Showing posts with label receivers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label receivers. Show all posts

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Fred Dean on Who Made the Hall Of Fame

"Cris Carter and 4 other guys"

That's news to Mr. Carter. Congratulations! In fact, Chris Carter did not make the Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility. Perhaps Mr. Dean knew that only one receiver had made it and he logically assumed that it was Carter:

Cris Carter : 234 games, 209 started / 130 TDs / 59.4 YPG
Art Monk : 224 games, 193 started / 68 TDs / 56.8 YPG

Not bad numbers for Monk or anything, but in like 1 additional season worth of starts Chris Carter has double the touchdowns. Plus, he had more yardage, even adjusting for games. Now I know Carter played for that one freakishly good Minnesota offense, but he also played for some pretty bad teams. Of course the biggest crime is that these two are not mutually exclusive. Just because they put in Monk doesn't mean they couldn't put in the other guy who is pretty obviously better.

So anyway, I was watching the AFC Pro Bowl team play the Cowboys + Adrian Peterson when I heard the quote that inspired this.

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Thats why they play the games, fool! (Version One of Many)

Paul Zimmerman is back!

Wonderful. I linked you as a reference to what I'm going to do, but before I start, let me make it loud and clear that no sane person should click that link. Trust me, I know less about football now than I did before I started reading that crap.

Anyway, Dr. Z spends a lot of time rambling, but his point can be reasonably inferred. Randy Moss should not be enshrined in Canton. Writes Zimmerman:

I promise you this, Gary. As long as I'm a selector, the Canton Highway will be a very difficult road for Moss. I don't care how many great years he gives the Patriots. The guy's a dog, and there are too many people who spent years of sacrifice without getting a sniff from the Hall.


Wonderful. Dr Z, if that is your real name, would you please tell us why you think his career with New England (i.e. the second half of his career) should have no barring on his HOF credentials. Why have you come to a decision so early? Any reason?

Also, Michael Irvin was perhaps the biggest "dog" in NFL History, and he got your vote year after year for HOF consideration.

Michael Irvin (159 Games):
750 Receptions
11904 Yards

Randy Moss (138 games adjusted proportionally to 159 games and rounded):
779 Receptions
12328 Yards

Randy Moss will likely play much longer than Michael Irvin did.

Look, my assessment of Moss is that he won't be anything insanely special in NE. He has diminishing physical skills and has proven over a large sample size that his effort level is determined by factors not attributable to Randy Moss.

But already, Moss has a very solid case for the HOF. If he exceeds expectations in New England, is there really anyway that you can not vote this guy in first ballot? I mean, Dr. Z thought Irvin should be in, so obviously citing Moss' character against him is a gianormous double standard of epic proportions.

Then again, this is the same guy who thinks that Art Monk, a man who retired as the most prolific receiver in NFL History (by the metric of receptions) should not be inducted into Canton. I can't stress this enough. A man who thinks that one of the greatest receivers ever to play should not be in the hall has a vote for the hall of fame. Old and senile doesn't quite describe this. Dustybakerdumb doesn't quite describe this. This is downright and utterly senseless.

And that, in a nutshell, is why they play the games. So dudes like Dr. Z come out looking completely and utterly clueless time and time again.

Actually, there are a bunch of other reasons the games are played, but honestly, is that not the most significant one?

Friday, April 13, 2007

A Bonus Article Tonight for all those Loyal Readers

All 4 of ya.

We are probably going to be doing nothing but draft stuff for the next two weeks in this here space because...well, nobody is going to write anything about anything in football but the draft between now and then.

Anyway, I've noticed that most scouts will overvalue a players' physical tools, especially at the wide receiver position, and then when said player fails to meet expectations they write article about how tough it is to pinpoint receivers.

Well, the truth of the matter is, it's not all that hard. You've just got to look for the guys with the most college experience. Receiver is a very mental position and you want a guy who is aware of what is going on around him playing for you. So if you are going to get behind a WR prospect, get behind a guy like Dwayne Bowe, a highly rated 4 year player (3 year starter) at LSU. You'll be right more often than this guy.

But he will learn his lesson eventually. At least, thats what I thought until I read this article. Now I'm convinced he won't ever learn why he sucks at scouting prospects.

You need to be an INsider to access it. Sorry.

Productive NFL wide receivers come in many different sizes, shapes and speeds. Just take a look at the wide receivers who led the NFL in catches last season. Sure, Houston's Andre Johnson fits the mold as the league leader with 103 receptions. After all, the former No. 3 overall pick (2003) checks in at 6-foot-3 and 219 pounds with 4.4 speed. But how do you explain Mike Furrey, a former undrafted free agent in 2000, hauling in the second-most passes (98) in 2006?

Furrey plays the slot receiver in Mike Martz' offense.

Seriously Todd, no position in football is more affected by what their team is doing around them than the WR position. You probably should know this considering the career path you've chosen.

Andre Johnson caught a bunch O hitches from David Carr. That type of offense is only successful if you turn those hitches into TD's sometimes.

Other productive NFL receivers who slipped in recent drafts include Carolina's Steve Smith (third round, 2001), Seattle's Deion Branch (second round, 2002), Arizona's Anquan Boldin (second round, 2003), the N.Y. Jets' Jerricho Cotchery (fourth round, 2004) and New Orleans' Marques Colston (seventh round, 2006). Meanwhile, David Terrell (2001), Ashley Lelie (2002), Charles Rogers (2003) and Reggie Williams (2004) all looked the part as high draft picks coming out of college but haven't come close to matching production for investment.


Steve Smith, 2 years CC + 2 years at Utah, all starting
Deion Branch, 4 years at Louisville
Anquan Boldin, 4 years at Flordia State (correct me if I'm wrong)
Marques Colston, 4 year starter at Hofstra (also a really lucky find)
Jerrico Cotchery, 3 year starter at NC State, additional PT as a Freshman

David Terrell, 2 1/2 year starter
Ashley Lelie, 3 year starter
Charles Rogers, 3 year starter
Reggie Williams, 2 1/2 year starter

Have you learned anything from this trend? I'm guessing not. Okay then, moving on.

The bottom line is that evaluating wide receiver talent from the college ranks has become maddening for NFL front offices. In my estimation, there are a couple reasons for this. First off, I would argue that quarterback is the only position with more outside factors to skew collegiate production. Secondly, the ability to "separate" is the most important skill for a wide receiver. Unfortunately, it also can be the trickiest to properly evaluate.

Todd McShay actually thinks that QB production is the most skewed position on the entire field. He actually wrote this paragraph. This is hilarious. The easist position where a convienient FORMULA exists to project success to the NFL level is the position that Todd McShay believes is the one that gets skewed the most.

Did I read that correctly?

Secondly, the ability to seperate is not really all that meaningful of a quality for a receiver. The fact that you value it so much completely explains why you can't evaluate them properly. I would think the two biggest sticking points for grading a reciever are:

1) How well he plays the ball (the catch)
2) How well he gets yards after the catch (after the catch)

I would say that MOST receivers are relatively identical in the way they seperate. This probably explains why you can't grade a difference accurately. It's also a huge red flag that you are doing this whole scouting thing improperly, but I'm not one to tell you how to do your job.

Or am I?

While catching the ball is the ultimate goal, a receiver with great hands is rendered useless if he can't get open. It's not difficult to evaluate a receiver's hands, top-end speed and leaping ability. The challenge when evaluating a wide receiver's separation skills is to sift through those potentially deceptive variables, which include his supporting cast, the offensive system he plays in and the types of defensive coverage and level of competition he faces.

It's good that its not that hard to evaluate hands, speed, and leaping ability, because those things really don't matter. I mean, you don't want to draft a guy who drops the ball a lot, but those guys stick out like sore thumbs even at the Collegiate level.

Also, why would supporting cast, offensive system, or coverage (well, I can sort of see coverage) have anything to do with how well a guy seperates. You still haven't even told us why getting seperation is important. You have no credibility whatsoever.

Although there's no exact formula that makes up a receiver's ability to separate, here's a look at some of the key ingredients:

There's probably no formula because it doesn't really matter. Let me tell you how the passing game works. The defense, if in a zone, rolls coverage to where most receivers are. Not all receivers are going to seperate on any given play. The QB reads the defense and hits the open guy.

So, seperation, as you call it, is really just the ability to run.

Wonderful. I can see how someone would think that a receiver is defined by his ability to run while playing football. But lets see some of Todd McShay's fancy terms for this skill:

1. Initial burst
2. Recognition/instincts
3. Change-of-direction skills
4. Competitiveness


Initial burst, you mean running Todd?

I personally think recognition and insticts are the most important trait for a successful receiver. Hey kiddies, you know how you develop recognition and insticts? Stay in school. Play your senior year. Learn something. College is fun. Enjoy it. Become a better NFL prospect in the process.

Change of direction skills is completely useless and arbitrary. Unless you are talking about run after catch skills. Then its just arbitrary, but can have a conceivable use.

Competitveness is not a possible criteria to get open. It just isn't.

Jerry Rice will forever be the ultimate example of this attribute. A relentless approach to the craft -- both in practice and in games -- allowed Rice to overcome below-average speed throughout his brilliant 20-year career.


Joe Montana, Steve Young, and Rich Gannon may have had something to do with this too Todd.

This is a nice gritty article from Todd McShay with great upside and a high ceiling to allow for a lot of potential growth. What it's missing in facts and analysis (everything), it makes up for with initial burst and competitiveness.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Joe Theismann!

Has created a list of the top 5 receivers in the NFL (Oh, Goodie!!)

1. Marvin Harrison
2. Steve Smith
3. Chad Johnson
4. Torry Holt

Not a bad list at all. Harrison finished 2nd in receiver DPAR (which in no way is a foolproof statistic, far from it, but its probably the single best one to measure WR production) behind teammate Reggie Wayne. Smith was a legitimate MVP candidate in 2005. Johnson led the league in WR yards this year and does so consistently. Holt's among the top of the DPAR list year in and year out.

5. Randy Moss.

Am I the only one who watched the Seahawks and the Raiders on Monday Night last year? Randy Moss must have dropped 30 balls in that game alone. For the 2006 season, he posted a 0.8 DPAR. 0.8. If you don't know how funny that is, read this. The only thing more funny that that is that the color commentator called out a certain receiver on national TV for lackidasical effort. That commentator was...you guessed it, Joe Theismann.

In 2005, he put up a more respectable 15.2 DPAR. But that ranks him 25th in the league.
In 2004, he posted a DPAR of 23.1, good for 22nd in the league. Still not elite.

It could be debated as to whether or not Theismann is making his list based on a guy's potential, because that would make his choice of Moss defensible. But if this is the case, why was he # 5? Seems to me like he has a lot more receiving talent than both Harrison and Holt, and maybe Johnson. The thing about Moss is that he disappears from the field for months at times.

I know he's part of the Raiders' offensive system, and not an intrigal part of it at that. I know Raider QBs get sacked once in every 8 dropbacks. But Randy Moss is part of this. He is getting paid to help his young (crappy) QB. He is providing no help whatsoever.

Randy Moss hasn't been relevant since 2003. At this point, are we even sure he still has the same skills that made him famous in his youth? We can be certain that he's not a top 10 receiver in this league anymore, much less top 5. Why can't Joe Theismann?