Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tanatastic

Jennings wont hit 1k yards

Recommended Posts

Guys like Favre and Rodgers make these wrs stars, then they bust on other teams,s et your watch to it. Greg wont hit 1k in that offense. TDs are fluky so any starter has a shot at 10 theoretically but its not really a WR friendly red zone offense. Id be shaky with him as even a wr3. I like high end wr2 potential from my wr3 like my wayne from last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He'll put up some good numbers but the question is when will he be injured and for long will he be out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No interest in someone with a low ceiling.

 

this. im not touching jennings, unless he falls 4/5 rds past his adp.

low ceiling is spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry i just have to take a minute out to laugh at your comments about "your wayne from last year"

 

that said, jennings really isn't on my radar this season. he could be in that 75-950-6 range. i have to agree with the sentiment that the ceiling just isn't very high for him in that offense with that QB. Even what we saw from Harvin was a younger, more dynamic play maker being used in ways that Jennings can't be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like jennings in the low 3wr range or high 4 wr range . he is there really only wr treat imo on this team. but with rudolph getting the redzone td rec and of course the beast with his running ..yes maybe just a high 4 range

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree with this but at the same time cecil shorts almost hit 1,000 with blaine gabbert and chad henne. jennings is much better than shorts so i give jennings a chance. i wouldnt look at him as anything more than a 3rd WR at best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he put up decent numbers, but I believe he will be streaky and inconsistent. I don't see him as a week in and week out starter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like jennings in the low 3wr range or high 4 wr range . he is there really only wr treat imo on this team. but with rudolph getting the redzone td rec and of course the beast with his running ..yes maybe just a high 4 range

Agree. I wouldn't consider unless it was as a WR 4 and there was nobody better still out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It think he will put up low WR1 numbers, so I am glad everyone lets me take him as a WR3. I also think everyone overrates Percy Harvin a lot. In fact, I switch the projections for the two of them around.

 

Can't wait for football season, that's what makes things fun. Last year there were a lot of lower ranked RBs that you could grab and do well with, including Spiller, Ridley and Charles. AP was going in the 3rd or 4th because everyone insisted he was injured and wouldn't play, or would play badly. This year all the good RBs are going early again, and these WRs are getting pushed back and undervalued. I love guys like Wallace, Nicks and Jennings this year. They're all WR1 caliber guys with some question marks to them, but they're dropping down to WR3 range! They are indeed too risky to take as WR1s, but you don't even have to worry about that risk, they all go late so worst case scenario you plug in some even later guys off crap teams and get the production you need, getting carried by your RBs that you drafted early on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It think he will put up low WR1 numbers, so I am glad everyone lets me take him as a WR3. I also think everyone overrates Percy Harvin a lot. In fact, I switch the projections for the two of them around.

 

Can't wait for football season, that's what makes things fun. Last year there were a lot of lower ranked RBs that you could grab and do well with, including Spiller, Ridley and Charles. AP was going in the 3rd or 4th because everyone insisted he was injured and wouldn't play, or would play badly. This year all the good RBs are going early again, and these WRs are getting pushed back and undervalued. I love guys like Wallace, Nicks and Jennings this year. They're all WR1 caliber guys with some question marks to them, but they're dropping down to WR3 range! They are indeed too risky to take as WR1s, but you don't even have to worry about that risk, they all go late so worst case scenario you plug in some even later guys off crap teams and get the production you need, getting carried by your RBs that you drafted early on.

 

nicks and wallace are going mid 5th to very early 6th. I wouldn't call that late. Jennings does slip but really to the early 7th at best. Yes these guys can be your WR 3's depending on how your draft shakes out but i'm not seeing the amazing value when you consider situations (Jennings) and injury history (Nicks).

 

I do like Wallace. Tannehill has shown some flashes and Wallace should be his go to guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree with this but at the same time cecil shorts almost hit 1,000 with blaine gabbert and chad henne. jennings is much better than shorts so i give jennings a chance. i wouldnt look at him as anything more than a 3rd WR at best

 

i think there's a number of WRs on less than good teams w/ value, like shorts last yr, as they play from behind and didnt exactly have a stellar running gm. idk how many passes jax threw last yr, dont have it handy, but id bet they were prolly top 12 in attempts. nothing about jax looks like minnesota, who is a playoff team with great running gm.

i dont want anything to do with jennings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

nicks and wallace are going mid 5th to very early 6th. I wouldn't call that late. Jennings does slip but really to the early 7th at best. Yes these guys can be your WR 3's depending on how your draft shakes out but i'm not seeing the amazing value when you consider situations (Jennings) and injury history (Nicks).

 

I do like Wallace. Tannehill has shown some flashes and Wallace should be his go to guy

 

That's pretty late. By round 6 no matter what you selected you should be getting to your WR2 or WR3 at worst, and if you waited that long you should have shored up at least 5 other positions by then anyway, I mean you have to pick somebody right?

 

I guess if you have so little faith in these guys you can collect some more RB depth or something, but by the first 5 rounds typically someone will draft 2 RBs, 1WR at least. Then the other 2 picks you might get a QB or TE or another WR, but the point is you've got to have taken somebody and now you're on your 6th player, that pick shouldn't be making or breaking your draft if you picked well the first 5 rounds as you should. If your biggest underperformer is your 5-7th round WR picks you should probably be having a good year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's pretty late. By round 6 no matter what you selected you should be getting to your WR2 or WR3 at worst, and if you waited that long you should have shored up at least 5 other positions by then anyway, I mean you have to pick somebody right?

 

I guess if you have so little faith in these guys you can collect some more RB depth or something, but by the first 5 rounds typically someone will draft 2 RBs, 1WR at least. Then the other 2 picks you might get a QB or TE or another WR, but the point is you've got to have taken somebody and now you're on your 6th player, that pick shouldn't be making or breaking your draft if you picked well the first 5 rounds as you should. If your biggest underperformer is your 5-7th round WR picks you should probably be having a good year.

 

there are a lot of assumptions in the above.

 

i was simply pointing out that those are the mid rounds of a draft. some might argue the tail end of the early rounds. I have no issue with wallace or nicks.....( or jennings really) i just don't see much upside with Jennings. I do see upside with Nicks and Wallace, those guys would be your 5th pick unless you had a late pick then you might get lucky with one as your 6th player.

 

Rather than debating where Jennings will go and what you'd have drafted by then, i'd be interested in some reasons why you expect him to perform well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

 

In short, overcorrection due to injury and exaggerated concerns of age. He is 29 years old, WR is a position that players can play well until at least around 33/34 in most cases.

 

I do consider where someone will go and what you have planned to draft. I use a soft BAP value based system. But I understand you can't win with 3 RB1s and no WR1, so I make an effort to fill my positions based on the contributions I'm looking for, and I'll look at various ADPs to come to that determination. Jennings and those other WRs I listed before are getting taken late enough that I can lower my priority on WR2 and WR3, and instead try and fill out other positions. Last year I essentially ignored RB until the mid rounds, as I've stated before. This year I feel like the ADPs are breaking out in such a way that WR talent is devalued greatly, so I can get my value in waiting on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry i just have to take a minute out to laugh at your comments about "your wayne from last year"

 

 

Whats so funny? I drafted wayne as my wr 3 last year when nobody liked him. I expected high wr2 numbers from him and got wr1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh... he might do ok... but i wouldn't take him over stevie johnson/Mike Williams or others that you can have later... I could see him putting up something like 800yds and 5-6TDs...

 

That said... he's a talented WR with a young/crappy QB... maybe Ponder locks on and jennings gets 80+ rec for the first time in 4 years... but i'm not seeing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×