(06-11-2017, 08:14 PM)Bullseye Wrote:

(06-11-2017, 09:49 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: ...
- In the most conventional sense, Lee was the #2 WR in 2016, not the #3. Seems very odd to list him there.

The only way I remotely disagree with you is the Lee analysis.  Had Hurns not been injured, Lee still would be considered the #3 WR, although Lee performed well as the #2.

Listing Ramsey as a #2 was laughable, as was the DL stuff.

The only thing that makes that a bit nebulous is that Lee was getting the lion's share of the outside snaps over Hurns before Hurns was injured and Hurns was playing much more from the slot than he was playing outside.

This is why I used the phrase "in the most conventional sense." Because Lee was being used in 2 receiver sets outside as often (probably more often) than Hurns before the injury -- and when they had three receivers on the field it was usually Hurns playing the slot. "Conventionally" your slot guy is the #3 even though it's not a hard and fast rule.

EDIT for Correction: After going back and looking at snap counts, Lee and Hurns were splitting the outside #2 snaps pretty evenly prior to Hurns' injury.

---