Fantasy Scouting Report: Nate Washington
Weight: 185 lbs
Bye: Week Seven
Why We like Him
A vertical threat with very explosive deep speed, Washington signed with the Titans this past offseason and now finally gets a chance to be an every-down receiver.
He posted a respectable stat line with the Steelers in 2008 (40 receptions, 631 yards, three touchdowns) despite seeing limited action in an offensive system that is predicated on running the football.
Washington is averaging a very impressive 16.4 yards per reception for his career, meaning he’s dangerous in open space when he’s got the football in his hands.
The Titans' two-headed rushing attack featuring Chris Johnson and LenDale White will force opposing defenses to respect the run, leaving the secondary vulnerable at times for Washington to exploit.
Remember, despite his age, quarterback Kerry Collins still throws a very nice deep ball.
Why We Don’t like Him
Washington is unproven as an every down receiver, so there may be some hiccups in his development as he gets accustomed to the extra snaps.
In addition, Tennessee will once again be a ball-control football team, meaning they play good defense combined with a relatively conservative offensive game plan. However, we do expect them to open up the passing game a little more in 2009.
Washington has the potential to be one of the best value picks at wide receiver in this year’s draft. He’s got great speed, reliable hands, and an explosive burst that makes him difficult to track down in the open field.
The Tennessee offense will still be relatively conservative this season, so owners shouldn’t expect ridiculous numbers. However, the NFP preaches upside and Washington has it.
Look for him in the middle rounds. He has the potential to crack the starting lineup and make a serious impact for a very reasonable price.
If you liked this scouting report be sure to check out the 2009 National Football Post Fantasy Draft Guide.
Hit me up on Twitter: @JoeFortenbaugh
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?