Draft Conundrum

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

19 minutes ago, Danand said:

The REAL story is, that despite missing so many starters on offense and having almost no contribution from the wide receiver core, Flacco managed to get decent production out of no names.

The Seahawks/Wilson homer you are, ofc you won't recognize how many times Wilson was bailed out of throws by amazing catches from his wide receivers. The Texans game alone had a handful. 

"Decent production out of no names" -- which no names put up decent production? Mike Wallace was the only guy who did even close to anything.

I watched Russell Wilson every game this year, including the Houston game. Which throws here are you talking about?

I see two possible throws. The back shoulder to Lockett at the start, and the throw to Paul Richardson with 1:23 left in the game. Two throws (one borderline) isn't really out of the norm for any QB.

[drd23]

You are severely underrating Wilson, Dan (and overrating Flacco at the same time in that comparison)

Yes Baldwin is the best WR between the 2 teams, but Wilson was far and away the more productive, and more impressive, of the two QBs (and I don't even like Wilson)

[dcfields]

And the whole 4th quarter Flacco thing isn’t exactly something to hang your hat on. Collins and Buck played great down the stretch. The O-line drastically improved mainly due to Joe D, IMO (Castillo was horrible). The bigger picture is, “Who were the opposing QBs in that stretch?” Cutler, Huntley, Savage, Kiser, Brissett. Pees was more to blame for the defensive failures than the players were. Flacco gets paid to be a top 10 QB. In any other line of work, he’d be fired for not living up to his expectations.

All I’m saying is draft someone now so we can trade or cut Flacco in 2 years. In 2 years, we’ll know enough about the player we draft now to determine if we need to draft someone at the top of the 2020 draft.

[Danand]

10 hours ago, drd23 said:

You are severely underrating Wilson, Dan (and overrating Flacco at the same time in that comparison)

Yes Baldwin is the best WR between the 2 teams, but Wilson was far and away the more productive, and more impressive, of the two QBs (and I don't even like Wilson)

I am not underrating Wilson. I am making a point, that QB's can only take their team so far. Even Wilson with the supporting cast he has can't take his team to the PO, and he also has games where the offense puts up 0-3 points in a half. Is that because he is a bad QB? No. Was he a better QB than Flacco this year? Yes.

But as Flacco, he can't do it alone, and when Wilson got more help, just as Flacco did, they both played better.

Its not like Wilson put up 5000 yards on the year but the defense couldn't help him. He was helpless because of a useless oline and no running game.

 

 

[RavensfanRD]

I pray when Flacco is gone we don't get the Pre-Flacco years at QB. People really don't appreciate when they have a winning QB and it boggles my mind. Is Joe Flacco "Elite" or one of the GOATS? No (Despite what my sig says and personal feelings aside lol) But he's a winner who continually help put this team in a position to win. I hope we get the QB a lot of y'all looking for after 2018. 2019 is going to be very, very interesting, lol

[Danand]

1 hour ago, RavensfanRD said:

I pray when Flacco is gone we don't get the Pre-Flacco years at QB. People really don't appreciate when they have a winning QB and it boggles my mind. Is Joe Flacco "Elite" or one of the GOATS? No (Despite what my sig says and personal feelings aside lol) But he's a winner who continually help put this team in a position to win. I hope we get the QB a lot of y'all looking for after 2018. 2019 is going to be very, very interesting, lol

What so far distinguishes Flacco from the Alex Smiths, is the weird ability to win in the playoffs. Brian Baldinger showed some plays from the Chiefs/Titans game where Alex Smith didn't take the risk on some throws, where the wide receiver was open. Flacco has a proven record he dares to make those throws. Whether it is "getting hot" at the right time vs. poor performance in regular season which leads us to not getting into the playoffs, I would love to see most critics acknowledge, that Flacco has a proven edge compared to others in his bracket og Average Joe's.

 

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

6 hours ago, Danand said:

I am not underrating Wilson. I am making a point, that QB's can only take their team so far. Even Wilson with the supporting cast he has can't take his team to the PO, and he also has games where the offense puts up 0-3 points in a half. Is that because he is a bad QB? No. Was he a better QB than Flacco this year? Yes.

But as Flacco, he can't do it alone, and when Wilson got more help, just as Flacco did, they both played better.

Its not like Wilson put up 5000 yards on the year but the defense couldn't help him. He was helpless because of a useless oline and no running game.

And yet even without an OL and running game, Wilson threw for 34 TD's and 11 INT's and almost 4,000 yards. Flacco's best season doesn't even touch that. I'm just not sure why Wilson was even injected into this conversation. If anything, he showed he could win 9 games basically by himself this year. This year for Russell Wilson was the equivalent of 2013 for the Ravens - you know - the season where Flacco had 19 TD's and 23 INT's and the team still went 8-8 despite him?

Everyone knows QB's need help around them, that's not a new thing. What separates players like Wilson and Flacco is their ability to produce when they don't have that help. Wilson has shown he can, and Flacco has shown he can't.

[diamondbull424]

Yet when both have talent around them, they both take their team to the same heights. The defenses are similar talent wise (typically). The offense’s are similar talent-wise (typically). Yet both quarterbacks just seem to win.

It makes sense with Wilson. With Flacco, there should be no reason that he’s a winner given his stats and limitations, which is why many want to upgrade from him.

Yet there must be some unexplainable characteristic that he contributes that can’t be categorized. Like some sort of winning pheromone or something. He just seems to get the job done. Others might be more accurate, have better field vision, better playmakers, etc. But guys like Dalton don’t seem to get it done, yet guys like Flacco seem to find a way.

[Danand]

58 minutes ago, Darth Pees said:

And yet even without an OL and running game, Wilson threw for 34 TD's and 11 INT's and almost 4,000 yards. Flacco's best season doesn't even touch that. I'm just not sure why Wilson was even injected into this conversation. If anything, he showed he could win 9 games basically by himself this year. This year for Russell Wilson was the equivalent of 2013 for the Ravens - you know - the season where Flacco had 19 TD's and 23 INT's and the team still went 8-8 despite him?

Everyone knows QB's need help around them, that's not a new thing. What separates players like Wilson and Flacco is their ability to produce when they don't have that help. Wilson has shown he can, and Flacco has shown he can't.

Wilson was drawn into this because I used him as an example of a QB, who could do everything in his power, but if he didn't have a team around him, he would accomplish the same thing as Flacco. Rodgers for instance takes worse teams than the Seahawks to the playoffs. Wilson also had games this year, where the Seahawks offense didn't produce any points in the first half. If he was such an outstanding QB, Seattle WOULD have produced those points.

You are so far ahead of yourself with the Flacco bashing, that you choose to not acknowledge anything he has done. As DB's points out, somehow Flacco manages to produce the same results.

Its not like the Seahawks defense was crap this year, they had equal the succes or played better than the Ravens. Flacco may have had a better oline late in the season, but early in the season it was just as bad as the Seahawks and he had less receiving options.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

57 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

Yet when both have talent around them, they both take their team to the same heights. The defenses are similar talent wise (typically). The offense’s are similar talent-wise (typically). Yet both quarterbacks just seem to win.

It makes sense with Wilson. With Flacco, there should be no reason that he’s a winner given his stats and limitations, which is why many want to upgrade from him.

Yet there must be some unexplainable characteristic that he contributes that can’t be categorized. Like some sort of winning pheromone or something. He just seems to get the job done. Others might be more accurate, have better field vision, better playmakers, etc. But guys like Dalton don’t seem to get it done, yet guys like Flacco seem to find a way.

One plays well and wins - the other doesn't and wins. That's really all it boils down to. To say "they both get the same results" is pretty misleading because one directly contributes to those results while the other, for the most part, does not.

And we can't really talk about "getting it done" when we're going into 3 straight years of missing the playoffs, now can we? Seahawks just missed the playoffs for the first time in 5 years and actually managed to maintain competitive after winning a Superbowl. I'm just saying there is nothing to compare Wilson and Flacco.

[Danand]

6 minutes ago, Darth Pees said:

One plays well and wins - the other doesn't and wins. That's really all it boils down to. To say "they both get the same results" is pretty misleading because one directly contributes to those results while the other, for the most part, does not.

And we can't really talk about "getting it done" when we're going into 3 straight years of missing the playoffs, now can we? Seahawks just missed the playoffs for the first time in 5 years and actually managed to maintain competitive after winning a Superbowl. I'm just saying there is nothing to compare Wilson and Flacco.

I am just saying there is much to compare Wilson to Flacco.

Wow, that approach to making an argument is easy.

If Flacco had it easy coming into the league, Wilson had a much easier intro with the best defense in the league and a top top running game. THAT DOESN'T TAKE ANYTHING FROM HIM!

That is however not how you view Flacco. Your narrative that Ravens wins despite of Flacco is just wrong. When the offense suddenly performs, Flacco for some reason is not a part of it according to you. When the offense performs bad it is for some reasons because of Flacco.

Looking at their careers, they have very much had similar starts to their careers. The last couple of years Wilson has played better, while Flacco struggled more. Still, besides some passing yards and statistics, the results are still somewhat the same.

The famous "wins are not a QB stat". Then why the hell do they pay quarterbacks so much? Statistics is what made people believe in Blake Bortless = statistics makes you able to support a specific narrative which really depends on the story you want to tell.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

Quote

That is however not how you view Flacco. Your narrative that Ravens wins despite of Flacco is just wrong. When the offense suddenly performs, Flacco for some reason is not a part of it according to you. When the offense performs bad it is for some reasons because of Flacco.

When the offense performs bad, it is because Flacco turns the ball over and doesn't produce. Sometimes it's also the running game is poor. When the offense performs well, it is almost always as a result of the running game producing - not Flacco. This year was no different. Once the running game got going, amazingly, Flacco started to play better and the offense produced.

Quote

Looking at their careers, they have very much had similar starts to their careers. The last couple of years Wilson has played better, while Flacco struggled more. Still, besides some passing yards and statistics, the results are still somewhat the same.

I don't know how you can honestly say this. Russell Wilson's first 3 years he averaged 24 TD's, 8.66 INT's and 3,200 passing yards. Flacco in his first 3 years averaged 20 TD's, 11 INT's, and 3,400 yards. Wilson had 2 years with over 6% TD percentage. Flacco hasn't hit 6% in his entire career. I mean there's really just no comparison, aside from the initial bulk stats. Once you dive into efficiency stats and factor in Wilson's rushing stats and total TD's and INT's, it's not even close. Then you look at the responsibilities of each through their first 3 years and what they were asked to do in their offenses, and it's even more apparent.

Then we reach the second bolded statement. The results are still somewhat the same? In the past 3 years, the Seahawks have made the playoffs twice. We've missed the playoffs every year. Statistically, Wilson has 2 years with over 30 TD's - Flacco doesn't have a single one of those years over 20. Wilson is averaging 9 INT's in the past 3 seasons - Flacco is averaging close to 18. The results are not even close, no matter how you want to spin it - team success, individual success. It's not even close.

Quote

The famous "wins are not a QB stat". Then why the hell do they pay quarterbacks so much?

QB's make so much because it's the most important and difficult position in the NFL to play. It's also the one position where having a great player can really mask deficiencies elsewhere. Wilson masks his OL. Brady masks his WR's. Great ones can also elevate those around them. 

[RavensfanRD]

10 minutes ago, Darth Pees said:

When the offense performs bad, it is because Flacco turns the ball over and doesn't produce. Sometimes it's also the running game is poor. When the offense performs well, it is almost always as a result of the running game producing - not Flacco. This year was no different. Once the running game got going, amazingly, Flacco started to play better and the offense produced.

I don't know how you can honestly say this. Russell Wilson's first 3 years he averaged 24 TD's, 8.66 INT's and 3,200 passing yards. Flacco in his first 3 years averaged 20 TD's, 11 INT's, and 3,400 yards. Wilson had 2 years with over 6% TD percentage. Flacco hasn't hit 6% in his entire career. I mean there's really just no comparison, aside from the initial bulk stats. Once you dive into efficiency stats and factor in Wilson's rushing stats and total TD's and INT's, it's not even close. Then you look at the responsibilities of each through their first 3 years and what they were asked to do in their offenses, and it's even more apparent.

Then we reach the second bolded statement. The results are still somewhat the same? In the past 3 years, the Seahawks have made the playoffs twice. We've missed the playoffs every year. Statistically, Wilson has 2 years with over 30 TD's - Flacco doesn't have a single one of those years over 20. Wilson is averaging 9 INT's in the past 3 seasons - Flacco is averaging close to 18. The results are not even close, no matter how you want to spin it - team success, individual success. It's not even close.

QB's make so much because it's the most important and difficult position in the NFL to play. It's also the one position where having a great player can really mask deficiencies elsewhere. Wilson masks his OL. Brady masks his WR's. Great ones can also elevate those around them. 

Brady, while great, is a product of scheme. I'll believe that till the day I die. It's a reason EVERYONE that has QB'd while he was away with injuries had a good/great year with the Pats. They know how to scheme those around them to make them better. Now with that said, I'm not denying he's one of the GOATs, but I wouldn't say he mask his WR's. I give all that credit to Hoodie.

But back to my original thought...

I pray he's cut in 2019 so we can see some interesting things! Good or bad! And if he's picked up by a team, I'll follow him there as a secondary squad behind the Ravens. BECAUSE JOE FLACCO IS THE GOAT! FIGHT ME! 

[Danand]

38 minutes ago, Darth Pees said:

When the offense performs bad, it is because Flacco turns the ball over and doesn't produce. Sometimes it's also the running game is poor. When the offense performs well, it is almost always as a result of the running game producing - not Flacco. This year was no different. Once the running game got going, amazingly, Flacco started to play better and the offense produced.

I don't know how you can honestly say this. Russell Wilson's first 3 years he averaged 24 TD's, 8.66 INT's and 3,200 passing yards. Flacco in his first 3 years averaged 20 TD's, 11 INT's, and 3,400 yards. Wilson had 2 years with over 6% TD percentage. Flacco hasn't hit 6% in his entire career. I mean there's really just no comparison, aside from the initial bulk stats. Once you dive into efficiency stats and factor in Wilson's rushing stats and total TD's and INT's, it's not even close. Then you look at the responsibilities of each through their first 3 years and what they were asked to do in their offenses, and it's even more apparent.

Then we reach the second bolded statement. The results are still somewhat the same? In the past 3 years, the Seahawks have made the playoffs twice. We've missed the playoffs every year. Statistically, Wilson has 2 years with over 30 TD's - Flacco doesn't have a single one of those years over 20. Wilson is averaging 9 INT's in the past 3 seasons - Flacco is averaging close to 18. The results are not even close, no matter how you want to spin it - team success, individual success. It's not even close.

QB's make so much because it's the most important and difficult position in the NFL to play. It's also the one position where having a great player can really mask deficiencies elsewhere. Wilson masks his OL. Brady masks his WR's. Great ones can also elevate those around them. 

You just wrote how you approach this.

Every good thing on Ravens offense = everybody else

Every good thing on Seahawks offense = only Wilson.

No point in arguing with that.

[wackywabbit]

I feel like too many people are only thinking about what's good for 2018. This is absolutely the right time to get a future starting QB under contract for 4-5 years.