NFL 2021: The offseason and draft thread

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

The idea of Belichick staring from the sidelines as Jameis Winston throws his fifth pick-six of the season in game three . . . that's some potential high comedy right there.

I mean there's a reason that he's at 50/1 odds despite being freely available as an unrestricted free agent.

You know what name I'm surprised to not see there? Alex Smith. Supposedly his return from injury caught WFT by surprise as they never expected he would make it back, and he wasn't particularly warmly welcomed when he got back. Smith said it's like he "threw a wrench" into their plans.

Seems a prime candidate to be moved in a trade this offseason. I'd give Belichick trading for someone like Alex Smith higher odds than a lot of the names on the list.

Alex Smith could barely stand. He had to worry about a “drop step” on his Frankenstein leg. Of course WFT is concerned about him, no one can count on him to not get injured again and possibly worse than before. Then you add on top of it that he wasn’t the pick of the new coach and OC and they had to give Haskins enough time to implode.

Now, with his contract size, Alex is expendable and probably will not be back. Too bad, he is a quality person and a good leader. But, they need to find something long term and he ain’t it

WFT should cut Alex Smith and he should sign as a backup in San Francisco.

From some quotes from Shanahan today, it sounds like Garoppolo will continue to be the starter, but they acknowledge the need of a backup (which I'm guessing means it won't be Mullens or Beat Hard anymore). Josh Rosen is going to get a shot at QB3 but I'm betting the team looks for a veteran at QB2.

PREFERABLY A VETERAN THAT HAS NEVER PLAYED FOR JACKSONVILLE, K THX

*Legion* wrote:

WFT should cut Alex Smith and he should sign as a backup in San Francisco.

From some quotes from Shanahan today, it sounds like Garoppolo will continue to be the starter, but they acknowledge the need of a backup (which I'm guessing means it won't be Mullens or Beat Hard anymore). Josh Rosen is going to get a shot at QB3 but I'm betting the team looks for a veteran at QB2.

PREFERABLY A VETERAN THAT HAS NEVER PLAYED FOR JACKSONVILLE, K THX

Listen, Gabbert clearly has a championship pedigree, and actually knows how to beat Kansas City in a Super Bowl. Makes a lot of sense for everyone.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

and actually knows how to beat Kansas City in a Super Bowl.

Step 1: get a Hall of Fame QB to start in front of you.

You know what? If signing Gabbert can make that part happen too, then fine, I'm in.

Ego Man wrote:

Alex Smith could barely stand. He had to worry about a “drop step” on his Frankenstein leg. Of course WFT is concerned about him, no one can count on him to not get injured again and possibly worse than before. Then you add on top of it that he wasn’t the pick of the new coach and OC and they had to give Haskins enough time to implode.

Now, with his contract size, Alex is expendable and probably will not be back. Too bad, he is a quality person and a good leader. But, they need to find something long term and he ain’t it

Hmm, looks like someone has a tag that needs a choosin.

billt721 wrote:

I'm skeptical of any reporting like that until the player actually says they want out. Everything else is just propaganda. Wasn't there a bunch of similar reporting leading up to his latest extension that led people to believe he'd be moved or allowed to walk? And then of course there was all the stuff during his early years about how all his teammates hated him. Maybe he's talking about management being a bunch of f*ck-ups because he's lonely and wants some friends.

Well here's more for you to be skeptical about: Wilson reportedly "stormed out" of a meeting he had with coaches after his ideas for fixing the offense were rebuffed.

From The Athletic:

Before the Thursday night game against Arizona, Wilson met with his coaches. For some time, Wilson has sought — even pushed — for influence within the organization regarding scheme and personnel. In the meeting, he outlined his own ideas for how to fix the offense. His suggestions were dismissed, multiple sources told The Athletic — another reminder to Wilson that the Seahawks did not see him the same way he saw himself, as a player who had earned greater control over his situation, his future, his legacy.

He stormed out of the room.

The Super Bowl this year was a trigger. Wilson flew to Tampa to pick up his Walter Payton Man of the Year award. He and his wife, Ciara, watched the game in a suite next to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, and as Tom Brady battled Patrick Mahomes on the field below, Wilson seethed. During the game, he texted Jake Heaps, his former teammate and private quarterback coach, to vent about watching the game instead of playing in it.

Wilson later spoke with Carroll, according to a source, to talk about the way the Seahawks addressed the offensive line, an issue that had bothered Wilson for years. He wanted to know the team’s plan, but it wasn’t relayed to him, at least not to Wilson’s satisfaction, the source said. Carroll implored him to have faith.

But after the Super Bowl, Wilson took his message public.

That Monday, CBS’ Jason La Canfora tweeted that “Russell Wilson’s camp” was frustrated with his pass protection and called it “a situation worth monitoring.” The next day, Wilson went on “The Dan Patrick Show” and said he wanted to be more involved with the organization. He was asked about the almost 400 times he has been sacked over his nine-year career: “That’s a big thing that we gotta fix, that’s gotta be fixed.” He brought up Brady, a player whose status he craves, and the play of Tampa Bay’s offensive line in the Super Bowl: “He wasn’t touched really.” Several times he mentioned his “legacy,” as well as his goal to play 10 to 15 more years, just like Brady.

On a Zoom call with Seattle reporters that same day, Wilson was asked if he was frustrated with the Seahawks. “I’m frustrated with getting hit too much,” he said. Ex-Seahawk Brandon Marshall said Wilson was “beyond frustrated” with the team and added that Wilson “is trying to figure out how to move on in a classy way.” Patrick echoed the QB’s desire for urgency and, citing a source, said the “current situation is unsustainable.” By then, La Canfora had even listed possible trade destinations for Wilson: the Raiders, Dolphins, Saints and Jets among them.

(...)

“The reason that we’re here is because he’s on pace to be the most sacked quarterback in the history of the NFL,” said Robert Turbin, Wilson’s former teammate and a groomsman at his wedding.

This really is a situation created by Carrol and Schneider. Everyone on the outside can see clear paths how to fix the relationship and make a better team.

One of the ironies here is, if Wilson does get traded, the price is going to be so high the new team would have to denude itself of some quality players and loads of draft picks, making him stuck in the same situation again. If he wants to go to a team with a decent offensive line and skill position players so he can Cement His Awesome Legacy, where does he go? The Saints' cap is so bad they can barely afford to pay the janitor, let alone supporting his contract.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

One of the ironies here is, if Wilson does get traded, the price is going to be so high the new team would have to denude itself of some quality players and loads of draft picks, making him stuck in the same situation again.

I don't exactly agree with this. Seattle has supposedly set three 1st rounders as the rough price, and given past QB trades, that seems about right as the ballpark. Teams that have drafted well of late can survive that loss of draft capital - I mean it's not like they're getting rid of 7 straight 1st rounders like the Rams.

Also, as I mentioned before, trading for RW isn't going to murder your cap, because his guaranteed money is overwhelmingly signing bonus that stays in Seattle. In 2021, a team would be paying Wilson less ($19m) than Jacoby Brissett made last season ($21.3m). If you put just that $19m the new team pays on the 2021 QB contract board, he would slide in one spot below Matt Stafford and one spot above Taysom Hill.

If he wants to go to a team with a decent offensive line and skill position players so he can Cement His Awesome Legacy, where does he go? The Saints' cap is so bad they can barely afford to pay the janitor, let alone supporting his contract.

Yeah, the Saints are out, but I don't think it needs to be a playoff team. Wilson would elevate a team that has a decent roster but doesn't have a top 10 QB. I don't think the "legacy" stuff means he must win in 2021 at all costs, but that he's 32 and he knows his effective years are counting down, and wants to make that Manning/Brady late career push somewhere that's actually going to try and protect him.

But let's set aside practical options and go straight for the fun option. Can you think of a team run by someone that might like a good Christian boy like Russell Wilson? Maybe someone that could be in a position to get some 1st round picks coming their own way by moving their current QB? A team whose QB led the league in sacks in 2018 and so they immediately spent 1st and 2nd round picks on linemen the following April?

*Legion* wrote:

Can you think of a team run by someone that might like a good Christian boy like Russell Wilson? Maybe someone that could be in a position to get some 1st round picks coming their own way by moving their current QB? A team whose QB led the league in sacks in 2018 and so they immediately spent 1st and 2nd round picks on linemen the following April?

Agent says Russell Wilson would accept a trade only to the Cowboys, Saints, Raiders, or Bears.

OK, here we go:

Raiders send three 1sts and Marcus Mariota to Seahawks for Russell Wilson.

Patriots send a 2nd plus a 2022 5th to 49ers for Jimmy Garoppolo.

49ers send New England's 2nd plus a 2022 1st to Raiders for DEREK CARR FRESNO STATE.

#freeWilson
#totheAFC
#noBears

On pace to be most sacked QB ever?

Can't really blame the guy.

billt721 wrote:

I'm skeptical of any reporting like that until the player actually says they want out. Everything else is just propaganda.

Looping back around to this, now that he's naming team names through his agent, are we past the point of propaganda?

*Legion* wrote:

Well here's more for you to be skeptical about: Wilson reportedly "stormed out" of a meeting he had with coaches after his ideas for fixing the offense were rebuffed.

lol. Seattle franchise gonna Seattle franchise I guess. Run your best player out of town and then don't sniff the playoffs for 20 years. That's gonna suck for the 100 people in Seattle who aren't 2012-bandwagoners. But then, they also lived through the pre-Russ era, so maybe it'll be comfortable to get back to that.

*Legion* wrote:
billt721 wrote:

I'm skeptical of any reporting like that until the player actually says they want out. Everything else is just propaganda.

Looping back around to this, now that he's naming team names through his agent, are we past the point of propaganda?

When you're wrong, you're wrong I guess. I'll refrain from posting anymore so as to not look like even more of a moron.

billt721 wrote:

That's gonna suck for the 100 people in Seattle who aren't 2012-bandwagoners.

Damn you're more savage to the Seahawks than most Niners fans. I love it.

For the record, I don't necessarily think a move WILL happen. But we definitely are getting into the deep water.

Because one of my tasks today at work is super-annoying, I decided to look into the historic being-sacked leaders.

Russell gets sacked an average of over 10 more times per season than the next QB on the list (Drew Bledsoe).

Top 10 Average Sacks Per Season Played

Name Sk Sn Sk/Sn Russell Wilson 394 9 43.78 Drew Bledsoe 467 14 33.36 John Elway 516 16 32.25 Matthew Stafford 385 12 32.08 Phil Simms 477 15 31.8 Donovan McNabb 410 13 31.54 Matt Ryan 410 13 31.54 Ben Roethlisberger 516 17 30.35 Aaron Rodgers 468 16 29.25 Randall Cunningham 484 16 28.47

Source data

I don't blame the guy for wanting out. Not that I did, but Jesus that is really bad.

Edit: Note, I limited myself to the top 25 all-time QBs. I am avoiding work, not making new work. So, grain of salt, there may be someone who played 1 season and got sacked 50 times that I did not look at.

Edit Edit: because I am too old to remember how math works, evidently.

jowner wrote:

On pace to be most sacked QB ever?

Can't really blame the guy.

The most sacked QBs of all time, for reference. Including both sack count, and sack percentage:

1. Brett Favre - 525 sacks (4.9%)
2. Tom Brady - 521 sacks (4.7%)
3. John Elway - 516 sacks (6.6%)
4. Ben Roethlisberger - 516 sacks (6.2%)
5. Dave Krieg - 494 sacks (8.5%)
6. Randall Cunningham - 484 sacks (10.1%)
7. Phil Simms - 477 sacks (9.3%)
8. Aaron Ridgers - 468 sacks (6.6%)
9. Drew Bledsoe - 467 sacks (6.5%)
10. Philip Rivers - 464 sacks (5.4%)
(...)
20. Russell Wilson - 394 sacks (8.3%)

Favre and Brady are obviously at the top through sheer longevity, their actual sacks rates being pretty low.

I've always considered Seahawks legend Dave Krieg the king of sacks, and at 8.5% he's definitely up there, though Cunningham and Phil Simms behind him take it up another notch. Obviously these guys were playing in an earlier era where defenders could be less particular about how they hit the QB to take him down.

Wilson being at 8.3%, pretty much at Dave Krieg's rate, while playing in the modern NFL and having the foot speed he has, I'd say that perfectly well illustrates his frustrations.

EDIT: tboon beating me to the punch while coming at it from a different angle, sacks per season.

Your methodology is more sound than mine.

tboon wrote:

Your methodology is more sound than mine.

I'd argue they both tell a story. Sack rate communicates to us how often a QB's pass play ends in a sack, which controls for a lot of factors. But at the same time, rate metrics like that don't communicate to us the cumulative effect. After all, two QBs can both take sacks on 8% of pass plays, but one who attempts 575 passes versus one who attempts 325 passes are going to have taken different levels of cumulative abuse over the course of the season.

I find that sacks per season number an interesting companion to the sack rate metric.

*Legion* wrote:
tboon wrote:

Your methodology is more sound than mine.

I'd argue they both tell a story. Sack rate communicates to us how often a QB's pass play ends in a sack, which controls for a lot of factors. But at the same time, rate metrics like that don't communicate to us the cumulative effect. After all, two QBs can both take sacks on 8% of pass plays, but one who attempts 575 passes versus one who attempts 325 passes are going to have taken different levels of cumulative abuse over the course of the season.

I find that sacks per season number an interesting companion to the sack rate metric.

I agree, they are both interesting to look at together. The reason I think your methodology is more sound is that sacks per season assumes 100% play for every season, which is not true of course, especially if the QBs are getting sacked at a high rate.

Also, look at Deshaun Watson's number. Dude has played 3 years, been sacked 174 times, 58 sacks per season.

Edit: Certis gets sacked at a high number per season as well: 4 years, 179 sacks: 44.75 per season. No wonder you needed to get away!

Edit Edit: Of course Deshaun has played for 4 season (so 43.5/season). Certis for 5 (so 35.8 per season). Not quite Neil Lomax numbers (45.25/season).

Never trust me near numbers.

Deshaun Watson met with the new Texans coach and apparently reiterated that he wants to be traded.

This brings to mind a story I saw a couple days ago that I need to find again. There was a recommendation, I think from the Fritz Pollard Alliance, that organizations should have 2-4 players who are included in the decision of choosing the team's head coach. They consider this a means of helping encourage the minority coach hire rate, as those players in leadership positions who would get included in that group would have a much higher rate of being black than the front office people who currently do that decision making.

tboon wrote:

Also, look at Deshaun Watson's number. Dude has played 3 years, been sacked 174 times, 58 sacks per season.

Yeah, he had a David Carr-like 62 in his first full season starting, and it hasn't improved much since.

Part of that is on Bill O'Brien and the offense he ran. They were heavy on straight, deep dropbacks, and low on things like play action which help the offensive line. Deshaun Watson had the highest YPA on play action passes in 2020, yet one of the lowest play action pass rates of any starter. The offensive line was asked to hold up on a lot of long, difficult pass protections.

Question for the Seahawks fans: given the choice, would you rather keep Russ or Pete Carroll?

You don't know who the replacement for either would be, but you do know that you would get a bunch of draft pick compensation if you lose Russ.

*Legion* wrote:

2. Tom Brady - 521 sacks (4.7%)

There's absolutely no way the refs let Brady get sacked 500+ times. No way in hell.

*Legion* wrote:

Question for the Seahawks fans: given the choice, would you rather keep Russ or Pete Carroll?

You don't know who the replacement for either would be, but you do know that you would get a bunch of draft pick compensation if you lose Russ.

With the caveat that every year since moving to Hawaii I've watched fewer and fewer sporting events in general -- seriously, I think I caught all of 1 game in the second half of the season this year, so it's tough to say whether or not I'm still a fan -- but there's no actual choice here. Carroll needs to go, and that's been obvious for several years at this point. Appreciate that the team won a championship with him at the helm, but that was almost a decade ago and since then it's basically been a bunch of 1-playoff-game-and-out seasons.

For that matter, I think most fans wish Schneider would move on as well.

*Legion* wrote:

Question for the Seahawks fans: given the choice, would you rather keep Russ or Pete Carroll?

You don't know who the replacement for either would be, but you do know that you would get a bunch of draft pick compensation if you lose Russ.

At this point? It's Russ.

I'm glad he's getting vocal and getting out of his robot mode. Never trusted that. He's ambitious. Own it dude.

Pete's worn out his welcome. Players league, so let's go.

Cannot believe this town will say goodbye to:

Griffey
The Sonics
Randy Johnson
A-Rod
Russell Wilson

Because management must be obeyed.

Would add that there's no Paul Allen around now to appeal to. My recall is he was always pretty player and fan friendly with both the Blazers and Seahawks.

Wonder if this wouldn't have been resolved previously if he'd still been at the top.

Top_Shelf wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

Question for the Seahawks fans: given the choice, would you rather keep Russ or Pete Carroll?

You don't know who the replacement for either would be, but you do know that you would get a bunch of draft pick compensation if you lose Russ.

At this point? It's Russ.

I'm glad he's getting vocal and getting out of his robot mode. Never trusted that. He's ambitious. Own it dude.

Pete's worn out his welcome. Players league, so let's go.

Cannot believe this town will say goodbye to:

Griffey
The Sonics
Randy Johnson
A-Rod
Russell Wilson

Because management must be obeyed.

Don't forget Ichiro

Enix wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

2. Tom Brady - 521 sacks (4.7%)

There's absolutely no way the refs let Brady get sacked 500+ times. No way in hell.

That's what, 26 sacks a season, or a bit more than 1.5 per game? Seems reasonable.

Also, that's about half of what Wilson has endured. Ugh.