|
Post by Jancey on Sept 10, 2015 17:57:26 GMT -5
Charles Johnson is Teddy B's #1 WR and is in for a solid year, dive. I would think you'd know this. Color me dumbass, no I didn't. Wait a sec... www.nfl.com/player/charlesjohnson/2541147/profile Take a good look. Seriously? #1? WHere do you get this? Even in preseason. Yeah, color me clueless. lol Look at any starting WR's stats in the preseason and they won't be gaudy. Technically, it's either him or Wallace, but I'd put my money on Johnson.
|
|
|
Post by Divebitch on Sept 10, 2015 18:14:14 GMT -5
Look at any starting WR's stats in the preseason and they won't be gaudy. Technically, it's either him or Wallace, but I'd put my money on Johnson. If that's the case, I better not drop Kyle Rudolph, was trying to see if I could upgrade, to no avail. lol Was hoping Cordarelle would rebound with a healthy AP and a new WR in Wallace.
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Sept 10, 2015 18:29:18 GMT -5
he's a #1 only because the Vikings have no one to through to. Not worth a pick.
|
|
|
Post by Jancey on Sept 10, 2015 18:47:54 GMT -5
he's a #1 only because the Vikings have no one to through to. Not worth a pick. Not only is he worth a pick in all formats, but he will be WR3/flex worthy as well. He was great in the second half of the year last season as a rookie. He's in for a great year, and I'd be willing to make an avatar bet he scores 15+ points in week 1 in PPR.
|
|
|
Post by saskabronco on Sept 10, 2015 20:41:10 GMT -5
he's a #1 only because the Vikings have no one to through to. Not worth a pick. How can you say he's not worth a pick? Maybe not a high pick, but any receiver who is a definite starter is worth a pick. Especially considering he already has great chemistry with his QB and put up really solid numbers for the last half of last year. You are saying that people should be taking 3rd and 4th string recievers who may or may not see the field over a definite starter?
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Sept 10, 2015 20:47:55 GMT -5
he's a #1 only because the Vikings have no one to through to. Not worth a pick. How can you say he's not worth a pick? Maybe not a high pick, but any receiver who is a definite starter is worth a pick. Especially considering he already has great chemistry with his QB and put up really solid numbers for the last half of last year. You are saying that people should be taking 3rd and 4th string recievers who may or may not see the field over a definite starter? Yeah, if they're better.
|
|
|
Post by Jancey on Sept 10, 2015 23:13:36 GMT -5
he's a #1 only because the Vikings have no one to through to. Not worth a pick. How can you say he's not worth a pick? Maybe not a high pick, but any receiver who is a definite starter is worth a pick. Especially considering he already has great chemistry with his QB and put up really solid numbers for the last half of last year. You are saying that people should be taking 3rd and 4th string recievers who may or may not see the field over a definite starter? It's okay, saska. CJ will put juggs in his place within a couple weeks.
|
|