Russel Wilson Football Outsiders article --and what it shows

[formido]

That was great, thanks.

I know we've incorporated the quick passing game but was surprised to see FO classify our offense as being centered on the short passing / screen game.

Curious what others think about that.

It's false. Seattle runs more than passes, so if we're categorizing strictly by play count, our offense is centered on rushing. If we're categorizing by value, most of our offensive value comes from long passes. Hardly any of our big plays come from screens, wide receiver or otherwise. We're a big play pass team. One of Pete Carroll's goals is to win big plays. He tracks big plays. I guarantee screen plays are nowhere on his goal's list.

 

[Ad Hawk]

That was great, thanks.

I know we've incorporated the quick passing game but was surprised to see FO classify our offense as being centered on the short passing / screen game.

Curious what others think about that.

It's false. Seattle runs more than passes, so if we're categorizing strictly by play count, our offense is centered on rushing. If we're categorizing by value, most of our offensive value comes from long passes. Hardly any of our big plays come from screens, wide receiver or otherwise. We're a big play pass team. One of Pete Carroll's goals is to win big plays. He tracks big plays. I guarantee screen plays are nowhere on his goal's list.

But if screen plays keep the D off-balance, and force the LBs/safety to play up (see Kearse TD on fake screen to Tate), then we use them as part of the overall goal.

This is football chess at its best. Lose a pawn to capture a knight.

 

[Axx]

Best qb in the nfl but still try to run to pass ...

This team could easily pass to run

 

[TwistedHusky]

It might also be the lack of protection.

I seem to remember quite a few passes down the sideline that started when Wilson was flushed to one side and then ended up tossing the ball for a reasonable gain down the sidelines. Often, when he is running to one side, he has an uncanny ability to throw the ball straight in spite of his direction of travel (apparently that physics thing does not bother him).

It would be interesting if there was a way to see where the ball was thrown from on a lot of those sideline passes. I am betting that a good 30% of them (at least) were thrown from the same side.

It might be that the middle of the field is not used as much because if he was running to one side or the other, he would have to turn and throw across his body in the opposite direction of his momentum in order to hit a target in the middle. Which I know he has done occasionally for a score in the endzone when the defender leaves his man, but it probably would not be wise to get into a habit of doing that anywhere else.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

I enjoyed the one guy who dismissed Wilson because we have a run-first offense and top defense and so Wilson must not be having to do much.

 

[plyka]

I have a hunch that most interceptions are in the middle of the field. The sideline of the field provide protection from that angle, and so only one defensive player can make a play on the ball.

Concerning the intermediate depth throws, the run sets up the pass, and if we passed more, perhaps these routes would be better defended. Play-action sets up a lot of RW's successful passes.

I don't have stats to back this up, however, so everything I've said is probably moot.

The middle of the field does provide a higher risk, and I think this is why it is empty. But that's kind of my point in the first post --you're going to have to unleash Wilson, and this includes taking advantage of the middle of the field. There are more risks, but if you limit yourself then you're not getting everything you can get. Not to mention, i'm sure if football outsiders has this graph, by now 32 teams in the league have this graph, and you can expect defenses to start compensating for this tendency.

If the Hawks are going to win a superbowl, I think they will need to take more risks than they are currently taking. They are without a doubt the best team in football, but if they limit themselves even slightly and are not at 100% output, they may fall below the Broncos or the Saints or even the 49ers.

I think they need to open up the entire field for Wilson and give him more pass attempts.

 

[Ad Hawk]

I'd be curious to compare this chart to other teams (QB/OC) and their tendencies. I'd bet you see Brees with far more intermediate throws middle of the field than Wilson. But he didn't take many in his game against us. We must defend it well. In practice, too. So that's RW's problem with middle of the field: he's just scared! :shock:

 

[CostaRicaHawk]

14-2!~ There is nothing I think they need to change...





Yes I can see the future.

 

[muxpux]

It would be interesting if there was a way to see where the ball was thrown from on a lot of those sideline passes. I am betting that a good 30% of them (at least) were thrown from the same side.

this is kinda my thought. would be interesting to see a chart like this with some kind of way to tell where the pass originated (pocket, out of pocket, etc) or just a chart showing friom where he has thrown. (complete/incomplete)

 

[plyka]

It would be interesting if there was a way to see where the ball was thrown from on a lot of those sideline passes. I am betting that a good 30% of them (at least) were thrown from the same side.

this is kinda my thought. would be interesting to see a chart like this with some kind of way to tell where the pass originated (pocket, out of pocket, etc) or just a chart showing friom where he has thrown. (complete/incomplete)

You couldn't do it on this chart, there would be a million lines cluttering up the picture...although I'm sure we could find some generic stats, ie X% of Wilsons throws come from the pocket, X% from rolling out to his left, etc.

Edit: this is absolutely incredible, but I just counted the number of throws Wilson has thrown past 10 yards and inside the hashes --a total of 3! Two accurate and one inaccurate --that is such a low number that I'm starting to question the validity of the chart or of my grasp of the chart.

 

[Evil_Shenanigans]

This is easy. They're saving the Middle for Harvin.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

Great article on Wilson.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/film-r ... ell-wilson

But what does it tell me? It tells me Wilson is incredible. This much is obvious and is intended to be the main point of the article --which everyone in the world agrees with. But it also tells me that Bevell and or Wilson are not taking advantage of the entire field. I've had a few gripes all season regarding the seahawk offense --none of them have been Wilson's play which has been outrageous. My 2 main complaints have been:
(1)the Seahawks refusal to take more risks --they believe in their idealogy of eliminate TO's at all costs, run run run, play conservative, reduce the number of possession, play field position and rely on your defense. Well, this anti-risk stance is not always the wise choice --you have two variables risk versus reward. You should take risks up to your marginal cost justifies when taking into consideration marginal benefit or reward. And this offense just does not take enough risks --as outlined by another poster in another thread, where he pointed out Wilson has the 17th most yards of any QB but is rated in the top 3 when you take averages into account (yards per attempt, completion %, points per attempt, etc). This is just one series of stats, alone it may mean nothing, but put together with what we see, goes to show that Wilson is being underutilized and that there are not enough risks being taken with the offense.

(2) The Seahawks are not utilizing the middle of the field, or the intermediate pass routes. This can be seen from this great picture put up in the football outsiders article. It shows all of Wilson's accurate and inaccurate passes over the entire year --but look at the middle of the field, in the intermediate passing range. It's almost completely EMPTY! They love to pass to the sides of the field, they even pass it in the intermediate range to the sides of the field. But the intermediate range in the middle of the field is COMPLETELY empty. Although this was not a major point in the article, this was my major take away from this picture. It is unbeleivable to me how little they use the middle of the field, especially on intermediate routes. I don't understand why. Perhaps I'm making a mistake with the picture and how it is set up, as I can't fathom why the middle of the field is so empty with attempts.

The Seahawks lead the league in Toxic Differntial - the total of the Takeaway Ratio and the Big Play Ratio. They're seeing the reward WHILE minimizing the risk. It's not an either/or proposition. They have a philosophy to maximize both.

The biggest reason they pass so much to the sidelines is because of that philosophy. They teach their WR's to fight for control of the red line, an imaginary line midway between the hash marks and the sidelines. They even have the redline painted on their practice field. The purpose of this is to get the ball to the outside of the receiver where the defender can't get to it. Lots of sideline passes and passes near the red line mean less chance of a turnover. Their players aren't about speed, they're about the ability to win those matchups and go up for the ball or make the tippy toe sideline catch. This isn't about the deep sideline pass, as some of the comments over at FO seem think, deep throws tend to be to the the sidelines anyways because the WR is streaking straight ahead, keeping distance from the safety.

The big plays come when the safety covers the deep threat and the WR who controlled the red line on the short route breaks his tackle or they come when the deep receiver outjumps the defender for the big play. Both these plays are generated by controlling the red line. Our other big play comes from the Beast. With the WR's fighting for the red line outside, it stretches the field and when Beast gets to the second level they have to come back for him. But the WR's are taught to block and that means he can break a few tackles for a big play.

Thus we maximize our big plays while minimizing our turnovers. Toxic Differential goes through the roof. We win games.

Btw, the team with the highest TD by November in each conference tends to go to the Superb Owl. This year, that was Seattle and Cincinatti.

 

[Reaneypark]

It would be very interesting to see if we start getting guys wide open in the deep middle as coverages roll to the sidelines.

 

[-The Glove-]

Last year RW made a lot of passes down the middle so its not like he can't or won't. Who knows why they're not utilizing it this season

 

[plyka]

Great article on Wilson.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/film-r ... ell-wilson

But what does it tell me? It tells me Wilson is incredible. This much is obvious and is intended to be the main point of the article --which everyone in the world agrees with. But it also tells me that Bevell and or Wilson are not taking advantage of the entire field. I've had a few gripes all season regarding the seahawk offense --none of them have been Wilson's play which has been outrageous. My 2 main complaints have been:
(1)the Seahawks refusal to take more risks --they believe in their idealogy of eliminate TO's at all costs, run run run, play conservative, reduce the number of possession, play field position and rely on your defense. Well, this anti-risk stance is not always the wise choice --you have two variables risk versus reward. You should take risks up to your marginal cost justifies when taking into consideration marginal benefit or reward. And this offense just does not take enough risks --as outlined by another poster in another thread, where he pointed out Wilson has the 17th most yards of any QB but is rated in the top 3 when you take averages into account (yards per attempt, completion %, points per attempt, etc). This is just one series of stats, alone it may mean nothing, but put together with what we see, goes to show that Wilson is being underutilized and that there are not enough risks being taken with the offense.

(2) The Seahawks are not utilizing the middle of the field, or the intermediate pass routes. This can be seen from this great picture put up in the football outsiders article. It shows all of Wilson's accurate and inaccurate passes over the entire year --but look at the middle of the field, in the intermediate passing range. It's almost completely EMPTY! They love to pass to the sides of the field, they even pass it in the intermediate range to the sides of the field. But the intermediate range in the middle of the field is COMPLETELY empty. Although this was not a major point in the article, this was my major take away from this picture. It is unbeleivable to me how little they use the middle of the field, especially on intermediate routes. I don't understand why. Perhaps I'm making a mistake with the picture and how it is set up, as I can't fathom why the middle of the field is so empty with attempts.

The Seahawks lead the league in Toxic Differntial - the total of the Takeaway Ratio and the Big Play Ratio. They're seeing the reward WHILE minimizing the risk. It's not an either/or proposition. They have a philosophy to maximize both.

The biggest reason they pass so much to the sidelines is because of that philosophy. They teach their WR's to fight for control of the red line, an imaginary line midway between the hash marks and the sidelines. They even have the redline painted on their practice field. The purpose of this is to get the ball to the outside of the receiver where the defender can't get to it. Lots of sideline passes and passes near the red line mean less chance of a turnover. Their players aren't about speed, they're about the ability to win those matchups and go up for the ball or make the tippy toe sideline catch. This isn't about the deep sideline pass, as some of the comments over at FO seem think, deep throws tend to be to the the sidelines anyways because the WR is streaking straight ahead, keeping distance from the safety.

The big plays come when the safety covers the deep threat and the WR who controlled the red line on the short route breaks his tackle or they come when the deep receiver outjumps the defender for the big play. Both these plays are generated by controlling the red line. Our other big play comes from the Beast. With the WR's fighting for the red line outside, it stretches the field and when Beast gets to the second level they have to come back for him. But the WR's are taught to block and that means he can break a few tackles for a big play.

Thus we maximize our big plays while minimizing our turnovers. Toxic Differential goes through the roof. We win games.

Btw, the team with the highest TD by November in each conference tends to go to the Superb Owl. This year, that was Seattle and Cincinatti.

Regarding risk versus reward, of course it's not an either or --it is a ratio. The goal is to get the best ratio. My point is, if you're too tenative (not taking enough risk) then you're making a mistake. Assuming you're in the position of not taking too much risk --when you take more risk, the reward increases more than the risk does. I'm contending that they are not taking enough risk, and it's obvious when you take into consideration a few stats:

1) Wilson is 17th overall in total passing yards (despite playing the entire season), but when you take into consideration ratios or averages, like yards per attempt, completion %, etc., he is mostly in the top 3. This shows he is being underutlized.

2) Is the graph. I counted, past 10 yards and inside of the hashes, the Seahawks have attempted a grand total of 3 passes THE ENTIRE SEASON. It is one of the most amazing stats you will ever hear in my opinion. 3 passes after 14 games for 1/3 of the field. What does this tell you? It could be many things, but whatever the reason, it is an obvious MISTAKE. You cannot basically eliminate 1/3 of the field in your attack. You may be 100% right in your post, but we are not playing a Madden game, this is not a stock mindless defense that we play against every week. It is a defense that can make adjustments. What adjustments do you think they will make (if they haven't already)? Their defense will play the WRs/TEs for the outside, they will send help to the outside, etc. It gives the defense a huge advantage. They basically know that the WRs is not going to catch the ball in this 1/3 of the field, so why not play them to the outside, almost like you know where they want to go before they do?

 

[Ozzy]

Someone on Twitter made the argument that YPA is best indicator of how well a QB is playing and Wilson is either the top or very near the top in that category. Loved the article.

 

[hawk45]

Great article. I'm having difficulty believing how few attempts there have been between the hashes. If defenses haven't picked up on that and countered it by now I'm wondering if there is a reason. Certainly in man coverage the alignment of the DB is typically to the inside of the WR, to force the WR outside and use the sidelines as an extra defender. So I can see how man coverage would complement strategy of throwing out there. So in other words, defenses may know we want to throw out there, but be okay with it because that aligns with their own goals when they play man coverage. You're not going to get guys as wide, wide open near the extra-defender sidelines. In fact it takes receivers with tremendous ability to catch without much separation, and a very accurate QB, to make a living out there.

I'm with those who believe that sooner or later a defense will come along who will try and take that away. In man coverage, though, their adjustments might well result in our guys getting more wide open.

 

[plyka]

Great article. I'm having difficulty believing how few attempts there have been between the hashes. If defenses haven't picked up on that and countered it by now I'm wondering if there is a reason. Certainly in man coverage the alignment of the DB is typically to the inside of the WR, to force the WR outside and use the sidelines as an extra defender. So I can see how man coverage would complement strategy of throwing out there. So in other words, defenses may know we want to throw out there, but be okay with it because that aligns with their own goals when they play man coverage. You're not going to get guys as wide, wide open near the extra-defender sidelines. In fact it takes receivers with tremendous ability to catch without much separation, and a very accurate QB, to make a living out there.

I'm with those who believe that sooner or later a defense will come along who will try and take that away. In man coverage, though, their adjustments might well result in our guys getting more wide open.

No defense would be ok with our strategy of only throwing outside, and keep going with what they are doing. It makes zerro sense. If you know what the receivers are doing, you use it to your advantage. It may also be a reason why our offense does not look at threatening as it should, when compared to the Broncos or the Saints. With the running game the Hawks have, the passing attack should be as potent as any other team, especially taking into consideration the talent of Russel Wilson. I think I saw an obvious difference between the Hawks in the Saints game and the Hawks versus 49ers or Rams. Against the Saints, they took many more risks. Remember that 3rd and 12 from deep in Hawk territory, at the end of the 1st half when Russell threw that back shoulder pass to Baldwin/Kearse (don't remember which one). At the time the score was 20-7 with 2 minutes left --give it back to Brees and he could have taken them into half at 20-14. Instead the Hawks take the risk, and put the game to an end with a score right before half. Against the 49ers you didn't see them taking these risks. Throwing it in the middle of the field is a risk, but it is completely worth it taking into cnosideration your potential rewards.

UNLEASH WILSON PLEASE!

 

[scutterhawk]

This is a problem, but if he can keep winning it won't matter .

All I care about, is that Russell Wilson just keeps on winning, everything else is just window dressing.
We have the winningest Quarterback in Seahawks history, and it appears that almost every change that he's made, has been changes for the better, so I see no need to try and get cute with the game plans, and take ANY unnecessary risks.
How many here thinks that it's worth taking the RISKS of seeing Russell Wilson getting banged up, just so's we fans can MAYBE see one or two sensational plays, I sure as hell wouldn't.
He's already been cheap hit more than I care to see, so I say let's stay with what's working, and IF that trend starts taking a down turn, then, AND only then, would I like to see RW making intelligent adjustments and keep on winning.
Just keep my boy Russell Wilson UPRIGHT, he'll do the rest :th2thumbs:

 

[hawk45]

I just watched the 2013 highlight vid posted in another thread. The first thing that jumps out to me is, we played our first 9 or 10 games with no pass protection, so if Wilson threw a pass over 20 yards a lot of times it had to be outside the pocket.

The 2nd thing you notice is, you do not see some huge gaping part of the field not being used. You see passes right on the hash marks or just outside them up to 30 yards downfield.

So really all we're seeing is that there haven't been many balls dead-center on the field in a strip a few yards wide, and no deep balls dead-center. I don't think it's this huge hole in our offense that defenses can take advantage of. Watch the highlight vids, at no time do you get the impression that the DBs gain even a slight advantage by not covering a 2 yard wide strip of field or that our offense is being handcuffed. If a guy crosses the strip they still have to cover him.