Jarvis Landry Contract Situation

[ninotoreS]

Tannehill is terrible because he has an ineffective deep ball. I have no idea how people think that's holding Landry back.

Really? You have no idea?

You don't see how a one-dimensional QB is an obvious weakness for an offense that opposing defenses can exploit to the detriment (of at least some degree) of everyone else in that offense?

[ericanadian]

Tannehill is terrible because he has an ineffective deep ball. I have no idea how people think that's holding Landry back.

Really? You have no idea?

You don't see how a one-dimensional QB is an obvious weakness for an offense that opposing defenses can exploit to the detriment (of at least some degree) of everyone else in that offense?

Every offense has weaknesses. Miami has a solid RB, and a QB that spreads the ball around effectively underneath (which Landry benefits from greatly). Further, although Tannehill lacks downfield accuracy, he has the arm-strength to get the ball downfield, so teams still need to respect the occasional bomb to Stills or Parker. Is there a belief that Landry could be effective downfield? In my view, Stills and Parker would pick up 90% of the benefit if Tannehill could suddenly throw deep.

[DrNoish]

I think if teams really respected the downfield threat Landry would benefit from deeper YPC and RAC. Teams don't seem to worry on a 50% catch rate or a guy that has a few flashes but overall not presented much of a challenge 1 on 1. They're headed in a direction that will be interesting because he Has to spread the ball and their defense is getting better which will hurt Landry, but he could just become more efficient per touch. If Landry had been benefited by 10% last year he'd have been WR9.

[ericanadian]

I think if teams really respected the downfield threat Landry would benefit from deeper YPC and RAC. Teams don't seem to worry on a 50% catch rate or a guy that has a few flashes but overall not presented much of a challenge 1 on 1. They're headed in a direction that will be interesting because he Has to spread the ball and their defense is getting better which will hurt Landry, but he could just become more efficient per touch. If Landry had been benefited by 10% last year he'd have been WR9.

I get the thought process, but Landry was fifth in the league with 624 yards RAC. Maybe a better QB could provide a better aDoT, but would that play to Landry's strengths? I don't see him as a deep threat, so more deep routes would likely be a poor use of his skills, especially when you have Stills and Parker on the roster.

[Space Cowboy]

He's Boldin esq where he is borderline QB proof. Of course, Flacco was the exception there. Horrible pairing that was.

[ninotoreS]

Every offense has weaknesses. Miami has a solid RB, and a QB that spreads the ball around effectively underneath (which Landry benefits from greatly). Further, although Tannehill lacks downfield accuracy, he has the arm-strength to get the ball downfield, so teams still need to respect the occasional bomb to Stills or Parker. Is there a belief that Landry could be effective downfield? In my view, Stills and Parker would pick up 90% of the benefit if Tannehill could suddenly throw deep.

I think you already know the point I made is ironclad, simple as it is.

Because Tannehill is the way he is, defenses know they can usually get away with bringing one or more of their safeties up closer to the LoS most of the time, and that directly impacts a receiver like Landry who lives underneath; he has to work that much harder to find a soft spot in coverage. This is just basic football reality. A QB that can respectably attack every level of the field forces defenses to stretch out, which in turn creates space underneath. We consistently see this in the NFL's best offenses today.

You think Tom Brady's ability to attack vertically didn't help Wes Welker and now Edelman catch a bazillion passes underneath? How about Brees with Sproles and Colston back in the day? Roethlisberger with Bell? Palmer with Fitz and DJ? Eli with Cruz (when he was good)? Rodgers with Cobb (same)? Wilson with Baldwin? Matt Ryan with Freeman / Coleman in '15 / '16? Rivers with Allen? Peyton Manning with practically every slot-receiver and joker-TE he ever had? Some of these names are RBs obviously, but the principle is the same: these guys ate reliable volume underneath because they resided in offenses with QBs possessing arm-talent that defenses had to respect at every level of the field... and that usually meant they'd cede the underneath receptions, because those do less damage.

Landry is a baller, so he's still getting it done even with a mediocre QB that to some extent limits all of Miami's O (even Ajayi; he regularly faced stacked boxes last year because defensive-coordinators respected him more than Tannehill), but it's plainly logical to theorize that Landry could be even better in an offense with a better QB that could prevent defenses from zeroing in on him in coverage the way they can with Tannehill.

[ericanadian]

Every offense has weaknesses. Miami has a solid RB, and a QB that spreads the ball around effectively underneath (which Landry benefits from greatly). Further, although Tannehill lacks downfield accuracy, he has the arm-strength to get the ball downfield, so teams still need to respect the occasional bomb to Stills or Parker. Is there a belief that Landry could be effective downfield? In my view, Stills and Parker would pick up 90% of the benefit if Tannehill could suddenly throw deep.

I think you already know the point I made is ironclad, simple as it is.

Because Tannehill is the way he is, defenses know they can usually get away with bringing one or more of their safeties up closer to the LoS most of the time, and that directly impacts a receiver like Landry who lives underneath; he has to work that much harder to find a soft spot in coverage. These is just basic football reality. A QB that can respectably attack every level of the field forces defenses to stretch out, which in turn creates space underneath. We consistently see this in the NFL's best offenses today.

You think Tom Brady's ability to attack vertically didn't help Wes Welker and now Edelman catch a bazillion passes underneath? How about Brees with Sproles and Colston back in the day? Roethlisberger with Bell? Palmer with Fitz and DJ? Eli with Cruz (when he was good)? Rodgers with Cobb (same)? Wilson with Baldwin? Matt Ryan with Freeman / Coleman in '15 / '16? Rivers with Allen? Peyton Manning with practically every slot-receiver and joker-TE he ever had? Some of these names are RBs obviously, but the principle is the same: these guys ate reliable volume underneath because they resided in offenses with QBs possessing arm-talent that defenses had to respect at every level of the field... and that usually meant they'd cede the underneath receptions, because those do less damage.

Landry is a baller, so he's still getting it done even with a mediocre QB that to some extent limits all of Miami's O (even Ajayi; he regularly faced stacked boxes last year because defensive-coordinators respected him more than Tannehill), but it's plainly logical to theorize that Landry could be even better in an offense with a better QB that could prevent defenses from zeroing in on him in coverage the way they can with Tannehill.

Gordon with a bunch of terrible QBs. Hopkins with Hoyer. Welker with Cassel. DT & Sanders with Osweiler and FrankenManning. Receivers have put up solid numbers with terrible QBs with a fair amount of regularity. Even bad QBs have strengths and when those strengths line up with a receivers strengths, production happens.

Landry was top five in YAC. He was solid to elite in terms of catch rate at every level. He had 131 targets and 94 receptions. Where is the dramatic improvement going to come from? Sure, he could put up a freak season with an elite QB, but the assumption seems to be that this is a bad situation for him and that he has a greater than 50% chance of finding a better situation because Tannehill can't throw deep. I get the "logic", but it completely ignores Landry's actual performance.

[Factory of Sadness]

Arguing about the 'effect' of Tannehill's 'poor deep ball' on Landry is rather a waste of time as it is based on an absolute misconception.

Tannehill is a good deep ball thrower. There's plenty of evidence on this from people who have charted the deep ball. Have a look at 'The Deep Ball Project' which ranks him second to A Rod last year. Or look at Cian Fahey's Pre-Snap Reads, which pegs him as the number 3 deep ball thrower last year. PFF commended his deep ball whilst ranking him between Dalton and Mariota as the 18th best QB due to weaknesses under pressure. Tannehill's deep ball was good before and after Mike Wallace came to town, but he didn't connect well with Wallace and the perception stuck.

Tannehill has weaknesses under pressure, though he's definitely not lacking in guts. He will stand in there too long at times and doesn't seem to have a great feel for the pocket. He can sometimes blow a read. He is a little stiff in his motion so when he misses, he can sometimes miss by a lot. What he is though is an accurate QB overall and a good deep passer.


1) http://slicemiami.com/2017/05/03/ryan-t ... tom-brady/
2) http://dailydolphin.blog.palmbeachpost. ... l-project/
3) https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/p ... his-season

[jonesmaster]

According to the reports out of Miami everyone is breaking out this year with the exception of Landry (who has received limited discussion relative to his teammates). Keeping in mind that this is obviously unlikely, I would be ok with Landry maintaining his current role, which I think is very stable despite all thats being preached. That being said, I am hoping he is able to leave Miami and sign with an "up and coming" team e.g. CLE, SF, NYJ. I think they are all closer to a QB1 than Miami, and terrible teams with a young QB are a great place for fantasy WRs

[ericanadian]

Arguing about the 'effect' of Tannehill's 'poor deep ball' on Landry is rather a waste of time as it is based on an absolute misconception.

Tannehill is a good deep ball thrower. There's plenty of evidence on this from people who have charted the deep ball. Have a look at 'The Deep Ball Project' which ranks him second to A Rod last year. Or look at Cian Fahey's Pre-Snap Reads, which pegs him as the number 3 deep ball thrower last year. PFF commended his deep ball whilst ranking him between Dalton and Mariota as the 18th best QB due to weaknesses under pressure. Tannehill's deep ball was good before and after Mike Wallace came to town, but he didn't connect well with Wallace and the perception stuck.

Tannehill has weaknesses under pressure, though he's definitely not lacking in guts. He will stand in there too long at times and doesn't seem to have a great feel for the pocket. He can sometimes blow a read. He is a little stiff in his motion so when he misses, he can sometimes miss by a lot. What he is though is an accurate QB overall and a good deep passer.


1) http://slicemiami.com/2017/05/03/ryan-t ... tom-brady/
2) http://dailydolphin.blog.palmbeachpost. ... l-project/
3) https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/p ... his-season

Subjective stats posing as objective stats. The slicemiami article gives him an accuracy percentage of 55.6% on balls of 21+ DoT, while thr dailydolphin rings him in at 61% on balls of 20+. Problem is, he only threw one pass with a DoT of 20 yards, which means that your two sources are giving you two different numbers even if you adjust for their differing parameters.

His completion rate on balls of 21+ was middle of the pack at 37.2%. He threw the deep ball at a rate well below league average, and while there's something to be said for taking what the defense gives you, it's pretty easy to rack up solid efficiency stats by only trying when it's easy. It doesn't make you an elite deep-baller.

I'll acknowledge that Tannehill did show improvement on his deep ball last year, but it's one year (42 passes) and that doesn't negate several years of being poor on the deep ball.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

I'm really surprised so many ppl think Miami is a bad situation. For Landry, I think it's great. Great chemistry with Tannehill. Anywhere else and who knows how they'll use him. I think the potential upside is minimal but potential downside is big if he were to change teams.

[Space Cowboy]

I'm really surprised so many ppl think Miami is a bad situation. For Landry, I think it's great. Great chemistry with Tannehill. Anywhere else and who knows how they'll use him. I think the potential upside is minimal but potential downside is big if he were to change teams.

He'd put up bigger #'s if he had Rodgers, Ryan, Brees, Luck, etc......

Some argue Tannenhill's lack of skill helps him. It doesn't hurt him given his skillset, but it definitively doesnt help.

[ColdZealDonkeyStrike]

I'm really surprised so many ppl think Miami is a bad situation. For Landry, I think it's great. Great chemistry with Tannehill. Anywhere else and who knows how they'll use him. I think the potential upside is minimal but potential downside is big if he were to change teams.

He'd put up bigger #'s if he had Rodgers, Ryan, Brees, Luck, etc......

Some argue Tannenhill's lack of skill helps him. It doesn't hurt him given his skillset, but it definitively doesnt help.

To this point in his career, Tannehill's tendencies have helped Landry tremendously. Tannehill doesn't like to push the ball downfield and has fed his security blanket Landry more than slot WRs are usually fed. Outside of the Welker/Edelman role in NE, where else is a slot WR going to average 10 targets a game like Landry did from mid-2014- mid-2016?

It is a legitimate concern whether the 2nd half of last season is more the norm going forward though. As a dolphins fan, Landry is a really good player, but I don't like how reliant the offense was on him. It significantly limits your offense once teams know the passing game is so heavily dependant on shorter routes. I think Gase knows that, and Landry is not likely to see more targets than he saw last year if things go according to plan.

The Dolphins fan in me wants Landry back at a Baldwin-like $11-12m/year contract, but I think he is looking for somethig closer to the top WRs in the league.

[Cameron Giles]

He'd put up bigger #'s if he had Rodgers, Ryan, Brees, Luck, etc......

Some argue Tannenhill's lack of skill helps him. It doesn't hurt him given his skillset, but it definitively doesnt help.

Over the past three seasons, Jarvis Landry is:

5th in receptions (288)
9th in targets (409)
11th in receiving yards (3,051)

I honestly don't see how he can get that much better by changing teams. The only thing that could improve are touchdowns, but he's not someone that's really a redzone target. Tannehill may not be a great QB, but he maximizes the full potential of Landry and more.

And realistically, you named a bunch of teams that are probably not going to be in the market to overpay another team's WR.

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

2018: NE cuts Brandin Cooks to avoid paying him an enormous amount of money. Jarvis Landry signs there to spite MIA's lackluster interest in him and to win a ring. Landry goes for 80/1100/8 in the regular season en route to a 31-28 NE Super Bowl victory over TB.

In all seriousness, I think Landry is a PPR asset due to his lack of speed. He's a very good but not great slot WR and would fall somewhere on the scale between Stefon Diggs and Cole Beasley. I think Landry is worth closer to a late 1st than the 1.01-1.04 range I often see him being sold for, and even then I'd rather buy Jamison Crowder for much cheaper and similar production.