bushwacked Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 In DD's game predicion comments included the following: There's a good chance that YAHOO! was named by someone discovering their fantasy team was going against the Seahawks defense that week. While the Seattle rush defense sometimes rose as high as average, the team ended the #1 worst unit against wide receivers last year That suprises me. In watching there games last year, it seemed as though there secondary was quite good and they couldn't stop the run to save their lives. I'm assuming they were the worst unit fantasy wise. Anyone know how they ranked against the pass in NFL terms? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1stimer Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 They weren't the worst ... according to profootball-reference.com Passing D ranked 31st against passing attempts ranked 23rd against passing yards ranked 13th against passing yard/average ranked 19th against passing td's Rush D ranked 19th against rushing attempts ranked 23rd against rushing yards ranked 24th against rushing yard/average ranked 25th against rushing td's So as you can see they gave up more rushing td's than receiving and were ranked the same in yards. So it is a pretty equally bad D. On a side note ... in 2003 they were ranked 5 in rushing td's and 26 in receiving td's ... so they strenthened their receiving D some but let their rushing D fall quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted September 8, 2005 Author Share Posted September 8, 2005 They weren't the worst ... according to profootball-reference.com Passing D ranked 31st against passing attempts ranked 23rd against passing yards ranked 13th against passing yard/average ranked 19th against passing td's Rush D ranked 19th against rushing attempts ranked 23rd against rushing yards ranked 24th against rushing yard/average ranked 25th against rushing td's So as you can see they gave up more rushing td's than receiving and were ranked the same in yards. So it is a pretty equally bad D. On a side note ... in 2003 they were ranked 5 in rushing td's and 26 in receiving td's ... so they strenthened their receiving D some but let their rushing D fall quite a bit. 975719[/snapback] Thanks, how are why is a defensive team ranked against "attempts?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1stimer Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 Thanks, how are why is a defensive team ranked against "attempts?" 975748[/snapback] Got me ... just reporting the stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted September 8, 2005 Author Share Posted September 8, 2005 Got me ... just reporting the stats. 975755[/snapback] Thanks! I guess if you play the Rams 3 times a year you would be ranked last or near against passing attempts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 it lets you know if the other team took control of the game and was permitted to run the ball at will...or how often it happened rather in comparison to the rest of the league.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 I think what DMD is referring to is the '04 Seahawk D giving up some HUGE games to WR (which led them to average giving up 24+ fantasy ppg to opponent WR, tops in the league). Fer khrist'sake, Peerless Price scored a TD on them. Technically speaking, the run defense was so bad, and the LBs inabilty to do anything against the pass (partially due to injuries of Chad Brown and Anthony Simmons), the secondary got ripped apart. It's not THAT bad of a group though. Trufant, Hamlin, and Boulware are a young and solid group that will only get better. Added depth with Herndon and Dyson at the corners, and Howell at SS, are a positive. Won't mean a lick if the line and the LBs continue to be unproductive, but the eternal optimist in me says that the defense will be a surprise this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehand Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 (edited) I think what DMD is referring to is the '04 Seahawk D giving up some HUGE games to WR (which led them to average giving up 24+ fantasy ppg to opponent WR, tops in the league). Fer khrist'sake, Peerless Price scored a TD on them. Technically speaking, the run defense was so bad, and the LBs inabilty to do anything against the pass (partially due to injuries of Chad Brown and Anthony Simmons), the secondary got ripped apart. It's not THAT bad of a group though. Trufant, Hamlin, and Boulware are a young and solid group that will only get better. Added depth with Herndon and Dyson at the corners, and Howell at SS, are a positive. Won't mean a lick if the line and the LBs continue to be unproductive, but the eternal optimist in me says that the defense will be a surprise this season. 976802[/snapback] I concur. The '04 D's tendency to A.) not get off the field on 3rd down, leaving the D on the field for long periods of time & B.) hold pretty well EXCEPT for third downs, THEN getting tired & giving up Huge game changing plays, were their undoing. However the housecleaning performed by Ruskell in the offseason (only 3 returning starters on D) will result in a much more mentally tough group, and a top 15 D. Probably not a starter in Deep leagues, but an OK backup/bye week fill in, in my homer opinion. Edited September 8, 2005 by Bonehand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.