Why David Nelson?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Why David Nelson?

    Just wondering why everyone is so in love with this guy?

    I'll admit that I haven't seen much tape of him. But he really hasn't accomplished much in this league and is coming off a major injury.

    The only thing that I've really seen is that he's big...which I dont think is a good enough reason to sign the guy. I can list a number of big WRs who were bad.

     

    Also, didn't he play in the slot most of the time for the Bills? From what I've read, he's a possession slot receiver. With Hern locked up, maybe Welker soon, I don't think we need another slot guy.

     

    Again, I haven't seen too much of him, so let me know what I'm missing!

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

    Just wondering why everyone is so in love with this guy?

    I'll admit that I haven't seen much tape of him. But he really hasn't accomplished much in this league and is coming off a major injury.

    The only thing that I've really seen is that he's big...which I dont think is a good enough reason to sign the guy. I can list a number of big WRs who were bad.

     

    Also, didn't he play in the slot most of the time for the Bills? From what I've read, he's a possession slot receiver. With Hern locked up, maybe Welker soon, I don't think we need another slot guy.

     

    Again, I haven't seen too much of him, so let me know what I'm missing!




    I dont get it either. I remember him making some noise a couple years back with Fitzy and to me he is a tweener WR/TE but more leaner and taller than Hernandez but def. not a better player so not sure where we would play him or why we would want him when we have a similar player. A smaller TE that cant block well enough to be an in-line TE 24/7 but not fast or agile enough to be put outside 24/7 either. I just want a real # 1 WR to go with this group so teams cant bog down the middle anymore...

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up



    80 rec and 1000 yards? So I am assuming you would replace Welker with Nelson.

     

    Would still leave us short at outside WR, which is the biggest question for the offense.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up

     



    80 rec and 1000 yards? So I am assuming you would replace Welker with Nelson.

     

     

    Would still leave us short at outside WR, which is the biggest question for the offense.

     



    Nope I would replace Lloyd with Nelson. What we save cutting Lloyd would pay for Nelson. Then I'd still bring Welker back or try to find a replacement for Welker and look to the draft for a 3rd WR while using Hern more as a WR then TE with Ballard playing the #2 TE role

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up

     



    80 rec and 1000 yards? So I am assuming you would replace Welker with Nelson.

     

     

    Would still leave us short at outside WR, which is the biggest question for the offense.

     



    Nope I would replace Lloyd with Nelson. What we save cutting load would pay for Nelson. Then I'd still bring Welker back or try to find a replacement for Welker and look to the draft for a 3rd WR while using Hern more as a WR then TE with Ballard playing the #2 TE role

     



    Did Nelson play outside in college, or has he always been a slot guy? It would be risky to open the season with a guy who has played in the slot throughout his NFL career and stick him as our starting outside WR.

     

    Also, not to knock you, but 1000 yards is rather ambitious...Gronk, Hern and Welker would still be on top of the receiving hierarchy...so either you're anticipating 4 1,000 receivers, or you expect one of them to get hurt.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up

     



    80 rec and 1000 yards? So I am assuming you would replace Welker with Nelson.

     

     

    Would still leave us short at outside WR, which is the biggest question for the offense.

     



    Nope I would replace Lloyd with Nelson. What we save cutting load would pay for Nelson. Then I'd still bring Welker back or try to find a replacement for Welker and look to the draft for a 3rd WR while using Hern more as a WR then TE with Ballard playing the #2 TE role

     

     



    Did Nelson play outside in college, or has he always been a slot guy? It would be risky to open the season with a guy who has played in the slot throughout his NFL career and stick him as our starting outside WR.

     

     

    Also, not to knock you, but 1000 yards is rather ambitious...Gronk, Hern and Welker would still be on top of the receiving hierarchy...so either you're anticipating 4 1,000 receivers, or you expect one of them to get hurt.



    Lloyd got 1000 yrds with Welker, Gronk, and Hern on the team so replacing Lloyd with Nelson would be swapping out the players and given Nelsons ability I don't see a drop off in production between Lloyd last year and what Nelson can provide (though Nelson should provide more YAC)

    Nelson was an outside WR in college and played some outside with the Bills but took on more of the Boldin possession WR working the middle of the field given his size. He can play outside or in making him cloase to a Z flanker then a slot guy

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     but not fast or agile enough to be put outside 24/7 either.



    At his pro day he posted a 38 inch vertical, a 124 inch broad jump and a 6.74 in the 3 cone drill.  That would put him in the top 5-7 range in all of those things at this year's combine.  The kid is plenty explosive.  Sure he doesn't have 4.4 speed, but how many guys at that height do?  If he had that kind of speed he'd be Randy Moss.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up

     



    80 rec and 1000 yards? So I am assuming you would replace Welker with Nelson.

     

     

    Would still leave us short at outside WR, which is the biggest question for the offense.

     



    Nope I would replace Lloyd with Nelson. What we save cutting load would pay for Nelson. Then I'd still bring Welker back or try to find a replacement for Welker and look to the draft for a 3rd WR while using Hern more as a WR then TE with Ballard playing the #2 TE role

     

     



    Did Nelson play outside in college, or has he always been a slot guy? It would be risky to open the season with a guy who has played in the slot throughout his NFL career and stick him as our starting outside WR.

     

     

    Also, not to knock you, but 1000 yards is rather ambitious...Gronk, Hern and Welker would still be on top of the receiving hierarchy...so either you're anticipating 4 1,000 receivers, or you expect one of them to get hurt.

     



    Lloyd got 1000 yrds with Welker, Gronk, and Hern on the team so replacing Lloyd with Nelson would be swapping out the players and given Nelsons ability I don't see a drop off in production between Lloyd last year and what Nelson can provide (though Nelson should provide more YAC)

     

    Nelson was an outside WR in college and played some outside with the Bills but took on more of the Boldin possession WR working the middle of the field given his size. He can play outside or in making him cloase to a Z flanker then a slot guy



    Lloyd got close to 1,000 yards because at least one of Gronk or Hern was usually out. If both were healthy throughout the season, I don't think Lloyd comes even close to 1,000...maybe 700.

     

    And if Nelson played outside in college then I guess I'm a little more comfortable with it. Had 630 yards in 4 years though...so I'm not sure how good he was on the outside though.

     

    Taking money out of the picture for a second, I personally just think Lloyd is a better outside receiver. He's had success in the league and is not coming off a major injury. If you sign Nelson as a backup to Lloyd or another WR, then great...makes good depth. But as a starter? I'm just not sold yet.

     

    In a season where I expect the Pats to be championship contenders, I'd rather have the Pats pay a little more for a more sure thing.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

     but not fast or agile enough to be put outside 24/7 either.

     



    At his pro day he posted a 38 inch vertical, a 124 inch broad jump and a 6.74 in the 3 cone drill.  That would put him in the top 5-7 range in all of those things at this year's combine.  The kid is plenty explosive.  Sure he doesn't have 4.4 speed, but how many guys at that height do?  If he had that kind of speed he'd be Randy Moss.

     



    Then why did he go undrafted? Again, legitimate questions because I don't know much about this player.

    Vernon Gholston had great combine numbers and became a bust.

     

    To me, it just seems like people like him because of his measurables, not his football skills. He did not produce in college and has had one okay season. On a team that should be a threat to the Super Bowl, is this the guy you want to open the season with as a number 2 receiver?

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up

     



    80 rec and 1000 yards? So I am assuming you would replace Welker with Nelson.

     

     

    Would still leave us short at outside WR, which is the biggest question for the offense.

     



    Nope I would replace Lloyd with Nelson. What we save cutting Lloyd would pay for Nelson. Then I'd still bring Welker back or try to find a replacement for Welker and look to the draft for a 3rd WR while using Hern more as a WR then TE with Ballard playing the #2 TE role

     




     

    so you want 2 TE/WR tweeners playing on the outside??? I dont think that would work. LLoyd isnt great but to think Nelson is gonna be better outside?? I dont know if I agree. Also, who knows if nelson would fit in and how do you know he is gonna be cheaper than lloyd?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    Lloyd got close to 1,000 yards because at least one of Gronk or Hern was usually out. If both were healthy throughout the season, I don't think Lloyd comes even close to 1,000...maybe 700.

     

     

    And if Nelson played outside in college then I guess I'm a little more comfortable with it. Had 630 yards in 4 years though...so I'm not sure how good he was on the outside though.

     

    Taking money out of the picture for a second, I personally just think Lloyd is a better outside receiver. He's had success in the league and is not coming off a major injury. If you sign Nelson as a backup to Lloyd or another WR, then great...makes good depth. But as a starter? I'm just not sold yet.

     

    In a season where I expect the Pats to be championship contenders, I'd rather have the Pats pay a little more for a more sure thing.

     



    And how many seasons have both been healthy now? All I'm going by is what I've seen in past years.

    This past year was also Lloyd 2nd best year of his career so it was above his normal average. If he's a better receiver could be debatable, but again Lloyd had one of the lowest YAC in the league so there is room for Nelson to provide more production if he can create the same chances as Lloyd created this season

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up

     



    80 rec and 1000 yards? So I am assuming you would replace Welker with Nelson.

     

     

    Would still leave us short at outside WR, which is the biggest question for the offense.

     



    Nope I would replace Lloyd with Nelson. What we save cutting Lloyd would pay for Nelson. Then I'd still bring Welker back or try to find a replacement for Welker and look to the draft for a 3rd WR while using Hern more as a WR then TE with Ballard playing the #2 TE role

     

     




     

     

    so you want 2 TE/WR tweeners playing on the outside??? I dont think that would work. LLoyd isnt great but to think Nelson is gonna be better outside?? I dont know if I agree. Also, who knows if nelson would fit in and how do you know he is gonna be cheaper than lloyd?



    Who are the two TE/WR tweeners? Nelson is a WR who put up very good cone numbers and runs low-mid 4.5's. Who's the other TE/WR tweener you are thinking of?

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up

     



    80 rec and 1000 yards? So I am assuming you would replace Welker with Nelson.

     

     

    Would still leave us short at outside WR, which is the biggest question for the offense.

     



    Nope I would replace Lloyd with Nelson. What we save cutting Lloyd would pay for Nelson. Then I'd still bring Welker back or try to find a replacement for Welker and look to the draft for a 3rd WR while using Hern more as a WR then TE with Ballard playing the #2 TE role

     

     




     

     

    so you want 2 TE/WR tweeners playing on the outside??? I dont think that would work. LLoyd isnt great but to think Nelson is gonna be better outside?? I dont know if I agree. Also, who knows if nelson would fit in and how do you know he is gonna be cheaper than lloyd?



    Nelson will be cheaper than Lloyd. I don't think that's a question. He's coming off a torn ACL and has had limited to success.

    But with a ton of available cap space. I'd rather them be less stingy for the last two years if it means signing/holding onto a more proven player

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

     but not fast or agile enough to be put outside 24/7 either.

     



    At his pro day he posted a 38 inch vertical, a 124 inch broad jump and a 6.74 in the 3 cone drill.  That would put him in the top 5-7 range in all of those things at this year's combine.  The kid is plenty explosive.  Sure he doesn't have 4.4 speed, but how many guys at that height do?  If he had that kind of speed he'd be Randy Moss.

     




    Listen we have had all kinds of stiff from Slater to Bethel johnson play outside so im not saying he cant , but it doesnt mean its ideal. You battle with the top CBs who can press and jam you, its a different story believe me. Its one thing to project which is fine, but he hasnt done any of that yet and has been hurt. I guess I dont get the fascination to put a tweener outside when Hernandez is already here, is a tweener and being considered for the same role,. makes a lot of money. There are too many needs IMO to go out and get redundant players and Christ if you gonna UPgrade Lloyd atleast make sure he IS better and Nelson hasnt proven capable of playing outside despite peoples man crush on him

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    • He's a big target with a large catch radius (something the Pats sorely need, esp in the red zone)
    • He has great hands
    • He has decent enough speed to be considered a mid-deep threat
    • The year before his injury (his second year in the league) he put up starting caliber numbers with limited chances and Fitz throwing him the ball (68 recs and 681 with only 13 games start and Fitz I'm projecting to 80rec 1000yrds with Brady over 16 games)
    • He's young
    • He's cheap
    • He's someone BB wanted to sign as a UDFA in 10' but chose Buffalo to get a chance to break a starting line up

     



    80 rec and 1000 yards? So I am assuming you would replace Welker with Nelson.

     

     

    Would still leave us short at outside WR, which is the biggest question for the offense.

     



    Nope I would replace Lloyd with Nelson. What we save cutting Lloyd would pay for Nelson. Then I'd still bring Welker back or try to find a replacement for Welker and look to the draft for a 3rd WR while using Hern more as a WR then TE with Ballard playing the #2 TE role

     

     




     

     

    so you want 2 TE/WR tweeners playing on the outside??? I dont think that would work. LLoyd isnt great but to think Nelson is gonna be better outside?? I dont know if I agree. Also, who knows if nelson would fit in and how do you know he is gonna be cheaper than lloyd?

     



    Who are the two TE/WR tweeners? Nelson is a WR who put up very good cone numbers and runs low-mid 4.5's. Who's the other TE/WR tweener you are thinking of?

     




    I dont consider him a outside WR. Sure he is 6'6, but runs a 4.6 which is good for that height but you combine that with his slight frame and he aint getting off the line. Maybe he isnt a TE either but bottomline he is redundant, if we cant agree on that than we disagree and I would set my aims higher that Nelson....

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

     but not fast or agile enough to be put outside 24/7 either.

     



    At his pro day he posted a 38 inch vertical, a 124 inch broad jump and a 6.74 in the 3 cone drill.  That would put him in the top 5-7 range in all of those things at this year's combine.  The kid is plenty explosive.  Sure he doesn't have 4.4 speed, but how many guys at that height do?  If he had that kind of speed he'd be Randy Moss.

     

     



    Then why did he go undrafted? Again, legitimate questions because I don't know much about this player.

     

    Vernon Gholston had great combine numbers and became a bust.

     

    To me, it just seems like people like him because of his measurables, not his football skills. He did not produce in college and has had one okay season. On a team that should be a threat to the Super Bowl, is this the guy you want to open the season with as a number 2 receiver?



    To be fair, Victor Cruz went undrafted and now he's a top receiver in the league.  I think people like the idea of Nelson's size and deep threat ability.  It's more wishful thinking that Brady can develop a cheap, serviceable outside receiver.  If the money is right, I like the idea as well.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

    I dont consider him a outside WR. Sure he is 6'6, but runs a 4.6 which is good for that height but you combine that with his slight frame and he aint getting off the line. Maybe he isnt a TE either but bottomline he is redundant, if we cant agree on that than we disagree and I would set my aims higher that Nelson....



    He's rounded up 6'5" and ran a 4.54 according to his combine numbers so not sure where you are pulling your data from. And how would he be redundant? Aaron Hernandez is 6'1" and ran a 4.7 40 at the combine. They are two completely different players. Nelson is a full .15s faster then Hern, 4" taller, had a better vertical, and a better 3 cone.

    Hern WR/TE tweener, Nelson WR there is no redundancy

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

     

    Lloyd got close to 1,000 yards because at least one of Gronk or Hern was usually out. If both were healthy throughout the season, I don't think Lloyd comes even close to 1,000...maybe 700.

     

     

    And if Nelson played outside in college then I guess I'm a little more comfortable with it. Had 630 yards in 4 years though...so I'm not sure how good he was on the outside though.

     

    Taking money out of the picture for a second, I personally just think Lloyd is a better outside receiver. He's had success in the league and is not coming off a major injury. If you sign Nelson as a backup to Lloyd or another WR, then great...makes good depth. But as a starter? I'm just not sold yet.

     

    In a season where I expect the Pats to be championship contenders, I'd rather have the Pats pay a little more for a more sure thing.

     

     



    And how many seasons have both been healthy now? All I'm going by is what I've seen in past years.

     

    This past year was also Lloyd 2nd best year of his career so it was above his normal average. If he's a better receiver could be debatable, but again Lloyd had one of the lowest YAC in the league so there is room for Nelson to provide more production if he can create the same chances as Lloyd created this season



    So then you're assuming one gets hurt, as I asked earlier. And in 72 total games combined prior to this past season, they missed a total of 4 games.

     

    I won't complain if Nelson goes off for 1000 yards if we sign him, but I don't see that happening unless the combination of Gronk and Hern combined miss more than half a season, which has happened just once in their three years here.

     

    And I'm not sure Nelson can create the same chances as Lloyd. Lloyd is coming off three straight seasons of at least 900 yards. Nelson has a 100 yards more than that over a span of the last 3 seasons.

    And while there hav been undrafted guys who have blossomed, most of them were at least pretty good in college. Nelson never had more than 300 yards in a college season.

     

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     


    Nelson will be cheaper than Lloyd. I don't think that's a question. He's coming off a torn ACL and has had limited to success.

     

    But with a ton of available cap space. I'd rather them be less stingy for the last two years if it means signing/holding onto a more proven player



    But signing Nelson doesn't prevent you from signing any other WR and adds at minimum depth to a team (who after Lloyd is cut) will have Slater as the only signed WR. They need WR's, he's a cheap option (as you can't sign an unlimited number of players), he's been a starter, and for that price you might not find someone with his ability.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    I thought it (signing Nelson) was a good idea when it seemed like Lloyd had one foot out the door.  Maybe Nelson can do all of what Lloyd could do, and potentially more.  The upside could be high and the cost could be a wash if they release Lloyd, but I think having the guy you know (warts and all) may be better than taking a chance on "potential" at this point.   If Lloyd is here for another year and if Welker is re-signed, then I am not sure Nelson is the best fit.  But I'll defer to those who say he can and has played outside. 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

     

    So then you're assuming one gets hurt, as I asked earlier. And in 72 total games combined prior to this past season, they missed a total of 4 games.

     

     

    I won't complain if Nelson goes off for 1000 yards if we sign him, but I don't see that happening unless the combination of Gronk and Hern combined miss more than half a season, which has happened just once in their three years here.

     

    And I'm not sure Nelson can create the same chances as Lloyd. Lloyd is coming off three straight seasons of at least 900 yards. Nelson has a 100 yards more than that over a span of the last 3 seasons.

    And while there hav been undrafted guys who have blossomed, most of them were at least pretty good in college. Nelson never had more than 300 yards in a college season.

     

     

     



    Hernandez only played in 10 games last season, 14 the previous, and 14 the one before that. He's missed 10 games in 3 seasons not including post season

     

    Gronk missed 5 games last season and was not 100% or was missing against the Ravens last year/year before too, and the Super Bowl the previous year

    I'm going to say the chances both are healthy for the entire season together is on the lower side

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

     but not fast or agile enough to be put outside 24/7 either.

     



    At his pro day he posted a 38 inch vertical, a 124 inch broad jump and a 6.74 in the 3 cone drill.  That would put him in the top 5-7 range in all of those things at this year's combine.  The kid is plenty explosive.  Sure he doesn't have 4.4 speed, but how many guys at that height do?  If he had that kind of speed he'd be Randy Moss.

     

     



    Then why did he go undrafted? Again, legitimate questions because I don't know much about this player.

     

    Vernon Gholston had great combine numbers and became a bust.

     

    To me, it just seems like people like him because of his measurables, not his football skills. He did not produce in college and has had one okay season. On a team that should be a threat to the Super Bowl, is this the guy you want to open the season with as a number 2 receiver?

     



    To be fair, Victor Cruz went undrafted and now he's a top receiver in the league.  I think people like the idea of Nelson's size and deep threat ability.  It's more wishful thinking that Brady can develop a cheap, serviceable outside receiver.  If the money is right, I like the idea as well.

     



    Cruz actually produced in college, albeit with Umass.

    Again, loving a guy because of his height and 40 time can be misleading. Guy might be a physical freak, but that doesn't always translate to the game.

    Pats have a legitimate shot at winning a title. Nelson can make good depth. But as a replacement for out starting WR? Risky move for a team that has scored under 21 points 3 of their last 5 playoff games. And if you include the Jets game, where they got a garbage time score, it's been 4 of their last 6 playoff games being held under 3 TDs.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

     

    I dont consider him a outside WR. Sure he is 6'6, but runs a 4.6 which is good for that height but you combine that with his slight frame and he aint getting off the line. Maybe he isnt a TE either but bottomline he is redundant, if we cant agree on that than we disagree and I would set my aims higher that Nelson....

     



    He's rounded up 6'5" and ran a 4.54 according to his combine numbers so not sure where you are pulling your data from. And how would he be redundant? Aaron Hernandez is 6'1" and ran a 4.7 40 at the combine. They are two completely different players. Nelson is a full .15s faster then Hern, 4" taller, had a better vertical, and a better 3 cone.

     

    Hern WR/TE tweener, Nelson WR there is no redundancy



    There is a difference between timed speed and football speed and like I said, I dont wanna change your opinion , we just disagree. I dont think we have a need for him, I dont thnk he is the answer outside and I thnk we should aim higher. If people are talking of cutting lloyd after going for 74/900, what are people expecting from Nelson with cheaper money and coming off an ACL.  I dont care about cone drills and all that unless you are a CB. If he doesnt bulk up , he will struggle to beat man coverage as weve seen already with LLoyd and I dont think Nelson is better than lloyd outside of you "projecting" what he will do here. The redundancy comes in when u have a bunch of mediocre 4.6 guys (Hern, LLoyd, Nelson) and none of them can seperate outside or take the top off. He looks explosive coming out that slot with Linebackers on him...but show me the tape of him dominating outside...

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Why David Nelson?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to dapats1281's comment:

     

     


    Nelson will be cheaper than Lloyd. I don't think that's a question. He's coming off a torn ACL and has had limited to success.

     

    But with a ton of available cap space. I'd rather them be less stingy for the last two years if it means signing/holding onto a more proven player

     



    But signing Nelson doesn't prevent you from signing any other WR and adds at minimum depth to a team (who after Lloyd is cut) will have Slater as the only signed WR. They need WR's, he's a cheap option (as you can't sign an unlimited number of players), he's been a starter, and for that price you might not find someone with his ability.

     



    That's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing with people who say replace Lloyd with Nelson.

    Sign Nelson behind Lloyd? I'd be fine with that

    Cut Lloyd, replace Lloyd with someone else, and sign Nelson? I'd be fine with that, depending on who the replacement is.

     

    Replacing Lloyd in the offense means replacing the other starting WR.

     

    And doing some light research, most don't see Nelson as an outside WR in this league. Also sounds like the Bills want to move Stevie into the slot, which is why theyre more okay with letting Nelson go.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share