Who has the better WR corps?

I know Denver fans will go apeshit over the mere thought that Seattle could possibly have a better WR corps than Denver. Afterall, Seattle's WR's are "pedestrian" and Denver's group is part of the greatest passing game in NFL history. But Denver is a pass first offense and Seattle is a run first offense so our WR's get targeted far less than Denvers do.

What if both teams had swapped WR corps and Peyton's pass first offense threw to Baldwin, Tate and Kearse while Seattle had Wilson throwing far less to Decker, D Thomas and Welker?

If Denver had our WR's:

D Thomas: 92 recs on 143 targets for 1430 yds, 14 TD's, 19 catches of 20+ yds
Doug Baldwin prorated: 97 recs on 143 targets for 1524 yds, 10 TDS, 27 catches of 20+ yds

Doug Baldwin would be on the All Pro team.

Eric Decker: 87/137, 1288 yds, 11 TD's, 19 for 20+
Jermaine Kearse: 79/137, 1247 yds, 14 TD's, 18 for 20+

Wes Welker: 73/110, 778 yds, 10 TD's, 12 of 20+
Golden Tate: 72/110, 1008 yds, 6 TD's, 13 of 20+

Denver's WR's: 252/390, 3496 yds, 35 TD's, 50 of 20+
Seattle's prorated: 248/390, 3779 yds, 30 TD's, 58 of 20+

I think our WR corps stacks up pretty well to theirs if our guys were running routes for Denver and had Peyton Manning throwing to them. You'll see that Decker, Thomas and Welker look significantly more "pedestrian" if they only get targeted as often as our guys do.

Now consider their WR's will be up against the Legion of Boom and our WR's will be up against the very week and injury depleted Broncos secondary.

Of course our WR's would have better stats if they played with Manning, but IMO there's still no comparison...........of ALL the comparisons this week, the WR corps are the biggest discrepancy. Stats and depth wise, the Broncos have the better WR.

A healthy Harvin makes it closer, but even then I give the advantage to Denver for WR's.

Just like how hands down we have the better RB and Secondary. Hands down they have the better passing game. It almost seems disrespectful to ask such a silly question.

Sgt. Largent":7e6ubq9c said:

Of course our WR's would have better stats if they played with Manning, but IMO there's still no comparison...........of ALL the comparisons this week, the WR corps are the biggest discrepancy. Stats and depth wise, the Broncos have the better WR.

A healthy Harvin makes it closer, but even then I give the advantage to Denver for WR's.

Click to expand...

Football Outsiders doesn't. Across the board, FO gives higher DVOA ranks to Baldwin over DThomas, Kearse over Decker and Tate over Welker.

Their WR corps is a lot lot lot lot lot lot lot better

Sgt. Largent":p039176r said:

Of course our WR's would have better stats if they played with Manning, but IMO there's still no comparison...........of ALL the comparisons this week, the WR corps are the biggest discrepancy. Stats and depth wise, the Broncos have the better WR.

A healthy Harvin makes it closer, but even then I give the advantage to Denver for WR's.

Click to expand...

Huh? That is not even close to the biggest discrepancy, the qb the safeties the corners the linebackers Denver's oline are all bigger than the WR's

SalishHawkFan":2rabee73 said:

Sgt. Largent":2rabee73 said:

Of course our WR's would have better stats if they played with Manning, but IMO there's still no comparison...........of ALL the comparisons this week, the WR corps are the biggest discrepancy. Stats and depth wise, the Broncos have the better WR.

A healthy Harvin makes it closer, but even then I give the advantage to Denver for WR's.

Click to expand...

Football Outsiders doesn't. Across the board, FO gives higher DVOA ranks to Baldwin over DThomas, Kearse over Decker and Tate over Welker.

Click to expand...

Here's what I know, you put Baldwin and DThomas in front of all 32 GM's and coaches, and EVERY SINGLE one of them would take Thomas......including our own coach and GM.

Seattle didn't have a No.1 receiver all year, and it remains to be seen that Harvin is that guy (although the tape begs to differ). No one would consider Tate, Baldwin, or Kearse as their number one either. Although, Tate is starting to come into his own and could turn out to be a No.1 ala Steve Smith in Carolina if he keeps up his hard work. Baldwin and Kearse are VERY nice role players and excel in this offense because they fit their assign roles SO well.

I don't entirely trust D.Thomas as he didn't do shit before Manning got there, it doesn't change the fact that he has shown up and produced when given the opportunity. J. Thomas has shown to be a capable receiver (don't know how good he is at blocking, etc...but he can't be terrible with that big ass body he carries around) but is still relatively unproven in the NFL.

Eric Decker is another one of those players that didn't do shit until Manning got to Denver as well. But has shown to be a reliable "go to" type of player.

I'll pass on Welker, he can run routes really well, but he's old, and has shown that he can drop passes in the worst possible moments. Maybe he gets overwhelmed and over thinks the situation, which leads to these type of drops. But, I'd like to think my money players would show up when their number is called (IE- Tate, Baldwin, Kearse).

My vote goes to Denver, but only slightly as I think our guys could do what they do in Denver just as well...the only problem is we don't have anyone that can offer what the Demaryius and Julius Thomas can. I love what Seattle's WR core is capable of doing, I love the chemistry they have with Russell and the 12th Man, and I don't think there's a tougher WR tandum than Tate and Baldwin. I think that in itself makes them special players, and elevates their level of play beyond what most people think they are capable of. They have their chips just like every other Seahawks, and they exploit it better than any other receivers in the league.

This shouldn't even be a debate. Any Hawks fan would trade our receiver group for theirs. You just have to take off the Hawk-biased glasses.

I don't think there is any shade of blue or green glasses I could put on to make me see the Seahawk WRs as being "just as good" or even better than Denver's.

It isn't something that can be compared statistically at least. The type of play from both teams doesn't make it a realistic comparison, too different.

I do understand that because Tate, Baldwin and Kearse have been thrust to the forefront, many might confuse them as our 1, 2 and 3. In reality, they are 3, 4 and 5 but have done so well that people confuse them as 1, 2 and 3. I'd like to see how they stack up against any other teams 3, 4 and 5.

Love this group and they deserve as much respect as our secondary, IMO, as they have had to contend with similar losses / issues....while still kicking ass.

Manning has always made "stars" of wr's. Pierre Garcon anyone?

Yeah, clearly it's Denver, they have a ton of weapons.

Largent80":167s75js said:

Manning has always made "stars" of wr's. Pierre Garcon anyone?

Click to expand...

So we're suppose to discount all his current WR's who all had 10+ TD's and a ton of catches this year to our WR level?

The question was who has the better WR corp, not who has the better WR corp when Manning is throwing to them.........which btw I expect he will be this weekend.

Largent80":18lfw16u said:

Manning has always made "stars" of wr's. Pierre Garcon anyone?

Click to expand...

Good QB's will always make their WR's look better but Garcon is not a good example.

Garcon led the league in receptions this year on a terrible team with a hurting QB. He's a good WR.

Regarding the topic, I love our WR's and their grit but Denver has the better WR corp. They probably have a top 3 WR corp if not #1.

Denver has the best receiving corps in the league, period.

Seattle corps, if fully fit, should be top 10 but that has rarely been the case. Harvin and Rice have spent too much of their time on the sidelines.

Each of Bay-Bay, Decker, and Welker could arguably be the #1 option on most NFL offenses. Add JT and Moreno, and it becomes quite the set. Each of them rarely sees a double team as the defense cant ignore the other threats. Even Tamme, Virgil, Caldwell, Dreesen and Holiday are quality backups and could be starters on a number of teams.

Yes having manning has really helped their development a lot (e.g. DT now runs much much better routes). But like with Garcon and some other colts receivers, the players have developed and will likely maintain a high level even without Manning.

Working with Peyton makes the players around him so much better. Forget about the WRs, you would be surprised how much work he does with the O-line and even the RBs. (see http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10036 ... n-magazine). PM can be described as being anal-retentive but is also a great teacher.

Manning has the best set of passing weapons he has ever had imo and the numbers show it.

Denver by far. This thread is embarrassing.

Kam could snap dthomas left leg in half and I would still trade db AND tate AND kearse for him the day after the sb without blinking an eye.

If Robinson cano bats .700 In the first month of the season are we going to call him goat? No, cause everyone knows his stats would drop over the course of the season. You can't predict stats based on small sample sizes. Db wouldnt be an all pro In any offense imo.

Sgt. Largent":nc2jomqb said:

Largent80":nc2jomqb said:

Manning has always made "stars" of wr's. Pierre Garcon anyone?

Click to expand...

So we're suppose to discount all his current WR's who all had 10+ TD's and a ton of catches this year to our WR level?

Click to expand...

Did I say that?....and do we throw the ball as much as Denver?