Why Not Steve Smith as a starter.

I've read the boards the last few weeks and wanna challenge everyone who thinks we need to completely rebuild the WR's corps to convince me that Steve Smith shouldn't be one of our starters.

Here's my facts:

He's on pace for the following:

Average the last three games. 133 catches - 1888 Yards
Last 5 games (minus his best and worse) 86 - 1027
6 games (minus his worse game) 98 - 1258
All 7 games 86 - 1108

I say pair him with a first round pick with some height/speed/route running and we have a nice set.

 

I've been on that bandwagon.

For me, it's a 5'8" guy kicking ass and wearing tiger balm on his nutsack.

 

I say we need three capable guys.

I'd like for two of those guys to be above 5'9. This will always hurt Smith, and it hurt him even last week. He'll never be a consistent threat down the field or over the middle.

He has improved. There are things he does well and we spot him. But he's still shown inconsistancy and problems with Jake hitting a 5'9 guy.

Back to the stats.....he is getting more looks because he's the only target. Last week, literally, the only guy that could run something other than a fade.

We need two more. That doesn't mean those two get penned in as a starter for the short term. Particuarly the rookie.

Think about it. Picks 21-32. How many of those guys start from the get go. A lesser percentage. And that's assuming a first round WR is spotted, when we as easily could, or perhaps should, go corner.

So then you are talking about a rookie second rounder outside the top 50. That player likely starts out as a third guy, even at best.

And this is all assuming Steve will become more consistent, will not throw more hissy fits or punch teammates, ect.

And Steve has to prove that. He can do that best by playing out this year, and then next as a tendered RFA. By that time, if we want him to be one of the three, and he is a clear starter above the others we bring in, offer a long term contract.

 

My point isn't that he should be annointed, and I should clarify that. My point is the guy has a knack for exceeding expectations, and I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see him WIN the starting spot from whomever was drafted/signed to replace him.

But yeah, 2 more good WR's would be nice.

Speaking of, what WR's are UFA next year that are currently starting?

 

Really, for me it's all about his height. Like Piper said, he'll never be consistent over the middle, and nearly impossible to hit in traffic. Right now he's getting most of his success on two patterns: streaks/deep outs and hooks. He's had some success on crossing routes in spread formations when the opponent's defense is in the dime, and last week Henning incorporated the WR screen, which worked a couple of times.

He's a game breaker in the slot, and paired against most nickels, it's a mismatch in our favor. But I strongly feel we need someone bigger to start for this offense. I'm not a professor of NFL offenses by any stretch, but the way I understand it, the ideal WR for this offense would be Moose, circa 1999. A 6'2" or bigger WR with excellent hands, above average downfield blocking ability, and 4.5 speed.

Right now, we don't have that guy. Arguably, we could go with one of those, and keep Smith at #2 and probably be markedly better. A 3WR set is not our norm, so if you bust Smith back to #3, it seems like a waste. His main job goes back to returning kicks, and he's earned more touches than that.

So I'm waffling on busting Smith back to the slot. But we do need a new #1, and a #1WR in that mold would make Smith even better.

 

Thats just it..

 

I understand. But no, you can't block out 5'9. Or what I see.

He's limited in many ways in what we can do. See hasbeens post. 5'9 does hurt, two passes were incomplete because of that. Yeah, they were high, but a normal sized reciever comes down with those balls. THAT's what I'm saying, so I'm not confusing any issue at all. Any QB is going to have more overthrows with a 5'9 reciever.

He's made some plays, that we desperately need. Playmaker, yes. Consistant player, no. Downfield threat, no.


>>exactly my point, he's proving when he gets looks he produces, so continue to give him looks.

He gets those looks for being the only choice. He came through in some situiations, but the stats are inflated due to the fact that he's the only player we could set up.

 

\

You're wrong. Those are statistics and projections. Smith playing by himself at WR and Smith playing opposite another guy are totally different numbers. Reference the first five weeks against the last three.

Why not as a starter? Without generously reading anyone else's comments:
*inconsistency. He simply doesn't have it down, compared to your average starter, when it comes to most of the little things a wide receiver has to do in this league.
*He has occasional mental lapses, most notably based on motivation/anger. He has to find physical means to get himself "up" for the game, and a lot of games he can mail it in. Add that to inconsistency and you have a bad combination if things aren't just right.
Also look at it this way. Smith's play was largely uninspired and uninspiring at returning kicks for most of last year. He was taking on a lot, being a starter, and a return man, but his returning skills declined. That's basically like throwing a Pro Bowler away to make up for a lack of a starting receiver.
But that's not the issue in this addendum. The issue reprises itself this year, when during a stretch of football Smith just stops being as useful. As if bored, uninspired, whatever. Then he goes on his marginal tirade, and when I say that I mean to say that he can't even bitch with the Terrell Owens's of the league, much less play with them. So undoubtedly he gets chewed like nobody else has in years, not long after all that happened, which puts pride, anger, force behind him. Most likely, the chewing and motivating came from after he mailed in the New Orleans game after the tirade. He probably got a hell of a private meeting with Fox, may have met with JR about his actions, and certainly sat down with Peete and others for words of encouragement - I can all but guarantee that the receivers weren't in on the bulk of it - things such as "well if you think you're that good, play to it and you'll get that contract". Now he plays up to it, possibly, though I stand behind the idea that a lot of it has come from trash yards and the simple idea of being options 1-5 (yes, that's "the only option") on every pass play, and who's to say he doesn't get undermotivated in the future? Namely, what happens after we draft players? What happens when we pay him, or what if we don't pay him and we run him through RFA (A likelihood)? What happens when Smith wants to play hard, but just isn't motivated enough? We just suck that day?

*He's an explosive returner, and occasionally explosive with the ball in his hands no matter what. Much more so than his all-around ball skills, that is, which means that an obvious team like Carolina will put the ball in his hands in obvious ways. That does, in fact, mean becoming more predictable.

As well, what Smith does as a receiver is somewhat dimensional. It's not rounded out by all-around good play, great routes, or going and getting the toughest catches. Therefore, you'll probably see very few timing passes (one I can remember from Peete last year, on a 5 yard square in, was intercepted because of sloppy routes and easy recognition), and a lot of stop/hook/hitch/curl type routes so that Steve can be facing the ball as much as possible. That's yet another way to become more predictable - but think of it this way.
Return man + explosive + somewhat limited in use = part time offense, not starter, IMO. It means you put him on the field at certain times to create certain things, rather than put him on the field all day and simply not use him for what he's worst at. That's limiting the offense.

*5'9 doesn't matter a ton to me. Sure, he can't block. Sure, you have to place the ball very well to get it to him. If he were a top notch receiver, does 5'9 versus 5'11 change that much at receiver? Not to me. Smith has a somewhat filled out frame, decent wingspan, and big hands. His fumbling in past years and currently, those are more a function of carelessness and ball placement, as well as mental lapses. Not small, Ricky Williams-ish hands. So physically, there's no extreme excuse in size. It's not an extreme plus, but at receiver it's more excusable.

Certainly, I'd love to have a 6'3 pair of starting receivers. Just like, in theory, you want 6'1 corners. But I don't care about that like I did four and five years ago. A 5'10 to 6' receiver with ball skills is more able, IMO, than a 6'5 one who's lacking in instinct or athleticism. So I wouldn't discount Smith for that - but he certainly does not play to the speed he runs flat out, he can play tentative and runs routes slowly, especially out of his breaks, compared to what you'd expect from his athleticism. Not terrible, but if you look at the way Jeffers and Walls ran theirs, they were certainly blessed - but you tend to expect that, because you see it around the league from a lot of the starters in the NFL and you expect that a lot more from your starting pair than the explosive third receiver/return man, which is what Smith is on most every team in the NFL and should be here.
Right now, it's like we're using a lot of oregano to spice sauce because we forgot to buy meat, rather than to make the sauce to our tastes. It's spreading Smitty thin, and not using him to our best possible results. We can go get receivers, believe it or not they're available over six months out of the year.

 

Smith needs to be playing out of the slot with Moose & Dyson opposite each other.

Talk about match-up problems that presents for the secondary.

There, he becomes a dangerous weapon. Getting Smith in the open field is the key. He's so much like Metcalf sometimes, but not quite a Deion Sanders. He's definately stronger and tougher than Deion though.

As long as he's a starting WR, he'll never be as good as he could be, or put up the numbers he's capable of.

Plus, taking him out of the starter role and making him a 3rd WR makes him a fulltime KR alongside Smart & as well as starting PR. I'm still waiting for the reverse with Smart and Smith on the return, I'd like to burn Tampa with that one, and have everybody else we play from then on worried about it. Then use it again later when we play Indy.

So no, I don't think Smith should be a "starting WR"

I don't think we need a WR overhaul. I just think we need spread the ball around more. Young, Baker, and Seidman could get a couple of touches a game, and I haven't seen Hoover getting deep down the middle like last year either. Foster getting a couple of more catches, and Moose, Proehl, Wiggins, Magnum is enough talent somebody should be getting open. If we get Dyson back for Tampa, and he's healthy enough to be effective, that's all we need.

If Dyson can show enough to keep him, and we can use a high draft pick next year, we're all of a sudden deep.

 

Re: Re: Why Not Steve Smith as a starter.

No, I don't think I'm wrong but thank you for the well thought out response and the open mindedness to "think outside the box" I'm gonna link this thread on my favorites so we can re-address it later in the season.