Would you support a 'Moneyball' style book on the Seahawks?

BirdsCommaAngry · Jan 27, 2016

This hypothetical book would detail ways of how PC, JS, and co. perform their duties in a much more specific way than what we can get from the various articles, Win Forever, and our own speculations. It would allow us to better understand what has made the current teams so remarkable and to do so in a way that some of us might be able to apply parts of their ways of working into our own lives. It would also likely put us at a competitive disadvantage compared to not having some of our secrets documented for anyone to read. Which would you prefer?

Rob12 · Jan 27, 2016

BirdsCommaAngry":3czomtm5 said:
This hypothetical book would detail ways of how PC, JS, and co. perform their duties in a much more specific way than what we can get from the various articles, Win Forever, and our own speculations. It would allow us to better understand what has made the current teams so remarkable and to do so in a way that some of us might be able to apply parts of their ways of working into our own lives. It would also likely put us at a competitive disadvantage compared to not having some of our secrets documented for anyone to read. Which would you prefer?

I absolutely want a book on this team. But now now, or even close to now. The more we understand, the more other teams understand.

I'd guess we're getting a 30 for 30 at some point, and definitely a book. Just may not be until about 2025 or so. There's a lot of work left to be done.

bjornanderson21 · Jan 28, 2016

If Pete and John had continued their success with personnel moves, then yes a book should be written.

The problem is that Pete and John abandoned their successful philosophies BEFORE we even won the Super Bowl, and 2 years in a row we have slid and that is a direct result of their failures with trades/drafts/signings catching up. We are still riding on the successes of their first 3 years, but we are seeing the consequences of all their failures over their last 3 years.

If Schneider had just been AVERAGE for a GM over the last 3 years, we would be 2-time defending Champs and we'd be playing for our third in a row.

THAT is how spectacular their drafting was, and how good they were at finding undervalued players and making them better in our system.

If a book is written, it pretty much needs to end before we even win the Super Bowl because their philosophies changed and their successes pretty much came to a halt as far as personnel moves.

Erebus · Jan 28, 2016

Yes I would be very interested in reading that. But I agree with Rob. Now is not the time. I want to have our competitive advantage as long as possible. I also doubt Pete and John would share any trade secrets while still on the job.

Scottemojo · Jan 28, 2016

bjornanderson21":2aeme532 said:
If Pete and John had continued their success with personnel moves, then yes a book should be written.

The problem is that Pete and John abandoned their successful philosophies BEFORE we even won the Super Bowl, and 2 years in a row we have slid and that is a direct result of their failures with trades/drafts/signings catching up. We are still riding on the successes of their first 3 years, but we are seeing the consequences of all their failures over their last 3 years.

If Schneider had just been AVERAGE for a GM over the last 3 years, we would be 2-time defending Champs and we'd be playing for our third in a row.

THAT is how spectacular their drafting was, and how good they were at finding undervalued players and making them better in our system.

If a book is written, it pretty much needs to end before we even win the Super Bowl because their philosophies changed and their successes pretty much came to a halt as far as personnel moves.

Who pooped in your cheerios? That goes beyond cynical and really is just self entitled fan talk.

Popeyejones · Jan 28, 2016

BirdsCommaAngry":14j5uvop said:
This hypothetical book would detail ways of how PC, JS, and co. perform their duties in a much more specific way than what we can get from the various articles, Win Forever, and our own speculations. It would allow us to better understand what has made the current teams so remarkable and to do so in a way that some of us might be able to apply parts of their ways of working into our own lives. It would also likely put us at a competitive disadvantage compared to not having some of our secrets documented for anyone to read. Which would you prefer?

I think every fan would (or at least should) want more in-depth reporting on their favorite team, but I have two questions, one simply pragmatic and the other maybe more substantive concern.

PRAGMATIC QUESTION: Who is getting access to do this and how do they keep it from just being a hagiography of celebratory back-patting after the fact? Moneyball worked because Lewis is a writer first and wasn't much of an A's fan, and because he was there for something while it was happening, and got to actually see it rather than just rely on fond recollections of how awesome everyone was. To get a real and non-BS account of what was happening in the 2012 off-season someone would have needed to be there. Just as an example, at the time they may have believed that Jaye Howard was the steal of that draft, but you'd never be able to find that out now.

MORE SUBSTANTIVE QUESTION: I just don't know if the story would be that interesting. Moneyball is so interesting for two reasons:

1) It was symbolic of a HUGE shift in player evaluation as people had been evaluating players one way for 100 years, and then someone started to evaluate them a different way and then everyone changed what they had always been doing. I think the Seahawks nailed the draft as well as anyone has for a couple years and then had (on balance) really poor drafts for a couple years, but beyond drafting well I think it's hard to pinpoint anything they did that was super revolutionary (they just had a great run across a couple drafts), or anything that they did the flipped what everyone else does. I suppose one could credit the Seahawks with the rising value of larger cornerbacks, but those types of ebbs and flows at different positions happen all the time; they go in and out like the tide rather than tidal wave that was Moneyball-style player evaluation.

2) Moneyball also works as a story because MLB doesn't have a salary cap, so it's a classic David and Goliath tale. The NFL, with the hundreds of little ways that it forces parity, doesn't allow for those types of stories. Instead, the Seahawks story is a pretty straightforward NFL one and could be written about any number of teams: All the pieces fall in place and a team rises to the top, and then fights to hang on and maintain its position as its picked apart by free agency, the salary cap, and departing coaches.

FINAL VERDICT: 1) Would have needed someone there on the ground while the action was actually happening, 2) Despite being a really great team that had a pretty epic short draft run I don't think there's any evidence for the Seahawks F.O. really revolutionizing anything, 3) the NFL isn't really built for these types of stories.

Better football books: If someone had been on the ground for Chip Kelly's rise in Oregon; Michael Lewis' own work on the rise of the left tackle in the NFL (skip all the mealy-mouthed Michael Oher stuff); A great insider urban politics story about power and stadium fights in San Diego, Oakland, St. Louis, Minnesota, etc. (which gets you that 'Big NFL' versus 'Small Town' David and Goliath thing).

Popeyejones · Jan 28, 2016

bjornanderson21":33sgugv4 said:
If Pete and John had continued their success with personnel moves, then yes a book should be written.

The problem is that Pete and John abandoned their successful philosophies BEFORE we even won the Super Bowl, and 2 years in a row we have slid and that is a direct result of their failures with trades/drafts/signings catching up. We are still riding on the successes of their first 3 years, but we are seeing the consequences of all their failures over their last 3 years.

If Schneider had just been AVERAGE for a GM over the last 3 years, we would be 2-time defending Champs and we'd be playing for our third in a row.

THAT is how spectacular their drafting was, and how good they were at finding undervalued players and making them better in our system.

If a book is written, it pretty much needs to end before we even win the Super Bowl because their philosophies changed and their successes pretty much came to a halt as far as personnel moves.

Did their philosophies change, or did they just nail the hell out of the draft for a couple years and then really miss for a couple years?

So much of this IMO just comes down to random chance IMO, and we really need to fight the urge to apply order or logic to it.

(and when random chances shines brightly on you, you should of course, celebrate the crap out of it :lol: )

BullHawk33 · Jan 28, 2016

Frankly, I would prefer the success to continue, to keep the corporate secrets quiet until well after John and Pete leave. If an organization gives out the recipe for success it had better be prepared with another plan to get ahead.

Basis4day · Jan 28, 2016

Just please don't have a petition for a book. That's all i ask.

HomerJHawk · Jan 28, 2016

If the book has color pictures i'll buy it. But I'll wait another 10 years.

McGruff · Jan 28, 2016

bjornanderson21":436oadr8 said:
If Pete and John had continued their success with personnel moves, then yes a book should be written.

The problem is that Pete and John abandoned their successful philosophies BEFORE we even won the Super Bowl, and 2 years in a row we have slid and that is a direct result of their failures with trades/drafts/signings catching up. We are still riding on the successes of their first 3 years, but we are seeing the consequences of all their failures over their last 3 years.

If Schneider had just been AVERAGE for a GM over the last 3 years, we would be 2-time defending Champs and we'd be playing for our third in a row.

THAT is how spectacular their drafting was, and how good they were at finding undervalued players and making them better in our system.

If a book is written, it pretty much needs to end before we even win the Super Bowl because their philosophies changed and their successes pretty much came to a halt as far as personnel moves.

Nothing changed. The rest of the league caught up a little. The roster improved to the point that it became harder for young guys to make an impact, but they are still doing what they have always done.

McGruff · Jan 28, 2016

Popeyejones":2mvbo5uw said:
bjornanderson21":2mvbo5uw said:

If Pete and John had continued their success with personnel moves, then yes a book should be written.

The problem is that Pete and John abandoned their successful philosophies BEFORE we even won the Super Bowl, and 2 years in a row we have slid and that is a direct result of their failures with trades/drafts/signings catching up. We are still riding on the successes of their first 3 years, but we are seeing the consequences of all their failures over their last 3 years.

If Schneider had just been AVERAGE for a GM over the last 3 years, we would be 2-time defending Champs and we'd be playing for our third in a row.

THAT is how spectacular their drafting was, and how good they were at finding undervalued players and making them better in our system.

If a book is written, it pretty much needs to end before we even win the Super Bowl because their philosophies changed and their successes pretty much came to a halt as far as personnel moves.

Click to expand...

Did their philosophies change, or did they just nail the hell out of the draft for a couple years and then really miss for a couple years?

So much of this IMO just comes down to random chance IMO, and we really need to fight the urge to apply order or logic to it.

(and when random chances shines brightly on you, you should of course, celebrate the crap out of it :lol: )

Some of it is that there are also good draft classes and bad draft classes overall. The only glaring whiff is the ggreat receiver class of 2014 yielding very little results for us thanks to the injuries to Paul Richardson.

Smoke · Jan 28, 2016

Popeyejones":3733h1c1 said:
bjornanderson21":3733h1c1 said:

If Pete and John had continued their success with personnel moves, then yes a book should be written.

The problem is that Pete and John abandoned their successful philosophies BEFORE we even won the Super Bowl, and 2 years in a row we have slid and that is a direct result of their failures with trades/drafts/signings catching up. We are still riding on the successes of their first 3 years, but we are seeing the consequences of all their failures over their last 3 years.

If Schneider had just been AVERAGE for a GM over the last 3 years, we would be 2-time defending Champs and we'd be playing for our third in a row.

THAT is how spectacular their drafting was, and how good they were at finding undervalued players and making them better in our system.

If a book is written, it pretty much needs to end before we even win the Super Bowl because their philosophies changed and their successes pretty much came to a halt as far as personnel moves.

Click to expand...

Did their philosophies change, or did they just nail the hell out of the draft for a couple years and then really miss for a couple years?

So much of this IMO just comes down to random chance IMO, and we really need to fight the urge to apply order or logic to it.

(and when random chances shines brightly on you, you should of course, celebrate the crap out of it :lol: )

Also if I recall, didn't Pete say something going into the 2013 draft about how this was the first class coming out of college that he hadn't coached against? I wonder if some of the falloff in our drafting has to do with Pete not being in college ball anymore..

Subzero717 · Jan 28, 2016

Scott McCloughan.

TwistedHusky · Jan 28, 2016

It is pretty transparent exactly what they are doing, and how they are doing it.

That is why it feels like our #1s don't work out at the rate other teams' #1s (and even #2s) do, but our 5th round picks seem to consistently bring us great players.

Go back and look at the draft #s and the success rate of players by round, as well as the relative value ranking of the players in terms of contribution to the team so far. Pretty balanced, because we tend to draft guys with a higher chance of being very good, but in exchange we are willing to take on much more risk.

Since most FOs draft and score in the draft as to overweight reduction of risk, guys that might have a few holes in their game or that are missing a slot or two in the measurables section fall to us repeatedly.

Since Pete is from a skill dev space, he knows the areas he can help a player overcome, and he knows that his playing style allows players that would normally be valued lower contribute higher levels to this team. (For example, with corners for a while it was quickness and speed, then size that mattered. So fast + big was going to be on everyone's draft board but fast + average speed is going to fall. However for us, physical corners were highly valued. So we could make a slower but physical corner work for us, which meant we would likely have some great corners available from that pool.)

Pete is about getting the highest ceiling and just biting the bullet when it does not work out. Most teams factor in that early round players SHOULD work out and then some % of them will hopefully have a high ceiling. Completely contrasting approaches.

BirdsCommaAngry · Jan 29, 2016

Popeyejones":2509ojpx said:
I think every fan would (or at least should) want more in-depth reporting on their favorite team, but I have two questions, one simply pragmatic and the other maybe more substantive concern.

PRAGMATIC QUESTION: Who is getting access to do this and how do they keep it from just being a hagiography of celebratory back-patting after the fact? Moneyball worked because Lewis is a writer first and wasn't much of an A's fan, and because he was there for something while it was happening, and got to actually see it rather than just rely on fond recollections of how awesome everyone was. To get a real and non-BS account of what was happening in the 2012 off-season someone would have needed to be there. Just as an example, at the time they may have believed that Jaye Howard was the steal of that draft, but you'd never be able to find that out now.

MORE SUBSTANTIVE QUESTION: I just don't know if the story would be that interesting. Moneyball is so interesting for two reasons:

1) It was symbolic of a HUGE shift in player evaluation as people had been evaluating players one way for 100 years, and then someone started to evaluate them a different way and then everyone changed what they had always been doing. I think the Seahawks nailed the draft as well as anyone has for a couple years and then had (on balance) really poor drafts for a couple years, but beyond drafting well I think it's hard to pinpoint anything they did that was super revolutionary (they just had a great run across a couple drafts), or anything that they did the flipped what everyone else does. I suppose one could credit the Seahawks with the rising value of larger cornerbacks, but those types of ebbs and flows at different positions happen all the time; they go in and out like the tide rather than tidal wave that was Moneyball-style player evaluation.

2) Moneyball also works as a story because MLB doesn't have a salary cap, so it's a classic David and Goliath tale. The NFL, with the hundreds of little ways that it forces parity, doesn't allow for those types of stories. Instead, the Seahawks story is a pretty straightforward NFL one and could be written about any number of teams: All the pieces fall in place and a team rises to the top, and then fights to hang on and maintain its position as its picked apart by free agency, the salary cap, and departing coaches.

FINAL VERDICT: 1) Would have needed someone there on the ground while the action was actually happening, 2) Despite being a really great team that had a pretty epic short draft run I don't think there's any evidence for the Seahawks F.O. really revolutionizing anything, 3) the NFL isn't really built for these types of stories.

Better football books: If someone had been on the ground for Chip Kelly's rise in Oregon; Michael Lewis' own work on the rise of the left tackle in the NFL (skip all the mealy-mouthed Michael Oher stuff); A great insider urban politics story about power and stadium fights in San Diego, Oakland, St. Louis, Minnesota, etc. (which gets you that 'Big NFL' versus 'Small Town' David and Goliath thing).

Thank you for your response, Popeye. I have a few counterpoints and I hope that my focusing on slight disagreement won't take away from how much I enjoyed and learned from your post.

In my opinion, Moneyball isn't compelling just because it's a reiteration of David vs Goliath but because Moneyball also follows the seemingly current de facto blueprint of a highly individualistic story. In other words, the stories that tend to become popular in Western culture are also the ones where the hero perseveres in circumstances where almost everyone and everything is working against him or her. Moneyball basically paints a picture where Billy Beane mostly succeeds despite his scouts outdated beliefs, his team's owner's unwillingness to spend larger amounts of amount, his manager's unwillingness to play some of the players their statistics uncovered (I cannot currently recall if this element was only added for the film or not), and probably a few other details I'm unable to remember at the moment. We seem to respect Billy Beane based on the merit of his ability and derive our estimate of his ability based on the multitude of roadblocks he experienced.

At the very least, some of these elements seem to also apply to the Seahawks. The element I personally would want brought to light is PC's use of collectivist philosophy and how he has adapted that philosophy to the more solely individualistic tendencies of young African-Americans. I agree that having an embedded writer during our earlier years under this regime would have likely been best. However, if any of the higher level employees were to keep a regular and thorough journal of their experiences during these years, there could possibly be a story to be told from their experiences that wouldn't be overly distorted with hindsight. If a book on the Seahawks were to be successful, it would need to be more than a football book. It would need to be a book presenting ideas about reshaping the culture of a business or perhaps a theme that's even larger in scope, like systematic revolution. The symbolism of the book could ultimately be merging Eastern and Western ideals into an even more optimal philosophy.

Overall, the potential success of a book may or may not seem or be realistic, but it also appears that the potential for a quality true story, or at least a quality story based on real events, is there for the taking.

Popeyejones · Jan 29, 2016

^^^^ Thanks for the reply. :th2thumbs:

Totally agreed about the "Beane Against the World" angle definitely being an attactive one, and a big, big part of Moneyball.

I think the collectivist ethos is a bit of a harder sell, as that's really true of all teams and all sports. It's true of the military and police forces, and you see that stuff pop up in all types of business settings too. As far as sports go I also think Phil Jackson has already co-authored the type of book you're talking about a few times already. These guys coach, end up going on the corporate speaking gig circuit getting paid 20K a pop to say platitudes about leadership, and then get book deals to write "lessons from sports" books. On the one hand that suggests there's a market for it, but on the other hand, that also suggests that the niche of the market for that already has sports guys who have filled it.

Again though, as you said, we're just disagreeing around the margins and generally agree. :th2thumbs:

halcon lloriquear · Jan 29, 2016

I would read such a book

Barthawk · Jan 29, 2016

Scottemojo":qpim4td1 said:
bjornanderson21":qpim4td1 said:

If Pete and John had continued their success with personnel moves, then yes a book should be written.

The problem is that Pete and John abandoned their successful philosophies BEFORE we even won the Super Bowl, and 2 years in a row we have slid and that is a direct result of their failures with trades/drafts/signings catching up. We are still riding on the successes of their first 3 years, but we are seeing the consequences of all their failures over their last 3 years.

If Schneider had just been AVERAGE for a GM over the last 3 years, we would be 2-time defending Champs and we'd be playing for our third in a row.

THAT is how spectacular their drafting was, and how good they were at finding undervalued players and making them better in our system.

If a book is written, it pretty much needs to end before we even win the Super Bowl because their philosophies changed and their successes pretty much came to a halt as far as personnel moves.

Click to expand...

Who pooped in your cheerios? That goes beyond cynical and really is just self entitled fan talk.

They could afford to be average after nailing the 2010, 2011, 2012 drafts.. 2013,2014 can be looked at as a miss, but they were going to be depth anyway you look at it.. when you have 4th and 5th round guys playing like first rounders in a rookie deal and you couple that with success in the UDFA market a team can be more of a gambler in the draft.

sc85sis · Jan 29, 2016

Might be interesting after the fact from John and the scouting staff's POV. I'm not sure you'd learn much more about Pete's approach than what's already been written. He's pretty open about it.

As far as their "failure" the last few years, Pete also was open that he'd have a short-term advantage due to having recruited so many players as USC's head coach. That advantage is gone, as expected. Also, no draft prospect is ever a sure thing regardless of how good management is at evals. Stud happens.

Would you support a 'Moneyball' style book on the Seahawks?

Well-known member

New member

New member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Member

Active member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Similar threads