***David Wilson Bandwagon*** (1 Viewer)

[Concept Coop]

I know the guy isn't getting enough carries, has a terrible O-Line, has a QB that is completing less and less balls every week, but I don't know if DW is bad at pass protection.

He is. I don't know if Scott is any better, but Wilson is poor in pass protection. And regardless of what anyone says, or what stats they use to suggest otherwise, the only people whose opinions matter don't trust Wilson to keep the QB safe, and have said so. Until that changes, it is going to hinder his production.

See, there were comments about his Pass Pro as a rookie, but I can't remember a single quote from the coach where they commented good or bad on DW's pass blocking. Can you show me an example of this? You imply that no matter what stats we use, as there seem to be strong stats that say he is not a bad pass blocker, that the coaching staff does not trust him in pass pro. Can you show me a quote?

I seem to recall that someone cited that 44% of DW carries were run plays. Since he had 50% more carries than Scott, then wouldn't that put him in on more passing plays that Scott?

I know it's in this thread, and will take a look. But Coughlin said Wilson can't block at a defenders feet, that they've told him that, and that Wilson is still doing it and will need to learn. This after week 1.

As for the stat - it needs context. Wilson isn't allowing sacks because they aren't depending on him to keep Eli standing. The stat is using pass blocking attempts as the numerator, but that is a very vague data point. Wilson is isn't left on an island as much is Scott is. Scott is facing more blitzes, etc.

The stat is raw/basic - like catch %, for example. We could use last years numbers to suggest that Larry Fitzgerald is a poor receiver, since he caught less than 50% of his targets. That is because the stat doesn't take into account anything but the base numbers: receptions/targets. But we all know Larry wasn't getting many quality targets, was double teamed often, etc.

Same thing here: Wilson isn't messing up because he isn't being trusted to. That's why he isn't allowing pressure.

 

[Loan Sharks]

I don't understand all this bickering. Seems like you guys enjoy it, though. Wilson is clearly talented and he's clearly in a rut (along with the rest of the Giants, sans-Cruz). I don't know what more needs to be said.

If you could step back and get over your over analysis.... what do people think of his prospects this week? I'm thinking at home, against a weak Eagles defense, the passing game opens up some red zone opportunities for him. If you've got him, are you stepping back from the ledge and starting him this week?

Of couse we enjoy it.

We are all football fans and we all like analyzing information. What is cool is that there are several different explanations for the performance of this player to date.

Some people are stat guys, some are theory guys some are eyeball guys and gut guys.

Everyone wants to see how Wilson turns out to see if they are correct, right now it is the most popular prediction thread, there have been others like Ben Gay, Matt Leinart, DeAngelo Williams and such,

 

[Concept Coop]

If Scott, who is playing in obvious passing downs, is scoring on par with Wilson - that's either a positive for Scott, or a negative for Wilson.

To use an out of sport example, it's like pointing to Dwight Howard having a higher FG% than Kevin Durant and suggesting he's a better shooter or offensive player because of it.

 

[snitwitch]

Starting D-Will with confidence this week. Who's with me???

 

[JustinHawkins]

Starting him but not confident

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Starting D-Will with confidence this week. Who's with me???

probably some people in the deangelo williams thread

 

[TheFanatic]

WTF happened to the Giants?

general consensus in here is they have an elite talent in Wilson and are not using him enough

Definitely not the consensus, or even general consensus.

Only the consensus of delusional David Wilson owners.

He can't even get more than 3.5 YPC during garbage time when defenses are in the prevent. He can't break tackles, can't hold onto the football, and can't pass protect.

They're probably using him too much.

I would concur, it is definitely not a consensus. But for some reason the majority of people here thought Wilson was an "elite talent" despite reality.

No offense but this is a 79 page thread about a guy who couldn't beat out Andre Brown and is only starting due to injury.

Psssst. Wilson was the starter before Brown went down. Brown was going to be third down and goal line.

Also, I hardly think the book is written yet on David Wilson. This season got derailed for him because of his two fumbles in week one.

Not true, they were listed as co starters, and Wilson was returning kicks.

But if you want to split hairs, you got me, Wilson is a elite running back who can't get short yardage, is a liability on passing plays who was the starter because he had one percent more of a time share than the stud Andre Brown who's coach thought the best way to utilize him was on kick returns.

I am shocked he can't handle the full load.

Can we address this point specifically. There was talk that he was bad in pass pro his rookie season. I can't recall him getting Eli sacked this year. Can some of you stat gurus take a look at this and let us know where he stands on pass protection.

I know the guy isn't getting enough carries, has a terrible O-Line, has a QB that is completing less and less balls every week, but I don't know if DW is bad at pass protection.

I've posted these stats you're requesting several times and people keep ignoring them so... I'll do it again.

Using ProFootballFocus Pass Blocking Efficiency Ratings and Stats... they are typically regarded as highly reputable for these kinds of things. Here's what we find

Da'rel Scott: He currently ranked 23rd overall among active RBs (with over 25% pass blocking snaps). On 50 Pass Blocking snaps he has allowed: 0 Sacks, 2 Hits, 1 Hurry for a total of 3 Pressures allowed and a Pass Blocking Efficiency Score of 95.5 (the highest possible is 100).

David Wilson: He is currently ranked 24th overall among active RBs (with over 25% pass blocking snaps). On 21 Pass Blocking snaps he has allowed: 1 Sack, 0 Hits and 0 Hurries for a total of 1 Pressure allowed and has a Pass Blocking Efficiency Score of 95.2 (the highest possible is 100).

Sooooooooooooooooooo... all in all they're more or less both completely, 100% even. Their scores are almost identical. This is the issue I; and many analysts have with the current situation going on in New York. As, the Giants aren't giving a reason as to this bizarre usage of their running backs. Coughlin just keeps ignoring the issue. And if you saw the sack that Wilson 'allowed' one could argue he's actually been better than Scott in pass protection this season. As the 'allowed' sack by Wilson came when two Dallas defenders made their way into the backfield as Wilson was coming out of a play action fake and he simply was unable to adjust in time to square up on the defender. Irregardless of the fact that there were two defenders that broke through the line and not one, so even if he was able to square up his guy he still would have 'allowed' a sack.

Thanks for this. The only conspiracy I see in this thread is the utter lack of reading comprehension....

 

[TheFanatic]

I know the guy isn't getting enough carries, has a terrible O-Line, has a QB that is completing less and less balls every week, but I don't know if DW is bad at pass protection.

He is. I don't know if Scott is any better, but Wilson is poor in pass protection. And regardless of what anyone says, or what stats they use to suggest otherwise, the only people whose opinions matter don't trust Wilson to keep the QB safe, and have said so. Until that changes, it is going to hinder his production.

See, there were comments about his Pass Pro as a rookie, but I can't remember a single quote from the coach where they commented good or bad on DW's pass blocking. Can you show me an example of this? You imply that no matter what stats we use, as there seem to be strong stats that say he is not a bad pass blocker, that the coaching staff does not trust him in pass pro. Can you show me a quote?

I seem to recall that someone cited that 44% of DW carries were run plays. Since he had 50% more carries than Scott, then wouldn't that put him in on more passing plays that Scott?

I know it's in this thread, and will take a look. But Coughlin said Wilson can't block at a defenders feet, that they've told him that, and that Wilson is still doing it and will need to learn. This after week 1.

As for the stat - it needs context. Wilson isn't allowing sacks because they aren't depending on him to keep Eli standing. The stat is using pass blocking attempts as the numerator, but that is a very vague data point. Wilson is isn't left on an island as much is Scott is. Scott is facing more blitzes, etc.

The stat is raw/basic - like catch %, for example. We could use last years numbers to suggest that Larry Fitzgerald is a poor receiver, since he caught less than 50% of his targets. That is because the stat doesn't take into account anything but the base numbers: receptions/targets. But we all know Larry wasn't getting many quality targets, was double teamed often, etc.

Same thing here: Wilson isn't messing up because he isn't being trusted to. That's why he isn't allowing pressure.

Wait, who was it in this thread that was arguing that Wilson was being blitzed constantly because he was such a liability in pass pro? Now he's not being blitzed at all? Which is it?

44% of the plays he is in on are passing plays. He has to be seeing some blitzes, yet he's only given up one sack when two guys broke through the line. And when close to half his plays are pass plays, it would seem the coaches are trusting him. I wonder what that percentage is for other RB's.

 

[Khy]

I know the guy isn't getting enough carries, has a terrible O-Line, has a QB that is completing less and less balls every week, but I don't know if DW is bad at pass protection.

He is. I don't know if Scott is any better, but Wilson is poor in pass protection. And regardless of what anyone says, or what stats they use to suggest otherwise, the only people whose opinions matter don't trust Wilson to keep the QB safe, and have said so. Until that changes, it is going to hinder his production.

See, there were comments about his Pass Pro as a rookie, but I can't remember a single quote from the coach where they commented good or bad on DW's pass blocking. Can you show me an example of this? You imply that no matter what stats we use, as there seem to be strong stats that say he is not a bad pass blocker, that the coaching staff does not trust him in pass pro. Can you show me a quote?

I seem to recall that someone cited that 44% of DW carries were run plays. Since he had 50% more carries than Scott, then wouldn't that put him in on more passing plays that Scott?

I know it's in this thread, and will take a look. But Coughlin said Wilson can't block at a defenders feet, that they've told him that, and that Wilson is still doing it and will need to learn. This after week 1.

As for the stat - it needs context. Wilson isn't allowing sacks because they aren't depending on him to keep Eli standing. The stat is using pass blocking attempts as the numerator, but that is a very vague data point. Wilson is isn't left on an island as much is Scott is. Scott is facing more blitzes, etc.

The stat is raw/basic - like catch %, for example. We could use last years numbers to suggest that Larry Fitzgerald is a poor receiver, since he caught less than 50% of his targets. That is because the stat doesn't take into account anything but the base numbers: receptions/targets. But we all know Larry wasn't getting many quality targets, was double teamed often, etc.

Same thing here: Wilson isn't messing up because he isn't being trusted to. That's why he isn't allowing pressure.

This simply isn't true. If you were watching the games or properly reading what I'm posting here. 50% of Wilson's snaps are runs and 50% are passes. He's let up 1 sack, no hurries and no hits on those 50% of his snaps. So they're 'trusting him' just fine they're simply opting for a committee for reasons they haven't explained. I've hypothesized that they're trying to bring him along slowly to build his confidence. People keep ignoring this point. But if you've watched the games, you'd see he's been solid in pass prot.

 

[Concept Coop]

Wait, who was it in this thread that was arguing that Wilson was being blitzed constantly because he was such a liability in pass pro? Now he's not being blitzed at all? Which is it?
44% of the plays he is in on are passing plays. He has to be seeing some blitzes, yet he's only given up one sack when two guys broke through the line. And when close to half his plays are pass plays, it would seem the coaches are trusting him. I wonder what that percentage is for other RB's.

Don't attribute said comment to me, because I didn't make it.

NFL Teams blitz more on 3rd down than the first two combined. That is because the run vs. pass option is usually much more obvious. That is why Scott is in on 3rd down; that is why the stat is flawed.

Wilson is blocking on 1st and 2nd down, when the run/pass option is 50/50, play action is more effective, etc. Again 'passing play' is too vague to use as a variable.

 

[Concept Coop]

This simply isn't true. If you were watching the games or properly reading what I'm posting here. 50% of Wilson's snaps are runs and 50% are passes. He's let up 1 sack, no hurries and no hits on those 50% of his snaps. So they're 'trusting him' just fine they're simply opting for a committee for reasons they haven't explained. I've hypothesized that they're trying to bring him along slowly to build his confidence. People keep ignoring this point. But if you've watched the games, you'd see he's been solid in pass prot.

A play action on first down is a lot different than 3rd and 8. Therefore, "passing down" is a flawed data point.

Again - Larry Fitzgerald caught less than 50% of his balls, Eric Decker caught 60%. Who has better hands? Who is a better WR?

Dwight Howard makes more of his shots than Kevin Durant. Who is a better shooter? Who is a better offensive player?

You can keep your head in the sand and continue looking for data points to further your conspiracy theory, but it's not going to get you anywhere. The people whose opinions matter understand that Wilson is not very good in pass protection yet.

 

[steveski]

This simply isn't true. If you were watching the games or properly reading what I'm posting here. 50% of Wilson's snaps are runs and 50% are passes. He's let up 1 sack, no hurries and no hits on those 50% of his snaps. So they're 'trusting him' just fine they're simply opting for a committee for reasons they haven't explained. I've hypothesized that they're trying to bring him along slowly to build his confidence. People keep ignoring this point. But if you've watched the games, you'd see he's been solid in pass prot.

A play action on first down is a lot different than 3rd and 8. Therefore, "passing down" is a flawed data point.

Again - Larry Fitzgerald caught less than 50% of his balls, Eric Decker caught 60%. Who has better hands? Who is a better WR?

Dwight Howard makes more of his shots than Kevin Durant. Who is a better shooter? Who is a better offensive player?

You can keep your head in the sand and continue looking for data points to further your conspiracy theory, but it's not going to get you anywhere. The people whose opinions matter understand that Wilson is not very good in pass protection yet.

Unless I missed something, we're still comparing Wilson with other RB's at pass blocking, right?

If so, then why are you comparing a slot receiver that is, at best, the 3rd best receiving option on the team and a WR1 that is seeing double coverage or at least the top corner. And then comparing shooting percentage of a small forward and a center. Next thing you're going to tell me is that your hammer is better than my screwdriver.

 

[Concept Coop]

Unless I missed something, we're still comparing Wilson with other RB's at pass blocking, right?

If so, then why are you comparing a slot receiver that is, at best, the 3rd best receiving option on the team and a WR1 that is seeing double coverage or at least the top corner. And then comparing shooting percentage of a small forward and a center. Next thing you're going to tell me is that your hammer is better than my screwdriver.

There is a bit of irony here. You're accusing me of missing the very point I am trying to make: everything needs context.

Don't compare Wilson's pass protection numbers to Scott's becuase they are very different situations. There is a reason the coaches take Wilson out on 3rd down.

Just like you shouldn't compare the FG% of a center and SG, you shouldn't compare the pass blocking numbers of an early down back to a 3rd down back.

 

[JuniorNB]

Starting D-Will with confidence this week. Who's with me???

Mulling it out between Wilson and Gio Bernard.

 

[steveski]

Unless I missed something, we're still comparing Wilson with other RB's at pass blocking, right?

If so, then why are you comparing a slot receiver that is, at best, the 3rd best receiving option on the team and a WR1 that is seeing double coverage or at least the top corner. And then comparing shooting percentage of a small forward and a center. Next thing you're going to tell me is that your hammer is better than my screwdriver.

There is a bit of irony here. You're accusing me of missing the very point I am trying to make: everything needs context.

Don't compare Wilson's pass protection numbers to Scott's becuase they are very different situations. There is a reason the coaches take Wilson out on 3rd down.

Just like you shouldn't compare the FG% of a center and SG, you shouldn't compare the pass blocking numbers of an early down back to a 3rd down back.

You think the difference between pass protection numbers from someone on the same team playing the same position on a different down is similar to comparing numbers for 2 player playing different positions on different teams? Ok.

 

[Concept Coop]

Unless I missed something, we're still comparing Wilson with other RB's at pass blocking, right?

If so, then why are you comparing a slot receiver that is, at best, the 3rd best receiving option on the team and a WR1 that is seeing double coverage or at least the top corner. And then comparing shooting percentage of a small forward and a center. Next thing you're going to tell me is that your hammer is better than my screwdriver.

There is a bit of irony here. You're accusing me of missing the very point I am trying to make: everything needs context.

Don't compare Wilson's pass protection numbers to Scott's becuase they are very different situations. There is a reason the coaches take Wilson out on 3rd down.

Just like you shouldn't compare the FG% of a center and SG, you shouldn't compare the pass blocking numbers of an early down back to a 3rd down back.

You think the difference between pass protection numbers from someone on the same team playing the same position on a different down is similar to comparing numbers for 2 player playing different positions on different teams? Ok.

Fine. Let's use Dirk Nowitzki (.475) and Dennis Rodman (.520). Both play PF. Both future HOFers. Happy?

There is a reason they trust Wilson on early downs, but not obvious passing downs. You can try to understand it, or you can keep searching for conspiracy theories.

 

[Concept Coop]

Until he is trusted in obvious passing downs, we won't know much about his pass protection - good or bad.

 

[TwinTurbo]

It's ride or die with Wilson this week against Philly. And for those of us that drafted him as a RB2 or RB3 with AD, Martin or Morris, you probably have no better option.

Last time the Giants played the Eagles, they rushed for nearly 200 combined yds. Wilson had 90 total yds and 1 rec TD.

I'm all-in with Wilson in Fanduel as well.

 

[B-Deep]

elite

lol

 

[Khy]

Unless I missed something, we're still comparing Wilson with other RB's at pass blocking, right?

If so, then why are you comparing a slot receiver that is, at best, the 3rd best receiving option on the team and a WR1 that is seeing double coverage or at least the top corner. And then comparing shooting percentage of a small forward and a center. Next thing you're going to tell me is that your hammer is better than my screwdriver.

There is a bit of irony here. You're accusing me of missing the very point I am trying to make: everything needs context.

Don't compare Wilson's pass protection numbers to Scott's becuase they are very different situations. There is a reason the coaches take Wilson out on 3rd down.

Just like you shouldn't compare the FG% of a center and SG, you shouldn't compare the pass blocking numbers of an early down back to a 3rd down back.

You think the difference between pass protection numbers from someone on the same team playing the same position on a different down is similar to comparing numbers for 2 player playing different positions on different teams? Ok.

Fine. Let's use Dirk Nowitzki (.475) and Dennis Rodman (.520). Both play PF. Both future HOFers. Happy?

There is a reason they trust Wilson on early downs, but not obvious passing downs. You can try to understand it, or you can keep searching for conspiracy theories.

You're literally trying to prove a football stat point on pass blocking efficiency between 2 RBs on the same team. By comparing two Power Forwards, in Basketball, who never played on the same team and are somehow comparing their shot percentage to that of pass blocking efficiency. What's an "obvious passing down" short of 3rd and more than 5 yards? And can you provide me with a statline stating that Scott is on the field on every 3rd and long since the start of the season? And then can you provide proof that Scott has been efficient on those situations?

Until you can provide both of those you're essentially trying to argue the existence of God by saying that Ford is a company that makes cars.

 

[Concept Coop]

You're literally trying to prove a football stat point on pass blocking efficiency between 2 RBs on the same team. By comparing two Power Forwards, in Basketball, who never played on the same team and are somehow comparing their shot percentage to that of pass blocking efficiency. What's an "obvious passing down" short of 3rd and more than 5 yards? And can you provide me with a statline stating that Scott is on the field on every 3rd and long since the start of the season? And then can you provide proof that Scott has been efficient on those situations?

Until you can provide both of those you're essentially trying to argue the existence of God by saying that Ford is a company that makes cars.

That's not what I am trying to do. At all. I am pointing to FG% in basketball ONLY to ID another raw stat that needs context.

You're pointing to a raw stat and suggesting that it proves XYZ. I'm telling you why it doesn't. You're clinging to it to support your theory that Coughlin is in a two team, billion dollar fantasy league, in which his opponent owns Wilson.

 

[Khy]

You're literally trying to prove a football stat point on pass blocking efficiency between 2 RBs on the same team. By comparing two Power Forwards, in Basketball, who never played on the same team and are somehow comparing their shot percentage to that of pass blocking efficiency. What's an "obvious passing down" short of 3rd and more than 5 yards? And can you provide me with a statline stating that Scott is on the field on every 3rd and long since the start of the season? And then can you provide proof that Scott has been efficient on those situations?

Until you can provide both of those you're essentially trying to argue the existence of God by saying that Ford is a company that makes cars.

That's not what I am trying to do. At all. I am pointing to FG% in basketball ONLY to ID another raw stat that needs context.

You're pointing to a raw stat and suggesting that it proves XYZ. I'm telling you why it doesn't. You're clinging to it to support your theory that Coughlin is in a two team, billion dollar fantasy league, in which his opponent owns Wilson.

I understand that you think Wilson's a problem in pass protection because he's not in on many 3rd downs. However, you can't just ignore the fact that one the passing downs he's been in on he's allowed 1 sack, no hurries and no hits. And has allowed 0/0/0 since the first game against Dallas when said sack occurred. You're throwing all of those pass blocks out the window as if they are irrelevant and the defense clearly never blitzed or anything to that effect. I'm at least providing evidence that he's been proficient in pass protection. You're just sitting here saying "That evidence is stupid and I don't like it!" while providing no evidence to the contrary besides your random basketball references.

 

[B-Deep]

time and time again wilson-o-philes compare him to the best of the best backs, only to back off of it later

could this guy be the next jamaal charles?

sure, so could Scott for that matter, anything is possible

what we know is this year he is doing abysmal and the team has not seen the need to drmatically increase his use despite being 0-4

who knows what the future brings, but there is one thing this guy is already a hall of famer at, and that is making people adamantly believe he is elite

i think there's a chance he does well this week, i kinda hope so, the thread would be more fun if he has a big week

i still would not start him unless i had to, and i still think he's much more likely to finish his NFL career as an average/mediocre back than an elite one

 

[Concept Coop]

I understand that you think Wilson's a problem in pass protection because he's not in on many 3rd downs. However, you can't just ignore the fact that one the passing downs he's been in on he's allowed 1 sack, no hurries and no hits. And has allowed 0/0/0 since the first game against Dallas when said sack occurred. You're throwing all of those pass blocks out the window as if they are irrelevant and the defense clearly never blitzed or anything to that effect. I'm at least providing evidence that he's been proficient in pass protection. You're just sitting here saying "That evidence is stupid and I don't like it!" while providing no evidence to the contrary besides your random basketball references.

Just like I can't ignore that Dennis Rodman makes more of his shots than Dirk Nowitski (or Michael Jordan), "based on evidence". That is a fact. It lacks context, but it's a fact. But it's not useful. Just like your stat.

I'm trying to provide context and you are DESPERATELY trying to keep it out of the equation. I'm telling you where your "evidence" falls short.

The fact that Scott has a similar score, on higher volume, in a more difficult situation, does not help your point.

 

[Loan Sharks]

Until he is trusted in obvious passing downs, we won't know much about his pass protection - good or bad.

Since he is not trusted by his coaching staff, that tells me a lot about his pass protection.

 

[Concept Coop]

Until he is trusted in obvious passing downs, we won't know much about his pass protection - good or bad.

Since he is not trusted by his coaching staff, that tells me a lot about his pass protection.

Me too.

 

[Khy]

I understand that you think Wilson's a problem in pass protection because he's not in on many 3rd downs. However, you can't just ignore the fact that one the passing downs he's been in on he's allowed 1 sack, no hurries and no hits. And has allowed 0/0/0 since the first game against Dallas when said sack occurred. You're throwing all of those pass blocks out the window as if they are irrelevant and the defense clearly never blitzed or anything to that effect. I'm at least providing evidence that he's been proficient in pass protection. You're just sitting here saying "That evidence is stupid and I don't like it!" while providing no evidence to the contrary besides your random basketball references.

Just like I can't ignore that Dennis Rodman makes more of his shots than Dirk Nowitski (or Michael Jordan), "based on evidence". That is a fact. It lacks context, but it's a fact. But it's not useful. Just like your stat.

I'm trying to provide context and you are DESPERATELY trying to keep it out of the equation. I'm telling you where your "evidence" falls short.

The fact that Scott has a similar score, on higher volume, in a more difficult situation, does not help your point.

Again, give me proof of this... can you show me a statistic somewhere that Scott is in the backfield defending against a blitz more often than Wilson? Someone earlier in the thread was trying to state that when Wilson was in the backfield teams were blitzing more often because they know he's a liability. You come in with the opposite argument that teams aren't blitzing when Wilson is in the game but are in fact blitzing on Scott's downs making them more difficult situations.

You cannot BOTH be right. It's physically impossible for you to both be right. The simple fact is neither of you gave any evidence to your claims, you simply state them as fact and act like that somehow disproves the stat lines showing that Wilson's been proficient in his pass blocking downs. EDIT: And ignoring stat lines completely, that he's simply looked very good on the field when he's been put in situations where he had to step up and block.

 

[T with T]

It's ride or die with Wilson this week against Philly. And for those of us that drafted him as a RB2 or RB3 with AD, Martin or Morris, you probably have no better option.

Last time the Giants played the Eagles, they rushed for nearly 200 combined yds. Wilson had 90 total yds and 1 rec TD.

I'm all-in with Wilson in Fanduel as well.

All in with Wilson this week ride or die over Bell/Roddy..... I believe he can have a 20 plus ppr game... I know it sounds crazy but with 15 plus touches he should be GOLDEN.

 

[T with T]

I understand that you think Wilson's a problem in pass protection because he's not in on many 3rd downs. However, you can't just ignore the fact that one the passing downs he's been in on he's allowed 1 sack, no hurries and no hits. And has allowed 0/0/0 since the first game against Dallas when said sack occurred. You're throwing all of those pass blocks out the window as if they are irrelevant and the defense clearly never blitzed or anything to that effect. I'm at least providing evidence that he's been proficient in pass protection. You're just sitting here saying "That evidence is stupid and I don't like it!" while providing no evidence to the contrary besides your random basketball references.

Just like I can't ignore that Dennis Rodman makes more of his shots than Dirk Nowitski (or Michael Jordan), "based on evidence". That is a fact. It lacks context, but it's a fact. But it's not useful. Just like your stat.

I'm trying to provide context and you are DESPERATELY trying to keep it out of the equation. I'm telling you where your "evidence" falls short.

The fact that Scott has a similar score, on higher volume, in a more difficult situation, does not help your point.

Again, give me proof of this... can you show me a statistic somewhere that Scott is in the backfield defending against a blitz more often than Wilson? Someone earlier in the thread was trying to state that when Wilson was in the backfield teams were blitzing more often because they know he's a liability. You come in with the opposite argument that teams aren't blitzing when Wilson is in the game but are in fact blitzing on Scott's downs making them more difficult situations.

You cannot BOTH be right. It's physically impossible for you to both be right. The simple fact is neither of you gave any evidence to your claims, you simply state them as fact and act like that somehow disproves the stat lines showing that Wilson's been proficient in his pass blocking downs. EDIT: And ignoring stat lines completely, that he's simply looked very good on the field when he's been put in situations where he had to step up and block.

Good point!

 

[T with T]

Wilson 16-100 2-24 and a td..... that's 21 points for me for 3 point 100 yard bonus.... I can see it now..

 

[Banger]

I understand that you think Wilson's a problem in pass protection because he's not in on many 3rd downs. However, you can't just ignore the fact that one the passing downs he's been in on he's allowed 1 sack, no hurries and no hits. And has allowed 0/0/0 since the first game against Dallas when said sack occurred. You're throwing all of those pass blocks out the window as if they are irrelevant and the defense clearly never blitzed or anything to that effect. I'm at least providing evidence that he's been proficient in pass protection. You're just sitting here saying "That evidence is stupid and I don't like it!" while providing no evidence to the contrary besides your random basketball references.

Just like I can't ignore that Dennis Rodman makes more of his shots than Dirk Nowitski (or Michael Jordan), "based on evidence". That is a fact. It lacks context, but it's a fact. But it's not useful. Just like your stat.

I'm trying to provide context and you are DESPERATELY trying to keep it out of the equation. I'm telling you where your "evidence" falls short.

The fact that Scott has a similar score, on higher volume, in a more difficult situation, does not help your point.

Again, give me proof of this... can you show me a statistic somewhere that Scott is in the backfield defending against a blitz more often than Wilson? Someone earlier in the thread was trying to state that when Wilson was in the backfield teams were blitzing more often because they know he's a liability. You come in with the opposite argument that teams aren't blitzing when Wilson is in the game but are in fact blitzing on Scott's downs making them more difficult situations.

You cannot BOTH be right. It's physically impossible for you to both be right. The simple fact is neither of you gave any evidence to your claims, you simply state them as fact and act like that somehow disproves the stat lines showing that Wilson's been proficient in his pass blocking downs.

what does it matter? As I've said since the summer, it doesn't matter what you or I think, it only matters what TC thinks. He's going to do things his way and as long as an average talent like Scott is getting 3rd down work that tells us all we need to know. When Scott is firmly on the bench then everyone should throw Wilson in their lineup as that will be the change of heart and show of complete trust since he was drafted.

 

[Banger]

Wilson 16-100 2-24 and a td..... that's 21 points for me for 3 point 100 yard bonus.... I can see it now..

you should look up the definition of insanity.

 

[B-Deep]

Until he is trusted in obvious passing downs, we won't know much about his pass protection - good or bad.

Since he is not trusted by his coaching staff, that tells me a lot about his pass protection.

people here argue it tells you a lot about his coaching staff

 

[msudaisy26]

Wilson 16-100 2-24 and a td..... that's 21 points for me for 3 point 100 yard bonus.... I can see it now..

you should look up the definition of insanity.

It is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting something different to happen.

This would be new for Wilson

 

[Concept Coop]

Again, give me proof of this... can you show me a statistic somewhere that Scott is in the backfield defending against a blitz more often than Wilson? Someone earlier in the thread was trying to state that when Wilson was in the backfield teams were blitzing more often because they know he's a liability. You come in with the opposite argument that teams aren't blitzing when Wilson is in the game but are in fact blitzing on Scott's downs making them more difficult situations.

You cannot BOTH be right. It's physically impossible for you to both be right. The simple fact is neither of you gave any evidence to your claims, you simply state them as fact and act like that somehow disproves the stat lines showing that Wilson's been proficient in his pass blocking downs. EDIT: And ignoring stat lines completely, that he's simply looked very good on the field when he's been put in situations where he had to step up and block.

Teams blitz more on 3rd down. QBs are sacked more on 3rd down. That is why David Wilson is not in the game in said situations; because it's more likely that a RB will be needed to prevent pressure, and he can't handle it yet, according to the people that see him in practice every day.

"Passing down" does not mean a play in which there was a pass. "Passing down" is a situation in which it is assumed that the offense will need to pass in order to get the first down, or preserve the clock. Wilson is not in on said plays, so how can he look good on them?

 

[Vincent Gambini]

So the Giants waived Darrell Scott. It's your show, Wilson.

 

[Banger]

Until he is trusted in obvious passing downs, we won't know much about his pass protection - good or bad.

Since he is not trusted by his coaching staff, that tells me a lot about his pass protection.

people here argue it tells you a lot about his coaching staff

I know...even if it does, no one on this board is going to replace the coaching staff, nor are they going to change their thinking with their posts in the shark pool or call to sports radio. If he's statistically the best RB in pass pro since they kept the stat, it doesn't matter.

 

[Banger]

Wilson 16-100 2-24 and a td..... that's 21 points for me for 3 point 100 yard bonus.... I can see it now..

you should look up the definition of insanity.

It is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting something different to happen.

This would be new for Wilson

the posts that this will be the week are not new....

 

[Vincent Gambini]

http://www.giants.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Giants-waive-DaRel-Scott-add-C-Reynolds/9cc9fda5-1967-483e-8945-f32c34c361a4

 

[TheFanatic]

So the Giants waived Darrell Scott. It's your show, Wilson.

But, but, the coaches don't trust him?

 

[Banger]

So the Giants waived Darrell Scott. It's your show, Wilson.

is that true?

 

[Banger]

So the Giants waived Darrell Scott. It's your show, Wilson.

But, but, the coaches don't trust him?

I guess we'll see if they are right....good for Wilson owners.

 

[Vincent Gambini]

So the Giants waived Darrell Scott. It's your show, Wilson.

But, but, the coaches don't trust him?

I think they saw what we all saw these past few weeks. He's a playmaker if they just give him the damn ball, Keyshawn style.

 

[Concept Coop]

I think they saw what we all saw these past few weeks. He's a playmaker if they just give him the damn ball, Keyshawn style.

Who saw this?

 

[Banger]

should be an interesting thread one way or the other this weekend. The stars are aligned and now he needs to perform.

 

[JFS171]

Interesting... watch Michael Cox here...

 

[Concept Coop]

I guess we'll see if they are right....good for Wilson owners.

I really don't think this means Wilson is the 3rd down back. I'm expecting someone else in that role. I hope I'm wrong, as a new Wilson owner.

 

[Khy]

So the Giants waived Darrell Scott. It's your show, Wilson.

is that true?

100% Giants waived RB Da'Rel Scott.

It's a surprising move, and a vote of confidence in shaky starter David Wilson. It's a sign the Giants are ready to start using Wilson in more passing situations. It leaves the G-Men with just used-up veteran Brandon Jacobs and practice-squad type Michael Cox behind Wilson. Scott rushed five times for 26 yards against the Chiefs on Sunday, but was averaging only 3.5 yards per carry. That number slumps to 3.0 for his career.
Related: Giants

Source: Ralph Vacchiano on Twitter
Oct 1 - 4:11 PM

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

So the Giants waived Darrell Scott. It's your show, Wilson.

But, but, the coaches don't trust him?

this thread is lol

 

[B-Deep]

The scott news is pretty big

would everyone agree now that if he has a bad week this week it is a bad sign for him?

He should get as many looks as he will get, against as bad of defense as he will see (perhaps other than the redskins)

if he has a crappy week this week can we agree he's in trouble?