Shock2k
New member
This is usually the part of the season where I try to figure out how good the team REALLY is vs. how good (or bad) I think they are. Which of course is subjective, and because of that, relevant only to me. A 10 and 1 teams is a good team, that’s not what I’m saying, but is a 10 and 1 Seahawks team as good against a Denver, New Orleans or Carolina? Either way, the stats are fun for some folks so I will post them.
Reviewing the Schedule to date:
Well this is a little difficult because if you look at strength of schedule to this point the Seahawks are at .303, which means 30% of teams we have played have a record of .500 or above. Before the season began our projected strength of schedule was .516 (with 7 quality opponents based on 9 or more wins).
Now to be fair the Seahawks played the Texans when they still had Arian Foster, Matt Schaub and a sense of pride (Not to mention a 2 and 1 record). So I would still consider the Texans game a quality win. As would I with games on the road against Arizona and St. Louis at a point both teams were on the rise (especially after St. Louis went all in with Zack Stacy). The Panthers and the Colts were indisputably difficult games, especially considering the strength of those defenses at the time.
San Francisco at Home was not the "Real" San Francisco without Manningham and Crabtree, not to mention the sudden RG3'Itis running rampant in the league against the read option (Note rumors of Cam Newton now becoming primarily a pocket passer).
Taking a look at the ranks of teams we’ve played through the 2013 season doesn’t show any kind of reasonable inference as to “how good” the team is.
Though looking at the notable injuries alongside the games puts a little more perspective to the games played, I still don’t feel like there is an answer.
Yes “FB1” is Michael Robinson, I considered him on the “unpaid PUP list.” To me the team just didn’t feel the same.
Looking at the offense: Passing:
Wonder why we aren’t getting a lot of national play even though we are a 10 and 1 team. I don’t think it's East Coast bias, I think it's just a lack of excitement. If you want a lot of attention you need big time quarterback play. Don’t get me wrong, Wilson seems to throw and one of our receivers seems to catch some impossible pass at least once a game. But to be frank that’s a highlight reel, there is no bigger story working here, hence the lack of national attention. (I have a feeling that may change in bigger games coming up and in the playoffs). Throw in no real interesting games since Week 2 and….
Anyways,
As a team we rush 55% of the time and pass 45% of the time. So though not exceedingly so, we are a rushing team.
So looking at the base Passing Offense:
At first glance looks pretty pedestrian. Though highlighting the "8th in Completion Percentage" and then using other stats makes the Seahawks passing offense look a lot better.
I give you some stats that go a little deeper:
[tr[td]Avg Pass Yards/Play[/td][td]13.6[/td][td]2[/td][/tr]
Ok, more meaning for me personally. What does it tell me? Russell Wilson is as awesome and elite of a quarterback as a young Payton Manning, Drew Brees or Tom Brady. Weighting in the absolute masters of the catch we have running routes for him.
Plus take into account:
Besides Ben Roethlisberger, of the top 10 QB’s by passer rating Russell overcame more QB hits and Sacks then all of them. But still maintains the 5th highest passer rating in the league.
And put it to you this way, let’s say the Run/Pass percentage were reversed, Russell Wilson would have 3,075 yards at this point in the season, good enough for 5th in the League.
That’s a hell of a passing game, and a hell of a quarterback. Would I trade Andrew Luck for Russell Wilson… the answer is hell to the no.
Reviewing the Schedule to date:
Well this is a little difficult because if you look at strength of schedule to this point the Seahawks are at .303, which means 30% of teams we have played have a record of .500 or above. Before the season began our projected strength of schedule was .516 (with 7 quality opponents based on 9 or more wins).
Now to be fair the Seahawks played the Texans when they still had Arian Foster, Matt Schaub and a sense of pride (Not to mention a 2 and 1 record). So I would still consider the Texans game a quality win. As would I with games on the road against Arizona and St. Louis at a point both teams were on the rise (especially after St. Louis went all in with Zack Stacy). The Panthers and the Colts were indisputably difficult games, especially considering the strength of those defenses at the time.
San Francisco at Home was not the "Real" San Francisco without Manningham and Crabtree, not to mention the sudden RG3'Itis running rampant in the league against the read option (Note rumors of Cam Newton now becoming primarily a pocket passer).
Taking a look at the ranks of teams we’ve played through the 2013 season doesn’t show any kind of reasonable inference as to “how good” the team is.
| Opponent | Week | Week 11 Defensive Rank | Rank When Played |
|---|---|---|---|
| Carolina | 1 | 4 | 7 |
| San Francisco | 2 | 11 | 24 |
| Jacksonville | 3 | 31 | 28 |
| Houston | 4 | 20 | 5 |
| Indianapolis | 5 | 24 | 17 |
| Tennessee | 6 | 29 | 11 |
| Arizona | 7 | 1 | 5 |
| St.Louis | 8 | 16 | 24 |
| TampaBay | 9 | 12 | 17 |
| Atlanta | 10 | 30 | 30 |
| Minnesota | 11 | 28 | 28 |
Though looking at the notable injuries alongside the games puts a little more perspective to the games played, I still don’t feel like there is an answer.
| Opponent | Week | Week 11 DefensiveRank | Rank When Played | Injuries |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carolina | 1 | 4 | 7 | FB1,DE1,DE2,OLB1 |
| SanFrancisco | 2 | 11 | 24 | FB1,OLB1 |
| Jacksonville | 3 | 31 | 28 | FB1,DT4,OLT1,OLB1 |
| Houston | 4 | 20 | 5 | FB1,OLT1,ORT1,OC1,OLB1 |
| Indianapolis | 5 | 24 | 17 | FB1,OLT1,ORT1,OC1 |
| Tennessee | 6 | 29 | 11 | FB1,OLT1,ORT1,MLB1 |
| Arizona | 7 | 1 | 5 | FB1,OLT1,ORT1,MLB1 |
| St.Louis | 8 | 16 | 24 | OLT1,ORT1,FB2 |
| TampaBay | 9 | 12 | 17 | OLT1,ORT1,FB2,WR1 |
| Atlanta | 10 | 30 | 30 | OLT1,ORT1,OC1,FB2,WR1 |
| Minnesota | 11 | 28 | 28 | WR1,FB2,CB2 |
Yes “FB1” is Michael Robinson, I considered him on the “unpaid PUP list.” To me the team just didn’t feel the same.
Looking at the offense: Passing:
Wonder why we aren’t getting a lot of national play even though we are a 10 and 1 team. I don’t think it's East Coast bias, I think it's just a lack of excitement. If you want a lot of attention you need big time quarterback play. Don’t get me wrong, Wilson seems to throw and one of our receivers seems to catch some impossible pass at least once a game. But to be frank that’s a highlight reel, there is no bigger story working here, hence the lack of national attention. (I have a feeling that may change in bigger games coming up and in the playoffs). Throw in no real interesting games since Week 2 and….
Anyways,
As a team we rush 55% of the time and pass 45% of the time. So though not exceedingly so, we are a rushing team.
So looking at the base Passing Offense:
| Base Passing Stats | Value | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| TotalYards | 2316 | 19 |
| Attempts | 252 | 31 |
| Completions | 184 | 29 |
| Completion% | 64.30% | 8 |
At first glance looks pretty pedestrian. Though highlighting the "8th in Completion Percentage" and then using other stats makes the Seahawks passing offense look a lot better.
I give you some stats that go a little deeper:
| Extended Passing Stats | Value | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| Touchdowns | 20 | 7 |
| Interceptions | 6 | 1 |
| Passer Rating | 105.1 | 5 |
Ok, more meaning for me personally. What does it tell me? Russell Wilson is as awesome and elite of a quarterback as a young Payton Manning, Drew Brees or Tom Brady. Weighting in the absolute masters of the catch we have running routes for him.
Plus take into account:
| Offensive Line Badness | Value | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| SacksAllowed | 29 | 8 |
| QBHits | 55 | 8 |
| PasserRating | 105.1 | 5 |
Besides Ben Roethlisberger, of the top 10 QB’s by passer rating Russell overcame more QB hits and Sacks then all of them. But still maintains the 5th highest passer rating in the league.
And put it to you this way, let’s say the Run/Pass percentage were reversed, Russell Wilson would have 3,075 yards at this point in the season, good enough for 5th in the League.
That’s a hell of a passing game, and a hell of a quarterback. Would I trade Andrew Luck for Russell Wilson… the answer is hell to the no.
