What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Kurt Warner expected to retire after this season (1 Viewer)

Ghost Rider

Ghost Rider

Footballguy
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/200...tory?id=4813241

Arizona's next loss could mark the last time that quarterback Kurt Warner plays in an NFL game.

He always could change his mind, but this likely will be the 38-year-old Warner's final NFL season, according to sources close to the quarterback.

Warner has been voted to five Pro Bowls, won two NFL MVP awards, one Super Bowl and became the second quarterback in history to throw more than 100 touchdown passes for two NFL franchises.

Earlier this season, Warner suffered a concussion that raised questions about his future.

 
Ghost Rider said:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/200...tory?id=4813241

Arizona's next loss could mark the last time that quarterback Kurt Warner plays in an NFL game.

He always could change his mind, but this likely will be the 38-year-old Warner's final NFL season, according to sources close to the quarterback.

Warner has been voted to five Pro Bowls, won two NFL MVP awards, one Super Bowl and became the second quarterback in history to throw more than 100 touchdown passes for two NFL franchises.

Earlier this season, Warner suffered a concussion that raised questions about his future.
Click to expand...
And Leinhart sux....ruh roh!Who is the next QB there?

 
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOF. Downgrade Fitz. Bolden is now useless. Kurt should be a 1st ballot HOF

 
I hope Kurt changes his mind, but if not, he'll walk away a 1st ballot HOF QB, who still has one of the most amazing stories coming into the league.

 
This is why I don't like Breaston in dynasty.

Hopefully the Cards address QB in this year's deep draft of them because the answer is not currently on the roster.

 
If this happens, it could actually help the value of some of the Cardinals. The running game could become more of a focus so Wells' value could go up, and with the WR's - Their ADP's could fall far enough to make them great value picks.

That's assuming Arizona doesn't go with Leinart at QB of course.

 
Frankbot said:
If this happens, it could actually help the value of some of the Cardinals. The running game could become more of a focus so Wells' value could go up, and with the WR's - Their ADP's could fall far enough to make them great value picks.That's assuming Arizona doesn't go with Leinart at QB of course.
Click to expand...
Arizona's O-line isn't good enough to overcome a stacked D-line. Warner made defenses play honest. I'm not sure if Leinart could do the same.
 
Mr. Retukes said:
Frankbot said:
If this happens, it could actually help the value of some of the Cardinals. The running game could become more of a focus so Wells' value could go up, and with the WR's - Their ADP's could fall far enough to make them great value picks.That's assuming Arizona doesn't go with Leinart at QB of course.
Click to expand...
Arizona's O-line isn't good enough to overcome a stacked D-line. Warner made defenses play honest. I'm not sure if Leinart could do the same.
Click to expand...
Well as soon as Warner leaves, then the offensive gameplan will change... alot. The offense is tailored around Kurt Warner to the fullest. Coach Whiz didnt come here looking to be a top passing team and last in rushing. But he's got 2 stud WR's, some young RB's that put the ball on the ground and a HOF QB that is tremendous against the blitz, so Whiz had to adjust. But once another QB takes over, whoever it may be, the Cardinals will no longer be a pass first team, which in fantasy terms will obviously hurt some of the WR's and help Beanie. I dont think a new QB will hurt Fitz's value too much just based on him making any QB look good. I personally don't think Boldin will be here next year so it will be irrelevant for him. But I really think this will help Beanie big time. If he just stops fumbling, which is a huge problem, but if he figures it out he can be real good. He has shown some pretty nasty runs this year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jous said:
I doubt actually he'll be 1st ballot, but he'll get in. Maybe 3rd or 4th year eligible
Click to expand...
IIRC someone posted here one time that all but one HOF QB went in on the first ballot. Assuming that is true, I don't see why it would be any different for Warner. Perhaps the only reason would be if both Warner and Favre retire in the same year, and thus become eligible the same year, and voters decide to take only one QB in that class and it's Favre. But I suspect they would take both of them.
 
Twilight said:
Capella said:
Raider Nation said:
PantherPower said:
I hope Kurt changes his mind, but if not, he'll walk away a 1st ballot HOF QB
Click to expand...
Chase isn't convinced he's a "lock" Hall-of-Famer ... LOL.http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...&p=11298796
Click to expand...
:lmao: Jeez.
Click to expand...
Not checking the link, but he would have been right before last year. Now, though, I think any Warner fans can book hotels in Canton safely 5 years hence if he does retire this year.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:
 
Boldin is as good as gone anyway.....the real guy you have to worry about is Fitz. His value has already been taking a hit ever since Kurts week 11 concussion.

 
Warner retires

Turn the team into a power running team

Sign Mike Vick

Have him bootleg out and go deep to Fitz.

EZ GAME

 
As a Fitz owner this makes me sad. If they don't draft/acquire a QB, maybe I should hope the other owners don't keep up and trade him from A Johnson.

 
Fitz is still the best WR in the NFL, and he's already put up uberstud numbers with Leinart, McCown, Navarre, and pre-2008 Warner (you know, back when he was just an old, washed-up journeyman that no NFL team wanted). Besides, Warner has been holding Fitz back this season. As a Fitz owner in dynasty, I'm not downgrading him a lick based on this news.

 
SSOG said:
Fitz is still the best WR in the NFL, and he's already put up uberstud numbers with Leinart, McCown, Navarre
Click to expand...
With Warner:6.3 rec, 90.3yds, 0.7 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 101 rec, 1445 yds, 11 TDs

Without Warner:

4.6 rec, 60.9yds, 0.46 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 74 rec, 974 yds, 7 TDs

Even if we throw out his rookie season, he's still down 200+ yards and 5 TDs, which drops him well out of the range of what even top 5 FF WRs typically score.

Without Warner (rookie season thrown out):

5.9rec, 77 yds, 0.41 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 94 rec, 1230 yds, 6 TDs

Note: Those numbers are copy/pasted from prior to the start of this season, so they don't include this season's numbers. Adding in this year's numbers would probably bring the yards down to around 1400, with a slight uptick to TDs and receptions staying basically the same. So still a pretty huge difference between his numbers with/without Warner. A difference of top 3 guy vs. top 15/20 guy. Not that I'm saying Fitz will drop out of the top 3/5 without Warner, but to say he's produced near as well with bad QBs in the past is false.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I know the media wants to see Favre end his career with a ring...

But Warner is the guy I want to see winning the super bowl. It would be a remarkable conclusion to a fabulous career.

 
SSOG said:
Fitz is still the best WR in the NFL, and he's already put up uberstud numbers with Leinart, McCown, Navarre, and pre-2008 Warner (you know, back when he was just an old, washed-up journeyman that no NFL team wanted). Besides, Warner has been holding Fitz back this season. As a Fitz owner in dynasty, I'm not downgrading him a lick based on this news.
Click to expand...
Let me start by saying I'm not sure how much, if any, Fitz should be downgraded if Warner retires. However, your statement here made me curious, so I looked up the numbers for Fitz with and without Warner. Because Warner was in and out of games in relief of Leinart and due to multiple injuries, I decided to look at all games in which Fitz played and Warner had 10+ pass attempts vs. all others. Here is the data:Fitz games in which Warner had 10+ pass attempts: 58 games, 369 receptions, 5015 receiving yards, 42 receiving TDs

This is an average of 101 receptions, 1383 receiving yards, and 12 receiving TDs per 16 games

Fitz games in which Warner did not have 10+ pass attempts: 34 games, 154 receptions, 2052 receiving yards, 17 receiving TDs

This is an average of 72 receptions, 966 receiving yards, and 8 receiving TDs per 16 games

Pretty sizable gap there. And this does not include Fitz's 30/546/7 performance in 4 postseason games with Warner last year... add that in, and the gap is even bigger.

Notes:

1. I didn't know if you were jesting about the bolded, but I counted all Warner games together. I don't see any reason to separate them if the question is how Warner's retirement will affect Fitz.

2. It should be noted that 29 of the 34 games in the second group occurred in Fitz's first 3 seasons, so he is no doubt better today than he was in those seasons... so perhaps that is reason to think he would perform better with other QBs now.

3. The other QBs Arizona used over this span were collectively below average (Leinart, McCown, Shaun King, Navarre). We don't know who will start for Arizona next year if Warner retires. If it is a better QB than this group, presumably that could mean better results.

All that said, I disagree with the statement that Fitz has proven he can put up "uberstud" numbers with QBs other than Warner. I'm not saying he can't, but he hasn't yet proven he can.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL said:
SSOG said:
Fitz is still the best WR in the NFL, and he's already put up uberstud numbers with Leinart, McCown, Navarre
Click to expand...
With Warner:6.3 rec, 90.3yds, 0.7 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 101 rec, 1445 yds, 11 TDs

Without Warner:

4.6 rec, 60.9yds, 0.46 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 74 rec, 974 yds, 7 TDs

Even if we throw out his rookie season, he's still down 200+ yards and 5 TDs, which drops him well out of the range of what even top 5 FF WRs typically score.

Without Warner (rookie season thrown out):

5.9rec, 77 yds, 0.41 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 94 rec, 1230 yds, 6 TDs

Note: Those numbers are copy/pasted from prior to the start of this season, so they don't include this season's numbers. Adding in this year's numbers would probably bring the yards down to around 1400, with a slight uptick to TDs and receptions staying basically the same. So still a pretty huge difference between his numbers with/without Warner. A difference of top 3 guy vs. top 15/20 guy. Not that I'm saying Fitz will drop out of the top 3/5 without Warner, but to say he's produced near as well with bad QBs in the past is false.
Click to expand...
:thumbdown:
 
I think if Calvin has proven he can put up great numbers despite horrible QB play (more last year than this year mind you) then its safe to say Fitz can do the same. I think they are the 2 most gifted WRs in the NFL. But Steve Smith could still beat up both of them easy. :hot:

 
Raider Nation said:
SSOG said:
Fitz is still the best WR in the NFL.
Click to expand...
Not named "Johnson" you mean?
Click to expand...
I'm not going to get into skillsets, because they're very different WRs (Fitz runs the best routes and has the best hands in the league, IMO, whereas Andre possesses physical advantages that Fitz could never hope to match). I will, however, get into results. Johnson is mediocre in traffic, which means when Houston gets into the red zone (i.e. the most important 20 yards on the entire field), Johnson's just another guy. Fitzgerald's a beast between the 20s, but unlike Andre, he's still a beast inside the 20s, as well. I meant exactly what I said, exactly how I said it- Fitzgerald is still the best WR in the NFL.
FreeBaGeL said:
With Warner:

6.3 rec, 90.3yds, 0.7 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 101 rec, 1445 yds, 11 TDs

Without Warner:

4.6 rec, 60.9yds, 0.46 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 74 rec, 974 yds, 7 TDs

Even if we throw out his rookie season, he's still down 200+ yards and 5 TDs, which drops him well out of the range of what even top 5 FF WRs typically score.

Without Warner (rookie season thrown out):

5.9rec, 77 yds, 0.41 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 94 rec, 1230 yds, 6 TDs

Note: Those numbers are copy/pasted from prior to the start of this season, so they don't include this season's numbers. Adding in this year's numbers would probably bring the yards down to around 1400, with a slight uptick to TDs and receptions staying basically the same. So still a pretty huge difference between his numbers with/without Warner. A difference of top 3 guy vs. top 15/20 guy. Not that I'm saying Fitz will drop out of the top 3/5 without Warner, but to say he's produced near as well with bad QBs in the past is false.
Click to expand...
I never said that Fitz has been as good without Warner as he has been with Warner. I said that Fitz has still put up uberstud numbers without Warner. And yes, 94/1230/6 are still studly numbers, ESPECIALLY when you consider that that's not a garden-variety 94/1230/6... that's a 94/1230/6 that was put up with Josh McCown, John Navarre, Shaun King, and rookie Matt Leinart. Get him a better quarterback than those four horsemen of suck (and really, anybody with a pulse is a better QB than those four horsemen of suck), and I'd expect better than 94/1230/6 from him. Especially if Boldin skips town while we're at it (which means more targets for Fitz, who is already a massive target hog to begin with).
 
My gut tells me McNabb will not be with the eagles next year with one year on his deal. He want's and extention and it's not looking like the eagles will do that.

Leinart isn't the answer and with all the parts in place a trade with the eagles makes perfect sense.

Oh and McNabb lives in Arizona and is good friends with Fitz.

 
SSOG said:
Raider Nation said:
SSOG said:
Fitz is still the best WR in the NFL.
Click to expand...
Not named "Johnson" you mean?
Click to expand...
I'm not going to get into skillsets, because they're very different WRs (Fitz runs the best routes and has the best hands in the league, IMO, whereas Andre possesses physical advantages that Fitz could never hope to match). I will, however, get into results. Johnson is mediocre in traffic, which means when Houston gets into the red zone (i.e. the most important 20 yards on the entire field), Johnson's just another guy. Fitzgerald's a beast between the 20s, but unlike Andre, he's still a beast inside the 20s, as well. I meant exactly what I said, exactly how I said it- Fitzgerald is still the best WR in the NFL.
FreeBaGeL said:
With Warner:

6.3 rec, 90.3yds, 0.7 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 101 rec, 1445 yds, 11 TDs

Without Warner:

4.6 rec, 60.9yds, 0.46 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 74 rec, 974 yds, 7 TDs

Even if we throw out his rookie season, he's still down 200+ yards and 5 TDs, which drops him well out of the range of what even top 5 FF WRs typically score.

Without Warner (rookie season thrown out):

5.9rec, 77 yds, 0.41 TDs per game

Over a 16 game season, that prorates out to 94 rec, 1230 yds, 6 TDs

Note: Those numbers are copy/pasted from prior to the start of this season, so they don't include this season's numbers. Adding in this year's numbers would probably bring the yards down to around 1400, with a slight uptick to TDs and receptions staying basically the same. So still a pretty huge difference between his numbers with/without Warner. A difference of top 3 guy vs. top 15/20 guy. Not that I'm saying Fitz will drop out of the top 3/5 without Warner, but to say he's produced near as well with bad QBs in the past is false.
Click to expand...
I never said that Fitz has been as good without Warner as he has been with Warner. I said that Fitz has still put up uberstud numbers without Warner. And yes, 94/1230/6 are still studly numbers, ESPECIALLY when you consider that that's not a garden-variety 94/1230/6... that's a 94/1230/6 that was put up with Josh McCown, John Navarre, Shaun King, and rookie Matt Leinart. Get him a better quarterback than those four horsemen of suck (and really, anybody with a pulse is a better QB than those four horsemen of suck), and I'd expect better than 94/1230/6 from him. Especially if Boldin skips town while we're at it (which means more targets for Fitz, who is already a massive target hog to begin with).
Click to expand...
By the method I outlined above, if I throw out Fitz's rookie season, here are his numbers in games in which Warner did not have at least 10 passing attempts: 18 games, 1272 receiving yards, 9 receiving TDs. That is a 16 game average of 85/1131/8. I realize as I said in my post that he compiled those numbers with some bad QBs, but I think calling those uberstud numbers is a major overstatement. Or maybe we just define uberstud differently...
 
Just Win Baby said:
By the method I outlined above, if I throw out Fitz's rookie season, here are his numbers in games in which Warner did not have at least 10 passing attempts: 18 games, 1272 receiving yards, 9 receiving TDs. That is a 16 game average of 85/1131/8. I realize as I said in my post that he compiled those numbers with some bad QBs, but I think calling those uberstud numbers is a major overstatement. Or maybe we just define uberstud differently...
Click to expand...
The difference must be in the "at least 10 passing attempts" stipulation, because when I've looked at the numbers before, Fitzgerald has been a 100/1200 guy with the Four Horsemen (I've always gone off the same numbers that Freebagel already posted). Yes, the TDs are noticeably lower with the Four Horsemen than they are with Warner, but I'm not a fan of predicting based on TDs, since they're the smallest sample size and most volatile stat we have for WRs. The receptions and yards, though, I would call above reproach. 100 catches = uberstud.Edit: your "10 attempts" stipulation probably hurts Fitzgerald unfairly, because you're including games where Warner got injured after a handful of attempts and Fitz wound up playing with a backup QB who hadn't gotten any first-team reps all week long. When you're looking at the games started by the Four Horsemen, you're at least looking at games where they practiced with the first team offense during the week.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SSOG said:
Just Win Baby said:
By the method I outlined above, if I throw out Fitz's rookie season, here are his numbers in games in which Warner did not have at least 10 passing attempts: 18 games, 96 catches, 1272 receiving yards, 9 receiving TDs. That is a 16 game average of 85/1131/8. I realize as I said in my post that he compiled those numbers with some bad QBs, but I think calling those uberstud numbers is a major overstatement. Or maybe we just define uberstud differently...
Click to expand...
The difference must be in the "at least 10 passing attempts" stipulation, because when I've looked at the numbers before, Fitzgerald has been a 100/1200 guy with the Four Horsemen (I've always gone off the same numbers that Freebagel already posted). Yes, the TDs are noticeably lower with the Four Horsemen than they are with Warner, but I'm not a fan of predicting based on TDs, since they're the smallest sample size and most volatile stat we have for WRs. The receptions and yards, though, I would call above reproach. 100 catches = uberstud.Edit: your "10 attempts" stipulation probably hurts Fitzgerald unfairly, because you're including games where Warner got injured after a handful of attempts and Fitz wound up playing with a backup QB who hadn't gotten any first-team reps all week long. When you're looking at the games started by the Four Horsemen, you're at least looking at games where they practiced with the first team offense during the week.
Click to expand...
I counted every game Warner and Fitz played in together except two games. In one of those games, Warner had 2 attempts, and in the other he had 6 attempts. I don't see how you can argue that those games shouldn't be counted in the non Warner group.But even if I take those out of the non Warner group, the other 16 games without Warner since his rookie year (not counting his rookie year), he has had 87 catches, 1158 receiving yards, and 8 TDs.The main reason I chose the 10+ cutoff is that there were a few games in which Warner relieved Leinart and had more than 10 attempts, and I felt it was more accurate to put those in the Warner group than the non-Warner group, in terms of gauging the effectiveness of Fitz with and without Warner.And you are saying 100/1200, which is not completely accurate, as shown above. 87 catches is a lot less than 100, and 1158 receiving yards is less than 1200. So if 100/1200 equals uberstud, Fitz hasn't shown that he merits that tag without Warner.Look, Fitz is certainly a top 10 caliber WR for sure, no matter who his QB is. But when you say uberstud I'm think top 1-3 WR. And I'm not convinced he is that without Warner. It depends on who replaces him, and right now the most likely candidate is Leinart. If Fitz was to enter next season with Leinart as his QB, I wouldn't rank him in the top 3.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Yogibear
Joe Schmidt passes away at age 92
Replies
1
Views
455
JohnnyU
JohnnyU
Yogibear
5 Big Free Agent Moves that need to happen before the season starts
Replies
2
Views
486
travdogg
T
S
Chris Borland retires due to health concers
2 3
Replies
144
Views
5K
cr8f
cr8f

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top