Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
racist
I agree that in the end, it was the right call, but the reasons behind his poor showing were not the reasons people avoided him. He's had plus hands throughout his career yet had a lot of drops this season. That alone is very weird. But dropping 12 yard curl patterns didn't kill his value. What really hurt Wallace was atrocious line play which was partially due to the line playing poorly and partially due to losing Pouncey, Martin, and Incognito. Hard for a deep threat to get deep when his QB is getting sacked with the frequency in which Tannehill has been getting sacked (he's leading the league).
You see, high variance players are indeed nice to flex at times but that's only a surface argument. Wallace's floor is essentially a WR6 and he'll reach that floor 50% of the time. His ceiling is high but not near high enough to offset that floor.
Same HC, 4 of the 5 OL positions are vacant so largely gonna be all new next year and a MAJOR excuse everyone will use for why they can't pass protect. I don't see it getting leaps and bounds better, no running game to take the pressure off the pass game either, not good.
Well, he's only been on Miami for one year, but I do agree that 2014 could be a good year for both of them. It'll hinge on protection, though. If they don't improve that offensive line then Miami could very easily be a dumpster fire this year. Either way, I wouldn't trade Wallace for two 2nds. What is the hit rate on a 2nd? Wallace already has a pretty decent floor and we know he's got top 10 upside. He's an easy hold for now at those prices.
I can only imagine how insightful the other 31,792 posts have been. Keep up the good work.
Relative to the huge contract Miami gave him, yeah, he's bad. But that's neither Wallace's fault nor particularly relevant to FF. I've never been a big Mike Wallace fan in FF given his typical big time price tag, but 2013 might serve to drive his cost down enough that he becomes pretty intriguing. The targets will be there -- and the lack of deep TDs was likely variance / comfort level with Tannehill. That discussion is much more valuable than just holding on to leftover 2013 butt-hurt.
In fairness, Ben throws a much better deep ball than Tannehill - but it does seem that they made the right choice.Wallace : $12,000,000 per - 73 rec. 930 yds, 5 TD
Brown : $8,300,000 per - 110 rec. 1,499 yds, 8 TD
Just thought I'd post that here.
Was Big Ben throwing a much better deep ball in his sophomore year?In fairness, Ben throws a much better deep ball than Tannehill - but it does seem that they made the right choice.Wallace : $12,000,000 per - 73 rec. 930 yds, 5 TD
Brown : $8,300,000 per - 110 rec. 1,499 yds, 8 TD
Just thought I'd post that here.
Yes he was. By an absolute ton. Using season ending volume stats to measure something like "better deep ball" is disingenuous at best.A quick check of a few stats relevant to downfield efficiency for 2nd year Roethlisberger and 2nd year Tannehill (Ben is the 1st listed)Was Big Ben throwing a much better deep ball in his sophomore year?Big Ben in his second year threw for 2300 yards with 17 tds to 8 ints in 12 games.In fairness, Ben throws a much better deep ball than Tannehill - but it does seem that they made the right choice.Wallace : $12,000,000 per - 73 rec. 930 yds, 5 TD
Brown : $8,300,000 per - 110 rec. 1,499 yds, 8 TD
Just thought I'd post that here.
In His 3rd year in 15 games he managed a whopping 18 td passes to 23 ints with 3500 yards.
Don't get me wrong there is a lot of growth that Tannehill has to have but he is coming off a year where he threw for 3913 yards with 24 td's to 17 ints.
There is still a ton of potential for Tannehill and Mike Wallace both in NFL and in real life.
I was commenting on the post I replied to that compared Antonion Brown's 2013 production with Mike Wallace's 2013 production. Not sure what Roethlisberger did during his second season is relevant.Was Big Ben throwing a much better deep ball in his sophomore year?In fairness, Ben throws a much better deep ball than Tannehill - but it does seem that they made the right choice.Wallace : $12,000,000 per - 73 rec. 930 yds, 5 TD
Brown : $8,300,000 per - 110 rec. 1,499 yds, 8 TD
Just thought I'd post that here.
I agree with pretty much everything you said, but just to run the counterpoint here, Big Ben only threw the ball 268 times in his second season which is just insanely low, even if he only played 13 games. That run game and defense were great, so I'm sure the play-action pass was extremely effective (ranked 1st in rush attempts, 32nd in pass attempts). Ben was pretty much in QB heaven - good protection, good ground game, often in the lead (9th in points scored, 3rd lowest points allowed). Also, the new pass interference rules had just gone into effect and everybody's passing stats were up in 2004 and 2005.Yes he was. By an absolute ton. Using season ending volume stats to measure something like "better deep ball" is disingenuous at best.A quick check of a few stats relevant to downfield efficiency for 2nd year Roethlisberger and 2nd year Tannehill (Ben is the 1st listed)Was Big Ben throwing a much better deep ball in his sophomore year?Big Ben in his second year threw for 2300 yards with 17 tds to 8 ints in 12 games.In fairness, Ben throws a much better deep ball than Tannehill - but it does seem that they made the right choice.Wallace : $12,000,000 per - 73 rec. 930 yds, 5 TD
Brown : $8,300,000 per - 110 rec. 1,499 yds, 8 TD
Just thought I'd post that here.
In His 3rd year in 15 games he managed a whopping 18 td passes to 23 ints with 3500 yards.
Don't get me wrong there is a lot of growth that Tannehill has to have but he is coming off a year where he threw for 3913 yards with 24 td's to 17 ints.
There is still a ton of potential for Tannehill and Mike Wallace both in NFL and in real life.
Comp %: 62.7 / 60.4
TD %: 6.3 / 4.1 (Ben led the NFL)
Y / A: 8.9 / 6.7 (Ben led the NFL)
Y / C: 14.2 / 11.0 (Ben led the NFL)
Reothlisberger's 2nd year numbers absolutely DESTROY Tannehill's.
Further, just watch the two guys play. I didn't watch a ton of Dolphins' games last year, but one of the strongest impressions I came away with was Wallace with a step or two deep and Tannehill missing either the read or the pass itself, usually due to ridiculous pressure. Ben's greatest attribute as a QB has ALWAYS been the ability to avoid that same pressure and hit big plays down the field.
True. However, Brown's 2013 production vs. Wallace's 2012 production is.I was commenting on the post I replied to that compared Antonion Brown's 2013 production with Mike Wallace's 2013 production. Not sure what Roethlisberger did during his second season is relevant.Was Big Ben throwing a much better deep ball in his sophomore year?In fairness, Ben throws a much better deep ball than Tannehill - but it does seem that they made the right choice.Wallace : $12,000,000 per - 73 rec. 930 yds, 5 TD
Brown : $8,300,000 per - 110 rec. 1,499 yds, 8 TD
Just thought I'd post that here.
Wallace played better with a better qb, go figure, not to mention better coaching/scheme
He stunk in the beginning of the year but he turned it around as the season went on, Tannehill just stinks at getting him the ball deep. He literally missed him on about 7 wide open bombs with either under throws or overthrows. If the ball was there on half those he would have been looking at 1200 and 8. He adds a ton to the offense if Tannehill can do his job.
You're right, it probably doesn't mean anything if the QB can get it to him when he's wide open.
We all know you read my posts. You don't have to pretend here.
But Touchdown There said he was worth that much, so the contract shouldn't be hard to trade. An elite WR in his prime, signed to a reasonable deal - surely there are buyers. Right? RIGHT?
