Posted 02 January 2013 - 09:44 PM
Wallace is a deep threat and nothing else whereas Smith is a better overall receiver. I would like to have Wallace but he is not worth anything more than a 3rd round draft pick. if Brandon Marshall (a more complete receiver) was traded for a 3rd rounder what sense does it make offer a first rounder for someone who can only run a 9 route? The only receiver that would warrant a first round pick is Calvin Johnson.
Smith has never been a huge touchdown numbers guy and 2009 was also a down year for smith with Matt Moore playing QB. Rothelisberger is 10x the QB Moore is and Big Ben.
How does scoring more TDs produce more offense??? in that case Mike Tolbert produced more offense the final game of the season than Cam Newton.
Wallace is a deep threat and a YAC threat.
Is he has complete as Smith? No. But If you haven't noticed Smith is getting old....it is showing even if some are in denial. His past blurs what he is slowly becoming.
Big Ben is a much better QB than Moore. Moore still played great in 2009 so that window really gets thrown out.
You don't think 12 TDs is more offensive production than 60 yards?
We can't afford Wallace so there is much point in going on and on IMO. If you look at Smith's age, what Wallace does......and the fact Cam is a big armed vertical passer. Wallace would be a dream. The fact he isn't the physical lunatic Smith is with veteran savvy doesn't mean he wouldn't be an ideal WR for Cam.
Posted 02 January 2013 - 09:45 PM
More well rounded. I agree.
Greg Jennings is a better option that Mike Wallace
Is he more dangerous and have the upside Wallace could have playing in a vertical attack with Cam?
I wouldn't complain about either if we could get one