Field Gulls: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:





Matchupalooza: Hawks Tackles Vs Packers Ends

Sean Locklear is playing for tomorrow's millions. Some team somewhere is going to offer the Hawks steady right tackle big bucks this offseason, because they think he can make the switch to left tackle, and, moreover, because they're freakin' flush with cash. Last week, Lock took a sack allowed on an edge rush that looked like the Kentucky Derby: 100 furlongs forward, a half circle turn and 100 furlongs back where Matt Hasselbeck was busy chewing his cud in the starting gate. It certainly wasn't Beck's sharpest game, and when he's frustrated, he'll abuse his pass pro, live in the pocket waiting for something downfield to develop and ignore underneath routes. Hustle ends that don't take themselves out of the play and don't quit, are one of Lock's weaknesses. The other, is straight, pedal to the floor, bull rushers.

Aaron Kampman can be that. He hustles, too. He'll give you edge rush in a pinch and isn't bad at run stopping. It's debatable whether Kampman has arrived as one of the league's premier defensive ends, or if he's just in a supremely productive 2 year window. He entered this season like a house on fire, recording 9 sacks in the first 8 contests. Since then he's recorded only 3 sacks, and against less than stellar competition. One was recorded against Brandon Gorin, a mid-season replacement for the Rams. The other two came against the Lions, Mike Martz, George Foster (Oh, he of 11.75 sacks allowed and 9 false starts) or someone presumably behind him on the depth chart. Sacks are a dicey stat. A player can achieve pass rush without creating sacks, and a player achieving consistent pass rush can have his sacks bunch up at times. Not because he's necessarily playing better during that stretch, but because of luck and opportunity. Still, it's a noteworthy drop off.

Walter Jones is still a very good tackle. When a player reaches a certain age, and has been great for a very long time, he'll begin to receive rewards and accolades for the body of his career. For instance, Jones' recent All-Pro nod. The kneejerk counterforce to these plaudits is, of course, healthy skepticism. That can prejudice the skeptic's opinion as much as reputation poisons the traditionalist's opinion. Jones may no longer be as good as Joe Thomas, but that doesn't mean he's still not one of the very best left tackles in all of football. After a slow start to the season, caused by an advisable absence from the preseason, Jones has been steady, an occasional force in the run game, and a well rounded tackle with few weaknesses in pass pro. His worse weakness, though, will be tested this Saturday.

Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila has the explosive first step and cool nickname of a premier edge rusher. And he is a premier edge rusher, but he's not much else. KGB has 9.5 sacks on the season and only 22 solo tackles. This season he's been subbed heavily. Teamed with Cullen Jenkins, KGB's not strictly a third down end or pass rush specialist, but he's not far from it. Jenkins is not, on paper, a player that should give Jones any trouble. But KGB is. Jones is slower around the edge than he once was, and when he meets a defender, less willing to extend his chronically injured left shoulder out and risk re-injury. The Hawks have gone as far as employing pop blocks, moving guard Rob Sims out and Jones in, but that's a troublesome solution. Sims is then at a natural disadvantage to edge rushers who start closer to edge, forcing Sims to catch up before he engages the defender. Further, the space between the tackle and guard created by pop blocks can be exploited by a blitzing linebacker, something Seattle saw all too clearly in its second contest against the Rams.

So how does Seattle account for potential mismatches at both ends of the offensive line? The obvious solution is to avoid third and long. Of course they could just score more points than their opponent while they're at it, since I'm giving out dime store advice. Third and long, at some point, is an eventuality. The Hawks should take an idea from Green Bay's playbook. That is, short routes, backs in the flanks, and an occasional screen, especially to the left, where KGB will be sucked up, and supreme cover linebacker A.J. Hawk is on the opposite side of the field. The other thing that the Packers are smart about is that they are willing to send a receiver on a route short of the first down marker, if they know it's likely to materialize fast enough to allow them to escape excessive pressure or a sack. All those 5 yard gains on 3rd and 7 may net negative DVOA, but they also allow the Pack to have the best adjusted sack rate in football. It's a move a team makes when it trusts its defense; keeps an eye to the bigger picture, where five yards might help your punter pin the team back, or just help your QB avoid a pick or sack. Sometimes, that quick slant, or 5 yard crossing pattern or fullback screen turns into so much more. The Hawks have the talent to beat the Pack at their own game, now will they use it?

0 recs | Comment 30 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

something Brett and I were talking about
if you're able to re-sign Tru early enough in the offseason, would you franchise Locklear?

by Matthew on Jan 10, 2008 5:47 AM PST   0 recs

Franchise
I forget, did we sign Josh Brown to a longterm deal?  If not, he may be a candidate for a repeat franchise.  If we get him signed, I think Lock might be the logical choice, if the Hawks believe that he is worth the average of the top three highest paid RTs (or whatever the formula is for franchise players).  

I bet we end up franchising Tru.  People are going to be willing to throw a whole lot of money his way.

by jeager on Jan 10, 2008 7:31 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

No, but apparently
Brown already said he's going to stay and only the fact they he/they can't/won't sign an extension during the season has prevented them from already doing so.

Yeah, from what I can tell, we're almost certain to franchise Tru, but if you're going to throw a multi-year deal his way anyways, might as well try to do it quickly enough so that you can use your franchise on Lock if you want.

by Matthew on Jan 10, 2008 8:10 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

The problem with franchising Lock is...
You then have to pay him roughly 10 million, and though you're offensive line is fine for 2008, you have no long term replacement for Walter Jones. On the plus side, I've never seen a deeper draft for offensive tackles. Actually, it's deep for tackles and running backs. I don't know if Ruskell plans this stuff, but damn does everything seem to turn up roses for the guy.

Okay, I'm out of here. I'll try to blog all day tomorrow.

by John Morgan on Jan 10, 2008 12:44 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Well, this is certainly me
trying to transplant my baseball framework to football, but the way I see it, we need to get long-term replacements for both tackles in this draft. Being able to keep Lock on a one-year deal for '08 would help ease the transition of the new tackles into the starting line.

I have no idea if it works that way in football though.

by Matthew on Jan 10, 2008 1:03 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Here's my thinking.
I'm exhausted, so if any of this doesn't make sense, my apologies. The Hawks have about 9.5 million in cap space. That's among the worst in the NFL, and 10 teams have 30 mil+. Just like in MLB, lots of floating money means contracts will be inflated. A player like Hackett, who's actual performance may not warrant a big payday, is going to be paid like Nate Burleson, minimum. Hackett is actually a player the Hawks should want to keep. If Seattle signs Marcus Trufant, they're going to basically blow their wad. Now, Seattle can hopefully free up some space by cutting or having retire Gray, Womack, Russell, Mike Green, Tom Ashworth and hopefully Shaun Alexander. That should free up enough space to sign Tru, Hacks, the draft picks and maybe allow Seattle to franchise Lock, but would mean no free agents could be signed. That's my guess, anyway. A right tackle is not the biggest premium in the world, Lock himself was a 3rd round pick. So, do you pay through the nose to sign Lock, or do you draft a longterm replacement for Jones, break him in at right tackle, and worry about filling in at right tackle over the next two years while Jones is still playing?

by John Morgan on Jan 10, 2008 3:16 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

oh right, ::smacks head:: salary cap
man, we look kinda screwed on space. Do we need to cut Shaun to keep Hacks, Tru and draft freely?

by Matthew on Jan 10, 2008 3:34 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Not to mention Brown...
Who, I hate to say, if it comes down to it is pretty replaceable. It's hard to say for sure how much everyone is going to cost, but it would be a big boost cutting Alexander. Trufant is the top priority, then Hackett, Lock, then Brown. WRT the draft, Seattle is in a great position, late first round early second round picks have been proven to provide the best bang for the buck. Rookie salaries are all standardized, y'know. Seattle should be able to sign Hacks, Tru and their draft picks without too many problems, but Lock is all but gone - Unless, Ruskell really plans on rolling into next season with Jennings and Wilson as his starting CBs. I'm hoping he's not planning that.

by John Morgan on Jan 10, 2008 4:45 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

God I hope not.
I don't mind Jennings, but Wilson as a starter? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!

We need to hold on to Tru.

"I'm not familiar with this type of.. thing I'm seeing."

by Thingray on Jan 10, 2008 5:09 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

In-house options, the market, or the draft?
Ruskell has some tough calls. Assuming like you say that Lock is all but gone, what are your thoughts on the in-house options at RT, Willis and Wrotto? Since we'll almost certainly need to go to the market for a new RG do you think we'll need to buy/draft a whole new right side? Or, do Willis and Wrotto compete for it? (And while we're at it, does Ruskell start looking for a new O-Line coach?)

It's a huge question precisely because it's such a good draft for tackles (which usually means it's also a great draft for guards). Seattle could potentially cut ties with as many as 4 RTs this off-season (Lock, Willis, Chop, and Ashworth).

As for RB, should Ruskell forgo drafting a RB early, and adopt a true by-committee approach with MoMo and Weaver, there should be quality available into day 2.

Cory Boyd (S. Carolina) is tailor-made for the WCO. Boyd is a quality runner (5ypc every year), and is the best I've ever seen at pass pro, and would be an absolute steal on day two (disclosure: I work at S. Carolina).

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Jan 11, 2008 7:57 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

re: RG
shouldn't we move Sims over there? Granted that just moves the hole from RG to LG, but I think I'd prefer to break in a new RT and LG then an entire new side on the line.

by Matthew on Jan 11, 2008 8:08 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Willis is the Replacement
Wrotto probably projects better as a guard
V. 1.0, mutherf***er, know what I'm sayin'?

by Scruffy Lefty on Jan 11, 2008 8:18 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Alexander and Burleson
Burleson has this poison pill in his contract that could get triggered if the team cuts or Alexander or restructures his contract.
For reference see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nate_Burleson
How would you deal with that?

by vj on Jan 11, 2008 9:10 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

trade Burly?
I'm not clear on whether that sort of thing "gets triggered" or if it's only relevant at time of signing. We'd have to know the exact language in the contract to be sure.

Thank god, unlike the Mariners, we can trust the team to do an intelligent thing.

by Matthew on Jan 11, 2008 9:37 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Or Restructure Burly's contract
It would be pretty hard to have that trigger next year because I think Burly is only going to make around 4mil
V. 1.0, mutherf***er, know what I'm sayin'?

by Scruffy Lefty on Jan 11, 2008 9:47 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Well
I'd hope that it was set up like the poison pill in Hutch's contract, where he had to be the highest paid o-lineman at the time of the offer (which screwed us b/c Walt was already that guy).

They've restructured Burly's deal already, so it could be that they took that out then.

by Strang on Jan 11, 2008 10:28 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Unfortunately
the franchise tag takes the top 3 at any offensive line position, not just RT.  So we'd essentially be paying Locklear like a top of the line Left Tackle, instead of the very good but not great Right Tackle that he is.  

Hopefully we can resign him to a reasonable long term deal, and draft our future LT in the first or second round.

by minor threat on Jan 10, 2008 1:22 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Lock isn't worth that money
I could see signing both Tru and Brown to long term deals because Tru has so many roots in the NW and Brown loves it here. That doesn't mean you go throwing the franchise on a player that isn't worth franchise money.

If there are better options in the draft/FA then I say let Locklear go. If someone is willing to spend 5/7 years and 6-7 million a year on this guy then let them. Let Lock have his big payday.

by SeattleSlayer on Jan 10, 2008 8:33 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

nice break down
One thing I'd like to mention is the bye week and how refreshed the Packers defense, especially Kamp, has said it is:
"I feel great. I know Ryan (Pickett) feels the same way and the rest of the guys."
Kamp isn't so much of a bull rusher though, unless thats the descriptor for someone who just pushes against your right arm until it tires. He just "out motors" guys.
I have a feeling ole Holmie will pull a fast one and try running the ball on us, though. Just call it a hunch, I guess.
Should be a good one! I look forward to it.
"and there is your dagger!"

by NumberFour on Jan 10, 2008 7:21 AM PST   0 recs

Jenkins
has been nicked up as well. He's a very good player. His health has been coming around too.

Screens have worked for big gainers a few times this year.

by olpete on Jan 10, 2008 8:58 AM PST   0 recs

Jones v. KGB
Based on a scouting report I read on either NFL.com or Fox Sports, it's virtually impossible to speed rush Jones.  Their opinion was Jenkins might have more success because he plays with leverage and strength v. speed.    

by packfan on Jan 10, 2008 9:25 AM PST   0 recs

GB Weather
As the game gets closer, the forecasted temp is going up. Originally called for 23 degrees and snow and now the outlook is for 32 degrees and 20% chance of snow.

32 degrees is virtually the same temp as the last home game against Arizona.

by FarNorth on Jan 10, 2008 5:00 PM PST   0 recs

Locklear
I think he may get away from us. Some team is going to pay him elite tackle money considering what top olinemen have recently gotten.

I think a nice, underrated target in free agency would be Stacy Andrews,og/ot, Bengals. I think he played mostly RT this year and the Bengals are one of the least sacked teams in the NFL. Andrews can play guard or tackle so he brings versatility alowing the Hawks in the draft to decide if they want an OG or an OT.

This is a great draft coming up for what the Hawks need; very deep at rb, te and oline.

RB like Jonathan Stewart, Rashard Mendenhall, Felix Jones, Ray Rice, Kevin Smith, Mike Hart, James Davis or Jamaal Charles would really help the Hawks next year.

TEs like Fred Davis, Martin Rucker, John Carlson, Jacob Tamme, Martellus Bennett and Jermichael Finley would really help the Hawks next year.

Olinemen like Sam Baker, Jeff Otah, Gosder Cherilus, Michael Oher, Duke Robinson, Roy Schuening, Oneil Cousins, Barry Richardson, Chris Williams, Heath Benedict would really help the Hawks too.

The Hawks are gonna be so much better next year and that said they are in the 2nd week of the playoffs right now. Awsome.

Keep Tru and the defense comes back in tact and a year better and more together.

And with the improvement of the run and pass defenses this season this front office knows how to recognize a problem and fix it. I have every confidence that they will recognize the running game as the weakness and they will fix it this offseason, they have shown that they can fix the problems and can get it done well in free agency (Grant) and in the draft (Mebane), and heck they tried to get Dielman so I don't see why they wouldn't try again.

Ok,Rant over. I am just so pumped with this team, management and core (even after Hass and Walt).

by puerto on Jan 10, 2008 5:31 PM PST   0 recs

good points
The Front Office has done a good job of recognizing the teams problems and trying to fix them.

The FO realized that the run D was going to suffer without Tubbs, so they drafted Mebane.  Same goes for the secondary with Grant.

They obviously realize that Gray is close to finished.  It seemed like Dielman was all but signed before he went back to the chargers(haha, now you're stuck with Norv Turner!)

I am almost positive that the FO will improve the run game next season.  I don't think they'll cut Alexander, but I do expect them to pick up a player like Mewelde(sp??) Moore or draft a running back in rounds 2/3/4 of the draft and pair that player with Morris and Weaver.

I also don't expect the FO to do something stupid like give Michael Turner 50 million to come here.

Josh Brown is better than you. The Rest of the team is worse.

by MFAN on Jan 10, 2008 7:03 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I have a hard time believing
that they will cut Alexander but I do believe they will attempt to restructure his contract
V. 1.0, mutherf***er, know what I'm sayin'?

by Scruffy Lefty on Jan 10, 2008 8:58 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I agree Scruffy
It would make sense for both the Team and Alexander to restructure his contract. If he's cut he  would cost somthing like 3 mill next year and 5 mil the next against the cap. (Don't quote me, but that's what I've heard) Alexander has already made like 25 mill these first two years of his new deal, so he doesn't need the money. His recent play makes it hard for me to believe that he would get more then the veterans minimum if a new team picks him up. So for both the Hawks and Alexander the best option is clearly restructuring his contract.

I don't think they'll let Tru go anywhere. Wilson seems like a good CB, but fits better as a Nickel CB. Hopefully they won't have to franchise him to save cap room.

As for Lock, I agree with what John has said previously that some team is going to think of him as a franchise type LT and out spend the Hawks for him. It's a shame to because Lock is a very solid RT for us, I think that playing next to Grey affects him a lot. If Lock moves on then the Hawks can find a replacement for him and possibly Walt in the future as late as the second or even third round. This draft is unbelivably loaded with OT's, its so loaded that OT's that are good enough to go in the first like Sam Baker, Cheralis, and Chris Williams could end up going in the second. It's not a knock on them there's just so much talent at that position that they get pushed back. There's also talented OT's that should be available in the third round who could start at RT like Tony Hills, Carl Nicks, and Mike McGynn. I've be wondering that if Lock does leave then perhaps they just simply let Willis take his spot. I was not able to see the Atlanta game. Did anybody see how he looked at RT.    

This draft is also loaded at RB if they don't feel that MO can be the primary carrier. Stewart and Mendenhall would both be nice fits in this offense. I'd be very happy with both of them in the first. They could also get a guy like Jamal Chareles or Kevin Smith in the second. I personally like Smith, he has incredable vision and cutting ability.

I personally think that the Hawks really need a good TE, somthing that's been lacking for a long time. Both Fred Davis and Martrilius Bennet (sp?) would fit perfectly. Both are very good blockers, have good hands and can stretch the field.

That turned into quite a rant, I never ment it to turn out like that.

by joeshow30 on Jan 10, 2008 9:53 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Jones vs. KGB...
a mismatch in favor of GB? I think that's a bit dramatic.

Maybe Jones has lost a bit, but the guy is still a fantastic LT. There isn't a DE in football that's a "mismatch" against him.

by PLU Tim on Jan 10, 2008 8:09 PM PST   0 recs

Freeney?

by Matthew on Jan 10, 2008 8:58 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

SPIN MOVE!!!
V. 1.0, mutherf***er, know what I'm sayin'?

by Scruffy Lefty on Jan 10, 2008 8:59 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Jones v. KGB
Re-read the post.  That was the point.  KGB does not have an edge on Jones.  Nor does any other speed rusher.  The scout was pointing out that Cullen Jenkins might have a better shot of puting pressure on Hasselbeck because he rushes with power and leverage.  

by packfan on Jan 11, 2008 7:47 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

M_image
High Point/Low Point Of 2007 Seahawks Season?
Image_114_small
OT: She is a woman possessed!
Small
Turns out Mack Strong is a gentleman
Small
Holmgren's last season - Interesting article
Small
Jonathan Ogden to retire.
Small
We are losing to Swoop
Small
Cedric Benson kicked to the curb...
Small
Strahan Retires Officially
Photo_95_small
Which WR is going to step up?
Small
Boys extend Owens

Post New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Managers

Image_114_small Shrug

Jj_flag_detail1_small John Morgan

News Fetch

Mutedposthorn_small Stencil

Graphics Editor

0000039510_20070504111310_small Scruffy Lefty

ad

Site Meter