2021 Draft RD 2 PK 56 WR D'wayne Eskridge, W Michigan

[chris98251]

BASF,

The 'commitment to the run' comments are from Carroll himself. But I agree, they are tiresome.

I am tired of watching us force a middling run game when we have one of the better WR groups and one of the best QBs in the league. Trotting out #s does not tell the whole story, so it makes no sense to jump on that carousel with you - but numbers IN CONTEXT matter. Data in aggregate does not.
(There have been literally multiple page long threads on this site covering how Carroll's predilections in this regard make little sense...feel free to check those)

What is salient is that our greatest strengths are for the passing game not the running game. (Though Carson is stellar) so resources to facilitate more use of our greatest advantages seem to be a good direction for us.

And anything that makes running harder for Carroll to try to force is fine by me. An undersized WR usually isn't a great blocking WR (not always, Tate was fantastic and he was not big).

Regardless, the #s tend to be roughly that 1 in 3 picks are going to work out for us. If even 2 of these 3 picks end up contributing to the team, that is a win.

On paper, and watching the film, this pick makes little sense to me. But it feels like the same kind of pick we tend to be winners on so I am going to assume this ends up being one of our good picks when we look back on it later.

We will know if he can get out of Top Hat's with a Maple Bar once he shows up..........

 

[BASF]

BASF,

The 'commitment to the run' comments are from Carroll himself. But I agree, they are tiresome.

I am tired of watching us force a middling run game when we have one of the better WR groups and one of the best QBs in the league. Trotting out #s does not tell the whole story, so it makes no sense to jump on that carousel with you - but numbers IN CONTEXT matter. Data in aggregate does not.
(There have been literally multiple page long threads on this site covering how Carroll's predilections in this regard make little sense...feel free to check those)

What is salient is that our greatest strengths are for the passing game not the running game. (Though Carson is stellar) so resources to facilitate more use of our greatest advantages seem to be a good direction for us.

And anything that makes running harder for Carroll to try to force is fine by me. An undersized WR usually isn't a great blocking WR (not always, Tate was fantastic and he was not big).

Regardless, the #s tend to be roughly that 1 in 3 picks are going to work out for us. If even 2 of these 3 picks end up contributing to the team, that is a win.

On paper, and watching the film, this pick makes little sense to me. But it feels like the same kind of pick we tend to be winners on so I am going to assume this ends up being one of our good picks when we look back on it later.

So, what context do you want the numbers? Here's the problem. Carroll believes we should run the ball more effectively and more. Our wins against good defenses bear that out. In our wins against good pass defenses and good pass rushing defenses, we had about 22 times rushing attempts a game (wife moved my paperwork with the actual breakdowns, I will find it when I have the time) and had about 33 passing attempts a game. In our losses, the numbers were unbalanced in the passing games favor at about 15 to 38, in essence that greatest strength that so many want to have emphasized more has already been tried, and it failed.

The horrified reaction by some to the fact that a balanced run pass split would be beneficial to the Seahawks directly from our head coach is comical, especially when we were twenty-fourth in actual rushing attempts. Balance wins games. The numbers bare that out. They always have.

 

[Own The West]

Apparently, he's got a little bit of dog in him. Check the vid of him PANCAKING dbs in the run game. :shock:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/BenFennell_NFL/status/1384916160475508737[/tweet]

 

[Ad Hawk]

And that right there is why Pete chose D'Wayne and not a different receiver. His speed and ability to catch are important, but maybe not head-and-shoulders above others. But this willingness to get after the DB? For the run game, and the gadget plays?

Yes, please!

 

[cymatica]

BASF,

The 'commitment to the run' comments are from Carroll himself. But I agree, they are tiresome.

I am tired of watching us force a middling run game when we have one of the better WR groups and one of the best QBs in the league. Trotting out #s does not tell the whole story, so it makes no sense to jump on that carousel with you - but numbers IN CONTEXT matter. Data in aggregate does not.
(There have been literally multiple page long threads on this site covering how Carroll's predilections in this regard make little sense...feel free to check those)

What is salient is that our greatest strengths are for the passing game not the running game. (Though Carson is stellar) so resources to facilitate more use of our greatest advantages seem to be a good direction for us.

And anything that makes running harder for Carroll to try to force is fine by me. An undersized WR usually isn't a great blocking WR (not always, Tate was fantastic and he was not big).

Regardless, the #s tend to be roughly that 1 in 3 picks are going to work out for us. If even 2 of these 3 picks end up contributing to the team, that is a win.

On paper, and watching the film, this pick makes little sense to me. But it feels like the same kind of pick we tend to be winners on so I am going to assume this ends up being one of our good picks when we look back on it later.

So, what context do you want the numbers? Here's the problem. Carroll believes we should run the ball more effectively and more. Our wins against good defenses bear that out. In our wins against good pass defenses and good pass rushing defenses, we had about 22 times rushing attempts a game (wife moved my paperwork with the actual breakdowns, I will find it when I have the time) and had about 33 passing attempts a game. In our losses, the numbers were unbalanced in the passing games favor at about 15 to 38, in essence that greatest strength that so many want to have emphasized more has already been tried, and it failed.

The horrified reaction by some to the fact that a balanced run pass split would be beneficial to the Seahawks directly from our head coach is comical, especially when we were twenty-fourth in actual rushing attempts. Balance wins games. The numbers bare that out. They always have.

I think everyone is tired of the bland run game where almost every run looks like a zone read, but Wilson never keeps it. Need more variety, the 49ers offense being the prime example. Perhaps Waldron's offense will make defenses have think a little bit more before teeing off, which has been the biggest problem over the years IMO.

 

[Jville]

My view is that unique talent brings variety to a team and that variety expands the play book. I like the C'Wayne Eskridge pick. He's versatile, physical and a competitive player.

With regards to trends on the offensive side of the ball, I like the personnel moves they have made over the last 3 years. Keeping an eye on their 12 personnel trend has helped my understanding. Their passing success jumped from 46% (2018) to 61% (2019) out of 12 personnel. Having realized that improved outcome, their 12 personnel utilization jumped from 14% (2019) to 28% (2020). Their rush success jumped from 49% (2019) to 62% (2020) while the pass success improved a couple of percentage as well.


With regards to 11 personnel, last years' success rates were significantly lees than the success rates of 12 personnel. Thus the JS & PC response in adding wide receiver talent to improve and expand the 11 personnel playbook. I like the decision making going on at the VMAC. Carry on :2thumbs:

 

[BASF]

I think everyone is tired of the bland run game where almost every run looks like a zone read, but Wilson never keeps it. Need more variety, the 49ers offense being the prime example. Perhaps Waldron's offense will make defenses have think a little bit more before teeing off, which has been the biggest problem over the years IMO.

Absolutely agreed. The Waldron and Dickerson hire is crucial to my hope for this season. They both come from coaching trees that is all about disguise and will take our offense to the next level.