 11-5 / .488
29P Minnesota / 12-4 / .441
30P San Diego / 13-3 / .453
31P New Orleans / 13-3 / .426
32P Indianapolis / 14-2 / .473

Charles said...

Hey Rob,

Not sure if you read Mike Sando's blog on espn regularly or not, but he was saying something about a trade possibly with Broncos making alot of sense and wondered if that would be much of an option now that our pick from Denver ended up being 14th. Supposedly it'd be Branch and Denvers pick back for Marshall and some other pick(s). Does the fact that its 14 make it worth alot more and therefore not worth it? Are there any better options than getting a player like Marshall and losing Branch? and what do you think about the possiblity of a trade like this?

D said...

Thank godness this painful season is over and now I can focus on the draft without the distraction of yet another missed tackle or block.
Mayor props Rob for this great site....

This team is bad and need help in every possible way. While it would be good to focus on protecting and getting to the QB I think the right players will be there but not at the positions that have the highest need.

How do you pass on Haden or Bradford if they are there at #6?

The only player I think is worth taking over them if they are there at 6 (I assume the 2 DTs are gone)is Morgan.

I'm thinking this will happen:

6.-Bradford (this is a QB league and Hass is not coming up with the right answers).
14.-Bulaga, a slight reach but he should be a solid OT. Anthony Davis might end up here?
40.-Brian Price DT or Greg Romeus DE. We should be so lucky if they are still around.

That is not the dream scenario but maybe a realistic one?

Rob Staton said...

Anonymous - Blount's stock is a tough one to call. He's clearly talented and although he made a mistake, I thought the whole issue in Boise was blown a little out of proportion. As an example, BJ Raji was suspended for a game for striking an opponent - he goes in the top ten. Blount misses most of the season. If he works out and interviews well, he could go in the 4-5th round range. I think more realistically he'll be a late round pick, but one with value.

Charles - I would be stunned if Seattle traded that 14th overall pick for Brandon Marshall. If the Seahawks are that desperate for a receiver, they should take Dez Bryant in the top ten or pick up a Damian William/Brandon LaFell/Arrelious Benn later. The Seahawks need an upgrade at the skill positions without doubt - this team lacks playmakers. But trading a pick as high as that for a known trouble causer would be a strange move.

D - I think you've been realistc there. A lot of people will want the Seahawks to spend that 6th overall pick on an offensive tackle, but I'm not sure there's one that warrants going that high. At 7th overall I was looking at guys like Haden and Spiller in the mock draft, essentially moving up one place just puts people like Dez Bryant in contention too. It's going to be a difficult one to project over the next few weeks - I've felt for some time that Seattle would be better picking later in the top ten because the difference at pick 6 and pick 10 is marginal but much more expensive.

If reports are to be believed, Washington are showing a lot of interest in Sam Bradford. They pick before Seattle. I'll be surprised if they don't take a quarterback. He could fall to #6 though if someone like Ryan Mallett flies up the board (not unlikely).

Bryan Bulaga will go in that 10-20 range I think, but he's better suited at right tackle. The Seahawks should expect a Jake Long type ceiling in that he's always likely to have a better career on the right. I'll be surprised if Brian Price drops into round two and he's a bit too similar to Brandon Mebane for me (they'd essentially rotate), although I think that's the area Greg Romeus could go.

D said...

Great point on Price Rob. I was more looking for a feasible DT at that pick but Price is actually a lot like Mebane. I was thinking Price might fall due to the run on NTs and rush-OLBs early. A lot of 3-4 teams will have to adress their needs early.

Bulaga might be more of a RT but I have a feeling that over the next months he will be talked more and he will sneak into the LT-sights of some teams.

If Washington does go after Bradford (makes a ton of sense) then I think Haden will be a great pick for the Hawks. I would agree that a better pass D might be achived by a great 4-3 DE but there aren't that many around this draft I reckon. Everson Griffens stock seems to be declning and I have no clue about Greg Hardy. After them we are pretty much in the talent pool where Romeus is.

CiaranH said...

If we move to a 3-4, which I think we should, a lot of the DL places are already in place. Mebane handles double teams brilliant and could slide to NT, and the likes of Lo-Jack and Redding have the build to play 3-4 ends. That frees us up to play Hawthorne and Lofa together, and use Curry, Hill and Tapp more aggresively. My ideal 1st round would be Bradford/Spiller, we need to look to the future offensively

Anonymous said...

Stl (Suh)
Det (McCoy)
TB (Morgan)
Wash (Bradford)
KC (McClain)
Sea (Berry)

14 Williams/Campbell/Brown (OT)
40 Iupati/Asomagah/Johnson (OG)

E in F

Rob Staton said...

McClain is a strong possibility for Kansas City. He's a perfect 3-4 linebacker and if they feel that is their priority, he could go that early. Personally, I would stay way from Eric Berry that early if I was the Seahawks. We know they had scouts at Tennessee's game with VT as reported by Chris Steuber. This team has too many big needs in terms of creating a spine for the future to draft a safety who has been hyped tremendously - but has serious faults that personally make it too much of a stretch to take him that early. The safety position hasn't been a major point of concern for Seattle this year - Berry would be a luxury the Seahawks can ill afford. I'll be surprised if he goes that early regardless.

Anonymous said...

The Broncos do own the Bears pick.

Anonymous said...


Whats the difference between Bulaga and Robert Gallery. To me, they seem like the same kind of player and Bulaga fits better as a guard ala Leonard Davis and Robert Gallery.

Rob Staton said...

Anonymous - I would tend to agree that Bulaga will face the same problems starting at left tackle. In college, he's been able to over power a lot of people. That's his main strength. I like that about him, because in some games he's been dominant - Russell Okung is never 'dominant'. However, when Bulaga came up against a good speed rusher, he struggled. That's the main reason why people project him to be a right tackle at the next level - you don't want him blocking a QB's blind side against Peppers or Ware, but he'll do a good job in the run game and blocking in front against better match ups.

Swamp_fox said...

John Morgan at Field Gulls advocated in Saturdays podcast that the 'Hawks trade up for Gerald McCoy as part of a switch to 3-4 D, then take another long term cornerstone like Berry, or homerun hitter like Spiller with 2nd first rounder. Interesting idea - no idea what we'd have to give up to go from 6 to 2 (love to hear your educated guess on that price).

I don't like Bradford's frame and injury history with that 6 pick. Mallett with 15 or 40 (?) would be intriguing though.

Rob Staton said...

I'm not sure why you'd draft McCoy to switch to a 3-4... for me he's the protoype 4-3 three technique defensive tackle. Ndamukong Suh can probably play the three and also 3-4 DE, but McCoy? I can't see it myself.

To trade up to number two overall would depend largely on the team you're trading with. They would probably expect both first round picks. Seattle doesn't have the best bargaining power in terms of moving up because they own two first rounders - any seller worth their salt will ask for them both to move down.

Bradford's injury problems will scare some, others will fall in love with his accuracy. Ryan Mallett is the X-factor here. He could be a top ten pick, he could be the first quarterback off the board.

Anonymous said...

Rob, great discussion as usual, but I'm disconcerted about your comment on Okung "never" being dominant. Did you see their bowl game? I only watched a portion of it, but saw 2 pancake blocks in a row (one DE and one OLB that he reached 5 yards for) and after the pancake of the DE he took a punch to the ribs without even flinching for an additional 15 yards. I saw total dominance, man among boys, professional demeanor, etc... Small sample size, but I was impressed. I think Bruce Campbell is as good or better at pass pro and clearly better at run blocking, and have him as the OT with the greatest upside, but Okung looks very solid to me. Nobody can argue the physical tools are there.

Also, with 3-4 DE's (elephant) having greater value, I think it is possible that Morgan could drop to 14. He is the same size as Lawrence Jackson (6-4, 270), ideal for 4-3 but undersized a bit for 3-4. It wouldn't surprise me if elephant DE's Dunlap, Heyward and even Williams (Nose Tackle) are taken ahead of Morgan.

My dream first 3 picks would be Campbell/Morgan/Cox (CB). While I would love Spiller, Cox is a big CB with tremendous return skills in his own right. He could contribute on Special Teams immediately, and be an upgrade to Jennings. If Javid Best is around at 40, he would be a good choice also. In mid rounds, I like Boo Robinson in part because he has been compared to Mebane, and Myron Rolle as developmental SS.

I do think the Redskins take Bradford, but Clausen could fall to late 1st round to a team like Minnesota. For a hail mary, I have Indy taking Colt McCoy as the future #2 at the bottom of the 1st round. Painter was terrible in relief of Manning.

Rob Staton said...

Hi annonymous - with regard to Okung, when I talk about being dominant I really mean consistent. For me, being a 'dominant' LT means you're not liable to get beaten, you dominate your opponent for the whole game. Okung has flashes where he blocks very well, finishes his blocks and drives people forward. But the bowl game showed up the big issue I have with Okung. He was flat out beaten twice in the fourth quarter, both times showing passive effort and on one occassion the consequence was the QB Zach Robinson being drilled into the ground. He got up holding his ribs and spine and was visibly hurting. Both rushers gave up considerable size disadvantages to Okung and on both occassions should've been dealt with via a simple punch or shadow. He let them waltz past with relative ease. How will he cope against NFL rushers?

Okung worries me at the next level, he'll always have that about him. Last year he would've been a late first round pick because he has shown an ability to do things well, but it's consistency and full effort throughout that's missing. I think he benefits amongst pundits and mocks because it's a weak tackle class. From a talent point, I grade him in the 20-35 range.

hcg said...

This blog is an exact representation of skills. I appreciate the blogger for posting the most excellent thought. This topic posted by you is trustworthy. I like you recommendation.Your recommendation is of well use to people. A great article post, this is something very interesting. A great concept that reflects the excellent thoughts of the writer.