Greg Jennings vrs Mike Wallace..a year later.

Because a completed pass does not necessarily entail a successful play. A completed pass of 20+ will almost always entail a successful play.

 

There is a difference between less compelling, and completely useless. I'm sure I don't need to draw up a hypothetical to prove that.

 

Any time you're dealing with statistics, you can do just as much harm as good by looking at certain metrics. Catch rate is dangerous because it can mislead people. Really the only metric I'm comfortable looking at for WRs is yards-per-target.

 

Saying that my argument was similar to a catch rate argument is like saying that an Audi and a Radio Flyer are basically the same thing.

 

It's misleading because it's not nearly drilled down enough. It's not focused, and it's often poorly aimed. Especially in the example that was erected as a straw man earlier.

 

Exactly, which is why we need better passes of 20+ yards.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

Egypt is quite dry so rain there would be pretty useful I'd guess.

If the "catch rate" is about as useless in evaluating wide receivers as rainfall in Egypt, that would say to me that 'catch rate' is very useful.

 

I don't think thats a good path to take. Those passes are too low-probability IMO. A lot more efficient ways to try and make successful plays.

 

That's true, but not many teams have the luxury of a Mike Wallace. If we cant hit him deep? He is a wasted asset.

This is all irrelevant anyway, Lazor Tanny and Wallacebwill be doing big things in 2014.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

Agreed, which is why I was opposed to the signing. In order to hit Wallace deep, you need a lot of different things to happen. All those things coming together is pretty unlikely.

I have a hard time seeing a marked improvement in both the OL and the QB to that degree. Odds are that both will not hit the necessary mark, but there is a small chance I suppose.

 

The more time Tannehill has to throw, the better he is. If our new line can hold for literally 1/4 to a 1/2 a second more, we'll be in the playoffs.

 

Considering Hartline doesn't fit Lazor's vertical and YAC oriented offense as a starter and is too expensive to be a Jason Avant #3 possession receiver, I don't see why people are so oblivious to the fact Hickey is looking to replace him. Miami has its Jason Avant, and his name is Brandon Gibson [or Rishard Matthews]. What Miami doesn't have however is a second playmaker like Riley Cooper to allow a vertical/YAC oriented offense to maximize production b/c the last starting receiver in the NFL who comes to mind when you think of the NFL's best vertical and YAC offense is Brian Hartline. That'd be like featuring Reggie Bush in Seattle's smash-mouth run-oriented offense.

Wallace might be more expensive, but at least he fits the new offense, and it's not like Hartline's contract is peanuts. Therefore, if we're looking to save money and there's a choice between releasing the most expensive receiver who fits the offense and the second most expensive receiver who doesn't fit the new offense, it'd be pretty silly to keep the $30 million receiver whom you're gonna need to replace regardless. You get Hartline's replacement now, and if need be- you get Wallace's replacement later.

 

I'll reiterate the point I've been making but clarify it. Mike Wallace isn't a bad receiver. He's just highly overpaid and lacks elite or even good skills in every other facet. I'll liken it to a video game. He rolled his MMNFLRPG character and got 10 in speed, 2 in hands (he had a drops problem in Pittsburgh as well), 1 in charisma, 2 in dexterity, and a 2 in strength. He's elite at running fast and that's about it. That doesn't mean he's bad, that just means he's a bad fit. That said, if your QB is good, but can't hit deep, just because he rolled a 2 throwing deep and 6's and 7's in the other stuff, that doesn't mean he's bad. The problem is, if your QB rolled ****ty deep ball stats and your highest paid player is a receiver who does 99% of his work deep, then you have a mismatch of talent.

I believe in talent maximization so if your players can't maximize each other, then you switch out. A QB is a harder piece of the puzzle to find AND Mike Wallace is severely overpaid so I'm much more willing to move on from him. Seriously, if Peyton Manning was his QB, he wouldn't have 1500 yards. Mike Wallace is a complementary piece to an offense that we're paying like a main cog.

 

You know why this is an irrelevant stat? Because those other teams didn't have possibly the fastest if not top 3 fastest WR in the NFL and those teams might have had a 6'3 WR that leaps compared to Wallace at his size and skill trait. All these stats are really really stupid. To a degree they are good but to break down someones performance/abilities/or criticize their game just off that it is extremely poor and lazy.

Take into account our QB might be just as bad as Henne on deep balls.

there were 3 cases where Wallace was wide open, hit him in stride he has 1200 yards and 9TDs, you guys still complaining then?

This board has hated players that have been our only threat for the past few years. Hated Marshall, hated Bush, now hate Wallace. I can't wait until Wallace leaves and we are stuck with Gibson and Hartline and Wallace shines just ike Marshall did elsewhere.

You think its a coincidence players leave Miami and excel on other teams? I can name COUNTLESS players that have done better then they have done here and I can count a handful that have done better here then the previous team they were on.

 

and throwing an accurate deep ball one out of 10 passes isn't an accomplishment either.

Its amazing how its the WR fault for not "fighting" for the ball but not the QB's fault for throwing in errand inaccurate hail marry pass. WR job is to catch, QBs job is to throw, we have one guy who can catch and run but doenst out jump defenders and we have one guy that can throw on the run but can't throw deep.

So how do you blame 1 and not the other? How embarrassing of an argument is this. Before you guys cry some more, you do know RT is going to get a big contract in a year or two right? and when he gets paid top 5-10 money you better hope he has a complete game because then, like "Wallace" we have big time money invested in a one trick pony, or let me put it this way, a QB that can only play 2/3rds of the game.

 

How is that in any way an explanation of why that's irrelevant?

The key point is you took virtually the exact same situation and changed just the offensive coordinator and Wallace wasn't very good. It's a pretty clean set of circumstances to draw a conclusion from. I'm not sure why what you wrote seems to make it irrelevant.

 

LMAO. thats honestly something someone whose never played the sport professionally or in an organized format would say.

Breaking tackles is just as much of an effort as it is skills. Someone can just stop and be "content" with 5 yards on the catch someone can want "more" then 5 yards.

And honestly, breakign tackles is a lot easier then fighting for the ball. All you have to do is run or try to have some sort of agility and movement in your hips or spin move or what not.

Trying to out jump someone while running 15-20 mph then stopping to track the ball and leap with control and balance is almost as much "skill" as anything else in the game. If it were "based on effort" then the whole world would be jumping or fighting for the ball.

Now don't get me wrong, i agree 100% Wallace doesn't fight for the ball as much as he should but that isn't his game. Its THAT SIMPLE.

You guys sound like Mike D'Antoni trying to get Gasol to play his 7seconds or less offense. Great, good job. Keep doing it OVER AND OVER again until you lose your job loll.

And for the record, IF the ball is under thrown or overthrown to a guy running nearly 20mph or so that can't and will never be only the fault of the WR. Do you have ANY idea how fast that is in order for one to A) get into yet ANOTHER gear to catch up to an overthrow or to B) stop so fast that you can wait for the ball to fall in oyru laps while your defender is ALREADYY BEHIND you and in better position then the WR itself?

You guys truly have a very poor way of thinking to form these opinions and breaking down mistakes on the player.

 

Oh thats all we did? Took out the coordinator and boom, wallace is basically on a Super Bowl team. Damn, i wonder why we didn't win the SB or contend for the past 5 years. Hmm...maybe because we don't have BIG BEN???? So now big ben is a no body? just a 2/3rd complete QB? Now you'd take RT over Big Ben is what you are saying?

REALLLLLLLLY?????

and if you want to hack on Wallace only, let me put it this way, its much MUCH easier to throw a deep ball the manner in which RT17 was to wallace then it is to throw a deep ball running for your life out of the pocket like Big Ben would. So OBVIOUSLY Big Ben has a far better deep ball then RT17 ever in his life has displayed so far.

 

Please don't use logic or common sense on these boards, it is against the rules.

 

Your point? Irrelevant. One of the greatest TE of all time, it happens all the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhkQutXZqSk

 

GREAT DEEP BALL, RT17 would have placed that ball right in between the 2 DBs for a pick on an under throw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twz6SH0ylpk

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08f3uKVpebA

yet another one. Look at the ball placement by big ben.

Conversation over. We have a piss poor (throwing deep) QB throwing deep to a very fast WR that isn't 6'3 220 with a massive vertical. No point in arguing over this its like beating a dead horse. Everyone has an opinion, if everyone KNEW what they were doing or seeing was accurate then every team in the NFL would be great, hence the imbalance because not EVERYONE is good at "analyzing" players or plays.

 

I think you're very badly confused here about multiple things.

The Steelers had nearly all the same elements from when Wallace was quite good in 2010 and 2011, and just changed the offensive coordinator. The result was Wallace was mediocre in 2012, before Miami even came into the scene.

 

You never mentioned in 12' or mentioned you meant Pitts situation so the confusion was due to your lack of information.

Okay so we put it on the OCoord, which i also mentioned in the past had a big role in Miami failing. So that isn't a situation we are not seeing eye to eye with. But you do realize you are indirectly stating if Wallace has the proper OC then he is a great talent, you do realize that right?

So basically argument again is over because we are stating Sherman used Wallace in a way he is not "BUILT" to be used. so to blame Wallace as a poor player or under performing is very very dumb. I can't wait to see Hartline in a offense that requires YAC and oNLY YAC. He'll probably fail faster then Bess did. Thats what Miami did with Wallace except Wallace didn't do bad and had the QB play been better on the deep passes then Wallace would have had a very good year for a WR with such a pathetic surrounding when it comes to offense (OC, Oline, QB play deep, run game etc)

 

I'm oblivious to your thought pattern thinking a 1000yd WR who is solid at worst can be disregarded and replaced. Apple's really do fall off trees I guess.
I don't like the way you disregard a players stats and ability for a coach and his 'style' of play before he's coached a Miami game with no replacement player/players that fit his 'system'. Your crystal ball must be on fire!

 

Was that Wallace who has no ability other than speed, blowing by 2 Pro Bowl DBs??

Noooooooo.

 

but what you're leaving out is the fact we hired a new Offensive Coordinator who is implementing a revised offense that's predicated more on the vertical game and big play/YAC production. So the oddball at the moment isn't Wallace; it's Tannehill. Regardless of Lazor, if Tannehill can't correct his downfield woes his days as a starter will be numbered, so there's no reason to shoot your offense in the foot and ditch a productive receiver just b/c the QB isn't getting the job done. Now, we don't want Tannehill's days to be numbered; instead we want to see him fix his downfield woes and become an upper echelon QB, so it makes more sense to keep the only receiver Tannehill has completed a pass to beyond 40 yards the past two years and in doing so hope Wallace's continued presence helps Tannehill develop his vertical game.

Furthermore, pretending that all Wallace does is run fast and catch deep balls is patently false, otherwise Pitt wouldn't have offered him $50 million, Miami $60 million, nor more money from Minnesota. The type of receiver you described is an Anthony Armstrong or a Ted Ginn who could've been had for a fraction of the cost. Mike Wallace on the other hand posted 5000 yards and 37 TDs the past 5 years for an average of 9th best in the league, and that didn't all come from deep balls.

And respectfully, you should get the facts straight about Wallace's hands considering his drop rate was 8th BEST among all receivers with at least 80 targets at 2.1%, meanwhile Hartline's was 7th WORST at 6.8%.

 

clueless fans are clueless I guess. You should probably invest some of your time into understanding scheme fits rather than running your mouth about stuff you obviously don't comprehend, genius. Earth to FanMarino, Dan Henning and Mike Sherman are no longer Miami's coordinator. The days of dink-and-dunk passing, heavier use of horizontal stretch principles, and not utilizing players in space are gone. I even gave you an example of how a productive player in one system can be a poor fit in another, but apparently even that eluded your expansive brain power.

Now, rather than irrelevantly popping off like a disrespectful little turd teenager, why don't you argue the actual points of my post since you failed miserably the first time around. So let's try this again, how 'bout enlightening myself and others how Hartline is a great fit for an offense that will be emphasizing the vertical game and big play/YAC ability? Tell me how Hartline's production is universal across all schemes as if he's Calvin Johnson. What evidence has Hartline provided you and your ignorance to make you think he's a playmaker who can do damage in space and consistently produce in the vertical game that would make you think he translates well to Lazor's offense?

 

Takes one to know one...lol

Oh the threads just before the draft.

 

but haven't you heard the new rule, Pappy? NFL teams are now only allowed ONE playmaking receiver on their roster, so if Miami is looking at Herron, it's only because this new rule means he can only be drafted if Wallace is then released. I mean, the other alternative is just plain silliness- the one that involves Hickey looking at a truckload of playmaking receivers in the draft b/c he simply prefers playmaking receivers and is looking to add another one to the roster. Now, if Hickey prefers playmaking receivers [let's be honest here- who doesn't] and wants to draft one, possibly in the 1st round, whose starting job becomes most in jeopardy, the playmaker Wallace's or the non-playmaker Hartline's?

 

dick.

You got any fresh trout in the freezer you can FedEx me to make up for that not nice comment and ensure our friendship remains uncompromised?

Hey, why ya highlighting in pink, Michael Sam?

 

You're taking one part of a long argument and speaking out against it. Which is silly on your part.

But fine, its what you want to do, let's do it. Please list for me, with actual evidence how all of the QB's with better deep accuracy (on a similar amount of throws) throw a bread basket deep ball. I want to see what those numbers are where the WR on a 40+ yrd bomb doesn't have to adjust to the ball or fight for a jump ball or come back to the ball. Because the simple fact of the matter is they all get help from their receiver on most of the bombs, its only Tannehill who is expected to drop it perfectly into the receivers sweet spot 40+ yards in the air while on the run every time.

All actions require effort. The point I was making is that you cannot just break tackles on effort you need something more like speed or strength, which are skills. The simple act of fighting for the ball (not being successful at it just simply trying) requires only effort therefore any receiver, including Wallace, is capable of it.

So you're going to tell me that underthrown or overthrown balls are never because the WR screwed up, or the line allowed too much pressure to0 fast, or the OC called bad plays.....its always the QB's fault? Really?

 

It was pretty clear what ck was saying. He referenced it directly.

Okay so we put it on the OCoord, which i also mentioned in the past had a big role in Miami failing. So that isn't a situation we are not seeing eye to eye with. But you do realize you are indirectly stating if Wallace has the proper OC then he is a great talent, you do realize that right?

Sherman didn't use Wallace wrong. He didn't do as much as he could do to get Wallace productive, but there's a very good argument that he shouldn't have.

I have no idea what you're talking about in regards to an offense that requires YAC and only YAC. That's not a thing.

 

There's a lot here I don't agree with, but I think is secondary to the question of where you got the idea Lazor is going to run Chip Kelly's offense from?

 

Good point. He may not want to run Chip's offense so we don't score too many points.

 

What does that mean? That you can't score points without running Chip Kelly's offense, or that he's clearly going to run an offense he was a QB coach for one year rather than something closer to what he's done in the same position drawing from a variety of influences?

'cause both are kinda ridiculous.

 

Firstly, there's been enough talk by players speaking about what Lazor is doing and how it differs to Sherman's offense. There was a direct reference to Sherman's overuse of horizontal concepts and how Lazor is bringing more of a vertical element. There was also a reference to Lazor having a greater emphasis on big play ability and stressing the importance of addressing the vertical game. Secondly, you factor in where Lazor came from and why Miami hired him, b/c I highly doubt he's gonna come from one of the NFL's most successful offenses and not bring those explosive attributes with him, especially given who our owner is and his obsession with obtaining a high powered offense.


Like I've mentioned previously, Philly's 2013 squad was the most productive YAC offense of the past 20 years and posted more 20+ yard receptions, more 40+ yard receptions, and more yards per attempt than any team of the past 5 years. It's not a coincidence Lazor is in Miami. He directly aided Kelly with the offense and even some of the passing concepts. He isn't here to be Philbin's whipping boy, and he's not here to help Miami maintain the same crappy offensive status quo of the past 2 years. He's here because he was a part of an offense that went from 29th in scoring to 4th overnight.... went from 25th in passing yards per attempt to 1st overnight..... went from 24th in passer rating to 4th overnight.... went from 13th in rushing yards to 1st overnight..... and went from 13th in YAC to 1st overnight. Honestly, what reason could you have to think Lazor wouldn't want to load his grocery cart with as many Philly goodies as possible?

It's an entire offensive philosophy that went into Philly's overnight change, not just tweaking a few things and expecting a trickle down affect across the board. The same will be true here. The one sentence Lazor won't hear in Miami is, "what are you doing, you're bringing too much of Philly's offense with you! Five plays is more than enough so scale it back!" Obviously it doesn't HAVE to be Philly 2.0, but that doesn't change the fact there's gonna be a much greater emphasis on both the vertical game and utilizing players in space for the same reasons Chip Kelly chose to do so in Philly- because it leads to greater production and more points than when the offense has to meticulously work its balls off for every yard, made all the harder by the fact Miami doesn't yet have a seasoned All Pro quarterback running the show capable of consistently and efficiently moving the ball up and down the field on his own. Therefore the more help he can get from the offensive design and the personnel around him, the more productive the offense will be.

 

Lazor is a sharp cat who has experience in a variety of offenses and used that experience to help Kelly create Philly's offense, which clearly wasn't Oregon 2.0. He has more than enough brains and experience with Philly's offense to recognize what concepts and principles worked, as well as the type of philosophy used to create that offense when the group of offensive Philly minds got together to collectively devise it.

BTW, c'mon with the first 14 words of your post. Obviously teams can "score points" without a [strike]Chip Kelly[/strike] Eagles offense, but don't come in here suggesting that the way Philly did things last year didn't make the point scoring easier. If scoring as many points without running a Chip Kelly offense is as easy as scoring them with a Chip Kelly offense, then why did 28 teams fail to score as many points as Kelly's offense? For heck sake, Philly's offense under Kelly scored 10 points more per game than the year prior without him. Basically what you're trying to say here is there's no advantage to a "Chip Kelly" offense, which is kind of a mind=blown insinuation to me.

Now, that aside and to ask you to humor me for a moment, who do we have running the show to give us that Chip Kelly point equivalency you speak of without the aid of offensive design or utilizing playmakers and space? Is Tannehill gonna outduel Tom Brady at his own game by moving the team up and down the field on his own arm more efficiently than the master?

 

It means we Dolphins fans are so not used to a high powered offense. The strain of experiencing it may be more than our hearts can bear.

Lazor got the chance to work with one of the most innovative offensive minds in the country. It seems kind of ridiculous to assume he wouldn't want to bring along any if not most of Chip's concepts. And...logical to assume he would, such as Todd was doing.