- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Safety in early rounds?
Posted on 4/6/14 at 12:32 pm to bonethug0108
Posted on 4/6/14 at 12:32 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
Actually, going back to last year, we were in a worse(not by much) position at WR.
Moore & Colston going into 2013
148catches 2195 yards 16 TDS
Moore & Colston's actual production 2013
112 catches 1400 yards 7 TDS
quote:
I'd say Stills is better than Moore, and that is the ONLY difference between this year and last year before the draft.
in the end, why would anyone want to have a passing game like last year? You act like that would have us in good shape.
This post was edited on 4/6/14 at 12:41 pm
2
Posted on 4/6/14 at 12:40 pm to Lester Earl
Way to miss the forest for the trees buddy.
WHEN did I ever ever ever say not to draft a WR or that it wasn't a high priority position?
And part of that drop off was Moore missing 3 games, and the other part was Stills eating in to his playing time(39% of the snaps for Moore vs. 61% for Stills).
Add what those 2 had together this year and you basically match Moore's production from 2012. And Stills will have a much bigger role without Moore so you have to figure he'll come close to that by himself this year.
Colston missed 1 game this year(none last year) and had very little drop off. Hell one good game and he basically matches it.
So again, I'm not saying DON'T draft a WR. It's way up there on the priority list. But it also isn't nearly as bad as what everyone is claiming.
WHEN did I ever ever ever say not to draft a WR or that it wasn't a high priority position?
And part of that drop off was Moore missing 3 games, and the other part was Stills eating in to his playing time(39% of the snaps for Moore vs. 61% for Stills).
Add what those 2 had together this year and you basically match Moore's production from 2012. And Stills will have a much bigger role without Moore so you have to figure he'll come close to that by himself this year.
Colston missed 1 game this year(none last year) and had very little drop off. Hell one good game and he basically matches it.
So again, I'm not saying DON'T draft a WR. It's way up there on the priority list. But it also isn't nearly as bad as what everyone is claiming.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 12:50 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
WHEN did I ever ever ever say not to draft a WR or that it wasn't a high priority position?
again, you talking out both sides of your mouth. Saying that we are OK there, but then in the next sentence saying it's a high priority. Make up your mind.
quote:
And part of that drop off was Moore missing 3 games, and the other part was Stills eating in to his playing time(39% of the snaps for Moore vs. 61% for Stills).
Add what those 2 had together this year and you basically match Moore's production from 2012. And Stills will have a much bigger role without Moore so you have to figure he'll come close to that by himself this year.
Ok, to expand more:
Our production from our WRs
in 2012
186 catches 2943 yards 20 TDS
in 2013
164 catches 2433 14 TDS
quote:
It's way up there on the priority list. But it also isn't nearly as bad as what everyone is claiming
Posted on 4/6/14 at 12:50 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Colston is viable, but he is getting old and is injury prone. Pierre Thomas caught more balls than Colston did last year.
I think the Saints were the only team in the league that had 4 guys catch more than 70 balls and they only lost one of those guys. Colston and Graham also played through some injuries. If they are 100% then they are still one of the top duos in the league.
I do think WR is still a top need though because of the lack of depth at the position.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 12:52 pm to Noplacelikehome
quote:
I think the Saints were the only team in the league that had 4 guys catch more than 70 balls and they only lost one of those guys.
two of them were running backs, and 1 was a tight end.
Only proves my point more. We are desperate for WR help.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:03 pm to Lester Earl
quote:Because again you are failing to see what I'm clearly saying.
again, you talking out both sides of your mouth. Saying that we are OK there, but then in the next sentence saying it's a high priority. Make up your mind.
I'm saying we aren't as bad as everyone else is saying. I'm saying we would be okay IF(and we won't) went into the season as is.
I'm not saying we are awesome super locked down great hunky dory at the position.
We can definitely stand to upgrade, especially looking at where that position is compared to others.
It's almost on EXACT equal footing as CB and very close to LB.
But at least we have starters at every position on the team including WR, save for 1.
We don't have a clear starting center and at best we have 1 guy that played a few snaps there in preseason and had a few snap issues in those few snaps.
How anyone can say center isn't clearly our top need is not looking at the whole picture. And no, I'm not saying we should draft a center in the first before you even try going there.
Again:
Center
WR, CB, LB
G
NT/DT
BPA
That's our needs list. See how high I put WR?
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:06 pm to Lester Earl
quote:Agreed
Only proves my point more. We are desperate for WR help.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:07 pm to bonethug0108
You're letting yourself get into semantic arguments, Bonethug.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:09 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
I wouldn't even say there is an immediate need at WR.
I will agree to disagree here. The issues at WR is what led to many of the teams 3rd down & redzone woes on the road. It also is behind what caused Brees to lock on & try to force passes to Graham as an attempt to make a positive play.
quote:
Everyone wants to put it on the receivers, but the line played a much bigger part of our struggles.
Actually, this was quite the opposite as many fans felt we were ok at receiver & that it was the fault of the O-line & not the receivers for the problems offensively. Did the line have problems? Yes. Were Brown & DLP awful for long periods? Yes, but the receivers were as well.
Many of the offense's problems with the receivers came on timing routes, mainly the short quick hitters. Many times Brees would take his 3-4 step drop & look to complete a pass on time but the intended receiver would not be open forcing him to hold on to the ball. Just as QB's have to know the timing, so do linemen. They know when the ball is going to come out hot or when it's going to be a deep drop back for a shot play downfield. On the quick timing routes, they know they only have to hold blocks for maybe a second or two. When the ball doesn't come out on time, it throws the whole play off. So the receivers become at fault just as much as the linemen. The fact is the receivers struggled against press coverage which is why the offense as a whole struggled especially on the road.
The team actually may need to draft more then one receiver this draft because outside of Colston & Stills everyone is unproven or not durable. So to say receiver is not an immediate need is quite false.
Toon - Benched the second half of the season, unproven
Andy Tanner - Unproven, inexperienced, undersized
Joe Morgan - Has missed 34 out of 48 games in his career. Injury prone.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:12 pm to Hoodoo Man
quote:Yeah he's very good at arguing those instead of the actual points. But at least he's good at it.
You're letting yourself get into semantic arguments, Bonethug.
Edit:
I'm not saying that didn't happen at all, BigBrod, but I did not see that happening at a higher than usual rate with the receivers, while I did see the line being beat the frick up at a much(much) higher than usual rate.
Now if you are looking at 2-3 games, especially the Seattle games, then you are watching the wrong film. EVERYONE had trouble against Seattle's secondary with their propensity to hold.
This post was edited on 4/6/14 at 1:18 pm
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:19 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
I'm saying we aren't as bad as everyone else is saying. I'm saying we would be okay IF(and we won't) went into the season as is.
Bone, the offense was God awful at times on the road last season, there is no way around that. Yes we do need an upgrade at center. There's no doubt about that but you are seriously overlooking how bad the problem was at receiver in 2013. A team can win by game planning & scheme in the quiet at home, which did happen but you need talent to win on the road, plain & simple.
Even still, the offense still had their issues at home at times on 3rd down & redzone. They have to get more talented at receiver period or the offense will continue to struggle against press coverage. The playoff game against Seattle should have been an eye opener. The offense moved the ball well on the ground but they couldn't capitalize through the air once they moved into Seahawk territory.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:20 pm to bonethug0108
Wait, did you not say this?
I addressed it and all you continue to do is say "we're not bad off, but WR is a priority".
Our WRs are not up to par. Do you want to disagree? Because it sure seems like you want to. Otherwise you wouldn't say shite like I quoted above. Or you wouldn't say Tanner/Morgan/toon are fine as WR.
You can't reason with someone like that. You basically do that with everything. You're going to oppose my stance on the WRs, then in the next breath say you wouldn't be surprised when we draft a WR early.
"I'm not saying we won't draft a pass rusher, but we don't need one at all"
If you're going to allude to something, just stick with it. Stop playing the fence.
quote:
Actually, going back to last year, we were in a worse(not by much) position at WR.
I addressed it and all you continue to do is say "we're not bad off, but WR is a priority".
Our WRs are not up to par. Do you want to disagree? Because it sure seems like you want to. Otherwise you wouldn't say shite like I quoted above. Or you wouldn't say Tanner/Morgan/toon are fine as WR.
You can't reason with someone like that. You basically do that with everything. You're going to oppose my stance on the WRs, then in the next breath say you wouldn't be surprised when we draft a WR early.
"I'm not saying we won't draft a pass rusher, but we don't need one at all"
If you're going to allude to something, just stick with it. Stop playing the fence.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:22 pm to bonethug0108
Like you said, IF, and that is a big IF, we go into the season with this group of WR, we are still relatively fine.
Are we BETTER? No. Are we going to fall out of the sky and become a bottom half offensive team? No.
Can we improve the receiving corp? Yes.
That is all there is to it, we CAN improve it, but if we went into the season as is, we are still relatively fine.
In the draft, we could replace sproles' production with cooks/lee/OBJ in the 1st. For all we know, SP could double dip and get himself a bigger WR in the 2nd as well.
Are we BETTER? No. Are we going to fall out of the sky and become a bottom half offensive team? No.
Can we improve the receiving corp? Yes.
That is all there is to it, we CAN improve it, but if we went into the season as is, we are still relatively fine.
In the draft, we could replace sproles' production with cooks/lee/OBJ in the 1st. For all we know, SP could double dip and get himself a bigger WR in the 2nd as well.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:24 pm to htran90
quote:
For all we know, SP could double dip and get himself a bigger WR in the 2nd as well.
Cooks round 1, Matthews round 2
I would die via fap
We would still be mega weak at LB when it comes to pass coverage but that's another thread
This post was edited on 4/6/14 at 1:25 pm
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:27 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
Now if you are looking at 2-3 games, especially the Seattle games,
This wasn't just against Seattle. It was @ Tampa, @ New York, Miami(even though the final score says blowout the offense had some serious lulls in that game), @ New England, San Francisco,@ St. Louis, @ Carolina & of course @ Seattle.
That's eight games Bone. That's not a blimp on the radar, that's a trend. The truth is, the trend started in 2012 but everyone passed it off on missing Payton as a play caller.
This post was edited on 4/6/14 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:30 pm to htran90
quote:
Like you said, IF, and that is a big IF, we go into the season with this group of WR, we are still relatively fine.
How can anyone be ok with how our WRs played last year? What am I missing?
I still think this is extremely short sighted.
What if Colston gets hurt? Or even Stills? How fricked are we?
Say the wheels come off of Colston totally this year. What about next year? Sure would be nice to have a 2nd year guy to step in then a rookie.
This year we NEED depth. In the immediate future we are going to need starting caliber WR to replace the slowing Colston.
Our WR as is, is not fine, guys
This post was edited on 4/6/14 at 1:31 pm
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:34 pm to htran90
quote:Thank you for getting it.
Like you said, IF, and that is a big IF, we go into the season with this group of WR, we are still relatively fine.
Are we BETTER? No. Are we going to fall out of the sky and become a bottom half offensive team? No.
Can we improve the receiving corp? Yes.
That is all there is to it, we CAN improve it, but if we went into the season as is, we are still relatively fine.
In the draft, we could replace sproles' production with cooks/lee/OBJ in the 1st. For all we know, SP could double dip and get himself a bigger WR in the 2nd as well
No we shouldn't stand pat, but we wouldn't be horrible if we did.
Not sure how a smart guy like Lester can't see that.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:35 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
If you're going to allude to something, just stick with it. Stop playing the fence.
gotta play both sides.. that way you can never be wrong on the internets. It's a pretty big deal
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:38 pm to Rand AlThor
quote:
Cooks round 1, Matthews round 2
I definitely could get down with this.
Posted on 4/6/14 at 1:38 pm to bonethug0108
This is all moot.
We're gonna draft a receiver.
If we did it two years ago, and we did it last year, we'll definitely do it this year after losing Moore.
We're gonna draft a receiver.
If we did it two years ago, and we did it last year, we'll definitely do it this year after losing Moore.
Page 2 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News