Signings, Cuts, Trades

[ndub]

We shouldnt be comparing kc offense to ours.. hollywood

chris jones is legit the only guy on their dline though.. i wouldnt want that at all tbh over our guys.. id probably take tyrann, cause i do not like our safties at all..

Yeah I’m extremely confused on why we are trying to make parallels between their offense and our offense lol... other than their offense is the current gold standard of what an offense should look like. We run the ball much more and much better than they do, and we pass less frequent and with less success than they do. They’re honestly kinda opposite in what they do, and do well, from us. I don’t know if it’s just pure denial going on or not, but there’s absolutely no way Hollywood or even Andrews stacks up to Hill/Kelce, much less the other guys and passing creativity.

 

[ChainedBird]

Yeah I’m extremely confused on why we are trying to make parallels between their offense and our offense lol... other than their offense is the current gold standard of what an offense should look like. We run the ball much more and much better than they do, and we pass less frequent and with less success than they do. They’re honestly kinda opposite in what they do, and do well, from us. I don’t know if it’s just pure denial going on or not, but there’s absolutely no way Hollywood or even Andrews stacks up to Hill/Kelce, much less the other guys and passing creativity.

While I agree that our offenses are overall very different, I think the above comments are purely comparing the passing part and tbf a KC-lite passing game sounds like the perfect way to stop people crowding our run game. Just need to get that O-line sorted...

I think the Kelce/Andrews comparison is fair, they both perform at a similar level but Andrews is maybe a bit less consistent imo. Hollywood is definitely a step below Hill, but if he can keep up his playoff form then anything is possible!

 

[rmcjacket23]

We are absolutely drafting a WR early(Rd 1-3)All this talk about being happy with the progress of our current group is a smoke screen. You don’t offer 9 million to Ju Ju if you believe the guys in house can get the job done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well that was also on a short term deal, which means you didn't think JuJu was a long term option either.

Plus, $9M really isn't a lot in the WR market. That's like back end top 30 WR money. It's clearly what you would pay a WR2 on pretty much any team.

 

[rmcjacket23]

Yeah I’m extremely confused on why we are trying to make parallels between their offense and our offense lol... other than their offense is the current gold standard of what an offense should look like. We run the ball much more and much better than they do, and we pass less frequent and with less success than they do. They’re honestly kinda opposite in what they do, and do well, from us. I don’t know if it’s just pure denial going on or not, but there’s absolutely no way Hollywood or even Andrews stacks up to Hill/Kelce, much less the other guys and passing creativity.

What specific attributes do Hill and Kelce bring that Hollywood and Andrews don't? You should be focusing on that, not how they stack up statistically. I think Kelce is a bit more athletic than Andrews is, and I think Hill probably runs a better route tree than Hollywood, but I don't think the gaps are that big. But if Hollywood were playing in KC, and they didn't have Hill, he's a 1200-1300 yard receiver all day long, with double digit TDs annually. I don't think anybody would argue with that.

I think that you think they're better because they catch more passes and get more yards, which has as much to do with the number of pass attempts as it does how good of a football player they are.

 

[Simba]

Yeah I’m extremely confused on why we are trying to make parallels between their offense and our offense lol... other than their offense is the current gold standard of what an offense should look like. We run the ball much more and much better than they do, and we pass less frequent and with less success than they do. They’re honestly kinda opposite in what they do, and do well, from us. I don’t know if it’s just pure denial going on or not, but there’s absolutely no way Hollywood or even Andrews stacks up to Hill/Kelce, much less the other guys and passing creativity.

Because there are clear parallels. I don’t think anyone is saying that we’re trying to be this super dangerous passing attack thats going to throw for 5000 yards a year. But we clearly have been trying to approach the weaponry the same way as far as the makeup and a similar type of skills those guys have.

 

[rmcjacket23]

It dnt matter if we actually had kelce and hill, we still wouldnt come close to what those guys are doing over there lol..

Correct. Hill and Kelce aren't both getting 1,300 yards in an offense that's throwing the ball 400 times. Just on volume alone its pretty close to impossible.

If we want pass catchers like those on this team, then you've got to change the entire offensive philosophy, i.e. Lamar throws the ball 500,550,600 times. And I'm not close to convinced that this offense or team will win more football games if it happens.

I think there are some people on these boards that think we should add a WR because we want to improve depth at the position and push some of our existing players to play better, which is what I'd like to see.

I think there are others (like Sizzle) who want a WR early because they want to be able to say that we've got like a 1,300 yard receiver on the team. I think if you traded up and drafted Jamar Chase next Thursday, it would be a very big ask of him to get even 1,000 yards in his rookie year. I just don't see where the volume to achieve that is coming from. You'd have to drop targets to both Andrews and Hollywood by a pretty gigantic margin to make that work.

If we take a first round receiver, so be it. And I think there's a lot of fans who are going to be sorely disappointed by their rookie year "stat line" and then come back in here next year complaining about how Lamar has no "weapons". That's not logical in my eyes.

 

[rmcjacket23]

Because there are clear parallels. I don’t think anyone is saying that we’re trying to be this super dangerous passing attack thats going to throw for 5000 yards a year. But we clearly have been trying to approach the weaponry the same way as far as the makeup and a similar type of skills those guys have.

He's taking a very, very, very 30,000 foot view of the offenses and pretending like there's no parallels to be drawn. That's not accurate. Just because one team likes to run a lot and the other likes to throw a lot doesn't mean there's nothing comparable about them.

If you look at the passing game and the types of attributes both teams have focused on obtaining from their skill position players, there is a LOT of similarities between the two teams. The major difference, as we've beaten into the ground at this point, is the performance at QB as a passer between the two, and the differences in how coaches scheme their players open and attack defensive weaknesses.

 

[ndub]

While I agree that our offenses are overall very different, I think the above comments are purely comparing the passing part and tbf a KC-lite passing game sounds like the perfect way to stop people crowding our run game. Just need to get that O-line sorted...

I think the Kelce/Andrews comparison is fair, they both perform at a similar level but Andrews is maybe a bit less consistent imo. Hollywood is definitely a step below Hill, but if he can keep up his playoff form then anything is possible!

True on all this! I think Kelce shows up more in big games than Andrews

 

[ndub]

What specific attributes do Hill and Kelce bring that Hollywood and Andrews don't? You should be focusing on that, not how they stack up statistically. I think Kelce is a bit more athletic than Andrews is, and I think Hill probably runs a better route tree than Hollywood, but I don't think the gaps are that big. But if Hollywood were playing in KC, and they didn't have Hill, he's a 1200-1300 yard receiver all day long, with double digit TDs annually. I don't think anybody would argue with that.

I think that you think they're better because they catch more passes and get more yards, which has as much to do with the number of pass attempts as it does how good of a football player they are.

You are vastly overrating Hollywood....you said it yourself, Hill runs better routes and I’d argue better hands as well. Hill takes games over; when is the last time you could say that about Hollywood? It’s like just because they’re both on the shorter side and can fly they get compared. I’d even argue Hill has a different body type strength/legs wise than Hollywood

 

[ndub]

Because there are clear parallels. I don’t think anyone is saying that we’re trying to be this super dangerous passing attack thats going to throw for 5000 yards a year. But we clearly have been trying to approach the weaponry the same way as far as the makeup and a similar type of skills those guys have.

Clear parallels... that’s about like saying Dollar Tree and Target have a lot of parallels just because they’re retail stores...

 

[rmcjacket23]

You are vastly overrating Hollywood....you said it yourself, Hill runs better routes and I’d argue better hands as well. Hill takes games over; when is the last time you could say that about Hollywood? It’s like just because they’re both on the shorter side and can fly they get compared. I’d even argue Hill has a different body type strength/legs wise than Hollywood

How many games is Brown or really any Ravens pass catcher going to be able to take a game over? Not many.

Look at the games where Hill "took over" and tell me how many passes went his way. He had over 90 yards in 5 games. He had at least 11 targets in 4 of those games. The other one was against the Jets, where he had 4/98 and 2 TDs, but its also the Jets, so I'm not sure what to make of that.

In reality, if you give a ton of NFL WRs 10-15 targets a game, there's a pretty damn good chance they're going to "take it over". They're likely to end up with a high number of receptions, yards, and most likely, scores.

In 32 regular season games with the Ravens, Hollywood has had double digit targets TWICE, total. His average target share in 2019 was about 4.5 per game, and in 2020, it was about 6.5. And that's targets, not receptions. Assuming even a 2/3 catch rate, which would be pretty good, you're talking 4-5 receptions per game.

You're going to have a very, very, very difficult time showing me WRs, league-wide, who take over games routinely with 4-5 receptions on a weekly basis. You'd have to be averaging upwards of 20-25 yards per catch to have a gigantic impact.

Go look at the games that Andrews "took over". 8 targets, 9 targets, etc. It's pretty hard for any player in this league to be utterly dominant in football games when they're catching 4 passes. It's not impossible (see week 1, 2019, Hollywood vs the Dolphins), but its also not even remotely sustainable for any WR in the league.

If Hollywood and Andrews had the same volume that Hill and Kelce got in 2020, it would shatter your brain to see what kind of stat line they would put up.

And they likely never will, because I don't see Lamar Jackson increasing his passing volume by like 40-50%, which is what its going to take to have guys producing at the Hill/Kelce level in this offense.

 

[RavensMania]

True on all this! I think Kelce shows up more in big games than Andrews

I'm certainly giving him a pass in 2019 playoff game due to his injury. He probably shouldn't have been playing at all.

 

[rossihunter2]

Because there are clear parallels. I don’t think anyone is saying that we’re trying to be this super dangerous passing attack thats going to throw for 5000 yards a year. But we clearly have been trying to approach the weaponry the same way as far as the makeup and a similar type of skills those guys have.

there are schematic, philosophical and stylistic similarities between the 2 offences

we're not out here trying to copy what buffalo's doing or what green bay or tampa bay are doing etc.

but both teams have been attacking skill position talent with similar types of traits for good reason

 

[ndub]

there are schematic, philosophical and stylistic similarities between the 2 offences

we're not out here trying to copy what buffalo's doing or what green bay or tampa bay are doing etc.

but both teams have been attacking skill position talent with similar types of traits for good reason

Ok, maybe you're right, but it's like comparing generic Great Value to Coke. One is much better than the other, even if we are trying to mimic them.

 

[rossihunter2]

Ok, maybe you're right, but it's like comparing generic Great Value to Coke. One is much better than the other, even if we are trying to mimic them.

it's about attacking inefficiencies with different methods, the use of motion pre and post-snap etc.

we've taken those tools and created the most efficient and productive running attack in NFL history, they've done close to the same as a passing attack - 2 approaches that take advantage of similar defensive conflicts using similar tools but in different phases

 

[ndub]

it's about attacking inefficiencies with different methods, the use of motion pre and post-snap etc.

we've taken those tools and created the most efficient and productive running attack in NFL history, they've done close to the same as a passing attack - 2 approaches that take advantage of similar defensive conflicts using similar tools but in different phases

Agreed

 

[RavensMania]

How many games is Brown or really any Ravens pass catcher going to be able to take a game over? Not many.

Look at the games where Hill "took over" and tell me how many passes went his way. He had over 90 yards in 5 games. He had at least 11 targets in 4 of those games. The other one was against the Jets, where he had 4/98 and 2 TDs, but its also the Jets, so I'm not sure what to make of that.

In reality, if you give a ton of NFL WRs 10-15 targets a game, there's a pretty damn good chance they're going to "take it over". They're likely to end up with a high number of receptions, yards, and most likely, scores.

In 32 regular season games with the Ravens, Hollywood has had double digit targets TWICE, total. His average target share in 2019 was about 4.5 per game, and in 2020, it was about 6.5. And that's targets, not receptions. Assuming even a 2/3 catch rate, which would be pretty good, you're talking 4-5 receptions per game.

You're going to have a very, very, very difficult time showing me WRs, league-wide, who take over games routinely with 4-5 receptions on a weekly basis. You'd have to be averaging upwards of 20-25 yards per catch to have a gigantic impact.

Go look at the games that Andrews "took over". 8 targets, 9 targets, etc. It's pretty hard for any player in this league to be utterly dominant in football games when they're catching 4 passes. It's not impossible (see week 1, 2019, Hollywood vs the Dolphins), but its also not even remotely sustainable for any WR in the league.

If Hollywood and Andrews had the same volume that Hill and Kelce got in 2020, it would shatter your brain to see what kind of stat line they would put up.

And they likely never will, because I don't see Lamar Jackson increasing his passing volume by like 40-50%, which is what its going to take to have guys producing at the Hill/Kelce level in this offense.

Since you've done the research on this I have a couple questions for you.

Is it true that the majority of teams that have two players that take the bulk of "passing" targets and are there teams that spread it around to a 3rd pretty equally. I'm just curious if you have come across these teams.

 

[Ellicottraven]

it's about attacking inefficiencies with different methods, the use of motion pre and post-snap etc.

we've taken those tools and created the most efficient and productive running attack in NFL history, they've done close to the same as a passing attack - 2 approaches that take advantage of similar defensive conflicts using similar tools but in different phases

Hey Rossi, give me your best case scenario for our first round pick and your worst case scenario in the event there is no trade partner to move back and we must make a pick in the first. Curious.

 

[Ellicottraven]

How many games is Brown or really any Ravens pass catcher going to be able to take a game over? Not many.

Look at the games where Hill "took over" and tell me how many passes went his way. He had over 90 yards in 5 games. He had at least 11 targets in 4 of those games. The other one was against the Jets, where he had 4/98 and 2 TDs, but its also the Jets, so I'm not sure what to make of that.

In reality, if you give a ton of NFL WRs 10-15 targets a game, there's a pretty damn good chance they're going to "take it over". They're likely to end up with a high number of receptions, yards, and most likely, scores.

In 32 regular season games with the Ravens, Hollywood has had double digit targets TWICE, total. His average target share in 2019 was about 4.5 per game, and in 2020, it was about 6.5. And that's targets, not receptions. Assuming even a 2/3 catch rate, which would be pretty good, you're talking 4-5 receptions per game.

You're going to have a very, very, very difficult time showing me WRs, league-wide, who take over games routinely with 4-5 receptions on a weekly basis. You'd have to be averaging upwards of 20-25 yards per catch to have a gigantic impact.

Go look at the games that Andrews "took over". 8 targets, 9 targets, etc. It's pretty hard for any player in this league to be utterly dominant in football games when they're catching 4 passes. It's not impossible (see week 1, 2019, Hollywood vs the Dolphins), but its also not even remotely sustainable for any WR in the league.

If Hollywood and Andrews had the same volume that Hill and Kelce got in 2020, it would shatter your brain to see what kind of stat line they would put up.

And they likely never will, because I don't see Lamar Jackson increasing his passing volume by like 40-50%, which is what its going to take to have guys producing at the Hill/Kelce level in this offense.

Very interesting take for sure. Can you give me an idea of how many targets/receptions Hill/Kelce had vs Brown/Mandrews? Thanks.

 

[rmcjacket23]

Ok, maybe you're right, but it's like comparing generic Great Value to Coke. One is much better than the other, even if we are trying to mimic them.

Since you've done the research on this I have a couple questions for you.

Is it true that the majority of teams that have two players that take the bulk of "passing" targets and are there teams that spread it around to a 3rd pretty equally. I'm just curious if you have come across these teams.

I only looked at the Ravens vs Chiefs comparison.

Based on a quick scan from this site:
https://www.lineups.com/nfl/nfl-targets

Teams that seem to spread the ball somewhat "evenly" among at least three different targets:
Cincinnati (the gold standard for this)
Carolina
Dallas
Jacksonville (very wide spread)
New England (very wide spread)
NY Giants
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington

The first thing you'll notice is that there aren't many "good" teams on this list. Now I'm taking a subjective view in some ways, and others can peruse that website and see if they disagree in spots.

There's plenty of teams who have two "go to" guys and then there's a sharp drop off in targets to the third. There are other teams, like Arizona, Green Bay, LA Chargers, Houston, and Chicago, who literally have one player dominating a ton of targets, and there's like a 3-4 target per game drop off to the next closest guy on the team. Some of these stats are actually quite staggering.

I would say, in general, from the list above, there's three things going on:
a) some of these teams have horrible or non-spectacular receiving/pass-catching groups, so they really have no choice but to spread it around (New England, Philadelphia, Jacksonville, Washington).
b) I don't think any one of these teams as a real sort of "alpha" WR who's significantly better than the rest of the group.
c) A lot of these teams have very pass-heavy schemes, at least from 2020. Cincinnati, Dallas, Giants, Pittsburgh, and others are either built to throw the ball a ton intentionally, or had to out of necessity. So one could expect a wider distribution of players getting significant targets with a larger volume scale.