Nate Burleson, Andre Johnson, and Roy Williams are (1 Viewer)

[Maurile Tremblay]

The position is still a difficult one to master and there are so many variables that can lead to success or failure that expecting 3 (4 including Michael Clayton) very young WR's to produce top 15 numbers is too much. Could they all do it? Sure, but the probability is low.

Well, FBG isn't projecting that they'll all do it. We're (sort of, roughly, not really but it's close enough for our present purposes) projecting that each one individually has a greater than 50% chance of doing it.If each one has a 60% chance of being in the top 15, then the chance that all four will be in the top 15 is about 13%.

It is perfectly appropriate to rank each of those four in the top 15 individually while thinking they are a real long shot to all get there as a group.

 

[LHUCKS]

I agree with you on Roy.AJ slightly overrated.Burleson I like ...great upside.

 

[Chase Stuart]

All three of them are ranked in the top 15 despite the fact that history does not support three WR's aged 24 gaining 1000 yards. Since 1990, there have been 15 WR's aged 24 who have gained 1000 yards - an average of one per year.

Good research, cstu, but I think you are misusing statistics to single out one attribute that points one way when there may be a great many other attributes that point the other way.For one thing, Burleson's production has nothing to do with Johnson's or Williams's or Clayton's or any other player not on the Vikings. It would be goofy to go through the following thought-process: Typically, only one 24-year-old gets 1,000 yards. I think Michael Clayton will get 1,000 yards this year, so I guess that means Burleson won't. If Clayton gets hurt tomorrow, does that magically increase Burleson's chances? No. They are independent of each other, and each guy should be projected on his own merits. It is no argument against Burleson that some people think Clayton or Johnson or Williams will get 1,000 yards. They have nothing to do with each other.

So let's consider Burleson in particular. Maybe it's historically a bad sign that he's 24 years old. Maybe it's historically a good sign that he's a Capricorn. Maybe it's historically a bad sign that he has four siblings. (How many WRs with four siblings have had 1,000 yards in the same year?) Maybe it's historically a good sign that his name starts with the letter N.

You can find all sorts of historical trends like that if you look for them. But they have no value if there's no causal mechanism at work. What causes a 24-year-old to be at a disadvantage vis-a-vis a 23-year-old? Probably nothing.

Twenty-four-year-olds in general may be at a disadvantage vis-a-vis 25-year-olds -- but we're not dealing with 24-year-olds in general. We're dealing with Nate Burleson et al.

Count Burleson's age as a small strike against him if you want. But then focus on much more important issues -- his talent, his QB, the offensive system he plays in, his role in the offense, his success last year, his speed, his hands, his route-running, etc. All of that stuff matters a lot more than his age.

I personally agree with you that Roy Williams is overrated. I disagree that Burleson is overrated -- he is a stud in a fantastic situation. I'm not sure about Andre Johnson. On his own merits, he r0x0rs, but I have reservations about Carr and the Texans' offense in general.

 

[cstu]

For one thing, Burleson's production has nothing to do with Johnson's or Williams's or Clayton's or any other player not on the Vikings. It would be goofy to go through the following thought-process: Typically, only one 24-year-old gets 1,000 yards. I think Michael Clayton will get 1,000 yards this year, so I guess that means Burleson won't.---------------MT,I never said that their production is dependent on each other. What I am saying is that expecting these 4 guys as a group to at be top 15 is unrealistic based on the historical production of WR's 24 and younger. If you think Burleson is the guy to do it, then go ahead and draft high . However, it could just as easily be the other guys. As a group, I will be they don't live up to their ADP - and I will bump this post at the end of the year either way.

 

[Otis]

Agree completely.

Agree wif this guy.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

What I am saying is that expecting these 4 guys as a group to at be top 15 is unrealistic based on the historical production of WR's 24 and younger.

But nobody is projecting them to do it as a group. FBG does projections for individuals, not for groups. They could each have a good chance as individuals while having a poor chance as a group. 0.6 * 0.6 * 0.6 * 0.6 = 0.13.

 

[Clarkmeister]

For one thing, Burleson's production has nothing to do with Johnson's or Williams's or Clayton's or any other player not on the Vikings. It would be goofy to go through the following thought-process: Typically, only one 24-year-old gets 1,000 yards. I think Michael Clayton will get 1,000 yards this year, so I guess that means Burleson won't.

---------------

MT,

I never said that their production is dependent on each other. What I am saying is that expecting these 4 guys as a group to at be top 15 is unrealistic based on the historical production of WR's 24 and younger. If you think Burleson is the guy to do it, then go ahead and draft high . However, it could just as easily be the other guys. As a group, I will be they don't live up to their ADP - and I will bump this post at the end of the year either way.

So you pick 4 other WR's not ranked higher than 8 by FBG (since none of the four 24-yr olds are ranked higher than that) that you do think *as a group* will all finish in the top 15. And note that you are a huge favorite since the guys listed are 8, 13, 14, and 15.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Ignoring the players who were injured and looking at the players who stayed healthy (Rison, Bruce, Moss and Jackson(though he missed 3 games)), only Moss and Bruce produced top 15 numbers at age 24.

So what you are saying is that only 2 out of 4 were able to repeat, and one that didn't missed 3 games?This would seem to invalidate your point.

 

[cstu]

Ignoring the players who were injured and looking at the players who stayed healthy (Rison, Bruce, Moss and Jackson(though he missed 3 games)), only Moss and Bruce produced top 15 numbers at age 24.

So what you are saying is that only 2 out of 4 were able to repeat, and one that didn't missed 3 games?This would seem to invalidate your point.

Moss and Bruce were coming off seasons ranked as the #2 WR - none of these guys have done that yet.DJax played 6 games prior to the concussion and was on pace for 69 catches for 862 yards and 0 TD's. That seems like a regression from his 70/1081/8 season the previous year.

I will guarantee this (and back it up by putting it in my sig if I'm wrong) - the average WR ranking of these WR's will be greater than 12 (their average ADP is 11.3 right now).

For me, it's obvious that people are expecting too much out of these guys and that their downside is greater than their upside based on their ADP.

 

[BLS JIHAD!!]

Would you add Mi. Clayton in there ?

NO! Because he was born exactly 20 years TO THE DAY behind Jerry Rice.Take that stat and shove it where you like. This kid is going to be something special.

 

[cstu]

For one thing, Burleson's production has nothing to do with Johnson's or Williams's or Clayton's or any other player not on the Vikings. It would be goofy to go through the following thought-process: Typically, only one 24-year-old gets 1,000 yards. I think Michael Clayton will get 1,000 yards this year, so I guess that means Burleson won't.

---------------

MT,

I never said that their production is dependent on each other. What I am saying is that expecting these 4 guys as a group to at be top 15 is unrealistic based on the historical production of WR's 24 and younger. If you think Burleson is the guy to do it, then go ahead and draft high . However, it could just as easily be the other guys. As a group, I will be they don't live up to their ADP - and I will bump this post at the end of the year either way.

So you pick 4 other WR's not ranked higher than 8 by FBG (since none of the four 24-yr olds are ranked higher than that) that you do think *as a group* will all finish in the top 15. And note that you are a huge favorite since the guys listed are 8, 13, 14, and 15.

These guys will outproduce those four. Jackson

Driver

S. Smith

Boldin

 

[BLS JIHAD!!]

These guys will outproduce those four. JacksonDriverS. SmithBoldin******************************************************************You think those four will outproduce Burleson, A. Johnson, M. Clayton and R. Williams?If so, what's the bet? You're on for anything short of my home.PS - We're talking aggregate score, correct?

 

[j3r3m3y]

Moss and Bruce were coming off seasons ranked as the #2 WR - none of these guys have done that yet.

But thats not the way you presented it.

DJax played 6 games prior to the concussion and was on pace for 69 catches for 862 yards and 0 TD's. That seems like a regression from his 70/1081/8 season the previous year.

"On pace" is meaningless, particularly for recievers, you should have listed him in with the other guys who were injured. You included him to skew the results.

For me, it's obvious that people are expecting too much out of these guys and that their downside is greater than their upside based on their ADP.

That is an opinion, and you have a right to it, but the data you presented yourself does not back it up.Will they all be top 15? Probably not but tell me which ones will and which ones wont?

Then again never before last year had 4 major hurricanes struck Florida in the same year. Historical data is interesting and even useful, but not absolute.

 

[Gerg73]

Have you taken into consoideration the FACT that the NFL is more Pass Happy than ever before with the New 5 yard rules and such? Did you calculate that into why maybe the 24 year olds suck?There is so much wrong with the logic in this thread that it surprises me.Any FF'er who would take a WR corps of . JacksonDriverS. SmithBoldinOver AJBurlesonClayton RoyBecause of AGE is seriously flawed in their thinking. I know your argument started out that these guys are going too high in most drafts, but if you think you're going to find value with RB's in the spots these guys are going, then enjoy your Yahoo League. I'd rather take any of these 4 younger WR's with UPSIDE than the 4 you listed.It's funny how you leave risk out of the equation also. Haven't all 4 of the WR's you listed as "Better" missed significant time in the last 3 years with a SERIOUS injury?Isn't Steve Smith STILL 5'9"?So, what's the bet then? That these 4 will not live up to their Draft position or that these 4 YOUNGER WR's will outscore the 4 you listed?Because I'd be willing to bet up tp $100 your WRONG on that.

 

[BLS JIHAD!!]

Have you taken into consoideration the FACT that the NFL is more Pass Happy than ever before with the New 5 yard rules and such? Did you calculate that into why maybe the 24 year olds suck?

There is so much wrong with the logic in this thread that it surprises me.

Any FF'er who would take a WR corps of :

D. Jackson

Driver

S. Smith

Boldin

Over

AJ

Burleson

Clayton

Roy

Because of AGE is seriously flawed in their thinking. I know your argument started out that these guys are going too high in most drafts, but if you think you're going to find value with RB's in the spots these guys are going, then enjoy your Yahoo League. I'd rather take any of these 4 younger WR's with UPSIDE than the 4 you listed.

It's funny how you leave risk out of the equation also. Haven't all 4 of the WR's you listed as "Better" missed significant time in the last 3 years with a SERIOUS injury?

Isn't Steve Smith STILL 5'9"?

So, what's the bet then? That these 4 will not live up to their Draft position or that these 4 YOUNGER WR's will outscore the 4 you listed?

Because I'd be willing to bet up tp $100 your WRONG on that.

Hey, wait your turn!! I'm first to milk him outta some bling.

 

[cstu]

Moss and Bruce were coming off seasons ranked as the #2 WR - none of these guys have done that yet.

But thats not the way you presented it.

only Moss and Bruce produced top 15 numbers at age 24. What's interesting to note is that Moss and Bruce were #2 WR's at 23, while Rison and Jackson were #8 and #16 respectively.

I did present it that way - Moss and Bruce had proved themselves as elite WR's while Rison and Jackson had not.

DJax played 6 games prior to the concussion and was on pace for 69 catches for 862 yards and 0 TD's. That seems like a regression from his 70/1081/8 season the previous year.

"On pace" is meaningless, particularly for recievers, you should have listed him in with the other guys who were injured. You included him to skew the results.The reason I included Jackson is because he was healthy most of the year. I did go back and use all of his numbers from the season since I realized he was actually better after the injury than before. Adjusted for 16 games he would have had 83/1170/5 - an improvement on yards, but less TD's. Those numbers would have been 9 fantasy points less than the previous year in which he ranked #16.

Here are the adjusted numbers for the other injured WR's:

Boston - 64/1024/2

Crowell - 72/853/8

Boldin - 89/997/2

Would you be happy with those numbers from WR's you drafted in the top 15?

For me, it's obvious that people are expecting too much out of these guys and that their downside is greater than their upside based on their ADP.

That is an opinion, and you have a right to it, but the data you presented yourself does not back it up.Will they all be top 15? Probably not but tell me which ones will and which ones wont?

Then again never before last year had 4 major hurricanes struck Florida in the same year. Historical data is interesting and even useful, but not absolute.

"Will they all be top 15? Probably not but tell me which ones will and which ones wont?"That's exactly what I'm trying to put across - people are fighting an uphill battle trying to pick the one or more of these guys that will finish in the top 15. Much like the internet bubble, the price of these guys is being raised based on potential.

 

[Clarkmeister]

For one thing, Burleson's production has nothing to do with Johnson's or Williams's or Clayton's or any other player not on the Vikings. It would be goofy to go through the following thought-process: Typically, only one 24-year-old gets 1,000 yards. I think Michael Clayton will get 1,000 yards this year, so I guess that means Burleson won't.

---------------

MT,

I never said that their production is dependent on each other.  What I am saying is that expecting these 4 guys as a group to at be top 15 is unrealistic based on the historical production of WR's 24 and younger.  If you think Burleson is the guy to do it, then go ahead and draft high .  However, it could just as easily be the other guys.  As a group, I will be they don't live up to their ADP - and I will bump this post at the end of the year either way.

So you pick 4 other WR's not ranked higher than 8 by FBG (since none of the four 24-yr olds are ranked higher than that) that you do think *as a group* will all finish in the top 15. And note that you are a huge favorite since the guys listed are 8, 13, 14, and 15.

These guys will outproduce those four. Jackson

Driver

S. Smith

Boldin

Fair enough. At least now we have a fair barometer when you bump it at the end of the year. It's much easier to say who *won't* do something as opposed to who *will*. Kudos for giving an apples to apples comparison.

 

[cstu]

These guys will outproduce those four:

D. Jackson

Driver

S. Smith

Boldin

******************************************************************

You think those four will outproduce Burleson, A. Johnson, M. Clayton and R. Williams?

If so, what's the bet? You're on for anything short of my home.

PS - We're talking aggregate score, correct?

It's really unfair to compare these guys since the focus of thread was to point out that those guys are over-valued based on their ADP. I'm not gong to bet money on it, however, I do believe these scenarios are likely. Jackson will out-produce A. Johnson

S. Smith will out-produce R. Williams

Boldin will out-produce Clayton

Driver will out-produce Burleson

 

[hellzbellz]

possible the most rediculous thing i have ever readfirst of all its really hard to be a bust as a reciever when you have daunte culpeper as you qbas seen in travis taylor, through training camp and preseason he seems to be a diamond in the ruff pickup for the vikes, but most of it has to do with dauntenate burleson will become a premier wide reciever in the nfl and will put over 1000 yards next season... mark my words...MARK EM

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Agree with MT and PRS.These is really an abuse of statistics and far from a valid "study" despite all the back patting. It's one of those fun studies I like to do to find odd correlations, but nothing I ever put much stock in.I may agree with your conclusion (AJ and Roy are overrated), but the method used to get there is suspect.

 

[Gerg73]

These is really an abuse of statistics and far from a valid "study" despite all the back patting. It's one of those fun studies I like to do to find odd correlations, but nothing I ever put much stock in.I may agree with your conclusion (AJ and Roy are overrated), but the method used to get there is suspect.

Again, Iwould like to know who's the better VALUE you can get at 3.6 than Andre Johnson or N. Burleson.Are you advocating taking 3 Rb's? A QB at that point?You want to talk about Value, so tell me who's better at the spots Burleson and AJ are going.Assuming you already took 2 RB's like MOST will df course you don't advocate reaching for D.Jax or S. Smith, so who would you pick at 3.6 if you already have 2 RB's?

 

[cstu]

Week 1:Burleson - 3/45/0AJ - 3/18/0Roy - 2/13/0Clayton - 4/57/0vs. D. Jackson - 6/65/1Driver - 4/48/0S. Smith - 8/138/1Boldin - 4/62/0

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Here's another one.

 

[cstu]

possible the most rediculous thing i have ever read

first of all its really hard to be a bust as a reciever when you have daunte culpeper as you qb

as seen in travis taylor, through training camp and preseason he seems to be a diamond in the ruff pickup for the vikes, but most of it has to do with daunte

nate burleson will become a premier wide reciever in the nfl and will put over 1000 yards next season... mark my words...MARK EM

It is huh?

 

[Hellfire Snail]

If Minny can't run the ball they are totally screwed. Without Moss they'll need balance and play-action to move the chains. I think Burleson is very solid reciever but if Culpepper played like he did today, forget it. Andre Johnson? Houston offense looks :X :X :X Roy Williams? Detroit offense looks :X :X :X Clayton should be okay. Galloway got more looks today but I like Griese to hook up MC this year.

 

[Gerg73]

Congratulations! If the Week was over after Week #1, you'd be right already! Guess what? There's a LOT of Games left. Will you bump this after EVERY Week? Or only the ones where the guys you picked do well? Why not bump it EVERY Week with updated Yearly stats. That would be cool.

 

[cstu]

Congratulations! If the Week was over after Week #1, you'd be right already! Guess what? There's a LOT of Games left. Will you bump this after EVERY Week? Or only the ones where the guys you picked do well?

Why not bump it EVERY Week with updated Yearly stats. That would be cool.

Will do, even if it's looking like I was wrong.

 

[cstu]

Week 2:

Burleson - 3/48/0

AJ - 4/20/0

Roy - 5/96/1

Clayton - 6/84/0

Season:

Burleson - 6/93/0

AJ - 7/38/0

Roy - 7/109/1

Clayton - 10/141/1

vs.

Week 2:

D. Jackson - 8/131/0

Driver - 6/105/1

S. Smith - 4/34/0

Boldin - 8/119/0

Season:

D. Jackson - 14/196/1

Driver - 10/153/1

S. Smith - 12/172/1

Boldin - 12/181/0

Total stats for Burleson, AJ, Roy, Clayton vs. DJax, Driver, Smith and Boldin:

30/381/1 vs. 48/702/3

 

[takealookatmyteam]

Andre Johnson is putting up numbers without having a QB at all this season. There is a huge pile of crap lining up behind center for the Texans but it is definately not a QB.

 

[BassNBrew]

possible the most rediculous thing i have ever read

first of all its really hard to be a bust as a reciever when you have daunte culpeper as you qb

as seen in travis taylor, through training camp and preseason he seems to be a diamond in the ruff pickup for the vikes, but most of it has to do with daunte

nate burleson will become a premier wide reciever in the nfl and will put over 1000 yards next season... mark my words...MARK EM

Marking them.

 

[plinko]

Andre Johnson is putting up numbers

Link?

 

[takealookatmyteam]

Andre Johnson is putting up numbers

Link?

 

[plinko]

Andre Johnson is putting up numbers

Link?

(alternate use: vermyhead: )

 

[jesse]

Week 2:

Burleson - 3/48/0

AJ - 4/20/0

Roy - 5/96/1

Clayton - 6/84/0

Season:

Burleson - 6/93/0

AJ - 7/38/0

Roy - 7/109/1

Clayton - 10/141/1

vs.

Week 2:

D. Jackson - 8/131/0

Driver - 6/105/1

S. Smith - 4/34/0

Boldin - 8/119/0

Season:

D. Jackson - 14/196/1

Driver - 10/153/1

S. Smith - 12/172/1

Boldin - 12/181/0

Total stats for Burleson, AJ, Roy, Clayton vs. DJax, Driver, Smith and Boldin:

30/381/1 vs. 48/702/3

does anyone else in here know how to spell "padding" ???Got it buddy, get over yourself! You're one of the things i hate most about FBG.

 

[cstu]

Week 2:

does anyone else in here know how to spell "padding" ???Got it buddy, get over yourself! You're one of the things i hate most about FBG.

And what is your contribution to FBGs - threads about how much Vick sucks? Keep up the good work.

 

[jesse]

Obvious padding. We get the point, you were right. Nice try searching for justification............you're lame.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Does everyone just not care that AJ has gone against the two best defenses in football?

 

[jesse]

Week 2:

Burleson - 3/48/0

AJ - 4/20/0

Roy - 5/96/1

Clayton - 6/84/0

Season:

Burleson - 6/93/0

AJ - 7/38/0

Roy - 7/109/1

Clayton - 10/141/1

vs.

Week 2:

D. Jackson - 8/131/0

Driver - 6/105/1

S. Smith - 4/34/0

Boldin - 8/119/0

Season:

D. Jackson - 14/196/1

Driver - 10/153/1

S. Smith - 12/172/1

Boldin - 12/181/0

Total stats for Burleson, AJ, Roy, Clayton vs. DJax, Driver, Smith and Boldin:

30/381/1 vs. 48/702/3

does anyone else in here know how to spell "padding" ???Got it buddy, get over yourself! You're one of the things i hate most about FBG.

And what is your contribution to FBGs - threads about how much Vick sucks? Keep up the good work.

P.S. Vick still SUCKS!

 

[Jack McCoy]

Week 2:

Burleson - 3/48/0

AJ - 4/20/0

Roy - 5/96/1

Clayton - 6/84/0

Season:

Burleson - 6/93/0

AJ - 7/38/0

Roy - 7/109/1

Clayton - 10/141/1

vs.

Week 2:

D. Jackson - 8/131/0

Driver - 6/105/1

S. Smith - 4/34/0

Boldin - 8/119/0

Season:

D. Jackson - 14/196/1

Driver - 10/153/1

S. Smith - 12/172/1

Boldin - 12/181/0

Total stats for Burleson, AJ, Roy, Clayton vs. DJax, Driver, Smith and Boldin:

30/381/1 vs. 48/702/3

does anyone else in here know how to spell "padding" ???Got it buddy, get over yourself! You're one of the things i hate most about FBG.

Nothing wrong with bumping his thread to prove that he was right, as long as he's willing to continue bumping it if the tide changes (which he seems willing to do). Had he been wrong so far, someone else would have been happy to dig up this thread and rub it in his face.

Good initial post, ctsu. So far, your analysis seems to be pretty accurate.

 

[Vitruvian Man]

Obvious padding. We get the point, you were right.

Nice try searching for justification............you're lame.

Gerg73 asked cstu for the weekly updates- cut the guy some slack.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Obvious padding. We get the point, you were right.

Nice try searching for justification............you're lame.

If this is what most of your posts are like, you won't be here long.

 

[jesse]

Obvious padding. We get the point, you were right.

Nice try searching for justification............you're lame.

If this is what most of your posts are like, you won't be here long.

Only post like this when it's obvious.

 

[nexus]

we really need a smiley forHINDSIGHT IS 20/20? REALLY???!

 

[BassNBrew]

Obvious padding. We get the point, you were right.

Nice try searching for justification............you're lame.

If this is what most of your posts are like, you won't be here long.

Only post like this when it's obvious.

Obivious that he made some great points and took a position.

 

[BassNBrew]

Obvious padding. We get the point, you were right.

Nice try searching for justification............you're lame.

If this is what most of your posts are like, you won't be here long.

Only post like this when it's obvious.

And by the way...if he hadn't of bumped it, I would have.

 

[coolnerd]

Does everyone just not care that AJ has gone against the two best defenses in football?

No. He dropped at least 1 pass last week and two this week. One of the passes this week would have been a touchdown. He was been drafted as and touted as an elite player, so those guys are productive no matter what the situation or defense. He has not shown the ability to beat the double team or catch the ball in traffic with any regularity. I am applying the standards of elite, not just one of the many guys who catch balls when wide open in the perfect system with a perfect QB, but a guy who does stuff dispite the handicaps and makes his team better.

 

[cstu]

All I tried to do is make the point that expectations were too high for these guys from what I could tell about what other young WR's had done in the past. So far it has been shown to be true but I don't mind being proved wrong if it works out that way. I'll continue to update it as the season goes on just to see how it turns out.

 

[Dr.I]

First of all, I'm not expecting any of these guy to fall off the face of the planet and be complete busts. However, they are young receivers who have not ranked above #16 (Burleson last year was the highest) and I think it's likely they will under-perform their draft ranking.

All three of them are ranked in the top 15 despite the fact that history does not support three WR's aged 24 gaining 1000 yards. Since 1990, there have been 15 WR's aged 24 who have gained 1000 yards - an average of one per year.

Now, you might be asking "but wait, Burleson and Johnson have had over 1000 yards when they were aged 23 and under - shouldn't they be able to repeat that with a year more experience?" It's a good question, but again history shows that it's not very likely. Here are the list of 23 year old WR's who gained 1000 yards and their position rank at 23 and 24:

Andre Rison (#8 WR at 23, #16 at 24)

Isaac Bruce (#2 WR at 23, #8 at 24)

Germane Crowell (#8 WR at 23, #63 at 24 - injured, missed 7 games)

Randy Moss (#2 WR at 23, #1 at 24)

Darrell Jackson (#16 WR at 23, #34 at 24 - injured, missed 3 games)

David Boston (#3 WR at 23, #73 at 24 - injured, missed 8 games)

Anquan Boldin (#4 WR at 23, #59 at 24 - injured, missed 6 games)

Ignoring the players who were injured and looking at the players who stayed healthy (Rison, Bruce, Moss and Jackson(though he missed 3 games)), only Moss and Bruce produced top 15 numbers at age 24. What's interesting to note is that Moss and Bruce were #2 WR's at 23, while Rison and Jackson were #8 and #16 respectively.

Neither Burleson nor Johnson have proven that they are top tier players as Moss and Bruce did and in my opinion have more in common with Rison and Jackson based on last year's ranking (#16 and #22).

Roy Williams seems even less likely to gain 1000 yards given the competition he has at WR on his team. While he's a very talented player, he is still only 24 with one season under his belt and two other top WR's battling for catches.

All three stand to have good seasons, but I would temper expectations for these young WR's.

Just curious but when did a wr that has missed the last 2 seasons with injuries and a rookie who didn't play a down last year become top wrs? Rogers and Williams may have a ton of talent, but I don't know too many people that would consider either one a top wr.

 

[cstu]

Week 3:

Burleson - Injured

AJ - Bye

Roy - Bye

Clayton - 5/44/0

Season:

Burleson - 6/93/0

AJ - 7/38/0

Roy - 7/109/1

Clayton - 15/185/1

vs.

Week 3:

D. Jackson - 8/125/0

Driver - 2/49/0

S. Smith - 11/170/3

Boldin - 6/88/0

Season:

D. Jackson - 22/321/1

Driver - 12/202/1

S. Smith - 23/342/4

Boldin - 18/269/0

Total stats for Burleson, AJ, Roy, Clayton vs. DJax, Driver, Smith and Boldin:

35/425/1 vs. 75/1134/6

 

[shining path]

Week 3:

Week 3:

D. Jackson - 8/131/0

Driver - 6/105/1

S. Smith - 4/34/0

Boldin - 8/119/0

I don't think you're giving your guy enough credit here. (edit - it looks like the season stats are right, though)S. Smith 11/170/3

If that's not the S. Smith of which you speak, then I take it all back.

But Steve is a freaking beast. I didn't see him play much in 2003, but I've seen him twice this year and he's almost unstoppable, 5'9 or not.

Not that anyone cares, but I had Smith/Burleson/DJax bracketed together right after Horn/Walker/Wayne.