Jump to content

2021 NCAA/Draft Prospect Thread


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, TheRealMcCoy said:

I meant more catching passes from out the backfield than giving him a handful of runs per game. I think you could do that with Rodgers though. Dude is a little tank lol.

But, that's cool. I'm willing to take the risk with one of our 3rds.

Once they are in the 3rd, sure. 

It’s mainly just like let’s take a thousand foot view of it. If Moore hits what is he? 
all conservative guesses would be a role/gadget guy, solid 3rd or 4th passing option after at least a bulk receiver and Goedert. The margin for him to become anything more seems pretty small. So as a team that has a ton of other needs and lacks really a top receiver, taking a guy like Moore seems like it’d be doomed to fail. 
 

Im all for taking guys like this when the team can afford to take those shots. But right now in the 2nd it’s a bit too rich for me. Not with the Linebackers, edges, corners and possibly other WRs who might be there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kiltman said:

Once they are in the 3rd, sure. 

It’s mainly just like let’s take a thousand foot view of it. If Moore hits what is he? 
all conservative guesses would be a role/gadget guy, solid 3rd or 4th passing option after at least a bulk receiver and Goedert. The margin for him to become anything more seems pretty small. So as a team that has a ton of other needs and lacks really a top receiver, taking a guy like Moore seems like it’d be doomed to fail. 
 

Im all for taking guys like this when the team can afford to take those shots. But right now in the 2nd it’s a bit too rich for me. Not with the Linebackers, edges, corners and possibly other WRs who might be there.

Sure, but IH mocked him at 49. Not 37. If he falls out the top 50 I say that's good value which is why I said I'd take him at 70 or 84. I don't blame anyone on here for not wanting to take the risk on a guy who got injured these past 2 years, but we've seen guys be injury prone in college and then fine in the league and the opposite as well. Anyways, his ceiling is probably being one of the best YAC threats in the league from the slot. A player you wanna find touches for, because he's a dynamic play maker. He has return ability too.

Edited by TheRealMcCoy
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TheRealMcCoy said:

Sure, but IH mocked him at 49. Not 37. If he falls out the top 50 I say that's good value which is why I said I'd take him at 70 or 84. I don't blame anyone on here for not wanting to take the risk on a guy who got injured these past 2 years, but we've seen guys be injury prone in college and then fine in the league and the opposite as well. Anyways, his ceiling is probably being one of the best YAC threats in the league from the slot. A player you wanna find touches for, because he's a dynamic play maker. He has return ability too.

At 49 it’s more closely approaching the range yeah. Like with everyone, eventually you just have to take them. Hard to say without seeing the exact board.

Just to me if we are taking yet another shot at WR, don’t we want a guy that can play X and get a high volume of balls? It’s like the major hole we have. We have plenty of Zs, move Zs and guys who could develop in the slot. Always room for upgrades, and there is plenty of room, but those seem to be the type of guys they probably would aim for. Looking at the Colts and Chargers they seem to value that body type too.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Kiltman said:

At 49 it’s more closely approaching the range yeah. Like with everyone, eventually you just have to take them. Hard to say without seeing the exact board.

Just to me if we are taking yet another shot at WR, don’t we want a guy that can play X and get a high volume of balls? It’s like the major hole we have. We have plenty of Zs, move Zs and guys who could develop in the slot. Always room for upgrades, and there is plenty of room, but those seem to be the type of guys they probably would aim for. Looking at the Colts and Chargers they seem to value that body type too.

 

We have a ton of Z's and this is something I've been thinking about for a while now. Gotta figure Reagor, Watkins, Ward and Hightower can all play the Y. Probably JJ too. Fulgham and JJ can play X, probably Reagor too. And Reagor, Watkins and Hightower can all play Z. So from that, I'd say our biggest need is an X, and a more sure explosive player at the Y. With that in mind, who are the best X receivers in this draft that we realistically have a shot at? Chase and arguably Pitts are the top two, but what about Waddle, Smith, Marshall, and Bateman? Are they X's?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, EagleBlueDon said:

but what about Waddle, Smith, Marshall, and Bateman? Are they X's?

I think Smith and Marshall are/can be. I think Waddle and Bateman are best suited in the slot.

I think Nico Collins and the dude from Illinois are two interesting X guys. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Scalamania said:

I think Smith and Marshall are/can be. I think Waddle and Bateman are best suited in the slot.

I think Nico Collins and the dude from Illinois are two interesting X guys. 

I don't want to fall into the "need" trap again, but i think we definitely need a legitimate X. Not saying Fulgham can't be that, but i don't want him as the unquestioned X. I feel fine about Y and Z though for the most part. Between Ward, Reagor, Watkins and Hightower, two of them can fill those. Elijah Moore in the slot is tempting though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Scalamania said:

I think Nico Collins and the dude from Illinois are two interesting X guys. 

Yup. Collins and Imatorbhebe are the two primary X guys I'm looking at. 

Bateman is more an X than anything else, but he's pretty able to play any of the positions IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Danger said:

Yup. Collins and Imatorbhebe are the two primary X guys I'm looking at. 

Bateman is more an X than anything else, but he's pretty able to play any of the positions IMO.

I really like Bateman out of the slot, but you're right he can play anywhere. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, EagleBlueDon said:

Elijah Moore in the slot is tempting though.

Amari Rodgers > Elijah Moore - though Moore will likely be drafted higher. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, EagleBlueDon said:

I don't want to fall into the "need" trap again, but i think we definitely need a legitimate X. Not saying Fulgham can't be that, but i don't want him as the unquestioned X. I feel fine about Y and Z though for the most part. Between Ward, Reagor, Watkins and Hightower, two of them can fill those. Elijah Moore in the slot is tempting though.

A fair thing to bring up with how it backfired last year.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone Focuses way too much on X,Y and Z specific Receivers. Everyone did it last year comparing Jefferson, Reagor and Mims. Jefferson could only play Slot, Reagor is A deep Threat and Mims is yattah yah. People need to get off the traditional thinking. Its outdated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IrishHooligan00 said:

Everyone Focuses way too much on X,Y and Z specific Receivers. Everyone did it last year comparing Jefferson, Reagor and Mims. Jefferson could only play Slot, Reagor is A deep Threat and Mims is yattah yah. People need to get off the traditional thinking. Its outdated. 

Eh I don’t see how describing what a guy is best at and how he’ll be used is some archaic practice. Just calling them a receiver isn’t specific enough for scouting. And you should weigh your current roster some in how you build, both to learn from mistakes but also to build a better team. 

Like we can’t keep taking guys that need manufactured touches. Just like we really need to focus on boundary players in the secondary. On top of all of that is the injury issues.

Yeah when it comes to roster building don’t get too cute trying to find guys for specific roles. But when you are breaking down say Bateman or Marshall vs Moore, it matters in a discussion what those guys will be in your team. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

X and Z isn't used necessarily to describe where they line up on the field like it once was, but rather more what their M.O. is as a receiver. How they beat the defenders.

X is more physical, jump ball, contested catch
Y is more versatile in the slot, crisp routes, and keeping the defenders more on their toes about the wide array of directions they can take/routes to be run.
Z is about separation and quickness, the ability to get beat the defender to a spot.

 

At least, that's how I think of them, maybe I'm wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...