We Do Not Need Any More Receivers

[maverick4]

The Colts enjoyed nearly a 2:1 time of possession advantage and scored nearly 3:1 to the Pats in the second half. Our defense wasn't stopping the Colts but the Pats offense certainly was NOT helping the defense out by sustaining drives and keeping the Colts offense OFF the field.

The Patriots offensive performance in the 2nd half was inadequate. Their time of possession was woefully inadequate and did not allow their defense to rest.

The Patriots do need to UPGRADE their receiver corps. I'm not talking about adding a Randy Moss level talent. I neither would want to pay the price nor put up with his headaches/issues.

This is a lapse in reasoning; our problems with time of possession and an inability to generate first downs, do not directly suggest a need to upgrade receivers. I think they indicate a need for better play-calling, better-designed formations, and self-scouting of our own tendencies so that we're not constantly calling plays that the defense expects.

 

[patsox23]

guys arguing the yards per average as opposed to '05 is a bit misleading because in '05, we had no running game and had a lot of 3rd and longs. That does and will affect the average.

Sure we need a deep threat, hopefully CJ provides that. As far as FA, it is slim pickings.

EXCELLENT POINT, worth repeating.

 

[Rob0729]

This is a lapse in reasoning; our problems with time of possession and an inability to generate first downs, do not directly suggest a need to upgrade receivers. I think they indicate a need for better play-calling, better-designed formations, and self-scouting of our own tendencies so that we're not constantly calling plays that the defense expects.

And since we did generate first downs aparently the OC was pretty good. You do realize the Pats were FOURTH in the league in first downs with 330 (121 rushing, 181 passing, and 28 via penalties). Only three teams generated first downs better than the Pats this year. Also, the Pats were fifth in the league in rushing first downs. So by your own metrics of measuring OCs, McDaniels is a very good OC.

Also, the Patriots were sixth in the league in terms of time of possession with 31:35. They were fifth in third downs made and sixth in third down percentage. They were first in both fourth downs made and percentage.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

This is a lapse in reasoning; our problems with time of possession and an inability to generate first downs, do not directly suggest a need to upgrade receivers. I think they indicate a need for better play-calling, better-designed formations, and self-scouting of our own tendencies so that we're not constantly calling plays that the defense expects.

The problems also don't directly suggest a problem with play calling or formations. Everyone attributes it to their own preconceived notions on which is at fault.

 

[maverick4]

And since we did generate first downs aparently the OC was pretty good. You do realize the Pats were FOURTH in the league in first downs with 330 (121 rushing, 181 passing, and 28 via penalties). Only three teams generated first downs better than the Pats this year. Also, the Pats were fifth in the league in rushing first downs. So by your own metrics of measuring OCs, McDaniels is a very good OC.

As I said before, we are arguing inverse things. You list all these great offensive stats, but then say we need to upgrade receivers. How does that make any sense?

I say our talent is fine, but that we need to fine-tune our offensive play-calling and execution. And Belichickfan, you're right, my conclusion about what is wrong is also just my guess, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Rob0729]

Time of Possession
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/b...ence=NFL&year=season_2006&sort=534&timeframe=

First Downs per game
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/b...ence=NFL&year=season_2006&sort=533&timeframe=

 

[maverick4]

Time of Possession
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/b...ence=NFL&year=season_2006&sort=534&timeframe=

First Downs per game
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/b...ence=NFL&year=season_2006&sort=533&timeframe=

You're arguing against your own point! If you list all these great offensive stats, then how does it make sense that you still think we need to make a major upgrade in receivers?

 

[Rob0729]

As I said before, we are arguing inverse things. You list all these great offensive stats, but then say we need to upgrade receivers. How does that make any sense?

I say our talent is fine, but that we need to fine-tune our offensive play-calling and execution.

All I am saying is that we can use an upgrade at WR not a major upgrade. You said McDaniels is a huge liability. I am talking a minor upgrade. You are talking sweeping changes.

I didn't offense was bad. I thought it was pretty good. I just think a WR more suited to be the #1 guy would make the offense much better. I am the one who has argued that this year's offense was more productive than either the 2001 or 2003 Super Bowl teams offense.

So we aren't arguing the inverse things. I just don't buy that you can cherry pick stats and say that the good stats are because of the receivers and the bad ones (or the ones you perceive as bad eventhough they are actually rather good) are attributed to McDaniels. You said the Pats number of first downs and time of possession go directly to McDaniels. The Pats are in the top six in the league in both categories.

 

[Rob0729]

You're arguing against your own point! If you list all these great offensive stats, then how does it make sense that you still think we need to make a major upgrade in receivers?

Never said we need a major upgrade at WR. I am promoting the Pats going after Kevin Curtis. Although I think he could be potentially better than Branch in our offense, I don't think adding Curtis would be considered a major upgrade at WR.

Again, I thought our offense overall wasn't bad. It was above average. Give Brady another weapon or two and it could be sensational.

 

[maverick4]

So we aren't arguing the inverse things. I just don't buy that you can cherry pick stats and say that the good stats are because of the receivers and the bad ones (or the ones you perceive as bad eventhough they are actually rather good) are attributed to McDaniels.

It's an interesting topic - how do you determine how much of a team's success comes from its talent, or from its coaching? I think you can look for clues in the stats.

A very talented team with mediocre coaching will put up huge numbers, but will also be sloppy at times, and will be stopped in key moments. An average team with great coaching may not have the best stats, but will execute in key moments, and do what is needed to win. I suspect great coaching will have more a higher ranking for red zone stats than for total yards, for example.

Going by the past two years, I would say we have loads of talent on offense, but mediocre coaching. Just my opinion.

 

[dhamz]

guys arguing the yards per average as opposed to '05 is a bit misleading because in '05, we had no running game and had a lot of 3rd and longs. That does and will affect the average.

But 2004 was also 1 yard better than 2006 (7.8 to 6.8). And in 2004, we clearly had a running game.

The gaps are more pronounced if you look at yards per completion which was almost 13 in 2004 and has now fallen to 11 in 2006.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Assuming Troy Brown comes back, and CJ doesn't get hurt, there is 1 or 2 spots (if we go with 6 WR).
Kevin Curtis would be nice, but we might have a chance at Jason Hill in the 2nd round or Aundrae Allison.

That's a rather big assumption to say Troy Brown will be back for sure. I do agree that the Pats will at least look for a new receiver in the 2nd round. I'll say it now and I've said it before the Pats have not YET replaced Branch with a comparable talent at WR.

Here are the Pats top receivers in 2006:

Reche Caldwell
2006 Patriots 15/14 61 760 12.5 62t 4
Troy Brown
2006 Patriots 16/9 43 384 8.9 23 4
Chad Jackson
2006 Patriots 12/1 13 152 11.7 35t 3
Jabar Gaffney
2006 Patriots 11/6 11 142 12.9 33 1

Look at that objectively please
760, 384, 152, and 142 yards respectively from the Pats top 4 wideouts.
And that is BEFORE we have confirmation that Troy Brown of the 384 receiving yards is returning.
No matter how rosily you look at those numbers the Pats don't look in the greatest shape at WR.

It is possible that CJ will blossom and outproduce this year's numbers but there is no guarantee. It is I think likely that Gaffney will produce more than 142 yards next season but again no guarantee.

Cutting to the chase when the Pats needed 1st downs in the AFCCG in the 2nd half the Pats offense could not get them. If we simply kill 3 minutes of clock we win the game. If we had converted a few third downs previously we would have won the game. But we didn't.

The Patriots running game was fairly uneffective come crunch time and I think it was because defenses could afford to disrespect the Pats receivers and stack against the run. The Pats talent at HB looks good with Dillon and a blossoming Maroney. But that talent will be wasted if it has to face 8 and 9 man fronts all next season.

Thus I conclude that it would be HELPFUL for the Patriots to upgrade their wide receivers. You can blame the offense's failures on the OC all you want, but I think it is also a fact that coaching can only bring so much overachievement out of a limited talent base.

 

[maverick4]

Cutting to the chase when the Pats needed 1st downs in the AFCCG in the 2nd half the Pats offense could not get them. If we simply kill 3 minutes of clock we win the game. If we had converted a few third downs previously we would have won the game. But we didn't.

And how does this translate into evidence that we need better receivers (as opposed to poor play-calling, for instance)?

 

[maverick4]

I think it is also a fact that coaching can only bring so much overachievement out of a limited talent base.

Our offensive talent is clear based on our high 2006 rankings in yards gained, points per game, first downs made, etc. So I disagree, I think our offense has more talent now than we had in 2003, for example.

 

[Rob0729]

It's an interesting topic - how do you determine how much of a team's success comes from its talent, or from its coaching? I think you can look for clues in the stats.

A very talented team with mediocre coaching will put up huge numbers, but will also be sloppy, and be stopped in key moments. An average team with great coaching may not have the best stats, but will execute in key moments, and do what is needed to win. I suspect great coaching will also have more a higher ranking for red zone stats than for total yards, for example.

Going by the past two years, I would say we have loads of talent on offense, but mediocre coaching. Just my opinion.

I would argue the opposite. I think we have a lot of average talent with a few exceptions that is getting coached up. I don't think Caldwell would be any team's #1 WR like he was for us. Troy Brown wasn't good enough to our our #3 WR two year ago and he was our #2 for most of this year. Dillon was good in spurts, but he consistently had to take himself out of the game. Our o-line was up and down for most of the season.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Our offensive talent is clear based on our high 2006 rankings in yards gained, points per game, first downs made, etc. So I disagree, I think our offense has more talent now than we had in 2003, for example.

Your argument is basically that the Patriots need NO new wide receivers and NO talent upgrade at that position correct? The Pats got a lot of production out of their tight ends this year which bolsters the overall receiving numbers. But please don't mistake tight end production for wide out production. Those are two entirely different animals. If you look at the stats for wideout production which I have kindly listed above even you should be able to admit that is subpar wide receiver production by NFL standards.

I just don't buy what you're selling. Sorry. Like I said we have great coaching but coaching will only get so much out of limited talent.

Simply put the Pats could not grind out first yards on the ground because the Colts and BOB SANDERS, remember him, were stacking against the run all game long. This is because they did not respect the Pats receivers. And the Pats receivers did not make them pay for stacking by catching first downs. I think it's pretty simple.

Your argument relies on the premise that it is all OC Ryan Mcdaniel's fault and that talent has no impact on football game. It's all coaching. On that I would beg to differ.

To make an additional point, the Pats offense performed acceptably during the regular season but in the playoffs, against the best teams the NFL has to offer, the offense showed itself to be inadequate. And if your goal is winning Superbowls you need to step it up to the next level. I don't see the Pats squad making it to the next level with the status quo talent level of 2006.

I would argue the opposite. I think we have a lot of average talent with a few exceptions that is getting coached up. I don't think Caldwell would be any team's #1 WR like he was for us. Troy Brown wasn't good enough to our our #3 WR two year ago and he was our #2 for most of this year. Dillon was good in spurts, but he consistently had to take himself out of the game. Our o-line was up and down for most of the season.

You make an excellent point and I agree. The Patriots need to upgrade their talent level on offense. Wide receiver is clearly one position where we could see an immediate impact imo. It is also possible that we could see an indirect impact/improvement by drafting a great offensive lineman. I think BB and the braintrust need to take a long hard look at the Patriots weaknesses in the offseason. The WR situation is just one of the more obvious ones.

PS Please don't misintrepret support of adding new wide receivers as opposition to adding new linebackers. The defense can also use an upgrade, particularly in the middle of the field. And if we *gulp* don't resign Samuel then cornerback also becomes a priority.

 

[GoWhalers]

Your argument is basically that the Patriots need NO new wide receivers and NO talent upgrade at that position correct? The Pats got a lot of production out of their tight ends this year which bolsters the overall receiving numbers. But please don't mistake tight end production for wide out production. Those are two entirely different animals. If you look at the stats for wideout production which I have kindly listed above even you should be able to admit that is subpar wide receiver production by NFL standards.

I just don't buy what you're selling. Sorry. Like I said we have great coaching but coaching will only get so much out of limited talent.

Simply put the Pats could not grind out first yards on the ground because the Colts and BOB SANDERS, remember him, were stacking against the run all game long. This is because they did not respect the Pats receivers. And the Pats receivers did not make them pay for stacking by catching first downs. I think it's pretty simple.

Your argument relies on the premise that it is all OC Ryan Mcdaniel's fault and that talent has no impact on football game. It's all coaching. On that I would beg to differ.

To make an additional point, the Pats offense performed acceptably during the regular season but in the playoffs, against the best teams the NFL has to offer, the offense showed itself to be inadequate. And if your goal is winning Superbowls you need to step it up to the next level. I don't see the Pats squad making it to the next level with the status quo talent level of 2006.



You make an excellent point and I agree. The Patriots need to upgrade their talent level on offense. Wide receiver is clearly one position where we could see an immediate impact imo. It is also possible that we could see an indirect impact/improvement by drafting a great offensive lineman. I think BB and the braintrust need to take a long hard look at the Patriots weaknesses in the offseason. The WR situation is just one of the more obvious ones.

PS Please don't misintrepret support of adding new wide receivers as opposition to adding new linebackers. The defense can also use an upgrade, particularly in the middle of the field. And if we *gulp* don't resign Samuel then cornerback also becomes a priority.

I can't agree with this post enough, on every point. The offense definately struggled to execute against the best the leage has to offer.

I'm hoping for a Day 1 WR and run-blocking OL. If there's an amazing defensive talent that fills a void who slips in the first round, I'm sure the Pats will take them, but otherwised I'm convinced Belichick could coach a bunch of 4th graders into an top NFL defense!

 

[salty]

Simply put the Pats could not grind out first yards on the ground because the Colts and BOB SANDERS, remember him, were stacking against the run all game long. This is because they did not respect the Pats receivers. And the Pats receivers did not make them pay for stacking by catching first downs. I think it's pretty simple.

To make an additional point, the Pats offense performed acceptably during the regular season but in the playoffs, against the best teams the NFL has to offer, the offense showed itself to be inadequate. And if your goal is winning Superbowls you need to step it up to the next level. I don't see the Pats squad making it to the next level with the status quo talent level of 2006.

I agree completely. The Patriots could not make the Colts pay for selling out against the run, and thats because they do not have a good receiving corps. Turning to what they have now:

-Gaffney came up with some great catches down the stretch and I believe he is a keeper.

-Reche Caldwell dropped TWO touchdowns in that Indy game and is generally not to be relied upon, in my opinion. Its just blatantly clear that the guy is scared to death of getting hit. I'd really like to see him gone next year, but I know that is probably an overreaction. Still, I think he should be the third or perhaps even fourth receiver, not a starter. Even then, I don't know how effective he would be as a slot receiver since I can hardly see him going over the middle with any regularity.

-Troy Brown, much as I love the guy, will be another year older. He needs to come back next year in some capacity (as a coach, if not a player), but I would hardly rely on him anymore to play a big role in the offense.

-I still think Chad Jackson will develop in to a very good wide receiver. I think he'll contribute much more next year, but I'd still give him another year until he is ready to really shine.

This leaves the Pats with a #2 (Gaffney), a #3, and a #4 (Jackson/Caldwell, or vice versa).

So that leaves me thinking the Pats should really bring in a vetern wide receiver to start with Gaffney, and not someone off the trash heap either. I say veteran because another high draft pick won't contribute immediately, and really I don't like using high draft picks on WRs anyways since they often don't pan out well. Problem is, there really aren't very man free agent WRs available this year. Donte Stallworth will be too expensive and is injury prone anyway. For me, Drew Bennett would be the best option, if his price is close enough to reasonable.

 

[maverick4]

I agree completely. The Patriots could not make the Colts pay for selling out against the run, and thats because they do not have a good receiving corps.

After working out some kinks, our receiving corps going into the playoffs was comparable to any we have had in the past 5 years, with the exception of 2004 maybe. Remember, going into the Colts game, our receivers were leading all teams in receiving in the playoffs. The difference is that teams now aren't afraid of stacking the box against us, because we don't make the proper play calls and in-game adjustments to make them pay.

I absolutely contest the idea that teams stack the box against us simply because we don't have a bona-fide star receiver or deep threat. Under that reasoning, most teams in the league would face a stacked box consistently. By the way VCJ, your arguments and knowledge would look better if you called our OC Josh McDaniels, not Ryan like you wrote.

 

[cstjohn17]

This year the offense as a whole was inconsistent. Brief history capsule:
- 2004 we had excellent balance (run versus pass)
- 2005 our running game slowed and the passing game had to pick up the slack. The continuity and skill of the 2005 WRs allowed Brady to have his best passing year.
- 2006 the offense had a much better running attack but when it sputtered our passing game had difficulty picking up the slack

I don't know if it was QB, WR, RB, TE or OL but it resulted in one of Brady's worst years:
- first year in 3 years QB rating dropped
- lowest passing yards since becoming a fulltime starter
- 2nd lowest TD passes
- 2nd lowest YPA

WR is not our number one need but it is a unit that could use some top end talent as well as additional competition for the 5th and 6th spots. Compared against other NFL receiving units a tandem of Caldwell, Gaffney, Jackson, Brown, Kight would have to rank in the bottom 3rd as far as talent. A great QB and a good running game help, but if either of these trail off the unit could be exposed.