Wilson Is Not an MVP Candidate—He's Something Much Better

[Anthony!]

Good read and explains changes made on offense last couple of weeks

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2595 ... e-seahawks

 

[JSeahawks]

He's the man.

 

[byau]

Wow..REALLY good read! Thanks for posting

My few favorite points

• Though rushing isn't really the story here, Wilson's rushing yards (399) rank second among quarterbacks to Cam Newton and his 5.2 yards per attempt are third to Ryan Mathews and Thomas Rawls.

(in between the lines: we have two of the top three YPA in rushing in Rawls and Wilson!)

• Wilson ranks fourth in the NFL in completion percentage at 67.7 percent, behind Philip Rivers, Kirk Cousins and Drew Brees.

• Wilson ranks third in the NFL in yards per attempt at 8.4, behind Palmer and Ben Roethlisberger.

Those two stats combined: high completion percentage, and high yards per attempt. Wow

Football Outsiders gives the Seahawks a 76.4 percent chance to reach the playoffs, higher than the once trendy Falcons (12.7 percent) or any NFC East team. They have a 10.0 percent chance of reaching the Super Bowl and a 5.0 percent chance of winning, better odds than the Packers (7.1, 2.7) or Vikings (6.4. 2.3). Football Outsiders doesn't base these percentages on they are proven winners logic, but on strength of schedule and a deep, nitty-gritty statistical dive.

In other words, the Seahawks offense has a reasonable chance to lead the team to a third straight Super Bowl, despite a rough start and the loss of two of its biggest playmakers.

Didn't realize the percentages were that high. And funny as I read those stats I too was thinking "well, they're basing their odds off of potential and past performance" and writer Mike Tanier reads my thoughts and follows it up with "Football Outsiders doesn't base these percentages on they are proven winners logic, but on strength of schedule and a deep, nitty-gritty statistical dive"

Anyway, fun article to read

 

[ApnaHawk]

Best QB in Seahawks history!

 

[Seymour]

LOL....@ Bleacher Report.

That article wasn't bad, but these idiots just wrote this fine piece of work 10 days ago.

All they want is clicks. ukeface:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...ning-seahawks-becoming-more-of-a-celebrity-qb

 

[edogg23]

OK I'll bite... One of the reason Wilson has such a great QBR is because the ball is velcro'd to his hand unless someone is wide open. That article didn't even mention that. The Steelers game was probably the first true game this year where he was getting the ball out quickly, throwing guys open instead of waiting for someone to get wide open. I loved what I saw from him that game and hope that side of him comes out more consistently!

 

[Anthony!]

LOL....@ Bleacher Report.

That article wasn't bad, but these idiots just wrote this fine piece of work 10 days ago.

All they want is clicks. ukeface:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...ning-seahawks-becoming-more-of-a-celebrity-qb

Hmm whatever

 

[Anthony!]

OK I'll bite... One of the reason Wilson has such a great QBR is because the ball is velcro'd to his hand unless someone is wide open. That article didn't even mention that. The Steelers game was probably the first true game this year where he was getting the ball out quickly, throwing guys open instead of waiting for someone to get wide open. I loved what I saw from him that game and hope that side of him comes out more consistently!

LOL only here can a great article about our QB come out and someone has to belittle it. Pathetic but expected.

 

[Jville]

It strikes me that the underlying theme and subject of "Anthony's" multiple Russell Wilson threads is about his devotion to and worship of Russell Wilson ...... rather than about Russell Wilson the quarterback, the football player or the man.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

OK I'll bite... One of the reason Wilson has such a great QBR is because the ball is velcro'd to his hand unless someone is wide open. That article didn't even mention that. The Steelers game was probably the first true game this year where he was getting the ball out quickly, throwing guys open instead of waiting for someone to get wide open. I loved what I saw from him that game and hope that side of him comes out more consistently!

As opposed to guys like Brady and Manning who dink and dunk safe passes and crosses that are less than 10 yards 90% of the time?

That's why the study had to have 1,500 attempts, so that opinions like yours were rendered moot.

Russell's always been a very accurate QB, not sure why it matters how he got there for the QBR stat. You'd like him to be less safe and take more risks?

 

[edogg23]

OK I'll bite... One of the reason Wilson has such a great QBR is because the ball is velcro'd to his hand unless someone is wide open. That article didn't even mention that. The Steelers game was probably the first true game this year where he was getting the ball out quickly, throwing guys open instead of waiting for someone to get wide open. I loved what I saw from him that game and hope that side of him comes out more consistently!

As opposed to guys like Brady and Manning who dink and dunk safe passes and crosses that are less than 10 yards 90% of the time?

That's why the study had to have 1,500 attempts, so that opinions like yours were rendered moot.

Russell's always been a very accurate QB, not sure why it matters how he got there for the QBR stat. You'd like him to be less safe and take more risks?

I'm not knocking Wilson, and guys like Montana ran a west coast offense with lots of safe short passes that are easy completions. But that just proves my point, QBR is fairly meaningless stat. And yes I would like him to be more aggressive with getting the ball out quicker like he did against the Steelers, what is wrong with that?

Wilson has always struck me as a conservative qb thst is accurate, but not elite accuracy

 

[SeaChase]

It strikes me that the underlying theme and subject of "Anthony's" multiple Russell Wilson threads is about his devotion to and worship of Russell Wilson ...... rather than about Russell Wilson the quarterback, the football player or the man.

Spot on.

 

[Seafan]

Likely not making the pro bowl but can talk MVP.

 

[erik2690]

I'm not knocking Wilson, and guys like Montana ran a west coast offense with lots of safe short passes that are easy completions. But that just proves my point, QBR is fairly meaningless stat. And yes I would like him to be more aggressive with getting the ball out quicker like he did against the Steelers, what is wrong with that?

Wilson has always struck me as a conservative qb thst is accurate, but not elite accuracy

"QBR is fairly meaningless stat"...... first I hope we are all talking about "QB rating" and not QBR, gets confusing sometimes. Second, you can't just say a stat is meaningless like an automatic fact. I think comparing QB rating across eras maybe might not work, but comparing within timeframes it is not a meaningless stat at all. QB rating is near the top of the list of QB stats most correlated to winning. So if winning is what you like high QB rating is more important than quite a few stats including volume stats like yards and TD's. No stat is going to give you a full picture, but to say rating is fairly meaningless seems a bit overboard. What stats do you like to check on to measure productivity? ANY/a? Wilson does pretty well in most so I'm not sure it will reflect much differently.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

OK I'll bite... One of the reason Wilson has such a great QBR is because the ball is velcro'd to his hand unless someone is wide open. That article didn't even mention that. The Steelers game was probably the first true game this year where he was getting the ball out quickly, throwing guys open instead of waiting for someone to get wide open. I loved what I saw from him that game and hope that side of him comes out more consistently!

As opposed to guys like Brady and Manning who dink and dunk safe passes and crosses that are less than 10 yards 90% of the time?

That's why the study had to have 1,500 attempts, so that opinions like yours were rendered moot.

Russell's always been a very accurate QB, not sure why it matters how he got there for the QBR stat. You'd like him to be less safe and take more risks?

I'm not knocking Wilson, and guys like Montana ran a west coast offense with lots of safe short passes that are easy completions. But that just proves my point, QBR is fairly meaningless stat. And yes I would like him to be more aggressive with getting the ball out quicker like he did against the Steelers, what is wrong with that?

Wilson has always struck me as a conservative qb thst is accurate, but not elite accuracy

I don't know what you mean by elite accuracy........Russell is near the top in every stat that takes into account accuracy.

Would we like him to do things like throw his receivers open, get rid of the ball quicker and not hesitate sometimes? Absolutely, but like I said that might be at the expense of said accuracy and QBR.

People love the gunslinger QB's, but they throw a lot of picks and incompletions.

 

[Tech Worlds]

This really is kinda sick Anthony. Seek help.

 

[edogg23]

I'm not knocking Wilson, and guys like Montana ran a west coast offense with lots of safe short passes that are easy completions. But that just proves my point, QBR is fairly meaningless stat. And yes I would like him to be more aggressive with getting the ball out quicker like he did against the Steelers, what is wrong with that?

Wilson has always struck me as a conservative qb thst is accurate, but not elite accuracy

"QBR is fairly meaningless stat"...... first I hope we are all talking about "QB rating" and not QBR, gets confusing sometimes. Second, you can't just say a stat is meaningless like an automatic fact. I think comparing QB rating across eras maybe might not work, but comparing within timeframes it is not a meaningless stat at all. QB rating is near the top of the list of QB stats most correlated to winning. So if winning is what you like high QB rating is more important than quite a few stats including volume stats like yards and TD's. No stat is going to give you a full picture, but to say rating is fairly meaningless seems a bit overboard. What stats do you like to check on to measure productivity? ANY/a? Wilson does pretty well in most so I'm not sure it will reflect much differently.

I agree with you, meaningless was too strong of a term and yes I meant QB Rating like you said.

 

[BadgerVid]

I'm not knocking Wilson, and guys like Montana ran a west coast offense with lots of safe short passes that are easy completions. But that just proves my point, QBR is fairly meaningless stat. And yes I would like him to be more aggressive with getting the ball out quicker like he did against the Steelers, what is wrong with that?

Wilson has always struck me as a conservative qb thst is accurate, but not elite accuracy

"QBR is fairly meaningless stat"...... first I hope we are all talking about "QB rating" and not QBR, gets confusing sometimes. Second, you can't just say a stat is meaningless like an automatic fact. I think comparing QB rating across eras maybe might not work, but comparing within timeframes it is not a meaningless stat at all. QB rating is near the top of the list of QB stats most correlated to winning. So if winning is what you like high QB rating is more important than quite a few stats including volume stats like yards and TD's. No stat is going to give you a full picture, but to say rating is fairly meaningless seems a bit overboard. What stats do you like to check on to measure productivity? ANY/a? Wilson does pretty well in most so I'm not sure it will reflect much differently.

There are some problems with QB rating...many have said it really should be called "Passer Rating". That said, with Russell's QB rating combined with rushing stats that would make many (if not most) RBs a little jealous, one would think people would stop with the "average" and "game manager" labels.

 

[RiverDog]

Good read and explains changes made on offense last couple of weeks

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2595 ... e-seahawks

Did anyone take a look at some of the other names on that list?

#13 Chad Pennington, #16 Daunte Culpepper, and #18 Jeff Garcia all ahead of #20 Dan Marino. And it gets worse:

There's #21 David Garrad, #29 Rich Gannon, #34 Mark Brunell, #53 Jake Delhomme, #54 Kyle Orton, #59 Jeff George, and #63 Steve Beuerlien before you get to #64 Dan Fouts. Then sprinklle in #65 Ryan Fitzpatrick and #66 Matt Cassell until you get to #67 John Elway. Johnny Unitas is at #78,

About 1 in every 5 of those quarterbacks on that list are a laughing stock, and many are ranked ahead of first ballot Hall of Famers. It is heavily weighted towards the modern quarterbacks that have played within the past 20 years. It's nothing short of outrageous to mention some of those names in the same breath as guys like Marino, Elway, Unitas, Van Brocklin, Baugh, et al.

It's a bogus list. The only thing it proves in a historical context is that the game has changed so much as to render the QBR as a worthless stat as far as rating quarterbacks from 20 years and eariler. They should just use it to rank active quarterbacks and leave it at that.

 

[jkitsune]

Good read and explains changes made on offense last couple of weeks

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2595 ... e-seahawks

Did anyone take a look at some of the other names on that list?

#13 Chad Pennington, #16 Daunte Culpepper, and #18 Jeff Garcia all ahead of #20 Dan Marino. And it gets worse:

There's #21 David Garrad, #29 Rich Gannon, #34 Mark Brunell, #53 Jake Delhomme, #54 Kyle Orton, #59 Jeff George, and #63 Steve Beuerlien before you get to #64 Dan Fouts. Then sprinklle in #65 Ryan Fitzpatrick and #66 Matt Cassell until you get to #67 John Elway. Johnny Unitas is at #78,

About 1 in every 5 of those quarterbacks on that list are a laughing stock, and many are ranked ahead of first ballot Hall of Famers. It is heavily weighted towards the modern quarterbacks that have played within the past 20 years. It's nothing short of outrageous to mention some of those names in the same breath as guys like Marino, Elway, Unitas, Van Brocklin, Baugh, et al.

It's a bogus list. The only thing it proves in a historical context is that the game has changed so much as to render the QBR as a worthless stat as far as rating quarterbacks from 20 years and eariler. They should just use it to rank active quarterbacks and leave it at that.

This is one of the problems with declaring current QBs to be all-time greats compared to heroes of yore. There's just so much that has changed in the game, in terms of rules which favor the offense, focus on developing quarterbacks and wideouts, etc. You cannot reasonably expect someone like Unitas to put up numbers that look at all reasonable by today's standards, be it QB rating, yards, TDs, or any other metric.

That said, it can be used more effectively to compare contemporaries. Comparing Andrew Luck and Russell Wilson (just to pick two random names out of thin air that I've never heard before) by statistics is much more reasonable.