(06-02-2016, 01:38 AM)Nately120 Wrote: So we should make coaching decisions based on a guy's twitter activity?  Argh, can't we just see which of them is best at being a WR?

I never said make a coaching decision based off of it lol i said it bothers me.

(06-02-2016, 01:53 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Um....  your #2 is your possession receiver.  A guy that can run slants, curls, outs, things like that of the short-to-intermediate range and getting YAC is exactly what we want.  Run good routes and get the yards to move the chains.

He might get a lot of slot work and be a TJ type of receiver, which just means that the young guys are stepping up on the outside, which is good.

But I like Lafell as a route runner and YAC guy.......  we have AJ to go deep 

Also if hes a posession receiver that would require hands,thats why boyd sounds better. But if core can play He offers more speed on the outside.

(06-02-2016, 12:13 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: While i agree to a point players still are considered by what they do best.

A bigger body like Lafell is usually used outside more often than in the Slot in the NFL.

We will move our guys around lots i am sure like we did last year for sure and Boyd could be on the outside
with Lafell in the Slot at times. I just consider Boyd to be more of a Slot receiver myself. Quick, possession WR
with great hands. That is not Lafell who is a big bodied YAC guy with speed.

LaFell was in the slot 63% of the time his last year in CAR. That was also the way he was most effective. I'm not saying he won't be on the outside, but he himself said when he got here he wanted to play in the slot more. In NE they made him play outside and it may be one of the reasons his production never lived up.

As for the whole "your number 2 is", that just doesn't hold true as much in today's NFL. In Pitt Bryant would be their #2 and he is a down field threat, same with Fuller in HOU now. Heck, Marvin Jones was more effective downfield for us than anything he did underneath. Your #2 is whatever helps you win football games.

(06-02-2016, 12:57 PM)Au165 Wrote: LaFell was in the slot 63% of the time his last year in CAR. That was also the way he was most effective. I'm not saying he won't be on the outside, but he himself said when he got here he wanted to play in the slot more. In NE they made him play outside and it may be one of the reasons his production never lived up.

Cannot disagree with the facts, i guess we will just have to see how it plays out.

Last year was a bad year for him though with the injury and all. I would like to see what his percentage was in the
Slot his best year in New England. We should move the WR's around a lot as we usually do no question.

Lafell most likely will be the starter outside opening day no matter what with his experience over Boyd and Core.

We won't always run 3 receiver sets. I must add this is not a bad thing either as Lafell is a willing blocker and can
play physical.

(06-02-2016, 11:59 AM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I never expected Boyd to start out Wide over Lafell, never. Boyd is a Slot receiver in the NFL, 2nd best one in the
Draft behind Sterling Shepard in my opinion. He will be starting in the Slot come opening day barring injury is what
i truly believe. Especially with Eifert out.

That is unless Core just lights up the world and even then Core is a Wideout and not a Slot receiver.

I guess we both disagree with Dehner's claim that Boyd is "questionable" as a slot WR. WTF, Paul? 

Tate #3, calling it now. He has "earned" it.

(06-02-2016, 12:32 PM)bengalsturntup5532 Wrote: Lefell lafell whatever,it doesnt matter when He drops it. Ive seen video evidence of it last year.

I'll bet Brady never even thrrew the ball deep to Lafell more than one or two times.

Link to the video evidence please.

I don't trust fan opinions at all.  (see: Dalton is a weak armed scrub QB)

(06-02-2016, 12:32 PM)bengalsturntup5532 Wrote: Lefell lafell whatever,it doesnt matter when He drops it. Ive seen video evidence of it last year.

LaFell's career drop % is significantly better than Mo Sanu's.

He was coming back from injury last year and shaking off rust when he came back.

(06-02-2016, 01:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: LaFell's career drop % is significantly better than Mo Sanu's.

He was coming back from injury last year and shaking off rust when he came back.

LaFell has 278 career receptions, Sanu has 152. If Sanu and LaFell had equal career receptions, the percentage would probably closer.

Sanus drop percentage should drop once he is in Atlanta and adds more receptions to his total.

(06-02-2016, 01:39 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: LaFell has 278 career receptions, Sanu has 152. If Sanu and LaFell had equal career receptions, the percentage would probably closer.

Sanus drop percentage should drop once he is in Atlanta and adds more receptions to his total.

Not following this logic at all. Sanu's worst season as far as drop % was 2014, when he was used the most.

So how is more usage going to lower his drops? 

Point blank, LaFell's drops are greatly exaggerated by folks who simply don't like the signing. If I need to, I can compare LaFell's drop % to many other good WRs and anti-LaFell guys aren't going to like the results. One rusty game with numerous drops does not = dude has terrible hands. His career numbers show that his hands are pretty average. Not bad.

(06-02-2016, 01:49 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Not following this logic at all. Sanu's worst season as far as drop % was 2014, when he was used the most.

So how is more usage going to lower his drops? 

Point blank, LaFell's drops are greatly exaggerated by folks who simply don't like the signing. If I need to, I can compare LaFell's drop % to many other good WRs and anti-LaFell guys aren't going to like the results. One rusty game with numerous drops does not = dude has terrible hands. His career numbers show that his hands are pretty average. Not bad.

cant bash lafells drops during a year he was battling injuries if we don't bash eifert for the same thing.

(06-02-2016, 01:57 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: cant bash lafells drops during a year he was battling injuries if we don't bash eifert for the same thing.

TD receptions may be the differentiating factor for those bashing LaFell but not Eifert. Eifert had 13 TDs and LaFell had 0. Both had practically the same number of targets (72 for Eifert vs 74 for LaFell), but LaFell only had 37 receptions compared to Eifert's 52 receptions. Now obviously not every target is fully catchable and therefore resulting in a drop if not a reception, but I think people may be thinking differently if LaFell had more receptions with that many targets.

So if a player is getting in the end zone far more often, that player may be far more forgiven compared to someone with very similar stats except for TD receptions.

(06-02-2016, 01:57 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: cant bash lafells drops during a year he was battling injuries if we don't bash eifert for the same thing.

Good point. According to sporting charts, Eifert and LaFell had identical drop % in 2015 (8.1%).

For LaFell, I think you can chalk it up to injury. A year before, his drop % was an AJ Green-like 1.7% on 119 targets.

Eifert had only 2 drops on 59 targets in his rookie year. I'm not worried about either one of them. 

(06-02-2016, 02:53 PM)ochocincos Wrote: TD receptions may be the differentiating factor for those bashing LaFell but not Eifert. Eifert had 13 TDs and LaFell had 0. Both had practically the same number of targets (72 for Eifert vs 74 for LaFell), but LaFell only had 37 receptions compared to Eifert's 52 receptions. Now obviously not every target is fully catchable and therefore resulting in a drop if not a reception, but I think people may be thinking differently if LaFell had more receptions with that many targets.

So if a player is getting in the end zone far more often, that player may be far more forgiven compared to someone with very similar stats except for TD receptions.

The drops were an anomaly for LaFell and so were the lack of TDs. He had 7 TDs in 2014 (9 if you count playoffs) and 5 the year before that. Pretty much all of his drops happened in his first game off the PUP list. I think people are judging him too harshly for 1 game, and a season where he only played 11 games at less than 100% coming off a foot injury. 

Feet are pretty important to WR's. So is timing, which he was probably lacking with Brady after such a long layoff.

(06-02-2016, 03:09 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: The drops were an anomaly for LaFell and so were the lack of TDs. He had 7 TDs in 2014 (9 if you count playoffs) and 5 the year before that. Pretty much all of his drops happened in his first game off the PUP list. I think people are judging him too harshly for 1 game, and a season where he only played 11 games at less than 100% coming off a foot injury. 

Feet are pretty important to WR's. So is timing, which he was probably lacking with Brady after such a long layoff.

I agree about the drops and timing, but think the seven touchdowns in 2014 was more of an anomaly.  He only has 20 total in his entire six year career.

(06-02-2016, 03:09 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: The drops were an anomaly for LaFell and so were the lack of TDs. He had 7 TDs in 2014 (9 if you count playoffs) and 5 the year before that. Pretty much all of his drops happened in his first game off the PUP list. I think people are judging him too harshly for 1 game, and a season where he only played 11 games at less than 100% coming off a foot injury. 

Feet are pretty important to WR's. So is timing, which he was probably lacking with Brady after such a long layoff.

I fully understand that. People who are focusing on drops, yards, TDs, etc are looking at 2015, not trends over the whole career.

You hit the nail on the head...people are too hasty to judge LaFell for 2015 when practically every category was an anomaly compared to previous seasons.

(06-02-2016, 01:12 PM)Shady Wrote: I guess we both disagree with Dehner's claim that Boyd is "questionable" as a slot WR. WTF, Paul? 

If there is a spot he fits in as a rookie that is it.

This is conflicting from everything i have heard from the coaches and even Hobspin.

Plus Boyd's talents fit there as well. He is quick with great hands, smooth as a cadillac according to Adam Jones.

(06-02-2016, 03:14 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: I agree about the drops and timing, but think the seven touchdowns in 2014 was more of an anomaly.  He only has 20 total in his entire six year career.

TD's are a lot like INT's on the defensive side of the ball. A lot of times they can be more about opportunity over skill. You normally want to throw out the high and low and find what they really are as far as consistent production.

(06-02-2016, 03:14 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: I agree about the drops and timing, but think the seven touchdowns in 2014 was more of an anomaly.  He only has 20 total in his entire six year career.

Well before last season, he trended up each season. 

1 TD as a rookie, then...
3 TDs
4 TDs
5 TDs
7 TDs

If he can just get 4, he'd match MLJ and Sanu's combined totals from last season. With Eifert missing time, I'm thinking 7 TDs for LaFell is a reasonable prediction. He probably going to be leaned on heavily early. 

I have heard hes had drop problems in other years in carolina,i dont have video evidence no, i cant save that stuff to my phone,but a pats fan explained it and there was video of him being wide open,they decribed it as clanking off his hands,and said his hands are bad with the deeper stuff. I tend to trust them till Im proved otherwise,i mean they wanted sanu over him,right now my opinion is,i dont know how lafell improves our offense,He just has to prove what He can do and what He cant. But i can say hes the last guy i wanted to sign, and i have had no reason to change my mind. Im sure time will tell. I just see all the rooks as better options right now. Hope He proves me wrong.