Which Russ Wilson would you rather have, current or rookie?

[KiwiHawk]

"Stats in blue represent pass blocking. Teams are ranked according to Adjusted Sack Rate, which gives sacks (plus intentional grounding penalties) per pass attempt adjusted for down, distance, and opponent."

This is using sack rate, which we've already determined is impacted by our QB being slow to release the ball (37th slowest release out of 32 teams, so he's slower than some backups) If there is anyone still confused about how your QB holding the ball longer correlates to a higher sack rate, please see me after class, because I believe the rest of us are up to speed on that one.

Oddly, Football Outsiders reckons our line is 3rd-from-last based on Adjusted Sack Rate, and Wilson's time to throw was also 3rd-to-last. Coincidence?

So that is definitely NOT an isolated look at OL performance. As I posted earlier, we are 19th in pass block success, which is an individual offensive lineman's ability to hold his block for 2.5 seconds, which is the metric they chose to determine whether a pass block is successful or not, due to the fact that the average NFL QB releases the ball in 2.75 seconds.

Also keep in mind that the entire range of offensive line scores were in the 80s, barring Arizona at 77 (incredibly low in light of the fact they don't have Tom Cable), so there really isn't a massive difference in the scores.

So why does Seattle choose rub-blockers when they are below average in pass rush? It gets back to the QB running around with Benny Hill music. Walter Jones could not block effectively for Russell Wilson, because Wilson regularly extends the play well beyond any reasonable blocking time. So what is the point shelling out huge dollars for the best possible OL when the QB is just going to run around anyway?

Note I am NOT criticising Wilson for extending the play - it's where his brilliance comes to the fore, as well as the odd brain explosion 22-yard loss. They go hand-in-hand, and you can't have the one without the other.

I'm only saying it's pointless to waste massive resources blocking for a guy who goes into sandlot mode every other play. Concentrate instead on buying Wilson time and opening up his field through an effective and potent rushing attack.

The concern is Wilson getting hurt, because when he's hobbled, then we have to rely on the OL to keep the pressure away, and that's a fair call. However, Wilson has only been hurt twice - once when he was trodden upon by an actually accidental incident involving Suh (as opposed to Suh's many purposeful accidents) which happened well after any reasonable blocking time, and the other on a horse-collar tackle when Wilson tucked the ball away and became a runner, which was in fact due to a blown block by the left tackle, to be fair.

But in the normal course of business, Wilson's pass protection is largely Wilson, and it has to be that way because of how often the play is extended.

 

[Seymour]

"

But in the normal course of business, Wilson's pass protection is largely Wilson, and it has to be that way because of how often the play is extended.

Couldn't have anything to do with tendency...... :roll:

Pete and his run, run, bomb, punt philosophy gives the edge to the defense to tee off on Wilson and also puts Wilson in deeper routes than most QB's which obviously MAKES him have to hold the ball longer.

Lets not forget that.

 

[KiwiHawk]

"

But in the normal course of business, Wilson's pass protection is largely Wilson, and it has to be that way because of how often the play is extended.

Couldn't have anything to do with tendency...... :roll:

Pete and his run, run, bomb, punt philosophy gives the edge to the defense to tee off on Wilson and also puts Wilson in deeper routes than most QB's which obviously MAKES him have to hold the ball longer.

Lets not forget that.

And yet if Pete forced Wilson to be a pocket Brady throwing primarily short passes, you would be criticising Carroll for a conservative passing game that never made big plays. Carroll will always be damned in your eyes no matter what he does.

Why is it, do you think, that Carroll is legendary for scheming to the strengths of the players he has on defense, and on offense he does a complete 180 on his fundamental coaching philosophy and forces his players to be who they are not?

Or is it perhaps remotely possible - in spite of how incredibly silly this may sound - that he is actually scheming to Wilson's strengths?

I know, mind blown.

 

[Seymour]

"

But in the normal course of business, Wilson's pass protection is largely Wilson, and it has to be that way because of how often the play is extended.

Couldn't have anything to do with tendency...... :roll:

Pete and his run, run, bomb, punt philosophy gives the edge to the defense to tee off on Wilson and also puts Wilson in deeper routes than most QB's which obviously MAKES him have to hold the ball longer.

Lets not forget that.

And yet if Pete forced Wilson to be a pocket Brady throwing primarily short passes, you would be criticising Carroll for a conservative passing game that never made big plays. Carroll will always be damned in your eyes no matter what he does.

Why is it, do you think, that Carroll is legendary for scheming to the strengths of the players he has on defense, and on offense he does a complete 180 on his fundamental coaching philosophy and forces his players to be who they are not?

Or is it perhaps remotely possible - in spite of how incredibly silly this may sound - that he is actually scheming to Wilson's strengths?

I know, mind blown.

Based on what, your crystal ball? :roll:

Ridiculous post. Move the chains and you'll not hear from me.

 

[KiwiHawk]

"

But in the normal course of business, Wilson's pass protection is largely Wilson, and it has to be that way because of how often the play is extended.

Couldn't have anything to do with tendency...... :roll:

Pete and his run, run, bomb, punt philosophy gives the edge to the defense to tee off on Wilson and also puts Wilson in deeper routes than most QB's which obviously MAKES him have to hold the ball longer.

Lets not forget that.

And yet if Pete forced Wilson to be a pocket Brady throwing primarily short passes, you would be criticising Carroll for a conservative passing game that never made big plays. Carroll will always be damned in your eyes no matter what he does.

Why is it, do you think, that Carroll is legendary for scheming to the strengths of the players he has on defense, and on offense he does a complete 180 on his fundamental coaching philosophy and forces his players to be who they are not?

Or is it perhaps remotely possible - in spite of how incredibly silly this may sound - that he is actually scheming to Wilson's strengths?

I know, mind blown.

Based on what, your crystal ball? :roll:

Ridiculous post. Move the chains and you'll not hear from me.

Based on your consistent bashing of Carroll throughout a run that is the most successful in franchise history and includes a Super Bowl win by a team considered to be the best of the decade, and in consideration for one of the best teams of all time.

Even when it's crystal-ball-clear that his MO is to adapt the system to the personnel, you insist he's making Wilson hold the ball and throw bombs, even though Wilson's adjusted yards per attempt at Wisconsin was 11.8 (3.6 more than his career average as a pro). He's been throwing bombs his whole career. It's what he does.

 

[Seymour]

Couldn't have anything to do with tendency...... :roll:

Pete and his run, run, bomb, punt philosophy gives the edge to the defense to tee off on Wilson and also puts Wilson in deeper routes than most QB's which obviously MAKES him have to hold the ball longer.

Lets not forget that.

And yet if Pete forced Wilson to be a pocket Brady throwing primarily short passes, you would be criticising Carroll for a conservative passing game that never made big plays. Carroll will always be damned in your eyes no matter what he does.

Why is it, do you think, that Carroll is legendary for scheming to the strengths of the players he has on defense, and on offense he does a complete 180 on his fundamental coaching philosophy and forces his players to be who they are not?

Or is it perhaps remotely possible - in spite of how incredibly silly this may sound - that he is actually scheming to Wilson's strengths?

I know, mind blown.

Based on what, your crystal ball? :roll:

Ridiculous post. Move the chains and you'll not hear from me.

Based on your consistent bashing of Carroll throughout a run that is the most successful in franchise history and includes a Super Bowl win by a team considered to be the best of the decade, and in consideration for one of the best teams of all time.

Even when it's crystal-ball-clear that his MO is to adapt the system to the personnel, you insist he's making Wilson hold the ball and throw bombs, even though Wilson's adjusted yards per attempt at Wisconsin was 11.8 (3.6 more than his career average as a pro). He's been throwing bombs his whole career. It's what he does.

Thought so. :roll:
So you are saying that it is based on a load of shit then! My Carroll bashing started 3 years ago when I got tired of the CableVelle shit show, and since have come to realize that the offense is Carroll not Bevell or Schotty running the show.
My bashing started long after "the run" you hide behind. So your assumption is based on your imagination and nothing more. :177692:

 

[IndyHawk]

Where is this stat coming from, and what % of his sacks were under 2.5 seconds?

I ask because of the 1,195 sacks in the NFL last year, only 20 of them (1.7%) occured at or under 2.5 seconds.

Because of that, we could go crazy and QUADRUPLE over the league average the rate at which Wilson was sacked in under 2.5 seconds last year, and we'd still be talking about 3.5 of the 51 times he was sacked.

Put another way, even after that crazy quadrupling if we removed all the times he was sacked in under 2.5 seconds and didn't remove them for anyone else he'd be the 6th most sacked QB in the league last year instead of the 3rd.

None of this means the Hawks' o-line is good, but it does mean that 2.5 seconds is probably a pretty bad yardstick to judge line play.

51 sacks are 51 sacks...stop rationalizing to put a positive spin on it . The down side of these sacks are numerous... like stalled drives...loss of downs...loss of yards...potential for fumbles and turnovers...and worst of all....having the backup QB under center because your starter has been injured.

Popeye makes good points but that isn't good enough
for you..You just want to blame only the OL when there are
multiple reasons leading to 51 sacks.
Start a thread on it so I can give you a few.

So I am not sure who you are talking to, however in the case it is me I mad e it very very clear I dont blame just the oline, and I spelled it out in the thread.

That was for X Ray but hell you and the other 4 that seem to follow any
RW post I put up might as well believe it was meant for you :lol:

 

[KiwiHawk]

Thought so. :roll:
So you are saying that it is based on a load of shit then! My Carroll bashing started 3 years ago when I got tired of the CableVelle shit show, and since have come to realize that the offense is Carroll not Bevell or Schotty running the show.
My bashing started long after "the run" you hide behind. So your assumption is based on your imagination and nothing more. :177692:

I guess one of the hazards of being constantly negative is that no one remembers when you had anything good to say.

 

[toffee]

Footwork.

[instagram]B0BaNq0FYgb[/instagram]




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[12AngryHawks]

Consider:

Rookie
-Cheap cap hit
-Inexperienced
-Faster
-Less spotlight
-No Ciara factor

Current
-Experienced
-Poised
-Better pocket passer
-Can better read defences
-Ciara factor
-$$$ cap hit

I have no agenda, just curious. Also, this is a one year hypothetical. So if you pick rookie, that doesn't mean you get Sophmore Russ next year... etc.

I can't speak for everyone else, but to me, the choice is pretty obvious.

 

[Russ Willstrong]

For what this team needs I say current RW. He has better touch and anticipation. He has always been mature beyond his age but at this point has more confidence and command of his game and this team than ever. A true franchise qb.