Seahawk Linebacker Notes (1 Viewer)

[pretender]

(Rotoworld) LB Julian Peterson will play the strong side this season.Impact: Leroy Hill and middle linebacker Lofa Tatupu are the 'Hawks' other two starters. All three have solid IDP potential.

 

[Weiner Dog]

Thanks Pretender!

LeRoy Hill

Julian Peterson

link:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/football/272734_hawk05.html

Defensive additions: Linebacker Julian Peterson. Cornerback Kelly Jennings. Defensive end Darryl Tapp. Each is new, but all are expected to make significant contributions to the Seahawks' improving defense. Peterson, a former Pro Bowl player with the San Francisco 49ers, was signed in free agency to play the strong side -- and make plays from sideline to sideline. Jennings and Tapp, the team's top two picks in April's draft, are expected to fill major roles. Getting comfortable in the defense now will allow them to play more instinctively during the season.

 

[Miggity]

Leroy Hill

He hasn't been getting much love this offseason, not sure why after putting up (from memory) about 70 combined tackles and 7 sacks as a part timer last year.

 

[Rovers]

Man, this bites. I thought Peterson would be the Will.... traded Mad Williams for him.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I still don't think Hill will see much time in the nickel.

So, would you rather have a 2-down WLB or a 3-down SLB?

 

[boubucarow]

I still don't think Hill will see much time in the nickel.

So, would you rather have a 2-down WLB or a 3-down SLB?

Temper any entusiasm for Hill. He is the odd man out on passing downs which will limit upside severely..

 

[Jene Bramel]

I still don't think Hill will see much time in the nickel.

So, would you rather have a 2-down WLB or a 3-down SLB?

C. None of the above.

 

[Weiner Dog]

I still don't think Hill will see much time in the nickel.

So, would you rather have a 2-down WLB or a 3-down SLB?

Temper any entusiasm for Hill. He is the odd man out on passing downs which will limit upside severely..

I wouldn't cork the Hill champagne just yet. When your two starting DE's are only Fisher and Wistrom, removing Hill from 3rd-down plays is not a given. IMO, I could easily see the following nickle D playing outE: Peterson

DT: Tubbs

DT: Bernard

DE: Fisher

LB: Tatapu

LB: Hill

CB: Trufant

SS: Boulware

FS: Hamlin

CB: Herndon

nickle CB: Jennings

Here's an interesting tidbit to consider ~

Hill had as many sacks last year as Wistrom has had the past two seasons combined.

 

[Keg]

of course 3 downs is always better then 2 but does anyone have any stats for how many FF Points on AVG were scored by WLBs on 3rd down?

and no i dont want to take the task on to figure it out

 

[boubucarow]

I still don't think Hill will see much time in the nickel.

So, would you rather have a 2-down WLB or a 3-down SLB?

Temper any entusiasm for Hill. He is the odd man out on passing downs which will limit upside severely..

I wouldn't cork the Hill champagne just yet. When your two starting DE's are only Fisher and Wistrom, removing Hill from 3rd-down plays is not a given. IMO, I could easily see the following nickle D playing outE: Peterson

DT: Tubbs

DT: Bernard

DE: Fisher

LB: Tatapu

LB: Hill

CB: Trufant

SS: Boulware

FS: Hamlin

CB: Herndon

nickle CB: Jennings

Here's an interesting tidbit to consider ~

Hill had as many sacks last year as Wistrom has had the past two seasons combined.

When typing that post i did wonder if Peterson would play DE in the nickle/dime defense but remember that he is one of the best one on one man coverage LB's in the NFL and only had one season with over 4 sacks. He probably will be covering a tight end or running back on the nickle defense so Fisher and Winstrom will be on the field and Hill will be on the bench.

 

[cracKer]

I don't think this affects Peterson's value much. He has always been a hit & miss fantasy performer and will continue to be so in Seattle...regardless of position. While his versatility adds a ton of actual value to the Seahawks, it keeps him from consistently performing at a studly level.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Daryl Tapp could easily take over the #3 DE job, no?

IMO, Peterson is too valuable in coverage to be playing much DE on passing downs. Hill proved to be a good blitzer last year with 7.5 sacks, but he had 0 INTs and only 2 PDs.

And, is Wistrom likely to be as ineffective as he was last year again? 4 sacks in 16 games is pretty terrible for a guy who plays as much as he does and had as much surrounding talent as he did. If he bounces back to his normal level of play, there would be even less reason to consider playing Peterson at DE.

 

[Jene Bramel]

Daryl Tapp could easily take over the #3 DE job, no?

IMO, Peterson is too valuable in coverage to be playing much DE on passing downs. Hill proved to be a good blitzer last year with 7.5 sacks, but he had 0 INTs and only 2 PDs.

And, is Wistrom likely to be as ineffective as he was last year again? 4 sacks in 16 games is pretty terrible for a guy who plays as much as he does and had as much surrounding talent as he did. If he bounces back to his normal level of play, there would be even less reason to consider playing Peterson at DE.

Proving that Aaron sees all...From the FBG Blogger

Wistrom recovering, as are Hawks

MIKE SANDO; The News Tribune

KIRKLAND – Watching practice from the sideline could be worse for injured Seattle Seahawks defensive end Grant Wistrom.

At least he gets to watch a swift, young group that has a chance to improve for a second consecutive season.

“We expect to be much better,” Wistrom said Monday as the team opened its final minicamp of 2006.

Wistrom hopes to be better as well. He played with a shoulder injury for most of last season, a revelation that might explain why he finished with only four sacks, down from 71/2 in his previous full season (2003).

Wistrom apparently wanted to conceal the injury from opportunistic opponents.

“It was just something I dealt with all year,” he said.

Wistrom underwent surgery after the Super Bowl. Now he spends about six hours per day rehabbing at team headquarters.

The Seahawks expect him to return sometime before the regular season.

“I’m right on track,” Wistrom said.

 

[Weiner Dog]

Daryl Tapp could easily take over the #3 DE job, no?

IMO, Peterson is too valuable in coverage to be playing much DE on passing downs. Hill proved to be a good blitzer last year with 7.5 sacks, but he had 0 INTs and only 2 PDs.

And, is Wistrom likely to be as ineffective as he was last year again? 4 sacks in 16 games is pretty terrible for a guy who plays as much as he does and had as much surrounding talent as he did. If he bounces back to his normal level of play, there would be even less reason to consider playing Peterson at DE.

Proving that Aaron sees all...From the FBG Blogger

Wistrom recovering, as are Hawks

MIKE SANDO; The News Tribune

KIRKLAND – Watching practice from the sideline could be worse for injured Seattle Seahawks defensive end Grant Wistrom.

At least he gets to watch a swift, young group that has a chance to improve for a second consecutive season.

“We expect to be much better,” Wistrom said Monday as the team opened its final minicamp of 2006.

Wistrom hopes to be better as well. He played with a shoulder injury for most of last season, a revelation that might explain why he finished with only four sacks, down from 71/2 in his previous full season (2003).

Wistrom apparently wanted to conceal the injury from opportunistic opponents.

“It was just something I dealt with all year,” he said.

Wistrom underwent surgery after the Super Bowl. Now he spends about six hours per day rehabbing at team headquarters.

The Seahawks expect him to return sometime before the regular season.

“I’m right on track,” Wistrom said.

Heck, even if you give Wistrom a mulligan for last year, he still has only 15.5 sacks over his previous 40 games. These number looks even worse when you consider Wistrom has been chasing divisional sack-happy QB's like Warner, McCown, A Smith, Rattay, Dorsey and Bulger for many of those 40 games.Wistrom plays with a high motor, but he's only pumping out 150hp at this stage of his career.

 

[Rozelle]

Man, this bites. I thought Peterson would be the Will.... traded Mad Williams for him.

Seattle (in years past) use a right-side / left side deal with their backers. When you look at Gamebook on NFL.com from last year, LB's are not list as WLB/SLB, only as OLB. S0 ... it may not be as bad as you think.

 

[Rovers]

I don't think this affects Peterson's value much. He has always been a hit & miss fantasy performer and will continue to be so in Seattle...regardless of position. While his versatility adds a ton of actual value to the Seahawks, it keeps him from consistently performing at a studly level.

That inconsistancy had more to do with playing in the 3-4.... or at least so I had hoped. Most 3 down WLB's are pretty darned consisant. (forgetting the move to SLB at the moment)I have to think Tapp will be the thrid down DE though.... and I think there is a chance Wistrom could move to tackle on those plays. It's a copy cat league, and I've been hearing more and more about this kind of player utilization.

The NYG are talking about moving Tuck to T, KC about moving Hali inside with Hicks at DE, the Jets used Bryan Thomas in that role last year. All DE's moving inside on passing downs. I could see Seattle doing the same thing with Tapp/Wistrom. It would not surprise me to see a lot of 4-3 defenses doing this if they have the right personnel for it.

Peterson at SLB still isn't good news..... although perhaps not as bad as I first thought. I was hoping he could put up stud numbers this year, finally playing in a 4-3. I needed a stud LB.... in a 16 team league I had 4 LB's (we start 3) all roughly ranked from 20 to 30. I was looking for an LB that could break top 15, with some luck. I don't think Peterson is that guy now. So, now I have 5 mediocre LB's!

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

That inconsistancy had more to do with playing in the 3-4.... or at least so I had hoped.

but he only played 1 season in the 3-4 and that was 2005 after coming back from a torn Achilles.

 

[coolnerd]

That inconsistancy had more to do with playing in the 3-4.... or at least so I had hoped.

but he only played 1 season in the 3-4 and that was 2005 after coming back from a torn Achilles.

Peterson IDP value has always been dependant on his big play ability which by nature is inconsistent.. I suspect nothing to be different.On Seattle as a whole, I am betting that they will be able to mix and match what they do on third down with that front seven keeping opposing OC and fantasy players off balnce all year. I think all three of the LBs are rosterable, but Hill and Peterson not very predictable.

 

[DonFue]

Weiner Dog and I still agree. If anyone is considering Daryl tapp in their LB rankings, I want to be in an IDP league with them! Read the SEAHAWKS FRONT SEVEN thread from April.

Waiting for concrete proof from a local sports reporter is a waste of time...the best players will eventually be on the field (see koutivedes/tatupu "camp battle" from 2005)!

 

[Rovers]

Weiner Dog and I still agree. If anyone is considering Daryl tapp in their LB rankings, I want to be in an IDP league with them! Read the SEAHAWKS FRONT SEVEN thread from April.

Waiting for concrete proof from a local sports reporter is a waste of time...the best players will eventually be on the field (see koutivedes/tatupu "camp battle" from 2005)!

Why would Tapp be in a LB ranking? He's a DE. I took him in a dynasty league rookie draft, but wouldn't touch him in a redraft. I've mentioned this before.... Suggs is the classic example. Listed at MFL as a DE, listed on the Ravens site as a DE/LB. As a DE, he's pretty valuable. As an LB, near terrible FF-wise. That's why I picked up Bryan Thomas of the Jets in FA. He's still listed as a DE, but will play OLB/Rush LB/DE. As long as I can start him as a DE, he has value. I was hoping Lawson would get listed as a DE as well, but knew that was unlikely. I don't see any chance that Tapp will be listed as an LB though.

I am interested to see how Greg Ellis gets listed this year. If he splits time as DE-LB, but keeps his DE listing, he might be a good value.

This is a gray area at MFL. NFL.com's depth charts are my league's determining authority for positional listings.... now, they also show Suggs as a DL/LB. MFL has him as a DE. Due to the nature of FF, D hybrid players have to be either or.... not both. It hasn't happened yet in my leagues, but I can see where this could become a point of contention.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Weiner Dog and I still agree.  If anyone is considering Daryl tapp in their LB rankings, I want to be in an IDP league with them!  Read the SEAHAWKS FRONT SEVEN thread from April. 

Waiting for concrete proof from a local sports reporter is a waste of time...the best players will eventually be on the field (see koutivedes/tatupu "camp battle" from 2005)!

Why would Tapp be in a LB ranking? He's a DE. I took him in a dynasty league rookie draft, but wouldn't touch him in a redraft. I've mentioned this before.... Suggs is the classic example. Listed at MFL as a DE, listed on the Ravens site as a DE/LB. As a DE, he's pretty valuable. As an LB, near terrible FF-wise. That's why I picked up Bryan Thomas of the Jets in FA. He's still listed as a DE, but will play OLB/Rush LB/DE. As long as I can start him as a DE, he has value. I was hoping Lawson would get listed as a DE as well, but knew that was unlikely. I don't see any chance that Tapp will be listed as an LB though.

I am interested to see how Greg Ellis gets listed this year. If he splits time as DE-LB, but keeps his DE listing, he might be a good value.

This is a gray area at MFL. NFL.com's depth charts are my league's determining authority for positional listings.... now, they also show Suggs as a DL/LB. MFL has him as a DE. Due to the nature of FF, D hybrid players have to be either or.... not both. It hasn't happened yet in my leagues, but I can see where this could become a point of contention.

Im waiting for the day that DE/OLB is a required position in IDP leagues, and I don't mean a DE/OLB flex.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Weiner Dog and I still agree. If anyone is considering Daryl tapp in their LB rankings, I want to be in an IDP league with them!

never saw anyone do that.

 

[DonFue]

I would just be surprised to see Hill or Petersen come off the field since they can rush or drop. Why put a one-dimensional DE out there? I can definitely see Tapp turning into a PR specialist but not at the expense of those OLBs (at least not on a substantial basis).

Tatupu 90 solo/23 assists/4 sacks/3-5 picks

Hill 85/20/6/0-2

Petersen 55/12/8/1-3

Check game logs from the playoffs...Hill led the team in tackles...and he was only in his 2nd, 3rd and 4th games at WLB!

 

[Pick]

DD Lewis =

 

[Rovers]

I would just be surprised to see Hill or Petersen come off the field since they can rush or drop. Why put a one-dimensional DE out there? I can definitely see Tapp turning into a PR specialist but not at the expense of those OLBs (at least not on a substantial basis).

Tatupu 90 solo/23 assists/4 sacks/3-5 picks

Hill 85/20/6/0-2

Petersen 55/12/8/1-3

Check game logs from the playoffs...Hill led the team in tackles...and he was only in his 2nd, 3rd and 4th games at WLB!

I didn't see anyone suggest that Hill or Peterson would get pulled.... rather, Wistrom would move to tackle and Tapp would be inserted at DE. That's what I was talking about anyway.... and this seems to be a trend, with teams like KC and the NYG talking about doing this.... pulling a DT and having three DE's play in either 3 or four man fronts on passing downs. The Jets did this last year with DE Thomas.

 

[DonFue]

Agreed! I think if the Seahawks get steady play from the DBs they could wipe their collective butts with the NFC!

 

[Weiner Dog]

I still don't think Hill will see much time in the nickel.

So, would you rather have a 2-down WLB or a 3-down SLB?

Temper any entusiasm for Hill. He is the odd man out on passing downs which will limit upside severely..

I wouldn't cork the Hill champagne just yet. When your two starting DE's are only Fisher and Wistrom, removing Hill from 3rd-down plays is not a given. IMO, I could easily see the following nickle D playing outE: Peterson

DT: Tubbs

DT: Bernard

DE: Fisher

LB: Tatapu

LB: Hill

CB: Trufant

SS: Boulware

FS: Hamlin

CB: Herndon

nickle CB: Jennings

Here's an interesting tidbit to consider ~

Hill had as many sacks last year as Wistrom has had the past two seasons combined.

Toot! Toot! This is exactly what is happening thus far. Jennings has been replacing a DE (Tapp or Fisher) and Peterson has been playing in a 3-pt a few times.

Granted...this could change once Wistrom is feeling better, but Wistrom is not the player he used to be (...or has ever been the player he should have been).