Lambs current 17 game projection

[Aerolithe_Lion]

It’s not
He is a big play guy but he’s not a number one type because of his strength being the big play and a number one has to do everything

But then when the guy who’s proclaimed the #1 isn’t out-producing the guy who doesn’t qualify as a #1, what then?

If you’re singling out a specific drive, 3 catches for 32 yards isn’t better than 2 catches for 32 yards.

When extrapolated to a season, why is 90 catches for 1100 yards any better than 60 catches for 1100 yards?

 

[jterrell]

I guess the question is, “What is your personal definition of a #1 WR?” Just a guy who you’re okay with being the best WR on the team?

If someone has a definition that requires producing more than 98 catches and 1224 yards they are on drugs.

Stefon Diggs had 103 catches for 1225 yards and 10 TDs last year. Is he not a number 1???
Those are top 10 caliber numbers.

Tyreek Hill had 111, 1239 and 9 TDs.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

If someone has a definition that requires producing more than 98 catches and 1224 yards they are on drugs.

Stefon Diggs had 103 catches for 1225 yards and 10 TDs last year. Is he not a number 1???
Those are top 10 caliber numbers.

Tyreek Hill had 111, 1239 and 9 TDs.

Both those guys have proven monster years before that. Both those guys are on pace for monster years this year. Focusing only on their 2021 doesn’t necessarily define their worth.

I think we need a few years in a 17 game season to really get a feel for what is a big season. In a 16 game schedule, both those guys have 1100-odd yards. Is every 1100 WR a no. 1? There are at least 30 players in the nfl who’ve had one or are on pace for 1200 this season. Does it make sense that there are 30-40 #1 WRs? Teams are throwing more, record passing yards every year. 1100 yards in a 16 game schedule (or up-converted for 17th game) may not quite be what it was in 1995.

 

[jterrell]

But then when the guy who’s proclaimed the #1 isn’t out-producing the guy who doesn’t qualify as a #1, what then?

If you’re singling out a specific drive, 3 catches for 32 yards isn’t better than 2 catches for 32 yards.

When extrapolated to a season, why is 90 catches for 1100 yards any better than 60 catches for 1100 yards?

Because you got a lot more first downs? Moved ball on more Possessions?
Receptions matters and does yards and do TDs. They all factor in.

What matters most as a WR1 is consistently producing and helping the offense weekly.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Because you got a lot more first downs? Moved ball on more Possessions?
Receptions matters and does yards and do TDs. They all factor in.

What matters most as a WR1 is consistently producing and helping the offense weekly.

I think Gallup has proven to do that as well as CeeDee

 

[jterrell]

I think we need a few years in a 17 game season to really get a feel for what is a big season. In a 16 game schedule, both those guys have 1100-odd yards. Is every 1100 WR a no. 1? There are at least 30 players in the nfl who’ve had one or are on pace for 1200 this season. Does it make sense that there are 30-40 #1 WRs? Teams are throwing more, record passing yards every year. 1100 yards in a 16 game schedule may not quite be what it was in 1995.

Far more likely people miss games in a 17-game season and even if they play all 17 it is a whopping 6% increase in season length.

Modern offenses play more receiving options with more spread.

What Diggs and Hill did last year was obviously WR1 work and no one has ever suggested otherwise.
Pretending that these numbers wouldn't be WR1 numbers for CeeDee is just a waste of time.
He's currently 15th in yards and receptions and tied for 17th in TD receptions.

The entire point you are making is kinda strange because we all know CeeDee is a big play guy and had he not dropped a walk-in 40+ yard TD his numbers would be top 5 in yards and TDs.
He has to develop focus, not big play ability.
Amari is the one who lacks big play ability at this point in his career but he does have the focus.

 

[jterrell]

I think Gallup has proven to do that as well as CeeDee

Gallup has been an outside deep play specialist.
The perfect WR2; especially when paired with Dak.
Hopefully he can continue to expand his route tree as he goes.

CeeDee has been a slot heavy WR that can play all over and specializes in YAC.
Unfortunately, that has also meant he is trying to look upfield and make moves before he catches the ball too often.
But he can play inside or out, on the line or on the move and is a WR1 for sure. Just a young one that needs to focus.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Far more likely people miss games in a 17-game season and even if they play all 17 it is a whopping 6% increase in season length.

Modern offenses play more receiving options with more spread.

What Diggs and Hill did last year was obviously WR1 work and no one has ever suggested otherwise.
Pretending that these numbers wouldn't be WR1 numbers for CeeDee is just a waste of time.
He's currently 15th in yards and receptions and tied for 17th in TD receptions.

The entire point you are making is kinda strange because we all know CeeDee is a big play guy and had he not dropped a walk-in 40+ yard TD his numbers would be top 5 in yards and TDs.
He has to develop focus, not big play ability.
Amari is the one who lacks big play ability at this point in his career but he does have the focus.

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

 

[darthseinfeld]

Which is why people saying Lamb will just be a better Amari or replace Amari was a little misleading. Gallup is the guy who’ll take Amari’s role in the offense

Gallup isnt taking the #1 role. Lamb isnt the same type player Cooper is, but Lamb is taking that role as the Cowboys main WR

 

[CowboyRoy]

98 catches, 1,224 yards and 9 TD's

The old 16 game season would be

92 catches, 1,152 yards

Lamb is just getting started.

 

[CowboyRoy]

No more akin to Coopers 2020 (92, 1141). Reception total is good, but YPC is meh. You would like a 90 catch #1 WR to get you 1,300+

Gallup caught 66 passes in 2019

I agree. Legit #1 should be at 1300 yards.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Gallup isnt taking the #1 role. Lamb isnt the same type player Cooper is, but Lamb is taking that role as the Cowboys main WR

Lamb is better than Cooper. Already was better than him last year.

 

[darthseinfeld]

But then when the guy who’s proclaimed the #1 isn’t out-producing the guy who doesn’t qualify as a #1, what then?

If you’re singling out a specific drive, 3 catches for 32 yards isn’t better than 2 catches for 32 yards.

When extrapolated to a season, why is 90 catches for 1100 yards any better than 60 catches for 1100 yards?

Because most one guys production was on go routes

 

[darthseinfeld]

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

A #1 WR is as black and white as it comes. Its a teams #1 receiving option. Every team has one. Whether they should be or not is another matter.

The definition you are looking for is an elite WR. They arent the same question

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

A #1 WR is as black and white as it comes. Its a teams #1 receiving option. Every team has one. Whether they should be or not is another matter.

The definition you are looking for is an elite WR. They arent the same question

I don’t agree. I feel DK is a true #1 but not elite. Elite is an overused word… maybe 4 guys total right now are “elite”.

 

[darthseinfeld]

I don’t agree. I feel DK is a true #1 but not elite. Elite is an overused word… maybe 4 guys total right now are “elite”.

Then you attaching way too much meaning on the term #1 WR. Every team has a #1 WR. If you want to ask what a "true #1" is, you are going to have 30 pages goal posts moving.

If you want to do the Ceedee VS Gallup thing: The guy that can average 5 to 6 catches a game is a lot closer to any definition of "true #1" than a guy who is basically a go route WR. That one is not even close. I always like to leave a person an opportunity for a rebuttle, but if you disagree with that you are just trolling Lamb like @WillieBeamen said

 

[817Gill]

ROFL, I am reading this thread trying to understand what anyone is talking about....
98 catches would be 3rd in Cowboys history behind only single seasons of Michael Irvin and Jason Witten.
1,224 yards would be 12th best by a Cowboy all-time and best by a Cowboys WR since Dez in 2014.
9 TD's would be tied for 19th all-time amongst Cowboys and again best since Dez in 2014.

That is plus WR1 numbers.

People confuse #1 WR with top 5 WR. Just cause you’re a 1 doesn’t mean you’re one of the 5 or 6 best WR’s. It means you can produce and command the attention of the lead dog in a WR room.

98/1224/9 statline is a perfectly good and productive stat-line for an NFL lead WR. It’s not a top 5 season, but it’s a line that shows clear production at a level needed to operate as a productive passing game.

Here are some stat-lines from consensus #1 WR’s:

Mike Evans- 74/1035/14

Keenan Allen- 106/1138/6

AJ Brown (2020, missed games 2021)- 70/1075/11

DK Metcalf- 75/967/12

Lamb would be right up in this tier of the 7-14 range of WR’s. All of them being Pro-Bowl caliber legitimate NFL WR1’s. You don’t have to be Davante, Kupp, or Tyreek to be a WR1. It’s about what attention you force defenses to give you and if you can remain productive for the general entirety of the season.


I would say something around 90/1100/7 is the general baseline for a productive WR1 along with producing this with the attention of the defense in mind. If you’re getting schemed against and putting up that stat-line you’re doing the job of a WR1.

 

[817Gill]

A #1 WR is as black and white as it comes. Its a teams #1 receiving option. Every team has one. Whether they should be or not is another matter.

The definition you are looking for is an elite WR. They arent the same question

Beautiful

 

[WillieBeamen]

People confuse #1 WR with top 5 WR. Just cause you’re a 1 doesn’t mean you’re one of the 5 or 6 best WR’s. It means you can produce and command the attention of the lead dog in a WR room.

98/1224/9 statline is a perfectly good and productive stat-line for an NFL lead WR. It’s not a top 5 season, but it’s a line that shows clear production at a level needed to operate as a productive passing game.

Here are some stat-lines from consensus #1 WR’s:

Mike Evans- 74/1035/14

Keenan Allen- 106/1138/6

AJ Brown (2020, missed games 2021)- 70/1075/11

DK Metcalf- 75/967/12

Lamb would be right up in this tier of the 7-14 range of WR’s. All of them being Pro-Bowl caliber legitimate NFL WR1’s. You don’t have to be Davante, Kupp, or Tyreek to be a WR1. It’s about what attention you force defenses to give you and if you can remain productive for the general entirety of the season.


I would say something around 90/1100/7 is the general baseline for a productive WR1 along with producing this with the attention of the defense in mind. If you’re getting schemed against and putting up that stat-line you’re doing the job of a WR1.

Stefon Diggs (somebody who is considered a top-5 WR) last year, put up the same numbers Ceedee is projected to finish with. And he plays with a top-3 QB.

 

[817Gill]

Stefon Diggs (somebody who is considered a top-5 WR) last year, put up the same numbers Ceedee is projected to finish with. And he plays with a top-3 QB.

Yup exactly. Command the attention of the defense and make plays consistently and that’s all you need.

At the very least too many people have already made up their mind on what they think Ceedee is which is idiotic. This is his 5th game ever as the 1, we are going to see him keep ascending.