Giants WRs for 2006 (1 Viewer)

[(HULK)]

I gotta admit, these guys have me befuddled.

The first 8 games of the season, Amani Toomer posted 41 yards a game and a total of 2 touchdowns, while Plaxico Burress posted 82 yards a game and a total of 5 touchdowns. During this timeframe, it was basically twice as good to own Burress.

The last 8 games of the season, Amani Toomer posted 56.5 yards a game and a total of 5 touchdowns, while Plaxico Burress posted 70 yards a game and a total of 2 touchdowns. They were much closer in value at this point in the season.

I'm wondering what to make of these guys. During weeks 13 - 16 (fantasy crunch time), Burress only manged 47, 37, 34, 40 yards each week, with no trips to the endzone.

Will them be similar in value this year to the first 1/2 of the season last year, or the second half? Will Toomer be a much better value being a relatively late pick or will Burress make it worthwhile for someone who takes him in the 5th?

Will they continue to be incredibly inconsistant and hard to rely on for a fantasy team?

Anyone with insight is welcome to share. Thanks.

 

[(HULK)]

After 30 views and no replies, I'm guessing everyone else is as confused about them as I am.

 

[TheFanatic]

I've never seen a Giants WR put up consistent numbers in my 12 years in FFB. I could see Plax taking that next step and becoming that guy. And he seemed to do that in the first half of the season last year. Then they decoyed him and found their former WR1 (Toomer) was one helluvan option at WR2 with single coverage and the Giants took what the Defenses gave them. As Plax gets better he will be better at handling the double team as well....

 

[Joseph]

One thing to note is Burress got a TON of targets last year. He was thrown to 166 times, and caught only 76 passes (45.8%). Manning's overall completion % was a bit higher than this (52.8%).

Looking game by game, only once in the last 6 games did Manning have a higher completion % to Burress than his average on the year.

If you expect Manning to become more accurate this year, It stands to reason that Burress would catch a good number more passes (assuming he's targetted the same amount). Either that or Manning will throw to other targets who he has a better completion % with.

 

[(HULK)]

One thing to note is Burress got a TON of targets last year. He was thrown to 166 times, and caught only 76 passes (45.8%). Manning's overall completion % was a bit higher than this (52.8%).

Looking game by game, only once in the last 6 games did Manning have a higher completion % to Burress than his average on the year.

If you expect Manning to become more accurate this year, It stands to reason that Burress would catch a good number more passes (assuming he's targetted the same amount). Either that or Manning will throw to other targets who he has a better completion % with.

Good info. I didn't realize he was targeted that much last year.I definitely expect Manning to continue to improve more this year, and I was figuring one or both of these WRs would be a good value in this years draft... but the question was which would be better to have, Burress as a #2 WR or Toomer as a #4.

 

[Joseph]

One thing to note is Burress got a TON of targets last year.  He was thrown to 166 times, and caught only 76 passes (45.8%).  Manning's overall completion % was a bit higher than this (52.8%). 

Looking game by game, only once in the last 6 games did Manning have a higher completion % to Burress than his average on the year. 

If you expect Manning to become more accurate this year, It stands to reason that Burress would catch a good number more passes (assuming he's targetted the same amount).  Either that or Manning will throw to other targets who he has a better completion % with.

Good info. I didn't realize he was targeted that much last year.I definitely expect Manning to continue to improve more this year, and I was figuring one or both of these WRs would be a good value in this years draft... but the question was which would be better to have, Burress as a #2 WR or Toomer as a #4.

also of note (maybe) is the 45.8% complete to Burress is the lowest completion % to him over his career (at least according to the FBG stats that go back only a few years). His career average is somewhere around 50%.I'm not exactly sure what that means, but we've got:

1. Burress catches a lower % of his targets than his other giants teammates.

2. A QB who most expect to complete a higher % of his passes this year.

3. Burress traditionally catches a higher % of his targets than in 2005.

To me, those are three items that would indicate the Burress is in position for a jump in stats next year

 

[houndirish]

Burress as #2 definitely over Toomer as #4. The reasons have already been stated at this point.

 

[AeroFANatic]

I think Burress will be a decent #2 WR this year. However, as a NYG fan, I feel they need to draft a speedster that can stretch the field. Plax and Toomer no longer can do this...and Carter and Tyree just arent it.

End of 2nd round...the name Maurice Stovall of Notre Dame makes me tingly. He'd be a perfect fit in that system IMO.

 

[Traders2001]

After 30 views and no replies, I'm guessing everyone else is as confused about them as I am.

|Nobody cares about 6 td's WR .

 

[CalBear]

I would rather have Toomer, who you can get for nothing, than Burress, who you'll have to pay for. Toomer is only 32 this year, and could easily approach 1000 yards and 6-8 TDs if the Giants pass offense improves.

That said, I don't think either of them is likely to make their owners jump for joy.

 

[yetiknight]

IF Burress slips past the fifth round he will have decent value. I see him living up to a fourth or fifth pick. But he won't slip very far past that position. And he isn't blow up beyond your best expectations.

Toomer has the potential to give you outstanding value. If he does nothing, you lose nothing. Which should pretty much answer your question.

Shockey may end up being the real value. But injuries are always the issue. If he drops far enough because of the risk, and stays healthy all year, he could be huge value at his position.

 

[Sopranos]

I would rather have Toomer, who you can get for nothing, than Burress, who you'll have to pay for. Toomer is only 32 this year, and could easily approach 1000 yards and 6-8 TDs if the Giants pass offense improves.

That said, I don't think either of them is likely to make their owners jump for joy.

I picked up Toomer in a dynasty. Got him for next to nothing. Cheaper than S Parker ,McCareins and some other lower tier WR. He is my bye week filler and he should do ok.Nice pick up for me IMO

 

[Construction Man Jim]

I think Burress will be a decent #2 WR this year. However, as a NYG fan, I feel they need to draft a speedster that can stretch the field. Plax and Toomer no longer can do this...and Carter and Tyree just arent it.

End of 2nd round...the name Maurice Stovall of Notre Dame makes me tingly. He'd be a perfect fit in that system IMO.

Stovall is no speedster.And I expect the Giants to focus on defense early in the draft (WLB - Ernie Sims, DeMeco Ryans, Chad Greenway, D'Qwell Jackson, DB - Jason Allen, Jimmy Williams, Antonio Cromartie, Donte Whitner, Richard Marshall, Jonathan Joseph, DT - Gabe Watson) unless tremedous value presents itself at LOT (Darryn Colledge at 56) or WR (Santonio Holmes at 25, Sinorice Moss in the 2nd, Greg Jennings in the 3rd, Jeremy Bloom in the 4th or 5th).

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Y'know I was looking at the catch percentages of the top fantasy guys last year and Plaxico's absurdly low numbers really jumped out at me.

Looking back a year ago, Plax was just the opposite, catching a top % of passes thrown his way while in Pittsburgh.

There's the possibility of a few culprits here.. namely Manning wasn't that accurate or Plax was dropping too many passes or Plax was unaccustomed to the feature #1 WR role... or some combination of the three.

I'm still undecided as to whether I think Plax is a good bet to repeat last year or not.