Steelers Vs Browns

[SteelerEmpire]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' timestamp='1294112286' post='592764']




That was a sweet play.

Fitzgerald's Super Bowl performance alone is reason for me to take him but at this point, it's best just to agree to disagree.
[/quote]

I say Taylor runs down Fitz on that long TD run and catches him if he didn't slip down. The Steelers have been trying to get Taylor and Wallace to race for over a year now.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='STEELERS PROPHET268' timestamp='1294112673' post='592770']
in a way theres almost no wrong answer.....all these guys are amazing

if i was starting a team i would be thrilled to get any of these guys
[/quote]

Agreed.

The WR position is loaded with young talent right now.

We'll see even more special talents drafted next April too.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='SteelerEmpire' timestamp='1294112973' post='592775']
I say Taylor runs down Fitz on that long TD run and catches him if he didn't slip down. The Steelers have been trying to get Taylor and Wallace to race for over a year now.
[/quote]

Does Ike have 4.3 speed?

[Token]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' timestamp='1294113189' post='592779']
Does Ike have 4.3 speed?
[/quote]

Apparently he has 4.2 speed.
Or at least, used to have 4.2 speed

Apparently he ran a 4.18 at Louisiana-Lafayette's Pro Day but it was handheld so he may have been a little faster/slower than that but I doubt by much. So yea, he's pretty fast.

Tim Shaw was his sprint coach who also coached deion and he said this
[quote]Shaw gives Taylor the nod over Sanders in the speed department.

"Ike is the fastest kid I've ever trained,'' Shaw said.

Shaw said that would include Tennessee running back Chris Johnson, who ran the fastest time ever at the combine (4.24), and Sanders, who ran a 4.27 for No. 2 on the combine list.[/quote]

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='Token' timestamp='1294119148' post='592830']
Apparently he has 4.2 speed.
Or at least, used to have 4.2 speed
[/quote]

Yeah, I just checked an old SI article and he ran a pretty fast 40 time.

Wallace would probably smoke him now though.

[XxSizzleXx]

Just to be clear because I said I would have him top 15 doesn't mean I would have him 15th, it could be 11th or something. Top 10 WR's can run all the routes though.

[ravensdfan]

[quote name='thewarden86' timestamp='1294089215' post='592202']
Gift? No, Browns got whooped solidly. Don't think for a second they wouldn't have loved to hurt our playoff position and go out themselves on a winning note.
[/quote]

Oh c'mon now. No one is saying you guys didn't come to play but anyone could see the Browns didn't.

Fact remains though, Ravens have no one but Cam and a missed assignment to blame.

[SteelerEmpire]

Awww. Here we go. Quote: "The advanced statistical metrics at Football Outsiders rank Wallace as the No. 1 receiver in the NFL in 2010 both in terms of total value and value per play."

[url="http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/12/30/mike-wallace-nfls-best-big-play-wr/"]LINK TO ARTICLE[/url]

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='SteelerEmpire' timestamp='1294245841' post='593823']
Awww. Here we go. Quote: "The advanced statistical metrics at Football Outsiders rank Wallace as the No. 1 receiver in the NFL in 2010 both in terms of total value and value per play."

[url="http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/12/30/mike-wallace-nfls-best-big-play-wr/"]LINK TO ARTICLE[/url]
[/quote]

This quote sums it up for me.

[quote]
The FO metrics aren't perfect, nor are they the end-all, be-all, but they're no more flawed than simply looking at total receptions or total yards without any context.
[/quote]

[JohnJohnson]

[quote name='SteelerEmpire' timestamp='1294245841' post='593823']
Awww. Here we go. Quote: "The advanced statistical metrics at Football Outsiders rank Wallace as the No. 1 receiver in the NFL in 2010 both in terms of total value and value per play."

[url="http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/12/30/mike-wallace-nfls-best-big-play-wr/"]LINK TO ARTICLE[/url]
[/quote]

That's nice and all, but there's no way I take Wallace over Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, Fitzgerald, and others that are lower. I expect Mike Wallace to improve a lot, even Tomlin says that he needs to, as referenced in that very article. He has a very high YPC, but that's not all that matters. Like I said, he has yet to give us the kind of trouble that a route runner like Holmes did. As he and Ben develop chemistry, that will probably come.

[XxSizzleXx]

What's the average receivers catch rate, because his is only 61%.

[thewarden86]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' timestamp='1294247859' post='593856']
This quote sums it up for me.


[/quote]

As it should! Maybe you should re-read it.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='thewarden86' timestamp='1294261781' post='594051']
As it should! Maybe you should re-read it.
[/quote]

Why should I? It really doesn't validate either of our arguments. Metrics nor total catches and yards take into account skills like hands, route running or the ability to get yards after the catch.

A lot of what I've read about Wallace is that he's starting to become a more complete WR. As impressive as he is now and even with Football Outsider's metrics, I'm not going to say Wallace is better than players like Johnson, Megatron, Fitzgerald, White, or Nicks, who are all more complete WRs.

[thewarden86]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' timestamp='1294263893' post='594084']
Why should I? It really doesn't validate either of our arguments. Metrics nor total catches and yards take into account skills like hands, route running or the ability to get yards after the catch.

A lot of what I've read about Wallace is that he's starting to become a more complete WR. As impressive as he is now and even with Football Outsider's metrics, I'm not going to say Wallace is better than players like Johnson, Megatron, Fitzgerald, White, or Nicks, who are all more complete WRs.
[/quote]

You've cited "body of work" if I'm not mistaken. Nicks' only impact has been this year. Wallace was being discussed as an impact league wide last year as a rookie.

I wouldn't necessarily put him ahead of Johnson and Fitz either. Not sure if he'll ever be the possession receiver those two are, but White's shiftyness is well within Wallace's capabilities and I'm not convinced Nicks is better.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='thewarden86' timestamp='1294265697' post='594123']
You've cited "body of work" if I'm not mistaken. Nicks' only impact has been this year. Wallace was being discussed as an impact league wide last year as a rookie.

I wouldn't necessarily put him ahead of Johnson and Fitz either. Not sure if he'll ever be the possession receiver those two are, but White's shiftyness is well within Wallace's capabilities and I'm not convinced Nicks is better.
[/quote]

That's incorrect; Nicks made an impact last season as well, catching more balls for more yards than Wallace and the same amount of TDs.

Wallace is certainly as quick as White but Roddy is the more all-around and better player in my opinion.

I can understand you not feeling Nicks is better but their careers have been very comparable so far.

[thewarden86]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' timestamp='1294268325' post='594179']
That's incorrect; Nicks made an impact last season as well, catching more balls for more yards than Wallace and the same amount of TDs.

Wallace is certainly as quick as White but Roddy is the more all-around and better player in my opinion.

I can understand you not feeling Nicks is better but their careers have been very comparable so far.
[/quote]

Nicks had less than 10 more receptions and both had 6 tds. He was also the #2 (I'm in the Giants market) where Wallace was the slot. This year he had 19 more receptions and 195 FEWER yards than Wallace and one more TD.

Avg per catch in 2010?

Nicks: 13.3
Wallace: 21.0 It's amazing to think what Wallace's numbers would be had he gotten even 10 more catches.