Seattle is rebuilding

[KiwiHawk]

Well no Graham or Richardson on offense a RB in Carson off a injury and I guess the O line is fine since it is not a rebuild

This is the logical fallacy called "non-sequiter" or "it doesn't follow". This means the conclusion does not follow the argument or is not supported by the argument.

The presence or lack of Graham, Richardson, or Carson has no impact on the need to improve the offensive line, and whether or not this is a rebuild has no impact on the needs of the offensive line.

The offensive line was a problem. Among the solutions to that problem are changing the OL coach (done) and replacing OL players (to be determined). It is presumed Solari will assess the tools he has available, determine who needs to be replaced, and provide that report to PC & JS who will take action or not depending on the recommendation and how they determine the priorities for player acquisition.

Nothing about that has anything to do with Graham, RIchardson, or Carson. Regardless of who they are replaced with, we will require an offensive line. Regardless of whether this is a rebuild or not, we will require an offensive line.

I hope I cleared that up. Logical fallacies are cheap debate tactics and shouldn't be used in polite discussion as they can be inflammatory.

Uh, but he wasn't saying that losing Graham and PRich affects the OL. He was saying that losing those guys, having Carson coming off an injury as our main RB (as of now), and having a shit OL means that we are indeed rebuilding. He just phrased it in a facetious way.

I get what he was on about, but the way he said it is endemic to the problems on this board. People are free to disagree with people using strawmen, non-sequiters, and other logical fallacies that discourage conversation about issues except by people who also want to grandstand and belittle the opinions of others using cheap tactics instead of reasoned arguments.

This season it is my quixotic quest to try to encourage positive discussion by trying to discourage cheap and potentially inflammatory debate tricks by pointing out what they are.

It's easy to be flippant. Much harder to to present a case and be willing to discuss a reasoned criticism of that case. But when someone bothers to present a reasoned opinion, there's no reason to respond with a cheap shot. It's why we can't have nice things around here.

So I figure I'll make an attempt while this place still has a pulse, because I've participated here for some 15+ years and I am tired of seeing it descend into bullying with false logic and grandstanding.

 

[seahawkfreak]

Well it isn't close to what the FO did when PC first got here so I can see the argument. If you gut your house and then remodel it, is that a rebuild? Tearing the house and foundation down and making a new home is a rebuild but it is definitely not a remodel.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

The presence or lack of Graham, Richardson, or Carson has no impact on the need to improve the offensive line, and whether or not this is a rebuild has no impact on the needs of the offensive line.

Dodging logical fallacies also requires football knowledge. Which dictates that having good offensive skill players who can get open, or engender trust for a quick almost-blind throw or deep prayer from the QB, helps lessen the need for an offensive line that can constantly protect for more than the requisite three seconds.

Having nobody in your WR quiver, however, leaves the QB holding onto the ball.

So if anything, losing Graham and Richardson probably INCREASES the need for a better offensive line.

 

[KitsapGuy]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/bcondotta/status/973700581155004416[/tweet]

 

[KiwiHawk]

The presence or lack of Graham, Richardson, or Carson has no impact on the need to improve the offensive line, and whether or not this is a rebuild has no impact on the needs of the offensive line.

Dodging logical fallacies also requires football knowledge. Which dictates that having good offensive skill players who can get open, or engender trust for a quick almost-blind throw or deep prayer from the QB, helps lessen the need for an offensive line that can constantly protect for more than the requisite three seconds.

Having nobody in your WR quiver, however, leaves the QB holding onto the ball.

So if anything, losing Graham and Richardson probably INCREASES the need for a better offensive line.

So exactly how do Graham and Richardson - the players with the highest drop rates on the team (and it's not even close) - engender trust for quick almost-blind throws? How many times does Wilson watch the ball ping off their hands and land in the hands of a defender before he avoids the kind of throws you are talking about, hangs on to the ball too long, and takes a sack?

Seems to me that getting rid of the guys who don't catch the ball helps the QB, doesn't it?

And you're implying I lack football knowledge? Pot. Kettle. Black.

 

[droop828]

When Russell Wilson is your QB you aren’t rebuilding. To me is more like reshuffling and these moves make sense if you ask me.

 

[toffee]

I only wish that we pull the same trigger last off season. We would have gotten more or at least some compensation for our leaving stars.

It’s always better to be one season too early than a season too late.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Kinger95]

People don’t understand that franchises can’t be good every year. Other than the spurs and patriots most franchises do have ups and downs and in the downs is when you restock picks/prospects and young players so that they can help you get good again or traded for guys that can. Only crappy part is most times rebuilding takes longer than 2-3 years

 

[KitsapGuy]

Keep it on topic here. Personal attacks are not allowed. :141847_bnono:

 

[adeltaY]

I honestly think it was just a sarcastic comment. I appreciate what you're saying about calling out logical fallacies, I'm just not sure that comment was a good example of one.

 

[Northwest Seahawk]

I don't agree that we need reinforcement for WR

Oh right because you don't need a passing game to win in the NFL. It is amazing what Wilson has done with what he has but that's statement you made is grossly inaccurate.

 

[joeseahawks]

As it stands today, we are probably a 4-6 wins team. Meaning we will get high draft picks the following season, which is great. We might even be the worst team in the NFL next year as most teams have really improved. We will go 0-4 against 49ers and Rams and 1-1 against Cards. Win 3 games at home and lose all games on the road. I would trade Bobby W. and KJ and get draft picks. 2018 is a transition year. Our hope is to draft well in 2018 and 2019, so that we can compete again in 2020.
Let's be honest, this current roster has no chance at a SB run. NONE.

 

[original poster]

We might even be the worst team in the NFL next year as most teams have really improved.

Especially the Dolphins.

 

[massari]

Realistically, they won't be competing until at least 2019. Our older stars will all be at least 30 by then. Time to try selling them now, load up on picks, clear cap room and make another run with our elite QB in a couple seasons.

Sell Wagner, Wright, Thomas and Duane Brown if they're able to get fair returns. Nowhere to go but down for these guys.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Um...no

 

[Uncle Si]

I started thinking more about the Suh situation. While it does appear the Hawks are looking to get younger (healthier) in many spots, I still think JS/PC want to have a team that can push of Super Bowl contention.

I cant see PC signing off on looking over a rebuild that doesnt take rather immediate effect. He's been doing this for awhile and is getting on. Doubt he wants to start over.

(repost from other thread where it didnt make any sense)

 

[MontanaHawk05]

The presence or lack of Graham, Richardson, or Carson has no impact on the need to improve the offensive line, and whether or not this is a rebuild has no impact on the needs of the offensive line.

Dodging logical fallacies also requires football knowledge. Which dictates that having good offensive skill players who can get open, or engender trust for a quick almost-blind throw or deep prayer from the QB, helps lessen the need for an offensive line that can constantly protect for more than the requisite three seconds.

Having nobody in your WR quiver, however, leaves the QB holding onto the ball.

So if anything, losing Graham and Richardson probably INCREASES the need for a better offensive line.

So exactly how do Graham and Richardson - the players with the highest drop rates on the team (and it's not even close) - engender trust for quick almost-blind throws? How many times does Wilson watch the ball ping off their hands and land in the hands of a defender before he avoids the kind of throws you are talking about, hangs on to the ball too long, and takes a sack?

Seems to me that getting rid of the guys who don't catch the ball helps the QB, doesn't it?

And you're implying I lack football knowledge? Pot. Kettle. Black.

Sixteen touchdowns.

Drops...effort...run-first...quiet between the 20s...and they still provided big dividends in the one area that matters above all else. If they're one-dimensional, they sure picked one hell of a single dimension to succeed in.

I'm just going to keep dropping that little line until someone can give me a satisfactory answer as to how we're going to replace that offensive production for 2018. Nobody's given me one yet. Truth is, I don't think we're going to.

 

[Uncle Si]

The presence or lack of Graham, Richardson, or Carson has no impact on the need to improve the offensive line, and whether or not this is a rebuild has no impact on the needs of the offensive line.

Dodging logical fallacies also requires football knowledge. Which dictates that having good offensive skill players who can get open, or engender trust for a quick almost-blind throw or deep prayer from the QB, helps lessen the need for an offensive line that can constantly protect for more than the requisite three seconds.

Having nobody in your WR quiver, however, leaves the QB holding onto the ball.

So if anything, losing Graham and Richardson probably INCREASES the need for a better offensive line.

So exactly how do Graham and Richardson - the players with the highest drop rates on the team (and it's not even close) - engender trust for quick almost-blind throws? How many times does Wilson watch the ball ping off their hands and land in the hands of a defender before he avoids the kind of throws you are talking about, hangs on to the ball too long, and takes a sack?

Seems to me that getting rid of the guys who don't catch the ball helps the QB, doesn't it?

And you're implying I lack football knowledge? Pot. Kettle. Black.

Sixteen touchdowns.

Drops...effort...run-first...quiet between the 20s...and they still provided big dividends in the one area that matters above all else. If they're one-dimensional, they sure picked one hell of a single dimension to succeed in.

I'm just going to keep dropping that little line until someone can give me a satisfactory answer as to how we're going to replace that offensive production for 2018. Nobody's given me one yet. Truth is, I don't think we're going to.

You dont think the team is going to sign replacements for these players?

I mean Richardson's 6 TDs could be replaced by a WR who comes in and gets 8/9? Then Grahams replacement is responsible for 7/8?

Perhaps both new players add a different dynamic that allows other players to contribute more?

The issue I always had with how Graham was used was that it seemed his role was tipped, whether he was the target or not based on the set up.

 

[Seymour]

2005 Seahawks....Shaun Alexander 28 TD's

2017 Seahawks all RB's combined 2 TD's.

Build a flippin running game and problem solved!!!!!!!!!....for the umteenth time. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Also, Graham averaged 4 Td's his first 2 years, yet you want to assume the 1 year he stepped it up is what we will lose?? This is blind faith and exaggeration of facts.

 

[EverydayImRusselin]

The presence or lack of Graham, Richardson, or Carson has no impact on the need to improve the offensive line, and whether or not this is a rebuild has no impact on the needs of the offensive line.

Dodging logical fallacies also requires football knowledge. Which dictates that having good offensive skill players who can get open, or engender trust for a quick almost-blind throw or deep prayer from the QB, helps lessen the need for an offensive line that can constantly protect for more than the requisite three seconds.

Having nobody in your WR quiver, however, leaves the QB holding onto the ball.

So if anything, losing Graham and Richardson probably INCREASES the need for a better offensive line.

So exactly how do Graham and Richardson - the players with the highest drop rates on the team (and it's not even close) - engender trust for quick almost-blind throws? How many times does Wilson watch the ball ping off their hands and land in the hands of a defender before he avoids the kind of throws you are talking about, hangs on to the ball too long, and takes a sack?

Seems to me that getting rid of the guys who don't catch the ball helps the QB, doesn't it?

And you're implying I lack football knowledge? Pot. Kettle. Black.

Sixteen touchdowns.

Drops...effort...run-first...quiet between the 20s...and they still provided big dividends in the one area that matters above all else. If they're one-dimensional, they sure picked one hell of a single dimension to succeed in.

I'm just going to keep dropping that little line until someone can give me a satisfactory answer as to how we're going to replace that offensive production for 2018. Nobody's given me one yet. Truth is, I don't think we're going to.

It was only 2 years ago that Baldwin/Lockett combined for 20 TD's. Both are still on the team. Last year they combined for 10. Lockett is healthy again and in his 4th season. It is also not unreasonable to expect a RB TD regression to the mean. Over the last 3 years the average NFL team had 12 rushing TD per season. Over the last 3 years the Seahawks had 9 rushing TD per season. Going from 4 to 9 or 4 to 12 would make up 5-8 TD. It is entirely reasonable to expect a QB like Wilson to be able to elevate WR/TE around him. I think your concern is misplaced. I do think they obviously need to add some TE help (only 2 on the roster) but I do think with Wilson behind center, he will produce. In addition if Solari can improve the OL there could be additional improvements elsewhere.