I just got a weird fear...is DK Metcalf the new Darrius Heyward-Bey?!

The dude can't turn to save his life.
https://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/what-the-fakenews-media-wont-tell-you-tom-brady-is-more-athletic-than-dk-metcalf

I hate the title of this article, but it makes an interesting point.

(03-07-2019, 02:32 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: The dude can't turn to save his life.
https://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/what-the-fakenews-media-wont-tell-you-tom-brady-is-more-athletic-than-dk-metcalf

I hate the title of this article, but it makes an interesting point.

I mentioned this before, his issue is he added too much bulk killing his flexibility. The video of him running the 3 cone he stumbles twice during it because he is running too upright. He needs to take at least 10 pounds off and work on his flexibility I think in order to really be effective. 

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/are-d.k.-metcalf-s-agility-times-a-concern

(03-02-2019, 06:54 PM)JWW1971 Wrote: Metcalf looks like a beast in the combine, If we can get a couple of LB or O-Line men in FA, should we go for him if he is available at 11

WR is not what this team needs at this time. We already have a combine beast anyway.

(03-09-2019, 01:06 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: WR is not what this team needs at this time. We already have a combine beast anyway.

Draft bpa not need. Drafting for need is how u end up with ogbuehi and fisher or Jackson over Thomas. Or price(even though he’s gonna be great)

(03-09-2019, 01:06 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: WR is not what this team needs at this time. We already have a combine beast anyway.

I was thinking more of converting him to TE, I know it would be a long shot and a high risk pick at 11

(03-10-2019, 06:54 AM)JWW1971 Wrote: I was thinking more of converting him to TE, I know it would be a long shot and a high risk pick at 11

You’d be better off with Noah Fant he already knows how to play TE.

Having concrete hips usually doesn't work in the nfl.

(03-09-2019, 11:25 PM)Jpoore Wrote: Draft bpa not need. Drafting for need is how u end up with ogbuehi and fisher or Jackson over Thomas. Or price(even though he’s gonna be great)

Actually, CB wasn't a need like WR was when Jackson was taken.
Also, the way you phrased it, it makes it sound like WJ3 is a bust even though he's been very good since he saw the field.

(03-09-2019, 11:25 PM)Jpoore Wrote: Draft bpa not need. Drafting for need is how u end up with ogbuehi and fisher or Jackson over Thomas. Or price(even though he’s gonna be great)

Except in the rankings that year Jackson was rated higher than Thomas so???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(03-09-2019, 11:25 PM)Jpoore Wrote: Draft bpa not need. Drafting for need is how u end up with ogbuehi and fisher or Jackson over Thomas. Or price(even though he’s gonna be great)

This is how not to approach the draft. Do you go into a store and buy things you don't really need because they are on sale while not getting what you came to the store for? Some idiot made this statement and now people want to use it as the holy grail of drafting. Trade up ,trade down but don't take a player who doesn't help your team now unless it is the later rounds or you already have a playoff caliber team.

(03-11-2019, 10:01 AM)Catmandude123 Wrote: This is how not to approach the draft. Do you go into a store and buy things you don't really need because they are on sale while not getting what you came to the store for? Some idiot made this statement and now people want to use it as the holy grail of drafting. Trade up ,trade down but don't take a player who doesn't help your team now unless it is the later rounds or you already have a playoff caliber team.

The reason this doesn't work, is often times a rookies impact isn't felt for 2 or 3 years down the road. Sure the occasional rookie can play at an all pro level year 1, but more often then not they are average to below average year 1. By drafting for two to three years down the line you set yourself up to put guys in when you need them at a ready to perform level. It also allows you to move on from vets on your own terms when their heir is ready versus forcing them in. The problem is because it has had mixed results here people get sour on the idea.

It's not cut and dry though because some teams believe in it and some don't.

(03-04-2019, 11:47 PM)Jpoore Wrote: People said the same thing about mike Williams. He doesn’t have a limited route tree, rather he was handicapped by the system, as multiple wrs and tes from the ole miss system have complained how bad it is and how they’re only allowed to run very basic stuff.
Hopkins has the same shirt ahuttle time, megatron didn’t even run bc he knew it would be bad, and dez had same 3 cone.
See Hopkins and dez as comparisons on if u use them right.

Hopkins @ Clemson - 206 receptions for 3020 yards (14.7 YPC), 27 TDs.
Dez @ Oklahoma - 147 receptions for 2452 yards (16.5 YPC), 29 TDs.
Megatron @ GT - 178 receptions for 2927 yards (16.4 YPC), 28 TDs.
Metcalf @ Miss - 67 receptions for 1228 yards (18.3 YPC), 14 TDs.

Not saying he won't be a productive NFL player, but injury history + lack of college production = no first round grade in my book.  Particularly considering our OL/LB/TE needs ...

(03-11-2019, 10:28 AM)shanebo Wrote: Hopkins @ Clemson - 206 receptions for 3020 yards (14.7 YPC), 27 TDs.
Dez @ Oklahoma - 147 receptions for 2452 yards (16.5 YPC), 29 TDs.
Megatron @ GT - 178 receptions for 2927 yards (16.4 YPC), 28 TDs.
Metcalf @ Miss - 67 receptions for 1228 yards (18.3 YPC), 14 TDs.

Not saying he won't be a productive NFL player, but injury history + lack of college production = no first round grade in my book.  Particularly considering our OL/LB/TE needs ...

I don't want him, but to be fair you double dinged him for injury history because his production was actually great if you extrapolate it out. 

(03-11-2019, 10:13 AM)Au165 Wrote: The reason this doesn't work, is often times a rookies impact isn't felt for 2 or 3 years down the road. Sure the occasional rookie can play at an all pro level year 1, but more often then not they are average to below average year 1. By drafting for two to three years down the line you set yourself up to put guys in when you need them at a ready to perform level. It also allows you to move on from vets on your own terms when their heir is ready versus forcing them in. The problem is because it has had mixed results here people get sour on the idea.

It's not cut and dry though because some teams believe in it and some don't.

So for instance you need a tackle but you take a QB. Then down the road just how does that help you at the tackle position? BPA only applies to teams that already have set rosters that don't need to upgrade multiple positions. I believe we are in the multiple position category.

(03-11-2019, 10:13 AM)Au165 Wrote: The reason this doesn't work, is often times a rookies impact isn't felt for 2 or 3 years down the road. Sure the occasional rookie can play at an all pro level year 1, but more often then not they are average to below average year 1. By drafting for two to three years down the line you set yourself up to put guys in when you need them at a ready to perform level. It also allows you to move on from vets on your own terms when their heir is ready versus forcing them in. The problem is because it has had mixed results here people get sour on the idea.

It's not cut and dry though because some teams believe in it and some don't.

So for instance you need a tackle but you take a QB. Then down the road just how does that help you at the tackle position? BPA only applies to teams that already have set rosters that don't need to upgrade multiple positions. I believe we are in need of multiple position category.

(03-11-2019, 11:19 AM)Catmandude123 Wrote: So for instance you need a tackle but you take a QB. Then down the road just how does that help you at the tackle position? BPA only applies to teams that already have set rosters that don't need to upgrade multiple positions. I believe we are in need of multiple position category.

It doesn't you have to find another way to get  tackle, maybe it's FA or later in the draft or a trade. The idea is the ceiling of the player you take is higher than the one you need. I'd rather have the best QB in the league over the 16th best tackle simply because I needed a tackle 3 years ago and he was the best one in that draft. 

It applies to a lot of teams believe it or not. The reasons a lot of teams at the top stay at the top of the draft is because they draft for need. When you have a chance to take an elite talent you take the elite talent.Maybe you trade your old starter for a need, maybe you cut them to clear cap to sign needs, but you take talent over all else.

....and sometimes you get lucky and a guy like Devin White is where talent and need converge to a perfect pick. Now that's not saying you always take BPA no matter what, if a need is similar in value sure but if the discrepancy is huge then talent always.