WR Martavis Bryant (2 Viewers)

Clearly, Bryant has an attraction to the end zone. Combined college and pro, he has 18 touchdowns on just 71 catches.

ETA: Wow, that's over 25%. I assume its because he has the Wallace type speed for long TDs coupled with the large body for red one looks. Its a nice combo to have. That's right, 1 out of every 4 catches was for a TD.

Tomlin can sure pick WRs ... Wallace, Brown, Sanders, and now Bryant.

Tomlin's like the opposite of Belicheck with WR scouting.

mnmplayer said:

Clearly, Bryant has an attraction to the end zone. Combined college and pro, he has 18 touchdowns on just 71 catches.

ETA: Wow, that's over 25%. I assume its because he has the Wallace type speed for long TDs coupled with the large body for red one looks. Its a nice combo to have.

Tomlin can sure pick WRs ... Wallace, Brown, Sanders, and now Bryant.

Click to expand...

That's why I wanted Bryant in all my leagues. Ended up missing him in a startup (went 3 spots before I was going to pick him in the 12th) and he went just before my pick in a rookie draft at #24.

cstu said:

Bayhawks said:

Run It Up said:

Bayhawks said:

Because Wheaton is (barring injury) going to see around 30 targets over the rest of the season? (4/game)
Because Miller is (barring injury) going to see around 35 targets over the rest of the season? (5/game)

Click to expand...

I wouldn't count on these.

Click to expand...

Why not? Care to provide any reason why these guys will see their targets cut even more than I already cut them?

Click to expand...

The last 3 games Miller and Wheaton each have 11 targets (3.7 a game). I also think that a guy who has 5 TD's on 17 targets will get the ball more.

Click to expand...

And over those last 3 games Bryant averaged 5.7 targets. If you are going to use those games as your barometer, then you have to use them for Bryant, as well.

You are welcome to think Bryant is going to jump up to 10+ targets/game, but you'll end up being wrong.

Not all target are created equal. Bryant will not need 10 targets a game to be useful, because his targets are of high value. Compare his targets to a guy like Hawkins who gets 10 a game but will be lucky to score 5 TDs for the season, let alone during a 3 game stretch. However, 6-8 targets per game should yield good results. If he ever gets to 10 targets a game watch out. He is making progress towards more targets each week.

Last weeks game was the first time Bryant cracked the 50% mark in snaps and both his total snaps and snap percentage are trending up.

WK1-6 (0%)

WK7 22-of-65 snaps (33.8%) HOU

WK8 33-of-84 snaps (39.2%) IND

WK9 37-of-72 snaps (51.3%) BAL (started)

Considering that his usage correlates to a large increase in offensive production this has to reinforce the coaches decision to play him in a positive fashion as the result was an unprecedented offensive success. Bryant certainly weighs in on their minds as a key ingredient as he was the only major personnel change to the offense during this period. The other thing worthy of note is WK9 was the first game where Bryant "started".

Brown and Wheaten have maintained their snap percentages through this period, DHB (31%,34%,22%) and Moore (35%,27%,20%) have seen drops in snap percentage so I think it actually helps Wheaten and Brown or at least doesn't hurt them. The question is if he gets to 60+% usage, which WR will pay the price in snaps? Will DHB/Moore lose even more or will Wheaten pay the price? Not sure but it's doubtful that Bryant has peaked in usage as his speed/size combo is elite and his production warrants more increase so if the coaches feel he is ready he could eventually become and every-down starter.

I'm not sure if that happens this year, but it should happen eventually. He also fits as the perfect compliment to Brown, who is not a tall red zone threat. He may have blossomed so early because Bryant has never played the #1 target role with Sammy Watkins and DeAndre Hopkins as teammates in college so he is already comfortable making the most of his sparse target usage thus far as he has not showed lack of focus that can sometimes happen when #1 WR in college makes the transition to the NFL as #2 or #3 option. Bryant has certainly slid into this role gracefully.

Steelers wide receiver Martavis Bryant is no stranger to Rex Ryan

mnmplayer said:

Not all target are created equal. Bryant will not need 10 targets a game to be useful, because his targets are of high value. Compare his targets to a guy like Hawkins who gets 10 a game but will be lucky to score 5 TDs for the season, let alone during a 3 game stretch. However, 6-8 targets per game should yield good results. If he ever gets to 10 targets a game watch out. He is making progress towards more targets each week.

Last weeks game was the first time Bryant cracked the 50% mark in snaps and both his total snaps and snap percentage are trending up.

WK1-6 (0%)

WK7 22-of-65 snaps (33.8%) HOU

WK8 33-of-84 snaps (39.2%) IND

WK9 37-of-72 snaps (51.3%) BAL (started)

Considering that his usage correlates to a large increase in offensive production this has to reinforce the coaches decision to play him in a positive fashion as the result was an unprecedented offensive success. Bryant certainly weighs in on their minds as a key ingredient as he was the only major personnel change to the offense during this period. The other thing worthy of note is WK9 was the first game where Bryant "started".

Brown and Wheaten have maintained their snap percentages through this period, DHB (31%,34%,22%) and Moore (35%,27%,20%) have seen drops in snap percentage so I think it actually helps Wheaten and Brown or at least doesn't hurt them. The question is if he gets to 60+% usage, which WR will pay the price in snaps? Will DHB/Moore lose even more or will Wheaten pay the price? Not sure but it's doubtful that Bryant has peaked in usage as his speed/size combo is elite and his production warrants more increase so if the coaches feel he is ready he could eventually become and every-down starter.

I'm not sure if that happens this year, but it should happen eventually. He also fits as the perfect compliment to Brown, who is not a tall red zone threat. He may have blossomed so early because Bryant has never played the #1 target role with Sammy Watkins and DeAndre Hopkins as teammates in college so he is already comfortable making the most of his sparse target usage thus far as he has not showed lack of focus that can sometimes happen when #1 WR in college makes the transition to the NFL as #2 or #3 option. Bryant has certainly slid into this role gracefully.

Click to expand...

This is a good post, but you have the bolded section backwards. Bryant's snap increase came about because of the increased offensive production, not the increased offensive production came about because of Bryant's snap increase.

When the Steelers don't throw for 400 yards/game and 6 TDs/game, Bryant will not continue to put up 20 FF point games. When the offensive production levels off, so will his production.

He'll be a valuable WR2 (at worst a WR3), but he's not going to continue to put up weekly WR1 numbers this year.

Bayhawks said:

mnmplayer said:

Not all target are created equal. Bryant will not need 10 targets a game to be useful, because his targets are of high value. Compare his targets to a guy like Hawkins who gets 10 a game but will be lucky to score 5 TDs for the season, let alone during a 3 game stretch. However, 6-8 targets per game should yield good results. If he ever gets to 10 targets a game watch out. He is making progress towards more targets each week.

Last weeks game was the first time Bryant cracked the 50% mark in snaps and both his total snaps and snap percentage are trending up.

WK1-6 (0%)

WK7 22-of-65 snaps (33.8%) HOU

WK8 33-of-84 snaps (39.2%) IND

WK9 37-of-72 snaps (51.3%) BAL (started)

Considering that his usage correlates to a large increase in offensive production this has to reinforce the coaches decision to play him in a positive fashion as the result was an unprecedented offensive success. Bryant certainly weighs in on their minds as a key ingredient as he was the only major personnel change to the offense during this period. The other thing worthy of note is WK9 was the first game where Bryant "started".

Brown and Wheaten have maintained their snap percentages through this period, DHB (31%,34%,22%) and Moore (35%,27%,20%) have seen drops in snap percentage so I think it actually helps Wheaten and Brown or at least doesn't hurt them. The question is if he gets to 60+% usage, which WR will pay the price in snaps? Will DHB/Moore lose even more or will Wheaten pay the price? Not sure but it's doubtful that Bryant has peaked in usage as his speed/size combo is elite and his production warrants more increase so if the coaches feel he is ready he could eventually become and every-down starter.

I'm not sure if that happens this year, but it should happen eventually. He also fits as the perfect compliment to Brown, who is not a tall red zone threat. He may have blossomed so early because Bryant has never played the #1 target role with Sammy Watkins and DeAndre Hopkins as teammates in college so he is already comfortable making the most of his sparse target usage thus far as he has not showed lack of focus that can sometimes happen when #1 WR in college makes the transition to the NFL as #2 or #3 option. Bryant has certainly slid into this role gracefully.

Click to expand...

This is a good post, but you have the bolded section backwards. Bryant's snap increase came about because of the increased offensive production, not the increased offensive production came about because of Bryant's snap increase.

When the Steelers don't throw for 400 yards/game and 6 TDs/game, Bryant will not continue to put up 20 FF point games. When the offensive production levels off, so will his production.

He'll be a valuable WR2 (at worst a WR3), but he's not going to continue to put up weekly WR1 numbers this year.

Click to expand...

Unless he does.

Stranger things have happened.

cor·re·late
verb
verb: correlate; 3rd person present: correlates; past tense: correlated; past participle: correlated; gerund or present participle: correlating
ˈkôrəˌlāt,ˈkärəˌlāt/

1. 1.
   have a mutual relationship or connection, in which one thing affects or depends on another.
   "the study found that success in the educational system correlates highly with class"
   synonyms: correspond to/with, match, parallel, agree with, tally with, tie in with, be consistent with, be compatible with, be consonant with, coordinate with, dovetail (with), relate to, conform to;
   

I don't think the bolded is wrong or backwards at all... catching 42% of the non garbage time TD passes definitely has a mutual relationship compatible & consistent with the outcome. In fact, it never has happened in Ben's career prior to Bryant taking the field. I dare say this would not have happened without Bryant on the field, but that is not provable, just like I cant go back and say how good Jordan would have been without Pippen on the court for a 3 game stretch, but to say that these TDs simply would have gone to Moore/DHB/Wheaten would not fall in line with the first 6 games as we saw no signs of this with Ben throwing 1.3 TDs per game over the first 6 games of the season with these guys playing in Bryant's position prior to Bryant stepping on the field. This wasn't some prolific offense like Denver throwing 3-4 TDs/game before the back to back 6 TD outbursts. It was struggling or mid range at best.

his snap count increase came as a result of the horrid offense and Wheaton sucking hind ###

mnmplayer said:

cor·re·late
verb
verb: correlate; 3rd person present: correlates; past tense: correlated; past participle: correlated; gerund or present participle: correlating
ˈkôrəˌlāt,ˈkärəˌlāt/

1. 1.
   have a mutual relationship or connection, in which one thing affects or depends on another.
   "the study found that success in the educational system correlates highly with class"
   synonyms: correspond to/with, match, parallel, agree with, tally with, tie in with, be consistent with, be compatible with, be consonant with, coordinate with, dovetail (with), relate to, conform to;
   

I don't think the bolded is wrong or backwards at all... catching 42% of the non garbage time TD passes definitely has a mutual relationship compatible & consistent with the outcome. In fact, it never has happened in Ben's career prior to Bryant taking the field. I dare say this would not have happened without Bryant on the field, but that is not provable, just like I cant go back and say how good Jordan would have been without Pippen on the court for a 3 game stretch, but to say that these TDs simply would have gone to Moore/DHB/Wheaten would not fall in line with the first 6 games as we saw no signs of this with Ben throwing 1.3 TDs per game over the first 6 games of the season with these guys playing in Bryant's position prior to Bryant stepping on the field. This wasn't some prolific offense like Denver throwing 3-4 TDs/game before the back to back 6 TD outbursts. It was struggling or mid range at best.

Click to expand...

If you merely meant that they occurred at the same time, then I stand corrected, however, the way it was worded, I read it to mean that you believed that Bryant's presence was responsible for the offensive increase. That's not the case, he just happened to be one of those who benefited from it. Once could say that Markus Wheaton's improved play correlated with the increased offensive performance, or that Bell's poor rushing correlated with the increased offensive performance (as he had 2 of his worst rushing days the last 2 weeks). While both statements would be true, if one meant that those things were causal, with regards to the increased offensive performance, they'd be just as wrong as saying Bryant's presence was a cause.

Bayhawks said:

mnmplayer said:

Not all target are created equal. Bryant will not need 10 targets a game to be useful, because his targets are of high value. Compare his targets to a guy like Hawkins who gets 10 a game but will be lucky to score 5 TDs for the season, let alone during a 3 game stretch. However, 6-8 targets per game should yield good results. If he ever gets to 10 targets a game watch out. He is making progress towards more targets each week.

Last weeks game was the first time Bryant cracked the 50% mark in snaps and both his total snaps and snap percentage are trending up.

WK1-6 (0%)

WK7 22-of-65 snaps (33.8%) HOU

WK8 33-of-84 snaps (39.2%) IND

WK9 37-of-72 snaps (51.3%) BAL (started)

Considering that his usage correlates to a large increase in offensive production this has to reinforce the coaches decision to play him in a positive fashion as the result was an unprecedented offensive success. Bryant certainly weighs in on their minds as a key ingredient as he was the only major personnel change to the offense during this period. The other thing worthy of note is WK9 was the first game where Bryant "started".

Brown and Wheaten have maintained their snap percentages through this period, DHB (31%,34%,22%) and Moore (35%,27%,20%) have seen drops in snap percentage so I think it actually helps Wheaten and Brown or at least doesn't hurt them. The question is if he gets to 60+% usage, which WR will pay the price in snaps? Will DHB/Moore lose even more or will Wheaten pay the price? Not sure but it's doubtful that Bryant has peaked in usage as his speed/size combo is elite and his production warrants more increase so if the coaches feel he is ready he could eventually become and every-down starter.

I'm not sure if that happens this year, but it should happen eventually. He also fits as the perfect compliment to Brown, who is not a tall red zone threat. He may have blossomed so early because Bryant has never played the #1 target role with Sammy Watkins and DeAndre Hopkins as teammates in college so he is already comfortable making the most of his sparse target usage thus far as he has not showed lack of focus that can sometimes happen when #1 WR in college makes the transition to the NFL as #2 or #3 option. Bryant has certainly slid into this role gracefully.

Click to expand...

This is a good post, but you have the bolded section backwards. Bryant's snap increase came about because of the increased offensive production, not the increased offensive production came about because of Bryant's snap increase.

When the Steelers don't throw for 400 yards/game and 6 TDs/game, Bryant will not continue to put up 20 FF point games. When the offensive production levels off, so will his production.

He'll be a valuable WR2 (at worst a WR3), but he's not going to continue to put up weekly WR1 numbers this year.

Click to expand...

I think it's safe to say, after last week's 6th TD pass, that Tomlin, Haley and Big Ben really like putting the pedal to the metal and don't plan on running a conservative offense regardless of how much they are beating an opponent. That bodes well for us Bryant owners. It appears they can't get enough of scoring TDs. It's like a bunch of kids in a newfound candy store.

OK, I don't want to put words in your mouth but it sounds like you think Ben scores those TDs without Bryant and that Bryant was just a benefactor to Ben's elite record breaking skillset. Either way you want his WRs and Brown would be tough to pry from someone else's roster while Bryant seems headed for #2 duties.

mnmplayer said:

OK, I don't want to put words in your mouth but it sounds like you think Ben scores those TDs without Bryant and that Bryant was just a benefactor to Ben's elite record breaking skillset. Either way you want his WRs and Brown would be tough to pry from someone else's roster while Bryant seems headed for #2 duties.

Click to expand...

I don't think he gets 6 TDs without Bryant.

lod01 said:

mnmplayer said:

OK, I don't want to put words in your mouth but it sounds like you think Ben scores those TDs without Bryant and that Bryant was just a benefactor to Ben's elite record breaking skillset. Either way you want his WRs and Brown would be tough to pry from someone else's roster while Bryant seems headed for #2 duties.

Click to expand...

I don't think he gets 6 TDs without Bryant.

Click to expand...

Me either, but that's obvious from my narrative. My point is regardless of the narrative as to why, you want Bryant. I guess how badly depends on your narrative.

lod01 said:

Bayhawks said:

mnmplayer said:

Not all target are created equal. Bryant will not need 10 targets a game to be useful, because his targets are of high value. Compare his targets to a guy like Hawkins who gets 10 a game but will be lucky to score 5 TDs for the season, let alone during a 3 game stretch. However, 6-8 targets per game should yield good results. If he ever gets to 10 targets a game watch out. He is making progress towards more targets each week.

Last weeks game was the first time Bryant cracked the 50% mark in snaps and both his total snaps and snap percentage are trending up.

WK1-6 (0%)

WK7 22-of-65 snaps (33.8%) HOU

WK8 33-of-84 snaps (39.2%) IND

WK9 37-of-72 snaps (51.3%) BAL (started)

Considering that his usage correlates to a large increase in offensive production this has to reinforce the coaches decision to play him in a positive fashion as the result was an unprecedented offensive success. Bryant certainly weighs in on their minds as a key ingredient as he was the only major personnel change to the offense during this period. The other thing worthy of note is WK9 was the first game where Bryant "started".

Brown and Wheaten have maintained their snap percentages through this period, DHB (31%,34%,22%) and Moore (35%,27%,20%) have seen drops in snap percentage so I think it actually helps Wheaten and Brown or at least doesn't hurt them. The question is if he gets to 60+% usage, which WR will pay the price in snaps? Will DHB/Moore lose even more or will Wheaten pay the price? Not sure but it's doubtful that Bryant has peaked in usage as his speed/size combo is elite and his production warrants more increase so if the coaches feel he is ready he could eventually become and every-down starter.

I'm not sure if that happens this year, but it should happen eventually. He also fits as the perfect compliment to Brown, who is not a tall red zone threat. He may have blossomed so early because Bryant has never played the #1 target role with Sammy Watkins and DeAndre Hopkins as teammates in college so he is already comfortable making the most of his sparse target usage thus far as he has not showed lack of focus that can sometimes happen when #1 WR in college makes the transition to the NFL as #2 or #3 option. Bryant has certainly slid into this role gracefully.

Click to expand...

This is a good post, but you have the bolded section backwards. Bryant's snap increase came about because of the increased offensive production, not the increased offensive production came about because of Bryant's snap increase.When the Steelers don't throw for 400 yards/game and 6 TDs/game, Bryant will not continue to put up 20 FF point games. When the offensive production levels off, so will his production.

He'll be a valuable WR2 (at worst a WR3), but he's not going to continue to put up weekly WR1 numbers this year.

Click to expand...

I think it's safe to say, after last week's 6th TD pass, that Tomlin, Haley and Big Ben really like putting the pedal to the metal and don't plan on running a conservative offense regardless of how much they are beating an opponent. That bodes well for us Bryant owners. It appears they can't get enough of scoring TDs. It's like a bunch of kids in a newfound candy store.

Click to expand...

So, it's safe to say after 2 games, that they like scoring points? You take 2 games & throw out 2.5 seasons where they were much more inclined to play it conservative? That seems....smart.

One thing that has changed is their defense ranking has slipped from #1 in 2011 to #20 today, and they just lost two more key players in Polamalu and Shazier that won't play this week.

Defensive Rank in points scored:

2011 #1

2012 #6

2013 #14

2014 #20

2014 is the worst ranked defense since 1988 thus far. There is more need to throw the ball now than at any point in Ben's career. I'd say that's another feather in the Bryant cap.

Bayhawks said:

So, it's safe to say after 2 games, that they like scoring points? You take 2 games & throw out 2.5 seasons where they were much more inclined to play it conservative? That seems....smart.

Click to expand...

Not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that, from what I saw last week, I believe that they think they have now assembled a team that can put up points at will and want to. They didn't need to score that 6th passing. They had already pummeled the Ravens. TD. When they did, Tomlin was on the sidelines laughing.

Previous teams the last 2 years were not even remotely this explosive. Brown has even more experience. Bell is better than any RB they have had recently, Bryant, after only a handful of games, is more feared now than any WR opposite Brown.

lod01 said:

Bayhawks said:

So, it's safe to say after 2 games, that they like scoring points? You take 2 games & throw out 2.5 seasons where they were much more inclined to play it conservative? That seems....smart.

Click to expand...

Not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that, from what I saw last week, I believe that they think they have now assembled a team that can put up points at will and want to. They didn't need to score that 6th passing. They had already pummeled the Ravens. TD. When they did, Tomlin was on the sidelines laughing.

Previous teams the last 2 years were not even remotely this explosive. Brown has even more experience. Bell is better than any RB they have had recently, Bryant, after only a handful of games, is more feared now than any WR opposite Brown.

Click to expand...

It really doesn't matter what you think you saw on the sidelines, or that Tomlin was laughing during the end of the game.

What matters is:

1-The Steelers aren't going to turn into the 2007 Patriots, or the 2013 Broncos. They had a pretty good offense under Aryans: Wallace was a big deep threat, Brown breaking into the 1000 yard club, but they "retired" Aryans in order to get "back to Steelers football." While they have deviated from that the last 2 weeks, it isn't going to be completely gone, forever.

2-Even if they did want to go balls out air attack, they aren't going to throw for 40 times for 400 yards and 6 TDs each week. It isn't going to happen. So, when that 40 attempts drops to 35, and those 400 yards drops to 280, and those 6 TDs drop to 2-3, Bryant, as the 3rd receiving option, isn't going to be the FF point producer he has been the last 2 weeks.

Like anyone here thinks that Ben is going to throw for 6 TDs....even ever again. You can stop posting that. Fact is, this offense has received a significant upgrade with Bryant in the lineup.

lod01 said:

Like anyone here thinks that Ben is going to throw for 6 TDs....even ever again. You can stop posting that. Fact is, this offense has received a significant upgrade with Bryant in the lineup.

Click to expand...

Definitely.

And as he gets more snaps, more reps, he's going to get more confident, more comfortable.

Breakout star.

To the championship!

The 6TD straw man argument can be retired as never to happen again, except a week later it did, now the new straw man is Ben won't match the 2007 Patriots or the 2013 DEN Broncos? Really? Don't go out on a limb. We were all expecting 42 more TDs this year over the next 7 games and for Ben to throw 64 TDs in 2014.

mnmplayer said:

The 6TD straw man argument can be retired as never to happen again, except a week later it did, now the new straw man is Ben won't match the 2007 Patriots or the 2013 DEN Broncos? Really? Don't go out on a limb. We were all expecting 42 more TDs this year over the next 7 games and for Ben to throw 64 TDs in 2014.

Click to expand...

Straw man? WTF are you talking about?

In the last 2 games, Bryant has been a viable FF WR1. In those same 2 games, Roethlisberger threw the ball 86 times for 12 TDs & 862 yards. Bryant had 12 targets, 8 catches, 127 yards and 4 TDs.

So, Roethlisberger is averaging 431 yards & 6 TDs in the 2 games that Bryant has been a FF WR1. Over his career, he has averaged 240 yards and 1.6 TDs per game. Over the 1st 7 games of this season, he was averaging 265 yards & 1.4 TDs per game. Even if you assume that Pitt continues to throw the ball more (which isn't a given, despite many posters hoping for this to happen), you're looking at, optimistically, 300 yards and 2 TDs per game.

Bryant has gotten only 14% of the targets, and only 14% of the yards during the 2-game explosion when he's been a FF WR1, but he garnered 33% of the TDs. If you make the optimistic projections I noted above, and continue to give Bryant 14% of the yards and 33% of the TDs, he will average 39 yards and .66 TDs a game. Thats 7.86 FF points/game (non-PPR).

So, if you are expecting Bryant to be a WR1 for the rest of the year, you need him to average about 12 FF points/game. So, you are expecting him to increase his already ridiculously high % of the targets, or you are expect him to jump past Bell and/or Brown in the receiving hierarchy in Pitt, or you expect Pittsburgh to continue to put up the insane passing numbers that they have over the last 2 weeks. None of those 3 things are likely.

So, what, exactly is the straw man? Explain, please, how you expect Bryant to average 12 FF points/game the rest of the year. Because unless you can do that, you agree with me that he is likely to be a WR2 going forward.

I am not thinking of him as a WR1. If he is a WR2 as a breakout rookie, I am happy.

Bayhawks said:

mnmplayer said:

cor·re·late
verb
verb: correlate; 3rd person present: correlates; past tense: correlated; past participle: correlated; gerund or present participle: correlating
ˈkôrəˌlāt,ˈkärəˌlāt/

1. 1.
   have a mutual relationship or connection, in which one thing affects or depends on another.
   "the study found that success in the educational system correlates highly with class"
   synonyms: correspond to/with, match, parallel, agree with, tally with, tie in with, be consistent with, be compatible with, be consonant with, coordinate with, dovetail (with), relate to, conform to;
   

I don't think the bolded is wrong or backwards at all... catching 42% of the non garbage time TD passes definitely has a mutual relationship compatible & consistent with the outcome. In fact, it never has happened in Ben's career prior to Bryant taking the field. I dare say this would not have happened without Bryant on the field, but that is not provable, just like I cant go back and say how good Jordan would have been without Pippen on the court for a 3 game stretch, but to say that these TDs simply would have gone to Moore/DHB/Wheaten would not fall in line with the first 6 games as we saw no signs of this with Ben throwing 1.3 TDs per game over the first 6 games of the season with these guys playing in Bryant's position prior to Bryant stepping on the field. This wasn't some prolific offense like Denver throwing 3-4 TDs/game before the back to back 6 TD outbursts. It was struggling or mid range at best.

Click to expand...

If you merely meant that they occurred at the same time, then I stand corrected, however, the way it was worded, I read it to mean that you believed that Bryant's presence was responsible for the offensive increase. That's not the case, he just happened to be one of those who benefited from it. Once could say that Markus Wheaton's improved play correlated with the increased offensive performance, or that Bell's poor rushing correlated with the increased offensive performance (as he had 2 of his worst rushing days the last 2 weeks). While both statements would be true, if one meant that those things were causal, with regards to the increased offensive performance, they'd be just as wrong as saying Bryant's presence was a cause.

Click to expand...

That is a ridiculous position to take. You think Calvin Johnson's presence on the field with Detroit and the prolific production he enjoys are mere coincidences too?

As an owner who junked Wheaton in favor of Bryant, I can tell you that Bryant is literally and figuratively head and shoulders above Wheaton and his presence on the field, often at the expense of Wheaton, has been a huge positive factor for the Pittsburgh offensive surge of late.

"A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument.[1] To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument."

I called attention to the 2007 Patriots or 2013 Broncos comparison, as no one was making that outlandish claim for this offense. If they were please provide a link. Then you spent 4 paragraphs arguing that he is not a WR1. Waste of time pointing out the obvious. Where was that claim by anyone in this thread?

He is most certainly a WR that was picked up off the waiver wire in redraft/ekeper as a WR5 or WR6 as he was not even activated until week7 and as of last week is already cracking my lineup as a WR3 with upside. The entire point is you want him on your team as he has very high upside, with increasing snaps/opps and happens to also have elite measurable so I posted about this aligning of the stars in the shark pool. That was my narrative not that he is a WR1 from here on out (even though as you pointed out he has produced as such which I didn't even take into consideration, so thanks for that info). In fact, I described him on his own team as the 2nd best WR to benefit from A. Brown's and L. Bell's attention.

Then you end with an ironic statement "So, what, exactly is the straw man? Explain, please, how you expect Bryant to average 12 FF points/game the rest of the year." Again, where did I or anyone else claim that I expect him to average 12ppg the rest of the year? You are arguing with yourself. I said he was the missing piece to the puzzle, that the defense is ranked 20th where it used to be ranked #1 and that Ben will need to throw the ball more (situational improvement) and actually had a good WR RZ target now who is seeing increasing snaps (opportunity) who also has elite speed/size (talent). When talent meets opportunity meets a good situation you have good upside potential and he is already producing good value already for his (free) WW price.

Somebody stated: "He'll be a valuable WR2 (at worst a WR3), but he's not going to continue to put up weekly WR1 numbers this year." Nobody here argued with that. I never even claimed he was a WR2, so it sounds like we both think he is starter material on a start 3WR team. It seems like we are in agreement about Bryant.

We agree that this is not the 2007 Patriot offense, check

We agree this is not the Denver 2013 Offense, check

We agree Bryant is not a WR1, check

We agree Bryant is at least WR3 with upside, check

Feel free to check off all the other items for which you agree. I am not asserting anything more than below.

I think we can all agree that with Pitt being ranked 20th in D Ben will throw a lot more than in the past.

I think we can agree Bryant has elite measurables

I think we can agree his snap counts are increasing

I think we can agree he is in a good situation, with increasing opportunity

I think we can agree Bryant is a TD magnet.

I think we can agree to buy Bryant at a price of WR3/WR4

I think we can agree that these types of situations have potential to grow to something bigger if development continues on the same trajectory.

Cheesedawg said:

That is a ridiculous position to take. You think Calvin Johnson's presence on the field with Detroit and the prolific production he enjoys are mere coincidences too?

Click to expand...

1-Martavis Bryant is not Calvin Johnson.

2-We have a much larger sample size to work with when discussing Calvin Johnson's impact on Detroit's offense vs Bryant's impact on Pittsburgh's.

3-Calvin Johnson has been the target of 29% of his QB's passes since he began (which includes his rookie year when he wasn't the #1 option, and includes any games when he didn't play due to injury or was used as a decoy like the last few weeks). Bryant was the target of 13% of Roethlisberger's passes the last 2 weeks.

So no, it's not a ridiculous position to take; what's ridiculous is you thinking that comparing Bryant, a rookie with 3 NFL games to his credit would have even remotely the same impact on his team's offense as one of the best WRs in the history of the NFL.

Cheesedawg said:

As an owner who junked Wheaton in favor of Bryant, I can tell you that Bryant is literally and figuratively head and shoulders above Wheaton and his presence on the field, often at the expense of Wheaton, has been a huge positive factor for the Pittsburgh offensive surge of late.

Click to expand...

Yeah, this action wouldn't cloud your perception of the situation, would it?

The FACT is that Bryant hasn't played on even 50% of the snaps the last 2 weeks. He has benefited form the offensive surge, not been the cause of it.

As for suggesting that his presence on the field has come at the expense of Wheaton, maybe you should check your facts. Bryant's insertion into the lineup came at the expense of Justin Brown, not Wheaton. Brown was the 3rd WR for the first 6 weeks, and he was getting virtually the same % of snaps as Bryant is now. Since Bryant became active, Brown hasn't gotten a helmet once.

But you dropped Wheaton for Bryant, and you want to see what you want to see, and you want to have found the WW hit for the season, so you think that you have some special insight into the Steelers' offensive meetings.

mnmplayer said:

"A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument.[1] To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument."

I called attention to the 2007 Patriots or 2013 Broncos comparison, as no one was making that outlandish claim for this offense. If they were please provide a link. Then you spent 4 paragraphs arguing that he is not a WR1. Waste of time pointing out the obvious. Where was that claim by anyone in this thread?

Click to expand...

A misrepresentation of an opponent's argument, huh? Kind of like ignoring my point that Bryant's numbers will decline when the Steeler's passing numbers normalize?

Here is the original post of yours that I responded to:

Considering that his usage correlates to a large increase in offensive production this has to reinforce the coaches decision to play him in a positive fashion as the result was an unprecedented offensive success.

Click to expand...

You brought up the offensive success that the Steelers had; offensive success that you believe was a result of Bryant's usage. My argument was that the Steelers offensive success wasn't a result of Bryant's presence (as indicated by his 13% target and yardage numbers), rather that Bryant benefited from the Steelers 2 game passing game explosion.

I only mentioned the 07 Pats and 13 Broncos to demonstrate that these Steelers aren't those teams, and for Bryant to continue to put up the numbers he has been doing, the Steelers would need to be like those teams. When they return to more normal offensive production, Bryant's FF production will regress, as well, unless you expect him to jump past Brown/Bell, or score even a higher percentage of his teams TDs than he did the last 2 games. Neither is likely.

So the only person creating a straw-man is you. You're ignoring the basis of my argument, which is that Bryant's numbers will decline when the Steelers passing numbers normalize, and instead focusing on the small comment about the 07 Pats and 13 Broncos.

BTW-the "someone" who said ""He'll be a valuable WR2 (at worst a WR3), but he's not going to continue to put up weekly WR1 numbers this year" was me, and if you're not arguing with that, the only argument you seem to be having is with the strawman that YOU created.

"Super Mart" is now an official entry on his Wikipedia page.

Bayhawks said:

BTW-the "someone" who said ""He'll be a valuable WR2 (at worst a WR3), but he's not going to continue to put up weekly WR1 numbers this year" was me, and if you're not arguing with that, the only argument you seem to be having is with the strawman that YOU created.

Click to expand...

Irony is lost on you isn't it. I meant that you agreed with me. And I still don't think you understand what straw man means. Ignoring a comment is not creating a straw man, creating false assertions is. This isn't going anywhere.

mnmplayer said:

Bayhawks said:

BTW-the "someone" who said ""He'll be a valuable WR2 (at worst a WR3), but he's not going to continue to put up weekly WR1 numbers this year" was me, and if you're not arguing with that, the only argument you seem to be having is with the strawman that YOU created.

Click to expand...

Irony is lost on you isn't it. I meant that you agreed with me. And I still don't think you understand what straw man means. Ignoring a comment is not creating a straw man, creating false assertions is. This isn't going anywhere.

Click to expand...

You took this snippet from one of my posts:

1-The Steelers aren't going to turn into the 2007 Patriots, or the 2013 Broncos. They had a pretty good offense under Aryans: Wallace was a big deep threat, Brown breaking into the 1000 yard club, but they "retired" Aryans in order to get "back to Steelers football." While they have deviated from that the last 2 weeks, it isn't going to be completely gone, forever.

2-Even if they did want to go balls out air attack, they aren't going to throw for 40 times for 400 yards and 6 TDs each week. It isn't going to happen. So, when that 40 attempts drops to 35, and those 400 yards drops to 280, and those 6 TDs drop to 2-3, Bryant, as the 3rd receiving option, isn't going to be the FF point producer he has been the last 2 weeks.

Click to expand...

One line where I mentioned the 07 Pats and 13 Broncos; where the rest of the post was citing the fact that when Pitt's passing numbers normalize, Bryant's numbers will drop off. Then you go on to ridicule the idea that Ben Roethlisberger would throw 42 more TD passes this year, CREATING THE FALSE ASSERTION that I had suggested that as a possibility. Then you proceed to focus on the Pats/Broncos mention, as if it were the main point of the argument.

So let's recap:

You CREATE THE FALSE ASSERTION that my argument is that since Ben won't throw 42 more TD passes that Bryant is worthless.

In doing so, you MISREPRESENTED MY ARGUMENT.

The goal, one can only imagine, is that people reading this thread don't actually read my actual argument, and believe the straw-man YOU are creating, which meets this criteria: TO BE SUCCESSFUL, A STRAW MAN ARGUMENT REQUIRES THAT THE AUDIENCE BE IGNORANT OR UNINFORMED OF THE ORIGINAL ARGUMENT.

Seems like you are the one who doesn't understand what a straw-man, because the definition YOU posted proves that is exactly what you have done.

I just want to talk about Martavis, did I enter the marriage counseling thread?

I'm placing my bets that he sniffs WR1 #'s next year (and possibly ROS) assuming he and Ben stay healthy. Now I jinxed it damn.

This kid is still on my waiver wire. I don't see him continuing because I honestly don't see big Ben as a great qb and putting up Peyton Manning numbers the rest of the year. Someone can try and sway me but right now I'm firmly on seeing him as nothing more than a Wr3

Here are the only assertions I have made:

We agree that this is not the 2007 Patriot offense, check

We agree this is not the Denver 2013 Offense, check

We agree Bryant is not a WR1, check

We agree Bryant is at least WR3 with upside, check

Feel free to check off all the other items for which you agree. I am not asserting anything more than below.

I think we can all agree that with Pitt being ranked 20th in D Ben will throw a lot more than in the past.

I think we can agree Bryant has elite measurables

I think we can agree his snap counts are increasing

I think we can agree he is in a good situation, with increasing opportunity

I think we can agree Bryant is a TD magnet.

I think we can agree to buy Bryant at a price of WR3/WR4

I think we can agree that these types of situations have potential to grow to something bigger if development continues on the same trajectory.

This is how this conversation has gone thus far:

[SIZE=medium]Me, “Carl Lewis is great jumper and helped his track team break NCAA records. “[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You, “You think Carl Lewis can jump to the moon? Prove it!”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Me, “No I said Carl Lewis is a great jumper. He won his NCAA long jump competition and also is developing his speed so his jumps could get even longer in the future. His full potential has not yet been tapped. Plus he is getting more opportunity and his coaches put him in the lineup recently where he performed well.”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You, “It’s physically impossible for Carl Lewis to jump to the moon, scientifically impossible for a man to out jump the gravitational pull of the earth, even if he could get close enough to the moon for the moons gravity to pull him in, he couldn’t survive long enough in space without the earth’s atmosphere. Besides that its -70 degrees Celsius in space; no way he could survive … blah blah blah for 4 paragraphs citing how Carl Lewis cannot jump to the moon.”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Me, “I only asserted that he was a great jumper with elite physical skills and can see how he could even improve on his jump length going forward. He may even compete in the Olympics someday.”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You, “Hahaha, YOU think Carl Lewis can jump to the moon! I have clearly shown how this is physically AND scientifically impossible! Sure he could make it to the Olympics someday, but I win this argument hands down!”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Me *Sigh*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]That’s a straw man with a twist of irony at the end in that we both agree Carl Lewis could make it to the Olympics. What are we arguing about here? We both like Bryant?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You make outlandish claims like "Ben won't throw 6 TDs per game" , "The sun wont rise from the West!" "Gravity cannot be defeated!" We know all this. What do you have to add? I don't need to read 4 paragraphs about how he won't produce WR1 numbers every week. That's obvious to everyone.[/SIZE]

RealReactions said:

This kid is still on my waiver wire. I don't see him continuing because I honestly don't see big Ben as a great qb and putting up Peyton Manning numbers the rest of the year. Someone can try and sway me but right now I'm firmly on seeing him as nothing more than a Wr3

Click to expand...

If this is a 6 team league than I would leave him on the waiver wire. However if there are 6+ teams I would pounce on him....unless you are only allotted one bench spot.

mnmplayer said:

Here are the only assertions I have made:

We agree that this is not the 2007 Patriot offense, check

We agree this is not the Denver 2013 Offense, check

We agree Bryant is not a WR1, check

We agree Bryant is at least WR3 with upside, check

Click to expand...

Here are the only assertions I have made:

The Steelers offense isn't going to be as pass heavy as teams like the 2007 Pats or 2013 Broncos, check

When the Steelers offense normalized, Bryant's FF production will decline, check

Bryant, for this year, is likely a WR2, or a strong WR3, check

Note, that NOWHERE in there does it say "Anyone who likes Bryant expects Ben to throw 6 TDs every game."

As for your Carl Lewis comparison, you're a little off:

You, [SIZE=medium]“Carl Lewis is great jumper and helped his track team break NCAA records. “[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Me, “Good point, but I think Carl Lewis benefited from the other members of his team, rather than him being the catalyst for their record-breaking performance."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You, [/SIZE]"According to the dictionary definition of helped, it's obvious that I'm right."

Me, "If you only meant that Lewis was part of the NCAA record, I stand corrected, the way I read it, I thought you meant Lewis was the reason they broke the records."

3rd poster, "It's obvious that Carl Lewis' track coach is going to change his entire coaching philosophy to give Carl Lewis the chance to jump to the moon."

Me (to 3rd poster), "You think that Lewis' coach is going to change how he has coached for years because of 2 great performances? That sounds smart."

3rd poster "I saw his coach smiling when they broke the NCAA record. To me, that means everything he has shown us about how he coaches over the last 8 years means nothing."

Me (to 3rd poster), "It doesn't matter that he's smiling. He has coached one way his entire career, he's not going to change because of 2 great performances. Lewis' coach isn't Coach A, who always encourages his long jumpers to try to jump to the moon, and he's not Coach B, who gave his long jumper every chance in the world last season to jump to the moon.

You, "This straw-man about him not jumping to the moon is played out. Really, we all expected him to jump to the moon!"

Me, "Huh? Carl Lewis is going to be a strong asset to his track team, but he's not going to jump to the moon. Here are my reasons why (list of reasons).

You, "I'm going to ignore the reasons you gave (because I agree with them) and continue to derail this discussion by defining what a straw-man is, which ironically, is me making a straw-man argument of my own."

So, yeah, what exactly has your straw-man argument added to this thread?

King of the Jungle said:

RealReactions said:

This kid is still on my waiver wire. I don't see him continuing because I honestly don't see big Ben as a great qb and putting up Peyton Manning numbers the rest of the year. Someone can try and sway me but right now I'm firmly on seeing him as nothing more than a Wr3

Click to expand...

If this is a 6 team league than I would leave him on the waiver wire. However if there are 6+ teams I would pounce on him....unless you are only allotted one bench spot.

Click to expand...

12 teams 5 bench spots he just doesnt stand out to me. He is a product of an unreal record setting 2 weeks. Everyone on my bench I feel is better than him and has more value.

RealReactions said:

King of the Jungle said:

RealReactions said:

This kid is still on my waiver wire. I don't see him continuing because I honestly don't see big Ben as a great qb and putting up Peyton Manning numbers the rest of the year. Someone can try and sway me but right now I'm firmly on seeing him as nothing more than a Wr3

Click to expand...

If this is a 6 team league than I would leave him on the waiver wire. However if there are 6+ teams I would pounce on him....unless you are only allotted one bench spot.

Click to expand...

12 teams 5 bench spots he just doesnt stand out to me. He is a product of an unreal record setting 2 weeks. Everyone on my bench I feel is better than him and has more value.

Click to expand...

You're alone here.

flapgreen said:

RealReactions said:

King of the Jungle said:

RealReactions said:

This kid is still on my waiver wire. I don't see him continuing because I honestly don't see big Ben as a great qb and putting up Peyton Manning numbers the rest of the year. Someone can try and sway me but right now I'm firmly on seeing him as nothing more than a Wr3

Click to expand...

If this is a 6 team league than I would leave him on the waiver wire. However if there are 6+ teams I would pounce on him....unless you are only allotted one bench spot.

Click to expand...

12 teams 5 bench spots he just doesnt stand out to me. He is a product of an unreal record setting 2 weeks. Everyone on my bench I feel is better than him and has more value.

Click to expand...

You're alone here.

Click to expand...

He should be owned in all 10 team and larger leagues. Period.

Agreed

Holy ####. This thread really went off the rails. Lol

Sabertooth said:

Holy ####. This thread really went off the rails. Lol

Click to expand...

Perfect example of how far the Shark Pool has fallen.

Yeah it's a mess.

flapgreen said:

RealReactions said:

King of the Jungle said:

RealReactions said:

This kid is still on my waiver wire. I don't see him continuing because I honestly don't see big Ben as a great qb and putting up Peyton Manning numbers the rest of the year. Someone can try and sway me but right now I'm firmly on seeing him as nothing more than a Wr3

Click to expand...

If this is a 6 team league than I would leave him on the waiver wire. However if there are 6+ teams I would pounce on him....unless you are only allotted one bench spot.

Click to expand...

12 teams 5 bench spots he just doesnt stand out to me. He is a product of an unreal record setting 2 weeks. Everyone on my bench I feel is better than him and has more value.

Click to expand...

You're alone here.

Click to expand...

I'm fine with that. Usually the public is wrong... You must not bet a lot to know that, you will soon learn. The steelers haven't magically become an offense of power. If you actually watched the games big Ben has looked awful the first half of the season except those 2 games. Weather is getting colder and they will lean on the run and big Ben will be his usual self throwing maybe 2tds a game.

Lol

Bayhawks said:

Cheesedawg said:

That is a ridiculous position to take. You think Calvin Johnson's presence on the field with Detroit and the prolific production he enjoys are mere coincidences too?

Click to expand...

1-Martavis Bryant is not Calvin Johnson.

2-We have a much larger sample size to work with when discussing Calvin Johnson's impact on Detroit's offense vs Bryant's impact on Pittsburgh's.

3-Calvin Johnson has been the target of 29% of his QB's passes since he began (which includes his rookie year when he wasn't the #1 option, and includes any games when he didn't play due to injury or was used as a decoy like the last few weeks). Bryant was the target of 13% of Roethlisberger's passes the last 2 weeks.

So no, it's not a ridiculous position to take; what's ridiculous is you thinking that comparing Bryant, a rookie with 3 NFL games to his credit would have even remotely the same impact on his team's offense as one of the best WRs in the history of the NFL.

Cheesedawg said:

As an owner who junked Wheaton in favor of Bryant, I can tell you that Bryant is literally and figuratively head and shoulders above Wheaton and his presence on the field, often at the expense of Wheaton, has been a huge positive factor for the Pittsburgh offensive surge of late.

Click to expand...

Yeah, this action wouldn't cloud your perception of the situation, would it?

The FACT is that Bryant hasn't played on even 50% of the snaps the last 2 weeks. He has benefited form the offensive surge, not been the cause of it.

As for suggesting that his presence on the field has come at the expense of Wheaton, maybe you should check your facts. Bryant's insertion into the lineup came at the expense of Justin Brown, not Wheaton. Brown was the 3rd WR for the first 6 weeks, and he was getting virtually the same % of snaps as Bryant is now. Since Bryant became active, Brown hasn't gotten a helmet once.

But you dropped Wheaton for Bryant, and you want to see what you want to see, and you want to have found the WW hit for the season, so you think that you have some special insight into the Steelers' offensive meetings.

Click to expand...

You really are the master of the straw man argument, aren't you? You really should change your forums' name to Scarecrow. That would be perfect.

As most everyone with a high school education would understand, I did not equate Bryant with Calvin. I was giving the easiest example to understand that I could find about a player who clearly has a direct impact on his team's offensive production when he is in the game. Bryant has a skill set which, when he is on the field, clearly give the offense more potency. Ben has a weapon now that he didn't have before and he is using that weapon well.

All I did was point out the fallacy of your statement "Bryant's snap increase came about because of the increased offensive production, not the increased offensive production came about because of Bryant's snap increase". It is HIS offensive production which is earning him more snaps! His snap percentage, which is the only stat worth citing in this discussion, is rising rapidly every week, and it is because he is playing great and Ben is using him with great effect.

Your other straw man is saying that, because I owned Wheaton before and dumped him for Bryant, I can't look at either player with an unbiased eye. That is also ridiculous. Fantasy owners who take stubborn positions on players and can't fairly judge them anymore are losers. Obviously, when I drafted Wheaton I thought he was an underrated commodity on a team with good passing upside. I was right about the Pitt passing game, but I was wrong on Wheaton- and so were the Steelers. Like me, they watched Wheaton for the first 6 games and were rightfully unhappy with his production. In game 6, when Pitt scored only 10 on Cleveland, Wheaton played nearly all the snaps in the game, was targeted 11 times, and produced 33 yards and zero TD's (again!). The next week when Bryant got on the field for the first time, Wheaton's snaps went from 90+% in the first 6 games to an average of less than 50% over the next three games. Is Bryant the cause of Wheaton's snap percentage plummeting or is it just because Wheaton has stunk? Who cares? All I know is Bryant is trending up and that makes me feel like I made a good choice for now. I know I don't need to point out his production over his first three games because it is nothing short of eye-popping.

But thanks for trolling, Scarecrow.

Go with the trends. Bryant is trending up and producing every week. He's locked in as my wr3 until he lets me down. Period.

Cheesedawg said:

You really are the master of the straw man argument, aren't you?

Click to expand...

I'm the master of the straw man? Right. I said Bryant was benefiting from PITTSBURGH'S offensive increase, and you change that and say

"It is HIS offensive production which is earning him more snaps!" as if I said Bryant wasn't producing, or that he wasn't earning more snaps.

What I said was that his numbers were the result of Pittsburgh's offensive explosion, not the impetus for them, but you are trying to create an argument over a point I didn't make. There's your straw-man, that YOU created.

BTW-if you look at his snap percentage, it is the same snap percentage as J Brown was getting as the #3 WR before he got benched for Bryant. Bryant has stepped into J Brown's role & has taken those snaps from him. He has done very well with them, and as such, he has earned (IMO) more playing time. But, he has not been the impetus for the Steelers' offensive explosion, rather he has benefited from it. That is my point. If you want to discuss that, fine, but don't create any more straw-men because you can't rationally discuss the actual point.

Bayhawks said:

Cheesedawg said:

You really are the master of the straw man argument, aren't you?

Click to expand...

I'm the master of the straw man? Right. I said Bryant was benefiting from PITTSBURGH'S offensive increase, and you change that and say"It is HIS offensive production which is earning him more snaps!" as if I said Bryant wasn't producing, or that he wasn't earning more snaps.

What I said was that his numbers were the result of Pittsburgh's offensive explosion, not the impetus for them, but you are trying to create an argument over a point I didn't make. There's your straw-man, that YOU created.

BTW-if you look at his snap percentage, it is the same snap percentage as J Brown was getting as the #3 WR before he got benched for Bryant. Bryant has stepped into J Brown's role & has taken those snaps from him. He has done very well with them, and as such, he has earned (IMO) more playing time. But, he has not been the impetus for the Steelers' offensive explosion, rather he has benefited from it. That is my point. If you want to discuss that, fine, but don't create any more straw-men because you can't rationally discuss the actual point.

Click to expand...

His numbers are the result of him being on the field, being open and catching the ball.

Enough with the "chicken and egg" stuff wrapped up as some "straw man" debate.

By all measurables he appears to be a valid part of the offense. It is not as if both Mike Wallace and A Brown didn't get theirs when they played together.