Kevin Curtis (1 Viewer)

[MLBrandow]

He's currently being drafted WR39 according to antsports.com

Anyone notice that in the WR2 spot for STL when Bulger was healthy, he average 11.25 ppg and 16.5 in PPR?

that would have made him a top-10 WR last year.....

and 80/1200/10.... (those are scaled and happened to round nicely)

Thought this was worth sharing, because he's going in the 10/11th round in most redrafts.

And I don't know about you guys, but somehow I don't think Bruce is going to be the WR2 this year....

 

[zamboni]

As always, it's tough to extrapolate for a full season, but I agree that Curtis may be a nice late-round value play.

To be sure, Bruce isn't just going away, but I wouldn't be surprised to see his PT start to get reduced at the expense of Curtis. There's a new coaching staff in town, with no historical allegiance to Isaac.

 

[PatsWillWin]

As always, it's tough to extrapolate for a full season, but I agree that Curtis may be a nice late-round value play.

To be sure, Bruce isn't just going away, but I wouldn't be surprised to see his PT start to get reduced at the expense of Curtis. There's a new coaching staff in town, with no historical allegiance to Isaac.

I could be mistaken, but Bruce was re-signed this off-season and I'm almost positive it was the current (new) regime that did it.

 

[David Yudkin]

From what I have seen, Curtis was filling in for Bruce not taking over. Even the stats seem to back this up. From Week 12 on last year, Bruce was targeted 50 times to Curtis' 21. And Curtis did not break 20 yards receiving in his last 5 games.

I see the same info you see (Curtis ADP WR42 and Bruce ADP WR45) and come to the complete opposite conclusion. IMO, Bruce is the one to grab here. Until last year, he was Top 20 6 years in a row. He is as old or younger than a ton of other WR--none of which are getting the "old" label, nor are they being projected to suffer a major dropoff in production.

Bruce is currently 33. Other guys either older or within a few months of him age wise include: Joey Galloway, Marvin Harrison, Rod Smith, Keenan McCardell, Eddie Kennison, Keyshawn Johnson, Terrell Owens, Eric Moulds, Muhsin Muhammad, and Joe Horn. How many times do people draft the up and coming WR and let the old veteran go to another owner and get burned by it?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

from week 12 on, I don't think that Bulger was the QB.

I think Bulger-Curtis had a very nice connection.

I know Bruce was hurt during the first half of last year too.

 

[MLBrandow]

They sure paid him too

2006 5000000.00

2007 2500000.00

2008 3000000.00

You guys don't think Bruce looked a bit slow last year?

I hadn't even looked at Bruce's contract.... looks to me like they signed him to be #2 again....

You'd think that late it would be worth grabbing both. You get a solid second-tier WR1 between the (whichever starts).

 

[zamboni]

As always, it's tough to extrapolate for a full season, but I agree that Curtis may be a nice late-round value play.

To be sure, Bruce isn't just going away, but I wouldn't be surprised to see his PT start to get reduced at the expense of Curtis. There's a new coaching staff in town, with no historical allegiance to Isaac.

I could be mistaken, but Bruce was re-signed this off-season and I'm almost positive it was the current (new) regime that did it.

Yes, that's correct. I still think the allegiance factor is something to consider though, as Bruce will probably not get as much of a benefit of the doubt as the clear-cut #2 as he did with the Martz regime. He'll probably have to fend off Curtis .

 

[Men-in-Cleats]

I agree that he could potentially be a great value here but not one without a great deal of risk. It is tricky to look at the last few years data because there really wasn't a more pass happy offense in the league than Martz's one in STL, but they have a new regime there that is talking about more balance to the offense. If they are truly more balanced there and their defense can improve then there might not be as many balls to go around. I don't see him overtaking Bruce short of an injury this year, I see them both limiting each other's production by splitting up the balls that don't go to Holt. Add in a couple of pass catching TE's they drafted and if more balls go to Jackson this year, the slice of the pie for Curtis might not be what it was last year when Bruce was hurt.

 

[msommer]

from week 12 on, I don't think that Bulger was the QB.

I think Bulger-Curtis had a very nice connection.

I know Bruce was hurt during the first half of last year too.

Your point is then that Bulger-Bruce does not have a good connection?Who then was the qb in 2003 and 2004 when Bruce caught quite a few balls?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

from week 12 on, I don't think that Bulger was the QB.

I think Bulger-Curtis had a very nice connection.

I know Bruce was hurt during the first half of last year too.

Your point is then that Bulger-Bruce does not have a good connection?Who then was the qb in 2003 and 2004 when Bruce caught quite a few balls?

Curtis wasn't a big part of the O in '03 as a rookie. In 04 he clearly was WR3. Now I think it's a battle for wr2/wr3 between the two.

I think Curtis' 2nd half slip can be more attributed to who was at QB, rather than Curtis not producing well.

 

[pinequick]

He's currently being drafted WR39 according to antsports.com

Anyone notice that in the WR2 spot for STL when Bulger was healthy, he average 11.25 ppg and 16.5 in PPR?

that would have made him a top-10 WR last year.....

and 80/1200/10.... (those are scaled and happened to round nicely)

Thought this was worth sharing, because he's going in the 10/11th round in most redrafts.

And I don't know about you guys, but somehow I don't think Bruce is going to be the WR2 this year....

Granted, but in a completely different offense.

 

[Two Deep]

Curtis appears to be a younger faster Bruce.

 

[LHUCKS]

My money is on Curtis remaining the WR3 this year. Historically Linehan's #3's haven't done much.

You can count on one hand WR#3s that have had an impact ff wise.

 

[pinequick]

My money is on Curtis remaining the WR3 this year. Historically Linehan's #3's haven't done much. You can count on one hand WR#3s that have had an impact ff wise.

Amen. Burned by Stokley last season.

 

[massraider]

I agree that he could potentially be a great value here but not one without a great deal of risk. It is tricky to look at the last few years data because there really wasn't a more pass happy offense in the league than Martz's one in STL, but they have a new regime there that is talking about more balance to the offense. If they are truly more balanced there and their defense can improve then there might not be as many balls to go around. I don't see him overtaking Bruce short of an injury this year, I see them both limiting each other's production by splitting up the balls that don't go to Holt. Add in a couple of pass catching TE's they drafted and if more balls go to Jackson this year, the slice of the pie for Curtis might not be what it was last year when Bruce was hurt.

This is kind of a reason I like Bruce, especially at his likely draft spot. I think you'll see a lot less 3 WR sets, meaning fewer snaps for Curtis.

 

[David Yudkin]

from week 12 on, I don't think that Bulger was the QB.

I think Bulger-Curtis had a very nice connection.

I know Bruce was hurt during the first half of last year too.

Your point is then that Bulger-Bruce does not have a good connection?Who then was the qb in 2003 and 2004 when Bruce caught quite a few balls?

Curtis wasn't a big part of the O in '03 as a rookie. In 04 he clearly was WR3. Now I think it's a battle for wr2/wr3 between the two.

I think Curtis' 2nd half slip can be more attributed to who was at QB, rather than Curtis not producing well.

If people choose to ignore what has happened on and off the field, so be it. IMO, if the Rams fully intended to have Curtis take over as the #2 WR, then they would have let Bruce walk. Instead, they brought him back for 3 years for $15 million. You don't give an average of $5 million a year to a WR3--no way, no how.If the same situation occurred in Indy and Harrison missed a few games with an injury, would we be saying that Wayne and Stokely would be the starting WR for the Colts and Harrison the #3 WR? Of course not.

 

[modus]

From what I have seen, Curtis was filling in for Bruce not taking over. Even the stats seem to back this up. From Week 12 on last year, Bruce was targeted 50 times to Curtis' 21. And Curtis did not break 20 yards receiving in his last 5 games.

I think those numbers have more to do with Fitzgerald not being able to go through his progressions. Curtis had outstanding numbers until Fitzgerald stepped in.

 

[Adam Sommer]

Note that I have listed Curtis as my #1 most undervalued pick this year in many posts here on FBG....

First, Bruce will be 34 in November.....so he's getting up their in age, especially in a fast pace offense such as the one StLouis runs....

Second, many of the talk shows here in StLouis believe that Bruce will take a more limited role this season in order to stay healthy and play at a high level all year (not get tired late in the season and for the playoff). Or that he will get injured again, or with multiple minor injuries, etc....he has 13 years under his belt and alot of miles in this offense....

Curtis is a natural to take over and would be a solid starter IF the Rams maintain the same style of offense under a new head coach/system.....remember, Martz would throw the ball like a mad man (he is crazy you know), whereas I would bet on the Rams playing it smarter this season and running the ball more, not going for a million hail marys and so on....

But I am betting on Curtis being the #2 WR in StLouis most of the season and is a great backup if not starter (depending on rules etc) on most fantasy teams. As he is being drafted much later than many other #2 WR, he presents a great value in many drafts....

 

[MLBrandow]

Well, I guarantee you either Curtis or Bruce will have an outstanding year.

I also think there is enough offseason evidence to pool our knowledge and figure it out.

This is going to make for a great discussion over the next few days....

 

[David Yudkin]

Note that I have listed Curtis as my #1 most undervalued pick this year in many posts here on FBG....

First, Bruce will be 34 in November.....so he's getting up their in age, especially in a fast pace offense such as the one StLouis runs....

Second, many of the talk shows here in StLouis believe that Bruce will take a more limited role this season in order to stay healthy and play at a high level all year (not get tired late in the season and for the playoff). Or that he will get injured again, or with multiple minor injuries, etc....he has 13 years under his belt and alot of miles in this offense....

Curtis is a natural to take over and would be a solid starter IF the Rams maintain the same style of offense under a new head coach/system.....remember, Martz would throw the ball like a mad man (he is crazy you know), whereas I would bet on the Rams playing it smarter this season and running the ball more, not going for a million hail marys and so on....

But I am betting on Curtis being the #2 WR in StLouis most of the season and is a great backup if not starter (depending on rules etc) on most fantasy teams. As he is being drafted much later than many other #2 WR, he presents a great value in many drafts....

If, as you suggest, the Rams tone down the offense, strive for a balanced attack, and do not pass 3 out of 4 plays, wouldn't it stand to reason that Bruce would get more rest during the game even without having to take plays off?Not to belabor the point, but there are plenty of 33 and 34 WR doing just fine out there and ones that will rank far better than WR45--and those are on teams that historically have had much weaker passing stats than STL.

 

[Adam Sommer]

I agree. Age is not the ONLY factor in my reasoning. I was just pointing out that he is nearly 34.

The buzz on some talk shows here (like Bernie M. from the Post-Distpatch) is that Bruce will have a more limited role. I know this is the media, for all I know they know nothing.

Curtis is a good fit for the #2 WR role, and Bruce could make a natural progression to a #3 WR or poscession role. The media here had this same conversation prior to Faulks reduced role a while back (and about Ozzie Smiths change, but thats baseball ) so they have been right in the past.

Heck, Bruce could be a pro bowler this season, but my money is on Curtis as #2 WR for most of the season with Bruce either injured or in a reduced type of role.

That being said, I think it is reasonable to think that all Rams WR will have lower numbers than years past. With Martz gone, crazy ball is over. The Rams will most likely play a smarter game, with a more balanced gameplan.

 

[Sinrman]

Very difficult to count on a #3 WR on a team. Even in wide open offenses, like Indy's, you can't exactly. As we found out with Stokley, who did VERY well in 2004, the following season taught us not to go TOO crazy on them.

In this case, I'd be looking at nabbing Bruce as well. Many people have forgotten about him...

 

[Adam Sommer]

http://www.stlouisrams.com/article/54137/

I suppose taking Bruce of Curtis would make sense here. But, as this article also says, Curtis did a perfect job of filling in for Bruce last year, and would if given that chance again.

So I guess you would have to judge Bruce's injury risk at his age etc...like a previous poster said, one of these two will have a nice year, but which one?

After researching further, I would have to agree with David Y. over myself and say Bruce is the safer bet.....

 

[Bob_Magaw]

as to the bruce-curtis comparisons...

curtis is no doubt faster... i'm not sure if bruce was ever a 4.4 guy, & may have lost a half step...

that said, bruce is one of the best route runners in the business. how can a 4.5 guy consistently beat a DB that runs a 4.4 or even sub 4.4? because there is a difference between running a straight line in track shorts & starting from a stationary position. bruce's strengths involve MAINTAINING his speed throughout the route stem... where the DBs have to gather themselves when they stop & start & it takes them a few strides to regain their speed, bruce is extremely fluid, is very crafty & wily & knows all the tricks like not having a tell when you are about to cut, can cut at full speed, runs extremely precise routes & has an almost telepathic rapport with bulger at this point.

bruce is just a year removed from a huge year (close to 1,300 yards i think)... the point about curtis being adversely affected by bulger's absence could have affected bruce, too. he was slowed by a turf toe injury last season... if that is chronic, it is bad news for bruce... if not, that kind of problem would slow a younger WR, too (see lavernues coles).

i'm not a STL resident... bernie is right sometimes, but he is wrong at times, also... from following a rams homer board past few years, it seems like randy karraker & howard balzer are maybe more respected as insider sources... i thought some of bernies articles last year weren't "news" but read more like op ed pieces on what martz was doing wrong...

it does seem like if bruce was going to be shoved out of the way by curtis (new regime has no loyalty to bruce), why not just let him go rather then reup him for $5 million this year.

curtis is a great deep threat, but bruce is one of the best in intermediate areas & probing & finding vulnerabilties in zone defense... if anything, THAT skill set would seem to dovetail better with linehan's scheme in which he takes occasional deep shot but wants to emphasize keeping bulger healthy, more max protect, 3-5 step drops, short & intermediate high percentage completions...

CLEARLY the TE will be more involved in 2006 & beyond... sometimes in two TE set with klopfenstein & byrd... this could take a chunk out of WR2 production... though burleson did good in 2004 in that role in linehan's last year with MIN... booker didn't do much last season in MIA, but at this point, i don't think booker is close to bruce (if he ever was... maybe it was closer when he was two time pro bowler), so maybe we can't infer too much from that fact.

and TEs could be good for bulger & bruce, by opening up the sideline routes outside the hashes...

 

[PatsWillWin]

I'm not sure I buy the Bruce taking on a "limited role" talk. As has been pointed out, while I don't know how much bonus $ he got when he restructured his money, his salary and cap number are pretty damn high for a WR that the new coaching staff wants to take on a limited role.

So, working under that assumption, along with the fact that I expect the Rams offense to be much more balanced with Martz gone, I personally don't see Curtis as a fantasy factor this season, barring a Bruce injury - I just don't think the offense is going to be open enough for a WR3 to produce anything consistent fantasy-wise.

EDIT: I do, however, think he has some dynasty value. The Rams don't really have anyone else on their roster who looks like they could step up and be the WR2 when Bruce is done. Shaun McDonald has never done much to impress, and I believe he's in a contract year.

Doesn't mean they can't add anyone between now and when Bruce leaves, of course, but just a thought.

 

[Adam Sommer]

I agree about the #3 WR comment....no way will who ever that is have a huge fantasy impact...

I live in StLouis and I think Bernie M. is a idiot (more due to his Cards comments, but thats a different board)...

As far as his contract is concerned, well, Bruce has been a lifelong Ram, is an original STL Ram, a fan favorite, and still capable of producing. But I believe that Lenihan will put the best guy on the field, regardless of contract.

 

[diesel7982]

No one listened when I said he was a top 30 WR last year.

I dont see that same value this year.

 

[MLBrandow]

CLEARLY the TE will be more involved in 2006 & beyond... sometimes in two TE set with klopfenstein & byrd... this could take a chunk out of WR2 production... though burleson did good in 2004 in that role in linehan's last year with MIN... booker didn't do much last season in MIA, but at this point, i don't think booker is close to bruce (if he ever was... maybe it was closer when he was two time pro bowler), so maybe we can't infer too much from that fact.

and TEs could be good for bulger & bruce, by opening up the sideline routes outside the hashes...

*edited for clarityThis might be a key point here. How much production are we expecting from TE1+TE2? Will it be enough to knock WR2 back down to fantasy mediocrity?

This I don't know, as my football history doesn't go back so far.

Anyone have any good Linehan offense stats available?

This does support the prevailing idea here though that whomever wins, Bruce or Curtis, the other will have severely limited numbers this year.

 

[Z-Dog]

Good thread so far, very solid.

The most telling point is the contract that Bruce signed. As for older guys being rested and so forth, that's what people say in the offseason, but I haven't seen it happen much when it's game time.

 

[The Man With No Name]

Good Kevin Curtis read

I do have Curtis in one of my 2 leagues, but am not as high on him as some have stated. Bruce should be the #2 wr and put up decent stats in 2006 if healthy. If not Curtis steps in and produces.

I wonder how much outside wide receiver Curtis has played. A large amount of his production has probably come from the slot wr position-not sure.

Curtis will be an unrestricted free agent after this season.

BTW, the article says he ran a 4.2 forty, and scored 48 on the wonderlick.

 

[Bri]

But bruce and Holt missed some time last year so he played more

 

[LHUCKS]

So let's talk Curtis upside...

As long as Holt is healthy and in his prime Curtis is going to be the Linehan #2 at best...which isn't much historically.

You're better off finding upside elsewhere at Curtis' current ADP.

 

[Bri]

So let's talk Curtis upside...

As long as Holt is healthy and in his prime Curtis is going to be the Linehan #2 at best...which isn't much historically.

You're better off finding upside elsewhere at Curtis' current ADP.

who were some of his #2s?

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

as to the bruce-curtis comparisons...

curtis is no doubt faster... i'm not sure if bruce was ever a 4.4 guy, & may have lost a half step...

that said, bruce is one of the best route runners in the business. how can a 4.5 guy consistently beat a DB that runs a 4.4 or even sub 4.4? because there is a difference between running a straight line in track shorts & starting from a stationary position. bruce's strengths involve MAINTAINING his speed throughout the route stem... where the DBs have to gather themselves when they stop & start & it takes them a few strides to regain their speed, bruce is extremely fluid, is very crafty & wily & knows all the tricks like not having a tell when you are about to cut, can cut at full speed, runs extremely precise routes & has an almost telepathic rapport with bulger at this point.

bruce is just a year removed from a huge year (close to 1,300 yards i think)... the point about curtis being adversely affected by bulger's absence could have affected bruce, too. he was slowed by a turf toe injury last season... if that is chronic, it is bad news for bruce... if not, that kind of problem would slow a younger WR, too (see lavernues coles).

i'm not a STL resident... bernie is right sometimes, but he is wrong at times, also... from following a rams homer board past few years, it seems like randy karraker & howard balzer are maybe more respected as insider sources... i thought some of bernies articles last year weren't "news" but read more like op ed pieces on what martz was doing wrong...

it does seem like if bruce was going to be shoved out of the way by curtis (new regime has no loyalty to bruce), why not just let him go rather then reup him for $5 million this year.

curtis is a great deep threat, but bruce is one of the best in intermediate areas & probing & finding vulnerabilties in zone defense... if anything, THAT skill set would seem to dovetail better with linehan's scheme in which he takes occasional deep shot but wants to emphasize keeping bulger healthy, more max protect, 3-5 step drops, short & intermediate high percentage completions...

CLEARLY the TE will be more involved in 2006 & beyond... sometimes in two TE set with klopfenstein & byrd... this could take a chunk out of WR2 production... though burleson did good in 2004 in that role in linehan's last year with MIN... booker didn't do much last season in MIA, but at this point, i don't think booker is close to bruce (if he ever was... maybe it was closer when he was two time pro bowler), so maybe we can't infer too much from that fact.

and TEs could be good for bulger & bruce, by opening up the sideline routes outside the hashes...

I completely agree with you concerning Bruce and his route running. You are dead on here.I would not count on anything the Saint Louis media says concerning anything. There is not one in the bunch here in Saint Louis that is anything but a lapdog for the Rams front office. The only person who openly says anything is Kevin Slaten and he is just a blow hard that says things for shock value. I would take anything from any local media with a grain of salt.

Of the two, I like Bruce to outpreform his ADP and unless you are predicting injury I do not think Curtis will provide much in the way of a FF WR.

 

[Islander]

From what I have seen, Curtis was filling in for Bruce not taking over. Even the stats seem to back this up. From Week 12 on last year, Bruce was targeted 50 times to Curtis' 21. And Curtis did not break 20 yards receiving in his last 5 games.

I see the same info you see (Curtis ADP WR42 and Bruce ADP WR45) and come to the complete opposite conclusion. IMO, Bruce is the one to grab here. Until last year, he was Top 20 6 years in a row. He is as old or younger than a ton of other WR--none of which are getting the "old" label, nor are they being projected to suffer a major dropoff in production.

Bruce is currently 33. Other guys either older or within a few months of him age wise include: Joey Galloway, Marvin Harrison, Rod Smith, Keenan McCardell, Eddie Kennison, Keyshawn Johnson, Terrell Owens, Eric Moulds, Muhsin Muhammad, and Joe Horn. How many times do people draft the up and coming WR and let the old veteran go to another owner and get burned by it?

T Owens will be 33 yrs old in December! Geez, I thought he was something like 30 yrs old.

 

[MLBrandow]

So let's talk Curtis upside...

As long as Holt is healthy and in his prime Curtis is going to be the Linehan #2 at best...which isn't much historically.

You're better off finding upside elsewhere at Curtis' current ADP.

who were some of his #2s?

You know... Cris Carter..... usual garbage.... And those comparisons about Bruce's close WRs age-wise are silly. Lumping every WR in the NFL within 3 years of him isn't saying much.

There's a big difference between 30 and 33.

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

So let's talk Curtis upside...

As long as Holt is healthy and in his prime Curtis is going to be the Linehan #2 at best...which isn't much historically.

You're better off finding upside elsewhere at Curtis' current ADP.

who were some of his #2s?

You know... Cris Carter..... usual garbage.... And those comparisons about Bruce's close WRs age-wise are silly. Lumping every WR in the NFL within 3 years of him isn't saying much.

There's a big difference between 30 and 33.

David's post says that all those guys are within a few months or older than Bruce.

 

[David Yudkin]

So let's talk Curtis upside...

As long as Holt is healthy and in his prime Curtis is going to be the Linehan #2 at best...which isn't much historically.

You're better off finding upside elsewhere at Curtis' current ADP.

who were some of his #2s?

You know... Cris Carter..... usual garbage.... And those comparisons about Bruce's close WRs age-wise are silly. Lumping every WR in the NFL within 3 years of him isn't saying much.

There's a big difference between 30 and 33.

Which WR on the list is only 30?Keenan McCardell 1/6/1970

Rod Smith 5/15/1970

Joey Galloway 11/20/1971

Marvin Harrison 8/25/1972

Keyshawn Johnson 7/22/1972

Isaac Bruce 11/10/1972

Joe Horn 1/16/1972

Eddie Kennison 1/20/1973

Muhsin Muhammad 5/5/1973

Eric Moulds 7/17/1973

Terrell Owens 12/7/1973

Basically, all these guys will start or end the season at 33 or older. There is no one here that's 30.