With Kelly Herndon getting the axe, it seems appropriate to debut the long lost season review for Kelly Jennings. So powered by elementary geometry and the wonder that is Microsoft's paint program, onward:

Seahawks' fans, gird thy loins and keep your kvetching to a minimum, Kelly Jennings is going to get beat deep this year, more than once. As a second year corner trusted to start, that might be a tautologous statement, but Jennings is especially susceptible to the deep pass. Not because he's slow, Jennings, like Josh Wilson, has rare speed for a corner. Not because his overall awareness is weak, or that he takes plays off or that he'll be facing an unprecedented quality of opponent (well, no more than any inexperienced NFL player). In true Tim Ruskell fashion, Jennings is a heady player, a hard worker and comes from a major program, Miami. Jennings will be beat deep because it happened in college, again and again. Be it his stiff hips, his inability to leave a proper cushion in deep zone or his poor awareness when the ball is in the air, for all Jennings' speed, he has yet to be strong in deep coverage. With Deon Grant in the fold, that might be alright, though.

Ideally, a team wants elite, rounded player's without weakness, at every position, but that's never going to happen. Instead, a team must construct a good formula. A set of player's with complimentary abilities. Denver imported Dre' Bly to pair with Champ Bailey this offseason in the hopes of attaining more cover sacks from a front seven that lacks pass rush. The idea, a pair of elite corners will keep the receivers covered and the quarterback clutching and double clutching until the pocket eventually collapses. That's a way of managing one weakness with an attainable strength. Seattle, on the other hand, has only one true cover corner--and Marcus Trufant has yet to truly validate that label. John Marshall has instead constructed a potentially elite pass rush and a set of DBs and LBs who can play strong zone coverage and be opportunistic when the QB is pressured.

This formula is precisely why Seattle let a talented young safety, Ken Hamlin, go and (over)paid for Grant. Hamlin liked to play close to the line and had decent range on short to intermediate routes. He did not, however, excel in deep coverage. He bit hard on play-action, took bad angles deep and simply doesn't have the speed to track down a wide receiver in pursuit. I doubt Grant is much faster than Hamlin, but he excels at keeping the play ahead of him, therefore, when a receiver comes streaking into his deep shell, Grant is able to get a body on him when Hamlin can't. Using vectors, this little diagram might clear up what I mean:

For simplicity's sake, we'll say everyone is running 10 YPS in this diagram. When we pick up the action, Holt has run 20 yards down the field on a simple streak pattern. Hamlin is essentially parallel to Holt but ten yards to left; he starts closer than Grant, but because Hamlin trails Holt, Holt will be running away from Hamlin for the length of his pursuit. In football jargon, that means Hamlin is beat. Grant is ten yards to the left and ten yards up the field from Holt, where Holt wishes to be, and therefore Holt is actually running towards Grant. Now let's jump one second forward in time:

The result is that while Hamlin starts closer to Holt, after 1 second Hamlin is roughly 4 yards behind Holt and destined to never catch the speedy receiver. We know that because in this example Hamlin and Holt make a 45-45-90 right triangle with Hamlin's angle of pursuit equaling the hypotenuse. Meanwhile, Grant has intercepted him precisely, with both players reaching the same spot thirty yards down the field at exactly the same time. Football routes are never this simple or orderly, but the geometry holds true: A defender in zone coverage must stay ahead of a receiver with similar or better speed if they have any hope of intercepting them.

The reason for that digression brings us back to constructing a winning formula. Jennings is weak against deep passes and will let receivers get behind him, but very strong against short and intermediate routes where his excellent speed, agility and coverage skills keep him on his opponents' hip. Grant plays very deep and won't contribute a great deal against short or intermediate passes, but excels at picking up his man after he's passed the cornerback. Between the two, Seattle should have excellent short and deep coverage on the right side. That formula, unfortunately, leaves them a man down on the left. Trufant must be able to man his side competently, essentially on an island. Not every play, but for many plays and for crucial plays. The more Grant must help Trufant against the deep pass, the more often Jennings will be exposed. So, remember, as the bile is tickling you tonsils after a receiver streaks past Jennings for a score, that burn is on the whole secondary.

D.J. Hackett has quickly become the worst kept secret in Seattle football. After an impressive second season where he led all receivers in DPAR with <50 receptions, he exploded onto the scene in 2006 with the second best DVOA in football, behind only Devery Henderson and his absolutely absurd 23.3 yards per reception. Despite being targeted only 67 times, Hackett still cracked the top 15 in DPAR. Ahead of big names such as Javon Walker, Joe Horn, Anquan Boldin, Andre Johnson and Hines Ward.  The one question remaining for Hackett is, now a starter, expected to see 100+ passes, how good can he be?

If Hackett faltered this season, he wouldn't be the first player in the history of DPAR to look untouchable playing out of the slot, but a shell of himself once he was thrust into starting duty. Jeremy McDaniel's 2000 season has an eerie resemblance to Hackett's 2006:

McDaniel (2000): 43 REC 697 YDS 16.2 YPC 2 TD 62.3 CTCH% 24.2 DPAR 45.8 DVOA

Hackett (2006): 45 REC 610 YDS 13.6 YPC 4 TD 67 CTCH% 22.0 DPAR 35.7 DVOA

McDaniel battled through ankle injuries in 2001 and now plays in the Arena Football League. Here's a couple more examples to scare the bejeebus out of you:

Joey Porter (2002): 51 REC 688 YDS 13.5 YPC 9 TD 73 CTCH% 29.6 DPAR 47.1 DVOA

Troy Walters (2003): 36 REC 456 YDS 12.7 YPC 3 TD 69 CTCH% 19.0 DPAR 56.5 DVOA

Porter is still a good receiver, but Oakland is an offensive graveyard and Porter's been at loggerheads with the ownership for quite some time. Walters was at the other end of Peyton Manning, a player making a case for best quarterback in football history. He also was deep into his career and a borderline athlete.

Hackett has had zero personality concerns over his professional and collegiate career. When his program went under at California State University-Northridge he simply transfered to Colorado and not only didn't miss a beat but took his play to another level. Hackett also didn't receive any gifts from Matt Hasselbeck or Seneca Wallace. Both were below average quarterbacks in 2006. Finally, McDaniel, by far the scariest scenario for Hackett, battled ankle injuries his entire amateur and professional career and--likely--eventually, simply lost the cutting ability to be an NFL receiver.

The moral of the story isn't that Hackett is going to collapse or that he'll be out of the league in a couple years, but that DPAR is a fine measure of a player's performance (in context), but not their projection.

So, what is Hack's projection?

Hackett was drafted in the fifth round of the 2004 draft. One in a number of bright spots in a surprisingly productive draft, headed by "Trader" Bob Whitsitt (who, no doubt, has compromising pictures of Paul Allen.) His 40 was nothing to shout about, 4.53, but Hack impressed in a number of other important areas. His vert, 41", is NFL elite. His cone and shuttle (6.8 and 4.1) pointed to the incredible agility he's shown in the NFL. More importantly, he did nothing but produce in college, no matter the program, no matter the QB. Hack is a solid route-runner, has great hands and absolutely explodes out of cuts, helping his ability to separate despite less than ideal speed. 211 of Hackett's 610 yards were accomplished after the catch, indicating in small part an ability to work in the open field.

The problem with looking at his numbers on the whole, though, is that as a 3rd or 4th receiver, Hackett has faced a ton of zone coverage. Much of Hack's seemingly excellent (and recording nearly 35% of your yards after the catch is nothing short of excellent) production was against nickel and dime backs; to a lesser extent safeties and to a much lesser extent linebackers. When he takes the field this fall he will be working against starting cornerbacks, who are quicker and smarter than the competition he has previously faced.

Hackett has started 8 games over the last two seasons, a reasonable sample size to draw some conclusions from. In all 8 of those contests he's been, presumably, the #2 receiver. The teams he has faced over that stretch have been, essentially, league average against #2 receivers (their average ranking, as measured by Football Outsiders, is 15th.) Hackett has averaged 4 receptions per contest, possibly a result of an inability to get open, certainly affected by the fact that though Hackett may have started, he was used in less formations that an average #2. Over those starts he's averaged 57 yards a contest, not great, but 14 YPC, right in line with his career. He's also recorded five touchdown receptions, a good sign for a team in need of a target in the red zone.

None of that screams #1 receiver. It does, however, imply that Hackett isn't going to collapse in full time duties. His DVOA is almost certain to decrease inversely with his traditional stats increasing, but his DPAR can be expected to stay strong. The biggest obstacle Hackett faces is simply getting open. As a slot receiver he was free to pick apart zones, but as a starter he will face much more man coverage. The stat to look for in the pre-season and early regular season is simple receptions. If Hackett can post a few 6-8+ reception games early, you can be pretty certain that Hack is ready to start, perhaps ready for superstardom, but if he stays around four receptions a contest, continues to disappear for stretches between big plays, it might be a good indication that Hack is better suited for playing out of the slot, a position he would continue to be valuable in, just not among the NFL elite.    
 

Maybe it's an overly developed sense of pride, but I don't like to link in lieu of providing my own analysis. Sometimes, though, you have to admit when others have done it first and done it better.

This is roughly everything you ever needed to know about Deion Branch going forward:

Bill Barnwell projects Branch's future using his top five similarity scores.

The Hawks attained Branch after week 1 and by week 3, he was on the field. It's impossible to completely understand what impact missing training camp and the pre-season, plus switching systems mid-season, has on a player, but for argument's sake, even the greatest non-QB offensive player in the history of the NFL, Jerry Rice, had troubles when he joined the Hawks mid-season in 2004. In fact, both suffered similar problems: A drop in catch percentage coupled with being targeted less often overall.

Branch is the Hawk's presumed #1 heading into 2007. With four good receivers to spread the ball around to, I'm not certain that Branch will put up awesome fantasy stats, but expect his catch percentage to return to 60+ and don't be surprised if his DVOA returns to the top ten.

Sean Locklear is a good young right tackle and while I wouldn't have a beer with the guy, he has good football character. That is, he's an exceptionally hard worker with a desire to be the best tackle in football. Those two traits, personality and work-ethic, are often crammed into one catchall, character, but they couldn't be more separate. Ray Lewis, Pac-Man Jones, Michael Strahan, LT and on and on ad infinitum, are players with significant concerns about the quality of their personality, but each has succeeded because they're dedicated and ultra-competitive. Lock is an excellent talent that has flashed the borderline obsessive drive of an NFL legend. With that said, I've yet to drink fully from the goblet of Kool-Aid when it comes to Lock. Rotoworld reports many people in their outfit thought that he was the Hawks' best overall offensive lineman in 2005--that's absurd, of course, and says much about the fickle nature of opinion. Lock is a strong man, agile and with a load of potential, but he is by no means in the league of Walter Jones or Steve Hutchinson. Not yet, anyhow.

Locklear is a solid all around lineman who can pull, deliver a good run block in space, seal the edge on an end rush and string a defensive end wide and out of the play. Honestly, though, I've always thought that Lock's strongest ability in pass-pro is disguising his holds. I don't mean that as a dig, either. We all know that a certain amount of holding occurs on every play, but that, with few exceptions, it's called only when the violation is flagrant. Lock has shown the ability to hold the opponent close enough to his body and briefly enough that he rarely gets called for it, but still attains an advantage. Football is often dirty, with chop blocks and leg whips (like the one that cost Beck 4 games) a near constant, but unsavory tactics and borderline cheating wins games. I'm not endorsing Tony Siragusa body slamming a prostrate Rich Gannon, but rather than take a puerile moralistic stance, I'll simply say: More power to Lock if he can get away with it. I don't think a little jersey grab is ruining the integrity of the game.

Last season, Lock was hobbled most of the year with a high ankle sprain. I wrote about the dreaded high ankle sprain a few months ago when Marcus Trufant was sidelined with the injury. The important thing to know when evaluating how it affected Lock's performance is that high ankle sprains are more serious than they sound and can continue to hamper lateral agility even after a player has returned from the injury. That's a big blow for a right tackle and it showed. Edge rushers were eating Locklear for brunch and dinner, roll-outs were regularly blown up and runs around right end were a joke.

The right tackle job has been opened to competition in training camp and after signing a one year tender, Lock's not just playing for pride or to seize the starting job, but for the promise of untold wealth come next off-season. That's a set of conditions that drives an already strong competitor into a frenzy. I expect him to play harder, train better and generally outwork any and all reasonable expectation throughout the season. A very good season could be the difference between a modest extension with the Hawks and making bank as a free agent. I prefer hard facts to gut feelings when forecasting, but I feel compelled to say Lock, healthy, entering his third season starting and with everything to prove and even more to earn, will have a huge season in 2007.

Chris Gray is about as consistently mediocre and old as you'll find in an NFL linemen. Excepting 2005 and 2003, years when seemingly every member of the Hawk line simultaneously transformed into fearsome pass blockers, Gray has allowed 4 or more sacks every year he's started full time. That's a ton of sacks for a right guard. As a reserve, especially because of his experience at center and our need for depth at that position, he has value, but I truly hope he's not starting for Seattle in 2007. Gray presents nothing interesting in the way of projection and despite a terrible season in 2006, at 37, is likely only to get worse in 2007. He's a below average run blocker and can be a ghost in pass coverage, where stronger defenders move through him like a wisp. Gray is a couple shades above replacement level, or he was last season, and if he never again takes another snap in the regular season, instead getting paid to be a field mentor, a defacto coach, that would be just fine by me.

Ray Willis, a fourth round pick out of Florida State drafted in Ruskell's inaugural season, 2005, looks like the early front runner to earn the starting nod as Seattle's right guard. Willis is about as slow as they come, but he's a load and impressively strong. His technique, especially entering his third season in the NFL, should be polished enough to start. Willis is mostly valuable for his size, an attribute that allows him to hold the point of attack well, but he doesn't blow guys off the line and will never, ever be a functional pulling guard. Despite his size, Willis is top heavy and that coupled with his poor speed off the line makes him susceptible to the bull rush. Still, Willis mirrors well, and while he's no track star, his feet are quick-enough in a small space that he should improve the Hawks pass protection, if nothing else. Willis has suffered multitude shoulder injuries. Next to the knee and in some cases the foot, shoulder injuries can be the most debilitating of injuries for a lineman. At the time he was drafted, despite weighing 327 pounds, Willis was thought to be able to add some weight to a massive frame. It will be interesting to see how he plays in the preseason. On the surface, Willis looks like a very strong player without the necessary fast-twitch strength to be a true force, a player that helps hold the pocket, but isn't much more than adequate at opening rushing lanes. It's possible, though, with his shoulder injuries now two years behind him and a ton of time and reps to develop, that he's discovered the hand punch and quickness off the line to use his size to absolutely punish opposing defenders. The kind of blocker that holds the point in the first half and pancakes like a country diner in the second. All in all, Willis isn't a word class talent, but he doesn't need to be to be a productive player for a team desperate for an upgrade at right guard.

The final player in the mix is Mansfield Wrotto. Ruskell has already said that every player taken in the first four rounds of the draft will make the team, so regardless of his production, he'll be in the mix all season for snaps at right guard. Wrotto is thought to have the most talent of the bunch, but as I said before, I don't have any idea what to expect from him.

Let's get this right out of the way: I wouldn't have drafted Chris Spencer. For one, it's rarely wise to draft a center in the first round. A centers' individual value can be debated--Robert Weintraub thinks it's the second most valuable offensive position behind quarterback, but even if you think the center is the keystone to a functioning line, starting centers can be found throughout the draft. So can Pro Bowl centers like Olin Kreutz (third round) or Jeff Saturday (undrafted). And two, Spencer was a one year starter whose draft stock soared more because of his projection than his performance. But that, of course, is water under the bridge. Spencer's a Hawk and the presumed starter in 2007.

Spencer is an absolute tools freak. In High School he set a 5A Super Heavyweight state lifting record with a combined 1,675 pounds in the squat, bench and dead lift. He bested his high school squat total of 700 pounds by shouldering 725 pounds in college at Mississippi. Those simply aren't numbers associated with a center. His build and meteoric rise his senior season saw Spencer shoot into the first round. On a team with a lot of polished players, Spencer is a bit of an oddity, a projectable guy with a ceiling like a cathedral.

Given his strength, it might be surprising that "Hollywood" (shudder) played so poorly at left guard last season. Spencer has the size to be a guard, is agile and massively strong, but like many centers, he lacks power off the line. Here is a comparison for your consideration:

Justin Blalock:
40: 5.1 20: 2.96 10: 1.73
Theoretical Top Speed: 9.35 YPS
Theoretical Distance at which he reached his top Speed: 11.01 yards.
Weight: 320
Projected Force (Mass x Acceleration) after traveling .5 yards: 407.63 PDL

Chris Spencer:
40: 5.21 20: 3.01 10: 1.80
Theoretical Top Speed: 9.09 YPS
Theoretical Distance at which he reached his Top Speed: 10.82 yards.
Weight: 309
Projected Force after traveling .5 yards: 389.39 PDL

This represents a tweak in the system I've been working on, that's why the numbers are different, but the same ideas are in play. Simply enough, I'm trying to estimate the amount of force a lineman is able to strike the opposing lineman with using their weight and some kinematic assumptions about how the human body accelerates during a run.

The result? Spencer lacks the punch off the line to blow a defender back. That's fine, and probably has a lot to do with him playing center instead of guard. A center generally combo blocks--that is, he works with another offensive lineman, usually a guard, but often a tackle when pulling, to overwhelm a defender, but doesn't man-up against any single player.

For a center Spencers' numbers are very, very good. Here's how the two top rated centers from the 2007 class performed at the same metric.

Ryan Kalil
Projected Force after .5: 370.97 PDL

Samson Satele
Projected Force after .5: 340.51 PDL

Satele, not surprisingly, is not known for his run-blocking. Anyway, before we roam too far afield, my point is that Spencer doesn't quite have what it takes to be a great guard, but his strength is absolutely elite for a center.

Spencer is also considered quite agile, with a keen ability to pull and work within space. Those abilities will be key for the Hawks in 2007. With Rob Sims holding down the left guard spot and, presumably, Chris Gray, Ray Willis or Mansfield Wrotto seizing the right guard spot, Seattle will need another agile lineman who can pull when run-blocking and maneuver in front of blitzing linebackers when in pass protection. With our fullback situation very shaky, Spencer will be counted on to deliver blocks at the second level. With our backs a collection of some of the worst pass blockers in football, Spencer will also be counted on to react to blitzing linebackers and keep Beck off his back. Both were sizable weaknesses for the 2006 Seahawks, and both must be improved upon if Seattle wishes to be successful in 2007.

Finally, let's examine his shoulder situation for a second. The NFL is famously tight lipped about the injuries of its players. Therefore, it's hard to find anything more specific than "shoulder injury" about Spencer's injury, but let's work from what we know and see if we can't narrow down what might be amiss with the big man. First we know that Spencer is an NFL lineman and his injury was to his shoulder. That points to a strain, sprain or dislocation. We also know that Spencer didn't miss any time last year, that rules out dislocation. He did, however, need surgery to his shoulder. That may have simply been to remove scar tissue, we can not know, but Spencer did have some lingering effects. That still leaves us with a pretty murky picture, but it's fair to say that Spencer should be reasonably healthy once the season starts. Let's hope so, because he's a key ingredient in a line that looks not just good, but young, talented and with tremendous potential.

All told, Rob Sims started five games his rookie season, including two in the playoffs. He received strong reviews from everyone who watched him. That's good and significant, but Sims is still really just a prospect. Finding reliable information on any draftee not from this most recent class has proven to be a bit of an adventure, but with enough searching I found the scoop on Sims. So, for a second, let's assume last season never happened. It's 2006, the draft is upon us, Hutch is gone and the Hawks are fresh off being jobbed in the Super Bowl. With the 31st selection in the fourth round of the NFL draft the Seattle Seahawks take Rob Sims, T/G out of Ohio State. How would I rate this pick?

The first thing to know about Sims is that he's a four year starter who recorded 40 starts over his college career. That's always a very good thing. Sims split time between tackle and guard at OSU--for many analysts that puts him in the dreaded tweener role. I, however, love tackles that are drafted to play guard. Tackles are generally more athletic and the position is of more premium than guard, so it generally attracts better overall talent. Further, when the majority of a player's career is spent at tackle (28 starts as opposed to just 12 at guard) they are scouted as a tackle and many of the negatives, be it stiff hips or an inability to work in space (Sims was cited for both), are evaluated whilst they play as a tackle. For whatever reason, these negatives are more or less transposed as-is when evaluating the player as a guard. That's somewhat akin to knocking a player's range in center field, moving them to right field and then assuming that same weakness. In other words, a player who has shown any ability to work as a tackle at the highest level (in this case meaning at a major college) probably won't have major agility problems working as a guard. It's simply a less demanding position.

The two qualities I value most in a scouting profile are effort and technique, with few exceptions I treat the rest as dross. Sims is considered an outstanding technical pass blocker. That's a very big positive for a player with less than ideal agility. It's not too important to me if Sims is a good guy or not, but I want to know if he'll work. Sims' father was a defensive tackle in the NFL, his mother a teacher. Bad seeds come from the country club as well as the ghetto, but at the very least, we shouldn't expect Sims' pals to shoot up a night club. Before 2005, Sims had been criticized for carrying extra weight and suffering lapses of stamina. It's possible Sims carried the weight as an attempt to compensate for a poor overall build for a tackle: At 6'2" and with just 31 3/4" arms, you can imagine he had trouble with edge rushers. Sims worked hard to become a guard before the 2005 season, so it's fair to say that while a certain amount of danger exists that Sims will loaf, his 40 career starts, willingness to reshape himself as a guard and NFL pedigree indicate a reasonable willingness to work.

Sims didn't participate at the NFL combine because of a hamstring injury. An injury before the most important week of your young career is usually a big red flag for me for a variety of reasons. For Sims, though, less so. Previously, Sims had missed only one contest in his whole college career because of injury and that injury, groin pull, was similarly transient and minor. The real problem with Sims missing the combine is that it limits the amount of information we have to evaluate his physical tools. The same injury persisted into his pro day, but Sims decided to participate in the majority of drills anyhow. His results are intriguing, if incomplete. His 5.25 at the forty is essentially meaningless. For one, it's hard to know how it was affected by his hamstring injury, but more importantly, at least for my analysis, is that without a 10 yard and 20 yard breakdown I can't separate his initial acceleration (which is important) from his top-end speed (which isn't). His upper body strength, both fast-twitch (27 reps) and especially slow-twitch (515 pound bench) are impressive. In fact, his strength drills were all excellent: 515-pound bench press, 600-pound squat, 365-pound power clean. Compare that to the top two guard prospects off 2007, Ben Grubbs (430-pound bench press, 363-pound power clean) and Arron Sears (425-pound bench press, 500-pound squat, 310-pound power clean). Overall, it's an incomplete portrait, albeit tantalizing.

So, in summary, Sims is a former offensive tackle with 40 career starts at a major university, strong technique--especially pass blocking, and a hardy mix of physical tools that are sub-elite, but muddled a bit by an untimely injury: That's a very, very strong prospect and one I would have applauded Ruskell for grabbing late in the third round.

Sims has the drive, strength, technique and talent to be an elite offensive guard. His strong play last season is welcome, but five games, playing on fresh legs against defensive tackles without such a luxury, is not more important than the four years in college that preceded it. Walter Jones needs a partner in crime to be at his best, a player strong enough to force back the opponents nose tackle and savvy enough to adjust for stunts and blitzing linebackers. Too often last season Jones was forced to work double duty compensating for the screen door that was the Hawks left guard while Chris Spencer and Floyd Womack started. Sims does not have the agility to be an elite blocker on the second level and he'll need to to continue to compensate with technique when facing speed rushers. Still, what Sims can do well gives him the potential to be a Pro Bowl caliber guard. His second season in the NFL may be a little too early to expect that, but at his very least, his play and presence will be a huge upgrade from the potpourri of out of position linemen and (I assume) soon to be waiver fodder that soaked up the snaps at left guard in 2006.

Walter Jones has always been a great run blocker, but job one for any blind-side tackle is protecting the quarterback. Here's Jones', and a few other notable Hawks, sacks allowed for their careers:

And here's a look at the Seahawks Adjusted Line Yards rankings for the last 7 seasons: for runs behind left tackle, around left end and overall.

Some Observations:

• Before last year, 2003 was Jones' worst year allowing sacks. He followed up that substandard campaign with two of his best--including a phenomenal 2004 where he didn't allow a single sack. So while 2006 looks bad, and the instability at left guard certainly contributed, there is good reason to think he can rebound over the next few seasons.
• Sims and Spencer split most of the snaps at left guard, but neither recorded many sacks allowed. Some of the sacks that were attributed to Jones are, no doubt, their fault. Spencer was clearly overmatched at left guard, and while Sims has excellent pass blocking technique, his awareness is still that of a rookie. He was susceptible to blitzing linebackers and speed rushers stunting to the inside not so much because he would get beat, but because he would be out of position.
• The two worst Seattle performances in adjusted line yards were in 2002, a season Hutch missed 12 games due to a broken leg, and 2006, the Hawks first season without Hutch.
• The major reason I think you see a rebound in rushes around left end and behind left tackle but an overall decline in rush blocking from Seattle's line is compensation. When Jones and Hutch lined up on the left, teams were forced to shade linebackers to that side or get ripped to pieces on run after run. In 2006, no such compensation was needed, and defenders ran roughshod over our middle and right side. From 2005, the Hawks lost 29, 27 and 21 spots in the ranking on runs up the middle, behind right tackle and around right end, respectively. While it's quite probable Chris Gray saw a decline, that doesn't explain the seemingly awful performance by Sean Locklear. I think, again, this is mostly losing Hutch and the dominant left side that he formed when teamed with Jones.

Conclusions:

First, I don't think Jones declined as much as it initially looks. Instability along the left side plus an overall decline in quality from best-guard-in-football Steve Hutchinson to a center and a rookie is likely more to blame for his awful sack totals and the general perception that Jones had a down season. Second, Jones, 33, is a good age for left tackles. One where he can be expected to see a rebound to his previously elite level of performance, but much of that depends on Sims' sophomore season. Will he progress? Can he become a more effective pass blocker? An elite run blocker? I'll try and figure that out tomorrow.