Welcome to PatsFans.com

Seeking a #4 and #8 Receiving Target

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by mgteich, Apr 9, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,453
    Likes Received:
    97
    Ratings:
    +227 / 17 / -2

    TARGETS 1, 2 and 3
    We have our top 3 targets: Amendola, Gronkowski and Hernandez.

    TARGET 4 - a flanker
    WE NEED A NUMBER FOUR TARGET THAT CAN STRETCH THE FIELD (a flanker)
    I like Lloyd or Sanders or an early 2nd round draft choice in this role.

    TARGET 5, 6 and 7
    These are likely a running back, 3rd TE and 3rd WR in some order. We have the wide receiver in Jones. Jones replaces our #3 from last year, Branch or Edelman depending on health.

    TARGET 8 and backup WR
    This is role of the #4 WR receiver. He is likely not even be active unless there is an injury at WR or TE. NO ONE was in that role to start the season. Then Salas was acquired. After cutting him after a couple of weeks, Branch was signed.
    ==================================
    BOTTOM LINE - We need a #4 and a #8 receiving target.

    A) To me, Lloyd, Edelman and Sanders are each worth a roster spot (perhaps only 2 of the 3 can make the roster, but we've carried more before).

    B) Perhaps Belichick is higher on Jones than we are, and considers him the solution for our #2 WR spot (#4 target) or at least good enough to compete for the spot with a draftee and/or veterans yet to be signed.

    C) The #4 wide receiver could start as Jenkins, or a vet, or a draftee, or no one (as was the case last year). Or the #4 receiver could be Ebert or Holmes. This is not an unusual or unreasonable roster spot for a rookie (or and untested player like Salas last year).
  2. Brady6

    Brady6 On the Roster

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    Messages:
    9,411
    Likes Received:
    340
    Ratings:
    +727 / 77 / -119

    #12 Jersey

    You do realize all 6 (Gronk, AH, Hoom, Fells, VS and Winslow) of our TE's combined for 182 targets in 2012 correct? Flanker which was Lloyd had 130 all on his own but yet that is our #4 target? Even in 2011 Gronk and Hernandez both had less than 130 targets.

    We need a #1 WR and it can't be Lloyd who is average at best. Especially when you consider it's unlikely we can rely on Amendola to replace all 174 targets Welker saw in 2012.

    If you direct the majority of you targets to TE's all a team has to do is send 8-9 guys and force the TE's to stay in and block.
  3. JMC00

    JMC00 On the Roster

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,993
    Likes Received:
    118
    Ratings:
    +303 / 5 / -7

    Gronk and Hernandez had 234 targets combined in 2011
  4. Brady6

    Brady6 On the Roster

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    Messages:
    9,411
    Likes Received:
    340
    Ratings:
    +727 / 77 / -119

    #12 Jersey

    Thing is if Brady is going to throw it 600+ times I really only put them down even if they play every game for 100-120 targets each because of defenses game planning to force them to block. I can't see Amendola getting more than at most 150 targets even if he played all 16 games so thats less than half Brady's usual attempts. We need a true #1 WR in the draft that can at least take 100 targets and catch 60-65 balls.
  5. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,453
    Likes Received:
    97
    Ratings:
    +227 / 17 / -2

    In 2011, EACH of the top TE's had more targets that the TOTAL of the receivers not named Welker.

  6. Brady6

    Brady6 On the Roster

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    Messages:
    9,411
    Likes Received:
    340
    Ratings:
    +727 / 77 / -119

    #12 Jersey

    The combo of Branch and Johnson had 122 targets for 66 catches 978 yard. Gronk had 124, AH had 113. Either way like I said we need a WR capable of taking on 100+ targets, catching 65-75 balls and gaining 900-1000 yards. Don't you agree?
  7. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,453
    Likes Received:
    97
    Ratings:
    +227 / 17 / -2

    I agree. And Lloyd is one of those who is qualified to perform that function.

  8. Brady6

    Brady6 On the Roster

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    Messages:
    9,411
    Likes Received:
    340
    Ratings:
    +727 / 77 / -119

    #12 Jersey

    Maybe in some type platoon with a rookie early in the year but Lloyd's stats last year told me he is ill suited to match up against the #1 outside CB in the NFL.
  9. Ozymandias

    Ozymandias Rookie

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,419
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Lloyd's not a #1 receiver that they need on the perimeter. He's better suited to be a back-up at this point coming on third downs and other special packages.

    I agree with Jax however, if a rookie(s?) is brought in then Lloyd or someone with a similar skillset would be a good platoon partner whilst the rookie gets his feet wet and learns the playbook and how to be an NFL WR.

    I don't expect whomever is brought in to replace Lloyd's role to immediately have better statistical production than him but they must have a greater impact than he did. Otherwise its going to be tough to win a super bowl with the same weaknesses on the perimeter that have dogged this team since Moss' departure.
  10. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    22,218
    Likes Received:
    92
    Ratings:
    +325 / 15 / -10

    He did last year, exactly what you are saying someone needs to do next year :confused:
  11. VOODOOZF

    VOODOOZF Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    At the moment all of the Patriots wr's/te's do the exact same thing. Lloyd isnt the answer. His skill set does not stretch the field and I wouldn't want to go into the season with an untested late first rnd rookie taking that role.

    At this point I think I would give up the 3rd choice for Sanders. I think he is a diamond in the rough.
  12. Brady6

    Brady6 On the Roster

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    Messages:
    9,411
    Likes Received:
    340
    Ratings:
    +727 / 77 / -119

    #12 Jersey

    He did not do it well Andy come on under a 1000 yards and 4 touchdowns and you want to roll with that again? Maybe as a worst case but should we not aim hirer?

    My thought is you draft a WR get him in here for PTA, camp etc and if he doesn't pick it up fast enough you go out and give Lloyd a 1 year deal in August because I'm certain he will be available.
  13. Metaphors

    Metaphors Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,670
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    If you are going to lobby against Lloyd, using his stats is not the best way to approach it. Just looking at stats, he did pretty much what was needed for his role in the offense. You can ask for more catches, yards or TDs...but it likely would have just reduced the production for one of the other skill players. In other words, the offense (at least for the regular season) was pretty much running at full capacity.

    I do believe there is an issue with Lloyd that isn't reflected in the stats. Too often he was coverable by a single CB...often not even the top opposing CB. That is one more player in coverage or one more player to blitz. If you are going to be split out alone in the Pats offense and the defense leaves a single CB on an island, you have to clearly win that matchup more often than not. In addition, a significant number of those wins should involve enough YAC that it hurts the defense. Basically, you enable Brady to pass them out of that defensive formation...opening up mismatches somewhere else.

    The goal of the offense should be twofold...

    1) Stay flexible enough to run or pass effectively without having to change personnel.

    2) Put out 5 skill position players that can each can win a single coverage situation with some consistency.

    Put these two aspects together and you essentially force the defense to stay base and zone most of the time. That helps the OL protect Brady. And if Brady has any time against a zone, the Pats are in very good shape. So how are the Pats looking so far?

    - Gronk (healthy) = Mismatch against anyone and strong in running game
    - Hernandez = Mismatch against anyone but a bigger CB, big enough to block 2nd level LB
    - Amendola = Wins consistently against single coverage
    - Vereen = Requires a CB or strong FS

    If the Pats go with Ballard, they can move anywhere from a power run formation to almost a complete spread (you keep Ballard on the line) depending on the defense.

    But what about adding another WR? I'm not sure that Sanders is the guy to demand attention outside the numbers...but the Pats must be convinced to offer a 3rd. If he does that job, the Pats top level receivers are essentially set for the near future. Jones and Edelperson just provide veteran depth. Any draft pick would a high upside (Hunter) or developmental guy (Denard Robinson) that doesn't have to deliver this year.
  14. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,453
    Likes Received:
    97
    Ratings:
    +227 / 17 / -2

    Edelman is back (our #4 WR, backup receiver, punt returner and #8 target).

    Sanders has an offer.

    Both these are 1-year deals.

    I look for us to draft a WR in the 1st or 2nd.
  15. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,858
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +50 / 2 / -0

    Although I'm not crazy about drafting WRs - expecting they will need time to develop, I think with the Pats having a strong need for a deep threat I'd not be surprised to see them use their #1 pick in a deep WR draft.

    Although I wouldnt mind seeing Lloyd return, he didn't play the flanker role well enough.

    I'm thinking if he we're coming back he would have restructured, as I think we have him for $2 million in dead money on the cap as it is - I'm not sure they'd spend more on him now.

    I'd say they're looking for someone much better and younger than Lloyd anyway - if he were adequate to the role, he'd still be here.
  16. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,453
    Likes Received:
    97
    Ratings:
    +227 / 17 / -2

    With regard to Lloyd, I suspect that he might be reconsidered if the steelers match the offer to Sanders. If Sanders signs, we'll draft a WR, bring in more vet jags, and be ready to go.

  17. Ozymandias

    Ozymandias Rookie

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,419
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My thought exactly. Lloyd's production when isolated without proper context looks fine on paper but the inconsistencies and soft mentality along with no YAC-ability on the field meant he was a receiver without the ability to make impactful big plays on his own.

    Even though he oftentimes generated zero separation the Patriots scheme maximized getting the ball to him. After that its up to the receiver to "create" things after that and that's what Lloyd failed to do. He wasn't a playmaker and if Steelers don't match the offer Sanders can step in Lloyd's role and be more of a playmaker on the perimeter in those one-on-one situations. Sanders has the quickness and speed to get open and to make plays after he does.

    As it stands Sanders likely is the fourth receiving target they're seeking. Perhaps a high draft pick WR can fill that spot too if things don't go as planned.
  18. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,858
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +50 / 2 / -0

    I'm still having a tough time imagining him coming back (and I'm only slightly more enthused over Sanders than Lloyd)

    Lloyd already counts $2 million on this year's cap (I think). Reworking the contract could have resulted in reducing that hit - but now there's no getting rid of it PLUS they'd have to pay his salary.

    Basically he was more attractive as a WR before he was cut. If they valued him even at an amount less than he was due, the deal would have been done.

    Seems to me the Patriots actions imply they are looking for an upgrade at the outside WR spot, looking for someone who can do what Lloyd did not - i.e. stretch the field, gain separation, hold onto the ball and pick up YAC
  19. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    22,218
    Likes Received:
    92
    Ratings:
    +325 / 15 / -10

    You said we need a guy who can get 65-75 catches and 900-1000 yards.
    Thats what Lloyd did.

    I get you don't like the guy, but saying what we need is exactly what he produced makes your argument look whacky.

    He was 25th among WRs and 6th among #2 WRs, aiming higher is great, but easier said than done. You won't get that from a rookie.
  20. Mack Herron

    Mack Herron Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,985
    Likes Received:
    30
    Ratings:
    +76 / 0 / -2

    #24 Jersey

    Yup. They are doing what they can but the 2013 WRs will be hard pressed to match the productivity of the 2012 WRs.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>