Bruce Irvin Just Made Things Interesting

[firebee]

We just learned an important lesson, one that we choosing to ignore here.

1 - Great defenses tend to beat great offenses in the SB (Pats vs Giants, Seattle vs Denver, Denver vs Panthers)

(Ok I know, the Panthers offense sucked but I think the trend is established)

Key to a great defense in a league that is now predicated upon the effectiveness of the QB? You have to stop the opposing QB.

It should also be noted that of the defensive players available, LBs are probably undervalued at this point vs DEs, Corners and DTs. So if we can lock up a LB that rushes the QB? What is an average DT going to ask at market rate?

Irvin is everything you want in a LB that is a pass rush threat, at what seems like it could possibly be an effective rate.

Dollars still have to be spent keeping the defense strong.

After multiple lessons that the best opportunity to win a SB comes from a strong defense (including a whole bunch of Patriots SBs, remember them beating the Greatest Show on Turf?), our move forward would be to jettison a strong defensive player making our defense weaker?

How is that improving any shot at getting to SB much less winning another one?

The Hawks have had MUCH MUCH MUCH more success drafting defense than offense. The hawks have a much better chance of finding a good replacement for Irvin than they do okung or even sweezey (who is replacement level).

Defense wins championships, but last year's defense was not championship level and our offense clearly needs help on OL.

Keeping Irvin will make our offense worse, and it won't make our defense any better than it was last year. Zero steps forward, two steps back.

Signing quality veteran offensive lineman and replacing Irvin with a good rookie LB would be 2 steps forward and 1 step back.

Signing quality linemen that fit our system and aren't huge cap hits if they don't work out. Everyone is on the bandwagon for signing 6-10 million dollar a year players, but I think we can land good fits for less. Wisniewski, Paradis, Hairston, Harris, Polumbo... maybe Jeff Allen or a KC player that's been getting coached up by Heck. I'm not too into the whole Mack or trading for Thomas talk that's going around. I'd rather see us bring in a large group of semi-proven guys looking to prove something or aged veteran types looking to be fill ins on a championship team the last few years they're in the league. Decent quality and lots of depth that creates a real competition... not players that are penciled in as starters due to the size of their contract.

 

[TwistedHusky]

The key to being a great team (besides have a great QB, which is a requirement now), is having better players than the opponent in certain specific areas.

As long as you can exploit your strength or minimize weaknesses there is no specific area those strengths have to come from. But, you have to be able to pay those people and still have enough left over to be competitive in other areas.

We have already seen that 6-8M a year will get you an average to crappy corner and DTs + DEs are always at a premium. So again, while it is a lot of money to lock into the LBs, it might be better to spend a little more to have great players in one space than to spend less and have average players all over the place.

Our DTs are decent vs the run but crap against the pass, so maybe we just need DTs that can occupy players to free teh LBs to attack. We aren't getting good DTs out of FA.

And again, making our offense better isn't going to help us. Sure we need to fix the OL, but we just need real OL not top 15 guys. Just not a guy that played DT last year, someone that knows the position.

If LBs are one of the least expensive defensive players on an impact per player basis, you have to go that route. Because DTs and DE are high value and the market on corners is just borderline stupid.

Remember that our draft process with defenders isn't really put together to find guys that can contribute fully in Year 1. We got Clark because of DV concerns for cheap, but even he isn't ready to be an every down guy. You cannot just expect we can pop in some guys from the draft and won't be materially worse. Especially at our draft slot.

 

[Bigpumpkin]

If he's willing to take 3-5 million per year LESS than a market deal Seahawks fans should hold annual parade for him.

I find it really incredibly hard to believe that's what he meant, but it would be an AWESOME, AWESOME story if it were true.

LOL....the fellow has yet to prove that he can walk on water!

 

[Fade]

Bruce Irvin most likely will not be replaced by 1 player, but 2.

1 for the Base D (Sam LB) & 1 for Nickle Edge Rusher.

Seattle needs to spend money on a Tamba Hali type, or draft a TRUE Leo for the Nickel downs, or preferably both. The Sam LB in the base is the least important piece, that position doesn't even see 50% of the snaps.

Nickel Line
AVRIL -- BENNETT ---------- -- CLARK --- (NEW GUY HERE)

 

[A-Dog]

There was a thread earlier where a poster suggested going after Von Miller. Unsurprisingly, this idea was ridiculed, but I think the possibility warrants a look.

Pete has already said pass rush is a priority. That doesn't become less of a priority with Irvin gone. We've seen what happens in critical situations (Superbowl vs NE, Divisional round vs Carolina) when Cliff Avril goes down -- our pass rush goes down the tubes. While he has blossomed as an every-down SAM linebacker, Irvin hasn't really grown as a pass rusher, and he hasn't been more than adequate as an outside nickel rusher for us. He certainly can't serve as our premier edge rusher when Avril's not there. Aside from some not insignificant durability issues, Avril turns 30 in two months, and he's game is built on speed (4.51 40 coming out of college).

Frank Clark likely isn't the answer as an edge rusher on passing downs. Sure, he can take some snaps there, but he seems better suited as Michael Bennett type - a DE on mixed downs and an inside rusher on passing downs. Cassius Marsh is the backup LEO according to the depth chart but he's yet to record a sack in his two seasons.

Von Miller kills 5 birds with one stone: a) he replaces Irvin as the every day SAM, b) he replaces Irvin as edge rusher on passing downs, c) he can back up the Leo spot on mixed downs, d) he upgrades our pass rush over what we had last year with Irvin, e) should he or Avril get dinged, we'd still have a premier edge rusher on the field.

As far as cost goes, yes Miller will get paid, likely similar to what Justin Houston got last offseason. He could also be franchised, meaning we'd have to give up picks. However, Irvin is likely going to command ~$9M APY, and re-signing him doesn't improve our pass rush at all -- we'd likely still have to draft or sign another player if Pete is to believed and improving the pass rush is a priority. In terms of dollars, it likely means Okung is gone, in addition to Irvin. We might even have to let Jimmy Graham go in order to make it work. To me it's worth it. We wouldn't need to spend draft picks on a LB or a pass rusher, and could go VERY heavy on OL in the draft. With Miller on board and Jeremy Lane re-signed, we'd have the most talent on defense in the history of the franchise - the defense could keep the team afloat while the O-line re-tools.

It's worth thinking about.

 

[IndyHawk]

There was a thread earlier where a poster suggested going after Von Miller. Unsurprisingly, this idea was ridiculed, but I think the possibility warrants a look.

Pete has already said pass rush is a priority. That doesn't become less of a priority with Irvin gone. We've seen what happens in critical situations (Superbowl vs NE, Divisional round vs Carolina) when Cliff Avril goes down -- our pass rush goes down the tubes. While he has blossomed as an every-down SAM linebacker, Irvin hasn't really grown as a pass rusher, and he hasn't been more than adequate as an outside nickel rusher for us. He certainly can't serve as our premier edge rusher when Avril's not there. Aside from some not insignificant durability issues, Avril turns 30 in two months, and he's game is built on speed (4.51 40 coming out of college).

Frank Clark likely isn't the answer as an edge rusher on passing downs. Sure, he can take some snaps there, but he seems better suited as Michael Bennett type - a DE on mixed downs and an inside rusher on passing downs. Cassius Marsh is the backup LEO according to the depth chart but he's yet to record a sack in his two seasons.

Von Miller kills 5 birds with one stone: a) he replaces Irvin as the every day SAM, b) he replaces Irvin as edge rusher on passing downs, c) he can back up the Leo spot on mixed downs, d) he upgrades our pass rush over what we had last year with Irvin, e) should he or Avril get dinged, we'd still have a premier edge rusher on the field.

As far as cost goes, yes Miller will get paid, likely similar to what Justin Houston got last offseason. He could also be franchised, meaning we'd have to give up picks. However, Irvin is likely going to command ~$9M APY, and re-signing him doesn't improve our pass rush at all -- we'd likely still have to draft or sign another player if Pete is to believed and improving the pass rush is a priority. In terms of dollars, it likely means Okung is gone, in addition to Irvin. We might even have to let Jimmy Graham go in order to make it work. To me it's worth it. We wouldn't need to spend draft picks on a LB or a pass rusher, and could go VERY heavy on OL in the draft. With Miller on board and Jeremy Lane re-signed, we'd have the most talent on defense in the history of the franchise - the defense could keep the team afloat while the O-line re-tools.

It's worth thinking about.

Elway has just gone on record saying they will franchise Von if neccesary so that idea is gone.

 

[gmor]

With the possibility of no Lynch, Okung and Kam, or a combo of at least 2 of these players not being back........I could see the Hawks using that cap space giving Irvin a shockingly nice contract to keep him around.

He's still on the upward swing of his potential, and he really is a versatile player that does a lot rushing and coverage wise. Plus he fits into the "we take care of our players that we develop" mantra Pete and John are always preaching.

Now if some other team blows him away with a 8-9M a year deal like Curry? No, we're not matching that. But I could definitely see us giving him a nice 6-7M a year contract.

That's not going to work, and it is part of the reason why the Seahawks aren't as talented as they were a couple years ago.

Losing quality players and using that money just to keep someone you ALREADY HAD makes the team worse.

The Hawks need to be ADDING players who are CHEAP, and that means drafting like they used to. By saving all that money and adding talent from the draft they can keep the MOST IMPORTANT players (which Irvin is not).

The salary cap PUNISHES teams who refuse to replace veterans with younger guys. You just end up getting worse each year because you have LESS TALENT because you keep paying more money to the guys you already had while losing some of the talent you used to have.

Irvin is the #1 candidate for replacing via draft.

Agree with Bjorn. Unless it's a really good deal, it's time to move on.

 

[A-Dog]

Elway has just gone on record saying they will franchise Von if neccesary so that idea is gone.

Just because he gets franchised doesn't mean he won't move teams.

Personally I would be in favor of giving up two late #1's for him.

 

[Basis4day]

There was a thread earlier where a poster suggested going after Von Miller. Unsurprisingly, this idea was ridiculed, but I think the possibility warrants a look.

Pete has already said pass rush is a priority. That doesn't become less of a priority with Irvin gone. We've seen what happens in critical situations (Superbowl vs NE, Divisional round vs Carolina) when Cliff Avril goes down -- our pass rush goes down the tubes. While he has blossomed as an every-down SAM linebacker, Irvin hasn't really grown as a pass rusher, and he hasn't been more than adequate as an outside nickel rusher for us. He certainly can't serve as our premier edge rusher when Avril's not there. Aside from some not insignificant durability issues, Avril turns 30 in two months, and he's game is built on speed (4.51 40 coming out of college).

Frank Clark likely isn't the answer as an edge rusher on passing downs. Sure, he can take some snaps there, but he seems better suited as Michael Bennett type - a DE on mixed downs and an inside rusher on passing downs. Cassius Marsh is the backup LEO according to the depth chart but he's yet to record a sack in his two seasons.

Von Miller kills 5 birds with one stone: a) he replaces Irvin as the every day SAM, b) he replaces Irvin as edge rusher on passing downs, c) he can back up the Leo spot on mixed downs, d) he upgrades our pass rush over what we had last year with Irvin, e) should he or Avril get dinged, we'd still have a premier edge rusher on the field.

As far as cost goes, yes Miller will get paid, likely similar to what Justin Houston got last offseason. He could also be franchised, meaning we'd have to give up picks. However, Irvin is likely going to command ~$9M APY, and re-signing him doesn't improve our pass rush at all -- we'd likely still have to draft or sign another player if Pete is to believed and improving the pass rush is a priority. In terms of dollars, it likely means Okung is gone, in addition to Irvin. We might even have to let Jimmy Graham go in order to make it work. To me it's worth it. We wouldn't need to spend draft picks on a LB or a pass rusher, and could go VERY heavy on OL in the draft. With Miller on board and Jeremy Lane re-signed, we'd have the most talent on defense in the history of the franchise - the defense could keep the team afloat while the O-line re-tools.

It's worth thinking about.

This, to me, is a non starter.

It's two first rd picks and only if Denver tags him with the non-exclusive franchise tag and then you need to offer him a contract that the Broncos can't match. Miller will make more that Houston, whose cap hit is right around 20 million dollars per season.

All of this does nothing for the most glaring weakness on the team; the O-Line.

This is as unrealistic as signing Suh last year.

 

[Basis4day]

Elway has just gone on record saying they will franchise Von if neccesary so that idea is gone.

Just because he gets franchised doesn't mean he won't move teams.

Personally I would be in favor of giving up two late #1's for him.

Honest question. How many players have been signed by another team after application of the franchise tag and thus given up the two first rd picks?

 

[Bigpumpkin]

This is as unrealistic as signing Suh last year.

Yes....but there were several poster who thought that we had a chance! :roll:

 

[hawkfan68]

The general consensus here is that Irvin may prove to be costly. Yet someone wants to sign Von Miller? Von will definitely command more than Irvin would. Denver is not letting Von Miller go. Nor should they.

As others have mentioned and I agree with - Irvin is underrated. He's developing into a pretty good LB for a guy who was mainly a DE, that's massive adjustment. He's probably the best cover LB on the team. I think the Seahawks would be wise to keep him. He had a part in helping the Seahawks being a top 5 defense each year. Why weaken it by getting rid of him? They could very well create a Cary Williams like situation here. That wouldn't be good.

 

[Fade]

The general consensus here is that Irvin may prove to be costly. Yet someone wants to sign Von Miller? Von will definitely command more than Irvin would. Denver is not letting Von Miller go. Nor should they.

As others have mentioned and I agree with - Irvin is underrated. He's developing into a pretty good LB for a guy who was mainly a DE, that's massive adjustment. He's probably the best cover LB on the team. I think the Seahawks would be wise to keep him. He had a part in helping the Seahawks being a top 5 defense each year. Why weaken it by getting rid of him? They could very well create a Cary Williams like situation here. That wouldn't be good.

The money would be better allocated to a 8-10 sack D-Lineman. Bruce may be that guy in a pure 3-4, but in the Hawks scheme he is a 6 sack guy.

The Ruskell Seahawks paid Hill, Tatupu, and Peterson which is a horrible model. The money is better served to go up front on the D-Line. 4-3 LBs are like RBs easily replaceable. I would trade Wagner & Wright for elite D-Lineman without a second thought, problem is no GM would do it.

 

[hawkfan68]

The general consensus here is that Irvin may prove to be costly. Yet someone wants to sign Von Miller? Von will definitely command more than Irvin would. Denver is not letting Von Miller go. Nor should they.

As others have mentioned and I agree with - Irvin is underrated. He's developing into a pretty good LB for a guy who was mainly a DE, that's massive adjustment. He's probably the best cover LB on the team. I think the Seahawks would be wise to keep him. He had a part in helping the Seahawks being a top 5 defense each year. Why weaken it by getting rid of him? They could very well create a Cary Williams like situation here. That wouldn't be good.

The money would be better allocated to a 8-10 sack D-Lineman. Bruce may be that guy in a pure 3-4, but in the Hawks scheme he is a 6 sack guy.

The Ruskell Seahawks paid Hill, Tatupu, and Peterson which is a horrible model. The money is better served to go up front on the D-Line. 4-3 LBs are like RBs easily replaceable. I would trade Wagner & Wright for elite D-Lineman without a second thought, problem is no GM would do it.

How much did the Seahawks give Wright? I would think that Irvin is at least as good as Wright is, if not better. is Wright getting six sacks? How many interceptions does Wright have in his career? I like KJ Wright and am glad he's a Seahawk. I just believe Bruce is a better player.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14946/bruce-irvin
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14140/k.j.-wright

 

[Jimjones0384]

I think more important than bringing back irvin, is getting Mebane and rubin back. They are absolute forces on the line. I think Mebane may be hard, but rubin is thrilled to finally be on a contending team. I don't think kpl is the answer, but could get a serviceable option from fa until we can groom a draft pick. I agree the sam is a spot to hide some lesser talent, therefore less money.

 

[vin.couve12]

KPL will not replace Irvin. He's not even remotely the right kind of backer for that. If anything, Wright would slide back to SLB and KPL would play Weak. Run defense would probably suffer though because Wright isn't as good at the POA. Irvin has grown into a real force defender at setting the edge.

Yup. KPL is a roster bubble guy at this point. He's undersized and seems constantly outmatched. The scout who drafted him compared him to Navarro Bowman, which is a bit like comparing Kelly Jennings to Richard Sherman. Obviously KPL did not develop in the NFL as the scout thought he might. If Irvin is gone, I think Seattle will draft a SAM LB early.

Wright has taken his game to a new level playing at WILL so I'm not exactly anxious to move him out of there, but FWIW I thought he played outstanding on the line at setting the edge back when he was at SAM.

I agree that Wright was good at setting the edge, but for me, Irvin not only sets the edge, but also changes it. Not giving ground is different than being a real force defender that can even pinch that edge back further. Wright is more of a position guy. His quick reads get him in position fast and his long arms keep people off of him mostly, but he's not necessarily a powerful player. That part also show in his pass rush game too and keeps him from really succeeding in that aspect. That also reminds me that I like a SLB that can rush the passer as well since that 4-3 Under is so much like 3-4. If you want to change it up and drop the Leo and rush the Sam then you can...and we like to do things that we can. :twisted: I agree that I like Wright where he's at.

I don't know, just my dos pesos.

 

[firebee]

I think more important than bringing back irvin, is getting Mebane and rubin back. They are absolute forces on the line. I think Mebane may be hard, but rubin is thrilled to finally be on a contending team. I don't think kpl is the answer, but could get a serviceable option from fa until we can groom a draft pick. I agree the sam is a spot to hide some lesser talent, therefore less money.

Completely agree with this... Everyone is talking like Mebane is done and he's been as dependable and durable as they come. Let him finish it out in Seattle and get Rubin resigned. These guys are cogs that allow our other guys to do what they do. We can draft a young guy to bring up behind them, but do we really want to try some new guy out at DT that's likely to blow assignments and possibly not be as dependable as Mebane has been. Mebane might not put up glorious statistics, but he controls the trenches and allows our other guys to do what they do. Rubin proved himself and deserves a run. Get them signed and solidify the interior on defense. Draft some guys or sign another younger guy on the cheap end to bring up behind them. If they come up and prove to be reliable, then we can think about going a different direction. Don't mess with a good thing in hope of finding a replacement.

 

[Tical21]

The general consensus here is that Irvin may prove to be costly. Yet someone wants to sign Von Miller? Von will definitely command more than Irvin would. Denver is not letting Von Miller go. Nor should they.

As others have mentioned and I agree with - Irvin is underrated. He's developing into a pretty good LB for a guy who was mainly a DE, that's massive adjustment. He's probably the best cover LB on the team. I think the Seahawks would be wise to keep him. He had a part in helping the Seahawks being a top 5 defense each year. Why weaken it by getting rid of him? They could very well create a Cary Williams like situation here. That wouldn't be good.

The money would be better allocated to a 8-10 sack D-Lineman. Bruce may be that guy in a pure 3-4, but in the Hawks scheme he is a 6 sack guy.

The Ruskell Seahawks paid Hill, Tatupu, and Peterson which is a horrible model. The money is better served to go up front on the D-Line. 4-3 LBs are like RBs easily replaceable. I would trade Wagner & Wright for elite D-Lineman without a second thought, problem is no GM would do it.

I heard something from Ian Furness today that I totally forgot. When we won the Super Bowl, we had Mike Bennett and Cliff Avril coming off the bench.

 

[Fade]

The general consensus here is that Irvin may prove to be costly. Yet someone wants to sign Von Miller? Von will definitely command more than Irvin would. Denver is not letting Von Miller go. Nor should they.

As others have mentioned and I agree with - Irvin is underrated. He's developing into a pretty good LB for a guy who was mainly a DE, that's massive adjustment. He's probably the best cover LB on the team. I think the Seahawks would be wise to keep him. He had a part in helping the Seahawks being a top 5 defense each year. Why weaken it by getting rid of him? They could very well create a Cary Williams like situation here. That wouldn't be good.

The money would be better allocated to a 8-10 sack D-Lineman. Bruce may be that guy in a pure 3-4, but in the Hawks scheme he is a 6 sack guy.

The Ruskell Seahawks paid Hill, Tatupu, and Peterson which is a horrible model. The money is better served to go up front on the D-Line. 4-3 LBs are like RBs easily replaceable. I would trade Wagner & Wright for elite D-Lineman without a second thought, problem is no GM would do it.

I heard something from Ian Furness today that I totally forgot. When we won the Super Bowl, we had Mike Bennett and Cliff Avril coming off the bench.

That is the model I am speaking on. Wagner, KJ, Malcolm Smith, and Bruce were cheap LBs. The Hawks were paying Mebane, Red Bryant, Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett. They also had Tony McDaniel, Clinton McDonald, and O'brien Schofield on cheap contracts. They were absolutely loaded on the D-Line.

 

[CurryStopstheRuns]

Elway has just gone on record saying they will franchise Von if neccesary so that idea is gone.

Just because he gets franchised doesn't mean he won't move teams.

Personally I would be in favor of giving up two late #1's for him.

Honest question. How many players have been signed by another team after application of the franchise tag and thus given up the two first rd picks?

You should know of at least one.