Off-season news 2024

[Screamin12th]

The defense was one of the worst defenses in football last year. Easily bottom 5 and arguably the worst run defense in football.

IMO the biggest indictment of late era Pete Carroll was he kept trying to run an offense that relied on having a strong defense. People forget that those great Seahawk teams routinely had games were the offense would do nothing for the first half. But because the defense so good, they could just grind down defenses.

The offense was wildly inconsistent, largely based on the health of the offensive line. But too often they were playing from behind and simply didn't have enough offensive drives. Pete's style isn't really designed to play from behind.

IIRC, the defense had the fewest 3 and outs in the NFL last year.

The Seahawks offenses was about average last year, which is pretty bad given the talent on that side of the ball. The Seahawk defense was straight up bad, which is why changes needed to happen.

Seahawks Defense was ranked 4th worst in 3 and outs on percentage of drives at 21% the Eagles Chargers and Broncos were worse. Steelers defense was only 2.9% better and they were a top 10 defense. A better stat is Points per play, and plays per game, Like i posted above. In a NFL game teams average almost one 3 and out per quarter on offense. Or just under 4 per game. ( 3.92 ) seattle averaged on defense 3.62 per game. So yes below average but they also faced on average almost 2 more drives per game because the offense couldn't sustain.

 

[flyerhawk]

Seahawks Defense was ranked 4th worst in 3 and outs on percentage of drives at 21% the Eagles Chargers and Broncos were worse. Steelers defense was only 2.9% better and they were a top 10 defense. A better stat is Points per play, and plays per game, Like i posted above. In a NFL game teams average almost one 3 and out per quarter on offense. Or just under 4 per game.

I really don't get why you think points per play is a useful stat. Teams with stout run defenses and porous defenses will have have bad points per play numbers whereas defenses with terrible run defenses and good pass defenses will have great points per play numbers. Can you explain why you think it is a useful stat? I've never even heard of this being a stat.

 

[Screamin12th]

Like it or not these stats do in fact go hand in hand.

I really don't get why you think points per play is a useful stat. Teams with stout run defenses and porous defenses will have have bad points per play numbers whereas defenses with terrible run defenses and good pass defenses will have great points per play numbers. Can you explain why you think it is a useful stat? I've never even heard of this being a stat.

Because over the course of a season not just one game these stats equal out and show a pattern. You will notice good defense give up less points per play than bad ones, and bad defenses give up more points per play. What this shows is also the other side of the ball how much the offense or lack there of effects the defense.

It's like the full book not just the prologue!

Hawks defense wasn't good at all I am not saying they are but they were better than the numbers when you take into account how bad the offense was in large stretches of games. Had the offense been more competent or played to their actual talent level then our defense wouldn't have been close to last it would have been in the 19-23 range. Bad but not 32nd bad.

 

[Screamin12th]

Also i like points per play on offense ( Not only defense ) because it shows how effective a offense can be. Seattles offense was 11th best in Points per play in the NFL ( SF was #1 ) but they couldn't put together long drives way to often. Points per play on Defense now shows how long a Defense spends on the field and how effective they are. A NFL field is only 100 yards so if it takes a team 10 plays to go 100 yards or 4 plays to go 100 yards tells you that one defense is a little more stout.

Seattles offense was the WORST offense in Plays per game yet 11th in Points per play. Had they been better at sustaining drives they could have been one of the most explosive offenses in the NFL and that is reflective of the talent level on the offensive side of the ball. Like it or not the Hawks Offense is LOADED and should be better than they are but they can not sustain. this drops 100% directly onto the coach and QB.

yes i LOVE to dig deeper into stats because 1 or 2 stats do not show you the whole picture. But pair it with as many stats as you can and it starts to frame the WHOLE image. The NFL is not and has never been black and white.

 

[flyerhawk]

Like it or not these stats do in fact go hand in hand.


Because over the course of a season not just one game these stats equal out and show a pattern. You will notice good defense give up less points per play than bad ones, and bad defenses give up more points per play. What this shows is also the other side of the ball how much the offense or lack there of effects the defense.

It's like the full book not just the prologue!

Hawks defense wasn't good at all I am not saying they are but they were better than the numbers when you take into account how bad the offense was in large stretches of games. Had the offense been more competent or played to their actual talent level then our defense wouldn't have been close to last it would have been in the 19-23 range. Bad but not 32nd bad.

You didn't really explain why points per play was a useful stat. The Seahawks offenses was 11th in points per play. The defense was 18th despite giving up the most plays of any defense.

2nd worst team in rushing yards per game. Worst team in giving up 1st downs. 24th in yards per play despite being mostly run over. 29th in 1st downs per play. Last in defensive time of possession.

I'm sure that if the Seahawks defense was top 5 rather than top 10-12, that would have helped the defensive numbers.

But I think you are trying to find a way to blame the offense for why the defense was so bad.

 

[flyerhawk]

Also i like points per play on offense ( Not only defense ) because it shows how effective a offense can be. Seattles offense was 11th best in Points per play in the NFL ( SF was #1 ) but they couldn't put together long drives way to often. Points per play on Defense now shows how long a Defense spends on the field and how effective they are. A NFL field is only 100 yards so if it takes a team 10 plays to go 100 yards or 4 plays to go 100 yards tells you that one defense is a little more stout.

I honestly have no idea what defense you think is more stout in your example. I'm guessing you think the defense that averaged 10 yards per play over 10 plays is more stout than the defense than average 25 yards per play on 4 plays?

Seattles offense was the WORST offense in Plays per game yet 11th in Points per play. Had they been better at sustaining drives they could have been one of the most explosive offenses in the NFL and that is reflective of the talent level on the offensive side of the ball. Like it or not the Hawks Offense is LOADED and should be better than they are but they can not sustain. this drops 100% directly onto the coach and QB.

Seattle was 11th in 1st downs per play. Which is consistent most other offensive stats. Somewhere in that 10-15 range.

Where the Hawks REALLY struggled was 3rd down conversions. 28th in the NFL. That definitely hurt.

yes i LOVE to dig deeper into stats because 1 or 2 stats do not show you the whole picture. But pair it with as many stats as you can and it starts to frame the WHOLE image. The NFL is not and has never been black and white.

That is certainly true. But you are focusing on one somewhat tenuous stat to prove a point.

By any objective measure the Seahawks defense was very bad last year. It's the reason why Pete got fired. The offense wasn't great but if the offense was as bad as the defense the Seahawks would have been a Top 3 pick in the draft.

 

[Screamin12th]

That is certainly true. But you are focusing on one somewhat tenuous stat to prove a point.

By any objective measure the Seahawks defense was very bad last year. It's the reason why Pete got fired. The offense wasn't great but if the offense was as bad as the defense the Seahawks would have been a Top 3 pick in the draft.

No i just bring up PPP because it shows everything we all expected from our Offense and Defense 1) the offense is better than what the showed on the field, 2) The Defense is not as bad as they showed on the field.

There is Talent on the defense but they are or were in a broken scheme, There is talent on the offense LOTS OF IT but they are not utilizing it to it's full potential AND they REFUSE to run the damn ball and shit the bed on 3rd downs. Decision making on both sides of the ball have been pretty bad. (Coaching/Players) but the talent is there. Teams dinked and dunked us down the field a lot last year. It was maddening!

2024 will tell us a lot about the Defense but I expect pretty much the same on offense, a under performing unit once again. They will be middle of the pack and fail in the most crucial game changing moments.

 

[flyerhawk]

No i just bring up PPP because it shows everything we all expected from our Offense and Defense 1) the offense is better than what the showed on the field, 2) The Defense is not as bad as they showed on the field.

There is Talent on the defense but they are or were in a broken scheme, There is talent on the offense LOTS OF IT but they are not utilizing it to it's full potential AND they REFUSE to run the damn ball and shit the bed on 3rd downs. Decision making on both sides of the ball have been pretty bad. (Coaching/Players) but the talent is there.

I more or less agree with this.

Honestly, I think that the spine of the Hawks defense last year was not very good. Which is why they got rid of most of it. Brooks, Bobby, Quandre, and Adams are all gone. I agree that the scheme did not fit the personnel and that put the LBs in very bad positions over and over. I think Diggs is cooked. He might do ok on a team with a ferocious pass rush but he can't be counted on to cover deep anymore.

 

[Screamin12th]

I started looking at Point per play back when Knox and Largent brought it up way back when. It's always a stat i fall back on to get a much bigger picture. Knox explained how it shows the value of your position players mainly QB's on offense and Linebackers/S on Defense.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Sorry screamin, but the number of times I saw Seattle have a lead and then allowed a 7-8 minute drive on the defense with multiple 3rd down conversions thanks to our soft zone was maddening... You can look at stats all day. I watched those games and even in the 1st quarter when everyone is rested it was a miracle if our defense forced a 3 and out (which Seattle's D was bottom 5 in doing). Offenses do need to establish some rhythm.. when you win the coin flip, go down and score something, and then the opposing O takes 8 minutes off the click and still scores... that really doesn't lead to success.

Points per play is an interesting take... I've never heard it used in an discussion or in general when reviewing football stats. I'll have to think on that more. In Seattle's case, given we had the worst TOP and a bottom 5 3rd down conversion rate allowed AND 3 and out %... that just means they were on the field a lot and allowed a lot of conversions and exploited the soft zone with receivers exploiting zone coverage (which is EXACTLY what McVay/Shanny did, and it's obvious other coaches were following suit). So yah... great... you allowed a 14 play drive with a TD vs. a team that allowed a TD with a 3 play drive... so your points per play are lower, but is that a good thing? You also let the opposing O chew a TON of clock, and keep your O off the field (shut down certain plays/rhythm). That's a weird stat to argue.

I mean as I said in my post, the defense isn't entirely to blame. Why JSN was catching 50% of his receptions behind the LOS and Walker was being jammed up the middle is beyond me... but I think flyer hits the nail on the head that we were trying to control a game with a defensive scheme that really didn't allow for that.

 

[Screamin12th]

Sorry screamin, but the number of times I saw Seattle have a lead and then allowed a 7-8 minute drive on the defense with multiple 3rd down conversions thanks to our soft zone was maddening...

Sorry Shark, but the number of times I saw the offense only needed a FIRST DOWN to hold onto a lead or a drive to take the lead and they couldn't do it was Maddening... LOL See how that works? I mean if i was lying it would be one thing but im not so it is what it is. The defense was bad the offense choked when needed to sustain and the whole thing was a mess.

Cincy, Defense gave up only 3 points in the 2nd half ... Offense?? where are you offense??? 3 in the 2nd half oops a 13-17 loss.
Rams game the Defense gave up 10 points in the 4th, sucked but wait where was the offense? They had 13-7 lead at half what happened? Oh thats right they couldn't get out of their own way. 4 punts a INT and missed FG in the 2nd half with three 3 and out drives..

There were times last year that it was maddening when all you needed was one drive, one score, ONE GOD DAMN FIRST DOWN to hold on and we just couldn't do it.

Like i said before Yes the defense was bad, never did i say they were not they just were not as bad as some believe. A little more help from one of the MOST TALENT LOADED OFFENSES in the NFL ( minus the QB ) and you got at least 2 more wins. Not bashing on Geno he is just a middle of the pack at best body and we can all agree he isn't on the same level as say Metcalf, Lockett, JSN, Walker.

 

[Screamin12th]

I think with a more consitent offense and MORE RUNNING! This would have turned a 30-32nd ranked defense into a 20-24th ranked one. Not good but we have had teams win the Superbowl with Defenses that bad before. ( Not many mind you )

The 5 worst defensive teams to win a Super Bowl were the 2011 Giants 25th, 2006 Colts 23rd, 2009 Saints 20th, 2007 Giants 17th, and the 2022 Chiefs with PPG against rank of 16th were the 5th worst defense to win a Super Bowl. What did all those teams have in common? A competent enough offense and QB play that 100% helped their Defense. It's a Team sport and The defense depends on the offense just as much as the offense depends on the defense. They do go hand in hand and the success of one is 100% helped by the success of the other.

 

[flyerhawk]

I think with a more consitent offense and MORE RUNNING! This would have turned a 30-32nd ranked defense into a 20-24th ranked one. Not good but we have had teams win the Superbowl with Defenses that bad before. ( Not many mind you )

The 5 worst defensive teams to win a Super Bowl were the 2011 Giants 25th, 2006 Colts 23rd, 2009 Saints 20th, 2007 Giants 17th, and the 2022 Chiefs with PPG against rank of 16th were the 5th worst defense to win a Super Bowl. What did all those teams have in common? A competent enough offense and QB play that 100% helped their Defense. It's a Team sport and The defense depends on the offense just as much as the offense depends on the defense. They do go hand in hand and the success of one is 100% helped by the success of the other.

Oh I see. This is you going back to your blame Geno thing.

No one is arguing that the offense was great. It wasn't. It was adequate though. Which is a heck of a lot better than the defense was

 

[Screamin12th]

Oh I see. This is you going back to your blame Geno thing.

No one is arguing that the offense was great. It wasn't. It was adequate though. Which is a heck of a lot better than the defense was

Leave it to you to grasp at the whole Geno thing ONCE AGAIN. You are his true white knight. lol

Im Sorry Geno is a average at Best QB that you are in love with. It doesn't change the fact he is AVERAGE.

I would Take Wilson, Kitna, Hasselbeck, Krieg and Zorn and even Dilfer every sunday over Geno. Good Geno=T-Jack. Bad Geno = McGwire. There now i said something you can grasp onto and cry and wine all you want seeing as you seem to need this. Geno behind the greatest Oline with the Greatest OC and Greatest WR would still only be around a top 10 QB.

 

[flyerhawk]

Leave it to you to grasp at the whole Geno thing ONCE AGAIN. You are his true white knight. lol

Im Sorry Geno is a average at Best QB that you are in love with. It doesn't change the fact he is AVERAGE.

I'm not in love with Geno. I would LOVE to see us get a QB of the future that could be an elite QB. But that isn't in the cards right now.

The defense last year was terrible. A bottom 5 defense in the league. In fact, it has been a pretty bad defense for several years now. Given the resources that the team put into it, that made no sense.

Hopefully McD will turn that around.

The offense underperformed. But only based on the expectation of it being a top tier offense. Instead it was an above average offense.

If we had a league average defense last year, we win 11 or so games. We aren't going to have an elite offense with Geno so there is only so much improvement we can expect on offense.

 

[Screamin12th]

I'm not in love with Geno. I would LOVE to see us get a QB of the future that could be an elite QB. But that isn't in the cards right now.

The defense last year was terrible. A bottom 5 defense in the league. In fact, it has been a pretty bad defense for several years now. Given the resources that the team put into it, that made no sense.

Hopefully McD will turn that around.

The offense underperformed. But only based on the expectation of it being a top tier offense. Instead it was an above average offense.

If we had a league average defense last year, we win 11 or so games. We aren't going to have an elite offense with Geno so there is only so much improvement we can expect on offense.

I expect improvement on the defense and mostly just because The addition of Murphy, the return of Uchenna Nwosu and the continued growth of Witherspoon and Woolen. If the Hawks DO NOT RUN THE BALL AGAIN then maybe not so much. You can't have Geno throwing 35 passes or more per game, keep him at or under 30 and use the clock and things will be cozy. This team can win with Geno just as long as they dont try and make him "carry" the team and limit his chances for his inevitable fudge up at the most crucial time.

 

[Screamin12th]

Talking about Improvements I would like to know who everyone thinks will be the player that Most improves the team or who will be the most improved player?

My pick is JSN, I know a lot of talking heads are writing about him but I'm right there with them. JSN is a uniquely skilled player. The quickness to make his 4.48 speed feel like 4.3, the route running of a Tron Light cycle and agility that makes defenders trip over grass. Lets not forget one of his best skill, Catching. His hands are a soft fleshy mess of glue!

I am excited to see Murphy and believe he will be very good just not a game changer. It's not like we got ourselves a Donald or Jones type player. Thats just stupid to think like that, but he doesn't need to be either of those guys to make our front better. His stoutness and ability to diagnose and shut down the running lanes is a huge plus But I believe JSN will become one of the best WR's in the NFL in 2024.

 

[MrS]

i expect metcalf to improve over last year the most, I think he will put up numbers close to his 2020 season.
honestly felt like all our WRs underperformed last year, i see that changing with grubb running the offense. JSN should improve too, but i dont think he will live up to the hype.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Talking about Improvements I would like to know who everyone thinks will be the player that Most improves the team or who will be the most improved player?

My pick is JSN, I know a lot of talking heads are writing about him but I'm right there with them. JSN is a uniquely skilled player. The quickness to make his 4.48 speed feel like 4.3, the route running of a Tron Light cycle and agility that makes defenders trip over grass. Lets not forget one of his best skill, Catching. His hands are a soft fleshy mess of glue!

I am excited to see Murphy and believe he will be very good just not a game changer. It's not like we got ourselves a Donald or Jones type player. Thats just stupid to think like that, but he doesn't need to be either of those guys to make our front better. His stoutness and ability to diagnose and shut down the running lanes is a huge plus But I believe JSN will become one of the best WR's in the NFL in 2024.

JSN is an easy pick and I agree. Outside of Tyler getting older and basically being his last year in the NFL (unless he wants to play cheap elsewhere), the fact basically 50% of his receptions were caught behind the LOS (WTF?) when he should be running over the middle was absolutely ridiculous to me. From reports so far, Grubb is utilizing him underneath and NOT at the LOS. I was beyond puzzled why they even drafted him at that point and JSN was visibly pissed off as well. He's not Deebo Samuel... put him over the middle of the field on crossing/underneath/hitch routes exploiting zone... which we saw offenses exploit Seattle's cover 3 on all year.

I also think Fant could be on the list. Seattle paid Fant a decent amount of money...


On defense, I don't think anyone really improves majorly but if I had to pick:

1) Woolen. I get he sucks in run defense. You know who else sucks in run defense that everyone at this point seems to consider the best in the league? Sauce "THE GRAB" Gardner. It's a passing league... don't make him run defend. When Carroll benched him not too long after CMAC with a lead blocker ran his direction (untouched) I was beyond blown away. Only Al Woods dropping into coverage in 2022 blew my mind more.

2) Derrick Hall. It's hard not to improve at this point after Carroll inexplicably wouldn't put basically a 1st round pick on the field (after Nwosu went down mid season) when Seattle was going nowhere anyway (even if they made the playoffs, would've been eliminated round 1).

Special Teams:

... uh.... if Dee Eskridge can stay healthy for 4 games this year and do something relevant, that's a vast improvement. I feel special teams should be mentioned because with the new kickoff rules it is more important now.

 

[Screamin12th]

i expect metcalf to improve over last year the most, I think he will put up numbers close to his 2020 season.
honestly felt like all our WRs underperformed last year, i see that changing with grubb running the offense. JSN should improve too, but i dont think he will live up to the hype.

is that improving or just returning to past production?