Reconsidering ... 2006

by Sunil @ Canal Street Chronicles on Nov 26, 2007 2:43 PM CST in News

Each week, when we do our blogger interviews, I must answer the same question about the 2006 draft. Specifically, I'm forced to justify the Saints' selection of Reggie Bush, a selection that I still think was justified, given the fact that the next-best fit was A.J. Hawk, who went fifth and hasn't impacted his team both on and off the field, as Reggie has.

Lately, when asked about the 2006 draft, I've taken to claiming that the entire draft class sucked, that the most-dominant players were Vince Young and, hold for it, Devin Hester. But I think I've been shortchanging somebody.

Consider the rate stats (since they haven't all played the same numbers of games) for the following players:

	Catches/game	Yards/game	AVG	TD/game
Player 1	4.71	68.67	14.58	0.79
Player 2	5.52	75.4	13.7	0.56
Player 3	5.85	89.26	15.25	0.48
Player 4	5.89	73.96	12.56	0.56

I won't keep you in the dark: Player 2 is Marques Colston.

As for the rest:

Player 1

Player 3

Player 4

If his game-to-game numbers compare to those three, he must be one of the best receivers in the league, right?

I think it's reasonable to say he was the best player in the 2006 draft.

Do you?

Tweet Comment 3 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

YES!

By far he's the best. I don't even have to look at the stats. He's just so damn cute!

by jdawgman on Nov 26, 2007 4:44 PM CST reply actions

agreed

I've been saying this all along. While all the hype over Reggie Bush wasn't COMPLETELY unmerited (though, for the first handful of games last season, it seemed that way), I think Colston is by far a more consistent and, more often than not, effective player and his stats are proof.

Plus, yeah, he's so dreamy. Jdawgman knows what's up.

by mdawglady on Nov 27, 2007 10:48 AM CST reply actions