Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Roster churn - Seahawks #1 since 2010 (by a large margin)

dos poptarts

By dos poptarts,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

dos poptarts Newbie

dos poptarts

Posted
Posted

Was trying to organize the Panthers roster into different groups and ran across this article while trying to do some research. (sorry if it had already been posted). While I don't agree 100% with the article, coorelation != causation, it does provide some credence that Pete Carroll and John Schneider wants to see as many bodies to evaluate as possible. Might be why they've been able to plug backups in during the season w/o significant dropoffs in output. Talent eval still being the most important.

 

No idea where the Panthers might be on this list...

I was looking at roster churn and trying to group the Panthers into 3 tiers.

Tier 1: Elite

Tier 2: Very good at their position

Tier 3: Avg/Below avg/unproven (these is where there should be lots of turnover, but I don't know if that's the case before G-man arrived.)

 

 

The Seahawks' Secret: Moves. Lots of Moves

Since January 2010, when Seattle hired Pete Carroll as its coach, the Seahawks have logged 1,105 transactions, by far the most in the NFL, according to Stats LLC. In fact, Seattle is the only team over that span to crack 1,000 transactions. Only five other teams topped 900.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303743604579350702085746462

 

 

 

 

BN-BH437_COUNT0_G_20140129222706.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

they are never satsified with what they have is what i take from that, and i like it. i also see that with gettleman.

 

one of the things that i'm sure people would complain about is letting go of guys with potential. we always get attached to guys that we hope some day will turn into something special...the underdog player. i think that in the hurney era we were really bad about that.

 

some players spent years on the roster with the team just waiting for that moment to come where it all clicks. that's just not a way to ensure you have the best team possible, tho.

 

we have to be constantly looking for the right fit and we don't need to take much time to see if it's there. sure, some day two or three draft picks might need a couple years to develop, but i think even with that it doesn't take long to see if the light is capable of coming on or if what they can deliver when they finally "get it" is worth the time put into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

That is interesting to see some of the best teams on the top of this list, but there is also a good number of some of the worst teams, so I'm not sure if there is a correlation there.

 

i think there is.

 

with the seahawks and pats, i can look at that and see that it's their model of doing business.

 

with the bucs and colts and some of the other teams, they have just had a huge overhaul in their team because of coaching changes and such. i don't see we'll see a pattern there the way we do with the seahawks and pats.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EightyNine Newbie

EightyNine

Posted
Posted

i think there is.

 

with the seahawks and pats, i can look at that and see that it's their model of doing business.

 

with the bucs and colts and some of the other teams, they have just had a huge overhaul in their team because of coaching changes and such. i don't see we'll see a pattern there the way we do with the seahawks and pats.

 

Yeah, but if you look at that, it kinda looks like the Jets and Jaguars model too..

 

It doesn't tell the whole story.

 

The Seahawks vastly improved once they found their quarterback. Thats what usually makes the biggest difference.

 

There are just too many average to below average teams high on that list to say there is a correlation.  The Broncos were 26th and look how good they are? Just like the Seahawks, they became contenders when they got their quarterback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

Just a reference point.   Transaction doesn't equate to roster changes only.  If for example you sign a guy to the practice squad, waive him, resign him, elevate him to the active roster, send him back to the practice squad and then waive him again, that would be 6 transactions with the same guy.  Sure they had a ton of them but it could be 300 transactions with 50 guys not a 150 guys necessarily.

Just saying...............

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kurb Newbie

Kurb

Posted
Posted

The correlation is in mindset.

 

The Jags are always looking for another player to help them get wins, so they cycle through tons of players to do so.

 

The Seahawks are doing the same.

 

Stockpiling talent is a constant effort.

 

 

I certainly hope the Panthers follow a similar model going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dos poptarts Newbie

dos poptarts

Posted
  • Author
Posted

they are never satsified with what they have is what i take from that, and i like it. i also see that with gettleman.

 

one of the things that i'm sure people would complain about is letting go of guys with potential. we always get attached to guys that we hope some day will turn into something special...the underdog player. i think that in the hurney era we were really bad about that.

 

some players spent years on the roster with the team just waiting for that moment to come where it all clicks. that's just not a way to ensure you have the best team possible, tho.

 

we have to be constantly looking for the right fit and we don't need to take much time to see if it's there. sure, some day two or three draft picks might need a couple years to develop, but i think even with that it doesn't take long to see if the light is capable of coming on or if what they can deliver when they finally "get it" is worth the time put into it.

 

This is what I "think" Carroll and Schneider are doing. Is Hawk recovered from partying yet? He might have more insight. But what the Hawks show is their Coach/GM philosophy. Yes, they could be waiving, cutting, re-signing the same player to pad the transactions, but you can't pad a 15% lead on the 2nd place team.

Bad teams with new GMs/HCs should have high transactions as they get their team assembled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EightyNine Newbie

EightyNine

Posted
Posted

This is what I "think" Carroll and Schneider are doing. Is Hawk recovered from partying yet? He might have more insight. But what the Hawks show is their Coach/GM philosophy. Yes, they could be waiving, cutting, re-signing the same player to pad the transactions, but you can't pad a 15% lead on the 2nd place team.

Bad teams with new GMs/HCs should have high transactions as they get their team assembled.

Its easy to look at Seattle at the top of this list and make a correlation, but I'm just not sure if its there.  The Seahawks are reaping the benefits of drafting well.. Their best players came from the draft.  They really started to be contenders when they got their quarterback, which probably shows a much much better correlation.  They aren't players that came from constantly changing your roster.  Your highest turnover rate should be at the bottom of your roster, not the top.  I agree that you need to always improve in this area, but i think there are too many factors (quarterback, draft success, good teams not on the list, and bad teams that are on the list) to make this type of direct correlation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

The correlation is in mindset.

 

The Jags are always looking for another player to help them get wins, so they cycle through tons of players to do so.

 

The Seahawks are doing the same.

 

Stockpiling talent is a constant effort.

 

 

I certainly hope the Panthers follow a similar model going forward.

 

good explaination.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Off Season Thread

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      That's my biggest concern with making him the 2C.  You split up the Aho Jarvis bromance that accounted for a lot of points.  If Jarvis excels as a C, it could help the team even more though.
    • PanthersNCSU
      Barnwell - Ranking WR, TE, RB Groups in NFL

      By PanthersNCSU · Posted

      The Saints being that high is the one that killed me. Chris Olave might not know his name at this point, Shaheed is coming off injury as well, so 31 year old Brandin Cooks might be your best WR...coming off a 260 yard season over 10 games. Kamara is Kamara, but didn't have 1,000 yards last year and is about to turn 30.  Toss in the fact that Taysom Hill may be the best QB on the team and I truly don't understand Barnwell's thoughts beside seeing the names "Olave" and "Kamara" and going yep, that sounds better than "Chuba" and "Thielen". 
    • TD alt
      Barnwell - Ranking WR, TE, RB Groups in NFL

      By TD alt · Posted

      Now now now, I wouldn't say there is no logic, but there's just not a lot of in-depth thought put into Barnwell's  "analysis." Now to be fair to him (and other national writers), pre-season team rankings are basically clickbait. And...Barnwell, himself, said that "there's a lot of projection here." He basically admits that he doesn't know how the hell things are going to turn out with our receiver group. He also said that "I find myself" more intrigued by Coker than Legette; that does not mean that he said that fans should be, or that Coker will even be better than Legette (regardless of ESPN's per-route-run stat). So, yeah, Barnwell said some things, but even he has to basically admit that he doesn't know how bad or good that our playmakers will be in 2025.  Overall, what Barnwell is basically thinking is that the Panthers have gotten worse at the offensive skill positions, and baked into that is that others have gotten better. That's the argument in July (meaning, please don't give this any more weight than it's due). I would personally be surprised (not shocked) if we end up worse than the Titans, Pats and Giants at least. Once you throw in the Bills, Giants, Jets, Steelers, and even the Chargers, I personally think there are several teams' skill groups that may end up ranked lower than ours by the end of 2025.  @kungfoodudeis one of my dudes, but like others he is over the tipping point. He's had enough. Seeing is believing. I will say this though: Barnwell's piece is less about logic than just good ol' opinion. And to be honest, he might as well be a Huddler throwing out sh¡t in the summer based upon nothing but good feels or bad feels.  Our offense as a whole (just like any other team's) is going to depend upon the play of the O-line and especially the QB. How you can even rank the skill positions without expressly baking those two things in the cake is beyond me. I would dare say that that's not even logical. 
×
×
  • Create New...