Playing both DEN WR's (1 Viewer)

[Deranged Hermit]

I have been struggling with this as I usually hate to start any two WR's on a particular team not named Carter/Moss, Harrison/Wayne, or Moss/Welker. That being said, I think this tandem is special enough to at least play matchups with and spot start Royal here and there. Cutler seems to be on fire and Denver seems to have no qualms about throwing the ball a million times a game.

This isn't a WDIS as I've already made up my mind to start Royal over Jones-Drew and Jon Stewart at my flex position. I'm just interested in hearing other's opinion on the subject.......

 

[Young 8]

I have been struggling with this as I usually hate to start any two WR's on a particular team not named Carter/Moss, Harrison/Wayne, or Moss/Welker. That being said, I think this tandem is special enough to at least play matchups with and spot start Royal here and there. Cutler seems to be on fire and Denver seems to have no qualms about throwing the ball a million times a game.

This isn't a WDIS as I've already made up my mind to start Royal over Jones-Drew and Jon Stewart at my flex position. I'm just interested in hearing other's opinion on the subject.......

mmm....no

 

[jeeb]

There was a great article stating that historically starting 2 productive WRs from the same team is the most consistently safe choice.

I would have loved to start both Moss/Welker last year and Wayne/Harrison the years before.

 

[the_future420]

Started Marshall/Cheese last week and they got me 51 points combined.

 

[W1cked]

I had JT Housh and Chad Johnson last year and it didn't work out that well. So I try to stay away from two WRs on the same team.

 

[Charlie Harper]

If you only had Royal, do you start him? Yes.

If you only had Marshall, do you start him? Yes.

What is the problem here? You are over thinking the situation. I'll be happily starting the Wayne/Gonzalez combo this season in one league. I'd love to have both Denver WRs.

 

[Deranged Hermit]

There was a great article stating that historically starting 2 productive WRs from the same team is the most consistently safe choice.

I would have loved to start both Moss/Welker last year and Wayne/Harrison the years before.

As would I, but do you think the Broncos will:A. Throw the ball as much as those teams? NE and Indy both had record setting offenses. I'm not sure I'm ready to annoint Denver into that class quite yet.

B. Have the same level of elite QB play? Brady and Manning are future HoF QB's. Culpepper was as good as it got over a three year span. Can Cutler make that jump into that class so soon?

 

[Ghost Rider]

B. Have the same level of elite QB play? Brady and Manning are future HoF QB's. Culpepper was as good as it got over a three year span. Can Cutler make that jump into that class so soon?

He has six TDs in two games against two defenses that were both very good last year, so I would say the answer is a resounding yes. If you see him play, it becomes even more obvious. He looks fantastic this year.

 

[Buffaloes]

A. Throw the ball as much as those teams? NE and Indy both had record setting offenses. I'm not sure I'm ready to annoint Denver into that class quite yet.B. Have the same level of elite QB play? Brady and Manning are future HoF QB's. Culpepper was as good as it got over a three year span. Can Cutler make that jump into that class so soon?

A. With Denver's defense, I have a feeling that they are going to be in a lot of shootouts this year.B. Denver's offense is wide open now. I really think Shanahan has a lot of trust in Cutler and I think Cutler will be one of the better QBs in the league by the end of the year.

 

[MCguidance]

I am sure there are some owners out there with Fitz and Boldin, likely even winning. I think if it is an elite duo (and they have a good year) it could be fairly productive and be just fine.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I think Cutler will be one of the better QBs in the league by the end of the year.

By the end of the year? Maybe I am being a homer, but I think Cutler is easily one of the best 7-8 QBs in the NFL right now, and arguably top 5. I mean, if you were starting an NFL team today, how many QBs would you take before Cutler? Brady and Manning would obviously be the first two, but who else? Just asking...

 

[savemejee]

There was a great article stating that historically starting 2 productive WRs from the same team is the most consistently safe choice.

I would have loved to start both Moss/Welker last year and Wayne/Harrison the years before.

As would I, but do you think the Broncos will:A. Throw the ball as much as those teams? NE and Indy both had record setting offenses. I'm not sure I'm ready to annoint Denver into that class quite yet.

B. Have the same level of elite QB play? Brady and Manning are future HoF QB's. Culpepper was as good as it got over a three year span. Can Cutler make that jump into that class so soon?

Tom Brady wasn't Tom Brady until last year.Take a look at Cutler's last 2 games vs. Oakland and San Diego last year:

vs. Oak: 16-32 214yds 0tds 2ints

vs. SD: 14-32 155yds 0tds 2ints

And this year:

vs. Oak: 16-24 300yds 2tds 0ints

vs. SD: 36-50 350yds 4tds 1ints

This is not the same Jay Cutler.

 

[thatguy]

The Boldin/Fitz/Warner trio is working out for me.

Ultimately I think it comes down to your supporting cast though. Putting a lot of your eggs in one basket can backfire big time, or it can pay off big time. If your supporting cast is strong enough to carry you through potential down weeks for your player's respective offenses, do it.

 

[MCguidance]

The Boldin/Fitz/Warner trio is working out for me.Ultimately I think it comes down to your supporting cast though. Putting a lot of your eggs in one basket can backfire big time, or it can pay off big time. If your supporting cast is strong enough to carry you through potential down weeks for your player's respective offenses, do it.

I knew you guys were out there, lol. I have Warner as well, but for the reason (not the only one) you stated, chose not to go with Boldin but Marshall. I think if Warner and Co. have a huge year there is no doubt that it is the right move if you get them at a fairl reasonably draft day price.

 

[TitusIII]

I think Cutler will be one of the better QBs in the league by the end of the year.

By the end of the year? Maybe I am being a homer, but I think Cutler is easily one of the best 7-8 QBs in the NFL right now, and arguably top 5.

QB's I'd choose before Cutler if I needed to win one game today:Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, Brees, McNabb, Warner, RoethlisburgerArguments could be made by homers:Rivers, Hasselbeck, Rodgers, Garrard, FavreLongterm(5+ years): Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, coin-flip between Big Ben and Cutler...pretty close, eh? Whatever the case, Denver has the makings for a nice passing attack for years to come.

 

[MCguidance]

I think Cutler will be one of the better QBs in the league by the end of the year.

By the end of the year? Maybe I am being a homer, but I think Cutler is easily one of the best 7-8 QBs in the NFL right now, and arguably top 5.

QB's I'd choose before Cutler if I needed to win one game today:Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, Brees, McNabb, Warner, RoethlisburgerArguments could be made by homers:Rivers, Hasselbeck, Rodgers, Garrard, FavreLongterm(5+ years): Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, coin-flip between Big Ben and Cutler...pretty close, eh? Whatever the case, Denver has the makings for a nice passing attack for years to come.

Should add Favre and E. Manning, too.

 

[thatguy]

The Boldin/Fitz/Warner trio is working out for me.Ultimately I think it comes down to your supporting cast though. Putting a lot of your eggs in one basket can backfire big time, or it can pay off big time. If your supporting cast is strong enough to carry you through potential down weeks for your player's respective offenses, do it.

I knew you guys were out there, lol. I have Warner as well, but for the reason (not the only one) you stated, chose not to go with Boldin but Marshall. I think if Warner and Co. have a huge year there is no doubt that it is the right move if you get them at a fairl reasonably draft day price.

Definitely. I probably wouldn't have ended up with this trio in a redraft, but it's a dynasty league so it's what I got - right now I'm loving it. I also own Marshall in the league, so I'm pretty content with my WRs.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

I think Cutler will be one of the better QBs in the league by the end of the year.

By the end of the year? Maybe I am being a homer, but I think Cutler is easily one of the best 7-8 QBs in the NFL right now, and arguably top 5.

QB's I'd choose before Cutler if I needed to win one game today:Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, Brees, McNabb, Warner, RoethlisburgerArguments could be made by homers:Rivers, Hasselbeck, Rodgers, Garrard, FavreLongterm(5+ years): Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, coin-flip between Big Ben and Cutler...pretty close, eh? Whatever the case, Denver has the makings for a nice passing attack for years to come.

Watching Cutler he has many of Roethlisberger's attributes, with a stronger arm. Among the young QBs I think these are the best two for the next 10 years. Romo is probably in there too.

 

[Burning Sensation]

I think Cutler will be one of the better QBs in the league by the end of the year.

By the end of the year? Maybe I am being a homer, but I think Cutler is easily one of the best 7-8 QBs in the NFL right now, and arguably top 5.

QB's I'd choose before Cutler if I needed to win one game today:Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, Brees, McNabb, Warner, Roethlisburger

Arguments could be made by homers:

Rivers, Hasselbeck, Rodgers, Garrard, Favre

Longterm(5+ years):

Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, coin-flip between Big Ben and Cutler...pretty close, eh? Whatever the case, Denver has the makings for a nice passing attack for years to come.

:X

 

[Shooter McGavin]

Due to the Colston injury, I'm pretty well locked into starting these two for the forseeable future. It worked out pretty well this week -- moreso thanks to Ed Hoculi -- but I'd like to diversify if possible. I'm shopping Royal to see if I can get decent value for him, but if I can't, I'll be content to roll with them for at least the next couple of weeks, which are nice matchups against NO and KC.

My concern would be for later in the season if there's a big snow game in Denver or something that could hurt the production of both Marshall and Royal.

 

[TitusIII]

I think Cutler will be one of the better QBs in the league by the end of the year.

By the end of the year? Maybe I am being a homer, but I think Cutler is easily one of the best 7-8 QBs in the NFL right now, and arguably top 5.

QB's I'd choose before Cutler if I needed to win one game today:Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, Brees, McNabb, Warner, Roethlisburger

Arguments could be made by homers:

Rivers, Hasselbeck, Rodgers, Garrard, Favre

Longterm(5+ years):

Brady, Romo, Palmer, Manning, coin-flip between Big Ben and Cutler...pretty close, eh? Whatever the case, Denver has the makings for a nice passing attack for years to come.

People seem to forget how good Palmer was before the injury...he was certainly looking like a hall-of-fame calibre talent at the QB position. Maybe the injury derailed him, or possibly the franchise is just broken, but I'd still take my chances with Carson.EDIT: As for starting these two, nah, not yet...

 

[Scarpaggio]

If you only had Royal, do you start him? Yes.If you only had Marshall, do you start him? Yes.What is the problem here? You are over thinking the situation. I'll be happily starting the Wayne/Gonzalez combo this season in one league. I'd love to have both Denver WRs.

It becomes a problem when you have Fitz, Edwards, Marshall and Colston as your other WR. I'm strongly considering Royal this week in place of Edwards. If I didn't have all of these other WR I would start both and be happy about it.

 

[Charlie Harper]

If you only had Royal, do you start him? Yes.If you only had Marshall, do you start him? Yes.What is the problem here? You are over thinking the situation. I'll be happily starting the Wayne/Gonzalez combo this season in one league. I'd love to have both Denver WRs.

It becomes a problem when you have Fitz, Edwards, Marshall and Colston as your other WR. I'm strongly considering Royal this week in place of Edwards. If I didn't have all of these other WR I would start both and be happy about it.

You missed the point. If he is better than your other WRs, you start him. If he isn't, bench him. If one of your other WRs happens to be his teammate, it is irrelevant.

 

[LionsFan78]

 

[Deranged Hermit]

If you only had Royal, do you start him? Yes.If you only had Marshall, do you start him? Yes.What is the problem here? You are over thinking the situation. I'll be happily starting the Wayne/Gonzalez combo this season in one league. I'd love to have both Denver WRs.

It becomes a problem when you have Fitz, Edwards, Marshall and Colston as your other WR. I'm strongly considering Royal this week in place of Edwards. If I didn't have all of these other WR I would start both and be happy about it.

You missed the point. If he is better than your other WRs, you start him. If he isn't, bench him. If one of your other WRs happens to be his teammate, it is irrelevant.

In my case, he'd be a flex player, so that's much more of a gray area. I start Marshall and Boldin every week. No brainer. I start Marshawn Lynch every week. No brainer. Now choosing between Royal, Jonathan Stewart and Jones-Drew....not so much a no brainer. I'm sure plenty of others are in a similar circumstance. Hopefully Royal or Stewart can separate themselves from the pack soon.

 

[grouse]

If Ed Hochuli doesn't blow that call, Eddie Royal finishes Week 2 with; 4 catches for 33 yards and 0 TD. Granted, that came on a day when Marshall caught 18 balls and you have to figure that won't happen weekly. But I do wonder what a 'normal' week will look like for Eddie Royal because we haven't seen it yet. Week 1, Marshall wasn't there. Week 2, the ref gives him an unexpected gift. As good as Royal has been, I'm still reluctant to put him in my lineup.

 

[Charlie Harper]

If you only had Royal, do you start him? Yes.If you only had Marshall, do you start him? Yes.What is the problem here? You are over thinking the situation. I'll be happily starting the Wayne/Gonzalez combo this season in one league. I'd love to have both Denver WRs.

It becomes a problem when you have Fitz, Edwards, Marshall and Colston as your other WR. I'm strongly considering Royal this week in place of Edwards. If I didn't have all of these other WR I would start both and be happy about it.

You missed the point. If he is better than your other WRs, you start him. If he isn't, bench him. If one of your other WRs happens to be his teammate, it is irrelevant.

In my case, he'd be a flex player, so that's much more of a gray area. I start Marshall and Boldin every week. No brainer. I start Marshawn Lynch every week. No brainer. Now choosing between Royal, Jonathan Stewart and Jones-Drew....not so much a no brainer. I'm sure plenty of others are in a similar circumstance. Hopefully Royal or Stewart can separate themselves from the pack soon.

Again, my point is that starting Marshall is irrelevant to starting Royal. The only question you should be concerned with is who will score more out of Royal, Stewart and MJD. You starting Marshall does not affect which one of those 3 will score the most points.

 

[Bermuda_Chub]

Asked this specific question to the Audible gang on the Drive Block last week. Bloom felt that it all came down to whether Cutler has made the jump to elite status (he was 70% confident that Cutler had made the leap before the Chargers game). If so, it was a "sound strategy" in Bloom's opinion, and there was no reason to trade Royal or Marshall.

I decided to run some numbers on my own, comparing CJ/Housh '07 vs. CJ/Colston '07, Marvin/Wayne '04 vs. Marvin/Holt '04 and Holt/Bruce '01 vs. Holt/Horn '01. What I learned is that while a mixed pair is likely to outscore a same team WR tandem on a week-to-week basis, it is usually by a small amount. The offset is that the paired WR tandem is more likely to "blow up" for a few weeks during the season, and is also more likely to score 20+ on a weekly basis (1 pt per 10 yards/6 per TD). Conclusion: other than bye week problems for short roster leagues, there is no reason to avoid a strong WR tandem.

 

[TruckBoatTruck]

I decided to run some numbers on my own, comparing CJ/Housh '07 vs. CJ/Colston '07, Marvin/Wayne '04 vs. Marvin/Holt '04 and Holt/Bruce '01 vs. Holt/Horn '01. What I learned is that while a mixed pair is likely to outscore a same team WR tandem on a week-to-week basis, it is usually by a small amount. The offset is that the paired WR tandem is more likely to "blow up" for a few weeks during the season, and is also more likely to score 20+ on a weekly basis (1 pt per 10 yards/6 per TD). Conclusion: other than bye week problems for short roster leagues, there is no reason to avoid a strong WR tandem.

Great idea, thanks for doing that. Hunch confirmed.