| 2021 Stats | WAS | Week | |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
TOT |
| TM Snap % |
18% |
10% |
15% |
93% |
99% |
100% |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
59% |
| recYds |
-
|
19
|
-
|
19
|
41
|
58
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
137 |
| Tar/Rec |
- |
1/1 |
- |
4/2 |
9/5 |
6/4 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
20/12 |
| TM Tar% |
0% |
2% |
0% |
12% |
20% |
16% |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
11% |
| recTDs |
-
|
1
|
-
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2 |
| FScore |
0 |
7 |
0 |
1 |
4 |
11 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
25 |
| FS/PPR |
0 |
8 |
0 |
3 |
9 |
15 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
37 |
| Opp |
lac
|
nyg
|
@ buf
|
@ atl
|
no
|
kc
|
@ gb
|
@ den
|
bye
|
tb
|
@ car
|
sea
|
@ lvr
|
dal
|
@ phi
|
@ dal
|
phi
|
|
|
| |
| 2019 Stats | CLE | Week | |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
TOT |
| recYds |
-
|
-
|
14
|
82
|
-
|
47
|
-
|
-
|
12
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
22
|
29
|
23
|
-
|
229 |
| Tar/Rec |
- |
- |
2/1 |
3/3 |
- |
6/3 |
- |
- |
2/2 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1/1 |
4/3 |
2/1 |
- |
20/14 |
| recTDs |
-
|
-
|
0
|
1
|
-
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
-
|
4 |
| FScore |
0 |
0 |
1 |
14 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
14 |
2 |
0 |
46 |
| FS/PPR |
0 |
0 |
2 |
17 |
0 |
13 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
17 |
3 |
0 |
60 |
| Opp |
hou
|
@ lac
|
@ bal
|
ne
|
lvr
|
@ buf
|
@ den
|
nyj
|
car
|
bye
|
@ lvr
|
@ tb
|
den
|
@ mia
|
@ no
|
atl
|
lac
|
|
|
| |
| 2018 Stats | ARI | Week | |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
TOT |
| TM Snap % |
92% |
98% |
84% |
65% |
67% |
67% |
44% |
73% |
- |
63% |
39% |
40% |
35% |
63% |
81% |
9% |
- |
61% |
| recYds |
19
|
17
|
35
|
52
|
0
|
69
|
12
|
12
|
-
|
51
|
5
|
5
|
10
|
31
|
22
|
3
|
-
|
343 |
| Tar/Rec |
6/3 |
6/4 |
3/1 |
4/2 |
5/0 |
6/5 |
4/2 |
4/2 |
- |
9/5 |
3/1 |
2/1 |
3/1 |
5/3 |
8/3 |
1/1 |
- |
69/34 |
| TM Tar% |
18% |
22% |
12% |
16% |
0% |
19% |
11% |
11% |
- |
24% |
17% |
13% |
13% |
13% |
24% |
3% |
- |
15% |
| recTDs |
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
1 |
| FScore |
1 |
1 |
9 |
5 |
0 |
6 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
40 |
| FS/PPR |
4 |
5 |
10 |
7 |
0 |
11 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
10 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
6 |
5 |
1 |
0 |
74 |
| Opp |
was
|
@ lar
|
chi
|
sea
|
@ sf
|
@ min
|
den
|
sf
|
bye
|
@ kc
|
oak
|
@ lac
|
@ gb
|
det
|
@ atl
|
lar
|
@ sea
|
|
|
| |
Ricky Seals-Jones 2019 Outlook
As Bleacher Report noted, the Cardinals added TEs Maxx Williams and Charles Clay this offseason, but both could end up playing behind Seals-Jones. While he's been a work in progress, the former Texas A&M wide receiver is starting to emerge as an NFL-level pass-catcher at the tight end position. Even in an atrocious Cardinals offense, he managed to catch 34 passes for 343 yards and a touchdown in 2018. Only Christian Kirk, Larry Fitzgerald and David Johnson caught more balls for the team. Worth noting is the fact that new Cardinals HC Kliff Kingsbury recruited Seals-Jones to Texas A&M when he was the OC of the Aggies, though Kingsbury left for the head coaching job at Texas Tech before Seals-Jones enrolled. Beyond that, the addition of new quarterback Kyler Murray could help Seals-Jones explode onto the scene in 2019. It's possible RSJ emerges as a viable piece in the new Murray-led Arizona offense even if he's not necessarily the starter (a job that could go to Clay or Williams, who are superior blockers). One last item here, the Cardinals ended the 2019 draft with the selection of UCLA tight end Caleb Wilson, another interesting project-type player who could be an issue for those banking on Seals-Jones in Dynasty leagues.
| | |
