New DVOA ratings, Seahawks #9 O, #2 D, #9 ST

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13

  • I'll take that all damn day.
    #NEXTMANUP
    User avatar
    Evil_Shenanigans
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2422
    Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:15 am


  • It is pretty funny how obviously bad we were at covering #3 and #4 receivers. A lot of said on here how that was what was destroying us and led to our losses. #21 seems about right in that area.
    User avatar
    mistaowen
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1556
    Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 1:54 pm


  • mistaowen wrote:It is pretty funny how obviously bad we were at covering #3 and #4 receivers. A lot of said on here how that was what was destroying us and led to our losses. #21 seems about right in that area.


    Well we aren't obviously bad.

    Obviously bad is last year when we were ranked #32 in covering RB's. That is obviously bad.
    User avatar
    hawksfan515
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5211
    Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
    Location: Battle Ground, Washington


  • Happy to see the Hawks doing so well with DVOA rankings, which is the most accurate form of rankings IMO.
    Image
    User avatar
    HawkFan72
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11293
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Antioch, CA


  • They also claim we're the second most consistent team. I'm trying to just enjoy the ride right now, comparing to where we were in the Mora year, we have come a long way, who knows how long it will last but ride the lightening.
    User avatar
    the ditch
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 1563
    Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:05 am
    Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada


  • I want the division THIS year! and this tells me there is no reason that can't happen, just need a couple things to fall in place...
    GO HAWKS!!!!
    Image
    User avatar
    dunceface
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3209
    Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 10:29 am


  • Weighted are the numbers that really matter, where we're #11 for special teams; but still, this is great. Obviously, we all know our offense has improved by leaps and bounds the past few games, but I didn't realize our overall ranking had climbed quite so much. This is awesome.
    Rams bet status: honored. Bradford still sucks.
    RedAlice is right.
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24154
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


  • RolandDeschain wrote:Weighted are the numbers that really matter, where we're #11 for special teams; but still, this is great. Obviously, we all know our offense has improved by leaps and bounds the past few games, but I didn't realize our overall ranking had climbed quite so much. This is awesome.


    ABANDON SHIP! WE FELL TO #11 ON SPECIAL TEAMS RANKINGS!

    :sarcasm_off: ;)
    User avatar
    hawksfan515
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5211
    Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
    Location: Battle Ground, Washington


  • "But then when you get to other WR's we drop all the way down to #21.... lol.."

    So we might be screwed against Miami because even their GM said they don't have any #1 or #2 WR's, that they are filled with a bunch of 3's 4's and 5's
    arghawkfan
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 95
    Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:40 pm


  • Was just checking out NFL.com defense stats as well.

    We are #2 in points allowed
    #3 in yards
    #3 pass yards
    #5 sacks

    With the teams we face and the teams the other top defenses face, we have a shot at being the #1 ranked defense.

    And the best thing is we are middle of the pack in turnovers. The reason that is good is because unlike the Bears, if our defense doesn't force turnovers we aren't completely screwed. Turnovers are an added bonus for us, not something we need to have happen for us to win.
    User avatar
    amill87
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1331
    Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:35 pm


  • Those statistics state what I have suspected all season long. Our corners are so good they literally delete the #1 and #2 WRs from the stat sheet. They are so good, in fact, that QBs rarely test them, instead opting to throw over the middle of the field on short/intermediate distance passes, or hitting RBs in the flat on screens and swing routes. Nothing else is open for them.

    What impresses me most is that we do this primarily with man coverage. Man cover corners are a dying breed in the modern NFL (though they may be coming back thanks to us), making good ones very rare and difficult to find in the draft. Thanks to our simply amazing scouting efforts, we have two elite man cover corners, which lets us play cover 1 and even cover 0 looks without it being too risky to attempt.

    Compare this to the days when Trufant and Jennings were our starting corners. Trufant was never bad, but even during his Pro Bowl year, he was no Brandon Browner or Richard Sherman.
    Feel free to contact me if you need legal assistance. I have a great lawyer that helped me with an ex who violated my privacy and kept harassing me on MySpace and Facebook. He's very good. And there is legal precedent. - linuxpro

    He is hold back the legion of boom - skater18000
    User avatar
    SmokinHawk
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 5609
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:29 am
    Location: Not Umatilla, Oregon


  • SmokinHawk wrote:Those statistics state what I have suspected all season long. Our corners are so good they literally delete the #1 and #2 WRs from the stat sheet. They are so good, in fact, that QBs rarely test them, instead opting to throw over the middle of the field on short/intermediate distance passes, or hitting RBs in the flat on screens and swing routes. Nothing else is open for them.

    What impresses me most is that we do this primarily with man coverage. Man cover corners are a dying breed in the modern NFL (though they may be coming back thanks to us), making good ones very rare and difficult to find in the draft. Thanks to our simply amazing scouting efforts, we have two elite man cover corners, which lets us play cover 1 and even cover 0 looks without it being too risky to attempt.

    Compare this to the days when Trufant and Jennings were our starting corners. Trufant was never bad, but even during his Pro Bowl year, he was no Brandon Browner or Richard Sherman.


    Hell yes :th2thumbs:
    User avatar
    hawksfan515
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5211
    Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
    Location: Battle Ground, Washington


  • I just wet myself, championship style.
    poop
    User avatar
    SacHawk2.0
    .NOT a Moderator
     
    Posts: 9650
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:51 pm
    Location: With a white girl


  • What is DVOA?
    kobebryant
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1162
    Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 1:45 pm


  • That shows me that there are some major bias going on in the power rankings... I havent seen us in the top ten anyway.
    User avatar
    Hawksfan78
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 122
    Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 7:13 am


  • I wonder if Thurmond coming back will help relieve stats against the slot receivers and dump offs? Hmmm.. Trufant is great depth to have but he is over the hill and not a great nickle corner.
    User avatar
    Seahwkgal
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 2188
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm


  • I'll take it!
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 10821
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • mistaowen wrote:It is pretty funny how obviously bad we were at covering #3 and #4 receivers. A lot of said on here how that was what was destroying us and led to our losses. #21 seems about right in that area.


    I believe this is about to change with Thurmond III coming back from injury. Trufant played admirably, but has lost a few steps.
    rideaducati
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1571
    Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 3:18 pm


  • SacHawk2.0 wrote:I just wet myself, championship style.


    I would like to hear more about this and how it is different than normal wetting of oneself.
    User avatar
    falcongoggles
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3107
    Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:46 pm
    Location: Florence, Italy


  • hawksfan515 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:Weighted are the numbers that really matter, where we're #11 for special teams; but still, this is great. Obviously, we all know our offense has improved by leaps and bounds the past few games, but I didn't realize our overall ranking had climbed quite so much. This is awesome.


    ABANDON SHIP! WE FELL TO #11 ON SPECIAL TEAMS RANKINGS!

    :sarcasm_off: ;)


    Fire Brian Schneider! (He's probably the brother of John, so it only makes sense to get rid of the nepotism, amirite?)
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 14379
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


  • Superbowl futures odds are still 30-1 for the Hawks

    Minnesota 80-1.. I like this one, Value bet
    GO HAWKS!!!
    User avatar
    Twisted
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1554
    Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:29 pm


  • falcongoggles wrote:
    SacHawk2.0 wrote:I just wet myself, championship style.


    I would like to hear more about this and how it is different than normal wetting of oneself.

    Got to be all about quantity man. At least that's my guess. What say you Sac?
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    Image
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 10764
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • hawksfan515 wrote:ABANDON SHIP! WE FELL TO #11 ON SPECIAL TEAMS RANKINGS!

    :sarcasm_off: ;)


    Lol, don't get on my case about it, I'm just saying that the weighted (i.e., more recent) ST rankings have us dropping the figurative ball on special teams, compared to earlier in the season.
    Rams bet status: honored. Bradford still sucks.
    RedAlice is right.
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24154
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


  • Would the #3/#4 WR go on tru's & LB's lack of defense?
    User avatar
    vance_jetzt
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 81
    Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:26 pm


  • kobebryant wrote:What is DVOA?


    Well, it's either the name of Trey Parker and Matt Stone's band, or it's a Football Outsiders stat that I think stands for Defense-adjusted Value Over Average.
    Rzzzzz...
    User avatar
    peachesenregalia
    * NET Starfish *
     
    Posts: 10432
    Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:29 am
    Location: Helm's Deep


  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    hawksfan515 wrote:ABANDON SHIP! WE FELL TO #11 ON SPECIAL TEAMS RANKINGS!

    :sarcasm_off: ;)


    Lol, don't get on my case about it, I'm just saying that the weighted (i.e., more recent) ST rankings have us dropping the figurative ball on special teams, compared to earlier in the season.


    Yeah, I'm alright with it as long as we don't see that in our offense (Weighted is a higher) and defense (when you are ranked that high it's hard to get too much higher when weighted, and we only drop .1% in weighted defense. Not much at all).
    User avatar
    hawksfan515
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5211
    Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
    Location: Battle Ground, Washington


  • hawksfansinceday1 wrote:
    falcongoggles wrote:
    SacHawk2.0 wrote:I just wet myself, championship style.


    I would like to hear more about this and how it is different than normal wetting of oneself.

    Got to be all about quantity man. At least that's my guess. What say you Sac?


    Pretty much. The amount of moisture is much higher when wetting ones self championship style.
    poop
    User avatar
    SacHawk2.0
    .NOT a Moderator
     
    Posts: 9650
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:51 pm
    Location: With a white girl


  • SmokinHawk wrote:Those statistics state what I have suspected all season long. Our corners are so good they literally delete the #1 and #2 WRs from the stat sheet. They are so good, in fact, that QBs rarely test them, instead opting to throw over the middle of the field on short/intermediate distance passes, or hitting RBs in the flat on screens and swing routes. Nothing else is open for them.

    What impresses me most is that we do this primarily with man coverage. Man cover corners are a dying breed in the modern NFL (though they may be coming back thanks to us), making good ones very rare and difficult to find in the draft. Thanks to our simply amazing scouting efforts, we have two elite man cover corners, which lets us play cover 1 and even cover 0 looks without it being too risky to attempt.

    Compare this to the days when Trufant and Jennings were our starting corners. Trufant was never bad, but even during his Pro Bowl year, he was no Brandon Browner or Richard Sherman.

    Very well said!
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 10821
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • Seattle is now #4 in overall DVOA, behind just Denver, New England, and SF. SF is #1 at 41%, which is pretty amazing considering that most of that was with Alex Smith at QB.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10285
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • Twisted wrote:Superbowl futures odds are still 30-1 for the Hawks


    BFS had something like $1000 on the Seahawks back when they were 75-1 earlier this year. I can't remember exactly but it was something like that.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10285
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • vance_jetzt wrote:Would the #3/#4 WR go on tru's & LB's lack of defense?


    I think "inexperience" is a better term for our linebackers. Another part of it, like Smokin pointed out, is QB's throwing over the middle so much because there's nowhere else for them to go. Very few QB's can string together repeated long drives with that.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11233
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • kearly wrote:Seattle is now #4 in overall DVOA, behind just Denver, New England, and SF. SF is #1 at 41%, which is pretty amazing considering that most of that was with Alex Smith at QB.

    The 49ers were ranked #6 last week. They got a huge bump for the way they manhandled a Bears team that was top-5 by DVOA, but I'm pretty sure the numbers don't account for Cutler being unavailable for that game.
    jewhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 551
    Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:39 pm


  • jewhawk wrote:
    kearly wrote:Seattle is now #4 in overall DVOA, behind just Denver, New England, and SF. SF is #1 at 41%, which is pretty amazing considering that most of that was with Alex Smith at QB.

    The 49ers were ranked #6 last week. They got a huge bump for the way they manhandled a Bears team that was top-5 by DVOA, but I'm pretty sure the numbers don't account for Cutler being unavailable for that game.



    They also don't account for Colin Kaepernick having a better game than Smith has had all season...against a top 5 DVOA bears D that didn't show up to play.
    President of the Perfect Parents Society - est. 2013
    User avatar
    JesterHawk
    * Smackmeister *
     
    Posts: 6974
    Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:56 pm


  • Alex smith had 211 yards 2 td's week 1 , 226 yards 2 td's week 2, 303 yards 3 td's week 5, 232 yards 3 td's week 8.

    Now I hate the 9ers with a passion but I can't watch as a blatantly incorrect stat is thrown around.
    "Know thy self, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories." - Sun Tzu
    User avatar
    BigMeach
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 351
    Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:11 am





It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 10:34 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information