Jump to content
DoleINGout

Yes!! Maurice Harris, wide receiver, 1-year

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Maurice Harris will not be the No. 1 in any situations barring, like, half the WR room dying. Stats don't tell the whole story, but his tell nothing good: 

  • 2 Approximate Value
  • 3.1 Average Yards of Separation (Pretty average)
  • 11.85% Target Air Yards Share (Not very good despite the fact that Washington's WR group wasn't exactly elite)
  • 59.60% Completion Rate (Below 60% is obviously a concern)
  • 304 Receiving Yards and 0 Touchdowns - That's nothing special at all
  • -1.46 WAR for Washington when targeting Harris (Rank 570 of 574)
  • -2.2 Average Yards After Catch Above Expected - The Patriots' quick-pass system is at least somewhat reliant on having guys with some ability after the catch. If this is to be believed, Harris is not a good fit. This was good for WORST IN THE NFL.

I do not understand the hype, guys.

Edited by AlNFL19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AlNFL19 said:

I do not understand the hype, guys.

the hype is largely just me posting yourube videos and one other guy saying he could be a competent fourth stringer.

im excited that we improved over chris hogan and patterson with harris and bruce ellington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AlNFL19 said:

2 Approximate Value

i dont value stats much but this is what?

1 hour ago, AlNFL19 said:

3.1 Average Yards of Separation (Pretty average)

maurice harris is pretty average but his sideline awareness, size, above average hands, patience and IQ reading D make up for his shortcomings in average separation.

1 hour ago, AlNFL19 said:

11.85% Target Air Yards Share (Not very good despite the fact that Washington's WR group wasn't exactly elite)

dont see the point of this. the redskins had a short passing game to boot with a run first offense to compliment their strong defense. stats are largely if not entirely misleading and thus utterly meaningless with no context.

1 hour ago, AlNFL19 said:

59.60% Completion Rate (Below 60% is obviously a concern)

first year alex smith (whom he connected well with in limited opportunities half a season) and josh johnson and colt mccoy and mark sanchez

1 hour ago, AlNFL19 said:

304 Receiving Yards and 0 Touchdowns - That's nothing special at all

young guy on a roster saturated with receivers that all have/had a similar skillset. largely average if not slightly above average receiver, young guy, limited offense stuck behind tenured guys like pierre garçon and jamison crowder.

1 hour ago, AlNFL19 said:

-1.46 WAR for Washington when targeting Harris (Rank 570 of 574)

this seems to account for something the entire team fails at which is winning and blames it on the timing of when someone is basically targeted or used by their team to make it seem like situational failure is all one guys fault. i dont like metics.

2 hours ago, AlNFL19 said:

-2.2 Average Yards After Catch Above Expected - The Patriots' quick-pass system is at least somewhat reliant on having guys with some ability after the catch. If this is to be believed, Harris is not a good fit. This was good for WORST IN THE NFL.

chris hogan was not a great yac guy. malcolm mitchell was not a great yac guy. brandon lloyd was not a great yac guy.

the offense changes year to year and the game plan changes game to game along with the personnel featured. harris is a possession receiver the specializes in giving his qb a target to throw to. harris is reliable as a pass catcher and dependable in general. he is flawed but he is here because he is exactly what the patriots need for depth. a couple of games out of a 19 or 20 game season for the Pats he will finish the game as the leader in receptions and targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DoleINGout said:

the hype is largely just me posting yourube videos and one other guy saying he could be a competent fourth stringer.

im excited that we improved over chris hogan and patterson with harris and bruce ellington.

Did we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, ChazStandard said:

Did we?

No, not even close to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2019 at 6:17 PM, DoleINGout said:

https://www.patspulpit.com/2019/3/14/18266255/2019-nfl-free-agency-patriots-sign-wide-receiver-maurice-harris

 

This is underrated signing of the off-season ao far by the Pats!! Great feel against zone and reads coverages well. Not the fastest guy, but certainly fast enough. Big guy at 6'3, over 200 lbs. and shifty. Was a guy who had a rapport with Alex Smith. Reliable pass catcher cheap, exactly what the Pats needed.

O............kay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2019 at 7:39 PM, DoleINGout said:

He will AT TIMES (certain games and matchups) be the #1. And very capable at that positon too.

His Highness Josh Gordon will be our #1 but I could see Harris as a good option opposite 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ChazStandard said:

Did we?

A sack of Idaho potatoes would be an improvement over everything Hogan did last year except for one nice SB catch.

But losing CP was a bummer.  I feel like we were just scratching the surface of what he could do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, mission27 said:

A sack of Idaho potatoes would be an improvement over everything Hogan did last year except for one nice SB catch.

But losing CP was a bummer.  I feel like we were just scratching the surface of what he could do. 

patterson has potential sure, but as a running back gadget player, not really as a receiver.

1 hour ago, SBLIII said:

No, not even close to it.

bruce ellington and maurice harris are better receivers than chris hogan.

1 hour ago, ChazStandard said:

Did we?

at receiver? they certainly did. there is no debate. patterson and hogan are embarrassingly bad receivers. on offense overall did they improve? i'd still say yes, even if patterson offers unique versatility and has some potential left to grow. cp just couldnt figure out how to be a receiver though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No denying Hogan was  from below-average to a borderline liability last year, and Patterson is just a gadget player. However they both have a history of production that totally dwarfs that of Ellington and Harris combined. Do those guys have the ability to produce at this level? Maybe. But it is WAY to early to call them upgrades, especially over Hogan who had two very good seasons here, and even in his bad season put up better numbers than the new guys have in their careers.

Highly doubtful they both make it through TC in my opinion. Wouldn't be surprised if neither of them do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ChazStandard said:

No denying Hogan was  from below-average to a borderline liability last year, and Patterson is just a gadget player. However they both have a history of production that totally dwarfs that of Ellington and Harris combined. Do those guys have the ability to produce at this level? Maybe. But it is WAY to early to call them upgrades, especially over Hogan who had two very good seasons here, and even in his bad season put up better numbers than the new guys have in their careers.

Highly doubtful they both make it through TC in my opinion. Wouldn't be surprised if neither of them do.

I think we see at least 1 rookie drafted high at WR, very possible it's 2. Neither of Ellington, Berrios or Harris are locks to even make the roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, DoleINGout said:

i dont value stats much but this is what?

Approximate Value is ProFootballReference's all-in-one stat. The Pro Bowl average is around 12. 2 is not very good. And I get that stats aren't an end-all-be-all but if you don't value stats that's just silly. 

23 hours ago, DoleINGout said:

dont see the point of this. the redskins had a short passing game to boot with a run first offense to compliment their strong defense. stats are largely if not entirely misleading and thus utterly meaningless with no context.

I don't see the point of this rebuttal. It truly doesn't make any sense. The fact that they had a "run first offense" and "strong defense" have NOTHING to do with this. Heck, having a "short passing game" has nothing to do with this. This isn't a misleading statistic. It's exactly what it sounds like. "11.85% Target Air Yards Share" means he was the target of 11.85% of Washington's total air (PASSING) yards. That's not very good, and it's not like he was playing with a stacked group to take targets away from a talented receiver.

23 hours ago, DoleINGout said:

young guy on a roster saturated with receivers that all have/had a similar skillset. largely average if not slightly above average receiver, young guy, limited offense stuck behind tenured guys like pierre garçon and jamison crowder.

Say what you will about this, I think a guy who totals 300 yards in a year isn't some great find with No. 1 ability who's actually an above-average receiver. If he was really that good Washington would've played him more and thrown him the ball more regardless of how "good" the rest of their receivers were.

23 hours ago, DoleINGout said:

malcolm mitchell was not a great yac guy.

False. He was a very good YAC guy. His only season, he ranked 5th in the NFL in average YAC above expectation at 1.1. He had several long after-catch runs that season, and probably could've done better without his knee issues. Sure, Hogan and Lloyd might not be great at it, but saying Mitchell was not a good YAC guy is not right. He was good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, AlNFL19 said:

False. He was a very good YAC guy. His only season, he ranked 5th in the NFL in average YAC above expectation at 1.1. He had several long after-catch runs that season, and probably could've done better without his knee issues. Sure, Hogan and Lloyd might not be great at it, but saying Mitchell was not a good YAC guy is not right. He was good.

You're correct, that is until the knee issues limited Mitchell to the same role other wide receivers have played that didn't get YAC.

27 minutes ago, AlNFL19 said:

No. 1 ability who's actually an above-average receiver

Ability to be the featured receiver in a game plan at least a few times a year is what I said which is not the same thing as "No. 1 ability". While Harris has above average traits he has to prove it with above average production. Currently Harris appears to have the opportunity to do that.

27 minutes ago, AlNFL19 said:

I don't see the point of this rebuttal. It truly doesn't make any sense. The fact that they had a "run first offense" and "strong defense" have NOTHING to do with this. Heck, having a "short passing game" has nothing to do with this. This isn't a misleading statistic. It's exactly what it sounds like. "11.85% Target Air Yards Share" means he was the target of 11.85% of Washington's total air (PASSING) yards. That's not very good, and it's not like he was playing with a stacked group to take targets away from a talented receiver.

The rebuttal you're referring to does not make any sense because I misunderstood the meaning of the stat you used. I interpreted it to mean something else. However, Harris' target percentage of the teams total passing yards/attempts is still a weak correlation to how Harris performs in general. This stat seems reflective of the Redskins usage of players and the quarterbacks decision making as much as anything else which is not indicative of the capabilities of an individual.

27 minutes ago, AlNFL19 said:

if you don't value stats that's just silly. 

totally subjective

Edited by DoleINGout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stats say he was a garbage player in Washington.  We’ll see what he can do with good coaching. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DoleINGout said:

You're correct, that is until the knee issues limited Mitchell to the same role other wide receivers have played that didn't get YAC.

??? He played one season, was Top-5 in the NFL in YAC above expectation, and then never played again. I don't get what you're trying to say here.

11 hours ago, DoleINGout said:

The rebuttal you're referring to does not make any sense because I misunderstood the meaning of the stat you used. I interpreted it to mean something else. However, Harris' target percentage of the teams total passing yards/attempts is still a weak correlation to how Harris performs in general. This stat seems reflective of the Redskins usage of players and the quarterbacks decision making as much as anything else which is not indicative of the capabilities of an individual.

"How he performed in general" also wasn't very good. 

Also, Washington is an NFL team run by guys with experience at the biggest level of the sport. If they saw Harris as some above-average receiver, he would've played more than 45% of the team's snaps. 

On 3/15/2019 at 9:52 PM, DoleINGout said:

young guy on a roster saturated with receivers that all have/had a similar skillset. largely average if not slightly above average receiver, young guy, limited offense stuck behind tenured guys like pierre garçon and jamison crowder.

I missed this one the first time, but this is kind of ridiculous. Pierre Garçon hasn't played for Washington in 2 years and isn't even on an NFL team right now.

12 hours ago, DoleINGout said:

totally subjective

???????????????

sub·jec·tive
/səbˈjektiv/
adjective
1.
based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×