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!
WHOAH THERE SWITZ!!!!
I was merely making the point that if you get the ball a lot, you produce. Not a point against any of you "stellar" arguments, merely rebuking Fourd's notion that if he gets more targets he'll produce less...Remember, Hester is his team's #1 WR, and if he makes rapport with Cutler, we all know Cutler will force a few...Perhaps you can point out where I said he'll get less production with more targets? I'm saying I still don't see gianmarco's point that he had a better second half than first. He actually did less with the increased targets than would be expected. As his total production went up his PER TARGET production went down, that's not debatable. Perhaps he's not cut out to be a number 1.As their number 1 wr he finished behind Forte and Olsen in receptions and tds despite having more targets. He scored ONE td the second half. And this year he still has both of them along with what should be better competition at the wr spot and Desmond Clark, who had 70+ targets. So tell me why Hester will have the ball force-fed to him?WHOAH THERE SWITZ!!!!I was merely making the point that if you get the ball a lot, you produce. Not a point against any of you "stellar" arguments, merely rebuking Fourd's notion that if he gets more targets he'll produce less...Remember, Hester is his team's #1 WR, and if he makes rapport with Cutler, we all know Cutler will force a few...
Cutler like to force a few to Brandon- 6'4" 230 lb - Marshall. Thats the type of guy you force balls to- not 5'10 185 lb guys. Why? They have a big catch radius and can shield the ball with their body a lot better. (OK one or two exceptions to this are Wes Welker and Steve Smith who are strong as hell with great hands). Expecting Cutler to force balls to a small target with questionable hands is to either ignore how football is played or to call Cutler a dumb QB.
I fully expect Bennett (6'0" 203Lbs) to take the #1 WR role early in the season, if not by the end of minicamp. Iglesias (6'0" 210Lbs) and Knox (6'1" 190Lbs) will battle it out for #2 and #3. Aromashadu, Broussard, and Davis will stick. That's 6 WRs. I highly doubt Hester stays at WR for too long. The Bears need him at KR. It reminds me a lot of when Steve Tasker played WR for the Bills. Then they drafted Moulds, and signed some FAs and Tasker was no longer needed as a WR.baconisgood said:
Also I am not sure how good the Bears are at developing College WR's into Pro WR......so I don't think they have a very good chance of developing a bad CB into a good Pro WR...just sayin
Are you not the same guy that said Dwill is not a staring RB?? I can find the quote if you like.Anyhow, I think you off base agian this time. I see Hester as a 70+ 1000+-6 + this year and only going to get better.
Yep, that was me... the team officials also thought that... I can dig that quote up if you want.
That's fine... I've been wrong before... but I've also been right before.
Why would Cutler force feed the ball to Hester 180 times?We think you are over-estimating his opportunity.As much as we talk about talent and opportunity as being two separate factors, they are closely intertwined.Hester's athletic ability, combined with the injury to Loyd, combined with the lact of talent and youth in the other WR's on the roster provided Hester with the opportunity to catch 50-something balls. Third behind the RB and the TE.So what is in flux in 2009? Not his athletic ability. The situation with the QB? Check. The situation with the other WR's on the roster? Check.So what makes you think he will be Cutler's top target this season? Because he's so good? Because Cutler will know he was on pace for 80 catches last year and has to progress in 2009 because it's a rule of some kind? Because Earl Bennett isn't developing into an NFL caliber WR?Hester could be the next Peter Warrick and Bennett could be the next Chad Johnson. It happens sometimes. Who did you think would lead the Bengals in receiving in 2002?
So you have to go all the way back to 2002 for a comparison, and Bennett is NOWHERE the prospect Chad was. I think only reason chad slipped out of the 1st rd is he looked like a fool in the bowl game and showed he still needed to grow up.
And wouldn't it be a mistake to assume that Cutler will target Hester more often this year than any other WR merely because Orton/Grossman did so last year? Or that he will target him more often than Hester was targeted last year?
I snagged that one out because I remember it vividly...I was on the Chad Johnson side of that one. But it's normal to remember your hits.
While Chad may have been a better WR prospect than Bennett, care to compare Peter Warrick to Devin Hester as WR prospects?My point being that when a guy finishes the year as the leading WR with 51/665, I don't assume that he's going to be the #1 WR for that team the next season.I've also been a proud DeAngelo Williams owner since his rookie season. 
I don't think it's a mistake to believe that Hester will be targeted more than he was last season. Brining in Cutler should open up the passing offense and there should be more opportunities for the WR. Hester should also now be the starter for a full season. Is 180 targets assumption a mistake? yes, I think that's a mistake to think he'll be near that. The pro-rating based on Grossman/Orton for Hester is like saying that Royal should remain flat in production without Cutler and Orton at the helm. It's possible, but unlikely and the correlation should not be relied upon.
So it's a mistake to transpose numbers from one QB to another....unless it isn't.Gotcha.
So it's a mistake to transpose numbers from one QB to another....unless it isn't.Gotcha.
In essence, the disparity in the QB talent matters and needs to be taken into consideration.Your Warrick comparison is definitely intriguing. A little bit different situations for each of those guys, but nonetheless, interesting. 
I think you're underestimating Cutler's chemistry with Bennett from Vanderbilt. Cutler petitioned the Broncos to draft Bennett in last year's draft and thinks pretty highly of him. While Bennett struggled significantly last year, he should get on track when reunited on the field with Cutler.I really think Cutler and Marshall were big factors in Royal's success. Royal wasn't thought to be anywhere near a top 15 NFL talent last year at this time by anyone. We could be in a very similar situation in the 2010 offseason where one of the Bear WRs breakout and we're saying they're a legitimate #1 NFL WR. These guys should not be dismissed, they have a number of positive factors in their favor.
Way better than the Bears receivers? Yes. Both top 15 talent wise? No, maybe top 25 for Royal and top 10 for Marshall but the Bronco pair are not Fitz and Boldin or Moss and Welker
BTW, I agree with you on your proposition that disparity in talent has to be taken into account. My issue merely was that assuming Cutler comes in and Hester remains the primary target could be in flux as well as any of the other variables. We agree that Cutler could be significant "up" factor. I'm just not sold that Hester is the primary beneficiary of that thermal.Patoons said:JamesTheScot said:So it's a mistake to transpose numbers from one QB to another....unless it isn't.Gotcha.
