The Total Inability of 49er Fans to Understand Receiver Performance

Originally posted by nickbradley:
So, here's the narrative we hear on webzone incessantly:
- Crabtree will never be a #1
- Manningham is overrated
- Moss is Washed up
- Williams needs to be cut (for some reason)
- Delanie Walker is Awesome! No reason to draft Coby Fleener

Well, I'm here to tell you that all of those are untrue with the exception of the Moss one - because I have no idea how much he has left in the tank. I will rely on Footballoutsiders.com to assess the performance of our receivers. http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr

Crabtree - Crabtree improved dramatically from 2010 to 2011, after an even bigger improvement from 2009 to 2010. Extrapolating the trend, he should be a top 15 WR in 2012. On par with a Dez Bryant or something like that. method: I did a curve fit for 2009/10/11 stats and extrapolated the trend. Now, we can all throw stones at this extrapolation, but it is clear that Crabtree has the stuff to be a #1 and has improved a ton every year.

Manningham - Is everyone aware that Manningham was the 16th Best WR in 2010? And that he caught 65% of passes thrown his direction that year? And that he only caught 51% of targeted passes in 2011? He was hurt all year, and Cruz got the better routes to run. Manningham may end up being the steal of Free Agency.

Williams - On a per-play basis, Williams performed as well as Myles Austin and Torrey Smith. That's borderline #1 performance, for a little guy out of the slot that's 23 years old!

Moss - total wild card in 2012

Walker - Everyone thinks Walker is dominant, but it is a *Myth*. DVOA of -7% in 2011, 0.3% in 2010, and a horrid -20% in 2009. Totally replaceable, and not on par with other teams that run 2 TEs. You replace him with Coby Fleener (bump walker to 3rd TE), and productivity shoots up!

** With the exception of Moss, Manningham is the "old man" of the receiver corps at the ripe old age of 25!

Thoughts?

I agree with you about Moss. I was, and still am, critical of that signing. Manningham is a solid #2 at best - a good replacement for Morgan. Crabs, on the other hand, is no number 1. Hasn't played like it, not dedicated like one, and not consistent like one. He might have the "stuff" to be one, but he hasn't played like one. I have no problem with drafting Fleener, just not with our 1st pick. I have to reiterate this: Teams pick for starters in the 1st round for no later than year two. If the draftee don't pan out, fine. But that's what teams draft first rounders for. No team - and I mean no team - is that talented to be picking for "BPA", i.e for luxury in the 1st. Fleener, if picked in the 1st, has ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE ON EARTH TO START FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS so long as one Vernon Davis is on the roster and healthy. So, I don't see Baalke & Co. drafting a projected back-up in the 1st round. I cannot see how that would be good roster management. Say whatever you will about Delanie Walker (and I've never used "dominant" in describing Walker), he plays his role quite well for us. And if we are going to replace him we certainly aren't going to do it with a 1st rounder. There are certainly TE's we could get in the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th who arguably are better options than Walker and could replace him, if that's what we want to do. Just the idea of using our 1st rounder on a guy with no chance to start make no sense. Even worse using that 1st rounder to replace Walker - himself a backup - is akin to using an AK-47 to hunt and kill rats and roaches. Just unnecessary.

Originally posted by nickbradley:

Originally posted by niners9:
i pretty much agree with your posts. i still am unsure of crabs, it could be because of our type of offense, but to me he drops to many balls and sometimes disappears. but i do think he has the tools to become a true #1, hopefully moss can bring that out of him. also, i am a big moss fan. he has always been my favorite non-49er and i think he'll be a big help. i was also a fan of manningham and wanted us to go after him before FA started, im glad he's here and think he is an upgrade from morgan(i was a morgan fan as well). and williams was a good players last year and i see no need to cut him.

as far as fleener is concerned. i wouldnt mind drafting him, just not in the 1st. TE is not a need and to draft a #2 TE in the 1st i think makes no sense. he is by far an upgrade to walker, but i think the pick could be used better. getting a TE a little later makes more sense to me.

Again, stats are your friend. Crabtree caught 64% of passes that targeted him, including lousy ones that are uncatchable. That's a pretty high rate. It was 55% and 56% in 2009 and 2010.

Drafting two awesome tight ends worked out very well for the Patriots...

i understand that is a high rate, but he still dropped too many pass, espically on some key situations. as far as drafting two TEs, the pats drafted hernandez in the 4th round. im not against drafting a TE to run harbaughs 2 TE formation, but not in first. there are going to be plenty of good recieving TEs in the 3rd or 4th.

Yeah, ppl are VERY confused about the Harbaugh/Roman 49er offense. We ran 2 sometimes 3 TE sets a majority of the time. And that was WITH Walker. VD and Fleener would be in together on almost every single play...together. Fleener would essentially be the 3rd WR with the other two (real WR's) being Manningham and Crabtree. I think many of you are thinking we'll be running a lot of 3 and 4 WR sets (LOL) with Fleener on the bench. Nope. With Fleener, the luxury is Walker and Moss.

Ppl, please...understand OUR offense. We don't run a spread offense unless down 21 points; even then, with Fleener, we wouldn't have to change personnel groupings! We'll run almost all of our offense off the same personnel groupings; we'll just run different formations off them to keep the defense guessing.

Originally posted by HessianDud:
the condescension of MadDog finally melds with the frequency and redundancy of nickbradley.

I thought the post was very good and made sense. . It's better then the normal stuff...... "Alex is the Suxors let him go to miami he can't score lol" <my view of niner talk.

YAC are what we have been lacking. Our third down percentage often took a hit because we would run short routes and not be able to get the extra yards. This is my own speculation (and it's been brought up per Maiocco), but often times last season it seemed we had our best WR (Crabtree) of Vernon running underneath short of the marker. I'm not trying to turn this into a 3rd down percentage post, but as stated YAC. The WCO floureshes off YAC and we often neglected to get it.

Not sure to blame the QB or the WR, but I feel both have a part in it. The WR has to have seperation to get the yards, while the QB has to get the ball out on time. We get the timing down and start getting more YAC, we don't struggle so much in the red zone and on 3rd downs.

Originally posted by jacklegniner:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by nickbradley:

Originally posted by

I'm down with Fleener even more than previously. I think he would help tremendously with what ails this offense and that's reliable targets on 3rd down and in the red-zone. His strengths would also work well with Alex's weaknesses, namely Alex's tendency to lob the ball high at times, for fear of throwing a pass that might be intercepted. With his size and hands, Fleener can go up and get high passes or use his body to create separation. I think he'd be a reliable and constant target all over the field, literally from Day 1.

Scouts think Fleener is a Jimmy Graham Clone. Nah, we don't want that..we;ve got Walker!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/ct-spt-0301-pompei-nfl--20120301,0,2606399.column

Its about need.

Do we really NEED to spend a first round pick on a #2 tight end? Even if he is as good as fleener, we have other needs then TE.

Delanie is a solid backup and VD is a stud.

I think the 2 sides of the argument get confused on the schemes that we run. (WR TE XXXXX TE WR) - this is a 2 TE example and then just imagine a QB and RB behind the center X. If one Wr is Crabs and the Other is Mario, that still means Moss is the 3rd WR not on the field. If we draft a WR like Hill then he will be the 4th WR not on the field, at least in 2 TE sets. When he takes over for Moss the following year, Hill would be the 3rd WR not on the field unless he leap frogs Mannigham. If we go to a 3 WR set than Hill still wouldn't be on the field unless someone needed a breather. People say Fleener or another TE is a Luxury and it really isn't. A 2nd TE would be a starter from day one when we use the multiple TE formations which is alot in our offense. Even when we go to 3 WR sets it will be Crabs, Moss and Manningham so the drafted WR wouldn't be used until they leap frog one of the starter's.

maybe I'm confused at where we are getting hung up here... someone please explain!

The highlighted are bad premises. 1st, with Crabs, Moss, and Manningham on the roster (and as much as I want to see Crabs ass traded for picks) there is no way in hell we are going to use two TE's sets more than 3 WR sets this season. Just won't happen and I really think those days are over for us. 2nd, to say "A 2nd TE would be a starter from day one when we use the multiple TE formations" makes no sense because by definition the 2nd TE isn't a starter at all and, thus, has limited snaps. Lastly, to think that Stephan Hill wouldn't instantly upgrade our WR corp, won't at least compete for the #1 spot, or would not see the field ( )is just lunacy. All of that just to justify a luxury pick - yes, luxury because it's a position we don't need - in the first round?

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by nickbradley:
So, here's the narrative we hear on webzone incessantly:
- Crabtree will never be a #1
- Manningham is overrated
- Moss is Washed up
- Williams needs to be cut (for some reason)
- Delanie Walker is Awesome! No reason to draft Coby Fleener

Well, I'm here to tell you that all of those are untrue with the exception of the Moss one - because I have no idea how much he has left in the tank. I will rely on Footballoutsiders.com to assess the performance of our receivers. http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr

Crabtree - Crabtree improved dramatically from 2010 to 2011, after an even bigger improvement from 2009 to 2010. Extrapolating the trend, he should be a top 15 WR in 2012. On par with a Dez Bryant or something like that. method: I did a curve fit for 2009/10/11 stats and extrapolated the trend. Now, we can all throw stones at this extrapolation, but it is clear that Crabtree has the stuff to be a #1 and has improved a ton every year.

Manningham - Is everyone aware that Manningham was the 16th Best WR in 2010? And that he caught 65% of passes thrown his direction that year? And that he only caught 51% of targeted passes in 2011? He was hurt all year, and Cruz got the better routes to run. Manningham may end up being the steal of Free Agency.

Williams - On a per-play basis, Williams performed as well as Myles Austin and Torrey Smith. That's borderline #1 performance, for a little guy out of the slot that's 23 years old!

Moss - total wild card in 2012

Walker - Everyone thinks Walker is dominant, but it is a *Myth*. DVOA of -7% in 2011, 0.3% in 2010, and a horrid -20% in 2009. Totally replaceable, and not on par with other teams that run 2 TEs. You replace him with Coby Fleener (bump walker to 3rd TE), and productivity shoots up!

** With the exception of Moss, Manningham is the "old man" of the receiver corps at the ripe old age of 25!

Thoughts?

I agree with you about Moss. I was, and still am, critical of that signing. Manningham is a solid #2 at best - a good replacement for Morgan. Crabs, on the other hand, is no number 1. Hasn't played like it, not dedicated like one, and not consistent like one. He might have the "stuff" to be one, but he hasn't played like one. I have no problem with drafting Fleener, just not with our 1st pick. I have to reiterate this: Teams pick for starters in the 1st round for no later than year two. If the draftee don't pan out, fine. But that's what teams draft first rounders for. No team - and I mean no team - is that talented to be picking for "BPA", i.e for luxury in the 1st. Fleener, if picked in the 1st, has ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE ON EARTH TO START FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS so long as one Vernon Davis is on the roster and healthy. So, I don't see Baalke & Co. drafting a projected back-up in the 1st round. I cannot see how that would be good roster management. Say whatever you will about Delanie Walker (and I've never used "dominant" in describing Walker), he plays his role quite well for us. And if we are going to replace him we certainly aren't going to do it with a 1st rounder. There are certainly TE's we could get in the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th who arguably are better options than Walker and could replace him, if that's what we want to do. Just the idea of using our 1st rounder on a guy with no chance to start make no sense. Even worse using that 1st rounder to replace Walker - himself a backup - is akin to using an AK-47 to hunt and kill rats and roaches. Just unnecessary.

....Why is there no chance on Earth. You know that it's possible to start 2 TEs, right? RIGHT!?!

Harbaugh and Roman LOVE TEs and use 2 or 3 of them all the time. They were so hard up for good TEs last year that they started used a Defensive Tackle.

If you don't understand the value of Coby Fleener in this offense, then you don't understand this offense.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Yeah, ppl are VERY confused about the Harbaugh/Roman 49er offense. We ran 2 sometimes 3 TE sets a majority of the time. And that was WITH Walker. VD and Fleener would be in together on almost every single play...together. Fleener would essentially be the 3rd WR with the other two (real WR's) being Manningham and Crabtree. I think many of you are thinking we'll be running a lot of 3 and 4 WR sets (LOL) with Fleener on the bench. Nope. With Fleener, the luxury is Walker and Moss.

Ppl, please...understand OUR offense. We don't run a spread offense unless down 21 points; even then, with Fleener, we wouldn't have to change personnel groupings! We'll run almost all of our offense off the same personnel groupings; we'll just run different formations off them to keep the defense guessing.

Why is this hard to understand?

The starting lineup isn't always 2 RBs, 1 TE, 2 WRs.

The 49ers LOVE multiple TE sets. If Fleener is trafted by the Niners, he'll play. ALOT.

In Harbaughs last game at Stanford, Luck threw 4 TDs. ALL to TEs. Fleener caught 3 of them.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Yeah, ppl are VERY confused about the Harbaugh/Roman 49er offense. We ran 2 sometimes 3 TE sets a majority of the time. And that was WITH Walker. VD and Fleener would be in together on almost every single play...together. Fleener would essentially be the 3rd WR with the other two (real WR's) being Manningham and Crabtree. I think many of you are thinking we'll be running a lot of 3 and 4 WR sets (LOL) with Fleener on the bench. Nope. With Fleener, the luxury is Walker and Moss.

Ppl, please...understand OUR offense. We don't run a spread offense unless down 21 points; even then, with Fleener, we wouldn't have to change personnel groupings! We'll run almost all of our offense off the same personnel groupings; we'll just run different formations off them to keep the defense guessing.

It's tunnel vision. They don't want to stop drafting or signing WR's until they think a true #1 has appeared. Even after Moss, Mario and Crabs they still want to draft Hill or trade the 1st for Wallace. If we did that than Mario would be useless because he would be on the bench. The only way to get all those wr's on the field is to go 3 and 4 wr's sets the majority of the time and we don't do that unless like you said we get down by 21 points(ie:Philly game).

The 2nd TE stays into block which is what Walker does. But then they also go out for passes which is what Walker doesn't do very well. If Walker isn't a threat then guess what, VD gets double teamed. If it was Fleener or another mismatch TE (meaning really Tall or Athletic and super fast), if they double teamed VD, then that would mean Fleener is 1 on 1 with a 6'2 linebacker on him...Wouldn't we kill for that matchup on 3rd and 3.

I'm starting to feel like 49erLiferinChicago he's trolling everyone, he acts like he doesn't comprehend the concept that a team can focus on 2 TE formations and essentially have 2 starters at TE, its not an either-or type situation at all. Fleener can basically become the #3 WR on this team or the #2 TE or whatever makes people feel comfortable, still wouldn't change him playing a majority of the snaps on offense, hence being able to more readily contribute than any single WR that they could draft. Have him in on running plays, passing plays...whatever the situation, he would have a role.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Yeah, ppl are VERY confused about the Harbaugh/Roman 49er offense. We ran 2 sometimes 3 TE sets a majority of the time. And that was WITH Walker. VD and Fleener would be in together on almost every single play...together. Fleener would essentially be the 3rd WR with the other two (real WR's) being Manningham and Crabtree. I think many of you are thinking we'll be running a lot of 3 and 4 WR sets (LOL) with Fleener on the bench. Nope. With Fleener, the luxury is Walker and Moss.

Ppl, please...understand OUR offense. We don't run a spread offense unless down 21 points; even then, with Fleener, we wouldn't have to change personnel groupings! We'll run almost all of our offense off the same personnel groupings; we'll just run different formations off them to keep the defense guessing.

People, please understand that we used that form of offense due to the lack of production at the WR position! And that lack of production was laid bare in front of God and the world during the NFL title game. Do people really think we would have run sooooooo much TE formations had Edwards and Crabs produced like they should have? Our coaching staff was the most creative in the NFL last season, and masterful at using to the max the players they had.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
People, please understand that we used that form of offense due to the lack of production at the WR position! And that lack of production was laid bare in front of God and the world during the NFL title game. Do people really think we would have run sooooooo much TE formations had Edwards and Crabs produced like they should have? Our coaching staff was the most creative in the NFL last season, and masterful at using to the max the players they had.

This is nonsense. Harbaugh used 2 and 3 TE formations at Stanford as well, its one of the key components of his version of the WCO. You're making baseless assumptions here. His history tells us that he favors TE heavy sets and likes to pass and run out of heavy-type sets. If anything Harbaugh under-utilized the 2 TE formations simply because Walker wasn't a major offensive threat so he needed someone else to look to. Put Fleener on this team and your standard offensive set becomes VD, Fleener, Crabtree and Manningham/Moss with Gore in the backfield.


Anything else you'd like to pull out of your posterior?

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Yeah, ppl are VERY confused about the Harbaugh/Roman 49er offense. We ran 2 sometimes 3 TE sets a majority of the time. And that was WITH Walker. VD and Fleener would be in together on almost every single play...together. Fleener would essentially be the 3rd WR with the other two (real WR's) being Manningham and Crabtree. I think many of you are thinking we'll be running a lot of 3 and 4 WR sets (LOL) with Fleener on the bench. Nope. With Fleener, the luxury is Walker and Moss.

Ppl, please...understand OUR offense. We don't run a spread offense unless down 21 points; even then, with Fleener, we wouldn't have to change personnel groupings! We'll run almost all of our offense off the same personnel groupings; we'll just run different formations off them to keep the defense guessing.

People, please understand that we used that form of offense due to the lack of production at the WR position! And that lack of production was laid bare in front of God and the world during the NFL title game. Do people really think we would have run sooooooo much TE formations had Edwards and Crabs produced like they should have? Our coaching staff was the most creative in the NFL last season, and masterful at using to the max the players they had.

Total, utter and complete BS. Seriously.

Have you EVER watched a Stanford game? Harbaugh and Roman freakin' LOVE TEs. 2 and 3 TE sets are a STAPLE of the offense.

Harbaugh may very well have CHOSEN SF because of the presence of Vernon Davis and Delanie Walker.

If you don't know that, they you really aren't paying attention. This was ALWAYS going to be a TE friendly offense.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
People, please understand that we used that form of offense due to the lack of production at the WR position! And that lack of production was laid bare in front of God and the world during the NFL title game. Do people really think we would have run sooooooo much TE formations had Edwards and Crabs produced like they should have? Our coaching staff was the most creative in the NFL last season, and masterful at using to the max the players they had.

This is nonsense. Harbaugh used 2 and 3 TE formations at Stanford as well, its one of the key components of his version of the WCO. You're making baseless assumptions here. His history tells us that he favors TE heavy sets and likes to pass and run out of heavy-type sets.


Anything else you'd like to pull out of your posterior?

Correct.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Fleener, if picked in the 1st, has ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE ON EARTH TO START FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS so long as one Vernon Davis is on the roster and healthy.

Doesn't matter if he "starts" (i.e. listed #1 on the depth chart). 49ers, if I am not mistaken, run a great number of their plays out of 2+ TE sets. Just having both Fleener and Davis on the field at the same time creates matchup nightmares. Running plays out of a 2 TE set with VD and Fleener, along with Moss/Manningham and/or Crabtree on the outside and Gore in the backfield would have defenders' heads exploding! Not to mention it would not be the worst thing in the world to have another big, tall target on the field. Given the red zone performance of this team last year its hardly a luxury.