Meyers - Forgotten or undervalued?

[captain stone]

That's if you take the WR group on an island. They don't play on an island, they play with running backs, tight ends, and a QB. All of those things are going to open up additional opportunities for the WR's and I think we have at worst a top 10 offense.

The discussion is WRs, so...

 

[Pats2000]

The discussion is WRs, so...

So...that's like saying the running backs can be evaluated without taking the O-line into consideration.

 

[rochrist]

Last year Meyers seemed to be the only receiver that could get open. This year with a better supporting cast. it should allow more room for him to operate. Plus it seems like he is playing with a lot of confidence. My question? : Does he have the quickness to be the next Edelman/Welker/Brown in the slot?

I believe so.

 

[Sicilian]

Nice player. Is what he is. (On the 2007 team, I’m afraid he’d be quite low on the depth chart)

I feel like he, NA & Bourne will be the top WR options, but I’m hoping the TEs are the true #1. And I’m hoping the run game is strong.

Well, he wouldn't beat out Moss or Welker, that's for sure. But remember that by the time we reached the Game That Shall Not Be Named, Jabar Gaffney had pulled ahead of Stallworth for the WR3 snaps. Meyers had a better (statistical) season last year with Cam Newton at QB than Gaffney's best season to date in 2007. So while Meyers wouldn't have been the focal point of any defensive gameplan, on a team that was using at least 3 WR consistently, Meyers could easily have been a "starter" on that 07 team.

 

[Deus Irae]

Well, he wouldn't beat out Moss or Welker, that's for sure. But remember that by the time we reached the Game That Shall Not Be Named, Jabar Gaffney had pulled ahead of Stallworth for the WR3 snaps. Meyers had a better (statistical) season last year with Cam Newton at QB than Gaffney's best season to date in 2007. So while Meyers wouldn't have been the focal point of any defensive gameplan, on a team that was using at least 3 WR consistently, Meyers could easily have been a "starter" on that 07 team.

That is some very tortured reasoning.

 

[Sicilian]

That is some very tortured reasoning.

All reasoning is tortured when you're trying to project (or preject I suppose, if that were a real word) how a player now would fit into an offense from 15 years ago. But that was the premise presented by the poster I replied to, so I added my take. Saying Meyers could be the WR3 ahead of Gaffney/Stallworth of that season is not outlandish.

 

[Deus Irae]

All reasoning is tortured when you're trying to project (or preject I suppose, if that were a real word) how a player now would fit into an offense from 15 years ago. But that was the premise presented by the poster I replied to, so I added my take. Saying Meyers could be the WR3 ahead of Gaffney/Stallworth of that season is not outlandish.

Yes, I agree that it's difficult to compare when there's a long stretch of time between the players. But, yes, your position is outlandish. Your reasoning was godawful, man.

 

[Sicilian]

Yes, I agree that it's difficult to compare when there's a long stretch of time between the players. But, yes, your position is outlandish. Your reasoning was godawful, man.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Deus Irae]

Thanks for the feedback.

You argued that it's tough to compare across the distance of years, then pulled the "better year" for Meyers over a comparison that featured one player who'd never had a full season with fewer than 34 catches, while playing for an expansion team, to a guy who's had two seasons, including one with just 26 catches

I mean, my point about your awful reasoning in this particular comparison shouldn't have needed to be explained.

 

[DaBruinz]

Without reading the comments yet I'll just say that I'm really high on JM. He looks to be the next diamond in the rough. The next Troy Brown or Julien Edelman.

Without even knowing it, he Wally Pipped Harry out of a job.

Take that with a grain of salt because I'm usually overly optimistic.

This idea that he replaced Harry just doesn't fly. They are different players and play different receiver positions with different skill sets.

Yes, I like Meyers. I think that people are over-looking him. I think that he'll be a combination of Branch and Givens more than Edelman.

 

[Sicilian]

You argued that it's tough to compare across the distance of years, then pulled the "better year" for Meyers over a comparison that featured one player who'd never had a full season with fewer than 34 catches, while playing for an expansion team, to a guy who's had two seasons, including one with just 26 catches

I mean, my point about your awful reasoning in this particular comparison shouldn't have needed to be explained.

And I think you're quibbling. I guess we'll just agree to disagree on this one. But to say that a player who is trending upwards through his first two seasons couldn't beat out a guy who had been pretty average through his first 5 seasons for a WR3 spot would be the outlandish proposition, not the other way around. If I'd said he would have had a Welker like season, THAT would have been outlandish. I said the guy could have been the WR3. That's not going out on any kind of limb. I never argued that it was a lock. I said it could easily HAVE been. As in it's a possibility, in response to the idea that he would have been "quite low on the depth chart" which I was responding to. I think he would have been right in the mix.

 

[Vatahala]

ivensThis idea that he replaced Harry just doesn't fly. They are different players and play different receiver positions with different skill sets.

Yes, I like Meyers. I think that people are over-looking him. I think that he'll be a combination of Branch and Givens more than Edelman.

If Meyers could develop into a first down machine like Givens that would be great. I would bet that of Givens 56 catches in 2004, at least 40 went for first downs

 

[Hyped]

Meyers is gonna be our WR1 this year, IMO. I have said it before...when we go to 12 personnel....Bourne is coming off the field....Henry/Smith will split targets...and Agholor is the deep guy....N'Keal and Gunner will fight for target scraps... all meanwhile Meyers will never come off the field and won't be running deep routes...and even plays in the slot too! He's gonna lead the team in reps, targets, catches, and probably yards......

 

[Kdo5]

He has steadily gotten better and better and I'd be surprised if he isn't our leading receiver. Correct me if I'm wrong but given he was our best receiver last year, I'm assuming he was already facing off against some of the better corners on different teams. I have high hopes for the kid. He is productive, reliable and consistent and he is someone who I look at as a very dedicated, hard working type as an undrafted guy.

He passes the eye test when you watched last season and the preseason games this season.

 

[Tony2046]

This idea that he replaced Harry just doesn't fly. They are different players and play different receiver positions with different skill sets.

Yes, I like Meyers. I think that people are over-looking him. I think that he'll be a combination of Branch and Givens more than Edelman.

I think Meyers is ahead of Harry and will be on the field a lot more. That's what I meant by Wally Pipped.

I don't hate Harry and would love to see him become solid contributor.

I do like your Branch or Givens comparison.

 

[BradytoMosstoGronk]

Have a feeling he's gonna outproduce Bourne and Agholor. Kid has potential written all over him.

Stashed him late in my fantasy draft, eagerly awaiting the "WHO HAS MEYERS?"

 

[DaBruinz]

Last year Meyers seemed to be the only receiver that could get open. This year with a better supporting cast. it should allow more room for him to operate. Plus it seems like he is playing with a lot of confidence. My question? : Does he have the quickness to be the next Edelman/Welker/Brown in the slot?

This isn't factual. It only seemed like it because Cam missed so many open men on a regular basis. This was pointed out by several pundits including Lazar (?) who posted videos of him regularly missing open receives. Particularly James White. But also Harry, Izzo, and Byrd.

 

[DaBruinz]

I think Meyers is ahead of Harry and will be on the field a lot more. That's what I meant by Wally Pipped.

I don't hate Harry and would love to see him become solid contributor.

I do like your Branch or Givens comparison.

Ok.. but to be "Wally Pipped" you are usually replaced directly. And that just isn't the case which is why I said something since Meyers and Harry play different positions in the receiving corps.

 

[DaBruinz]

Have a feeling he's gonna outproduce Bourne and Agholor. Kid has potential written all over him.

Stashed him late in my fantasy draft, eagerly awaiting the "WHO HAS MEYERS?"

I didn't stash him. He's one of my 7 receivers along with Ridley, Claypool, Kirk, "Hollywood" Brown, Ruggs III, and Tee Higgins. We play 3 WR, 1 WR/TE, and 1 WR/RB in case you were wondering why I have 7.. It's also a 12 person league..

 

[Deus Irae]

And I think you're quibbling. I guess we'll just agree to disagree on this one. But to say that a player who is trending upwards through his first two seasons couldn't beat out a guy who had been pretty average through his first 5 seasons for a WR3 spot would be the outlandish proposition, not the other way around. If I'd said he would have had a Welker like season, THAT would have been outlandish. I said the guy could have been the WR3. That's not going out on any kind of limb. I never argued that it was a lock. I said it could easily HAVE been. As in it's a possibility, in response to the idea that he would have been "quite low on the depth chart" which I was responding to. I think he would have been right in the mix.

I'm someone who just tossed out some small bouquets to Meyers, earlier in the thread, and was inclined to give the kid his props. But you took your opinion positions (trending upwards, pretty average), as fact, then ignored any possible context for those opinions. The first part is not a big deal, as long as you can supply the latter. But you didn't. You also take the "why" aspect of the 2007 WR3 play and changes, and completely ignore it. And then you just toss out the "it's not outlandish".

You're usually a much more logically sound and reasonable poster than that. If that were not the case, I wouldn't have bothered replying in the first place.