Santana Moss at #32 on Wimer's Board (1 Viewer)

[Mark Wimer]

This thread is a follow up from the following thread:Steven Jackson at 16 thread, in which Couch Potato stated the following:

For example, I'd love to know why Antonio Bryant is ranked WR15 and Santana Moss WR32 by Wimer, or why Joey Galloway is ranked WR10 and Roy Williams WR30 by Tremblay.

I'll speak to the first part of the question:I know that Couch Potato is very knowledgable about FF, so he's on top of the NFL news/free agency/etc surrounding this situation, but for others who may not have all the particulars dialed in, I'll throw down a quick review as the situation in Washington has changed dramatically over the off-season. The situation in San Francisco has also changed during the same time frame, partly as a result of the shifts in Washington (the two situations are definitely linked due to personnel changes).

1. The top San Francisco receiver last year, Brandon Lloyd, is now a Redskin. According to reports (including some new ones just in the last week), Lloyd is doing well adapting to the new offense in Washington.

2. Antwaan Randle-El is also now in the Washington WR stable.

3. Al Saunders is installing a new offense in Washington that has almost everyone there excited for 2006 (see the news blogger Washington team page here for particulars on the offense and on the players' jelling within it).

Now, for my reasoning: Last year, Washington's receiving corps was Santana Moss(84 receptions), TE Chris Cooley (71 receptions), and a bunch of other fantasy non-entities, none of whom caught more than 22 passes (that was David Patten, who, while only playing in 9 games, was the second receiver on Washington's WR corps). Mike Sellers was a red-zone fiend, with 12/72/7 receiving in a specialized role, but that was about it for the Redskins.

This year, while the passing game is expected to be more "wide-open", there are several players, much more talented than their 2005 counterparts, at WR for the 2006 Redskins. Moss had a career season last year (Santana Moss Career) - which he will not repeat with all the upgrades at WR around him. I see him sinking back into the pack of good-but-not-outstanding fantasy WRs as there will be a smaller piece of a larger passing pie going to him in 2006 (as opposed to a huge piece of a modest passing pie last year). He'll be a starting caliber WR, but not a WR1 in fantasy terms (in fact, I expect his numbers to be in the WR3 ballpark).

In short, Moss will have less opportunities to catch balls this year, despite the new offense, and his fantasy production will drop off due to this, IMO.

When Brandon Lloyd departed San Francisco, it left the 49ers without a bona-fide #1 WR (Lloyd was far-and-away the top SF WR last year during a miserable rookie campaign by Alex Smith that depressed everyone's numbers in SF). Antonio Bryant is the guy that the SF brass brought in to be their #1 (he also played with new veteran backup QB Trent Dilfer in Cleveland last year, and Dilfer may well be the starter in SF this year if Smith stinks again). According to all reports, Bryant is showing a new maturity in his secure role as the teams #1 WR (the main knock on Bryant in Dallas and Cleveland was his attitude/coachability, which hasn't been a problem in SF). As Santana Moss showed us last year, when one WR is the focus of an NFL WR corps, he can put up top-shelf fantasy #'s.

This year, we have either an improved Alex Smith (with a bitter year of NFL experience under his belt, there is literally nowhere to go but up after a disastrous 9 games for 84/165 for 875 yards, 1 TD and 11 interceptions on his part) or his replacement Trent Dilfer throwing the football. Whoever is tossing the pigskin, Antonio Bryant will be the #1 target among the WRs. He'll have a big pile of opportunities to put up fantasy numbers across from the supporting cast of WRs including the renowned Arnaz Battle (and company). Bryant has the "big piece of pie" in front of him for 2006.

Given a plethora of opportunities to produce, even on an under-powered offense like San Francisco's, should yield quality fantasy #'s for Bryant. He's not likely going to be an elite, #1 fantasy WR, but I do believe he'll be a very solid WR2 due to his situation. He crossed the 1000-yards receiving barrier last year for the first time in his career (69/1009/4 in Cleveland), and looks like a player on the cusp of the best years of his career now that he's finally found a measure of maturity and a positive attitude. Blogger Stories detailing Bryant's newfound Maturity and bond with Alex Smith

Thus, Santana Moss is #32 on my WR board, and Antonio Bryant is #15. Fantasy production comes down to opportunity/situation as well as talent - and in Bryant's case, an vast improvement in maturity/attitude over his early years in the league.

My .02...(you did ask....).

 

[David Yudkin]

I salute you for going against the grain. But it is for this very reason that I have abstained from posting my rankings, as I have guys slotted all over the map and could not bear to endure the grilling and justification I would have to endure to answer to the masses.

 

[diesel7982]

Santana Moss = 900/5 this year.

Roy Williams at #30 better be predicting an injury.

 

[Couch Potato]

Mark, I've always appreciated your ability to stand up for your rankings. You just offered more than could be asked for. Good job. At the risk of being redundant, I'll never knock an outside-the-consensus ranking (we all have some - mine this year is Corey Bradford ) where that ranking is supported somehow. I just want to understand it. Thank you for going to the effort of posting here.

Now I have a confession. I'm in 5 dynasty leagues. I've either drafted or traded for Bryant in 4 of the 5. That doesn't mean I'd put him at WR15 for 2006, but I do think he's seriously undervalued from a dynasty perspective in the eyes of most due to SF's miserable offense the last couple of years.

 

[Couch Potato]

Roy Williams at #30 better be predicting an injury.

Tremblay has moved him up to #17 since that post -- he said there were some errors and has now fixed them.

 

[LHUCKS]

Roy Williams at #30 better be predicting an injury.

Or you could just consider the fact that Roy has never seen an 850 yard season.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Roy Williams at #30 better be predicting an injury.

Or you could just consider the fact that Roy has never seen an 850 yard season.

It's hard to find a more overrated receiver than Roy

 

[Couch Potato]

I salute you for going against the grain. But it is for this very reason that I have abstained from posting my rankings, as I have guys slotted all over the map and could not bear to endure the grilling and justification I would have to endure to answer to the masses.

LOL. And yet it is yours I'd love to see more than just about anyone else's, because I know they'll be all over the map and probably in the right places on that map.I first caught a glimpse of the talents of a guy that called himself Anarchy a few years ago when he set me straight on Warrick Dunn. I had to swallow hard and admit he was right or I'd probably still be clinging to Duckett hope; after that I started really paying attention to his opinions. I became a big fan of Anarchy, who became David Yudkin through the power of staffmember status, and I continue to be. If this sounds like sucking up, so be it if it'll get me an emailed copy of those super secret rankings.

Big wuss, not wanting to endure answering to the lowly masses. Pfffft.

 

[joffer]

Moss at 32 is too low. Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff. When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR? Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

 

[Mark Wimer]

Mark, I've always appreciated your ability to stand up for your rankings. You just offered more than could be asked for. Good job. At the risk of being redundant, I'll never knock an outside-the-consensus ranking (we all have some - mine this year is Corey Bradford ) where that ranking is supported somehow. I just want to understand it. Thank you for going to the effort of posting here.

Now I have a confession. I'm in 5 dynasty leagues. I've either drafted or traded for Bryant in 4 of the 5. That doesn't mean I'd put him at WR15 for 2006, but I do think he's seriously undervalued from a dynasty perspective in the eyes of most due to SF's miserable offense the last couple of years.

LOL - I have Bryant in a IDP Dynasty league. Got him in restricted free agency last year when his value was nada after the down years in Dallas.Nice pickup.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Moss at 32 is too low. Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff. When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR? Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

No kidding. People act like Washington signed TO. They signed guys who were #2 wide receivers, every team has one.

 

[Doug Drinen]

Sure his numbers will drop from last year

I feel a lot of "he won't duplicate last year's numbers, therefore you shouldn't draft him" vibe about Moss. 100% of all fantasy players think that Moss' numbers will decline. That's a given. It's not at issue. It's already factored into his price.

but not off of a cliff.

I'm with joffer. I haven't done any projections yet, so I probably ought to keep my mouth shut, but my gut tells me he's good value at WR13.

 

[Mark Wimer]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

No kidding. People act like Washington signed TO. They signed guys who were #2 wide receivers, every team has one.

Sorry, I must disagree. Brandon Lloyd was the top WR for the 49ers last year, by far. The team didn't have much success passing due to their QB situation, but what pass offense there was was due to Lloyd, by and large. SFO 2005He wasn't a fantasy #1, but he's good enough to bleed a significant # of catches away from Moss.

 

[Vicktimized]

I'm confused....

I understand that they added weapons, and therefore Moss won't be option A, B and C anymore.

But didn't he fade at the end of the year exactly because they had no other threats? The G-Men exposed this in a mid season meeting...blitz Brunell, double Moss, watch the Skins crumble.

Considering a lot of Moss's value came off big big plays, wouldn't it stand to reason more of these plays will come? He and Portis are still their #1 threats to take it to the house, and will be Brunell's 1st read. If the D can't just 'not cover' Lloyd and Randle-el, shouldn't Moss be able to expose the lesser coverage on him?

For that matter, Steve Smith's in the same boat. Key Johnson will put up some numbers, whereas no other WR last year in Car did jack. But Smith's still going to see lots of love...

 

[fruity pebbles]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

No kidding. People act like Washington signed TO. They signed guys who were #2 wide receivers, every team has one.

Sorry, I must disagree. Brandon Lloyd was the top WR for the 49ers last year, by far. The team didn't have much success passing due to their QB situation, but what pass offense there was was due to Lloyd, by and large. SFO 2005He wasn't a fantasy #1, but he's good enough to bleed a significant # of catches away from Moss.

Lloyd will be the underneath receiver and will draw some coverage away from Moss. If anything this may help him. Washington threw 150 balls to receivers and tight ends not named Santana last year. There are enough passes to go around even with Santana getting his. It's not like last year was his first good year. He had 1100 yards and 10 TDs two seasons ago with the Jets.

 

[redman]

This is probably the toughest spot on the 'Skins roster to project because, if you look at Saunders' WR numbers in KC, there were both years in which one WR had the lion's share of the work, and there were years when the 2nd and even the 3rd WR had numbers that were quite close to the leading WR.

While there were differences between those KC teams and this Washington team, I'm not sure how to analyze their effects upon Moss. While Cooley is good, he's not dominant at his position the way that Gonzo was and he certainly isn't the best receiver on his team like Gonzo was. Moss is better than any WR that Saunders had in KC, and Lloyd may be too although it's too early to say right now.

If I had to pick numbers for which Moss was a "lock" (meaning, he'd get these numbers or better in each category, assuming no injuries), I'd probably say 65/1070/6. While I don't believe he can or will radically exceed any of those numbers, to me that means he's easily better than #32 among WR's.

 

[redman]

I'm confused....

I understand that they added weapons, and therefore Moss won't be option A, B and C anymore.

But didn't he fade at the end of the year exactly because they had no other threats? The G-Men exposed this in a mid season meeting...blitz Brunell, double Moss, watch the Skins crumble.

Considering a lot of Moss's value came off big big plays, wouldn't it stand to reason more of these plays will come? He and Portis are still their #1 threats to take it to the house, and will be Brunell's 1st read. If the D can't just 'not cover' Lloyd and Randle-el, shouldn't Moss be able to expose the lesser coverage on him?

For that matter, Steve Smith's in the same boat. Key Johnson will put up some numbers, whereas no other WR last year in Car did jack. But Smith's still going to see lots of love...

Brunell's leg injury in the Giants game at the end of the year was the cause of a huge decline in the passing game. It had nothing to do with Moss. Obviously, factor that risk into your selection of Moss given that Brunell isn't any younger.

 

[NOSRAC247]

I can agree with that. One game he'll have 100+ and 2 td's, the next 20 yrds and thats it. Too inconcsistent to be taken early

 

[tommyGunZ]

This is probably the toughest spot on the 'Skins roster to project because, if you look at Saunders' WR numbers in KC, there were both years in which one WR had the lion's share of the work, and there were years when the 2nd and even the 3rd WR had numbers that were quite close to the leading WR.

While there were differences between those KC teams and this Washington team, I'm not sure how to analyze their effects upon Moss. While Cooley is good, he's not dominant at his position the way that Gonzo was and he certainly isn't the best receiver on his team like Gonzo was. Moss is better than any WR that Saunders had in KC, and Lloyd may be too although it's too early to say right now.

If I had to pick numbers for which Moss was a "lock" (meaning, he'd get these numbers or better in each category, assuming no injuries), I'd probably say 65/1070/6. While I don't believe he can or will radically exceed any of those numbers, to me that means he's easily better than #32 among WR's.

Moss is one of the couple players we see every year that may end up being a draft day bargain b/c everyone will be overcorrecting his statistics expecting too big of a downfall.

Also of concern is brittle Mark Brunnell - I have no faith in the kid from Auburn to be able to step in and have chemistry with Moss. That's one area where bigger WRs have an advantage.

 

[David Yudkin]

I salute you for going against the grain.  But it is for this very reason that I have abstained from posting my rankings, as I have guys slotted all over the map and could not bear to endure the grilling and justification I would have to endure to answer to the masses.

LOL. And yet it is yours I'd love to see more than just about anyone else's, because I know they'll be all over the map and probably in the right places on that map.I first caught a glimpse of the talents of a guy that called himself Anarchy a few years ago when he set me straight on Warrick Dunn. I had to swallow hard and admit he was right or I'd probably still be clinging to Duckett hope; after that I started really paying attention to his opinions. I became a big fan of Anarchy, who became David Yudkin through the power of staffmember status, and I continue to be. If this sounds like sucking up, so be it if it'll get me an emailed copy of those super secret rankings.

Big wuss, not wanting to endure answering to the lowly masses. Pfffft.

I actually had a heart to heart with Dodds about this, and we went back and forth about what to do or not to do. He suggested that I should submit my rankings and write an article explaning the whys and why nots to have as a record so when people all went HUH???? and ran to the message board there would not be a need to answer 10 pages of questions.That way when people saw "Kitna, Jon" at the top of my QB rankings, there would be less pandemonium in the streets. (For the record, I DO NOT have Kitna #1 on my list, although I venture that he is higher on mine than any other staff member.)

 

[fruity pebbles]

I can agree with that. One game he'll have 100+ and 2 td's, the next 20 yrds and thats it. Too inconcsistent to be taken early

He had one game last year with less than 50 yards. Steve Smith on the other hand had four.

 

[redman]

I can agree with that.  One game he'll have 100+ and 2 td's, the next 20 yrds and thats it.  Too inconcsistent to be taken early

He had one game last year with less than 50 yards. Steve Smith on the other hand had four.

That WR screen (an unlikely holdover from Spurrier to Gibbs) that they love to run with him helps him get yards on a consistent basis, and his elusivness and quickness in getting by the first man on those plays is something to watch. He routinely turns those into 20 yard gains.

 

[Tau837]

Moss at 32 is too low. Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff. When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR? Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

 

[joffer]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

the Redskins (not Brunell alone) have averaged 282 completions over the last two years, i expect a slight increase, right now i have 292 projected. And yes, my distribution is slightly different.

 

[Roc Pile]

Ive been checking a lot of stats lately and Santana is fairly consistent, starting 3 years ago with the jets he was ok, then he took off and had an amazing nov. the next year. The only reason he slowed down after that was because of the departure of QB in Chad Pennington.. then he switches teams and goes nuts. I think this guy would be a great number two WR, as far as Lloyd and randle el goes, every team has 3 wrs, i really dont think that will hurt him in any way. Last year they had NOBODY else to throw to at WR, just look at all the top recivers, they all have a good wr opposite to them, chad, marvin, holt, fitz, even rmoss has porter and co.

I see 70/1050/9

 

[Tau837]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

the Redskins (not Brunell alone) have averaged 282 completions over the last two years, i expect a slight increase, right now i have 292 projected. And yes, my distribution is slightly different.

I was kind of hoping you'd elaborate a bit.

 

[joffer]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

the Redskins (not Brunell alone) have averaged 282 completions over the last two years, i expect a slight increase, right now i have 292 projected. And yes, my distribution is slightly different.

I was kind of hoping you'd elaborate a bit.

Portis - 36Betts - 11

Rock - 4

Moss - 70

Lloyd - 43

AREL - 36

Patten - 16

Cooley - 61

Sellers - 7

that was my first pass, still tweaking

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Roy Williams at #30 better be predicting an injury.

Tremblay has moved him up to #17 since that post -- he said there were some errors and has now fixed them.

I had Roy Williams at #17 in my projections on the site, but for some reason (a typo on my part) he was lower than that in the rankings. That is now fixed.The other error was with the Denver WRs. I had them overprojected as a group by Tony Scheffler's production (30/339/4) because of an Excel error. So R.Smith/Walker/Lelie/Watts were all a bit too high, especially Lelie. I've corrected this in the rankings, but they won't be fixed in the projections until early next week when they are all updated.

 

[Tau837]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

the Redskins (not Brunell alone) have averaged 282 completions over the last two years, i expect a slight increase, right now i have 292 projected. And yes, my distribution is slightly different.

I was kind of hoping you'd elaborate a bit.

Portis - 36Betts - 11

Rock - 4

Moss - 70

Lloyd - 43

AREL - 36

Patten - 16

Cooley - 61

Sellers - 7

that was my first pass, still tweaking

Interesting. Big drop for the TEs.

 

[joffer]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

the Redskins (not Brunell alone) have averaged 282 completions over the last two years, i expect a slight increase, right now i have 292 projected. And yes, my distribution is slightly different.

I was kind of hoping you'd elaborate a bit.

Portis - 36Betts - 11

Rock - 4

Moss - 70

Lloyd - 43

AREL - 36

Patten - 16

Cooley - 61

Sellers - 7

that was my first pass, still tweaking

Interesting. Big drop for the TEs.

the addition of Lloyd and Randle El could just as likely eat into the TE numbers as Moss's numbers. You said yourself that TEs caught only 54 passes in 04. Cooley's good, but he ain't Gonzo.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

Trent Green's averaged 340 completions a year over the last 3 years. You can't really compare KC's RB and tight end reception numbers to Washington's unless you also factor in the number of completions KC's had over the last few years. You're using Brunell's completion numbers of 250 and KC's reception numbers. Of course things are going to look off.

 

[Tau837]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

Trent Green's averaged 340 completions a year over the last 3 years. You can't really compare KC's RB and tight end reception numbers to Washington's unless you also factor in the number of completions KC's had over the last few years. You're using Brunell's completion numbers of 250 and KC's reception numbers. Of course things are going to look off.

That is a good point, but it would only apply to the RBs, not the TEs, since I actually predicted a 20%+ drop for the TEs from Washington's numbers last season. If I ignored KC's numbers and just thought about what I think Saunders could bring to the offense, I'd probably project 50 receptions for the RBs and hold the TEs the same. This means the strawman would be allowing 53 for all WRs other than Moss. Still not enough IMO.But then my completions are probably too low, as joffer pointed out, so I can see it working out to 70 receptions for Moss... but that is likely close to his ceiling IMO. Not the #32 WR, but not much value as the 13th WR drafted right now.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

Trent Green's averaged 340 completions a year over the last 3 years. You can't really compare KC's RB and tight end reception numbers to Washington's unless you also factor in the number of completions KC's had over the last few years. You're using Brunell's completion numbers of 250 and KC's reception numbers. Of course things are going to look off.

That is a good point, but it would only apply to the RBs, not the TEs, since I actually predicted a 20%+ drop for the TEs from Washington's numbers last season. If I ignored KC's numbers and just thought about what I think Saunders could bring to the offense, I'd probably project 50 receptions for the RBs and hold the TEs the same. This means the strawman would be allowing 53 for all WRs other than Moss. Still not enough IMO.But then my completions are probably too low, as joffer pointed out, so I can see it working out to 70 receptions for Moss... but that is likely close to his ceiling IMO. Not the #32 WR, but not much value as the 13th WR drafted right now.

He has a high YPC though. At 70 receptions and roughly 17 yards per catch, you're looking at around 1200 yards. He's averaged 8 TDs a year over the last 3 years. 1200 yards and 8 TDs would make him the #10 WR based on FBG's current projections.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

You're basically saying he will go from a 1400 & 9 WR to a 800 & 5 WR.

I think we all expect Moss to decline some this year, but that's really drastic for a guy who is still clearly the #1 receiver on the team.

 

[imeimex]

I think we are all looking into the effect Randle El will have on the passing game because of his great playoff stretch. Randle El only caught 35 passes last year as the number 2. He has never been a big targeted receiver. He obviously adds a lot because of his versatility, returns and reverses but I don't think he will effect Moss's targets too much.

 

[diesel7982]

Roy Williams at #30 better be predicting an injury.

Or you could just consider the fact that Roy has never seen an 850 yard season.

I_j_r_es. Well that and _ar_i_gt__.Ill let you fill in the blanks.

 

[diesel7982]

You're basically saying he will go from a 1400 & 9 WR to a 800 & 5 WR.

I think we all expect Moss to decline some this year, but that's really drastic for a guy who is still clearly the #1 receiver on the team.

But thats a vast difference from last year, when he was the ONLY WR on that team. And with Brunell regaining his 2004 form, theres no guarantee there will even be the same # of pass yards as last year to distribute amongst Moss, Lloyd, Randle El, Cooley, Portis, Betts, etc.

 

[wannabee]

You're basically saying he will go from a 1400 & 9 WR to a 800 & 5 WR. 

I think we all expect Moss to decline some this year, but that's really drastic for a guy who is still clearly the #1 receiver on the team.

But thats a vast difference from last year, when he was the ONLY WR on that team. And with Brunell regaining his 2004 form, theres no guarantee there will even be the same # of pass yards as last year to distribute amongst Moss, Lloyd, Randle El, Cooley, Portis, Betts, etc.

I did not realize how much action Moss had compared to the other 'skin WRs until I read Dr. Drinen's article: http://www.footballguys.com/06drinen-whothrows.phpThe 'skins are at the bottom.

 

[imeimex]

You're basically saying he will go from a 1400 & 9 WR to a 800 & 5 WR. 

I think we all expect Moss to decline some this year, but that's really drastic for a guy who is still clearly the #1 receiver on the team.

But thats a vast difference from last year, when he was the ONLY WR on that team. And with Brunell regaining his 2004 form, theres no guarantee there will even be the same # of pass yards as last year to distribute amongst Moss, Lloyd, Randle El, Cooley, Portis, Betts, etc.

I did not realize how much action Moss had compared to the other 'skin WRs until I read Dr. Drinen's article: http://www.footballguys.com/06drinen-whothrows.phpThe 'skins are at the bottom.

Wow 44.3 to the #1 compared to 6.5% to the #2, those numbers have never been approached before and it is hard to believe they will ever be matched again. The tight end did get 23.1% but I'm sure that the TE will still be targeted highly in the Saunders offense. His target % will surely go down, and has been mentioned before there is no guarantee that Brunell does not revert back to 2004 form. Moss can make plays from anywhere, but he still needs his attempts.

 

[Tau837]

Moss at 32 is too low.  Sure his numbers will drop from last year, but not off of a cliff.  When did Brandon Lloyd become some uber-talented WR?  Santana could easily muster 70/1200/7 even with other legitimate WR targets.

I don't know about this. Are you assuming Brunell is the QB? From 2002 to 2005, he played 43 games and averaged 15.8 completions per game. If he maintains that pace over 16 games, that's 253 completions. And I don't think that number will go up much if Todd Collins or Campbell ends up playing extensively.Last season, Washington RBs caught a whopping 42 passes. This will go up. In 2004, Washington RBs caught 56 passes. Saunders' RBs in KC averaged 90 receptions from 2002 to 2005, with no less than 67 in any season. I expect an increase in RB receptions. 65 seems on the conservative side of reasonable.

Last season, Washington TEs caught 104 passes. In 2004, they only caught 55. Saunders' TEs in KC averaged 88, but I don't think Cooley is as good as Gonzalez... so I'd say the TEs are due for a drop in receptions. I'd say 80 is reasonable.

That leaves 108 for the WRs.

If we suppose that Moss gets 70, as you suggest, that would leave only 38 for the rest of the WRs, including Lloyd, Randle El, Patten, and whoever else might be involved (Jacobs?).

Now this is just a strawman. I suppose you must either expect more completions or a different distribution. Which is it?

Trent Green's averaged 340 completions a year over the last 3 years. You can't really compare KC's RB and tight end reception numbers to Washington's unless you also factor in the number of completions KC's had over the last few years. You're using Brunell's completion numbers of 250 and KC's reception numbers. Of course things are going to look off.

That is a good point, but it would only apply to the RBs, not the TEs, since I actually predicted a 20%+ drop for the TEs from Washington's numbers last season. If I ignored KC's numbers and just thought about what I think Saunders could bring to the offense, I'd probably project 50 receptions for the RBs and hold the TEs the same. This means the strawman would be allowing 53 for all WRs other than Moss. Still not enough IMO.But then my completions are probably too low, as joffer pointed out, so I can see it working out to 70 receptions for Moss... but that is likely close to his ceiling IMO. Not the #32 WR, but not much value as the 13th WR drafted right now.

He has a high YPC though. At 70 receptions and roughly 17 yards per catch, you're looking at around 1200 yards. He's averaged 8 TDs a year over the last 3 years. 1200 yards and 8 TDs would make him the #10 WR based on FBG's current projections.

Well, I'd probably go with 70/1150/7, which would have been WR13 last year if I'm not mistaken. As he is WR13 ADP right now, there is no value there. And keep in mind, my view is that this is a high side projection, or to put it another way, a projection that carries high risk. So I wouldn't be very comfortable drafting him as WR13.

 

[LHUCKS]

Roy Williams at #30 better be predicting an injury.

Or you could just consider the fact that Roy has never seen an 850 yard season.

I_j_r_es. Well that and _ar_i_gt__.Ill let you fill in the blanks.

I didn't say there weren't reasons for Roy's disappointing numbers last year. Just pointing out that one can easily justify a ranking of #30 for Roy. FWIW I have him in my top 20.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Everbody said Moss would suck in 2005. I chuckled and snagged him extremely cheaply in all of my redrafts. I am VERY glad he is being projected very low again.

Since he has been fully recovered from his rookie year injury, all Moss has done is average 1142 yards and 8 TDs per season over the last three seasons (on some pretty mediocre teams with mediocre QBs at best).

Everybody LOVES Steve Smith, and rightfully so, but what is the difference between the two guys?

Smith in HIS 3 healthy years averaged 1182 yards and 7 TDs per season (pretty much the same as Moss if not a few fewer fantasy points). He's small and ridiculously fast to go along with remarkable quuickness and solid hands (that should sound familiar too). He has the trust of his veteran QB (hmm, where have I heard that before?). He's in his prime at 27 years old (yeah - within a month of Moss).

Yet Smith is ranked 1st and Moss is ranked 15th in a recent keeper ranking list I saw.

Everbody acts like Moss' season was a fluke, but there is a very simple reason for his success - the guy is EXTREMELY talented. You don't put up 1500 yards in the NFL as a fluke. You just don't. Look back at some of the previous receivers who have put up those kind of numbers. You won't find too many 1 year wonders on the list.

Even funnier is the notion that Brandon Lloyd, who was just traded away by a team that has no proven receivers, is going to "steal" catches from Moss. Brandon Lloyd has by far more career drops than TDs. He's a 4th round NFL pick who has been given EVERY chance to be "the guy" and has failed. He's not big, he's not fast, and he has exceptionally poor concentration. That said, he could be a decent COMPLEMENTARY receiver and should be an upgrade at #2 over Patten.

So what do people think is going to happen? Everyone ASSUMES because of the #1/#2 ratio in Washington that Moss had a ton of targets in 2005. Believe it or not, he didn't. He was 13th in targets last year. He just did more WITH those targets than most of the guys in front of him like he did the year before and the year before that. So why in the world would we expect his opportunities to be dramatically reduced? If you were the O coordinator, would you design more plays for the guy who tends catch everything thrown to him and run into or near the end zone or the guy who catches less than half of the balls thrown to him and who is considerably slower and less elusive?

While the #2 receiver will probably see more action in 2006, the offense as a whole should improve (resulting in more potential targets and red-zone opps). The net effect on Moss should be minimal. He may drop a bit from his STELLAR numbers last year, but that's mostly just because they were so stellar and we can't expect as many thing to "go right" again this year. But there are only 3 or 4 receivers in the NFL I'd feel more comfortable with than Moss in 2006. Some of the guys I've seen ahead of him in rankings just blow my mind. SIXTH YEAR receiver Antonio Bryant who plays for maybe the worst offense in football and is one of the few guys in the league who actually rivals Lloyd in the "drops" category every year is one of them.

 

[Tau837]

Everbody said Moss would suck in 2005. I chuckled and snagged him extremely cheaply in all of my redrafts. I am VERY glad he is being projected very low again.

Since he has been fully recovered from his rookie year injury, all Moss has done is average 1142 yards and 8 TDs per season over the last three seasons (on some pretty mediocre teams with mediocre QBs at best).

Everybody LOVES Steve Smith, and rightfully so, but what is the difference between the two guys?

Smith in HIS 3 healthy years averaged 1182 yards and 7 TDs per season (pretty much the same as Moss if not a few fewer fantasy points). He's small and ridiculously fast to go along with remarkable quuickness and solid hands (that should sound familiar too). He has the trust of his veteran QB (hmm, where have I heard that before?). He's in his prime at 27 years old (yeah - within a month of Moss).

Yet Smith is ranked 1st and Moss is ranked 15th in a recent keeper ranking list I saw.

Everbody acts like Moss' season was a fluke, but there is a very simple reason for his success - the guy is EXTREMELY talented. You don't put up 1500 yards in the NFL as a fluke. You just don't. Look back at some of the previous receivers who have put up those kind of numbers. You won't find too many 1 year wonders on the list.

Even funnier is the notion that Brandon Lloyd, who was just traded away by a team that has no proven receivers, is going to "steal" catches from Moss. Brandon Lloyd has by far more career drops than TDs. He's a 4th round NFL pick who has been given EVERY chance to be "the guy" and has failed. He's not big, he's not fast, and he has exceptionally poor concentration. That said, he could be a decent COMPLEMENTARY receiver and should be an upgrade at #2 over Patten.

So what do people think is going to happen? Everyone ASSUMES because of the #1/#2 ratio in Washington that Moss had a ton of targets in 2005. Believe it or not, he didn't. He was 13th in targets last year. He just did more WITH those targets than most of the guys in front of him like he did the year before and the year before that. So why in the world would we expect his opportunities to be dramatically reduced? If you were the O coordinator, would you design more plays for the guy who tends catch everything thrown to him and run into or near the end zone or the guy who catches less than half of the balls thrown to him and who is considerably slower and less elusive?

While the #2 receiver will probably see more action in 2006, the offense as a whole should improve (resulting in more potential targets and red-zone opps). The net effect on Moss should be minimal. He may drop a bit from his STELLAR numbers last year, but that's mostly just because they were so stellar and we can't expect as many thing to "go right" again this year. But there are only 3 or 4 receivers in the NFL I'd feel more comfortable with than Moss in 2006. Some of the guys I've seen ahead of him in rankings just blow my mind. SIXTH YEAR receiver Antonio Bryant who plays for maybe the worst offense in football and is one of the few guys in the league who actually rivals Lloyd in the "drops" category every year is one of them.

Even though I was arguing lower numbers, this post made me think about it some more.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Everybody LOVES Steve Smith, and rightfully so, but what is the difference between the two guys?

Good posting. I was comparing them to each other last offseason -- they are extremely similar as players. Quick and fast with good moves and hands, but importantly, much stronger and tougher than you'd expect from guys their size. They are not track guys -- they are football players. Both of them. Fantastic open-field runners. Just darn good players.I've got S.Moss in several of my keeper leagues now after last year's drafts, and I'm pretty happy about it.

Although I'd rather have Steve Smith if I could choose.

 

[DrJ]

Roy Williams at #30 better be predicting an injury.

Or you could just consider the fact that Roy has never seen an 850 yard season.

You could also consider that Chris Chambers was able to rank in the top 12 without logging 1000 yards. With 8 TD's in his first 2 seasons, while missing games in each, it's pretty reasonable to see him hitting a Chameresque 963 and 11 TD's with even slightly improved QB play and some health.

 

[Justloveit]

Respect to Wimer for going against the grain in his ranking of S.Moss. I'm tired of seeing rankings that are simply a regurgitation of how things ended the previous season.

Further respect to Wimer for having the minerals to come on the board and justify his ranking.

 

[The Leprechaun Hunter]

Moss had 24 receptions of 20+ yds including 10 of 40+ so I think he was more a product of the system last year than his overall talent dictates. With the new OC, I don't see Moss taking as many gap passes for big yardage. He's still the #1 WR in Washington, but I agree that he won't be in the top 20 WRs this season.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

A few more thoughts that were going through my head as I fell asleep last night.Redskins receiving rankings in 2005:Receptions: 24thYards: 22ndScoring: 13thI find it strange that everyone thinks Randle El and Lloyd are big upgrades over David Patten and James Thrash, yet act like the receiving stats from last year are static.How much are they going to improve? Hard to say. The overall offensive pie SHOULD get bigger though. I can't see a completely healthy Moss only able to put up 850 yards this year.Once upon a time, Joe Gibbs coached teams were able to do this...1988:

| Gary Clark | 16 | 2 6 3.0 0 | 59 892 15.1 7 || Art Monk | 16 | 7 46 6.6 0 | 72 946 13.1 5 || Ricky Sanders | 16 | 2 14 7.0 0 | 73 1148 15.7 12 |

1989:

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD | REC YARD AVG TD |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Gary Clark | 15 | 2 19 9.5 0 | 79 1229 15.6 9 || Art Monk | 16 | 3 8 2.7 0 | 86 1186 13.8 8 || Ricky Sanders | 16 | 4 19 4.8 0 | 80 1138 14.2 4 |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+

1991:

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD | REC YARD AVG TD |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Gary Clark | 16 | 1 0 0.0 0 | 70 1340 19.1 10 || Art Monk | 16 | 9 19 2.1 0 | 71 1049 14.8 8 || Ricky Sanders | 16 | 7 47 6.7 1 | 45 580 12.9 5 |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+

The Washington offense has some room to grow.

 

[mbuehner]

I like the Moss prediction, but in order for Bryant to rank WR15 he is going to need to post on the order of 1000 yards and 8 tds.

Last season with Lloyd and Battle leading the way, all of SF wide recievers combined put up 1500y and 8tds, easily last in the league. They will be hard pressed not to improve on those numbers, but assuming Battle stays healthy he is going to see his share of balls as well.

Bryant has posted 1000 yards once in his career, and never more than 6 tds. He is moving to a new system with a 2nd year QB and a ton of question marks at RB. In order for Bryant to have a shot at 8, you got to figure at least 16 passing TDs out of this offense (and it seems generous giving him half of all recieving TDs, there would have to be serious chemistry there). Alex Smith threw a wopping 1 td in 9 games last season, and overall 8 were thrown. Basically the 9ers will have to double their passing TD production and improve their passing yardage by perhaps 50% to accomodate those numbers for Bryant. That is a tall order.

 

[Mark Wimer]

Everbody said Moss would suck in 2005. I chuckled and snagged him extremely cheaply in all of my redrafts. I am VERY glad he is being projected very low again.

Since he has been fully recovered from his rookie year injury, all Moss has done is average 1142 yards and 8 TDs per season over the last three seasons (on some pretty mediocre teams with mediocre QBs at best).

Everybody LOVES Steve Smith, and rightfully so, but what is the difference between the two guys?

Smith in HIS 3 healthy years averaged 1182 yards and 7 TDs per season (pretty much the same as Moss if not a few fewer fantasy points). He's small and ridiculously fast to go along with remarkable quuickness and solid hands (that should sound familiar too). He has the trust of his veteran QB (hmm, where have I heard that before?). He's in his prime at 27 years old (yeah - within a month of Moss).

Yet Smith is ranked 1st and Moss is ranked 15th in a recent keeper ranking list I saw.

Everbody acts like Moss' season was a fluke, but there is a very simple reason for his success - the guy is EXTREMELY talented. You don't put up 1500 yards in the NFL as a fluke. You just don't. Look back at some of the previous receivers who have put up those kind of numbers. You won't find too many 1 year wonders on the list.

Even funnier is the notion that Brandon Lloyd, who was just traded away by a team that has no proven receivers, is going to "steal" catches from Moss. Brandon Lloyd has by far more career drops than TDs. He's a 4th round NFL pick who has been given EVERY chance to be "the guy" and has failed. He's not big, he's not fast, and he has exceptionally poor concentration. That said, he could be a decent COMPLEMENTARY receiver and should be an upgrade at #2 over Patten.

So what do people think is going to happen? Everyone ASSUMES because of the #1/#2 ratio in Washington that Moss had a ton of targets in 2005. Believe it or not, he didn't. He was 13th in targets last year. He just did more WITH those targets than most of the guys in front of him like he did the year before and the year before that. So why in the world would we expect his opportunities to be dramatically reduced? If you were the O coordinator, would you design more plays for the guy who tends catch everything thrown to him and run into or near the end zone or the guy who catches less than half of the balls thrown to him and who is considerably slower and less elusive?

While the #2 receiver will probably see more action in 2006, the offense as a whole should improve (resulting in more potential targets and red-zone opps). The net effect on Moss should be minimal. He may drop a bit from his STELLAR numbers last year, but that's mostly just because they were so stellar and we can't expect as many thing to "go right" again this year. But there are only 3 or 4 receivers in the NFL I'd feel more comfortable with than Moss in 2006. Some of the guys I've seen ahead of him in rankings just blow my mind. SIXTH YEAR receiver Antonio Bryant who plays for maybe the worst offense in football and is one of the few guys in the league who actually rivals Lloyd in the "drops" category every year is one of them.

Obviously, we have a difference of opinion about these 2 players. That's what the preseason is for. You indict both Lloyd and Bryant for "drops", but ignore who they were working with last year (both had large chunks of the season with rookies - Charlie Frye and Alex Smith) - the timing and co-ordination between QB and receiver is no easy thing, and if the ball arrives just a tad early or late, the receiver ends up looking bad - but it can be more the fault of the passer than the receiver. First year QBs are notorious for having mechanical/timing issues at this level.

Regarding Moss being a top-5 receiver as far as "comfort" goes, take a look at his game logs Santana Moss Game logs - Moss can be an extremely frustrating player when it comes to consistency: last year, he was between 34 and 89 yards receiving with 0 TDs 9 different weeks (2-5 FP if 15 yards = 1 FP). 2-5 FP a week for half the season is not comfortable in my book - and almost everyone agrees that last year was a "career" season for Moss.

People who draft this guy as their #1 WR are not going to be happy this year, IMO. See my reasons earlier in the thread.

Conversely, I believe people who grab Antonio Bryant for their WR 2 are going to be pleased.