Jump to content

Pro Day Updates


Lith
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, GangGreen Machine said:

I would be more worried about Christian Watsons usage than London's. Watson screams Stephen Hill to me. I hope I'm wrong. 

I can see your point for sure, for some reason I thought he had massive production to back up the athletic numbers but when I looked at his stats...yeah very Hillish.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like one common theme I'm noticing is that some players are hyped the heck up from an athleticism standpoint and have subsequently put up numbers that weren't matching the hype. Thinking of Ojabo, Burks, Hutchinson, Brandon Smith, Daxton Hill, etc.

Like Odafe Oweh and Micah Parsons were actually freak athletes last year and the above group were to me at least hyped up to be that but weren't.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Chrebetfan80 said:

it's a tough call, I'm very interested to see what he runs at a pro day (provided he's healthy enough to run by then).  I think there are some concerns about his actual speed and explosive numbers, but he does get open despite being a much bigger guy.  I think what makes him such an interesting prospect is his feel for coverage and body position when running routes despite his limitations with quickness, speed, and experience.  I think those are very very valuable traits to have considering he's what many consider a "green" prospect (one with very little experience). Projecting him further down the road is tantalizing because you see how good he is at the nuances already, once he gets more experience he could be a real problem for defenders in terms of out positioning them. 

I have to give him credit, @Paradis made a great comparison to Jimmy Graham and I think its a really unorthodox but true comp.  He's not going to blow guys away with speed or quickness but he'll know how to get open, shield defenders, and can sneak deep with the ability to set defenders up.  He did that in college and I think it can translate going forward. 

All that said, whenever you talk about lack of pure separation from a prospect there is inherent risk in their play at the next level. I just do not think its enough to warrant a massive slide down in draft position. 

 

By comparison lets discuss Burks.  Much of the hype around him coming into the predraft process by a lot of us was that while he is very raw as a prospect, he was going to display elite physical traits in speed and explosiveness.  I had heard people from his camp talking about the possibility of him running a 40 in the 4.2s.  He presented an extremely average athletic profile to along with an underdeveloped game.  His draft stock took a hit because of that since there wasnt as much that you could hang your hat on with him..  I still like burks, but I think it would be beneficial for him to play closer to 215, get his speed down a little bit, and then a lot of work on his route running.  He's a little more of a developmental prospects which we all kind of knew coming in, just now you cant just say he'll be an elite athlete at the position. 

That all makes sense and meshes with what I see when I watch those guys and how I think they project. 

I’ll follow with, think we’ve discussed the Jets’ issues separating from man coverage. I think that plus a lack of speed leads to congestion in the short to intermediate areas of the field which is where London prefers to work. Plus ideally Wilson offers big play ability with his arm and inclination to take shots. So even if he projects to the pros okay I worry about fit. Fair or am I missing something?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, derp said:

That all makes sense and meshes with what I see when I watch those guys and how I think they project. 

I’ll follow with, think we’ve discussed the Jets’ issues separating from man coverage. I think that plus a lack of speed leads to congestion in the short to intermediate areas of the field which is where London prefers to work. Plus ideally Wilson offers big play ability with his arm and inclination to take shots. So even if he projects to the pros okay I worry about fit. Fair or am I missing something?

No that all makes sense

What i would say is that london fills a need in the same way that a Jameson Williams would fill a need.  Both bring something to the table the jets dont have right now.  The jets were very high on cory davis ability to be a physical presence and big target for wilson in the middle of the field.  We saw that not pan out like they though and his contested catch situation was not good.  London is much better in those situations which helps that area of the offense quite a bit. 

Williams offers that take the top of separation speed that the jets have been lacking.  And to a lesser extent Wilson in a similar mold where he can do a lot of the things that moore does as well.    All three can serve a distinct purpose in the jets offense.  

If you get a london or a williams you are playing them more outside than inside and have to have comfort in that.  It's been established that Cory Davis may be better in the slot, in a role similar to Enunwa when he was here.  Now the difference between inside and outside wrs in an offense like this is kind of moot considering the use of motion and tight formations. Wr's need to be able to do everything.  But allowing davis to motion from outside to inside and stack behind a London and then work inside of Londons outside releases.  Or vice versa allowing williams to motion under davis then free release off davis to work outside just does a tremendous amount for the offense as a whole. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

Funny how every one is worried about WR usage and projection and are all happy to jump on the Travon Walker bandwagon at #4 overall.

The top five rookies in sacks last year had one combined season of over ten sacks in college. Parsons went from 6.5 in two college years to double digits as a pro. Oweh had zero his last year in college and was top five in sacks. Tools matter for pass rushers.

For wide receivers, there’s actually a strong correlation between percentage of a team’s passing game and pro production. Moreover, I was trying to see if there’s a reason London didn’t run past guys in college. Guys who are fast usually run past someone once or twice even by accident, and London had plenty of opportunities.

Effectively, I’m wondering if there’s a reason for London’s lack of big play production, kind of like Walker’s lack of pass rush snaps, Georgia’s heavy rotations, and Walker’s usage at DT (which is usually good for pass rusher projection, forces guys to learn gold hand usage) partially explain his sack numbers. And even he fell into a few, London still didn’t run past guys.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

Funny how every one is worried about WR usage and projection and are all happy to jump on the Travon Walker bandwagon at #4 overall.

Athletic ability for edge has way higher correlation to pro success than college production in raw counting numbers like sacks or TFLs. Ideally you want both, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree on this take especially with how Georgia deploys their DL rotation.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jets Voice of Reason said:

Athletic ability for edge has way higher correlation to pro success than college production in raw counting numbers like sacks or TFLs. Ideally you want both, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree on this take especially with how Georgia deploys their DL rotation.

These are excuses I see to justify ignoring factors such as production.  People are not ignoring lack of production in this thread for Wr 'because that's how the team used him'

There is also plenty of cases of A grade athletic numbers failing at pass rusher.

I do not hate Walker but his rise so fast and so far after the combine is an alarm bell to me.

We need a guy that is going to get to the QB as his prime skill.  We have tons of guys that get 8 sacks and play okay run defense.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Beerfish said:

These are excuses I see to justify ignoring factors such as production.  People are not ignoring lack of production in this thread for Wr 'because that's how the team used him'

There is also plenty of cases of A grade athletic numbers failing at pass rusher.

I do not hate Walker but his rise so fast and so far after the combine is an alarm bell to me.

We need a guy that is going to get to the QB as his prime skill.  We have tons of guys that get 8 sacks and play okay run defense.

What you're describing in bold is known and factored into what I described above and doesn't hold up as an argument with the overall data set. Being an athletic freak doesn't guarantee success, but it's a basic requirement and they tend to bust at a lower rate when hitting certain athletic benchmarks (low 3-cone and shuttle, high vert and broad jump numbers) and bust at a significantly high rate if they test poorly on those numbers. That being said, Travon Walker can bust because not all high caliber athletes end up working out to your point, but he's one of the few guys in this class from what I'm charting that is on the higher end of athleticism. David Ojabo has an average athletic profile and can be considered high risk even though he's hyped up as a freak athlete.

My other point from me looking at some of the college vs pro production on 2014 and 2015 draft classes is that college production in terms of sacks and TFLs don't always align with NFL production. I looked at sacks/college games and TFLs/games there's not some standout truth when it comes to that unfortunately for edge, probably due to the different levels of competition.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Jets Voice of Reason said:

What you're describing in bold is known and factored into what I described above and doesn't hold up as an argument with the overall data set. Being an athletic freak doesn't guarantee success, but it's a basic requirement and they tend to bust at a lower rate when hitting certain athletic benchmarks (low 3-cone and shuttle, high vert and broad jump numbers) and bust at a significantly high rate if they test poorly on those numbers. That being said, Travon Walker can bust because not all high caliber athletes end up working out to your point, but he's one of the few guys in this class from what I'm charting that is on the higher end of athleticism. David Ojabo has an average athletic profile and can be considered high risk even though he's hyped up as a freak athlete.

My other point from me looking at some of the college vs pro production on 2014 and 2015 draft classes is that college production in terms of sacks and TFLs don't always align with NFL production. I looked at sacks/college games and TFLs/games there's not some standout truth when it comes to that unfortunately for edge, probably due to the different levels of competition.

I do not think Travon Walker will bust at all.  I think he may be a good player in the league, as in Quinnen Williams is a good player but not a game changer.  I do not see a 12-15 sack guy and that is what the jets need, if not that we need to get a difference maker in another position group.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Funny how every one is worried about WR usage and projection and are all happy to jump on the Travon Walker bandwagon at #4 overall.

Agree. I don't really get it He seems risky me at #29 no less #4

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally got my hands on some All-22, and have plenty of time recovering from surgery next week.  I really wanted to break down Burks, but now I'm going between Burks/Pierce.

From Youtube tapes, I'm really surprised by Burks lack of burst.  I thought he was much more explosive on film than pretty much any of his numbers.  I thought maybe he would re-do the 40 at his pro-day but he stood by it, even if disappointing, which makes me think that's the higher end of the spectrum that he expected.  

The lack of physical capabilities worry me because in college, you can scheme players open with ease, especially if you have a mobile QB (which he did).   I don't know, if we draft him, I'll probably do a deeper dive I guess so I can talk myself into it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Beerfish said:

These are excuses I see to justify ignoring factors such as production.  People are not ignoring lack of production in this thread for Wr 'because that's how the team used him'

There is also plenty of cases of A grade athletic numbers failing at pass rusher.

I do not hate Walker but his rise so fast and so far after the combine is an alarm bell to me.

We need a guy that is going to get to the QB as his prime skill.  We have tons of guys that get 8 sacks and play okay run defense.

What would you say if the vast majority of college balls thrown are quick reads. Hard to sack a guy when the ball is out in 1-2 seconds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GangGreen Machine said:

What would you say if the vast majority of college balls thrown are quick reads. Hard to sack a guy when the ball is out in 1-2 seconds. 

I'd says that Aidan Hutchinosn and Jermaine johnson should be #1 and #2 in the draft 100% for sure in that case, along with the many many others that got more 6 sacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Beerfish said:

I'd says that Aidan Hutchinosn and Jermaine johnson should be #1 and #2 in the draft 100% for sure in that case, along with the many many others that got more 6 sacks.

I hate to bring it up by how the heck did the Jets swing and miss on Vernon Gholston? Fantastic numbers coming out. Looked like Tarzan, played like Jane. I was a little bit removed from football during those years. 

I never bothered to look back to see why he didn’t succeed technique wise. I do remember he seemed to be playing out of position the first year or two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/9/2022 at 9:58 AM, Lith said:

 

Here's the thing (reflected in the reactions from people in this thead)

Burks testing mediocre isn't shocking. He was never a top 10, maybe even round 1 WR.... The proverbial "you guys" put him up there. There's not a WR i would spend a top 10, maybe even top 25 pick on... if i did, it would be because the alternatives are "blagh"

Burks is the same guy he was last fall, draft-media/fans are coming down from the high, is all. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we traded back and took London/Wilson later in the first, I would be happy/fine it. If I was GM, I would feel better with Pickens/Tolbert/Drummond later from a value standpoint. (before you say anything, i'm late to the Watson party, haven't dug in).... That said, it's hard to poke holes in the case for London somewhere in the first. He's such a dominant chain mover, natural playmaker who uses his frame, and knows how maneuver in traffic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Paradis said:

If we traded back and took London/Wilson later in the first, I would be happy/fine it. If I was GM, I would feel better with Pickens/Tolbert/Drummond later from a value standpoint. (before you say anything, i'm late to the Watson party, haven't dug in).... That said, it's hard to poke holes in the case for London somewhere in the first. He's such a dominant chain mover, natural playmaker who uses his frame, and knows how maneuver in traffic. 

I’m coming around to your take on the WR class talent level but still think London is a square peg in a round hole. I’m also just tired of the Jets playing offense in a shoebox and that’s a bias I probably can’t overcome.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, derp said:

I’m coming around to your take on the WR class talent level but still think London is a square peg in a round hole. I’m also just tired of the Jets playing offense in a shoebox and that’s a bias I probably can’t overcome.

So do you just feel he's overvalued, or thinking he'll have issues at the NFL level? Hard to imagine him flat out busting. He looks like nothing like those other big guys who couldn't separate. Put on N'Keal Harry's film and London's side by side. Harry's issues seemed obvious from the get go. Relied on being schemed open/LOS stuff all day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Paradis said:

So do you just feel he's overvalued, or thinking he'll have issues at the NFL level? Hard to imagine him flat out busting. He looks like nothing like those other big guys who couldn't separate. Put on N'Keal Harry's film and London's side by side. Harry's issues seemed obvious from the get go. Relied on being schemed open/LOS stuff all day. 

Just fit. Not that the Jets need Jameson Williams or Robby Anderson, but I think your beef with the London-Mike Evans comparison is why I question the London fit. He operates in the area of the field that’s already congested due to the team’s personnel and I don’t think that’s a good fit for him or the team. Think they need someone who can at least threaten teams downfield - even if he’s a 4.55 guy - and pretty sure the next college defender I see London run past will be the first.

Jets don’t have guys who can beat man coverage besides Moore. Defenses can run press man, move defenders up into the box, pressure, whatever and there’s really no threat of getting beaten by a big play. Then the only area of the field the Jets can really play, because of the personnel short to intermediate, is more congested because defenses can flood defenders there without concern.

Add on that the Jets didn’t play with a fullback or multiple tight ends as often last year because of personnel, and if they do that more which I think is on the table they’re possibly going to get slower in 12, 21, and even 22 or 13 groupings. 

Plus best case for Zach Wilson is that he’s able to attack defenses downfield for bud plays, and we just haven’t seen London really operate in that area.

I do think London compliments Moore okay and he’d be more functional if their other receiver was say DJ Chark instead of Davis, but I don’t think he meaningfully changes the way defenses can attack the Jets even if he adds a big body and is an upgrade on Crowder.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, derp said:

Just fit. Not that the Jets need Jameson Williams or Robby Anderson, but I think your beef with the London-Mike Evans comparison is why I question the London fit. He operates in the area of the field that’s already congested due to the team’s personnel and I don’t think that’s a good fit for him or the team.

That's a fair conversation to have. The narrative i've had since last november is -- Holy sh*t does this team need a boundary/jump ball guy... Like, for real. It so obviously hampered our playcalling, ability to score and made everything easy on the other team's DC. 

Mike Williams and DJ Chark were my two desired FAs... one is not longer an option. The best outside guy the draft, IMO is Jalen Tolbert (all things considered).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/11/2022 at 8:36 AM, section314 said:

Great interview with Jerry Rice two days ago. Said speed, as in straight line that they test in the 40, is way overrated. Basically said guys can train for it and is probably the least important thing that scouts look at. He clearly delineated between “ track” speed and football speed. Said route running, ability to get open and catch the ball and YAC are what scouts look for. Friendly wager that Burks is 1st WR off the board.

Garret Wilson has football speed, track speed, and body control.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paradis said:

Here's the thing (reflected in the reactions from people in this thead)

Burks testing mediocre isn't shocking. He was never a top 10, maybe even round 1 WR.... The proverbial "you guys" put him up there. I've said since last fall, there's not a WR i would spend a top 10, maybe even top 25 pick on... if i did, it would be because the alternatives are "blagh"

Burks is the same guy he was last fall, draft-media/fans are coming down from the high, is all. 

The problem is this draft is weak at the top. We can say there are no WRs worthy of top 10 but in my mind other position groups are in the same boat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

The problem is this draft is weak at the top. We can say there are no WRs worthy of top 10 but in my mind other position groups are in the same boat.

You're not wrong, but there's a few top shelf defenders and trenchmen on offense, who will (I assume) be graded significantly higher to make this debate moot. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Paradis said:

That's a fair conversation to have. The narrative i've had since last november is -- Holy sh*t does this team need a boundary/jump ball guy... Like, for real. It so obviously hampered our playcalling, ability to score and made everything easy on the other team's DC. 

Mike Williams and DJ Chark were my two desired FAs... one is not longer an option. The best outside guy the draft, IMO is Jalen Tolbert (all things considered).  

Jump ball guy would definitely help, but man that skill set has become less prevalent in the pros and tends to be more of a second banana role to a technician who can get open and attack multiple levels. I think illegal contact rule enforcement has just made it so much easier for smaller guys to get open and create after the catch without guys hanging all over them, and with that not being as valuable a skill any more the package just doesn’t produce like it used to. That and good tight ends, while not boundary guys, can really really produce.

Mike Williams would’ve been absolutely perfect as a big boundary guy who can stretch the field as Moore attacks all three levels of the field and add size in the red zone - and even he’s come on late as a big play guy across from a technician in Allen. I guess in some weird way London and Moore could combine to add what Allen and Williams do but I ultimately think Moore is a big play guy you throw the ball too if he’s open or he gets YAC and a little go up and get it downfield ability would be important.

I think Davis’ presence hurts. He’s fine but functionally when you’re looking to complement the group he just clogs things up since he really can’t beat man coverage.

I still like Burks the most because I think he can get downfield and is also dangerous after the catch but he’s raw enough I think you need to be committed to running 2 wide as a base and have him developing behind Davis until he beats him out and effectively playing a Berrios type role or committed to three wide and have a Chark in place ahead of him. And I could absolutely get behind Tolbert in the same capacity or even Pickens, but I don’t think you can be confident you’re getting a day one impact from any of those guys. Of course if they beat out Davis then all good, but I wouldn’t be confident in early production.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, derp said:

Jump ball guy would definitely help, but man that skill set has become less prevalent in the pros and tends to be more of a second banana role to a technician who can get open and attack multiple levels. I think illegal contact rule enforcement has just made it so much easier for smaller guys to get open and create after the catch without guys hanging all over them, and with that not being as valuable a skill any more the package just doesn’t produce like it used to. That and good tight ends, while not boundary guys, can really really produce.

Mike Williams would’ve been absolutely perfect as a big boundary guy who can stretch the field as Moore attacks all three levels of the field and add size in the red zone - and even he’s come on late as a big play guy across from a technician in Allen. I guess in some weird way London and Moore could combine to add what Allen and Williams do but I ultimately think Moore is a big play guy you throw the ball too if he’s open or he gets YAC and a little go up and get it downfield ability would be important.

I think Davis’ presence hurts. He’s fine but functionally when you’re looking to complement the group he just clogs things up since he really can’t beat man coverage.

I still like Burks the most because I think he can get downfield and is also dangerous after the catch but he’s raw enough I think you need to be committed to running 2 wide as a base and have him developing behind Davis until he beats him out and effectively playing a Berrios type role or committed to three wide and have a Chark in place ahead of him. And I could absolutely get behind Tolbert in the same capacity or even Pickens, but I don’t think you can be confident you’re getting a day one impact from any of those guys. Of course if they beat out Davis then all good, but I wouldn’t be confident in early production.

https://voca.ro/15hgb4Y0ADRB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/11/2022 at 10:41 AM, Lith said:

This is why I would want Garrett Wilson at 10.  Great route runner who would fit well in our offense.  I think he is exaclty what we need.  Edge at 4.  Wilson at 10.  And I am a happy man on draft night (which rarely happens).  

I’ve pretty much fallen here too. Edge at 4 and Wilson/Sauce/Hamilton at 10 if no trade back. Wilson is definitely my #1 and i really want to have London as #2, but I’m just worried about nfl separation 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paradis said:

It’s not that I think the skill doesn’t matter, I just don’t think we see the tall #1 outside receiver in the NFL nearly as often as we used to. It’s valuable as a part of a wide receiver’s skill set - Adams, Hopkins - but as part of a package with a guy who can attack multiple levels of the field, more than say a Brandon Marshall who really hit more short to intermediate.

In terms of big (6’3+) WR’s who produced last year it’s guys who can hit you down the field and generally play with a smaller guy who gets more targets and/or produces more yards.

I do like Tolbert, part of that is also his YAC ability. Don’t love that he’s old but he’s produced for a while. The waiting on him playing is less him and more the Jets. If I’m the Packers I’ll roll him out with Rodgers but for the Jets there’s not really anyone in this class I’m super excited about rolling out day one with Wilson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, derp said:

It’s not that I think the skill doesn’t matter, I just don’t think we see the tall #1 outside receiver in the NFL nearly as often as we used to. It’s valuable as a part of a wide receiver’s skill set - Adams, Hopkins - but as part of a package with a guy who can attack multiple levels of the field, more than say a Brandon Marshall who really hit more short to intermediate.

In terms of big (6’3+) WR’s who produced last year it’s guys who can hit you down the field and generally play with a smaller guy who gets more targets and/or produces more yards.

I do like Tolbert, part of that is also his YAC ability. Don’t love that he’s old but he’s produced for a while. The waiting on him playing is less him and more the Jets. If I’m the Packers I’ll roll him out with Rodgers but for the Jets there’s not really anyone in this class I’m super excited about rolling out day one with Wilson.

Don't disagree, but sounds like now we're just talking about the best "universal" model WR1. Players can be dominant in different ways, but versatility is certainly a theme. Eitherway, i'm more focused on making sure we have someone who can at least excel at those things the outside guys do... the closer we got to the end zone, the more we had to rely on misdirection and slants/digs/outs... DC's gonna have your lunch in that case. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Paradis said:

Don't disagree, but sounds like now we're just talking about the best "universal" model WR1. Players can be dominant in different ways, but versatility is certainly a theme. Eitherway, i'm more focused on making sure we have someone who can at least excel at those things the outside guys do... the closer we got to the end zone, the more we had to rely on misdirection and slants/digs/outs... DC's gonna have your lunch in that case. 

 

I guess less universal WR1 and more, is there a productive big outside receiver who doesn’t make plays downfield? Specifically as it relates to London. If they’re drafting someone early he needs to produce.

You’re not going to be elite without making contested plays of course but I t  the you also need to be able to separate on the ground and play at multiple levels to justify early draft capital. And this offense also again really needs a guy who can separate against man coverage.

Kind of like the run game, it’s gone the way of post offense and the mid range jumper in basketball. Defensive backs are athletic that contested jump balls in short to intermediate areas aren’t that efficient, at least not versus throwing to an open guy or making that same throw down the field.

Even your Graham comparison - there’s a little TE in there with London. Now it’s possible he’s way faster than he showed and there’s something to unpack there but I think offering…something…downfield is key for an outside guy - and also for the Jets’ needs - and I haven’t seen that from London. The size is important too but I think they’re both necessary (and I’d lean being a multi level guy over the size - you’d go the other way I’m sure and that’s completely reasonable, but I think you want both in the same package - especially if you’re spending round 1 capital).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/12/2022 at 10:17 PM, derp said:

I guess less universal WR1 and more, is there a productive big outside receiver who doesn’t make plays downfield? Specifically as it relates to London. If they’re drafting someone early he needs to produce.

You’re not going to be elite without making contested plays of course but I t  the you also need to be able to separate on the ground and play at multiple levels to justify early draft capital. And this offense also again really needs a guy who can separate against man coverage.

Kind of like the run game, it’s gone the way of post offense and the mid range jumper in basketball. Defensive backs are athletic that contested jump balls in short to intermediate areas aren’t that efficient, at least not versus throwing to an open guy or making that same throw down the field.

Even your Graham comparison - there’s a little TE in there with London. Now it’s possible he’s way faster than he showed and there’s something to unpack there but I think offering…something…downfield is key for an outside guy - and also for the Jets’ needs - and I haven’t seen that from London. The size is important too but I think they’re both necessary (and I’d lean being a multi level guy over the size - you’d go the other way I’m sure and that’s completely reasonable, but I think you want both in the same package - especially if you’re spending round 1 capital).

Ill jump into this convo with my own two cents on why I like London as a fit as well as why I think WAtson and Williams also work even though you can argue all three have different strengths and weaknesses to their games. 

I understand where you are coming from with a guy like London possibly clogging up the areas of the field already occupied by Davis, but I think what drafting a guy like London, or even Watson for that matter, do for your offense is allow Davis to work off of motion a little more.  This will greatly help with him in man coverage, and get him some more favorable matchups.  A lot of times you would think in the offense you want moore or berrios to work off of motion because of their size against press corners.  While that isnt false, Moore especially is more than capable of creating for himself, and has a much better series of releases than Davis.  London while maybe slower and a little more plodding of a WR possibly is really good against man coverage because of how he uses his body position and sets defenders up.  He doesnt try to be something he is not.  It's not like we put him on an island and say ok create separation, blow past this defender.  No that would be Watson, or Williams job (also allows Davis to work off of motion and work off the speed of both those players).   London can be your contested catch Deep guy, can be your boundary WR, and can kick into the slot and work that intermediate to deep middle because of how he uses his size and body positioning.  

The point of it is, all of these guys allow you to move Davis around a little and make him a more effective WR because he does not have to be on the line and beating press.  Williams, Watson, London can all to some extent or another beat press, and stress a defense in different ways.  London with savvy and size, Watson with size and speed, Williams with dynamic speed and burst. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Chrebetfan80 said:

Ill jump into this convo with my own two cents on why I like London as a fit as well as why I think WAtson and Williams also work even though you can argue all three have different strengths and weaknesses to their games. 

I understand where you are coming from with a guy like London possibly clogging up the areas of the field already occupied by Davis, but I think what drafting a guy like London, or even Watson for that matter, do for your offense is allow Davis to work off of motion a little more.  This will greatly help with him in man coverage, and get him some more favorable matchups.  A lot of times you would think in the offense you want moore or berrios to work off of motion because of their size against press corners.  While that isnt false, Moore especially is more than capable of creating for himself, and has a much better series of releases than Davis.  London while maybe slower and a little more plodding of a WR possibly is really good against man coverage because of how he uses his body position and sets defenders up.  He doesnt try to be something he is not.  It's not like we put him on an island and say ok create separation, blow past this defender.  No that would be Watson, or Williams job (also allows Davis to work off of motion and work off the speed of both those players).   London can be your contested catch Deep guy, can be your boundary WR, and can kick into the slot and work that intermediate to deep middle because of how he uses his size and body positioning.  

The point of it is, all of these guys allow you to move Davis around a little and make him a more effective WR because he does not have to be on the line and beating press.  Williams, Watson, London can all to some extent or another beat press, and stress a defense in different ways.  London with savvy and size, Watson with size and speed, Williams with dynamic speed and burst. 


That all makes sense, appreciate your take. I will throw out there that it’s partially the areas of the field Davis produces but also partially that I don’t think any of the three really meaningfully creates vertical spacing on the field. But the ability to beat man, even with questionable separation, is important. I’m still a little leery of the WR type but I don’t love smaller guys either so this class really doesn’t offer a lot.

I was going to briefly throw out there that the two things I’d be optimistic about were the Jets to take London are the different training for football that I’ve thrown out there a few times, and also his ability on back shoulder throws. I feel like Wilson did a lot of back shoulder stuff when I watched him last year and I could see the goal of bringing in London to add that threat to the roster.

Obviously that doesn’t do a lot for spreading the field vertically, but I don’t think I did a good job considering the horizontal spacing component that can improve in that regard - and how important that is for getting other guys in the offense open and YAC opportunities. Especially if you aren’t flooding the field with receivers. I can certainly see how pulling a defender or two towards the sideline gives Moore room to operate, etc - or pull guys to London’s side and then let a tight end leak out the other way.

Douglas is also clearly taking a slow approach to this build, and as he makes moves that I think are redundant for that given year he follows them with a different roster build the following year that makes more sense, and so I have to give him a little of the benefit of the doubt there.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nokobe Dean not running today, just doing on field drills.  He is expected to run in april.  Not sure of the reason for the delays.  Whatever his time will be, he plays fast.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of clogging the field...

Moore ran a 4.35.  Assuming he's not locked into the slot, wouldn't he be an option to stretch the field?  It seems backwards to have the bigger guys in close and the smaller guy outside, but...Tyreek Hill....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...