Steelers Ink Antonio Brown

[Ravenswintitle]

There's a lot of ego going on but I bet he ends up playing for Pitt this season.
His agent has to see they're running out of options and sitting out the year is very risky
The team may be able to get a 2nd at best but he would be more valuable in that offense this year.

[JAB1985]

And I stopped reading here because you clearly have no clue what you're talking about.

First off, of course Marshall had more receptions and yards than Wallace. He had 143 passes thrown his way last year. That's a whopping 30 more than Wallace has had thrown to him. Over the previous two years, Marshall has 2,228 yards to Wallace's 2,450 yards. But Marshall has had 289 passes thrown to him vs. Wallace having 211. This is obviously partly due to Wallace having Roethlisberger vs. Marshall having Henne/Moore/Thigpen throwing the ball, but still, when one receiver over a two year stretch has 37% more passes thrown to him, it should be obvious that he would have better base stats.

Oh, except that he doesn't.

But more to the point, Steelers are a pass-happy team? The Steelers were the #19 team in passing attempts last year. They were exactly middle-of-the-pack average in the NFL (#17) in their pass:run ratio.

Now, you can claim "analytics and football don't mix" and "its (it's) not proof of anything" all you want. And while I would agree that stats aren't the be-all-end-all in this game, the reality is that they are both instructional and often directional. And they are most certainly more meaningful than, say, claiming "Pittsburgh is a pass-happy team," as statistics allow us to easily refute such a claim. Pittsburgh appears to be a pass-happy team because they pass more than they run (which in today's NFL, everybody who doesn't have Tebow or Yates throwing the ball does that) and because their passing game is exceptionally well executed. But as I have shown several times on this board, just because something appears one way, reality is not that way, and statistics show us that.

Every single stat except the overall # receptions (and, for this past season, yards) - advanced or simple - show Wallace is the better receiver. The advanced stats compensate for the fact that Wallace has a better QB throwing him the ball than Marshall. Now, you can watch them on the field and just like to have the bigger, stronger guy if you want. And Wallace may not be preferable vs. Marshall for teams that don't need a burner but do need a physical WR.

But none of that is an argument for why Marshall is supposedly better. Feel free to tout the "He's better because he had more yards on a worse passing team" all you want. It's nonsensical and you've done nothing to actually attempt to prove why Marshall is supposedly better than Wallace.

- C -

youve already admitted the game goes beyond statistics but continue to use statistics as the end all be all, yet also claim that they arent. youve already said hes not as big and not as physical, but yet claim hes better in every aspect. you say marshall lacks by having a bad QB the last two years but then only use those last two years to go by. to me youre a continuous contradiction and quite frankly your argument means nothing to me because of your attitude despite its bias nature. you continue to see things your way, ill continue to see them mine.

[Benny8444]

The highest tender is a 1st round pick now there is no more 1st and 3rd round tender.

The 49ers were thinking about signing him to an offer sheet because they needed another WR to go along side Crabtree and had a late 1st round pick. I dont believe they would have signed him though as 1st rd picks are so valuable these days. as the cap hit even if less than fitz money would be to much and the 49ers will have to pay players in 2013 and 2014 and will need space.

yes, some players get 1st round picks for them near their deal or under the tag but those are usually top 5 at their position. Wallace is not in that catagory. The cowboys made a stupid trade for williams and seattle giving a 1st for branch was even worse, they were a desprate team looking for any player.

No team will give a 1st for wallace, he is not a top 5 WR some people may say he is not top 10. I have him around 8-9. Plus the teams know Pitt has little leverage an cant sign him due to the lack of cap space. Plus he wont get Fitz money anywhere.

He will play for pitt this year as his value will drop if he sits the year out. Either way he wont be there in 2013 and they wont get a 1st for him even under the tag (which they cant use due to cap space). Either way this will be a holmes like situation. Holmes was in his prime when they traded him and they could have gotten a 2nd for him in my view.

[psuasskicker]

Jab - You realize you have yet to actually make an argument for why Marshall is a better receiver than Wallace? So far all you've tried to do is tell me why my argument doesn't prove Wallace is better, you haven't bothered to say why Marshall is. At least, not with anything factually accurate (Steelers are a passing-heavy offense, for example).

Benny, argue exceptions to the top five players by position getting 1st round picks traded for them all you want.
a) It's not particularly true.
b) It's beside the point. The point is, first round picks are traded for guys that need new contracts, not - as you claimed - guys that are in the middle of a sensible contract.
c) Still waiting for you to prove me wrong on b.

So far I'm hearing a lot of "Man, that Wallace guy sucks" and "Man, the dude can only run one route." No one here is actually bothering to put together reasoning for how Wallace is NOT one of the top receivers in the game. Top five, top ten, who friggin' cares. He's better than Antonio Brown and he's better than no less than 95% of the other WRs in this league. When he gets a new deal, he's going to be paid as such, cause that's what he deserves. Take your blinders off to the fact that the Steelers have one of the best receivers in the NFL, and be thankful that it looks pretty likely they're not going to have him for a whole lot longer.

- C -

[wickedsolo]

Comparing Marshall to Wallace is silly IMO.

Apples & Oranges IMO.

Marshall, from a style of play stance, compares much more favorably to guys like Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin, Plaxico Burress, etc.

Mike Wallace should be compared to guys like Steve Smith, Victor Cruz, etc.

Both guys can absolutely dominate a game.

[JAB1985]

Jab - You realize you have yet to actually make an argument for why Marshall is a better receiver than Wallace? So far all you've tried to do is tell me why my argument doesn't prove Wallace is better, you haven't bothered to say why Marshall is. At least, not with anything factually accurate (Steelers are a passing-heavy offense, for example).

Benny, argue exceptions to the top five players by position getting 1st round picks traded for them all you want.
a) It's not particularly true.
b) It's beside the point. The point is, first round picks are traded for guys that need new contracts, not - as you claimed - guys that are in the middle of a sensible contract.
c) Still waiting for you to prove me wrong on b.

So far I'm hearing a lot of "Man, that Wallace guy sucks" and "Man, the dude can only run one route." No one here is actually bothering to put together reasoning for how Wallace is NOT one of the top receivers in the game. Top five, top ten, who friggin' cares. He's better than Antonio Brown and he's better than no less than 95% of the other WRs in this league. When he gets a new deal, he's going to be paid as such, cause that's what he deserves. Take your blinders off to the fact that the Steelers have one of the best receivers in the NFL, and be thankful that it looks pretty likely they're not going to have him for a whole lot longer.

- C -

first off, 1.5/1 ratio is a passing heavy offense. im not sure where you draw the line, but anything over 1/1 is pass heavy technically, and a 60-40 split is certainly a pass first offense. or in other words factually accurate.

secondly this is what you responded to by throwing about a ton of numbers and calling them proof for the next 2 pages.

Marshall is better than wallace. when he has a qb that can throw even remotely decent hes a top wr by ability. Both have inconsistency with hands. Marshall is stronger and battles across the middle more and as much of a head case as he is, wallace wanting 17/year is just as crazy.

you say i give no argument, my argument is that hes better when he has a better QB (3 100/1000 in a row and in the top 6 statistically min, top 3 twice) and that hes bigger and stronger and therefore able to add more to an offense (his ability), in this case hes a redzone presence where wallace isnt as much. youve agreed to those points in various posts but continue to only site your analytics as proof to the contrary. Im not a stat guy, you are, im not going to throw a bunch of numbers i dont care about to prove to you that he is. we can agree to disagree if you choose.

much like your argument that Marshall is older and worse than wallace and therefore wallace being worthy of at least 2 2nd rounds like marshall was. that trade happened 2 years ago when marshall was 26 (which wallace will be wednesday making them about 5 months apart in age at the time) and coming off 3 100/1000 sesasons in a row. wallace cant say that. its selective to take away his 3 most productive years when he actually had a top 10, maybe only top 15 qb vs a guys best two with a top 10 qb. thats your argument and its completely biased.

your argument that he only has those stats due to more targets making him a lesser talent is kind of bogus when you consider larry fitz himself had 1 less reception and 8 more targets than marshall while compiling a whopping 12/ypg more than marshall, which to me isnt all that much when you consider the difference in talent. actually almost all the top WRs typically have over 135 targets, because theyre good and their teams tend to try to get the ball in their hands a lot despite double teams which account for the lower catch rates. Wallace however, had 10 less than antonio brown on his own team. arguably making him their #2 option despite his production. Theres really not that many teams you can point 2 that have that scenario unless its more of a 1a 1b scenario. which considering how close they were statistically wallace and brown fall under. there certainly is not an ELITE WR that falls under that category, with hakeem nicks being the closest to it.

your set with your opinion and choosing to dismiss or see past any argument to the contrary, which is fine but dont claim its just people spouting off that he sucks and they dont like him when you just dont accept their form of argument. you consider debunking your facts as not supporting my argument, but imo, debunking those areas where you say he is better, is supporting my argument. despite that, to me any argument that has Fitz behind marshall and also behind wallace is a fallacy and why i dont put much stock into stats or this argument in particular. ability doesnt always match production because theres too many factors. like i said, its your prerogative, continue about it as you see fit.

[srobert96]

No cap room to franchise him....none.

103 million tied up in top 12 contracts with Brown deal in 2013.

Time to pay cc bill they have been running up for last 2 years.

But outside of that you are killing this thread, keep it up.

Does that number take into account Brown's new contract as well as all the restructuring of contracts they did to get under the cap this year? I am not even sure that the Pitt could clear enough to franchise him and trade him.

I doubt anyone would give them a first even if they could franchise him. His contract demands are not going to go down. Pitt and potential suitors had more leverage this year because he was a restricted free agent. Next year he would have to be franchised at what has to be more than 9m.

[The Excellector]

And I stopped reading here because you clearly have no clue what you're talking about.

First off, of course Marshall had more receptions and yards than Wallace. He had 143 passes thrown his way last year. That's a whopping 30 more than Wallace has had thrown to him. Over the previous two years, Marshall has 2,228 yards to Wallace's 2,450 yards. But Marshall has had 289 passes thrown to him vs. Wallace having 211. This is obviously partly due to Wallace having Roethlisberger vs. Marshall having Henne/Moore/Thigpen throwing the ball, but still, when one receiver over a two year stretch has 37% more passes thrown to him, it should be obvious that he would have better base stats.

- C -

How can you measure this? You can't truly measure how bad a QB is. You're saying that even though his QB was worse, he should have been more productive, without a true measurement of just how bad the QB was, nor a measurement for the drastic difference in quality between his QB and Roethlisberger, because you can't measure that with stats alone.

You can't truly measure the quality of a performance against a fringe starter, compared to a performance against an All-Pro, or a performance against a defense in a more suitable system compared to a system that does not fit. When you realize this, you don't use an argument much different from those you are criticizing and JAB has already addressed this.

[madmikey]

Wallace will eventually sign his tender and play. He won't want to go into UFA next year after a full year off. He'd cost himself millions and he has to know that. The Steelers have all the leverage - they know it and Wallace knows it.

As for what happens long-term, who knows? A lot will likely depend on how the other Steelers receivers look this year. If Sanders steps up and makes it through injury-free, I think it significantly lowers the chances of Wallace returning. If Sanders doesn't step up though I could see the Steelers figuring out a way to sign Wallace long-term.

[TheJoeFlaccoShow]

Does that number take into account Brown's new contract as well as all the restructuring of contracts they did to get under the cap this year? I am not even sure that the Pitt could clear enough to franchise him and trade him.

...............2012 2013
Ben R ......8.90 19.60
Harrison...9.03 10.69
Woodley...4.94 13.24
Ike Taylor.4.28 9.45
L Timmons.3.99 8.66
Polamalu...6.25 7.50
H Miller.....7.07 7.96
Colon........2.85 7.70
Keisel........4.50 4.50
R Clark......4.25 4.75
Pouncey.....2.99 3.30
A Brown.....2.75 6.20
...............61.79..103.54

This should illustrate what the Steelers had to do just to get under the cap this year, and how they just shoved all the money back. (2014 is similar as well). Look at the giant spikes in salary from the restructuring, twice for a lot of the guys at the top.

They will probably cut Harrison and Keisel, so they will be relieved of that salary, but the problem is Harrison restructured and the dead money hit will be huge. Keisel will be full savings, but that is only 4.5 million. They might net $8 million or so, but that is not much considering they are at $104 right now.

With a cap of $122 that leaves them in a pretty uhhh...bad spot to say the least.

[TheJoeFlaccoShow]

Wallace will eventually sign his tender and play. He won't want to go into UFA next year after a full year off. He'd cost himself millions and he has to know that. The Steelers have all the leverage - they know it and Wallace knows it.

.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but 26 yr old 1200 yd receivers on the open market get paid. They are available....hardly ever.

And he won't be sitting out the whole year, he can't. He will play the last 6 games and playoffs and will have plenty of suitors in 2013, believe that.

[psuasskicker]

first off, 1.5/1 ratio is a passing heavy offense. im not sure where you draw the line, but anything over 1/1 is pass heavy technically, and a 60-40 split is certainly a pass first offense. or in other words factually accurate.

Well then you'll need to consider Miami as part of that pass heavy offense as well as their pass:run ratio was over one, which still invalidates the point you were trying to make. If that's your definition, then literally every offense last year was a pass-heavy offense except for the Texans and the Broncos, as those were the only two that had designed runs more than designed passes.

So pretty much, regardless what your intention was of stating it, your point isn't valid. Yes, the Steelers did pass a higher percent of the time than the Dolphins did. But it wasn't by much. And it's not really accurate in any way to say that the Steelers are a pass-happy team, which you at the very least implied.

you say i give no argument, my argument is that hes better when he has a better QB (3 100/1000 in a row and in the top 6 statistically min, top 3 twice) and that hes bigger and stronger and therefore able to add more to an offense (his ability), in this case hes a redzone presence where wallace isnt as much.

That's not an argument for WHY he's better. That's an argument THAT he's better. I don't care that you think he is better, I already know you do. Why is being bigger and stronger better than faster and more technically precise? Why is being a better red zone presence (which I can give you plenty of statistical indicators which shows that's actually not true, but realistically all you need to do is look at #TDs vs # passes thrown to each in the red zone to see how wildly inaccurate a statement that is) better than being excellent all over the field? Why do Marshall's characteristics allow him to add more to an offense than Wallace's? You haven't made an argument for why he's better.

How can you measure this? You can't truly measure how bad a QB is. You're saying that even though his QB was worse, he should have been more productive, without a true measurement of just how bad the QB was

First, I didn't say he should have been more productive. I simply argued he wouldn't have been as productive as Wallace if Wallace had the same QB.

Second, you certainly can measure it. You baseline all NFL players to come up with average performance at a position, then you measure the player's performance against that average, and come up with how well that player would have performed with better or worse. This is what DVOA does...read up on it if you want to know more about it, I'm not re-explaining it here...I already linked it for you.

- C -

[Ravenswintitle]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but 26 yr old 1200 yd receivers on the open market get paid. They are available....hardly ever.

And he won't be sitting out the whole year, he can't. He will play the last 6 games and playoffs and will have plenty of suitors in 2013, believe that.

he's been availble for a while now but no team would give up a 1st and what he's asking to be paid.

[TheJoeFlaccoShow]

he's been availble for a while now but no team would give up a 1st and what he's asking to be paid.

Last I checked he was a RFA, not an UFA like he will be next year. Despite the rules, those guys don't go anywhere the total cost is too prohibitive.

No one is giving up a 1st AND a contract, but they will certainly just give up a contract. BIG difference.

Wallace is a 5/50 guy if not more all day long.

[Paintballguy]

Last I checked he was a RFA, not an UFA like he will be next year. Despite the rules, those guys don't go anywhere the total cost is too prohibitive.

No one is giving up a 1st AND a contract, but they will certainly just give up a contract. BIG difference.

Wallace is a 5/50 guy if not more all day long.

Agreed. Big difference between paying a guy a big contract and paying a guy a big contract + giving up a 1st round pick. Wallace is going to get a big contract somewhere not in Pitt regardless of what happens this year.

[Ravenswintitle]

Last I checked he was a RFA, not an UFA like he will be next year. Despite the rules, those guys don't go anywhere the total cost is too prohibitive.

No one is giving up a 1st AND a contract, but they will certainly just give up a contract. BIG difference.

Wallace is a 5/50 guy if not more all day long.

Right, so he'll be with Pitt this year. He has no option. Not sure if I'm missing your point

[JAB1985]

Well then you'll need to consider Miami as part of that pass heavy offense as well as their pass:run ratio was over one, which still invalidates the point you were trying to make. If that's your definition, then literally every offense last year was a pass-heavy offense except for the Texans and the Broncos, as those were the only two that had designed runs more than designed passes.

So pretty much, regardless what your intention was of stating it, your point isn't valid. Yes, the Steelers did pass a higher percent of the time than the Dolphins did. But it wasn't by much. And it's not really accurate in any way to say that the Steelers are a pass-happy team, which you at the very least implied.

now youre arguing that 1.51 isnt more than 1.2 by enough to be considered more? seriously? seems like if somebody doesnt see exactly what you do youll deny it completely. 60-40 to most people is a pass first offense. 1.51:1 vs 1.2:1 are small numbers with big implications. not to mention miami sucking and playing down most weeks vs the steelers being 13-3 and playing ahead with a good defense. considering that aspect and that teams, including the steelers, typically run the ball in that scenario its more telling of their philosophy to continue to throw the ball and vice versa with miami.

First, I didn't say he should have been more productive. I simply argued he wouldn't have been as productive as Wallace if Wallace had the same QB.

even if you feel Wallace is better statistically its only minutely. their stats are comparable as is so youre saying that roethlisberger and matt Moore arent that different? none of this addresses why the steelers themselves switched to Brown being more of the focal point after week 7. if hes a top 5 WR or right outside the top 3 as you suggest hed be beating DBs to a point that he would be getting more opportunities/targets by force.

[TheJoeFlaccoShow]

Right, so he'll be with Pitt this year. He has no option. Not sure if I'm missing your point

We are talking about 2013, not 2012.

[Benny8444]

The only way he is not with Pitt this year is if they can find someone to trade for him. But that team will also have to sign him so Pitt won't get much. I am calling a 3rd at the most. You may get a desperate team to give a 2nd.

If he is on Pitt he sits out till week 12 then plays the last 6 games And becomes a Ufa.


I do agree now that 1st round picks are traded for players entering their final year or in their final year because no team will trade a productive player in the middle of their fair contract unless they get offered 2 1sts or something. Then it is almost to hard to pass up

[The Excellector]

Well then you'll need to consider Miami as part of that pass heavy offense as well as their pass:run ratio was over one, which still invalidates the point you were trying to make. If that's your definition, then literally every offense last year was a pass-heavy offense except for the Texans and the Broncos, as those were the only two that had designed runs more than designed passes.

So pretty much, regardless what your intention was of stating it, your point isn't valid. Yes, the Steelers did pass a higher percent of the time than the Dolphins did. But it wasn't by much. And it's not really accurate in any way to say that the Steelers are a pass-happy team, which you at the very least implied.



That's not an argument for WHY he's better. That's an argument THAT he's better. I don't care that you think he is better, I already know you do. Why is being bigger and stronger better than faster and more technically precise? Why is being a better red zone presence (which I can give you plenty of statistical indicators which shows that's actually not true, but realistically all you need to do is look at #TDs vs # passes thrown to each in the red zone to see how wildly inaccurate a statement that is) better than being excellent all over the field? Why do Marshall's characteristics allow him to add more to an offense than Wallace's? You haven't made an argument for why he's better.



First, I didn't say he should have been more productive. I simply argued he wouldn't have been as productive as Wallace if Wallace had the same QB.

Second, you certainly can measure it. You baseline all NFL players to come up with average performance at a position, then you measure the player's performance against that average, and come up with how well that player would have performed with better or worse. This is what DVOA does...read up on it if you want to know more about it, I'm not re-explaining it here...I already linked it for you.

- C -

You can't throw a performance against Boller and a performance against Aaron Rodgers, into a vacuum, come up with an average, and then base performances off of that average to determine who is better than who. There are too many intangible variables to consider.