Would you rather: $8-10 mill a year to spend on WR2 or TE1?

[*ochocincos*]

(09-13-2017, 04:43 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Was that 23 WR2s or just 23 WR in general?  I'd also have to consider a scoring comparison between the top 10 WR2s and the top 10 TEs.  It seems to me that TEs are critical when it comes to moving the chains on 3rd down, or at least they are versus the Bengals.

23 WRs in general. Add another 8 WR and 1 TE to the 900-999 range, and another 11 WRs and 3 TE in the 800-899 yard range. You're then looking at 42 WRs and 6 TEs with 800+ yards. So at least 10 of those WRs are WR2s.
It should be noted that Eifert has never exceeded 615 receiving yards due to his injuries.