Jump to content

2.50 - Jayden Reed [WR; Michigan State]


CWood21

Recommended Posts

Just now, CWood21 said:

When did 4.45 not be fast enough?

Seems like in the draft discussion the Packers came out and said they had him timed at 4.3something. I was just saying, he looked like he was faster than a 4.45 guy on that run. 

Not saying it isn't 'fast enough,' but he's got a gear few do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2023 at 7:27 PM, R T said:

The stupid part would be that some people believe the Packers are reliant on RAS scores to make decisions on drafting players. 

Oh I agree. It's just funny that people would say the Packers rely too much on RAS and use a player with a low RAS score that the Packers drafted as proof of this lol. Then some of these same people are saying this receiving corps could be the best since 2011, it's comical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Old Guy said:

Seems like in the draft discussion the Packers came out and said they had him timed at 4.3something. I was just saying, he looked like he was faster than a 4.45 guy on that run. 

Not saying it isn't 'fast enough,' but he's got a gear few do. 

If you haven't learned yet, the 40 time is probably, by far, the most overrated football statistic to ever exist. People need to stop caring so much about it. It typically has nothing to do with whether a guy is going to be a good football player, especially if the numbers are within a reasonable range for the position in question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2023 at 7:27 PM, R T said:

The stupid part would be that some people believe the Packers are reliant on RAS scores to make decisions on drafting players. 

I mean, they don't use "RAS" itself, but they do use an athletic profile compilation that closely resembles RAS, which is why every February-April it is fairly easy to hit on a lot of future Packers in mocks by simply looking at the RAS score. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2023 at 6:27 PM, R T said:

The stupid part would be that some people believe the Packers are reliant on RAS scores to make decisions on drafting players. 

It would be more stupid to believe that they don't use an analytics based athletic testing system as a top qualifier for who they draft. We as fans have RAS and the correlation is strong, why wouldn't we use it? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Old Guy said:

Did Jayden Reed look like a 4.45 guy when he took it to the house on that run? Dude was moving. Whatever that number is, it's plenty fast enough. 

Rumor has it that he was sick when he ran at the Combine.

And yeah, the dude was moving.  He's always moving.  He plays really fast with a ton of quickness in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, incognito_man said:

1a and 1b for me from this draft class

Cannot dispute.

Will offer up Wicks as another good one from this class.  Different from those two, though, in that he has great size and quickness.

To me, he's just a great compliment to some of these quickness/speed guys out there.

I don't know where I'd rank him, or how I would rank him, but I'm as excited for Wicks' future as I am for Reeds' future.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

It would be more stupid to believe that they don't use an analytics based athletic testing system as a top qualifier for who they draft. We as fans have RAS and the correlation is strong, why wouldn't we use it? 

Some people are super stubborn to adopt trends if they happen to like an outlier.  When every year 6 of our 8 draft picks all have a high RAS, there is probably something there.  Just like the WR thresholds that I constantly had fights over for the last 3 or 4 drafts.  We have literally taken Jennings, Cobb and Reed outside of the numbers in the past 20ish years, but there is no pattern.  Didn't like half of the forum have a big circle around Zach Tom, LVN, Watson, Doubs, Gary, and Wicks?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, CWood21 said:

When did 4.45 not be fast enough?

 

15 hours ago, Old Guy said:

Seems like in the draft discussion the Packers came out and said they had him timed at 4.3something. I was just saying, he looked like he was faster than a 4.45 guy on that run. 

Not saying it isn't 'fast enough,' but he's got a gear few do. 

After the pick John Eric Sullivan said the packers had him at 4.37 . He has certianly looked that fast at times.

 

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2023/05/04/packers-clocked-rookie-wr-jayden-reed-at-4-37-in-the-40-yard-dash/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...