Chiefs Two 1st round picks for Russell Wilson in '16 and '17 or '17 and '18 - Page 77

Discuss Thrower · 06-21-2015, 11:57 AM

Clayton on show seems to hint that SEA would be open to non-exclusive Tag for RW in 2016- seems surprising but SEA will study all avenues
— DAVIS HSU (@DavisHsuSeattle) June 20, 2015

Do you sign the offer sheet if the Seahawks non-exclusively tag Russell Wilson?

Pole cumming.

**SAUTO** · 06-27-2015, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

I am totally ok with admitting I'm wrong when I'm wrong

best post of the year

ThaVirus · 06-27-2015, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

You simply can not lead the receiver in that situation.

That throw has to be into the receiver's hip, allowing only the receiver the opportunity to make a catch.

I agree here. Should have been low and in the receiver's body.

With another down (or two) if the play doesn't hit pay dirt, you've got to make absolutely sure your guy is the only one that has a shot at it.

It either needs to be a touchdown or an incompletion.

Mother****erJones · 06-27-2015, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Matt Ryan

You take the guy with 0 Super Bowls let alone an appearance and has had 3 great receiving options and one of which is perhaps the best TE to ever play the game. Lol

ThaVirus · 06-28-2015, 01:01 AM

Russell Wilson myths debunked

Quote:

Myth 1: Wilson's stats are underwhelming

He's #3 in the league, behind only Rodgers and Manning, in AY/A since he came into the league, the QB stat most predictive of team wins.

He needs 248 attempts to qualify for career passer rating records, and if he does nothing but maintain his rating, he'd be #2 all time, again behind Rodgers.

And this is with a ton of turnover in his receiving targets (Miller -- injured for 2014; Rice -- injured for a good portion of 2013, then retired; Harvin -- injured for 2013, you know the rest; Tate -- left in FA after 2013; McCoy -- injured in 2013 and 2014). Not to mention Seattle's o-line struggles.

Myth 2: Wilson isn't asked to do much

Wilson passed for 3475 yards and rushed for 849. Seattle had 6012 total yards. Wilson accounted for 72% of Seattle's yards (31% of their rushing yards). How does that compare to other QBs?

Wilson 72%
Manning 73%
Brady 71%
Rodgers 75%

Another common sentiment is that Wilson's numbers are inflated because he's playing ahead so often. How does he compare to some other QBs? Percentage of pass attempts made while trailing in the game (calculated from "splits" page on PFR):

Wilson: 34%
Rodgers: 34%
Brady: 34%
Manning: 41%

Pretty similar to other QBs who have been on good teams consistently.

He's also led 15 game winning drives in 3 years. Compared to other young QBs:

Wilson 15
Luck 12
Kaep 8
Newton 8
Tannehill 5
Foles 5

(yes, this stat is imperfect, but Wilson has played a big part in a lot of impressive late game situations. Good examples are in 2012 against NE/CHI/ATL or the overtime drives in 2014 against DEN/GB).

Myth 3: Seattle's offense is carried solely by Lynch, not Wilson

Is Lynch a vital part of Seattle's offense? Of course. But here's Seattle's offensive DVOA during the Carroll/Lynch era:

2010: #29
2011: #22

[Wilson is drafted]

2012: #4
2013: #7
2014: #5

Here's Lynch's yards per carry with Seattle:

2010: 3.5
2011: 4.2

[Wilson is drafted]

2012: 5.0
2013: 4.2
2014: 4.7

Lynch benefits from the threat Wilson poses on the read option, just like Wilson benefits from Lynch.

Myth 4: Seattle's offense is carried by their defense

Seattle's defense is great, but the offense has quietly been good-to-great for the last three years, too (as shown above, in the 4-7 range in DVOA).

The difference between Seattle and the median team (NYJ) in average starting field position is 2.5 yards, so they aren't put in substantially better field position by the defense. Just like Wilson+Lynch, Seattle's offense+defense is a symbiotic relationship. Seattle's offense was #1 in fewest turnovers per drive (not placing the defense in hard positions) and #3 in time of possession per drive (giving the defense time to rest). Due to Seattle's lack of turnovers, Seattle's opponents started with the worst field position in the NFL (Jon Ryan gets some credit here, too).

And there's zero relationship between a team's defensive and offensive performance, anyway.

Myth 5: Wilson's scrambling makes him susceptible to injury

In 2014, Wilson was only tackled on 1/3 of his runs. On the remainder, he ran out of bounds untouched or slid. He ran 109 times (not counting kneel downs), meaning that he was tackled an extra 2 times per game from scrambling. For someone who is built very similarly to Marshawn Lynch (they are the same height and Lynch is 10 lbs heavier), that's not a lot of hits.

O.city · 06-28-2015, 08:01 AM

Zero relationship between offensive and defensive performance anyway, right after talking about not putting the defense in bad positions.

Does that seem weird to anyone?

ViperVisor · 06-28-2015, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

Zero relationship between offensive and defensive performance anyway, right after talking about not putting the defense in bad positions.

Does that seem weird to anyone?

Not 100% true. Better field position makes it slightly easier to get points. So DEF/ST have some effect.

Hammock Parties · 06-28-2015, 10:16 AM

That post should effectively end this debate.

Especially as it relates to Alex Smith.

keg in kc · 06-28-2015, 10:21 AM

All the debate in the world isn't going to make this franchise commit multiple #1's to any position, much less a quarterback under 30 who isn't from San Francisco, much less while Alex Smith is under contract.

**DaneMcCloud** · 06-28-2015, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mother****erJones

You take the guy with 0 Super Bowls let alone an appearance and has had 3 great receiving options and one of which is perhaps the best TE to ever play the game. Lol

You're a dumbass dipshit

Mother****erJones · 06-28-2015, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You're a dumbass dipshit

Ya you're right Dane, I'm the dipshit for taking a Super Bowl winning quarterback.

**DaneMcCloud** · 06-28-2015, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mother****erJones

Ya you're right Dane, I'm the dipshit for taking a Super Bowl winning quarterback.

Dude, come on. Wilson over Ryan? Do you honestly believe that Wilson would have averaged 4,000 yards or had any Super Bowl appearances in Atlanta?

Do you honestly believe that Matt Ryan wouldn't have two Super Bowl appearances in Seattle had he been their QB?

Wilson's a good QB. He's a leader. He's unique. He's like Fran Tarkenton, in that he's a winner when the entire team, running game and defense around him is great.

But he's not a prototypical NFL QB, like the Manning's, Luck, Ryan, Brady and Rodgers. Put any of those guys in Seattle and they appear in the past two Super Bowls, hands down. Put Wilson in Indy, Atlanta, New England or Green Bay and they're lucky to make the playoffs.

-King- · 06-28-2015, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mother****erJones

Ya you're right Dane, I'm the dipshit for taking a Super Bowl winning quarterback.

HOnestly....how many QBs wouldn't have won a superbowl in 2013 with Seattle.

Wilson averaged 174 yards in that post season. ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY ****ING FOUR! He had 103 yards in the first playoff game.

I mean... come on... Is the superbowl winner argument the one you really want to use?

RunKC · 06-28-2015, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Dude, come on. Wilson over Ryan? Do you honestly believe that Wilson would have averaged 4,000 yards or had any Super Bowl appearances in Atlanta?

Do you honestly believe that Matt Ryan wouldn't have two Super Bowl appearances in Seattle had he been their QB?

Wilson's a good QB. He's a leader. He's unique. He's like Fran Tarkenton, in that he's a winner when the entire team, running game and defense around him is great.

But he's not a prototypical NFL QB, like the Manning's, Luck, Ryan, Brady and Rodgers. Put any of those guys in Seattle and they appear in the past two Super Bowls, hands down. Put Wilson in Indy, Atlanta, New England or Green Bay and they're lucky to make the playoffs.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: you could put a lot of QB's on that Seattle team (particularly the 2013 team) and they would make the SB.

**SAUTO** · 06-28-2015, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

HOnestly....how many QBs wouldn't have won a superbowl in 2013 with Seattle.

Wilson averaged 174 yards in that post season. ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY ****ING FOUR! He had 103 yards in the first playoff game.

I mean... come on... Is the superbowl winner argument the one you really want to use?

He charisma'd them to victory

milkman · 06-28-2015, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Dude, come on. Wilson over Ryan? Do you honestly believe that Wilson would have averaged 4,000 yards or had any Super Bowl appearances in Atlanta?

Do you honestly believe that Matt Ryan wouldn't have two Super Bowl appearances in Seattle had he been their QB?

Wilson's a good QB. He's a leader. He's unique. He's like Fran Tarkenton, in that he's a winner when the entire team, running game and defense around him is great.

But he's not a prototypical NFL QB, like the Manning's, Luck, Ryan, Brady and Rodgers. Put any of those guys in Seattle and they appear in the past two Super Bowls, hands down. Put Wilson in Indy, Atlanta, New England or Green Bay and they're lucky to make the playoffs.

It is merely speculation.

I would speculate that a non mobile Matt Ryan struggles behind the over rated Seahawk line.

He's been sacked 188 times in his 7 seasons, an average of just under 27 per season.
He's thrown 91 picks, an average of 13 per.

My guess is that he gets sacked an average of 4-5 times more per season and throws an average of 3-4 more picks, and the Seahawks miss the playoffs at least once in the 3 seasons that Wilson has been there, and there are no SBs.

Marshawn Lynch also remains the guy that struggles to average 4.0 ypc before the threat that Wilson provides that Ryan doesn't.

View Poll Results: Is Wilson worth two first round draft choices?
Yes	56	43.41%
No	73	56.59%
Voters: 129. You may not vote on this poll

06-21-2015, 11:57 AM
Discuss Thrower "You like to drink?" Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: "I like to drink." Casino cash: $-230000	Two 1st round picks for Russell Wilson in '16 and '17 or '17 and '18 Clayton on show seems to hint that SEA would be open to non-exclusive Tag for RW in 2016- seems surprising but SEA will study all avenues — DAVIS HSU (@DavisHsuSeattle) June 20, 2015 Do you sign the offer sheet if the Seahawks non-exclusively tag Russell Wilson? Pole cumming.
Posts: 45,215

06-28-2015, 08:01 AM	#1145
O.city In Search of a Life Join Date: Jul 2009 Casino cash: $-595936	Zero relationship between offensive and defensive performance anyway, right after talking about not putting the defense in bad positions. Does that seem weird to anyone?
Posts: 84,186

06-28-2015, 10:16 AM	#1147
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $950478	That post should effectively end this debate. Especially as it relates to Alex Smith. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 296,925

06-28-2015, 10:21 AM	#1148
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	All the debate in the world isn't going to make this franchise commit multiple #1's to any position, much less a quarterback under 30 who isn't from San Francisco, much less while Alex Smith is under contract.
Posts: 58,682