Third Year WRs for 2008 - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Third Year WRs for 2008

Moderator: Football Moderators

Which third year receiver will have the best fantasy season in 2008?

Poll ended at Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:24 pm

Marques Colston, NOS
28
40%
Santonio Holmes, PIT
11
16%
Brandon Marshall, DEN
18
26%
Greg Jennings, GBP
12
17%
Brad Smith, NYJ
0
No votes
Derek Hagans, MIA
0
No votes
Jason Avant, PHI
1
1%
other (please discuss)
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 70

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby Humpback » Sat Feb 23, 2008 2:09 pm

RiffRaff, you say stats are worthless without links, but that link you provided is complete garbage. No link is better than one that's clearly wrong. Targets aren't an official stat, that's why they're going to be different from different sources, but you should've at least check the stats that can't be disputed, like catches, yards and TDs, and noticed how far off they are on this site. Is this some guy sitting on his couch manually jotting down stats as he watches the games? :-D

Anway, I just threw in targets because another poster said that Colston is a huge part of NOs passing game, and I just wanted to show that Marshall was as big a part of Denvers passing game. I'm not arguing that Marshall is necessarily better than Colston (in real life or FF), but I think they are very close right now.

Totally agree about stats being able to be manipulated, but that can obviously go both ways. Colston only broke 50 yds receiving twice in his first 6 games last year, and only 100 once in the first half of the season. He also padded his stats during the last 4 games of the year- the only time he faced a passing defense that wasn't in the bottom 10 in the NFL was vs. Philly, and he had 3 catches for 16 yards in that game. In the other 3 games vs. crap pass defenses, he had 25 catches for 300 yards and 5 TDs.

You can say that Colston's done it a little longer than Marshall if you'd like, but it's really a stretch to say Colston's done it for 2 seasons (especially considering he hasn't even played 2 full seasons), and not count Marshall's great season as doing it. You have to at least try and be fair...
14 Teams, each keep 14 players
QB: P. Manning, Schaub
RB: MJD, Westy, C. Johnson, A. Bradshaw, J. Ringer
WR: TO, Driver, J. Gage, Crabtree, J. Morgan, K. Curtis, E. Bennett, M. Sims-Walker
TE: Witten, M. Lewis
K: Gostkowski, J. Brown
D/ST: Tenn, NE
Humpback
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Fantasy Expert
Posts: 3333
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby RiffRaff » Sat Feb 23, 2008 2:23 pm

What would Marshall's numbers have been if Walker would not have been injured and Henry doesn't go into a funk with all of his issues?

Javon gets his bonus, Denver keeps a solid one-two punch for years to come. However, Marshall's Targets go down significantly, his yards go down, his receptions go gown, his TD's are in question(more or less, maybe he gets better looks).

Here's what I think happens if Walker and Henry don't get hurt or stupid. Cutler maintains Walker as his goto guy, Denver doesn't abandon the run as much and Marshall has a Holmes type of season.

We are talking the same kind of numbers for Holmes if Ward gets hurt in Pitt.

I'm not falling into the trap of simply looking at raw stats. I remember Burleson's season 2 when Moss was hurt a ton and all of Minny Fans had high hopes when Burly became the #1 when Moss was dealt for the start of Burleson's 3rd year. :-o Burleson's season 2 stats were not as good as Marshalls, however, Burleson had Moss for more games than Marshall had with Walker.

Now that it looks like Javon is on his way out, Marshall will start his first season as the number 1. There isn't a Free Agent out there that is better than Marshall. Knowing Marshall will definitely be the #1 now will give him more value. Am I ready to take him over Colston? Nope, but he has gained a lot.
Image
The Eagles rule, the Viqueens drool.
E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES, EAGLES, EAGLES
RiffRaff
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerPick 3 ChampionCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 3527
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Big Old 0 for the Grill-0- Meter. Minnesota Weather Sucks

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby RiffRaff » Sat Feb 23, 2008 2:26 pm

Humpback wrote:RiffRaff, you say stats are worthless without links, but that link you provided is complete garbage.


My point is stat maniuplation, it's obvious now that there isn't one concrete answer on targets. Treat has found many places, I've found many. I haven't found a single one that has all the stats right. I haven't even been able to dissect anyones because there haven't been any links. Don't hide behind your stats, show them.

My link had mistakes, are you saying your stats are accurate, prove it.

EDIT:
Although I did check out Football Guys now and they appear to have Accurate of info on the Concrete, but I bet someone could find a mistake.
http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/targets.php?year=2007&startweek=1&week=17&pos=flex&team=all
Last edited by RiffRaff on Sat Feb 23, 2008 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
The Eagles rule, the Viqueens drool.
E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES, EAGLES, EAGLES
RiffRaff
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerPick 3 ChampionCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 3527
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Big Old 0 for the Grill-0- Meter. Minnesota Weather Sucks

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby BlueBandit24 » Sat Feb 23, 2008 2:41 pm

All these stats are fine and dandy but the last time I checked none of these players get to carry those over to next year. They're nice to use a reference point but so many factors can change that they have to be taken with a grain of salt. Marshall produced down the stretch in 2006 and throughout 2007 so I have seen enough of a sample size to know that he is the real deal. My only real concern is who is going to be the most productive next season.

I don't see Marshall and Colston or any of the 4 for that matter being separated by much in terms of value. In a situation where things are close I am going to take the most talented player and I feel that is Marshall. He's got the build, phenomenal hands and is willing to go over the middle or make plays deep. His 1st year as a wide receiver was his senior year at Central Florida, so as a soon to be 24-year old at a position where it takes time to adjust, I have to believe that he has only scratched the surface of his potential.

Jennings, Colston, and Holmes all have great QB's throwing to them, but none of those QB's are going to get any better as they are already at the top of their game. Marshall was a stud despite having a young QB who is still learning the ropes. As Cutler improves the entire offense should and Marshall will be the benefactor.

The only issue I see with Marshall are some of his off the field problems, but those aren't enough to shy me away from him because he is a top talent in an offense that is generally productive under Shanahan.
Image
BlueBandit24
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 5373
Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby Humpback » Sat Feb 23, 2008 2:53 pm

RiffRaff wrote:
Humpback wrote:RiffRaff, you say stats are worthless without links, but that link you provided is complete garbage.


My point is stat maniuplation, it's obvious now that there isn't one concrete answer on targets. Treat has found many places, I've found many. I haven't found a single one that has all the stats right. I haven't even been able to dissect anyone else's because there haven't been any links. Don't hide behind your stats, show them.

My link had mistakes, are you saying your stats are accurate, prove it.


Not saying that at all, in fact if you look, I said that targets aren't a official stat and if you look different places, you'll get different answers. I'm not using targets as an argument that he's better than Colston, I said I just said that earlier to show that he's a focal point of their passing game, just like Colston. Whether the number is 140 or 170 is irrelevant, the point is that it's very high and at least on par with Colstons. Not hiding behind anything.

All I meant by that is, if you look at a site and you see stats that you know are wrong, I wouldn't exactly trust ones that there isn't an official number for. Like I said, I'd say it's better to provide no link at all than one which is obviously wrong in many areas.

As for "what would his numbers have been if this or that" argument, it's kind of moot, isn't it? You can manipulate hypotheticals even easier than stats. No one knows what would've happened, all we know is what did. Likewise, no one knows what's going to happen next year, and even if you did know that Henry is going to be a stud and Walker is going to be healthy and a stud, you can't be sure that's going to negatively impact Marshall anyway.
14 Teams, each keep 14 players
QB: P. Manning, Schaub
RB: MJD, Westy, C. Johnson, A. Bradshaw, J. Ringer
WR: TO, Driver, J. Gage, Crabtree, J. Morgan, K. Curtis, E. Bennett, M. Sims-Walker
TE: Witten, M. Lewis
K: Gostkowski, J. Brown
D/ST: Tenn, NE
Humpback
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Fantasy Expert
Posts: 3333
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby RiffRaff » Sat Feb 23, 2008 3:09 pm

Humpback wrote:
As for "what would his numbers have been if this or that" argument, it's kind of moot, isn't it? You can manipulate hypotheticals even easier than stats. No one knows what would've happened, all we know is what did. Likewise, no one knows what's going to happen next year, and even if you did know that Henry is going to be a stud and Walker is going to be healthy and a stud, you can't be sure that's going to negatively impact Marshall anyway.



I'd highly recommend using hypothetical in all fantasy football moves. Otherwise FF becomes nothing but a numbers game and all drafts would be the same. It would be very boring, kind of like baseball and it's 10,000 stats.

The numbers would have shown that Burleson would have had a great year 3. The Hypothetical person might have seen something else. The stat only person would have been dead wrong in this situation.

My plate of Crow will be eaten if I'm wrong. I'm sure Swiper will grill it up nicely. ;-D
Image
The Eagles rule, the Viqueens drool.
E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES, EAGLES, EAGLES
RiffRaff
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerPick 3 ChampionCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 3527
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Big Old 0 for the Grill-0- Meter. Minnesota Weather Sucks

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby SwiperNoSwiping » Sat Feb 23, 2008 3:14 pm

I don't really have much more time to mess with this argument, and truthfully, I don't know how many more times I can say the same thing. I provided several stats comparing the two WR, and one of them was targets. Saying my stats are incorrect? I've seen the numbers on more than one site to know what they are. You want links? Here:

Marshall: http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/MarsBr00-1.php
5 57 11.4 0 102 1325 13.0 7

Colston: http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/ColsMa00-1.php
0 0 0 98 1202 12.3 11

That shows Colston being outrushed, outcaught, out receiving 'yarded', out avg yds per catch. That alone answers that. You can look up game logs here: (also where I took targets from).
-Marshall: http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/MarsBr00-3.php
-Colston: http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/ColsMa00-3.php

Using those I was able to determine all the rest which are accurate deductions , all of which are undisputable except for the straw you keep grasping at being targets. Why is your only argument that targets isn't an accurate stat? Even removing it (which I will do after I even gave you all of Copper's looks), All of these favor Marshall, except for tds. There's my links and what I consider solid statistics and not incorrect data like the link you provided from Footballdiehards which was flawed for multiple WR.

Catches: Marshall 102, Colston 98
Yards: Marshall 1325, Colston 1202
Yds/Game: Marshall 82.8, Colston 75.1
Yds/Catch: Marshall 13.0, Colston 12.3
First downs: Marshall 70, Colston 63
Games under 50 yds rec: Marshall 1, Colston 6
Games under 5 catches: Marshall 4, Colston 6
Games targeted under 5 times: Marshall 0, Colston 3
Rushing yards: Marshall 57, Colston 0

Other source used: http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&statisticCategory=RECEIVING&season=2007&seasonType=REG&experience=null&tabSeq=0&qualified=true&Submit=Find
-this was for yds per game and first downs. But validates the other data you seem to be questioning.

There's my links.

Pointing out irrelevant things that didn't happen isn't fair to say either. What if Deuce doesn't get hurt? What if and when Meachum plays? What if NO actually didn't have to air it out completely to stay in some games last year, and all the catchup ball they were playing. It's flawed the way you are looking at it. You say Marshall was nothing the first games when Henry was leading the league, I provided evidence to the contrary. You argue targets isn't a legit stat since it doesn't favor your guy. Fine, there's still plenty of others that support Colston shouldn't be considered higher.

As I said, it's not obvious Colston should be considered higher. That was your point I was disputing, and I've given enough reasons why. You just refuse to see them or acknowlege them.
SwiperNoSwiping
Grillmaster
Grillmaster

Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterGolden Eagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 22027
Joined: 3 Feb 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Has Left The Premises.

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby RiffRaff » Sat Feb 23, 2008 3:35 pm

I haven't disagreed with Concrete stats.

I just believe that Marshall's stats have more to do with circumstance. Circumstances that won't give him the advantage over Colston in most situations.
Marshall Would Not Have Had The Numbers if Walker was Healthy. This isn't a team of Rod Smith, Eddy, Davis and Elway.

I'm banging my head on the wall as much as anyone.

Ok, I'm done.

Next year at Swiper's house. I like my Crow "Well Done". ;-D
Image
The Eagles rule, the Viqueens drool.
E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES, EAGLES, EAGLES
RiffRaff
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerPick 3 ChampionCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 3527
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Big Old 0 for the Grill-0- Meter. Minnesota Weather Sucks

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby Humpback » Sat Feb 23, 2008 3:55 pm

RiffRaff wrote:
Humpback wrote:
As for "what would his numbers have been if this or that" argument, it's kind of moot, isn't it? You can manipulate hypotheticals even easier than stats. No one knows what would've happened, all we know is what did. Likewise, no one knows what's going to happen next year, and even if you did know that Henry is going to be a stud and Walker is going to be healthy and a stud, you can't be sure that's going to negatively impact Marshall anyway.



I'd highly recommend using hypothetical in all fantasy football moves. Otherwise FF becomes nothing but a numbers game and all drafts would be the same. It would be very boring, kind of like baseball and it's 10,000 stats.

The numbers would have shown that Burleson would have had a great year 3. The Hypothetical person might have seen something else. The stat only person would have been dead wrong in this situation.

My plate of Crow will be eaten if I'm wrong. I'm sure Swiper will grill it up nicely. ;-D


Of course you use hypotheticals in your projections, but I disagree with your analysis of them. There's a better chance that Walker's not on Denver next year than he is, and who knows how productive he'll be even if he is back. Similar situation for Henry- he's been stupid his entire career, as well as injury prone. I can't expect him to do much more next year, especially when he's one infraction away from getting suspended. Does any one really expect him to be a stud #1 RB next year? Yes, it's possible, but not likely if you look at his track record. He's been in the league for 7 seasons, played all 16 games just once. I don't think having or not having Henry is going to make a material difference in Marshall's stats even in the off chance that he regains his form from 5 or 6 seasons ago. You would have to think that it's likely for Walker to be back, healthy, and productive, and Henry to be healthy, not stupid, and productive, and for both of those things to be bad for Marshalls stats for your argument to make sense to me. It's possible, but my hypotheticals are much, much different from those.

Even if you think his numbers are the result of circumstance, you should at least admit that he's "done it" for a season. That was your entire argument earlier, and it just really doesn't mesh, especially if you think Colston's "done it" for 2 seasons. He hasn't even played for 2 full seasons, and his first wasn't as good as Marshall's last, but you can't seem to admit that. If you said "he's done it for one season, but I'm not sold yet", that would be different. I'd still think that he's at least close to as good as Colston, but at least you're argument would be much stronger IMO.

It doesn't mean that Marshall is head and shoulders above Colston or even better than him, but I think he is much more than just a beneficiary of circumstances.
14 Teams, each keep 14 players
QB: P. Manning, Schaub
RB: MJD, Westy, C. Johnson, A. Bradshaw, J. Ringer
WR: TO, Driver, J. Gage, Crabtree, J. Morgan, K. Curtis, E. Bennett, M. Sims-Walker
TE: Witten, M. Lewis
K: Gostkowski, J. Brown
D/ST: Tenn, NE
Humpback
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Fantasy Expert
Posts: 3333
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Third Year WRs for 2008

Postby SwiperNoSwiping » Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:17 pm

RiffRaff wrote:Ok, I'm done.

Next year at Swiper's house. I like my Crow "Well Done". ;-D


I could be serving up a heaping helping to myself. I just disagreed with your saying he hasn't done 'it' and that hes worthy of consideration over Colston. Up to the drafter. Points have been made...

It's been fun Raff. :-? :-D
SwiperNoSwiping
Grillmaster
Grillmaster

Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterGolden Eagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 22027
Joined: 3 Feb 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Has Left The Premises.

PreviousNext

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 4:26 hours
(and 38 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact