Mike Wallace..showing signs of life?

"Fineas wrote:

But we are not getting more of those long passes this year, at least not at a higher percentage. Wallace has been in on 92.3% of our passing snaps this year, so he's been in on almost all of them. Last year Tannehill threw for 671 yards on deep (20+ yards past the LOS) passes (20 completions) as compared to 450 (12 completions) this year.

Ah, Fineas, here is another area where a stats based approach does not work

THill would hit DBess and Hartline on comebacks and outs, that is one of the reasons why RAC and YAC was so miniscule last season, the route was not designed to keep the Wr going down the field, this is what Wallace offers and THill has missed often enough hitting that route to make an effect on the numbers

Add in, "20 yds in the air past the los" also does not reflect his impact, as hitting underneath stuff and having the receiver do the work COULD be an effect of Wallace running off the coverage deep down the field

I'm thinking of Thigpen v NOLA and Clay v SD

W/o context, bulk stats are only good to show trends, they do not tell the entire story

"Fin-Omenal wrote:

Who!?!? Earl Thomas??:shifty:

Oh yeah...Earl Thomas, the Pro Bowl safety...seems like someone here went on and on about his being only a nickel back in the NFL. To the same great lengths someone is currently dissing on Wallace. Who could that have been? Cannot seem to remember now... :shifty:

"padre31 wrote:

Ah, Fineas, here is another area where a stats based approach does not work

THill would hit DBess and Hartline on comebacks and outs, that is one of the reasons why RAC and YAC was so miniscule last season, the route was not designed to keep the Wr going down the field, this is what Wallace offers and THill has missed often enough hitting that route to make an effect on the numbers

Add in, "20 yds in the air past the los" also does not reflect his impact, as hitting underneath stuff and having the receiver do the work COULD be an effect of Wallace running off the coverage deep down the field

I'm thinking of Thigpen v NOLA and Clay v SD

W/o context, bulk stats are only good to show trends, they do not tell the entire story

Stats tell the entire story. If you pay attention to stats, you would have known that Mike Wallace gets most of his RAC yards on shallow crosses to the left. In all other areas, his RAC yards are very limted.

If we had paid attention to the stats, he would not be a Miami Dolphin today.

"MrClean wrote:

Oh yeah...Earl Thomas, the Pro Bowl safety...seems like someone here went on and on about his being only a nickel back in the NFL. To the same great lengths someone is currently dissing on Wallace. Who could that have been? Cannot seem to remember now... :shifty:

....and he's one of the worst run defending safeties in the league with a 1.7% run stop percentage, which is what I said he would be before entering the league.

"MrClean wrote:

Oh yeah...Earl Thomas, the Pro Bowl safety...seems like someone here went on and on about his being only a nickel back in the NFL. To the same great lengths someone is currently dissing on Wallace. Who could that have been? Cannot seem to remember now... :shifty:

And you know what we are all wrong about a player or a topic from time to time.... But when someone insist on speaking so matter-of-factly it's kind of funny to watch a blow up in their face.

Case in point this thread

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Something struck me when I watched Wallace' non-reaction to the Cromartie interception and it's something I previously wondered in relation to his deep ball tracking skills.

I wonder if Wallace has a clinical visual processing deficiency. It would seem to explain these concerns because I am remiss to believe that an NFL player is just so lazy that he won't make a play to save an interception for his QB.

"Fineas wrote:

I figured, but that still begs the question of why should we, or anyone, care if the TD pass is caught by a WR or by a TE?

Just because we were discussing about the WR group with and without Wallace.

"padre31 wrote:

Ah, Fineas, here is another area where a stats based approach does not work

THill would hit DBess and Hartline on comebacks and outs, that is one of the reasons why RAC and YAC was so miniscule last season, the route was not designed to keep the Wr going down the field, this is what Wallace offers and THill has missed often enough hitting that route to make an effect on the numbers

Add in, "20 yds in the air past the los" also does not reflect his impact, as hitting underneath stuff and having the receiver do the work COULD be an effect of Wallace running off the coverage deep down the field

I'm thinking of Thigpen v NOLA and Clay v SD

W/o context, bulk stats are only good to show trends, they do not tell the entire story

Nobody is claiming stats tell the whole story. But we really haven't had a big YAC improvement this year. It has improved by less than 0.2 yards per attempt. Take away either the Thigpen or Clay plays you cite, neither of which were attributable to Wallace's presence in any meaningful way IMO, and YAC is probably down this year. I'm not even sure Wallace was on the field for the Clay TD against SD -- if he was he was on the other side of the field. Wallace did go downfield on the Thigpen play against NO but any WR runnign that same route would have accomplished the same thing -- the CB is going to follow the WR no matter who it is. In truth, a bigger WR who was a better blocker than Wallace may well have enabled that play to be a TD.

I kind of believe it's a direct reflection of Ryan Tannehill's growing development. Not to spite Mike Wallace, as he has been increasingly important in the offense, it just seems that maybe perhaps they are getting on the same page and the offense is starting to work. Credit also goes to the coaching staff and Tannehill also.

Offense is still growing and I can kind of start to see bright spots under this decade-long (or longer) black cloud.

"Sceeto wrote:

Just because we were discussing about the WR group with and without Wallace.

It wasn't limited to the WRs, it was about the whole passing game and all the pass catchers, including the TEs and RBs.

"Fineas wrote:

It wasn't limited to the WRs, it was about the whole passing game and all the pass catchers, including the TEs and RBs.

Not earlier on, but whatever, doesn't really matter.

"Fineas wrote:

I figured, but that still begs the question of why should we, or anyone, care if the TD pass is caught by a WR or by a TE?

You're question is too vague. It's the nature of the TD that counts as well, not just the 6 points by a WR or TE. It's what the TYPE of TD reception shows, as to present and future performance. A long TD by a WR is most likely a sign of a viable deep threat, unless the DB fell down or something. What would you be more stoked over, a 3 yard pass to a wide open TD or a 95 yard TD to a streaking WR blowing by everyone on the way to the endzone?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arKd8qnPB-I

I know which one I'd be happier with.

"jim1 wrote:

You're question is too vague. It's the nature of the TD that counts as well, not just the 6 points by a WR or TE. It's what the TYPE of TD reception shows, as to present and future performance. A long TD by a WR is most likely a sign of a viable deep threat, unless the DB fell down or something. What would you be more stoked over, a 3 yard pass to a wide open TD or a 95 yard TD to a streaking WR blowing by everyone on the way to the endzone?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arKd8qnPB-I

I know which one I'd be happier with.

Sure, the long ones are more exciting, but they are all 6 points. If you asked me to choose between 20 long TDs to WRs or 30 short ones to TEs and FBs, I'll take the 30. And if the 3 yd pass to a wide open TE was the game-winner and the 95-yard highlight reel play came in a 35-7 loss, I'd be much happier about the 3 yd TD.

mike Wallace is duckfooted..lol
Webbed feet?

"rtl1334 wrote:

Something struck me when I watched Wallace' non-reaction to the Cromartie interception and it's something I previously wondered in relation to his deep ball tracking skills.

I wonder if Wallace has a clinical visual processing deficiency. It would seem to explain these concerns because I am remiss to believe that an NFL player is just so lazy that he won't make a play to save an interception for his QB.

I've seen Calvin do it. For two years everyone here yelled at Brandon for doing it.

"Fineas wrote:

Sure, the long ones are more exciting, but they are all 6 points. If you asked me to choose between 20 long TDs to WRs or 30 short ones to TEs and FBs, I'll take the 30. And if the 3 yd pass to a wide open TE was the game-winner and the 95-yard highlight reel play came in a 35-7 loss, I'd be much happier about the 3 yd TD.

Yes but you need hundreds of other short passes to get those short TDs. That's the big picture here. Chunk yardage = less changes for something bad to happen. A 90 yard TD from 1 play 3 feet from your own end zone.

A short 3 yard TD throw most likely required 8-12 other perfectly executed plays, including passes and runs.

A more consistent run game would help immensely with deep shots. 2 and 1? Take a shot why not. 1st and 10 when you have good runners and good pass catchers underneath, etc.

"Fineas wrote:

This assumes that Wallace is drawing double coverage, which really hasn't been the case. At least not any more than any other WR who runs deep against a two-deep zone will draw deep safety help. Teams are playing the same standard coverages against us that they play against every other team. Most coverage packeages have some kind of deep zone coverage by a safety. Against such defenses, whether the guy going deep is the Dolphins' Mike Wallace or 60 Minutes' Mike Wallace, the safety's job is to help cover that guy when he enters that zone. Yeah, using 60 Minutes' Mike Wallace is an extreme example, but the safety's assignment is to help cover any receiver who enters that deep zone, whether that is a 4.3 speed guy or a 4.6 speed guy.

Lol you would make a terrible defensive backs coach.

Its not necessarily the coverage calls that change so much as the way the calls are executed. In a two deep zone any safety to Wallace's side would be cognizant of his speed and get more depth in his drop to guard against the deep route. That opens the field up for other players.

In a single high coverage the safety would probably be more concerned with Wallace than any one else, he'd have to get more depth than usual in order to be in a position to make a play on any deep route to Wallace, again giving more space to the other receivers on the field.

Typically there is either a safety over Wallace with a corner in press or a soft corner with a safety buzzing underneath to guard the shorter routes. It doesn't happen that way all the time, teams take chances, as they do with all receivers, but for the most part you can see an uncommon level of respect for Wallace in terms of the way he is defended and in most cases it provides some level of relief to the other receivers.

"jdang307 wrote:

Yes but you need hundreds of other short passes to get those short TDs. That's the big picture here. Chunk yardage = less changes for something bad to happen. A 90 yard TD from 1 play 3 feet from your own end zone.

A short 3 yard TD throw most likely required 8-12 other perfectly executed plays, including passes and runs.

A more consistent run game would help immensely with deep shots. 2 and 1? Take a shot why not. 1st and 10 when you have good runners and good pass catchers underneath, etc.

Indeed.

As KB points out every 2.3 seconds, Wallace isn't good with the timing routes. His releases are inconsistent and he doesn't run precise routes. But the biggest factor IMO is the overall design of the offense. It's a quick passing game, predominantly 3-5 step drops. By definition most of the vertical routes, take offs, posts, digs, post corners, corner posts, deep comebacks, etc are not an option and defenses know this. It makes it a lot easier to predict and defend against Wallace's strengths. Due to the 3-5 step game and the protection issues, most of MWs big play opportunities come on play action (requiring a credible run game) or off of the QB extending the play past it's natural end point (not a Tannehill strength). As those two things improve Wallace's production will increase.

"Fineas wrote:

Sure, the long ones are more exciting, but they are all 6 points. If you asked me to choose between 20 long TDs to WRs or 30 short ones to TEs and FBs, I'll take the 30. And if the 3 yd pass to a wide open TE was the game-winner and the 95-yard highlight reel play came in a 35-7 loss, I'd be much happier about the 3 yd TD.

You're thoroughly missing the point.

"Fineas wrote:

Nobody is claiming stats tell the whole story. But we really haven't had a big YAC improvement this year. It has improved by less than 0.2 yards per attempt. Take away either the Thigpen or Clay plays you cite, neither of which were attributable to Wallace's presence in any meaningful way IMO, and YAC is probably down this year. I'm not even sure Wallace was on the field for the Clay TD against SD -- if he was he was on the other side of the field. Wallace did go downfield on the Thigpen play against NO but any WR runnign that same route would have accomplished the same thing -- the CB is going to follow the WR no matter who it is. In truth, a bigger WR who was a better blocker than Wallace may well have enabled that play to be a TD.

I don't believe our receivers are particularly any good in that category, even Wallace, he doesn't have precise n.s.e,w compact explosiveness like his former teammate brown, its more graceful speed that needs the ball in the air.

"GMJohnson wrote:

Indeed.

As KB points out every 2.3 seconds, Wallace isn't good with the timing routes. His releases are inconsistent and he doesn't run precise routes. But the biggest factor IMO is the overall design of the offense. It's a quick passing game, predominantly 3-5 step drops. By definition most of the vertical routes, take offs, posts, digs, post corners, corner posts, deep comebacks, etc are not an option and defenses know this. It makes it a lot easier to predict and defend against Wallace's strengths. Due to the 3-5 step game and the protection issues, most of MWs big play opportunities come on play action (requiring a credible run game) or off of the QB extending the play past it's natural end point (not a Tannehill strength). As those two things improve Wallace's production will increase.

this is true imo and I believe ryan needs to adjust any of his calls at the los where the corner is playing press against Wallace, these two have to have the freedom in the offense so ryan can learn to throw the ball quickly to the outside over the top of the corner about 25 yards from the los, the trust has to be there, andryan just has to throw it a couple times a game.

"Fineas wrote:

That defensive alignment for the Jets in that picture is very atypical. Teams have not been playing the safeties much, if any, further back this year than last. Not sure what the down, distance and time was for that play but it is clearly a passing situation. And it seems a stretch to claim that it is Wallace that caused them to play the safeties so deep when the S on Hartline's side is 17 yards off the LOS.

I don't see it as a stretch at all. If I were the DC and I just saw Wallace get behind the a good D on multiple occassions and the QB complete a couple of passes I would certainly consider playing my Ss deeper. In fact, I'd be an idiot if I didn't, particularly when Cromartie didn't seem fully healthy.

"firedan wrote:

mike Wallace is duckfooted..lol
Webbed feet?

hehhehe...interesting right...the norm for an athlete like this is usually the opposite, but when you get a chance check out ole floopy feet...

"rafael wrote:

Do you think the S alignment may have been a factor in the Jets allowing 100 yards rushing against them for the first time this year? IMO those two long passes against Carolina had an obvious carry-over effect on how the Jets game planned for us. I don't believe (never have) that Wallace was worth that salary, but I do believe he impacts the D in a way that helps those around him. That's assuming you actually make the D pay when they don't respect him. I think that early in the season the opponents respected him more, but then as he and RT failed to make plays that respect faded. Carolina flat-out dared us to throw deep. Wallace and RT made some plays and there was a ton more space underneath against the Jets. I anticipate that the same may happen against Pitt.

100%, Can't say it any better than that.

My biggest concern about Pitts D is their LBs vs our backs and TEs in pass pro. Lebeau is a master at getting 1 on 1 matchup for his LBs, Philbin prefers getting more guys into pass routes but this might be a good week to take a more conservative approach. If Tannehill has time to throw I don't think their secondary can hold up.

I think they'll have Taylor shadow Wallace and beat him up off the LOS but that'll require safety help. They like to have Polamalu near the LOS, leaving Clark deep (over Wallace) and 1 on 1s for Hartline, Matthews, Clay, etc.

"KB21 wrote:

Tannehill has gotten him the ball plenty of times. Wallace simply hasn't made plays on the ball. That has been proven.

really? when was that proven?