D.Driver vs. C.Johnson For the Rest of the Season... (1 Viewer)

[eaglesphan79]

Donald Driver:

Pro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage.

Con: Favre's health. Does the week 11 innjury have any lingering effects?

Schedule: @Sea, NYJ, @SF, Det, Min

Chad Johnson

Pro: On Fire right now.

Con: Could go back to sharing TDs with Housh, Rudi, Henry, etc.

Schedule: @Cle, Bal, Oak, @Ind, @Den

Statistically, GB has the more favorable schedule for WR production...

Who has more value?

 

[Gargoylez]

Im sorry is there a question there?

??????

That isnt a question. CJ85 is a #1 receiver and Driver is a decent #2.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Im sorry is there a question there???????That isnt a question. CJ85 is a #1 receiver and Driver is a decent #2.

CJ85 is THE # 1 receiver right now but Driver is either a GREAT #2 or a decent # 1. Regardless, how can you not like CJ the rest of the way?

 

[One]

Donald Driverro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage. Con: Favre's health. Does the week 11 innjury have any lingering effects?Schedule: @Sea, NYJ, @SF, Det, MinChad JohnsonPro: On Fire right now.Con: Could go back to sharing TDs with Housh, Rudi, Henry, etc.Schedule: @Cle, Bal, Oak, @Ind, @DenStatistically, GB has the more favorable schedule for WR production...Who has more value?

I'd much rather have Johnson. Palmer is beginning to look like he's got confidence back to pass deep downfield. In that case CJ>DRIVER. Regardless, both are great recievers to own.

 

[tribecalledjeff]

Donald Driverro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage. Con: Favre's health. Does the week 11 innjury have any lingering effects?Schedule: @Sea, NYJ, @SF, Det, MinChad JohnsonPro: On Fire right now.Con: Could go back to sharing TDs with Housh, Rudi, Henry, etc.Schedule: @Cle, Bal, Oak, @Ind, @DenStatistically, GB has the more favorable schedule for WR production...Who has more value?

If you are writing this to inquire about a trade, I think you're seeing that CJ has a ton more VALUE than Driver. However, I'm not sure that he will get a TON more production. His perceived value is through the roof, when it's pretty unrealistic to expect him to continue what he's done the last 2 weeks.Basically:CJ >> DriverCJ's perceived value >>>> Driver's perceived valueWhenever this happens, it's a great opportunity for a trade. I think if you can upgrade significantly at another position, I'd do it. Something like I'll give you CJ for Driver, but you're throwing me back SJax for Addai. As an example, I just traded CJ and MBIII for Gore and Burress. I consider that a much bigger upgrade at RB than dropoff at WR. This is a long winded way of saying "sell high." A lot of owners right now are expecting these 40-45 point games (ppr) the rest of the way, and there's a very small probability of that actually happening. If you can take advantage of that, do it. *note* Don't flame me saying that CJ will produce numbers... of course he will. I like him as a top 5 guy the rest of the way, just not the absolute clear cut stud #1 3 TDs per week guy that some think he is now.

 

[eaglesphan79]

Im sorry is there a question there???????That isnt a question. CJ85 is a #1 receiver and Driver is a decent #2.

I'm not questioning if CJ85 is the better player. He obviously is, and if I were starting an NFL team, I'd take him over Driver in a heartbeat.But, the bottom line is that up until 2 weeks ago, CJ & Driver had almost identical numbers, with Driver actually having an edge in fantasy valueAfter 9 weeks:CJ 40 rec - 482 yards - 2 TDsDD 50 rec - 580 yards - 3 TDsNote: Over 50% of CJs fantasy points came in the past two weeks...so, I think it's a fair question to see who would have more value for the rest of the season, taking into count DD has the more favorable schedule...

 

[todd2006]

I own Ocho Cinco, Driver, Galloway, and Reggie Brown... I start the first three, but almost benched Driver for Lundy this past week in the FLEX spot. Ocho Cinco seems to be hit or miss. Driver and Galloway (most of the time) get you decent points each week. Reggie I haven't figured out yet.

You can't bench 85. You might bench Driver.

That should answer your question.

 

[Resident A]

Donald Driver:

Pro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage.

That is not a word.I will answer your post irregardless] of your grammatical stupidty.

Chad is a top-6 or so WR. Driver is a top-15. They are not that far apart, but you will be hard-pressed to find anyone who'd choose Driver over #85.

 

[tribecalledjeff]

Donald Driver:

Pro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage.

That is not a word.I will answer your post irregardless] of your grammatical stupidty.

Chad is a top-6 or so WR. Driver is a top-15. They are not that far apart, but you will be hard-pressed to find anyone who'd choose Driver over #85.

I would recommend that if you're going to call someone stupid, you don't have a typo within that sentence.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Donald Driver:

Pro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage.

That is not a word.I will answer your post irregardless] of your grammatical stupidty.

Chad is a top-6 or so WR. Driver is a top-15. They are not that far apart, but you will be hard-pressed to find anyone who'd choose Driver over #85.

According to Dictionary.com:"Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so."

So technically it is a word.......

 

[eaglesphan79]

Donald Driver:

Pro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage.

That is not a word.I will answer your post irregardless] of your grammatical stupidty.

Chad is a top-6 or so WR. Driver is a top-15. They are not that far apart, but you will be hard-pressed to find anyone who'd choose Driver over #85.

According to Dictionary.com:"Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so."

So technically it is a word.......

i found that too...thanks...so, one might use it in casual writing...hmmmmm, kind of like an internet message board post...

 

[fred_1_15301]

Donald Driver:

Pro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage.

That is not a word.I will answer your post irregardless] of your grammatical stupidty.

Chad is a top-6 or so WR. Driver is a top-15. They are not that far apart, but you will be hard-pressed to find anyone who'd choose Driver over #85.

According to Dictionary.com:"Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so."

So technically it is a word.......

i found that too...thanks...so, one might use it in casual writing...hmmmmm, kind of like an internet message board post...

 

[dickey moe]

Can we stop with this "Ocho-Cinco" garbage?

 

[zenzephyros]

I agree that Driver has a much more favorable schedule, but Palmer and Ocho Cinco are known for their end of the year passing sprees... don't bet against them no matter who they play.

As for Driver... I would expect the focus to return back to a healthy Jennings so that Favre won't have to force the ball into Driver's double/triple coverage. That is how the season startered and I predict more of the same from here on out. That is why I traded for Jennings when his value was SO LOW due to the injury.

 

[Mr. Sparkle]

Hopefully not Driver, as I traded him away yesterday for Roethlisberger. I am a McNabb owner, and my backups are Huard and Vince Young. I need qb help. I still hve CJ,TO and can plug in D. Mason, Welker or Devery Henderson.

 

[perry147]

Donald Driver:

Pro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage.

That is not a word.I will answer your post irregardless] of your grammatical stupidty.

Chad is a top-6 or so WR. Driver is a top-15. They are not that far apart, but you will be hard-pressed to find anyone who'd choose Driver over #85.

According to Dictionary.com:"Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so."

So technically it is a word.......

i found that too...thanks...so, one might use it in casual writing...hmmmmm, kind of like an internet message board post...

Resident ##### needs to learn tact.

 

[Gargoylez]

I agree that Driver has a much more favorable schedule, but Palmer and Ocho Cinco are known for their end of the year passing sprees... don't bet against them no matter who they play.

As for Driver... I would expect the focus to return back to a healthy Jennings so that Favre won't have to force the ball into Driver's double/triple coverage. That is how the season startered and I predict more of the same from here on out. That is why I traded for Jennings when his value was SO LOW due to the injury.

Would you trade LT because he had a tough schedule ahead of him?Ok a bit of a reach but you get the point. Ocho Sinko or whatever the wacko calls himself... IMO he is untrade-able right now and his value is tops for a WR right now. i.e. he is goign to outscore any other WR, and to trade him means your trading your X factor, unless you can get a tomlinson or something.

With Favre hurting (how bad who knows) Driver is falling quickly.

 

[Bri]

Donald Driverro: Favre will constantly force the ball to Driver irregardless of the situation of coverage. Con: Favre's health. Does the week 11 innjury have any lingering effects?Schedule: @Sea, NYJ, @SF, Det, MinChad JohnsonPro: On Fire right now.Con: Could go back to sharing TDs with Housh, Rudi, Henry, etc.Schedule: @Cle, Bal, Oak, @Ind, @DenStatistically, GB has the more favorable schedule for WR production...Who has more value?

which one are you trading for?oh I see your sig

 

[Magnus_CA]

How has this topic lasted this long without being attacked by one of the shark pool snobs?

My guess is it's coming in 5-4-3-2...