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. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Correlations are based on the full range of data, which means those kinds of instances are included.
     
  2. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Is anyone arguing that Brian Hartline and Calvin Johnson should be paid the same?
     
  3. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    If you're going to keep banging this hollow drum as to WR TDs not correlating to winning, the question still stands: When is the last time that a NFL team with 3 WR TD receptions or fewer had a winning season? If these WR TD receptions aren't important then there should have been a few of these teams in the last several years, right? Maybe it's time for you to "put up or shut up", as the saying goes. If WR TD receptions are truly unimportant, then show us, please.
     
    MrClean, ToddPhin and dWreck like this.
  4. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    I saw just the title of this thread when it was made, and remember thinking "I bet that'll get 40 something pages within a couple days"

    55 pages in 4 days. Not bad.
     
  5. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    Where did that come from? I'm referring to the concept of yours that WR have no 'special talents" that lead one to score more rec TDs than another.
     
    ToddPhin likes this.
  6. emocomputerjock

    emocomputerjock Senior Member

    5,649
    1,853
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    DC
    What I mean is, my hunch is that passing tds to TE's dont correlate highly with winning. I don't think Passing TDs to RBs correlates highly with winning either. The passing TDs to WRs doesn't correlate hightly. I think that TDs overall, naturally, correlate highly, but I don't think it's as important how they're gotten as they are gotten.

    Personally, like I said elsewhere in this thread, I don't have an issue with Hartline being Hartline - he's got a role, he's got some things that he's good at, and some things that he'll never be good at. I think he's produced at roughly the same rate per target no matter the QB. I don't think that Hartline negatively impacts the offense as much as not having anyone else out there to subsidize those scores. When you look at the other metrics out there such as DYAR, DVOA, WPA, EPA and so on, the issue isn't as much with Hartline (though he's certainly no world beater), it's with the other guys on the offense.
     
    ToddPhin and Stringer Bell like this.
  7. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    This doesn't make sense. Nobody is suggesting an acceptable or unacceptable level of distribution of TDs. Nobody suggested that 3 WR TDs is good. Just that it is a reflection of greater things than simply the ability of the WRs.
     
    shouright likes this.
  8. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    Fluctuation and variance in a WRs career year to year as per rec TDs is one thing, the notion that all WRs are basically equal in terms of ability to score rec TDs is something else.
     
  9. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    I'll take this into consideration when Hartline faces the type of stiff coverage Calvin receives (especially this year with Detroit losing their #1 TE and #2-4 WRs),...... but until then, while he's facing single coverage (and did so for 2 years with Marshall drawing gobs of attention) and only musters 3 TDs in 3 years, the greatest single factor influencing his lack of TD production is his own lack of ability. The sample size is large enough now for Miami fans to stop making excuses for it.

    And it's not like his single TD was due to external factors, as we've watched him drop 2 passes in the endzone this year, get caught from behind on at least 1 occasion, and get tackled easily on many other receptions where better players do not. He had more than enough opportunity to convert his 128 targets and 74 catches into more than just 1 TD.
     
    dWreck likes this.
  10. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Right, and nobody suggested that. What was suggested is that a WRs ability can't be accurately measured by his TD totals.
     
    shouright likes this.
  11. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    Circumstances affect a players production not just in TDs but all facets. That doesn't mean you can't view production, in the context of overrall talent and performance, and make a reasonable assessment of how good they are at producing points. How defenses respond to different guys IMO is the best indicator of how much of a threat they are.
     
  12. Ozzy

    Ozzy Premium Member Luxury Box


    You know you can't exclude the Qb. Most of the blame is on him....


    :shifty:
     
  13. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Sure, but there are certain measures that fluctuate and vary more than others. It certainly would be great to know exactly what plays are called on defense for every play. Unfortunately I'm not aware of that data being available. Hopefully soon.

    Either way, I think everyone's made their assessments, and there appears to be a divergence of opinion regarding their assessments of Hartline.
     
  14. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    Agreed. But Hartlines TD production suggests that he lacks certain skills and when I watch him play I see that he does indeed lack those skills. It's not a statistical anaomly or a product of his teammates' shortcomings.
     
  15. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    What was clearly stated is that WRs have no "special talents" that lead one to score more TDs than another. Which is absurd. What was also stated is that the percentage of WR TDs to overall TDs dosen't correlate to winning- my point to that is, who cares? Of course there are other factors, I haven't seen anyone disagree with this yet. But the WRs have to carry their weight, which is why when the subject of how many TDs our WR scores and when the last time a team with 3 or fewer actually had a winning season, made the playoffs, won the Super Bowl, take your pick- Shouright clams up and suddenly is too busy to run what should be very simple numbers for someone with access to that data and a proclivity to use it.

    All this was brought up by Shouright in terms of Hartline iirc, and why TDs by WRs aren't all that important and shouldn;t factor heavily into his contract negotiations- am I wrong in that assumption?

    As to your "reflection of greater things" comment- wrong. What Shouright said is that WR rec TDs are all about randomness and the QBs involved, that "special talents" are not factors that lead one WR (say a Calvin Johnson) to score more TDs than another (say a Brian Hartline) and that in terms of TD production all WRs talents levels are equal. And that's absurd.
     
  16. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    I'll ask again, before you or I or anyone else spends (or wastes?) the time doing that research: what would tell us not to blame the quarterbacks involved for that finding, if it exists?

    I've already shown you that TDs thrown overall are far more strongly related to winning than TDs thrown to wide receivers specifically. That work has been done.

    What you're doing now is moving the goal posts (from winning in general to "playoffs") and asking me to make another field goal.

    I'll tell you what: you give me a good reason why that finding wouldn't be attributable to the quarterbacks involved, and I'll do the research and line up the field goal team.
     
  17. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    Fair enough.
    I look at it this way: first and foremost you've gotta have a playmaker at receiver, especially in today's game with today's rules. If you don't have AT LEAST one you're at a disadvantage. With all things equal, playmakers trump non-scoring possession receivers. If you're either starting from scratch (like we essentially are now with just Bess & Matthews) or are lacking a playmaker, finding one should be the position's top priority, ahead of brining in a possession guy. I think it's a terrible use of resources to dish out 7 million for a pair of possession guys when you don't have a playmaker on offense, so in that regard, other avenues should be approached before bringing back Hartline. Now, the exception would be if a team already has playmakers but lacks a reliable possession guy, which in that case bringing one in should be the highest positional priority. If we add Jennings, Wallace, or Bowe and satisfy enough other needs to make re-signing Hartline financially feasible, then by all means- bring him back b/c he's an asset if used properly, which is- not as a primary target.
     
    emocomputerjock likes this.
  18. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Let's say those special talents exist. How should we measure them?
     
  19. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    How many hundreds of posts ago did I say that? 500? 700?
     
  20. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    Play calls are not available but it's not difficult to make generic observations about how certain guys are defended. Some Wrs are clearly viewed as threats while others are not. Based on the coverages he recieves I think it's fair to say that BH is not viewed as a threat by opposing teams.
     
    ToddPhin likes this.
  21. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    No, just that their "special talents" aren't accurately reflected by TD totals.

    Yes, randomness is a big part of those "greater things". Certainly if the defense creates a turnover inside the 10 yd line, and Brian Hartline catches a subsequent TD pass, he doesn't deserve most of the credit for that TD.
     
  22. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    What does it matter if they're more able to score TDs if for whatever reason those TDs don't happen? :confused1:

    The point is that it makes sense to plunk your money down for the guy who's more reliably able to make them happen (the QB), rather than the receiver whose production in that regard is highly variable and highly dependent on that other player's ability, as well as a host of other factors.
     
  23. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    If you have a RB that scores a bunch of TDs. A TE that can score a bunch of TDs. and WRs who can score a bunch of TDs, you're in pretty good shape right?

    Shouright wasn't trying to minimize the importance of WR TDs (which is fine). He was eliminating it as a factor which doesn't make sense. If my guy scores 3 TDs in that game, it relieves pressure from the rest of the team. If I have a Hartline that can catch between the 20s no problem but seizes up in the RZ, I have to rely on my TE's and RBs almost EVERY SINGLE trip to the red zone.

    Sit here and tell us to our faces, it is not a factor. A Percy Harvin who takes a screen at the 20 and runs it in is not a factor. A Calvin Johnson catching a pass no WR has business making, is not a factor.

    Of course there are other factors. You score 30 and they score 35 you're going to lose. But the goal is to score TDs, and to prevent them. A WR scoring a TD is a 1.0 correlation to 6 points.
     
    ToddPhin likes this.
  24. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    I don't agree. From what I've seen it appeared Miami got pretty much what the defenses usually played.
     
    Anonymous likes this.
  25. emocomputerjock

    emocomputerjock Senior Member

    5,649
    1,853
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    DC
    I agree, you have to have playmakers, no matter what position they play at. I think upgrading the other spot over the Bess/Moore/whoever rotation should be priority, followed closely by finding a bigger threat at the TE spot. I think Miller taking over for Bush will be an improvement at RB, and I think that Tannehill will continue his progression from last year.
     
    ToddPhin likes this.
  26. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    Yes, I've read your field goal metaphor before. By the way, thank you for making the case for subjective analysis, as in watching the games and drawing conclusions from them, because that is what you have to do to find out how much WRs are to be praised, or blamed, for the success of the passing game, same thing for theQBs. Might as well throw in offensive lines, too- they count, don't they, team game and all? You have to actually watch, because statistics don't tell the whole story. It could be a question of great catches and lousy passes or vice versa, you never know.

    Again, thx for pointing that out- as an example, who was better on any given fast break for the Lakers, Magic dishing or James Worthy scoring? Depends on the play, and you'd have to watch to tell. All the stat box would show is points scored and an assist, not HOW it happened. And that's just an inherent limitation of statistical analysis.
     
  27. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    With your eyeballs perhaps- try that and put the numbers down, because from the conclusions that you derive from statistical analysis, it appears that you could use a change of pace.
     
  28. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008

    Sure, they are factors, but determining if Harvin or Johnson are factors by using TDs is inaccurate and misleading. The line of logic here would have people believe that Eric Decker was better than Calvin Johson this year, when the reality is that he was just lucky enough to be on a better team.
     
  29. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    OK, then why do the research you're talking about?
     
  30. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    You're right, who scored the TDs isn't as important as how many are scored. I don't think that even needs to be stated. But when the primary target of the passing game is not scoring it stands to reason that the passing game as a while will struggle to score. Blame the QB if you'd like, but I don't think Irish is going into the offseason looking to upgrade Tannehill.
     
    MrClean and ToddPhin like this.
  31. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    I would agree that, in general, TD production is a reflection of more than just the ability of the receiver, but this isn't generally speaking; it's specifically speaking, and specifically speaking, our abysmal receiver scoring production is indeed due to ability. Correction, Rishard Matthews is the only one with an argument b/c he was a rookie who didn't see many attempts but has potential to grow, where as Hartline & Bess are veterans who've showcased their shortcomings enough to fill a jelly bean jar.
     
  32. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Then why look and see if anyone's made the playoffs with three or fewer TD receptions by the wide receivers?

    You're bouncing all over the place here.
     
  33. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    Thank you.
     
  34. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    No, but he might wanna save a little of his money so he can pay Tannehill if and when he pans out and his second contract comes up.
     
  35. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    To fill FT Knox you mean...
     
  36. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    who know, perhaps Miller taking over for Bush and freeing up that money will allow us the flexibility to add both Jennings and Hartline. Definitely agree about TE following it closely.
     
    emocomputerjock likes this.
  37. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    Have you ever tried counting a jelly bean jar, jughead. :p
     
    GMJohnson likes this.
  38. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Not necessarily, because the data show that, in terms of winning games, you'll still be limited by your quarterback's ability to throw touchdowns to those players, whatever that ability is.
     
  39. jim1

    jim1 New Member

    5,902
    3,054
    0
    Jul 1, 2008
    No, I'm not. I'm curious for one thing, ad also maybe the results will help you drift back down to reality. You have a distinct habit of avoiding unpleasant questions and issues. This makes me think that maybe you're less interested in getting to the truth of an issue than in promoting half baked theories and sustaining debates as to their merits, or lack thereof. When you run away, you look even worse- I thought that you would have seen that by now. Your'e clearly arguing that WR TDs are overvalued, so run the numbers. Man up instead of ducking and hiding.
     
  40. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    which means Hartline didn't force them out of their comfort zone.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page