Wilford's value lies beyond the stat line | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Wilford's value lies beyond the stat line

hugoguzman said:
I decided to take a closer look at Wilford's stats and realized that a) his value will not be statistical in nature b) his stats are skewed by the fact that he played on an extremely run-happy team:
http://www.realfootball365.com/nfl/articles/21760.html

Take a look and let me know what you think.
Click to expand...

I like Wilford and he was a great pickup. However until we get a competent QB he like any other Miami WR will just waste away.
 
I have been a fan of that pickup from the start, without a good TE we need someone to move the chains.
 
We will see him be very productive this coming season,,, all you gotta do is watch!!!
 
Thanks for the props guys!

alexwr4 - I was born in Argentina and have Italian and Dominican heritage, but I'm from the MIA.

Wilford has the physical tools to become a valuable weapon for the Dolphins, but as dabeastdabone pointed out, without solid QB play, he will never truly shine.
 
I think the addition of Wilford was one of the best ones made so far this season. We had speed in Ginn, and we needed to compliment that with a big tall possesion type receiver. That is what Wilford is. I am excited to see him play.
 
Also, bear in mind that Parcells likes to have receivers that can block, Keyshawn was his blocking receiver in the past, Wilford fills that role.
 
With this slow off-season, he has been my favorite and best addition so far.

very nice article.
 
dabeastdabone said:
I like Wilford and he was a great pickup. However until we get a competent QB he like any other Miami WR will just waste away.
Click to expand...

Add help on the offensive line also otherwise Qbs will be running for there lives with no passing or running game.
 
hugoguzman said:
I decided to take a closer look at Wilford's stats and realized that a) his value will not be statistical in nature b) his stats are skewed by the fact that he played on an extremely run-happy team:
http://www.realfootball365.com/nfl/articles/21760.html

Take a look and let me know what you think.
Click to expand...


Im usually not one to knock anyone's article and I think you write some good stuff but you made some serious errors in this article. You state that 7 teams threw twice as much as the Jags did. Not one team in the NFL has ever thrown twice as many passes as the jags did last year. In fact last year the greatest differance between Jacksonville and the top team was a 183 passes, hardly twice as many passes. I personally think we somewhat overpaid for Wilford, both Hackett and Johnston signed lower contracts and neither of these guys are a lesser player than Wilford. I wanted us to sign Wilford but expected a little lower. I dont think as highly of Wilford as you seem to and think if Wilford was all that great Jacksonville would have made an attempt to resign him especially since he did not get a huge contract.
Wilford is a solid player but not a guy you want as your starter if you can help it.This is the guy if you have starting you are seeking to make an upgrade to every season. Hopefully he will be a role player for us because his redzone prowess is pretty overrated although solid.
 
dlockz said:
Im usually not one to knock anyone's article and I think you write some good stuff but you made some serious errors in this article. You state that 7 teams threw twice as much as the Jags did. Not one team in the NFL has ever thrown twice as many passes as the jags did last year. In fact last year the greatest differance between Jacksonville and the top team was a 183 passes, hardly twice as many passes.
Click to expand...

Valid point. That stat was based on a mixup between Jacksonville's completions and the top passing teams. The numbers are correct, but that reference to "twice as much" was supposed to be removed.

Surprised that made it through the editorial process.

I actually enjoy when people spot stuff like this. It helps us improve our editorial process.

Thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom