Deep Threats: Mike Wallace vs Kenny Stills | Page 9 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Deep Threats: Mike Wallace vs Kenny Stills

Mudder1310 said:
There's value in a player when they offer superior team chemistry. Is it enough to offset any performance downgrade? That's the question. No one is looking at our WRs and gameplanning around Stills like they would Wallace, but I don't think a single player matters as much in this offense. Distribution is the key. If 7 guys all had 4 catches out of 40 throws, I think that's a lot closer to right than 1 with 10 and the rest with 3. It widens the defense, makes our O more unpredictable.
Click to expand...

That is what makes me pause.

We only know how this offense works WITH Wallace. The good and the bad.

I'm concerned that without that guy the other teams need to plan for we regress to teams stacking the box, taking away our ground game and all those passes we like to throw within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage.

Time will tell I guess.
 
Avigatorx said:
That is what makes me pause.

We only know how this offense works WITH Wallace. The good and the bad.

I'm concerned that without that guy the other teams need to plan for we regress to teams stacking the box, taking away our ground game and all those passes we like to throw within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage.

Time will tell I guess.
Click to expand...

Towards the end of the season, it did not matter. Teams were collapsing down anyway when they realized our Oline could not handle anything. Fix the Oline, the deep ball will come around.
 
PhinSoldia said:
Will he fight for his targets and try to outwork his defenders on poorly thrown balls
Click to expand...

Kenny Stills has always done this, in both college & NFL.

[video=youtube;-CT91ox3cA8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CT91ox3cA8[/video]

[video=youtube;yI94WyB8Ymg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yI94WyB8Ymg[/video]
 
Biggest thing I have noticed between Stills and Wallace is that Stills is going to use his hand more than his body to catch the ball.
 
normaldude said:
Throws of 20+ Yards, Last 2 Seasons

-------------------------------------

Mike Wallace
- Targets: 54
- Receptions: 12
- Completion%: 22.2%
- Yards: 460
- TD: 2

Kenny Stills
- Targets: 30
- Receptions: 15
- Completion%: 50%
- Yards: 710*
- TD: 7

*47.3 Yds per Rec (leads all NFL WRs)

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12477833/mike-wallace-traded-minnesota-vikings-miami-dolphins


Mike Wallace is a great deep threat, but only when paired up with the right type of QB (like Ben Roethlisberger), who is good at arcing a deep ball into a fast bucket (over-the-shoulder go route, in stride).

Ryan Tannehill is better at throwing low-trajectory direct laser beams, which is a better match for an acrobatic catch radius guy like Kenny Stills.
Click to expand...

Stills had Brees throwing him the ball. Do that comparison next year again. What will your excuse be if Stills has Wallace-like numbers?
 
Kdawg954 said:
Brees vs. Tannehill . . . let's be serious.

And honestly, Still's doesn't have a "huge" catch radius . . . he's very similar to Wallace, except slower.

I like that we cleared the money, but I can't sit up here and say we upgraded at WR. We didn't, we got worse.
Click to expand...

Really? Didn't get worse in my opinion. Stills can be better than Wallace in a lot of ways. Attitude, less drops, more fight for a ball, cheaper and younger. Only thing I'm seeing right now is Stills has less experience. Wallace will NOT be remembered down the road in Phins history. His huge contract might.
 
Irving Fryar will have more love from Phin fans than Wallace imo. Says alot.
 
phins_4_ever said:
Stills had Brees throwing him the ball. Do that comparison next year again. What will your excuse be if Stills has Wallace-like numbers?
Click to expand...

Then I will admit that I was wrong.

However, my prediction is that Tannehill+Stills will have better deep ball production than Tannehill+Wallace.
 
normaldude said:
Then I will admit that I was wrong. However, my prediction is that Tannehill+Stills will have better deep ball production than Tannehill+Wallace.
Click to expand...
you won't be wrong. Tannehill had a better deep ball to everyone not name mike Wallace. Probably due to the fact that Wallace never did any offseason workouts with any teammates, and mysteriously had hammy problems every week that hindered any regular season practice and then low and behold that asshole quit on most of the deep ball chances he did have and dropped most of the rest.
 
Mike Wallace is a better deep threat than Kenny Stills. The operative word here is threat. You can put up 40 times all day long if you want, but Mike Wallace has the kind of speed that makes NFL safeties pee. Kenny Stills does not. The speed delta between them will affect the way teams play coverage against us, even if we had trouble hitting those deep shot for reasons that are Wallace's fault, Tannehill's fault and Mike Sherman's fault. Teams have to respect the threat even if you often fail to connect, because hitting on a deep ball like that can change a game.

However, Kenny Stills has a much more complete skill set to run routes and has more reliable hands than Wallace. That makes him a better fit for Tannehill and he'll probably be more productive here than Wallace was. That's assuming he stays on the straight and narrow he walked in New Orleans after having come out of Oklahoma will concerns about his character.
 
TheWalrus said:
Mike Wallace is a better deep threat than Kenny Stills. The operative word here is threat. You can put up 40 times all day long if you want, but Mike Wallace has the kind of speed that makes NFL safeties pee. Kenny Stills does not. The speed delta between them will affect the way teams play coverage against us, even if we had trouble hitting those deep shot for reasons that are Wallace's fault, Tannehill's fault and Mike Sherman's fault. Teams have to respect the threat even if you often fail to connect, because hitting on a deep ball like that can change a game. However, Kenny Stills has a much more complete skill set to run routes and has more reliable hands than Wallace. That makes him a better fit for Tannehill and he'll probably be more productive here than Wallace was. That's assuming he stays on the straight and narrow he walked in New Orleans after having come out of Oklahoma will concerns about his character.
Click to expand...
according to this the deference between mike Wallace measurable speed and Kenny stills is not as great as some would believe.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=68061&draftyear=2009&genpos=WR

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/profilexnews.php?pyid=112674&draftyear=2013&genpos=WR
 
TheWalrus said:
Mike Wallace is a better deep threat than Kenny Stills. The operative word here is threat. You can put up 40 times all day long if you want, but Mike Wallace has the kind of speed that makes NFL safeties pee. Kenny Stills does not. The speed delta between them will affect the way teams play coverage against us, even if we had trouble hitting those deep shot for reasons that are Wallace's fault, Tannehill's fault and Mike Sherman's fault. Teams have to respect the threat even if you often fail to connect, because hitting on a deep ball like that can change a game.

However, Kenny Stills has a much more complete skill set to run routes and has more reliable hands than Wallace. That makes him a better fit for Tannehill and he'll probably be more productive here than Wallace was. That's assuming he stays on the straight and narrow he walked in New Orleans after having come out of Oklahoma will concerns about his character.
Click to expand...

true ted Ginn was faster than both guys and not as good. People get too caught up on 40 times
 
Wildbill3 said:
according to this the deference between mike Wallace measurable speed and Kenny stills is not as great as some would believe.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=68061&draftyear=2009&genpos=WR

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/profilexnews.php?pyid=112674&draftyear=2013&genpos=WR
Click to expand...

There's 40 times and then there's actual speed on the field. Don't forget that Jerry Rice ran a 4.7.

Mike Wallace has another gear even from most fast guys and his ability to sustain his top speed is incredible. I've railed against him as much as anyone but I don't see any reason not to give him what little he is actually due. I mean, he didn't get $12 million a year because he's a great route runner with stellar hands. He got it because of that speed. It's unique.

But like I said, give me Kenny Stills overall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom