Wednesday, 20 January 2010

Wednesday mocks

I'll be updating my own mock draft tomorrow, but for now here's a collection to have a look at:

Mel Kiper publishes his first mock draft of 2010. He has the Seahawks taking Derrick Morgan (DE, Georgia Tech) 6th overall and C.J. Spiller (RB, Clemson) 14th overall.

Rob Rang also has the Seahawks taking Derrick Morgan (DE, Georgia Tech) and C.J. Spiller (RB, Clemson). Both are logical picks for the Seahawks in that Pete Carroll has already spoken of the need to find a greater edge rush, whilst the team lacks a playmaker like Spiller on offense. I will be stunned however, if Jonathan Dwyer (RB, Georgia Tech) is anywhere near the first round of the 2010 draft as projected here.

Walter Cherepinsky thinks Seattle goes defense with both first round picks, selecting Eric Berry (S, Tennessee) and Derrick Morgan (DE, Georgia Tech). With the top two quarterbacks off the board and C.J. Spiller going at #13 to the 49ers, the Seahawks might be faced with the possibility of having to ignore the offense. The strength and depth of this draft is on defense, so the slim picking on the other side of the ball could disappear quickly.

Matt McGuire predicts that the Seahawks will draft Sam Bradford (QB, Oklahoma) with the 6th overall pick. This might be proven wrong, but I have a hard time believing Pete Carroll will draft a quarterback coming from a spread offense having avoided the system completely in college. Even with Seattle's need at the position, it'd be a surprise. The second pick is Taylor Mays (S, USC) at #14.

Bucky Brooks at posts his first mock draft of the year. Two of his picks stand out to me - no Jimmy Clausen in round one and Eric Berry falling into the teens. These are both projections I've made in my previous mock drafts and written about often on the blog. The Seahawks take Carlos Dunlap (DE, Florida) and Charles Brown (OT, USC) in round one. Keep an eye on Brown - he's under rated and fits the Alex Gibbs scheme perfectly.

Chris Sullivan at Seahawk Addicts offers a half-mock draft with picks 1-16 posted. The Seahawks take two defensive prospects - Gerald McCoy (DT, Oklahoma) and Earl Thomas (S, Texas). I'm a fan of both and if McCoy falls to the #6 pick it should be a no brainer. It'd be a huge steal even that early in the draft.

Draft Tek and their sophisticated software have calculated a new mock draft. The Seahawks bank two top defensive prospects in Joe Haden (CB, Florida) and Derrick Morgan (DE, Georgia Tech). As mentioned before, the obvious strength and depth in the 2010 class is on defense. Could they go in this direction despite the obvious needs on offense?

Chris Steuber updates his latest projection. I posted this yesterday, but here it is again in case you missed it. Steuber is the only one in this collection of mocks to predict the Seahawks will take Jimmy Clausen (QB, Notre Dame) - something that is possibly more likely than some people perhaps hope or think. C.J. Spiller (RB, Clemson) is the choice at #14.


Savage said...

That DraftTek mock would be great, considering it bring two of the top prospects in the draft at difficult positions to fill in DE and CB.

Watching Revis dominate one side of the field during the playoffs shows the value a great CB can have on a defense. Haden displays the athleticism to man up a WR. He shut down Gilyard, Julio Jones, LaFell and AJ Green. Those are 3 of the top WR's in college and potential high draft choices. I would be thrilled if he fell to 14, but I just cant see the probability in that happening.

Unless Gerald McCoy falls to 6, I think Morgan is the way to go. There needs to be a consistent pass rush to succeed on defense and he's the best bet in the draft.

DSAhawker said...

Please no Dunlap Please no Dwyer Please no Dunlap Please no Dwyer Please no Dunlap Please no Dwyer Please no Dunlap Please no Dwyer Please no Dunlap Please no Dwyer Please no Dunlap Please no Dwyer

I've been calling Haden and Morgan as well...Haden's been overlooked quite a bit IMO, at least from a Seahawks perspective. And Morgan is lightyears better than Dunlap both athletically (yeah I said it, Dunlap an athletic freak my butt, if you don't use it then you don't earn the title) and technically (no brainer there)

Patrick said...

I do agree that Charles Brown seems like he would fit into our offense perfectly. As soon as I read Kyle's observations about what type of OL fit into Gibbs scheme I immediatly thought of Charles Brown. I'd be pretty happy with him going at #14, especially if that meant we aggressively targeted Jahvid Best in Round 2 (Although I don't think he makes it past Detroit so we'd have to trade up). I still hope Bradford is our pick at #6. I read on Draft Debacled (Yes, I know its like the Wikipedia of draft sites) that Pete Carroll actually wanted Bradford at USC. Do you think there's any truth to that rumor?

If Bradford isn't available at #6, I'd like Eric Berry, Gerald McCoy, Derrick Morgan, or Joe Haden... so pretty much a top defensive player lol Really though, if Bradford is gone I hope we trade down and manage to grab Spiller and Brown. I'd also take Dunlap, and I'm also curious about Price or Dan Williams. Getting a top DT seems like it should possibly be a priority in this draft.

Rob Staton said...

List updated to include Mel Kiper's first mock draft of 2010.

Savage said...

I wonder how serious Pete Carroll is about considering a 3-4 defense as mentioned during the press confrence today. Schnieder has been scouting on defense the last couple years for this style as well. If they were to go this route is would bring Terrance Cody, Dan Williams and Carlos Dunlap into consideration at 14 for sure.

Rob Staton said...

I don't think Cody is a realistic option at #14. He's had a lot of hype, but he isn't a first round pick.

Dunlap's physical qualities are amazing, but his effort and attitude are not. It's a shame, because he's a guy you could use in a multitude of ways - he could play edge rush, move inside, play five technique. But too inconsistent in effort and performance.

Anonymous said...

if we switch to 3-4, we have the lb's (curry/hill/tatupu/hawthorne) and can use cole/mebane at NT and jackson/redding/reed at de. blitz our lb's to create pressure. our draft should then be:

6 berry/haden
14 spiller/bryant
40 ghee/mcdaniel

gives us an offensive playmakers, and defensive secondary playmakers

E in F

Rob Staton said...

I don't think the Seahawks will move to a 3-4. It hasn't been ruled out, but nothing has at this stage. I fully expect Pete Carroll to stick with what he used at USC. After all, this defense has been drafted with a 4-3 focus. It would make little sense shifting.

CLanterman said...

Over at, we're doing a seven round interactive mock draft.
I drafted Bradford with #6 (Clausen went at #5, otherwise I would've picked him), Brian Price at #14 (Mebane's friend, and I'm sure PC is aware of how good Price is), and then I traded our 2nd,4th, and 6th rounders for New Orleans' 31st overall and 6th rounder to draft Charlie Brown, who I felt was the last good LT available and a great fit for both Gibbs and Carroll.
To me, this is about as ideal of a draft as possible. Now if I can just land Daniel Teo'Nesheim in the 6th I'll be happy.

Rob Staton said...

Thanks for passing that on CLanterman, much appreciated. It certainly fills some vital holes at DL, QB and OT.

Savage said...

I agree that moving to a 3-4 isn't likely, but I am pretty sure that Carroll used some variations of a 3-4 at USC where he would have a DE standing at the line of scrimmage instead of in a 3 point stance. I believe the Cardinals may run something similair right now. This could be a way to get Curry more involved in the pass rush.

Anonymous said...

@E in F,
3-4 OLBs are different from 4-3 OLBs. 3-4 DEs are closer to 4-3 DTs than 4-3 DEs. Hawthorne is too small to be a 3-4 OLB (he'd make more sense at WLB) and Reed is laughably small as a 3-4 DE (he and Tapp might make ok 3-4 OLBs). The rest of our defense might fit into a 3-4, but there would be a lot of shoe-horning involved and we couldn't expect all the players to adjust to the new scheme.

Anonymous said...


Carroll runs a 4-3 Under ( which sometimes looks like a 3-4 because one of the DEs plays standing up. The Cardinals run a pure 3-4.

As far as I know, Carroll and Bradley don't have any experience running 3-4s and primarily have worked with Kiffin's Tampa 2 principles.


Ralphy said...

From ESPN Insider.

Within his notes from the press conference introducing John Schneider as the new GM of the Seattle Seahawks, NFC West blogger Mike Sando including this little gem at the end: "the Seahawks are weighing the possibility of trying a 3-4 defensive alignment."

Color us captivated. While the team does seem to have the depth at LB to pull off the switch -- David Hawthorne filled in ably at MLB when Lofa Tatupu went down with injury -- the shift for the line might be tricky, especially finding a proper NT. Of course, if it does happen, maybe they'll make a play for Vince Wilfork, who might be franchised or put on the trade block this offseason.

Moreover, if they do go down the route of switching to a 3-4, they could use the draft to fill some holes, including at pass-rusher:

Anonymous said...


i know about bigger lb's and de's in the 3-4. messed up on reed, and i didn't include tapp (figuring if we moved to 3-4, he wouldn't be resigned), but jackson would be ok. the rest could work.

NT Cole/Bryant
DE Jackson/Mebane/Redding/Terrill
OLB Curry/Hill/Reed
ILB Tatupu/Hawthorne/Lewis

Should work ok and get more pressure on qb

E in F