Redskins 2013 Salary Cap Status

And many questioned his signing

At least one here still does.

Oh, by the way, Jabar Gaffney's 2012 stats? 4 receptions, 68 yards. Now there's an impact player!

One point difference is markedly higher? As a contrast, the defense limited opponents to several points less in the 2nd half of the season compared to the 1st half, which was my whole point to begin with. Someone posted or linked those stats too after the season, it was a stark contrast. Again, and for the last time, Garcon began suiting up when the defense improved and that explains the wins/losses by a wide margin.

Garcon was the leading receiver in games played because he was targeted often. Simple as that. But he still didn't produce a lot given the targets. Again, it's in the numbers. Tana scored twice as many TDs on fewer receptions. And as the season wore on Garcon was quiet for long stretches.

The legend of Garcon as an elite WR, though hasn't broke 1000 yards with arguably the greatest QB in history throwing to him, is reaching epic proportions in Redskins history. Well, really just among a moron or two.

To the best of my memory, Gaffney was out on a drug thing last year that our FO knew about way before we did, and presumably let him walk because of it. Also to the best of my memory, Garcon hasn't ever produced a better season than Gaffney's last with us. Again, and for the last time, the forest through the trees picture is that Garcon is eating up an enormous amount of cap space and has yet to prove he's worth it. Saying otherwise is just idiocy.

Garcon accounted for 7.5% of our cap space last year.

Preliminarily, the average points per game previously given is skewed b/c in games Garcon played, the defense scored no points while it scored 21 in games he did not play. Thus, the actual average points per game by the offense without Garcon was 21.14, over the course of the season that is a difference of ~ 70 points.

Thus, when Garcon was in the game:
The offense scored 20.3% more points;
The offense produced 10.6% more yards; and
The passing game produced 36% more yardage.

Further, when playing, Garcon accounted for 35% of the receiving yards produced in the passing game. As to the total yardage amassed over the year, Garcon accounted for 17.5% of the receiving yards and 9% of the total offensive yards produced.

All of those numbers appear to be greater than 7.5%.

As to his, not "producing given lots of targets", of Hankerson, Morgan, Moss and Garcon. Garcon had the highest average yards/target last year: 9.45 (67 targets); Moss was close at 9.39 (61 targets). Davis (31 targets), Paul (15)and Robinson (19) had slightly higher per target yards but also had significantly less targets. Despite being targeted only six fewer times than Garcon, Moss only had one game with more than 70 yards and averaged only 35 yards/game. On the other hand, Garcon had five games over 80 yards (Two 100+ yard games) and averaged 70 yards/game (take out his two "injury" games and it shoots up to 89 yards/game). On YAC, Garcon was the clear leader - 6.7/catch. Moss was 5.5./catch. No one else was is even in the ballpark.

Your statement that "Garcon was the leading receiver in games played because he was targeted often" as somehow either bolstering your argument or refuting mine is nonsensical and, as with many of your assertions, illogical. By all statistical measures save touchdowns, when he was on the field, Garcon was the best receiver and, thus, was legitimately the primary target. Your assertion that Garcon got his yards in junk minutes is just stupid and you need to show me something to prove it. Here's what I remember about his "junk minutes":

Pierre Garcon 2012 Highlights "DC or Nothing" - YouTube

Did he score less TD's than Moss. Yup. However, comparing the "with Garcon offense" to the "without Garcon" offense, your assertion that:

[T]he offensive production wasn't hugely different over the course of the season, with or without Garcon.

is, simply:

Dr Cox - Wrong Wrong Wrong Wrong - YouTube

And, since you wish only to look at individual scoring without doing any delving into the numbers behind the scoring (with the implicit assertion that point production is the only legitimate bottom line), I suggest the REAL bottom line is wins and losses:

With Garcon: 8-1
Without Garcon: 2-5

Whether the defense played better or not, when Garcon was on the field the Skins won. When he was not, they lost.

In terms of win percentage, offensive scoring, total offensive yardage produced and yardage produced in the passing game, Garcon's impact on the offense easily exceeded the 7.5% of the cap space dedicated to him. As usual, and in any way relevant to actual factual information or logical thought, you are wrong. <cue Dr. Cox>

Finally, I am not asserting that Garcon is an elite receiver. While I believe he certainly has the potential to be so, elite status is something that is earned with consistent production. Regardless, it is clear to me that, for this offense, Garcon is a game changer and, if he stays healthy, was well worth the money spent.

You dont need stats to see the offense was simply much better when Garcon was on the field. If you didnt see it, you werent watching.

You dont need stats to see the offense was simply much better when Garcon was on the field. If you didnt see it, you werent watching.

This.

You dont need stats to see the offense was simply much better when Garcon was on the field. If you didnt see it, you werent watching.

You know, I absolutely agree with you. Considering the initial spark and excitement he helped create in the first game with that long TD -- splitting and outrunning the Saints defense, the game tying touchdown in the Baltimore game, the incredible grab and run in the memorable Thanksgiving game -- again splitting and outrunning the defense, his performance in the seven game win streak during which he put up big yardage with clutch catches and out produced every other receiver on the team, I thought the assertions that:

Garcon made little to no impact in several games (outside the ones he missed completely), getting yardage in junk minutes but otherwise being very quiet[;]
… the offensive production wasn't hugely different over the course of the season, with or without Garcon[;]
… as the season wore on Garcon was quiet for long stretches[;] and
Garcon is eating up an enormous amount of cap space and has yet to prove he's worth it
… were self-evidently stupid.

However, since I “know absolutely nothing about the game football”, because I am a “moron” for thinking Garcon is a potentially elite receiver, and it would be sheer “idiocy” to believe that Garcon was well worth his cap impact, I just wanted to see how the stats stacked up in light of my moronic and idiotic assertion that Garcon’s in-game impact has comfortably exceeded his cap impact.

After doing so, I feel comforted that my complete lack of football knowledge didn’t stop me from appreciating what a difference maker Garcon is in this offense. Sorry if my pedantic investigation of facts and figures may have bored those who are not as football impaired as me.

No i got you Joe, i saw the context of the last couple pages.

I just think sometimes put the stats aside (isnt directed at you Joe, this is for everybody) and look at the the chemistry between the team and offensive flow of the game. There is no doubt an impact in playcalling and the defense was more on their heels. Garcon is a guy defensive cordinators have to account for on every play. The affect on the field was night and day imo.

Hatters gone Hatt..

Garcon is a beast. Point blank.

One point difference is markedly higher? As a contrast, the defense limited opponents to several points less in the 2nd half of the season compared to the 1st half, which was my whole point to begin with. Someone posted or linked those stats too after the season, it was a stark contrast. Again, and for the last time, Garcon began suiting up when the defense improved and that explains the wins/losses by a wide margin.

Garcon was the leading receiver in games played because he was targeted often. Simple as that. But he still didn't produce a lot given the targets. Again, it's in the numbers. Tana scored twice as many TDs on fewer receptions. And as the season wore on Garcon was quiet for long stretches.

The legend of Garcon as an elite WR, though hasn't broke 1000 yards with arguably the greatest QB in history throwing to him, is reaching epic proportions in Redskins history. Well, really just among a moron or two.

To the best of my memory, Gaffney was out on a drug thing last year that our FO knew about way before we did, and presumably let him walk because of it. Also to the best of my memory, Garcon hasn't ever produced a better season than Gaffney's last with us. Again, and for the last time, the forest through the trees picture is that Garcon is eating up an enormous amount of cap space and has yet to prove he's worth it. Saying otherwise is just idiocy.

Goat you're very bad at thinking.

yep. we've made some bad signings, but garcon ain't one of them.