ProFootballFocus: Best/Worst drop rate for 2011 WRs

The Goat

Was surprised Tana didn't have more drops but then a took a second look at the number of times he was targeted...not all that many...no wonder he's on the "naughty" list. I hope he's not on the roster this season simply because we should have more/better talent than what he can offer at this point in his career.

__________________
Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes he eats you.

That Guy

all I'm saying is that if he were a better player or open more, he probably would have gotten more targets.

__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!

skinsguy

I'll give ya that those numbers are what they are, and I will even give you that every single one of those catchable passes were right in the bread basket. But, I can't agree that a player dropping 15 of those 115 passes is horrible. That's about 85% of catchable passes completed. Maybe I'm alone in thinking that. Am I saying a player doesn't need to improve past that? No, not at all. But, if you're going to judge a player solely on these stats, you're not cut out to be a GM in the league. While we are just using these stats to prove that a receiver is not as good as people think he is, you can also use the same stats and logic to determine that having the three most dependable receivers on your team, Tate, Bryant, and Floyd does not get you in the playoffs. Nor does having the "best" receiver from these stats, Tate, gets you a record above .500.

When I look at these stats, I see players who are being thrown to more than others because they are the "go to" receivers when you need a clutch catch. Yes, they dropped a few balls, but they obviously were dependable, otherwise the quarterback wouldn't throw to them. And when I see a receiver catching all 35 passes thrown to him, but knowing his team finished 7-9, that tells me those 35 passes were probably largely dump off passes, short high percentage passes. Or, that receiver benefited from the number one guy getting doubled a few times. Does that make him any less of a receiver? No not all, but it also doesn't make him the best receiver in the league.

And maybe it's just semantics, but if a player's catching ability is not up to par, that tells me he is lacking sound fundamentals. Skills are improved by sound fundamentals.

__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.

Mattyk

Leading the league in drops isn't good any way you spin it. I'm sure Roddy White would be the first to admit that. That said he went through some early season struggles but got things worked out. It happens.

__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop

htownskinfan

Since this is a wr thread and I didnt want to start a whole new thread about it,I found out this morning that the skins offered Jacoby Jones of the texans a million more than the texans and he turned us down,so glad he did.{last offseason}

__________________
Ho
Lee
Chit

Skins4L

this.

He's right. And its just one specific category. And who's determining catchable? I'm sure some could be disputed as well if we all sat and watched film.

__________________
ALL HAIL

Skins4L

yea he had some clear drops this year

__________________
ALL HAIL

SmootSmack

Very interesting. Did not know that

__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

htownskinfan

This was according to John Mclain of the Houston Chronicle

__________________
Ho
Lee
Chit

freddyg12

We had a guy in the 80s/early 90s that dropped his fair share, but he made up for it w/his toughness & ability to make the chain moving catch in the middle of the field, and a lot of big plays downfield - Gary Clark.

Of course Clark played w/a couple great wr's & was always part of a good to great offense. I think big play wr's that drop a lot of passes are analogous to home-run hitters. If you have a good lineup around them, it's worth it to deal w/those occassional drops. If the lineup around them isn't that good, those drops become a much bigger deal cause the team has a harder time making up for it.

Adding a HR hitter w/a poor batting avg. to a poor hitting lineup probably doesn't get you much, but if you've already got good hitters, you can deal w/a few strikeouts from your power hitters. The problem w/Moss is that he's no longer a HR hitter. At this point in his career he's got to be close to sure handed. I think he deserves some slack after coming back from a broken hand, hope he can make the team next year. Either way, we need a complete reciever, a guy that's a deep threat & can make the tough catches. Hopefully Hank will be that guy.

celts32

This seems like as good a thread as any to mention how ready I am to move on from Moss...

__________________
Section 115 Row 23

“Goal line, goal line. I-left, tight wing, 70 chip on white.”

http://victorybeer.com/

Mattyk

If we can get a playmaker in the draft or free agency, I'd move on from Moss too. We've got Gaffney to fill the possession type of role, and Hankerson to continue to develop.

__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop

freddyg12

I'm never ready to move on from players that have been that good for us & on top of that don't cause any problems for the team. I get GTripp's point he's made in several other threads; that Moss' or any vet's spot on the roster prevents another youngster from being groomed. But I look at it this way; we have one of the weakest wr corps in the nfl & Moss is still 1 of the 2 best.

Maybe Hank changes that quickly or a new FA or draft pick does as well. Still, the past 2 years have shown that Shanny will keep a trusted vet WR on the roster, e.g. Galloway, Stallworth, Anderson. Maybe Gafney is the only one for that spot, but I think Moss still has value for the team if he can get over his drops from last year.

I see the point though, Hank, Paul & Gafney are pretty certain to make it, if they only keep 2 others that could put Moss into some tough competition. Armstrong, Anderson & Stallworth aren't likely to be here unless there's training camp injuries.