Marty Booker Wants #1 Spot

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 7:43 AM CST in News

On the deciding factors for Marty Booker signing with the Bears instead of with a team like the New England Patriots who showed interest was playing time.

In New England he ends up being third string, but in Chicago, with our mess of a receiving corp he just might get that shot.

"It will be good to get back to that role," Booker said via teleconference Thursday, two days after agreeing to two-year, $3.5 million deal with his former team.

"When I was traded to Miami, it was a point where I had to take the back seat to being No. 1. I didn't get the opportunities I would have liked. But to come back and help out the young guys and hopefully be that No. 1 guy, it's a role I'm comfortable with. It's a role I'm ready to accept."

Again, I don't mind Marty Booker and I don't mind the Bears bringing him back, but he is not a #1 by any definition other then possibly his spot on the depth chart. No team is game planning Booker and they are not double teaming him.

I do however get the feeling that he will be #1. I think the Bears are hoping Devin Hester improves enough that they can put him in at #2. And to that point if he does drastically improve, maybe that helps Booker, but as it stands I am not comfortable with that setup.

Tweet Comment 35 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I think Marty will be great

I really do think that Marty Booker is number one material, especially compared to Moose. Moose has been our number one for a while and he didn't prove to me even in day one that he was a number one. I think that Marty will prove a lot of people wrong this year, especially if he's the number one. I mean think about it, he wasn't happy being traded in the first place and especially wasn't happy to be the second or third option, yet he did produce fairly well with the opportunities he was given. Plus, it's not like the bears just released him or anything, he was traded for a more pressing need at the time. I think the fact that Marty is happy now to be back and the fact that he isn't that old for a receiver, he will be very productive. I am not comparing him to Randy Moss by any means here, but look at what has happened with Moss. He wasn't happy in Oakland and he didn't produce, but when we got to New England he was happy and he produced the best season of his career. I expect Marty to gain over 1000 yds and catch about 85-90 balls next year. Marty Booker was the best receiver that I can remember the bears having other than injury prone Marcus Robinson. I personally an happy to see him back.

"I have no comments at this time.....well, other than what I just posted."

by diehardbearfan on Mar 7, 2008 7:59 AM CST reply actions

Sorry, I didn't read past the first ...

...two sentences. Moose was not the No. 1; comparing Booker to him as a No. 1 is wrong. They compare as No. 2's. Unless, of course, you're fine with comparing Hester to Berrian as No. 2's in which Hester/Bradley falls woefully short.

This is just poor reasoning.

by tyger1147 on Mar 7, 2008 8:40 AM CST up reply actions

No, you're wrong

In '05 and '06 Moose was the number 1 receiver.

'06 - 60 catches vs. 51 catches, 863 yards vs. 775 yards.

'05 - 64 catches vs. 13 catches, 750 yards vs. 246

I think Booker can easily put together two years like that and he's the same age (maybe a year younger?) than Moose was when we signed him.

He replaces Moose in '05. Hester replaces Berrian in '05 (surely he can get 13 catches). Bradley can easily be Justin Gage.

Our TE's are better.

Why do you have to compare things to last season? Why not compare seasons where we actually went to the playoffs. :)

We need good line play. That will make all the difference. That and receivers that can catch. I think Booker will do a fine job at that.

by mikebdot on Mar 7, 2008 10:10 AM CST up reply actions

The number 1

receiver is not based on performance. Wes Welker led the league in receptions if I am not mistaken, but there is not way Randy Moss is not their #1 receiver.

I would say you have to look at a combination of where they are placed on the depth chart versus how the defenses handle the. If the opposing team's best CB is always on your #1, the #2 could have better stats.

That said I don't recall what the depth chart looked like in 05 and 06.

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 10:21 AM CST up reply actions

The point stands

especially for '05. We made the playoffs with a terrible offense that was definitely led by Moose.

'06 it's arguable to a point, but it's pretty much a toss up anyway.

Hester caught more balls than Berrian did in '05 and should easily be able to catch 60 passes for similar numbers to '06 (you know, the year we went to the fucking super bowl). Hester played in maybe 1/4 of our snaps this season on offense and caught 20 passes. He could easily catch 60 if given starter playing time. If Booker can replace Moose we could be fine, especially with the added weapon of Olsen, who will now be in year 2 of the offense and hopefully will add just a slight amount of bulk so he can block better.

Regardless, all of this is moot if we don't address the line and Jake Scott is talking to the Titans today. That is discouraging. I really like that kid.

by mikebdot on Mar 7, 2008 10:53 AM CST up reply actions

You're right.

I didn't look back far enough. But I'm not going to compare '05 because the offense was horrible and they didn't have a QB. In contradiction to what I've said before, I'd almost argue that the Bears didn't have a "real No. 1" in '05 or '06. But yeah, I was just talking about this past year, which is always more relevant.

by tyger1147 on Mar 7, 2008 11:41 AM CST up reply actions

It's only

more relevant if it's a season you would like to mimic. I would like to mimic '06. Hester stepping up like Berrian did, and solid, but not great, production from Booker would be all that is required from him.

But, I don't disagree that strongly with the notion that there really wasn't a true #1. But it shows you don't really need one to go to the playoffs, what you need is a running game, which is why we need lineman and a running back.

Just curious, anyone else think Felix Jones could be similar to Brian Westbrook?

by mikebdot on Mar 7, 2008 12:36 PM CST up reply actions

Absolutely

If the Bears of Oline in the first and Flacco is gone by the second, I'd have no problems with that pick if he slipped that far.

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 12:37 PM CST up reply actions

Who Cares?

This is getting a bit too semantical.

If we are doing that, lets just say that there's a flanker and a wide-out. You'll never see a play-book with a WR position labeled #1 and #2.

The closest you can get is who is more often considered the first target on a given play. But, that is constantly going to change and has more to do with the game situation and the defense they are facing, than it does who is more talented.

Booker is will be a fine starting WR on this team, and will bring more to the position than Moose did. That's a net-positive. Berrian leaving is definitely a loss. But, let's not forget. No one was really thinking that Berrian would amount to much of anything more than a couple of years ago. It's not unreasonable to ask another player to step up in the same way.

by bfos7215 on Mar 7, 2008 10:48 AM CST up reply actions

Unfortunately we cannot let it go

This topic has caused UFC style throwdowns around here.

Two men enter, one man leaves!

There must be a winner.

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 10:51 AM CST up reply actions

That's funny

I saw and old quote I had forgotten about the other day:

"Arguing online is like competing in the special olympics, regardless of who wins, everyone involved is still retarded".

Which is why my "no, you're wrong" was really tongue in cheek earlier, but I think I have a valid point to sell the idea of us starting Hester and Booker, at least in my own mind. We fool ourselves every year just so we can bear watching the first few games with some amount of encouragement. I just want us to be relatively healthy next year.

by mikebdot on Mar 7, 2008 10:57 AM CST up reply actions

At this point I am not going to

get too riled up about who starts. I just want more experience available.

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 10:59 AM CST up reply actions

How 'bout it!

Hey! Let's say Booker wasn't really a 1 but better than a 2. How about a 1.5! Let's call Hester a 2.5 since we can't figure out if he's a 2 or a 3. If you guys want I can come up with a mathematical formula that we can all disagree with. That should keep us occupy until the draft!

by rob in iraq on Mar 7, 2008 11:02 AM CST up reply actions

Thousands of miles away

and you still have time to be a smart ass:)

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 11:08 AM CST up reply actions

You Bet!

I make time for anything Bears!

by rob in iraq on Mar 7, 2008 11:10 AM CST up reply actions

I agree with the above post

Regarding Hester being the #2, I think I would rather see Bradley the #2 and Hester #3 out of the slot. Of course it all depends, if we draft a WR that impresses the shit out of everyone in training camp, highly unlikely, then that gives the Bears some options. I just don't understand the lack of creativity with our offense.

GO BEARS!!!!!

by McRipper on Mar 7, 2008 8:25 AM CST reply actions

I really can't imagine

the Bears being done with their first two rounds of picking and it not be a some combo or QB/RD/OL.

That means at best we are drafting a WR in the third. If a guy impressed everybody in camp, he is going hight than the third.

I haven't checked his projections, but that Royal kid out of Va Tech, looked pretty impressive. I'd wager he is a 2nd rounder though based only on combine results.

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 8:59 AM CST up reply actions

3rd round has been a charm for us at WR

Berrian and Booker were selected in the third round; hopefully we can do it again. In my opinion, I'd rather see us select a RB (Mendenhall/Stewart) in the 1st round because the running game is more important to us than the passing game; keeps the defense off the field when it's working. How about Carl Nicks for OT in the second? If Williams or Clady aren't available at 14 then Nicks should be available in the 2nd and he's about the same as the Otah/Baker. This means no Flacco, I wouldn't waste time on Henne but I would like to see Johnson on the second day. Bears sometimes do well with picks that drop down due to baggage (Alex Brown in the fourth for instance). So are there any receivers that fit that description we can get in the third? I believe there is.

Note: Before I get blasted for Tank Johnson I said "sometimes".

by rob in iraq on Mar 7, 2008 10:15 AM CST up reply actions

I agree

I was mostly talking 3rd or up. I guess i was kind of hoping for a Marques Colston type pick. And about Royal, he looked pretty damn impressive at the combine.

GO BEARS!!!!!

by McRipper on Mar 7, 2008 10:30 AM CST up reply actions

I agree

I was mostly talking 3rd or up. I guess i was kind of hoping for a Marques Colston type pick. And about Royal, he looked pretty damn impressive at the combine. He's a return specialist though, so he might not be that valuable to us.

GO BEARS!!!!!

by McRipper on Mar 7, 2008 10:31 AM CST up reply actions

That would be nice

I can't get ESPN out here so I can't get the WR they mentioned that has 1st round talent but is going to drop due to off field baggage. I believe he played at Indiana, Harvey maybe? Someone help me with this?

by rob in iraq on Mar 7, 2008 10:38 AM CST up reply actions

James Hardy?

I think you're referring to James Hardy from Indiana. Yeah, I think he has a 1st round grade and i've seen some mocks with him getting drafted in the first. Might be a long shot for him to be available in the 3rd.

GO BEARS!!!!!

by McRipper on Mar 7, 2008 1:10 PM CST up reply actions

Actually Royal

would be of great value to us.

Firstly, we need a good receiver.

Secondly, he can be used at the 30 as a person to make the return when they kick short to avoid Hester.

Lastly, if Hester is on his way to being our #1 receiver his return attempts will go down. Of course, the way people kick away from him I suppose you could just put him on the field anyways. He probably doesn't get enough shots to return the ball to tire him out.

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 1:45 PM CST up reply actions

Hester

had 85 returns last season (punt + KO). That's 5.3 per game. How many offensive plays are run per game? 60-80? 6 extra plays per game are not that big of a deal. I'm not sure why others keep saying he'll be tired out. That's just goofy. Especially with the number of 2 TE sets we will run (or 3 near the goal line), we could easily remove him from the field to make up for 6 plays.

Shorter me: I agree. Nice to have an insurance policy back there, but he won't get tired THAT easily.

by mikebdot on Mar 7, 2008 3:22 PM CST up reply actions

Yup

that is where I ended up. If he is lucky he gets kicked to once every 5 kicks or something.

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 3:25 PM CST up reply actions

wait...

Hester had 85 returns last year.

Are you really trying to say that opposing teams had 340 kicks against the Bears last year?

21 kicks a game... either the Bears give up a lot of scores, or have the most 3-and-outs in history...

visit the mindful mission.

by big_lowitzki on Mar 7, 2008 4:23 PM CST up reply actions

did you read what he wrote.

-leopoldjones

by leopoldjones on Mar 7, 2008 5:14 PM CST up reply actions

Got to stop taking everythign so literal

my comment was purely meant to say he rarely gets kicked to, so it wouldn't be a big deal to have him as a #1 and keep him with return duty.

I did not attempt to do any math in my head.

by Adam T on Mar 7, 2008 6:51 PM CST up reply actions

depth chart

The only way this hester experiment is going to work is if he is an every down reciever. Therefore I think if lovie sees hester as a #1, then he needs to be put into that role now!

we saw what happened when he was brought in sparingly last year. every defense pointed him out and were able to make him ineffective. Hester is the best athlete in football today. I truly believe if lovie wants him to become a #1 reciever, then that process needs to start this season.

by rahulsriram on Mar 7, 2008 9:03 AM CST reply actions

Hester will burn out

if he has to battle CBs and then sprint downfield every offensive possession, and will be a less dangerous return threat. Some WRs manage to do both for a season or two but are rarely effective doing both for very long. Hester is so valuable as a return specialist, I would hope he is used primarily in passing situations and can conserve that energy. Bradley and the draftpick must be the guys who line up every play and become our #1 and #2 WRs. Booker just doesnt have the speed to get enough separation, and he actually dropped more passes than Berrian last year. If he plays every down, he will be stunting the growth of the WRs we should be developing for our future.

by gillrowdy on Mar 7, 2008 9:58 AM CST reply actions

I agree with this. But....

...If no one kicks to him any more, which is most likely, using him up on offense will bring the best of both worlds. We get the ball on the 40 every possesion AND have Hester blowing past safeties on offense.

by bfos7215 on Mar 7, 2008 10:50 AM CST up reply actions

Haas

I'd like to see what Mike Haas can do. He could be a good possession receiver since he showed some great hands in the 07 preseason.

-$uchM@N!

by suchman on Mar 7, 2008 10:00 AM CST reply actions

Claps

I love this man, I couldnt agree with you any less than 100% that Hass deserves his chance, he was a beast in college and I feel the reason they let berrian and moose go was not only for hester to get a chance but hass as well.

Hass '09!

by DaNate23 on Mar 7, 2008 10:21 AM CST up reply actions

HAHAHAHAHAAS!

C'mon. Don't you know that he's white?

Maybe he can be a decent little possession receiver but that is not what the bears need.

by Chad @ Windy City Gridiron on Mar 7, 2008 12:42 PM CST up reply actions

How depressing is it...

...that the big news of the day is that Marty Booker is excited to be a #1 receiver again. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Jerry, if can't get out of bed for FA, then do something in the draft. I just can't go through another year of everyone calling for Rex's head (or Kyle's, for that matter) because we have not improved at either receiver, OL, or running back, but rather taken steps back at those positions (same running backs, but what if Benson really has lost a step due to injury? Is it possible to have negative steps?

And honestly...Hester is just beginning to learn the WR position. It will take a few seasons, and it might not work at all (see Matt Jones), or with inconsistent results (Antwaan Randle-El). Therefore, Hester as a number one receiver next year is insane. While it could certainly pay off, at this point it is a rebuilding move. Why has this offense, a year and change removed from the Super Bowl, gone into rebuilding mode? I pray that Bradley emerges.

Please Jerry. I understand that we build through the draft (though often with mixed results), but we need SOME guys who can step in now.

by rocky on Mar 7, 2008 10:05 AM CST reply actions