But we are not getting more of those deep completions. We are getting less. So again, where is the evidence that Wallace is helping the other receivers?
Except the Jets didn't do it regularly last week. Nor has any other team we have played this year. And on that one play, they did it on Hartline's side too.
I don't think so. The argument was that we can see that Wallace has improved then passing game because we have more passing TDs. I then pointed out about a half dozen more realistic explanations for that and that when you look at the last 10 games of last year, as opposed to Tannehill's first 5 NFL starts, even the TD pass improvement is pretty limited. So the response was that we have more TDs to WRs instead of TEs and RBs. To which I explained that they are all worth the same 6 points so who cares if the TDs are scored by WRs as opposed to TEs. So what is this brilliant point that I am missing?
Seeing as you are so much smarter than me I'm sure you would make a brilliant defensive backs coach. You can say that the safeties play differently against Wallace but I don't see any evidence of that. I see them playing the same way they did last year and the same way they do on the other side. And even if they are and what you say is true, we are not seeing any tangible benefit from that. We are completing fewer deep passes at a lower level of efficiency and our productivity on the underneath stuff is basically the same. The slight improvement we see is more due to Tannehill's development than Wallace's presence. I guess one could disagree on that, but if you do than you pretty much have to take the position that there has been no noticeable improvement by Tannehill's from his rookie year to this year. There's just not enough improvement in our passing game to believe Tannehill has noticeably improved AND Mike Wallace is having a significant impact on the passing game overall.
I don't think we can look back on the entire season to see Wallace' impact on the offense. Being that he has come from a different offense and team, we have to identify when he became comfortable within our scheme. Only time will tell but I think the Carolina game may prove to be the game that changed the way teams defended us. Against Carolina they played with the safeties closer to the line of scrimmage. Although we only connected on two deep passes, we showed the potential threat of our quick strike capability. Against New York they played with the safeties far back which opened up the running game as well as the short passing game. Teams may be entering into a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. Play the safeties up and we'll knock the top off your defense. Play the safeties deep and we'll slice and dice you with short passes and the running game. The last four games will be very telling.
When within 8 yards of the LOS at the snap his run stop pct is 6.1, which is 20th of 57 safeties that have played 50% of snaps. His total run stop pct means less because he is usually lined up much deeper than 8 yds from the LOS. He is only within 8 yds of the LOS on 11% of snaps. Not conducive with having a high run stop pct. Given the chance to play close to the LOS he has proven he can be effective. Chancellor is within 8 yds of the LOS on 70% of snaps, yet in those situations his run stop pct is lower at 4.6% In 2012, Thomas lined up within 8 yds of the LOS on 35% of snaps and had a run stop pct of 6.9% in those situations for 19th of 55 safeties and raised his overall pct to 3% which was 31st of 55. It's pretty obvious that IF the Seahawks need Thomas to play closer to the LOS and focus more on run defense, he is more than capable of doing a good job. He is a two time All Pro at safety already in his young career. Not bad for a guy that some folks here stated rather emphatically would only be a nickel back at the NFL level.
Do you have a statistic to back that up? If you don't then it is meaningless. Everything that happens on a football field can be measured with a stat. Just ask KB.
I watch his interviews. I watch the games. I study the guy as closely as I can without virtually/physically stalking him and so far my verdict is: no heart. I don't know what it is but this guy has little to no passion, or has a very funny way of showing it. No fighting for balls, no signs of regret or frustration when messing up game-changing plays and more importantly a very low football IQ, at least from what I can see. Hartline, just for comparison, is as sharp as needle and as feisty as a rooster. He used to play QB so he knows the game from more than one angle and is always visibly frustrated/disappointed when he or the team just doesn't cut it. Hartline has heart(no pun intended). Every week I hear him talking about the details and what they need to do and how they will be challenged, Wallace too many times has just said "I don't know, play better?". Speed isn't everything.
Do you realize how easy a post-corner route is to run and why it's run? It's ran inside and then cut to the corner especially with a guy with speed to drag the corner and the safety into the middle of the field, then cut to the corner and use your speed and giving the receiver more space to work with and the QB doesn't have to be so exact. Since when is a 12 yard pass even what I've been talking about? The post corner isn't a comeback or a deep in, it's a simple cut where usually it's ran with a speed guy who just changes his angles, not a hard cut butt goes down and loses the guy. It's about giving the QB and receiver more space to make long throws. This would assist Tannehill with his throws as he is so nervous of the db picking it off that many times he throws the ball out of bounds. I could teach Wallace to run this pattern tonight. Jesus run a post look back for a milli second and then turn your head and run to the corner. I can teach 14 year olds to do it. We don't run it. As someone stated timing of our offense and also the design with 3-5 step drops usually hinders these patterns. But with a guy like Wallace you can hit these patterns on a five step drops with trust, which is the key, that his speed will bring him open even if it's just a 25 yard pass. We don't have to hit 60 yards in the air passes.
Quite presumptuous relative to what his close teammates and coaches, former and present have to say about him.." Great teammate" is the most popular description I've heard and I know I read and listen to as many sources as anyone.. Guy has been here half of season and you think you know him well enough to defame his character..bs
Well, for starters our WRs have had a major issue with actually being able to score TDs in the Bess/Hartline years, around 2008-2012, so this year's group scoring more this year is a healthy sign. To see Wallace getting open deep (as he has been, frequently) and stretching the defense, which the Bess/Hartline combo was awful at- is a lot more satisfying that watching a short flip to a RB or TE. They might all be worth 6 points, but I'll take a 90 yard TD pass over a 1 yard FB dive into the end zone any day. It would be more exciting, but that isn't really the point- it's what the successful deep pass is indicative of and a reflection of the importance of having a viable deep passing game. To be more specific about it, as to avoid confusion- it's not just about the TD passes at this point- Wallace has 3, Hartline has 3 as well I think- it's about Wallace consistently getting open deep- that's huge. It's up to RT to start throwing better deep balls and the OL to give him more time to throw them. Also- Hartline actually broke a tackle on his TD reception last week and didn't fall down like a playing card in the breeze at first contact, great to see. It's just common sense- if there's a team weakness in terms of establishing a deep passing game but to you there's no difference between long TD passes manifesting improvement in that facet of the game, as opposed to a pass to a RB or TD- personally I would consider that a pretty shallow way of looking at the situation. 6 points is indeed 6 points, but imo sometimes it's better to look a bit deeper, not focus on the obvious such as TDs "are all worth the same 6 points so who cares if the TDs are scored by WRs as opposed to TEs." Wallace and Hartline (Gibson and Matthews as well) scoring TDs is a sign of our offense becoming more well balanced and being able to stretch a defense- in my book that's pretty important stuff.
The main reason our WRs didn't score TDs was that we weren't a very good offense overall and when we did get into the red zone we usually ran it or threw it to the TE or RBs. And that's fine, as long as we get the TD. If we had actually gotten better inside the red zone with these WR TDs I might be inclined to agree with you to some extent. But we haven't. We've gotten worse. In fact, since 2008 there has been almost an inverse relationship between our team red zone TD% and the number of WR TDs. In 2008, we had only 5 WR Tds but had a red zone TD% of 58.33 (9th). In 2009 we had only 6 WR TDs but had a red zone TD% of 64.81 (2nd). In 2010, we got Brandon Marshall and our WR TDs went up to 10, but our red zone TD% dropped to 52.94 (14th). In 2011, Marshall's TDs went up and the team's WR TDs stayed at 10, but our red zone TD% dropped to 47.17 (24th). Last year, with no Marshall and no Wallace, we had just 3 WR Tds, but our red zone TD% rose to 55.26 (11th). And this year, with Wallace, we have 11 WR TDs, but our red zone TD% dropped to 52.78 (18th). In short, over the past 6 seasons the 3 years in which we had 10+ WR TDs, our red zone TD% was notably worse than in the 3 years when we had 6 or fewer WR TDs. Wallace consistently getting open deep is really only useful if Tannehill gets him the ball and he actually catches it. Unfortunately, that is happening at a much lower rate than it did last year with Hartline. And Wallace clearly had nothign to do with Hartline breaking that tackle. Again, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, we have not improved our deep passing game this year. It is worse. Both in terms of completions/yards and efficiency (completion %).
Not sure why you're so focused on WR red zone TDs- that's hardly the point and i'm a bit confused as to why you would choose to focus so hard on that aspect given the context of the conversation. The point is opening up the passing game, receivers getting open deep, stretching the field, keeping defenses on their heels and making the offense more dangerous. We have 11 WR TDs this year, there would be plenty more if Tannehill got to even average as a deep passer. Don't let a blind devotion to stats deceive you. Sorry, but once again you thoroughly missed the point. No need to continue this, let's just agree to disagree, as they say.
Fineas, just addressing what you said about Hartlines TD having nothing to do with Wallace..and how it relates to the Wallace affect that could be happening without stats being able to show..watching the play Wallace was on the other side in a bunch formation, once Hartline beat his corner on a wicked inside move you will notice a pretty clear path to the endzone except for a safety coming over late from the direction that Wallace was in, you could see the defense flow from his side to Hartlines side trying to make the tackle, it was a futile attempt because they were out of position...maybe this is something that is hard to put a stat on but is very real in the defenders minds when they line up..game of inches game of space, those two things can be won (mentally, position) before the snap.
Right, and the question becomes whether the defense was dictated by the formation or the player? IMO the theory that defenses are changing the way they defend based on a single player is very much overused.
Why do we assume the defense is stretching? The fact that Wallace is getting open regularly is pretty indicative of how defenses are playing him. They are letting him get open deep and will take their chances with a throw that succeeds ~17% of the time.
2012 Total TD receptions = 13 2013 Total TD receptions = 17 ..and still a ways to go. Attribute that to what you will. Better ball placement?
Exactly. If they ran a bunched formation with two receivers to Wallace's side, then that is the reason the safety was shaded to that side. We have to continue this myth that receivers have a major impact on the game and change the way defenses are played though. You know, that traditional NFL thinking that has already been bebunked by the numbers.
Why only look at TD receptions, rather than total TDs? The easy attribution is the frequency with which the team passes the ball.
I'm not arguing about our results, just about the two different hypotheticals. We know Tanehill is improved, which means by definition the numbers of WR corps as a whole must have improved. Things might be working a little better moving forward. Wallace has had a better two games. Let's keep it moving.
His TD % has gone up from 2.5% to 3.8%. Your point about comparing total TDs is noted, but his TD pass % has gone up significantly.
Is the passing game more effective than last year??? 2012 net yards per attempt: 5.9 2013 net yards per attempt: 5.6
Yes due to the passing game being better. Last year we had Bess and Hartline to throw to. This year we have more weapons, including an improved Clay and Matthews. Even if Wallace is not a prototypical RZ threat he still commands respect back there. That screen earlier this year he took to the house against indy, was that in the RZ or just outside of it? Now, if you're making an argument we should have kept Reggie Bush ... I'm with you
Tannehill's TD % (td/att) is 3.8% this year, as opposed to 2.5% last year. Running Games TD% this year is 2.6%, as opposed to 3.4% last year. 3.1% this year overall (TDs/offensive play - run, pass, sack), last year it was 2.8%.
I've seen too many Dolphins games, live and on tv, where the defense crowds the LOS and not only Safeties but CBs didn'st pay nearly enough respect to our WRs ability to get deep. I'm still slightly nauseated by the years that Bess and Hartline started for us. Also, any play that results in a touchdown or huge gain 17% of the time should scare the sh** out defenses. One of the issues is turning more big plays into TDs when the WR is WIDE OPEN and headed for the endzone. It seems that so many want to gloss over that- just a completion isn't good enough when the receiver is WIDE OPEN deep. It's called maximizing opportunities, and doing that changes Carolina Panther style losses into wins. I think that many are just not in touch with the concept of WIDE OPEN, because before this year that happening was a rare event.
The best measure of passing game efficiency is net yards per attempt. Miami's is essentially the same as last year. IMO the passing game hasn't been much better this year than last.
47 red zone attempts in 451 passes this season (10.4% of passes). 44 red zone attempts in 484 passes last season (9.1% of passes). I don't have an easy way to check on red zone rushes unless I go through each individual player. :/ Note: This is actually from 19yds and in, because that's how ESPN breaks it down.
Last season Miami faced a below average number of 8-men in the box. I don't think you're in touch with the success rate of the type of plays you're describing. What do you think the league average success rate is on passes 30 yards beyond the LOS?
The offense this year is averaging 1.61 pts per drive though, as opposed to 1.42 last year. So there's definitely improvement overall IMO.
I'd have to watch to coach's tape of the Jet's game to verify (and I doubt I'll have time to do so before the Pitt game), but during the Jet's game my impression was that they were playing their Ss deep far more than I'd seen any opponent in several years. I know some people want to maintain that a speed WR doesn't impact how the D plays, but I just don't agree. It wasn't that way when I played or coached D. It wasn't that way when I was a fast WR. I've noticed more shading of the S towards Wallace's side in our games and I've seen more off coverage and deeper off coverage against us this year than in past years. Even Sherman has said that defenses have played us differently since we added Wallace. (I'm going to assume that he watches film of our opponents). So people can claim that it has no effect or that it's just a myth, but I see to much evidence that it is a reality.
Should I really care? You're the one who mentioned 17%, what I'm focused on is the number of times that Mike Wallace has been WIDE OPEN deep and the play should have resulted in a huge gain or a TD. The stats show "incompletion"- big whoop. What it is is a huge waste, a potentially game changing play either resulting in zilch or not everything that it could and should have been. I don't care about league averages, I care about Wallace, a QB who can certainly throw a good deep ball and just has to get better at it, and these plays turning losses into wins. If RT and Wallace can get on the same page that will be huge, we have to take advantage of the opportunities that Wallace is providing.
Right, but points per drive is going to be affected by more than just offensive efficiency. A huge difference is Miami's takeaways per game. 1.0 last season has increased to 1.8 this season. The expected points from a turnover are higher than expected points from a punt or kickoff.
However, I would say TDs are somewhat important. Yes., more passing TDs, better passing game, but this convo has gone in so many directions. I'm getting nauseous.
Right, and I'm saying your expectation of "just has to get better at it" is not a realistic expectation. He's already pretty good at it.
