Success of "fastest" WRs since '00

[*ochocincos*]

The two most productive "fast" WRs were also early 1st-round picks (DHB and Stallworth), just like Ross.
However, unlike Ross, neither of those guys ever topped 1000 yards in a season in college.
The combination of these two things gives me confidence John Ross can be more productive than DHB or Stallworth and the most productive "fast" WR ever assuming he can stay healthy.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(04-13-2018, 04:44 PM)The Caped Crusader Wrote: I guess my reading comprehension is bad. I don't see anything bad there, really, at all. 


First sentence - We trained for years (assuming Chad and him) to be able to run routes as well as we did.
Second sentence - He has talent.
Third sentence - He hasn't had the training that Chad and him have had.
Fourth sentence - You can't live and die by your talent. You have to train, learn technique.
Fifth sentence - Everyone has talent, you have to lead by technique (obviously).
Sixth sentence - I'm trying to teach him.
Seventh - His talent is better than everyone else.


I'm not seeing the bad there. 

Sure is a lot of praise there to end in YIKES.

[Luvnit2]

(04-13-2018, 04:37 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: You would think the 9th overall pick in the draft and a guy in his second year in the NFL would know the basics and nuances of route running. 

I love and respect TJ, but keep in mind he is not doing this for free. It would make no sense for TJ to say Ross is a good or great route runner yet, that would all but guarantee his financial relationship with Ross disappears quickly.

Yes, you tear down the student so the teacher can look great later and not vice versa.

[XsandOs]

Statistics are like prisoners of war. You squeeze them enough, they will tell you whatever you want to hear.

Limiting sample size by a cutoff point (Year 2000 and above, 4.3, etc.) can help make an argument, but provides an incomplete picture.  

Julio Jones ran a 4.35, that is fast. Jackson and Cooks are in the same category.

Randy Moss, Joey Galloway ran 4.2s before the 2000 cutoff.

We picked Warrick #4 overall, his teammate Laverneus Coles ran 4.29 and was picked in third round. Who had the better career?

I understand Fred's concern, and to some extent it is justified, for the moment. But Ross is not just any fast receiver - he is the fastest player in football.

He is not a 5'7"-5'8" speedy gimmick player, who is drafted to run 10-15 times a game to force safety coverage on top and open underneath, or drafted to return kicks and punts.

I am hoping for the best.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(04-13-2018, 05:37 PM)XsandOs Wrote: Limiting sample size by a cutoff point (Year 2000 and above, 4.3, etc.) can help make an argument, but provides an incomplete picture.  

Actually, pretty much all talk about 40 time is cut off by 2000 (or rather more accurately 1999) because that's when they started using mechanical assistance in timing the 40.

It's why you'll hear tales of Bo Jackson timing 4.12 for his 40. It was just a bunch of guys sitting up in the seats hand timing and it produced wildly different times when you consider that a reaction time difference on start/stop of just 1/10ths of a second each, would turn a 4.3 into a 4.5, or into a 4.1... and that would be 3 guys all timing the same player.

It's also why prior to Ross, Chris Johnson was the "fastest" because he did it in the mechanically timed era, and anything prior to then isn't counted as official towards records.

[sonofstat]

to be honest I thought his comp was Ted Ginn....he had a good career with some splash plays if he was a mid round pick but never got over 800yds which as another #9 pick is not success.

hope JR smashes it but its a huge year for him

[XsandOs]

(04-13-2018, 05:51 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Actually, pretty much all talk about 40 time is cut off by 2000 (or rather more accurately 1999) because that's when they started using mechanical assistance in timing the 40.

It's why you'll hear tales of Bo Jackson timing 4.12 for his 40. It was just a bunch of guys sitting up in the seats hand timing and it produced wildly different times when you consider that a reaction time difference on start/stop of just 1/10ths of a second each, would turn a 4.3 into a 4.5, or into a 4.1... and that would be 3 guys all timing the same player.

It's also why prior to Ross, Chris Johnson was the "fastest" because he did it in the mechanically timed era, and anything prior to then isn't counted as official towards records.

 I understand what you are saying, but fast is fast. The only difference between now and then is, that the stop is electronic. Start is still by hand.

So Moss and Galloway, who ran and were timed at the combine, would at worse run 4.3s timed with electronic stop - based on your 1/10 differential.

Moss, Darrel Green, Bo, Dion, Coles, Gault, etc., were fast. Not just because of their hand timed 40 suggested, but you saw it on the field.  

The second point is the cutoff of 4.3. So what is fast? At 4.3, one leaves out Julio Jones, Brandin Cooks and DeSean Jackson. They were timed with electronic stop.
 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(04-13-2018, 06:27 PM)XsandOs Wrote:  I understand what you are saying, but fast is fast. The only difference between now and then is, that the stop is electronic. Start is still by hand.

So Moss and Galloway, who ran and were timed at the combine, would at worse run 4.3s timed with electronic stop - based on your 1/10 differential.

Moss, Darrel Green, Bo, Dion, Coles, Gault, etc., were fast. Not just because of their hand timed 40 suggested, but you saw it on the field.  

The second point is the cutoff of 4.3. So what is fast? At 4.3, one leaves out Julio Jones, Brandin Cooks and DeSean Jackson. They were timed with electronic stop.
 

The start is by hand, but then later adjusted with the assistance of mechanical. The start is kind of a mishmash of both hand and mechanical.

It's why you'll see "unofficial times" on the 40 when you watch the combine. The unofficial time is the unadjusted/uncorrected hand start time, and the mechanical end time. Only when they go back to the video and adjust the actual start time based off first movement, is it then made official. It's why unofficial times are almost always faster than official times, even when 1/2 of the unofficial time is still mechanical.

Sacks didn't become an officially tracked stat until 1982. Tackles didn't become an officially tracked stat until 2001.

2000 is a pretty acceptable cutoff time when talking about the 40. 1999 would be better, but I understand the wanting to make it even.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

I don't care about the second point. Take that up with Fred. My only point was that there was nothing wrong with cutting it off at that point in history, because that's when it became apples-to-apples comparisons.

If you want to talk about "saw on the field" that's an entirely different thing and then you're going into a completely unprovable topic of who "looked" faster based off eye tests.

[McC]

Okay. Another trash John Ross thread. There haven't been nearly enough of those.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(04-13-2018, 07:32 PM)McC Wrote: Okay.  Another trash John Ross thread.  There haven't been nearly enough of those.

Sure haven't, but i don't think that was Fred's intention here.

[XsandOs]

(04-13-2018, 07:23 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: The start is by hand, but then later adjusted with the assistance of mechanical. The start is kind of a mishmash of both hand and mechanical.

It's why you'll see "unofficial times" on the 40 when you watch the combine. The unofficial time is the unadjusted/uncorrected hand start time, and the mechanical end time. Only when they go back to the video and adjust the actual start time based off first movement, is it then made official. It's why unofficial times are almost always faster than official times, even when 1/2 of the unofficial time is still mechanical.

Sacks didn't become an officially tracked stat until 1982. Tackles didn't become an officially tracked stat until 2001.

2000 is a pretty acceptable cutoff time when talking about the 40. 1999 would be better, but I understand the wanting to make it even.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

I don't care about the second point. Take that up with Fred. My only point was that there was nothing wrong with cutting it off at that point in history, because that's when it became apples-to-apples comparisons.

If you want to talk about "saw on the field" that's an entirely different thing and then you're going into a completely unprovable topic of who "looked" faster based off eye tests.

 Ok LeonardLeap. As you say.

[McC]

(04-13-2018, 07:48 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Sure haven't, but i don't think that was Fred's intention here.

Riiiiiight.

[*SHRacerX*]

(04-13-2018, 03:12 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: How is he a football player? He doesnt understand how to get separation. Did you read the latest piece on him and Housh?


“That took us years. It won’t happen overnight,” Houshmandzadeh says.  “He’s been fast his whole life. Whoever worked with him has never really gone over the basics and the nuances of route running. You can’t always run by you. You get to this level, everybody can run. Your technique and ability to separate has to come to the forefront because you can’t beat everybody with speed. That’s what I’m trying to get him to understand. He’s got speed no one else has.”


YIKES

I think Housh was being a little "see, that's why he needs me" dramatic.   Ross screwed Adoree Jackson (a first round pick last year) in to the ground with a route move, not his speed.  His speed makes safeties back off or risk giving up big plays with one missed tackle (he did score once every 5 times he touched the ball) and this has implications in helping the rushing attack.  

When Rudi had his best season as a Bengal, he had 1450+ yards and 4.3 ypc.  That team had the big plays of Chris Henry at X receiver.  Henry had 6 TDs in just 31 receptions....almost one every five times he touched the ball.  

A lot of people are still looking to take a dump on Ross for last year.  Whether it was his health, his fumble, or the route he "gave up on", it doesn't matter.  Some folks are just dead set on blaming him for all the offensive failings a year ago.  

This team absolutely needs Ross out there at X receiver.  That position is so critical to take advantage of the double teams on AJ Green.  Ditto a strong performance out of the slot.  If Ross and Boyd do what I believe they are capable of doing and you add Eifert to the Red Zone threats, you can see how this offense can be high-powered again.  

[*SHRacerX*]

(04-13-2018, 04:36 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I remember Brandon Cooks running a fast forty.

He is a damn good receiver.

Agreed.  And what of Tyreek Hill?  A smaller burner at KC that has been outstanding.  He ran a 4.24, I believe, and it just goes to show you what an offensive mind can do with speed like that.  

[BengalChris]

(04-13-2018, 03:12 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: How is he a football player? He doesnt understand how to get separation. Did you read the latest piece on him and Housh?


“That took us years. It won’t happen overnight,” Houshmandzadeh says.  “He’s been fast his whole life. Whoever worked with him has never really gone over the basics and the nuances of route running. You can’t always run by you. You get to this level, everybody can run. Your technique and ability to separate has to come to the forefront because you can’t beat everybody with speed. That’s what I’m trying to get him to understand. He’s got speed no one else has.”


YIKES

Yep. He played in the Pac 12 where good defense just didn't exist. That has to be factored into his college play. Maybe he'll work out for the Bengals, but it's not something the team can count on.

[fredtoast]

(04-14-2018, 10:51 AM)BengalChris Wrote: Yep. He played in the Pac 12 where good defense just didn't exist. That has to be factored into his college play. Maybe he'll work out for the Bengals, but it's not something the team can count on.

That is why Brandon Cooks, Keenan Allen, and Marvin Jones have been flops, right?  Can't be a good WR if you played in the PAC 12.

[XsandOs]

(04-14-2018, 11:37 AM)fredtoast Wrote: That is why Brandon Cooks, Keenan Allen, and Marvin Jones have been flops, right?  Can't be a good WR if you played in the PAC 12.

Fred, you instigator.

I haven't been on this board for several years, but now remember your style.

Well played Sir.

[*bfine32*]

(04-13-2018, 01:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Forty times and stats from ProFootballReference.com

Over the last 18 years ('00-'17) there have been a total of 10 WRs who ran the forty in 4.30 or faster at the combine.  

Five of the ten never had a single season with 500 receiving yards, and 2 more only had a single season.  Only 1 of them (Donte Stallworth) had more than 2 seasons with at least 500 receiving yards.  

In 45 combined NFL seasons they only produced 11 seasons with 500+ yards.

Not a single one of them ever had a 1000 season.  

The 10 WRs only produced 3 seasons with as many as 900 receiving yards (Stallworth '05, Darrius Heyward Bay '11, Marquise Goodwin '17).

8 of the 10 were listed at less than 6 feet tall, and the two that were at least 6 feet tall (Stallworth, Heyward Bay) accounted for two of the three 900 yd seasons and seven of the eleven 500+ yard seasons.


 

What about former Bengal great Laveranues Coles?

[fredtoast]

(04-14-2018, 08:21 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Agreed.  And what of Tyreek Hill?  A smaller burner at KC that has been outstanding.  He ran a 4.24, I believe, and it just goes to show you what an offensive mind can do with speed like that.  

Hill has been healthy and he is an incredible talent, but his rookie season he was not stretching the defense at all.  In fact he averaged less than 10 yards per reception (9.7).

So even an "offensive mind" took a year to develop Hill into a downfield receiver.

[fredtoast]

(04-14-2018, 12:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What about former Bengal great Laveranues Coles?

4.41 at the combine