packersfan
Footballguy
Nice article on Marshall in last week's ESPN the Magazine. What jumped out at me was the part where it talked about Cutler and Marshall watch game film together. Very smart move by Marshall there.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Brandon Marshall Thread (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter az_prof
- Start date
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
Fixed.
Banger
Footballguy
I think you watched the wrong games. He's 5th among all wr's in targets at 9.8/game this year behind Housh, Mason, Fitz and Chad Johnson. There's a good chance that he'll be targetted less next year when Walker returns.
Banger
Footballguy
pretty high praise from Shanny.
Paddy O'Seanessy
Footballguy
That being just statistics. If, as I observed, he's not in the game plan until late, garbage/catchup time on a crappy team, he's going to have a lot of "targets". I liked Walker, too, when he went to denver, but if you're saying Marshall sits for him, you've not watched any of his games.Receivers are like bars -- the more good ones in the neighborhood the better it is for all of them. Marshall either gets the benefit of Walker in the 'hood or gaining more focus in his absence.
Rovers
Footballguy
I think it's time you rethink your position on Marshall.... he is not only a top 20 FF WR, he's a top 20 NFL WR.
SSOG
Moderator
I made my thoughts clear in the game thread. Marshall had a very nice first half, but nothing spectacular. The ball was crammed down his throat, and to his credit he made some plays, but that half was more defined by the plays that he DIDN'T make than the plays that he did. He finished that half averaging less than 7 yards per target, which for a WR is pretty bad. Then the second half came out and he disappeared. All in all, a decent game, but not anywhere as good as the raw numbers suggest. He was force-fed the ball, plain and simple.I don't get why people think it's such an insult for me to say that Marshall is a good WR, but not a great one. Unless you think he's better than one of Marvin Harrison, Terrell Owens, Randy Moss, Torry Holt, Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin, Reggie Wayne, Chad Johnson, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Andre Johnson, Braylon Edwards, Steve Smith, Roy Williams, Marques Colston, Lee Evans, Hines Ward, or Santonio Holmes, then you're really just arguing that I should have Marshall ranked 18th instead of 21st-25th (I have him behind those guys, plus Walker, Santana Moss, and Laveranues Coles, and sort of in a cluster with Plaxico Burress, Wes Welker, Donald Driver, and Joey Galloway).Pretend that all 24 of those WRs (the 24 I listed plus Marshall) are fully healthy right this very second, and your team is playing the superbowl in two weeks. Which of those guys would you take Marshall over? Unless you can name over 10 different guys off that list that you'd choose Marshall over TODAY, then you're really just arguing semantics with me, arguing the difference of a bare handful of slots.
lee evans? santonio holmes? are you havin a laugh? how on earth would you have plax below those guys?
az_prof
Footballguy
How many of those guys are second year players? Only Colston and Holmes. And yes, I think Marshall is just as talented as Colston and I would rather have him than Holmes anyday. He has improved tremendoulsy this year and is likely to improve even more. He has a better physical frame than a lot of those more experienced guys who right now are better so in a year or two I expect him to surpass many of these players. He has a ceiling of a TO--now, I don't know if he will continue to work hard enough to reach it--but he has TO type ability.As far as being forced the ball, all the best WRs get forced the ball. Lots of looks==lots of production. He wouldn't be getting the looks if he wasn't getting opened.
SSOG
Moderator
No, I am not having a laugh. Plaxico Burress really has one skill- running really far down the field and jumping really high. He puts up great numbers because his QB only has one skill- throwing the ball really far down the field and way over his receiver's head. Santonio Holmes and Lee Evans are better deep threats, and much more complete packages. Lee Evans in particular is a STUD. The guy's Steve Smith 2.0. The season he had last year with J.P. Losman at the helm was unreal. And Holmes is getting overlooked this year because he's been dinged, but the guy has been a beast when healthy. He's averaging 11.3 yards per target. That's UNHEARD OF, far and away the best figure in the NFL. According to Football Outsiders, there hasn't been a single receiver who's been better than Holmes on a per-play basis (and yes, that includes Randy Moss). Take Holmes' per-target numbers and give him as many targets as Randy Moss and he'd have 1400 yards and 14 TDs right now.havox said:
It doesn't matter. You seem to be missing the point I keep making- I'm not talking about which WRs I'd rather have on my team for the next 10 years, I'm talking about which WRs I'd rather have on my team for one game played tomorrow. Unless the NFL starts instituting a rule that TD passes caught by sophomore players are worth 9 points instead of 6, what year he's in doesn't make one lick of difference. He's not one of the top 20 WRs in the NFL *TODAY*.az_prof said:
There's a difference in my mind between getting a ton of targets and getting force-fed the ball. If a WR has 10+ catches and under 10 yards per catch, then that means he's getting a ton of rinky-dink dink-and-dunk passes 3 yards from the LoS (and my grandma could get open within 3 yards of the LoS). That, in my mind, is force-feeding him the ball. If he's just running quality intermediate and long routes and gaining separation and as a result he gets a ton of targets, then that's not force-feeding him the ball. That wasn't what happened against Houston. Of the 16 balls thrown Marshall's way, 12 of them were marked "short left", "short right", or "short middle".az_prof said:
SSOG
Moderator
When did I ask for status as an expert homer, and why should I care if it's in the cesspool? I've always said what I believed, and I've *ALWAYS* supported my claims and backed up my opinions with a very solid foundation of reasons. If you disagree with me, then great. If you want to listen to me, then great. If you don't want to listen to me, then great. It's not like I'm suddenly going to change my opinion because a lot of people disagree with me. Not only would that be intellectually dishonest and self-serving, but it wouldn't do anyone any good. Contrarian opinions are what keep people honest around here.Marshall had a very good game. 10 catches on 13 targets is great, and 8.8 yards per target is pretty good. I was glad to see Denver giving him the ball on some running plays because I think that's a good way to take advantage of his biggest talents. Regardless, one good game isn't going to change an opinion that I've formed over the first 15 games of the season. I stand by my earlier point. I listed 24 people currently playing WR and said asked, under the assumption that everyone was healthy, who people would take Marshall over. Unless someone could name 9 or 10 players on that list, then everything else is just semantics- people are saying I should rank Marshall 18th instead of 21st.So far nobody has taken me up on that challenge. With all the people who think my stance is so ludicrous, you'd think there would be at least one person who could step up to the plate here. Maybe my stance isn't quite so ludicrous after all, eh?
SSOG
Moderator
From earlier in this thread:
Also, I'm low on Jennings because of his low targets? Say what? Could have you possibly mischaracterized my feelings even more? I'm low on Jennings because I was low on him coming into the season (based on his brutal year last year), because I didn't see him play enough to change my mind, and because I'm wary of Favre's WRs in the long term. And I don't even know if "low" is the word to use, I'm simply less high on him than I am on Holmes (who I am sky high on) and Marshall (who I am pretty high on, too- I said I'd take him over Terrell Owens in dynasty, didn't I?).If anything, my biases tend to go AGAINST players with obscene target numbers because of the near-certain regression to the mean. You said it, Marshall just led the league in targets this year. You *KNOW* his targets are going to regress next year, which sets him up to very easily see all of his numbers regress if he doesn't step up his game. His per-play metrics are the weakest of the three by a LONG shot, and his targets are the biggest outlier stat any of the three has put up.
Banger
Footballguy
His targets will go down but due to the type of wr he is he'll be targetted much more than Holmes. In the 2nd half of the year they often used him as a RB of sorts by throwing it to him at the line and letting him get 8-9 yards. They did it several times yesterday and he almost scored on one from the 20 yard line that I believe he took down to the 2 or so. You are comparing a home run threat (Holmes) to a possession wr and so of course their yards per catch/target numbers will be different. Per play metrics would be more relevant if they all get the same # of plays but they won't.
FavreCo
Footballguy
You got it. I can't figure out why Holmes is even in the same sentence as Marshall, who has the most # of yards after intital contact this year.
SSOG
Moderator
I view the comparison between Marshall and Holmes as one of four competing factors. Holmes Targets, Holmes per-play metrics, Marshall's targets, and Marshall's per-play metrics. I think Holmes targets and Marshall's per-play numbers are both going to increase. I think Marshall's targets and Holmes per-play numbers are both going to decrease. The question then is whether Holmes' per-play metrics will decrease less than Marshall's targets (I think they will), or whether Holmes' targets will increase more than Marshall's per-play metrics (I think they will, too). The next question is whether that net change is going to be enough for Holmes to catch up to Marshall, given Marshall's higher starting point. I think they will, but I don't have a problem with anyone who wants to disagree.
FavreCo
Footballguy
I see. You are blinded.
SSOG
Moderator
Who cares about yards after contact? If one player led the league in yards BEFORE contact and another led the league in yards AFTER contact, which would you rather have? I'd probably have the "yards before contact" leader because he probably finished with more total yards, but that's just me.Yards after contact gives you a good idea of a player's skillset, but if two players have identical catch%, firstdown%, and yards per target, then what does it matter what the breakdown between yards before and yards after contact is (unless someone can demonstrate that one or the other has a better predictive value for future seasons, or a stronger correlation to future success)?
Rovers
Footballguy
SSOG, you are a stubborn one! Hey, I meant no offense, just givin ya the stick poke a litle bit. With Walker talking his way off the team, I think Marshall has to be considered as a top ten WR going into next year's redraft leagues. Yes, I've been on his bandwagon before the draft, and yes, I own him in two leagues. Whether or not he is as talented as some other top 10 WR's are is sorta a moot point. Given his situation however, I see him getting even MORE targets next year. From a FF perspective, this kid will be a stud next year. We can agree to disagree I suppose. Happy New Year!
SSOG
Moderator
If Walker's off the team, then we agree to agree- Marshall's a likely top-10 guy next year. I've never questioned his fantasy value.The big worry about Marshall is always going to be Chris Chambers, who is another guy who put up stud numbers in a season where he led the league in targets, but who didn't do as well per play as most of his peers. He was a very, very popular pick that season, and he wound up being one of the biggest busts of the year. That's always a possibility, although I think it's highly unlikely with Marshall because his per-play metrics have been much better than Chambers', because Marshall's value isn't predicated on a huge number of TDs (which are very volatile from season to season), and because Marshall has Mike Shanahan and Jay Cutler, which makes a huge difference. He wouldn't be the safest top-10 pick on the board, and we'll have to see what the offseason brings, but I do like Marshall's chances to be a top 10 FANTASY WR at the beginning of next season.If you think he's getting more than 170 targets next year, though, you are absolutely insane. It is not happening. It's just not. 170 is just too high of an outlier.
Marshall is a lights out natural hands catcher. He won't be Chambers, who couldnt stay among the elite because of his hands on short and intermediate routes.
Last edited by a moderator:
kevinallen
Footballguy
I've read this whole thread and have come to the conclusion that you spent way too much time arguing your point only to admit you think Marshall is a top 10 WR next season.What's the argument then?
Last edited by a moderator:
toastedgnome
Footballguy
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Rovers
Footballguy
You made this Chambers comparison, and then broke it down as how it doesn't apply to Marshall! I agree with the second thought there. Chambers hasn't had a decent QB, and even Rivers is a huge upgrade. I happen to think Chambers will also be a nice sleeper next year, as he was new to the SD offense. Rarely do traded WR's light it up with a new team, it's the second year that they have to be judged in, most of the time. Rare talents like TO and Moss are the exceptions to the rule.
SSOG
Moderator
Top 10 *FANTASY* WR (assuming Walker is gone). Fantasy != Reality.
az_prof
Footballguy
The latest news does not sound promising as far as Walker returning. Very strange comment by Walker that 'if Denver is not a good situation for him it is a good situation for Brandon Marshall.' It sounds like he has sour grapes that Marshall did so well and it sounds as if he is worried that he won't be the featured WR.
By ARNIE STAPLETON, AP Sports Writer
December 31, 2007
ENGLEWOOD, Colo. (AP) -- Javon Walker stopped short of demanding a trade like he did two years ago in Green Bay, but he suggested Monday that it might be best for everyone if the Denver Broncos sent him packing.
"It's not that they don't want me here, but I just don't think it's the best fit for me," Walker said as he prepared to meet with coach Mike Shanahan for his exit interview.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Broncos (7-9) expected to compete for a championship but they lost Walker for two months after he underwent a third operation on his right knee, and Denver posted its first losing season since 1999.
Big changes are expected this offseason, perhaps starting with the departure of defensive boss Jim Bates, although Walker sounded as though he'd like to be the first one out the door.
Walker said he wouldn't ask for a trade but just didn't see himself fitting into Denver's plans in 2008, when he's due to make about $7.5 million in salary and bonuses.
He has said he wouldn't be amenable to restructuring his contract despite his injury-riddled season, and that he just needs an offseason of rest to return to his Pro Bowl form after catching 26 passes for 287 yards and no touchdowns this season.
In his absence, second-year pro Brandon Marshall blossomed into the Broncos' primary receiver with 102 catches for 1,325 yards and seven TDs, and slot receiver Brandon Stokley played so well that he received a three-year contract extension.
In a rambling eight-minute group interview in front of his locker that was eventually cut off by the team's public relations staff, an unusually jovial Walker said he can still be a great receiver but probably for somebody else.
"I just don't see it happening for me here," he said. "What it boils down to at this point is I've got to go where the best fit is for me. ... And if it's not the best situation for me (in Denver), it's the best situation for Brandon Marshall."
This was the first indication that Walker was unhappy in Denver, although he acknowledged last summer that he initially wanted out after cornerback Darrent Williams died in his arms in a New Year's Day drive-by shooting that remains unsolved.
Walker asked out of Green Bay after missing the 2005 season with a knee injury that occurred in the Packers' opener, the very thing his then-agent Drew Rosenhaus feared when Walker was threatening to hold out for more money.
Walker was upset that the Packers dismissed his contract complaints and also didn't appreciate Brett Favre telling him to put up and shut up, so he was traded to Denver on draft day in 2006, signed a five-year contract extension worth more than $40 million and had a stellar season for the Broncos.
But it's become apparent to Walker that he had it good in Green Bay, where the Packers capitalized on his deep threat ability much more than the Broncos have.
"Green Bay made me who I was for a team like this to want to bring me here," Walker said. "So, maybe it takes a team like that to go back."
Walker suggested, however, that he could find happiness if he stays in Denver.
"Yeah, if they do want me back, I greatly appreciate it," he said. "If not, you've got to move on."
Shanahan, who has called this the toughest season of his 13-year tenure in Denver, was unavailable for comment. He's scheduled his season-ending news conference for Jan. 7.
By ARNIE STAPLETON, AP Sports Writer
December 31, 2007
ENGLEWOOD, Colo. (AP) -- Javon Walker stopped short of demanding a trade like he did two years ago in Green Bay, but he suggested Monday that it might be best for everyone if the Denver Broncos sent him packing.
"It's not that they don't want me here, but I just don't think it's the best fit for me," Walker said as he prepared to meet with coach Mike Shanahan for his exit interview.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Broncos (7-9) expected to compete for a championship but they lost Walker for two months after he underwent a third operation on his right knee, and Denver posted its first losing season since 1999.
Big changes are expected this offseason, perhaps starting with the departure of defensive boss Jim Bates, although Walker sounded as though he'd like to be the first one out the door.
Walker said he wouldn't ask for a trade but just didn't see himself fitting into Denver's plans in 2008, when he's due to make about $7.5 million in salary and bonuses.
He has said he wouldn't be amenable to restructuring his contract despite his injury-riddled season, and that he just needs an offseason of rest to return to his Pro Bowl form after catching 26 passes for 287 yards and no touchdowns this season.
In his absence, second-year pro Brandon Marshall blossomed into the Broncos' primary receiver with 102 catches for 1,325 yards and seven TDs, and slot receiver Brandon Stokley played so well that he received a three-year contract extension.
In a rambling eight-minute group interview in front of his locker that was eventually cut off by the team's public relations staff, an unusually jovial Walker said he can still be a great receiver but probably for somebody else.
"I just don't see it happening for me here," he said. "What it boils down to at this point is I've got to go where the best fit is for me. ... And if it's not the best situation for me (in Denver), it's the best situation for Brandon Marshall."
This was the first indication that Walker was unhappy in Denver, although he acknowledged last summer that he initially wanted out after cornerback Darrent Williams died in his arms in a New Year's Day drive-by shooting that remains unsolved.
Walker asked out of Green Bay after missing the 2005 season with a knee injury that occurred in the Packers' opener, the very thing his then-agent Drew Rosenhaus feared when Walker was threatening to hold out for more money.
Walker was upset that the Packers dismissed his contract complaints and also didn't appreciate Brett Favre telling him to put up and shut up, so he was traded to Denver on draft day in 2006, signed a five-year contract extension worth more than $40 million and had a stellar season for the Broncos.
But it's become apparent to Walker that he had it good in Green Bay, where the Packers capitalized on his deep threat ability much more than the Broncos have.
"Green Bay made me who I was for a team like this to want to bring me here," Walker said. "So, maybe it takes a team like that to go back."
Walker suggested, however, that he could find happiness if he stays in Denver.
"Yeah, if they do want me back, I greatly appreciate it," he said. "If not, you've got to move on."
Shanahan, who has called this the toughest season of his 13-year tenure in Denver, was unavailable for comment. He's scheduled his season-ending news conference for Jan. 7.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
I have Marshall #6 on that list....EEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! Why? No one else with an opinion different than your's has stepped up to the challenge.
SSOG
Moderator
That's not true anymore. FavreCo has stepped up to the plate and announced that he thinks that Brandon Marshall is as good as Larry Fitzgerald, Marvin Harrison, or Reggie Wayne. I've made my thoughts on that pretty clear in the next post.
Banger
Footballguy
I don't think that claim is insane other than Wayne. Who knows what Harrison's future will be and with respect to Fitz, he's a great wr but in his 2nd year he had...165 tgts 103 rcpt 1409 yds 10 tds compared to MarshallsThat's not true anymore. FavreCo has stepped up to the plate and announced that he thinks that Brandon Marshall is as good as Larry Fitzgerald, Marvin Harrison, or Reggie Wayne. I've made my thoughts on that pretty clear in the next post.
170 tgts 102 rcpt 1325 yrds 7 tds.
Look pretty close to me.
Ironically Fitz's #'s this year were almost identical to his 2nd year (I looked twice to make sure I didn't mistype it)...167 tgts 100 rcpt 1409 yrds 10 tds. So all these metrics that make Marshall an inferior wr I expect would also apply to Fitz as well.
SSOG
Moderator
First off, it's not just about the stats. Fitz is a stud. Watch the games to see that.Second off, you're using cumulative stats. Marshall had 7.74 yards per target this season, with a 60% catch%. Fitz had 8.54 and 62%. His red-zone efficiency is also the best in the entire league. And most importantly, we aren't comparing 2nd year Marshall to 2nd year Fitzgerald, we're comparing 2nd year Marshall to Fitzgerald today. By the same token, I don't know what Harrison's future will be, but if he was fully healthy and I was only picking him for one game, you better bet that I'm going to take him over Marshall.I don't think that claim is insane other than Wayne. Who knows what Harrison's future will be and with respect to Fitz, he's a great wr but in his 2nd year he had...165 tgts 103 rcpt 1409 yds 10 tds compared to Marshalls170 tgts 102 rcpt 1325 yrds 7 tds. Look pretty close to me. Ironically Fitz's #'s this year were almost identical to his 2nd year (I looked twice to make sure I didn't mistype it)...167 tgts 100 rcpt 1409 yrds 10 tds. So all these metrics that make Marshall an inferior wr I expect would also apply to Fitz as well.
Banger
Footballguy
Well, Fitz's 2nd year #'s and this years numbers are nearly identical so it doesn't matter much. Fitz's catch % 100/167=.5988, Marshall catch % 102/170=.6, I'd say they're identical. Yards/tgt Fitz's was 1409/167=8.43, Marshall's 1325/170= 7.79. The grand total is and 84 yard difference over the course of a season or .5 fpts/wk. Pretty insignificant.Red zone wise, Fitz outscored Marshall 7 to 5. Marshall had 24 tgts 12 catchs to Fitz's 17 tgts 12 catchs. Look I think Fitz is a better wr but not drastically better and the #'s bear that out.First off, it's not just about the stats. Fitz is a stud. Watch the games to see that.Second off, you're using cumulative stats. Marshall had 7.74 yards per target this season, with a 60% catch%. Fitz had 8.54 and 62%. His red-zone efficiency is also the best in the entire league. And most importantly, we aren't comparing 2nd year Marshall to 2nd year Fitzgerald, we're comparing 2nd year Marshall to Fitzgerald today. By the same token, I don't know what Harrison's future will be, but if he was fully healthy and I was only picking him for one game, you better bet that I'm going to take him over Marshall.I don't think that claim is insane other than Wayne. Who knows what Harrison's future will be and with respect to Fitz, he's a great wr but in his 2nd year he had...165 tgts 103 rcpt 1409 yds 10 tds compared to Marshalls170 tgts 102 rcpt 1325 yrds 7 tds. Look pretty close to me. Ironically Fitz's #'s this year were almost identical to his 2nd year (I looked twice to make sure I didn't mistype it)...167 tgts 100 rcpt 1409 yrds 10 tds. So all these metrics that make Marshall an inferior wr I expect would also apply to Fitz as well.
FavreCo
Footballguy
Makes sense. Why would you want a WR that can break tackles better than any other WR in the game.
No, I'll take the guy that has the yards AFTER initial contact because he then gets BOTH. Fitz has no ability to break tackles and he's slow as molasses.http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/yardsafte...hreceivers.html
Note who is in the top 5 and who isn't for yards AFTER catch. Marshall is the best at yards after initial contact and #4 in YAC (#2 at the WR psoition behind Welker - who has the luxury of Moss drawing coverage and Brady at QB.
Fitz is nowhere to be found.
So, based on your post, you want YAC, then you should want Marshall.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Cool...now I can retract my rediculous assertion.That's not true anymore. FavreCo has stepped up to the plate and announced that he thinks that Brandon Marshall is as good as Larry Fitzgerald, Marvin Harrison, or Reggie Wayne. I've made my thoughts on that pretty clear in the next post.
SSOG
Moderator
Fitz has an identical catch% and better yards per target. He converted a higher percentage of his 3rd/4th down targets into first downs. His TD:Target ratio in the redzone blows Marshall's out of the water (41% to 21%). He's basically equal or better in every meaningful measurement... and, oh yeah, this is despite the fact that he dealt with worse QB play (throw out weeks 1-5, when Leinart was healthy, and we aren't even having this conversation). Oh, and those aggregate numbers that you first posted? You forgot to mention that Fitzgerald compiled his in 15 games to Marshall's 16. Fitz averaged 15% more yards per game and 50% more TDs per game than Marshall. Fitz might have only averaged .5 more fantasy points per week, but he averaged more than TWO more fantasy points per game.Generally, when one WR's statistics are superior to the others in every way, then it's not a "tossup" as to which is better. And this is if you're just basing the argument off of statistics- I think anyone watching both Fitzgerald and Marshall play would be hard-pressed to declare Marshall the better talent.
You realize that yards are yards, right? You realize that 50-yard TD receptions count for 6 whether you got 49 yards after contact or none, right? I'll take whichever guy is averaging more yards per target, because it doesn't matter what the breakdown of before contact/after contact is... all yards count the same.Tell me, if one WR posted 100/1400/15 without getting a single yard after contact, would you tell me that a WR that posted 100/800/10 with all 800 yards coming after contact had a better season? Would you rather have the second guy than the first? Of course not, because YAC is a meaningless statistic, a tool whose only use is to describe a player's skillset but not his value. A WR's value is much better described by statistics such as catch% and yards per target. In the end, YAC means about as much as "yards while tiptoeing the sideline". I could say "Don't you want a WR who has demonstrated an ability to stay inbounds?", but in the end, I want a WR who gets yards, regardless of how they come.Makes sense. Why would you want a WR that can break tackles better than any other WR in the game.No, I'll take the guy that has the yards AFTER initial contact because he then gets BOTH. Fitz has no ability to break tackles and he's slow as molasses.
http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/yardsafte...hreceivers.html
Note who is in the top 5 and who isn't for yards AFTER catch. Marshall is the best at yards after initial contact and #4 in YAC (#2 at the WR psoition behind Welker - who has the luxury of Moss drawing coverage and Brady at QB.
Fitz is nowhere to be found.
So, based on your post, you want YAC, then you should want Marshall.
You do realize that you're arguing that Marshall is better than Fitzgerald... according to a statistic in which the top 5 WRs in the league are Wes Welker, Brandon Marshall, Roddy White, Steve Smith, and Jerricho Cotchery, right? Oh yeah, YAC is a really good way to determine a player's value. Marshall's one of the best in the league, so he must be one of the best WRs in the entire NFL, along with Jerricho Cotchery, right? Forget that scrub Randy Moss, give me Roddy White any day of the week. Roddy White gets YAC, and according to FavreCo, YAC is a useful indicator of how good a WR is and isn't a statistic that pretty much solely relates usage patterns. Rowdy Roddy White is an UBERSTUD and way better than any Terrell Owens or Chad Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald.
Oh, and Brandon Marshall breaks tackles very well, but he's no Anquan Boldin. Nor is he a Terrell Owens.
Not a problem, man. I'd hate to leave you hanging out in the wind like that.
Edit: Just for emphasis, any time you say that a WR is one of the best in the league based almost entirely on a statistic that ranks Roddy White as a top-5 WR, then you need to seriously rethink your argument.
Last edited by a moderator:
thatguy
Footballguy
I disagree with this part. I think he's as good as, or better than, either of these guys at breaking tackles.Fitz has an identical catch% and better yards per target. He converted a higher percentage of his 3rd/4th down targets into first downs. His TD:Target ratio in the redzone blows Marshall's out of the water (41% to 21%). He's basically equal or better in every meaningful measurement... and, oh yeah, this is despite the fact that he dealt with worse QB play (throw out weeks 1-5, when Leinart was healthy, and we aren't even having this conversation). Oh, and those aggregate numbers that you first posted? You forgot to mention that Fitzgerald compiled his in 15 games to Marshall's 16. Fitz averaged 15% more yards per game and 50% more TDs per game than Marshall. Fitz might have only averaged .5 more fantasy points per week, but he averaged more than TWO more fantasy points per game.Generally, when one WR's statistics are superior to the others in every way, then it's not a "tossup" as to which is better. And this is if you're just basing the argument off of statistics- I think anyone watching both Fitzgerald and Marshall play would be hard-pressed to declare Marshall the better talent.
You realize that yards are yards, right? You realize that 50-yard TD receptions count for 6 whether you got 49 yards after contact or none, right? I'll take whichever guy is averaging more yards per target, because it doesn't matter what the breakdown of before contact/after contact is... all yards count the same.Tell me, if one WR posted 100/1400/15 without getting a single yard after contact, would you tell me that a WR that posted 100/800/10 with all 800 yards coming after contact had a better season? Would you rather have the second guy than the first? Of course not, because YAC is a meaningless statistic, a tool whose only use is to describe a player's skillset but not his value. A WR's value is much better described by statistics such as catch% and yards per target. In the end, YAC means about as much as "yards while tiptoeing the sideline". I could say "Don't you want a WR who has demonstrated an ability to stay inbounds?", but in the end, I want a WR who gets yards, regardless of how they come.Makes sense. Why would you want a WR that can break tackles better than any other WR in the game.No, I'll take the guy that has the yards AFTER initial contact because he then gets BOTH. Fitz has no ability to break tackles and he's slow as molasses.
http://sports.iwon.com/nfl/stats/yardsafte...hreceivers.html
Note who is in the top 5 and who isn't for yards AFTER catch. Marshall is the best at yards after initial contact and #4 in YAC (#2 at the WR psoition behind Welker - who has the luxury of Moss drawing coverage and Brady at QB.
Fitz is nowhere to be found.
So, based on your post, you want YAC, then you should want Marshall.
You do realize that you're arguing that Marshall is better than Fitzgerald... according to a statistic in which the top 5 WRs in the league are Wes Welker, Brandon Marshall, Roddy White, Steve Smith, and Jerricho Cotchery, right? Oh yeah, YAC is a really good way to determine a player's value. Marshall's one of the best in the league, so he must be one of the best WRs in the entire NFL, along with Jerricho Cotchery, right? Forget that scrub Randy Moss, give me Roddy White any day of the week. Roddy White gets YAC, and according to FavreCo, YAC is a useful indicator of how good a WR is and isn't a statistic that pretty much solely relates usage patterns. Rowdy Roddy White is an UBERSTUD and way better than any Terrell Owens or Chad Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald.
Oh, and Brandon Marshall breaks tackles very well, but he's no Anquan Boldin. Nor is he a Terrell Owens.
Not a problem, man. I'd hate to leave you hanging out in the wind like that.Edit: Just for emphasis, any time you say that a WR is one of the best in the league based almost entirely on a statistic that ranks Roddy White as a top-5 WR, then you need to seriously rethink your argument.
Jeff Tefertiller
Footballguy
Brandon Marshall recently slipped and fell through a television at his home and gashed his arm, according to NFL Network's Adam Schefter.
Marshall reportedly was treated at and later released from a hospital after needing several stitches. Considering Marshall's past off-field decision making, it's hard not to speculate that there may be more to this story. Marshall should be ready well before training camp.
from profootballtalk.com, via rotoworld
Marshall reportedly was treated at and later released from a hospital after needing several stitches. Considering Marshall's past off-field decision making, it's hard not to speculate that there may be more to this story. Marshall should be ready well before training camp.
from profootballtalk.com, via rotoworld
ScottyFargo
Footballguy
I bet it was the Wii
Jeff Tefertiller
Footballguy
do they have soccer?
The Man With No Name
Footballguy
Or diving?
cstu
Footballguy
My speculation is that is was wrestling and he was performing a Dusty Rhodes Bionic Elbow.
TD5150
Footballguy
Jeff Tefertiller
Footballguy
From rotoworld (citing NFL.com):NFL Network's Adam Schefter reports Brandon Marshall's arm-through-the TV injury occurred when he slipped on an empty McDonalds bag.Happens to the best of 'em. Marshall apparently tried to brace his fall with his arm and put it through the television entertainment center. "It's funny because I pride myself on YAC (yards after catch) and being one of the toughest players to take down once I have the ball in my hands," Marshall said. "So for the next couple of days I'm going to take the time to build my confidence back up after allowing that McDonalds bag to take me down." His arm will be in a cast for two weeks. It's uncertain how many stitches he needed.
Rushmore
Footballguy
The Bengals need to inquire about this McD's bag for strong safety. They could certainly use someone who can tackle.
Prodigal19
Footballguy
NFL Network's Adam Schefter reports Brandon Marshall will miss the next three months after undergoing arm surgery over the weekend.
As it turns out, the injury was far more severe than Marshall has let on. He severed an artery, a vein, and five muscle tendons. Marshall not only needed stitches, but surgery to suture the wounds. He'll be in a cast for the next two weeks and a splint four weeks after that. Marshall reportedly didn't get hurt slipping on a McDonalds bag. He was wrestling with family members.
As it turns out, the injury was far more severe than Marshall has let on. He severed an artery, a vein, and five muscle tendons. Marshall not only needed stitches, but surgery to suture the wounds. He'll be in a cast for the next two weeks and a splint four weeks after that. Marshall reportedly didn't get hurt slipping on a McDonalds bag. He was wrestling with family members.
http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/
MARSHALL SEVERED ARTERY, TENDONS, NERVE
Posted by Mike Florio on March 24, 2008, 7:21 p.m.
We knew there was more to the bizarre Brandon “I’ll Say I Slipped On A McDonald’s Bag Because No One Will Believe I Slipped On A Banana Peel” Marshall story.
And indeed there is.
According to Adam Schefter of NFL Network, Marshall seriously screwed up his right arm when he supposedly slipped on a paper bag from McDonald’s and crashed his arm into a television entertainment center.
As it turns out, Marshall didn’t slip on a bag. Per Schefter, Marshall admitted to the team that he was wrestling with family members when the incident occurred.
Maybe coach Mike Shanahan suggested that Marshall’s version of the events would be subjected to a polygraph test, and that Marshall opted not to try to beat the machine.
MARSHALL SEVERED ARTERY, TENDONS, NERVE
Posted by Mike Florio on March 24, 2008, 7:21 p.m.
We knew there was more to the bizarre Brandon “I’ll Say I Slipped On A McDonald’s Bag Because No One Will Believe I Slipped On A Banana Peel” Marshall story.
And indeed there is.
According to Adam Schefter of NFL Network, Marshall seriously screwed up his right arm when he supposedly slipped on a paper bag from McDonald’s and crashed his arm into a television entertainment center.
As it turns out, Marshall didn’t slip on a bag. Per Schefter, Marshall admitted to the team that he was wrestling with family members when the incident occurred.
Maybe coach Mike Shanahan suggested that Marshall’s version of the events would be subjected to a polygraph test, and that Marshall opted not to try to beat the machine.
