There were troubling issues with last year’s group, beyond blated salaries and cap numbers. Everyone knows about Wallace’s complaints about lack of targets and the group’s poor yards-after-catch metrics. But former Dolphins receiver Chris Chambers --- who spent two weeks as a Dolphins assistant coach during training camp--- noticed something else that bothered him. “The older guys, Mike and Brian, even though they played well at times, could have set a better example in that room, as far as learning and not joking around,” Chambers said. “Because if they start joking around, the rookies and second-year guys will start joking around. “Some days it could have been more serious to set a better example. The receiver coaches taught well, but the room needed to be tightened up a bit. Greg Jennings will help that. He will be way more professional and he played at a high level. He is going to show the [young receivers] so much. He’s almost like a third coach, a player/coach.” "I watch this kid [Parker] and he looks like Mark Clayton," Dolphins executive Nat Moore told the team's Finsiders web site. "He caught everything in his range, has an unbelievable skill set and catches the ball out front, has got good, soft hands, and runs good routes. His future is unlimited." http://miamiherald.typepad.com/spor...rom-sean-payton-evaluators-marlins-canes.html
It will be interesting to see if Parker & Tannehill will have chemistry. If so, I'll be interested in what the people who swore it wasn't necessary for Wallace have to say.
I think Kenny Stills is the best receiver on the roster, currently. You might see DeVante Parker claim that title at some point but have to let him actually prove it.
I think Greg Jennings is the best WR on the roster. He's going to contribute in the short, intermediate, and deep passing attack. Kenny Stills may be the better athlete overall, and at 22 Stills the higher ceiling at this stage of his career, but I trust Greg Jennings more than anyone else on the roster in terms of maximizing his skill set within the offense. There's zero doubt in my mind that he's going to catch at least 60 balls for 800-1000 yards, 5-7 TD's. I wouldn't be shocked if he put up Brian Hartline like numbers (circa 2012/13) with 1000 yards. Unlike Brian Hartline, Greg Jennings (before signing with Minnesota) was/is a very strong YAC receiver, which is great for Tannehill and our offense. Maybe it's because I'm a glass half empty kind of fan, but Greg Jenning's floor is significantly higher than anyone else's on the WR corps. And that gives me confidence in him. He's not Calvin Johnson, Dez Bryant, D. Thomas, etc... and he never will be. What he is, is an all around solid WR, who is dependable producer with some big play ability. I feel good about this receiving corps, for the first time in a long, long time. We've got a lot of quality 1-5, IMO. I too don't want to sleep on Parker, as he could very well be the ODB/Keenan Allen of this rookie class, especially with his size, ball skills, and hands. Not to mention he's a perfect fit for this offense.
I thought players couldn't work extra besides the set dates (minicamp, OTA's, and training camp), are they doing this on their own time?
Consider: Last season, of the 14 passes thrown to Stills that traveled at least 20 yards in the air, 71.4 percent were deemed catchable by Pro Football Focus. Conversely, of the 24 deep passes thrown by Tannehill to Wallace, only 29.2 percent were catchable.
I was thinking about this the other day... you think it's fair to say Stills is equal to a 1st round pick right now? In other words, if he had come out last draft, factoring in his NFL experience, would he have been considered a first round pick?
Looks like they just add "catches" and "drops" to give us the total number of "catchable balls": https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/01/21/signature-stats-drop-rate-wide-receivers/ It's not perfect, but I see no other simple method of getting at catchable, unless you are going to go through tape of every play and measure the distance of the ball to the receiver, etc.. I think the stat is fine (for a simple stat), given that we're talking football stats here.
Simplistically yes. It doesn't take into account how much a receiver had to adjust to the ball to be able to make a play on it, which would cause the receiver's rating to go up and the QB's to go down, in their player performance rating system. I watched some clips of Stills last year at New Orleans, and he had to make adjustments to make a LOT of catches. The same adjustments I found myself WISHING Wallace could make last year. Stills wasn't underthrown hardly at all...primarily because he adjusted to the underthrows well, making them "catchable" balls instead of underthrows.
Yeah, I think you're right you can make that argument when specifically comparing Wallace to Stills, though without a better stat it's hard to know how strong the bias is. I was looking more at whether PFF's criteria for catchable is decent for WR's in general.
I really do like this unit I see no reason with this group plus our TE group why Tannehill's state line for 2015 couldn't look like: 68% completion, 4,400 yards, 32 TD's and a 97 QB rating. I think he will always have his share of mistakes and interceptions but as long as were looking at 15 or fewer I feel fine with that. From an offense perspective. I'd like to see around 375 total yards a game and close to 27 pt avg. Biggest ? would be the infamous OL are they going to be up to snuff?
