Garrett Wilson or Treylon Burks

[derp]

55 minutes ago, Paradis said:

This is quickly going to become one of my least favorite comps.... Put on Evans A&M games next to London. They're similar only in cosmetics... Evans is/was athletically a whole tier above London...  London though already has a better sense of craft nuance in short areas, finding zones between DBs and the like - then Evans did when he declared.

Not trying to be a jerk, I LOVE Drake London.

If Evans was athletically a whole tier above London and London tests a while tier worse than Evans did there will - and should be - major questions about how London is going to translate to professional football.

[Ghost420]

2 hours ago, J_Smith said:

He’s Mike Evans 2.0, love Drake London

Could also be Nkeal Harry 2.0.

[Be_a_Jet]

B-U-R-K-S

[David Harris]

2 hours ago, LAD_Brooklyn said:

My preference would be Drake London. 

6'5, 210 lbs

I like Burks and I'm ok with Wilson. But Drake would add a bit of spice then what's available on the roster or FA. 

---------

8. NEW YORK JETS (VIA SEA): WR DRAKE LONDON, USC

Record: 5-8
Strength of Schedule: .515

Drake London still leads the FBS in contested catches with 19 — and he hasn’t played since Oct. 30 when he suffered a season-ending injury in the second quarter of USC’s game against Arizona.

 

The 6-foot-5, 215-pound London racked up 19 contested catches in just eight games. What might be even more impressive is that the towering wideout is also still tied for fifth in the FBS with 22 forced missed tackles after the catch, so he’s not just a big-bodied red-zone target.

The USC product recorded more than 100 yards receiving in six of his first seven games and was well on his way to another one before getting hurt. If he had stayed healthy, this would have been the runaway Biletnikoff Award winner. He could be the NFL antidote for Zach Wilson.

Is he all 50/50 balls? Those guys don’t tend to do well.  Mike Evans is 6’5” but runs a 4.3 past people in addition to bodying them up on contested catches.  I want to know if Drake can run past people?

[Paradis]

37 minutes ago, derp said:

If Evans was athletically a whole tier above London and London tests a while tier worse than Evans did there will - and should be - major questions about how London is going to translate to professional football.

Maybe, If you’re expecting them to be the same player. Evans was much more the field stretcher. London plays more like Kupp and wins using different techniques IMO. They’re not worlds apart but they’ll be deployed differently i think. London also doesn’t rely on manufactured yards by LOS touches and slants etc. like N Harry and company. he ran traditional routes and played strong at the catch point. @David Harris and @Ghost420 

[Paradis]

Drake London is a super sized… Wayne Chrebet. 

*Ducks to avoid tomatoes and heads of lettuce*

[HawaiisOnlyJetsFan]

1 minute ago, Paradis said:

Maybe, If you’re expecting them to be the same player. Evans was much more the field stretcher. London plays more like Kupp and wins using different techniques IMO. They’re not worlds apart but they’ll be deployed differently i think. London also doesn’t rely on manufactured yards by LOS touches and slants etc. like N Harry and company. he ran traditional routes and played strong at the catch point. 

Like this analysis. London more so reminds me of a slower less athletic Eric Decker. Possession guy and RedZone threat at the next level.

[Paradis]

5 minutes ago, HawaiisOnlyJetsFan said:

Like this analysis. London more so reminds me of a slower less athletic Eric Decker. Possession guy and RedZone threat at the next level.

If you look at the way Jordy Nelson was brought along, that might be more like London. 

[Patriot Killa]

7 minutes ago, Paradis said:

Drake London is a super sized… Wayne Chrebet. 

*Ducks to avoid tomatoes and heads of lettuce*

Oh my

[HawaiisOnlyJetsFan]

3 minutes ago, Paradis said:

If you look at the way Jordy Nelson was brought along, that might be more like London. 

Ah yes that's an even better comp. ? 

[Barton]

What if the top WR goes before pick #10......

[JustInFudge]

I'm on board with a WR early in the draft.  I've been tossing back and forth the 3 WR's mentioned in this thread; Wilson, Burks, London.  I think all 3 are next level players and present a little different aspect to the position.  

Wilson - dude a is a smooth, fast twitch, explosive player who you can get the ball to in 30 different ways, and he's got a chance to make a big play.  He's good after the catch, looks for extra yards but what you love about his game is he catches it all over the field.  At and behind the LOS, up the sideline, over the middle, slants, flares, outs - you see it all on display when plays.

Burks - honestly, other than size (which is important), I dont see much of a difference in their game.  The exact same description of Wilson could be applied to Burks.  Both can get the ball in all over the field and make a play out of it.  All the stuff you want to see is on display, route running, soft hands, suddenness, YAC, hard to bring down, etc.  

London - you cant deny his physical presence.  That basketball body is sexy.  He's a fierce competitor.  Love his fire and desire to win.  That said, the more I watch, the more I dont see the consistency at winning and separating, he just goes up and gets it but damn, he does it well.  He looks more like Jimmy Graham out there than Mike Evans (who I did make the comparison to at one point).  Not using a lot of imagination here but is he Michael Pittman or Patrick Turner.  I cant tell but he's an intriguing prospect, nonetheless.

I think for me it's down to Wilson vs. Burks baring some crazy bad testing I dont foresee, it's all about who fits what you want to do on offense better and I legit, cant answer that right now because I'm not 100% sure what is the ideal fit.

[BCJet]

I know its hard to do comps in this way, but watching Deebo in the SF offense is a thing of beauty and ive been looking at these WRs size and career rushing numbers and Burks has a ton more rushes over the other guys. He also has the size to be a factor with the ball in his hands and apparently has MASSIVE hands to go along with his frame so to me, he seems like the pick.

I dont want to pigeon hole Moore as a slot guy, because he isnt and we need one full season to see what he can truly do as a WR and as much as I like Berrios (esp on the jet sweeps) he is still going to be a role player for us.  So to me, putting Davis, Moore and someone like Burks out there with Carter and a legit TE could really create mismatches and allow Burks to be the jet sweep guy and really cause some havoc.

[JustInFudge]

9 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Burks, I see him as a more unique prospect.  (Not better just more unique) As stated in post #1 I think wilson is closer to moore.

I think Burks becomes Deebo Samuel in this offense.

This comparison, I dont see.  Like, I somewhat understand the comparison but as the resident Deebo Samuel fanboi around here, they're just slightly different in build and running/play style.  Deebo a little lower center, heavy on the bottom half and his stop and go is ridiculous, like a RB and kick return mixed together, which is why he was so deadly in the return game in college as well.  He just way more joystick-ish than Burks, IMO

That said, I'm biased, I started a thread about him being the "next big play threat in the NFL" the second he declared, I got some push back but as usual, well, we know how it played out. 

 

 

[maury77]

I think if you look at the WRs San Francisco has run out the last few years (Aiyuk, Deebo, Travis Benjamin, Bourne), Wilson seems to fit that model a lot more than Burks or London. 

[derp]

9 hours ago, Paradis said:

Maybe, If you’re expecting them to be the same player. Evans was much more the field stretcher. London plays more like Kupp and wins using different techniques IMO. They’re not worlds apart but they’ll be deployed differently i think. London also doesn’t rely on manufactured yards by LOS touches and slants etc. like N Harry and company. he ran traditional routes and played strong at the catch point. @David Harris and @Ghost420 

Not maybe if you expect them to be the same player. Evans, the field stretcher, was a 4.53 guy with a 37” vert and slow agility times. It’s all just on the right side of borderline for a jumbo wide receiver because they’re never going to move laterally like the smaller guys. If London tests a tier worse than that athletically, that basically puts him in an athletic graveyard tier for guys who are 6’5+ - not to mention Evans has like 20 pounds on him.

“Plays like Kupp” is vague but Kupp’s trump tool is quickness. London doesn’t win with quickness and isn’t going to bust out good shuttle times.

I think guys need *something* athletically to translate. You put London a tier below Evans and that means he’s got nothing.

[Ghost420]

I'll be surpsied if Burks isn't the #1 wr after the combine and workouts but we will see. 

[Sammybighead]

I’ve been going back and forth on this every other day. Good debate.

I think Burks has the higher ceiling but Wilson is built for this offense and ready to contribute on the outside day 1. Burks would have to be brought along until he can master the offense and route tree.

For that reason, I’d give the slight edge to Wilson today. Pro days, combine, etc can shift that easily though. But I like the idea of getting a guy that can make an immediate impact because Zach needs help now. And honestly, I think that’s what the coaching staff is thinking as well.

[Barton]

Wilson looks like a safe bet. Higher floor, maybe lower ceiling. 

[Paradis]

I say this both from intuition, and early scuttlebutt from Florham -- Really don't think the Jets are expected to go WR in Round 1. 

We may see a mid/late Day 2 pick spent on all purpose WR, but TE is likely to be picked ahead of WR. That cluster of McBride/Ruckert/Likely/Wydermyer is where your attention may be better put.

[Paradis]

7 hours ago, JiFapono said:

London - you cant deny his physical presence.  That basketball body is sexy.  He's a fierce competitor.  Love his fire and desire to win.  That said, the more I watch, the more I dont see the consistency at winning and separating, he just goes up and gets it but damn, he does it well.  He looks more like Jimmy Graham out there than Mike Evans (who I did make the comparison to at one point).  Not using a lot of imagination here but is he Michael Pittman or Patrick Turner.  I cant tell but he's an intriguing prospect, nonetheless.

I've said Jimmy Graham as well. If didn't have to then tackle the 40 lb. weight difference counter that would follow - i'd be dropping that comp-line everywhere. Their style of play is very similar. 

[Ghost420]

10 minutes ago, Paradis said:

I've said Jimmy Graham as well. If didn't have to then tackle the 40 lb. weight difference counter that would follow - i'd be dropping that comp-line everywhere. Their style of play is very similar. 

So he's a tight end not wr?

[nycdan]

45 minutes ago, Paradis said:

I say this both from intuition, and early scuttlebutt from Florham -- Really don't think the Jets are expected to go WR in Round 1. 

We may see a mid/late Day 2 pick spent on all purpose WR, but TE is likely to be picked ahead of WR. That cluster of McBride/Ruckert/Likely/Wydermyer is where your attention may be better put.

So much hinges on what we do leading up to the draft.

If we don't sign a FA WR, how can we not take one in round 1?  There's no TE worth a pick that high, and none of them would 'solve' our talent problem.  We can't go into next season with Davis, Moore and (if we even resign him) Berrios as our only WRs.

[Paradis]

17 minutes ago, nycdan said:

If we don't sign a FA WR, how can we not take one in round 1?  There's no TE worth a pick that high, and none of them would 'solve' our talent problem.  We can't go into next season with Davis, Moore and (if we even resign him) Berrios as our only WRs.

Because you and the board have an inflated sense of need at the position, in my opinion. With Moore, Davis and Berrios establishing themselves as your auto 3-WR personnel - it’s hardly the most pressing need on the roster. Like not even a conversation, compared to lack of talent on Defense. 

Now, I’m not saying that’s a good squad. If there was a Chase or other blue chip, ok. There isn’t tho. And taking any of these guys top 10 is reckless. Draft the talent, not the need. They’ll be no 1st round skill players for NY this year. I’d almost put money on it.

if JD took Burks over Linderbaum, I’d ask you to pass me a shovel. Get to diggin’

[derp]

2 hours ago, Paradis said:

I say this both from intuition, and early scuttlebutt from Florham -- Really don't think the Jets are expected to go WR in Round 1. 

We may see a mid/late Day 2 pick spent on all purpose WR, but TE is likely to be picked ahead of WR. That cluster of McBride/Ruckert/Likely/Wydermyer is where your attention may be better put.

We saw a team that ran a lot of 12 personnel early in the season despite having…less than optimal talent at the tight end position. But Davis-Crowder-Moore-Berrios at WR.

Some order of edge/other defender (or OL I guess) in R1 followed by a day two that includes McBride, defender/OL, and Ruckert might let them play the style they actually want to play. Obviously depends on FA and who they can land. But I don’t know if they actually want to be in three wide a bunch.

I do think the big issue is what is the role Davis plays over the next couple years because he disappointed.

The big boring issue, which I think is why we all want receivers, is they don’t have many guys who can beat man coverage. It’s pretty much Moore right now. And frankly that’s been an issue for a while.

[Paradis]

1 hour ago, derp said:

We saw a team that ran a lot of 12 personnel early in the season despite having…less than optimal talent at the tight end position. But Davis-Crowder-Moore-Berrios at WR.

Some order of edge/other defender (or OL I guess) in R1 followed by a day two that includes McBride, defender/OL, and Ruckert might let them play the style they actually want to play. Obviously depends on FA and who they can land. But I don’t know if they actually want to be in three wide a bunch.

I do think the big issue is what is the role Davis plays over the next couple years because he disappointed.

The big boring issue, which I think is why we all want receivers, is they don’t have many guys who can beat man coverage. It’s pretty much Moore right now. And frankly that’s been an issue for a while.

I agree with everything you said here. 

but we both know there’s no “blue chip” WR in this draft (from a scouting perspective) and there’s next to no prudence in spending one of our top 10 picks on one — because we’re tired of “nobody winning outside”… to the casual fan; No one’s saying we don’t need to improve and we don’t need a playmaker at WR… just saying it’s not going to come from those first 2 picks in 2022. 

[derp]

56 minutes ago, Paradis said:

I agree with everything you said here. 

but we both know there’s no “blue chip” WR in this draft (from a scouting perspective) and there’s next to no prudence in spending one of our top 10 picks on one — because we’re tired of “nobody winning outside”… to the casual fan; No one’s saying we don’t need to improve and we don’t need a playmaker at WR… just saying it’s not going to come from those first 2 picks in 2022. 

Yup, I think it’s tempting to solve the “team doesn’t have a guy who can beat man coverage” with a top ten pick…but it’s not a prudent use of resources for a bunch of different reasons. I’d rather see them crush 12 personnel while figuring out how to replace Davis. That’s my own bias at play a little - I think 12 packages are great - but also think it’s the best use of resources and they seem to like the personnel grouping so maybe everyone wins there.

[BurntDice]

29 minutes ago, derp said:

Yup, I think it’s tempting to solve the “team doesn’t have a guy who can beat man coverage” with a top ten pick…but it’s not a prudent use of resources for a bunch of different reasons. I’d rather see them crush 12 personnel while figuring out how to replace Davis. That’s my own bias at play a little - I think 12 packages are great - but also think it’s the best use of resources and they seem to like the personnel grouping so maybe everyone wins there.

I’ve been thinking that Davis may be an excellent slot receiver in the mold of Decker or Fitzgerald. Bigger guy who has decent/good speed, good at contested catches, and plays well over the middle. This might help with opening up the potential for guys to draft. You think he’s a good fit in the slot? I know it’s a lot of money for a #3 but it could make sense. 
 

Paur that with someone like Wilson/Ridley and Moore on the boundaries and it could work out pretty well. 

[sec101row23]

16 hours ago, Paradis said:

I say this both from intuition, and early scuttlebutt from Florham -- Really don't think the Jets are expected to go WR in Round 1. 

We may see a mid/late Day 2 pick spent on all purpose WR, but TE is likely to be picked ahead of WR. That cluster of McBride/Ruckert/Likely/Wydermyer is where your attention may be better put.

I think you are correct.  We are wasting a lot of energy dissecting these WRs when most likely they won’t be taken by the Jets, especially if there isn’t a trade down scenario.  I don’t see them being top 10 worthy and most likely not slipping into the second.   
 

 

[derp]

1 hour ago, sec101row23 said:

I think you are correct.  We are wasting a lot of energy dissecting these WRs when most likely they won’t be taken by the Jets, especially if there isn’t a trade down scenario.  I don’t see them being top 10 worthy and most likely not slipping into the second.   
 

 

It’ll be interesting, I guess the strategy should be come more clear once free agency is done. No RG in FA opens up OL 3 ways (long term tackle option which fits at guard, Linderbaum and McGovern to RG, or just draft a guard). Hamilton or Dean/Lloyd if those positions are lightly addressed.

Or an edge rusher double dip or a surprise at DT or corner.

I don’t think any of those fit as neatly as WR from a fan perspective but certainly agree it’s likely wasted energy on our part.

[DoomProphet]

On 1/14/2022 at 9:29 PM, docdhc said:

Both look explosive. Guess I’d rather have the big guy all things being equal. I would trust jets to know who fits the system better

IMO Wilson would fit the LaFleur system better but we already have that type of receiver in Moore. When is the last time the Jets had a legit red zone threat that could win the jump balls in the endzone and get you 12-15 TDs a year. Plus he's an athletic freak at 6' 4" and with sub 4.4 speed.

Wilson is a ready NFL receiver from day one, Burks is a little more of project but he has a higher ceiling than Wilson.

I'm sold on Burks after watching this video. We need this type of receiver for explosive plays and in the redzone. He has amazing atheticism and great speed for his size!

[derp]

14 hours ago, BurntDice said:

I’ve been thinking that Davis may be an excellent slot receiver in the mold of Decker or Fitzgerald. Bigger guy who has decent/good speed, good at contested catches, and plays well over the middle. This might help with opening up the potential for guys to draft. You think he’s a good fit in the slot? I know it’s a lot of money for a #3 but it could make sense. 
 

Paur that with someone like Wilson/Ridley and Moore on the boundaries and it could work out pretty well. 

I think those guys had better hands and were more consistent in contested situations.

I guess more importantly, I think viewing a slot as a #3 is a little old school. Don’t need to box the third target in the passing game into the slot - I’d rather see them find guys who can be more dynamic producers inside and just let him be a third target outside.

[Augustiniak]

2 hours ago, sec101row23 said:

I think you are correct.  We are wasting a lot of energy dissecting these WRs when most likely they won’t be taken by the Jets, especially if there isn’t a trade down scenario.  I don’t see them being top 10 worthy and most likely not slipping into the second.   
 

 

I really think we’re going D 2x in the first round with maybe a trade back from 10.  There will be enough day 2 picks and FA for them to address wr.

[IntoTheGreen]

3 hours ago, DoomProphet said:

IMO Wilson would fit the LaFleur system better but we already have that type of receiver in Moore. When is the last time the Jets had a legit red zone threat that could win the jump balls in the endzone and get you 12-15 TDs a year. Plus he's an athletic freak at 6' 4" and with sub 4.4 speed.

Wilson is a ready NFL receiver from day one, Burks is a little more of project but he has a higher ceiling than Wilson.

I'm sold on Burks after watching this video. We need this type of receiver for explosive plays and in the redzone. He has amazing atheticism and great speed for his size!

Watch some full game tape. It leaves more to be desired from a potential top 10 pick. Yes, the explosive plays are there. Yes he can be used in some dynamic ways. Yes, he has the size speed ratio. Theres a lot of boxes checked, but he's very raw (route running, getting off the LOS, body positioning, etc.) and gives very inconsistent effort and he doesnt seem to always play to his speed when he is lazy. 

I really want to like him more, but I don't want to force myself to fall in love. I'll watch a few more games (Alabama, Ole Miss).

[Doggin94it]

On 1/15/2022 at 3:07 PM, Paradis said:

I say this both from intuition, and early scuttlebutt from Florham -- Really don't think the Jets are expected to go WR in Round 1. 

We may see a mid/late Day 2 pick spent on all purpose WR, but TE is likely to be picked ahead of WR. That cluster of McBride/Ruckert/Likely/Wydermyer is where your attention may be better put.

That's what I like to hear. This WR group seems forced to me - by which I mean teams will be talking themselves into who's the best in the group but none of them would even have been in the conversation last year. We'd have been discussing them in the Toney/Bateman/Moore range. 

That's not a slight - all those guys looked good this year, obviously moore looks great - but these are bottom of round 1, early round two type guys we shouldn't be considering in the top 10.