Do the Hawks value the LT position differently?

OP
OP
cdallan

cdallan

Active member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
1,378
Reaction score
0
Location
Scotland
Interesting that A-Dog refers to us going the moneyball route as to the LT position. Ironically, Michael Lewis' next book was "The Blind Side"...which is all about how the LT position became so valuable. I know we are not putting much money into the OL generally, but you are supposed to want a premium athlete at the LT position due to the specific importance of that position.

I know PC and JS like going against the grain, but they are seriously going against the prevailing wisdom here. Gilliam is a good enough raw athlete to perhaps do a job, but if we have a problem at LT then the whole offense may be ruined. You can hide a poor LG to an extent, but not a LT. High risk, potentially high reward if we get a serviceable LT on the cheap.
 

A-Dog

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
1,315
Reaction score
61
kearly":4ec7onkj said:
A-Dog":4ec7onkj said:
I'm not sure I buy it though, simply because injuries are such a hard thing to predict.

No prediction is necessary. If a guy gets hurt a ton, you kick him to the curb and try someone else. It's as simple as that.

And for the record, Gibbs was pumped to get Russell Okung.
Prediction is necessary if you're going to pay a player a lot of money if you think he's the "healthy" type. Like I said in that same post, it makes sense from a "cut bait on injury prone players" perspective. From a "find and pay healthy players as a strategy" perspective I find it a bit dubious.

And of course Gibbs expressed positivity after getting Okung. What's he gonna say, "Okung is pretty good but gosh darnit I wish we could have gotten Williams?" I'm sure he was very happy to get either one but I recall there were some pretty strong whispers that Gibbs preferred Williams, and scheme-wise it makes sense in terms of Williams' skillset vs. Okungs.

This has been quite the contentious topic. :snack:
 

hawkfan68

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
10,005
Reaction score
1,700
Location
Sammamish, WA
Luckily for the Seahawks FO, Wilson has been durable. However, building on the cheap does have a glaring weaknesses and should somehow Wilson get hurt. You'll see a quick change to this philosophy. For a team that is so hell bent on establishing a run first mentality, disregarding the OL makes no sense. Hopefully they can find some gems in the draft but their record in drafting OL has been spotty at best.
 

A-Dog

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
1,315
Reaction score
61
cdallan":35sjt40f said:
Interesting that A-Dog refers to us going the moneyball route as to the LT position. Ironically, Michael Lewis' next book was "The Blind Side"...which is all about how the LT position became so valuable. I know we are not putting much money into the OL generally, but you are supposed to want a premium athlete at the LT position due to the specific importance of that position.
Actually what I said is that it ISN'T just LT, it's Moneyball across the whole OL. Obviously that's harder to do at LT - I mean Billy Beane still had to have someone hitting 3rd in the lineup. That's why Gilliam is so important, if he can be a league average LT, that's a huge win financially (at least until free agency comes along).

Also, to the earlier point about Pete & John giving Unger a big contract, that was two years before Sherm, ET, and KJ got their huge deals, with Wilson and Wagner soon to follow. There wasn't as much of a need to play Moneyball before our superstars started getting paid.
 

hawksfansinceday1

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
24,629
Reaction score
3
Location
Vancouver, WA
hawkfan68":27o2x5yr said:
Luckily for the Seahawks FO, Wilson has been durable. However, building on the cheap does have a glaring weaknesses and should somehow Wilson get hurt. You'll see a quick change to this philosophy. For a team that is so hell bent on establishing a run first mentality, disregarding the OL makes no sense. Hopefully they can find some gems in the draft but their record in drafting OL has been spotty at best.
My gut tells me this is the year that change in philisophy begins. They're obviously building around Wilson now that Beast is done and his mobility will gradually decline. The draft will say if I'm correct.
 

vin.couve12

New member
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
5,079
Reaction score
1
Location
Vancouver, WA
I can't find the actual score right now, but I'll put this in perspective:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/jaredstanger/status/465284025624829952[/tweet]

2014draft OT 1


Now let's compare that to this year's stock of OTs

http://3sigmaathlete.com/rankings/ol/

The highest SPARQ score for any OL in this draft is a 126 with the next highest being a 119.

For more perspective:

Okung's 40: 5.18
Gilliam's 40: 5.03

Okung's 10-yard split: 1.79
Gilliam's 10-yard split: 1.68

Okung's short shuttle: 4.80
Gilliam's short shuttle: 4.56

Okung's 3-cone: 7.79
Gilliam's 3-cone: 7.59

Okung's vertical: 32.5
Gilliam's vertical: 35


Now, do the Seahawks value the position differently really? Or do they know what they already have to work with in a player who's development skyrocketed dramatically in the second half of the season? If Sowell can challenge then all the better. I'm not sure that even a 1st round OT in this draft will have a chance.
 

vin.couve12

New member
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
5,079
Reaction score
1
Location
Vancouver, WA
McGruff":kvq0eqi4 said:
Gilliam0

Gilliam's Sparq was 126.2
Very much appreciated, Good Sir. That puts him tied with Anthony Fabiano of Harvard for the best SPARQ score for all OL in this year's draft.
 

vin.couve12

New member
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
5,079
Reaction score
1
Location
Vancouver, WA
Bradley Sowell doesn't seem to be measured as far as I can find, but here are his numbers. One thing I find interesting is his bench reps while having over 35" arms. Long armed guys usually don't bench well.

Dates: 03/09/12
Height: 6067
Weight: 309
40 Yrd Dash: 5.22
20 Yrd Dash: 2.96
10 Yrd Dash: 1.88
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 21
Vertical Jump: 29
Broad Jump: 08'06"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.65
3-Cone Drill: 7.43
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
vin.couve12":1pnlk5fa said:
Bradley Sowell doesn't seem to be measured as far as I can find, but here are his numbers. One thing I find interesting is his bench reps while having over 35" arms. Long armed guys usually don't bench well.

Dates: 03/09/12
Height: 6067
Weight: 309
40 Yrd Dash: 5.22
20 Yrd Dash: 2.96
10 Yrd Dash: 1.88
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 21
Vertical Jump: 29
Broad Jump: 08'06"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.65
3-Cone Drill: 7.43

I just took way too much time doing a very unscientific study comparing those number's to this year's prospects. Eliminating ones that were not close in any or very few categories, especially in the agility drills that the Seahawks seem to value . . .

Before I get to the answer, though, Sowell has really excellent agility numbers in the SS and 3cone. That further emphasizes the value we place there for OL. Good job to english at seahawksdraftblog for bringing that to the forefront.

Here are the comps with height, weight and SPARQ score.

Connor McGovern OG Missouri 6042 306 117.9
Joe Thuney OG North Carolina State 6045 304 114.8
Spencer Pulley C Vanderbilt 6040 301 113
Brandon Shell OT South Carolina 6053 324 112.2
Joe Haeg OT North Dakota State 6060 304 108.9
Tyler Johnstone OT Oregon 6054 301 107
Joshua Garnett OG Stanford 6043 312 96.3
Graham Glasgow OC Michigan 6057 307 95.9
Joe Gore OT Clemson 304 93.2

that's obviously a wide variance, since I don't know how Sparq is weighted. But I see that middle three of Shell, Haeg and Johnstone and that's about where I'd probably put Sowell.
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
Bradley Sowell
Height: 6067
Weight: 309
40 Yrd Dash: 5.22
20 Yrd Dash: 2.96
10 Yrd Dash: 1.88
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 21
Vertical Jump: 29
Broad Jump: 08'06"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.65
3-Cone Drill: 7.43

Joe Haeg
Height: 6060
Weight: 304
40 Yrd Dash: 5.16
20 Yrd Dash: 2.98
10 Yrd Dash: 1.76
225 Lb. Bench Reps: unknown
Vertical Jump: 27.5
Broad Jump: 09'25"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.47
3-Cone Drill: 7.47

Tyler Johnstone
Height: 6054
Weight: 301
40 Yrd Dash: 5.21
20 Yrd Dash: 23.00
10 Yrd Dash: 1.78
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 24
Vertical Jump: 30.5
Broad Jump: 08'67"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.6
3-Cone Drill: 7.31

Brandon Shell
Height: 6054
Weight: 324
40 Yrd Dash: 5.22
20 Yrd Dash: 2.92
10 Yrd Dash: 1.75
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 22
Vertical Jump: 30.5
Broad Jump: 09'33"
20 Yrd Shuttle: unknown
3-Cone Drill: unknown
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
Brandon Shell is at his pro day today, so hopefully we'll get his agility drills fleshed out. At 325 pounds I can't expect he'll run those well.

Looking at Sowell compared to other prosepcts, he's considerably more agile than most, but doesn't have the lower body explosiveness of the elite prospects.
 

justafan

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2011
Messages
2,102
Reaction score
3
I think they value how important tackles are.They have drafted 2 in the 1st and 1 in the second since they got here.I love the fact that they are trying to find talent there.
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
A-Dog":1avo06zd said:
From a "find and pay healthy players as a strategy" perspective I find it a bit dubious.

And of course Gibbs expressed positivity after getting Okung. What's he gonna say, "Okung is pretty good but gosh darnit I wish we could have gotten Williams?" I'm sure he was very happy to get either one but I recall there were some pretty strong whispers that Gibbs preferred Williams, and scheme-wise it makes sense in terms of Williams' skillset vs. Okungs.

My recollection of the rumor is that it wasn't specific to anyone other than the front office at large.

Okung was considered by pretty much everyone to be 1B to Williams 1A anyway, I seriously doubt Gibbs was faking his excitement. A LT prospect as good as Okung doesn't fall to #6 very often. Thankfully for Seattle 2010 was a loaded draft which allowed some studs to fall to their first three picks.

A-Dog":1avo06zd said:
From a "find and pay healthy players as a strategy" perspective I find it a bit dubious.

Plug enough players into the competition and eventually you will find ones that stay healthy.

DavidSeven brings up a good theory on the system making everyone look injury prone. I think the jury is still out on that one (Cable didn't have a rep for injuries in his previous stops) but it's a good thought.

StoneCold":1avo06zd said:
Wasn't Okung's first contract before they new what they had with RW? I could see them making different decisions if we had a non-mobile qb. Whatever all the considerations are they think they can get by with a Cheap OL.

That's a totally fair point, assuming that Wilson never holds the ball ever again. We already know from the past three seasons that Wilson gets killed when holding the ball behind this OL. But if they can get the ball out quick with consistency using the spread, then it could be something Seattle uses to get away with having a cheap OL.
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
I love our FO and I'm willing to keep up the OL experiment in light of some of the scheme changes last season. But at some point results have to start mattering. The idea of drafting raw athletes to play OL has gotten Seattle some of the worst ranked OLs in the NFL the past 3 seasons. Maybe it's a bit unfair given the number of new faces, but 2016 feels like a put up or shut up year for Tom Cable's SPARQ emphasis.
 

vin.couve12

New member
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
5,079
Reaction score
1
Location
Vancouver, WA
I would contend that while the OL was horrible, RW was also guilty of the scrambler's complex in that his belief in his own ability to extend the play also left open the option to hold the ball. I would also further contend that the leagues best QBs in it's history are not scrambling QBs strictly because the rather extreme option of extending the play is, in fact, NOT an option. Thus, an efficiency in pre-snap reads and quick decision making aren't just a matter of being good, but also a matter of not winding up in a stretcher all the damn time.

When I was a kid I never liked QBs. In my neighborhood, you didn't play QB unless you couldn't run or there was something wrong with your legs. You might ask a kid, "Well, can you at least throw the ball?" That changed when I first saw Randall Cunningham roll out, take a big hit to his legs, plant his arm, pop back up and throw a TD. That wasn't the normal, physically inept QB that I was used to seeing. Even in his Ultimate Weapon season; however, I never saw him play better than one season where, (I think it was Kotite) spent all of his camps with him giving him a 3 second clock. The clock was a timer for him to get rid of the ball. His passing efficiency was greater than I had seen with the possible exception of the one Vikings season. It had nothing to do with his ability outside of his brain and that whip of an arm.

The OL for the Hawks in the first 8 games was heinous, as my drill instructors used to say. But folks on this board like to play a game called blame everyone but Russell. I understand the relative roll of a QB on any given team, but the guy is not infallible as it seems that most here like to believe. He camped in those first sets of games like he had a 10 million dollar RV. It worsened due to the OL play, and he clearly became a gunshy QB in a dual cascading effect. I'll always be a RB and QBs to me have usually been the guys to screw up a game, and it took some guts to come back from that, but lets not pretend he didn't play a part in it. I've seen the improvement of the OL almost solely attributed to RW's getting rid of the ball, but that's just not real. The OL was improved by leaps and bounds and shouldn't be asked to protect the QB for 5 seconds or more. That's asinine.

That said, even though I have some concerns about continuity, I do think things will come together albeit with some rocky spots.
 

vin.couve12

New member
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
5,079
Reaction score
1
Location
Vancouver, WA
Oh, and the OL also sucked mad bowls of...stuff in run blocking for Marshawn too. First half of the season and all...

EDIT: Don't mind me...probably disregard even.
 

Largent80

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
36,653
Reaction score
5
Location
The Tex-ASS
If fingers are to be pointed, point them at JS and PC. They drafted Britt, and put an unknown rookie at center.
 

vin.couve12

New member
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
5,079
Reaction score
1
Location
Vancouver, WA
For the record, I'll admit that I had a little too much Vantucky Pale last night in making that post. :lol:
 

poplarbluffman

New member
Joined
Feb 5, 2016
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
vin.couve12":2519d0a4 said:
This too:

St. Louis Rams OT Greg Robinson named one of 10 most disappointing rookies of 2014
Read more at http://cover32.com/2014/12/18/st-louis- ... OWyGGRJ.99


Why reference it? Because of expectations and where he is on one of the lists above.

High draft pick doesn't mean better. New doesn't mean better even...it's just new.


Robinson had brutal short times(3 cone/shuttle)..they matter

agree bad year for LT's this year

because of Wilson's height guards matter more then ot's
 

Latest posts

Top