Lazor.." He will be an exciting piece"

I'm really, really excited to see what Lazor brings. He's being hyped up a lot... if the offense delivers on that hype, we're in the playoffs again. w00t! :up:

Even beyond the play calls, using the players to their strengths just seems so obvious. Not doing so is just being bull headed and shooting yourself in the foot.

The idea that what Mike Sherman did to Wallace was a baffling and objectionable mismanagement isn't really accurate. There are loads of things about Sherman you can find objectionable, but the idea of him lining up in different positions or going in motion more is somehow a game changer is optimistic to put it politely.

How DARE they insult Tecmo Bowl like that?

"Silverphin wrote:

How DARE they insult Tecmo Bowl like that?

Tecmo Bowl was awesome, however it did have a terrible playbook

"Disgustipate wrote:

The idea that what Mike Sherman did to Wallace was a baffling and objectionable mismanagement isn't really accurate. There are loads of things about Sherman you can find objectionable, but the idea of him lining up in different positions or going in motion more is somehow a game changer is optimistic to put it politely.

But the Steelers DID that. I know that they did. I saw it myself, and it worked! Why not use him in a similar way?

"Disgustipate wrote:

The idea that what Mike Sherman did to Wallace was a baffling and objectionable mismanagement isn't really accurate. There are loads of things about Sherman you can find objectionable, but the idea of him lining up in different positions or going in motion more is somehow a game changer is optimistic to put it politely.

The issue though, 'Pate, is that Wallace is an imperfect receiver. He has certain skills, and lacks other skills. Physicality at the line and precise, crisp routes are not his strong suit. So while it's not unheard of to line a guy up on one side exclusively, if a guy benefits from being moved around, why not? A guy like Marvin Harrison will beat his guy, lined up on one side. Yet when he went down with injury, the Colts moved Wayne around for the first time in his career, and had his best year and loved it.

Yes, Philbin was given a square peg for his round hole. But instead of making that hole square, he kept shoving that peg into the mismatched hole.

"Disgustipate wrote:

The idea that what Mike Sherman did to Wallace was a baffling and objectionable mismanagement isn't really accurate. There are loads of things about Sherman you can find objectionable, but the idea of him lining up in different positions or going in motion more is somehow a game changer is optimistic to put it politely.

Why wouldn't that be making better use of Wallace's talents? Nothing wrong with a little optimism anyway.

"jdang307 wrote:

The issue though, 'Pate, is that Wallace is an imperfect receiver. He has certain skills, and lacks other skills. Physicality at the line and precise, crisp routes are not his strong suit. So while it's not unheard of to line a guy up on one side exclusively, if a guy benefits from being moved around, why not? A guy like Marvin Harrison will beat his guy, lined up on one side. Yet when he went down with injury, the Colts moved Wayne around for the first time in his career, and had his best year and loved it.

Yes, Philbin was given a square peg for his round hole. But instead of making that hole square, he kept shoving that peg into the mismatched hole.

Reminds me Sparano/Henning trying to make Ginn a possession WR. That said, Wallace isn't long for Miami in any offensive scheme, IMO.

"Clark Kent wrote:

Reminds me Sparano/Henning trying to make Ginn a possession WR. That said, Wallace isn't long for Miami in any offensive scheme, IMO.

They tried to make him a complete WR. They threw deep to Ginn a decent amount of times.

Whether Lazor will be a success in Miami will come down to Tannehill and the OL. Tannehill needs to step up this year and show that he deserved to be a top ten pick in 2012. If he doesn't, Lazor's offense will not have much success in 2014.

While many people seem to think the OL will be much improved this year. Other than Pouncey and Albert, the rest of the starters will be players who really haven't proved they can play effectively in the NFL on a regular basis. You have some free agents who were basically very average on their previous NFL teams and several backups and rookies who have to step up and show they deserve to be on an NFL roster.

I think the new OL coach is a vast improvement over the OL coach last year, but it is still to be determined if the Dolphins have the players on the OL who can get the job done on a consistent basis. The OL remains a HUGE question mark heading into this season, IMO.

"Disgustipate wrote:

The idea that what Mike Sherman did to Wallace was a baffling and objectionable mismanagement isn't really accurate. There are loads of things about Sherman you can find objectionable, but the idea of him lining up in different positions or going in motion more is somehow a game changer is optimistic to put it politely.

That's just a lil something he didn't do, there were bigger issues.

"jw3102 wrote:

Whether Lazor will be a success in Miami will come down to Tannehill and the OL. Tannehill needs to step up this year and show that he deserved to be a top ten pick in 2012. If he doesn't, Lazor's offense will not have much success in 2014.

While many people seem to think the OL will be much improved this year. Other than Pouncey and Albert, the rest of the starters will be players who really haven't proved they can play effectively in the NFL on a regular basis. You have some free agents who were basically very average on their previous NFL teams and several backups and rookies who have to step up and show they deserve to be on an NFL roster.

I think the new OL coach is a vast improvement over the OL coach last year, but it is still to be determined if the Dolphins have the players on the OL who can get the job done on a consistent basis. The OL remains a HUGE question mark heading into this season, IMO.

Your forgetting the part where the players they are replacing have much more talent, and better attitudes, and better work ethic..more talent isn't up for debate, neither is better attitude.

I know it camp and no pads and bs tweets, but based on the last two games and camp, I'm not encouraged. Doesn't matter if you're wearing pads or not, a drop is a drop and an inaccurate throw is the same with or without pads and an offense that cant produce in camp and pre season games is a red flag.

More motion isn't an an unambiguously positive element. It's balanced against the increased difficulty to learn the playbook, an increase in procedural penalties, and there's the fact that motion isn't really inherently all that problematic to the defense. If anything, I'd imagine it to be an arms race that has stagnated at this point.

Since when was Wallace's issue the release off the ball, anyway? He's no Brandon Marshall, but there are several other major elements of the position that he performs more objectionably at than getting off the line of scrimmage.

The big benefit behind motion is forcing a defensive declaration pre snap. Moving guys around isn't really creating anything fundamentally different about how the defense is playing you. If anything, moving Wallace inside forces him into running routes he's not best suited for.

The problem really is that Mike Sherman is being scape-goated. There is an narrative that he was too asinine or clueless to use motion. He wasn't sitting there trying to remember what that thing is where the WR runs across the formation pre snap. He is running an offense through the construct of his scheme, which is pretty similar to a lot of successful ones. He has to make calculated decisions about tactics and strategies, and many times his decisions were wrong. But the exaggeration and hyperbole is over the top, almost to the degree oF what we saw with Henning.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

"Disgustipate wrote:

More motion isn't an an unambiguously positive element. It's balanced against the increased difficulty to learn the playbook, an increase in procedural penalties, and there's the fact that motion isn't really inherently all that problematic to the defense. If anything, I'd imagine it to be an arms race that has stagnated at this point.

Since when was Wallace's issue the release off the ball, anyway? He's no Brandon Marshall, but there are several other major elements of the position that he performs more objectionably at than getting off the line of scrimmage.

What's ironic is that the biggest perceived positive about Wallace is that he is 'stretching the defense', when in fact if he is running routes from the inside, you are inherently minimizing the potential for that kind of impact.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

"djphinfan wrote:

Your forgetting the part where the players they are replacing have much more talent, and better attitudes, and better work ethic..more talent isn't up for debate, neither is better attitude.

Debatable.

And I wouldn't bank on Albert. Doubt he plays 16 games. Strange that we gave him 54 million bucks when Long wasn't signed because of injury concerns for a much better deal... I digress.

This oline is really going to disappoint some of you... It isn't that much better than 2013. Maybe not at all with 2 rookies potentially starting...

"Stringer Bell wrote:

The big benefit behind motion is forcing a defensive declaration pre snap. Moving guys around isn't really creating anything fundamentally different about how the defense is playing you. If anything, moving Wallace inside forces him into running routes he's not best suited for.

The problem really is that Mike Sherman is being scape-goated. There is an narrative that he was too asinine or clueless to use motion. He wasn't sitting there trying to remember what that thing is where the WR runs across the formation pre snap. He is running an offense through the construct of his scheme, which is pretty similar to a lot of successful ones. He has to make calculated decisions about tactics and strategies, and many times his decisions were wrong. But the exaggeration and hyperbole is over the top, almost to the degree oF what we saw with Henning.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

yeeeeah, naaaah, for me I could care less about the motion crap, even though I believe when you have a mike Wallace, you don't line him up on one side of the field over 90 percent of the time, allowing the defender to set his mechanics and mentally check in, its all about how he used the Qbs skillset, or didn't in this case..jmo

"Disgustipate wrote:

The idea that what Mike Sherman did to Wallace was a baffling and objectionable mismanagement isn't really accurate. There are loads of things about Sherman you can find objectionable, but the idea of him lining up in different positions or going in motion more is somehow a game changer is optimistic to put it politely.

moving Wallace around and utilizing him more than just on the right side doesn't need to be utterly "game-changing" in a Michael Jordan sense of the word for it to have an impact.

Supposedly Wallace was the second most doubled receiver last year behind Calvin Johnson. Defenses knowing exactly where he's gonna be every snap and thus Sherman facilitating their efforts to cover him up certainly did Wallace and the offense no favors that's for sure. Does Calvin line up on the left sideline all season long? Heck no. They move him around to get their best playmaker better looks, to create confusion, and to create better opportunities for others which you most certainly can't do as well by cementing him at one spot.

Besides, moving X receiver around plays into the entire philosophy of Kelly/Lazor's offense, and if you remove that aspect, it changes everything and the philosophy goes out the window. So you can't isolate the movement of Wallace and look at it in a vacuum like you're attempting to do.

If you wanna gauge the affects of moving Wallace around, you really need to look at the 2012 Eagles offense that didn't move Jackson around much nor innovatively devised better ways to get him the ball in space . So it's not even about solely moving Wallace or Jackson. Occasionally maybe the move is meant to isolate Hartline, Clay, or Matthews/Gibson rather than Wallace since all our receivers have their own unique strengths and weaknesses, and thus Wallace during these instances is simply nothing more than a secondary move. So "not moving Wallace" tells us about more than just Wallace. If you wanna put Hartline on the left corner for a better matchup, then you gotta move Wallace somewhere else. Keeping Wallace on the right side 90% of the time tells us that no one else motioned or lined up on the right side where perhaps they would've had a better matchup against that specific corner or for that specific play/route or because perhaps it simply offered a better matchup than Wallace against that particular corner on that specific play. It's quite simple. The NFL is heavily situational, complex, and features offensive and defensive players of a wide array of strengths and weaknesses. Moving receivers around is nothing more than a form of flexibility and adaptability that offers improved means of capitalizing on those strengths and weaknesses, to exploit your own strengths and opponent weaknesses while minimizing opponent strengths and your own weaknesses.

The 2012 Eagles ranked 29th in scoring with 16.5 ppg. Jackson averaged 63.6 ypg with 2 TDs.
The 2013 Eagles ranked 4th in scoring with 27.6 ppg. Jackson averaged 83.3 ypg with 8 TDs.
More importantly to Jackson's stats and the offense's efficiency, his completion percentage increased from 52.9% [52.2% for his career] to 65.1%.... and his yards per attempt increased from 8.2 [9.1 for his career] to 10.6. Suddenly this explosive player that everyone thought was essentially nothing more than a deep threat and wasn't conducive to an efficient offense , became vastly more efficient than Brian Hartline's 56.7% while adding 5 more TDs than Hartline and 3 more yards per pass attempt than Hartline's 7.6.

Here's the breakdown of where Jackson caught the ball in 2013:
18% right side
13% left side
6% middle
16% left sideline
46% right sideline
61% sidelines

These reception percentages are slightly skewed by the fact they weren't all caught along the same latitude he lined up at, as DeSean ran crossers, out routes, drags, corners, and wheels from the slot where 184 of his routes originated, but you can still see that he caught the ball ALL OVER THE FIELD.

45% of those slot targets were crossing/drag routes and bubble screens, obviously to take advantage of his speed and playmaking ability. Miami fans were momentarily teased of such potential by Wallace's 19 yard screen TD against Indy... but rarely was he played in the slot where defenders are less likely to press him or get their hands on him to redirect his stem and where he could use that speed to go left, right, straight, or behind the LOS rather than predominantly either straight or left with the sideline covering him to the right like he saw all last season. Limiting his time in the slot meant less drags across the field on clear outs with open field to work with. It means less speed-outs where the safety has no room for hesitation without getting beat to the spot, and even then has his hands full to get there in time if the corner either has been cleared or lacks sufficient depth. It means less deep crossers that offer their own set of benefits with a player like Wallace running them. It means less wheel routes and corner routes for chunk yardage that he should be able to excel at with his speed just as Jackson did. It means less confusion creating and less advantage taken of confusion, because let's face it, the fastest receiver in the NFL will create confusion if you strategically place him in a location that makes multiple defenders responsible for him depending on where he takes his route, and the fastest receiver in the NFL will most certainly do a better job of taking advantage of confusion and busted coverages and turning them into chunk yardage b/c you're no longer limiting which direction he can run. An out route from the slot can become a wheel route for a big gain or it can even be turned upfield for chunk yardage; an out route on the perimeter is typically headed out of bounds where 4.2 speed goes out the window as the sideline never misses a tackle. Hell, just watch a Philly game to see how effective a playmaking receiver can be out of the slot and how diverse he can become as a receiver compared to when he's lined up in one spot the entire time.

Not to mention, Jackson & Wallace clearly have some route limitations on the outside, but that doesn't mean those limitations permeate their games equally across the field, just as Jackson demonstrated last year. They could actually have an expanded route tree from the slot b/c it's a different animal, and as such you could discover new strengths to their game that don't exist on the outside. So, if Wallace has limitations as a perimeter receiver as you suggest, then why would you argue that lining him up 90% of the time on the right sideline is no big deal? You of all people should be arguing that he NEEDS to be moved around more to minimize limitations on the perimeter and instead use those snaps elsewhere where he and the plays themselves have a better chance of being successful as seen with DeSean Jackson's respectable 65% reception rate, 10.6 yards per pass attempt, 9 TDs [4 more than his career avg], and 1332 yards [375 more than his career average].

Here's some good stuff:
DeSean averaged 5.06 yards PER ROUTE out of the backfield, second highest among all his routes, which he ran 71% of the time from the slot. Those are easy completions and as good as a successful run.
His most efficient routes were corners at an insane 5.57 yards PER ROUTE from the slot].
3rd most efficient were out routes at 4.57 yards PER ROUTE from the slot].
4th most efficient were crossing routes at 3.97 yards PER ROUTE from the slot].
5th most efficient were screens at 2.5 yards PER ROUTE from the slot]. Keep in mind with those 2.5 yards that he was only targeted about a third of these routes.

Look at that, the majority of Jackson's five most efficient routes were run from the slot. Meanwhile, go routes, posts, hitches, and in routes, which averaged 1.99, 2.26, 2.06, and 1.58 yards respectively per route were run 79% of the time on the outside. Now, efficiency wise, what would it look like if we removed ALL of Jackson's slot snaps and added them to the outside? Do you still wanna argue that it's no big deal to have a similar receiver like Wallace entrenched 90% of the time on the right boundary?

"Clark Kent wrote:

Debatable.

And I wouldn't bank on Albert. Doubt he plays 16 games. Strange that we gave him 54 million bucks when Long wasn't signed because of injury concerns for a much better deal... I digress.

This oline is really going to disappoint some of you... It isn't that much better than 2013. Maybe not at all with 2 rookies potentially starting...

I'm not expecting Majic..and I'll take my chances on my evals of the talent level relative to last year.

You do realize Jon Martin, tyson Clabo, Nate garner ( Brenner etc) and John Jerry played most of the season.

Brandon Albert is a monstrous upgrade over the bust that was Jon Martin, his talent was a scam..as in not talented at all. He was a product of a system and the best Qb prospect ever.

Jogn Jerry was a fat ass.

Tyson Clabo was and is so washed up he could barely move, the guy was absolute garbage on film in his last year in Atlanta, his body was never worked on over the years seriously and the athleticism he did have, was gone..

Garner and Brenner, come on man, Dallas Thomas has talent..

No one is arguing their gonna struggle some, but to not be able to see more talent across the board, some spots to the extreme, is just staying in a safe evaluation zone..

If you have to see it happen all together then ok, but don't think that some folks have to wait to know were better across the board.

It's not just motion, it's also where he lines up. A lot of Wallace's highlights in Pitt did not involve pre snap motion.

Well, Sherman did put Wallace into the position of being college open many a time last season, so I'm really psyched to see if that's something Lazor can improve upon. Wooo!

"djphinfan wrote:

I'm not expecting Majic..and I'll take my chances on my evals of the talent level relative to last year.

You do realize Jon Martin, tyson Clabo, Nate garner ( Brenner etc) and John Jerry played most of the season.

Brandon Albert is a monstrous upgrade over the bust that was Jon Martin, his talent was a scam..as in not talented at all. He was a product of a system and the best Qb prospect ever.

Jogn Jerry was a fat ass.

Tyson Clabo was and is so washed up he could barely move, the guy was absolute garbage on film in his last year in Atlanta, his body was never worked on over the years seriously and the athleticism he did have, was gone..

Garner and Brenner, come on man, Dallas Thomas has talent..

No one is arguing their gonna struggle some, but to not be able to see more talent across the board, some spots to the extreme, is just staying in a safe evaluation zone..

If you have to see it happen all together then ok, but don't think that some folks have to wait to know were better across the board.

* Albert > Any LT we had start last season. True. But he needs to remain healthy. Which has been an issue for him over the last 2 seasons.

* Cogs, despite being a dip**** was a pro bowl caliber player. Turner/Thomas are young guys with potential. But it's hard to say they're short term solutions (Long term, I have high hopes).

*Shelly Smith is not a terrific pass blocker. Maybe an upgrade over Jerry, but when you give up 58 sacks and countless pressure, the upgrade needs to be vast not slight.

*And I love Ju'Waun James long term. I think he's going to be a solid player for us for many, many years. But for now, he's still a rookie. The top 3 LT's in last years class (all top 5 picks) had their struggles and they were far better prospects.

You and a lot of other people want to close the book on the offensive line like it's a done deal... It's not.