Top 25 Average Prime WR's Rated 1-100

[LuckIsGOAT]

100 - Rice

96 - TO

95 - Bob Hayes, Moss

93 - AB, Fitz

92 - S.Smith Julio, Megatron, Alworth, Sharpe

91 - Harrison, Holt, Odell, Carmichael, Carter, Irvin, not quite ready to put Thomas here yet

Edited August 6, 2020 by LuckIsGOAT

[JAF-N72EX]

Top 25 Average Prime WR's Rated 1-100

On 7/28/2020 at 6:49 PM, mdonnelly21 said:

Rice and Moss tied for the best WR of all time with a 99. 

So what does it take to get 100 under this format?

On 7/28/2020 at 6:49 PM, mdonnelly21 said:

55 is the worst WR of all time.

So what does it take to get to a rating of 1?

[mdonnelly21]

On 8/5/2020 at 11:28 PM, JAF-N72EX said:

Top 25 Average Prime WR's Rated 1-100

So what does it take to get 100 under this format?

So what does it take to get to a rating of 1?

It's going by Grade 

100 doesn't exist. It's perfect 

Nothing under a 55 since we are going by grades 

[diamondbull424]

On 7/31/2020 at 6:49 PM, Titans_Matt said:

Oh dang you clearly missed my post earlier. Let me show you again:

 

“He led the NFL in receiving touchdowns 9 times, TDs 7 times, won 2 MVPs and 3 rings at the WR position. He led the NFL in a major offensive statistical category 33 times, which is 7 more times than the next closest NFL player ever.”

Yeah but this all happened in an era when there were 8-10 teams in the NFL so he dominated an era with 3x less teams and rosters had less than 45 (38 for the Packers) players on it. So not only was it an era with less impressive physical specimens but there was less competition on an actual roster, let alone the league at large. Lastly the NFL was segregated at that point in time. Thus he competed with even less competition.

On 8/5/2020 at 1:14 AM, TecmoSuperJoe said:

Like Jim Brown, modern era max potential Don Hutson would be interesting to see. Unfortunately we can't figure that out. All we know is that he did dominate his era. 

I understand this concept about era arguments. The way I handle it in basketball is to assume if you took an all time great of the past and allowed him to train within a hyperbolic chamber for 2 years straight with modern equipment, technology, and rules in mind... what would they look like on the other side with their physical traits in mind.

So if I factor that same concept into the equation here, I don’t think Hutson is able to progress his athletic traits enough to combat TO’s advanced physical traits or his athleticism. So it would rely on him becoming more advanced in his route releases and route running than the modern athlete, which he could do, but to surpass even TO‘s level of mastery in those technical fields would be highly unlikely IMO, let alone surpassing him to the degree that his technical traits would overwhelm TO’s advantage in physical traits and athleticism.

A maxed out Don Hutson would likely put on an additional 25-30 lbs of muscle and bulk up to be roughly 6’1” 205-210 lbs. Based off of his listed strengths of his hands and change of pace/quickness (not speed). A modern WR comparison might look like Keenan Allen. Those are realistic athletic results he could reach within two years of training and those are technical strengths that are possible for him to reach.

Yet I don’t think anyone would confuse Keenan Allen and his brilliance for the same level of greatness as a TO, let alone most any WR that would be featured within the top 25 WRs of all time ratings wise.

A guy like Jim Brown however could potentially train for two years under modern advantage and still come out as the GOAT running back. Thus I would be inclined to recognize his dominance (which still happened in a far more competitive league) than a player like Don Hutson.

Edited August 8, 2020 by diamondbull424

[diamondbull424]

Peak Rating- Top 3 Seasons
1. Jerry Rice- 97/100

2. Randy Moss- 95/100
3. Michael Irvin- 95/100
4. Terrell Owens- 94/100
5. Calvin Johnson- 94/100

6. Torry Holt- 92/100
7. Antonio Brown- 92/100
8. Julio Jones- 92/100
9. Andre Johnson- 92/100
10. Herman Moore- 92/100
11. Steve Smith- 92/100
12. Sterling Sharpe- 92/100
13. Cris Carter- 92/100

14. Larry Fitzgerald- 91/100
15. Rod Smith- 91/100
16. A.J. Green- 91/100
17. Chad Johnson- 91/100
18. Marvin Harrison- 91/100
19. Reggie Wayne- 91/100
20. Isaac Bruce- 91/100
21. Tim Brown- 91/100
22. Michael Thomas- 91/100
23. DeAndre Hopkins- 91/100

24. Andre Reed- 90/100
25. Wes Welker- 90/100

HMs: Steve Largent- 90/100; James Lofton- 90/100; Jimmy Smith- 90/100

Bold- still in prime and thus can improve ranking.

* Why Rice is only a 97? Feel like the perfect receiver would be Rice’s technical proficiency with Megatron’s size, but Moss’s fluidity and speed. Judging Rice off of that standard, I’d rate him as a 97.

Edited August 8, 2020 by diamondbull424

[LuckIsGOAT]

Bob Hayes is SUPER underrated

72 TDs in his first 7 seasons(91 games) thats 13 TDs per 16. Nearly the same as Randy Moss and he did it in the 60s

Edited August 11, 2020 by LuckIsGOAT

[JAF-N72EX]

On 8/7/2020 at 6:39 PM, mdonnelly21 said:

It's going by Grade 

100 doesn't exist. It's perfect 

Nothing under a 55 since we are going by grades 

So the title should be "Top 25 Average Prime WR's Rated 55-99" then. 

 

[Billy86]

On 7/31/2020 at 9:42 PM, Danger said:

He played against people who literally wouldn't even get a D-II college scholarship today.

So no different to Jim Brown then? 

[Billy86]

On 7/31/2020 at 10:47 PM, Danger said:

Even if you want to ignore that TO is objectively better 1:1. TO has way surpassed him statistically.

And by this logic, Eli Manning was superior to Roger Staubach, Fran Tarkenton, John Elway and Johnny Unitas. 

 

TO is absolutely one of the very greatest of all time, but to claim he was 'objectively better' than Don Hutson recall just calls into question your knowledge on the history of the league and sport, and the differences and rule changes between various eras. 

[diamondbull424]

12 hours ago, Billy86 said:

So no different to Jim Brown then? 

This is not accurate. Jim Brown played in an era that was far less segregated. Teams had larger rosters (35-40 compared to 25-33) and more teams as well by that point (14 teams vs 10 teams).

The only major negative for Brown is that he played during an era when the AFL was also pooling potential stars away from the NFL and thus watering down talent. But that still was less impactful then not having any colored athletes in the league during Hutson’s entire career.

What’s more the RB position is far more reliant upon athletic traits, vision, and instincts. Asking an All Time Great RB to jump through a time portal when he’s 6’2” 232 lbs and noted for being a world class athlete is a far easier projection of talent than taking a 6’1” 183 lbs WR who was noted for his quickness and hands but not his speed. Brown placed 5th nationally as a decathlon in college, while simultaneously being the second leading scorer for the basketball team, while simultaneously being an All American and eventual HOF athlete for the Lacrosse team, and all while being the best RB in the nation. That’s his athletic profile. There is no comparison between Jim Brown and Don Hutson as athletes and in what they competed against. The only comparison is in their “greatness”.

But this isn’t a list of “greatness”, it’s a list of best rated players. Even accounting for era adjustments, Hutson is in no way comparable to Brown when considering athletic traits and overall imposing composition.

[tyler735]

Not to derail the thread too much, but I always struggle with the whole Jim Brown would dominate in any era argument. There is no denying he was far ahead of his peers in terms of talent, but there is also no denying almost all of his peers would struggle to play D-1 (probably even D-2) football let alone in the NFL if they played in today's NFL.

I may catch some flak for this, but I can't help but think if you take a an average recent RB like Jonathan Stewart for example. Who when he came into the league was about 230lbs, strong as an ox, had 4.4 speed in the 40, and placed him in a time machine and put him in the league when Jim Brown played, I tend to think the results would be at least every bit the same as they were for Brown. In other words, I don't think Brown dominates in today's NFL like many think he would.