The Athletic's Dugar Projects 8.2 Wins

flv2

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2022
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
1,426
Location
Bournemouth, UK
This isn't particularly specific, though.

Our projected comp picks are both related to the two most underperforming units on our squad, and while I would've liked to see Brooks back (and apparently so would've Schneider), I'm not seeing serious analysis about our ILB or OL units as being downgraded. The mere fact that a couple of dudes went elsewhere isn't analysis on its own.

And yeah, we didn't have a round 2 pick, but that's not a direct 'downgrade'. We got a player out of that trade and all draft capital is good for is potential. Saying 'your draft could've gone better' is not the same as 'your draft was bad'.

These read less like 'solid' reasons that we're going to take a step back and more like speculative reasons. Could these points end up being true in the final estimation? Sure, but nothing stands out here that reads to me like anyone is ignoring some inconvenient truths.
You lost 2 starting LBs, 2 rotational TEs, a back-up QB, and a starting OL. You added...less.

Of course losing a major pick is a downgrade. Trading a 2nd round pick for Williams was an immediate upgrade. The down side is when the Draft came around other teams upgraded with their picks and your pick was already gone. If other teams upgrade and you don't it's a net downgrade.
 
Last edited:

DarkVictory23

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
2,012
Reaction score
2,993
You lost 2 starting LBs, 2 rotational TEs, a back-up QB, and a starting OL. You added...less.

Of course losing a major pick is a downgrade. Trading a 2nd round pick for Williams was an immediate upgrade. The down side is when the Draft came around other teams upgraded with their picks and your pick was already gone. If other teams upgrade and you don't it's a net downgrade.
Ok, but this still isn't particularly specific analysis of the actual players involved. By your metric, we actually added 2 starting LBs, a starting TE, a starting OL, and a starting QB. That reads like... more. Of course, it's not as simple as that, but that is why I said this isn't very specific analysis.

We lost and gained specific players, so we can analyze whether the players we gained were better or worse than what we lost, not rely on a comp picks formula.


Similarly, losing a major pick is a downgrade in the abstract talking about draft capital going into the draft. But we're no longer talking about draft capital. The draft has happened. The Seahawks draft grades across multiple outlets have ranged from average to good. Whether their draft could have turned out better or not isn't weighing the Seahawks draft against other teams, it's weighing it against a hypothetical draft.
 

Oly

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
32
Reaction score
74
Location
Middle of cornfields
With the huge unknowns in terms of coaching and scheme, the floor/ceiling gap is larger than in most years. It's just so hard for me to look at this team and feel good about nailing a prediction within a win or two. I guess I wouldn't be shocked at 5-6 wins, but I equally wouldn't be shocked with 11-12.

Why 5-6 seems plausible: New schemes, but especially ones on offense with complicated motion and, probably, cadences. Not only could I see lots more false starts and delay of games, but with this hugely inexperienced OL I can see lots more assignment mistakes. So I could see a world in which we can count off 5 drives as lost causes before the kickoff, just because there might be 5 times where a false start is followed up by a pressured throw/sack from a missed assignment, and then they're in 3rd and 15. On defense, we're an injury at LB away from some real problems, we don't have a game-wrecking pass rusher, and I'm not convinced that our safeties can cope with extra time in the pocket. That's lots of question marks on both sides of the ball. I'm not saying I think any of this will happen, but I wouldn't be shocked if it did.

Why 11-12 seems plausible: These new schemes confuse defenses that haven't seen them, and even if MM's defensive schemes aren't new, they're so creative that knowing what the Ravens did last year or even what the Hawks did last week doesn't mean opposing offenses will have great ways to beat those schemes. So if they can keep mistakes down, we could see meaningful scheme advantages on each side of the ball. As long as Geno keeps getting the ball out quickly, that mitigates the blocking problems and there might not be a better receiving corps than the Hawks (and they're top 3 regardless). In a passing league, there is a believable world in which the Hawks are top-5 in points. On defense, I'm of the belief that a pocket-collapsing DT is the most important player other than QB, and with Williams and Murphy...holy s***, that could be absolutely deadly to other teams. That opens up Mafe and MM's creative rush schemes (which he can pull off without lots of blitzers), and with one of the best CB tandems in the league, I can see the Hawks being top-5 in pass defense. Top-5 points and top-5 pass defense is what we see on 13-win teams. Do I think this is likely? Probably not (mainly because of the OL), but I also don't think any of this is absurd homerism.

I suppose this lands me at a prediction of 8.5, so betting the over makes sense, but I honestly can't tell you if I think 6 or 12 are more likely. It's going to be an interesting year, at the very least. Which is so much better than we've been able to say for several years.
 

Latest posts

Top