SB Nation - Jon Gissinger

Targets and Catches (Part Two, a.k.a. Will Franklin's Redemption)

Bill C. — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:00:17 -0000

Image via The Trib's G.J. McCarthy

You may have noticed that, somewhere around 1pm yesterday, the title of yesterday's "Targets and Catches" post changed to "Targets and Catches (Part One)." That's because I figured out the next direction I wanted to take the concept of targets and couldn't wait to get started on it.

As discussed yesterday, the concept of targets (catches + incomplete passes intended for a given receiver) versus catches is a pretty good one, despite the likely flaws in the ways target data is collected (dropped/tipped passes that become interceptions don't have target data attached, not every scorekeeper probably records targets the same way, etc.). It allows us to look into a receiver's reliability in ways that simpler measures do not, and once national data is collected on this (offseason project #12,424), it might give us a way to measure a quarterback's performance independent of the quality of his receivers (hey Uribe Auction, here's how we get to Receiver Independent Passing Stats, or RIPS...I love it when a plan comes together).

But simply looking at a players Catch% (Catches per Target) does a disservice to those who are likely to run deeper, lower-percentage routes. How about we do this as well: create a Yards Per Target measure. Yards Per Catch is a good way to measure a receiver's explosiveness, and wouldn't the incorporation of target data create something that shows us both explosiveness and reliability? Let's try that.

Below are tables for 2006-09 giving us the following information:

Catches
Yards
Catch% (Catches divided by Targets)
Yards Per Target

2006

2006 Yards Per Target
Name	Pos.	Catches	Yards	Catch%	Yds/Target
Chase Coffman	TE	58	638	65.2%	7.2
Martin Rucker	TE	53	511	77.9%	7.5
Will Franklin	WR	48	829	57.8%	10.0
Jared Perry	WR	37	429	67.3%	7.8
Brad Ekwerekwu	WR	32	430	64.0%	8.6
Tommy Saunders	WR	25	271	73.5%	8.0
Danario Alexander	WR	15	251	71.4%	12.0
Jason Ray	WR	6	50	40.0%	3.3
Tony Temple	RB	6	34	85.7%	4.9
Earl Goldsmith	RB	5	59	100.0%	11.8
Greg Bracey	WR	3	79	50.0%	13.2
Marcus Woods	RB	2	11	40.0%	2.2
Jimmy Jackson	RB	1	-2	50.0%	-1.0
Andrew Hoskins	WR	0	0	0.0%	0.0
TOTAL	ALL	291	3,590	66.0%	8.1

Here's where we start to see the value of Will Franklin. The 'Copta had an awful catch rate this season, but as we see here, a) he made up for it with his explosiveness, and b) being a deep threat means you're probably seeing more low-percentage passes. Meanwhile, tight ends running high-percentage routes will have good catch rates, but their Yards Per Target figures show that while it's good to have high-percentage targets, there isn't necessarily a lot of explosiveness there.

Two other interesting things to note:

1) Danario was very clearly showing his big-play potential early on. It really is a damn shame that he ended up having to fight so many injuries, but on the bright side, if he hadn't, he'd have almost certainly gone pro last year.

2) Clearly we should have been passing to Earl Goldsmith more often. Ahem.

2007

Image via the inestimable Bill Carter

2007 Yards Per Target
Name	Pos.	Catches	Yards	Catch%	Yds/Target
Martin Rucker	TE	84	834	77.8%	7.7
Jeremy Maclin	WR	80	1,055	72.1%	9.5
Chase Coffman	TE	52	531	80.0%	8.2
Will Franklin	WR	49	709	64.5%	9.3
Tommy Saunders	WR	41	397	74.5%	7.2
Danario Alexander	WR	37	417	77.1%	8.7
Jared Perry	WR	13	152	65.0%	7.6
Derrick Washington	RB	10	70	71.4%	5.0
Jason Ray	WR	8	61	80.0%	6.1
Tony Temple	RB	7	68	77.8%	7.6
Jimmy Jackson	RB	6	30	100.0%	5.0
Earl Goldsmith	RB	4	20	66.7%	3.3
Greg Bracey	WR	3	53	33.3%	5.9
Blake May	WR	0	0	0.0%	0.0
TOTAL	ALL	394	4,397	73.2%	8.2

And here's where the numbers even out for Senor Goldsmith.

Even though his YPT dipped in 2007, Franklin was still a decent weapon here, averaging over 9.0 per target (which appears to be a pretty good number) and, as we must not forget, becoming one helluva downfield blocker for Maclin. In all, Chase Coffman was the most reliable target this season, but obviously the WRs were more dangerous, even though they didn't really thrust too many nunchuks.

(Non-RMN regulars just read and re-read that last sentence 5-6 times, then gave up on figuring it out what it meant. Here's the explanation.)

2008

Bill Carter again

2008 Yards Per Target
Name	Pos.	Catches	Yards	Catch%	Yds/Target
Jeremy Maclin	WR	102	1,260	75.6%	9.3
Chase Coffman	TE	90	987	88.2%	9.7
Tommy Saunders	WR	72	833	78.3%	9.1
Jared Perry	WR	41	567	68.3%	9.5
Derrick Washington	RB	29	277	76.3%	7.3
Danario Alexander	WR	26	329	60.5%	7.7
Andrew Jones	TE	20	146	83.3%	6.1
Jerrell Jackson	WR	9	98	69.2%	7.5
Earl Goldsmith	WR	5	58	83.3%	9.7
Michael Egnew	TE	4	22	50.0%	2.8
Jimmy Jackson	RB	3	26	75.0%	6.5
Wes Kemp	WR	1	15	50.0%	7.5
Jon Gissinger	TE	1	10	100.0%	10.0
Brandon Gerau	WR	0	0	0.0%	0.0
Forrest Shock	WR	0	0	0.0%	0.0
TOTAL	ALL	403	4,628	76.0%	8.7

Here's where Chase Coffman became the best tight end we'll ever see. He was so reliable that throwing to him actually resulted in more yards per target than Jeremy Maclin, All-American. Here's also where Jared Perry, a.k.a. Will Franklin 2.0, began to show value. He was a reasonably reliable option his first couple of years (obviously targeted much more in 2006 than 2007, when Maclin emerged), but while he still couldn't hit 70% from a Catch% perspective, his big-play ability went up a notch, and he went from averaging 7-8 yards per target to over 9. Meanwhile, Jerrell Jackson registered with numbers very similar to Perry's freshman numbers, albeit on a small sample size.

2009

Yup, Bill Carter.

2009 Yards Per Target
Name	Pos.	Catches	Yards	Catch%	Yds/Target
Danario Alexander	WR	107	1,644	73.8%	11.3
Jared Perry	WR	46	695	53.5%	8.1
Jerrell Jackson	WR	37	458	60.7%	7.5
Wes Kemp	WR	23	335	52.3%	7.6
Derrick Washington	RB	23	99	69.7%	3.0
Andrew Jones	TE	7	39	58.3%	3.3
Rolandis Woodland	WR	4	23	66.7%	3.8
Michael Egnew	TE	3	25	60.0%	5.0
De'Vion Moore	RB	3	13	100.0%	4.3
Kendial Lawrence	RB	2	42	100.0%	21.0
Brandon Gerau	WR	2	19	66.7%	6.3
T.J. Moe	WR	2	8	40.0%	1.6
Gilbert Moye	RB	1	5	50.0%	2.5
TOTAL	ALL	260	3,405	63.9%	8.4

And here's where we find out just how amazing Danario Alexander has been this season (as if there were any doubt). Looking only at receivers who were targeted at least ten times in a given season, Alexander's 11.3 per-target average is topped only by ... 2006 Danario Alexander, who was targeted only 21 times. For ~~Domino Axelrod~~ Danario to be both this reliable and this explosive has just been amazing.

Here are the overall averages per position:

WR: 67.3% catch rate, 8.7 yards per target
TE: 77.2% catch rate, 8.2 yards per target
RB: 75.0% catch rate, 5.5 yards per target

So for the last four seasons, here are your top ten in terms of Yards Per Target (with a minimum of ten targets):

Danario Alexander (2006): 12.0 per target (on 21 targets)
Danario Alexander (2009): 11.3 (145)
Will Franklin (2006): 10.0 (83)
Chase Coffman (2008): 9.7 (102)
Jeremy Maclin (2007): 9.5 (111)
Jared Perry (2008): 9.5 (60)
Jeremy Maclin (2008): 9.3 (135)
Will Franklin (2007): 9.3 (76)
Tommy Saunders (2008): 9.1 (92)
Danario Alexander (2007): 8.7 (48)

Will Franklin, you are absolved.

Danario Alexander, you officially have a case for having been the best receiver in Mizzou history.

Targets and Catches (Part One)

Bill C. — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:00:15 -0000

One of the measures I am looking to track more in-depth in the future, in terms of my play-by-play data, is the notion of catches versus targets. In the play-by-play data exists a line that I have yet allowed to go unrecorded: "Pass incomplete to _____." Obviously I record that the pass is incomplete, but I have not really paid attention to who the pass was intended for. It's a rather objective measure -- does everybody record who a pass was intended for the same way? If the QB is throwing the ball away and it goes 20 feet over a certain receiver's head, does it count as an incompletion "to" that receiver? Does every score-keeper even keep track of this? Plus, if a ball is tipped by a receiver and intercepted (e.g. Jerrell Jackson in the Oklahoma State game), the "intended for" bit isn't recorded. Clearly this is a piece of data that is rather inconsistent.

That said, this is also one of those measures where you figure that the inconsistencies balance out over time. Even if it doesn't paint a perfect picture, it probably tells an interesting story. Therefore, let's take a look at how our view of a receiver's (or quarterback's) performance changes when adding in "intended for" data.

The categories below are:

Catches: receptions
Targets: receptions + incomplete passes intended for that receiver (as recorded in the play-by-play data). In general, you can think of those incomplete passes as either being a) dropped or b) too well-covered to be completed. If your QB is accurate, you will obviously catch more of your targeted passes, but if you struggle to get open and clear space from the guy covering you, a lot more of your targeted passes are going to fall incomplete.
Catch%: the percentage of "targets" a receiver catches
Target%: the percentage of a team's overall targets aimed at a specific receiver

Without further ado, let's take a look at the last four years of Mizzou "target" data and see what it tells us.

2006

Image via Phoebe Sexton / Columbia Missourian

2006 Targets and Catches
Name	Catches	Targets	Catch%	Target%
Chase Coffman	58	89	65.2%	20.2%
Will Franklin	48	83	57.8%	18.8%
Martin Rucker	53	68	77.9%	15.4%
Jared Perry	37	55	67.3%	12.5%
Brad Ekwerekwu	32	50	64.0%	11.3%
Tommy Saunders	25	34	73.5%	7.7%
Danario Alexander	15	21	71.4%	4.8%
Jason Ray	6	15	40.0%	3.4%
Tony Temple	6	7	85.7%	1.6%
Greg Bracey	3	6	50.0%	1.4%
Marcus Woods	2	5	40.0%	1.1%
Earl Goldsmith	5	5	100.0%	1.1%
Jimmy Jackson	1	2	50.0%	0.5%
Andrew Hoskins	0	1	0.0%	0.2%
TOTAL	291	441	66.0%	100.0%

WRs: 60.1% of targets
TEs: 35.6%
RBs: 4.3%

Before looking at ensuing seasons, it is hard to get a grasp on what these numbers actually mean, but a couple of things should stick out pretty quickly. First, thanks to a midseason bout with the dropsies, Chase Coffman's numbers were only decent, not great. Martin Rucker was a rather automatic target at TE, but Coffman wasn't amazing. Meanwhile, if your #1 WR is only catching 58% of the passes thrown at him, that is going to do a number on your completion percentage.

Anyway, before we try to interpret this too much, let's take a look at how 2007 unfolded.

2007

Image via ESPN.com

2007 Targets and Catches
Name	Catches	Targets	Catch%	Target%
Jeremy Maclin	80	111	72.1%	20.6%
Martin Rucker	84	108	77.8%	20.1%
Will Franklin	49	76	64.5%	14.1%
Chase Coffman	52	65	80.0%	12.1%
Tommy Saunders	41	55	74.5%	10.2%
Danario Alexander	37	48	77.1%	8.9%
Jared Perry	13	20	65.0%	3.7%
Derrick Washington	10	14	71.4%	2.6%
Jason Ray	8	10	80.0%	1.9%
Greg Bracey	3	9	33.3%	1.7%
Tony Temple	7	9	77.8%	1.7%
Earl Goldsmith	4	6	66.7%	1.1%
Jimmy Jackson	6	6	100.0%	1.1%
Blake May	0	1	0.0%	0.2%
TOTAL	394	538	73.2%	100.0%

WRs: 63.9% of targets
TEs: 32.2%
RBs: 3.9%

Despite a deep, experienced cast of receivers (Rucker and Franklin were seniors, Coffman and Saunders were juniors), Jeremy Maclin came out of nowhere to become Chase Daniel's most trusted receiver. His 72% Catch% was much higher than Will Franklin's 58% from the season before. Meanwhile, MotherRucker stayed right around 78% while Chase Coffman improved dramatically, from 65% to 80%. Franklin did improve to 65%, but he was still a far less reliable target than others around him. Of course, he obviously ran deeper routes than guys like Coffman, Rucker or Saunders, so that might have something to do with it. Then again, were his routes any different than those of Maclin? Maclin still outshone him in that regard.

With Maclin and an extra year of experience for Chase Daniel, the overall Catch% rose from 66% to 73% in 2007. This, of course, tells us nothing about how many passes Daniel chose to throw away (which would just go in the play-by-play as "pass incomplete" with no "intended for" information), but it does show that Daniel was completing one more pass for roughly every 14 catchable balls in 2007, and that could make a difference of 2-3 completions per game.

2008

Image via Chris Lee / Post-Dispatch

2008 Targets and Catches
Name	Catches	Targets	Catch%	Target%
Jeremy Maclin	102	135	75.6%	25.5%
Chase Coffman	90	102	88.2%	19.2%
Tommy Saunders	72	92	78.3%	17.4%
Jared Perry	41	60	68.3%	11.3%
Danario Alexander	26	43	60.5%	8.1%
Derrick Washington	29	38	76.3%	7.2%
Andrew Jones	20	24	83.3%	4.5%
Jerrell Jackson	9	13	69.2%	2.5%
Michael Egnew	4	8	50.0%	1.5%
Earl Goldsmith	5	6	83.3%	1.1%
Jimmy Jackson	3	4	75.0%	0.8%
Wes Kemp	1	2	50.0%	0.4%
Jon Gissinger	1	1	100.0%	0.2%
Brandon Gerau	0	1	0.0%	0.2%
Forrest Shock	0	1	0.0%	0.2%
TOTAL	403	530	76.0%	100.0%

WRs: 66.6% of targets
TEs: 25.5%
RBs: 7.9%

In 2008, Missouri lost Martin Rucker and his 78% catch rate but still improved as a team, from 73% to 76%. Danario Alexander aside (this was the year he was recovering from knee injuries and was clearly not as confident/aggressive a receiver), just about everybody showed improvement. Coffman improved to a sickening 88% (that means that eight of every nine balls that were thrown at him and were even remotely catchable, were caught...yeah, he deserved the Mackey Award), Saunders improved to 78%, which is the highest you'll see from a highly-targeted receiver, and even Maclin improved to 76%. Having a ton of reps with the same quarterback helped a ton, I'm sure, as did the fact that said quarterback (Daniel) was as automatic as a computer in his reads, especially over the first half of the season.

So what happens when you lose your quarterback and your top three targets? As shocking as it may sound, your numbers go down!

2009

Image via the one, the only Bill Carter

2009 Targets and Catches
Name	Catches	Targets	Catch%	Target%
Danario Alexander	107	145	73.8%	35.6%
Jared Perry	46	86	53.5%	21.1%
Jerrell Jackson	37	61	60.7%	15.0%
Wes Kemp	23	44	52.3%	10.8%
Derrick Washington	23	33	69.7%	8.1%
Andrew Jones	7	12	58.3%	2.9%
Rolandis Woodland	4	6	66.7%	1.5%
Michael Egnew	3	5	60.0%	1.2%
T.J. Moe	2	5	40.0%	1.2%
De'Vion Moore	3	3	100.0%	0.7%
Brandon Gerau	2	3	66.7%	0.7%
Kendial Lawrence	2	2	100.0%	0.5%
Gilbert Moye	1	2	50.0%	0.5%
TOTAL	260	407	63.9%	100.0%

WRs: 86.0% of targets
TEs: 4.2%
RBs: 9.8%

So here's where I start to get encouraged about Blaine Gabbert's prospects moving forward. With a relatively similar cast of characters in the receiving corps (Alexander was clearly better than any receiver in 2006, but Gabbert was without anyone nearing the reliability of Rucker, so they cancel out) and the propensity for throwing many more deep balls than Daniel, the Catch% for Gabbert's sophomore season was almost identical to Daniel's.

Now, unless one of our redshirting freshmen is suddenly capable of pulling a Jeremy Maclin impersonation (doubtful, to say the very least), Gabbert will head into 2010 without his top two targets, which is obviously something Daniel didn't have to worry about heading into 2007. However, while losing Alexander is a huge concern, losing Perry simply might not be too big a deal. Jackson has done a lovely Perry impersonation in recent weeks, and besides, Perry's 54% catch rate is simply horrendous. We know that Perry had a decent amount of bad luck this season -- how many times did Gabbert throw too high for him in the Oklahoma State game? -- but 54% is too low to blame simply on bad luck. Over four seasons, Perry never topped 70%, and while Jackson's 61% is nothing impressive, it is still better than what Perry managed this season. With another year (at least) of getting used to catching Gabbert's fastballs (and another year of Gabbert learning to keep the ball down as much as possible), I would expect Jackson's catch rate to be closer to the 65-70% range next year.

However, is that good enough? Gabbert can be expected to improve a decent amount next year, but ... who becomes the #1 target? And if it's Jackson, can Mizzou succeed at a high level with a #1 WR target catching only 65-70%, especially when there is suddenly no ultra-reliable tight end option to fall back on in times where a completion absolutely must be made?

Speaking of the tight end position, I guess this is the year in which we officially learned that WRs and TEs are basically exactly the same in this system. Alexander's Target% of 35% this year was 10% higher than Maclin ever managed and came within 10% of matching that of Maclin and Coffman from 2008. Lining up in the tight end slot position quite often, Alexander was actually able to approximately compensate for the loss of both players this year and catch passes at a very high rate for a receiver. Meanwhile, thanks to Alexander being a WR, tight ends accounted for only 4% of targets this year, and that's only if you count Michael Egnew as a tight end. The position disappeared from Mizzou's repertoire, but the passing numbers stayed relatively successful thanks to Alexander. With Alexander gone in 2010, do we see guys like Andrew Jones or Egnew working their way back into Gabbert's sights, or will another big receiver like Wes Kemp move into that role?

I have a lot more questions here than answers, but answers weren't the purpose of this exercise. I wanted to see if target data was viable and interesting, and while I found it both of those things, I'm curious what you think.

Missouri/Nevada: Anatomy of a Dagger

RPT — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 16:17:06 -0000

Missouri's offense is reaping praise for its 97-yard fourth quarter drive that put Nevada away on Friday. What exactly happened on that drive following Brian Coulter's forced fumble at the MU 3? Let's take a closer look:

Situation: 1st and 10 at MIZZ 3
Personnel/Formation: "12" personnel (1 back, 2 tight ends), Ace formation, Gabbert under center
Result: Derrick Washington rush for 2 yards to the MIZZ 5.

What happened: ZOMG MISSOURI WENT UNDER CENTER. Missouri tries to get out of the shadow of its own endzone, running the little used Ace formation with two in-line tight ends, including a very rare Jon Gissinger sighting. The handoff goes off-tackle to the left, where the left side of the line gets a pretty good push, only to have Washington stopped by the left side of the Nevada D-Line crashing down to the right.

Situation: 2nd and 8 at MIZZ 5
Personnel/Formation: "11" personnel with standing TE, Gun Trips Left (3x1 receivers) before Jones motions right
Result: Derrick Washington rush for no gain to the MIZZ 5.

What happened: Because the left side of the Missouri line gets blown off the line of scrimmage, it's hard to tell if this play was a middle draw, an off-tackle to the left, or a delay counter to the right. Austin Wuebbels manages to block his man, although he gets blown backward in the process, clogging the lane and forcing Washington to try to bounce right to no avail.

Situation: 3rd and 8 at MIZZ 5
Personnel/Formation: Two-back Gun set, Lawrence/Washington split on each side of Gabbert, 2x1 receivers
Result: Blaine Gabbert pass complete to Danario Alexander for 8 yards to the MIZZ 13 for a 1ST down.

What happened: Nevada shows blitz but rushes only four, with two would-be blitzers immediately bailing from the line of scrimmage. The receivers are getting extremely cushy coverages out wide, and all three receivers get a free release. Lawrence flares out right and Washington hooks up the middle, both as safety valve outlets that Gabbert never even considers. Gabbert sees what appears to be a Nevada zone aimed at taking away the middle of the field deep, and our man "Dontario" Alexander breaks out to the sideline where there's a major soft spot in coverage. Alexander was in the slot, and the unidentified MU receiver split out to his left was able to stretch the field vertically and open up that sideline for Danario.

Situation: 1st and 10 at MIZZ 13
Personnel/Formation: Gun Trips Right (1x3, stand up TE in slot), Washington left of Gabbert
Result: Blaine Gabbert pass incomplete to Andrew Jones.

What happened: Missouri runs one of the staples of its offense, the playaction pass with a pulling guard. Gabbert shows run to Washington, as Wuebbels pulls right to attack the end left unblocked by Dan Hoch, who's crashed left to sell the fake. The inside slot receiver shows bubble screen, which at first appears to suck down the defenders and open up the short hitch route to Jones. The pocket sets for Gabbert, but the defense doesn't crash down on the bubble as hard as expected. Gabbert throws a laser behind a pretty well-covered Jones and lives to fight another down.

Situation: 2nd and 10 at MIZZ 13
Personnel/Formation: Two back Gun set, Washington and Lawrence split, two receivers (2x1) strong right
Result: Kendial Lawrence rush for 3 yards to the MIZZ 16.

What happened: Missouri runs Lawrence off tackle on what could have been considered a lead play if Washington had elected to get out and block. Nevada brings a linebacker blitz from the strong side, but the play runs away from the blitzer and leaves him as a non-factor. Both Nevada linebackers read the play perfectly and contain the run on the near side.

Situation: 3rd and 7 at MIZZ 16
Personnel/Formation: Gun Trips Right, 1x3 receivers with Washington to left of Gabbert
Result: Blaine Gabbert pass complete to Wes Kemp for 18 yards to the MIZZ 34 for a 1ST down.

What happened: Again, Nevada brings four, and settles into the Half Quarters in coverage. Hoch and Fisher are able to push their rushers outside, but the left defensive tackle gets a strong push up the middle on the bull rush. Barnes is able to recover to push the rusher past Gabbert, allowing him to step up and deliver a bit of an arching throw from the hash marks to the opposite sideline, where Wes Kemp has all kinds of space. The corner continues retreating to take away his quarter of the field deep, only to have Kemp settle underneath. Two third downs. Two conversions for Gabbert.

Situation: 1st and 10 at MIZZ 34
Personnel/Formation: Show empty set (3x2, Lawrence in slot), Lawrence motions into backfield
Result: Kendial Lawrence rush for 1 yard to the MIZZ 35.

What happened: Missouri runs the play that was one of its biggest successes against Bowling Green. In 2009, David Yost has loved splitting his backs out wide and giving the ball to them on what appears to be jet sweeps. Instead of motioning the backs into the backfield and having them come set, Yost is having the backs take the ball on the move, and instead of racing to the outside like most receivers, he's having the backs cut upfield almost immediately. The zone blocking scheme moves left as Lawrence takes the handoff. All seven men in the box for Nevada follow the play, and Lawrence is tripped up for negligible gain.

Situation: 2nd and 9 at MIZZ 35
Personnel/Formation: Can't exactly tell -- ESPN montage cuts off start of play.
Result: Blaine Gabbert pass complete to Jared Perry for 17 yards to the NEV 48 for a 1ST down.

What happened: Can we PLEASE start calling Jared Perry by the name "Sir Screen Pass" in the future? For all the grief the O-Line has earned so far this season, they get major props on this play. Gabbert takes the snap and immediately looks right for Perry on the inside screen, who is initially boosted by a solid block from Kurtis Gregory at the line of scrimmage. Perry takes another couple of steps downfield and has a wall of Tim Barnes and Jayson Palmgren to his left. Danario ties his man up long enough to push Perry passed the first down marker, and Perry's momentum carries him forward into Nevada territory. Solid downfield blocking for Mizzou by both the line and the receivers has been a staple of success for the Tigers over the past few seasons, and it comes up huge on this play.

Situation: 1st and 10 at NEV 48
Personnel/Formation: Gun right, 2x2 receivers (standing TE Jones in slot), Washington right of Gabbert
Result: Derrick Washington rush for 42 yards to the NEV 6 for a 1ST down.

What happened: This one is going to kill Nevada in the film room this week. Gabbert takes the snap and immediately hands off to Washington on the sweep to the left. The play is IMMEDIATELY busted up by the backside defensive end and a hard-crashing linebacker, only to have the 'backer shake loose at Washington's feet and have the end slide off of Washington's waist. Those two diagnosed the play PERFECTLY, but just couldn't finish the play. Those two are now stuck upfield, and the offensive line and Danario Alexander have come down to effectively seal off the remaining five Nevada defenders in the box, opening up the left side for Washington. A HORRID pursuit angle by the Nevada safety allows D-Wash to get outside with absolutely zero moves required. Washington scampers down the field and could have waltzed in if Perry could have tied up his man. This play is seriously going to be a kick in the junk for the Nevada coaching staff.

Situation: 1st and Goal at NEV 6
Personnel/Formation: Two-back Gun set, 1x2 receivers strong to the right
Result: Derrick Washington rush for 2 yards to the NEV 4.

What happened: Gabbert takes the quick snap and gives to Washington moving right to left. Nevada has eight men in the box and simply outnumbers Missouri at the point of attack. All things considered, not a bad run by Washington to lower the boom and pick up two hard-earned redzone yards.

Situation: 2nd and Goal at NEV 4
Personnel/Formation: Gun left, Washington left of Gabbert, 2x2 receivers, with receivers at left stacked close together
Result: Blaine Gabbert pass complete to Jared Perry for 4 yards for a TOUCHDOWN.

What happened: Danario Alexander immediately fired off the ball and blows back the Nevada corner. The ball is out of Gabbert's hand quickly enough that Fisher, Barnes, Wuebbels and Gregory really don't get out in time to provide any sort of screen for Perry, but Perry hits the seam in between two defenders quick enough that it doesn't particularly matter. Missouri's celebration is subdued as Mizzou appears to have been flagged for offensive pass interference, but the throw stays behind the line of scrimmage and the points stay on the board. Gilmore and Tessitore determine that Mizzou got away with one, and I'm in no position to argue, although I'm not exactly complaining.

The margin of defeat or the margin of victory can be just that small. A couple of CLUTCH third down conversions by Gabbert as well as poor tackling and pursuit by Nevada on the Washington run puts the game squarely in Missouri's control.

Mizzou 2009, Part Eight: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends

Bill C. — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 15:00:11 -0000

The Three Burning Questions train keeps a-rolling...

Wide Receivers / Tight Ends

2008 Unit Ranking: #25 in the nation (#5 in the Big 12)

Projected WR Depth Chart
Danario Alexander (6'5, 215, Sr.)
Jared Perry (6'1, 180, Sr.)
Wes Kemp (6'4, 225, So.)
Jerrell Jackson (6'1, 190, So.)
T.J. Moe (6'0, 190, Fr.)?
L'Damian Washington (6'4, 175, Fr.)?
Gahn McGaffie (5'11, 185, RSFr.)
Brandon Gerau (6'0, 175, So.)
Rolandis Woodland (6'3, 200, RSFr.)

Projected TE Depth Chart
Andrew Jones (6'5, 245, So.)
Michael Egnew (6'6, 230, So.)
Jon Gissinger (6'3, 250, Sr.)

So...has a #1 WR emerged? Yes and no. By all accounts, Danario Alexander is looking faster and healthier than he has since August 2007, when, as Gabe Dearmond has pointed out multiple times, he and most press thought he was playing far better than either Will Franklin or Jeremy Maclin. (And as a reminder, a quick look at the box score from the 2007 Illinois game reminds you that the coaches kind of thought so too--Alexander had ten touches, while Maclin and Franklin combined for seven. Then Danario got hurt...for the first of many times.) If he's healthy and confident, he's competition for Dezmon Briscoe in the "pure explosiveness" department.

But, and here's where it may not be smart to pay too close attention to practice reports, Danario's had at least a little trouble catching Blaine Gabbert's passes. Simply reading this in the practice reports doesn't really worry me, but this was, at times, a bit of an issue last year too. He seems to catch the deep and intermediate balls pretty easily, but the shorter, more fired-in passes seem to give him trouble. And we throw a LOT of shorter, more fired-in passes...which, needless to say, Gabbert probably throws with quite a bit of fire. Hands are the single biggest issue with both Alexander and Wes Kemp, so while we should never read too much into practice reports (good or bad), there's at least a bit of a red flag here. It's hard to underestimate how much of a killer dropped passes can be to an offense, much less an offense led by a first-year starting quarterback.

But if Alexander doesn't struggle with the dropsies or get hurt again (one more injury, and he catches Kirk Farmer* for the career record, I think), he could absolutely be a "6-9 catches, 70-120 yards a game" type of player. And it sounds like there are enough other capable guys to benefit if Alexander's good enough to draw extra attention.

* That's my second Kirk Farmer reference in three days. What the hell?

Will a true freshman play? More than one? Really, we can look at this question from two different angles. The other angle would be, "Are the returning backup candidates holding off the new guys?" We'll start with the way the question was originally asked. It appears that two main freshmen are leading candidates for breaking into the rotation, though each has a physical liability. First, there's L'Damian Washington, who has been the most consistent freshman receiver in camp and appears to be a legitimate big-play threat. He's also holding only 180 pounds (with rocks in his pockets) on his 6-foot-4 frame. As has been mentioned many times over the last few days, Jared Perry showed up on campus weighing less than 150 pounds, and he contributed immediately. And for that matter, Brandon Banks of Kansas State STILL doesn't weigh 150 pounds. Washington looks like he might break in half with one good hit, but clearly if he's good enough to make a difference, go ahead and play him.

The other candidate is T.J. Moe, who is smart and explosive...well, he will be explosive if he can ever get back to 100% after a foot injury. He's been making his way back for months now, and I think we all assume he will play if healthy...but at some point, he needs to be 100% in practice to prove what he can do.

On the other side of the equation, how are the other potential backups doing? Will there be a need to play both freshmen? Reviews have been mixed thus far. After a nice spring, Brandon Gerau has apparently been more-or-less invisible in August...which I guess could be good or bad, depending on how you look at it. Rolandis Woodland struggled with his own dropsy issues, but it sounds like he's started to make some plays, which is a lovely sign. Gabe Dearmond has been talking up Woodland's ridiculous speed for a while now, but...well, Greg Bracey was really fast too. He hardly ever saw the field, though, because "ridiculously fast" doesn't naturally equate to "good wide receiver" (it does, however, equate to "badass res hall linebacker").

Beyond Gerau and Woodland, the other candidate to break into the rotation is Gahn McGaffie. He was threatening to lose his redshirt this time last year before injuries held him back, and while he's getting some reps in the return game, he hasn't been mentioned a whole lot in terms of receiving.

What percentage of Rucker-Coffman can Jones-Egnew be? It's easy to watch Andrew Jones and Michael Egnew play and see a poor man's version of Martin Rucker (Jones) and Chase Coffman (Egnew). Jones is the "seven yards on third-and-six" guy, a strong runner who looks for contact. Eggo is long and lean and seems to glide more than search out contact. While Egnew is still working his way back into the rotation after some offseason injuries, Jones seems to have really started to come along. He and Gabbert seem to have a pretty good connection going.

But back to the question at hand: just how much can they approximate the best tight end duo in Mizzou history? It would not be fair to compare them, as sophomores, to what Rucker and Coffman did in 2007, as a senior and a junior. But what about 2005, when Rucker was a sophomore, Coffman a freshman? That year, the two combined for 94 catches (tying for the team lead with 47 each), 1,070 yards, and 5 TDs with Brad Smith at quarterback. Can Jones and Eggo copy that? Why not? In a 12-game schedule, that's 7.8 catches per game, 11 yards per catch. At worst, I would expect 5-6 catches between them at 9-11 yards per catch, which isn't that far off. Between Jones, Jared Perry, Wes Kemp, and Derrick Washington, it appears that Blaine Gabbert has some serious bail-out options, which will be an awesome thing if bigger-play guys like Danario Alexander, L'Damian Washington, Rolandis Woodland, and Egnew can make good a handful of times a game.

The Rock M Photo Gallery

Bill C. — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 02:29:32 -0000

RMN's own Bill Carter was clicking away today at the Black & Gold Game, and as he always does, he had some awesome shots. Pictures below courtesy of BC's Zenfolio account See the whole gallery here.

Before you get worried that the offense was a bit stagnant today, remember that Derrick Washington only touched the ball three times.

Luke Lambert and God Coulter in pursuit.

Lambert in pursuit (again), this time on Giss_43.

Andrew Jones and the Hurricane go at it.

This guy needed some healthy receivers today.

Spring Football Update: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends

Bill C. — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:00:12 -0000

The switch has been flipped from basketball to football, and I figure the best way to dip our toes back in the water is to revisit my 2009 Walkthrough series from January and see what has or hasn't changed since then. We move now to WRs and TEs.

We'll start with the bigger, slower guys, as I want to end with WRs.

Tight Ends

Photo from The Trib's Gerik Parmele

If Jones is the relatively known quantity, Michael Egnew is the wild card. With Danario Alexander hurt, Egnew spent the first few weeks doing a reasonably credible wide receiver impersonation before moving back down to #3 TE on the depth chart after Alexander got rolling. Egnew, who clearly needs a nickname...Eggo or something...was a solid downfield blocker and effort guy in his time on the field, but when you watch him play, you quickly start thinking two things: 1) Damn, this guy needs to put on about 20 pounds, and 2) Damn, this guy could be one ridiculously athletic tight end.

If Andrew Jones is in the Martin Rucker mold of tight end, Egnew is the longer, leaner Coffman model. That's where I'm going to stop any comparison of anybody to Coffman, but those are the roles Jones and Egnew could play if both continue to improve on the field. I'm excited about Egnew's upside, but I'm much less sure of his becoming a guaranteed contributor.

What's Changed? Not much of anything, actually. Andrew Jones is still the steady, 7-yards-on-3rd-and-6 guy who will keep the chains moving for Blaine Gabbert and the Mizzou offense. Meanwhile, Michael Egnew is getting every chance in the world to prove that he can be a viable part of this offense. Eggo (is it catching on yet?) caught eight passes for 68 yards at last Saturday's scrimmage and appears to be attempting to fill the redzone void left by Chase Coffman. News is encouraging with these two.

Also potentially encouraging: have you noticed how many times walk-on Beau Brinkley's name has been mentioned in practice reports? Quite a few. Granted, you have to take everything related to spring football with a grain of salt, but it does seem as if he could at least be a competent option if somebody above him gets hurt.

Tight ends have been the main difference between Missouri's spread attack and everybody else's. Chase Coffman and Martin Rucker added an element of size and toughness not always associated with the spread, and it made Mizzou a unique force. Clearly we have yet to find out if tight ends can be as dynamic in the Missouri offense as in years pass, but in Egnew and Jones, Gabbert will have pretty solid weapons to soften up the middle of the defense and exploit mismatches.

Expected Spring Finish
1. Andrew Jones (So)
2. Michael Egnew (So)
3. Jon Gissinger (Sr)
4. Beau Brinkley (So)

We've reviewed three units thus far and have come across only two seniors: a walk-on RB (Shawn Scott) and a TE (Giss) who doesn't contribute a whole lot on the field. Building for 2010-11, baby.

Wide Receivers

Photo from PowerMizzou's Dan Turner

There's a lot of talent, athleticism and youth in this group, and while there are a lot of candidates for #2 and #3, the difference between an okay season and a run at a third-straight North title could be the emergence of a #1.

What's Changed? In this case, not much has changed either, and that's not necessarily good. With Jared Perry and Danario Alexander out due to minor injury, lots of WRs have gotten 1st-string reps, and some have played well, particularly Jerrell Jackson and Wes Kemp. However, the hopes of finding a true #1 guy don't seem to have been met just yet.

To be sure, there are lots of names in the mix right now. We know the elders, Perry and Alexander, will be pretty reliable targets, as will Jackson. Kemp struggled with his hands in the fall, but he seems to have improved significantly. Plus, soon-to-be former walk-on Brandon Gerau has apparently done a wonderful Tommy Saunders impersonation thus far. If variety's the spice of life, then Blaine Gabbert will...

...actually, that analogy was going to suck. We'll just say Gabbert will have lots of targets. The problem is, the hands corps still needs a) a go-to guy (maybe that's Jones? Alexander?), and b) a homerun threat. Jackson is fast and may end up being that threat (when he did see action in 2008, he was playing the Maclin role, which shows that the staff does think of him as something of a dangerous runner), but the main hopes for a homerun in the spring (for me, at least) were Rolandis Woodland and Gahn McGaffie, neither of whom seem to have distinguised themselves much. By that, I mean I haven't read their names very often. Woodland had a nice, long catch in Saturday's scrimmage, and while that's encouraging, it's also the first time I've read his name this spring.

I really want to see something encouraging from the WRs at next Saturday's Black & Gold game. Aside from the obvious (QB play), that's the unit to which I'll be paying closest attention. Including Jones, Egnew and RBs, the list of decent receivers to whom Gabbert may be able to throw reliably in the fall is in the double digits. But one of the keys to a good offense is eating up larger chunks of the field whenever possible. This offense will have hands and variety, but I'm less sure about the explosiveness just yet.

Expected Spring Finish
1. Jerrell Jackson (So)
2. Danario Alexander (Sr)
3. Jared Perry (Sr)
4. Wes Kemp (So)
5. Rolandis Woodland (RSFr)
6. Brandon Gerau (So)
7. Gahn McGaffie (RSFr)

On this list we see the first two senior contributors listed at any skill position.

A 2009 Walkthrough: Tight Ends

Bill C. — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:30:07 -0000

Quarterbacks
Running Backs

We are skipping over wide receivers, as I'm already tired of being on the same schedule as Inside Mizzou's daily position previews--I want to be unique, dammit! We'll do tight ends today, O-line tomorrow, and wide receivers Saturday after Jeremy Maclin's late-Friday-morning announcement.

Returnees

Andrew Jones (6'5, 240, sophomore)
2008: 20 catches, 146 yards

One of (technically) three true freshman tight ends to see their redshirts torn off in 2008 (including TE/long snapper Beau Brinkley), Jones got a leg up on the field for 2009 by filling in admirably during Chase Coffman's turf toe absence. We're talking about a limited sample size here, but Jones showed toughness and a very reliable set of hands. He also looked like he had bulked up a little from the beginning of the season and should end up being able to pretty easily carry 245-255 pounds on his 6'5 frame.

If there's one single difference between Jones and Coffman, it's in pure athleticism. I don't see Andrew Jones hurtling anybody anytime soon (though with his likely ability to win collisions pretty well, I'm not against him trying and seeing what happens--just don't break your wrist on the way down), and it's unlikely that he'll put up too many big gainers (Coffman's longest catch of the season was for 48 yards; Jones: 15), but aside from a reliable running game, the most important weapon a QB can have at his disposal is a reliable target on third-and-6. There is almost no doubt that Jones can and will become a big-time chains mover, which will allow Blaine Gabbert (or whoever wins the starting job) to take more chances on deep routes, knowing that he can still convert a first down on an underneath route on the next down.

The Iowa State game was Jones' shining moment from this season. You can check out some of what Jones has to offer at the 1:32, 3:23, 3:31, 4:16 and 5:03 marks of this video.

Michael Egnew (6'6, 220, sophomore)
2008: 4 catches, 22 yards

If Jones is the relatively known quantity, Michael Egnew is the wild card. With Danario Alexander hurt, Egnew spent the first few weeks doing a reasonably credible wide receiver impersonation before moving back down to #3 TE on the depth chart after Alexander got rolling. Egnew, who clearly needs a nickname...Eggo or something...was a solid downfield blocker and effort guy in his time on the field, but when you watch him play, you quickly start thinking two things: 1) Damn, this guy needs to put on about 20 pounds, and 2) Damn, this guy could be one ridiculously athletic tight end.

If Andrew Jones is in the Martin Rucker mold of tight end, Egnew is the longer, leaner Coffman model. That's where I'm going to stop any comparison of anybody to Coffman, but those are the roles Jones and Egnew could play if both continue to improve on the field. I'm excited about Egnew's upside, but I'm much less sure of his becoming a guaranteed contributor.

Jon Gissinger (6'3, 240, senior)
2008: 1 catch, 10 yards

This Poway, CA, product has been a solid team player and backup for going on four years now, and it appears that he will be the same in 2009. Each spring, Giss makes some ridiculous catch that makes me think he should probably crack into the TE rotation, but a) he's been stuck behind some ridiculously good tight ends, and b) well, I guess he doesn't make those plays all the time, huh? Gissinger is a solid special teams contributor and all-around athlete, but he just hasn't quite been able to see the field much yet. With two sophomores in front of him, it wouldn't surprise me to see him used as the main blocking back on those rare occasions when a Mizzou TE is used primarily as such.

And here's to hoping he gets to catch a few passes his senior year!

Redshirts

There were no scholarship redshirts at this position.

Incoming

Sheldon Richardson (6'4, 290, St. Louis)

This product of Gateway High looks like the perfect prototype at defensive tackle, but he has expressed wishes that he either end up at tight end or defensive end. He apparently wasn't carrying a full 290 pounds at US Army All-American practices, due to basketball. We've all heard the stories by now about how ridiculous an athlete he is (he even returned kickoffs!), and I'm sure he would be a powerful, unique weapon to have at TE, but I think my ultimate preference is that he becomes a 6'4, 275 pound monster at defensive end (we need as many great athletes as we can get on that side of the ball). Pinkel and Staff always let the player decide which position he wants to play, though, so we'll see what SR decides. He'll be an impact player wherever he goes--he really is a freak of an athlete--but here's to hoping he's a DE.

Alex Sanders (6'5, 205, Springfield)

Sanders' Rivals film revealed a guy who, while probably too slow to be a wide receiver, is a smooth athlete with solid hands who can do a lot of damage after the catch. His frame looks like it could easily hold another 30-40 pounds as well. He is an exciting prospect and future weapon...as long as he recovers fully from the torn ACL and LCL he suffered back in October. Though he should be just fine in the future, you have to figure the injury assures him of a 2009 redshirt.

Potential Incoming

Ronnie Wingo

Okay, I don't actually think Wingo will end up a tight end in college, but I joked yesterday that he could play any of about 12 positions, and at 6'3, 215, technically tight end could be one of them. And as I said with Wingo, if he comes back from Fayetteville without committing, the biggest threat to getting him to Mizzou will have probably passed.

2008 vs 2009

The tight end position could be a strength for Missouri in 2009, but it will be nothing like that to which Mizzou has grown accustomed. There is simply no way to replace a player like Chase Coffman--he is potentially the greatest tight end Mizzou will ever see--but there are candidates and options, and in a rebuilding year it's all about options.

2009 Mizzou TEs on the YouTubes

Andrew Jones

Sheldon Richardson (an interview)

AMP: Richardson talks Mizzou and more @ Rivals Video

Poll

Over the last four seasons, Missouri tight ends have averaged 114 catches and 11 TDs, but the main recipients of those passes are gone. What percentage of that success will the 2009 Missouri tight end unit be able to replicate?

100%

2 votes

80%

28 votes

60%

36 votes

40%

3 votes

69 votes | Poll has closed

SB Nation - Jon Gissinger

Targets and Catches (Part Two, a.k.a. Will Franklin's Redemption)

2006

2007

2008

2009

Targets and Catches (Part One)

2006

2007

2008

2009

Missouri/Nevada: Anatomy of a Dagger

Mizzou 2009, Part Eight: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends

Wide Receivers / Tight Ends

2009 Mizzou Football Preview Series

The Rock M Photo Gallery

Spring Football Update: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends

Tight Ends

Wide Receivers

A 2009 Walkthrough: Tight Ends

Returnees

Redshirts

Incoming

Potential Incoming

2008 vs 2009

2009 Mizzou TEs on the YouTubes

Over the last four seasons, Missouri tight ends have averaged 114 catches and 11 TDs, but the main recipients of those passes are gone. What percentage of that success will the 2009 Missouri tight end unit be able to replicate?

100%

80%

60%

40%