The future of the OL

[chris98251]

Throw the Gallery trade away, he was here for one purpose, to teach the scheme and be an on field coach, he did that and we moved on once we had the baseline for how we play on the O line.

Given our penchant for taking players that have a skill set or a certain athletic ability if we go FA I don't think we go big name, we go with experience but a skill set or a athletic ability established already, 2nd tier guys that are cheaper that have established themselves that can be coached to our system.

I also would not be so quick to dismiss Lewis, he isn't all world physically, but like Unger is smart, and can make calls, that is the difference. Any rookie will have to learn the system and how to read a NFL defense and make calls, that takes time and why many times a rookie Center will play Guard for a while along side a experienced guy. Again a lesser known F.A. may be brought in if anything.

Great topic for discussion though Kearly, will be interesting to see where we put effort in to signing our own guys going forward, that will be the first tell in the plan.

 

[mrt144]

Throw the Gallery trade away, he was here for one purpose, to teach the scheme and be an on field coach, he did that and we moved on once we had the baseline for how we play on the O line.

Given our penchant for taking players that have a skill set or a certain athletic ability if we go FA I don't think we go big name, we go with experience but a skill set or a athletic ability established already, 2nd tier guys that are cheaper that have established themselves that can be coached to our system.

I also would not be so quick to dismiss Lewis, he isn't all world physically, but like Unger is smart, and can make calls, that is the difference. Any rookie will have to learn the system and how to read a NFL defense and make calls, that takes time and why many times a rookie Center will play Guard for a while along side a experienced guy. Again a lesser known F.A. may be brought in if anything.

Great topic for discussion though Kearly, will be interesting to see where we put effort in to signing our own guys going forward, that will be the first tell in the plan.

Be cool if someone familiar with the FA market would chime in - who is potentially one of those athletic also rans?

 

[Erebus]

Throw the Gallery trade away, he was here for one purpose, to teach the scheme and be an on field coach, he did that and we moved on once we had the baseline for how we play on the O line.

Given our penchant for taking players that have a skill set or a certain athletic ability if we go FA I don't think we go big name, we go with experience but a skill set or a athletic ability established already, 2nd tier guys that are cheaper that have established themselves that can be coached to our system.

I also would not be so quick to dismiss Lewis, he isn't all world physically, but like Unger is smart, and can make calls, that is the difference. Any rookie will have to learn the system and how to read a NFL defense and make calls, that takes time and why many times a rookie Center will play Guard for a while along side a experienced guy. Again a lesser known F.A. may be brought in if anything.

Great topic for discussion though Kearly, will be interesting to see where we put effort in to signing our own guys going forward, that will be the first tell in the plan.

The Gallery "trade" (he was actually a free agent) shouldn't be dismissed simply because of his role (which even that I disagree with). The fact remains they invested resources (cap room and roster spot) in him for the purpose of improving the o-line. They gave him a 3 year/$15 million deal, which isn't role-player money.

 

[penihawk]

Not re-signing Kearse and cutting Graham would free up an extra 12M or so to spend on the OL (9M from Graham and about 3-4M from Kearse). I'm hoping they do this.

The Seahawks spent 12.8M on the OL last season with only two other teams spending less. Would be nice if they can double that number in free agency to go along with some high draft picks next season.

A great line and no playmakers? How did that work out for Dallas?

 

[brimsalabim]

If we could improve to the level of adequacy it would make a difference but seriously we start 4 backups half the season and 5 backups when Okung goes down. There has to be improvement.

 

[Tech Worlds]

We win 3 more games this season if we just aren't garbage upfront.

So it should not cost much to upgrade from garbage to poor.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Thanks for the post kearly. Good read. Really hope Pete and John are able to at least get this o-line up to a level of decent next season. Won't be easy though. I still regret them not signing Wisnewski last offseason and then compounding that mistake by starting Nowack for the first half of the season. Lewis is below average in pass pro, so is Sweezy and Britt is simply awful. The interior must be upgraded.

Having Rawls healthy for a whole year could really help the o-line as well.

 

[DavidSeven]

I would re-sign Okung. I would let Sweezy walk and make at least one splash acquisition for a G or C. This puts you in good position for the draft, as you won't be forced to reach for anyone.

To me, the goal has to be making the OL better in absolute terms, not the most "cost effective." I cannot imagine any scenario in which our OL is better by leaving a gaping hole at LT and committing to Sweezy for another 3 years. We are not making a pie-in-the-sky deal for Joe Thomas, so you'd either be counting on a rookie or Britt at Tackle -- no thanks. Letting Okung walk also basically forces you to draft OT in the 1st, which is a recipe for a Britt-stake.

It is just easier to find a Right Guard. There are more FA options. You can swing a college OT inside. You have Glowinski. The only thing that makes me hesitate on moving from Sweezy is that our Center and Left Guard situation is even worse, and upgrading all three spots in one off-season may be asking too much.

This will be a tough riddle to figure out because we dug ourselves a huge hole last off-season.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

I would re-sign Okung. I would let Sweezy walk and make at least one splash acquisition for a G or C. This puts you in good position for the draft, as you won't be forced to reach for anyone.

To me, the goal has to be making the OL better in absolute terms, not the most "cost effective." I cannot imagine any scenario in which our OL is better by leaving a gaping hole at LT and committing to Sweezy for another 3 years. We are not making a pie-in-the-sky deal for Joe Thomas, so you'd either be counting on a rookie or Britt at Tackle -- no thanks.

It is just easier to find a Right Guard. There are more FA options. You can swing a college OT inside. You have Glowinski. The only thing that makes me hesitate on moving from Sweezy is that our Center and Left Guard situation is even worse, and upgrading all three spots in one off-season may be asking too much. Regardless, I don't think letting Okung walk is the right move -- he is literally the only lineman we got who could start on 1/2 the other teams.

This will be a tough riddle to figure out because we dug ourselves a huge hole last off-season.

This does make a lot of sense David. Problem is Okung will get 11-12 per IMO. Suppose if you cut Graham the cap space is there but damn that's a high price to pay. And moving on from Sweezy is fine too so long as Britt gets replaced as well.

 

[chris98251]

Okung has killed more drives then almost anyone I can remember, missed games due to injury, he's a expensive muscle car in the garage, you drive and it when you have a few bucks in your pocket but it's not for everyday commuting which is what Okung has become.

 

[DavidSeven]

This does make a lot of sense David. Problem is Okung will get 11-12 per IMO.

At that price, you're probably right. I've seen projections for him closer to the $7M/Year range. That's what Sportrac projected last summer, and he didn't have a breakout year.

I really have no idea of the price -- depends on what the market dictates. However, I think his injury history is a concern for all the teams, not just us. That should drop his price some, unless some other teams gets really desperate.

 

[Hasselbeck]

First off, I think you nailed it pretty damn well kearly.

The compensatory picks wrinkle is what will be interesting. Because as Fade and kearly both alluded to, JS loves those free picks basically. And really when you think about it, given the top heavy part of this roster with so much money tied to the key guys.. it makes a lot of sense to try and rack up as many extra picks as you in can in hopes of churning out talent at a cheap rate. It's what Baltimore and New England have crushed for several years now.

That said.. even Baltimore and New England bit the bullet in FA and went after key guys to fill big holes. I go back and forth on this in my head, but I really think JS is going to be aggressive in FA/trade market to fix the offensive line and add a couple of veterans to this line.

I've mentioned this in previous threads.. but will do so again here.. after every single playoff loss in the JS/PC era, the team has reacted in a manner to fix the biggest glaring need. I'm throwing the 2010 season out the window because there was a lot more than one big need and a lockout year really threw that offseason into a very weird sequence of events.. but just to recap..

2012 - Loss to Atlanta
Biggest weakness in that game? Pass rush. Chris Clemons was lost the week before to an ACL tear and the pass rushers behind him were average at BEST. Really Bruce Irvin was the "best" pass rusher we had after Clem went down, and he was still really green at that position. So what happens in FA? JS quietly goes out and gets Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril. He adds Tony McDaniel. He drafts Jordan Hill and Jesse Williams. Suddenly the DL is no longer a few pieces, and now its incredibly deep.

The other "big" weakness entering the 2013 season was at WR .. or at least it appeared that way on paper.. and JS swung the deal for Percy Harvin. Clearly that did not pan out the way he hoped.. but it does show that JS was willing to swing for the fences to get a player that could be a game changing piece to the puzzle here.

2014 - Super Bowl XLIX.
The play call heard round the world that will be forever branded as one of the most dubious decisions in the history of professional sports. So how do you tackle that? Well, in the event you want to throw the ball in the red zone.. you should probably get a viable big target for it, and what better guy than Jimmy Graham - a 6'7 monster TE who posted double digit touchdowns in 3 of his 4 years as a starting TE in New Orleans.

The Super Bowl also decimated the secondary. JS reacted by signing Cary Williams (did not work) and drafting Tye Smith. He added Mohammed Seisay and Kelcie McCray via trade during preseason. Small moves, but moves all the same.

The 2014 season also showed that the Seahawks lacked a capable return man, so once again, JS gets aggressive and moves up in the draft to secure the best return man in the draft and a guy with WR upside in Tyler Lockett. This move was an A+ decision as not only did Lockett shore up the kicking and punt returns, he would grow week by week at wide receiver and could very well be a starter in 2016.

2015 - Loss to Carolina
Remains to be seen what will happen, but the things that really stuck out in the loss to Carolina and the near loss to Minnesota. Defensively, we could not cover the TE. Offensively we could not protect Russell Wilson with much regularity .. especially on the interior part of the line. The hole at running back and tight end came via injury, and hopefully Rawls and Graham will be back in 2016 to fill both these needs.. but I still think this team desperately needs a blocking TE going forward as well.

I suspect JS will address all of these things in the coming months, and it will be a really exciting and interesting offseason in the PNW.

 

[dogorama]

I keep hearing the word "continuity" splashed around the board like it is something you dare not abandon. I will grant you that some players and even coaches sometimes get better with experience but continuity really means more of the same. Typically the players given college scholarships were the best not just on their team, but probably their conference too and that holds true for the pros as well. Granted there those exceptions who don't live up to their expectations but just take a look at who the great players are and they typically were always great throughout their careers and that plays true down the line of competence. In fact, if continuity were such an essential element to success no one would ever get fired. Ask Kodak, Blockbuster, Nokia, Polaroid, and Borders how well "continuity" worked for them.

 

[Zorn76]

Great OP.

Wouldn't bother me in the least if we had 5 new guys starting for the OL next year.

Let Okung and Sweezy walk for starters. Glowinski had a great debut, and deserves a crack at competing for a #1 spot.

Britt doesn't have enough of "it" going for him. Seldom see progress there. Lewis has shown some competency at center, but he could easily be replaced. Good for depth, though.

Our FO really needs to do their homework for the line in the draft.

The frustrating thing is they don't even have to be great, just decent. But what we have now is essentially garbage, so much so that even Pete has publicly acknowledged it as unacceptable.

A better OL could've made for a much more interesting - and competitive - 1st half of football a week ago, as well as beating the crap out of Az (playoff style) like the Panthers did today.

 

[kearly]

The only thing that makes me hesitate on moving from Sweezy is that our Center and Left Guard situation is even worse, and upgrading all three spots in one off-season may be asking too much.

The line feels like it's a 2+ year fix to me. I don't see a clear building block on the current OL, especially if my theory on Okung proves correct. We could be looking at five new starters by 2017.

My biggest worry is that Seattle won't abandon the flawed processes that got them in this mess at OL. Never at any point have PC/JS or Cable self-repudiated their methods. Reaching for guys in the draft because Cable likes them hasn't worked.

The only bad thing I can say about Pete is that he can be stubborn at times and slower than he should be at ditching a bad process or a struggling assistant coach. Pete is a fixer, but does he accept that the process with Cable the past few years has been deeply flawed? If he doesn't, then true progress on the OL would surprise me.

 

[massari]

Not re-signing Kearse and cutting Graham would free up an extra 12M or so to spend on the OL (9M from Graham and about 3-4M from Kearse). I'm hoping they do this.

The Seahawks spent 12.8M on the OL last season with only two other teams spending less. Would be nice if they can double that number in free agency to go along with some high draft picks next season.

A great line and no playmakers?

Kearse can be replaced fairly easy by drafting a WR in the early rounds. Jeremy Lane, Irvin, DT, DE, OL all seem more important to sign ahead of Kearse.

Here's a little bit of info about Graham's injury. http://rotoviz.com/2016/01/is-jimmy-graham-done/

"As a reminder, Graham tore his patellar tendon. Historically, that’s been a devastating injury from which to return. Here’s what our own orthopedic surgeon, Dr Jeff Budoff, had to say about it:

Please see my Victor Cruz article from this past offseason. In short, it’s extremely difficult to return to full effectiveness from a patellar tendon tear. The odds are overwhelming that Graham’s explosiveness, acceleration, top speed and quickness will be permanently compromised, and he’ll probably never again be able to jump quite as high or change direction quite as fast. In all medical probability, he’ll never again be 100% the Jimmy Graham we knew.

Victor Cruz never made it back (at least yet) from his patellar tendon tear. Nor did Ryan Williams. Or Greg Childs. Jerod Mayo returned this year after a torn patellar tendon last year, but posted just 2.2 tackles per game, vs 5.7/game for his pre-injury career. Jim Leonhard started 53 games over four seasons prior to tearing his patellar tendon in 2011. He returned the following season, but only started 13 games over the next three years. Cadillac Williams tore a patellar tendon in back-to-back seasons (2007 and 2008) and returned to play each time, finally leaving the NFL after the 2011 season. But his performance never really recovered."


If history is any indication, there should be a lot of concern about Graham ever being the same again. Also, how many games will he miss? Better off spending that 9M somewhere else like the OL.

 

[Davidess]

After last years Draft JS said the hawks came away with 2/3 of the players they wanted. the 3rd that many assumed the hawks wanted was C Mitch Morse from Mizzou. unfortunately KC drafted him at 49. I do believe that is the plan they had going in and it backfired. Not like JS/PC to put their eggs in one basket but I think they assumed Morse would be there considering he was Projected 7th round and slowly started to climb up boards during the draft process. I think they would've waited to select Frank Clark and would've gone with Morse then Lockett then Clark somewhere later on..Clark was falling on boards because of his history. just an assumption though

 

[Overseasfan]

RT - I like Gilliam here. He's no special talent but he's been playing decent and he still has more potential. We're better off keeping him here and investing in the other OL positions. If he stagnates in his growth during 2016 try to find a replacement next year.

RG - This is the best situation on the O-line. Sweezy is a solid starter and it is certainly possible and even likely he's retained fot relatively cheap. If not, we still have Glowinski behind him who should prove a capable starter himself.

C - I feel like the best situation here is to just keep Lewis and spend a late round pick here as well. Very good centers can easily fall into day 3 of the draft. Then have the rookie develop behind Lewis or start the rookie and use Lewis as serviceable back-up + mentor

LG - Let's just experiment here for a bit. Britt isn't working out here. He's the primary reason for our interior struggles. Keeping him as back up for both RT and LG isn't a bad idea but we are going to need a new starter here. Sokoli is a promising talent who could develop into someone special but he isn't ready yet. Poole has some of the measurables the Hawks look for in a LG but I highly doubt he'd be any improvement. Best bet is to sign a cheap vet here to hold the fort down untill next year.

LT - The premier Oline position. Keeping Okung would be a mistake here. He's way too expensive for his value. I'd draft a LT in the first few rounds to try and find a long term answer, while we also sign a proven vet with average production as a fail safe or as mentor for the rookie.

So if I were in charge the OL would look like this:
RT - Gilliam
RG - Sweezy/Glowinski
C - late round draft pick/Lewis
LG - FA
LT - early round draft pick/FA

Plenty of continuity on the right side and a fresh start on the left.

 

[Hawkscanner]

The line feels like it's a 2+ year fix to me. I don't see a clear building block on the current OL, especially if my theory on Okung proves correct. We could be looking at five new starters by 2017.

My biggest worry is that Seattle won't abandon the flawed processes that got them in this mess at OL. Never at any point have PC/JS or Cable self-repudiated their methods. Reaching for guys in the draft because Cable likes them hasn't worked.

The only bad thing I can say about Pete is that he can be stubborn at times and slower than he should be at ditching a bad process or a struggling assistant coach. Pete is a fixer, but does he accept that the process with Cable the past few years has been deeply flawed? If he doesn't, then true progress on the OL would surprise me.

I would tend to agree with you in that I don't see the issues that are currently present on the Offensive Line being fixed in 1 season alone. I could be wrong, but I don't see it. Glowinski's really the only one that I see as being a potential "building block", as I would contend with you that Okung is gone. And I say that purely from the standpoint of basic economics -- supply vs. demand. He will be the best LT on the market and there are a lot of desperate teams desiring to upgrade that position. Like Maxwell last year, someone is going to offer Okung somewhere between $10-11 Million ... and though it's going to hurt in the here and now, Schneider has got to resist the temptation to match. There's a lot of miles on that horse and you would be paying for past performance and getting diminishing returns. We've all seen those diminishing returns over the past couple of seasons for ourselves. I'm firmly of the mindset that he's gone.

My nightmare scenario would be the one that you describe above -- that we'll be looking for 5 new starters in 2017. If that ends up happening, that would tell me that this offseason is a complete and total failure. You're right, they've got to stop reaching for guys in the draft simply because this guy or that guy happens to be a mean streak and works hard. They've got to look at the entire package. Getting guys who are not only nasty grinders, but who are also more athletic at the center and guard positions would seem like an absolute necessity if the Seahawks ever hope to have a prayer of competing against the defensive lines of the Rams and Panthers.

The draft (in combination with undrafted free agents) is where they're going to get the pool they're going to draw on. Perhaps they get lucky and land an Alex Mack if he REALLY wants to be part of a winning team and takes a bit of a discount ... but for the most part, I'd say the OL parts are coming via the draft. My thing is that you figure out who the best 5 guys are in training camp. Training camp is for figuring out who can play and who can't, trying all kinds of different combinations, who works where, etc. I heard yesterday that the NE Patriots tried out (someone can correct me if I'm wrong) about 47 different OL combinations this season. That's completely and totally insane. If the Seahawks end up doing that -- Russell Wilson is flat out going to get killed. No, ideally you figure out who your 5 guys are by the end of training camp ... and you let them play together from there on out. You look to establish that consistency as quick as possible. That's the only way that we're even going to start to build any semblance of a line that's worth anything. If team keeps continually switching parts in and out year after year ... don't look for things to change any time soon. Make the changes that are necessary NOW -- this offseason -- and let the growing pains begin, as these guys learn, grow, take their lumps, and mature.

 

[Erebus]

RT - I like Gilliam here. He's no special talent but he's been playing decent and he still has more potential. We're better off keeping him here and investing in the other OL positions. If he stagnates in his growth during 2016 try to find a replacement next year.

RG - This is the best situation on the O-line. Sweezy is a solid starter and it is certainly possible and even likely he's retained fot relatively cheap. If not, we still have Glowinski behind him who should prove a capable starter himself.

C - I feel like the best situation here is to just keep Lewis and spend a late round pick here as well. Very good centers can easily fall into day 3 of the draft. Then have the rookie develop behind Lewis or start the rookie and use Lewis as serviceable back-up + mentor

LG - Let's just experiment here for a bit. Britt isn't working out here. He's the primary reason for our interior struggles. Keeping him as back up for both RT and LG isn't a bad idea but we are going to need a new starter here. Sokoli is a promising talent who could develop into someone special but he isn't ready yet. Poole has some of the measurables the Hawks look for in a LG but I highly doubt he'd be any improvement. Best bet is to sign a cheap vet here to hold the fort down untill next year.

LT - The premier Oline position. Keeping Okung would be a mistake here. He's way too expensive for his value. I'd draft a LT in the first few rounds to try and find a long term answer, while we also sign a proven vet with average production as a fail safe or as mentor for the rookie.

So if I were in charge the OL would look like this:
RT - Gilliam
RG - Sweezy/Glowinski
C - late round draft pick/Lewis
LG - FA
LT - early round draft pick/FA

Plenty of continuity on the right side and a fresh start on the left.

The recurring theme I see in your post is that you want to go cheap, either in terms of cap space or draft capital. But why? Being cheap is part of the problem of the last few years and what led us into this position. We have the cap space and draft capital to make some real moves and make the offensive line a strength without really hurting the rest of the team. Why settle for trying to achieve an average offensive line?