The David Givens Delusion

[PATRIOTS-80]

There certainly is an awful lot of emotion around Givens vs Caldwell comparisons, although I note from the recent poll that 70% of us think Reche Caldwell will definitely start again next year:

http://208.109.107.176/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=46461

But there's obviously a vocal minority that continues to despise the guy.

Football Outsiders stats are always interesting. Like all stats they have the virtue of objectivity, and unlike most they attempt to assess performance on a per play basis adjusted for the difficulty of the opponent.

And for those who think I'm cherrypicking stats, you're more than welcome to adduce your own.

So what do Football Outsiders stats they say right now about Caldwell now (we'll compare to Givens later)?

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

He is the 34th best receiver in the league in point contribution above replacement (average) at 13.0 DPAR, and 32nd best in defense adjusted average above replacement per play at 8.5%.

This fits what I think most of us observe, i.e. that Caldwell is a terrible #1 receiver, a decent #2, and an excellent #3 by league standards.

Unfortunately, he's our #1, and gets vilified for obviously not being a replacement for Branch..

I'm not going to reprise the debate about whether Caldwell would be better or worse if Branch or Givens were still here, except to say that the only other WR we have with over 50 passes attempted is Troy Brown, who is the 46th ranked receiver with a DVOA of -1.5%, i.e. below average. Again, that seems about right.

None of the rest of our receivers had 50 or more attempts so far, but amusingly, Chad Jackson has a DVOA of 33.3% on 16 attempts. If by some miracle he held that performance for 34 more attempts, he'd be second in the league behind Reggie Wayne's 35.4%! Doug Gabriel was -1.8%, BTW.

Shockingly, Deion Branch is having a significantly worse year than Caldwell, even worse than Brown, worse than Gabriel, at a 51st ranked DVOA of -5.1%. Imagine the uproar if Belioli had given a 1st rounder for Caldwell, yet Seattle's getting far worse performance out of Branch.

Givens has of course been hurt this year, and only 20 passes were thrown his way, with a truly awful DVOA of -32.0%.

To get back to the point of this thread, let's look last Givens last year: he was the 35th ranked receiver with a DVOA of 5.5%, i.e. a little worse than Caldwell this year. Again, despite the fury of his support on this thread, I think this aligns well with what 70% of us see and think, that Givens was an OK #2 receiver last year and Caldwell is a more than adequate replacement.

To be fair, Givens had an extraordinary year in 2003, with a 3rd ranked DVOA of 55.9%, far better than even Branch has ever had. Memories of that extraordinary year probably motivate his fervent supporters here. But he's regressed since, with a 31st ranked 16.6% DVOA in 2004 and was plain mediocre last year.

Branch last year was the 13th ranked receiver with a DVOA of 19.0%, and significantly produced 27.5 points above average over the season. Add those 27.5pts to this years offense and we're likely 12-2 or even 13-1 right now, and thinking 4th ring.

But there's still a puzzle here, because Branch isn't producing in Seattle, Givens looked terrible, and Caldwell is having a career year. We can attribute that to the Brady effect, as Brady was able to elevate Branch, Givens, Caldwell, and Patten vs their performance elsewhere. But Brady can't work his magic with every receiver, and the stats say we have this year in totality a terrible WR group, with Caldwell being the only above average receiver.

I have to wonder if Brady is having a down year for some reason other than the switch in wide receivers. In 2005 DPAR says Brady contributed 104pts above average; this year he's so far only contributed 59pts. His DVOA was 4th ranked at 30.9%, and this year he's 10th ranked at 15.8%. That fall off aligns with his failure to win enough votes (other than from fans) to make the pro-bowl this year.

There's a chicken and egg problem here, and it's easy to blame his loss of receivers, but last years receivers were nothing special and those same receivers are terrible with other teams. I'm beginning to suspect that while the downgrade of his receivers is real, Brady's performance has taken a disproportionate drop. Maybe it's the disruption of the change, maybe he really is injured, maybe he's just having an off year, but I think there may be a Brady factor as well this year.

My guess and hope is that it's the disruption; it may be as simple as bad luck due to the extraordinary number of turnovers this year. I'd like to believe Brady will step up his game and again carry the offense despite not having great receivers. But I wouldn't bet on it. Our best hope is with our defense and our extraordinary special teams -- and that on offense the turnovers regress to the mean, Watson, Maroney, and O'C return, Graham stays healthy, and Dillon steps up his game in the playoffs.

Just an awesome post. Really well-stated!!!!!!!!!!

 

[AzPatsFan]

Givens is missed. He was able read opposing defenses..had a great raport with Brady and was a very good WR. Please stop with the "we don't miss anyone bs" Anyone that has watched this team realizes that we miss Branch and Givens.

Baloney! It is a delusion. We miss the fellow who was under contract for the 2006 season, said he would honor his contract, that he signed without having any one break his arm, and then changed his mind and shot his way out of town.

Caldwell after several games to acclimate plus a TC, is the equal and perhaps an upgrade over the 4th season Givens, in his first season with the Pats. Perhaps that should be expected, he was much more highly rated as an athlete, by the only ones who put their money where their mouth is.

Should the Patriots have assumed that a player with an exemplary history would honor his contract or anticipate he wouldn't. Should they have had an alternate plan? They did; they drafted CJ and planned to give him a year to learn before he had to play, if Deon wouldn't resign when he was free in 2007.

What is their alternate plan if Brady, also under contract, said he wouldn't honor it? What about their plan for Seymour, Wilfork and Warren stating they won't honor their contracts? Please get real!

 

[pencilneckgeek]

I would not have paid Givens what the Titans paid him. On that, I think most of us are in agreement.

However, I strongly disagree that Caldwell = Givens. Reliability, strength, explosion, blocking, YAC - you name it, and Givens is superior.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

Absolutely. Givens had equal smarts and the physical skills to make plays when the coverage was there or to break a tackle after the catch. It is clear to the eye, but not so obvious to the calculator. Caldwell's numbers are inflated by the simple fact that nobody else has been able to get open outside the hashmarks downfield. Caldwell may have become Brady's favorite wideout, but teams have figured that out and will him shut down because he doesn't have the skills to beat a solid corner and maybe not even zone coverage where the defense is watching him closely.

I'm definitely leary of the potential playoff matchups. Denver, SD, Baltimore. Yikes! That would be an ugly path to the Superbowl. Sure hope Chad Jackson busts out soon, because he's got the best skills of the bunch and could make life hard for defenses if he can get to where Brady can find him. Improving his run blocking would help, say, get him on the field. Brady might find him then. Gaffney might have what it takes to be the #2 that Pats would like, but Brown/Caldwell look like 3/4 material in terms of pass-catching ability. I'll just hope Maroney can return at roughly full strength and be the wild card that has been the saving grace of their otherwise pedestrian offense this season.

 

[pencilneckgeek]

One other note (and apologies if this was covered ad nauseum when I wasn't looking): there's no need to dump on Branch just because he is good enough to have negotiating power even in the face of non-guaranteed contracts. He did what any of us would do with the opportunity to get enough money to never have to work again, knowing full well that he could be broken in two and miss-out on that opportunity. It's nice to have a monster salary for 4 years, it's quite another to be given a nest egg that you can retire on. He was simply good enough to be set for life and took advantage of that. Belichick didn't hesitate to cut Law and Malloy for financial reasons. That's the way it goes. You can't expect player guarantees without team guarantees.

 

[njpatsfan]

Absolutely. Givens had equal smarts and the physical skills to make plays when the coverage was there or to break a tackle after the catch. It is clear to the eye, but not so obvious to the calculator.

Translation - the boatload of facts presented completely refute my opinion, so I will just make up things to 'prove' I'm right.

Caldwell's numbers are inflated by the simple fact that nobody else has been able to get open outside the hashmarks downfield. Caldwell may have become Brady's favorite wideout, but teams have figured that out and will him shut down because he doesn't have the skills to beat a solid corner and maybe not even zone coverage where the defense is watching him closely.

Let's see, Caldwell's numbers are inflated because he's the only one getting open, but teams are shutting him down because he has no skills. Do you even read what you write ?

Give it up folks - Kasmir et al has beat the living crap out of your 'arguments'.

Don't you all have a Red Sox board to post on ?

R

 

[pencilneckgeek]

Let's see, Caldwell's numbers are inflated because he's the only one getting open, but teams are shutting him down because he has no skills. Do you even read what you write ?

Aw, NJPF, you're sweet like sugar; too bad you're illiterate. Teams have "figured out" that Caldwell is the receiver who Brady has gotten comfortable throwing to, and NOW they're focusing on him, so he won't be getting open. His contribution has been gravy, and it probably would have been sustainable if NE had Branch as a No. 1, but they don't. I don't expect to see much from Caldwell from here on out.

 

[Mark Morse]

When Branch was out, Givens became like Caldwell, based on the stats. Now, a truly fair comparison can't be made unless you take a look at the differences in the offenses in 2004 to 2006. One had Weis, the other McDaniels.

I will grant you the difference in OC's but in 2005, when Branch went down, Givens was the man. If we had Givens and Caldwell (who is nothing but a #2 reciever) we would have been better off.

Now, as for this claim that the Patriots played it all wrong and "LET" both guys go, that is a crock of garbage. The Patriots made MORE THAN FAIR attempts to re-sign both Givens and Branch on several occasions. And both chose the routes they did. Givens did negotiate in good faith, its just that the Titans offered him the possibilty to be something that he's not. And that is a #1 receiver.

If they had paid fair market (alibi overpriced) for Givens, they could have traded Branch. They had to know that Branch was still upset about the 4 vs 5 year deal he signed as a rookie. I don't begrudge Givens for getting the big contract, especially for a 7th round pick that made himself into a starting WR. Look what happened to him, he got hurt and was knocked out for the year. My point is the Pats should never have been in a position to lose both players in thh same year! FAIR = market value

As for Branch, Sorry, but they attempted to treat Branch the SAME way they treated Brady and Seymour. Branch felt that he deserved better than Brady and Seymour and didn't want to honor the last year of his rookie contract. Branch refused to negotiate and laid an ultimatum at the feet of the Patriots AFTER the draft. Its my belief that Branch PURPOSELY waited until after the draft to prevent the Pats from trading him at the draft.

He waited until after the draft so that he would have the leverage ... it was still about the 4 year vs 5 year contract they pulled on him during his rookie year. They got the best they could for him ... a low 1st round pick. However, I would trade a low 1st round pick anyday for an established young player of Branch's ability.

 

[patsox23]

Caldwell may have become Brady's favorite wideout, but teams have figured that out and will him shut down because he doesn't have the skills to beat a solid corner and maybe not even zone coverage where the defense is watching him closely.

Caldwell has BEEN the favorite wideout pretty much all year. You'd think the opposition has already figured that out, and he still has made some plays each game, so I'm not sure your theory holds water.

 

[patsox23]

One other note (and apologies if this was covered ad nauseum when I wasn't looking): there's no need to dump on Branch just because he is good enough to have negotiating power even in the face of non-guaranteed contracts. He did what any of us would do with the opportunity to get enough money to never have to work again, knowing full well that he could be broken in two and miss-out on that opportunity. It's nice to have a monster salary for 4 years, it's quite another to be given a nest egg that you can retire on. He was simply good enough to be set for life and took advantage of that. Belichick didn't hesitate to cut Law and Malloy for financial reasons. That's the way it goes. You can't expect player guarantees without team guarantees.

Why can't you? They collectively bargained it this way. To give Branch a pass on his lack of good faith (pretty much every step of the way) is a bit naive.

And don't lump me in with "what anyone would do" when it comes to breaching a contract and forcing yourself off your TEAM just because you want to get paid more than you're actually worth. 7th-highest paid WR - yes, THAT makes sense.

 

[pencilneckgeek]

You're naive if you expect an athlete with the potential to make $10M if he doesn't get hurt to play for a fraction of that. Seymour held out for a raise, because he was good enough to get the raise. Branch did the same thing, only he got the money from someone else. Branch doesn't care what he's worth; he only cares what he gets paid. It's not a lack of good faith anymore than Belechick ending Law and Lawyer's contracts was a lack of good faith. Brady could retire at the end of the year; that's not a lack of good faith; that's a decision. Branch decided he'd rather not play this year and risk getting hurt and try to get a big payday next year. The Patriots decided to trade him so they could get something in return for him. It's business, plain and simple; faith has nothing to do with it.

Patsox23 are you telling me that if you were positive you could get a $10M payday that you'd just keep playing for far less in hopes of not getting hurt and missing out on the retirement check? Please. Is your 401k that good?

 

[njpatsfan]

Aw, NJPF, you're sweet like sugar; too bad you're illiterate. Teams have "figured out" that Caldwell is the receiver who Brady has gotten comfortable throwing to, and NOW they're focusing on him, so he won't be getting open. His contribution has been gravy, and it probably would have been sustainable if NE had Branch as a No. 1, but they don't. I don't expect to see much from Caldwell from here on out.

It's your arguments that are temporally challenged. 'Givens would be a better receiver right now than Caldwell has already proven to be because in the future teams will shut him down'. I actually gave you the benefit of the doubt in choosing to interpret your ramblings the way I did - this makes even less sense.

Of course, as patsox pointed out, even your 'future facts' are already wrong.

I say again, do you actually read what you write ?

R

 

[njpatsfan]

One other note (and apologies if this was covered ad nauseum when I wasn't looking): there's no need to dump on Branch just because he is good enough to have negotiating power even in the face of non-guaranteed contracts. He did what any of us would do with the opportunity to get enough money to never have to work again, knowing full well that he could be broken in two and miss-out on that opportunity. It's nice to have a monster salary for 4 years, it's quite another to be given a nest egg that you can retire on. He was simply good enough to be set for life and took advantage of that. Belichick didn't hesitate to cut Law and Malloy for financial reasons. That's the way it goes. You can't expect player guarantees without team guarantees.

Of course it's appropriate to dump on Branch. Of the roughly 1600 players in the NFL who had contracts with years remaining, Branch was the only one not to honor his. Many who stood to gain much more than Branch if they could invalidate their contracts. Even Randy Moss and Joey Porter honored their contracts.

Oh, and lets explode that '$10 million dollars' mantra. The Patriots offer had $8 million in guaranteed money, but it was for less years - leaving Branch another shot at FA in his prime. So Branch screwed the Patriots, us fans, and his 'friend' Tom Brady - for what in the end will perhaps not be much difference in his bottom line.

Not to mention the way he did it - promising to fulfill his contract, then saying the Patriots 'lied' to him (four years ago) about his contract, skipping the charity events, Chayutt's misinformation campaign through Borges, and not responding to the Patriots offer with a counteroffer. And the fact that Chayutt committed tampering with at least one other NFL team.

As far as business is concerned, in the real world, if you break a contract, you are sued - often for many multiples of what the contract value was in damages. This is nothing like 'business'

Deion deserves to be dumped on. You're not going to find too many intelligent posters here that will agree with you (but I'm sure the usual suspects will make themselves known)

R

 

[patsox23]

njpatsfan nails it. The FACTS seem to be leading the arguments on this thread. thank God.

 

[bradmahn]

Hi, new user here. Really enjoyed the board (and particularly this thread). I figured I'd chime in with my $0.02.

Caldwell's numbers are comparable to Givens's from the '05 season, but those stats are misleading. To me, Caldwell's season and his immediate impact is much, much more impressive. Consider (as some have already said) that Givens knew the system and had been in it for three seasons prior to last year. Caldwell has come in, and in one offseason, developed an understanding of the offense and a relationship with Brady that is remarkable. Caldwell has also done all of this without another WR that other defenses must respect, consistently drawing double teams and the attention of the defense.

It is in my opinion that, if Deion hadn't bailed out on the season, and Caldwell actually had the opportunity to play on the same field as him, he [Caldwell] would have even better numbers and we would not be having this discussion.

Let's look at Caldwell's production after being in the offense for several seasons and having a legitimate threat lining up across the field from him. As it is now Caldwell's season, although similar to some that Givens has had, is much more impressive (IMO).

 

[patsox23]

GREAT post, bradmahn. Looks like sanity and compelling argument are taking over this thread. Good to see.