Best member of last nine draft classes - Wilson over Luck?!?!?

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

 

It means they have had the same amount of "chances" with the football as passers. With both QB's making the same "amount" of passes, Wilson is significantly more efficient, in every category. 

 

I'm all about QB efficiency, but Wilson mostly played in an offense that stressed efficiency and high percentage passes, while Luck played in an offense that featured more low percentage throws. We have a small sample size so far, but Luck with Reich is far more efficient than Luck with any other play caller he's had, and that's primarily because of Reich's offense, not Luck's ability. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Those aren't elite QB's (except for maybe Wilson in 2013). That list just proves my point.

Manning was elite in 2014 and not only that Manning had a great defense. Von Miller was 100% and played. We were 8.5 point underdogs on the road in the playoffs. Just because Luck hasn't beat Tom Brady doesn't mean he can't beat elite QB's. Most lose to Tom Brady. (Mahomes AFC Title game) and (Wilson in the SB) lost to Brady when it counted most in the playoffs. Big Ben has lost to Brady twice in Title games too and has never beat him in the playoffs. 

[Yoshinator]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Unlike you (and a lot of people, so not just putting this on you), I don't believe in the proverbial "QB Wins" stat. Football is the ultimate team game, they win and lose together. 

 

I think really good and great QBs can drag a team to victory, but I don't think losses should be laid solely at the feet of the QB without any further analysis. There are plenty of games where the QB plays well, and the team still loses. On the other hand, I think mediocre and bad QBs can hold a team back, but that doesn't mean every win is in spite of the QB (Blake Bortles was fantastic against the Pats last season). 

 

So, on it's face, I disagree with the statement that "Luck can't beat elite QBs." First, it's not true, and second, wins are accomplished by the team, not one player.

 

 

All these qualifiers...

 

You can rationalize anything if you just keep moving the goal posts.

As I said, the QB is the most important player on the team. Take him out, the team is poor, take out a random player at another position, it's not so bad. You only need an average team with a great QB to win a SB, you need a great all-around team with an average QB. That's why teams build quickly behind young QB's like the Jets and Browns before their 2nd contracts. The QB means more than anyone else. If yours is average or worse, you need an elite team behind him.

[Superman]

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

You only need an average team with a great QB to win a SB

 

How much more wrong can you be?

[Four2itus]

31 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The 2012 game against Rodgers was rigged for us to win because of Pagano's cancer

Complete horse crap. 

[Yoshinator]

6 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Half of those QBs have HOF credentials... I think your opinion is proving a point, just not the one you're trying to make...  

Eli and Rivers are over the Hill, Dak and Stafford are average, Matt Ryan is good, but no HOFer. Based on the years, it was nothing special.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

@Jared Cisneros

 

I just realized something.  If it's all rigged anyway, then you have no right to knock Luck for any reason because it's not his fault.  You can't blame Luck for not beating elite QBs if the games are rigged, right?   

 

Explain that.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

Complete horse crap. 

I think Reggie Wayne would agree 

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

@Jared Cisneros

 

I just realized something.  If it's all rigged anyway, then you have no right to knock Luck for any reason because it's not his fault.  You can't blame Luck for not beating elite QBs if the games are rigged, right?   

 

Explain that.

 

You still play the games and you can't rig everything. The rigging is done by the refs, not the players.

[Yoshinator]

I think I'm done with this topic, starting to get out of hand. Will discuss something better at another time. Peace guys!

[Lucky Colts Fan]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

You still play the games and you can't rig everything. The rigging is done by the refs, not the players.

 

So it's the refs fault that Luck "can't beat elite QBs" because they want those elite QBs like Brady, Mahomes, etc. in the championship games... is that right?

[Creekside]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm all about QB efficiency, but Wilson mostly played in an offense that stressed efficiency and high percentage passes, while Luck played in an offense that featured more low percentage throws. We have a small sample size so far, but Luck with Reich is far more efficient than Luck with any other play caller he's had, and that's primarily because of Reich's offense, not Luck's ability. 

 

3,300 passes is a lot of football for both players. It's not like Wilson has had it easy. He was sacked 299 times to Luck's 174. .... yet his ave yds per pass is better, so it's not like Wilson isn't throwing downfield.

 

In my opinion, Wilson's 3 TDs to 1 INT compared to Luck's 2 TDs to 1 INT has much to do with Wilson making better decisions.

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

 

3,300 passes is a lot of football for both players. It's not like Wilson has had it easy. He was sacked 299 times to Luck's 174. .... yet his ave yds per pass is better, so it's not like Wilson isn't throwing downfield.

 

In my opinion, Wilson's 3 TDs to 1 INT compared to Luck's 2 TDs to 1 INT has much to do with Wilson making better decisions.

 

I didn't say Wilson has had it easy, but when one QB throws 29 times a game and the other throws 38 times a game, it's pretty obvious which QB is being asked to do more by his team. Add in the fact that the Seahawks had a really good running game the first few years of Wilson's career, and the Colts had a terrible running game, and you can understand the disparity in attempts/game.

 

As for yards/attempt, if you look at net yards/attempt (which adjusts for sack yards), you'll see the effect of Wilson's sacks, especially since 2016 when Seattle's run game started to fall apart. It coincided with a drop in his passer rating as well. (Adjusted net yards/attempt accounts for TDs and INTs. It's not perfect, but it's a representation of QB efficiency that makes some sense.)

 

Wilson is traditionally more careful with the ball. I've never argued that. But Luck's offenses and his play callers have always emphasized downfield passing first, while Wilson has played in more efficiency based offenses. At the same time, Wilson is great on deep passes, and that's something else I've never argued.

[lollygagger8]

1 hour ago, egg said:

                              Att       Comp %       ave yds       TD / INT      sacks      Fum lost      Rate

     

      Wilson         3,261         64.2              7.9            196 / 63        299              16            100.3

        Luck           3,290         60.8              7.2            171 / 83        174              18              89.5

 

      The two QB's have almost identical career attempts. I like Luck, be he's not the better QB.

 

         

 

 

 

Get all these facts outta here! 

[chad72]

50 minutes ago, egg said:

With both QB's making the same "amount" of passes, Wilson is significantly more efficient, in every category. 

 

 

A lot of efficiency is not just the QB, the style of offense and how much the QB is relied upon. When you have Arians running 7 step drops and Chud doing similar 20 yard outs, Luck's efficiency is going to go down, IMO. When you have to throw only about 29 times a game versus 38 times on average consistently, it is also a reflection of the run support and offense being run, IMO. 

 

Wilson uses his legs far more and is a better escape artist than Luck, that helps him keep his efficiency high, IMO. That part, I will agree.

 

RW - 29 passing attempts per game, 33 rushing yards per game, 229 passing yards per game

Luck - 38 passing attempts per game, 19 rushing yards per game, 275 passing yards per game

 

RW is a very good QB, but at best, it is a push with Luck, based on circumstances. Once he has been relied upon more, his playoff and SB appearance numbers have gone down, proving once again football is the ultimate team sport.

[chad72]

Hey, HOF Peyton was 0-6 vs Tom Brady before he started beating him, let us not forget. Guess what, Luck is in the same boat, 0-6 right now. It is not over yet!!!  

[CurBeatElite]

4 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

give the ball to Lynch 

 

My wife could have made that call and she doesn't even watch football

 

[aaron11]

5 hours ago, egg said:

                              Att       Comp %       ave yds       TD / INT      sacks      Fum lost      Rate

     

      Wilson         3,261         64.2              7.9            196 / 63        299              16            100.3

        Luck           3,290         60.8              7.2            171 / 83        174              18              89.5

 

      The two QB's have almost identical career attempts. I like Luck, be he's not the better QB.       

Wison has had some pretty conservative offensive coaches too, while Luck has had a couple of coordinators that were all about throwing it deep and taking chances.  i guess both have had pretty poor Olines

 

if you look at just last year, Wison again had a very high rating but Luck had 1000 more yards in the same number of games played, plus a few more TDs, and a higher %.

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 hours ago, egg said:

                              Att       Comp %       ave yds       TD / INT      sacks      Fum lost      Rate

     

      Wilson         3,261         64.2              7.9            196 / 63        299              16            100.3

        Luck           3,290         60.8              7.2            171 / 83        174              18              89.5

 

      The two QB's have almost identical career attempts. I like Luck, be he's not the better QB.

 

         

 

 

Luck is better so we disagree. Your stats are nice but Luck has had to carry the Colts his whole career and has been asked to do more. Only thing RW has on him is, he has had no major injury. Lets see Wilson win a SB without Lynch and a great defense. It won't happen. Wilson struck gold once, credit to him as he took advantage of being on a stacked team but then he blew a SB 5 years ago and hasn't came close to winning another one.

[Creekside]

4 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

A lot of efficiency is not just the QB, the style of offense and how much the QB is relied upon. 

 

As recently as 2017 the Seahawks running backs only had 1043 yards rushing ( 65 yds per game)

 

Wilson threw for 4,000 yards and 34 TDs to only 11 INTs. 

 

And he ran 95 times for 586 yards.

 

Anyone who saw a Seahawks game in 2017 saw the Russel Wilson show.

 

He was relied on plenty, and he had a great year.

 

[Creekside]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Luck is better so we disagree. Your stats are nice but Luck has had to carry the Colts his whole career and has been asked to do more. Only thing RW has on him is, he has had no major injury. Lets see Wilson win a SB without Lynch and a great defense. It won't happen. Wilson struck gold once, credit to him as he took advantage of being on a stacked team but then he blew a SB 5 years ago and hasn't came close to winning another one.

 

See post above.

[2006Coltsbestever]

10 minutes ago, egg said:

 

See post above.

I seen it and I think Wilson is very good to great but without Luck it is proven we stink. 4-12 without him in 2017 was a show nobody wanted to see. We have a better roster now but with Brissett who is a good backup, best we would do is 8-8 IMO. With Luck we are capable of going 11-5 and winning the SB. Also comparing Luck and Wilson statistically is really impossible because Wilson has played like 25 more games. If Luck played the same amount of games, he would be way ahead in TDs and Yards. To Wilson's credit, he has stayed healthy so I give him credit there. 

 

One last thing. Some may not think so but I think QB rating is a bad way to rank a QB. It doesn't tell the near the story how good a QB is. Luck had a terrible QB rating his rookie season but yet set the record for passing yards for a rookie and went 11-5.

[Boiler_Colt]

They're both top 7 QB's. Wilson has accomplised more and is an electric scrambler but I believe Luck is a more skilled passer. In reality though it is not an apples to apples comparison.

 

They were drafted into much different circumstances. Luck to a horrible roster and Wilson to one of the top rosters of the last decade. They don't even have remotely similar play styles. In fact I doubt either guy would succeed playing the other's style.

 

They're both really good, they're just really good at completely different things and their offensive systems have been tailored accordingly.

 

Also, the take that Luck can't beat elite QB's is a laughably bad one. First off, he has. 3-1 against Manning (including the playoffs and both years Denver went to the SB). 2-0 against Rogers. 1-0 against Wilson in the year Seattle won the SB. Etc., etc. So he hasnt beaten NE, few QB's have. Also, Luck is not required to play defense against said QB's. 

[chad72]

2 hours ago, egg said:

 

As recently as 2017 the Seahawks running backs only had 1043 yards rushing ( 65 yds per game)

 

Wilson threw for 4,000 yards and 34 TDs to only 11 INTs. 

 

And he ran 95 times for 586 yards.

 

Anyone who saw a Seahawks game in 2017 saw the Russel Wilson show.

 

He was relied on plenty, and he had a great year.

 

 

No one said RW was not good, at least I did not. I just do not think RW is better than Luck like you insinuate. Like I said, using his legs more than Luck helps him maintain his efficiency because he is more elusive than Luck with his legs. 2017, they missed the playoffs when they relied more on him (actually proves my point) and once they ran more with Chris Carson, Mike Davis and Penny, they were back in the playoffs again in 2018. 

 

Like most of us have said here before, talented QBs in different offensive systems they have played in, so just comparing a few blanket stats with another does not give you the whole picture, both of them are very good.

 

[ColtsBlueFL]

10 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

russell-wilson-jj-watt-among-best-of-past-nine-draft-classes

 

Adam Schein of NFL.com gives his best picks of the past nine drafts.

 

Quenton Nelson is the best pick of the 2018 draft.

 

 

The real head-scratcher is that he chose Russell Wilson over Andrew Luck for the best pick of the 2012 class.

 

 

Just because that Seahawks D carried Wilson to a few SBs, he gets the nod for a "better career" so far, so he's a better draft pick?  C'mon Adam...  

 

Here''s a guy that compared them just over 2018, and he went with Russell Wilson as well-

 

 

8 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah I went and looked up Wilson's stats during his SB run. He threw for only 524 yards in 3 games and had just 3 TDs. That is an average of 175 yards per game passing and 1 TD a game. They were a run 1st team back then. Lynch averaged nearly 100 yards a game in that SB winning run. Did Wilson mess things up, no but he wasn't the main reason why they won a SB either. If people think that then that is like saying Peyton was in 2015 with Denver  . It was Denver's defense being the main reason why they won in 2015, Peyton just played good enough and didn't screw anything up.

 

Things happen in Playoff runs vs. the best teams. I don't think P. Manning lit up the stat sheets in the Colts 2006 SB run either.

 

2 hours ago, egg said:

 

As recently as 2017 the Seahawks running backs only had 1043 yards rushing ( 65 yds per game)

 

Wilson threw for 4,000 yards and 34 TDs to only 11 INTs. 

 

And he ran 95 times for 586 yards.

 

Anyone who saw a Seahawks game in 2017 saw the Russel Wilson show.

 

He was relied on plenty, and he had a great year.

 

 

I believe he was accountable for between 80-85% of their offense (depending upon if sacks were factored in or not).  P. Carroll deliberately went more to the power run game last year for that reason.

 

I Love Luck, glad he's our QB..  But I doubt you find many Colts fans selecting Wilson, and won't find many Seahawk fans choosing Luck.

[2006Coltsbestever]

47 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Here''s a guy that compared them just over 2018, and he went with Russell Wilson as well-

 

 

 

Things happen in Playoff runs vs. the best teams. I don't think P. Manning lit up the stat sheets in the Colts 2006 SB run either.

 

 

I believe he was accountable for between 80-85% of their offense (depending upon if sacks were factored in or not).  P. Carroll deliberately went more to the power run game last year for that reason.

 

I Love Luck, glad he's our QB..  But I doubt you find many Colts fans selecting Wilson, and won't find many Seahawk fans choosing Luck.

Yeah I think most Colts fans think Wilson is very good to great but Luck is just better. Not a knock against Wilson. 

 

In 2006 Peyton had 5 INT's in his 1st 2 playoff games which is bad but we won both games. Overall he threw for over 1000 yards during that 4 game run though = over 250 yards a game. He also had a game winning drive vs NE. His run is very underrated IMO. What many may not know is, during Wilson's SB winning run in 2013 he threw for only 524 yards and 3 TD's in 3 games. In 2015 Peyton threw for 539 yards and 2 TD's but also threw for a 2 point conversion. Some people said Peyton sucked or was not the reason why the Broncos won that SB during that SB run but nobody mentions he was actually just as good as Wilson was in his 2013 SB winning run. 2006 Peyton was clearly better than both those SB winning runs.

[jvan1973]

19 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The 2012 game against Rodgers was rigged for us to win because of Pagano's cancer, won't convince me otherwise. Can't argue with the others, but it's a moot point as Wilson is in the NFC and Peyton is retired, so it has no bearing on who he has to beat to make a SB today. Beat the Pats, Steelers, or Chiefs with Mahomes and you'll have accomplished something.

Good God.    

[shasta519]

21 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I get that. Luck has definitely been asked to do more, but Wilson has had more success. I'm not arguing that Wilson's success makes him the better QB, but I don't think it can be argued that he's had more success.

 

I also think some understate just how awful Wilson's pass protection and offensive play calling has been most of his career. Almost as bad as Luck's, at times worse. But Wilson has different traits, and handles pressure differently than Luck, for better or worse. 

 

I hate this debate...because it gives me incredible cognitive dissonance.

 

Wilson is more efficient as a passer. And has Luck beat on virtually every career stat...except for yards/game and pass attempts. 

 

Also...people seem to disregard the value that Wilson has as a runner. 3,600+ yards over 7 seasons. That rushing attack has greatly benefitted from his dual threat ability early on.

 

They are both fantastic but different players. Cases can be made either way.

[shasta519]

16 hours ago, egg said:

 

As recently as 2017 the Seahawks running backs only had 1043 yards rushing ( 65 yds per game)

 

Wilson threw for 4,000 yards and 34 TDs to only 11 INTs. 

 

And he ran 95 times for 586 yards.

 

Anyone who saw a Seahawks game in 2017 saw the Russel Wilson show.

 

He was relied on plenty, and he had a great year.

 

 

The last two seasons have been fantastic. I am all for having an incredibly efficient QB like that.

[shasta519]

21 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The 2012 game against Rodgers was rigged for us to win because of Pagano's cancer, won't convince me otherwise. Can't argue with the others, but it's a moot point as Wilson is in the NFC and Peyton is retired, so it has no bearing on who he has to beat to make a SB today. Beat the Pats, Steelers, or Chiefs with Mahomes and you'll have accomplished something.

 

I don't believe the refs let Reggie Wayne go for 212 yards that day. He put the offense on his back that game...and made like 3-4 amazing plays. Take away one of those...and the Colts lose that game. 

[Superman]

37 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I hate this debate...because it gives me incredible cognitive dissonance.

 

Wilson is more efficient as a passer. And has Luck beat on virtually every career stat...except for yards/game and pass attempts. 

 

Also...people seem to disregard the value that Wilson has as a runner. 3,600+ yards over 7 seasons. That rushing attack has greatly benefitted from his dual threat ability early on.

 

They are both fantastic but different players. Cases can be made either way.

 

For me, the answer is that you can't always declare which player is better. For situations like this, it's mostly a matter of preference.

 

But I don't agree that Wilson's SB or his efficiency make him a better QB than Luck, same as I don't believe that Luck's greater volume (per game) or yardage or his role on his team make him a better QB than Wilson. And those seem to be the go-to arguments (same as it was Brady/rings, Manning/stats for a long time; neither of those were definitive, IMO). 

 

And when you look at some of the all time greats in recent history, I think we'd all agree that judging any of them after seven years would have been a mistake. We have guys who played for 15-20 years, and some of them evolved and adapted every couple of seasons. It's only over time that we truly know whether a QB will achieve and sustain greatness. Until then, it's just preference.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, shastamasta said:

 

I hate this debate...because it gives me incredible cognitive dissonance.

 

Wilson is more efficient as a passer. And has Luck beat on virtually every career stat...except for yards/game and pass attempts. 

 

Also...people seem to disregard the value that Wilson has as a runner. 3,600+ yards over 7 seasons. That rushing attack has greatly benefitted from his dual threat ability early on.

 

They are both fantastic but different players. Cases can be made either way.

I love debating stuff like this but what I hate about debates like this is, people think a person is dissing the player that one thinks isn't as great. If you have read my posts for example, I have consistently said that Wilson is very good to great. In all honesty I haven't seen 1 person in here that has posted say that Wilson isn't very good or great. I have posted clear cut facts about Wilson though that shows he has been less than stellar at times. His SB winning run in 2013 was average at best. He threw for 524 yards in 3 games and only 3 TD's. Those are just facts. Anyone that watched the Seahawks from 2012-2015 knows Lynch and the defense were the main reasons they won a lot of games but they want to ignore that for some reason. They were definitely the main reason's why they won the SB they won. Luck has never had near the defense that the Seahawks had in Wilson's first 4 years and he has never had a RB like Lynch. These are just facts, no hate about it. Like I posted yesterday, Manning's SB run in 2015 was just as good as Wilson's run in 2013. Manning threw for 539 yards and 2 TD's so his Wilson's were pretty even. I bring up Manning because a lot of people said the Broncos won in spite of him. If that is the case I could say the same thing about Wilson in 2013. Then in 2014 Wilson threw the worst INT in SB history which cost the Seahawks the game which is another fact. Luck makes silly decisions at times but without a run game it forces a QB at times to make more decisions. Luck has made the playoffs 4 times and most of the reason why the Colts made the playoffs was because of him. Now we finally have a very good O.Line and a running game. Last season look how much more efficient Luck was over the last 10 games because he finally got help. Throwing for 40 TD's is pretty impressive too which Luck has done in his career and Wilson has not. Luck had 39 last year.

[throwing BBZ]

14 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I love debating stuff like this but what I hate about debates like this is, people think a person is dissing the player that one thinks isn't as great. If you have read my posts for example, I have consistently said that Wilson is very good to great. In all honesty I haven't seen 1 person in here that has posted say that Wilson isn't very good or great. I have posted clear cut facts about Wilson though that shows he has been less than stellar at times. His SB winning run in 2013 was average at best. He threw for 524 yards in 3 games and only 3 TD's. Those are just facts. Anyone that watched the Seahawks from 2012-2015 knows Lynch and the defense were the main reasons they won a lot of games but they want to ignore that for some reason. They were definitely the main reason's why they won the SB they won. Luck has never had near the defense that the Seahawks had in Wilson's first 4 years and he has never had a RB like Lynch. These are just facts, no hate about it. Like I posted yesterday, Manning's SB run in 2015 was just as good as Wilson's run in 2013. Manning threw for 539 yards and 2 TD's so his Wilson's were pretty even. I bring up Manning because a lot of people said the Broncos won in spite of him. If that is the case I could say the same thing about Wilson in 2013. Then in 2014 Wilson threw the worst INT in SB history which cost the Seahawks the game which is another fact. Luck makes silly decisions at times but without a run game it forces a QB at times to make more decisions. Luck has made the playoffs 4 times and most of the reason why the Colts made the playoffs was because of him. Now we finally have a very good O.Line and a running game. Last season look how much more efficient Luck was over the last 10 games because he finally got help. Throwing for 40 TD's is pretty impressive too which Luck has done in his career and Wilson has not. Luck had 39 last year.

 

 I am wondering why you intentionally left out Wilson's running stats re: 2013?

 Did you know Henry Aaron never hit 50 home runs playing in Milwaukee's small ball park, or in Atlanta. Willy did it twice in Candlestick. So he was a far greater home run hitter right?
  Your points need to be complete and fair in context.
 Seattle runs the ball more than anyone most every year, it is a philosophy.
Wilson has played behind poor pass blocking lines also. And he is fabulous at extending plays then creating offense. Andrew is a robot. Tell  him what to do, one throwing motion, just do it.
 I will take Wilson's td's and int. rate. Hopefully Andrew throws it less with fewer int.'s this season. 

[Peterk2011]

18 hours ago, egg said:

As recently as 2017 the Seahawks running backs only had 1043 yards rushing ( 65 yds per game)

Wilson threw for 4,000 yards and 34 TDs to only 11 INTs. 

And he ran 95 times for 586 yards.

Anyone who saw a Seahawks game in 2017 saw the Russel Wilson show.

He was relied on plenty, and he had a great year.

 

Yep, he had a great 2017 individual season. In that year, he attempted 553 passes, which is his carreer high so far (by quite a margin actually).

 

Usually, Wilson's nr. attempts per season is around 450 ish, (2 years over 500, 2 years around 400, the rest was around 450). Luck's usual or average yearly "load" is over 600 attempts. The "usual" difference is quite big, around/over 150 attempts per season, which is 10 attempts per game. That's big.

 

However, both had one year, when their nr of attempt were almost identical. In 2017 - the year you mentioned above - Wilson's had 553 attempts, and in 2016 Luck had 545 attempts. Wilson threw for 4,000 yards, 34 TDs, 11 INTs, 61.3 comp pct in 16 games, and Luck threw for 4250 yards, 31 TDs and 13INTs and 63.5 comp pct. Aren't the numbers quite similar? They are.

 

Btw, 2016 was the year when Luck played the entire season with injured shoulder. Probably that's why his unusual low on attempts. Anyway, their numbers were similar. Ask less from your QB over the air, and his numbers will become more efficient in most statistical aspects. Ask more, and he'll become less efficient. It's true for every quarterbacks, regardless of strenghts and weaknesses and playing style.

 

So it's pointless to compare carreer total "effectivity" stats of 2 QB's if one of them attempts 25-28 passes a game and the other attempts 10 more per game. The latter's stats will always look less effective than the former's. Just as pointless as comparing "totals" like total yards, completions, etc, because in those stats, the latter will always be "better" than the former, because he's throwing the ball more. (Not talking about cases when one QB is terrible and the other is a HOF of course.)

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 I am wondering why you intentionally left out Wilson's running stats re: 2013?

 Did you know Henry Aaron never hit 50 home runs playing in Milwaukee's small ball park, or in Atlanta. Willy did it twice in Candlestick. So he was a far greater home run hitter right?
  Your points need to be complete and fair in context.
 Seattle runs the ball more than anyone most every year, it is a philosophy.
Wilson has played behind poor pass blocking lines also. And he is fabulous at extending plays then creating offense. Andrew is a robot. Tell  him what to do, one throwing motion, just do it.
 I will take Wilson's td's and int. rate. Hopefully Andrew throws it less with fewer int.'s this season. 

Ok to be fair, Wilson is obviously a better runner than Manning or Luck. Manning ran like a duck lol. Wilson's efficiency is better than Luck's but do you not think playing with a HOFame RB for 4 years would help any QB's efficiency? Look at Luck last year over the last 10 games. He was very efficient and it was because we had a run game for the 1st time in his career. Having said that, Mack isn't near the RB Lynch was but Mack is good.

 

To your point about Mays and Aaron. You have no argument from me there. From the film I have seen on both, Mays was the better player IMO.

[Creekside]

16 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Ask more, and he'll become less efficient. 

 

 

Not true of Wilson in 2017, which was the point of that post.

 

Wilson was the offensive workhorse  in 2017, and his production and performance did not decrease. 

 

Look, Russel Wilson has a career TD/INT rate of 3 to 1. This is great.

 

Andrew Luck has a career TD/INT rate of 2 to 1.

 

The difference is eye-popping significant.

 

In 2017 when Wilson carried the entire offense on his back, his production remained great.

 

 

[Peterk2011]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

Not true of Wilson in 2017, which was the point of that post.

Wilson was the offensive workhorse  in 2017, and his production and performance did not decrease. 

 

It did. It's just a matter of what stats you pick. His completion pct. was at carreer low, his QBR was the second lowest of his carreer, his yards per attemp was his carreer low. In all of these 3 stats, he was average at best compared to other QB-s in 2017.

 

Was he average? Hell no. But if you bring stats, bring all of them. And evaluate them in context.

[2006Coltsbestever]

28 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 I am wondering why you intentionally left out Wilson's running stats re: 2013?

 Did you know Henry Aaron never hit 50 home runs playing in Milwaukee's small ball park, or in Atlanta. Willy did it twice in Candlestick. So he was a far greater home run hitter right?
  Your points need to be complete and fair in context.
 Seattle runs the ball more than anyone most every year, it is a philosophy.
Wilson has played behind poor pass blocking lines also. And he is fabulous at extending plays then creating offense. Andrew is a robot. Tell  him what to do, one throwing motion, just do it.
 I will take Wilson's td's and int. rate. Hopefully Andrew throws it less with fewer int.'s this season. 

I am assuming you are talking about Mays and not McCovey. Aaron hit more home runs than both but IMO Mays was the better all-around player from what I have seen. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

22 minutes ago, egg said:

 

Not true of Wilson in 2017, which was the point of that post.

 

Wilson was the offensive workhorse  in 2017, and his production and performance did not decrease. 

 

Look, Russel Wilson has a career TD/INT rate of 3 to 1. This is great.

 

Andrew Luck has a career TD/INT rate of 2 to 1.

 

The difference is eye-popping significant.

 

In 2017 when Wilson carried the entire offense on his back, his production remained great.

 

 

Wilson has come along way. I seen him as a game manager type like an Alex Smith until 2017 and last year. Let me say he is much better than Alex Smith but Alex was good when healthy. Wilson has done a lot to help carry the Seahawks the last 2 years. I just dislike it when some say he is better than Luck because he has a ring when Lynch accounted for a lot of that offense in 2013. 

[Creekside]

40 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

It did. It's just a matter of what stats you pick. His completion pct. came down, his QBR was the second lowest of his carreer, his yards per attemp was carreer low.

 

If you bring stats, bring all of them. And evaluate them in context.

 

                                          comp %      yds        ave yds        TD / INT      rush yds      pass rate

Wilson career ave:         64.2           3,661        7.9                28 / 9           522                  100.3 

 

Wilson 2017 ave:            61.3           3,983         7.2               34 / 11         586                    95.4