Geno Staying put

[flyerhawk]

Cool you do that because it has to be black and white with you, either or, this or that, there is no grey area or other options am i right? LMAO!


I dont care who our QB is for 2023 just as long as we are not spending 20+ million on a 33 year old career backup that has had one year of extremely lucky play. Geno has a great arm, had it in college also but he doesn't even have the best arm on the team. Geno's issue has and will always be he is a gun slinger with turnover problems and he just got away with it this passed year more so based on luck.

So you you are anybody BUT Geno. Cool.

 

[flyerhawk]

And hey, give him a $501M 5 year contract with the cap hit in 2023 at $1M and the remaining 4 years at $125M each, I just want $0 guaranteed.

I want Jennifery Connelly to come over to my house and have a threesome with me and my wife.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

I want Jennifery Connelly to come over to my house and have a threesome with me and my wife.

What? That's Judy Hale, pretty sure. I mean I'd bang Jennifer Connelly over quite a few people (including Harold) as well, but just sayin'...

 

[wilwhite]

Cool. So I'll put you down with the ride with Lock crew. Probably just plug n play anyway. But we will for sure save some money.

I agree. I think Lock is probably not much better than Geno but he at least gives us HOPE of being better. And while I do think it is time for Pete to move on, he's still a very good coach when it comes to winning games. He'll keep the team focused enough to get us 7 or 8 wins.

(From a year ago and a different thread. Sorry. Couldn't help it.)

 

[flyerhawk]

(From a year ago and a different thread. Sorry. Couldn't help it.)

Sure. I had no faith in either but I had less pessimism about Lock than Smith.

 

[Screamin12th]

pigs lol

 

[Screamin12th]

this is a good listen

‎Dave 'Softy' Mahler and Dick Fain on Apple Podcasts

‎Sport · 2024

podcasts.apple.com

Hugh Millen looks at all the stuff that was involved with Geno's play the good and the bad but the convo he has is a good one and should open some peoples eyes to reality not the fantasy land that was the 2022 season for Geno.

this is also worth reading.

Seahawks Draft Blog – Rob Staton

seahawksdraftblog.com

Hugh Millen raised an interesting point on KJR on Friday. He pointed to a stat provided by PFF listing ‘turnover worthy plays’ by each quarterback. Smith had the second most in the NFL, just behind Josh Allen. Millen also pointed out that Allen had far more ‘explosive’ passing plays and a lot more rushing yards to compensate for his erraticism.

Building on the point, he then noted that when looking at the top-10 quarterbacks — on average 80.6% of their turnover worthy plays had resulted in actual turnovers. In comparison, Geno Smith saw only 48% of his turnover worthy plays actually result in an interception.

That’s staggering.

If he’d thrown the 80.6% average like the rest of the QB’s in the top-10, he would’ve had 25 picks. Even if he’d had a still well below average 65% — he would’ve led the league in turnovers.

I’m not even sure if this accounts for stuff like the pick-six against San Francisco in Seattle which was called back for a fortuitous penalty. That play was blown dead, after all. So it could be even worse than these numbers suggest.

Regardless, Smith had incredible luck when it came to turnovers this season.

Yes INCREDIBLE LUCK but in a way it was a stab to the Hawks back seeing as it took incredible luck to keep them out of the top 10 with their own Draft pick.

 

[flyerhawk]

Well at least now I know where you are getting your numbers from. They can't do basic math.

The stat says that Smith had 32 TWP. 8 fumbles, if we assume they all counted as TWPs. So that means he had 24 TWP pass plays. 80% of 24 plays is 19 interceptions.

FTR...


PFF counts a QB holding onto to the ball too long as a turnover worthy play. It's even more nebulous than I realized.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

See, there's the real core of the issue. I see Geno Smith as a player who will not be what he was in 2022 and will most likely regress, you see him as a competent starter who can hold the fort for a few more years.

Yes that is where the rub between the those who want to sign Geno to a contract like the one flyerhawk suggested and those who don't. Geno has BUYER BEWARE stamped on him in bright red. Coming off a season that produced some amazing stats for Geno he's going to want the team to show him the money, yet last year seemed more of a fluke considering he had 8 years in the league and two of those years with the Seahawks with no sign of being more than a back up QB. Also Geno play tailed off and looked like vintage Geno the latter part of last season. So is it worth risking 16 million in cap in 2023 and 24 million in cap in 2024 and 14 million in 2025 for someone with Geno's red flags? If you feel he can't repeat his early play in 2022 then obviously you don't want to risk that cap hit for three years (16 + 24+14) because the Seahawks can put that money to better use on the roster-DT, pass rusher, ILB, Center, guard ( if Gabe Jackson is released) maybe a safety (if Diggs or Adams or both is released this year or next).
The Seahawks have to many needs to squander 54 million of cap space on Geno for the next three years given the risk of regression that comes with Geno. Signing Lock and drafting a QB they think highly of, seems much more sound. At the very least the Seahawks can sign some impact players to fill holes with the additional cap space over the next 3 years and at best they find their franchise QB on a rookie contract, have cap space to make moves and go for the gold.

 

[flyerhawk]

Yes that is where the rub between the those who want to sign Geno to a contract like the one flyerhawk suggested and those who don't. Geno has BUYER BEWARE stamped on him in bright red. Coming off a season that produced some amazing stats for Geno he's going to want the team to show him the money, yet last year seemed more of a fluke considering he had 8 years in the league and two of those years with the Seahawks with no sign of being more than a back up QB. Also Geno play tailed off and looked like vintage Geno the latter part of last season. So is it worth risking 16 million in cap in 2023 and 24 million in cap in 2024 and 14 million in 2025 for someone with Geno's red flags? If you feel he can't repeat his early play in 2022 then obviously you don't want to risk that cap hit for three years (16 + 24+14) because the Seahawks can put that money to better use on the defense-DT, pass rusher, ILB, Center, guard ( if Gabe Jackson is released) maybe a safety (if Diggs or Adams or both is released this year or next).
The Seahawks have to many needs to squander 54 million of cap space on Geno for the next three years given the risk of regression that comes with Geno. Signing Lock and drafting a QB they think highly of, seems much more sound. At the very least the Seahawks can sign some impact players to fill holes with the additional cap space over the next 3 years and at best they find their franchise QB on a rookie contract, have cap space to make moves and go for the gold.

There are lots of questions with Geno. There are no surefire solutions. But the odds of Geno Smith being a better QB for the Seahawks next year than a rookie QB are DRAMATICALLY higher. And his chances of being better than any other QB that the Seahawks could get, save maybe Derek Carr who will cost more, are very good.

From a pure statistical probability perspective, Geno Smith gives the team the best chance of success next season. That's what it boils down for me.

Maybe we should use our #5 pick to draft a QB. Maybe we should even trade up. I'll let JS/PC determine that. But even if that happens, we STILL want a QB for this season.

 

[Anointed One]

If I had my druthers I would prefer that we find a better QB. Which is why I would like to see us use a 2nd or 3rd round pick to grab a QB like Hooker. QB position would still be fairly decent cap wise and we would have a QB for now and a QB for the future and if Hooker doesn't pan out we aren't in a terrible position.

FTR, this is how I feel as well... I would love to get Jake Haener in the 2nd or 3rd round...

 

[flyerhawk]

FTR, this is how I feel as well... I would love to get Jake Haener in the 2nd or 3rd round...

This is what I think is the best course but I wouldn't upset if they went for a QB early in the draft either. I'm fine trusting them on that as I think they've shown themselves to be pretty good judges of QBs.

 

[Anointed One]

Maybe we should use our #5 pick to draft a QB. Maybe we should even trade up. I'll let JS/PC determine that. But even if that happens, we STILL want a QB for this season.

That's what I'm basing my opinion on as well... If we did draft a QB with the #5 pick, he's not going to be sitting out a year or two while he learns the system... He'd play right away, which means we more than likely won't be that good... Doesn't matter which QB we have back there if we don't have a solid defense to back him up... Doesn't have to be a great defense, just solid... Our defense has way too many holes... So if we do draft a QB at #5, we won't be competitive for a few years...

 

[MrS]

if we take levis or Richardson at 5, its going to be a rough year maybe more. Neither of those guys are ready to start day 1

 

[Screamin12th]

Yes that is where the rub between the those who want to sign Geno to a contract like the one flyerhawk suggested and those who don't. Geno has BUYER BEWARE stamped on him in bright red. Coming off a season that produced some amazing stats for Geno he's going to want the team to show him the money, yet last year seemed more of a fluke considering he had 8 years in the league and two of those years with the Seahawks with no sign of being more than a back up QB. Also Geno play tailed off and looked like vintage Geno the latter part of last season. So is it worth risking 16 million in cap in 2023 and 24 million in cap in 2024 and 14 million in 2025 for someone with Geno's red flags? If you feel he can't repeat his early play in 2022 then obviously you don't want to risk that cap hit for three years (16 + 24+14) because the Seahawks can put that money to better use on the roster-DT, pass rusher, ILB, Center, guard ( if Gabe Jackson is released) maybe a safety (if Diggs or Adams or both is released this year or next).
The Seahawks have to many needs to squander 54 million of cap space on Geno for the next three years given the risk of regression that comes with Geno. Signing Lock and drafting a QB they think highly of, seems much more sound. At the very least the Seahawks can sign some impact players to fill holes with the additional cap space over the next 3 years and at best they find their franchise QB on a rookie contract, have cap space to make moves and go for the gold.

This 100% this.
Geno wont be what he was last year ever again. There was to much luck involved and I don't bet on luck. That money is to important to spend on someone that is not and never will be the answer. To many holes all over this defense and even with a real top 10 QB they will still be a .500 club. Resign Lock to a cheap 2 or 3 year contract and have him and a rookie compete. Then use the saved money on some FA's to help this defense. God knows we need help on the defense in the WORST way.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

if we take levis or Richardson at 5, its going to be a rough year maybe more. Neither of those guys are ready to start day 1

Pete would do the same as he did with RW, which is to lean on the run , limit pass attempts ( RW only had 393 attempted passes in 16 games), have safer easier throws if it was Richardson, Levis is much more developed I feel.

 

[Anointed One]

To many holes all over this defense and even with a real top 10 QB they will still be a .500 club. Resign Lock to a cheap 2 or 3 year contract and have him and a rookie compete. Then use the saved money on some FA's to help this defense. God knows we need help on the defense in the WORST way.

I'm not opposed to this scenerio only if we draft a QB after our #5 overall pick and possibly after the 1st round all together... I'd want those given to defense, OL and or a possible WR with our #20.....

I'd be ok signing Lock (I'm record for being in that corner already if the price tag for Geno gets too high) and have a rookie sit a year or two... If Lock panned out and showed he could be a very QB on this team, then it would be a win/win because we'd have a backup QB for at least 4 years with the rookie and could also use him for trade bait as well..

I just want the focus to be on ensuring our defense gets fixed because we've seen how well this team does when our defense is very competitive under Pete Carroll...

 

[Anointed One]

Pete would do the same as he did with RW, which is to lean on the run , limit pass attempts ( RW only had 393 attempted passes in 16 games), have safer easier throws if it was Richardson, Levis is much more developed I feel.

That's if you're sold on those two, which you seem to be... I just don't see it.. I would be pretty upset if we drafted one of them with our #5...

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I just want the focus to be on ensuring our defense gets fixed because we've seen how well this team does when our defense is very competitive under Pete Carroll.

Then saving 54 million over 3 years. in cap space to spend on needs should appeal

 

[HaroldSeattle]

That's if you're sold on those two, which you seem to be... I just don't see it.. I would be pretty upset if we drafted one of them with our #5...

Stroud would be at the top of my list. I do feel those two could work out. Upgrade at center and maybe guard, add depth at RB and a rookie QB won't be asked to carry the team, feel Pete doesn't put to much on a QB until they are ready for it. Upgrade the defense through both the FA market and draft and the roster should be solid for years to come and the cap situation should be an advantage for the Seahawks the next few years.