Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 50

Thread: Jimmy can catch

  1. #1
    sdvikefan is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,321

    Jimmy can catch

    I have heard some people (not Viking fans of course) say that Kleinsasser is not really a good receiving TE, that he's a really good blocker but that's it. Well I found something interesting about that...Kleinsasser already has the 4th highest total receptions by a TE in Viking team history. He needs 43 more and he will pass Joe Senser for the number 3 spot. Steve Jordan is the top receiving TE in team history with 498 total catches...no one else comes close. Of course the Vikings have used their tight ends differently than most teams over the years but it's still a pretty good accomplishment since he's been playing 5 seasons and was used quite a bit as an H-back.

    I know we were all very relieved when Kleinsasser was resigned this year. I think we'll be even happier once the season starts.
    "Meet at the quarterback!" -Purple People Eaters

  2. #2
    whackthepack is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,535

    Jimmy can catch

    If he can stay healthy and not drop passes (kleinsdropper).
    He also needs to do more after he catches the ball, a few extra yards never hurt.
    What we've got here is failure to communicate.

  3. #3
    purplepat is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,510

    Jimmy can catch

    As much as I like JK, that's still not saying much. His career totals add up to maybe two good seasons by a receiving TE.

    What this probably means is that the Vikings have not had any TE play for them for more than a couple of seasons. Joe Senser was great, but had his career cut very short because of injury. Stu Voigt was a great Vikings TE, but he played in the 70s when teams passed less, and even then not much to the TE. Jordan, of course, was around for years and that's how he got to nearly 500 catches.

    Doesn't mean JK isn't a great TE, but no one is going to mention him in the same breath as Tony Gonzalez, or Todd Heap, or (god forbid) Jeremy Shockey in terms of being a dangerous threat as a receiver...at least not yet.
    SKOL VIKINGS!

  4. #4
    bigdogbovy's Avatar
    bigdogbovy is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    532

    Jimmy can catch

    OK, he's not the receiver that Gonzalez or Shockey is, but to say that he's not as good as heap? 9 out of 10 NFL coaches would take The sauce in a minute over heap. equal in pass catching and better in every other aspect of the game.
    de43540278a8c8500baf55c07109eb7e

  5. #5
    josdin00's Avatar
    josdin00 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,619

    Jimmy can catch

    "bigdogbovy" wrote:
    OK, he's not the receiver that Gonzalez or Shockey is, but to say that he's not as good as heap? 9 out of 10 NFL coaches would take The sauce in a minute over heap. equal in pass catching and better in every other aspect of the game.
    I'm not sure you're actually going to find 28 NFL coaches that believe that Kleinsasser is as good of a reciever as Heap. From what I've seen of Heap, he looks better than Shockey as a reciever, and I just don't think that Kleinsasser is there yet.

  6. #6
    magicci's Avatar
    magicci is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    oxnard, ca
    Posts
    5,440

    Jimmy can catch

    this is good for us because other teams will be underestimating him remember how he got that touchdown against the chiefs last year, nobody was even looking in his direction. He is also good at breaking tackles, from what i see it's a mission to take him down

  7. #7
    muchluv4smoot's Avatar
    muchluv4smoot is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,318

    Jimmy can catch

    "bigdogbovy" wrote:
    OK, he's not the receiver that Gonzalez or Shockey is, but to say that he's not as good as heap? 9 out of 10 NFL coaches would take The sauce in a minute over heap. equal in pass catching and better in every other aspect of the game.


    Wow are you off here! I have actually heard quiet a few coaches say they think heap could be the best TE in the league. I bet the majority of coaches would put heap, shockey, gonzo, and crumpler as their top 4 TE's, in some order. Jimmy may be a good TE, I won't dispute that, but not in the category of heap and gonzo. Jimmy is not equal in pass catching to heap. Jimmy can't be a downfield threat like heap is. Jimmy caught most of his passes last year, as dump off passes over the middle. They were like 5 yard passes that he ran for another ten, because the middle of the field was so open, thanks to moss drawing all the defenders to the outside of the field. man I feel like the sienfeld guy, "don't touch jimmy" "Jimmy likes elaine".

    JK is the best blocking TE in the game without a doubt, and this can be underrated, but he just doesn't have the receiving skills to be mentioned in the gonzo and heap category. Again I say, catching 5 yard dumpoff passes doesn't make him a good receiver. Watch how many times gonzo and heap catch 5 yard dumpoff passes. And JK didn't only catch those passes because our offense didn't call for him to run deeper routes. He didn't run them because he isn't good at it. Remember why Tice said we signed wiggins this offseason? To be the receiving TE we have had missing in our offense, since chamberlain's pro bowl year. If JK was so good at catching, he would be used in the role that wiggins will play this year and we wouldn't have needed to sign wiggins. Again, these were Tice's words and not mine.

    I think a lot of people need to watch the ravens play and see how well heap can block. Everyone thinks since he catches so many balls, that he can't block, but that ain't true.

    Find any football magizine out there, or website, that ranks players at each position, and I bet there is not a one that has jimmy ahead of heap.

    Again, I am not bashing Jimmy or saying he sucks. I think he is probably the 5th best TE in the league, which is pretty damn good if you ask me.

  8. #8
    bigdogbovy's Avatar
    bigdogbovy is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    532

    Jimmy can catch

    Sorry not a Heap believer. nor crumpler for that matter. Jimmy gets overlooked on his rec skills because he is so good at blcking and that's how the vikes use him. I have yet to see Jimmy drop a well thrown ball, and he pulls in quite a few poorly thrown ones as well. Jimmy's numbers stay where they are because of how he fits in. The Ravens, KC and NY need thier TE to catch downfield. The vikes have no need for thier TE to go down field or to catch tons of passes. Also we signed wiggins as a Recieving TE because tice want's to use Jimmy as a blocker and runner does this mean he can't catch? no way. Just not his role. Randy Moss could be a hell of a kick returner, but that's not his role. Jimmy is a hell of a reciever but that's not his role.
    de43540278a8c8500baf55c07109eb7e

  9. #9
    muchluv4smoot's Avatar
    muchluv4smoot is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,318

    Jimmy can catch

    "bigdogbovy" wrote:
    Sorry not a Heap believer. nor crumpler for that matter. Jimmy gets overlooked on his rec skills because he is so good at blcking and that's how the vikes use him. I have yet to see Jimmy drop a well thrown ball, and he pulls in quite a few poorly thrown ones as well. Jimmy's numbers stay where they are because of how he fits in. The Ravens, KC and NY need thier TE to catch downfield. The vikes have no need for thier TE to go down field or to catch tons of passes. Also we signed wiggins as a Recieving TE because tice want's to use Jimmy as a blocker and runner does this mean he can't catch? no way. Just not his role. Randy Moss could be a hell of a kick returner, but that's not his role. Jimmy is a hell of a reciever but that's not his role.


    OK, why did you say the vikes offense doesn't have a need for a TE to go downfield like KC and others, then try and explain why we signed wiggins to do exactly that in our offense this year? Fact is we do need TE's to go downfield in our offense, but jimmy isn't good at it, thus he didn't do it last year. Wiggins signing was for this spot that we weren't able to use in our offense last year. Again Tice's words not mine. Our offense does need a TE to go downfield and thus the signing of wiggins.

    If you were on this site during last season, not sure if you were, you would have seen a ton of posts complaining that daunte was dumping the ball off to his RB(moe) and TE(jimmy) way too much and that he needed to go downfield to his WR's(bates, cambell, and burleson). The reason why he had to dump the ball off all the time, was because we had no TE to threaten the seams. The DB's were playing our WR's on the outside of the field. This is also why we would get 15-20 yards on five yard dumpoff passes. We needed a TE to take this role, instead of just dumping the ball off all the time, and this is what wiggins was signed for, because jimmy wasn't good at that role. Although I don't think wiggins is all that good at being this downfield TE, our coaches do.

    Also, I am not saying jimmy can't catch the bal well or has bad hands, but he isn't a good receiving TE. Good for dumpoff passes, but not running routes like the heaps, shockeys, and gonzos. This is why I, and many others, put him down around 5th best TE.

    Is it just me or have we had this arguement already bigdog?

  10. #10
    ndakvikefan's Avatar
    ndakvikefan is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    154

    Jimmy can catch

    Well muchluv I actually agree with you for the most part. We do need a TE to split the seams. You are absolutely right. But I do dissagree with you about jimmy catching the ball. He does have very good hands, I watched him play in college. Here is the problem with his pass catching: The man is 6-3 280lbs with huge stubby guns on him. You won't see many men that size fully extending making finger tip catches. A man that size need to have the ball thrown pretty much in his hands, and I bet if you were able to go back and look at the passes he drops it is because he had to extend for them. This is not an excuse, just a reason. Yes alot of TE's would make those catches but most TE's are not his size. This is the reason he is not a downfield threat, he has the speed but because of his size he is not the most elegant reciever.
    As for him being as good as Heap, as a all around TE he is just as good but as a recieving TE, NO but at the same time all Heap or Gonzales have over Jimmy is that they are better recievers.
    I found a rating system for every position on a website, and the league average for TE's was 198 and Kleinsasser was a 488 and the league's best ws a 916. I don't know what the criteria for this rating system was it just showed the numbers. Another thing about Heap and Gonzales, is taht they are not the usual TE's they are more like big WR's and they are thier teams prime recievers, so who would I rather have on my team, Todd Heap or Tony Gonzales who can't block and would not get many catches with the vikes corps of recievers or Jimmy who can bail out Duante as a safety valve and play the role of the second Tackle? I would take Jimmy for the vikes he fits the role.
    8f72d7a2bfbfd6a931c3ea8edbece812

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. TW's best catch was not the one handed catch on third down........
    By carolinafan in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-17-2006, 07:42 PM
  2. Jimmy??
    By shawn in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-16-2005, 11:42 PM
  3. Jimmy K
    By dan3ski in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-02-2005, 04:49 PM
  4. Thanks Jimmy
    By acsfreak84 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-03-2004, 04:54 PM
  5. Jimmy K
    By dan3ski in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-01-2004, 06:40 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •