Keenan McCardell = Pure Value in 2005 (1 Viewer)

[Joe T]

Current FBG concensus ranking = 39 (high =32, low =54)Antsports ADP of 9.12 and 37th receiver taken overallxpert leagues ADP of 11.12 and the 42nd receiver taken overallI'm a big value believer and the upside with McCardell is high in that he is only one year removed from an 1100 yard 8 TD season with 84 catches. After sitting out most of last season, McCardell signed a new 2 year contract and returns as the #1 receiver on an improving Charger passing offense. The Chargers could easily see 3,800 yards passing and 30 passing TD's with only a slight improvement over last season.Even if you see McCardell as the number 3 option on offense on this team behind LT and Gates, he will still rack up plenty of catches and yards. Look at what Eddie Kennison did for the Chiefs last year to find a similar situation... Eddie put up 1086 yards and 8 TD on 62 catches.McCardell has historically been an 80-90 catch per year guy. In McCardell's six years in Jacksonville he never caught less that 75 passes in a season. He could very easily give you 75 catches for 1100 yards and 6 TD this season which would be top 12 numbers for a guy you can get in the 9th round (or later) of your draft. On the high side, he could get 85 catches for 1200 yards and 8 TD which would be in the 7-9 range of WR's. On the low end, he should give you Kennison like numbers with 65 catches for a little over 1000 yards and 5 or 6 TD's which would still be top 25 WR numbers.If you like value and maybe you'd like to win your league, you can't go wrong getting a player of McCardell's caliber in the 9th round.Good luck this year.Joe T.

 

[16000]

 

[RedRaiders]

I'll bump him up on my sheets

 

[David Yudkin]

If this were a poll, I would vote flaVVed.The Chargers have been one of the worst teams for WR production the past three years.Their WR corps has produced:2002: 146/1951/112003: 129/1770/122004: 126/1921/13For those three seasons, SD has ranked 30th in receptions, 28th in receiving yards, and 22nd in TD for WR.Add in the Gates and LT factors, and I don't see any way at all that McCardell comes close to 1000/6 unless Parker and Caldwell fall off of the face of the earth.The numbers cited above average out to 1880/12. If McCardell did get 1000/6, that would leave only 880/6 for the rest of their WRs. So unless the Chargers drastically change their game plan, I don't see any of their WR having much fantasy value.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I disagree Yud.I think were K.Mc's ADP is, given to how he will perform = value.Remeber he was banged up, missed a handful of games in the begining of the season.With a training camp plus pre-season to get on the same page as Brees. I think LT's and Gates passing numbers go a little south and Mccardell could approach 1000/5 easily.

 

[Joe T]

If this were a poll, I would vote flaVVed.

The Chargers have been one of the worst teams for WR production the past three years.

Their WR corps has produced:

2002: 146/1951/11

2003: 129/1770/12

2004: 126/1921/13

For those three seasons, SD has ranked 30th in receptions, 28th in receiving yards, and 22nd in TD for WR.

Add in the Gates and LT factors, and I don't see any way at all that McCardell comes close to 1000/6 unless Parker and Caldwell fall off of the face of the earth.

The numbers cited above average out to 1880/12. If McCardell did get 1000/6, that would leave only 880/6 for the rest of their WRs. So unless the Chargers drastically change their game plan, I don't see any of their WR having much fantasy value.

lol Yudkin. Who were the chargers receivers the last 3 years?

Did you see what the Eagles passing offense did once they got TO?

2001 they were 19th in Passing yards, '02 18th, '03 19th..... add TO and they moved to 6th last year in passing yards.

Hmmm... now you are thinking... McCardell is not TO.

Well, I agree. Lets take the Bucs then before adding a healthy McCardell for his first full season which will be much like the chargers this year.

2000 they were 15th in passing yards, 2001 16th, 2002 16th, 2003 in McCardell's first full healthy season with the Bucs they moved to 6th.

I'm working on an article that shows what happens to a teams passing performance when you add a top 20 WR. Let me just give you a little preview and say 'they improve.' The article is more on R. Moss than McCardell, but the theory still applies.

so if you think SD is going to continue with the same lame WR stats after adding a better WR... well good luck to you.

 

[Joe T]

Remeber he was banged up, missed a handful of games in the begining of the season.

He missed 9 games last year due to a hold out. Was traded by the Bucs to the Chargers late in the season.Started 6 games and put up 331 yards and 3 TD's in a new offense with.... no preseason which is your other point.

 

[David Yudkin]

I disagree Yud.

I think were K.Mc's ADP is, given to how he will perform = value.

Remeber he was banged up, missed a handful of games in the begining of the season.

With a training camp plus pre-season to get on the same page as Brees. I think LT's and Gates passing numbers go a little south and Mccardell could approach 1000/5 easily.

McCardell wasn't hurt--he was a long holdout in Tampa Bay. In 16 games (counting their playoff game), Parker totaled 56/783/4. Caldwell was on pace for 54/965/10 before he got hurt.

McCardell's numbers from last year expanded over a full season work out to 70/898/2 over a full season. However, that would add up to 180/2646/14 for the three of them, and that would be very unlikely to happen.

LT's numbers already wnet south--he had about half the receiving totals in 2004 than he did in 2003. And with the season Gates had, I can't imagine the team not at least trying to go to Gates as much.

And in 19 years as a head coach, Marty Schottenheimer has produced a grand total of *T-W-O* 1,000 yard receivers . . . Stephone Paige (1,021) in 1990 and Andre Rison (1,092) in 1997.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

He was hurt,He has a hamstring at the end of the year and I knowhe missed at least the game vs INDY and the week 17 where everyone sat against KC.

 

[amnesiac]

McCardell's numbers from last year expanded over a full season work out to 70/898/2 over a full season. However, that would add up to 180/2646/14 for the three of them, and that would be very unlikely to happen.

And in 19 years as a head coach, Marty Schottenheimer has produced a grand total of *T-W-O* 1,000 yard receivers . . . Stephone Paige (1,021) in 1990 and Andre Rison (1,092) in 1997.

If he had 3 tds last year, how does that expand to two this year?Also, why can't McCardell eat into the other recievers #s to bump up his own?

I'm very interested in JoeT's upcoming article, and I'm enjoying the KoolAid right now.

 

[David Yudkin]

If this were a poll, I would vote flaVVed.

The Chargers have been one of the worst teams for WR production the past three years.

Their WR corps has produced:

2002: 146/1951/11

2003: 129/1770/12

2004: 126/1921/13

For those three seasons, SD has ranked 30th in receptions, 28th in receiving yards, and 22nd in TD for WR.

Add in the Gates and LT factors, and I don't see any way at all that McCardell comes close to 1000/6 unless Parker and Caldwell fall off of the face of the earth.

The numbers cited above average out to 1880/12.  If McCardell did get 1000/6, that would leave only 880/6 for the rest of their WRs.  So unless the Chargers drastically change their game plan, I don't see any of their WR having much fantasy value.

lol Yudkin. Who were the chargers receivers the last 3 years?

Did you see what the Eagles passing offense did once they got TO?

2001 they were 19th in Passing yards, '02 18th, '03 19th..... add TO and they moved to 6th last year in passing yards.

Hmmm... now you are thinking... McCardell is not TO.

Well, I agree. Lets take the Bucs then before adding a healthy McCardell for his first full season which will be much like the chargers this year.

2000 they were 15th in passing yards, 2001 16th, 2002 16th, 2003 in McCardell's first full healthy season with the Bucs they moved to 6th.

I'm working on an article that shows what happens to a teams passing performance when you add a top 20 WR. Let me just give you a little preview and say 'they improve.' The article is more on R. Moss than McCardell, but the theory still applies.

so if you think SD is going to continue with the same lame WR stats after adding a better WR... well good luck to you.

But TB was also more of a passing team than the Chargers. Comparing the 3-year average splits (2000-2002) for TB vs SD (2002-2004) . . .TB WR: 176/2237/11

SD WR: 133/1880/12

You are assuming that a) the Chargers will pass more, and b) the passes will go to McCardell. Schottenheimer does not air it out often and his system spreads the ball around instead of going to a primary receiver.

You're simply moving McCardell from Team A to Team B but ignoring the makeup and game planning of the teams.

 

[Joe T]

He was hurt,

He has a hamstring at the end of the year and I knowhe missed at least the game vs INDY and the week 17 where everyone sat against KC.

agree.. he was hurt, but most of the season he missed due to hold out. but you are right, he was dinged up for several of the games he played and did miss week 17.

 

[David Yudkin]

If he had 3 tds last year, how does that expand to two this year?

McCardell had only 1 TD last year.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

He was hurt,agree.. he was hurt, but most of the season he missed due to hold out. but you are right, he was dinged up for several of the games he played and did miss week 17.

There are no stats for him after week 14. Does that mean he was active and just not put in for weeks 15 and 16?

 

[David Yudkin]

Other food for thought about San Diego over the past three years . . .Team passing attempts: 22ndTeam passing plays: 26thRushes: 6thRun-to-pass ratio: 6th (47%/53%)As I said already, SD is a running team, and that will hurt McCardell's numbers.

 

[amnesiac]

If he had 3 tds last year, how does that expand to two this year?

McCardell had only 1 TD last year.

Then JoeT lied earlier in this thread. Still, if you are putting a cap on the passing game at a certain number, why are you assuming Keenan can't eat into the other recievers #s? He's the only one on the team who's proven he can play.Of course, looking at last year, we're seeing a guy who's having a hard time staying healthy, so maybe his ADP is pretty appropriate?

 

[Joe T]

But TB was also more of a passing team than the Chargers.  Comparing the 3-year average splits (2000-2002) for TB vs SD (2002-2004) . . .

TB WR: 176/2237/11

SD WR: 133/1880/12

You are assuming that a) the Chargers will pass more, and b) the passes will go to McCardell.  Schottenheimer does not air it out often and his system spreads the ball around instead of going to a primary receiver.

You're simply moving McCardell from Team A to Team B but ignoring the makeup and game planning of the teams.

a) i'm not assuming the Chargers will pass more at all... I'm assuming they will pass more to their WR's because they have better WR's available.Your argument is flawed. Very flawed in fact.

It is the equivalent of saying... well, the Chargers didn't pass for more than 510 yard in 01, 02, or 03 to the tight end, so they can't possibly throw for more than 510 yards to the tight end in '04. (uh oh Gates 964 yards)

It doesn't make sense.

Or that the Eagles can't throw for more than 2500 yards to their WR in '04 because they haven't done it in the past.

If you give them someone to throw to, they will throw it.

Maybe the Raiders passing game won't improve either with Moss...

Guess what?

 

[amnesiac]

He was hurt,agree.. he was hurt, but most of the season he missed due to hold out. but you are right, he was dinged up for several of the games he played and did miss week 17.

There are no stats for him after week 14. Does that mean he was active and just not put in for weeks 15 and 16?

MFL is showing him as Questionable for those games.

 

[Joe T]

Other food for thought about San Diego over the past three years . . .

Team passing attempts: 22nd

Team passing plays: 26th

Rushes: 6th

Run-to-pass ratio: 6th (47%/53%)

As I said already, SD is a running team, and that will hurt McCardell's numbers.

One question:When a team adds a top 20 caliber reciever, historically do you think their passing attempts, yards, TDs go up, down, or stay the same?

or maybe this will help you with your food for though>

bad running teams that add a good running back, do they run the ball less, more, or the same?

 

[footballman_696969]

SHHHHH... I just grabed him in the 15th ( ) round in an all FBG mock.

 

[Jason Wood]

Other food for thought about San Diego over the past three years . . .

Team passing attempts: 22nd

Team passing plays: 26th

Rushes: 6th

Run-to-pass ratio: 6th (47%/53%)

As I said already, SD is a running team, and that will hurt McCardell's numbers.

One question:When a team adds a top 20 caliber reciever, historically do you think their passing attempts, yards, TDs go up, down, or stay the same?

or maybe this will help you with your food for though>

bad running teams that add a good running back, do they run the ball less, more, or the same?

1) Define "Top 20 Caliber" because I wouldn't contend that McCardell is a "Top 20" caliber player necessarily. Furthermore he was already added to the team for half a season (so we already know somewhat what his impact will be). And lastly, Terrell Owens being added to the mix in Philly was a TERRIBLE example comparitively. Owens = one of the best receivers in the game, a true difference maker not to mention (as Yudkin already showed), Andy Reid is one of the most pass-happy coaches in the league, Schotty most certainly, is not.2) The Chargers have a 100-catch RB and 100-catch TE in the fold, and won't be in the top half of the league in passing attempts. McCardell could very well exceed his ADP, but as Maurile noted in our Player Spotlight, it's by no means a sure bet.

Player Spotlight Article: Keenan McCardell

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Keenan is a 35 year old receiver who has 6 or fewer TDs in 12 of his 13 years, and 1 TD in 7 games last year and all of the sudden 6 TDs is his DOWNSIDE? Wow.SD has:Gates, who will take a BUNCH of goal-line looks and a lot of targets in generalParker, who looked just as good as McCardell last year if not betterCaldwell, who had a very nice start to the season last yearVincent Jackson, who is listed behind McCardell but has the talent to eat into his numbers this year if he shows any kind of developmentThe reason McCardell has such a low ADP is that there is NO guarantee he will be a focal point in the passing game or even remain a starter all year long. What you list as his downside I feel he would be lucky to get as an upside.

 

[David Yudkin]

But TB was also more of a passing team than the Chargers.  Comparing the 3-year average splits (2000-2002) for TB vs SD (2002-2004) . . .

TB WR: 176/2237/11

SD WR: 133/1880/12

You are assuming that a) the Chargers will pass more, and b) the passes will go to McCardell.  Schottenheimer does not air it out often and his system spreads the ball around instead of going to a primary receiver.

You're simply moving McCardell from Team A to Team B but ignoring the makeup and game planning of the teams.

a) i'm not assuming the Chargers will pass more at all... I'm assuming they will pass more to their WR's because they have better WR's available.Your argument is flawed. Very flawed in fact.

It is the equivalent of saying... well, the Chargers didn't pass for more than 510 yard in 01, 02, or 03 to the tight end, so they can't possibly throw for more than 510 yards to the tight end in '04. (uh oh Gates 964 yards)

It doesn't make sense.

Or that the Eagles can't throw for more than 2500 yards to their WR in '04 because they haven't done it in the past.

If you give them someone to throw to, they will throw it.

Maybe the Raiders passing game won't improve either with Moss...

Guess what?

Sure, anything can happen, but IMO I don't see the Chargers foregoing LT or Gates in favor of McCardell--who may or may not even be the team's primary WR. Caldwell and Parker have done well when they have played, but they have had injuries and have missed some time. Could McCardell come in and assume the role as the WR1. Sure, he could.but if you look at McCardell, he has not been a WR1. in Jacksonville, he was second fiddle to Smith. In Tampa Bay, he was second fiddle to Johnson. Only after Johnson left the team and TB had a lot of injuries to their WR did McCardell become the primary WR--and that was for a total of 6 games.

IMO, you are putting together a lot of scenarios that could happen, but situations that go against established patterns. Could things change? Absolutely. Is McCardell in the same class as Owens or Moss? Apparently McCardell thopught so, as that was the kind of money he was demanding during his hold out last season.

In today's NFL, given the right mix of injuries and high scoring, yes, McCardell and any other team could prduce a 1,000 yard WR, so the concept is not totally out of the question. But I would not say the odds are very good.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

[MFL is showing him as Questionable for those games.

Thx, I saw that. On Yahoo, his "Last 4 Games" show as week 11-14. On your comment above about having trouble staying healthy, Yahoo also shows that going back ten years (1995) he missed one game in '98 and two in 2002. Not bad. I guess you could argue that 2 in 2002 and 3 in 2004 could be the beginning of a trend, I'm still drinking the Kool-Aid for now....

 

[David Yudkin]

Here are all the 35+ year old WR that have produced 1000/6 in a season:Jerry Rice (x3), Tim Brown, Jimmy Smith, Cris Carter, Irving Fryar, and James Lofton.

 

[Joe T]

Keenan is a 35 year old receiver who has 6 or fewer TDs in 12 of his 13 years, and 1 TD in 7 games last year and all of the sudden 6 TDs is his DOWNSIDE? Wow.

SD has:

Gates, who will take a BUNCH of goal-line looks and a lot of targets in general

Parker, who looked just as good as McCardell last year if not better

Caldwell, who had a very nice start to the season last year

Vincent Jackson, who is listed behind McCardell but has the talent to eat into his numbers this year if he shows any kind of development

The reason McCardell has such a low ADP is that there is NO guarantee he will be a focal point in the passing game or even remain a starter all year long. What you list as his downside I feel he would be lucky to get as an upside.

Good points. Lets take 'em one at a time.

His last eight years he has had 5 TD's or more in 7 of the 8 years with last year being the exception. So my saying 5 or 6 TD's on the downside is pretty damn accurate.

Gates will get his looks. I'm not denying that. What you have is an improving offense behind a young qb who is getting better every year. The chargers haven't had a WR to pass to in recent memory. You have a guy coming in with 2 pro bowls and 10,000 yards to his name and you are talking about him being unseated during the season by some no name Vincent Jackson. Reminds me of the guys saying the rookie Keary Colbert would unseat Muhsin Muhammad last year (didn't happen).

Good luck this year.

 

[David Yudkin]

The Chargers haven't had a WR to pass to in recent memory.

David Boston doesn't count?

 

[Joe T]

The Chargers haven't had a WR to pass to in recent memory.

David Boston doesn't count?

I hope this is schtick, S.

 

[Joe T]

One question:

When a team adds a top 20 caliber reciever, historically do you think their passing attempts, yards, TDs go up, down, or stay the same?

bump for yudkin.

 

[David Yudkin]

One question:

When a team adds a top 20 caliber reciever, historically do you think their passing attempts, yards, TDs go up, down, or stay the same?

bump for yudkin.

For starters, define what a Top 20 WR is.Do you mean a guy that ranked in the Top 20 the year before (which McCardell was not)?

Do you mean a guy that ranked in the Top 20 at any point in his career?

Please explain what the parameters are.

TIA . . .

 

[Doug Drinen]

When a team adds a top 20 caliber reciever, historically do you think their passing attempts, yards, TDs go up, down, or stay the same?

Just off the top of my head, I'd guess that passing yards go up by around 5 or 6 percent:1998: Derrick Alexander (ranked #12) moved from bal to kan. kan passing yards per game went from 195.6 to 217.0

1996: Billy Brooks (ranked #20) moved from buf to was. was passing yards per game went from 218.5 to 215.8

1993: Gary Clark (ranked #12) moved from was to pho. pho passing yards per game went from 209.0 to 227.2

2003: Laveranues Coles (ranked #13) moved from nyj to was. was passing yards per game went from 220.2 to 204.6

1996: Quinn Early (ranked #18) moved from nor to buf. buf passing yards per game went from 209.2 to 222.4

1998: Bert Emanuel (ranked #13) moved from atl to tam. tam passing yards per game went from 164.9 to 174.2

1988: Willie Gault (ranked #16) moved from chi to rai. rai passing yards per game went from 228.6 to 218.9

1976: John Gilliam (ranked #9) moved from min to atl. atl passing yards per game went from 168.6 to 129.2

1996: Jeff Graham (ranked #19) moved from chi to nyj. nyj passing yards per game went from 195.6 to 244.4

1995: Alvin Harper (ranked #19) moved from dal to tam. tam passing yards per game went from 214.8 to 208.8

1992: Drew Hill (ranked #14) moved from hou to atl. atl passing yards per game went from 227.1 to 243.2

2002: Qadry Ismail (ranked #18) moved from bal to ind. ind passing yards per game went from 264.2 to 262.5

1999: Raghib Ismail (ranked #14) moved from car to dal. dal passing yards per game went from 221.6 to 204.9

1973: Harold Jackson (ranked #4) moved from phi to ram. ram passing yards per game went from 163.0 to 150.5

1978: Harold Jackson (ranked #10) moved from ram to nwe. nwe passing yards per game went from 154.4 to 187.9

1993: Mark Jackson (ranked #13) moved from den to nyg. nyg passing yards per game went from 164.2 to 198.8

1981: John Jefferson (ranked #1) moved from sdg to gnb. gnb passing yards per game went from 228.2 to 223.5

1975: Ron Jessie (ranked #9) moved from det to ram. ram passing yards per game went from 169.1 to 175.0

2000: Keyshawn Johnson (ranked #12) moved from nyj to tam. tam passing yards per game went from 173.8 to 176.5

1976: Charlie Joiner (ranked #18) moved from cin to sdg. sdg passing yards per game went from 142.7 to 191.9

1999: Tony Martin (ranked #16) moved from atl to mia. mia passing yards per game went from 223.9 to 233.5

2002: Keenan McCardell (ranked #19) moved from jax to tam. tam passing yards per game went from 226.3 to 229.1

1994: Anthony Miller (ranked #7) moved from sdg to den. den passing yards per game went from 253.8 to 273.9

1995: Rob Moore (ranked #16) moved from nyj to ari. ari passing yards per game went from 205.2 to 243.3

2004: Terrell Owens (ranked #12) moved from sfo to phi. phi passing yards per game went from 204.6 to 263.0

2003: Peerless Price (ranked #7) moved from buf to atl. atl passing yards per game went from 211.5 to 164.4

1995: Andre Rison (ranked #12) moved from atl to cle. cle passing yards per game went from 204.3 to 235.8

2002: Bill Schroeder (ranked #20) moved from gnb to det. det passing yards per game went from 248.1 to 198.0

1974: Otto Stowe (ranked #19) moved from dal to den. den passing yards per game went from 193.4 to 190.0

1998: Yancey Thigpen (ranked #6) moved from pit to ten. ten passing yards per game went from 169.0 to 217.6

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Keenan is a 35 year old receiver who has 6 or fewer TDs in 12 of his 13 years, and 1 TD in 7 games last year and all of the sudden 6 TDs is his DOWNSIDE?  Wow.

SD has:

Gates, who will take a BUNCH of goal-line looks and a lot of targets in general

Parker, who looked just as good as McCardell last year if not better

Caldwell, who had a very nice start to the season last year

Vincent Jackson, who is listed behind McCardell but has the talent to eat into his numbers this year if he shows any kind of development

The reason McCardell has such a low ADP is that there is NO guarantee he will be a focal point in the passing game or even remain a starter all year long.  What you list as his downside I feel he would be lucky to get as an upside.

Good points. Lets take 'em one at a time.

His last eight years he has had 5 TD's or more in 7 of the 8 years with last year being the exception. So my saying 5 or 6 TD's on the downside is pretty damn accurate.

Gates will get his looks. I'm not denying that. What you have is an improving offense behind a young qb who is getting better every year. The chargers haven't had a WR to pass to in recent memory. You have a guy coming in with 2 pro bowls and 10,000 yards to his name and you are talking about him being unseated during the season by some no name Vincent Jackson. Reminds me of the guys saying the rookie Keary Colbert would unseat Muhsin Muhammad last year (didn't happen).

Good luck this year.

The point on the "downside" is simply that you listed his downside as 6 TDs (not 5 or 6, but 6), when his career average or any X-year average you want to look at is lower than that and his ONLY time spent in his current system produced 1 TD. That isn't what I'd call "a damn accurate" downside. If you had called it a prediction, or a projection, cool - I still think it's high, but it's defendable. Calling it a "downside" is a BIIIG stretch. His real downside is that his number is called in the red-zone VERY infrequently and he gets 1 or 2 TDs. That's a VERY conceivable scenario for a 35 year old receiver who had 1 TD last year.As for Jackson, I was very careful to avoid suggesting that McCardell would be "unseated" by him. Maybe he will and maybe he won't, but what I think could easily happen is that Jackson looks pretty good and they call his number a fair amount to see what they have, particularly later in the season. But even aside from Jackson, I'm not convinced that McCardell is significantly better than either Parker or Caldwell at this stage in their careers. So depending on how the season is going, if all else is equal, the team might play the young guys to get them experience. McCardell has always been the kind of player that is valuable to his team, but has never really been the kind of player that couldn't be replaced.

I just don't think you can overlook the fact that McCardell is 35 and will be approaching 36 toward the end of the season. Quite a few HOF-type players have been able to beat father time and remain true game breakers at that age, but I don't think McCardell is that kind of player. I believe he will still be valuable to the team, but I don't think he will be putting up good fantasy numbers when all the other players get their pieces of the pie.

 

[Joe T]

Since Brees became the starter in '01 the Chargers passing offense has moved from 23rd, to 22nd, to 18th the last three years. In passing TD's they've moved from 29th, to 13th, to 6th. Their passing game is getting better. Brees in entering his 5th season and is coming off a career year.There is still room for improvement in the passing game to move in the low teens in passing yardage.McCardell is as solid a possession receiver as there has been in the game the last 8 years.If you honestly believe Cardwell, Parker, or god forbid the great Vincent Jackson are going to take away from McCardell's catches this year then keep him around the 40th ranked receiver next year... please don't make me link in where last year I said Muhsin Muhammad was the biggest WR value on the board... because I will do it.

 

[Joe T]

When a team adds a top 20 caliber reciever, historically do you think their passing attempts, yards, TDs go up, down, or stay the same?

Just off the top of my head, I'd guess that passing yards go up by around 5 or 6 percent:1998: Derrick Alexander (ranked #12) moved from bal to kan. kan passing yards per game went from 195.6 to 217.0

1996: Billy Brooks (ranked #20) moved from buf to was. was passing yards per game went from 218.5 to 215.8

1993: Gary Clark (ranked #12) moved from was to pho. pho passing yards per game went from 209.0 to 227.2

2003: Laveranues Coles (ranked #13) moved from nyj to was. was passing yards per game went from 220.2 to 204.6

1996: Quinn Early (ranked #18) moved from nor to buf. buf passing yards per game went from 209.2 to 222.4

1998: Bert Emanuel (ranked #13) moved from atl to tam. tam passing yards per game went from 164.9 to 174.2

1988: Willie Gault (ranked #16) moved from chi to rai. rai passing yards per game went from 228.6 to 218.9

1976: John Gilliam (ranked #9) moved from min to atl. atl passing yards per game went from 168.6 to 129.2

1996: Jeff Graham (ranked #19) moved from chi to nyj. nyj passing yards per game went from 195.6 to 244.4

1995: Alvin Harper (ranked #19) moved from dal to tam. tam passing yards per game went from 214.8 to 208.8

1992: Drew Hill (ranked #14) moved from hou to atl. atl passing yards per game went from 227.1 to 243.2

2002: Qadry Ismail (ranked #18) moved from bal to ind. ind passing yards per game went from 264.2 to 262.5

1999: Raghib Ismail (ranked #14) moved from car to dal. dal passing yards per game went from 221.6 to 204.9

1973: Harold Jackson (ranked #4) moved from phi to ram. ram passing yards per game went from 163.0 to 150.5

1978: Harold Jackson (ranked #10) moved from ram to nwe. nwe passing yards per game went from 154.4 to 187.9

1993: Mark Jackson (ranked #13) moved from den to nyg. nyg passing yards per game went from 164.2 to 198.8

1981: John Jefferson (ranked #1) moved from sdg to gnb. gnb passing yards per game went from 228.2 to 223.5

1975: Ron Jessie (ranked #9) moved from det to ram. ram passing yards per game went from 169.1 to 175.0

2000: Keyshawn Johnson (ranked #12) moved from nyj to tam. tam passing yards per game went from 173.8 to 176.5

1976: Charlie Joiner (ranked #18) moved from cin to sdg. sdg passing yards per game went from 142.7 to 191.9

1999: Tony Martin (ranked #16) moved from atl to mia. mia passing yards per game went from 223.9 to 233.5

2002: Keenan McCardell (ranked #19) moved from jax to tam. tam passing yards per game went from 226.3 to 229.1

1994: Anthony Miller (ranked #7) moved from sdg to den. den passing yards per game went from 253.8 to 273.9

1995: Rob Moore (ranked #16) moved from nyj to ari. ari passing yards per game went from 205.2 to 243.3

2004: Terrell Owens (ranked #12) moved from sfo to phi. phi passing yards per game went from 204.6 to 263.0

2003: Peerless Price (ranked #7) moved from buf to atl. atl passing yards per game went from 211.5 to 164.4

1995: Andre Rison (ranked #12) moved from atl to cle. cle passing yards per game went from 204.3 to 235.8

2002: Bill Schroeder (ranked #20) moved from gnb to det. det passing yards per game went from 248.1 to 198.0

1974: Otto Stowe (ranked #19) moved from dal to den. den passing yards per game went from 193.4 to 190.0

1998: Yancey Thigpen (ranked #6) moved from pit to ten. ten passing yards per game went from 169.0 to 217.6

'top of head' is good schtick btw.

 

[jwvdcw]

One question:

When a team adds a top 20 caliber reciever, historically do you think their passing attempts, yards, TDs go up, down, or stay the same?

bump for yudkin.

For starters, define what a Top 20 WR is.Do you mean a guy that ranked in the Top 20 the year before (which McCardell was not)?

Do you mean a guy that ranked in the Top 20 at any point in his career?

Please explain what the parameters are.

TIA . . .

The main problem I have with you quoting SD's pass attempts the past few years is that those years were spend developing a young QB or having an aging veteran in there....now after Brees has break out year, they have a pro bowl QB back there! Thats a huge difference, so I don't think those past 3 years' numbers matter much at all.

 

[Joe T]

I just don't think you can overlook the fact that McCardell is 35 and will be approaching 36 toward the end of the season. Quite a few HOF-type players have been able to beat father time and remain true game breakers at that age, but I don't think McCardell is that kind of player. I believe he will still be valuable to the team, but I don't think he will be putting up good fantasy numbers when all the other players get their pieces of the pie.

Good points again. Age is a huge factor and I agree with you that it is a concern. But saying he is not that kind of player is arguable.McCardell is 15th all time in the NFL in receptions and played very little in his first 3 seasons.

Maybe 1000 and 6 is high... I don't think it is. But even if it is high, he still will outperform his ADP in '05 which makes him a nice value even if you don't think he will get 1000 and 6.

 

[Family Matters]

I have to agree with Joe T that McCardell is a decent value pick. Considering what he did last year I expect to see an improvement this year. Consider this:1. He sat out 9-10 games in a contract dispute with TB before being traded to SD.2. No camp for him by either team.3. He steps in and produces decent numbers (except for TD's) without the benefit of a camp, practice with Brees or an team members.4. Further he had to learn a totally new offemse and personel.So when you consider these facts it's realistic that he can improve and that puts him in the 900-1000 yard range with 6-8 TD's as realistic upside. Based on his past performance that's not unrealistic. As for SD'd past performance in passing they could improve some and the distribution could also change as McCardell has undoubtedly gained Bree's trust.So to argue against that he's a decent value is not a good arguement. To get a decent WR with 900-1000 yard potentiol after 37 or more have been drafted is what I consider to be decent if not good value.As for those making a case against it happenning, certainly it's possible but let's not forget this offense is evolving. Last year was the first year Brees demostrated he can throw. With new targets like Gates & McCardell to go along with a couple of burners like Cladwell & Parker and the awesome LT, they are more dynamic then they have been in a while. So I could accept an improved offense spurred by the improved passing game.

 

[Jason Wood]

I have to agree with Joe T that McCardell is a decent value pick. Considering what he did last year I expect to see an improvement this year. Consider this:

1. He sat out 9-10 games in a contract dispute with TB before being traded to SD.

2. No camp for him by either team.

3. He steps in and produces decent numbers (except for TD's) without the benefit of a camp, practice with Brees or an team members.

4. Further he had to learn a totally new offemse and personel.

So when you consider these facts it's realistic that he can improve and that puts him in the 900-1000 yard range with 6-8 TD's as realistic upside. Based on his past performance that's not unrealistic. As for SD'd past performance in passing they could improve some and the distribution could also change as McCardell has undoubtedly gained Bree's trust.

So to argue against that he's a decent value is not a good arguement. To get a decent WR with 900-1000 yard potentiol after 37 or more have been drafted is what I consider to be decent if not good value.

As for those making a case against it happenning, certainly it's possible but let's not forget this offense is evolving. Last year was the first year Brees demostrated he can throw. With new targets like Gates & McCardell to go along with a couple of burners like Cladwell & Parker and the awesome LT, they are more dynamic then they have been in a while. So I could accept an improved offense spurred by the improved passing game.

It's a perfectly good argument if you really think he's the 39th best WR on the board; which I do

 

[David Yudkin]

Just off the top of my head, I'd guess that passing yards go up by around 5 or 6 percent:

1996: Billy Brooks (ranked #20) moved from buf to was. was passing yards per game went from 218.5 to 215.8

2002: Qadry Ismail (ranked #18) moved from bal to ind. ind passing yards per game went from 264.2 to 262.5

1999: Raghib Ismail (ranked #14) moved from car to dal. dal passing yards per game went from 221.6 to 204.9

1974: Otto Stowe (ranked #19) moved from dal to den. den passing yards per game went from 193.4 to 190.0

I sifted through Doug's list to find the closest apples-to-apples comparisons: teams that had Top 5 RB AND Top 5 TE like SD does.The only ones that came close were the ones cited above.

Qadry Ismail went to the Colts who had Edge (Top 5 RB) and Pollard (Top 5 TE) and PASSING YARDAGE WENT DOWN

Otto Stowe went to the Broncos who had Otis Armstrong (Top 5 RB) and Riley Odoms (Top 5 TE) and PASSING YARDAGE WENT DOWN.

Billy Brooks went to the Redskins who had Terry Allen (Top 5 RB) and PASSING YARDAGE WENT DOWN.

Rocket Ismail went the Cowboys who had Emmitt (Top 5 RB) and PASSING YARDAGE WENT DOWN.

By coincidence or not, the teams that acquired Top 20 WR that had Top 5 RB all had their passing stats go down.

I still say that McCardell will rank no better than third on the team in terms of pecking order after LT and Gates, and who knows how the WR will shake out from there.

 

[Joe T]

Just off the top of my head, I'd guess that passing yards go up by around 5 or 6 percent:

1996: Billy Brooks (ranked #20) moved from buf to was.  was passing yards per game went from 218.5 to 215.8

2002: Qadry Ismail (ranked #18) moved from bal to ind.  ind passing yards per game went from 264.2 to 262.5

1999: Raghib Ismail (ranked #14) moved from car to dal.  dal passing yards per game went from 221.6 to 204.9

1974: Otto Stowe (ranked #19) moved from dal to den.  den passing yards per game went from 193.4 to 190.0

I sifted through Doug's list to find the closest apples-to-apples comparisons: teams that had Top 5 RB AND Top 5 TE like SD does.The only ones that came close were the ones cited above.

Qadry Ismail went to the Colts who had Edge (Top 5 RB) and Pollard (Top 5 TE) and PASSING YARDAGE WENT DOWN

Otto Stowe went to the Broncos who had Otis Armstrong (Top 5 RB) and Riley Odoms (Top 5 TE) and PASSING YARDAGE WENT DOWN.

Billy Brooks went to the Redskins who had Terry Allen (Top 5 RB) and PASSING YARDAGE WENT DOWN.

Rocket Ismail went the Cowboys who had Emmitt (Top 5 RB) and PASSING YARDAGE WENT DOWN.

By coincidence or not, the teams that acquired Top 20 WR that had Top 5 RB all had their passing stats go down.

I still say that McCardell will rank no better than third on the team in terms of pecking order after LT and Gates, and who knows how the WR will shake out from there.

Ummm David, I'm not Mauile Tremblay when it comes to logic, but it might also have something to do with the WRs you're quoting there.I'd say its more of a coincidence that they all suck... not that they are going to a team with a top 5 RB.

GDB not seeing the trees.

 

[Gr00vus]

Another thing to look out for is whether the Charger defensive backfield can improve, and if the pass rush can improve (lousy cheap Merryman). The Chargers were passing quite a bit last year due to falling into shoot outs because their pass defense was bad. This (and the improvement of the offensive line) led to more passing than Marty probably would have liked, except last year Brees had time to be successful and the receivers were making some plays (even before McCardell got there), unlike the previous year. IF the pass defense steps up (and all signs point to this happening baring injury), it will give less reason to pass as much. This could bite into the overall offensive passing numbers. Then again they'll have to play KC, Denver and the Raiders twice, so those games could see some nice passing numbers.Keenan was a nice addition, geat hands, crisp routes, knack for getting open. He's lost a step and he was never a top level break away threat. He's not really an option around the goal line. I have a hard time coming up with a scenario where he gets more than 1000 yards or more than 6 touchdowns. His upside is limited. There are other guys in his ADP range I'd rather take a chance on breaking out than Keenan.And as a Charger fan, I really think the wr to have this year for FF purposes would be Caldwell. Cheaper with more upside. Moreso than Keenan at this point, he can make stuff happen after he has the ball in his hands. He'll probably draw the #2 cb and no double coverage for a while (thanks to Keenan). If he can stay on the field he seems ready to and capable of doing some great stuff.just my opinion

 

[ko-jack]

just make sure brees is the real deal

 

[David Yudkin]

More to reflect upon . . .JoeT researched how teams have done when adding a Top 20 WR. Well, here's how WR have done when they were 35 (McCardell's present age). McCardell has had 4 Top 20 seasons. Here are the numbers for how WR have done when they were 35 and had at least 3 Top 20 seasons (24 total WR):Jerry Rice (14) - 7/78/1Steve Largent (12) - 28/403/3Tim Brown (10) - 91/1165/9James Lofton (10) -57/1072/8Harold Jackson (10) - 39/669/0Charlie Joiner (9) - 36/545/0Cris Carter (9) - 96/1274/9Andre Reed (9) - 52/536/1Harold Carmichael (9) - 1/7/0Cliff Branch (7) - 39/696/5Jimmy Smith (7) - 74/1172/6John Stallworth (7) - 41/521/2Art Monk (7) - 46/644/3Drew Hill (7) - 90/1104/4Stanley Morgan (6) - 23/364/5Henry Ellard (5) - 52/1014/2Jake Reed (4) - 21/360/3Tony Martin (4) - 26/393/0Anthony Carter (4) - 0/0/0Roy Green (4) - 8/105/0Irving Fryar (4) - 86/1316/6Ed McCaffery (3) - 19/195/0Terance Mathis (3) - 23/218/2JT Smith (3) - 18/225/2Average (7) - 40/586/3Of the 24 WR, 5 hit the 1000/6 that JoeT projected McCardell for for this coming season.

 

[Joe T]

More to reflect upon . . .

JoeT researched how teams have done when adding a Top 20 WR. Well, here's how WR have done when they were 35 (McCardell's present age). McCardell has had 4 Top 20 seasons. Here are the numbers for how WR have done when they were 35 and had at least 3 Top 20 seasons (24 total WR):

Jerry Rice (14) - 7/78/1

Steve Largent (12) - 28/403/3

Tim Brown (10) - 91/1165/9

James Lofton (10) -57/1072/8

Harold Jackson (10) - 39/669/0

Charlie Joiner (9) - 36/545/0

Cris Carter (9) - 96/1274/9

Andre Reed (9) - 52/536/1

Harold Carmichael (9) - 1/7/0

Cliff Branch (7) - 39/696/5

Jimmy Smith (7) - 74/1172/6

John Stallworth (7) - 41/521/2

Art Monk (7) - 46/644/3

Drew Hill (7) - 90/1104/4

Stanley Morgan (6) - 23/364/5

Henry Ellard (5) - 52/1014/2

Jake Reed (4) - 21/360/3

Tony Martin (4) - 26/393/0

Anthony Carter (4) - 0/0/0

Roy Green (4) - 8/105/0

Irving Fryar (4) - 86/1316/6

Ed McCaffery (3) - 19/195/0

Terance Mathis (3) - 23/218/2

JT Smith (3) - 18/225/2

Average (7) - 40/586/3

Of the 24 WR, 5 hit the 1000/6 that JoeT projected McCardell for for this coming season.

and were back...so you're saying this doesn't scream value in the 9th round?

 

[David Yudkin]

so you're saying this doesn't scream value in the 9th round?

There are two different things going on here. One is the 1000/6 projection, the second is whther McCardell in the 9th is pure value.I've already addressed the first in about 6 ways in this thread and don't see a great chance of the 1000/6 happening. As for the 35 year old numbers, many of them fell way short of the 1000/6 mark--and certainly their talent level was as good or better than McCardell's.As for the other part, McCardell could be a value pick if he does approach the 1000/6 numbers, but if he doesn't I'm not so sure about being a great value. Some value, maybe, great value, maybe not.IMO, there are several other WR getting drafted after McCardell that should produce similar numbers and have a higher upside than McCardell does. Does that make McCardell more valuable or less valuable? Using my set of projections, then it does not. In your set of projections, then it does.Depending upon where you see these guys producing will determine if each individual sees them as value or not. I see McCardell at 800/4 which in my book gets him in the low 40s for rankings. So IMO, McCardell is getting drafted around where he should be if not a little bit too soon.In either case, we don't see eye to eye on what he will do this year, which is just the way it goes, i guess. Other than that, it's all good . . .

 

[Joe T]

so you're saying this doesn't scream value in the 9th round?

There are two different things going on here. One is the 1000/6 projection, the second is whther McCardell in the 9th is pure value.I've already addressed the first in about 6 ways in this thread and don't see a great chance of the 1000/6 happening. As for the 35 year old numbers, many of them fell way short of the 1000/6 mark--and certainly their talent level was as good or better than McCardell's.

As for the other part, McCardell could be a value pick if he does approach the 1000/6 numbers, but if he doesn't I'm not so sure about being a great value. Some value, maybe, great value, maybe not.

IMO, there are several other WR getting drafted after McCardell that should produce similar numbers and have a higher upside than McCardell does. Does that make McCardell more valuable or less valuable? Using my set of projections, then it does not. In your set of projections, then it does.

Depending upon where you see these guys producing will determine if each individual sees them as value or not. I see McCardell at 800/4 which in my book gets him in the low 40s for rankings. So IMO, McCardell is getting drafted around where he should be if not a little bit too soon.

In either case, we don't see eye to eye on what he will do this year, which is just the way it goes, i guess. Other than that, it's all good . . .

You make some interesting points and I enjoyed the list. But really I look at the list and go in depth into what those players were doing and I like my prediction even better. The list you have certainly is historically true... but if you use any simple reasoning when looking at the list and not just taking it at face value you know that guys who were playing in the 60's and 70's did not have the training and diet that we have today that helps guys sustain their careers longer. You also have guys who were injured on the list during the year they turned 35 but went on to have successful years after they were 35 (Rice, Joiner).

The biggest thing about your list that I like is that there are very few players on it who were as successful as McCardell when they were 31, 32, 33, 34 etc... those guys that were still at the top of their games in their 30's actually did pretty well at 35. The guys who's careers were ending and actually retired that year which you have a number on your list A Carter, Largent, Mathis, Green etc shouldn't even be compared to McCardell. These guys were retiring. Their careers were done.

Take some time to really review your list...

I'd say it helps my argument more than hurts it.

The fact that the 35 year olds averaged 40/583/3 when you included a lot of injured guys, guys who were in their last season, guys who did not have the training we have today, guys who played before the passing game evolved into what it is today and I'd say that average is better than I'd expect.

Thanks for helping.

 

[David Yudkin]

As far as the 35 year old data set, I suppose each individual will have to decide whther McCardell's career has been closer to:Tim Brown (10) - 91/1165/9James Lofton (10) -57/1072/8Cris Carter (9) - 96/1274/9orJake Reed (4) - 21/360/3Tony Martin (4) - 26/393/0Ed McCaffery (3) - 19/195/0Terance Mathis (3) - 23/218/2JT Smith (3) - 18/225/2We'll have to wait until January to find out . . .

 

[Joe T]

As far as the 35 year old data set, I suppose each individual will have to decide whther McCardell's career has been closer to:

Tim Brown (10) - 91/1165/9

James Lofton (10) -57/1072/8

Cris Carter (9) - 96/1274/9

or

Jake Reed (4) - 21/360/3

Tony Martin (4) - 26/393/0

Ed McCaffery (3) - 19/195/0

Terance Mathis (3) - 23/218/2

JT Smith (3) - 18/225/2

We'll have to wait until January to find out . . .

Fortunately for McCardell, his career is not over. I'd also suggest his career after reaching 30 years of age is much closer to the guys at the top of this list. You realize his first three years in the league he didn't play right?Also, my second prediction is that after McCardell puts up 1000 and 6 or better, Yudkin will either be no where to be found or will claim 'he got lucky, my assumptions were still right on the money.'

 

[Joe T]

Jake Reed (4) - 21/360/3

Tony Martin (4) - 26/393/0

Ed McCaffery (3) - 19/195/0

Terance Mathis (3) - 23/218/2

JT Smith (3) - 18/225/2

We'll have to wait until January to find out . . .

lol.4 of these 5 guys retired during the year you list above. You are making my points for me.

They are not in the same arena as a guy who just signed an $8 Million contract.

 

[ookook]

I may be the only one here, but I think that McCardell will take receptions away from Gates. Defenses will focus more on Gates this year and McCardell will have the benifit of camp and plays designed to get him the ball. With that said, I think 800 to 900 yards and 5 TDs would be about the highest upper bound I would be comfortable with. And if so, it will likely come with fewer receptions for LT and AG. 600 to 700 yds and 4 TDs would be not inconceivable. FBG has 700 and 5 and about WR43 in 1 ppr leagues (which I hate).