John63":30kl1dt3 said:
SeaWolv":30kl1dt3 said:
This is what happens when you take RW out of the lineup for a month. The Hawks would have made the playoffs had RW not injured his finger.
THIS^^^
Actually, it's NOT this, unless you posted these DVOA stats for no reason.
If you read the discussion about whether Seahawks 'broke' DVOA or not that I referenced before, they go into detail that Seahawks fade in terms of offense (in particular, passing) happened BEFORE Russell's injury. Either, we think these stats 'say' something or they don't.
Again, we are higher rated in this system because of Pete's philosophy (don't turn the ball over) and Russell's style of play (very quick boom/very quick bust) that makes us seem efficient when we aren't. This system essentially doesn't fault us for the three and outs and just counts them as a 'failure' whereas other teams that have more traditional turnovers get punished.
Meanwhile, THOSE teams actually have the ball way more than our 3 and out offense does, so while these 'stats' say hey, we must be better, Russ didn't throw as many INTs! Meanwhile, having Russ try and convert a 3rd down with his arm might as well have been a TO because we sure weren't keeping the ball.
I'd be interested to see what the yards/points/etc. effect would have been if Russell's INTs increased to average but his efficiency on third down rose to average as well. My personal guess is that we'd have down better...