Advanced Wide Receiver Stats

[wolfkaosaun]

(03-18-2016, 01:34 AM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: These stats are fine and dandy but I'm sure that there are a lot of teams that look at Fuller's 40 time and start drooling.  It comes down to the age old quandary or whether to draft based on athletic potential vs. how polished a guy is.  A team may believe that Doctson maxes out at an 8.9 where Fuller could max out at a 9.9.  Do you take the risk or go with the safer bet in that case?

Fuller has something that Docston doesn't, which is speed. However, Docston is a great overall receiver. He's best with intermediate routes, but once looking at his route tree, he's the most well rounded of all the wide receivers.

Also, he's more athletic than Fuller. Fuller has speed, but he also struggles catching the ball.

(03-18-2016, 07:57 AM)TGISunday Wrote: Bigger question for the whole field of receivers, which ones know more than an abbreviated route tree due to running some derivative of the air raid offense in college? 

It honestly looks like Docston does. Or at least has the highest production when it comes down to overall. He has a much less drop rate and one of the best successes when it comes to numerous routes.

(03-18-2016, 08:06 AM)TGISunday Wrote: Also agree about Shepard being pushed up the boards, probably due to the thin free agency and draft markets at wideout this year.  Not sure he's a solution on the outside at the next level, but he's really polished at slot.

Shepard's biggest problem is his size. He struggles against very physical corners. But he can make guys miss easily and if a corner gives him space and doesn't use press, Shepard wins those matches way more often than not. He'd be a great slot receiver.