SJ what I feel is missing is TOP for the defense. Clearly when the offense cannot play more than 3-4 plays before the defense is back out there has to have an impact, especially in a hybrid 3-4 without a normal NT. Case in point was a “normal” run play up the middle by Mitchell. JReed was on him. Dude is 100 pounds heavier. Mitchell was able to get away. Look at first qtr. the Ravens didn’t do that. Second half I am sure JReed etc were gassed big time. We have seen JReed be dominant on the line. In games where the offense of playing well almost all 4 quarters. How about research of TOP and it’s impact to the defense?
Introducing 2 new guys(Clark&Williams) to room almost always has an affect mostly negative on team performance . Couple people pushed out of jobs, different dynamic, tendency to evaluate new guys as game is on. Will look a lot different when schedule toughens. Positive about last weekend is a shared experience. Hope everyone not happy and working hard at dialling it in. The group is and will be much better. Only one way to get another shot at Ravens this year.
Hmmmm. I must admit, I'm not a fan of selecting this data point, and that data point, and implying something in the form of a question from it. FWIW, I don't know who you think is giving the Seahawks 'a pass'. I'm certainly not. This team has enough good players to be competitive in every game, and they have enough developing talent to be competitive next year and the year after. That's not a pass.
Is this questioning Pete? I think you have to ignore an awful lot of data points to imply he's not a successful coach. This whole up and down on Pete is coming in shorter cycles every year. Last year he was a genius early in the season, and a problem later in the season. This year it's seems almost after every good game Pete is getting a lot out of his guys, and every bad game Pete isn't getting enough out of his guys. Maybe Pete's the problem?
Pete actually has a track record to point at. You know who doesn't? Our two coordinators. At least not as coordinators. There is no evidence that I can find that says either one of them is maximizing the talent they have on the field......and they both have a considerable amount IMHO. But if you look at the numbers they are both average to below average, and that might be generous. If Pete has a weakness it is his patience. With players and coaches. If our defense ends up average to below average this year, and so does our offense, what rationale would suggest he brings either coordinator back next year, other than simply patience and process......which is to say, hope.
It's Clint and Shane who shouldn't get a pass in all of this. Time for them both to make a difference. They need to be a step ahead of the opposition, not a step behind. If we know the opposition is going to run screens on offense, and we still can't stop it, are we coaching that correctly? If the offense knows the defensive philosophy and how it attacks offenses, can we not scheme beaters to take them away from what they do best?
I know injuries and having a young team (youngest team with a winning record I think) can create chaos that's hard to overcome for coordinators, so I don't want to be too hard on Clint and Shane. They'll get their chance in the next few weeks to show whether they can make a difference for their team. I don't give either of them another year in Seattle if they can't.
Wentz to the Rams! We might get the benefit of taking on Carson Wentz this season, perfect for stat padding and lulling ourselves into a false sense of security. (I really like Carson and a post-career dissection on him will be beyond fascinating)
We’ve got what we’ve got now, so we have to make do with it. If Pete and Waldron aren’t gonna give Lock a go, then they have to scheme better to allow Geno to get it off earlier and use more run game and blocking. That’s the how and the why. That’s what they need to do and that’s what what they haven’t been doing. The when is NOW before it’s too late. IMO Lock should be part of it, even if it’s just interchanging him and Geno throughout the game instead of completely dropping him.
They are no stronger than their weakest link, which is the OL. When it can't consistently compete, you get 3 and outs, great running backs who get stopped, an OK QB under too much pressure, excessive dependence on TEs for blocking instead of receiving, and then so many downs for the D that they get gassed and too easily read. Lucas coming back will hopefully make a difference but then they're still just another starter injury away from the same fate.
Love the let's really think about this !!! We can all be GM's and Coaches, I love it - I am absolutely positive they have a plan, together, I just don't really very often agree with it! For the D - I am believer in what the Ravens have , A Monster in the middle to big DT along side ,Basically a true DE on one side ,then flush the other with a LB or as Pete says a LEO, -Love their plan. It would be mine. I remember in the 90's I floated playing 3 safeties all the time ,one basically be a hybrid LB/ safety, HE needing to be the smartest guy on the field/essential being a free agent /play caller. Guess what -ten years later we started seeing it. NOW on offense ,said before ,Other than QB it needs to be on the O-line. Nothing works without them ,nothing!!! You can have all the so-called skill players you want ,to have a Consistent quality offense you need a good O-line!!! NUTSHELL!
Ah yes, it's November 7th and Kenny has introduced the "Is Pete still a good head coach?" discussion into the discourse (because that's what this entire thing boils down to). Not that it's not appropriate right now, but this has come up every year since like 2015* and the fact that it never really goes away is probably something that should actually concern everyone, including Pete's biggest fans. Because this topic has had ample ammo for a long time.
*we mostly skipped this last year because the specific issues could be blamed on specific players, but it's still the same core issue...coaching and leadership.
Maybe I'll join you in the negativity chorus if the Hawks lay another egg like the last one, but for now I'm still on the glass is half full side. They have good players, especially on a developing defense. My hope is that they just hit a snag. Hey, the Broncos beat the Chiefs. The NFL is surprising more often than not. Let's see how they rebound. Seaside, buck up.
Couple other things about post. Why are we underselling the lions? This team has a very good shot at being the number 1 seed in the NFC. If that’s not a great win, on the road, at their home opener in a very hostile environment... what is?
Going toe to toe with the bengals on the road and kind of getting unlucky not to win? That’s not a good game? They just went on the road to the Niners and smoked them. They also are a top team in the AFC.
So I don’t get why those two games are being undersold.
Also, great teams have a stinker game most years. Even the SB champion
2022 rams lost to Cards 37-20 and SF 31-10
2020 Bucs lost 38-3 to New Orleans
2019 patriots lost 34-10 to the titans
It’s not great to get your ass kicked... but it’s also not uncommon for great teams to have it happen to them. I would even say it’s pretty typical during the course of an NFL season.
Back in the early days of the PC/JS regime they were not afraid to cut or move vets that were average or in the downside of their career. In the 2011-2015 they added vets at the start of the run then increased it to keep the run alive.
They seem to think this is just a soft rebuild and they just need to add a few key vets here and there the problem is the vets seem to be all in the downside of careers. Geno ? Diggs? Etc.
I believe they have some good pieces but need to add elite young talent. Take the lumps now for a year and build up. That means moving on for high priced vets that are not worth the cost. Look to ‘25 as the year
Since the D in DVOA means "Defense-adjusted", the 10th place considers the strength of the defenses faced, so it's not fair to double dip on the "bad defenses" penalty. DVOA already does that.
I believe that a mediocre game against a fantastic Browns defense may be doing a lot of heavy lifting — and sucking against the Ravens (the second best defense) didn't weight that much —, ir was ugly, but all metrics of that game for the Browns D were worse than their season averages.
But the Lions are the 8th best defense, and Cincinnati the 11th best (still going by DVOA). It may seem strange to say so, but the Seahawks faced 4 good defenses (including the 2 best) and 4 bad ones (all 4 in the bottom 7, and the upcoming Commies are also in that group).
Apart from the Rams, we won against all bad defenses, the very best, the 8th best, and lost to the 2nd best and the 11th best.
So the offense still functioned against good defenses (Ravens notwithstanding), just not as well as they did against bad ones.
Once we reverse, apart from the Lions, we only won against bad offenses (4 of the bottom 6). So yeah, defense is looking fantastic against the likes of Giants, but terrible against any competent team.
DVOA has zero interest invested in validating anyone's priors. That DVOA ranking isn't saying Geno Smith is amazing because it's not ranking Geno Smith, its ranking the entire offense's accomplishments vs the strength of the offense's opponents and their prior performance.
By the way, they evaluate individual players. Geno has a passing DVOA of 8.6% and a DYAR of 336, meaning he's 8.6% better than the average QB when passing, and produced the equivalent of 336 yards above what would be expected of a replacement-level QB.
For me, I look at the title of the stat. Over Expected contains ambiguity, and I think that's what Parallax has issue with. Whose expectation? Who is to say THAT person who came up with the expectation, or the set of historical data behind the expectation isn't flawed?
All of these stat we're looking at are attempts to gauge how well a team is doing deeper than the wins and losses, and provide some sort of insight into future success chances of the team... the problem is that no matter how many layers of metrics we examine, there are too many variables and no constants. The equations are unsolvable by definition. Even the "eye" test is so subjective that it is debateable. I prefer to just watch the ultimate in reality television that is the NFL, hope for the best, and see what unfolds. The drama is amazing. I trust that Pete and John have an organization that treats employees very well and creates an environment where success can grow. It is all a work in progress and I am excited to see how our team continues to develop as we chase our next title.
Sure they do post those but I haven't found a lot of value in using their DVOA numbers for individual players. I think DYAR has more value for QBs although I also think EPA and/or CPOE might be more useful.
DVOA would be useless for moneyball because DVOA can't be used to score a specific player's quality in any game or season. That's not what it does.
It's not perfect, there's no single perfect metric for unit or even team performance in the NFL but DVOA has a long track record and its been far more right than wrong.
Personally, very happy with the team and the direction it is going. I think Pete Carroll deserves to get criticized for his unsuccessful attempts at maintaining a good team in the post LOB era.
But for my money, there is no one I want more in charge than PC and JS to build a team. We are in year 2 of the rebuild and I think it is in a great spot. I would tell Jody to stay the course.
I’m a bit difference from most as I expected the hawks to make the playoffs last year. Every article claiming they were tanking or signing baker mayfield or whatever flavor of the day, kind of got a chuckle from me. So in my mind, this is all going to plan.
The big decision will be this off-season. Stay with Geno? Go to Lock? Or draft a rookie QB? We will be entering year 3 of the rebuild and the rookies will be 3 years into their contracts with the second crop in year 2.
This will be especially interesting if the Hawks win a playoff game or if the hawks make the playoffs and lose. What’s enough to stay with Geno? I don’t know
Although I still am bullish this year the real opportunity is 2024 and 2025 (year 4 of the 2022 rookie class).
Unfortunately, the Niners may have hit on a rookie QB that would be detrimental to our chances. Altho I am not anywhere near sold on Purdy. I also have seen Shanny blow it consistently in pressure situations. Pete also owns the Niners and shanny. So we will see.
My opinion, stay the course! Rebuild is going great. Very unfortunate to get the tackles injured as those were the pieces I really wanted to stay take a step forward this year. But injuries are out of anyones control.
If I were jody, I am looking at the 2025 season results. That would be the year from me that settles what to do moving forward.
On the flip side, I do not want to see another regime come in and mess up this rebuild to bring in “their guys”. That is exactly what bad organizations do and gets franchises stuck in quagmires for years.
Parallax, do you enjoy watching the Seahawks games? Or is it just unrelenting pain and misery with all the boneheads and stupid trades and bad coaching and worthless statistics and metrics and not playing Lock and PC is stupid and has to go? I think you make some valid points and know football, but holy cow...why do you even watch given all the perceived incompetence by the Seahawks leadership?
I am thankful the Seahawks are almost always competing for a playoff spot every year, thanks in large part to PC/JS. As a result, they are always "close" to becoming SB-competitive. And anything can happen once the playoffs start. I'm so thankful we are in the discussion most years, despite all the stupidity you cite from your sofa.
I don't think you give any credit for how competitive we are every year...and don't recognize how many other teams are not. MANY teams in the NFL are bad year in and year out. They draft, they trade, they change coaches and schemes, owners come and go, uniforms change, they continue to suck. Far fewer teams are consistently competitive. Seattle is one of those teams since PC/JS. And regardless of record, I'll pull for them every year...they are my team.
Do I think Geno is a great QB? No. However, I have some faith the Hawks leadership is starting Geno instead of Lock for a reason. They get to watch/test/probe/measure/analyze/assess both players every day...not just during games. They are sticking with Geno (for now) because they think they have a better shot at winning with Geno. That could change at any time and I don't believe coach ego is a factor. They traded for Williams because they think he can help now, and think it was worth the price. Maybe you know better than they do, but I'm sticking with them on all fronts. I agree with SSJ's assessment that we'll see Lock on the field if the Hawks are no longer in contention for the playoffs. Right now they are clearly in contention, so why upset the apple cart by changing QB's, which can lead to all sorts of issues? Particularly if the leadership thinks Geno is the best option right now? I guess you believe it's worth the risks to try the backup now based on flaws you've seen this year on game day with Geno. Okay.
It must not be fun watching, given all the incompetence you bring up consistently.
Fair enough. I appreciate your measured response to my somewhat emotion based reply. The sports media all say PC is a legend. Certainly in the culture he fosters. Maybe not as much in play calling, game management, or personal evaluations. Dunno. It would be a worthwhile analysis from SSJ. Is PC still the guy or are there better options that could push the team into the promised land?
He hits right though and keeps his head out of it. Remember Earl Thomas. He was a little guy and hit really hard and a ball hawk. He was good for 9 seasons with us. I think Witherspoon will be similar.
Just listened to Marshawn on Smartless, and he didn't have anything good to say about Pete. Maybe the rah rah isn't enough to coach an elite football team. I want to see the Seahawks become great again at defense and running the football, it's what Pete is supposed to be good at but we haven't seen it in what seems like forever. If we could get that back, any QB would look good.
I listened to that Smartless and this isn't a fair take in my opinion. Lynch never said he didn't like Pete or that Pete was all rah rah and nothing else. All he really said was that he didn't get Pete's super positivity and constant energy, in a very funny but brief impression. It didn't work or connect with him, which is fine. It's not like Pete kept Lynch from being great, far from it. Clearly it did work with other players but it's not remotely surprising it alienated someone like Lynch, who is definitely a very unique individual (as has been proven so many times I've lost count).
He did once again commend Tom Cable and Sherman Smith for being his primary coaching connection with the Seahawks and helping develop him into the Beastmode we all know and love.
I took it as if you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything at all, but you might be right. For the record, I like Pete and I keep hearing about how the Seahawks culture is a players favorite. But after all these seasons of making the playoffs then one and done, you've got to wonder if it's the best we can do.
Johnny Manziel and Russ Wilson reminded us what raw football looks like when they released The Dogs of Chaos. I enjoyed watching Pete Carroll turn into a kid again, going from a deflated coach as Russ bolted from the pocket, to finding his inner cheerleader a moment later. The whole Team embraced that, one film frame review at a time. So did I. So did we all. It's called Passion and passions do not obey order and structure much, if at all. The team's call for "more Bobo" is telling us something.
The offense wins time of possession, scores consistently, is able to hold the ball with few turnovers. It features a better than average (top 10 at least) run game, and big-play capability in the WR room.
The defense gives up yards but stingy on points, and wins turnovers for the offense. Plus pressure rate and above average secondary.
Special teams are not ordinary.
It is a formula that works, and it is called "Pete ball."
And the Seahawks *do have the players* to play complementary football, right now against all but the best opposition IF everybody does their job. The major problem is the one we have been disucssing--a QB that is capable of running the show.
If the offense turns the ball over, goes 3/out consistently, the D gets gassed and everything falls apart.
They need to be better on the O-line, I do think if healthy with the youngin at RG (sorry forgot his name again-) with a little time together they can be at the worst OK - Have to have that!
Ken wrote in one of the post-game articles that the D has now played the equivalent of two additional games worth of snaps than the offense. That is unsustainable and (half way through the season no less) leads to break downs.
This is a good D that has been stretched to the breaking point.
Yeah, it is unsustainable and the offense has a part to play but my original comment still stands. Get the fuck off the field. The LOB had a much better argument to make in this respect vs Wilson's offense, because they could get off the field. The Seahawks defense has struggled with these issues since 2017.
Yeah that LOB D bent... an awful lot. But the "time of possession" battle was still won more often than not by the Seahawks because of the running game.
The LOB was built around Pete's philosophy of not surrendering explosive plays either passing or running--keep everything in front of you. It forces the opposition into long drivers with no mistakes in order to score, with a D that is ready to pounce on errors. This 2023 D is not THAT D, at least not yet, but it has potential.
It will get better when the offense can covert more 3rd downs with fewer 3 and outs and stupid turn overs. When Geno and the OC are gone and a fan like me can't call 65 % of the plays.
When the starting O line gets healthy and the time of possession is nearly equal. When we get a playmaker QB instead of a place holder.
When we get back to a 4/3 D that we actually can play with the personally we have.
SJ what I feel is missing is TOP for the defense. Clearly when the offense cannot play more than 3-4 plays before the defense is back out there has to have an impact, especially in a hybrid 3-4 without a normal NT. Case in point was a “normal” run play up the middle by Mitchell. JReed was on him. Dude is 100 pounds heavier. Mitchell was able to get away. Look at first qtr. the Ravens didn’t do that. Second half I am sure JReed etc were gassed big time. We have seen JReed be dominant on the line. In games where the offense of playing well almost all 4 quarters. How about research of TOP and it’s impact to the defense?
Introducing 2 new guys(Clark&Williams) to room almost always has an affect mostly negative on team performance . Couple people pushed out of jobs, different dynamic, tendency to evaluate new guys as game is on. Will look a lot different when schedule toughens. Positive about last weekend is a shared experience. Hope everyone not happy and working hard at dialling it in. The group is and will be much better. Only one way to get another shot at Ravens this year.
Hmmmm. I must admit, I'm not a fan of selecting this data point, and that data point, and implying something in the form of a question from it. FWIW, I don't know who you think is giving the Seahawks 'a pass'. I'm certainly not. This team has enough good players to be competitive in every game, and they have enough developing talent to be competitive next year and the year after. That's not a pass.
Is this questioning Pete? I think you have to ignore an awful lot of data points to imply he's not a successful coach. This whole up and down on Pete is coming in shorter cycles every year. Last year he was a genius early in the season, and a problem later in the season. This year it's seems almost after every good game Pete is getting a lot out of his guys, and every bad game Pete isn't getting enough out of his guys. Maybe Pete's the problem?
Pete actually has a track record to point at. You know who doesn't? Our two coordinators. At least not as coordinators. There is no evidence that I can find that says either one of them is maximizing the talent they have on the field......and they both have a considerable amount IMHO. But if you look at the numbers they are both average to below average, and that might be generous. If Pete has a weakness it is his patience. With players and coaches. If our defense ends up average to below average this year, and so does our offense, what rationale would suggest he brings either coordinator back next year, other than simply patience and process......which is to say, hope.
It's Clint and Shane who shouldn't get a pass in all of this. Time for them both to make a difference. They need to be a step ahead of the opposition, not a step behind. If we know the opposition is going to run screens on offense, and we still can't stop it, are we coaching that correctly? If the offense knows the defensive philosophy and how it attacks offenses, can we not scheme beaters to take them away from what they do best?
I know injuries and having a young team (youngest team with a winning record I think) can create chaos that's hard to overcome for coordinators, so I don't want to be too hard on Clint and Shane. They'll get their chance in the next few weeks to show whether they can make a difference for their team. I don't give either of them another year in Seattle if they can't.
Wentz to the Rams! We might get the benefit of taking on Carson Wentz this season, perfect for stat padding and lulling ourselves into a false sense of security. (I really like Carson and a post-career dissection on him will be beyond fascinating)
We’ve got what we’ve got now, so we have to make do with it. If Pete and Waldron aren’t gonna give Lock a go, then they have to scheme better to allow Geno to get it off earlier and use more run game and blocking. That’s the how and the why. That’s what they need to do and that’s what what they haven’t been doing. The when is NOW before it’s too late. IMO Lock should be part of it, even if it’s just interchanging him and Geno throughout the game instead of completely dropping him.
Don’t know why you’ve been so confused Joe!
They are no stronger than their weakest link, which is the OL. When it can't consistently compete, you get 3 and outs, great running backs who get stopped, an OK QB under too much pressure, excessive dependence on TEs for blocking instead of receiving, and then so many downs for the D that they get gassed and too easily read. Lucas coming back will hopefully make a difference but then they're still just another starter injury away from the same fate.
Love the let's really think about this !!! We can all be GM's and Coaches, I love it - I am absolutely positive they have a plan, together, I just don't really very often agree with it! For the D - I am believer in what the Ravens have , A Monster in the middle to big DT along side ,Basically a true DE on one side ,then flush the other with a LB or as Pete says a LEO, -Love their plan. It would be mine. I remember in the 90's I floated playing 3 safeties all the time ,one basically be a hybrid LB/ safety, HE needing to be the smartest guy on the field/essential being a free agent /play caller. Guess what -ten years later we started seeing it. NOW on offense ,said before ,Other than QB it needs to be on the O-line. Nothing works without them ,nothing!!! You can have all the so-called skill players you want ,to have a Consistent quality offense you need a good O-line!!! NUTSHELL!
Ah yes, it's November 7th and Kenny has introduced the "Is Pete still a good head coach?" discussion into the discourse (because that's what this entire thing boils down to). Not that it's not appropriate right now, but this has come up every year since like 2015* and the fact that it never really goes away is probably something that should actually concern everyone, including Pete's biggest fans. Because this topic has had ample ammo for a long time.
*we mostly skipped this last year because the specific issues could be blamed on specific players, but it's still the same core issue...coaching and leadership.
Maybe I'll join you in the negativity chorus if the Hawks lay another egg like the last one, but for now I'm still on the glass is half full side. They have good players, especially on a developing defense. My hope is that they just hit a snag. Hey, the Broncos beat the Chiefs. The NFL is surprising more often than not. Let's see how they rebound. Seaside, buck up.
Couple other things about post. Why are we underselling the lions? This team has a very good shot at being the number 1 seed in the NFC. If that’s not a great win, on the road, at their home opener in a very hostile environment... what is?
Going toe to toe with the bengals on the road and kind of getting unlucky not to win? That’s not a good game? They just went on the road to the Niners and smoked them. They also are a top team in the AFC.
So I don’t get why those two games are being undersold.
Also, great teams have a stinker game most years. Even the SB champion
2022 rams lost to Cards 37-20 and SF 31-10
2020 Bucs lost 38-3 to New Orleans
2019 patriots lost 34-10 to the titans
It’s not great to get your ass kicked... but it’s also not uncommon for great teams to have it happen to them. I would even say it’s pretty typical during the course of an NFL season.
NFL all about how you bounce back.
Back in the early days of the PC/JS regime they were not afraid to cut or move vets that were average or in the downside of their career. In the 2011-2015 they added vets at the start of the run then increased it to keep the run alive.
They seem to think this is just a soft rebuild and they just need to add a few key vets here and there the problem is the vets seem to be all in the downside of careers. Geno ? Diggs? Etc.
I believe they have some good pieces but need to add elite young talent. Take the lumps now for a year and build up. That means moving on for high priced vets that are not worth the cost. Look to ‘25 as the year
Since the D in DVOA means "Defense-adjusted", the 10th place considers the strength of the defenses faced, so it's not fair to double dip on the "bad defenses" penalty. DVOA already does that.
I believe that a mediocre game against a fantastic Browns defense may be doing a lot of heavy lifting — and sucking against the Ravens (the second best defense) didn't weight that much —, ir was ugly, but all metrics of that game for the Browns D were worse than their season averages.
But the Lions are the 8th best defense, and Cincinnati the 11th best (still going by DVOA). It may seem strange to say so, but the Seahawks faced 4 good defenses (including the 2 best) and 4 bad ones (all 4 in the bottom 7, and the upcoming Commies are also in that group).
Apart from the Rams, we won against all bad defenses, the very best, the 8th best, and lost to the 2nd best and the 11th best.
So the offense still functioned against good defenses (Ravens notwithstanding), just not as well as they did against bad ones.
Once we reverse, apart from the Lions, we only won against bad offenses (4 of the bottom 6). So yeah, defense is looking fantastic against the likes of Giants, but terrible against any competent team.
Excellent points 👍🏼
DVOA has zero interest invested in validating anyone's priors. That DVOA ranking isn't saying Geno Smith is amazing because it's not ranking Geno Smith, its ranking the entire offense's accomplishments vs the strength of the offense's opponents and their prior performance.
By the way, they evaluate individual players. Geno has a passing DVOA of 8.6% and a DYAR of 336, meaning he's 8.6% better than the average QB when passing, and produced the equivalent of 336 yards above what would be expected of a replacement-level QB.
For me, I look at the title of the stat. Over Expected contains ambiguity, and I think that's what Parallax has issue with. Whose expectation? Who is to say THAT person who came up with the expectation, or the set of historical data behind the expectation isn't flawed?
All of these stat we're looking at are attempts to gauge how well a team is doing deeper than the wins and losses, and provide some sort of insight into future success chances of the team... the problem is that no matter how many layers of metrics we examine, there are too many variables and no constants. The equations are unsolvable by definition. Even the "eye" test is so subjective that it is debateable. I prefer to just watch the ultimate in reality television that is the NFL, hope for the best, and see what unfolds. The drama is amazing. I trust that Pete and John have an organization that treats employees very well and creates an environment where success can grow. It is all a work in progress and I am excited to see how our team continues to develop as we chase our next title.
Sure they do post those but I haven't found a lot of value in using their DVOA numbers for individual players. I think DYAR has more value for QBs although I also think EPA and/or CPOE might be more useful.
DVOA would be useless for moneyball because DVOA can't be used to score a specific player's quality in any game or season. That's not what it does.
It's not perfect, there's no single perfect metric for unit or even team performance in the NFL but DVOA has a long track record and its been far more right than wrong.
Personally, very happy with the team and the direction it is going. I think Pete Carroll deserves to get criticized for his unsuccessful attempts at maintaining a good team in the post LOB era.
But for my money, there is no one I want more in charge than PC and JS to build a team. We are in year 2 of the rebuild and I think it is in a great spot. I would tell Jody to stay the course.
I’m a bit difference from most as I expected the hawks to make the playoffs last year. Every article claiming they were tanking or signing baker mayfield or whatever flavor of the day, kind of got a chuckle from me. So in my mind, this is all going to plan.
The big decision will be this off-season. Stay with Geno? Go to Lock? Or draft a rookie QB? We will be entering year 3 of the rebuild and the rookies will be 3 years into their contracts with the second crop in year 2.
This will be especially interesting if the Hawks win a playoff game or if the hawks make the playoffs and lose. What’s enough to stay with Geno? I don’t know
Although I still am bullish this year the real opportunity is 2024 and 2025 (year 4 of the 2022 rookie class).
Unfortunately, the Niners may have hit on a rookie QB that would be detrimental to our chances. Altho I am not anywhere near sold on Purdy. I also have seen Shanny blow it consistently in pressure situations. Pete also owns the Niners and shanny. So we will see.
My opinion, stay the course! Rebuild is going great. Very unfortunate to get the tackles injured as those were the pieces I really wanted to stay take a step forward this year. But injuries are out of anyones control.
If I were jody, I am looking at the 2025 season results. That would be the year from me that settles what to do moving forward.
On the flip side, I do not want to see another regime come in and mess up this rebuild to bring in “their guys”. That is exactly what bad organizations do and gets franchises stuck in quagmires for years.
Stay the course, Go hawks
Parallax, do you enjoy watching the Seahawks games? Or is it just unrelenting pain and misery with all the boneheads and stupid trades and bad coaching and worthless statistics and metrics and not playing Lock and PC is stupid and has to go? I think you make some valid points and know football, but holy cow...why do you even watch given all the perceived incompetence by the Seahawks leadership?
I am thankful the Seahawks are almost always competing for a playoff spot every year, thanks in large part to PC/JS. As a result, they are always "close" to becoming SB-competitive. And anything can happen once the playoffs start. I'm so thankful we are in the discussion most years, despite all the stupidity you cite from your sofa.
I don't think you give any credit for how competitive we are every year...and don't recognize how many other teams are not. MANY teams in the NFL are bad year in and year out. They draft, they trade, they change coaches and schemes, owners come and go, uniforms change, they continue to suck. Far fewer teams are consistently competitive. Seattle is one of those teams since PC/JS. And regardless of record, I'll pull for them every year...they are my team.
Do I think Geno is a great QB? No. However, I have some faith the Hawks leadership is starting Geno instead of Lock for a reason. They get to watch/test/probe/measure/analyze/assess both players every day...not just during games. They are sticking with Geno (for now) because they think they have a better shot at winning with Geno. That could change at any time and I don't believe coach ego is a factor. They traded for Williams because they think he can help now, and think it was worth the price. Maybe you know better than they do, but I'm sticking with them on all fronts. I agree with SSJ's assessment that we'll see Lock on the field if the Hawks are no longer in contention for the playoffs. Right now they are clearly in contention, so why upset the apple cart by changing QB's, which can lead to all sorts of issues? Particularly if the leadership thinks Geno is the best option right now? I guess you believe it's worth the risks to try the backup now based on flaws you've seen this year on game day with Geno. Okay.
It must not be fun watching, given all the incompetence you bring up consistently.
Fair enough. I appreciate your measured response to my somewhat emotion based reply. The sports media all say PC is a legend. Certainly in the culture he fosters. Maybe not as much in play calling, game management, or personal evaluations. Dunno. It would be a worthwhile analysis from SSJ. Is PC still the guy or are there better options that could push the team into the promised land?
Appreciate you Parallax.
Assume that he doesn’t think the Williams trade was bone-headed. Then reasses your comment.
DW for the most part is good, but he also needs to attend a tackling seminar. WRAP!
He hits right though and keeps his head out of it. Remember Earl Thomas. He was a little guy and hit really hard and a ball hawk. He was good for 9 seasons with us. I think Witherspoon will be similar.
Just listened to Marshawn on Smartless, and he didn't have anything good to say about Pete. Maybe the rah rah isn't enough to coach an elite football team. I want to see the Seahawks become great again at defense and running the football, it's what Pete is supposed to be good at but we haven't seen it in what seems like forever. If we could get that back, any QB would look good.
I listened to that Smartless and this isn't a fair take in my opinion. Lynch never said he didn't like Pete or that Pete was all rah rah and nothing else. All he really said was that he didn't get Pete's super positivity and constant energy, in a very funny but brief impression. It didn't work or connect with him, which is fine. It's not like Pete kept Lynch from being great, far from it. Clearly it did work with other players but it's not remotely surprising it alienated someone like Lynch, who is definitely a very unique individual (as has been proven so many times I've lost count).
He did once again commend Tom Cable and Sherman Smith for being his primary coaching connection with the Seahawks and helping develop him into the Beastmode we all know and love.
I took it as if you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything at all, but you might be right. For the record, I like Pete and I keep hearing about how the Seahawks culture is a players favorite. But after all these seasons of making the playoffs then one and done, you've got to wonder if it's the best we can do.
Saying that nothing has worked is ridiculous. You are undermining your credibility.
Seahawks coaches with 10+ win seasons:
Carroll 8
Holmgren 3
Knox 1
All others combined 0
Half of Carroll’s came after the LOB “broke up.”
Johnny Manziel and Russ Wilson reminded us what raw football looks like when they released The Dogs of Chaos. I enjoyed watching Pete Carroll turn into a kid again, going from a deflated coach as Russ bolted from the pocket, to finding his inner cheerleader a moment later. The whole Team embraced that, one film frame review at a time. So did I. So did we all. It's called Passion and passions do not obey order and structure much, if at all. The team's call for "more Bobo" is telling us something.
And Russ was only good because of the defense. Anyway, that now 11 year old meme from BestGuyAround will live forever.
Complementary football.
The offense wins time of possession, scores consistently, is able to hold the ball with few turnovers. It features a better than average (top 10 at least) run game, and big-play capability in the WR room.
The defense gives up yards but stingy on points, and wins turnovers for the offense. Plus pressure rate and above average secondary.
Special teams are not ordinary.
It is a formula that works, and it is called "Pete ball."
And the Seahawks *do have the players* to play complementary football, right now against all but the best opposition IF everybody does their job. The major problem is the one we have been disucssing--a QB that is capable of running the show.
If the offense turns the ball over, goes 3/out consistently, the D gets gassed and everything falls apart.
They need to be better on the O-line, I do think if healthy with the youngin at RG (sorry forgot his name again-) with a little time together they can be at the worst OK - Have to have that!
How about "Competent" football?
If the defense could tackle guys on first contact and get off the field on 3rd down, they wouldn't be gassed.
Ken wrote in one of the post-game articles that the D has now played the equivalent of two additional games worth of snaps than the offense. That is unsustainable and (half way through the season no less) leads to break downs.
This is a good D that has been stretched to the breaking point.
Yeah, it is unsustainable and the offense has a part to play but my original comment still stands. Get the fuck off the field. The LOB had a much better argument to make in this respect vs Wilson's offense, because they could get off the field. The Seahawks defense has struggled with these issues since 2017.
Yeah that LOB D bent... an awful lot. But the "time of possession" battle was still won more often than not by the Seahawks because of the running game.
The LOB was built around Pete's philosophy of not surrendering explosive plays either passing or running--keep everything in front of you. It forces the opposition into long drivers with no mistakes in order to score, with a D that is ready to pounce on errors. This 2023 D is not THAT D, at least not yet, but it has potential.
It will get better when the offense can covert more 3rd downs with fewer 3 and outs and stupid turn overs. When Geno and the OC are gone and a fan like me can't call 65 % of the plays.
When the starting O line gets healthy and the time of possession is nearly equal. When we get a playmaker QB instead of a place holder.
When we get back to a 4/3 D that we actually can play with the personally we have.
Just some random thoughts.
Think I've said that too-