Andre Roberts

[gkekoa]

In my opinion, Garçon was not worth the contract but was not too far off. He was a solid number two and a quality guy in the locker room. Him coming here was the typical result of day one free agency. You overpay solid football players, which should be avoided. I feel very comfortable saying SM would have never brought him here.

In terms of middling free agents, I have no problem with PG and the contract he received. The fact he is still here speaks to how close he comes to being worth the contract we gave him.

 

[Ruzious]

You do realize that Jackson has never had double digit receiving TDs - correct? You also realize that Jackson had 6 or less receiving TDs in all but 2 of those seasons - right? Also - many of the top receivers don't have that many TDs due to many factors. For Garcon this includes the fact that Reed is the primary target & as a result others are not going to get as many chances. During the RG3 era - it was a run first offense - especially in the red zone - which lessened his chances.

You also fail to mention other factors like blocking where Garcon excels. I agree with Skinsdad about the overpayment & am not suggesting that the rt move will be to retain Garcon over Jackson. However - I don't believe that you are giving him enough credit. As for the INTs? Huh? Cousins only threw 3 of these in his last 10 games. I believe this sort of demonstrates that it was a matter of Cousins getting used to the system and coaches. I am pretty sure that Cousins would take the blame (rightfully so) for most of his picks prior to that time.

Yes, all of the ints that Garcon was a part of were in the first half of the season - which I mentioned in another post. That doesn't excuse him in any way. One was blatant in the NE game. I don't remember many specific plays, but I do remember seeing week after week - when Garcon was the #1 wide receiver - that he f'd up and caused - or nearly caused interceptions. There were a couple of times where he couldn't come back to the ball. He correctly stopped his route but had cement feet and failed to come back towards Cousins. There were at least 2 cases where he could've prevented ints on jump ball type plays and failed. Just saying he's better than Jackson at blocking doesn't mean a whole lot, since you and I could probably block better than Jackson. Jackson might not be an answer, but that doesn't make Garcon a good player. The fact that he averaged 10.8 yards a catch matches the eye test - which shows Garcon has lost at least a step and isn't particularly effective.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

Yes, all of the ints that Garcon was a part of were in the first half of the season - which I mentioned in another post. That doesn't excuse him in any way. One was blatant in the NE game. I don't remember many specific plays, but I do remember seeing week after week - when Garcon was the #1 wide receiver - that he f'd up and caused - or nearly caused interceptions. There were a couple of times where he couldn't come back to the ball. He correctly stopped his route but had cement feet and failed to come back towards Cousins. There were at least 2 cases where he could've prevented ints on jump ball type plays and failed. Just saying he's better than Jackson at blocking doesn't mean a whole lot, since you and I could probably block better than Jackson. Jackson might not be an answer, but that doesn't make Garcon a good player. The fact that he averaged 10.8 yards a catch matches the eye test - which shows Garcon has lost at least a step and isn't particularly effective.

I didn't say that he was just better than Jackson at blocking - I said that he was the best blocking WR on the team & is a very good blocker in comparison to lots of receivers. He certainly isn't an all-pro, but he is good WR & has contributed quite a bit (you can't measure everything in stats). You make him sound like he is the worst WR on the team & doesn't even deserve to be on the roster. Disagree. Again - not saying that he is worth his entire salary nor that he perhaps should be gone after next season - just that he is a decent player.

 

[Sportster 72]

Charlie Casserly apparently feels better about Garcon than some, he has him rated as one quarter of the best receiving quartet in football.

 

[Ruzious]

I didn't say that he was just better than Jackson at blocking - I said that he was the best blocking WR on the team & is a very good blocker in comparison to lots of receivers. He certainly isn't an all-pro, but he is good WR & has contributed quite a bit (you can't measure everything in stats). You make him sound like he is the worst WR on the team & doesn't even deserve to be on the roster. Disagree. Again - not saying that he is worth his entire salary nor that he perhaps should be gone after next season - just that he is a decent player.

That's fair, I agree he's a decent player. I just got the impression that a lot of folks consider him to be better than that.

 

[skinsdad62]

Yes, all of the ints that Garcon was a part of were in the first half of the season - which I mentioned in another post. That doesn't excuse him in any way. One was blatant in the NE game. I don't remember many specific plays, but I do remember seeing week after week - when Garcon was the #1 wide receiver - that he f'd up and caused - or nearly caused interceptions. There were a couple of times where he couldn't come back to the ball. He correctly stopped his route but had cement feet and failed to come back towards Cousins. There were at least 2 cases where he could've prevented ints on jump ball type plays and failed. Just saying he's better than Jackson at blocking doesn't mean a whole lot, since you and I could probably block better than Jackson. Jackson might not be an answer, but that doesn't make Garcon a good player. The fact that he averaged 10.8 yards a catch matches the eye test - which shows Garcon has lost at least a step and isn't particularly effective.

again the breakdown of KC's ints doesnt support that garcon was "responsible" for "a lot " of KC's ints .

 

[Sportster 72]

471 people caught a pass last year, Garcon was tied for 33rd in receptions. Decent, good .... call it whatever you want it put him in the top 10% of the league.

 

[gkekoa]

471 people caught a pass last year, Garcon was tied for 33rd in receptions. Decent, good .... call it whatever you want it put him in the top 10% of the league.

33rd in receptions suggests he is the best number two in football at catching the ball. That is pretty damn good.

 

[Ruzious]

again the breakdown of KC's ints doesnt support that garcon was "responsible" for "a lot " of KC's ints .

LOL, you put it in quotes and still didn't get what I said right. I said partially responsible.

 

[Ruzious]

33rd in receptions suggests he is the best number two in football at catching the ball. That is pretty damn good.

If that's your logic, then where did he rank in yards per catch?

 

[gkekoa]

If that's your logic, then where did he rank in yards per catch?

Considering I specifically stated "at catching the ball," I didn't say anything about YPC.

As for where he ranks in a severely foolish category, I won't look because it has Marcus Easley as the best WR in the league. PG is also ahead of Fitz and Jarvis Landry. Julio Jones and Calvin Johnsonare tied at 90 as well.

PG was 45th in yards (8 were TEs ahead of him), tied for 29th in TDs (6 were TEs ahead of him), and 32nd in first downs (5 TEs ahead of him).

 

[skinsdad62]

LOL, you put it in quotes and still didn't get what I said right. I said partially responsible.

he wasnt partially responsible 8 of 11 fell on KC 2 were unknown 1 was a reciever so if the 1 int is put on garcon that is 10 that isnt his . no where near a lot

 

[Ruzious]

Considering I specifically stated "at catching the ball," I didn't say anything about YPC.

As for where he ranks in a severely foolish category, I won't look because it has Marcus Easley as the best WR in the league. PG is also ahead of Fitz and Jarvis Landry. Julio Jones and Calvin Johnsonare tied at 90 as well.

Your previous logic was to use one stat (# of catches) to justify your view on Garcon. Hence my comment. If you're going to use one stat, then I might as well use that same logic to justify my view on him - picking and choosing whatever one stat fits my conclusion. Understand?

 

[Ruzious]

he wasnt partially responsible 8 of 11 fell on KC 2 were unknown 1 was a reciever so if the 1 int is put on garcon that is 10 that isnt his . no where near a lot

Obviously I disagree with those numbers - which is okay.

 

[Sportster 72]

How many yards per catch does a possession receiver need to average?

 

[skinsdad62]

Obviously I disagree with those numbers - which is okay.

well those are the numbers by the best source we have

 

[Ruzious]

How many yards per catch does a possession receiver need to average?

I'm not sure I'd call him a possession receiver.

 

[gkekoa]

Your previous logic was to use one stat (# of catches) to justify your view on Garcon. Hence my comment. If you're going to use one stat, then I might as well use that same logic to justify my view on him - picking and choosing whatever one stat fits my conclusion. Understand?

The stat you used proves nothing and isn't a true characterization based on the people who actually led the league in that category.

 

[Ruzious]

The stat you used proves nothing and isn't a true characterization based on the people who actually led the league in that category.

You quoted me and seem to have completely missed my point. That's probably a sign that we should end the discussion now.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

Remember you also called out Garcon for not having that many TD catches. I showed you that some of the best WRs in the NFL also don't have that many TD catches (since it is based on a lot of factors that a WR can't control). I also showed you that Jackson usually also has very few TD catches during any given year.

I guess that the main pt is that you are being overly critical of Garcon for some reason & most of us are not part of the Pierre Garcon fan club - we simply view him as one of several good assets for the Redskins offense (at this time - could easily change in a season or two).