The #2 WR debate..... (1 Viewer)

[Outbackjack]

I know this continues to be a hot topic, but I absolutely don’t believe we need a #2 WR.

Many reasons why.....I’ll list below.

1. We currently are winning with our current roster, on the road, against good teams.

2. Mike Thomas will be double and triple teamed.....um OK. They can put all 11 on him for all I care, in the current state of “not having a #2, CGM is dominating both receptions and yards, even though he’s double teamed.

3. CGM formations everywhere, he IS a #1, and a #2....he plays X, Y and Z. And still hasn’t been stopped.

4. We have a RB and TE that catch the ball a ton, and an offense and coach that spreads it around to 7-8 guys.

5. It’s about formations with Sean, not a “#2 WR”

6. But we can’t win without a #2. Let’s check out the number 2 WR on several teams currently with a winning record.

Buf- Beasley 30-283
SF- Goodwin 11-182
Ravens- Snead 15-223
Colts- Pascal 13-239
Seahawks- Metcalf 20-389
Packers - MVS 21-417
Panthers - Samuel 23-297
Cowboys- Gallup 27-421
Saints - Ginn 18-254

Gallop and Metcalf stand out with much better yardage. And yes, we beat both those teams with our lack of a #2.

7. Ginn is plenty good enough for what we need. So is TRS as a “#3” when he returns.

8. We basically got to the Super Bowl with this roster, we now have an even better D....we don’t need a precious “#2”

Maybe Loomis will trade for someone, but if he doesn’t, can we please stop the “we need a #2” chat.

And if you do insist we need one, please add why.

I’ve just added 8 points on why we don’t.

 

[Nick Name]

Pretty much agree. I think CSP is thinking beyond what a #2 is. Checkers vs chess IMO.

 

[UltraSaints]

This idea that we can’t get better and improve just because we have MT is irrational. There is no doubt we could improve at the #2 spot. MT is a beast. We know that, but doesn’t mean he cant be limited come playoff time. We would be a better team with a better #2 WR. That’s a fact. We shouldn’t take any chances. It’s win, and win now.

 

[SweetT]

Honest question:
Would another WR, that could create mismatches, and one that could move the chains, bother you, or would you be ok with it?

I’m enjoying the ride, but I surely wouldn’t mind another weapon

 

[Saint Spud]

Honest question:
Would another WR, that could create mismatches, and one that could move the chains, bother you, or would you be ok with it?

I’m enjoying the ride, but I surely wouldn’t mind another weapon

Exactly.

And there’s a reason why we are being mentioned so prominently by so many people in trade talks for a pass-catcher. Payton realizes we need more.

 

[Nightshade]

I haven't seen anyone say we can't win without a better #2, doesn't mean we still can't improve. Teams fear CGM but what happens if he is out a game? Do you trust that Ginn or TQS or Carr can pick up enough slack?

Saying we don't need a better #2 reminds me of all this who wanted the team to trade Bridgewater. We could definately another WR that opponents at least respect.

Can we win without an upgrade at WR absolutely but if the oppurtunity presents to be an even better team it would be foolish not to jump on it.

 

[Loose Cannon]

I know this continues to be a hot topic, but I absolutely don’t believe we need a #2 WR.

Many reasons why.....I’ll list below.

1. We currently are winning with our current roster, on the road, against good teams.

2. Mike Thomas will be double and triple teamed.....um OK. They can put all 11 on him for all I care, in the current state of “not having a #2, CGM is dominating both receptions and yards, even though he’s double teamed.

3. CGM formations everywhere, he IS a #1, and a #2....he plays X, Y and Z. And still hasn’t been stopped.

4. We have a RB and TE that catch the ball a ton, and an offense and coach that spreads it around to 7-8 guys.

5. It’s about formations with Sean, not a “#2 WR”

6. But we can’t win without a #2. Let’s check out the number 2 WR on several teams currently with a winning record.

Buf- Beasley 30-283
SF- Goodwin 11-182
Ravens- Snead 15-223
Colts- Pascal 13-239
Seahawks- Metcalf 20-389
Packers - MVS 21-417
Panthers - Samuel 23-297
Cowboys- Gallup 27-421
Saints - Ginn 18-254

Gallop and Metcalf stand out with much better yardage. And yes, we beat both those teams with our lack of a #2.

7. Ginn is plenty good enough for what we need. So is TRS as a “#3” when he returns.

8. We basically got to the Super Bowl with this roster, we now have an even better D....we don’t need a precious “#2”

Maybe Loomis will trade for someone, but if he doesn’t, can we please stop the “we need a #2” chat.

And if you do insist we need one, please add why.

I’ve just added 8 points on why we don’t.

I mostly disagree with you, but +rep for a well thought out post.


To start, I think your list of teams with WR2s with low numbers is a bit misleading:
- SF/BAL have elite receiving TEs.
- Dallas, Buffalo and Indy are not Super Bowl contenders.
- Packers have massive WR injury issues.
- The Seahawks and Panthers both spread the ball around and have three other guys with 200+ yards receiving.

I think the example of a team winning without elite WRs would be New England over the years.

My reasons for wanting a #2 WR:
1) If CGM goes down, we are in deep trouble

2) Late last year teams could slow our offense down by shutting CGM and AK down. I know this is easier said than done and so far, nobody has really figured it out in 2019. But as the weather cools down and the air comes out of the ball, we run the risk of having the same offensive issues if we have the same (or worse) offensive personnel.

3) Ginn is better suited in the Devery deep threat/big play role than he is a #2 WR on a team that mostly runs possession offense. Our starting QB no longer airs the ball out, and our backup QB is coached to manage the game. What we really need is a #2 WR who can reliably get open and reliably catch the ball.

4) In the winter/playoffs when the game becomes more conservative, Kamara is going to struggle again if we aren't able to keep teams honest. If you can double CGM and single cover all of our other WRs, you can allot extra attention to Kamara.

Honestly, I think #4 might be the most important point. For me personally it's less of a concern about getting it done right now, and more about in 8-10 weeks.

For a lot of us who want to upgrade WR2, if we had several guys that were very serviceable (like SEA or CAR) that'd be fine. Problem is, we don't. bringing in a #2 WR bumps Ginn down to #3, where he'd be perfectly acceptable, if not above average, and the WR group as a whole looks better.

But either way good post and good points.

 

[Mississippi Saints Fan]

When you say "need", that could be a very subjective word. I'm not saying we necessarily need another weapon, but I do think we could benefit majorly from having another set of dependable hands. If something were to happen to Thomas, even minor that would force him to miss a game or two, we would be in trouble.

I'll say this, even though the teams we've faced haven't been able to take Thomas out of the game, I'd be a little worried if we were to meet the Patriots in the Super Bowl. Belichick would do everything in his power to limit him, and if any team could do it, it might be them. Always have to think ahead.

Our WRs behinid Thomas and Ginn are really just bodies out there blocking and taking away a db. Cook was improving before his injury, and of course we can lean on the screen game, but I think adding another reliable pass catcher would be smart. Whether we actually need to or not is open for debate, but I do welcome the idea.

 

[Saint Spud]

I mostly disagree with you, but +rep for a well thought out post.


To start, I think your list of teams with WR2s with low numbers is a bit misleading:
- SF/BAL have elite receiving TEs.
- Dallas, Buffalo and Indy are not Super Bowl contenders.
- Packers have massive WR injury issues.
- The Seahawks and Panthers both spread the ball around and have three other guys with 200+ yards receiving.

My reasons for wanting a #2 WR:

1) If CGM goes down, we are in deep trouble

2) Late last year teams could slow our offense down by shutting CGM and AK down. I know this is easier said than done and so far, nobody has really figured it out in 2019. But as the weather cools down and the air comes out of the ball, we run the risk of having the same offensive issues if we have the same (or worse) offensive personnel.

3) Ginn is better suited in the Devery deep threat/big play role than he is a #2 WR on a team that mostly runs possession offense. Our starting QB no longer airs the ball out, and our backup QB is coached to manage the game. What we really need is a #2 WR who can reliably get open.

4) In the winter/playoffs when the game becomes more conservative, Kamara is going to struggle again if we aren't able to keep teams honest. If you can double CGM and single cover all of our other WRs, you can allot extra attention to Kamara.

Honestly, I think #4 might be the most important point.

For a lot of us who want to upgrade WR2, if we had several guys that were very serviceable (like SEA or CAR) that'd be fine. Problem is, we don't. bringing in a #2 WR bumps Ginn down to #3, where he'd be perfectly acceptable, if not above average, and the WR group as a whole looks better.

But either way good post and good points.

Agree with all this.

I do think if TQS were healthy consistently, he’s good enough to be that guy. But I’m Not willing to roll the dice on him being healthy with a Lombardi on the line.

 

[Loose Cannon]

I know this continues to be a hot topic, but I absolutely don’t believe we need a #2 WR.

Many reasons why.....I’ll list below.

1. We currently are winning with our current roster, on the road, against good teams.

2. Mike Thomas will be double and triple teamed.....um OK. They can put all 11 on him for all I care, in the current state of “not having a #2, CGM is dominating both receptions and yards, even though he’s double teamed.

3. CGM formations everywhere, he IS a #1, and a #2....he plays X, Y and Z. And still hasn’t been stopped.

4. We have a RB and TE that catch the ball a ton, and an offense and coach that spreads it around to 7-8 guys.

5. It’s about formations with Sean, not a “#2 WR”

6. But we can’t win without a #2. Let’s check out the number 2 WR on several teams currently with a winning record.

Buf- Beasley 30-283
SF- Goodwin 11-182
Ravens- Snead 15-223
Colts- Pascal 13-239
Seahawks- Metcalf 20-389
Packers - MVS 21-417
Panthers - Samuel 23-297
Cowboys- Gallup 27-421
Saints - Ginn 18-254

Gallop and Metcalf stand out with much better yardage. And yes, we beat both those teams with our lack of a #2.

7. Ginn is plenty good enough for what we need. So is TRS as a “#3” when he returns.

8. We basically got to the Super Bowl with this roster, we now have an even better D....we don’t need a precious “#2”

Maybe Loomis will trade for someone, but if he doesn’t, can we please stop the “we need a #2” chat.

And if you do insist we need one, please add why.

I’ve just added 8 points on why we don’t.

Also, from your list, the 49ers just traded for Emmanuel Sanders, which would indicate that they don't think having one legit receiving threat (Kittle) is enough - which is sort of the point many of us are making.

 

[Poison]

I don't accept that. We are a good team in 2019 because on any given day, we are above-average to elite on defense. Our special teams unit has been making plays too and putting us in a good position more often than not.

Our offense has some standout players, but in the scheme of things, it is ranked 19th of 32 teams - about middle of the pack. Yes, I accept there are other variables that affect that (quality of opposition, protecting a lead established early, controlling the ball and winning TOP) which probably understate our efficacy on that side of the ball, but it's not the high-powered unit it once was and has not been really since the Dallas game last year.

If we are to go the distance in 2019 we will likely have to contend with the Patriots who are better than any other team at closing down key play-makers on the opposition. A legit #2 WR would create match-up difficulties and at the very least, would require an opposing defense to put work in to that #2 WR and perhaps open up opportunities elsewhere on the field.

I'm reminded of the 2016 win that led Brandin Cooks to take to social media and complain that "closed mouths don't get fed". In that instance, I think it was the Rams who invested a lot of time into stopping Cooks, which totally opened the game up for Mike Thomas in his rookie season. A guy who can be a straight ahead burner with reliable hands that commands more respect than a 34 year-old Ginn could open up underneath routes in a major way for us. A strong intermediate target (a la Snead circa 2016) could would be hard to match up on, particularly if they line up with Jared Cook in the game as well.

The prognosis for TQS seems unclear and I'm not persuaded he's NFL calibre yet because we simply haven't seen him healthy enough for long enough to know if he will command respect. Frankly, I don't see how this team is not immeasurably improved with an established #2 WR. It's the missing piece IMO.

 

[Gumbo's Dad]

January 14, 2018. The divisional playoff game against the Vikes. Kamara limited to 43 yards on 11 carries. CGM 85 yards on 7 receptions. In one stretch of 3 plays, Drew threw to GGM 3 times in a row, the third pass I believe was finally completed. Ginn caught 8 passes. It was not enough to keep one whiff by Marcus Williams from costing us another SB shot. I don't get the resistance to getting another pass catching weapon. Cook has been a disappointment and is now injured. TQS pretty much the same story. We are able to win in the regular season. In the playoffs, when elite teams have a season of film on us, is when another pass catching weapon can make a difference.

 

[Bespoke]

I wouldn't use SF, and GB as examples why the Saints shouldn't try to upgrade at WR / add another receiving threat. When Healthy Green Bay runs deep on pass catchers: Davante Adams, Valdez-Scantling, Allison, (Have you seen Kumerow lately? Rodgers is making him look like the next coming of Jordy Nelson) Jimmy Graham, and they also use both their Running Backs Aaron Jones/Jamal Williams in the passing game, running receiver like routes. When they get healthy Rodgers will have an abundance of receiving options.

San Francisco is expecting to compete in the playoffs this year, saw Receiver options as a weakness and went out and traded for Emmanuel Sanders.... to give Garapolo another weapon.

You trade for another receiving option because you don't want another NFC Championship situation.... (4 catches for 36 yards) Mike Thomas' stat-line in the biggest game of the season... What if you run into Wade Phillips again? Say what you want but the last 2 times we faced Wade's defense he hasn't allowed Mike to do anything against his D', they will follow Ramsey on Mike the whole game, and have Weddle shadow him from the safety spot. While Fowler or a DE attacks Kamara in the backfield preventing him from getting out into routes... his strategy was to make guys like Arnold, Ginn, Carr, Tre'Quan beat us in the NFC Champ.. and we saw how the worked out.

Even if the Rams miss the playoffs.. Green Bay has improved their Defense leaps and bounds this year under Mike Pettine. Jaire Alexander is the type of corner who has the talent, and moxy to check Mike with Safety help. San Francisco's Defense is the real deal this year, might run into Dallas down the line, could meet Mike Zimmer in January again and his Defense boasts Xavier Rhodes, and Harrison Smith CB, and Safety perfect for matching up with MT and Kamara... after watching Ginn drop that pass the hit him in the chest in the endzone, it definitely brought a little concern to the receiver position if we're counting on him to be the #2 guy, he made it up later but in the playoffs that would be magnified.

 

[Mackenzie]

I know this continues to be a hot topic, but I absolutely don’t believe we need a #2 WR.

Many reasons why.....I’ll list below.

1. We currently are winning with our current roster, on the road, against good teams.

2. Mike Thomas will be double and triple teamed.....um OK. They can put all 11 on him for all I care, in the current state of “not having a #2, CGM is dominating both receptions and yards, even though he’s double teamed.

3. CGM formations everywhere, he IS a #1, and a #2....he plays X, Y and Z. And still hasn’t been stopped.

4. We have a RB and TE that catch the ball a ton, and an offense and coach that spreads it around to 7-8 guys.

5. It’s about formations with Sean, not a “#2 WR”

6. But we can’t win without a #2. Let’s check out the number 2 WR on several teams currently with a winning record.

Buf- Beasley 30-283
SF- Goodwin 11-182
Ravens- Snead 15-223
Colts- Pascal 13-239
Seahawks- Metcalf 20-389
Packers - MVS 21-417
Panthers - Samuel 23-297
Cowboys- Gallup 27-421
Saints - Ginn 18-254

Gallop and Metcalf stand out with much better yardage. And yes, we beat both those teams with our lack of a #2.

7. Ginn is plenty good enough for what we need. So is TRS as a “#3” when he returns.

8. We basically got to the Super Bowl with this roster, we now have an even better D....we don’t need a precious “#2”

Maybe Loomis will trade for someone, but if he doesn’t, can we please stop the “we need a #2” chat.

And if you do insist we need one, please add why.

I’ve just added 8 points on why we don’t.

The Patriots spanked the Jets beyond belief last night. They then proceeded to wake up and trade for Sanu. Teams can always get better. We should do the same. We want to not only get to the SB but win it. We need all the talent we can get. You also don’t mention what will happen if MT or Ginn get injured. I’m knocking on wood but we are not deep at that position at all.

 

[Uptking]

I mostly disagree with you, but +rep for a well thought out post.


To start, I think your list of teams with WR2s with low numbers is a bit misleading:
- SF/BAL have elite receiving TEs.
- Dallas, Buffalo and Indy are not Super Bowl contenders.
- Packers have massive WR injury issues.
- The Seahawks and Panthers both spread the ball around and have three other guys with 200+ yards receiving.

I think the example of a team winning without elite WRs would be New England over the years.

My reasons for wanting a #2 WR:
1) If CGM goes down, we are in deep trouble

2) Late last year teams could slow our offense down by shutting CGM and AK down. I know this is easier said than done and so far, nobody has really figured it out in 2019. But as the weather cools down and the air comes out of the ball, we run the risk of having the same offensive issues if we have the same (or worse) offensive personnel.

3) Ginn is better suited in the Devery deep threat/big play role than he is a #2 WR on a team that mostly runs possession offense. Our starting QB no longer airs the ball out, and our backup QB is coached to manage the game. What we really need is a #2 WR who can reliably get open and reliably catch the ball.

4) In the winter/playoffs when the game becomes more conservative, Kamara is going to struggle again if we aren't able to keep teams honest. If you can double CGM and single cover all of our other WRs, you can allot extra attention to Kamara.

Honestly, I think #4 might be the most important point. For me personally it's less of a concern about getting it done right now, and more about in 8-10 weeks.

For a lot of us who want to upgrade WR2, if we had several guys that were very serviceable (like SEA or CAR) that'd be fine. Problem is, we don't. bringing in a #2 WR bumps Ginn down to #3, where he'd be perfectly acceptable, if not above average, and the WR group as a whole looks better.

But either way good post and good points.

I agree completely. A quality #2, IMO, would put us over the top. We’re not even at the half way point. We can always improve. It’s SB champions or bust for us. Gotta be as loaded as possible