Patterson at WR: 18 catches, 114 yards, 0 TDs
That's Cordarelle Patterson of the Raiders year totals thus far. No TDs on kickoff returns as a Raider.
@"RS Express" said: Patterson: 18 rec, 114 yds. 10 rushes, 124 yards, 2 TD. KR: 13 for 401 yards, 30.8 avg. Vikings 2017 KR: 17 for 432, 25.4 avg.Treadwell: 14 rec for 152 and, er, nothing.
CP will likely be cheaper next year than our current WR bust...
I've said it before and I'll say it again...I will take the 25 everytime vs somewhere between the 15 and the 35 with the occasional bigger one.
On touchback they have almost zero risk of a penalty, how many time dif we see returns set back to the 12 or so because of a penalty. Also virtually no risk of injury,
....real estate is expensive and the NFL is going to give our O the first 25 yards of it for free....all you have to do is catch the ball and kneel.
If he could actually be a contributor on O...bring him back, but wasting a roster spot on a KR specialist in todays kicking game is stupid IMO. Especially with our defense not surrenderinG as many scores. His avg is 5 yards more, if we give up 3 scores a game on avg that's only 20 yards a game he would improve our starting field position...not worth the game day active roster spot on that alone. He better bring it on offense as well without being a liability when out there.
Patterson as a #3 or #4 guy? Special Team Ace? Nice fit in the payroll?
Sure, no problem with that. As long as the #84 doesn't get sullied anymore.
@"purplefaithful" said: Patterson as a #3 or #4 guy? Special Team Ace? Nice fit in the payroll?Sure, no problem with that. As long as the #84 doesn't get sullied anymore.
#84 should just be retired, especially after Randy is in the HoF (hopefully this coming induction). Nobody is even wearing it this season and for some reason a lot of the young receivers these days seem to like teen numbers. ??
@"CLOBIMON" said:@"purplefaithful" said: Patterson as a #3 or #4 guy? Special Team Ace? Nice fit in the payroll?Sure, no problem with that. As long as the #84 doesn't get sullied anymore.
#84 should just be retired, especially after Randy is in the HoF (hopefully this coming induction). Nobody is even wearing it this season and for some reason a lot of the young receivers these days seem to like teen numbers. ??
I dont like the idea of retiring numbers, although I am good with Special K's #77 being hung up permanently, teams only have so many options for numbers so leave them active but have the ring of honor for the players. not saying Randys contributions arent deserving but I dont like the practice in general.
As a KR, Patterson during his 4 years here gave us the #1 or #2 average starting field position after a kickoff...
As a WR, I can't help but wonder what Shurmur would do with Patterson's talent based on the mileage he's getting out of guys like Keenum and Remmers...Musgrave certainly was able to put Patterson in a position to succeed...I'm guessing he'd do the same here...
@"BarrNone55" said: As a KR, Patterson during his 4 years here gave us the #1 or #2 average starting field position after a kickoff... As a WR, I can't help but wonder what Shurmur would do with Patterson's talent based on the mileage he's getting out of guys like Keenum and Remmers...Musgrave certainly was able to put Patterson in a position to succeed...I'm guessing he'd do the same here...
I have to think that Shurmur was involved in the decision to not try and resign CPatt. as far as the starting field position.... we are only talking about a matter of a few yards difference per kick off from top to bottom IIRC. KR stats are pretty over hyped with the 25 yard line starting spot now IMO.
If he would come on the cheap and Shurmur was convinced he could get 10-15 productive plays per game out of him where he isnt handicapping the offense when he is on the field... I would be good with bringing him back. he was really looking good on P coverage last year which would be a nice addition.
I’m fine with Patterson as a #4-5 WR backing up the X
position and being primarily a ST stud.
He’s not a guy you want on the field much on offense, but he could hold
down the X position for some period of time if someone got injured. I think his value is greatly diminished with the new touchback rules. You're pretty much just expecting him to get 1 TD a season. I'm not sure how many special teamers you want that get paid more than a rookie contract.
I'd think they'd prefer to see how well Rodney Adams and Stacey Coley, or maybe another rookie develops as a real WR before they'd look getting Patterson back.
I doubt they'd waste their time and money on Flashy again.
If only the guy could translate his gunner strength to deep receiving threat. He's still past the blockers and first one down there for the Raiders punt team nearly every time.
@"CLOBIMON" said: If only the guy could translate his gunner strength to deep receiving threat. He's still past the blockers and first one down there for the Raiders punt team nearly every time.
hes got some skills, just not sure how they cant be put together into an offensive weapon.
@"JimmyinSD" said:@"BarrNone55" said: As a KR, Patterson during his 4 years here gave us the #1 or #2 average starting field position after a kickoff... As a WR, I can't help but wonder what Shurmur would do with Patterson's talent based on the mileage he's getting out of guys like Keenum and Remmers...Musgrave certainly was able to put Patterson in a position to succeed...I'm guessing he'd do the same here...
I have to think that Shurmur was involved in the decision to not try and resign CPatt. as far as the starting field position.... we are only talking about a matter of a few yards difference per kick off from top to bottom IIRC. KR stats are pretty over hyped with the 25 yard line starting spot now IMO.If he would come on the cheap and Shurmur was convinced he could get 10-15 productive plays per game out of him where he isnt handicapping the offense when he is on the field... I would be good with bringing him back. he was really looking good on P coverage last year which would be a nice addition.
I'm sure you are right that Shurmur was involved, but the key is that Patterson wanted a relatively big contract - on paper he got 2 years for $8.5M with $5M guaranteed. I didn't think he was worth keeping for that price and doubt Shurmur did. But it's a different story if his price drops significantly.This is all dependent on the Raiders opting out of the remaining $3M, and they might just keep him if they think he starts to pick up their offense late in the season. We have 2 excellent WRs and some decent depth, so getting Patterson back next year is not a big deal - I just think he's going to end up more role player than starter and if he accepts the salary for that, he's a good guy to have.
@"JimmyinSD" said:@"CLOBIMON" said: If only the guy could translate his gunner strength to deep receiving threat. He's still past the blockers and first one down there for the Raiders punt team nearly every time.
hes got some skills, just not sure how they cant be put together into an offensive weapon.
Running past people works for a gunner. Not so much at WR. Actually reading the defense, running good routes and being in the right place matter as much as being fast.
@"greediron" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:@"CLOBIMON" said: If only the guy could translate his gunner strength to deep receiving threat. He's still past the blockers and first one down there for the Raiders punt team nearly every time.
hes got some skills, just not sure how they cant be put together into an offensive weapon.
Running past people works for a gunner. Not so much at WR. Actually reading the defense, running good routes and being in the right place matter as much as being fast.
some of the same skills he has as a gunner can help him as a WR. one of the biggest issues for many WR is getting off a jam at the line... PR often have 2 guys to beat on any given kick so he has that down. I think his routes were improving last year... I can see him back here if it was on the cheap, but somebody else will think that Minny and Oakland both missed something and pay him more than they should.
Gunner doesn't require much studying. I don't think his issues are in the physical realm. His routes should have improved over the course of that many years. But knowing which one to run based on the play call and how the defense lines up seemed to be his biggest issue.
@"greediron" said: Gunner doesn't require much studying. I don't think his issues are in the physical realm. His routes should have improved over the course of that many years. But knowing which one to run based on the play call and how the defense lines up seemed to be his biggest issue.
like I said, if Shurmur can get him on the field for 10 plays without being to predictable and/or hurting the team because he is just a decoy, then I would be fine, if he is only coming back as a gimmick and a special teamer... pass.
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.