1. #130951
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    15,588

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]

    no they wouldn't, because that would mean Steve Smith was the # 3 WR in 09.

    Your the only person that thinks production isn't what the 3rd receiver is about.

    Regardless, besides your SNAPS theory you came back with JUST RECEPTIONS.

    So yo would think a guy with 40 receptions, 400 yards, and 4 TDS would be the third receiver over a guy with 39 receptions, 600 yards, and 7 TDs

    which would make no sense
    [/quote]

    Snaps is the only thing that makes sense...but you aren't going to sit there and count the snaps (neither am I) so the closest thing to that is pure receptions.

    and I'm pretty sure you and me are the only people even discussion what makes a 3rd receiver the third receiver in the first place....so bringing up what everyone else thinks is irrelevent since no one else is even thinking about it.

    your hypothetical are ridiculous by the way, answer me this who would be the third receiver.

    55 Receptions 650 yards 3 TD's vs 40 Receptions 750 Yards 6 TD's

    you make hypothetical that support only your opinion and don't understand that it's going to end up more muddled then that...but that's besides the point, the 3rd receiver is the receiver who takes the 3rd most snaps period...that's not debatable it's just a fact...

  2. #130952
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    15,588

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"][quote user="DavenIII"]
    I'll bet 20$ on either Barden "or" Jernigan producing more then Hixon this year...
    [/quote]

    define production
    [/quote]

    yeah well that's the problem isn't it, lets go with Fantasy Scoring alone...and fantasy scoring in OUR Fantasy league only..(the GMB one)

  3. #130953
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    15,588

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]So yo would think a guy with 40 receptions, 400 yards, and 4 TDS would be the third receiver over a guy with 39 receptions, 600 yards, and 7 TDs

    which would make no sense
    [/quote]

    would it make sense to say a guy who had 10 receptions for 400 yards and 4 TD's was the third receiver over a guy who had 35 receptions for 399 yards and 3 TD's?

    I would say the 35 reception guy was more likely the 3rd (or 4th) receiver and the 10 reception guy just got a lucky reception here or there but wasn't really a factor at all.

  4. #130954
    Hall of Famer MattMeyerBud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    60,564

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="MattMeyerBud"]

    no they wouldn't, because that would mean Steve Smith was the # 3 WR in 09.

    Your the only person that thinks production isn't what the 3rd receiver is about.

    Regardless, besides your SNAPS theory you came back with JUST RECEPTIONS.

    So yo would think a guy with 40 receptions, 400 yards, and 4 TDS would be the third receiver over a guy with 39 receptions, 600 yards, and 7 TDs

    which would make no sense
    [/quote]

    Snaps is the only thing that makes sense...but you aren't going to sit there and count the snaps (neither am I) so the closest thing to that is pure receptions.

    and I'm pretty sure you and me are the only people even discussion what makes a 3rd receiver the third receiver in the first place....so bringing up what everyone else thinks is irrelevent since no one else is even thinking about it.

    your hypothetical are ridiculous by the way, answer me this who would be the third receiver.

    55 Receptions 650 yards 3 TD's vs 40 Receptions 750 Yards 6 TD's

    you make hypothetical that support only your opinion and don't understand that it's going to end up more muddled then that...but that's besides the point, the 3rd receiver is the receiver who takes the 3rd most snaps period...that's not debatable it's just a fact...
    [/quote]

    hypothetically a receiver could have 1 more reception but 300 less yards and 4 less TDs and u would consider that guy the 3rd receiver. Obviously you'd be wrong on that.

    I make the hypothetical because it just shows how faulty your way could be.

    Personally I would consider the 2nd the second receiver you mentioned as the hands down #3 receiver.

    Just because one guy is more of a deep threat and one guy is more of a possession guy, you don't automaticaly lose because your a deep threat vs a possession guy. I mean YOU have this thought that third receiver is the slot receiver for osme strange reason even though we've had guys like Amani Toomer, Steve Smith, and Victor Cruz completely contradict your statement.
    Fear the name, appreciate the game

  5. #130955
    Hall of Famer MattMeyerBud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    60,564

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="MattMeyerBud"]So yo would think a guy with 40 receptions, 400 yards, and 4 TDS would be the third receiver over a guy with 39 receptions, 600 yards, and 7 TDs

    which would make no sense
    [/quote]

    would it make sense to say a guy who had 10 receptions for 400 yards and 4 TD's was the third receiver over a guy who had 35 receptions for 399 yards and 3 TD's?

    I would say the 35 reception guy was more likely the 3rd (or 4th) receiver and the 10 reception guy just got a lucky reception here or there but wasn't really a factor at all.
    [/quote]

    i think it would make the most sense, but personally I think theres only one way to really address this to make it fair and thats to incorporate a fantasy points scale to it...

    1 point per reception, 10 per yard, 6 per TD. Its the only fair way to account for everything the player did

    Fear the name, appreciate the game

  6. #130956
    Hall of Famer MattMeyerBud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    60,564

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="MattMeyerBud"][quote user="DavenIII"]
    I'll bet 20$ on either Barden "or" Jernigan producing more then Hixon this year...
    [/quote]

    define production
    [/quote]

    yeah well that's the problem isn't it, lets go with Fantasy Scoring alone...and fantasy scoring in OUR Fantasy league only..(the GMB one)
    [/quote]

    1 per reception, 1 per 10 yards, 6 for TD
    Fear the name, appreciate the game

  7. #130957
    Hall of Famer MattMeyerBud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    60,564

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    and on a side note, why doing the 3 stat catagories COULD have a jaded victory, theres nobody thats ever averaged 40 yards a catch lol.
    Fear the name, appreciate the game

  8. #130958
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    15,588

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]
    hypothetically a receiver could have 1 more reception but 300 less yards and 4 less TDs and u would consider that guy the 3rd receiver. Obviously you'd be wrong on that. [/quote]

    for the purposes of that bet yes I would....because we are talking PURELY about the time they spend on the field and not at all talking about production at all....like I said the only way to do it for real is snaps...but since neither of us will count the snaps receptions is the closest thing to snaps.



    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]I make the hypothetical because it just shows how faulty your way could be.[/quote]

    But it's a stupid hypothetical I can do exactly the opposite....who wins if Hixon stats are 3 Rec for 200 yards and a TD vs Barden having 17 receptions for 199 yards and no TD...I'm guessing you would say Hixon? but with that stat line it's clear Hixon just had a lucky catch or two but wasn't really part of the offense at all....that shows how faulty YOUR way could be.

    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]Personally I would consider the 2nd the second receiver you mentioned as the hands down #3 receiver. [/quote]

    and I would disagree I think the 55 Reception guy was the #3 because he was there for more first down receptions and likely taking more snaps from scrimmage...he was opening the field up for the #1 and #2 guys most of the time...the other guy had some longer receptions that led to TD's but that's because of the 4 wide set they were in when he came into the game....he was against the nickle CB or a safety most of the time.

    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]Just because one guy is more of a deep threat and one guy is more of a possession guy, you don't automaticaly lose because your a deep threat vs a possession guy.[/quote]

    no you lose because you aren't on the field as often as the other guy.


    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"] I mean YOU have this thought that third receiver is the slot receiver for osme strange reason even though we've had guys like Amani Toomer, Steve Smith, and Victor Cruz completely contradict your statement.
    [/quote]

    Cruz played slot most of the time....so that doesn't contridict my statement at all? Toomer was a #2 receiver he was never #3 Steve Smith played Slot again...so all the names you just threw out there just prove my point even more.

  9. #130959
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    15,588

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"][quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="MattMeyerBud"]So yo would think a guy with 40 receptions, 400 yards, and 4 TDS would be the third receiver over a guy with 39 receptions, 600 yards, and 7 TDs

    which would make no sense
    [/quote]

    would it make sense to say a guy who had 10 receptions for 400 yards and 4 TD's was the third receiver over a guy who had 35 receptions for 399 yards and 3 TD's?

    I would say the 35 reception guy was more likely the 3rd (or 4th) receiver and the 10 reception guy just got a lucky reception here or there but wasn't really a factor at all.
    [/quote]

    i think it would make the most sense, but personally I think theres only one way to really address this to make it fair and thats to incorporate a fantasy points scale to it...

    1 point per reception, 10 per yard, 6 per TD. Its the only fair way to account for everything the player did

    [/quote]

    I'm fine with fantasy points scale to measure PRODUCTION...the point you aren't understand is PRODUCTION has absolutely nothing to do with what # Receiver you are....that has to do with snaps...and only snaps.

    if you produce well as a 4th receiver you might get promoted to 3rd or 2nd receiver....but for example at the start of this season Cruz wasn't the 3rd or even 4th receiver...by the end of the season he was the #2 receiver (maybe still #3 behind Manningham it's arguable)

    your production allows you to move around on the depth chart...but that doesn't mean the depth chart is dictated purely by your production...the coaching staff decides who will be on the field each play...and whoever is on the field the most as a WR is the #1 second most is #2 and third most is #3....production isn't even part of the discussion.

  10. #130960
    Hall of Famer MattMeyerBud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    60,564

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="MattMeyerBud"]
    hypothetically a receiver could have 1 more reception but 300 less yards and 4 less TDs and u would consider that guy the 3rd receiver. Obviously you'd be wrong on that. [/quote]

    for the purposes of that bet yes I would....because we are talking PURELY about the time they spend on the field and not at all talking about production at all....like I said the only way to do it for real is snaps...but since neither of us will count the snaps receptions is the closest thing to snaps.



    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]I make the hypothetical because it just shows how faulty your way could be.[/quote]

    But it's a stupid hypothetical I can do exactly the opposite....who wins if Hixon stats are 3 Rec for 200 yards and a TD vs Barden having 17 receptions for 199 yards and no TD...I'm guessing you would say Hixon? but with that stat line it's clear Hixon just had a lucky catch or two but wasn't really part of the offense at all....that shows how faulty YOUR way could be.

    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]Personally I would consider the 2nd the second receiver you mentioned as the hands down #3 receiver. [/quote]

    and I would disagree I think the 55 Reception guy was the #3 because he was there for more first down receptions and likely taking more snaps from scrimmage...he was opening the field up for the #1 and #2 guys most of the time...the other guy had some longer receptions that led to TD's but that's because of the 4 wide set they were in when he came into the game....he was against the nickle CB or a safety most of the time.

    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]Just because one guy is more of a deep threat and one guy is more of a possession guy, you don't automaticaly lose because your a deep threat vs a possession guy.[/quote]

    no you lose because you aren't on the field as often as the other guy.


    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"] I mean YOU have this thought that third receiver is the slot receiver for osme strange reason even though we've had guys like Amani Toomer, Steve Smith, and Victor Cruz completely contradict your statement.
    [/quote]

    Cruz played slot most of the time....so that doesn't contridict my statement at all? Toomer was a #2 receiver he was never #3 Steve Smith played Slot again...so all the names you just threw out there just prove my point even more.
    [/quote]

    no again we're not.. Different packages happen all the time, we've had 4 wide sets with Mario NOT on the field

    You can't go by that. Your trying to make this your own thing, when we're talking in general about a #3 receiver. There is no real snaps stat unless u pay for one of those sites and quite frankly I don't trust them. They just said we need to worry about Guard for this upcoming year.

    Your the only person that thinks #3 WR isn't about production. You can debate on sometimes whose #1 and #2 when it comes to stats because safteys may roll over the #1 and keep the #2 in single coverage (like we see with Cruz and Nicks), but all of that is void with the 3 receiver.

    Your hypothetical would of consisted of some putting stats up that nobody has EVER came close to. I would wave the flag if that happened.
    Fear the name, appreciate the game

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts