How bad was Kearse this year?

[razor150]

Wasn't Russell Wilson's QB rating throwing to Kearse only a couple of decimal points higher than just throwing it into the dirt? That pretty much says it all.

I thought I read somewhere that Russ would've had a higher QB rating just throwing it away every time instead of targeting Kearse.

What's really awesome about all these stats is that Kearse was targeted 4 times as much in the red zone as Jimmy F*****g Graham.

You may be right. Either way, says a lot about how bad Kearse was this year.

I don't know why, but Kearse almost seems like a security blanket for Wilson, which is the reason why he gets so many targets. So I don't necessarily blame it all on Kearse, a portion of the blame is on Wilson. We've all seen Wilson try to force something to Kearse that doesn't have a shot of ever being completed. It is especially bad in the end zone, which makes no sense with a guy like Jimmy Graham around. We really could improve our passing game by cutting Kearse.

 

[mrt144]

Wasn't Russell Wilson's QB rating throwing to Kearse only a couple of decimal points higher than just throwing it into the dirt? That pretty much says it all.

I thought I read somewhere that Russ would've had a higher QB rating just throwing it away every time instead of targeting Kearse.

What's really awesome about all these stats is that Kearse was targeted 4 times as much in the red zone as Jimmy F*****g Graham.

That's not true - http://nflsavant.com/targets.php

Jimmy had 4 more targets in the Red Zone than Kearse.

BUT Kearse was 1/16 on Red Zone targets.

In fact Kearse had the lowest % of catches to targets among the top 246 eligible receivers and yet was the 39th most targeted player in the Red Zone across the NFL. He is the only player in the NFL with single digit reception % because everyone above him was in double digits and everyone below him was 0%

If you are looking for a smoking gun on the adaptability of the crew on the USS Seahawks, look no further.

Even if we make allowances for "maybe he was having an off year and can bounce back" or "its important to have a familiar body at WR for RW", Bevell and RW kept drinking from the poisoned well all season. RW has 3-4 options on any given passing play, to consistently go to the worst performing WR on the team...

 

[mrt144]

Wasn't Russell Wilson's QB rating throwing to Kearse only a couple of decimal points higher than just throwing it into the dirt? That pretty much says it all.

I thought I read somewhere that Russ would've had a higher QB rating just throwing it away every time instead of targeting Kearse.

What's really awesome about all these stats is that Kearse was targeted 4 times as much in the red zone as Jimmy F*****g Graham.

You may be right. Either way, says a lot about how bad Kearse was this year.

I don't know why, but Kearse almost seems like a security blanket for Wilson, which is the reason why he gets so many targets. So I don't necessarily blame it all on Kearse, a portion of the blame is on Wilson. We've all seen Wilson try to force something to Kearse that doesn't have a shot of ever being completed. It is especially bad in the end zone, which makes no sense with a guy like Jimmy Graham around. We really could improve our passing game by cutting Kearse.

This is one of the eternally unanswerable questions - how do you get through to Wilson that maybe that which he could trust he can't any longer and he needs to adjust. RW could stumble across the realization himself but he doesn't seem like a problem solver or meta game genius. Since we don't know how the sausage is made we can only speculate on who is most responsible but even in assigning that responsibility, theres not a clear cut solution.

 

[Flyingsquad23]

I have a lot love for this guy and have tried defending him all year, that said it was an obvious rough year. I like most here watched every play this year and by my judgment not everything is on Jermaine. You would be lying if you thought all those opi were legit calls, his drop rate was only 2% with almost all of his non catches being great coverage and a bunch of terribly thrown balls. Now don't go and over react, I definitely expected much more from him, yet I'm not willing to place all the blame for the pretty average offense on one guy. The natural evolution of the unit points to Tyler and Paul getting their chances to take over the role.....if they can stay healthy, Kearse has missed 1 game in the last 4 years.

You may continue your bashing now.

 

[mrt144]

I have a lot love for this guy and have tried defending him all year, that said it was an obvious rough year. I like most here watched every play this year and by my judgment not everything is on Jermaine. You would be lying if you thought all those opi were legit calls, his drop rate was only 2% with almost all of his non catches being great coverage and a bunch of terribly thrown balls. Now don't go and over react, I definitely expected much more from him, yet I'm not willing to place all the blame for the pretty average offense on one guy. The natural evolution of the unit points to Tyler and Paul getting their chances to take over the role.....if they can stay healthy, Kearse has missed 1 game in the last 4 years.

You may continue your bashing now.

Certainly if Kearse's Red Zone output was even at 50% or hell 30%, we'd have less people scratching their heads on the Red Zone woes. But this is a clear smoking gun on where things went horribly wrong in the Red Zone.

And I don't put this all on Kearse, I put some of it on RW and Bevell seemingly trying to push through the adversity with Kearse almost like trying to restore his mojo and they'd get clutch Kearse back.

I also put it on RW and DB on to give him almost the same amount of overall targets as JFG. Even if 90% of the reason for Kearse's abysmal catch rate was on RW being terrible in throwing to him, I think it warrants a question as to why he was the singular receiver on the team who got the brunt of the worst from RW to the degree that RW's completion. How does one QB under perform grievously with one specific WR to this extent?

To put this in context

RW output with Kearse 64.7% Completion 21 TDs 4219 Yards
RW output without Kearse 68.2% Completion 20 TDs, 3709 Yards

How does RW have those numbers throwing to everyone but Kearse and it sqaurely falls on RW just missing pass after pass after pass to him?

 

[2_0_6]

His body language this year was odd. Almost seemed like his mind wasn't into it.

 

[Foghawk]

Pretty safe to say IMO that Kearse worked his way to the bottom end of the depth chart this season. I don't see him climbing back up it next season unless injuries to the position bump him up. That said, I appreciate all the memorable things he has done on the field for the team.

 

[cover-2]

I was undecided on how I felt about re-signing Kearse this past season. Now I would rather us cut him. Lets use his roster spot on a player with more upside and that is cheaper. I be surprised if Kearse makes the 53 man roster next season.

 

[DynoHawk]

He's good for 1 circus catch a year. the rest of the time he's garbage. Someone posted on twitter to @jkearse_15 letting Jermaine know that he had just bought his jersey. Had to respond with "bummer, didn't you know he's not gonna be on the team next year?" Guy replied back, "why not" "just a hunch" .....

 

[mrt144]

He's good for 1 circus catch a year. the rest of the time he's garbage. Someone posted on twitter to @jkearse_15 letting Jermaine know that he had just bought his jersey. Had to respond with "bummer, didn't you know he's not gonna be on the team next year?" Guy replied back, "why not" "just a hunch" .....

That's also not true - he wasn't garbage last year, he was a solid #3 receiver. How do we start accounting for a huge dropoff in Kearse and Kearse alone among every horse in the stable? Or what made him serviceable last year and not this one?

 

[KiwiHawk]

I'm not going to defend Kearse because he had a pretty poor season last year, but I do want to bust some of the fallacies that are being treated as fact in this thread.

1: Poor percentage of targets became catches / poor QBR throwing to Kearse / 1 red zone reception / lowesr red zone reception rate / blah blah blah
This is in fact a stat. However, it completely lacks context, which makes it an irrelevant stat. Kearse's drop rate was one of the lowest of our receivers. So if he's not catching them and he's not dropping them, then what's left? The passes were uncatchable. Not catching uncatchable balls thrown in his direction is not his fault. A target means the ball was thrown in his direction, not to him. As he is often the last read, he is often the direction in which Wilson throws it out of bounds to avoid the sack.

2: "and for those who say his blocking is good. what good is being able to block when our line is so terrible that the running back is getting tackled for a 3 yard loss every time"
This one is simply ridiculous. Kearse is a wide receiver, who blocks defensive backs on the second level, not a fullback. Three yards in the backfield is not second level. The statement demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of what WR blocking is about, and almost stopped me from reading the rest of this thread in disgust. This used to be a board where people understood football. Now, not only does this sort of statement get made, but it then gets quoted for truth instead of debunked. Absurd.

We run quasi-legal picks with Kearse all the time. It's bread-and-butter to us. He's getting caught once every 3 games. That's not terrible. We get more holding calls on kick returns in playoff games alone. But go back and review the games and you'll see quite a few times Kearse running the interference that buys a step for Lockett/Baldwin/Richardson that results in a big gain.

Football is a team sport. If you are isolating one individual and assessing his output without considering his actual role on the team, then you're doing it wrong.

 

[mrt144]

He was 2nd in yards total, #1 in yards per reception for WRs with more than 10 catches, 3rd in receiving TDs and 4th in Catch% for recievers with more than 10 catches.

How can you not define that as solid #3 within the context of everyone else on the team - throw out what a #3 does on another team, look at it in the context of the team itself.

I'm open to the idea that last year WAS the biggest fluke in a career you could imagine but that doesn't refute that he was indeed, a solid #3 receiver, it merely shifts the conversation as to whether it was a fluke or not.

 

[mrt144]

I'm not going to defend Kearse because he had a pretty poor season last year, but I do want to bust some of the fallacies that are being treated as fact in this thread.

1: Poor percentage of targets became catches / poor QBR throwing to Kearse / 1 red zone reception / lowesr red zone reception rate / blah blah blah
This is in fact a stat. However, it completely lacks context, which makes it an irrelevant stat. Kearse's drop rate was one of the lowest of our receivers. So if he's not catching them and he's not dropping them, then what's left? The passes were uncatchable. Not catching uncatchable balls thrown in his direction is not his fault. A target means the ball was thrown in his direction, not to him. As he is often the last read, he is often the direction in which Wilson throws it out of bounds to avoid the sack.

Does being the last read in the play really cause him to be the whipping boy of poor RW's play to such an egregious and inefficient amount and where do you start fixing that?


For context, the only time RW had a worse catch rate with a receiver over 10 targets on the season was Sidney Rice in 2013 with 42% catch rate, and Braylon Edwards in 2012 with a 47% catch rate. Neither were with the team the following year.

 

[KiwiHawk]

I'm not going to defend Kearse because he had a pretty poor season last year, but I do want to bust some of the fallacies that are being treated as fact in this thread.

1: Poor percentage of targets became catches / poor QBR throwing to Kearse / 1 red zone reception / lowesr red zone reception rate / blah blah blah
This is in fact a stat. However, it completely lacks context, which makes it an irrelevant stat. Kearse's drop rate was one of the lowest of our receivers. So if he's not catching them and he's not dropping them, then what's left? The passes were uncatchable. Not catching uncatchable balls thrown in his direction is not his fault. A target means the ball was thrown in his direction, not to him. As he is often the last read, he is often the direction in which Wilson throws it out of bounds to avoid the sack.

Does being the last read in the play really cause him to be the whipping boy of poor RW's play to such an egregious and inefficient amount and where do you start fixing that?

He's only a whipping boy to an uninformed fan base seeking a scapegoat for a frustrating season. I assure you he is not a whipping boy to his coaches. He's a selfless guy who is willing to perform a role that makes him unattractive because it is what the team needs him to do. His fellow players understand this. All you have to do is listen to Doug Baldwin when he talks about Kearse, and I hold the opinion of Doug Baldwin far higher with regard to a fellow player than the opinion of fans.

 

[mrt144]

I'm not going to defend Kearse because he had a pretty poor season last year, but I do want to bust some of the fallacies that are being treated as fact in this thread.

1: Poor percentage of targets became catches / poor QBR throwing to Kearse / 1 red zone reception / lowesr red zone reception rate / blah blah blah
This is in fact a stat. However, it completely lacks context, which makes it an irrelevant stat. Kearse's drop rate was one of the lowest of our receivers. So if he's not catching them and he's not dropping them, then what's left? The passes were uncatchable. Not catching uncatchable balls thrown in his direction is not his fault. A target means the ball was thrown in his direction, not to him. As he is often the last read, he is often the direction in which Wilson throws it out of bounds to avoid the sack.

Does being the last read in the play really cause him to be the whipping boy of poor RW's play to such an egregious and inefficient amount and where do you start fixing that?

He's only a whipping boy to an uninformed fan base seeking a scapegoat for a frustrating season. I assure you he is not a whipping boy to his coaches. He's a selfless guy who is willing to perform a role that makes him unattractive because it is what the team needs him to do. His fellow players understand this. All you have to do is listen to Doug Baldwin when he talks about Kearse, and I hold the opinion of Doug Baldwin far higher with regard to a fellow player than the opinion of fans.

He might have all the right attributes that coaches look for in a teammate but what accounts for what we just saw and how does the team potentially mitigate it going forward?

 

[Seymour]

He was 2nd in yards total, #1 in yards per reception for WRs with more than 10 catches, 3rd in receiving TDs and 4th in Catch% for recievers with more than 10 catches.

How can you not define that as solid #3 within the context of everyone else on the team - throw out what a #3 does on another team, look at it in the context of the team itself.

I'm open to the idea that last year WAS the biggest fluke in a career you could imagine but that doesn't refute that he was indeed, a solid #3 receiver, it merely shifts the conversation as to whether it was a fluke or not.

I may have misunderstood your previous post. By last year are you talking about 2015? I was thinking last year being 2016 since our season is over? Anyway if you meant 2015 then i stand corrected and apologize.

 

[mrt144]

He was 2nd in yards total, #1 in yards per reception for WRs with more than 10 catches, 3rd in receiving TDs and 4th in Catch% for recievers with more than 10 catches.

How can you not define that as solid #3 within the context of everyone else on the team - throw out what a #3 does on another team, look at it in the context of the team itself.

I'm open to the idea that last year WAS the biggest fluke in a career you could imagine but that doesn't refute that he was indeed, a solid #3 receiver, it merely shifts the conversation as to whether it was a fluke or not.

I may have misunderstood your previous post. By last year are you talking about 2015? I was thinking last year being 2016 since our season is over? Anyway if you meant 2015 then i stand corrected and apologize.

I'm still in 2016 Season mode until the SB is over. Yes, 2015, obviously. Nothing else would make any sense.

 

[Seymour]

He was 2nd in yards total, #1 in yards per reception for WRs with more than 10 catches, 3rd in receiving TDs and 4th in Catch% for recievers with more than 10 catches.

How can you not define that as solid #3 within the context of everyone else on the team - throw out what a #3 does on another team, look at it in the context of the team itself.

I'm open to the idea that last year WAS the biggest fluke in a career you could imagine but that doesn't refute that he was indeed, a solid #3 receiver, it merely shifts the conversation as to whether it was a fluke or not.

I may have misunderstood your previous post. By last year are you talking about 2015? I was thinking last year being 2016 since our season is over? Anyway if you meant 2015 then i stand corrected and apologize.

I'm still in 2016 Season mode until the SB is over. Yes, 2015, obviously. Nothing else would make any sense.

Hence my original post LOL. After you posted the stats it became obvious.

 

[razor150]

2: "and for those who say his blocking is good. what good is being able to block when our line is so terrible that the running back is getting tackled for a 3 yard loss every time"
This one is simply ridiculous. Kearse is a wide receiver, who blocks defensive backs on the second level, not a fullback. Three yards in the backfield is not second level. The statement demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of what WR blocking is about, and almost stopped me from reading the rest of this thread in disgust. This used to be a board where people understood football. Now, not only does this sort of statement get made, but it then gets quoted for truth instead of debunked. Absurd.

This response is absurd, I think you fundamentally did not understand what he is saying. He is basically saying "What is so great about having Kearse's downfield blocking when the RB is getting crushed behind the line because our OLine sucks." This isn't a criticism of Kearse's role as a blocker, it's saying the importance isn't that high on the pecking order due to how bad the oline is.

 

[KiwiHawk]

2: "and for those who say his blocking is good. what good is being able to block when our line is so terrible that the running back is getting tackled for a 3 yard loss every time"
This one is simply ridiculous. Kearse is a wide receiver, who blocks defensive backs on the second level, not a fullback. Three yards in the backfield is not second level. The statement demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of what WR blocking is about, and almost stopped me from reading the rest of this thread in disgust. This used to be a board where people understood football. Now, not only does this sort of statement get made, but it then gets quoted for truth instead of debunked. Absurd.

This response is absurd, I think you fundamentally did not understand what he is saying. He is basically saying "What is so great about having Kearse's downfield blocking when the RB is getting crushed behind the line because our OLine sucks." This isn't a criticism of Kearse's role as a blocker, it's saying the importance isn't that high on the pecking order due to how bad the oline is.

Your response to my response to the absurd response is also absurd. Kearse doesn't block for the running back unless the play goes spectacularly well. Kearse blocks for his fellow receivers. On short passes, bubble screens, reverses, etc., Kearse is the guy who gets called upon to block.