I have seen this trend lately and its bothering me...Fitz falls to the 2nd tier of wrs and people arent so hot on him. With good reason, we know that shakier qb play will mean worse opportunities for Fitz. However, I think this will be proved wrong, not by the qbs (leinart sucks) but by Fitz himself. The qbs arent idiots, they know who their best target is and im confident they will get the ball to him. Remember how kurt warner kind of liked boldin better and would force it to him all the time!! When boldin got hurt is when fitz would be at his best. Anyone remember that game where warner forced 3 consecutive GL throws to boldin? i had fitz and was screaming at the tv. Yet Larry still posted great stats. No more anquan in AZ. My point is that I think larry could have one of his best seasons this year and he will make whatever qb is back there look better than they are. I still put fitz in my wr top tier after moss and andre.
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!
Larry Fitz aka the forgotten man, aka the undervalued one. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Montana16
- Start date
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Well, I would tend to disagree. We know Fitz's numbers were through the roof with Warner and nowhere near as good with Leinart. We also know that his numbers were exceptional playing with Boldin and ok (but night quite as good) with Boldin out for short stretches. And we also know that overall the Cardinals have struggled to run the football.
Bottom line, I don't see whoever is the QB having the accuracy and success as Warner did, I don't see an established threat to replace Boldin, and the running game has been suspect. If I'm a defensive coordinator, I double Fitz all day long and make Arizona beat me someplace else.
I don't see another 100/1400/10 season this year. He should still be in the Top 10, but I think he will be closer to the borderline WR1s than the elite guys this year.
Bottom line, I don't see whoever is the QB having the accuracy and success as Warner did, I don't see an established threat to replace Boldin, and the running game has been suspect. If I'm a defensive coordinator, I double Fitz all day long and make Arizona beat me someplace else.
I don't see another 100/1400/10 season this year. He should still be in the Top 10, but I think he will be closer to the borderline WR1s than the elite guys this year.
Well...Thats interesting and I hadnt seen that ranking. Fair enough. I guess im mainly talking about the "mainstream" ranks like espn and cbs yadda yadda, not that I hold those in any kind of high regard. Mainly in the mock drafts I keep getting fitz after deshaun and calvin and wayne, when I believe he is right above those guys.BusterTBronco said:
We know nothing of the sort.Fitz's career numbers with Boldin in the lineup: 5.6 receptions, 73.8 yards, 0.6 TDs
Fitz's career numbers without Boldin in the lineup: 6.1 receptions, 90.1 yards, 0.8 TDs.
Fitz's career numbers without Boldin since 2005: 7.0 receptions, 105.5 yards, 1.0 TDs.
benson_will_lead_the_way
Footballguy
Nice work SSOG, weren't Fitz' numbers comparable with Leinart as well. You're a stats guy and figured you could dig them up quicker. I seem to remember a debate that he put up good numbers with Leinart starting as well.
What were Fitz's numbers with Boldin since 2005? This seems like a selective stat grab.
Last edited by a moderator:
GreatLakesMike
Footballguy
Well, no one in my dynasty leagues is selling low. lol.. trust me, I've made a few inquiries.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Here are the actual career totals for Fitzgerald.
In 8 games without Warner AND Boldin not playing:
35 receptions, 569 receiving yards, 3 TD (projects to 70-1138-6 over 16 games)
In 36 games without Warner or Warner seeing limited time:
160 receptions, 2193 receiving yards, 18 TD (projects to 71-975-8 over 16 games)
In 8 games without Warner AND Boldin not playing:
35 receptions, 569 receiving yards, 3 TD (projects to 70-1138-6 over 16 games)
In 36 games without Warner or Warner seeing limited time:
160 receptions, 2193 receiving yards, 18 TD (projects to 71-975-8 over 16 games)
I've gathered a bit of Fitzgerald discussion here. The upshot is that, if you ignore his rookie season (which in my opinion is perfectly justifiable given the numbers he's put up since), then Fitzgerald has been a 90/1250/6 guy with "Not Kurt Warner" under center.
You'll have to talk to Mike Sando about it. As for whether it's a "grab stat", that depends on what Sando means by "since 2005". If he meant "Fitzgerald's stats without Boldin from 2005 to present", then I think it's perfectly justifiable to exclude 2004 (it was Fitz's rookie year, and his numbers from every season since demonstrate that it was aberrational and no longer relevant to Fitzgerald's production going forward). I mean, when we're projecting Brandon Marshall, do we still factor in his rookie year? When we're projecting Andre Johnson, do we factor in his rookie year? By that token, excluding Fitzgerald's rookie year (especially doing it transparently by providing the numbers both including and excluding that year) is fair game. If he meant from 2006 to present, then yeah, it's a grab stat (because there's no legit reason to exclude 2005, unless you're just deliberately gerrymandering cutoffs to make the data as appealing as possible).I interpreted "since 2005" as meaning "excluding his rookie season" based on his verbiage earlier in the post (he says he put together Fitzgerald's numbers "since 2004", meaning including 2004, so it stands to reason that the "since 2005" numbers would include 2005, as well). As I said, though, those numbers don't represent my own research. You'll have to ask Mike Sando about them.
You said that his numbers without Boldin were worse than his numbers with Boldin. That's simply not true. His numbers +Warner/+Boldin are worse than his numbers +Warner/-Boldin. His numbers -Warner/+Boldin are worse than his numbers -Warner/-Boldin. In all cases, removing Boldin from the equation has resulted, thus far, in an improvement in Fitzgerald's numbers.
ceo3west
Footballguy
Ouch
Those numbers represent a pretty poor sample, imo. For instance, 16 of the 36 games that Fitz played without Warner came in his rookie year, where he was (duh) a rookie. 6 of the 8 games where he played without Warner *AND* without Boldin came in his rookie season, too. In other words, his rookie season is disproportionately represented in both samples, which is a big deal because his rookie numbers were so far below his career averages (58 receptions, 780 yards), so anything that heavily weights those numbers is going to heavily underestimate Fitzgerald's production. If you discount his rookie year from the sample, his numbers without Warner were 102/1413/10 in 20 games, which works out to 82/1130/8 a season. Keeping in mind that Fitzgerald's numbers are better without Boldin than they are with Boldin, increasing those numbers by 10% would get you a 1250/9 receiving season, which would get you production comparable to what Sidney Rice put up last year.
benson_will_lead_the_way
Footballguy
Great post. And it just goes to show you that stats without proper context are MEANINGLESS. I see so many people here and elsewhere find the stats that fit their point of the view, and then hand them down like judgments from Judge Dredd. You've got to look at the whole picture and try to take as many considerations into it as you can, as I feel you've done here.
As I said, it's not nearly as cut-and-dried as it looks. The majority of the numbers we have for Fitzgerald without Warner (and, most importantly, Fitzgerald without Warner OR Boldin) come from his rookie year, where he was a rookie. Another huge chunk of the numbers come from Leinart's rookie year, where he was a rookie. Fitzgerald has had a lot of sustained success with non-Warner QBs throughout his career (for instance, his 4-game numbers with Josh McCown in 2004 would pro-rate to 93/1380/13 over 16 games, and his 5-game numbers with Leinart in 2005 would pro-rate to 109/1433/3), but his career non-Warner numbers don't show it because there's so much mud in the waters.Plus, it seems like there's a lot of difference in opinion about what games count as "with Warner" or "without Warner". You'll see two people come up with two different samples of Fitzgerald's stats without Warner, and they'll both have different numbers. For instance, based on Yudkin's numbers of Fitzgerald's stats without Warner (discounting his rookie year), Fitz averaged 82/1130/8 per 16 games. Freebagel ran the numbers in the dynasty thread for the exact same sample (Fitzgerald's numbers without Warner, discounting his rookie year) and got 94/1230/6 per 16 game season. You've got two thorough and conscientious posters coming up with substantially different numbers for the exact same sample, because one poster is just looking at games where Warner didn't play, while another is including games where Warner saw limited action.In short, there really is no simple, easy way to boil down Fitzgerald's stats without Warner throughout his career. We don't have a consensus on which years we should include, we don't have a consensus on which games count as "with Warner" or "without Warner". All we know for sure is that Fitzgerald *HAS* been successful in the past without Warner (all of his Sans-Warner numbers since 2005 are top-10 WR material), and that Fitzgerald's numbers have been across-the-board better without Boldin than they have been with Boldin.
I dont think many people think he will fall out of the top 10. The problem with having Leinart is he is no longer a no-brainer top 3 WR. I still think he is a top 3 dynasty WR, but i wouldnt touch him where he will go in redrafts this year.
Tau837
Footballguy
Leinart wasn't in the NFL in 2005. Not sure which season you're talking about here.SSOG said:
One of the issues with determining which games to use as "Warner games" vs. "Leinart games" vs. "non-Warner games" vs. "non-Leinart games" is that Warner relieved Leinart multiple times. That's why I chose to break it down by counting all games in which Leinart had 20 or more passing attempts, figuring that meant it was enough playing time for Leinart to count it as a "Leinart game," even though that means in some cases some Warner performance was mixed in. Even so, those results weren't good for Fitz, as I posted previously a number of times:SSOG said:
Tau837
Footballguy
OK, because of the fact that Leinart split time in multiple games, I actually went through the game logs and determined what Fitz's performance has been while playing with Leinart. Here is the data.
Fitz playing with Leinart from 2006-2009:
- Approximately 59.5 quarters of play
- 119 targets, 70 receptions, 982 receiving yards (14.0 ypr), 5 TDs
- Scaling up to 16 games (64 quarters) yields: 128 targets, 75 receptions, 1056 receiving yards, 5.4 TDs
SSOG has suggested that we shouldn't count Leinart's rookie season, so here are the numbers for Fitz playing with Leinart from 2007-2009:
- Approximately 26.5 quarters of play
- 59 targets, 29 receptions, 409 receiving yards (14.1 ypr), 1 TD
- Scaling up to 16 games (64 quarters) yields: 142 targets, 70 receptions, 988 receiving yards, 2.4 TDs
So it turns out that it doesn't help Fitz's numbers to eliminate Leinart's rookie season. I suspect that the 5 game stretch SSOG earlier referred to as 2005 was really the first 5 games of 2007, during which Fitz had 34/448/1... but only 15/212/0 of that was from Leinart, so counting his full production for those games skewed the numbers so they looked better after Leinart's rookie season.
However, to be fair, Fitz's playing time with Leinart after Leinart's rookie year was sporadic, with plenty of mopup time and other short stints, which might distort the numbers. They played 3 full games together since Leinart's rookie year in which Leinart played the entire game at QB. Here are Fitz's numbers in those games:
- 3 games
- 27 targets, 14 receptions, 141 receiving yards (10.1 ypr), 0 TDs
- Scaling up to 16 games yields: 144 targets, 75 receptions, 752 receiving yards, 0 TDs
It just keeps getting worse...
Now, Leinart could be better with more experience and an entire offseason, training camp, and preseason working as the #1 QB. (If that holds true.) But those numbers sure are unexpectedly bad. IMO a few things stand out about the numbers:
- Plenty of targets, so that is good.
- But an unimpressive catch percentage, particularly since Leinart's rookie year. I'm sure that is on Leinart and not Fitz, based on what we know about Fitz's hands and high skill level.
- Very low on TDs. Leinart had 35 red zone passing attempts in 2006, and Fitz caught 5 of them for TDs. Since then, Leinart only had 11 red zone passing attempts, with Fitz catching 1 for a TD. This doesn't look great for Fitz. For one thing, Leinart will likely be less effective at getting the team into the red zone... and then he and Fitz will have to improve on these numbers or Fitz won't be getting double digit TDs.
Some people have dissected the numbers as Warner vs. others (and without generally separating the split time games), but I think it more appropriate to look at it like Leinart vs. others, since he is currently Fitz's QB. So that's what I've done here. If you think Anderson will beat out Leinart, or will replace Leinart at some point, then perhaps these numbers become a bit less relevant. But they are the most relevant numbers available at this point IMO.
Fitz playing with Leinart from 2006-2009:
- Approximately 59.5 quarters of play
- 119 targets, 70 receptions, 982 receiving yards (14.0 ypr), 5 TDs
- Scaling up to 16 games (64 quarters) yields: 128 targets, 75 receptions, 1056 receiving yards, 5.4 TDs
SSOG has suggested that we shouldn't count Leinart's rookie season, so here are the numbers for Fitz playing with Leinart from 2007-2009:
- Approximately 26.5 quarters of play
- 59 targets, 29 receptions, 409 receiving yards (14.1 ypr), 1 TD
- Scaling up to 16 games (64 quarters) yields: 142 targets, 70 receptions, 988 receiving yards, 2.4 TDs
So it turns out that it doesn't help Fitz's numbers to eliminate Leinart's rookie season. I suspect that the 5 game stretch SSOG earlier referred to as 2005 was really the first 5 games of 2007, during which Fitz had 34/448/1... but only 15/212/0 of that was from Leinart, so counting his full production for those games skewed the numbers so they looked better after Leinart's rookie season.
However, to be fair, Fitz's playing time with Leinart after Leinart's rookie year was sporadic, with plenty of mopup time and other short stints, which might distort the numbers. They played 3 full games together since Leinart's rookie year in which Leinart played the entire game at QB. Here are Fitz's numbers in those games:
- 3 games
- 27 targets, 14 receptions, 141 receiving yards (10.1 ypr), 0 TDs
- Scaling up to 16 games yields: 144 targets, 75 receptions, 752 receiving yards, 0 TDs
It just keeps getting worse...
Now, Leinart could be better with more experience and an entire offseason, training camp, and preseason working as the #1 QB. (If that holds true.) But those numbers sure are unexpectedly bad. IMO a few things stand out about the numbers:
- Plenty of targets, so that is good.
- But an unimpressive catch percentage, particularly since Leinart's rookie year. I'm sure that is on Leinart and not Fitz, based on what we know about Fitz's hands and high skill level.
- Very low on TDs. Leinart had 35 red zone passing attempts in 2006, and Fitz caught 5 of them for TDs. Since then, Leinart only had 11 red zone passing attempts, with Fitz catching 1 for a TD. This doesn't look great for Fitz. For one thing, Leinart will likely be less effective at getting the team into the red zone... and then he and Fitz will have to improve on these numbers or Fitz won't be getting double digit TDs.
Some people have dissected the numbers as Warner vs. others (and without generally separating the split time games), but I think it more appropriate to look at it like Leinart vs. others, since he is currently Fitz's QB. So that's what I've done here. If you think Anderson will beat out Leinart, or will replace Leinart at some point, then perhaps these numbers become a bit less relevant. But they are the most relevant numbers available at this point IMO.
I don't know that that's the case. If Leinart plays as poorly as Leinart has played in the past, then Leinart will get replaced like Leinart has gotten replaced in the past. That seems self-evident to me. It's like in Oakland- when a QB sucks as much as Jamarcus, then the QB gets replaced. You can't project, in my opinion, based on 16 games of terrible QBing... because no terrible QB ever lasts 16 games. And, from a dynasty perspective, you can't allow a terrible QB situation to impact your projections several years out, because no terrible QB situation ever goes several years without getting addressed.Worst case scenario is that Matt Leinart is as bad today as he was 2 years ago. If that's the case, then guess what... his numbers with Fitzgerald are irrelevant, because Derrick Anderson is going to be the guy under center.
Tau837
Footballguy
Pinning his hopes on Derek Anderson doesn't inspire much confidence. His career QB rating is lower than Leinart's.
Worst case scenario is Leinart will be worse than he was two years ago, then Anderson takes over and is no better, resulting in a Buffalo Bills type QB situation for the next several years.
Fighting Noles
Footballguy
You've stated that before SSOG (in regards to the ARZ QB situation "inevitably" getting better SOON if Leinart stinks again), but what makes you so "sure" of that? A LOT OF TEAMS GET MORE THAN 16 GAMES OF POOR QB PLAY, BELIEVE ME AS A FIN FAN....In addition to the BILLS QB's - which you've openly admitted have killed EVANS for YEARS, the Titans haven't had good FANTASY QB's for years now either, the Raiders ditto, the Dolphins - post Marino (over a decade really - although us Fin fans are very hopeful with Henne now), the Lions QB's had been poor for a while (turned over almost annually, until landing Stafford who they hope will be their franchise QB), Houston (pre Schaub), Cleveland (looks like they are heading for five plus years of bad QB's), Denver may be heading down that road now, Minny (pre & post? Favre possibly), San Fran looks like it is headed for five plus years of "very avg" QB's, etc....I mean franchise QB's don't just grow on trees and sometimes teams choices can lead them to making other decisions based on the personnel they have NOW. Maybe ARZ becomes more of a running team now without Warner (ESPECIALLY in the REDZONE). I'm not at all saying that Fitzs' talent doesn't keep him in the top 3 DYNASTY WR discussion, but you don't seem open to even considering a drop due to poor QB play (or arguing him #1 OVERALL at times I believe in PPR - I know F&L did, but I "believe" you agreed - NOT putting words in your mouth though). Would Austin be in your top 5 if he played for the Bills or Titans? I don't think so. I agree that Austin isn't as talented as Fitz, but his situation is better and therefore he has moved into a lot of peoples top 5-7 (including your top 5 I believe - from the Dynasty thread).I'm just not sure that IF Leinart bombs again for 8-10 games (& they are say 4-5 - possible with that schedule) & then they switched to Anderson to try to make the playoffs & he was just avg. also, & then they went into 2011 with Skelton or a low tier FA because they couldn't land a top QB via the draft (in that division they could routinely finish around 7-9 for the next few years and never necessarily land a top QB in the draft), that mediocre QB play couldn't settle in @ ARZ for the next 3 or 4 years very easily. I know I'm making assumptions here, but I don't believe you have Leinart highly ranked from what I've read of yours in the past, & I know you don't like Anderson either. So that scenario certainly is "possible".And that would have to hurt Fitz somewhat - Right??? I think you can pull up any stats you want, & then Yudkin & Just Win will pull up theirs, but you and F & L always bring up the "pass the eyeball" test & Leinart just doesn't pass it for me. Does he for you? You've even stated that Leinart may help Fitz because Warner couldn't throw deep last year due to his injury (& I agree on Warner hurting Fitzs' YPC last year due to that). But I just don't see that with Leinart. Warner got rid of the ball so quickly & was so accurate on the 15 yarders (& in the REDZONE) that unless Leinart has improved dramatically in that area (& that certainly didn't appear to be the case in the 2009 games he played in) he has to hurt Fitz somewhat from a fantasy perspective.I don't think Anderson passes the eyeball test either, but at least he did have one Pro Bowl Year. Just curious why you assume ARZ couldn't "possibly" be in for 3 or 4 years of very mediocre QB play - because you have stated that now more than once....
And J.P. Losman has a lower QB rating than Trent Edwards. That doesn't mean he can't properly use Lee Evans.
I'm not saying that Arizona's QB is destined to be a top-10 fantasy uberstud. In fact, I'm not even saying that Arizona is going to get top-20 play out of its QB. I'm saying that if Leinart isn't good enough to utilize Fitzgerald, then Arizona will get a QB good enough to utilize Fitzgerald because, ultimately, "good enough to utilize Larry Fitzgerald" is not a very high standard of QBing. Matt Leinart doesn't need to be as good as Kurt Warner. He needs to be as good as Jeff Blake (who Anquan Boldin posted a WR4 season with), or as good as Dan Orlovsky (who Calvin Johnson posted a WR3 season with), or as good as J.P. Losman (who Lee Evans posted a WR7 season with), or as good as Jon Kitna (who Chad Ochocinco posted a WR3 season with), or as good as Jake Delhomme (who Steve Smith posted multiple years of uberstud production with). Or even as good as Derrick Anderson (who Braylon Edwards- BRAYLON EDWARDS!- put up a WR3 finish with). We are not talking about a very high threshold of QBing necessary in order for stud receivers to post stud fantasy numbers. Matt Leinart doesn't have to be a top-10 QB. he doesn't even have to be a top-20 QB. He just has to be a warm body. That's all it takes for guys like Larry Fitzgerald to post crazy numbers. Hell, Kurt Warner's arm fell off a quarter of the way through the season last year and Fitzgerald still put up a WR5 finish. And if Matt Leinart is incapable of being a warm body, then Arizona will find someone who isn't.Arizona knows what makes its entire offense tick. It's Larry Fitzgerald. It knows where its bread is buttered.
I think the Cardinals will be a bit more concerned about winning than getting Fitz big numbers. Of those QB/WR combos you listed, how many of their teams made the playoffs, or even finished with a .500 record? None of them but Carolina, and adding Delhomme isnt really fair because he was a good QB up until 2 years ago.
Fighting Noles
Footballguy
SSOG - You are "picking" your good years for those WR's just to make YOUR point.
You claim EVANS' WR7 finish with Losman as proof, but how many years has Evans' been almost unstartable around that year?
What about Moss in Oakland? AJ before Schaub? Calvin last year? Braylon the following 2 years after his good year? Heck Michael Clayton had a great year with Brian Griese - What does that prove???
The question I posed wasn't IF Fitz COULD put up ELITE #'s with mediocre QB play (He CAN) - It was whether or not the CHANCES of him doing so have now GONE DOWN without Warner. That is all we should care about in FANTASY Football. We aren't NFL GM's here debating whether or not Fitz has top flight WR talent. Clearly he does. We are debating whether or not he deserves to be in the top 2/3 WR's in Dynasty & his status in redrafts THIS year. Like you stated in the Dynasty thread - There are a LOT of top end WR's in the league now AND IMO there a lot of VERY GOOD passing teams also. I don't think ARZ is one of them anymore with Leinart/Anderson. Therefore, I think Fitzs' chances of ELITE production compared to someone with Manning/Romo/Brady/Rodgers/Rivers etc. throwing to him has decreased.
I also think Fitz could still put up respectable YEAR END #'s but have a LOT MORE 5/65/0 games in the mix now. This also makes a big difference in FANTASY - CONSISTENCY (when it comes to ELITE WR's).
Obviously where we mainly disagree is whether or not Fitz simply needs a "warm body" to get his #'s (as you stated) and also whether or not ARZ considers Fitz its bread/butter that makes its ENTIRE offense tick. You also state he doesn't need even TOP 20 QB play - Just what #'s are you projecting for LEINART? If he finishes outside the top 20 - he is looking at somewhere between 2600 - 3200 yards passing in all likelihood (see Cassell last year for example). Does Fitz still get his ~ 1200 - 1300 yards under that scenario?
I think situation matters when evaluating TOP 10 players & where to slot them accordingly and I think Fitzs' situation has changed for now & not for the better IMO....
You claim EVANS' WR7 finish with Losman as proof, but how many years has Evans' been almost unstartable around that year?
What about Moss in Oakland? AJ before Schaub? Calvin last year? Braylon the following 2 years after his good year? Heck Michael Clayton had a great year with Brian Griese - What does that prove???
The question I posed wasn't IF Fitz COULD put up ELITE #'s with mediocre QB play (He CAN) - It was whether or not the CHANCES of him doing so have now GONE DOWN without Warner. That is all we should care about in FANTASY Football. We aren't NFL GM's here debating whether or not Fitz has top flight WR talent. Clearly he does. We are debating whether or not he deserves to be in the top 2/3 WR's in Dynasty & his status in redrafts THIS year. Like you stated in the Dynasty thread - There are a LOT of top end WR's in the league now AND IMO there a lot of VERY GOOD passing teams also. I don't think ARZ is one of them anymore with Leinart/Anderson. Therefore, I think Fitzs' chances of ELITE production compared to someone with Manning/Romo/Brady/Rodgers/Rivers etc. throwing to him has decreased.
I also think Fitz could still put up respectable YEAR END #'s but have a LOT MORE 5/65/0 games in the mix now. This also makes a big difference in FANTASY - CONSISTENCY (when it comes to ELITE WR's).
Obviously where we mainly disagree is whether or not Fitz simply needs a "warm body" to get his #'s (as you stated) and also whether or not ARZ considers Fitz its bread/butter that makes its ENTIRE offense tick. You also state he doesn't need even TOP 20 QB play - Just what #'s are you projecting for LEINART? If he finishes outside the top 20 - he is looking at somewhere between 2600 - 3200 yards passing in all likelihood (see Cassell last year for example). Does Fitz still get his ~ 1200 - 1300 yards under that scenario?
I think situation matters when evaluating TOP 10 players & where to slot them accordingly and I think Fitzs' situation has changed for now & not for the better IMO....
Arizona can't win without getting Fitzgerald big numbers. He's the guy who makes the offense work. He's the guy that opens up the running lanes for Wells, he's the guy who creates gaps in coverage for Hightower and Breaston. If Arizona doesn't commit to Fitzgerald, then defenses won't commit to Fitzgerald, and if defenses don't commit to Fitzgerald then Arizona doesn't have the firepower to move the ball.Besides, who else are Leinart and Anderson going to throw to? It's not like Arizona is flush with alternatives. Is Tim Hightower going to be a 1,000 yard receiver? Is Steve Breaston? Is Matt Leinart such a good QB that he's going to be able to go through his progressions well enough to get 800 yards out of his #3 WR? Is Ben Patrick going to magically morph into a 400 yard TE? The 4 sets of offensive projections have Arizona getting anywhere from 3375 yards passing to 3900 yards passing- anywhere from 300 below their lowest level from the last 3 years down to 900 below their lowest level from the last 3 years. All of the projectors have the TEs combining for 200 yards. They have the RBs combining for between 550 and 750 yards (which would rate anywhere from average based on the last 3 years to the highest level of the last 3 years, despite the reduction in the passing pie as the whole). The four projectors left 2600 yards left for the WRs to divide among them... and I challenge anyone to come up with a rational split for the Arizona WRs that doesn't leave Fitzgerald getting 1200 yards. And no, giving 800 yards to Doucet or having Breaston produce within 20% of Fitzgerald is not rational.
Yes, I was picking the good years from those WRs to make my point. I never said that the threshold of QB play required for stud numbers was nonexistent, I said it was very low. Some teams have managed to fall below that unbelievably low threshold. Some QBs just don't know how to use their WRs. My point is that I'm not betting on that happening, because the threshold is so unbelievably low. If Matt Leinart is Jamarcus Russell, then Fitzgerald probably won't get his 1200... but Jamarcus Russell was really, really, really, really, really bad. I'm not going to bet on any QB ever being as bad as Russell.As for consistency... consistency is ludicrously overrated. For one thing, there are fewer things more inconsistent from year to year than consistency. For another thing, guys who single-handedly win you games have a ton of value. As long as you're starting the inconsistent guy when he has his big games, then his inconsistency or consistency makes very little difference. I'd prefer an "inconsistent receiver" with 1200/10 than a "consistent receiver" with 1150/10. I mean, how much value do you think "consistency" really has? How many more yards would an inconsistent receiver need before you preferred him to a consistent receiver? 200? 100? 50? 20? 10? I'd probably rate it in the 10-20 yard range, value-wise. In other words... negligible.For my Arizona projections... I'm not one who thinks the sky is falling and they're going to see a ridiculous 33% reduction in passing stats. They're still a passing offense. They have a coach and coordinator who favor the pass. I've got them down for ~3500 passing yards- a huge reduction from their past levels, but not bottom-10-in-the-league levels.
He didnt even have 1100 last year, what makes you so sure he will have 1200 this year. As far as splits, i think the Cardinals pass less this year, so there will be fewer passing yards to go around.
I could see things working out like this:
Fitz - 1000 yards
Breaston 750 yards
Doucet - 550 yards
Hightower - 400 yards
Wells - 200 yards
Others - 400 yards
Tau837
Footballguy
Nicely done. You didn't even have to irrationally have Breaston getting 800 yards or Doucet within 20% of Fitz. 
The Real Hipster Doofus
Footballguy
One thing I can say for sure is that I am glad all the uncertainty with situation has occurred so I could actually acquire Fitz in a couple leagues.
In one league I dealt Sidney Rice, Brent Celek and the 2010 1.06 (league drafts before the NFL draft so its more of a risky pick) this offseason for Fitzgerald and had a few people tell me I was crazy to pay that much for Fitzgerald.
I do not expect him to put up the kind of ridiculous numbers he has in the past this season. I agree he is in for a downturn this year, but not to the extent people are expecting. I see him in the 5-10 range this year, and as time goes on Leinart will either succeed or a more competent QB will be brought in and his numbers will go back up.
Buy him now wherever you can.
In one league I dealt Sidney Rice, Brent Celek and the 2010 1.06 (league drafts before the NFL draft so its more of a risky pick) this offseason for Fitzgerald and had a few people tell me I was crazy to pay that much for Fitzgerald.
I do not expect him to put up the kind of ridiculous numbers he has in the past this season. I agree he is in for a downturn this year, but not to the extent people are expecting. I see him in the 5-10 range this year, and as time goes on Leinart will either succeed or a more competent QB will be brought in and his numbers will go back up.
Buy him now wherever you can.
Add me to the list. Like you, i see him finishing in the 5-10 range this year. Maybe you dont like Rice as much as me, but i think Rice finishes in the same range. Both players have uncertainty at QB after this season, so im not sure the gap is that big between them after 2010. To give a young top 5 TE and a top 6 rookie pick is too much, IMO.
The Real Hipster Doofus
Footballguy
Time will tell. The rookie picks are a difficult proposition with the draft happening before the NFL draft. Dwyer was the 1.04, Gerhart the 1.06, B. Tate didn't go until the 2.03, McCluster the 2.10, Mike Williams the 3.10, etc.... In other words it much more of a guessing game when you are making picks before the draft has even occured.
I don't believe Celek to be the top 5 young TE that you do. I think he is a good, starting caliber option at TE, but I have this sneaking suspicion that this past year was his best and its time to move him. Plus on that team I already have Jermichael Finley.
I am relatively high on Rice myself, and I don't really place a whole lot of importance on situations because they change fast. I expect him to be in that 5-10 range of WR's, I just expect Fitz to be top 2.
You've got Arizona's passing offense declining by 900 yards from last year, but you've also projected Arizona's RBs/TEs to INCREASE their production from last year's totals (despite the fact that last year was already a 3-year high for RB/TE production).Also, Fitz didn't get 1100 last year... with Boldin in town. Boldin's gone. Now Fitz is the primary beneficiary of "who the hell else are they going to throw to?" syndrome.
Yes, those things happen when you have a bad QB. I actually think Hightower and Wells will catch for more yards than i listed. Last year the Cardinals RB's and TE's caught for over 970 yards, so i dont think 1000 is that big of a stretch. Especially with Boldin gone, and the additional coverage Fitz will see. I should probably have that number around 1200 as Leinart will be dumping the ball off left and right.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
I didn't look closely enough, but I didn't see anybody mention that Fitz's QB killed him last year. For 2/3 of the season, Kurt Warner couldn't throw the ball down the field.SSOG owning in here, BTW.
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
There's no possible way Hightower catches for more yards than he did last year. I'd bet my first-born child on it.If you think Trent Edwards is Cpt. Checkdown, you should have seen Kurt Warner early last season with a bum shoulder coming off hip surgery. Every other pass attempt was a dumpoff to Hightower or Boldin for 5 yards. Warner got much better as the season went on, but Hightower's receptions were padded tremendously by the early-season Warner injuries.
Last edited by a moderator:
Youre probably right about Hightower, as i think Wells will be on the field more than last season, limiting Hightowers chances. However, i think Wells will get the receptions Hightower isnt. Either way, those two RB's should combine for over 600 yards. Leinart is horrible at passes more than 15 yards down the field, and i dont think this is something the Cardinals coaching staff is unaware of. Look for alot of underneath passing from the Cards this year.I hope i am wrong about Fitz, i own him in my main dynasty league. Even the most talented players have down years, and from everything i can tell, this might be one for Fitzgerald. Im not suggesting trading him, he is still my #2 dynasty WR, but i see his value slipping a bit during the season. I might even look to buy Fitz during the season in my other leagues if i can find a disgruntled owner.
I think the "bad QB = more dumpoffs" thing is cliche and not really all that based in reality. I mean, look at Mark Sanchez last year. One of the biggest criticisms of him was how terribly he underutilized Dustin Keller, and Thomas Jones/Shonn Greene combined for a whopping 58 receiving yards. Kurt Warner's arm, as I've mentioned a couple of times already, was shot last year. I just have a hard time seeing Matt Leinart out-dumpoff 2009 Kurt Warner, who was a dumpoff maestro, while the passing offense as a whole regresses so radically.Sometimes a bad QB's security blanket winds up being an RB or a TE who he just constantly dumps off to. Of course, just as frequently the bad QB's security blanket winds up being the uberstud WR who catches everything thrown his way. I know that if *I* somehow found myself under center in an NFL football game, my only thought on every play would be "immediately throw it somewhere in Fitzgerald's zip code and then curl up and beg the DE's not to kill me".
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
Jake Delhomme -----> Steve Smith
Tanner9919
Footballguy
great post.he'll probably catch 10-15 fewer balls in 201085/1190/8hard to grasp those numbers, but I think Fitz is due for a HUGE drop-off..
Jake Delhomme >>>> Matt Leinart
The Arizona Cardinals are one of the more likely landing spots for free-agent QB JaMarcus Russell (Raiders), reports Rich Cimini, of ESPNNewYork.com, according to sources.
Dancing Bear
Footballguy
This is truly remarkable and truly an incorrect perception!The numbers with Leinart are staggeringly different, and to Fitzgerald's detriment.
You can check the details discussions here :
http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...8&hl="</a>"]Detailed Analysis
Much of this discussion is very "selective" ...
The body of performance data clearly shows that Fitzgerald is going to be much less than what he was with Warner.
Fitzgerald averages 11.7 ppg throughout his career, all statistics and performance included [playoffs as well].
Fitzgerald averages 12.5 ppg throughout his career with Boldin, with Warner.
Fitzgerald averages 6.9 ppg throughout his career with Boldin, with Leinart.
Fitzgerald averages 7.8 ppg throughout his career with Boldin, with other QB's.
Fitzgerald averages 15.4 ppg throughout his career without Boldin, with Warner.
Fitzgerald averages 5.7 ppg throughout his career without Boldin, with Leinart.
Fitzgerald averages 6.9 ppg throughout his career without Boldin, with other QB's.
Lumping all QB's together but Warner is clever ... too bad it ignores the fact that King, Rattay, St. Pierre , Navarre & McNown as a group OUT PERFORMED Leinart.
Leinart has only thrown 9 total TD's to either Boldin/ Fitzgerald in 18 appearances [12 starts].
Arizona lost both Warner and Boldin ...
Fitzgerald will not eclipse 71 receptions, 960 yards and 6 TD's.
In closing I'll add that I love this guy as a football player, and I will be willing to draft him depending upon when I can get him and at what value ...
Just don't expect the 12.5 ppg that you have seen from him and Warner. Tone it down to 8.2 ppg and adjust accordingly.
baconisgood
Footballguy
The Bengals were 8-8, the Browns were 10-6 and missed the playoffs on tiebreakers, the Bills were 7-9.
