Which WR would you take at #20

[Bach]

I have Braylan 1a and Williams 1b. I think there's a small dropoff after them.

I have Troy Williamson as the 3rd best WR slightly ahead of Mark Clayton, with Roddy White 5th.


1a. Braylan Edwards
1b. Mike Williams
3. Troy Williamson
4. Mark Clayton
5. Roddy White

[Hostile]

None of the above.

[ghst187]

Originally Posted by CanadaBoys

I would HOPE that 1 of these 2 would be a #1. I can't imagine spending 1st round picks on guys that aren't. I mean, i don't expect Randy Moss or TO... But they should at least be on par with the Steve Smith's and Joe Horn's of the world. These guys are legit #1's. Even if they are in the top 3 or 4 guys in the league.

IMO, Mike Williams and Braylon Edwards are the only guys with true #1 potential in this year's first round. Now, I think Clayton can be as good as Terry Glenn, but how good is Glenn without a possession WR? Effective, but not lethal for sure. That's how I perceive Clayton. I don't really ever foresee Williamson being able to take over a game either. Maybe I am comparing #1's to Moss and TO. Most team's #1's are effective, but not lethal without complimentary players. You can gameplan to effectively contain Steve Smith and Joe Horn but you can't Moss or TO (even if they don't have other decent WRs on their team). With Smith, Horn, and Harrison as a #1 standard, I'd say Clayton probably could measure up, but he won't be lethal without another good WR. Guess that's what I really want, lethality a la Irvin/Harper/Novacek-style.

[Sitting Bull]

Matt Jones should be in the poll. Mort wasn't making up the hype in his recent article- Jones' has scouts' whipped into a frenzy with his freakish measurables and it sounds like Jerry is as intrigued with him as anyone.

If we can secure a third rounder by trading down a few spots from #20 and packaging a future pick, I see us taking Jones at the bottom of the first round.

The Cowboys will justify it as calculated gamble, made with a "bonus" first rounder, on a potential gamebreaking WR who doesn't have to star for us this season.

[CanadaBoys]

Originally Posted by ghst187

IMO, Mike Williams and Braylon Edwards are the only guys with true #1 potential in this year's first round. Now, I think Clayton can be as good as Terry Glenn, but how good is Glenn without a possession WR? Effective, but not lethal for sure. That's how I perceive Clayton. I don't really ever foresee Williamson being able to take over a game either. Maybe I am comparing #1's to Moss and TO. Most team's #1's are effective, but not lethal without complimentary players. You can gameplan to effectively contain Steve Smith and Joe Horn but you can't Moss or TO (even if they don't have other decent WRs on their team). With Smith, Horn, and Harrison as a #1 standard, I'd say Clayton probably could measure up, but he won't be lethal without another good WR. Guess that's what I really want, lethality a la Irvin/Harper/Novacek-style.

Good post.

I agree... I would hope for Clayton to be like an Eric Moulds... always a good #1... but not as effective as he could be with a legit #2.

Now... If we could have just gotten Lee Evans. I loved Lee last year more than all the other WR's. I love those fiesty, fast little guys. He really came on halfway through the year...

[cowheel]

If he's not named Braylon Edwards or Mike Williams...
none of them.

[Hostile]

Originally Posted by cowheel

If he's not named Braylon Edwards or Mike Williams...
none of them.

Agreed.

[Future]

Originally Posted by CanadaBoys

All this being said... If i thought Mathis would be there in the 2nd I'd consider using the #20 on other needs (DE? Pollack/Spears) and take a chance on Mathis in round 2. The guy flat out FLIES. Plus he is a major threat of KOS.

Still. Clayton is a far safer bet.

Whats that cliche?...High risk high reward!!??

I like the upside of Williamson. And Hank put it well, where was Clayton in those games, being no factor at all. From seeing that, it gives me the signal that hes not a gamer, doesn't drive for the ball and the pressure with the game is on the line. And the talent that he had around him, made him a lot better like hank also said.

Since Williamson has such speed size and potential, i say go with him over clayton. You never know.

[big dog cowboy]

Originally Posted by Sitting Bull

If we can secure a third rounder by trading down a few spots from #20 and packaging a future pick, I see us taking Jones at the bottom of the first round.

Absolutely no way that happens. We have to many holes to be drafting projects on day one. Especially in the first round.

[blindzebra]

Put me down for none of the above at #20. If one of them is there at #42 maybe.

I just don't get the we need a WR bad stance.

NE just won another Super Bowl without a #1 WR. We currently have two very solid #2 WRs in Glenn and Key and another potential WR at that level in Morgan. Toss in Crayton and Copper, who both showed potential, and WR is not a pressing need. I'd put it about 6th behind DE, OLB, FS, RT and RB/FB.

If the Howard deal goes down, I'd be much more open to taking a WR in the first, but as it stands now, if Williams ain't there when we pick we should address other needs.

[SuspectCorner]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Put me down for none of the above at #20. If one of them is there at #42 maybe.

I just don't get the we need a WR bad stance.

NE just won another Super Bowl without a #1 WR. We currently have two very solid #2 WRs in Glenn and Key and another potential WR at that level in Morgan. Toss in Crayton and Copper, who both showed potential, and WR is not a pressing need. I'd put it about 6th behind DE, OLB, FS, RT and RB/FB.

If the Howard deal goes down, I'd be much more open to taking a WR in the first, but as it stands now, if Williams ain't there when we pick we should address other needs.

Bingo, we have a winner.

but if i HAD to pick one at #20 - i'd choose Williamson. i think he has the most NFL potential of the pool mentioned.

[St. Richard]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

NE just won another Super Bowl without a #1 WR.

Deion Branch is a #1 receiver in my mind. The guy is productive, gets open, has great hands and moves the chains. I know he doesn't have great size, but do you think the Patriots cared about his size after the Super Bowl? He doesn't have world class speed, but I saw him make Smoot his female dog in college.

Say you have Branch and Javon Walker on the same team, which is the #1 receiver? (This is a trick question )

Originally Posted by blindzebra

If the Howard deal goes down, I'd be much more open to taking a WR in the first, but as it stands now, if Williams ain't there when we pick we should address other needs.

I agree that if the Howard trade is made (or if another top defensive end is added), that opens the door to taking other positions, such as WR. We just disagree that Williams should be the only option. There are several players who could be very good -- and Williams, of course, is one of them -- but I think Clayton could be a very good option later in the round.

[blindzebra]

Branch had 35 catches, the longest was for 26 yards and 4 TDs, those aren't exactly Moss/Owens/ Harrison numbers now are they?

[St. Richard]

In 2004, Branch was suited up for nine regular season games, but really played much in only six due to injuries. When completely healthy and money on the line, he had 15 catches for 249 yards in the AFC championship game and Super Bowl (where he was named MVP). But I never compared Branch to Moss/Owens/Harrison. I only state that IMO the Patriots have a guy that is their go-to guy. In New England's system, I don't know that anyone would be able to put up huge numbers year after year, but I think Branch can be a consistent 1,000-yard player for them.

The trick question part of my post is that Branch and Walker were teammates in 1998, leading Jones Junior College to an undefeated national chamionship season. Branch was named first team JUCO All-American, then Walker was in 1999. Both were great, but Branch was the #1 guy in spite of Walker's obvious edge in measureables.

The point I was making originally was that a player like Mark Clayton, in spite of less than ideal measureables, can be a #1 go-to guy in Dallas. They can put a prototype WR on the other side, but I believe a guy like Clayton will be a steady reliable performer for his team for at least 10 years.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by St. Richard

In 2004, Branch was suited up for nine regular season games, but really played much in only six due to injuries. When completely healthy and money on the line, he had 15 catches for 249 yards in the AFC championship game and Super Bowl (where he was named MVP). But I never compared Branch to Moss/Owens/Harrison. I only state that IMO the Patriots have a guy that is their go-to guy. In New England's system, I don't know that anyone would be able to put up huge numbers year after year, but I think Branch can be a consistent 1,000-yard player for them.

The trick question part of my post is that Branch and Walker were teammates in 1998, leading Jones Junior College to an undefeated national chamionship season. Branch was named first team JUCO All-American, then Walker was in 1999. Both were great, but Branch was the #1 guy in spite of Walker's obvious edge in measureables.

[View Full Quote]The point I was making originally was that a player like Mark Clayton, in spite of less than ideal measureables, can be a #1 go-to guy in Dallas. They can put a prototype WR on the other side, but I believe a guy like Clayton will be a steady reliable performer for his team for at least 10 years.

Your idea of a #1 WR is seriously lacking. Larry Brown and Desmond Howard won Super Bowl MVPs too, were either of them all pro level players?

Key had nearly 1,000 yards and was our "go to WR" yet his production was matched by a TE, so is Key a #1 WR?

Simple truth is most teams don't have a true #1 WR, we are one of several teams that have a pretty solid group of receivers. Drafting a WR is not do-or-die for us, especially in the first round.