Well, if you want him that badly and truly believe there's a chance he doesn't make it to your #42 pick then you either trade up or hope he falls to you b/c there's no reason to overdraft him by 30+ spots and significantly ignoring BPA in the process. I know Stedman was highly productive and looked great in college but so did Davone Bess (293 catches, 3610 yards, 41 TDs) and Jarrett Dillard (292 catches, 4138 yards, 60 TD). Granted I'm not saying Bailey is no better a prospect than them. If we're talking about a Dez Bryant type then I'd understand, but a 5'9ish, 190 pound, 4.5'ish receiver?.... and being among a decent group of late 1st to 2nd round receivers available this year? I'd be quite upset if we took him at #12 and moderately upset if we traded up #42, regardless of being fond of him.
WADR I believe that might be based on the public's and your own specific perception of their pre-draft value b/c it was reported that if Seattle didn't take Irvin there were a handful of teams in line behind them who would've, as he possesses an elite skill set and showcased nearly identical physical intangibles to Von Miller. With Miller being drafted at #2, I didn't see Irving going 15th as any stretch. I know I was hyping Irvin up constantly as he was my greatest defensive draft crush.
Those teams were reportedly at the bottom of round 1 if I recall correctly, in like picks 28-32ish. The draft is usually relative "would've taken him" and "actually take him" are two different things. A lot of times it comes down to a handful of prospects when a team is on the clock so in all likelihood they would have considered him, but I don't know if they would have "really" taken him. He was still drafted earlier than he should have been in my opinion, but they figured he wouldn't be there when they picked in round two, so they bit the bullet and took him earlier. James Carpenter was definitely a reach though, I was a big fan of him and took him in the GM League draft, but even I can tell you that was a little too high for him.
http://thecfx.com/2013/01/16/cordarrelle-patterson-have-you-all-gone-mad/ A little different take on Patterson. It is one that I think has to be taken in context as well. There are some mitigating circumstances here, but the fact is, this is a supremely talented player that was no a dominant receiver by any stretch of the imagination. One thing I did that is a little different from the way CFX does it is that I looked at the games where Tennessee played winning teams. Patterson was more productive than Hunter in these games. Hunter is your classic tease player that feasts against poor competition but goes into a shell against top competition. Patterson's productivity score was 46 in these games. Not great, but better than Hunter's 26. What we have to remember is that this is a junior college transfer receiver that needed time to acclimate to the speed of the SEC. I do wonder what his productivity numbers would have been had he gone back for his senior season? Speaking of productivity numbers, the most productive wide receiver in this draft by a large margin is Stedman Bailey. His productivity score against winning teams was an off the charts 107. The top five productive receivers in this draft: 1. Stedman Bailey, West Virginia 107 2. Quinton Patton, Louisiana Tech 91 3. DeAndre Hopkins, Clemson 85 4. Keenan Allen, California 84 5. Marcus Wheaton, Oregon State 81
I don't agree with this at all. I feel like this year is a very horizontal-draft, talent wise It runs more wide at talent tiers, than in vertical tiers. There is not as much separating this years 2nd round receivers from it's 1st round receivers as you usually see. Ditto on defensive ends going in the 5-12 range versus the 13-35 range, imo. It's a draft with very little incentive to pick at 12, actually. It seems like the tiering is thus: The Five-Star Prospects are the top 5, maybe 6 players. The Four-Star Prospects Are the PLayers Up Into The Thirties... Many With Question Marks. This years #12 pick will not be vastly superior to the #42 pick, imo, compared to most years. Call me crazy.
Well, and you still want to get value relative to the spot though, because other teams will otherwise accrue MORE talent than you. this is like a game show where you go in that phone booth with money blowing around in it and get sixty seconds to stuff your pockets. Sure, you're happy when you come out because you feel like you got a lot of money... but then someone else gets more than you in the sixty seconds, and so they win and keep all the money and you go home with nothing. The draft is like that. Who cares that you got a couple good players if another team got a couple GREAT players. Only one team goes to the Superbowl, and it;s usually got more talent than the teams that are sitting home.
I call him Electric Cordarrelle. He'll probably be the first offensive skill position player off the board. That usually happens in the top 5, but we may just get lucky this year. He's essentially Randy Moss below the waist, Andre Johnson above. The vison and mentality...... even rarer. I'd rate him very closely to Julio Jones.... Hard to compare him, but I'd go with B.Marshall, A.Johnson. Those limbs are very Moss or AJ Green like though. My gut says the plan isnt to spend the mega bucks on a Wallace or Bowe, but to go with Jennings short term, resign Hartline, and be a serious player for WRs early. Patterson would in time be considered a slam dunk at #12.
Admittedly I watched less college football than I have in a long time this year because of my HS coaching job. But from what I did see Bailey and Hopkins are my two favorite WRs in the draft. I like Bailey from every angle. His height is the only real knock on the guy from what I've seen, but he's not a midget either and his ball skill make up for his lack of height. I was so impressed with how Hopkins just dominated a good LSU defense when they knew the ball was going to him. Boyd deserves some of the credit there too, but Hopkins was still impressive nonetheless.
I could compromise on 2a if enough of you knuckleheads want him there, but there are a few other receivers I'd rather have at 2a if they're still on the board.
To each their own. If we reach our round two pick, I can't imagine any player being available that could help this team on the field as much as Stedman Bailey would... unless some first round guy fell precipitously... and even then. I just think this kid is going to be, at worst, a productive NFL receiver, and at best a Pro Bowl guy at some point. There are top ten picks you wish you felt that confident about... you get a chance at him in the second you take it. And to me, the ONLY reason I don;t have him top ten is his size. That's it. If Stedman Bailey stood 6'3" and 210lbs h'd be a top 10 pick.
Quinton Patton is one of my favorites. He's not going to wow with his physical skills, but when you watch him, he just knows how to play this position.
The only WRs I'd consider taking over Bailey there would be Williams or Austin IF Jennings is the WR the Dolphins get in FA and those guys fall that far, which I doubt. If Jennings is the guy, a burner who can take the top off of a defense would fit really well.
That's just a wee bit of an exaggeration don't you think? It would be a full time job to correct grammar, and I'm sure even you and I make some grammatical errors from time to time. Well, maybe you don't, because you have one of your subordinates at the BBC proof read your posts for you. So, folks can carry on with using 'your' when they mean 'you're', etc, and I'll not say a word. It's misspelling the names of players that I feel compelled to correct from time to time, and if I didn't my cohort, Stitches, would. Now, come 'ere and give me a big hug you Limey cottager.
Honest question for the draft guys, has an "off the charts" physically gifted but very raw WR ever made it in the NFL?
Does Pierre Garcon count? Not exactly polished, coming from little ole Mount Union college where he feasted on defenses by running the 9 route all day. Also does Vincent Jackson count? Not exactly a technician coming out of Northern Colorado, playing against the likes of Adams State College and Cal Poly. I mean I realize that small school does not necessarily equal "raw" but those two certainly didn't have big school coaching or experience coming out, PROBABLY were deemed "raw" by several draftniks, scouts, GMs, etc. Roddy White (University of Alabama-Birmingham), Miles Austin (Monmouth), Victor Cruz (Massachussetts), Marques Colston (Hofstra), Cecil Shorts (Mount Union) and Andre Roberts (Citadel) all fit the bill as well.
I dunno, does he? I'm asking you guys. Let's not forget, I'm the guy who is dumb enough to take Bailey at 12.
I think a better question is has a physically gifted but unproductive wide receiver ever made it in the NFL? I'd have to do some research on that. So far, the lowest productivity grade I've seen on a receiver that has produced in the NFL is Julio Jones's 56 from his final year at Alabama. That was against top competition. His overall productivity grade for all games was 62, which is still the lowest of the first round receivers recently drafted. Cordarrelle has a productivity score of 46 against top competition and 35 against all competition. The Tennessee receiver that was actually a dominant receiver over the past two years was DaRick Rogers, who had a productivity score of 86 during his sophomore season. Basically, all this means is that if you take Patterson high, you take him based on what you think he will become in the NFL, not based on what he has done to this point.
I actually figured that up separately because I did want to see how he compared with a guy like Tavon Austin. I look at Cord, Tavon, and Percy just to give an overall comparison. Cordarrelle Patterson -- 44 productivity score overall, 56 against winning teams Tavon Austin -- 61 productivity score overall, 66 against winning teams Percy Harvin -- 38 productivity score overall, 43 against winning teams As a receiver: Cord Patterson -- 35 overall, 46 winning teams Tavon Austin -- 57 overall, 52 winning teams Percy Harvin -- 43 overall, 43 winning teams This interests me very much, because I've felt that Patterson's best comparison was Percy Harvin all along, and the numbers are very similar. All three players are very close in their rating, and Percy has gone on to become a productive receiver in the NFL when he has been able to stay on the field. We also know how much Jeff Ireland liked Percy Harvin in the 2009 draft, and I'm convinced Miami would have drafted him had he been available to them. I guess the ultimate question is whether you take a player who is more of a jack of all trades with the 12th pick or do you take a guy who is a proven wide receiver? In hindsight, would Percy Harvin had gone in the top half of the first round. With his injuries, probably not, but with his production, I think it is a no brainer. Then again, Miami did make the mistake of taking a jack of all trades in Ted Ginn Jr back in 2007 in the top 10.
I haven't watched every WR, but those two are my favorites in this draft over more heralded guys like Patterson, Keenan Allen or Justin Hunter. (Caveat: I haven't watched Terrence Williams yet, so I don't have an opinion on him).
I think the thing to remember is that size+speed functions as a safety net. Also it might be unfair comparing his production in 2012 to guys that had been with their teams working as wide receivers for YEARS prior to to the production scores you're quoting. A better study may be to look at first year JUCO transfer WRs of the past and compare what Cordarrelle Patterson did in 2012 to what they did, keeping in mind that Derek Dooley said he's never been around a new player that made that big an impact that quickly.
The only thing about that is that there have not been that many JUCO wide receivers who have gone on to play in the NFL. Two recent ones that come to mind are Quinton Patton and Rishard Matthews. Rishard had a 49 PS in his first season and improved it to 81 in his second. Quinton Patton has been productive ever since he set a foot on the LT campus.
Which is IMO all the more reason you've got to dig into the tape and evaluate the talent and not judge him based on historical examples which don't seem plentiful nor do they quite fit. The most important thing that we're not really going to know would come from interviews and chalkboard sessions. If you feel like he's going to "get it" with time then the talent (and I mean every facet of it, not just "size-speed" as many people use the word to mean) he lays down on the film says sky is the limit.
No it doesn't, if your goal is to have a top-tier WR. Because Pro Bowl receivers see very little action on punt and kick return. That's only useful for knowing his floor if he disappoints as a receiver (relative to being drafted high) and you still want contributions. the exception is his first year, but you draft for a career... not year one. Actually, scratch that, even year one I think we all agree Cordarrelle needs to focus on learning WR, not multiple roles. so the only scenario in while his return skills figure in is if he busts as a receiver.
I agree. If I'm drafting a guy based on his potential as my #1 WR, then I don't care much about his return ability. That only works as the 'floor'. Basically, if I'm not very confident that he will develop into my #1 guy then at least I have a Ginn. I tend to be more conservative in my assessments, meaning that I would have to be fairly confident in his odds of being that #1 WR eventually, confident enough that his 'floor' as a non-WR has little import for me. I don't have as much confidence in Patterson developing as many here. That's why I have him as a fall back option at best in the first. I would much rather take other WRs in the 2nd. Actually, my favorite scenario (although admittedly a long shot) would be to trade back to the late first or even early second and add another second. Then I'd draft Elam S, Bailey, WR and Carradine, DE with those first three picks. I'd probably add a TE and maybe RB and CB or OL with my other picks in the second and third. Throw in a FA WR and TE and that's a hell of an offseason.
Huge fan of Hopkins. Williams is quite the treat as well, especially if you can get over how un-physical he is after he catches the ball.
Again I strongly disagree with this. Football players are not video game avatars. They don't have attributes and skill sets that are neatly compartmentalized into different functions. The skills that make him a good return man and runner with the football in his hands, which are evidenced by his production at those spots, will absolutely have an impact on his ability to play wide receiver.
Plus, I feel that if you draft him this high, you don't take away the things he does very well just so he can concentrate on developing at one position.
That too. And let's not sit here and pretend he had no production at receiver. His production in the SEC matches Mike Wallace's production in his final year with Ole Miss almost exactly.
I believe that there are literally a dozen + WRs every draft that physically have the talent to be great NFL WRs. But that physical talent is not the biggest determinant in their success. IMO their personality and willingness to work at their craft are far bigger determinants assuming that they have at least a base level of #1 WR talent. In other words, you give me the choice between two WR prospects: one has off the charts physical talent, but more questionable drive and willingness to work while the other has lesser but still very good physical talent + great drive and willingness to work on their craft and I'll take the second one every time. But that personality and willingness to work is hard to evaluate without talking to them. And even then, most people are smart enough to at least tell you what want to hear. What I like to see is somebody who has obviously worked on their craft. I see that in Hopkins and Bailey. I see subtlety in their route running that only comes with work. I would say that Hopkins has more refinement than Bailey and has made greater strides over last year. But in Bailey, while also a good route runner I also see an uber tenacity and aggressiveness with the ball in the air which I also love. It's kind of a "refuse to fail" personality. I think when you see those traits in college players, that the odds are very high that they'll put in the work at the next level. If Williams has a lack of physicality after he catches the ball and presumably less physicality with the ball in the air, I may be less than enthusiastic about drafting him early. He'd probably have to have some other traits that really wow'd me assuming I arrived at the same assessment.
