2010 Receptions (from who)

[mgteich]

2009

running backs 74

tight ends 43

moss 83

edelman 37

tate 0

others 153

total 390

==============================

SOME OPTIONS

We could

A) change our offense and use the tight ends more (perhaps for 75 catches)

B) count on Edelman for 75 catches

C) count on tate for 50 catches

D) count on a rookie/fa for 35 catches
===============================

It would take ALL of the above to match 2009's production. That strategy would require two successful additions (TE and WR), no injuries and for both Tate and Edelman to step up.
===============================

 

[patsinthesnow]

I could trust Edelman to get 75+ catches if he was a fulltime starter. He has potential to even reach 90.

If Edelman got 37 catches as a 7th round rookie that only started what,5 games? I trust a 2nd round rookie receiver to get 50-60 receptions.

Moss and Faulk will have their same ole great production.

TEs will still have poor production in 2010, IMO.

 

[mgteich]

So,

You are counting on 75 from Edelman AND 50 from Tate AND 50 from a rookie second rounder AND no injuries.

Actually, I'm OK with counting on Edelman for 75-90 in the slot if he isn't injured again (twice last year as I recall).

The hard part is to count on Tate and a rookie for 75 -100 catches.

I could trust Edelman to get 75+ catches if he was a fulltime starter. He has potential to even reach 90.

If Edelman got 37 catches as a 7th round rookie that only started what,5 games? I trust a 2nd round rookie receiver to get 50-60 receptions.

Moss and Faulk will have their same ole great production.

TEs will still have poor production in 2010, IMO.

 

[patriotscpfc]

I wish you wouldn't keep discounting Welker from everything.

It has been said his comeback is going very well from all sources. I wont be shocked if he is fully healthy by week 6. I'd count on him for a minimum 30 receptions while we work him back in.

 

[patsinthesnow]

Counting on Tate for 50 receptions is like counting on Crable for 5 sacks. You CANNOT count on it, but it's not impossible.

So count Tate for 25. I'll take 25 less receptions off the total if it ment we ran the ball more.

 

[patriotscpfc]

Counting on Tate for 50 receptions is like counting on Crable for 5 sacks. You CANNOT count on it, but it's not impossible.

So count Tate for 25. I'll take 25 less receptions off the total if it ment we ran the ball more.

This. I'm Tate's biggest fan and if he can stay healthy all year and return well, anything else we get will be a positive for now.

And with Moss healthy, I reckon we could count on him for an extra 10.

Crumpler - 15-20

Get Maroney involved in the passing game more.

 

[jmt57]

Wanting one player to come in and replace Welker's production is unreasonable. Welker led the entire league in receptions despite missing three games. It would be unrealistic to expect somebody to step in and duplicate those numbers.

However when you look at Edelman's numbers in the three games Welker missed (I'm counting the final game against Houston as a missed game, though it technically was not) Edelman averaged 7 receptions for 74 yards per game. Though that's not as good as Welker's production, over a full season that extrapolates out to 112 catches for 1179 yards. I don't expect those numbers, but his numbers should be more than double what they were last year by starting 16 games rather than 3.

Yes improvement does need to be made on the roster at WR and TE, but it is not as dire as it appears by simply subtracting the number of receptions, yards and touchdowns by players no longer on the roster (assuming Welker will not be able to play.)

The Pats got 43 receptions for 546 yards from the TE position last year; it shouldn't be all that difficult to surpass that in 2010 - even if we don't know who the new Tight Ends will be yet.

The five RB combined for 74 catches, 608 yards and 1 TD; it wouldn't be a stretch to ask and expect them for more in the passing game in 2010.

The big question is not how to replace Welker, but who will improve the numbers from the flanker opposite Moss. Some combination of Tate, a free agent, and a rookie has to do better than Galloway, Aiken and Stanback. In fact, it would be almost impossible for them to not be an improvement; those three combined for only 30 receptions, 415 yards and 2 TD last year.

One other thing the Pats could do is run the ball a little bit more too. Last year it seemed as if one or two running backs were out with injuries every week, which could have led to the Pats passing more and running less. If they can stay healthier at RB this year then it would stand to reason are more likely to run more often.

 

[Metaphors]

2009

running backs 74

tight ends 43

moss 83

edelman 37

tate 0

others 153

total 390

==============================

SOME OPTIONS

We could

A) change our offense and use the tight ends more (perhaps for 75 catches)

B) count on Edelman for 75 catches

C) count on tate for 50 catches

D) count on a rookie/fa for 35 catches
===============================

It would take ALL of the above to match 2009's production. That strategy would require two successful additions (TE and WR), no injuries and for both Tate and Edelman to step up.
===============================

I would start by setting a goal different from a season where the Pats struggled on offense (2009 or 2002: 370+ comp) or wore out their offense (2007: 400 comp). Just spitballing but how about a 350 completion target or about 22 per game.

So a breakdown like this gets us there:
RBs = 70
TEs = 60
Moss = 60
Edelman = 60
Tate = 30
Rookie = 20
Others (including Welker) = 50

Unless I did the math wrong, that is 350 completions. So that means the Pats need:

-About the same level of production out of the RBs. Faulk, Maroney and Morris are certainly capable of 4-5 receptions per game.

- A nice bump in production from the TEs. Crumpler doesn't get the Pats there so a couple of new additions would need to get 2-3 catches per game. It is almost a certainty that one of the 2nd round picks will be a TE.

- A drop in catches for Moss. This is likely his last year with the Pats so let the weaning process begin. This is still 4 catches per game and hopefully quality will replace some of the quantity. Also keeps him a little healthier.

- A reasonable jump in production for Edelman. Not a Welker 10-catch average which seems a bit unreasonable and unlikely.

- Tate getting 2 catches per game. Shouldn't be much of a problem.

- Rookie addition only getting 1-2 catches per game.

- 3 catches per game going to other WRs like Patten, Aiken and Welker for the stretch run.

This seems like a good model for success. Only assumptions would be adding a top TE (Pitta in the 2nd) and a WR capable of 1-2 catches/game (Ajirotutu in the 6th/7th), as well as Welker returning for last handful of games. The Pats certainly have the ammo to do more than that for the passing game (I like Emmanuel Sanders if he slides a bit), but I don't think they NEED to.

Couple other aspects make this approach possible:

1) Consistent production from the running game. Doesn't have to be great but has to be good enough to keep the offense in solid down/distance and prevent situations where Brady is dropping back 40-50 times a game.

2) Major bump in production from 4th quarter defense. If the offense can trust the defense late, they can look to build sustained, soul-sucking drives and play field position rather than building huge leads.

3) Effective play in the kicking game. Mainly focused on punting and kick returns.

Put all of that together and you don't need to build a run-n-shoot WR corps.

 

[mgteich]

We had Watson in 2009, who is a $4M experienced TE. And you expect it to be automatic for an unnamed rookie to have more receptions. Why?

LET's SUMMARIZE
Moss 90 (if stays healthy and improves a bit over his 2009 numbers)
Edelman 75 (pretty high expectation for a player who was out twice with injuries)
RB's 75
TE's 50 (OK, I increased the total a bit from 2009)
==============

So, the question is where the next ONE HUNDRED reccetptions are coming from.

My GUESS is that we expect to sign Branch AND use a top draft choice.

As someone else, said, Tate will make the team, and we have strong hopes for him as a returner. I would expect his production to replace Aiken.

Wanting one player to come in and replace Welker's production is unreasonable. Welker led the entire league in receptions despite missing three games. It would be unrealistic to expect somebody to step in and duplicate those numbers.

However when you look at Edelman's numbers in the three games Welker missed (I'm counting the final game against Houston as a missed game, though it technically was not) Edelman averaged 7 receptions for 74 yards per game. Though that's not as good as Welker's production, over a full season that extrapolates out to 112 catches for 1179 yards. I don't expect those numbers, but his numbers should be more than double what they were last year by starting 16 games rather than 3.

Yes improvement does need to be made on the roster at WR and TE, but it is not as dire as it appears by simply subtracting the number of receptions, yards and touchdowns by players no longer on the roster (assuming Welker will not be able to play.)

The Pats got 43 receptions for 546 yards from the TE position last year; it shouldn't be all that difficult to surpass that in 2010 - even if we don't know who the new Tight Ends will be yet.

The five RB combined for 74 catches, 608 yards and 1 TD; it wouldn't be a stretch to ask and expect them for more in the passing game in 2010.

The big question is not how to replace Welker, but who will improve the numbers from the flanker opposite Moss. Some combination of Tate, a free agent, and a rookie has to do better than Galloway, Aiken and Stanback. In fact, it would be almost impossible for them to not be an improvement; those three combined for only 30 receptions, 415 yards and 2 TD last year.

One other thing the Pats could do is run the ball a little bit more too. Last year it seemed as if one or two running backs were out with injuries every week, which could have led to the Pats passing more and running less. If they can stay healthier at RB this year then it would stand to reason are more likely to run more often.

 

[mgteich]

I'm fine with this. I would note that you expect
A) 70 catches from a rookie and others.
B) the offense to be effective with 40 fewer catches.
=======================================

CONCLUSIONS

A) My last post indicated that we needed 80 catches from the rookie and others, so we are on the same page.

B) Is there a running back addition in our plans that will account for additional production in the running game?

QUOTE=Metaphors;1777846]I would start by setting a goal different from a season where the Pats struggled on offense (2009 or 2002: 370+ comp) or wore out their offense (2007: 400 comp). Just spitballing but how about a 350 completion target or about 22 per game.

So a breakdown like this gets us there:
RBs = 70
TEs = 60
Moss = 60
Edelman = 60
Tate = 30
Rookie = 20
Others (including Welker) = 50

Unless I did the math wrong, that is 350 completions. So that means the Pats need:

-About the same level of production out of the RBs. Faulk, Maroney and Morris are certainly capable of 4-5 receptions per game.

- A nice bump in production from the TEs. Crumpler doesn't get the Pats there so a couple of new additions would need to get 2-3 catches per game. It is almost a certainty that one of the 2nd round picks will be a TE.

- A drop in catches for Moss. This is likely his last year with the Pats so let the weaning process begin. This is still 4 catches per game and hopefully quality will replace some of the quantity. Also keeps him a little healthier.

- A reasonable jump in production for Edelman. Not a Welker 10-catch average which seems a bit unreasonable and unlikely.

- Tate getting 2 catches per game. Shouldn't be much of a problem.

- Rookie addition only getting 1-2 catches per game.

- 3 catches per game going to other WRs like Patten, Aiken and Welker for the stretch run.

This seems like a good model for success. Only assumptions would be adding a top TE (Pitta in the 2nd) and a WR capable of 1-2 catches/game (Ajirotutu in the 6th/7th), as well as Welker returning for last handful of games. The Pats certainly have the ammo to do more than that for the passing game (I like Emmanuel Sanders if he slides a bit), but I don't think they NEED to.

Couple other aspects make this approach possible:

1) Consistent production from the running game. Doesn't have to be great but has to be good enough to keep the offense in solid down/distance and prevent situations where Brady is dropping back 40-50 times a game.

2) Major bump in production from 4th quarter defense. If the offense can trust the defense late, they can look to build sustained, soul-sucking drives and play field position rather than building huge leads.

3) Effective play in the kicking game. Mainly focused on punting and kick returns.

Put all of that together and you don't need to build a run-n-shoot WR corps.[/QUOTE]

 

[mgteich]

OK, 30 catches from Welker. That will make the difference between 360 catches and 390 catches this year. We still need a 70-80 catches from two additions.

I wish you wouldn't keep discounting Welker from everything.

It has been said his comeback is going very well from all sources. I wont be shocked if he is fully healthy by week 6. I'd count on him for a minimum 30 receptions while we work him back in.

 

[Metaphors]

I'm fine with this. I would note that you expect
A) 70 catches from a rookie and others.

That is about 4 catches a game from WRs other than Moss, Edelman and Tate. That include rookies, vets (Patten for now), Aiken and eventually Welker. Welker will likely skew the average towards the end of the season (just like Edelman will get more catches before Welker's return).

This works out to an average game log like the following:

Moss: 4 catches
Edelman: 4
Faulk: 2
Tate: 2
Pitta: 2
Crumpler: 2
Maroney: 2
Patten: 1
Aiken: 1
Morris: 1
Ajirotutu: 1

That is the pre-Welker distribution. Obviously Brady won't hit 11 guys every game, but spreading the wealth pays long-term dividends...particularly against teams with a shutdown corner and in the playoffs.

B) the offense to be effective with 40 fewer catches.

Absolutely. You don't think the Pats can be effective with Brady going 22-34 on average? At 7.8 ypa (his sweet spot), that would be an average game of 22-34, 265 yds, 2 TDs...or 4240 yds, 32 TDs for the year. That is easily a top 10 passing offense and if Brady keeps his INTs low, it is top 5 for effectiveness. What else do you want? If that isn't enough to win a vast majority of your games, the rest of your team is broken. Might want to spend resources there.

A) My last post indicated that we needed 80 catches from the rookie and others, so we are on the same page.

Possibly. Except I didn't get the impression you were counting Welker in the "other". Take Welker completely out of the equation for 2010 and things change. The fact that Belichick hasn't brought in a vet besides Patten leads me to believe the he is counting on Welker at some point in 2010. If Welker plays 6 games at full strength (though rusty), getting 80 catches from the rookie/other becomes no problem at all.

B) Is there a running back addition in our plans that will account for additional production in the running game?

Not a RB addition per se (though I like James Starks in the draft, but more for pass catching than rushing), but an overall commitment to the running game. For example, Maroney needs 15 touches to be effective. Commit to getting him those touches. Try to find a game where Maroney wasn't effective with 15 touches (can be done, but isn't easy).

This goes back to the point about 4th quarter defense. It is easier to be patient with the running game when you aren't trying to build an insurmountable 4th quarter lead because you don't trust your defense. Strengthening the defense will do more for the running game than any RB addition could.

 

[mgteich]

In the end, we are solving two different problems in this thread.

You wish to solve the problem of why we are not winning enough critical games. So, you want to increase the effectiveness of the running game and the 4th quarter defense. I agree with that assessment.

I am trying to make the passing game at least as effective as last year, even without the services of Welker. In that case, I believe that we are seriously deficient at the moment.
===============================
We can go into the season with significantly less punch in the passing game compared to last year, and focus exclusively on imporving the running game and the 4th quarter defense. That is certainly an option. The point of th thread, for me, was to examine how to improve our passing game over 2009, without Welker.

.Not a RB addition per se (though I like James Starks in the draft, but more for pass catching than rushing), but an overall commitment to the running game. For example, Maroney needs 15 touches to be effective. Commit to getting him those touches. Try to find a game where Maroney wasn't effective with 15 touches (can be done, but isn't easy).

This goes back to the point about 4th quarter defense. It is easier to be patient with the running game when you aren't trying to build an insurmountable 4th quarter lead because you don't trust your defense. Strengthening the defense will do more for the running game than any RB addition could.

 

[PatsCanDoIt]

The most productive rookie wide receiver Bill has ever had was Branch in 2002; however, he only caught 43 passes. Branch's production compares more to Edelman's from last year. That same year David Givens had 9 catches. Then in 2003 he had 34. I see Tate making a similar improvement. Greater production would be a surprise.

Now some new talent is needed but I don't expect miracles from a rookie. At best a rookie playing slit end or wide out will only catch 25 passes. It doesn't matter who the guy is. More than that would be a surprise.

I posted a month ago that I think Edelman can provide around 65 catches in place of Welker. So unless Welker can come off the pup and contribute or we find a vet to contribute this team will lose around 40 receptions from last year.

 

[Metaphors]

In the end, we are solving two different problems in this thread.

We can go into the season with significantly less punch in the passing game compared to last year, and focus exclusively on imporving the running game and the 4th quarter defense. That is certainly an option. The point of th thread, for me, was to examine how to improve our passing game over 2009, without Welker.

I understand where you are going but I question the methodology of limiting the scope to receivers. That is why I've had an issue with the suggestions that signing Boldin, plus another veteran WR, plus multiple high draft picks at receiver would be the way to go. Investing so heavily at receiver only pans out if you pass constantly.

The Pats dropped back to pass over 600 times (about 38 per game). You want to improve the passing game and make it more effective? Maximize the times you pass because you want to...and minimize the times you pass because you have to. So if the Pats become more successful in their passing game, they will actually end up with fewer attempts/completions.

If the Pats end up with 390 receptions in 2010, they will meet your goal of equaling 2009. I'm willing to bet that the effectiveness of the passing game (and the length of the Pats stay in the playoffs) will equal 2009 as well.

 

[spacecrime]

Oh my God! Are we bickering in APRIL over who will get the catches?

On April 4 of 2007, how did you divvy up the catches? You were probably panicking then, too.

What? Our #1 receiver is Stallworth. Or Gaffney? No way! Both are #3's at best.

And the slot guy we got for a 2nd draft pick from teh Dolphins. Wes Wilker. He wasn't even drafted. He's not a #1.

ACK ACK ACK!!! TELL ME WHERE WE WILL GET 300 RECEPTIONS!!!!! YIKES YIKES HELP HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2007 went okay IIRC.

In every year that Tom Brady played more than one game, he has thrown for less than 300 yards exactly twice. 2001 and 2004. Superbowl years.

The receptions will go to the players on the field. Whether Golden Tate or Sam Aiken or julian Edelman or Deion Branch or whoever.

 

[mgteich]

I understand your position.

And I believe that the team had that attitude last year.

And that attitude cost us games, and was one of the reason the patriots were not in the Super Bowl.
================================================
After all, we had no problems. just sign galloway and wait for tate. Oh, Galloway went down. No problem. Aiken is a fine receiver.
=========================
And talking about the SB years of 2001 and 2004 is simply not relevant. We had a much better defense in those years. We now rely much more on our passing offense. Blame the FO if you want to, but the team is structured differently than in 2001 or 2004.

And in our current offense, the tight end has a reduced role. So the wideouts do need to catch more than 350 passes.

We need an effective passing game that can carry the team for four quarters, not just three. And it really, really does help to have better options than Aiken as our #3.
=========

I do understand your position. If Moss were injured, Edelman and Stanback would simply get 100 catches apiece and be all-stars. This is a free country. You are free to believe such horsehockey if you wish.

Oh my God! Are we bickering in APRIL over who will get the catches?

On April 4 of 2007, how did you divvy up the catches? You were probably panicking then, too.

What? Our #1 receiver is Stallworth. Or Gaffney? No way! Both are #3's at best.

And the slot guy we got for a 2nd draft pick from teh Dolphins. Wes Wilker. He wasn't even drafted. He's not a #1.

ACK ACK ACK!!! TELL ME WHERE WE WILL GET 300 RECEPTIONS!!!!! YIKES YIKES HELP HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2007 went okay IIRC.

In every year that Tom Brady played more than one game, he has thrown for less than 300 yards exactly twice. 2001 and 2004. Superbowl years.

The receptions will go to the players on the field. Whether Golden Tate or Sam Aiken or julian Edelman or Deion Branch or whoever.

 

[Metaphors]

And talking about the SB years of 2001 and 2004 is simply not relevant. We had a much better defense in those years. We now rely much more on our passing offense. Blame the FO if you want to, but the team is structured differently than in 2001 or 2004.

Isn't that the answer? Get a defense the caliber of 2003/2004 (or at least in the ballpark). They weren't the '85 Bears or 2000 Ravens, so it isn't impossible. Then the Pats offense can be more effective while being less prolific.

And in our current offense, the tight end has a reduced role. So the wideouts do need to catch more than 350 passes.

It isn't the offense. It is the tight ends. They just can't get open quick enough. Watson and Thomas had an opportunity but didn't capitalize. That is why all of them have been systematically flushed. Crumpler isn't that guy either, but before Sept. there will be a TE in place that is capable of quick separation and has reliable hands (in Belichick's opinion at least).

We need an effective passing game that can carry the team for four quarters, not just three. And it really, really does help to have better options than Aiken as our #3.

Seriously, you guys need to stop with the Aiken #3 stuff. He becomes a #3 if 2 players ahead of him wash out (which is what happened last year). You might as well complain about having better options than Hoyer as a #1 QB or Wilhite as a #1 corner. Same exact situation. They may end up in those positions in 2010, but that means the season has gone horribly wrong.

I do understand your position. If Moss were injured, Edelman and Stanback would simply get 100 catches apiece and be all-stars. This is a free country. You are free to believe such horsehockey if you wish.

It is equal horsehockey to believe that Belichick is not in the middle of executing a plan to maximize all the assets at his disposal (money, players, picks). Not just this year but for years to come. I don't agree with every move he makes (not a big Brace fan for example), but in no way do I believe he doesn't recognize all the needs of this team or that he doesn't have Plan A on how to address them...and Plan B in case that doesn't work out...and Plan C...

 

[mgteich]

A) I agree that we should imporve our defense, We are a long way from 2004.

B) I believe that we will use a 1st or 2nd to secure a tight end. I don't think that Belichick will wait longer. I suspect that he won't even wait until the draft to use the #2. I certainly would like to see us use the position more. I would not be suprised to see us also use or #4 for a #3 TE.

C) Aiken was our flanker in 2009, our #3 receiver, our Z receiver. Edelman was our backup slot receiver.

As of now, Edelman is the slot receiver, and Aiken is the flanker. Obviously, we ALL would like to see 2-3 players all move past Aiken on the wide receiver depth chart. But then that is what this post is all about.

D) And just what was Plan A, B and C for the flanker position in 2009? How effective were these plans? No one doubts that Belichick has plans.

MY PLAN A
----------
X Moss
Y Olsen or Greshem
Z Thomas or Branch
slot Edelman
#4 WR Patten or draftee
#5 WR/KR Tate

Isn't that the answer? Get a defense the caliber of 2003/2004 (or at least in the ballpark). They weren't the '85 Bears or 2000 Ravens, so it isn't impossible. Then the Pats offense can be more effective while being less prolific.



It isn't the offense. It is the tight ends. They just can't get open quick enough. Watson and Thomas had an opportunity but didn't capitalize. That is why all of them have been systematically flushed. Crumpler isn't that guy either, but before Sept. there will be a TE in place that is capable of quick separation and has reliable hands (in Belichick's opinion at least).



Seriously, you guys need to stop with the Aiken #3 stuff. He becomes a #3 if 2 players ahead of him wash out (which is what happened last year). You might as well complain about having better options than Hoyer as a #1 QB or Wilhite as a #1 corner. Same exact situation. They may end up in those positions in 2010, but that means the season has gone horribly wrong.



It is equal horsehockey to believe that Belichick is not in the middle of executing a plan to maximize all the assets at his disposal (money, players, picks). Not just this year but for years to come. I don't agree with every move he makes (not a big Brace fan for example), but in no way do I believe he doesn't recognize all the needs of this team or that he doesn't have Plan A on how to address them...and Plan B in case that doesn't work out...and Plan C...

 

[Metaphors]

C) Aiken was our flanker in 2009, our #3 receiver, our Z receiver. Edelman was our backup slot receiver.

Aiken was the flanker in 2009 at certain points of the year. That was by necessity and not by design.

As of now, Edelman is the slot receiver, and Aiken is the flanker.

Even worse than the "Aiken is the #3" noise is the "as of now" that is used to justify it. "As of now", Ghost is the punter. Does anyone put him on the depth chart there at any point? Of course not. There are no games until September so the only meaning discussion of depth charts have to do with then, not "as of now". I could just as easily say that Tate is the flanker and Patten in the #4. Not now, but a best guess for how it will be when it counts.

D) And just what was Plan A, B and C for the flanker position in 2009? How effective were these plans? No one doubts that Belichick has plans.

Plan A = Galloway
Plan B = Tate
Plan C = Edelman (see Jacksonville game)

Aiken was Plan D and stop-gaps between plans. The plans didn't work. Galloway flopped, Tate couldn't get on the field and Welker was injured twice. So complain about Belichick managing receivers or complain about the scouting/training staff or just complain about bad luck...but "Aiken as #3" is just foolish.

MY PLAN A
----------
X Moss
Y Olsen or Greshem
Z Thomas or Branch
slot Edelman
#4 WR Patten or draftee
#5 WR/KR Tate

Mine
-----
X Moss
Y Pitta
Z Tate
Slot Edelman
#4 Ajirotutu
#5 Aiken

After week #9
--------------
X Moss
Y Pitta
Z Tate
Slot Welker
#4 Edelman
#5 Ajirotutu
#6 Aiken

No big money FAs and only a late round draft pick at WR (along with Pitta in the 2nd round). They can do more if they feel that Tate isn't quite there, Welker isn't progressing or Edelman can't take on a larger role. Moss leaves next year with a slew of big-time WRs in the 2011 draft and the Pats holding two first round picks.

There is still work to be done but I just fail to see where the passing game is going to be a concern. Use available resources to get the defense closer to a 2004 level and let the chips fall where they may.