2009 NFL Draft on year later: Seattle Seahawks

Posted: March 26, 2010

The 2009 draft of the Seattle Seahawks shows the failure of pre draft player rankings. The draft is not a science, it is merely conjecture. I along with Mel Kiper and Todd McShay are wrong far more often then we are right. Last year everyone had LB Aaron Curry has the most NFL ready prospect in the draft. Many of us wanted him to go to St. Louis, I wanted my Lions to draft him, but he ended up not even being the best LB in that draft, and we could argue that he wasn’t even in the top ten of best prospects from the 2009 draft one year later.

So let us look at the 2009 draft picks of the Seahawks:

1.Round One (4)- LB Aaron Curry
2.Round Two (49)- C Max Unger
3.Round Three (91)- WR Deon Butler
4.Round Six (178)- QB Mike Teel
5.Round Seven (245)- DB Courtney Green
6.Round Seven (247)- DE Nick Reed
7.Round Seven (248)- TE Cameron Morrah

This is a pretty poor draft, graded somewhere in the bottom of the C range. They bit on the apparently over hyped Curry who gave them just 61 tackles and 2 sacks. Unger may have been the best pick, playing 13 games at RT before taking over the center position. WR Butler played every game but only caught 15 passes. QB Teel did not play, and that is just a wasted pick. Same for Greene who was cut in training camp. Reed played every game and had 17 tackles. That brings us two TE Morrah who caught one ball in the three games he played in.

So the Seahawks wasted at least two of their picks, spent another on an over hyped talent, and got little production out of the rest. The Unger picks proves they can make good selections, but it there any wonder why they have the sixth pick in the 2010 draft? They didn’t improve at all, the other teams got a little worse.

By Joshua Lobdell

More Posts By Joshua Lobdell

Comments

4 Archived Responses to “ 2009 NFL Draft on year later: Seattle Seahawks ”

Jay
Mar 26, 2010

You are right on on draft choices 2 through 7, however you still have to give Curry a year or two more to develope. Then we’ll really know. I think almost every team who drafted behind us would have jumped at the chance to draft Curry.
John
Mar 27, 2010

When Seattle took Curry, I remembered that on 3/4 of his “highlight film”, he looked like he was getting knocked out, and yes: receiving a concussion in the process. He was “getting up slowly”, on other plays where it looked like he had gotten dinged pretty good. These are the film plays that everybody and their Aunt Martha saw, not some secret, personal tapes. What were they thinking? I know Julian Peterson overran a lot of tackles and he may have been faster than he was effective, but taking Curry was a step backward for the defense. Is it any wonder those boobs just got lucky with Unger and perhaps Butler? That’s like 2 for 7 or something, terrible. Many players who became either starters or stars for better teams than Seattle made their picks later in the round than our total failures were selected. That’s one great reason to draft positions of need rather than take the “best player available.” That outlook is for the Indy-Dallas-Giant-Cardinal-New Orleans-Minnesota-Patriots type teams; you know, good teams who have a chance of winning.