Was Vincent Jackson Snubbed?
by creanium on Dec 29, 2009 5:36 PM PST
in San Diego Chargers Statistics
Email
PrintWhat kind of year would it be without Chargers fans up in arms about some player being snubbed by the Pro Bowl selections? Last year it was Philip Rivers. This year: Vincent Jackson. Chargers fans are not alone in their bewilderment.
In the Chargers Pro Bowl Discussion thread, a rather heated debate erupted about whether or not Brandon Marshall deserves to not only be selected to the Pro Bowl over Vincent Jackson, but whether or not he belongs there in the first place.
Read on to see how the various Wide Receivers stack up.
Let's look at the numbers for the four Wide Receivers selected to the Pro Bowl (ordered by their Pro Bowl ranking):
| Player | Receptions | Yards | Yards per Rec | TD | TD % | First Downs | First Down % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andre Johnson | 95 | 1504 | 15.8 | 9 | 9.47% | 65 | 68.42% |
| Reggie Wayne | 95 | 1243 | 13.1 | 10 | 10.52% | 71 | 74.74% |
| Brandon Marshall | 101 | 1120 | 11.1 | 10 | 9.90% | 56 | 55.45% |
| Wes Welker | 122 | 1336 | 11.0 | 4 | 3.28% | 70 | 57.38% |
| Vincent Jackson | 68 | 1167 | 17.2 | 9 | 13.24% | 58 | 85.29% |
Going by just stats alone, it's clear that Vincent Jackson is having a stellar year and is performing above and beyond the rest of the field; his efficiency is unmatched.
So why the snub? Is it due to lack of receptions? All 4 Pro Bowl Wide Receivers have more than 90 receptions, to Jackson's 68 receptions. It's the only logical explanation I could garner.
Lack of receptions or not, there's no denying the production coming out of Vincent Jackson. He absolutely deserves to be in the Pro Bowl over Brandon Marshall.
If it were up to me, and going by stats alone, Vincent Jackson and Reggie Wayne should be the starters.
[EDIT]: Originally I had made the case to drop Wes Welker from the Pro Bowl team based solely on stats, but there's an inherent danger on relying solely on stats. Upon further review and convincing otherwise, I was shown the light and have seen Welker's value as a receiver outside just his stats. I blame it not so much on my Chargers fanboyism, but more on my ignorance of the Patriots and paying attention to Welker's contributions this year. I stand corrected, mea culpa.
But, all this worrying about which Chargers were snubbed will all be for naught since they won't be able to participate in the Pro Bowl this year anyway since they'll be preparing for the big game the following week. Right?
| Player | Team | DYAR |
|---|---|---|
| V. Jackson | SD | 458 |
| W. Welker | NE | 413 |
| R. Wayne | IND | 389 |
| R. Moss | NE | 346 |
| H. Ward | PIT | 286 |
| S. Holmes | PIT | 271 |
| A. Johnson | HOU | 267 |
| C. Ochocinco | CIN | 243 |
| A. Collie | IND | 217 |
| M. Wallace | PIT | 203 |
| M. Floyd | SD | 193 |
| K. Walter | HOU | 187 |
| D. Mason | BAL | 186 |
| B. Marshall | DEN | 181 |
| J. Cotchery | NYJ | 158 |
| K. Washington | BAL | 158 |
| B. Hartline | MIA | 143 |
| G. Camarillo | MIA | 131 |
| K. Britt | TEN | 129 |
| M. Sims-Walker | JAC | 129 |
98 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Brandon Marshall does not even belong in the discussion. The fact that he made the Pro Bowl is an absolute joke.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
He made it based off his performance against the Colts mostly. Andre Johnson is deserving. Wayne gets in just because Peyton is having an MVP season. Still shocking the VJ missed it with the season he’s having.
"I did not invent the wheel, I was the crooked spoke adjacent." - Aesop Rock
by John Gennaro on Dec 29, 2009 5:56 PM PST up reply actions
Frankly, that’s stupid. Marshall is barely a top 30 guy in the NFL.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 6:07 PM PST up reply actions
are you being serious?
I know his FO numbers aren’t great, but he has had three consecutive seasons with 100+ receptions and 1100+ yards. He has 10 TDs which is top 2 in the conference this year. He has had dominant game changing performances this year and in the past.
Don’t get me wrong, I think VJ is better than him and I woudn’t be surprised if Marshall was not a pro-bowler, but he IS in the discussion.
by Stephen (shaynes41) on Dec 29, 2009 6:12 PM PST up reply actions
Damn serious. He gets a lot of his numbers in ways that just aren’t very productive.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 6:14 PM PST up reply actions
Hell yes. Welker has had a great year.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 6:17 PM PST up reply actions
I think VJ is the best reciever we've had in a LONG time,but.....
even though he’s had an outstanding season,there are three or four guys ahead of him in my opinion.Andre,Wes,Reggie and Ocho….do I think he deserves it,YES,but those guys are having an equal or better season than he is at the moment.On another note,VJ is a monster and I’m confident that he’ll end up having a Fitzgerald-esqe or better type of playoff run,for sure.
I’m not sure there is such a thing as 1100 non-productive yards per season from a WR.
The thing I hate the most about these discussions is that y’all make defend people I really don’t like…
by Stephen (shaynes41) on Dec 29, 2009 6:18 PM PST up reply actions
He’s productive. He’s the 25th most productive receiver in the NFL. There are over 100 receivers in the NFL, so that’s pretty good. What I’m saying is that he’s not in the top 10 or even 20. I’m not saying he sucks.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 6:19 PM PST up reply actions
I believe that ranking system has a flaw in it.
If you read the description of how DYAR came about you will see that the FO guys realized the DVOA wasn’t accurate because it was ranking known bad WRs higher than well regarded WRs who should have been ranked higher. So they modified they ranking method and came up with DYAR which more closely matches what they KNEW to be true based on observations of real games. I think that the fact that DYAR ranks Marshall 25 and around guys like Crotchery, K.Walters, and M.Wallace shows that it needs some more tweaking.
by Stephen (shaynes41) on Dec 29, 2009 6:24 PM PST up reply actions
He’s certainly more physically gifted than those guys, but I think it’s hard to deny that he gets thrown to more than just about anyone, that most of his routes are short, high completion types and that he still fails to come up with the ball rather frequently. Also, he gets a ton of garbage yards. Six yards on 3rd & 10, 12 yards on 3rd and 18, that sort of thing. His ranking matches up rather well with my perception of him as a player.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 6:28 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with that. He was a lot better last year when there was more than one receiving option.
"I did not invent the wheel, I was the crooked spoke adjacent." - Aesop Rock
by John Gennaro on Dec 30, 2009 2:24 AM PST up reply actions
Only partially true
Their comment is that since DVOA is a rate statistic, it does not capture the cumulative value of a player. They noticed this omission via the observation that you reference. It is not a case that they then “fudged” a stat to match their pre-conceived notion of the WR rankings. They just came up with a stat that sensibly measure the cumulative value of a player at the “skill” positions.
by HuangDi on Dec 29, 2009 6:30 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Don't forget its just statistics.
I find it hard to believe people will say that catches are just stats and then turn to an FO number to back up their point. SD has been very low all year in the FO numbers all year and have won a bunch of games that FO said should have lost and yet SD is 2nd in AFC and 3rd in NFL. FO is clearly not the end-all-and-be-all of the NFL. In the same light, Jackson’s numbers are tweaked to make him look better. He gets long completions cause SD throws many 10-20 yard patterns to receivers (they need to cause the only get 1 yards run on 1st down) whereas as Denver only needs 3-4 yards cause they have a real running game.
by riversformvp on Dec 29, 2009 6:35 PM PST up reply actions
Didn't say it was
it’s just another reference to consider. Voters look at other stats (catches, TDs, yards) too, why not look at one more. My only (only) comment above was that DYAR was not conceived as a “fudge” statistic.
You might want to tell Richard Wade that
All due respect.
Tell me what? Please enlighten me.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 7:21 PM PST up reply actions
That it's not all DYAR/DVOA
“He’s productive. He’s the 25th most productive receiver in the NFL. "
That sounds pretty absolute, in my opinion.
Show me a better way to measure productivity and I’ll use that.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 8:30 PM PST up reply actions
There is no pure way to do it
It’s always a multitude of factors. DVOA is just a tool to use like YAC or Average or first down % or whatever the heck else you want to use. No one stat is an absolute measure of how good someone is.
I’m not using it as a measure of how good, but how productive. Taking the context of a given play, comparing the result to the average result in such a situation then adjusting for the quality of the opponent seems like the closest thing to a “pure” way. That we have access to both a counting stat and rate stat that does this with DYAR and DVOA is as close as we’re going to get.
I ask, why use catches and yards when you have DYAR which measures the same things only better? And why use Yards/Rec, etc. when we have DVOA which measures the same thing only better?
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 9:37 PM PST up reply actions
But you're using it as a pefect stat
There is no perfect stat, nothing absolute, no matter how impressive such a measurement is, there are other factors that it does not take into account.
Quarterbacks are not purely rated on passer rating (Which is the closest to mainstream advanced stats get), nor should receivers be purely ranked upon these stats. You need to have some sort of objective view on it.
I’m not just using these stats. I’ve watched him play. I’m including that along with the stats to form my opinion. If you’ll notice I’m not complaining about Andre Johnson making it even though he ranks #7 according to DYAR because I’ve seen him play, too, and I don’t feel that the ranking of #7 matches up with what I’ve seen.
I see other people quoting less complete stats to make their arguments. My point is that they’re using stats that are more flawed than the ones I’m using.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 30, 2009 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
HAD a real running game
It hasn’t been nearly as good in recent weeks, I think….
Anyway, this debate could rage on … and on … and on…. Go to it, everyone: it’s kind of fun. ;)
The fan vote’s 33%, right?… Players 33%, too? (Or is it players and coaches?…) And then sportswriters or media account for the final 3rd? Is that right?…
Anyway, fans, players, media, even coaches could have been “blinded” by Marshall’s gaudy stats, no doubt (as was written about on another post); but if you asked NFL DBs who’d they’d like to least go up against, I’m not sure you’d have consensus…. Some might say AJ, some VJ, some Marshall, some Moss, some Wayne, some Welker…. Hell, how do we know?! — They’re all really good and essentially unstoppable one-one-one.
The Chargers played like crap over their first five games before playing exceptionally well over their last 10. Their DVOA ranking reflects that.
You don’t seem to understand how DVOA works. If you only need 3-4 yards, 3-4 yards will be recorded as a successful play. Jackson’s numbers look better because they are better. More of his receptions go for first downs or are otherwise successful plays. Marshall gets dinged for having fewer successful plays.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 7:20 PM PST up reply actions
I see the logical end to this debate now
Its whether frequent short yardage plays are more valuable than infrequent long yardage plays. Its the Wes Welker vs. Randy Moss argument, underneath a lot or down the field a few times.
by riversformvp on Dec 29, 2009 7:34 PM PST up reply actions
Not exactly. Welker is more productive than Moss while Jackson is more productive than Marshall. Also, Welker, Jackson and Moss are top 10 while Marshall isn’t top 20.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 7:36 PM PST up reply actions
Aside the statistics treatment by FO
If you treat first downs to have a lot of value in your statistical system then of course you should argue the value of first downs. It would sort of saying that LT is better than whomever even though his average per carry is low but he has a inordinate amount of touchdowns for his carries load. It has a lot to do with system as well as skills. Its just hard to see why a guy with 102 catches and 9 TDs and is the focus of his teams offense should be kept out because the other guy gets more first downs. Receivers are meant to receive…
by riversformvp on Dec 29, 2009 7:39 PM PST up reply actions
Isn't the point of Football to move down field and eventually score?
And in order to move down the field, you have to consistently get first downs?
Hell, even Antonio Gates has better stats than Marshall.
78 rec; 1145 yds; 14.7 avg; 7 TDs; 60 FDs; 76.93% FD%
You say that like Antonio Gates isn’t an elite receiver.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 7:45 PM PST up reply actions
I'm just pointing out that there are now two receivers on the Chargers
Who individually do a better “receiving” job than Marshall
Don’t forget Malcom Floyd.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 8:10 PM PST up reply actions
Actually, I think we found someone that Marshall is doing arguably better than
36 | 636 | 17.7 | 1 (TD) | 29 (FD) | 80.56%
Floyd leads him in DYAR (by a bit) and DVOA (by a lot).
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 8:32 PM PST up reply actions
This is silly. Should the running backs be selected by who has the most carries?
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 7:45 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
It is silly.
No matter what we say it won’t change how they vote or which criteria they use.
by riversformvp on Dec 29, 2009 7:51 PM PST up reply actions
What he said.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 8:11 PM PST up reply actions
So they adjusted DVOA for consistency and came up with DYAR. So a player who is consistently good through the year gets a bump. Essentially they are adjusting a rate statistic (DVOA) to take into account the volume of a players stats through the year.
Obviously, they realized that they DVOA stat didn’t match their own true perception of who was a good player, so they factored in another set of stats that account for a player’s “consistency” of production through the year.
I’m not against this, I just think the FO folks need to factor in some more stats… Because there is no way on God’s green earth any of us would rather have Mike Wallace’s 2009 season over Brandon Marshall’s 2009 season…
by Stephen (shaynes41) on Dec 29, 2009 8:54 PM PST up reply actions
Just guessing, but I think FO
would probably agree with you (to an extent). They admit it is not a perfect statistic, does not completely separate an individual’s contribution, etc.. As best you try to come up with these stats using first-principles (what’s the goal of any play, true value should be based on …) in the end, they are going to tweak their statistical model based on fitting a number of data sets. And those (historical) data sets may or may not have included subjective rankings. Who knows.
With regard to Mike Wallace, FO would probably say that being ranked higher means that, hypothetically, if you put Mike Wallace in the same situation(s) that Marshall was given in 2009, then he would have likely had the better season.
Because there is no way on God’s green earth any of us would rather have Mike Wallace’s 2009 season over Brandon Marshall’s 2009 season…
Are you sure of that? And if so, how?
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 9:39 PM PST up reply actions
I guess we could set up a poll if you wanted…
I’m just betting that most of us looked at Mike Wallace and said “Who?” The #3 receiver on the Steelers (with <700 yards) has had a better season than the #1 receiver on the Broncos (1100+ yards)?
I honestly have not paid a lot of attention to either of the guys outside of the games where they played the chargers. Any rating system will selectively use stats they think are important and then fiddle with them to come up with a score that tries to represent reality. Whenever a score seems to run contrary to generally agreed upon truth two questions should be asked:
1. Does this shed some light on this player that the general opinion has overlooked (is he better or worse than we thought)?
2. Or, is our scoring system out of wack?
Obviosuly, when FO tried to rank the WRs by DVOA, they saw the discrepancy put more stock in question 2 and came up with DYAR which is much better. In regards to Marshall, I think both questions are relevant. Obviously he has a relatively low yards per catch and relatively low 1st downs per catch and DYAR helps to reveal this to us unwashed masses. However, I think the sheer volume of his contribution should not be overlooked as a positive thing, and the DVOA and DYAR scores seem to tend to overlook that (or even lower his score because of it).
I’m not trying to say that FO’s stats aren’t valuable and interesting, just imperfect. And I will say no more on the subject because I am sick of defending brandon marshall…
by Stephen (shaynes41) on Dec 30, 2009 8:25 AM PST up reply actions
Obviosuly, when FO tried to rank the WRs by DVOA, they saw the discrepancy put more stock in question 2 and came up with DYAR which is much better.
This is inaccurate. They still use DVOA. There’s nothing wrong with it other than the fact that it doesn’t account for playing time. DYAR accounts for playing time. It also uses a different baseline (replacement instead of average) because otherwise below average players would have a negative value when in reality slightly below average players are valuable.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 30, 2009 3:40 PM PST up reply actions
OPS in baseball is kind of like that
It is not a sophisticated stat, but it does seem to correlate with true offensive contribution (runs and wins for the team) than other common statistics, e.g. RBIs or plain batting average.
2009 DYAR Leaders
VJ is number one through week 16.
1 V.Jackson 458
2 W.Welker 413
3 S.Rice 396
4 R.Wayne 389
5 M.Austin 353
Wonko could probably give a better answer
but as I understand, it is the cumulative value of a player above an average replacement player at the same position. The average replacement being calculated league-wide.
do the numbers correspond to something or are they some sort of variety of scores that gets added up?
by Stephen (shaynes41) on Dec 29, 2009 5:59 PM PST up reply actions
Not statistic is perfect
but DYAR makes a rational attempt to isolate the value of a player separate from other factors. It is more than just yards. It considers opponent, situation (meaningful vs. garbage time), result of play (yards that make first downs v. not), etc.. The Football Outsiders site admits that DYAR for receivers cannot be completely de-coupled from quarterback play, so Rivers playing well will help Jackson’s DYAR to some extent. But I have to say, DYAR (and DVOA) are probably a better metric than most voters’ “instinct” or “gut feel”.
Direct quotes from the Football Outsiders site
I posted this on the other thread about the Pro Bowl, too.
“We cannot yet fully separate the performance of a receiver from the performance of his quarterback. Be aware that one will affect the other.”
“These statistics measure only passes thrown to a receiver, not performance on plays when he is not thrown the ball, such as blocking and drawing double teams.”
As I added on the other post as well, nor does DYAR, etc. take into account when a receiver is being double-teamed and is still thrown the ball (whether he catches it or not). At least I don’t believe it does…. Maybe I missed that.
Nor do the stats take into account the coach’s play-calling, if the QB audibles, or if the QB is pressured when he throws it in the receiver’s direction.
Lifted from Football Outsiders
Wide receivers are ranked according to DYAR, or Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement. This gives the value of the performance on plays where this WR caught the ball, compared to replacement level, adjusted for situation and opponent and then translated into yardage.
2006
How many bolts went to the pro bowl in 2006… and we were out in the first round. Its about this franchise getting a ring not snubs or number of players in. Think the Bengals have something to play for now in the playoffs? I go back to the 79-80-81 bolts, same thing get the ring first everything well fall into place after that.
Marshall got in...
Because everyone got googly eyed after he and McDaniels made up on the sideline. Ask a defensive coordinator which player scares them more? Further, I can’t remember watching a Broncos game this year when Marshall didn’t drop any easy catch.
"As a confirmed melancholic, I can testify that the best and maybe only antidote for melancholia is *action*. However, like most melancholics, I suffer also from sloth." - Edward Abbey.
by Jeff (sliderockmpc) on Dec 29, 2009 5:56 PM PST reply actions
You were making a decent argument until you said...
“(Jackson) absolutely deserves to be in the Pro Bowl over Brandon Marshall or Wes Welker.”
Um… no.
Jackson’s an incredible talent. You would have a fair argument in saying he’s as deserving as Marshall, and possibly that he’s as deserving as Wayne.
But that he ABSOLUTELY deserves to be in over Marshall and Welker is utterly ridiculous, specifically as it relates to Welker.
Welker gets overlooked because he’s the little white guy running the underneath routes, but he’s damn well as deserving as anyone this year:
Welker leads the league by far with 122 catches (third best in NFL HISTORY) and his 1,336 yards are second in the league (obviously, to Johnson). And he was out TWO GAMES.
Hell, just this past weekend Welker had a perfect 13 catches on 13 targets, taking (as usual) several huge hits from linebackers. He leads the league in yards after catch. And he and Johnson are tied this year for the most 10-plus reception games (7) in a season in NFL history.
Oh, yeah. And unlike his fellow premier receivers, he did all this while returning 27 punts for 338 yards.
Talk up V-Jax all you want: He’s a monster, no argument, and I voted for him. I wish he was in there. But he “absolutely deserves” to be in there over Welker?
Dude, the stats don’t support that, and neither does the reality. Take off your Chargers blinders and get a grip.
Yeah I gotta agree with this
And point out the heated debate was Andre Johnson vs VJack. A couple people (including myself) discounted Bmash as a viable probowler based solely on the number of passes the guy has dropped.
Im not sure about you guys but I absolutely cannot stand when a guy watches a ball go off his hands.
Gates has had more than a few big drops this year
by riversformvp on Dec 29, 2009 6:37 PM PST up reply actions
Bmarsh had like 3 in one game man
Im not talking about balls the guy could have caught, Im talking about a ball that hits you in the numbers.
HAHA Two of those was real bad
Apparently Gates has 7, but I can only remember watching two. Maybe on the Chargers drops dont matter as much. I remember during the Tennessee game, my brother have quite a bit of money on the Chargers. Big Mac had that holding penalty negating a score, and I was just laughing. He didnt understand why, I just said watch we’ll score anyway.
Fair enough
I stand corrected in Welker’s value as a receiver and his production this year. Blame it on not necessarily Chargers blinders, but lack of paying attention to the Patriots this year and Welker’s contributions to the team outside of sheer stats. I’ve updated the story to reflect this.
by creanium on Dec 29, 2009 8:13 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
That's very cool of you
And I appreciate you updating the story and making that point. It was unfair of me to chalk up your earlier conclusions purely to “Chargers blinders,” so please accept my apology for that.
by Rick Gershman on Dec 29, 2009 10:24 PM PST up reply actions
No offense taken
And thanks for the apology. Between his DYAR/DVOA ratings and other facts you pointed out, I realized my glaring oversight and knew it needed to be corrected.
I still stand by my position that he absolutely belongs in there over Brandon Marshall. =)
Interesting to also take a look at
the Pro Football Focus site. I have been tracking their stats over the 2009 season, and the methodology seems reasonably sound (you need to review their explanation before making some sense of everything). Organization is not as good as FO (yet), but check out Marshall v. Welker v. Jackson.
In the view of PFF, Jackson and Welker would be considered fairly close in terms of value. But way ahead of Marshall.
Wide Receiver is a position loaded with talent
You don’t think Randy Moss might have been snubbed, too?… He’s got 13 TDs. According to DYAR, Andre Johnson’s only the 7th best (or should I say “most productive”?) WR in the AFC, yet NO ONE is saying he shouldn’t be on the squad. In fact, he’s one of the 2 starters…. And he SHOULD be.
I wish VJ had been named, too, but it’s not any HUGE snub. If he wants to use it as motivation, that’s cool. — I’d think his motivation is high enough already. Let’s Go, VJ, Rivers, Bolts and all y’all…!…
Im surprised that Randy Moss wasn’t selected.. seeing as the pro-bowl is fan selection. Although he is having one of his down seasons, he certainly has the numbers…
Randy Moss: 78 receptions, 1189 yards, 13 td’s.
Looking at it now, it seems that there are two obvious choices: Andre Johnson and Wes Welker. Then there are 4 recievers to chose from for the next 2 spots: Reggie Wayne, Vincent Jackson, Randy Moss and Brandon Marshall… then 4 recievers in the following tier (Santonio Holmes, Hines Ward, Chad Ochocinco and Derrick Mason)…
But anyway, disussing that 2nd tier – I’d give the nod to Reggie Wayne because it seems that his states are a notch higher then the others (albeit only by a bit), and get rid of Brandon Marshall because nearly half of his games are pretty mediocre statistically. Its pretty much a toss up between Randy Moss and Vincent Jackson, i think. (This is coming from a guy that hates the Patriots) Hell, if it comes down to that then it should come down to the things these recievers do off the states such as blocking – and vincent jackson is one of the best, while randy moss is just OK. Therefore I believe Vincent is more deserving.
In conclusion, its too bad about Vincent Jackson, he definitly deserves it. But in the end it wont even matter because the Chargers will be in the superbowl.
SNUBBED - period.
It’s okay though. This is going to fuel VJ’s fire during the playoffs run. By the end of the playoffs, I’m very sure the rest of the nation will really know who Philip Rivers is throwing to when they hear the phrase “Rivers to Jackson”.
Go VJ! Go Chargers!
33 Wins. Yeah, I said it.
I'm a Cardinals fan who voted for Vincent Jackson
I believe he should have made it over Brandon Marshall.
Its hard to argue against a receiver who receives a lot of passes
Since its kinda the title of the job.
He also drops a bunch of passes and a bunch of the passes he catches he does little or nothing with relative to say an elite player like Jackson, Welker, or Moss.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 7:37 PM PST up reply actions
I don't know if I call Welker and eltie player yet
He might be an elite role player but I wouldn’t go further. I know he gets open quickly but it’s a two-dimensional job (if you count the return game). He rarely goes downfield (even though when he does it also does damage because the defense isn’t expecting it) but I can’t see anyone using him for a legitimate downfield threat. When his rookie contract is up he won’t get #1 money because he can’t be a true #1. But yeah, the other two are monsters at WR. Moss is the best I’ve ever seen.
by riversformvp on Dec 29, 2009 7:43 PM PST up reply actions
How many guys in the league do what Welker does?
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 7:46 PM PST up reply actions
theres only one good example, i think
Davone Bess.
by jordanmowbray on Dec 29, 2009 7:52 PM PST up reply actions
Anthony Gonzalez in Indy
Pretty much their 3rd receiver for the last 5 years. Who was the other guy…Ricky Proehl for a while
by riversformvp on Dec 29, 2009 7:54 PM PST up reply actions
Oh yeah, the guy from preseason Charlie Martin
Basically a Wes Welker copy
by riversformvp on Dec 29, 2009 7:57 PM PST up reply actions
Only not half as good.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 29, 2009 8:11 PM PST up reply actions
Whhhaaaa????
How dare you! Consider someone to be better than Charlie Martin? HOW DARE YOU!
Anatidaephobia-Fear that a Duck is watching you. Pryor, come January 1st, there will be millions watching you. We are banking on your overwhelming football prowess, blessed Juju.
People see white skin and good hands and think Welker.
Bess has done a great Welker imitation for the past few weeks. Both Steve Smiths are similar to Welker. Nobody comes close to being as quick, as tough or as good at making every single catch. I still don’t know that any other team in the league would know how to use him.
"I did not invent the wheel, I was the crooked spoke adjacent." - Aesop Rock
by John Gennaro on Dec 30, 2009 2:30 AM PST up reply actions
good point john
I believe Bess is definitely the next Wes Welker. Hes been playing like him since he started off in Hawaii, trust me, ive seen lots of Warriors fan and have seen many games
by jordanmowbray on Dec 30, 2009 2:48 AM PST up reply actions
Eddie Royal
is kind of a Wes Welker type of receiver as well. He will carve you up for 8 yards here, 10 yards there.
by SoCalBoltFan on Dec 30, 2009 9:20 AM PST up reply actions
Similar, but again, not nearly as good.
Bolts from the Blue // "I have got to be the most boring GM in the league." - A.J. Smith
Bloody Elbow // " looks like your comment violated rule #4. and it’s a heck of a rule, rule #4" - Kid Nate
by Richard Wade on Dec 30, 2009 3:41 PM PST up reply actions
If im not mistaken
Anthony Gonzalez doesnt go into the middle as much as Welker or Bess.. i thought thats what u meant when u said “How many guys in the league do what welker does?”…
by jordanmowbray on Dec 29, 2009 7:58 PM PST up reply actions
A lot of a player being selected
is based on rep and play in previous seasons. My guess is that if VJ puts another great season on the board next year he will be in the pro bowl (even if a lesser known player has a better season). It is not fair, but thats how it is.
I can't believe anyone gives a flying crap
about a popularity contest that now, thanks to the NFL’s infinite wisdom, won’t even have some of the best players playing because they’ll be in the SB.
Players were already avoiding the Pro Bowl in order to avoid injury. Doesn’t that say a little something about this dog & pony show?
Combine it with the Miss America pageant – it has just about the same bearing on the game of football.
As for VJ getting snubbed – I feel pretty certain that he’ll be able to get up this morning & continue on with his life as a dominant NFL WR.
If the thunder don't get ya then the lightning will!!
Robert Hunter
Because VJ did not actually make the pro bowl,
Are we going to have to pay him like a Pro Bowl receiver when contract talks begin?
Anatidaephobia-Fear that a Duck is watching you. Pryor, come January 1st, there will be millions watching you. We are banking on your overwhelming football prowess, blessed Juju.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bolts From The Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
BFTB Apparel Store
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
