Mike Wallace currently projects to:
72 catches (ties career high)
144 targets (career high, next closest 119 in 2012)
952 yards (median value out of five seasons, two higher, two lower totals in career)
13.2 average YPC (0.1 higher than the lowest YPC of his career at 13.1 in 2012)
49 Yard Longest play (this is significantly shorter than any other year thus far at 49 yards with the next closest being 60 yds as a rookie)
2.6 TDs (round up to 3 TDs, it is still only 50% of the lowest year of TD production in his career. This is a major downward deviation for Wallace)
45 First Downs (median value out of five years)
What I infer:
- the coaches are trying to get Wallace the ball.... lots. Thus the extraordinarily high # of targets.
- That the major deficiency is in big plays, deep plays, going for TDs. Given the lack of time Tannehill has to throw deeper routes, it suggest to me that the weakness in O-line protection has affected Wallace's numbers.
If these things are true, then coaches are less to blame than I would have thought. It also means we are probably losing games (this is not news) not just because of the effect of sakcs from poor pass protection, but the lost opportunity of the points Wallace could and HAS proven he puts on the board in the NFL.
If Wallace were on his regular pace with deep ball catches and TDs, he would have 2 additional TDs at this point. That's an additional 14 points for this offense. That's an additional 2.3 points per game.
That differential would have been enough to tie or beat the Bills. I believeover a season that differential is likely to account for winning two close games you would otherwise lose.
That's the difference between 9-7 and 7-9... ot 10-6 and 8-8.
There's only one thing that concerns me and undermines this postulate (that the poor Oline protection is causing Tannehill to not have time to deliver deep balls to Wallace) and it's the 2010 Steelers O-line.
According to PFF the Steelers line ranked DEAD LAST in the NFL in 2010. 31st in run. 31st in pass. 32nd in penalties. And yet, that season was Mike Wallaces CAREER HIGH for TDs with 10.
That poses a real problem to me. Because if an Oline ranked DEAD LAST in the NFL was not only NOT preventing Wallace from catching TDs, but he was able to post a career high with 10 TDs that year... then can we really blame our O-line for Wallace's limited production?
Drops aren't to blame, as Wallace has dropped only 1.9% of his passes, which is a very acceptable drop rate compared to other good players this season.
The other differences are, obviously, the QB throwing the ball, and the coaching system/offense and playcalls.
Well, we can't say a great run game was helping Wallace out in 2010, because the Steelers Oline ranked 31st running the ball. We can;t say he was targeted more and had more opportunities touching the ball, because at 100 targets that season, it would only rank as FOURTH most targets out of his six years (if you include this years projections). It can;t be the number of catches giving him more chances to house it either, as his 60 catches that year rank 5th most out of these 6 seasons (again, using 2013 projected numbers). So he was getting a lot of TDs on comparatively fewer chances, and without good pass rpotection, and without a good running game to keep defenses honest.
Well, perhaps, you may think, they were using him differently? Purposely throwing the long ball to him more than short passes, so he caught more deep TD bombs. That would make sense, but if that were true you'd expect to see his longest catch of that season be one of the longer catches of his career. Instead, his longest catch that season was 56 yards, barely more than the 49 yarder that is his longest for THIS season. His 2010 longest catch of 56 yards ranks shorter than the 95, 82 and 60 yard longs he posted in other seasons... so it does not, at first glance, seem like Wallace had a career high TDs in 2010 because they were specifically designating him to get very deep ball routes and catches relative to other seasons.
Honestly, the only things I can think of that make sense were that that year his QB must have played at a very high level. So I decided to check Roethlisberger's stats and see if this bore out. Well, turns out that was the year Roethlisberger played only 12 games. Charlie Batch QUarterbacked three games for the Steelers and Byron Leftwich played one game.
So it seems, the one aberrant factor that year was the changing guard at QB. Which suggests that QB had the main impact on Wallace having his best season ever with the worst QB protection in the league.
So where does that leave us? Maybe nowhere. I'm no stats major and I'm sure there are a zillion problems with drawing any conclusions from the stats I find so interesting here... but what it suggests to me is that having Tannehill as his QB, more so than the O-line's problems (as I had thought before), may be the main factor affecting Wallace's production. That's not to say it's Tannehill is "to blame". This could be a chemsitry and trust thing, or it could be a propensity Tannehill has that is just not letting Tannehill look downfield and see Wallace open... or maybe it's the couple of underthrows we have already seen where Tannehill's ball location was good enough to get the ball to Wallace with no one behind him... but not good enough to keep Wallace in stride for a TD score. If Tannehill places a couple of balls better, Wallace probably has 3 TDs now and is on his usual pace.
Whether this is something that improves with time, I don't know. I know that when I watched Tannehill I saw him have a lot of velocity on 'laser' type passes to the outside and middle, but not as much distance on the ball when booming it deep. I would not in any way say Tannehill has a weak arm. Not at all. I would say that his arm may be better at the 'fastball' than the deep ball and we may not see the most nor the best from our $60m investment until he and Tannehill find a way to get in sync on those deep passes. If Tannehill runs out of arm when Wallace gets too deep, but Wallace needs to get a certain depth before beating the coverage, it means Tannehill MUST get better at anticipating and recognizing the instant Wallace HAS beaten the coverage even BEFORE he is already running five yards beeyond them. Tannehill must release his deep ball early enough that he can still hit Wallace in stride.
Thinking out loud during this stream of consciousness thread, I now believe that the solution has to be Tannehill improving noticing and recognizing his short time window in which Wallace is ABOUT to come open deep and releasing the ball decisively at that moment. Until he develops and commits to that anticipation on his deep balls to Wallace we will see fewer TDs than we could, and perhaps fewer wins too.
Page 1 of 2
-
finfansince72 likes this.
-
Guest
Justifying Wallace is different than justifying Marshall. Our coaches believe justifying Wallace is making him consistently run a full route tree. Many fans felt justifying him was huge plays and underneath room for Hartline and Gibson.
Justifying Wallace, in reality, would have been $40 million rather than $60.
Sent from my GT-P3110 using Tapatalk -
I don't think he runs the routs the way Tannehill expects, so the QB doesn't trust him. Tannehill isn't the most accurate with the deep ball and Wallace doesn't fight for the ball. The QB doesn't want to give up INT's so he goes to the open guy, takes a sack or whatever rather than heave it deep to a guy that isn't aggressive if the ball is short or off.
-
Eh, just focused on Td's, THill is simply not an accurate deep passer to Wallace yet, down inside the RZ he mostly looks for Gibson and Clay, but not concerned about Wallace overall.
6 games in, he has hit on some deep stuff including vs the Bills, so there are signs that their rapport is growing. -
1.9% drops? That number can't be right. Off the top of my head I remember several in one game and that's on 27 receptions. 3 drops would be over 10% unless I'm doing something wrong.
-
RT appeared to be battered, a step behind & confused during the game. was the worst start of his young career... no YEAR-TWO QB can survive this sack rate. is the fix in on time? I hope so
-
It's not so much that he can't run the routes. It's more that he doesn't run precise routes. He's not a quick twitch guy. He takes too many steps to get into his break. He rounds his routes off. He doesn't run the route at the same depth each and every time. His awareness on his routes is nonexistent. When you are in a timing offense and you are throwing the ball where you expect the receiver to be, and he's not there, then you have trust issues between the quarterback and the receiver.
This issue is compounded with the fact that Mike doesn't fight for the football. He doesn't go up and get it at the high point. He waits till it comes to him, so if he doesn't blow by his coverage, he's a guy that will likely get beat to the ball by his coverage.
I was telling you guys this stuff before we signed him, but no one wanted to listen to me. Everyone was blinded by the shine on this shiny hood ornament. -
finfansince72 Season Ticket Holder Club Member
He just isn't making the kind of impact his contract implies. There is no sugar coating it, he hasn't been worth the money. He's paid to be an elite WR, not a decent one. Those drop numbers do seem off, maybe its just the spotlight on him but he seems to make a big drop every game and he certainly isn't the big play guy we have needed. Its only 6 games in so its not time to start moving on but it kind of seems like the writing is on the wall with him and that he is going to be a big disappointment. I never liked his contract but I did hope that he would become the player we need here. You can see why Pitt gave the money to Antonio Brown and not him, which should have been a red flag.
-
Its funny how people look at catches and projections, if you dont make the playoffs you can keep your career highs, and anyone can have 100 catches catching bubble screens that get blown up after 2 yards, Hes easily top 5 fastest receivers if not the fastest and you have him running out routes and slants which don't use his speed. The steelers had the same if not worse line then him but big head Ben found a way to get the ball down the field.
Tannehill is too scared to look off a safety and throw the ball down the field, its kind of funny to me that hartline has just as many deep routes caught and targets and that is obsurd, you want mike Wallace to be a play maker then let him make plays. use his speed and throw it to him, i guarantee tannehill on a 5 step drop cannot over thrown Wallace on a streak, throw it and let him run under it like everyone else does is the league, Andy dalton to aj green, stafford to megatron, glennon to v. jackson, vick/foles to djax...i guess we are the only team with no deep routes only slants and outs in our playbook.TooGoodForDez likes this. -
What Speed guy runs great routes? none that's why there called speed guys
-
I think Mike Wallace is a good example of a player being in a perfect situation, which he was in Pittsburgh IMO. Ben Roethlisberger has made a living basically buying an inordinate amount of time behind the LOS. That pretty much is exactly what Mike Wallace needs in order to be successful. There really isn't any other QB in the league that can do what Roethlisberger does. Really shouldn't be surprising that his numbers aren't as good in Miami. And thats not a knock on Tannehill, because Wallace would be doing the same on almost every team in the league.
-
I disagree 100% with you i guarantee if you put him on the pats, Bengals pretty much any other decent team he would be catching deep route touchdowns and would be a fantasy filler like he was in pitt, the guys has got to get routes over 20+ yards to be successful just like any other #1 receiver, you think megatron gets fantasy points by out routes n bubble screen n reverses, umm no the guy gets the ball down the field. how many times in the past 2 games have you seen tannehill throw a pass where there has been at least two receivers in the same area, that cannot happen.
-
TRUE!!!!
Just make your pony do his trick and you'll sell tickets to the show!!!!! -
The issue with Mike Wallace is that he creates big plays by getting behind the defense. Guys like Calvin Johnson, AJ Green, etc. make a lot of contested catches which Wallace is incapable of making.
Mike Wallace's best friend in Pittsburgh was broken plays where Roethlisberger would scramble, giving Wallace extra time and getting the defense out of position. -
Um, Calvin Johnson has been targeted 20% of the time on throws 20+ yards. Mike Wallace has been targeted 20.8% of the time on the same throws.Stringer Bell likes this.
-
One trick ponies will not do well in this style of offense. It was something I pointed out before he was signed and it was summarily ignored. Name me the one trick pony in Green Bay? They don't have one. They have a group of complete receivers that can play outside and inside. That is what we should have been striving to get, but we had to make a move to see if we could get a spike in season ticket sales.....so Mike Wallace was signed.
-
Well your correct but, watch this week when the pats put all 11 whithin 15-20 yards, wallace on a streak can give you what you want and be behind the defense, just like it has been all three games in a row we lost they stack the box and dare us to throw deep and we never do, then you wonder why we cant run and havnt had a 100 yard rusher in the 3 losses
-
you want to know why? if you throw the ball down the field and have a deep threat its easy for jordy nelson to catch underneath routes because the defense has been spread out, our offense does not spread the defense, and Aaron Rodgers makes them guys do what he wants, tannehill throws to whomever the play was designed for, so really thats a horrible comparison if you ask me -
Bottom Line:
Ryan Tannehill has left around 150 yards and at least 1 TD on the field due to bad throws to Wallace.
Those get completed, this thread doesn't get made, and his detractors are silent.
I'm not going to pretend that Marshall didn't do what he did last year. Quarterbacking matters.Sceeto, Bpk and bigballa2102 like this. -
Others have mentioned it....Wallace will not fight for those tough receptions. I'm not sure if that's out of laziness or a lack of confidence but if a secondary is all over him it's likely an incomplete or worse.
He's fast...which is good but...Brian is fast too and puts 100% into every reception, the guy is always diving, sliding or leaping for throws that Mike would maybe reach out his hand for. -
Thats a good state you mean hes caught 20% not targeted, and i guarantee you staffords targets over 20+ are way over tannehills, so your saying that hartline having more deep route catches than Wallace is ok ? that's absurd, megatron leads his team in catches over 20+!!!
-
-
Hartline ran a 4.5 please don't tell me hes fast compared to Wallace 4.3, Hartline is a great route runner why he gets open underneath, that's not Wallace strength if you want him to succeed put him where he wants to be running deep routes, you didn't buy him for his great reverse running abilities. Your not going to go out and buy a triple crown running horse to trail ride with!!! -
I think the point is that if you're paying someone as a top-5 WR, they should be able to do all of the above.
-
Right, but are Ryan Tannehill's deep throws considered bad relatively speaking? IIRC, the number show him to be above average.
I think part of the problem here is that deep throws have an inherently low success rate. Expectations may be out of line. -
no if your paying someone you know what he does you should conform to him, he was successful and made you pay him for what he did not what you think he should do!!!!mi2cents likes this. -
number dont win games bro as much as you think they might the score does, and his deep throws are you considering YAC yards as 20+ throws, cuz personally i can only remember a handful of throws over 20 yards one for a td to hartline, and about 4 picks LOL -
Good stuff, I actually think the stats mainly yardage and TD's will go up by seasons end. He'll get 1k if he stays healthy no doubt. All in all he's been ok for us. More productive than Jennings in Minnesota in my opinion. We paid quite a bit to get him but Mike Wallace isn't really my complaint about this season and if Tannehill ever gets more time back there to throw a pass I think Wallace will be even better. Wallace is a big play threat though and shouldn't be a guy leading our team in receptions or catching 10 passes a game. Hartline and Gibson are the ones that should be doing that.
-
First of all...he may be above average throwing to everybody else..he is piss poor throwing to Wallace...
it is not only the deep throws BTW... -
At this point, this year, it's pretty close. Wallace has 3 more receptions, 30 more yards, 1 less TD, and a lower catch rate than Jennings. Their YPC are both about the same. Mike Wallace gets $30M guaranteed and Greg Jennings gets $18M guaranteed, both over three years, I believe. Of course, Wallace is younger, so there's that. As the contracts go on, maybe we have Wallace in his prime while Jennings declines.
But at this point in time, there isn't a whole lot of difference. I wouldn't have given $47M to Jennings, but $60M was too much for Wallace. And in Year One of both their contracts, you could say that with production equal and $13M less over three years, Minnesota may be getting a little more bang for their buck than Miami is.
Hopefully, the trend changes, though. -
No, free agency isn't necessarily expensive. See: Brandon Gibson.
-
With the idea that Wallace opens options for others, the QB needs the time for that to develop.
-
9.6% of Ryan Tannehill's pass attempts are 20+ yards down the field.
11% of Matthew Stafford's pass attempts are 20+ yards down the field.
Ryan has an accuracy percentage of 42.9% on those throws.
Matthew Stafford has an accuracy percentage of 31.3%.
Matthew Stafford has 249 yards on 20+ yard throws. Ryan Tannehill has 291 yards on those throws.cuchulainn and Fin D like this.
Page 1 of 2