Has he maintained that 10 yard per target, 1000+ yard, and 8 TD per season? No, he hasn't. He has declined in each of the past 3 years. It does in fact make the offense worse, for a few reasons. For one, when you pay a guy this much, you will force the ball to him in an attempt to justify the salary. Secondly, you limit what you can do at his position, therefore limiting your ability to call a full array of plays within the passing game. You also limit your ability to conceptualize things. At the proper value, signing Mike Wallace can be justified. That value is around $4-5 million per season tops.
Yeah. Everyone is just making up the limitations to Wallace's game because he just not a likable guy. Me, Greg Cosell, Alen, Sean Tomlinson....etc....we are simply making it all up.
$5-6 million because he does more on the field than Wallace does relative to his ability to run routes and be consistent. I'm not even sure Wallace is worth $4 million. His relative value this past season was $1 million. I have a feeling that when he's away from Ben Roethlisberger, it is going to remind folks of Alvin Harper without Troy Aikman.
You choose to ignore any evidence to the contrary too. Everyone has their own opinions. Watching Bkp video of NFL Live it sounds like Jerry Rice doesn't agree with you. Also, Sean Tomlinson is just some fantasy football blogger. What makes him any sort of expert we should lend credence to?
We sign Wallace I just somehow expect the words Free Agent bust to be associated with it in a couple years. I'd rather drop some cash at RT, re-sign Clemons, re-sign Jones, grab one of the TE's, re-sign Fasano as a #2 TE/H-back and then draft a couple high WR's.
Listen I'm with you that Wallace is slightly overrated because of his big play ability but come on. This is hyperbole
So you think Hartline is worth a million or 2 more and is more consistent than a receiver with a much higher yards per target, 32 more 1st downs, 1300 more yards, and 26 more TDs over the same 4 year period? How about what he does on the field relative to actual production? I mean, I've never seen a ref award our team 6 points for Hartline's route looking beautiful.
Yes, in 2011 he posted a ridiculous 10.56 yards/target... with 54 1st downs (11th in NFL), 8 TD, and 1193 yards. Yeah, that really makes the offense worse. Wallace had a down year in 2012. So what? By this standard then 3 of Hartline's 4 years were mega down years. Wallace's down year is a great year for Hartline. Why would we have to force the ball to a guy who already averages 1000+ yards and 8 TDs per season on only 101 targets? That's 27 less targets than Hartline received last year. That's why Wallace could be a good fit- he doesn't need to be fed the ball to be highly productive. If anything it sounds like maximizing targets to me. What Wallace produces on 101 targets (1011 yards & 41 first downs) takes Hartline an extra 20+ targets to accomplish, except Hartline falls short by 7 TDs.
You sound ridiculous now. I don't know that Wallace will set the world on fire but I refuse to believe he will not produce for this team if signed.
I don't fully agree with that. 800 yards with 8 TDs is pretty decent! Will he be worth the giant numbers he demanding? I don't know, but to act as if he's a complete turd is ridiculous.
So I'm clear.... Mike Wallace's numbers were negatively affected by Haley's system, but we should grab him cause system fit doesn't matter?
That's nowhere even remotely close to what would make him worthwhile. Regular repetition of his 2010 season is the kind of thing that would justify the contract he's going to get.
I never said he will. I said I think he will produce a lot more than KB is implying. I went out of my way to mention that I don't know if he will live up to the giant contract demands. At the same time his down year is pretty damn good in comparison to the stink we have around here. You want talent in FA? You overpay
His production comes on vertical routes. That's the issue here. He's a VERTICAL ONLY receiver who will be miscast in an offense that DOESN'T THROW THE BALL VERTICAL much and also DOESN'T have one receiver that runs just a couple of routes, and another receiver that runs just a couple of routes. Tell me, which receiver in Green Bay runs only vertical routes?
No, Mike Wallace's down year isn't pretty good in comparison to what we have here, and it's not worth overpaying for. That would pretty much be an abject failure.
that's not apples to apples. a) you're assuming he doesn't fit the system when in fact none of know how Philbin & Sherman would or wouldn't want to utilize Wallace should they sign off on him, and Wallace will not be here if Philbin doesn't ok it. b) Wallace's numbers will be affected by how he's used, not some notion of how you think he will or won't fit our system. If Philbin uses him properly his numbers should be just fine.
You keep repeating that ad infinitum ad naseum, even when others have posted videos showing him running much more than just vertical routes. Repeating a lie over and over does not make it become true, except maybe to the weak minded.
His numbers were more than likely most negatively affected by holding out till the end of preseason. So, no time to get acclimated to the new system.
I know that Philbin in GB ran a more vertically oriented WCO. If we bring in Wallace he's obviously on board with it and has a vision already in place on how to use his talent. Tell me, which receiver in Miami can run ANY vertical routes w/o limitations? NONE. There's no two ways about it; we have NO speed, NO big play ability, NO scoring threat at receiver, and we'll continue to be an average team until that improves b/c Bess & Hartline as a starting duo are dogs*** that even a dog wouldn't eat. For a guy who's supposedly such a terrible receiver he sure does score TDs, rack up the yards, break open games, and move the chains pretty darn well.... much better than the guy you feel is worth $6.0M per year.
I disagree that Wallace's down year isn't better by comparison. I do agree that 10-11M per would be overpaying IF he were to have a repeat of last season. Catastrophic failure? I personally doubt it. Jesus, leave me alone. You're making an argument between us that isn't there. My original issue was KBs post. Wallace is only worth 4M per? Mr. Clean has it right. If Philbin sees Wallace's skill set as an asset to this offense we will sign him. That is the bottom line. But let's not pretend the guy is a scrub.
So again, you are calling me, Greg Cosell, Alen, Sean Tomlinson, Mike Tomlin....etc....liars. Despite the fact that I've shown you still photos of Mike Wallace running the types of routes he would be asked to run in Miami's system that are absolutely HORRIBLE routes that are not run at the proper depth and are rounded off. I guess precision route running doesn't apply to the west coast offense? Look, if you want to continue to stick your head in the sand and ignore the fact that Mike Wallace is a limited receiver that limits what you can do with him on offense, then that's your issue. If you want to constantly ignore guys who watch tons of film on Mike Wallace or any other player for that matter, then that's your issue. You can also continue to think that Joe Philbin would gladly sign off on this without massive pressure from ownership when it is beyond obvious that Mike Wallace does not do the things from the receiver position that makes him a fit in the WCO nor does he do the things Joe Philbin is used to seeing from his receivers during his time in Green Bay. I can't do that. I can't ignore what the film shows and what the numbers show. I can't delude myself into thinking that Mike Wallace is such a great fit in the offense that he should be paid $12+ million a season, and I can't delude myself into thinking that this is a player who you completely change your offensive system to fit.
and I've already posted Wallace's stats on passes thrown from 0 to 10 yards, which are significantly greater than Hartline's..... so who's the less dimensional receiver? Hartline isn't a threat to score, doesn't have the deep speed, tracking ability, nor ball skills to pose a legitimate vertical threat, isn't a plus contributor in the short passing game, disappears for half the season, and gets a quarter of his yards from one game, but somehow he's more dynamic, consistent, and versatile than Wallace?
So you really think that Joe Philbin wants to screw up the timing of his offense with such a poor route runner? To be such a strong TD threat, he sure is a below average redzone receiver. Which is interesting, since he can't run vertical routes in the redzone.
No, I said you are wrong to label him vertical only especially after video evidence posted in this thread and others in the past 24 hours or so that he does many more things. Yes, he is not the best route runner in the world, I'd agree to that, but he is NOT just a vertical receiver. Also, please tell me why you choose to throw out the name of this Sean Tomlinson, some fantasy football blogger, as some sort of expert, especially after misinformation was pointed out in regards to Wallace in the linked blog. He's no more of an expert than half this forum. Anyone can start a blog and write about anything, but it does not make them right, or any sort of authority that we should blindly believe. Yet you ignore Mark Kaboly, a sports writer for the Pittsburgh Tribune, who follows the Steelers much more closely than any of us do. http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/49179081/ns/sports-player_news/ Also, he will NOT be a Dolphin unless Philbin wants him on the roster. I firmly believe that. I didn't even care either way if we signed this guy, until I see all the nonsense. Now I hope they do.
Anyone wanna dispute that Pitt went to a SB with Wallace? If he's such a bad starting WR you'd think a SB trip would be out of the question, right, considering ours [and their 3 total TDs] did a great job of ruining any hopes we might've had last year? You'd also think a SB winning organization like Pittsburgh wouldn't offer Wallace $10.0M/year if they didn't think he's worth it.
I ignore most sports writers because they do not watch the film and typically have an agenda they want to push. Guys like Sean and Alen, they don't push agendas. They simply break down the film and give it to you straight. I particularly don't pay attention to anything that is linked to something that has NBC in it.
Does Pittsburgh run an offensive system based on timing and precision route running, or do they run a more vertically oriented system that allows Big Ben to hold the football and move around to hit downfield targets? You know, Alvin Harper was very productive in the Coryell system with the Cowboys. He wasn't so productive when he went to Tampa Bay and played in Sam Wyche's West Coast Offense.
If Wallace's 836 yards, 8 TD, and 33 first downs during a down season is considered "not producing", then what do you call 3 of Hartline's 4 years that average 36 catches, 557 yards, 1.7 TDs, and 28 first downs? Like I said, only receiver in the league with 10.0+ yards/target, 4000 yards, and 30+ TDs since 2009. I don't get how you guys criticize one of the more consistent receivers in the league but glorify the one year wonder Hartline whose stats only improved b/c his targets increased by default with Tannehill having no one else to throw to on the right side. Hartline's yards per target- decreased. Yards per catch- decreased. 1st down percentage- decreased. TDs percentage- mega decreased. 61 more targets and STILL only 1 TD
Add Aaron Nagler to the list of people that don't think Mike Wallace is a good fit in Miami: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1555935-nfl-free-agent-scouting-report-mike-wallace Hmm. He must be another one that doesn't like Mike Wallace.
Let me get this straight. Someone writes for the Pittsburgh Tribune and follows the Steelers closely, ignore them. Someone writes for The Bleacher Report and is the founder of CheeseheadTV, we are to believe them???
Yeah. You should ignore someone that knows Joe Philbin's offense and understands that Mike Wallace is a vertical threat only because it doesn't fit your POV that Mike Wallace is the best receiver in the game.
