Moss WANTS to be a Redskin

Didn't Moss just put up career highs in receptions, and his second most productive season yardage wise?

I mean...the numbers simply don't bare out what you're saying here, GTripp. He seemed to excel in this offense. You're expecting this massive drop in his production when, for all intents and purposes, even though he's a short guy who's speed may not be what it was, he is still producing like a number one receiver.

It's not a matter of disagreeing with you on principal, it's that the numbers he put up last year simply don't bare out what you're talking about.

If it's about getting younger, just say you don't want him around because you want to get younger. But his numbers the past two seasons have been good, and receivers are having longer careers all the time.

If anything, a receiver core that featured Moss, Hankerson and Armstrong would allow Moss to be more productive if Hankerson becomes the number one receiver. And it's still a big if. But if Hankerson can be the kind of threat that commands double teams, that allows Moss to excel in the slot.

If you subscribe to the "well, we're just going to lose anyone, so there's no point in trying to win" theory, then starting a bunch of rookies and second-year players is fine. But again; there's no guarantee you end up like the Bucs.

You could just end up like the Panthers. And they still had Steve Smith, but Smith doesn't really scare anyone like he used to.

Teams still respect Santana Moss. They still realize he can burn them and be a big playmaker and be productive no matter who the quarterback is. I mean, how many quarterbacks has he had since he came into the league? And he still produces?

Moss is a top 10 WR, I'm not sure how you define highly productive but I would argue that Moss is far closer to highly productive then replacement level.

There's alot you said that I disagree with but in short I don't think "effective against No.2 CBs" is an accurate description of Moss. Nor do agree that he is unplayable against top comp.
He simply cannot produce at the level he did if those statements were true, especially when he only had 1 other decent complementary WR in AA.

He was No.4 in yards, No.10 in receptions.

Here are some WRs with similar yds/target:
Roddy White 179 targets/1389 yards=7.76
Moss 146/1115=7.64
Reggie Wayne 173/1355=7.83
Colston 133/1023=7.70
*Larry Fitz=6.54 (but he had a horrible group of QB limit his production)

In your opinion Moss isn't capable of being a major player in a dynamic WR corps.
But, his production suggests otherwise.

Moss didn't/doesn't produce like a 3rd WR, Moss had top 10 production.

This is where we disagree, and this is where I believe you discount not only Moss's talent/production but discount the difference in talent between top NFL WRs and the rest of NFL WRs.
You seem to believe its simply a matter of next man up.
But, that's not the case.
Every WR that becomes the main cog in their team's passing game doesn't have top 10 production.

Paraphrasing Mike Irvin: "You cannot anoit someone a number 1 WR, you become a No.1 WR"

A more radical turnover doesn't equal more production from the WRs.

Again, I think its far more likely to have a dynamic WR corps with Moss then without Moss.

And having Moss around creates favorable match-up for Hankerson et al this year and allows them to progress into being the focal point of the passing game rather then being thrust into that role.

Those are the 2 main reason why it makes sense for Moss to come back.
Granted I'm assuming that Mike Shanahan actually has a plan for the QB position like he said he does, and I'm also assuming that QB will be viable.

If there isn't a viable QB under center then re-signing Moss is kinda superfluous.I have quoted 30 gut here, but I am also responding to NLC1054, because I think they agree and their points are complementary.

I do think it's a gross misuse of stats to say that Moss was a top ten receiver because he was top four in receptions and top ten in yards. Yards are *incredibly* dependent on receptions. Top four in receptions but top ten in yards = not good. Not a good supporting argument of being a top ten player at a position, at least in the context of how I am defining "top ten" player.

I am defining it by you asserting there are nine or fewer receivers in football you would deem more valuable than Santana Moss. This may not be what you're saying at all, but this is what I'm reading. Disproving such an assertion is almost too easy for me to do if the only basis is how often one is thrown to.

Here are some WRs with similar yds/target:
Roddy White 179 targets/1389 yards=7.76
Moss 146/1115=7.64
Reggie Wayne 173/1355=7.83
Colston 133/1023=7.70
*Larry Fitz=6.54 (but he had a horrible group of QB limit his production)

My focus is here. As I write this very sentence, I have not done the exercise I am about to do. I have a hunch that held just to 2010 standards, that Moss shakes up a lot better vs if we expand the sample. My *idea* is that the players above are cherry picked, but who knows, I could be attacking the wrong thing.

I do know where Moss ranks because I am not uninformed re: Moss' past. And while I know where the baselines for performance are and where Moss stacks up against those baselines, I still find value in knowing where similar players rank.

2009
Roddy White 165 targets/1153 yards=6.99
Moss 146/1115=7.55
Reggie Wayne 149/1264=8.48
Colston 107/1074=10.04
Larry Fitz 153/1092=7.14

2008
Roddy White 148 targets/1383 yards=9.34
Moss 138/1044=7.57
Reggie Wayne 130/1128=8.67
Colston 88/760=8.64
Larry Fitz 154/1431=9.29

2007
Roddy White 137 targets/1204 yards=8.79
Moss 115/808=7.03
Reggie Wayne 156/1515=9.71
Colston 144/1202=8.35
Larry Fitz 167/1412=8.46

Obviously, the comparison gets less valuable the further we go back. However, it's quite clear that your 2010 comparison doesn't do anything to show Moss favorably, but rather shows an overall downward trend in how efficient Roddy White and Larry Fitzgerald have been in recent years. White, though, has seen a touchdown spike that mitigates the meaningful impact of getting fewer yards per target.

Would now seeing, clearly, that Moss has been pretty much the same mediocre player for the last four years change your other dependent assertions? Because, IMO, any proposition that requires the belief that Moss has been an above average starting NFL receiver at any point in the last four years to stand can be knocked down by a rather stiff breeze.

I think teams still have to, and do, respect Santana Moss because it wouldn't make sense to force the Redskins to go deep to him and gamble that they can't. But defenses know that it's not that difficult to actually take him away as long as they come prepared to do so. And there are defensive coordinators who lost their jobs two or three years ago who had no trouble limiting Moss' impact on a game. The numbers are quite clear on that. Moss just isn't valuable if he's going underneath the sticks every play because the Redskins can't spring him deep.

As a quick, but direct response to NLC's argument: I don't see how you could say Moss "excelled" last year with meaningful statistical ranks (http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr2010) such as "32" and "39", and 38th in YPT (http://wp.advancednflstats.com/playerstats.php?year=2010&pos=WR&season=reg). Maybe you didn't know Moss is not a top 30 receiver in any meaningful statistical category? Sure, he's doing okay in heavily use-dependent numbers, perhaps something with the name "Total" in the category, but I'll open the floor up to you to find something that ranks receivers by usefulness and thinks Moss is in the top 20 of anything.

He was 18th in Success Rate this year among-st NFL receivers (Advanced NFL Stats (http://wp.advancednflstats.com/playerstats.php?year=2010&pos=WR&season=reg)), so I suppose that that could be the high-water mark for where he ranks. Anything higher than that just isn't based in anything that happened in reality. In practicality, he's probably somewhere between the 35th and 40th best receiver in the NFL, and trending downward.

New rule, until the lockout ends-GTripp and 30Gut can only post in tweet form. 140 characters or less :)

New rule, until the lockout ends-GTripp and 30Gut can only post in tweet form. 140 characters or less :)#ButIDontWanna

#ButIDontWanna

Well done

H92ZQ15sB90

'Tana working out with Ochocinco and Andre Johnson. Looks like Moss put on some muscle. I know it's only simple route stuff and cone drills, but I think Moss looks a little more explosive then he did at the end of the season. Probably healthier than he was last year.

Still wouldn't mind having 89 back...

What a receiving corps. Ochocinco, Moss, and Johnson. Who ya gonna cover who ya gonna cover. *Gets in face and shakes head repeating "who ya gonna cover" in annoying voice.*

H92ZQ15sB90

'Tana working out with Ochocinco and Andre Johnson. Looks like Moss put on some muscle. I know it's only simple route stuff and cone drills, but I think Moss looks a little more explosive then he did at the end of the season. Probably healthier than he was last year.

Still wouldn't mind having 89 back...


Some good stuff, Ocho is a funny dude some of the jokes that were being said made me LMAO.

Id like to see Moss play the slot. What outside linebacker or safety playing 15 yards off him will be able to stick him?

H92ZQ15sB90

'Tana working out with Ochocinco and Andre Johnson. Looks like Moss put on some muscle. I know it's only simple route stuff and cone drills, but I think Moss looks a little more explosive then he did at the end of the season. Probably healthier than he was last year.

Still wouldn't mind having 89 back...

If you were just watching the footwork you probably wouldn't know that Andre Johnson was head and shoulders the best player in the group would you.