Jamarcus Russell...not too shabby?

by naq92 on Sep 16, 2009 9:28 PM PDT

I'm going to start off by first mentioning the astronomical upside of Jamarcus Russell. Perhaps the strongest throwing arm in the league, the size, the calm demeanor (although, i guess whether thats a good attribute or a bad one, is debatable). But obviously, he hasn't established himself as a strong starting QB because his obvious weaknesses, such as throwing accuracy, lack of work ethic (maybe?), pocket presence, poor mechanics. However, given the way he played on monday night, I feel that his performance should be drawing a nod from the raidernation as opposed to the scrutiny and criticism that has followed.

First off, I'd like to say that I understand where the harsh criticism of Jamarcus is coming from. We haven't had a winning team in a looong time, and we havent had a decent QB in a loong time. I get that. I also get that some of Jamarcus' throws are absolutely UNWATCHABLE, leaving you wondering which receiver he was throwing to, if there was one at all. And in the 1st quarter, he definitely killed what could've been a great opening drive. However...I still believe there was more good than bad.

I'll start with the intangibles, which isn't too much. I would say his calm-demeanor is definitely a positive, especially with so many young players around. I think its good for a leader of the team to remain calm, cool and collected when things are going his way. Instead of dwelling on the past, start thinking about what to do to help the team for the future. I also think you have to applaud him for going back into the game when the raiders needed him most. Shows that he's not a quitter and that he doesn't only care about the dollar signs. I'm sure it would've been quite easier for him to rest his knee (which did take a nasty shot on that QB sneak) and come back in practice on wednesday, if not the next series. Instead, Jamarcus went back after the Raiders got a 1st down, and promptly scored a potential game-winning TD.

next, I'm going to talk about his statistics. The official game line is this: 12/30 208 yards 1TD/2INT. pretty bad. all around. But I definitely dont think he played as badly as the stats would indicate. So let's break this down...

1. I'm going to remove the second pick and corresponding incompletion because it came on a hail mary and not on a throw where Jamarcus was actually making reads, working on timing, testing his accuracy. It was a chance play, and all Jamarcus had to do was throw it up and hope somebody caught the ball. lets be honest with ourselves Russell haters, theres no way to justify holding that 2nd pick against him.

that would bring our line to 12/29 1TD/1INT.

2. unfortunately, i couldn't find official stats to support this (help please?), but from watching the game, I'm absolutely convinced there were atleast 6 balls that could've been caught by our receivers, that weren't. obvious ones that come to mind were DHB, who must've missed 2 or 3, Louis Murphy, there was one he shouldve caught, and of course, the un-tuck rule. Mcfadden and JLH also had a noticeable drop. However, I will conservatively say (until someone can find some good stats) that Raiders receivers dropped (or atleast, shouldve caught) 5 passes. I'm including the louis Murphy play as one dropped pass as a TD catch for the reasons I'm sure many of you guys have already dropped down all over this blog.

That would most likely (not definite) bring Jamarcus Russell's line to 17/29. 250+ yards. 2TDs/1INT.

not bad at all. in fact, I'd say that's quite good. It doesn't erase those awful throws which have been happening too consistently. But it does erase some throws where he really threaded the needle and didn't get compensation for it (JLH, 3rd and 15, etc). I'm not saying that he couldn't have done better, I'm just saying that he did a lot better than what your lying eyes would tell you. : )

Off-topic sidenote: one heck of a job by Super Mario Henderson, handling Merrimen the way he did. props to Cable on how balanced our run game looked in regards to the rotation of mike bush and mcfadden. props to miller for being a great target our QB could consistently fall back to. props to Tommy Kelly, Gerard Warren, Richard Seymour and Greg Ellis for showing us that, with the right talent, the standard four man rush is not obsolete. if this team plays the same way they did tonight in KC, we're looking at a 1-1 record. The Silver And Black Are Back.

Tweet Comment 16 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Fiction can be fun

this post is the definition of delusional

Chiefs 2009 Predictions
Tamba Hali will have Double Digits sacks
The OL will be a strength by years end
Larry Johnson will have 1200+ yards
the team will win 7+ games
a receiver not named Bowe will emerge
.

by teabaggingexper on Sep 16, 2009 9:38 PM PDT reply actions

did you even read it?

i just wanna know why you think its so out-of-line?? bcuz, to be honest, i think most of your arguments are based on semantics and strong-terms like delusional.

Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up!!

by naq92 on Sep 16, 2009 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions

I read your post naq92 and it was fine.

Don’t worry about the Chiefs fan there he’s just a troll. JaMarcus Russell has real talent and if he improves on his accuracy he’ll help the Raiders win a lot of games.

by sirbed on Sep 17, 2009 12:15 AM PDT up reply actions

here is the problem

you are trying to give hime credit for dropped passes, why dont you take away the ones he threw badly and the receiver made a play to catch the pass. it goes both ways! but you dont want to look at those plays do you?

The guy played about as terrible as a NFL QB can play, trying to “what if” his stats to respectable will do you or your team no good

by teabaggingexper on Sep 17, 2009 8:27 AM PDT up reply actions

Which plays exactly did the receivers make a play for Russell...

because I don’t remember those. The premise to “what if” was not to help the team- it was made to help the analysis of his performance. This post is saying that his performance is not as bad as his base stats suggest and I think it make a strong case to the legitimacy of that statement.

Wherever I go, that's where I am.

by Rich Langford on Sep 17, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions

half of his throws were pretty inaccurate.

although i also believe that the rookie receivers couldn’t get open very often, and jamarcus tried to make the throws where only his receivers could get it, but they were either too high or too low. his accuracy needs to be worked on quite a bit if they were to have a legitament passing game. he’ll be better when chaz gets back.

by patriotguy on Sep 17, 2009 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions

17/29. 250+ yards. 2TDs/1INT

That line would have more than doubled his QB rating on the night.

I thought the offense was very vanilla against the Chargers, with the only innovative play being the successful reverse for JLH with Russell in front. The Raiders need to work in more screens and quicker routes to make the passing game more successful.

Prevent John Marshall from running the prevent defense!

by LiveAdam on Sep 16, 2009 9:40 PM PDT reply actions

well..that would've been best-case scenario.

just think that he didnt do as bad as the numbers suggest..

i agree. screens and quicker routes would be great. especially with all of the speed this team has.

Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up!!

by naq92 on Sep 16, 2009 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions

Good Post Naq

I think it is fair to mention too that his first pick was largely due to a poor rout by Murphy. He has to break in front of the corner on that one. Also I think it is fair to say that a couple of his poor throws were actually poor routes or mis reads between a qb and a receiver. This is going to happen when teams start two rookies!

I can’t wait ’til Chaz is back.

I also like Russell’s calm presence. I was also impressed that when it mattered most he was on point. The third and 15 that JLH dropped and then the bomb to Murphy.

Wherever I go, that's where I am.

by Rich Langford on Sep 17, 2009 12:39 AM PDT reply actions

In reality, if his receivers had been bigger, faster and had better hands, J-mark would

have been 30-30. So basically, in my book, he’s been perfect this year. A+ J-Mark!!!!

by Bacon on Sep 17, 2009 9:47 AM PDT reply actions

i don't totally agree with you.

i seen pocket presence, which is good, but he was making bad decisions. i’ll give him a B, because it’s the first game, and i believe he’ll only get better.

by patriotguy on Sep 17, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions

hmm

interesting post, and you did get all the drops that i remember

heyward bey x 2
murphy x 2 (including 1 touchdown)
higgins (the first down drop)
mcfadden (on a swing route)

i do know that his stats aren’t perfectly representative on how he played, but he was pretty bad for most of the night. in the second half we couldn’t move the ball at all it was plain ridiculous.

you can also argue that his 1 pick (i am not counting the second pick) was the receivers fault, but that is not for sure.

i would say the special teams coverage had more to do with the loss than russell/receivers bad performance. think to the end of the first half. we score with like 30 seconds left or something like that. the chargers probably had the minsdet of "lets just take a knee and we receive in the 2nd half). however, sproles returns the kickoff for 70 yards and the chargers have a field goal attempt as time expires. that changes the whole flow of the game.

another thing (obviously) whas the defensive collapse in the 4th quarter. the chargers went on consecutive touchdown drives after being contained the whole game. what happened? prevent defense. the coaches can deny but thats what it was. NO blitzing, just a four man rush, not that the 4 man rush failed the whole night. the linebackers dropped like they were safeties or something, and sproles and nanee made some catch-and-run plays. also, on a third and 1, gates was totally uncovered. i saw it and yelled. they manned up on the WR’s, but left gates completely uncovered, and rivers threw the ball before completing his 3 step drop.

the defense didn’t stay aggressive and that cost them. russell’s play didnt cost us the game. it actually almost won it down the stretch

by raiderrocker18 on Sep 18, 2009 2:19 AM PDT reply actions

thx.

ya…its impossible to know who’s fault it was w/out knowing the play. i personally wasnt a fan of the play call, because it seemed like murphy was the only possible target that couldve been thrown to on that play and because at the time it was first and ten, and we were running all over those SD pussies. just let the runners keep running!!

totally agree w/u about the defense. bottom line was the Chargers were stuck at the 10 and all the Raiders had to do was stop them, and we win. couldnt come through in the clutch, so we dont deserve the win. just cant wait till we play them in SD in november

Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up!!

by naq92 on Sep 18, 2009 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions

Raiders vs Chiefs

He made some throws that were dead on. Others, really bad throws. He lacks accuracy and everyone knows that. He has one of the strongest arms in the NFL. I think he trys to laser it in everytime. He needs to work on that as well. Not every throw needs to be 100 mph. He has decent pocket presence. Will he get better with more playing time and working more with the rookie WR’s? Yes, I think he’ll get better. Will it be immediate? No, it won’t. The only chance you guys have against us is using your run game. We will most likely be getting Flowers back this week which will be great for our secondary. Page loves playing the Raiders. Our secondary is dangerous. Our linebackers in coverage. Not so well. So middle routes to Miller scares me. If JaMarcus gets to aggressive on deep routes it will be a problem for you guys. I do believe you guys are playing a lot better this year. So are we, by a lot. Chargers are going down hill and well, the Broncos are a joke. This division is up for grabs. Good luck on Sunday guys.

by Chiefsfan85 on Sep 18, 2009 3:13 AM PDT reply actions