Best WR right now (1 Viewer)

[HULLOBUDMAN]

1. Holt 2. Smith 3. RoyThey can not be covered right now. Impossible.

I can attest to this; these are my starting 3 WRs in my ppr league. And I am coasting.

picked at the turn?

 

[dawgtrails]

Terrell Owens. Even with a slow start, a possible overdose, a foreign offensive system, and virtually no preseason time with his new QB...Owens is still on pace for 70+ catches for close to 1,000 yards and 13 touchdowns. Owens still gains seperation easily from DB's, is a top 3 yac guy and a top 3 jump ball receiver from where I sit. This guy is still the best there is at the position in the NFL.

So a big year following by a dud, a big game followed by a dud, etc...is "better" than 6 straight 1300 yard seasons, 5 straight games with a TD, etc?

You are incorrect in applying the good year (game), bad year (game) label on Owens. Check the stats again.If you prefer to look at the last three years, Owens has 29 touchdowns in 36 games, while Holt has 31 touchdowns in 46 games. And this three year look ignores Holt's past inconsistancies in scoring touchdowns, in missing double digit touchdowns in all three previous years from 2000-2002. Where as Owens has proven to be able to score his touchdowns in any situation and with several different quarterbacks. Over the past six years, Owens has scored 72 touchdowns in 80 games, while Holt has just 48 touchdowns in 96 games.Holt has shown a steady decline over the past three season in touchdowns, receiving yards and YPC. While Owens has shown a steady increase in receiving yards, YPC and an increase in touchdowns from '03 to '04...while also maintaining that torrid touchdown pace of basically one touchdown per game from '04 to '05, that we have all come to expect from him. As Owens has shown the ability to do this touchdown a game average for 5 out of 6 years now, and under three different QBs.Holt may go for 100/1 a small percentage (6%) of the time more than Owens, but this doesn't make him a better Football player than Owens. The overall numbers don't lie...Owens| 2000 sfo | 14 | 97 1451 15.0 13 || 2001 sfo | 16 | 93 1412 15.2 16 || 2002 sfo | 14 | 100 1300 13.0 13 | 7 79 11.3 1 (Ru stats)! 2003 sfo | 15 | 80 1102 13.8 9 || 2004 phi | 14 | 77 1200 15.6 14 || 2005 phi | 7 | 47 763 16.2 6 |Holt| 2000 stl | 16 | 82 1635 19.9 6 || 2001 stl | 16 | 81 1363 16.8 7 || 2002 stl | 16 | 91 1302 14.3 4 || 2003 stl | 16 | 117 1696 14.5 12 || 2004 stl | 16 | 94 1372 14.6 10 || 2005 stl | 14 | 102 1331 13.0 9 |

Are you citing those stats to show that TO is a better receiver?? Cause I dont see it.Looks like Holt is a lock to play 16 games, catch at least 90 balls, and gain 1300-1600 yards, and get 8+ TDS.Where as TO is a lock for what?? Missing a few games every year, catching not as many balls as Holt, not gaining as many yards as Holt, but putting up more TDs.I didnt know we strictly rated players on their touchdown output.

 

[delusional]

1. Holt

2. Reggie Brown

3. Coles

4. Boldin

5. Berrian

Top 5 right now ( in my league )

But seriously, Moss hasn't been a top 15 wr for 2+ years now

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

Terrell Owens. Even with a slow start, a possible overdose, a foreign offensive system, and virtually no preseason time with his new QB...Owens is still on pace for 70+ catches for close to 1,000 yards and 13 touchdowns. Owens still gains seperation easily from DB's, is a top 3 yac guy and a top 3 jump ball receiver from where I sit. This guy is still the best there is at the position in the NFL.

So a big year following by a dud, a big game followed by a dud, etc...is "better" than 6 straight 1300 yard seasons, 5 straight games with a TD, etc?

You are incorrect in applying the good year (game), bad year (game) label on Owens. Check the stats again.If you prefer to look at the last three years, Owens has 29 touchdowns in 36 games, while Holt has 31 touchdowns in 46 games. And this three year look ignores Holt's past inconsistancies in scoring touchdowns, in missing double digit touchdowns in all three previous years from 2000-2002. Where as Owens has proven to be able to score his touchdowns in any situation and with several different quarterbacks. Over the past six years, Owens has scored 72 touchdowns in 80 games, while Holt has just 48 touchdowns in 96 games.Holt has shown a steady decline over the past three season in touchdowns, receiving yards and YPC. While Owens has shown a steady increase in receiving yards, YPC and an increase in touchdowns from '03 to '04...while also maintaining that torrid touchdown pace of basically one touchdown per game from '04 to '05, that we have all come to expect from him. As Owens has shown the ability to do this touchdown a game average for 5 out of 6 years now, and under three different QBs.Holt may go for 100/1 a small percentage (6%) of the time more than Owens, but this doesn't make him a better Football player than Owens. The overall numbers don't lie...Owens| 2000 sfo | 14 | 97 1451 15.0 13 || 2001 sfo | 16 | 93 1412 15.2 16 || 2002 sfo | 14 | 100 1300 13.0 13 | 7 79 11.3 1 (Ru stats)! 2003 sfo | 15 | 80 1102 13.8 9 || 2004 phi | 14 | 77 1200 15.6 14 || 2005 phi | 7 | 47 763 16.2 6 |Holt| 2000 stl | 16 | 82 1635 19.9 6 || 2001 stl | 16 | 81 1363 16.8 7 || 2002 stl | 16 | 91 1302 14.3 4 || 2003 stl | 16 | 117 1696 14.5 12 || 2004 stl | 16 | 94 1372 14.6 10 || 2005 stl | 14 | 102 1331 13.0 9 |

Steady decline the last 3 years for Holt? I guess you ignore that Holt's receptions were up and yardage and TD were barely off his 2004 totals in spite of missing 2 games. I will concede the point that TO is much more of a red zone threat and Holt will not have as many double digit TD years as TO.

Holt doesn't come anywhere near Owens in touchdowns. Owens is on a virtual touchdown per game pace over 7 years running now, with multiple quarterbacks (yes, this means Tim Rattay too).

Your point? I just conceded that fact in the post that you quoted.

 

[Pipes]

btw it is:1. S Smith2. Holt3. Boldin4. CJ

Close...put in Harrison for CJ then you are 100% correct.

 

[dawgtrails]

Terrell Owens. Even with a slow start, a possible overdose, a foreign offensive system, and virtually no preseason time with his new QB...Owens is still on pace for 70+ catches for close to 1,000 yards and 13 touchdowns. Owens still gains seperation easily from DB's, is a top 3 yac guy and a top 3 jump ball receiver from where I sit. This guy is still the best there is at the position in the NFL.

So a big year following by a dud, a big game followed by a dud, etc...is "better" than 6 straight 1300 yard seasons, 5 straight games with a TD, etc?

You are incorrect in applying the good year (game), bad year (game) label on Owens. Check the stats again.If you prefer to look at the last three years, Owens has 29 touchdowns in 36 games, while Holt has 31 touchdowns in 46 games. And this three year look ignores Holt's past inconsistancies in scoring touchdowns, in missing double digit touchdowns in all three previous years from 2000-2002. Where as Owens has proven to be able to score his touchdowns in any situation and with several different quarterbacks. Over the past six years, Owens has scored 72 touchdowns in 80 games, while Holt has just 48 touchdowns in 96 games.Holt has shown a steady decline over the past three season in touchdowns, receiving yards and YPC. While Owens has shown a steady increase in receiving yards, YPC and an increase in touchdowns from '03 to '04...while also maintaining that torrid touchdown pace of basically one touchdown per game from '04 to '05, that we have all come to expect from him. As Owens has shown the ability to do this touchdown a game average for 5 out of 6 years now, and under three different QBs.Holt may go for 100/1 a small percentage (6%) of the time more than Owens, but this doesn't make him a better Football player than Owens. The overall numbers don't lie...Owens| 2000 sfo | 14 | 97 1451 15.0 13 || 2001 sfo | 16 | 93 1412 15.2 16 || 2002 sfo | 14 | 100 1300 13.0 13 | 7 79 11.3 1 (Ru stats)! 2003 sfo | 15 | 80 1102 13.8 9 || 2004 phi | 14 | 77 1200 15.6 14 || 2005 phi | 7 | 47 763 16.2 6 |Holt| 2000 stl | 16 | 82 1635 19.9 6 || 2001 stl | 16 | 81 1363 16.8 7 || 2002 stl | 16 | 91 1302 14.3 4 || 2003 stl | 16 | 117 1696 14.5 12 || 2004 stl | 16 | 94 1372 14.6 10 || 2005 stl | 14 | 102 1331 13.0 9 |

Steady decline the last 3 years for Holt? I guess you ignore that Holt's receptions were up and yardage and TD were barely off his 2004 totals in spite of missing 2 games. I will concede the point that TO is much more of a red zone threat and Holt will not have as many double digit TD years as TO.

Holt doesn't come anywhere near Owens in touchdowns. Owens is on a virtual touchdown per game pace over 7 years running now, with multiple quarterbacks (yes, this means Tim Rattay too).

Your point? I just conceded that fact in the post that you quoted.

wrong post

 

[SickThing]

I confess I voted for T.O. just because I knew he wouldn't get the respect he deserves.

As for the "right now" label, I think that term has two different meanings; one being who's been the best this season so far, which goes to Holt. Or "the best right to have for this season", which includes games not played yet. This is where I think T.O. gives Holt and Smith real competition. As I posted in a T.O. thread, I think we've going to see T.O. have a big second half now that he starts to get some time with Bledsoe finally to get their timing and routes more together.

 

[dawgtrails]

I confess I voted for T.O. just because I knew he wouldn't get the respect he deserves. As for the "right now" label, I think that term has two different meanings; one being who's been the best this season so far, which goes to Holt. Or "the best right to have for this season", which includes games not played yet. This is where I think T.O. gives Holt and Smith real competition. As I posted in a T.O. thread, I think we've going to see T.O. have a big second half now that he starts to get some time with Bledsoe finally to get their timing and routes more together.

I am not sold on TO. Once again, I think Sunday is in everyone's mind. He played the Houston Texans, lets not forget. He did only have 5 catches, and 45 yards. Obviously you can't ignore the 3 touchdowns, that is huge. However, I don't think you can expect him to score like that too often.He hasn't had more than 6 catches in any game this year. He also hasn't even gotten 90 yards in a game yet.

 

[oukurt]

Tough call between Moss and Holt.

 

[dawgtrails]

Terrell Owens. Even with a slow start, a possible overdose, a foreign offensive system, and virtually no preseason time with his new QB...Owens is still on pace for 70+ catches for close to 1,000 yards and 13 touchdowns. Owens still gains seperation easily from DB's, is a top 3 yac guy and a top 3 jump ball receiver from where I sit. This guy is still the best there is at the position in the NFL.

So a big year following by a dud, a big game followed by a dud, etc...is "better" than 6 straight 1300 yard seasons, 5 straight games with a TD, etc?

You are incorrect in applying the good year (game), bad year (game) label on Owens. Check the stats again.If you prefer to look at the last three years, Owens has 29 touchdowns in 36 games, while Holt has 31 touchdowns in 46 games. And this three year look ignores Holt's past inconsistancies in scoring touchdowns, in missing double digit touchdowns in all three previous years from 2000-2002. Where as Owens has proven to be able to score his touchdowns in any situation and with several different quarterbacks. Over the past six years, Owens has scored 72 touchdowns in 80 games, while Holt has just 48 touchdowns in 96 games.Holt has shown a steady decline over the past three season in touchdowns, receiving yards and YPC. While Owens has shown a steady increase in receiving yards, YPC and an increase in touchdowns from '03 to '04...while also maintaining that torrid touchdown pace of basically one touchdown per game from '04 to '05, that we have all come to expect from him. As Owens has shown the ability to do this touchdown a game average for 5 out of 6 years now, and under three different QBs.Holt may go for 100/1 a small percentage (6%) of the time more than Owens, but this doesn't make him a better Football player than Owens. The overall numbers don't lie...Owens| 2000 sfo | 14 | 97 1451 15.0 13 || 2001 sfo | 16 | 93 1412 15.2 16 || 2002 sfo | 14 | 100 1300 13.0 13 | 7 79 11.3 1 (Ru stats)! 2003 sfo | 15 | 80 1102 13.8 9 || 2004 phi | 14 | 77 1200 15.6 14 || 2005 phi | 7 | 47 763 16.2 6 |Holt| 2000 stl | 16 | 82 1635 19.9 6 || 2001 stl | 16 | 81 1363 16.8 7 || 2002 stl | 16 | 91 1302 14.3 4 || 2003 stl | 16 | 117 1696 14.5 12 || 2004 stl | 16 | 94 1372 14.6 10 || 2005 stl | 14 | 102 1331 13.0 9 |

Are you citing those stats to show that TO is a better receiver?? Cause I dont see it.Looks like Holt is a lock to play 16 games, catch at least 90 balls, and gain 1300-1600 yards, and get 8+ TDS.Where as TO is a lock for what?? Missing a few games every year, catching not as many balls as Holt, not gaining as many yards as Holt, but putting up more TDs.I didnt know we strictly rated players on their touchdown output.

I am rating them on a per game basis. And it goes beyond touchdowns only, although Owens massive touchdown lead on Holt says quite alot.Over the past 5 years per game...Owens leads...Catches 2 yearsYards 4 yearsYPC 2 yearsTouchdowns 5 yearsHolt leads...Catches 3 yearsYards 1 yearYPC 3 yearsTouchdowns 0 yearsIt is clear for anyone to see that Owens owns Holt in both yardage and touchdowns, while Holt has a slight edge in catches and YPC. I'll take the guy with the large touchdowns and yardage edge...

Does actually playing in games matter in this discussion? Holt has played in every game but 2. Owens has missed at least 2 games four of the last 6 years.I will take a guy who gets slightly less yards per game, more catches, better yards per catch, less TDs than guy who does the opposite.I love TO man, I hear ya on the merits of him. I just feel that Holt has too many things going for him this year and the previous 6 years to not be the number 1 guy.

 

[gump]

I am rating them on a per game basis. It is clear for anyone to see that Owens owns Holt in both yardage and touchdowns, while Holt has a slight edge in catches and YPC. I'll take the guy with the large touchdowns and yardage edge...

Back to Consistency. Who cares about a per game basis? Don't GM/coaches/owners and fantasy owners look for the guy who produces week in and week out?

 

[SickThing]

I confess I voted for T.O. just because I knew he wouldn't get the respect he deserves. As for the "right now" label, I think that term has two different meanings; one being who's been the best this season so far, which goes to Holt. Or "the best right to have for this season", which includes games not played yet. This is where I think T.O. gives Holt and Smith real competition. As I posted in a T.O. thread, I think we've going to see T.O. have a big second half now that he starts to get some time with Bledsoe finally to get their timing and routes more together.

I am not sold on TO. Once again, I think Sunday is in everyone's mind. He played the Houston Texans, lets not forget. He did only have 5 catches, and 45 yards. Obviously you can't ignore the 3 touchdowns, that is huge. However, I don't think you can expect him to score like that too often.He hasn't had more than 6 catches in any game this year. He also hasn't even gotten 90 yards in a game yet.

I acknowledged the slow start in yardage previously. I stated why I felt it was like that had happened and why I feel it will greatly change. It wasn't Sunday that suddenly made me feel this way at all. To further elaborate on that small sampling of past games this season, you have to note the facts that T.O. is in his first season with this offense and missed most of the offseason with a hammy pull, so he has played with few practices to work on routes and timing right from the beginning. Then he broke his hand and missed yet more practices. Then he had to deal with massive media distraction because a small accidental overdose. And he played against some good defenses during all of this. So there's a lot of unrealized potential that is about to make itself seen. I felt the same way about this before last Sunday.

 

[Yitbos69]

Question was who is the Best WR NOW not over the last six year or for the next six years to come.

Holt is the Best WR NOW

 

[ren hoek]

Steve Smith just finished OBLITERATING the absurd Ravens secondary. I can see the argument for Holt and maybe Owens, but not anyone else. Smith is the obvious choice at #1 right now in my opinion.

 

[EBF]

Why isn't Boldin on that list? He's easily a top 5 WR.

 

[Hellfire Snail]

Steve Smith just finished OBLITERATING the absurd Ravens secondary. I can see the argument for Holt and maybe Owens, but not anyone else. Smith is the obvious choice at #1 right now in my opinion.

As an aside, though, I think Boldin and Roy Williams have limitless ability. IF they could stay healthy, and IF they were on powerhouse teams, they would be breaking records.

 

[ren hoek]

Steve Smith just finished OBLITERATING the absurd Ravens secondary. I can see the argument for Holt and maybe Owens, but not anyone else. Smith is the obvious choice at #1 right now in my opinion.

As an aside, though, I think Boldin and Roy Williams have limitless ability. IF they could stay healthy, and IF they were on powerhouse teams, they would be breaking records.

Another thing that's just nuts about Smith is the statistic I saw last night on ESPN. Apparently Carolina is 0-2 without Smith in the line-up, and 4-0 when he plays. That speaks volumes about what a phenomenal player he is, without taking anything away from the others of course.

 

[Yitbos69]

Smith is very very good WR and could be the Best WR NOW he is a playmaker with great hand and speed........It really to me is Holt 1A and Smith 1B

 

[TME]

"Right now" I think Steve Smith is one of the most dominant players in the game. A guy that deserves mention in MVP talks.

Holt, though the ever productive receiver, is not in those talks. Furthermore, though Holt's career stats look very impressive over his career, the guy accross from him, Bruce, has produced very well over that time period as well. Not to take anything away from Holt, his skills are well known, but the career production is as much a part of offensive philosophy and system as his skils (which are very good).

Smith, though only deserving of this praise the past two years (but we are talking "right now"), also does his damage on a run first team with a lot less talent around him.

It's close, but the past two years, Smith is the guy that can take over a game. He's one of the best players, not just WRs.

 

[sinatravolta]

TO is extremely athletic, and very talented (although he drops a lot of easy catches). But how people could seriously be saying he's the best WR right now is hard to believe. Football is very much a team game and TO has shown that he screws up teams! Do you want a guy who steps up when the going gets tough, or who starts complaining when he's not getting the ball enough - even if the team's winning?

The first year on the Eagles - TO helped them win some games during the first 3/4 of the season, and then he played well in the Super Bowl. But they won the playoff games to get to the Super Bowl without him. And he screwed up the team the next year. And he obviously didn't get the 49ers winning. And so far he's helped the Cowboys beat - the Houston Texans! Going off for 3 TDs in a game against one of the worst teams in the league. Great for fantasy - not so important in the W-L department. You could say he's drawing defensive attention away from Glenn, but Glenn was doing pretty well without TO last year.

So anyway - I think Smith and Holt are clearly the top 2 - and help their teams get wins more than any other WRs.

Could TO have been the best WR right now? Probably. Is he? Definitely not. If you were a GM or coach - could you possibly say you'd rather have him on your team than Smith or Holt (or even a number of other guys in this conversation)? Not if you were a half decent one.

 

[-OZ-]

"Right now" I think Steve Smith is one of the most dominant players in the game. A guy that deserves mention in MVP talks.

The proof is, as they say, in the pudding. How did Carolina do without him?(FWIW, I voted SS, but still say Ward should have been on the list)

 

[SproutDaddy]

I also think Boldin should be in this conversation

 

[dawgtrails]

I also think Boldin should be in this conversation

Enough of the Boldin love.He is not the best wr in football right now. I dont know how anyone can seriously look at what Steve Smith or Tory Holt have done the past few weeks, and what they have done the last year or 2 and say otherwise.Boldin had a fantastic game last night. Doesnt make him the best wr in the game right now.

 

[Keg]

Terrell Owens.

Even with a slow start, a possible overdose, a foreign offensive system, and virtually no preseason time with his new QB...Owens is still on pace for 70+ catches for close to 1,000 yards and 13 touchdowns. Owens still gains seperation easily from DB's, is a top 3 yac guy and a top 3 jump ball receiver from where I sit. This guy is still the best there is at the position in the NFL.

So a big year following by a dud, a big game followed by a dud, etc...is "better" than 6 straight 1300 yard seasons, 5 straight games with a TD, etc?

You are incorrect in applying the good year (game), bad year (game) label on Owens. Check the stats again.If you prefer to look at the last three years, Owens has 29 touchdowns in 36 games, while Holt has 31 touchdowns in 46 games. And this three year look ignores Holt's past inconsistancies in scoring touchdowns, in missing double digit touchdowns in all three previous years from 2000-2002. Where as Owens has proven to be able to score his touchdowns in any situation and with several different quarterbacks. Over the past six years, Owens has scored 72 touchdowns in 80 games, while Holt has just 48 touchdowns in 96 games.

Holt has shown a steady decline over the past three season in touchdowns, receiving yards and YPC. While Owens has shown a steady increase in receiving yards, YPC and an increase in touchdowns from '03 to '04...while also maintaining that torrid touchdown pace of basically one touchdown per game from '04 to '05, that we have all come to expect from him. As Owens has shown the ability to do this touchdown a game average for 5 out of 6 years now, and under three different QBs.

Holt may go for 100/1 a small percentage (6%) of the time more than Owens, but this doesn't make him a better Football player than Owens. The overall numbers don't lie...

Owens

| 2000 sfo | 14 | 97 1451 15.0 13 |

| 2001 sfo | 16 | 93 1412 15.2 16 |

| 2002 sfo | 14 | 100 1300 13.0 13 | 7 79 11.3 1 (Ru stats)

! 2003 sfo | 15 | 80 1102 13.8 9 |

| 2004 phi | 14 | 77 1200 15.6 14 |

| 2005 phi | 7 | 47 763 16.2 6 |

Holt

| 2000 stl | 16 | 82 1635 19.9 6 |

| 2001 stl | 16 | 81 1363 16.8 7 |

| 2002 stl | 16 | 91 1302 14.3 4 |

| 2003 stl | 16 | 117 1696 14.5 12 |

| 2004 stl | 16 | 94 1372 14.6 10 |

| 2005 stl | 14 | 102 1331 13.0 9 |

Are you citing those stats to show that TO is a better receiver?? Cause I dont see it.Looks like Holt is a lock to play 16 games, catch at least 90 balls, and gain 1300-1600 yards, and get 8+ TDS.

Where as TO is a lock for what?? Missing a few games every year, catching not as many balls as Holt, not gaining as many yards as Holt, but putting up more TDs.

I didnt know we strictly rated players on their touchdown output.

I am rating them on a per game basis.

And it goes beyond touchdowns only, although Owens massive touchdown lead on Holt says quite alot.

Over the past 5 years per game...

Owens leads...

Catches 2 years

Yards 4 years

YPC 2 years

Touchdowns 5 years

Holt leads...

Catches 3 years

Yards 1 year

YPC 3 years

Touchdowns 0 years

It is clear for anyone to see that Owens owns Holt in both yardage and touchdowns, while Holt has a slight edge in catches and YPC. I'll take the guy with the large touchdowns and yardage edge...

dont you just how you can manipulate numbers to say what you want them tonow how do you factor in that TO missed the equivalent of ONE FULL SEASON

 

[badmofo]

look jackasses, there is not a clear cut WR. Of course Boldin should be in there, along with Fitz & TO. Holt can't do what Boldin does and Boldin can't do what Holt does. Each WR brings there own niche to the game. Plus, Boldin is much faster than Holt. Holt reminds me of a better Drew Pearson, who was pretty damn good. Steve Smith is probably the best right now, but there are about 10 in there.

 

[Keg]

Holts numbers project out to 99/1403 19TDs

Smiths numbers project out to 124/1800 8TDs

Boldins numbers project out to 107/1339 8TDs

TOs numbers project out to 70/886 13TDs

with 1pt/recp

Holt projects out to 353 fantasy points

Smith projects out to 352 fantasy points

Boldin projects out to 289 fantasy points

TO projects out to 237 fantasy points

 

[Garts]

look jackasses, there is not a clear cut WR. Of course Boldin should be in there, along with Fitz & TO. Holt can't do what Boldin does and Boldin can't do what Holt does. Each WR brings there own niche to the game. Plus, Boldin is much faster than Holt. Holt reminds me of a better Drew Pearson, who was pretty damn good. Steve Smith is probably the best right now, but there are about 10 in there.

Boldin much faster then Holt?

 

[Keg]

look jackasses, there is not a clear cut WR. Of course Boldin should be in there, along with Fitz & TO. Holt can't do what Boldin does and Boldin can't do what Holt does. Each WR brings there own niche to the game. Plus, Boldin is much faster than Holt. Holt reminds me of a better Drew Pearson, who was pretty damn good. Steve Smith is probably the best right now, but there are about 10 in there.

color me confused....boldin is a ton of things but i dont think fast is one of them,boldin ran a 4.7 during his combine....how much faster has he gotten since then?

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_...34/ai_n13562631

Take Arizona Cardinals wide receiver Anquan Boldin. At Florida State, Boldin earned a reputation as one of the nation's deadliest weapons. He led his squad in receiving and touchdowns as a junior in 2002, and had displayed everything on game film that scouts tend to look for.

But when he recorded times above 4.7 in the 40-yard dash at the combine, a time well above NFL standards for a wide receiver, Boldin paid the price.

Holt runs in the neighborhood of 4.4http://www.stlouisrams.com/article/35017/

I run pretty fast. As far as a 40 time, I run a 4.4 consistently.

 

[Keg]

look jackasses, there is not a clear cut WR. Of course Boldin should be in there, along with Fitz & TO. Holt can't do what Boldin does and Boldin can't do what Holt does. Each WR brings there own niche to the game. Plus, Boldin is much faster than Holt. Holt reminds me of a better Drew Pearson, who was pretty damn good. Steve Smith is probably the best right now, but there are about 10 in there.

Boldin much faster then Holt?

i think he meant when they race running on their hands with a fridge tied to holts waist

 

[One]

Holts numbers project out to 99/1403 19TDsSmiths numbers project out to 124/1800 8TDsBoldins numbers project out to 107/1339 8TDsTOs numbers project out to 70/886 13TDswith 1pt/recp Holt projects out to 353 fantasy pointsSmith projects out to 352 fantasy pointsBoldin projects out to 289 fantasy pointsTO projects out to 237 fantasy points

drop the projections, they are laughable and never hold weight by season's end.

 

[Dieselskid]

look jackasses, there is not a clear cut WR. Of course Boldin should be in there, along with Fitz & TO. Holt can't do what Boldin does and Boldin can't do what Holt does. Each WR brings there own niche to the game. Plus, Boldin is much faster than Holt. Holt reminds me of a better Drew Pearson, who was pretty damn good. Steve Smith is probably the best right now, but there are about 10 in there.

Boldin much faster then Holt?

i think he meant when they race running on their hands with a fridge tied to holts waist

Tie a fridge to both of their waists and Boldin is faster.

 

[SickThing]

look jackasses, there is not a clear cut WR. Of course Boldin should be in there, along with Fitz & TO. Holt can't do what Boldin does and Boldin can't do what Holt does. Each WR brings there own niche to the game. Plus, Boldin is much faster than Holt. Holt reminds me of a better Drew Pearson, who was pretty damn good. Steve Smith is probably the best right now, but there are about 10 in there.

Boldin much faster then Holt?

i think he meant when they race running on their hands with a fridge tied to holts waist

Tie a fridge to both of their waists and Boldin is faster.

In refrigerator races, William Perry always wins. Oh yeah... feel free to get back to serious discussion.

 

[Disco Stu]

I also think Boldin should be in this conversation

Enough of the Boldin love.He is not the best wr in football right now. I dont know how anyone can seriously look at what Steve Smith or Tory Holt have done the past few weeks, and what they have done the last year or 2 and say otherwise.Boldin had a fantastic game last night. Doesnt make him the best wr in the game right now.

This Boldin lovefest is getting out of hand.

 

[Keg]

Holts numbers project out to 99/1403 19TDsSmiths numbers project out to 124/1800 8TDsBoldins numbers project out to 107/1339 8TDsTOs numbers project out to 70/886 13TDswith 1pt/recp Holt projects out to 353 fantasy pointsSmith projects out to 352 fantasy pointsBoldin projects out to 289 fantasy pointsTO projects out to 237 fantasy points

drop the projections, they are laughable and never hold weight by season's end.

considering that the OPs question was who is the best WR right now I dont know how you can throw out the projections, they are the best sample avail for a right now argument so if using this yrs stats to project off of doesnt work what time frame should we look at?1 yr? 2yrs? does more really equal TODAY?

 

[Mister CIA]

Blinded by the light, held up like a loofa by the foreman of the night.

BTW, I voted SSmith.

 

[Keg]

Year.........Games.........Catches........Yards.........TDs.........Games w/out TD

2003..........12.................79............979............6................6

2005..........16................103..........1563..........13................8

05Playoffs....4.................36............466............5.................1

Totals.........32...............214..........3008..........24................15

2006............4................31.............450...........2.................

Totals.........36...............245..........3458...........26................17

avgs:

6.8 catches/game

96.05 yards/game

.722 TDs/game

project those numbers out over a season for smitty and it looks like this:

109 catches

1537 yards

12 TDs

i will add Holt, Boldin TO later and if anyone has anyone else just say so

any other WRs gonna come close to those numbers for their last 36 games played?

 

[Keg]

Year.........Games.........Catches........Yards.........TDs.........Games w/out TD2003..........12.................79............979............6................62005..........16................103..........1563..........13................805Playoffs....4.................36............466............5.................1Totals.........32...............214..........3008..........24................152006............4................31.............450...........2.................Totals.........36...............245..........3458...........26................17avgs:6.8 catches/game96.05 yards/game.722 TDs/gameproject those numbers out over a season for smitty and it looks like this:109 catches1537 yards12 TDsi will add Holt, Boldin TO later and if anyone has anyone else just say soany other WRs gonna come close to those numbers for their last 36 games played?

If I was going to call somebody out for manipulating the stats, here is where I would do it. Why choose to compare the last 36 games? Appears to be an odd numbered choice, one that doesn't make sense. If we were back in the fifties, we could say 36 games equals three 12 game seasons. But since we are not, we can say 36 games equals two full seasons, and another quarter of a season

if you notice the total ended at 32 and i added this years 4 games(i was being lazy)...those stats were from a post earlier this yr to combat people saying Smith had only done it for ONE YEAR, I showed what his last 32 games were(the equivalent of 2 years)...see I had a reason for what i did.....and I didnt do it first to see how it looked, if you want me to back out the 1st four games of those numbers i am sure that everything will just go up

 

[Hellfire Snail]

I also think Boldin should be in this conversation

Enough of the Boldin love.He is not the best wr in football right now. I dont know how anyone can seriously look at what Steve Smith or Tory Holt have done the past few weeks, and what they have done the last year or 2 and say otherwise.Boldin had a fantastic game last night. Doesnt make him the best wr in the game right now.

This Boldin lovefest is getting out of hand.

The Boldin love did sort of explode after last night, but look what the guy has done. His rookie year was legendary. The guy racks up 100 catch years like he's taking a stroll on the beach. He is, and has always been, a total monster, and with a carousel of QB's throwing to him to boot. Blake? McCown? Warner? Now a rookie? It doesn't matter. He is a dominant, dominant football player.

 

[Keg]

Year.........Games.........Catches........Yards.........TDs.........Games w/out TD2003..........12.................79............979............6................62005..........16................103..........1563..........13................805Playoffs....4.................36............466............5.................1Totals.........32...............214..........3008..........24................152006............4................31.............450...........2.................Totals.........36...............245..........3458...........26................17avgs:6.8 catches/game96.05 yards/game.722 TDs/gameproject those numbers out over a season for smitty and it looks like this:109 catches1537 yards12 TDsi will add Holt, Boldin TO later and if anyone has anyone else just say soany other WRs gonna come close to those numbers for their last 36 games played?

If I was going to call somebody out for manipulating the stats, here is where I would do it. Why choose to compare the last 36 games? Appears to be an odd numbered choice, one that doesn't make sense. If we were back in the fifties, we could say 36 games equals three 12 game seasons. But since we are not, we can say 36 games equals two full seasons, and another quarter of a season

if you notice the total ended at 32 and i added this years 4 games(i was being lazy)...those stats were from a post earlier this yr to combat people saying Smith had only done it for ONE YEAR, I showed what his last 32 games were(the equivalent of 2 years)...see I had a reason for what i did.....and I didnt do it first to see how it looked, if you want me to back out the 1st four games of those numbers i am sure that everything will just go up

But your 32 or 36 game format is still very selective here. Why did you not include Smith's 4 playoff games in 2003? You use Smith's 2003 season, then fail to include Smith's 2003 playoff stats...yet you use Smith's 2005 season and include Smith's 2005 playoff stats, along with Smith's first 4 games in 2006. This 32 or 36 game sample you are providing still looks pretty selective from over here.

you know what you made me go to NFL.com and look because i know that i didnt purposely leave out any games....and if you check nfl.com for 2003 you will see there are no Playoff games listed, I honestly didnt even realize they were in the playoffs when i was compiling the stats...i then went and checked other players that played in the 2003 playoffs(other teams) and they didnt have any playoff stats either...wierd even wierder is that i cant find any SB stats listed under the yearly breakdown either

 

[-OZ-]

you know what you made me go to NFL.com and look because i know that i didnt purposely leave out any games....and if you check nfl.com for 2003 you will see there are no Playoff games listed, I honestly didnt even realize they were in the playoffs when i was compiling the stats...i then went and checked other players that played in the 2003 playoffs(other teams) and they didnt have any playoff stats either...wierd even wierder is that i cant find any SB stats listed under the yearly breakdown either

http://pro-football-reference.com/players/SmitSt01.htmLook under post-season data

 

[EBF]

Enough of the Boldin love.He is not the best wr in football right now. I dont know how anyone can seriously look at what Steve Smith or Tory Holt have done the past few weeks, and what they have done the last year or 2 and say otherwise.Boldin had a fantastic game last night. Doesnt make him the best wr in the game right now.

Pretty sure Boldin averaged more yards/game than both Holt and Smith last season.

 

[EBF]

2005 receiving yards per game:

Terrell Owens - 109

Anquan Boldin - 100.1

Steve Smith - 97.7

Torry Holt - 95.1

Not very tough to see where the Boldin love is coming from. He's pretty much been sensational from day one when healthy.

 

[titanT]

No HOUSH?