That goes back to my previous question: how do you define a #1 WR. In my opinion, any guy who ends up crossing a certain yard mark isn’t automatically a #1. A #1 goes beyond just getting some stats because his QB throws a lot or the defense doesn’t stress guarding him.
Kenny Golladay, Adam Thielen, Davante Parker, Robert Woods, Torrey Smith, Juju Smith Schuster… all these guys have had those types of seasons. Are they all now locked in as number 1’s solely because of a stat line, or were there outlying circumstances they benefited from to achieve this?
To me, a #1 isn’t just how he produces, it’s the where’s and the why’s. DK Metcalf is a perfect example of this. Last year Russell Wilson went down with injury and it affected DK’s statline. He only ended up with something like 900 yards and 12 TDs. But every game people play the Seahawks, they say, “We need to keep DK double covered every single snap, if we let up even once we’re in trouble. Let up a couple times and he can single handedly run away with the game.” A number 1 commands respect. Not saying he’s elite, or all-pro caliber or even a top 10 WR.
How many teams think this about CeeDee? That he’s going to destroy you if you don’t give him #1 respect all game? CeeDee hasn’t had 100 yards receiving in 14 consecutive games. These 2 TDs he’s had have been the first two TDs he’s had in 12 games. He doesn’t dominate, even sporadically. He’s a nice, consistent 60ish yards who’ll get you a TD every 3rd game or so. While the finish line is a pretty 1100, that isn’t IMO a true #1.
Michael Gallup and CeeDee Lamb are different styles of WR, but they’re approximately the same caliber. And that doesn’t have to be a bad thing
