What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

QB Russell Wilson, PIT (5 Viewers)

Love this kid. I have him and Luck on my dynasty team and am seriously considering trading Luck just because Wilson is money and Luck has the name recognition.

 
considering offering stafford for this guy in dyno. Talk me off the ledge
Seattle is built to be a team that will win on the ground and grind out wins playing solid defense. Over the long haul Stafford is going to have many more monster games throwing for more than 400 yards. Wilson may never get that chance to post monster games (passing yards) because of the way his team is built. Sure, he will have some 4 TD games like he has recently, but you have to know that TDs aren't the better barometer for future statistical success. For a QB passing yardage is much more likely to indicate future statistical success. Think back to the Aikman days. He was a wonderful efficient QB on a running team. Aikman had some monster games, but they were few and far between.How did I do?
 
considering offering stafford for this guy in dyno. Talk me off the ledge
Seattle is built to be a team that will win on the ground and grind out wins playing solid defense. Over the long haul Stafford is going to have many more monster games throwing for more than 400 yards. Wilson may never get that chance to post monster games (passing yards) because of the way his team is built. Sure, he will have some 4 TD games like he has recently, but you have to know that TDs aren't the better barometer for future statistical success. For a QB passing yardage is much more likely to indicate future statistical success. Think back to the Aikman days. He was a wonderful efficient QB on a running team. Aikman had some monster games, but they were few and far between.How did I do?
Decently. Stafford's value is likely at a career low right now. But watching Wilson this year has been fun, and watching Stafford this year has been painful. Obviously that's not a good reason to make a move in and of itself. The bigger question IMO than whether he keeps the passing TDs up is whether that read option gets figured out, or if he keeps putting up RGIII stats on the ground.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
PFF's Rookie of the Year Rankings - through Week 16

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/12/25/roty/

1. Russell Wilson, QB, SEA (+33.1)

I remember talking about Wilson with Neil Hornsby during preseason. He came away convinced he was pretty special, to which my cynical response was let’s see how he would do during the regular season. Well, the cynic in me dies a little every time I see Wilson, instead I’m stunned by his play. He was superb against San Francisco and his form, especially in the second half of the year, makes a mockery of the fact 74 players were taken ahead of him in any draft class. There aren’t 74 players in the league I’d take over him.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So while on draft day "there's not a GM in the NFL that would take Wilson ahead of Luck, RG3, or Tanneyhill" that is meaningless NOW.....
It's not meaningless if you asked them now and they still would all take Luck and RG3 ahead of Wilson. Every single one would. Today. Tannehill I'm not sure about.
IMO if we could go back and hold the draft over knowing what we know now, Luck and RGIII would still go 1-2. And maybe Tannehill would go before Wilson.But the important difference is Wilson would be a top 10-15 pick, not a third round pick. He's proven that he deserved to be picked in the first half of the first round, just as he would have been if he were 2-3 inches taller.

What order he and Tannehill would be taken in doesn't really matter with regard to how well Wilson is performing and how he looks for the future.
I highly doubt it
Update?
 
So while on draft day "there's not a GM in the NFL that would take Wilson ahead of Luck, RG3, or Tanneyhill" that is meaningless NOW.....
It's not meaningless if you asked them now and they still would all take Luck and RG3 ahead of Wilson. Every single one would. Today. Tannehill I'm not sure about.
IMO if we could go back and hold the draft over knowing what we know now, Luck and RGIII would still go 1-2. And maybe Tannehill would go before Wilson.But the important difference is Wilson would be a top 10-15 pick, not a third round pick. He's proven that he deserved to be picked in the first half of the first round, just as he would have been if he were 2-3 inches taller.

What order he and Tannehill would be taken in doesn't really matter with regard to how well Wilson is performing and how he looks for the future.
I highly doubt it
Update?
If you played in the land of hypothetical the draft would go Wilson, RGIII, Luck.
 
What does Wilson, at his height do for the future of the draft? I think he may have made some shorter QBs some serious money.

 
'Sabertooth said:
What does Wilson, at his height do for the future of the draft? I think he may have made some shorter QBs some serious money.
If a shorter than ideal QB in future drafts can bring his level of maturity, character, work ethic, arm strength, accuracy, pocket awareness, and athleticism then yes he's made them some money.
 
Agree with the previous two posts. Wilson's success won't have much impact on shorter players because most of them are not compelling in the same way that he is/was.

Seriously, there are almost no prospects that have proven themselves in (and dominated in) two BCS conferences... And he was strong in every single intangible on top of his statistical and on field performance.

He is unique.

 
If you played in the land of hypothetical the draft would go Wilson, RGIII, Luck.
In the land of the real:By passing yards: Luck, Griffin, Wilson

By passing TD's: Wilson. Luck, Griffin

By fewest INT's: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By QB rating: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By rushing yards: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By rushing TD's: Griffin, Luck, Wilson

By fewest fumbles lost: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

 
What does Wilson, at his height do for the future of the draft? I think he may have made some shorter QBs some serious money.
I don't know if he made anyone any money, but I'd guess that NFL teams will not be so quick to dismiss college QB's due to their height. Beyond that, it's still going to be up to the individual ability of each college QB.
 
I'll be at the Hawks/Rams game today, get to see Wilson make some history!
Oh man, I can't wait for today's game! I'm particularly interested in how we play the Rams compared to in week 4. I had a thought over the past week that it was rather unfortunate that we played away so many games early in the season when Wilson was still learning and could have used home field advantage. We might have won those away games if they were scheduled late in the season.At any rate, here's to hoping Russell Wilson breaks Manning's rookie record today...
 
Finished with 26TDs, 4rushing TDs, 10ints a 100 QB Rating, and lead his team to 11 wins.

Single greatest rookie season by a QB ever. :thumbup:
Sorry.:By passing yards: Luck, Griffin, Wilson

By passing TD's: Wilson. Luck, Griffin

By fewest INT's: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By QB rating: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By rushing yards: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By rushing TD's: Griffin, Luck, Wilson

By fewest fumbles lost: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By team offensive yards per play: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

 
Finished with 26TDs, 4rushing TDs, 10ints a 100 QB Rating, and lead his team to 11 wins.

Single greatest rookie season by a QB ever. :thumbup:
Sorry.:By passing yards: Luck, Griffin, Wilson

By passing TD's: Wilson. Luck, Griffin

By fewest INT's: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By QB rating: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By rushing yards: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By rushing TD's: Griffin, Luck, Wilson

By fewest fumbles lost: Griffin, Wilson, Luck

By team offensive yards per play: Griffin, Wilson, Luck
WINS??? Probably trump all those stats..... Wilson had 11.... RGIII Had 7.
 
WINS??? Probably trump all those stats..... Wilson had 11.... RGIII Had 7.
LOL, you post his stats and then say they don't matter. It's "Rookie of the Year". Not "Rookie on Team With Most Wins In The Year." Going by that measure some Patriots rookie will win.
RGIII had 8.... oddly enough that "measure" is what a lot of people with votes are using. John Clayton for example is ALL OVER THAT and insists that is why Luck should be ROY. His vote counts.....mine and yours does not. While its shouldn't be the only thing that counts....when it comes to QB it is important.Also, where did I say stats don't matter? Please re-read the first post of mine you responded to. :shrug:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seattle 2011: 7-9

Seattle 2012: 11-5

improvement under Wilson: 4 wins

Washington 2011: 5-11

Washington 2012: 10-6

improvement under Griffin: 5 wins

Division titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0

 
Seattle 2011: 7-9

Seattle 2012: 11-5

improvement under Wilson: 4 wins

Washington 2011: 5-11

Washington 2012: 10-6

improvement under Griffin: 5 wins

Division titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Not really much of a debate. Griffin is the ROY this year. If you compare Wilson's season to the past 10 ROY winners, would he have won any of them? Perhaps.

2002 Clinton Portis

2003 Anquan Boldin

2004 Ben Roethlisberger

2005 Carnell "Cadillac" Williams

2006 Vince Young

2007 Adrian Peterson

2008 Matt Ryan

2009 Percy Harvin

2010 Sam Bradford

2011 Cam Newton

 
Seattle 2011: 7-9

Seattle 2012: 11-5

improvement under Wilson: 4 wins

Washington 2011: 5-11

Washington 2012: 10-6

improvement under Griffin: 5 wins

Division titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Not really much of a debate. Griffin is the ROY this year. If you compare Wilson's season to the past 10 ROY winners, would he have won any of them? Perhaps.

2002 Clinton Portis

2003 Anquan Boldin

2004 Ben Roethlisberger

2005 Carnell "Cadillac" Williams

2006 Vince Young

2007 Adrian Peterson

2008 Matt Ryan

2009 Percy Harvin

2010 Sam Bradford

2011 Cam Newton
He'd have won at least half by my count. Probably more.
 
Postseason pressure? Russell Wilson refuses to feel it

Here is a little bit from the article.

The players’ schedule read “off” the past two days. But, of course, Russell Wilson was “on.”

Monday, the team’s rookie quarterback was in to lead the rest of the Seahawks’ rookie class through a workout at Virginia Mason Athletic Center – a routine initiated by Wilson when coach Pete Carroll started giving the players a “Victory Monday” after the overtime win in Chicago that kicked off the team’s five-game winning streak to close the regular season.

Tuesday, Wilson was in to get a jump on this week’s preparation for Sunday’s wild-card playoff game against the Washington Redskins at FedExField – an “off” day ritual for quarterbacks around the league, and especially the “separation is in the preparation” mentality that Wilson preaches and practices.
 
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. You weaken your argument when you "fudge" things.
Redskins were down against the Ravens when RGIII left the game. Therefore 8. If you feel like RGIII should get credited for a win when the team was down as he left the game.... ok, we have to disagree.
 
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. You weaken your argument when you "fudge" things.
Redskins were down against the Ravens when RGIII left the game. Therefore 8. If you feel like RGIII should get credited for a win when the team was down as he left the game.... ok, we have to disagree.
It doesn't matter if you disagree, that is how the stat is determined. Griffin started the game, his team won, he gets credit for the win. This isn't baseball, & you don't get to pick and choose how the stats are determined, just because it suits your argument.So, since Griffin led his team to a 5 win improvement, AND a division title, while Wilson led his team to a 5 win improvement, but no division title, Griffin's season was better, right?It's kind of silly when you look at it that way, isn't it? When you ignore all other factors, except for the one that makes your argument for you?
 
What value would you place on Wilson, in dynasty league trades involving rookie picks?

2013 - 1.0?

2014 - 1.0? plus more?

 
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.
 
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.
You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin; he should do the same for Wilson, who didn't finish 3 games (even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson). I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, rather that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.
:own3d:
 
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.
You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin, Wilson didn't finish 3 games, so why didn't he discount those wins, even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson. I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, but that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.
No, you clearly misunderstood. The Redskins were losing when RGIII left the game, he doesn't get the credit for the win. Had the Redskins been winning and RGIII leaves due to injury (and they maintain the lead from that point on), sure...give him the win. Do you watch or follow baseball? mmm-kay, this really isn't as difficult as you are making it.
 
:lmao: at the Russell Wilson for Rookie of the Year crowd.

Sorry, but he trails in almost every single relevant passer statistic to Griffin. In one of the two that he doesn't (passing yards), he gets crushed by Andrew Luck. In total TD's, he's had a short field really often thanks to his top-rated defense. If Griffin or Luck got the ball in their opponents' territory half as often as Wilson, they'd lead him in TDs. Hench Wilson's TDs/Total yards being so much lower.

Total yards, turnovers, TD/INT, rushing yards, Y/A, compl %, QB Rating...Griffin is superior in every one of them.

Wilson had a great rookie season, but saying it's the best ever by a QB is laughable...he's 2nd or 3rd this year alone.

As for W/L record, I guess Matt Cassel is a stud becaus he led the Patriots to an 11-5 record? Of course not...just like Seattle's defense and Marshawn Lynch get most of the credit for Seattle's 11 wins, not Wilson.

Good luck with that homer attitude. I'd love to see your face when RoY is announced and the vote isn't even close. If you're lucky, Wilson will finish 2nd.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.
You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin, Wilson didn't finish 3 games, so why didn't he discount those wins, even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson. I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, but that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.
No, you clearly misunderstood. The Redskins were losing when RGIII left the game, he doesn't get the credit for the win. Had the Redskins been winning and RGIII leaves due to injury (and they maintain the lead from that point on), sure...give him the win. Do you watch or follow baseball? mmm-kay, this really isn't as difficult as you are making it.
You realize that Blown Saves isn't a football statistic, right? :lmao:
 
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.
You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin, Wilson didn't finish 3 games, so why didn't he discount those wins, even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson. I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, but that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.
No, you clearly misunderstood. The Redskins were losing when RGIII left the game, he doesn't get the credit for the win. Had the Redskins been winning and RGIII leaves due to injury (and they maintain the lead from that point on), sure...give him the win. Do you watch or follow baseball? mmm-kay, this really isn't as difficult as you are making it.
I do watch and follow baseball. You do realize that we are talking about football, right? Specifically, the NFL, right? mmm-kay, the NFL gives wins to a QB who starts the game. Since RGIII started the Baltimore game, he is credited with the win. YOU want to discount the win from RGIII to bolster your argument. But he is credited with the win by the NFL, so you saying it doesn't count means squat.It wouldn't be a whole lot different than me saying Wilson shouldn't get credit for the GB win, because the last TD shouldn't have counted. The NFL calls it a win, I can make excuses for why it doesn't/shouldn't count all I want, but it still counts as a win for Wilson.
 
Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.
You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin; he should do the same for Wilson, who didn't finish 3 games (even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson). I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, rather that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.
It's still absurd. There are plenty of ways to bash ITS without relying on being ridiculous. It ruins any positive gains you may make in the matter.
 
In total TD's, he's had a short field really often thanks to his top-rated defense. If Griffin or Luck got the ball in their opponents' territory half as often as Wilson, they'd lead him in TDs. Hench Wilson's TDs/Total yards being so much lower.
I can't believe I went and calcualted it, but their average starting positions aren't as big of a factor as you are purporting. I didn't include the drives from the Cleveland game, nor did I include end of game, run out the clock drives. The Redskins average starting field position was their own 23.8 yard line.

The Seahawks average starting field position was their own 26.6 yard line.

Less than three yards difference.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top