Brady6
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2013
- Messages
- 15,641
- Reaction score
- 5,580
There was some talk about him being bi-polar.Wasn't the thing with Lloyd more of his locker room prescence? He had a bad attitude and didn't mesh well with the team
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.There was some talk about him being bi-polar.Wasn't the thing with Lloyd more of his locker room prescence? He had a bad attitude and didn't mesh well with the team
And yet again, another attempt to crap on a former member of the team for no good reason. What the hell is wrong with you people?
900 yards and 12 yards a catch is not really the Law Firm of wide receivers.He caught some balls, I'll give him that, but was he ever tackled or did he just fall down whenever he caught the ball? He was like the Law Firm of receivers in that he was solid but never a threat to make a big play.
Somebody did a thorough breakdown of Lloyds performance here using metrics and it showed that given the amounts of targets Loyd got combined with his YAC and perhaps one other thing that while his production (on paper) was good - the truth was the opposite.
We need to be careful citing 'someone here did a breakdown'
Those are usually rife with assumptions and inconsistencies, and the debate over them never resolves them, it just ends up in intenet tough guy protocals.
And, you can't 'thoroughly breakdown' something like that without analyzing the target itself rather than looking at a number.
For example balls thrown to Lloyd were the type of throws that have a much lower completion % than ones thrown to Welker, so there is no meaning in comparing catches per target.
Most football statistical analysis is flawed and lacks context. That is why using one statistical method to compare players is usually full of fail.These are the stat guys who don't watch the game live. Analytics are great, but just a small part of analyzing players and plays
No one is apples to apples. We don't have 'roles' that we squeeze people into despite their skillset. We have an offense that changes to adapt to the talent available.Edelman isn't really an apples-to-apples comparison to Welker. For one, when Wes was a free agent, the choice that they made was Welker vs. Amendola, not Welker vs. Edelman.
For another, Edelman spends a whole lot more time outside of the slot than Welker did. In terms of utilization, they don't strike me as being all that similar as players, beyond the fact that Edelman's been the primary WR target since Welker left.
No one is apples to apples. We don't have 'roles' that we squeeze people into despite their skillset. We have an offense that changes to adapt to the talent available.
Well they do a lot of the same things. There skillsets, of course are not identical.Sure, but some players are a lot more similar than others, and a lot more comparable in their roles than others. In this case, I think Edelman and Welker are a lot less similar than most of these posts suggest.
Well they do a lot of the same things. There skillsets, of course are not identical.
But they are both white, so that causes misconception all by itself.
Maybe the discussions should be:
Instead of paying Amendola and Lafell money to be crappy, we could've had 1 probowl WR with that money
Edelman isn't really an apples-to-apples comparison to Welker. For one, when Wes was a free agent, the choice that they made was Welker vs. Amendola, not Welker vs. Edelman. Remember the timing of the whole thing: the Pats hurried to lock up Amendola once Welker was meeting with Denver and it was clear he was probably going to sign there, because they didn't want to be left with neither. Edelman was out there in free agency the whole time, but the Pats were willing to wait on him, presumably because a) they didn't think he would attract a ton of interest (which he didn't), and b) they didn't seem to be all that afraid of losing him. So while Edelman has clearly grown into a prominent role in the passing game, I think it's fair to say that the Patriots didn't plan on that. Which is fine: this is why you pay a bunch of guys a smaller amount of money and let them fight it out in camp.
Separately, if you're just looking at how they play on the field, Edelman spends a whole lot more time outside of the slot than Welker did. In terms of utilization, they don't strike me as being remarkably similar players--or in remarkably similar roles--beyond the fact that Edelman's been the primary WR target since Welker left.
If you ask me, they didn't really replace Welker at all. They couldn't, because nobody did what he did nearly as well as he did it. They moved on, for better or worse, from an offense that relies so heavily on a pure slot receiver (yes, Welker lined up outside the slot occasionally, but it was rare).
Replacing Welker is a relative term. What do you mean by it. Replace the current version of Wes Welker (or what the Pats probably would have gotten if they resigned him) or what Welker was in the past for this team? When I talk about replacing Welker, I talk about what Welker would have probably given us more so than what he did for this team in the past.
Even then, Welker and Edelman are different players with different skill sets. But they both played a similar role in this offense in that they were both slot receivers who are/were Brady's favorite target.
That's exactly where the misconception is. Edelman is not primarily a slot receiver. I just went back over last week's game, and he lined up for 47 snaps on offense (including penalties). The breakdown was as follows:
Lined up in the slot: 14
Lined up as an outside receiver: 28
Lined up in slot then motioned out: 3
Lined up out then motioned into slot: 2
So he lined up outside about twice as often as he lined up in the slot. A few of his snaps from the slot were in trips formations with multiple slot receivers, and conversely a few of his outside snaps were inside the numbers, but neither was the case frequently enough to make those numbers misleading.
But, to be fair, that doesn't tell the whole story. It would be just as telling to look at whether he was lined up inside or outside the numbers. Again, this includes penalties, and I accounted for short/far side of the field (so if he's lined up barely outside the numbers on the short side, I count it as inside, or barely inside the numbers on the far side counts as outside).
Inside the numbers: 19
Outside the numbers: 28
While I don't record this for every game (in fact, this is the first time I've done it), this lines up pretty closely with what I was expecting from watching the past year-plus. Edelman can line up in the slot, and does a good amount of the time, but he's primarily an outside-the-numbers guy by a pretty wide margin, in a way that Welker never was. His skill set more closely resembles Antonio Brown's than Welker's.
So one day WW will enter the Pats HOF. What is your opinion on that? Yes or No. He was great less Da Drop.