Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

Hey, maybe there's a reason to be excited...

Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive - AFC East Blog - ESPN

Excerpt:

Re: Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

An interesting blurb. A couple points that come to mind for me:

1) He doesn't count Holt for much because he thinks Tate and Price will push him out of playing time quickly. That wouldn't be a bad thing, but I think he's discounting Holt a bit too much. At worst I think he provides mentorship for those young players (Brady uses Holt as his prime example for good route running). But realistically, he's the type of guy you can count on for big catches in late game situations while Moss is doubled. He also provides positional flexibility as I think he can really play outside (ideal) or in the slot (if needed here and there).

2) The whole idea of the receiver corp made me think of this: We love Wes Welker, he's the best slot receiver in the game, but before he came to New England we had no idea how well he would gel with Tom Brady. Some keep worrying about replacing Welker, which is an unreasonable expectation, but how far fetched is it that we could find another receiver this year who gels with Brady? Maybe not to the tune of 100 catches, but between Edelman in year two, Tate and Price in year one, and Holt as a vet presence, I think the odds are overwhelmingly in favor of ONE of those players hitting a stride with Brady and blowing us away. Then when Welker comes back, we've got at least 3 good WR options, possibly more, and it's not even counting the TE's and RB's.

There's reason to be hopeful for sure, and if nothing else there's going to be some entertaining competition to follow.

Re: Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

OTOH, for some of us, the question was, to borrow from Strongbad, would he use his talents for good or for awesome? :)

Re: Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

I'm very excited about the state of this WR corp right now. WR3 killed this team last year. I expect Holt to start at the position, Tate and Price may push him for PT, but I agree with Sicilian that its a discredit to Holt to think he's just an afterthought.

If even one of Tate/Price contributes this season, then you have Moss, Edelman, Welker, Holt and one other guy all in the mix. To some extent, we've learned that quantity is just as important as quality at the WR position.

Then add in Gronk and Hernandez, and Crumpler to some extent, not to forget Faulk - and I think Brady will have plenty of weapons this year.

Re: Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

I really like this group. It's very promising, with Edelman and possibly Tate taking big steps forward in contribution, Patten and Holt providing steady mentorship and proven experience good enough for the #3 position (if they have anything left). I don't want to attach any expectations to Price, but anything he can contribute in his rookie season would be a bonus. Gronk and Hernandez are interesting, but also moderate expectations.

And then there's Randy who, doggin' or not, can still burn you, despite his age.

Re: Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

I know that it's the slow season, but couldn't these writers take more than .000000000000000001 seconds to do their columns? People whined and moaned about SMY and her AdT article, but that was Pulitzer level material compared to this crap and the "3rd time's a charm" article that Reiss mailed in.

Re: Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

Yeah, this group does look good. I'm optimistic about Tate if he's (finally) healthy. In the little amount of time he played last year, he was able to get behind the defense. I remember in the Bucs game that he was so wide open at one point that it would have been an easily 60-70 yard TD. Brady, however, underthrew him and the result was an INT. If Tate can still show the same ability to get behind a defense and make them pay for covering him one on one and if he's fine tuned his route running to connect with Brady successfully on the underneath and intermediate routes, then he can be a weapon. What we know at this point for a fact is that Brady is high on him. That's good enough for me.

Most people know my opinion on Hernandez. He's going to be able to line-up in the slot and on the LoS in this offense (ala Dallas Clark in Indy). Right off the bat, I think he'll create some big match-up problems with opposing defenses by threatening the seam and the middle of the field. Because we have Crumpler (whose strongsuit these days is his blocking by far) and Gronk, who looks to be an aggressive blocker and a double threat in the passing game as well, Hernandez shouldn't send nearly the amount of time run blocking as he should pass blocking. As had been mentioned, he can also be effective on a draw play. Gronk I'm not nearly as sure on as Hernandez. I wouldn't be suprised to see him have success in O'Brien's offense (he's said a few times that he's planning on using the TE's in more of a pass catching role, which would explain the Hernandez and Gronk draft picks). However, the big question is whether or not his back will be an issue. He looks healthy, though. At least based on what we've seen.

As for Price, I'm high on him but the more I think about it, the more I wouldn't be suprised to see him redshirted this year like Tate was last year. If there is a season in 2011, Moss and Holt will most likely be gone. I wouldn't be suprised to see Price get more playing time in 2010 as the season wears on, but his year will be 2011 (2012 if there is a lockout). Basically, I see the WR position looking like this at the beginning of the season: Moss and Holt at flanker and split end with Edelman and Tate in the slots. That's if we go four-wide. In the event we go five wide, I can see Hernandez lining up in the slot as well. We'll probably see many more two TE sets this year, though.

All in all, this is the most competition we've had for snaps at WR in years. Certainly not a bad thing...

Re: Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

I'm with you on this one. The title of this thread is wrong -- Graham didn't say anything whatsoever about the Pats' WRs. He just quoted another writer's opinion. He couldn't even be bothered to have his own opinion like the rest of us.

In that fine journalistic spirit, I'd like to report that Deus Irae, writing at PatsFans.com, described a column written by Tim Graham of ESPN.com as "crap." Irae was commenting on the state of football reportage in the deep offseason. He believes that Shalise Manza Young's recent blog on Adalius Thomas, which has been the subject of criticism among fans, compares favorably to Mr. Graham's effort. Further, Irae questions whether the current work of fan favorite Mike Reiss can meet fans' sky-high expectations, as Mr. Reiss "mailed in" a column on Shawn Crable.

If I learn more, I'll let you know.

Re: Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

Now that was well played.

+1

Re: Graham: Even minus Welker, Pats WRs impressive
 

I think Wes Welker's success has more to do with how good he is, and how the Pats use him, than with his "geling with Brady". Welker re-defined the slot receiver position. Before the Pats traded for him, they knew that they couldn't cover him. I think that if utilized properly, Wes would be ANY QB's favorite target. In other words, Welker, if given a real oportunity, would gel with any coherent QB. Miami was simply to stubborn of thought to realize what Wes was capable of.