Art Thiel ask if its Time to trade Russell

[Sgt. Largent]

The idea of 30M for one player is seemingly insane. That's anywhere from 3 to 5 pro bowlers at varying other positions.

It especially is for a QB that you're not really making the focal point of your offense.

Which is why this is a debate on Russell. Not many people are debating that Russell's a great football player, and a great QB. But if Pete is doubling down on the pound the rock ball control run game, why would we pay our QB 25-30M a year sucking up that much cap space.

Yes you pay guys like Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Ryan, etc that kind of money because they are the focal points of their offenses.

This is why our offense has been in this limbo ever since Russell got paid, it's been a tug of war between trying to make the offense work while paying the defense vs. wanting to run the ball when your QB is sucking up 50% of the cap space for the offense.

First off, Wilson makes 34% of the total offense cap WITHOUT Graham on there and he also has the 7th highest cap hit in the league right now. So throw out that exaggeration. 2nd. I keep hearing this term "focal point". Which means exactly what? How would we know when he is? Was he in 2nd half of 2015? Another term being tossed around that nobody can really define or substantiate even if he were. Don't ever expect Pete to become Sean Peyton, and remember that Wilson helps the run game too.

I suspect a compromise can be had. Bring in a strong screen game (that has worked well here with very little effort or priority given to it), and that alone could swing the passing stats and help the run game and pass rush as well. Schotty is said to do well with that, and that is my hope to help get us on track.

Focal point means just that, the offensive playcalling and scheme goes through the QB...........and yes out of necessity that's what happened last year, Russell was the focal point because the run game and line was so terrible.............and it didn't work out very well.

Thus the concerted effort by Pete to fix the run game.

I'm not arguing with you Seymour, it might work paying Russell 25-30M, and I'm in no way saying get rid of him. I'm saying that's the philosophical discussion that needs to be had.....................if you want to run the ball, control the clock, then is it wise to pay your QB to throw it maybe 20 times.

 

[Seymour]

The idea of 30M for one player is seemingly insane. That's anywhere from 3 to 5 pro bowlers at varying other positions.

It especially is for a QB that you're not really making the focal point of your offense.

Which is why this is a debate on Russell. Not many people are debating that Russell's a great football player, and a great QB. But if Pete is doubling down on the pound the rock ball control run game, why would we pay our QB 25-30M a year sucking up that much cap space.

Yes you pay guys like Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Ryan, etc that kind of money because they are the focal points of their offenses.

This is why our offense has been in this limbo ever since Russell got paid, it's been a tug of war between trying to make the offense work while paying the defense vs. wanting to run the ball when your QB is sucking up 50% of the cap space for the offense.

First off, Wilson makes 34% of the total offense cap WITHOUT Graham on there and he also has the 7th highest cap hit in the league right now. So throw out that exaggeration. 2nd. I keep hearing this term "focal point". Which means exactly what? How would we know when he is? Was he in 2nd half of 2015? Another term being tossed around that nobody can really define or substantiate even if he were. Don't ever expect Pete to become Sean Peyton, and remember that Wilson helps the run game too.

I suspect a compromise can be had. Bring in a strong screen game (that has worked well here with very little effort or priority given to it), and that alone could swing the passing stats and help the run game and pass rush as well. Schotty is said to do well with that, and that is my hope to help get us on track.

Focal point means just that, the offensive playcalling and scheme goes through the QB...........and yes out of necessity that's what happened last year, Russell was the focal point because the run game and line was so terrible.............and it didn't work out very well.

Thus the concerted effort by Pete to fix the run game.

I'm not arguing with you Seymour, it might work paying Russell 25-30M, and I'm in no way saying get rid of him. I'm saying that's the philosophical discussion that needs to be had.....................if you want to run the ball, control the clock, then is it wise to pay your QB to throw it maybe 20 times.

Well in trying to convince you, I am also trying to convince myself as well. :twisted:
I think there is no doubt a limit to what we pay Wilson....and that is very close to the 30M figure. That is why this is a discussion, not so much because of Wilson's "shortcomings" that come with every QB that get tossed around here so much.
Give him an average blocking oline and some help with play calling and things should change on offense I think. That oline should also help stop the carousel of RB's getting funneled through here wasting even more team resource.

 

[chris98251]

Well if he is 85 percent of the offense he should get paid right?

Numerous mediots are stating he is underpaid for his performance, after all Grab a Ho is getting paid more and he has not done anything in the league yet.

 

[adeltaY]

Where's the evidence that Russ has been bad in the first half his entire career? I said previously he had a better passer rating in the first half than the second half just last year. I wouldn't be surprised if he has a better career passer rating in the fourth than the first, but I doubt he has a really bad passer rating in any quarter overall. This year, he was bad in the first and amazing in the fourth, you'll get no argument from me there, the stats back it up. Is it true overall or was this just a bad year?

I'm all for paying whatever it takes to keep him. Sure, we can imagine that we trade Russ and get Darnold and he's just as good on a cheap contract, but what's the likelihood of that? Someone brought up the hit rate on first round picks, even top ones. It's not fantastic. How great are Winston, Mariota, and Bortles really doing? I think the first two are really good, but they're going to need extensions soon and their teams haven't accomplished much. Goff and Wentz look damn good and so does Watson. Paxton Lynch looks like a bust, Pat Mahomes hasn't looked great in limited action, and Trubisky is a question mark because his team is so bad. If you really look at it, the only teams who have won or are poised to win the SB with a rookie contract QB are the Rams and Eagles. The other teams are still seasons away from really competing. If you're in the AFC, especially, forget it. If Brady's playing close to the level he played at this year, you have almost no chance.

You trade Russell Wilson and have to rehaul the defense at the same time? We don't have an established OL (closer to established as crap, but I think it's looking up), question marks at TE, we have no idea what we have at RB, and Doug is our only surefire receiver (PRich might leave and Lockett is playing for a contract next season). You bring in a new QB and he's in the same situation as Trubisky (much better receivers, worse OL, worse RBs). Unless you're bringing in Andrew Luck 2.0 or have a really good offensive coaching staff, you won't have a championship-caliber offense for years! That's assuming we can get the defense back to championship-level in two years.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Where's the evidence that Russ has been bad in the first half his entire career? I said previously he had a better passer rating in the first half than the second half just last year.

No he doesn't, 78.0 passer rating in first half, 112.00 rating in 2nd half.

http://www.nfl.com/player/russellwilson ... ionalstats

This isn't news, Russell's first to second half stats are night and day, and they have been his entire career. Just go through year by year on this site.

Also not news is that he's a rhythm/tempo QB that needs to run around, get the tempo going and get those first 5-10 passes out of the way to try and find a rhythm.

The question every year is how do we get Russell in rhythm and tempo quicker? Or can we?

 

[adeltaY]

Where's the evidence that Russ has been bad in the first half his entire career? I said previously he had a better passer rating in the first half than the second half just last year.

No he doesn't, 78.0 passer rating in first half, 112.00 rating in 2nd half.

http://www.nfl.com/player/russellwilson ... ionalstats

This isn't news, Russell's first to second half stats are night and day, and they have been his entire career. Just go through year by year on this site.

Also not news is that he's a rhythm/tempo QB that needs to run around, get the tempo going and get those first 5-10 passes out of the way to try and find a rhythm.

The question every year is how do we get Russell in rhythm and tempo quicker? Or can we?

I meant 2016 by last year, my bad. Here's the rest, with rounding.

2012: 106/93
2013: 106/96
2014: 91/95
2015: 101/111
2016: 97/89
2017: 78/112

So, you can see that he was rated higher in the first half in three seasons and higher in the second half the other three. The major outlier is this past season. Everything else is good to great. You're 100% correct if we're talking about this season. He clearly started games off poorly and improved as he threw more. I think this comes down to coaching and holding him accountable. Call better plays early and convince him to take more risks or chew his ass out if he doesn't play well. Whatever it takes.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Where's the evidence that Russ has been bad in the first half his entire career? I said previously he had a better passer rating in the first half than the second half just last year.

No he doesn't, 78.0 passer rating in first half, 112.00 rating in 2nd half.

http://www.nfl.com/player/russellwilson ... ionalstats

This isn't news, Russell's first to second half stats are night and day, and they have been his entire career. Just go through year by year on this site.

Also not news is that he's a rhythm/tempo QB that needs to run around, get the tempo going and get those first 5-10 passes out of the way to try and find a rhythm.

The question every year is how do we get Russell in rhythm and tempo quicker? Or can we?

I meant 2016 by last year, my bad.

2016 is an outlier cause of Russell's injuries IMO, all his stats dropped.

idk, good discussion. I love Russell, dude's a baller, and those are hard to find. My hope is if we can at least get an above average run game going, and he can get back to making plays when we need them, and not have to carry the offense getting pounded.

 

[mrt144]

Where's the evidence that Russ has been bad in the first half his entire career? I said previously he had a better passer rating in the first half than the second half just last year.

No he doesn't, 78.0 passer rating in first half, 112.00 rating in 2nd half.

http://www.nfl.com/player/russellwilson ... ionalstats

This isn't news, Russell's first to second half stats are night and day, and they have been his entire career. Just go through year by year on this site.

Also not news is that he's a rhythm/tempo QB that needs to run around, get the tempo going and get those first 5-10 passes out of the way to try and find a rhythm.

The question every year is how do we get Russell in rhythm and tempo quicker? Or can we?

I meant 2016 by last year, my bad.

2016 is an outlier cause of Russell's injuries IMO, all his stats dropped.

idk, good discussion. I love Russell, dude's a baller, and those are hard to find. My hope is if we can at least get an above average run game going, and he can get back to making plays when we need them, and not have to carry the offense getting pounded.

We can finally discombobulate how much of this was due to Bevell and Cable falling into the abyss of their own beliefs on what works.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

We can finally discombobulate how much of this was due to Bevell and Cable falling into the abyss of their own beliefs on what works.

Doubt it, first loss you'll see Fire Schottenheimer/Solari posts because they weren't the "right" coordinators.

Maybe we'll see some subtle scheme and playcalling changes, but like I said even before Bevell and Cable were fired, this is Pete's team..............so doubt we'll even be able to notice a big scheme or playcalling difference.

 

[mrt144]

We can finally discombobulate how much of this was due to Bevell and Cable falling into the abyss of their own beliefs on what works.

Doubt it, first loss you'll see Fire Schottenheimer/Solari posts because they weren't the "right" coordinators.

Maybe we'll see some subtle scheme and playcalling changes, but like I said even before Bevell and Cable were fired, this is Pete's team..............so doubt we'll even be able to notice a big scheme or playcalling difference.

No doubt there will be impulsive "this sucks" posts but from my lifetime of playing games, its entirely possible that both lost sight of the details that made things flow instead of trickle. Sometimes you get in a funk where mistakes are compounded by mistakes made in an effort to correct.

 

[Scorpion05]

If you want to try and change the subject to shortcomings.of the defense and site RW's success, then keep that in perspective too.

Hawks allowed the least points scored for years. RW didn't need to score as many points as other QBs for HIS success.

Stupid redirects fail.

Except that doesn't happen in a vacuum. What would have happened if say, Russell played for the Broncos? Would they have missed the playoffs?

Winning football games is more than just conventional stats like yards and points allowed. What about converting third downs? What about killing another team's momentum with a long drive, or with a crucial touchdown? What about not turning the ball over? What about giving your offense a chance when the protection is suspect and the running game is non-existent

No one is here to say Russell is perfect. He sometimes hesitates too often. He struggles a bit with interior pressure. He's bound to sail a throw or two during a game. To which, big whoop...may I introduce you to any elite QB ever

Point is, winning football games is not algebra, it's Calculus. If Russell was a traditional pocket QB for example, the way defenses attack us would be different. Everything would be different. I can rarely recall a time in recent years when we needed a big play from Russell to switch the momentum or take the lead, and Russell delivered. Saying RW doesn't need to score as many points is silly because it implies Russell throws and rushes for far less TDs and Yards than other QBs. Which is inaccurate. He's always accounted for about 4000 yards and 25+ Tds a year. The only time he didn't was when he was badly injured

 

[AF_BASS_MAN]

I think it’s a little premature to even entertain the idea of trading RW3.

If the dude falls off this next year or two, without the LOB to keep opposing scores low against us, then we can resurrect this thread in 2020.

We have been playing complimentary football until 2017. Let’s see what Russ can really do now.

 

[RussB]

Trade him for Kirk and a draft pick if it was an option.

 

[mrt144]

Trade him for Kirk and a draft pick if it was an option.

Cousins?

:lol:

 

[hgwellz12]

Trade him for Kirk and a draft pick if it was an option.

Deez Nuttz is available...

 

[getnasty]

Trading Russell Wilson and signing another QB to big money(like Cousins) makes no sense. If your trading Russ it's for a ton of picks and cap space and then try to replicate 2013/14. Depth, great D, great line and run the ball.

 

[scutterhawk]

Many know that I've been more critical of RW than almost anyone here, but in the current climate even with a backup QB winning the SB, you keep RW because his contract is and will continue to be ever more outdated.

RW is a very, very good QB/Point Guard. I don't think he should be payed at the top of the list even if some other lesser guys are making more, but an outdated contract fits. Let him play it out and if you see a diamond in the rough of a QB then draft him mid to late round and if he sits for a couple years then so be it. If RW can improve further as a pocket aware passer then maybe you pay and stay and so be it. The outcome should be all business and no message board sentiment will matter, including my own.

BYAH!

Fine with the playing contract out but looking at it with more vision..
His trade value will never be higher before that contract ends because
the closer you get the less you will get.
Maybe he doesn't get any better or improve squat so keep paying?
As above stated did we win the SB with an elite QB?
I feel like I'm still waiting to see that.

You SEEN it in the second half of 2015, you've just chosen to ignore it.
He'd proved THEN, that he can be elite when he gets SOME HELP from his O-Line, EVEN WITHOUT having the likes of Marshawn Lynch to help keep Defenses on their heels.
Oh and, it was the DEFENSE that gave up all those points put up by Cam Newton in the playoffs, and it was Russell Wilson that scored the Seahawks back within reach of winning that game in the second half.
NO Quarterback is going to do it all by himself, not even LORD Brady.

Easy big guy..
I saw a half a season that doesn't make a career..
That Carolina game in 2nd half?What happened in the first?Off the top of my head I see a pick 6
and/or a RW fumble that led to another score by the Panthers.
That 2nd half only makes that comeback stuff in above posts look more valid..
The Carolina game(playoff loss) is not a good example to me.
Of course he cannot do it all which is obvious but fanboys want it where
there is an excuse for him and want to pay him whatever 30 plus million?
No vision of winning anything or what it really takes to do it..
Just plow 15% of the cap into a QB that will likely be in decline when he losses speed/leg injury
That scares me..I'm not just content to see an average football team
with a Matthew Stafford @the helm with no playoffs..
I've already been there so I'm sorry for being greedy.

If he'd have played like that for one or two games in a row, you'd maybe have some argument, BUT, 9?, > NINE < games in succession is a pretty damned good sample size, and it's goofy to suggest that it was anything other than superb.
Feel free to keep downplaying RW's accomplishments if you wish, but that's not going to alter the FACT that he showed that he can be an ELITE passer.

 

[SeadogEast]

We never had a true franchise quarterback in Seattle and it is difficult to slam the best QB we ever had. With that said, I wouldn't be against it. I always thought Pete was holding Wilson back. However, after watching Wilson play the last two years, I realized he can't lead a team the way a Rogers, Brady, or Brees can by doing more with less. Paying him $30 million a year would be criminal and would destroy this team ability to compete.

I agree Wilson is exciting and is a better player than most experts would have predicted. Bevell/Cable weren't great play callers and their departure was long over due. However, Wilson is not the same player since year three and he doesn't seem to be prepared as he once was. Without a decent running back, he needs far too much time to throw the ball. This makes it even more difficult with a poor offense line. His height is a factor and this will be a bigger problem as Wilson's athletic ability diminishes in next three years. Marshawn did so much to reduce the glaring weaknesses of Wilson's game and Wilson has not grown out of the free style, scramble mode quarterback. Many of his 4th quarter come backs were due to his poor play earlier in the game and you can't win that way long term.

A move would hurt the team in the short term. However, if we keep him, we are stuck in the Buffalo Bills 8-8 purgatory.

 

[Sports Hernia]

They are a 5 win team w/out him.
I do enjoy a good podcast though. :2thumbs:

that pretty much cuts through the BS.

If you're a Russell detractor or critic, that's fine. But until we have a better replacement at the most vital position on the team, then all your points are moot.............and it's why we're going to continue to pay Russell through his next contract.

because the alternative isn't tolerable.

Thread winner right there ^^^ :2thumbs:

 

[IndyHawk]

The idea of 30M for one player is seemingly insane. That's anywhere from 3 to 5 pro bowlers at varying other positions.

It especially is for a QB that you're not really making the focal point of your offense.

Which is why this is a debate on Russell. Not many people are debating that Russell's a great football player, and a great QB. But if Pete is doubling down on the pound the rock ball control run game, why would we pay our QB 25-30M a year sucking up that much cap space.

Yes you pay guys like Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Ryan, etc that kind of money because they are the focal points of their offenses.

This is why our offense has been in this limbo ever since Russell got paid, it's been a tug of war between trying to make the offense work while paying the defense vs. wanting to run the ball when your QB is sucking up 50% of the cap space for the offense.

On one spectrum this is what I have been saying but you put it in a better way
I'm good with that and frankly I get tired of trying to point out that 30 plus million
on his next contract is insane to do no matter how anyone tries to surgar coat
around it.
I'm saying here and now if that happens forget Championships because
his cap figure by that time will be 40-50% of the offense alone.
How do we pay for a good line for our QB who can't run wild anymore?
Or we pay for a line but have crappy RB's and WR's.You cannot assume
we will draft well to cover anything ha ha.
I guess we could go cheap with defense and special teams and have a
great offense(there is an idea)I bet we get a wild card and done at best.
I'd rather take my chances with the ransom of picks and win another
Championship.
The same formula we used before when all we needed was a game manager.