The Jeff Ireland Discussion Thread

The theory isn't totally illogical or implausible, but my guess is that when you're talking about two receivers who are playing at a very high level everywhere else on the field, whatever differences in production they may show when the field is compressed, assuming they are significantly different from the league norm for receivers in that area (which itself is a big assumption), are going to be due to how the guy throwing them the ball functions in that area.

That's the far more plausible explanation IMO, and I suspect if the correct data were gathered, they would bear that out.

 

should have taken matt ryan over jake long. /thread

 

I said inside the the 40, scoring range. Why do you keep using a narrow range of 5 games as a means of comparison?

Since 2009, Jackson & Williams have 21 redzone TDs compared to Bess & Hartline's 14, and that's in almost 2 less combined seasons of work considering Williams was in college in '09 and Jackson missed most of 2010.

To boot, those TDs since '09 don't include the scoring differential outside the redzone, which jumps to 15 verse 2, and all but 3 of those TDs came in opponent territory. Unfortunately ESPN only breaks down the stats to inside the 50 and redzone, so I can't show any inside 40 stuff, but regardless, inside opponent territory Jackson & Williams have scored 33 TDs verse Bess & Hartline's 15, and they did it in roughly 2 less years combined.

 

Well the guy throwing them the ball is going to have the same affect on their production inside the RZ as much as he would outside the RZ. I don't think there is a special RZ ability for QBs either.

 

You do realize you are asking him to prove a negative by asking him to provide you with evidence of that he claims does not exist? It would make more sense for you to provide evidence to refute his claim. Your highlight clip IMO does not do that. It only shows that Bess has an elusive quality to his game. It does not show him breaking tackles or taking the ball away from a defender while they are both in a dogfight. It does not show him getting many TDs either which I believe is the point Phinsational has been making to you. They are both decent recievers but they do not produce many points for the team.

 

Your opinion. /continue

 

The data exists. It consists of the red zone performance of starting wide receivers in the NFL. That data hasn't been collected, but it's said that our receivers are "substandard." How do we know they're substandard if we don't know the standard?

You know the standard only by collecting the data and establishing it. Only then can you say who is "substandard."

I'm not saying these guys are standard, substandard, or above-standard. I'm saying we don't know what they are. Phinsational is saying they're substandard, so the onus is on him to establish the standard and show they're below it.

 

And I don't think so either, but I do think it's possible that QBs with very little experience play worse in the red zone than they do elsewhere, due to the compression of the field and the density of defenders in that area. The "tighter windows" they talk about when comparing college to the NFL are even tighter in the red zone.

 

In addition to that, you need to determine whether the RZ performance is actually representative of ability, or just a random subset of their overall performance. A t-test would give you the level of randomness occurring. The major problem though is how you measure RZ performance? You can't use yardage, because passes thrown into the endzone are truncated. Efficiency can't be used because it inherently penalizes the closer you get to the end zone. The best bet for WRs would likely be using their catch-rate.

 

You mean catches per target?

 

Yes.

 

High yards per target doesn't correlate to anything by itself, and you haven't attempted to show it doesn't. No one has yet to show that Hartline's higher yards per target is due to having more receptions downfield, having a greater success rate on those receptions, and with a greater YPT (or even yards/catch) than most of the league, and that's not factoring in how often he's bracketed compared to the NFL's top 20 or so receivers.

Does Hartline's yards per target mean you can target him as often as Marshall, do so facing the coverage Marshall sees, and expect the same results & lofty yards-per-target? If a high yards-per-target equates to being a scoring threat then why does Hartline have only 6 career TDs despite his 15.8 avg, where as Bess and his dinky 10.7 avg have 11 TDs? I'm sorry but yards-per-target doesn't make you a scoring threat.

Use your eyes. That's all is needed.
A few things:
1. I see what you're trying to do here by skirting the topic and essentially reducing the situational aspect of the game down to nothingness. It's that eloquent, lawyerly knack of yours.
2. Of course Plaxico Burress will have the same ability over the rest of the field that he does in the endzone, but that doesn't mean he'll be equally successful across the field, because the dynamics/situational aspect of the game changes, which changes his value at different points on the field, and that's what I'm debating. For instance, how often do offenses throw a 10-12 yard fade/jump ball (into tight coverage to boot) over the first 60 yards of the field?... and on 1st down to boot?
3. With the field compressed to 15 yards, how often will we witness Hartline running a vertical on a double move or a 15 yard hitch/out?
4. Outside the redzone, how often does a corner [w/o safety help] have an advantage of the back of the endzone acting as a second DB?
5. How often is a receiver needed to fight for an extra inch or foot on 1st or 2nd down when the offense isn't near the goal line? Do you hear announcers saying, "Oh no, Hartline caught a 7 yard pass on 2nd down but came up short of the 44!"... or "Hartline's inability to pick up 8 yards instead of 7 has put this offense is a tough 3rd & 1 predicament"? yard line and has put a lot of pressure on his offense to convert a long 3rd & 1"? Outside of 3rd or 4th and short (which usually goes to a running back) or being backed up on your own goal line is there anywhere else on the field where inches and feet matter nearly as much as they do in the redzone, especially near the goal line.

Of course I agree with what you're saying b/c if it's 3rd & 5 at the 50 and Hartline catches a quick pass, he has the same chance of beating the defender for those 5 yards as he does if it's 3rd & goal from the 5, which is little to none.

Of course, but by the way you and others are talking, our resources are just fine with Hart & Bess as our top 2 targets.

they're more scoring & turnover margin efficient despite, so they are accomplishing more than prior to drafting him.... and if they win a playoff game, they'll accomplish even more, especially if they actually score in the playoff game. Of course that's not all b/c of Julio Jones, but to say his presence on the field doesn't greatly help their offense's success would be silly.

 

But what you're illustrating here is why ALL TEAMS would theoretically have decreased production from their wide receivers in the red zone, whereas your point is that Hartline and Bess are significantly worse than the league norm among receivers in the red zone, "substandard" as you called it.

 

......which is why the receiver needs more playmaking ability than Hartline has so that those catches inside the redzone can get you closer or into the endzone since there's an absolute specific distance you're trying to meet.


Let me ask you (and Shouright) this.
If you need 7 yards, how many receivers around the league would you prefer to place the ball directly in their hands and say "Now go get me those 7 yards" rather than Hartline?

 

I never said ALL TEAMS' receiver production drops off to near nothingness and causes their offense to become 1 dimensional in the process b/c of it. There's a difference between little to no production verse slightly decreased production when an offense is facing a shorter field and with the back of the endzone acting as a 12 defensive man. It's like you're trying to argue, during an age where rules favor the passing game (namely the receiver), that no other team in the league has receivers scoring touchdowns. Things getting tougher in the redzone isn't a reason to kick some pebbles and just say, "Ahh screw it!". It's a reason to say, "Let's get someone in here who can produce despite greater adversity".

 

Yards per target correlates with yards per pass attempt for the team. Yards per pass attempt correlates with winning very highly. Its also extremely predictive in nature, more so than scoring.

Hartline has been targeted as much as Marshall this season, with a higher YPT, so I don't believe it to be an issue.

My eyes tell me the Earth is flat. Surely they are being deceived.

Why don't they? How is Burress more likely to catch a 10 yard jump ball inside the 40 as opposed to outside the 40? I'd be willing to bet the probability only varies as a function of randomness.

Who knows, thats at the mercy of the playcaller. What we do know is that Brian Hartline's ability resulting in 9.7 YPT will still remain with him regardless of where on the field he is. Whether it be agility, intelligence, technique, etc.

This is not exclusive to Brian Hartline.

There is a very slight increase in value of yards once you get inside the 10 yard line. Otherwise, the yards are of equal value. Here is an good chart with expected points by field position:

Considering he averages 9.7 yards every time the ball is thrown toward him, I don't think the math is on your side.

Its impossible to say what our resources should be allocated to when we do not know what is available.

 

Do you know what the league norm is in that regard? How much does production by wide receivers decrease on average when teams enter the red zone?

 

Right, and that receiver's "playmaking ability" would manifest itself outside the redzone as much as it would inside the redzone.

Whoever has the highest statistical probability of gaining 7 yards on a pass play. It is that simple.

Regardless, I'm not sure how you went from labeling Hartline a "possession" receiver, but now are questioning how he would perform gaining 7 yards.

 

how? Ross knows the fan base hates Ireland, he sees all the empty seats, he even said he expects this team to make the playoffs, so i don't see how he'll be okay with a 4th straight losing season under Ireland's watch.

 

Again, I never said he's a problem when it comes to moving the ball over the first 80 yards of the field. How has his yards per attempt helped the offense's success during his stay? There's not a correlation there whatsoever.
Jesse Holley averages 24.1 yards-per-target. We should probably go after him then, no? Why isn't he an All Pro, starting where ever he wants, and racking up 1200 yards and 10+ TDs?

That's 5 games. And of course Hartline will be targeted more considering there's no other receiver to target outside of Bess. Not to mention we run an uptempo offense. You do the math: combine 2 receivers, the 4th most plays run from scrimmage, plus rarely to never seeing bracketed coverage, and tell me how many guys will be targeted more.

We've run 27 more plays than Chicago; Marshall sees twice the coverage Hartline sees, and he has 3 other receivers the ball can be spread around to, but per SI.com he's still been targeted 3 more times than Hartline.

There's a difference between targeting Hartline 53 times b/c you want to and 53 times b/c you have to.
BTW, how many points/game is Chicago scoring amongst Marshall's 56 targets? 29.8 (3rd in NFL)? That's nearly 10 more points/game than Miami with Hartline's 53 target "contribution".

apparently so.

Burress is more likely to catch a 10 yard jump ball inside the 40 (namely the redzone) b/c an offense is more likely to throw a 10 yard jump ball in the redzone than during the first 80 yards. Honestly, how often do we see any team throw a 10 yard jump ball in their own territory? Again, it's about the situational aspect of the game.

Cmon, like any playcaller, when our own 5 yard line, will moronically ask Hartline to run a double move vertical 10 rows into the stands behind the endzone..... or ask him to run a 15 yard out route or hitch knowing that 15 yards puts him out of bounds and penalized for being the first man to touch the ball. What makes Hartline successful up until scoring range and the redzone/goalline doesn't necessarily translate to making him successful after it.

9.7 YPT will only remain with him as long as situational aspects of the game aren't being isolated, as he doesn't average 9.7 ypt inside our opponents' 40.

I was just showing how around the goal line and the rest of the field aren't necessarily the same. Plus I was showing that when a corner has the back of the endzone acting as an extra defender (which is kinda like bracketed coverage), Hartline isn't nearly as productive, and that's essentially what great receivers see all the time when bracketed high & low by corner and safety, yet those receivers will still produce, or at least not see as drastic of a dip in production compared to when Hartline is at a disadvantage. Even with Hart's 253 previous week's performance, Cincy still didn't stick a safety over the top of him, and IIRC much of it was bump and run.

that's quite understandable, and thank you for the chart. but I'm not as worried about overall yards inside the 10 as I am the ability of the player (receiver in this case) to score, especially when the success of the player's effort can be determined by a matter of inches or a few feet.

There's nothing about 9.7 that says you can put the ball in Hartline's hands and trust him to pick up 5 yards in the face of contact.

so you're agreeing if the resources are there, they should be allocated toward improving our current, top 2 targets, or at least making someone else the top target? Would you say the same thing about Pouncey if the resources are there?

 

Well, obviously their yards per catch/attempt will decrease b/c the field is shorter, but their touchdown production should increase dramatically in the redzone. I'm guessing the completion % will decrease slightly, but then again, inside the redzone it only takes one completion in the endzone to put 6 on the board.

 

I love when we grown men resort to graphs and charts to talk about football.

 

The playmaking ability won't necessarily manifest itself if it's not given the opportunity TO manifest considering playmaking opportunities [like short 12 yards fades & jump balls] are typically practiced over the first 80 yards of the field. You don't see coaches calling a 12 yard jump ball on 3rd & 10 at their own 30 yard line. Added, a receiver like Jordy Nelson running over a DB for that extra yard that results in a TD is no different in playmaking ability as if he gains that extra yard on the 40 yard line, only that extra yard for the TD carries a little more weight. Based on what you say, the opposite is true for Hartline, that b/c he goes down easily upon contact and for little to no gain after contact, then when you need him to fight for that extra yard at the goal line with a defender on him, he's most likely not going to get it.

Sorry, delay of game. Uncovering that amount of info would take too long.
This isn't a question meant for some no-watching football geek to simply provide a statistical answer to. {not referring to you, just saying, in general}
Based on watching the games themselves, please give a quick rundown of receivers you'd rather have with the ball in their hands trying to pick up 7 yards. Let's pretend technology is stuck back in the 70's and you're forced to rely on what your eyes and gut tell you.

Understandable, but I didn't say 7 yards including the route; I said 7 yards with the ball in his hands. Big difference.

 

So you don't actually know. For you this stops at the level of theory.

Do you realize that can be known? The data are there for the taking.

You've collected a lot of data and done a lot of work here, and I'm not shooting it down just for the sake of doing so. I'm shooting it down because you haven't ruled out alternative explanations, and when you're going against the grain like this, you ought to IMO.

By "against the grain" I mean that you're concluding that the play of two guys who are currently among the league leaders at their position right now is in some way suspect. Your data need to be much more solid to do that IMO.

There is an awful lot of room for alternative explanations when you're essentially saying, "hey, these two guys here -- you know, the ones who have demonstrated enough ability to be among the league leaders at their position -- are really badly deficient in some area of the field, and it's their fault."

You're asking me to essentially trust you and your theory in comparison to the generally very high level of ability two individuals have demonstrated in reality. I need more solid data if I'm going to do that.

 

And my point was that PPG is a team stat, it can be misleading no matter how many games have been played. CK says that a 1 yd or 5 yd drive can be "very" difficult. I wonder how many "very's" he would use to describe how difficult an 80 yd drive is.

 

Not sure if you're referring to me but that wasn't my argument at all. You mentioned that Thigpen's TD shouldn't count as offensive production, fair enough. But if the offense gets us into FG range and the kicker fails to execute, you say that's just too bad. It seems like a double standard to me. Likewise, if the offense commits 4 turnovers in 6 mins vs Houston which result in 24 points, those points count against the team's PPG allowed.

Fact is, the offense turned it over at the MIA 7 yd line, Houston got a FG. 2 mins later another TO at the MIA 46 = TD. 17 seconds later another TO at the MIA 26 = another TD. 15 seconds later a TO at the MIA 31 = another TD. Against Oakland there were no TOs allowed and Oakland scored 13 points. NY scored 23 points, including 7 on a pick 6 and the winning FG after a missed Carpenter FG, which is basically a turnover.

Against Arizona, the defense pitched a shutout for 30 mins. Then Carpenter misses a FG from the 41 yd line and Arizona drives for a TD immediately afterwards. AZ tied the game at 21 after Tannehill fumbled at midfield, and won the game after Tannehill threw a pick at midfield in OT. In five games our defense has allowed two TD's drives that were not aided by an offensive turnover or a missed FG, In addition, 2 more offensive turnovers, at the MIA 26 (vs NY) and MIA 4 (vs Arizona) resulted in 0 points b/c the defense was able to force a turnover. Overall, there have been 2 TD drives of over 60 yds allowed all season long, yet we're at 19.1 PPG allowed.

So not only is our offensive production not very good, the offense has a chronic problem with putting the opposing offense in scoring position. This brings me back to my point, PPG scored/allowed is a poor way of measuring offensive/defensive performance. I wasn't disagreeing with your statement, I was adding some context to it.

 

Why don't coaches call those plays in those situations? And to be quite honest I see fades all over the field, but thats not really the issue here.

Assuming that to be the case, the fact that Brian Hartline goes down easily upon contact is reflected in his overall numbers. Either way, Jordy Nelson has as many TDs as Brian Hartline this season.

I'm not sure why we would want to pretend that. Inherently it would lead to a less informed conclusion.

Either way, here are some WRs I'd put ahead of Hartline, based on their play this season:

81-C.Johnson
84-R.White
12-M.Colston
19-M.Austin
82-T.Smith
88-D.Thomas
17-M.Wallace
80-A.Johnson
80-M.Floyd
15-B.Marshall
87-R.Wayne
80-V.Cruz
11-L.Fitzgerald
18-A.Green
84-A.Brown
12-P.Harvin
11-J.Jones

Sure, but then that begs the question: why are you omitting running the route when assessing a WRs ability?

 

Because Jesse Holley's 24.1 YPT is not statistically significant due to an extremely low number of targets. The lower the number of targets, the less reliable the number is.

Which inherently leads to a more reliable assessment of his ability when looking at his numbers.

Chicago has a lower net-yards-per-attempt than Miami. Chicago has scored 12 offensive TDs to Miami's 11 offensive TDs. There really is no appreciable difference between offenses. Surely we should keep in mind that Chicago has scored 5 defensive TDs.

So his ability hasn't changed. Just the play that is called.

Except his abilities translate to a lot of other things than what you're claiming. Inherently, a double-move only works if a single-move is a threat.

Right, everyone's YPT goes down the closer to the goalline one gets. Thats indisputable. But again, if you are going to isolate certain situational aspects, you need to prove that isolating those aspects is relevant and significant. In this case you need to prove that the best WRs in the league become much better in the RZ, while the below average WRs become much worse.

The question isn't whether they are same, just whether the skills that make someone a great player for the first 80 yards are the same skills that make someone great for the last 20.

Certainly gaining 9.7 yds every time the QB throws the ball to the WR is indicative of what you can expect when you throw the ball to that WR. Whether there is contact or not isn't relevant. If Brian Hartline is able to gain 9.7 yds with 0 yards after contact, thats just as likely to occur inside the 20 as outside of it.

I don't think Pouncey can be improved upon.

Either way I'm not a fan of blindly allocating resources toward a certain position. It would depend on who the player is, the cost of the player, and the effect it would have on the players already on the roster. I don't think bringing in anyone who will require a high-number of targets is a good allocation of resources, considering what we have. But again, it all depends on whats available. Mike Wallace is a player that intrigues me, because he produces with a low number of targets, however I'm not sure of his cost.

 

Funny because true.

 

Let's keep it all in this thread.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/10/11/3044325/a-case-can-be-made-to-defend-miami.html

New article about defending Ireland.

This thread WILL reach over 100 pages by years end. Maybe longest number of pages ever for a thread, except ladies lounge, by the time Ireland finally retires.

 

"Coach Joe Philbin — a gamble in that he had never been a head coach — also looks increasingly like a solid hire. That’s Ireland, too."

I disagree somewhat since word was Ireland wanted, was it McCoy, from Denver I think? And supposedly Ross wanted Philbin.

To be fair, that may be a way of re-interpreting the facts. Perhaps Ireland decided on those two, and he and Ross were leaning different directions on which they preferred. If that were the case, Ireland gets partial credit. But if Philbin was low on Ireland's list and Ross pushed for and got I'm then it's not a credit to Ireland.

 

McCoy hasn't been a head coach either.

 

There was so much dumb contradictory **** that came out of the head coaching process that it's really impossible to make heads or tails out of it without filling in speculation on your own which can be biased.

 

Assuming the team plays at this compete level rest of year, If he manages to resolve the 2 biggest needs (safety and wr), along with resigning the kry guys he needs to, ill happily retract some of the crap i sent his way.