Prior to this game, Slater had a total of 9 kick returns, with the longest being a 31 yarder. How does that translate into a failure because he has yet to break one for over 40 yards?
That's actually a decent stat to use to measure this guy.
So, is the point that it's sort of foolish to label Slater a failure because he has yet to break a 40-yard return? Wow, that sounds unfair.
Strangely, the important yards-per-return stat is missing from this analysis. Let's look it up. Right now he has 11 returns for 155 yards.
That's 14 yards per return.
Hmm, is that good or bad? Well, they seem to pretty much give you 20 yards if you catch it and bring it out to the wedge, so that doesn't seem very good. Let's compare it to Hobbs, who is returning behind the same blockers, facing the same coverage. Hobbs, of course, is probably winded from playing starting corner all game, and is facing a lot more bruises and tears.
Anyway, Hobbs has 38 returns for 1043 yards. That's 27.4 per return. Just about double Slater.
So, statistically, that says Slater absolutely sucks.
He has five total tackles, so he isn't helping out on defense.
He has a dropped pass, no receptions, so he isn't helping out on offense.
There is lots of advice for moderation here, but I think through 12 games we have seen enough to objectively label Slater a failure. You can look at his total lack of contribution, his critical fumble, and his horrible statistical performance. It's unsurprising, given that he had similar performance in college, with zero tackles as a safety. He may be very fast, but he sucks at football.