My suggested approach to the Off-season - 1st wave wrap-up & looking ahead

[QuebecCard]

Sure that stat matches.. but are we really saying MW is a tenth of the player as those guys?

MW is trash.. go die on the Hill that MW is something other than that.

The usual final response from someone who was royally trashed.

 

[QuebecCard]

It’s funny all you little chirpers grab 1 stat I threw out there that didn’t perfectly alight with the MW is trash and run with it… yet still haven’t answered why he’s given any reason he will excel, be a #2 and has shown anything but being a bottom of the barrel #3.

People on this board would rather try and “burn” someone on what as shown to be a rather meaningless stat comparison (may bad! All time greats had similar comparison but surely you could slice that differently because those all time greats were being forced targets each game bc they were great… so just maybe that stat isn’t an accurate comparison when you dive into it?!?!? I know intelligent analysis aren’t welcome here.)

Word salad, multiplied by word salad = word salad.

 

[DaHilg]

The usual final response from someone who was royally trashed.

You’re ridiculous… context was provided in next post. Looks like you’re the one word vomiting without any context

 

[Krangodnzr]

It’s funny all you little chirpers grab 1 stat I threw out there that didn’t perfectly alight with the MW is trash and run with it… yet still haven’t answered why he’s given any reason he will excel, be a #2 and has shown anything but being a bottom of the barrel #3.

People on this board would rather try and “burn” someone on what as shown to be a rather meaningless stat comparison (may bad! All time greats had similar comparison but surely you could slice that differently because those all time greats were being forced targets each game bc they were great… so just maybe that stat isn’t an accurate comparison when you dive into it?!?!? I know intelligent analysis aren’t welcome here.)

You were using a hilariously bad stat to bolster your assertion. A 65% catch rate is SOLID for a WR, it literally UNDERMINES your argument.

Calling guys like Wilson trash is the problem. He's a perfectly solid WR who can play in a good NFL offense, but he is not a primary receiver, and no one is claiming he is or should be. I think he would be a perfectly effective #4 target in this offense behind MHJ, McBride, and <player to be acquired>.

 

[QuebecCard]

You’re ridiculous… context was provided in next post. Looks like you’re the one word vomiting without any context

You overstated your case, were effectively countered, and then decided to double down on hyperbole masquerading as fact.

Flailing is always entertaining. Thank you.

 

[kerouac9]

I do not dispute that.(I do think you can find 5-7 worse WR rooms, but irrelevant)

My point is that is has a smaller impact on a team that runs 3rd most 12 and the most 13 formations.

Would love if the 2nd or 3rd rounder was spend on one of the speed WRs. Noel or Bond

The ranking of formations matters much, much less than the frequency of formations.

Using this table to track formation tendencies.

The Cards rated 25th in 11 perconnel (one back, 1 TE), but that was still 50.4% of total plays. Do we need a credible option on more than half of the plays?

According to this table, the Cards ran 12 personnel at the 8th-highest rate in the NFL, but that was less than 30% of the time and passed out of that formation 41.7% of the time.

Yes, we were 2nd in 13 personnel, but it was 150 plays.

There's also a chicken-and-egg problem where are we playing more 12 and 13 personnel because of a philosophical basis or because our #3 WR (and often #2 WR) were below-average, and you're trying to get your best 11 players on the field.

 

[Stout]

Huh?
Didn’t try to change the subject a single time. Our discussion was whether it was a gaping hole or not. I’m still saying due to the scheme

Ah, the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and making noise to ignore everything. Cool.

 

[Stout]

Well, aside from the WR and OL rooms, no room has a gaping hole. Which is good. He has delivered his promise to build the depth/belly of the team and build a culture. That can make us relevant. Now he needs to take the next step and build a playoff team that competes in the playoffs. He hasn't done that yet. We (badly) need high-end impact players. Depth/belly players now have limited to no value, especially draft picks. Monti needs to identify the handful of players that can really hit and go get them.

@BACH, here is my first post in the thread, that you began arguing with. This was my simple assertion--a positive one for Monti, as he's done relatively well. "Aside from the WR and OL rooms, no room has a gaping hole." To which you decided to argue in a different direction. It's very simple, right off the bat. I'm talking about the WR room. Can you comment on that, the strength (or weakness) of our WR room without reverting to "but, but, but passing game" misdirects?

 

[DaHilg]

You overstated your case, were effectively countered, and then decided to double down on hyperbole masquerading as fact.

Flailing is always entertaining. Thank you.

What? So you don’t think it’s factual that top end WRs receive more errant balls being they get more targets and often are forced throws VS a low end WR that likely is only thrown to when open and/or is 3rd/4th/5th option? Thus 60% of balls thrown Jerry Rices way are caught isn’t the same as 60% of balls thrown Michel Wilson??? Would really take someone trying to drive insulting a fellow community member to not understand that.

Don’t think anything is being masquerading here - that should be common sense no?

 

[Cardiac]

The ranking of formations matters much, much less than the frequency of formations.

Using this table to track formation tendencies.

The Cards rated 25th in 11 perconnel (one back, 1 TE), but that was still 50.4% of total plays. Do we need a credible option on more than half of the plays?

According to this table, the Cards ran 12 personnel at the 8th-highest rate in the NFL, but that was less than 30% of the time and passed out of that formation 41.7% of the time.

Yes, we were 2nd in 13 personnel, but it was 150 plays.

There's also a chicken-and-egg problem where are we playing more 12 and 13 personnel because of a philosophical basis or because our #3 WR (and often #2 WR) were below-average, and you're trying to get your best 11 players on the field.

Quality post.

 

[QuebecCard]

What? So you don’t think it’s factual that top end WRs receive more errant balls being they get more targets and often are forced throws VS a low end WR that likely is only thrown to when open and/or is 3rd/4th/5th option? Thus 60% of balls thrown Jerry Rices way are caught isn’t the same as 60% of balls thrown Michel Wilson??? Would really take someone trying to drive insulting a fellow community member to not understand that.

Don’t think anything is being masquerading here - that should be common sense no?

Maybe commas, colons, semicolons and periods could make this understandable and even compelling. As it stands, it mirrors this type of incomprehensible bureaucratize:

"Pursuant to the aforementioned policy directives, the aforementioned applicant shall submit a formal requisition for the aforementioned resource allocation, ensuring adherence to all applicable protocols and procedures, within the stipulated timeframe, or risk potential ramifications."

I'll wait.

 

[Krangodnzr]

What? So you don’t think it’s factual that top end WRs receive more errant balls being they get more targets and often are forced throws VS a low end WR that likely is only thrown to when open and/or is 3rd/4th/5th option? Thus 60% of balls thrown Jerry Rices way are caught isn’t the same as 60% of balls thrown Michel Wilson??? Would really take someone trying to drive insulting a fellow community member to not understand that.

Don’t think anything is being masquerading here - that should be common sense no?

65% is 65%. 68% is league average, so Wilson sits right around league average.

You're trying to close your way out of a bad argument instead of just admitting it was a dumb argument.

 

[DaHilg]

65% is 65%. 68% is league average, so Wilson sits right around league average.

You're trying to close your way out of a bad argument instead of just admitting it was a dumb argument.

What a joke - keep ignoring the premise of the debate. MW is trash and isn’t a WR2, still waiting for your guys reasoning for why he is going to excel.

Not wasting my time debating this topic as I have already validated how the analysis should be viewed differently from a common sense perspective

 

[DaHilg]

Maybe commas, colons, semicolons and periods could make this understandable and even compelling. As it stands, it mirrors this type of incomprehensible bureaucratize:

"Pursuant to the aforementioned policy directives, the aforementioned applicant shall submit a formal requisition for the aforementioned resource allocation, ensuring adherence to all applicable protocols and procedures, within the stipulated timeframe, or risk potential ramifications."

I'll wait.

Ok. You sooo smart. Who’s impressed by this? I’ll wait.

 

[kerouac9]

What a joke - keep ignoring the premise of the debate. MW is trash and isn’t a WR2, still waiting for your guys reasoning for why he is going to excel.

Not wasting my time debating this topic as I have already validated how the analysis should be viewed differently from a common sense perspective

I agree he isn’t a high-end WR2 right now, and I hoped he’d make the leap last season.

He didn’t.

But could he end up being a functional #2 wr/#3 passing option in a good offense? I think so.

That’s OBJECTIVELY what he was last year. He’s not going to be Tee Higgins, but the best version of Michael Wilson can be a good WR. He can be Darius Slayton.

 

[QuebecCard]

What a joke - keep ignoring the premise of the debate. MW is trash and isn’t a WR2, still waiting for your guys reasoning for why he is going to excel.

Not wasting my time debating this topic as I have already validated how the analysis should be viewed differently from a common sense perspective

Define 'trash' and, following this definition, how does MW fit the criteria?

So far, you've validated your argument to the satisfaction of one: You.

 

[PDXChris]

Okay, good. You agree that the WR room isn't good. See, that was much easier than trying to obfuscate by changing the subject!

I'd call our WR room top heavy and an injury away from being really bad!

 

[Krangodnzr]

I agree he isn’t a high-end WR2 right now, and I hoped he’d make the leap last season.

He didn’t.

But could he end up being a functional #2 wr/#3 passing option in a good offense? I think so.

That’s OBJECTIVELY what he was last year. He’s not going to be Tee Higgins, but the best version of Michael Wilson can be a good WR. He can be Darius Slayton.

This. I think, top end, he can approach Frank Sanders good, but he certainly isn't getting the volume targets to put up Frank Sanders numbers.

An NFL offense can function pretty well if you have a collection of #2/#3s if you pair them with a Trey McBride caliber TE. Look at the Chiefs...while they do have Mahomes and Murray doesn't approach Mahomes level of play, if the Cardinals continue to run the ball pretty well, they won't have to have two really good WRs to have a good offense.

 

[kerouac9]

An NFL offense can function pretty well if you have a collection of #2/#3s if you pair them with a Trey McBride caliber TE. Look at the Chiefs...while they do have Mahomes and Murray doesn't approach Mahomes level of play, if the Cardinals continue to run the ball pretty well, they won't have to have two really good WRs to have a good offense.

Yeah this might be a step to far for me. (1) Comparing what Mahomes can to do almost anyone else is kind of a fool's errand. (2) KC's passing offense was pretty mid last year. The year before they were top 5 but had Rashee Rice playing pretty good ball. THey were also #2 in the NFL in passing attempts, and that's not gonna happen here.

I'm gonna need another example (at least) to believe this isn't sui generis or just a Reid thing (I was thinking of those McNabb teams that had, like, Todd Pinkston as the top receiver and still kept going to the NFC Championship game every year).

Green Bay last year had a top 5 offense and no one had more than 76 targets. That's wild.

 

[Chopper0080]

Quality post.

Don't encourage him. His role is to provide the snark.

 

[Chopper0080]

Yeah this might be a step to far for me. (1) Comparing what Mahomes can to do almost anyone else is kind of a fool's errand. (2) KC's passing offense was pretty mid last year. The year before they were top 5 but had Rashee Rice playing pretty good ball. THey were also #2 in the NFL in passing attempts, and that's not gonna happen here.

I'm gonna need another example (at least) to believe this isn't sui generis or just a Reid thing (I was thinking of those McNabb teams that had, like, Todd Pinkston as the top receiver and still kept going to the NFC Championship game every year).

Green Bay last year had a top 5 offense and no one had more than 76 targets. That's wild.

For me, if I am going to draft a WR in round 1, he better have the potential ability to be a 1b than a dude I hope beats out Wilson. This offense does need a better WR2 than Wilson, but I don't feel like it is worthwhile to force it at this point. The Cardinals need early draft picks who have the chances to be an impact player vs a guy to fill a hole.

 

[BACH]

@BACH, here is my first post in the thread, that you began arguing with. This was my simple assertion--a positive one for Monti, as he's done relatively well. "Aside from the WR and OL rooms, no room has a gaping hole." To which you decided to argue in a different direction. It's very simple, right off the bat. I'm talking about the WR room. Can you comment on that, the strength (or weakness) of our WR room without reverting to "but, but, but passing game" misdirects?

We seem to be discussing different things.

To answer this question. Yes. I agree there is a need for a speed WR. I state again. Would love to add one of the speed guys in the 2nd and 3rd.

To answer the original question. No. I do not agree it’s a gaping hole. I based that on how much we run 12 and 13 and how much we pass out of that AND how much we run out of 3 WR set. Zach Pascal had a crazy amount of snaps as a blocking WR. Would a speed WR be able to do that? I doubt it, hence I do not think there will be that many snaps for that speed WR to make him a huge part of the offense.

 

[SECTION 11]

I agree he isn’t a high-end WR2 right now, and I hoped he’d make the leap last season.

He didn’t.

But could he end up being a functional #2 wr/#3 passing option in a good offense? I think so.

That’s OBJECTIVELY what he was last year. He’s not going to be Tee Higgins, but the best version of Michael Wilson can be a good WR. He can be Darius Slayton.

Seems easy enough to grasp.

 

[DaHilg]

I agree he isn’t a high-end WR2 right now, and I hoped he’d make the leap last season.

He didn’t.

But could he end up being a functional #2 wr/#3 passing option in a good offense? I think so.

That’s OBJECTIVELY what he was last year. He’s not going to be Tee Higgins, but the best version of Michael Wilson can be a good WR. He can be Darius Slayton.

This I can agree with.. He’s no where near Slayton today though and Slayton has on field speed I haven’t seen from MW.. but I do feel his ceiling could yield similar stats, again his ceiling which I’m not sure he can reach

 

[Stout]

For me, if I am going to draft a WR in round 1, he better have the potential ability to be a 1b than a dude I hope beats out Wilson. This offense does need a better WR2 than Wilson, but I don't feel like it is worthwhile to force it at this point. The Cardinals need early draft picks who have the chances to be an impact player vs a guy to fill a hole.

Well said. This is why, although I think we have a gaping hole in the WR room, I don't want a Rd 1 WR.