RANKING NFC WEST TEAMS

BEWARE: Another long post by me. I’ve ranked the NFC West teams using a simple points system. Since this a NFC West ranking much of the end results means that its relative to the NFC West, however, since our division owns two of the best teams in the league (SEA and SFO), plus a fast up-and-come (RAMS), and a mysterious dark horse who many believe possess the ingredients of a quality had they had better QB play (ARI). With 2 of the more potent offensives in the NFL and 4 of the better defenses in the league, one can definitely take these rankings outside of the NFC West as well.

I’ll start with OFFENSES:

QUARTERBACK (#1 = 5, #2 = 4, #3 = 3, #4 = 2): Rank based on Total Depth w/ an extra 1 point given to the best starter.

#1) SEATTLE SEAHAWKS (5.0 + .5 = 5.5 Points)
Russell Wilson*/ Tarvaris Jackson/ Brady Quinn
#2) SAN FRANSISCO 49ERS (4.0 + .5 = 4.5 Points)
Colin Kaepernick*/ Colt McCoy/ Scott Tolzien/ B.J. Daniels
#3) ST LOUIS RAMS (3.0 POINTS)
Sam Bradford/ Kellen Clemens/ Austin Davis/ Timothy Jenkins
#4) ARIZONA CARDINALS (2.0 POINTS)
Carson Palmer/ Drew Stanton/ Ryan Lindley/ Caleb TurBush

I think based on depth Seahawks have the best group of all NFC West Teams based on overall experience and starting history. One could argue McCoy over T. Jack but Jackson is coming into a situation in which he is familiar with. He is respected by his teammates, has chemistry/history with much of the players in the Seahawk’s Offense, and extensive experience in Bevell’s system while McCoy has to transition from the Browns to 49ers and replace Alex Smith. Bradford showed quality growth in 2012 but this is another season that should test him as this will be the first time in his career where he’ll be without Steven Jackson, Danny Amendola, and Brandon Gibson. A 33 year old Palmer has to make the switch from AFC to NFC as well as playing in one of, if not the best defensive divisions in the NFL behind the NFC West’s worst O-Line group.

Which leaves the argument between Wilson and Kaepernick. I for one think Wilson is the better overall QB while Kaepernick is the better overall athlete… so I just ended up splitting the best starter point in half and giving it to each team as both Wilson and Kaepernick are productively elite in their own ways.

RUNNINGBACKS (#1 = 5, #2 = 4, #3 = 3, #4 = 2): Rank based on Total Depth w/ an extra 1 point given to the best starter.

#1) SEATTLE SEAHAWKS (5.0 + 1.0 = 6.0 Points)
RB: Marshawn Lynch*/ Robert Turbin / Christine Michael/ Derrick Coleman/
FB: Michael Robinson/ Spencer Ware
#2) SAN FRANSISCO 49ers (4.0 Points)
RB: Frank Gore/ Kendell Hunter/ L. James/ Anthony Dixon/ Marcus Lattimore
FB: Bruce Miller/ Will Tukuafu
#3) Arizona Cardinals (3.0 Points)
RB: Rashad Mendenhall/ Ryan Williams/ Stefan Taylor/ William Powell
RB: Alfonso Smith/ Andre Ellington
#4) St. Louis Rams (2.0 Points)
RB: Daryl Richardson/ Isaiah Pead/ Zac Stacy/ Chase Reynolds
RB: Terrance Ganaway/ Eric Stevens


Might get arguments from 9er fans but Seattle has the best RB corps overall. Lynch was also the best RB in the NFC West in 2012 and 2011. Turbin was impressive enough in a limited role as a rookie and from reports he has made improvements in developing his lower body as well as understanding the Seahawks Zone blocking scheme more. Michael was the highest RB taken in the draft out of NFC West teams and they all took at least one. Furthermore, some draftniks believed Michael had 1st round talent but was knocked down because of character risks. Robinson is not as good as a blocker as Bruce Miller but he is solid enough and is a better rusher/receiver. Spencer Ware is a swing-back with Marshawn Lynch physicality as runner with Michael Robinson versatility to be a well-rounded FB.

While SF has a good group, very comparable at their best: Gore is 30 years old, Hunter is coming off an injury which is why I give Turbin the edge over him while they would be equal, James while limited did flash at times but isn’t the type of workhorse Turbin and Michael have the potential to be, Dixon has been under-utilized other than when Gore was injured in 2010. Lattimore likely won’t play this season. So their situation could go downhill fast which is probably why they have 10 RB/FB listed on their total roster. SF’s FB are great blockers but offer little else.

It was hard to gauge the Rams and Cardinals as both team’s websites don’t list a FB on their roster. However, I decided it with talent Mendenhall and Williams are both 1st round picks while the Rams will need multiple young players to step-up to replace versatile and productive workhorse, Steven Jackson.

WIDE RECEIVER: (#1 = 5, #2 = 4, #3 = 3, #4 = 2): Rank based on Total Depth w/ an extra 1 point given to the best starter.

#1) SEATTLE SEAHAWKS (5.0 Points)
Top 5 WR: Sidney Rice/ Percy Harvin/ Golden Tate/ Doug Baldwin/ Chris Harper
WR: Jermaine Kearse/ Phil Bates/ Stephen Williams/ Charly Martin/ 5 Others
#2) ARIZONA CARDINALS (4.0 + 1.0 Point = 5.0 Points)
Top 5 WR: Larry Fitzgerald*/ Michael Floyd/ Andre Roberts/ Ryan Swope/ Jarett Dillard
WR: LaRon Byrd/ Kerry Taylor/ Robert Gill/ 5 Other Rookies
#3) SAN FRANSISCO 49ERS (3.0 Points)
Top 5 WR: M. Crabtree (INJ)/ Aquan Boldin/ Mario Manningham/ A.J. Jenkins/ Quinton Patton
WR: Ricardo Lockette/ Kyle Williams/ Kassim Osgood/ Marlon Moore/ 2 Others
#4) ST. LOUIS RAMS (2.0 Points)
Top 5 WR: Chris Givens/ Tavon Austin/ Austin Pettis/ Steadman Bailey/ Brian Quick
WR: Raymond Radway/ Nick Johnson/ Andrew Helmick/ Blake Emory

I think Seahawks should have the most formidable corps in the West. In 2012, Rice and Tate were both ranked among the best in the NFL in production and efficiency per target. Harvin is one of the most versatile dynamic play-makers in the league and has been in Bevell’s system previously. Baldwin is a quality slot WR and is very clutch. Harper leads a very young and talented cast of WRs at the backend and gives the Seahawks a Boldin-esque type WR at 6’1, 234 pounds with a 4.45 forty speed possessing long-arms and big hands.

To put that in perspective there are 10 variables of height out of 46 WRs in the NFC West from 5’8 to 6’5 (I’ll chart the top names in WT in each HT variable):

(2) 5’8: SFO- C. Hall, 187; ARI- C. Hawkins, 180
(1) 5’9: STL- T. Austin, 174
(6)5’10: SEA- G. Tate, 202; STL- S. Bailey, 193; SEA- D.Baldwin, 189
(5)5’11: ARI- A. Roberts, 195; J.Dillard, 190
(13)6’0: ARI- R. Swope, 205; SFO- Q. Patton, 204; SEA- B. Swain, 200; STL- K. Taylor, 200
(6) *6’1: SEA- C. HARPER, 234*; P. Bates, 220, SFO- A Boldin, 220; M. Crabtree, 214
(3) 6’2: SFO- R. Lockette, 211, STL- J. Brown, 205; M. Rios, 203
(5) 6’3: ARI- M. Floyd, 225; STL- Brian Quick, 220; ARI- L. Fitzgerald, 218
(3) 6’4: STL- LaRon Byrd, 220; D. Buckner, 215; SEA- S. Rice, 202
(2) 6-5: SFO- K. Osgood, 220; SEA- S. Williams, 208

3 Closest WRs relative to Harper’s HT and WT are Malcolm Floyd, Aquan Boldin, and teammate Phil Bates. Floyd has 2 inches on Harper but weighs about 10 pounds less. Both Boldin and Bates measure the same in HT but Harper has about 15 pounds on them. I know a lot of evidence to get to a minuscule point but Seahawks’ Chris Harper is in a league of his own, out of the 46 WRs in the NFL West, he might not be the tallest but he certainly by a safe margin is the biggest especially compared to the WRs in the 5’8 – 6’2 range. Seahawks continue to draft players that are physically and athletically unique to the standard. Harper in just athletic comparison is a bigger, faster, stronger version of a rookie Anquan Boldin.

Cardinals come in at 2nd but tied for 1st because of Larry Fitzgerald. Had Crabtree not been injured I would have probably split SFO and ARI for #2. But I would take Arizona’s top 5 over Boldin, Manningham, Jenkins, Patton, and whomever. Boldin is an aging veteran and certainly isn’t the type of WR that ages well especially when he has to transition to a new team and build chemistry with a new QB, so asking him to produce like a #1 guy is going to be a long-shot, Manningham is coming off an injury. Jenkins is under heavy pressure in the wake of Crabtree’s injury and after a very unimpressive rookie year. Patton although very talented is still a rookie but I’ll at least predict he’ll be more productive than A.J. Jenkins.

Rams come in last, had this been purely on potential they would rank higher as all of their listed WRs have 2 or less years of total experience.. Austin and Bailey have a lot of talent, they are like the rookie versions of Harvin and Baldwin but they are still rookies and have to replace two of Bradford’s favorite targets in Amendola and Gibson. Givens and Pettis are quality wideouts while Quick needs to step-up to his draft status. Down the road this could become a dangerous corps, but as of now, they need a lot of seasoning compared to the rest of WEST.

TIGHT ENDS (#1 = 4, #2 = 3, # 3 = 2, # 1 = 1). Point reduction as 3 TEs usually make a roster with only 2 making any impact. Team with best starter gets 1.0 point bonus.

# 1) ST. LOUIS RAMS (4.0 Points)
TOP 3 TE: Jared Cook/ Lance Kendricks/ Zach Potter/
TE: Phillip Lutzenkirchen/ Cory Harkey/ Mike McNiell/ Cameron Graham
#4) ARZONA CARDINALS (3.0 Points)
TOP 3 TE: Rob Housler/ Jeff King/ Jim Dray
TE: Kory Sperry, Alex Gottlieb/ D.C Jefferson/ Kyle Auffray
#3) SAN FRANSISCO 49ERS (2.0 + 1.0 = 3.0 Points)
TOP 3 TE: Vernon Davis*/ Vance McDonald/ Garett Celek
TE: DeMarcus Dobbs/ MarQuis Gray/ 2 others listed as Long Snappers
#4) SEATTLE SEAHAWKS (1.0 Points)
TOP 3 TE: Zach Miller/ Sean McGrath/ Luke Willson
TE: Cooper Helfet/ Victor Marshall/ Darren Fells/ Anthony McCoy (I.R.)

Call me crazy but depth and experience is why I rank Rams and Cards better than 49ers and Seahawks. The 49ers and Seahawks both have very good well-rounded starters but both are relying on a rookie and 2nd year players to make up the depth whether or not those players are talented or not. Vernon Davis lifts the 49ers to tie in 2nd place with his best starter bonus. St. Louis has the best set of TEs in the NFC W and potentially in the NFL now that Hernandez was released with Cook and Kendricks. Potter provides them an experienced and solid blocker type. Card’s TEs aren’t name sexy but they have 12 years of experience between them. Housler, the youngest, had a very good season in 2012. King and Dray look to be well-rounded role players.

OFFENSIVE TACKLE (#1 = 5, #2= 4, #3 = 3, #4= 2): No individual bonus points for Offensive Line players. However, the best collective group in terms of experience and chemistry factors gets a 1.0 point bonus. That team of course is SAN FRANSISCO.

3 TIED FOR #1 (5 points + 4 points + 3 points = 12 points/ 3 teams = 4 points)

SAN FRANSISCO 49ERS (4.0 Points)
Starters: LT -Joe Staley/ RT- Anthony Davis
OT: Kenny Wiggins/ Luke Marquart/ Carter Bykowski
SEATTLE SEAHAWKS (4.0 Points)
Starters: LT- Russell Okung/ RT- Breno Giacomini
OT: Mike Person/ Michael Bowie/ Alvin Bailey
ST. LOUIS RAMS (4.0 Points)
Starters: LT- Jake Long/ RT- Roger Saffold
OT: Chris Williams, Joe Barksdale, Ty Nsekhe, Terrell Brown, Sam Hooey, Braden Brown
ARIZONA CARDINALS (2.0)
Starters: LT- Levi Brown/ RT- Bobby Massie
OT: Nate Potter/ Paul Fanaika/ Joe Caprioglio/ J. Johnson-Webb

I think San Fran and Seattle are equal at Tackle although I’m sure 49er fans would argue. I would take Okung over Staley. Davis over Giacomini. However, both teams lack experienced depth which kind of hurt them in overall rankings, however, both team have guards who can swing over if necessary.

St. Louis had the most interesting and best depth overall. Long is a very good and premier LT. Saffold is quality and both have the potential to get better as they get to practice against not only the best D-Line in the NFC West but probably the best in the NFL which I factored into the Ram’s ranking on par with San Fran and Seattle. Cardinals of course end up in last place.

OFFENSIVE GUARD (#1 = 5, #2= 4, #3 = 3, #4= 2)

#1: San Fransisco 49ers (5 points)
Starters: LG- Mike Iupati/ RG- Alex Boone
OG: Adam Snyder, Dan Kilgore, Joe Looney, Al Netter, Wayne Tribue, Patrick Omameh
#2 Seattle Seahawks (4 Points)
Starters: LG- Paul McQuistan/ J.R. Sweezy
OG: John Moffitt, Rishaw Johnson, Ryan Seymour
#3 Arizona Cardinals (3 Points)
Starters: LG- Jonathan Cooper/ RG- Daryn Colledge
OG: Chilo Rachal/ Sergio Kelemete/ Earl Watford
#4 St. Louis Rams (2 Points)
Starters: LG- Harvey Dahl/ RG- ???? ????
OG: Barett Jones, Shelly Smith, R. Watkins, B. Washington, Ryan Lee


More or less self-explanatory.


OFFENSIVE CENTER: (#1 = 4, #2 = 3, #3 = 2, #4 = 1) Reduction in points due to usually only 2 OCs making a roster with 1 making impact.

#1 Seattle Seahawks (4 Points)
OC: Max Unger, Lemuel Jeanpierre, Jared Smith
#2 St. Louis Rams (3 Points)
OC: Scott Wells, Tim Barnes, Kevin Saia
#3 San Francisco 49ers (2 Points)
OC: Johnathan Goodwin, Sherman Carter
#4 Arizona Cardinals (1 Points)
OC- Lyle Sendlein, Scott Wedige, Adam Bice

No one is going to argue Seattle’s position or shouldn’t they have the best starter and likely the best depth at the position. And I felt the Rams have a better overall group than the 49ers as the Rams O-line improved when Wells came back from injury plus he’s been one of the premier OCs since his time with the Packers. Goodwin is also the oldest of the 4 starters, and while a quality player, he isn’t better than the first two. Arizona again is last but in years past Sendlein was a decent player.


SEATTLE SEAHAWKS:
BACKS RANKING: 11.5/10
WR/TE RANKING: 6/ 9
O-LINE RANKING: 12/14
OVERALL: 29.5/33
OFFENSIVE POTENCY: 89% (89.39)

SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS:
BACKS RANKING: 8.5/10
WR/TE RANKING: 6/9
O-LINE RANKING: 12/14 +1 FOR BEST O-LINE OVERALL = 13/14
OVERALL: 27.5/33
OFFENSIVE POTENCY: 83% (83.33)

ST. LOUIS RAMS:
BACKS RANKING: 5/10
WR/TE RANKING: 6/9
O-LINE RANKING: 9/14
OVERALL: 20/33
OFFENSIVE POTENCY: 60% (60.60)

ARIZONA CARDINALS:
BACKS RANKING: 5/10
WR/TE RANKING: 8/9
O-LINE RANKING: 6/14
OVERALL: 19/33
OFFENSIVE POTENCY: 57% (57.57)

AVERAGE OFFENSIVE POTENCY: 73% (72.72)

Teams under the average, the average becomes the maximum output.

Teams over the average, the average becomes the minimum output.

SEATTLE SEAHAWK’S OFFENSIVE POTENCY OUTPUT: 73% to 89%
SAN FRANSISCO 49ERS OFFENSIVE POTENCY OUTPUT: 73% to 83%
ST. LOUIS RAMS OFFENSIVE POTENCY OUTPUT: 60% to 73%
ARIZONA CARDINALS OFFENSIVE POTENCY OUTPUT: 57% to 73%

So at worst the Seahawks will sputter around 73% potency, while at best they could be as high as 89%.

So for this to make any sense, over a course of 16 games at times the Seahawks at max potential could perform up to 16% better than San Fran’s offense. Relative to the Ram’s O: up to 29% better. Relative to the Card’s O, up to 32% better.

San Fran O on the other hand have up to a 10% chance to perform better than the Seahawks’O. Vs Rams: 23%. Vs Cards: 26%.

St. Louis has up to a 16% chance to perform better than the Cards over a course of a season. While the Cards have up to 13% chance to perform better than St. Louis offenses at times. Both teams need to be at their best and need SFO and SEA to be at their worst for their offenses to even compare.

I think the eye test proves my analysis well as most people would agree:
Seahawks O > 49ers O > Rams O > Cards O

Once I get to the Defensive rankings, we will get a better gauge on head to head matchups, NFC W Offenses vs Defenses.

Informational overload. +1 for the obvious time you took on it though. I concur with the standings.

I agree with the conclusion but based on just reading the QB analysis so far I found it pretty irrelevant to bring up QB depth. You said "I think based on depth Seahawks have the best group of all NFC West Teams". While having a good backup matters a little, it matters about 1/5000 as much as who your starter is. So while I agree with your conclusion of Wilson being the best in the west, I consider kind of foolish to bring overall QB depth into the discussion. Most backups, at least on really good teams, wont play a snap all year. (Disregarding when Flynn played a couple snaps last year when we were blowing the wheels off a couple teams)

Just a thought. Overall great work

The stimulation I enjoyed while reading the OP was surpassed only by the satisfaction I received when my head exploded as I witnessed cartire's follow-up post.

therealjohncarlson":1mwa143o said:

I agree with the conclusion but based on just reading the QB analysis so far I found it pretty irrelevant to bring up QB depth. You said "I think based on depth Seahawks have the best group of all NFC West Teams". While having a good backup matters a little, it matters about 1/5000 as much as who your starter is. So while I agree with your conclusion of Wilson being the best in the west, I consider kind of foolish to bring overall QB depth into the discussion. Most backups, at least on really good teams, wont play a snap all year. (Disregarding when Flynn played a couple snaps last year when we were blowing the wheels off a couple teams)

Just a thought. Overall great work

Click to expand...

It matters somewhat, back-ups still have to be prepared to play, and they do get reps in practice, I think it was Knox that said, perfect practice is what makes a team good or something along that lines.

If QBs are struggling in practice, it doesn't help offensive chemistry and growth of players on the depth chart, and defenses aren't getting the best competition either.

Theoretically, if Wilson and Kaepernick were injured, I expect T.Jack to perform better than C. McCoy. It matters.

I don't know if a points system is ever a good way to review something, for many reasons including the one therealJC listed. A points system type mentality is the same kind of thinking that led to Russell Wilson being ranked #5 among QBs under age 25. Sometimes, a player is much more (or much less) than the sum of the parts.

I thought your rankings were pretty good though. My only quibble so far (still reading through) would be STL at #4 for WR. I think they probably have the 2nd best WR group after us right now. If you watched Bailey, you know that he'll be at least an NFL average WR, and he could very easily be much more. In almost every way, he's a Bobby Engram (coming out of college) clone. Austin is going to be a pain in the ass and one of the biggest playmakers in the division. He'll be flawed too, but overall I kind of envision him as being the Chris Johnson of NFL WRs- explosive and productive, if a bit on the empty side. I don't really expect their WR group to amaze this season, but I like it more than SF's (especially without Crabtree) and way more than AZ's. Fitz had a miserable 2012 season and Palmer isn't a good bet to stay healthy all season, and even if he does he's playing his first year in their offense and might as well have the body of a 40 year old after everything he's been through during his NFL career. AZ's line sucks too, and that's kinda important for someone like Palmer. I think Palmer's upside is probably what he did last year in Oakland. It's going to be an ugly season for them. Outside of a possible Fitz bounce-back season, I don't see anything on that WR group that impresses me, other than Ryan Swope who may never play an NFL down at the rate things are going.

Also, I think I would prefer to just rank the offensive line as a unit rather than by sub-position. More than any area of any area of a team, OL must play as a single unit, and it's another case where the whole might be lesser or greater than the sum of the parts.

I found your TE and O-line rankings a bit off. Why the focus on depth when most of these teams would trade their entire unit for Vernon Davis? Jared Cook is far less than the sum of the parts when you watch his actual playmaking results. Zach Miller can still dominate, look at the playoffs. Depth is nice, but not a requirement. Look at Detroits receiver corps. It is as deep as a kiddie pool after megatron, but who cares? Same goes for Vernon Davis.

I felt like the whole exercise was about proving Seattle is better than SF. Maybe I am wrong, but that is what it feels like.

Is Carpenter listed? I didn't notice him.

Great write up, thanks for taking the time and providing thought provoking material in a time when there is nearly nothing to read about. Huge advantage for me also because I read like 1 word a minute so I will be finishing this post just in time for the first preseason game.

I still think that it comes down to Seattle and SF, that the other two are not in the same league quite yet. Within that, I also don't feel the Hawks have a clear advantage over SF anywhere outside of the secondary. On the flipside, I don't see a clear advantage for SF outside of the defensive front and O-line.

Every other aspect of the teams could be argued for the entire off season. So much is similar between the two. Even the fans are equally arrogant and annoying to each other along with each team having a coach that opposing fans love to hate.

I know that many believe the Rams are going to be a much better team in 2013, that may be true, but it isn't like the Hawks/Niners are just going to plateau at their 2012 level. The Rams IMHO are likely going to finish stronger, but still have a little growing to do if they are to overcome the Niners/Hawks right now.

loafoftatupu":14uurr4i said:

I still think that it comes down to Seattle and SF, that the other two are not in the same league quite yet. Within that, I also don't feel the Hawks have a clear advantage over SF anywhere outside of the secondary. On the flipside, I don't see a clear advantage for SF outside of the defensive front and O-line.

Every other aspect of the teams could be argued for the entire off season. So much is similar between the two. Even the fans are equally arrogant and annoying to each other along with each team having a coach that opposing fans love to hate.

I know that many believe the Rams are going to be a much better team in 2013, that may be true, but it isn't like the Hawks/Niners are just going to plateau at their 2012 level. The Rams IMHO are likely going to finish stronger, but still have a little growing to do if they are to overcome the Niners/Hawks right now.

Click to expand...

So, given their injury situation right now, or even without it, would you take SF's WRs over ours if you could have either one?

I wouldn't.

Scottemojo":1co2t1ne said:

I found your TE and O-line rankings a bit off. Why the focus on depth when most of these teams would trade their entire unit for Vernon Davis? Jared Cook is far less than the sum of the parts when you watch his actual playmaking results. Zach Miller can still dominate, look at the playoffs. Depth is nice, but not a requirement. Look at Detroits receiver corps. It is as deep as a kiddie pool after megatron, but who cares? Same goes for Vernon Davis.

I felt like the whole exercise was about proving Seattle is better than SF. Maybe I am wrong, but that is what it feels like.

Click to expand...

I for one wouldn't trade Miller, McGrath, and Willson for Vernon Davis.

I know STL wouldn't trade Cook and Kendricks for Vernon Davis... they should have one of the better duos in the NFL.

Only Arizona would probably trade their whole unit for Vernon Davis... but they are 2nd because Housler was pretty good last year catching 45 balls. And they have the most experienced depth.

If this had been a STARTERS ONLY rankings I could see where a lot of you are talking about...but I decided to rank Starters + Depth and then give the team with the best starter a bonus point. This is a contact sport, guys get hurt, depth matters.

TE was actually the hardest position grouping to place because I did put premiums on Davis and Miller. But as I looked at each team's depth, I felt I got it right in the end.

As for O-line I think I got it right, its the end results that counts...

San Fran ranked 13/14 overall, Seattle ranked 12/14 overall, St. Louis ranked 9/14 overall, and Arizona ranked 6/14. I think that fairs well to the actuality. We know San Fran has the best line, we also know that the Seahawk's line isn't that far behind, Long and a healthy Wells will go a long way to solidifying the Rams line and Arizona has a lot of work to put in.

Nice job on this but I think you have grossly underestimated Jake Long - that guy ate our lunch when we played them

Yes, the Rams and Hawks would trade their entire TE group for Vernon Davis. SF has the highest rated TE's in our division, and to think otherwise to me is almost enough of a farce to cost the entire post it's credibility.

Ad Hawk":3ddtefh7 said:

So, given their injury situation right now, or even without it, would you take SF's WRs over ours if you could have either one?

I wouldn't.

Click to expand...

No, but not because of talent, because of how they fit into the system. If you lined up both sets of receivers, who were all healthy, I would still take the Seattle crew regardless of offense, but in SF, the passing game is different. Very much focused on 3 or less targets with little use outside that group. For the Niners, they have the right guys in place to ball like that. VD, Crabs and now Boldin could support an entire passing offense.

In Seattle, the ball is absolutely everywhere. In that situation I would certainly want the set of receivers that are on the Hawk's roster. Now mind you, I really haven't factored in Harvin yet. As a football player, he may be one of the best in the NFL, not just with Seattle and SF. This Harvin thing could be a very, VERY big deal and could totally decimate any idea of what we envisioned the Seahawks offense looking like. Something to see once he is on the field, but for now, who knows? Wilson spread the ball out so evenly that no one WR really stood out except for Rice, who didn't produce crazy numbers in comparison and was a deeper threat.

I just see each group working for each team's program. SF is going to suffer from the Crabtree injury, Boldin can fill SOME of that role, but not the all around, everytime, "here I am", combination of the fair speed, height and athleticism that a young Crabtree just coming into his prime carries. Crabtree was poised to set the numbers on fire with Kaeperstank riding him. Manningham, Boldin and Crabtree make a pretty solid group of starting receivers, too bad for SF they won't all be on the field at the same time. Heck, we don't even know if Manningham is fully recovered.

loafoftatupu":17ssc4ra said:

I still think that it comes down to Seattle and SF, that the other two are not in the same league quite yet. Within that, I also don't feel the Hawks have a clear advantage over SF anywhere outside of the secondary. On the flipside, I don't see a clear advantage for SF outside of the defensive front and O-line.

Every other aspect of the teams could be argued for the entire off season. So much is similar between the two. Even the fans are equally arrogant and annoying to each other along with each team having a coach that opposing fans love to hate.

I know that many believe the Rams are going to be a much better team in 2013, that may be true, but it isn't like the Hawks/Niners are just going to plateau at their 2012 level. The Rams IMHO are likely going to finish stronger, but still have a little growing to do if they are to overcome the Niners/Hawks right now.

Click to expand...

Agreed with everything you wrote.

Scottemojo":17ssc4ra said:

I found your TE and O-line rankings a bit off. Why the focus on depth when most of these teams would trade their entire unit for Vernon Davis? Jared Cook is far less than the sum of the parts when you watch his actual playmaking results. Zach Miller can still dominate, look at the playoffs. Depth is nice, but not a requirement. Look at Detroits receiver corps. It is as deep as a kiddie pool after megatron, but who cares? Same goes for Vernon Davis.

I felt like the whole exercise was about proving Seattle is better than SF. Maybe I am wrong, but that is what it feels like.

Click to expand...

Also agree here. Seems like if anybody wants to they can choose to focus on any particular piece data and manipulate it in order to find ways to make one team to appear better than the other. If a fellow Niner fan wrote something like this I am sure it would highlight a different reason as to why the Niners would be awarded more points.

loafoftatupu":2hnirouu said:

Ad Hawk":2hnirouu said:

So, given their injury situation right now, or even without it, would you take SF's WRs over ours if you could have either one?

I wouldn't.

Click to expand...

No, but not because of talent, because of how they fit into the system. If you lined up both sets of receivers, who were all healthy, I would still take the Seattle crew regardless of offense, but in SF, the passing game is different. Very much focused on 3 or less targets with little use outside that group. For the Niners, they have the right guys in place to ball like that. VD, Crabs and now Boldin could support an entire passing offense.

In Seattle, the ball is absolutely everywhere. In that situation I would certainly want the set of receivers that are on the Hawk's roster. Now mind you, I really haven't factored in Harvin yet. As a football player, he may be one of the best in the NFL, not just with Seattle and SF. This Harvin thing could be a very, VERY big deal and could totally decimate any idea of what we envisioned the Seahawks offense looking like. Something to see once he is on the field, but for now, who knows? Wilson spread the ball out so evenly that no one WR really stood out except for Rice, who didn't produce crazy numbers in comparison and was a deeper threat.

I just see each group working for each team's program. SF is going to suffer from the Crabtree injury, Boldin can fill SOME of that role, but not the all around, everytime, "here I am", combination of the fair speed, height and athleticism that a young Crabtree just coming into his prime carries. Crabtree was poised to set the numbers on fire with Kaeperstank riding him. Manningham, Boldin and Crabtree make a pretty solid group of starting receivers, too bad for SF they won't all be on the field at the same time. Heck, we don't even know if Manningham is fully recovered.

Click to expand...

Because of what you point out in your post, I would count on our running game to be featured alot more than even last year. Gore, Hunter, James will be getting a ton of carries on rotation to keep all 3 fresh for every down. Couple that to the ability of Kaep to burst out a potential 56 yard run or deep pass using the pistol, and that will be enough to keep defenses honest. It will be Greg Roman's ability to adjust when defenses start watching film during the course of the season trying to counter is what our season will hinge on.

Lucky for both our teams we have explosive playmakers that are capable for making such adjustments in order to keep the offensive scheme fresh.

QB depth matters in regards to how big the drop-off will be when the starter goes down. It doesn't matter in the sense that 49ers and Seahawks are superbowl contenders with their starting qbs. NOT with their backups.........

"So for this to make any sense, over a course of 16 games at times the Seahawks at max potential could perform up to 16% better than San Fran’s offense. Relative to the Ram’s O: up to 29% better. Relative to the Card’s O, up to 32% better."

I am not going to remember this post at the end of the seasons but OP - it would be really neat with a re-analysis at the end of the year compared to this

loafoftatupu":315zyn8c said:

I still think that it comes down to Seattle and SF, that the other two are not in the same league quite yet. Within that, I also don't feel the Hawks have a clear advantage over SF anywhere outside of the secondary. On the flipside, I don't see a clear advantage for SF outside of the defensive front and O-line.

Click to expand...

I'd say the Hawks have a clear advantage over SF at WR. Rice, Harvin, Tate, Baldwin is far superior to a 49ers position group without Crabtree playing. The 49ers have way too many question marks with injury concerns (Manningham), guys that have yet to develop cohesion with Kaepernick (Jenkins, Williams) or newbies (Patton).

And Anquan Boldin is not a game-changing receiver, he just isn't. He is good, yes. But I see him as more of a possession guy/chain mover than a guy who is going to dominate, especially with defenses not having to contend with Crabtree. Boldin and Vernon Davis are going to be getting a lot of attention from defenses.

Overall, I think WR is a position I'd be worried about as a 49ers fan.

MeanBlueGreen":1l0x3ud6 said:

Nice job on this but I think you have grossly underestimated Jake Long - that guy ate our lunch when we played them

Click to expand...

I didn't grossly underestimate Jake Long... I ranked the Rams OTs equally to the Seahawks and 49ers. That is saying something about how I feel about the Rams tackles.