Wilson 14th in Benoit's list of best QBs

[lobohawk]

If I remember correctly, Andy Benoit generally has Wilson ranked lower than others. He's never been a Wilson fan.

He always brings up these things for Wilson. Too short and not a pocket passer.

 

[Popeyejones]

If I remember correctly, Andy Benoit generally has Wilson ranked lower than others. He's never been a Wilson fan.

FWIW after that run in the back half of 2015, Benoit, like everybody else, was incredibly bullish on Wilson, and his ability to mold into an all time great QB. Back then Benoit was particularly calling out what he thought was a more long-term development of Wilson in the pocket.

But like a lot of other people (TBF, myself included) he thinks Wilson is a really good QB who struggles in a couple areas that have so far kept him from really ascending to that top level.

TBH I wouldn't conclude that this ranking JUST results from Benoit being hater or an idiot.

As evidence, Sando's article summarizing the QB evaluations of 40 NFL talent evaluators also put Wilson in that 12-14 range early this year.

Robert Clark and Kevin Mays (who both looooove the Seahawks) put Wilson in the same bin earlier this year.

There's of course people who put Wilson higher too and Benoit, pro-talent evaluators, Mays, and Clark can all be wrong for sure, but it's not like Benoit is standing alone by himself as some long-term and isolated critic of Wilson's game.

 

[Scorpion05]

Correction, he is the 4th highest rated, behind Drew Brees who is 3rd

That above ranking seems more in line with what Wilson has delivered despite playing behind a simply awful OLine, w/o much of a run game to take some of the pressure away from him.

Yep

Wilson is quickly becoming one of the most unfairly critiqued Qbs I've ever seen. I've never seen someone so nitpicked at for missed throws, "pocket awareness," etc. when virtually every metric shows he's doing a hell of a lot with chicken s***. No running game, no bonafide receiving threat(at least not being utilized properly ie: Jimmy Graham), and statistically among the worst O-lines in recent history. Second to First most pressured Qb since he's been in the league, and Rees Odhiambo is ranked DEAD last.

It's just getting irritating, especially in the media, to see them praise Derek Carr and Andrew Luck even when they struggle. When they struggle it's because of their supporting cast. When Russell does, it's because he's not reading defenses, not making quick decisions, and inaccurate. Thank god for Advanced stats :irishdrinkers:


Edit: Not to mention, many were crapping on Carson Wentz last year but that was largely blamed on him missing his LT for those games, why can't we apply that same logic here? Russell doesn't have an LT, RT, or guards

With RW he is what he is and if he is as good as you think the team would be 5-0. He has limitations and he's not getting any faster. He struggles in the red zone. He's inconsistent on what should be easy completions. He doesn't throw WRs open and generally won't throw to receivers unless they are wide open. Rated 14th is fair. He was much better as a passer at the end of 2015. Don't know what happened to him but he looks like he's lost some confidence. 34 TD passes seems like a dream. I hope I'm wrong. I hope he shakes off whatever it is and returns to his 2015 form.

I am in the business of fair, reasonable, logical arguments. That happens when you put all the facts on the table and judge it with the proper perspective

So, if you look at the facts of him having the lowest paid O-line, the worst LT in the league according to advanced stats. No running game, the 1st or 2nd most pressured QB since 2013, the only QB this year completing over 60% of his passes under pressure. Yet still has a high QB rating, respectable completion percentage, etc. etc.

If you look at all of those facts and your "humble" conclusion is that RW is who he is? And that we'd be 5-0 if he was actually good? Then there's nothing to talk about, arguing for the sake of arguing is pointless. I don't know any true football mind who completely discounts the importance of getting into a rhythm or suggest a QB can't miss throws. It's why over the years I compare the criticism Russ receives compared to other QBs over the years who have struggled with bad O-lines before fixing it(Carson Wentz, Brady, Andrew Luck, etc.)

 

[Scorpion05]

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.

Carson Wentz struggled with his LT missing last year. And would have lost to the Panthers had Cam not crapped the bed. He didn't play as well but the rest of the O-line was solid enough. Good luck with putting Wentz behind our O-line. In fact, we should do that trade to prove a point. Same with Dak

 

[Popeyejones]

I am in the business of fair, reasonable, logical arguments. That happens when you put all the facts on the table and judge it with the proper perspective

So, if you look at the facts of him having the lowest paid O-line, the worst LT in the league according to advanced stats. No running game, the 1st or 2nd most pressured QB since 2013, the only QB this year completing over 60% of his passes under pressure. Yet still has a high QB rating, respectable completion percentage, etc. etc.

If you look at all of those facts and your "humble" conclusion is that RW is who he is? And that we'd be 5-0 if he was actually good? Then there's nothing to talk about, arguing for the sake of arguing is pointless. I don't know any true football mind who completely discounts the importance of getting into a rhythm or suggest a QB can't miss throws. It's why over the years I compare the criticism Russ receives compared to other QBs over the years who have struggled with bad O-lines before fixing it(Carson Wentz, Brady, Andrew Luck, etc.)

TBH, I think my problem with this "fair, reasonable, logical" argument is that it flies in the face of how a player's abilities are actually evaluated in the NFL.

Pro evaluaters are evaluating talent not based on stats, or based on the successes or failures of the players around them. Those are the things that GET IN THE WAY when trying to evaluate the talent of a player.

Instead, what they're looking at is what player X does in situation Y over many iterations of that situation.

If you're evaluating a QB and the line gives up immediate pressure you don't grade the QB on that play, because he had nothing to do with what happened on it.

If none of the WRs get separation in their route combos and the pass results in an incompletion, you're not knocking the QB for his completion %. Instead you're looking to see if he maintains his base and footwork in that crappy situation, tries to force the pass and potentionally give up a pick or throws the ball away, keeps his eyes downfield while manipulating the pocket in that bad situation or goes a little haywire in his footwork and positioning as he's starting to feel a little stressed out about the failed play, and so on.

It's why when evaluators are looking at college QBs and see a high or low completion percentage, the very first things they're trying to get a read on are what type of throws are being asked of him, how are his receivers at getting separation, is he working out of a clean or muddy pocket (and how does he work out of a muddy pocket), and so on.

In short, all the stuff you're citing is the stuff that pro-evaluaters are trying to avoid when evaluating talent.

 

[Seymour]

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.

 

[ludakrishna]

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.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Not worth reading. Anyone who says he's 14th best knows absolutely nothing about football. Next

 

[Seymour]

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.

 

[Popeyejones]

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:

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Or, if you just refuse to give Wilson any credit, ever..........there is that part.

 

[Popeyejones]

Or, if you just refuse to give Wilson any credit, ever..........there is that part.

If this is directed at me, in what world have I not regularly complimented Wilson or given him credit for the parts of his game that make him a great QB?

Instead, I'm just correctly recognizing that the rate at which he's pressured, the poor quality of his 0-line, and the lack of a running game are the three things that have been coming up all year in debates about Wilson's play, and that there's a solution for that.

You basically want to find a QB who maps onto the same issues Wilson is dealing with, and compare that person to WIlson. Maybe you get lucky and that person is even similar to Wilson in his performance and efficiency as a passer this year, so you have a really good comparable player in terms of both QB rating and the types of things they're dealing with.

That player is Carson Palmer, who is facing a comparable pressure rate, has a comparably bad running game and bad o-line, and so far has put up a comparably equivalent performance (i.e. rank WIlson one spot above where you rank Palmer and you've got your answer as to how Wilson is playing).

I'm not saying it's perfect by any means, but if you want to net out all of these other factors and figure out why some experts so far are putting Wilson in that 12-14 range, if you think Carson Palmer is also in that range, you've got your answer. :2thumbs:

 

[hawk45]

If this is directed at me, in what world have I not regularly complimented Wilson or given him credit for the parts of his game that make him a great QB?

Instead, I'm just correctly recognizing that the rate at which he's pressured, the poor quality of his 0-line, and the lack of a running game are the three things that have been coming up all year in debates about Wilson's play, and that there's a solution for that.

You basically want to find a QB who maps onto the same issues Wilson is dealing with, and compare that person to WIlson. Maybe you get lucky and that person is even similar to Wilson in his performance and efficiency as a passer this year, so you have a really good comparable player in terms of both QB rating and the types of things they're dealing with.

That player is Carson Palmer, who is facing a comparable pressure rate, has a comparably bad running game and bad o-line, and so far has put up a comparably equivalent performance (i.e. rank WIlson one spot above where you rank Palmer and you've got your answer as to how Wilson is playing).

I'm not saying it's perfect by any means, but if you want to net out all of these other factors and figure out why some experts so far are putting Wilson in that 12-14 range, if you think Carson Palmer is also in that range, you've got your answer. :2thumbs:

Then maybe Carson is ranked too low as well.

I think you are very fair re: Wilson and share your assessment of him. Good QB who flirts with greatness, continues to struggle with pocket presence and that remains the biggest barrier to achieving greatness. I disagree slightly with you that he has always been as poor in the pocket to the extent he is now. That is, I agree he has used his legs to escape - and perhaps too early - his entire NFL career, but that as the line has deteriorated his rabbit tendencies on plays where he actually has adequate protection have been exacerbated. Where we are the last 2 years (no run game, 3/5 or more new faces on the OL, all past solid starters or pro-bowlers gone in FA), any progress has stalled, and in fact we see some regress in his game.

The place where I'd quibble with the article is that it says the rankings are who you'd want for the rest of 2017, assuming the QB could bring his system but not his players.

I think the "not bringing his players" bit helps Wilson (Carson too) because if you give him a middle-of-the-pack OL and run game I absolutely want Wilson above Rivers, Cousins, Winston, Manning, Newton, Wentz and Smith for the rest of 2017. Carson would be above some of those players as well.

What do you think?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Not directed at anyone in particular, other than those who flat you refuse to give the guy any credit. Oh well, it is what it is. And it's entertaining regardless.

 

[Popeyejones]

Hawk 45:

Yeah, I kind of struggle with that idea too, as I'd rather rank a player regardless of their scheme and surrounding players, or inclusive of their scheme and surrounding players, not with one and not the other.

For a guy like Wilson, who I think is a very good but very high variance player, I think he really fits the Seahawks: With a very good D and spotty O-line I think you're a lot more into a high variance player than you are with a mediocre D and good O-Line. I know it's not a popular opinion by a long shot, but I also think the Hawks do a fairly decent job at accentuating the areas in which Wilson excels and minimizing the areas in which he struggles.

They're definitely not catering to skills and limitations as much as they were early in his career (or NEARLY as much as the Texans are with Watson or Washington did with RGIII in his rookie year, or as much the Panthers did with Cam save for a brief spell before this year) but I still think that the passing game is oriented to maximize the areas in which Wilson truly shines and minimize the areas in which he struggles.

 

[Mad Dog]

Wow, I think some people might need to be careful what they wish for.

Wilson is the third best thing that has happened to this franchise (after Paul Allen and Pete Carroll). Best QB we've ever had. I think recency bias is skewing opinions badly. How many times was Matt Hasselbeck boo'd off the field in his tenure for some absolutely awful performances? And some of you seem to be intent on ranking Wilson with Matt on even terms.

I ask you this: how many times has RW been blown out? How many times has the team fallen badly behind and Wilson gives a big FU to the coaches and carries this team on his back? Dude is an embodiment of "its not how you start, its how you finish."

Every year we go through this (including 2015). OL is terrible, we blame Wilson for being as someone put it "mostly terrible." Then OL starts to find its legs, Wilson is suddenly good again and we end up winning 10+ games and winnign at least one playoff game.

If Wilson was on a team that gave a rat's behind about offense, he'd be a star. But instead, all the cash goes to defensive stars rather than shoring up the worst OL in football. I understand the mindset of the FO because a defensive star costs the same as a mediocre o-lineman. But still blaming Wilson for our offensive woes is head-shaking. You will all miss him terribly when he's gone.

 

[hawk45]

Hawk 45:

Yeah, I kind of struggle with that idea too, as I'd rather rank a player regardless of their scheme and surrounding players, or inclusive of their scheme and surrounding players, not with one and not the other.

For a guy like Wilson, who I think is a very good but very high variance player, I think he really fits the Seahawks: With a very good D and spotty O-line I think you're a lot more into a high variance player than you are with a mediocre D and good O-Line. I know it's not a popular opinion by a long shot, but I also think the Hawks do a fairly decent job at accentuating the areas in which Wilson excels and minimizing the areas in which he struggles.

The article said the scheme comes with the QB and the players do not. That is why I would rank Wilson higher, and I think you are saying you don't necessarily disagree you just don't prefer the parameters the article uses.

Moving to the parameters you suggest, where if he goes to a different team he changes scheme *and* players (which is probably the more likely way something like that would happen) then yes, I don't think it's a foregone conclusion he would thrive under a different scheme.

I think your viewpoint was much strengthened when we could run block and had Lynch. It used to be we could say that on another team/scheme Wilson wouldn't benefit from a strong running game and commitment to rushing. Now that we can't say that, the scheme isn't nearly as friendly to Wilson as it once was. Basically we try to run a few times until it's clear we can't, then ask a high-variance player to be a high-consistency player without good protection, rushing, PA, etc.

 

[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.

But how much of Watson's pressure is based on blitzes?

He also has Hopkins to throw to, who is far better than any receiver we have. He has a better running game, and arguably a better offensive scheme. But that's just my opinion

What I know for sure is that Watson doesn't have the worst performing LT in the league(Rees)

 

[Scorpion05]

I am in the business of fair, reasonable, logical arguments. That happens when you put all the facts on the table and judge it with the proper perspective

So, if you look at the facts of him having the lowest paid O-line, the worst LT in the league according to advanced stats. No running game, the 1st or 2nd most pressured QB since 2013, the only QB this year completing over 60% of his passes under pressure. Yet still has a high QB rating, respectable completion percentage, etc. etc.

If you look at all of those facts and your "humble" conclusion is that RW is who he is? And that we'd be 5-0 if he was actually good? Then there's nothing to talk about, arguing for the sake of arguing is pointless. I don't know any true football mind who completely discounts the importance of getting into a rhythm or suggest a QB can't miss throws. It's why over the years I compare the criticism Russ receives compared to other QBs over the years who have struggled with bad O-lines before fixing it(Carson Wentz, Brady, Andrew Luck, etc.)

TBH, I think my problem with this "fair, reasonable, logical" argument is that it flies in the face of how a player's abilities are actually evaluated in the NFL.

Pro evaluaters are evaluating talent not based on stats, or based on the successes or failures of the players around them. Those are the things that GET IN THE WAY when trying to evaluate the talent of a player.

Instead, what they're looking at is what player X does in situation Y over many iterations of that situation.

If you're evaluating a QB and the line gives up immediate pressure you don't grade the QB on that play, because he had nothing to do with what happened on it.

If none of the WRs get separation in their route combos and the pass results in an incompletion, you're not knocking the QB for his completion %. Instead you're looking to see if he maintains his base and footwork in that crappy situation, tries to force the pass and potentionally give up a pick or throws the ball away, keeps his eyes downfield while manipulating the pocket in that bad situation or goes a little haywire in his footwork and positioning as he's starting to feel a little stressed out about the failed play, and so on.

It's why when evaluators are looking at college QBs and see a high or low completion percentage, the very first things they're trying to get a read on are what type of throws are being asked of him, how are his receivers at getting separation, is he working out of a clean or muddy pocket (and how does he work out of a muddy pocket), and so on.

In short, all the stuff you're citing is the stuff that pro-evaluaters are trying to avoid when evaluating talent.

But that is flawed logic.

This argument is akin to saying...well World War II has no impact on what America is today. Our function, our development as a nation. Of course it does. Our history and our circumstances governs our outcome. If history went differently, America would be different.

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

If a Qb has a history of having a decent O-line, then those few times he's under immense pressure does not define his play. If he has a clean pocket more often than not, you may not notice the one or two throws he misses, because he'll make other great throws and probably end the game with a 68% completion percentage and 2-3 Tds. This idea that in Football, you can analyze him in isolation is illogical. The absurd part is, what Russell is accomplishing despite his many obstacles should draw praise. Instead, it's drawing criticism.

Like I've stated previously, the frustrating part is once Russell gets a better O-line, the narrative will be that he's suddenly "Developed" into a better passer. That will be the conclusion his critics come up with to justify their ego in previously criticizing him

 

[Seymour]

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:

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.

BTW, the 25% number doesn't matter where the rushing yards come from. The opposing D still has to respect the run and keep more men in near the LOS which opens up more targets downfield.