As we await the Seahawks opening their first OTA to the media on May 23, let’s do a mailbag. A big thank you to everyone who chimed in. I couldn’t get to every question — there were more than 70 submissions — but I tried to address the themes in which people appeared most interested.

Let’s dive in. Some questions have been lightly edited for clarity and length.

What do you think Drew Lock has to achieve in order to keep Pete from finding his replacement next year? — @chihuahuaGlory

How realistic is it for either Geno Smith or Drew to play the “point guard” role based on their skill sets, a renewed emphasis on the running game and the newly drafted tackles? Can they sustain Pete’s preferred MO of ball control, tough D and win close games? — Paul M.

Pete Carroll has been around long enough for us to know exactly which areas Lock will need to succeed in to keep Seattle out of the quarterback market.

• Lock will need to protect the football; he’s tied for sixth among qualifying quarterbacks in interception rate since 2019, according to TruMedia.

• He’ll need to push the ball downfield with accuracy.

• And he’ll need to be effective on third down. Lock has struggled on third down since entering the league, but, for what it’s worth, he’s been better than Russell Wilson by EPA per dropback, according to TruMedia.

Other factors will matter as well, but those three areas will hold the most weight in Carroll’s mind when evaluating Lock at the end of the season, assuming he beats out Smith.

Being the “point guard,” game manager or whatever nickname we use for playing quarterback with the training wheels on is a difficult task if the passer isn’t accurate, capable of throwing with anticipation, efficient near the red zone or able to consistently complete passes when the defense knows he’s about to throw. Lock and Smith could operate in the most quarterback-friendly offense known to man and still not have team success if they can’t check all those boxes. Independent of the run game or the defense, the quarterback must deliver in those areas to carry out Carroll’s vision.

How much change should we expect to the offense? And what is reasonable to expect from that side of the ball? Giant downgrade at QB in terms of talent but (potentially) a QB more likely/willing to play to a Rams-ish scheme and take checkdowns, etc. It’s really hard for me to balance the drop-off in quality and loss of a world-class deep ball with the fact Geno or Lock will be less resistant to some of the stuff we expected to see from Shane Waldron. — Sean K.

One thing to keep in mind when assessing an offense is how much the quarterback’s decisions impact where the ball goes. Checkdowns, crossing routes, deep balls, stick routes — the frequency of these throws will depend on what the quarterback is most comfortable with. The passing game coordinator can design whatever he wants, and the offensive coordinator can call the ideal play every snap, but it doesn’t matter if the players don’t execute. That’s why I was always skeptical that a new offensive coordinator would dramatically change Russell Wilson’s game.

I think Smith will win the job because of his familiarity with the offense. And I think Lock’s belief in his strong arm mixed with his anticipation issues will get him into trouble during training camp. But with either Lock or Smith at the helm, expect the quarterback to be comfortable taking what’s in front of him as opposed to holding out for the home-run ball as Wilson often did. The positive: fewer back-breaking negative plays. The negative: fewer game-changing, explosive plays down the field. And because Smith and Lock don’t have the deep-ball accuracy, arm strength or ability to make layered throws that Wilson possesses, I’d anticipate a vanilla passing offense in 2022, one that may routinely struggle in obvious passing situations (two-minute, playing from behind, third-and-long, etc.). The run game must carry the load.

What is your realistic expectation for this upcoming season? What can define it as a success or failure for you? — @Seahawks328

Realistically, the Seahawks need to be competitive. I like using point differential as a measuring stick. Last year, they were a plus-29. That was better than the Steelers (minus-55) and the Raiders (minus-65), who made the playoffs but weren’t as good as their records suggested. Like Seattle, the Commanders finished 7-10 but their minus-99 point differential indicates they weren’t actually good football team. The Seahawks will probably have a losing record in 2022, but if they can avoid being embarrassed and finish with a point differential somewhere around league average (last year they were 14th), the rebuild will feel headed in the right direction. Failure would be getting blown out left and right.

Obviously, drafting Ken Walker III raises questions with Chris Carson’s health. How likely is it for Carson to be on the field this year, or do you think they cut him in June to save money? — @teaakayyy

Do you think Walker has the potential to become RB No. 1? Is he ready to go now or is he a project? — @TySporting

The Seahawks drafted Walker because they don’t know what will happen with Carson’s neck. Does that mean they’ll cut Carson? No. (Also, cutting a player who is unable to pass a physical is slightly different than a normal release.) They just have to play the waiting game until camp. But that uncertainty played a role in the Seahawks’ decision, no doubt. If you look at their history of drafting running backs high — Christine Michael in 2013, C.J. Prosise in 2016, Rashaad Penny in 2018 — they always are motivated by the availability of the previous starter.

Setting aside positional value relative to draft slot, Walker is supremely talented and can explode for a major gain at a moment’s notice. He’s like Penny in that regard (though not as powerful). I wouldn’t be surprised if Walker is not only Seattle’s No. 1 running back by late in the season, but also in the Offensive Rookie of the Year conversation.

Carroll and GM John Schneider claim they’re trying to (“always”) compete this year, but with the roster as is, the likelihood of that being successful is slim. If their jobs are safe, why are they not fronting up that this is gonna be a multiyear rebuild? — Matthew D.

Do you think there is that big of a gap in the floor and ceiling (record-wise) for the Seahawks this year? I’d like to think no matter who starts at QB, at worst they are probably a four- or five-win team and at best six or seven. — A A.

If you had to guess, what’s the fewest wins that would trigger a change at head coach? — Alan H.

Carroll and Schneider haven’t acknowledged this is a rebuild because they’re just not wired that way. Carroll is addicted to the idea of competing to win it all every year — that’s legitimately all he knows, even if it’s farfetched to the rest of us. As for Schneider, he grew up in Wisconsin wishing that his hometown Packers did everything possible every year to be in position to contend for a title. He brought that same attitude to Seattle. Also, I’d guess that when Jody Allen met with them this offseason, she didn’t like the idea of a full-on rebuild. The Seahawks have been a very successful business the past decade-plus and from that perspective, actively putting out a substandard product doesn’t sound like a great idea.

In reality, the Seahawks will win anywhere from four to eight games in 2022, depending on quarterback performance, offensive line play and how healthy the defense stays throughout the season. Anything fewer than four wins and I can see Allen wanting to make a change, especially if those losses are lopsided. Blowouts are bad for business and a sign that this rebuild isn’t going well. I predicted a 5-12 season, which should keep the brain trust around in 2023, so long as their point differential isn’t embarrassing.

You have mentioned a few times that you don’t have confidence in the brain trust to turn it around. Yet this draft seems to have been better than previous. Do you get the sense that Pete has handed over the control to John more? If so, would this give you more faith? And, piggybacking on this, do you have a good feel on who had the final say in personnel decisions then and now? — Michael C.

The Seahawks had a great draft. However, the more people I speak with, the more I conclude that their draft was largely a product of having obvious needs at premium positions in a year when filling those needs was fairly easy based on the talent available. There is no indication that Carroll relinquished power or that the brain trust found the magic touch again. From my understanding, Schneider’s staff is still running the show, with Carroll overseeing the whole operation. As for having restored faith in the organization, I’m still skeptical, largely because I’m not sold it has learned the necessary lessons from all the missteps the past six years and change. This franchise needing to hit the reset button was no accident. The 2022 draft was a step in the right direction, but there’s still a long way to go.

What do you think the best route for finding the QB of the future is, assuming Lock/Smith are not the answer? A roster not built for tanking may lead to the best QBs being gone by the time the Seahawks draft in 2023. Do you trade multiple firsts to move up for a star? Count on a tank? Something else? — Conor O.

I’d prefer acquiring a veteran, but let’s assume there won’t be any good ones on the market next offseason. The Seahawks don’t need to tank to find a franchise quarterback. This is a people business at the end of the day, and the people in the building matter in ways that improved draft position via tanking can’t quantify. You can find a franchise guy outside of the top 10, especially if you already have the infrastructure in place to make it so that the rookie doesn’t have to come in and be Superman from the beginning. The order in which the quarterbacks are picked does not reflect how talented each passer will be in the pros.

Tanking to improve draft position is a dangerous game to play and a sure way to lose a locker room. If you like someone in the draft and need to move up to get him, then trade the necessary assets. There’s no price too expensive if you end up landing your guy. That’s how Seattle should look at this whole rebuild, really: Construct the best, most successful team possible, acquiring as much talent at every position. Then if there’s a quarterback you feel you can win because of in the draft, make a trade. If not, stay put and draft a guy you can win with, since those guys are a little easier to snag.

Assuming the offense takes a step down from recent years, what does success look like in Year 1 for Charles Cross, Abraham Lucas and Walker? — Keith C.

Individual offensive lineman success is hard to quantify, and even metrics such as Pro Football Focus grades and pass block win rate don’t tell the whole story. But if Cross ends up top-15 in both categories, I’d say that’s a successful rookie season. Lucas needs to win the starting job, keep it for the entire season and prove to be a capable, starting-caliber right tackle similar to the rookie year Damien Lewis had at right guard in 2020. I’m not worried about the yards or touchdowns with Walker as much as him solidifying himself as the team’s No. 1 running back by the end of the season. That means being efficient and explosive with the carries he receives.

https://twitter.com/TheAthletic<a class='ath_autolink' href='https://theathletic.com/nfl/'>NFL</a>/status/1525131333470658564

With Clint Hurtt as defensive coordinator, do you think we will see more disguise in coverage than we did under Ken Norton? Also, do you think we will see major differences in percentage of man vs. zone coverages and blitz rate? — Vince W.

The 3-4 front with split safeties does offer more flexibility in that regard, I think. You can run Cover 2, Cover 4, Cover 6 or rotate a safety into the box after the snap and run Cover 1 or Cover 3. And obviously you can alternate between man and zone in these different coverages. So, yes, I’d expect more disguised looks, more exotic blitzes and more man coverage in the team’s new defensive structure. While Seattle’s Cover-3 scheme in the glory days thrived on simplicity and being able to line up and dominate the offense, the Seahawks’ new defense should be more multiple and deceptive, which makes sense considering the talent drain on that side of the ball in recent years.

Who are your favorite Seahawks to interview, and are there position groups you enjoy covering more than others? — Themanebro !

I’ve been covering the Seahawks since 2017. For X’s and O’s and postgame stuff, I loved talking with KJ Wright, Bobby Wagner, Cliff Avril, Bradley McDougald, Justin Britt and Quandre Diggs. For discussions about how the team is feeling, I’d go to Shaquill Griffin, Doug Baldwin, Duane Brown and DJ Fluker. If I need a laugh or want to tap into the team’s energy, I’d lean on Frank Clark, Luke Willson, Nick Bellore or Neiko Thorpe. Avril, Wagner, Wright and Tyler Lockett are excellent for non-football discussions, too. There’s some overlap elsewhere as well but those are my favorites.

Defensive backs are typically the best players to interview. In my experience, defensive players in general are more colorful and entertaining than those from the offensive side of the ball, and they have this nastiness mixed with attitude and confidence that makes them fun to cover. I believe that to be true at all levels of football.

What’s the noise about KJ returning in “some” capacity? I know it’s not as a player, but … — @ondokusan

The Seahawks aren’t going to re-sign Wright, even though the veteran linebacker has expressed a desire to return to Seattle. Wright, at 32, doesn’t fit what the Seahawks want to do defensively and I’m sure they’ve communicated this to him. So, the noise is just that: noise. Wright could join the team as an analyst or assistant coach, but that’ll be up to Wright’s willingness to commit to the work hours required of an NFL coach. Some guys would rather spend that time with their families, particularly if they have young children (which Wright does).

(Top photo: Steph Chambers / Getty Images)