Red Zone Woes Part 1: Pre-stat opinions

[Nickster]

17 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I am too. Inside the 10, the decrease in pass attempt % from 2018 was very surprising. It was even down from last year which is just incredible to me. 

I’m all on board with Taylor but this is another reason I am against high draft picks on backs.  In today’s game, you usually have to pass it in the end zone.

 

Frank is trying to force the run too much in general.  IMO.  Take it when it’s there, but don’t force it.  None of the running teams did well in the playoffs.

 

Defenses have adjusted.

 

also you rate MACs ability to get open in tight spaces higher than I do, but I’d like to see them go to him more too.

 

I just don’t think it would make a major difference.

 

 

 

[EastStreet]

7 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Ebron is over 6 4 and is a better receiver than any of our bigs, so that shouldn’t be surprising.  Data also shows throws to tight ends are down league wide over the last 4 or so years.  One reason is because of all the nickel.

 

It’s not too hard to figure out.  We don’t threaten much in the edges of the field with our receivers or our QB. We need a true alpha receiver and/or a mobile QB.  Teams don’t have to do more than man up on our outside and can disregard rushing lanes and pocket containment when rushing.  

We are limited in what we can call on the goal and in the red zone with our personnel.  This should be pretty clear.

 

Brady has 4.  Mahomes has 2 and forces the edge and buys time himself.  Rodgers and Allen both have one and both force the edge and buy time themselves.

It's very debatable to say Ebron is a better receiver given his drops and catch rate%. When he came to us, the Colts totally transformed his "use", skewing it to high RZ usage compared to his prior years (look at his RZ target history pre-Colts). Even with his drop rate, he was extremely effective. That said, there's no reason to think we couldn't have had the same RZ success with MAC, or even Doyle. While Ebron is more "dynamic" that Doyle, I wouldn't say he's more dynamic in the catching space than MAC. I'd also say that both Doyle and Ebron have better hands overall by far. 

 

As far as TE usage being down, what I see with the top RZ teams, is that they use more bigs plain and simple than we do in the RZ. And logically, the increased use of nickel should actually add to the mismatch delta between a DB and TE. So not buying that whole line of thought. And just to add, when we did use TEs vs Buffalo, we were highly successful vs the nickel. IMO, you're hanging to much on that article. 

 

As far as our personnel in the RZ, I'd say it's more accurate to say we limit ourselves (use and targets of 6-4 guys).

 

BTW, I'm not opposed to an alpha WR. They don't grow on trees though. I'd also say that Pittman has a decent chance to grow into one. I'm not a fan of our WR usage over the last couple years at all though. Reich left Luck alone, and let him continue doing what he always did. Since Luck though, way too much musical chairs, and treating a lot of WRs as interchangeable (across positions) instead of scheming to their strengths (like Reid and other coaches do).

 

Anyway, some WRs can play any position. Some are great as possession guys, some deep, some inside, some outside, etc.. I just think Reich has tried to fit some round objects in square holes, as well as some triangles and stars. In short, even if we did grab a WR early in the draft or a FA, It's not a given to me that they'd be used the right way. I love the way for instance Reid started Hill out at one position, and highlighted his strengths. Never put too much on him early. As he found success, his role expanded, and gradually worked him to a new position with a much more well rounded tree. In contrast, Reich's usage of Cain (not that I'm saying Cain is anywhere near as good as Hill - although Hill was a 5th rounder....) was an extreme head scratcher. Cain was deep guy, and also a motion guy. What did Reich do... He tried to make him a possession guy. It was just never going to work out. 

[EastStreet]

24 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I’m all on board with Taylor but this is another reason I am against high draft picks on backs.  In today’s game, you usually have to pass it in the end zone.

 

Frank is trying to force the run too much in general.  IMO.  Take it when it’s there, but don’t force it.  None of the running teams did well in the playoffs.

 

Defenses have adjusted.

 

also you rate MACs ability to get open in tight spaces higher than I do, but I’d like to see them go to him more too.

 

I just don’t think it would make a major difference.

I'm fine with Taylor a decent amount in the RZ, but we over did it. And is was just very very predictable at times. And the amount of tight bunch sets just made it more predictable. What I'm not OK with, is running it to much, being predictable about it, and then using your smallest APB in the process. At least we seemed to spread it out more when Hines was in, which at least gave him more of a chance than Taylor.

 

MAC, and bigs in general, don't have to be crazy wide open in tight spaces. The size delta is the mismatch. Relying on crazy wide open guys in a small RZ or inside the 10 situation is just silly to me. A 6-4 or taller 250 guy vs a sub 6 foot/200lb guy should be easy. Other teams exploit it much better than we do. I'm not saying it should be 100% all about that. It just needs to be more than it is. 

[Nickster]

3 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

It's very debatable to say Ebron is a better receiver given his drops and catch rate%. When he came to us, the Colts totally transformed his "use", skewing it to high RZ usage compared to his prior years (look at his RZ target history pre-Colts). Even with his drop rate, he was extremely effective. That said, there's no reason to think we couldn't have had the same RZ success with MAC, or even Doyle. While Ebron is more "dynamic" that Doyle, I wouldn't say he's more dynamic in the catching space than MAC. I'd also say that both Doyle and Ebron have better hands overall by far. 

 

As far as TE usage being down, what I see with the top RZ teams, is that they use more bigs plain and simple than we do in the RZ. And logically, the increased use of nickel should actually add to the mismatch delta between a DB and TE. So not buying that whole line of thought. And just to add, when we did use TEs vs Buffalo, we were highly successful vs the nickel. IMO, you're hanging to much on that article. 

 

As far as our personnel in the RZ, I'd say it's more accurate to say we limit ourselves (use and targets of 6-4 guys).

 

BTW, I'm not opposed to an alpha WR. They don't grow on trees though. I'd also say that Pittman has a decent chance to grow into one. I'm not a fan of our WR usage over the last couple years at all though. Reich left Luck alone, and let him continue doing what he always did. Since Luck though, way too much musical chairs, and treating a lot of WRs as interchangeable (across positions) instead of scheming to their strengths (like Reid and other coaches do).

 

Anyway, some WRs can play any position. Some are great as possession guys, some deep, some inside, some outside, etc.. I just think Reich has tried to fit some round objects in square holes, as well as some triangles and stars. In short, even if we did grab a WR early in the draft or a FA, It's not a given to me that they'd be used the right way. I love the way for instance Reid started Hill out at one position, and highlighted his strengths. Never put too much on him early. As he found success, his role expanded, and gradually worked him to a new position with a much more well rounded tree. In contrast, Reich's usage of Cain (not that I'm saying Cain is anywhere near as good as Hill - although Hill was a 5th rounder....) was an extreme head scratcher. Cain was deep guy, and also a motion guy. What did Reich do... He tried to make him a possession guy. It was just never going to work out. 

I thought Cain was going to be good.  Crazy athleticism.

 

Look I don’t have the data and I’m not all that interested in Ebron data, but I distinctly remember people saying he was supremely talented but lazy, ADD maybe, bad hands, etc.  HOWEVER, the talent is clearly there as a receiver.  He was a disinterested blocker.  
 

I think it is clear that Ebron is way more talented as a receiver than our guys.  He does have butterfingers at times, but I think he has trouble staying on the field for other reasons than ability to get open.

 

hey I like talking to you.  I wasn’t trying to be combative. Sometimes I try to be funny.  And I ain’t that damn funny.

[Nickster]

8 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I'm fine with Taylor a decent amount in the RZ, but we over did it. And is was just very very predictable at times. And the amount of tight bunch sets just made it more predictable. What I'm not OK with, is running it to much, being predictable about it, and then using your smallest APB in the process. At least we seemed to spread it out more when Hines was in, which at least gave him more of a chance than Taylor.

 

MAC, and bigs in general, don't have to be crazy wide open in tight spaces. The size delta is the mismatch. Relying on crazy wide open guys in a small RZ or inside the 10 situation is just silly to me. A 6-4 or taller 250 guy vs a sub 6 foot/200lb guy should be easy. Other teams exploit it much better than we do. I'm not saying it should be 100% all about that. It just needs to be more than it is. 

Well man if it were that easy, you’d get a failed basketball player at 6 9 and 270 plus and there are plenty of these types of bodies that play college and not pro.

 

I don’t think Mac uses his body well, and he doesn’t stop start well.  Stop start is big for those little goal line routes.

 

 

look man I like Mac.  I’m just saying hes no Kielce or little, and yes he’s no Ebron.  Not being Ebron is not all bad but I the RZ it can be.

[Nickster]

On 1/13/2021 at 10:41 AM, EastStreet said:

I'll tell you what, Doyle, MAC, and Burton have the 3 best situational success rates in the RZ of all of our pass catchers....... but none are in the top 3 in RZ targets....

 

So tell me oh wise Nickster, what statistical evidence do you have lol... 

zero. There’s a stat for you.

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I thought Cain was going to be good.  Crazy athleticism.

 

Look I don’t have the data and I’m not all that interested in Ebron data, but I distinctly remember people saying he was supremely talented but lazy, ADD maybe, bad hands, etc.  HOWEVER, the talent is clearly there as a receiver.  He was a disinterested blocker.  
 

I think it is clear that Ebron is way more talented as a receiver than our guys.  He does have butterfingers at times, but I think he has trouble staying on the field for other reasons than ability to get open.

 

hey I like talking to you.  I wasn’t trying to be combative. Sometimes I try to be funny.  And I ain’t that damn funny.

Ebron's hands are way worse than Doyle's or MACs. Doyle's catch rate is 10pts higher. MAC's is 20pts higher.  To add, Ebron probably has the highest drop rate of any starting TE over the last 3 years. 

 

Not sure you fully understand just how good MAC was this year when actually used. Great catch rate. Great YPT and YPC. Great blocking. His targets were probably a third of Ebron's, but his stats/avgs blow Ebron's away.

[EastStreet]

10 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Well man if it were that easy, you’d get a failed basketball player at 6 9 and 270 plus and there are plenty of these types of bodies that play college and not pro.

 

I don’t think Mac uses his body well, and he doesn’t stop start well.  Stop start is big for those little goal line routes.

 

 

look man I like Mac.  I’m just saying hes no Kielce or little, and yes he’s no Ebron.  Not being Ebron is not all bad but I the RZ it can be.

MAC ran great sail routes (which is not an easy route) early in the year vs MN. I think he connected on like 3 in one game. They we never saw it again the rest of the year... Still scratching my head.

 

Anyway, that's not a basic route and he and Rivers were in perfect synch. It's basically a clear out where the outside WR clears out (goes straight), and the guy running from the slot (TE in this instance) runs vert and then breaks later in the route behind the clear out to the sideline. No, not a starting/stopping, but great route running, and great hands. It's criminal we didn't see more of that later in the year. Once maybe a fluke, but multiple perfect shots in the same game is not fluke. 

 

We've also seen MAC snatch a lot of balls out of the air. He's got a a catch rate of around 80%. That's special.... That's got to be top 5ish among WRs...... 

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

Ebron's hands are way worse than Doyle's or MACs. Doyle's catch rate is 10pts higher. MAC's is 20pts higher.  To add, Ebron probably has the highest drop rate of any starting TE over the last 3 years. 

 

Not sure you fully understand just how good MAC was this year when actually used. Great catch rate. Great YPT and YPC. Great blocking. His targets were probably a third of Ebron's, but his stats/avgs blow Ebron's away.

Maybe MAc was schemed open a lot?  Look I’ve wondered why we don’t throw to Mac more but it seems like many of his catches are downfield rather than in tight spaces.  I don’t know for sure. 
 

It seems though that if Mac was as good as that we’d have a dozen teams beating down our door trying to acquire him.  That might be the case.  No way of knowing.  But it doesn’t appear to be the case.

 

Mac is pretty ponderous looking.  I doubt he’s shaking himself open very often. Rivers made a living throwing to TEs so that’s not it. MFrank coached the Chargers and Eags, both very TE prominent teams. Maybe he’s changed but I doubt it.  

I don’t recall many of MAcs receptions being close to the LOS.  They seem to target Doyle there.

 

again I’m not against targeting TEs more, I just don’t  think ypthat is a major factor with our RZ issue.

 

 

[EastStreet]

18 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Maybe MAc was schemed open a lot?  Look I’ve wondered why we don’t throw to Mac more but it seems like many of his catches are downfield rather than in tight spaces.  I don’t know for sure. 
 

It seems though that if Mac was as good as that we’d have a dozen teams beating down our door trying to acquire him.  That might be the case.  No way of knowing.  But it doesn’t appear to be the case.

 

Mac is pretty ponderous looking.  I doubt he’s shaking himself open very often. Rivers made a living throwing to TEs so that’s not it. MFrank coached the Chargers and Eags, both very TE prominent teams. Maybe he’s changed but I doubt it.  

I don’t recall many of MAcs receptions being close to the LOS.  They seem to target Doyle there.

 

again I’m not against targeting TEs more, I just don’t  think ypthat is a major factor with our RZ issue.

Schemed open? lol.. You're starting to stretch again, and use what-if type arguments with no statistical basis to minimize simple stats. You do that way too much. MAC made both contested/possession and longer route catches. Do you realize how good 80% is? If not, look at receiving stats. There are very few WRs and TEs with 80%ish catch rates. Most guys in that range are RBs.

 

As far as teams beating down doors, MAC is a RFA, so teams really can't beat down the door unless they want to give up draft picks. And TE is a devalued position, so not going to happen, especially given the little that MAC was used. Most sites only list UFA's in their top FAs, but I've seen MAC listed on a few lists as a top 5 or 10 TE for 2021. I know PFN had him on their list. 

 

On the insinuation he isn't shaking folks off... He wasn't used very often, but when he was given a priority read, he looked pretty open to me. Sites grade separation differently, but PP shows MAC clearly better than Ebron. Kelce only had 0.03 better separation. MAC had identical separation to Kittle. 

 

As far as where he's catching passes, 3 of his 4 catches vs Buffalo were under 5 yards from the LOS. Only one was 10 or more yards down field. Honestly though, I'd rather see him used like he was in the MN game, where he had 3 catches 15+ yards, and only one at the LOS.

 

In short, you're again making all kinds of statements like they're fact, when they are actually in direct contrast 

 

 

[Nickster]

7 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Schemed open? lol.. You're starting to stretch again, and use what-if type arguments with no statistical basis to minimize simple stats. You do that way too much. MAC made both contested/possession and longer route catches. Do you realize how good 80% is? If not, look at receiving stats. There are very few WRs and TEs with 80%ish catch rates. Most guys in that range are RBs.

 

As far as teams beating down doors, MAC is a RFA, so teams really can't beat down the door unless they want to give up draft picks. And TE is a devalued position, so not going to happen, especially given the little that MAC was used. Most sites only list UFA's in their top FAs, but I've seen MAC listed on a few lists as a top 5 or 10 TE for 2021. I know PFN had him on their list. 

 

On the insinuation he isn't shaking folks off... He wasn't used very often, but when he was given a priority read, he looked pretty open to me. Sites grade separation differently, but PP shows MAC clearly better than Ebron. Kelce only had 0.03 better separation. MAC had identical separation to Kittle. 

 

As far as where he's catching passes, 3 of his 4 catches vs Buffalo were under 5 yards from the LOS. Only one was 10 or more yards down field. Honestly though, I'd rather see him used like he was in the MN game, where he had 3 catches 15+ yards, and only one at the LOS.

 

In short, you're again making all kinds of statements like they're fact, when they are actually in direct contrast 

 

 

With respect East when one says maybe, one is not stating things as if they are fact.  And if you read the post you responded to, you will not see anything stated as a fact.  Do you really read the posts?  Because it seems as If you push your agenda pretty hard.  There is nothing in my post that stated anything authoritatively.

Stats only show so much in football.  I think a lot of people try to act as if football stats are like baseball stats and they are not .

 

Most baseball stats are based on one players performance against another player.  There is negligible influence on the hitter from his teammates.  It’s him v. The field.

football is nothing like that. 
 

You can have great players put up bad stats on bad teams.  And lesser players vice versa and all permutations in between.

 

In baseball, a guy pretty much is what he is over a minimum number of ABs against a variety of pitchers.  It has nothing to do with much else.  
 

in football that is not the case.  Catch rate over 39 pass attempts is not necessarily indicative of everything that goes into a catch rate.  

 

Do you really think JT is one of the best catchers of the ball in football?  I doubt it.  Most of his catches are easy catches this year.  
 

And East, you don’t use your own logic.  Sail routes are not RZ routes.  At all, they are among the slowest developing routes in the game.  it has nothing to do with tight spaces in the RZ.  Many my posts show that I think MAc is better when he gets moving.  Repeat after me remember?
 

Much of being a good receiver is not really measurable statistically.  Getting to the right spot in zones and other read routes is probably at least 50% of the deal for adequately athletic NFL type receivers.  There is a recent trend of a few rookies putting up good numbers, but usually takes 2 or 3 years.  I think receiving proficiency often takes longer than quarterbacking. maybe MAC doesn’t read well?  He doesn’t have much experience there.

 

I think you overestimate Macs catch rate.  He’s got pretty good hands, I doubt he truly has some of the best hands in the game.  The types of catches he makes likely are on average not the most difficult ones.

 

 

 

 

 

[EastStreet]

16 minutes ago, Nickster said:

With respect East when one says maybe, one is not stating things as if they are fact.  And if you read the post you responded to, you will not see anything stated as a fact.  Do you really read the posts?  Because it seems as If you push your agenda pretty hard.  There is nothing in my post that stated anything authoritatively.

When you constantly attack simple facts/stats, especially when there is an abundance, with hypothetical fuzz, then you're simply not being intellectually honest. Combat stats/facts with other stats/facts, not with "maybes" or what ifs.

16 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Stats only show so much in football.  I think a lot of people try to act as if football stats are like baseball stats and they are not .

 

Most baseball stats are based on one players performance against another player.  There is negligible influence on the hitter from his teammates.  It’s him v. The field.

football is nothing like that.  
 

You can have great players put up bad stats on bad teams.  And lesser players vice versa and all permutations in between.

 

In baseball, a guy pretty much is what he is over a minimum number of ABs against a variety of pitchers.  It has nothing to do with much else.  

The above is more what if, maybe, deflection stuff. You haven't addressed one fact I've put out with a counter fact or stat. Players fluctuate vs competition, sure. That's why you have AVGs, and put more stock in those data points as the sample size gets larger.

16 minutes ago, Nickster said:

in football that is not the case.  Catch rate over 39 pass attempts is not necessarily indicative of everything that goes into a catch rate.  

 

Do you really think JT is one of the best catchers of the ball in football?  I doubt it.  Most of his catches are easy catches this year.  

For his position (RB), yes I do. He is what his stats say he is, until he's not.

16 minutes ago, Nickster said:

And East, you don’t use your own logic.  Sail routes are not RZ routes.  At all, they are among the slowest developing routes in the game.  it has nothing to do with tight spaces in the RZ.  Many my posts show that I think MAc is better when he gets moving.  Repeat after me remember?

Dude, don't try it. You're the one that brought up MAC in both long and short stuff in an attempt to muddy. I spoke to both, giving factual examples of a game where he had longer passes (MN), and short passes (BUF). You're the one that tried to lean off topic. 

16 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Much of being a good receiver is not really measurable statistically.  Getting to the right spot in zones and other read routes is probably at least 50% of the deal for adequately athletic NFL type receivers.  There is a recent trend of a few rookies putting up good numbers, but usually takes 2 or 3 years.  I think receiving proficiency often takes longer than quarterbacking. maybe MAC doesn’t read well?  He doesn’t have much experience there.

Having a high catch rate matters. Having very few drops matters. Having a good AVG matters. Having good separation matters. Being a good blocker matters. Being clutch in a playoff game like Buffalo matters. A TE that can run a sail route effectively and in synch with his QB matters. If he only checked one of those boxes, then I would say that one stat may be misleading. Just about every stat he has, and just about every grade he has (from various sources) suggests he's pretty good. I've yet to see anything factual suggest he's not. 

 

And again, you're adding fuzz with "maybe this", or "maybe that". Nothing you toss at the wall is sticking man. Bring a fact or stat to the table for once.

16 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

I think you overestimate Macs catch rate.  He’s got pretty good hands, I doubt he truly has some of the best hands in the game.  The types of catches he makes likely are on average not the most difficult ones.

Again, more subjective stuff.. OK lol... Must be all luck from the golden gods. Got it.

[Nickster]

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

When you constantly attack simple facts/stats, especially when there is an abundance, with hypothetical fuzz, then you're simply not being intellectually honest. Combat stats/facts with other stats/facts, not with "maybes" or what ifs.

The above is more what if, maybe, deflection stuff. You haven't addressed one fact I've put out with a counter fact or stat. Players fluctuate vs competition, sure. That's why you have AVGs, and put more stock in those data points as the sample size gets larger.

For his position (RB), yes I do. He is what his stats say he is, until he's not.

Dude, don't try it. You're the one that brought up MAC in both long and short stuff in an attempt to muddy. I spoke to both, giving factual examples of a game where he had longer passes (MN), and short passes (BUF). You're the one that tried to lean off topic. 

Having a high catch rate matters. Having very few drops matters. Having a good AVG matters. Having good separation matters. Being a good blocker matters. Being clutch in a playoff game like Buffalo matters. A TE that can run a sail route effectively and in synch with his QB matters. If he only checked one of those boxes, then I would say that one stat may be misleading. Just about every stat he has, and just about every grade he has (from various sources) suggests he's pretty good. I've yet to see anything factual suggest he's not. 

 

And again, you're adding fuzz with "maybe this", or "maybe that". Nothing you toss at the wall is sticking man. Bring a fact or stat to the table for once.

Again, more subjective stuff.. OK lol... Must be all luck from the golden gods. Got it.

 

 

Well there will be a new QB in town.  

 

So you think Jonathon Taylor is a better receiver than Nyheim Hines then?  

And you actually think MAC is the 3rd or 4th best pass catching TE in the NFL then?

 

 

 

[EastStreet]

23 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

 

Well there will be a new QB in town.  

bummer if so. doesn't really matter though on the topic

Quote

 

So you think Jonathon Taylor is a better receiver than Nyheim Hines then?  

Taylor has a higher YPT and YPC, higher catch rate, longer completions, more YAC, etc.. Hines didn't have to share many RB targets the last two years, and JT just took a big chunk and had all better AVGs doing so in year 1. Yes, I think he's better.... 

Quote

And you actually think MAC is the 3rd or 4th best pass catching TE in the NFL then?

I didn't say that. I think he's capable of being much more than he is (target wise), and potentially top 5. The crime is not giving him more targets to prove himself. You can't say he's top 5 until he is, but you also can't say he isn't given the stats he's putting up when given the opportunity. 

[Nickster]

30 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

bummer if so. doesn't really matter though on the topic

Taylor has a higher YPT and YPC, higher catch rate, longer completions, more YAC, etc.. Hines didn't have to share many RB targets the last two years, and JT just took a big chunk and had all better AVGs doing so in year 1. Yes, I think he's better.... 

I didn't say that. I think he's capable of being much more than he is (target wise), and potentially top 5. The crime is not giving him more targets to prove himself. You can't say he's top 5 until he is, but you also can't say he isn't given the stats he's putting up when given the opportunity. 

East.  This to me is a stunning opinion.  I wish we were sitting across from each other so that I could see if you are serious or not.

 

What if anything do you drink?

[Superman]

13 hours ago, EastStreet said:

In contrast, Reich's usage of Cain (not that I'm saying Cain is anywhere near as good as Hill - although Hill was a 5th rounder....) was an extreme head scratcher. Cain was deep guy, and also a motion guy. What did Reich do... He tried to make him a possession guy. It was just never going to work out. 

 

This is a weird angle, IMO. Cain played 200 snaps for us, and caught 4 passes. I don't think the way the staff used him was Cain's problem.

[Nickster]

26 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

bummer if so. doesn't really matter though on the topic

Taylor has a higher YPT and YPC, higher catch rate, longer completions, more YAC, etc.. Hines didn't have to share many RB targets the last two years, and JT just took a big chunk and had all better AVGs doing so in year 1. Yes, I think he's better.... 

I didn't say that. I think he's capable of being much more than he is (target wise), and potentially top 5. The crime is not giving him more targets to prove himself. You can't say he's top 5 until he is, but you also can't say he isn't given the stats he's putting up when given the opportunity. 

 

Yeah, I'm really concerned.  I think we were poised to really improve on this years' performance next year given PR.

 

Who would you like to see (realistically) and who do you  lean towards?

[EastStreet]

14 minutes ago, Nickster said:

East.  This to me is a stunning opinion.  I wish we were sitting across from each other so that I could see if you are serious or not.

 

What if anything do you drink?

 

Tell me what specifically statistically, or factually, that tells you that Hines is better than JT?

And this is JT's first year.... 

 

Actually drinking SBs now with a table spoon of sugar and a shot of french vanilla creamer..

[EastStreet]

29 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

This is a weird angle, IMO. Cain played 200 snaps for us, and caught 4 passes. I don't think the way the staff used him was Cain's problem.

Not an angle, just a head scratcher to me. Why take a deep threat z/slot guy with a slight frame and put him at X and ask him to run possession routes is something I just don't understand. Not saying he was ever all that, but he was tied for the 2nd highest rated WR in the 2018 draft. I understand why he dropped due to the character flags, but the way he was used made zero sense. I get it, we were hurting at X and JB didn't throw long much anyway, but he was never going to be that guy (possession X).

[Nickster]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

 

Tell me what specifically statistically, or factually, that tells you that Hines is better than JT?

And this is JT's first year.... 

 

Actually drinking SBs now with a table spoon of sugar and a shot of french vanilla creamer..

Stats don't tell the whole story.  

 

What are SBs?  Like you're drinking right now?  Cool.  Wish I could.

[Superman]

Just now, EastStreet said:

Not an angle, just a head scratcher to me. Why take a deep threat z/slot guy with a slight frame and put him at X and ask him to run possession routes is something I just don't understand. Not saying he was ever all that, but he was tied for the 2nd highest rated WR in the 2018 draft. I understand why he dropped due to the character flags, but the way he was used made zero sense. I get it, we were hurting at X and JB didn't throw long much anyway, but he was never going to be that guy (possession X).

 

I left out the fact that his QB wasn't good at the things that you wanted him to be used for...

 

It looked like they had a good feel for Cain's fit before the 2018 season, then he got hurt. We never saw him physically perform after that. He got a significant number of snaps, but only 14 targets, and 4 catches, then they let him go. I don't think Cain's issue was the way the staff used him.

 

So it's weird to me to see you latch onto Deon Cain of all people as an example of Reich misusing a receiver.

[EastStreet]

31 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

Yeah, I'm really concerned.  I think we were poised to really improve on this years' performance next year given PR.

 

Who would you like to see (realistically) and who do you  lean towards?

I have no clue to be honest. I don't want a rebuild year with Eason, don't want a JB part 3. I don't want Wentz. I'd take Carr or Stafford if it cost only a 1st or less. Darnold is an option, but I think he might be broke (same concern as Wentz). I'd be open to anyone really, even Fitzmagic or Winston. Fitz played very well for Miami without a lot of O help. Winston to me is just as much gamble as Wentz or Darnold. 

 

I don't know. The draft other than Lawrence seems to be a lot of guys with high bust or JAG potential. And I just don't want to expend a lot of capital just to move up for a dice roll and rebuild year... 

 

We were pretty close to a 13-3 year (Jax and Pitt) and a #2 slot with PR. I think he would have been better in year 2.  Oh well.

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Stats don't tell the whole story.  

 

What are SBs?  Like you're drinking right now?  Cool.  Wish I could.

starbucks pike place coffee

 

stats may not tell the whole story, but when there are multiple data points pointing up, and none pointing down, your best bet it up... 

[Nickster]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

I have no clue to be honest. I don't want a rebuild year with Eason, don't want a JB part 3. I don't want Wentz. I'd take Carr or Stafford if it cost only a 1st or less. Darnold is an option, but I think he might be broke (same concern as Wentz). I'd be open to anyone really, even Fitzmagic or Winston. Fitz played very well for Miami without a lot of O help. Winston to me is just as much gamble as Wentz or Darnold. 

 

I don't know. The draft other than Lawrence seems to be a lot of guys with high bust or JAG potential. And I just don't want to expend a lot of capital just to move up for a dice roll and rebuild year... 

 

We were pretty close to a 13-3 year (Jax and Pitt) and a #2 slot with PR. I think he would have been better in year 2.  Oh well.

The only thing about Winston to me is he'd be cheap and could have a future.  Fitz would be cheap and a stop gap.

 

My issue with Wentz, Carr, and Stafford is the investment would be so high that missing on this would doom this young team. 

 

I think on the QB thing you and I are pretty close.  

 

I hadn't thought about Fitzmagic.  That is a possibility.  Honestly, I don't know if I've ever watched him play a football game.  I don't know what he does well and what he struggles with.  

 

[Nickster]

8 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

starbucks pike place coffee

 

stats may not tell the whole story, but when there are multiple data points pointing up, and none pointing down, your best bet it up... 

 

Oh, I thought you were Irish or something.  

 

I can't actually believe you think JB is a better receiver than Hines.  I don't believe you.  You sure you are being honest with yourself?

[Nickster]

8 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

starbucks pike place coffee

 

stats may not tell the whole story, but when there are multiple data points pointing up, and none pointing down, your best bet it up... 

 

Let me revise though.  Football stats out of context and taken without nuance on players with small sample sizes don't tell you anything definitive.

 

Stats without film study are basically meaningless.  

[EastStreet]

22 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I left out the fact that his QB wasn't good at the things that you wanted him to be used for...

 

It looked like they had a good feel for Cain's fit before the 2018 season, then he got hurt. We never saw him physically perform after that. He got a significant number of snaps, but only 14 targets, and 4 catches, then they let him go. I don't think Cain's issue was the way the staff used him.

 

So it's weird to me to see you latch onto Deon Cain of all people as an example of Reich misusing a receiver.

Not latching onto anything. Very simple question.

 

Why would any coach take a speed/deep Z/slot with a slight frame (200lbs), and ask him to play possession X, and be the rub guy.... If you think that's proper use, OK I guess, but is that what you really think?

 

He was playing well by all reports in the slot/z going D and crossers/glides in 2018. They should have just left him on the PS in 2019 with JB under center.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Not latching onto anything. Very simple question.

 

Why would any coach take a speed/deep Z/slot with a slight frame (200lbs), and ask him to play possession X, and be the rub guy.... If you think that's proper use, OK I guess, but is that what you really think?

 

He was playing well by all reports in the slot/z going D and crossers/glides in 2018. They should have just left him on the PS in 2019 with JB under center.

 

They had TY and Campbell in those roles, and Funchess got hurt. They got Cain some reps (in multiple spots, by the way; they didn't just stick him at X and nowhere else). I don't think their usage of him is an indication of how they would have used him in an ideal situation. 

[EastStreet]

24 minutes ago, Nickster said:

The only thing about Winston to me is he'd be cheap and could have a future.  Fitz would be cheap and a stop gap.

 

My issue with Wentz, Carr, and Stafford is the investment would be so high that missing on this would doom this young team. 

 

I think on the QB thing you and I are pretty close.  

 

I hadn't thought about Fitzmagic.  That is a possibility.  Honestly, I don't know if I've ever watched him play a football game.  I don't know what he does well and what he struggles with.  

 

I think Winston and Reich might be a decent match. Reich is conservative, and Winston suffered in Arian's risk it biscuit scheme. If Reich could restrain and focus him (he restrained Rivers too much IMO), he might do well.

 

Fitzmagic would be ready made for Reich's system. He easily outplayed Tua this year, and that aside, just played very very well with limited tools. He is absolutely a stop gap.

 

I'd be OK with a 1st for Stafford or Carr. Both have at least 5 years left in the tank. No more than a first though. Maybe a third too for Carr.

[EastStreet]

27 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

Oh, I thought you were Irish or something.  

 

I can't actually believe you think JB is a better receiver than Hines.  I don't believe you.  You sure you are being honest with yourself?

I'm Irish/German/Italian.

 

If given the same opportunity (targets) next year, I'd wager a good sum that JT would outperform Hines.

[EastStreet]

23 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

Let me revise though.  Football stats out of context and taken without nuance on players with small sample sizes don't tell you anything definitive.

 

Stats without film study are basically meaningless.  

lol... it's not that small of a sample size. JT simply does more with the ball. Better yards, better YAC, more physical, etc..

[Nickster]

8 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I'm Irish/German/Italian.

 

If given the same opportunity (targets) next year, I'd wager a good sum that JT would outperform Hines.

 

My Lord I think you are serious.  I honestly thought you were BSing.

 

Gerrys can have beer before lunch and Ities wine, but it's usually we Irish with the whiskey before breakfast.

 

One thing is almost clear with PRs retirement.  The backs will be less productive as pass catchers next year with someone else QBing unless Brady comes over.

 

PR is one of if not the best QB of all time throwing to backs, and I'd bet you could find stats to prove it.

[EastStreet]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

They had TY and Campbell in those roles, and Funchess got hurt. They got Cain some reps (in multiple spots, by the way; they didn't just stick him at X and nowhere else). I don't think their usage of him is an indication of how they would have used him in an ideal situation. 

 

You're dodging the question. Do you think it's a good coaching move to use a guy who is slight in stature, 6-1 200lbs, has always played the z/slot role, to possession X to do rubs and such?

 

Like I said, I get it, we were short at X.... Still, Inman was bigger. Pascal was bigger. Johnson was bigger. Campbell was out. They didn't have to use him at X, and that's where he was slotted most of the time. They could have played him at slot, or moved TY into slot and let him play Z. And yes they moved him around a bit, but he was mostly at X. And moving him around to all 3 positions is bad in itself from a development perspective. Reich likes the "interchangeable" word way too much... 

[EastStreet]

4 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

My Lord I think you are serious.  I honestly thought you were BSing.

 

Gerrys can have beer before lunch and Ities wine, but it's usually we Irish with the whiskey before breakfast.

 

One thing is almost clear with PRs retirement.  The backs will be less productive as pass catchers next year with someone else QBing unless Brady comes over.

 

PR is one of if not the best QB of all time throwing to backs, and I'd bet you could find stats to prove it.

I think any QB in Reich's O will be throwing to RBs quite a bit. Perhaps not as successful as Luck or Rivers, but the targets will be there. Seems to me RBs are often 2nd, if not 1st reads. 

[Superman]

Just now, EastStreet said:

 

You're dodging the question. Do you think it's a good coaching move to use a guy who is slight in stature, 6-1 200lbs, has always played the z/slot role, to possession X to do rubs and such?

 

Like I said, I get it, we were short at X.... Still, Inman was bigger. Pascal was bigger. Johnson was bigger. Campbell was out. They didn't have to use him at X, and that's where he was slotted most of the time. They could have played him at slot, or moved TY into slot and let him play Z. And yes they moved him around a bit, but he was mostly at X. And moving him around to all 3 positions is bad in itself from a development perspective. Reich likes the "interchangeable" word way too much... 

 

I think it was a coaching move made out of necessity and opportunity, and as such I don't agree to judge it as decision that reflects the staff's evaluation or usage of that player. I don't think it's a failure of a decision, especially for a second year player who didn't have a rookie season and was buried on the depth chart. Use him in multiple areas to see if he can carve out a role for himself.

 

I feel like you're judging their usage of Cain as if they took Hollywood Brown in the first and tried to make him a possession receiver.

[Nickster]

Just now, EastStreet said:

I think any QB in Reich's O will be throwing to RBs quite a bit. Perhaps not as successful as Luck or Rivers, but the targets will be there. Seems to me RBs are often 2nd, if not 1st reads. 

 

PR puts a very catchable ball in there.  

 

I predict a large drop in RB pass catching proficiency, but we will almost certainly have more proficiency in other areas PR is weak at.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I think it was a coaching move made out of necessity and opportunity, and as such I don't agree to judge it as decision that reflects the staff's evaluation or usage of that player. I don't think it's a failure of a decision, especially for a second year player who didn't have a rookie season and was buried on the depth chart. Use him in multiple areas to see if he can carve out a role for himself.

 

I feel like you're judging their usage of Cain as if they took Hollywood Brown in the first and tried to make him a possession receiver.

Not at all. I see him as 

 

1) a cheap draft pick with a potentially high ceiling. Zero risk if he doesn't work out, but a great bargain if he does.

2) had exceptional chemistry from all reports (Camp 2018) deep with Luck

3) was coming off injury in 2019 (which in itself begs for a slow roll) and really still a rook in terms of route maturity

4) anyone thinking a 6-1 skinny  dude was going to succeed as a possession X when he's never done anything close, is just trying to stunt development. 

 

Sorry man, you just don't take a rook coming off injury and ask him to play a role he's not cut out for, and has never played. It's like they purposefully tried to kill any confidence and stunt development at the proper position. It was already a given he needed route work as he ran a limited tree at Clemson. Like I said, there were other/better options for X. Just a horrible developmental decision. But, like I said, not a huge loss.

[EastStreet]

8 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

PR puts a very catchable ball in there.  

 

I predict a large drop in RB pass catching proficiency, but we will almost certainly have more proficiency in other areas PR is weak at.

Really just depends who is the guy. There are lots of different flavors to choose from.

[Nickster]

26 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Really just depends who is the guy. There are lots of different flavors to choose from.

Friendly wager?

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Friendly wager?

on what