Props to Robby Anderson.

[HessStation]

7 hours ago, Bob Robbins said:

 

The problem with your argument is even if you are right or partially right about certain points, you are way off base on twice as much. He is a #3 or #4 on a Super Bowl contender? That is just completely ignorant.

He is effective deep and he is effective on the comeback route if absolutely nothing else. However, he showed more route capability last year and I think he will continue to do so this year now that Darnold is back. He is a young player.

No, he is not a #1. But to call him essentially a fringe starter just because he is not a #1 is just absolutely idiotic. I agree with other posters who say he would have a starting role on just about any team in the league.

The level of ignorance I see on this board never ceases to amaze me. Adams is vilified because he is a “box safety” and we didn’t draft someone else who was available. Robby is a scrub because he isn’t a true #1. I get that this fan base is starved for wins and success but I swear some people here just love to be miserable about every player and every facet of the team.

 

You’re only adding to it by paraphrasing with false narratives and going to extremes. Nobody at least not me, called him a scrub. He’s a great deep threat who gets outmuscled and doesn’t run strong routes, hence his total catches and % rate are low, even on a team where he’s a primary target due to lack of talent.  I’m speaking to numbers # by targets, not where they line up. Crowder is essentially the #1 target/option on most plays. 

if they kept him and added a first round #1 with Crowder (with Bell and if Herndon ends up for real) that’s pretty solid. If you want to call Crowder a slot/#3 for all intents, semantically, fine that’d make Anderson a #2, ok. But Anderson is an inconsistent risk/reward guy ie great to have on the team due to his speed over the top and soft hands but doesn’t do everything well, (routes and tough catches.
As a primary target last year he only had 50 catches and a 53% catch rate. He’s on pace for the same numbers this year. 
He adds value but has limitations. I’d love to keep him too but solely based on his big play capabilities, which is a huge asset. 
 

There I basically said the same thing again for the 10th time in the same thread. Love your passion.

[Dunnie]

Robby is the best player on our offense.  Hed be a top wr w/ a real qb.
Now that we possibley have a guy whos ready to be a real qb, robby is going to take off.

???????balahahajajaj

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[Dunnie]

disagree with hand strength.
disagree w/ picking on his accent.
Does everything James Lofton /Ted Ginn did/does and will continue to., here or elsewhere...  cos, believe me, other teams will be interested,...

Then trade this beast now ...I also agree on picking on his accent.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[genot]

1 hour ago, HessStation said:

You’re only adding to it by paraphrasing with false narratives and going to extremes. Nobody at least not me, called him a scrub. He’s a great deep threat who gets outmuscled and doesn’t run strong routes, hence his total catches and % rate are low, even on a team where he’s a primary target due to lack of talent.  I’m speaking to numbers # by targets, not where they line up. Crowder is essentially the #1 target/option on most plays. 

if they kept him and added a first round #1 with Crowder (with Bell and if Herndon ends up for real) that’s pretty solid. If you want to call Crowder a slot/#3 for all intents, semantically, fine that’d make Anderson a #2, ok. But Anderson is an inconsistent risk/reward guy ie great to have on the team due to his speed over the top and soft hands but doesn’t do everything well, (routes and tough catches.
As a primary target last year he only had 50 catches and a 53% catch rate. He’s on pace for the same numbers this year. 
He adds value but has limitations. I’d love to keep him too but solely based on his big play capabilities, which is a huge asset. 
 

There I basically said the same thing again for the 10th time in the same thread. Love your passion.

That 53% catch rate is a bullsh*t statistic. How many of those were catchable balls. Do we know, or remember. Darnold throws a pass to Crowder., at the end of the game. Would have been a 1st down, and iced the game. Wasn't a catchable ball. Even Darnold was mad at himself for that pass. I never said Robby was a complete receiver, ala Jones, Green, Diggs. He has a skill set, that for one is rarer to find, and can be just as valuable to a passing offense as those players have been. Question. Receiver A. !00 catches. !2 yds per catch. Receiver B. 70 catches, 15 yrds per catch. Is receiver A that much more valuable to an offense than receiver B?

[Losmeister]

29 minutes ago, genot said:

I never said Robby was a complete receiver, ala Jones, Green, Diggs

"COMPLETE WR" how many in the whole league? 8-10

Robby has more TDs the last 2 years than Jones and 1 less than Green, 5 less than Diggs.

 

[HessStation]

35 minutes ago, genot said:

That 53% catch rate is a bullsh*t statistic. How many of those were catchable balls. 

OMG LOL

[genot]

2 minutes ago, Losmeister said:

"COMPLETE WR" how many in the whole league? 8-10

Robby has more TDs the last 2 years than Jones and 1 less than Green, 5 less than Diggs.

 

Oh, i agree with you. Im just trying to throw a bone his way. Those receivers do run more quality routes than Robby, but i think i made the so what point. Doesn't mean they're more valuable to an offense than Robby.

[genot]

2 minutes ago, HessStation said:

OMG LOL

What. Lol. Who needs accurate QB's. Just throw the ball, and if the receiver is any good, he'll catch it.

[Bleedin Green]

1 hour ago, genot said:

What. Lol. Who needs accurate QB's. Just throw the ball, and if the receiver is any good, he'll catch it.

The same argument applies to every single WR in the league, so it does nothing to excuse a player who is doing comparatively worse than others.

Robby is certainly by no measure bad, but he's definitely overrated by some around here, being given an endless stream of excuses why he's supposedly better than the majority of evidence shows him to be.  The guy is a good complementary player, and certainly brings a skill that is highly valued throughout the league, but that's really just the beginning, middle, and end of it all.  If he's willing to be no more than a #2/#3 guy in an offense, and be paid as such, then he's absolutely worth keeping around.

In the end, all we need to remember is the start of last season, when the Jets gave him every opportunity to step up into that role as their top guy, giving him a far more diverse play / route set, and it was an unmitigated disaster that he showed himself completely incapable of handling.  The funny part of it all was when he got all huffy late in the season because Bates started calling nothing but deep routes and comebacks for Robby, which is also when he suddenly found success again.  He's a limited player, and there's nothing wrong with that, as there are plenty of successful guys out there who are, but let's not pretend otherwise.

[genot]

10 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

The same argument applies to every single WR in the league, so it does nothing to excuse a player who is doing comparatively worse than others.

Robby is certainly by no measure bad, but he's definitely overrated by some around here, being given an endless stream of excuses why he's supposedly better than the majority of evidence shows him to be.  The guy is a good complementary player, and certainly brings a skill that is highly valued throughout the league, but that's really just the beginning, middle, and end of it all.  If he's willing to be no more than a #2/#3 guy in an offense, and be paid as such, then he's absolutely worth keeping around.

In the end, all we need to remember is the start of last season, when the Jets gave him every opportunity to step up into that role as their top guy, giving him a far more diverse play / route set, and it was an unmitigated disaster that he showed himself completely incapable of handling.  The funny part of it all was when he got all huffy late in the season because Bates started calling nothing but deep routes and comebacks for Robby, which is also when he suddenly found success again.  He's a limited player, and there's nothing wrong with that, as there are plenty of successful guys out there who are, but let's not pretend otherwise.

I think it's a bullsh*t stat. A receiver is targeted 10 times, catches 6 passes. We're those other 4 catchable. That's just someone's opinion. Half the people here could say yes. The other half, no.

[HessStation]

1 hour ago, genot said:

What. Lol. Who needs accurate QB's. Just throw the ball, and if the receiver is any good, he'll catch it.

Dude, the low catch rate is a direct reflection of his two current limitations, space in short/intermediate routes ie bad route runner and coming down with the 50/50 balls. 
The only other notable player w that low a catch rate, which was still two points higher, from last year is Landry, who has his own limitations, lack of top end speed...plus being double covered a lot last year....hence the trade for OBJ. 

They still desperately need a #1 guy. 

[genot]

1 minute ago, HessStation said:

Dude, the low catch rate is a direct reflection of his two current limitations, space in short/intermediate routes ie bad route runner and coming down with the 50/50 balls. 
The only other notable player w that low a catch rate, which was still two points higher, from last year is Landry, who has his own limitations, lack of top end speed...plus being double covered a lot last year....hence the trade for OBJ. 

They still desperately need a #1 guy. 

It's not a solid stat in my opinion. If you feel differently, that's cool. I respect your view. I just disagree with it. Dropped catch ratio is a much more solid, believable statistic. The football was in the receivers hands and he didn't reel it in. That stat is more opinion based. If it was another receiver, he would have caught it. Pure conjecture.

[Bleedin Green]

14 minutes ago, genot said:

I think it's a bullsh*t stat. A receiver is targeted 10 times, catches 6 passes. We're those other 4 catchable. That's just someone's opinion. Half the people here could say yes. The other half, no.

It doesn't mean much in a vacuum, I'll give you that, but if looked by comparison on a relative scale, it certainly means something if one player consistency has a higher or lower catch rate than the others at his position.

People can certainly try to argue about one individual throw, but that applies to all players, and over longer periods of time with more data to work with, the outliers have no meaningful impact.  Ultimately, Robby's catch rate has been in the mid-to-low 50s throughout his entire career, consistently near the worst rate each year for all Jets' WRs who had to deal with the same QBs throwing to them.

[Bleedin Green]

15 minutes ago, genot said:

It's not a solid stat in my opinion. If you feel differently, that's cool. I respect your view. I just disagree with it. Dropped catch ratio is a much more solid, believable statistic. The football was in the receivers hands and he didn't reel it in. That stat is more opinion based. If it was another receiver, he would have caught it. Pure conjecture.

Wait, which one are you saying is more opinion based?  The catch rate isn't opinion based at all.  It's simply a matter of two facts.  How many times was the WR thrown to, and how many times did he catch it?  Very cut and dry.  You don't necessarily have to agree with the value it brings, but definitely nothing even slightly opinion based about it.

Drops on the other hand, are completely subjective, as it's based entirely on the concept of which particular throws an individual stat-keeper personally decides the WR should have caught but didn't, under only a limited set of circumstances.

So are you saying that the one you label as "pure conjecture" is also the "much more solid, believable statistic"??  I feel like I must be missing something here.

[genot]

1 minute ago, Bleedin Green said:

Wait, which one are you saying is more opinion based?  The catch rate isn't opinion based at all.  It's simply a matter of two facts.  How many times was the WR thrown to, and how many times did he catch it?  Very cut and dry.  You don't necessarily have to agree with the value it brings, but definitely nothing even slightly opinion based about it.

Drops on the other hand, are completely subjective, as it's based entirely on the concept of which particular throws an individual stat-keeper personally decides the WR should have caught but didn't, under only a limited set of circumstances.

So are you saying that the one you label as "pure conjecture" is also the "much more solid, believable statistic"??  I feel like I must be missing something here.

Catch ratio is more opinion based. Drop ratio is a more solid stat. Why. A QB can throw the ball in the vicinity of a receiver. If that receiver was considered the target, it's factored into that catch ratio stat line. Drop ratio, to me, is not as much relying on opinion. The ball was in the receivers hand, so obviously it was catchable, and the receiver didn't.

[nycdan]

35 minutes ago, HessStation said:

Dude, the low catch rate is a direct reflection of his two current limitations, space in short/intermediate routes ie bad route runner and coming down with the 50/50 balls. 
The only other notable player w that low a catch rate, which was still two points higher, from last year is Landry, who has his own limitations, lack of top end speed...plus being double covered a lot last year....hence the trade for OBJ. 

They still desperately need a #1 guy. 

The correlation between a true #1 WR and a Super Bowl title is pretty much invisible.

[Jet_Engine1]

8 hours ago, Losmeister said:

btw, my FREE ROBBY movement, as it were, is primarily meant to be

free him from

the stupidity of a fan base who hasnt had a speed WR to speak of since Wesley Walker,

from this bizarre " he's not an elite #1 WR" of which there are maybe a 8-10 in a 32 team league,

from this socioeconomic bias against people who speak the english language as he does,

or have odd hairdos

from people who cant get over "nut in her eye".....

(but gush over sheldon who had a weapon and a kid in his car and was as high as a kite doing 140mph)

he's an UDFA who has done real well for us...  may it long continue and may he continue to haul in TDs...

.FOR THE NEW YORK JETS    if not here then elsewhere ......

Who is gushing over Sheldon? LOL. Robby is a good Receiver, wish he was a bit stronger....but the whole hairdo and speech thing? Whatever. It would benefit him to change his image a bit (endorsements etc), but as long as he keeps blowing past DBs and not being an idiot off the field, whatever. 

 

 

[Paradis]

31 minutes ago, nycdan said:

The correlation between a true #1 WR and a Super Bowl title is pretty much invisible.

The correlation between ANY position (not named QB) and SB titles is pretty much invisible. Teams do it differently every year.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't prioritize finding that WR1 over just about everything not named Oline

[Jethead]

Robbie is a key weapon for Sam. we are building a pretty solid receiving corps. who cares if he's 1,2, or 3, he belongs. And, he sure can take the top off the defense. Reminds me of Wesley Walker in that respect.

[HessStation]

40 minutes ago, nycdan said:

The correlation between a true #1 WR and a Super Bowl title is pretty much invisible.

Given the Tom Brady + holy cheaters factor, somewhat yes. But if you did a study which I’m not doing, most SB contending teams usually have a pretty good WR group

[Losmeister]

6 hours ago, genot said:

Oh, i agree with you. Im just trying to throw a bone his way. Those receivers do run more quality routes than Robby, but i think i made the so what point. Doesn't mean they're more valuable to an offense than Robby.

right on.

[Losmeister]

4 hours ago, Jet_Engine1 said:

ho is gushing over Sheldon?

keeps getting mentioned when our Dts are being discussed...   like snax, as "one who got away"

[Jet_Engine1]

5 minutes ago, Losmeister said:

keeps getting mentioned when our Dts are being discussed...   like snax, as "one who got away"

Literally nobody herències has said that in ages. We got great value for him, and the guy has done nothing since leaving.  Snacks was the "one that got away", but the Giants overpaid him so...

[Losmeister]

6 minutes ago, Jet_Engine1 said:

he guy has done nothing since leaving

thats what i say when his name comes up ...also that while snax can play...  not for THAT wage

[BornJetsFan1983]

On 10/14/2019 at 11:39 PM, Bob Robbins said:

 

McLaurin looks very good so far but not sure what that has to do with anything you (or anyone else) have said.

Saying Robby is a #4 on some teams is just wrong. Let alone that you said “or worse.” But there is a long line of ignorant fans (Jets fans or otherwise) that think any player who isn’t elite is a player who is mediocre or sucks. Maybe that’s why you think a talented young player who has been held back by abysmal QB play wouldn’t even start on some teams. The truth lies somewhere in the middle; no he is not a world beater but he is a solid enough outside receiver who quite possibly is not even in his prime yet.

Anyone who says he is a #1 is obviously wrong. But claiming he is a #4 or worse honestly might be even dumber than that.

 

I don't think he is a 2 or a solid 3. Maybe one day