Mebane and Sweezy, gone.

[c_hawkbob]

Do you guys really think that he can be a viable NFL LT?

Perhaps.

I just hope we're not planning on it as plan A this year.

[obiken]

"Perhaps.

I just hope we're not planning on it as plan A this year."


Me to CB!

[NorthHawk]

I think Gilliam is more suited to LT than RT in our Offense and I think he can be at least satisfactory.
I would expect it to be like a rookie season for him early on, so don't expect Walter Jones productivity but if he really does have the talent, he could be solid for a number of years for us - or at least until his contract is up.
That doesn't mean they won't draft an OT for the future or for competition. If Gilliam does become a top Tackle, he'll be gone soon and we will need a replacement so if one is available in this draft, I can see it happening.

[RiverDog]

obiken says "Do you guys really think that he can be a viable NFL LT?"

Perhaps.

I just hope we're not planning on it as plan A this year.

It sure is starting to look like Plan A. They haven't expressed much interest in anyone else, so they must be either very confident of Gilliam or have some pretty good intelligence that an OT they really like will be available when our name is called. I sure don't see what we've been doing in the offseason as an attempt to upgrade the OL, at least not yet. It looks more like "next man up" to me, similar to how we replaced Unger last season.

[NorthHawk]

Then again, RD it's called Player Development.
Why would you have young players in the system if you don't expect to eventually use them?
Players are drafted to eventually start. Now is Gilliam's time to show what he has at a marquee position.
There is potential there with his athleticism and OL experience, but he will certainly be on a learning curve.
The question is would an expensive veteran be worth the cost for a short term?
Having seen Gilliam playing at the NFL level, he certainly would be better at first than a draft pick (at 26, anyway).
The question that comes to mind is where is his upside?

Therefore I see them selecting an athletic T/G who can eventually move to the edge either because of injury, or because Gilliam develops into a tackle who will demand more money than we are willing to spend.

[mykc14]

Do you guys really think that he can be a viable NFL LT?

I actually do as well. I'm not saying he is going to be a Pro-Bowler, especially not in season 1, but I do think he has the tools to be a legitimate starting LT in this league.

[HumanCockroach]

http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/nf ... 66812.html

[HumanCockroach]

Today we'll be discussing the approach Pete Carroll and John Schneider have taken to fill out the Seahawks offensive line. Both have been quoted several times expressing their concern that college football is no longer producing plug and play caliber players. The emergence of the spread offense means that collegiate OL are no longer asked to do the same things they once were. The result of this is that the highly ranked OL coming out of college still have a lot to learn, and teams don't even know if they'll be able to adapt and acquire the skills it takes to compete at the next level.
-- For a team like the Seahawks, with a solid O Line coach in Tom Cable, it just makes more sense to draft for athletic qualities and measurables rather than production. It's why they move a J.R. Sweezy from DT to OG after drafting him. It's why they're trying the same with Kristjan Sokoli. Gilliam is set to compete for the left tackle spot, and he was a college TE convert from DL. They believe that with the low level of experience in the traditional pro style offense coming out of college, they'd have to basically start from square one with any OL they draft. So why burn a high pick on player A when they can get player B, who has similar measurables, in round 5?
-- While I understand the rationale behind this mindset, I must admit that we haven't seen it consistently work out. Our OL seems to always be one year away from gelling, and each year a key player has left via free agency. But you only need to look at the rest of the league to see that teams who thrust their highly drafted rookie offensive lineman into starting roles have several problems.
-- The first, and most obvious problem, is that the rookies struggle. Almost all rookies in all positions have their growing pains, but OL seems to be the biggest drop off and slowest climb back up to quality play. Year after year we see all the player comparisons for rookie tackles and guards. Year after year we hear the draft pundits talk about how this player or that player will be a perennial pro bowler. And once the season starts, those same players seem to fall back down to earth. The athleticism is there, but they just look lost. There are, of course, exceptions to this, but those exceptions are typically drafted far higher than the Seahawks have been able to draft in the PC/JS era. They come at the expense of making the playoffs the year before.
-- The second, and less quantifiable problem, that teams who draft their OL high have is supporting talent. Take Dallas. They have for several years been regarded as the standard for a high performing OL. While they struggled a bit last year, they were still in the top half of the league based on Football Outsiders metric. Unfortunately, on the defensive side of the ball, they were 17th against the pass (often playing from behind so teams had less need to throw on them) and 29th against the run (burn that clock, baby). If you watched any Cowboy games over the past couple years, you'll hear the color commentator heap praise upon them for spending so many high draft picks on their offensive line. "That's how you build a great offensive line" they exclaim. It's also how you build a bad overall team.
-- For every high pick a team spends on an offensive lineman, they are missing out on picking a talent at another position. Given college football's trend of producing OL that aren't prepared to make an impact their first couple seasons, it seems prudent to draft other positions that will have an immediate impact early and wait until later to draft project OL. Would you rather have Tyler Lockett (pick 69) or Hronis Grasu (pick 71)?
-- It's easy to look at the sacks given up last season, coupled with our free agency losses of incumbent starters, and assume that we should use any resource necessary to bolster the OL. Looking at the games where we had the most problems, it was against the Aaron Donalds and Kawann Shorts of the league. Our problem wasn't on the edge, it was inside penetration made by pro bowl players. While I personally think that Gilliam will be a step down from Okung this year, I do also think he's serviceable enough to protect Russ long enough for him to do his scramble thing. What we need is more help between tackles, and there is plenty of depth for that area in later rounds. There are draft gurus who will tell you that there are fewer OG to be had later in the draft, but keep in mind that PC/JS like their OG to have played OT in college. So, a draft deep at OT is deep at OG as far as the Seahawks are concerned.
-- I'll probably still be pulling my hair out come draft day, because that's just what I do. We have this tendency to take what we're told by draft gurus as infallible truth, and base our immediate reactions of who we draft vs who else was available on their draft boards. After this many successful seasons, this FO has earned our trust. I want that stud left tackle to combine with a cerebral and solid center, and hey, maybe throw in an agile mauler at left guard. Maybe one of those players is available in round one. But I'll say this: if we pass on OL with our first pick, I won't panic.
( Brendan O'Leary FieldGulls )

[savvyman]

The Post above should be required reading for every Seahawk fan.....

[NorthHawk]

I've been saying inside out for a while now. Ifedi and McGovern would be very good fits. Both can play multiple roles with McGovern maybe even moving to C or play T in a pinch.
Strength up the middle is key in all team sports and we got bit a couple of times last year from inside pressure.

[Hawktawk]

Having caught the TD on the fake FG in the NFC championship it is obvious how explosive and athletic Gilliam is. Whether that translates into being a great LT is to be seen but it is intriguing for sure.

[obiken]

The Post above should be required reading for every Seahawk fan.....

I agree and a great post by Human. I just think that the OL, especially LT, is the one skilled position you can't teach in 5 minutes. They have taken track stars and made WR's out of them. IF a guy can hit you can adapt him to LB, but LT is such a key position to try and get away with it is a long shot at best. Let me state categorically, I don't agree with their strategy, they have gotten away with it up till now due to the people in place on the OL since 2012, those people are gone now. Okung is gone, Unger is gone, and now the rest are gone.
Never the less, as I told Human, this is the year that their strategy either becomes Walshesque genius, or we have a QB in the medic ward.

[c_hawkbob]

It sure is starting to look like Plan A. They haven't expressed much interest in anyone else, so they must be either very confident of Gilliam or have some pretty good intelligence that an OT they really like will be available when our name is called. I sure don't see what we've been doing in the offseason as an attempt to upgrade the OL, at least not yet. It looks more like "next man up" to me, similar to how we replaced Unger last season.

Still too early to make that call.

[RiverDog]

Still too early to make that call.

So when is it not too early? May 1st? September 1st? Or like last season, are we to wait until November 1st or so until a new crop of unproven players has had a chance to gel?

Honest question: In your opinion, which FA linemen are still out there that would represent an upgrade over Okung and Sweeny? I took a quick look and didn't see very many. Most of the good ones (Andre Smith, Alex Boone, Alex Mack, Evan Mathis, et al), players that might have represented an upgrade, have already signed with other teams. The FA period is clearly winding down, leaving the draft, redefining a few players roles (Gilliam to LT) and unexpected cuts as means of improving our OL per Pete's pledge.

[HumanCockroach]

When did they say they were going to be signing a bunch of FA lineman? I must have missed it. I mean they did sign two, but I can't recall any statement that emphatically said that they would be spending a bunch of money on older,offensive lineman. When did they say that?

[RiverDog]

When did they say they were going to be signing a bunch of FA lineman? I must have missed it. I mean they did sign two, but I can't recall any statement that emphatically said that they would be spending a bunch of money on older,offensive lineman. When did they say that?

They didn't say that they were going to sign "a bunch" of FA linemen, and I never indicated that they did. What they said they were going to do was that they were going to improve the OL and all they have done to this point is refused to resign two of our better starters and refused to pursue any of the top FA linemen.

You guys keep telling me that I'm impatient, that it's too early to come to the conclusion that Pete's pledge was nothing but a bunch of double talk. OK, fine. Even though I never said that we aren't going to make an improvements, never said that it's going to be no better and perhaps worse than last year's unit, for the sake of argument, I'll agree to your accusations: I'm Nervous Nelly, watching opportunity after opportunity sail past, and now I'm anxious as a three peckered Billy goat in a herd of sheep worried that Pete's pledge is a bunch of hooey. So how long must I wait? Until after the draft? The first preseason game? The final cut to 53? Or will it be like last year, with everyone telling me that we're going to have to wait 6-8 games for a bunch of unknown players/projects to gel?

[NorthHawk]

Relax, Nellie. You're heading into retirement, so enjoy it.
We still have the Draft as well as camp cuts to come where there will probably be some more FA's that could help.
If they make no other changes/additions, then you will have something to worry about.
As well, Glowinski and Sokoli will have had a full year to develop, so maybe they have been making big strides in that area.

Just maybe Pete's idea to improve the OL was to better the competition. We didn't have quality depth last year so even if they add a single draft pick along the OL, it will help.
I'd be disappointed, too if that was the case, but there is a long way to go until we set our hair on fire.

[RiverDog]

Relax, Nellie. You're heading into retirement, so enjoy it.
We still have the Draft as well as camp cuts to come where there will probably be some more FA's that could help.
If they make no other changes/additions, then you will have something to worry about.
As well, Glowinski and Sokoli will have had a full year to develop, so maybe they have been making big strides in that area.

Just maybe Pete's idea to improve the OL was to better the competition. We didn't have quality depth last year so even if they add a single draft pick along the OL, it will help.
I'd be disappointed, too if that was the case, but there is a long way to go until we set our hair on fire.

I did say "for the sake of argument." I do realize that the roster is not yet a finished product. I just get tired of all these generic "it's too early" or "they haven't even taken a snap yet" responses to any and all observations made about the status of our OL and any efforts, or lack thereof, to improve it.

[HumanCockroach]

The only confusion I have, is how in the world someone can claim that the only way to improve a line is through their personal preferred high price free agent acquisitions or a high draft pick. Somehow there's simply no other way? Hell, even Holmgren signed "lesser" free agents ( or do people somehow think Chris Gray and Tobeck were highly sought after lineman at the time all of a sudden years after the fact?)..

Seattle used the limited cap space they had, to sign two veteran lineman as low cost/ high reward contracts, drafted and groomed MULTIPLE players last season alone, and have 9 picks this year ( IF they don't trade back or a player and garner even more) have around 8 million dollars clearing up part June first ( of they wait until then to "retire" Lynch as not only the base salary is cleared but the cap hit can be spread after that date).

Maybe they do sign a later FA ( seem to remember Mathis becoming available for penny's on the dollar last season post draft, and there have been multiple rumblings about players like Unger being dumped because of salary as well). People begrudge them for "losing" Giacomini ( despite complaining about him during his time here) and how was he acquired? Scrap heap. People bemoaned the loss of Carpenter( despite complaints his entire time in Seattle) how was he acquired? Drafted. People are upset with Seattle's refusal to over pay for Okung and Sweezy ( despite consistently complaining about them during their time in Seattle) how were they acquired? Drafted, one exceedingly late and converted on top off it as well.... Amazingly enough, NONE of those players people have moaned about "losing" were "high priced free agent" players. 0. And somehow not signing some random aging, overpriced, free agent shows a "lack of dedication to improving" the line.

News flash. Signing expensive free agent lineman, isn't the only way to improve ANY part of ANY team.

[NorthHawk]

My point, RD was that we don't know much about Sokoli or Glowinski but have heard good things.
We saw Glowinski play and he looked half decent in the little time he had, and just maybe he's going to be a surprise this year.
I'm hoping they select 2 OL in the first 4 picks as there are a number of players with a lot of potential in the first 100 that could help us.
From what I've been reading, there is a dropoff in talent after the 3rd, but there are always those that defy the evaluations.

[c_hawkbob]

So when is it not too early? May 1st? September 1st? Or like last season, are we to wait until November 1st or so until a new crop of unproven players has had a chance to gel?

Honest question: In your opinion, which FA linemen are still out there that would represent an upgrade over Okung and Sweeny? I took a quick look and didn't see very many. Most of the good ones (Andre Smith, Alex Boone, Alex Mack, Evan Mathis, et al), players that might have represented an upgrade, have already signed with other teams. The FA period is clearly winding down, leaving the draft, redefining a few players roles (Gilliam to LT) and unexpected cuts as means of improving our OL per Pete's pledge.

Of course not September (that's a bit ridiculous, seriously) but at least until after the draft and the flurry of activity that always follows.

[monkey]

"Perhaps.

I just hope we're not planning on it as plan A this year."


Me to CB!

I absolutely believe he can be.
What's more, it's clear that the Seahawks ARE planning on it as plan A, and have been all along.
Gilliam is going to be just fine.
By the time the draft, and the post draft free agency period are over, I expect to have two new faces on the line as well.
I like this plan.

[monkey]

The only confusion I have, is how in the world someone can claim that the only way to improve a line is through their personal preferred high price free agent acquisitions or a high draft pick. Somehow there's simply no other way? Hell, even Holmgren signed "lesser" free agents ( or do people somehow think Chris Gray and Tobeck were highly sought after lineman at the time all of a sudden years after the fact?)..

Seattle used the limited cap space they had, to sign two veteran lineman as low cost/ high reward contracts, drafted and groomed MULTIPLE players last season alone, and have 9 picks this year ( IF they don't trade back or a player and garner even more) have around 8 million dollars clearing up part June first ( of they wait until then to "retire" Lynch as not only the base salary is cleared but the cap hit can be spread after that date).

Maybe they do sign a later FA ( seem to remember Mathis becoming available for penny's on the dollar last season post draft, and there have been multiple rumblings about players like Unger being dumped because of salary as well). People begrudge them for "losing" Giacomini ( despite complaining about him during his time here) and how was he acquired? Scrap heap. People bemoaned the loss of Carpenter( despite complaints his entire time in Seattle) how was he acquired? Drafted. People are upset with Seattle's refusal to over pay for Okung and Sweezy ( despite consistently complaining about them during their time in Seattle) how were they acquired? Drafted, one exceedingly late and converted on top off it as well.... Amazingly enough, NONE of those players people have moaned about "losing" were "high priced free agent" players. 0. And somehow not signing some random aging, overpriced, free agent shows a "lack of dedication to improving" the line.

News flash. Signing expensive free agent lineman, isn't the only way to improve ANY part of ANY team.

Bravo sir! Bravo!

[RiverDog]

Of course not September (that's a bit ridiculous, seriously) but at least until after the draft and the flurry of activity that always follows.

The reason I said September is that's when the final 53 is set, after other teams make their cuts, and once our roster is considered final. I can assure you that if we draft no OL's any higher than the 3rd, make no significant roster additions, then start out slowly like we did last season, that there will be a contingent of 12's that will be scolding other 12's to "give them a chance, they haven't played together. Wait until they gel."

But at least you gave me a relatively specific time, which is about mid May(?). I'll twiddle my thumbs and tap my foot until then.
,

[HumanCockroach]

So, if they had spent a ton off money on lineman, didn't sign any of their own free agents, and let every defensive free agent walk ( as well as guys like Kearse, maybe cut Graham and Baldwin) and then expended all three 1-3 round picks on offensive lineman they would have been ok? Despite losing viable receivers, and components from the defense?

I really am attempting to understand the unrealistic way people view how a team can sign whomever and whenever they feel the urge while losing nothing, and having a limited amount of room under the salary cap. How does that work exactly? Cut Wagner, Sherman and ET sign a bunch of older line guys and hope for the best? Maybe, skip signing Wilson and Baldwin sign some lineman and pray you find another receiver and QB somewhere that can replace them?? Truth is, there are "core" players Seattle feels are indispensable, I'm sorry it isn't the guys you want them to be, but unfortunately it wasn't Sweezy, Okung, Carpenter or Giacomini, it was instead Kam, ET, Sherman, Wright, Wilson, Wagner etc. It's unfortunate that they aren't as valuable to you as the lineman you complained about over the last four years on a regular basis, but look on the bright side. They let Irvin walk, so at least you got something you wanted.

[obiken]

Did I miss something that we are being lambasted by you and Monkey, for simply having a concern about the future health of our Qb??

[HumanCockroach]

What are you talking about? No where have I ever said anything of the sort. What I have said and continue to say had been consistent. No one knows how the line will perform, it is unrealistic and short sighted to mortgage the resources people seem hell bent on mortgaging for average players on the short term to alleviate their fears, and that there are more than one way to improve performance than the only two that are continually professed as the only way to do it ( ie overspending for average aging talent or drafting unprepared, young talent early in the draft). At no point have I said that their plan will work, I've simply stated that until we see that plan unfold, there is no way anyone can know it WON'T work.

I trust the FO and coaches to put the best possible product on the field they can each and every season. They won't be 100%, but I've seen no instance where it's been a lack of effort to do so. So I will wait until at least they do that prior to claiming they haven't, not a second before.

No one here knows squat about how that line will perform prior to them playing a down, despite claims to the contrary, and while everyone feels "safe and comfortable" in names they "know" it doesn't necessarily mean improvement regardless of the proclamations to the contrary.

It isn't lambasting someone for pointing that out. Its simply pointing it out.

[RiverDog]

So, if they had spent a ton off money on lineman, didn't sign any of their own free agents, and let every defensive free agent walk ( as well as guys like Kearse, maybe cut Graham and Baldwin) and then expended all three 1-3 round picks on offensive lineman they would have been ok? Despite losing viable receivers, and components from the defense?

I really am attempting to understand the unrealistic way people view how a team can sign whomever and whenever they feel the urge while losing nothing, and having a limited amount of room under the salary cap. How does that work exactly? Cut Wagner, Sherman and ET sign a bunch of older line guys and hope for the best? Maybe, skip signing Wilson and Baldwin sign some lineman and pray you find another receiver and QB somewhere that can replace them?? Truth is, there are "core" players Seattle feels are indispensable, I'm sorry it isn't the guys you want them to be, but unfortunately it wasn't Sweezy, Okung, Carpenter or Giacomini, it was instead Kam, ET, Sherman, Wright, Wilson, Wagner etc. It's unfortunate that they aren't as valuable to you as the lineman you complained about over the last four years on a regular basis, but look on the bright side. They let Irvin walk, so at least you got something you wanted.

You're putting words into my mouth, implying that I said things I never so much as suggested. No where did I say that we should have resigned Sweezy, Okung, Carpenter, et al, should have gone out and signed some high priced free agents, should spend our high draft picks on the OL. I've noted that we had some opportunities that we passed on, and that's as close as I've ever gotten to advocating specific acquisitions.

All I am saying that Pete pledged that we would improve our OL and so far, acknowledging that we are still a ways away from our final roster, I have seen very little evidence that he intends to fulfill that pledge. Have you?

[c_hawkbob]

That's exactly the problem I was trying to express to you Roach; you say:

I really am attempting to understand the unrealistic way people view how a team can sign whomever and whenever they feel the urge while losing nothing, and having a limited amount of room under the salary cap.

When no one has express any such unrealistic view. And It's because any time someone expresses any level of concern about the offensive line you take it as:

So, if they had spent a ton off money on lineman, didn't sign any of their own free agents, and let every defensive free agent walk ( as well as guys like Kearse, maybe cut Graham and Baldwin) and then expended all three 1-3 round picks on offensive lineman they would have been ok? Despite losing viable receivers, and components from the defense?

When NO ONE here has ever expressed such an extreme opinions.

You are constructing an extreme view of what is being said for you to argue against. It would help considerably if you'd argue instead about things that are actually being said.

[RiverDog]

Yea, I'm not sure what your deal is, Roach. You're usually pretty argumentative, as I can be, but not this antagonistic where you're acting as if you're trying to pick a fight (re: the Irvin cheap shot). Neither myself, CBob, or Obi have said or even implied anything close to the statements or sentiments you are attributing to us or to an unknown someone. I've challenged you to show me specifically where I've said something you claimed I did and you blew me off. It's frustrating.

[HumanCockroach]

So when is it not too early? May 1st? September 1st? Or like last season, are we to wait until November 1st or so until a new crop of unproven players has had a chance to gel?

Honest question: In your opinion, which FA linemen are still out there that would represent an upgrade over Okung and Sweeny? I took a quick look and didn't see very many. Most of the good ones (Andre Smith, Alex Boone, Alex Mack, Evan Mathis, et al), players that might have represented an upgrade, have already signed with other teams. The FA period is clearly winding down, leaving the draft, redefining a few players roles (Gilliam to LT) and unexpected cuts as means of improving our OL per Pete's pledge

They didn't say that they were going to sign "a bunch" of FA linemen, and I never indicated that they did. What they said they were going to do was that they were going to improve the OL and all they have done to this point is refused to resign two of our better starters and refused to pursue any of the top FA linemen.

You guys keep telling me that I'm impatient, that it's too early to come to the conclusion that Pete's pledge was nothing but a bunch of double talk. OK, fine. Even though I never said that we aren't going to make an improvements, never said that it's going to be no better and perhaps worse than last year's unit, for the sake of argument, I'll agree to your accusations: I'm Nervous Nelly, watching opportunity after opportunity sail past, and now I'm anxious as a three peckered Billy goat in a herd of sheep worried that Pete's pledge is a bunch of hooey. So how long must I wait? Until after the draft? The first preseason game? The final cut to 53? Or will it be like last year, with everyone telling me that we're going to have to wait 6-8 games for a bunch of unknown players/projects to gel?

RiverDog
Legacy

Posts: 4881
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 9:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

There's plenty more if you would like, claiming they have done nothing ( false) that if they don't draft multiple lineman in the first three rounds they are sunk, or claims of double talk, lies, lack of dedication, claims to the effect that players weren't good enough, claims of even the "loss of two all pros" ( okung and sweezy for the love of god)... There's plenty more, stretched over YEARS.

[monkey]

Did I miss something that we are being lambasted by you and Monkey, for simply having a concern about the future health of our Qb??

I was not intending to "lambaste" anyone!
I'm just trying to show the counterpoint to your worry, that's it!

I'm just honestly NOT AT ALL worried about LT! I am far more worried about LG Center and RT at the moment. I also truly believe that after the draft, I won't be at all worried those positions either, because they will have been adequately addressed.

[monkey]

Check this out!
http://sports.mynorthwest.com/115478/garry-gilliam-talks-next-step-evolution-seahawks-left-tackle/
The more I listen to him, the more I read about the reason that the Seahawks picked up a big athletic former TE in college, un-drafted player named Garry Gilliam, who they projected to play LT, the more convinced I am he's going to excel. I am convinced beyond any doubt that Gilliam will not only hold his own, but will actually do quite well next year at LT.
I'm convinced that he's our LT of the future, for a long time to come.

[Zorn76]

^^^I hope so^^^

But just in case....

[HumanCockroach]

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... nfl-draft/

[Seahawks4Ever]

Even though we have drafted his replacement I will always have a fond place in my heart for Brandon Mebane and what he brought to the table. When he was out our run stopping ability went by the way-side.

I am NOT going to miss J.R. Sleezy. Why?? Because he was still racking up stupid rookie-like penalties. He wasn't as bad as Breno in that regard, but bad enough. Just last season his flags killed many drives. What was most maddening was that a lot of his penalties were away from the play, in other words he didn't need hold. Then there illegal procedure effups, again, stuff you expect of a rookie not a veteran. So, I am glad I don't have to curse at him anymore.