"" Mike Wallace BETTER stay in Miami, that's my guy." Guess who?

Taking away your teams best WR and the 3rd and 4th is bad buisness, no matter how you slice it.

 

Don't agree. There are plenty of scenarios where the team could be improved after removing those guys.

 

'

Cap space doesn't win games. Talent does. You're robbing Peter to pay Paul. You can clear the room by getting rid of underperforming players like Hartline & Gibson whose production is more easily replaced for less money.

And #1 WR isn't a hole. So, you think we should create a hole to fill another hole. Again, that's Ireland Game Management 101.

Fill DT, keep Wallace.

 

Makes more sense to keep your best WR and hope the QB finds him for big plays. You can still add a Crabtree and draft his replacement in 2016 by dumping the bad WRs.

 

That is great, but the team has a lot more considerations that just WR. They have major issues at DT, CB, LB, TE, and OL. They have secondary needs at a few other positions as well.

 

They also have a draft and FA $$ to address that.

 

Yes, and if you're using your cap space well you have more talent?

 

You'd be much better off having a receiver who can contribute such plays from routes of various lengths -- short, intermediate, and long. Wallace can contribute long, but he doesn't have the RAC ability other receivers do in the short and intermediate ranges, and that's where the team's current quarterback is most effective. And neither does Hartline.

This is a "turn the page" year at the receiver position. It's when you've come to realize the strengths of your quarterback of the future, and you remodel your receiving corps in accordance with them.

 

No. You were just given a scenario where you could keep Wallace and have room for Suh.

 

Great. Still doesn't address all the other issues facing the Dolphins? Suh essentially takes up Hartline and Gibson's salary.

 

Sure. But that's not what you're arguing. Your arguing to jettison talent we already have that's been better then anything else we've had for at least a decade to get a talent at another hole.

I'm saying get rid of Gibson & Hartline to make room for Suh. That makes more sense.

Look, if we can get a Demaryius Thomas caliber WR, then I'm in favor of getting rid of Wallace. If we can get a Mike Wallace caliber player for less then we're paying Mike Wallace, then get rid of him. But it makes no sense getting rid of Wallace for Suh without matching or bettering Wallace's production, when you get just get rid of Hartline & Gibson and still have Suh room.

 

The draft and lower price FAs cover the other issues.

Our biggest issues are oline depth, DT, #2 WR.

 

If we let go of Wallace, and just keep Jarvis, Hartline, Gibson and some rookie unproven receiver, you're going to see how mediocre our offense really is.

Can't let go of Wallace without a legit threat to replace him, he stretches the field for everyone else and with the exception of Jarvis and Clay, every other target is below average talent.

Letting go of Wallace is accepting that we're rebuilding and not retooling.

You want to improve the offense you remove Hartline, bring in a rookie receiver, add a guard or two, get Albert healthy. You want to destroy the offense, let go of Wallace and replace him with a rookie... you're going to see just how bad we can be when none of our targets can get any separation except Landry...

 

Who is currently doing that for the Patriots, who are in the Super Bowl, and who have a quarterback whose style and strengths are very similar to Tannehill's?

 

Gronkowski?

 

They have a lot more needs than that IMO. Right now only TE on the roster is Dion Sims. CB absolutely is a need. I'm not sure you can expect Louis Delmas to be ready at the start of the season.

And I agree 100% that they will have to use the draft and low-end FA to fill a lot of these holes. I'm not sure why WR is immune to that.

 

Its immune because we'd need to draft a new #1 WR high which detracts from other needs.

You're still ignoring that getting rid of Wallace creates a new big hole that can't easily be filled.

 

Gronkowski was targeted on passes 20+ yards in the air less than once per game in 2014, and he caught only five such passes all year. Coby Fleener and Zach Ertz, for example, were better performers in that area in 2014.

 

The question was who stretches the field for the Patriots. I gave a guess at a guy who might stretch the field on the seams for them.

 

It sounds like we may need to define just what "stretching the field" really is. My definition is a guy who's targeted frequently (as compared to the league norm) on passes 20+ yards in the air downfield.

The answer is that nobody really stretches the field for the Patriots. They don't have a receiver who stretches the field in the traditional sense, yet they win anyway, aided by short and intermediate range receivers who receive the ball from a very good and accurate quarterback.

It isn't absolutely necessary to replace Mike Wallace with a "field-stretcher" in the Dolphins' current offense, with Ryan Tannehill at quarterback. The team can do just fine with sure-handed, short and intermediate area receivers, who, like the ones on the Patriots, do something with the ball after they catch it.

 

I was only saying maybe. I agree that a guy targeted a handful of times over 20 yards isn't stretching the field.

 

I don't really care to play battleship. I don't care if you are creating holes. I have no problem with the WR unit being a hole going into 2015, granted you improve in other areas. In fact, the two teams in the SB this weekend both have pretty bad WR units. They make up for it in other areas.

 

LOL at Mike Wallace stretching the field. To his credit, Wallace has improved his game to fit the offense, but he isn't stretching the field. The Dolphins don't really have a downfield passing game.

 

New England's offense is far more disciplined and their execution per down is top of the league. Their receiving core as a whole is far better than ours and Gronkowski may not stretch the field but he draws two defensive players more than 60% of the time. One on one he's winning that match up the majority of the game.

And lol @ brady/tannehill's skills being similar... They couldnt be more different.. Two different type of quarterbacks, one thrives in the pocket while the other excels when he moves out of the pocket. Brady's arm talent is superior, not even close. tannehill is effective when he uses his legs but keep him in the pocket all game and we arent that good.

 

You say that as if Tannehill scrambles often, which couldn't be farther from the truth, just go ask DJ...
IMO, Tannehill's best games were ones where he actually stayed mostly in the pocket, and he can be compared to Brady, especially at this point in their respective careers. Brady had low YPA numbers, just like Tannehill, and was labeled a game manager at this point in his career.

 

For a guy eho can only contribute "long" he certainly had admirable numbers.

I get that some of you hate Mike Wallace for whatever reason, but you are grasping hard at straws on why we should jump the gun and cut him a year early.

 

Wallace was 75th in the league in 2014 in yards after the catch.

By contrast, the Patriots had four players in the top 33 in the league in that area:

Gronkowski, 11th
Edelman, 17th
Vereen, 24th
LaFell, 33rd

That's how you reach the Super Bowl without a "field-stretcher."

 

I think its actually quite the opposite. Miami's 'long' game is non-existent.

 

Difference in QB ability and offensive philosophy.

Ryan for the first time in his career displayed the desire and some improvement on these long plays at the end of the season. It's something to build on not throw out the window.

 

I don't think they should be building around the team's weaknesses. Ryan isn't a great deep ball passer. The offense isn't designed to spring a lot of deep balls. The OL isn't good enough to regularly call those plays. Invest in players that better fit the system IMO. Wish Miami went after Golden Tate last offseason, so there would be less consternation over Wallace. Randall Cobb would be an ideal fit for this offense.

 

Really? Ted Ginn?? Clyde Gates??/ they DID NOT do it.

 

only 5? that cannot be right.

 

Just another Wallce witchhunt is all 25.

Let's cut our best WR and create a huge hole, all in effort to free up 2.5 M in cap room. It's Madden agenda thinking.

It's ridiculous the amount of hate the guy gets to the point where people think it's a good idea to dump Wallace when his contract clearly was drawn up to make a decision about him in 2016. But hey let's eat 9.5 M in dead money just to save 2.5M.

They keep wanting to argue with me about this but the problem is they keep spotting me the facts.

 

This is inaccurate. Wallace is not costing the team $9.5M in dead money. He has offset language in his contract, so it will be $9.5M minus whatever he is paid elsewhere.

 

Not saying you are wrong but can I have a link to his contract? Even if that's the case and you save 6M it isn't worth getting rid of your best WR. Now if you do this and can finagle Cobb onto the roster?? Then I'm all ears, but the suggestion of cutting 3 of your top 4 WRs with a lame duck coaching staff and a QB who still needs to improve is insanity.

 

There really isn't a significant difference between the Dolphins' and the Patriots' offensive philosophies. Both passing games emphasize the short and intermediate ranges, and both QBs are more accurate than most in those areas. The difference is that Brady is more experienced (and perhaps better than Tannehill will ever be), and the Patriots' receivers have YAC ability, while the Dolphins' receivers, other than Landry, do not.

So why not remodel the receiving corps with players who have the speed to go long, but who can also catch short and intermediate range passes and get YAC with them? That way you cater to Tannehill's current strength, while also allowing room for him to develop down the field. It would be a mistake to consider that improvement down the field a foregone conclusion, however, and not prioritize the kinds of players who can make plays (YAC) with what he already does well.

 

I really really doubt any team will sign Suh for the combined values of Hartline and Gibson's salaries.