Rookie QB comparison from O'Neil

[Nunya]

According to O'Neil, Wilson is doing above average then most rookie QBs over the past 20 years.

Of all the rookies who began the season as their team's starting quarterback over the past 20 years, only one attempted fewer passes than Russell Wilson through five games.

But none had more victories.

Coach Pete Carroll has tailored his team's approach to the fact that he went with a rookie. In evaluating the results of that decision after five games, the best comparison isn't to the rest of the quarterbacks who are starting in this league or the guy who could be starting here in Matt Flynn, but the 20 rookies who started at quarterback in Week 1 over the past 20 years.

http://seattletimes.com/html/dannyoneil/2019387527_oneil10.html

http://seattletimes.com/html/seahawksbl ... _comp.html

 

[m0ng0]

Last week was a step in the right direction, lets hope he continues to build on that!

 

[Fearless Frog]

I find this piece absurd. Wins are not a QB stat. If our defense doesn't play at an unbelievable level, we'd be 0-5 and Wilson would have been benched already.

And you know what? The Seahawks have done that. Through five games, Seattle not only has a winning record but has had a chance to win every game.

Yeah, and in no way is Wilson responsible for this. In a game where our defense was dominating beyond reasonable expecations, we were only up 6-0, and Russell managed to give away the lead.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

I find this piece absurd. Wins are not a QB stat. If our defense doesn't play at an unbelievable level, we'd be 0-5 and Wilson would have been benched already.

And you know what? The Seahawks have done that. Through five games, Seattle not only has a winning record but has had a chance to win every game.

Yeah, and in no way is Wilson responsible for this. In a game where our defense was dominating beyond reasonable expecations, we were only up 6-0, and Russell managed to give away the lead.

Ah, I see. So if we lose it's his fault but if we win it's none of his doing. Got it. Good talk.

 

[12thMan1]

I find this piece absurd. Wins are not a QB stat. If our defense doesn't play at an unbelievable level, we'd be 0-5 and Wilson would have been benched already.

And you know what? The Seahawks have done that. Through five games, Seattle not only has a winning record but has had a chance to win every game.

Yeah, and in no way is Wilson responsible for this. In a game where our defense was dominating beyond reasonable expecations, we were only up 6-0, and Russell managed to give away the lead.

Actually Wilson kinda is responsible. Without his touchdown passes to Mccoy and Tate then we currently wouldn't have a 3-2 record.

 

[Fearless Frog]

I find this piece absurd. Wins are not a QB stat. If our defense doesn't play at an unbelievable level, we'd be 0-5 and Wilson would have been benched already.

And you know what? The Seahawks have done that. Through five games, Seattle not only has a winning record but has had a chance to win every game.

Yeah, and in no way is Wilson responsible for this. In a game where our defense was dominating beyond reasonable expecations, we were only up 6-0, and Russell managed to give away the lead.

Ah, I see. So if we lose it's his fault but if we win it's none of his doing. Got it. Good talk.

Wins are not a QB stat. This is not an opinion. Teams win games. A QB can throw 3 pick-sixes and his team can still win, do you credit that as a "QB win" and "he played well enough for the team to win"?

 

[Zebulon Dak]

Ah, I see. So if we lose it's his fault but if we win it's none of his doing. Got it. Good talk.

Wins are not a QB stat. This is not an opinion. Teams win games. A QB can throw 3 pick-sixes and his team can still win, do you credit that as a "QB win" and "he played well enough for the team to win"?

It depends on what he did with the rest of his snaps. No 1, 2 or even 3 plays win or lose a game on their own.

You're only as strong as your weakest link, right? Right now the Seahwks are 3-2. Russell Wilson is 3-2 as a starting QB. Take your bullshit somewhere else.

 

[Fearless Frog]

Ah, I see. So if we lose it's his fault but if we win it's none of his doing. Got it. Good talk.

Wins are not a QB stat. This is not an opinion. Teams win games. A QB can throw 3 pick-sixes and his team can still win, do you credit that as a "QB win" and "he played well enough for the team to win"?

It depends on what he did with the rest of his snaps. No 1, 2 or even 3 plays win or lose a game on their own.

You're only as strong as your weakest link, right? Right now the Seahwks are 3-2. Russell Wilson is 3-2 as a starting QB. Take your bullshit somewhere else.

Bullshit? Don't get mad at me for pointing out the obvious. Here's a better example: A team wins a game 3-0 on a field goal, or 2-0 from a safety. Is that a QB win? The QB played well enough to win?

I'm sorry, but this is football. It is the ultimate team sport. Saying Russell Wilson deserves to continue to start because the team is 3-2 flies in the face of all long and evidence that we've seen on the field.

 

[AgentDib]

It is possible to like Wilson and still recognize that team stats can be silly when applied to individual players.

The Cardinals are leading our division, does that make Kolb/Skelton the best QB tandem? The Falcons are undefeated, does that make Lousaka Polite the best fullback in the NFL? Of course not.

You only think it is persuasive because the argument fits your conclusion. If the GB game ended differently and we were 2-3 would you be arguing to bench Wilson based on our record? You wouldn't, because you don't actually believe that the team's record tells you what you need to know about QB play.

Imagine that TJack was our QB this year with the same passing production. Would you still be citing our 3-2 record as the reason why we needed to stick with him instead of giving Wilson a shot?

 

[Fearless Frog]

It is possible to like Wilson and still recognize that team stats can be silly when applied to individual players.

The Cardinals are leading our division, does that make Kolb/Skelton the best QB tandem? The Falcons are undefeated, does that make Lousaka Polite the best fullback in the NFL? Of course not.

You only think it is persuasive because the argument fits your conclusion. If the GB game ended differently and we were 2-3 would you be arguing to bench Wilson based on our record? You wouldn't, because you don't actually believe that the team's record tells you what you need to know about QB play.

Imagine that TJack was our QB this year with the same passing production. Would you still be citing our 3-2 record as the reason why we needed to stick with him instead of giving Wilson a shot?

EXACTLY. Thank you for articulating this point in a way that I couldn't.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

Imagine that TJack was our QB this year with the same passing production. Would you still be citing our 3-2 record as the reason why we needed to stick with him instead of giving Wilson a shot?

Yes, if that's what Coach thought was the best thing to do.

I don't CARE who our QB is. I never have. I want the guy who the people in charge believe is our best option. Right now they think it's Wilson so that's who I think it is.

 

[AgentDib]

Imagine that TJack was our QB this year with the same passing production. Would you still be citing our 3-2 record as the reason why we needed to stick with him instead of giving Wilson a shot?

Yes, if that's what Coach thought was the best thing to do.

I don't CARE who our QB is. I never have. I want the guy who the people in charge believe is our best option. Right now they think it's Wilson so that's who I think it is.

We agree on this completely. And that is why we are both supporting Wilson, not because our record is 3-2 or 2-3 or 17-grapefruit.

 

[AF_Hawk]

I find this piece absurd. Wins are not a QB stat. If our defense doesn't play at an unbelievable level, we'd be 0-5 and Wilson would have been benched already.

And you know what? The Seahawks have done that. Through five games, Seattle not only has a winning record but has had a chance to win every game.

Yeah, and in no way is Wilson responsible for this. In a game where our defense was dominating beyond reasonable expecations, we were only up 6-0, and Russell managed to give away the lead.

Did you not even look at the second article that compares the stats of some notable rookies and compares them through five games? He is on par and beyond some through five games with qb rating, completion %, and TD/int ratio. The only thing he is below on are on attempts and yards. There is nothing to hate about his progression. Nobody should expect him to be all world or Peyton Manning his rookie season.

 

[LymonHawk]

Hmmm....where have I seen this thread before?

 

[Fearless Frog]

I find this piece absurd. Wins are not a QB stat. If our defense doesn't play at an unbelievable level, we'd be 0-5 and Wilson would have been benched already.

And you know what? The Seahawks have done that. Through five games, Seattle not only has a winning record but has had a chance to win every game.

Yeah, and in no way is Wilson responsible for this. In a game where our defense was dominating beyond reasonable expecations, we were only up 6-0, and Russell managed to give away the lead.

Did you not even look at the second article that compares the stats of some notable rookies and compares them through five games? He is on par and beyond some through five games with qb rating, completion %, and TD/int ratio. The only thing he is below on are on attempts and yards. There is nothing to hate about his progression. Nobody should expect him to be all world or Peyton Manning his rookie season.

Sorry but Wilson does not have the luxury of playing like a rookie when there is a perfectly good veteran option on the bench (who I'm betting money on will still be a far better pro than Wilson). And Wilson is in a FAR better situation than the other rookie QBs being compared. Realistically, this may be the best team Wilson will ever be a part of. This is the best defense in franchise history and a rushing game that compares favorably with 2005's.

 

[LymonHawk]

Usually, when a team a picks a top QB in the draft, it is because they were terrible the year before. That is not the case here.

We have a top 5 defense, and a top 5 running game. For a true comparison, you would have to compare RW only with teams with same strengths or weaknesses. IMHO.

Last time I looked, football was a team game. Did Luck inherit a team with the same talent as Wilson? If not, then the comparisons are flawed.

The Colts give up 27.5 points a game.

We give up 14. points a game.

Just sayin'.

 

[ImTheScientist]

I find this piece absurd. Wins are not a QB stat. If our defense doesn't play at an unbelievable level, we'd be 0-5 and Wilson would have been benched already.

And you know what? The Seahawks have done that. Through five games, Seattle not only has a winning record but has had a chance to win every game.

Yeah, and in no way is Wilson responsible for this. In a game where our defense was dominating beyond reasonable expecations, we were only up 6-0, and Russell managed to give away the lead.

Awesome to know that losses are to blame on qbs but wins are not. :2:

 

[AF_Hawk]

I find this piece absurd. Wins are not a QB stat. If our defense doesn't play at an unbelievable level, we'd be 0-5 and Wilson would have been benched already.

And you know what? The Seahawks have done that. Through five games, Seattle not only has a winning record but has had a chance to win every game.

Yeah, and in no way is Wilson responsible for this. In a game where our defense was dominating beyond reasonable expecations, we were only up 6-0, and Russell managed to give away the lead.

Did you not even look at the second article that compares the stats of some notable rookies and compares them through five games? He is on par and beyond some through five games with qb rating, completion %, and TD/int ratio. The only thing he is below on are on attempts and yards. There is nothing to hate about his progression. Nobody should expect him to be all world or Peyton Manning his rookie season.

Sorry but Wilson does not have the luxury of playing like a rookie when there is a perfectly good veteran option on the bench (who I'm betting money on will still be a far better pro than Wilson). And Wilson is in a FAR better situation than the other rookie QBs being compared. Realistically, this may be the best team Wilson will ever be a part of. This is the best defense in franchise history and a rushing game that compares favorably with 2005's.

You do realize that despite some hiccups Wilson has played against some good defenses and faired well considering poor offensive line play right? And why do people think automatically that Flynn would be any better considering the poor oline play?

 

[BASF]

Sorry but Wilson does not have the luxury of playing like a rookie when there is a perfectly good veteran option on the bench (who I'm betting money on will still be a far better pro than Wilson). And Wilson is in a FAR better situation than the other rookie QBs being compared. Realistically, this may be the best team Wilson will ever be a part of. This is the best defense in franchise history and a rushing game that compares favorably with 2005's.

Less starting experience than Wilson does not make him a veteran. Sitting on the bench for all but one season of your eight year college and professional career does not make you a veteran. Wilson had more starts in college and has more starts in the pro's. Game experience is far more valuable than sitting for years.

 

[volsunghawk]

Sorry but Wilson does not have the luxury of playing like a rookie when there is a perfectly good veteran option on the bench (who I'm betting money on will still be a far better pro than Wilson).

Dude should have beat out the rookie, then.