Purely off talent I would rank him #6 overall, just after McCluster but before LaFell. Williams could be a big redemption story in the pros, or he could just continue to be a head case that just never gets it.If you had to rank Mike Williams based purely on talent, where would he be?
Yeah he could be a guy to target after the first couple of rounds in a rookie draft, how many of those pan out anyway right. ThanksPurely off talent I would rank him #6 overall, just after McCluster but before LaFell. Williams could be a big redemption story in the pros, or he could just continue to be a head case that just never gets it.If you had to rank Mike Williams based purely on talent, where would he be?
Good work. I think you are way too low on Damian Williams. He doesn't have FF WR1 potential, but I would be willing to bet he is a good pro starter.
Good work. I think you are way too low on Damian Williams. He doesn't have FF WR1 potential, but I would be willing to bet he is a good pro starter.
Yeah, I'm not as high on Williams as other sites/magazines because I'm high on other players like Shipley, Price, Gilyard, and my guy Blair White! The NFL comparison that is always thrown around is former USC WR and current Giants WR Steve Smith. He'll be utilized best in a West Coast offense where he can take short passes and attempt to turn them into long gains. His lower body could use some more strength and that could help his quickness in and out of breaks.Some sites put a lot of focus on Damian Williams's performance in the Bowl game against BC which I found to be a bit odd since I didn't see BC as having much of a defense.
The Patriots have drafted a couple of "build up speed" wide receivers in the past few years in Chad Jackson and Bethel Johnson who rarely got open. I have seen Williams's name connected with the Pats here and there; if he is taken with one of their 2nd round picks I hope he has the potential to develop the savy to get off the line.
Cecil, how coachable do you think this guy is? What round would you feel comfortable drafting him in?
I've seen McCluster listed as a RB on other sites/mags - but I feel his best spot will be as a slot receiver/return man. With so many wide open passing attacks in the NFL your slot guy is basically a starter now. However, even with limited touches McCluster is a playmaker that defenses will have to spy on and gameplan for. Return TDs will be another way he can help his team, along with Wildcat QB and RB.He is very small, but showed at the Senior Bowl weigh ins (and during practice and the game) that he is very strong. McCluster is also working to become a more natural receiver. As he becomes more experienced at the position the better he'll be. It's hard to discount McCluster because of his size because he's proved the doubters wrong at every level. 4 straight 100-yard rushing days in the SEC this year, including that 282-yard performance against Tennessee. 44 receptions this year, so getting 50 catches in the NFL is not out of the question.What do people make of McCluster? I am not a big "size" guy, but I know I don't want my WRs above 6'5 and below 5'9 and his numbers are 5'8, 165. As someone that is 5'7 155, I know how he is built, and I can't see that turning into an every-down WR. The comparison was to Harvin and I prefer traditional WRs on my FF teams (happen to love them on my "real" NFL team), so I did not follow him that much from a FF perspective. Is McCluster the kind of guy who will have a few good years with "out of the norm" stats like 45 receptions for 8 TDs, or will he just be happy to make it as a 40, 600, 5 TD kind of guy?
His lower body is rail thin, and thus he's more Pinkston than sleeper.Does Alric Arnett have some sleeper potential? Does he have the frame to add some weight or is he Todd Pinkston like?
Depends on which talents you prioritize.HandsQuicknessRoute-runningScrewing up a good situationDeep speedTake your pick.If you had to rank Mike Williams based purely on talent, where would he be?
Some things are easier to correct than others, thanks for playing.Depends on which talents you prioritize.HandsQuicknessRoute-runningScrewing up a good situationDeep speedTake your pick.If you had to rank Mike Williams based purely on talent, where would he be?
Look, I didn't mean to offend.I was merely making the point, perhaps too subtley, that his off-the-field troubles are just as much part of his innate makeup as are his measurables. I don't think you can distinguish between the two in a manner that helps predict future success or failure. I've posted in other threads that I think the demarcation between the so-called physical and mental skill is a false dichotomy. If you can train for the combine to increase your strength reps and decrease your 40 time, it should be apparent that you can't parse out the mind from the body. They work too much together and as a system to part them out and grade them individually.Sure, some things can be corrected. But many times they aren't. And we don't know yet how to distinguish between the guys who are just going to be ####-ups their whole lives and the guys who were just immature and end up growing up. We don't know that with anymore certainty than we do which ones will learn to concentrate on their hands more as a pro or will polish their route-running and set-up moves. Just because it can be learned by some other individual doesn't mean it can by this particular individual.Some things are easier to correct than others, thanks for playing.Depends on which talents you prioritize.HandsQuicknessRoute-runningScrewing up a good situationDeep speedTake your pick.If you had to rank Mike Williams based purely on talent, where would he be?
No problem.Its all about potential isnt it? I'm not too worried about throwing a 3rd round dart at a head case, if it doesnt work out I'll dump him later and hopefully I had better luck with my earlier picks.Look, I didn't mean to offend.I was merely making the point, perhaps too subtley, that his off-the-field troubles are just as much part of his innate makeup as are his measurables. I don't think you can distinguish between the two in a manner that helps predict future success or failure. I've posted in other threads that I think the demarcation between the so-called physical and mental skill is a false dichotomy. If you can train for the combine to increase your strength reps and decrease your 40 time, it should be apparent that you can't parse out the mind from the body. They work too much together and as a system to part them out and grade them individually.Sure, some things can be corrected. But many times they aren't. And we don't know yet how to distinguish between the guys who are just going to be ####-ups their whole lives and the guys who were just immature and end up growing up. We don't know that with anymore certainty than we do which ones will learn to concentrate on their hands more as a pro or will polish their route-running and set-up moves. Just because it can be learned by some other individual doesn't mean it can by this particular individual.
thanks for checking 'em out EBF, I always am curious what your takes are.I will have to go back and watch the game again (just watched it 2 weeks ago for the 2nd time) but White had a much better performance in the practices than he did in the game. Roberts, Barnes, and Sanders could all creep up my rankings before the draft - plenty to like about all 3!Nice work. I agree with your top 4. After that my list is pretty different.I don't see Jordan Shipley being anything but a depth player in the NFL. He's also very old for a rookie. Blair White didn't show me much athletic ability in the Shrine Game. I'm higher on Andre Roberts, Freddie Barnes, and Emmanuel Sanders than you are. Roberts is a slightly bigger, slightly less explosive clone of Eddie Royal. Very smooth runner. Barnes disappointed me with a 4.65 time at his pro day, but I like his frame and receiving skills. I think he could be a Cotchery/McCardell/Houshmandzadeh/Rod Smith type of gem. Separation might be a problem. Sanders is more of a longshot than the other two. He doesn't have a great build, but he's fast and productive. He catches the ball very cleanly. I could see him being a third round pick in the mold of Mike Wallace.
Best couple of 3rd rounders I ever spent, I love drafting in May!Yeah he could be a guy to target after the first couple of rounds in a rookie draft, how many of those pan out anyway right. ThanksPurely off talent I would rank him #6 overall, just after McCluster but before LaFell. Williams could be a big redemption story in the pros, or he could just continue to be a head case that just never gets it.If you had to rank Mike Williams based purely on talent, where would he be?
Do you see where it says 2010 in the title?Dude. You made me think there was new DraftGuys material already.![]()