Luck vs. Wilson

[Shaman]

 

 

[Bier Meister]

Luck had more attempts when behind than the rest of the quarterbacks and Wilson had more attempts when ahead than the rest of the quarterbacks. Luck did better when behind, partially due to big plays and some higher risk throws.

 

reinforcing what i was saying... this is basic stuff here.

 

Strangely Luck's yards per attempt decreased when ahead, this included low yards/attempt against Denver, Houston, and Kansas City as well as 2 strong performances against Jacksonville.

 

i do not find it strange at all (for any qb) to have yds/att go down when playing with a lead. seems like teams would be playing to move the chains and hold possession. when playing from behind, more willing to take more risks

 

Luck had some awful games when he fell behind quality defenses, but he also threw the ball a lot so some of his interceptions get hidden by the shear amount of times that he threw the ball.

 

I am not going to fault a qb too much when falling behind. game plan is more predictable..hence more ints (i alluded to this earlier)

 

Conversely, one could argue that he was bound to throw an interception given so many throws with his team behind. I'd just say that he threw so many interceptions that some games were over by halftime and point out that two of his worst games came against divisional foes of the Seahawks.

 

they only lost 5 games. not too many were over by halftime.

20-24 to miami (tied at halftime; 1 int)

9-19 to sd (6-10 at halftime; 1 int)

8-38 to stl (0-28 at halftime.... 45 yd fumble rt, 98 yd punt rt, 57 yd pass; 4 int- none in 1st half)

11-40 to az (3-27 at halftime; 1 int)

28-42 to cin (0-14 at halftime; 4 td/ 0 int)

 

 

[Bobby Brown]

Strangely Luck's yards per attempt decreased when ahead, this included low yards/attempt against Denver, Houston, and Kansas City as well as 2 strong performances against Jacksonville.

 

i do not find it strange at all (for any qb) to have yds/att go down when playing with a lead. seems like teams would be playing to move the chains and hold possession. when playing from behind, more willing to take more risks

 

 

It's a comparison between Luck and Wilson. The opposite happens with Wilson; that's the context that statement is coming from. Point being is that Russel Wilson actually throws quite a bit more than Luck when ahead, and he's averaging nearly three more yards per throw while doing it. Hawks21 was getting blasted a bit for claiming that Luck has to do more in the 4th quarter because he doesn't do as much/as good as Wilson when the game is close or holding a lead.

 

That claim doesn't appear to be without some merit.

[Bier Meister]

It's a comparison between Luck and Wilson. The opposite happens with Wilson; that's the context that statement is coming from. Point being is that Russel Wilson actually throws quite a bit more than Luck when ahead, and he's averaging nearly three more yards per throw while doing it. Hawks21 was getting blasted a bit for claiming that Luck has to do more in the 4th quarter because he doesn't do as much/as good as Wilson when the game is close or holding a lead.

 

That claim doesn't appear to be without some merit.

 

 

21 was stating the luck was responsible for those deficits, pretty much ignoring other facets of the game. i was stating that luck has to do more throughout the entire game- pressure wilson hasn't had to deal with very often due to a powerful rushing attack and excellent defense. i really do not know how anyone who knows anything about football can deny that.

[Seahawks21]

21 was stating the luck was responsible for those deficits, pretty much ignoring other facets of the game. i was stating that luck has to do more throughout the entire game- pressure wilson hasn't had to deal with very often due to a powerful rushing attack and excellent defense. i really do not know how anyone who knows anything about football can deny that.

 

So we should give Luck a pass on subpar play because his defense that gave up the 8th fewest points in the league left him in terrible holes, and his rushing attack that averaged 4.3 YPC just put way too much pressure on him to succeed. Anybody who knows anything about football should just give him a free pass to be as erratic as he wants to be under those conditions.

[Bier Meister]

So we should give Luck a pass on subpar play because his defense that gave up the 8th fewest points in the league left him in terrible holes, and his rushing attack that averaged 4.3 YPC just put way too much pressure on him to succeed. Anybody who knows anything about football should just give him a free pass to be as erratic as he wants to be under those conditions.

 

 

are you talking about subpar play from luck? you really do not know much about the factors that go into those numbers you keep posting, do you? nor do you want to learn.

 

were you a football fan in 02? do you recall what an excellent running game and defense did for a below average qb?

 

bb- happy to continue this conversation elsewhere

[Seahawks21]

are you talking about subpar play from luck? you really do not know much about the factors that go into those numbers you keep posting, do you? nor do you want to learn.

 

were you a football fan in 02? do you recall what an excellent running game and defense did for a below average qb?

 

bb- happy to continue this conversation elsewhere

 

57 percent and one of the lowest QB ratings in the NFL isn't subpar? ohhhh, I gotta hear this one. Even if he had a bad defense, bad receivers, and one of the worst running games in the league, those numbers would be subpar. But to put them up with a defense that doesn't give up many points, good targets, and a mediocre running game? That's not subpar?

 

Take a guy like even Kaepernick for example. Even a guy that throws as awkwardly as he does put up much more efficient numbers than Luck. Now that's saying something.

[QFFL]

Since nobody seems willing to point out the most important fact that should be taken from this heated discussion, let me enlighten you all to one unarguable fact: Neither of these two QB's is remotely worthy of holding Tebow's jock.

 

 

I think you meant Johnny Football!!

[DMD]

There is a fair comparison - which would you rather have? Russell Wilson or a proven winner like Manziel?

[robotpimp]

DMD is dead on. The Colts were a laughing stock during the year between Manning and Luck. Luck carries the team basically every week. I would say that he is the best young QB in the league.

 

That said, Wilson is damn good. It's just that Luck is already proving to be elite at the position.

 

To piggyback off of Mr. T - Luck has had no help at RB whatsoever, there is no balanced attack.. completely agree with DMD and Mr.T

[keggerz]

Anyone know who holds the record for most passing yards in their first 2 NFL seasons?

 

Asking for a friend.

[cara murphy]

Both of the two players are excellent. I don't care who is better or who is the best one. They are in different teams, why must we make a choose?

[Shaman]

Both of the two players are excellent. I don't care who is better or who is the best one. They are in different teams, why must we make a choose?

 

 

Argument!!!

[Seahawks21]

Anyone know who holds the record for most passing yards in their first 2 NFL seasons?

 

Asking for a friend.

 

Anyone know who holds the record for wins in their first two seasons? Just asking.

[stevegrab]

Anyone know who holds the record for wins in their first two seasons? Just asking.

 

Assiging wins to the QB in football is stupid, always hated it. It is the most team oriented sport I know of, one player does not WIN the game, the team does. Even the passing yards are aided by the OL, and receivers, but at least the QB is directly involved in the plays.

[Seahawks21]

Assiging wins to the QB in football is stupid, always hated it. It is the most team oriented sport I know of, one player does not WIN the game, the team does. Even the passing yards are aided by the OL, and receivers, but at least the QB is directly involved in the plays.

 

So there's not a correlation between the Pats, Packers, Broncos, Saints etc. perennially making the playoffs and the name of their quarterbacks?

 

Lots of average quarterbacks have thrown for a ton of yards. Not nearly as many have won a bunch of games.

[stevegrab]

So there's not a correlation between the Pats, Packers, Broncos, Saints etc. perennially making the playoffs and the name of their quarterbacks?

 

Lots of average quarterbacks have thrown for a ton of yards. Not nearly as many have won a bunch of games.

 

Is that what I said? NO.

 

The point is Russell Wilson isn't soley (or even mostly) responsible for those wins. Great defense, good running game plus play a major role. QBs like Peyton and Luck (Favre, Brady, Brees, Rodgers) pretty much carry their teams, often with mediocre defense and other offensive talent.

 

This alls seems to boil down to Seahawks fans thinking their QB is being dissed for not being considered as good or better than Luck.

 

Lot of great QBs have never won a SB, some not so great ones have.

[Seahawks21]

This alls seems to boil down to Seahawks fans thinking their QB is being dissed for not being considered as good or better than Luck.

 

 

 

Partly, sure, but I would add one more line.

 

This all seems to boil down to Seahawks fans thinking their QB is being dissed for not being considered as good or better than Luck, even though the overwhelming majority of tangible evidence suggests that he should be.

 

I have no problem with people saying "my gut" makes me believe Luck is superior, or that by watching him you believe he carries himself as one of the greats. Heck, I'm in that camp. But at least admit it. Don't just say "Luck is better" and cover your ears and scream "ALALALALALLALALLLL".

 

In conclusion, I will end by saying this.

 

If you haven't watched a bunch of Russell Wilson, he is WAY better than you think he is. He makes plays, with his arm, that very very few quarterbacks in this league can make. He is ridiculously clutch, and he is one of those guys that is first in the building, last out. The efficiency the Seahawks offense has shown since he has taken over isn't primarily because of their running game and defense, and it isn't a fluke. How can you be a product of your teammates, when you have arguably the worst line in the league, and bad receivers? Russell is only going to get better, which is scary, and I would have no doubt that if needed, he would throw for 4,000 yards, and with a higher rating than Luck has had.

 

But Russell is uncool. Dude is square. I don't know that he has the hair on his chest that Andrew Luck has, and to me, that will end up being the difference. I think they're going to have a chance to wage the war though. They'll end up seeing each other in the big game.

Edited July 11, 2014 by Seahawks21

[Mustangt125]

Has this turned to fantasy yet?

 

Barring any surprises, I anticipate these both being available in rounds 5-7.

 

If they're both available and I need a QB, I think i go with Luck.

Edited July 11, 2014 by Mustangt125

[Bobby Brown]

21 was stating the luck was responsible for those deficits, pretty much ignoring other facets of the game. i was stating that luck has to do more throughout the entire game- pressure wilson hasn't had to deal with very often due to a powerful rushing attack and excellent defense. i really do not know how anyone who knows anything about football can deny that.

 

 

I agree that Luck has had to do more than Wilson, that really isn't a point of discussion, I don't think anyway. But it seems like we are getting worked up with 21s posts and trying to buy into different arguments.

 

Per the previous stat breakdown....Luck threw behind/close 487 times and Wilson threw 307 times; yet they both ended up with five come from behind of five wins.

 

I don't necessarily agree with everything Hawks 21 is picthing. But everyone wants to give the benefit of the doubt for Luck and minimize what Wilson is doing. The advanced metrics seem to tell a story that isn't so obvious.

[Bier Meister]

I agree that Luck has had to do more than Wilson, that really isn't a point of discussion, I don't think anyway. But it seems like we are getting worked up with 21s posts and trying to buy into different arguments.

 

 

Per the previous stat breakdown....Luck threw behind/close 487 times and Wilson threw 307 times; yet they both ended up with five come from behind of five wins.

 

I don't necessarily agree with everything Hawks 21 is picthing. But everyone wants to give the benefit of the doubt for Luck and minimize what Wilson is doing. The advanced metrics seem to tell a story that isn't so obvious.

 

 

there have been several discussions and points pertaining to them.

- who is the better qb? 21 seems to believe the strongest determining characteristic is efficiency. myself and others believe that efficiency is not the best way to evaluate how good a qb is, largely due to other factors that come into play.

 

- 21 appears to believe that luck is forced to throw due to his own errors. i believe i effectively refuted that.

 

- he also tends to ignore some of the basic principles that lead to a team's and player's success (related to the other topics)

 

 

in a nutshell, i give much more credit to players in the following situations:

- marshsawn lynch rushing for 4.2 y/c in a run first offense, with players stacking the box

- andrew luck putting up very good numbers in a pass oriented offense where defenses are focused on him- in nickel and dime packages with defenders dropping into coverage.

 

these types of players carry their teams in spite of their being the primary focus of their opponents.

 

also, if i recall last year luck threw the ball 170 more times than wilson, but had the same amount of ints and had a difference of only 3%.

[keggerz]

I can't see Wilson having the success that Luck had with the Colts but I could easily see Luck having as much if not more success with the Seahawks.

 

Stats be damned, it's what I see when I look at each QB...and I like Wilson, just think he's not what Luck is...and for the record, Luck has MUCH better "feet" than people realize.

[DMD]

There is no reason to be bumping up old threads just because Russell Wilson was exposed. So everyone stop it.

[Seahawks21]

[DMD]

LOL. I could not resist after last summer. You can still feel good about Wilson. I mean he's clearly no Romo, but he plays as well with a big lead as any one.