Michael Jenkins vs Roddy White - A look at the numbers

[FullMetalFalcon23]

This is my first thread for a while so my apologies if it doesn't flow too well.

I was going to post this in a thread Peyton put up about Hank Baskett, where he mentioned Jenkins stats and how he wish he would turn out at least one Hank Baskett like performance (150 yards) this season. But I thought I would bring it here instead as the thread vanished before I could finish.

I do feel for what he is giving us he is overpaid. Taking his full contract and dividing it by years, last years figures at $5million for the year / 635 yards = $7874 per yard. Alternativey $5million/ 50 receptions = $100,000 per reception. I know there are other things he does as well but I think a little bit more bang for the buck is needed here. Need to get the ball to him more.

Just did a little research on Roddy the number I found was a contract worth $48 million over 6 years. For numbers sake let us say he receives the total for $48million / 6 years = $8million a year. On last years figures the value of his production on a numerical basis by yards equates to $8million/ 1,153 yards = $6938.42 c per yard or per reception $8million/ 85 receptions = $94117.65 yards a reception.

Now I know in both contracts portions of the money is incentive activated and what not, And so I am uncertain as to what exactly these guys earned last year but as a barometer for evaluation from a financial standpoint: Is Jenkins worth it? When you consider that Roddy's contract is nearly double the value and yet he is providing considerably better value for money.

[phocis850]

I don't know, maybe there is just something wrong with looking at the stats this way. Roddy is ten times better than Jenkins. With the way you calculate it, the less you work the more you get.

[Peyton]

Yeah I deleted that thread, felt a little bit mean. I am hard on ole boy.

[Peyton]

Your post is interesting because I love statistics, but when it comes to Michael Jenkins, it really just boils down to this - I think Michael Jenkins is a role player, and that role shouldn't be starting WR.

He is just way too limited as a route runner. He is completely lacking swerve. He can run fly patterns, post, corners, skinny post, and hooks. That's pretty much it. That leaves a whole lot of routes that he isn't any good at.

[FullMetalFalcon23]

(09-22-2010 03:09 PM)phocis850 Wrote:  I don't know, maybe there is just something wrong with looking at the stats this way. Roddy is ten times better than Jenkins. With the way you calculate it, the less you work the more you get.

Yeah I mean really to be fair to Jenkins perhaps the base barometer would be to look at other number 2's with similar receiving yards/receptions and compare their salaries to his. I don't dislike Jenkins, I holdout for better days for him, but some part of me feels as though we could pay him or someone else less to do the job he is doing for us at this point and time.

Regardless of how prolific a passer Matt becomes if Jenkins' performance doesn't improve what we would see is an increase in yards and completed receptions that would derive more from him getting more opportunities than him making the most of the opportunity.

I do hope his shoulder is ok though, and I am hoping he comes in as a big part of the game plan on Sunday.

---

(09-22-2010 03:18 PM)Peyton Wrote:  Your post is interesting because I love statistics, but when it comes to Michael Jenkins, it really just boils down to this - I think Michael Jenkins is a role player, and that role shouldn't be starting WR.

He is just way too limited as a route runner. He is completely lacking swerve. He can run fly patterns, post, corners, skinny post, and hooks. That's pretty much it. That leaves a whole lot of routes that he isn't any good at.

That is a very good point. As a number two in my opinion you have to be a consumate route runner. You don't have to be a burner but you certainly have to be a creator of opportunity. You cannot do that when your repertoire consists on linear routes only.