Post Draft Bloom 100 is here (1 Viewer)

[Sigmund Bloom]

Great article as always Bloom, thanks for sharing it! In the end, how much back and forth was there for you on the Montee Ball ranking? I agree with talent over situation in dynasty...but to my eyes the RB's above Ball aren't significantly better (if they are indeed better) and his situation is awfully good...even if Hillman does take carries. Tough decision for you or no brainer?

I've overrated too many mediocre backs solely because of situation. not that tough really. Another thing is that this situation might not be as good as it looks on the surface judging by Fox's history and what it takes for Peyton to trust a running back.

 

[cstu]

Great article as always Bloom, thanks for sharing it! In the end, how much back and forth was there for you on the Montee Ball ranking? I agree with talent over situation in dynasty...but to my eyes the RB's above Ball aren't significantly better (if they are indeed better) and his situation is awfully good...even if Hillman does take carries. Tough decision for you or no brainer?

I've overrated too many mediocre backs solely because of situation. not that tough really. Another thing is that this situation might not be as good as it looks on the surface judging by Fox's history and what it takes for Peyton to trust a running back.

cough...Stacy...cough

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Great article as always Bloom, thanks for sharing it! In the end, how much back and forth was there for you on the Montee Ball ranking? I agree with talent over situation in dynasty...but to my eyes the RB's above Ball aren't significantly better (if they are indeed better) and his situation is awfully good...even if Hillman does take carries. Tough decision for you or no brainer?

I've overrated too many mediocre backs solely because of situation. not that tough really. Another thing is that this situation might not be as good as it looks on the surface judging by Fox's history and what it takes for Peyton to trust a running back.

cough...Stacy...cough

I actually had Stacy higher than Ball pre-draft and lower post-draft...

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

I don't understand why Justin Hunter can't become an elite WR, but Patterson can.

That's not a bad criticism actually. Hunter does have the 2nd highest ceiling of any WR in this class after Patterson, and you might argue higher.

If you think Patterson has the upside of Harvin why doesn't Hunter have the upside of AJ Green?

I would say the better best case comparison for Hunter would be Randy Moss.

From a purely physical standpoint, Hunter pre-ACL did have Moss's length, jets, ups, and killer instinct. The problem is that he hasn't flashed like that since 2010, and he was extremely inconsistent this year when it came time to catch the ball.

On the other hand, Patterson looked like Harvin in the open field last year, and not just on one or two plays. He's really not that different at all from Harvin when he came out, except he's bigger.

So while they may both have very high ceilings, Patterson looks more capable of hitting his.

Randy Moss is an elite WR1 so I am missing your point. There is something about Patterson that is causing you to be selectively optimistic in terms of upside. The Harvin comparisons are off base though. Harvin is unlike so many other players before him. This notion of just get him the ball and he'll make plays is being incorrectly applied to Patterson for the big reason that Patterson hasn't shown an ability to run inbetween the tackles. Patterson has only shown to be a gimmick perimeter runner, while Harvin can run foundation running game plays as a HB and he also possess the route running ability of a receiving HB. Thus Harvin can get the ball in many more practical and strategically viable ways. Not to mention the intensity and power that Harvin runs with, which speaks to a mentality that Patterson lacks as well. I don't think many would compare the two solely on WR skills, it's due to wishful thinking that the slash part of their games are equal when they are clearly not. This is the subtle distinction that I think many people are failing to make. Review the nature of their plays with the ball in their hands. Note how quickly Harvin is able to get north and south and where he is on the field when he does it and compare that to Patterson who is almost exclusively doing it on the perimeter on slower developing plays. Harvin gets downhill and has vision in heavy interior traffic, it's something defenses won't have to worry about with Patterson because he's not gutting teams up the middle instead he bounces and strings things. I think the wide side of the NCAA field helped Patterson and the lack of dimensions as a runner is going to make funneling him easier and NFL defenders will understand the tendancies of his improv skills better. I know that Patterson has some open field ability, but the look of his plays usually resemble a game of smear the queer where he is going sideline to sideline, as apposed to Harvin who can use the A or B gaps and gash a defense quickly which I think translates to the NFL better because he uses his quickness to beat power in the middle of the field much more effeciently. Patterson hasn't shown the aerial ball skills and leaping extension technique to dominate as an outside WR, nor has he shown the jitterbug quickness and route footwork to work the slot underneath stuff. He's so much different than Harvin when you look closely at how they play and how defenses must adjust to them given all strategies they use at a high level.

As for Hunter he has shown that he can get open, go up and get he ball in a way that there is no defense for. He's inconsistent, but he was coming off a major injury and he's an amateur. Now he's a professional and he's healthier. Everything you want him to do as an outside WR he can do and he can do it in a way that often leaves defenses helpless when the play is executed well. Reps will help refine his game, it's how pros become consistent. He has a way to go obviously, but he doesn't need to reinvent himself because what he does now translates to the NFL.

Only a tiny fraction of Harvin's production comes between the tackles, I don't see that as an important difference. That's not "many more" ways, just one way. As for Patterson's intensity and consistency of effort, that is a definitely part of his risk factor, as his is lack of polish as a receiver. I still think that it is no coincidence that the team that just traded away Harvin spent a 2,3,4, and 7 to get Patterson. They are alike enough that Im sure many Harvin plays will now be run with Patterson in Minnesota.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Great article as always Bloom, thanks for sharing it! In the end, how much back and forth was there for you on the Montee Ball ranking? I agree with talent over situation in dynasty...but to my eyes the RB's above Ball aren't significantly better (if they are indeed better) and his situation is awfully good...even if Hillman does take carries. Tough decision for you or no brainer?

I've overrated too many mediocre backs solely because of situation. not that tough really. Another thing is that this situation might not be as good as it looks on the surface judging by Fox's history and what it takes for Peyton to trust a running back.

cough...Stacy...cough

I actually had Stacy higher than Ball pre-draft and lower post-draft...

I was going to say cough...Eric Shelton...cough

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Great article as always Bloom, thanks for sharing it! In the end, how much back and forth was there for you on the Montee Ball ranking? I agree with talent over situation in dynasty...but to my eyes the RB's above Ball aren't significantly better (if they are indeed better) and his situation is awfully good...even if Hillman does take carries. Tough decision for you or no brainer?

I've overrated too many mediocre backs solely because of situation. not that tough really. Another thing is that this situation might not be as good as it looks on the surface judging by Fox's history and what it takes for Peyton to trust a running back.

cough...Stacy...cough

I actually had Stacy higher than Ball pre-draft and lower post-draft...

I was going to say cough...Eric Shelton...cough

oh sheesh dont remind me

 

[Drop]

I don't understand why Justin Hunter can't become an elite WR, but Patterson can.

That's not a bad criticism actually. Hunter does have the 2nd highest ceiling of any WR in this class after Patterson, and you might argue higher.

If you think Patterson has the upside of Harvin why doesn't Hunter have the upside of AJ Green?

I would say the better best case comparison for Hunter would be Randy Moss.

From a purely physical standpoint, Hunter pre-ACL did have Moss's length, jets, ups, and killer instinct. The problem is that he hasn't flashed like that since 2010, and he was extremely inconsistent this year when it came time to catch the ball.

On the other hand, Patterson looked like Harvin in the open field last year, and not just on one or two plays. He's really not that different at all from Harvin when he came out, except he's bigger.

So while they may both have very high ceilings, Patterson looks more capable of hitting his.

Randy Moss is an elite WR1 so I am missing your point. There is something about Patterson that is causing you to be selectively optimistic in terms of upside. The Harvin comparisons are off base though. Harvin is unlike so many other players before him. This notion of just get him the ball and he'll make plays is being incorrectly applied to Patterson for the big reason that Patterson hasn't shown an ability to run inbetween the tackles. Patterson has only shown to be a gimmick perimeter runner, while Harvin can run foundation running game plays as a HB and he also possess the route running ability of a receiving HB. Thus Harvin can get the ball in many more practical and strategically viable ways. Not to mention the intensity and power that Harvin runs with, which speaks to a mentality that Patterson lacks as well. I don't think many would compare the two solely on WR skills, it's due to wishful thinking that the slash part of their games are equal when they are clearly not. This is the subtle distinction that I think many people are failing to make. Review the nature of their plays with the ball in their hands. Note how quickly Harvin is able to get north and south and where he is on the field when he does it and compare that to Patterson who is almost exclusively doing it on the perimeter on slower developing plays. Harvin gets downhill and has vision in heavy interior traffic, it's something defenses won't have to worry about with Patterson because he's not gutting teams up the middle instead he bounces and strings things. I think the wide side of the NCAA field helped Patterson and the lack of dimensions as a runner is going to make funneling him easier and NFL defenders will understand the tendancies of his improv skills better. I know that Patterson has some open field ability, but the look of his plays usually resemble a game of smear the queer where he is going sideline to sideline, as apposed to Harvin who can use the A or B gaps and gash a defense quickly which I think translates to the NFL better because he uses his quickness to beat power in the middle of the field much more effeciently. Patterson hasn't shown the aerial ball skills and leaping extension technique to dominate as an outside WR, nor has he shown the jitterbug quickness and route footwork to work the slot underneath stuff. He's so much different than Harvin when you look closely at how they play and how defenses must adjust to them given all strategies they use at a high level.

As for Hunter he has shown that he can get open, go up and get he ball in a way that there is no defense for. He's inconsistent, but he was coming off a major injury and he's an amateur. Now he's a professional and he's healthier. Everything you want him to do as an outside WR he can do and he can do it in a way that often leaves defenses helpless when the play is executed well. Reps will help refine his game, it's how pros become consistent. He has a way to go obviously, but he doesn't need to reinvent himself because what he does now translates to the NFL.

Only a tiny fraction of Harvin's production comes between the tackles, I don't see that as an important difference. That's not "many more" ways, just one way. As for Patterson's intensity and consistency of effort, that is a definitely part of his risk factor, as his is lack of polish as a receiver. I still think that it is no coincidence that the team that just traded away Harvin spent a 2,3,4, and 7 to get Patterson. They are alike enough that Im sure many Harvin plays will now be run with Patterson in Minnesota.

The point I want to emphasize is that that one way gives birth to a whole branch of strategic options and thus dictates defensive counter strategies. Harvin keeps the defense honest even with his tiny fraction of inside runs because he can gash defenses and they must respect it from certain formations. Patterson has not proven able to do this and thus defenses will play him knowing his tendency is to run outside, information that they can exploit better because unlike Harvin's inside/outside threat Patterson is not presenting as complex of a pick your poison situation. I think that is an important difference from a game theory and balance standpoint. A smart defensive coordinator will react differently to Harvin motioning into the backfield than he would Patterson doing the same thing in the same set, not because he knows exactly what he's going to see from either of them but mainly because he knows what he's not going to see from Patterson. This is why I don't compare the strategically balanced versatility of Harvin with the gimmick versatility of Patterson, it's disrespectful to Harvin and how good he really is. I'm not very high on Patterson because I view him as strictly a WR and his skills just aren't that good and his frame doesn't give him enough of an advantage for me to see how he can consistently dominate NFL competition in order to be elite.

 

[EBF]

Never been as high on Patterson as I was on Harvin. He doesn't seem as fluid or nimble. More of a jerky style.

His 7.28s time in the three cone drill is the worst of any WR drafted this year.

He's got the height/weight/speed that you want in a #1 receiver, but I'm not sold on his game just yet.

 

[Drop]

He's under 6-2 and has small hands.

 

[cstu]

He's under 6-2 and has small hands.

He has 9" hands, while that's smaller it's bigger that T.Y. Hilton (8.5") and he didn't do too bad last year.

 

[Drop]

My point is that he doesn't have the prototype size that I want in a #1 WR.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Great article as always Bloom, thanks for sharing it! In the end, how much back and forth was there for you on the Montee Ball ranking? I agree with talent over situation in dynasty...but to my eyes the RB's above Ball aren't significantly better (if they are indeed better) and his situation is awfully good...even if Hillman does take carries. Tough decision for you or no brainer?

I've overrated too many mediocre backs solely because of situation. not that tough really. Another thing is that this situation might not be as good as it looks on the surface judging by Fox's history and what it takes for Peyton to trust a running back.

cough...Stacy...cough

I actually had Stacy higher than Ball pre-draft and lower post-draft...

I was going to say cough...Eric Shelton...cough

oh sheesh dont remind me

Same coach.