One person's list of NE's all-time top five WRs

[BSR]

So in the scenario I painted, to which you responded with the above comments, what makes this hypothetical receiver better is whether his team's kickoff coverage team does its job in the last 3 seconds of the game, and what makes him worse is that his team's kickoff coverage team fails to do its job.

This is the argument you have just made. After having seen it put in these terms, is that what you really believe?

No, you have 60 minutes to make enough plays to win the game. Winning and losing counts, not almost winning and almost losing.

There is no single equation to defining greatness but on a team that has won superbowls I tend to want to measure the players by their contributions to those winning teams. And again, I haven't said that Brown has been the better regular season WR. I am taking a qualitative approach to measure respective players contribution to their team's success.

 

[BSR]

So Trent Dilfer was a better QB than Dan Marino?

So Dan Marino was a better QB than Montana?

I think a better comparison would be Trent Dilfer to other Raven's QB. Prior to this year would it be safe to say that Dilfer was the Raven best QB ever? He certainly was their most successful QB. I think a fair case can be made even though he probably wasn't their statistically best QB.

 

[BSR]

It's more accurate to say that Troy had the best postseason game a Patriots WR has ever had, namely Boxscore - New England Patriots vs. Pittsburgh Steelers, January 27, 2002 - The Football Database His receiving line is pretty good, and the two special team plays cement it.

More debatably, I'd say that year he had the best postseason a Patriots WR has ever had.

I think that is fair. They don't win that first superbowl with out him and who knows how things play out with out that. I put a lot of value on that contribution.

 

[Ring 6]

So Dan Marino was a better QB than Montana?

I think a better comparison would be Trent Dilfer to other Raven's QB. Prior to this year would it be safe to say that Dilfer was the Raven best QB ever? He certainly was their most successful QB. I think a fair case can be made even though he probably wasn't their statistically best QB.

So you are changing the argument when it shows you are wrong?

By your argument Jermaine Wiggins is better than Gronk, Russ Hochstein better than Mankins, hell David Patten would be better than Stanley Morgan.
Its just a stupid argument.

 

[ivanvamp]

So you are changing the argument when it shows you are wrong?

By your argument Jermaine Wiggins is better than Gronk, Russ Hochstein better than Mankins, hell David Patten would be better than Stanley Morgan.
Its just a stupid argument.

I do think it can be helpful when comparing two players of similar caliber to bring in the championships won aspect. I mean, what separates Brady from Peyton Manning? Both have insane regular season numbers, both have set all kinds of records, etc. But Brady has won FAR more in the postseason than Manning has, so in that case it's an important factor.

But Welker's numbers dwarf Brown's. It really isn't close, especially when the number of games played is taken into account. So in that case, championships won isn't an important factor. I guess, unless Brown put up crazy great performances as a WR in Super Bowls, etc.

 

[Ring 6]

I do think it can be helpful when comparing two players of similar caliber to bring in the championships won aspect.

Agree 100%, but being on a winning team doesn't make a lesser player better than one who is clearly superior.

I mean, what separates Brady from Peyton Manning? Both have insane regular season numbers, both have set all kinds of records, etc. But Brady has won FAR more in the postseason than Manning has, so in that case it's an important factor.

Agreed

But Welker's numbers dwarf Brown's. It really isn't close, especially when the number of games played is taken into account. So in that case, championships won isn't an important factor. I guess, unless Brown put up crazy great performances as a WR in Super Bowls, etc.

Again, agreed, which is why I posted the examples I did. Also WRs don't win Championships. The only position you can really judge on title is QB and you can only do that since the 80s when the game starting to become overly QBcentric.
And, you just have to use your head. Brady is better than Manning because without the post season its very close and in the post season its not contect. Dilfer is not better than Marino because he won a title by playing worse QB than Marino ever played and was along for the ride.
Is Deion Branch better than Stanley Morgan because he was on 2 Championship teams, even though he didn't play as well? Was it Morgans level of play that caused the Patriots to not be a Championship caliber team, or Branch's that was THE reason they were? Of course not, so you can't be better by association when you do not play better on the field.
That is the Brown/Welker argument in a nutshell, and it is silly to waste time on.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I'd put Brown above Welker, but that may be more emotive of me than rational.

It's Brown by a mile for me.

Troy always seemed to make the impossible catches for first downs when they were needed most

How many seasons have we had threads talking about Wes Welker dropping a pass for a critical first down?

I realize how unfair that is - given Welker's full body of work - but all things being equal (or in Welker's favor) and I'm giving it to Troy based on just my gut reaction that Troy was on the winning end of so many "must make" catches.

Had Welker made just 2 more catches at critical times this debate wouldn't be taking place. That may be unfair but it's the way it is.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's Brown by a mile for me.

Troy always seemed to make the impossible catches for first downs when they were needed most

How many seasons have we had threads talking about Wes Welker dropping a pass for a critical first down?

I realize how unfair that is - given Welker's full body of work - but all things being equal (or in Welker's favor) and I'm giving it to Troy based on just my gut reaction that Troy was on the winning end of so many "must make" catches.

Had Welker made just 2 more catches at critical times this debate wouldn't be taking place. That may be unfair but it's the way it is.

Welker already has 442 first downs in his career. Brown had 312 total.
Welker has more plays for 40+ yards than Brown had in his career (13 to 11)
Welker has more plays for 20+ yards than Brown had in his career (86 to 66)
Welker's career per game average is 61.3 yards, compared to Brown's 33.2 yards
Brown already has 8,580 yards receiving in his career, while Brown finished with 6,366
Welker already has 768 receptions, while Brown finished with 557

Brown's not even close to Welker.

And if you want to argue about the "clutch" stuff, just go back and take a look at Troy Brown's play in the snow game v. Oakland.

 

[BSR]

So you are changing the argument when it shows you are wrong?

By your argument Jermaine Wiggins is better than Gronk, Russ Hochstein better than Mankins, hell David Patten would be better than Stanley Morgan.
Its just a stupid argument.

I am not changing anything, I am simply clarifying since it seems you didn't understand what I was trying to convey the first time.

Those examples you gave don't compare. Brown played at a really high level in those playoff games, especially 2001. Hochstein, Patten and Wiggins played good but weren't special. Brown was one of the special players on those teams.

How about this one. What part of Brady's career is more impressive? 2001-2004 or 2007-2011. According to your logic it is 2007-2011 that makes Brady elite since that is when he puts up his gaudy numbers and MVPs. I say it was 2001-2004 that separates him from the rest.

 

[Deus Irae]

I am not changing anything, I am simply clarifying since it seems you didn't understand what I was trying to convey the first time.

Those examples you gave don't compare. Brown played at a really high level in those playoff games, especially 2001. Hochstein, Patten and Wiggins played good but weren't special. Brown was one of the special players on those teams.

How about this one. What part of Brady's career is more impressive? 2001-2004 or 2007-2011. According to your logic it is 2007-2011 that makes Brady elite since that is when he puts up his gaudy numbers and MVPs. I say it was 2001-2004 that separates him from the rest.

Your memory seems to be quite selective on this topic. In 2001, against the Raiders, Brown had two fumbles and was bailed out by Izzo both times. He also did almost nothing as a receiver, getting 4 catches for 43 yards, with 29 of those yards coming on one reception.

 

[ivanvamp]

Your memory seems to be quite selective. In 2001, against the Raiders, Brown had two fumbles and was bailed out by Izzo both times. He also did almost nothing as a receiver, getting 4 catches for 43 yards, with 29 of those yards coming on one reception.

In the Super Bowl that year, Brown had 6 catches for 89 yards, so that was nice. And he had a huge game in the AFCCG that year: 8 rec for 121 yards.

Of course, he also had two huge special teams plays in that game, but like you, I don't count those as part of the WR argument.

FWIW, here's Welker's stats in the Super Bowls:

2007: 11 rec, 103 yds
2011: 7 rec, 60 yds, 2 rushes, 21 yds

Troy Brown was pretty good in the 2003 AFCCG and Super Bowls as well, but he was a non-factor as a WR in 2004:

AFCCG: 1 rec, 11 yds
Super Bowl: 2 rec, 17 yds

 

[BSR]

I do think it can be helpful when comparing two players of similar caliber to bring in the championships won aspect. I mean, what separates Brady from Peyton Manning? Both have insane regular season numbers, both have set all kinds of records, etc. But Brady has won FAR more in the postseason than Manning has, so in that case it's an important factor.

But Welker's numbers dwarf Brown's. It really isn't close, especially when the number of games played is taken into account. So in that case, championships won isn't an important factor. I guess, unless Brown put up crazy great performances as a WR in Super Bowls, etc.

Remember your example about the WR that pulls in a seeming game winning TD at the end of the game only to have it lost on a return? It shows that sometimes performance is effected by circumstances outside the players control. In the case of Brown, I think 2001 shows he was capable of so much more but due to a variety of circumstances outside his control just didn't. Now that's not to say that Brown should get credit for performance that he didn't actually have but just to show that it cuts both ways.

I think both Welker and Brown have been great for the Patriots. Welker has great statistical success. Brown has had great playoff success. I am just choosing to put more emphasis on the playoff success.

 

[Deus Irae]

In the Super Bowl that year, Brown had 6 catches for 89 yards, so that was nice. And he had a huge game in the AFCCG that year: 8 rec for 121 yards

Sure, but this isn't about stats, since Welker's clearly the winner there. It's not about big plays, either, since Welker's had plenty of them. This is about the drops, as ridiculous an argument as that is. So, given that, it's important to point out Brown's preformance in that Raiders game.

 

[Deus Irae]

Remember your example about the WR that pulls in a seeming game winning TD at the end of the game only to have it lost on a return? It shows that sometimes performance is effected by circumstances outside the players control. In the case of Brown, I think 2001 shows he was capable of so much more but due to a variety of circumstances outside his control just didn't. Now that's not to say that Brown should get credit for performance that he didn't actually have but just to show that it cuts both ways.

I think both Welker and Brown have been great for the Patriots. Welker has great statistical success. Brown has had great playoff success. I am just choosing to put more emphasis on the playoff success.

Again, Welker's been better in the playoffs than has Brown.

 

[BSR]

Your memory seems to be quite selective on this topic. In 2001, against the Raiders, Brown had two fumbles and was bailed out by Izzo both times. He also did almost nothing as a receiver, getting 4 catches for 43 yards, with 29 of those yards coming on one reception.

It was a blizzard, I think everyone can agree that that was an atypical game. Jerry Rice had 4 catches for 48 yards in that game in a much better passing offense. How is that selective. They don't win the superbowl that year without Troy Brown. Is that an accurate statement or not?

 

[ivanvamp]

Remember your example about the WR that pulls in a seeming game winning TD at the end of the game only to have it lost on a return? It shows that sometimes performance is effected by circumstances outside the players control. In the case of Brown, I think 2001 shows he was capable of so much more but due to a variety of circumstances outside his control just didn't. Now that's not to say that Brown should get credit for performance that he didn't actually have but just to show that it cuts both ways.

I think both Welker and Brown have been great for the Patriots. Welker has great statistical success. Brown has had great playoff success. I am just choosing to put more emphasis on the playoff success.

But that last point is exactly what Deus and I are saying: Welker has had just as much playoff success as Brown has. Brown's playoff value has included huge plays on special teams. This is not to diminish those contributions - they were enormous. But they weren't as a *wide receiver*. Welker's playoff production as a WR has been better than Brown's. Or at least it's been even. That the Pats' defense gave up two last-minute TDs to the Giants is not Welker's fault. All you can point to with respect to that is Welker's "drop", which was partly on him and partly on Brady.

 

[BSR]

Again, Welker's been better in the playoffs than has Brown.

We will never agree on that. I am sure you also think that 2007 - 2011 Brady has been better in the playoffs than 2001-2004 Brady. I don't. Early Brady was a champion. Later Brady is still a great QB but not a champion.

 

[ivanvamp]

It was a blizzard, I think everyone can agree that that was an atypical game. Jerry Rice had 4 catches for 48 yards in that game in a much better passing offense. How is that selective. They don't win the superbowl that year without Troy Brown. Is that an accurate statement or not?

It wasn't a blizzard. It was snowing. There's a huge difference. And Brady threw for 312 yards in that game - it wasn't a game whereby Brady and the passing offense couldn't work. I mean, David Patten, a less talented receiver than Brown, had 8 receptions for 107 yards, and Jermaine Wiggins, a slow-footed TE, had 10 receptions for 68 yards. If you throw in Brown's -9 yards rushing, and Troy accounted for 34 yards of offense that day, when the Patriots as a whole had 365 total yards.

 

[Deus Irae]

It was a blizzard, I think everyone can agree that that was an atypical game.

Brown didn't get it done. He choked and the team had to overcome his lousy play. You're just making excuses. You minimize Welker's work in "big games" because the defense blows leads after he makes his plays, and you minimize Brown's lousy game.

Jerry Rice had 4 catches for 48 yards in that game in a much better passing offense. How is that selective.

Patten managed to pull in 8 receptions and Wiggins had 10. Again, you're just making excuses.

They don't win the superbowl that year without Troy Brown. Is that an accurate statement or not?

They don't even beat the Raiders that year, because of Troy Brown's lousy play, if Larry Izzo doesn't save Troy Brown's ass in a game where Brown played like a choking dog. Is that an accurate statement? After all, it's at least as true as the statement you're making.

 

[Deus Irae]

We will never agree on that. I am sure you also think that 2007 - 2011 Brady has been better in the playoffs than 2001-2004 Brady. I don't. Early Brady was a champion. Later Brady is still a great QB but not a champion.

We won't agree because I'm using facts and logic while you're using emotion and a selective memory. It's really just that simple difference.