Friday, 26 March 2010

Suh for the Seahawks?

By Rob Staton
I wouldn't get too excited by the title because the chances of Ndamukong Suh returning to the North West (he's originally from Oregon) are limited to none. I am 100% sure that the worst case scenario for Suh will be going third overall to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers - and that's only if Detroit prefer Gerald McCoy.


Bucky Brooks from the NFL Network publishes his latest mock draft today and he sends Suh to the Seahawks. It won't happen. You're probably bored of me saying Russell Okung won't go second overall, but I am completely convinced that will not happen. For arguments sake, let's say this does happen and the Buccs do take Gerald McCoy third overall. Ndamukong Suh's best position might actually be as a five technique in the 3-4 system. He has all the qualities you want for that roke and it might actually suit him more than lining up as a three technique in the 4-3. I think it'd be a major stretch to watch the two 3-4 teams (Kansas City and now Washington) passing on Suh - regardless of needs elsewhere.

Let me quote Mike Mayock for you on this subject:

"The fact that you (Charles Davis) and Bucky both have Okung going #2 to Detroit tells me it's got no shot at happening (said only half jokingly). I'll tell you now Bucky, if Suh gets to #6 I'll come out and coach your Notre Dame high school defensive backs at 6am because that aint happening. Here's the deal: at #2 I don't see Detroit passing on value. Suh is way too good to pass on at that point. There's no way at #4 or #5 Washington or Kansas City pass him up. He can't get to #6." - Mike Mayock

I completely agree with Mayock. There's no chance Ndamukong Suh gets to #6. It's almost just as impossible for McCoy to last until #6. In my opinion, the Seahawks probably won't be drafting one of those two stud defensive tackles and will have to look elsewhere. A nice thought, but an unlikely eventuality.


Kip Earlywine said...

Man, Mayock can be a jerk sometimes, heh.

Specifically regarding Washington and KC:

Washington is switching to a 3-4. Haynesworth will be the nose. Will Orakpo drop to 3-4 OLB? Or will the move him to a 3-4 DE? I'm guessing OLB.

So yeah, even with the big contracts Washington has on defense, adding a 3-4 DE could make sense.

On the other hand, Suh is an unknown commodity as a 3-4 end, and the Skins badly need a left tackle or a QB. Even for Suh, that could be a tough call to make. I'd give Washington an outside shot at taking Suh, but I wouldn't consider it likely.

KC has realistically no chance. They invested two top 5 picks the last two years on 3-4 DEs.

I personally think that if Suh reaches #4, he'll probably reach #6. Its getting to #4 that will be the hard part.

Mr Fish said...

On the other hand, if the unexpected happens and Suh is still on the board when we pick at 6, the Seahawks should not hesitate.

In fact, they should leap out of their chairs and yippie-skip up to the desk with his name on the selection.

Because I can't conceive of a scenario where there'd be someone still on the board that they'd want more.

Matthew Baldwin said...

I agree, Kip. Suh gets to 4, he's likely to be there at 6.

WAS - $100m on Haynesworth.

KC - I don't see them going d-line in the top 5 for the 3rd year in a row. Glenn Dorsey #5 in 2008. Tyson Jackson #3 in 2009. And don't forget they took Alex Maghee in the 3rd round last year too.

KC needs a 330lb pig of a NT to make their 3-4 work and they can get one with one of their two 2nd rounders.

It's a dream scenario, but I still don't both DTs make it past DET and TB.


Rob, with all do respect how do you know that Detroit will pass on Russell Okung? It was just last week you were all over Jimmy Clausen at 6th overall. According to a lot of experts aside from Kiper Clausen isn't even worth such a high pick. Hence, Carroll and company trading for Whitehurst. Yes, we all understand that you have a friend form Detroit with inside information. Guess what I have a friend form Detroit too.

brainyhawk said...

There is no way Suh get's past KC. Glenn Dorsey, while a high pick, is a poor fit for a 34 scheme. Suh would be their Richard Seymore. KC passing Suh would be like us passing Charles Brown with the 60th pick because we allready have Ray Willis under contract(except for a WAY higher pick, I know). Dorsey does not fit the scheme while Suh would be perfect. Plus in an uncapped year KC could trade the Dorsey, get some value and dump his salary.

Kip Earlywine said...

I've read some comments by KC fans, and they like Dorsey so far. Plus, no way do you give up on a talent like Dorsey after only 2 years. I agree that Dorsey is better served in a 4-3, but I just can't see them drafting Suh and then putting themselves in a buyers market situation to unload Dorsey. It would definitely be a head scratching move, especially given their huge need at left tackle and big needs at other parts of their 3-4 defense.

And its not like 3-4 end is a premium position either. I'd honestly say, they have about as much a chance of drafting Suh as the Hawks do of drafting McClain.

Steve in Spain said...

The only way Suh falls to 6 is if his knees are way worse than is publicly known. Doubt that's the case though...

Rob Staton said...

Kip - I'd disagree slightly because when I watched Suh last year I honestly thought the guys best position was probably 3-4 end. This regime in KC didn't draft Dorsey, but they feel obliged to use him because of the cost and his zero trade value. I think they'd race up to the podium to drat Suh because he'd take that defense to another level.

Washington does have major offensive neededs but would potentially have the makings of an elite defense with Suh, Haynesworth, Orapo etc. It's probably a moot point anyway, because Suh won't get out of the top three.

Matt - Suh would be a major upgrade for a team that still has zero pass rush.

DUWORKSON - I never personally rated Clausen highly, you can check the archives for proof. Seattle had a huge need at QB and I consistently said that - with no guarantees - if they see Clausen as a franchise QB, they'll take him. They made a trade for Whitehurst trade and I switched the picks. That happens all the time in free agency - needs change. As for Detroit and Okung, I've been through it a hundred times really as to why I think it has 0% chance of happening. For starters, Detroit are higher on Backus than most want to believe. Secondly, Backus isn't Detroit's problem and neither is their offense. Third - the moves in free agency to me look distinctly like a team setting up the perfect environment to bring in a stud D-lineman. Just drafting Suh wasn't going to make the 32nd ranked defense any better. Suh and a supporting cast was. Fourth - Okung in my opinion isn't worthy of the pick. I'm prepared to come on the blog and hold my hands up if proven wrong - but I am completely confident that Detroit will not draft Okung.

Anonymous said...

I think there may be a trade at #3 or #5. Up all night guy's?

Anonymous said...

Washington will take Suh at #4 if he's there for a couple of reasons.

First, Bruce Allen has hinted in a number of different ways that he'll be going BPA at that pick, and that would certainly be Suh.

Second, Washington's presumptive starters on the DL are Haynesworth at 5 technique, Kemo at NT, and a 37 year old Phil Daniels at the other 5 technique. Getting another long term starter at 5 technique is a pretty big need. (also Brian Orakpo will be playing OLB Kip, he played 4-3 OLB last year).

Third, Washington's contracts on defense maybe seem large, but they are actually very manageable. Andre Carter, Carlos Rogers, Rocky McIntosh--they are all making peanuts compared to their market value, and LaRon Landry's contract isn't bad around 6 million a year. As a 13th pick, Brian Orakpo's contract is also pretty small considering his value--there were less than 20 million in guarantees and he'll see all of that. The two biggest contracts on that side are Deangelo Hall's and Albert Haynesworth's. However, Bruce Allen used an interesting nuance in their contracts to accelerate almost all of their guaranteed money to this year because it's uncapped. They'll each be making about 20-25 million dollars of their guaranteed money, which means in future seasons, they'll only be on the books for about 8 million or so. That's a very manageable number, and with the departure/retirement of the other big cap guys on the horizon (London Fletcher, Clinton Portis, even Santana Moss), Washington will actually be well under the cap in future seasons if a cap is reinstated. They'll be able to afford signing a guy like Suh at 4, and resign all of their RFA, including giving an expensive long term deal to Jason Campbell in the unlikely event that Allen thinks he's worth it.

And remember, Washigton is the highest revenue team in the league. If anyone can afford another 50 million dollar defensive lineman, it's them.

Lastly, the Redskins will take Suh at 4 because if he's available, that almost certainly means Sam Bradford and Russell Okung were both taken at 1 and 2 so the likely BPA at Washington's biggest positions of need will be off the table. I suspect Shanahan is higher on second tier QBs like Colt McCoy and Tim Tebow than he is on Clausen at 4. The only way they won't pick Suh in those circumstances is if they successfully trade down, which means someone else drafted Suh at 4.

That said, there is no way Suh will drop to four. Tampa Bay is apparently very high on him, more so than they are on Gerald McCoy. And to address the topic of the article, Suh won't make it to 6. He'd have to get passed on as the clear cut BPA by 5 other teams that he fits a need for.


Rob, all your points are very valid and I agree with all of them. However, prior to 09' season Backus was simply the worst LT in the entire NFL averaging a league leading of almost 9 sacks a year. Now, I understand that Backus bounced back and hand a decent year in 09". But Backus is pushing 33 and his better days are behind him. For Stafford to fully mature and develop into the franchise QB they better address the LT position. Stafford can only take so many hits until he starts developing bad habits or gets a career ending injury. In that case it doesn't matter if Suh or McCoy was the BPA player because the Lions will be wasting another draft pick in the first round for a QB. Simply, put the most important position that the Lions need to draft is a LT to protect their franchise's investment.

Anonymous said...

I respect your writing, Rob, and I don't expect Suh to fall to the Seahawks either. But you're basing your argument off supporting points that I don't agree with.

1 - that Detroit likes Backus. On this point, it's pretty much your word against others'. Plenty of us have seen signs that Detroit doesn't like Backus. And even besides that, it's gonna be hard for fans to take "signs of support" from a front office at face value; everyone knows about the jockeying and smokescreens that go on during draft season. The more cynical of us basically take any FO statement and interpret it to mean the exact opposite. Worked for Darryl Tapp and Corry Redding, and apparently Matt Hasselbeck.

2 - that defense is Detroit's problem. So is the offense, Rob. You go on about how Detroit's defense ranked 32nd overall last year without mentioning their offense ranked 26th. I do not see that as enough of a difference to justify going either way; both sides of the ball could benefit equally from a first-round pick, IMHO.

3 - Rob, with the signing of Corey Williams, a lot of people think they already have a good defensive interior. I don't think I've really seen you address this.

4 - the Lions seem to have greater investments on the offensive side of the ball than the defensive side. Again, this is a big supporting point in favor of Detroit taking an OT, and again, it's one I haven't seen you address much.

5 - if Detroit does take an OT, is Okung the only prospect? I'd agree he's overrated, but is Davis a possibility?

Rob Staton said...

DUWORKSON - I respect the counter viewpoint.However, when I watched Detroit last year, I didn't see Stafford 'taking a load of hits'. No more so than the majority of QB's in the league. What I did see, was a joke of a defense that ranked 32nd in the league and let Detroit down badly. Aside from the fact Suh and McCoy are light years ahead of Okung in terms of ability, I do think Detroit's biggest needs remain on defense. They are still in a big rebuild. With needs at both positions, taking the much greater talent in Suh would make a lot more sense for me and I maintain that I'll be literally stunned if Okung goes second overall.

Rob Staton said...

Annonymous - I have addressed the Corey Williams addition. I've said ever since it was made that just drafting Suh alone wouldn't make the NFL's worst defense much better. Creating a better environment to introduce Suh would be much more ideal. They've brought in a supporting cast. Williams and KVDB are not enough. They need an overhaul which I expect to see.

Everything Jim Schwartz and the F.O. has said has been in support of Backus. Schwartz made a point of saying he felt Backus should've gone to the pro-bowl. When I watched Backus in 2009, I didn't see a liability. Elite? No. Servicable? Yes.

Detroit's offense wasn't ranked that high I admit that, but when you break down individual stats, such as T.O.P. and passing game numbers it shows that there was some positives. It's bad accross the board on defense.

I don't think any of the OT's are in the same stratosphere as Suh and McCoy, which is another key reason why I think Detroit won't make a major reach just to replace Backus when there's two potential studs staring right at them at what remains an area of need.

Anonymous said...

While I am generally in favor of trading down to garner picks vs. up and sacrificing them, I thought about the following scenario. Tell me your thoughts:
1. Seattle trades 6 and 14 to Detroit for 2 and 34.
2. Use 2 for Suh or McCoy. Offer to trade 34 to Denver for Marshall. Might have to wait until the night after the 1st round for Denver to make a decision.

Why I think this makes sense for Seattle:
1. We don't actually give up any picks. (No 2 for 1 deals)
2. We land a franchise DT to pair with Mebane. It's the only way to be sure we get one of the two elite DT's.
3. We put ourselves in better position to land Marshall for fair value, and even if Denver doesn't bite, pick 34 isn't bad.

Why would Detroit consider this:
1. While the trade chart disagrees, this may present better value for a team that has perennially picked at the top of the draft.
2. They could get two elite players vs. 1 (example-Berry/Davis or Okung/Haden).

The trade chart would call this a great deal for Seattle, but we all know teams are generally VERY interested in trading out of the top 5 to avoid the big contracts. Detroit might just bite.