Comparison of some top WRs entering their 3rd year (1 Viewer)

[FantasyTrader]

SSOG,

Agreed with what you have to say about YAC (to a point). It is an overrated stat, but I don't think you're giving YAC it's just due by lumping it in with yards while tightroping the sideline. To me, YAC can be reflective of a WR's level of explosiveness (notice I said "can be").

Guy's who get seperation, are excellent at cutting out of their breaks, selling routes and powerful enough to break tackles are usually good YAC guys.

What does it say about a guy that gets minimal YAC? Generally that when he catches the ball the closest defender is right on top of him.

You say there's no difference between those two guys. Well, maybe not that year in terms of fantasy p.p.g. but over the longhaul? YAC can tell you quite a bit.

 

[thehornet]

A lot of good posts in here but one thing that needs to be considered when looking at pts per target stat and it's that not all targets are created equally. I like that SSOG likes to concentrate on pts per target stat when looking at Marshall, why not look at the YAC? Hmmm, because maybe he's in the top 2 or 3 in the league in that stat. Could that be why he has so many targets compared to others because once you get the ball in his hands he runs better than nearly every WR in the league. They throw the ball to him a RB several times a game where they throw it to him at the line and let him try to beat 2-3 players for 8-9 yards.

The reason I don't look at YAC is because it's a meaningless stat. Tell me- if two WRs have a 60% catch rate, and average 10 yards per target and 16.7 yards per reception, and both WRs convert first downs and score TDs at exactly the same rate and get the same number of targets, but one WR averages 0 YAC per reception while the other averages 14 YAC per reception, which is the better WR? Answer: Neither, they're exactly the same. YAC doesn't mean anything. Yards per reception, catch%, conversion%, TD%, yards per target, and targets... all of these metrics are meaningful. YAC carries about as much meaning as "yards on throws to the left" or "yards while tightroping the sideline". It might tell us how a WR is used, but it doesn't mean that that WR is better. -SSOG

You cannot be serious. This is an invaluable stat that most ceratainly is a skill that good/great receivers posess. Why would you not want a receiver who can change a play into a seriously long run?

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

#1. I'm pretty confused here. How was he 'brutal'? Through week 5, he had two 100 yard games, and was averaging 4 catches for 72.8 yards. As a rookie. And the reason I stop at week 5 is because that's when Jennings was injured; an injury that lingered all season long. Still, he finished with 45 catches for 632 yards and 3 touchdowns in 14 games. How is that Brutal? By comparison, Holmes only caught 4 more balls in 16 games, and fnished with 824 yards and 2 touchdowns. So tell me me how Jennings was brutal?

#2. Now this I can buy. If you're unsure because of the Favre factor, that's fine.

Frankly, I can't understand why everyone is so quick to pile on Greg Jennings right now.

How was he brutal? 43% catch%, 6.02 yards per target. That is brutal.

End of the year, Jennings and Holmes had very similary numbers. In year two, Jennings is blowing away Holmes. On top of that, Holmes is on the injury report every week. It appears that Jennings is also more durable.Not to mention how brutal Marshall was in year one, yet he's the one everyone is so high on.

I can see you're not ever going to change your mind here and that's fine. But it might be good to watch the guy play before making these kind of assumptions.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

A 10% drop might not seem like much, but if Marshall drops 10%, and Holmes increases 10%, that's a pretty significant change. And this is if Holmes just increases 10%- I barely covered him, but I personally believe Holmes ranking 57th in tpg is also a big fluke and likely to regress to the mean (in this case, an upwards change).

Now, here is where it looks like you're are suggesting they regress to a league mean. Your statement is just pure speculation and has nothing to do with a regression to a player's mean. Holmes averaged 5.37 last year and 6.18 this year. His current mean is 5.79. If he's going to regress to his own mean, he's going down. The only way he's regressing upward is to someone else's mean.

A player's "true mean" and a player's "career average" are two totally different numbers. A player's "true mean" is what they would get if they played 1,000 seasons *AT THEIR CURRENT TALENT LEVEL AND SITUATION*, which is key. Expecting Holmes to outproduce his rookie numbers and expecting Holmes to "regress to the mean" are not mutually exclusive propositions.

I think I get it now. When you say "Holmes will regress to the mean", it has absolutely nothing to do with statistics or facts at all. What you really mean is "Holmes will regress to my personal projection".

 

[SSOG]

SSOG,Agreed with what you have to say about YAC (to a point). It is an overrated stat, but I don't think you're giving YAC it's just due by lumping it in with yards while tightroping the sideline. To me, YAC can be reflective of a WR's level of explosiveness (notice I said "can be"). Guy's who get seperation, are excellent at cutting out of their breaks, selling routes and powerful enough to break tackles are usually good YAC guys. What does it say about a guy that gets minimal YAC? Generally that when he catches the ball the closest defender is right on top of him. You say there's no difference between those two guys. Well, maybe not that year in terms of fantasy p.p.g. but over the longhaul? YAC can tell you quite a bit.

In my experience, the guys with the best YAC are the guys catching the ball on the shortest pass patterns, and the guys with the worst YAC are the guys catching the ball on the longest pass patterns. Not always, certainly, but it definitely has a big impact on the ratings. Guys on deep patterns generally have a defender right on top of them because the ball hangs up in the air, or because they have to adjust to the ball while it's in flight.I'm not saying that YAC isn't a good thing, I'm just saying that if two players are averaging the same yards per reception with the same catch% and the same number of targets, I don't care who is getting more YAC. YAC would suggest a difference in usage patterns, but not a difference in ability. Both are producing at exactly the same level, and that's what it's all about- production.

You cannot be serious. This is an invaluable stat that most ceratainly is a skill that good/great receivers posess. Why would you not want a receiver who can change a play into a seriously long run?

I could use the same argument against you. Why wouldn't you want a receiver who doesn't HAVE to change a play into a seriously long run, because he's already catching the ball 20 yards downfield?If two guys have the same catch%, yards per target, and yards per reception, what difference does YAC make?

End of the year, Jennings and Holmes had very similary numbers. In year two, Jennings is blowing away Holmes. On top of that, Holmes is on the injury report every week. It appears that Jennings is also more durable.Not to mention how brutal Marshall was in year one, yet he's the one everyone is so high on. I can see you're not ever going to change your mind here and that's fine. But it might be good to watch the guy play before making these kind of assumptions.

2006-Greg Jennings = 43% catch%, 6.02 yptBrandon Marshall = 54% catch%, 8.35 yptSantonio Holmes = 57% catch%, 9.58 yptDoesn't look like Jennings and Holmes had similar production in 2006 at all. Also, it certainly doesn't look like Marshall was brutal at all in 2006 (not that it matters, since I'm less high on him than everyone else is). I also question how Jennings (who was hurt last year and, according to everyone in this thread, had that injury drastically impact his production) is less durable than Santonio. Both have had a season completely healthy, and a season with nagging injuries.For what it's worth, here are the 2007 numbers-Greg Jennings = 63% catch%, 11.11 yptBrandon Marshall = 60% catch%, 7.89 yptSantonio Holmes = 65% catch%, 10.60 yptJennings is obviously producing as much as Holmes is this year. I've said multiple times that it's entirely possible that I've got a big blind spot on Jennings, and I've explained multiple times why that might be, but by all means, if you guys want me to say it again- I have a big potential blind spot on Greg Jennings because he was so awful last year and because Brett Favre has a history of making good WRs look great.

I think I get it now. When you say "Holmes will regress to the mean", it has absolutely nothing to do with statistics or facts at all. What you really mean is "Holmes will regress to my personal projection".

Ummm... yeah? Isn't that what this is all about- PROJECTING what happens in the future? I never knew there was a pro-football-reference that already had next year's stats on it, or I obviously wouldn't spend so much time trying to figure out what a player's true mean was, as determined by talent and situation, and then figure out where their numbers were going to go from this season as a result.Here, I'll spell it out for you. Holmes is not the 57th most talented WR in the league. He's not playing in a system which I think will repress his numbers in the long-term. As a result, I expect his targets to increase. Marshall is not the 2nd most talented WR in the league. He's not playing in a system which historically has funneled passes into a single target to this degree. As a result, I expect his targets to decrease. In both cases, I view this as "regression to the mean". If you want me to back up any of my claims with facts or statistics, I'd be more than happy to do so, but in the end, this is my personal projection, supported by facts, data, and analysis.

 

[The Finist]

SSOG,Agreed with what you have to say about YAC (to a point). It is an overrated stat, but I don't think you're giving YAC it's just due by lumping it in with yards while tightroping the sideline. To me, YAC can be reflective of a WR's level of explosiveness (notice I said "can be"). Guy's who get seperation, are excellent at cutting out of their breaks, selling routes and powerful enough to break tackles are usually good YAC guys. What does it say about a guy that gets minimal YAC? Generally that when he catches the ball the closest defender is right on top of him. You say there's no difference between those two guys. Well, maybe not that year in terms of fantasy p.p.g. but over the longhaul? YAC can tell you quite a bit.

In my experience, the guys with the best YAC are the guys catching the ball on the shortest pass patterns, and the guys with the worst YAC are the guys catching the ball on the longest pass patterns. Not always, certainly, but it definitely has a big impact on the ratings. Guys on deep patterns generally have a defender right on top of them because the ball hangs up in the air, or because they have to adjust to the ball while it's in flight.I'm not saying that YAC isn't a good thing, I'm just saying that if two players are averaging the same yards per reception with the same catch% and the same number of targets, I don't care who is getting more YAC. YAC would suggest a difference in usage patterns, but not a difference in ability. Both are producing at exactly the same level, and that's what it's all about- production.

You cannot be serious. This is an invaluable stat that most ceratainly is a skill that good/great receivers posess. Why would you not want a receiver who can change a play into a seriously long run?

I could use the same argument against you. Why wouldn't you want a receiver who doesn't HAVE to change a play into a seriously long run, because he's already catching the ball 20 yards downfield?If two guys have the same catch%, yards per target, and yards per reception, what difference does YAC make?

End of the year, Jennings and Holmes had very similary numbers. In year two, Jennings is blowing away Holmes. On top of that, Holmes is on the injury report every week. It appears that Jennings is also more durable.Not to mention how brutal Marshall was in year one, yet he's the one everyone is so high on. I can see you're not ever going to change your mind here and that's fine. But it might be good to watch the guy play before making these kind of assumptions.

2006-Greg Jennings = 43% catch%, 6.02 yptBrandon Marshall = 54% catch%, 8.35 yptSantonio Holmes = 57% catch%, 9.58 yptDoesn't look like Jennings and Holmes had similar production in 2006 at all. Also, it certainly doesn't look like Marshall was brutal at all in 2006 (not that it matters, since I'm less high on him than everyone else is). I also question how Jennings (who was hurt last year and, according to everyone in this thread, had that injury drastically impact his production) is less durable than Santonio. Both have had a season completely healthy, and a season with nagging injuries.For what it's worth, here are the 2007 numbers-Greg Jennings = 63% catch%, 11.11 yptBrandon Marshall = 60% catch%, 7.89 yptSantonio Holmes = 65% catch%, 10.60 yptJennings is obviously producing as much as Holmes is this year. I've said multiple times that it's entirely possible that I've got a big blind spot on Jennings, and I've explained multiple times why that might be, but by all means, if you guys want me to say it again- I have a big potential blind spot on Greg Jennings because he was so awful last year and because Brett Favre has a history of making good WRs look great.

I think I get it now. When you say "Holmes will regress to the mean", it has absolutely nothing to do with statistics or facts at all. What you really mean is "Holmes will regress to my personal projection".

Ummm... yeah? Isn't that what this is all about- PROJECTING what happens in the future? I never knew there was a pro-football-reference that already had next year's stats on it, or I obviously wouldn't spend so much time trying to figure out what a player's true mean was, as determined by talent and situation, and then figure out where their numbers were going to go from this season as a result.Here, I'll spell it out for you. Holmes is not the 57th most talented WR in the league. He's not playing in a system which I think will repress his numbers in the long-term. As a result, I expect his targets to increase. Marshall is not the 2nd most talented WR in the league. He's not playing in a system which historically has funneled passes into a single target to this degree. As a result, I expect his targets to decrease. In both cases, I view this as "regression to the mean". If you want me to back up any of my claims with facts or statistics, I'd be more than happy to do so, but in the end, this is my personal projection, supported by facts, data, and analysis.

hardcoredx

 

[grind]

A 10% drop might not seem like much, but if Marshall drops 10%, and Holmes increases 10%, that's a pretty significant change. And this is if Holmes just increases 10%- I barely covered him, but I personally believe Holmes ranking 57th in tpg is also a big fluke and likely to regress to the mean (in this case, an upwards change).

Now, here is where it looks like you're are suggesting they regress to a league mean. Your statement is just pure speculation and has nothing to do with a regression to a player's mean. Holmes averaged 5.37 last year and 6.18 this year. His current mean is 5.79. If he's going to regress to his own mean, he's going down. The only way he's regressing upward is to someone else's mean.

A player's "true mean" and a player's "career average" are two totally different numbers. A player's "true mean" is what they would get if they played 1,000 seasons *AT THEIR CURRENT TALENT LEVEL AND SITUATION*, which is key. Expecting Holmes to outproduce his rookie numbers and expecting Holmes to "regress to the mean" are not mutually exclusive propositions.

I think I get it now. When you say "Holmes will regress to the mean", it has absolutely nothing to do with statistics or facts at all. What you really mean is "Holmes will regress to my personal projection".

Now this is the funniest thing I've read on a fantasy football discussion board in quite some time. Good work.

 

[thehornet]

Great article on Marshall in the Denver Post. The writing is on the wall even if SSOG dosn't want to admit it.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_7766063

 

[FavreCo]

Great article on Marshall in the Denver Post. The writing is on the wall even if SSOG dosn't want to admit it.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_7766063

Total stud and the obvious choice between the 4 listed by the OP.

 

[thehornet]

SSOG,Agreed with what you have to say about YAC (to a point). It is an overrated stat, but I don't think you're giving YAC it's just due by lumping it in with yards while tightroping the sideline. To me, YAC can be reflective of a WR's level of explosiveness (notice I said "can be"). Guy's who get seperation, are excellent at cutting out of their breaks, selling routes and powerful enough to break tackles are usually good YAC guys. What does it say about a guy that gets minimal YAC? Generally that when he catches the ball the closest defender is right on top of him. You say there's no difference between those two guys. Well, maybe not that year in terms of fantasy p.p.g. but over the longhaul? YAC can tell you quite a bit.

In my experience, the guys with the best YAC are the guys catching the ball on the shortest pass patterns, and the guys with the worst YAC are the guys catching the ball on the longest pass patterns. Not always, certainly, but it definitely has a big impact on the ratings. Guys on deep patterns generally have a defender right on top of them because the ball hangs up in the air, or because they have to adjust to the ball while it's in flight.I'm not saying that YAC isn't a good thing, I'm just saying that if two players are averaging the same yards per reception with the same catch% and the same number of targets, I don't care who is getting more YAC. YAC would suggest a difference in usage patterns, but not a difference in ability. Both are producing at exactly the same level, and that's what it's all about- production.

You cannot be serious. This is an invaluable stat that most ceratainly is a skill that good/great receivers posess. Why would you not want a receiver who can change a play into a seriously long run?

I could use the same argument against you. Why wouldn't you want a receiver who doesn't HAVE to change a play into a seriously long run, because he's already catching the ball 20 yards downfield?If two guys have the same catch%, yards per target, and yards per reception, what difference does YAC make?

End of the year, Jennings and Holmes had very similary numbers. In year two, Jennings is blowing away Holmes. On top of that, Holmes is on the injury report every week. It appears that Jennings is also more durable.Not to mention how brutal Marshall was in year one, yet he's the one everyone is so high on. I can see you're not ever going to change your mind here and that's fine. But it might be good to watch the guy play before making these kind of assumptions.

2006-Greg Jennings = 43% catch%, 6.02 yptBrandon Marshall = 54% catch%, 8.35 yptSantonio Holmes = 57% catch%, 9.58 yptDoesn't look like Jennings and Holmes had similar production in 2006 at all. Also, it certainly doesn't look like Marshall was brutal at all in 2006 (not that it matters, since I'm less high on him than everyone else is). I also question how Jennings (who was hurt last year and, according to everyone in this thread, had that injury drastically impact his production) is less durable than Santonio. Both have had a season completely healthy, and a season with nagging injuries.For what it's worth, here are the 2007 numbers-Greg Jennings = 63% catch%, 11.11 yptBrandon Marshall = 60% catch%, 7.89 yptSantonio Holmes = 65% catch%, 10.60 yptJennings is obviously producing as much as Holmes is this year. I've said multiple times that it's entirely possible that I've got a big blind spot on Jennings, and I've explained multiple times why that might be, but by all means, if you guys want me to say it again- I have a big potential blind spot on Greg Jennings because he was so awful last year and because Brett Favre has a history of making good WRs look great.

I think I get it now. When you say "Holmes will regress to the mean", it has absolutely nothing to do with statistics or facts at all. What you really mean is "Holmes will regress to my personal projection".

Ummm... yeah? Isn't that what this is all about- PROJECTING what happens in the future? I never knew there was a pro-football-reference that already had next year's stats on it, or I obviously wouldn't spend so much time trying to figure out what a player's true mean was, as determined by talent and situation, and then figure out where their numbers were going to go from this season as a result.Here, I'll spell it out for you. Holmes is not the 57th most talented WR in the league. He's not playing in a system which I think will repress his numbers in the long-term. As a result, I expect his targets to increase. Marshall is not the 2nd most talented WR in the league. He's not playing in a system which historically has funneled passes into a single target to this degree. As a result, I expect his targets to decrease. In both cases, I view this as "regression to the mean". If you want me to back up any of my claims with facts or statistics, I'd be more than happy to do so, but in the end, this is my personal projection, supported by facts, data, and analysis.

SSOG, I think you have some great knoweldge so don't take this the wrong way. But isn't time you gave Marshall some props? In real life and fantasy? C'mon man, I know you know!

 

[SSOG]

SSOG, I think you have some great knoweldge so don't take this the wrong way. But isn't time you gave Marshall some props? In real life and fantasy? C'mon man, I know you know!

Where have I not given Brandon Marshall some props? Hell, I said in the Dynasty thread that I'd rather have Marshall than Terrell Owens, a consensus top-10 dynasty WR. The point I keep making is just that Marshall isn't top-20 right this very second. Every time I make this point, I provide a list of 24 WRs and challenge people to name 10 guys on that list they'd take Marshall over for a game tomorrow, assuming everyone is healthy. So far, no one has taken me up on my challenge, which makes me question how many people ACTUALLY disagree with me, and how many simply THINK they disagree with me because they're misunderstanding my stance.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

all the stats in the world are useless if you dont take into account the QB. Some QBs get tunnel vision for a WR and lets face it, Cutler loves Marshall. I'm expecting even bigger numbers next year from him. I think Jennings with get more competition from Jones. Holmes needs to stay healthy before I put him too high. Colston is just way above any of the other 3rd year guys.

 

[thehornet]

SSOG, I think you have some great knoweldge so don't take this the wrong way. But isn't time you gave Marshall some props? In real life and fantasy? C'mon man, I know you know!

Where have I not given Brandon Marshall some props? Hell, I said in the Dynasty thread that I'd rather have Marshall than Terrell Owens, a consensus top-10 dynasty WR. The point I keep making is just that Marshall isn't top-20 right this very second. Every time I make this point, I provide a list of 24 WRs and challenge people to name 10 guys on that list they'd take Marshall over for a game tomorrow, assuming everyone is healthy. So far, no one has taken me up on my challenge, which makes me question how many people ACTUALLY disagree with me, and how many simply THINK they disagree with me because they're misunderstanding my stance.

true. For the record, i would currently place Marshall in the Top 10 WR in the league. Hands down. Look at what he's done with Cutler. Imagine if he had a decent QB throwing to him. And please dont tell me about all his targets. Half those throws are uncatchable or placed incorrectly by his own QB. If Peyton was throwing him the ball, then he would probably have better numbers with half the targets.

 

[Banger]

SSOG, I think you have some great knoweldge so don't take this the wrong way. But isn't time you gave Marshall some props? In real life and fantasy? C'mon man, I know you know!

Where have I not given Brandon Marshall some props? Hell, I said in the Dynasty thread that I'd rather have Marshall than Terrell Owens, a consensus top-10 dynasty WR. The point I keep making is just that Marshall isn't top-20 right this very second. Every time I make this point, I provide a list of 24 WRs and challenge people to name 10 guys on that list they'd take Marshall over for a game tomorrow, assuming everyone is healthy. So far, no one has taken me up on my challenge, which makes me question how many people ACTUALLY disagree with me, and how many simply THINK they disagree with me because they're misunderstanding my stance.

here was your quote..."Also, to back up my claim that Marshall is not currently a top-20 WR... Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Braylon Edwards, Reggie Wayne, Marvin Harrison, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Chad Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Plaxico Burress, Torry Holt, Joey Galloway, Marques Colston, Steve Smith, Roy Williams, Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, Santonio Holmes, Hines Ward, Dwayne Bowe, Donald Driver, Lee Evans, Laveranues Coles, Brandon Stokley, Wes Welker, Deion Branch, Darrell Jackson, Javon Walker, Santana Moss, Derrick Mason, Terry Glenn. That's 30 WRs. Can you name 11 guys on that list who Brandon Marshall is better than right now? I'm not saying that he's not better than ANYONE on that list, I'm just saying that I can't pull 11 names that I'd take Marshall over, assuming those guys are healthy."I'm assuming we're looking at these players as they are now and into the future. I'd take him over Galloway, Roy Williams, Calvin, Holmes, Ward, Bowe, Driver, Evans, Coles, Stokely (that's hysterical), Welker, Branch, DJax, Walker, Moss, Mason, Harrison and Glenn. That's 18 out of 30. I might take him over Colston as well.

 

[SSOG]

all the stats in the world are useless if you dont take into account the QB. Some QBs get tunnel vision for a WR and lets face it, Cutler loves Marshall. I'm expecting even bigger numbers next year from him. I think Jennings with get more competition from Jones. Holmes needs to stay healthy before I put him too high. Colston is just way above any of the other 3rd year guys.

Holmes has missed four games in his career. Isn't it a bit too early to talk about the looming specter of injury here?Also, yes, Cutler loved Marshall this year. Marshall had 170 targets. That number's coming down next year. Guaranteed. He's still very likely going to be a 140 target guy, but that's still a 20% reduction in his number from this year.

true. For the record, i would currently place Marshall in the Top 10 WR in the league. Hands down. Look at what he's done with Cutler. Imagine if he had a decent QB throwing to him. And please dont tell me about all his targets. Half those throws are uncatchable or placed incorrectly by his own QB. If Peyton was throwing him the ball, then he would probably have better numbers with half the targets.

I really hate to burst your bubble, but Jay Cutler is not a guy you can invoke the "imagine if he had a decent QB" argument on. Jay Cutler had a 64% completion rate, 7.5 yards per attempt, and a QB rating of 88. ESPN ran an article asking scouts and GMs which young QB was most likely to jump to the Manning/Brady tier, and they picked Cutler over Roeth, Romo, or Palmer. He ranked 12th in QB rating, 9th in yards per attempt, 8th in DVOA, and was an absolute stud on 3rd down, playing better than pretty much anyone but Brady (while mostly focusing on Stokley, not Marshall). Cutler may not be a Manning or a Brady, but Cutler is a more than capable passer and is certainly no liability to his WRs.

I'm assuming we're looking at these players as they are now and into the future. I'd take him over Galloway, Roy Williams, Calvin, Holmes, Ward, Bowe, Driver, Evans, Coles, Stokely (that's hysterical), Welker, Branch, DJax, Walker, Moss, Mason, Harrison and Glenn. That's 18 out of 30. I might take him over Colston as well.

You're assuming wrong. The hypothetical I keep using is to imagine your team is playing in the Superbowl in two weeks and all of the WRs are 100% healthy. I'm high on his LONG TERM value (I'd take him over Terrell Owens in a dynasty league), but at this very moment, I don't think he's one of the top 20 WRs in the NFL. He's a borderline top-20 guy, but that's it.

 

[Banger]

I'm assuming we're looking at these players as they are now and into the future. I'd take him over Galloway, Roy Williams, Calvin, Holmes, Ward, Bowe, Driver, Evans, Coles, Stokely (that's hysterical), Welker, Branch, DJax, Walker, Moss, Mason, Harrison and Glenn. That's 18 out of 30. I might take him over Colston as well.

You're assuming wrong. The hypothetical I keep using is to imagine your team is playing in the Superbowl in two weeks and all of the WRs are 100% healthy. I'm high on his LONG TERM value (I'd take him over Terrell Owens in a dynasty league), but at this very moment, I don't think he's one of the top 20 WRs in the NFL. He's a borderline top-20 guy, but that's it.

Kind of a pointless assumptions since several of those players may never be healthy.

 

[SSOG]

I'm assuming we're looking at these players as they are now and into the future. I'd take him over Galloway, Roy Williams, Calvin, Holmes, Ward, Bowe, Driver, Evans, Coles, Stokely (that's hysterical), Welker, Branch, DJax, Walker, Moss, Mason, Harrison and Glenn. That's 18 out of 30. I might take him over Colston as well.

You're assuming wrong. The hypothetical I keep using is to imagine your team is playing in the Superbowl in two weeks and all of the WRs are 100% healthy. I'm high on his LONG TERM value (I'd take him over Terrell Owens in a dynasty league), but at this very moment, I don't think he's one of the top 20 WRs in the NFL. He's a borderline top-20 guy, but that's it.

Kind of a pointless assumptions since several of those players may never be healthy.

Maybe, but that's the claim I'm making. Call it pointless all you want, but make sure you understand it before you disagree with it.

 

[FavreCo]

here was your quote..."Also, to back up my claim that Marshall is not currently a top-20 WR... Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Braylon Edwards, Reggie Wayne, Marvin Harrison, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Chad Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Plaxico Burress, Torry Holt, Joey Galloway, Marques Colston, Steve Smith, Roy Williams, Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, Santonio Holmes, Hines Ward, Dwayne Bowe, Donald Driver, Lee Evans, Laveranues Coles, Brandon Stokley, Wes Welker, Deion Branch, Darrell Jackson, Javon Walker, Santana Moss, Derrick Mason, Terry Glenn. That's 30 WRs. Can you name 11 guys on that list who Brandon Marshall is better than right now? I'm not saying that he's not better than ANYONE on that list, I'm just saying that I can't pull 11 names that I'd take Marshall over, assuming those guys are healthy."

The hypothetical I keep using is to imagine your team is playing in the Superbowl in two weeks and all of the WRs are 100% healthy. Done. Toss up between Marshall and Fitz, Wayne and Harrison.

 

[SSOG]

here was your quote..."Also, to back up my claim that Marshall is not currently a top-20 WR... Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Braylon Edwards, Reggie Wayne, Marvin Harrison, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Chad Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Plaxico Burress, Torry Holt, Joey Galloway, Marques Colston, Steve Smith, Roy Williams, Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, Santonio Holmes, Hines Ward, Dwayne Bowe, Donald Driver, Lee Evans, Laveranues Coles, Brandon Stokley, Wes Welker, Deion Branch, Darrell Jackson, Javon Walker, Santana Moss, Derrick Mason, Terry Glenn. That's 30 WRs. Can you name 11 guys on that list who Brandon Marshall is better than right now? I'm not saying that he's not better than ANYONE on that list, I'm just saying that I can't pull 11 names that I'd take Marshall over, assuming those guys are healthy."

The hypothetical I keep using is to imagine your team is playing in the Superbowl in two weeks and all of the WRs are 100% healthy. Done. Toss up between Marshall and Fitz, Wayne and Harrison.

Wow. And people think *MY* position is far-fetched? You think Brandon Marshall is as good as Larry Fitzgerald is right now? You think he's as good as Marvin Harrison or Reggie Wayne? You think he's better than Chad Johnson, Torry Holt, or STEVE FREAKIN SMITH? You realize that I meant the Carolina version of Smiff and not the New York Giants version, right?Wow. Just wow.

 

[az_prof]

SSOG, i like Holmes a lot, I really do, and Big Ben too, but no way I put him over Marshall. ColstonMarshallJenningsHolmesIMO

Brandon Marshall this season is averaging 10.3 targets, 6 catches, 81 yards, and .43 TDs per game. That's 10.68 fppg.Santonio Holmes this season is averaging 6.2 targets, 4 catches, 65 yards, and .64 TDs per game. That's 10.3 fppg.Essentially, both are producing equal numbers... if we take them in a vacuum. Let's add some context, shall we? Santonio Holmes is producing similar totals despite playing much of the year gimpy. He's producing similar numbers on 40% less targets. Brandon Marshall's 10.3 targets per game ranks him third in the entire NFL, and puts him on pace for 165 targets. Do you know what happens to WRs with 160+ targets in year N+1? Let me tell you.Between 2002 and 2006, a WR posted 160+ targets 17 total times. Here's the data, with the year N and year N+1 targets in parentheses afterwards.2002 Marvin Harrison (204, 142)2002 Randy Moss (186, 170)2002 Eric Moulds (180, 119)2002 Marty Booker (165, 105)2002 Hines Ward (161, 156)2003 Torry Holt (183, 129)2003 Randy Moss (170, 84)2003 Anquan Boldin (165, 102)2004 Laveranues Coles (162, 133)2005 Anquan Boldin (171, 152)2005 Chris Chambers (166, 154)2005 Plaxico Burress (166, 121)2005 Larry Fitzgerald (165, 108)2005 Torry Holt (163, 178)2006 Torry Holt (178, 147)2006 Donald Driver (171, 133)2006 Andre Johnson (165, 78)Those last three values are the pace through 14 games. Anyway, of the 17 WRs with 160 targets, only 5 of them managed 150+ in year N+1. The result is a huge regression in fantasy performance. You get guys like Donald Driver, who was the #5 WR in fantasy football when he had 160+ targets, but who fell to 22nd (despite comparable play) when his targets fell back towards his career averages. Or Chris Chambers, who, despite being an irredeemable turd, put up some studly numbers thanks to his 160+ targets.Santonio Holmes, on the other hand, is way at the opposite end of the spectrum. He's currently ranked 57th in targets per game, right between Vernon Davis and Michael Jenkins. He's a mortal LOCK for an increase in targets next year- he really has nowhere to go but up.Brandon Marshall, like all 160+ target WRs, is currently suffering from Chris Chambers disease. This doesn't mean that he's the most overrated WR in the history of fantasy football, like Chambers was, but 160+ target WRs are always overrated because most people simply don't REALIZE that they're 160+ target WRs, or don't understand the concept of regression to the mean. Next year, I guarantee you that Holmes' targets will be more in line with Marshall's, and if their level of play both stay constant, Holmes' numbers will blow Marshall's out of the water. I see a lot of parallels between Holmes/Marshall and Evans/Chambers, actually- both sets were putting up very comparable numbers, but one of the two was doing it at a mind-bogglingly efficient rate (Evans and Holmes), while the other was doing it at a generally inefficient rate (Chambers and Marshall). Like I said, Marshall's targets have nowhere to go but down, and Holmes' have nowhere to go but up. Barring any DRASTIC change in their per-target efficiency, Holmes' numbers should blow Marshall's out of the park next year.

Very, very good analysis here. But it does fails to account for a, as you would put it, "DRASTIC change in per-target efficiency". Denver's offense is 6th in the league in yds. per game, yet only 17th in the league in p.p.g. They move the ball and end up not scoring. Brandon Stokley has started 9 games this year - Javon Walker only three. And I personally feel that the Broncos will realize, when they sit down and review their season that at times they asked too much out of their 2nd yr. QB. Would you agree that these factors being present are typically what will generate a DRASTIC change in per-target efficiency?I won't be at all surprised if Marshall's targets are shaved 30% next year and he actually scores MORE. The average top 10 WR in the NFL has a catch:TD ratio of 8.5:1 - Brandon Marshall? 14.3:1! That's the highest ratio of any of the top 10 receivers. Since we're throwing around terms like regression to the mean, what happens when Walker et al return and opposing defenses cannot consistently over/under Marshall? I'll tell you - his catch:TD ratio will regress to the mean. My brain is tired now so I'm not going to delve into how these numbers play out in terms of his total production but there's reasons present to believe a DRASTIC change in his per-target efficiency is forthcoming in '08.

 

[az_prof]

here was your quote..."Also, to back up my claim that Marshall is not currently a top-20 WR... Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Braylon Edwards, Reggie Wayne, Marvin Harrison, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Chad Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Plaxico Burress, Torry Holt, Joey Galloway, Marques Colston, Steve Smith, Roy Williams, Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, Santonio Holmes, Hines Ward, Dwayne Bowe, Donald Driver, Lee Evans, Laveranues Coles, Brandon Stokley, Wes Welker, Deion Branch, Darrell Jackson, Javon Walker, Santana Moss, Derrick Mason, Terry Glenn. That's 30 WRs. Can you name 11 guys on that list who Brandon Marshall is better than right now? I'm not saying that he's not better than ANYONE on that list, I'm just saying that I can't pull 11 names that I'd take Marshall over, assuming those guys are healthy."

The hypothetical I keep using is to imagine your team is playing in the Superbowl in two weeks and all of the WRs are 100% healthy. Done. Toss up between Marshall and Fitz, Wayne and Harrison.

This hypothetical is really unfair because the other three guys are more experienced and in the case of Wayne and Harrison have had a HOF QB throwing the ball to them their entire careers.

 

[az_prof]

SSOG, I think you have some great knoweldge so don't take this the wrong way. But isn't time you gave Marshall some props? In real life and fantasy? C'mon man, I know you know!

Where have I not given Brandon Marshall some props? Hell, I said in the Dynasty thread that I'd rather have Marshall than Terrell Owens, a consensus top-10 dynasty WR. The point I keep making is just that Marshall isn't top-20 right this very second. Every time I make this point, I provide a list of 24 WRs and challenge people to name 10 guys on that list they'd take Marshall over for a game tomorrow, assuming everyone is healthy. So far, no one has taken me up on my challenge, which makes me question how many people ACTUALLY disagree with me, and how many simply THINK they disagree with me because they're misunderstanding my stance.

here was your quote..."Also, to back up my claim that Marshall is not currently a top-20 WR... Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Braylon Edwards, Reggie Wayne, Marvin Harrison, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Chad Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Plaxico Burress, Torry Holt, Joey Galloway, Marques Colston, Steve Smith, Roy Williams, Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, Santonio Holmes, Hines Ward, Dwayne Bowe, Donald Driver, Lee Evans, Laveranues Coles, Brandon Stokley, Wes Welker, Deion Branch, Darrell Jackson, Javon Walker, Santana Moss, Derrick Mason, Terry Glenn. That's 30 WRs. Can you name 11 guys on that list who Brandon Marshall is better than right now? I'm not saying that he's not better than ANYONE on that list, I'm just saying that I can't pull 11 names that I'd take Marshall over, assuming those guys are healthy."I'm assuming we're looking at these players as they are now and into the future. I'd take him over Galloway, Roy Williams, Calvin, Holmes, Ward, Bowe, Driver, Evans, Coles, Stokely (that's hysterical), Welker, Branch, DJax, Walker, Moss, Mason, Harrison and Glenn. That's 18 out of 30. I might take him over Colston as well.

Here is the list of the guys I would put below Marshall from this challenge:Glenn: ??? I can't believe he is even listed; he is ancient and is a pucccy who is always "hurt"Mason: ??? Again, not in the same class at this stage in his careerMoss: undersized and always has hammy issuesWalker: serious knee injuries slashes his perceived value; hasn't been able to stay healthyDJax:??? Can't believe he is listed. He is washed up and never was that great but benefited from being the featured WR in a good offense in SEA.Branch: An undersized possession WR who has never had a year as good as Marshall has had in his first year starting. Welker: Undersized slot WR who benefited this year from being in a great offense with a great QB and a great WR to draw coverage; let's talk regression to the mean here... He has great hands and runs good routes but he is not an elite Wr.Stokeley:??? This is a joke, right? Guy is always hurt and is a slot WR. He had one great year when his buddy Peyton targeted him a ton in the red zone.Coles: Getting old and not as talented IMO; again, this isn't even close.Evans: I love Evans and he is a talent but he is more of a long threat and as someone else has said Marshall can both be a long threat and a possession. Evans doesn't seem to get open in the short routes, so I would not trade Marshall for Evans, although Evans IS a great Wr.Driver??? He is the perfect examples of a guy who has been made great by Favre and would not be a top 20 WR on most other teams.Bowe: I like him a lot but he hasn't shown as much as Marshall has yet. Show me more...Ward: Old and slow. He is a great guy and I love him but the wheeel is going to fall off his wagon soon.Holmes: Talented guy who needs to step up his production and stay healthy.Calvin Johnson: Hmmmmm, highly touted, given every opportunity in one of the most pass happy offenses in the NFL and he sure didn't produce. He MAY be better at some point in the future, but that is not certain. Galloway: OLD and not as talented at this point in his careerBurrress: bad attitude and hurt too much; bad handsHarrison: great guy and HOF career...approaches his endTO:Age...and character issues; you never know what this guy will do and he drops too many passesGuys that I put in the same category: Roy Williams, Andre Johnson, Holt (approaching the end of his career), Larry Fitz, TJ Housh, Wayne (great WR but seriously, would he be this good on any other team??),Braylon Edwards, Guys that are better: Steve Smith, Colston, ChadJohnson, Randy MossIMO, since you asked, I would put him among the top 10, between 5-10.

 

[LBH]

1.Colston- This guy has put up big numbers 2 years in a row, and I dont see any reason he cant continue to get better. My opinion is that he is clearly ahead of the other recievers in this group value wise

2.Marshall-Love his talent, but I think I want to see what happens with a healthy Walker, and if he can have another good season before I put him on the same level as Colston

3.Holmes-He seems a little one dimensional to me, and that is as the clear deep threat on the team. In ppr leagues I think his value might be a little limited until Ward retires

4.Jennings- I really like Jennings a lot. Unfortunately, I also like James Jones and Driver a lot too. Its tough to be a dominant fantasy wr when you have 2 other really good wrs on the field with you

 

[SSOG]

Here is the list of the guys I would put below Marshall from this challenge:Glenn: ??? I can't believe he is even listed; he is ancient and is a pucccy who is always "hurt"Mason: ??? Again, not in the same class at this stage in his careerMoss: undersized and always has hammy issuesWalker: serious knee injuries slashes his perceived value; hasn't been able to stay healthyDJax:??? Can't believe he is listed. He is washed up and never was that great but benefited from being the featured WR in a good offense in SEA.Branch: An undersized possession WR who has never had a year as good as Marshall has had in his first year starting. Welker: Undersized slot WR who benefited this year from being in a great offense with a great QB and a great WR to draw coverage; let's talk regression to the mean here... He has great hands and runs good routes but he is not an elite Wr.Stokeley:??? This is a joke, right? Guy is always hurt and is a slot WR. He had one great year when his buddy Peyton targeted him a ton in the red zone.Coles: Getting old and not as talented IMO; again, this isn't even close.Evans: I love Evans and he is a talent but he is more of a long threat and as someone else has said Marshall can both be a long threat and a possession. Evans doesn't seem to get open in the short routes, so I would not trade Marshall for Evans, although Evans IS a great Wr.Driver??? He is the perfect examples of a guy who has been made great by Favre and would not be a top 20 WR on most other teams.Bowe: I like him a lot but he hasn't shown as much as Marshall has yet. Show me more...Ward: Old and slow. He is a great guy and I love him but the wheeel is going to fall off his wagon soon.Holmes: Talented guy who needs to step up his production and stay healthy.Calvin Johnson: Hmmmmm, highly touted, given every opportunity in one of the most pass happy offenses in the NFL and he sure didn't produce. He MAY be better at some point in the future, but that is not certain. Galloway: OLD and not as talented at this point in his careerBurrress: bad attitude and hurt too much; bad handsHarrison: great guy and HOF career...approaches his endTO:Age...and character issues; you never know what this guy will do and he drops too many passesGuys that I put in the same category: Roy Williams, Andre Johnson, Holt (approaching the end of his career), Larry Fitz, TJ Housh, Wayne (great WR but seriously, would he be this good on any other team??),Braylon Edwards, Guys that are better: Steve Smith, Colston, ChadJohnson, Randy MossIMO, since you asked, I would put him among the top 10, between 5-10.

I appreciate an honest assessment of the "challenge", but I'm not sure you understood it. You kept mentioning injury histories and how close someone might be to the end, when the whole point of the challenge was to ignore injuries and only look at the present. The wheels might fall off of Ward's wagon soon... but they haven't fallen off right now. Suggesting that you'd take Marshall over Owens because of age and character issues misses the point since, by all accounts, Owens is a model citizen and totally unaffected by age RIGHT NOW.

 

[FavreCo]

Wow. And people think *MY* position is far-fetched? You think Brandon Marshall is as good as Larry Fitzgerald is right now? You think he's as good as Marvin Harrison or Reggie Wayne? You think he's better than Chad Johnson, Torry Holt, or STEVE FREAKIN SMITH? You realize that I meant the Carolina version of Smiff and not the New York Giants version, right?Wow. Just wow.

You can wow all you want but Steve Smith with ANY QB not named Delhomme is a TURD. Marshall with any QB is productive. Why? Because he's the only game in town and already has mastered route running. Did I mention lately that Marshall is #1 in yards after contact and #2 WR in the NFL for YAC? Yeah, I take him over them.Hello, Marvin is on his last leg. Wayne has Manning, of course he puts up numbers but Marshall will = them next year. Fitz is s....l....o....w. Great hands and production WITH Warner. Not so great with Leinart who will be starting. Ocho Sucko? He may not even be with Palmer next year and he sucked this year with him. At 30, he's closing out his career fast. 1 year of 10 TD's. Marshall does that next year and some.Holt..good but old. Explain EXACTLY what he has done this year to say he is better than Marshall, especially long term. Ok, not long term. Right now. Yeah, thought so.

 

[SSOG]

Wow. And people think *MY* position is far-fetched? You think Brandon Marshall is as good as Larry Fitzgerald is right now? You think he's as good as Marvin Harrison or Reggie Wayne? You think he's better than Chad Johnson, Torry Holt, or STEVE FREAKIN SMITH? You realize that I meant the Carolina version of Smiff and not the New York Giants version, right?Wow. Just wow.

You can wow all you want but Steve Smith with ANY QB not named Delhomme is a TURD. Marshall with any QB is productive. Why? Because he's the only game in town and already has mastered route running. Did I mention lately that Marshall is #1 in yards after contact and #2 WR in the NFL for YAC? Yeah, I take him over them.Hello, Marvin is on his last leg. Wayne has Manning, of course he puts up numbers but Marshall will = them next year. Fitz is s....l....o....w. Great hands and production WITH Warner. Not so great with Leinart who will be starting. Ocho Sucko? He may not even be with Palmer next year and he sucked this year with him. At 30, he's closing out his career fast. 1 year of 10 TD's. Marshall does that next year and some.Holt..good but old. Explain EXACTLY what he has done this year to say he is better than Marshall, especially long term. Ok, not long term. Right now. Yeah, thought so.

Yes, it's Jake Delhomme that makes Steve Smith good. Jake Delhomme is a magical, mystical being whose very presence on the football field allows Smith to beat double coverages with regularity and causes a team to TRIPLE COVER Steve Smith in the NFC Championship Game.You did mention that Marshall was #2 in the NFL in yards per catch. Did I mention that the rest of the top 5 was Wes Welker, Roddy White, Steve Smith (yes, the very same Steve Smith who sucks with anyone but Delhomme), and Jerricho Cotchery?Roddy White is third in the NFL in YAC. Roddy. Freaking. White. Roddy White. Let's say this some more so that it sinks in. Brandon Marshall's YAC total falls right between Wes Welker's and Roddy White's. And somehow this is evidence that Marshall is a stud? Somehow you're defending YAC as a statistic that reveals which WRs are true beasts? To repeat myself... RODDY WHITE!!!By the way, "Ocho Sucko" has 100+ more yards on 9 fewer targets than Marshall. He also has two more TDs. Just sayin'.

 

[Bri]

The Marshall love is insane in this thread. I never understand why people have to jump to "best" and can't just say "excellent young WR". Very very odd that the Broncos homer that watches probably "too many" Broncos replays is the one debating the negative side here.

 

[SSOG]

The Marshall love is insane in this thread. I never understand why people have to jump to "best" and can't just say "excellent young WR". Very very odd that the Broncos homer that watches probably "too many" Broncos replays is the one debating the negative side here.

Thank you, Bri, I was beginning to think I was all by myself in this. I think I've got a history of being too high on Denver players/coaches/schemes, if anything.