Report: Seahawks Release T.J. Duckett
by John Morgan on Aug 24, 2009 8:59 PM PDT
Email
Print
This makes Edgerrin James the thunder to Julius Jones and Justin Forsett's lightning. Seattle joins a lengthy list of teams that have flirted with Duckett but passed. Maybe he's the NFL's Russell Branyan. Maybe he's the NFL's Andy Marte.
Without giving this lengthy thought, I can see two reasons Seattle dropped Duckett.
1. He's bad. Duckett is slow to the hole and that doesn't help an offensive line struggling to sustain blocks.
2. He's never been a receiver. When the rushing stalled and the emboldened Broncos defense fearlessly attacked the pass, it was the screen game and Justin Forsett that gave the offense life. James has declined as a receiver, but he's still functional running simple patterns and screens.
I was going to run a hokey "The Lost Tape: Cardinals at Seahawks" feature during the offseason. I'm sure I can unearth those notes and give the film another look and give a better exposition of what this means tomorrow.
But until then: Fuck.
218 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
For the record
I am not saying I think Duckett is bad, merely that that might be the opinion of the team.
The worst part about this is that it puts an end to the notion that James was merely a "depth" signing.
I hate to lose a guy who was among the league leaders (if not the best) on 3rd and short.
And I know it’s not my money, but giving Duckett a $2.5 million bonus and then cutting him two weeks into the preseason is a travesty. I’m sure Paul Allen will revisit this move when it comes time to decide Ruskell’s future with the team. This could prove to a $4.5 million mistake (Duckett’s bonus + Edge’s deal) when it’s all said and done.
Meaning what?
Was the bonus he received a sunk cost or could we have cut him before it was due?
I’m fine with Ruskell cutting his losses. For instance, it had to be done with Keary Colbert. But in the case of Duckett, I don’t understand Ruskell/Mora/Knapp’s sudden change in thinking. Duckett is exactly the same player he has always been. If they didn’t think he was cut out to be Seattle’s “thunder” back they should have reached that decision ages ago.
As far as Edge goes, there were cheaper and younger options available in free agency.
You're basing an argument on a sunk cost
but giving Duckett a $2.5 million bonus and then cutting him two weeks into the preseason is a travesty. I’m sure Paul Allen will revisit this move when it comes time to decide Ruskell’s future with the team. This could prove to a $4.5 million mistake (Duckett’s bonus + Edge’s deal) when it’s all said and done.
Paul Allen is a businessman. If this move works, Ruskell will keep his job for a long, long time.
We already paid him the money, thus it should have NO BEARING in the decision to keep or release him. Since roster positions are finite, the “screw it, let’s keep him since we just paid him” argument doesn’t work.
I’d rather pay the extra $2 million for a back that could provide more value than retain one that frankly, has too little value.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
While your point is true,
I’m sure Paul Allen would’ve been happier if we had cut Duckett and signed Edge two weeks ago.
Absolutely right.
Allen won’t forget that.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
I highly doubt Allen cares about 2.5 million.
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Aug 24, 2009 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions
You don't become rich
By forgeting about $2.5 million dollars. I doubt Allen would be excited about Ruskell giving away that money to anything other than chairty.
A minute fraction of wealth.
2.5 mil to us is a lot, 2.5 mil to Paul Allen is nothing. Let’s says he has 2.5 bil, 1/1000 of his wealth is nothing.
False.
if I have $1,000,000 of net worth, I’m going to be pretty upset if I lose $1,000 in a situation that could have been avoided.
And I don’t know if it’s true or not, but it seems like people who have more money value their money even more than the average person.
It's not like Allen had to sit down and personally write out the check to Duckett
The ’Hawks are their own entity. They have their own budget. Allen knows in advance there is X amount of $ going to salary, and X amount being paid out in bonus. Because of the salary cap, and the need to structure bonuses that fit in the cap, those amounts are predictable and relatively static.
And this move had no impact on the overall salary structure. Essentially, Edge was swapped straight out for the salary that Duckett would’ve made if he stayed on the roster.
Allen’s not Mike Brown – he’s not going to quibble about $1M here and $500K there. He’s concerned with the big picture – How does the $150M budget translate into wins, losses, and attendance at the gate.
As long as his overall investment is paying off, I doubt he cares about the minutia of roster transactions.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
Duckett was also scheduled to make a salary of 2.5 million this year
So by signing Edge for 2 mil, they actually save 500,000 on a possibly better player.
Yes, it’d have been better to release Duckett earlier and not cough up the 2 million bonus, but I think they were certain he was going to do well. I guess he did (or didn’t do) enough to prove them wrong.
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 25, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Duckett
Was going to make $2.5 million on top of the bonus just paid to him? That doesn’t sound right.
I also get the impression the 2 million bonus was guaranteed
and would’ve had to be paid regardless, not certain about it though.
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 25, 2009 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
It's a little ambiguous.
Seattle paid a $2 million signing bonus to Duckett in March 2008. The team guaranteed another $2 million to him in 2009. Duckett’s contract counts about $3.3 million against the 2009 cap if he’s on the roster and $3.2 million if he is not.
Was the $2 million bonus for 2009 guaranteed even if he was cut earlier?
Very ambiguous, that part seems to say they could've avoided paying him
but this part seems to say it would’ve been due the moment they cut him. Maybe.
The $4 million in bonus money, which seemed excessive given that Duckett did not appear to be in high demand, is what makes the gap in salary-cap charges negligible. The team would not have to pay Duckett’s 2009 salary of $2.5 million upon releasing him, but bonus money scheduled to count against future caps would come due at once.
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 25, 2009 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions
The bonus money is already paid
but it’s cap hit is pro-rated over a few years.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
Scary, but true
Duckett’s contract was the equivalent of two separate 1 year deals – a trial period, and then a deal that presumes he’s handling a good load of the carries.
I remember thinking when the deal was signed that Ruskell obviously expected TJ to return to his Atlanta form, handle a good share of the load for Mora. and was prepared to pay him accordingly. With all they had invested in him, they must have been pretty convinced he wasn’t up to it.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
I don't know if it matters to him or not.
It just seems a bit weird to me to dismiss $2.5 million dollars as if it doesn’t matter to him. It may or may not, but I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that it doesn’t matter to him.
I'm sure the big picture matters, but not the individual details.
It’s like any business. Say I own an apartment building. I don’t know a thing about running one, so I hire a property manager. I pay him a salary, give him an operating budget and then expect him to improve the value of the building and turn a profit. I’m going to expect some waste – it’s inherent cost of doing business. If he tells me that he paid a contractor $500 but decided he wasn’t doing a good job, and then paid another an extra $250 to come in and finish the job right, I’m not going to argue because he’s the supposedly the expert. And at the end of the year, if he’s accomplished his goals and turned a good profit, I’m not going to nit-pick about $250 here or there.
OTOH, if at the end of the year the building is falling down and vacant – then I’m going to be pissed off and scouring the books to figure just how bad the guy messed up.
I suspect that’s where Allen/Ruskell’s financial relationship is at. It’s what he does with the budget as a whole, not the individual transactions. If the ‘Hawks are 10-6 and in the playoffs at the end of the year, then this is seen as part of the necessary steps to get the team there. OTOH, if the team’s a 4-12 steaming pile, then it’s additional evidence that Ruskell wasn’t a good manager.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
by jteckmann on Aug 25, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, good points.
I agree with what you said, but at the same time, Paul is probably thinking, I don’t mind paying extra if it does a better job, but let’s look at what we did so we can evaluate what we have better and not have to cost ourselves this $2.5 million.
Sort of a fine for now, but let’s learn from this and see if it is preventable in the future attitude I guess.
Absolutely right.
Well said.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
by Nick Andron on Aug 25, 2009 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions
If 2.5 mil equals 1-2 more wins and the playoffs
then yeah, it was worth it. (and I’m not say it does, that’s just the rationality behind gamble they’re making)
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 25, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions
He'll just take 5 less boat trips.
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Aug 25, 2009 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions
Meaning the money was gone the minute it was spent.
A sunk cost is a cost that cannot be recouped therefore it does not factor into any subsequent decision.
If the team is better cutting Duckett, the team MUST cut Duckett.
Whether the outcome could have been avoided with better player evaluation is a different question.
by trippsixxes on Aug 25, 2009 12:19 AM PDT up reply actions
I think Duckett is pretty bad.
The guy’s big, built for power, but he doesn’t really lay any thunder. He doesn’t blow through a crevice on 3rd and short for the first, he picks his way through. It drove me nuts last season and reminded me of a tubby guy trying to do ballet. It was slow, and my reaction usually went something like: “No, no, just hit the hole! Wait, fall forward…okay, that worked. Phew.”
Duckett has a knack for picking his way through a stacked line, but what you want there is a guy who sees a little daylight and hits it. I think in the zone blocking scheme that Knapp is trying to implement, Duckett’s style is a little too much late-career Alexander and not enough Brandon Jacobs.
That said, James is an uninspiring replacement. I’m pretty ‘meh’ on the whole thing.
Good points on both counts.
Esp. the Alexander/Jacobs statement. I thought Duckett was catching it well in camp. Maybe the team wanted to take a good look at that aspect of his game and didn’t like what they saw. He was of limited use – a large man with a small bag of tricks, though James is a questionable move, at best.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
I'm surprisingly bummed about this
I never bought that Duckett was any good but I really wanted him to be.
I feel exactly the same way
For some strange reason, I really wanted him to succeed. For the Hawks to be that team that he realizes his skills and plays at a high level.
But at the same time, I never had high hopes for him and he’s never impressed me.
I’d rather take a flier on a veteran like Edge than continue on with a player that’s consistently performed sub-par for us.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
Maybe not
I think the coachs (the new regime) really wanted him to be more than a short-yardage back and needed him to step up in pass protection. Mora sounded disappointed in describing what Duckett showed during the Donks game in his KJR interview today.
While Duckett was more of a Mora/Ruskell guy than a Holmgren guy, I think he probably didn’t grow into the role that they envisioned for him (unless Knapp had expectations that Mora Ruskell didn’t).
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
Exactly
I don’t disagree with you John, but it’s evident the club wanted him to be more than just the 3rd and short guy. Saturday, he proved that his skill set, relative to our O-line, limited him to that be only that guy.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
Saturday proved nothing.
If the front office is making this decision because of Duckett’s struggles on Saturday, it’s being terribly rash. I would prefer to believe that’s not the case. James fills some kind of role the team does not believe Duckett can fill. I am not yet sure what that is.
Actually, being terribly rash is sometimes a pretty normal Ruskell move
I just with he’d have went after a LT instead of a RB to fix the run game. Although the more I think about it, it was pretty obvious it wasn’t the running backs, since all of them have looked pretty mediocre so far (thanks to the line) so maybe it’s something else.
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 24, 2009 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions
But it's okay because we can fill our line with people drafted after the 4th round because of the scheme.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 24, 2009 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions
In this instance I'd have preferred one of his trademark rash trades
at least then we could have landed a RB with some youth and upside and put an end to this patch job at RB.
Acquiring Michael Bush is almost certainly a pipe dream, but there are probably more than a few quality young backs available for a second or third rounder.
"trademark rash trades"
examples please?
besides Branch (which, to me, was not at all a rash trade) I can’t think of anything that was even remotely rash.
Keary Colbert
Alvin Pearman, Josh Parry … Ruskell has a habit of burning future 5th-7th round picks at positions that could easily be filled just as adequately and cheaper on the FA market.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
I guess I disagree
Using a handful late round picks over four years to fill out depth doesn’t really seem like a habit, and I’m not sure we could have found “just as adequate” free agents. Colbert wasn’t anything to write home about, but the dudes we picked up off the street were even worse! rather than being a problem, I think that using late second day picks is a sign that our GM is active and involved in making the team better.
Personally, It's one of my biggest pet-peeves about TR
Individually, the moves may not seem like much, but over time they add up.
IMO, there is such a thing as being overactive and micro-managing. Take Pearman – you’ve got Scobey & Weeks, who have been on the roster for a couple seasons performing basically the same function. Ruskell makes no effort to upgrade during the offseason. Right after camp, he fires off a 5th rounder for a player who is a marginal upgrade at best. Then winds up having to sign one of the street anyways, because Pearman gets hurt. It’s a lot of dancing around to end up in essentially the same spot.
And it’ sets in motion a dog-chasing-it’s-tail feel for the offseason – Ruskell will trade and manuver in the draft to recoup picks he gave away the prior season. Which makes you wonder how much that’s held us back or prevented us from getting certain guys we may have otherwise targeted. It’s especially frustrating to see Ruskell act so casual with 2nd day picks during the season, when come draft time he’s really good at finding hidden talent with them.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
It's never about one game
But I think the team set out goals for Duckett that he wasn’t able to fulfill (over the course of who knows how many regular season games, practices and preseason games).
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
Exactly
Saturday was his chance to show the team he could be more than a 3rd down back. He did not show that.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
Excellent at what the game plan asked of him. Yes.
I agree, John. I’m bummed too.
What does it say about a team when they have a dedicated short yardage running back? It means they believe in dominating on every 3rd-and-1, 4th-and-1, goal-and-short play by keeping it on the ground and bulling for the first down. That was the Seahawks with Duckett, one of the better short yardage bulls in the game (and a power back with surprising speed to occasionally break through). The offensive linemen will miss him too, since all O linemen take great pride in dominating with their ground game.
Now what do we do on 3rd-and-short? Send Forsett on a jump over the middle? Pass to Carlson or Housh every time? There are no good play calls on 3rd-and-1. There is the ability to blast through the middle of the line and win, and then there is everything else.
The last time I saw Duckett play a reg season game was AZ last December. Six carries, 1 TD, and 3-out-of-4 times he was asked to gain a first with a yard to go, he got the first down. We’ve now lost that. I’ll miss T.J.
Practice Squad
Not for sure, of course. He could go Nick Reed. But I think if Seattle was thinking of signing him to the 53, he would be returning.
yes to your sig question.
the other page disappeared. dwyer, spiller all along. :)
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
What percentage of carries do you think Jones will get?
60/30/10 Jones/Edge/Forsett? Or do you think Jones will be more of a number one? Or Jones and Edge will be like Jones and Morris, one week Jones is the #1, the next Edge is the #1?
This is a terrible move.
Andrew Raycroft for backup? Does not compute.
by Woodinville_12thMan on Aug 24, 2009 9:11 PM PDT reply actions
Duckett has suspect pass pro
He concussed himself vs San Diego while trying to block a LB.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
He also flipped Mike Vrabel on his back like a helpless turtle vs. NE.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 24, 2009 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions
He did the same to the guy he blocked when he concussed himself
There’s more to pass pro than occasional pancake blocks. He’s had flashy plays, but I’m not sure that he could be depended on to help protect Matt.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
I threw something up hastily to keep another post on-topic.
This is a better post.
Odd move
Hopefully we can get that short yardage still. Not real impressed with Edge in recent years, but maybe he can help us. Who knows.
That's what they signed TJ (Houshmandzadeh) for
:P
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
lol
The beginning of the end is when some fool says that losing Duckett “is the beginning of the end” (and actually means it).
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
by ninjasocks on Aug 24, 2009 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
As Justin Forsett's onetime TA at Cal
(and yes, it’s shameless namedropping, but that’s about the only perk associated with teaching social theory at 8 in the morning), I choose to look on the bright side and interpret this as a statement about the team’s satisfaction with Forsett’s production. Maybe he’ll be promoted to the #2 option, with Edgerrin James the #3. I guess there’s an Occam’s razor problem here (why dump Duckett and pick up Edge just to play Forsett more?), but I prefer my delusional scenario to one in which Ruskell is making a huge error.
How is Edgerrin James at pass-blocking?
I don't know about now,
but at Indy I thought he was an elite pass blocker and a sub elite (to a guy like Brian Westbrook, Marshall Faulk, or Reggie Bush) pass catcher.
He's not an elite pass catcher anymore
but if you want receive and redirected behind his blockers, Edge can do that.
I was going to make a similar point, that it's a combination of confidence in Forsett and dissatisfaction with Duckett
Forsett looked great catching screen passes on Saturday. Duckett’s just too one-dimensional. With Jones, Forsett and Edge they can disguise what’s coming, where Duckett telegraphs a short yardage rush.
I like today’s + Edge, – Duckett move. The RB situation needed a shakeup and TJ was the weakest link.
by lemonverbena on Aug 24, 2009 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree with the telegraphing thing
But either my memory is faulty or the fact that defenses could see Duckett coming didn’t matter TOO often.
Glenn Beck likes argument, but has a deap-seated hatred for logic.
Fair point
More that Duckett was too much of a one-trick pony
by lemonverbena on Aug 25, 2009 9:13 AM PDT up reply actions
bleh
I’ve never liked Edge and even more so now that he is on the wrong side of 30. He can pass block still I’m sure but I still don’t like the move. Who would have tought that the team would release Knapp’s boy though.
Horrible Timing
Kind of fucked up to Duckett on the timing, sounds like a good guy and hard worker, but I guess that’s the business side of it.
I'm not so sure
If he’d have performed better in camp he’d still be with the team. If they knew beforehand, Edge has been available since April, why wouldn’t they have picked him up earlier? Unless it’s a personal issue, but I wouldn’t think so since they’ve known him so long.
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 24, 2009 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't know
I mean damn it was Game 2 in the preseason. Let him work out the kinks and rust before reg season. Look at Kerney .
silver lining?
Edge will give us a lot of insight into our biggest division rival’s offensive schemes!
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
Edge cost me a fantasy championship...
in my damn keeper league when we traded for him and he signed with the worst running team in the history of the NFL.
I don’t care if that’s hyperbole, I’m not happy about him cursing my team… so this better god damn well work, or Ruskell will get the Bill Bavasi Seattle General Manager of the Year Award.
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 Aug 24, 2009 9:34 PM PDT reply actions
Why now?
Edge has been available since forever, Duckett has been on the team since forever. Duckett must’ve been really unimpressive during camp to pick James over him. The guy’s 31 and has got 3,000 carries on him. Yeah, that equals experience, but oh well. 1 year 2 mil equals stop gap. Basically they just think he’ll be better then Duckett this year, and they’re probably right.
Duckett looked terrible as a feature back on Saturday
I will say that. But it’s telling all the people who were so familiar with him still thought he was the right guy to be a second string, do-everything back. Edge is much closer to being that guy.
I don't care about a second-string, do everything back.
I want a guy who can get the third and short. Duckett was that guy. Edge is not. I’m sad.
Not very optimistic of our run game
Considering our offensive line and players… I guess we’ll have to pray that Hasselback stays healthy so we can have shotgun with 3 WR set on every other play.
Whiny Bitches
I’m a Seahawks fan and I don’t understand why the fuck you guys are all whining because we lost DUCKETT!!! It’s fuckin Ducket man!!!!! He is awful…..Edge is plenty better. You will see. Fuckin a
I'm more worried about the O-line than Edge
You can’t run if the O-line can’t make holes. Doesn’t matter how good you are really (except for maybe Barry Sanders). And at the moment it looks like our O-line woes are continuing and it might hurt us bad this season again.
You belong on the espn message boards.
Surprised everything wasn’t in ALL-CAPS.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
Yeah, really.
That was pure ESPN message board material.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Aug 25, 2009 2:44 AM PDT up reply actions
...
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
by Misfit74 on Aug 24, 2009 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Apparently from a pro-war counter-protest in the run-up to the latest Persian Gulf excusion
According to this place it happened in St. Louis outside of a Boeing plant.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
Nice. Love the last sign.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
The picture before that is a guy with a swastika prison tatt.
It’s a classy crowd
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
Missed that one. just saw a bird.
But yes, that guy pictured above is really a tool. For real and stuff.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
What has Edge done lately?
What has Edge done the past 3 years so dramatically better than Duckett? Not disagreeing with you that Edge isn’t better but you’re acting like we signed Turner or Gore.
I think he might be responding to the folks claiming that this is the "begininning of the end"
Releasing TJ Duckett is the freaking “beginning of the end”. Neither Edge nor Duckett were going to win rushing titles, but Edge probably offers us a couple of things that Duckett couldn’t.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
Ruskell hasn't been drafting O-linemen
that seem able to do the job. He has a top flight O-line coach, but the talent he’s given him doesn’t seem to be working well together or maybe even capable of doing the job. It’s all on him. He could have just shelled out the bucks for O-line upgrades or focused on it more than he has, but he seems to be of the mind that he can draft O-line guys late or doesn’t need to put big money into the O-line to be effective.
Not sure why he hasn’t made the O-line more of a priority after all this time, but he hasn’t. It’s hurt our team because of it and may cost Ruskell his job this year. But I can’t sympathize for him because he had his chances to solidify this O-line and messed them up in FA or missed in the draft. It’s been haunting him for years.
Obligatory O-line hasn't been the same since Steve Hutchinson comment.
by LantermanC on Aug 24, 2009 9:51 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Loss of Hutch was unfortunate
but it would have been mitigated had we found an adequate replacement in the draft or FA. But none of our draft picks have so far turned out to be outstanding and our FA moves to shore up the O-line have missed.
Ruskell has no contract right now. I think this year he will have to win to get a new contract which I think might be hard to do without a soliid O-line unless this defense turns out to be the real deal.
I’m kind of disappointed too because I’d like to see Ruskell as GM for another 3 years without Holmgren clashing with him. They had very different draft philosophies which probably caused alot of behind the scenes disagreements. But I prefer Ruskell’s draft philosophy and I’d like to see how it works with a defensive coach like Mora and a defensive GM like Ruskell on the same page.
I’ve been listening to Mora lately and he seems to have a good grasp of what a defender can and cannot do. I think if Mora and Ruskell are given time to work together they might create a very good defensive team. But Allan may be replacing Ruskell this year if they fail. It’ll be a real disappointment to me if Allan doesn’t see that he has a possible GM/Coach combination that may very well get him a Super Bowl.
Mora and Ruskell are on the same page in a way that Holmgren and Ruskell never were. I’d like to see the combination work for at least three more years. I think that combination will make good progress with Mora helping to provide vision for the defense and help to find the players he needs to execute what he wants to do. He never had time to do that in Atlanta and in San Francisco that team eas more focused on offense.
by ASeahawkfan on Aug 24, 2009 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Mighty long response for a sarcastic one liner from me.
I’m ok with Ruskell’s drafts. I don’t think they’re much better than Holmgren’s, but that’s because Ruskell has struck out with every one of his 1st round picks thus far. If he’s around next year, he’s got two chances to hit a home run (or strike out), so I’ll be interested to see how it pans out. What has always baffled me though, is that Ruskell seems to ‘play it safe’ in the 1st round, and by doing so, his guys aren’t safe at all. It’s bizarre.
It is very bizzare
Especially considering the home runs he hits in rounds 2-3. It’s almost like we should have Holmgren make the first pick and Ruskell make all the rest.
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 24, 2009 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Holmgren picked Spencer
But 2006 through 2008 are all Ruskell.
Spencer is a classic Holmgren pick: high ceiling potential but low floor.
The other picks are all Ruskell fairly safe picks. Not as high a ceiling for potential but less likely to bust. That’s Ruskell’s MO.
But he hasn’t had a coach with a clear idea of what he wants to do on defense until now. That helps a ton when drafting. That’s why I think it would be a huge mistake for Allan to pull the plug on Ruskell now that he has a coach with a clear vision for the defense.
by ASeahawkfan on Aug 24, 2009 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I figure I'll take some crap here until I'm better known
So I don’t worry about the sarcasm. I see you guys deal with what you view as stupid posts by making fun of the person. I’ve seen it happen more than a few times on here.
I don’t much care when people react that way. I state what I state because I’m right most of the time. So I don’t worry about getting ridiculed by folks that will have to admit that I’m right down the line. I’m a patient person and I don’t mind waiting three years to see if I’m right.
And if I’m proven wrong, I’ll admit it. Don’t have a problem with that at all.
So I’ll make my opinions known when I have one. Since I write novels and stories pursuing my desire to become a writer, I have trouble keeping my posts short on matters that require more explanation.
by ASeahawkfan on Aug 24, 2009 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Ignore the sarcastic joke it wasn't really directed at you. Most of the time when someone says the o-line is a mess.
They instantly point at Hutchinson as there example.
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Aug 24, 2009 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions
What Scruffy said,
it wasn’t pointed at you, just putting it in before anyone else did, not that a frequent FG reader would blame it on the Hutchinson fiasco though.
Calm down.
Seattle is a sarcastic town. Hawks fans are a pessimistic bunch. Nothing personal, all in good nature.
Andrew Raycroft for backup? Does not compute.
by Woodinville_12thMan on Aug 24, 2009 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I know the pain of being a Seattle sports fan
It’s definitely rough. But if we ever do win, it will feel even sweeter for having had to endure so much defeat.
Ruskell is a very tough GM to appraise
It seems every offseason he makes at least one awesome move, but then he makes some really boneheaded decisions at the same time that even the average fan would probably be smart enough to avoid.
Like in 2006, he signed Peterson but failed to franchise Hutch despite the obvious nature of the move. He also made a pretty bad trade for Branch basically to spite Djack.
In 2007, he hit an absolute homerun by signing Kerney and Grant, but also signed Brian Russell and Marcus Pollard. He also traded Djack for a 4th. I know that Djack vanished after that trade, but I doubt he would have had he stayed in Seattle. Good GM’s usually don’t trade their #1 WR for 4th round picks. It sure as hell would have been nice to have Djack last year. Instead, Ruskell held a dick measuring contest and sent Djack on his way.
In retrospect, Ruskell had an abysmal offseason last year in free agency. Only the hardcore homers thought Wahle was a real solution at LG. Ruskell’s 3 biggest signings, Wahle/Jones/Duckett, were all scrap heap signings from teams that no longer wanted them. The best signing by far was Olindo Mare, coming off a career worst season by another team that was eager to part ways. Solari was a good hire, but coaching hires, especially positional coaches, are close to insignificant unless they have talent to work with. Ruskell’s decision to ignore WR depth and rely heavily on young, unproven WR talent proved fatal. His choice to name Holmgren’s successor was another mistake. All in all, 2008 wasn’t just about injuries or aging, but partially because of a pretty terrible offseason (although a decent draft).
This year he made a couple good moves like Housh and attempting to sign Jermaine Phillips, but screwed up by violently overpaying for Cole thus forcing him into role he’s completely unfit for. The JP trade was a mixed bag because it certainly downgrades the team but will save money and gave Seattle some draft day flexibility and a potentially useful DL. Its not a trade I would have made and if up to me, I’d take that trade back (and then not draft Curry), but I wouldn’t call it a bad move, just a preference.
Ruskell has shown an uncommon ability to lure big name free agents to Seattle and that is big. Kerney was being pursued by multiple teams, Denver most notably. Housh was pursued by 3 teams. Grant was the #1 free agent Safety that year according to scout.com. It seems that Ruskell struggles though with the smaller free agent signings- which is weird because its the complete opposite of his draft history- where he always strikes out in round 1 but finds gold in rounds 2-7.
This post is very long, but touching quickly on his drafts- I think he’s an excellent drafter that has gotten unlucky. Spencer was not his pick and Curry is too soon to tell, plus he didn’t have a first in 2007, so we literally have a sample size of just 2 to judge him by, and one of those players has only played 1 season. Jackson will probably bust at this rate, and Jennings has been exposed. That said, Jackson has the tools to be a borderline pro-bowler and Jennings gave us 2 good seasons before 2008. So while its tempting to label Ruskell as a 1st round disaster machine, I’d say its probably 1 or 2 years too early make that judgment.
I'm mixed on Ruskell as well
I see enough promise that I’d like to see wha the does with three years of him and the coach on the same page.
I don’t think the Deion Branch trade was bad. I think it was an unlucky move. D-Jack seemed to be breaking down and had some soso hands that would just as often fail us as give us a win.
Deion Branch had good hands. Seemed to be durable. And was trained under Belichek which showed in that Kansas City game where he stripped the ball. I’m hoping he comes back strong this year like Engram two years after a similar injury. Not sure he will, but I’m hoping.
As far as 2007 goes I don’t think anyone could have forseen the injury decimation at WR. Engram was coming off a career year. Burleson was much improved. And Branch was supposed to be ready fairly early in the season. So I don’t really agree that we looked weak at WR.
I would probably wait to assume Cole wasn’t a good signing until he plays. James Harrison looked like crap for years prior to becoming who he was. We’ll see if Cole can do the job for our defense. He may turn out to be a very solid signing for a very reasonable price. Haynesworh is making twice as much as Cole and I doubt you’re going to find high quality D-linemen for as cheap as Cole from here on out. So I don’t agree we overpaid. Contracts are inflating and we have to pay what the market requires. I thought we paid too much for Leroy Hill and Marcus Trufant given their production levels, but now I look at Suggs contract and Asante Samuel’s and it looks like we paid about the market rate. Like it or not, Cole is actually cheap if he can finish the season and do his job enough to improve our run defense.
Yeah. I agree. Ruskell has done the best job of luring FAs here of any GM I can recall. And I mean FAs that can still produce a high level and are not well on their way out of the league.
I hope Paul Allen gives Ruskell more time. I’d at least like to see how the drafts improve with a defensive coach helping to grade defensive players necessary for his system. Ruskell picked some real gem LBs and a great DT in Cole as well as a very good nickel corner in JW. But I bet Jim Mora will really upgrade our first round defensive picks as he and Bradley will personally be able to target and rate the defensive players to see if they can do what they want them to do. Something I doubt Holmgren participated in.
But I think Ruskell’s job is the on the line if this defense doesn’t show marked improvement regardless of the state of the offense. Not so much in wins and losses, but in all statistical rankings. The excuse of a bad offense can no longer be an excuse for a bad defense.
Thoughts
It would be nice if Ruskell could somehow be demoted to scouting director, because his ability to find undervalued talent on draft day is arguably the best in the NFL. But since that’s not realistic, I’m fine with him staying GM. That said, if he’s fired and replaced by a big name coach or GM, I wouldn’t complain. Overall, I think Ruskell to this point has been about an average to slightly above average GM. I’m not sure if Holmgren held him back, because while there certainly was a disconnect, Holmgren is a future HOF coach with a tremendous eye for talent himself, and the Seahawks best season was a marriage of their talents. I agree that Ruskell and Mora deserve 3 years together to show us what they can do, although considering that the team is in transition and Hasselbeck/Walter Jones are on their last legs, this is not the ideal time to audition in terms of the W/L column.
Cole will get a chance to prove his worth, and to be fair, he’s never played a meaningful game to my knowledge in a 4-3 next to a pro-bowl caliber DT. But contracts are not made on future performance but past performance, and in the past, Cole was a sub-mediocre 3rd string DT on a bad rushing defense, who had 8 starts in 6 seasons, and was cut twice after not being drafted. He was not highly coveted in FA, and his own team had made an offer of 3 years, $9 million, less than half what he signed for here. For Cole to be a good value signing, he will have to play much better than he did in GB. Its too early to judge, but Cole looked invisible in the first two preseason games, and more than the money, I’m upset that he’s cock blocking Red Bryant, who’s probably already better than Cole and who’s potential is vastly higher.
Regarding Branch- he was fairly injury prone even pre-trade. He missed 11 games in NE, and missed 22 starts in 4 years. Even when healthy, Branch is a sub-1000 yard WR that makes a quality #2 but was never worth a 1st round pick or #1 WR money.
Djack dropped passes but if you look at the WR leader board for dropped passes, most of them are pro-bowlers. Djack consistently ranked ahead of Branch in DPAR and DVOA until he was traded away from Seattle (not only because he had more yards, but because he scores a lot more TD’s). And even with his demands for more money, he still would have cost less than Branch. And it wouldn’t have cost us a 1st to keep him. Ironically enough, Djack’s career best season in DPAR was his last season in Seattle (2006).
Even if Branch had stayed completely healthy, he would have needed to increase his production to match Djack, meaning some 1000 yard seasons and years with 8-10 TD’s. I would say the Branch situation is slightly analogous to the Bedard one. We overpaid for a good player, and that sucks, but at the same time we’re still glad we have that player and we wish them the best. It doesn’t mean we wouldn’t go back and undo that trade if we could.
Good post
And basically the way I feel about him. You can look at one string of moves and see a solid strategy, long-range plan that brings in undervalued talent. Then you look at another series of moves, and it’s a bunch of impetuous, knee-jerk transactions that just tread water while spending excess money.
I’m still willing to give him the benefit of the doubt at this point because I think there was a HUGE disconnect between his overall vision (and strengths as a talent evaluator) and the prior coaching staff. It reminded me of when I have to go out and buy my wife clothes or something – I have a vague idea what she likes, but most attempts wind up looking pathetic and desperate …. “You like pulling, man blocking Guards right? Here’s a perfectly good Mike Wahle, on the clearance rack – you had something just like this a few years ago!” … “Look! I got you this Keary Colbert. Whaddya mean you don’t like it? It’s just like all the other WCO receivers you have, even came from the same store. I paid good money for this, I can’t return it!”
So, I do think this will be a very telling season for Ruskell now that he has a coaching staff of his own design, that he is presumably on the same page with.
But yeah – I haven’t figured out if he’s more Bill Bavasi or Jack Zduriencik.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
That last line was well put
Bill Bavasi made some terrible FA signings, but except for Raul (which was a Gillick move supposedly), his worst ones were the smaller signings. Also, Bavasi was absolutely inept with finding players that fit Safeco field, his lineups played poor defense, were extremely right-handed, and were among the worst in the league at drawing walks in a ball park where defense and patient left-handed hitting is at a bigger premium than anywhere else in baseball. Jack Z made such a turnaround mostly by adding average or even below average players to the roster just because they actually fit Safeco.
Ruskell reminds me of Bavasi because some of his signings are stupid the moment the ink dries, and they are usually the smaller FA just like Bavasi. He also reminds me of Bavasi because he continues to find players that don’t fit ZBS or WCO, continuing to jam square blocks into round holes. And on defense, he values effort, leadership, and experience to a fault- kind of like how Bavasi overvalued those same things when he signed Spiezio, Aurilia, Washburn, Silva, etc.
Ruskell is like Jack Z though (when I think of Z’s defining principle, its finding “value” or contribution vs. cost) because he has a good eye for value on draft day, which is why his drafts after the 1st round have been so exceptional. Its not an accident that Ruskell is dynamite in round 2, because thats where elite talent dies off and some of the most undervalued players in the draft are selected.
You can’t build a championship team from 1 or 2 huge free agent signings every year- just look at the Redskins. Instead, you build great teams through finding players whose contribution exceeds their cost, and loading your roster with those players, even if they are just average contributors. Cole aside, Ruskell has done a great job of that and this is why he signs about ~1 big FA a year while managing the cap. So in probably the most important area of evaluating an NFL GM, Ruskell passes with flying colors. It would be nice though if he could shake some of his Bavasi-esque tendencies, because if he did he’d be one of the best GM’s in the NFL.
Paul Allen didn't fire Mike Holmgren when he was losing.
I don’t see any reason that Tim Ruskell won’t get a new contract.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Aug 25, 2009 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions
He fired Holmgren the GM
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
Holmgren was 31-33 in his first 4 Seahawks seasons.
Remember the “fire Holmgren” Commercial on NFL network? lol.
I thought people were crazy for wanting to fire Holmgren but he did get off to a fairly rough start (in the W/L column) and that’s what precipitated the demotion I think.
You must have a really short memory.
They were 7-9 after 2002, and a lot of people wanted Holmgren fired, because they also remembered him going 6-10 in 2000 on top of that ugly ass 1-5 slide to end the ‘99 season after starting 8-2. I know I didn’t want him fired and thought he should get a few more years with the Seahawks.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Aug 25, 2009 8:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Big-time offer to OG from San Diego
(which means Whale’s Vagina, btw)
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
I recall the Dielman deal
Too bad it didn’t work out. Wish he had brought in more than just Dielman. There two or three guys on the market that year that would have helped.
by ASeahawkfan on Aug 24, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Dielman was never going to be a Seahawk anyway
He came up to Seattle merely to drive his value up.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
by Wayward Llama on Aug 25, 2009 8:12 AM PDT up reply actions
I think the same thing with Hutch.
Unless he was franchised, he was never going to stay a Seahawk. He was looking to leave the team. Can’t blame Ruskell for it.
Well
Dielman left almost 10 million dollars on the table when he signed with San Diego. So while its probably partially true that he was trying to drive his value up (that true with ANY FA visit), at the end of the day he took a much smaller contract to stay in San Diego.
The weather those two days was some of the blackest, bleakest weather I have ever seen in my life, and I’ve lived a lot of places, including Europe. Considering that it was probably his first impression of Seattle and like everyone he only knows about the rain and coffee up here, and that he came from “sunny San Diego,” I can definitely see how he would have been scared away from signing here.
In retrospect, the Seahawks dodged a bullet. Dielman has been unspectacular in San Diego since signing that deal and there have been occasional rumors about him being released because of his contract. If he had signed in Seattle, he’d be making 25% more than the San Diego contract, and would most likely be a problem contract by this point.
He believes o-line talent can be developed
he’s also said that he doesn’t like high o-line picks since they tend to not be as flashy and you can’t show the highlights.
But without the offensive line, you won’t have any flashy highlights to show. I wasn’t a fan for it in the last draft, but I really hope either Locklear shows last week was just an anomaly or he steps up and proves he can be a good left tackle in the league.
by Trepidation on Aug 24, 2009 10:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Give Ruskell and Mora three years together
and I think the results will be amazing. I hope Allan sees what he has with a GM and coach on the same page. Mora will help Ruskell with defensive drafting and the defense will improve.
I am actually beginning to believe that Mora may have been put into situations where he didn’t have the greatest chance of success. I’d like to see Mora get his chance with a GM that is on the same page with him because he may well have been screwed in Atlanta because that team was all about Michael Vick.
by ASeahawkfan on Aug 24, 2009 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Resetting the clock on the Ruskell-hater watch
Not a week goes by without someone claiming that Ruskell’s job is in jeopardy — on no evidence beyond their own disagreement with his decisions.
Paul Allen hasn't extended Ruskell's contract
I think that is a fair reason to believe Ruskell may be on the hot seat and performance this year will determine if Paul Allen decides to go in a new direction. As quiet as Paul Allen is as an owner, I have no doubt he keeps up with what is going on with his team or has a key person doing it for him that advises him on what he should do.
I hope Ruskell gets three more years, but he may not. Paul Allen is only so patient. He has given Ruskell five years to get’er done. And this defense seems not much better from the day he arrived and if last year is repeated, it will be much worse.
That’s not hating on Ruskell, that’s just reality.
That still is not evidence.
It doesn’t really mean anything. How many times have contracts ended for employees, only to see a new contract? To look at just the defense today and the day he signed is a narrow-sighted way of looking at it. After 2004, the defense wasn’t all that great. It was much better in 2005. Then in 2007, it was pretty decent, too.
Then you have to look beyond the defensive personnel. He’s done things like getting the VMAC open. There are more, but I have to head off to work.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Aug 25, 2009 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Evidence? As in hard evidence?
Doesn’t mean anything? If Allen had full confidence in Ruskell, I think he would extend him.
When Allen moves to replace someone, you will not see it coming. He’ll do it. You won’t hear public criticism, He won’t scream or discuss anything with the media or anything of that kind. And I think there is ample evidence given how subtlely Paul Allen moves to indicate that Allen might not think his team is in good hands.
Do you think he hasn’t noticed the O-line that went from a top O-line in the league to a bottom O-line in the league? Do you think he hasn’t noticed that his defense is not a solid unit. That it oscillates from good to very bad. I think he probably wants some consistency. He probably has access to information and advisers that keep him more informed of what is going on with his team than any fan could dream of. You think he sits there telling himself it’s all injuries?
I get the feeling he feels this team may be moving in the wrong direction and he may take action. I think another disastrous season may well cause a change at the top. And I think the lack of a contract extension is Allen’s way of saying “Prove my team is in good hands”.
At least that is what I think given Paul Allen’s reclusive nature. He lost confidence in Holmgren as GM four years in and fired Trader Bob Whitsitt after two years. And both of those men did some nice things for Seattle along with the bad. So thinking a GM that doesn’t seem to be handling Allen’s team well is safe is not really paying attention to how quickly and decisively Paul Allen will move if he thinks the team is moving in the wrong direction.
I think this is a “prove it” year for Ruskell and I think he knows it. But as usual, we’ll have to wait and see what happens.
What is your call on it? I’ve stated what I think.
1. No improvement on defense: And the improvement must be substantial as in movement towards the top 10 and improvement in several key categories against solid competition including scoring, turnovers, rush defense, and pass defense.
2. Disaster of a Season: No playoffs and not at least challenging for the playoffs.
Equals Ruskell gone.
If this team goes into rebuild mode, and it will if there is another disastrous season, he may well bring in a GM that he feels will be able to take the high draft picks and build him a better team.
by ASeahawkfan on Aug 25, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm not asking for hard evidence.
It’s only nothing more than an observation. You don’t really have anything to support your basis other than logical reasoning. The fact that you really think it means something only shows that you give meaning to speculation that has none.
You say that if Allen had full confidence in Ruskell, he’d extend him. Fair enough, but by the same token, if Paul Allen wanted to replace Ruskell, don’t you think that he would have done it already? If Allen didn’t have full confidence, much less no confidence in Ruskell then it stands to reason that he has enough confidence to at least let Ruskell see the contract through. Also, just how do we know that they’re not in the process of extending Ruskell?
I’m sure that Ruskell noticed all of the above, but you forget that in his years as ownership, Allen has not acted quickly or rashly based on inconsistencies. See: 1999-2002. The oscillation that you spoke of applies there.
Also, I think it’s a matter of opinion on how well Ruskell’s handled the team. He’s the best GM the Seahawks have ever had. It was also his idea to build the VMAC, which will impact the Seahawks for years to come. I think he’s done more good than he’s done bad. It’s human nature for people to focus and dwell on the negatives that they forget the positives.
No improvement? Again, stating that there is no improvement in the defense from point A to point B with four seasons in between is myopic. You must look at it season by season. One of those seasons included one of the best defensive seasons in franchise history, a fact that he had a hand in. One of those seasons, the team was extremely plagued by injuries, something that’s not in Ruskell’s control. Those are things that you might want to look at when saying that there has been no improvement from today compared to the day that he signed.
I can agree that if there is another disastrous season, that it would at least put Ruskell on the hot seat, if not lead to his termination as GM, but that’s only a contingency, and quite frankly, it’s not the same as saying that Ruskell is on the hot seat based on the fact that his contract hasn’t been extended yet.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Aug 25, 2009 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Of course
I think that might be my first comment on NinersNation if anyone decides to post this there. Heck, it might be fun to write that up as a fanpost at RotB (they don’t get a lot of traffic over there).
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
Sorry, didn't mean to incite any trolling
It’s funny in my head, but I could see how it could be considered trolling (on a sister site).
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
Well, to be honest...
this does bump our Roundtable ranking for RB up to at least an A++++.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
Lock it up. Championship!
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
I still have a feeling they are going to win the Super Bowl
I know it’s unrealistic. But I have a strong feeling they are going to shock the world this year.
I had a feeling they were going to have a horrible season last year even though I picked 10-6 as their record. This year I feel exactly the opposite. My mind is saying 7-9 to 8-8 at best. But my feeling is saying Super Bowl win.
I’ll predict with my mind and then go with my feeling and see who wins. I’ll be pulling for the nebulous feeling all the way. I have no idea how they will pull it off, but this scrappy little team may do something this year.
by ASeahawkfan on Aug 24, 2009 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions
You don't know how many times I've heard this.
by John Morgan on Aug 24, 2009 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions
I know
It’s as common as leaves in the fall.
Only reason I’m really doing it because my feeling was so spot on last year. I don’t normally go on feelings, they rarely are every right. Last year was a first.
But I’m going to try it again. What the hell. I’ve got nothing to lose. If I miss on the pick which is most likely. then I’ll just chalk up 2008 as a strange moment of prescience never to occur again.
by ASeahawkfan on Aug 24, 2009 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions
I thought the 2005 Seahawks would win 7 games.
I think the 2009 Seahawks will win 7 games.
That said, I just don’t see how this years team is capable of winning it all. They are so frighteningly thin in so many areas and are relying way too much on players over 30.
It's pretty simple, really
Simple in theory anyway.
1) Hass and the WR’s stay healthy (With Knapp having an actual QB, he may have his best year yet)
2) The O-Line finally picks up the zone blocking scheme and run game becomes adequate.
3) The new defensive scheme does as it’s been promising to do all off-season and the defense as a whole finally lives up to their potential.
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 24, 2009 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions
you forgot
4) ???
5) Profit!!!!
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
by Nick Andron on Aug 25, 2009 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe his concussion scared the team?
I wasn’t a fan of James with the cards, but meh. Not much I can do about it, he’s on the team.
Can we lay off the overreaction?
I endorsed Seattle signing Duckett and even I don’t understand the panic, delirium or desire to burn Tim Ruskell at the stake. He does this. He did it last year with Forsett. That proved to be a mistake. I think this will too. But we’re talking a hundred rushing plays. Chill.
It's a strange move
But it almost seems like a wash. I don’t see Edge as an improvement over Duckett, but I don’t see the loss of Duckett as a major mistake. Though I may change my mind if we can’t convert short yardage again. Then again if Edge helps keep Matt upright and provides similar production to Duckett, then Ruskell will have done well. Duckett did seem like a liability in pass protection and I’m quite sure Mora and Knapp are most concerned about protecting Hasselbeck knowing he is their best hope of winning.
Heck, I don’t even know if it is official that Duckett is being released. I thought this was only speculation right now.
by ASeahawkfan on Aug 24, 2009 10:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Not "official" yet
but both moves are confirmed by NFL Network. It’s done.
And Sando is all over this, of course.
by lemonverbena on Aug 24, 2009 11:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Funny how this is the thing that gets people questioning Ruskell's job security.
To me this move is starting to look more and more like the right thing to do. If Jones gets injured, I feel a lot more comfortable with James and Forsett splitting carries than I do Duckett and Forsett.
Completely agree
Both in ability to run, but also in pass-pro, screen plays, etc.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
by Nick Andron on Aug 25, 2009 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions
Dammit.
There was a point last season where I thought Duckett should be getting the bulk of the carries. I don’t think Duckett is great or anything, but I don’t see how dropping him for Edge makes us better.
Agreed
To me, this is like swapping out one used garage-sale couch for another one from Goodwill. One may be slightly better than the other in some aspects, but they both have problems. And really, you’re at the point where you should’ve got a brand new one anyways.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
Simple as this
Knapp needs multi-dimensional (complete) backs in at all times. Checkdowns are going to be very important for every play. Edge can do it all. It is the classic “one trick pony” issue, plus James’ instant familiarity with the zone blocking system.
Edge beats Duckett in every area except probably short yardage.
I'd actually say Edge might be a better short yardage back.
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Aug 25, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Just out of curiosity
Did anyone think Duckett was in danger of being cut? This wasn’t even part of John’s speculation in the E. James post earlier today.
Glenn Beck likes argument, but has a deap-seated hatred for logic.
This move is not a commentary on the running game.
But rather a sad commentary on pass protection.
TJ’s pass pro wasn’t bad enough to get him cut, but the O-Line’s was.
Every back in the game will now be a threat for a screen pass. Perhaps the only way to get some push from the O-Line will be to hope they back up themselves.
Question...
For you northwesterners. I am from the northeast but have been a Seahawk fan since year one. My question is why did they let Weaver go? He could block, run, catch. In my opinion he was better than Duckett last year. He could have been the short yardage guy. Just my opinion. I guess it isnt going to matter who they put in the backfield if the o-line does get a lot better it will be Hasselbeck who is doing all the running.
Money
and position. Seattle wanted a more traditional FB, and drafted one. Weaver is more of a 1-back, sorta like Laron McClain (sp?) for the Ravens. Philly is more likely to employ him that way. I loved Weaver, but he’s less of a fit in this offense than Holmgren’s.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
I think he could have been converted
into a RB for short yardage. I mean he is pretty good at making his own holes. Either way I guess it is a moot point now since he is in Philly.
Oh I agree.
When they first signed Duckett I didn’t understand why they just didn’t give those carries to Weaver.
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Aug 25, 2009 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't know if money was the problem
Weaver signed a one year deal for $1.75 million with incentives up to $2.5 million. If money was the problem, why did we just sign Edge for $2 million after giving Duckett a bonus?
Not that we didn't have it...
but Team Ruskell had a value that he thought Weaver (or any FB) should slot at. Weaver was thinking of a different number. (Where have we heard that before?)
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
Weaver is injured.
As much as I love him.. he’s hurt again now anyway.
Listening to Weaver interviews and following the situation
Weaver wanted money like a fulltime RB and wanted a chance to be a fulltime RB because pure FBs are paid grunt wages on a team. Seattle did not want to pay him like a RB or give him the chance to be a fulltime RB,so he opted to go elsewhere to get a chance to prove he can be a starting RB in this league.
I wish him nothing but luck doing so. He is taking a risk that may or may not pay off. But I always applaud people who believe enough in themselves to take a chance. Good luck to him and may he succeed even if it isn’t in Seattle.
Actually, the one thing questionable about Weaver
Was short yardage. Though he never really had anyone to run behind.
Here is the scout.com list of available veteran FA RBs
No real point, other than to say that the list of unsigned RBs was not deep once Ruskell made the decision to dump Duckett. I’m assuming that he was uninterested in any college free agents. There had been talk of Seattle’s interest in Warrick Dunn. I think I can speak for all of us when I say I’m glad that didn’t happen.
When I think about our actual rushing attack, right now I’d be just about ecstatic with league average. I do however, think we’ll catch the ball well out of the backfield and be good in pass pro—eventually.
Consider also the emergence of Carlson and Housh in the short passing game, and I think we will be okay as long as we can count on the O-line/RBs to convert in short yardage. Obviously Duckett was great at that. With Edge though, we probably get a net overall boost given what he brings in pass pro and as an outlet receiver.
Pos
Rank Name Type 2008 Team
RB 6 Edgerrin James UFA 10 Arizona
RB 7 Warrick Dunn UFA 12 Tampa Bay
RB 8 Deuce McAllister UFA 8 New Orleans
RB 9 Kenny Watson UFA 7 Cincinnati
RB 11 Ahman Green UFA 11 Houston
RB 13 Selvin Young UFA 2 Denver
RB 14 Chris Perry UFA 5 Cincinnati
RB 15 Deshaun Foster UFA 4 San Francisco
RB 17 Najeh Davenport UFA 7 Indianapolis
RB 19 Rudi Johnson UFA 8 Detroit
RB 20 Michael Pittman UFA 11 Denver
RB 22 Tatum Bell UFA 5 Detroit
RB 24 J.J. Arrington UFA 4 Denver
RB 25 Nick Goings UFA 8 Carolina
RB 26 Reuben Droughns UFA 9 NY Giants
RB 27 Aaron Stecker UFA 9 New Orleans
RB 28 Brian Calhoun UFA 2 Detroit
RB NR Jesse Chatman UFA 7 NY Jets
RB NR Travis Minor UFA 8 St. Louis
RB NR Maurice Hicks UFA 5 Minnesota
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
Ha! We sign Shaun next week.
Maybe we’ll cut all these ‘one trick ponies’ like Duckett and Forsett and sign more aging multi-dimensional backs!
Edgerrin James – Shaun Alexander: The All-Has-been-Backfield!
:(
To me this seems to be a shift in offensive personality more than a talent one.
It seemed like they had big plans for Owen Schmitt and a power rushing offense. For whatever reason, losing an LT and a C, Owen not looking polished, as John said the OL not adjusting to the ZBS very well and losing blocks, the run game does not look like what they want it too. However, the pass catching TE, four WRs that play with the 1st team, and Forsett/Jones having good hands, along with a vet QB points to the strength of the offense still being the passing attack.
I still don’t like the move, but if it means we are going to spread the field and poke holes in team’s nickle and dime defenders I can see the logic clearly. JJ and Edge at least theoretically represent good to outstanding pass blocking, and all three of the backs that figure to play a lot in a single-back set can catch the ball.
on 3rd-and-1, you don't "poke holes in team's nickel and dime defenders"
you blast through the middle with a guy like Duckett and get a first down, or you call something else and pray.
because on 3rd-and-1 the defense would not be in a dime.
To the larger point: Keeping the ball on the ground to convert short yardage is how great football teams sustain drives and win games. This is the high percentage play, which is to say that teams who reliably convert 3rd-and-1 on the ground with a power RB like TJ Duckett tend to sustain a higher percentage of drives and win a higher percentage of games.
If I really believed that Edge at 31 could be as reliable in converting 3rd downs when called on, then I would have not problem with losing Duckett in favor of Edge. But in this case we lost something that was unique on our team in exchange for an aging backup to what we already have.
For all of Duckett's hard fighting for those first downs last year
We still went 4-12
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 25, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Many reasons we went 4-12. Duckett was not one.
just check his game stats on how many 3rd downs he converted. He was not the problem.
Didn't say he was the problem
I think he did very well. I’m just questioning exactly how much that “win a higher percentage of games” percentage is? If he weren’t on the team, would we have gone 3-13? 2-14? I’m not so sure, and more importantly, is it worth spending 4.5 million on that percentage? And how much over average was he? It’s not like if someone else was doing it, we all the sudden convert none of them.
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 25, 2009 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
That is terrible logic
He converted the 3rd downs and got us 6 touchdowns.
I would say piss-poor QB play, a string of backups for offensive linemen, a coach making bad playcalls, a safety who is the new Ibanez in the GIF world, and many other things attributed to us going 4-12.
Beverly Hills 90210.......Denver Broncos 7.
by SSreporters on Aug 25, 2009 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Hm
I don’t really see how this helps you guys. What skills does Edge bring to the table that Jones doesn’t? And to lose a great short yardage back and $2 million seems like a net loss to me…
On a side note, if Duckett really is a Brandon Jacobs clone as was implied in my thread of doom, that man needs to start suing people now because he has been screwed out of too many jobs by garbage backs.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 25, 2009 8:32 AM PDT reply actions
So much for drafting Duckett over Branch.
NEEDS MORE FREEDOM!
by Scruffy Lefty on Aug 25, 2009 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah
Fortunately, I didn’t do the trade. Not that I’m that high on Branch, but at least he still has a job. Mike Walker is still available though, i kind of like him. It’s weird because my league is so deep, guys like Matt Leinart (seriously), Jabar Gaffney, and Kevin Jones had been drafted but neither Duckett nor Walker has been.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 25, 2009 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions
meh
Shaun Alexander was a great short yardage back in 2005. In 06-07 he was still here, yet we weren’t so great at short yardage, went 19-13. In 08 Duckett was great at short yardage, went 4-12. I’m not overly concerned. 9 out of 10 I’d bet it’s more play call and blocking then who carries the rock.
by B.B.Finnegan on Aug 25, 2009 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions
I agree this is a Ruskell failure
I understand that cutting Duckett makes sense if you think it is the right move given that the bonus is already paid. However, it is appropriate to criticize the FO for failing to make the move earlier and avoiding the salary. It is not like there was no opportunity to deal with this earlier…
Anyone remember Leonard Weaver!!!! No one would have been upset if we had cut Duckett and retained Weaver because we all knew we had too many big bodies in the backfield at the time (with Schmitt also). Now what do we have?
We specifically chose to hang onto Duckett instead of Weaver. Weaver is a better pass catcher and pass blocker. We should have used Weaver as a halfback along with Jones and Forsett and Schmitt as a FB. We would then also have Weaver as FB depth.
As for Edge. I think comparisons to Shaun Alexander are unwarranted. He is still a league average back and he was tearing it up in the playoffs last year. I remember specifically in the ATL wild card game last year that he looked pretty spiffy. I think you hope for a 2007 Fred Taylor type of late career renaissance.
I definitely feel like we still need a lot better back than we have. I know that we like to de-emphasize the HB position over here and focus on OL play… but theres no denying the contributions of a monster back.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFbcSM6XHec
You are gonna be hearing a lot about this guy when ball season gets going. I think its time we start the campaign for Seahawks 2010 first round pick. This guy is thunder and lightning. Watch the video, look for the 235 pound back running away from DB’s.
Some valid points about Weaver, yes.
But if ‘tearing it up in the playoffs’ means 3.9ypc or so, we have different ideas about what a good running game means. Edge’s playoff running is tearing it up when compared to Hightower’s 2x yards per, but still sub-par.
I’ll check the link….looks fun. I have a few guys I’m quite interested in, too. Drafting a back is something I’ve lobbied for at least two straight years. Think of how even a 6th or 7th round back from this year’s draft would look on the roster right now? James Davis? (Rashad Jennings, of course).
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
Ahh yes. I know of whom you speak.
Surely we draft our next workhorse, superstar back next year.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer
I think Berry or Mays would be a great fit personally
To replace Russell. That’s assuming Denver tanks and you guys get a really high pick though, because I think both will most likely go in the top 10.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 25, 2009 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions
How about a different look at that monster hit he laid on the Cane...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyLIiq1CmMQ&feature=related
I’m on the bandwagon.
by trippsixxes on Aug 25, 2009 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
There should be a fanpost all season long
for people to officially jump on the Dwyer bandwagon. The guy is bannanas. We can drown out all the Taylor Mays cries.
by michaelfox99 on Aug 25, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Shocker.
This, is about as shocking as the sky being blue. The second James was brought in you could see the writing on the wall.
The one thing I would have liked to see is over the next two preseason games, would have been letting TJ and James fight it out for the backup job. It was never going to happen, but since TJ was paid already it would have been nice. Oh, well, good luck TJ, I liked what you could do around the goal line and in short yardage plays, I’m sure another team will snap you up quick.
Writing was on the wall?
When the rumors of James started pouring in it seemed more likely that it was a depth move, not an imminent TJ Duckett is doomed move.
Sando read the writing on the wall
The bigger personnel question, in my view, might concern what happens to veteran backup T.J. Duckett. Justin Forsett has seemingly done enough to stick around, particularly given his relatively low price tag. But the Seahawks presumably would not keep four halfbacks on their initial 53-man roster.
by lemonverbena on Aug 25, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions
Two things BrianL,
When I said “writing on the wall” did I say TJ or Julius or Justin, no. Here we go with people reading into something that is not there. There is no way the team keeps four running backs when three of the four don’t really play special teams (Jones, James and TJ (to a lesser degree). The team has two FB’s, and three RB’S, with that said Forsett stays (beacuse of his time returning punts, and being a cap-friendly 3rd and long RB). Jones is being given the reigns as the starter, so he is not going. That leaves TJ and James, and why in the world would you sign James to a contract and cut him a day, week or month later. SO TJ was the odd man out, but any of the other two “could” have been cut, but simple math says it had to be TJ. Also Lemonverbena showed the Sando blog report (above) , and he thought the same as well. So where was I overstating something, SOMEONE HAD TO BE CUT.
ok.
If you think I’m “fly(ing) of the handle”, then I’m sorry, but your wrong. When someone puts words in my mouth (as facts) that I didn’t say, then I will make sure the second time they get what I mean straight. I’m not a fan of writing something and then having it taken out of context.
You said I said something I didn’t, and I wanted to make sure the second time I got my point across. I’m sorry if you think that is flying off the handle, but it is not, I never got angry, just wanted to make sure I was clear the second time.
This post is titled "Seahawks Release T.J. Duckett"
You said that the writing is on the wall. It’s not hard to assume that you meant “The writing was on the wall that TJ Duckett would be released.”
If you felt I put words in your mouth, I’m sorry, but what I wrote was not critical of you and didn’t warrant the reaction you gave it.
Next up, Jamaal Charles and Kansas City
Heading into the 2008 NFL draft John posted a write up about Jamaal Charles.
Charles was drafted in the third round by Kansas City and since then has been buried on the Chiefs depth chart and has had limited playing time this preseason (6 carries for 10 yards, 1 reception for 20 yards). He is presumably losing some value as the Chiefs add more running backs and attenuate his opportunities. Charles is an excellent receiver out of the backfield, which seems to be one of the key factors in the pursuit of Edgerrin James.
I know it takes two to tango and neither the Hawks nor the Chiefs may want to dance with each other, but based on John’s analysis it would seem like going after Charles would make more sense than paying a lot of money for James. Wishing for trades is like wishing for my dog to poop gold bullion – neither is going to happen, but I guess it’s my way of coping when my Pursuit of Happyness is derailed by the Seahawks pursuit of, well… I hope Edgerrin James works out but when I wake up with cold sweats in the middle of the night this is the only picture that I see…
by scratchandsniff on Aug 25, 2009 10:24 AM PDT reply actions
Charles would have been nice
And if wishes were ponies, we’d have a stable of Tiffany Lombardi-trophy nags by now.
Schefter on ESPN brought up Franco Harris too. It’s a lazy comparison. Franco was 34, like Warrick Dunn is now. Franco was a panic signing when Curt Warner ripped up his knew in Week 1. Edgerrin James for TJ Duckett is a carefully considered move. Edge just turned 31, with light wear-and-tear from last season and coming off a strong showing in the playoffs. Edge is good in pass pro and can catch the ball, unlike Franco, whose primary focus in Seattle was running out of bounds.
by lemonverbena on Aug 25, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I agree to an extent
But the issue for me is not about run emphasis vs. receiving skills or relative age comparisons. The issue for me is that the Seahawk’s running back situation was league average at best going into training camp, with serious offensive line concerns on top of that. Since the beginning of camp the offensive line situation has deteriorated and is possibly a liability now with Jones out, Locklear struggling to get up to speed on the left side and now Spencer out. Maybe, maybe the running game got a slight improvement with the signing of James and the release of Duckett, although if it’s an improvement then it’s a very modest improvement when taken in context of the bigger picture of the entire offense. If the Seahawks are serious about contending this year then they will need more than a “tweek” of the running back situation to get the ground game rolling. Maybe bringing in an aging veteran running back (and that’s the comparison) was the only available option, and maybe it will improve things slightly (and I’m always hopeful albeit skeptical), but when I think about the running situation going into this year I just take a deep breath, sigh and say to myself we’ll see – I hope they make it work and it’s not deja-vu.
by scratchandsniff on Aug 25, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Good points.
Our o-line was already a point of concern. Now it might be our biggest concern. Perhaps we felt that passing the ball will now be emphasized more and so we wanted RBs who could pass block and catch.
I like Duckett
but this kind of feels like the Sweeney vs. Shelton thing during Spring Training this year. Yeah, I prefer one over the other but the difference isn’t great enough to foam at the mouth over.
Late to this stage of the party
so dunno who’s gonna read or respond, but I’m surprised at the overwhelming negative reaction.
Ultimately I think this is a modest net upgrade. I’m going to miss TJ Duckett, I really liked him. Duckett’s been working so hard at being a better blocker. It showed. But ultimately James is better in all facets. The news is making a far bigger splash than the impact on the field will be. It alleviates very little in the running game, but it moderately mitigates the dimensional requirements (whether those are actual deficiencies or not) brought on with any need to rely on Duckett to any substantive extent.
What about Owen Schmitt?
He’s a monster of a guy isn’t he? I mean he could potentially barrel it through better than James on 4th and atoms right?
Glenn Beck likes argument, but has a deap-seated hatred for logic.
He was great in college
Hopefully he can do it in the NFL.
Brett Favre is the Kenny Powers of football.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
Related FanShots on Field Gulls
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- NFL to mandate knee and thigh pads for players
- Sadly, the Pro Bowl may continue to exist and be held in New Orleans
- Giants’ Coughlin nowhere near retirement at age 65
- Seahawks trade for Kellen Winslow; hope to make 2-TE sets more productive
- All reports positive after Peyton Manning’s first organized team activity in Denver
