Well if Chad Johnson gets cut that will cement our WR corps as worst in the league.

Ah, so the reason Legedu Naanee, the worst WR in football last year according to PFF, is slotted as a #1 WR is because we didn't have 7 picks in the first two rounds. Got it.

 

No the reason he's the number 1 is because we used our picks to fill other needs. I know getting a franchise QB, solidifying the o-line, a play making TE and the future at RB is really stupid and pointless, but nevertheless, there you are. That's why if we just had more picks we could have filled every need in just one draft!!!!

 

The reason why Legedu Naanee is slotted as the #1 WR is because he's been good in camp and practice. Not because we're in a position where we've resorted to playing a guy who will likely continue to be the worst starting WR.

 

Davone Bess - UDFA
Legadu Naanee - #172 (R5)
Julius Pruitt - UDFA
Marlon Moore - UDFA
Roberto Wallace - UDFA
Jeff Fuller - UDFA
BJ Cunningham - #183 (R6)
Rishard Matthews - #227 (R7)
Brian Hartline - #108 (R4)
Chris Hogan - UDFA
Clyde Gates - #111 (R4)

Listed in order from the latest depth chart. Does anyone...anyone...believe there is another wide receivers unit in the NFL that has such low pedigree?

 

I can't tell if this is sarcastic or not.

 

Even with his low PFF rating, his drop pct was still only 4%, better than any of our 3 main WRs last season. His yards per catch was only 10.6 and I'd guess that factored into his rating.
The year before, PFF rated him 46th out of 110. His pct of passes dropped was 2% and he averaged 16 yds per catch. For what it's worth, that season Wes Welker was 44th and Steve Johnson was 48th. So, you can't go just be his PFF rating and objectively say he sucks.

 

Reading some of your posts, it genuinely seems like you believe a team's receiving unit is judged on the talent of its best WR rather than the entire WR/TE/RB pass catching unit as a whole.

As far as depth goes, I'm not sure how you say we don't have any when our 2s & 3s were the ones marching down the field with Tannehill against The Bucs "depth". We have more overall depth & talent at WR/TE/RB than we've had in a handful of years.

Unfortunately, it takes time for that depth to develop, so the complaining you're doing is somewhat irrational. Gates has the talent to be very good; Wallace has the talent to be outstanding; Egnew has the talent to become one of the better receiving TEs in the game; Clay has the talent to develop into one of the game's top Hbacks (perhaps a notch below Aaron Hernandez); Rishard Matthews has the talent to be a good player. Fuller has the talent to be a stud.
BUT, they. all. need. time. to. develop.

So complaining that we don't have playmakers is a silly notion b/c ALL the above guys have it in them to be playmakers, but again, they need time to develop.

Basically your entire, dare I say "rant", is reduced to our young guys not developing fast enough for you.

 

I was basing it off the fact that he has 4 TD's in 5 years in the league, but using PFF to support my argument. If he couldn't get on the field and contribute in a pass-happy San Diego system, I'd say it's unlikely he'll have a whole lot of success anywhere else.

 

No, I sincerely believe that Legedu Naanee is in the position he is in because he has performed well in camp. He has by all accounts. I don't know if this is a common phenomena for him, to perform well in camp but poorly in games.

It would not be particularly shocking for Naanee to become a good player. He is quite talent physically, and was raw coming into the league. It does not beggar belief that a guy in his situation given different coaching, moving to a different receiver position, and running a different route tree in a different offense would provide different results.

We're also not in a position where we have to start him. The first depth chart had the coaching staff put him opposite of Johnson, and they made a conscious decision to play both Bess and Hartline at different receiver positions than Naanee, despite the fact that on paper historically they would be better options to start at wide out opposite Johnson.

 

I don't think anyone is arguing pedigree.

 

I think out of all our needs, WR was the least important. That's not to say WRs aren't important, just that if we made a list of the 5 biggest needs, WR was 4 or 5.

 

There's a reason for that. You look at it in terms of snaps. Last year Brandon Marshall took 907 of our WR unit's 2341 snaps. That's very close to 40% of the unit. The top two guys Marshall and Hartline took 66% of the snaps. There's really not much point in looking at a WRs unit beyond the top 3 if you want to evaluate how skilled the unit is.

In Miami's case that top three is going to be Davone Bess, Brian Hartline and Legedu Naanee.

With Cam Newton throwing the football, Legedu Naanee averaged 6.3 yards per attempt in his direction last year. Bess and Hartline averaged 6.8 and 8.3, respectively, albeit with Matt Moore as their quarterback. Then again, with our starting QB position down to Matt Moore playing in a system for which he doesn't seem suited, and a rookie quarterback who will doubtless take his lumps when he plays...you don't expect much better. And keep in mind, Hartline had the highest YPA of the three and he's the one people were itching to replace with Chad Johnson and are still itching to replace with Roberto Wallace.

Even if people reclaim their sanity and re-insert Brian Hartline back in that rotation, you're talking a 7.1 yard per attempt average to the wide receivers. That's not good. Wide receivers are supposed to average more. I don't think the Bills are much better off, if at all, but I think the Jets are and New England certainly is.

I just don't agree with this. You don't make up for lack of talent by just putting in more time developing a guy. That's not how it works. The difference between the 1st rounder and the UDFA isn't simply teaching and developing the UDFA for a longer amount of time.

If those guys all have the talent to be playmakers, then who in this league doesn't? You have to remember that above all this is a league where you're competing against each other. Differentiation occurs. You dismiss criticism on the basis of Rishard Matthews and Roberto Wallace having the talent to be playmakers but needing time...but why can't you say the same about, I dunno, T.J. Graham, Donald Jones, Jeremy Kerley, Chaz Schilens, Mohammed Massaquoi, Derek Hagan, Anthony Armstrong, Dezmon Briscoe, Sammie Stroughter, etc? Where's the differentiation?

 

I thought he should have grabbed Stephen Hill in the 2nd round. We'll see if that ends up a good thing or not.

But once you get beyond a certain point you might as well scrap the position and circle back to it next year.

 

Ok, so are you of the opinion that had we had BM and say a Victor Cruz last year we would have went all the way? This year?

 

2nd round: So you would've prioritized WR over ensuring your new franchise QB is protected? Terrible move! Ireland just provided Tannehill with what might become the best book end protectors in the game (Martin & Long). That's SIGNIFICANTLY more important for Tanny's development b/c he'll be able to focus on the game rather than constantly running for his life or dealing with injury (see Bradford & Stafford). WRs are worth peanuts if a QB doesn't have time to throw to them.

3rd round: DE trumps WR, period..... and especially so if the team employs a fast tempo WCO where receivers will be rotated in more often than usual.

3rd round: Michael Egnew. Possibly the best receiving option on the board based both on our offensive scheme and the fact we'll frequently be using multiple TE sets. How do you think we could employ 2 & 3 TE formations with only 2 TEs (Fasano & Clay)? Adding that talented 3rd TE was a must, and we got the 3rd best one in the draft rather than the 12th best WR.

4th round: Perhaps you would've traded up for the 15th rated WR rather than a playmaking 1st round talent like Lamar Miller. Glad you're not drafting for us.

5th round: At this point, if you're a good GM, you're drafting for value, not need.


** Seems you view Ireland's draft as a failure to take the 6th WR.. 12th WR.. 13th WR.. 15th WR.. and 23rd WR [rounds 2 - 5].
**** I look at it as Ireland taking off the board the draft's 5th OT.... 7th DE.... 3rd TE..... 8th RB.. and 17th LB.

When will you understand that great teams DO. NOT. DRAFT. FOR. NEED?
The rule of thumb is: fill needs in FA; draft for the future.

 

That is the talent I'm judging. We're not talking about all pass catchers here, we're talking about WR specifically or so I thought. And even then, our tight ends aren't that good either. Fasano is average. Clay is unproven, though has shown some ability to make plays in a very small sample size. Egnew has the physical talent, but he was never a playmaker at Missouri. Yes he caught a lot of balls, but his yardage and TD's were rather bad for a guy with his talent. Maybe it was just the system, and he'll be given more opportunity for chunk yardage here. I do know that Chase Coffman and Martin Rucker were both highly productive in that system with similar measurables, and have sucked in the NFL. So we'll see. I do love the pass catching potential of the backs however.

Face it, our depth sucks. I don't care what they do against 2nd and 3rd stringers of an untalented Bucs team. They won't be going against them in a real game. In the end, we scored 7 points against a defense that was 30th in the NFL last year. Color me not impressed whatsoever.

There's a reason most of those "talented" players you just named were either undrafted, or taken very low in the draft. If you're hopes are depending on UDFA's and low draft picks, expect us to be without playmakers for a long time. Hell we haven't had many playmakers at WR/TE in a long time. Not surprising considering we've only taken 2 of them higher in the draft since 2000. Ted Ginn and Chris Chambers. And then Marshall that cost us two 2nd rounders.

No, it's not a silly notion. Like I said, if you're planning on UDFA's developing into studs, then you're going to be waiting a hell of a long time before you see one on this team.

My rant is based on our "proven" wr's sucking, and our young WR's not being talented enough, and most likely never developing to anything more than decent 2nd or 3rd stringers.

 

If we didn't just draft Tannehill, didn't have squat at RT, and didn't employ an offensive scheme that revolves around timing and great route running, then I'd wholeheartedly agree with you on taking a developmental talent like Hill.

IMO providing Tannehill with what may become the best pass blocking bookends in the league will aid his development and efficiency better than a single WR.

 

The problem with this logic is that lineman have proven to not being that difficult to find later in the draft. If we had a good GM, we'd likely already have a good RT that didn't cost us a high 2nd rounder. When you're desperate for pass catchers, you shouldn't be spending high picks on something you could get later without much difficulty. That being said, I wasn't really impressed with last year's WR group either. But Stephen Hill was a no brainer to me. Way too much talent to pass up for a right tackle. I was a big fan of Reuben Randle as well. And I would taken Sanu over Egnew rather easily as well.

 

I don't have a problem focusing. It matters because we aren't a WR away from glory, and that's the only way WR is 2nd to a QB in terms of need.

You know what a young QB needs more than a great WR? A good oline to give him time, a good running game to keep the defense honest, a sure handed TE to be his safety valve and a stout defense to bail him out. I wonder how we drafted?

You act as if we won't have any receptions by a WR this year.

 

but we're not running the same offense as last year, so those stats are insignificant, no?
What is significant IMO is:

Packers #3, 4, 5 WRs were targeted 26% of time.
Jennings------- 18%
Nelson--------- 17%
Finley---------- 17%
Running Backs- 17%

Are you saying we should give talented players like Gates just one year to emerge as a great contributor, and if not, they get cut?
I understand there's a difference between a 1st rounder and an UDFA. Personally, I'd rather have a franchise hopeful QB like Tannehill with our 1st pick than trading up for the top rated WR of this class (who is nothing like a Calvin Johnson) or standing pat and drafting Floyd. I'm not sure if you're insinuating that we should've used our 2013 1st rounder to draft Stephen Hill..... and I wouldn't trade Pouncey for Jon Baldwin.

A lot of guys don't have the talent to be playmakers in this league, which is why a ton of receivers are considered possession guys. There are plenty of guys who don't have the natural talent at their respective position as Gates, Egnew, Clay, Fuller, or Wallace do. It doesn't matter what other guys are like; it only matters if our staff believes our guys possess the talent to become something. As a Draft Guru I'd think you'd understand that "projecting aspect" of it more than most people.

I'm not sure what you're arguing against in the first place considering we went offense with our 1st 4 picks in '11, with 3 of those being potential playmakers at WR, TE, and RB...... and then went offense with 4 of our first 5 picks in '12, with 3 of those being on hopeful playmakers at QB, TE, and RB. Regardless of whether or not you feel it was the right "players", it was still heavily focused on adding playmakers as well as improving the receiving aspect of the offense while bolstering the oline with athletic studs at C & RT who will hopefully allow Tannehill time to get the ball to all these offensive players we've added.

There's nothing to say that we're done going after weapons either. It's only been 2 drafts. People irrationally complained Ireland didn't have it in him to draft a 1st round QB, but he did.... and he didn't just do it to do it; he waited and took a guy he really wanted and felt would be an ideal fit. So there's no reason to believe we won't turn our efforts toward trading up for an ideal & talented receiver in 2013 now that we've drafted for value at Oline, TE, RB, and QB and with those positions now being pretty much set. Ireland's taken a QB at #8, twice traded up for the best backs on the board, traded up for an Hback, and taken a chance on a small school talent like Gates despite us not having many picks in '11, so why would anyone believe he doesn't care about the WR position or wouldn't draft one high in 2013?



*** The one thing obvious about Ireland is he doesn't like drafting for need. HOWEVER, if he does have to draft for need, it's obvious he'll trade up for the best talent & value & rather than standing pat and taking whatever need falls to him. So next year, if WR is still a need, IMO it's likely we'll see him trade up for a WR he covets.

 

I think Clay will be a great target this season. Sometimes a weakness will spring a strength. I think Clay will step up.

 

There's no problem with the logic. If you see a RT whom you think can lock down that side for a decade and save your QB from IR, then you take him.
Assuming you'll find one in the later rounds capable of doing all the things this offense requires of him is where the logic is flawed. Not only did Martin fill the team's 2nd greatest need (RT), but he also represented tremendous value where we took him. There's absolutely no way it's a bad pick unless he fails. If Martin makes us better, it's a good pick, period.

Besides, teams using 1st or 2nd rounders to lock down the RT position for their franchise QB is nothing new. GB did it for Rodgers; NE for Brady; Colts for Manning; Browns for Weeden; Vikings for Favre. It's a passing league. The QB needs to be protected, especially when there are more pass rush specialists coming off the left side to take advantage of matchups than years past IIRC.

 

I don't see how anybody can say Hill was a "no-brainer". The opinions on him were all over the place. He was anything but a sure thing. I wanted a WR earlier than we got one, but I wouldn't have gone for Hill at that point. I probably would have taken Sanu in the third.

 

.....and even then, GB's offense saw only 35% of its pass targets go to the #1 & #2 WR.

66% went to TEs, backs, and #3 through #5 WRs.

I see absolutely NOTHING wrong with Ireland & Philbin beefing up & solidifying the "66%" this year and then going after a premium WR next year when we'll better know what compliments the receiving/TE corps the best.


Simply grabbing the best receiver available this year doesn't mean he'll necessarily be the best fit. Look at GB for example: Nelson & Jennings are 2 different receivers. If you already have a Jennings type but need a Nelson, then it doesn't make much sense to grab another Jennings. We have a lot invested recently in developmental receivers; some are in the Nelson mold, and a few are in Jennings'. Giving this season a chance to play out will give us a better idea if this offense is more in need of a Nelson type or more in need of a Jennings. Basically, what we need from a top receiver could completely change depending on who shape up to be our #2 through 5.

 

There's no one way to skin a cat.
All that matters is whether or not the guys we drafted produce and contribute to winning. Period.
Complaining that the positions weren't prioritized in the order some fans had hoped is insignificant.
Plus, there's no way to address all the positions we needed addressed in only 2 drafts, especially when considering our offensive scheme has diverged drastically from the Sparano-Henning days just 2 years prior. If all the offense is missing is a top playmaking WR, then I'd say we're in pretty good position for 2013 considering we'll have more picks freed up and sufficient money to play with in FA. This isn't just about looking at the current year and current situation, but also looking into the future as well, and IMO the future is now being set up quite well.

 

Also, no draft or offseason is going to address every need [when a team has many], and no draft is going to address every fan's wants.
The past 2 drafts marked the first time in a while I was actually happy about the overall results rather than finding myself trying to be a good fan by looking for reasons to rationalize many of the picks I initially shook my head at.

 

All backwards, no wonder you don't like the GM. My theory: Good lineman are drafted and kept until they burn out. Wrs are a dime a dozen. Martin was a value pick at a greater need, and partially a result of drafting a young QB .A steal compared to Stephen hill.... hes a gamble bud. Egnew > Sanu too IMO.

I think a lot of folks who are butt-hurt over not drafting a WR until round 6, dismiss that we already have role-players in Bess and BHart. They dismiss what Miller and Egnew can bring to the offense. What we're missing is a bonified #1 with game breaking ability. That can be addressed now that we have a QB and can protect him.

High draft pick or Dwayne Bowe ?

 

You had me at "all backwards" you lost me at Dwayne Bowe.

 

Much agree.

Hey, if impatient fans got what they wanted exactly when they wanted it, we'd have Orton, Kolb, Flynn, and Ponder battling it out for the starting QB job.


Unfortunately, fans are so quick to dismiss their past mistakes and are ready to repeat their actions by blasting our GM in similar fashion for not immediately grabbing a top receiver, any top receiver, even if it meant over-drafting one, taking one who isn't necessarily the best fit, or one who might take a few years to develop.

Instead, Ireland's built up the part of the offense that will see the bulk of the pass attempts [#3-#5 WR, TE, and RB] when he wasn't addressing QB and QB protection. Having done it this way, we can now afford to be quite choosy about what top receiver we draft or sign in FA to compliment the rest of the offense, and IMO it's a lot easier to find a top receiver to compliment an existing surrounding cast than it is to draft an entire surrounding to compliment a top receiver.

 

Seems like someone added them up a few years ago, and high round WRs bust at a far higher rate than high round offensive linemen.

 

I like Clay myself. It seems everytime he touches the ball it's for a 20+ yard gain.

 

Saying RT is a bigger need than WR is false. Getting rid of Brandon Marshall made WR far and away the biggest need on the team. If anybody is dime a dozen, it's OL. There's a reason you see so many lineman going undrafted or taken late in the draft and becoming good starters.

The biggest problem with this statement is we're not just missing a #1. We're missing a #1 AND a #2. Brian Hartline is at best a backup wideout. The only thing we have is a reliable slot WR.

 

That's because OL are easy to evaluate. They're the safest pick you can make. Hence why most GM's not named Jeff Ireland are capable of finding them later in the draft. The team is pretty much doomed until Ireland gets a clue and brings in the "chunk yardage" players we've been hearing about for years instead of yet another 1st or 2nd round lineman. Considering how long it took him to make the obvious choice of taking a QB in round 1, I fear it could be awhile. Though I'm hopeful we'll get one next year. I mean, not even Jeff Ireland is dumb enough to pass on one after realizing just how awful our WR's are this year. It should be a no brainer, even for Ireland.

 

You think he didn't believe it was a priority this year? He drafted 2 of them.
Were they as high of a selection as fans would've wanted in a perfect world? No.
Were they as highly drafted as Ireland, himself, would've liked in a perfect world? Probably not.
What I do like is that despite a need for a top receiver he stuck to his board and drafted what he felt was the best value rather than succumbing to the pressure of drafting/reaching for need.

Heck, we can still sign a quality FA receiver next year who could possibly make a bigger impact in 2013 than a highly drafted rookie this year [when factoring in the developmental process]. If not, I seriously doubt we go the first 2 rounds w/o drafting a WR if we don't get one in FA.

 

But clearly WR is priority #1, 2 nd 3 next draft, unless our roster talent shocks us this season.

 

Yep, NFL rookies should hang it up if they're not solidified as starters by preseason game 2.