Porter v. Burleson

[Adrenaline]

I think Collins is going to have a career year with the addition of Moss so I voted for Porter. That said I saw Burleson play twice last year against my Packers & think he's a good receiver also. This is an interesting thread debating 2 receivers that should be #2s.

[spain]

Randy Moss said that Collins is better than Culpepper and I believe him..

[Big Score 1]

Randy Moss said that Collins is better than Culpepper and I believe him..

 

839068[/snapback]

 

 

Spain,

I have an infinitely higher degree of both moral fiber and character quality, than Randy Moss.

That being said, I have some Beach Front property in Arizona for sale.....cheap!

How many acres should I put you down for?

[Seahawks21]

I should've respoded earlier, as I'm getting pretty sick of DMD beating me to the punch as he so often does, opposing the popular opinion.

 

Make no qualms, Burleson is Minnesota's #1. Porter is OAKs #2. I have to believe that Minnesota will still put up bigger stats than Oakland, especially in the passing game. If any of you have watched Burleson, you will know the talent he is, and the #s he can produce as a featured guy. To me this discussion is a joke. Porter has never really consistently done ANYTHING. Why you would take him over a potential stud just doesn't make any sense.

[skylive5]

I have been leaning pretty heavily for Porter... with what is most likely faulty logic. However, I have now seen the error of my ways and since I had not voted yet I don't get to say I change my vote.

 

I would most definitely go for the clear #1...Burleson.

 

There have been some interesting arguments for both, but when it all gets boiled down... Burleson is the #1 in Min being thrown to by Culpepper a known #1 quantity... Porter is the #2 in Oak being thrown to by ...well... Collins....

 

So I change my mind from last night at your house Club.... it's Burleson for me.

[DMD]

I have been leaning pretty heavily for Porter... with what is most likely faulty logic. However, I have now seen the error of my ways and since I had not voted yet I don't get to say I change my vote.

 

I would most definitely go for the clear #1...Burleson.

 

There have been some interesting arguments for both, but when it all gets boiled down... Burleson is the #1 in Min being thrown to by Culpepper a known #1 quantity... Porter is the #2 in Oak being thrown to by ...well... Collins....

 

So I change my mind from last night at your house Club.... it's Burleson for me.

 

839330[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

(insert evil laugh )

[muck]

Is Burleson even "guaranteed" the #1 WR role? I know he's pencilled in, but, is that a lock?

 

More than once in recent memory, the "anticipated #1 WR" ended up being the #2 (see KRob v. DJax about two years ago in SEA) ... and with MRob and TWill lurking around, I've been wondering if the same thing is possible here.

[Hugh 0ne]

Is Burleson even "guaranteed" the #1 WR role?  I know he's pencilled in, but, is that a lock?

 

More than once in recent memory, the "anticipated #1 WR" ended up being the #2 (see KRob v. DJax about two years ago in SEA) ... and with MRob and TWill lurking around, I've been wondering if the same thing is possible here.

 

839586[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

No way MRob has the ability to be the #1 guy, and no way the rookie becomes the #1 guy. It's pretty sewn up that Burleson is the guy, MRob #2, and I think we'll see more and more of Taylor, and as the season progresses Williamson.

 

Tice's take on Taylor:

 

Q: What about Travis Taylor?

A: Travis has been a good find. (He's) a guy that I was told was strictly a slot guy has proved to be more than just a slot guy. We're happy to have him. He's another smart player that wants to show that the situation that he was in limited his chance to make plays. And certainly with a guy like Daunte (Culpepper) and the other players around him, he's going to have an opportunity to make some plays for us.

[muck]

See, there you go... I'd completely forgotten about TTaylor...he was a "top 10" draft pick coming out of college for a reason...lots of ability that wasn't given much of a chance in BAL with their series of crappy QBs...

[NAUgrad]

I should've respoded earlier, as I'm getting pretty sick of DMD beating me to the punch as he so often does, opposing the popular opinion.

 

Make no qualms, Burleson is Minnesota's #1.  Porter is OAKs #2.  I have to believe that Minnesota will still put up bigger stats than Oakland, especially in the passing game.  If any of you have watched Burleson, you will know the talent he is, and the #s he can produce as a featured guy.  To me this discussion is a joke.  Porter has never really consistently done ANYTHING.  Why you would take him over a potential stud just doesn't make any sense.

 

839312[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Burleson has exactly one decent year playing next to one of the most explosive WR's in the game. I'm not convinced he will excell as a featured guy. Moss always had to be accounted for, unlike Burleson who was most often set up on a 1on1 situation. I won't be surprised if Burleson's numbers actually dip a little being matched up against team #1 CB. We'll see how amazing a talent he is.

[Hugh 0ne]

Burleson has exactly one decent year playing next to one of the most explosive WR's in the game.  I'm not convinced he will excell as a featured guy.  Moss always had to be accounted for, unlike Burleson who was most often set up on a 1on1 situation.  I won't be surprised if Burleson's numbers actually dip a little being matched up against team #1 CB.  We'll see how amazing a talent he is.

 

839648[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

A fair part of his "one good year" was as the #1 WR facing the #1 CB because Moss was out.

[major-tom]

A fair part of his "one good year" was as the #1 WR facing the #1 CB because Moss was out.

 

839683[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

good point, Burly got my vote

[NAUgrad]

A fair part of his "one good year" was as the #1 WR facing the #1 CB because Moss was out.

 

839683[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I'm not exactly sure when Moss was out, but based on stats he was probably injured and out from weeks 7-11. If I remember right, Moss was sort of gimpy the rest of the season, but teams had to prepare for him regardless.

 

So during those 5 weeks, Burleson went 6-53, 6-43, 1-8, 11-141, 5-52. Certainly the 11-141 was impressive, but the other weeks proved very average at best. Burleson ended the year (including playoffs) averaging 4.2 recepts per game and 62 yds per game. Again, very average at best. So this year, opposite Burleson is and old injury riddled rec., another that has never done anything, and a rookie. How exactly is Burleson supposed put up even better numbers this season?

 

Porter last year in a very up and down year averaged 4.0 catches and 62.4 yards per game on one of the leagues worst offenses. Seems like similar numbers to me. I could actually see Burleson end the season with similar stats to Porter numbers from last year.

[Clubfoothead]

Well to my shock the masses have spoken so even though I disagree a few follow-up questions for those who like Burleson better:

 

1. If you use a tier style ranking system do you have them in the same tier?

2. Do you expect Burleson to improve on last years stats or have about the same numbers?

[Hugh 0ne]

So this year, opposite Burleson is and old injury riddled rec., another that has never done anything, and a rookie.  How exactly is Burleson supposed put up even better numbers this season?

 

839989[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Well, for one, I think the fact that he goes into training camp as the #1 guy and takes all the snaps as the #1 guy will certainly help. Also, with Taylor and Williamson, a solid QB, and pretty deep running game, he'll have the supporting staff to put up good numbers.

 

Do you really think that a DISTANT #2 WR on a Kerry Collins team will put up decent numbers? Sorry, I saw a lot of Collins when he was a Giant, and not much of it was positive.

[Hugh 0ne]

Well to my shock the masses have spoken so even though I disagree a few follow-up questions for those who like Burleson better:

 

1.  If you use a tier style ranking system do you have them in the same tier?

2.  Do you expect Burleson to improve on last years stats or have about the same numbers?

 

840018[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

1. No, different tier. Burleson bottom of the 2nd tier, Porter somewhere in the 3rd tier.

 

2. Burleson will improve on last years numbers.

[DMD]

Man. This thread just won't die It's like everyone will start introducing themselves as a Burleson or a Porter guy. I do refuse to get a tatoo over this though.

 

I'm not exactly sure when Moss was out, but based on stats he was probably injured and out from weeks 7-11.  If I remember right, Moss was sort of gimpy the rest of the season, but teams had to prepare for him regardless.

 

So during those 5 weeks, Burleson went 6-53, 6-43, 1-8, 11-141, 5-52.  Certainly the 11-141 was impressive, but the other weeks proved very average at best.  Burleson ended the year (including playoffs) averaging 4.2 recepts per game and 62 yds per game.  Again, very average at best.  So this year, opposite Burleson is and old injury riddled rec., another that has never done anything, and a rookie.  How exactly is Burleson supposed put up even better numbers this season?

 

839989[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Your rundown of the 5 weeks for Burleson conveniently leaves some elements out. Let's break them down:

 

Week 7 (TEN 3, MIN 20) - Vikings could have won and never thrown a pass

Burleson 6-53

 

Week 8 (NYG 34, MIN 13) - Vikes never saw it coming. Neither did I actually.

Burleson 6-43 TOUCHDOWN

 

Week 9 (MIN 28, IND 34) - Vikes only had the ball for 25 minutes, CPep only threw 16-19 for 169 yds, 1 TD in a close game that MIN almost won by rushing (24 rushes for 138 yds, 1 TD)

Burleson 1-8 TOUCHDOWN oh yes, Burleson 91 yard punt return TOUCHDOWN

 

Week 10 (MIN 31, GB 34) Shootout against divisional rival. Play 'em twice a year

Burleson 11-141 TOUCHDOWN

 

Week 11 (DET 19, MIN 22) comeback win thanks to a TD catch by someone

Burleson 5-52, TOUCHDOWN

 

So, basically, Burleson had five touchdowns during the five "non-Moss" weeks. His best game was against a divisional rival. His "worst" game had only one catch but two touchdowns.

 

To reply to a previous post, Burleson does not get the "good cornerback" now. He gets the exact same one he has always had (they do not swap sides). He could get more safety attention though it didn't stop him from scoring in almost every game when he did last year.

 

You cannot extrapolate 1:1 what a five game stretch averaged really since each was dependent on game situations. It is pretty impressive that he scored in almost every one. For what it is worth, he averaged 5.8 catches per game without Moss while he was the #1 WR.

 

The question "How exactly is Burleson supposed put up even better numbers this season?" to me is how could he possibly NOT? If in fact the other receivers are sub-standard around him, it would only serve to make him more important, not less. There is one truism that I will always believe in - "a great QB can make a great WR out of a merely good one. But it does NOT go the other way"

 

One of the top passers in the game now will have Burleson as a #1 and he is going to decline? Just do not see it. Not even.

 

Porter last year in a very up and down year averaged 4.0 catches and 62.4 yards per game on one of the leagues worst offenses.  Seems like similar numbers to me.  I could actually see Burleson end the season with similar stats to Porter numbers from last year.

 

839989[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Again, break it down a little. Remove just two of Porters games - the freak Denver matchup when he had 135 yards and 3 TDs (he only had 3 catches for 21 yards against DEN in week 6) and his 148 yard, 3 TD game against the Titans (no matchup this year) and here is what Porter produced in 14 games:

 

50 catches, 715 yards, 3 TDs. Average = 3.6 catches, 51 yards per game

 

This in a season where he was the NUMBER 1 receiver and the Raiders were almost always far behind and hunting for trash time yards and scores.

 

Now Porter moves back to being a #2 on a team that has arguably the best WR in the NFL for a #1, plus a new rushing game and he is going to even approach what he did as the #1 on a team always behind with zero rushing game? How does that work?

 

I could break it down more but evidently everyone has their mind made up on this. It would be extremely rare that a player moves from #2 to #1 on his team tha features one of the best QBs in the league would possibly do worst than a a player that goes from #1 to #2 on a team headed by Kerry Collins and that will have a passing attack designed to find Randy Moss.

 

One more time and I am writing an article about this...

[Hugh 0ne]

You know, the main downside to this website is that the admins never give any detailed responses in the forums. I mean, any dummy could say yes or no, or I agree or disagree, etc.

[Clubfoothead]

You know, the main downside to this website is that the admins never give any detailed responses in the forums. I mean, any dummy could say yes or no, or I agree or disagree, etc.

 

840107[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

No $hit there.

 

[NAUgrad]

Man. This thread just won't die  It's like everyone will start introducing themselves as a Burleson or a Porter guy. I do refuse to get a tatoo over this though.

Your rundown of the 5 weeks for Burleson conveniently leaves some elements out. Let's break them down:

 

Week 7 (TEN 3, MIN 20) - Vikings could have won and never thrown a pass

Burleson 6-53

 

Week 8 (NYG 34, MIN 13) - Vikes never saw it coming. Neither did I actually.

Burleson 6-43 TOUCHDOWN

 

Week 9 (MIN 28, IND 34) - Vikes only had the ball for 25 minutes, CPep only threw 16-19 for 169 yds, 1 TD  in a close game that MIN almost won by rushing (24 rushes for 138 yds, 1 TD)

Burleson 1-8 TOUCHDOWN oh yes, Burleson 91 yard punt return TOUCHDOWN

 

Week 10 (MIN 31, GB 34) Shootout against divisional rival. Play 'em twice a year

Burleson 11-141 TOUCHDOWN

 

Week 11 (DET 19, MIN 22) comeback win thanks to a TD catch by someone

Burleson 5-52, TOUCHDOWN

 

So, basically, Burleson had five touchdowns during the five "non-Moss" weeks. His best game was against a divisional rival. His "worst" game had only one catch but two touchdowns.

 

To reply to a previous post, Burleson does not get the "good cornerback" now. He gets the exact same one he has always had (they do not swap sides). He could get more safety attention though it didn't stop him from scoring in almost every game when he did last year.

 

You cannot extrapolate 1:1 what a five game stretch averaged really since each was dependent on game situations. It is pretty impressive that he scored in almost every one. For what it is worth, he averaged 5.8 catches per game without Moss while he was the #1 WR.

 

The question "How exactly is Burleson supposed put up even better numbers this season?" to me is how could he possibly NOT? If in fact the other receivers are sub-standard around him, it would only serve to make him more important, not less. There is one truism that I will always believe in - "a great QB can make a great WR out of a merely good one. But it does NOT go the other way"

 

One of the top passers in the game now will have Burleson as a #1 and he is going to decline? Just do not see it. Not even.

Again, break it down a little. Remove just two of Porters games - the freak Denver matchup when he had 135 yards and 3 TDs (he only had 3 catches for 21 yards against DEN in week 6) and his 148 yard, 3 TD game against the Titans (no matchup this year) and here is what Porter produced in 14 games:

 

50 catches, 715 yards, 3 TDs. Average = 3.6 catches, 51 yards per game

 

This in a season where he was the NUMBER 1 receiver and the Raiders were almost always far behind and hunting for trash time yards and scores.

 

Now Porter moves back to being a #2 on a team that has arguably the best WR in the NFL for a #1, plus a new rushing game and he is going to even approach what he did as the #1 on a team always behind with zero rushing game? How does that work?

 

I could break it down more but evidently everyone has their mind made up on this. It would be extremely rare that a player moves from #2 to #1 on his team tha features one of the best QBs in the league would possibly do worst than a a player that goes from #1 to #2 on a team headed by Kerry Collins and that will have a passing attack designed to find Randy Moss.

 

One more time and I am writing an article about this...

 

840099[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Since there is absolutely nothing going on right now in the football world, what the hell I'll keep responding.

 

Yes, your breakdown is correct and I saw that when I was looking at stats (it just didn't help my arguement so I didn't include it). In a number of games, Cpep didn't throw the ball that much and the Vikes didn't have that much time of possesion. That is exactly how Burleson may not have as good of numbers as last year. They could and probably will run the ball and at least try to have a more ball control offense.

 

CB's sometimes do actually trade sides. As a matter of fact, more and more #1 CB's match up with teams #1 wide reciever no matter where they're lined up.

 

I don't disagree with the discussion of Collins being a constant dissapointment. That could certainly hinder Porter's production, but I still think that Porter can be every bit as good as a #2 receiver in a wide open offense (if not better) as a #1 in a run oriented, defensive team.

Edited June 13, 2005 by NAUgrad

[DMD]

Yes, your breakdown is correct and I saw that when I was looking at stats (it just didn't help my arguement so I didn't include it).

840128[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I knew that was what you were doing and that's about the only reason I responded I spelled out and bolded TDs to help me

 

CB's sometimes do actually trade sides.  As a matter of fact, more and more #1 CB's match up with teams #1 wide reciever no matter where they're lined up.

 

840128[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I'm not saying it never happens, but it is rare enough to pretty much disregard and in the case of either Porter or Burleson - it will not apply. It is very rare though. It's almost all about committing one of the safeties.

[redcoltfan]

I agree with DMD and HUGH. Nate will clearly have better numbers than the #2WR in Oakland. Better offense. Better QB. etc...

 

Hey Hugh,

Who do you think will have better numbers- Burleson-MINN or Clayton-TBAY?

 

I see them both taken almost the exact same spot in the few mocks I have seen.

 

 

So, Who do you like?

[TitansFan]

What the hey, I might as well add to this.

 

Last year Oakland gave up the 2nd most points per game, and Minnesota gave up the 7th most ppg. Oakland hasn't exactly done anything to improve their defense, meaning they will probably be trying to come from behind in most of their games. Minnesota on the other hand has been very active this offseason in improving their defense, meaning that if these additions improve their defense, they should be doing more ball control at the end of games. Advantage Porter.

 

However, Burleson is the #1 and Porter is a #2, with Porter being behind one of, if not the best receiver in the game. This could go both ways: Burleson will be facing better corners this year as opposed to last, and Porter will be facing the second corner. Also, a lot of focus will be placed on Moss, possibly giving Porter deep one-on-one oppertunities. And if Jordan can establish some type of a running game, the defense will have to keep an eye on him, opening more oppertunities for Moss and Porter. Granted, Moss will get many balls thrown his way, limiting Porter. But if they have to play from behind, there should be ample oppertunities for Porter to succeed.

 

This is why I voted for Porter.

[Hugh 0ne]

I agree with DMD and HUGH. Nate will clearly have better numbers than the #2WR in Oakland. Better offense. Better QB. etc...

 

Hey Hugh,

Who do you think will have better numbers- Burleson-MINN or Clayton-TBAY?

 

I see them both taken almost the exact same spot in the few mocks I have seen.

 

 

So, Who do you like?

840140[/snapback]

 

OK, I'd expect probably more of the same from Clayton. Not that much has changed, unless he decides to have a sophmore slump. We'll see what happens with the RB's, but either way, I'd see more of the same from Clayton, maybe an extra TD or two, and a few extra rec's, similiar yardage. Let's say: 85 Rec's, 1150 yards, 9 TD's.

 

Burleson finished with 68 Rec's for 1006 yards and 9 TD's. Partly as the #2 WR, and partly as the #1 WR. Here's where the big question mark comes into play. Those numbers should go up. But how much? He could do 75 Rec's for 1100 yards and 6 TD's. Or he could do 90 Rec's and 1300 yards and 12 TD's. Tough to call. I guess it's a risk/reward thingie. With the potency of the Vikes offense, and the fact that he has Cpep and not Griese throwing him the ball, I'd be inclined to take the gamble and go with Burleson.

 

JMHO.

[Big Score 1]

Just an FYI.

 

I had both Porter & Burleson on my main Fantasy League last year. As such I followed them both extremely closely.

 

DMD's assertion that Porter put up the numbers he did last year, as Oakland's #1 WR, is not quite accurate.

 

At the beginning of the Oakland's season, Gannon was the starter and he distributed the ball both fairly evenly and fairly poorly. Gannon certainly didn't look to be the same QB from just two seasons previous. Curry, Porter and even Gaberial were all being targeted pretty much evenly.

 

Then Gannon went down and Collins took over at QB. Collins took maybe two or three games to get his feet under him and once comfortable, Curry actually became his most targeted WR.

 

Possibly this favoritism for Curry, by Collins, goes back to pre season familiarity when they were getting most of their reps together?

 

At one point last season, Porter openly complained about the number of looks he was getting during the games.

 

It was only once Curry went down with the Achilles injury, that Porter actually began seeing the targets commiserate with the label of being the Teams #1 WR.

 

Lastly, Porter was moved from the Slot to the Flanker position, for the first time in his NFL career. Considering that Porter was an extremely raw WR coming into the NFL from College, I highly doubt that he had much experience with the Flanker position, prior to last season.

 

I see the Moss / Porter combo as possibly being similar to the Moss / Carter combo. Don't forget, the Moss / Carter combo didn't have Dante throwing to them initially, yet they were still able to simultaneously, put up individual 1,000+ yard seasons.

 

And before you start with the Porter ain't no Carter cries, I know that. My point was to show that even though Dante wasn't throwing the ball, Moss + another good WR across from him, can each have 1,000+ yard seasons.

 

The next thing to look at is Norv Turner offenses.

 

Has Norv, as a Head Coach, ever had an offense produce a pair of 1,000+ yard WR's, in the same season?

 

The answer is yes!

 

Norv's Washington Redskin's offense had both Michael Westbrook and Albert Connell each notch 1,000+ yards one year....with Brad Johnson as their QB.

 

Read that again.

 

Michael "sucker punch" Westbrook & Albert "hang onto your wallet" Connell!!!

 

I think Moss & Porter are ever so slightly more talented, than those two mutts.

 

Anyway, when trying to project for Porter, take the above into consideration.