Jason Wood's Thoughts

I'm fond of saying that the two keys to fantasy success are Ability and Opportunity. When a player possesses both, he's all but assured of fantasy success and, in my view, Nate Burleson fits that mold perfectly.

ABILITY:

1) Last year, his 2nd season in the league, Burleson put together 68 receptions for 1,006 yards and nine touchdowns; good enough for a 16th place finish among fantasy receivers. He played a huge role in allowing Daunte Culpepper to put together one of the best passing seasons in NFL history, and led the team in receiving (yes, he had more yards than Randy Moss).

2) Burleson is a sure-handed precise route runner with good (not great) speed. At 6'0", 197 lbs., he has adequate size but doesn't possess the imposing physical dimensions of some of the league's other promising young receivers. He was a 3rd round selection in the 2003 draft, after catching an astonishing 138 receptions in his final collegiate season.

3) Guess how many receivers had more yards-after-the-catch (YAC) than Burleson? TWO. He was 3rd among wideouts in YAC last year, generating 456 yards after the ball was in hand. In other words, he's a playmaker in the open field.

OPPORTUNITY:

1) This just in, Randy Moss is now a Raider. Assuming you haven't been in stasis for the last six months, it's no surprise that the most talented receiver in the NFL is no longer a Viking. What that means for Burleson is that he's now the #1 receiver on a team that led the league in passing last year, and has finished with no less than 3,850 yards in each of the last five years.

2) What's impressive about Burleson is that he was able to maintain his productivity with and without Moss in the lineup. Some may argue that Burleson won't be as effective without Moss to take away opposing defenses best cover corner; yet Burleson did much of his damage (particularly in terms of TD production) when Moss was sidelined.

3) Opposing defenses won't be able to focus on Burleson without getting burned elsewhere. The WR corps runs deep with Marcus Robinson, rookie Troy Williamson and Travis Taylor to go along with two solid tight ends (Kleinsasser and Wiggins) and a cadre of RBs who can catch passes.

4) Culpepper has already shown a propensity to throw to Burleson in the red zone. Last year, here were the league leaders in Red Zone Receptions:

1. Antonio Gates - 17 receptions
2. Marvin Harrison - 16 receptions
3. Jeremy Shockey - 15 receptions
4. Nate Burleson - 14 receptions
5. Tony Gonzalez - 13 receptions
6. Chad Johnson - 13 receptions
7. Muhsin Muhammad - 13 receptions
8. Ike Hilliard - 12 receptions
9. Randy Moss - 11 receptions
10. Terrell Owens - 11 receptions

Positives

• Daunte Culpepper is one of the most accurate and productive quarterbacks in the league
• Burleson is the #1 receiver on a prolific passing team, and he's entering his 3rd season and 2nd as a starter; historically opportune times to bet on a receiver breaking out
• There are too many other offensive weapons for opposing defenses to overplay Burleson consistently

Negatives

• No one can effectively predict the impact of losing Randy Moss, although I don't see it happening, it's possible Moss' departure could significantly derail the team's overall production
• The Vikings spent a top 10 overall draft choice on WR Troy Williamson and also signed WR Travis Taylor in free agency, moves that potentially belie our assertion that Burleson is the clearly WR1
• The team is playing for a lame duck head coach and a first time offensive coordinator. Although OC Loney plans on keeping the offense intact, he may not be as effective as Scott Linehan, his predecessor

Final Thoughts

There's a lot to like about Nate Burleson's situation. He's the top receiver on an ultra-productive offense with a Pro Bowl QB at the helm. In just his second season (his first as a starter), Burleson finished 16th among fantasy WRs, scored nine TDs, finished third in YAC and fourth in red zone receptions. He was also productive with and without Randy Moss in the lineup. Entering his 3rd season, all the pieces are in place for Burleson to take the next step in his development; which would put him solidly among the league's most productive young receivers. I believe Nate Burleson has an excellent opportunity to finish among the top 10 fantasy receivers and would suggest you draft accordingly.

David Yudkin's Thoughts

There has been a lot of debate this off-season involving the Vikings, and much of it has centered on whether the offense will crumble with the departure of All World wideout Randy Moss. With Moss out of the picture, all eyes instead have turned to third-year receiver Nate Burleson as a potential focal point of the offense.

There are essentially two trains of thought involving Burleson heading into the 2005 NFL season. Many feel he will endure a tough season facing double coverage on a regular basis and will struggle to measure up to last year's numbers (68-1006-9). Some others surmise that Moss' production has to go somewhere, and Burleson appears to be positioned as the main benefactor.

As to whether the Minnesota offense will tank this season (and by how much), I researched what happened in Year X + 1 after a franchise lost a prominent or Top 5 wide receiver - either by his departure from the team or due to serious injury. Here are the examples I uncovered . . .

1980 - 1981 Chargers (Lost John Jefferson to Green Bay)
Charlie Joiner		71-1132-4 (WR 11)	70-1188-7 (WR 6)
Chargers Passing	4741/30		        4873/34

1983 - 1984 Redskins (Lost Charlie Brown to injury)
Art Monk 		47-746-5 (WR 24)	106-1372-7 (WR 6)
Redskins Passing	3765/29		        3417/24

1993 - 1994 Rams (Lost Henry Ellard to Washington)
Flipper Anderson 	37- 552-4 (WR 47)	46-945-5 (WR 21)
Rams Passing		3021/16		        3597/23

1994 - 1995 Bills (lost Andre Reed to injury)
Billy Brooks 		42-482-2 (WR 67) 	53-763-11 (WR 20)
Bills Passing		3714/23		        3348/24

1994 - 1995 Packers (lost Sterling Sharpe to retirement) 
Robert Brooks 		58-648-4 (WR 44)	102-1497-13 (WR 5)
Packers Passing	        3977/33		        4539/39

1994 - 1995 Falcons (lost Andre Rison to Cleveland)
Bert Emanuel		46-649-4 (WR 43)	74-1039-5 (WR 23)
Falcons Passing	        4344/25		        4456/26

1995 - 1996 Packers (lost Robert Brooks to injury)
Antonio Freeman	        8-106-1 (WR 119)	56-933-9 (WR 16)
Packers Passing	        4539/39		        3938/39  

1995 - 1996 Dolphins (lost Irving Fryar to Philadelphia)
O.J. McDuffee 		62-819-8 (WR 24)	74-918-8 (WR 19)
Dolphins Passing	4398/28		        3783/22

1996 - 1997 49ers (lost Jerry Rice to injury)
Terrell Owens 		35-520-4 (WR 57)	60-936-8 (WR 20)
49ers Passing		3859/24		        3432/20

1996 - 1997 Lions (lost Brett Perriman to Kansas City)
Johnnie Morton		55-714-6 (WR 35)	80-1057-6 (WR 18)
Lions Passing		4023/23		        3605/19

1998 - 1999 Cowboys (lost Michael Irvin to injury -- *Jason Tucker in 1998)
Raghib Ismail		23-439-2 (WR 69*)	80-1097-6 (WR 13)
Cowboys Passing	        3546/18		        3278/20

1999 - 2000 Jets (lost Keyshawn Johnson to Tampa Bay)
Wayne Chrebet 	        48-631-3 (WR 55)	69-937-8 (WR 19)
Jets Passing		3001/22		        4023/23

2000 - 2001 49ers (lost Jerry Rice to Oakland)
Terrell Owens 		97-1451-13 (WR 3)	93-1412-16 (WR 2)
49ers Passing		4400/32		        3559/32

Players			684/5			1084/8
Team Passing		3948/26		        3834/27		

Of course, there are several issues with Moss' trade to Oakland that make this much more problematic. For starters, Randy Moss is a notch or two above almost all of the aforementioned wide receivers. Next, the Vikings as a team had such elevated passing numbers (4754/39) that a let down seems to be in order and who really knows if the 'rules enforcement' will carry over to 2005. And of course, some of the corresponding QBs on the list have been top-notch (Marino, Favre, Kelly, Young, Fouts). From a team perspective, the average yardage dropped a mere 3% while passing TD remained essentially the same or inched up slightly. From a player perspective, in each case there was someone waiting in the wings that dramatically improved his production.

I am sure many are clamoring . . . 'But how did Burleson do last year when Moss was out?'

Burleson posted 29-297-4 in the 5 games Moss essentially did not play, averaging 11 fantasy points per game. He totaled 39-709-5 in the games where Moss played'an average of 9.5 fantasy points per game. A case could also be made that the Minnesota offense had to regroup midstream, as the injury to Moss forced a hasty modification to the offense game plan in a very short time span. With an entire off-season to retool, the team should be much more prepared to enduring a life without Moss.

The other factor'and one that many people appear to have overlooked'is Minnesota's ability to crank out top fantasy wide receivers. Maybe there is something in the water in Minnesota, but the Vikings wide receivers have fared very well in recent memory. Since 1987 (18 seasons) . . .

Team			Top 10 WR Seasons	Top 20 WR Seasons
Vikings			19			26
49ers			17			20
Packers			11			16

In that time, QBs, WRs, coaches, offensive coordinators, and supporting personnel have turned over countless times. The Vikings have now had a 1,000-yard receiver for 12 consecutive seasons.

Many will point out that Burleson is not the second coming of Cris Carter or Randy Moss, and that could very well be the case. But Burleson did produce some alarming numbers in college, hauling in 139 passes for 1,629 yards and 12 TD in 12 games his final season at Nevada-Reno before Minnesota invested the 71st pick in the 2003 draft to obtain him. Maybe Burleson will turn into a future Hall of Famer, maybe he won't. Here's how Burleson's numbers compare to some other notable wide receivers after two seasons:

Wide Receiver	               Totals
M Harrison		137  1702  14
A Monk			114  1691   9
A Reed			101  1376  11
J Lofton		100  1788  10
C Johnson		 97  1495   6
N Burleson		 97  1461  11 
T Owens			 95  1456  12
S Largent		 87  1348  14
M Irvin			 58  1032   7
H Ellard		 50   890   6
I Fryar			 50   834   8
C Carter		 44   845   8

Positives

• Randy Moss is gone - meaning Burleson becomes the de facto focus of the offense and could inherit the lion's share of Moss' production
• Burleson may become the primary cog in an environment that has been a flagship for wide receiver fantasy production (whether it be due to the system, QBs, coaches, playing indoors, an easy NFC North schedule, or other external factors)
• A small sample size of teams in similar situations (losing a premier WR) has shown that player production of the new WR1 has gone up substantially while the team's passing totals have remained somewhat similar

Negatives

• Randy Moss is gone - meaning Burleson becomes the de facto focus of opposing defenses and being a marked man via constant double coverage could limit his production
• Nate Burleson is no Randy Moss. He may be an "above average" or even "good" WR, but "elite" might be pushing it. And who's to say that rookie Troy Williamson won't evolve into the next "chosen one" in Minnesota
• The Vikings have a new offensive coordinator and have expressed an interest in running the ball more. The team also has made valiant attempts to improve their defense, and they may be in more ball control games and fewer offensive shootouts this season.

Final Thoughts

The bottom line is that Burleson will start the season as the #1 receiving option on a team that had 4,754 passing yards and 39 TDs through the air. The Vikings had at least 1,000 more passing yards than 20 teams and at least 10 more passing TDs than 28 NFL franchises did last year. Since 1994, the Vikings have ranked Top 10 in scoring 8 times, Top 10 in total yards 9 times, and Top 10 in passing yards 10 times. There may be some bumps in the road and some period of adjustment, but the Vikings offense should again be one of the best in the league. The new scheme to run more may mean a slight dip in the team's passing attempts, but Minnesota should not turn into the Steelers. Blending all the different forces at work, personnel and coaching changes, historical trends, and a smattering of common sense, Burleson should emerge as a top fantasy WR this season.

Quotations from the Message Board Thread

To view the entire Player Spotlight thread (there's a ton of fantastic commentary in there), click here.

Me & My Uncle:
Personally, I am not sold on [Culpepper's] ability to make a good WR into a great FF WR. QBs like Manning and Favre can do this, but there are not many QBs with that much accuracy, power, and smarts to do that. So few, in fact, that is hard to assume that [Culpepper] will be one of them. The fact that he has been a FF force probably has more to do with Moss than it does with [Culpepper], since every QB not named Sage had great success throwing to Moss.

earlybreak:
A good player but can he take double teams every week? I think so but not in the mold of Moss.

Just Win Baby:
Moss missed 5 games altogether, weeks 7-11 last season. During those games, Burleson had 29/297/4. Project that to 16 games and you get 93/952/13.

Now, what has changed since that stretch of 5 games?

1. The Minnesota RBs have gotten healthy and off suspension. This, combined with a stated intent to focus more on the running game this year by Tice, could result in:
a. More rushing attempts and less passing attempts.
b. More red zone rushing and less red zone passing, leading to more rushing TDs and fewer passing TDs.
c. More involvement in the passing game by the RBs. This is probably a stretch, since the Vikings RBs combined for 106/1081/4 last year... but they did average 10.2 ypc... could be easier and less risky to move the chains with those passes than short passes to the WRs.

2. The only other WR targets for Culpepper with Moss out last year were Marcus Robinson, Kelly Campbell, and Kennan Howry. This wasn't exactly the stiffest competition for targets. With Taylor and Williamson this year, Culpepper may be inclined to share the ball a bit more with the other wideouts.

3. The defense appears to be significantly improved. This could lead to a more conservative offense, whether it is in terms of less passing attempts or just more conservative passing attempts. This is a repeat of 1a above, but for a different reason. Last year the Vikes' defense gave up 21 or more points 12 times, so the offense had to score in the mid 20s to have a chance to win. This year that likely won't be the case.

Nate Burleson Projections

SOURCE	RSHYD	RSHTD	REC	RECYD	RECTD
Jason Wood	0	0	77	1165	9
David Yudkin	0	0	90	1350	10
Message Board Consensus	0	0	82	1131	8