The effect of a viable WR2 on stud WRs

[darin3]

You are kinda making my point, D.

 

Maclin is the WR2...Nicks (at the time) was the WR2....Steve Johnson was the WR2. The WR2 benefits far more from the WR1's presence then vice versa.

 

My (and Det's) point is, the addition of the WR2 doesn't always add to the value of the WR1. In fact, if you look at some of the more memorable seasons WR1's produced, they did it by the sheer volume of targets due in large part to NOT having a capable WR2. Look at Owens in Philly 7 years ago...he had Pinkston as his WR2, so the Eagles had to force-feed T.O a ton of balls. Same with Brandon Marshall in Denver the year he blew up....same with Moss in New England a couple years ago. With no other options, these stud WRs were fed an over-supply of targets. Add a decent WR2, and those excess targets (and stats) likely go away.

 

Point is, while having a solid WR2 may make life a little easier for the WR1 in some scenarios, it doesn't mean a boon to the WR1's fantasy value. I'd seriously like to see some stats where an already-studly WR1 got even better when they added a decent WR2. i can't think of one .

Yeah in that case, I'd have a hard time thinking of an example. I honestly think it can work both ways. In the case of Nicks/Smith, I don't think Smith was ever going to be a #1 WR. Lee Evans could never make it as a #1.

 

I think there are examples on both sides. And to that end, there's an ebb and flow. There are a few examples primed to happen this season: Julio Jones' effect on Roddy White. Jonathan Baldwin's on Dwayne Bowe. In the case of both of these guys, I can see White's numbers decrease OR stay beyond excellent, and Bowe's numbers become far more consistent IF Baldwin is the real deal. Bowe has needed a competent #2 for years now.

[tazinib1]

[MTSuper7]

An example that comes to mind is Boldin as a Cardinal vs. Boldin last year as a Raven. When you are lined up opposite Larry Fitzgerald, you will get more looks and opportunity than when you are lined up across an aging Derrick Mason. It really does become a "pick your poison" situation when you have multiple WRs and/or TEs that can beat single coverage consistently. It's one of the reasons Jacoby Jones gets hyped every preseason. The other major factor is the QB and OL play, because a WR2 won't get as much action if the QB isn't adept at (or given time to) making his progressions. But assuming at least average QB and OL play, an upgrade at WR2 might benefit the WR1 but I am more inclined to think that a stud is a stud and commands the ball in all but the most extreme circumstances of a defense sacrificing elsewhere to try to take the stud out of the game plan.

[Chavez]

Lee Evans could never make it as a #1.

 

Maybe my Badger red is showing here, but Lee Evans rarely had anything resembling a competent QB.

[darin3]

Maybe my Badger red is showing here, but Lee Evans rarely had anything resembling a competent QB.

Well Ryan Fitzpatrick turned Stevie "who the heck are you" Johnson into a fantasy somebody pretty fast. Maybe it was because he had the speedy - yet wildly inconsistent - Evans on the other side. Who knows.

[Seahawks21]

Thank you. Exactly. And Evans working deep is very different than a ready-to-retire Mason working on the other side. The FS absolutely has to honor Evans' speed and ability, meaning he'll be playing between the hash marks even if he is shaded to Boldin's side rather than playing on the hash on Boldin's side, which in turn gives Boldin - as I explained earlier and you just reitereated above - more room to work into his area of strength, which is using his athleticism, size, and strength in short to midrange routes.

Ummm, well, no. Watch a bit of tape or football, think this one over, and get back to us. Test this theory. I think you'll find that it isn't exactly accurate. Man 1 with the free safety picking a side isn't exactly the most common play in football.

Edited August 14, 2011 by Seahawks21

[tazinib1]

Well Ryan Fitzpatrick turned Stevie "who the heck are you" Johnson into a fantasy somebody pretty fast. Maybe it was because he had the speedy - yet wildly inconsistent - Evans on the other side. Who knows.

 

Or maybe he had the Amish Rifleman throwing him the ball?

[Bronco Billy]

Ummm, well, no. Watch a bit of tape or football, think this one over, and get back to us. Test this theory. I think you'll find that it isn't exactly accurate. Man 1 with the free safety picking a side isn't exactly the most common play in football.

 

So where does the double team on the WR1 come from? The DT helping the CB underneath?

[detlef]

Nope..real deal and prevelent to the topic at hand.

Well, for starters, Jones is not the first great WR to come out of college. Some panned out, others did not. None the less, my point is that, regardless of how good he is, we don't have any data to support the positive effect he's had on White's numbers. Because, well, the season has yet to be played. So, forgive me if I don't include him as an example in this argument.

 

OK maybe Julio Jones is a bad example.... but it proves exactly the point at hand, given the fact that Atlanta gave up serious booty to get a legit, potential superstar WR to pair up with one who is already both legit and a star.

 

There are countless other cases where a mild upgrade at WR2 has meant good things - fantasy and otherwise - for the WR1.

Are there? So far the ones being tossed around the most are Jones' effect on White and Evans' effect on Boldin. Neither of which has actually happened. Is there, in fact, a long list of ones that have already panned out?

 

And, for the record, ATL giving up so much does nothing to prove the point at hand. The debate is not about whether or not it's a good thing to have two great WRs, the debate is whether or not it's specifically good for White's stats. Something I'm rather certain ATL did not really consider when they decided to improve their team by adding a potentially great WR.

 

At any rate, I've noticed some claiming that, by bringing up a guy like Wayne, that we're trying to skew the debate and turn it into 1a/1b situations rather than 1/strong 2 situation. So, am I to understand that the other side of the discussion is focusing on WRs who are good enough to draw the attention of the defense but not the QB? How exactly does that work? Doesn't the WR need to prove that he's worthy of enough attention from the D that they're willing to sacrifice coverage on the proven #1 by actually catching balls? Thereby being, not only a boon to the WR1 by keeping the D honest but also a vulture to his looks?

 

So far, there have been theories on both sides of the discussion, but no real data. I'm not saying having a better WR2 is bad for a great WR1, I'm just wondering if it's truly better. Better for the team? Absolutely. Better for the QB? Certainly, and I'm big on Ryan for this very reason. But where's the data that proves the popular opinion that Jones (provided he's as good as advertised) is going to have a positive effect on White?

[Ditkaless Wonders]

So where does the double team on the WR1 come from? The DT helping the CB underneath?

 

 

Like B.J Raji dropping into coverage against the Bears, intercepting the ball, and making it into the endzone for his Big Momma Hip Roller dance? I think that is a Dom Capers special. Not many teams will run that.

[detlef]

An example that comes to mind is Boldin as a Cardinal vs. Boldin last year as a Raven. When you are lined up opposite Larry Fitzgerald, you will get more looks and opportunity than when you are lined up across an aging Derrick Mason. It really does become a "pick your poison" situation when you have multiple WRs and/or TEs that can beat single coverage consistently. It's one of the reasons Jacoby Jones gets hyped every preseason. The other major factor is the QB and OL play, because a WR2 won't get as much action if the QB isn't adept at (or given time to) making his progressions. But assuming at least average QB and OL play, an upgrade at WR2 might benefit the WR1 but I am more inclined to think that a stud is a stud and commands the ball in all but the most extreme circumstances of a defense sacrificing elsewhere to try to take the stud out of the game plan.

Boldin went from Kurt Warner throwing him balls to Joe Flacco. One could also argue that he was the WR2 taking advantage of the attention Fitz was getting. Thus, he's a poor example in this case.

[detlef]

It's called a complimentary receiver. Moss and Carter, Bruce and Holt come to mind.

 

Carter wasn't the fastest guy on the field. Moss played further downfield, obviously, and Carter was great coming across the middle and/or running a quick out. Nobody in the league was better at catching passes on the sidelines than Carter and Moss helped him do that.

Look at Carter's career stats before and after 1998 and tell me that Moss' presence improved them

 

Bruce seems slightly nicer when Holt joined in 99, then again, it appears he had injuries in the two previous years and missed some games. Regardless, his single greatest year statistically was prior to Holt's arrival.

Edited August 14, 2011 by detlef

[detlef]

One more thing. Just in case I wasn't clear enough from the outset. I'm talking about the effect a strong WR2 has on a high-end WR1. Roddy White, AJ, Megatron, Fitz, Wayne (now), etc.

[WaterMan]

Unfortunately Moss has retired so there isn't too much of, "Will this WR benefit being #2 under this great receiver?"

 

I believe there are too many factors to straight up say most WR2s will benefit from a great WR1. Just from looking and Carter/Moss. Moss was so good that he ate heavily into Carter's numbers when Carter was close to retirement.

 

It probably takes a great WR1 to help out the WR2. Not some hyped up WR with a TV show or hard work ethic. You have to be truly great to deserve extra attention by a defense. This is why Green Bay sometimes had 3 and 4 people covering Moss.

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Unfortunately Moss has retired so there isn't too much of, "Will this WR benefit being #2 under this great receiver?"

 

I believe there are too many factors to straight up say most WR2s will benefit from a great WR1. Just from looking and Carter/Moss. Moss was so good that he ate heavily into Carter's numbers when Carter was close to retirement.

 

It probably takes a great WR1 to help out the WR2. Not some hyped up WR with a TV show or hard work ethic. You have to be truly great to deserve extra attention by a defense. This is why Green Bay sometimes had 3 and 4 people covering Moss.

 

 

I don't remember the Green Bay Packers having three or four players covering Moss. Perhaps you meant the Brown County Sheriffs. I heard they always had three guys trailing Moss around at all times to keep him in line while in Green Bay. One could never be too sure Moss would not fire up a dutchie, get in a vehicle, and go looking for meter maids. Best to always have eyes on him.

[gbpfan1231]

Like B.J Raji dropping into coverage against the Bears, intercepting the ball, and making it into the endzone for his Big Momma Hip Roller dance? I think that is a Dom Capers special. Not many teams will run that.

[i_am_the_swammi]

Unfortunately Moss has retired so there isn't too much of, "Will this WR benefit being #2 under this great receiver?"

 

I believe there are too many factors to straight up say most WR2s will benefit from a great WR1. Just from looking and Carter/Moss. Moss was so good that he ate heavily into Carter's numbers when Carter was close to retirement.

 

It probably takes a great WR1 to help out the WR2. Not some hyped up WR with a TV show or hard work ethic. You have to be truly great to deserve extra attention by a defense. This is why Green Bay sometimes had 3 and 4 people covering Moss.

 

You have the argument backwards...we are talking about whether a good WR2 helps a WR1, not viceversa.

[Furd]

I'm from the school that a stud WR is going to get his, even if bronco billy is starting on the other side. I can't think of an instance of a stud WR getting studlier with the addition of a 1a type of player - maybe Fitzgerald/Boldin?

 

In any event, PPR league, top 5 WRs last 4 years

 

White

Lloyd

Bowe

A. Johnson

Jennings

 

A. Johnson

Welker

Wayne

Marshall

Moss

 

A. Johnson

Fitzgerald

Boldin

Marshall

White

 

Moss

Owens

Wayne

Edwards

Houshwhatever

 

Setting aside the tag teams, is the claim that, for instance, Johnson would have had even better years if Houston had somebody like Boldin on the other side? Same thing for the Lloyds or Bowes of those lists?

 

I'm thinking that their stats would, in most circustances, suffer if you stuck a pseudo-stud on their teams. Only so many balls to go around,

 

Maybe its different in non PPR leagues?

 

Edited August 14, 2011 by Furd

[i_am_the_swammi]

Oddly, not one of the people saying that the addition of a solid WR2 has increased the performance of the existing WR1 has provided any stats backing that up.

 

To the contrary, I can think of numerous WR1s that have had phenomenal years without the solid complimentary WR2....mostly due to the sheer number of passes they see, since they are usually the only solid option to throw to (see T.O in Philly, Moss in NE, AJ in Houston, Wayne in IND after Harrison retired, VJax in SD, White in ATL).

 

Edit: even more to the argument that it doesn't help, Brandon Marshall blew up in Denver the year after Rod Smith retired...is it a coincidence that Marshall was the only legit receiving option on that team once Smith left?

Edited August 14, 2011 by i_am_the_swammi

[Seahawks21]

So where does the double team on the WR1 come from? The DT helping the CB underneath?

At least 80% of the time where the split end is "doubled", the other safety will have deep middle third, and the backside corner will play deep outside leverage on the WR2. Even that is pretty darn rare. Like I've said before, if a WR1 is any good, the defense will roll cloud coverage in his direction with the CB1 playing with flat responsibility or trail leverage if in man.

Edited August 14, 2011 by Seahawks21

[Bronco Billy]

At least 80% of the time where the split end is "doubled", the other safety will have deep middle third, and the backside corner will play deep outside leverage on the WR2.

 

Then by definition the WR1 is not doubled, is he? That's corner under responsibility on each WR with deep FS help each way.

[Bronco Billy]

Like I've said before, if a WR1 is any good, the defense will roll cloud coverage in his direction with the CB1 playing with flat responsibility or trail leverage if in man.

 

How can a secondary play cloud coverage with a hard corner that you are describing? Playing a hard corner and then rolling the FS/CB to the WR1 side is doubleteaming the WR1 while forcing the CB2 into one-on-one coverage all the way to the opposite hash. That's exactly what the initial discussion entailed and how undesirable that was when the WR2 is a capable and credible threat, and how vulnerable that leaves the D on the WR2 side of the field.

 

You keep contradicting yourself. You seem to understand the langauge, but you don't understand the principles of the system.

[Clubfoothead]

Yeah well I still drafted Boldin

[bpwallace49]

I love how in this scenario everyone is running two man routes against press man to man coverage with a cover 1 safety over the top.

[Bronco Billy]

I love how in this scenario everyone is running two man routes against press man to man coverage with a cover 1 safety over the top.

 

It's just an example to simply things for discussion, no more. As to your assertion about press coverage, that's the essence of the discussion - what can or cannot the elements of a secondary do successfully when a very good to great WR1 is paired with a legit WR2. What concessions does that force the secondary to make? The OP asserts that there aren't any real concessions, which I think is absolutely wrong. I think it either implicitly changes the way the secondary can play effectively, or the secondary fails.

Edited August 14, 2011 by Bronco Billy