Barry Jackson Sports Buzz: PFF final 2012 ratings for some Dolphins offensive players

Interesting.

At first blush you could interpret this as Tannehill being less the problem than the surrounding talent... But other things to consider that I wonder if PFF accounts for properly:
- sacks or hurries may be due to the QB holding the ball too long.... Which may be the QBs fault or the WRs fault
If no one is getting open... Or it could be the OCs fault if its bad play design or a
predictable call.
- what if the coaching staff is limiting the amount of the Playbook they can use due to the rookie QB... And it's impacting success by making the offense easier to predict, leading to
things like more stuffed run plays... How would PFF ever know? They would grade that as a failure by the O Line.

There are a million 'buts' and 'what ifs'.

That said, the data suggests upgrading the OL and WR would make a bigger impact on play-execution than upgrading the QB would.

(Shou will be displeased)

 

I hate how much of a crutch Pro Football Focus has become for sports writers. I especially don't like how Jackson using it by just listing the raw rankings.

 

I am not in the media but I think he was just throwing some figures out there for the average reader to digest. Its just a little info for the average reader that does not subscribe to paid internet stat sites. They just thow doo doo on the wall and see what sticks. They have to throw something of value ( to some ) out there.

 

I agree that its a crutch, but I don't think Jackson is using it that way. He was just listing what they said he didn't really make any conclusions based on the data. Its in the that thing he does where he just lists things being said about all the local teams.

 

LOL, its good to know someone was reading this board:

 

Youre still trying to convince yourself of this?

 

He'll never give it up.

 

Sounds like a personal problem.

 

- Did we bring in CJ, Naanee, Gaffney, the rookies and UDFA WRs? Yes or no.
Yes, so we did in fact try, which is different then doing nothing.

- Hartline got near the yards Marshall did last year? Yes or no?
Yes. So his yards were more or less replaced.

- Marshall had a horrible 6 TDs last year, Hartline had an even worse 1. Yes or no?
Yes. That means we didn't replace Marshall's TD output.

What exactly was I wrong about?

Oh wait I forgot, Marshall's yards were extra special magic yards!

 

Marshall had around 1500 yards, hartline bad barely over 1000. Plus we never replaced hartlines production as a #3. And this was an already weak wr corps that we lost around 1000 yards of production from.

Expecting Naanee who has always stunk and washed up ochocinco to replace that was almost as silly as expecting two late round wr's to do it. We did nothing of significance to replace that production.

 

Naanee, Ocho, Gaffney, and some crappy UDFAs? That's trying? Lol..

 

But I thought Naanee was a poor man's Brandon Marshall?

 

Then don't read them and disregard them. I hate how so many forum members belittle PFF as if they can offer something better.

 

Marshalls yards here the year before were 1200ish.

Replacing Hartlines production at the 3# wasn't the discussion or what you acted like I was crazy about. If it is, then I'd say bringing in a CJ or rookie to try and replace Hartline's #3 production weren't bad moves.

You guys have to at some point realize Marshall was not good in Miami and in fact, was only slightly better then Hartline this year.

 

We passed for literally the exact same passing yards in 2012 (without Marshall) as we did in 2011 (with him).

 

Those don't seem too far off my crude eyeball test. Tanny ranks a bit higher than I would have expected. I'd put him at league average to slightly below league average, which isn't bad for a rookie. Hartline and Bess are good players; not elite, but good. I was thoroughly unimpressed with all facets of our running game for most of the year. I wouldn't pay Bush much money to come back, especially if we don't address the line. I'd rather invest in a receiver.

 

Do you think had we kept Marshall, that our total passing yards in 2012 would have been no better? It is not an even comparison to say we'd have done the same with him in 2012 as without, considering we played a different schedule, in a different offense with a different QB, compared to 2011.

Also our YPA was 7.3 in 2011 and 6.8 in 2012. Significant difference in efficiency. And we are always being told by the cognoscente around here, how important YPA is.

 

Marshalls numbers here in 2010 and 2011 were very similar despite all those variables you pointed out.

 

I don't think we would have really passed for more yards, no. Not significantly more at least. But at the very least we didn't "lose" yardage production from last year with the loss of Marshall and "promotion" of Hartline (which is how I took what I had bolder).

With Marshall I do think we would have scored slightly more and probably run for more yards though.

 

Doesn't the suckhood of some players bring down the ratings of others? How can we know, for example, that Tanny wasn't asked to go downfield, but it took so long for the receiver to get there and people were so close to smacking him in the chops that he had to dump it off short?

 

And the reason for that was.....wait for it......better qb play this year. Had we gotten another good wr or two then we would actually been BETTER. I know thats a new concept to some dolphin fans who love mediocrity but believe it or not its possible. Its what happens when you give a good rookie qb a supporting cast. A supporting cast is when you have players around you capable of doing their jobs without every throw having to be perfect. I know it's not new to you Pete but to some it is apparently.

 

I do think we would have passed for more yards. You had 3 reliable targets: Marshall, Bess and Hartline. We traded Marshall and nobody took the spot as reliable target. We were able to pick up some slack in yardage to basically match last year's yardage total, but it took more targets.

That's because we got rid of 15 ypc Marshall and picked up his slack with a bunch of lower ypc receivers.

 

Reliable would be about the last word I'd use to describe Marshall during his time here.

 

For the record, I dont even like Marshall. Ive stated in other threads how overrated he was. But he still gives you production we never replaced. And on top of that we previously only had an average WR corps WITH Marshall. Hes still better as a 1 then Hartline is by a fair margin.

 

I don't understand how you guys think we should be outraged that we couldn't replace a top 5 (in talent) WR in one offseason.

Obviously we tried to upgrade the position but that's not something that can be done in a quick flip.

 

With the ypc and ypa thing, I'm not sure how much is a function of the offense, personnel, or QB though. It sure seemed like Matt Moore went down the field more last year than Tannehill did this year. Is that because Moore has a greater affinity to go deep, because Tannehill wanted to limit his mistakes (being a rookie and all), because Tannehill was under more pressure from rushers (I don't know the answer to that for the record), or because Tannehill didn't trust his targets like Moore did? (Or even other reasons).

Also our Ypa is lower because completion percentage is lower (not that it would make a .5 difference). I'm not sure completion percentage would have changed with Marshall in the fold (maybe it would have).

Of all the people whose numbers suffered without Marshall (or another viable option) here it was actually Fasano IMO. I think Tannehill would have been better, sure but not sure how much. He may have been even more likely to lock on to one target with an alpha such as Marshall in the fold (leading to more picks).

 

We were not demonstrably better with Marshall in any important stat, unless you count the 5 more TDs he got than Hartline didn't this year.

You act as if you can just take Marshalls production from last year and add it to our team this year and boom, we're that much better. It doesn't work like that and it never did. Marshall's presence made no demonstrable difference to our offense, regardless of the system or QB. We are not a worse team because he isn't here. We are a worse team because he isn't here playing like he does other places.

His production was absolutely replaced. Unless you have your own made up things that count as production like arrests or stabbings.

 

Our total passing yards in 2010 were 3527, compared to 3182 this season. The threat of Marshall made life easier for Davone Bess and other receivers, even though under Henning and with Henne at QB it was more dink and dunk than this season. In 2011, the yards weren't much different but the YPA was 7.3 compared to 6.8 this season, which is a lot different. The passing offense, with Marshall, Matt Moore at QB and being ran by Brian Daboll was more efficient. The scoring was much higher in 2011 than this season or in 2010 too.

 

It's the scheme, and the personnel. Moore had Marshall to throw to deep. Had Moore been the starter this season, his ypa would have been likely similar to Tannehill's IMO.

 

You cant replace his talent but you can replace his production. If you consider that attempt to upgrade the position an actual attempt, your standards have been lowered by our teams lack of success in recent years. One offseason is certainly enough time to at least make an adequate attempt to replace production.

So you mean to tell me our wr's didnt hold us back? That if we had actual starting caliber wr's we arent at least 1-2 games better? If you honestly feel that way, dont answer because we will never agree. There isnt even anything to talk about. I have Jet fans and Pat fans telling me how good Miami would be if we had actual skill players.

Again, its not about replacing Marshall...I SUPPORTED that. Its about replacing his production. We were an average WR with him and lacking a #2. We may have found a #2 (Hartline) but Bess is a decent 3/great 4 and we lack depth even more. And we still lack a #1. Ireland needs to go hard getting at least 2 WR's...probably signing 1 of the big 4 (Wallace/Bowe/Jennings/Welker) and drafting 1 in the first 2 rounds.

 

I wasn't comparing those years to now. I was comparing them to each other.

During those years Marshall's numbers were very close to each other, despite different QBs, schedules, systems, etc. That's why a few of us believe that those same variables (QBs, schedules, systems, etc.) wouldn't have had a major affect on Marshall this year.

 

What?

Our receiver did hold us back. But having Marshall's Miami Dolphin kind of production wouldn't have made us better because that production wouldn't have been added on top of Hartline's production, it simply would have replaced it. We don't get Marshalls 1200 yards from last year PLUS Hartlines 1000 yards this year. It would have been like in years past, where Marshall gets the bulk and everyone else gets significantly less.

 

You think Welker is a possibility?

 

He's always had drops, going back to his days in Denver.

Despite his drops, his catch percentage was higher than Hartline. Davone Bess has been the highest but it's trending downwards.

As for dropping catchable balls, yeah Marshall is up there but he's not egregious. He has a lot of targets and catches so it all has to be looked at.

 

Bet that was Dansby

 

I think so too, but this year or so it seemed to me, Bess also had more catches than ever that I'd call "WOW" catches.

 

Um....points.....to.....sig........

Damnnnnnnnnnnnn