Yardbarker: Michael Clayton

Camp Breakdown - WR

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:08:41 -0500

Last season proved to be a tough one for the WR corp of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Big things were expected from some former high draft picks, who failed once again to make an impact in our passing game. The group is led by old but still kicking vet, Joey Galloway. Ike Hilliard firmly entrenched himself as the number 2 receiver last year, and proved to be quite a reliable target on 3rd downs. We signed one FA receiver who we have high hopes for, and drafted a receiver in Round 2. This position battle should be one of the more interesting camp battles, as there are 3 wide open spots in my opinion. Currently on the Roster - Taye Biddle, Antonio Bryant, Brian Clark, Michael Clayton, Joey Galloway, Cortez Hankton, Ike Hilliard, Dexter Jackson, Chad Lucas, Maurice Stovall, Paris Warren Gauranteed Roster Spots - Joey Galloway, Ike Hilliard, Dexter Jackson Joey Galloway had another stellar last season for the Bucs. He finished the season with 57 catches, for 1014 yards, 8 Td's and a 17.8 YPC average. Our puny armed QB had a tough time utilizing Joey and his deep play abilities, but occasionaly Carmela mustered up enough will power to throw some bombs to Joey, the long being a 69 yard touchdown. Galloway still has plenty left in the tank (how this is possible, I don't know) and is still one of the leagues faster receivers. Ike Hilliard actually led the team in catches with 62, and proved to be quite a reliable 3rd down choice for Mrs. Garcia. Dexter Jackson will rarely see the field as a WR, but should get plenty of action at both punt and kick returns, until he learns the offense, and learns how to catch. No Chance - Taye Biddle, Brian Clark, Cortez Hankton Battling for Spots - Antonio Bryant, Michael Clayton, Chad Lucas, Maurice Stovall, Paris Warren I find it hard to imagine more than 2 of these players making the team. We will most likely carry 3 TE's and 4 RB's which would make it hard to have more than 5 total receivers on the 53 man roster. Hence the reason earlier, I said this should be the most interesting camp battle to watch. Antonio Bryant is a player that has shown some promise in his career. In 2005 in Cleveland, he had 69 catches for 1000+ yards. He has proven to have some issues with coaching and was out of the league last season. This is Gruden's David Boston project for camp. If he pans out, Bryant has potential to give us a dangerous 3rd option receiving wise. If not, we cut his ass, and tell him goodbye. Michael Clayton (a guy who once looked like the next Hines Ward) has been inconsistent now for 3 seasons. He has not posted more than 33 catches or 375 yards since his 80 catch 1200 yard rookie season. If that player could ever come back to the Bucs, I think our WR class is very strong. I am slowly losing hope though. I realize that he was injured one of those seasons, but he has still yet to regain that super confident form that made him such a devastating receiver his rookie season. Chad Lucas is a guy who always seems to stick around through camp, and ends up being one of the last cuts. He does some impressive stuff in camp, so I had to throw him on this list. I don't think he will make the team though. Maurice Stovall is another Gruden draft choice whom I once held out high hopes for. He is a giant, and could be a dangerous middle of the field possesion receiver. Could be, is the optimal phrase here though. Stovall actually saw action in 15 games last season, but ended up with 10 catches. He has an upper hand on some of our other receivers though, as he might have been our best special teams player last season. As a gunner on the punt team, he was a force to be reckoned with. Paris Warren was having a brilliant pre-season last year before suffering a season ending injury. He is a great route runner, and has awesome hands. Very Ike Hilliardesque in my opinion. As mentioned earlier, should be the most hotly contested battle of camp.

Buccaneers Fantasy Depth Chart

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:26 -0500

Earnest Graham was one of the top free agent pickup of 2007 with ten touchdowns in ten starts. He'll enter this season as part of a deep backfield in Tampa. See where we think he should be slotted in drafts, and the rest of the Bucs in our fantasy depth chart summary.

2008 Fantasy Football Contract Years

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:26:13 -0500

Here's a list of players going into their contract year. Some BIG name head up this group like: Steven Jackson, Brandon Jacobs, Earnest Graham, Michael Clayton, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Roy Williams (DET)

5 teams pursing Lito today

Sat, 26 Apr 2008 06:57:26 -0500

The New Orleans Saints and their second-round pick (No. 40 overall) in this weekend's draft have long been linked to the Giants and their double-fisted Super Bowl suite drinker Jeremy Shocker. But now the Saints and that same second-round pick are linked to the Eagles and their obsolete cornerback Lito Sheppard, who surely won't be kept around given the arrival of Asante Samuel. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Saints are one of the five teams chasing Sheppard. Others include the Bucs and the Rams. However, the Rams are reluctant to give up their second-round pick, which is No. 33 overall. As to the Saints, they can't trade the same pick twice (duh), so what are they up to? Our guess is that they're trying to play two NFC East rivals against each other, hoping that one of them takes the Saints' second-rounder in order to prevent the other from getting it. Or maybe, as a reader suggested, the Saints are merely the straw man in a three-way trade. Maybe they'll get Sheppard with that second-round pick and then trade him straight up to the Giants for Shockey.

Matt Millen Knows How to Pick'em

Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:51:47 -0500

His teams have won thirty-one games compared to eighty-one loses. He's never built a team that has won more than 7 games in a season. His continued employment has inspired an "Angry Fan March", a halftime walkout and a stadium full of fans to wear a visiting team's colors. Is Matt Millen a terrible General Manager? Yes Is his penchant for selecting wide receivers in the first round and subsequent inability to do so successfully evidence of his inabilities to run a franchise? Not necessarily…. Consider the subjective observation first. We tend to forget that each of the wide receivers Millen drafted (Charles Rogers, Roy Williams, Mike Williams and Calvin Johnson) was chosen in the widely-regarded appropriate slot. He never reached. It's true there were questions surrounding Mike Williams concerning his year off from football and potential weight issues. However, if not for those concerns Williams would not have even lasted until the tenth pick where the Lions selected him, the latest they drafted any of the four wide receivers. To be honest, I must admit that as a Titans fan I was upset when Tennessee chose Pacman Jones over Williams. In hindsight, disregarding off-the-field issues (And the troubles both players have had can be attributed to "off-the-field" issues. Pacman loves strip clubs so much he eats his meals there and Mike Williams treats every meal with the enthusiasm of a trip to the strip club.) the decision between Jones and Williams was like choosing between Christina Aguilera and Britney Spears. Once one got kinda fat and the other went crazy you suddenly wished you had given Mandy Moore a longer look. The other three were highly praised picks. Furthermore, all indications are that Calvin Johnson will join Roy Williams as a successively used high draft pick, giving Millen a 50% Success Rate when it comes to drafting 1st Round Wide Receivers. Is this Success Rate acceptable or further evidence that Millen belongs in a broadcast booth? To answer this question we need to determine what characterizes a successful first round wide receiver. Then we must determine a way to objectify whether or not a player meets those criteria and compare Millen's Success Rate against the league's average. First off, for a comparison I used the 1st Round Wide Receiver classes from 1995 to 2005 as my data set. This eleven year period works well as it gives us a representative sample of current trends while allowing enough time to evaluate selections to determine their success or indications of success to come. It should be noted now that the remarkable "1996 First Round WR Class" is included in the sample. A class featuring Keyshawn Johnson, Terry Glenn, Eddie Kennison, Marvin Harrison and Eric Moulds—all of whom proved themselves to be worthy first round selections by the metric of this study. During this stretch forty-eight wide receivers were drafted in the first round by a total of twenty-nine teams (Dallas, Oakland and San Diego were the three who did not make such a selection). Now, back to the question of what personifies a successful first round wide receiver. After considering the matter, I determined that an NFL team expects two attributes from a wide receiver it selects in the first round: impact and duration. Teams don't draft wide receivers that highly in the hopes that they will merely contribute nor do they select players hoping to get one or two good years out of them. A successful first round wide receiver is one that produces at a high level for an extended period of time. With this in mind, I set out to uncover a simple metric that would indicate if a player had achieved an acceptable level of impact and duration. Immediately upon reviewing the stats one number jumped out and it proved itself to be an appropriate metric after further analysis: 60 receptions. A player with 60 catches in a season averages 3.75 per game, or nearly one per quarter—which would demonstrate a wide receiver of notable value to his offense. Furthermore, since 1995, players with 60 grabs have a median ranking of 41st for receptions on the year (mean = 40.923). It's safe to assume that NFL teams selecting a wide receiver in the first round expect that player to become a top 40 receiver at some point in their career. For a better understanding of what 60 receptions is, and the level of player that typically achieves the mark, consider a listing of some of the wide receivers who just topped 60 catches last year and some who fell just short. 60+: Andre Johnson (60), Santana Moss (61), Reggie Brown (61), Roy Williams(63) <60: Amani Toomer(59), Joey Galloway (57), Ronald Curry (55), Roydell Williams (55) Given that Johnson, Moss and Roy Williams missed multiple games, this list also demonstrates the conservatism of 60 receptions as a benchmark. I wanted this quality in such a simple metric because if Matt Millen's Selection Success Rate is 50%, as I claim, I would like to give other GMs every benefit of the doubt and err on the side of caution. In fact, the benchmark could even be dropped as low as 56 catches without changing any of the conclusions of this analysis. However, given the above argument, 60 receptions is a reliable metric for determining a "successful" wide receiver season. Sixty receptions signify significance but how many times must a player achieve this standard in order to demonstrate duration? Looking at the data the magic number seems to be three. Three years of 60+ receptions separates guys like Eddie Kennison (3) and Ike Hilliard (3) from Peter Warrick (2 …. really?). And this works well across the board. So the standard for a Successful First Round Wide Receiver is at least three years of at least sixty receptions—with one exception. Some of the players in this data set haven't been in the league long enough to require three successful years for justification. A simple solution: any player drafted since 2004 only needs one year of at least 60 catches to make it upon the successful selection list. This allows for the inclusion of guys who have demonstrated an indication of future success while leaving off the players who can't reasonably be considered a justified first round wide receiver. Michael Jenkins is the personification of the young guys who didn't make the cut; four seasons with a single season high of 53 snags. On the flipside, this unfortunately leads to Michael Clayton's inclusion—this truly is a conservative standard of success. However, between 1995 and 2005, only twenty-one of the forty-eight receivers drafted in the first round achieved the 60 receptions in three years (or one) benchmark, 43.75%. And while other examinations would have to be performed to determine the success rate at other positions, the fact that less than half the receivers taken in the first round since 1995 can be declared successful is truly telling of the risk a team undertakes by selecting a wide receiver with their first pick in the draft. If this percentage seems unusually low, then you might question the validity of the "60 x 3 Metric." However, it proves to have done a pretty accurate job of separating players who have proved themselves worthy of their draft position versus those who fell short. Guys who just made the list: Eddie Kennison, Ike Hilliard and David Boston. Kennison and Hilliard have never been anything special but have put together careers which justify their presence of the list of successful choices. And although Boston might seem as though he doesn't belong, a review of his short career reveals otherwise; over a four-year period he was a highly effective wide receiver. 2005: Games:5 Receptions: 4 Yards: 80 Touchdowns: 0 2003: Gms:14 Rcpts: 70 Yds: 880 TDs: 7 2002: Gms:8 Rcpts: 32 Yds: 512 TDs: 1 2001: Gms:16 Rcpts: 98 Yds: 1598 TDs: 8 2000: Gms:16 Rcpts: 71 Yds: 1156 TDs: 7 1999: Gms:16 Rcpts: 40 Yds: 473 TDs: 2 Then, those guys who just missed the list: Peter Warrick, Travis Taylor, Rod Gardner and Javon Walker. The first three clearly never justified their high selection and the fact that they just missed the list once more highlights the conservatism of the "60 x 3" metric. Arguments could be made for Walker's inclusion but he really hasn't accomplished as much as you initially think—at least not yet. Aside from one strong year and one Pro Bowl level one, he's been barely more than a replacement level receiver, granted he lost a year to an ACL tear. Regardless, no metric will be perfect and Javon Walker's exclusion is more than made up for with Michael Clayton's inclusion. The proportionality of successful picks is maintained. So assuming Calvin Johnson proves himself to be worthy of his high selection—the great assumption of this analysis—Matt Millen's 1st Round Wide Receiver Selection Rate of 50% is above the league average of 43.75%. While the difference is certainly not enough to declare that Millen has been "better" than the rest of the league in his selections, the numbers indicate that he is at least as good as other general managers. Indeed, only five teams who have selected multiple receivers in the first round since 1995 have a higher success rate: the Jets, Rams, Colts, Bills and Cardinals. By this standard, the worst team at selecting receivers early is not Detroit but Jacksonville. Despite these numbers, the argument could still be made that Millen's mistake is not in which receivers he drafted but in his selection of receivers at all. And this is a valid point. A position in which the majority of first round picks fail… might be a position to avoid with your first round pick. Or perhaps you should limit yourself to two wideouts per decade rather than four every five years. Just a little rule of thumb for Millen to consider. At the same time, the data shows that wide receivers picked in the Top 10 have faired relatively well (52.38% Success Rate), certainly better than those selected lower down in the first round (37.04% Success Rate). Perhaps this in some way justifies Millen's selecting four wide receivers with Top 10 selections—if you're going to draft a receiver in the first round, make sure it's within the first ten picks. Just more than half of these players pan out and of the four chosen by the Lions it appears as though two will do so. I guess Nick Bakay is right. However, I would still say that Millen's mistake has not been the players he's chosen but agree with the common opinion that his mistake lies in his affinity for choosing receivers. But enough with Matt Millen. Regardless of his "Receiver Selectionability" he still sucks. What else can the numbers from this study tell us? After all, a review of forty-eight first round wide receivers should tell us a little more than, "Millen's ok." For starters, the higher success rate of Top 10 picks versus lower first round picks begins to address an assertion that has become popular the past few years, that high expectations lead to the (perceived) failure of first round receivers. However, Top 10 picks have higher expectations than lower first round picks yet have been more successful as a group. That's why is was such a big deal when Dwayne Bowe outperformed Calvin Johnson last year—we weren't expecting it. Johnson was the higher pick, he should have done more. Nevertheless, typically the Top 10 guys do outperform the guys picked in the 11th-32nd range, seemingly indicating that Superior Ability and Greater Opportunity trump Better Team Talent and Lower Expectations. Forget pressure. They're all first round draft picks, they feel the pressure. Just ask Robert Meachem. Continuing in this theme, the general consensus is that it takes three years for a wide receiver to truly "get it" and begin producing at a high level. While this may be true in regards to a player reaching his potential, or eventual, level of production, it doesn't seem to be true that a team has to wait for three years to see what it has in a wide receiver. Of the players who ever met the "60 x 3" metric, nearly 40% caught 60 balls in their first season and two-thirds did so within their first two seasons. Lastly, the data revealed an interesting pattern—the extremely high likelihood that the 3rd receiver selected in the first round will fail. Of these eleven players in this position, only one made the list of successful picks. Eddie Kennison; the receiver on the successful list who came the closest to being left off. Kennison is a combined eleven receptions over the successful threshold. Honestly, I couldn't come up with any logical explanation why this might be. There is always the probability that this finding is nothing more than a statistical anomaly but if you can come up with some rational reason, please share. Regardless, it's quite bizarre. I set out to answer a simple question, "Just how bad is Matt Millen at selecting wide receivers?" The answer was quite surprising, albeit unprofound. If nothing else, perhaps this study has uncovered a simple metric for determining receiver success and given some further insight into the uncertainty of 1st Round receiver selections. Or perhaps it reveals something different altogether, that the Detroit Lions don't select receivers that are doomed to fail but that the receivers they select are doomed to fail once they become Lions. I'm sorry Detroit fans. My "Fire Millen" shirt is in the mail. By: Parker Woodard Pwoodar1@utk.edu

Misleading Headline: Bucs Go Hollywood

Tue, 22 Jan 2008 14:58:14 -0500

Congratulations to Tampa Bay wideout Michael Clayton on his nomination. Juno, Michael Clayton Among Top Oscar Nominees

Buccaneers - Stovall making a name for himself on special teams

Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:10:32 -0500

During the offseason, much was made about the development of second-year wide receiver Maurice Stovall. He was expected to possibly eclipse Michael Clayton and take the starting job from game one. However, as the preseason progressed, Stovall's name was lost in the shuffle, and all news about him was lost. Weeks before, Gruden wa more...

JoeSportsFan.com :: The Monday Football Column

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:27:05 -0500

Week 3 in the NFL through the eyes of JoeSportsFan.com. Tom Brady is going to finger a lot of New England females... HOOZAH!!!

Picking True #1 WRs

Wed, 22 Aug 2007 16:35:29 -0500

Wide receivers. These are the guys who give fantasy managers more headaches than any other position. You know how it goes. One week your WR2 grabs 3 balls for 40 yds, while that scrub on your bench catches 4 balls for 110 yds and one long TD. So you switch them next week and the scrub goes 3-25, while your WR2 who you were cursing last week is putting up 7-60 and a TD on your bench. What you want is a WR who will get at least 5 catches a game and always top 50 yds and hopefully the century mark on a weekly basis, plus a red-zone look a game. So it begins -- the great search for consistency. The best way to find that consistency and eliminate those headaches is to grab true #1 WRs on their own teams. There are only 32 out there in a perfect world, but with teams like Oakland and Tennessee around, the list of true-impact #1 WRs are much more limited. Just like I did in my previous blog post: http://www.screamingsports.com/en/profile/profile_readblog.aspx?b=2526 in which I broke down all 32 teams' running back situations, I have detailed all 32 teams' wide receiver situations below. The teams that have a star next to them are the teams that I believe possess a true #1 WR who will get 5+ catches and put up some fairly solid numbers week-to-week. The teams with two WRs listed are guys you can also take who will put up numbers like WR1s because they play for such good offenses. Upon further breakdown, there are only 20 teams that possess true #1 WRs. Among the 12 teams without a star, only Detroit and New England have desirable options. They have so many good options that I don't see any one WR putting up big numbers. There are others that you can gamble on like Atlanta, Chicago and SF, who I didn't list as having a big #1 because I'm concerned the poor QB play won't allow for big numbers. Then there are the rest of the teams, which I wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole (Jac, KC, Min, Ten, etc.) So the stars show just 23 big-producing guys, and maybe a few sleepers I left off (Brandon Marshall, Santonio Holmes, etc.) Looking at the big picture heading into a draft with 12 teams, you'll notice that there are only about 2 of these guys for each fantasy team. Keep that in mind, and try to grab 3. You'll have much fewer headaches starting Braylon Edwards, a true #1 WR on his own team, rather than starting Greg Jennings, a clear-cut #2 WR on his own team. Here is the breakdown: *Ari - Fitzgerald, Boldin Atl - Horn Bal - M. Clayton *Buf - L. Evans *Car - S. Smith Chi - Berrian *Cin - C. Johnson, Houshmandzadeh *Cle - B. Edwards *Dal - Owens *Den - Walker Det - Roy Williams *GB - Driver *Hou - A. Johnson *Ind - Harrison, Wayne Jac - M. Jones KC - Kennison Mia - Chambers Min - Williamson NE - Moss *NO - Colston *NYG - Burress *NYJ - L. Coles Oak - Curry *Phi - R. Brown *Pit - Ward *SD - V. Jackson SF - D. Jackson *Sea - Branch *Stl - Holt *TB - Galloway Ten - B. Jones *Was - S. Moss Draft accordingly.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers (Fantasy Value)

Wed, 04 Jul 2007 04:19:14 -0500

The Bucs have gotten... this situation before in the past...At 37 years Garcia still has the mobility and with his veteran leadership qualities he has...

Bucs' Clayton Has Been A Stranger To The End Zone

Fri, 13 Oct 2006 18:24:15 -0500

In his last 18 games, Tampa Bay wide receiver Michael Clayton has as many touchdowns as I do. In fact, the last game Clayton scored in was the final game from his rookie season in 2004. Why hasn't been able to replicate the numbers he put up as a rookie? First, he was hampered by various injuries throughout most of last season, which really never let him get on track and in step with quarterback Chris Simms. Second, it appears that the majority of the blame can be placed on Tampa Bay's offense stalling and sputtering for stretches of games. According to his coaches and teammates, Clayton's dip in productivity is certainly not a product of his work ethic, as both Jon Gruden and Joey Galloway praise Clayton's workout regiment. As far as fantasy is concerned, I would hold on to Clayton for now in hopes that maybe he gels with new QB Bruce Gradkowski and turns things around. Chances are that there isn't much left on the waiver wire right now anyway. If things don't pick up in the next couple weeks or so, and there are better options on your waiver wire, then you may want to go ahead and cut your losses heading into the playoffs.