Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

The problem here seems to me that if Randle-El had signed for a $1M signing bonus and $1M a year salary, everyone would be falling all over themselves saying what a great value he was. And that would be absolutely true if he had signed for such a paltry number.

The fact is that he's a $10M bonus purchase plus annual salary increments. That's what he is; so you kind of have to evaluate him and the value he brings to the team against what he cost. It's kind of like the Mark Brunell situation; if Brunell was making the veretan minimum with no signing bonus money to amortize, he'd be a lot better value as "quarterbacking depth" than he is now.

Randle-El is much better than Archuletta who also got $10M to sign a contract here. But being better than Archuletta last year is hardly a form of high praise.

So in order to try not to be offensive, might I suggest that Randle-El's performance on the field - taking into account all of his field position contributions and receptions and gadget plays - did not merit a $10M signing bonus.

And by the way, all of his accomplishments yielded a 5-11 record... Had he not signed here and had the Skins kept that $10M in the bank, would the record have been all that much worse? I don't think so...

Why do we complain about "lack of continuity" then complain about a player's performance after just one season.

GTripp, here's a project for you. Find out how Wide Receivers did in their first year playing for a new team following a trade or free agent move the past few years. See if there's a significant drop-off, on average, when a receiver has a new system to play in

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Why do we complain about "lack of continuity" then complain about a player's performance after just one season.

GTripp, here's a project for you. Find out how Wide Receivers did in their first year playing for a new team following a trade or free agent move the past few years. See if there's a significant drop-off, on average, when a receiver has a new system to play in

GTripp, here's a project for you. Find out how ANY PLAYER did in their first year playing for a new team following a trade or free agent move the past few years. See if there's a significant drop-off, on average, when ANY PLAYER has a new system to play in

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

GTripp, here's a project for you. Find out how ANY PLAYER did in their first year playing for a new team following a trade or free agent move the past few years. See if there's a significant drop-off, on average, when ANY PLAYER has a new system to play in

Drew Brees?

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Drew Brees?

Daunte Culpepper?

[Beemnseven]

And again, the point is not to bust on ARE because maybe he did the best he could for the action he saw.

It's more of a critique of the front office for paying that type of money for a guy with such a limited role, on a team that's supposedly committed to the run, when they already tossed a 3rd and 4th round draft picks for Brandon Lloyd. Plus you had Thrash (who everyone SAYS is immeasurably valuable to his team both as a player and a "leader") and David Patten doing practically nothing.

It's not so much the players that they choose, it's the hideous misallocation of available resources that make these decisions so potentially damaging to the team in the long run.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

GTripp, here's a project for you. Find out how Wide Receivers did in their first year playing for a new team following a trade or free agent move the past few years. See if there's a significant drop-off, on average, when a receiver has a new system to play in

Will do.

I used Football Outsiders DVOA metrics to try to keep it simple.

One stat that attempts to be all inclusive. It's not perfect because wide receivers don't handle the ball as much as RBs or QBs do, nor can this stat show how efficient a guy is at blocking. Just receiving and getting upfield after the catch.

One thing I have to point out; this is a per play statistic. Therefore a ranking of 18 doesn't necessarily mean the 18th best receiver in the league. It means on the plays he had, he did better than all but 17 guys in the league (In 2006, Devery Henderson finished no. 1 in WR DVOA. No one in their right mind thinks that Devery Henderson is the leagues top WR right now, but he was the best per play [as a 3rd WR] in 2006. So by this metric, 3rd receivers are going to be overvalued.). Don't pay attention to the ranking number itself, pay attention to the ranking relative to the other players in the study. That's where the accuracy is. Any ranking in the top 20 is top of the league caliber. League average is about rank # 40, but varies by year.

2006
Terell Owens PHI->DAL 2006 rank: 28, 2005 rank: 32
Antwaan Randle El PIT->WAS 2006 rank: 76, 2005 rank: 77
Brandon Lloyd SF->WAS 2006 rank: 80, 2005 rank: 82
Mike Furrey StL->DET 2006 rank: 27, 2005 rank: N/A
Javon Walker GB->DEN 2006 rank: 30, 2004* rank: 22
Reche Caldwell SD->NE 2006 rank: 32, 2005 rank: N/A
Donte Stallworth NO->PHI 2006 rank: 35, 2005 rank: 44
Joe Jurevicius SEA->CLE 2006 rank: 29, 2005 rank: 10
Eric Moulds BUF->HOU 2006 rank: 37, 2005 rank: 64
Deion Branch NE->SEA 2006 rank: 53, 2005 rank: 13
Keyshawn Johnson DAL->CAR 2006 rank: 60, 2005 rank: 52
Antonio Bryant CLE->SF 2006 rank: 57, 2005 rank: 31

2005
Santana Moss NYJ->WAS 2005 rank: 5, 2004 rank: 8
Derrick Mason TEN->BAL 2005 rank: 25, 2004 rank: 43
Joe Jurevicius TB->SEA 2005 rank: 10, 2003* rank:
Randy Moss MIN->OAK 2005 rank: 36, 2004 rank: 15
Travis Taylor BAL->MIN 2005 rank: 42, 2004 rank: 80
Laverneus Coles WAS->NYJ 2005 rank: 56, 2004 rank: 71
Plaxico Burress PIT->NYG 2005 rank: 66, 2004 rank: 4
Ike Hilliard NYG->TB 2005 rank: 58, 2004 rank: 81
Mushin Muhammad CAR->CHI 2005 rank: 78, 2004 rank: 16
Az Hakim DET->NO 2005 rank: 18, 2004 rank: 19
Koren Robinson SEA->MIN 2005 rank: 55, 2004 rank: 48
David Patten NE->WAS 2005 rank: 89, 2004 rank: 30

2004
Justin McCareins TEN->NYJ 2004 rank: 23, 2003 rank: 4
Terrell Owens SF->PHI 2004 rank: 17, 2003 rank: 43
Marcus Robinson BAL->MIN 2004 rank: 36, 2003 rank: 19

These results show that a receiver rarely suffers a significant drop in production in his first year in a system. Generally a good receiver is a good receiver, and a bad receiver is a bad receiver.

Notice what happened to David Patten (or Mushin Muhammad) in 2005 though...ouch.

Also, Santana Moss is some sort of ridiculous outlier. Admittedly, he was already a top of the class receiver in New York who flew under the radar (and these numbers show that trading Coles for him was great any way you slice it), but to finish among the top 5 in per play value in his first season here is freakin unbelievable.

*-prior year lacked adequate sample size

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Randle-El is much better than Archuletta who also got $10M to sign a contract here. But being better than Archuletta last year is hardly a form of high praise.

So in order to try not to be offensive, might I suggest that Randle-El's performance on the field - taking into account all of his field position contributions and receptions and gadget plays - did not merit a $10M signing bonus.

I don't disagree with anything in this post, in fact I agree 100%. My only point was that it's early to call ARE a bust and he had a decent year in 2006. In fact, ARE was one of the few bright spots from 06; he made plays whenever he touched the ball (even if he didn't touch the ball enough).

[RobH4413]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I don't disagree with anything in this post, in fact I agree 100%. My only point was that it's early to call ARE a bust and he had a decent year in 2006. In fact, ARE was one of the few bright spots from 06; he made plays whenever he touched the ball (even if he didn't touch the ball enough).

Many of his catches were clutch... getting a crucial first down to save a drive here and there.

Yeah he hasn't produced numbers, but like Sheriff implied: in a predominantly run oriented offense that didn't start producing untill the second half of the season, he did fine.

Quite frankly I don't care who our receivers were this past year... the ball wasn't getting to them. Evaluating someone's worth is pre-mature considering there is a lot of time left on his contract.

Was his contract excessive for his value to the team this year? Without a doubt.

Has he proven to be a valuable asset? Yes.

I think his potential right now is through the roof... and so far he's taken advantage of every oppurtunity he's been given. I'm just hoping that the oppurtunity will present itself next season.

[Hog1]

As has been said, ARE had a good year. I look for him to substantially improve, and play a more integral role in 2007