A:

I like Hakeem Nicks. I’ve spent a lot of time debating his qualities in the last two months with Andy Richardson (the other main writer here). In my opinion, Nicks looks like the best bet for success of all the rookie wide receivers. I like him better than Michael Crabtree, Jeremy Maclin, Derrius Heyward-Bey, Percy Harvin and the others.

Nicks was a three-year starter in a pro-style offense at North Carolina. I think that will help him make a faster transition to the NFL. Crabtree and Maclin, on the other hand, are coming out of spread offenses.

And I also like that Nicks is going to an established team with a veteran quarterback. I expect he’ll be the clear No. 1 receiver there before long, and I don’t think it take too much time before he’s a starter – maybe before October. Steve Smith is really more of a No. 3 receiver, and Domenik Hixon is just a guy – released by the Broncos less than two years ago. As soon as he’s ready, Nicks will be New York’s top receiver, I figure.

As for Ramses Barden, I have very little interest in him. I don’t have a lot of confidence he’ll even get on the field this year. He’s coming out of tiny school (Cal Poly), so he’ll need a lot of work.

You’ve no doubt read the glowing optimism about Barden becoming a big red-zone weapon because he’s 6-foot-5. I don’t see it. Every year, there’s a couple of those big, “watch-this-guy-dominant-on-fade-routes” receivers in the draft, but rarely do you see any of those guys ever make an impact – particularly in their first year.

At 6-foot-6, James Hardy was supposed to be that guy for Buffalo last year; he didn’t do anything. Neither did Malcolm Kelly or Limas Sweed, who are both 6-foot-4. All three of those guys were selected in the second round.

In 2007, we had the ultimate big-receiver prospect – Calvin Johnson; he caught 2 TDs inside the red zone as a rookie. Also that year, Sidney Rice (6-4) and Dwayne Jarrett (6-5) were selected in the second round; neither did much of anything in their first year.

In 2006, the most-heralded big-receiver prospect was Maurice Stovall (6-4) of Tampa Bay; he’s done nothing in three years. Later in that draft – the fourth round – the Broncos selected Brandon Marshall. Marshall did not make an impact as a rookie but has gone on to become an elite pro (although not as a fade-route option).

Two big receivers were selected in the first round in 2005. Matt Jones (6-6) and Mike Williams (6-5). Need I go on? It’s a lot easier talking about how great big guys are going to be in the red zone than actually ever getting anything out of them.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

There’s nothing wrong with going with top-flight wide receivers. I expect Larry Fitzgerald will be the first selected in most leagues, and I think Randy Moss could be very good with Tom Brady back in the lineup. Moss struggled in the red zone last year, and I believe that was because Matt Cassel was at quarterback. I do not, however, see a lot of difference between the next half-dozen receivers on the board. And after that group, there’s not a big drop to another group of 10 receivers (I’ve got guys like Terrell Owens, Chad Ochocinco and Anquan Boldin in that group). Maybe your answer, then, is to trade down. Trade away that first-round pick, and maybe pick up third- and fourth-round picks in return.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

You're definitely keeping Michael Turner and DeAngelo Williams. In leagues giving 6 points for touchdown passes, quarterback tends to be the most important position, so I would also keep the two quarterbacks. I think of Kurt Warner as being your current solution and Jay Cutler being a starter-caliber guy who's also more of a long-term option. I actually spent 5-10 minutes running the numbers on this, and the computer tells me (without factoring in ages) that they're both top-35 players for this year. For the final keeper, I'd go with Roy Williams. I'm not a Williams fan (few have him lower on their draft boards than I do) but he's at least a clear No. 1 wide receiver, and you need somebody at that position.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

I don't see there being much difference between Brown and McFadden. They're both in committee situations. I'm projecting Brown to be a little better this year. With McFadden, he's a little younger and there might be a little more upside there. With Brown, maybe he's a little more explosive this year now that he's a full year removed from reconstructive knee surgery. With these backs, it might come down to which one is better in Wildcat situations. Brown excelled in that role last year, but now the Dolphins have drafted Pat White. White might take over a lot of those duties. McFadden ran that type of offense extensively at Arkansas, so I could see the Raiders using him a lot more in that capacity -- I was surprised they didn't use him in those formations more often last season.

• Comments
• Add Comment