I think that has happened twice all season on deep throws, there have been many times Wallace has been in press coverage, has beaten his man off the Los, and not been looked at..I'm not just talking about throwing it and trusting your receiver to make a play, he hasn't done that, I'm talking about quick recognition, a clean throw to an open receiver, in quick enough fashion off the Los..
I wish more GMs based that evaluation when he was coming out.. You seem to have no room to make variables part of the equation when discussing a players ceiling.. Are you saying in hindsight you wouldn't of taken luck #1 because of what stats showed?
What that play showed is just how poor Wallace is at tracking the ball. The ball was thrown perfectly, and if Wallace had continued to run to the left hash, it is a TD. Instead, Wallace went the other way before readjusting to where the ball actually was.
I believe that you can look at certain stats and get a good feel for the player, and I am all on board that at some point, a statistical model will be able to be developed to take the guess work out of scouting. In most statistical models, the variables are adjusted into the equation to take them into account.
I edited my post..I'll ask again. In hindsight, knowing what the stats show you, would you not take luck #1?
Essentially, what you guys are wanting Ryan to do is abandon the offensive principles as far as timing goes to suit one player on the team that is not a good enough player to alter the scheme to fit anyway. What you are essentially saying is "to hell with the timing aspect of the offense if it means getting the ball to Mike Wallace more often".
If I went totally on a stats model to make that decision, I would have taken Russell Wilson #1. The stats models that I am familiar with had him rated as the top quarterback in the draft.
I watched that play about 10 times in a row and I disagree. That ball was significantly underthrown, and I think that it's a caught ball for a TD if Tannehill released it a second or two earlier. I have no idea how you can say that was a perfectly thrown ball- Wallace had to hit the brakes for that underthrown ball. Look at RT wait to release the ball- he waited too damn long, bottom line, especially for such a fast receiver.
That ball couldn't have been thrown any better in that situation. There isn't a quarterback in the NFL that would have made a better throw on that pass. There are several other receivers that would have won the game by catching that pass.
And in that stats model who would be the # 2 QB? How about this guy: 3800 yards 43 TD 9 INT 74.3%completions Sounds great, but that top pick just bought you Kellen Moore. A good example of why stats by themselves are not the answer.
If you can't see that RT waited too long to throw that ball and underthrew it, I can't help you. You might want to , but you can;t lay every problem at the feet of Mike Wallace. Tannehill chose to wait so long that a 65 yard pass in the air wasn't nearly long enough. If Wallace kept running to the left hash as you suggest the ball would have been 10 yards or so underthrown.
hell yeah I think there are times where checking into a different play to exploit a possible advantage in one on coverage is important.
There aren't stats that measure every conceivable circumstance. nobody is saying there is. But unless you watch every play of every QB in the NFL, just relying on what you see or think you see is virtually useless because it has no context or comparison to others. And you've demonstrated that you don't have a real strong grasp of how often most QBs throw catchable deep passes. Tannehill is right there in the middle of the pack and better than some very good QBs. And Tannehill has thrown a much higher percentage of catchable balls to other WRs, such as Hartline. Maybe that is random chance. Maybe it is all on Tannehill. Or maybe Wallace bears some culpability too, e.g., not tracking the ball in the air well enough, not adjusting to it or letting the DB beat him to it.
Kellen Moore did not rate highly in statistical models. The #2 quarterback according to the models was RGIII. #3 was Andrew Luck. #4 was Nick Foles. #5 was Brandon Weeden, and #6 was Ryan.
There's plenty of evidence, you just can't see it on the broadcast tape. Reed is 17 yard deep and half way between the numbers and the hash at the snap. He then immediately flows backwards and towards the middle of the field, or towards Mike Wallace's side, essentially leaving Hartline with a 1 on 1 vs Cromartie. By the time the ball is thrown Reed is 22-23 yards deep and centered on Tannehill/the hash, again, Hartline is 1 on 1 with Cromartie, meanwhile the Jets are having a team meeting around Mike Wallace at the bottom of the screen.
I thought someone else earlier in the thread said anything of importance regarding the game of football could be measured with a stat, or words to that effect.
You're not talking about Ryan tap dancing and patting the baby a few times before launching it are you
Not sure what you are talking about. Reed's reaction has nothing to do with Wallace or anything Wallace is doing. He drops on the snap and goes about 2 yards to his left. No major move there and there were 3 receivers bunched on that side, so the conclusion that he took those 2 steps specifically due to Wallace is highly doubtful. The team meeting comment is pretty absurd. Only one guy is covering Wallace and that's a linebacker (#52) who only barely responds to Wallace. Presumably, if the defense was so terrified of Wallace and was scheming to stop him they'd probably be covering him with someone other than a 250 lb ILB. No other defender makes any reaction whatsoever to Mike Wallace. And #52 (David Harris) had no impact on the play -- he literally never got within 10 yards of Hartline. The gif at this link shows it in motion and you can watch it over and over again. http://fansided.com/2013/12/01/dolphins-jets-brian-hartline-td-adds-miami-lead-gif/ Unless you think a slower or lesser receiver would have been completely uncovered and #52 would have immediately gone to chase Hartline (and is significantly faster than he actually is), it is clear that Mike Wallace had no impact on that play.
They are playing zone. You could replace Mike Wallace with Helen Keller and their coverage responsibilities aren't going to change.
There are 4 defenders covering the 3 receivers on the right side of the offense plus the back in the backfield. The linebackers drop into a short zone. The defense isn't doing anything special to deal with Mike Wallace. If they were, I think we can all agree it wouldn't have been covering him with a 250 lb ILB.
I'm not even sure what route he was running on that play. It looks like a short hitch, but he came off the line poor and drifted after turning. Typical piss poor route running from him.
It's a quarter-quarter-half zone, so technically there is no one "covering" Wallace unless he enters their zone. Milliner has a quarter, Landry has a quarter, Reed has a half, Pace has the flat, Harris and Davis have the hook/curl responsibilities. However, because of the trips alignment to the bottom of the screen and Reed's alignment, Hartline pretty much has a 1 on 1 vs Cromartie. You can think whatever you'd like as to the Jets' motives, I'm just putting the info out there.
Do you not see the corner and the safety waiting for Wallace should he try to go down the field? I'm guessing that's why he breaks his route off, and I'm pretty sure that's why Tannehill immediately went to Hartline.
Wait a second...that would mean Wallace had an effect on the play due to the coverage being geared more toward him and his side of the field. We ALL know that's not true.
Let's see, here's Cromartie on Wallace, again with Reed helping over the top. Notice Cro giving up a decent sized, 7 yard cushion. Wallace breaks his route off at 14 yards, Cromartie hasn't just turned his hips, he's turned his back and is in full flight down field. OK, balls out, incomplete to Hartline, play's over. Where is Cromartie? He's still 7 yards away, and Reed is now 29 yards from the LOS. But hell, we were deep in our territory so maybe the Jets were just playing conservative. Surely if we were in scoring range they'd play it a little tighter, no? Again, Cromartie on Wallace with Reed over the top. Notice Cro is still playing off. Wallace breaks his route off at about 13 yards, where is Cromartie? Back turned, hauling *** down field. Wallace makes the catch, where is Cromartie? Wallace gets up off his knees and turns up field, where is Cromartie? He's at home, waaaashing his tights
Stringer is a knowledgeable guy, he knows better. I think this has more to do with the guys who were against signing Wallace to begin with grading him on a bit of a curve.
