Tight Ends
-
What do you disagree with precisely?
For starters, I think the lack of a WR corp inflated his numbers, not the opposite. Also, I disagree with implying that Belichek made a mistake by letting him go considering the production NE got from the TE position this year.
For starters, I think the lack of a WR corp inflated his numbers, not the opposite. Also, I disagree with implying that Belichek made a mistake by letting him go considering the production NE got from the TE position this year.
Think about it like this, if the WR were bad then wouldn't that mean that they would focus more on Watson in coverage. You could cover each WR on our roster with one guy and easily put two on Watson since he was our only reciving option. I can understand why you feel that no WR production means that Watson was focused on more by our QB's, but that does also mean he was focused on more by opposing defenses. I also credit Watson for his production becuase he got production evenly over the course of the season even though we had 3 different starters.
I will agree that Belichek didn't make a mistake by letting Watson go. I can go over all day why Watson didn't produce well in NE but the bottom line is that he didn't produce well there. For the price that they would have had to pay Watson to stay they were able to draft and pay 2 rookie TE the same price who by all accounts fit in their system a little better and did do well this year.
-
Homotron said:
Best option on the Browns and unfortunately for you guys that isn't saying much. Ben Watson is certainly a athletic TE but he's no where close to the best in the division and saw the numbers he saw this season because A. Colt McCoy being a rookie. B. Best option in a very poor passing attack. Please don't try and argue otherwise because you'd only end up dancing a dance you have no business dancing. (As far as the poor core is concerned) He was let go by the Patriots for a reason and signed with the Browns because there wasn't much interest elsewhere.You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
good post, gipper. the belief that watson had a good year simply because colt had no other options is purely insane. to suggest being on a team with a lack of a receiving corp makes one better makes you question a person's sanity or it's just further proof as to what some people's real agendas on this board really are (steeler fan trolling perhaps? lol).
yes, watson may have been the only reliable target colt had, but i'm sure you'll agree with me when i say that watson still had to get open, run his routes correctly and catch the ball consistently. in order for watson to be able to do that, he would have to be a good te.
there's nothing to really argue with on that point. people can argue who was the best overall te, best blocking te, etc. all day, but the bottom line is that watson's abilities aren't magically produced or inflated by the fact that other people on his team can't get open, run their routes correctly or catch the ball consistently.
-
For starters, I think the lack of a WR corp inflated his numbers, not the opposite. Also, I disagree with implying that Belichek made a mistake by letting him go considering the production NE got from the TE position this year.
Think about it like this, if the WR were bad then wouldn't that mean that they would focus more on Watson in coverage. You could cover each WR on our roster with one guy and easily put two on Watson since he was our only reciving option. I can understand why you feel that no WR production means that Watson was focused on more by our QB's, but that does also mean he was focused on more by opposing defenses. I also credit Watson for his production becuase he got production evenly over the course of the season even though we had 3 different starters.
I will agree that Belichek didn't make a mistake by letting Watson go. I can go over all day why Watson didn't produce well in NE but the bottom line is that he didn't produce well there. For the price that they would have had to pay Watson to stay they were able to draft and pay 2 rookie TE the same price who by all accounts fit in their system a little better and did do well this year.
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Think about it like this, if the WR were bad then wouldn't that mean that they would focus more on Watson in coverage. You could cover each WR on our roster with one guy and easily put two on Watson since he was our only reciving option. I can understand why you feel that no WR production means that Watson was focused on more by our QB's, but that does also mean he was focused on more by opposing defenses. I also credit Watson for his production becuase he got production evenly over the course of the season even though we had 3 different starters.I will agree that Belichek didn't make a mistake by letting Watson go. I can go over all day why Watson didn't produce well in NE but the bottom line is that he didn't produce well there. For the price that they would have had to pay Watson to stay they were able to draft and pay 2 rookie TE the same price who by all accounts fit in their system a little better and did do well this year.
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
-
You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
good post, gipper. the belief that watson had a good year simply because colt had no other options is purely insane. to suggest being on a team with a lack of a receiving corp makes one better makes you question a person's sanity or it's just further proof as to what some people's real agendas on this board really are (steeler fan trolling perhaps? lol).
yes, watson may have been the only reliable target colt had, but i'm sure you'll agree with me when i say that watson still had to get open, run his routes correctly and catch the ball consistently. in order for watson to be able to do that, he would have to be a good te.
there's nothing to really argue with on that point. people can argue who was the best overall te, best blocking te, etc. all day, but the bottom line is that watson's abilities aren't magically produced or inflated by the fact that other people on his team can't get open, run their routes correctly or catch the ball consistently.
but the bottom line is that watson's abilities aren't magically produced or inflated by the fact that other people on his team can't get open, run their routes correctly or catch the ball consistently.
What is more logical?
Player A finally "gets it" at the age of 30 and produces good numbers for the first time in his career.
or
Player A Gets targeted a ton because he is the only above average (slightly) option receiving wise on his new team.
-
but the bottom line is that watson's abilities aren't magically produced or inflated by the fact that other people on his team can't get open, run their routes correctly or catch the ball consistently.
What is more logical?
Player A finally "gets it" at the age of 30 and produces good numbers for the first time in his career.
or
Player A Gets targeted a ton because he is the only above average (slightly) option receiving wise on his new team.
What is more logical?
Player A finally "gets it" at the age of 30 and produces good numbers for the first time in his career.
or
Player A Gets targeted a ton because he is the only above average (slightly) option receiving wise on his new team.
edit: i guess you didn't comprehend my post. your response has nothing to do with my point. when watson "gets it" or how much he got targeted last season is irrelevant to my point. you ever think why watson was targeted so much last season? watson was targeted over the other receivers on his team because he was reliable and more consistent. that's all i'm saying. it's as simple as that.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Think about it like this, if the WR were bad then wouldn't that mean that they would focus more on Watson in coverage. You could cover each WR on our roster with one guy and easily put two on Watson since he was our only reciving option. I can understand why you feel that no WR production means that Watson was focused on more by our QB's, but that does also mean he was focused on more by opposing defenses. I also credit Watson for his production becuase he got production evenly over the course of the season even though we had 3 different starters.I will agree that Belichek didn't make a mistake by letting Watson go. I can go over all day why Watson didn't produce well in NE but the bottom line is that he didn't produce well there. For the price that they would have had to pay Watson to stay they were able to draft and pay 2 rookie TE the same price who by all accounts fit in their system a little better and did do well this year.
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
Bad WR corps = defense paying more attention to the TE. It is a two way street. He gets looked at more by the QB and gets double covered by the defense. both should cancel each other out. the only difference between when he played in NE and when he played here is that when he played in NE he didn't get attention in the passing game and here he did. You are passing his ability on the years where he wasn't in a system that actually threw to the TE often (they changed more to a TE after he left and they got two rookies they wanted to get production out of).
-
What is more logical?
Player A finally "gets it" at the age of 30 and produces good numbers for the first time in his career.
or
Player A Gets targeted a ton because he is the only above average (slightly) option receiving wise on his new team.
edit: i guess you didn't comprehend my post. your response has nothing to do with my point. when watson "gets it" or how much he got targeted last season is irrelevant to my point. you ever think why watson was targeted so much last season? watson was targeted over the other receivers on his team because he was reliable and more consistent. that's all i'm saying. it's as simple as that.
edit: i guess you didn't comprehend my post. your response has nothing to do with my point. when watson "gets it" or how much he got targeted last season is irrelevant to my point. you ever think why watson was targeted so much last season? watson was targeted over the other receivers on his team because he was reliable and more consistent. that's all i'm saying. it's as simple as that.
I can agree with that although it isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.
-
edit: i guess you didn't comprehend my post. your response has nothing to do with my point. when watson "gets it" or how much he got targeted last season is irrelevant to my point. you ever think why watson was targeted so much last season? watson was targeted over the other receivers on his team because he was reliable and more consistent. that's all i'm saying. it's as simple as that.
I can agree with that although it isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.
I can agree with that although it isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.
edit: my op was directed at the steeler troll's responses to the gipper. i never said watson was elite or a hof'er. the troll was basically making it seem as if a bad receiving corps was the only reason watson had the stats he had. ofcourse he was targeted more than his teamamtes, but that's only because he was more reliable/consistent than they were.
-
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
Bad WR corps = defense paying more attention to the TE. It is a two way street. He gets looked at more by the QB and gets double covered by the defense. both should cancel each other out. the only difference between when he played in NE and when he played here is that when he played in NE he didn't get attention in the passing game and here he did. You are passing his ability on the years where he wasn't in a system that actually threw to the TE often (they changed more to a TE after he left and they got two rookies they wanted to get production out of).
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Bad WR corps = defense paying more attention to the TE. It is a two way street. He gets looked at more by the QB and gets double covered by the defense. both should cancel each other out. the only difference between when he played in NE and when he played here is that when he played in NE he didn't get attention in the passing game and here he did. You are passing his ability on the years where he wasn't in a system that actually threw to the TE often (they changed more to a TE after he left and they got two rookies they wanted to get production out of).If he were any where near as good as you are trying to make him out to be, you don't think that NE would have found a way to get him the ball? I give up. It is obvious that Ben Watson all of a sudden has emerged as a great TE at the age of 30. Logic be damned.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Bad WR corps = defense paying more attention to the TE. It is a two way street. He gets looked at more by the QB and gets double covered by the defense. both should cancel each other out. the only difference between when he played in NE and when he played here is that when he played in NE he didn't get attention in the passing game and here he did. You are passing his ability on the years where he wasn't in a system that actually threw to the TE often (they changed more to a TE after he left and they got two rookies they wanted to get production out of).If he were any where near as good as you are trying to make him out to be, you don't think that NE would have found a way to get him the ball? I give up. It is obvious that Ben Watson all of a sudden has emerged as a great TE at the age of 30. Logic be damned.
If he were any where near as good as you are trying to make him out to be, you don't think that NE would have found a way to get him the ball? I give up. It is obvious that Ben Watson all of a sudden has emerged as a great TE at the age of 30. Logic be damned.
You are completely ignoring the fact that THEY HAD LEGITIMATE OPTIONS OTHER THAN HIM. When you have a players like Branch/Welker and Moss/Welker at the top of there game then you don't drop down to your TE read that often. The ONLY reason that the two new TE in NE did as good as they did this year stat wise was because Moss was over and they brought Branch back way past his prime. when your new #1 option is Welker who is now getting the main focus with now one behind him to take his spot you throw more to the TE.
The situation isn't just as simple as you claim. To say that the passing offense in NE was exactly the same when Watson was there is ridiculous and to think that bad WR make a better TE without taking into account that the same TE is now being double covered alot more is stupid. Plus like alot of people who watch the NFL you have forgotten that the TE is also a blocker and that is also playing into my decision and Watson is one of the best run blocking TE in the NFL, he is a COMPLETE TE something that can not be said for either TE in NE and when you put his receiving ability with his run blocking ability he is a top 10-15 TE in the NFL and far better than anything Cinci has, better than Miller by a long shot, and in a good neck and neck race with Heap for the #1 TE in the AFCN.
If bad WR make a good TE wouldn't it make sense that Good WR make a bad TE. Wouldn't that be a good way to explain his numbers in NE? Think about it.
-
If he were any where near as good as you are trying to make him out to be, you don't think that NE would have found a way to get him the ball? I give up. It is obvious that Ben Watson all of a sudden has emerged as a great TE at the age of 30. Logic be damned.
You are completely ignoring the fact that THEY HAD LEGITIMATE OPTIONS OTHER THAN HIM. When you have a players like Branch/Welker and Moss/Welker at the top of there game then you don't drop down to your TE read that often. The ONLY reason that the two new TE in NE did as good as they did this year stat wise was because Moss was over and they brought Branch back way past his prime. when your new #1 option is Welker who is now getting the main focus with now one behind him to take his spot you throw more to the TE.
The situation isn't just as simple as you claim. To say that the passing offense in NE was exactly the same when Watson was there is ridiculous and to think that bad WR make a better TE without taking into account that the same TE is now being double covered alot more is stupid. Plus like alot of people who watch the NFL you have forgotten that the TE is also a blocker and that is also playing into my decision and Watson is one of the best run blocking TE in the NFL, he is a COMPLETE TE something that can not be said for either TE in NE and when you put his receiving ability with his run blocking ability he is a top 10-15 TE in the NFL and far better than anything Cinci has, better than Miller by a long shot, and in a good neck and neck race with Heap for the #1 TE in the AFCN.
If bad WR make a good TE wouldn't it make sense that Good WR make a bad TE. Wouldn't that be a good way to explain his numbers in NE? Think about it.
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
You are completely ignoring the fact that THEY HAD LEGITIMATE OPTIONS OTHER THAN HIM. When you have a players like Branch/Welker and Moss/Welker at the top of there game then you don't drop down to your TE read that often. The ONLY reason that the two new TE in NE did as good as they did this year stat wise was because Moss was over and they brought Branch back way past his prime. when your new #1 option is Welker who is now getting the main focus with now one behind him to take his spot you throw more to the TE.The situation isn't just as simple as you claim. To say that the passing offense in NE was exactly the same when Watson was there is ridiculous and to think that bad WR make a better TE without taking into account that the same TE is now being double covered alot more is stupid. Plus like alot of people who watch the NFL you have forgotten that the TE is also a blocker and that is also playing into my decision and Watson is one of the best run blocking TE in the NFL, he is a COMPLETE TE something that can not be said for either TE in NE and when you put his receiving ability with his run blocking ability he is a top 10-15 TE in the NFL and far better than anything Cinci has, better than Miller by a long shot, and in a good neck and neck race with Heap for the #1 TE in the AFCN.
If bad WR make a good TE wouldn't it make sense that Good WR make a bad TE. Wouldn't that be a good way to explain his numbers in NE? Think about it.
There is so much flawed in that post that my brain actually started smoking. I'm done with this. If you think Watson is really that good then I am glad for you. Homerism is alive and well.
God Bless.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
You are completely ignoring the fact that THEY HAD LEGITIMATE OPTIONS OTHER THAN HIM. When you have a players like Branch/Welker and Moss/Welker at the top of there game then you don't drop down to your TE read that often. The ONLY reason that the two new TE in NE did as good as they did this year stat wise was because Moss was over and they brought Branch back way past his prime. when your new #1 option is Welker who is now getting the main focus with now one behind him to take his spot you throw more to the TE.The situation isn't just as simple as you claim. To say that the passing offense in NE was exactly the same when Watson was there is ridiculous and to think that bad WR make a better TE without taking into account that the same TE is now being double covered alot more is stupid. Plus like alot of people who watch the NFL you have forgotten that the TE is also a blocker and that is also playing into my decision and Watson is one of the best run blocking TE in the NFL, he is a COMPLETE TE something that can not be said for either TE in NE and when you put his receiving ability with his run blocking ability he is a top 10-15 TE in the NFL and far better than anything Cinci has, better than Miller by a long shot, and in a good neck and neck race with Heap for the #1 TE in the AFCN.
If bad WR make a good TE wouldn't it make sense that Good WR make a bad TE. Wouldn't that be a good way to explain his numbers in NE? Think about it.
There is so much flawed in that post that my brain actually started smoking. I'm done with this. If you think Watson is really that good then I am glad for you. Homerism is alive and well.
God Bless.
There is so much flawed in that post that my brain actually started smoking. I'm done with this. If you think Watson is really that good then I am glad for you. Homerism is alive and well.
God Bless.
You are so narrow minded it is freakin ridiculous. So one way works but the other doesn't. Bad WR's can make a TE's numbers go up, but Good WR's won't cause a TE's numbers to go down. Makes alot of sense if you don't think about it! Taking one bit that supports your argument into account and discounting everything else that goes against it is no way to make an argument for anything.
I'm sorry Watson was never used as a slot receiver when he was in NE either like the two rookies. And I like how I'm so high on him when I said he is around the 15th best in the NFL, not THEY best, but sure as hell a lot better than your giving him credit for.
Go push your flawed logic on another topic, I would get a real kick out of reading how Joe Thomas is over rated and how we should ship out Haden while we still can.
-
There is so much flawed in that post that my brain actually started smoking. I'm done with this. If you think Watson is really that good then I am glad for you. Homerism is alive and well.
God Bless.
You are so narrow minded it is freakin ridiculous. So one way works but the other doesn't. Bad WR's can make a TE's numbers go up, but Good WR's won't cause a TE's numbers to go down. Makes alot of sense if you don't think about it! Taking one bit that supports your argument into account and discounting everything else that goes against it is no way to make an argument for anything.
I'm sorry Watson was never used as a slot receiver when he was in NE either like the two rookies. And I like how I'm so high on him when I said he is around the 15th best in the NFL, not THEY best, but sure as hell a lot better than your giving him credit for.
Go push your flawed logic on another topic, I would get a real kick out of reading how Joe Thomas is over rated and how we should ship out Haden while we still can.
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
You are so narrow minded it is freakin ridiculous. So one way works but the other doesn't. Bad WR's can make a TE's numbers go up, but Good WR's won't cause a TE's numbers to go down. Makes alot of sense if you don't think about it! Taking one bit that supports your argument into account and discounting everything else that goes against it is no way to make an argument for anything.I'm sorry Watson was never used as a slot receiver when he was in NE either like the two rookies. And I like how I'm so high on him when I said he is around the 15th best in the NFL, not THEY best, but sure as hell a lot better than your giving him credit for.
Go push your flawed logic on another topic, I would get a real kick out of reading how Joe Thomas is over rated and how we should ship out Haden while we still can.
Dallas-Witten
Indy-Clark
Houston-Daniels
Atlanta- Gonzalez
Those are 4 TEs off of the top of my head that have put up numbers even though they have good WRs around them.
And since you mentioned it, Thomas was overrated this year and I am not completely sold on Haden yet.
-
What do you disagree with precisely?
For starters, I think the lack of a WR corp inflated his numbers, not the opposite. Also, I disagree with implying that Belichek made a mistake by letting him go considering the production NE got from the TE position this year.
For starters, I think the lack of a WR corp inflated his numbers, not the opposite. Also, I disagree with implying that Belichek made a mistake by letting him go considering the production NE got from the TE position this year.
Well, he may certainly have gotten more passes thrown to him because the rest of the WR corps was unreliable, but still, he came through with those catches which I give him credit for.
On the second point, note that I may have backed off on calling it a mistake. It may have been, as I said, just a matter of not being the right fit for the system.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
You are so narrow minded it is freakin ridiculous. So one way works but the other doesn't. Bad WR's can make a TE's numbers go up, but Good WR's won't cause a TE's numbers to go down. Makes alot of sense if you don't think about it! Taking one bit that supports your argument into account and discounting everything else that goes against it is no way to make an argument for anything.I'm sorry Watson was never used as a slot receiver when he was in NE either like the two rookies. And I like how I'm so high on him when I said he is around the 15th best in the NFL, not THEY best, but sure as hell a lot better than your giving him credit for.
Go push your flawed logic on another topic, I would get a real kick out of reading how Joe Thomas is over rated and how we should ship out Haden while we still can.
Dallas-Witten
Indy-Clark
Houston-Daniels
Atlanta- Gonzalez
Those are 4 TEs off of the top of my head that have put up numbers even though they have good WRs around them.
And since you mentioned it, Thomas was overrated this year and I am not completely sold on Haden yet.
Dallas-Witten
Indy-Clark
Houston-Daniels
Atlanta- Gonzalez
Those are 4 TEs off of the top of my head that have put up numbers even though they have good WRs around them.
And since you mentioned it, Thomas was overrated this year and I am not completely sold on Haden yet.
I am not sure that anyone is claiming that Watson is necessarily as good as the guys you list. The question was the relative abilities of the 4 AFCN TEs. However, note in my statistical listing that Watson was like 5th in the NFL in catches and in yards.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
You are so narrow minded it is freakin ridiculous. So one way works but the other doesn't. Bad WR's can make a TE's numbers go up, but Good WR's won't cause a TE's numbers to go down. Makes alot of sense if you don't think about it! Taking one bit that supports your argument into account and discounting everything else that goes against it is no way to make an argument for anything.I'm sorry Watson was never used as a slot receiver when he was in NE either like the two rookies. And I like how I'm so high on him when I said he is around the 15th best in the NFL, not THEY best, but sure as hell a lot better than your giving him credit for.
Go push your flawed logic on another topic, I would get a real kick out of reading how Joe Thomas is over rated and how we should ship out Haden while we still can.
Dallas-Witten
Indy-Clark
Houston-Daniels
Atlanta- Gonzalez
Those are 4 TEs off of the top of my head that have put up numbers even though they have good WRs around them.
And since you mentioned it, Thomas was overrated this year and I am not completely sold on Haden yet.
Dallas-Witten
Indy-Clark
Houston-Daniels
Atlanta- Gonzalez
Those are 4 TEs off of the top of my head that have put up numbers even though they have good WRs around them.
And since you mentioned it, Thomas was overrated this year and I am not completely sold on Haden yet.
1. Not one of those guys is as good of a blocker as Watson is which is PART OF BEING A TIGHT END!!! It should factor into your decision. Gonzalez and Clark are basically just glorified slot receivers and Daniels and Witten are average blockers at best. All of these guys will also line up in the slot on downs where there is no TE which is something that Watson doesn't do. When you add the fact that they get about 15% more snaps because of being in the slot, they are going to have slightly inflated numbers compared to TE that just play TE.
2. Thank you for proving my point. Maybe we can trade Haden for Jimmy Clausen and give them Ward too for a throw in. Maybe Thomas should agree to a pay cut since he had one off year (where he still played like one of the top 10 tackles in the NFL).
-
Dallas-Witten
Indy-Clark
Houston-Daniels
Atlanta- Gonzalez
Those are 4 TEs off of the top of my head that have put up numbers even though they have good WRs around them.
And since you mentioned it, Thomas was overrated this year and I am not completely sold on Haden yet.
1. Not one of those guys is as good of a blocker as Watson is which is PART OF BEING A TIGHT END!!! It should factor into your decision. Gonzalez and Clark are basically just glorified slot receivers and Daniels and Witten are average blockers at best. All of these guys will also line up in the slot on downs where there is no TE which is something that Watson doesn't do. When you add the fact that they get about 15% more snaps because of being in the slot, they are going to have slightly inflated numbers compared to TE that just play TE.
2. Thank you for proving my point. Maybe we can trade Haden for Jimmy Clausen and give them Ward too for a throw in. Maybe Thomas should agree to a pay cut since he had one off year (where he still played like one of the top 10 tackles in the NFL).
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
2. Thank you for proving my point. Maybe we can trade Haden for Jimmy Clausen and give them Ward too for a throw in. Maybe Thomas should agree to a pay cut since he had one off year (where he still played like one of the top 10 tackles in the NFL).Yes, because that is exactly what I said.
I love Thomas but that doesn't change the fact that he had a less than stellar year by HIS standards. Hell, Abraham made him look like a 5th round rookie. He is still better than almost all LTs in the league.
Haden showed great ball skills and tremendous potential, especially for a guy that hasn't played the position as long as most. That doesn't change the fact that he also looked lost in coverage at times. He definitely can become elite but right now the jury is still out.
I'm sorry if I don't think a guy is the greatest player ever because he is playing for my favorite team. I remember that I used to do that back in grade school. Webster Slaughter was all world!!!
As far as Watson goes, I think he is a solid TE and is adequate for the time being and like Gipper said he did take advantage of his opportunities but let's not act like he a stud all of a sudden because he caught a lot of dump offs.
-
mikeyP72 said:
You never actually say anything Pizzadude. You just make empty statements like Steeler fans.Please explain why you aren't sold on Haden, I'd love to hear it.
Pot<>Kettle
-
mikeyP72 said:
You never actually say anything Pizzadude. You just make empty statements like Steeler fans.Please explain why you aren't sold on Haden, I'd love to hear it.
Pot<>Kettle
Pot<>Kettle
No not really. You haven't really done anything but stat our opinion on empty statement and receiving stats for a position that doesn't just revolve around what the stats say. The TE position goes deeper than catches and yards it is a multi job position that can not be judged by stats alone but that is apparently all you can look at. And even all the factors that go into why he didn't do as well in NE are ignored. You use receiving stats from other TE who are used as slot receivers in a lot of situations and are actually the 2nd receiving option on their team where as Watson in NE and in Cleveland was used as a 3rd receiving option TE.
Oh and taking cracks at age is funny and pushing that I'm a homer is a riot. What I'm saying is that Watson is a top 15 TE and at tied for top TE in the AFCN. I'm not saying that he is the best TE receiving wise or blocking wise, but combined his receiving ability and blocking ability combined make him a top 15 TE. That's not a homer statement that is a statement from someone who is actually looking at all the factors that make up a TE to make an informed decision, not one from some narrow minded dude only looking at a stat sheet.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Think about it like this, if the WR were bad then wouldn't that mean that they would focus more on Watson in coverage. You could cover each WR on our roster with one guy and easily put two on Watson since he was our only reciving option. I can understand why you feel that no WR production means that Watson was focused on more by our QB's, but that does also mean he was focused on more by opposing defenses. I also credit Watson for his production becuase he got production evenly over the course of the season even though we had 3 different starters.I will agree that Belichek didn't make a mistake by letting Watson go. I can go over all day why Watson didn't produce well in NE but the bottom line is that he didn't produce well there. For the price that they would have had to pay Watson to stay they were able to draft and pay 2 rookie TE the same price who by all accounts fit in their system a little better and did do well this year.
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
I haven't read Gips replies yet but based on your responses I can deduce what was said and I completely agree. I'm not sure why anyone thinks Ben Watson is all world because he put up 700 yards receiving. As I already pointed out his career receiving yards were 400 less and he has 6 td's less than Miller yet played one more season. He also can't block and Miller blocks like a lineman. Todd Heap on the other hand is injury prone but if not for his injuries would be a top 5 guy in the league. Period. Ben Watson despite his production this year is the worst TE in the division. He's a cast off that had a solid year because of the inept receiving core around him. He still has solid speed so as a safety valve he did well and I'd wager had significantly more targets than the rest of the team.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login