PDA

View Full Version : Three WR sets....which one is the best? SI ranks 'em...


KChiefs1
06-24-2005, 08:37 AM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/andrew_perloff/06/23/perloff.multiple.receivers/index.html

5. Raiders (Randy Moss, Jerry Porter, Ronald Curry): Moss and Porter is a pretty fearsome duo on paper, but Curry could be the element that makes the Raiders' offense unstoppable. Curry is recovering from a torn Achilles' heel that ended his 2004 season, but is reportedly running and will be full strength by the season. Oakland believed in Curry enough to sign him to a contract extension this offseason. If he gets back to where he was last year, the Raiders have three home-run threats. Considering you have to double-team Moss, Porter and Curry will have great opportunities -- and Kerry Collins has the arm strength to hit them long.

4. Cardinals (Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin, Bryant Johnson): A year before Mariucci selected Mike Williams, Arizona coach Dennis Green surprised folks by taking Fitzgerald with the No. 3 pick in the 2004 draft. The Cards had just selected wide receivers Johnson and Boldin in 2003, and both showed enormous potential. All three are outstanding players, but the team's offense still has question marks -- can someone, perhaps rookie J.J. Arrington, provide a running game, and does QB Kurt Warner have anything left? Based on Green's history, there's reason to believe the Cardinals will be able to put some points on the board and these young receivers will lead the way.

3. Lions (Roy Williams, Charles Rogers, Mike Williams): How many receivers in the league are over six-feet tall and can run an under-4.3 40-yard dash? At least half of them -- Rogers and Roy Williams -- are Lions. And Detroit added another physical freak -- Mike Williams -- in the draft. Look for Mariucci to line Mike up in the slot and use his size as a very effective possession receiver, while Rogers and Roy menace defenses downfield. Add a slightly over-the-hill Marcus Pollard at tight end and running back Kevin Jones and the Lions should be hard to stop. Two potential issues: Rogers' injury history and instability at quarterback. An early call to Jeff Garcia over Joey Harrington might help the young stud receivers.

2. Rams (Torry Holt, Isaac Bruce, Kevin Curtis or Shaun McDonald): Several commentators have pointed out that the Rams have had trouble replacing Hakim in their slot position and the offense has come down to earth a little. Then St. Louis selected Curtis and McDonald in the third and fourth round of the 2003 draft. Both appear to be developing into potential weapons at the third-receiver spot. The No. 1 and No. 2 spots are still in good shape with Holt and Bruce -- as long as you don't ask Bruce to go out long -- and either Curtis or McDonald adds an element of speed that makes the Rams dangerous once again. Curtis appeared to be the guy in last year's playoffs, combining for 235 receiving yards in two games, but McDonald also had his moments and will be in the mix.

1. Colts (Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Brandon Stokley): Is it the system or the receivers? Offensive coordinator Tom Moore is one of the best, QB Peyton Manning is the best, tight end Dallas Clark is an emerging star and running back Edgerrin James is one of the better RBs in the league. But don't underestimate the talent of this receiving crew. All three are fast, good route-runners and sure-handed. Whenever you watch a Colts game, one of the three always seems to be wide open 30 yards down the field. That's what happens when an offense has so many ways to kill you and your quarterback's ball-fake fools cameramen and defenses on virtually every down. History says Manning will have difficulty topping his 49-touchdown record, but look for huge seasons from Harrison, Wayne and Stokley once again. Now, if they can somehow translate this into some success on a cold field in Foxboro ....

BCD
06-24-2005, 09:37 AM
Wha?! The Chiefs aren't on this list? Bastards!

HolmeZz
06-24-2005, 09:39 AM
Ehh, I'd give Oakland a little credit. They should be atleast ahead of Arizona. I'd probably put them ahead of Detroit too.

ptlyon
06-24-2005, 09:39 AM
I am pretty sure that we would have been on this list if he hadn't cut Morton.

Mile High Mania
06-24-2005, 09:51 AM
I disagree with the Lions and Cardinals until they've proven to a fearsome trio. Johnson hasn't done much and Boldin missed a lot of action last year. Mike Williams should rock, but has done nothing and Rogers spends more time on the injured list.

I'd list Oakland at #3, maybe even 2a and 2b with the Rams. Indy is the easy #1 for this one.

I would put Smith, Lelie and Watts ahead of the Cards and Lions just based on 2004 and the improvement that should take place in 2005.

I would list the Packers right there with the Rams if you're going to list dual options for the #3. I don't think either of the options for the Rams are much better than either #3 option for Green Bay.

Chiefaholic
06-24-2005, 09:59 AM
Obviously the Chiefs don't belong on the top five 3 WR sets. But as a TEAM we're damn hard to beat through the air or the ground because of the number of quality weapons.

But, just out of curiousity, where did we fall on the list? After watching training camp in KC, I think KC may suprise a few people at the level of talent we really have.

Hoover
06-24-2005, 10:23 AM
I disagree with the Lions and Cardinals until they've proven to a fearsome trio. Johnson hasn't done much and Boldin missed a lot of action last year. Mike Williams should rock, but has done nothing and Rogers spends more time on the injured list.

I'd list Oakland at #3, maybe even 2a and 2b with the Rams. Indy is the easy #1 for this one.

I would put Smith, Lelie and Watts ahead of the Cards and Lions just based on 2004 and the improvement that should take place in 2005.

I would list the Packers right there with the Rams if you're going to list dual options for the #3. I don't think either of the options for the Rams are much better than either #3 option for Green Bay.
While I agree that the Lions and Cards have talent they should not be in the top 5 until they prove something.

Give me a break about the Broncos.

The Bad Guy
06-24-2005, 11:01 AM
The Broncos ahead of the Cards?

What has Watts ever done?

Boldin and Fitzgerald are budding stars. If Boldin didn't get hurt last year he would have been a monster again and Fitz had a great rookie year.

Wait a minute, you say that these trios have never done anything, but you then want to put the Broncos in there "based" on the improvement that "should" take place in 2005?

That's hypocricy at it's best.

RedThat
06-24-2005, 11:09 AM
The Broncos ahead of the Cards?

What has Watts ever done?

Boldin and Fitzgerald are budding stars. If Boldin didn't get hurt last year he would have been a monster again and Fitz had a great rookie year.

Wait a minute, you say that these trios have never done anything, but you then want to put the Broncos in there "based" on the improvement that "should" take place in 2005?

That's hypocricy at it's best.

exactly

htismaqe
06-24-2005, 11:43 AM
The Broncos ahead of the Cards?

What has Watts ever done?

Boldin and Fitzgerald are budding stars. If Boldin didn't get hurt last year he would have been a monster again and Fitz had a great rookie year.

Wait a minute, you say that these trios have never done anything, but you then want to put the Broncos in there "based" on the improvement that "should" take place in 2005?

That's hypocricy at it's best.

This is Chiefsplanet. We openly sanction Bronco homerism.

Mile High Mania
06-24-2005, 12:08 PM
The Broncos ahead of the Cards?

What has Watts ever done?

Boldin and Fitzgerald are budding stars. If Boldin didn't get hurt last year he would have been a monster again and Fitz had a great rookie year.

Wait a minute, you say that these trios have never done anything, but you then want to put the Broncos in there "based" on the improvement that "should" take place in 2005?

That's hypocricy at it's best.

Settle down slick. We're talking 'trios'. I don't believe I disrespected Boldin or Fitzgerald, nor do I believe I diminished their greatness in any comments. As a duo, the sky is the limit - yes Fitz had a good rookie season and had Boldin not been injured he likely would have rocked.

But, we're talking trios... right? Ok, so I look at Bryant Johnson (49 / 537 / 1) and Darrius Watts (31 / 385 / 1) from 2004.

I'll take Rod and Lelie as the better duo compared to Boldin and Fitzgerald, based on both health and production. Watts was a true #3 receiver in 2004, compared to Fitzgerald that was the #2 while Boldin was out. Watts had 18 less receptions and only 152 fewer yards playing behind two 1,000 yard 7 TD receivers.

So, you tell me why it's hypocrisy at best? The Denver Trio has done it with Plummer while the AZ Trio hasn't done it yet with Warner. The Denver Trio was more productive than the AZ trio in 2004.

So, again, tell me why I'm so incredibly off base? Are we going to use an injury excuse?

Mile High Mania
06-24-2005, 12:09 PM
This is Chiefsplanet. We openly sanction Bronco homerism.

Yeah, let's not let production or dislike of the Broncos get in the way of a valid argument.

htismaqe
06-24-2005, 12:14 PM
Yeah, let's not let production or dislike of the Broncos get in the way of a valid argument.

There's no need to get so defensive. It's not like you're arguing for the Chiefs or something.

This is a Bronco homer board and always has been. Carry on.

Mile High Mania
06-24-2005, 12:17 PM
There's no need to get so defensive. It's not like you're arguing for the Chiefs or something.

This is a Bronco homer board and always has been. Carry on.

Seriously, I'm not defensive about any of this... and there's no arguing. We're just debating the topic. I don't get defensive about this crap...

Was my last statement with the comparisons not valid? It's not like I'm saying the Denver Trio is equal to the freaking Colts.

htismaqe
06-24-2005, 12:22 PM
Seriously, I'm not defensive about any of this... and there's no arguing. We're just debating the topic. I don't get defensive about this crap...

Was my last statement with the comparisons not valid? It's not like I'm saying the Denver Trio is equal to the freaking Colts.

Personally, I think the Denver trio sucks.

Mile High Mania
06-24-2005, 12:24 PM
Personally, I think the Denver trio sucks.

Is there any particular reason? Plus, let's not forget... I didn't say I would rank them in the top 5 of the league. I merely questioned the validity of 2 of the 5 in this SI list, stating that I would take Denver over those 2.

The AZ and DET trios have a world of talent... will be realized? Who knows at this point. I think it's funny to have the DET trio listed when Rogers is 1 of the 3.

RedThat
06-24-2005, 12:24 PM
I'll take Rod and Lelie as the better duo compared to Boldin and Fitzgerald, based on both health and production. Watts was a true #3 receiver in 2004, compared to Fitzgerald that was the #2 while Boldin was out. Watts had 18 less receptions and only 152 fewer yards playing behind two 1,000 yard 7 TD receivers.

So, you tell me why it's hypocrisy at best? The Denver Trio has done it with Plummer while the AZ Trio hasn't done it yet with Warner. The Denver Trio was more productive than the AZ trio in 2004.

So, again, tell me why I'm so incredibly off base? Are we going to use an injury excuse?

I don't think it's fair to compare healthy guys to injured guys.
Not fair. I might as well go out on a limb and say Freddie Mitchell is a better receiver than Anquan Boldin because Boldin was hurt and Mitchell played, was healthy, and produced better numbers. But really who's the better WR?

htismaqe
06-24-2005, 12:25 PM
Is there any particular reason?

Nope.

ptlyon
06-24-2005, 12:25 PM
Anquan Boldin

WHO?

htismaqe
06-24-2005, 12:25 PM
I don't think it's fair to compare healthy guys to injured guys.
Not fair. I might as well go out on a limb and say Freddie Mitchell is a better receiver than Anquan Boldin because Boldin was hurt and Mitchell played, was healthy, and produced better numbers. But really who's the better WR?

Fred Mitchell IS better. He's better than all 3 Denver WR's COMBINED.

Mile High Mania
06-24-2005, 12:29 PM
I don't think it's fair to compare healthy guys to injured guys.
Not fair. I might as well go out on a limb and say Freddie Mitchell is a better receiver than Anquan Boldin because Boldin was hurt and Mitchell played, was healthy, and produced better numbers. But really who's the better WR?

Well, if you're gonna get all crazy... use a receiver that actually had better numbers than Boldin in your comparison. Boldin had more than twice as many receptions and nearly double the yardage with 1 fewer TD in half the games FredEx played.

So, you have no issues with the Detoit trio being listed even though Rogers has missed more games than played due to injury?

Mile High Mania
06-24-2005, 12:30 PM
Fred Mitchell IS better. He's better than all 3 Denver WR's COMBINED.

ROFL Now, you're just being goofy.

RedThat
06-24-2005, 12:41 PM
Well, if you're gonna get all crazy... use a receiver that actually had better numbers than Boldin in your comparison. Boldin had more than twice as many receptions and nearly double the yardage with 1 fewer TD in half the games FredEx played.

So, you have no issues with the Detoit trio being listed even though Rogers has missed more games than played due to injury?

Ah kinda...A little mixed. When it comes to talent, I think they are one of the better in the league. But, yeah I see where your getting at about production, and health. there is no doubt though, that if Rogers stayed healthy, he would be a productive WR. Unfortunately, he hasn't. I don't know how to judge them to be honest. It is very difficult to place them in the top. We have to remember though all these guys we're top picks, and we know the media will hype them. And because of all this overhype, of course they are going to be placed in the top 5 for trio WR's. I don't know, only time will tell. hopefully, rogers will be healthy this year, Roy Williams is awesome, and Mike Williams, I think is the best WR that came out of this draft. We shall wait and see what happens, then we can make accurate judgements.

Mile High Mania
06-24-2005, 01:47 PM
Ah kinda...A little mixed. When it comes to talent, I think they are one of the better in the league. But, yeah I see where your getting at about production, and health. there is no doubt though, that if Rogers stayed healthy, he would be a productive WR. Unfortunately, he hasn't. I don't know how to judge them to be honest. It is very difficult to place them in the top. We have to remember though all these guys we're top picks, and we know the media will hype them. And because of all this overhype, of course they are going to be placed in the top 5 for trio WR's. I don't know, only time will tell. hopefully, rogers will be healthy this year, Roy Williams is awesome, and Mike Williams, I think is the best WR that came out of this draft. We shall wait and see what happens, then we can make accurate judgements.

Yeah - if Rogers can stay healthy, that's a frightening trio without a doubt. I wonder if Harrington can make it happen. They have a damn tight team loaded with youth.

InChiefsHell
06-24-2005, 02:12 PM
Fred Mitchell IS better. He's better than all 3 Denver WR's COMBINED.

Freddie Mitchell's POOP is better...

...but even he is no Rich Scanlon...

jspchief
06-24-2005, 02:57 PM
So, you have no issues with the Detoit trio being listed even though Rogers has missed more games than played due to injury?I guess I look at it as the best trio on the field, thus assuming they are healthy. While you can argue that Rogers is injury prone, if you've seen him play, you can't question his ability.

My list would go like this:
1. Indy, of course.

2. Oakland. Moss and Porter are an excellent 1/2, and Curry or Gabriel are very capable at #3.

3. St. Louis. Despite his age, Bruce still produces. Holt is obvious, and either #3 is proven, much like Oakland. The only reason Pakland is ahead of them isbecause I think a young Porter may be more productive this year than an old Bruce.

4. Cincinatti. Chad Johnson may be the best in the league. TJ Houshmandzadeh is coming into his own. Warrick could be a decent #2, and Kelly Washington might be better than Warrick.

5. Arizona. At the end of the season, I expect it to be Detroit, but Mike Williams is nobody right now. Fitz was average with no QB or WR help, but the combo of him and Boldin should be dynamite now that they have a QB (sort of). Bryant Johnson will reap the benefits as well.

Honorable mention:

Detroit. If Williams is anywhere close to the hype, they'll be top five easily (assuming a healthy Rogers).

Denver. Watts is still a bit of a question mark. Lelie appears to be softening those stone hands, he's gonna be a guy to be reckoned with. The question is, how much longer can Smith do it?

Tennessee. With Bennet and Calico, they should have an excellent 1 and 2. The question remains, who's the #3 gonna be?

Carolina. I think Colbert will bump Proehl from the #2 spot. With Smith doing his thing, and Proehl in the slot where he excells, the sky (or more accurately, Delhomme) is the limit.

htismaqe
06-24-2005, 03:08 PM
Freddie Mitchell's POOP is better...

...but even he is no Rich Scanlon...

Fred Mitchell, NFL Comeback Player of the Year

htismaqe
06-24-2005, 03:09 PM
I guess I look at it as the best trio on the field, thus assuming they are healthy. While you can argue that Rogers is injury prone, if you've seen him play, you can't question his ability.

My list would go like this:
1. Indy, of course.

2. Oakland. Moss and Porter are an excellent 1/2, and Curry or Gabriel are very capable at #3.

3. St. Louis. Despite his age, Bruce still produces. Holt is obvious, and either #3 is proven, much like Oakland. The only reason Pakland is ahead of them isbecause I think a young Porter may be more productive this year than an old Bruce.

4. Cincinatti. Chad Johnson may be the best in the league. TJ Houshmandzadeh is coming into his own. Warrick could be a decent #2, and Kelly Washington might be better than Warrick.

5. Arizona. At the end of the season, I expect it to be Detroit, but Mike Williams is nobody right now. Fitz was average with no QB or WR help, but the combo of him and Boldin should be dynamite now that they have a QB (sort of). Bryant Johnson will reap the benefits as well.

Honorable mention:

Detroit. If Williams is anywhere close to the hype, they'll be top five easily (assuming a healthy Rogers).

Denver. Watts is still a bit of a question mark. Lelie appears to be softening those stone hands, he's gonna be a guy to be reckoned with. The question is, how much longer can Smith do it?

Tennessee. With Bennet and Calico, they should have an excellent 1 and 2. The question remains, who's the #3 gonna be?

Carolina. I think Colbert will bump Proehl from the #2 spot. With Smith doing his thing, and Proehl in the slot where he excells, the sky (or more accurately, Delhomme) is the limit.

I think you gotta mention Pittsburgh, just because Ward and El are so good...

KCChiefsMan
06-24-2005, 03:18 PM
the Dolphins might get some credit there Chambers/Booker/Boston

jspchief
06-24-2005, 03:18 PM
I think you gotta mention Pittsburgh, just because Ward and El are so good...I thought about them. Last year ( with Burress) they were a clear top 5, but there are few question marks this year.

I assume they will let Wilson and Randle El battle for the #2 spot. Cedrick Wilson is a big question mark IMO. Randle is a great slot receiver, but will he be any good as a #2?

It's another group that could be worthy at the end of the year, but right now they aren't IMO. I also have a feeling Rothlisberger may come back to earth a bit this year.

jspchief
06-24-2005, 03:20 PM
the Dolphins might get some credit there Chambers/Booker/BostonTo borrow a quote from Elvis..."they can't throw the ball to themselves".

Besides QB questions. I'll believe in Boston again as soon as he actually plays an entire season. As far as I'm concerned, that guy doesn't exist.

KCFANinNC
06-24-2005, 05:48 PM
I guess I look at it as the best trio on the field, thus assuming they are healthy. While you can argue that Rogers is injury prone, if you've seen him play, you can't question his ability.

My list would go like this:
1. Indy, of course.

2. Oakland. Moss and Porter are an excellent 1/2, and Curry or Gabriel are very capable at #3.

3. St. Louis. Despite his age, Bruce still produces. Holt is obvious, and either #3 is proven, much like Oakland. The only reason Pakland is ahead of them isbecause I think a young Porter may be more productive this year than an old Bruce.

4. Cincinatti. Chad Johnson may be the best in the league. TJ Houshmandzadeh is coming into his own. Warrick could be a decent #2, and Kelly Washington might be better than Warrick.

5. Arizona. At the end of the season, I expect it to be Detroit, but Mike Williams is nobody right now. Fitz was average with no QB or WR help, but the combo of him and Boldin should be dynamite now that they have a QB (sort of). Bryant Johnson will reap the benefits as well.

Honorable mention:

Detroit. If Williams is anywhere close to the hype, they'll be top five easily (assuming a healthy Rogers).

Denver. Watts is still a bit of a question mark. Lelie appears to be softening those stone hands, he's gonna be a guy to be reckoned with. The question is, how much longer can Smith do it?

Tennessee. With Bennet and Calico, they should have an excellent 1 and 2. The question remains, who's the #3 gonna be?

Carolina. I think Colbert will bump Proehl from the #2 spot. With Smith doing his thing, and Proehl in the slot where he excells, the sky (or more accurately, Delhomme) is the limit.

That is a better read than SI's.. I only disagree about Den. Lelie an Watts blow donkey ballz.

Douche Baggins
06-24-2005, 05:49 PM
Haha. Htismaqe giving Mitchell the full Scanlon treatment.

milkman
06-24-2005, 07:03 PM
Fred Mitchell, NFL Comeback Player of the Year

How do you win comeback player if you were never there before?

jspchief
06-24-2005, 09:49 PM
How do you win comeback player if you were never there before?Ask Drew Brees.

theultimatekcchiefsfan
06-24-2005, 10:40 PM
I am pretty sure that we would have been on this list if he hadn't cut Morton.


ROFL ROFL

The Bad Guy
06-25-2005, 12:37 AM
Settle down slick. We're talking 'trios'. I don't believe I disrespected Boldin or Fitzgerald, nor do I believe I diminished their greatness in any comments. As a duo, the sky is the limit - yes Fitz had a good rookie season and had Boldin not been injured he likely would have rocked.

But, we're talking trios... right? Ok, so I look at Bryant Johnson (49 / 537 / 1) and Darrius Watts (31 / 385 / 1) from 2004.

I'll take Rod and Lelie as the better duo compared to Boldin and Fitzgerald, based on both health and production. Watts was a true #3 receiver in 2004, compared to Fitzgerald that was the #2 while Boldin was out. Watts had 18 less receptions and only 152 fewer yards playing behind two 1,000 yard 7 TD receivers.

So, you tell me why it's hypocrisy at best? The Denver Trio has done it with Plummer while the AZ Trio hasn't done it yet with Warner. The Denver Trio was more productive than the AZ trio in 2004.

So, again, tell me why I'm so incredibly off base? Are we going to use an injury excuse?

I'm not going to use any excuse. You want to diminish AZ's trio because they have never "gotten" it done, but you want to priase your own trio based on what they "should" do in 2005.

If doing it is 31 catches, then congratulations, your standards are far below mine.

Plus, the trio in AZ did it with a QB carousel last year. Give AZ a decent QB and see what that trio would do.

And you might be the only fan in the NFL that would take Smith/Lelie/Watts over Boldin/Fitzgerald/Johnson.

Parker is right - Bronco homerism dominates Chiefsplanet.

Mile High Mania
06-25-2005, 07:10 AM
I'm not going to use any excuse. You want to diminish AZ's trio because they have never "gotten" it done, but you want to priase your own trio based on what they "should" do in 2005.

If doing it is 31 catches, then congratulations, your standards are far below mine.

Plus, the trio in AZ did it with a QB carousel last year. Give AZ a decent QB and see what that trio would do.

And you might be the only fan in the NFL that would take Smith/Lelie/Watts over Boldin/Fitzgerald/Johnson.

Parker is right - Bronco homerism dominates Chiefsplanet.

My fan affilliation has nothing to do with my comments. You sound like I shouldn't account for injuries on the part of Boldin, or the fact they had QB issues. Well, the Denver trio was playing with Plummer and based on a lot of what I've read around here, that should negatively impact the Denver receivers.

I compared the Den 3 with the AZ 3 from last year. Last year the Denver 3 kicked their asses. Total receptions were almost the same, but there was upwards of 600 more yards and I think 5 more TDs by the Denver 3.

I'm comparing 31 catches by Watts (rookie) playing a true #3 role compared to the 49 by BJ (rookie) playing more of a #2 role for half the season.

My standards aren't low - I'm just comparing the 2 players and their production based on their rank in the pecking order last year.

There's been lots of mentions of pretty strong "duos" in this thread with question marks around the #3 for various teams... enh, they pretty much don't apply if you can't come up with a #3.

Mile High Mania
06-25-2005, 07:14 AM
And you might be the only fan in the NFL that would take Smith/Lelie/Watts over Boldin/Fitzgerald/Johnson.

Ahhh... forgot this one. Yeah, if it's the AZ Trio with Warner or the Denver Trio with Plummer... gimme the Denver option.

jspchief
06-25-2005, 07:19 AM
Ahhh... forgot this one. Yeah, if it's the AZ Trio with Warner or the Denver Trio with Plummer... gimme the Denver option.Assuming everyone stays healthy on both teams, I think you'll be eating those words at the end of the year.

Mile High Mania
06-25-2005, 07:39 AM
Assuming everyone stays healthy on both teams, I think you'll be eating those words at the end of the year.

Ok, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong... I just don't think I'm incredibly off base here. I'm talking about 3 guys that have done it vs two groups of trios (AZ and DET) that haven't done it.

jspchief
06-25-2005, 07:50 AM
Ok, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong... I just don't think I'm incredibly off base here. I'm talking about 3 guys that have done it vs two groups of trios (AZ and DET) that haven't done it.Oh, I don't think you're terribly off base. I said in my first post that Detroit doesn't make my top five, but it makes my honorable mention. As does Denver. I Have to see it from Mike Williams before I buy it.

But I do think Arizona will have the better receiving corps over Denver this year (assuming all parties are healthy). I think Boldin and Fitzgerald will be a better duo than Smith/Lelie, and IMO Johnson is easily better than Watts. Not only do I think these guys are simply better receivers, I think in Denny Green's offense, they will thrive.

Mile High Mania
06-25-2005, 07:56 AM
A lot will ride on JJ Arrington... I think that guy is gonna rock. I think the jury is still out on Watts to a degree personally, he had a number of drops... but he was a rookie. If he does improve on some areas, the kid could do very well.

Mile High Mania
06-25-2005, 07:57 AM
Also, if you back away from trios and look at duos... well, then the class gets crowded.

htismaqe
06-25-2005, 12:30 PM
Ask Drew Brees.

ROFL

Mile High Mania
06-25-2005, 01:45 PM
Yeah - the whole Drew Brees thing was just odd. How can you "comeback" when you technically were never there previously? Shouldn't it be the "finally produced" award?

NaptownChief
06-25-2005, 02:06 PM
"tight end Dallas Clark is an emerging star"


That is true on the football field but certainly not on the golf course...Monday he and Jeff Saturday were playing out at my club and it wasn't a pretty sight. The worms had a tough day to say the least.

Ultra Peanut
06-25-2005, 02:18 PM
22 – Denver – Nate Robinson
Too short and too black to play in the league. What this league needs is less players like Nate Robinson. Robinson is everything that is wrong with the NBA. Everything from his strutting on the court to his dunking and then his athletic and leaping ability. Don’t even get me started on his suspect jump shot. Nate Robinson is all image and he needs to stay away from the NBA. Nobody will draft him. I hope a drunk driver runs over Nate’s short stumpy legs.

23 – Sacramento – Hakim Warrick
When is the last time that a 6’8 string-bean of a power forward succeeded in the NBA? Never, that’s when! You should’ve came out of college when Carmelo came out, Hakim. You’re nothing but a much-improved bitch of a basketball player you piece of shit. You are everything that is wrong with the game of basketball. Winning a national title at Syracuse is stupid.

24 – Houston – Charlie Villanueva
The thing I really like about Charlie is his pure toughness. People always tell me that I’m repeating myself when I tell this story but that’s because it’s such a great story: Charlie came into the University of Connecticut as a player who had a “questionable work ethic”, whatever that means. He came away as a winner of a national championship (an absolutely invaluable experience that cannot be measured in terms of NBA draft intangibles) and so improved that he became a starter. I don’t know of very many starters for basketball teams that have “questionable work ethics” because they obviously had to work in order to start. It’s just simple logic.

25 – Seattle – Joey Graham
Joey Graham can go to hell as far as I’m concerned. I was walking down the street with my grandmother, who is a very active 84 years old, and Joey pushed her into a puddle of mud and told me to go **** myself. I was startled at first that anyone could do such a thing. Luckily, my keen eye caught the fact that the kid in question was wearing an Oklahoma State basketball jersey and it had the same number that I think I remember Joey Graham having. Obvious character issues.

26 – Detroit – Linus Kleiza
What people may not know about Linus is that he has a heart of gold. This young man helped pick my grandmother up when she was lying facedown in a puddle of mud (thanks to All-American loser Joey Graham) and his smile brought a certain unforgivable happiness to my world again. I asked him what his name was and it wasn’t Linus Kleiza but it was close enough. What a great young man. Detroit should draft him.

27 – Utah – Wayne Simien
Let me tell you a little something about Wayne Simien that you may not know: he doesn’t vote and he eats red meat. Need I say more? I also saw him jacking off in the bathroom before his draft workout with Detroit. Would you spend a 1st round draft pick on a guy who jacks off in a dirty bathroom in Detroit? Also, he may or may not agree with a socialist’s point of view. I asked him about that earlier and he asked me to move on to the next question. What are you trying to hide, “Wayne”?

"Here is Nate Robinson making white people scared again. He's too black for the NBA and it may hurt the game. Don't do it, Denver!"

Mile High Mania
06-25-2005, 03:08 PM
Psi... was that just a bad attempt at hijacking or killing a thread?

Ultra Peanut
06-25-2005, 03:15 PM
I'm offended that you would cast such terrible aspersions in my direction.

jspchief
06-25-2005, 04:01 PM
"tight end Dallas Clark is an emerging star"


That is true on the football field but certainly not on the golf course...Monday he and Jeff Saturday were playing out at my club and it wasn't a pretty sight. The worms had a tough day to say the least.That's interesting, considering Clark's parents own a golf course.