Back of the Roster Battle: Wide Recievers

[Synovia]

I realize that the gameday roster will change from week to week. But...

For the sake of discussion, lets just assume everyone on the roster is healthy, and you have 6WR + Slater.

Under what scenarios do you think all 6 will be active, if everyone on the roster is healthy?

In the more realistic scenario that not all 6 are active, WHO do you sit? Again, lets say all 6 are healthy. Throw a name out. You have 6 to choose from.

If you're don't have a good answer to the last question, that's fine. Lets go at it from the other direction: of the 6, which are active no matter what, again assuming everyone is healthy?

And on your points on using an OL to fill the role, and the small number of plays involving 3 TE's... All good points.

Again, who you sit depends on who you're playing. Welker and Ocho are active every game. Branch misses a couple games to injury. Tate and Price play more against teams with weak secondaries. Edelman plays more against teams with weak linebackers.





I think the thing people are forgetting is that we essentially have 3 roles for TEs.

Gronk: The versatility role. He's good at everything, so he doesn't give anything away as far as playcalling tendencies. He can block, he can run a seam to beat a cover-two.

Hernandez: The Dallas Clark role - He blocks sometimes, but generally when hes out there, they're putting the ball in the air. He can run WR-like routes.

Crumpler: Catches an ocasional pass, but is really there just as a blocker. If hes in, you're probably running the ball.


The thing about Smith and Yeatman, is they're both the Crumpler type. Can you really see Yeatman, with his 5.1 speed running a fly down the middle of a cover 2? Of course not.


If Gronk goes down, the offense changes. Nobody on the roster can do what he does.

If Hernandez goes down, Gronk can do some of the things he does, and a WR can do some of the others, but Yeatman/Smith can't so they're not going to replace him.


Pretty much the only time that the lesser of Smith/Yeatman is usefull, is when the other one gets hurt, or when we're running a play where we need multiple blocking TEs.


If Yeatman was a fantastic blocker, and Smith was more of an all around player (a poor man's Gronk), I could see keeping both, as Gronk is the least replaceable of the TEs. But they're not, they're both in the role thats easiest to replace.

 

[RayClay]

No, they weren't. He was consistently above average. The only thing that dropped off were the TDs.

I said he was middle of the pack, you said above average. Look it up, we were both right, he was slighlty above average, twenty first in the league.

By the way, since he started out much better, that means he couldn't have been consistently above average, if you want to play semantics games.

He had 2 TD returns by October, no returns over 40 other than that and ended up 21st in the league.

If you can find statistics that turn that into "consistently above average" in the second half, bring them on.

 

[Synovia]

You're using training camp numbers. Show me a 5th or better yet, a 6th receiver, not including TEs or RBs who got significant touches in the regular season. Changing the question does not make the answer relevant.

Those aren't training camp numbers.

 

[Synovia]

I
By the way, since he started out much better, that means he couldn't have been consistently above average, if you want to play semantics games.

He had 2 TD returns by October, no returns over 40 other than that and ended up 21st in the league.

21st in the league in average yards/return is pretty damn good when 15 of the guys above you returned less than 4 kicks.

(And Hester, who was in those remaining 6, only returned 12 kicks. That list that Tate is listed at 21 has 194 players)

 

[Tunescribe]

I think the new kickoff rule lessens need for a player who is a returner first and position player second.

 

[RayClay]

21st in the league in average yards/return is pretty damn good when 15 of the guys above you returned less than 4 kicks.

(And Hester, who was in those remaining 6, only returned 12 kicks. That list that Tate is listed at 21 has 194 players)

And 25 or 26 snaps out of over 1,000 pretty much makes my point.

Also, since we know he had a 103 yd TD and another one, during the first half, where I said he was great, let's subtract that a guess of a 97 yd return and make it even (200) and subtract 2 from hit total returns

1097 / 41 becomes

897 / 39

or 21.97

I doubt he averaged that much in the second half, based on my observations, but see where that puts him "consistently above average" for half 2, when he had no TDs.

 

[Synovia]

I think the new kickoff rule lessens need for a player who is a returner first and position player second.

Tate played 52% of the snaps last year. I'm not sure I'd call him a " player who is a returner first and position player second"

Despite Price looking great in camp, if anyone is going to get called that, its him. He played like 25 plays the whole of last year.

 

[Synovia]

And 25 or 26 snaps out of over 1,000 pretty much makes my point.

I say he gets cut, how's that.

Tate played over 500 snaps.

 

[nnmnmmnn]

Excellent post, thank you.

Again, who you sit depends on who you're playing. Welker and Ocho are active every game. Branch misses a couple games to injury. Tate and Price play more against teams with weak secondaries. Edelman plays more against teams with weak linebackers.

Ok, so you either have Tate and Price, and sit Edelman, or you keep Edelman and sit one of Tate or Price. So one of Tate or Price plays every week. For the sake of simplifying the discussion, lets say Price is the better of the two. So roughly speaking, you either sit Edelman or Tate every week.

You're essentially using two 53 man roster spots so you have flexibility and the option of choosing between two guys at your #5 WR position on gameday.

Personally, I'd just keep Edelman and leave Tate off the roster. I don't think the ability to "upgrade" from Edelman to Tate, or Tate to Edelman is worth a roster spot.

I think the thing people are forgetting is that we essentially have 3 roles for TEs.

Gronk: The versatility role. He's good at everything, so he doesn't give anything away as far as playcalling tendencies. He can block, he can run a seam to beat a cover-two.

Hernandez: The Dallas Clark role - He blocks sometimes, but generally when hes out there, they're putting the ball in the air. He can run WR-like routes.

Crumpler: Catches an ocasional pass, but is really there just as a blocker. If hes in, you're probably running the ball.


The thing about Smith and Yeatman, is they're both the Crumpler type. Can you really see Yeatman, with his 5.1 speed running a fly down the middle of a cover 2? Of course not.


If Gronk goes down, the offense changes. Nobody on the roster can do what he does.

If Hernandez goes down, Gronk can do some of the things he does, and a WR can do some of the others, but Yeatman/Smith can't so they're not going to replace him.


Pretty much the only time that the lesser of Smith/Yeatman is usefull, is when the other one gets hurt, or when we're running a play where we need multiple blocking TEs.


If Yeatman was a fantastic blocker, and Smith was more of an all around player (a poor man's Gronk), I could see keeping both, as Gronk is the least replaceable of the TEs. But they're not, they're both in the role thats easiest to replace.

All excellent points. Maybe my preference for keeping both Yeatman and Smith wasn't well thought through. I was going on a rather vague thought that with all the 2-3 TE sets, a 4th would be a good idea. Maybe you're right on that. But I'm still not convinced that using a roster spot on a 6th receiver is the best use of it.

 

[Synovia]

Personally, I'd just keep Edelman and leave Tate off the roster. I don't think the ability to "upgrade" from Edelman to Tate, or Tate to Edelman is worth a roster spot.

And thats fine. People can disagree. I don't think that the addition of a 2nd blocking TE adds much over just using a Tackle to play in those short yardage situations.


Roster space is always at a premium, and considering that two of our WRs are FA's next year, and a 3rd is older, I'm for keeping as many young guys as possible.

Especially when one (Tate) was essentially a rookie, and still managed to have a decent season. Yeah, 24 receptions isn't a whole lot, but its not bad for a rookie or 2nd year guy. I mean, ****, Tate looks a whole lot better now than Welker did at this point in his career.

All excellent points. Maybe my preference for keeping both Yeatman and Smith wasn't well thought through. I was going on a rather vague thought that with all the 2-3 TE sets, a 4th would be a good idea. Maybe you're right on that. But I'm still not convinced that using a roster spot on a 6th receiver is the best use of it.

It might not be, but a 4th TE isn't, IMO, the reason to drop a young receiver with potential. And I'm not sure there's a 5th RB I'd keep over Tate. You want to keep an extra tackle or something, fine.

 

[Synovia]

And 25 or 26 snaps out of over 1,000 pretty much makes my point.

Also, since we know he had a 103 yd TD and another one, during the first half, where I said he was great, let's subtract that a guess of a 97 yd return and make it even (200) and subtract 2 from hit total returns

1097 / 41 becomes

897 / 39

or 21.97

I doubt he averaged that much in the second half, based on my observations, but see where that puts him "consistently above average" for half 2, when he had no TDs.

Oh Wow, if you take away the two longest kick returns, his average drops significantly.

If I take away Leon Washington's 3 TDs, he drops to 21.3.

 

[Synovia]

I doubt he averaged that much in the second half, based on my observations, but see where that puts him "consistently above average" for half 2, when he had no TDs.

You do realize that kick distances, return distances, and fieldgoal accuracy all drop across the league in the 2nd half, right? Like, for everyone?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

We carry 6 WRs because it's likely that Branch gets injured. P >> 0.5

And I view Slater as a ST guy, not a WR. That said, he's shown that he can get open and catch at least against guys who some coaches thought could play in the NFL.

 

[fthft]

what is up with Tate? I am assuming he is injured because he hasn't been out there. Anybody know the severity and whatnot? I'm a big Tate guy, think he can definitely help the team.

 

[YearbookCurfew]

Everyone will make the cut except for Buddy.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

what is up with Tate? I am assuming he is injured because he hasn't been out there. Anybody know the severity and whatnot? I'm a big Tate guy, think he can definitely help the team.

Wait for the next BB press conference archived on Patriots.com
He goes over the injury status of each player in typical BB detail.

 

[PatsFan24]

I like BT and voted for him to make it more on that than because I think he will :/

 

[Richard Camembert]

I think the new kickoff rule lessens need for a player who is a returner first and position player second.

Not so sure. I'm thinking return men will still have value in colder weather/outdoor sites, where it will be harder to just kick a field goal. Also I imagine having a good return man to receive kicks will prevent teams from trying to kick off to the opposing 5 yard line similar to directional punts.

Also, on a different topic, a lot of these choices are easier than they should be because of the several players who can be PUP'd. Choices will get harder when the hurt guys return.

So I have all but Buddy making the roster.

 

[NEPettyOfficer72]

Julian Edelman is underrated and will be utilized more this season. Virtually, another Wes Welker running around which will be an additional weapon for teams to deal with.

 

[Coach42]

Brandon Tate was essentially a rookie last year, I don't get the hate. I don't love the guy but give him a legit chance.