Upgrading the Offensive Line through Free Agency

[RiverDog]

Two guys can just be busts. Moffitt clearly didn't have his heart in football, thus his retirement. Carpenter was just a flat out bad pick and to be honest look at the players out of Alabama since Saban has been there. They are physically dominant but almost all of them have really underachieved as pros. Julio Jones is the only guy I can think of off the top of my head who has matched his pre-draft hype. Eddy Lacy looks promising and Mark Barron looks like he has a shot. Aside from those three guys, look at this list of 1st and 2nd rounders that Saban has produced:

Andre Smith
Rolando McClain
Kareem Jackson
Javier Arenas
Terrance Cody
James Carpenter
Mark Ingram
Trent Richardson
Dre Kirkpatrick
Donte Hightower
Courtney Upshaw
Dee Milliner
Chance Warmack
D.J. Fluker

Now I just listed the players taken in the first two rounds but it's not like I'm cherry picking. Saban has had 36 players taken in the draft since he's been at Alabama. Collectively they have made 2 pro-bowls. Something ain't right in Tuscaloosa.

Wow. That's surprising. I remember making an argument about USC position players, like Reggie Bush, Matt Leinart, and Mike Williams being over rated because they played on teams that were so dominant. There also might be some underlying entitlement attitudes at work, too, that just because they played for a NC team or even in the SEC that they were preordained to be appearing in multiple Pro Bowls. They may not have been as hungry as players from lessor programs.

[HumanCockroach]

Or as Carroll says, they were lacking "grit" or maybe they gritless? LOL. Whichever, it seems like Carroll and Schneider target "their" kinds of players, talent or conventional wisdom be damned. They are going to miss on some, just the nature of the way the NFL is. Carpenter "miss", Sherman "hit", Moffitt "miss" , Wilson "hit".... etc. They hit far more often than they miss, just wish once in a while it would be on a lineman, not just a "starting" lineman, but a truly dominant 15 year stud.

[c_hawkbob]

There simply was not much in the way of O-line upgrades to be had in free agency this year. Meanwhile this is an amazingly strong and deep draft class for O-linemen.

That we've been weaker on the line than anywhere else on team for a while is no secret and I believe it's been our plan all along to let linemen go in free agency and replace them in the draft this year.

Personally I'm liking what I'm seeing here.

[monkey]

There simply was not much in the way of O-line upgrades to be had in free agency this year. Meanwhile this is an amazingly strong and deep draft class for O-linemen.

That we've been weaker on the line than anywhere else on team for a while is no secret and I believe it's been our plan all along to let linemen go in free agency and replace them in the draft this year.

Personally I'm liking what I'm seeing here.

Risky plan, starting rookie o-linemen in a year when the team is defending their Super Bowl title.
Just saying, if that's the plan, that's REALLY risky. Starting a rookie here or there throughout the team, no big deal, but they will likely need two just on the O-Line...that's borderline stupid IMO.
I have to believe that they are absolutely convinced Bailey and Bowie are ready to replace Carp and Breno, or there's just no way they would take that big a risk, because even if those two are ready, they're still not much of an upgrade...

[HumanCockroach]

When I saw Penns name pop up as a release have to admit my first thought was bring him in. That said he has had a history of weight problems and his play slipped last season. Just don't want the Hawks to sign someone for the sake of it. If Penn fits, then they should pull the trigger ( if it isn't an obscene amount of money) but just don't care for the idea of rushing to fill spots just to do it. They have shown the ability to find little used guys and make them serviceable, I would prefer better, just not sure dumping large amounts of cap space on so, so FA fills that requirement.

[RiverDog]

Or as Carroll says, they were lacking "grit" or maybe they gritless? LOL. Whichever, it seems like Carroll and Schneider target "their" kinds of players, talent or conventional wisdom be damned. They are going to miss on some, just the nature of the way the NFL is. Carpenter "miss", Sherman "hit", Moffitt "miss" , Wilson "hit".... etc. They hit far more often than they miss, just wish once in a while it would be on a lineman, not just a "starting" lineman, but a truly dominant 15 year stud.

Not disagreeing with you at all. How can any Seahawk fan not be pleased by the net result?

Nevertheless, when we/they do miss, they can expect fans like me to raise holy hell. Not that I'm calling for anyone's head, but it would be a pretty boring existence if all I were to do was to rubber stamp every decision simply because it came from our football Gods and accept every explanation offered because they know more about football than I do.

The problem that I have with relying on this year's draft class is that we don't have a lot of draft capital to spend. If all we had to do was add depth, I could see the logic, but we need starting quality linemen, and we're probably not going to get immediate help with a #32 overall and no 3rd rounder. Besides, if we couldn't make something out of either a first round pick and a third round pick, what gives us any confidence that we can find a diamond in the rough in this year's draft?

I'm a lot like North Hawk. I worry that our division is so competitive that our inattention to the OL might be our downfall next season. Our division record last year was just 4-2, and one of our wins went down to the last minute. The Rams have two picks in the top half of the first round this season.

[NorthHawk]

Right now we don't have a #1 RT. I guess Bowie, Bailey, or a Draft pick will be it.
When Okung goes down for his annual injury time, it will mean we have questions on both ends of the OL and questionable play inside. Not a good move if you value your Franchise QB.
On the other hand, the DL is one of the deepest parts of the team with 2 Rookies last year, yet we continue to look at adding to it a la Melton.
What sticks out is not one OL has come for a visit - none. Why not? We lost our starting RT and Sweezy And Carpenter inside aren't much to write home about. Surely we could have upgraded somewhere along the line.
Unless things change, Russ will get hurt this year. We're not good enough to compete and win along the LoS when on Offense. I hope I'm wrong.

[briwas101]

Im just gonna go through my list of thoughts:

1. Thank you Kalibane for that list of players, i always appreciate work like that. Those players have overwhelmingly disappointed in the NFL and I think it does say something about the program.

2. As far as drafting need or BPA, IMO the best approach is BPA at PON (best player available at position of need) except for extreme circumstances where the BPA at PON is only like #10 on your board and there are clearly more talented players at other positions. You don't want to miss out on a pro bowl LB just because you need an average Guard, but you also don't want to miss out on filling a major hole on your team just because a slightly better player is available but would be stuck down on the depth chart because it is a position of strength. Those are the extremes, but in most cases BPA at PON is the way to go.

3. The carpenter pick. This is absolutely not an example to use against drafting needs. For one thing, Schneider let a non-scout non-front-office guy (cable) choose the player and that mistake was compounded by Schneider's mistake of not pulling the trigger on the trade that was available to him. For those who don't remember, Schneider had an open offer on the table but he rejected the trade of picks because he didn't think there was enough "value" in the trade. I consider it a mistake on his part because his options were (1) draft a player that he probably knew wasn't good enough to be picked that high, or (2) trade back and still get Carpenter or someone else AND still get an extra pick or two.

I said it was a mistake back on that draft day and I stand by it. If you truly don't have anyone that you think is worth drafting at your spot then you take a trade offer that allows you better value at your new spot and you get another pick. Even if the trade offer doesn't match up with the outdated pick value chart I say you still make the move if it improves your chances of improving the team. Schneider chose to stick to the chart and draft Cable's player and there is no question now that it was the wrong move. Honestly though, in my heart I feel like he knows it was a mistake and in the future he would pull the trigger on the trade, but maybe that is more of just me wishing.


4. Sweezy: I know a lot of people like to use him as a "success" but I don't view it that way at all. If sweezy was actually GOOD then it would be a success, but because he isn't good it doesn't matter HOW he became a guard or how little time he's had at the position. The two weakest spots on the team (and they are LEGITIMATE weak spots) are both Guard positions. I just don't see how Sweezy can be considered a success when we need an upgrade over him. He got the job because we don't really have anyone else. The versatility that cable and pete want so much can also be a problem because if one of your starting tackles is also one of your 2 best guards then you have to choose which position he will start at and then you are forced to start the 3rd best player at whichever position the other guy isn't playing.

Versatility is nice for covering positions when you have injuries, but in order to have THE BEST players at each position you need to have competition at each position between players that focus on THAT position. Sweezy was a starting guard BECAUSE we don't have much talent on OL and he was competing against players who were pretty much competing at G as their "backup spot" for versatility. It's easy to win a starting job when you aren't really competing with anyone for it. Letting Wilson be the starting QB in 2014 without a legit competition is ok, letting Sweezy be the starting guard because you can't be bothered to acquire some competition is not ok.

5. How lack of free agent OL affects draft: to the person that said we are kind of being forced to draft for needs because we are haven't signed OL, that is correct. We can either sign FAs, trade for players, or draft. If signing FAs doesn't happen then that just leaves trades and the draft. There is still time before the draft for us to pick up an OL, but if we don't then we are essentially forcing ourselves to draft MULTIPLE linemen.

[NorthHawk]

Im just gonna go through my list of thoughts:

1. Thank you Kalibane for that list of players, i always appreciate work like that. Those players have overwhelmingly disappointed in the NFL and I think it does say something about the program.

2. As far as drafting need or BPA, IMO the best approach is BPA at PON (best player available at position of need) except for extreme circumstances where the BPA at PON is only like #10 on your board and there are clearly more talented players at other positions. You don't want to miss out on a pro bowl LB just because you need an average Guard, but you also don't want to miss out on filling a major hole on your team just because a slightly better player is available but would be stuck down on the depth chart because it is a position of strength. Those are the extremes, but in most cases BPA at PON is the way to go.

3. The carpenter pick. This is absolutely not an example to use against drafting needs. For one thing, Schneider let a non-scout non-front-office guy (cable) choose the player and that mistake was compounded by Schneider's mistake of not pulling the trigger on the trade that was available to him. For those who don't remember, Schneider had an open offer on the table but he rejected the trade of picks because he didn't think there was enough "value" in the trade. I consider it a mistake on his part because his options were (1) draft a player that he probably knew wasn't good enough to be picked that high, or (2) trade back and still get Carpenter or someone else AND still get an extra pick or two.

I said it was a mistake back on that draft day and I stand by it. If you truly don't have anyone that you think is worth drafting at your spot then you take a trade offer that allows you better value at your new spot and you get another pick. Even if the trade offer doesn't match up with the outdated pick value chart I say you still make the move if it improves your chances of improving the team. Schneider chose to stick to the chart and draft Cable's player and there is no question now that it was the wrong move. Honestly though, in my heart I feel like he knows it was a mistake and in the future he would pull the trigger on the trade, but maybe that is more of just me wishing.


4. Sweezy: I know a lot of people like to use him as a "success" but I don't view it that way at all. If sweezy was actually GOOD then it would be a success, but because he isn't good it doesn't matter HOW he became a guard or how little time he's had at the position. The two weakest spots on the team (and they are LEGITIMATE weak spots) are both Guard positions. I just don't see how Sweezy can be considered a success when we need an upgrade over him. He got the job because we don't really have anyone else. The versatility that cable and pete want so much can also be a problem because if one of your starting tackles is also one of your 2 best guards then you have to choose which position he will start at and then you are forced to start the 3rd best player at whichever position the other guy isn't playing.

Versatility is nice for covering positions when you have injuries, but in order to have THE BEST players at each position you need to have competition at each position between players that focus on THAT position. Sweezy was a starting guard BECAUSE we don't have much talent on OL and he was competing against players who were pretty much competing at G as their "backup spot" for versatility. It's easy to win a starting job when you aren't really competing with anyone for it. Letting Wilson be the starting QB in 2014 without a legit competition is ok, letting Sweezy be the starting guard because you can't be bothered to acquire some competition is not ok.

5. How lack of free agent OL affects draft: to the person that said we are kind of being forced to draft for needs because we are haven't signed OL, that is correct. We can either sign FAs, trade for players, or draft. If signing FAs doesn't happen then that just leaves trades and the draft. There is still time before the draft for us to pick up an OL, but if we don't then we are essentially forcing ourselves to draft MULTIPLE linemen.

I'm not so sure our FO knows how to find OL. Certainly not as well as they know the Defensive Line. It might be why Cable was allowed to select Carpenter and not be overruled. Maybe they don't know what to look for. Until they show us they can find OL gems in mid rounds (or even in the first 2 rounds), I won't be convinced they know Offense the way they know Defense.
Regarding FAs at least bring some OL in and see what they offer. We need starters all along the line.

[briwas101]

Also, to go off of what riverdog said a few posts up, NONE OF US CAN COMPLAIN ABOUT THE OVERALL RESULTS.

There is no question that the overall results of what Pete and John have done are phenomenal. Just a few years ago there were people worrying that moving on from Hass would bring a decade of suckiness and yet here we are with a very talented young team WITH A CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So i would hope that people understand that when big fans of the hawks complain on here, it is more about not getting complacent.

When you are the best you have to compete with yourself. The only way to compete with yourself is to be honest about the (relatively few) mistakes that have been made and what can be done to avoid them in the future. You have to take a fresh look at each position and each salary cap number for players.

Some of the mistakes that have been made are frustrating because you see them make such awesome moves that could only be done by intelligent people, and then they make some mistakes that you would think they are too smart to make. It isn't that I (or anyone else, i think) expects perfection, it's that they have set a high bar for themselves and certain KINDS of mistakes shouldn't be made by people who are so high up there in terms of making wise choices.

So please understand that, everyone. The overall results speak for themselves, but there is always room to improve.

[briwas101]

I'm not so sure our FO knows how to find OL. Certainly not as well as they know the Defensive Line. It might be why Cable was allowed to select Carpenter and not be overruled. Maybe they don't know what to look for. Until they show us they can find OL gems in mid rounds (or even in the first 2 rounds), I won't be convinced they know Offense the way they know Defense.
Regarding FAs at least bring some OL in and see what they offer. We need starters all along the line.

That is a very good point and one that I think is valid.

It is too easy to just say Schneider is great at scouting. There has to be specific positions where he is better at judging talent than others. Clearly the Hawks have done well with the secondary. I would say without a doubt that is their strongest area.

I was actually just thinking about this on my way home from work yesterday that maybe the Hawks need a special scout for the OL. Maybe they need someone whose main strength is OL to help assist Schneider in drafting OL. The cost of paying an extra scout is NOTHING compared to the salary of a bad pick or the opportunity cost of wasting the pick.

I kind of feel that WR might be one of their weaknesses as well, seeing as how they keep drafting WRs that don't even make the roster. Part of that might be because they keep trying to find their type of WR (tall) but there just aren't many WRs who are good that fit that description, and the ones who do are usually drafted earlier.


Based on their draft results, there is no question that Pete and John do better on D than they do on O.

[Zorn76]

There simply was not much in the way of O-line upgrades to be had in free agency this year. Meanwhile this is an amazingly strong and deep draft class for O-linemen.

That we've been weaker on the line than anywhere else on team for a while is no secret and I believe it's been our plan all along to let linemen go in free agency and replace them in the draft this year.

Personally I'm liking what I'm seeing here.

Risky plan, starting rookie o-linemen in a year when the team is defending their Super Bowl title.
Just saying, if that's the plan, that's REALLY risky. Starting a rookie here or there throughout the team, no big deal, but they will likely need two just on the O-Line...that's borderline stupid IMO.
I have to believe that they are absolutely convinced Bailey and Bowie are ready to replace Carp and Breno, or there's just no way they would take that big a risk, because even if those two are ready, they're still not much of an upgrade...

Breno and Carp were really no better than average rookies, IMO. They had some moments, but nothing that lended itself to improving consistency wise. Pete and John have, overall, demonstrated good judgement on who is worth patience and who needs to go. Clearly, they felt that BG was better off to leave, and I think Carp only stays for depth, at best.

The bar wasn't raised last year up front. Guys like BG and Carp, who had some experience, were as bad at times as anybody making their league debut. The difference is plugging in players who can learn from their mistakes in short order, and show enough upside to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Solving our OL issues, even just improving them to a certain degree, will have a Huge impact team wide. If our offense can burn a little more clock than last year, sustain drives that may or may not result in more points, it gives the defense that much more rest.

Our D was phenominal last season, not only stat wise, but because there were several wins that saw us lose the T.O.P by a considerable margin. I think chief among the reason for the possession discrepancy was the protection up front, which created a lot of 3rd and longs for the offense, and subsequently made Ryan's day quite busy at times.

I'd really like to see us draft 3 offensive linemen this spring, with at least one of those coming in the 1st or 2nd round. It's the closest thing we have to a glaring need, and it needs to be fixed, pronto!

[c_hawkbob]

There simply was not much in the way of O-line upgrades to be had in free agency this year. Meanwhile this is an amazingly strong and deep draft class for O-linemen.

That we've been weaker on the line than anywhere else on team for a while is no secret and I believe it's been our plan all along to let linemen go in free agency and replace them in the draft this year.

Personally I'm liking what I'm seeing here.

Risky plan, starting rookie o-linemen in a year when the team is defending their Super Bowl title.
Just saying, if that's the plan, that's REALLY risky. Starting a rookie here or there throughout the team, no big deal, but they will likely need two just on the O-Line...that's borderline stupid IMO.
I have to believe that they are absolutely convinced Bailey and Bowie are ready to replace Carp and Breno, or there's just no way they would take that big a risk, because even if those two are ready, they're still not much of an upgrade...

Not really so risky because the guys we're giving the exit sign to are not that much better than the guys backing them up. We'll be replacing journeymen with journeymen while bringing in a healthy group of fresh talent.

Heck, considering the fact we're letting starters walk will translate to compensatory picks and we may well be able to package a couple of own late round pick for a draft day trade that could amount to an upgrade in the short term while our new guys develop and still not hurt our draft strategy on the strength of those added picks.