Interesting stat on Johnson

[seesred]

Draft
Last April in the NFL Draft there were 11 receivers and one tight end chosen
on the first day.

Listed below are the names and where they were drafted.
Name Round
Charles Rogers 1- 2nd pick
Andre Johnson 1- 3rd pick
Bryant Johnson 1- 17th pick
Taylor Jacobs 2- 44th pick
Bethel Johnson 2- 45th pick
Anquan Boldin 2- 54th pick
Tyrone Calico 2- 60th pick
Teyo Johnson (TE) 2- 63rd pick
Kelley Washington 3- 65th pick
Nate Burleson 3- 71st pick
Kevin Curtis 3- 74th pick
Billy McMullen 3- 95th pick

After 15 games here’s how they are are doing based on “production”…

Name, Round, Receptions, Yards, TD
Anquan Boldin 2- 54th pick, 6, 1350, 8
Andre Johnson 1- 3rd pick, 61, 925, 4
Bryant Johnson 1- 17th pick, 33,416, 1
Nate Burleson 3- 71st pick, 28, 447, 2
Charles Rogers 1- 2nd pick, 22, 3 (IR)
Kelley Washington 3- 65th pick, 21, 295, 3
Tyrone Calico 2- 60th pick, 18,297, 4
Bethel Johnson 2- 45th pick, 15, 200, 1
Teyo Johnson 2- 63rd pick, 14, 128, 1
Kevin Curtis 3- 74th pick , 4, 13, 0
Taylor Jacobs 2- 44th pick , 3, 37, 1
Billy McMullen 3- 95th pick,1,2,0

After all said and done we have the top rookie WR in the NFL and the 3rd most productive.Great future for both ahead.

GBR

 

[jstadvl]

Anyone else

think the new staff should keep sully as a wide receiver coach?
I Do! Same money, doing what he loves, hmmm!

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Nobody said get rid of Johnson.

The kid can play and will only get better.

Bring on a QB

 

[SECTION 11]

Great research there. Johnson and Boldin are both solid. Up until Johnson hurt his shoulder against Dallas he was playing very well for a rookie. He torched All American senior Philip Buchanon for 140 something yards and a 44 yard TD as a junior in college. He's been everything you would expect (and then some) out of the guy so far in the NFL considering he was the 17th pick.

Eric Moulds only had 20 catches his first year. We're looking at a better version, perhaps MUCH better version in Bryant Johnson. Same height, same weight, better receiver.
Skillet hands is going to be a player.

We're set at receiver. Fitzgerald and Williams are great receivers and all, but we don't need either of them. We need guys that can cover them. One's playing at BOB here on Friday I believe.
DeAngelo Hall. Punt returns will be an offensive weapon for whoever grabs this guy. Good size, lightning fast, strong enough to fight whoever at the line.
I'm just rambling. Ignore me.

 

[pinnacle]

looking at that list...makes me think if we would have taken Suggs at #6....and not traded with NO..we would have then had what...the 37th pick in the draft in round 2?

Taylor Jacobs and bethel johnson would have clearly been available at #37 ..and maybe...but probably not..bryant johnson would have fallen in the draft (doubtful..but maybe).. I bet we would have ended up with Taylor Jacobs and Suggs. This can obviously be debated forever...but I would rather have pace, johnson and Boldin than Suggs and Taylor Jacobs. We know the Cardinals had bryant johnson rated higher than boldin (everyone probably did)...and I bet taylor jacobs was rated higher also..

If we would have kept #6 and used it..was there a team from 17 - 36th slot that would have picked bryant johnson? As it actually occured..teams between 19 (cardinals were 17 and 18 I think) thru 43 all passed on available receivers..If new orleans had 17 and 18...would they have taken Bryant Johnson? doubtful..

Bryant Johnson 1- 17th pick
Taylor Jacobs 2- 44th pick
Bethel Johnson 2- 45th pick

 

[jstadvl]

I didn't say

get rid of Johnson. I mentioned keeping our WR coach. If your referring to my post Muff.

 

[JeffGollin]

Why Statistics Often Mislead

While it's true, Johnson is 3rd most productive, this has nothing to do with how much or little he has contributed to the team in absolute terms.

What rankers leave out are drop-offs in productivity between one group of players and the next.

I'm not saying Johnson couldn't eventually be an important cog in our offense, but right now the distance between Q and BJ is huge. And in terms of giving our passing attack what it needs right now (i.e. go-to guy who can get open consistently and then go up and git it) Johnson didn't fill that void for us this year.

 

[kerouac9]

Re: Why Statistics Often Mislead

Originally posted by JeffGollin
...but right now the distance between Q and BJ is huge.

That is totally unfair; the distance between Q and almost any reciever in the NFC that's not Moss, Holt, and Owens is huge. I think that Bryant might have earned some time off his back on this board with a couple of nice plays last week. That was a very, very nice move he put on the corner on that bomb in the first or second quarter.

It's just not fair to compare BJ and Quan, and I wish people would stop doing it. It's not really fair to compare C. Pace and Freeney or Rice, either; so I compare him to the production I expect from a starting DE. Look at BJ's numbers as a borderline #2 WR right now, and they're all right. I think that he has the potential to be pretty good. I agree with Sec that the shoulder injury really slowed his progress, but he'll be one of the better #2 recieving options in the league by Year 3.

 

[earthsci]

Re: Re: Why Statistics Often Mislead

Originally posted by kerouac9
That is totally unfair; the distance between Q and almost any reciever in the NFC that's not Moss, Holt, and Owens is huge. I think that Bryant might have earned some time off his back on this board with a couple of nice plays last week. That was a very, very nice move he put on the corner on that bomb in the first or second quarter.

It's just not fair to compare BJ and Quan, and I wish people would stop doing it. It's not really fair to compare C. Pace and Freeney or Rice, either; so I compare him to the production I expect from a starting DE. Look at BJ's numbers as a borderline #2 WR right now, and they're all right. I think that he has the potential to be pretty good. I agree with Sec that the shoulder injury really slowed his progress, but he'll be one of the better #2 recieving options in the league by Year 3.

Great post K9!

 

[imaCafan]

Re: Re: Why Statistics Often Mislead

Originally posted by kerouac9
That is totally unfair; the distance between Q and almost any reciever in the NFC that's not Moss, Holt, and Owens is huge. I think that Bryant might have earned some time off his back on this board with a couple of nice plays last week. That was a very, very nice move he put on the corner on that bomb in the first or second quarter.

It's just not fair to compare BJ and Quan, and I wish people would stop doing it. It's not really fair to compare C. Pace and Freeney or Rice, either; so I compare him to the production I expect from a starting DE. Look at BJ's numbers as a borderline #2 WR right now, and they're all right. I think that he has the potential to be pretty good. I agree with Sec that the shoulder injury really slowed his progress, but he'll be one of the better #2 recieving options in the league by Year 3.

Without the shoulder injury, our rookie wr's MAY have been 1 & 2 instead of 1 & 3.

 

[JeffGollin]

It's just not fair to compare BJ and Quan, and I wish people would stop doing it.
It's totally fair.

First of all, the original point was that, since his stats ranked 3rd (in close proximity to Boldin), that made him really good. Well, if you're going to imply that he's great because he's #3, then it's fair to compare him to #1.

But even more significant - on most other NFL teams, the standard of measurement would be: "Is your top draft pick making the plays he needs to make in order to spark your offense?"

How often have you heard head coaches and GM"s say: "In the modern-day NFL, your top pick has to come in right away and play to high standards?" Johnson has played decently, but "decent" isn't good enough when you're the team's top pick.

If he were a 3rd or 4th round pick, I'd agree that we should cut him more slack. But BJ was our top pick.

If the names of the players were omitted and the Cardinals hadn't gotten lucky with Q or drafted someone different in round 2, would you be satisfied with the production we got out of our #1 draft choice?

 

[SECTION 11]

Eric Moulds was the 24th pick. Johnson's going to nearly double his rookie production. He's doing fine. He'll probably end up with 35-40 catches on the season.
Not too shabby for a rookie still fighting that nasty training camp hangover...

 

[imaCafan]

Johnson will be really good next year. He won't be Quan, but I believe we'll be very happy with the Q and BJ as 1-2!

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
How often have you heard head coaches and GM"s say: "In the modern-day NFL, your top pick has to come in right away and play to high standards?" Johnson has played decently, but "decent" isn't good enough when you're the team's top pick.

Actually, you never hear coaches or GMs say it. Only media types and fans ever say that. You expect it a little more from a top ten pick, but from #17, I think that you can afford to wait a little while. If you're disappointed with the performance of BJ at 17, thank goodness you're not a Saints or Jets fan, and have to worry about the production of Robertson or Sullivan this season.

The reason that the play of rooks like Freeney and Peppers last season, or Suggs and Quan this one, is that you don't really expect first-year players to make that kind of contribution so early on in their careers. They're the exception, as opposed to the rule. EVERYONE here assumed that BJ was going to be a developmental project, and not an immediate contributor. Considering that he started the season #4 on the depth chart, and moved himself up to being a starter (or near enough), and is going to earn his bonus for being in 35% of offensive plays DESPITE the fact that he was injured for a portion of the middle of the season is impressive.

Combine that with what we've seen in recent weeks as both a blocker and a receiving threat, and I think that BJ is probably a little AHEAD of schedule. It would be nice to see more production and playmaking out of him, but he's only a rookie. Personnally, I think that he's had more impact on the team than Calvin Pace, despite his limited playing time and position.

 

[Northern Card]

...and coming out of PENN... we can expect that it will take BJ a touch longer to fully adapt the NFL.

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by Northern Card
...and coming out of PENN... we can expect that it will take BJ a touch longer to fully adapt the NFL.

Ahem...coming out of Penn STATE...not the Ivy League school. And there's nothing wrong with Penn State receivers. It didn't take Joe Jurevicious a 'touch longer' to develop. It depends upon the player selected, not the school. Penn State used to have a fully run-oriented school, yes, but not one completely devoted to it, like Nebraska or Navy. Now, if it was one of those schools then, yes, you'd have a valid point.

 

[Duckjake]

The Cardinals receiver situation is unique. Seldom, if ever, would you see two rookie wide receivers as the focus of a team's passing attack. Usually there are veteran wide outs who are the primary target so BJ's numbers are inflated when compared to rookies on teams with vets like NO and NYJets.

Q is the exception, he would have outstanding #'s even if he played for Minnestota or Indy.

BTW: will the Quan be back in time for practice Friday? He has a lot of presents to deliver tonight.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

The problem was/is not really what Johnson contributed this year. It was fine. He's coming along ok.

The problem is what we needed from him this year, after we lost our top three WRs.

We actually needed two guys like Quan. As the offense went down in flames, people started pointing fingers. BJ wasn't exactly lighting it up, so he became a target along with gilmore.

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by Crimson Warrior
The problem was/is not really what Johnson contributed this year. It was fine. He's coming along ok.

The problem is what we needed from him this year, after we lost our top three WRs.

We actually needed two guys like Quan. As the offense went down in flames, people started pointing fingers. BJ wasn't exactly lighting it up, so he became a target along with gilmore.

Great point!

This is the best distillation of "what's wrong with Bryant Johnson" that I've heard.

 

[Northern Card]

Originally posted by Stout
Ahem...coming out of Penn STATE...not the Ivy League school. And there's nothing wrong with Penn State receivers. It didn't take Joe Jurevicious a 'touch longer' to develop. It depends upon the player selected, not the school. Penn State used to have a fully run-oriented school, yes, but not one completely devoted to it, like Nebraska or Navy. Now, if it was one of those schools then, yes, you'd have a valid point.

Sorry, I did mean Penn State... and, frankly, it isn't my point... I was merely paraphrasing an evaluation of Penn State offensive stars made by professional scout. But, then again... what would he know, he only does it for a living.

How many balls did Joe J... catch in year one?

 

[Loyal Card 17]

everyone needs to understand this was an rebuilding year. so next applies in this case. boldin is a top 5 wr this season. people don't expect that kind of results from a rookie wr. they expect the kind of production like bryant johnson having. Next year both wr should have a shot at the pro-bowl. hopfully with the projected production that will lead the cards to the playoffs. here are the things i'm for. this imo will give the best chance of having a successful 2004 season.

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by Northern Card
Sorry, I did mean Penn State... and, frankly, it isn't my point... I was merely paraphrasing an evaluation of Penn State offensive stars made by professional scout. But, then again... what would he know, he only does it for a living.

How many balls did Joe J... catch in year one?

And that scout would be? And why paraphrasing?

I don't know how many Joe J caught in year one...most rookie WRs don't catch many in year one, though, so your point is invalid and, indeed wrong.

But hey...let's not let historic facts on contributions of rookie receivers distort anything

 

[Harpo]

I wouldn't worry to much about BJ. No one knows whether he will be an all-pro or not, but he had a decent rookie year. Yes he dropped some balls, but that's expected, he didn't have great hands at PSU, and is still developing. The guy isn't noted for his hands and he's a rookie. Now if the guy is still dropping 29.17% of the passes that hit his hands when he is in year 4, like the Cards other starting WR then we'll talk. Then again, if he was still playing for the Cards they would offer him a 2 year contract with a half million dollar signing bonus. BJ is not the problem. The problem is that the teams "veteran" WR absolutely sucks.

 

[Northern Card]

Originally posted by Stout


And that scout would be? And why paraphrasing?

I DON'T RECALL THE NAME OF THE SCOUT... DIDN'T THINK I'D EVER NEED IT, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT THE SAID SAME POINT HAS BEEN MADE BY OTHER POSTERS IN THE PAST. AGAIN, SORRY... I HAVEN'T DONE A SEARCH TO LINE-UP THOSE NAMES.

I PARAPHRASED BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE THE EXACT QUOTE. THAT IS WHAT ONE DOES WHEN YOU RECALL A POINT, BUT DON'T HAVE THE EXACT WORDS.

I don't know how many Joe J caught in year one...most rookie WRs don't catch many in year one, though, so your point is invalid and, indeed wrong.

YOU SUGGEST THAT JOE J. TOOK LITTLE TIME TO REACH HIS POTENTAL IN THE NFL... BUT, CAN'T GIVE US A FEW NUMBERS TO SUPPORT YOUR ARGUMENT... AND, YET - FEEL FREE TO QUESTION MY SUGGESTION MY SOURCES RE: IT MAY TAKE BJ A BIT OF TIME TO REACH HIS FULL POTENTIAL?

But hey...let's not let historic facts on contributions of rookie receivers distort anything

SO, YOU IN EFFECT REACH THE SAME CONCLUSION AS ME... BUT MY POINT 'IS INVALID, AND INDEED WRONG".

BUT HEY... LET'S NOT LET YOUR SELF-PROCLAIMED HISTORIC KNOWLEDGE OF PENN STATE FOOTBALL..ETC. ETC. - AND HOW QUICKLY THEY ADAPT TO THE PRO GAME DISTORT ANYTHING

 

[john h]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
It's just not fair to compare BJ and Quan, and I wish people would stop doing it.
It's totally fair.

First of all, the original point was that, since his stats ranked 3rd (in close proximity to Boldin), that made him really good. Well, if you're going to imply that he's great because he's #3, then it's fair to compare him to #1.

But even more significant - on most other NFL teams, the standard of measurement would be: "Is your top draft pick making the plays he needs to make in order to spark your offense?"

How often have you heard head coaches and GM"s say: "In the modern-day NFL, your top pick has to come in right away and play to high standards?" Johnson has played decently, but "decent" isn't good enough when you're the team's top pick.

If he were a 3rd or 4th round pick, I'd agree that we should cut him more slack. But BJ was our top pick.

If the names of the players were omitted and the Cardinals hadn't gotten lucky with Q or drafted someone different in round 2, would you be satisfied with the production we got out of our #1 draft choice?

You need to evaluate players including the wideouts in the total context of a team. On a running team such as Denver with Portis running wild their stats could be entirely different. Our team played comming from behind on a consistent basis and usually a QB throwing under pressure and often off the mark requiring players to catch the ball behind them over them and in other awkward places. It is very difficult to just look at stats and evaluate a players. They play a part but in the end you have to believe your eyes. Boldin looked really great no matter how you evaluate him.