The effect of a viable WR2 on stud WRs

[detlef]

However, I also recognize that you have convinced yourself of your postiion and would prefer to argue rather than discuss, and so I'll let it go at what I've posted so far. Think as you will.

Oh the irony. I take it you're implying that my inclination to argue rather than discuss and that I'm beyond convincing has something to do with the fact that I'm not prepared to accept everything you say as the gospel truth? Could be that nobody has actually illustrated a situation where a WR1's numbers have actually increased? That they're throwing out situations like Jones in ATL or Evans in Baltimore or a few others that actually haven't happened yet as evidence of why this is true? Well, when they're not using Moss to Carter when, in fact, Carter's numbers didn't actually increase once Moss came on board? Could that be it?

 

If it pleases the jury. After having said this, BB proceeded to get into a pissing match (with someone other than me, mind you) over why, in theory, a better WR2 should improve the statistical production of the WR1 but actually has yet to produce any specific evidence of this happening.

[Pope Flick]

How about a list of ten WR2s who went to a team with a bonafide WR1. Perhaps a list to work from would aid in this debate.

 

Roy Williams' #s sure spiked they year the Lions found Mike Furrey to be a nice WR2 for instance.

[darin3]

It's all conjecture, but it could be argued that Randy Moss' blow-up season in New England coincided with Wes Welker's breakout season. It also could be argued as a "chicken and egg" type of situation, though. I see both sides.

[Pope Flick]

It's all conjecture, but it could be argued that Randy Moss' blow-up season in New England coincided with Wes Welker's breakout season. It also could be argued as a "chicken and egg" type of situation, though. I see both sides.

 

 

it's also murky - I don't see how you can dismiss Wayne as being a WR1B and not being relevant. There are VERY few WRs who are WR1s right out of the gate and he was no exception. I think you could use both Wayne and Harrison as a good example here, but for the fact that Harrison's highs were so high during this time they were due to fall for being unsustainable. And at some point he helped Wayne become the WR1A...

[detlef]

How about a list of ten WR2s who went to a team with a bonafide WR1. Perhaps a list to work from would aid in this debate.

 

Roy Williams' #s sure spiked they year the Lions found Mike Furrey to be a nice WR2 for instance.

He also went from having Joey Harrington throwing him the ball (some Jeff Garcia) to Jon Kitna. Also, Detroit went from throwing 505 and 520 passes in 04 and 05 to 596 in 06. So, there could have also been a change of philosophy involved.

 

After all, are we going to pretend that Mike Furrey was a high-end WR2? The guy played 6 seasons and amassed 7 TDs in his career. I would be more inclined to guess that Furrey took advantage of the fact that 1) Detroit was throwing the ball a ton and 2) that teams were giving him room and trying to keep Williams from beating them.

[Pope Flick]

He also went from having Joey Harrington throwing him the ball (some Jeff Garcia) to Jon Kitna. Also, Detroit went from throwing 505 and 520 passes in 04 and 05 to 596 in 06. So, there could have also been a change of philosophy involved.

 

After all, are we going to pretend that Mike Furrey was a high-end WR2? The guy played 6 seasons and amassed 7 TDs in his career. I would be more inclined to guess that Furrey took advantage of the fact that 1) Detroit was throwing the ball a ton and 2) that teams were giving him room and trying to keep Williams from beating them.

 

 

I'm not pretending, that year in question he put up over 1000 yards and 6 TDs. That's WR2 #s right there. Not a sexy name, but WR2 #s nevertheless.

 

Again, this debate gets very murky because of all the factors involved. You wanted an example, I came up with one and you dismissed it. RWs production was up much more than 20% from previous year's, which was the difference in passes thrown so that frankly isn't holding water (in fact his yardage doubled, which is 100%).

 

I think BB might be correct.

[detlef]

it's also murky - I don't see how you can dismiss Wayne as being a WR1B and not being relevant. There are VERY few WRs who are WR1s right out of the gate and he was no exception. I think you could use both Wayne and Harrison as a good example here, but for the fact that Harrison's highs were so high during this time they were due to fall for being unsustainable. And at some point he helped Wayne become the WR1A...

I don't see how Harrison's numbers illustrate a positive impact adding a strong WR2 does.

 

Reggie Wayne started only 9 and 7 games respectively in his first two seasons. He became a legit starter in the year they typically do, his 3rd. So, that would be the fair time to look at his impact on Harrison. After all, before that you would not consider him an upper tier WR2, let alone 1A. Based on PT, he wasn't even the unquestioned WR2 on the team.

 

So, we look at Harrison's stats before and after 2003, when Wayne became that legit threat on the other side of the field.

 

In the 4 years prior to 2003, he had 12,14,15,11 TDs. In 4 years starting at 2003, 10, 15,12,12. You can go ahead and look up the yards, but it actually looks like they were better by some bit before hand. Certainly not enough to say there was a drop-off, and I'm not implying that that there is. But rather, that it is not necc or even probably a positive. Honestly, I've been looking, and I've yet to find a good example of where a WR1's numbers went up because a high-end WR2 was added.

[detlef]

I'm not pretending, that year in question he put up over 1000 yards and 6 TDs. That's WR2 #s right there. Not a sexy name, but WR2 #s nevertheless.

 

Again, this debate gets very murky because of all the factors involved. You wanted an example, I came up with one and you dismissed it. RWs production was up much more than 20% from previous year's, which was the difference in passes thrown so that frankly isn't holding water (in fact his yardage doubled, which is 100%).

 

I think BB might be correct.

Just so I have this straight, you're implying that things opened up for Roy Williams because Ds were worried about Mike Furrey?

 

Sorry, but, like you said, there are far too many factors at play to pin that "spike" (which was more yards but not more TDs) on the fact that they went out and grabbed an upgrade at WR2. Considering that "upgrade" was a journeyman at best. And, it's certainly not a strong enough case to support the notion as a general rule.

 

If anything, considering that same 2006 season saw Furrey grab 5 more TDs than he did in any of his other 6 seasons, would point to the fact that a WR2 can take advantage of the attention the WR1 is going to get.

Edited August 14, 2011 by detlef

[keggerz]

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?

I haven't looked up any WRs except for Wayne/Harrison....and I only wanted to look at how Wayne impacted Harrison early...mainly because there was a changing of the guard due to age....what I also was very curious about was Harrison's HUGH 2002 season, Wayne's 2nd....over the last 8 games that they played together in 2002:

 

Wayne 32/509 3 extrapolates to 64/1018 6

 

Harrison 76/910 8 extrapolates to 152/1820 16

 

Harrison's actual 2002 stats 143/1722 11

 

In the first half of the season Wayne hadn't really done much and in week 9 he went 5/93 and in week 10 he went 6/121 1 so that was why I figured I would look to see how Wayne truly emerging impacted Harrison

 

2002 was the apex in Harrison's career but what many might not realize is that he was 30 yo that year too so him starting to slide statistically shouldn't have been a huge surprise, yet with Wayne improving Harrison was still fantasy relevant for 4 more years and if not for an injury most likely had another couple years of productivity in him

[Pope Flick]

Just so I have this straight, you're implying that things opened up for Roy Williams because Ds were worried about Mike Furrey?

 

Sorry, but, like you said, there are far too many factors at play to pin that "spike" (which was more yards but not more TDs) on the fact that they went out and grabbed an upgrade at WR2. Considering that "upgrade" was a journeyman at best. And, it's certainly not a strong enough case to support the notion as a general rule.

 

If anything, considering that same 2006 season saw Furrey grab 5 more TDs than he did in any of his other 6 seasons, would point to the fact that a WR2 can take advantage of the attention the WR1 is going to get.

 

 

Sure - why not? You wanted an example and you pointed out that passing attempts went up 20% the same year Furrey became a viable WR2 AND RWs yardage doubled.

 

Please provide me a list of sexy career WR2s that meet your criteria. You're just going to poke holes in everything, and yes BB is right: you've made up your mind and are dismissive of anything that contradicts that.

 

As for the general rule thing - I jumped into this late and found Furrey in about 10 minutes. And if a schmutz like him can lend a nice example to this theory then more abound because we found one in Mike Furrey.

[keggerz]

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?

not a WR2 but Dallas Clark surely helped Wayne put up stats and vice versa...also in 2009 (1st year no harrison) Garcon and Collie weren't chopped liver with Collie putting up 60/676 and 7 and Garcon 47/765 4

[detlef]

I haven't looked up any WRs except for Wayne/Harrison....and I only wanted to look at how Wayne impacted Harrison early...mainly because there was a changing of the guard due to age....what I also was very curious about was Harrison's HUGH 2002 season, Wayne's 2nd....over the last 8 games that they played together in 2002:

 

Wayne 32/509 3 extrapolates to 64/1018 6

 

Harrison 76/910 8 extrapolates to 152/1820 16

 

Harrison's actual 2002 stats 143/1722 11

 

In the first half of the season Wayne hadn't really done much and in week 9 he went 5/93 and in week 10 he went 6/121 1 so that was why I figured I would look to see how Wayne truly emerging impacted Harrison

 

2002 was the apex in Harrison's career but what many might not realize is that he was 30 yo that year too so him starting to slide statistically shouldn't have been a huge surprise, yet with Wayne improving Harrison was still fantasy relevant for 4 more years and if not for an injury most likely had another couple years of productivity in him

Good points, but it does bear mention that Harrison scored 14 and 15 TDs (averaging nearly 100 yds per game in both years) in the two years prior to the season where Wayne was productive down the stretch. So, even if you extrapolate his 2nd half (which involves assuming that there wasn't other factors in play, like who they were playing and such), his new numbers for 2002 aren't way better.

 

I will give you this, I hear you on the fact that Wayne may have allowed him to stay relevant, longer. Then again, I've read enough about he and Manning that much of that could have been due to their connection. I've heard stories where they'd break the huddle and Manning would all of a sudden say "Buffalo last year" or something and Harrison knew that he meant, "Run that play we scored on against Buffalo last year when we were in the same position we are now."

[keggerz]

Sure - why not? You wanted an example and you pointed out that passing attempts went up 20% the same year Furrey became a viable WR2 AND RWs yardage doubled.

 

Please provide me a list of sexy career WR2s that meet your criteria. You're just going to poke holes in everything, and yes BB is right: you've made up your mind and are dismissive of anything that contradicts that.

 

As for the general rule thing - I jumped into this late and found Furrey in about 10 minutes. And if a schmutz like him can lend a nice example to this theory then more abound because we found one in Mike Furrey.

I did the same and thought Wayne Harrison then Wayne Clark...collie garcon

[detlef]

Sure - why not? You wanted an example and you pointed out that passing attempts went up 20% the same year Furrey became a viable WR2 AND RWs yardage doubled.

 

Please provide me a list of sexy career WR2s that meet your criteria. You're just going to poke holes in everything, and yes BB is right: you've made up your mind and are dismissive of anything that contradicts that.

 

As for the general rule thing - I jumped into this late and found Furrey in about 10 minutes. And if a schmutz like him can lend a nice example to this theory then more abound because we found one in Mike Furrey.

No, I'm just going to poke holes in things that don't seem to make the point. I am challenging the theory that, when a team brings in a solid WR2, it has a positive impact on the WR1s stats because it opens things up for him. BB seemed to think that anyone with any knowledge of football would understand why this is clearly the case.

 

And his theory is based on the fact that the D has to worry about this guy enough for the WR1 to exploit the lack of attention. So, in order for that to be the case, Ds would have to give a crap about Mike Furrey. A guy who had played 8 games and caught 1 pass in 2004 and sat out the entire 2005 season. So, I'm sorry, but I don't see how that fits the description of what happens to the WR1 when a team upgrades at WR2. Because your example has "statistical anomaly" written all over it. Some dude, who never really did squat before or after that year, happened to have a great season, the same year that Roy Williams (in his 3rd season btw, you know, the one that guys always break out in?) also happened to have way more yards (but not more TDs). Oh, and that happened to coincide with changing from Joey Harrington to Jon Kitna and throwing the ball a bunch more than the previous years.

[tazinib1]

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.

 

I guess we'll have to revisit this thread after the season. What I was getting at, and you're smart enough to where I didn't think I had to explain it, was Julio Jones being the next Reggie Wayne in terms of WR1/WR2.

[Furd]

Roy Williams

 

I thought that this thread was about studs?

 

Anyway, I think your'e nuts if you think that Mike f'n Furrey had anything to do with Williams' numbers one way or the other. Nobody schemed for Furrey. He was great at taking what the defense gave him, which was quite a bit.

 

I think consistent with the theme of this thread, the better analysis would to be to look at Willaims' numbers after C. Johnson came aboard.

 

[detlef]

I did the same and thought Wayne Harrison then Wayne Clark...collie garcon

But Wayne has been up and down in both TDs and Yds from one year to the next. Always being nice in yards and sometimes being nice in TDs. Yet, Clark has been there and productive through most of it. How does this illustrate anything? Who was the guy that came along an opened things up for Wayne? He's always had good numbers and he's always played on a team that throws it all over the yard with an amazing QB.

[Pope Flick]

No, I'm just going to poke holes in things that don't seem to make the point. I am challenging the theory that, when a team brings in a solid WR2, it has a positive impact on the WR1s stats because it opens things up for him. BB seemed to think that anyone with any knowledge of football would understand why this is clearly the case.

 

And his theory is based on the fact that the D has to worry about this guy enough for the WR1 to exploit the lack of attention. So, in order for that to be the case, Ds would have to give a crap about Mike Furrey. A guy who had played 8 games and caught 1 pass in 2004 and sat out the entire 2005 season. So, I'm sorry, but I don't see how that fits the description of what happens to the WR1 when a team upgrades at WR2. Because your example has "statistical anomaly" written all over it. Some dude, who never really did squat before or after that year, happened to have a great season, the same year that Roy Williams (in his 3rd season btw, you know, the one that guys always break out in?) also happened to have way more yards (but not more TDs). Oh, and that happened to coincide with changing from Joey Harrington to Jon Kitna and throwing the ball a bunch more than the previous years.

 

 

True. And it's also true that the year in question he HAD to be accounted for and racked up over 1000 yards doing it.

 

You think that Ds prepped for Furrey's presence in Week 14 as they did in week 1? Because that's what you're trying to argue here. And again, pass attempts went up 20% and RWs yardage doubled.

 

And LMAO with the '3rd year WRs always break out in' - that's a nice concept and boy these guys really burned it up last year:

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d807...-wide-receivers

 

Still waiting for the approved Sexy List of Legit WR2s.

[keggerz]

Andre Reed/Eric Moulds 1998.....reed at the end of his career was still a solid WR2...Reed 63/795 5 Moulds 67/1368 9

 

Then in 99 Moulds takes a step back...Reed is in his last year and puts up just 52/536 1....Price as a rookie 31/393 3

Then in 2000 with a much more seasoned price as a solid WR2 Moulds puts up 94/1326 5 with Price putting up 52/762 3

2001 Moulds 67/904 5 Price 55/895 7

2002 Moulds 100/1292 10 Price 94/1252 9

 

What happened when Price went to ATL to be a #1? He flopped

What happened to Moulds in 2003 without Price and with Josh Reed as his WR2 (far from a solid WR2, much better as a WR3), Moulds falls to 64/780 1

But then in 2004 Moulds goes for 88/1043 5....all because a talented rookie that could stretch the field named Lee Evans lined up opposite him at WR2 (48/843 9 )

[keggerz]

But Wayne has been up and down in both TDs and Yds from one year to the next. Always being nice in yards and sometimes being nice in TDs. Yet, Clark has been there and productive through most of it. How does this illustrate anything? Who was the guy that came along an opened things up for Wayne? He's always had good numbers and he's always played on a team that throws it all over the yard with an amazing QB.

Clark had his first fantasy relevant year in 2007....that year Wayne had his best year in the NFL...as we know production doesn't happen in a vacuum and guys no matter who they are can't be expected to not have some sort of drop off after a career year...wayne had a drop off in 2008, no doubt but in 2009/2010 with a very very good clark and the addition of two solid WRs (garcon and collie) he was able to increase his numbers for 2 consecutive years....and as far as TDs go those are pretty hard to expect to see numbers not go up and down but when they are still within an acceptable parameter and catches and yards go up I think it is easy to see that the addition of more solid options did indeed help wayne

[keggerz]

But Wayne has been up and down in both TDs and Yds from one year to the next. Always being nice in yards and sometimes being nice in TDs. Yet, Clark has been there and productive through most of it. How does this illustrate anything? Who was the guy that came along an opened things up for Wayne? He's always had good numbers and he's always played on a team that throws it all over the yard with an amazing QB.

Inconsistent in TDs I will give you (0,4,7,12,5,9,10, 6, 10, 6) but to say he has been up and down in yards is a bit disingenuous since you make it sound like he has been up and down year to year and that isn't the case...starting in 2001 (1st year in the league) thru 2010

2001:345

2002: 716

2003: 838

2004: 1210

2005: 1055 (1st time stepping back)

2006: 1310

2007: 1510

2008: 1145 (2nd time stepping back)

2009: 1264

2010: 1355

 

and you can do the same with catches

2001: 27

2002: 49

2003: 68

2004: 77

2005: 83

2006: 86

2007: 104

2008: 82 (only step back from previous year)

2009: 100

2010: 111

Edited August 14, 2011 by keggerz

[detlef]

Inconsistent in TDs I will give you (0,4,7,12,5,9,10, 6, 10, 6) but to say he has been up and down in yards is a bit disingenuous since you make it sound like he has been up and down year to year and that isn't the case...starting in 2001 (1st year in the league) thru 2010

345

716

838

1210

1055 (1st time stepping back)

1310

1510

1145 (2nd time stepping back)

1264

1355

 

and you can do the same with catches

27

49

68

77

83

86

104

82 (only step back from previous year)

100

111

I said he was "always nice in yardage". The "up and down" bit was to imply that there's been no consistent trend one way or another. Again, my main point about Wayne is that he has always had both an amazing QB and solid complimentary options. Who's to say that those other options have both helped him by keeping Ds honest and hurt him by taking away looks? It sure seems that way because you can't point to any specific trend. Seems like he gets his yards (more or less) every year and alternates when he gets his scores.

[keggerz]

I said he was "always nice in yardage". The "up and down" bit was to imply that there's been no consistent trend one way or another. Again, my main point about Wayne is that he has always had both an amazing QB and solid complimentary options. Who's to say that those other options have both helped him by keeping Ds honest and hurt him by taking away looks? It sure seems that way because you can't point to any specific trend. Seems like he gets his yards (more or less) every year and alternates when he gets his scores.

 

ummm, you kinda covered both bases but there is no denying that you said he was up and down in yardage

 

But Wayne has been up and down in both TDs and Yds from one year to the next. Always being nice in yards and sometimes being nice in TDs. Yet, Clark has been there and productive through most of it. How does this illustrate anything? Who was the guy that came along an opened things up for Wayne? He's always had good numbers and he's always played on a team that throws it all over the yard with an amazing QB.

 

 

 

to me the trends show that as his options got better and more respect so did he...and I guess you are just going to completely bypass the Reed/Moulds/Price example

 

and done, no need to get into a pissin match when your mind is already made up...and that is ok

Edited August 14, 2011 by keggerz

[detlef]

Andre Reed/Eric Moulds 1998.....reed at the end of his career was still a solid WR2...Reed 63/795 5 Moulds 67/1368 9

 

Then in 99 Moulds takes a step back...Reed is in his last year and puts up just 52/536 1....Price as a rookie 31/393 3

Then in 2000 with a much more seasoned price as a solid WR2 Moulds puts up 94/1326 5 with Price putting up 52/762 3

2001 Moulds 67/904 5 Price 55/895 7

2002 Moulds 100/1292 10 Price 94/1252 9

 

What happened when Price went to ATL to be a #1? He flopped

What happened to Moulds in 2003 without Price and with Josh Reed as his WR2 (far from a solid WR2, much better as a WR3), Moulds falls to 64/780 1

But then in 2004 Moulds goes for 88/1043 5....all because a talented rookie that could stretch the field named Lee Evans lined up opposite him at WR2 (48/843 9 )

Nice example, though Moulds missed time in 2003. Only 3 games, but that almost accounts for the yardage. Not sure if he had a lingering issues beyond the 3 games of what. But that could be the best one yet.

[detlef]

ummm, you kinda covered both bases but there is no denying that you said he was up and down in yardage

 

 

 

 

 

to me the trends show that as his options got better and more respect so did he...and I guess you are just going to completely bypass the Reed/Moulds/Price example

 

and done, no need to get into a pissin match when your mind is already made up...and that is ok

But he didn't. It's hard to say when exactly he went from the guy who was feeding off the respect Harrison was getting to being the go-to guy himself. However, there is no "trend". His stats have not gotten increasingly better as Indy got better weapons on the other side because, well, his stats have been going up and down (albeit at a high level) for the last several years. An in those years, he's had either Harrison as 1A or an elite TE and/or Manning has been taking advantage of guys like Collie or Garcon not getting any love from the D because they're worried about Wayne and Clark. But what hasn't happened is some spike either up or down that coincided with a significant change to the quality of other receivers on that team. There's no example of "This is Wayne all by himself and this is Wayne when there was a solid option on the other side".

 

Hell, take this last year. Clark went down and the WR troupe was a freaking MASH unit. So what happened to Wayne? Well, his TDs dropped, but no lower than they were in 2008 when he had Clark, Harrison, and the only season Gonzales was worth a crap, and his yardage was the 2nd highest of his career. And if you were in a PPR league, it was barely off the previous season. Certainly not enough to make a point over.

 

Shall I go on? 2007? His best year ever? That was the season where Indy's 2nd receiver had the lowest amount of catches during Wayne's run as WR1. In other words, his very best season was the year when he got the least amount of help from the other side. Marvin Harrison was hurt for most of the year and Dallas Clark was 2nd with 58 catches, less than Indy's #2 receiver has had in any season lately, including this year when everyone was getting hurt.

 

And, again, "up and down" means that it's not an unbroken curve. Up one year, down from that the next, then back above that level, and so on. Is that not the case? That doesn't mean he's inconsistent, it simply means that he hasn't been trending one way or the other.

 

In other words, this is not me being stubborn, this you not actually showing how Wayne is an example of the theory holding true.

 

And, as for me "ignoring the Moulds bit" Dude, you posted 3 responses, I was taking them one at a time.

Edited August 14, 2011 by detlef