Time to go DiPoto on the roster

[Hasselbeck]

We really do need to shake up the depth. Most of ours did not really develop the way we wanted them to. Need fresh blood on the underbelly.

But the depth is an indictment on our poor drafting and FA signings the last 2-3 years.

If we draft right, then guys like Marsh, KPL, Jefferson, Reed, Shead, Rawls, Gilliam, McCray, Morgan, Seisay, Terrell, Thorpe, etc. are now heavy contributors and challenging the stars of this team for their jobs.

THIS is the real problem, our hit rate in the draft has plummeted from it's amazing levels of 2010-2012 to missing on most each year now. Thus causing us to maybe hang onto guys like Lane, Kearse, etc when we should be moving on because the next man up is ready to rock.

A big part of me wonders a few things regarding our recent drafts.. namely..

- Just how big a role did Scot McCloughan play in identifying talent, especially in the later rounds? To me it appears the drop off correlates with his departure to Washington.

- Were our incredible drafts the result of Pete Carroll having a cheat sheet of knowing a ton of the prospects inside and out from his time at USC when he'd recruit many of those same players?

But yeah I agree, one thing that makes the Patriots so good is they have the aging vet with the big salary replaced before the vet ages and demands that big salary.

 

[KiwiHawk]

One thing I find interesting is I think there is a little misconception about what each draft should result in.

A little misconception? There's a complete lack of understanding.

When you are perennially 8-8 with a sucky roster, then sure you have a lot of drafted players making the team and turning into starters for your 8-8 team, which is why you're 8-8. You draft in the middle of the round and you have roster spots to fill.

If you are a perennial playoff team and Super Bowl contender with a stacked roster, then you don't see so many rookies starting. You draft late every round, and your roster is hard to break in to.

The only reason we saw so many of our depth players on the field this year is because the starters were out, and when you have a lot of starters out - or specific key starters out - you're not going to have an ideal season. It's not because the depth guys played, but because of why the depth guys played.

 

[Seanhawk]

Isn't DiPoto just going Schneider on the Mariner roster?

 

[Seymour]

I like the idea, and agree for the most part but one problem.

You have to be willing to do that to the staff that isn't performing as well.

Clearly Pete is not willing to do that, now that they are "in the good ole boys club".

 

[sdog1981]

Isn't DiPoto just going Schneider on the Mariner roster?

This guy gets it

 

[theincrediblesok]

One thing I find interesting is I think there is a little misconception about what each draft should result in.

A little misconception? There's a complete lack of understanding.

When you are perennially 8-8 with a sucky roster, then sure you have a lot of drafted players making the team and turning into starters for your 8-8 team, which is why you're 8-8. You draft in the middle of the round and you have roster spots to fill.

If you are a perennial playoff team and Super Bowl contender with a stacked roster, then you don't see so many rookies starting. You draft late every round, and your roster is hard to break in to.

The only reason we saw so many of our depth players on the field this year is because the starters were out, and when you have a lot of starters out - or specific key starters out - you're not going to have an ideal season. It's not because the depth guys played, but because of why the depth guys played.

Two years ago Cardinals were plagued with injury they ended up with having really good backups, and yet everyone was thinking that they were going to be very bad that year. They had great depth. I just wish we had that this year but hopefully next year will be a great crop of guys.

 

[Hawk-Lock]

The Seahawks should never copy the Mariners...ever. Mariners are arguably one of the worst sports franchises in all of the major sports in the last decade. I like Dipoto and understand your message, but we don't need to go all "Dipoto" on this roster. Pete and Dipoto gutted rosters when they first got to their respective teams. No need to overhaul a roster that just made the playoffs.

We are not as far off as most think. Get a solid Oline and we are fine.

 

[Grahamhawker]

One thing I find interesting is I think there is a little misconception about what each draft should result in.

A little misconception? There's a complete lack of understanding.

When you are perennially 8-8 with a sucky roster, then sure you have a lot of drafted players making the team and turning into starters for your 8-8 team, which is why you're 8-8. You draft in the middle of the round and you have roster spots to fill.

If you are a perennial playoff team and Super Bowl contender with a stacked roster, then you don't see so many rookies starting. You draft late every round, and your roster is hard to break in to.

The only reason we saw so many of our depth players on the field this year is because the starters were out, and when you have a lot of starters out - or specific key starters out - you're not going to have an ideal season. It's not because the depth guys played, but because of why the depth guys played.

True. It's tough to crack the starting roster on a winning team.
But what about depth players? It just seems like we could be in better shape there if we drafted better. As the drafted guys are dropped they get replaced by UDFAs. Not that this is bad in and of itself, but the process seems rather backwards, even if a gem UDFA turns up once in a while.

Isn't Luke Willson being the only player from the 2103 draft still on the roster in 2016 somewhat of an issue?
Richardson,Britt, Marsh, and Pierre-Louis from 2014
Clark, Lockett, and Glowinski from 2015.

I see this as below average drafting for a team in the Seahawks' situation, but I could be wrong.

Comparing to the last few Patriots' Drafts (players still on roster):
2015: Pats (7)- Hawks (3)
2014: Pats (5)- Hawks (4)
2013: Pats (2 + Collins/traded)- Hawks (1)

Almost 2X as high a "keep rate". Could mean nothing, but it's interesting.

 

[Jazzhawk]

Time to get tough.

You do know that Pete and John were the first to do this around these parts back in 29010, right?? Nothing new to them.

 

[Seymour]

Time to get tough.

You do know that Pete and John were the first to do this around these parts back in 29010, right?? Nothing new to them.

Difference being, those were not "their guys", and there was not the long term relationships built yet.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Agreed, Tical. Good post. At least they've proven they can do it with the players based on past history; they need to prove they can do it with coaches, too.

 

[Seanhawk]

Time to get tough.

You do know that Pete and John were the first to do this around these parts back in 29010, right?? Nothing new to them.

Difference being, those were not "their guys", and there was not the long term relationships built yet.

And DiPoto had long term relationships built?

 

[Tical21]

I get the roster churn after a disappointing year, especially for a team and coach that prides himself on competition at every spot.

But you can't jettison players like Lane and Kearse who have HUGE dead cap hits. Because salaries are slotted by position, so you can't get rid of Kearse because there will be no money to replace him.

As far as the others you listed? I think most of them are already gone, or be forced to go into their last year with no extension. They didn't earn it.

Dunno about Lane, but Kearse and 4 mil? I'm over it. I'll pay him to not be here. Let Kasen or Smith have that roster spot.

 

[Tical21]

Time to get tough.

You do know that Pete and John were the first to do this around these parts back in 29010, right?? Nothing new to them.

But they stopped with the success. Forgot what got them here.

 

[Tical21]

Time to get tough. Scare em. Shock em. A lot of folks in that locker room are feeling a little too comfortable with their mediocre play. DiPoto looked at our roster when he got here and said "if you've been here, and you haven't been performing to expectations, see ya later, I don't have time for it. Ackley, Miller, LoMo, Jesus, whoever was in CF, I'm looking at you. Taijuan, gonnna underperform? Next."

Rememeber when the Seahawks were like that? Now, they're all buddies, and they're all family, and you get to stay as long as you want if you're a nice guy and everybody likes you.

Gilliam. Time's up. Gone.
Willson. Still can't block or run routes, see ya.
Kearse, done. Owed money or not. Get out. We're not waiting anymore.
KPL? Going to squander your starting opportunities and still make boneheaded plays. Next.
Rubin. Gonna play pat-a-cake all year? Don't need it.
Lane. Gonna take a step back? See ya. Ain't got time for it.
Marsh. Gonna give you a full year of DE on 3rd down and you get two pressures. Go on. Get.

Good luck with that.

While YOU may be tired of all of those things your ideas are not even considered by the team, especially in the manner of tone you use.

People are not perfect, well except YOU maybe.

The heck kind of post is this? Are you breaking the news that Pete isn't checking my .net account?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I get the roster churn after a disappointing year, especially for a team and coach that prides himself on competition at every spot.

But you can't jettison players like Lane and Kearse who have HUGE dead cap hits. Because salaries are slotted by position, so you can't get rid of Kearse because there will be no money to replace him.

As far as the others you listed? I think most of them are already gone, or be forced to go into their last year with no extension. They didn't earn it.

Dunno about Lane, but Kearse and 4 mil? I'm over it. I'll pay him to not be here. Let Kasen or Smith have that roster spot.

We made our Lane and Kearse bed, now we have to lie in them.

Like I said earlier up the thread, you can't cut a player with that much dead cap, because the roster money isn't there to replace him without taking it from another part of the team.

That's how cap space is dedicated, a certain amount to each unit of the team. If you pull from one, it has to be a clean break (or close), or else you're forced to pull cap from another unit on the team.

So if anyone wants Lane or Kearse gone with that much of a dead cap hit, then you need to specify where the money's coming from. Cause now you not only are paying the 4-5M of dead cap, you have to replace either/both players.

 

[chawx]

I get the roster churn after a disappointing year, especially for a team and coach that prides himself on competition at every spot.

But you can't jettison players like Lane and Kearse who have HUGE dead cap hits. Because salaries are slotted by position, so you can't get rid of Kearse because there will be no money to replace him.

As far as the others you listed? I think most of them are already gone, or be forced to go into their last year with no extension. They didn't earn it.

Dunno about Lane, but Kearse and 4 mil? I'm over it. I'll pay him to not be here. Let Kasen or Smith have that roster spot.

We made our Lane and Kearse bed, now we have to like in them.

Like I said earlier up the thread, you can't cut a player with that much dead cap, because the roster money isn't there to replace him without taking it from another part of the team.

That's how cap space is dedicated, a certain amount to each unit of the team. If you pull from one, it has to be a clean break (or close), or else you're forced to pull cap from another unit on the team.

So if anyone wants Lane or Kearse gone with that much of a dead cap hit, then you need to specify where the money's coming from. Cause now you not only are paying the 4-5M of dead cap, you have to replace either/both players.

It's like you're saying we're Kearse'd ...
---
I'm the first to make that comment by the way, no need to look it up.

 

[Seymour]

Time to get tough.

You do know that Pete and John were the first to do this around these parts back in 29010, right?? Nothing new to them.

Difference being, those were not "their guys", and there was not the long term relationships built yet.

And DiPoto had long term relationships built?

I'm not comparing to DePoto there. You need to follow the previous posts and the statement that Pete has cleared the dead wood in the past. That alone does not mean he will be AS willing to do that with "his guys", his staff, and players he has built a relationship with.

 

[Largent80]

Time to get tough.

You do know that Pete and John were the first to do this around these parts back in 29010, right?? Nothing new to them.

But they stopped with the success. Forgot what got them here.

Yeah Pete how dare you not find the fountain of youth and maintain that edge of never winning a championship.

 

[Tical21]

I get the roster churn after a disappointing year, especially for a team and coach that prides himself on competition at every spot.

But you can't jettison players like Lane and Kearse who have HUGE dead cap hits. Because salaries are slotted by position, so you can't get rid of Kearse because there will be no money to replace him.

As far as the others you listed? I think most of them are already gone, or be forced to go into their last year with no extension. They didn't earn it.

Dunno about Lane, but Kearse and 4 mil? I'm over it. I'll pay him to not be here. Let Kasen or Smith have that roster spot.

We made our Lane and Kearse bed, now we have to lie in them.

Like I said earlier up the thread, you can't cut a player with that much dead cap, because the roster money isn't there to replace him without taking it from another part of the team.

That's how cap space is dedicated, a certain amount to each unit of the team. If you pull from one, it has to be a clean break (or close), or else you're forced to pull cap from another unit on the team.

So if anyone wants Lane or Kearse gone with that much of a dead cap hit, then you need to specify where the money's coming from. Cause now you not only are paying the 4-5M of dead cap, you have to replace either/both players.

I doubt there is a team with 0 dead money. We took far bigger hits for Percy and Williams. 4 million is going to Kearse whether or not he's on the team. If he's on the team, its dead money. If not, it's dead money. No difference at this point.