Hartline wants 5-6 million per season

There's not a whole lot of difference between being statistically irrelevant and completely irrelevant. So you can get hopped up on semantics all you want, but my point remains pretty clear and true.

 

Don't try to pull that one on me Mr. Bell. Remember I'm an attorney! The record is above. Everyone can see you just tried to move the goalposts. Fin D never stated someone else implied that WR skills are completely irrelevant.

You went from A, B to Z.

 

Let's play with this. You'd be fine, as GM, to field a team every single year where your WR's don't score any TDs at all. Zero.

 

Here's why I chuckle & shake my head at the excuse-making for Hartline's 1 TD per year production over the past 3 years. I'll use Hakeem Nicks as the example (making plays after the catch, making the tough catch, not being caught from behind, not being tackled by a jumping flea, hauling down 50-50 balls, catching a fade).

[video=youtube;spJU90xwl7o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spJU90xwl7o[/video]

[video=youtube;nZyQCGeo6ys]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZyQCGeo6ys[/video]

[video=youtube;yL1o0TxAkCk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL1o0TxAkCk[/video]

[video=youtube;h369_rfm0WY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h369_rfm0WY[/video]

[video=youtube;ZuWrACqGd-I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuWrACqGd-I[/video]

**hail mary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdWyt8UKUos
**nice tipped ball TD, not caught from behind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJA4Aayjxi8

Honestly, do Miami fans live in a bubble to not understand touchdowns aren't just a product of a QB making perfect throws to a guy open in the endzone or near it? I would've added, "to a receiver in stride", but we all know Hartline catching a pass in stride typically results in being caught from behind. Some of you can scapegoat Tannehill all you want, but it doesn't absolve Hartline's lack of ability once the ball has left the QBs hand, as I just gave you 7 quick examples from Hakeem Nicks alone. Those are 49 extra points we never put up due to the Hitman's inability to make those types of plays.

 

There's a randomness factor that is being overlooked too. It's just performance. Much was made of Brandon Marshall's dropped touchdowns he could've caught from Henne and Moore. That randomness factor can be ironed out with time, as Brandon Marshall showed before he got here that he had every ability to score those touchdowns that he didn't score in Miami. And sure enough, he showed it again after he was done with Miami.

But with Brian Hartline we're being asked to swallow a LOT more on faith, because this is three years in a row now where he's showed an inability to get the ball in the end zone, including one year that's damn near a full-decade record in the entire National Football League. And his 3 touchdown receptions in 2009 as a rookie didn't necessarily scream out "I'm a scoring machine," either.

Surely you can see how the above is quite reasonable.

 

I would implore people.

Please watch the above videos posted by Todd.

Then try and insist that touchdown catches are purely a result of QB play.

 

It is very random.I may have more faith in Hartline than most. I think he is fully capable of being a receiver than can bring in seasons with 5+ touchdowns at times. He'll need better QB play. We'll see if he does.

 

The point is whether any of that is strongly associated with winning, and it isn't.

 

Touchdowns are not associated with winning? Really?!?

 

Who ever said this???? The strawmen are overwhelming. I'm not even sure that QB play is the biggest factor, never mind the only one.

 

Thanks.

.... meanwhile here's Hartline catching a pass in space and why he's NOT a factor in the quick passing game, in turn hindering our offense's capability:

[video=youtube;xN-u0jn4z2M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xN-u0jn4z2M[/video]

 

It always seems to come back to stylistic preference doesn't it? You keep harping on Hartline after the catch, but I'm not sure anyone has ever suggested he was good after the catch????

Can you post a clip of a WR running the wrong route on a play where the ball wasn't thrown to him?

 

Touchdowns by wide receivers are not strongly associated with winning, no, and when the variance associated with QB rating is partialled out, they actually have a weakly negative relationship with winning.

 

Common variable? Same QB throwing to them.

 

Shou has.

 

Everyone who's arguing Hartline would have more than 1 TD per season if he didn't have poor QB play or a "rookie QB".

 

Another likely factor: same person calling the plays.

 

No, because that would be only three fewer than the Miami Dolphins' wide receivers scored in 2012, and that would mean I'm probably getting quarterback play not unlike Ryan Tannehill's, which isn't good enough to win.

 

Has this argument been flipped, yet? I see most people as arguing why we should NOT give Hartline $5-6 million per year, as if the team has to do it.

If you were a GM, why WOULD you sign Hartline for $5-6 million per year. Does he provide qualities that are worth that sort of salary allotment? Can you get similar production for less money? Are there other WR that produce similar results and are being paid a similar salary?

Seems like starting an argument of why you SHOULDN'T sign a guy is an easy way to back yourself into a lot of bad contracts.

 

No, nobody said that. If they did, you would actually post a link to their post?

 

Can you post a link to where he said that its 100% on the QB???

 

Read every thread with Tannehill or Hartline as the subject. His argument has been that WR skill is statistically irrelevant to winning and to qb rating. And that Hartline's lack of TD production is all Tannehill's fault.

 

What positions have the highest correlations between touchdowns and winning?

 

Then you haven't really been reading the thread.

 

You said Meaningless.

 

I don't think he's ever said that a WRs TDs are a complete function of a QBs ability? Suggesting a high-degree is influence by QB ability isn't the same thing.

Ultimately TDs aren't a very good measure, because they're essentially a function of overall team success. A defense that creates more turnovers is going to impact a WRs TD totals. Play calling is going to affect TD totals for a WR. QB play will as well.

 

Since when did making plays after the catch and scoring points become a "stylistic preference"?

You act like Hartline is the only good route runner in the NFL and that everyone else in the NFL couldn't run one to save their arse.
There are posters here suggesting he's good after the catch and playing the ball is in the air, but even more so- there are people either dismissing that aspect of the game or are putting Hartline in the class of those playmaking receivers just b/c Brian had a 1k season.

 

True...given that Bess had 5 and 3 TDs the previous two years and Miami's struggles getting the ball into the end zone through the air makes targeting him only 4 times in the redzone perplexing whether it be the play-calling or QB.

 

Anything correlating TDs and winning is going to be misleading because it will suffer from overfitting.

What would be instructive is correlating TDs will future wins. Break up sample into two separate data sets and see if TDs in one set correlates with TDs in another set.

If you're looking for strong predictivity of winning, then net yards per pass attempt is going to be the strongest, even stronger than TDs.

 

really? scoring more TDs and picking up chunk yards don't aid winning?
No, you're right, making life more difficult on an offense by having to repeatedly execute lengthy drives b/c its receivers lacks playmakers is much more associated with winning.

 

I'd say a -0.19 correlation with winning when QB rating is controlled for is pretty darn meaningless.

 

Yes, he did. This is what we've been arguing about.

He says Hartline's feeble TD production is all on Tannehill. That means he thinks WR skill is irrelevant completely or statistically.

 

Since you can achieve the same things without breaking tackles or using the right joystick? A screen pass that goes for 30 yds with 5 broken tackles is no more valuable than a 30 yd option route where the WR makes a good read and gets no YAC.

No, he's not the only good one. He certainly is one of the best, and certainly one of the brightest. And it definitely makes up for a lot of what he lacks IMO.

Who suggested these things???

And I'm not sure that anyone is putting Hartline anywhere because he had a 1k season. Most of the Hartline fans have been saying the same thing for years now. Though to be fair, I do recall I had an argument with Shou a few years back when he said Hartline wasn't very good. Shou is one of the ones who's opinion has evolved over time.

 

I don't think he ever said its all on Tannehill. If you have a link feel free to post it.

 

Really? So a 66 yard reception on the receiver's back that results in TD rather than a drive ending in a punt and 0 points doesn't aid in winning a game?

 

Picking up chunk yards does aid winning. We are making progress now. Here are "big play" stats from this season:

http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/leaders.asp?year=2012&type=Receiving&range=NFL&rank=119

 

a more likely factor: receivers who aren't playmakers.

 

I tend to think more TD's than the other team has a good correlation with winning. But what do I know. The only reason that isn't a better correlation is because of defensive TDs.

But I think, usually, scoring more TDs than the other team leads to winning

 

This is true. Also, turnovers. If I'm channelling Raf right, winning both the YPA and turnover battle will result in a win 95% of the time. However, the statement is,

I'm just requesting the data, if it exists. Shou doesn't have to provide it, nor does he have to make any additional assertions about the validity of the data he's already posted.

 

A 66 yd reception for a TD most likely has the same expected points added as a 66 yd reception that doesn't result in a TD.