Who's the "safest" #1 WR pick (1 Viewer)

[scott46984]

For argument's sake, consider a scenario where you have your choice of any of the WR's. You of course want as much production as possible, but you also are willing to give up a bit of upside in favor of consistency. How would that change your rankings?

I'm inclined to say:

1) Harrison

2) Wayne

3) Chad Johnson

4) Fitz

3) S Smith

Ignoring ADP and other variables, and given this set of circumstances, who would be your top 5 WR's?

 

[jurb26]

Harrison, not close.

 

[Punchie]

Wayne

Harrison

Holt

CJ

Roy Williams

 

[zoonation]

TO or Harrison

Both will have huge games and never put up duds.

Edit to add Steve Smith in here too, for the same reasons.

 

[Sweat Hog]

Harrison, then Owens.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

WTF? Did TO die? The only receiver I'd take over TO this year is Smith and maybe Harrison.

 

[The_U]

Harrison, not close.

OK, so you're at -1 out of 5.For 2007 I'll take:ChadS. SmithWayneFitzgeraldOwens

 

[scott46984]

The Owens responses are very surprising to me, b/c in my mind he's exactly the opposite. Could have a big year and lots of multiple TD games, but with his personal history also has an increased potential to miss games and cost you points, which is the situation this scenario would seek to avoid.

Interesting perspectives...

 

[-OZ-]

Harrison, not close.

OK, so you're at -1 out of 5.For 2007 I'll take:ChadS. SmithWayneFitzgeraldOwens

How is Fitzgerald safer than Marvin?

 

[jurb26]

Harrison, not close.

OK, so you're at -1 out of 5.For 2007 I'll take:

Chad

S. Smith

Wayne

Fitzgerald

Owens

 

[zoonation]

Harrison, not close.

OK, so you're at -1 out of 5.For 2007 I'll take:ChadS. SmithWayneFitzgeraldOwens

right. because 85 didn't throw up about 8 dud games last year.

 

[CrossEyed]

I can't believe people are typing "TO" and "safe" in the same sentence.

 

[-Crippler-]

Harrison, not close.

OK, so you're at -1 out of 5.For 2007 I'll take:ChadS. SmithWayneFitzgeraldOwens

Just ignore all statistical data and history, and you're not quite as wrong

 

[zoonation]

The Owens responses are very surprising to me, b/c in my mind he's exactly the opposite. Could have a big year and lots of multiple TD games, but with his personal history also has an increased potential to miss games and cost you points, which is the situation this scenario would seek to avoid. Interesting perspectives...

with the exception of the suspension year, TO is as sure a thing as there is in fantasy football.

 

[joffer]

smith

 

[Chase Stuart]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

 

[jurb26]

The correct answer is Harrison by a good margin. No other WR offers the kind of consistency of Harrison and also offers WR #1 potential. Here are his finishes the past 8 years:

1

2

1

1

5

5

9

1

In that 8 years span he has missed 1 game. He has the best fantasy QB in the league, maybe the best QB in the NFL. He plays in a pass friendly offense. He plays in a dome. He has Wayne across the field from him to lessen coverage. He has scored double digit TDs each of the last 8 years, with a minimum of 1100 yds. This is no contest. He is not flashy and will not be on ESPN highlights every week. He will just be in the top 5 as sure s the sun comes up and possibly even break out to a #1 finish.

 

[scott46984]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

Curious why age is relevant to you in this discussion - less chance of injury or having this be the year of the big dropoff?

 

[PatytonsGhost]

I can't believe people are typing "TO" and "safe" in the same sentence.

Drama 49'ers, Philadelphia anyone....D a ....?Wayne, CJ, Harrison, Smith, Roy, Holt used to be

 

[Ministry of Pain]

My thoughts are in this thread.

Other thread Link

 

[gianmarco]

The Owens responses are very surprising to me, b/c in my mind he's exactly the opposite. Could have a big year and lots of multiple TD games, but with his personal history also has an increased potential to miss games and cost you points, which is the situation this scenario would seek to avoid. Interesting perspectives...

Go back and look at TO's 11 year history. Aside from his suspension year, where has he missed games or not produced? He's had the same character issues and fought with coaches and teammates all his career and it has NEVER affected his production. Pull up any year of his and show me the history that makes you think he has the potential to miss games. This "fear" of TO is so absurd. One year out of 11 where he gets suspended and now his personality makes him at risk to get suspended again and miss games? Unless you don't want your WR scoring TD's, TO is about the safest pick at WR there is. Harrison and TO are about as safe as they come.

 

[LordHusker]

Marvin Harrison has had double-digit TDs and minimum 1,100 yards EVERY YEAR since 1999.

Until he shows even a miniscule decline, I don't see how you even attempt to argue.

 

[Warehouse Nasty]

This is always hard to answer because everyone has a different definition of safe. That said, I think you have to narrow the pick down to a player from Cincy or Indy because neither team has a great defense and they both have great QB's that will have to pass a decent amount to win. That leaves Chad, Harrison, and Wayne from the list above. I think given Chad's up and down last year I'd rule him out. That leaves Harrison and Wayne. Wayne is younger and improving each year at a pretty impressive rate.

I'd say Wayne is the "safest" pick. That said, I picked the first WR in my draft last weekend and I took Smith and I'd do it again.

 

[Warehouse Nasty]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

Not sure the above fits the criteria the OP is looking for. He's willing to give up some #1 potential to ensure a top-5 type finish

 

[zoonation]

Marvin Harrison has had double-digit TDs and minimum 1,100 yards EVERY YEAR since 1999.Until he shows even a miniscule decline, I don't see how you even attempt to argue.

Only TO's numbers are similar.

 

[PatytonsGhost]

The Owens responses are very surprising to me, b/c in my mind he's exactly the opposite. Could have a big year and lots of multiple TD games, but with his personal history also has an increased potential to miss games and cost you points, which is the situation this scenario would seek to avoid. Interesting perspectives...

Go back and look at TO's 11 year history. Aside from his suspension year, where has he missed games or not produced? He's had the same character issues and fought with coaches and teammates all his career and it has NEVER affected his production. Pull up any year of his and show me the history that makes you think he has the potential to miss games. This "fear" of TO is so absurd. One year out of 11 where he gets suspended and now his personality makes him at risk to get suspended again and miss games? Unless you don't want your WR scoring TD's, TO is about the safest pick at WR there is. Harrison and TO are about as safe as they come.

Agree with your post, for me it is an irrational fear with his eradic behavior + i just don't like the guy. I have avoided him like the plague but its hard to argue consistent production...

 

[YoUnG GuNz]

1. Harrison

2. CJ

3. Smith

4. TO

5. Roy Williams

 

[zoonation]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

 

[Chase Stuart]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

Not sure the above fits the criteria the OP is looking for. He's willing to give up some #1 potential to ensure a top-5 type finish

Is that what safe means?Is the question "most likely to finish in the top five?"If so, I might have to reconsider my answer.

 

[scott46984]

The Owens responses are very surprising to me, b/c in my mind he's exactly the opposite. Could have a big year and lots of multiple TD games, but with his personal history also has an increased potential to miss games and cost you points, which is the situation this scenario would seek to avoid. Interesting perspectives...

Go back and look at TO's 11 year history. Aside from his suspension year, where has he missed games or not produced? He's had the same character issues and fought with coaches and teammates all his career and it has NEVER affected his production. Pull up any year of his and show me the history that makes you think he has the potential to miss games. This "fear" of TO is so absurd. One year out of 11 where he gets suspended and now his personality makes him at risk to get suspended again and miss games? Unless you don't want your WR scoring TD's, TO is about the safest pick at WR there is. Harrison and TO are about as safe as they come.

Don't dispute your point about the suspension, however I do believe that once something like this has happened before it's more likely a coach or organization will be quicker to put their foot down and be less forgiving if questionable behavior happens again. You make a good point though - sometimes when something happens like what happened to TO, it sticks in our minds to the point we "assume" it's likely to happen again, and it clouds judgement. That's why discussions like this are so helpful - thanks.

 

[jurb26]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Clearly a guy who has finished as the #1 WR once in his career is more likely to do it than a guy who has done it 4 times.

 

[Warehouse Nasty]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

Not sure the above fits the criteria the OP is looking for. He's willing to give up some #1 potential to ensure a top-5 type finish

Is that what safe means?Is the question "most likely to finish in the top five?"

If so, I might have to reconsider my answer.

I don't really know. I guess that's my interpretation. That's why in my original repsonse I said it's hard to answer because everyone has their own definition of "safe". I agree that Smith is most likely to end up #1 so that makes him a "safe" play but I'd guess his standard deviation would be higher than a guy like Wayne or Harrison because he doesn't have nearly as good a QB and he doesn't have another legitimate threat to take the pressure off.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

 

[scott46984]

My thoughts are in this thread.

Other thread Link

Nice analysis MOP - If I read it correctly you're advocating Harrison and Owens are the two safest, which supports what others are saying about Owens. Nice job. I must admit those of you pushing Owens are making a compelling argument.

 

[smcindoe]

I had the choice between protecting CJ and Harrison this year and chose CJ because I think the upside is a little better. But purely for consistency, I'd take Harrison.

 

[pizzatyme]

To answer the original question:

Harrison

Steve Smith

Owens

Holt

Then probably Wayne.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

Yes Chase but Harison has put up 8 straight double digit TD seasons...how many in a row does Smith have?

 

[jurb26]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Clearly a guy who has finished as the #1 WR once in his career is more likely to do it than a guy who has done it 4 times.

Who is more likely to finish #1 at QB this year: Peyton Manning (one time) or Daunte Culpepper (four times)? And for the record, Harrison's first #1 finish was even earlier than Culpepper's first number one finish.Steve Smith has been the better receiver the past two years, at least when Delhomme's on the field. Use the miserable Weinke numbers if you want, but I don't know why you think that would be a good predictor of future production. And we know how much David Carr loves his #1 WR, so losing Delhomme again might not hurt at all. Harrison's great, but he's not the same player he was in his late 20s.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

My thoughts are in this thread.

Other thread Link

Nice analysis MOP - If I read it correctly you're advocating Harrison and Owens are the two safest, which supports what others are saying about Owens. Nice job. I must admit those of you pushing Owens are making a compelling argument.

People want younger WR to have that 1,200-1,500 yd and 12-15 TD season but there are only 2-3 in the league that have done it with any consistency and those are TO, Harrison and Randy Moss back in the Viking Era...

 

[Warehouse Nasty]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

Seriously, how much better can Harrison and Wayne get? Their QB is on top of his game and can't likely play a whole lot better than he did last year. The only way their numbers go up is if their defense gets worse, their running game slips, or there becomes a discrepancy between the two WR's numbers. Smith, on the other hand, had a monster year playing 14 games under a QB who ranked 21st last year in fantasy points. There is certianly more room to improve on Delhomme's part than there is on Manning's part.

 

[jurb26]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Clearly a guy who has finished as the #1 WR once in his career is more likely to do it than a guy who has done it 4 times.

Who is more likely to finish #1 at QB this year: Peyton Manning (one time) or Daunte Culpepper (four times)? And for the record, Harrison's first #1 finish was even earlier than Culpepper's first number one finish.Steve Smith has been the better receiver the past two years, at least when Delhomme's on the field. Use the miserable Weinke numbers if you want, but I don't know why you think that would be a good predictor of future production. And we know how much David Carr loves his #1 WR, so losing Delhomme again might not hurt at all. Harrison's great, but he's not the same player he was in his late 20s.

Harrison was #1 last year.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

Sorry, Smith has averaged 0.81 TD/game, Harrison has averaged 0.80 TD/game. So Smith has averaged more TDs per game, but does have two fewer in three fewer games.

 

[Todem]

Marvin for the $$$$

 

[jurb26]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

Seriously, how much better can Harrison and Wayne get? Their QB is on top of his game and can't likely play a whole lot better than he did last year. The only way their numbers go up is if their defense gets worse, their running game slips, or there becomes a discrepancy between the two WR's numbers. Smith, on the other hand, had a monster year playing 14 games under a QB who ranked 21st last year in fantasy points. There is certianly more room to improve on Delhomme's part than there is on Manning's part.

Does Delhomme even know there are other WRs on his team than the guy who lines up as the #1?

 

[GoBills02]

Mine...

Harrison

TO

Smith

TJ (yes, I did type that)

CJ

On a side note, I grabbed Holt at 3.9 today as the 10th WR off the board.

 

[Warehouse Nasty]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

Seriously, how much better can Harrison and Wayne get? Their QB is on top of his game and can't likely play a whole lot better than he did last year. The only way their numbers go up is if their defense gets worse, their running game slips, or there becomes a discrepancy between the two WR's numbers. Smith, on the other hand, had a monster year playing 14 games under a QB who ranked 21st last year in fantasy points. There is certianly more room to improve on Delhomme's part than there is on Manning's part.

Does Delhomme even know there are other WRs on his team than the guy who lines up as the #1?

Doesn't appear so given his track record. That's another good argument for Smith.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

Yes Chase but Harison has put up 8 straight double digit TD seasons...how many in a row does Smith have?

That's great, but it's not going to help you for this year. Emmitt Smith had seven straight years with double digit TDs before dropping to 4 in his eight season in the league. Surely don't have Thomas Jones ranked above Reggie Bush, despite Jones having 1,000 combined yards in three straight years and Bush having done it just once.

 

[jurb26]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

Sorry, Smith has averaged 0.81 TD/game, Harrison has averaged 0.80 TD/game. So Smith has averaged more TDs per game, but does have two fewer in three fewer games.

4 fewer in 1 less game:Smith, 30 games 20 TDs

Harrison, 31 games 24 TDs

 

[zoonation]

Steve Smith's the safest #1 WR, because he's most likely to end up as WR1. He's also pretty young, relative to the other players.

why is that?

Because he's been unstoppable the last two years whenever he's playing and Delhomme is his QB. He's been a large amount better than Marvin Harrison when Manning is his QB, or Holt when Bulger is his QB, or Johnson when Palmer is his QB, or Owens when Romo is his QB. Look at the past two years. Harrison, e.g., has averaged 83.1 total yards per game in 30 games, excluding weeks 16/17 of 2005 (Harrison barely played). Smith has averaged 99.9 total yards per game over his last 27 games, excluding weeks 1/2 of last year (Smith injury) and weeks 14-16 of last year (Delhomme injury). It's not even very close. And Smith has the same number of TDs in fewer games.

fair enough. a little bit of cherry picking here, but I see your point.He has also been hurt a fair amount in a short period of time and has only finished first once. can't srgue with your stats though....he is pretty much a lock barring injury