Seahawks

Seattle Seahawks extend WR Percy Harvin

stevenlourie Seahawks

Yesterday, I went against the convention and went opposed to the Seahawks trading a 1st rounder for Percy Harvin. I felt that a 1st round pick was too much to give up for him for a one year rental and that he wouldn’t be worth the type of money he was expecting on any potential extension. I get into my reasoning more here. However, this contract is less than I was expecting so I like this extension a little more than I like this trade.

Harvin will get 67 million over 6 years with 14.5 million guaranteed. That guaranteed number is a little misleading. They can technically cut him after a year without owing him more money, but another 11 million is guaranteed for injury only. The only reason the Vikings would ever cut Harvin after one season is if he were to get injured and in that case, they’ll have to pay out the extra 11 million, so it’s essentially 25.5 million guaranteed. It’s still an overpay for various reasons I talked about yesterday, but he’s getting less yearly than Mike Wallace and Dwayne Bowe so it’s not awful. I still think the Vikings ended up winners.

Grade: B

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Minnesota Vikings trade WR Percy Harvin to the Seattle Seahawks

stevenlourie Seahawks, Vikings

Trade for Seattle: I’m going to go away from convention for this one. I don’t like this move. Percy Harvin has very good upside. We’re talking about someone who, over the past 2 years, has 1652 receiving yards on 651 routes run, which is among the most efficient in the NFL. And yes, he was doing that with mediocre quarterback play, but he was also his team’s only option and targeted relentlessly, which won’t be the case in Seattle. He also can’t seem to stay healthy and on the field. He’s never played more than 649 snaps in a season nor does he have a 1000 yard season. He’s got amazing upside and he’s a great fit in Seattle’s offense, but upside is the key word.

I think they overpaid. One of the dumbest arguments I hear is “Percy Harvin is more of a proven player than anyone at they could have taken at 25.” That’s vaguely what NFL Network’s Charles Johnson said on Path to the Draft today and it’s pretty much what a bunch of NFL fans are also saying. Yeah, no shit he’s more proven. They’re rookies. You also aren’t going to have to pay a rookie 60-80 million dollars. That’s what I’m so baffled people don’t understand. It’s not, would you rather have Percy Harvin or Cordarrelle Patterson. It’s would you rather pay Cordarrelle Patterson 7 million over 4 years or Percy Harvin 65 million over 5.

The Seahawks definitely gave up too much for Harvin if they view him as a one year rental, giving up a 1st rounder, a 7th rounder, and a mid-rounder next year (rumored to be a 3rd round pick). It doesn’t sound like that’s the case, but that brings up a different issue, how much are you going to have to pay him? One of the many reasons the Vikings parted ways with Harvin were his unreasonable contract demands. He wanted to be paid close to what Calvin Johnson and Larry Fitzgerald were getting and while it doesn’t sound like his rumored extension is going to reach that, he’ll probably end up the 3rd highest paid receiver in the NFL in the 60-65 million dollar range of 5 years and he’s just simply never proven he’s that type of player. It’s a massive risk.

Grade: C

Trade for Minnesota: I think the Vikings were the clear winners here. The last straw with Harvin was when he demanded to be traded because he thought Christian Ponder sucked. There was various other off the field things like that and frankly I don’t think Percy Harvin was a very good teammate in Minnesota. The Vikings got way more for Harvin than was originally predicted and they likely have a deal in place with a veteran receiver like Greg Jennings and they can use either the 23rd or 25th pick on a much cheaper receiver like Cordarrelle Patterson to pair with him.

Ponder’s receiving corps will be better in 2013 than 2012 I believe and the Vikings will be better off in the long run without the headache that Percy Harvin was becoming. He likely would have been gone after next season anyway, if he even had reported this season at all, so the Vikings got a good haul for him considering the circumstances. Would you rather have Percy Harvin for maybe one season (or 2/3 since he’s always hurt) or Cordarrelle Patterson for 4?

Grade: A

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Seattle Seahawks 2013 Needs

stevenlourie Seahawks

When the Seahawks’ took Russell Wilson in the 3rd round, it wasn’t really criticized. That seemed to be a fitting range for him. However, then it was reported that GM John Schneider compared him to Drew Brees and “had to have him” because he felt he was one of the top-3 players he scouted in 2011, which sounded like hyperbole and maybe a little bit crazy. The Seahawks then made him their week 1 starter in pre-season, as he beat out expensive free agent signee Matt Flynn, and 8 games into the season, it was starting to look like possibly a mistake.

The Seahawks were only 4-4 despite a strong defense and Wilson had just 10 touchdowns to 8 interceptions (and one of those touchdowns was really an interception). However, Wilson’s play over the next 10 games proved Schneider right and then some. It didn’t look like hyperbole any longer that this kid was Brees-esque and one of the top-3 players in the draft. He threw 19 touchdowns to 3 interceptions the rest of the way, winning 8 of 10, and even though the Seahawks came up short in Atlanta, they have plenty of reason to be hopeful for the future.

Wilson is clearly their franchise quarterback and while he wasn’t the franchise savior that Robert Griffin was, Wilson is probably the most likely of the 2012 draft quarterbacks to win a Super Bowl in the next few years because he’s supported by a fantastic running game and what was the league’s #1 defense in 2012. This team won 7 games in 2011 despite 14 games of Tarvaris Jackson and 2 games of Charlie Whitehurst at quarterback. They just needed a quarterback and now they found one. Given their amazing home field advantage, if they can ever get a top seed, they could be very dangerous in the post-season.

Offensive Tackle

Russell Wilson’s mobility made this offensive line look better than it was, but they have some obvious holes. Breno Giacomini struggled on the right side at tackle. James Carpenter was supposed to play there, but the injury prone former 1st round pick was moved to guard. They could use an upgrade over Giacomini.

Guard

Carpenter may have moved to guard, but that doesn’t mean he played well. None of their guards really did. John Moffitt, a 3rd round pick from that same draft, 2011, Paul McQuistan, a veteran journeyman, and JR Sweezy all struggled there. Sweezy was the worst and, considering he was a 7th round pick rookie converting from the defensive line, that makes sense. Schneider and Pete Carroll have made a lot of smart decisions, but I have to make fun of them for that one. Sweezy said he hadn’t played offensive line since middle school. How did they decide to convert him to offensive line? Did they watch his middle school tape?

Defensive Tackle

Jason Jones and Alan Branch are both free agents. The Seahawks mentioned adding some extra pass rush this off-season. Defensive tackle is where they really need it. Jones is a solid pass rusher, but he’s only a situational player and that’s it and of course he’s a free agent anyway. Branch is a good run player, but doesn’t get much pass rush.

Wide Receiver

The Seahawks could use some receiving help. Doug Baldwin and Golden Tate are talented young receivers and Sidney Rice is good when healthy, but that’s not always the case.

Defensive End

Speaking of not healthy, Chris Clemons tore his ACL and will be in a race to play week 1. Meanwhile, Red Bryant struggled mightily through injuries this season. Bruce Irvin was their first round pick last year, but I still have concerns about his run play and his ability to be a starter. He was terrible in his only start against Atlanta after Clemons got hurt. They said they want to add more pass rush. Here could be a place to do it.

Outside Linebacker

If they don’t re-sign LeRoy Hill, they will need a new 3rd linebacker, though I suppose they could give Malcolm Smith the job. The 2011 7th round pick impressed in limited action this year.

Kicker

Steven Hauschka is a free agent who will need to either be re-signed or replaced.

[switch_ad_hub]
[switch_ad_hub]
[switch_ad_hub]

Seattle Seahawks at Atlanta Falcons: Divisional Round Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Playoffs 2 NFL Picks, Falcons, Seahawks

Note: I normally don’t do picks this early, but Chris Clemons is expected to be out with a torn ACL. Once news of that is confirmed, this line will go up from -2.5. I like the Falcons either way, but I like them a lot more at -2.5 than -4.5, so I’m going to get this one locked in before the line moves. And if Clemons doesn’t have a torn ACL, well I was going to make this pick anyway so it’s not a loss.

Allow me to save you some time and give you all the analysis you’ll hear on ESPN or any other major sports network shows: “Matt Ryan has never won a playoff game so he can’t possibly win this game BLAH BLAH BLAH.” That’s one of the stupidest arguments because it presumes you can tell from 3 games that a generally solid quarterback somehow becomes worse in the postseason than the regular season.

Peyton Manning, though obviously a better quarterback, was in a similar situation early in his career, losing his first 3 postseason games, before winning 2 in 2003 and taking his team to the AFC Championship. Eli Manning lost his first two before leading the Giants to the Super Bowl in 2007, winning 4 in the process. Two of Ryan’s three losses came against eventual Super Bowl champs and one came on the road as a rookie. And yet people still seem to think that he can’t possibly win this game because of what happened in those first 3 games.

Everyone in the media will probably be on the Seahawks this week and an early ESPN poll shows that the public is 2/3rds on the Seahawks. I don’t have public betting action yet, but I bet the public will be all over Seattle getting points. I love fading the public because they always lose money in the long run and this week is certainly no exception. I especially love fading them when they’re on a dog because that creates a slighted favorite and gives them even more motivation. The Bengals and Colts were popular upset picks this week. How’d that work out?

I’ve been down on the Falcons all season. I’ve frequently said that they’re not as good as their record because of a lot of close calls with inferior teams. I still think they will lose at home to either Green Bay or San Francisco. Those teams are different monsters. But, it’s almost like the Falcons have become underrated for being overrated, that people have called the Falcons “overrated” so many times that everyone has forgotten that they’re a good football team with a great home field advantage.

Matt Ryan is 32-6 at home in his career, while the Seahawks have lost in Miami, Arizona, St. Louis, and Detroit this year, had a close call in Carolina, went to overtime with Chicago, and trailed 14-0 in Washington just last week before Robert Griffin got hurt. And that’s what people are overlooking this week (as well as the impact of Chris Clemons’ loss, contrary to popular belief rookie Bruce Irvin can’t fill his shoes as an every down end).

While the Seahawks are 12-24 ATS as non-divisional road dogs since 2005, the Falcons are 14-6 ATS as non-divisional home favorites since 2008, only losing twice (once was against the Packers in the playoffs in 2010, but no one was stopping them that year). On top of that, the Seahawks have to play this game on the East Coast at 1 PM as a West Coast team, a huge disadvantage. I expect them to get another home win against a road challenged team and for Matt Ryan and the rest of the Falcons to use the criticism positively and get his first postseason win.

Atlanta Falcons 27 Seattle Seahawks 17

Pick against spread: Atlanta -2.5 (-110) 4 units

Seattle Seahawks at Washington Redskins: Wild Card Round Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Playoffs 1 NFL Picks, Commanders, Seahawks

For analysis on Seattle click here
For analysis on Washington click here

Unlike in past years, the Seahawks aren’t just a good home team. They’re a good team with a great home field advantage. After all, they do rank #1 in DVOA and weighted DVOA. However, they still have road losses against St. Louis, Arizona, Detroit, and Miami, as well as close calls against Carolina and Chicago, all 6 of whom missed the playoffs. The Seahawks are just 7-12 ATS as road favorites since 2005 and I like that Washington may feel slighted that no one is really talking about them to win this game. I think Seattle has a better chance to win this game, but I’m going to grab the 3 points for a small play. It would have to be all the way past the key line of 4 for me to play a significant play on the Redskins though.

Seattle Seahawks 20 Washington Redskins 19

Pick against spread: Washington +3 (-110) 2 units

Seattle Seahawks: Wild Card Round Power Rankings (#6)

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Power Rankings, 2012 Playoffs 1 Power Rankings, Seahawks

If the Seahawks had home field advantage throughout the playoffs, they’d be the Super Bowl favorites by far. They went 8-0 at home this season, beating three highly seeded playoff teams, the 49ers, Packers, and the Patriots. Those 8 wins came by an average of 18.5 points per game. And unlike past seasons, they aren’t just a good home team. They’re a good team with an excellent home field advantage. They rank 1st in both weighted and regular DVOA by a wide margin. You could call them the best overall team in the league. They’re one of two teams to not lose a single game by more than a touchdown and they beat the only other team who is (Patriots).

However, their relative road struggles are important because they’ll have to win 4 straight games away from Seattle to win the Super Bowl. I don’t doubt their ability to win a road playoff game, but 4 away from home in a row? They were just 3-5 on the road this year, losing to Miami, Detroit, St. Louis, and Arizona. While all 4 of those losses could have gone either way, so could have their wins in Carolina and Chicago.

Their only convincing road win was against the Bills, a huge 50-17 win. That does happen to be their most recent road game and they have won their last 2 (including an overtime win in Chicago), but that’s not enough to change my mind about their Super Bowl chances as a wild card. They should be able to win in Washington and maybe even in Atlanta, but I don’t like their chances of winning in Green Bay or San Francisco.

Projected fate: Lose to Atlanta in divisional round

[switch_ad_hub]
[switch_ad_hub]
[switch_ad_hub]

St. Louis Rams at Seattle Seahawks: Week 17 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 17 NFL Picks, Rams, Seahawks

St. Louis Rams (7-7-1) at Seattle Seahawks (10-5)

Everyone knows about the Seahawks’ home prowess, but it’s really, really significant, possibly even more than people realize. At home, they are 47-20 ATS since 2005, including 6-0 ATS as double digit favorites and 16-3 ATS as touchdown plus home favorites. For contrast, they are 24-43 ATS on the road in that same time period.

On average, they outscore opponents at home by an average of 7.3 points per game. On the road, they are outscored by 5.1 points per game. For this reason, I don’t feel that using 2.5 as a home field adjustment for them is inappropriate. I feel that using 6 (split the difference) or something around there is a more appropriate adjustment (either way: add 6 at home and subtract 6 on the road).

Even using the standard 2.5, we’re getting significant line value with the Seahawks. The Seahawks are all the way in 2nd at net points per drive at 0.90 now, while the Rams are at -0.34 in 24th. If you take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per team per game), and add that standard 2.5, you get that Seattle should be favored by 16 here. If you use that 6 point adjustment, you get a line of Seattle -19.5. DVOA backs this all up, as Seattle ranks far and away best in both regular and weighted DVOA, while the Rams are 17th and 16th respectively, not bad, but not good enough for me to even consider taking the points here.

For this reason, I don’t even care that this line has moved 3.5 points since last week. Seattle -7.5 was ridiculous anyway. Even Seattle -11 right now is too low for this dominant home team. I don’t care that the public is all over the Seahawks. I don’t care that teams tend to struggle off of back-to-back blowouts. Teams are 28-42 ATS since 1989 off of two straight wins by 24 or more, but the Seahawks were in this spot last week and didn’t seem to care. Now they’re the 6th team since 1989 to have three win straight by that many and just the 2nd (2004 Colts) to win 3 straight by 29 or more. They’re also the first team in that time period to outscore opponents by 120 or more over a 3 game stretch.

I don’t care that the Rams are 10-3 ATS as dogs this year and that they haven’t lost a divisional game and that the Seahawks seem due for a letdown because no one is this good and that everything I normally like to do is telling me to stay away from the Seahawks this week because nothing is this easy. I don’t even care that I don’t like to lay more than a touchdown for a significant play. I’m doing that here. I’m expecting another blowout. There’s just too much line value. The Seahawks are too good at home. And it’s not like Pete Carroll has any qualms about running up the score.

Public lean: Seattle (70% range)

Seattle Seahawks 38 St. Louis Rams 10

Pick against spread: Seattle -11 (-110) 4 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Seattle Seahawks: Week 17 NFL Power Rankings (#7)

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Power Rankings, 2012 Week 17 NFL Power Rankings, Seahawks

Last week: 6 (-1)

Record: 10-5

Net points per drive: 0.90 (2nd)

DVOA: 41.1% (1st)

Weighted DVOA: 51.5% (1st)

Studs

QB Russell Wilson: 15 of 21 for 171 yards, 4 touchdowns, 1 interception, 2 drops, 2 throw aways, 129.7 adjusted QB rating, pressured on 10 of 27 drop backs (4 scrambles, 1 sack, 3 of 5, 1 touchdown, 1 throw away), rushed for 29 yards (7 after contact) on 6 attempts, 1 broken tackle

RB Marshawn Lynch: Rushed for 111 yards (36 after contact) and a touchdown on 26 attempts, 3 broken tackles, caught 2 passes for 19 yards and a touchdown

LT Russell Okung: Did not allow a pressure on 29 pass block snaps, run blocked for 38 yards on 5 attempts

CB Richard Sherman: Allowed 3 catches for 73 yards on 8 attempts, 1 interception, 3 pass deflections, 4 solo tackles, 1 assist

Duds

LE Bruce Irvin: 1 quarterback hurry on 23 pass rush snaps, 1 penalty, 1 solo tackle, 2 assists, 1 stop, 1 missed tackle

LE Red Bryant: Did not record a pressure on 21 pass rush snaps, no tackles

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

San Francisco 49ers at Seattle Seahawks: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, 49ers, Seahawks

San Francisco 49ers (10-3-1) at Seattle Seahawks (9-5)

Everyone knows about the Seahawks’ home prowess, but it’s really, really significant, possibly even more than people realize. At home, they are 46-20 ATS since 2005, including 16-8 ATS as home dogs. They’ve already knocked off the Cowboys, Packers, and Patriots as home dogs this season, en route to a 7-0 SU and ATS home record. For contrast, they are 24-43 ATS on the road since 2005.

On average, they outscore opponents at home by an average of 6.9 points per game. This is against an average line of -2.6, which is right around the standard adjustment for home field advantage. As a result, they outscore opponents against the spread by an average of 4.3 points per game. For this reason, I don’t feel that using 2.5 as a home field adjustment for them is appropriate. I feel that using 6.9 or something around there is a more appropriate adjustment, possibly even more based on how well they’ve done this year (outscoring opponents against the spread by 16.9 points per game).

We’re getting line value even using the standard 2.5 point adjustment. The Seahawks rank 3rd in net points per drive at 0.77, right behind the 49ers, who are 2nd at 0.90. If you take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per game), and add 2.5 points for home field, we get that Seattle should be favored by 1 point. If we use a more appropriate number for home field, no matter what it is, we’re getting significant line value. Using 6, the line should be Seattle -4.5 and using 6.9, the line should be Seattle -5.5. And that’s not even taking into account that the Seahawks actually rank better in DVOA and weighted DVOA, ranking 2nd in both, while the 49ers rank 4th.

Besides, the 49ers haven’t won more than 2 games in a row all season. They started the season with wins against the Packers and Lions and were anointed the NFL’s best and then they lost in Minnesota. They followed up with blowout wins against the Jets and Bills and then people were back on their bandwagon, before they then got blown out by the Giants at home. They followed that up with divisional wins against the Seahawks and Cardinals before tying the Rams at home. After that, they blew out the Bears and Saints in consecutive weeks, before losing to those same Rams again. Now they’re on a two game winning streak against the Dolphins and Patriots and have once again been anointed the NFL’s top team. I don’t know if they’ll be able to handle that.

This is a much bigger game for the Seahawks. The 49ers just need one more win to win the division and can get the job done next week against Cardinals. Obviously, they still want to win out and get the first round bye, but they can relax a little bit and they might be without one of their top defensive players, Justin Smith. They’ve already gotten their huge win. Now the Seahawks are looking to do the same. It’s kind of like when the 49ers knocked off the Patriots last week after the Patriots had just got a huge win against the Texans. Now it’s the Seahawks’ turn and I think they’ll get the job done, especially at home in a nationally televised game.

It’s a significant play even though the Seahawks are coming off two straight blowout wins and teams are 4-10 ATS since 1989 off of back-to-back wins by 31 or more and 27-42 ATS off of back-to-back wins by 24 or more. The 49ers fell flat in this spot against the Giants earlier this year, but it’s a different dynamic here for the Seahawks as dogs and I’m not going against them at home.

Rather than putting 1 unit on the money line and 3 on the spread, I’m putting all 5 on the money line. Since 1989, there have been 422 teams who have been favorites of less than 2. Of those 422 teams, only 8 of those teams lost by exactly 1 point, about 1.9%. I still say that was the smart move after some thought and I’m going to do that again here. It’s not worth the extra 15 cents on the dollar for something that will hurt me about 2% of the time.

Public lean: Seattle (50% range)

Sharps lean: SF 16 SEA 15

Final thoughts: Justin Smith is out and the line moved to Seattle -1. I really like Seattle’s chances of winning straight up at home, especially with Smith out, so I’ll add one unit on the spread at -1 (-110) to go with 4 units on the money line at +105. The Patriots’ offensive explosion against the 49ers last week came when Smith left the game. Aldon Smith puts up the numbers, but Justin is their most irreplaceable defensive player.

Seattle Seahawks 17 San Francisco 49ers 13 Upset Pick +105 4 units

Pick against spread: Seattle -1 (-110) 1 unit

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Seattle Seahawks: Week 16 NFL Power Rankings (#6)

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Power Rankings, 2012 Week 16 NFL Power Rankings, Seahawks

Last week: 6 (+0)

Record: 9-5

Net points per drive: 0.77 (3rd)

DVOA: 38.5% (2nd)

Weighted DVOA: 44.8% (2nd)

Seattle is in an interesting spot as well. Like Green Bay, I’m torn on them, whereas the 5 teams ahead of them on this list I’m less torn on. Seattle might be playing better than anyone right now and I fully expect them to beat the 49ers in Seattle this week, but can you really trust a team that lost to Arizona, St. Louis, Miami, and Detroit on the road to go into Washington and win a playoff game, let alone into San Francisco, Green Bay, or Atlanta. If they had been able to get the #2 seed, I’d like their Super Bowl chances better, because they’d only have to play 1 road playoff game in that scenario, at most, but thanks to the 49ers’ win in New England, the only way that happens is if the 49ers somehow lose at home to the Cardinals.

Studs

QB Russell Wilson: 14 of 23 for 205 yards, 1 touchdown, 3 throw aways, 1 drop, 96.8 adjusted QB rating, pressured on 10 of 29 drop backs (2 sacks, 3 scrambles, 1 of 5, 3 throw aways), rushed for 92 yards and 3 touchdowns on 9 attempts

RB Marshawn Lynch: Rushed for 113 yards (36 after contact) and a touchdown on 10 attempts, 4 broken tackles, caught 1 pass for 14 yards on 1 attempt, allowed 1 sack on 3 pass block snaps

LT Russell Okung: Did not allow a pressure on 30 pass block snaps, run blocked for 6 yards on 2 attempts

CB Byron Maxwell: Allowed 1 catch for 15 yards on 5 attempts, 1 pass deflection, 2 solo tackles, 1 stop

Duds

CB Richard Sherman: Allowed 6 catches for 89 yards and a touchdown on 9 attempts, 6 solo tackles, 1 assist, 1 stop

LE Red Bryant: Did not record a pressure on 14 pass rush snaps, no tackles

DT Clinton McDonald: Did not record a pressure on 22 pass rush snaps, 1 assist

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]