Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

We have the 3rd highest average draft position o-line

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
  • I compiled a list of all week 1 starters, plus projected starters for TB and Miami, and swapped Duane Brown into the Texans lineup despite his holdout. I then looked up each player's overall draft position. For undrafted players, they were assigned 255, although there was actually a player drafted 255, but most drafts end by then. I then averaged them all out. Only the Redskins and Browns have higher average draft position among their five o-line starters, and they both have pretty damn good o-lines.

    This is more fuel for the fire that Cable sucks at developing linemen, although Joeckel wasn't drafted and developed by the Seahawks and is skewing the numbers. An interesting thing about this list is the only o-line comparable to the Seahawks last year was the Vikings, and they are dead last in average draft position. This is an indictment on both their ability to identify talent in the draft and their ability to develop it.

    Team - Average
    WAS - 49
    CLE - 52.6
    SEA - 65.6
    NYG - 74
    BUF - 78.8
    DAL - 80.4
    LAR - 80.8
    HOU - 81.6
    NO - 82.4
    MIA - 85.4
    DET - 90
    ARI - 92.8
    CAR - 102.4
    ATL - 105.6
    CIN - 108.2
    KC - 108.4
    CHI - 113.8
    PHI - 121
    IND - 121.8
    PIT - 123
    TB - 123.4
    NE - 123.8
    OAK - 124
    TEN - 125.6
    DEN - 128.6
    SF - 130.4
    GB - 131.2
    NYJ - 135.2
    JAX - 140.8
    LAC - 160.2
    BAL - 161
    MIN - 162
    User avatar
    Erebus
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1406
    Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:53 pm
    Location: Ft. Meade, MD



  • NYG, Hou, and NO aren't far behind us and their lines sucked worse than ours.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    User avatar
    Wenhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3066
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • First, a huge thank you to Erebus for doing all that work! Excellent find and work. Finally some solid proof against all those "but we draft last" of course we suck replies I'm tired of reading.

    Fact of the matter is, yes not a ton of $$ (younger talent) but a ton of resource is getting chewed up drafting lineman year after year that are doing nothing but holding us back thanks to Cable, Brennon Carroll and Co.

    Anyone watch the Vikings all new line they put together last night? Nice job Vikings....yes it can be done with someone in charge that knows what the hell they are looking at for talent.

    The Vikings entered Monday with five starting linemen who had not been on the field together for even one snap in the preseason: Easton, left tackle Riley Reiff, center Pat Elflein, right guard Joe Berger and right tackle Mike Remmers.


    It would be hard not to say nice things about the linemen after their showing against the Saints. They opened plenty of holes for rookie running back Dalvin Cook, who ran for 127 yards, and they allowed just one sack of quarterback Sam Bradford, who was throwing the ball all over the field.

    Bradford completed 27 of 32 passes for 346 yards with three touchdowns and had a career-high passer rating of 143.0.


    http://www.twincities.com/2017/09/12/vikings-offensive-line-answers-plenty-of-questions-in-opener/

    Always Compete....unless you are a coach.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • This topic has been beaten to death.

    Ifedi is starting his 2nd year. Britt is starting his 2nd year at center. Fant was going to be the starter and Rees is in his first year as a starter and only his 2nd year in the league. Glow is a 5th rounder and has only started 2 games at RG. How many games has this crew played together? ONE.

    Like you said, Joeckel wasn't the Hawks #2 pick but the Jags. He only has 5 starts at LG.

    I don't know what else to say except the Hawks have had several OL make huge contracts so there is no problem with their talent evaluation and they simply have a young line that needs to grow together.
    Thomas Paine: To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead
    User avatar
    Seafan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5921
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:30 pm
    Location: Helotes, TX


  • The topic will continue to be beaten to death because it has been turned into a campaign.

    There will be more reaches and to fuzzy assertions to follow.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 6903
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


  • Seafan wrote:This topic has been beaten to death.

    Ifedi is starting his 2nd year. Britt is starting his 2nd year at center. Fant was going to be the starter and Rees is in his first year as a starter and only his 2nd year in the league. Glow is a 5th rounder and has only started 2 games at RG. How many games has this crew played together? ONE.

    Like you said, Joeckel wasn't the Hawks #2 pick but the Jags. He only has 5 starts at LG.

    I don't know what else to say except the Hawks have had several OL make huge contracts so there is no problem with their talent evaluation and they simply have a young line that needs to grow together.


    And who is in charge of this constant rotation not letting the line gel?

    Who is in charge of training these lineman to be the best at their respective position?

    Who makes the call to take a guy who has played one OL osition through college, and decide to pull him from his experience and throw him at another OL position?

    Who is the guy that decides to take player that have never played OL and think he can train them in one year to be good at a position they have never played?

    And the last and most important question-Who is responsible for coaching and training the offensive line?

    There is one answer to all these, but it seems you have never asked these questions.
    User avatar
    johnnyfever
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 818
    Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 3:38 pm
    Location: Spokane


  • OL actually take a few years, like most positions, to pan out. Every once in a while you get a rook who can actually play right now or maybe in a year, but most of the time you don't get ROI for about 3 years.

    We never retain them and just start over. That's really the biggest thing. Most fans think that the draft is like their microwave, and that's just not true. Not even in the slightest.

    That doesn't account for Joekel, however. It really wasn't just the one time. He was swatted like a fly more than once. He lacks strength to play inside, IMO.

    If we're going to take the time to grow, move him out to LT where his feet and height (which also means lack of leverage against powerful DTs), will serve him better against smaller, faster defenders. If Roos is so impressive, let him play. I know he's strong enough to handle playing G and he's also shorter, which will help leverage and also RW's vision.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3462
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • Jville wrote:The topic will continue to be beaten to death because it has been turned into a campaign.

    There will be more reaches and to fuzzy assertions to follow.


    We didn't chose to "turn this into a campaign". The finished product, their end results, the continuous year after year shit show, and now the additional stress on an aging defense that can no longer hold 40 minutes on the field at a high level presents this to any objective fan interested in investigating the problem.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • Seafan wrote:This topic has been beaten to death.

    Ifedi is starting his 2nd year. Britt is starting his 2nd year at center. Fant was going to be the starter and Rees is in his first year as a starter and only his 2nd year in the league. Glow is a 5th rounder and has only started 2 games at RG. How many games has this crew played together? ONE.

    Like you said, Joeckel wasn't the Hawks #2 pick but the Jags. He only has 5 starts at LG.

    I don't know what else to say except the Hawks have had several OL make huge contracts so there is no problem with their talent evaluation and they simply have a young line that needs to grow together.

    BS! Our QB is getting beaten to death! What you are expressing isn't an excuse it's an indictment! No coach or GM in their right mind would plan to develop 5 offensive linemen and start them all and expect to have success! It's lunacy!
    User avatar
    brimsalabim
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3689
    Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:50 am


  • Jville wrote:The topic will continue to be beaten to death because it has been turned into a campaign.

    There will be more reaches and to fuzzy assertions to follow.



    I don't get what you are getting at. This is the kind of research that eliminates funny assertions. The best teams in the league have Olines built with 4th-7th round draft picks because they can identify and coach up players. This saves money against the cap for these teams to spend on elite talent positions i.e. Pass rushers, pass catchers, and quarterbacks. Tom Cable has been here 7 years and has squandered a massive amount of draft capital and free agent signings. He has brought in over 50 free agents in 7 years. If you don't know that is 10 players per position along the Oline. At this point would you not want to know what this team would look like if they had one of the other 31 line coaches in the league?
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1521
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • vin.couve12 wrote:OL actually take a few years, like most positions, to pan out. Every once in a while you get a rook who can actually play right now or maybe in a year, but most of the time you don't get ROI for about 3 years.

    We never retain them and just start over. That's really the biggest thing. Most fans think that the draft is like their microwave, and that's just not true. Not even in the slightest.

    That doesn't account for Joekel, however. It really wasn't just the one time. He was swatted like a fly more than once. He lacks strength to play inside, IMO.

    If we're going to take the time to grow, move him out to LT where his feet and height (which also means lack of leverage against powerful DTs), will serve him better against smaller, faster defenders. If Roos is so impressive, let him play. I know he's strong enough to handle playing G and he's also shorter, which will help leverage and also RW's vision.


    We have no starting rookies! Read my post above about the new oline the Vikings just put together this year. Hogwash, excuses.

    We didn't decide to swap positions of all those guys, our fearless and stubborn leaders did because they know more than all the other teams that generally avoid such stupidity. You could use a dart board and get better starting position results than Cable is getting.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • O-linemen, D-linemen, Running backs, and Linebackers can start and dominate as rookies. Don't believe the Cable garbage about time to develop.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1521
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • Seafan wrote:This topic has been beaten to death.

    Ifedi is starting his 2nd year. Britt is starting his 2nd year at center. Fant was going to be the starter and Rees is in his first year as a starter and only his 2nd year in the league. Glow is a 5th rounder and has only started 2 games at RG. How many games has this crew played together? ONE.

    Like you said, Joeckel wasn't the Hawks #2 pick but the Jags. He only has 5 starts at LG.

    I don't know what else to say except the Hawks have had several OL make huge contracts so there is no problem with their talent evaluation and they simply have a young line that needs to grow together.


    Need to grow together? And so we should be okay with below mediocre performances at a professional level? How much time do they need to grow? Isn't that what practice and the preseason are for? Shouldn't take half the season of games that count to see an improvement. Like the poster above said even Minnesota put together an OL that put ours to shame and this was the first time they played together.
    Touchdooooooown SEAHAWKS!!!!
    User avatar
    Seahaaaawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 952
    Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:33 am
    Location: Redmond Washington


  • sdog1981 wrote:O-linemen, D-linemen, Running backs, and Linebackers can start and dominate as rookies. Don't believe the Cable garbage about time to develop.

    That's few and far between league wide and has nothing to do with cable. It's not McDonalds.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3462
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • sdog1981 wrote:
    Jville wrote:The topic will continue to be beaten to death because it has been turned into a campaign.

    There will be more reaches and to fuzzy assertions to follow.



    I don't get what you are getting at. This is the kind of research that eliminates funny assertions. The best teams in the league have Olines built with 4th-7th round draft picks because they can identify and coach up players. This saves money against the cap for these teams to spend on elite talent positions i.e. Pass rushers, pass catchers, and quarterbacks. Tom Cable has been here 7 years and has squandered a massive amount of draft capital and free agent signings. He has brought in over 50 free agents in 7 years. If you don't know that is 10 players per position along the Oline. At this point would you not want to know what this team would look like if they had one of the other 31 line coaches in the league?


    I'm not dismissing the work that went into building the list. I hear and see the frustration. But, to seize upon a ranking, in isolation from all other factors, as a vehicle to arrive at a desired predetermine conclusion is a flawed exercise. It is only useful for fuzzy campaigns of persuasion. I fully expect frustration to drive the search for more fuzzy assertions. That is the nature of negative campaigns

    With regards to a change of the offensive line coach, I expect that to be be reviewed once again in 2018. And I am ok with an annual post season performance review of all Seahawk personnel.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 6903
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


  • http://seahawksdraftblog.com/monday-not ... the-o-line

    I guess some in this thread would like to cut the OL and start from scratch. What good would that do?

    You may not like it but the 8 guys the Hawks dressed are the OL this season. The best thing for the Hawks to do is to stay the course and of course they will and they don't give a s&&& what you think of it. All lines need time to integrate. So what if you have a problem with it. Like I said earlier - this has been beaten to death.
    Thomas Paine: To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead
    User avatar
    Seafan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5921
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:30 pm
    Location: Helotes, TX


  • Which means nothing.

    Aaron Curry, Jason Smith, Ryan Leaf.

    Plus, you're including Joekel, whom we did not pick. We picked him up off the street after the team that drafted Luke cut him.

    Draft position means NOTHING.

    Tom Brady, Russell Wilson, Doug Baldwin, Chris Carson....


    To say that they can't identify and develop talent, then include Luke Joekel, invalidates your argument.

    Like Brock Huard says, "Figures Lie, and Liars Figure."
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy

    http://ivotuk.com/
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 16325
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • ivotuk wrote:Which means nothing.

    Aaron Curry, Jason Smith, Ryan Leaf.

    Plus, you're including Joekel, whom we did not pick. We picked him up off the street after the team that drafted Luke cut him.

    Draft position means NOTHING.

    Tom Brady, Russell Wilson, Doug Baldwin, Chris Carson....


    To say that they can't identify and develop talent, then include Luke Joekel, invalidates your argument.

    Like Brock Huard says, "Figures Lie, and Liars Figure."


    It means plenty around here to all those that cling to the thin thread that we draft last, therefore of course we suck. It's just another BS excuse to ignore the problem.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • Well it doesn't mean a whole lot really. Check out statistics league wide on 1st round picks alone and that will tell you enough.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3462
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • vin.couve12 wrote:Well it doesn't mean a whole lot really. Check out statistics league wide on 1st round picks alone and that will tell you enough.


    Yet there are so many out there (safely say vast majority) claiming teams like Dallas is good because they have all the high picks. Can't have it both ways.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • Seafan wrote:http://seahawksdraftblog.com/monday-notes-dont-just-blame-it-on-the-o-line

    I guess some in this thread would like to cut the OL and start from scratch. What good would that do?

    You may not like it but the 8 guys the Hawks dressed are the OL this season. The best thing for the Hawks to do is to stay the course and of course they will and they don't give a s&&& what you think of it. All lines need time to integrate. So what if you have a problem with it. Like I said earlier - this has been beaten to death.


    STRAWMAN! This line already sucks and has, very baldly, the past 3 three years. Why isn't this line better than 2015? 2016? Was there a change of strategy that we should give some time? The reason there is no time given to integration is because this line is as bad as previous line decisions.

    This subject has not reached a "beaten to death" fact. This part of our team is a very, very bad part of our history and is only growing.

    I bet someone could make an argument that this line is worse than the 2002 Houston Texans.
    User avatar
    seahawkfreak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3486
    Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:36 pm
    Location: Aiken , SC


  • Seymour wrote:
    vin.couve12 wrote:Well it doesn't mean a whole lot really. Check out statistics league wide on 1st round picks alone and that will tell you enough.


    Yet there are so many out there (safely say vast majority) claiming teams like Dallas is good because they have all the high picks. Can't have it both ways.

    Dallas goes for much larger OL where their sort of innate nastiness lends to greater gains than technicalities regarding scheme.

    I've was always a big Buddy Ryan fan as a kid. I didn't know it at the time, but I loved the mid 80s Bears defense and also the very late 80s/early 90s Eagles defense. I learned later that they were coached by the same guy. Anyway, he was famous for finding gritty, mean and nasty gems all over the place. He said he generally knew it when he talked to them before the draft or otherwise.

    Kam said the same thing about his backup rook....can't remember his name, but that means something. Not that this has anything to do with anything, but it's different styles of thought and maybe an ineptitude as well....I had a few with my wife so don't mind me...
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3462
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • Yeah, yeah....maybe we have problems identifying a mentality. Or maybe we're looking for the wrong one. We don't on defense, like Buddy, but also like Buddy, we don't seem to identify much on OL.

    Either way, these are all "compound problems." The OL isn't the only problem.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3462
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • ivotuk wrote:Which means nothing.

    Aaron Curry, Jason Smith, Ryan Leaf.

    Plus, you're including Joekel, whom we did not pick. We picked him up off the street after the team that drafted Luke cut him.

    Draft position means NOTHING.

    Tom Brady, Russell Wilson, Doug Baldwin, Chris Carson....


    To say that they can't identify and develop talent, then include Luke Joekel, invalidates your argument.

    Like Brock Huard says, "Figures Lie, and Liars Figure."


    Those guys are major outliers. There are plenty of busts in the early rounds and you hear about them more precisely because they failed to live up to their draft status. There are hundreds of late round picks whom no one cares to recall who also fail to make an impact.

    The real problem is that the Seahawks have been picking in the late first round, and that's the earliest given trade downs and trading first round picks. The stud OL are long gone by pick 20. The Hawks never have a chance to get the guys who are both technically sound and highly athletic. They'd have to trade up quite a bit to do it and it would handicap them later in the draft. So, they have to go the route of picking guys who are highly athletic, but raw, because they're the best ones left.

    The problem is, that it isn't working so well and we can see that other teams are doing better jobs of it. Look at the Packer's line that held up pretty well against a very strong Seattle pass rush:

    Bakhtiari (4th round) - elite pass blocking LT
    Lane Taylor (UDFA) - solid LG
    Corey Linsley (5th) - very good center
    Jahri Evans (4th) - FA signing, and we cut him last season :(
    Kyle Murphy (6th) - not good, but played acceptably against Bennett/Clark/Avril in his first start. Not disastrous like our OL
    [Bryan Bulaga was a 1st round pick but he didn't play]
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 559
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


  • ivotuk wrote:Which means nothing.

    Aaron Curry, Jason Smith, Ryan Leaf.

    Plus, you're including Joekel, whom we did not pick. We picked him up off the street after the team that drafted Luke cut him.

    Draft position means NOTHING.

    Tom Brady, Russell Wilson, Doug Baldwin, Chris Carson....


    To say that they can't identify and develop talent, then include Luke Joekel, invalidates your argument.

    Like Brock Huard says, "Figures Lie, and Liars Figure."


    Ummm im not sure brock huard platitudes are compelling evidence that draft position doesnt have some correlation to performance. Nor does naming guys.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3257
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • Identifying existing talent that fist your scheme and needs versus trying to create it from scratch is another thing, Pocic looks good and was said to be one of the most polished college guys, yet he is not out there, his technique is much better then most of our starters, Pete even said he had great technique this pre season and is smart and talented. I wonder why they are holding him out if only because they have nobody else that can play Center active.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 22149
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • chris98251 wrote:Identifying existing talent that fist your scheme and needs versus trying to create it from scratch is another thing, Pocic looks good and was said to be one of the most polished college guys, yet he is not out there, his technique is much better then most of our starters, Pete even said he had great technique this pre season and is smart and talented. I wonder why they are holding him out if only because they have nobody else that can play Center active.


    IDK but if I had to guess I would say experience and strength, plus his arms are short for a tackle the position most feel needs the upgrade. I can see him moving right into LG next season and letting Joeckel walk. For now he backs up 3 or four positions which is an important thing. He's likely getting most of his practice reps at LG with some at center.
    Thomas Paine: To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead
    User avatar
    Seafan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5921
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:30 pm
    Location: Helotes, TX


  • We didn't draft Joeckel, but we paid him $8M to come here, so that speaks to talent evaluation I'd say.
    User avatar
    CodeWarrior
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1912
    Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 6:02 pm


  • We didn't draft al of our players. Some of them were drafted by other teams and failed there first before being shoved into our starting line up.
    User avatar
    brimsalabim
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3689
    Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:50 am


  • This whole idea that draft position means nothing just needs to stop.

    Do people really understand what they are saying with this comment?

    The highest draft position means you get first shot at selecting talent.

    It means you have the best chance to get the player you want.

    It means you have the highest chance of success.

    It means you have a greater value player by all measurable standards.

    It actually means thousands of things more than nothing.

    Draft position does not mean guaranteed success, that is as far as it goes. Otherwise, why not turn all early round picks into all 5-7th round picks and compile massive picks, after all, "a 1st round pick is the same value as a 7th round pick." :roll:

    This thread and research is very helpful. It tells us we are not at any real disadvantage in building our line with young talent. As far as us not selecting Joeckel, well we selected Ifedi in the 1st, we are paying Joeckel $8M to play guard which puts him near the upper part of guards. So IMO we have stamped a somewhere in the first round pick on him.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • As I read your list, it doesn't really matter who drafted a starting player, just what round they were drafted and who they are playing for now, correct? For instance, James Carpenter (25th) plays for the Jets but was drafted by Seattle. Max Unger (49th) and Russell Okung (6th) also were picked by the Seahawks but are starting for other teams.

    We don't have a talent issue in Seattle and I think your list does a good job of pointing it out. We all know we don't keep linemen past their 4 year contracts for the most part and as we can see by the list of 3 players above, there are plenty of ex-Seahawks that are starting in the NFL.

    So if the talent isn't an issue then I would say the zone blocking scheme (ZBS) itself is at fault. The reason it takes so long for a line to gel is that all the permutations take time to develop. It isn't something the players dealt with in college. It isn't always the same for each line front. On Monday's discussion on one of the radio stations, Pete referred to a specific play where the lineman that looked to have missed the block wasn't at fault. The net result that I took from Pete was that the actual scheme isn't really apparent from just looking at the replay even if a free running defender seems to have been running in a gap that Joekel (for example) appeared to be closest to.

    The ZBS is just too complicated of a system with the way we are cycling through our linemen. It doesn't give our new players enough time to learn it to be successful and it is too nuanced to pick it up quickly. We either need to change our personnel planning and keep some of our offensive line starters that know ZBS on the roster or we need a new offensive line scheme that our players can pick up quickly as they cycle through our team each year.

    In a way I don't necessarily see this as a coaching issue except that it just takes way too long to coach linemen up on the scheme.

    Here is a link to an article talking about the ZBS for those that want to know more: https://www.fieldgulls.com/football-bre ... -tom-cable
    Last edited by BullHawk33 on Wed Sep 13, 2017 5:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
    BullHawk33
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 376
    Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
    Location: Puyallup


  • vin.couve12 wrote:
    Seymour wrote:
    vin.couve12 wrote:Well it doesn't mean a whole lot really. Check out statistics league wide on 1st round picks alone and that will tell you enough.


    Yet there are so many out there (safely say vast majority) claiming teams like Dallas is good because they have all the high picks. Can't have it both ways.

    Dallas goes for much larger OL where their sort of innate nastiness lends to greater gains than technicalities regarding scheme.

    I've was always a big Buddy Ryan fan as a kid. I didn't know it at the time, but I loved the mid 80s Bears defense and also the very late 80s/early 90s Eagles defense. I learned later that they were coached by the same guy. Anyway, he was famous for finding gritty, mean and nasty gems all over the place. He said he generally knew it when he talked to them before the draft or otherwise.

    Kam said the same thing about his backup rook....can't remember his name, but that means something. Not that this has anything to do with anything, but it's different styles of thought and maybe an ineptitude as well....I had a few with my wife so don't mind me...


    That has nothing to do with the conversation we are having on draft selection position. They have higher draft valued players that produce better than most, yet our picks consumed more resource. We are not at a disadvantage there. That is the point being made.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • Erebus wrote:I compiled a list of all week 1 starters, plus projected starters for TB and Miami, and swapped Duane Brown into the Texans lineup despite his holdout. I then looked up each player's overall draft position. For undrafted players, they were assigned 255, although there was actually a player drafted 255, but most drafts end by then. I then averaged them all out. Only the Redskins and Browns have higher average draft position among their five o-line starters, and they both have pretty damn good o-lines.

    This is more fuel for the fire that Cable sucks at developing linemen, although Joeckel wasn't drafted and developed by the Seahawks and is skewing the numbers. An interesting thing about this list is the only o-line comparable to the Seahawks last year was the Vikings, and they are dead last in average draft position. This is an indictment on both their ability to identify talent in the draft and their ability to develop it.

    Team - Average
    WAS - 49
    CLE - 52.6
    SEA - 65.6
    NYG - 74
    BUF - 78.8
    DAL - 80.4
    LAR - 80.8
    HOU - 81.6
    NO - 82.4
    MIA - 85.4
    DET - 90
    ARI - 92.8
    CAR - 102.4
    ATL - 105.6
    CIN - 108.2
    KC - 108.4
    CHI - 113.8
    PHI - 121
    IND - 121.8
    PIT - 123
    TB - 123.4
    NE - 123.8
    OAK - 124
    TEN - 125.6
    DEN - 128.6
    SF - 130.4
    GB - 131.2
    NYJ - 135.2
    JAX - 140.8
    LAC - 160.2
    BAL - 161
    MIN - 162


    HawkGA
    NET Hall Of Famer
     
    Posts: 105019
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 12:29 pm


  • Looking at average draft position of starters isn't really a good way to express value. You have to look at cap dollars, where we are setting the floor.

    Rees Odhiambo was a 3rd round pick. Does that make him a good player? He is not explosive, strong, long, quick, or experienced.

    Luke Joeckel obviously is not a first round quality player. He signed a one-year "prove it" deal.

    Another consideration is that the Seahawks are picking near the bottom of these rounds. Getting the 31st pick in Germain Ifedi is not really the same as getting a Top 10 pick in Tyron Smith or Jack Conklin.
    User avatar
    hawknation2017
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 729
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 8:44 am


  • BullHawk33 wrote:....So if the talent isn't an issue then I would say the zone blocking scheme (ZBS) itself is at fault. The reason it takes so long for a line to gel is that all the permutations take time to develop. It isn't something the players dealt with in college.


    I used to think that myself. I've moved on from that after looking further into this. It is clearly more coaching than scheme, at least here it is.
    Here is a list of teams using the ZBS.....

    Teams that relied on a zone blocking scheme

    1959–1967: Green Bay Packers [HC Vince Lombardi][3]
    1984–1991: Cincinnati Bengals [HC Sam Wyche]
    1995–2009: Denver Broncos [HC Mike Shanahan and Josh McDaniels (kept scheme in first year)]
    1999–Present: University of Iowa [HC Kirk Ferentz]
    2001–2007: West Virginia University [HC Rich Rodriguez]
    2001–2008: Bowling Green State University [HC Urban Meyer and Gregg Brandon]
    2002–2006: University of Minnesota [HC Glen Mason]
    2003–2004: University of Utah [HC Urban Meyer]
    2004–2006: Atlanta Falcons [HC Jim L. Mora]
    2005–2010: University of Florida [HC Urban Meyer]
    2005–2009: University of Notre Dame [HC Charlie Weis]
    2006–2010: University of Michigan [HC Lloyd Carr and Rich Rodriguez]
    2006–Present: Green Bay Packers [HC Mike McCarthy]
    2006–2013: Houston Texans [HC Gary Kubiak]
    2007–2012: University of Oregon [OC Chip Kelly]
    2008–2010: Oakland Raiders [HC Tom Cable]
    2009–2009: Florida State University [HC Bobby Bowden][4]
    2010–2012: Buffalo Bills [HC Chan Gailey]
    2010–Present: Seattle Seahawks [HC Pete Carroll]
    2010–2014: Washington Redskins [HC Mike Shanahan and OC Kyle Shanahan]
    2012: Oakland Raiders [HC Dennis Allen]
    2012–Present: University of Arizona [HC Rich Rodriguez]
    2012–Present: University of California, Los Angeles [HC Jim L. Mora]
    2012–2015: Miami Dolphins [HC Joe Philbin]
    2012–Present: Ohio State University [HC Urban Meyer]
    2013–Present: Arizona Cardinals [HC Bruce Arians]
    2013–Present: Auburn University [HC Gus Malzahn]
    2013–Present: Brigham Young University [HC Bronco Mendenhall and OC Robert Anae]
    2013–Present: Dallas Cowboys [HC Jason Garrett]
    2013–Present: Jacksonville Jaguars [HC Gus Bradley]
    2013–Present: University of Oregon [HC Mark Helfrich]
    2013–2015: Philadelphia Eagles [HC Chip Kelly]
    2013–Present: Pittsburgh Steelers [HC Mike Tomlin]
    2014–Present: Baltimore Ravens [HC John Harbaugh
    2014–Present: Cleveland Browns [HC Mike Pettine
    2014–Present: New Orleans Saints [HC Sean Payton]
    2015–Present: Atlanta Falcons [HC Dan Quinn and OC Kyle Shanahan]
    2015–Present: Denver Broncos [HC Gary Kubiak]
    2016–Present: San Francisco 49ers [HC Chip Kelly]
    2016–Present: Miami Dolphins [HC Adam Gase]
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • BullHawk33 wrote:As I read your list, it doesn't really matter who drafted a starting player, just what round they were drafted and who they are playing for now, correct? For instance, James Carpenter (25th) plays for the Jets but was drafted by Seattle. Max Unger (49th) and Russell Okung (6th) also were picked by the Seahawks but are starting for other teams.

    We don't have a talent issue in Seattle and I think your list does a good job of pointing it out. We all know we don't keep linemen past their 4 year contracts for the most part and as we can see by the list of 3 players above, there are plenty of ex-Seahawks that are starting in the NFL.

    So if the talent isn't an issue then I would say the zone blocking scheme (ZBS) itself is at fault. The reason it takes so long for a line to gel is that all the permutations take time to develop. It isn't something the players dealt with in college. It isn't always the same for each line front. On Monday's discussion on one of the radio stations, Pete referred to a specific play where the lineman that looked to have missed the block wasn't at fault. The net result that I took from Pete was that the actual scheme isn't really apparent from just looking at the replay even if a free running defender seems to have been running in a gap that Joekel (for example) appeared to be closest to.

    The ZBS is just too complicated of a system with the way we are cycling through our linemen. It doesn't give our new players enough time to learn it to be successful and it is too nuanced to pick it up quickly. We either need to change our personnel planning and keep some of our offensive line starters that know ZBS on the roster or we need a new offensive line scheme that our players can pick up quickly as they cycle through our team each year.

    In a way I don't necessarily see this as a coaching issue except that it just takes way too long to coach linemen up on the scheme.

    Here is a link to an article talking about the ZBS for those that want to know more: https://www.fieldgulls.com/football-bre ... -tom-cable



    The issue is you can't keep everyone. Okung, Carpenter, Unger and Sweezy (throw him in too) is a $23m cap hit in 2017(rising significantly over the next few years too). Who would you cut to make that happen?
    User avatar
    EverydayImRusselin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1420
    Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:38 am


  • EverydayImRusselin wrote:The issue is you can't keep everyone. Okung, Carpenter, Unger and Sweezy (throw him in too) is a $23m cap hit in 2017(rising significantly over the next few years too). Who would you cut to make that happen?


    If your system is inherently difficult on new linemen and it takes time to be successful then either you just ride the lightning (like we have) and hope for the best from the o line or you have to change to a blocking scheme that allows you to be more successful earlier because of all the turnover.

    I'm not saying we had to keep them, although that is one option. I'm saying if you expect to cycle through people often, like we have, you had better have a plan to allow them to succeed early, which is not what we have seen from this system.
    BullHawk33
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 376
    Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
    Location: Puyallup


  • Seymour wrote:
    BullHawk33 wrote:....So if the talent isn't an issue then I would say the zone blocking scheme (ZBS) itself is at fault. The reason it takes so long for a line to gel is that all the permutations take time to develop. It isn't something the players dealt with in college.


    I used to think that myself. I've moved on from that after looking further into this. It is clearly more coaching than scheme, at least here it is.
    Here is a list of teams using the ZBS.....

    Teams that relied on a zone blocking scheme

    1959–1967: Green Bay Packers [HC Vince Lombardi][3]
    1984–1991: Cincinnati Bengals [HC Sam Wyche]
    1995–2009: Denver Broncos [HC Mike Shanahan and Josh McDaniels (kept scheme in first year)]
    1999–Present: University of Iowa [HC Kirk Ferentz]
    2001–2007: West Virginia University [HC Rich Rodriguez]
    2001–2008: Bowling Green State University [HC Urban Meyer and Gregg Brandon]
    2002–2006: University of Minnesota [HC Glen Mason]
    2003–2004: University of Utah [HC Urban Meyer]
    2004–2006: Atlanta Falcons [HC Jim L. Mora]
    2005–2010: University of Florida [HC Urban Meyer]
    2005–2009: University of Notre Dame [HC Charlie Weis]
    2006–2010: University of Michigan [HC Lloyd Carr and Rich Rodriguez]
    2006–Present: Green Bay Packers [HC Mike McCarthy]
    2006–2013: Houston Texans [HC Gary Kubiak]
    2007–2012: University of Oregon [OC Chip Kelly]
    2008–2010: Oakland Raiders [HC Tom Cable]
    2009–2009: Florida State University [HC Bobby Bowden][4]
    2010–2012: Buffalo Bills [HC Chan Gailey]
    2010–Present: Seattle Seahawks [HC Pete Carroll]
    2010–2014: Washington Redskins [HC Mike Shanahan and OC Kyle Shanahan]
    2012: Oakland Raiders [HC Dennis Allen]
    2012–Present: University of Arizona [HC Rich Rodriguez]
    2012–Present: University of California, Los Angeles [HC Jim L. Mora]
    2012–2015: Miami Dolphins [HC Joe Philbin]
    2012–Present: Ohio State University [HC Urban Meyer]
    2013–Present: Arizona Cardinals [HC Bruce Arians]
    2013–Present: Auburn University [HC Gus Malzahn]
    2013–Present: Brigham Young University [HC Bronco Mendenhall and OC Robert Anae]
    2013–Present: Dallas Cowboys [HC Jason Garrett]
    2013–Present: Jacksonville Jaguars [HC Gus Bradley]
    2013–Present: University of Oregon [HC Mark Helfrich]
    2013–2015: Philadelphia Eagles [HC Chip Kelly]
    2013–Present: Pittsburgh Steelers [HC Mike Tomlin]
    2014–Present: Baltimore Ravens [HC John Harbaugh
    2014–Present: Cleveland Browns [HC Mike Pettine
    2014–Present: New Orleans Saints [HC Sean Payton]
    2015–Present: Atlanta Falcons [HC Dan Quinn and OC Kyle Shanahan]
    2015–Present: Denver Broncos [HC Gary Kubiak]
    2016–Present: San Francisco 49ers [HC Chip Kelly]
    2016–Present: Miami Dolphins [HC Adam Gase]


    Since we tend to draft and not sign experienced linemen it really starts with college. Such a small number of schools even teach linemen well and the list of colleges with ZBS is incredibly small. Such a small number of those schools provide talent each year to the draft. It is just a numbers game and the players that go to the NFL just don't know the ZBS.

    Our talent philosophy requires us to cycle through o linemen each year. We lean on them earlier and have to bring them up to speed faster. My theory is that the scheme is too complicated to make that happen successfully with new people each year. The o line starts performing better 4 or 5 weeks into the season each year. That is no accident as it just takes them time to get through all the learning needed. Coaching is definitely a function of performance but the scheme continues to fail until all 5 players learn and execute properly.

    Patriots had a crap line protect Brady and it worked. That happened because of a coaching change but mostly because of how the different scheme that supported the talent they had was applied. They worked with what they had and we should do that too. The scheme simply doesn't support the talent.
    BullHawk33
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 376
    Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
    Location: Puyallup


  • BullHawk33 wrote:Patriots had a crap line protect Brady and it worked.


    Hoooo boy

    Now you're REALLY stepping on some people's sacred-cow beliefs about the importance of the OL.

    Next we'll hear lunacies like how Peyton Manning's line was proven to be bad once he left the Colts, or how Aaron Rodgers has actually been one of the league's most sacked QB's over the years, or how David Carr's sack rate followed him to other teams once he left Houston while Matt Schaub immediately improved things...

    Oh wait...those are all true... :?: :?: :?:
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 15841
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    BullHawk33 wrote:Patriots had a crap line protect Brady and it worked.


    Hoooo boy

    Now you're REALLY stepping on some people's sacred-cow beliefs about the importance of the OL.

    Next we'll hear lunacies like how Peyton Manning's line was proven to be bad once he left the Colts, or how Aaron Rodgers has actually been one of the league's most sacked QB's over the years, or how David Carr's sack rate followed him to other teams once he left Houston while Matt Schaub immediately improved things...

    Oh wait...those are all true... :?: :?: :?:


    :lol: well done ...... Oh slayer of myths and delusions.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 6903
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


  • EverydayImRusselin wrote:
    The issue is you can't keep everyone. Okung, Carpenter, Unger and Sweezy (throw him in too) is a $23m cap hit in 2017(rising significantly over the next few years too). Who would you cut to make that happen?


    Dump Graham, Lacy, and Joeckel.

    That is very near $23M right there. What good is Graham used as a blocker anyway? It's like buying a Ferarri and turning it into a flower box.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • Seymour wrote:
    vin.couve12 wrote:
    Seymour wrote:
    vin.couve12 wrote:Well it doesn't mean a whole lot really. Check out statistics league wide on 1st round picks alone and that will tell you enough.


    Yet there are so many out there (safely say vast majority) claiming teams like Dallas is good because they have all the high picks. Can't have it both ways.

    Dallas goes for much larger OL where their sort of innate nastiness lends to greater gains than technicalities regarding scheme.

    I've was always a big Buddy Ryan fan as a kid. I didn't know it at the time, but I loved the mid 80s Bears defense and also the very late 80s/early 90s Eagles defense. I learned later that they were coached by the same guy. Anyway, he was famous for finding gritty, mean and nasty gems all over the place. He said he generally knew it when he talked to them before the draft or otherwise.

    Kam said the same thing about his backup rook....can't remember his name, but that means something. Not that this has anything to do with anything, but it's different styles of thought and maybe an ineptitude as well....I had a few with my wife so don't mind me...


    That has nothing to do with the conversation we are having on draft selection position. They have higher draft valued players that produce better than most, yet our picks consumed more resource. We are not at a disadvantage there. That is the point being made.

    Well I think it does. I was listening to Joekel on an interview yesterday and, going back to what I was saying, when he talks he's kind of....passively dumb.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3462
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • Seymour wrote:
    EverydayImRusselin wrote:
    The issue is you can't keep everyone. Okung, Carpenter, Unger and Sweezy (throw him in too) is a $23m cap hit in 2017(rising significantly over the next few years too). Who would you cut to make that happen?


    Dump Graham, Lacy, and Joeckel.

    That is very near $23M right there. What good is Graham used as a blocker anyway? It's like buying a Ferarri and turning it into a flower box.

    This is very much agree with.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3462
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • vin.couve12 wrote:
    Seymour wrote:
    EverydayImRusselin wrote:
    The issue is you can't keep everyone. Okung, Carpenter, Unger and Sweezy (throw him in too) is a $23m cap hit in 2017(rising significantly over the next few years too). Who would you cut to make that happen?


    Dump Graham, Lacy, and Joeckel.

    That is very near $23M right there. What good is Graham used as a blocker anyway? It's like buying a Ferarri and turning it into a flower box.

    This is very much agree with.


    Today Pete might even agree also. Problem is, too late. Live and learn, or in our case live in stubborn futility.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2907
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    BullHawk33 wrote:Patriots had a crap line protect Brady and it worked.


    Hoooo boy

    Now you're REALLY stepping on some people's sacred-cow beliefs about the importance of the OL.

    Next we'll hear lunacies like how Peyton Manning's line was proven to be bad once he left the Colts, or how Aaron Rodgers has actually been one of the league's most sacked QB's over the years, or how David Carr's sack rate followed him to other teams once he left Houston while Matt Schaub immediately improved things...

    Oh wait...those are all true... :?: :?: :?:




    Oh, man Anthony! is going to find you for posting this........ :lol:
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1521
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • Seriously though...go back and listen to a guy like Breno talk vs listening to Joekel. I find it kind of alarming how much of a difference there is how mentality even sort of comes through verbally.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3462
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • vin.couve12 wrote:Seriously though...go back and listen to a guy like Breno talk vs listening to Joekel. I find it kind of alarming how much of a difference there is how mentality even sort of comes through verbally.



    Just some things can't be evaluated. Breno was a bully and the line kind of took on that mentality. Sure he got some 15-yard penalties but he let the other team know they had a long day ahead of them.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1521
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • Seymour wrote:First, a huge thank you to Erebus for doing all that work! Excellent find and work. Finally some solid proof against all those "but we draft last" of course we suck replies I'm tired of reading.

    Fact of the matter is, yes not a ton of $$ (younger talent) but a ton of resource is getting chewed up drafting lineman year after year that are doing nothing but holding us back thanks to Cable, Brennon Carroll and Co.

    Anyone watch the Vikings all new line they put together last night? Nice job Vikings....yes it can be done with someone in charge that knows what the hell they are looking at for talent.

    The Vikings entered Monday with five starting linemen who had not been on the field together for even one snap in the preseason: Easton, left tackle Riley Reiff, center Pat Elflein, right guard Joe Berger and right tackle Mike Remmers.


    It would be hard not to say nice things about the linemen after their showing against the Saints. They opened plenty of holes for rookie running back Dalvin Cook, who ran for 127 yards, and they allowed just one sack of quarterback Sam Bradford, who was throwing the ball all over the field.

    Bradford completed 27 of 32 passes for 346 yards with three touchdowns and had a career-high passer rating of 143.0.


    http://www.twincities.com/2017/09/12/vikings-offensive-line-answers-plenty-of-questions-in-opener/

    Always Compete....unless you are a coach.


    Remmers sucks and the Vikings OL issues will rear their ugly head in due time, rest assured.
    ctrcat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 845
    Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:50 am


  • hawknation2017 wrote:Looking at average draft position of starters isn't really a good way to express value. You have to look at cap dollars, where we are setting the floor.

    Rees Odhiambo was a 3rd round pick. Does that make him a good player? He is not explosive, strong, long, quick, or experienced.

    Luke Joeckel obviously is not a first round quality player. He signed a one-year "prove it" deal.

    Another consideration is that the Seahawks are picking near the bottom of these rounds. Getting the 31st pick in Germain Ifedi is not really the same as getting a Top 10 pick in Tyron Smith or Jack Conklin.


    Why would you only look at cap dollars? I agree you can't just look at draft position, especially for players that were signed rather than drafted, but it makes no more sense to focus solely on the cap than it does to focus solely on the draft. Teams use both to assemble their rosters. If your O-line consists entirely of top-15 picks, I think it's fair to say you've invested heavily in the position, even if the cap dollars don't show it. (Higher picks do have a higher cap hit than lower picks, but rookie contracts are severely undervalued even at the top end.)

    I think the right way to do it is to consider the draft value that a team spends on the O-linemen they've drafted themselves, and for any free agents they've signed convert their contract into an approximate draft value. For the Hawks, the only player on the line that they didn't draft themselves is Joeckel, whose contract obviously doesn't come close to matching his original draft status. That would tend to lower the Hawks in these rankings, but probably not by a whole lot. They really have spent a good deal of draft capital on the O-line in recent years, so it's simply not true that they haven't invested in that group. It just hasn't paid off, at least not yet. In their defense, however, it seems to be a league-wide problem.

    Also, picking near the bottom of every round has nothing to do with these rankings, since they're not based on the round but the overall position in the draft. These rankings already treat a player picked at 10 differently than a player picked at 31. Granted, one could argue that the difference is severely understated at the top, since the difference between 10 and 31 is much larger than the difference between 110 and 131. It might make sense to use a draft value chart (like the Jimmy Johnson chart or an updated version of it) to convert picks into draft value, then calculate the average draft value on the line, then convert that back into a corresponding pick.
    Alexander
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 249
    Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 3:20 pm


Next


It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:02 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online