Just wanted to provide some stats through the 3/4 mark that you can't find anywhere on the net I don't believe, as they have to be crunched by hand.
I used 3 of the major field position categories (from SI.com):
I didn't include INTs when calculating passer rating b/c they're not listed under receiver stats and it would take a week to figure out who was responsible for what. Plus leaving them out provides an idea of what the receivers' production itself look like.
- the first 60 yards of the field (where chain moving is important)
- inside the opponent's 40 (b/c it's the closest available stat that represents being inside scoring range and starts the process of the field shrinking)
- and inside the redzone (for obvious reason)
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 800"]
Inside the 40
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: center"]catches[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]targets[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]catch%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]TD[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]TD%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]yards[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]avg[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1sts[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1sts %[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]TD+1sts%[/TD]
[TD]YAC[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]QBR[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hartline & Bess:[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]20[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]45[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]44%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]2%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]248[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5.5[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]12[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]27%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]29%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]58[/TD]
[TD="align: center"] 69.5[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Fasano, Clay, Moore:[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]16[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]27[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]59%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]22%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]200[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]7.4[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]15%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]37%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]66[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]121.9[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Julio & Roddy[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]38[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]67[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]57%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]10%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]411[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]6.1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]22[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]33%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]43%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]131[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]109.7[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gonzalez[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]22[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]29[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]76%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]24%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]211[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]7.3[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]9[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]31%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]55%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]57[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]135.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 750"]
Inside Redzone
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Catches[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]targets[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]catch%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]TD[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]TD%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]yards[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]avg[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1sts[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1sts %[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]TD+1sts%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]YAC[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]QBR[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hartline & Bess[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]9[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]22%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]11%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]19[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]2.1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]11%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]22%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="align: center"] 65.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Fasano, Clay, Moore[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]8[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]11[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]73%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]27%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]59[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5.4[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]18%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]45%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]35[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]124.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Julio & Roddy[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]12[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]28[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]43%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]25%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]105[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3.8[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]9[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]32%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]57%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]28[/TD]
[TD="align: center"] 93.0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gonzalez[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]10[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]13[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]77%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]54%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]67[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5.2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]15%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]69%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]127.3[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 900"]
First 60 yards of field
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: center"]catches[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]targets[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]yards[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]avg[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Catch%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1sts[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1sts %[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]YAC[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]20+[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]TD[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]QBR[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hartline & Bess[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]96[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]155[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1371[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]8.8[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]61.9%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]62[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]40%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]407[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]19[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"] 92.7[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Julio & Roddy[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]86[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]134[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1541[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]11.5[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]64.2%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]64[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]48%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]512[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]29[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]110.9[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Fasano, Clay, Moore[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]31[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]57[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]307[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5.4[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]54.0%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]14[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]25%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]103[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: center"] 69.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gonzales[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]51[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]68[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]559[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]8.2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]75.0%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]37[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]54%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]158[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]0[/TD]
[TD="align: center"] 98.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Page 1 of 2
-
Disnardo, Rhody Phins Fan, Fin-Omenal and 1 other person like this.
-
Well *gosh* phinsational, 28 targets in the RZ is a lot more than 9....
What that tells me is our offense is not very powerful as we have far fewer RZ trips.
And then there are "targets" like last week where THill led Hartline to much and out of bounds, this is one of the problems with stat monkery. -
b/c it was a 4 hour project, so I was only picking one team's players as a comparison..... and because Julio, Roddy, and Gonzalez provide a nice baseline as there's no arguing about their talent level..... and b/c this forum seems to love doing Atlanta-Miami comparisons. :lol:
I was initially only going to do Miami b/c it was time consuming, so Atlanta is basically a bonus. -
I don't what happens is we tend to run the ball for Td's as it protects THill.
Saw the same thing with Henne and imo, one of the mistakes Sherman has made this year. -
look closer.
Over the first 60 yards Hart & Bess had MORE targets (155 vs 134). As we cross the 50, the stats start changing the closer we get to the endzone and the greater the field shrinks.
Once we hit the 40, they've obviously declining (45 vs 67).... which isn't quite as discrepant as what happens the next 20 yards.
From the 39 to the 20 they drop drastically (9 vs 28) -
Eh, if that is tripled and they had the # of chances the Falcons Wr had we had 7 (?)
Bottom line is, the offense is simply not that powerful with Tannehill leading it, keep in mind this is essentially the same personal as we had last yr w/MMoore.
Basically, Tannehill is not very productive. -
Well gee, they did not lose effectiveness in the last 20 yds, the guy tossing them the ball is just not very good at it.
If you look at the Te #'s, they are similar, Fasano and Co did not suddenly create "open windows" in the RZ, the plain fact is our RZ chances are a little less than half of the Falcons chances 20 v 41 total targets
IE, we don't get to the RZ very often to begin with..even with Hartline and Co being statistically effective outside of the RZ. -
That's too bad.
I'm not looking for excuses to rationalize or coddle their production.
I wanted to see what it looks like verse an all around talented pass catching corps. Period.
Gonzalez is having almost as much production with a 5th year Ryan as rookie Ryan.... and Roddy is having a less statistically productive year than when Ryan was a rookie. I could also argue that young Julio Jones is only in his 2nd year whereas the veterans Bess & Hartline are in year 5 & 4. -
For fun, let's double our rates:
11/20=55%
2/9=22%
Double to say 40 targets"
55% target rate and a 27% Td rate on 40 targets=22 catches 6 additional Td's
2 additional for the Wr's
Now if we look at the supposed "40 yds and out" were explosive plays are supposedly more important, well look, our group is competitive with the Falcons as well. -
thanks for putting this together, interesting stuff-- one request/comment though. on your last table, can you order the players the same way you did on the first two? I got to that one and read it all wrong the first time because they were in a different order.
Other than that, good stuff! :up: -
Why would we triple that number when their production per attempt is terrible?
There's a reason they get less targets than Fasano, Clay, and Moore combined.
11% TD rate and 22% catch rate. Triple that and it's still 11% & 22%. That'll make a receiver get less targets. -
You're comparing a passing attack with a top 10 QB that is borderline elite vs a passing attack with a rookie QB. You didn't need to do this to see their receiving corps would have superior numbers. It's a waste of time. A better comparison would be between teams that have rookie QBs. It's an even playing field. You should have done a comparison vs Cleveland, Indianapolis, Washington, or Seattle.
-
No one is saying they're not good at moving the chains. They're obviously good at it. That's where the bulk of their stats come from. It's when the field shrinks is when they have difficulty b/c it's obvious they lack desired physical traits in that area as we get closer to the EZ.
This shows you that we could be not only efficient yardage wise at getting to the 40 but could see a big bump in production if we're not reliant upon them as our primary starters as we cross the 40. These stats tell me that they could do a great job of complimenting a starter or two with playmaking ability & scoring potential b/c Hartline & Bess can help make sure the chains are efficiently moving while the playmakers offer both the random big play & increased efficiency in the redzone. -
Why would you toss Marlon Moore in there?
Anywho, this is one of the problems with statisical comparisons, it assumes all things being equal, unless the Dolphins had the most efficient passing attack since John Hadl, less trips is of course going to mean less scores.
That is one of the problems with ones approach, half the trips, how do you suppose they'd stack up other than at least half of the production?
Yet outside of the RZ, everything is comparable, which tells me the receivers did not suddenly suck in the RZ, it's the guy tossing the football having issues. -
I'm not comparing passing attacks nor anything else. It was only meant to show OUR stats at the 3/4 way mark, not to show that their inferior to anyone else. Then for the heck of it I threw in Atlanta for fun. If you have a problem with it and don't want to read some of our situational stats, then dont.... and if you don't like the team I added in for fun, then crunch your own numbers to add to it. And stop looking a gifthorse in the mouth. You're lucky I added in any team. Would you have preferred I only stopped at Miami like I originally intended?
-
Why not? It shows that a TE, hback, and WR who rarely sees the field have more targets & TDs than our primary 2 receivers.Then WADR you don't understand the situational aspect of the game. Inside the RZ deals with scoring, not moving the chains.... and the redzone deals with a short field where special talent skills become important. I know you've used the term redzone target before Pads so don't choose now as the time to start playing silly. :p
..... and again, the guy tossing the football didn't have a problem with players not named Hartline & Bess. See how that works. -
Then how do you explain everyone not named Hartline & Bess having no problems with the QB inside the RZ? 8 of 11 with 3 TDs? That's outstanding considering who they are.
Are Hartline or Bess going over DBs on fades?.... running over defenders on quick passes/slants like we saw from Matthews in preseason? I suppose those physical limitation issues are the QB's fault? -
B/c the way football works, on the field, if your Te group was more productive the Wr group then receives their chances.
However, if we recall, BLine was open in the back of the EZ last week, in the RZ, and THill made a poor throw
DBess literally had to tap dance the sideline and get a non Td call overturned, to get a Td b/c THill's throw was that poor the week before.
Noticing a theme here? -
Heard the same bull**** when henne was the Qb and guess what?
Added Marshall, pretty much the same Qb.
At what point do Dolphins fans realize it's the Qb who drives RZ production in the passing game? -
Point being Aqua, if you look at his stats with an unbiased eye, you can see they are very effective, when the field shrinks they do not suddenly become bad players, the Qb is not making it work with them.
Until the Qb can drive the car it does not matter what rims you put on it.djphinfan likes this. -
Here, you want a rookie QB. Rookie Matt Ryan.
Roddy White (rookie Matt Ryan): 88 of 148.... 1382 yards.... 7 TDs.... 15.7 YPC.... 9.34 yards/attempt
Roddy White (5th year Ryan):.... 68 of 107.... 1023 yards.... 4 TDs.... 15.0 YPC.... 9.56 yards/attempt
Gonzalez with 2nd year Ryan:... 83 of 135..... 867 yards...... 6 TDs.... 10.4 YPC..... 6.4 yards/attempt
Gonzalez with 5th year Ryan: ....73 of 97 ..... 770 yards...... 7 TDs.... 10.5 YPC..... 7.9 yards/attempt
It's not the QB. It's the talent around the QB. Great talent will perform with a rookie.... and make him look darn good in the process.
Then when you add a great player like Julio, he helps take the offense over the top.
Like I said, Hartline & Bess are veterans in the 4th & 5th seasons where as Julio is only in year 2nd, so that should give an edge to H&B going by your angle of "inexperience affects the stats". -
Nonsense, add in Turner was beasting those yrs and Gonzo came..the next yr.
Appreciate your passion though phinsational. -
You're right. It was Ryan's 2nd year. I'll correct it. But it doesn't help your case. It hurts it.
So Gonzalez went from:
2008 w/ Tyler Thigpen: ....96 of 154.... 1058 yards.... 10 TDs.... 11.0 YPC..... 6.9 yards/attempt2009 w/ Matt Ryan:......... 83 of 135...... 867 yards..... 6 TDs..... 10.4 YPC..... 6.4 yards/attempt
to
Uhhh, so now what's your argument about the QB? Thigpen better than Ryan I suppose? Damn did Henning ruin some QBs!! :shifty:
-
No doubt. Won't argue with you there, my friend. IMO he would've still been more consistent than Tannehill is this year (mainly b/c he was a 5th year senior coming from a pro style offense and had a solid ground game to support him).... but I don't remember seeing some of the same level of wow-like flashes from Ryan that we're seeing from Tannehill.
-
Or Tyler Thigpen could produce 3 Td's with the likes of Mark Bradley and 5 Td's with a very young Dwayne Bowe.
To give you some context for how poor Tannehill has been:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/kan/2008.htm
If you subtract Gonzo, Thigpen still outproduced him..in 11 starts.
Are we beginning to get a sense for how poor Tannehill has produced as of yet?
He'll have throw 10 less Td's and has 2 more int's then Thigpen..with 4 games to go
If you take out Marshall from MMoore's 2011:
Fasano/Clay/Bess all easily outproduced Tannehill's performance so far this year.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/mia/2011.htm -
But you can't just subtract top players like Gonzo or Marshall and try to compare as if apples to apples. Cmon now Pods.
Their talented presence on the field benefits everyone else coverage wise.
- Marshall's presence means coverage shifts to him being priority #1 with the others secondary.
- Marshall's lack of presence means coverage then shifts to the next guys-- Hartline & Bess. Trickle down affect. So obviously that's gonna impact their production.
You're making a case against yourself by saying Mark Bradley caught more TDs (3) with an inferior backup QB Thigpen (who bombed in Miami) than Hartline & Bess can with a talented 1st round starter.
Knock the bologna off about trying to build up Thigpen over Tannehill; that's complete silliness.
- Here's some 6 degrees of Tyler Thigpen stuff: Thiggy couldn't beat out Henne... who played worse than Moore... who was replaced by Tannehill. I win. :lol:
-
good thing tanny has two 1k yard wrs .
-
Disagree, if Thigpen can make a scrubini like Bradley score 3 Td's, what is Tannehill's excuse?
This is one of the reasons why the whole "add a Wr" stuff just grates on me, cannot drive the family wagon, he is somehow going to be better with a porsche?
Never works like that, in fact Henne, Thigpen, and Moore pretty much mop the floor with Tannehill so far this year.
Even 1 Td to 1 int Henne kicks the crap out his performance, are we beginning to understand this yet?
How about comparing Henne in 09 or even 10, to Tannehill so far this yr?
I bet Henne wins that hands down, and yet, as Dolfans usually say "..better Wr's!.."
Nope, Rook needs to step up, all he has done is rack up yds, his production has been craptacular.
Henne finished 12/14 td to int's in 2009, 15/19 in 2010 this with Marshall -
Guest
Minus an elite Wide Receiver you mean. -
Guest
I can see why you don't like "stat monkery". You don't get statistics. You can't just double a small sample size and assume that the rates would hold constant.ToddPhin likes this. -
Nice job at compiling the numbers phinsational...
and can I add that the Falcons had 48 trips in the RZ compared to 27 for the Phins... statistically speaking they converted the same amount (% wise)... The Falcons 27 / 48 or 56% conversion to the Phins 15 / 27 or 55%...
As the Phins get closer to the RZ opponents must be changing the way they protect the WR passing lanes (since TE's for ATL and Phins have the same performance in the RZ), by changing the schemes and/ or by the way they pressure Thill...ToddPhin likes this.
Page 1 of 2