Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:00 pm
  • Image
    In 180 games, Walter Jones was called for 9 holding penalties in the course of 5,703 pass plays.
    First Round Inductee To Hall Of Fame 2014
    ESPN #1 Rated Seahawks Player of All Time
    User avatar
    KitsapGuy
    * NET Staff *
     
    Posts: 4527
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:09 pm
    Location: Kitsap County


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:03 pm
  • Basically offensive football 101. Doesn't fly with most fans because of a strange need to idolize, but he's absolutely right.
    --Poster of the Month - April 2018--
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    .NET Poster of the Month
     
    Posts: 4244
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 3:37 pm
  • Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.
    I hate Tim Ruskell.
    User avatar
    Trrrroy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3161
    Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:24 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 3:44 pm
  • You had me at fullback....
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2802
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:36 pm
  • How many receivers have we had that scare the defense though? The last few years it’s been Baldwin and Jimmy. Baldwin may make them a bit nervous but I don’t know that he strikes fear and no one is afraid of Jimmy the blocker.
    User avatar
    brimsalabim
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3976
    Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:50 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:50 pm
  • Trrrroy wrote:Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.



    Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
    Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

    Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1881
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 5:32 pm
  • brimsalabim wrote:How many receivers have we had that scare the defense though? The last few years it’s been Baldwin and Jimmy. Baldwin may make them a bit nervous but I don’t know that he strikes fear and no one is afraid of Jimmy the blocker.

    This has always been my issue with the team. There is NOBODY on the offense that keeps a DC up at night except Wilson.
    A.D.I.D.A.S.
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 37
    Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 9:54 pm


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 6:19 pm
  • sdog1981 wrote:
    Trrrroy wrote:Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.



    Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
    Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

    Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.


    Now we're talking semantics. Edelman was a #1 in the sense that he got targets, but to me he was no more a #1 than Bobby Engram was a #1. He got targets due to scheme, matchups, and Brady throwing the ball a ton. He's not a guy you throw the ball to in 1 on 1 no matter what. He's not a guy like Julio Jones, AJ Green, DeAndre Hopkins, or Fitzgerald. But again, we're talking semantics. Different definitions for what a #1 truly is.
    I hate Tim Ruskell.
    User avatar
    Trrrroy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3161
    Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:24 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:21 pm
  • Trrrroy wrote:Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.

    Seahawks never had one? So what do you consider Steve Largent? :(
    User avatar
    ZorntoLargent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1265
    Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 8:45 pm


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:48 pm
  • Partly why the Hawks were less productive with Graham. Poor run blocker, added a very nice red zone option which took 2 years to utilize, but we didn't need a WR#1/TE#1 to force the ball to. We needed another guy who could block and get separation with a LB 1on1.

    A strong miss unfortunately but Graham is one of my favorite people to have played in Seattle. How can you not root for the guy with a background like he has?
    Image

    "We all we got, we all we need"
    User avatar
    lukerguy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2013
    Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:00 pm


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:54 pm
  • Trrrroy wrote:
    sdog1981 wrote:
    Trrrroy wrote:Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.



    Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
    Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

    Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.


    Now we're talking semantics. Edelman was a #1 in the sense that he got targets, but to me he was no more a #1 than Bobby Engram was a #1. He got targets due to scheme, matchups, and Brady throwing the ball a ton. He's not a guy you throw the ball to in 1 on 1 no matter what. He's not a guy like Julio Jones, AJ Green, DeAndre Hopkins, or Fitzgerald. But again, we're talking semantics. Different definitions for what a #1 truly is.


    I'd bet the idea of having a WR that "scares people", a true #1, is this list above. They're taller (read: 6'1 or taller), fast (4.4 40), great hands, fluid body control, and vertical jump, and run crisp routes. That's hard to find, and makes a DB's job especially hard because the ideas like "open" or "separation" are now far broader. This WR gets the ball more often because of this ability to be open vertically, horizontally or deep down the field due to leap, speed and reach.

    But you don't need to have all of these to be a great WR, and in my view, still be a #1. Edelman isn't this kind of #1; neither is Baldwin, or Largent, or Engram, or many other great primary targets. Many WRs get open with intelligence, their moves at the line, etc. That may be the most important part of their craft, as illustrated by Baldwin breaking JNorman's jam, and scoring against the Redskins. He'll cause D-coordinators headaches, I"m sure.
    ____________
    BLUE and GREEN...
    User avatar
    Ad Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1689
    Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 8:25 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 14, 2018 11:26 pm
  • Yet in recent years the league is spending more on WR than ever. Just last years draft, three WR get selected in the top 10 even though most thought that they were graded lower. This off season Brandon Cooks is traded for a 1st round pick. Sammy Watkins signs for $16m per year after catching only 39 passes for 593 yards. Landry gets $15m per year. I could go on.

    It sure feels like the league is going hard after star WRs when they can, as opposed to a moneyball committee approach to the position if that is what this guy is suggesting.
    User avatar
    Recon_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2940
    Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:01 pm
    Location: Vancouver, Wa


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:49 am
  • sdog1981 wrote:
    Trrrroy wrote:Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.



    Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
    Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

    Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.


    So listing a TE proves that you always need a number one WR?
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7048
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:47 am
  • Baldwin keeps OC's up at night for sure. Forget his height, the man works hard and he and Wilson have chemistry. Every time we win, Baldwin is usually part of the formula.

    Golden Tate, Zach Miller, and Sidney Rice were part of the equation as well. Nobody considers them #1 receivers. Drew Brees stacked up records with guys that nobody's heard of since they left for other teams (well, except for Graham).

    I think the best way to say it is, what may be a #1 WR for one team might not be for another. A lot of it comes down to chemistry with the QB.

    What you REALLY want is more than one reliable guy, so that guys like Baldwin don't get doubled up. Which means we really need someone to emerge on this team next year. I hope Lockett is ready to have a contract year.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 16905
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:52 am
  • Trrrroy wrote:Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.


    I’d count the rams with Bruce and Holt. Again, that was a while ago.
    lobohawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 837
    Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:22 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:37 pm
  • TwistedHusky wrote:You had me at fullback....


    +10000
    Love, Peace & Elbow Grease. Let's ROLL, Hawks!
    User avatar
    hgwellz12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2512
    Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 1:17 pm


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:41 pm
  • I remember the year we won our chip, Russ had a statement that flashed during one of our games showing how many different receivers he'd hit thus far. It was crazy. I gotta find the stat...
    Love, Peace & Elbow Grease. Let's ROLL, Hawks!
    User avatar
    hgwellz12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2512
    Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 1:17 pm


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 1:29 pm
  • mikeak wrote:
    sdog1981 wrote:
    Trrrroy wrote:Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.



    Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
    Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

    Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.


    So listing a TE proves that you always need a number one WR?



    That goes back to the Jimmy Grah arbitration case when his argument was he was a pass catcher and a number one target not just a TE.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1881
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 1:52 pm
  • Someone will have to rise besides Doug.
    There is no $$$ to spend on a star WR when they have to pay RW $30 plus million a year soon.
    There is a salary cap which you can stupid like Dallas with it and find out the hard way.
    Will Dissly
    2018 Adopt a rookie
    User avatar
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3826
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:42 pm


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:47 pm
  • A.D.I.D.A.S. wrote:This has always been my issue with the team. There is NOBODY on the offense that keeps a DC up at night except Wilson.

    I don't get how 300-odd rushing yards keeps DCs up at night. Or are you referring to his passing yards and passing touchdowns that require someone to catch them?

    Because if that's the case then you have to consider the receivers as well.

    This is what Fantasy Football does. It' promotes the idea that we don't have a big point-scoring WR so we must have a bunch of nobodies.

    It's actually WORSE for a DC to defend a QB who spreads the ball around to a lot of targets because when the game is on the line you have to guess who to cover instead of knowing the ball will be thrown to Larry Fitzgerald (for example).

    We know Wilson is going to sandlot every third play. So the first criteria for our WRs is coping with a QB who deviates from the playbook, and convincing him to trust throwing you the ball. I don't think anyone in the league does it better than Doug Baldwin, so based solely on that criteria, Baldwin is he best WR in the NFL.

    Wilson only keeps DCs up at night because he has receivers who can be on the other end of his Benny-Hill plays. You don't get highlights running around throwing incomplete passes.
    User avatar
    KiwiHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1963
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 3:22 pm
    Location: Auckland, New Zealand


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:27 pm
  • hgwellz12 wrote:I remember the year we won our chip, Russ had a statement that flashed during one of our games showing how many different receivers he'd hit thus far. It was crazy. I gotta find the stat...


    I remember that, it was something ludicrous!
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 3071
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:35 pm
  • Baldwin underrated ITT. I think he's a matchup problem, his release off the line is arguably the best in the NFL.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2032
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:27 pm
  • There has been more big time #1 WR's in the SB than I expected. Maybe Bruce and Holt are not the #1 WR's like many picture but those dudes were a lot bigger than the likes of Marvin Harrison and Steve Smith who I did not include. I also left out Anquan Boldin who has crazy numbers but I don't think fits the #1 prototype WR. Even Antonio Brown is not 6'3 but the dude is arguably the best in the game the last 3 years so he is in my list.

    Fact is only 2/9 super bowls with Top WR's won since 2000, what worse is only 2 of 18 super bowls had a prototype #1 WR. Why do WR's get so dang much money??? It blows my mind.

    Julio Jones in 2017 = L
    Demerius Thomas in 2014 = L
    Antonio Brown in 2011 = L
    Larry Fitzgerald in 2009 = L
    Randy Moss in 2008 = L
    Reggie Wayne in 2007 = W
    Terrell Owens in 2005 = L
    Issac Bruce & Tory Holt 2002 = L
    Issac Bruce & Tory Holt 2000 = W
    User avatar
    Wenhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3221
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:00 pm
  • Because you have Lynn Swann, Jerry Rice, John Stallworth, Paul Warfield, Terrell Owens. So many of you need to look back at what made the NFL what it is, you see glamour now but the ideas and reasons go back farther then 10 year, it's been around a bit longer then that.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24009
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:25 pm
  • sdog1981 wrote:
    mikeak wrote:
    sdog1981 wrote:
    Trrrroy wrote:Payriots haven't had a #1 since Moss. Eagles don't have one. Seahawks never had one. Saints have role player wideouts. What was the last superbowl winning team with a true #1 reciever? The Colts with Wayne and Harrison? Giants with plaxico? It's been a while.



    Edelman has had 165 targets two years ago.
    Gronk has had more than 100 targets for 4 seasons in a row.

    Yes the pats have always had a number one WR. They do not spread the targets out that much.


    So listing a TE proves that you always need a number one WR?



    That goes back to the Jimmy Grah arbitration case when his argument was he was a pass catcher and a number one target not just a TE.


    That is incorrect

    Graham’s argument was that he was lined up as a wideout for a certain percentage of the snaps. The number of passes / catches was irrelevant
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7048
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:28 pm
  • Wenhawk wrote:There has been more big time #1 WR's in the SB than I expected. Maybe Bruce and Holt are not the #1 WR's like many picture but those dudes were a lot bigger than the likes of Marvin Harrison and Steve Smith who I did not include. I also left out Anquan Boldin who has crazy numbers but I don't think fits the #1 prototype WR. Even Antonio Brown is not 6'3 but the dude is arguably the best in the game the last 3 years so he is in my list.

    Fact is only 2/9 super bowls with Top WR's won since 2000, what worse is only 2 of 18 super bowls had a prototype #1 WR. Why do WR's get so dang much money??? It blows my mind.

    Julio Jones in 2017 = L
    Demerius Thomas in 2014 = L
    Antonio Brown in 2011 = L
    Larry Fitzgerald in 2009 = L
    Randy Moss in 2008 = L
    Reggie Wayne in 2007 = W
    Terrell Owens in 2005 = L
    Issac Bruce & Tory Holt 2002 = L
    Issac Bruce & Tory Holt 2000 = W


    Ricardo Lockette in 2014 (2013 season) = L
    ......
    ......
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7048
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 21, 2018 10:45 am
  • mikeak wrote:
    Wenhawk wrote:There has been more big time #1 WR's in the SB than I expected. Maybe Bruce and Holt are not the #1 WR's like many picture but those dudes were a lot bigger than the likes of Marvin Harrison and Steve Smith who I did not include. I also left out Anquan Boldin who has crazy numbers but I don't think fits the #1 prototype WR. Even Antonio Brown is not 6'3 but the dude is arguably the best in the game the last 3 years so he is in my list.

    Fact is only 2/9 super bowls with Top WR's won since 2000, what worse is only 2 of 18 super bowls had a prototype #1 WR. Why do WR's get so dang much money??? It blows my mind.

    Julio Jones in 2017 = L
    Demerius Thomas in 2014 = L
    Antonio Brown in 2011 = L
    Larry Fitzgerald in 2009 = L
    Randy Moss in 2008 = L
    Reggie Wayne in 2007 = W
    Terrell Owens in 2005 = L
    Issac Bruce & Tory Holt 2002 = L
    Issac Bruce & Tory Holt 2000 = W


    Ricardo Lockette in 2014 (2013 season) = L
    ......
    ......



    #SAVAGE
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1881
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: Kyle Shanahan on No. 1 WRs
Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:40 am
  • Wenhawk wrote:There has been more big time #1 WR's in the SB than I expected. Maybe Bruce and Holt are not the #1 WR's like many picture but those dudes were a lot bigger than the likes of Marvin Harrison and Steve Smith who I did not include. I also left out Anquan Boldin who has crazy numbers but I don't think fits the #1 prototype WR. Even Antonio Brown is not 6'3 but the dude is arguably the best in the game the last 3 years so he is in my list.

    Fact is only 2/9 super bowls with Top WR's won since 2000, what worse is only 2 of 18 super bowls had a prototype #1 WR. Why do WR's get so dang much money??? It blows my mind.

    Julio Jones in 2017 = L
    Demerius Thomas in 2014 = L
    Antonio Brown in 2011 = L
    Larry Fitzgerald in 2009 = L
    Randy Moss in 2008 = L
    Reggie Wayne in 2007 = W
    Terrell Owens in 2005 = L
    Issac Bruce & Tory Holt 2002 = L
    Issac Bruce & Tory Holt 2000 = W


    I think you can pin this down on chance and variance, tbh. Larry Fitz pretty much carried the Cards to the SB in 2009 - his playoff run is widely considered the greatest a WR has ever had. The rest were all big parts of getting their teams to the SB, they just couldn't win the last game.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2032
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR




It is currently Fri May 25, 2018 8:25 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online