Impact of Owens on Dallas Running Game (1 Viewer)

[David Yudkin]

I know we are collectively getting tired of T. O. threads, but I was curious as to the impact of a WR with 1,400 receiving yards on a team's rushing numbers.

In other threads, several people have concluded that having Owens will open up space to aid the running game.

There have been 42 teams since 1970 that have had at least one WR with 1,400 receiving yards (2 have had two the same year).

Those teams collectively averaged a 3.96 ypc which ranked on average 16th in the league--or pretty much average almost to a fault. The top ranked RB on those teams also had an average RB ranking of 16.4--again average (assuming that there were 32 starting NFL RB).

Of those 42 teams, they produced 19 Top 10 RBs, or 45% of the time. In a 32 team league (the NFL), I would suggest that the likelihood of a team having a Top 10 RB would be 31% (10 RB out of 32 teams). On first blush, it does look like a top WR does tend to help out RB.

As for the teams with limited success rushing the ball, I wonder if a lack of a good rushing attack was the root cause for some of these teams producing a 1,400 yard receiver.

 

[diesel7982]

I know we are collectively getting tired of T. O. threads, but I was curious as to the impact of a WR with 1,400 receiving yards on a team's rushing numbers.

In other threads, several people have concluded that having Owens will open up space to aid the running game.

There have been 42 teams since 1970 that have had at least one WR with 1,400 receiving yards (2 have had two the same year).

Those teams collectively averaged a 3.96 ypc which ranked on average 16th in the league--or pretty much average almost to a fault. The top ranked RB on those teams also had an average RB ranking of 16.4--again average (assuming that there were 32 starting NFL RB).

Of those 42 teams, they produced 19 Top 10 RBs, or 45% of the time. In a 32 team league (the NFL), I would suggest that the likelihood of a team having a Top 10 RB would be 31% (10 RB out of 32 teams). On first blush, it does look like a top WR does tend to help out RB.

As for the teams with limited success rushing the ball, I wonder if a lack of a good rushing attack was the root cause for some of these teams producing a 1,400 yard receiver.

 

[-jb-]

i'm more concerned with the marion barber factor than the terrell owens factor, honestly...interesting stats nonetheless.

 

[trader jake]

As for the teams with limited success rushing the ball, I wonder if a lack of a good rushing attack was the root cause for some of these teams producing a 1,400 yard receiver.

that's the key statement right there. doea a star WR help an "average" RB become a better fantasy player? i'd say no, but would be open to reading the names yudkin mentions here

 

[softball]

I know we are collectively getting tired of T. O. threads, but I was curious as to the impact of a WR with 1,400 receiving yards on a team's rushing numbers.

In other threads, several people have concluded that having Owens will open up space to aid the running game.

There have been 42 teams since 1970 that have had at least one WR with 1,400 receiving yards (2 have had two the same year).

Those teams collectively averaged a 3.96 ypc which ranked on average 16th in the league--or pretty much average almost to a fault.  The top ranked RB on those teams also had an average RB ranking of 16.4--again average (assuming that there were 32 starting NFL RB). 

Of those 42 teams, they produced 19 Top 10 RBs, or 45% of the time.  In a 32 team league (the NFL), I would suggest that the likelihood of a team having a Top 10 RB would be 31% (10 RB out of 32 teams).  On first blush, it does look like a top WR does tend to help out RB.

As for the teams with limited success rushing the ball, I wonder if a lack of a good rushing attack was the root cause for some of these teams producing a 1,400 yard receiver.

David, gotta admit in public. I'm a fan man. You do a great job in depth of thought. Something I appreciate and try to join in on, I just think I may talk(type) to quick sometimes.I am a BIG JJ supporter, and believe strongly that TO will be the reason he has an excellent fantasy year. Along with fabini and Kosier(good player)

MB3 shouldn't scare anyone, he is the backup. Parcells just doesn't do RBBC.

 

[pinequick]

As for the teams with limited success rushing the ball, I wonder if a lack of a good rushing attack was the root cause for some of these teams producing a 1,400 yard receiver.

that's the key statement right there. doea a star WR help an "average" RB become a better fantasy player? i'd say no, but would be open to reading the names yudkin mentions here

Yeah--I wonder if this is a "rate of change" sort of question? What did the addition of 1400-yard WR at time "t" do to the running game's production, when measured from time "t-1"? Good insight--good question.

 

[David Yudkin]

As for the teams with limited success rushing the ball, I wonder if a lack of a good rushing attack was the root cause for some of these teams producing a 1,400 yard receiver.

that's the key statement right there. doea a star WR help an "average" RB become a better fantasy player? i'd say no, but would be open to reading the names yudkin mentions here

I think where things go astray in terms of analysis is that there are some of the greatest combos ever to play the game and then there are some that are just plain ugly.The ones in the all-time greats include . . .

Harrison/Edge

Irvin/Emmitt

Moore/Sanders (or Perriman)

Faulk/Holt (or Bruce)

Rice/Craig

Rice/Hearst

And just Cardinals include . . .

Green/Ottis Anderson

Moore/Leeland McElroy (although Larry Centers ranked higher)

Boston/Pittman

Fitzgerald/Shipp (or Boldin)

I forgot about the Cards having two guys last year, so that makes it 19 Top 10 RB in 41 teams (46%).

 

[bentley]

As for the teams with limited success rushing the ball, I wonder if a lack of a good rushing attack was the root cause for some of these teams producing a 1,400 yard receiver.

that's the key statement right there. doea a star WR help an "average" RB become a better fantasy player? i'd say no, but would be open to reading the names yudkin mentions here

I think where things go astray in terms of analysis is that there are some of the greatest combos ever to play the game and then there are some that are just plain ugly.The ones in the all-time greats include . . .

Harrison/Edge

Irvin/Emmitt

Moore/Sanders (or Perriman)

Faulk/Holt (or Bruce)

Rice/Craig

Rice/Hearst

And just Cardinals include . . .

Green/Ottis Anderson

Moore/Leeland McElroy (although Larry Centers ranked higher)

Boston/Pittman

Fitzgerald/Shipp (or Boldin)

I forgot about the Cards having two guys last year, so that makes it 19 Top 10 RB in 41 teams (46%).

YOU CAN'T STOP 'LECTRIC LEELAND!!!And, good analysis.

 

[Ozymandias]

Well, it is good as far as it goes. But I wonder whether having a 1400 yard receiver is an indication of a good offense, and a good o-line. And that good o-line creates the basis for a good rushing offense.

In other words, correlation may not necessarily be causation.

 

[Righetti]

2005

CJ

97/1432/9

Rudi Johnson

337/1458/12

I can see (hope) for this kind of breakdown in Dallas

 

[losgalacticos]

OK- I feel stupid asking this, since I live in Philly. But I can't recall: Does TO block downfield? Keyshawn is know to to a nice job here. Maybe I don't remember because TO never does?

 

[Dt's Mules]

i'm more concerned with the marion barber factor than the terrell owens factor, honestly...interesting stats nonetheless.

marion looked better toward the end of last season and the glorified gym teacher has little tolerance for JJ's injury bug

 

[Green Apple Splatter]

I think it was Randy Galloway who said it, and I paraphrase, what people don't understand is the presence of TO opening things up for other players is the exact opposite of what TO wants. Some say this opens up more for Glenn and Witten, well, how will TO respond to that?

Edited for spelling.

 

[Bri]

ITYM Randy Galloway

 

[Green Apple Splatter]

ITYM Randy Galloway

Thanks

 

[Bri]

Owens and Keyshawn can both block. Technique and all is probably on Keyshawn's side but the end result(guy getting blocked) is the same.

Parcells has never had a WR like Owens. When he can run effectively, Parcells puts his WRs in tough spots all day long and is a very predictable run, run, pass play caller. I can't even tell ya how many "big" catches Chrebet and Bavaro had for him while they played and everyone knew it'd go to them. 3rd and 6...catch. 2 plays later 3rd and 8...catch. Run run run run then time for one of them to bail out a drive again. I think Owens will be bored and then put on the spot. He'll eventually whine about not getting thrown to on 1st and 2nd.

Meshawn got a zillion goalline targets under Parcells often times going back to him even though he dropped em'. I'm sure Owens will like that but again, a tough spot/catch to make.

Parcells is not Mike Martz and his love for the TE has not seemed to waver over the years. I won't be drafting Owens if he's again a top 3 WR in others' minds. I don't see him getting THAT much production. I wouldn't be surprised if Owens led the NFL in 3rd down catches for a first and even TDs by a WR but I can't ignore Parcells history with WRs.

I wonder about Crayton. Like Lloyd before Owens left San Fran, here's a youngster that is exciting and the staff has high hopes for. I sure hope Owens has a team attitude and doesn't get jealous of any attention he gets.

Before this, the Cowboys were easily defensed right up the middle with Witten and the run. I do think Owens improves the running game by simply spreading out the D. I think in the past opposing Ds focussed in the middle and let Dallas WRs get alot of room outside. Almost giving them some catches knowing full well that Parcells won't be going pass, pass, pass every play.

FWIW BB, Parcells assistant for forever, has never had a WR as good as Owens either. Weeks ago I posted in the Pats thread how the Pats have never had a WR make more than 2 or 2.5 mil. These guys just don't value the WR as much as us FFers do it's a different philosophy. Parcells can change. I think Drew (first or second year) threw the then record for most attempts by a QB in a single season. That was shocking back then. A good coach does adjust to his players' talent and Parcells is a very good coach. I won't be betting on it though and drafting T.O.

 

[redman]

i'm more concerned with the marion barber factor than the terrell owens factor, honestly...interesting stats nonetheless.

marion looked better toward the end of last season and the glorified gym teacher has little tolerance for JJ's injury bug

Agreed. I think you have to talk in terms of the "Dallas starting RB" in this disucussion. That person(s) will certainly benefit. In addition, you have to assume that if anything the Dallas o-line will be healthier, if not upgraded also.

Jones and Barber both averaged 3.9 ypc behind that banged up line and without TO in the lineup. I believe that that could improve to 4.1 or 4.2 ypc (not more because Parcells will still run with a lead to grind time off of the clock - see my breakdown of Parcells' top RB's from last season for more details).

The potential of the top RB is more or less the total number of carries by Barber and Jones last year (because they split time) which came to about 390, multiplied by that 4.1 or 4.2 ypc. Receptions are a bit harder to track given that I was surprised at how often they threw to RB's last year, so my best guess there is maybe 35 catches for 6.5 ypc. With TO in the lineup I like the starting Dallas RB for 14 rushing TD's.

This gives you a potential stat line that looks like this:

390/1600/14 35/228/0

You should adjust downward from there for injury risk, one RB stealing carries/starts, etc.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Owens and Keyshawn can both block. Technique and all is probably on Keyshawn's side but the end result(guy getting blocked) is the same.

Parcells has never had a WR like Owens. When he can run effectively, Parcells puts his WRs in tough spots all day long and is a very predictable run, run, pass play caller. I can't even tell ya how many "big" catches Chrebet and Bavaro had for him while they played and everyone knew it'd go to them. 3rd and 6...catch. 2 plays later 3rd and 8...catch. Run run run run then time for one of them to bail out a drive again. I think Owens will be bored and then put on the spot. He'll eventually whine about not getting thrown to on 1st and 2nd.

Meshawn got a zillion goalline targets under Parcells often times going back to him even though he dropped em'. I'm sure Owens will like that but again, a tough spot/catch to make.

Parcells is not Mike Martz and his love for the TE has not seemed to waver over the years. I won't be drafting Owens if he's again a top 3 WR in others' minds. I don't see him getting THAT much production. I wouldn't be surprised if Owens led the NFL in 3rd down catches for a first and even TDs by a WR but I can't ignore Parcells history with WRs.

I wonder about Crayton. Like Lloyd before Owens left San Fran, here's a youngster that is exciting and the staff has high hopes for. I sure hope Owens has a team attitude and doesn't get jealous of any attention he gets.

Before this, the Cowboys were easily defensed right up the middle with Witten and the run. I do think Owens improves the running game by simply spreading out the D. I think in the past opposing Ds focussed in the middle and let Dallas WRs get alot of room outside. Almost giving them some catches knowing full well that Parcells won't be going pass, pass, pass every play.

FWIW BB, Parcells assistant for forever, has never had a WR as good as Owens either. Weeks ago I posted in the Pats thread how the Pats have never had a WR make more than 2 or 2.5 mil. These guys just don't value the WR as much as us FFers do it's a different philosophy. Parcells can change. I think Drew (first or second year) threw the then record for most attempts by a QB in a single season. That was shocking back then. A good coach does adjust to his players' talent and Parcells is a very good coach. I won't be betting on it though and drafting T.O.

Parcell's changes his approach based on the personnel. Terry Glenn put up 1136 yards and 7 TD's in this offense. People who have watched Bill know that he is more comfortable getting a lead and pounding the ball until the other team adjusts, but don't pin a tag on Parcell's as he has shown the ability to adapt. TO will be a force because Parcell's will go the well when there is water. I root against the Cowboys though and seeing Parcell's don the star is really revolting to me. I hope TO stinks, but logic just doesn't support that

 

[Bri]

Parcell's changes his approach based on the personnel.  Terry Glenn put up 1136 yards and 7 TD's in this offense.  People who have watched Bill know that he is more comfortable getting a lead and pounding the ball until the other team adjusts, but don't pin a tag on Parcell's as he has shown the ability to adapt.  TO will be a force because Parcell's will go the well when there is water.  I root against the Cowboys though and seeing Parcell's don the star is really revolting to me.  I hope TO stinks, but logic just doesn't support that

I did point out that Parcells has adjusted to his talent at times. In fact, Glenn had almost the same yardage and TD totals the year Bledsoe threw 600+ passes. I'm not banking on it for FF though. With Glenn, I don't think it's fair to pull a couple seasons out of a 9 or 10 year career and call them the norm either.And I did say Owens might lead the NFL in TD catches by a WR so I'm not saying he'll stink.

 

[redman]

I respectfully disagree that Parcells changes his offensive philosophy and play-calling to match his personnel. Obviously, the the two aren't mutually exclusive, but you get just about the same look every year with Parcells with relatively minor adjustments made for talent gaps at certain positions.

I'll do the same breakdown I did with RB's as linked above, but this time with WR's (I've put multiple WR's in a given year when two had stats that arguably made them the primary receiving target):

+----------------------+----+----------------------+| Name                 |  G |  REC  YARD   AVG  TD |+----------------------+----+----------------------+| Earnest Gray'83      | 16 |   78  1139  14.6   5 || Bobby Johnson'84     | 16 |   48   795  16.6   7 || Lionel Manuel'85     | 12 |   49   859  17.5   5 || Bobby Johnson'85     | 16 |   33   533  16.2   8 || Bobby Johnson'86     | 16 |   31   534  17.2   5 || Lionel Manuel'87     | 12 |   30   545  18.2   6 || Lionel Manuel'88     | 16 |   65  1029  15.8   4 || Lionel Manuel'89     | 16 |   33   539  16.3   1 || Odessa Turner'89     | 13 |   38   467  12.3   4 || Stephen Baker'90     | 16 |   26   541  20.8   4 || Mark Ingram'90       | 16 |   26   499  19.2   5 || Vincent Brisby'93    | 16 |   45   626  13.9   2 || Michael Timpson'93   | 16 |   42   654  15.6   2 || Vincent Brisby'94    | 14 |   58   904  15.6   5 || Michael Timpson'94   | 15 |   74   941  12.7   3 || Vincent Brisby'95    | 16 |   66   974  14.8   3 || Terry Glenn'96       | 15 |   90  1132  12.6   6 || Keyshawn Johnson'97  | 16 |   70   963  13.8   5 || Wayne Chrebet'98     | 16 |   75  1083  14.4   8 || Keyshawn Johnson'98  | 16 |   83  1131  13.6  10 || Keyshawn Johnson'99  | 16 |   89  1170  13.1   8 || Terry Glenn'03       | 16 |   52   754  14.5   5 || Keyshawn Johnson'04  | 16 |   70   981  14.0   6 || Terry Glenn'05       | 16 |   62  1136  18.3   7 |An observation first. I think it's perfectly fair to disregard the Giants' stats for two reasons. First of all, it was a much more conservative era of football in terms of run-pass play-calling, and second the talent level did not even remotely match the present receiving corps of TO, Glenn and Crayton. In addition, it's clear that TO is the single best WR Parcells has ever coached, and he especially overshadows anyone on those Giants teams. Even so, you're left with a very wide variety of teams and players to look at, and you have a remarkably similar set of statistics all in all. From '93-'05, the stats ranged as follows:

Receptions: 42-90 (58-90 if you also opt to disregard the '93 Pats)

Yards: 904-1170 (if you opt to disregard the '93 Pats)

TD's: 3-10

These stats fall into a relatively narrow set of windows. What causes me to temper my enthusiasm for TO is that we're dealing with a very stubborn coach who is known for molding teams into his image, and not the reverse. We have about a 20-year history of this, and it's happened regardless of who his QB's, RB's or WR's have been.

This is not Don Shula who completely abandoned his old-fashioned conservative run-first offensive ways to air the ball out with Marino at QB. Parcells has never changed his stripes.

Even if you credit TO with a 10% increase in all of the best stats for this coming year, you're left with 99/1287/11.

But also take note that Parcells has also liked to utilize secondary targets in his offense. Look how often he's had dual receivers with similar numbers. While TO is clearly the best WR on this team, this is also the best WR corps from top to bottom that Parcells has ever coached. Terry Glenn has shown that he still has very good skills, and I'm a big fan of Patrick Crayton who I think is very talented. And note that this analysis does not include TE production, which is always a key component in Parcells' offenses, and Witten is as talented as any TE that Parcells has coached.

Do we think that Parcells is going to neglect them in the name of keeping TO happy?

Barring injury or personal meltdown, TO is going to have a good year, no doubt about it. My only point here is that it's far more likely that TO will be overvalued for this upcoming year than undervalued. In terms of value of the player versus cost of acquisition, I think that Glenn and even Crayton are going to be better values.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

I think the addition of TO should help Julius fantasy value (baring he stays healthy and out of the Parcells doghouse).

With the downfield threat that TO presents, it should keep the secondary back a few steps. That in turn should help YPC for JJ.

Also the fact that you have a receiver who can catch 7+ recepts almost every week, gets the ball into scoring position much more frequently. Unless Dallas decides to use another RB in the redzone/ near the goalline, there should be more opportunities for JJ to get TD's.

If Dallas' defense performs strong, that always helps RB's get "clock yardage" when teams are up or competing late in games (as opposed to playing catchup and passing alot).

I can't see the TO factor being detrimental to JJ...only helping. Like others have said, it will be other factors that determine JJ's fate in '06..

 

[Bri]

that was a good post redman

 

[Ridgelake]

Its excellent posting, Redman. You are putting into words and statistics more or less what I have been thinking. TO will help the Dallas offense, both passing and running. But it will be incremental, maybe 10%.

Parcells is not likely to change. He knows what gives teams the best chance to win given historical precedense. If he feels his team is superior, he will play it close to the vest and grind down the opponent. He won't take many chances. Against teams that he feels are better, he will open up the offense and take more chances.

TO will not change that philosophy. What TO will do is make defenses respect his ability. That means increased defensive allocation to that position. That means less attention to other part of the Dallas offense. Now TO might breakoff a couple of big plays, something that Key rarely did. So there will be some incremental improvement from that source. But overall, I'd be surprised to see more than incremental overall improvement in the Dallas offense next year. Parcells isn't going to change his philosophy.

 

[Footballhead]

Did JJ get 8 in the box against him last year? TO is just a combo of Key and Terry Glenn; he can go tthough the middle and catch the short ones and he can go deep. I simply think this is a scenario where TO will just help TO. TO (no pun entended) be honest, I'm more worried Bledsoe will throw a hang ball and leave TO open to vicious tackle.

 

[CalBear]

I think looking at 1400-yard receivers isn't the right way to go about it. Dallas isn't a team that has an established WR/QB connection that's pumping out yards; it is a team with a fairly balanced offense (#5 in rushing attempts in 2005, #18 in passing attempts, but #13 in yardage for both) that's adding a potential stud at WR. I think the interesting question would be, what happens to the running game when a team adds a stud WR?

Unfortunately, we'll run into the problem that stud WRs who go to new teams rarely end up as studs. We can take a couple of examples from 2005, Mason->BAL and Muhammad->CHI. Neither example is very clean; Chicago's rushing offense was much better in 2005 than 2004, Baltimore's was much worse, but both teams had significant QB issues which probably affected them more than the WR addition. Probably the cleanest recent example is Owens->PHI, where the team went from #9 in rushing yardage in 2003 to #24 in 2004, while going from #18 to #6 in passing yardage after Owens joined the team. (Philly also dropped from #2 to #23 in rushing TDs).

I would expect fewer rushing yards and TDs for Dallas in 2006, but a football's got a funny shape.

 

[redman]

Probably the cleanest recent example is Owens->PHI, where the team went from #9 in rushing yardage in 2003 to #24 in 2004, while going from #18 to #6 in passing yardage after Owens joined the team. (Philly also dropped from #2 to #23 in rushing TDs).

I think you and I are in agreement overall, but I don't know if this is the analysis I'd use. Even the "cleanest" example above has a very big problem with it: Andy Reid is far more willing to abandon the run than is Bill Parcells. There's simply no comparison there. And even that ignores the fact that TO dwarfs in terms of talent any recent WR transfer to another team, with the exception of Randy Moss last year . . . who of course was injured and whose stats therefore can't be compared.

 

[David Yudkin]

I think looking at 1400-yard receivers isn't the right way to go about it. Dallas isn't a team that has an established WR/QB connection that's pumping out yards; it is a team with a fairly balanced offense (#5 in rushing attempts in 2005, #18 in passing attempts, but #13 in yardage for both) that's adding a potential stud at WR. I think the interesting question would be, what happens to the running game when a team adds a stud WR?

Unfortunately, we'll run into the problem that stud WRs who go to new teams rarely end up as studs. We can take a couple of examples from 2005, Mason->BAL and Muhammad->CHI. Neither example is very clean; Chicago's rushing offense was much better in 2005 than 2004, Baltimore's was much worse, but both teams had significant QB issues which probably affected them more than the WR addition. Probably the cleanest recent example is Owens->PHI, where the team went from #9 in rushing yardage in 2003 to #24 in 2004, while going from #18 to #6 in passing yardage after Owens joined the team. (Philly also dropped from #2 to #23 in rushing TDs).

I would expect fewer rushing yards and TDs for Dallas in 2006, but a football's got a funny shape.

I think you hit the nail on the head--stud WR hardly ever switch teams, so there will be very little data to work with. Ad debated numerous times in other threads, many decent WR have gone to other teams and fared worse on their new team, but not many bonafide studs have made a change.You mentioned Owens, but Moss would also qualify and not much happened in OAK last year. As you mentioned, DAL had a somewhat balanced attack, and finding examples of elite WR switching to balanced offenses will be a needle in a haystack.

 

[Bri]

I think looking at 1400-yard receivers isn't the right way to go about it. Dallas isn't a team that has an established WR/QB connection that's pumping out yards; it is a team with a fairly balanced offense (#5 in rushing attempts in 2005, #18 in passing attempts, but #13 in yardage for both) that's adding a potential stud at WR.

Didn't they change to the excellent pass catching westbrook then though? It seemed, to me, they changed their O a little bit from Duce to him.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I respectfully disagree that Parcells changes his offensive philosophy and play-calling to match his personnel. Obviously, the the two aren't mutually exclusive, but you get just about the same look every year with Parcells with relatively minor adjustments made for talent gaps at certain positions.

I'll do the same breakdown I did with RB's as linked above, but this time with WR's (I've put multiple WR's in a given year when two had stats that arguably made them the primary receiving target):

+----------------------+----+----------------------+| Name                 |  G |  REC  YARD   AVG  TD |+----------------------+----+----------------------+| Earnest Gray'83      | 16 |   78  1139  14.6   5 || Bobby Johnson'84     | 16 |   48   795  16.6   7 || Lionel Manuel'85     | 12 |   49   859  17.5   5 || Bobby Johnson'85     | 16 |   33   533  16.2   8 || Bobby Johnson'86     | 16 |   31   534  17.2   5 || Lionel Manuel'87     | 12 |   30   545  18.2   6 || Lionel Manuel'88     | 16 |   65  1029  15.8   4 || Lionel Manuel'89     | 16 |   33   539  16.3   1 || Odessa Turner'89     | 13 |   38   467  12.3   4 || Stephen Baker'90     | 16 |   26   541  20.8   4 || Mark Ingram'90       | 16 |   26   499  19.2   5 || Vincent Brisby'93    | 16 |   45   626  13.9   2 || Michael Timpson'93   | 16 |   42   654  15.6   2 || Vincent Brisby'94    | 14 |   58   904  15.6   5 || Michael Timpson'94   | 15 |   74   941  12.7   3 || Vincent Brisby'95    | 16 |   66   974  14.8   3 || Terry Glenn'96       | 15 |   90  1132  12.6   6 || Keyshawn Johnson'97  | 16 |   70   963  13.8   5 || Wayne Chrebet'98     | 16 |   75  1083  14.4   8 || Keyshawn Johnson'98  | 16 |   83  1131  13.6  10 || Keyshawn Johnson'99  | 16 |   89  1170  13.1   8 || Terry Glenn'03       | 16 |   52   754  14.5   5 || Keyshawn Johnson'04  | 16 |   70   981  14.0   6 || Terry Glenn'05       | 16 |   62  1136  18.3   7 |An observation first. I think it's perfectly fair to disregard the Giants' stats for two reasons. First of all, it was a much more conservative era of football in terms of run-pass play-calling, and second the talent level did not even remotely match the present receiving corps of TO, Glenn and Crayton. In addition, it's clear that TO is the single best WR Parcells has ever coached, and he especially overshadows anyone on those Giants teams. Even so, you're left with a very wide variety of teams and players to look at, and you have a remarkably similar set of statistics all in all. From '93-'05, the stats ranged as follows:

Receptions: 42-90 (58-90 if you also opt to disregard the '93 Pats)

Yards: 904-1170 (if you opt to disregard the '93 Pats)

TD's: 3-10

These stats fall into a relatively narrow set of windows. What causes me to temper my enthusiasm for TO is that we're dealing with a very stubborn coach who is known for molding teams into his image, and not the reverse. We have about a 20-year history of this, and it's happened regardless of who his QB's, RB's or WR's have been.

This is not Don Shula who completely abandoned his old-fashioned conservative run-first offensive ways to air the ball out with Marino at QB. Parcells has never changed his stripes.

Even if you credit TO with a 10% increase in all of the best stats for this coming year, you're left with 99/1287/11.

But also take note that Parcells has also liked to utilize secondary targets in his offense. Look how often he's had dual receivers with similar numbers. While TO is clearly the best WR on this team, this is also the best WR corps from top to bottom that Parcells has ever coached. Terry Glenn has shown that he still has very good skills, and I'm a big fan of Patrick Crayton who I think is very talented. And note that this analysis does not include TE production, which is always a key component in Parcells' offenses, and Witten is as talented as any TE that Parcells has coached.

Do we think that Parcells is going to neglect them in the name of keeping TO happy?

Barring injury or personal meltdown, TO is going to have a good year, no doubt about it. My only point here is that it's far more likely that TO will be overvalued for this upcoming year than undervalued. In terms of value of the player versus cost of acquisition, I think that Glenn and even Crayton are going to be better values.

Appreciate all the hard data work, but I don't see this as telling us very much. I don't even know if this is statistically valid as Parcells has never had a receiver who is an offensive force. I am not even sure if you took many other teams you wouldn't see similar results?