Stone-hands Wallace

[Brian Fein]

Why can't Mike Wallace catch?

How is Mike Wallace any different from Ted Ginn at this point?  The only difference is that Wallace is occasionally servicable, doesn't return kicks, and wasn't selected 9 overall.

[Dave Gray]

Wallace is contributing more than you're giving him credit for, but I agree that he needs to improve, and really needs to get on the same page with Tannehill.

But he did have over 100 yards of offense + drew a pretty important PI call.

Also, there was another missed PI call in the endzone that would've been a TD.  And he is stretching the field.

[MikeO]

the drops have been bad no doubt. But he has opened up the middle of the field for Clay and Gibson. Clay's next contract he can thank Wallace for because Clay is getting great match-up's he is able to take advantage of because of the attention Wallace draws

[Spider-Dan]

How many 100+ yard receiving games did The Ginn Family have, ever?  Because Wallace has had 2 in five games as a Dolphin.

Wallace is not a possession receiver.  You may recall that Miami recently had one of those and sold him for a bag of peanuts because he wasn't scoring enough TDs.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

How many 100+ yard receiving games did The Ginn Family have, ever? 

Two. 

[Brian Fein]

When you are being paid as a top WR, I don't want to see balls thrown at you that hit you in the hands and then fall on the ground.  I recognize his role on the team and realize his contributions.  However, 7 catches for 107 yards or whatever could have been 10 for 150 if he didn't drop balls.  Funny, when Brandon Marshall dropped a bunch of balls, everyone got on his case.  But now Wallace gets a free pass?  

Especially when the big gripe on him from Pittsburgh was his drops?

It was a problem last week as well.  I appreciate his role on the team, but he needs to improve in this area.  Too many drops will bite you in the ass later on.

[Spider-Dan]

Two.

Which two were they?  I tried to find them but even in the 2009 game where he burned Revis, he only had like 57 yards total.

[Spider-Dan]

When you are being paid as a top WR, I don't want to see balls thrown at you that hit you in the hands and then fall on the ground.

So basically, you want a receiver that's a deep threat that stretches the field, someone who scores TDs, but also someone who is a reliable possession receiver in crunch time.  Someone like Larry Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson.

If Mike Wallace was one of them, he'd still be a Steeler.  He is not a tier 1 WR.  You should be comparing Wallace to players like Vincent Jackson or Greg Jennings.

[Brian Fein]

Which two were they?  I tried to find them but even in the 2009 game where he burned Revis, he only had like 57 yards total.

10/26/08 - 7 catches for 175 in a 25-16 win over Buffalo at home
9/21/09 - 11 catches for 108 in a 27-23 loss to Indy at home

[Brian Fein]

So basically, you want a receiver that's a deep threat that stretches the field, someone who scores TDs, but also someone who is a reliable possession receiver in crunch time.  Someone like Larry Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson.

If Mike Wallace was one of them, he'd still be a Steeler.

I'm asking for a guy that can catch balls that hit him in the hands.  Are you implying that guys that run fast will be prone to dropping balls?

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

IMHO, total yards is a poor measure.  I prefer yards/target.  For the same reason why I think total yards is a bad measure for Rushing preferring yards/carry.  A RB that gets 100 yards on 4 carries is more impressive than one that get 105 yards on 12 carries.  

Name - target - rec - yards - TDs - yards/target  
Gibson - 28 - 20 - 208-0 - 7.4
Hartline 33- 21 - 272 - 2 - 8.2
Wallace 28 -15 - 176 -1 - 6.3
Clay 25 - 20 -245 -1 - 9.8

For each time that Tannehill threw the ball in Wallace's direction the Dolphins got 6.3 yards.  However, for each time the ball was thrown in the direction of Clay the Dolphins gained 9.8 yards.  

I don't buy the whole well someone like Harline is not a deep threat BS.  If Wallace is catching balls 20 yards down the field and Hartline is catching them 2 yards down field, Wallace should have a higher average per target not lower.  

[Brian Fein]

This week alone, they threw the ball to Wallace 16 times, and he only caught 7 of them.

Is that acceptable to you because, well, Wallace stretches the field?

[Spider-Dan]

IMHO, total yards is a poor measure.  I prefer yards/target.  For the same reason why I think total yards is a bad measure for Rushing preferring yards/carry.  A RB that gets 100 yards on 4 carries is more impressive than one that get 105 yards on 12 carries.

Not really; given that no RB in the NFL is going to consistently gain 25 yards per carry, 4 rushes for 100 yards means you're a situational player that broke a big run.

I don't buy the whole well someone like Harline is not a deep threat BS.  If Wallace is catching balls 20 yards down the field and Hartline is catching them 2 yards down field, Wallace should have a higher average per target not lower.

If you're talking about where the players are catching balls, then the metric you should be using is "average per catch." 

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

So basically, you want a receiver that's a deep threat that stretches the field, someone who scores TDs, but also someone who is a reliable possession receiver in crunch time.  Someone like Larry Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson.

If Mike Wallace was one of them, he'd still be a Steeler.  He is not a tier 1 WR.  You should be comparing Wallace to players like Vincent Jackson or Greg Jennings.

Is he getting paid like Fitzgerald and Johnson?  

[Spider-Dan]

This week alone, they threw the ball to Wallace 16 times, and he only caught 7 of them.

Is that acceptable to you because, well, Wallace stretches the field?

You do realize that there is a significant difference between catching a 20-yard bomb and a 3-yard slant, right?