JohnBonhamRocks

Do you say that based on production?

I do think Kelly was referring to the go-to role Watkins played for Taylor that Reed played for him. No reason Matthews can't be that for Taylor. Every time I note that Matthews is more consistent and available, I feel like I have to add a disclaimer that I understand Watkins is more talented.

Is Watkins as productive (note: not talented) a WR as McCoy is a HB?

I feel like Matthews plays more like Reed than does Watkins.

Maybe they take 2 QBs? Taylor v. Peterman v. draft pick v. draft pick next camp?

I agree that Watkins can recover from injury, like you pointed out with Jones, Bryant, and Edelman. It's about probability. Matthews, while less talented, is more likely to be available to play given both of their injury histories. Watkins might be entering his prime. He might not. Same for Matthews. I get your point regarding our passing game and scheme fit, but my point was that, Watkins or no Watkins, Dennison's play-calling and Taylor's ability at QB are going to be relatively the same. It boils down to a boom-or-bust argument I think. Watkins gives you the potential for a top 10 WR, but the injury and availability concerns loom. Matthews is less talented, but he's consistent and plays more often. I like the safer bet, that's all, but I do understand wanting to take that chance at the same time. It was mentioned somewhere above, but I would think the money aspect of the whole argument has to favor Matthews.

I'd have to go through all the teams (and maybe I'll do that when I have more time), but I can safely say top half in the NFL, which is the definition of above average.

You said, "The per game average is the correct method for comparison with Matthews playing in 9 more games than Watkins." Then I showed how they have the same targets per game, but because Matthews plays more often his stats are a little better. You're moving the goal posts by re-focusing on YPC and TDs per game, but even considering that, my argument is on the "per game" part. Less games = less TDs, no? Let me stress that I agree it is obvious Watkins is a more explosive and dangerous WR. But Matthews is more productive overall because he's the more available and consistent WR.

See bold. Plus, over the past 3 years: - Matthews targeted 337 times in 45 games (about 7-8 targets per game) - Watkins targeted 273 times in 36 games (about 7-8 targets per game) I don't see the disparity in the numbers. See above. And why is that method "correct"? I bet Matthews has more impact on a game in which he plays than Watkins does from the bench. Better hope that WR isn't out for a game where the playoffs are on the line!

Again, not arguing talent vs. talent. Matthews isn't as good, but he's on the field more, so the stats even out. Hypothetical: would you take the most talented WR in NFL history if you knew he could only play 8-12 games? Watkins has played in a run-dominant system, agreed. Not sure how that would change had he stayed. Matthews also caught balls from Sanchez/Foles/Bradford/Wentz. None of them are exactly blowing Taylor out of the water.

When evaluating players, there is a choice to consider or not consider how their availability impacts their overall value. I choose to consider it. When I do, I see two guys from the same draft class who have averaged the following over their first three years (Matthews vs. Watkins): - 75 vs. 51 catches - 891 vs. 819 yards - 6.3 vs. 5.6 TDs PS: Johnson's best 3 years stretch in Buffalo is better than both Matthews and Watkins.

At least.

His best days are certainly behind him. Good thing the range of 500-800 yards and 4-8 TDs is not as good as his best days and still totally possible to reach this year. Matthews and Jones both run in the 4.4s, so while they aren't likely to line up to Goodwin at the Olympics, they can still get down field. Yeah, Watkins has a better YPC, but again that's when he's playing. I won't go so far as to say Jones is a lock for any type of production, but if I had to put too much stock into a rookie WR, then a guy with Jones' sustained production would be my choice.

Tough to get targets when you're not playing.

An aging vet who averaged 73 catches, over 800 yards, and 5-6 TDs the past 3 years. An unknown rookie who had the most catches than any other college football player in history. If you consider Matthews a WR2, then so is Watkins statistically. They put up the almost the same numbers.

Posted this in the other trade thread, but, in a vacuum, $10 million per year for a guy who will usually be in the line-up and give you about 900 yards and 5-6 TDs is good value. Edit: Also, unsure how Matthews/Jones/Boldin seems like anything worse than an above average top 3 WRs.

In a vacuum, $10 million per year for about 900 yards and 5-6 TDs from a guy that's usually in the line-up is good value.

Matthews at 4.46 and Jones at 4.45 for their 40 times most definitely have the speed to play outside. Boldin definitely is better suited for the slot, but I feel like his lack of burner speed wouldn't matter on the outside in the red zone.

I feel like either of Matthews, Jones, and Boldin can play outside.

Posted the following in another thread. Matthews, Jones, Boldin seems like a solid top 3 WRs for an NFL squad to me. Let's say we end up with this: Matthews: 890 yards & 6 TDs Jones: 500 yards & 3 TDs Boldin: 700 yards & 6 TDs Conservative estimates based on JM and AB's prior 3 years and quite randomly the CBS fantasy projected outlook for Jones. They combine to give us 2,090 yards and 15 TDs from our top 3 WRs. Our top 3 WRs statistically from last year - Watkins, Woods, and Goodwin - gave us roughly 1,475 yards and 6 TDs. A marked improvement just from what looks to be our WR corps' floor. Even if Boldin declines and Jones has an average rookie showing, we got better.

Voted yes. Matthews and Watkins have very similar production. While Watkins is more talented, Matthews is more available and professional. Darby and Gaines have both been up and down, but hopefully Gaines is a better system fit. A 2nd and 3rd, on the other hand, are clearly better than a 6th. (Depending on who you draft of course.)

The best ability... is availability. Pretend you don't know Watkins exists. Matthews, Jones, Boldin seems like a solid top 3 WRs for an NFL squad to me. Let's say we end up with this: Matthews: 890 yards & 6 TDs Jones: 500 yards & 3 TDs Boldin: 700 yards & 6 TDs Conservative estimates based on JM and AB's prior 3 years and quite randomly the CBS fantasy projected outlook for Jones. They combine to give us 2,090 yards and 15 TDs from our top 3 WRs. Our top 3 WRs from last year gave us roughly 1,475 yards and 6 TDs. A marked improvement just from what looks to be our WR corps' floor.

I like WF for draft scouting info, but dunno how they are for daily NFL transactions. That Watkins, Woods, Austin combo ain't bad though. I also like Matthews, Jones, Boldin as a WR corps.

Appreciate the insight...

Maybe he likes Matthews and gave OBD positive intel about him before the pulled the trigger? No basis, just speculation.