Kornheiser Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Originally posted by KevinthePRF Hey no fair comparison, I hated Dana Stubblefield, and was a proud Sam Shade basher from birth to abortion. And don't get me started on Wilbert Brown. The thing I wonder, what is the time window for a receiver, or any player, to develop? I guess two years is your cut off point in which a WR needs to come in catching 80 balls a season or is a lost cause. A hefty task for Gardner considering the plethora of rotating QBs he's had to deal with along with his own development. ========================================== Wilbert Brown??! ooooh, that was horrifying. The one-armed pancake. I never forgave Casserly for taking Shuler/over Dilfer, Westbrook/over Sapp, Kenard Lang/over Tarik Glenn, Andre Johnson/over Tony Brackens. I like to allow for three years. I already like Ramsey, Bauman & Royal, though. I'm skeptical on L.Betts. l'm luke warm on Lott, Scott. In year one, I was non-plussed by Gardner. In second year, Gardner exceeded my skepticism with all his drops & tips & never open. I felt it was Gardner holding Ramsey back, not the otherway around. Part of the reason I don't like him. But I'm prepared to watch a third year, so I will. He's a complimentary reciever at best. Like Shepard or Connell, Gardner might be servicable at #2, but he'll be at his best at #3. These people going on about Monk & Rice are just staff trying to stir up conversation. How long do you give? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dickens Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Eh, he's a holdover from the Marty year. I think Gardener is an okay receiver, he's nothing special. WRs are probably the easiest position to find. No reason to bring him back especially if a D-Mac emerges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 I like Gardner a lot. He's everything I expected him to be. I just think when his contract expires...it'll be time for Jacobs to move into the #2 spot. It's just the way the NFL works... can't keep paying everyone #1 money... especially when you've got the depth (ie. Jacobs) to minimize the loss. The Skins will just reinvest that money elsewhere. With that said.. I hope as hell he stays. As long as his contract demands aren't outrageous. I'm just prepared to accept the business side of the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Korny, Considering you said in that last post that you like to give three years, how come you've already written Gardner off after two? Also, why is it just stirring things up to mention Gardner is ahead of Monk at an equal time. He's well ahead of Monk at an equal time. Hell, Monk wasn't anything at all worth thinking about for four years. The majority of today's top receivers took a few years to emerge. Gardner was open last year. He caught most of what was thrown his way. He was the receiver teams doubled and allowed Thompson to have a strong end part of the year. Again, I don't know how well Gardner will do. But, it just isn't even close to appropriate to already judge him a likely No. 3 receiver at this point in his career because you have nothing to base such statements on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinthePRF Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Originally posted by Kornheiser ========================================== Wilbert Brown??! ooooh, that was horrifying. The one-armed pancake. I never forgave Casserly for taking Shuler/over Dilfer, Westbrook/over Sapp, Kenard Lang/over Tarik Glenn, Andre Johnson/over Tony Brackens. I like to allow for three years. I already like Ramsey, Bauman & Royal, though. I'm skeptical on L.Betts. l'm luke warm on Lott, Scott. In year one, I was non-plussed by Gardner. In second year, Gardner exceeded my skepticism with all his drops & tips & never open. I felt it was Gardner holding Ramsey back, not the otherway around. Part of the reason I don't like him. But I'm prepared to watch a third year, so I will. He's a complimentary reciever at best. Like Shepard or Connell, Gardner might be servicable at #2, but he'll be at his best at #3. These people going on about Monk & Rice are just staff trying to stir up conversation. How long do you give? Don't panic, Wilbert was just a sarcastic jab at a career backup. As far as time, it depends on the player and his surroundings. A guy like Harrison is going to develop a lot faster than say, Peter Warrick just because of QB consistency. A great example is Laverneus Coles, I guess it's just a coincedence he blossomed at the same time Pennington blossomed. Another good example is Mushim Muhammed, whose numbers have gone up and down like a roller coaster in Carolina because of the QB situation in Charlotte. Now with a position more independent, say DE, it takes much less time. You can either get around an OT or you can't, that simple. I'd like to say there is a fixed amount of time every player in the NFL can be judged, but there isn't. And I don't think Rod Gardner has maxed out his yet. He's technically a rookie as he came out his sophmore year of college. He has a lot of football ahead of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Even Madder Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Well you guys can argue all day long about Gardner, but the skins arent like to keep three great receivers happy. If Jacobs works out, he's gonna want more than #3 playing time. Two words for you: Trade Bait. One of those three will probably go. Yeah, Spurrier needs lots of WRs in his offense, but you dont pay big money to a guy who catches two balls a game. If he proves to be decent, Jacobs will definitely stay because he's cheap. Coles is locked in, he's not going anywhere. So that leaves Gardner. I wouldnt be surprised to see the Skins dangle him as trade bait next year. The good news is they wont go anytime soon. Weve got Gardner at least through 2005 and the rest of the guys for longer. So enjoy it while we got it. And maybe if Jacobs really works out, we trade Gardner in 2004 for a first round pick (ok wishful thinking). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 What EM and Die Hard are saying is probably right. Gardner is the odd man out. I think he's a guy you have to think, at least now, that you sacrifice when the time comes. However, that's premature. If he catches 100 balls the next couple of years and Jacobs can't stay on the field healthy, you may have to alter how valuable you think Gardner may be to the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidFan Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 NYC, is it adult swim at the YMCA or something? GO back to the jets site if you're just hear to bash and not bring any intelligence to the posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 NERDLINGS, TAKE ME TO YOUR LEADER/PARENTS... POINT ONE: Don't go hollier than thou, on the redskin fanfare. I am a 3rd generation redskin fan. And I live in DC Metropolitain. I drive on newly named Darrell Green Blvd (Route 28) & live within 30 minutes of Redskin Park. Get off the Gardner prozac, before it's too late because your going to crash hard. This year is it, he's gooooone. POINT TWO: You think Spurrier replaced 4 out of 6 recievers because he believes Gardner is the 2nd coming of Jerry Rice? You think Spurrier pulled him from the #2 spot last year & supplanted him with Derius Thompson (who they didn't even try to sign after season) because he's on pace to have a Jerry Rice carreer? Yes, that means he's inadequate as #1, when he can't even hold down #2 slot as the incumbent. POINT THREE: Rice didn't drop. Moss didn't drop. Carter didn't drop. Toomer didn't drop. Ward didn't drop. Burress didn't drop. Horn didn't drop. Moulds didn't drop. Owens didn't drop. Holt didn't drop. Harrison didn't drop. Westbrook didn't drop. POINT FOUR: Rice didn't tip up interceptions. Moss didn't tip up interceptions. Carter didn't tip up interceptions. Toomer didn't tip up interceptions. Ward didn't tip up interceptions. Burress didn't tip up interceptions. Horn didn't tip up interceptions. Moulds didn't tip up interceptions. Owens didn't tip up interceptions. Holt didn't tip up interceptions. Harrison didn't tip up interceptions. Westbrook didn't tip up interceptions. POINT FIVE: Pay more attention to the actual play of the game, than the stats. Or at least incorporate drops & tips for interceptions into your stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GURU Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Holy ****! Moss didn't drop? Terrell Owens doesn't tip up balls for interceptions? Buress didn't have his share of drops? Moulds? Westbrook?!?!?!?!? Does this guy watch football? Gardner got benched for one game. ONE game. He was in the starting lineup the rest of the time, and was the focus of opposing defenses' coverage. Sigh. Ya know, Art, it's pointless to debate with a guy who's already made up his mind that Gardner has Shepard/Connell upside, but he likes Royal based on a few preseason snaps. He either likes or dislikes. He mostly can't explain why. But if he does, he can't support his arguement with anything substantial. No point in responding. I'll be interested to see how Gardner responds to having a QB who can get him the ball anywhere on the field, an O-line which can give the QB some time, and some other receivers that defenses can't ignore. If Rod plays well, he'll be here for two years. And that's plenty enough time to make some noise in the playoffs. What happens after that depends on how the other receivers develop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinthePRF Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 I'd like to address point four, I was watching the Bears 49ers game, where Terrell Owens bounced an interception off his hands up in the air to SS Mike Brown of the Bears who ran it back for the game winning touchdown in OT. The same thing happened to Mike Brown the next week against Cleveland, though that one was batted up in the air at the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Originally posted by KevinthePRF Don't panic, Wilbert was just a sarcastic jab at a career backup. As far as time, it depends on the player and his surroundings. A guy like Harrison is going to develop a lot faster than say, Peter Warrick just because of QB consistency. A great example is Laverneus Coles, I guess it's just a coincedence he blossomed at the same time Pennington blossomed. Another good example is Mushim Muhammed, whose numbers have gone up and down like a roller coaster in Carolina because of the QB situation in Charlotte. Now with a position more independent, say DE, it takes much less time. You can either get around an OT or you can't, that simple. I'd like to say there is a fixed amount of time every player in the NFL can be judged, but there isn't. And I don't think Rod Gardner has maxed out his yet. He's technically a rookie as he came out his sophmore year of college. He has a lot of football ahead of him. ============================================= Very sensible I concur. It depends on the player. three years would be a generalization. But time doesn't fix the drops though. But it his year, he welcomed to prove me wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Originally posted by KevinthePRF I'd like to address point four, I was watching the Bears 49ers game, where Terrell Owens bounced an interception off his hands up in the air to SS Mike Brown of the Bears who ran it back for the game winning touchdown in OT. The same thing happened to Mike Brown the next week against Cleveland, though that one was batted up in the air at the line. ============================================ Well when he makes it a habbit let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posse81 Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone is trying to say that Gardner is Jerry Rice. BUT, the fact that he has similar numbers after 2 years, does tell you he has great potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Korny, It is not normal for a person to be so set in an untenable position devoid of any recognition or facts. Gardner's drops problem seemed to improve greatly. He did drop a handful of balls. One site that tracks this for the league lists him as having five drops all year. That's about what he had. The same site lists Owens with 10 drops. Harrison with 16. Burress had 12. And, before I bother going on, the point here is, these guys, in each case, were worse after two years than Gardner and in year two, Gardner was credited with people actually watching the games with FEWER mistakes than these guys made. Guru is right. It's impossible to argue with a person who has absolutely no supporting information but his own imagination and who refuses to recognize that reality is different than his self-perceived dream world. You're wrong. Not wrong by opinion. Wrong by reality. By fact. You can't support your position. You can say what you've said, but, in fact, none of it's true. I would recommend when you watch games that you look beyond the ESPN highlights for determining what you know. Actually watch other games. Actually read other stories. Actually pay attention to the actual performances and not just the self-created hype you've allowed yourself to support as ignorantly as you've supported it. Lacking knowledge or information or demonstrating any capacity to express understanding of football isn't required of you. However, when people are actually bothering to provide you information that's substantially better than yours, what you may want to do is say, "I had no idea that was true," rather than denying what is true with declaratives that are false. Up to you though. As I've said. It's foolish to annoint Gardner as an emerging star. It's just more foolish to condemn him as a failure when EVERY bit of evidence is against that position. It may be true. But, you've no support for expressing it, making it simply dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GURU Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Art, share this site immediately, if you can. I've been looking for stats like that for a long time, but can't find them on the standard sites. It's funny, too, because I knew from actually watching other games, that Owens dropped more balls than Gardner. Buress, too. That Harrison had drops isn't surprising. That he had so many is. I also know for a fact that Owens has had AT LEAST three passes bounce off his hands that resulted in interceptions the past couple of season. Two of them directly resulted in 49er losses. Again, from actually watching the games. I wish this guy was at least funny, like his namesake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Sure thing Guru. We've had this on the site before, but this is snap.com which does the stats for the league and you see it on ESPN and CNN, etc. This is the raw form and you even have a bit more data here. http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/index.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Diggler Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Just a thought in defense of Owens and Harrison's case of the dropsies: They probably saw at least 50 more balls come their way each than Rod Gardner. Gardner still probably had less drops per game or per throw however you want to figure it. But I thought it was worth noting when comparing WRs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Dirk, You're right, of course, that those guys had a lot of balls thrown their way. Furthering that point is the Redskins were 31st in bad throws to receivers. Uncatchable throws. Gardner, as an example, 141 balls thrown his way. Of them, 34 were considered uncatchable. Bad tosses by QBs. Marvin Harrison had 205 balls thrown his way. Just 32 were uncatchable. So, clearly, you have guys who are getting their hands on a lot more catchable balls, and it goes to figure they will have more drops. Marvin Harrison dropped 7.8 percent of all passes thrown his way. Gardner dropped 3.5. That's how that comparison works out. But, again, Harrison caught twice as many balls as Gardner, so, he's probably going to have more drops. It's just not true to say he doesn't drop. Most receivers do. Coles was among the league leaders with just one drop credited to him. But, despite that excellence, most receivers are dropping balls on occasion. Gardner's drops were improved from the previous year and he largely caught everything that was near him, including the tough catches he couldn't make the year before. That's easily witnessed and unquestioned improvement from one year to the next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Okay enough about these drops already Let's not forget ALL of our WR's were dropping balls left and right last year and why do you think this is? The reason is in the NFL and sorry Mr. Spurrier if you hear this you can not change QB's every week, you just can't do it. Try to think of catching a danny woefuls ball, then ramsey's the next week, it is completely different. I know these are pros here but it seemed everyone had the drops last year. I think if the skins get Jacobs looking good then he might be the trade bait. I say this because Gardner has size, and unless DMAC can get it together you need a big WR to go with these faster smaller ones. Garnder was our only consistent threat last year. I think with him not having 2 guys on him he might have a HUGE year, but we will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsanity56 Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Originally posted by Art Gardner has done nothing in his first two years as a professional that should give Redskin fans anything but pleasant thoughts and hope. He's been productive and he's improved. He's proven capable of making the tough catch and he's proven to be a receiver who worries the opposition which is why coverages were rolled his way so often last year. I agree with Cskin that he's not a true elite receiver. But, he's a guy who can be better than Art Monk was for us. Why so many of you are so down on him simply astounds me because there's been nothing in his first two years that should have you upset with the way he's performed, especially in light of the improvement in the areas where his performance could be frustrating. ============================================= no doubt art.what do people expect when you got banks,matthews,wuerrful throwing the ball to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Originally posted by GURU Holy ****! Moss didn't drop? Terrell Owens doesn't tip up balls for interceptions? Buress didn't have his share of drops? Moulds? Westbrook?!?!?!?!? Does this guy watch football? Gardner got benched for one game. ONE game. He was in the starting lineup the rest of the time, and was the focus of opposing defenses' coverage. Sigh. Ya know, Art, it's pointless to debate with a guy who's already made up his mind that Gardner has Shepard/Connell upside, but he likes Royal based on a few preseason snaps. He either likes or dislikes. He mostly can't explain why. But if he does, he can't support his arguement with anything substantial. No point in responding. I'll be interested to see how Gardner responds to having a QB who can get him the ball anywhere on the field, an O-line which can give the QB some time, and some other receivers that defenses can't ignore. If Rod plays well, he'll be here for two years. And that's plenty enough time to make some noise in the playoffs. What happens after that depends on how the other receivers develop. ==================================== Stat monsters, Feel free to compare drops stats between Gardner and Rice, Moss, Moulds, Holt, etc. do it - come on, do it, don't talk about it. Exactly! He was between #2 to#3 all year long. He never sniffed the #1 slot *LMAO* So stop pretending Gardner is on course to have a Jerry Rice career. The mentioning of Gardners name in the same sentence as Monk & Rice is preposterous. All your defences are predicated on a future which hasn't happened. When it happens, it happens. Until then Gardner is a fumbling, dropping, intercepted embarassment. Stop pretending people are following in Jerry Rices footsteps by fumbling & dropping. Gardner?: Darrell had better hands, Rod might be faster though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 NYC, If you don't have any sour grapes towards the Skins than what are you doing hanging around a Skins board talking smack. Face it bro, 4 of your best players are Skins now. Your team is on the decline. Your best WR is gone, Martin is getting old, and defenses are going to start figuring out that Pennington has a weak arm. I actually really liked the Jets last year, and I picked them to be AFC champs on this board about a year ago. Too bad for you they missed their window. Now, go away. Kornheiser, You should follow your own advice and watch the games. First, Owens, Moss, and some of the others you mentioned dropped plenty of balls their rookie years. I remember games where commentators openly wondered if Owens had what it took to be a success in the NFL. Westbrook didn't know what the he11 was going on half the time. Second, Gardner was a lot better last year than you give him credit for. You say he couldn't get open, but I watched many plays where he had a step or 2 but had to slow down for 1 of Danny's or Shane's lame duck passes. Third, it's not hard to understand why a young, not so intelligent player from a smallish school could have gotten frustrated and lost focus last year. He11, the whole team was crumbling around him. He had a rotation of lame duck and rookie qb's throwing him the ball. There was no other legitimate threat at WR. The oline leaked like a sieve. We weren't exactly an offensive machine, but somehow Gardner still managed to make some big plays and put up some very respectable numbers. I also don't agree that Gardner doesn't fit the system. What do we need, a bunch of little speedy guys? We still need 1 big guy who can make the tough catch for the first or for 6 and Gardner is that guy. Gardner and Coles are a perfect match. I agree that we'll probably lose Gardner when his contract is up, not because he sucks, but because he's going to blow the he11 up with some talent around him, and we won't be able to afford him. Hopefully McCants will be ready to fill in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Originally posted by wayne ============================================= no doubt art.what do people expect when you got banks,matthews,wuerrful throwing the ball to you. ============================================= I do tire of repeating one argument which is never address. DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS did banks, mathews, wuerffl make him drop the balls?? Let's drive this home once & for all until you get it. DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS get it yet?... DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS a few more times for slow ones... DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS repitition is key with animals DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS Have we almost figure it out folks... DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS one more time for the nerdlings & goober-nuts DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS DROPS Get back to me and let me know what part of that you didn't understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsanity56 Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 :stupid: are YOU for real???:laugh: you watch film from last year & see how many times gardener(& every other receiver for that matter) had to slow down to catch a pass thrown behind them(i.e. NO SEPARATION).Or how the pass was overthrown & the receiver tips the ball in an attempt to catch the damn ball.things were & will be different with ramsey @ the helm.he's more accurate & has more zip on the ball.YOU'LL SEE.now go away...HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.