kearly
New member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 15,974
- Reaction score
- 0
If we could strap PC/JS down and give them truth serum, I'm not sure if they could tell us all that much about what they plan to do at OL this offseason. Almost every decision they make will be influenced by how previous decisions went, and those previous decisions will contain elements out of Seattle's control, like for example how much teams offer Seattle's free agents, or how the draft board falls for OL.
So rather than spell out an exact plan with an exact five member lineup for 2016, I figured I'd just splash some random hunches and observations and see how the pieces fall together.
Hunch #1. This offseason will be all about improving stability on the OL.
Going for SPARQ warriors and late round picks at OL has been the MO of this team for the past several years, but a constant shuffling of players, combined with a greater than average number of OL injuries and some inexperienced play at center, has given Seattle one of the least cohesive offensive lines in the NFL.
Enough is enough. Rapport and experience matter a great deal on the OL, and in fact the greatest weakness Seattle's OL has had the past three seasons have been in areas where continuity and experience matter the most. Making line calls. Picking up blitzes. Knowing how the guy next to you is going to react to a stunt and being on the same page at all times.
It's okay if Seattle changes out a lot of pieces. They don't have to bring back the same five starters to have long term cohesion. What does matter is that the five starters they do have can be trusted to stay healthy and play at an adequate level for at least 2-3 seasons.
Hunch #2. Russell Okung has played his last down in Seattle.
When the offseason began last year, I was fairly confident that Max Unger only had a year left with the team, at most. It turned out, he only had a month left, as he was shipped to New Orleans in the Jimmy Graham trade. Unger was still a solid center when healthy, but durability had become an issue. Unger had missed 29 games over the previous five seasons, and had just two 16 game seasons out of six with Seattle (ironically, he started 16 games for the Saints in 2015).
Availability matters to Pete even more than it does for most coaches, it's something he's mentioned in radio interviews at times, including his recent sit down on Brock and Salk. It's also the reason why Matt Hasselbeck and Walter Thurmond were allowed to leave without Seattle putting up much of a fight.
Now, if a player is dirt cheap, I don't think it's quite as big a deal. Injury magnets like Paul Richardson and Jesse Williams will get plenty of chances for as long as they are on rookie deals. But when a guy gets paid, he needs to be available. Pete doesn't like paying guys who miss a lot of games.
And so it didn't surprise me at all when reporter Danny O'Neil said that he "knows for a fact" that a decision had been made to move on from Max Unger even before the Graham trade materialized. Reporters often know sensitive information from their time working behind the scenes, but aren't able to report it directly until after the fact.
With Okung being the only top 15 tackle on the market, he will get good offers from teams. His situation is similar to Jake Long three offseasons ago, when Long signed a $34 million deal. Long's contract, when adjusted for three years of NFL inflation, would likely top $10 million APY in today's money.
And I think with Seattle, they have an MO in the past of letting good players walk if they can't stay healthy, especially if parting ways saves Seattle a good chunk of money.
On a side note, I think Alvin Bailey might be gone as well. He's been in Cable's dog house since day one, and I just can't see Seattle offering him a pricey RFA contract. Which means that Gilliam would take over at LT, allowing Seattle to mull options at RT.
I wouldn't rule out Okung's return completely, but I think this will play out a lot like Golden Tate in 2014, with Seattle making a lowball offer and then waving goodbye. There's also a shiny comp pick to consider, and you know how much JS loves his comp picks.
Now, this isn't to say I agree with these moves, only to say that I think they will happen. Okung is a good player and would be my first choice among all Seahawks players to hang out with for a weekend (to talk about nerdy stuff like Game of Thrones, etc). And while I think Gilliam's skillset would work well at LT, there's no doubt he'd be a step down from a healthy Okung. But I could totally see this scenario playing out regardless, especially since the money saved on Okung could prove useful in the event that...
Hunch #3. Seattle will be "in on" some big name options at OL.
The money saved on Okung would put some options on the table for Seattle. Do they pursue Alex Mack? Do they call Cleveland about trading for Joe Thomas? Mack has started all 16 games in six of his seven seasons. And Joe Thomas has never missed a game in 9 seasons, a perfect 144/144 games played. If "availability" matters to Seattle, then I wouldn't be shocked if they were in the mix for those two.
There's also Stefen Wisniewski to consider, as well as any other lineman who could be acquired in a trade.
I'm not guaranteeing that Seattle will sign somebody big, but I do think Seattle will be in on a lot of these guys and see what happens, hoping that a deal breaks their way.
The last time Seattle made OL a high priority, they didn't just draft two OL with their first two picks, they also ended up signing Robert Gallery to a sizable deal. The 2011 OL was very young, and needed some veteran help. The 2016 line will similarly be in need of a veteran presence, especially if Okung moves on.
Hunch #4. JR Sweezy is expendable and could be gone. But odds are, he'll be back.
Sweezy is not the iron man that Mack and Thomas are, but he's been pretty durable on a line who's style of play seems to invite injuries. Sweezy has only missed 5 out of a possible 64 games so far, and three of those came his rookie year, meaning that he's 46 for his last 48 (and has perfect attendance in the postseason as well). Sweezy has also played four seasons at RG, making him the longest tenured member of the line if Okung is let go.
Sweezy is also just 26 years old. His age and durability make him an easy consideration as a building block player. The only question is his pay. Sweezy for all his strengths and flaws, is roughly an average RG. If the market bears out that he's paid like an average RG, he'll stay. And I think it probably will.
Even if it doesn't, I could see Seattle overpaying slightly for Sweezy, on account of his status as Tom Cable's beloved teacher's pet.
As said in hunch #1, I think Seattle is going to try to put an end to the constant shuffling of players approach used in years past, and Sweezy has all the elements required to be a low-key building block. Youth. Experience. Durability. Affordable. Adequate play.
If for some reason Sweezy is priced out and leaves, Seattle could move Justin Britt to RG and try Glowinsky at LG. Britt is a similar player to Sweezy, if a bit less capable. Glowinsky still has some things to learn, but he seems to be further along in pass protection than Justin Britt was entering his second season.
Hunch #5. Seattle will have a new starting center in 2016.
It may not be a big name like Mack or Wisniewski, but I would be surprised if Patrick Lewis or Drew Nowak started off the 2016 season at center. I think the PC/JS thought process last offseason was that Patrick Lewis or somebody who stood out in camp could stopgap the position for one season while the team prepared Sokoli for a 2016 debut, but reality proved to be not as rosy, with Pete officially acknowledging in recent interviews that Sokoli is a long term project.
Lewis has played well at times, but he struggled down the stretch in 2015 and athletically he's a poor fit for Tom Cable.
I think Seattle will look to add a new building block at center, preferably a veteran, but drafting a center early could be a possibility as well.
...
Overall, I look for Seattle to improve durability and dependability on the OL this offseason, with the hope that they might build a unit that can provide at least a couple seasons worth of stability and continuity. I would be very surprised if Seattle didn't bring in at least one veteran player in free agency.
PC/JS have been bitten repeatedly by wishful thinking on the OL the past couple years. Hoping injury prone players would stay healthy. Hoping that college DTs and late round picks could turn into quality OL. Hoping that inexperience at center wouldn't matter. I think PC/JS have learned lessons from those mistakes, and I think this offseason will feel like a reaction to those experiences, with the Seahawks putting a premium on experience and durability.
It would surprise me if Seattle did the same ol' song and dance all over again, using the same methods but hoping for different results for the fourth year in a row. I don't think that's going to happen. I think 2015 was a wake-up call, and as such I expect the 2016 offseason to be more pragmatic and less hopeful at the OL position than the previous three offseasons had been.
So rather than spell out an exact plan with an exact five member lineup for 2016, I figured I'd just splash some random hunches and observations and see how the pieces fall together.
Hunch #1. This offseason will be all about improving stability on the OL.
Going for SPARQ warriors and late round picks at OL has been the MO of this team for the past several years, but a constant shuffling of players, combined with a greater than average number of OL injuries and some inexperienced play at center, has given Seattle one of the least cohesive offensive lines in the NFL.
Enough is enough. Rapport and experience matter a great deal on the OL, and in fact the greatest weakness Seattle's OL has had the past three seasons have been in areas where continuity and experience matter the most. Making line calls. Picking up blitzes. Knowing how the guy next to you is going to react to a stunt and being on the same page at all times.
It's okay if Seattle changes out a lot of pieces. They don't have to bring back the same five starters to have long term cohesion. What does matter is that the five starters they do have can be trusted to stay healthy and play at an adequate level for at least 2-3 seasons.
Hunch #2. Russell Okung has played his last down in Seattle.
When the offseason began last year, I was fairly confident that Max Unger only had a year left with the team, at most. It turned out, he only had a month left, as he was shipped to New Orleans in the Jimmy Graham trade. Unger was still a solid center when healthy, but durability had become an issue. Unger had missed 29 games over the previous five seasons, and had just two 16 game seasons out of six with Seattle (ironically, he started 16 games for the Saints in 2015).
Availability matters to Pete even more than it does for most coaches, it's something he's mentioned in radio interviews at times, including his recent sit down on Brock and Salk. It's also the reason why Matt Hasselbeck and Walter Thurmond were allowed to leave without Seattle putting up much of a fight.
Now, if a player is dirt cheap, I don't think it's quite as big a deal. Injury magnets like Paul Richardson and Jesse Williams will get plenty of chances for as long as they are on rookie deals. But when a guy gets paid, he needs to be available. Pete doesn't like paying guys who miss a lot of games.
And so it didn't surprise me at all when reporter Danny O'Neil said that he "knows for a fact" that a decision had been made to move on from Max Unger even before the Graham trade materialized. Reporters often know sensitive information from their time working behind the scenes, but aren't able to report it directly until after the fact.
With Okung being the only top 15 tackle on the market, he will get good offers from teams. His situation is similar to Jake Long three offseasons ago, when Long signed a $34 million deal. Long's contract, when adjusted for three years of NFL inflation, would likely top $10 million APY in today's money.
And I think with Seattle, they have an MO in the past of letting good players walk if they can't stay healthy, especially if parting ways saves Seattle a good chunk of money.
On a side note, I think Alvin Bailey might be gone as well. He's been in Cable's dog house since day one, and I just can't see Seattle offering him a pricey RFA contract. Which means that Gilliam would take over at LT, allowing Seattle to mull options at RT.
I wouldn't rule out Okung's return completely, but I think this will play out a lot like Golden Tate in 2014, with Seattle making a lowball offer and then waving goodbye. There's also a shiny comp pick to consider, and you know how much JS loves his comp picks.
Now, this isn't to say I agree with these moves, only to say that I think they will happen. Okung is a good player and would be my first choice among all Seahawks players to hang out with for a weekend (to talk about nerdy stuff like Game of Thrones, etc). And while I think Gilliam's skillset would work well at LT, there's no doubt he'd be a step down from a healthy Okung. But I could totally see this scenario playing out regardless, especially since the money saved on Okung could prove useful in the event that...
Hunch #3. Seattle will be "in on" some big name options at OL.
The money saved on Okung would put some options on the table for Seattle. Do they pursue Alex Mack? Do they call Cleveland about trading for Joe Thomas? Mack has started all 16 games in six of his seven seasons. And Joe Thomas has never missed a game in 9 seasons, a perfect 144/144 games played. If "availability" matters to Seattle, then I wouldn't be shocked if they were in the mix for those two.
There's also Stefen Wisniewski to consider, as well as any other lineman who could be acquired in a trade.
I'm not guaranteeing that Seattle will sign somebody big, but I do think Seattle will be in on a lot of these guys and see what happens, hoping that a deal breaks their way.
The last time Seattle made OL a high priority, they didn't just draft two OL with their first two picks, they also ended up signing Robert Gallery to a sizable deal. The 2011 OL was very young, and needed some veteran help. The 2016 line will similarly be in need of a veteran presence, especially if Okung moves on.
Hunch #4. JR Sweezy is expendable and could be gone. But odds are, he'll be back.
Sweezy is not the iron man that Mack and Thomas are, but he's been pretty durable on a line who's style of play seems to invite injuries. Sweezy has only missed 5 out of a possible 64 games so far, and three of those came his rookie year, meaning that he's 46 for his last 48 (and has perfect attendance in the postseason as well). Sweezy has also played four seasons at RG, making him the longest tenured member of the line if Okung is let go.
Sweezy is also just 26 years old. His age and durability make him an easy consideration as a building block player. The only question is his pay. Sweezy for all his strengths and flaws, is roughly an average RG. If the market bears out that he's paid like an average RG, he'll stay. And I think it probably will.
Even if it doesn't, I could see Seattle overpaying slightly for Sweezy, on account of his status as Tom Cable's beloved teacher's pet.
As said in hunch #1, I think Seattle is going to try to put an end to the constant shuffling of players approach used in years past, and Sweezy has all the elements required to be a low-key building block. Youth. Experience. Durability. Affordable. Adequate play.
If for some reason Sweezy is priced out and leaves, Seattle could move Justin Britt to RG and try Glowinsky at LG. Britt is a similar player to Sweezy, if a bit less capable. Glowinsky still has some things to learn, but he seems to be further along in pass protection than Justin Britt was entering his second season.
Hunch #5. Seattle will have a new starting center in 2016.
It may not be a big name like Mack or Wisniewski, but I would be surprised if Patrick Lewis or Drew Nowak started off the 2016 season at center. I think the PC/JS thought process last offseason was that Patrick Lewis or somebody who stood out in camp could stopgap the position for one season while the team prepared Sokoli for a 2016 debut, but reality proved to be not as rosy, with Pete officially acknowledging in recent interviews that Sokoli is a long term project.
Lewis has played well at times, but he struggled down the stretch in 2015 and athletically he's a poor fit for Tom Cable.
I think Seattle will look to add a new building block at center, preferably a veteran, but drafting a center early could be a possibility as well.
...
Overall, I look for Seattle to improve durability and dependability on the OL this offseason, with the hope that they might build a unit that can provide at least a couple seasons worth of stability and continuity. I would be very surprised if Seattle didn't bring in at least one veteran player in free agency.
PC/JS have been bitten repeatedly by wishful thinking on the OL the past couple years. Hoping injury prone players would stay healthy. Hoping that college DTs and late round picks could turn into quality OL. Hoping that inexperience at center wouldn't matter. I think PC/JS have learned lessons from those mistakes, and I think this offseason will feel like a reaction to those experiences, with the Seahawks putting a premium on experience and durability.
It would surprise me if Seattle did the same ol' song and dance all over again, using the same methods but hoping for different results for the fourth year in a row. I don't think that's going to happen. I think 2015 was a wake-up call, and as such I expect the 2016 offseason to be more pragmatic and less hopeful at the OL position than the previous three offseasons had been.