Jump to content
Scout

Team with most above average players?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Semantics perhaps, but do players who necessarily place in the top 16 deserve to be called above average? Technically yes, but I’d be willing o bet the 15th best FS or SS is probably a JAG, he just happens to play at a position devoid of talent. 

Anyway, for NE I’d probably go Andrews, Brady, Andrews, Mason, Gronk, Gilmore, Hightower, McCourty, and Chung if we’re splitting up safety spots. Not a lot of high end talent in NE.

Edited by Yin-Yang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Semantics perhaps, but do players who necessarily place in the top 16 deserve to be called above average? Technically yes, but I’d be willing o bet the 15th best FS or SS is probably a JAG, he just happens to play at a position devoid of talent. 

Anyway, for NE I’d probably go David Brady, Andrews, Mason, Gronk, Gilmore, Hightower, McCourty, and Chung if we’re splitting up safety spots. Not a lot of high end talent in NE.

Maybe. It would depend on how broad you want to make the category of average, basically. Average could be the non-existent player between the 16th best and 17th best player at a position, or average could be like the middle 8, from 13th to 20th. Or more or less. A position could feasibly have 8 players then a big gap, then 16 players then a big gap, then 8 players, so maybe that's 8 above average, a ton of average, and 8 below average starters. While another may have 16 then a huge gap then 16, meaning there might be no average players. It's a hard idea to establish a baseline for, really. So that just kind of makes a very easily argued and explained standard for it. More convenient than logical, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Jakuvious said:

If we're going just top 16 period, there's A LOT of WRs listed in this thread that shouldn't be.

I don’t necessarily agree with a top sixteen, but the only other wide receivers I saw while skimming through this thread that I thought Watkins is more above average than are Jamison Crowder and Nelson Agholor. I suppose Josh Gordon isn’t really proven but I think he’s more consistent when he has played.

Edited by DoleINGout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DoleINGout said:

I don’t necessarily agree with a top sixteen, but the only other wide receiver I saw skimming through this thread that I thought Watkins is more above average than is Jamison Crowder. I suppose Josh Gordon isn’t really proven but I think he’s more consistent when he has played.

Jamison Crowder, Josh Gordon, Juju Smith-Schuster, DeSean Jackson, Nelson Agholor, Corey Coleman are all names that have been listed in this thread. Only Juju topped 800 yards last year. Only Agholor had as many TDs as Watkins. Heck, Emmanuel Sanders had a real rough year production wise last year too. Even Julian Edelman only really belongs on the list if we're talking above average for a slot WR, as he's not above average for a #1 IMO.

There's a lot of WRs listed in this thread that only belong if we're talking above average for a starting WR, or above average for a #2 WR or slot WR. I want to be clear I'm not describing Watkins as a top 10 WR or anything. He's an immense talent, a great deep threat, but overall just a good but not great WR right now. But there are less productive, less consistent, and less talented players being mentioned in this thread with less questioning/criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People need to stop putting rookies on the list.      They have proven nothing yet.   Doesnt matter how "likely" they are to be good players....fact is, rookies have proven nothing and none of them are a sure thing to be even average. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Jakuvious said:

But there are less productive, less consistent, and less talented players being mentioned in this thread with less questioning/criticism.

Watkins I quoted you on because he is so close. I like Watkins a lot from a raw talrnt perspective. Hopefully being moved around works better for his production but I'm not holding my breath. I expect 800 yards, six or seven touchdowns and more debate on this topic.

I missed Corey Coleman if he was mentioned.

Nelson Agholor I saw but forgot in my last post.

Josh Gordon I addressed specificaly and can agree with you on.

Julian Edelman I missed but he is an above average PED using player overall, not just in the slot.

Emmanuel Sanders and DeSean Jackson are craftier, more productive receivers and get the benefit of the doubt from me over Watkins. But both are arguable to a degree for different reasons.

JuJu Smith-Schuster is clearly better than Sammy Watkins in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, DoleINGout said:

I missed Corey Coleman if he was mentioned.

Me too, that would be silly if he was listed.

Tyrod shouldn't be on these lists either, he is better than average as far as efficiency but I'd put him at average overall.

Nick Foles shouldn't have been listed, being an above average backup means nothing.

As far as WR I'd just go with if you are top 40 you are better than average. Hard to differentiate between #1, #2 and slot guys on every team because most move around anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×