Players who need to go this offseason

[chf]

It was Richards first year. He had injuries and holdouts to deal with and still led the top scoring defense. But hes gotta go? Gtfo with that. Does he have a lot to learn? Certainly. Is there room to improve? Definitely. How about appreciating the good and moving forward with it instead of focusing on the negatives and calling for him to go? What if the next guy leads the league in scoring but doesnt make it to the SB? Gonna fire him too?

Coaches are just like players. They learn year to year, and can develop and improve. You dont just go firing any first year coordinator because things didnt go perfectly.

Well you do, if you're a shvtty franchise.

 

[flyerhawk]

I honestly have no idea why anyone would want to see any of our coaches get fired.

There is a reason why it's been over 20 years since the last team to go 3 straight Super Bowls. And that team didn't win one.

First time in franchise history we've had 4 straight 10+ win seasons. Anyone seriously think we won't win 10+ next year?

 

[PolarVortex]

I honestly have no idea why anyone would want to see any of our coaches get fired.

There is a reason why it's been over 20 years since the last team to go 3 straight Super Bowls. And that team didn't win one.

First time in franchise history we've had 4 straight 10+ win seasons. Anyone seriously think we won't win 10+ next year?

If anything, we need them to stay around longer to let their coaching philosophies fully implement. This is especially true of the defensive coordinator. How many have we had during Pete Carroll's reign? Four? I think part of the early defensive troubles the team had, especially with pass defense, might have been avoided with a DC that better understood his players and their respective skill sets.

 

[RegentDenali]

Anybody besides me want this thread locked? Speak up.

Droider has become one of the saddest shitstirers of the hoop, and now he's just attached three NFL teams to his account so he post crap like this. Sad.

 

[Warden]

I am just happy that posters on message boards have no input what so ever on what happens with the team

 

[Anointed One]

"One hundred percent, there is no way I can see (him back) with his salary," Clayton said on "Brock and Salk" Monday. "Yeah, if he would take a pay cut, massive pay cut, then he can come back, but you know that's not gonna happen. So no this has been it."

I wonder if he would go play his last year or so with the Raiders, assuming the Raiders would want that...

 

[Anointed One]

Interesting regards to Bruce Irvin...

Bruce Irvin says he might take less money to come back to Seattle

I would definitely come back if they [Hawks] matched or if it was a little less

 

[jakedog56]

Lynch, mebane, and okung are the ones i see being gone for sure. The rest will stay unless we can come up with better replacements.

And i dont know why anyone wants to dump graham, he can make our offense better, losing him had nothing to do with our O improving.

If Mebane would resign for say, $3.5 million on a 2 year deal then why not? He is worth that.

People don't want to dump Graham necessary but it is an interesting option if you can free up almost $10 millions from a player who may not be able to contribute next year......and it can be debated that one of the reasons the offense improved was because of removing the focus that was so high on Graham.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

Interesting regards to Bruce Irvin...

Bruce Irvin says he might take less money to come back to Seattle

I think the last to guy to say that was Golden Tate and when the offer came his idea of "close" was a lot different than the Seahawks. If we have the money I hope they don't low-ball Irvin. I'd like to see him stick around.

 

[BHF]

If Mebane would resign for say, $3.5 million on a 2 year deal then why not? He is worth that.

People don't want to dump Graham necessary but it is an interesting option if you can free up almost $10 millions from a player who may not be able to contribute next year......and it can be debated that one of the reasons the offense improved was because of removing the focus that was so high on Graham.

Another option is converting some of his salary to SB. Graham has no dead money. If we're hard up I can't imagine that he wouldn't agree to take a chunk of his salary up front.

 

[PolarVortex]

I wonder if he would go play his last year or so with the Raiders, assuming the Raiders would want that...

Just guessing here, but, I don't think Oakland would give him the starting nod over Martavius Murray. So, Lynch would have to want to play for the team knowing he would be a the back/3rd down RB. Would he accept a role like that? Who knows? Never know what is going on in that guy's mind.

 

[flyerhawk]

Interesting regards to Bruce Irvin...

Bruce Irvin says he might take less money to come back to Seattle

It boils down to whether they want him back or not.

I don't think he is going to get a huge contract offer but I could be wrong.

 

[Anointed One]

Just guessing here, but, I don't think Oakland would give him the starting nod over Martavius Murray. So, Lynch would have to want to play for the team knowing he would be a the back/3rd down RB. Would he accept a role like that? Who knows? Never know what is going on in that guy's mind.

Yeah but keep in mind Oakland is so far under the cap room they need to ensure they hit the league minimum so they don't get penalized... Assuming Lynch's salary would help them do so... We thought he was popular in Seattle, he's hella popular in Oakland... They would be able to market him while gaining more support from their ticket sales...

Does anyone feel that Latavius Murray is a feature back? I don't...

 

[Anointed One]

It boils down to whether they want him back or not.

I don't think he is going to get a huge contract offer but I could be wrong.

I think he could get an offer around 8-8.5 million a year because of his diversification... He can play in a 3/4 or a 4/3... He can get down in a 3 pt stance and rush the passer... He's great in coverage on RB's/TE's...

Like you, I would like to keep him but I dont' think we'll be able to afford him...

 

[PolarVortex]

Yeah but keep in mind Oakland is so far under the cap room they need to ensure they hit the league minimum so they don't get penalized... Assuming Lynch's salary would help them do so... We thought he was popular in Seattle, he's hella popular in Oakland... They would be able to market him while gaining more support from their ticket sales...

Does anyone feel that Latavius Murray is a feature back? I don't...

6th in the NFL in rushing yards.
6th among all NFL starting RBs in receptions.
307 touches.
1298 yards from scrimmage.

Yeah, he's most definitely a featured back.

 

[Anointed One]

6th in the NFL in rushing yards.
6th among all NFL starting RBs in receptions.
307 touches.
1298 yards from scrimmage.

Yeah, he's most definitely a featured back.

6th in the NFL in rushing because,

all these featured backs were injured:

LeVeon Bell
Jamaal Charles
Marshawn Lynch
Jonathon Stewart
Justin Forsett
Demarco Murray going to a team that didn't give him the ball...
Eddie Lacey ate his other RB

Basically got 6th by default... He only had 1088 yards rushing from scrimmage in 16 games... That's just average He would've been 12th the year before... Can't be too excited about 4.0 ypc average this day and age...

 

[Anointed One]

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | RUNNING BACKS 2015

This is an interesting stat line... Thomas Rawls is ranked #1 overall...

Running backs are ranked according to DYAR, or Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement. This gives the value of the performance on plays where this RB carried/caught the ball compared to replacement level, adjusted for situation and opponent and then translated into yardage. DYAR (and its cousin, YAR, which isn't adjusted based on opponent) is further explained here.

The next statistic given is DVOA, or Defense-adjusted Value Over Average. This number represents value, per play, over an average running back in the same game situations. The more positive the DVOA rating, the better the player's performance. Negative DVOA represents below-average offense. DVOA (and its cousin, VOA, which isn't adjusted based on opponent) is further explained here.

The simple version: DYAR means a running back with more total value. DVOA means a running back with more value per play.

RUSHING: Minimum 100 rushes, 44 players ranked
Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA Runs Yards EYds TD FUM Suc
Rate Rk

T.Rawls SEA 217 1 224 1 26.6% 2 27.7% 147 830 881 4 1 62% 1
M.Forte CHI 194 2 147 6 12.1% 6 7.1% 218 898 1,120 4 1 48% 17
De.Williams PIT 184 3 162 2 12.0% 7 9.6% 200 907 1,065 11 3 50% 9
T.Gurley STL 171 4 123 10 10.1% 9 4.9% 229 1,102 1,066 10 3 43% 36
L.Bell PIT 160 5 127 9 27.7% 1 20.1% 113 556 640 3 0 50% 10
A.Peterson MIN 143 6 133 7 2.2% 17 1.5% 327 1,490 1,369 11 6 45% 25
L.McCoy BUF 140 7 110 14 8.8% 11 5.2% 202 896 915 3 1 47% 21
R.Mathews PHI 133 8 106 15 20.5% 3 14.6% 108 539 611 6 3 53% 5
Da.Johnson ARI 131 9 148 5 15.3% 4 18.4% 125 581 685 8 2 56% 3
G.Bernard CIN 129 10 130 8 11.6% 8 11.7% 154 730 759 2 0 49% 13
J.Langford CHI 120 11 111 13 12.2% 5 10.6% 148 537 690 6 0 47% 20
J.Forsett BAL 117 12 101 18 9.1% 10 6.6% 151 641 759 2 0 46% 22
R.Jennings NYG 117 13 161 3 5.6% 13 10.9% 195 863 897 3 1 56% 4
M.Ingram NO 108 14 120 12 6.6% 12 8.3% 166 769 789 6 1 45% 30
D.Freeman ATL 89 15 121 11 -0.6% 24 2.3% 264 1,062 1,106 11 2 46% 23
J.Hill CIN 85 16 64 25 0.1% 21 -2.0% 223 792 976 11 3 49% 12
D.McFadden DAL 83 17 103 17 -0.4% 23 1.5% 239 1,089 1,012 3 3 50% 8
L.Miller MIA 81 18 105 16 1.7% 18 4.8% 194 872 806 8 1 43% 34
D.Martin TB 80 19 150 4 -1.7% 26 4.2% 288 1,402 1,136 6 4 48% 16
C.West KC 78 20 74 22 3.0% 15 2.3% 160 634 707 4 1 45% 27
L.Blount NE 64 21 90 19 0.2% 20 3.8% 165 703 728 6 1 52% 6
A.Blue HOU 61 22 10 35 -0.2% 22 -7.2% 183 698 726 2 2 45% 29
C.Hyde SF 61 23 27 30 4.1% 14 -3.0% 115 470 510 4 1 49% 14
C.Sims TB 49 24 71 23 2.4% 16 7.3% 107 529 462 0 1 57% 2
M.Lynch SEA 44 25 54 26 0.5% 19 2.5% 111 417 490 3 0 50% 11
T.J.Yeldon JAC 39 26 31 28 -3.2% 28 -4.4% 182 740 690 2 0 42% 38
I.Crowell CLE 36 27 -21 40 -4.0% 30 -11.3% 185 706 737 4 0 41% 40
C.J.Anderson DEN 34 28 70 24 -3.1% 27 2.6% 152 720 592 5 2 41% 41
L.Murray OAK 33 29 27 29 -5.5% 32 -6.0% 266 1,066 966 6 3 39% 43

 

[PolarVortex]

6th in the NFL in rushing because,

all these featured backs were injured:

LeVeon Bell
Jamaal Charles
Marshawn Lynch
Jonathon Stewart
Justin Forsett
Demarco Murray going to a team that didn't give him the ball...
Eddie Lacey ate his other RB

Basically got 6th by default... He only had 1088 yards rushing from scrimmage in 16 games... That's just average He would've been 12th the year before... Can't be too excited about 4.0 ypc average this day and age...

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | RUNNING BACKS 2015

This is an interesting stat line... Thomas Rawls is ranked #1 overall...

Running backs are ranked according to DYAR, or Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement. This gives the value of the performance on plays where this RB carried/caught the ball compared to replacement level, adjusted for situation and opponent and then translated into yardage. DYAR (and its cousin, YAR, which isn't adjusted based on opponent) is further explained here.

The next statistic given is DVOA, or Defense-adjusted Value Over Average. This number represents value, per play, over an average running back in the same game situations. The more positive the DVOA rating, the better the player's performance. Negative DVOA represents below-average offense. DVOA (and its cousin, VOA, which isn't adjusted based on opponent) is further explained here.

The simple version: DYAR means a running back with more total value. DVOA means a running back with more value per play.

RUSHING: Minimum 100 rushes, 44 players ranked
Player Team DYAR Rk YAR Rk DVOA Rk VOA Runs Yards EYds TD FUM Suc
Rate Rk

T.Rawls SEA 217 1 224 1 26.6% 2 27.7% 147 830 881 4 1 62% 1
M.Forte CHI 194 2 147 6 12.1% 6 7.1% 218 898 1,120 4 1 48% 17
De.Williams PIT 184 3 162 2 12.0% 7 9.6% 200 907 1,065 11 3 50% 9
T.Gurley STL 171 4 123 10 10.1% 9 4.9% 229 1,102 1,066 10 3 43% 36
L.Bell PIT 160 5 127 9 27.7% 1 20.1% 113 556 640 3 0 50% 10
A.Peterson MIN 143 6 133 7 2.2% 17 1.5% 327 1,490 1,369 11 6 45% 25
L.McCoy BUF 140 7 110 14 8.8% 11 5.2% 202 896 915 3 1 47% 21
R.Mathews PHI 133 8 106 15 20.5% 3 14.6% 108 539 611 6 3 53% 5
Da.Johnson ARI 131 9 148 5 15.3% 4 18.4% 125 581 685 8 2 56% 3
G.Bernard CIN 129 10 130 8 11.6% 8 11.7% 154 730 759 2 0 49% 13
J.Langford CHI 120 11 111 13 12.2% 5 10.6% 148 537 690 6 0 47% 20
J.Forsett BAL 117 12 101 18 9.1% 10 6.6% 151 641 759 2 0 46% 22
R.Jennings NYG 117 13 161 3 5.6% 13 10.9% 195 863 897 3 1 56% 4
M.Ingram NO 108 14 120 12 6.6% 12 8.3% 166 769 789 6 1 45% 30
D.Freeman ATL 89 15 121 11 -0.6% 24 2.3% 264 1,062 1,106 11 2 46% 23
J.Hill CIN 85 16 64 25 0.1% 21 -2.0% 223 792 976 11 3 49% 12
D.McFadden DAL 83 17 103 17 -0.4% 23 1.5% 239 1,089 1,012 3 3 50% 8
L.Miller MIA 81 18 105 16 1.7% 18 4.8% 194 872 806 8 1 43% 34
D.Martin TB 80 19 150 4 -1.7% 26 4.2% 288 1,402 1,136 6 4 48% 16
C.West KC 78 20 74 22 3.0% 15 2.3% 160 634 707 4 1 45% 27
L.Blount NE 64 21 90 19 0.2% 20 3.8% 165 703 728 6 1 52% 6
A.Blue HOU 61 22 10 35 -0.2% 22 -7.2% 183 698 726 2 2 45% 29
C.Hyde SF 61 23 27 30 4.1% 14 -3.0% 115 470 510 4 1 49% 14
C.Sims TB 49 24 71 23 2.4% 16 7.3% 107 529 462 0 1 57% 2
M.Lynch SEA 44 25 54 26 0.5% 19 2.5% 111 417 490 3 0 50% 11
T.J.Yeldon JAC 39 26 31 28 -3.2% 28 -4.4% 182 740 690 2 0 42% 38
I.Crowell CLE 36 27 -21 40 -4.0% 30 -11.3% 185 706 737 4 0 41% 40
C.J.Anderson DEN 34 28 70 24 -3.1% 27 2.6% 152 720 592 5 2 41% 41
L.Murray OAK 33 29 27 29 -5.5% 32 -6.0% 266 1,066 966 6 3 39% 43

You're trying to make this about Murray's value as a RB. It isn't. It is far less complicated than that. He either was and is a featured back (as I say he was and is) or he isn't (as you say he wasn't and isn't).

He had 307 touches last year. That is a featured back type total. Insisting he was not and is not Oakland's featured back is asinine and would be a waste of both of our time to argue any further.

 

[Anointed One]

You're trying to make this about Murray's value as a RB. It isn't. It is far less complicated than that. He either was and is a featured back (as I say he was and is) or he isn't (as you say he wasn't and isn't).

He had 307 touches last year. That is a featured back type total. Insisting he was not and is not Oakland's featured back is asinine and would be a waste of both of our time to argue any further.

I realized what's going on... I have no intentions of discussing this as a "featured back... I agree... he was... You just can't read my mind is what it boils down to....

I was thinking more along the lines of a future featured back... I just don't think he's going to their future at RB is what I meant to say... I basically agree with everything you said regards to a featured back this season...

 

[blstoker]

You're trying to make this about Murray's value as a RB. It isn't. It is far less complicated than that. He either was and is a featured back (as I say he was and is) or he isn't (as you say he wasn't and isn't).

He had 307 touches last year. That is a featured back type total. Insisting he was not and is not Oakland's featured back is asinine and would be a waste of both of our time to argue any further.

The thing is, was Murray a feature back because he was that good - or because they didn't have anyone else. Murray shot out the gate hot (630 yard rushing, 4.8 ypc, 3 TDs in the first 8 games) and the team benefitted from it (4-4 with 26.6 ppg). The last 8 games however he came back down to earth (436 yards rushing, 3.3 ypc; 3TDs) and the Raiders came back down with him (3-5 with 18.3 ppg). If Oakland feels they can get his first half production all year long - then it's a no brainer that they move forward with him. But if his second half is more what they are expecting - they have to move on and find someone else (and I am not saying that someone else is Lynch).