Houshmandzadeh planning exit strategy for offseason [Archive] - Baltimore Ravens Forums and Message Boards

purplepoe

11-27-2008, 07:37 PM

I like Ponytail Pimpjuice less than Ocho Stinko. I would take either one of them for reasonable money, but not near top dollar. I like drafting a guy and rolling with what we have. To me it seems the scheme and QB change was more than enough to fix the O.

This offense is far from fixed and it desperately needs a legit outside threat.

I'll take an established WR over drafting a WR high anyday.

Not saying I want TJ but I do want a proven guy.

This pass offense is ranked 29th. I'm not sure how that's fixed.

Are we on the right track with Flacco, Cameron and Co? Sure. But there are more pieces needed.

PP

StingerNLG

11-27-2008, 07:57 PM

I would take Housh if it was our only option. He is just still a possession receiver, and not a downfield threat.

I want a guy that will stretch the field. That's what we need right now.

psuasskicker

11-27-2008, 08:02 PM

Re: Drafting a WR instead of signing someone like TJ...

No way.

Drafting WRs is a complete crap-shoot. A list of the last ten years of first round WRs (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/22/AR2008042203256.html)...

Calvin Johnson, Ginn, Bowe, Meachem, Craig Davis, A Gonzalez
S Holmes
Braylon Edwards, Troy Williamson, Mike Williams, Matt Jones, Mark Clayton, Roddy White
Larry Fitzgerald, Roy Williams, Reggie Williams, Lee Evans, Michael Clayton, Michael Jenkins, Rashaun Woods
Charles Rodgers, Andre Johnson, Bryant Johnson
Donte Stallworth, Ashley Lelie, Javon Walker
D Terrell, Koren Robinson, Rod Gardner, Santana Moss, Freddie Mitchell, Reggie Wayne
Peter Warrick, Plaxico, Travis Taylor, Sylvester Morris, RJay Soward
Torry Holt, David Boston, Troy Edwards
Kevin Dyson, Randy Moss, Marcus Noah

So in case you weren't counting, that's:
10 really good or better WRs,
9 serviceable WRs who have seen reasonable playing time, and
24 pieces of crap.

That's a 44% hit rate for a decent or better first round WR, and 23% turning out to be a stud.

I would take Houshmandzadeh over all but 7 of the receivers on that list. That is to say, there's a 16% chance of drafting a WR in the first round better than Housh.

No no no no no no no...

If he'll come play here, and it won't cost billions to sign him, I want him.

- C -

psuasskicker

11-27-2008, 08:08 PM

I would take Housh if it was our only option. He is just still a possession receiver, and not a downfield threat.

I want a guy that will stretch the field. That's what we need right now.

No he's not.

This year he has been, because Fitzpatrick is a shitty QB.

The prior three seasons he's averaged 11.4 ypc and 9.3 TDs/year.

He's not a super-speedster or anything, but there aren't many guys that are.

- C -

pyite32

11-27-2008, 09:08 PM

No he's not.

This year he has been, because Fitzpatrick is a shitty QB.

The prior three seasons he's averaged 11.4 ypc and 9.3 TDs/year.

He's not a super-speedster or anything, but there aren't many guys that are.

- C -

That sounds like a possession receiver to me.

D. Mason stats for this year, 12.9 ypc. And we all know as good as Mason has been this year, he is a possession receiver not a deep threat.

That being said, I would take him b/c he is better than Clayton and we could still look for a deep threat in the draft.

Galen Sevinne

11-27-2008, 09:45 PM

This would be a great pick up especially if we could pick up a deep threat as well. i would love to see Mason and Houzy together.

StingerNLG

11-27-2008, 11:01 PM

No he's not.

This year he has been, because Fitzpatrick is a shitty QB.

The prior three seasons he's averaged 11.4 ypc and 9.3 TDs/year.

He's not a super-speedster or anything, but there aren't many guys that are.

- C -

pyite said basically what I was going to respond. You just described a possession receiver. He gets the ball and gets past the sticks; and not much more.

Houshmandzadah has never been considered a downfield threat. Not even with Carson Palmer.

RavensInBrazil

11-27-2008, 11:02 PM

Let's also remember that we're not exactly known for drafting great WRs

deuce

11-27-2008, 11:36 PM

Do not want. Agree we need more of a "big play" guy, plus age, meh. I'd love to draft a young stud receiver to develop with Flacco for the next decade.

RavensDomination

11-28-2008, 02:02 AM

Re: Drafting a WR instead of signing someone like TJ...

No way.

Drafting WRs is a complete crap-shoot.

No no no no no no no...

If he'll come play here, and it won't cost billions to sign him, I want him.

- C -

I totally agree, drafting a WR is hard to do, very hard. The Ravens haven't had much luck. I think the Ravens mantra of "right player, right price" will end up with TJ signing here in the offseason. He might be "just a possession WR" but he's a damn big and a damn good possession receiver. How many Super Bowls did Tom Brady win with a bunch of possession receivers?

A lot of people probably opposed Mason for the same reasons they are opposing TJ, and I think Mason has worked out VERY well for the Ravens, not to mention TJ is a much bigger target and has the same winning attitude.

Merlin

11-28-2008, 06:53 AM

We need to get a deep threat first ; love the Suggs - Anquan Boldin tag and trade scenario. That would be the best scenario by far. We would see the productivity of all of our other receivers pick up significantly.

Dade

11-28-2008, 07:29 AM

I am all for getting Houshmandzadeh for the right price. Agree with everyone that we need a big deep threat receiver. But imagine this WR core: Mason, T.J., a rookie deep threat WR.

HoustonRaven

11-28-2008, 09:17 AM

I would love to see TJ here, assuming the price is right.

The cliched "deep threat receiver" is a crap shoot when you're trying to draft for one.

We wont get a one on one trade (Suggs for Bouldin, for example). And after seeing Bouldin put the ball on the ground two times last night, I am not so sure about him either.

And someone posted "if Ray wants him here". What the hell is that supposed to mean? Last I checked, Ozzie makes the call.

RavinDonnie

11-28-2008, 09:40 AM

Well if Ray wants him then I am sure he will be a Raven... I would rather draft a down field threat, however that have not worked out well. We picked up Mason form the Titans and look at how great that has been for us.

I would rather have whosyoumomma over ocho stinko!

The inmate isn't running the ship anymore. Ray is too worried about getting himself paid to play GM these days which is a good thing. All his buddies he made Ozzie bring in sucked and ruined the team chemistry.

Dave Lap

11-28-2008, 10:11 AM

We just need an upgrade at the wide out spot. A deep threat WR who is big would be ideal but how many of those exist in the NFL? How many are actually available?

WR's in the draft ARE a crapshoot. The draft position we will have this year won't put us in a spot where we can take a highly touted guy. If we trade picks or players to trade up in the draft it could backfire on us.

So what is the best return for our investment?

Probably Housh although a Suggs for Boldin trade could be huge for us.

Housh is proven and he's bigger and better than Clayton.

As much as I love Suggs I think the proposed Boldin trade would bring us out on the better end. The question to ask is if Suggs prevents more points than Boldin could give us. It's hard to say but I think the answer is that Boldin is a skill position player of a high order and would have greater impact. If we had Boldin it would open up a lot of possibilities for our offense. Boldin doesnt have breakaway speed but his yards after the catch ability is huge.

We do have Yamon Figurs who runs like a 4.26 40. He showed that he can get behind the defense and make the catch. We need to see if he can be worked into the offense on a more regular basis.

I usually don't start following the draft until the college bowl games and Senior Bowl etc. so I don't know if there is a "can't miss" prospect out there that we could trade up for. I don't think so. If not, that alone should dictate our strategy to get a proven NFL receiver.

Jeremiah W

11-28-2008, 10:32 AM

psuasskicker

11-28-2008, 11:23 AM

I know drafting Wrs is at least as risky as drafting QBs, but the reward factor makes it worth it even at 44% or what ever. I give our scouting department credit for adding another 10% to any type of draft day gamble

1) It's not 44% that you wind up with a terrific receiver. It's 44% that you don't wind up with a complete piece of crap. That's not a "reward factor." That's an "Oh God I hope this doesn't blow up in my face factor." So no, it's NOT worth that.

2) Have you seen our front office's draft picks at WR?
R1 - Mark Clayton, Travis Taylor
R2 - Patrick Johnson
R3 - Yamon Figurs, Devard Darling
R4 - Marcus Smith, Demetrius Williams, Ron Johnson, Brandon Stokely
R5 - Jermaine Lewis
R6 - Clarence Moore, Javin Hunter, James Rice
R7 - Derek Abney, Justin Harper
Which one of these guys exactly is it that inspires such confidence in our FO's ability to pick WRs that we should spend another R1 or R2 draft choice on a WR because we're more likely to hit on a stud than any other team drafting a WR in those spots?

- C -

UKRavenStockers

11-28-2008, 11:42 AM

First of all I do not care what the passing game is ranked, it is very much improved, and is good enough with what we have under contract. A late 1st round or 2nd round WR would be a good investment, but the top 5 of Mason, Clayton, Williams, Figurs and Smith are good enough for now to develop as long as the O line and running game carry the load and keep the QB clean.

Huh? The bottom four guys between them have 37 catches, Mason on his own his has 56 catches. Clayton can be a decent #3 and maybe with a bit more learning can play Mason's role to a lesser extent when Mason starts to decline, which he's showing no signs of doing. Aside from those two the other three are nothing right now. Marcus Smith is a development guy that I like, but he's nothing yet, we're too deep in a big run to see what he's got just yet but it's safe to say that he's not going to be a major contributor anytime soon. Figurs is a deep threat who isn't a deep threat and Williams has proven countless times that he can't stay healthy, he's fine when he is healthy but he's healthy for about 15 snaps a season, and that simply isn't enough for your #3 WR.

Yes the passing game is improved, but we've gotta upgrade this passing attack and to me Housh would be an ideal player. Is he the big play threat? No, I don't particularly care about that either, "big play" receivers give you about 10 or so big plays a year and half of them don't make any worthwhile contributions beyond that. Housh is a big receiver and he can work teams over with post routes going over the middle of the field, picking up longer gains in the air. He won't "stretch the field" in the traditional sense, but he stretches it more frequently and more reliably than anything we've got. Mason & his stats are very comparable, yes, but the difference being that Mason is very YAC orientated, Housh picks up those yards with less YAC. I think Housh and Mason would compliment each other very well.

I'd far rather have a guy like Housh and have two WRs who I can gameplan around having 5-10 catches per game each (varying game per game obviously, not suggesting they'll get 160 catches per season), than have a guy who I may or may not get a big play from in the game. I'd far rather have guys like Mason & Housh who will help you win in every 16 games than have a big play guy who will pull of the occassional big game but will have long quiet spells as well.

Jeremiah W

11-28-2008, 11:49 AM

1) It's not 44% that you wind up with a terrific receiver. It's 44% that you don't wind up with a complete piece of crap. That's not a "reward factor." That's an "Oh God I hope this doesn't blow up in my face factor." So no, it's NOT worth that.

2) Have you seen our front office's draft picks at WR?
R1 - Mark Clayton, Travis Taylor
R2 - Patrick Johnson
R3 - Yamon Figurs, Devard Darling
R4 - Marcus Smith, Demetrius Williams, Ron Johnson, Brandon Stokely
R5 - Jermaine Lewis
R6 - Clarence Moore, Javin Hunter, James Rice
R7 - Derek Abney, Justin Harper
Which one of these guys exactly is it that inspires such confidence in our FO's ability to pick WRs that we should spend another R1 or R2 draft choice on a WR because we're more likely to hit on a stud than any other team drafting a WR in those spots?

- C -

How much better would they have been had they had a qb AND oc? I like CLayton. He clearly is not a bust. He may not be an Anquan Boldin or Roy Williams, but he is a playmaker at the NFL and a legit starter on at least half the teams in the leauge. Injury set him back a bit, but he has always produced when healthy and with an accurate QB.

Travis Taylor never turned into the player we needed, but he also was not as terrible as he is made out to be. He was still in the NFL at the start of the season playing for the Panthers. He showed skills and speed enough to pass the blame from the scouts onto himself. He could have been a good Wr if he really wanted to be. I don't think he ever really recovered from the broken collar bone as a rookie, and played too soft.

PJ was another one that had the measurables to justify they draft status, but for a 2nd rounder was pretty busty with the dropsies.

I don't remember Ron J, but 3 out of 4 4th round picks producing players is pretty good. Stokley was and still is a great 3rd WR in the NFL. Williams has shown he can be as well. Smith still may be, he looked good on tape and in the preseason.

Jermaine Lewis made his mark and got his ring.

Clarence Moore has more TDs than most 6th round picks. I still think that if he and Devard Darling had gotten more regular Pt with a real NFL QB they could have stuck around a little longer. Darling got himself a decent 2nd contract for a guy that hardly played at least.

When I look around the NFL at the top WRs, most of them are drafted in the 1st or 2nd round. Some emerge from the later rounds, but most of the top notch guys who draw and beat double coverage are high draft picks. Even the top 5 type guys recently have been good enough to justify that gamble in the future. Andre Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Braylon Edwards, and Calvin Johnson out weigh the busts I think. Crabtree should be this years top 5 WR pick, and I would roll the dice on him, or DHB at the end of the 1st round.

sailorsam

11-28-2008, 12:26 PM

I am all for getting Houshmandzadeh for the right price. Agree with everyone that we need a big deep threat receiver. But imagine this WR core: Mason, T.J., a rookie deep threat WR.

:iagree:

point is--he'd be an upgrade. and DMason is in his 30+s and can't be expeced to play every down forever. imagine DMason out of the slot, single coverage.

StingerNLG

11-28-2008, 12:53 PM

Wow.

How much better would they have been had they had a qb AND oc? I like CLayton. He clearly is not a bust. He may not be an Anquan Boldin or Roy Williams, but he is a playmaker at the NFL and a legit starter on at least half the teams in the leauge. Injury set him back a bit, but he has always produced when healthy and with an accurate QB.

Explain exactly how Mark Clayton has been a playmaker in the NFL???

In 4 seasons Clayton has 182 receptions for 2,252 yards and 9 touchdowns. IN FOUR SEASONS. In 2007 he had ZERO touchdowns.

That's a playmaker to you? Really???

Travis Taylor never turned into the player we needed, but he also was not as terrible as he is made out to be. He was still in the NFL at the start of the season playing for the Panthers. He showed skills and speed enough to pass the blame from the scouts onto himself. He could have been a good Wr if he really wanted to be. I don't think he ever really recovered from the broken collar bone as a rookie, and played too soft.

Wow. Just wow. Travis Taylor is exactly as terrible as he was made out to be. He couldn't catch a ball thrown into his numbers. He has bounced from team to team and can't keep his job. He was held onto way to long in Baltimore.

I remember when I was ran a video game website and I went to New York for a Madden launch party. I talked to Dante Culpepper and we were joking with him about Travis Taylor. He thought Taylor would be fine, and all he needed was a QB who could throw the ball to him. Then of course he found out what we all knew about him already. And that's why he isn't with the Vikings anymore. Oh and why he's not with the Panthers.

Jermaine Lewis made his mark and got his ring.

AS A PUNT/KICK RETURNER

Clarence Moore has more TDs than most 6th round picks. I still think that if he and Devard Darling had gotten more regular Pt with a real NFL QB they could have stuck around a little longer. Darling got himself a decent 2nd contract for a guy that hardly played at least.

Wait. So Clarence Moore has more TD's than most 6th round picks, but it's the QB's fault he wouldn't go over the middle and couldn't hold onto easy passes? I'm not even going to bother with this one.

HoustonRaven

11-28-2008, 12:57 PM

JW has taken wearing the purple glasses to another level.

Jeremiah W

11-28-2008, 04:14 PM

Wow.

Explain exactly how Mark Clayton has been a playmaker in the NFL???

In 4 seasons Clayton has 182 receptions for 2,252 yards and 9 touchdowns. IN FOUR SEASONS. In 2007 he had ZERO touchdowns.

2007 I am going to forget about. I saw enough to know the Ravens would bounce back, and that the team was not quite as bad as the record.
I can hit you with stats for wrs with comparable 1st 4year numbers like Derrick Mason or even Chris Carter, but there are too many variables starting with qb play and scheme to pick apart the numbers of a young WR that has been hurt for half the 4 years he has been in the NFL.

Wow. Just wow. Travis Taylor is exactly as terrible as he was made out to be. He couldn't catch a ball thrown into his numbers. He has bounced from team to team, and managed to stay in the NFL. Not worth a 1st round pick, but not as bad a pick as Mike Williams for example.

Wait. So Clarence Moore has more TD's than most 6th round picks, but it's the QB's fault he wouldn't go over the middle and couldn't hold onto easy passes? I'm not even going to bother with this one.

I am not going to defend the draft record of Oz, or the ability of WRs taken in the 4th-6th round. If they made the team they were good enough, but Randy Moss could have been here and he would have had numbers like he did in Oakland.

Now that we actually have a Qb and OC willing to try to win the game, WRs will not think of Harm City as the place to kill thier numbers, but for all the stats Ponytail pimp juice and Ocho Stinko put up (mostly with Carson Palmer throwing 40 times a game) how many wins do they got for all them stats? Not as many as Mark Clayton and Derrick Mason.

StingerNLG

11-28-2008, 05:33 PM

That was the worst response to factually getting proven wrong I have ever in my life seen. This is why I have such a hard time reading your posts Jeremiah.

Wow.

Jeremiah W

11-28-2008, 05:59 PM

That was the worst response to factually getting proven wrong I have ever in my life seen. This is why I have such a hard time reading your posts Jeremiah.

Wow.

You think your opinions are facts. That is why you struggle to comprehend where I am coming from. It is not a fact that Clayton is a bust. It is not even a valid opinion when supported by a snap shot of stats.

Travis Taylor could be concidered a bust, but he was not so bad that they should not draft another WR that high. He should not have been drafted that high, but he should have been drafted and been better than he was, but that is why it is a gamble.

Attacking the front office by throwing Demetrius Williams, Marcus Smith and fellow 4th rounder and TD in the Sb scoring WR Stokley and the best return man the Ravens ever had out of the 5th round, into the mix like they were busts or somethng is ridiculous.

I trust the FO to draft a Wr in the 1st or 2nd round if they think they are the right player at the right price, and pass on them and trade down if they do not grade out as high as a Ray Rice. I also doubt they would over pay Ponytail, but would put him opposite Mason in a heartbeat for the right price. Either way its a gamble and I would rather roll the dice on a draft pick at a lower price. Only the top 10 picks are crazy expensive.

HoustonRaven

11-28-2008, 06:03 PM

JW,

It's not Sting. It's you.

purplepoe

11-28-2008, 06:07 PM

That was the worst response to factually getting proven wrong I have ever in my life seen. This is why I have such a hard time reading your posts Jeremiah.

Wow.

Why bother with facts?

They are overrated.

PP

Jeremiah W

11-28-2008, 06:27 PM

HoustonRaven

11-28-2008, 06:31 PM

Jeremiah W

11-28-2008, 06:41 PM

Didn't you also call for Flacco's ousting, in favor for the doughy and over the hill Culpepper?

Yes, you indeed said our offense would be fine. You also said anything about everything about this team is fine / ok / SB contender etc.

You threw everything and anything at the wall and now your claiming success because a few things you've said have now stuck (sort of).

Kudos.

Other than being right that the Loveboat was not a good fit for the Ravens, what of your preseason predictions have stuck? I never called for Flacco's ousting, just his development behind a veteran, or at least a real one to compete with that has actually played some good football in the NFL. Daunte may not have been as good as I though he may be, but he is playing on the Lions after a half season retired. he is not good, but he was not as bad as the Lion D, and all I wanted was to get him a workout and a look as the possible comp for Boller for the roster spot if you care to look back.

I also did not put the Ravens in the SB before the season, I just said they could win the division with some half decent Qb play. I knew the Steelers would be good but beatable and questionable on the O line, and the Clowns and Bungles would fold. I think I had the Ravens winning 9 or 11 if they got a QB.

purplepoe

11-28-2008, 06:46 PM

The 3 of you guys have been calling kool aid since the preseason when I said Clayton would be fine as the #2 WR and the Ravens would be a good offense/ contender if they found a QB. I wanted a big WR, but thought Demetrius Williams could play that deep vertical role and maybe later on Smith could emerge as the over the middle possesion WR. clayton has done nothing but make plays when he gets the ball. He got hurt more often than you want a starting WR to be out, but I never saw a lack of talent or hands.

The Ravens have scored about 30 points per game over the last 6. Is there really a glaring need on offense? I would think it may be more at TE than WR if there was an area of concern that a free agent or high draft pick could address. Like I said all along though the talent is there on offense. You can cherry pick players all you like that did not live up to the status, but Clayton was no bust and Travis Taylor was along time ago. I doubt they draft a 1st round WR, but would expect that over signing TJ for the type of money some other team would pay him.

Pppphhh. You wanted Culpepper dude.

It's really a shame that this is the first season you've posted on this board. I'm sure during the 9 game losing streak last year you would've told us how close we were to winning 7 of those games.

You have the nuts to say you don't care about the pass offense's rank yet cite the defense's #2 rank when it suits you and helps you in a debate?

The fact is this team has indeed improved on offense. Nobody in their right mind would argue that point. However, the passing offense absolutely needs an upgrade at the WR position. Cam Cameron said it himself and let Ozzie know about it. You can sit here and tell us how you know this and that all you want. You sat here when this team was 2-3 and told us how even though that was their record, it really shouldn't be because they almost won vs Tenn and Pitt.

The Ravens have scored about 30 points per game over the last 6. Is there really a glaring need on offense?

Yes, there is.

PP

Jeremiah W

11-28-2008, 06:58 PM

Pppphhh. You wanted Culpepper dude.

It's really a shame that this is the first season you've posted on this board. I'm sure during the 9 game losing streak last year you would've told us how close we were to winning 7 of those games.

You have the nuts to say you don't care about the pass offense's rank yet cite the defense's #2 rank when it suits you and helps you in a debate?

The fact is this team has indeed improved on offense. Nobody in their right mind would argue that point. However, the passing offense absolutely needs an upgrade at the WR position. Cam Cameron said it himself and let Ozzie know about it. You can sit here and tell us how you know this and that all you want. You sat here when this team was 2-3 and told us how even though that was their record, it really shouldn't be because they almost won vs Tenn and Pitt.

Yes, there is.

PP

Your 4 win projection trumps my loveboat request. The fact is I was right and you can;t handle it. I did not say we should not upgrade teh WR core, but like always we disagree as to how it should be done and how much of a priority it really is. Did Fitz and Boldin just get good? Do Ocho and TJ really help the Bungles play dfense, at all? Moss was on a 1 win team in Oak. #1 Wrs, and fatassy football stats don't win football games by themselves. Even Peyton only has the 1 ring with Marvin and Wayne going through thier primes, and it was the D that carried them to the AFC championship game.

Personally I think Ponytail is a loser and a bit of questionable off season target. Unlike the loveboat, he definitly could play and start on almost any team, but his age and lack of blazing speed make him a bit of a long term risk for a big contact.

purplepoe

11-28-2008, 07:45 PM

Your 4 win projection trumps my loveboat request. The fact is I was right and you can;t handle it. I did not say we should not upgrade teh WR core, but like always we disagree as to how it should be done and how much of a priority it really is. Did Fitz and Boldin just get good? Do Ocho and TJ really help the Bungles play dfense, at all? Moss was on a 1 win team in Oak. #1 Wrs, and fatassy football stats don't win football games by themselves. Even Peyton only has the 1 ring with Marvin and Wayne going through thier primes, and it was the D that carried them to the AFC championship game.

Personally I think Ponytail is a loser and a bit of questionable off season target. Unlike the loveboat, he definitly could play and start on almost any team, but his age and lack of blazing speed make him a bit of a long term risk for a big contact.

The difference between you and me is that I can acknowledge when I am wrong or off on a prediction.

This team has absolutely exceeded my expectations.

You sat here 6 or 7 weeks ago and professed that you were right even though admitted you were wrong. People don't forget.

You ignore facts when they don't suit your argument.

As far as TJ. If they take a look at him and get him to sign a reasonable deal, that's great. If not? No big deal.

I hear Ozzie is looking for a right hand man. You really should get your resume together and send it in. He doesn't know what he's missing.

PP

Dade

11-29-2008, 06:54 AM

PP, some people just have to be right no matter what, best to ignore them.

StingerNLG

11-29-2008, 10:09 AM

You think your opinions are facts. That is why you struggle to comprehend where I am coming from. It is not a fact that Clayton is a bust. It is not even a valid opinion when supported by a snap shot of stats.

This is why people claim you don't know what you are talking about. It's because you really don't. I'm not even going to address the rest of your response to me because it's flat out incorrect.

I don't think my opinion is fact. In this case, it IS fact. You said Clayton was a "playmaker", and yet you can offer no evidence to it. It's because there is none.

So please. Do yourself a favor. Step back and check yourself before people just stop talking to you altogether.

psuasskicker

11-29-2008, 10:31 AM

I like CLayton. He clearly is not a bust. He may not be an Anquan Boldin or Roy Williams, but he is a playmaker at the NFL and a legit starter on at least half the teams in the leauge.

LOLOLOLOL

Jets - Cotchery and Coles, no.
Patriots - Moss and Welker, no.
Dolphins - yes, #2 behind Ginn
Bills - Evans and Hardy, no.
Steelers - Ward and Holmes, no.
Browns - Edwards and Stallworth, no.
Bengals - Ocho and Housh, no.
Titans - yes, #1/2
Colts - Wayne and Harrison, no.
Jaguars - yes, #1/2
Texans - Johnson and Walter, no.
Broncos - Marshall and Royal, no.
Chargers - Chambers and Jackson, no.
Raiders - yes, #1/2
Chiefs - yes, #2 behind Bowe
Giants - Plax and Toomer, no.
Cowboys - TO and Williams, no.
Redskins - yes, #2 behind Moss
Eagles - yes, #2 behind Jackson
Bears - yes, #1/2
Vikings - yes, #2 behind Berrian
Packers - Jennings and Driver, no.
Lions - yes, #2 behind Johnson
Bucs - yes, #2 behind Galloway
Panthers - Smith and Muhammad, no.
Falcons - White and Jenkins, no.
Saints - Colston and Moore, no.
Cards - Fitz and Boldin, no.
49ers - yes, #2 behind Bruce
Rams - Holt and Avant, no.
Seahawks - yes, #2 behind Branch

He'd probably be a starter on 13 teams other than the Ravens, and only might be a #1 on four of them, and that's only because the WR corps on those teams are really bad.

Clayton is a #3 WR in this league, and he gets forced into a higher slot by default of being on a team with a terrible set of options behind him. If we got Housh in the off-season, he's instantly the #3 option.

He is serviceable and nothing more. He is in no way "good" and cannot be held up as an example of a successful and solid pick in the first round.

Travis Taylor being argued as anything other than "bust" is laughable.

- C -

Jeremiah W

11-29-2008, 11:12 AM

This is why people claim you don't know what you are talking about. It's because you really don't. I'm not even going to address the rest of your response to me because it's flat out incorrect.

I don't think my opinion is fact. In this case, it IS fact. You said Clayton was a "playmaker", and yet you can offer no evidence to it. It's because there is none.

So please. Do yourself a favor. Step back and check yourself before people just stop talking to you altogether.

Let me step back and check myself....Ok I am still fine and you are still an idiot. Go ahead and ignore me. I am sooo afraid of that. Just cant wait to her your witty responses or handfull of "facts" about NFL players.

If you don't think Clayton is good enough that is fine. It is your opinion, not a fact. It is not the opinon of the team aparently, but whatever you are obviously always right. I never claimed I knew what I was talking about, I just prove it or argue as best I can with people with dubious football comprehension.

So to be clear. It is my opinion that Clayton is a good #2 NFL wr with enough game to be in the mix for years, not someone I can't wait to get out of town lke Travis Taylor. The guy drove me nuts too, but not because he did not have talent, but because it seemed like he looked to go to the ground instead of the endzone and looked for the saftey instead of the football.

I also think TJ is a top 15 NFL WR and obvious upgrade, but not worth what he is going to get offered. I do not like his ability to get open when Ocho Stinko is not drawing the double teams. On our team he would be the #1 and Mason would never be double covered, but I would still rather the team draft a guy with size and speed in the 1st or 2nd round and just develop the guys we have. Because in my opinion, the offense is well on its way to being a dominant unit already and does not need to add a huge salary at WR.

PurpleRulz

11-29-2008, 11:22 AM

1. I would take TJ Houshmanzadeh if we follow it up with a drafted WR (round 1 or 2) that s a deep threat. (Percy Harvin, DHB, Jeremy Maclin, Kenny Britt).

2. You can't let past failures at drafting a certain position stop you from taking a WR. Ozzie did not let the failure of Boller stop him from taking Flacco. Now, we have our franchise QB.

3. I would love Anquan Boldin, but that is not likely to happen. I sure wouldn't trade Suggs for Boldin. Suggs is our future on defense.

PurpleRulz

11-29-2008, 11:30 AM

If Clayton were a playmaker, then imagine the year that Flacco would have had right now. While Clayton did catch a deep TD pass and got one this past week, Clayton has dropped so many passes and was always denied when fighting for the ball.

Playmakers know how to go up, fight for the ball, and come down with it over 70% of the time.

Folks will criticize how Flacco throws that ball, but even Peyton Manning does not put every ball in the right spot. Sometimes the QB puts it up and depends on the WR to make the play. For instance, Matt Ryan threw a pass that was a little high to Roddy White, but White went up and just took the ball and ran it in for a TD. Clayton's no playmaker.

Getting back to TJ Houshmanzadeh, I am not sure if he's a WR that will fight for the ball, but he sure does know how to move the chains. It would be tough to defend both Mason and TJ. Add in, say DHB or Maclin, to partner with DW (if he can keep his butt healthy) as the deep threat and suddenly the offense is opened up for a guy like Ray Rice to do some major damage.

PurpleRulz

11-29-2008, 11:37 AM

This offense is far from fixed and it desperately needs a legit outside threat.

I'll take an established WR over drafting a WR high anyday.

Not saying I want TJ but I do want a proven guy.

This pass offense is ranked 29th. I'm not sure how that's fixed.

Are we on the right track with Flacco, Cameron and Co? Sure. But there are more pieces needed.

PP

I hear you, but disagree. You say we need "pieces", well let's look at what is already here.

1. We have a young strong OL that is playing very good and has the potential to be great next year.

2. We have two young RBs in Leron McClain and Ray Rice. We'll have McGahee for another year due to the cap, and whatever he adds is icing.

3. We finally have our Franchise QB!!!!

4. We will have Derrick Mason for one more year. Here is where we need a piece and that can be added with the signing of TJ Housh or a trade maybe for Boldin or someone else. (Chad Johnson? Doubt it, but never say never). We could also use a deep threat via the draft.

5. The draft will add any depth that is needed.

So I count two pieces, but not many pieces. I know you did not say "many" but your statement implies that we need a lot of pieces on offense, and I count at most two pieces.

StingerNLG

11-29-2008, 11:51 AM

Let me step back and check myself....Ok I am still fine and you are still an idiot. Go ahead and ignore me. I am sooo afraid of that. Just cant wait to her your witty responses or handfull of "facts" about NFL players.

You calling me an idiot is irony at it's very best.

I'm sorry if my actually looking up the facts to bust your ignorance bothers you.

If you don't think Clayton is good enough that is fine. It is your opinion, not a fact.

Except it is a fact. It's a fact that is easily looked up.

It is not the opinon of the team aparently, but whatever you are obviously always right.

Moron, do you know why they held onto Travis Taylor for so long? It's the same reason they are holding onto Mark Clayton this long. He was their 1st round pick. I believe he still has time left on his contract. Oh, and there is no one better on the team at the moment to push him off.

Answer me this oh wise one. If Mark Clayton is this "playmaker" you claimed he was, why is Derrick Mason the #1 receiver on this team?

I never claimed I knew what I was talking about,

And you lie.

I just prove it or argue as best I can with people with dubious football comprehension.

So..........what you say is you argue with yourself?

And you haven't proven shit here chet. You make these blanket statements, and you have yet to offer up a shred of evidence or actual knowledge about what you are talking about.

You have STILL yet to prove to any of us here how Mark Clayton is a "playmaker" in the NFL, or how Travis Taylor wasn't as bad as he showed on the field. You don't because you can't. The facts to backup such stupid claims doesn't exist. And so your best response is to ignore the facts and stats when they are presented to you, and continue to pretend you know more than everyone here when it is almost blatently obvious to everyone here that you do not.

Well, everyone but you. But then again, they always say people are legends in their own mind. You fit that bill son.

Let me put it in very plain terms. Your opinions so far have been utter garbage, and multiple people on this forum with WAY more football knowledge than you have continually called you on it. Thus, the irony of you calling me an idiot.

PurpleRulz

11-29-2008, 12:02 PM

Stinger,

This season, I have taped every game, and in every instance where Clayton has had to fight the defender for the ball, he has lost. In every instance. The deep TD pass, he was wide open. The TD he caught this past week, was on a busted play and an outstanding thrown ball by Flacco.

Playmakers do what their name implies, they make plays! Those guys do ask the QB to make perfect passes. They say, "just put the ball within my vicinity and I'll get it even if I have to take it from the defender."

Mark Clayton is no playmaker. There are no numbers that reflect this, but Clayton has lost every battle to fight defenders for balls. He even dropped four passes, or let the pass sail through his hands, that were sure TDs.

I like Clayton and thought he would have developed into what Derrick Mason is doing right now, but it does not look like it is going to happen.

Clayton does have some value as our 3rd WR, but you don't take WRs like that with the first pick.

I am also ready to give up on Demetrius "Dan Cody" Williams.

Give me a WR corp of:

1. TJ Houshmanzadeh or Boldin
2. Derrick Mason
3. Darrius Heyward Bey or Jeremy Maclin
4. Mark Clayton
5. Demetrius Williams
6. Marcus Smith

RavensDomination

11-29-2008, 12:02 PM

Stinger, how can you prove he isn't a good receiver? Last year aside he had a solid rookie campaign and nearly 1000 yards with a good QB.

I'm not saying Clayton is Steve Smith, but you act like he has never made a big play. He has made big plays. Games against the Vikings in his rookie year and Pittsburgh in his second year really stand out. He has had others as well. Last year with injuries he had a bad year, who didn't on offense besides McGahee? What WR would put up numbers in our offense last year? You can't judge how good a WR is by stats, look at Moss in Oakland, or Peerless Price on the flip side. The WR maybe more so than any other position is dependent on a number of external factors, the o-line play, the QB play, the play calling, the coverage, etc.

RavensDomination

11-29-2008, 12:06 PM

Stinger,

This season, I have taped every game, and in every instance where Clayton has had to fight the defender for the ball, he has lost. In every instance. The deep TD pass, he was wide open. The TD he caught this past week, was on a busted play and an outstanding thrown ball by Flacco.

Playmakers do what their name implies, they make plays! Those guys do ask the QB to make perfect passes. They say, "just put the ball within my vicinity and I'll get it even if I have to take it from the defender."

Mark Clayton is no playmaker. There are no numbers that reflect this, but Clayton has lost every battle to fight defenders for balls. He even dropped four passes, or let the pass sail through his hands, that were sure TDs.

I like Clayton and thought he would have developed into what Derrick Mason is doing right now, but it does not look like it is going to happen.

Clayton made an excellent catch on that Flacco TD bullet. Ask yourself this question - does Braylon Edwards make that catch? Come on dude, give credit where credit is due. You act like he had nothing to do with that TD, he made a great move, got behind the DB's, caught a rocket, and ran it for 6. A great play all around from everyone involved.

I don't know what passes you are referring to that were "sure TD's." But yes, the deep TD pass he WAS wide open - because he beat the DB badly and got himself open. Good lord you people use anything you can to explain away his successes. I don't get it.

And when Mason is out of the game Clayton runs many of the same routes with the same amount of success.

purplepoe

11-29-2008, 12:07 PM

I hear you, but disagree. You say we need "pieces", well let's look at what is already here.

1. We have a young strong OL that is playing very good and has the potential to be great next year.

2. We have two young RBs in Leron McClain and Ray Rice. We'll have McGahee for another year due to the cap, and whatever he adds is icing.

3. We finally have our Franchise QB!!!!

4. We will have Derrick Mason for one more year. Here is where we need a piece and that can be added with the signing of TJ Housh or a trade maybe for Boldin or someone else. (Chad Johnson? Doubt it, but never say never). We could also use a deep threat via the draft.

5. The draft will add any depth that is needed.

So I count two pieces, but not many pieces. I know you did not say "many" but your statement implies that we need a lot of pieces on offense, and I count at most two pieces.

No, we are in agreement.

We need to address the TE spot and get better talent at the WR spot.

I'm as excited with Flacco and the way things have progressed as anyone. But it's very apparent to me that we need some upgrades to get to where we need to be.

Cameron himself has said as much. I know some people on this board think what we have is enough. I don't and when the offensive coordinator says he wants better talent on his side of the ball, I think I'll stick with him.

PP

HoustonRaven

11-29-2008, 12:11 PM

And when Mason is out of the game Clayton runs many of the same routes with the same amount of success.

That's about as silly as your stance against the band ...

Clayton, since his arrival, has routinely dropped easy passes and does not fight for balls. This isnt something controversial or an opinion. This is the reputation he has created for himself. Mason, on the other hand, is Clayton's opposite.

Nobody is saying he is not an athlete or has had his moments of glory. What Sting and others are saying is he is not the "playmaker" that JW claims.

Your earlier comparisons to Moss have me scratching my head, too. Moss, if anything, proves Sting's point. Moss has success when he has a decent QB throwing to him. Clayton now has a decent QB and he has 4 drops this year and still routinely wont fight for the ball.

He is only a starter because there is nobody better on the team. Period.

RavensDomination

11-29-2008, 12:31 PM

That's about as silly as your stance against the band ...

Clayton, since his arrival, has routinely dropped easy passes and does not fight for balls. This isnt something controversial or an opinion. This is the reputation he has created for himself. Mason, on the other hand, is Clayton's opposite.

It's not an opinion? Ok, then prove it. Prove he has "routinely" dropped easy passes and "doesn't fight for the ball." I have every game on DVR, I'll be waiting. I remember one pass in the end zone when a DB made a good play by busting up the catch, I believe it was at Cleveland.

Nobody is saying he is not an athlete or has had his moments of glory. What Sting and others are saying is he is not the "playmaker" that JW claims.

Your earlier comparisons to Moss have me scratching my head, too. Moss, if anything, proves Sting's point. Moss has success when he has a decent QB throwing to him. Clayton now has a decent QB and he has 4 drops this year and still routinely wont fight for the ball.

Clayton has a rookie QB throwing to him. Flacco is looking for Mason..A LOT. Don't get me wrong, I love Flacco, but he's still a rookie. Moss had horrible numbers with a horrible offense, just like Clayton. When Clayton had McNair look at the numbers he put up. The proof is there, he can be a solid WR in this league, I don't know about a "playmaker" but he can be a Mason type receiver, no doubt.

HoustonRaven

11-29-2008, 12:41 PM

It's not an opinion? Ok, then prove it. Prove he has "routinely" dropped easy passes and "doesn't fight for the ball." I have every game on DVR, I'll be waiting. I remember one pass in the end zone when a DB made a good play by busting up the catch, I believe it was at Cleveland

Purple glasses. :grbac:

It's his reputation in the league. And now I wont do any research for you. See PurpleRulz post above. Dropping 4 VERY easy passes this season is not a matter of opinion either.

Clayton has a rookie QB throwing to him. Flacco is looking for Mason..A LOT. Don't get me wrong, I love Flacco, but he's still a rookie. Moss had horrible numbers with a horrible offense, just like Clayton. When Clayton had McNair look at the numbers he put up. The proof is there, he can be a solid WR in this league, I don't know about a "playmaker" but he can be a Mason type receiver, no doubt.

Moss has a career of success and one bad year on a horrible team with no QB. He had immediate success in Minnesota and continued success in NE. The fact you are even mentioning Moss and Clayton in the same sentence if mind-boggling.

McNair and Clayton ... yeah, really impressive ... 939 yards and 5 TD's in 2006. Same McNair throwing to him in 2007 .... 531 yards and a big goose egg for TD's. Yeah, that's some proof you're throwing around there.

Excuse me while I yawn a lot. And those are solid stats for a number 3 receiver, which is all he is good for.

If by proof you mean he can excel to mediocrity, then yes we are in agreement.

Jeremiah W

11-29-2008, 01:01 PM

I am not sure what color the glasses Sting and HR are wearing, but they can not see talent through them. They are really good at throwing around stats, to support short sighted opinions though and taking a reasonable debate way too personal.

I called Clayton a "playmaker" because I have seen him take short passes to the house. He has good feild vison and running ability, good hands and good route running. He is a good WR. He maybe should be our #3. I have been trying to get the ravens to get a #1wr for years, only to come around to the fact that the WR is so tied to the QB, it would not have mattered if we had Moss all this time, the O would still have sucked, but perhaps a decent Qb would have come here before McNair when he was mostly washed up. McNair got the ball to Clayton though and he made plays, and even has some stats to back up that opinion. Early this season, Clayton clearly was not even in the gameplan other than a trick play or as the 3rd or 4th read for a rookie Qb told to make 2 reads. As they have opened up the playbok, and allowed Joe to go through his progressions in the pocket, Clayton has gotten more involved and as is his nature, he makes plays when he gets the ball. What he does not do well, is why they do still need a big physical WR with speed, but like I have said the best way to get one without over paying is to draft one or two every year and hope they develop into starters in the 3rd or 4th season.

RavensDomination

11-29-2008, 01:01 PM

Purple glasses. :grbac:

It's his reputation in the league. And now I wont do any research for you. See PurpleRulz post above. Dropping 4 VERY easy passes this season is not a matter of opinion either.

Purple glasses because I call you out? Funny. Again, his "reputation in the league." Care to back that up? Who the hell are you anyway, Peter King? Did your "league sources" tell you that Mike Preston? Give me a break. Again, prove it. Prove 4 very easy passes were dropped. That's all I ask, like I said I have every game on DVR.

Moss has a career of success and one bad year on a horrible team with no QB. He had immediate success in Minnesota and continued success in NE. The fact you are even mentioning Moss and Clayton in the same sentence if mind-boggling.

McNair and Clayton ... yeah, really impressive ... 939 yards and 5 TD's in 2006. Same McNair throwing to him in 2007 .... 531 yards and a big goose egg for TD's. Yeah, that's some proof you're throwing around there.

The point in using Moss, which is very commonly done, is that no matter how good of a WR you are it doesn't mean anything if several external factors are working against you. Clayton has shown to be a good WR in the McNair year, how many #2's put up 939 yards and 5 TD's? You must not play fantasy, those are solid #2 WR numbers, maybe low TD's but we used Heap a lot in the red zone or we would run the ball in. It was Billick offense. Not to mention the fact that Mason had to get his 7-9 receptions a game to keep him happy.

Last year, in case you missed it, McNair was a shell of his former self, and Boller/Smith combo stunk. Not sure if you caught the fact that our entire team stunk last year (reference the Moss analogy).

HoustonRaven

11-29-2008, 01:11 PM

Purple glasses because I call you out? Funny. Again, his "reputation in the league." Care to back that up? Who the hell are you anyway, Peter King? Did your "league sources" tell you that Mike Preston? Give me a break. Again, prove it. Prove 4 very easy passes were dropped. That's all I ask, like I said I have every game on DVR

If you "DVR every game", you have all the poof you need, right? You and JW can sit back, make some popcorn and fawn over Clayton together now. The rest of the board sees Clayton for what he is -- no more then a #3 receiver in this league. And the stats you so proudly proclaimed would be your proof say just the opposite.

The point in using Moss, which is very commonly done, is that no matter how good of a WR you are it doesn't mean anything if several external factors are working against you. Clayton has shown to be a good WR in the McNair year, how many #2's put up 939 yards and 5 TD's

You brought up McNair, not me. Notice how you said McNair "year" and discounted the 2nd year. Guess what, they both count. So in two years Clayton has posted very vanilla numbers.

You must not play fantasy, those are solid #2 WR numbers, maybe low TD's but we used Heap a lot in the red zone or we would run the ball in. It was Billick offense. Not to mention the fact that Mason had to get his 7-9 receptions a game to keep him happy

And I am the one that needs to do the proving?

This is not a league of what if's, could have been or any other cliche.

StingerNLG

11-29-2008, 01:11 PM

Stinger, how can you prove he isn't a good receiver? Last year aside he had a solid rookie campaign and nearly 1000 yards with a good QB.

When you have a total of 2252 yards in 4 years, that doesn't make you that good of a receiver. Yes, he had one year with 939 yards and 5 touchdowns. That does not put him in the category of "playmaker".

Clayton made an excellent catch on that Flacco TD bullet. Ask yourself this question - does Braylon Edwards make that catch? Come on dude, give credit where credit is due. You act like he had nothing to do with that TD, he made a great move, got behind the DB's, caught a rocket, and ran it for 6. A great play all around from everyone involved.

One catch does not a pro-bowler make. I saw him catch a similar pass from Kyle Boller against the Vikings in 2005. It's the only other "game changing" pass I've seen him catch in 4 years.

When I see the word "playmaker", I think of Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Marvin Harrison, Larry Fitzgerald, Steve Smith, and even Hines Ward.

Mark Clayton is none of these. And you would be hard pressed to get a football expert to put Clayton anywhere NEAR these guys. No matter how hard Jeremiah and his fantasy world wants you to believe. It just isn't there.

Stinger,

This season, I have taped every game, and in every instance where Clayton has had to fight the defender for the ball, he has lost. In every instance. The deep TD pass, he was wide open. The TD he caught this past week, was on a busted play and an outstanding thrown ball by Flacco.

Demetrius Williams also caught a wide open ball for a touchdown a couple weeks ago. Clarance Moore before he got soft and developed alligator arms did the same. Are we calling them playmakers now too?

PR, you hit it right on the head.

psuasskicker

11-29-2008, 01:41 PM

[Clayton] has good feild vison and running ability, good hands and good route running. He is a good WR.

heh...

You're pretty funny, dude.

- C -

UKRavenStockers

11-29-2008, 01:47 PM

Clayton's a solid WR who can contribute to an offence, but since his promising campaign in 2006 he's really flattered to deceive. He's a capable contributor but I don't see why you wouldn't look to upgrade on him. He's far too similar a receiver to Mason, small body, possession type who looks to work underneath defences. He's not got the body size or the strength to muscle defences over the middle and not got the speed to burn guys or stretch a defence. I'm happy to keep him aboard as the #3 WR and groom him to take Mason's role (if he can pick things up when Mason starts to decline), but I think we've got to look to upgrade that #2 WR spot and get a receiver more complimentary to Mason's skill set to play opposite him and give defences something different to look at. Right now they've got pretty much identical receivers coming at them from either side of the field, just that Mason's much better and much more dangerous than Clayton. That's not a situation I'm happy with.

purplepoe

11-29-2008, 02:06 PM

UKRavenStockers

11-29-2008, 02:16 PM

The offensive coordinator and the FO know the WR corps needs to be upgraded.

It's not a secret really.

Clayton has been a disappointment overall. He's not terrible but he's not game changer worth the lofty draft pick.

I wonder how Clayton would be viewed by some on this thread if he were on another team. Would you really be worried about him as a fan of another team that's about to face the Ravens?

If you're honest with yourself, you know the answer to that question.

PP

Very true and I think psu's list at the top points that out entirely and is even a bit generous if I'm being perfectly honest. Clayton is a contributor, that's all most WRs are around the league, but he's not a particularly consistent contributor, hence our struggles even this season finding a reliable second option, proof enough of that is that our 2nd/3rd string/3rd down back (Ray Rice) is second on the team in receptions. For any team with a consistent #2 WR that simply would not be the case. Clayton has either got to re-up his game down the stretch or he's going to have to re-establish his position in the team from the #3 WR role, I don't think there's anyway we don't look to upgrade the position in the off-season unless Clayton has a storming close to the year, and it'd need to be something very special.

psuasskicker

11-29-2008, 03:06 PM

Very true and I think psu's list at the top points that out entirely and is even a bit generous if I'm being perfectly honest.

I think my list is exceptionally generous and that there are in fact probably less than 10 teams he'd actually be a starter for right now.

- C -

PurpleRulz

11-29-2008, 03:20 PM

The offensive coordinator and the FO know the WR corps needs to be upgraded.

It's not a secret really.

Clayton has been a disappointment overall. He's not terrible but he's not game changer worth the lofty draft pick.

I wonder how Clayton would be viewed by some on this thread if he were on another team. Would you really be worried about him as a fan of another team that's about to face the Ravens?

If you're honest with yourself, you know the answer to that question.

PP

This is a true assessment. It is true that Cameron was at Ozzie's office almost immediately after he was hired and has lobbied loudly for better offensive talent at both WR and TE. (I forgot about TE, so I guess the "more pieces" assessment was accurate on your part. My bad).

You don't draft future number 3 WRs with your first pick and that's what we did with Clayton. He is not terrible and does some things good, but with the first pick, you expect extraordinary and impact. Clayton really should be doing the things that Mason is currently doing. Mason has fought for so many passes this season and has developed a comfort zone with Flacco.

That said, we should not allow our misses with Travis Taylor and Mark Clayton to keep us from trying again. Both DHB and Jeremy Maclin provide the skillset that we need to stretch our offense.

(Considering that DHB is hurt and not playing today, either he will opt to stay for his Senior season or he will go second round at best. I'd take him if we trade down to the top of the second round).

Jeremiah W

11-29-2008, 03:46 PM

HoustonRaven

11-29-2008, 03:55 PM

:34853_lolpoint:
Compare numbers and you would have to say Clayton is still on HOF pace of Chris Carter and Derrick Mason.

This might just be the funniest thing you have ever said. Bar none.

And did you really just throw up three links to individual stats, Mr. Stats Dont Tell the Whole Picture?

xmradiodave

11-29-2008, 04:14 PM

Compare numbers and you would have to say Clayton is still on HOF pace of Chris Carter and Derrick Mason.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh174/BaltimoreMariners/Evil_Monkey_301.gif

purplepoe

11-29-2008, 04:32 PM

I was having this argument about Clayton 3 weeks ago with TL when he called Clayton a bust. He has more numbers than Mason and Chris Carter in his first 4 years. Only one season with a competent Qb and a hand full of games lost to injury.

Clayton looks like a playmaker to me. he has got to stay healthy and become a target of the QB, but with the ball in his hands, he can make plays, and he has proven it. He just has to keep doing it. Calling him a bust is beyond an unfair assessment, and does not take into consideration any of the circumstances. Mike Williams is a bust. Clayton is an NFL WR, who starts on a winning team. He may not be all we hoped yet, but he is not even close to a bust, who in my view is a guy who can not even start on a bad team.

http://www.nfl.com/players/markclayton/profile?id=CLA796702
http://www.nfl.com/players/criscarter/profile?id=CAR632736
http://www.nfl.com/players/derrickmason/profile?id=MAS078652

Compare numbers and you would have to say Clayton is still on HOF pace of Chris Carter and Derrick Mason. I do not think he is headed to Canton, but I also think that he could have Ocho Stinko type numbers playing with Palmer. Perhaps when Flacco starts playing like Peyton or Palmer, Clayton will be getting some Wayne or Harrison type Ponytail pimp juice stats. He still may develop into the player we thought he would be when drafted. Mason and Chris Carter took a while to start producing the way they do, and a whole lot of it has to do with the Qb and amount of times he is asked to throw and the type of routes.

I am all about upgrading the passing game by drafting a #1 Wr and TE with the first 2 picks, but I doubt they will get involved in bidding on TJ. I also think they can continue to get better with the guys they already have as Joe and the O line get better.

The reason Clayton wasn't getting involved early is because he isn't that good.

The coaches and FO view him as a disappointment and want to upgrade the WR position. If he had panned out, the WR position wouldn't be such a pressing need.

I dunno what world you live in but this passing offense is far from complete. Not even close. It's headed in the right direction.

The powers that be will address what clearly needs to be addressed and that is talent at the WR and TE positions.

As far as the bust label. People have different meanings for it. Some people call a player a bust if he's a monumental failure (Leaf). Others call a player a bust if he's drafted high (Clayton) and is a disappointment. Clayton falls into the latter category. I probably have called him a bust but I don't mean it in the Leaf sense. But he's absolutely been a huge disappointment and to argue that is just plain silly. Can he play in this league? Sure, he's your run of the mill WR. The problem is he was drafted in the 1st round and therefore being run of the mill isn't gonna cut it for many people.

PP

Dade

11-29-2008, 04:48 PM

I was having this argument about Clayton 3 weeks ago with TL when he called Clayton a bust. He has more numbers than Mason and Chris Carter in his first 4 years. Only one season with a competent Qb and a hand full of games lost to injury.

Clayton looks like a playmaker to me. he has got to stay healthy and become a target of the QB, but with the ball in his hands, he can make plays, and he has proven it. He just has to keep doing it. Calling him a bust is beyond an unfair assessment, and does not take into consideration any of the circumstances. Mike Williams is a bust. Clayton is an NFL WR, who starts on a winning team. He may not be all we hoped yet, but he is not even close to a bust, who in my view is a guy who can not even start on a bad team.

http://www.nfl.com/players/markclayton/profile?id=CLA796702
http://www.nfl.com/players/criscarter/profile?id=CAR632736
http://www.nfl.com/players/derrickmason/profile?id=MAS078652

Compare numbers and you would have to say Clayton is still on HOF pace of Chris Carter and Derrick Mason. I do not think he is headed to Canton, but I also think that he could have Ocho Stinko type numbers playing with Palmer. Perhaps when Flacco starts playing like Peyton or Palmer, Clayton will be getting some Wayne or Harrison type Ponytail pimp juice stats. He still may develop into the player we thought he would be when drafted. Mason and Chris Carter took a while to start producing the way they do, and a whole lot of it has to do with the Qb and amount of times he is asked to throw and the type of routes.

I am all about upgrading the passing game by drafting a #1 Wr and TE with the first 2 picks, but I doubt they will get involved in bidding on TJ. I also think they can continue to get better with the guys they already have as Joe and the O line get better.

WOW.

I cant believe what I just read. Do you seriously think Clayton will have a HOF career?

Well going by that logic, since Flacco has better numbers than Peyton Manning in his rookie year to this point, lets get his bust in Canton ready!

JW all we are saying is that for a first round pick, Clayton has seriously under achieved and has turned into a number 3 WR. Some if not most consider that a bust.

Back on topic, T.J. would be a good addition, but only for the right price. Plus drafting a WR in the draft.

We cant give up drafting a WR because we haven't had success. If the FO thought like that then we wouldn't have Flacco.

StingerNLG

11-29-2008, 04:59 PM

Ok, now we're just getting into comedy gold here.

We've gone from Mark Clayton being a playmaker to being a HOF candidate?

Jeremiah W

11-29-2008, 05:03 PM

The reason Clayton wasn't getting involved early is because he isn't that good.

The coaches and FO view him as a disappointment and want to upgrade the WR position. If he had panned out, the WR position wouldn't be such a pressing need.

I dunno what world you live in but this passing offense is far from complete. Not even close. It's headed in the right direction.

The powers that be will address what clearly needs to be addressed and that is talent at the WR and TE positions.

As far as the bust label. People have different meanings for it. Some people call a player a bust if he's a monumental failure (Leaf). Others call a player a bust if he's drafted high (Clayton) and is a disappointment. Clayton falls into the latter category. I probably have called him a bust but I don't mean it in the Leaf sense. But he's absolutely been a huge disappointment and to argue that is just plain silly. Can he play in this league? Sure, he's your run of the mill WR. The problem is he was drafted in the 1st round and therefore being run of the mill isn't gonna cut it for many people.

PP

If I understand your position, we are basically just arguing semantics. To me a playmaker is a guy who can get open and make people miss when he gets the ball, even if they do not do it all that often like a #2 wr on a run heavy team would be expected to. Even last year we ran the ball or threw it to Mason, it is not like we ever ran an offense like the Bungles or Lions where WRs are going to put up numbers even on bad teams.

I used the numbers of Mason and Carter, not to compare the talent, but to compare the stats they are pretty close in the 1st 4 years, and obviously Carter and Mason went on to be very good WRs with all the stats you could ask for.

I wanted to upgrade the WR position through the draft this year with Sweed or one of the other tall 2nd round prospects, but not because I thought Clayton was a bust, just because his game is too similar to Mason's to be a great combo. I thought Williams would be the guy who took away a lot of Clayton's snaps, but still wanted to draft another guy with a little more size to go over the middle and take a hit.

The O is still a work in progress with a rookie QB and a lot of 1st year starters. I still think that as long as the O line and Qb continue to improve, the passing game will as well even with the same weapons, but I have no problem trying to upgrade somewhere, just disagree about how glaring a need it is. It does not seem to matter who Drew Brees is throwing it to, and Brady won plenty of SB rings without Moss.

psuasskicker

11-29-2008, 05:15 PM

I was having this argument about Clayton 3 weeks ago with TL when he called Clayton a bust. He has more numbers than Mason and Chris Carter in his first 4 years. Only one season with a competent Qb and a hand full of games lost to injury.

Clayton looks like a playmaker to me. he has got to stay healthy and become a target of the QB, but with the ball in his hands, he can make plays, and he has proven it. He just has to keep doing it. Calling him a bust is beyond an unfair assessment, and does not take into consideration any of the circumstances. Mike Williams is a bust. Clayton is an NFL WR, who starts on a winning team. He may not be all we hoped yet, but he is not even close to a bust, who in my view is a guy who can not even start on a bad team.

http://www.nfl.com/players/markclayton/profile?id=CLA796702
http://www.nfl.com/players/criscarter/profile?id=CAR632736
http://www.nfl.com/players/derrickmason/profile?id=MAS078652

Compare numbers and you would have to say Clayton is still on HOF pace of Chris Carter and Derrick Mason. I do not think he is headed to Canton, but I also think that he could have Ocho Stinko type numbers playing with Palmer. Perhaps when Flacco starts playing like Peyton or Palmer, Clayton will be getting some Wayne or Harrison type Ponytail pimp juice stats. He still may develop into the player we thought he would be when drafted. Mason and Chris Carter took a while to start producing the way they do, and a whole lot of it has to do with the Qb and amount of times he is asked to throw and the type of routes.

I am all about upgrading the passing game by drafting a #1 Wr and TE with the first 2 picks, but I doubt they will get involved in bidding on TJ. I also think they can continue to get better with the guys they already have as Joe and the O line get better.

LOLOLOL

You are pure comedy gold dude. I don't know if you seriously believe this stuff, or if you're just trolling.

You conveniently missed the biggest reason why Clayton's numbers are better than Carter's and Mason's in their first four years...

Number of starts in 4 seasons:
Clayton - 43
Carter - 0
Mason - 12

Wanna compare Clayton's stats per start to Mason and Carter's stats per start? I'm thinking no...

- C -

purplepoe

11-29-2008, 05:28 PM

LOLOLOL

You are pure comedy gold dude. I don't know if you seriously believe this stuff, or if you're just trolling.

You conveniently missed the biggest reason why Clayton's numbers are better than Carter's and Mason's in their first four years...

Number of starts in 4 seasons:
Clayton - 43
Carter - 0
Mason - 12

Wanna compare Clayton's stats per start to Mason and Carter's stats per start? I'm thinking no...

- C -

Game. Set. Match.

Yikes.

And before you do it, don't bring up the "starts don't mean playing time" stuff because everyone knows that Mason was used as a returner for much of his early career before becoming an every down WR.

PP

HoustonRaven

11-29-2008, 05:34 PM

Add another cliche .... checkmate.

PSU, thank you!

PurpleRulz

11-29-2008, 07:28 PM

If I understand your position, we are basically just arguing semantics. To me a playmaker is a guy who can get open and make people miss when he gets the ball, even if they do not do it all that often like a #2 wr on a run heavy team would be expected to. Even last year we ran the ball or threw it to Mason, it is not like we ever ran an offense like the Bungles or Lions where WRs are going to put up numbers even on bad teams.

I used the numbers of Mason and Carter, not to compare the talent, but to compare the stats they are pretty close in the 1st 4 years, and obviously Carter and Mason went on to be very good WRs with all the stats you could ask for.

I wanted to upgrade the WR position through the draft this year with Sweed or one of the other tall 2nd round prospects, but not because I thought Clayton was a bust, just because his game is too similar to Mason's to be a great combo. I thought Williams would be the guy who took away a lot of Clayton's snaps, but still wanted to draft another guy with a little more size to go over the middle and take a hit.

The O is still a work in progress with a rookie QB and a lot of 1st year starters. I still think that as long as the O line and Qb continue to improve, the passing game will as well even with the same weapons, but I have no problem trying to upgrade somewhere, just disagree about how glaring a need it is. It does not seem to matter who Drew Brees is throwing it to, and Brady won plenty of SB rings without Moss.

Listen, I am not going to pile on you for having an opinion. Maybe there is something you see in Clayton that others, myself included, do not see. I don't think Clayton is a terrible WR and he does have a place in this offense for our future. The problem is that, at this point, he is not showing that his future is as our number 1 WR which is why he was drafted. He was drafted to be the guy. When he came out of college, he was supposed to specialize in getting YAC. Also in college, he did display some speed, but not great speed. Maybe with the addition of a deep threat-a field stretcher- the offense can spread more and guys like Clayton and even Ray Rice could really show their ellusiveness.

Nonetheless, a playmaker can thrive in any offense and Clayton has not thrived in this offense since his rookie season and even then he was the beneficiary of tipped passes.

Clayton should be the go to guy that asks for the ball and simply makes plays. Right now, Derrick Mason is the only playmaker for our passing game. Teams know this and yet Mason is still able to make plays. That is what Clayton should be doing right now and he just is not.

Lastly, Flacco is a smart QB. He goes to Mason a lot because he knows Mason will make a play. We need two playmaking receivers and TJ Housh is one guy that would fit. In the draft, there is Crabtree, Maclin, Robiskie, Harvin, and DHB. I want a WR with attitude.

Ravens45

11-30-2008, 03:24 PM

So.....Clayton=crap, huh? He's looked pretty good today.

I'm not gonna hate on JW like everyone else, because I can see his point. Is Clayton a "playmaker"? I don't think so. I agree with Houston Raven and Stinger, etc. that the title "playmaker" goes to guys like Steve Smith, Chad Johnson (excluding this season, lol....loser), and Anquan Boldin. Mark Clayton does NOT fit into that group of elite guys. Nowhere close.

Yet I disagree with those guys in saying that his stats are basically pathetic. I've always like Mark Clayton. I will admit that he hasn't lived up to the potential he had coming out of college (which he reminded me of a Steve Smith and Boldin with his exceptional ability to get YAC). He hasn't shown that ability in the NFL unfortunately.

Clayton is a decent #2 WR. Should we get Houshmanzadeh or Boldin (which I hope we do), Clayton could be a very good #3 receiver.

But to say that he's a "bust"? To take away credit from him because he was injured and had a poor season last year? I don't think that's fair. Clayton had a pretty good rookie season with McNair. And yes, you do consider BOTH seasons with McNair; not just 2006. But would anyone argue that Chad Johnson is no longer a great WR because he's having a poor season? No, of course not. I'm not comparing Clayton to Ocho Sucko, but the point is you don't label a player based on one poor season. Now, if Clayton played like last season every season, yeah...ditch him. He would be nothing short of a "Travis Taylor, Jr." Which by the way, WAS a bust. He made some spectacular catches, but he had some of the most unreliable hands I've ever seen. He holds some Ravens records, but so does Boller. That's only because they spent a good amount of years all in one place, not based on talent.

But back to the point.... Mark Clayton is having one heck of a game today. I can't believe I'm saying this, but we should all be rooting for New England today. I abhore the Pats, but they are playing Pittsburgh. Enough said.

RavensDomination

11-30-2008, 07:13 PM

Add another cliche .... checkmate.

PSU, thank you!

Yea definitely, you guys were right on, Clayton really showed us how much of a bust he is today....

How many VERY easy catches did he drop today? Can't wait to hear this one, you couldn't prove it before and you definitely won't be able to prove it now.

purplepoe

11-30-2008, 07:23 PM

Yea definitely, you guys were right on, Clayton really showed us how much of a bust he is today....

How many VERY easy catches did he drop today? Can't wait to hear this one, you couldn't prove it before and you definitely won't be able to prove it now.

LOL.

Clayton had a great game.

Does that mean I discount everything else I've seen? No.

When you want to have a big boy conversation, let us all know.

If you wanna base an argument on one game, go away.

Some of us look at the Ravens objectively and don't fawn over every F'n player.

PP

HoustonRaven

11-30-2008, 07:31 PM

Yea definitely, you guys were right on, Clayton really showed us how much of a bust he is today....

How many VERY easy catches did he drop today? Can't wait to hear this one, you couldn't prove it before and you definitely won't be able to prove it now.

buhahahahahaha

Riiiigggghhhtttt ... so by your logic, Kyle Boller is a great QB because he has a few good games under his belt??? I dont think so.

Clayton had a great game. No doubt about it.

But what myself and others were arguing was HIS ENTIRE CAREER.

You seem content to only look at a select few positives. Good for you. You and JW can spoon each other, covered in purple paint and do each other under you Clayton Fathead that you have on your ceiling. Im happy for you. ;)

RavensDomination

11-30-2008, 07:54 PM

It was his only great game? Yes or no.

He made great catches? Yes or no.

He dropped easy catches? Yes or no.

Sometimes you just have to learn to admit when you're wrong.

HoustonRaven

11-30-2008, 08:14 PM

It was his only great game? Yes or no.

He made great catches? Yes or no.

He dropped easy catches? Yes or no.

Sometimes you just have to learn to admit when you're wrong.

Yes, he has had a handful of great games. Yes, he like many in this league, has made great catches. No, in this particular game he did not drop easy passes ...

.... and absolutely NONE of that proves your point.

Again, we were talking about a CAREER.

There are at least a half dozen of current and former Ravens who fit your criteria.

Enjoy that narrow view you have of this team and its WR's. It must be quite comforting to not examine something fully and base an opinion on it.

Me, on the other hand, I will go along with Cam Cameron and his opinions of the WR needs of the team.

RavensDomination

11-30-2008, 08:21 PM

A CAREER?! This is his fourth whole season. If he was a 10 year vet I might go with what you're saying.

I think it's funny you bring up Cam Cameron. I am assuming you didn't see the post game press conferences shown on MASN? Willie Anderson was saying how it was great for Mark to get the opportunities since Cam Cameron was saying watching film all week that Clayton is really doing a lot for the team and needs to get more involved. Hmm, how about that, Clayton actually got the opportunity. It was no different with Boller or McNair, when they actually threw Clayton the ball he made things happen. Just like in the first Cincy game. He has shown to have playmaker skills when he actually gets the ball.

purplepoe

11-30-2008, 08:26 PM

It was his only great game? Yes or no.

He made great catches? Yes or no.

He dropped easy catches? Yes or no.

Sometimes you just have to learn to admit when you're wrong.

The difference between people who have a clue and those who don't is this.

Those who have a clue can acknowledge a great game (which Clayton had today) without losing perspective about the big picture.

You, on the other hand, seem to think that this game somehow erases a career (Clayton's) that's been an overall disappointment.

I can guarantee that all you would've heard from me is praise for Clayton and his game today with ZERO mention of my overall opinion of him. But instead, you decide that this game somehow proves a point in your head and that it's time for a "I told you so". But see, that's not how it works. One game doesn't make OR break a player.

Me? I'll enjoy tonight because we won. And it was great to see Clayton have a superb game.

PP

StingerNLG

11-30-2008, 09:46 PM

Jeremiah W

11-30-2008, 10:02 PM

RavensDomination

11-30-2008, 10:07 PM

When did I say this game erases everything else? Please quote that part of my replies.

I said from the beginning of this convo that Clayton has potential. He showed that today. You people wrote him off after last season and now you don't want to eat your crow. Well get your knife and fork ready...

RavensDomination

11-30-2008, 10:14 PM

PP, I'll help you put this in perspective for them. I'm with you on this.

Back in the Boller days, he would have a solid game, and sometimes string together 2 games in a row. And some of us would think he turned the corner. Then the following week he'd have a signature frustrating game and boom; right back to square one.

Clayton gets his due today. He played like the guy we want him to be. He did it against a 1-10-1 team. Let's seem him do this against the Redskins and Steelers.

THEN we can talk about Clayton becoming a Playmaker.

Comparing a QB and a WR is like comparing a man to a woman. Completely different beasts. The QB has a lot of power to sink or swim, completely on his own. Yea, he is dependent on getting time to block, or people getting open, but Flacco has shown that a good QB makes plays even when people aren't open and even when the line doesn't hold. A WR's success is dependent on so many external factors that he has ZERO control over, the QB getting time, the QB seeing him, the QB making the throw, the OC making him the primary read, etc. That was the point I was trying to make with Moss, he proved that no matter how great you are it means nothing with those external factors working against you. But of course my words got twisted and it was said I was comparing Moss to Clayton. And yet I'm called ridiculous :rolleyes:

PurpleRulz

11-30-2008, 11:15 PM

Mark Clayton did have an outstanding game today where he displayed playmaking ability. That said, one game a career does not make. I don't think the Redskins, Steelers, etc., are suddenly going to fear Clayton. (Maybe that plays into his hands and maybe it does not).

Another thing to point out is that Devard Darling had a very good game last season as well. What is he doing right now?

I've said it before that Mark Clayton does have a future in this offense, but as a 3rd WR at best. Even if Clayton plays well in these final games, we still must upgrade WR with a true number 1 and a field stretching deep threat.

StingerNLG

11-30-2008, 11:20 PM

A WR's success is dependent on so many external factors that he has ZERO control over, the QB getting time, the QB seeing him, the QB making the throw, the OC making him the primary read, etc.

Ok, I'm going to stop you there. Do you know the reason Mason still has more catches and yards this year than Clayton? Flacco is the only QB thowing you know.

It's because there are still important things for the WR that are in his control. Like being able to get open. Like holding onto the ball when it hits his hands. Like going up for the ball when it's there for you.

These are things Clayton did TODAY. These are NOT things Clayton did consistently over the course of 4 seasons. That is just the facts. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'll say it again. Let's see this against Washington, Pittsburgh, and Dallas. THEN we can talk.

StingerNLG

11-30-2008, 11:24 PM

You guys ran into a botched peelback block like your boy the "playmaker" ponytailpimpjuice mandzadza. You have no idea what you are watching even when it hits you right in the face.

Clayton+football=playmaker

Stop trying to judje a players entire career in the middle of his 4th year. You try to say you see the entire picture but you are stuck on stats, and fail to see circumstances.

Keep tallking though it is getting funny to see you get debacled evey week.

My god you are absolutely annoying. When do you possibly shut up?

Here's a question for you know-it-all. If we all fail to see the circumstances, where exactly has Mark Clayton been the first 10 games of the season?

Yeah, I thought so. Please shut up now.

RavensDomination

11-30-2008, 11:43 PM

Mark Clayton did have an outstanding game today where he displayed playmaking ability. That said, one game a career does not make. I don't think the Redskins, Steelers, etc., are suddenly going to fear Clayton. (Maybe that plays into his hands and maybe it does not).

12/11/05 - 7/105 2 td's
12/25/05 - 5/90 1 td
10/15/06 - 5/101 2 td's
11/12/06 - 7/125 1 td
12/10/06 - 5/112 1 td
12/24/06 - 7/108 1 td

last year he had a bad year, as did everyone else who wasn't wearing #23. Hell all three QB's who started only threw for a combined 13 td's, Mason caught 5 of them.

Again, I'm not saying he'll be a #1, but I think a solid #2 is not out of the question.

xmradiodave

12-01-2008, 06:47 AM

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh174/BaltimoreMariners/claytonTD.png

There... are you happy now?

UKRavenStockers

12-01-2008, 07:03 AM

Fair play to him, Clayton had a huge game. The day those types of games become more regular than flash in the pan is when this offence will take that big step forward from solid to good.

Dade

12-01-2008, 09:44 AM

Fair play to him, Clayton had a huge game. The day those types of games become more regular than flash in the pan is when this offence will take that big step forward from solid to good.

I give credit where's credits due. Clayton was unstoppable Sunday.

All I want is to see him do that every week. If he can do that then he'll be a playmaker on par with T.O. and Randy Moss. He has the ability to disappear in games for weeks.

Rochardrik

12-01-2008, 11:02 AM

It IS possible that we are seeing the emergence of a great wide receiver.
It is also possible that this is an aberration. But I tend to think that this is the beginning of more. After all, Flacco is a rookie, and has obviously favored Mason in the early going. In an interview, Flacco stated he is gaining more confidence in the "rest" of his receiving corps. In addition, Cam is opening up the playbook more and more. It remains to be seen if these oppurtunities afford Clayton his chance to excel, and if he siezes the oppurtunities, and runs with 'em! I doubt he becomes a major star, but my guess is, that he will show us a lot more than he has in his first 3 years!

RustonRifle

12-01-2008, 11:08 AM

It's not fair to label any offensive player a bust. Only this year have the Ravens been running what looks to be a competent NFL system. I'll make my judgements from this season going forward.

RavensDomination

12-01-2008, 11:09 AM

Ok, I'm going to stop you there. Do you know the reason Mason still has more catches and yards this year than Clayton? Flacco is the only QB thowing you know.

It's because there are still important things for the WR that are in his control. Like being able to get open. Like holding onto the ball when it hits his hands. Like going up for the ball when it's there for you.

These are things Clayton did TODAY. These are NOT things Clayton did consistently over the course of 4 seasons. That is just the facts. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'll say it again. Let's see this against Washington, Pittsburgh, and Dallas. THEN we can talk.

Mason is the #1 receiver. He is the primary read most of the time. Flacco is a rookie, a good one, but still a rookie. He is looking to Mason a lot, and Mason is great at running routes so he is usually open.

First let me address your things Clayton hasn't allegedly done.

-Clayton hasn't consistently caught the ball? He's certainly no Travis Taylor. I remember that great catch he had on a long TD vs the Vikings on Sunday Night Football in our house during his rookie campaign. Also the great catch at Pittsburgh beating Polamalu deep for a TD in 2006. His hands have never been an issue.

-Clayton can't get open? Again, how can you prove that claim? How can you say that is a "fact." When you watch an NFL game they follow the ball, you can hardly tell whether or not Clayton is open 20 yards down field.

-This year, Clayton has 4 "drops" according to the Washington Post. I don't know how they determine a "drop." Is that when the ball hits you in the hands and you don't catch it (i.e. an "easy catch"), or is that when the ball hits you in the hands a DB knocks it out, or is it when a ball is 5 feet over your head and you tip it with your hand and don't catch it? This is probably why the NFL doesn't keep this stat, its VERY subjective. Either way, Hines Ward has 7 "drops," as does TO, Roddy White, Steve Smith has 6 drops, Chad Johnson has 5, etc. etc. Without knowing how they determine a dropped pass it's hard to debate this. To me a dropped pass is what Randy Moss did in the back of the end zone last night. But I remember one play against Cleveland where Clayton had the ball but the DB knocked it out on a good play (they get paid too). I bet they included that in the "drop" category, even though it was just a good play by the DB. Either way 4 drops is not horrendous any way you look at it, Mason had a big drop that led to a pick 6, it happens.

Anyway, I am glad Clayton had a good game, it was pretty ironic considering this thread :D And I agree it would be nice to see him do this consistently, but how would Mason react to not being the primary read on every play, and not getting 7-9 receptions a game? He's whined about it in the past.

crazyraven

12-01-2008, 12:10 PM

I like Clayton and he had a great game. But He's an average joe who had an above average game against a terrible team.

Even so, If a raven fan wants to call him a playmaker, thats fine with me. :thumbup:

camdenyard

12-01-2008, 12:14 PM

I am willing to say that he's been disappointing during the Boller and McNair eras, but those two had issues. He seems to be developing a relationship with Flacco. I hope it continues.

Greg

12-01-2008, 12:33 PM

StingerNLG

12-01-2008, 01:07 PM

Mason is the #1 receiver. He is the primary read most of the time. Flacco is a rookie, a good one, but still a rookie. He is looking to Mason a lot, and Mason is great at running routes so he is usually open.

So why then is Clayton not "usually" open? If he's the #2 receiver, shouldn't he be drawing the lesser talented corners?

-Clayton hasn't consistently caught the ball? He's certainly no Travis Taylor. I remember that great catch he had on a long TD vs the Vikings on Sunday Night Football in our house during his rookie campaign. Also the great catch at Pittsburgh beating Polamalu deep for a TD in 2006. His hands have never been an issue.

Look at what you just wrote. You referenced two catches out of 4 years. The last one being 2 years ago. That's the point. Mark Clayton, up until last week, has all but been invisible.

When you can't remember a catch he's made in 2008, that's when you know you have an issue.

-Clayton can't get open? Again, how can you prove that claim? How can you say that is a "fact." When you watch an NFL game they follow the ball, you can hardly tell whether or not Clayton is open 20 yards down field.

How many balls does he get thrown his way? That's an easy indicator.

-This year, Clayton has 4 "drops" according to the Washington Post. I don't know how they determine a "drop." Is that when the ball hits you in the hands and you don't catch it (i.e. an "easy catch"), or is that when the ball hits you in the hands a DB knocks it out, or is it when a ball is 5 feet over your head and you tip it with your hand and don't catch it? This is probably why the NFL doesn't keep this stat, its VERY subjective. Either way, Hines Ward has 7 "drops," as does TO, Roddy White, Steve Smith has 6 drops, Chad Johnson has 5, etc. etc. Without knowing how they determine a dropped pass it's hard to debate this. To me a dropped pass is what Randy Moss did in the back of the end zone last night. But I remember one play against Cleveland where Clayton had the ball but the DB knocked it out on a good play (they get paid too). I bet they included that in the "drop" category, even though it was just a good play by the DB. Either way 4 drops is not horrendous any way you look at it, Mason had a big drop that led to a pick 6, it happens.

Hines Ward also maybe drops one pass every 10 attempts. You almost NEVER hear Roddy White's name in dropped passes. Same with Steve Smith.

That's the difference.

I'm also glad Clayton had a great game. Lord knows we need him to. But he needs to show us he can do it against the good teams consistently. THEN we can talk playmaker.

TheOrioleWay

12-01-2008, 01:13 PM

The word here in Cincinnati is that TJ will be franchised.

(yes, I'm having a field day with the locals today!) Who-dey!

elland

12-01-2008, 01:21 PM

Clayton had a promising rookie season with Boller in 2005.

In 2006 he had a very good season with McNair... And as I recall, many posters and experts claimed at the end of that season, that Clayton and DW should be our WRs.. and trade Mason.

Then both of the young recievers had a poor 2007 season with injuries and bad play by our QBs.. And Mason was amazing.

Is Clayton a playmaker? Yes!

A Hof or a bust, neither for now.

Is Todd Heap a great TE, well I think he would have had better stats with Cutler, Peyton or Brees than with Flacco this year.. And so would Clayton.

Do we keep Clayton for the next season? Yes, and with more promises now than yesterday!

Dave Lap

12-01-2008, 01:21 PM

Clayton can, I think, become Mason when Mason retires. We still need the home run hitter. It isn't a slight on Clayton who was never sold as such, he was sold as what he is, a shifty chain-mover who will occasionally bust off some good YAC.

With these long balls he has been getting my guess is defenses will start to play that and give him some more room underneath. When he gets into space he can create some YAC. I hope we see more of that as we run this season out.

Well said. Clayton is a better slot receiver than wide out and in past games. He did well his rookie year when he played in the slot.

My observation prior to yesterday: he has not gotten a lot of separation from the guy covering him in man coverage. I hope that continures to change. Give him a few more games and see how he does.....

PurpleRulz

12-01-2008, 04:13 PM

12/11/05 - 7/105 2 td's
12/25/05 - 5/90 1 td
10/15/06 - 5/101 2 td's
11/12/06 - 7/125 1 td
12/10/06 - 5/112 1 td
12/24/06 - 7/108 1 td

last year he had a bad year, as did everyone else who wasn't wearing #23. Hell all three QB's who started only threw for a combined 13 td's, Mason caught 5 of them.

Again, I'm not saying he'll be a #1, but I think a solid #2 is not out of the question.

Can't argue with that.

RavensDomination

12-02-2008, 11:30 AM

The word here in Cincinnati is that TJ will be franchised.

(yes, I'm having a field day with the locals today!) Who-dey!

No way in hell that happens, their owner is so cheap, they don't even spend up to the salary cap each year. I guess it's possible but I really don't see it.

RavensDomination

12-02-2008, 11:37 AM

So why then is Clayton not "usually" open? If he's the #2 receiver, shouldn't he be drawing the lesser talented corners?

Not necessarily. On his long TD yesterday he was drawing their #1 corner. Some corners, like C-Mac, don't switch their side of the field, some do, it all depends.

Look at what you just wrote. You referenced two catches out of 4 years. The last one being 2 years ago. That's the point. Mark Clayton, up until last week, has all but been invisible. When you can't remember a catch he's made in 2008, that's when you know you have an issue.

2 great catches, the point is he has made them, and made one two days ago. TWO DAYS AGO. Who here remembers all of Mason's 103 catches last year anyway? Or just one of them? That's ridiculous to use as an example.

How many balls does he get thrown his way? That's an easy indicator.

Not hardly. Again, if Mason is on the field and he gets open that's where the ball is going. I hate Preston but he pointed out how earlier in the year when Flacco struggled it was because teams were taking Mason away and he wasn't seeing the rest of the field (he's a rookie, it's to be expected). Sometimes when guys get open its only for a split second, if the QB doesn't read that and make the throw, oh well. A perfect example of this was Todd Heap on Sunday, he was only open for a split second (even though he beat the LB assigned to him pretty bad) because there was a LB blocking Flacco's throwing lane. Flacco made the read and the throw. If he had waited a split second longer Heap would not have been open. That split second is what separates a good QB from Kyle Boller.

Hines Ward also maybe drops one pass every 10 attempts. You almost NEVER hear Roddy White's name in dropped passes. Same with Steve Smith.

Both those guys are in the NFC, you hardly ever hear their name around here anyway. I listen to talk radio all the time I hardly ever hear about Clayton dropping balls, so what is your point exactly? I don't even know what that proves. I give you numbers and you give me hearsay.

I'm also glad Clayton had a great game. Lord knows we need him to. But he needs to show us he can do it against the good teams consistently. THEN we can talk playmaker.

Again, he has shown to be a playmaker, just not consistently. I hope he does get involved more with Mason getting older.

UKRavenStockers

12-02-2008, 11:40 AM

No way in hell that happens, their owner is so cheap, they don't even spend up to the salary cap each year. I guess it's possible but I really don't see it.

They used it last year on Stacy Andrews, no reason to think they won't use it again this year on a more proven player.

RavensDomination

12-02-2008, 11:46 AM

They used it last year on Stacy Andrews, no reason to think they won't use it again this year on a more proven player.

A 32 (at the beginning of next season) year old proven player? Not to mention one who doesn't exactly give a ringing endorsement of the franchise.

Gwaihir

12-02-2008, 02:05 PM

A 32 (at the beginning of next season) year old proven player? Not to mention one who doesn't exactly give a ringing endorsement of the franchise.

Plus, if they Franchise him, they have to pay him the average of the Top 5 WR Salaries!! Do you really think he's worth that Much? I would expect him to sign somewhere for much less than that!

StingerNLG

12-02-2008, 02:20 PM

Not necessarily. On his long TD yesterday he was drawing their #1 corner. Some corners, like C-Mac, don't switch their side of the field, some do, it all depends.

But for the most part, Clayton is drawing the #2 corner. Let's be honest here about this.

2 great catches, the point is he has made them, and made one two days ago. TWO DAYS AGO. Who here remembers all of Mason's 103 catches last year anyway? Or just one of them? That's ridiculous to use as an example.

Oh come on. You know better than that. You had to go back 2 years to find a time Clayton made a "playmaker" catch other than Sunday. You never have to do that for actual playmaker WR's.

Not hardly. Again, if Mason is on the field and he gets open that's where the ball is going. I hate Preston but he pointed out how earlier in the year when Flacco struggled it was because teams were taking Mason away and he wasn't seeing the rest of the field (he's a rookie, it's to be expected). Sometimes when guys get open its only for a split second, if the QB doesn't read that and make the throw, oh well. A perfect example of this was Todd Heap on Sunday, he was only open for a split second (even though he beat the LB assigned to him pretty bad) because there was a LB blocking Flacco's throwing lane. Flacco made the read and the throw. If he had waited a split second longer Heap would not have been open. That split second is what separates a good QB from Kyle Boller.

This is not about Kyle Boller. Don't try to change the arguement. This is about Mark Clayton, and you didn't at all answer my question. Why can't Mark Clayton get open? Especially if as you say teams were taking Mason away? I cannot remember a time when Mark Clayton has been as wide open as Derrick Mason has been, or Todd Heap has been at times (and yes, Flacco missed him a couple times too).

Both those guys are in the NFC, you hardly ever hear their name around here anyway. I listen to talk radio all the time I hardly ever hear about Clayton dropping balls, so what is your point exactly? I don't even know what that proves. I give you numbers and you give me hearsay.

You weren't listening to talk radio then in the past few weeks because one of the concerns of the team was the WR core and Clayton was brought up. He was brought up before the Bengals game on 105.7's pre-game show. So please.

You didn't bring me numbers that mean anything, because you gave a part of ths story. You didn't bother to give us receptions and attempts did you? No of course not. If you did, you'd see Roddy White isn't quite as you tried to claim.

Again, he has shown to be a playmaker, just not consistently. I hope he does get involved more with Mason getting older.

There is a difference between "shown to be", and "is".