psjordan wrote:The Giants comparison is not totally meaningless and was posted for a reason. Under Coughlin they are perennially drafting behind us and perennially finishing in front of us in a ton of meaningful categories. Even though they seemingly have as many - if not more - devastating injuries to important positions as any other team. In the area under discussion, they consistently have receivers (I really don't care if it's a FB) who seem to annihilate common expectations. From current stud Victor Cruz to the unknowns catching 17 passes in a game to Jake Ballard to Ahmad Bradshaw etc. etc.
I think it's important to manage expectations in regards to receivers and what they are asked to do in respect to their abilities. Just because the Giants are selecting after us, doesn't mean they are placing any less emphasis on the WR position. In fact, over the last couple of seasons they have placed a higher priority on receivers than we have.
Let's take the Giants' receiving corps and where they were selected in their respected drafts.
Hakeem Nicks (24) — First Round
Ramses Barden (26) — Third Round
Victor Cruz (25) — UDFA
Martellus Bennett (25)— Second Round
Domenik Hixon (27) — Fourth round
And let's compare that to that of the Vikings (I'm leaving off Simpson because we haven't seen him in regular season action yet and, to this point, hasn't entered the conversation. The same goes for Childs and Wright).
Percy Harvin — First Round (meeting or exceeding expectations)
Devin Aromashodu — Seventh Round (cut by 4 teams)
Michael Jenkins (30) — First Round (clearly has been on the downside of his career for the last couple of years and has underwhelmed BEFORE coming to Minnesota, especially given his first-round draft grade)
Stephen Burton (22) — Seventh Round
I don't think it's a stretch to say that the players that were taken earlier are naturally performing better, the exception being Victor Cruz. I think he's such a wild card an the exception to the rule that people place too much emphasis on him and his success when those players miss SIGNIFICANTLY more often than they hit.
Furthermore, Sidney Rice was productive as a Viking when he was able to stay on the field. To expect the production from Burton or Aromashadou that the Giants are getting (or got in one game) out of Bardon is not realistic given the perceived talent discrepancies. I see the Giants investing higher draft picks in the position (i.e. getting players that are largely more talented) and clearly have a better quarterback. When you pool that together, you should see better production, coaching aside.
I also think it's telling when the majority of receivers leave the Vikings they don't all of a sudden turn into production machines thanks to superior coaching. I can think of no clear example of a Vikings receiver that left and was as productive (or more so) but would welcome an example. Moss and Burleson are special cases and should be excluded from this discussion due to the nature of their departure. Even taking them into consideration, you couldn't make a case that their careers were significantly or noticeably better under different coaching.
I think the main issue in our receiver talent pool (or lack thereof) is in scouting the right talent in either the draft or free agency (Berrian) and committing the necessary draft attention to acquire more talented players. Does coaching play a part in the process? Absolutely. But the innate talent of the players makes a greater difference (in my opinion). Perhaps I'm misguided, but had the Vikings selected Cruz in the seventh round of the 2010 draft, I'm convinced his natural talent would have allowed him to rise to the top and not only make the 53, but make a similar impact to what we've seen him do in New York. Of course, quarterback play/chemistry also plays a part in that as well so it'd be folly to assume he'd be AS productive in Minnesota as he's been in New York.
I wish as much as anyone that our later-round guys turn out to be productive starters (if not full-blown impact players). But that's just not realistic. See below (worth the entire article read if you're really interested in diving deeper into this discussion):
about 6% of the players drafted after the fourth round from 2000 to 2010 - roughly 166 of the 2,779 players drafted - became strong NFL starters or more.
http://cfn.scout.com/2/1180349.html