No Brees - Hinder or Help Gates? (1 Viewer)

[salmonstud]

It looks like it will be the Rivers show in SD. How much of a hit do you think Gates will take on his production without Brees?

Gates will remain the #1 receiving option and young QB's usually lean on their TE's or their #1 WR option more than polished QB's that go through their progressions. However, I wouldn't be surprised to see at least a 20% fall off from last year in terms of Gates' fantasy production.

 

[Despyzer]

I don't expect much, if any, dropoff. In addition to the reasons that you supplied, you have to consider that Gates is still learning how to play the position. Scary, isn't it?

 

[TheFanatic]

I don't expect much, if any, dropoff. In addition to the reasons that you supplied, you have to consider that Gates is still learning how to play the position. Scary, isn't it?

There will be a drop off. Rivers has little or no NFL experience. Opposing teams are going to double Gates, leave an extra guy in the box for LT and single cover everyone else to see if the kid can beat them. Gates will be Rivers safety outlet, but he will have an extra guy on him all day....

 

[Jason Wood]

When a player is shattering all-time marks at his position [or close to it], it's all but a mathematical certainty that any change to his situation is going to impact him negatively.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I think Rivers will throw downfield more than Brees did. But Gates can get downfield to catch balls, so I'm not sure how that impacts him.

 

[Despyzer]

Opposing teams are going to double Gates, leave an extra guy in the box for LT and single cover everyone else to see if the kid can beat them. Gates will be Rivers safety outlet, but he will have an extra guy on him all day....

Double-temaing Gates and adding an extra man to key Tomlinson either leaves a guy sprinting free or next-to-zero pass rush. I'd have to think single coverage on a guy that may stay in and block would be a preferable option.

 

[TheFanatic]

Opposing teams are going to double Gates, leave an extra guy in the box for LT and single cover everyone else to see if the kid can beat them. Gates will be Rivers safety outlet, but he will have an extra guy on him all day....

Double-temaing Gates and adding an extra man to key Tomlinson either leaves a guy sprinting free or next-to-zero pass rush. I'd have to think single coverage on a guy that may stay in and block would be a preferable option.

Hence the point about letting the kid beat them. Little or no pass rush is no big deal if the kid can't get it to anyone.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Since I expect the total offensive efficiency to decline, I expect for him to decline also, although because he is a superstar, he may decline less than others on his team.

Less officient offense can definitely spell much lower TD numbers though. You can't score 'em if you can't get down there, so I'd set a high projection on TDs in 6-7 range for him, which basically moves him back to the pack.

 

[TheFanatic]

Since I expect the total offensive efficiency to decline, I expect for him to decline also, although because he is a superstar, he may decline less than others on his team.

Less officient offense can definitely spell much lower TD numbers though. You can't score 'em if you can't get down there, so I'd set a high projection on TDs in 6-7 range for him, which basically moves him back to the pack.

I hate to say it, but I actually agree with this entire post. He drops back but it's not like he's going to go from Superstar to mediocre or anything....

 

[Koya]

I can't see his production improving in all likelihood.

We don't now how that offense will run with Rivers at the helm. If they are awful, then sure, the receptions and yards might only drop say 20% or maybe hardly at all - but what about the scoring chances? If Rivers really struggles, you could see 8 or less TDs from someone you expect 12+ from... with a possibility of one of those endless years where you get three TDs in one game, and 4 more throughout the year.

Now, I dont expect this to happen, but it is certainly possible if Rivers really sucks - and we don't know that he wont.

Last couple of years you had a QB that meshed very very well with a receiver - Gates. To expect anything but some dropoff even if Rivers does well would be overly optimistic imo.

With Rivers as a first year starting QB? I would have concerns.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

We don't now how that offense will run with Rivers at the helm. If they are awful, then sure, the receptions and yards might only drop say 20% or maybe hardly at all - but what about the scoring chances? If Rivers really struggles, you could see 8 or less TDs from someone you expect 12+ from... with a possibility of one of those endless years where you get three TDs in one game, and 4 more throughout the year.

Now, I dont expect this to happen, but it is certainly possible if Rivers really sucks - and we don't know that he wont.

Actually, Rivers was quoted in the paper today as saying that the QB change isn't a setback for the Chargers. They're still pressing forward to get where they want to go. The time is now and they have an opportunity to do something special.If Rivers was going to suck, I'm pretty sure would have mentioned it. So as I read his statement, it means we won't see a drop-off in the Chargers' offensive production at all. Gates owners can relax.

 

[Koya]

We don't now how that offense will run with Rivers at the helm.  If they are awful, then sure, the receptions and yards might only drop say 20% or maybe hardly at all - but what about the scoring chances?  If Rivers really struggles, you could see 8 or less TDs from someone you expect 12+ from... with a possibility of one of those endless years where you get three TDs in one game, and 4 more throughout the year.

Now, I dont expect this to happen, but it is certainly possible if Rivers really sucks - and we don't know that he wont.

Actually, Rivers was quoted in the paper today as saying that the QB change isn't a setback for the Chargers. They're still pressing forward to get where they want to go. The time is now and they have an opportunity to do something special.If Rivers was going to suck, I'm pretty sure would have mentioned it. So as I read his statement, it means we won't see a drop-off in the Chargers' offensive production at all. Gates owners can relax.

Well, if Rivers said it, then Hard to argue with that. Horse's mouth after all.

Or Deer (in the headlights) mouth...

 

[Mister CIA]

If Gate's numbers decline, I'd expect it had more to do with emerging talent at the WR position, moreso than Rivers for Brees.

I can't help but laugh my ### off over all this Philip Rivers pessimism. PRivers = (2005 Carson Palmer) *(0.75).

I'm buying!

 

[CalBear]

It looks like it will be the Rivers show in SD. How much of a hit do you think Gates will take on his production without Brees?

Gates will remain the #1 receiving option and young QB's usually lean on their TE's or their #1 WR option more than polished QB's that go through their progressions. However, I wouldn't be surprised to see at least a 20% fall off from last year in terms of Gates' fantasy production.

When I've studied the stats of young QBs, I have found a negative correlation with TE production; TEs of young QBs are less likely to produce than WRs of young QBs. That is natural, as the TE is rarely the #1 option for most teams. San Diego obviously uses Gates as the first option a fair amount, but I still can't see how you can project Gates to produce at the level he has in the past two years, with a first-year starter at QB. In 2005 the Chargers were #12 in pass attempts, #11 in yards per pass attempt, and #4 in passing TDs; you have to assume all those numbers will go down significantly, and that will hurt Gates. He'll still be productive, but not at VBD 100+.

 

[CalBear]

If Gate's numbers decline, I'd expect it had more to do with emerging talent at the WR position, moreso than Rivers for Brees.

I can't help but laugh my ### off over all this Philip Rivers pessimism. PRivers = (2005 Carson Palmer) *(0.75).

I'm buying!

It seems fanciful in the extreme to suggest that Rivers can produce at anywhere near 2005 Carson Palmer, in 2006. Palmer, besides being a more highly-regarded QB to begin with, already had a year of starting experience in 2005. You'd be more realistic to peg Rivers' performance to 2004 Carson Palmer; 2900 yards and 18 TDs. Even that seems optimistic for a QB who has thrown just 30 NFL passes in two years, and in the one game he got significant playing time, had 115 yards and an INT.

 

[Mister CIA]

If Gate's numbers decline, I'd expect it had more to do with emerging talent at the WR position, moreso than Rivers for Brees.

I can't help but laugh my ### off over all this Philip Rivers pessimism. PRivers = (2005 Carson Palmer) *(0.75).

I'm buying!

It seems fanciful in the extreme to suggest that Rivers can produce at anywhere near 2005 Carson Palmer, in 2006. Palmer, besides being a more highly-regarded QB to begin with, already had a year of starting experience in 2005. You'd be more realistic to peg Rivers' performance to 2004 Carson Palmer; 2900 yards and 18 TDs. Even that seems optimistic for a QB who has thrown just 30 NFL passes in two years, and in the one game he got significant playing time, had 115 yards and an INT.

I think I'm right on target.Time will tell.

 

[BoltBacker]

Opposing teams are going to double Gates, leave an extra guy in the box for LT and single cover everyone else to see if the kid can beat them.

You don't think every SD opponent has already been doing this for the past year and a half??????????????????????????????

 

[BoltBacker]

I agree with Koya and Wood.

We knew he was Brees's favorite target but we can't be sure yet he'll be Rivers.

Gates 2006 < Gates 2005

SD WR 2006 >>> SD WR 2005