Bullish on the Tight End Position

by: Michael Steffes


I was working on finding some hard facts to support the belief that the Seahawks offense will be better than the national football writers believe. While I had a hard time quantifying the common belief that Mike Solari, Mike Wahle, and the new running backs will improve that aspect of the offense, the are some interesting numbers that show the importance of the tight end position. I went back to 05', and have chronicled the drop in production since then. If you read the previous post about Carlson being the starter and Putzier being a "secret weapon", and then figure that against the tight ends of late, it is easy to feel good about an 08' improvement. To continue on, click


In 2005, arguably Jerramy Stevens best season, tight ends combined for 58 receptions of the teams 307. This is 18% of the receptions or approximately 1 in 5. Ryan Hannam was the only other TE to catch a ball that year. He had 13 (Stevens had 45).

In O6, this dropped to 36 receptions from TE's (Stevens 22, Mili 10, Heller 4). That was 12% of the 292 receptions. In other words 1 of every 8 receptions was made by a TE.

The decline continued in 07'. In a pass happy offense, the tight end caught a mere 41 balls out of 371 total completions. This represented 11% of the receptions. This was only 1 of every 9 balls that were completed. You can see the gradual decline in production from the tight end position since 2005 and as this directly correlates to a decline in total offense.

In 08', this will improve. I expect Carlson and Putzier will be far superior to the group of both last year and 06'. Also, questions at the WR position should actually lead to more opportunities for the TE position. The only game in which Marcus Pollard caught more than three balls was vs Tampa. The first game of the season. In this game, Deion Branch caught 0 balls and Bobby Engram had a season low 3 catches.

Three catches a game is not a lofty goal for this group, and that would increase production by 7 catches. In a way, it is a catch-22. If the tight ends produce then it will ease the pressure on the WR group, and as the WR's catch more balls, then the tight ends will have to be covered by linebackers. In the end, if you consider that the backs are expected to command more respect as pass catchers as well, mismatches will be created and Matt Hasselbeck is one of the best in the biz at going through progressions and finding the open man. Read More!

Round By Round: The Final Numbers

by: Michael Steffes

I am not sure how this post is going to work out, and to be perfectly honest the numbers are mostly what you would expect, but I wanted to experiment for further use.

I have taken the roster information, which throughout the week I used to go round by round looking at the current Hawks, and added some statistics such as TD's, Tackles, Sacks, Pro Bowls, and Starts. These were last years #'s, so simply put, this is what the team got out of players picked from certain rounds LAST year. Also, there are no definitive stats for O linemen, other than starts, so this analysis devalues their contribution in many ways, but that will be addressed.

In using these numbers I was able to put a lot of the info into graphs so that you could view the results of the analysis in an easily viewable format. Now, I am just hoping blogger makes it do-able. Any graph or chart can be clicked on to view as larger image. So here we go....

To begin with, I set out in this analysis looking mostly to pass time till the draft. I expected, as I am sure many of you would, that the higher a player is drafted the better player he is. Often people use the rare case, such as Antonio Gates, as examples of why not to take players in the top of the draft. Well, the numbers suggest that the top of the draft is where the impact players do come from. At least on the Seahawks. I would also be remiss to mention that this is an incredibly small sample size, looking at only one team, but in this instance I didn't have the time to use the whole NFL, and really we are only interested in the Hawks.

To begin with lets look at the starting line up. What rounds does the team get the most starts of?

As you can see, over half of the pie is taken up by first and second rounders. This reinforces the importance of the first day. However, one thing that is interesting here is the number of starts that the team got from undrafted free agents (8th round). In nearly equals the contribution of the third rounders. To me, this sheds light on to why the team emphasizes these players during the month leading up to the draft. While many of us say "ho" hum" every time we hear of another low profile guy coming for visit, the team places importance on this and it has paid off. The are getting good production from undrafted free agents. You can see the totals of these positions better here in the bar graph....


Notice here that the Seahawks are getting their most starts from the 2nd round. Moving down from #25 into the second would allow Tim Ruskell to draft twice in the round he has had the most success.

Now it is important to recognize the difference between a starter and a quality starter. So where do the superstars come from? Lets look at this bar graph which depicts the pro bowls per draft round....


If you notice there are only two bars on the right side of the graph. The sixth round is represented by Matt Hasselbeck's 3 pro bowls, and the 8th (UDFA) is represented by Olindo Mare's 1 pro bowl. We all know that kickers are rarely taken in the top rounds, and I think many of you would consider Matt Hasselbeck's success from the sixth rare. Of course if we broke down the Patriots, they share a similar phenomenon, another connection between the two teams successes. Anyway, back to the graph. You can see that the pro bowlers mainly come from the first and second round. This says to me that while you can be a quality player if taken in the late rounds, really that rare athletic ability and college stardom that make a player a high pick are also what makes a player more likely to reach the highest level of success in the pros. So what position do we need a pro bowler at? Tight end would help? It would seem taking a 2nd rounder, which has been speculated to death, is the right choice. Also, as you will see upcoming, that round is where the touchdowns come from too.

Lets look now at how draft position actually correlates with statistical success. Here is a large chart you may want to click on that is a table of correlations. If you don't understand it don't worry, I will explain the numbers. The important thing to know is that the #'s with the * next to them are the ones that are statistically significant. This means they can used to make general assumptions. The others don't provide that because anomaly wasn't strong enough.


What you can see right off that bat is that the universal stats to both units, pro bowls and starts both have a negative correlation with draft round. On offense pro bowls have a -.381 value and starts have a -.561 value. On defense, pro bowl list at -.440 and starts at -.580. What this means is that as the round value goes down (closer to 1) the number of pro bowls and starts go up. Because these correlations are significant, we can assume that this would be a pattern you would see through out the league. When you break down the units, you see that on offense round doesn't have a significant correlation with touchdowns. The reason for this is because the team has found a lot of scoring from second and third rounds. You can see that better, here, in this bar graph....


Also of note here is that I didn't include touchdown passes, which is why the sixth round has no touchdowns. Had I included that, it is possible that there would have been a positive correlation, meaning the higher the round the more touchdowns. My feeling is that adding TD passes would have created a false number because most teams did not get a pro bowl QB in the sixth. When you look at this graph, also notice that the Hawks get their scoring from the 2nd and 3rd, along with the 7th and undrafted guys. To me this means that often the first rounders are used on defensive guys (which we know to be true) and the mid rounds is where the team likes to address the line. When looking at the fourth rounders we saw a large population of linemen in the fourth. This is why I said their contributions are devalued in this analysis. Because it is hard to judge a quality linemen from late rounds compared to a skill position. There are no real stats to do so.

Back to the correlations. Defensive statistics show some significant correlations as well. Both sacks(-.419) and tackles (-.478) are notable numbers. Again, what these numbers mean is that as the draft round gets lower(1st or 2nd), the number of sacks and tackles go up. This is backed up by what we saw in the daily looks, the Seahawks have found some special defensive players that were taken at the top of drafts. If you look back, a large portion of the defensive starters were taken in rounds 1 and 2. So what can we take from this? It makes complete sense that the Hawks use their first rounder on a defensive player despite the need for offense, because they have gotten better scoring production from the 2nd and 3rd rounds. That means that this draft sets up well for the Seahawks to dramatically improve both sides of the ball in the manner in which they have done it before. Here are the the bar graphs that show the tackles and sacks.

As you can see, both tackles and sacks are heavy on the first two rounds, but the difference between the two charts is again the 8th, or undrafted guys. To me this shows that pass rushers need to be addressed early. A team can get some general defensive production from the late rounds/free agents, but rarely do the get the sacks from there. We all know how the Seahawks defense thrives by creating pressure, and when you consider that the team brought in a lot of DT prospects who look to be late round guys, it could be they are thinking defensive end in the first. It would make sense compared to how things have worked out among the current Seahawks. Interesting to look at for sure.

Hope you enjoyed this analysis. Like I said, it really just supports what a lot you, including me, would suspect is par for the course. However, often numbers don't support what we believe, so it is fascinating to get the empirical proof. Now when you say D line in the first and TE in the second, you can sleep well knowing that those rounds fit according to where the Seahawks have done well from. Lets go get some more pro bowlers on Saturday, right!


Read More!

Pass Happy Hawks

We all know that last year the Hawks were basically forced into an offensive scheme that was centered around the passing game. This was out of necessity because they were completely ineffective in the run game. The Patriots had a offense that heavily focused on the pass too, but theirs seemed driven by an unnatural desire to mangle their opponents. Either way, this is actually a dangerous strategy. Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders, working in concert for ESPN, has a nice piece about quarterback hits. While it is geared towards Tom Brady, it can be applied to the Hawks as well.

If you want to read some analysis and how it relates to the Hawks....

Basically the story is meant to show that there is more to pass rush statistics than sacks. In essence, it is important to count QB hits along with sacks, and then factor in the number of attempts, as some teams run more than they pass.

Surprisingly, this article actually puts the Hawks line in a positive light, something that not many have done with last years performance. The first thing you may notice, is in the first chart, Matt Hasselbeck was in the top of the league in being bumped around by defenders with a total of 27 hits and 33 sacks. I will look at these numbers more closely in a minute.

The next thing you will see is in a lower chart, that because of the sheer number of pass attempts, actually 3 more than the pass happy Pats, the Seahawks ranked 10th in QB hit percentage. Matt was only hit 9.7% of his attempts. Rating higher that the line many said performed so well all season long in NE.

Here is the funny thing though. The article goes out of its way to mention that QB hits is a subjective stat. Different scorers count them differently. Seattle, and Qwest field are used as an example of a major difference. The Hawks combined to have 60 QB hits scored during their home games, and only 24 on the road. So it is possible that the Qwest field offical scorer is likely to call the lightest bump a QB hit. Call it the synic in me, but I saw our defense at home and on the road, and I think that could be the difference by itself. However, this suggests that it is possible that Hawks could have been even better. Either way, the Hawks still ranked as the 10th best pass protecting line, better than the Pats who got a lot of praise for their work. The Hawks line mostly took abuse. The moral of the story is that either way, when you pass a lot your QB gets knocked around a lot too. Strong reasoning to spend a little money and make sure the team can run next year, right.

What I am also interested in from this article is Hasselbeck's numbers. He was sacked THIRTY FIVE times!!!! Which is not so good, but he was only suffered a mere 27 quarterback hits. So why is this? Well my theory is that this shows poor coaching of the line and poor blocking by the running backs. Hasselbeck is a tough guy. He is not afraid to throw the ball and take a hit. The lack of hits, to me, shows how good this line could be if they fixed the scheme confusion. Another random Football Outsiders stat from a different piece is that the Hawks were tied for tops in the league in untouched defenders getting sacks with 13. This is heavily based on the line scheme, and not so much the actual personnel, else there would be more hits on Hasselbeck. When the linemen find the right scheme, they do quite well. The other reason defenders get through untouched is poor blocking from the running backs. However, Weaver should improve, and Jones is a quite capable blocker too. This bodes quite well for next year.

Also, this is an offense in which the QB often goes through several reads and then makes a decision. Smart QB's throw the ball away and take hits, not sacks. I think this is something that Matt has gotten a lot better at. At times he holds the ball too long, but I feel comfortable saying that if the team stops allowing untouched defenders through the line, the sacks will go down dramatically without the hits rising too much. They could easily put together a season like the Cleveland line last year with only 25 hits and 17 sacks (7.1%). That helped Cleveland win ten games, and they had one of the worst defenses ever. Imagine line play like that with the defense the Hawks are putting on the field. It could be something special. It would truly appear, that Mike Solari and the new running backs are the key. I can't wait to see how it works out.




THANKS EVERYONE!!! PLEASE SUPPORT THE SITE BY CHECKING OUT THE SPONSORS!! Read More!

Jones Boys Get Better w/ Age??

Rotoworld.com's blurb on the Jones signing makes an interesting point. After investigating I found it to be quite relevant, and therefore I am going to share it with you. Rotoworld says...

"Jones regressed in Dallas, but he's an upgrade from Alexander and could mature late like his brother."

To see a comparison of careers to this point....



As you can see, Thomas Jones truly didn't have his best years until he had been in the league for 4+ years. Granted, at this time, leaving AZ was like a revelation, as they won 3, 7, and 5 games while he was there. But still, Tampa was coming off a Superbowl win we he went East, and really still had limited success. However, in his 5th year, on the Bears he really blossomed. For many years people expected others to carry the load, but he was always the most consistent runner on that team. Also, you will notice that early in his career, he wasn't a feature back. Making the jump from an average of 120 carries in his first 4 years to an average of 290 over his next four. The increase in carries had a lot to do with his increase in yardage, but his yards/carry improved as well. What I am saying is that Thomas didn't really reach his full potential until he was counted on to carry the load.

Will Julius follow in his brothers footsteps? It certainly seems possible. Before MBIII started showing his skill Jones had a 993 yd and 1084 yd season. So it is possible that he will do better with more carries. He will have to prove he can handle that though as he has had several injuries too. I mentioned earlier that backs often find revival after leaving their first team. Priest Holmes and Chester Taylor both left Baltimore to have much better success. Thomas Jones is another to add to that list. He was certainly known as an underachiever until the Bears gave him a shot. Lets all hope Julius' career arch is a lot like his big brothers. If that happens, the Hawks just found a good back for real cheap.


Read More!