Dynasty Rankings (4 Viewers)

[DoubleG]

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/features/...p;article=34572

Thanks for posting BustedKnuckles.

Thanks again for all the insight Chris, erm...F&L...you know what I mean.

 

[corpcow]

All Wr's are special talents in the NFL.

Everyone is special? Everyone can't be special- it contradicts the very definition of special. I mean, by that token, you could use the words "special" and "average" interchangeably.Sure, when you compare NFL WRs to their high school or college peers, then they're special... but we're comparing NFL WRs against each other, and the threshold for "special" is much, much higher.

Exactly what I said before.TO put it another way, footballsavvy: "You keep using this word, but I do not think it means what you think it means."

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

You are special, just like everybody else.

 

[SSOG]

Football Outsiders ran an interesting stat today. They did a look at failed completions- passes that resulted in a reception and positive yardage, but which didn't really generate any positive value for the team for one reason or another. For example, a 2 yard completion on 1st and 10 is a "failed completion", because it reduces a team's chances of getting a new set of downs. Obviously a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 7 is another failed completion. Sure, in the end of year stats it looks exactly the same as a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 5, but obviously one is significantly more valuable than the other.

Bill James once wrote, (and you Sabermetric guys are going to have to forgive me because I'm sure I'm going to butcher this), that a good statistic was one where 80% of the results were exactly what you expected, and 20% of the results were completely unexpected. Basically what he was saying is that people already do a pretty good (but not perfect) job at figuring things out. If I invent a measure that says that Alex Smith, Vince Young, Jason Campbell, Matthew Stafford, and Peyton Manning are the five best QBs in the league, I think it's pretty clear that my statistic really blows. If, on the other hand, I have a statistic that says that the five best QBs are Manning, Rivers, Brees, Rodgers, and Alex Smith... well then, let's just say that I'm going to start trying to figure out what Alex Smith is doing to find his name in such lofty company, and probably start looking into buying him on the cheap, while I'm at it.

So, anyway, with all of that framework out of the way, I really think that the failed completion percentage for the QBs is very interesting. 80% of the names are of the "no duh" variety, while the other 20% are of the "hmmm... interesting..." variety. For those who don't feel like clicking the link, here's your top 10:

1. Trent Edwards

2. Jamarcus Russell

3. Alex Smith

4. Ryan Fitzpatrick

5. Matt Cassel

6. Brady Quinn

7. Matt Hasselbeck

8. Jay Cutler

9. Kyle Orton

10. David Garrard

Thoughts:

* first and foremost is how much Jamarcus really sucks. Not only did he post a 48.8 comp%, but 35.0% of those comps didn't even help his team out. Only 31.7% of the time when Jamarcus dropped back did he actually aid his team in its goal to get a new set of downs, and this is not even counting sacks! That's just mind-boggling. By comparison, Ryan Fitzpatrick aided his team in getting a new set of downs 36.6% of the time when he dropped back. There's suck, extreme suck, and "85% of the QB that Ryan Fitzpatrick is" suck.

* Alex Smith's resurrection has gotten a lot of pub, but this really demonstrates something I've felt all season- Gore's still the engine that makes that offense go. Smith throws a lot of rinky dink garbage that looks good on paper, but San Fran is one of the few teams in the league whose passing game is no higher-reward than its running game.

* Funny seeing both Cutler and Orton neck and neck on these lists. Those two QBs are always going to be inextricably linked based on Chicago's trade. I'm sure both sides of the aisle will see this as evidence supporting their side. After all, Jay Cutler cost two firsts and a third and couldn't outperform the guy he replaced... while Orton took over one of the most explosive offenses and turned it into Captain Checkdown and Friends. Personally, I think both sides are right. Cutler played like crap this year, and if he doesn't turn it around, spending two firsts and a third on him was a gross misallocation of resources. Of course, this also really illustrates a large part of my "bias" against Orton, too. He's still Captain Checkdown. Probably always will be. Putting him in charge of the 2008 Denver Broncos offense was like buying a Porsche and giving the keys to my 90 year old grandmother.

The WR list is also equally interesting, but I'm not going to go to into it because people will just think I've got an axe to grind. I do think it helps illustrate one of the primary reasons why I'm notoriously cooler one on particular WR than most everyone else, though.

 

[editor47]

Football Outsiders ran an interesting stat today. They did a look at failed completions- passes that resulted in a reception and positive yardage, but which didn't really generate any positive value for the team for one reason or another. For example, a 2 yard completion on 1st and 10 is a "failed completion", because it reduces a team's chances of getting a new set of downs. Obviously a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 7 is another failed completion. Sure, in the end of year stats it looks exactly the same as a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 5, but obviously one is significantly more valuable than the other.

Bill James once wrote, (and you Sabermetric guys are going to have to forgive me because I'm sure I'm going to butcher this), that a good statistic was one where 80% of the results were exactly what you expected, and 20% of the results were completely unexpected. Basically what he was saying is that people already do a pretty good (but not perfect) job at figuring things out. If I invent a measure that says that Alex Smith, Vince Young, Jason Campbell, Matthew Stafford, and Peyton Manning are the five best QBs in the league, I think it's pretty clear that my statistic really blows. If, on the other hand, I have a statistic that says that the five best QBs are Manning, Rivers, Brees, Rodgers, and Alex Smith... well then, let's just say that I'm going to start trying to figure out what Alex Smith is doing to find his name in such lofty company, and probably start looking into buying him on the cheap, while I'm at it.

So, anyway, with all of that framework out of the way, I really think that the failed completion percentage for the QBs is very interesting. 80% of the names are of the "no duh" variety, while the other 20% are of the "hmmm... interesting..." variety. For those who don't feel like clicking the link, here's your top 10:

1. Trent Edwards

2. Jamarcus Russell

3. Alex Smith

4. Ryan Fitzpatrick

5. Matt Cassel

6. Brady Quinn

7. Matt Hasselbeck

8. Jay Cutler

9. Kyle Orton

10. David Garrard

Thoughts:

* first and foremost is how much Jamarcus really sucks. Not only did he post a 48.8 comp%, but 35.0% of those comps didn't even help his team out. Only 31.7% of the time when Jamarcus dropped back did he actually aid his team in its goal to get a new set of downs, and this is not even counting sacks! That's just mind-boggling. By comparison, Ryan Fitzpatrick aided his team in getting a new set of downs 36.6% of the time when he dropped back. There's suck, extreme suck, and "85% of the QB that Ryan Fitzpatrick is" suck.

* Alex Smith's resurrection has gotten a lot of pub, but this really demonstrates something I've felt all season- Gore's still the engine that makes that offense go. Smith throws a lot of rinky dink garbage that looks good on paper, but San Fran is one of the few teams in the league whose passing game is no higher-reward than its running game.

* Funny seeing both Cutler and Orton neck and neck on these lists. Those two QBs are always going to be inextricably linked based on Chicago's trade. I'm sure both sides of the aisle will see this as evidence supporting their side. After all, Jay Cutler cost two firsts and a third and couldn't outperform the guy he replaced... while Orton took over one of the most explosive offenses and turned it into Captain Checkdown and Friends. Personally, I think both sides are right. Cutler played like crap this year, and if he doesn't turn it around, spending two firsts and a third on him was a gross misallocation of resources. Of course, this also really illustrates a large part of my "bias" against Orton, too. He's still Captain Checkdown. Probably always will be. Putting him in charge of the 2008 Denver Broncos offense was like buying a Porsche and giving the keys to my 90 year old grandmother.

The WR list is also equally interesting, but I'm not going to go to into it because people will just think I've got an axe to grind. I do think it helps illustrate one of the primary reasons why I'm notoriously cooler one on particular WR than most everyone else, though.

i have been saying this for weeks about alex smith. i don't know if he's the future in sf or on my fantasy team because of the lack of options, but ... i'll bet he led the league in 2-yard completions. there was very little verticality to that passing game.

 

[az_prof]

Football Outsiders ran an interesting stat today. They did a look at failed completions- passes that resulted in a reception and positive yardage, but which didn't really generate any positive value for the team for one reason or another. For example, a 2 yard completion on 1st and 10 is a "failed completion", because it reduces a team's chances of getting a new set of downs. Obviously a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 7 is another failed completion. Sure, in the end of year stats it looks exactly the same as a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 5, but obviously one is significantly more valuable than the other.

Bill James once wrote, (and you Sabermetric guys are going to have to forgive me because I'm sure I'm going to butcher this), that a good statistic was one where 80% of the results were exactly what you expected, and 20% of the results were completely unexpected. Basically what he was saying is that people already do a pretty good (but not perfect) job at figuring things out. If I invent a measure that says that Alex Smith, Vince Young, Jason Campbell, Matthew Stafford, and Peyton Manning are the five best QBs in the league, I think it's pretty clear that my statistic really blows. If, on the other hand, I have a statistic that says that the five best QBs are Manning, Rivers, Brees, Rodgers, and Alex Smith... well then, let's just say that I'm going to start trying to figure out what Alex Smith is doing to find his name in such lofty company, and probably start looking into buying him on the cheap, while I'm at it.

So, anyway, with all of that framework out of the way, I really think that the failed completion percentage for the QBs is very interesting. 80% of the names are of the "no duh" variety, while the other 20% are of the "hmmm... interesting..." variety. For those who don't feel like clicking the link, here's your top 10:

1. Trent Edwards

2. Jamarcus Russell

3. Alex Smith

4. Ryan Fitzpatrick

5. Matt Cassel

6. Brady Quinn

7. Matt Hasselbeck

8. Jay Cutler

9. Kyle Orton

10. David Garrard

Thoughts:

* first and foremost is how much Jamarcus really sucks. Not only did he post a 48.8 comp%, but 35.0% of those comps didn't even help his team out. Only 31.7% of the time when Jamarcus dropped back did he actually aid his team in its goal to get a new set of downs, and this is not even counting sacks! That's just mind-boggling. By comparison, Ryan Fitzpatrick aided his team in getting a new set of downs 36.6% of the time when he dropped back. There's suck, extreme suck, and "85% of the QB that Ryan Fitzpatrick is" suck.

* Alex Smith's resurrection has gotten a lot of pub, but this really demonstrates something I've felt all season- Gore's still the engine that makes that offense go. Smith throws a lot of rinky dink garbage that looks good on paper, but San Fran is one of the few teams in the league whose passing game is no higher-reward than its running game.

* Funny seeing both Cutler and Orton neck and neck on these lists. Those two QBs are always going to be inextricably linked based on Chicago's trade. I'm sure both sides of the aisle will see this as evidence supporting their side. After all, Jay Cutler cost two firsts and a third and couldn't outperform the guy he replaced... while Orton took over one of the most explosive offenses and turned it into Captain Checkdown and Friends. Personally, I think both sides are right. Cutler played like crap this year, and if he doesn't turn it around, spending two firsts and a third on him was a gross misallocation of resources. Of course, this also really illustrates a large part of my "bias" against Orton, too. He's still Captain Checkdown. Probably always will be. Putting him in charge of the 2008 Denver Broncos offense was like buying a Porsche and giving the keys to my 90 year old grandmother.

The WR list is also equally interesting, but I'm not going to go to into it because people will just think I've got an axe to grind. I do think it helps illustrate one of the primary reasons why I'm notoriously cooler one on particular WR than most everyone else, though.

I think this is very telling information and I appreciate your posting this. But I think there are two caveats that must be taken into consideration, especially if you apply this to receivers, but to a certain extent for the QBs too.The Offensive Coordinator and the offensive scheme. Some of those failed completions may be because the QB has to check down too often because he doesn't have the arm to hit the single covered receiver on a deep route or an out route. But some of them may be because those short routes and WR screens and HB screens are the emphasis of the team's offensive scheme.

For the WR, he may have a larger percentage of failed completions not only because of the routes the OC has him running, but also because his QB may be incapable of throwing to him accurately even when he is open on deep and out routes.

I am sure that the WR you allude to is Brandon Marshall because I watched enough of Denver's games this year to see that a lot of his receptions were WR screens and short crossing routes and short outs. That isn't Marshall's fault: the OC drew up those horrible plays and the QB is incapable of throwing to him when he is open on deep routes. I think I would want to see what he did the previous years on this metric when he had Cutler throwing in a Shanny offense. If his failed completion percentage were equally low each of those years then it would be more telling.

 

[az_prof]

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/features/...p;article=34572

Thanks for posting BustedKnuckles.

Thanks again for all the insight Chris, erm...F&L...you know what I mean.

Can't disagree with the majority of these rankings, but for the sake of discussion, I did have some questions about the Tier Five rankings.I see three types of backs in Tier 5.

a) Old backs who have had success in the past but are on the down hill side of age: 27, 28, 29 (Jacobs, F. Jackson; Sproles; Harrison)

b) Younger backs with pedigree who have failed to stay healthy or produce consistently (McFadden; Lynch; Reggie Bush)

c) Younger backs who have produced but haven't won a starting job yet. (Bradshaw)

The two question marks in this group in my mind, the guys who could really prove to be valuable RBs for the next two or three years, are Bradshaw first and foremost, and Harrison secondly. Harrison is surprisingly a somewhat older back but he has never really had a chance and is not a high pedigree guy. But he showed this year that he can play very well and while it was against poor defenses largely, we don't throw out those games when big name backs rack up the yards against them. There is a high likelihood that Harrison starts the year as the featured running back for Cleveland and so that at a minimum should put him up higher than he is ranked.

The other guy who really stands out in this group is Bradshaw. He is MUCH younger than most people would think and yet he has played three years now and performed well each of those years. He runs very hard for a smaller back, runs downhill, has a nose for the EZ, has the agility to make people miss, good vision, and good catching ability. He did get nicked up this year but managed to play through pain. If he recovers well this off season I could see him putting up huge numbers and he is young enough that even if he isn't fully recovered next season he could go somewhere else the following year and still have a long, successful career ahead of him somewhere else.

You ranked McFadden at the top of this list, while I would put either Bradshaw at the top, and Harrison second. I would probably put McFadden third because he stands out from the other guys in his grouping: Lynch and Reggie. Although those guys are young and pedigreed and mostly failed, they have had enough opportunity to show what they can do and it is clear to me that neither one is going anywhere else and becoming a featured back. McFadden has been in a horrible situation in Oakland where no one could succeed and he hasn't really been on the field much. He could still prove to be more talented than we think so he is the best best of those other guys.

Reggie has failed in a place that was very conducive to his success. I see him as a third down back going forward no matter where he plays.

Lynch has failed to beat out Fred Jackson! That's pretty bad. He also has character concerns and has already been suspended once and could be suspended again. In addition, for a bigger back he has had a lot of injuries that keep him sidelined.

 

[Futeki]

Football Outsiders ran an interesting stat today. They did a look at failed completions- passes that resulted in a reception and positive yardage, but which didn't really generate any positive value for the team for one reason or another. For example, a 2 yard completion on 1st and 10 is a "failed completion", because it reduces a team's chances of getting a new set of downs. Obviously a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 7 is another failed completion. Sure, in the end of year stats it looks exactly the same as a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 5, but obviously one is significantly more valuable than the other.

Bill James once wrote, (and you Sabermetric guys are going to have to forgive me because I'm sure I'm going to butcher this), that a good statistic was one where 80% of the results were exactly what you expected, and 20% of the results were completely unexpected. Basically what he was saying is that people already do a pretty good (but not perfect) job at figuring things out. If I invent a measure that says that Alex Smith, Vince Young, Jason Campbell, Matthew Stafford, and Peyton Manning are the five best QBs in the league, I think it's pretty clear that my statistic really blows. If, on the other hand, I have a statistic that says that the five best QBs are Manning, Rivers, Brees, Rodgers, and Alex Smith... well then, let's just say that I'm going to start trying to figure out what Alex Smith is doing to find his name in such lofty company, and probably start looking into buying him on the cheap, while I'm at it.

So, anyway, with all of that framework out of the way, I really think that the failed completion percentage for the QBs is very interesting. 80% of the names are of the "no duh" variety, while the other 20% are of the "hmmm... interesting..." variety. For those who don't feel like clicking the link, here's your top 10:

1. Trent Edwards

2. Jamarcus Russell

3. Alex Smith

4. Ryan Fitzpatrick

5. Matt Cassel

6. Brady Quinn

7. Matt Hasselbeck

8. Jay Cutler

9. Kyle Orton

10. David Garrard

Thoughts:

* first and foremost is how much Jamarcus really sucks. Not only did he post a 48.8 comp%, but 35.0% of those comps didn't even help his team out. Only 31.7% of the time when Jamarcus dropped back did he actually aid his team in its goal to get a new set of downs, and this is not even counting sacks! That's just mind-boggling. By comparison, Ryan Fitzpatrick aided his team in getting a new set of downs 36.6% of the time when he dropped back. There's suck, extreme suck, and "85% of the QB that Ryan Fitzpatrick is" suck.

* Alex Smith's resurrection has gotten a lot of pub, but this really demonstrates something I've felt all season- Gore's still the engine that makes that offense go. Smith throws a lot of rinky dink garbage that looks good on paper, but San Fran is one of the few teams in the league whose passing game is no higher-reward than its running game.

* Funny seeing both Cutler and Orton neck and neck on these lists. Those two QBs are always going to be inextricably linked based on Chicago's trade. I'm sure both sides of the aisle will see this as evidence supporting their side. After all, Jay Cutler cost two firsts and a third and couldn't outperform the guy he replaced... while Orton took over one of the most explosive offenses and turned it into Captain Checkdown and Friends. Personally, I think both sides are right. Cutler played like crap this year, and if he doesn't turn it around, spending two firsts and a third on him was a gross misallocation of resources. Of course, this also really illustrates a large part of my "bias" against Orton, too. He's still Captain Checkdown. Probably always will be. Putting him in charge of the 2008 Denver Broncos offense was like buying a Porsche and giving the keys to my 90 year old grandmother.

The WR list is also equally interesting, but I'm not going to go to into it because people will just think I've got an axe to grind. I do think it helps illustrate one of the primary reasons why I'm notoriously cooler one on particular WR than most everyone else, though.

i have been saying this for weeks about alex smith. i don't know if he's the future in sf or on my fantasy team because of the lack of options, but ... i'll bet he led the league in 2-yard completions. there was very little verticality to that passing game.

Does this at all take into account protection? A QB who is under tremendous pressure that completes a two yard pass on first down instead of being sacked or throwing it away actually had a "successful" play. I noticed above that the QBs listed generally have very poor protection. Furthermore, the offenses of teams with poor OL plays will often lean toward short passing to help out. The key would be identifying which of those belong in the list because of their own shortcomings and who don't belong because of their OL/offensive philosophy, which might change.

 

[footballsavvy]

I understand the distinction of "special talent" in the NFL amongst NFL WR. I was simply saying that all of the WR's on NFL rosters have amazing ability as athletes. I am 100% certain that I nor anyone on this board knows where Early Doucett's "Talent" ranks against other NFL WR's since we judge talent mostly by statistics. Yes there are some cases (Calvin) where the player is so dominate and physically gifted that we rank perceived talent over statistics in some cases.

Somehow, it became MY comment of "Elite Talent", when I was simply defending the poster's right to perceive his talent that way.

Bottom line, if you think Doucett MIGHT have elite talent, you should probably get him know while he can still be had. If you sit back and rest on your ability to ascertain his talent level based on anything other than how he performs when givin the chance, you will miss the boat if he does arrive.

I bet Dynasty owners who waited to pick up Rod Tidwell after his Monday Night Football TD catch and subsequent celebration where already too late because he had "perceived" subpar talent.

Jerry never gave up on him!!!

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Can't disagree with the majority of these rankings, but for the sake of discussion, I did have some questions about the Tier Five rankings.I see three types of backs in Tier 5.a) Old backs who have had success in the past but are on the down hill side of age: 27, 28, 29 (Jacobs, F. Jackson; Sproles; Harrison)b) Younger backs with pedigree who have failed to stay healthy or produce consistently (McFadden; Lynch; Reggie Bush)c) Younger backs who have produced but haven't won a starting job yet. (Bradshaw)The two question marks in this group in my mind, the guys who could really prove to be valuable RBs for the next two or three years, are Bradshaw first and foremost, and Harrison secondly. Harrison is surprisingly a somewhat older back but he has never really had a chance and is not a high pedigree guy. But he showed this year that he can play very well and while it was against poor defenses largely, we don't throw out those games when big name backs rack up the yards against them. There is a high likelihood that Harrison starts the year as the featured running back for Cleveland and so that at a minimum should put him up higher than he is ranked.The other guy who really stands out in this group is Bradshaw. He is MUCH younger than most people would think and yet he has played three years now and performed well each of those years. He runs very hard for a smaller back, runs downhill, has a nose for the EZ, has the agility to make people miss, good vision, and good catching ability. He did get nicked up this year but managed to play through pain. If he recovers well this off season I could see him putting up huge numbers and he is young enough that even if he isn't fully recovered next season he could go somewhere else the following year and still have a long, successful career ahead of him somewhere else.You ranked McFadden at the top of this list, while I would put either Bradshaw at the top, and Harrison second. I would probably put McFadden third because he stands out from the other guys in his grouping: Lynch and Reggie. Although those guys are young and pedigreed and mostly failed, they have had enough opportunity to show what they can do and it is clear to me that neither one is going anywhere else and becoming a featured back. McFadden has been in a horrible situation in Oakland where no one could succeed and he hasn't really been on the field much. He could still prove to be more talented than we think so he is the best best of those other guys.Reggie has failed in a place that was very conducive to his success. I see him as a third down back going forward no matter where he plays.Lynch has failed to beat out Fred Jackson! That's pretty bad. He also has character concerns and has already been suspended once and could be suspended again. In addition, for a bigger back he has had a lot of injuries that keep him sidelined.

I don't really get any of your reasoning. What you're saying is that it simply comes down to personal preference.

 

[squistion]

Football Outsiders ran an interesting stat today. They did a look at failed completions- passes that resulted in a reception and positive yardage, but which didn't really generate any positive value for the team for one reason or another. For example, a 2 yard completion on 1st and 10 is a "failed completion", because it reduces a team's chances of getting a new set of downs. Obviously a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 7 is another failed completion. Sure, in the end of year stats it looks exactly the same as a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 5, but obviously one is significantly more valuable than the other.

So, anyway, with all of that framework out of the way, I really think that the failed completion percentage for the QBs is very interesting. 80% of the names are of the "no duh" variety, while the other 20% are of the "hmmm... interesting..." variety. For those who don't feel like clicking the link, here's your top 10:

1. Trent Edwards

2. Jamarcus Russell

3. Alex Smith

4. Ryan Fitzpatrick

5. Matt Cassel

6. Brady Quinn

7. Matt Hasselbeck

8. Jay Cutler

9. Kyle Orton

10. David Garrard

Yeah, it is interesting, but I wouldn't read too much into it. Most of the names on the list (except Hass and Garrard) are QBs who were on some type of learning curve this year, either on a new team (Cutler, Orton, Cassell) or still trying to master the fine points of a team they have been with (Edwards, Russell, Smith, Quinn). That might explain the failed completion rate more than anything. Appreciate the link to the site, was not familar with Football Outsiders.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Three years? He was already right there with them in productivity in 2008. He was also the only receiver in the league facing triple coverage in 2009.

There's no doubt in my mind Calvin has the highest ceiling among receivers. I don't see how anyone could be surprised if he had a 90/1,500/18 season in 2010.

Did Calvin really get tripled this season? Like the rest of America, I didn't really catch any Detroit games. I guess I'll have to add him to my list along with Smiff.

Missed this question a few days ago. Here's an excerpt from one of the best beat writers in the business, Tom Kowalski:

Find the "eraser." Part of that conversation with Johnson should include a commitment to finding a player who can take some pressure off Johnson. They tried with Bryant Johnson and Kevin Smith. Didn't work.

Teams are using three defenders to stop Calvin Johnson, and that's not going to change until the Lions find another legitimate threat.

"They're not adding just one, but two extra people. That's three total people to defend him," Linehan said. "They'll use a linebacker and the safety who is supposed to be playing half the field. That's where we have to have the person I call the eraser, the person who erases that as a potential game plan. That has to be neutralized by somebody, whether it's the run game or another receiver, a slot guy or whatever.

"Something has to give there, because you can't keep trying to get the guy the football who's being triple-covered. I think the players know that's going to be a big part of our goals in the offseason."

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

Football Outsiders ran an interesting stat today. They did a look at failed completions- passes that resulted in a reception and positive yardage, but which didn't really generate any positive value for the team for one reason or another. For example, a 2 yard completion on 1st and 10 is a "failed completion", because it reduces a team's chances of getting a new set of downs. Obviously a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 7 is another failed completion. Sure, in the end of year stats it looks exactly the same as a 6 yard completion on 3rd and 5, but obviously one is significantly more valuable than the other.

Bill James once wrote, (and you Sabermetric guys are going to have to forgive me because I'm sure I'm going to butcher this), that a good statistic was one where 80% of the results were exactly what you expected, and 20% of the results were completely unexpected. Basically what he was saying is that people already do a pretty good (but not perfect) job at figuring things out. If I invent a measure that says that Alex Smith, Vince Young, Jason Campbell, Matthew Stafford, and Peyton Manning are the five best QBs in the league, I think it's pretty clear that my statistic really blows. If, on the other hand, I have a statistic that says that the five best QBs are Manning, Rivers, Brees, Rodgers, and Alex Smith... well then, let's just say that I'm going to start trying to figure out what Alex Smith is doing to find his name in such lofty company, and probably start looking into buying him on the cheap, while I'm at it.

So, anyway, with all of that framework out of the way, I really think that the failed completion percentage for the QBs is very interesting. 80% of the names are of the "no duh" variety, while the other 20% are of the "hmmm... interesting..." variety. For those who don't feel like clicking the link, here's your top 10:

1. Trent Edwards

2. Jamarcus Russell

3. Alex Smith

4. Ryan Fitzpatrick

5. Matt Cassel

6. Brady Quinn

7. Matt Hasselbeck

8. Jay Cutler

9. Kyle Orton

10. David Garrard

Thoughts:

* first and foremost is how much Jamarcus really sucks. Not only did he post a 48.8 comp%, but 35.0% of those comps didn't even help his team out. Only 31.7% of the time when Jamarcus dropped back did he actually aid his team in its goal to get a new set of downs, and this is not even counting sacks! That's just mind-boggling. By comparison, Ryan Fitzpatrick aided his team in getting a new set of downs 36.6% of the time when he dropped back. There's suck, extreme suck, and "85% of the QB that Ryan Fitzpatrick is" suck.

* Alex Smith's resurrection has gotten a lot of pub, but this really demonstrates something I've felt all season- Gore's still the engine that makes that offense go. Smith throws a lot of rinky dink garbage that looks good on paper, but San Fran is one of the few teams in the league whose passing game is no higher-reward than its running game.

* Funny seeing both Cutler and Orton neck and neck on these lists. Those two QBs are always going to be inextricably linked based on Chicago's trade. I'm sure both sides of the aisle will see this as evidence supporting their side. After all, Jay Cutler cost two firsts and a third and couldn't outperform the guy he replaced... while Orton took over one of the most explosive offenses and turned it into Captain Checkdown and Friends. Personally, I think both sides are right. Cutler played like crap this year, and if he doesn't turn it around, spending two firsts and a third on him was a gross misallocation of resources. Of course, this also really illustrates a large part of my "bias" against Orton, too. He's still Captain Checkdown. Probably always will be. Putting him in charge of the 2008 Denver Broncos offense was like buying a Porsche and giving the keys to my 90 year old grandmother.

The WR list is also equally interesting, but I'm not going to go to into it because people will just think I've got an axe to grind. I do think it helps illustrate one of the primary reasons why I'm notoriously cooler one on particular WR than most everyone else, though.

I think this is very telling information and I appreciate your posting this. But I think there are two caveats that must be taken into consideration, especially if you apply this to receivers, but to a certain extent for the QBs too.The Offensive Coordinator and the offensive scheme. Some of those failed completions may be because the QB has to check down too often because he doesn't have the arm to hit the single covered receiver on a deep route or an out route. But some of them may be because those short routes and WR screens and HB screens are the emphasis of the team's offensive scheme.

For the WR, he may have a larger percentage of failed completions not only because of the routes the OC has him running, but also because his QB may be incapable of throwing to him accurately even when he is open on deep and out routes.

I am sure that the WR you allude to is Brandon Marshall because I watched enough of Denver's games this year to see that a lot of his receptions were WR screens and short crossing routes and short outs. That isn't Marshall's fault: the OC drew up those horrible plays and the QB is incapable of throwing to him when he is open on deep routes. I think I would want to see what he did the previous years on this metric when he had Cutler throwing in a Shanny offense. If his failed completion percentage were equally low each of those years then it would be more telling.

Like all metrics and statistics, context must be taken into account. There can be, and often are, mitigating factors that lead to bad or good statistical results.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

My other gripes would be that I would rather have Nicks and Crabtree than Harvin. Harvin's electric, but these are big huge strong fast guys who have just as good skills at route running as Harvin has...Nicks sure flashed some great YAC skills...which is Harvin's big upside.

I like him, but I think I would just rather have Nicks and Crabtree at this point. In fact, I do...I own those two in multiple leagues and Harvin in none (anymore)

Can you unpack the bolded for us, please? How does that sentence describe Nicks and Crabtree but not Harvin? I understand that you're saying you'd rather have Crabtree or Nicks, but you didn't explain the difference between those two and Harvin.

 

[SSOG]

Does this at all take into account protection? A QB who is under tremendous pressure that completes a two yard pass on first down instead of being sacked or throwing it away actually had a "successful" play. I noticed above that the QBs listed generally have very poor protection. Furthermore, the offenses of teams with poor OL plays will often lean toward short passing to help out. The key would be identifying which of those belong in the list because of their own shortcomings and who don't belong because of their OL/offensive philosophy, which might change.

Short Passing Game != Failed Completions. A 5 yard pass on 1st and 10 is a successful completion. A 4 yard pass on 2nd and 6 is a successful completion. A 2 yard pass on 3rd and 2 is a successful completion. We aren't talking about a short passing game here, we're mostly talking about 2-4 yard completions on the early downs or junk on 3rd downs that winds up short of the sticks. Wes Welker is the undisputed king of the short passing game, and only 17.9% of his receptions were "failed completions". Of his 123 receptions, 101 were successful. Brandon Marshall, on the other hand, had 30.7% of his receptions that were "failed completions". Of his 101 receptions, only 70 were successful. That's the difference between a short passing game and an ineffectual passing game. A huge percentage of Marshall's receptions were the receiving equivalent of empty calories. Yeah, he got fed this year, but it was mostly junk food.

Like all metrics and statistics, context must be taken into account. There can be, and often are, mitigating factors that lead to bad or good statistical results.

Of course. As I'm fond of saying, statistics shouldn't be used to form opinions, they should be used to inform opinions. It's not like I'm rushing off to cut Alex Smith or Jay Cutler. This just adds some extra context to their statistics this season, a little asterisk attached to their completion percentage.

 

[Steed]

Does this at all take into account protection? A QB who is under tremendous pressure that completes a two yard pass on first down instead of being sacked or throwing it away actually had a "successful" play. I noticed above that the QBs listed generally have very poor protection. Furthermore, the offenses of teams with poor OL plays will often lean toward short passing to help out. The key would be identifying which of those belong in the list because of their own shortcomings and who don't belong because of their OL/offensive philosophy, which might change.

Short Passing Game != Failed Completions. A 5 yard pass on 1st and 10 is a successful completion. A 4 yard pass on 2nd and 6 is a successful completion. A 2 yard pass on 3rd and 2 is a successful completion. We aren't talking about a short passing game here, we're mostly talking about 2-4 yard completions on the early downs or junk on 3rd downs that winds up short of the sticks. Wes Welker is the undisputed king of the short passing game, and only 17.9% of his receptions were "failed completions". Of his 123 receptions, 101 were successful. Brandon Marshall, on the other hand, had 30.7% of his receptions that were "failed completions". Of his 101 receptions, only 70 were successful. That's the difference between a short passing game and an ineffectual passing game. A huge percentage of Marshall's receptions were the receiving equivalent of empty calories. Yeah, he got fed this year, but it was mostly junk food.

Did FO have this metric last year? I'd be interested to see how Marshall ranked for 2008.

 

[Instinctive]

My other gripes would be that I would rather have Nicks and Crabtree than Harvin. Harvin's electric, but these are big huge strong fast guys who have just as good skills at route running as Harvin has...Nicks sure flashed some great YAC skills...which is Harvin's big upside.

I like him, but I think I would just rather have Nicks and Crabtree at this point. In fact, I do...I own those two in multiple leagues and Harvin in none (anymore)

Can you unpack the bolded for us, please? How does that sentence describe Nicks and Crabtree but not Harvin? I understand that you're saying you'd rather have Crabtree or Nicks, but you didn't explain the difference between those two and Harvin.

What I'm trying to say is that they're just as good after the catch (Harvin is perhaps more elusive than Crabtree, but Crabtree is a good tackle-breaker) but they're also bigger and stronger...easier to get the ball to, better potential in the redzone IMO, and Nicks and Crabtree both run good routes.I just see them as equal almost everywhere...the almost being the size. All 3 are great at everything...but Nicks and Crabtree have the height and strength that I think Harvin lacks. And Harvin will never be able to just go out there and grow 6 inches.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

My other gripes would be that I would rather have Nicks and Crabtree than Harvin. Harvin's electric, but these are big huge strong fast guys who have just as good skills at route running as Harvin has...Nicks sure flashed some great YAC skills...which is Harvin's big upside.

I like him, but I think I would just rather have Nicks and Crabtree at this point. In fact, I do...I own those two in multiple leagues and Harvin in none (anymore)

Can you unpack the bolded for us, please? How does that sentence describe Nicks and Crabtree but not Harvin? I understand that you're saying you'd rather have Crabtree or Nicks, but you didn't explain the difference between those two and Harvin.

What I'm trying to say is that they're just as good after the catch (Harvin is perhaps more elusive than Crabtree, but Crabtree is a good tackle-breaker) but they're also bigger and stronger...easier to get the ball to, better potential in the redzone IMO, and Nicks and Crabtree both run good routes.I just see them as equal almost everywhere...the almost being the size. All 3 are great at everything...but Nicks and Crabtree have the height and strength that I think Harvin lacks. And Harvin will never be able to just go out there and grow 6 inches.

I'll bet you a 6-pack of Fat Tire Ale that Harvin is stronger than both Nicks and Crabtree. He was also a bigger red-zone presence than either of those guys in 2009.

 

[Cookiemonster]

My other gripes would be that I would rather have Nicks and Crabtree than Harvin. Harvin's electric, but these are big huge strong fast guys who have just as good skills at route running as Harvin has...Nicks sure flashed some great YAC skills...which is Harvin's big upside.

I like him, but I think I would just rather have Nicks and Crabtree at this point. In fact, I do...I own those two in multiple leagues and Harvin in none (anymore)

Can you unpack the bolded for us, please? How does that sentence describe Nicks and Crabtree but not Harvin? I understand that you're saying you'd rather have Crabtree or Nicks, but you didn't explain the difference between those two and Harvin.

What I'm trying to say is that they're just as good after the catch (Harvin is perhaps more elusive than Crabtree, but Crabtree is a good tackle-breaker) but they're also bigger and stronger...easier to get the ball to, better potential in the redzone IMO, and Nicks and Crabtree both run good routes.I just see them as equal almost everywhere...the almost being the size. All 3 are great at everything...but Nicks and Crabtree have the height and strength that I think Harvin lacks. And Harvin will never be able to just go out there and grow 6 inches.

I'll bet you a 6-pack of Fat Tire Ale that Harvin is stronger than both Nicks and Crabtree. He was also a bigger red-zone presence than either of those guys in 2009.

I wouldn't bet against F&L on that one. I'd love to share that sixer with ya and chat some football though.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I wouldn't bet against F&L on that one. I'd love to share that sixer with ya and chat some football though.

If I ever make it to the farthest reaches of Northern California, you're on!

 

[Cookiemonster]

I wouldn't bet against F&L on that one. I'd love to share that sixer with ya and chat some football though.

If I ever make it to the farthest reaches of Northern California, you're on!

I found my way to GA twice in the last 3 years. Never know

 

[Couch Potato]

I wouldn't bet against F&L on that one. I'd love to share that sixer with ya and chat some football though.

If I ever make it to the farthest reaches of Northern California, you're on!

Don't leave me out. Cookiemonster and I are practically neighbors... what's a few hundred miles.

 

[Deuceman]

I doubt if Nicks or Crabtree is this big or stronger

http://www.harvinzone.com/images/percy-2.jpg

 

[Couch Potato]

I doubt if Nicks or Crabtree is this big or stronger

http://www.harvinzone.com/images/percy-2.jpg

**roids**

 

[treat88]

I doubt if Nicks or Crabtree is this big or stronger

http://www.harvinzone.com/images/percy-2.jpg

I see this image brought up in almost every Percy Harvin discussion.Is this really supposed to be impressive by NFL standards? Even NFL WR standards?

Sorry, but this tells me nothing about his strength.

 

[coolnerd]

I doubt if Nicks or Crabtree is this big or stronger

http://www.harvinzone.com/images/percy-2.jpg

I see this image brought up in almost every Percy Harvin discussion.Is this really supposed to be impressive by NFL standards? Even NFL WR standards?

Sorry, but this tells me nothing about his strength.

The thing for me is that I have never seen in anything on the field to suggest that he is "weak," besides people assuming that short=small=weak.

 

[Ksquared]

I wouldn't bet against F&L on that one. I'd love to share that sixer with ya and chat some football though.

If I ever make it to the farthest reaches of Northern California, you're on!

Don't leave me out. Cookiemonster and I are practically neighbors... what's a few hundred miles.

Bigtime lurker since the start of this thread that also lives in the farther north of Northern California. Chris, if you ever make it out here, the beer would be on me. Thanks again for all the time and your well thought out responses.

 

[coolnerd]

I wouldn't bet against F&L on that one. I'd love to share that sixer with ya and chat some football though.

If I ever make it to the farthest reaches of Northern California, you're on!

Don't leave me out. Cookiemonster and I are practically neighbors... what's a few hundred miles.

Bigtime lurker since the start of this thread that also lives in the farther north of Northern California. Chris, if you ever make it out here, the beer would be on me. Thanks again for all the time and your well thought out responses.

I wish I knew some of you guys three years ago when I made the drive from SF to Humboldt. Pretty, but the "if go we off the cliff we are in the ocean" nature of it got old for a Texas flatlander.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I wouldn't bet against F&L on that one. I'd love to share that sixer with ya and chat some football though.

If I ever make it to the farthest reaches of Northern California, you're on!

Don't leave me out. Cookiemonster and I are practically neighbors... what's a few hundred miles.

Bigtime lurker since the start of this thread that also lives in the farther north of Northern California. Chris, if you ever make it out here, the beer would be on me. Thanks again for all the time and your well thought out responses.

Thanks guys. I've never made it further west than Wyoming/Colorado, but if ever do make it to central/northern California there's nothing I'd enjoy more than drinking a dozen beers and talking football with you guys.

 

[SSOG]

Did FO have this metric last year? I'd be interested to see how Marshall ranked for 2008.

It's not a real metric, they're just posting random stats and tidbits from the year on the run up to the superbowl. While it's not the same thing, you can often get a good idea for which receivers are getting "empty calorie" receptions by looking at the DVOA page for guys with a higher catch% and Yards per target figure than other guys with a comparable DVOA.

I doubt if Nicks or Crabtree is this big or stronger

http://www.harvinzone.com/images/percy-2.jpg

Ah, I was beaten to it this time.Everyone has to remember that in his last season of college, Percy Harvin was an RB. And I'm not talking about "he occasionally lined up in the backfield or took an end around", I'm talking about "listed as an RB in the media guide, putting up more rushing yardage than receiving yardage, getting more snaps in the backfield than split out wide, totaling more rushing yardage than anyone but Tim Tebow". And it's not like he just beat everyone to the corner on play after play- most of his running was of the tough, hard-nosed, right up the gut variety. He was the second best inside runner on the entire team (behind Tim Tebow, of course). Harvin isn't your typical NFL WR- power is a huge part of his game.

If you want to go by Bench Press, it's hard because neither Crabtree nor Nicks participated, but Harvin put up 19 reps of 225. For comparison, Eddie Royal (who had the best bench press I can ever recall a WR putting up, and actually outbenched some offensive linemen) had 24 reps. In terms of conversion rate, 19 reps of 225 is about the equivalent to maxing out at 450 lbs. I wouldn't say that Harvin's the strongest WR in the league, but he's definitely very strong for a WR.

 

[treat88]

In terms of conversion rate, 19 reps of 225 is about the equivalent to maxing out at 450 lbs.

Interesting. What is the conversion equation?

 

[SSOG]

In terms of conversion rate, 19 reps of 225 is about the equivalent to maxing out at 450 lbs.

Interesting. What is the conversion equation?

The conversion factor is "search google for a bench press calculator and plug in the numbers". Here's a link to the calculator I used, which seems to go into the formulas at the bottom of the page. Here's a link to another calculator I found just now while searching for a link to that first calculator. The second calculator estimates Harvin's max at 367.5 instead of 450, but I prefer the first calculator because the number it produces sounds much more impressive.

 

[EBF]

Did FO have this metric last year? I'd be interested to see how Marshall ranked for 2008.

It's not a real metric, they're just posting random stats and tidbits from the year on the run up to the superbowl. While it's not the same thing, you can often get a good idea for which receivers are getting "empty calorie" receptions by looking at the DVOA page for guys with a higher catch% and Yards per target figure than other guys with a comparable DVOA.

I doubt if Nicks or Crabtree is this big or stronger

http://www.harvinzone.com/images/percy-2.jpg

Ah, I was beaten to it this time.Everyone has to remember that in his last season of college, Percy Harvin was an RB. And I'm not talking about "he occasionally lined up in the backfield or took an end around", I'm talking about "listed as an RB in the media guide, putting up more rushing yardage than receiving yardage, getting more snaps in the backfield than split out wide, totaling more rushing yardage than anyone but Tim Tebow". And it's not like he just beat everyone to the corner on play after play- most of his running was of the tough, hard-nosed, right up the gut variety. He was the second best inside runner on the entire team (behind Tim Tebow, of course). Harvin isn't your typical NFL WR- power is a huge part of his game.

If you want to go by Bench Press, it's hard because neither Crabtree nor Nicks participated, but Harvin put up 19 reps of 225. For comparison, Eddie Royal (who had the best bench press I can ever recall a WR putting up, and actually outbenched some offensive linemen) had 24 reps. In terms of conversion rate, 19 reps of 225 is about the equivalent to maxing out at 450 lbs. I wouldn't say that Harvin's the strongest WR in the league, but he's definitely very strong for a WR.

I would caution against using bench press numbers as a strong indicator of football strength. Reggie Bush is monster in the weight room, but he doesn't break many tackles because he's a relatively light player.

Harvin has more weight room strength than Nicks and Crabtree, but they both have more leverage and they both outweigh him by 20+ pounds. I think they both trump Harvin in terms of function football strength. He's quicker and faster though.

 

[King of the Jungle]

Did FO have this metric last year? I'd be interested to see how Marshall ranked for 2008.

It's not a real metric, they're just posting random stats and tidbits from the year on the run up to the superbowl. While it's not the same thing, you can often get a good idea for which receivers are getting "empty calorie" receptions by looking at the DVOA page for guys with a higher catch% and Yards per target figure than other guys with a comparable DVOA.

I doubt if Nicks or Crabtree is this big or stronger

http://www.harvinzone.com/images/percy-2.jpg

Ah, I was beaten to it this time.Everyone has to remember that in his last season of college, Percy Harvin was an RB. And I'm not talking about "he occasionally lined up in the backfield or took an end around", I'm talking about "listed as an RB in the media guide, putting up more rushing yardage than receiving yardage, getting more snaps in the backfield than split out wide, totaling more rushing yardage than anyone but Tim Tebow". And it's not like he just beat everyone to the corner on play after play- most of his running was of the tough, hard-nosed, right up the gut variety. He was the second best inside runner on the entire team (behind Tim Tebow, of course). Harvin isn't your typical NFL WR- power is a huge part of his game.

If you want to go by Bench Press, it's hard because neither Crabtree nor Nicks participated, but Harvin put up 19 reps of 225. For comparison, Eddie Royal (who had the best bench press I can ever recall a WR putting up, and actually outbenched some offensive linemen) had 24 reps. In terms of conversion rate, 19 reps of 225 is about the equivalent to maxing out at 450 lbs. I wouldn't say that Harvin's the strongest WR in the league, but he's definitely very strong for a WR.

I would caution against using bench press numbers as a strong indicator of football strength. Reggie Bush is monster in the weight room, but he doesn't break many tackles because he's a relatively light player.

Harvin has more weight room strength than Nicks and Crabtree, but they both have more leverage and they both outweigh him by 20+ pounds. I think they both trump Harvin in terms of function football strength. He's quicker and faster though.

He ran with more power yesterday than I ever remember him displaying.

 

[gianmarco]

Did FO have this metric last year? I'd be interested to see how Marshall ranked for 2008.

It's not a real metric, they're just posting random stats and tidbits from the year on the run up to the superbowl. While it's not the same thing, you can often get a good idea for which receivers are getting "empty calorie" receptions by looking at the DVOA page for guys with a higher catch% and Yards per target figure than other guys with a comparable DVOA.

I doubt if Nicks or Crabtree is this big or stronger

http://www.harvinzone.com/images/percy-2.jpg

Ah, I was beaten to it this time.Everyone has to remember that in his last season of college, Percy Harvin was an RB. And I'm not talking about "he occasionally lined up in the backfield or took an end around", I'm talking about "listed as an RB in the media guide, putting up more rushing yardage than receiving yardage, getting more snaps in the backfield than split out wide, totaling more rushing yardage than anyone but Tim Tebow". And it's not like he just beat everyone to the corner on play after play- most of his running was of the tough, hard-nosed, right up the gut variety. He was the second best inside runner on the entire team (behind Tim Tebow, of course). Harvin isn't your typical NFL WR- power is a huge part of his game.

If you want to go by Bench Press, it's hard because neither Crabtree nor Nicks participated, but Harvin put up 19 reps of 225. For comparison, Eddie Royal (who had the best bench press I can ever recall a WR putting up, and actually outbenched some offensive linemen) had 24 reps. In terms of conversion rate, 19 reps of 225 is about the equivalent to maxing out at 450 lbs. I wouldn't say that Harvin's the strongest WR in the league, but he's definitely very strong for a WR.

I would caution against using bench press numbers as a strong indicator of football strength. Reggie Bush is monster in the weight room, but he doesn't break many tackles because he's a relatively light player.

Harvin has more weight room strength than Nicks and Crabtree, but they both have more leverage and they both outweigh him by 20+ pounds. I think they both trump Harvin in terms of function football strength. He's quicker and faster though.

He ran with more power yesterday than I ever remember him displaying.

I don't think I've ever seen Reggie run with as much power as he did yesterday. I don't know if it was the hype from the game or what but he really laid it out there yesterday. Maybe he can still "get it" despite being in the league as long as he has. Not only that, but his burst yesterday was unreal. His acceleration on that TD run when he spun away and decided to break through was unlike I've ever seen from him.

 

[MAC_32]

Since all of you like to nitpick at verbage instead of focus on an issue I'll retract my term 'special talent' in describing Early, he's a better than average talent with special potential that is still being developed, unlike Breaston who is already developed. My definition of special talent clearly differs from yours.

I don't think it's nitpicking at verbage. If I came here and posted that Earl Bennett was the greatest player to ever play WR in the history of the NFL, and people said that was insane, would that be a case of nitpicking verbage? Special means special. The word means "distinguished or different from what is ordinary or usual", or "extraordinary; exceptional, as in amount or degree". I don't think there's anything extraordinary about Doucet. I don't think there's anything about Doucet that is different from ordinary. That's not nitpicking verbage, that's disagreeing with classifying him as a special talent.Generally, when I'm talking about special, I'm talking about the top 10-20% of the league. If you extend the definition much beyond that, then you start getting guys who are, by definition, ordinary or usual. I'm really curious in what ways you think that Early Doucet stands above his peers. In what ways is he in the top 25% of the entire NFL? Do you believe that he has certain skillsets that would qualify as special? Would you rank him as a top 15 or even top 20 dynasty WR? What is special about him? Because when I look at him, I see a #4 WR with no distinguishing performances or characteristics, which is about as unspecial as they come.I also think that, while Breaston isn't special, he's a lot closer than Doucet is. He's already one of the league's better punt returners, and he's performed well as an actual real-world NFL #2 facing actual real-world #2 coverages. He may not be special, but he's dependable, and that has value, too.

Earl Bennett isn't special in any way, shape, or form, he's no better than average at anything.I think Early is everything that Anquan is and the Cards would not miss a beat if they shipped Q off and put Doucet in, Early got an unfair knock on his toughness for a couple of plays in college in which his QB left him out to dry. You skip over those plays and watch the rest of the sample and you see a tough, physical WR that can play out of every WR position, run all the routes all over the field. I don't think there's any other WR in the league as tough as Q, but guys like Early are not far behind, if he's at least slightly less injury prone than Q I think that will make up the difference.Now, feel free to take this opportunity to twist my words into saying something they're not, I think Early's a player and will be one and said why. He just needs the opportunity, now that he's getting one he's taking advantage of it. If he continues to get it expect more of the same.

 

[mikel2014]

I know it's tough to really get a measure on the rookie talent until after the combine and the draft, but I'm wondering how they compare so far. What tier would the 1st tier of rookie RBs be placed in? I'm thinking somewhere around tier 4 seems about right.

 

[EBF]

I know it's tough to really get a measure on the rookie talent until after the combine and the draft, but I'm wondering how they compare so far. What tier would the 1st tier of rookie RBs be placed in? I'm thinking somewhere around tier 4 seems about right.

That's a little too low. The top 2-3 guys who end up in good situations will carry tier 3 value. Imagine someone like Jonathan Dwyer on the Seahawks or Redskins. A first round RB on a team with no franchise back will be a hot commodity. Certainly on par with other "talented, but not a lock" propositions like Moreno, Beanie, Felix, and Greene.

 

[EBF]

I don't think I've ever seen Reggie run with as much power as he did yesterday. I don't know if it was the hype from the game or what but he really laid it out there yesterday. Maybe he can still "get it" despite being in the league as long as he has. Not only that, but his burst yesterday was unreal. His acceleration on that TD run when he spun away and decided to break through was unlike I've ever seen from him.

I'm not going to suggest that Reggie Bush has been anything but a disappointment over the course of his career, but I think people forget the role that injuries have played in that. He hasn't been healthy all of these years when he's been a "bust."When healthy, he has made some standout plays in critical junctures (the game yesterday, the long TD vs. Chicago in the playoffs, etc). He's not a terrible NFL player. He's just not the superstar we expected.

 

[az_prof]

Sidney Rice >>>>>> Miles Austin.

Austin was 4 for 34 today. If we extrapolate for a whole season we can predict with accuracy that next year he will produce:

64 receptions; 544 yards 0 TDs.

Mwwaaaahhhhhhhh. Maybe not. But the Vikings DBs are not exactly Revis and they shut him down stone cold.

Sidney Rice is looking like a true elite talent. Wish I had pulled the trigger and traded for Rice earlier this year.

 

[purplejesus28]

I tried the past two seasons to get S. Rice to no avail, after his owner got him and R. White for B. Edwards. I'd say there is no way I am getting him now.

 

[Black&Gold]

My only problem with the Vikings WRs is what they will look like when Favre retires. Who's going to be throwing the ball? I traded both Rice and Harvin away this season in my dynasty league. If they go with a rookie QB, it may take a few years for that QB to develop. While I think they both look good right now, would the passes they caught today look the same with Jamarcus Russel throwing the ball? Especially when they have AP to fall back on.

 

[corpcow]

My only problem with the Vikings WRs is what they will look like when Favre retires. Who's going to be throwing the ball? I traded both Rice and Harvin away this season in my dynasty league. If they go with a rookie QB, it may take a few years for that QB to develop. While I think they both look good right now, would the passes they caught today look the same with Jamarcus Russel throwing the ball? Especially when they have AP to fall back on.

I own Rice in a few leagues and I've been very high on him for awhile... tried to trade for him in any league where owners were giving up on him prior to this season. Frankly, the only way I'm moving him is if I can get a top 5-6 kind of guy as part of a deal.I've said this before and I'll say it again - I think he is a star in the making. Obviously, he's benefiting from Favre playing well, but Favre didn't "make" him - only accelerated the development. He attacks the ball and a lot of his success is that Favre feels comfortable just throwing jump balls for him. While Favre leaving may hurt his immediate value, I still think he's a top 10 kind of talent.Also, it's worth remembering that he is very young - though this was his 3rd year in the league, he is only 23 right now, and won't be 24 until the season starts. Don't forget he also struggled with knee injuries last year... didn't play that much, but when he did flashed some glimpses.

 

[EBF]

EBF: Ricky W. struck a blow that Shonn G will likely will never answer -- a foerarm shiver in a meaningful ff ball week. If you started SG today, hope you're closer to the top TWO in next year's draft than top 4 (at which point you will simply draft THIS YEAR'S VERSION of Shonnnn Greeneeee).

Wonder what people think of a Ricky for Greene trade now.

 

[SSOG]

I tried the past two seasons to get S. Rice to no avail, after his owner got him and R. White for B. Edwards. I'd say there is no way I am getting him now.

That's not true. Rice is going to be cheaper than he has any business being as soon as Favre retires.

 

[Instinctive]

I tried the past two seasons to get S. Rice to no avail, after his owner got him and R. White for B. Edwards. I'd say there is no way I am getting him now.

That's not true. Rice is going to be cheaper than he has any business being as soon as Favre retires.

Oh baby. I am goin after him in every league as soon as that news hits.

 

[sterjs]

If you want to go by Bench Press, it's hard because neither Crabtree nor Nicks participated, but Harvin put up 19 reps of 225. For comparison, Eddie Royal (who had the best bench press I can ever recall a WR putting up, and actually outbenched some offensive linemen) had 24 reps. In terms of conversion rate, 19 reps of 225 is about the equivalent to maxing out at 450 lbs. I wouldn't say that Harvin's the strongest WR in the league, but he's definitely very strong for a WR.

No chance these guys can legitimately bench 450 pounds.

 

[benm3218]

Shonn Greene love yet?

 

[mikel2014]

Shonn Greene love yet?

Shonn Greene has to be moving up the rankings with his showing this postseason. Anyone who watched him play these last few weeks is going to be impressed. I see top 10 potential.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I don't think I've ever seen Reggie run with as much power as he did yesterday. I don't know if it was the hype from the game or what but he really laid it out there yesterday. Maybe he can still "get it" despite being in the league as long as he has. Not only that, but his burst yesterday was unreal. His acceleration on that TD run when he spun away and decided to break through was unlike I've ever seen from him.

I'm not going to suggest that Reggie Bush has been anything but a disappointment over the course of his career, but I think people forget the role that injuries have played in that. He hasn't been healthy all of these years when he's been a "bust."When healthy, he has made some standout plays in critical junctures (the game yesterday, the long TD vs. Chicago in the playoffs, etc). He's not a terrible NFL player. He's just not the superstar we expected.

I agree and it's funny you mention that because in the Draft threads I've seen several people project CJ Spiller to Bush and act disappointed. Maybe they don't play in PPR leagues but that would be a very nice career for Spiller.