***The Official "Brian Hartline is a Klutz, etc." Thread.

do you think he's more than a fourth wide receiver.?

we know he's not a #1...and We know he's not a slot receiver...so that leaves the #2 role? is he good enough for that on a playoff team?

 

Hartline's not performing well, but there's a bigger systemic problem. All of our receiving options are some combination of misused or underutilized, besides maybe Jarvis Landry. Hartline isn't helping himself out with drops, but I don't know his performance is particularly out of line with everyone else.

 

Yeah, but then we would be without the objectionable poster that wants to tell everyone in the thread how much smarter he is than them

 

That's like labeling Billy Bob as the least drunk guy at the NASCAR race and suggesting it means he's sober. The only way this thread is like a year too early is if Hartline undergoes successful experimental surgery that imparts Calvin Johnson's DNA into his own.

because they were both great players who directly made their respective sides of the ball better and will be sharing a seat in Canton together?

 

Thought you were at a yard sale?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

Perhaps that's because Landry was drafted with Lazor's specific offensive requirements in mind, whereas Hartline is a holdover. The receivers aren't necessarily being "misused" or "underutilized". They're being used exactly how Lazor's system needs them used. Hartline isn't being "misused or underutilized"; he simply isn't performing optimally enough in the way Lazor's offense requires him which is drawing attention to his performance, unlike Wallace who has stepped up to the plate for the greater part. That's on Hartline, not Lazor. If you want to use Hartline in a way that fits his skill set, then we should bring back Henning or Sherman, no thanks.

Hartline will be gone or supplanted next year by someone who fits Lazor's scheme. In the meantime, there's no point in delaying the rest of the offense's progress/development just to accommodate Hartline's limitations. Tannehill needs to get comfortable in the offense and route combinations that are intended to be the mainstay, and the sooner that happens the better it will be for him and the offense, but he can't do that if Lazor tailors the scheme to fit a receiver who has little to no future in it. Basically, Lazor isn't gonna put things on hold, including Tannehill's development as a passer, just because of Hartline.

Gone are the days of an endless barrage of routes featuring receivers making low-difficulty catches just out of their breaks like all the stop routes, comebacks, curls, hitches, outs, etc that Henning & Sherman ran that provide no YAC and thus stressfully places most of the passing yards squarely on the QB's shoulders. Lazor isn't doing anything atypical. He's asking Miami's receivers to catch the ball on the move. That's not a crazy concept or the equivalent of pulling off a Triple-Lindy. If an NFL receiver can't efficiently gain separation on the move and can't consistently catch the ball on the move, then he has no business starting on any team. This is why Landry was drafted, because he can actually multitask- run & catch simultaneously, and he does so with his hands and does so in traffic or tight coverage. Of course Hartline is having problems. He has trouble just staying on his damn feet with the ball in his hands while running, so it's not a shock that he has difficulty trying to catch the ball while running, especially when he's not allowed to fall down in the process. This is why the rest of the offense experienced catching woes to start the season [because they're now actually required to catch the ball on the move], but they're adjusting to it, meanwhile Hartline is still dropping passes. This offense is exposing Hartline's hands, showing that they're not as good as some fans falsely believed.

Not to mention, Hartline's "separation" ability is solely dependent on route-running and cunning, which is why he was an ok fit for Henning & Sherman's offenses which had him constantly catching passes immediately out his breaks, all of which masked his limitations as a legitimate NFL receiver. He's so one dimensional it's not funny. He offers little versatility to catch the ball on the move b/c he doesn't have the speed to separate from NFL coverage, the size/length/physicality to use his body to create separation from tight NFL coverage, or the athleticism, tracking ability, leaping ability, and hand-eye coordination to catch contested balls or pluck off-target throws, and this limits what the offense can do, which limits its production.

Basically, if Hartline doesn't get open on route-running or cunning and the ball isn't well placed, he's a liability, and even when he does catch it on the move, he defeats the entire damn purpose by either immediately falling down or not avoiding the first tackler. He's useless as a 60+ target receiver in a real offense, and this offense is MORE productive with Hartline being LESS involved, yet many fans act like he's somehow necessary to the offense just because he runs great routes, as if he's the only damn player in the NFL capable of such, as if it's some type of white man's privilege or something, and is if a great route is the only way a receiver gets open in the NFL. I hate to break it to people but plenty of receivers run good routes AND get open by other means, as well as catch the ball in traffic if they can't gain separation. It's seriously ridiculous and ignorant how some fans act- how they treat fast, athletic, and/or big receivers as if they're all lazy, stupid, and rely solely on their natural ability.

 

Matthews > Gibson > Hartline.

Trade him for the best draft pick we can get and resign Damian Williams.

 

LOL nobody is trading for Brian Hartline with his current contract.

 

Lazor makes sense on this, says hart works as hard as anyone, and that usually comes back around in terms of production..hes press in in his limited opps..

im not giving him a pass, I still think he's a grey#4, but I don't think he's as bad as he's shown thus far...

long season lazor says, we will need him at some point.

 

I disagree that Gibson is better than Hartline. I think that is crazytalk.

However Hartline needs to step his game up. He is not playing up to snuff.

 

fixed that for you.
Contract is virtually irrelevant at this point. Unless a team hires Henning or Sherman from the grave, Hartline would be lucky to fetch a late round draft pick even if he were playing for the league minimum.

 

Gibson has at least comparable hands. He showed with the Ram that he can handle the outside receiver position. He is infinitely better than Hartline running after the catch. I don't see anything crazy about it at all.

 

Awesome post. I learned a lot.

 

I disagree. There is a reason that Gibson is mainly a slot receiver in Miami.

He 'showed' he can 'handle' the outside receiver position, however Hartline did it without quotation marks.

Gibson should have been cut at the beginning of the year.

 

That's not really reflected at all in what is occurring, and it seems like stuff you want to happen or want to see.

This offense isn't performing particularly better in terms of Yards after Catch than Mike Sherman's offense.

Brian Hartline's YPC is in line with the three other guys in the wide-out spots(3.0 for Hartline, 4.0 for Wallace, 3.4 for Matthews). The guys with anything approaching noteworthy YAC are Jarvis Landry and Brandon Gibson(who again is pretty much a total non-factor). It's the slot guys, running slot routes, and picking up high YAC on a short route depth.

Lazor should be fitting his "system" to the talent. He's said so much himself, and blanched at the idea that it was "his" system rather than one that fit the players. Which is just about right, because he's done a piss poor job of working it out in the passing gane.

 

What is he supposed to say? Don't all coaches have to lie and credit the players just like QBs praise their o-line after a win?

 

Yards After Catch per pass:

2014
Brandon Gibson: 6.9 (on eight receptions)
Brian Hartline: 3.0

2013
Gibson: 4.1
Hartline: 4.1

2012:
Gibson: 2.2
Hartline: 3.4

2011:
Gibson: 3.2
Hartline: 2.7

2010:
Gibson: 4.2
Hartline: 5.0

2009:
Gibson: 2.9
Hartline: 5.7

So not really infinitely better, or really even better in any sense. Even more so if you put it in a context of relative workloads.

 

Lazor specifically suggested that the product on the field represents him tailoring the offense to the players on the field. That's not really something he had to say to placate anyone or present a good public face.

 

How can you use q stat that has nothing to do with YAC and is QB dependant to prove this point?

You may be right but IMO that isn't the stat to show it.

 

All WR stats are dependent on QB

 

Judging from those numbers, I'm pretty sure those are yards after catch numbers, he just mis-labeled them.

 

Stringer is right, I mis-labeled it.

 

Those would be terrible YPC numbers. Horrid even.

 

Well, Miami is actually 29th in the NFL in YPC...

 

...........................

 

Alright that is fine then

I thought you basically meant yards per target, and those would be terrible numbers for that.

 

Under Sherman & Henning, Miami's passing offense ranked 30th in YAC per reception in 2013.... 28th in 2012... 31st in 2011... 28th in 2010... 30th in 2009... and 27th in 2008.

The YAC average ranks 8th this year under Lazor, and the reason it's not higher than that is because Hartline is terrible after the catch [3.2 YAC average compared to Landry's 6.4 and Gibson's 7.1 even though they're asked to do much of the same thing and even though Hartline doesn't face stiffer coverage]. If Harline's YAC avg were equal to Landry's, Miami would rank #3 in YAC per catch. Once Tannehill fixes his deep ball, the YAC average will improve even further.

Matthews' sample size is too small to use, and Hartline can't be compared to Wallace for the simple fact he faces nothing near the coverage Wallace sees, plus Tannehill has trouble with his deep ball, which is where Wallace has traditionally picked up chunks of YAC as the #3 receiver in the NFL in 25+ yard receptions since 2009. If you wanna compare Hartline to someone, compare him to Jarvis Landry who has 106 more YAC yards than Hartline despite being targeted 3 less times.

This is an example where that's not true, and I explained why that's the case and why it's actually more beneficial in this instance because it's for the greater good of the offense and Tannehill moving forward. In hindsight, Lazor saying he "fits the system to the talent" was either coach speak or not a reference to Hartline [who possesses very little talent]; otherwise he'd be calling Henning/Sherman's old plays that are more suited to Hartline's skill set. Not to mention, if Lazor says he "fits the system to the talent" it doesn't mean he needs to change his philosophy. He can still run an offense that focuses on upfield running routes & YAC and still have it tailored to best fit what his players can do within that philosophy. For instance, how many bombs are we throwing to Wallace this year? Virtually none, so Lazor has tweaked the system to get away from an area of struggle for Tannehill to focus more on what he thinks Tannehill does better within the scheme. Is Lazor stubbornly calling fades to Hartline in the redzone like Henning did despite him sucking at these? Nope.

I realize Tannehill & Hartline work the out-breaking routes well, but that's clearly not a staple of Lazor's philosophy, as it sends the receiver out of bounds and allows for no YAC or chunk yardage opportunity. Once Tannehill & Co have settled into Lazor's offense, perhaps Lazor will then start incorporating those out routes a little more, but for the time being, I'd have to think every out route run in practice is one less rep the offense has to establish and solidify the staple of the passing offense, which IMO is more important.

 

That's not a controlled comparison. You've got different systems, different QBs, and different whatever else. Sherman's offense allowed for little YAC, so there was little opportunity for Gibson to separate himself from Hartline. However, this year, in the same YAC-orriented offense, Gibson's YAC is more than double Hartline's. Gibson has as much YAC on 8 receptions as Hartline has on 20. I think that's a good start for arguing Gibson is better after the catch.

 

That doesn't mean Lazor changed his philosophy to fit the players. Miami's YAC average is 8th in the NFL [even WITH Hartline pulling it down] which is even higher than Denver's with Demaryius Thomas, Julius Thomas, and Emmanuel Sanders, and higher than Green Bay's with Nelson & Cobb, so Lazor clearly seems to have kept the integrity of his philosophy intact.

 

I'm not sure where you're getting that ranking but it isn't accurate.

http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-yards-after-catch-statistics/2014/
http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/leaders.asp?type=Passing&range=NFL&rank=230
http://hosted.stats.com/fb/tmleaders.asp?type=Receiving&range=NFL&rank=231

Likewise, you can look up individual YAC averages. What you're suggesting doesn't at all add up, Landry is the only receiver with any workload who has anything approaching a good YAC.

The correct thing to do would not to remove the deep passing entirely and figure out what is wrong and correct by whatever tools you have at your disposal.

Bill Lazor worrying about the purity of his offensive scheme is a bit laughable given he's the least likely element of this situation to make it beyond this year. He shouldn't be planning for the long term unless he's getting better short-term production.

 

If you look at the routes they run, if it's something like a crossing route, in full stride, Hartline goes down easier than Ted Ginn. Just watching them play, when it comes to routes where they catch the ball on the move, I know I'd rather see Gibson with the ball after the catch for that he can do than Hartline, who usually just dives forward and goes down without being touched if a defender is closing in on him. Some routes are not conducive for getting yac, so to just look at yac avg does not paint a full picture. You've seen them both catch the ball on the run, I'm sorry if you do not notice any difference.

 

That's your emotional reaction, that's not an explanation on why Brandon Gibson's lesser YAC somehow counts more than Brian Hartline's.

 

I got the stats from sportingcharts.com, your first link. Click on "YAC/R" and you can clearly see Miami's YAC Per Reception is currently 8th.

I don't know what else to make of it. The offense was 27th or worse in YAC Per Catch for 6 straight years before Lazor arrived, and now it's 8th, and that's WITH Hartline and with Tannehill's difficulty on the deep ball to Wallace which should otherwise be aiding YAC.

I don't disagree. However, it doesn't help when the guy throwing the deep ball has had issues doing so and has needed some mechanical tweaks. Not to mention Miami doesn't have anyone on the perimeter who excels at converting off-target or contested throws downfield like other QBs around the league do.

If Lazor has a philosophy that he feels is the most conducive to success, then why should he compromise it, especially when Philly has been so successful with it? For Hartline's sake? C'mon. The offense is scoring more per game than it has since 1995 and has just 1 less 30 point game through 7 games than it had the previous 2 years combined, and this on top of Lazor being tasked with pulling the offense out of Henning & Sherman's mesozoic era and into the modern game. Not sure how that calls for Lazor being the "least likely element" to make it beyond this year.

 

Exactly. This is one instance where the eyes don't lie. It's as plain as day to anyone watching. I was even surprised about Gibson's athleticism because of what his prior stats in St Louis appeared to suggest. I mean, I don't think he looks like Dez with the ball in his hands, but he's certainly athletically better after the catch than his YAC suggests. Hartline on the other hand has the athleticism of a one-legged man with vertigo. This is a fact. I have compared the two.

 

Then there's this...

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...medium=share&utm_campaign=web-des-art-top-145

 

you bastage, I almost yelled at my laptop.

 

Bull fcking sh!t. I am not reacting through emotion and for you to suggest as much is pure nonsense. I am basing on what NaboCane used to call The University of my Eyes. I know what I see and I trust my eyes more than anything else.