SB Nation User Blog: John Morgan

David Hawthorne is Playing Big But Can He Play Correct?

John Morgan — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:30:33 -0000

More photos » by Ted S. Warren - AP

At ends of the spectrum: D.D. Lewis is the elder linebacker that does his job and only that. David Hawthorne is the prospect flashing great potential, but struggling with fundamentals.

Browse more photos »

David Hawthorne has three sacks, five tackles for a loss and three interceptions in three starts. It's a line that has a few thousand Lofa Tatupu backers questioning their allegiances. Few want to say Hawthorne is better than Tatupu, but fewer still know how to prove otherwise. Hawthorne is active, making plays, making tackles, forcing turnovers, and Tatupu is on IR, on IR in his get-healthy season. If Tatupu has been Tats of old in 2008, this discussion might be more muted, but Tats of old is starting to look like, well, a player that doesn't exist anymore.

If Hawthorne had accumulated his eye-popping stats over a season, it would have inspired heated Hawthorne versus Tatupu debate. Heater had to do it in four. So how are we going to do this? Should I make rules or just hand out handguns. Field Gulls is place as any to wage this war. Let's pick sides and tear each other apart.

Ok, but really: Hawthorne is a find, but he's miles away from Tatupu when it comes to fundamental linebacker play. I gave myself a short schedule and stumbled into the most boring tape dissection I've had since Seattle at Pittsburgh in 2007. It's hard to judge an offensive line when Matt Hasselbeck pitches a tent in the pocket. It's hard to evaluate the wide receivers when they are never targeted. It's hard to evaluate a defense that started strong and then sat back and awaited the next drive ending pick. One drive was instructive, and it spoke to this debate.

Nate Burleson had committed pass interference in the end zone and still managed to drop a gimme touchdown. Detroit was back on the field, hoping to stem the comeback or at least kill some clock. It did neither, but it was close to achieving both.

What matters is Hawthorne. Seattle's linebackers are synchronized and interdependent. When Leroy Hill gets a tackle, Tatupu might have jammed the fullback and Aaron Curry contained the cutback lane. The tackle is typically the easy byproduct of team execution. On the first snap, Hawthorne jumped back and out of position. He did exactly same on the next snap, perhaps anticipating pass. His linebackers in smash did their job, but Hawthorne was sealed out by bad anticipation and a poor angle to the ball carrier. He made both tackles, the first after seven, the second after eight.

Hawthorne took a bad angle on a toss right to Aaron Brown. He couldn't bluff his way back into the action this time and Jordan Babineaux cleaned up after 19. Hawthorne didn't stand out on the next play, but he was all to apparent on the interception. Seattle got excellent pressure from its front three, and thankfully for us, Patrick Kerney shielded Stafford's vision before Stafford chucked an interception to Deon Grant. Behind Kerney, wide open in the middle stood Casey Fitzsimmons, open, open where Hawthorne had failed to drop. As the camera panned to Grant running under the pick, it was obvious a better quarterback would have found Fitzsimmons for the first.

If you're the right age, you probably remember thinking Michael Boulware was a superstar safety in the waiting. He had that Babineaux knack to be where the action was. In two seasons he had nine interceptions, three forced fumbles, three sacks and a touchdown return. His play was noticeable, electric, and terrible. Boulware couldn't read a route or defend play action. He was around tips but not in throwing lanes, he was a good blitzer, but absent in deep cover. Seattle never mustered much of a pass defense with Boulware and when Ruskell deigned to remake the secondary, Boulware was shipped out, benched by the Texans and then run out of the league.

Hawthorne is auditioning for a starting role, be it at MLB in Seattle, OLB in Seattle or LB somewhere else. His highs are exciting and his lows too subtle for most fans. His weaknesses reading an offense are apparent, but he's young. He could improve his execution and awareness with experience, and soon combine what he already has, playmaker potential, with what he needs to start. But I beg, before we pit these two young linebackers in combat, let's be sure the apprentice is good and not just bumbling his way into big plays.

Can Seattle Game Plan Around a Mortal Weakness?

John Morgan — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:45:34 -0000

More photos » by Matt York - AP

It's easy to beat a ballhawk like Dominque Rodgers-Cromartie, if the pass can beat the defender to the spot. Attempt to squeeze in a duck against tight man defense and Cromartie will flash his 4.33 speed, jump the route and pick the pass.

Browse more photos »

Colonel Paul Pasqiuna, medical director of the amputee program at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, said the general public suffers from a bias. That bias has slowed research into artificial limbs. People, especially the handed, assume a prosthetic must be lifelike. Pasqiuna said that the most functional, affordable prosthetic hand is the classic "hook" design that uses cables and a harness to control movement. The design is almost a century old. Most amputees are not worried about looks, but functionality. If their prosthesis could function like a hand, it wouldn't matter if it looked like a pineapple.

It forced me to question whether I was unhappy with how Matt Hasselbeck had played because it was ineffective or because it was unaesthetic. The effectiveness can be overstated. When considering the high number of attempts and low quality of defense, it's little wonder Hasslebeck totaled only 43 DYAR. Seattle rallied around Matthew Stafford's interceptions to win. But when it needed offense, the three yard swing pass was the offense it could muster. If not universally effective, the short passing game was relatively effective. It accomplished what Seattle needed then to win the game.

I expected Seattle to use the screen to slow Arizona. The Cardinals stacked eight in the box and dared Seattle to beat their secondary. Instead, Seattle stuck with its basic game plan of rushes and play action. Hasselbeck only targeted his backs twice: once to Justin Forsett for 16 and once incomplete to Owen Schmitt.

The screen is a powerful weapon and I've done nothing but rave about Greg Knapp's implementation of a varied and effective screen attack. Hasselbeck did not complete 17 passes to his backs because of an effective screen game, but an ineffective Lions pass rush. The passes Hasselbeck threw to his backs were not designed but outlet passes. Most were slow developing. Rather than attacking an aggressive defense, they worked because Detroit's defense could not create pressure. Hasselbeck would read his progressions and wait and wait and check down after a back finished his block and pulled out of the pocket. It took ages.

That will not work against the Cardinals. It won't work against most NFL teams. It relies on an offensive line that can block until receivers have run off linebackers and defensive backs. Beyond being difficult, it's low reward and high cost. Hasselbeck took five hits and a sack against the Lions 28^th ranked pass rush. If Seattle attempts the same against a better opponent on the road, holds, hits and sacks will spike, followed by fumbles and injuries.

The Seahawks offense is struggling. It cannot run, it cannot establish the pass off the run. The Arizona Cardinals are not a dominant defense, but they dominated Seattle at home. Arizona has challenged teams to pass against their young, fast and athletic secondary. Quarterbacks that could, like Matt Schaub, Peyton Manning and Jay Cutler, have torched the Cardinals pass defense. Quarterbacks that couldn't, like Shaun Hill, Jake Delhomme and Matt Hasselbeck, have been completely shut down. The "haves" averaged 373 yards of passing offense. The "have nots" have averaged 137. What do the "haves" have that the "have nots" lack? Arm strength.

My prevailing image of Hasselbeck against Arizona is not from this season, but last. Seattle was trailing by six with two minutes to play. Hasselbeck targeted Deion Branch on a crossing pattern and before the ball could reach him, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie overran Branch and intercepted the pass to effectively end the game. Branch had beaten Cromartie out of his break, but the pass never arrived.

Maybe it's overly simplistic to blame that loss on lost arm strength. Hasselbeck has thrown worse. But you beat man coverage by attacking man coverage. A well thrown pass zips to its target and allows time enough for the receiver to reach it, but not the defensive back to react. That isn't a consistent part of Seattle's arsenal anymore. I don't think Hasselbeck can beat a defensive back in close cover. Not reliably. It might not be pretty and it might not work, but slings, swings and screens may be the only offense Seattle can still run.

Why Check Down? Because It Works.

John Morgan — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:47:42 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

Part of Matt Hasselbeck playing caretaker is Seattle's new defensive identity. Lawrence Jackson has developed into an above average pass rusher. Seattle has an above average pass rusher at almost ever position on its defense. Hasselbeck has come full circle. He is now the Seahawks Trent Dilfer. But who then is the Seahawks Matt Hasselbeck?

Browse more photos »

Simple explanations are best and the simple explanation for Matt Hasselbeck's check down-fever was that Detroit was rushing the passer and dropping into medium and deep cover. The Lions were protecting an early 17 point lead. Their plan to attack the line and drop into deep cover is a typical response to an early lead. So Hasselbeck and Greg Knapp attacked them where they were exposed: between the linebackers and safeties.

He threw to T.J. Houshmandzadeh and Kevin Hobbs put a hat on the ball and forced a fumble. Max Unger was running towards the play and recovered. Unger was beat on his pass block and thus in excellent position to recover. It was a classic Big Play Babs maneuver.

In all, Seattle ran four play-action passes in seven pass plays. They all fit a single idea: draw the linebackers and wait for space between the linebackers and safeties. It worked. It also opened the run for the first time. Seattle ran play action four times, but ran only twice.

Justin Forsett attacked the middle on a simple run up the gut. Chris Spencer turned his man and from there it was Force against the second level. He ran for fourteen. It was the single longest play of the drive.

Julius Jones cashed in on an inside draw. Max Unger was run through and Jones had to bull and spin through a tackle in his own backfield. Specner and Rob Sims had fought back the defensive right and Jones cut left and into space for the touchdown.

A team uses the plays that work. I am sure the Seahawks will feature a similar playbook versus the attacking Arizona Cardinals. I did not consider Hasselbeck's showing a failure. It worked. However, in the big picture, this is the latest game in which Matt Hasselbeck seems unwilling to pass against modestly tight coverage. That coverage gets tighter this Sunday. Will Seattle design enough check downs to stay astride an explosive Cardinals offense?

A Bad Time for an Otherwise Good Decision

John Morgan — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:48:49 -0000

More photos » by Ted S. Warren - AP

Runs by Julius Jones have been worth 0 DYAR. Passes targeting Julius Jones have been worth 48 DYAR. This isn't Shaun Alexander's run game, but it does resemble 2007.

Browse more photos »

Four down football is coming. Its path to Seattle was retarded last Sunday. Jim Mora chose to go for it on fourth and one from the Seattle 38 because of frustration and desperation. The decision did not swing the game. Probability was already decidedly in Detroit's favor. But even most proponents of going for it on fourth would have been wary of going for it on one's own 38.

The Seahawks were favorites at home. The defense was not struggling - it had been burdened with two short fields in three drives. Seattle was down fourteen, but it was early in the first and Detroit's offense had shown no signs of being able to run away with the game. Seattle was creating pressure. On the preceding drive, the defense had quickly forced third and ten but was scored on when Bryant Johnson disguised a push-off within a one-handed catch. It was not an egregious no call, but nor was it call to panic.

Seattle had run twice and twice Julius Jones ran into his blockers attempting to find a hole. The interior offensive line was not creating push and, for whatever reason, the Lions linebackers where charging the line. They did not expect Seattle to pass. Matt Hasselbeck finally did pass, but it was a short pass to Justin Forsett and Forsett did the man's working, breaking two tackles to put Seattle within one.

On fourth and one, the Seahawks piled their linemen up and motioned their third tight end in to play fullback. The Lions were standing atop each other to attack the middle. Jones received the snap and ran into a wave of bodies. He wasn't even close.

The Lions dinked and dunked their way into, out of and back into field goal range. Before the failed first down attempt, Seattle had but an 11% chance of winning. After the field goal, Seattle had an 11% of winning. The field goal had done little but cash in the field position Seattle had ceded after failing to convert. It underscores just how aggressive coaches should be on fourth down that even a poor decision, poorly planned and poorly executed, didn't bury a team already down 14 in the first. But it was a bad decision and the execution made it worse. Sometimes a coach needs to step back, not consider the game in a global sense, but as it's unfolding, the individual matchups won and lost, punt the damn ball and allow the defense a chance to rally.

Steelers at Broncos Open Thread

John Morgan — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:20:42 -0000

More photos » by Nick Wass - AP

Kyle Orton squirms beneath the savage hand of inevitability.

Browse more photos »

Kyle Orton is in the midst of a career season. Many predicted Orton would improve behind a better line and in a more modern system, but few thought he would improve so much. So maybe he hasn't.

Football fans know of Derek Anderson and Rex Grossman. Both quarterbacks experienced amazing career seasons that were not preceded by success and that were not followed by success.

Grossman was the most likely success of the three. He was drafted in the first round, had a 61% completion percentage in college (a 54.6% completion percentage in 2006) and that one tool that can make any quarterback great for a snap: an awesome deep pass.

Anderson was the surest to fail. He was a tools prospect that played poorly in college. He had a better completion percentage in 2007 than any of his four years at Oregon State. His rise coincided with major additions to the offensive line and run game. Anderson could not beat out Charlie Frye in the preseason, but was so entrusted to retain his ability that Cleveland guaranteed him $14.5 million over three seasons and $24 million overall.

Orton isn't too far from his norms. His completion percentage today is higher than he ever finished at Purdue and will likely drop. The system Josh McDaniels has implemented inflates completion percentage. In that light, Orton's spike is not unsustainable. His interception rate is. Orton has one interception in 231 attempts. Before Grossman and Anderson failed, they sagged in the second half. Grossman was eaten alive by sacks and fumbles. Anderson's yards disappeared when teams dropped into deep cover. He lacked the accuracy to succeed underneath. Orton will get his by way of interceptions.

Tonight marks the midway point for Orton. He faces the Pittsburgh Steelers. Seahawks fans have been horrified to see Neckbeard turn a corner and seemingly become a franchise quarterback for the Broncos. Maybe he has, but I doubt it. You don't root for the Sarlacc Pit and I won't root for the Steelers tonight. Maybe it's in bad spirit, but I do root for truth to pop the bubble of sudden, undeserving stars. It's in that spirit that I do not root against the Broncos or for the Steelers, but only for the inevitable. May truth find Orton tonight. May it find him three or four times.

From Zero to Seven

John Morgan — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:13:45 -0000

More photos » by Ted S. Warren - AP

Jordan Babineaux sacked Matthew Stafford to force third and 20. Seattle's slack zones allowed Stafford to connect with Brandon Pettigrew for 18 on the next play. Detroit easily converted the fourth and two.

Browse more photos »

Seattle allowed Brandon Pettigrew to receive for 18 before Detroit converted the fourth two different ways. By the official scorer's spot, Kevin Smith ran for three to convert fourth and two. The play was ruled dead because the Seahawks had too many men on the field.

I say Seattle allowed Pettigrew to receive for 18 because that is how the zone was constructed. Jordan Babineaux had perfectly timed a delayed blitz and broke down to sack Matthew Stafford for ten. Seattle then went soft. It dropped a loose zone and rushed four. Seahawks defended the first down marker and opened the underneath. Aaron Curry seemingly knocked Pettigrew another three yards over the marker and for the first.

The ball was marked at the Seattle 29. The Lions raced to the line of scrimmage and snapped before Seattle could set, simultaneously converting the first on the ground and forcing the penalty to convert the first. I guess Seattle couldn't fathom a team going for it on fourth and two.

Jason Hanson missed the field goal attempt, but a play later, Detriot would have the ball again.

Seattle had given itself a big thumbs up to the eye socket. Brandon Mebane had blown up their first run attempt in the backfield. Curry had hit Stafford twice and Babineaux had sacked him for a loss of ten. It had forced three third and longs and allowed two conversions - the unconverted third picked up on fourth down. It attacked and retreated for 14 plays, 16 unofficial, and was spared by dumb luck.

In the jubilant arms of fortune, it threw the ball right back to Detroit.

Matt Hasselbeck passed into triple cover or, more accurately, at single cover. He threw it to Louis Delmas and broke to tackle Delmas before he could score. Hasselbeck didn't see Delmas but Delmas saw him. Looking down T.J. Houshmandzadeh and patting the ball once before firing.

Craig Terrill fired into the right tackle and Cory Redding came untouched from left end on a five man line. Redding hit Smith in the backfield and forced a fumble, but the play was ruled dead. Pettigrew had committed a false start. Pettigrew ran between Seattle's zone and Stafford hit him as he turned in a play that looked indefensible. Stafford's pass was too fast and Pettigrew too large for Seattle's zones to factor.

Seattle had played well but was down seven. It could have been down 10. The Seahawks were executing. Why then were they reeling? Hasselbeck bears the brunt: He made an indefensible pass. But that touchdown reception - rookie to rookie - that looked unstoppable -- what explains that? The 18 yard reception that preceded it, that didn't contest the pass and set up a makeable fourth, what explains that? If zones can make routine plays look unstoppable, maybe it is the defensive game plan that is truly indefensible.

"If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of...

John Morgan — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:56:23 -0000

"If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons." --Winston Churchill

Super Bowl XL put the aluminum taste of treachery in the Seahawks mouths. It was not that the Seahawks lost, it was that the game felt unwinnable.

Tonight's game is unlosable. Should the Broncos win, the Steelers fall behind the Bengals. Screw the Steelers. Should the Steelers win, the Seahawks improve their draft position. Either Seattle wins or Pittsburgh loses.

Introduction to the Last Weekend of the Regular Season

John Morgan — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:09:07 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

Seattle spotted Detroit 17 points in the first quarter. Matthew Stafford spotted Seattle 300 yards to build its comeback from.

Browse more photos »

I will take on a little more breakneck, a little less detail-rich rundown of last Sunday's game. My goal is to be done by tomorrow.

Seattle flies to Arizona Bay this weekend to fight for its last gasping chance at the playoffs. Arizona is 5-3 and owns the tiebreaker against Seattle. If Seattle wins, it is a game behind and will have neutralized the Cardinals tiebreaker. If Seattle loses, it will be all but out of the race.

The 2006 Seahawks scrabbled their way into the playoffs. The 2009 Seahawks are a better team. The 2009 Arizona Cardinals are probably better than both. The 2006 Seahawks lost twice to the Alex Smith-led San Francisco 49ers. The 2009 Seahawks lost to the Shaun Hill-led 49ers, but could beat the Alex Smith-led 2009 49ers at home. The 2009 Arizona Cardinals were not able to. The 2009 Seahawks need only be better for a day to crawl back into this.

And around. Seattle may not be better than Arizona, but short of total mismatches like yesterday's, early breaks can decide a game between close-matched opponents. Seattle has snuck into the playoffs before and could do so this season. Arizona like Seattle is dependent on the health of their aged quarterback. The Cardinals are a Kurt Warner injury from probable collapse. Maybe Matt Leinart steps up, but we'll cross that bridge when he puts down the beer bong.

Seattle did not win convincingly against Detroit. It profited from an exceptionally bad showing from Matthew Stafford. As I mentioned in my post game, Stafford's picks alone account for at least 225 yard and as much 300. Interceptions are, in classic coach speak, mistakes. An interception reflects a mistake by the offense more so than it reflects an achievement by the defense.

That was obvious for anyone who watched yesterday's game. Stafford threw jump balls, and often threw jump balls that descended closer to a defender than a receiver. Seattle caught them. It pressured Stafford and forced poor down and distance, but of the many things Stafford could have done, he often chose the worst possible.

So Seattle roared back against a team it is categorically better than. But it won. And it is categorically better than the Detroit Lions. That, however hollow feeling at the time, is a hopeful reminder. Seattle is on the low end of average. The Arizona Cardinals are on the high end of average. Seattle might have a one in three chance of beating Arizona on the road.

Maybe the breaks fall Seattle's way this time. If Arizona spots Seattle 17 in the first like Seattle spotted Detroit, Seattle's young defense could swarm and attack and maybe even run away with it. It's the unit that will carry Seattle these final eight weeks. It's the unit that is young, growing into its own, that shows flashes that it could sustain once the talent and coaching coalesce.

The 2006 Seahawks were hanging on to the inexorable. The 2009 Seahawks are building off the eventual. The 2006 Seahawks were sad and fading. We didn't realize it then but most realize it now. Maybe we don't yet realize how good the 2009 Seahawks are becoming. Maybe it will be 2012 before we do. This weekend they fight for the relevance of 2009. The Seahawks are old but they are healthy. The Seahawks are young but they are desperate. Let's go kick the Cards in the mouth.

Sunday Night Game Thread

John Morgan — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:13:06 -0000

More photos » by Manuel Balce Ceneta - AP

One of my favorite non-Seahawks, DeSean Jackson, gets a chance to embarrass another secondary. If he can avoid embarrassing himself.

Browse more photos »

A good NFC East matchup to complement my IPA. Life is good.

Seattle Seahawks Agonizing in Victory; Win on Stafford's Five Interceptions

John Morgan — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:49:41 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

Deon Grant and the defense benefited from five Matthew Stafford interceptions to lead Seattle back after going down 17 in the first.

Browse more photos »

Seattle won. It wasn't pretty, it wasn't exciting and the Seahawks never looked like a playoff team, but halfway through its season, Seattle is a game away from last year's win total. These are the slow steps to rebuilding. Seattle started behind by 17, but gutted out a win against a team it could have stomped. It's not satisfying but it's something.

The offensive line is still disorganized and Seattle's run game is a liability. This line needs practice together. The organization needs to thoroughly scrutinize its line talent. Much of it may not return next year. I doubt Seattle re-signs Damion McIntosh. Ray Willis is cheap enough to stick at depth, but does not fit Greg Knapp's system. Sean Locklear will likely stick. Max Unger is a Seahawks. The rest of Seattle's linemen better pick it up in the final eight. Some, like Mansfield Wrotto, may not make it through the season.

It is possible that Tim Ruskell has been shy about drafting talent on offense because he didn't know what offense to draft talent for. Whatever the explanation, Seattle is not renovating, it's building a new offense. What it can salvage from this year's unit is like recycled mortar from the Kingdome.

The defense is built. Seattle will cash in when the pick is right. It needs a young athletic defensive end. It could use another disruptive defensive tackle, but should entertain re-signing Cory Redding. There's holes to patch. The talent must develop for it to be great. This defense is young and talented and capable of looking elite if paired with a great offense.

That might take a while. Seahawks fan must be brave, because the tables will be flipped soon enough. Matthew Stafford is a 21-year old rookie playing for a team that finished 0-16 last season. If he pulls it together someday, these trials will make his fans love him. Seattle will get its Stafford soon enough. Matt Hasselbeck played fierce and his effort helped lead Seattle back, but scraping for yards against a bad defense is not some miracle turnaround or rebirth for the Seahawks offense.

It took 51 attempts to get 329 yards. 17 passes were to his backs or fullbacks. Hasselbeck played like the aging game manager I think he now is. Seattle won around him, but mostly because of Stafford's five interceptions (worth 225 or 300 yards* depending on your interpretation). It didn't win because of him. Hasselbeck dinked and dunked against the 30^th ranked pass defense. He stared at his wide receivers like there wasn't a throw he could make. Hasselbeck checked down like he was facing a gifted young secondary. He was facing Kevin Hobbs.

(*Corrected from 350)

Today wasn't fun but it was a win. Remaking this offense will be a struggle, but it can't be pushed back anymore. The defense is starting to click. The Seahawks are branching two directions. The team is getting better as a whole, but worse at critical positions. I won't remember Matt Hasselbeck leading the game with a pick or picking his way back on top, but I will remember Hawthorne's two and Josh Wilson sprinting down field for six.

Game Ball: Josh Wilson recorded his first tackle a yard before the first down marker. Hawthorne would follow with a tackle for no gain to force the field goal attempt. Jason Hanson missed. From there he was pretty quiet. He might be seen tackling his receiver where he stood like against Bryant Johnson in the second quarter, but he wasn't seen much.

Detroit is a bad passing offense and Kelly Jennings could disappear in the folds of their failure, but for Wilson, this was step up time against a corps of tall, powerful receivers. He wasn't leapt over or bullied out. When Megatron went high over him on a critical fourth quarter pass attempt, Wilson stuck in and disrupted the catch. Today was a training wheels step towards starting, but Wilson kept it level and finished off flying. The Seahawks need Pistol to turn his quiet day with an "!" into the beginning of a beautiful career at right corner.