This sounds like Art Howe telling Billy Beane that Carlos Pena is the first baseman and that he doesn't care that Scott Hatteberg does a better job of getting on base.
If you give me the choice, I'm going with stats. 6 TDs in a game is also a small sample size, and people that use stats look for more data than just one game. People that abhor stats are those that want to take a SSS and try to use that as a reason to state that stats are meaningless.
Sounds more like the Bengals drafting David Klingler because he was "statistically" the best college passer ever... Google how that statbusters career worked out.
Its only equivalent in the sense of how fast it goes from the arm of the pitcher to the hitter because of how close they are to the plate. Ask Jenny Finch to throw a football 30 yards.
How would you have judged Mike Wallace, over 2010-2011, with just stats, and no film. You could have any stat you like. No film. Your job, to determine if Mike Wallace fits Philbin's system. I think they both have their place. Stats give you an overall theme, a picture. The film will confirm it, or provide an alternate answer. Hypothetical, remembering Vincent Jackson's years in SD, a lot of deep passes from Rivers were jump balls. Passes weren't necessarily good, Jackson wasn't necessarily 'wide open.' But they completed a lot of these passes because VJ was so damn good at locating and then beating the snot out of the DB to get it. If you looked at the stat sheet of these completions, you have no idea if it was: Great throw, great route, great separation, great comeback to the ball, great physicality. Stats help you decide what to look for in the film. Both can be biased. Philbin looked at some stats of Wallace. Where his catches were. They were all over the field. That means he's not a one trick pony. Right?
Does "catchable" really cut it in summing up the deep throws to Wallace? The stats alone don't show that on 3 occasions that I can think of Wallace blew by his man and Tannehill could have thrown TDs on each play, but his passes were average at best. Wallace was wide open and Tannehill just didn't perform at a high level. All of the QB stats that you listed- how many times were the receivers as blatantly wide open as Wallace was? The dude was WIDE open. RT was 0 for the season last year on bombs, he and his coaches have admitted that he's struggling with deep passes, that speaks volumes imo. As one dimensional as Wallace is, they have to get those plays right and maximize to the scoring opportunities, especially given how much the offense is struggling.
Look at :38 of this clip as per sideline awareness and coming back to the ball: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6vaR0nobrU Granted that's just one play, I'm just saying that Wallace does show some skills there. Wallace certainly has his flaws that are impeding progress and Tannehill did launch a pass on the last play that Wallace should have come down with, adjusted better and not dropped it. Timing and anticipation issues aside, Tannehill just has to do a better jpb of capitalizing when Wallace is wide open on a deep pattern, having blown past the coverage. Again, both he and the coaching staff acknowledge this. I don't think that this is being hard on him and I do think that Tannehill can throw good deep balls, he just has to get his distance and timing down.
OK. I would look at where he caught the ball and what he did after the catch when he caught the ball. The data from 2010 shows me that he was targeted 106 times on passes beyond the LOS (since this offense does not throw behind the LOS much). I would note that in the intermediate range, where receivers make their money in this system, Mike Wallace averages 1.2 YAC yards per target on these passes. I would then compare that to the signature receiver in this offense, Greg Jennings, and what he did on targets in that range. Well, Greg averaged 3.4 YAC yards per targeted pass. If you want to look at just yards after the catch, then Jennings had 5.6 YAC on intermediate throws in 2010 while Mike Wallace had 1.75 YAC on intermediate throws in 2010. I would also look at the fact that Mike Wallace played almost exclusively on the right side of the formation, but on short throws, his largest amount of YAC yards comes in the middle to the left side line. What that tells me is that he was hit on a lot of shallow crossing patterns that allowed him to face the quarterback and catch the ball while going full speed across the defense. This allowed him to get his YAC yards. Mike Wallace in 2010 had 436 total YAC yards. 245 of those YAC yards (56.2%) came in the short middle to short left on 28 targeted passes. That pattern doesn't change much when you look at 2011. 108 total targets pass the LOS, 35 come short middle to left with 171 YAC yards on those targets. The one thing that did change was that he was better at getting YAC yards on 20+ yard throws in 2011. I would also note that Mike averaged 1.75 yards after the catch on 20+ yard throws while Greg Jennings averaged 8.6 yards after the catch on 20+ yard throws.
Agreed... and I think a lot of fan frustration is that both are inconsistent at times, leading to the missed plays, but people seem to come down on one side or the other without recognizing that both need to improve their game. Tannehill is a second year QB developing. Wallace is an accomplished vet that should be better. IIRC, on that missed overthrow to the wide open Wallace, Tannehill was running to his right when he launched it. I don't recall if he was being chased or not, whether he set up or simply threw it deep. He could have just been over excited and tried to get it deep too hastily.
Not sure how your comment makes sense. Having seen the movie, the Bill James approach espoused by Beane puts an emphasis on somewhat overlooked stats like walks and OBP- get on base, walk or single end up being the same result, doesn't matter. The single may look prettier but the walk is just as effective, right? And it was an overlooked stat as per James/Beane. What has Wallace been doing? He's been getting in scoring position, getting open deep and he needs Tannehill, in this baseball metaphor, to drive him home. Two man gig- in baseball, get on base and get driven in. In football, get open and get the ball from the QB to make the big play, ideally a touchdown. Well, Wallace has been getting WIDE open and Tannehill hasn't been metaphorically driving him home. I don't get the uproar- there are always multiple factors with 22 people on the field- protection, coverage, etc., but Tannehill has to make better deep throws and capitalize on those situations. Hopefully he can do it, I think that he can.
You're right, all of those other QBs are merely being held back by the fact that they don't have fast enough WRs on their team... All of those 'variables' tend to level out with a large enough sample size. It's only a matter of time before advanced statistic analysis becomes as big a part of football evaluation as it has in baseball. Because when it comes down to it the old eyeball test fails as often as it succeeds, just like in baseball. You can watch film of every QB in the league until your eyes pop out and the fact's going to remain that they generally completely around 30% of their 'long' pass attempts.
This is what I have a problem with. This is a statement that only looks at these throws from Ryan Tannehill in a vacuum, when the fact of the matter is, you simply don't see many NFL quarterbacks hitting open receivers in complete stride on throws covering a 50+ yard distance. In fact, I challenge you to find a quarterback that makes a better throw than the one Ryan made on Mike's dropped pass that would have won the game....a throw that traveled 70 yards in the air and hit Mike's oustretched hands.
If the Dolphins are on their own 10 and Wallace gets open 75 yards down the field should Tannehill be expected to make an on target throw to Wallace? I've seen enough football games to know that most QBs don't make perfect throws when they're throwing 50+ yards down the field. Any WR in the NFL can catch a ball thrown right into his hands. The ones who make a lot of money should be able to turn more of those low percentage throws into completions.
Watch Jacoby Jones get wide open on this play and then have to slow down a bit to catch this ball thrown by Flacco who has one of the strongest arms in the league. Flacco threw it to an area of the field and his WR tracked it and made a play. Had Flacco threw it so far he hit Jones in stride the safety wouldn't have almost made a play on it. But Joe Flacco is in fact a human being with limitations to how far he can throw a football. [video=youtube;_IJ6EDc3A88]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IJ6EDc3A88[/video]
Again, this statement puts all the blame on Ryan Tannehill is asks him to do something that no other quarterback in the league does consistently. This is also a great reason why you shouldn't base a receiver's value on his ability to get deep, but base it on his ability to make big plays from any part of the field. That's what moneyball does. It gets you looking at the most efficient ways to make big plays, and in the passing game, that is not the 40+ yard pass.
I would agree that the last play was on Wallace, not Tannehill. With some of the other throws, did they really have to be 60 yards or so in the air or did Tannehill just wait too long to throw? I'm not trying to hammer Tannehill, the short version is that he has to make up his mind and release the ball sooner. I think that he's fully capable of throwing some good deep balls, he just needs to get the timing down and get rid of the ball quicker. He waits and what happens? Then he has to throw the ball 60 or so yards in the air, it comes up a bit short and Wallace has to fight a recovering DB for the ball- all unnecessary. I don't think that it's asking too much for Tannehill to improve on the distance and timing of his deep passes, bottom line. He has plenty of arm and he's capable of good accuracy, very good building blocks. The deep ball is a two man gig, and it's relatively vital for it to work on this team with not so many great offensive options. It's on Tannehill and Wallace to get it right, bottom line, but at the same time it's pretty easy to see that Wallace is often getting WAY open on his deep routes. That should be making life easier for Tannehill and result in increased production. And it really hasn't been, not nearly enough.
Two things: 1. Mike Wallace doesn't run his routes at the same speed on every play, so you have to take that into account with timing. 2. In this system, if he starts looking to throw to Wallace sooner, it is going to throw off the timing he has with other receivers. The first point is the big one. Ryan can certainly throw the ball up as soon as he catches it if he wants to. He has to trust that Mike is going to come off the line the same way on each play and be at the same spot everytime. Mike Wallace isn't that good though.
On the first or second deep ball to Wallace last week he beat his man badly after 20-25 yards, not 75. This is critical- in your example what if Wallace was way open 20-40 yards down field. Forget 75 yards, that sounds more like a Hail Mary. Tannehill is waiting to long to release the ball- in your example I'd imagine Wallace being wide open in half the distance (or less) that you're referring to. Here, I looked it up again- go to 1:15 Wallace beat his man badly about 20 yards downfield, the rest was gravy and waiting for the ball to get there. 1:23 Wallace blew past his man, had to wait on the Tannehill throw. Should have been an easy touchdown. http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-...86927/Week-12-Panthers-vs-Dolphins-highlights
Seriously, when you look at the numbers on Mike Wallace and then watch the footage of him, you really notice the limitations relative to his ability as a route runner and his small catch radius. Honestly, Jeff Ireland should be fired for giving him $60 million. Doing that tells me that Jeff has no idea about player value.
Good points, and Wallace certainly is no angel in these situations. Still, Tanehill is going to have to learn to release that ball quicker and not underthrow Wallace imo. They're pros making stupid money, they have to get this down. I still have to wonder why the coaches allow Wallace to not practice with Tannehill before games, that seems counterintuitive to me as I've been saying.
The one thing that would probably have the biggest impact is the coaches doing away with the play fake on these plays. The play you want to highlight where Mike "blew" past his receiver, Ryan is asked to execute a play fake on the play and then make a half role. He is coached to be accurate and consistent in his drops because on these play designs, the routes are built in with the play fake, and the play fake is the timing mechanism. Realize that Ryan releases that ball on the 13 yard line at the right hash mark. It hits Mike at the 30 yard line on the other side of the field.
Good points again, and I've addressed the coaching aspect. Wallace is so fast and getting open so quick, the coaches have to design the plays accordingly. I still think that Tannehill has to be aware of this as well and pick up his pace as to delivering the deep balls to Wallace. Make better throws, release the ball quicker, and my guess is that the latter point might go a long way in taking care of the former.
Advanced statistics will NEVER take over the NFL, it can be factored in to a degree...but a computer doesn't account for all the variables you need to get the truth. That's why Billy Walters the worlds most successful football bettor has a team of 10 guys breaking down aspects of the game and not a computer program.
Right on brother. I agree 100%. And I don't take advanced metrics seriously anyway because people spin the numbers to justify their own truth (once viewed a QB measurement system that put Tom Brady as the 148th best QB of all time, and Phil Sims was ahead of him). The eye test tells me this team plays like garbage and guess what, they are below .500. The eye test is almost 100%, though there are times when you can't get in a players head and his poor/good performance is more mental or some other factor we as fans aren't privy to.
Same thing was said about Bill James's work with baseball stats. Cough. There is a reason teams are developing analytics departments within their football operations. What analytics can effectively help you do is determine the proper value for a player and help you make better financial decisions since this is a sport with a hard salary cap. Miami doesn't have this, but Miami is never in the forefront of anything. We are always reactionary instead of being proactive, particularly since Jeff Ireland has been running things. We are always trying to catch up with the game.
On the designed play fakes it's the design that's a bit off,(looks like Sherman isn't accounting for Wallace's speed) on some adjustment routes I see your point..Ryan and mike could be on a better page where Ryan sees that he has one on one coverage and throws it up with trust 30 yards on a line towards the sideline.
Watching Calvin drop a pass in his mitts, lose a battle for the football twice. Haha, Wallace is no Calvin, but last week I also saw him duck on a ball that was thrown a little behind him because he heard a DB's footsteps. They're not all perfect y'all!
Calvin at least makes an effort. Mike Wallace doesn't even try to catch a pass if it doesn't hit him in the breadbasket.
He made an effort on the td against Carolina and made an effort on the hail mary. He wouldn't have gotten his hands on it if he didn't. Sent from my Galaxy S3 using Tapatalk
You are still ignoring my question. You religiously claim Wallace doesn't fight for balls, or make an effort on those under throws. So explain how they made those big plays Sunday. I'll be waiting.
Thank you. I needed some confirmation on a few things about Wallace haters. What's even funnier is the phrase under your name.
It has nothing to do with hating Mike Wallace. Unless you have forgotten, I was the one telling you prior to his signing that he didn't fit the system, wouldn't produce in this system, and would never be worth the contract he gets on the open market. Everything I said about Mike before he signed has come to pass. Do you deny this? Do you deny that Mike Wallace is a poor route runner? Do you deny that he is limited in the routes that he actually runs? Do you deny that he is below average at going up to get the ball when he is being contested? He's getting paid Calvin Johnson money, and therefore, he should be doing the things that Calvin Johnson does on the field.
