05-27-2016, 11:47 AM
(05-26-2016, 08:30 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I can sincerely say that I believe LaFell > Sanu.
Just because the Falcons foolishly and desperately overpaid doesn't mean he's a better player.
And fwiw, I think the Lions overpaid for MLJ thanks to the sudden retirement of Calvin. I have a good feeling that LaFell is going to put up 700+ yards, look like a total bargain, and some of you will be eating your words by December.
People just misinterpret everything that happens on this board.
If I think MLJ is better than Lafell, it doesn't mean I don't think Lafell can put up 700+ yards and be a bargain. It means that if MLJ was here I think he would put up more yards and more TDs.
Lafell > Sanu, certainly, but Lafell came in to replace MLJ, not Sanu. I do agree with you that both teams overpaid for those guys, and I don't really believe this WR class was a strong one in FA this year.
However, I still believe the combination of Sanu + Jones would be a better fit THIS YEAR than Boyd + Lafell.
These rankings are so subjective anyways, did anyone even bother to look at the receiving rankings from last year???
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/stats/teamsort/nfl/year-2015-season-regular-category-receiving-type-offense
If you sort it by YDS/G Cinci is around 18th. Does that mean they have the 18th best WR core? I don't think so, but one could argue that. If that is the case, mixed with the notion that I have that Boyd/Lafell < Sanu/MLJ for this year, a WR group ranking in the 20s doesn't seem too far fetched.
We can sit here and claim our WR group was top 10 last year, but were they really? It's totally subjective based on the type of offense teams play. So are we ranking these groups off of production, or the potential production if each team threw the ball 50 times a game???
