Tim Ruskell and the Trader Whitsitt Superfund

by John Morgan on Nov 17, 2008 3:24 PM PST in Commentary

Here's the counter to the Tim Ruskell sucks argument: Ruskell inherited a franchise with a small handful of top tier talent, virtually no depth, and few players behind that top tier that were even NFL caliber. Want to argue that, look at the roster Ruskell inherited. Many of the problems the current Hawks face started in the final season of GM Mike Holmgren and flourished under the tyranny of "Trader Bob" Whitsitt. The two's sketchy drafts and free agent debacles left Seattle consistently scrapping to assemble a team. The few hits Holmgren/Whitsitt had almost all still play with Seattle: Maurice Morris and Rocky Bernard from 2002; Marcus Trufant and Seneca Wallace from 2003; Sean Locklear and Craig Terrill from 2004. The missing players are: Jerramy Stevens (2002), Ken Hamlin and Josh Brown (2003), DJ Hackett, Donnie Jones and maybe Niko Koutovides (2004) depending on how low you want to set the bar. That's the sum talent of three terrible drafts.

A draft class reaches maturity in three to five years. Four years removed from 2004 and six from 2002, with two first day picks starting for Seattle and three total starting anywhere in the NFL, isn't it time that Whitsitt and Holmgren share the blame?

Scrutinizing Tim Ruskell's moves, it's much harder to affix blame. I think fans fail to see that Tim Ruskell took on a rebuilding project. He's patched holes from the start. This season, the players he patched with aren't instant producers like Lofa Tatupu, Leroy Hill, Julian Peterson, Deon Grant, Patrick Kerney, Brandon Mebane, and Joe Jurevicius. Those cracks in Seattle's foundation finally brought the whole damn team down. Well, those cracks, injuries, bad luck and Arizona finally finding itself. But scrutinize the moves Ruskell made and the mess he was left and it's clear who's most to blame for this awful season.

This week we take an every play look at John Carlson and Josh Wilson. Evaluating receivers and DBs is...not ideal. It's important to watch every play and see a player's impact between targets. We'll do a quarter a day.

1 recs | Comment 12 comments |

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'm totally on board with Tim Ruskell.

Before the season, about 90% of the NFL would have liked to have the roster he put together. After that, it is on coaching, luck and the players themselves ( and outside of Brian Russell can you point to one starter and say “that guy is having a terrible season”?)

Injuries, the dynamics of the coaching situation (granted Ruskell was ultimately behind the decision, but not the results) and the further employment of John Marshall coaching Ruskell’s assemblance of studs were all things beyond Ruskell’s control.

2-8 or not, this team is deep and talented; and considerably young and talented as well.

With a little good fortune I think we are going to like what the team looks like with the players Ruskell has hand picked playing for the coaching regime Ruskell has picked as opposed to inherited.

The ability of Hasselbeck, Wahle, Kerney and Burleson to get back to somewhere near normal is pretty crucial though.

by puerto on Nov 17, 2008 3:47 PM PST 0 recs

Don't forget the Holmgren factor

There’s no proof as to how much input Holmgren has had in our player transactions as well. If Ruskell is focusing on the defense isn’t it possible that Holmgren has a little more say in the drafting of Wide Receivers then anyone is willing to admit?

All the irrational haters of Ruskell should give him 2-3 years. If at the end of it we are still this bad then show him the door but does anyone honestly see that happening?

by Hancock.Brett on Nov 17, 2008 3:51 PM PST 0 recs

What positions do you expext ruskell to draft/replace on offense

I look at the roster and i don’t see any position that is horrible besides recievers (and for the most part that can be blamed on injuries) but i thought branch played well yesterday

by xSAMx on Nov 17, 2008 5:00 PM PST 0 recs

Offensive guard, tackle, depth at wide receiver, tight end, maybe running back

by John Morgan on Nov 17, 2008 5:07 PM PST up 0 recs

hope so

I’m firmly aboard the Ruskell bandwagon but if he doesn’t seriously address the future of the o-line this draft then I will jump ship. Everything starts with the o-line and we feel painfully thin on the line.

by Snuffleupagus on Nov 18, 2008 7:41 AM PST up 0 recs

TE? really? didn't we cover that already?

I’d put RB, and QB ahead of TE

by JordonB on Nov 17, 2008 9:31 PM PST 0 recs

Keep Jones ,Forsett, Weaver, and Schmitt trade Morris and Duckett

Pick up a running back after addressing the O-line. DE OLB for pass rush.

by hawkr on Nov 17, 2008 10:14 PM PST 0 recs

you can't trade morris....

the deadline has passed and his contract is up after the season is over….

Duckett has done everything he has been asked to do well, including the game he got some extended play when Morris was out. There’s no reason we can’t keep them all, we have them all right now. Although, I think we’ll let Morris walk… I sure hope we resign weaver tho.

by JordonB on Nov 18, 2008 12:01 AM PST up 0 recs

I liked the signing of Duckett...

And he has done what we have asked of him. It’s just that I think Jones,Weaver,or Schmitt could of gotten the same results. Duckett is so slow getting to the line that it’s a nail biter every time he’s in there. Maybe it has something to do with our backs lining up so close to the QB. Doesn’t seem to give the blocking scheme time or the back the vision to make reads. Maybe that’s just how you set up in the WCO. Anyways I think Schmitt would make a great short yardage back.

by hawkr on Nov 18, 2008 3:46 PM PST 0 recs

It's a nail biter every time Duckett gets in there?

And Duckett is slow to the line, but doesn’t give the blocking scheme time? How does that make sense? Should he be slower to the line? You’re arguing two conflicting views there.

If it’s a nail biter with Duckett, what was it with Shaun the last few years?

by PascoJoe on Nov 18, 2008 4:37 PM PST up 0 recs

Sorry about that.....

What was meant to be said was that once Duckett decides to go he’s slow (no burst quickness) and when its one yard to be had the blocking is straight forward with RB following with bad intent. Set the RB’s a little deeper in non short yardage to allow the blocking to develop and allow the back to hit the hole at pace. And the last two years with Shaun….well it was time to go get a beer cause it wasn’t gonna happen.

by hawkr on Nov 18, 2008 7:24 PM PST up 0 recs