Wilson 14th in Benoit's list of best QBs

[Scorpion05]

Deshaun Watson has been pressured more than RW yet has better numbers while playing 1 less half through last week. Russells David Carr syndrome had made him excessively erratic and only Pete Carroll is to blame for that.

Watson has also been the beneficiary of the #2 rushing offense, while we are 15th. Huge difference there with run support and a definite advantage.

But 25% of those rushing stats are Watson himself. They're just average without him scrambling.

And just for the sake of the exercise, if we are going to evaluate QB performance as based on (1) pressure rate, (2) o-line quality, and (3) rushing stats, the Cardinals have an awful line too this year, the second worst rushing stats in the league (Seattle's #21), and Palmer is getting pressured at about the same rate as Wilson too.

Palmer and Wilson are also putting up pretty comparable seasons so far: Palmer's averaging .6 more YPC, but has 3 more picks too (Wilsons qb rating is 90 and Palmer's is 87).

Long story short, if you're a Seawhawks fan and want to come up with a fandom-neutral ranking for how WIlson is peforming so far this year, and to do so you want to control for pressure rate (about the same), bad offensive lines (both bad), and bad running games (almost exactly the same once you take out Wilson's runs from the Hawks' total), don't ask where you think Russell Wilson rates, ask where you think Carson Palmer rates, and then put Wilson there or one spot above there. :2thumbs:

Russell Wilson is accounting for 28% of the Seahawks rushing. This is what I'm talking about, being fair and reasonable. Don't point out what Watson is bringing to the table on that front without even pointing out Wilson is doing even more with less support

Wilson is completing over 60% of his passes when under pressure, unlike Carson

Carson is also a statue, so that over accentuates how bad his O-line actually is.

Lastly, Carson Palmer is not playing well according to advanced stats. He's not making anything happen. And he has a better receiving core. Yet still has worse stats than Wilson.

Comparing Carson and Russell is not objective, especially when Carson is playing worse. And comparing Watson and Russell is not objective, when the bottomline is Watson still has a better running game and a top 5 receiver. And probably a better offensive system with Bill O'Brien compared to Bevell. What would happen if Watson and Russell switched teams?

 

[Popeyejones]

I think your viewpoint was much strengthened when we could run block and had Lynch.

Oh yeah, `100% agreed.

The "right" conditions for having a strong preference for a high variance QB are having a great defense (protects against the low side of high variance), a great run game (protects against the low side of high variance), and a bad pass blocking o-line (plays into the upside of high variance -- obviously you'd rather be good at everything but with a better o-line which can more successfully pass block you want QB variance to go down a bit).

But that is flawed logic.

...[WWII comparison]...

Same concept here. A history of a bad O-line is going to condition Russell to leave pockets on the rare occasions that they are clean. It is also going to place a micro-focus on the times he misses throws with a clean pocket

1. I'm not really following the WWII comparison and I think it overcomplicates things, so I'm just going to let it lie.

2. Your argument is that Wilson has gotten demonstrably worse in some areas because he has been shell-shocked by a bad o-line. I've said it before but I'll say it again, and we're going to have to agree to disagree: I think in the areas in which Wilson struggles he has been struggling since the first game of his rookie year. They were things I thought he might develop out of (and he still might!) but he hasn't done so yet. I don't see him having regressed in those areas at all -- he just hasn't improved. I can see how it might look like a regression to some because the Seahawks aren't limiting his areas of struggle as much as they worked to do earlier in his career (which is pretty normal for a QB -- the Texans aren't going to pander to Watson's strengths forever, as you can't get away with that in the long term) but I just don't see him as having regressed at all.

I'm not near as concerned where Wilson rates after 5 games as I am at the end of the season. Any good or bad week can skew the numbers too far at this point to get all excited. Some here read these "week to week" ratings and use it to fuel their belief that Wilson is crap. Have at it, I'll be right here.

Oh, yeah, 100% agreed with you. Literally couldn't agree with you more.

TBH I suspect this stuff is coming up a lot right now because Wilson kind of appeared to plateu a little bit last year, and the rationale given for that was that he was injured. Now that he's not injured and through five weeks (which isn't much!) he's still playing at that level people are maybe getting a little antsy and starting to question that "well, he was just injured" explanation.

It doesn't mean that's right, but I think it *could be* what's going on a little bit with the very critical (and IMO too critical) Russell Wilson posts.

To be totally fair, as for small sample size and "plateau" last year, I think some people had gotten their hopes up that the small sample size of the end of the regular season of 2015 (in which Wilson was performing like the best QB in the history of the game) was a prediction of how he'd consistently perform from that point forward, which was always a little unrealistic, IMO.

Long story short, small sample size swings both ways (see: Chiefs fans deluding themselves into thinking the last 12 years of play don't matter and based on five games Alex Smith had become a COMPLETELY different player, or Texans fans now deluding themselves into thinking Watson can keep up this pace for the rest of his career).

But 25% of those rushing stats are Watson himself. They're just average without him scrambling.

...

and bad running games (almost exactly the same once you take out Wilson's runs from the Hawks' total)

Russell Wilson is accounting for 28% of the Seahawks rushing. This is what I'm talking about, being fair and reasonable. Don't point out what Watson is bringing to the table on that front without even pointing out Wilson is doing even more with less support.

Um, I did point out the exact point you're making. Maybe it got buried in there and you didn't see it? If so, I've deleted unrelated text and bolded where I made the same point.

Watson contributes 25% of the rush total for his team, and Wilson contributes 28%. Once you take out the QB contributions to the rushing game they have essentially equivalent run games.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

You can't really say Seahawks and Run Game in the same sentence thus far

 

[Joyodongo]

So some dude makes up a list of who he thinks the best quarterbacks in the league are? Who cares? It's a subjective list. It doesn't mean squat. The only thing that matters is how Russell fits into and powers our offense. It's by and large pretty good. Russell will advance in the playoffs farther than most on this list and that's all that matters.

I'm not worried about RW because of the list, I'm worried because of what I see, and what I see is an average QB, so I happen to agree with his position in the list.
"Where would we be without RW ???!!!" Of course we need a QB, that question could be applied to all NFL teams. Maybe, I say maybe, we'd be better now with someone like Dak, or Wentz ...
"He's the best player in our offense !!!" The point is that QB is the most important position in this game but I honestly think Doug is a better player than RW.

I think seeing "average QB play", while at the same time he is playing under the worst possible conditions the NFL has to offer (including often bad play calling) is a good sign. Many QB's would fold under those conditions yet Wilson while even playing at his worst, still can and has put together game winning drives when the money is down again and again. Finding a way to win when you are not playing your best is under valued here by some. None of those QB's you clamor for are close in the category, and winning is the name of the game last I checked.

I don't clamor for them, I say "maybe, just maybe, they are better/we'd be better with them".
I'm just sick of reading here & there and hearing in podcasts people saying that RW is the Seahawk's saviour when I think he's not even the best player in the O, let alone the whole team. I think I understand Sherm if he/the D are kind of upset with this because the FO/coaches seem to act the same way: almost everything RW does seems excusable.
And the point is that I'm disappointed because I thought that, after 2015, he could become a top-3 QB and, why not, the top-1 in the NFL. And seeing him not only not improve, but regress, hurts me as a fan.
But of course some/a lot of this goes to our hiper-clever FO and their evaluation of the importance of the O-Line, evaluation of the O-Line players, complacency with the O coaching staff and so on ...

 

[SoulfishHawk]

:34853_doh:

 

[Scorpion05]

I think your viewpoint was much strengthened when we could run block and had Lynch.

Oh yeah, `100% agreed.

The "right" conditions for having a strong preference for a high variance QB are having a great defense (protects against the low side of high variance), a great run game (protects against the low side of high variance), and a bad pass blocking o-line (plays into the upside of high variance -- obviously you'd rather be good at everything but with a better o-line which can more successfully pass block you want QB variance to go down a bit).

But that is flawed logic.

...[WWII comparison]...

Same concept here. A history of a bad O-line is going to condition Russell to leave pockets on the rare occasions that they are clean. It is also going to place a micro-focus on the times he misses throws with a clean pocket

1. I'm not really following the WWII comparison and I think it overcomplicates things, so I'm just going to let it lie.

2. Your argument is that Wilson has gotten demonstrably worse in some areas because he has been shell-shocked by a bad o-line. I've said it before but I'll say it again, and we're going to have to agree to disagree: I think in the areas in which Wilson struggles he has been struggling since the first game of his rookie year. They were things I thought he might develop out of (and he still might!) but he hasn't done so yet. I don't see him having regressed in those areas at all -- he just hasn't improved. I can see how it might look like a regression to some because the Seahawks aren't limiting his areas of struggle as much as they worked to do earlier in his career (which is pretty normal for a QB -- the Texans aren't going to pander to Watson's strengths forever, as you can't get away with that in the long term) but I just don't see him as having regressed at all.

I'm not near as concerned where Wilson rates after 5 games as I am at the end of the season. Any good or bad week can skew the numbers too far at this point to get all excited. Some here read these "week to week" ratings and use it to fuel their belief that Wilson is crap. Have at it, I'll be right here.

Oh, yeah, 100% agreed with you. Literally couldn't agree with you more.

TBH I suspect this stuff is coming up a lot right now because Wilson kind of appeared to plateu a little bit last year, and the rationale given for that was that he was injured. Now that he's not injured and through five weeks (which isn't much!) he's still playing at that level people are maybe getting a little antsy and starting to question that "well, he was just injured" explanation.

It doesn't mean that's right, but I think it *could be* what's going on a little bit with the very critical (and IMO too critical) Russell Wilson posts.

To be totally fair, as for small sample size and "plateau" last year, I think some people had gotten their hopes up that the small sample size of the end of the regular season of 2015 (in which Wilson was performing like the best QB in the history of the game) was a prediction of how he'd consistently perform from that point forward, which was always a little unrealistic, IMO.

Long story short, small sample size swings both ways (see: Chiefs fans deluding themselves into thinking the last 12 years of play don't matter and based on five games Alex Smith had become a COMPLETELY different player, or Texans fans now deluding themselves into thinking Watson can keep up this pace for the rest of his career).

But 25% of those rushing stats are Watson himself. They're just average without him scrambling.

...

and bad running games (almost exactly the same once you take out Wilson's runs from the Hawks' total)

Russell Wilson is accounting for 28% of the Seahawks rushing. This is what I'm talking about, being fair and reasonable. Don't point out what Watson is bringing to the table on that front without even pointing out Wilson is doing even more with less support.

Um, I did point out the exact point you're making. Maybe it got buried in there and you didn't see it? If so, I've deleted unrelated text and bolded where I made the same point.

Watson contributes 25% of the rush total for his team, and Wilson contributes 28%. Once you take out the QB contributions to the rushing game they have essentially equivalent run games.

I'm watching Thursday Night Football and seeing Derek Carr, with a great O-line miss some pretty open throws. I doubt he'll be nitpicked at though

My point isn't that the O-line, etc. has worsened Russell's abilities. My point is it is illogical to criticize a Quarterback for leaving a pocket early, when 70-80% of the time he has to run for his life immediately. Especially in an offense that prioritizes ball security. It is unreasonable to nitpick at the throws he misses, as if that is somehow uncommon throughout the league

The WWII analogy was just a general point that history affects the present. Russ has never had a good O-line. Therefore, it is ridiculous to criticize him the few times he has had a clean pocket


If you objectively believe the Texans running game is "equivalent" to ours I have a bridge to sell you. If you think Deshaun Watson is better than Wilson and is in a similar circumstance to Wilson, again you're just gonna remain stuck in your opinion. I love Deshaun Watson, but I would suggest you watch a Texans game from beginning to end. Russell faces more pressure and has a worse O-line

 

[JGfromtheNW]

I'm watching Thursday Night Football and seeing Derek Carr, with a great O-line miss some pretty open throws. I doubt he'll be nitpicked at though

My point isn't that the O-line, etc. has worsened Russell's abilities. My point is it is illogical to criticize a Quarterback for leaving a pocket early, when 70-80% of the time he has to run for his life immediately. Especially in an offense that prioritizes ball security. It is unreasonable to nitpick at the throws he misses, as if that is somehow uncommon throughout the league

The WWII analogy was just a general point that history affects the present. Russ has never had a good O-line. Therefore, it is ridiculous to criticize him the few times he has had a clean pocket

If you objectively believe the Texans running game is "equivalent" to ours I have a bridge to sell you. If you think Deshaun Watson is better than Wilson and is in a similar circumstance to Wilson, again you're just gonna remain stuck in your opinion. I love Deshaun Watson, but I would suggest you watch a Texans game from beginning to end. Russell faces more pressure and has a worse O-line

Thank you for posting with some perspective and sanity.

Watching the game last night I was astonished at 1) how much time Carr regularly had 2) how many wide open receivers he missed with said time 3) how many AWFUL passes he threw that should have been intercepted 4) how many WRONG decisions he made, which Tony Romo highlighted without crapping on him, especially considering how many times Carr threw into double coverage at the end of the game and 5) how nobody after the game was talking about how Carr should have lost the Raiders the game, but rather "WOW HE THREW FOR 400+ YARDS, WHAT A GAME."

 

[BlueClue]

I'm suprised they have Eli at 9th........someone must have noticed he's having a similar year to Wentz.

He should get an A for fighting through no running game for 4 games and no Oline.

You guys keep referencing your poor Oline.....that can be a drag but at least Wilson can move around
How did you let that Moose Okung walk away?

 

[Chapow]

I'm suprised they have Eli at 9th........someone must have noticed he's having a similar year to Wentz.

He should get an A for fighting through no running game for 4 games and no Oline.

You guys keep referencing your poor Oline.....that can be a drag but at least Wilson can move around
How did you let that Moose Okung walk away?

You'd have to ask the front office. He was rather injury prone and missed a lot of games while he was here. I'm guessing that had at least something to do with it.

 

[hawk45]

Thank you for posting with some perspective and sanity.

Watching the game last night I was astonished at 1) how much time Carr regularly had 2) how many wide open receivers he missed with said time 3) how many AWFUL passes he threw that should have been intercepted 4) how many WRONG decisions he made, which Tony Romo highlighted without crapping on him, especially considering how many times Carr threw into double coverage at the end of the game and 5) how nobody after the game was talking about how Carr should have lost the Raiders the game, but rather "WOW HE THREW FOR 400+ YARDS, WHAT A GAME."

Whenever I watch other NFL games I'm constantly reminded of how the criticism of Wilson on this board for an overthrow here or there is overblown. I remember watching the Patriots early this season in a quarter where Brady saw some consistent pressure for a couple series. All of a sudden I saw happy feet and I saw inaccuracy even when he wasn't being hit, until his line was able to reduce the pressure to a certain threshold.

Wilson sees that kind of pressure routinely. What I'm most impressed with is that he hardly ever turns into a pick machine.

Also, I've watched Matt Ryan miss wide-open throws when he has hardly seen pressure at all in a game. It never becomes a thing with him, because he's making 50 throws a game. Pete's mentality dictates that Russ isn't going to get that many chances to fling it, so if he does make some bad passes they are magnified and become huge pivotal points in the game.

 

[chris98251]

I'm suprised they have Eli at 9th........someone must have noticed he's having a similar year to Wentz.

He should get an A for fighting through no running game for 4 games and no Oline.

You guys keep referencing your poor Oline.....that can be a drag but at least Wilson can move around
How did you let that Moose Okung walk away?

How did you let that Moose Okung walk away

We didn't they tried to resign on a prove it deal meaning his health, instead he took a wheelchair out of the building and went to Denver.

 

[Popeyejones]

I'm watching Thursday Night Football and seeing Derek Carr, with a great O-line miss some pretty open throws. I doubt he'll be nitpicked at though

Why would you doubt that I'd have any critiques of his game? These types of ulterior motive claims are lazy and boring.

The good and bad of Carr on Thursday, as I saw it:

BAD:

1) Looked to be having some trouble diagnosing coverages more than you'd like, and throwing into double coverage. Got away with some dropped picks due to poor reads and decisions.

2) Accuracy was erratic. Some of these looked like non-throwaway throwaways, but he was missing a fair amount too.

3) Very bizarrely was climbing the pocket way too high, almost like he was trying to hide out behind his center and tackle while going through his progressions in the pocket. This is how that fumble that called back happened. It was just strange, and I'm surprised Romo didn't comment on it. I'd be shocked if it's not something that gets talked about during the film session as an area for improvement, as it was totally unforced, and just weird.

GOOD:

1) Passed for over 400 yards, 3 TDs, and 0 picks, and seriously could have passed for over 500 yards with 4 TDs if Amari Cooper didn't have four drops in that one game. :lol:

2) Put up big points and numbers while getting incredibly little help from the running game, which save for his scramble put up 75 yards total at about 3.5 yards per rush, which is bad.

3) Did all this while playing with a broken back. :lol:

4) Overall did a very good job of making life on his tackles easy by utilizing the pocket well and stepping up into the pocket, and taking the space that was given to him in it. Romo even commented on this and how much he has improved in this area. I thought it was notable too.

My point isn't that the O-line, etc. has worsened Russell's abilities. My point is it is illogical to criticize a Quarterback for leaving a pocket early, when 70-80% of the time he has to run for his life immediately. Especially in an offense that prioritizes ball security. It is unreasonable to nitpick at the throws he misses, as if that is somehow uncommon throughout the league

1) Wilson doesn't need to run for his life immediately 70-80% of the time. That's a ridiculous claim.

2) Instead, like all QBs, you evaluate what they do in the situations for which they are presented. That's the long and short of it. When Wilson has to run for his life immediately you're obviously going to evaluate him differently than if he doesn't. And if you're saying the situations in which he does are influencing the situations in which he doesn't than this is just a really fancy and convoluted way to make the "his offense line is ruining him" argument that you're claiming to not be making.

2) Of course everyone misses throws. Nobody has ever claimed otherwise. Back out here in the real world we can talk about accuracy and streakiness of accuracy without it being an all or nothing thing.

If you objectively believe the Texans running game is "equivalent" to ours I have a bridge to sell you. If you think Deshaun Watson is better than Wilson and is in a similar circumstance to Wilson, again you're just gonna remain stuck in your opinion. I love Deshaun Watson, but I would suggest you watch a Texans game from beginning to end. Russell faces more pressure and has a worse O-line

1) I said the Texans and Seahawks running backs have put up similar yardage numbers so far this season.

2) I never said Watson is better than Wilson or playing under similar circumstances to Wilson. All I've really had to say about Watson is that this rate of performance won't continue for him and that the Texans have really been catering to his strengths and minimizing his weaknesses in a way that's not sustainable. I have no idea where you're getting this from.

3) According to the best data we have (and it's in this very thread) Watson faces pressure on 46% of his dropbacks this year and Wilson faces pressure on 43% of his dropbacks this year. I don't really care and I don't understand why you're obsessing over Watson all of sudden, but on what factual basis do you make the claim that Wilson faces more pressure than Watson so far this year?

 

[evergreen]

What have you done lately? If you only watched Wilson from 2016 on and couldn't rely on his amazing first four years would you really be that high on him? He doesn't pass the eye test right now. Yes there are legitimate reasons why he's struggling. Left tackle anybody? Why the hell do we have jimmy graham and not a decent left tackle? In the past Wilson made most all of the throws to relatively open receivers that he now misses. He could regain his form,we'll see. Right now though he is average. And average sucks compared with elite. The only thing elite about him now is his Houdini plays.

 

[Popeyejones]

^^^

His deep ball is elite.

His situational awareness and ability to maximize yards while minimizing contact past the LOS is elite.

His accuracy when not throwing off his base is probably elite also.

His “Houdini plays” are better than elite. He’s battling with the ghost of Y.A. Tittle as the greatest of all time on those.

His ability to engage in greeting card athlete speak and talk at length without ever actually saying anything is definitely elite, if not GOAT, too.

(Not listing them but he’s also well above average in a lot areas too).

 

[chris98251]

Something I would like to see some day, a Line blocking well enough that Wilson had the time for his receivers to actually clear and get deep, I have a hard tome remembering when Wilson has not had to take something off the deep ball he throws. Being able to see him actually crank his arm up I wonder if he could actually get like 70 to 80 yards in the air alone, he makes it look that effortless.