A lot of people are touting Ryan Tannehill as a deep sleeper, pointing to the addition of Mike Wallace and the emergence of Lamar Miller of a credible run threat as pillars of this belief. Let me summarize my response to them in one word.
This one is so ridiculous, I almost don't even want to dig into the math on it. Let's start with Mike Wallace. We can all agree that he's best as a deep threat, except that Tannehill connects on just 33% of his deep passes (15+ yards), one of the worst figures in the league. Oh, also, he's a locker room cancer who tries only when he wants to and when things are going well, which they certainly haven't been as of late in Miami. Sounds like a recipe for success to me!
And then there's our man Lamar Miller: he's unproven and boasts a worse run efficiency metric than his backup, Daniel Thomas. If Tannehill struggled last year with the much more effective Reggie Bush in the backfield - not to mention Bush's infinitely more prodigious skills in the passing game - how well do you think a slower, less efficient, less seasoned Miller will do? Yeah. Don't even draft him. Not as a flier, not as a sleeper. He's below replacement level. He's not a sleeper, he's dead on arrival.
1. Tannehill was at 33% last year. Ok it could have been better, BUT this guy attributes all the blame to Ryan without even considering how his 33% came because his deep threats were terrible, rather than his inability.
2. Locker room cancer? Since when did Mike Wallace turn into T.O? I guess he was a cancer while winning the SB? He has never had THAT bad a reputation.
3. This fool has already decided that Miller is a bum and WILL be less efficient then Bush, based on what? Who is to say he wont be BETTER than Reggie? Its not like Bush ran for 1600 yards last year.
(Disclaimer: This was a fantasy analysis rather then a pure player analysis, but either way he is pretty much saying he is Blaine Gabbert/Chad Henne part II)