What #1 CB? Just b/c he was our "top target" it didn't mean opposing coordinators had their top corner following him around all game. Sorry but he didn't garner #1 WR attention. You could probably pull out of a hat who would be covering him on any particular play.
Maybe you could put him in for 35-40...but higher than that you have to show you can be relied on to score big touchdowns that could be game changing. We've obviously lacked anyone on the team who could change a game on a consistent basis for years.
I know for sure Cromartie, Sherman, Rogers and McCourtey had Hartline as their primary cover. Do you have some evidence to support otherwise?
Whether Hartline commanded that defenses use their #1CB to cover him or not is somewhat irrelevant. It would be silly for defenses not to use their best CB to cover our best WR.
You realize vs the Jets (Cromartie) he caught just 41 yards each game, 17 vs Seattle (Sherman), and 34 vs San Fran (Rogers)? WADR I'm not sure how that qualifies as doing a nice job vs #1 corners. If those teams did in fact choose to put their #1 corners on him (and w/o safety help peering over the top I might add), then that just shows how easily neutralized he can be if teams decide to do so. 9 measly catches in 4 games, and in the Seattle game he was no where to be found when Tannehill rallied us for a huge 17 point 4th quarter win. I don't recall McCourtey being on Hartline. I could be wrong but wasn't he at safety?
fans tend to overrate some players on their team.. im sure if you went around the other teams messageboards with this same question, but instead of hartline put in their number 2 receiver, you'd end up with about 60 top 40 players... hartline isn't better than any of the guys on this list, and there are some who aren't on this list that are also better than him
No you're not wrong. McCourty was at FS both times we played them, Gregory was on the other side. Talib was the LCB in both games. INOW you're having a discussion with someone who doesn't watch or remember even the basics of what happens on the field. Unless he was talking about Jason McCourty from Tennessee. Oh never mind he didn't follow Hartline around, either. No one did, all year. Not a single DB. Game Rewind, people. Its your friend.
I think NFL.com literally just posted a list of the top 40 wide receivers by Chris Wesseling. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000210224/article/ranking-the-nfls-top-40-wide-receivers Probably has been brought up already. Mike Wallace was #16 and Brian Hartline of course was not on it.
Though he doesn't say it, I think a big part of that is injury and age related. He made it through the 2012 year alright but only played 447 snaps in 2011 and he's 32 years old. Not agreeing with him, just saying that's probably his thought process. I don't see any justification for Percy Harvin above him, at all. The only justification for Demaryius Thomas would be based on age and potential. Bebe is good and that combination of Peyton and Bebe has been deadly, but if Peyton Manning were throwing to Andre Johnson then that combination would be deadlier than Peyton to Bebe has been.
The real question is should Mike Wallace be #16 and then, as it pertains to this thread, should Hartline grace the list. I wouldn't have it in exactly the order they have it, but I do think Mike Wallace seems appropriate at #16. I also don't think Hartline deserves to be on the top 40 list, even though there are players on their top 40 list I don't agree with being there either. Danario Alexander, for example.
It's even sillier to assign arguments to people that they never made. Let me see if you agree with the argument that you're jumping in on. True or false, Hartline runs routes like a TE and the primary way he gets receptions is by using his massive 6'2" 200# body to make contested catches since he cannot get seperation. Also, true or false, His 20 yard catches were all result of busted coverage.
21 receptions is low volume. That's not at all good in the context. We're talking about Brian Hartline being over-exposed, so he should be compared to his peer group in terms of exposure. And among his peer group, guys who were on the field the most- He did quite well. That's what matters. I don't know why you are focusing on this 26% thing. The number is incredibly flexible and situation and using it as some sort of guideline for anything is silly. On the NFL average for passing attempts, Hartline's number of targets is 22%. It's 20% if you put him outside of the top 10. It's 17% on the most prolific passing offense last year. Adjust his targets down a small amount, or up, or change the passing attempts on the offense, or any number of things and it changes, and it's not substantively changing the argument.
he did not do quite well. He was 55th out of 57 receivers in YAC per reception with at least 200 YAC. Hartline had 263 YAC by the way, so 200 YAC is a perfect number to use as a cut off. There's no way to swing this as being "quite well". It's quite terrible. It matches up exactly to what we see on film b/c he falls down as a ball carrier when the wind shifts and gets tackled from behind in a dead sprit for the endzone.
16 is the highest I've seen Mike Wallace. I'd be happy with 8 TD's. That would at least get us out of the WR TD slump we've been in for over a decade. Brandon Marshall's performance last year got me thinking the team is cursed.
Calvin Johnson Larry Fitz AJ green Rhody white Dez Bryant Julio Jones Steve Smith Andre Johnson Reggie Wayne. Hakeem Nicks Victor Cruz Vincent Jackson. If you tell me I have next year to play, and their all healthy, I'm taking these receivers over Brandon.. He called out the position after winning some fake *** trophy..I thought Philbin did the right thing, i dont think that dude gives a sh@& about any curses.
I'm talking about YPC for some reason, ignore it. YAC as I said I don't really care about. It doesn't really matter how a guy is producing yardage as long as he is producing it, the yards-per and number of 20+ yard catches are otherwise good.
Your opinion is your opinion. But I'm not sure how you can ignore the fact that guys who can create YAC make the QB's job easier and the offense more efficient overall. RG3 made a killing on short/behind the LOS throws last year, New England's offense is also heavy on short throws, getting the ball into the hands of guys who can do damage after the catch. Completion percentages go up, INT percents go down, fewer sacks and hits on the QB, all while maintaining the same level or overall production? You can't tell me it doesn't matter.
Sure, it's a nice thing to have, and an offense needs to have it, but one individual player does not. If Hartline were hurting in terms of production, efficiency or he had a bad completion or INT % when thrown at him, that'd be something. He doesn't.
How are TDs not part of production? How is having 1 TD for 70+ catches not lacking efficiency? How is having just 263 YAC also not lacking efficiency? His 14ish ypc are only decent. Hartline either does things decent or poorly, especially as a number 1.
They are, and it's really the striking negative about Hartline that actually rings home I think. But at the end of the day it's blown grossly out of proportion, and he's hardly single-handedly hamstringing the offense like people want to pretend. YAC has nothing to do with efficiency. Hartline's 14.6 yards per catch is quite good for someone with his workload. He's 9th among guys with 75%+ of their teams offensive snaps.
Its not blown out of proportion, though. The whole point of the offense is to score TDs. Hartline/Bess have notoriously bad scoring numbers, regardless of the offense, qb or position. If Hartline and Bess are your Top 2 WRs than yes, they are absolutely hamstringing your offense. We aren't talking about low TDs like Marshall when he was here having only 9 in two years. We are talking historically bad. Hartline averages less 2 TDs a year, consistently. WADR, that makes no sense. The more yards per catch you have, the more efficient you are. YAC gives you more yards. I don't see how having a percentage of a teams snaps means anything in regards to this stat or about Hartline's worth.
I agree. Hartline is a nice piece of the puzzle. But he is not a complete receiver. He has some serious holes, but that doesn't make him a bad WR. If he is your #1 you are in trouble. Ideally you'd rather have 3-4 guys who can all smell the endzone.
9th among how many guys? 11? I know he's 11th among 13 receivers with at least 25% of his team's offensive targets. The only 2 with less are Brandon Marshall & Reggie Wayne, but those two routinely see bracketed coverage making the transition to runner quite difficult with defenders draped all over them. Plus Marshall & Wayne combined to average an insane 112 catches (compared to Hartline's 74), meaning they didn't have the advantage of 1 huge YAC play significantly influencing their YAC per catch the way Hartline did with 47 YAC on the 80 yard busted coverage TD. In fact I don't ever recall seeing Marshall & Wayne running wide open like that. Without those free 47 YAC, Hartline's YAC per catch was 2.96 which would place him 13th out of 13 receivers with at least 25% targets and 57th out of 57 receivers with at least 200 YAC.
I think a WR who can't score TDs or create YAC needs to have an astronomically high completion % and astronomically low INT%, plus be a hellacious blocker on the edge to compensate. Same as a DB who can't tackle or create INTs, he better be shutting his WR down like Revis style. Or a DE who cant get any pressure on the QB better be playing the run like a friggin madman and racking up TFLs like candy on Christmas. Obviously the staff feels good about him b/c they re-signed him so I'll admit I'm probably too harsh in my critique. We'll see what happens now that he's back to being a complimentary receiver.
His YPC is inflated b/c of one busted coverage 80 yard play. His YPC on the other 73 receptions was 13.7 which would be tied for 43rd with at least 20 receptions, which is nothing special when factoring in 1 TD and not being a top 30 receiver in moving the chains. What's being ignored when using YPC as a barometer for Hartline's success is his one dimensionalism as a receiver. Because he's not a RAC guy he doesn't contribute in the short passing game the way a large amount of NFL receivers do, and as we all know, a shorter completion inherently results in a lower gain even though it's a benefit to the offense. Like GM already noted, short passes increase efficiency, reduce potential for INT, gets the ball out of the QB's hand quicker to limit potential sacks and lost yardage, and provides your playmakers an easy opportunity to utilize their skill set as a runner. Hartline's higher YPC is a direct result of not being a contributor in this important aspect of the passing game, so it shouldn't be viewed as a positive. It's not like his downfield ability (or 10+ yard receptions) are superior to the rest of the league b/c they're not; it's the fact that his contribution to the short passing game is inferior to the rest of the league which allows his YPC to deceptively remain high. If anything I view it as a negative b/c if Hartline possessed an ounce of playmaking ability he'd actually have a lower YPC. He'd have more catches, a higher catch rate, more yards, and more scores as well. I've illustrated this illusion numerous times but I'll do it once more in case you missed it. I'll use Michael Crabtree as a comparison this time. Let's start out with their overall stats. [TABLE="class: grid, width: 700"] [TR] [TD="align: center"][/TD] [TD="align: center"]catches[/TD] [TD="align: center"]yards[/TD] [TD="align: center"]YPC[/TD] [TD="align: center"]YPT[/TD] [TD="align: center"]Catch%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1st Down[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1st % per target[/TD] [TD="align: center"]TD[/TD] [TD="align: center"]TD% per target[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Crabtree[/TD] [TD="align: center"]85[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1105[/TD] [TD="align: center"]13.0[/TD] [TD="align: center"]8.8[/TD] [TD="align: center"]67.5%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]57[/TD] [TD="align: center"]48.7%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]9[/TD] [TD="align: center"]7.1%[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Hartline[/TD] [TD="align: center"]74[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1083[/TD] [TD="align: center"]14.6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]8.5[/TD] [TD="align: center"]57.8%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]48[/TD] [TD="align: center"]37.8%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1[/TD] [TD="align: center"]0.8%[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] As you can see above, Hartline's higher YPC is higher but that doesn't translate to greater production as he's clearly inferior in every category. If Hartline were an asset in the short passing game the way Crabtree is he'd see more easy, high-percentage receptions which would drop his YPC despite improving both his overall production and our offense's. Things change when broken down situationally. Throws Behind the LOS and up to 10 yards [TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"] [TR] [TD="align: center"][/TD] [TD="align: center"]catches[/TD] [TD="align: center"]yards[/TD] [TD="align: center"]YPC[/TD] [TD="align: center"]TD[/TD] [TD="align: center"]Long[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Crabtree[/TD] [TD="align: center"]68[/TD] [TD="align: center"]736[/TD] [TD="align: center"]10.8[/TD] [TD="align: center"]5[/TD] [TD="align: center"]38[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Hartline[/TD] [TD="align: center"]44[/TD] [TD="align: center"]441[/TD] [TD="align: center"]10.0[/TD] [TD="align: center"]0[/TD] [TD="align: center"]17[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Throws of 11+ yards [TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"] [TR] [TD="align: center"][/TD] [TD="align: center"]catches[/TD] [TD="align: center"]yards[/TD] [TD="align: center"]YPC[/TD] [TD="align: center"]20+[/TD] [TD="align: center"]TD[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Crabtree[/TD] [TD="align: center"]16[/TD] [TD="align: center"]363[/TD] [TD="align: center"]22.7[/TD] [TD="align: center"]15[/TD] [TD="align: center"]4[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Hartline[/TD] [TD="align: center"]30[/TD] [TD="align: center"]642[/TD] [TD="align: center"]21.4[/TD] [TD="align: center"]14[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Game Log [TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"] [TR] [TD="align: center"][/TD] [TD="align: center"]Games of 50 or less yards[/TD] [TD="align: center"] under 20 yards[/TD] [TD="align: center"]70+[/TD] [TD="align: center"]90+[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Crabtree[/TD] [TD="align: center"]6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1[/TD] [TD="align: center"]8[/TD] [TD="align: center"]5[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Hartline[/TD] [TD="align: center"]8[/TD] [TD="align: center"]3[/TD] [TD="align: center"]6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]3[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] As you can see, Crabtree is a more consistent and productive receiver in EVERY category but b/c he contributes significantly more in the 10 yards and under range he effectively sees a lower YPC despite posting a higher YPC in both categories. Now, if you're gonna tell me it's better to not contribute heavily in one aspect of the passing game so that the receiver can maintain a higher overall YPC, then I'm gonna call BS with all due respect. Here's another example of the YPC illusion. I'll use Dez Bryant this time. [TABLE="class: grid, width: 700"] [TR] [TD="align: center"][/TD] [TD="align: center"]catches[/TD] [TD="align: center"]yards[/TD] [TD="align: center"]YPC[/TD] [TD="align: center"]YPT[/TD] [TD="align: center"]Catch%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1st Down[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1st % per target[/TD] [TD="align: center"]TD[/TD] [TD="align: center"]TD% per target[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Dez[/TD] [TD="align: center"]92[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1383[/TD] [TD="align: center"]15.0[/TD] [TD="align: center"]10.0[/TD] [TD="align: center"]66.7%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]54[/TD] [TD="align: center"]42.9%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]12[/TD] [TD="align: center"]8.7%[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Hartline[/TD] [TD="align: center"]74[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1083[/TD] [TD="align: center"]14.6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]8.5[/TD] [TD="align: center"]57.8%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]48[/TD] [TD="align: center"]37.8%[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1[/TD] [TD="align: center"]0.8%[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] On the surface it looks like Dez & Brian have similar YPC's making you think they're about equal as downfield receivers...... until you look at it situationally. Throws of 11+ yards [TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"] [TR] [TD="align: center"][/TD] [TD="align: center"]catches[/TD] [TD="align: center"]yards[/TD] [TD="align: center"]YPC[/TD] [TD="align: center"]20+[/TD] [TD="align: center"]TD[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Dez[/TD] [TD="align: center"]32[/TD] [TD="align: center"]856[/TD] [TD="align: center"]26.6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]19[/TD] [TD="align: center"]7[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: center"]Hartline[/TD] [TD="align: center"]30[/TD] [TD="align: center"]642[/TD] [TD="align: center"]21.4[/TD] [TD="align: center"]14[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] See how that works? The YPC aren't similar when you actually break it down. What initially looked like a 0.4 yard discrepancy is actually 5.2 yards when the short passing game is omitted. What allows Hartline's overall YPC to look similar to Dez's is the fact Dez caught 6 more passes behind the LOS and 10 more passes 10 yards and under.
.... plus be an outstanding chain mover and be consistent & reliable across the entire season. Hartline was neither. Half his games featured 50 or less yards, and only 4 were 80+. That's pretty darn inconsistent. I already noted his pedestrian 52nd rank in 1st Down % (with at least 20 receptions). Not to mention he was a minimal contributor in our 7 wins, averaging 3.7 catches, 45 yards, 12.2 YPC, and 0 TD. So please tell me, what's all the fuss over a receiver who isn't a playmaker, doesn't score, isn't great at 1st downs, is downright terrible at YAC, didn't contribute much to our wins, picked up 23% of his yards in one game, and was mediocre at best during the final 12 games (49 catches, 628 yards, 12.8 YPC, 7.8 YPA, 0 TD)..... but of course Hartline fans will try to argue his 253 yard game and 455 yards over the first 4 games somehow contribute to the final 12 games. lol. What Hartline is is a great possession receiver on 1st down (50% of his yards). That's the extent of it. But even that's limited to the first half of the field b/c inside opponent territory he had a disappointing 24 catches for 287 yards and 11.96 avg, with only 1 catch coming inside the redzone. In fact the lone RZ catch was a 17 yarder on 3rd & Goal where he was given the underneath completion and was easily stopped short of the goal line.
The whole point of the offense is scoring touchdowns, but every aspect in your game is not focused around red zone ability. It's for specialists as much as anyone. I don't know how it doesn't make sense. Yardage is yardage regardless of how it is achieved. The fundamental argument is Hartline was over-used, comparison to guys in his peer group makes perfect sense. Especially from the standpoint of statistics that decrease with workload frequently, like YPC.
26 guys played at least 75% of their offensive snaps, and Hartline was 9th among them. Ahead of Andre Johnson, AJ Green, Brandon Marshall, Reggie Wayne, Victor Cruz, Larry Fitzgerald. You're not applying appropriately rigorous methodology if you're taking Brian Hartline's play out on account for busted coverage and not looking for the same among his peer group. Likewise, a similar burden would fall on you to go through "garbage" time plays as well. Otherwise, what you're doing can be done to similar effect with pretty much any player you'd want.
You can do that with a lot of receivers, and I'm not sure how it's really valuable. You're as much getting into the style of offense that the receiver plays in and their role in it than they are their comparative merits. I don't think Hartline is as good as Dez Bryant, but I'm not sure what your point is in regards to Michael Crabtree. He's much less productive down the field than Hartline is, but better in the short area and has maintained a realtively close yards per catch. So what, exactly? I'm not sure what is illusionary about that. Also, did you check to see how valid all Michael Crabtree's plays are, by the standards of Hartline's 80 yard play?
So basically what you're saying is Ireland was foolish to give Hartline that contract? We finally agree!
Disgustipate: Are you saying that Hartline should be on that top 40 list and if so, where would you put him?
I don't agree with that. Yardage that's achieved inconsistently isn't equal to yardage that's achieved consistently IMO. This isn't bowling where each frame is tallied for one final score. If you rack up 253 yards in a game, one you lose no less, those are 253 dead yards that don't carry over to the remainder of the season. You cant use that one game to say, "Well, Hartline's final 12 games really weren't that bad because he had that 253 yard game vs Zona the week prior". Each and every one of those games are separate from what happened in weeks 1 through 4, and sadly those final 12 games accounted for a disappointing 58% of his total yardage. If you extrapolates his final 12 games out to a full season you get: 65 catches, 837 yards, 12.8 YPC, 7.8 YPA, 0 TD. Would you consider this maximizing 26% of an offense's passing targets? A healthy Mario Manningham saw a higher level of production with less than 18% of the targets and with 14 more TDs to boot.
I'd put him in the low to mid 30's on that list of names, where I'd insert him on that list I have no idea, it's real ****ed up.
It was overpaying but we still needed him considering w/o him we would've literally had Binns & Matthews as our starting receivers with Bess on the to-be-traded list. He's still great on 1st down and over the first 60 yards of the field and should compliment what we brought in nicely.
I wouldn't take Reggie Wayne or Steve Smith over Marshall. Marshall is probably in the top 3 of Fantasy WR's. As for the Hartline discussion, I believe his routes, a product of Mike Sherman's offense and Tannehill's overthrows or under throws were a hamper on Hartline's TD's last year. Hartline needs to watch tape of Welker and his routes. The way Hartline turns to catch the ball rather than catch it over his shoulder, and his first step after a reception, along with the Tannehill overthrows or throws he's had to wait on, impacted Hartline's TD catches last year. His career was hurt by Henne, which we saw what B Mash did after he left. I think Hartline would improve by watching Welker film.
