It seems as if there is always lively debate about the Seahawks personal moves. The man behind the curtain is Tim Ruskell. About a week ago, one of the readers suggest we create a "Tim Ruskell Scorecard".
Well here at Seahawk Addicts we have done just that. This is a comprehensive look at every move I could find with any sort of relevance. It is all then graded numerically. Chris Sullivan reviewed it and actually made me raise one grade (Nate). So, as you will see, I took a lot of consideration into how the ratings would be received.
To Continue......
Here is how the Scorecard works. Each player/transaction was graded with one of 7 possible scores.
7pts = resounding success
5pts = Great Move in every regard
2pts = Net positive for team
0pts = Neutral
-2pts = Net outcome negative
-5pts = Bad Move, lasting ramifications
-7pts = Catastrophic mistake
HERE IS THE TIM RUSKELL SCORECARD
You will see, I only chose two 7's, one on each end of the scale
I want you to feel free to disagree with grades, but give good reasons.
Also, if there is anything that needs to be added, however, I think this is pretty inclusive.
One thing you will notice, is that I counted negative points for bad 5th round picks and under, but not 6th or 7th rounders. I arbitrarily choose that as the cut off.
Also, I have not graded any moves from this year, it is clearly too soon.
What I have concluded, is that this is a pretty impressive resume. There are certainly some noteworthy blemishes, but they are FAR outweighed by even the smallest moves becoming positive. Folks, we have one of the best general managers/front offices in the league. That is probably why we keep winning divisions. It is time to show a little trust, and faith, and give TR a little slack.
Also, I will link this in the right sidebar so all of you can refer back to it, long after this post is off the main page.
Please Remember to Support the Site by Checking Out the Advertisers. Loyal Readers--If You Could Please Check Out 2 or more Advertisers per day and See What they have to Offer, this Site Would Really Hum. Thank You Again for Your Support.
michael,
ReplyDeleteI can't access the the score card.
Any advice?
You have to create a google account. It was too big to put into the blog format. IT is just like the salary cap spreadsheet
ReplyDeleteGJ!
ReplyDeleteFun stuff.
-Jim
That is pretty cool, Michael. How do you make the time to do stuff like this?
ReplyDeleteI am a robot, I don't sleep. :-)
ReplyDeleteActually, I am on break from school right now, so I am on the computer a lot. You may have noticed that the spreadsheets and analysis have become more prevalent because of it.
Interesting info and loved the "should've done a deal last year before Brown lost his mind" comment.
ReplyDeleteClassic!
--JRuss
The link to the scorecard is http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pOO-aj705ClWYkUjLh3vKaw&hl=en&pli=1
ReplyDeleteYou need to redo the link on the right column, Mike. It has an extra http thing in the beginnin.
Great assessment!
Awesome scorecard. Put's it in perspective how good of a job he has done here. Some bad but mostly good.
ReplyDeleteLove the passion Michael. Something the (trib)Insider is missing.
I come here 1st for Seahawk news.
Keep up the great work.
Thanks Lyric, got it fixed
ReplyDeleteGreat job Mike. This is an awesome tool to refer to and use as a base for debate. Would love to see other teams bloggers do something similar and compare notes. One thing that might make it more accurate, is when grading a draft pick, to look at guys that were still available at our draft spot that we missed on. For instance, sure Obomanu was a nice pick in the 7th round, but Marques Colston was still available. Obviously this is hindsight and I don't fault Ruskell, but since we're judging this all in hindsight, why not see how he could of picked better.
ReplyDeleteNice work.
Surf Hawk
Wow... Pathon and Warrick. They were bad asses when they played for the Huskies and Florida St. I was excited when we got them. Boy was that a disappointment. HAHA... the names you forget.
ReplyDeleteCTS
great job mike, only things i disagree on are Hill and Joe J, without joe we might not make the SB that year "mister clutch." on hill, our run D sucks without him.
ReplyDeleteThose were definitely some of the tougher ones, but Joe J's impact was only a `1 yr prop, so it is hard to bump him to a 5, and Leroy is a very important part of our defense, but he kinda disappeared in 06 and has missed some games, so he doesn't quite reach 5 status yet.
ReplyDeleteThe good news is that this can be flexible, we can go back and re examine grades at any time. Although, Hills grade will probably now be attached to either re-signing or going free agent
Great Stuff...That being said I agree with hawkfaninOklahoma, Joe was the only guy that could stay on the field that year..He had something like 6 games in a row with 100 yards, I remember because he saved my fantasy team. I know he was only here for one year but without him we wouldn't have made the playoffs but that another story. I think he should have had a higher rating.
ReplyDeleteMike, How can I see the scorecard without a google account. I'm dreading creating another acount. I have enough to remember as is
ReplyDeletethoughts:
ReplyDelete1.) isn't "catastrophic success" an oxymoron, or if not something with a meaning along the lines of "pyrrhic victory"?
2.) what's special about 2,5, and 7? For example, I think Ashworth is clearly worse than a -2. If you had middling values you could put him where he belongs, at something like -4. I realize it creates more of a headache because then you have to do all sorts of fine comparisons...ok, leave it as is but Ashworth was awful and as you point out we're still paying him. -5 for Ashworth.
I couldn't give Ashworth a 5 because he was never expected to be a starter. He also didn't get a 10 mil signing bonus or something absurd.
ReplyDeleteBut I see what you are saying
also, as far as Tim Ruskell goes the next two years are absolutely critical. he has had mid-terms but next offseason is the final exam. Can he keep Lofa and Hill (not to mention other pricey "nucleus" players)? If not, will he pick one, let the other go and plan intelligently to replace him? Next year is where it counts.
ReplyDeleteMichael, you write "I couldn't give Ashworth a 5 because he was never expected to be a starter."
ReplyDeletethen shouldn't the fact that he wound up having to play more than he should have be a negative on the Ruskell ledger?
if you did this, say, by *unit*, you could penalize Ruskell for mishandling the O-line without putting it all on Ashworth.
Every offseason is critical. We say that every year.
ReplyDeleteI think Ruskell will be FAR more likely to lock up guys that he drafted and had success with long term, before free ageny.
I am reading "The Draft" right now, which is a look at the draft from all perspectives, one of whose is Tim Ruskells, and it amazes me the lengths that he goes to on character. The players he likes, and drafts, are guys that he will stick with. Mora, too, as you can see, is someone he really examined and now he is determined to go to battle with.
All of you should check out this book if you like stuff like that.
anonymous who really doesn't want to create a google account, if you send me an email, I will send you the excel file
ReplyDeleteThe only time Ashworth played was when Locklear had a high ankle sprain last year. He was the backup, that was what he was supposed to do. However, that said, he clearly could have done it better.
ReplyDeleteawesome, very cool stuff!
ReplyDeleteI can't wait for the draft!
so are there any rumors about teams being interested in D Jack? With no Hackett now I'm hoping we might take a look at him
ReplyDeleteI also loved the comment about J.Brown losing his mind.
ReplyDeleteL.Hill had plenty of sacks along with his run 'D' to warrant a higher pick. He played in 15 games as a rookie, had 7.5 sacks and 2 forced fumbles. If Lofa is a 7, Hill could be a 5.
C.Terry was excellent until off-field problems. It was time to part with him, though.
D-Jack was not really a team-player and has the hands of a DB (That's putting is nice). Pass.
ReplyDeleteVery Sandoesque Michael. You should send this scorecard to Sando at ESPN so he can link it on Hashmarks.
ReplyDelete-Paulyshoreisnomore
Yeah, I agree with mike on the ashworth arguement. TR can't really take a hit for Lock getting hurt. Can't forsee injuries. Plus him producing more than was expected of him is more of a plus than a minus... except that I've seen more talent in tightly coiled piles on my lawn. That being said I agree with the -2.
ReplyDeleteCTS
Can you post it as an image or something so one doesn't have to log on to see it?
ReplyDelete-PaulySINM
The way I saw Hill, and mind you, I wear an authentic 56 Hill Jersey on most Sundays, was that if Lofa is a 7, JP is a 5, then Hill has two be 2.
ReplyDeleteWould I have given him a 4 if it was part of the scoring...YES, but then I would have driven myself nuts trying to figure out if he was a 4, who was 3, who was 1. Then somebody would have said what about a 2.5 and i would have hung myself. Hope that makes sense
PaulySinm, if it that big a deal, if you send me an email, I will send you the original excel file.
ReplyDeleteSeahawkaholic@gmail.com
It is far too big to put as an image in a post, I tried.
ReplyDeleteyeah... that's a definate NO on D Jack. I would hope they stay away from FA WR's. Think we're pretty solid there and would hope they pick up a vet kicker and LB/ST player before the draft... not to mention locking up Tru 1st.
ReplyDeleteI would like to see them pick up a good red zone WR. Marcus Monk looks like a good project player with good room to develope him. He'll probably go undrafted.
6'5 1/4", 214, 4.549 40 time
Kind of a rough player, but has a lot of promise. cheap too
CTS
Don't see Weaver on there... also cut Chris Cooper who turned out to be a good DT and went to Arizona
ReplyDeleteMike,
ReplyDeleteI agree with hawkfaninOK and Hawks Nest:
He may have only been here one year, but Joe J. was an absolute freaking stud, and there is no way we make the playoffs, much less the Super Bowl without him. He was indeed Mr. Clutch, giving us another automatic, just like Engram, except he was a much bigger target in the Red Zone, which resluted in many TD's. I would say the same comment for re-signing Engram applies for Joe: "Where would we be without him?" We wouldn't have as many great memories of the '05 season, I can tell you that.
Also, I disagree that if Julian gets a 5, then Hill gets a 2. Hugh Millen has described Leroy as "The Badass of the LB corps". He may have gotten injured in his sophomore campaign, but he was lights out as a rookie, before JP arrived, and he was a stud again last year, even with sharing the stats between the three LB's. Think about it, how many more blitzes would Leroy have been sent on if JP wasn't there? The fact is that the entire LB corps deserves no less than a 5, considering how much they have to compete with one another for tackles.
(On a side note, I find that, of the three LB's, I am most disappointed with JP's great disappearing act of 2007. Especially in GB. Maybe because of Kerney we did not need to blitz him as much, so his sack total dropped, but I would hove expected him to put up more stats elsewhere, but it didn't really happen. But, the great '06 season should give him a 5 all on its own.)
Julian Peterson disappeared himself all the way to Honolulu for the pro bowl in 07'.
ReplyDeleteWeaver is a clear oversight, he will be added at some point.
Brilliant work as always Michael. This should be the first place every Seahawk fan goes for the latest information.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the ranking, and we could all debate on and on about picking nits on whether someone should be a 2 or 3.875 but overall I can't complain about any of them...
Except one, I must be reading this spreadsheet wrong - do you have Anthony Simmons as a 5??? I was under the impress he caused a lot more problems then he ever solved.
Keep up the great work, not sure if i could make it thru the day with out your blog, now that I've become addicted.
big seahawk loser--Good point on peterson. He really hasnt shown himself to be great in anything but pass-rushing. His coverage was mediocre last year, but I thought his run defense was very good, other than his propensity to guess and ram the wrong gap, leading to looong TD's by Benson and others...
ReplyDeleteStill, he's probably the best pure athlete on the team, next to Seneca Wallace.
Good job on the Ruskell card, Mike. I disagreed slightly with quite a few, but nothing major.
I did think that the first year after we lost Okeafor and Lucas was rough on the Hawks. Remember, they tried moving Trufant to Lucas side, and he struggled. Jennings is nowhere near as physical as Lucas, and while Lucas was great in the red zone, Jennings is a disaster there. Were fine now, but losing him hurt for ahwile. And the huge contract he signed isnt so huge anymore.
Okeafor was a fast, hard-hitting guy with attitude, and we missed him. Again, were fine now, but at the time...
-SlaveToTheBusinessman
Releasing Simmons earned him a 5, along with releasing Robinson which got him a 5.
ReplyDeletethose were mostly based on how those simple releases completely changed the attitude and mentality of the team.
Clearly 05' had a lot of moves, that while almost no brainers, had a huge effect. That probably happens anytime a new GM takes over, however not always for the positive.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteJust because a player makes it to the Pro Bowl doesn't necessarily mean he had a great season.
See: Roy Williams, Dallas Cowboys
(I hate how that guy makes it every year, even though he sucks in coverage. He just makes it because ESPN made him a household name, and he plays for the Cowpies. And don't get me started on how much I hate the self-appointed "America's Team". Screw the Cowboys.)
Anyway, back to the point, I think JP made the Pro Bowl more on reputation than on having a great season. I believe there have been many great points in the compensation pick thread about how a player doesn't have to make the Pro Bowl to be good. With JP and Tatupu in the same LB corps, I don't think that Hill will ever make the Pro Bowl, but it doesn't change the fact that he is a stud, and well deserving of a "5".
The other reason JP made the Pro Bowl is that sacks get you in more than tackles or good pass coverage or run stuffing. Sacks are the sexy statistic.
ReplyDeleteTo echo big seahawk loser probowl dont mean anything - even Ken Hamlin made it and we know what a liability he was in coverage. And the guy who said we made a mistake with Lucas, check his stats. One good year in Carolina after he left then he turned back into the questionable starter he was before his 2 years of solid play. Good riddence. And ZERO chance Djack comes back. Holmgren even made a joke about him quoted in a Seattle Times article.
ReplyDeleteRealspd