Those guys who disliked your post are the same guys that don't see a difference between a half-speed Wallace and a full-speed Hartline or Gibson.
It makes ALL THE DIFFERENCE to have a WR that can get separation against ANY DB.
Tannehill has never had that -- one reason why he was "content" w. Hartline. He never knew what real speed could do on an NFL field. We need another TRUE THREAT WR soon.
And what you said about Wallace is true for almost every team, if they lose their #1 Wide Receiver it's going to have a negative impact on them. I just don't understand how can you sign Wallace to a $60 Million dollar contract with the thinking of him getting hurt.
If you look at the most productive receivers in the NFL, they're guys that run somewhere between 4.48 and 4.55, In that range. They're not guys that are 4.32, and 4.2 -
That's what's become of the more over-rated, over-hyped, over-emphasized instrument in the NFL talent evaluators' tool box. The 40 is fool's gold. It's the NFL's version of the driver's test. Pass it once and you're in. After that, you're off the hook.
It's Always about the QB, if something were to happen to Wallace, it would rest on the shoulders of the QB.
If you look at the Top 10 scoring offenses in the league last year.
#1. Patriots: Fast Receiver: Matthew Slater and he had a grand total of Zero Catches last year. Starting WR Avg. 40 time of 4.65.
#2. Broncos: Fastest Receiver: Trindon Holliday (2 Catches for 17 Yards) Starting WR Avg. 40 time of 4.46
#3. Saints: Fastest Receiver: Devery Henderson (22 Catches For 316 Yards 1 TD) WR Avg. 40 time of 4.59
#4. Redskins: Fastest Receiver: Santana Moss (41 Catches For 543 Yards 8TD) WR Avg. 40 time of 4.46
#5. Packers: Fasters Reveiver: Jeremy Ross ( ZIP) WR Avg. 40 time of 4.55
#6. Giants: Fastest Receiver: Domenik Hixon (39 Catches 546 Yards 2 Td's) WR Avg. 40 time of 4.50
#7. Falcons: Fastest Receiver: Julio Jones (79, 1198, 10) WR Avg. 40 time of 4.43
What they all have in common is great QB play, that's what's important, not some obscured 4th or fifth round receiver. As Tannehill goes, so does the Dolphins..
As for signing 3 WR's, I am on board with 2 of the 3--Wallace and Hartline. But I'm on record as not liking the Brandon Gibson signing, but I hope I'm wrong about that. He's a #2 from one of the 3 worst WR corps in the NFL last year in my estimation (Miami, St. Louis and Cleveland). He's not a guy I would have signed. The draft was deep with good WR prospects in rounds 2-4. We had 5 picks in those rounds and didn't select any. That seems like a missed opportunity to me.
I never said that losing our #1 WR wasn't going to have a negative impact ... my comments were directed at how we don't have a 2nd deep threat. Obviously losing Wallace will hurt the team, but I'm saying that if Wallace gets hurt we will be speed-deficient again ... and that contributed to us ranking very low in scoring last year, so it's something I'd like to shore up.
It's always hard to take one player out of a team situation and compare them, but if you want to do that then let's agree on the parameters, cool? It's difficult to find a productive WR without sub 4.48 speed that is devoid of a solid running game and devoid of a deep threat on his team. IMHO, that's where we were last year, and Hartline fit your mold and had a very productive year at WR. Point taken. But, My thought is that by having a deep threat opposite Hartline we will open up the running lanes more and that will provide some much needed help for our running game. It should also significantly reduce double-coverage on Hartline. When he was covered by 1 DB he did well last year, so having a deep threat at the X position I think will help.
But, if you insist, I'm not sure exactly how you classify these receivers, who I consider the upper echelon of WR's in the NFL: Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, AJ Green, Julio Jones, Roddy White, Dez Bryant, Mike Wallace. Those are not slot receivers like Harvin, Cruz, Jennings, Welker, or Cobb. But of the wideouts (not slot guys) I'd only say that Larry Fitzgerald hasn't clocked under 4.48, and I consider those guys to all be productive NFL players. Those are the type of WR's we want to play the X position. I'm hoping Rishard Matthews can handle the backup X to Wallace, because I'm not comfortable with Gibson there as he lacks the speed.
We agree about the 40 time being overvalued. There are 3 parts to it that are important though, 1) quick initial burst to separate, 2) acceleration to eat up DB cushion, and 3) long speed to pull away from coverage deep. NFL receivers are not professional 3-point stance runners from a starters gun, so those 40 times aren't always exact indicators of burst, acceleration and long speed at the WR position (or any position). But, slow guys will not time well, and fast guys should time fairly well. It does give us a rough indicator, and that's a good way to use it. If you prefer 10-yard split times, that makes sense too, but deep speed is a separate thing from quickness IMHO. Hope we can reach consensus on that one.
Well you're right that the QB is the big determiner in the NFL, particularly with the current passing-centric rules. That was and is my central thrust. With the QB being so important, and with us finally having a good one around which to build, I'm in favor of surrounding our QB with weapons. My critique of the draft was that we didn't draft a WR or TE high, lost our LT and replaced him with a free agent RT sliding a guy who took his lumps in year 1 to LT. Not exactly building around your QB.
#1. Patriots: Their WR corps was really savaged. This is a good argument, because they're using a speed TE, Hernandez, and/or a size/speed mismatch TE, Gronkowski, to great effect with a very quick and excellent route runner, Welker, providing success. Great weapons but only Brandon Lloyd for deep speed last year, and now he's gone. But, Danny Amendola, a slot guy, does have decent speed. Whether it's below 4.48 I'm not sure, but he's definitely faster than Welker ... when healthy.
#2. Broncos: I think you kinda missed the argument on this one. D. Thomas and E. Decker are their starting WR's and both is a sub 4.48 guy. Trindon Holiday was an electric return specialist but not really a WR and never their primary deep threat.
#3. Saints: Well Jimmy Graham may not have broken 4.48 but I definitely consider him a deep threat, and at 6'7 he's a matchup nightmare for any DB and faster than any LB. Let him run 1v1 in your secondary at your own peril.
#4. Redskins: This isn't accurate. They have 3 primary receiver that all run under 4.48 in Garcon, Hankerson and Morgan, so they're never lacking a deep threat. Moss is more of a slot guy than an X receiver.
#5. Packers: Not really focusing on the offense with this one. Their main WR's last year Jennings, Cobb, Nelson and Jones, and only Jones is without speed. I doubt Jennings runs as fast as he used to, but he still can get open deep using his trickery. Nelson and Cobb both clocked under 4.48, so why you're even trying to suggest Jeremy Ross is their deep threat escapes me.
#6. Giants: Well their primary deep threat is in the slot, so this is kinda odd, but it's Victor Cruz. When Cruz isn't in the game, it's much tougher for New York, which is why his contract is such a difficult negotiation at the moment.
#7. Falcons: Well I agree that Julio Jones is their deep threat, and their WR3 is fast too, but even you state that Jones runs a sub 4.48 in the 40, so I'm not sure how this proves your point.
My main issue with the guys you listed is that you're not listing their primary deep threats. Their primary deep threats are mostly guys under that 4.48 threshold you established in your post. My point was that in a Miami Dolphins offense that lacked deep threats, I wanted to get a second guy with deep speed in case Wallace gets injured. I never said guys without blazing speed couldn't be productive. My point is that the team needs at least 1 deep threat on the field most of the time to open things up for that underneath WR/TE. Given our pronounced problem with it last year, I was disappointed we didn't grab someone in the draft to backup the X position. I have my fingers crossed that Rishard Matthews can be that guy, but I'm confident it's not Brandon Gibson.
"I want guys who want to make an impact on and off the field. Good human beings. Guys who want to get better. Guys who want to improve. They want to be great, want to win. Those types of guys we can work with every day." --Joe Philbin
- Defending the Read Option - What do you think?
Good thing is WR core is improved and TE core and RB core. Thats all a good thing. Mathews runs a 4.46 so he is not that slow.
The best thing is to catch the ball and run good routes.
we dont know how the offense will roll so saying that Gibson or Hartline is a bad pick because "insert wr name" was available in the draft is not only moot but viewing the draft with the Hindsight goggles
IN ALL of those instances the QB is rated top 10, so I will agree with CrazyDolfan that it starts with the man under center, we have added ENOUGH weapons to make this season a success from the offensive side of the ball
Follow me on Twitter.. @DSEmpire_BA
For My work http://dynastysportsempire.com/author/brent-antonio/