Zyphros

Dynasty: Michael Gallup Puns Galore

299 posts in this topic

1 minute ago, FF Ninja said:

I had him over Miller before the draft. I like Hurns but I'd rather have a rookie competing with him than competing with Allen Robinson. 

Sure, Miller was drafted a round earlier than Gallup. Normally that would make me think twice, but it was Chicago. The team that needlessly traded up one spot to draft Trubisky. 

If you liked Gallup more before the draft, I get it. But if you liked Miller more before the draft - and I think most did - landing spot shouldn't move the needle. Dallas looks like a good landing spot right now, but it's going to change drastically by this time next year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

4 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

If you liked Gallup more before the draft, I get it. But if you liked Miller more before the draft - and I think most did - landing spot shouldn't move the needle. Dallas looks like a good landing spot right now, but it's going to change drastically by this time next year. 

You simply don't know that for sure. And even if it is, it could easily be argued that it would change in Gallup's favor.

It's like politics. The future, hypothetical candidate always does well in polling versus the actual incumbent. That changes when those polled find out who the actual challenger is.

Edited by Andy Dufresne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Concept Coop said:

If you liked Gallup more before the draft, I get it. But if you liked Miller more before the draft - and I think most did - landing spot shouldn't move the needle. Dallas looks like a good landing spot right now, but it's going to change drastically by this time next year. 

Why are you so certain they will be bringing someone in next year? What if Gallup shines as a rookie? What if Hurns plays up to his 2015 level?

I'm just asking for the sake of discussion. Gallup was a top 5 WR for me before the draft, but with the hype surrounding him now and my picks, I really don't think I'm going to have him in any leagues. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FF Ninja said:

Why are you so certain they will be bringing someone in next year? What if Gallup shines as a rookie? What if Hurns plays up to his 2015 level?

I'm just asking for the sake of discussion. Gallup was a top 5 WR for me before the draft, but with the hype surrounding him now and my picks, I really don't think I'm going to have him in any leagues. 

If Hurns and Gallup look like an above average WR1/2 combo, then sure - they might stick with what they have. But what are the odds of that happening? Gallup was the 8th WR drafted and a 3rd round pick, and Hurns got 2.5M Guaranteed. 

They're going to upgrade because they currently have one of the very worst WR groups in the league. They'll have cap space and one more year to decide if Dak is worth 20M+ a year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

If Hurns and Gallup look like an above average WR1/2 combo, then sure - they might stick with what they have. But what are the odds of that happening? Gallup was the 8th WR drafted and a 3rd round pick, and Hurns got 2.5M Guaranteed. 

They're going to upgrade because they currently have one of the very worst WR groups in the league. They'll have cap space and one more year to decide if Dak is worth 20M+ a year.  

Logic checks out, but you just seem so certain. I'm not going to reach for Gallup, but I understand why other people will. He's going to get a year to prove the Cowboys don't need to bring in competition for him (assuming he can beat out Terrance Williams in training camp). That's more than Sutton is going to get. Ridley and Miller will likely be in AR15 & Julio's shadows throughout all or most of their rookie contracts. There's value in getting a shot to prove yourself in year 1. Especially in fantasy terms if you have a current hole in your starting lineup. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

14 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

Logic checks out, but you just seem so certain. I'm not going to reach for Gallup, but I understand why other people will. He's going to get a year to prove the Cowboys don't need to bring in competition for him (assuming he can beat out Terrance Williams in training camp). That's more than Sutton is going to get. Ridley and Miller will likely be in AR15 & Julio's shadows throughout all or most of their rookie contracts. There's value in getting a shot to prove yourself in year 1. Especially in fantasy terms if you have a current hole in your starting lineup. 

WRs are very rarely plug and play, even with the benefit of playing time. I'm not certain Gallup can't cement himself as an NFL WR2 in year one, but I'm certain that the odds of it happening aren't great. I think his situation is a plus, especially if you're open to flipping him. But it's only a short term boon, and the odds of him being startable next season are extremely slim, even despite it. 

Edit: WR2 in ATL >>> WR2 in Dallas. 

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

WRs are very rarely plug and play, even with the benefit of playing time. I'm not certain Gallup can't cement himself as an NFL WR2 in year one, but I'm certain that the odds of it happening aren't great. I think his situation is a plus, especially if you're open to flipping him. But it's only a short term boon, and the odds of him being startable next season are slim extremely even despite it. 

All he has to do is show enough in year 1 that the Cowboys believe he can be their starter in year 2. He doesn't actually have to go nuts. The odds of him being fantasy relevant in year 2 are higher, IMO, than most of the other rookies. Maybe Dallas will bring in a true WR1 next year, but definitely Ridley and Miller will be playing opposite of their team's true WR1 in 2019. At least with Gallup there's hope. 

But again, I think the odds I end up with him on one of my teams is about 10% so I'm not sure why I'm arguing with you. :P

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Is anyone taking into consideration Miller being 24 in Oct and Gallup just having turned 22? I really don't know how to weigh that, along with situation, perceived ceiling, competition for targets, etc. 

And then I find myself wondering, should we be talking about Tre'quan Smith in the same area of rookie drafts, given the fit with Brees and playing across from MT? And also being a 3rd round pick like Gallup?

Edited by ConnSKINS26
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

34 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Is anyone taking into consideration Miller beung 24 in Oct and Gallup just having turned 22? I really don't know how to weigh that, along with situation, perceived ceiling, competition for targets, etc. 

And then I find myself wondering, should we be talking about Tre'quan Smith in the same area of rookie drafts, given the fit with Brees and playing across from MT? 

I take it into consideration, sure. But I try to remind myself that most of these WRs are going to bust. I'm trying to find one of the few who will actually amount to something. A couple years doesn't amount to much, in that context. Those 2 years only matter if both guys hit, so give me the guy more likely to hit. That's my thought process anyway. 

I need to dig into Smith a bit more, but would argue his situation is at least as good as Gallup's. 

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

28 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

I take into consideration, sure. But I try to remind myself that most of these WRs are going to bust. I'm trying to find one of the few who will actually amount to something. A couple years doesn't amount to much, in that context. Those 2 years only matter if both guys hit, so give me the guy more likely to hit. That's my though process anyway. 

I need to dig into Smith a bit more, but would argue his situation is at least as good as Gallup's. 

 

That's logical, and if you see a big talent gap then I agree the age shouldn't be a defining factor. More of a tie-breaker.

That's exactly what I was thinking about Smith in NO. If we're saying that the great situation is what is (for some) elevating Gallup above Miller, despite being drafted a round later, then we need to be talking about Smith as well.

Of course this is mostly relevant for leagues drafting soon, or now. Leagues drafting later will have the benefit of training camp reports to know who is making an impact and earning a role early.

Edited by ConnSKINS26
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, massraider said:

https://www.mockdraftable.com/player/michael-gallup

Gallups' spider chart.  Underwhelming.

That spider chart doesn't look good but his numbers are more than adequate.  36" vert and over 10' broad jump with a sub 7 3-cone drill are pretty solid.  Has more than enough to not raise any red flags along with a 4.51 40 time.

From this year, Kirk is a pretty explosive player and his looks even worse.

And, of course, there's Antonio Brown

In other words, that spider chart is pretty worthless, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, gianmarco said:

That spider chart doesn't look good but his numbers are more than adequate.  36" vert and over 10' broad jump with a sub 7 3-cone drill are pretty solid.  Has more than enough to not raise any red flags along with a 4.51 40 time.

From this year, Kirk is a pretty explosive player and his looks even worse.

And, of course, there's Antonio Brown

In other words, that spider chart is pretty worthless, IMO.

I think it's a tool, not the be all and end all.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, gianmarco said:

That spider chart doesn't look good but his numbers are more than adequate.  36" vert and over 10' broad jump with a sub 7 3-cone drill are pretty solid.  Has more than enough to not raise any red flags along with a 4.51 40 time.

From this year, Kirk is a pretty explosive player and his looks even worse.

And, of course, there's Antonio Brown

In other words, that spider chart is pretty worthless, IMO.

By showing the one clear example of a star WR with a bad MockDraftable chart in Antonio Brown, you are showing the exception that proves the rule. If you also showed past top WR superstars like Dez, Calvin, Julio, AJ Green, Fitz, GordonSteve Smith, and so on, you would demonstrate pretty clearly that having elite metrics (and subsequently an impressive MockDraftable profile) matters, and matters a lot. Even a slot guy like Julian Edelman shows a lot in his chart. P.S. D.J. Moore looks pretty good. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m taking Gallup when I can. I was a Big fan before the draft and now I’m a HUGE fan. I think he has the tools and will prove to be a true WR1.

Tex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2018 at 10:23 AM, Faust said:

 

 

Cowboys don't want drops now I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Leroy's Aces said:

By showing the one clear example of a star WR with a bad MockDraftable chart in Antonio Brown, you are showing the exception that proves the rule. If you also showed past top WR superstars like Dez, Calvin, Julio, AJ Green, Fitz, GordonSteve Smith, and so on, you would demonstrate pretty clearly that having elite metrics (and subsequently an impressive MockDraftable profile) matters, and matters a lot. Even a slot guy like Julian Edelman shows a lot in his chart. P.S. D.J. Moore looks pretty good. 

I think @massraider said it best that it's a tool. I shouldn't have been so dismissive of the chart itself. There's no doubt that some of the top WRs have elite spider charts. But, I honestly didn't look for many.  In fact, Brown was the first and only one I looked at. Hopkins is another guy with a poor chart. Or Jordy.  And I'm sure there are others.

Similarly, there are some freaks that are awful WRs (DHB, Stephen Hill among others showing up as comps on Julio's page). 

Bottomline is that it's worth noting if a WR you like has poor measurables. And it's not a guarantee that a great spider chart will equal greatness. I was more trying to point out that his actual numbers are decent (10'2" broad, 36" vert, 4.51 speed, sub 7 second 3-cone) even though it doesn't look like it on the spider chart. It's not a death sentence for him if you like him, IMO.  And Moore does get a little bonus for his. I just think it's a tool to be taken with a grain of salt. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those charts are pretty cool. I've used playerprofile for the most part. Might use this now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

That's exactly what I was thinking about Smith in NO. If we're saying that the great situation is what is (for some) elevating Gallup above Miller, despite being drafted a round later, then we need to be talking about Smith as well.

I think the difference is that Gallup had a lot more pre-draft hype than Smith, and that carries over for a lot of people.

The same reason that ESB will regularly be drafted ahead of the other two WRs that were drafted early to his own team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Leroy's Aces said:

By showing the one clear example of a star WR with a bad MockDraftable chart in Antonio Brown, you are showing the exception that proves the rule. If you also showed past top WR superstars like Dez, Calvin, Julio, AJ Green, Fitz, GordonSteve Smith, and so on, you would demonstrate pretty clearly that having elite metrics (and subsequently an impressive MockDraftable profile) matters, and matters a lot. Even a slot guy like Julian Edelman shows a lot in his chart. P.S. D.J. Moore looks pretty good. 

Is there any actual data on how correlated it is?

My worry would be it essentially looks like a graphical representation of Sparq score, and Sparq's own creator measured that Sparq is terribly unpredictive of NFL WR success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Leroy's Aces said:

By showing the one clear example of a star WR with a bad MockDraftable chart in Antonio Brown, you are showing the exception that proves the rule. If you also showed past top WR superstars like Dez, Calvin, Julio, AJ Green, Fitz, GordonSteve Smith, and so on, you would demonstrate pretty clearly that having elite metrics (and subsequently an impressive MockDraftable profile) matters, and matters a lot. Even a slot guy like Julian Edelman shows a lot in his chart. P.S. D.J. Moore looks pretty good. 

I think it matters, but you’re also comparing 1st rd picks that have had success. There’s also the devante Parker’s, Patterson’s, DHB, perriman, etc that can also be hand picked as good charts that didn’t pan out. I don’t think it’s to be ignored, but I don’t think it’s an overall indicator. Like the site and how it’s presented. 

It does confirm one belief, Kerryon Johnson has long arms. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The other problem I have with th charts is that they aren’t all consistent with their metrics.  Some show 3-cone and some have it replaced with short shuttle, etc..  some have 6 metrics , others have 10-12.  Since players are missing some stats it looks like they just populate it with whatever stats they have available.  Not really apples to apples  

Edited by Boone22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Snorkelson said:

I think it matters, but you’re also comparing 1st rd picks that have had success. There’s also the devante Parker’s, Patterson’s, DHB, perriman, etc that can also be hand picked as good charts that didn’t pan out. I don’t think it’s to be ignored, but I don’t think it’s an overall indicator. Like the site and how it’s presented. 

It does confirm one belief, Kerryon Johnson has long arms. 

I agree that it is not an overall indicator, but useful for weeding out players, at least for me. If I miss out on a 6th round pick with poor metrics that becomes Antonio Brown every decade or so, I can live with that. 

My point (which is pretty simplistic) is that the vast majority (95%+ as a pure guess) of historically elite wide receivers had elite metrics in some form or fashion, while a mere handful of elite WRs had poor metrics yet became elite, which makes the tool useful. 

You are correct that I did not mention wide receivers with elite metrics that busted but I also did not mention the many more hundreds of wide receivers with awful metrics that also busted, which would be the apt comparison when discussing how useful the tool is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Leroy's Aces said:

I agree that it is not an overall indicator, but useful for weeding out players, at least for me. If I miss out on a 6th round pick with poor metrics that becomes Antonio Brown every decade or so, I can live with that. 

My point (which is pretty simplistic) is that the vast majority (95%+ as a pure guess) of historically elite wide receivers had elite metrics in some form or fashion, while a mere handful of elite WRs had poor metrics yet became elite, which makes the tool useful. 

You are correct that I did not mention wide receivers with elite metrics that busted but I also did not mention the many more hundreds of wide receivers with awful metrics that also busted, which would be the apt comparison when discussing how useful the tool is.

Maybe I need to go upthread, but I don’t think anyone is comparing Gallup to prime 1st rd talent. The guys you list are top picks in their fantasy drafts, not 2nd rd Guys. He’s in a prime spot to get opportunity because the depth chart kind of sucks. I won’t hate on someone liking him as the best wr in a weak class, but I probably take Moore if given the option. I certainly won’t avoid him because Dallas “will certainly add a prime wr next year.” They were certain to do it this year, and now we have Gallup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Concept Coop said:

Edit: WR2 in ATL >>> WR2 in Dallas. 

I don't think this is necessarily true. There are several factors for WR that matter, but the primary two are quantity of targets and quality of targets. Dak threw the ball 490 times last year and Ryan threw it 529. I could be wrong, but I expect the upward trend to continue for Dak just as it did Wilson. Outside of one fluke season, Ryan has not been that impressive. Dak could easily surpass him in efficiency. Julio is a known top talent. Dallas' 2019 WR1 that you presume is coming is a total unknown and may never even exist. Like I said, your logic is solid there, but things change fast in the NFL. I'd say there's at least a 30% chance they don't bring in a true WR1 for 2019 and a 99% chance they don't bring in someone as good as Julio. So Julio will still be commanding targets in ATL while this unknown guy will probably not command as many, leaving more for the Dallas WR2 and less for the ATL WR2. I also believe Sanu >> Terrance Williams. 

15 hours ago, gianmarco said:

That spider chart doesn't look good but his numbers are more than adequate.  36" vert and over 10' broad jump with a sub 7 3-cone drill are pretty solid.  Has more than enough to not raise any red flags along with a 4.51 40 time.

From this year, Kirk is a pretty explosive player and his looks even worse.

And, of course, there's Antonio Brown

In other words, that spider chart is pretty worthless, IMO.

I've seen a study before that shows there's no correlation between combine metrics and WR success. So you are correct, that chart is worthless.

That being said, if a guy is on an extreme end of the chart, I think it is notable. Gallup is not on an extreme end, so I think we can safely move on to more pertinent evaluations of his talent.

8 hours ago, FreeBaGeL said:

Is there any actual data on how correlated it is?

My worry would be it essentially looks like a graphical representation of Sparq score, and Sparq's own creator measured that Sparq is terribly unpredictive of NFL WR success.

I saw a breakdown of each combine measurement and how it correlated to NFL success. I can't remember which ones, but for RBs some of them had a decent positive correlation (none were overwhelming) and some of them did not. But for WRs, none of them had any correlation to success.

I'm still wary of any WR that runs a 4.7 and a little more intrigued by one that runs a 4.4, but for the most part I ignore those numbers and focus on things like breakout age and college dominator rating. Matt Harmon's reception perception is also a great resource. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

16 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Is anyone taking into consideration Miller being 24 in Oct and Gallup just having turned 22? I really don't know how to weigh that, along with situation, perceived ceiling, competition for targets, etc. 

And then I find myself wondering, should we be talking about Tre'quan Smith in the same area of rookie drafts, given the fit with Brees and playing across from MT? And also being a 3rd round pick like Gallup?

Age is a consideration, for sure.  

Your above example, the age thing that jumps out to me is Brees' age (and no first rounder next year) vs. Trubisky's age.  

Edited by massraider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have Gallup as my WR3 behind Ridley and Moore.  I kind of like Ridley as 1, but I love what Moore can do with the ball in his hands to give him the nudge as my #1.

Moore
Ridley
Gallup
Miller
Washington are my top 5

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gianmarco said:

I think @massraider said it best that it's a tool. I shouldn't have been so dismissive of the chart itself. There's no doubt that some of the top WRs have elite spider charts. But, I honestly didn't look for many.  In fact, Brown was the first and only one I looked at. Hopkins is another guy with a poor chart. Or Jordy.  And I'm sure there are others.

Similarly, there are some freaks that are awful WRs (DHB, Stephen Hill among others showing up as comps on Julio's page). 

Bottomline is that it's worth noting if a WR you like has poor measurables. And it's not a guarantee that a great spider chart will equal greatness. I was more trying to point out that his actual numbers are decent (10'2" broad, 36" vert, 4.51 speed, sub 7 second 3-cone) even though it doesn't look like it on the spider chart. It's not a death sentence for him if you like him, IMO.  And Moore does get a little bonus for his. I just think it's a tool to be taken with a grain of salt. 

1000%.  His numbers are not so terrible that is would be crazy if he becomes their #1.  Stefon Diggs:  https://www.mockdraftable.com/player/stefon-diggs

He has more potential WR1 size than most of the rest of the top WR.  Ridley is shorter and lighter, Moore is shorter, Kirk is 5'100, it's a stretch to project him as a WR1 for a team.  

By the way:  Calvin Ridley  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He could be what baldwin is for Seattle. Maybe a better fit as a number 2 but until they find a number 1 he could end up de facto wr1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm rather low on gallup.  Great numbers but when you watch the video i dont see a whole lot of contested plays nor much that really jumps out at me compared to other receiver highlight reels in this draft.  I do see a mobile qb scrambling to buy time a lot of the time and with him getting open because of that then throwing to him and hitting him in stride while on the run, or him catching passes while left wide open by shoddy Ds,  things like that.  Factor in questionable qb play in Dallas (ie. if a talent like Dez couldnt excel what are the odds Gallup does?) and its a pass for me.  If I'm going to look for a sleeper wr it'll be one or both of Baltimore's receivers, Scott/Lasley, both of whom could be had more cheaply. Similar athleticism and college success with them, and their highlights are both pretty impressive to me as well.

Edited by Crazysight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Crazysight said:

I'm low on gallup.  Great numbers but when you watch the video i dont see a whole lot of contested plays nor much that really jumps out at me compared to other receiver highlight reels in this draft.  I do see a mobile qb scrambling to buy time a lot of the time and with him getting open because of that then throwing to him and hitting him in stride while on the run, or him catching passes while left wide open by shoddy Ds,  things like that.  Factor in character concerns and questionable qb play in Dallas (ie. if a talent like Dez couldnt excel what are the odds Gallup does?) and its a pass for me.  If I'm going to look for a sleeper wr it'll be one or both of Baltimore's receivers, Scott/Lasley. Similar athleticism and college success with them, and their highlights are both pretty impressive to me as well.

I’ll take a late rd flyer on those guys, but I wouldn’t take them ahead of Gallup. I guess I’ll have to look back at character concerns, that’s the first I’ve heard. And dez simply isn’t that talented anymore or he would have a job. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

9 minutes ago, Snorkelson said:

I’ll take a late rd flyer on those guys, but I wouldn’t take them ahead of Gallup. I guess I’ll have to look back at character concerns, that’s the first I’ve heard. And dez simply isn’t that talented anymore or he would have a job. 

 

scratch the character part, i'd already edited that part out before you replied, think i'd confused him with somebody else.  That said i dont consider any of the above-mentioned receivers to be "likely" wr 1s in fantasy, so if i take one or more it'll be whoever drops farthest (which probably wouldnt be gallup).

Edited by Crazysight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Callaway is the one with character concerns btw (big-time), always good to know those ones ahead of time.

Went to the Browns of all places too.  Good luck young man!  :D

Edited by Crazysight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gallup is and will be a #1 WR.

Tex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BigTex said:

Gallup is and will be a #1 WR.

Tex

Even I'm not pimping him up to be that... come on now.

He's a very solid #2 with a chance to be more, more like the 1b to someones 1a in the very best of situations.  On most teams he's a luxury WR3-4 that can develop into a really good role player.  On the Cowboys he has the chance to cement himself early and be considered a staple in the offense.  I think he'll do that, but I don't think he has true #1 ability.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zyphros said:

Even I'm not pimping him up to be that... come on now.

He's a very solid #2 with a chance to be more, more like the 1b to someones 1a in the very best of situations.  On most teams he's a luxury WR3-4 that can develop into a really good role player.  On the Cowboys he has the chance to cement himself early and be considered a staple in the offense.  I think he'll do that, but I don't think he has true #1 ability.  

He’s a 1WR don’t over think this my friend. If he’s available with my 6th pick I’m taking him. If not I’ll go Ridley or DJ Moore.

Tex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this feel like a Stefan Diggs rookie year type situation to anyone? Guy walks on to an offense with very little quality options in front of him, a strong run game, and a mobile qb? Big differences being that there are a ton of vacated targets (as opposed to with Diggs who just took them from Patterson and Johnson) and Dak has shown he can be a better qb than Teddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BigTex said:

Gallup is and will be a #1 WR.

Tex

This is always fun:

Michael Gallup: 6'1", 205 lbs -- 4.51 forty, 36" vert, 122" broad, 4.37 twenty yard shuttle

DeAndre Hopkins: 6'1", 214 lbs -- 4.57 forty, 36" vert, 115" broad, 4.50 twenty yard shuttle

:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gianmarco said:

This is always fun:

Michael Gallup: 6'1", 205 lbs -- 4.51 forty, 36" vert, 122" broad, 4.37 twenty yard shuttle

DeAndre Hopkins: 6'1", 214 lbs -- 4.57 forty, 36" vert, 115" broad, 4.50 twenty yard shuttle

:ph34r:

Obviously a bad comparison because Hopkins has had way better qbs in his career... you know, in bizarro world anyway. Will say that Hopkins makes his cheddar with his route running (which we won’t see how Gallup really fares on that front until he is against nfl dbs and schemes) and did have a hall of famer opposite of him while he developed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.