The Detroit comps to two years ago are apt. If you switch the draft order around to be Em 1st, Arroyo 2nd and Zabel 3rd no-one would bat an eyelid. Even Arroyo 1st wouldn't move a lot of needles as dyanmic receiving TE's do often go in the 1st RD.
JS just moved around the order based on the board as it felll to him - the correct way to draft. He secured one of the best Inside Line options to plug the big need for the team without reaching (ok arguable if Zabel is a Top20 talent in this class, but given the talen gap from 15 to like 35 he wasn't a reach).
Zabel should be LG, anything else feels weird. He's not taking over from Cross at LT. He's not got any actual experience at C so won't move there. He's got great tape and proven ability at LG. I don't see the Hawks overcomplicating this. Just plug him into the gap at LG and stick with Olu at C, and as i've explained over and over the OLine as a whole will step up significantly with that security post-Turnstile Tomlinson.
I don't care about perceived financial values. I want top quality footballers playing good football! So lets get Zabel in at LG and make a good OLine - then once we're good start worrying about how to pay for them.
Ditto! I know I should care more about positional value, but for me the draft is all about stocking up on quality men and NFL players. If Zabel turns into a quality starter, I'm good. Positional value be damned.
Regardless of what position Zabel plays , I sure hope they can get at least mediocre play from the other two. Hopefully the new staff saw something salvageable from some of last years lack luster O line!
Well rookie camp didn’t go well. One of the many on here potential UDFA, including me, has been cut. Woodard gone. Along with DE Jackson. See who is brought in.
Seems awfully quick. I guess the coaches didn't like what they saw live after they liked them enough to sign them 2 practices ago? Makes me question how good our scouting is when a dude is cut after 2 practices.
This draft may not have had a full round of blue chip players (very few do) but what it had was potential starters throughout the three days of drafting. Otherwise, how do we end up with a quality RB in the 7th round? And potential starters as UDFA? This was not a bad draft.
It is part of the cost of upgrading your interior offensive line. Not that huge a deal, but one of those deeper knowledge things you force us to learn.
I wonder if they'd address the value issue in the next CBA (granted that's in 2031). Lumping all OL together under one price makes no sense in today's NFL. Neither is LB, where EDGEs dominate the market and it's impossible to keep an ILB at that price.
That's a good reminder that this draft class had very few picks without red flags. Other years' second round talents became first round picks this year. Mebane ain't wrong and most of us SSJ readers were surprised by the Zabel pick for those same reasons.
I don't mean to argue the point. But the center makes all the line calls, right? Especially in the Kubiak system. He's responsible for understanding the job the line has on every conceivable play and making certain they all are where they're supposed to be, all while listening to the QB maybe change the play, and change those calls, AND remembering to hike the ball on signal.
So he's the QB of the OL, right?
Why, then, does the league value him as if he were not important? Because good centers are easy to find? Not if this last draft is any indication. Because tackles are physical freaks who are even harder to find? (Again...about this last draft...)
Again, I'm not arguing the point. It's the way things are.
I'm arguing that the way things are is both unfair and unwise. Any one of those linemen breaks down and they take the whole line with it, and possibly get the QB hurt (or the RB, whatever). They're not replaceable. We fall in love with WRs, who seem easily found, draft QBs after the first ten spots even though the odds of success decrease exponentially...and expect to find starting OLine in the fifth round. I dunno. Seems like there oughtta be a better way.
It is curious how trench players on offense are an afterthought, but trench players on defense are valued significantly higher. I mean, they battle against each other. But d-linemen can get sacks, and o-linemen can't. They can get pancakes, but apparently that's not worth what sacks are. I suppose a sack is a 10-yard loss of real estate, and high probability of a stalled drive. A pancake can occur and you still can lose 2 yards on the play.
O-line is definitely the Rodney Dangerfield positions. No respect.
This positional value stuff infuriates me, in a way. I fully expected Creed Humphries (sp?). We drafed a shitty wr/scataback. I expected John Jinglehiemer or whatever his name was. We left him on the board and by all accounts he's not been great. But every draft I hope for a good/great center or guard on this O line and while Olu was considered great for college ball (Rimington award, yada yada), he's at best a project on a better team. But he STARTED for us! And fine, that's the way it goes. But we spent # 18 overall on this Busch Light kid, he just needs to hold down a spot and be really good at it. Not that I expect a rookie OL to come out of the gate as a Pro Bowler. But by gosh he had sure better be a guy who we either extend early or pick up the 5th year option for.
Full disclosure, I didn't love the pick mostly due to postiional value to begin with. But my hopes for this young man are to be a special player.
If you change our first pick, that cascades down to every pick that follows. Getting our OL a plug and play LG, which was our biggest weakness, we freed ourselves to pick BPA the rest of the way, and so the draft has to be looked at as a whole, not as a single player. By starting with our biggest need and getting Zabel, we just seemed to get great value the rest of the draft. Getting difference makers who are nearly indistinguishable from first round talent in the fifth round and a Zabel clone in the sixth round, and a 4th rounder value in the seventh round... I would say, as a whole we had a near perfect draft.
Oh, I completely agree. It's winding up here that frustrates me. According to a chart I saw on Twitter/X comparing teams investing the most (trade capital and free agency $) on OL, the Seahawks were near the top of the list. And assuming that chart was accurate the ROI has been ridiculously poor. It's very hard to project player to the next level and seems to be even more so with O line. But we seem to historically be bad at it. Zabel was a need pick, and it stinks that we even found ourselves there. But as long as he's a capable player, he will go down as a good pick. And I can't recall seeing an O lineman so celebrated before he's ever played a snap. He seems charming and it's easy to root for a blue collar farm boy. With any luck some of our other young players will make a leap and our line will not be a glaring weakness in '25 and beyond.
Exactly my take. Taking Zabel freed JS from forcing anything later in the draft to fill an obvious need. Maybe not a great positional value pick, but the context of the player and the team matter too, and of course positional need is part of their player grade. So 1.18 seems about right, and now they can go after the guys they are excited about without thinking 'shit, we still need a guard' for 2 days.
It's all just risk vs reward in the first round, isn't it? A guy like Zabel presumably has a lower risk of being a complete bust and a higher probability of being a serviceable NFL starter, at worst, right away. But how much better does a single interior O-lineman make the team, even if he's elite? Low risk, low reward. It's the most boring first round pick ever, but you can sleep easier at night.
That said, he still cost a first round pick and better be at least kinda good right away. There's going to be someone picked after him (there always is) kicking ass at a premium position, and we got a guard (or center). Unless Zabel is the best, there will be regret.
I would say an elite IOL makes the team better. Just go back to guys like Max and Toebeck. Yes Robbie had one of the top 3 best LTs ever in nfl history but Robbie had to make the calls and get all 5 guys working. And we saw what happened to us after Max left and the SB he helped NO get.
But if he can be blue chip at a particular position even center, and it’s obvious in training camp, I think that trumps the other stuff. Maybe you have to extend him after year three but the broader point is Seattle doesn’t have enough blue chip players. Hope it’s at guard or tackle but if his “blue chip” position is center, don’t you have to play him there and thank your lucky stars you have a blue chipper?
One reason for some (mild) pessimism about the draft is that most of the heralded picks—with one exception (qb), were at less premium positions. G, S, TE—all excellent but dependent on other players at more premium spots. Even the day 3 shots included two more iOL, an injury recovering receiver and DT, and an undersized and slow receiver. Don’t get me wrong, I love this draft and I could see this as historically good—but Ken’s focus on positional value has me cautious about the ultimate results. At least without considering improvement in other areas (OTs staying healthy, d edges continuing to improve, no major regressions, etc )
We did go against the grain but so did Detroit two yrs ago taking Gibbs at 12 and Campbell an inside LB at 18 (even lower value than center?). They got roundly panned but ended up with a couple difference makers. Hoping Zabel and Emmanwori are the same
Yes it’s possible these work out great. Getting the potentially best players, or huge difference makers, at lesser positions on an already decent roster may be better than dipping into relatively lower players at important positions.
The Detroit comps to two years ago are apt. If you switch the draft order around to be Em 1st, Arroyo 2nd and Zabel 3rd no-one would bat an eyelid. Even Arroyo 1st wouldn't move a lot of needles as dyanmic receiving TE's do often go in the 1st RD.
JS just moved around the order based on the board as it felll to him - the correct way to draft. He secured one of the best Inside Line options to plug the big need for the team without reaching (ok arguable if Zabel is a Top20 talent in this class, but given the talen gap from 15 to like 35 he wasn't a reach).
Zabel should be LG, anything else feels weird. He's not taking over from Cross at LT. He's not got any actual experience at C so won't move there. He's got great tape and proven ability at LG. I don't see the Hawks overcomplicating this. Just plug him into the gap at LG and stick with Olu at C, and as i've explained over and over the OLine as a whole will step up significantly with that security post-Turnstile Tomlinson.
I don't care about perceived financial values. I want top quality footballers playing good football! So lets get Zabel in at LG and make a good OLine - then once we're good start worrying about how to pay for them.
Ditto! I know I should care more about positional value, but for me the draft is all about stocking up on quality men and NFL players. If Zabel turns into a quality starter, I'm good. Positional value be damned.
Regardless of what position Zabel plays , I sure hope they can get at least mediocre play from the other two. Hopefully the new staff saw something salvageable from some of last years lack luster O line!
Well rookie camp didn’t go well. One of the many on here potential UDFA, including me, has been cut. Woodard gone. Along with DE Jackson. See who is brought in.
Seems awfully quick. I guess the coaches didn't like what they saw live after they liked them enough to sign them 2 practices ago? Makes me question how good our scouting is when a dude is cut after 2 practices.
On the other hand, kudos for moving quickly and not wasting time trying to be right after seeing something thay gave them pause.
This draft may not have had a full round of blue chip players (very few do) but what it had was potential starters throughout the three days of drafting. Otherwise, how do we end up with a quality RB in the 7th round? And potential starters as UDFA? This was not a bad draft.
It is part of the cost of upgrading your interior offensive line. Not that huge a deal, but one of those deeper knowledge things you force us to learn.
I wonder if they'd address the value issue in the next CBA (granted that's in 2031). Lumping all OL together under one price makes no sense in today's NFL. Neither is LB, where EDGEs dominate the market and it's impossible to keep an ILB at that price.
Labels are dangerous.
"I like transcribing videos for those of us (especially me) who learn better through reading than listening."
As someone who is wired the same way, THANK YOU SO MUCH for doing that work!!!
That makes three of us. I must say, though, that reading a transcription of a Pete Carroll or Mike Holmgren speech hurt my eyes.
I did a spit take while reading that! =D
Asked about Zabel, Brandon Mebane hesitates and gives us an inside look at the realities of playing Lineman at this level in today's NFL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7K4B9D9nul4
That's a good reminder that this draft class had very few picks without red flags. Other years' second round talents became first round picks this year. Mebane ain't wrong and most of us SSJ readers were surprised by the Zabel pick for those same reasons.
I don't mean to argue the point. But the center makes all the line calls, right? Especially in the Kubiak system. He's responsible for understanding the job the line has on every conceivable play and making certain they all are where they're supposed to be, all while listening to the QB maybe change the play, and change those calls, AND remembering to hike the ball on signal.
So he's the QB of the OL, right?
Why, then, does the league value him as if he were not important? Because good centers are easy to find? Not if this last draft is any indication. Because tackles are physical freaks who are even harder to find? (Again...about this last draft...)
Again, I'm not arguing the point. It's the way things are.
I'm arguing that the way things are is both unfair and unwise. Any one of those linemen breaks down and they take the whole line with it, and possibly get the QB hurt (or the RB, whatever). They're not replaceable. We fall in love with WRs, who seem easily found, draft QBs after the first ten spots even though the odds of success decrease exponentially...and expect to find starting OLine in the fifth round. I dunno. Seems like there oughtta be a better way.
WRs are like other positions: The are found in Day 1-2. Seattle got lucky with Baldwin and Kearse, but they are exceptions. Schneider WR draft picks:
1R: JSN
2R: Tate, Richardson, Metcalf, Eskridge
3R: Lockett, Darboh
4R: Durham, Harper, Norwood, Jennings
5R: Horton
6R: Swain
7R: Lawler, Moore, Young, Melton, White
Day 2 is 50-50; Day 3 is not where starting receivers are found. My guess is that this is typical.
Re Horton, it’s a win if he turns out to be as useful as Freddie Swain or David Moore.
It is curious how trench players on offense are an afterthought, but trench players on defense are valued significantly higher. I mean, they battle against each other. But d-linemen can get sacks, and o-linemen can't. They can get pancakes, but apparently that's not worth what sacks are. I suppose a sack is a 10-yard loss of real estate, and high probability of a stalled drive. A pancake can occur and you still can lose 2 yards on the play.
O-line is definitely the Rodney Dangerfield positions. No respect.
Agree with you there, Grant. When the Seahawks traded Max Unger their seasons for years went down the tube. This trade had a Huge negative impact.
This positional value stuff infuriates me, in a way. I fully expected Creed Humphries (sp?). We drafed a shitty wr/scataback. I expected John Jinglehiemer or whatever his name was. We left him on the board and by all accounts he's not been great. But every draft I hope for a good/great center or guard on this O line and while Olu was considered great for college ball (Rimington award, yada yada), he's at best a project on a better team. But he STARTED for us! And fine, that's the way it goes. But we spent # 18 overall on this Busch Light kid, he just needs to hold down a spot and be really good at it. Not that I expect a rookie OL to come out of the gate as a Pro Bowler. But by gosh he had sure better be a guy who we either extend early or pick up the 5th year option for.
Full disclosure, I didn't love the pick mostly due to postiional value to begin with. But my hopes for this young man are to be a special player.
If you change our first pick, that cascades down to every pick that follows. Getting our OL a plug and play LG, which was our biggest weakness, we freed ourselves to pick BPA the rest of the way, and so the draft has to be looked at as a whole, not as a single player. By starting with our biggest need and getting Zabel, we just seemed to get great value the rest of the draft. Getting difference makers who are nearly indistinguishable from first round talent in the fifth round and a Zabel clone in the sixth round, and a 4th rounder value in the seventh round... I would say, as a whole we had a near perfect draft.
Oh, I completely agree. It's winding up here that frustrates me. According to a chart I saw on Twitter/X comparing teams investing the most (trade capital and free agency $) on OL, the Seahawks were near the top of the list. And assuming that chart was accurate the ROI has been ridiculously poor. It's very hard to project player to the next level and seems to be even more so with O line. But we seem to historically be bad at it. Zabel was a need pick, and it stinks that we even found ourselves there. But as long as he's a capable player, he will go down as a good pick. And I can't recall seeing an O lineman so celebrated before he's ever played a snap. He seems charming and it's easy to root for a blue collar farm boy. With any luck some of our other young players will make a leap and our line will not be a glaring weakness in '25 and beyond.
Exactly my take. Taking Zabel freed JS from forcing anything later in the draft to fill an obvious need. Maybe not a great positional value pick, but the context of the player and the team matter too, and of course positional need is part of their player grade. So 1.18 seems about right, and now they can go after the guys they are excited about without thinking 'shit, we still need a guard' for 2 days.
It's all just risk vs reward in the first round, isn't it? A guy like Zabel presumably has a lower risk of being a complete bust and a higher probability of being a serviceable NFL starter, at worst, right away. But how much better does a single interior O-lineman make the team, even if he's elite? Low risk, low reward. It's the most boring first round pick ever, but you can sleep easier at night.
That said, he still cost a first round pick and better be at least kinda good right away. There's going to be someone picked after him (there always is) kicking ass at a premium position, and we got a guard (or center). Unless Zabel is the best, there will be regret.
I would say an elite IOL makes the team better. Just go back to guys like Max and Toebeck. Yes Robbie had one of the top 3 best LTs ever in nfl history but Robbie had to make the calls and get all 5 guys working. And we saw what happened to us after Max left and the SB he helped NO get.
Interesting nuance I’ve never considered.
But if he can be blue chip at a particular position even center, and it’s obvious in training camp, I think that trumps the other stuff. Maybe you have to extend him after year three but the broader point is Seattle doesn’t have enough blue chip players. Hope it’s at guard or tackle but if his “blue chip” position is center, don’t you have to play him there and thank your lucky stars you have a blue chipper?
Darnold and Kenneth will thank you too 🤗
One reason for some (mild) pessimism about the draft is that most of the heralded picks—with one exception (qb), were at less premium positions. G, S, TE—all excellent but dependent on other players at more premium spots. Even the day 3 shots included two more iOL, an injury recovering receiver and DT, and an undersized and slow receiver. Don’t get me wrong, I love this draft and I could see this as historically good—but Ken’s focus on positional value has me cautious about the ultimate results. At least without considering improvement in other areas (OTs staying healthy, d edges continuing to improve, no major regressions, etc )
We did go against the grain but so did Detroit two yrs ago taking Gibbs at 12 and Campbell an inside LB at 18 (even lower value than center?). They got roundly panned but ended up with a couple difference makers. Hoping Zabel and Emmanwori are the same
Yes it’s possible these work out great. Getting the potentially best players, or huge difference makers, at lesser positions on an already decent roster may be better than dipping into relatively lower players at important positions.