Don't forget the 2013 J.Boykin

[jdpanther5]

 

His 2012 and 2014 season basically cancel one another out.

How exactly do two bad/invisible seasons "cancel out"? 

The real Boykin is likely somewhere between his poor 12/14 and his solid stretch in 13.

[Castavar]

Look, I just want the best WR's out there, and I believe Funchess, Boykin, and Ginn are our best 3. I want somebody that can be relied on to catch the ball when they are open. I don't trust Philly at all.

[Castavar]

Don't forget 2014 Boykin with 23 yards and Aaron Rodgers as his quarterback. 

Don't forget he was injured and they were loaded with weapons.

[Mol3m4n]

Don't forget he was injured and they were loaded with weapons.

He wasn't injured the entire year. 

Your second argument makes very little sense to me. Boykin is supposed to be good because other people are better? Where is the logic behind that?  He was dropped on the depth chart and sent packing for a reason. 

I'm not saying that he can't be good, or that we don't need him at the moment, but I have seen nothing special from Boykin recently and if Benjamin had not been hurt, Boykin doesn't even make the team. 

[Castavar]

He wasn't injured the entire year. 

Your second aargument makes very little sense to me. Boykin is supposed to be good because other people are better? Where is the logic behind that?  He was dropped on the depth chart and sent packing for a reason. 

I'm not saying that he can't be good, or that we don't need him at the moment, but I have seen nothing special from Boykin recently and if Benjamin had not been hurt, Boykin doesn't even make the team. 

How does it make little sense? They had Cobb, Nelson, Adams, Quarless, Lacy, and Janis. There is only one football. They didn't need to keep him anymore because they are completely stacked and they knew Abbredaris was coming back from injury this year. Boykin was expendable, but that doesn't mean he couldn't become a #2/3 for another team. The "for a reason" statements are just stupid and doesn't make sense. I guess Brady was drafted in the 6th "for a reason" huh?

And I have seen nothing special from Brown, Bersin, (hell all our other receivers for that matter) either. I have actually seen more from Boykin than all of them.

[Mol3m4n]

How does it make little sense? They had Cobb, Nelson, Adams, Quarless, Lacy, and Janis. There is only one football. They didn't need to keep him anymore because they are completely stacked and they knew Abbredaris was coming back from injury this year. Boykin was expendable, but that doesn't mean he couldn't become a #2/3 for another team. The "for a reason" statements are just stupid and doesn't make sense. I guess Brady was drafted in the 6th "for a reason" huh?

Yes,  Brady was drafted in the 6th for a reason. You're making it really hard to not call you a name with a statement like that. Brady was unathletic and was not pro ready. He was also hard to gauge while splitting time in an Oregon offense trying to get a sophomore ready for the next year. 

As for Boykin, it tells me something that he couldn't stick around on the roster, even as a fifth reserve. The Packers must not have thought too much about his glorious 2013 season. 

[sharkkiller]

Yes,  Brady was drafted in the 6th for a reason. You're making it really hard to not call you a name with a statement like that. Brady was unathletic and was not pro ready. He was also hard to gauge while splitting time in an Oregon offense trying to get a sophomore ready for the next year. 

As for Boykin, it tells me something that he couldn't stick around on the roster, even as a fifth reserve. The Packers must not have thought too much about his glorious 2013 season. 

ummmm...Tom Brady went to Michigan not Oregon.

[Castavar]

Yes,  Brady was drafted in the 6th for a reason. You're making it really hard to not call you a name with a statement like that. Brady was unathletic and was not pro ready. He was also hard to gauge while splitting time in an Oregon offense trying to get a sophomore ready for the next year. 

As for Boykin, it tells me something that he couldn't stick around on the roster, even as a fifth reserve. The Packers must not have thought too much about his glorious 2013 season. 

Oh no, you're going to call me a name, I'm so hurt LOL What the hell are you even arguing about? It sounds like you have something against Boykin. I don't give a damn who gets the nod, I just want the best WR's out there on the field who can ACTUALLY catch, and I feel Boykin is one of them. No need to get hissy to where you want to call people names.

And thank God you weren't a GM at the time, eh?

[top dawg]

How exactly do two bad/invisible seasons "cancel out"? 

The real Boykin is likely somewhere between his poor 12/14 and his solid stretch in 13.

 

He wasn't injured the entire year. 

Your second argument makes very little sense to me. Boykin is supposed to be good because other people are better? Where is the logic behind that?  He was dropped on the depth chart and sent packing for a reason. 

I'm not saying that he can't be good, or that we don't need him at the moment, but I have seen nothing special from Boykin recently and if Benjamin had not been hurt, Boykin doesn't even make the team. 

Let me explain it more specifically, as my earlier posts in the thread obviously weren't communicative enough for some of you.

If you want to take a season in which he was targeted 12 times while injured, but had 3 drops and blow it up, that's on you. Moreover, if you want to take a season in which he was targeted 6 times and had no drops and blow it up, that's on you too.  With as small of a sample size as either one of them are, how can you draw any honest or accurate conclusion about any receiver with that small of a sample size.  The 2013 season he was targeted 83 times and had two drops. The 2013 season is a big enough of a sample size in and of itself to draw a conclusion, as he wasn't hurt, nor was he targeted so little that you say to yourself that this guy is a beast.

Like I said earlier in this thread, the most "honest" way (if you will) to draw a conclusion is to take his career in its totality and say he was targeted 101 times and had 5 drops, which of course is just under 5 percent, and very acceptable for a receiver, though not the best.

If you can't understand that, I just don't know what else I can tell you. 

________

On an off note, noting that a guy was cut, not re-signed or whatever without taking into account a team's superior depth at a position is an intellectually dishonest endeavor as well.  That doesn't mean that you're useless at a position, it just means that they don't believe that you justify keeping a roster spot over someone else who is obviously superior and/or has more upside.

If "seeing anything special" out of our receivers, including Boykin, is the litmus test for determining whether or not we need to keep, much less start, a guy in our present situation, then we have a problem. And, yes, we do have a problem.

[Mol3m4n]

ummmm...Tom Brady went to Michigan not Oregon.

typo

[Mol3m4n]

Oh no, you're going to call me a name, I'm so hurt LOL What the hell are you even arguing about? It sounds like you have something against Boykin. I don't give a damn who gets the nod, I just want the best WR's out there on the field who can ACTUALLY catch, and I feel Boykin is one of them. No need to get hissy to where you want to call people names.

And thank God you weren't a GM at the time, eh?

There's no need to get defensive. I was just trying to hold myself back from calling your statement asinine and idiotic. 

[Castavar]

There's no need to get defensive. I was just trying to hold myself back from calling your statement asinine and idiotic. 

Dude, you are obviously just looking for an argument. You have yet to make ONE point about anything. All you have done is sh*t on Boykin trying to bring up an irrevelant year where he was injured and stacked at WR. My point has been clear all along, I think Boykin should be #2 over Corey. All you have done is rag on Boykin for getting cut from a stacked Packers WR squad. Bottom line, we need him and he provides upside at the position where we are absolutely lacking at.

[Cammmmm]

I agree with Castavar I think Boykin should be #2.  At least he is targeted a lot by Anderson and caught a hi percentage if they where catchable.  Brown will still be on the roster, just no Bersin.

[top dawg]

I agree with Castavar I think Boykin should be #2.  At least he is targeted a lot by Anderson and caught a hi percentage if they where catchable.  Brown will still be on the roster, just no Bersin.

He has caught not only a high percentage, but all of them so far.