Money and Value: Another Wilson vs Luck Thread

In 2012, Luck signed a 4 year deal worth $2 dollars short of $22,108,000. He received up front a signing bonus worth $14, 518, 544.

In the same year, Wilson signed a 4 year deal worth $2, 996,702. Wilson’s signing bonus was a paltry $619, 400.

Luck’s rookie deal APY was $5.527m.
Wilson’s rookie deal APY was $749,146.

The difference in pay is staggering, and with Luck getting about 14.5m upfront at the time of signing, he could easily invest much of that money right away and get an overall bigger return compared to what Wilson could invest.

Why is this important? Well, Luck is eventually going to become the highest paid QB whether its next year with the Colts tearing up his 5th year option or in 2017 if they don't. Its safe to assume Luck is going to make a higher APY than Wilson and get more guaranteed money than Wilson especially after the River’s contract. Colts have no leverage but to oblige as Luck is already touted as the best young QB in the game and universally considered a top 5 QB by most talking heads, pundits, and analyst alike.

The Yearly Comparison of Known Money Cap Hits between the two young QBs that I would consider more or less equals at this point in their careers is a little eye opening if you haven't seen the numbers side by side.

Year: Luck………….(Wilson)
2012: $4,019,636 ($544,868)
2013: $5,024,545 ($681,085)
2014: $6,029,454 ($817,302)
2015: $7,034,363 ($7,054,868)
2016: $16,155,000 ($18,540,868)

Even though Wilson now has higher cap hits in 2015 and 2016, the cost of cap space is still heavily favored towards Luck. And that should always be the case once Luck signs his new deal a year or two from now. Also, note before the extension Wilson was slated to make less than $1.6m for his services in 2015.

All this matters because Wilson has been a great bargain and should continue to be a bargain at least compared to Luck.

I recently did an exercise using Pro Football Reference’s Approximate Value comparing KJ Wright ‘s career money and value with newly minted OLBs DeAndre Levy and Lavonte David. It showed David to be a great player at a relatively low cost but it also showed Wright to being the better LBer over the last 4 years at half the cost compared to Levy. What the Seahawks have paid and will pay for Wright in contrast to what the Lion’s have paid and will pay for Levy and likewise with the Bucs and David, Wright looks like a bargain even if just a year ago he signed a contract that made him the 2nd highest 4-3 OLB in the NFL. Continuing on with Luck and Wilson…


AV Comparison Luck (Wilson)
2012: 13 (16)
2013: 15 (16)
2014: 16 (19)
Total: 44 (51)

According to Approximate Value, Wilson despite the daily lovefest for Luck has always been more productive (or more valuable) than Luck. Every single year. Comparing that with the cap hits for each player in the last 3 years possibly makes Wilson one of the most bang-for-your-buck players in Sports History let alone NFL History.

In the Wright comparison, I had to figure out how to compare each LBer equally as the more you play or are available to play, the higher your AV accumulates. So I formulated two stats to put all players on the most equal standing: AV per Game and AV per Start. Luck nor Wilson have never missed a game in the last 3 years, so its all the same…

AV per Start between the two:
Luck: 44/48 = .91666
Wilson: 51/48 = 1.0625

From what I could gather of all the big name QBs only 1 QB in the last 3 years had a better AV per Start than Wilson. Aaron Rodgers, of course, with a phenomenal 46 AV in just 41 games/starts or 1.129 AV per Start. A figure that becomes an AV of about 54 over 48 starts. Only +3 over Wilson.

Doing this research, its safe to say that Wilson probably deserves the money he got and for the 3 years he has already put in, he has and always will be a bargain compared to what a lot of the more big name QBs have got or will get especially the nation’s wunderkind in Andrew Luck.

I'm PERSONALLY still not sure if Russell Wilson has achieved that truly elite status just yet as there are certain aspects to his game I like to see him to improve but if Luck is already widely considered elite and amongst the NFL's best QBs. Then Wilson is also elite, #3 just has been the more valuable player of the two.

If you take in cost for production into consideration... Over the last 3 years, Wilson, easily has been the Most Valuable Player in the NFL. That's not a sugarcoat, its a fact.

And on that note, I think its time for me to retire my signature.

Great write up! That was really cool to read. Also Is luck if elite without winning a SB and being 3-3 in the playoffs then Wilson is for sure elite with 2 SB appearances Back to back and being 6-2 post season.

Sooooo YES!
I really don't think a single word of your post is debatable.
We truly are a blessed fan base. But let the detractors continue with their 'hate'. We know what we have, I don't necessarily care if the naysayers keep doubting. As long as we keep winning, they can continue to display their utter foolishness to the world (while their teams continue to get knocked off in round one of the playoffs...if they even make the post season) . No skin off our backs.
GO HAWKS

And today I read how Luck is working on trying to lower his INT rate. His accuracy isn't great and he takes risks trying to force the ball.

Luck is going to get paid a lot more, but once again, it won't translate to wins, or at the very least it won't translate to post season wins.

You would think by now that GM's would have a formula, or at least an idea, of what the max amount of cap space a QB can take up before he guts the team and there is diminishing returns.

The team to watch for that is the Ravens. They've done a really good job of upgrading the roster with younger players while managing Flacco's large cap hit.

You can also make the comparison that if Wilson made as much as Luck has, we wouldn't have been able to afford to keep our defense together and without that defense, we'd most likely not have been to two Superbowls. It has nothing to do with Wilson's skill level and everything to do with being able to build the team we have.

I see Luck's career trajectory as being similar to Peyton Manning's. Both are going to be great regular season QB's and both are going to be seen as post season chokers, which isn't entirely accurate. Manning has rarely had a good defense and/or running game...both of which have traditionally been seen as the way to consistently advance in the NFL post season.

Guys, Luck is a better QB and if you wouldn't trade Luck for Wilson straight up you are bonkers.

TheRealDTM":2t03bn0s said:

Guys, Luck is a better QB and if you wouldn't trade Luck for Wilson straight up you are bonkers.

Click to expand...

Bullshit, what has Luck shown (proven with his play) to make him WORTH more as a QB?,, answer?....not a damned thing.
Luck would FAIL miserably in the Seahawks system @ Quarterback, and you'd be a damned fool to think you could "Straight Up" supplant Wilson with Andrew Luck and have the same success :141847_bnono:

Wilson played for a lot less and produced a lot more. Obvious answer when talking about their rookie contract periods. I'd say Luck is overall a slightly better QB than Wilson and would work better in most systems. Wilson is perfect for a team like the Hawks though. He is an amazing dual threat and his leadership abilities are some of the best I've ever seen.

TheRealDTM":28ihcvyc said:

Guys, Luck is a better QB and if you wouldn't trade Luck for Wilson straight up you are bonkers.

Click to expand...

Well one QB allready brought us a superbowl win..so...ya..I wouldnt trade

Yet, when Luck becomes the highest paid QB in the league, nobody will be talking about him being "selfish" :roll:

scutterhawk":1rof2bnx said:

Luck would FAIL miserably in the Seahawks system @ Quarterback

Click to expand...

Yeah I agree.. he wouldn't know what to do with a running game and the best defense in football.

I forgot Seahawks.net is the land where Andrew Luck is suddenly an awful quarterback. Weeeeee!

"Better" is subjective. Is Luck better than Wilson? Who really knows? Luck is a great QB and so is Wilson. That we got a great QB for pennies has really helped the Seahawks develop the rest of the team, and I'm glad Wilson signed a new contract and will be around for a while. I appreciate the OP analysis of value based upon something concrete: production and salary. Has Wilson been a better value to the organization than Luck? Unquestionably.

Dont see how luck is better than wilson. Throws too many picks and russell wilson isnt far behind him in passing yards even though the hawks run the ball 60% of the time. And wilson is a better playmaker.

2Cool4School":3a906tz5 said:

Dont see how luck is better than wilson. Throws too many picks and russell wilson isnt far behind him in passing yards even though the hawks run the ball 60% of the time. And wilson is a better playmaker.

Click to expand...

Well, actually Luck is far ahead in yardage. He's also pretty close in rushing TD's; that's a fact that not a lot know. The caveat is: yardage doesn't win games, points do. So you compare TD's and TD's to INT ratio. Then you add rushing TD's. I'm at work so I don't have time to look all of that up, but I know Luck threw a ton more TD's than Wilson did last year, but also threw more INT's.

Once again, I liken it to Peyton Manning. You always hear the phrase "post season choker", but if you analyze it, it's only partially correct. Manning has typically been one of the very best against the blitz over his career; popular consensus was if you blized him, he would shred you. So, putting him under pressure on the field doesn't work, so why would he be a "choker"?

In the post season, play amps up, players play faster and there is less of a talent disparity than at most times during the regular season. Now, if say, your team's defense doesn't measure up well against the other team's defense, and your offense is 1 dimensional (in other words, no balance with a run game), you're forced to try and do more, against more talented teams. Manning and (so far) Luck have both been in this situation continually in their post season careers and it shows. If your team is weaker than the other team in defense, run game, and special teams, then you damned well better be perfect in the passing game. Which is hard against better defenses. There is less margin of error in the playoffs, more pressure to succeed, and mistakes are amplified.

So we get back to the value of the position of QB vs. the ability to keep a good team together. Which is where this thread started.

I also don't get the irrational hate for Luck. Saying Luck is one of the best QBs in the league doesn't diminish anything that Wilson has done or will do. They are different QBs.

If Wilson shredded his knee and was done, and we HAD to chose another QB to be on our team, 98% of us would grab Luck if it was an option. And as soon as he donned a Seahawk uniform, he'd be the bestest ever and we'd all love him. The Luck hate is starting to sound like a bunch of Cowboys and Niners fans to be honest.

Hawks46":2l8eiauf said:

The team to watch for that is the Ravens. They've done a really good job of upgrading the roster with younger players while managing Flacco's large cap hit.

Click to expand...

Flacco's large cap hits don't kick in until next year... so his 2014 and 2015 cap hits haven't real affected Newsome in upgrading their roster. Let's see what happens next year and in 2017.

2014, $14.8M
2015, $14.55M
2016, $28.55M
2017, $31.15M
2018, $24.75M

Hasselbeck":288fp387 said:

scutterhawk":288fp387 said:

Luck would FAIL miserably in the Seahawks system @ Quarterback

Click to expand...

Yeah I agree.. he wouldn't know what to do with a running game and the best defense in football.

I forgot Seahawks.net is the land where Andrew Luck is suddenly an awful quarterback. Weeeeee!

Click to expand...

So it's your contention that Andrew Luck could put up nearly 800 yards, and add to what makes the Seahawks Running game the success that it's become? SMH
Wilson has done it.
Andrew Luck is a stud Quarterback, FOR AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SYSTEM, but he's not even in the same conversation when it comes to a POOR Quarterback protection Offense Line.
It would require Cable to completely strip to bare butt, and rebuild the Offense to accommodate for Andrew Luck.

scutterhawk":1d7y3rmc said:

Hasselbeck":1d7y3rmc said:

scutterhawk":1d7y3rmc said:

Luck would FAIL miserably in the Seahawks system @ Quarterback

Click to expand...

Yeah I agree.. he wouldn't know what to do with a running game and the best defense in football.

I forgot Seahawks.net is the land where Andrew Luck is suddenly an awful quarterback. Weeeeee!

Click to expand...

So it's your contention that Andrew Luck could put up nearly 800 yards, and add to what makes the Seahawks Running game the success that it's become? SMH
Wilson has done it.
Andrew Luck is a stud Quarterback, FOR AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SYSTEM, but he's not even in the same conversation when it comes to a POOR Quarterback protection Offense Line.
It would require Cable to completely strip to bare butt, and rebuild the Offense to accommodate for Andrew Luck.

Click to expand...

You wouldnt have to strip it down for Luck.Get rid of he zone read and build a better OLine,which is what they are doing anyway.

Lucks development and turn over ratio is pretty much what every great QB has gone through.Wilson has avoided the turnovers by playing more cautious and relying on his legs more.But being more cautious and holding the ball to long is what alot of people here complain about and i agree its a weakness at times.

With Luck you might get more TOs in this offense but not many more and i bet you lose fewer high scoring games.
I think he developed a gunslinger attitude since he got into the pros because he had to.Here he would probably revert to his Stanford style which was heavily run oriented and protect the ball better.

With Luck here we might have still won 1 maybe 2 SBs.The Colts would still have won zero with Wilson.
They are both great in there own way.Never could understand the hate for Luck.

Hawks46":1rzf3fwn said:

2Cool4School":1rzf3fwn said:

Dont see how luck is better than wilson. Throws too many picks and russell wilson isnt far behind him in passing yards even though the hawks run the ball 60% of the time. And wilson is a better playmaker.

Click to expand...

Well, actually Luck is far ahead in yardage. He's also pretty close in rushing TD's; that's a fact that not a lot know. The caveat is: yardage doesn't win games, points do. So you compare TD's and TD's to INT ratio. Then you add rushing TD's. I'm at work so I don't have time to look all of that up, but I know Luck threw a ton more TD's than Wilson did last year, but also threw more INT's.

Once again, I liken it to Peyton Manning. You always hear the phrase "post season choker", but if you analyze it, it's only partially correct. Manning has typically been one of the very best against the blitz over his career; popular consensus was if you blized him, he would shred you. So, putting him under pressure on the field doesn't work, so why would he be a "choker"?

In the post season, play amps up, players play faster and there is less of a talent disparity than at most times during the regular season. Now, if say, your team's defense doesn't measure up well against the other team's defense, and your offense is 1 dimensional (in other words, no balance with a run game), you're forced to try and do more, against more talented teams. Manning and (so far) Luck have both been in this situation continually in their post season careers and it shows. If your team is weaker than the other team in defense, run game, and special teams, then you damned well better be perfect in the passing game. Which is hard against better defenses. There is less margin of error in the playoffs, more pressure to succeed, and mistakes are amplified.

So we get back to the value of the position of QB vs. the ability to keep a good team together. Which is where this thread started.

I also don't get the irrational hate for Luck. Saying Luck is one of the best QBs in the league doesn't diminish anything that Wilson has done or will do. They are different QBs.

If Wilson shredded his knee and was done, and we HAD to chose another QB to be on our team, 98% of us would grab Luck if it was an option. And as soon as he donned a Seahawk uniform, he'd be the bestest ever and we'd all love him. The Luck hate is starting to sound like a bunch of Cowboys and Niners fans to be honest.

Click to expand...

He had almost 200 more passing attempts and the colts throw the ball all the time when they are 5 yards out to score. Just look at his splits.

In the redzone Luck only has 1TD pass that was further than 10 yards. He had 22TD inside the 10 yard line. Compare it to Wilson who had only 7TD inside the 10 and 6 from 10-20. Lynch had 12 Redzone TD. Colts RBs had 3TD in the Redzone

Wondering if strength of schedule would play into the value aspect. In Luck's case, there are probably many QBs that could have provided some of the same wins or stats against Indy's schedule. On the flip side, the pool of QBs that could have won against the Hawks' scheduled is limited.

I think it's just fantasy to think of what ifs, because really we don't have Luck, we have Wilson who John Schneider said shared the same grade as Luck, and we got Wilson for a bargain for his first 4 years.

Luck was a 1st round draft pick that went to a team that had sucked the previous year so a top QB prospect will always go to those team first.

Seattle for the last two years went 7-9 before they got Wilson. There was no way they would get Luck, going after Luck would of cost them major draft picks, and no way Indiana would trade away that draft pick.

If we did go after Luck in the 2012, we would probably lose Bruce Irvin, and Bobby Wagner, not to mention depth players like Jeremy Lane, and to a lesser extent JR Sweezy.

Everything happened for a reason and we got 1 Superbowl win out of the whole ordeal, and almost another one right at the 1 yard line.

Luck can stay where he's at and make history with his star wars stats, all good with me.