Over/Under: Wes Welker

Eric Olinger

wes_welker4

In this new series entitled Over/Under, I am going to highlight a player, determine some projections based on past tendencies, then state whether I think they will go “over or under” those expectations.  Projection criteria will be different for each player based on position and situation.

The first player I want to feature is the Denver Broncos’ newest receiver, Wes Welker.  Based on Welker’s six year average and Peyton Manning’s stats from his first year in Denver, I will put the over under for Welker at 90 receptions, 1,050 yards and eight touchdowns. I’m taking the over all across the board.

Welker arguably has been the safest wide receiver play for the last six years and has been a fantasy juggernaut in PPR leagues simply because of volume. Since joining the Patriots and becoming Tom Brady’s go-to receiver, Welker has averaged 112 receptions, 1,243 yards and just over six touchdowns per season.

Now, Welker will be catching passes from another all-time great in Manning.

Welker joining forces with Peyton Manning is near sacrilege. It would be like if Luke Skywalker actually turned to the Dark side and stood by Darth Vader and Lord Sidious’ side. It would be like Robin turning on Batman. It’s like when Hulk Hogan ditched the “Real American” red and yellow Hulkamania for the black and white of the N.W.O.  – some things just shouldn’t be seen.

So, what does this do to Welker’s fantasy value? He didn’t exactly go from Tom Brady to Blaine Gabbert, it’s Peyton Manning. Peyton. Freaking. Manning. Manning has long loved his slot receivers – look what he did for the careers of Brandon Stokley, Austin Collie and Blair White. The fact you even know who Blair White is should speak volumes.

While Peyton Manning started 2012 off a little slow and shaky, he got it going and finished the season with the second most passing yards of his career with 4,667 yards, just 33 shy of his personal best. He also had better than a 3:1 touchdown-to-interception ratio for the third time of his illustrious career by throwing 37 touchdowns and only 11 interceptions. Brady finished the year with 4,827 yards, 34 touchdowns and eight interceptions.

The biggest issue with Welker will be his target volume. In New England, he was the man in between the 20’s, usually being the first read. In Denver, he will have to compete with Demaryius Thomas and Eric Decker for balls. Some people don’t remember, but Stokley actually caught 45 passes for 544 yards and five scores on this squad last year. You can guarantee every one of those targets will be going Welker’s way along with some of Thomas’ and Decker’s, too. With Thomas and Decker playing the outside, Welker will do what he does best, find a soft spot in the coverage, sit down and haul in catch after catch.

In New England, he was competing with Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez, Julian Edelman, Danny Woodhead, and any other player Bill Belichick decided he wanted to highlight that week for targets. The biggest problem in New England is/was the lack of a deep threat. Everyone crowded the middle of the field without much of a concern for anything deep. Denver has that covered with their young duo at wide receiver.

Don’t get me wrong, Demaryius Thomas is still the Denver wide receiver to own in both redraft and dynasty leagues, but Welker’s fantasy value doesn’t take nearly as severe of a hit as initially expected. I think it might actually increase his overall fantasy numbers. Whatever he loses in points per reception will most likely be made up for in touchdowns. I expect Welker to record his first career double digit touchdown season in 2013. With no real threat of a receiving tight end on this offense and Manning’s arm strength being less than it once was, Welker will essentially allow the Broncos to use the tight end as an extra blocker to keep Manning’s back side clean so he can do his thing.

I’m sure not all of you agree and some of you might think I’m way off, but our readers are some of the most spirited and passionate fantasy footballers out there and I want to know, are you taking the over or the under on our stated line of 90/1,050/8?

Let me know in the comments section below.

eric olinger
Latest posts by Eric Olinger (see all)