Golden Tate and the Seahawks' Offense, Part I
There has been lot of talk about Golden Tate in the last few weeks and months so I wanted to post a piece I wrote about Tate a little while back that took a look at some game tape and broke down some of his strengths and weaknesses. Danny O'Neil did a two part series about Tate's numbers awhile back too that you should definitely check out first if you haven't seen them yet.
O'Neil's first piece took a look at Tate's stats and compare them to other notable 2nd round wide receivers in recent years - and basically points out that Tate is not that far behind what could be 'expected' of a player chosen in the 2nd round. Now, just because he's on pace, so to speak, doesn't mean he still won't ultimately fail. Danny's second piece looks at what we may 'expect' from Tate in year two. The good news is that often wide receivers (for example, high end players like Steve Smith and Chad Ochocinco), see a big jump from their first year to their second in production, something that I know we all hope happens with Tate.
Golden Tate had a very hit and miss rookie season. He ended up catching 21 passes for 221 yards - which is not especially impressive at first glace (though respectable for a rookie wide receiver). He did, however, have some very impressive catches so you hope he's poised to make a big contribution going forward. Simply put, the Hawks need him to.
First off, why did he struggle in his first year? He has the tools - he's got great hands, can break tackles, and is an exciting runner after the catch. He was the toast of training camp and preseason - wowing all the reporters at camp with his incredible acrobatic plays we'd hear about daily. He made some amazing catches in his few game opportunities but those opportunities were scarce because of his issues running routes and making mistakes.
Pete Carroll said early on in the year:
A couple weeks ago he played 20 plays or something and he had four or five mistakes out of those 20 plays so that's more than we want. They're little things, but they're important... It's just holding him back a little bit.
But added:
He's close. He's really close and it's just a matter of time.
Tate appeared to do much better in his next outing, hauling in a number of very impressive catches against Oakland, but severely hurt his ankle in that game and was forced to miss the next three weeks. By that time, Brandon Stokley was firmly entrenched at the slot and Tate's playing time dissipated the rest of the year, and he become almost an afterthought in the receiving corps - getting thrown in for the occasional low-percentage fade route, and many people began questioning whether he was a bust already.
Now, I'm inclined to believe Pete when he said that Tate is close. I went back and re-watched the first part of the season where Tate got a lot of time and you can see the potential is there - he makes some impressive catches and his run-after-the-catch ability is incredible. He's very hard to bring down and his balance is amazing. But those mistakes certainly dogged him.
Does he have the ability to eliminate those mistakes? Who knows - but what I do know is that he's a very versatile and dangerous player that the Hawks need to incorporate more into their offense. When they drafted him, it was reported that he was told to be ready for anything - including wildcatting. I don't know if the Hawks will try the wildcat much and I don't necessarily think that they should. What I do think they need to do is work him into the offense creatively without having him rely solely on excellent route running.
As Rob Staton over at Seahawks Draft Blog aptly put it (should be noted that Rob hasn't been super high on the Tate pick in the past, from what I can remember):
I was surprised the Seahawks didn't try to be more creative with Tate. I've always felt that his value comes when the ball is in his hands, so get him running some bubble screens, WR screens, HB screens if needs be - let him play in the slot and get him in space. End arounds. He's not got the size and power to play running back, but you need to be creative with him. If we're expecting that one day he'll be this really crisp productive route runner, then it's a wasted pick. We needed to treat Tate like KC treated McCluster.
McCluster is a very interesting comparison and a very dynamic player. I personally love the idea so I went back and watched a few KC games to see again how he's used in their offense. As a little sidenote, it's also an interesting comparison because I have been thinking more and more that the Hawks' offensive philosophy that is developing looks a little bit like the Chiefs' system. Build around the run - the Chiefs led the NFL in rushing in 2010; mix in a big bodied receiver in Dwayne Bowe. Pick up another big, fast vertical threat in Jon Baldwin. Mix in a speedy, shifty running back/wide receiver hybrid to make plays underneath and from the backfield. Have a mixture of east-west speed running backs and north-south bruisers in Jamaal Charles and Thomas Jones. Use your quarterback as a point guard of the system and distribute the ball to your playmakers - ie the most boring Pro-Bowl QB ever in Matt Cassell.
Similarly the Hawks are attempting to focus their offense more on running to set the tone. They have a big bodied receiver to throw to in Mike Williams and just drafted a tall speedster to pair opposite him in Kris Durham. They've got the beauty and the beast running back combo or Forsett/Washington and Lynch. Mix in Golden Tate to run around in the slot or out of the backfield. They have, or are looking for a QB that will point guard their offense. Though I'd say KC is a bit ahead in their plan (maybe a lot ahead), I see a lot of parallel stategery going on here.
Anyway, back to Dexter McCluster: Kansas City used him in a variety of fashions and he was very effective in almost all of them. They used him as a running back in certain sets (keep in mind this is a team with Jamaal Charles and Thomas Jones to run with as well), they used him on screen and bubble passes, he'd motion in from the wing to the backfield and run the ball. He'd motion from the backfield to the wing and run routes. Basically they got creative with him because he's dangerous with the ball in his hands - and I agree with Rob when he says that's how the Hawks need to approach the Golden Tate situation. I like the McCluster comparison a lot - but it might be even more relevant to compare Tate to Percy Harvin. Harvin did a lot of the things that McCluster did in 2010, but he did it with the Seahawks' current offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell designing and calling plays. If you go back and look at some gametape of Harvin (which I of course did), you can't help but get excited about the prospect of Tate taking that role.
One game in particular was very interesting: the week 7 game where the Vikings traveled to Green Bay to play the Packers. They did a lot with Harvin of what I just described with McCluster - motioning him from the wing into the backfield to run the ball - bubble screens, end arounds, fades, post routes - basically just straight up giving him the rock because he makes things happen. He scored a 17 yard rushing TD on a run up the gut after motioning in from the wing; he scored a TD that was later reversed to out of bounds at the 1 on a short swing/screen pass; he scored another TD on a deep post route at the back of the endzone that was later reversed because he was just out of bounds; all these things just scream Golden Tate to me.
If Tate doesn't refine his route-running skills and the Hawks refuse to use him otherwise then Staton is right - it's a wasted pick. But it would behoove the Hawks to get the ball in his hands because there's no denying that Tate is a talented player. Whether or not he puts it together this offseason, eliminates some of those mistakes and is put in a situation to showcase those talents remains to be seen.
In part two I will break down some of Golden Tate's early successes and failures so stay tuned for that...
39 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Can't help but wonder
with the offseason the way it is, is Golden being held back in which case should we expect to see what he can be in year 3? HA, that rhymed.
Watching the Seahawks is like peeing on yourself, everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling it brings
I remember JM hitting the "screen pass" thing as well.
The problem with doing that was that Matt Hasselbeck, among other things, just isn’t all that good at throwing screen passes. For whatever reason he never really has been that good at them. Maybe if Whitehurst had taken over earlier in the season and for more games they could have started to work him in, but as long as Hasselbeck was the starting QB – and this is not in and of itself an indictment of that strategy, just a side effect of the decision that was made – Tate was a guy whose strengths would be largely unused and whose weaknesses were exaggerated (particularly his inability at this point to stay locked in on every single play, which is kind of something you need when playing with a QB who could potentially throw you the ball at any time).
It also bears pointing out that Tate was drafted after his junior year so in a sense I think it’s helpful to treat this season, not last, as his rookie year. Even if the lockout doesn’t affect training camp at all, it would not be out of the ordinary to see that Steve Smith type getting it together in his 3rd actual year in the pros. In short: WAY too early to give up on him.
I don't know about Matt having problems with screens, but our inability to stretch the field doesn't help.
All opposing teams need to do is jam the shit out of the WR’s, knowing full well Matt can’t throw deep well. That makes it very, very hard to run screens to them.
Even when the team had Shaun Alexander and Hass still had enough of an arm to get it downfield, he didn't throw screens well.
Again, I think it’s more of a little quirky thing than a deal-breaking issue with Hasselbeck; it was just especially frustrating last season, I think, because he wasn’t able to do much of anything else either.
by Johnny Slick on May 20, 2011 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Shaun got a ton of receptions the first couple of years.
I assume quite a few of those were screens, because I can’t see him running any other patterns well.
I think
after his 3 decent years receiving (2001-2003) teams figured out he could not block a lick and took advantage of that. In addition I remember him dropping a lot of easy balls just like D-Jack. That is the one thing I never figured out why we were always at the top of the NFL in dropped passes when Matt throws such a catchable ball. Could you imagine in our best years how Matt’s stats would have looked if we did not lead the NFL in dropped balls?
Respect goes a long way....
Hass was very good at screens with a perfect touch
Not sure where you got that. For some reason Holmgren stopped using screens probably cuz Alexander was a terrible receiver out of the backfield.
Respect goes a long way....
also don't understand where this comes from
the year before last it seemed like the screen to forsett was about the only way we could gain any yards at all. There’s a reason we didn’t screen to a Mac Strong/Shaun Alexander backfield.
by dingoeatbaby on May 20, 2011 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah I always found our inability to run screens really frustrating.
Especially when other teams run them so well on us.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
Screen passes require a lot of coordination from your OL or else your QB gets squished like a bug
We used 10 different OL combinations last year (and I’m not sure if any were used in training camp), so I think continuity on the OL may have been a problem.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on May 20, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions
That said, we've had problems running screen passes for years and years
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on May 20, 2011 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions
ISTR them having issues with the screen even when we had the Tobeck-Hutch-Jones line.
Granted, they also had that one game vs the Vikings where the screen just totally nuked them. Blame the lack of screeny goodness on Alexander if you will, but there’s a point where you can only go back to the single common denominator during this time.
Anyway, I’m not sure what to pin it on but it did seem like it was Hasselbeck’s issue more than anyone else’s. Why, I am not sure. Maybe it was that defenses were so used to seeing him read the entire field that on a play where he really was keyed into one guy from the start, they could get in there. I also don’t think Hasselbeck was ever a world-beater in terms of touch – I mean, I don’t think he’s terrible in that department but his thing has always been about seeing when a guy is about to get open and throwing it into space just in time rather than throwing the ball just right. I do remember his receivers having the dropsies a LOT early in his career, which was always weird for a guy who didn’t gun the ball that hard.
My point here is not to bag on Hasselbeck, just want to make that clear. Different QBs are good at different things – it would be no fun to scout guys if every QB was good or bad at everything to the same degree, after all. But screen passes do seem to be one thing that Carroll was particularly eager to introduce to the Rams game once Hasselbeck was declared out, for instance, and that was not because they were necessarily trying to make the playbook more conservative – if anything, a screen can be a dangerous play, albeit one with a nice payoff if the defense overcommits on a blitz.
by Johnny Slick on May 20, 2011 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Oklahoma runs ridiculous amounts of screens and they have a lot of success with it.
I know that’s at the college level, but schematically or philosophically speaking, it’s sort of an extension of your run game and we all know Pete wants to run the ball.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
What is harder to catch?
A hard hit grounder that you react to instinctively, or a slow roller that gives you time to think about making the play (or I hope I do not screw this up).
Matt throws a slow ball that the receivers have to wait for. In that time they are thinking is the ball going to get there first or am I going to get hit as it gets to me. Makes for a lot of short arming catches or looking for the hit instead of the ball.
I'd love to see Tater used like that
I’d also love to see our LG block like “he who shall not be named”.
If they're gonna compare him with anyone...
He reminds me a lot of Cuba Gooding Jr’s character on Jerry Maguire.
"There's a lot that people don't know. Like our names." - Matt Hasselbeck
by HowieC on May 20, 2011 2:11 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
We need an "ambassador of quawn"
Two-thirds of the earth is covered by water. The other third is covered by Earl Thomas.
Knapp used the screen very well
I always wondered why Holmgren stopped using the screen much. When the OL has problems like when Big Walt was out it blew my mind we did not do that to slow down the pass rush. Forsett is and was a perfect back for it as he can even block but Alexander is another story…..
Respect goes a long way....
Pete mentioned in the pre-draft press conference that he wanted to get Tate more involved last year
and that he might “press” the issue this season. Hopefully, Bevell’s experience working with Harvin will help us get better production out of the guy.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on May 20, 2011 2:13 PM PDT reply actions
I think Bates tried to use him like Eddie Royal last year
This year, I think he’s going to be used more like Percy Harvin.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on May 20, 2011 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Disclaimer:
This comment isn’t based on any evidence whatsoever.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on May 20, 2011 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Cable needs to be able to work on his O-line .
I’m really liking the move to young players all across the field but the growing pains will be there.
Tate=Reggie
I can see Pete working him into the offense in the “Reggie Bush” role that he had at SC.
Good writeup, Danny, thanks
Man the media really do rev up the pressure on young players. Since when is a WR supposed to succeed within his first two years? Wasn’t it always a rule that they usually don’t get it until year three
Yeah I have to remind myself that from time to time
People will probably jump all over Durham if he doesn’t do anything this year too. Overall though I have high hopes for Tate. Overall he hasn’t really been given the opportunity to sink or swim yet.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
I remember when a lot of people were excited about the great crop of young WRs we had going into 2008
How the problem was that there was too much talent to fit on the active roster.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on May 20, 2011 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions
So could we not compare Tate to Leon Washington.
Seems they have about the same skill set. Great at screens and open field running. They can both be used in the slot, RB or as a wide out.
I honestly think that Tate and his lack of use is one of the reasons that Bates is no longer with us
PC wants to use him and Washington as a focal point of the offense and Bates either couldn’t figure it out or didn’t agree. Bevell has done well using this type of player. I am excited about it.
Very good point.
I can see Golden sort of in a Percy Harvin type role.
by Magnificentbutcher on May 22, 2011 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions

by 

































