re: Victor Cruz WR rankings

quote:

---

MT's average depth of target is 7.7 yards. ME's average depth of target is 15.7 yards. More than double MT's. At that depth of target and with Brees throwing to him, he should have a better catch rate.

---

Wait..... He has the best catch rate of any WR in the league, and yet you say he needs to be better?
Only ones better are RB who don’t have cornerbacks covering them.
I don’t care what is average yards per route is, MT isn’t doing it with LB and DE trying to cover him like RB do.

You and gyno both bring up depth of target as if that is a knock on MT and he’s not as good as WR as Evans.... he lines up in the slot a ton and runs underneath routes a lot more. He’s used in a more dynamic way then Evans. That’s somehow a knock on him? Juju is 1 yard different then MT on depth of target, so that’s a knock on him also?

You can go round and round with those stats.

Let’s look at separation, which is a pretty good indicator of route running.

Evans has an average cushion of 4.05 yards but a separation of only 1.28 (#79)
MT has an cushion of only 3.48 but a seperation of
1.47 (#47)
Next Gen Stats have the separation last season as Evans 2.1 and MT as 2.7, so more for both but MT is still better.
Im going to guess that the lower cushion is likely due to MT lining up in the slot a lot more, but yet he’s better at getting separation.


We won’t agree and that’s fine, you’ll keep putting laughing faces for some reason and gyno will never back down from any stance he is on ever, but really
So far MT is a better route runner, better at contested catches, better hands, and more receptions.
Evans has more yards (which as explained earlier the Bucs suck and are down a lot in games so have to air the ball out) and 1 more TD last year.
How is Evans a better WR?

Am I mistaken, or isn’t Evans a straight up
Tpos?

Are you slow? I said that with the 7.7 depth of target and Brees throwing him the ball, he should have a better true catch percentage. Feels like I’m explaining this to a 4 year old.

ETA: Put a different way, considering the way he’s used and the QB throwing him the ball, it’s expected that MT have a better catch percentage. You follow that? Or should I phrase it another way?

I offered a hypothetical on few posts ago. Give it a shot. ETA2: I’ll repost it for you since you seem to have overlooked it.

quote:

---

Let’s do a little hypothetical. Put Michael Thomas on the Bucs with Jameis and Fitzpatrick and bump his average depth of target up to 15.7 yards (same as 2018 Mike Evans). How far do you think that vaunted 89% true catch percentage falls? Or maybe it goes up?

---

quote:

---

If you don't think Evans is considered a top 5 WR, you're too much of a homer. Honestly, Hopkins at 3 is high

---

Calling people homers that dont put Evans in the top 5, but yet you're saying Hopkins is too high.

Mike Evans can’t catch or run routes. He’s not top 5. He’s a freak and can dominate at times, but just winning jump balls over guys 7” shorter than you isn’t enough.

I would take AB and Hopkins before Julio too, but those 3 are absolutely elite. OBJ’s potential is so great, he has to be on the list. If he stays healthy, he will continue to be there.

Funny, I don’t see Sammy Watkins, but people gave me a lot of shite on tigerdroppings before the draft when I said OBJ was best prepared and most talented wr going into that draft.

The data is there for his high percentage of dropped passes. He had a week in 2015 where he dropped more passes in one game than anyone had dropped in the previous several seasons....16 weeks of football. He runs vertical routes and deep posts basically all game. No route tree, very little double moves.

He’s fast and big. He makes it work, but he’s not consistent enough to be top 5. A lot of his yardage and production comes in garbage time anyway.

quote:

---

Funny, I don't see Sammy Watkins

---

Do you think he should be on a list?? He has underachieved since becoming a pro, and has been traded around the league only producing 1 1000 yd season in his career so for.