The Clay/Keller tandem intrigues the Dolphins because both have a knack for finding seams in the middle of the defense. “We talk all the time about the weapon we can be together,” Clay said. “I want to say we can be the top tight end duo in the league. I’ve learned a tremendous amount from him.” Keller said Clay’s value is not only his positional versatility, but also that “he does everything well. He can block well. If you put a safety or linebacker on him, you can take advantage of that matchup.” Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/13/3558853_p2/miami-dolphins-expect-big-things.html#storylink=cpy
They will be looking for a personnel package that they can run multiple formations out of for hurry-up purposes, and Charles Clay is a guy they are going to eye for that. I think we've seen a little bit more of that this preseason than we did last year, and there's a lot of stuff they can leverage there.
Keller and Sims can be a heck of a TE combo imo. If Egnew and Clay keep progressing we'll have a lot of versatility with that group. I still wish that we drafted at least one WR or picked up Da'Rick Rogers in FA, he's supposedly doing very well in Buffalo.
Thomas has been a disappointment since his promising rookie start. He led all rookie RBs until his injury, his rookie season, and hasn't done anything since. 1 TD and 5 fumbles. Clay has 5 TDs over 2 seasons, which is ok for a backup/part time player, but you still want more.
Yeah that would make sense. You put him in the back field one play, run no huddle and split him out one the next play. I'm still not convinced about his consistency though
hopefully the management is smart enough to resign Keller (assuming he stays relatively healthy this season). Keller and Sims is our future. Like you said, Clay adds that versatility element as more of a hybrid player. Even though Egnew has shown improvement in preseason, I don't see him with this team next season. I don't see much of a dropoff from Egnew to Sims, and IMO the ceiling is MUCH higher with Sims.
I like Sims quite a bit and he has the makings of a pretty darned good all around TE, certainly better than Egnew was during his rookie year. Between Sims and Egnew I'd take Sims, but for all the troubles and bad press that he's endured, Egnew has all the makings of a big, athletic seam buster. He's fast, big and one heck of an athlete- you have to give him that. That's not to say that he won't be working at Pizza Hut with Eddie Blake one day, but he is talented, a better deep/middle threat than Sims. Sims can be very good imo, but I doubt that he'll ever have that extra gear to make him a true weapon. He's Anthony Fasano 2.0, and combined with Dustin Keller I'm ok with that.
The part that stuck out of that article was where Barry Jackson said that Daniel Thomas has converted "well under half" of his short yardage runs into 1st downs or touchdowns. I have always wondered what that stat was for him. I don't know where to find it. The following chart is old (2008), but it charts 3rd down conversion percentages by distance when running or passing: As you can judge from the image, the success rate of converting on 3rd & 1 or 3rd & 2 by running the football is somewhere between 65 and 70 percent. When Barry Jackson says that Daniel Thomas' conversion rate has been "well under half" I am assuming he means ~40 percent.
So you only have a slightly better chance of throwing it on 3rd and 10 than running a draw? Maybe Henning really was a genius?
That's correct, though you should keep in mind that the graph does not show you the percentage tendencies that feed into that equilibrium. The market should find an equilibrium of tendency to where the pass is just as effective as the run and vice versa in every single one of these measures. The fact that running on 3rd & 1 thru 4 yards to go is so much more successful than passing shows that the market (was, as of 2008) irrationally passing the ball too much on those downs. If they start to run more, then either run success percentages will go down or pass success percentages will go up (or both) and the conversion percentages should meet. The fact that running on 3rd & 10 is just as successful as passing on 3rd & 10 just indicates that NFL offenses have hit the golden ratio for tendency to pass versus run on that down. I think Dan Henning was indeed trying to take advantage of the fact that nobody expects a run on this down.
Is this practical at all for coaches? Awful tough to choose to run on 3rd and 4. Or if you are feeling shaky about your line in short yardage
I'm pretty excited for Charles Clay in year 4. He flashed as a rookie, disappointed early as a sophomore but showed some big play potential. I'm really hoping he takes the leap year and becomes the weapon he has shown himself capable of being.
I imagine they could get the (relatively) big year out of Charles Clay that they're looking for. Never got the impression he was the sharpest knife in the drawer so struggling a little bit for 1H2012 was not that surprising as they felt him out and he felt them out. This will be his second season with the staff and you get the feeling that there's a little bit better definition for the staff's vision for what he does with them, especially if they (as I think will happen) don't end up rostering Lane or Rodriguez. He's also bound to have a better understanding of the offense. I think it's a lot like they said in talking about his versatility. When they line up with he and Dustin Keller, they can run out of the classic I Formation but they can also go into a 3- or 4-WR look while keeping a back in the backfield to protect the quarterback.
Agreed. It's not just the percentage that matters but the relative number of run v pass plays. Obviously, 3rd and 10 is a tough down to convert and most of the time teams pass. Which makes running that much more effective - but only if done rarely. It doesn't mean run and pass are equal. It's not as though teams are running/passing 50/50 on 3rd and 10. if that were the case, you'd find the pass conversion percentage much higher than the run conversion. Back to Thomas - that his percentage of success is significantly lower than the league average is a big negative. I am glad he is working hard but I don't see him as a great power back. I think Gray is a better option on 3rd and short b/c a) he's got that bowling ball power at 5'9 with a lower center of gravity; and b) he's harder to hit and track than Thomas is b/c of his short stature. Reminds me of Emmit Smith and MJD in those short yardage situations. They can sometimes sneak under players. If Gray continues to improve his running instincts in those situations (and I think it's just a matter of reps and he will) - he is the better option than Thomas. Other than Jeff Ireland having drafted the kid in round 3 of the draft, and that he is the most experienced back, I don't see the excitement over this player.
Sort of true, but not entirely. Another major factor to consider is the relative merits of giving up a big play vs. surrendering the first down. It could be that on 3rd and short defenses will only go so far to try and stop a rushing 1st down because they cannot risk giving up the long pass. To exaggerate, they probably would not load 11 in the box at the opponents 20 even if the run conversion success rate were far higher than passing at that down and distance. Further, at very short distances like 3rd and inches, I could imagine that success rates could always be higher running vs. passing barring a complete sell-out against the run ( thus exposing the long pass ). This kind of supply and demand equilibrium analysis is valuable, but the bigger picture at work is not conversion rate but expected points scored ( and wins ultimately ).
Yeah, pick 62 of the 2nd round in 2011. We traded a 5th and 7th to the redskins to trade up to get him so as to give Sparano and Daboll the bruising back they wanted for their offense at that time...
I usually like all of our draft picks as I'm a homer, but after we drafted him and videos were posted of his college highlights I'm like, really? This guy looks terrible.
I'm pulling for Thomas. He's public enemy #1 it seems, would love to see him rise from his figurative ashes
He actually played pretty well at the start of his rookie season and was leading all the rookie running backs up until a hamstring injury. Unfortunately, he is a slow starter, and either has hamstring issues or concussions that limit him. Regardless, he wasn't drafted for the offense we're not running and appears to have a more limited role. That may change if he can ever get his act back together...
