Bryant Johnson vs. Nate Burleson -- STATS
How much of an upgrade over Bryant Johnson is Nate Burleson?
They both have been in the league since 2003, so they're about the same age. Both have about the same number of career starts.
Burleson's career 13.5 yards-per attempt is an upgrade over Johnson's career 12.5. Burleson has one season with more than 1000 receiving yards (1006 in 2004), another season over 800 (812 last year). Johnson has been very consistent in the 400's-500's, with one exception--740 yards in 2006.
As far as touchdowns go, Burleson had two 9-TD seasons (2004 and 2007). Otherwise, both receivers are in the 1-4 range for their careers. Hopefully whatever worked for Burleson those two years he can recreate for us, and he can be more of a scoring threat.
I don't have a chart for receptions, but it's just like TD's and Yards--Burleson's best couple of seasons are far better than Johnson's, but their numbers are otherwise pretty similar for the rest of their careers. Burleson's best seasons in receptions were: 68, 50, and 63, but the rest of his seasons were 30 or less. Bryant Johnson is consistenlty in the 35-49 range his whole career. Careerwise, Johnson has 290 receptions to Burleson's 263.
Summary: Burleson brings some more upside, but more risk of very low production from injury, while Johnson is consistently mediocre.
data (source: www.profootballreference.com)
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Pride of Detroit or its writers. FanPosts are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable fans.
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Touchdowns
As far as touchdowns go, Burleson’s “down years” are Johnson’s best years. If he has quickness and can make solid catches, he is easily an upgrade.
Heres something else to think about
Who has either of these guys had to throw them the ball? Hassel(bad)back? And the year that his back didn’t hurt they ran the ball all year.
The main difference is SPEED
Burleson is quite a bit faster than Bryant Johnson, he can return kicks, and he is probably a better route runner. The only thing that means, though, is that Burleson is a slot/WR3, and not a WR2. If he can stay healthy and catch the ball, I will be happy. I agree that he is not much of an upgrade, if at all, over bryant johnson…….because he will not be playing Bryant Johnson’s position. Compare him to Dennis Northcutt…..that is who he will replace.
Oh you didn't know?? You're ass better CALLLLLLLL SOMEBODY!!!!!
From rotoworld....
with ESPN as their source….
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=1158&sn=t
Oh you didn't know?? You're ass better CALLLLLLLL SOMEBODY!!!!!
I realize that.....
And from that perspective, I agree that he may become the 2nd best WR on our team…..however, his position will not be WR2…..it will be WR3…..do you understand what I am saying?
Oh you didn't know?? You're ass better CALLLLLLLL SOMEBODY!!!!!
True
I just do not see him as physical enough or durable enough to play WR2…..we’ll see I guess.
Oh you didn't know?? You're ass better CALLLLLLLL SOMEBODY!!!!!
KDawg is talking about WHERE he plays on the field, not where he falls in the "pecking order"
A WR2 is a wideout who lines up split wide near the sidelines, and is usually a bigger, stronger posession receiver. Think Anquan Boldin.
A WR3 is a slot receiver who lines up between the wideout and the OL, and is usually a smaller, faster receiver who relies on quickness, cutting ability, and precise route-running to get open underneath, often while slashing across the defense. Think Santana Moss or Wes welker.
Nate Burleson is 6-1, 198. That’s typically slot receiver size, but he’s close enough to borderline that maybe Linehan might try lining him up outside as a sideline deep threat. Mike Furrey had one year of success at that size playing WR2, but this is a different playbook, and Burleson is a different person. Burleson doesn’t strike me as solidly built enough for that kind of regular punishment, so I tend to lean toward KDawg’s assessment, but we’ll see what happens.
Honorary Driver of the Kyle Wilson Bus and Keeper of the Dreadlocks!
The 313 Missile Squadron: Delmas, Berry, Wilson......seek and destroy!
Hey, as long as Zack Follett keeps hitting people, he can rap to Barney the Dinosaur for all I care.
I think I understand
While he may be our second best receiver, we will mainly use him in the slot ala Wes Welker, so that his speed and route running capabilities are used to the fullest.
The Bringers of Hope: Stafford - Delmas - C. Johnson - Pettigrew - Levy - Hill - Schwartz
Zack Follett: he will hurt your mind.
by Hyperion Ecta on Mar 5, 2010 6:14 PM EST up reply actions
That's what I am talking about.....
Thank you HE!
Oh you didn't know?? You're ass better CALLLLLLLL SOMEBODY!!!!!
Catching the ball would be a start
If he can do that, he’s already an upgrade of Johnson.
I agree-
Thanks for posting the comparison stats. I didn’t see the receptions listed.
by Kirt-LionFaninGR! on Mar 7, 2010 7:38 AM EST up reply actions
nevermind-
I read the rest of your posting-
Best line: Summary: Burleson brings some more upside, but more risk of very low production from injury, while Johnson is consistently mediocre.
by Kirt-LionFaninGR! on Mar 7, 2010 7:40 AM EST up reply actions
What I like about this signing
Is the immediate competition it creates for both players. They’re both 7 years in, not young but not old yet, and they can really put up some numbers opposite of Calvin Johnson, and with all 3 receivers on the field as well as Pettigrew all of the sudden we have an opportunity to spread the ball. Can you Double Cover CJ still? Yeah, but now Staff has options, and if we revamp the run game this year I’ll have some faith in our offense. I still don’t think this team can be really truly competitive until the defense is re-tooled and they’re doing a good job of that with the d-line moves this offseason. Honestly, I think the front office’s main concern is the secondary in the draft, and not the d-line. I like what’s being done. I would love Suh or McCoy on this line with some depth, but I’ll take a safety or a corner to improve our annually awful pass defense.
Color me unimpressed
I see a phrase like “Nate Burleson is one of this year’s top free agent wide receivers,” and I think, “this isn’t a very good year for free agent wide receivers.”
5 years/25 mil seems excessive, not that with the uncapped year, that really means anything.
Then again, since I’m just going to assume that William Clay Ford isn’t going to suddenly turn into Mike Illitch and do whatever it takes to turn his team into a winner, finices-wise, I take that to mean that that money is coming from a finite pool, which may make targeting other free agents like likely (not that I’m sure who the Lions actually have a shot at).
Hope Burleson proves me wrong, and shows off heretofore undiscovered, Wes Welker like skills.
But for now, I’m severely underwhelmed.
Official BYB Juju Consultant...now accepting rally creature applications!
Burleson was with Linehan in Minn
I think thats why he chose the Lions he was successful in the Linehan system in Seatle his style never fit their scheme
Good point!
Just like how Corey Williams was very successful in Green Bay as a DT in a 4-3, but in Cleveland his style didn’t fit as a DE in a 3-4.
Honorary Driver of the Kyle Wilson Bus and Keeper of the Dreadlocks!
The 313 Missile Squadron: Delmas, Berry, Wilson......seek and destroy!
Hey, as long as Zack Follett keeps hitting people, he can rap to Barney the Dinosaur for all I care.
I think Burleson can be decent
Not spectacular, just decent and that’s what we need. Reliability. If Staff can rely on a WR apart from CJ to throw it to than I think the whole offence will pick up.
The Bringers of Hope: Stafford - Delmas - C. Johnson - Pettigrew - Levy - Hill - Schwartz
Zack Follett: he will hurt your mind.


































