The author makes some very valid points. History has shown that, like kickers, the receiving leader does not repeat as #1 the next year. Worse yet, the drop-off is significant: an average of around 450 fewer yards, 5 fewer touchdowns, and 30 fewer receptions.
Is Steve Smith a prolific receiver? Absolutely. Worthy of a first round or even second round pick next year? Probably not.
Last edited by The Lung on Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
I think taking WRs in the first round is crazy anyway.
Some of those players had very good reasons for stinking it up the following year.
'96 Bruce: Injury
'96 Rice: Injury
'99 McDuffie: Injury
'01 David Boston: Injury
'04 Muhsin: Bears' Offense...'nuff said
It's far better to look at averages of players. Say for TO...from 00 to 04, he had 13, 16, 13, 9, and 14 TDs.
He averaged 13TDs over those 5 years. However, the author illustrates the two years where his TD total declined. What's a better measure? Pointing out 2 declining years or giving an average?
Also, keep in mind that Smith tied Harrison for TD catches (with Chambers and Ward 1 behind them) this year and tied Larry Fitzgerald for most receptions (with Boldin and Holt 1 behind them).
I don't get it. Steve Smith looks like a good bet to me next year. I would draft the guy in the late 2nd/early 3rd. There is no WR worthy of a 1st round pick next year IMO. Moss and TO's situations are too unstable.. and those are really the only WRs I would want to count on to carry my team.
BrutallyHuge wrote:I think taking WRs in the first round is crazy anyway.
Some of those players had very good reasons for stinking it up the following year.
'96 Bruce: Injury '96 Rice: Injury '99 McDuffie: Injury '01 David Boston: Injury '04 Muhsin: Bears' Offense...'nuff said
It's far better to look at averages of players. Say for TO...from 00 to 04, he had 13, 16, 13, 9, and 14 TDs.
He averaged 13TDs over those 5 years. However, the author illustrates the two years where his TD total declined. What's a better measure? Pointing out 2 declining years or giving an average?
Also, keep in mind that Smith tied Harrison for TD catches (with Chambers and Ward 1 behind them) this year and tied Larry Fitzgerald for most receptions (with Boldin and Holt 1 behind them).
Why is Steve Smith being singled out?
I think you make some excellent points here. Injuries and such. Plus I believe there were some changes that factored into the number(moose for example) that Smith won't ecounter...He'll have a good year....but NO wr should be taken in the 1st anyway"
I don't really like when people just take overall stats and try to find some arbitrary trend to it. The rushing title winner has not repeated since 2001. Does that mean we shouldn't draft SA in the first round next year?
If you are going to analyze data, try to find a reason for it. It seems like a big waste of time to me to do a bunch of analysis like this to move one guy down your draft board a little. I prefer data analysis that will show some correlation between cause and effect, that way you can find other players with the same causes for next year. Like BH said, he doesn't go into any reasons for why the top WRs historically don't repeat their performances, he just says that they don't.
I bet he only picks 3rd year wide-outs and contract year players.
I've seen/read/heard many people saying "beware of Steve Smith in 2006." I don't get it. He had an outstanding 2005, we can all agree on that.
But, it wasn't totally out of the blue like many would have you beleive. He had a nice 2003 (1,100, 7), and an outstanding playoff run as well (4 games, 404, 3). He was on the verge of a big breakout in 2004, but broke his leg.
I drafted S. Smith late in the 4th round of the 2005 draft, and it was a steal! I can keep him for 2006, at the cost of a late 3rd round pick, and it's a no brainer for me.
Stelly wrote:I've seen/read/heard many people saying "beware of Steve Smith in 2006." I don't get it. He had an outstanding 2005, we can all agree on that.
But, it wasn't totally out of the blue like many would have you beleive. He had a nice 2003 (1,100, 7), and an outstanding playoff run as well (4 games, 404, 3). He was on the verge of a big breakout in 2004, but broke his leg.
I drafted S. Smith late in the 4th round of the 2005 draft, and it was a steal! I can keep him for 2006, at the cost of a late 3rd round pick, and it's a no brainer for me.
I don't think people are saying don't pick this guy b/c he is not going to do what he did this year.
What I think they are saying is that it is highly unlikely that he is able to put up these kinds of numbers again. There are too many things that can change this offseason for the Panthers, particularly whether they bring in a No. 2 WR or not.
Smith will be a top-5 WR next year, but I doubt he has these kinds of numbers again.
Two years in a row, the #1 receiver has been from Carolina. Of course there's no way to guarantee it will happen three years in a row, but I wouldn't be the slightest bit suprised if it did.
josebach wrote:Two years in a row, the #1 receiver has been from Carolina. Of course there's no way to guarantee it will happen three years in a row, but I wouldn't be the slightest bit suprised if it did.
Sometimes people think too much.
Good point...last year teams knew Mushin was all they had, and he still burned them all at the end of the year. It was the same this year with Smith. They still don't look like they have a really good option at the #2, but Smith will still find a way to get open and get his yards. Sure, he might not have as big a year, but he's one of those people who are in great situations that should not all of a sudden drop off the face of the earth. Why pick a RB that will have the greater possibility of busting/getting hurt/phased into committee in the 2nd round (and there will be many next year) when you can have a safer bet with a top 5 WR? That's why I feel all of the top WR's should go in Round 2 next year.
MeShawn's VBD analysis also helps show that having a top WR can be a bigger advantage than getting a "decent" #2 RB.
The One, the Only, the Incomparable Mercer Boy. My My YouTube.
josebach wrote:Two years in a row, the #1 receiver has been from Carolina. Of course there's no way to guarantee it will happen three years in a row, but I wouldn't be the slightest bit suprised if it did.
Sometimes people think too much.
Good point...last year teams knew Mushin was all they had, and he still burned them all at the end of the year. It was the same this year with Smith. They still don't look like they have a really good option at the #2, but Smith will still find a way to get open and get his yards. Sure, he might not have as big a year, but he's one of those people who are in great situations that should not all of a sudden drop off the face of the earth. Why pick a RB that will have the greater possibility of busting/getting hurt/phased into committee in the 2nd round (and there will be many next year) when you can have a safer bet with a top 5 WR? That's why I feel all of the top WR's should go in Round 2 next year.
MeShawn's VBD analysis also helps show that having a top WR can be a bigger advantage than getting a "decent" #2 RB.
If you think there will be even more RB committees next year, I would think you would be even more inclined to take RBs early, not less.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by 
