Ranking Edelman among top receivers

I have not looked at the entire list of WRs but right now I would probably put in in the 30-40 range not counting his return ability and based only on his WR ability. Also this does not count TEs/RBs.

rochrist said:

47 catches is not producing 'on a par or better than JE'.

An awful lot of WRs have come through here and been unable to handle this offense. Chad? Galloway? You have no idea how any of those guys would do in this offense. Brady /doesn't/ automatically make every WR better. Watkins is soft. How do you suppose he'd do at punt returner? How about at DB?

JE has 1360 yards for the Pats so far this year. He'll end up with close to 1600. Desean Jackson is projected to finish with aroun 1150.

Click to expand...

You're counting punt return yards, which means nothing in a discussion of who's a better WR. Jackson has more receiving yards even with a dumpster fire at QB. I don't care how Watkins would do at DB or PR because that's 100% irrelevant to the discussion of who's a better WR.

And by 47 catches, I think you actually meant 57, which is how many Mike Evans has. What you fail to mention is that, with those 57 catches, he has produced 935 yards (more than Edelman) and 10 TDs (a whole lot more than Edelman). Again, with an absolute dumpster fire at QB in Glennon and McCown. This is one of the most egregious instances of cherrypicking stats that I've ever seen on Patsfans, which is really saying something.

If these are the best arguments that you can make in Edelman's favor, then I'll go ahead and consider my point made. I do have one last question, though, which I really do want you to answer: do you believe that Brady gets makes his WRs significantly better than a QB like Kyle Orton, Robert Griffin, or Josh McCown does?

BradyFTW! said:

You're counting punt return yards, which means nothing in a discussion of who's a better WR. Jackson has more receiving yards even with a dumpster fire at QB. I don't care how Watkins would do at DB or PR because that's 100% irrelevant to the discussion of who's a better WR.

And by 47 catches, I think you actually meant 57, which is how many Mike Evans has. What you fail to mention is that, with those 57 catches, he has produced 935 yards (more than Edelman) and 10 TDs (a whole lot more than Edelman). Again, with an absolute dumpster fire at QB in Glennon and McCown. This is one of the most egregious instances of cherrypicking stats that I've ever seen on Patsfans, which is really saying something.

If these are the best arguments that you can make in Edelman's favor, then I'll go ahead and consider my point made. I do have one last question, though, which I really do want you to answer: do you believe that Brady gets makes his WRs significantly better than a QB like Kyle Orton, Robert Griffin, or Josh McCown does?

Click to expand...

DeSean Jackson has 47, that's who I'm referring to. And yes, I'm counting everything, because I'm concerned about who is /more valuable to the team/ not who puts up more gaudy highlight reel stuff. The Pats, under BB and Brady have had exactly ONE year where they had that can of stuff.

As to your last question, of course Brady does better than the QBs you listed. But if you think that guarentees that any one of those particular players would perform better here, we'll agree to disagree. They might, the might not. As you point out, one guys is his team's entire offense.

Yeah...I don't know about an objective rating because it's so hard to separate what he is in NE as a guy, a teammate, all the intangible stuff that is just so hard to compare when theorizing that you could transfer WR whoever to a new franchise. Besides that if you also take into account what he gets paid for what he produces and provides, he's a total steal.

If I'm trying to be as objective as possible I'd say top 24 at worst - if every team was drafting 1 WR, I don't think he'd make it to the 2nd round. I'm not going to say he's not the physical specimen that a Megatron or Julio Jones is because he IS, just in a different way. Dude's a beast. He's just not the prototype.

But as it stands considering all the above - spirit, teammate, production, intelligence, development, contract - "ceiling" of any other player be damned, I'm siding with the guy who said there isn't anybody in the NFL I'd trade him for straight up. Ok...maybe Brady or Gronk.

This again? Folks, Like Welker, JE benefits enormously from the position he plays and the QB he plays with. Put him outside,even with Brady, and he ll get shut down. Weve seen this. Guys that can beat man coverage on the outside are the bishops on the chessboard, the slot receiver is more like a pawn. While great in his role (short passes and bubble screens), he cant be rated among the better receivers in the league, who threaten all parts of the field.

letekro said:

This again? Folks, Like Welker, JE benefits enormously from the position he plays and the QB he plays with. Put him outside,even with Brady, and he ll get shut down. Weve seen this. Guys that can beat man coverage on the outside are the bishops on the chessboard, the slot receiver is more like a pawn. While great in his role (short passes and bubble screens), he cant be rated among the better receivers in the league, who threaten all parts of the field.

Click to expand...

Well, other than the fact that he spends a large part of his time on the outside.

rochrist said:

Well, other than the fact that he spends a large part of his time on the outside.

Click to expand...

Um. Define "large part". He is out there sometimes, but generally only to catch a screen, block for same, or beeline immediately to the middle of the field. He is not an outside receiver by any stretch.

letekro said:

he cant be rated among the better receivers in the league, who threaten all parts of the field.

Click to expand...

Sure he can. Most - most - of the name mentioned so far don't play with scrubs either. Nelson/Cobb - Rodgers, DThomas - Manning, Brown - Roethlisberger, hell even Marshall/Jeffrey - Cutler, etc. etc. Those QBs are all good enough to have a go-to WR or WR duo that has some games and puts up numbers.

Mike Evans would be a good counter-argument, I'll admit.

Yes Edelman's team, his QB, and his system impact his production and value. But I'm not going to hold that against him. The fact that stats/production are padded by a system that funnels targets and yards to the best players on the team is not unique to NE.

Jordy Nelson wouldn't threaten a hot dog stand if he played in Jacksonville. But that's true of most of those guys.

letekro said:

Um. Define "large part". He is out there sometimes, but generally only to catch a screen, block for same, or beeline immediately to the middle of the field. He is not an outside receiver by any stretch.

Click to expand...

I think he's out there more than you think. Not sure how I could confirm it though without looking at video of all the games. I've heard from various places that he's outside as much as 50 percent of the plays he's on the field. Take it for what it's worth.

BobDigital said:

I have not looked at the entire list of WRs but right now I would probably put in in the 30-40 range not counting his return ability and based only on his WR ability. Also this does not count TEs/RBs.

Click to expand...

30-40? With all due respect, and I mean that, if YOU mean that you're just dead wrong. He's far, far, far better than that.

Gronk said:

Sure he can. Most - most - of the name mentioned so far don't play with scrubs either. Nelson/Cobb - Rodgers, DThomas - Manning, Brown - Roethlisberger, hell even Marshall/Jeffrey - Cutler, etc. etc. Those QBs are all good enough to have a go-to WR or WR duo that has some games and puts up numbers.

Mike Evans would be a good counter-argument, I'll admit.

Yes Edelman's team, his QB, and his system impact his production and value. But I'm not going to hold that against him. The fact that stats/production are padded by a system that funnels targets and yards to the best players on the team is not unique to NE.

Jordy Nelson wouldn't threaten a hot dog stand if he played in Jacksonville. But that's true of most of those guys.

Click to expand...

My main point (and the one you quoted) is that getting open from the slot is a much easier proposition given the fact that you are generally off the LOS (and therefore you cant really be jammed) and you can go left or right. On the outside, you have the sudeline doible teaming you. Jordy Nelson and many of the guys u mention can get open from that position and do major damage downfield. JE is a much much easier cover when he's out there. This is irrelevant to who the QB is

rochrist said:

I think he's out there more than you think. Not sure how I could confirm it though without looking at video of all the games. I've heard from various places that he's outside as much as 50 percent of the plays he's on the field. Take it for what it's worth.

Click to expand...

I agree. Add to that, who cares where he is. As long as he's on the field moving the sticks. If you rank him among best paid, best stats, biggest mouth, best fantasy points,,,etc, no, Edes wouldn't be the guy. But who else would you trade, today, to replace his production with the Pats right now?

rochrist said:

DeSean Jackson has 47, that's who I'm referring to. And yes, I'm counting everything, because I'm concerned about who is /more valuable to the team/ not who puts up more gaudy highlight reel stuff. The Pats, under BB and Brady have had exactly ONE year where they had that can of stuff.

As to your last question, of course Brady does better than the QBs you listed. But if you think that guarentees that any one of those particular players would perform better here, we'll agree to disagree. They might, the might not. As you point out, one guys is his team's entire offense.

Click to expand...

Edelman will most likely never play corner again. So that doesn't matter in a wr discussion. Just like ninkovich can long snap in am emergency. But that doesn't make him a better defensive end than Chandler Jones.

So you wouldn't want a wr to put up more yards and td, because that is highlight stuff? Guess you really doesn't care about Edelmans return tds either then. How is 1000y 10tds not helping a team?

This is not critiquing Edelman. Just saying that it's stupid to say he is a better wr because he could, but certainly never will, play corner. And that a wr producing means nothing at all and doesn't help the team

I would say this much about JE: if you were picking a team, had already picked your #1 WR, and were choosing your #2 WR, he's the man I'd pick above anyone in the NFL even if all the other #1's were still on the board. Unbelievably valuable player, but he's not a #1 WR.

Marinlik said:

Edelman will most likely never play corner again. So that doesn't matter in a wr discussion. Just like ninkovich can long snap in am emergency. But that doesn't make him a better defensive end than Chandler Jones.

So you wouldn't want a wr to put up more yards and td, because that is highlight stuff? Guess you really doesn't care about Edelmans return tds either then. How is 1000y 10tds not helping a team?

This is not critiquing Edelman. Just saying that it's stupid to say he is a better wr because he could, but certainly never will, play corner. And that a wr producing means nothing at all and doesn't help the team

Click to expand...

A lot of it is /when/ the production is made. A 40 yard TD when you're losing 31-6 and you're 3 games under .500 is worth a LOT less than an 8 yard catch when it's 3 and 7 and you're fighting for the number one seed. And last I checked, JE was on pace for his second straight 100 catch, 1000 yard season.

top 20 at best

Brady6 said:

I would say he is a top 25 WR in the NFL. However he is probably the best slot WR.

Click to expand...

Love Edelman. Best Slot WR is Antonio Brown and that is no knock on Edelman.

letekro said:

My main point (and the one you quoted) is that getting open from the slot is a much easier proposition given the fact that you are generally off the LOS (and therefore you cant really be jammed) and you can go left or right. On the outside, you have the sudeline doible teaming you. Jordy Nelson and many of the guys u mention can get open from that position and do major damage downfield. JE is a much much easier cover when he's out there. This is irrelevant to who the QB is

Click to expand...

Ok, so he should get points taken away for playing for a team that is using him correctly, and towards achieving the goal of winning games? How many years has Megatron been dominating outside routes on a ****ty-to-mediocre team? Larry Fitzgerald, same question. If all they have to do to make them even more productive is put them in the slot so they can't get jammed (your thesis), them shame on their coaches for not doing so. If the response to that comment is that Julian Edelman has a different skill set that those guys don't have that allows him to produce by lining up in different places on the field - then let's give him his due for having those skills and producing.

In my world you get credit for what you do - not for what you theoretically could do if everything else is perfect, not for scoring fantasy points in a losing cause, and not for having physical traits or a skill set that are more easily defined as prototype WR. You DO get credit for, most of all, for contributing to a wins. Dude moves the chains and scores points from all over the field. Whining about how he does it just seems lame. E.g. - I don't remember, and don't care, where he was lined up on the TD against San Diego. Dude makes plays.

I think the real question is he the greatest WR in the game or the greatest of all-time?

rochrist said:

DeSean Jackson has 47, that's who I'm referring to. And yes, I'm counting everything, because I'm concerned about who is /more valuable to the team/ not who puts up more gaudy highlight reel stuff.

Click to expand...

That's fine, but you're now answering a question that's entirely separate from the premise of the thread. You know what I think is valuable to the team? Making plays and scoring points. And DeSean Jackson has more receiving yards and TDs than Edelman, despite playing with a set of receivers that are worse than what the Pats have and a stable of QBs who are orders of magnitude worse than Brady.

If you think the fact that Edelman playing a bit of CB five years ago is important when evaluating him as a WR, then that's cool... but I'm pretty sure that most reasonably people would strongly disagree. It's about as relevant as saying that Brady's the best QB in part because he's good for an occasional unexpected punt, or Ninkovich is an elite DE because he can long snap in a pinch. It's a cool fact, and makes me like them more as players, but it's not at all relevant to a discussion of how good they are at the actual position that they do play.

As to your last question, of course Brady does better than the QBs you listed. But if you think that guarentees that any one of those particular players would perform better here, we'll agree to disagree. They might, the might not. As you point out, one guys is his team's entire offense.

Click to expand...

Of course I don't think that. There are some WRs who, despite exceptional talent, wouldn't be good fits here, at least not right away. Conversely, Edelman would definitely be worse in the Redskins' offense than DeSean, in the Bucs' offense than Evans, etc. That sword cuts both ways. And anyway, why would it be a point in Edelman's favor that, after five years in this specific offense, he's better in this specific offense than a bunch of guys who have never played in it? That *should* be true, whether or not he's better than those guys. I do think that Golden Tate, DeSean Jackson, or Mike Evans would all be better in this offense than Edelman... if they'd been here for the last five years.

You seem to want to frame this as a debate of people who care about stats vs. people who care about winning, but that isn't what this is. There's a reason why nobody's claiming Anquan Boldin is better than Edelman, despite the fact that he was the single biggest reason why the Ravens won the Super Bowl in 2012.

If anything, I would argue that winning isn't particularly relevant to discussing WR talent, precisely because WRs don't really drive wins. You'd always rather have good WRs than not, but there's a reason why when you look at the most successful teams of the last five years, most of them (New England, Seattle, San Fran, New Orleans) don't spend all that much money on WRs. The Pats are probably the best example of this fact in the league. Of the three best teams in the league, two of them (New England, Seattle) have relatively anonymous WR corps because they identified WR as a position that wasn't worth dumping a lot of money into.

Wins are relevant when discussing QBs because a truly great QB will make even a thoroughly mediocre team pretty good. QBs drive wins. But WRs just don't. So claiming that a WR is better because his team wins a lot is like claiming that Von Miller is better than JJ Watt because the Broncos win more than Texans. That argument would be both incorrect and irrelevant, just like this one is.