1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Hartline wants 5-6 million per season

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Perfectville_USA, Jan 26, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Easily.

    I am paying double for having a wide receiver that has an ability to catch long throws over a receiver who has to be ridiculously wide open to make long throws even possible.
     
  2. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    What are you admitting to here?

    As for the rest of it, it seems all you accomplished in doing was pointing out that other positions routinely catch TDs.
     
  3. PhiNomina

    PhiNomina White-Collar Redneck

    7,433
    3,637
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    Cleveland, OH
    Have you proven he can do this consistently and efficiently compared to other WR in the league?
     
  4. Boik14

    Boik14 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    75,121
    37,641
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    New York
    Like stringer said, if your post is about the guy who wrote the post youre responding to, its probably no bueno. If its about the topic and debating facts, thats fine. If youre talking about the person who wrote the post, youre also derailing the thread because youre changing the topic. You've been around long enough to know and its never really been a problem for you before so dont let it be a problem now. I understand certain posters get on the nerves of other posters. Thats why we have an ignore feature. Thats why Chrome and Firefox have options to ignore entire threads created by certain posters.
     
    shouright likes this.
  5. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    ...and how that relates to winning, compared to how it relates to winning when wide receivers, specifically, catch TDs. Correct.
     
  6. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    There are 3 different positions on any given play that can catch a TD pass and each of those 3 positions can each have 2 or more players on the field at any given time. Of course one group isn't more important than any other, which is all you've illustrated. You didn't show that WR TDs are not relevant to winning, you showed they aren't MORE relevant to winning than TE receiving TDs or Back receiving TDs.
     
  7. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    The Dolphins couldn't get over the hump with Marino, Duper and Clayton because the defense was weak, the RBs were rather average and the OL was lousy at run blocking. It was a passing team, plain and simple. If other factors didn't count and we had one of the best QBs ever, we should have won a few Super Bowls, no? It's not all about the QB- I don't see people negating the importance of QBs here, I see you trying to negate the importance of WRs and your data doesn't really show at all the likelihoods that you refer to, ie the WRs don't count for much of anything- no special talents and WR TD don't count. "Predicitve of winning" is a far cry from importance- far too many other variables to consider for your conclusions to have any validity.

    Most would agree that the QB is in fact the most important position, and given the choice between a star QB and a Star WR would take the star QB. But you have basically negated the importance of WRS (no special talents matter at the position, WR TD receptions are random and due to chance and the QB, etc.). You seem to dislike subjectivity, but you're questionably using data to arrive at subjective conclusions, case in point your fist paragraph above. Yes, Quarterbacks are important. But WRs are as well, and the percentage of TD receptions by the WRs can be indicative of a lot of things, including a QB who spreads the ball around better and lousy teams winging it in the 4th quarter of losing games, teams with bad defenses, take your pick. Trying to make generalizations base upon your narrow levels of criteria doesn't work- it's a team game. You're trying to draw a conclusion based upon weak links that are too narrowly focused, and these conclusions just don't hold water.

    Your data relating winning percentage to the percentage of TDs by WRs just doesn't mean a whole lot unless you factor in and try to figure out WHY teams with a high percentage of receiving TDs by WRs don't do particularly well.

    Also, I really am curious- if TDs by WRs aren't important to winning, when is the last time that a team with 3 or fewer WR receiving TDs won the Super Bowl? For that matter, when is the last time that a team with 3 WR TDs or fewer made the playoffs? I'm curious as to what the data shows in this regard, I do hope that you answer. If not Shouright, maybe someone else can provide the data. It still wouldn't prove anything, I'm just curious as to looking at the issue from a different angle.
     
    Boik14 likes this.
  8. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Precisely. So what that points out is that when you have a QB who throws more TDs, regardless of to whom, you've made yourself much more likely to win than if you have wide receivers who have a greater ability to catch TDs (if such an ability exists) but do not have a quarterback who throws as many for whatever reason.

    Again, all this points out is that, when you're deciding how much to pay your players, you sure ought to pay your quarterback a whole lot more for throwing TDs than you pay your wide receivers for catching them. You might reasonably pay your wide receivers big for other reasons, however.
     
  9. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    What you're doing here overall is changing the criterion from "winning" to "making the playoffs" or "winning the Super Bowl," and yes, if that's the case then we're talking about a whole new set of correlations here. The ones I've done pertain to winning, only.
     
  10. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,651
    67,545
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    And we didnt know how to draft good payers.
     
    jim1 likes this.
  11. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    There has never, ever, ever, in the history of the NFL, ever been a QB who threw for a TD without another person catching it for a TD.

    And there is no way in hell I or anyone else believe you've taken this stance to simply state a QB should cost more than a WR.
     
    MrClean likes this.
  12. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    I thought we were talking about Bess
     
  13. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Sure, and the data show that, in terms of winning, that person sure doesn't have to be a wide receiver. You can win just fine without throwing TDs to them, as long as you're throwing enough of them in general.

    People can believe whatever they'd like. I have no control over that.
     
  14. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yet, you can't make the playoffs without winning. So, winning correlates highly to making the playoffs. You can't say your stats don't apply to making the playoffs, they only apply to winning...since if you don't win, you don't make the playoffs, and vice versa. Therefore, your stats should compare favorably to making the playoffs, and finding out how many teams made the playoffs with WRs only catching 3 TDs is actually pretty important to the discussion.
     
    MrClean likes this.
  15. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Correct, though sometimes winning a certain number of games enables you to make the playoffs, and other times it does not.
     
  16. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Keep in mind that Davone Bess never reached UFA. But Hartline's ability to make plays down the field is what makes him more valuable IMO. Its those 10 receptions >20 yds.
     
  17. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    I'd say it is a personal opinion as to how they are defined.
     
  18. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I don't even know of an easy way of finding out WR td numbers for playoff teams other than going season by season and counting WR td numbers of playoff teams...and I'm far too lazy to do that. Would love to see the numbers, though.
     
  19. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    I'm just trying to look at it from a different perspective. What does the data show?
     
  20. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    But that doesn't mean WR TDs are not important. It means they aren't the only avenue to putting up TDs. But I guarantee you, there's never been a team that won the SB where their two leading WRs had 2 TDs between them for the season. I bet there's never been a team that won the Super Bowl when their #1 WR averages 1 TD a season. I bet those stand not just for Super Bowls, but for playoffs and winning seasons too.

    Again, what you've done is apply circular logic to paint yourself into a corner.
     
  21. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Not true.

    [video=youtube;-zqNG3tl7Aw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zqNG3tl7Aw[/video]
     
    shouright and Fin D like this.
  22. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I meant "a person". The point being, you can't throw a pass to no one and it be a TD.
     
  23. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    Ok, when is the last time a team with 3 WR TD receptions or fewer won the Super Bowl, made the playoffs or had a winning record? Please if possible provide all three, thx.
     
  24. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    Make it a set number of wins then. Like 10 games in a regular season, since that is usually enough to make the playoffs. Not always, but more often than not. How many teams in the past 25 years have ever went 10-6 with their WRs catching 3 or less TD passes? Or use 9-7 as the cutoff record. Either way would give people something that made sense. Rather than that Big Bang Theory type of geeky nonsense of correlations and when QB rating is controlled for, blah blah blah. EPAs and WPAs mean jack squat to me too for that matter.
     
  25. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    This year, it seems that SF had 14 TDs to WRs, and Bal had 13. NE had 10. Sea had 17. Den had 28. Sick of counting. Huge disparity compared to Miami's 3.
     
  26. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    And it means more than that, as well. It means that you can do just fine not emphasizing TDs to wide receivers, as long as you're throwing for a sufficient number overall.

    What it means is that the quarterback is far more the locus of importance for TDs than the wide receivers, since the quarterback is the guy throwing TDs to the players at the various positions available, the common denominator, if you will.
     
  27. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    I have no idea.
     
  28. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    But Sho-Right would have you believe that is mostly Tannehill's fault, because before this season, Bess and Hartline were such scoring machines. Oh wait! What?
     
  29. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Not possible. I have a life. :)
     
  30. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Actually what they did prior to this season fits with the data, as well, since they had quarterbacks in those seasons, too, who didn't pass for a high number of TDs overall.
     
  31. PhiNomina

    PhiNomina White-Collar Redneck

    7,433
    3,637
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    Cleveland, OH
    I thought we were talking about whether Brian Hartline was worth $5-6 million a year. If not, the thread title is misleading.

    You are trying to focus on the minutia of the argument. My point stands - Hartline isn't scoring TDs, and is providing similar production to Bess - so what makes him worth double the money?
     
  32. PhiNomina

    PhiNomina White-Collar Redneck

    7,433
    3,637
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    Cleveland, OH
    I'd be interested to see the total number and percentage of receptions in this yardage range for players in a similar salary range.

    Also be interesting to compare how many players have a similar number of receptions in this range that did NOT go for TDs.

    Brian Hartline seems to have the ability to get himself open from 2035 yds down the field, but struggles in A) finishing those plays as touchdowns and B) taking plays that are not down the field and turning them into big plays.

    That is why I don't believe he's worth $5-6 million.
     
  33. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Last year...NYG 21. NE 15. 2010 GB 23. Pitt 17. These are only Super Bowl teams. So bored...can't believe I'm counting TDs.
     
  34. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    It's not that TD receptions by WRs are the end all be all, it's that they're important. Like Mr. Clean I'd rather deal with straightforward numbers rather than some esoteric figures of questionable importance like the percentage of WR TDs to overall TDs. Too many other variables count, plain and simple.

    Hartline's TD production- the basic and obvious stuff is important- 6 rec TDs in 4 years. I don't really care a lot if he had a larger TD per reception ratio in his rookie year- he still only had 3 TDs- if anything that's the anomaly on the upside since he's scored 3 rec TDs in the last three years combined. The more straightforward the data, the better. The other stuff is mainly loopholes which convolute the issues at hand.

    If WR TDs are truly irrelevant, the data should prove that out. So maybe someone can actually find the data as to when the last time a team with 3 WR TD receptions or less:

    1. Won the Super Bowl
    2. Made the playoffs
    3. Had a winning record

    I'd be far more inclined to agree with Shouright on this issue if the numbers to these 3 questions support his conclusions.
     
    ToddPhin, jdang307 and MrClean like this.
  35. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    This is kinda like the old question: which came first, the chicken or the egg?
     
  36. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    It looks like on average TE's were getting about 4-6 TDs this year. Fasano had 5.
    It looks like on average backs were getting 3 and less. Bush had 2.

    Basically what that means is that Tannehill threw TDs to his other outlets an average amount of times. The deficiency it seems is the WRs.

    By all rights, this should end the debate from your side.
     
    ToddPhin, Steve-Mo, jdang307 and 3 others like this.
  37. PhiNomina

    PhiNomina White-Collar Redneck

    7,433
    3,637
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    Cleveland, OH
    Is there a non-paid resource that outlines salaries? I'd love to compare WR in the $5-6 range and their production compared to Hartline.
     
  38. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    Nothing, other than a slight increase for inflation.
     
    ToddPhin and PhiNomina like this.
  39. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    What if quarterbacks are differentially capable of throwing TDs to wide receivers?
     
  40. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    The quarterback, since TDs thrown overall, rather than TDs to wide receivers, per se, drive the bus.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page