Does it make sense that the catch % for a WR#3 or #4 would be lower than the #1 and #2 guys? I mean, on account of the fact that the #3 or #4 guys are usually catching balls after the play is already not working properly? Since, obviously, if the play was great, the #1 or #2 guys would have already been targeted and all?
Theoretically, the #3 or #4 guy is basically getting balls that are being thrown under duress or when the timing is already shot to hell.
Does it make sense that the catch % for a WR#3 or #4 would be lower than the #1 and #2 guys? I mean, on account of the fact that the #3 or #4 guys are usually catching balls after the play is already not working properly? Since, obviously, if the play was great, the #1 or #2 guys would have already been targeted and all?
Theoretically, the #3 or #4 guy is basically getting balls that are being thrown under duress or when the timing is already shot to hell.
FAX THE DEEP THINKER
Interesting - but there are other factors too, like how deep the QB is throwing, plus not every pass is catchable, even with Pat. Sometimes if flings it up there and you are like WTF, but in the end its like well dam, it was right there for WR X to catch. [Reply]
Does it make sense that the catch % for a WR#3 or #4 would be lower than the #1 and #2 guys? I mean, on account of the fact that the #3 or #4 guys are usually catching balls after the play is already not working properly? Since, obviously, if the play was great, the #1 or #2 guys would have already been targeted and all?
Theoretically, the #3 or #4 guy is basically getting balls that are being thrown under duress or when the timing is already shot to hell.
FAX THE DEEP THINKER
With Patrick Bestmotherfuckingqbinthehistoryofentiregoddamnworld Mahomes running the offense every receiver is the primary receiver. [Reply]
On the topic of the thread, signing Robinson to a very team friendly deal as basically Pat's 4th option when he drops back for a pass is OK in my book. He's a solid downfield blocker, a solid special teamer, seems to get along well with other team mates, and will know the offense on day 1. He won't get a 1000 barring significant injuries to Hill, Kelce, and Hardman. But,the one year contract allows the team to draft a WR in this extremely talented class and learn the playbook.
On the side topic, you absolutely draft best player available other than QB. If that happens to be a WR, you take him. Teams can't afford to pass on can't miss guys and be successful down the road. [Reply]
Does it make sense that the catch % for a WR#3 or #4 would be lower than the #1 and #2 guys? I mean, on account of the fact that the #3 or #4 guys are usually catching balls after the play is already not working properly? Since, obviously, if the play was great, the #1 or #2 guys would have already been targeted and all?
Theoretically, the #3 or #4 guy is basically getting balls that are being thrown under duress or when the timing is already shot to hell.
FAX THE DEEP THINKER
No. Andy designs plays for every receiver on the field to be the #1 look. If you watch the Texans game, for example, Robinson was target #1 on a play where he dropped the ball. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Hoover:
Interesting - but there are other factors too, like how deep the QB is throwing, plus not every pass is catchable, even with Pat. Sometimes if flings it up there and you are like WTF, but in the end its like well dam, it was right there for WR X to catch.
That's blasphemous! You are a fucking heretic! You are going to be burned at the cross! [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chiefaholic:
On the topic of the thread, signing Robinson to a very team friendly deal as basically Pat's 4th option when he drops back for a pass is OK in my book. He's a solid downfield blocker, a solid special teamer, seems to get along well with other team mates, and will know the offense on day 1. He won't get a 1000 barring significant injuries to Hill, Kelce, and Hardman. But,the one year contract allows the team to draft a WR in this extremely talented class and learn the playbook.
On the side topic, you absolutely draft best player available other than QB. If that happens to be a WR, you take him. Teams can't afford to pass on can't miss guys and be successful down the road.
Originally Posted by Hoover:
Interesting - but there are other factors too, like how deep the QB is throwing, plus not every pass is catchable, even with Pat. Sometimes if flings it up there and you are like WTF, but in the end its like well dam, it was right there for WR X to catch.
Clearly, there are a variety of factors as you say, Mr. Hoover.
I'm sure there have been teams in which the #3 guy has better hands and/or a larger catch radius than the #1 guy. In a case like that, maybe the #1 guy simply runs better routes or is faster or knows the playbook better or whatever. On the other hand, maybe the #3 guy is a slow, plodding dumbass who is rarely targeted but has catcher's mitts for hands.
In our case, we know that Mahomes is farcically accurate even when pressured or when the play breaks down.
Still, it seems to make sense that a #3 or #4 guy is (more often than not) a last-ditch solution to a busted play ... like a longer-distance safety-valve sort of player. Whereas, the #1 guy has the benefit of the original play design giving the #1 guy the advantages of timing as well as expected, planned (vs unexpected and improvised) accuracy.
It's only a theory, but I wonder if the league-wide numbers bear that out.
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
He just isn't very good. Disappers a lot. If they thought he was really good then Watkins would have been cut already.
When you pay dudes small money, any contribution to the team is valuable.
If the extremely unlikely happens and Gehrig Dieter and a bunch of other scrubs are head-and-shoulders better than Robinson to the point that the Chiefs can't afford to NOT have them on the roster, they would be on the hook for the extra $1.5 million or whatever it is that Robinson currently gets as a vet exemption in this deal.
That's literally the only possible way this could be a bad deal. And let's not forget about how valuable he could be in the case of injuries occurring throughout the lineup.
Like... I'm fine if people don't care about the edges of the roster and are like, "Whatever" regarding this move, but if you think it's a bad deal, you're kind of a fucking idiot. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
No. Andy designs plays for every receiver on the field to be the #1 look. If you watch the Texans game, for example, Robinson was target #1 on a play where he dropped the ball.
We all know that different players (ostensibly identified as the team's #1 or #4 or whatever) can be the #1 option on any given play call, Mr. Pitt Gorilla.
However, let's not kid ourselves (or in the case of pigs; "shoat ourselves") here.
Mahomes' #1 option in most cases is either Tyreek or Kelce ... with Sammy taking the #3 spot in terms of targets. In D-Rob's case, he's been targeted fewer than half as much as Kelce and Tyreek and almost half compared to Sammy.
Therefore, in the context of my theory, he would be the #4 guy (even though he might be the #1 option on certain plays).
This is a great move. This helps keep the unity and familiarity in tact for the offense. We didn’t pay squat for him and he has shown he can make plays. You can never have too much depth. [Reply]
