Slimm's 2019 Wide Receivers (underclassman)

TedSlimmJr

Hartselle Tigers (15-0) 5-A State Champ
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
11,567
Reaction score
4,410
It's easy to become enamored with DK Metcalf when you look at size, speed, NFL DNA but you have to wonder why such a dominant physical specimen did not dominate on the field. I know he had the neck injury and missed games but is it just the fact that he needs more time to develop or what? The type of player that would scare me away from drafting him top 20 or maybe even in the first round.

He had a very impressive YPR average but he was only on pace for about 1000 yards and 9-10 TD's last season. Andy Isabella was out there putting up 1700/13 td. Only top competition DK played last year was Alabama. Best games (over 100 yards) against Kent State and Louisiana-Monroe. Isabella put 219/2 on Georgia.

Just asking because I don't know.

A lot of it is the type of routes he was asked to run. Mostly vertical routes. Secondly, he’s only a RS Sophomore.

The ball was designed to go to A.J. Brown in most situations.

Andy Isabella did most of his damage against UGA matched up with backups and 3rd stringers with little to no experience after the game had already long been decided.

Isabella and Metcalf are two completely different receivers asked to do completely different things against a completely different level of competition week in and week out.

Isabella should be a great pro, but in an entirely different role than Metcalf. It’s the physical upside with Metcalf that you have to project. The tools and youth are there to be the most physically dominant receiver in the NFL. You can’t make that projection with any other receiver in this class. Risk? Sure. But the reward is greater also.
 

spiketex

Farewell El Bravo 47
Super Donator
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
7,406
Reaction score
1,492
I watched J.J. Arcega-Whiteside from Stanford interviewed the other day. My immediate impression is that JJ is an intelligent guy who exudes confidence. Interested to watch his tapes. At 6'2" and 225 lbs he's also a decent size. Both of his parents were professional basketballers in Spain, but he came to the US as a young guy. I like his professional sports heritage and the Stanford education. Slimm rates him at #7 - which is decent. Interesting prospect...
 
Last edited:

ckparrothead

Premium Member
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
51,259
Reaction score
5,120
Location
Tampa, FL
I've always felt JJAW is kind of tight as an athlete, as a receiver. He plays a bit like a guy that is extreme-sized, like a hybrid TE, except at 6020 and 225 lbs he's really not. Not sure I really love him.
 

ckparrothead

Premium Member
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
51,259
Reaction score
5,120
Location
Tampa, FL
Not for the first time I'm going to try and establish that we should not be so god damn beholden to the Indianapolis time measurements of esoteric drills such as the shuttle and cone drill.

If you ever want to be consistent about your own analysis and you don't want to end up constantly laughing at how silly you sound, then you know to take POOR times with a grain of salt, but to take EXCEPTIONAL times as what they are, which is an indicator of absolute ability.

We're used to guys coming out of the Combine and going and running at their Pro Day and improving their 40 times by maybe 0.05 seconds or 0.10 seconds, right? You usually don't get WILD differences in 40 times between Combine and Pro Day. When Joe Haden had wildly different times (two tenth variation), it was because of that weird-*** start of his at the Combine. Or some guys just weren't healthy for the Combine and made the mistake of running anyway.

Last year there were 44 players that felt like they could improve on their Combine shuttle drill and so they did it at their Pro Day. There were 26 that did the same with their cone drill.

Let's get this out right now. There's a selection bias at play here. Guys that did WELL in the shuttle or cone don't go running them again. The ones who did POORLY are the ones who tended to run them again. What I'm saying is you would naturally expect the players who re-run them to on average do BETTER at the Pro Day than they did at the Combine, because of this adverse selection issue.

Sure enough, average shuttle times decrease by -0.02 seconds and average cone times decrease by -0.04 seconds.

But that's...really not much. So these measurements must be extremely consistent, right?

WRONG!

Nearly 40% of the re-runs actually result in WORSE agility times than they did at the Combine. The average absolute change in the shuttle times was a tenth of a second, and the average absolute change in the cone drills was two-tenths of a second.

You had guys running their cone drill 0.39 seconds WORSE at their Pro Day than they did at the Combine. You also had guys running their cone drills 0.31 seconds BETTER at their Pro Day than the Combine.

Well, 50th percentile among Skill (Non-QB) players on Mock Draftable is a 7.01 second cone drill. Increase that by two-tenths of a second and the player is now a staggeringly bad 17th percentile. Decrease it by two-tenths of a second and the player is now a wonderful 79th percentile.

Do the same exercise with the shuttle drill, with 50th percentile for Skill (Non-QB) players being 4.26 seconds, reduce it to 4.16 seconds and you've got a 72nd percentile player, increase it 4.36 seconds and you've got a 29th percentile player.

And yet those are the AVERAGE changes in the agility measurements, when a guy runs at both the Combine and his Pro Day. Imagine the swing in percentiles that happens when a guy just has a particularly disparate set of runs.

These agility drills need to be taken with a grain of salt. When a guy runs one or both of them super-fast, that's great. It's a positive. It means he had that inside of him, because you can't run faster than you are. But if a guy flunks one or both of the agility times? Grain of salt.

I remember when Dez Bryant ran a 4.46 shuttle at his Pro Day.

Yeah, how'd that turn out?
 

ckparrothead

Premium Member
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
51,259
Reaction score
5,120
Location
Tampa, FL
The flip side of that argument is, and this is what I'm sensitive to as opposed to all these dipsticks going on about a Shuttle or Cone, but the fact D.K. Metcalf could never stay healthy in college, and wasn't really all that productive, and played in an almost purely vertical offense...I mean, yeah. Doesn't paint a great picture.

When Tom Luginbill lowers the cannon and takes aim at a player like D.K. Metcalf, that gets my attention. Not just because I respect the hell out of Tom, but because he almost never does it.
 

TedSlimmJr

Hartselle Tigers (15-0) 5-A State Champ
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
11,567
Reaction score
4,410
Luginbill is one of the best talent evaluators out there. And I'm talking about true talent evaluation. Not these talking heads like McShay or Louis Riddick or Kiper or Mayock or any of these NFL guys. I'm talking about true talent evaluation.

Metcalf has certain red flags in specific areas. Just like every other prospect in this draft. We could talk about every single one of them. It's up to evaluators to place their own level of concern on them.
 

j-off-her-doll

Finheaven VIP
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
17,470
Reaction score
5,160
Location
Dream Songs
Think there's a big gap between the Top 4 WR's and the rest of the group. Arcega-Whiteside would be my pick for the guy most likely to threaten that assumption, but we'll see how he does at his Pro Day, and I think it's more likely that he ends up a JAG than a high-quality player.

With the Top 4, I think it just depends on what you're looking for. Metcalf is probably the best deep threat to come along in years, and big plays are king in the NFL. He'll also open up things, for the rest of whichever offense he plays, more than any other receiver in the class.

I think Harry likely posts the best numbers of the group. This is a good time to point out that WR's are dependent upon their situation. But, Harry's RAC in conjunction with his ability to high-point the ball gives him the feel of a focal-point receiver. The debate is whether this is more valuable than a giant burner like Metcalf. Ideally, I'd opt for Metcalf's skillset, but it'd depend on the specific needs of an offense. I also think it depends upon the strengths/weaknesses of the QB.

In terms of role and ask, Butler is more similar to Metcalf, and Brown is more similar to Harry. Butler reminds me most of some combination of Brandon Marshall and Mike Evans. I don't have a great comp for Brown, but I do think he's the best route runner of the group, and he could be like a faster Anquan Boldin.

Think Calvin Johnson is the obvious comp for Metcalf, but I think he's a level below Johnson, which is not a knock at all. I like the Dez Bryant comp for Harry, but, based on what I know of him, Harry doesn't have Bryant's character concerns, and I'd project him to be more versatile. Of course, these are all high-end comps.
 

ckparrothead

Premium Member
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
51,259
Reaction score
5,120
Location
Tampa, FL
I don't know that I like the chances of any of the receivers at the top-end of this thing to be "sure things".

I think it's a deep class though. Guys like Deebo Samuel, Terry McLaurin, Tyre Brady, those guys may lack sexy size/speed stories, but they can play. And who would really be surprised if guys like Andy Isabella, Hakeem Butler, Parris Campbell, or Jalen Hurd become dominant forces in the NFL based on their physical characteristics of size and/or speed?

Hakeem Butler's highlights are the most Randy Moss-like in the class. He's ludicrous when he's at his best.
 

TedSlimmJr

Hartselle Tigers (15-0) 5-A State Champ
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
11,567
Reaction score
4,410
I'd be surprised if Jalen Hurd becomes a dominant force due to his hands being unreliable and poor football instincts. Doesn't really understand where defenders are. Very good athlete. Very unrefined as a receiver, and not because he was a RB. There are certain traits missing from a tangible and intangible perspective in my opinion. He "gets it"...but only so far. After that, he just can't "get it" anymore.

Deebo is probably my top receiver in this class. Him and A.J. Brown are the two safest. I like their defensive mentality they play the game with. Lot of upside with Metcalf and Butler, but a little more risky too. Deebo and A.J. are ready to come in and produce, while also bringing a certain level of physical domination also.
 

TedSlimmJr

Hartselle Tigers (15-0) 5-A State Champ
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
11,567
Reaction score
4,410
Does Metcalf's bad 3 cone time concern anyone?

It's something to consider. I think you just have to weigh how much affect you're going to let it have on his grade versus every other aspect of his athleticism and strength that are far beyond the elite category. In other words, how much have you seen it as a negative on film. It does no good to pay any attention to combine numbers that stick out in a good or bad way unless you're going to go back and check it on film. Or better yet, you should already have watched enough film to already know.

He's not a jitterbug. That's not what he is or what you want him to be. There's plenty of 6'0", 200 pound receivers with cone times below the 7's if that's what you're looking for. All you have to do is pick one. But I think for the routes you're going to want Metcalf to run, you probably won't let it alarm you too much. Not all receivers win in the same fashion or in the same areas of the field. A receiver with Metcalf's physical capabilities can open up things for other receivers.

Lastly, there's been a lot of productive receivers in the NFL with worse cone times than Metcalf that didn't have the other elite qualities he possesses. Guys have come in and caught over 100 balls as a rookie before with worse cone times than Metcalf and went on to become Hall of Fame caliber players. Others that never even did the agility drills at the combine and we still have no idea how bad their times would've been.

It's a data point. But it's just one data point to consider. Otherwise, just rank all receivers by cone times.
 

Phinatic8u

Please football gods, grace us Tua or Trevor
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Nov 6, 2008
Messages
18,330
Reaction score
5,342
Location
South Carolinia
Well, Slimm answered my question quite well.

Thank you sir.
 

j-off-her-doll

Finheaven VIP
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
17,470
Reaction score
5,160
Location
Dream Songs
Think Slimm nailed it, and I'd just add that a particular athletic deficiency for a WR is rarely a concern as long as he has one area where he good athletically. Even if Metcalf didn't jump well and just ran a 4.33 at his size, his athletic profile would be a plus. WR's know where they're going, and as long as the coach plays to Metcalf's strengths, it's basically a non-issue.
 

j-off-her-doll

Finheaven VIP
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
17,470
Reaction score
5,160
Location
Dream Songs
The more I think about it, the more Harry and AJ Brown stand out as the clear fits for Miami. Both should probably go in the 20s, but if one were to fall to Miami's second pick, either should quickly become the focal point of Miami's passing game.
 

j-off-her-doll

Finheaven VIP
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
17,470
Reaction score
5,160
Location
Dream Songs
I don't know that I like the chances of any of the receivers at the top-end of this thing to be "sure things".

I think it's a deep class though. Guys like Deebo Samuel, Terry McLaurin, Tyre Brady, those guys may lack sexy size/speed stories, but they can play. And who would really be surprised if guys like Andy Isabella, Hakeem Butler, Parris Campbell, or Jalen Hurd become dominant forces in the NFL based on their physical characteristics of size and/or speed?

Hakeem Butler's highlights are the most Randy Moss-like in the class. He's ludicrous when he's at his best.
Imo Mclaurin profiles as a poor-man's Kenny Stills. There's likely a role for him in the NFL, but I think he'll always be the guy who sees the 3rd or 4th most targets on a team.
 
Top Bottom