Caldwell or Gaffney - Who would you rather have?

[DaBruinz]

But wait a minute DaBruinz was just saying a minute ago that it was inevitable that Caldwell didn't live up to his regular season performance. He didn't have a drop in the regular season and all of the sudden on the big stage he drops two of the biggest passes that's came his way in his life.

WOW. Nothing like spewing garbage. I said NOTHING of the sort. Caldwell had 1 drop during the regular season and 2 in the post season.

To say that they were two of the biggest passes of his life is a HUGE exageration. Maybe you should stop trying to interpret what is said and just READ what is said.

Gaffney could improve because he was signed in the middle of the season. He didn't have TC or preseason and wasn't placed into the #1 WR role by default. Let's see who comes out on top when they both get to spend an entire offseason in NE.

Gaffney was signed during the bye week. He was on the roster for 11 weeks, did great for 2 and then was mediocre for the 3rd play-off game.

BTW, why is it that you are using Caldwell being placed in the #1 receiver role by default as something to hold AGAINST Caldwell. If anything, that should give him the benefit of the doubt. Because he was never brought in to be the #1 receiver. He was brought in to be the #2 behind Branch.

 

[DaBruinz]

Pats1 tried to imply that even though Gaffney outperformed Caldwell throughout the playoffs, Gaffney was just a flash in the pan and the following season he wouldn't do crap. Pats1 did this by pointing to Jermaine Wiggins. That's a stupid comparison because Wiggins immediately left the team after the 2001 playoffs. He didn't have a chance to improve... in NE. Wiggins went to the Panthers who had Rodney Peete as their starting QB and they finished 7-9.

Again, you purposely misconstrue facts. Wiggins did NOT immediately leave the team. The team basically CUT Wiggins who would have been an ERFA. You do realize that an ERFA means that the player basically has to play for the minimum or not play, right? Wiggins "didn't have a chance to improve in New England" because New England made the choice not to tender him an ERFA contract, making him a free agent.

Its not a stupid comparison when you don't misconstrue facts.

The Gaffney/Wiggins comparison is valid. Sorry that you don't like it, but it is.

 

[pats1]

Pats1 tried to imply that even though Gaffney outperformed Caldwell throughout the playoffs, Gaffney was just a flash in the pan and the following season he wouldn't do crap. Pats1 did this by pointing to Jermaine Wiggins. That's a stupid comparison because Wiggins immediately left the team after the 2001 playoffs. He didn't have a chance to improve... in NE. Wiggins went to the Panthers who had Rodney Peete as their starting QB and they finished 7-9.

He didn't have a chance to improve? Are you trying to tell me Wiggins no longer played NFL football after 2001?

Do you honestly think his clutch performance in the playoff would have at all improved his performance in 2002?

The Pats, you know, the team who actually runs things, decided he would not, even when they could have paid him minimum salary to stick around.

 

[Rob0729]

I still don't get how so many people are down on Caldwell because of two non-catches in the AFC Championships. He didn't even have the worst performance by a Patriots starter in that game. Heck, Brady made an even costlier mistake in that game than Caldwell.

Caldwell was brought in here to be a #2 or #3 WR and he stepped up and had to be the #1. If you look at his numbers after the bye, they weren't much different than what we used to get out of Givens or even Branch when they were here. He put in a lot of extra effort to get up to speed and the coaching staff respects that.

I am not going to choose Gaffney over Caldwell just because he had a few good games in the playoffs. Jermaine Wiggins was brought up in this thread and I think it is a good example.

Personally, I don't see either Gaffney or Caldwell getting cut. We don't know if Brown is going to come back for sure. I think if he was definitely coming back to the Pats, he would be signed right now. I can't see the Pats going another year starting the season with only one WR on the roster with any starting experience in this offense with Brady. The quality of receivers may be better this year, but the Pats have a difficult offense to learn so they will need both Caldwell and Gaffney especially early in the season.

 

[Seymour93]

But what you are failing to note is that your assessment of Gaffney is based off a track record of not even a game - just the touchdown catch.

I'm not assessing Gaffney on just that. I'm assessing his performance in the playoffs and then comparing it to Caldwell's. Clearly Gaffney had a better postseason as supported by the stats.

NYJ
-------------
Gaffney - 8 catches, 104 yards, 0 TD's
Caldwell - 5 catches, 50 yards, 0 TD's

@ SD
-------------
Gaffney - 10 catches 103 yards 1 TD
Caldwell - 7 catches 80 yards 1 TD

@ Indy
-------------
Gaffney - 3 catches, 37 yards, 1 TD
Caldwell - 4 catches, 46 yards, 0 TD's, 2 crucial dropped passes

 

[tombonneau]

The more accurate assessment would be based off both players' entire track record, weighted toward the most recent season. From this perspective, Caldwell's performance is clearly superior.

I agree let's look at their entire track record:

               +--------------------------+-------------------------+
                 |          Rushing         |        Receiving        |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| 2002 hou |  16 |     0      0    0.0    0 |    41    483  11.8    1 |
| 2003 hou |  16 |     1     13   13.0    0 |    34    402  11.8    2 |
| 2004 hou |  16 |     4     30    7.5    0 |    41    632  15.4    2 |
| 2005 hou |  16 |     4     13    3.2    0 |    55    492   8.9    2 |
| 2006 nwe |  10 |     0      0    0.0    0 |    11    142  12.9    1 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
|  TOTAL   |  74 |     9     56    6.2    0 |   182   2151  11.8    8 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

          +--------------------------+-------------------------+
                 |          Rushing         |        Receiving        |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| 2002 sdg |  14 |     2      9    4.5    0 |    22    208   9.5    3 |
| 2003 sdg |   9 |     5     39    7.8    0 |     8     80  10.0    0 |
| 2004 sdg |   6 |     4     45   11.2    0 |    18    310  17.2    3 |
| 2005 sdg |  16 |     2     10    5.0    0 |    28    352  12.6    1 |
| 2006 nwe |  16 |     1      5    5.0    0 |    61    760  12.5    4 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
|  TOTAL   |  61 |    14    108    7.7    0 |   137   1710  12.5   11 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

So Gaffney has had the most "impressive" body of work.

Bear in mind, Gaffney was having to play on one of the worst teams in the league with no offensive threats, whereas Caldwell was on a team with Brees, Tomlinson, and Gates.

Had Gaffney been signed earlier in the year, I have ZERO doubt he would at a minimum have replicated Caldwell's stats.

And yes, I'm basing my Gaffney over Caldwell almost entirely on Caldwell choking horribly.

IMO, both are a wash, they are JAG WRs who bring nothing special to the table. To that end, give me the guy who has not yet proven to choke.

And DaBruinz, you and I both know no matter what the Pats do on offense, between Moss, Stallworth, Welker and Watson, the #4 WR is not going to put up any kind of numbers.

Even on the most pass happy teams in the league, you will be hard-pressed to find a WR4 with more than 25-30 catches.

Just spot checking the top 3 passing teams of last year (Colts, Saints, Eagles) here are their WR4 #s:

Colts - Moorhead/Stokely (8) -- This is actually skewed bc Stokely got hurt. Wilkins was the #4 most of the year and had ZERO catches

Saints - Copper (23)

Eagles - Baskett (22)

I think we'd all agree NE is more likely to look like NO or PHI. So even if NE is in the top 3 in passing yards, the WR4 is looking at 20-25 catches. Again, marginal, and I'll take the guy who hasn't choked.

 

[tombonneau]

Pats1 tried to imply that even though Gaffney outperformed Caldwell throughout the playoffs, Gaffney was just a flash in the pan and the following season he wouldn't do crap. Pats1 did this by pointing to Jermaine Wiggins. That's a stupid comparison because Wiggins immediately left the team after the 2001 playoffs. He didn't have a chance to improve... in NE. Wiggins went to the Panthers who had Rodney Peete as their starting QB and they finished 7-9.

FWIW, Wiggins also led the Vikings in receptions one year. He has had a nice little career post-NE. Hardly garbage.

 

[pats1]

FWIW, Wiggins also led the Vikings in receptions one year. He has had a nice little career post-NE. Hardly garbage.

Was any of it a product of his clutch catch to set up Vinatieri?

 

[Seymour93]

Again, you purposely misconstrue facts. Wiggins did NOT immediately leave the team. The team basically CUT Wiggins who would have been an ERFA. You do realize that an ERFA means that the player basically has to play for the minimum or not play, right? Wiggins "didn't have a chance to improve in New England" because New England made the choice not to tender him an ERFA contract, making him a free agent.

Its not a stupid comparison when you don't misconstrue facts.

The Gaffney/Wiggins comparison is valid. Sorry that you don't like it, but it is.

Do you not see the problem here? If it was a half decent comparison then Gaffney would have had to have left the Pats during this offseason and subsequently gone to a mediocre team with a 38 year old starting QB. Obviously the Pats value Gaffney differently than how they evaluated Wiggins's services some five years ago.

 

[tombonneau]

Was any of it a product of his clutch catch to set up Vinatieri?

I don't know. I'm actually kind of confused as to why we are now arguing about Wiggins.

 

[pats1]

I agree let's look at their entire track record:

               +--------------------------+-------------------------+
                 |          Rushing         |        Receiving        |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| 2002 hou |  16 |     0      0    0.0    0 |    41    483  11.8    1 |
| 2003 hou |  16 |     1     13   13.0    0 |    34    402  11.8    2 |
| 2004 hou |  16 |     4     30    7.5    0 |    41    632  15.4    2 |
| 2005 hou |  16 |     4     13    3.2    0 |    55    492   8.9    2 |
| 2006 nwe |  10 |     0      0    0.0    0 |    11    142  12.9    1 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
|  TOTAL   |  74 |     9     56    6.2    0 |   182   2151  11.8    8 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

          +--------------------------+-------------------------+
                 |          Rushing         |        Receiving        |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| 2002 sdg |  14 |     2      9    4.5    0 |    22    208   9.5    3 |
| 2003 sdg |   9 |     5     39    7.8    0 |     8     80  10.0    0 |
| 2004 sdg |   6 |     4     45   11.2    0 |    18    310  17.2    3 |
| 2005 sdg |  16 |     2     10    5.0    0 |    28    352  12.6    1 |
| 2006 nwe |  16 |     1      5    5.0    0 |    61    760  12.5    4 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
|  TOTAL   |  61 |    14    108    7.7    0 |   137   1710  12.5   11 |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

So Gaffney has had the most "impressive" body of work.

Bear in mind, Gaffney was having to play on one of the worst teams in the league with no offensive threats, whereas Caldwell was on a team with Brees, Tomlinson, and Gates.

Huh? The only year that Chargers team made the playoffs was in 2004, when Caldwell tore his ACL.

FYI, they had the #1 pick in 2004, after their disastrous 2003 season. They drafted Manning, er, Rivers. Brees didn't become what he was until the 2004 season. In 2005, Caldwell found himself caught in the meat of the Chargers' WR depth chart after returning from his injury, so he didn't exactly have access to the new Brees.

If anything, having LT around would take away touches from the WRs.

Had Gaffney been signed earlier in the year, I have ZERO doubt he would at a minimum have replicated Caldwell's stats.

That's your opinion and I respect that. But it's downright strange.

And yes, I'm basing my Gaffney over Caldwell almost entirely on Caldwell choking horribly.

That's good to know. It makes someone look worse, and it certainly isn't me.

IMO, both are a wash, they are JAG WRs who bring nothing special to the table. To that end, give me the guy who has not yet proven to choke.

I certainly haven't heard of too many 61-catch JAG WRs in the NFL.

And if you're looking for that "special" flair, perhaps the Colts are a good match for you.

And DaBruinz, you and I both know no matter what the Pats do on offense, between Moss, Stallworth, Welker and Watson, the #4 WR is not going to put up any kind of numbers.

I don't think the Patriots' philosophy of spreading the ball around has changed because the acquisition of a player or two.

Even on the most pass happy teams in the league, you will be hard-pressed to find a WR4 with more than 25-30 catches.

Just spot checking the top 3 passing teams of last year (Colts, Saints, Eagles) here are their WR4 #s:

Colts - Moorhead/Stokely (8) -- This is actually skewed bc Stokely got hurt. Wilkins was the #4 most of the year and had ZERO catches

Saints - Copper (23)

Eagles - Baskett (22)

I think we'd all agree NE is more likely to look like NO or PHI. So even if NE is in the top 3 in passing yards, the WR4 is looking at 20-25 catches. Again, marginal, and I'll take the guy who hasn't choked.

I don't think any of us are expecting the #4 WR to put up big numbers.

But I'd prefer to have that #4 WR be someone who has been consistently solid, not someone who was AWOL most of the season before showing up for a big game or two.

 

[pats1]

I don't know. I'm actually kind of confused as to why we are now arguing about Wiggins.

Don't back away, now.

The point was loud and clear.

 

[pats1]

Do you not see the problem here? If it was a half decent comparison then Gaffney would have had to have left the Pats during this offseason and subsequently gone to a mediocre team with a 38 year old starting QB. Obviously the Pats value Gaffney differently than how they evaluated Wiggins's services some five years ago.

It's been awhile since I've seen someone miss the point of a comparison like you have this evening.

A question for you:

Did the Patriots, following the 2001 season, feel that Wiggins 2002 performance would be worth keeping him around on minimum salary for based on his 2001 playoff performance?

 

[tombonneau]

Well, at this point, we'll just have to waaaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittttttttttttttttttttt and see what happens.

I just pray that after a big game mid-season I'm not going to have to make an I-told-you-so post about Caldwell.

 

[tombonneau]

Don't back away, now.

The point was loud and clear.

No, I honestly have no idea what Wiggins has to do with it. He had a decent game in the Snow Bowl due to inclement conditions. That's hardly the same as a WR who caught on mid-season hitting his stride in prime time and having a huge playoff run.

If you honestly feel comfortable with Brady throwing to Caldwell in the clutch after that abortion of a game in Indy, be my guest.

Fool me once ......

 

[pats1]

Well, at this point, we'll just have to waaaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittttttttttttttttttttt and see what happens.

I just pray that after a big game mid-season I'm not going to have to make an I-told-you-so post about Caldwell.

If any part of your outrageous extrapolation from Caldwell's dropped pass comes true, I'll be astounded.

 

[BelichickFan]

Caldwell for me despite his chock job in the AFCCG. He was more consistently productive, admittedly with the advantage of being signed months earlier. I don't want either of them starting and, barring injury, that shouldn't be the case.

 

[tombonneau]

I don't think the Patriots' philosophy of spreading the ball around has changed because the acquisition of a player or two.

But I'd prefer to have that #4 WR be someone who has been consistently solid, not someone who was AWOL most of the season before showing up for a big game or two.

It's more like 3-4, but regardless, the Pats #4 WR only had 13 catches last year. 19 in 2005. 17 in 2004. So that's with spreading the ball around.

So again, WR4 will have marginal statistical impact, thus consistancy is irrelevent.

Besides, Gaffney was able to product consistantly in Houston. I would hardly call having to learn the offense in Week 8 and catch up being AWOL. It's not like he signed with the team in June.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

I don't think the Patriots' philosophy of spreading the ball around has changed because the acquisition of a player or two.



I don't think any of us are expecting the #4 WR to put up big numbers.

But I'd prefer to have that #4 WR be someone who has been consistently solid, not someone who was AWOL most of the season before showing up for a big game or two.

In the past, the Pats' philosophy of spreading the ball around was largely a consequence of necessity. They didn't have much in the way of true game breakers, so the offense was designed to spread the largess, spread the risk, so as to keep opposing defenses from keying one one or two players, and whoever they might have been in the lineup, they were most assuredly mortal.

This year's WR corps promises to be different, giving Brady weapons he has never had before. The name of the game will be exploitation. When you've got the horses, you ride them.

I have no idea, really, whether Caldwell or Gaffney stays, or if indeed either one does, but one thing is readily obvious - this season will feature a new and improved high octane game plan. When you have a Lamborghini ready to go, you don't want to pick up your date in a Volkswagen Rabbit.

 

[Seymour93]

It's been awhile since I've seen someone miss the point of a comparison like you have this evening.

A question for you:

Did the Patriots, following the 2001 season, feel that Wiggins 2002 performance would be worth keeping him around on minimum salary for based on his 2001 playoff performance?

No. As DaBruinz said they let him walk. But what does it have to do with Gaffney? The Pats have not let Gaffney go this offseason so the point is moot and the comparison doesn't make sense.