Russell Wilson and the 3 year, $45.5 million baseline

[SeaChase]

Wilson is a game Manager - nowhere near the same level as Brady, Peyton, or Rogers. Therefore, his payday should be nowhere near theirs. Can you image this teams success without the stellar running game and defense? Yeah, neither can I. The front office knows this and that's why they're having this stalemate.

 

[Hawkfan77]

Wilson is a game Manager - nowhere near the same level as Brady, Peyton, or Rogers. Therefore, his payday should be nowhere near theirs. Can you image this teams success without the stellar running game and defense? Yeah, neither can I. The front office knows this and that's why they're having this stalemate.

Russell is major part of that stellar run game you referenced. In 2011, Lynch had over 1200 yards and the Hawks ranked 21st in Rush Offense...Russell is a MAJOR reason why we are so successful running the ball.

Plus, in case you forgot, he's been in the league for 3 years and the cap is way more now than it was when those guys got their deals. Why do some keep drawing conclusions to things that aren't similar?

 

[Scottemojo]

Not gonna debate. Someone do the numbers.....

Your mind is made up without any knowledge of the salary cap and QB numbers (your words, not bashing you). Why keep asking others to do work for you that you clearly won't read, understand or even consider?

I did read an article that says, 9 million to Russell Wilson that someone posted. I was suggesting 10-12 million, so I wasn't to far off from the article. Another user posted there is only 10 million left on the cap this year. So, maybe I did read, understand, and consider. I also did my own research and concluded that the Seahawks don't have the money this year, not unless they make some cuts, but I'm far from an expert on these things. So, I feel someone that is more of an expert can do the numbers.

You can bash my knowledge of salary for pro sports, because I never balanced the books for the NFL before. I'm hoping someone can tell me that there is enough money, but so far the answer is no. I'm pretty exhausted of this topic, so good luck with all your speculations and what not.

I love this guy. Proposes Wilson get 12 mil a year, then says he doesn't know anything about the cap because he doesn't work in an NFL front office. So why talk money in the first place?

 

[SeaChase]

Wilson is a game Manager - nowhere near the same level as Brady, Peyton, or Rogers. Therefore, his payday should be nowhere near theirs. Can you image this teams success without the stellar running game and defense? Yeah, neither can I. The front office knows this and that's why they're having this stalemate.

Russell is major part of that stellar run game you referenced. In 2011, Lynch had over 1200 yards and the Hawks ranked 21st in Rush Offense...Russell is a MAJOR reason why we are so successful running the ball.

Plus, in case you forgot, he's been in the league for 3 years and the cap is way more now than it was when those guys got their deals. Why do some keep drawing conclusions to things that aren't similar?

You just proved my point, running backs don't get paid as much as Qb's. How many times do opposing defenses stack the box? If they feared the pass our running game would be that much better...

 

[Hawkfan77]

Wilson is a game Manager - nowhere near the same level as Brady, Peyton, or Rogers. Therefore, his payday should be nowhere near theirs. Can you image this teams success without the stellar running game and defense? Yeah, neither can I. The front office knows this and that's why they're having this stalemate.

Russell is major part of that stellar run game you referenced. In 2011, Lynch had over 1200 yards and the Hawks ranked 21st in Rush Offense...Russell is a MAJOR reason why we are so successful running the ball.

Plus, in case you forgot, he's been in the league for 3 years and the cap is way more now than it was when those guys got their deals. Why do some keep drawing conclusions to things that aren't similar?

You just proved my point, running backs don't get paid as much as Qb's. How many times do opposing defenses stack the box? If they feared the pass our running game would be that much better...

:229031_confused2:

I....don't....get...it?

 

[SeaChase]

Wilson is a game Manager - nowhere near the same level as Brady, Peyton, or Rogers. Therefore, his payday should be nowhere near theirs. Can you image this teams success without the stellar running game and defense? Yeah, neither can I. The front office knows this and that's why they're having this stalemate.

Russell is major part of that stellar run game you referenced. In 2011, Lynch had over 1200 yards and the Hawks ranked 21st in Rush Offense...Russell is a MAJOR reason why we are so successful running the ball.

Plus, in case you forgot, he's been in the league for 3 years and the cap is way more now than it was when those guys got their deals. Why do some keep drawing conclusions to things that aren't similar?

You just proved my point, running backs don't get paid as much as Qb's. How many times do opposing defenses stack the box? If they feared the pass our running game would be that much better...

:229031_confused2:

I....don't....get...it?

Wilson running a lot ...making a running back comparison joke.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Hasselbeck,

Peyton Manning....Come on! Did you see what the Seahawks did to him two Superbowls ago? Manning is great in the regular season, but falls short in post season. You can always find an exception to the rule. So, you are arguing that Wilson is elite?

Not gonna debate. Someone do the numbers.....

By the way, do you think Tom Brady would of made that throw?

1) If you don't think Peyton Manning is elite.. Any other thing you say can immediately be cast aside :lol: No team in the league and no quarterback in the league was beating us in SB48. That was the most complete game of the PC era by a wide margin. But anyway..

2) His cap hit would be projected at 9M .. That's not his annual salary. Seeing as how Russ still has one year left on his deal, the big cap hits wouldn't hit until further into the contract, which is also when the Seahawks will see more and more cap room because of the projected increase and other deals coming off the books (Irvin, Okung, etc)

Sooooo again.. READ the article because he lays it out very well. We can afford to re-up Wilson and Wagner today if both players agreed to something. Wilson appears pretty cool gambling on himself in a contract year a la Flacco a couple years ago, and Wagner will probably get done before camp.

3) I do not think Russell Wilson is elite yet. But he's a lot better than at least 25 other QB's and that's reason enough to pay him market value for a QB.

 

[Anthony!]

Hasselbeck,

Peyton Manning....Come on! Did you see what the Seahawks did to him two Superbowls ago? Manning is great in the regular season, but falls short in post season. You can always find an exception to the rule. So, you are arguing that Wilson is elite?

Not gonna debate. Someone do the numbers.....

By the way, do you think Tom Brady would of made that throw?

1) If you don't think Peyton Manning is elite.. Any other thing you say can immediately be cast aside :lol: No team in the league and no quarterback in the league was beating us in SB48. That was the most complete game of the PC era by a wide margin. But anyway..

2) His cap hit would be projected at 9M .. That's not his annual salary. Seeing as how Russ still has one year left on his deal, the big cap hits wouldn't hit until further into the contract, which is also when the Seahawks will see more and more cap room because of the projected increase and other deals coming off the books (Irvin, Okung, etc)

Sooooo again.. READ the article because he lays it out very well. We can afford to re-up Wilson and Wagner today if both players agreed to something. Wilson appears pretty cool gambling on himself in a contract year a la Flacco a couple years ago, and Wagner will probably get done before camp.

3) I do not think Russell Wilson is elite yet. But he's a lot better than at least 25 other QB's and that's reason enough to pay him market value for a QB.

Weather he is Elite or not is a matter of opinion, however one thing that is not is the fact that he has not had the weapons in the passing game around him that most of the top QBs have. He has never had his Gronk, his Nelson, his Hilton, and so on. Or an oline that is good at pass blocking. This year he has that weapon, but the oline is still a question mark. To me for him to do what he has given the lack of pass weapons around him makes him Elite. Not many other QBs could have done it. However that is a matter of opinion, and that is not taking into account what he does for our running game or how since Wilson our defense is on the field an avg of 6 minutes less than before Wilson. Add to all this he faces the most top 10 defenses in the league every year. In can think of only 1 QB currently playing that might be bale to do what Wilson has done with the limitation around him, RODGERS.

 

[McGruff]

Wilson is a game Manager - nowhere near the same level as Brady, Peyton, or Rogers. Therefore, his payday should be nowhere near theirs. Can you image this teams success without the stellar running game and defense? Yeah, neither can I. The front office knows this and that's why they're having this stalemate.

Russell is major part of that stellar run game you referenced. In 2011, Lynch had over 1200 yards and the Hawks ranked 21st in Rush Offense...Russell is a MAJOR reason why we are so successful running the ball.

Plus, in case you forgot, he's been in the league for 3 years and the cap is way more now than it was when those guys got their deals. Why do some keep drawing conclusions to things that aren't similar?

You just proved my point, running backs don't get paid as much as Qb's. How many times do opposing defenses stack the box? If they feared the pass our running game would be that much better...

Opposing offenses don't stack the box because we don't have any receivers worthy of dedicating two defenders to. Its simple math. Single coverage outside = 8 in the box.

However, what Wilson does do with eight in the box is that two of those 8 have to account for him first . . . one to the right, one to the left. That freezes those two defenders and opens up the middle for Marshawn.

Marshawn average before Russell Wilson? 3.99 for his career, 3.95 with Seattle.

Marshawn average after Russell Wilson? 4.63.

 

[McGruff]

BTW, excellent point by Anthony pointing out the quality of defenses. 6 games a year against AZ, SF and St. Louis. Find another division facing those kinds of aggresive defenses for that many games every season . . .

 

[fridayfrenzy]

https://mobile.twitter.com/jameswalkern ... 9589990403

 

[DJrmb]

I really don't understand the argument of "He's been so undervalued in his rookie contract so we have to make up for that now". That is just completely asinine thinking. That's the same thing as telling someone they need to pay double the price for their car because the last time they got one on sale...

I agree we've gotten a deal on him in his first contract and that RW has played at a much higher level than his contract but that does not mean the team should be penalized or have to back pay him for past performance. That has nothing to do with his future and should have nothing to do with his coming contract. We took a "risk" on him and were smart enough to draft him in the 3rd round when everyone was saying "he's too small" and "he can't be an NFL QB". We took that risk and our reward was getting a Franchise QB on a great deal for the first few years.

Russell should be paid full market value for a Franchise QB now and going forward. He does not get extra because the Seahawks made a great pick in the draft and payed him what he was pre-slotted to make based on where he was drafted. So please people, stop with the crap about needing to pay RW more or pad his contract because he got payed so little in his first deal.

 

[Scottemojo]

I really don't understand the argument of "He's been so undervalued in his rookie contract so we have to make up for that now". That is just completely asinine thinking. That's the same thing as telling someone they need to pay double the price for their car because the last time they got one on sale...

I agree we've gotten a deal on him in his first contract and that RW has played at a much higher level than his contract but that does not mean the team should be penalized or have to back pay him for past performance. That has nothing to do with his future and should have nothing to do with his coming contract. We took a "risk" on him and were smart enough to draft him in the 3rd round when everyone was saying "he's too small" and "he can't be an NFL QB". We took that risk and our reward was getting a Franchise QB on a great deal for the first few years.

Russell should be paid full market value for a Franchise QB now and going forward. He does not get extra because the Seahawks made a great pick in the draft and payed him what he was pre-slotted to make based on where he was drafted. So please people, stop with the crap about needing to pay RW more or pad his contract because he got payed so little in his first deal.

Call it asinine thinking all you want, I guarantee it is part of his and his agent's thought process.

 

[DJrmb]

I really don't understand the argument of "He's been so undervalued in his rookie contract so we have to make up for that now". That is just completely asinine thinking. That's the same thing as telling someone they need to pay double the price for their car because the last time they got one on sale...

I agree we've gotten a deal on him in his first contract and that RW has played at a much higher level than his contract but that does not mean the team should be penalized or have to back pay him for past performance. That has nothing to do with his future and should have nothing to do with his coming contract. We took a "risk" on him and were smart enough to draft him in the 3rd round when everyone was saying "he's too small" and "he can't be an NFL QB". We took that risk and our reward was getting a Franchise QB on a great deal for the first few years.

Russell should be paid full market value for a Franchise QB now and going forward. He does not get extra because the Seahawks made a great pick in the draft and payed him what he was pre-slotted to make based on where he was drafted. So please people, stop with the crap about needing to pay RW more or pad his contract because he got payed so little in his first deal.

Call it asinine thinking all you want, I guarantee it is part of his and his agent's thought process.

I doubt it. That is a fans way of thinking because they want to keep their favorite player no matter the cost. Maybe RW feels that way a little too but I doubt his agent is foolish enough to think that is at all realistic.

So are you telling me that in the unlikely scenario that the Seahawks let Wilson walk that his agent will negotiate with the new team telling them they have to pay more money because the Seahawks got such a deal on him? Said team would laugh them out of the room. What the hell do they care what RW was getting paid before?

 

[KiwiHawk]

Opposing offenses don't stack the box because we don't have any receivers worthy of dedicating two defenders to. Its simple math. Single coverage outside = 8 in the box.

However, what Wilson does do with eight in the box is that two of those 8 have to account for him first . . . one to the right, one to the left. That freezes those two defenders and opens up the middle for Marshawn.

Marshawn average before Russell Wilson? 3.99 for his career, 3.95 with Seattle.

Marshawn average after Russell Wilson? 4.63.

Ok, just stop. Please. Repeat after me:

"Correlation does not prove causation"

Yes, Lynch's average has been better since Wilson, but that doesn't prove Wilson is the cause of that increase. It could be that the OL understood Cable's Zone Blocking Scheme with a year of coaching under their belt. Over the first 7 games of 2011, the Seahawks averaged only 77.7 rushing yards per game. This increased to 134.9 per game over the last 9. Could not the 2012 numbers merely be an extension of the second-half success of the previous year?

Over the last 9 games of 2011, Lynch averaged 104.5 yards per game. In 2012, Lynch's average fell to 99.4 yards per game.

How do you explain the increase over the second half of 2011 without the presence of Russell Wilson, if you claim Wilson to be the cause of the increase from 2011 to 2012 which doesn't really exist if you look at where Lynch's production was at the second half of last season?

So not only does correlation not prove causation, but you don't even have correlation since Lynch was already producing over 100 yards per game *before Wilson arrived*.

So please, please stop trotting around this bullshit statistic as if it means anything. It's completely meaningless, it's false logic, and it's wrong anyway.

 

[McGruff]

Kiwi, we could go round and round about this, and I'm almost tempted because your insults sound so cute in my imagined accent, however I will leave it at this . . .

The difference between late 2011 and early 2012 could easily be explained by a rookie QB and teams not fearing a young and inexperienced Wilson and keying on Lynch. In addition, we didn't incorporate the read option until midway through 2012. His running was pretty minimal and scramble based until then.

The more salient point is that we have enough sample size before AND after Wilson at this point to attribute some degree of causation, especially when coupled with observational evidence that indeed Wilson does generally have at least one, if not two defenders assigned to him. That brief moment of indecision leaves more room for Lynch.

Russell and the running game is a symbiotic relationship. He benefits from it, but he also contributes to it, both with and without the ball.

 

[Anthony!]

Kiwi, we could go round and round about this, and I'm almost tempted because your insults sound so cute in my imagined accent, however I will leave it at this . . .

The difference between late 2011 and early 2012 could easily be explained by a rookie QB and teams not fearing a young and inexperienced Wilson and keying on Lynch. In addition, we didn't incorporate the read option until midway through 2012. His running was pretty minimal and scramble based until then.

The more salient point is that we have enough sample size before AND after Wilson at this point to attribute some degree of causation, especially when coupled with observational evidence that indeed Wilson does generally have at least one, if not two defenders assigned to him. That brief moment of indecision leaves more room for Lynch.

Russell and the running game is a symbiotic relationship. He benefits from it, but he also contributes to it, both with and without the ball.

Not to mention your HC already said Wilson is a huge reason for the success and is a huge part of the running game.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Opposing offenses don't stack the box because we don't have any receivers worthy of dedicating two defenders to. Its simple math. Single coverage outside = 8 in the box.

However, what Wilson does do with eight in the box is that two of those 8 have to account for him first . . . one to the right, one to the left. That freezes those two defenders and opens up the middle for Marshawn.

Marshawn average before Russell Wilson? 3.99 for his career, 3.95 with Seattle.

Marshawn average after Russell Wilson? 4.63.

Ok, just stop. Please. Repeat after me:

"Correlation does not prove causation"

Yes, Lynch's average has been better since Wilson, but that doesn't prove Wilson is the cause of that increase. It could be that the OL understood Cable's Zone Blocking Scheme with a year of coaching under their belt. Over the first 7 games of 2011, the Seahawks averaged only 77.7 rushing yards per game. This increased to 134.9 per game over the last 9. Could not the 2012 numbers merely be an extension of the second-half success of the previous year?

Over the last 9 games of 2011, Lynch averaged 104.5 yards per game. In 2012, Lynch's average fell to 99.4 yards per game.

How do you explain the increase over the second half of 2011 without the presence of Russell Wilson, if you claim Wilson to be the cause of the increase from 2011 to 2012 which doesn't really exist if you look at where Lynch's production was at the second half of last season?

So not only does correlation not prove causation, but you don't even have correlation since Lynch was already producing over 100 yards per game *before Wilson arrived*.

So please, please stop trotting around this bullshit statistic as if it means anything. It's completely meaningless, it's false logic, and it's wrong anyway.

The second half of 2011, Lynch was carrying that offense, no one was scared of Tarvaris he wasn't a threat at all. Lynch received an average of 23 carries per game for those 9 games. In 2012 he averages 19 carries a game the whole season that's why there was a 5 yards a game difference that you mention from 2011 to 2012.

 

[Anthony!]

https://mobile.twitter.com/jameswalkernfl/status/600755479589990403

Its a funny thread all those saying Wilson is no better than Tannehill. All you need to know is AFC. and career 84 QB rating. Compared to NFC and career 98 Qb rating.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Oh yeah and remember this stats line for 2012 where the Seahawks dominated in a three week berserker mode.

Lynch

12/09 Arizona - 11 carries 128 yards (58-0)
12/16 Bills - 10 carries 113 yards (50-17)
12/23 49ers - 26 carries 111 yards (42-13)

If Lynch kept getting carries during the Arizona and Bills game he would of average over 21 carries a game and probably received at least 105 yards a game for the 2012 season. The same could be said for Wilson beating Peyton Manning's TD record, and more yards if him and Marshawn wasn't pulled out of the game early.