Is Greg Newsome a better cb prospect than Tyson Campbell

[Charles]

I imagine a draft where we took Newsome at 25 and Michael Carter at 107.  We then could have taken Holland or Moore at 33...just would have been a much better draft to me.  Curious to hear everyone else's thoughts about it.

- charles 

[pwny]

They’re roughly comparable as prospects.

The difference here would be the ETN is a significantly better prospect than Carter with more explosion. Given that the entirety of our offense is going to be built around creating mismatches and the Percy Harvin role is going to be one of the biggest hallmarks of our offensive scheme under Urban, I’m not really sure why everyone is wanting them to have taken a lesser player to fit that role. 

[Charles]

20 minutes ago, pwny said:

They’re roughly comparable as prospects.

The difference here would be the ETN is a significantly better prospect than Carter with more explosion. Given that the entirety of our offense is going to be built around creating mismatches and the Percy Harvin role is going to be one of the biggest hallmarks of our offensive scheme under Urban, I’m not really sure why everyone is wanting them to have taken a lesser player to fit that role. 

So you'd rather have etn, campbell & Cisco over Carter, Newsome & holland?

[pwny]

37 minutes ago, Charles said:

So you'd rather have etn, campbell & Cisco over Carter, Newsome & holland?

I’d say yes.

Cisco and Holland are pretty comparable talents. Cisco has injury and durability concerns that are the separating factor and would push this towards Holland. But if they are both healthy, Cisco might be the better prospect, and certainly offers the higher ceiling as a big play creator. I’d lean Holland because he seems safer and probably has some better scheme versatility for our various looks. 

Newsome and Campbell again are pretty close. But Newsome has durability concerns and hasn’t ever played a full season. He also likely more of a zone/cover 3 corner only. I expect we’ll be playing a lot of mixed coverages, where Campbell likely fits in better even if you think both will be healthy and believe Newsome is the better zone corner.

The above two are pretty much a coin flip over which pair I’d prefer. I could go either way. 

The biggest difference for me is ETN and Carter. ETN is just a significantly better prospect, and has the extra gear that Carter doesn’t have, which should be vital in him playing the Harvin role. Carter also tore up his knee in high school and broke his arm in college; with his significantly smaller build and previous injury history, he’s also much riskier than ETN. And he split carries in college, so we really have no idea how his frame will hold up if he’s ever asked to be the bell cow for a team while his running mate is injured. A lot more risk there and not nearly the same upside. 

 

Something also worth nothing is that the Jets GM said they were going to draft Carter earlier, but they bet on the board falling the way it did and it paid off. They might not let him slide to our pick at 106 if they thought Urban was interested.

[Uncle Buck]

2 hours ago, pwny said:

They’re roughly comparable as prospects.

The difference here would be the ETN is a significantly better prospect than Carter with more explosion. Given that the entirety of our offense is going to be built around creating mismatches and the Percy Harvin role is going to be one of the biggest hallmarks of our offensive scheme under Urban, I’m not really sure why everyone is wanting them to have taken a lesser player to fit that role. 

I think you are right on in thinking that Urban was looking for his Jaguar equivalent of Percy.  Kadarius Toney could have done some of what Percy did, but I to believe that Etienne's overall skill set is probably closer to what Percy brought to the table.  It should be fun to see what Urban dials up for him.

One thing I'm hoping is that James Robinson doesn't end up getting lost in the shuffle in the new system.  For a player who went undrafted he really turned out to be a hidden gem that the Jags uncovered last year.  I know he isn't as dynamic as Etienne, but he is still a player who can move the chains for us, so it would be great if we can find a way to implement him too.

[Charles]

I don't know.   I'd feel better about Newsome and holland than campbell & Cisco.   I'm  also not sold on etn being that much better as a prospect.   That is where this draft is a big unknown,  since none of these guys were measured  by the same standard.  Who is to say who is really quicker than whom?

 

2 hours ago, pwny said:

 

 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Charles

[.Buzz]

Yeah, the only one I'd take in these pairings is Holland over Cisco and I don't even know that the margin is much. Cisco was a superior ballhawk which this team lacks in a big way, it's just the durability factor imo.

I also don't really like the ETN/Carter swap here. It's pretty widely reported we loved Toney. Urban wanted his "slash player" which ETN provides that can give him exotic looks with a homerun ability. So if you're talking about replacing ETN, we'd probably be looking more at a guy like Amari Rodgers. I don't really view ETN as a RB based on what Urban has stated.

Campbell is an ideal fit for that Baltimore style defense that Cullen brings. I'm still not in love with that pick (although CAR having him as CB3 and Dallas trying to move up to get him makes me feel better) but I prefer him over Newsome.

 

[pwny]

16 hours ago, Charles said:

That is where this draft is a big unknown,  since none of these guys were measured  by the same standard.  Who is to say who is really quicker than whom?

We can’t know for sure, but when I watch the tape, my eye test says that ETN has a quicker burst and an extra gear when he’s in the open field.

The testing was done on different fields in different conditions so it’s unknown whether it’s completely analogous, but ETN tested faster in the 40 with a faster 10 yard split. His jump measurements also bear out the idea that he can generate more explosion from his legs.

So I can’t know for sure, but what I see on tape and what the testing say are both the same.

[pwny]

Plus we know for certain that the Jets wanted to take Carter before they picked him and waited to take him where they did because they expected that he would fall to them. He was atop their board for a long time, and only waited for him at 107 because they knew he was likely to get there.

If we hadn’t taken ETN, it’d be wildly obvious that we were in the market for a player to play the Harvin role and with Carter the most obvious fit as we closed in on the 106th pick. There’s no reason to believe that the Jets would sit and hope we don’t pick the guy it was obvious we needed right in front of them. They‘d almost assuredly have taken one of their surplus of later picks and packaged them together and nabbed him. Then what? We just don’t play offense like the team envisioned because we goofed?

[Jags]

On 5/6/2021 at 5:27 PM, Charles said:

I don't know.   I'd feel better about Newsome and holland than campbell & Cisco.   I'm  also not sold on etn being that much better as a prospect.   That is where this draft is a big unknown,  since none of these guys were measured  by the same standard.  Who is to say who is really quicker than whom?

 

 

The tale of the tape my man. When all else fails, remember these are football players and the speed that matters is what you see on the field. ETN looks and is faster on the football field. 

[Tugboat]

I like Newsome more than Campbell as a player, but ultimately...if you want to build the team to fit this scheme, i can see why Campbell might be the better fit.

 

And while the Etienne thing kinda looks a little low value on paper, in light of where Carter ultimately went...without the benefit of hindsight, i don't think i could've expected anyone to go into the draft believing that they'd be able to scoop him up that late.  The other aspect of that, is that for as well as i think Carter would fill that "RB/Receiver" hybrid sort of role perfectly...i do think that Etienne gives you more flexibility in that range.  If you want to use him that way, you can...but i think he's also a little bit better fit if you just want to use him like a more conventional RB.  That can be beneficial in disguising intent, if leveraged correctly.  Whereas with Carter...he can play some more conventional RB snaps...but by and large, you have to look at him like more of a "change of pace" type back.  Every time you bring him in, you're subtly tipping tendencies, more so than with Etienne who you can just line up and have him run the ball between the tackles or whatever you want, for a bunch of plays.

Of course, that's all just academic, on both counts.  The proof is in the pudding.  If they actually use these guys deftly, and press the specific advantages on which i think you can justify the relative draft "premium"...it'll all make sense.  If they don't use those specific traits and aspects to effect...well, that's where i start to really break out the revisionist history kit and level a more serious criticism at their draft approach and "value".

 

There are ultimately just so many different ways to slice a draft.  I would've certainly done it differently.  But how you actually work with what you've managed to collect, can be really informative of how "effective" the draft was.  You can have the "most value" possible in the draft, and still have it not really work out that great, or be that impactful for your team...if the players don't fit and/or aren't applied right.  And you can have a pretty weak, "low value" draft, but if you get the right pieces and use them to maximum effect in key roles with lots of headroom for impact, it can end up being better for your team overall.  Lots of moving parts.

[Charles]

Naturally, all we'll ultimately remember is whether or not players from this draft hit or miss.  Additionally,  I don't operate under any delusion that I know more about prospects than the people who do it professionally,  and I tend to try to have faith in the the Jags' powers that be especially a new regime.  However, I still have opinions and was just curious what the opinions of the forum were,  but Instead got a treatise defending the draft strategy.  Not what really what I intended  

[Adrenaline_Flux]

1 hour ago, Charles said:

Naturally, all we'll ultimately remember is whether or not players from this draft hit or miss.  Additionally,  I don't operate under any delusion that I know more about prospects than the people who do it professionally,  and I tend to try to have faith in the the Jags' powers that be especially a new regime.  However, I still have opinions and was just curious what the opinions of the forum were,  but Instead got a treatise defending the draft strategy.  Not what really what I intended  

you wanted to get opinions from other people but didn't expect to receive different opinions from other people? I'm not sure what you intended or expected. and I don't mean that in any sort of negative way. I've enjoyed reading this thread and that includes reading your perspective on things, but am a little confused by this reply. 

[pwny]

8 hours ago, Charles said:

Naturally, all we'll ultimately remember is whether or not players from this draft hit or miss.  Additionally,  I don't operate under any delusion that I know more about prospects than the people who do it professionally,  and I tend to try to have faith in the the Jags' powers that be especially a new regime.  However, I still have opinions and was just curious what the opinions of the forum were,  but Instead got a treatise defending the draft strategy.  Not what really what I intended  

Hey man, we’re all welcome to our differing opinions. There’s been times I was fervently in the minority as I disliked a strategy as well; sometimes wrong, sometimes right.

I don’t necessarily agree with the entirety of the draft strategy either. I even did a deep dive into Trent Baalke’s history with knee injuries that showed that we’re taking on some big risk with some of the guys we had. In the draft rankings thread that goldfishwars is doing in NFL Gen, I believe I noted potential issues with every player we selected from round 2-5. I didn’t do a deep dive into every prospect, but I’m sure there was reason to believe there better options there at each spot. 

It’s just that I have been pegging ETN as an extremely likely target to be taken at 25 for like the entirety of the offseason as soon as we learned Urban was coming here, largely because I was expecting the team to make it a high priority to get a player that can run all the diverse sets that Urban wants to run. It may not be “great value” to select a RB at 25, but it always seemed like getting the best possible player to run that scheme is what they were going to do, and I felt that ETN was the best guy for that.

It’s okay if we disagree. We probably disagreed on many other draft selections through the years. You also aren’t alone in your thinking. I know pre-draft @LinderFournette had the same view and we had some arguments about the value between ETN at 25 and taking Carter later. And I’m sure many outside of the Jags forum on here believe the same. 

[LinderFournette]

3 minutes ago, pwny said:

Hey man, we’re all welcome to our differing opinions. There’s been times I was fervently in the minority as I disliked a strategy as well; sometimes wrong, sometimes right.

I don’t necessarily agree with the entirety of the draft strategy either. I even did a deep dive into Trent Baalke’s history with knee injuries that showed that we’re taking on some big risk with some of the guys we had. In the draft rankings thread that goldfishwars is doing in NFL Gen, I believe I noted potential issues with every player we selected from round 2-5. I didn’t do a deep dive into every prospect, but I’m sure there was reason to believe there better options there at each spot. 

It’s just that I have been pegging ETN as an extremely likely target to be taken at 25, largely because I was expecting the team to make it a high priority to get a player that can run all the diverse sets that Urban wants to run. It may not be “great value” to select a RB at 25, but it always seemed like getting the best possible player to run that scheme is what they were going to do, and I felt that ETN was the best guy for that.

It’s okay if we disagree. We probably disagrees on many other draft selections through the years. You also aren’t alone in your thinking. I know pre-draft @LinderFournette had the same view and we had some arguments about the value between ETN at 25 and taking Carter later. And I’m sure many outside of the Jags forum on here believe the same. 

I'm still not a fan of taking etn at 25 but I kinda get why but personally I rather have had amari rodgers in round 3 or even a guy like Felton in round 6(Felton fits the Percy role well.)

I'm still disappointed with not addressing te until u take a blocker te which is not what we needed.