Outside Threat Receivers

[Sciz]

Two years ago under McDaniels, Lloyd was the best outside, deep threat WR in the NFL. From what I've read from OTAs, he still has it.

 

[JR4]

The real issue is who makes the roster.

Welker, Lloyd, Gaffney and Slater as a STer seem to be locks. Stallworth hasn't produced in awhile.

Who are the other two?

Branch
Stallworth
Edelman
Other

This is behind my asking this question.

It seems most think what PATs offense didn't have last year was the
outside deep threat.

If you say Lloyd and Stallworth are the best outside threats then I would
think they both make the roster.
If say Lloyd gets hurt then there should be someone on the roster that
can step up to take over his job. Maybe not as good but a least still
threat.

But maybe patfanken is right, Pats do not have a real deep threat yet.
If he is talking speed alone maybe not but I've read except for top
corner backs covering, Lloyd can't be covered without help ... he always
finds the rock.

 

[Deus Irae]

This is behind my asking this question.

It seems most think what PATs offense didn't have last year was the
outside deep threat.

If you say Lloyd and Stallworth are the best outside threats then I would
think they both make the roster.
If say Lloyd gets hurt then there should be someone on the roster that
can step up to take over his job. Maybe not as good but a least still
threat.

But maybe patfanken is right, Pats do not have a real deep threat yet.
If he is talking speed alone maybe not but I've read except for top
corner backs covering, Lloyd can't be covered without help ... he always
finds the rock.

I can't pull up the 2011 stats, because they're incomplete on ESPN and that's all I can access right now, but....

In 2010, Lloyd had 77 catches
1 was a throw behind the line of scrimmage
22 were passes thrown 1-10 yards downfield
38 were passes thrown 11-20 yards downfield
7 were passes thrown 21-30 yards downfield
3 were passes thrown 31-40 yards downfield
6 were passes thrown 41+ yards downfield
For a total of 54 receptions from 11+ yards downfield

In 2010, Brady threw 66 completions 11+ yards downfield, total.

Take it for what it's worth.

 

[TheComeback]

I'd say Gaffney, Lloyd, Stallworth, Branch. Gaffney is the true downfield threat on this team ala Lance Moore. Lloyd is playing the Colston role where he can threaten every level of the field. Stallworth next based on pure speed. Reminds me of a Devery Henderson type. With Branch being able to go deep here and there.

Colston isn't an outside receiver, despite his size and ypc. He's actually much more of a threat in the middle of the field. Gaffney is a versatile midrange receiver. I never thought of him as a deep threat. He can play outside, and the Pats need that.

I happen to think Lloyd is enough of a deep threat that teams will have to respect him. He's not a burner, but you can't let him run down the field one on one with most NFL corners. He's too good at winning the ball in those matchups.

 

[mgteich]

1) Clearly yards per catch is not a relevant stat. All the receivers we are considering are in the 13.5-14.5 range: Lloyd, Gaffney, Stallworth and Branch.

2) The first issue is who would command a double team. There are two: Lloyd and Welker.

3) Does it matter that Stallworth has averaged less than 2 catches a game since 2007? I think that it does.

4) Brady had one of the very best passing offenses in the league in 2011 with receivers Welker, Gronk, Hernandez and Branch. Adding Lloyd, Gaffney and a backup TE is sufficient to make the passing game significantly better and more dependable. We'll also have more screens and dump-offs (RB receptions) now that Josh is back and our youngsters have a year of experience (Woodhead will get the RB share of receptions if they don't).

To understand better
A) Our #2 and #3 WR are Lloyd and Gaffney instead of Branch and Ochocinco.
B) We are arguing who should replace Underwood. I vote for Branch.

BOTTOM LINE

I don't see Stallworth making the roster unless there is an injury before Game 1 or if Branch isn't the 1-2 catch per game threat that Stallworth is if he is healthy.

This team isn't built around chucking the ball 30-40 yards down the field very often. We are much better than that using the short and intermediate routes, and counting on more completions and YAC's.

The top 6 receiving targets are Welker, Gronk, Lloyd, Hernandez, Gaffney and whichever running back is in the game.

We can fuss about whether we keep Branch or Stallworth. It seems unlikely that either will be active barring injuries. In any case, I'm fine with Gaffney replacing Lloyd as a starter if Lloyd is injured.

Even if Lloyd is injured and Branch is active, we are still ahead of last year. We have Gaffney instead of Ochocinco.

This is behind my asking this question.

It seems most think what PATs offense didn't have last year was the
outside deep threat.

If you say Lloyd and Stallworth are the best outside threats then I would
think they both make the roster.
If say Lloyd gets hurt then there should be someone on the roster that
can step up to take over his job. Maybe not as good but a least still
threat.

But maybe patfanken is right, Pats do not have a real deep threat yet.
If he is talking speed alone maybe not but I've read except for top
corner backs covering, Lloyd can't be covered without help ... he always
finds the rock.

 

[Sciz]

1) Clearly yards per catch is not a relevant stat. All the receivers we are considering are in the 13.5-14.5 range: Lloyd, Gaffney, Stallworth and Branch.

I don't think Lloyd's 18.8 in 2010 should be ignored, especially considering that last year's 13.8 was when he was catching passes from AJ Feeley and Kellen Clemens.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Not your finest effort Ice. Gaffney's skills are much different from Lloyd's and like it has been said you have less than a 1% chance of that being true, unless there's an injury to Lloyd.

And IF Branch makes the team, he's not going to take Brown's 2007 role. Don't forget, Branch is a one trick pony trying to make a team that prides itself on versatile players. He ONLY plays the Z. He only makes this team as a potential back up to Lloyd and he offers ZERO down field skill.

People better get used to the fact the Lloyd is a different kind of "downfield" threat. He isn't going to blow by ANY NFL CB. Lloyd's greatest skill, ISN'T in getting "separation" and being "open". He's a downfield threat because his great body control allows him to get into a favorable position to catch the ball even when he is covered. He isn't the kind of WR who teams will feel the need to rotate Safeties over the top to protect the CBs. I'm thrilled to have him, but he is what he is, and people expecting more will be disappointed.

We still don't have a "downfield burner". But with this offense, maybe we won't need one.

Thanks for the level-headed criticism.

However, I guess we see Lloyd's style differently. While you see it as a strength, I see it as a weakness. Tom Brady has never succeeded in throwing to guys who "aren't open." And yes, I understand what you are saying, as some players are money when the they have single coverage and the ball is thrown in their direction. But that is exactly why I don't think he will be a great fit in this offense, and while I don't think he'll do a Gallowayesque flop, I see Brady being more comfortable throwing to Gaffney, since Gaffney creates separation.

More "jump balls" relying on athleticism translates to more interceptions and less sure, low-risk catches. Always been a signature trait of Tom Brady, not throwing a lot of balls into traffic and relying on an athletic receiver to come down with it. That would be Eli Manning, and that's why the Giants can sometimes be unstoppable and sometimes look terrible.

Not sure where the less than 1% chance thing comes in. We've definitely seen lots of players who supposedly fit the scheme but never gained Brady's trust. We know Galloway has it, we don't know that Lloyd has it. To say there's less than 1% chance that, at the end of the season, Galloway will essentially be our #1 outside receiver- where is that coming from?

We'll see. I hope I'm wrong and Lloyd shines.

By the way, I didn't mean that Branch would play the same position as T Brown in '07, but rather that he'll be an honorary roster player will rarely see the field but will be a strong leader and backup.

 

[mgteich]

fair enugh

This is a moot point for most of us who are clear that our starters are Welker and Lloyd.

I don't think Lloyd's 18.8 in 2010 should be ignored, especially considering that last year's 13.8 was when he was catching passes from AJ Feeley and Kellen Clemens.

 

[patfanken]

2) The first issue is who would command a double team. There are two: Lloyd and Welker.

I think that Gronk and Hernandez from time to time are going to require some double team looks as well

3) Does it matter that Stallworth has averaged less than 2 catches a game since 2007? I think that it does.

The Stallworth signing has never excited me. He is what he is. He's experienced depth, with a chance to be a field stretcher (if he still has 4.3 speed) when we go to 3 wide outs. If he has 30 catches for the season it will be a huge win.

4) Brady had one of the very best passing offenses in the league in 2011 with receivers Welker, Gronk, Hernandez and Branch. Adding Lloyd, Gaffney and a backup TE is sufficient to make the passing game significantly better and more dependable. We'll also have more screens and dump-offs (RB receptions) now that Josh is back and our youngsters have a year of experience (Woodhead will get the RB share of receptions if they don't).

I don't see it as being "significantly better" if only because its going to be hard to improve on the Historic effort of last season. It was the 2nd best passing yardage EVER. "Just" as good would be a great accomplishment. What it WILL be is a significantly deeper set of receivers with a more diverse set of skills than last year. THAT will give Josh more flexibility in his schemes and make it harder for defenses to hone in on our game plans and protect against injuries

A) Our #2 and #3 WR are Lloyd and Gaffney instead of Branch and Ochocinco.
B) We are arguing who should replace Underwood. I vote for Branch.

I'm probably wrong, I don't think it speaks well of our receiving corps if Branch makes the team. His skill has always been his ability to create separation against zone based teams. He has NEVER been effective against strong physical man coverage, even in his prime. Now as his physical skills are deteriorating, combined with the fact that more and more teams have gone to playing the Pats with a physical play, especially in the short zones, his effectiveness has dropped even more. About the only thing he has going for him at this point is his familiarity with Brady.

Personally I'm still hoping for a TC retirement ceremony.

BOTTOM LINE

I don't see Stallworth making the roster unless there is an injury before Game 1 or if Branch isn't the 1-2 catch per game threat that Stallworth is if he is healthy.

This team isn't built around chucking the ball 30-40 yards down the field very often. We are much better than that using the short and intermediate routes, and counting on more completions and YAC's.

The top 6 receiving targets are Welker, Gronk, Lloyd, Hernandez, Gaffney and whichever running back is in the game.

We can fuss about whether we keep Branch or Stallworth. It seems unlikely that either will be active barring injuries. In any case, I'm fine with Gaffney replacing Lloyd as a starter if Lloyd is injured.

Even if Lloyd is injured and Branch is active, we are still ahead of last year. We have Gaffney instead of Ochocinco.

Your pretty much right on the money. I find it funny that our 4 main receivers are Gronk, Hernandez, Welker, and Lloyd. All are proven and effective. Most teams would die to have 4 dependable options, and we spend all this time and anguish speculating on who their backups will be.

BTW- before I assumed that the Pats would go with 5 WRs (plus Slater), with the Scaif signing I think there might be a slight chance that they only go with 4 (plus Slater) and keep 4 TE's with the idea that Hernandez is more WR than TE at this point. Just a thought.

 

[Ifleninwasawizard]

Patfanken, I don't really see why you are being so harsh on Branch. I realize he had plenty of troubles last year, but at times he had some decent production. There is no chance he is going to be playing the high percentage of snaps he did last year, which would likely make him more effective when he was on the field.

It doesn't make sense to throw away a proven asset, especially in a league where you never know who's going to go down when. Branch as a backup isn't the ideal, but backups are never the ideal. Despite everything else he still has that special connection with Brady, which inherently makes him one of the more dangerous backups in the league. He's the ideal safety net at one the more vital positions on the team.

 

[patfanken]

Patfanken, I don't really see why you are being so harsh on Branch. I realize he had plenty of troubles last year, but at times he had some decent production. There is no chance he is going to be playing the high percentage of snaps he did last year, which would likely make him more effective when he was on the field.

It doesn't make sense to throw away a proven asset, especially in a league where you never know who's going to go down when. Branch as a backup isn't the ideal, but backups are never the ideal. Despite everything else he still has that special connection with Brady, which inherently makes him one of the more dangerous backups in the league. He's the ideal safety net at one the more vital positions on the team.

I don't think I'm being harsh, just practical. Roster spots are going to be at a premium this season. I just don't think we should use one on a player that DOESN'T play ST's, has NO position flexibility, and is unlikely to get on the field unless someone is injured

Wouldn't it be more prudent if the Pats used that roster spot for someone else, and kept Branch in the area as a member of the "shadow roster". Or perhaps, if the rest of the WR roster are fairly healthy at the start of the season, put him on the PUP for the first 6 weeks, and that would give you more injury protection, WITHOUT using the roster spot for a player with diminishing skills, no position flexibility, playing more and more against defenses that don't match his skill set.