jarthur31 Posted February 17, 2006 Posted February 17, 2006 I am kind of amazed when i hear that peopel don't feel Lee EVans can step up and be the #1 receiver. I have seen nothing but solid play from him week in and week out. there's rarely a game where he has multiple drops. i remember the Denver game as being 1 of them this year. Otherwise, the guy has hands of glue, and the top end speed of a dragster. I personally belive Lee is the future #1 of this team, and could be right now. In this previous year, I really feel we had a 1a and 1b receiver on the field. In the O sets where we would have one receiver, lee would often be out there. Moulds is a solid character, rough em up type of receiver, but is not a deep threat anymore with his speed. Moulds is worth having on the roster, he can oinly make the team better. I believe in talent and production, not in someones age. Here's for a solid wide receiving core in Evans, Moulds, Reed, and Parrish next yr. Evans is a stud in the making. 603856[/snapback] He's not thick enough to be a number 1. He reminds me of P. Price but with better hands and much more mature mentally. Last year he had the year because of Eric and DB. This year he had neither and his numbers showed it. I really think he'll be making lots of PB tho. He really was a steal in the first round for us.
The Dean Posted February 17, 2006 Posted February 17, 2006 He's not thick enough to be a number 1. He reminds me of P. Price but with better hands and much more mature mentally. Last year he had the year because of Eric and DB. This year he had neither and his numbers showed it. I really think he'll be making lots of PB tho. He really was a steal in the first round for us. 605328[/snapback] Is Marvin Harrison "thick enough" to be a #1? How about Tory Holt?
MRW Posted February 17, 2006 Posted February 17, 2006 He really was a steal in the first round for us. 605328[/snapback] Is there such a thing?
Stussy109 Posted February 17, 2006 Author Posted February 17, 2006 I thought it would be a good idea in comparing wr's to compare them to the rest of there class. For this I'll just use the 2004 1st rd class of wr'sSo compared to the 7 wrs taken in the 2004 nfl draft in the first rd evans ranks 4th in catches. 2nd in yards. 1st in ypc (I'm not counting woods due to only having 7 catches). and 2nd(T) in td's. Overall compared to the 2004 wr class I think we got a damn good player. It could be argued that it looks even better for evans due to how porous our offense has been. I dont think evans has reached his ceiling yet, with commitment to building the oline, and backed by a viable te threat I believe Evans can excell in the event we lose moulds. 605161[/snapback] Great post, I love facts...
Stussy109 Posted February 17, 2006 Author Posted February 17, 2006 If a wide receiver gets too thick, they slow down, ALA Moulds David Boston etc. The Speed guys like Harrison, S. SMith, S. Moss, L. Evans will be productive, and hard to cover. WIth the New NFL rules on DB's being able to chuck only to 5yards, that minimizes the importance for strength and size as a WR
Recommended Posts