The Bucket Brigade

by abender20 on May 7, 2009 9:12 AM PDT in Seahawks News & Rumors

Why did Champ Bailey have a quiet year in 2008 while Cortland Finnegan erupted onto the scene? Tennessee built a better dam.

While the Seahawks have one of the best linebacking corps in all of football headed into the 2009 season, many people were still against drafting an expensive linebacker at 4th overall. I was one of those people. I'm not against the idea of Aaron Curry, as all signs point to him becoming an excellent linebacker for years to come. Rather, I would have preferred the Hawks spend their defensive dollars on fixing the damn instead of buying better buckets.

I started thinking about this concept after reading something John wrote while evaluating Aaron Curry (using Patrick Willis as an example):

However you slice it, Willis has not been transformative in the way Albert Haynesworth, DeMarcus Ware or Jared Allen have been.

I thought about why that would be, and that lead to thinking about analogous systems. Ultimately, I settled on the idea that trying to repress an offense is similar to trying to hold back a river. The best way to do so is to build a sturdy dam. If the dam starts to leak, you'd better have wonderful buckets to catch the remaining water.

A good defensive line causes havoc in both the run and pass games. Collapse and destroy the offensive line, and running lanes close and the quarterback runs out of time. The best place to stop an offense is at the source, in and around the backfield. Even the best defensive backs can only cover for so long. While linebackers can also fill the gaps and pressure the quarterback, committing more field resources towards doing so reduces the ability to cover and take on blockers downfield.

There's an economic argument to be made as well. In a system with unlimited resources, there would be no excuse to not sign the best available players at every position. However, given that salary caps are finite, teams need to spend money carefully. Outside of Albert Haynesworth, there weren't an awful lot of transformative defensive lineman available this offseason. Instead, the Seahawks are investing a significant chunk of their cap on linebackers; Seattle has chosen to go with an imperfect dam, hoping that their buckets will be good enough make up for that.

I'm not trying to fault the Seahawks in this case, as there may not have been better ways to spend the resources this offseason. Passing on Aaron Curry and letting Leroy Hill walk would not have been great decisions, given where the Hawks stood at the time. I just hope the long term goal is to help the great linebacking corps with this:

Tweet Comment 36 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

So this is us?

McCoy McCoy 2010, also acceptable, Russell Okung, Ndamukong Suh, Dez Bryant, Ciron Black, Eric Berry, and Bryan Bulaga.

by LantermanC on May 7, 2009 9:42 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Dammit, if I had been more clever, I would have put a halo on top of one of the buckets,

a beer in the other one, and a joint in the last one.

McCoy McCoy 2010, also acceptable, Russell Okung, Ndamukong Suh, Dez Bryant, Ciron Black, Eric Berry, and Bryan Bulaga.

by LantermanC on May 7, 2009 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions

That would have been lovely.

by abender20 on May 7, 2009 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions

Ok, no halo, but...

Bucket of Curry.

After spending a few minutes looking for images of ‘bucket of marijuana’ I decided it probably wasn’t the best thing to do at work.

McCoy McCoy 2010, also acceptable, Russell Okung, Ndamukong Suh, Dez Bryant, Ciron Black, Eric Berry, and Bryan Bulaga.

by LantermanC on May 7, 2009 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions

There you go

by John Morgan on May 7, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree with your analogy

It holds water (pun) if there is no passing game. Water doesn’t leap past and over a dam. The bucket brigade doesn’t just plug holes in the dam, it scoops up water flying over the dam. The LB’s don’t just plug running holes, and pressure the QB, but provide valuable and necessary pass defense, and that is an area in which Curry is expected to shine. Sure, pressuring the QB and limiting his time to throw is helpful, but a good offense will find your holes. As you pointed out, aside from Haynesworth, there weren’t a lot of elite D-line guys to go after, in FA or the draft, nonetheless Ruskell made a best effort grabbing Redding and Cole. I think in hindsight 1-2 years down the road that we’ll be very happy with the end result. Next years draft (not sure about FA) will be a better opportunity to shore up the dam. To your point (in support of it), 1-2 years from now we may have shored the D-line enough to redistribute $ away from buckets, but for now I don’t see a better alternative and am very pleased with Ruskells moves this off-season.

by diehard82 on May 7, 2009 10:41 AM PDT reply actions

Yes, it's a goofy analogy. It wasn't meant to be perfect.

Also,

I’m not trying to fault the Seahawks in this case, as there may not have been better ways to spend the resources this offseason. Passing on Aaron Curry and letting Leroy Hill walk would not have been great decisions, given where the Hawks stood at the time.

by abender20 on May 7, 2009 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions

Yes, but how does your damn protect against, say...

Tsunami’s, hurricanes, drought, global warming, or acts of terrorism??

by B.B.Finnegan on May 7, 2009 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Next year's draft?!?!

How DARE you propose we spend a high pick in next year’s draft on anything other than a QB of the future…

Or Taylor Mays.

I thought there could be no other presentation of possibility outside of those 2 options!

Alas, it is always darkest before the dawn, and there is now a new dawning for Washington sports. Believe it!!!

by Tyler Jorgensen on May 7, 2009 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions

Because Taylor Mays has not proven himself to be a safety worth a top 10 pick?

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on May 7, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions

I was...

being sarcastic. I hate the talk of drafting a S or QB at the top of the draft based on assumed need.

I’m a firm believer in a combination of best player available/best player available closest to the line of scrimmage. However, even as such, it is just waaay too early to start that talk, and yet I hear it daily, that Mays or Florida Jesus or Colt are “automatic” picks with the Denver pick or even a trade up with both our 1sts to get one of those guys… just… too much Madden GMing going on these days. :)

Please, for the LOVE OF GOD, stop suggesting next year's 1st round pick (or picks) be used for Taylor Mays and or a QB of the future. Let's just let the season unfold, people, and evaluate much deeper in the process!!!

by Tyler Jorgensen on May 7, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions

It is a strange phenomenon

As if some people enjoy the personnel moves more than the actual football.

by John Morgan on May 7, 2009 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions

Guilty.

McCoy McCoy 2010, also acceptable, Russell Okung, Ndamukong Suh, Dez Bryant, Ciron Black, Eric Berry, and Bryan Bulaga.

by LantermanC on May 7, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions

Well.... when no football is being played, what else am I supposed to do?

Can’t stand basketball or hockey, baseball isn’t interesting yet, so yeh, I’m also guilty.

by diehard82 on May 7, 2009 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions

Some of us do.

It’s just a temperament thing. That’’s not to say that we don’t enjoy the games, too, because we do; but some of us are wired to enjoy the team-building, the design and the maneuvering, even more.

by The Ancient Mariner on May 7, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions

A losing season makes the offseason moves that much more interesting for me to follow.

Whereas a winning team I’m less inclined to hope for moves to be made, but more hopeful about retaining players. I’m still hoping something happens at S, but I’m thrilled that so many areas have been addressed. I can’t be more excited about Lucas allowing us not to have to rely on a rebound/breakout year from Jennings because that’s exactly what the pipe dream would be if he were starting again this year. Not to discount Wilson, however. I love that guy.

by Misfit74 on May 7, 2009 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions

I understand that...

my only gripe is that I keep hearing names thrown out there in ready supply that I just don’t see as A) a good fit as an NFL caliber player at the slotted position or B) a need of the ’Hawks.

For instance, right now we keep hearing “Mays Mays Mays” and any derivative of a future QB from somewhere in the southeast.

I’m not sold any of those players will be good pros, particularly as first round picks. Maybe, maybe not. I’m just far more inclined to pick toward the line and work our way out. I personally think safety is a position you don’t draft high, you sign vets or develop lower rooks… and if possible, QB is the same.

I’d rather spend high picks on A) O Line B) D Line C) Cornerback D) best player available.

If Hass is healthy, he’s good for a good 2 years, maybe more. I’ll hope the team develops Teel, and if not, by the time Hass is done there will be a whole new crowd of FA/Tradeable QB possibilities (which will, 2 years from now, finally NOT include Brett Favre.)

by Tyler Jorgensen on May 7, 2009 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions

Brett Favre would look sexy in a Seahawk helmet.

The rugged old warrior lodged in the Pacific Northwest.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on May 7, 2009 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions

That would be hilarious if Favre were Hasselbeck's successor.

McCoy McCoy 2010, also acceptable, Russell Okung, Ndamukong Suh, Dez Bryant, Ciron Black, Eric Berry, and Bryan Bulaga.

by LantermanC on May 7, 2009 9:34 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Might as well confess this now.

I find the NFL’s offseason far more exciting that baseball and basketball’s regular seasons. I find hockey silly.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on May 7, 2009 6:17 PM PDT up reply actions

I find running baseball simulations more exciting than watching the NBA now.

Damn you Stern and Bennett. You ruined my first love.

McCoy McCoy 2010, also acceptable, Russell Okung, Ndamukong Suh, Dez Bryant, Ciron Black, Eric Berry, and Bryan Bulaga.

by LantermanC on May 7, 2009 9:35 PM PDT up reply actions

I think you just described a typical Redskins fan in the offseason.

Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.

by Carl Shinyama on May 7, 2009 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions

I've been thinking about this,

and it seems like cornerbacks would be the least important position.
D-Line is involved in every play. Passing plays they apply pressure, running plays, they stuff the runner if they go up the middle or engage blockers and try to get the tackle on sweeps or outside rushes.

LBers are trying to stop the run if it’s a run, and if it’s a pass, they either rush the passer, cover short dumpoffs to RBs and TEs, or cover intermediate routes.

CBs, obviously apply coverage on passing downs, but on runs up the middle, and maybe off the tackle, they’re not so important. Only in sweeps do they seem to be important.

Safeties are like LBs except instead of intermediate routes, they cover deeper routes as well.

But I guess that’s because I’m weighting all plays the same. A pass play is 3x as dangerous as a run play, and all downs can be passing downs. Not all situations, such as 3rd and long, is running a real feasible option (excluding FB draw of course).

McCoy McCoy 2010, also acceptable, Russell Okung, Ndamukong Suh, Dez Bryant, Ciron Black, Eric Berry, and Bryan Bulaga.

by LantermanC on May 7, 2009 11:00 AM PDT reply actions

You make sense.

One thing that Ruskell seems to have done is look for and get production per cap dollar. Curry represents this, as do the LBs being involved as you stated – as well as the investment there. A first round WR wouldn’t/couldn’t be counted on to produce in the first season or more in most cases while the LB can be plugged in an produce immediately. TJ was signed for immediate production. However, I’m not sure how the situational guys on the DL will be used. Redding? The sum of the parts looks to be formidable, similar to what the Giants have done. Those guys have to produce on the downs they’re given to make that work. If Curry doesn’t eclipse 100 tackles, I’ll be surprised. I would be surprised if Crabtree caught over 80 balls if we drafted him instead. I’m excited because if the coaches use these guys (LBs) properly, the disruption and effect on games could be awesome.

by Misfit74 on May 7, 2009 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions

Also, if you mention FB draw again I'll have to hunt you down.

;)

by Misfit74 on May 7, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions

They did upgrade their defensive line during the offseason

so I’d saw that is helping to rebuild the dam, not buying buckets. And the players you list “Albert Haynesworth, DeMarcus Ware or Jared Allen” earn top dollar in the league. Something the Seahawks couldnt afford. They have solid starters on the D-line now, and have a big money DE in Kerney. And you need to consider the new system they are installing, these new players might fit really well into it. We dont know yet. I think we need to wait an see how it plays out before we say that they didnt fix any problems.

And in terms of the draft, there wasnt any sure fire D-line stars that were apparent or worth the risk taking at 4 (maybe Raji but it was low chance after picking up Cole). Seahawks drafted best available talent and got younger at a position of need (losing Peterson). Also have to consider they have two #1 picks next year and maybe looking there to get improved D-linemen. I dont think you pass on a player like Curry, not when you are spending 4th pick money.

by Bellevue on May 7, 2009 12:36 PM PDT reply actions

Defensive line not so hot

I don’t feel its made such an improvement- we lost Rocky Bernard, one of the few -not-undersized men that could even bust double-teams. Wahl is penalty factory, spencer underwhelming, walter is declining. The only reason it doesn’t bust completely is B.Mebane and signing expensive defensive ends or LB, and even those good players won’t get us through the playoffs. )

by paul2 on May 7, 2009 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions

?? you are mixing offensive linemen and defensive linemen together

“Wahl is penalty factory, spencer underwhelming, walter is declining”. These are all o-linemen. What do they have to do with the defensive line? Are you saying that we should replace them instead of the moves they did at DE/DT’s? I’m a little confused by your reply.

Rocky didnt have a spectaular year in 08 and was becoming a free agent. He was looking for big money and has had some trouble with the law in the past. Cole is big boy (330lbs) and hopefully a force next to Mebane. Or at least he might provide some relief from Mebane getting doubled. He should do ok against the run. All in all I think our D-line is greatly improved over last season, Im not sure you’ll find many that disagree.

by Bellevue on May 7, 2009 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm excited about it - and agree.

We could be anywhere from average to dominant on the DLine, IMO. It depends on many things. We seem to have depth at DE and to a certain extent DT. I’m more hopeful than of the mind that our DLine is something we can hang our hat on, just yet. They do have me excited and optimistic. I’m pretty high on Redding, even after the team’s motives were unveiled.

by Misfit74 on May 7, 2009 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions

The Bucket List was a good movie

The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.

by Nick Andron on May 7, 2009 12:39 PM PDT reply actions

BTW, Champ Bailey is 6 years older than Cortland Finnegan

Also have to consider who each play oppostite of. There are alot variables to consider in your opening statement. Obvious, Broncos D is no where near the Titans D so yes there is a better “dam” as you say but comparing Bailey and Finnegan is hardly applicable to use as reference here, imho.

by Bellevue on May 7, 2009 12:49 PM PDT reply actions

I am not so enamored by this article.

You basically apologize for the entire article with

I’m not trying to fault the Seahawks in this case, as there may not have been better ways to spend the resources this offseason.

I have been saying for quite awhile about this Seahawks team that although last season left a lot to be desired, their are very few positions on the roster where anyone other than one of the top players at their position could come in and start.

Since you have focused on line play consider that we have on the OL:
Jones, Wahle, Locklear, Sims, Wrotto, Willis, Unger, Spencer.
That is 8 guys for 5 spots who are all better (at least potentially) than what you will get with a later round pick or a cheap FA, so you would have to really splurge to bring in a sure-thing OL starter.

On the D-line we have:
Kerney, Tapp, Atkins, Jackson, Mebane, Redding, Cole, Terrill
Again, 8 guys, this time for 4 spots, who are not going to be easy supplanted by anything other than a player who will take A LOT of resources to acquire.

When it comes down to it, the Seahawks need to win by having the talent on the roster play better and get coached better than they did last year. Every team would love to have Albert Haynesworth or Jared Allen but you have to be willing to commit major resources. LB’s may be less important but they are also cheaper and more readily available. There was nothing close to a Curry-level talent at his position in the draft at any line position. There was nothing close to the deal we gave Hill out there for any premium lineman who could actually start over the glut of capable guys we have.

In contrast, with Peterson gone, if we didn’t sign Hill and draft Curry we would be starting much lesser talents at those positions.

by michaelfox99 on May 8, 2009 8:58 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Well said sir!

by diehard82 on May 8, 2009 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions

I'll take this piece by piece.

You basically apologize for the entire article with [quoted me]

The point was football in general, not specifically the Seahawks. Just because the Hawks built the team this way doesn’t mean it’s wrong given the conditions now, just rather that it’s sub-optimal. There is a difference between criticism and general musings.

I have been saying for quite awhile about this Seahawks team that although last season left a lot to be desired, their are very few positions on the roster where anyone other than one of the top players at their position could come in and start.

You don’t believe this, right? Other than the linebackers, this team has a lot of solid but unspectacular talent. You could argue that the average level of talent on this team is above the league average (although that’s debatable as well), but the 2009 Seahawks aren’t laden with special talent across the board. While that will still lead to a successful team, there are very few players on the Hawks that are elite.

Since you have focused on line play consider that we have on the OL

Yes, we do in fact have an OL. This piece, however, was on construction of a defense.

Every team would love to have Albert Haynesworth or Jared Allen but you have to be willing to commit major resources. LB’s may be less important but they are also cheaper and more readily available.

You have, in fact, helped make my point. This is Macroeconomics 101:the fact that linebackers are cheaper and more readily available means that the cost to acquire them is lower. If you top coin to drop on a player of either position, you should choose the one that is both more transformative and more scarce.

In contrast, with Peterson gone, if we didn’t sign Hill and draft Curry we would be starting much lesser talents at those positions.

Once again, the point of my article was not to criticize how the Seahawks handled this offseason. Strawmanning like that isn’t necessary.
Remember, I did say:

Passing on Aaron Curry and letting Leroy Hill walk would not have been great decisions, given where the Hawks stood at the time. I just hope the long term goal is to help the great linebacking corps with this [a good defensive line]

It’s perfectly fine to disagree with anything written here, but please don’t argue for the sake of arguing.

Also, it’s probably worthwhile to note that not everyone is enamored with our defensive line, Colin Cole in particular.

by abender20 on May 8, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions

Can "strawmanning" be used

as a verb?

On the whole I feel as though he made some great points, but I do not think you two disagreed very strongly, if at all.

The fact that we have very few players that are “special,” or “elite” does not exclude the idea that it would take some “special” or “elite” players to truly upgrade most of the positions on our team. I think that point was well-made by him, and that your post was more defensive philosophy-based and he kind of missed with the OL point(which if he took the Dam to work both ways kinda works), but that there were not a lot of players available that would have given us a more than marginal upgrade. Considering all of the (at least) NFL average players we have on the DL, Curry represents a huge upgrade over whoever we were going to play at Peterson’s old role, AND he gives the front office/coaching staff the ability to use different defensive packages(both in game and from year to year), hide the defensive playcall better, and to ignore investing in the LB position for quite some time in the future as they build up the DL and secondary.