WR Sammy Watkins, BAL (1 Viewer)

[Milkman]

Sammy's acceleration is elite. It's his trademark attribute and how he's going to win in the NFL. He better have elite acceleration though because he's not particularly big and he can't jump so he has to separate to win.

 

[ShaHBucks]

Watkins doesn't have Olympic caliber speed (at least not US caliber) any more than Justin Hunter does, which came up in another thread.

A 10.59 is pretty fast. If Crabtree was that fast (I don't think he was able to run one before the draft - broken foot?), he would be a completely different animal and a better prospect. I've made that exact comparison before, Watkins could be what you would have if Crabtree WAS that fast. Where would Crabtree rank if he had Watkins speed?

I realize I seem like some kind of hater in the face of some of the ludicrous claims here (Olympic speed), but I'm not. Let Watkins be good or very good... even great. Lets chill out on the "faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound" theme..

The parallel I see are the folks putting this guy in the Calvin Johnson stratosphere, I recall I had a similar reaction in the Crabtree thread a couple years back as I do here - Just take a step back and breathe.

To answer your last question... I'd rather Crabtree was bigger with his current speed. He would be a completely different type of receiver if he were fast.

I can see how we can nit pick his speed on the track... but is football played on the track?? I'm of the belief that on any given Sunday, Watkins is going to be the fastest on field with pads on player out there. His acceleration is second to none when he gets the ball in his hands. We can debate his track times all we want but what's the point... all that matters is who he is on the field, and that's fast as ####.

I think this is kind of the point Matuski is trying to make. This is an overboard statement. Watkins is fast, sure. No need to exaggerate it. He will not be the fastest player on the field any given Sunday. I'd bet nearly every NFl team will have a DB faster than him to be honest. That doesn't mean he is going to get run down or it will greatly hinder his game. It's just the truth. This isn't Randy Moss, a guy who will blow by NFL DBs like they are average athletes. Matuski seems to be shedding some realism into the expectations and many don't like it very much. I'm not sure why. The comps of him and an Olympic sprinter are comical. It was a foolish statement that should have just been acknowledged as such once real information was introduced, but of course it wasn't.Watkins is a good prospect, the best WR in this draft. He has good speed and great overall ability. There is no need to embellish his speed for theater.

I think it's clear he won't have the fastest 40 time on the field... but I believe he'll be the fastest *on field with pads on* guy. I think his long speed is good, but his acceleration is elite. He can accelerate past people and has the long speed to sustain separation. I agree it's comical to compare him to an Olympic sprinter... Olympic sprinters don't make receivers.

I heard he's like a 4.2 "in pads."

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Watkins doesn't have Olympic caliber speed (at least not US caliber) any more than Justin Hunter does, which came up in another thread.

A 10.59 is pretty fast. If Crabtree was that fast (I don't think he was able to run one before the draft - broken foot?), he would be a completely different animal and a better prospect. I've made that exact comparison before, Watkins could be what you would have if Crabtree WAS that fast. Where would Crabtree rank if he had Watkins speed?

I realize I seem like some kind of hater in the face of some of the ludicrous claims here (Olympic speed), but I'm not. Let Watkins be good or very good... even great. Lets chill out on the "faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound" theme..

The parallel I see are the folks putting this guy in the Calvin Johnson stratosphere, I recall I had a similar reaction in the Crabtree thread a couple years back as I do here - Just take a step back and breathe.

To answer your last question... I'd rather Crabtree was bigger with his current speed. He would be a completely different type of receiver if he were fast.

No one is doing that. So in addition to your refusal to accept real facts, you are creating strawmen. What's next?

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I never once claimed Watkins was destined to be an Olympic calber sprinter. I stated his 100 meter PB which was run in 2011 at 10.45 seconds. I then said that was a pretty good time and compared it to some other times. It was merely used as a gauge to show that Watkins is pretty fast by saying he did run some track and field and he was pretty good at it. I was not claiming he was Usain Bolt or faster than a speeding bullet.

Sheeesh some people do whatever they can to put words in a persons mouth.

Also, no one is claiming he is Calvin Johnson athletic; once again that is putting words into people's mouths.

What many people are claiming in this thread as well as pundits in the NFL is that he is one of those NFL prospects that comes around every 4 to 5 years or so that looks the part and is destined to be an early pick and one heck of a football player.

 

[matuski]

Watkins doesn't have Olympic caliber speed (at least not US caliber) any more than Justin Hunter does, which came up in another thread.

A 10.59 is pretty fast. If Crabtree was that fast (I don't think he was able to run one before the draft - broken foot?), he would be a completely different animal and a better prospect. I've made that exact comparison before, Watkins could be what you would have if Crabtree WAS that fast. Where would Crabtree rank if he had Watkins speed?

I realize I seem like some kind of hater in the face of some of the ludicrous claims here (Olympic speed), but I'm not. Let Watkins be good or very good... even great. Lets chill out on the "faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound" theme..

The parallel I see are the folks putting this guy in the Calvin Johnson stratosphere, I recall I had a similar reaction in the Crabtree thread a couple years back as I do here - Just take a step back and breathe.

To answer your last question... I'd rather Crabtree was bigger with his current speed. He would be a completely different type of receiver if he were fast.

No one is doing that. So in addition to your refusal to accept real facts, you are creating strawmen. What's next?

Matuski seems to be shedding some realism into the expectations and many don't like it very much. I'm not sure why. The comps of him and an Olympic sprinter are comical. It was a foolish statement that should have just been acknowledged as such once real information was introduced, but of course it wasn't.

Start here. You don't like someone trying to keep this conversation reasonable. Oh well.

 

[ldizzle]

There is some chatter that the lions are thinking of moving up in the draft to get watkins

 

[Bob Magaw]

Watkins doesn't have Olympic caliber speed (at least not US caliber) any more than Justin Hunter does, which came up in another thread.

A 10.59 is pretty fast. If Crabtree was that fast (I don't think he was able to run one before the draft - broken foot?), he would be a completely different animal and a better prospect. I've made that exact comparison before, Watkins could be what you would have if Crabtree WAS that fast. Where would Crabtree rank if he had Watkins speed?

I realize I seem like some kind of hater in the face of some of the ludicrous claims here (Olympic speed), but I'm not. Let Watkins be good or very good... even great. Lets chill out on the "faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound" theme..

The parallel I see are the folks putting this guy in the Calvin Johnson stratosphere, I recall I had a similar reaction in the Crabtree thread a couple years back as I do here - Just take a step back and breathe.

To answer your last question... I'd rather Crabtree was bigger with his current speed. He would be a completely different type of receiver if he were fast.

I agree he isn't "Olympic caliber" in terms of speed (or if some are going to call a speed that many high schoolers are capable of, it devalues the conventional meaning until it is unrecognizeable, as you alluded to).

I haven't seen too many here compare him directly to Calvin Johnson. Not just here, but some scouts are saying he could be a comparable prospect to, or even better than, Julio Jones (some have even included AJ Green, that seems improbable if you use hindsight from his first three years in the NFL, but I don't recall exactly how scouts stacked him up at a comparable stage of development).

Right, Crabtree would be different if he had 10.6 (10.5?) speed, that is what I said. Also, more to the point, that he would be better. Not a crack, just an observation that it is consistent that you would express Crabtree rather have better size, you have made that abundantly clear you value size a lot at the position among top prospects. But the question was, where would Crabtree rank if he had the speed of Watkins? Wherever THAT would be, might be an approximation of a reasonable comp for Watkins. It may not be as sexy a comp as some other names batted around, but I think it could be realistic. Why Crabtree? Because Watkins is at least as physical, tough and RB-like with the ball in his hands as Crabtree (some traits that set them both apart from other WRs their size). Add deep speed to that and you have a WR that would rank higher than Crabtree as he is now. Again, how much higher is the question.

Just like you are advocating tapping the brakes on the top 5 talk, others are suggesting tapping the brakes on rigid expectations of what he can't be because he is in effect about 1" shorter and 10 lbs. lighter than Dez Bryant. I think it is generally acknowledged the top half dozen young WRs are bigger than Watkins, and it would be "beating the odds", so to speak, for him to overcome the elite size disadvantage to nonetheless emerge as one of the best. Kind of like he did before, when he became the only WR in NCAA history to be an AP All American as a true freshman. True, that is a lower bar than high level NFL achievement. But than more WRs with better size should have been able to do it, also, being a level playing field, if it wasn't in fact very difficult and worthy of the highest distinction.

To ask a similar question to the Crabtree one above, if Watkins was the same approximate dimension as Bryant (about 1" taller and 10 lbs. heavier), how much would his value as a prospect be enhanced through that size addition in your estimation?

 

[Raiderfan32904]

There is some chatter that the lions are thinking of moving up in the draft to get watkins

I don't think they have the firepower.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Watkins doesn't have Olympic caliber speed (at least not US caliber) any more than Justin Hunter does, which came up in another thread.

A 10.59 is pretty fast. If Crabtree was that fast (I don't think he was able to run one before the draft - broken foot?), he would be a completely different animal and a better prospect. I've made that exact comparison before, Watkins could be what you would have if Crabtree WAS that fast. Where would Crabtree rank if he had Watkins speed?

I realize I seem like some kind of hater in the face of some of the ludicrous claims here (Olympic speed), but I'm not. Let Watkins be good or very good... even great. Lets chill out on the "faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound" theme..

The parallel I see are the folks putting this guy in the Calvin Johnson stratosphere, I recall I had a similar reaction in the Crabtree thread a couple years back as I do here - Just take a step back and breathe.

To answer your last question... I'd rather Crabtree was bigger with his current speed. He would be a completely different type of receiver if he were fast.

No one is doing that. So in addition to your refusal to accept real facts, you are creating strawmen. What's next?

Matuski seems to be shedding some realism into the expectations and many don't like it very much. I'm not sure why. The comps of him and an Olympic sprinter are comical. It was a foolish statement that should have just been acknowledged as such once real information was introduced, but of course it wasn't.

Start here. You don't like someone trying to keep this conversation reasonable. Oh well.

http://www.olympic.org/olympic-results/london-2012/athletics/100m-m

Go ahead and list all the Olympians that aren't Olympians.

 

[matuski]

Watkins doesn't have Olympic caliber speed (at least not US caliber) any more than Justin Hunter does, which came up in another thread.

A 10.59 is pretty fast. If Crabtree was that fast (I don't think he was able to run one before the draft - broken foot?), he would be a completely different animal and a better prospect. I've made that exact comparison before, Watkins could be what you would have if Crabtree WAS that fast. Where would Crabtree rank if he had Watkins speed?

I realize I seem like some kind of hater in the face of some of the ludicrous claims here (Olympic speed), but I'm not. Let Watkins be good or very good... even great. Lets chill out on the "faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound" theme..

The parallel I see are the folks putting this guy in the Calvin Johnson stratosphere, I recall I had a similar reaction in the Crabtree thread a couple years back as I do here - Just take a step back and breathe.

To answer your last question... I'd rather Crabtree was bigger with his current speed. He would be a completely different type of receiver if he were fast.

No one is doing that. So in addition to your refusal to accept real facts, you are creating strawmen. What's next?

Matuski seems to be shedding some realism into the expectations and many don't like it very much. I'm not sure why. The comps of him and an Olympic sprinter are comical. It was a foolish statement that should have just been acknowledged as such once real information was introduced, but of course it wasn't.

Start here. You don't like someone trying to keep this conversation reasonable. Oh well.

http://www.olympic.org/olympic-results/london-2012/athletics/100m-m

Go ahead and list all the Olympians that aren't Olympians.

You are lost. The Olympic discussion happened well before you got here and was based on the US team.

Everyone here seems to understand such but you.

Going by your list, I was an Olympic caliber sprinter in high school as well. I guess by your benchmark anyone breaking 11 seconds is Olympic caliber? It is fairly clear you didn't run yourself and don't have a clue.

Congrats for comparing Watkins to Burkina Faso's Olympic representative (10.48). I didn't even know that country existed until you gave us this list.

eta - Sammy Watkins remains on the non-Olympian list. It isn't even close.

 

[Gandalf]

Watkins doesn't have Olympic caliber speed (at least not US caliber) any more than Justin Hunter does, which came up in another thread.

A 10.59 is pretty fast. If Crabtree was that fast (I don't think he was able to run one before the draft - broken foot?), he would be a completely different animal and a better prospect. I've made that exact comparison before, Watkins could be what you would have if Crabtree WAS that fast. Where would Crabtree rank if he had Watkins speed?

I realize I seem like some kind of hater in the face of some of the ludicrous claims here (Olympic speed), but I'm not. Let Watkins be good or very good... even great. Lets chill out on the "faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound" theme..

The parallel I see are the folks putting this guy in the Calvin Johnson stratosphere, I recall I had a similar reaction in the Crabtree thread a couple years back as I do here - Just take a step back and breathe.

To answer your last question... I'd rather Crabtree was bigger with his current speed. He would be a completely different type of receiver if he were fast.

No one is doing that. So in addition to your refusal to accept real facts, you are creating strawmen. What's next?

Matuski seems to be shedding some realism into the expectations and many don't like it very much. I'm not sure why. The comps of him and an Olympic sprinter are comical. It was a foolish statement that should have just been acknowledged as such once real information was introduced, but of course it wasn't.

Start here. You don't like someone trying to keep this conversation reasonable. Oh well.

http://www.olympic.org/olympic-results/london-2012/athletics/100m-m

Go ahead and list all the Olympians that aren't Olympians.

You are lost. The Olympic discussion happened well before you got here and was based on the US team.

Everyone here seems to understand such but you.

Going by your list, I was an Olympic caliber sprinter in high school as well. I guess by your benchmark anyone breaking 11 seconds is Olympic caliber? It is fairly clear you didn't run yourself and don't have a clue.

Congrats for comparing Watkins to Burkina Faso's Olympic representative (10.48). I didn't even know that country existed until you gave us this list.

eta - Sammy Watkins remains on the non-Olympian list. It isn't even close.

Who cares if Watkins is an Olympian or not? He's not going to be running for gold. He's going to be ballin' on Sundays. And he is an Olympian at being a WR. That is what I care about most.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Than a lot of US preps have speed that is "Olympic caliber". By this diminished comparison, it loses it's conventional meaning.

Watkins wouldn't make the US Olympic team.

As others have said, he is really fast, saying he is Olympic fast if what is meant by that is what plenty of US high schoolers could run, doesn't make the point any better. No doubt he would be a fearsome sprinter for the Laplanders or Inuit Eskimo teams.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

OK sounds good guys. I'm frankly unsure why people are so hung up on not calling a guy's speed "Olympic caliber" when it clearly is by the literal definition, that people want to be less encompassing of the actual definition of the words used. At the same time, these are the same people that use "epic" when describing some mildly exciting event, or uber when describing something that is slightly above average, or any other hyperbolic term to describe nearly anything. Maybe this group has some kind of USA-centric view which allows for exceptions like this.

 

[cstu]

OK sounds good guys. I'm frankly unsure why people are so hung up on not calling a guy's speed "Olympic caliber" when it clearly is by the literal definition, that people want to be less encompassing of the actual definition of the words used. At the same time, these are the same people that use "epic" when describing some mildly exciting event, or uber when describing something that is slightly above average, or any other hyperbolic term to describe nearly anything. Maybe this group has some kind of USA-centric view which allows for exceptions like this.

Amazing post!

 

[Faust]

Would the Lions trade up for WR Sammy Watkins?By Ryan Wilson | CBSSports.com

Just about everyone agrees that Sammy Watkins is the best wide receiver in the 2014 draft class. And depending on which mock draft you consult, he could go anywhere from No. 2 to No. 8. Meanwhile, the Lions, well-stocked at wideout and with plenty of other needs, have the No. 10 pick.

There's no way Watkins falls that far and even if he does, Detroit wouldn't even consider taking him, right?

On the surface, it sure seems implausible. Matt Millen hasn't been with the team since 2008, and in addition to Calvin Johnson, one of the league's best receivers, the Lions signed Golden Tate, and have Ryan Broyles and Kris Durham, too. For a seven-win outfit, there are bigger concerns.

Except that the team hosted Watkins Tuesday as one of their 30 allotted pre-draft visits, and that comes after new Lions coach Jim Caldwell had dinner with Watkins before his pro day. The former Clemson star even got to meet Johnson and Tate while in Detroit.

“It'd be definitely a blessing playing with Megatron and Golden Tate, having Reggie Bush and Matthew Stafford,” Watkins said, via the Detroit Free Press. “They're doing a great job with the program with all the coaches. If I ever go there, sky's the limit.”

It's one thing to be infatuated -- coaches and scouts fall in love every year around this time -- but that doesn't guarantee a team will trade up for that player. Exacerbating matters: The Rams, who hold the No. 2 pick, are in the market for a wide receiver and Watkins makes a lot of sense. If the Lions are serious, they'd have to trade up eight spots, which won't come cheap.

Two years ago, the Redskins moved up from No. 6 to No. 2 for the right to take Robert Griffin III. The cost (paid, incidentally, to the Rams): first-round picks in 2012, 2013 and 2014, and a 2012 second-rounder.

Assuming the Rams would be willing to listen to trade offers this time around (and we can't imagine they wouldn't), they may be looking for a similar haul. Working from the premise that the Lions would consider Watkins that high, they'd likely have competition from other teams looking for a quarterback.

From the perspective of early April, a month before the actual draft, this all seems highly improbable. Then again, who had the Lions using first-round picks on wideouts in four of five drafts from 2003-2007?

(Incidentally, ProFootballTalk.com's Michael David Smith writes that if the Lions are legitimately interested in Watkins, it would be because they think he's Megatron's eventual replacement.)

For the sake of discussion, let's say Watkins ends up in Detroit. He'd expect to have success playing alongside some of the league's most explosive players.

“I think I can go in and not be the superman wide receiver but go in there and make plays and help my team out. ... Going in (with) a veteran receiver that dominates the game and Golden Tate, too, won a championship, so they know how to play and they know how to prepare for the game,” Watkins said.

The good news is that in 29 days we won't have to speculate. The first round of the 2014 NFL Draft is Thursday, May 8.

 

[jurb26]

Cool. I guess I'm an Olympic caliber sprinter. Go figure.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Than a lot of US preps have speed that is "Olympic caliber". By this diminished comparison, it loses it's conventional meaning.

Watkins wouldn't make the US Olympic team.

As others have said, he is really fast, saying he is Olympic fast if what is meant by that is what plenty of US high schoolers could run, doesn't make the point any better. No doubt he would be a fearsome sprinter for the Laplanders or Inuit Eskimo teams.

What Bob said. Matuski and skypager, please drop it. This thread is for talking about how Watkins will fare in the NFL. Thanks.

J

 

[Balance]

Well, now this thread will drop off page 1. What a party pooper.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Well, now this thread will drop off page 1. What a party pooper.

Still interested in where you would rank Crabtree if he had the speed of Watkins or Watkins if he had the size of Bryant (call it an inch taller and 10 lbs heavier), which is very relevant to the thread.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Why do we always have to compare and find an exacet replica of a player that is already playing?....... if prospect doesn't fit, size, weight, speed, athletic ability, etc exactly then he can't possibly become an elite WR. It's ridiculous!

Watkins passes the eye test. He's been productive. He's on the upper end of athletic ability, but he's not a freak........what he does do better than almost every other WR that's entered the draft in the past 10 years is route running. He knows how to set up his defenders and get open. He's fast on top of that. It's silly watching everyone get into a pissing match over what cookie cutter WR mold Watkins fits in. Watkins is himself. He's a unique WR on his own. He'll be elite.

It's a fair question about comparing prospects to known NFL players.

But in defense, it often is helpful for describing a player's potential when the reader doesn't know much of the player in question. Sort of in a "His upside is a WR similar to _______" It gives you a good starting point.

But I agree, every player is his own player and no two are identical.

J

 

[Bob Magaw]

Why do we always have to compare and find an exacet replica of a player that is already playing?....... if prospect doesn't fit, size, weight, speed, athletic ability, etc exactly then he can't possibly become an elite WR. It's ridiculous!

Watkins passes the eye test. He's been productive. He's on the upper end of athletic ability, but he's not a freak........what he does do better than almost every other WR that's entered the draft in the past 10 years is route running. He knows how to set up his defenders and get open. He's fast on top of that. It's silly watching everyone get into a pissing match over what cookie cutter WR mold Watkins fits in. Watkins is himself. He's a unique WR on his own. He'll be elite.

It's a fair question about comparing prospects to known NFL players.

But in defense, it often is helpful for describing a player's potential when the reader doesn't know much of the player in question. Sort of in a "His upside is a WR similar to _______" It gives you a good starting point.

But I agree, every player is his own player and no two are identical.

J

Exactly.

Watkins hasn't been in the NFL yet, so it makes sense to look at pro WRs that in college had a similar constellation of physical traits, athletic attributes, skill sets and games, in order to help project how they will do at the next level.

Its kind of how language works. If you don't know a word, you can look it up in the dictionary or thesaurus to find related words that shed light on its meaning (if you don't know those words, either, you are in trouble! ).

It can also be a kind of short hand, so instead of a comprehensive breakdown, you can quickly capture the essence of what a player does well, average or poorly. Bloom and Waldman use them. Frank Coyle's scouting guide. Lots of people.

I've discussed it with EBF in a thread, who expressed the board possibly being overreliant on them at times, and questioning how much they really helped (or maybe if they even impeded understanding at times?). IMO, there is a kind of art in a well selected comp (comparable player), and there are certainly comps that are better or worse, but it would be hard to dispense with the apparatus and tradition completely. Sometimes it is helpful to express it as a combination of comps. Odell Beckham, Jr. reminds me of Randall Cobb, Casserly of Crabtree (but faster and smoother, he said - though Crabtree is a couple inches taller and about 15 lbs. heavier). Brandin Cooks reminds some people of Steve Smith and TY Hilton. Stedman Bailey reminds me of a smaller Hines Ward and Derrick Mason for his toughness, route running and hands. AJ Green and Justin Hunter have some similarities in build to Randy Moss. And so on.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I have to echo what Bob and Joe have said. Comparables are a way to try and predict the future numbers of a prospect and what type of a ceiling he may or may not have. Fantasy football is not an exact science which makes it such an enjoyable hobby. Watkins of course is his own player and will create his own story, but finding comparables also allows you to break a player down and see who he may actually be and what he can do.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

I have to echo what Bob and Joe have said. Comparables are a way to try and predict the future numbers of a prospect and what type of a ceiling he may or may not have. Fantasy football is not an exact science which makes it such an enjoyable hobby. Watkins of course is his own player and will create his own story, but finding comparables also allows you to break a player down and see who he may actually be and what he can do.

I think it's great to compare prospects to extant players. The reasons have been stated better than I could have. Most of the time prospects get compared to future HOF players or at least present day studs. I think this could be a possible problem with some people have with comparisons.

 

[Bob Magaw]

That could be a function of the fact that good prospects tend to get discussed in threads like this, and to elicit comps from good predecessors. If in 2015 there is a small, slow, unathletic, talentless UFA WR named Shecky Dinkledorfer and someone posits him as a combo of Jerry Rice, Randy Moss and Calvin Johnson, the proposed comp will probably be challenged as ill chosen (as it should) and that person could have some splainin to do.

Manziel is a very polarizing, divisive figure. In another thread, Raider and I invoked Tarkenton and were questioned on the basis you are describing. But yet Tarkenton himself said the same thing.

But the winnowing process through which this is worked through could be like how science progresses. Scouting is as much art as science (personnel types couldn't peer into the heart and mind of players like Walter Payton and Russell Wilson). But once a comp is posed, stats can be brought in to compare, as well as triangle numbers, and other measurables from tests and drills. Than saying Shecky Dinkledorfer is like Rice, Moss and Johnson would go the way of the Lamarckian Theory of Inheritance in modern biology.

I forgot for a minute the very premise of the thread is itself a comp. I prefer to start with a comparable-sized player and work from there, which is why I earlier (another thread?) used a faster Roddy White. I liked the Crabtree if he could run a 10.5 100 m. comp.

But Watkins is a rare talent deserving of high level comps (perhaps the above was a more general comment about the board). The oft cited fact that he is the only WR in collegiate history to be AP first team All American as a true freshman (and fourth ever after historically good college/NFL RBs Walker, Faulk and Peterson) strongly suggests that.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I am struggling with all this Watkins to Detroit talk. Do the Lions really not view Tate as a WR2? Are they really planning on moving up to target Watkins? Or is this all just a smoke screen?

Calvin Johnson/Watkins/Tate would be down rigth lethal, but I just am struggling to see this going down. I think from a fantasy perspective Watkins in Detroit would be really good now and long term. The draft can't get here soon enough.

 

[werdnoynek]

I am struggling with all this Watkins to Detroit talk. Do the Lions really not view Tate as a WR2? Are they really planning on moving up to target Watkins? Or is this all just a smoke screen?

Calvin Johnson/Watkins/Tate would be down rigth lethal, but I just am struggling to see this going down. I think from a fantasy perspective Watkins in Detroit would be really good now and long term. The draft can't get here soon enough.

I'm curious about this as well... who would play the slot? Tate? Sammy?

I believe without looking Tate is on the smaller side under 6' - maybe 5'11" or 10" - yet he didn't play much slot in Seattle, as that role was Doug Baldwin's from my understanding. Sammy can play any WR role and is lethal from all of them IMO... it would be interesting to see how they would use them. Tate just isn't all that imposing on the outside and I think Sammy would be better fit there if he ended up in Detroit.

 

[massraider]

Sammy in the slot sounds pretty good to me.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I am struggling with all this Watkins to Detroit talk. Do the Lions really not view Tate as a WR2? Are they really planning on moving up to target Watkins? Or is this all just a smoke screen?

Calvin Johnson/Watkins/Tate would be down rigth lethal, but I just am struggling to see this going down. I think from a fantasy perspective Watkins in Detroit would be really good now and long term. The draft can't get here soon enough.

I'm curious about this as well... who would play the slot? Tate? Sammy?

I believe without looking Tate is on the smaller side under 6' - maybe 5'11" or 10" - yet he didn't play much slot in Seattle, as that role was Doug Baldwin's from my understanding. Sammy can play any WR role and is lethal from all of them IMO... it would be interesting to see how they would use them. Tate just isn't all that imposing on the outside and I think Sammy would be better fit there if he ended up in Detroit.

It would be interesting from a FF perspective but imo Detroit would be better served trading down and trying to get 3 picks in the first 2 rounds to draft mainly defense.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I am struggling with all this Watkins to Detroit talk. Do the Lions really not view Tate as a WR2? Are they really planning on moving up to target Watkins? Or is this all just a smoke screen?

Calvin Johnson/Watkins/Tate would be down rigth lethal, but I just am struggling to see this going down. I think from a fantasy perspective Watkins in Detroit would be really good now and long term. The draft can't get here soon enough.

I'm curious about this as well... who would play the slot? Tate? Sammy?

I believe without looking Tate is on the smaller side under 6' - maybe 5'11" or 10" - yet he didn't play much slot in Seattle, as that role was Doug Baldwin's from my understanding. Sammy can play any WR role and is lethal from all of them IMO... it would be interesting to see how they would use them. Tate just isn't all that imposing on the outside and I think Sammy would be better fit there if he ended up in Detroit.

Tate is made for the slot. He was a converted running back from his time in high school. He is 5'10 and great in small spaces, his run after the catch ability is great as well. I think Watkins can line up anywhere including the slot, but in this situation Tate would be the slot guy as Watkins seems like a better fit outside.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

Also, if Detroit was to get Watkins, there is more than enough balls to go around for the 3 WR's. I know the Lions have a new coaching staff and it seems unlikely for Stafford to keep throwing as much as he has the last 3 years: 634 attempts, 727 attempts and 663. I do think Stafford will have 580-600 attempts. The Lions TE play is below average, and I don't think they throw to the the RB's nearly as much as they had in the old system and because they would have much better WR play than in years past.

The more I see Detroit wanting Watkins the more I actually am starting to get on board with this idea for Watkins and the Lions.

 

[jurb26]

I'm not opposed Det drafting Watkins. I am opposed them trading up to do so. From a fantasy perspective it would be awesome. Real nfl, not so much. I like Det's position at 10. They will have a good shot at their #1 DB and I think that guy should be Golbert, who I see as a similar level player/prospect and a bigger need. If both were available at 10 I'd have no problem picking Watkins. He is slightly higher on my board.

 

[Balance]

Well, now this thread will drop off page 1. What a party pooper.

Still interested in where you would rank Crabtree if he had the speed of Watkins or Watkins if he had the size of Bryant (call it an inch taller and 10 lbs heavier), which is very relevant to the thread.

I think he would be easier to imagine as an inch taller and 10 heavier. Everything he does now would be that much easier, he would be a bit closer to "elite" in my mind. He uses his size and positions himself well.. he still wouldn't have Dez's athleticism imo, but perhaps an edge on the mental (a small edge).

Give him top tier speed and I think his game would change... a lot. Hard to imagine a Crabtree blowing the top off a defense or running reverses and returning kicks.

 

[LarryAllen'sJockstrap]

I think the Andre Johnson comparison is a little off. Andre is so physical and has elite body control, along with the ability to turn the short pass into a long gain by beating defenders one on one.

I have high hopes for Watkins, but I don't see him being as dominant as AJ off the line or once he has the ball in his hands.

I think he's got a good combo of enough size, hands and speed to be an NFL quality receiver. IMO what could make him special is his understanding of the field and where the sweet spots are. Many great receivers made a career out of that mold. See Jerry Rice. If I was making a comparison, Reggie Wayne, Torry Holt and Roddy White come to mind.

 

[Shutout]

Sammy's acceleration is elite. It's his trademark attribute and how he's going to win in the NFL. He better have elite acceleration though because he's not particularly big and he can't jump so he has to separate to win.

This is where, IMO, people need to look the hardest at Watkins. There is a HUGE difference between being able to accelerate in college and the NFL. In college, these guys get free run because they know the college kids aren't fast enough to run with them or physical enough to press them.

In the NFL, he WILL get pressed and/or he will get bracketed or cut off of being able to run freely where he wants.

I'm not going to say that kills this ultra-high hype some people are building (I don't know) but I will say it is absolutely different and when you look at a guy like Dez Bryant: he's a big boy and he had trouble the first 2 years almost in learning how to deal with the press. Watkins isn't that big and it stands to reason it will be difficult. Can it be done? Sure. But most guys like this are slots guys and movers and most NFL teams don't draft a WR extremely high to play the slot.

That's the difference I see with Andre Johnson. His size and body control dictated from day one what he was able to do. He came in gifted and with potential and then he refined that while using those gifts. Watkins will come in gifted and with potential but will almost certainly have to adjust and learn/re-learn how he uses those gifts at the next level.

To me, he is much more Tavon Austin than Andre Johnson. In a few years, people might say Tavon is Percy Harvin on steroids.. Who knows? But it takes time when you have to adjust and Watkins is one of those guys who will need to. But he's never going to be the guy that can dominate every inch of a football field like ANdre can.

 

[massraider]

Watkins might not be tall, but he's not small.

He has an NFL body.

 

[werdnoynek]

Watkins might not be tall, but he's not small.

He has an NFL body.

Yeah, I don't know if I can agree with the Tavon Austin comparison...

He's more Dez than he is Tavon...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_oNI6gG97k

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Watkins might not be tall, but he's not small.

He has an NFL body.

Yeah, I don't know if I can agree with the Tavon Austin comparison...

He's more Dez than he is Tavon...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_oNI6gG97k

I think he's more Sterling Sharpe than Dez. Sorry no video.

 

[duaneok66]

Sammy's acceleration is elite. It's his trademark attribute and how he's going to win in the NFL. He better have elite acceleration though because he's not particularly big and he can't jump so he has to separate to win.

This is where, IMO, people need to look the hardest at Watkins. There is a HUGE difference between being able to accelerate in college and the NFL. In college, these guys get free run because they know the college kids aren't fast enough to run with them or physical enough to press them.

In the NFL, he WILL get pressed and/or he will get bracketed or cut off of being able to run freely where he wants.

I'm not going to say that kills this ultra-high hype some people are building (I don't know) but I will say it is absolutely different and when you look at a guy like Dez Bryant: he's a big boy and he had trouble the first 2 years almost in learning how to deal with the press. Watkins isn't that big and it stands to reason it will be difficult. Can it be done? Sure. But most guys like this are slots guys and movers and most NFL teams don't draft a WR extremely high to play the slot.

That's the difference I see with Andre Johnson. His size and body control dictated from day one what he was able to do. He came in gifted and with potential and then he refined that while using those gifts. Watkins will come in gifted and with potential but will almost certainly have to adjust and learn/re-learn how he uses those gifts at the next level.

To me, he is much more Tavon Austin than Andre Johnson. In a few years, people might say Tavon is Percy Harvin on steroids.. Who knows? But it takes time when you have to adjust and Watkins is one of those guys who will need to. But he's never going to be the guy that can dominate every inch of a football field like ANdre can.

Good post but the Austin inclusion was insane.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Well, now this thread will drop off page 1. What a party pooper.

Still interested in where you would rank Crabtree if he had the speed of Watkins or Watkins if he had the size of Bryant (call it an inch taller and 10 lbs heavier), which is very relevant to the thread.

I think he would be easier to imagine as an inch taller and 10 heavier. Everything he does now would be that much easier, he would be a bit closer to "elite" in my mind. He uses his size and positions himself well.. he still wouldn't have Dez's athleticism imo, but perhaps an edge on the mental (a small edge).Give him top tier speed and I think his game would change... a lot. Hard to imagine a Crabtree blowing the top off a defense or running reverses and returning kicks.

No doubt Bryant will make plays Watkins wouldn't (much better jumps at his pro day), but Watkins will make plays Bryant wouldn't due to his superior speed. It isn't obvious from here Watkins won't due as well or better overall, IMO. And I like Bryant a lot. I don't know about the mental part. Watkins appears more self-motivated and harder working, Bryant was kind of out of shape for his pro day. If Watkins doesn't need a baby sitter at the next level, that would be an improvement over Bryant, whether a small edge or larger is subject to debate.

It isn't hard for me to imagine Crabtree with the speed of Watkins. How that would translate to the NFL would require more imagination, maybe that is hard. But hypothetically, that could be what Watkins is (they have similar toughness, physicality, competitiveness and great hands). To the extent we are unable to imagine it, that could make problematic our ability to envision how he projects as a pro. Ideas about what he can't be as well as what he can be could be off the mark due to that inability. There is no question in my mind Crabtree would be better if he had Watkins speed. He is an inch shorter and just 5 lbs. less than Bryant, so Crabtree is roughly between the two WRs in question size-wise. Lack of long speed is one of the few chinks in his armor. Presumably better speed would help him to get open more often, more open when he is and to run away from more DBs in the open field.

Than some questions might be:

1 - Where should Crabtree rank as he is (assuming he is recovered from the ruptured Achilles tendon, he appeared to gain explosiveness just in the nearly two months he played in the regular season and playoffs, Demaryius Thomas recovered nicely from this injury)?

2 - How much of an uptick would he deserve with Watkins speed? Probably more than one spot. A couple? More?

 

[Faust]

Drafting the best vs. drafting for need

Jerry Angelo

Excerpt:

Sammy Watkins, WR, Clemson: No receiver has been this electrifying since Calvin Johnson came out of Georgia Tech. He is big, fast and explosive. Watkins’ after-the-catch yards are unreal. He is competitive and explosive. He has a rare ability and rare skill set in that he can be lethal as both a vertical receiver and in the short game. He’s Sterling Sharp with top-end speed. Watkins saved his best game for last in Clemson’s bowl game win over Ohio State. However, he’s young and will have to be handled the right way. Watkins is sensitive and naive, but he wants to be great and with the right coach and quarterback, he will be.

 

[Faust]

The NFL’s Next Big Thing Isn’t Really Big at All

 

[ClevelandRocks]

Not sure if this comparison has been thrown out there yet but I think it holds water, I'll crunch the metrics at some point but a more explosive A. Boldin.

Resembles Boldin as far as strength, route running, struggles to separate like Boldin. Better athlete then Boldin.

 

[Faust]

The SI 64, No. 9: WR Sammy WatkinsDoug Farrar

Excerpt:

Bio: Many draft analysts will tell you that the 2014 class contains the deepest group of receivers they’ve seen in at least a decade. And Clemson’s Sammy Watkins can be found near the top of all those lists for a multitude of reasons.

Facing some of the nation’s best defenses, he put up 3,391 yards and 27 touchdowns on 240 catches in his three-year collegiate career, and really exploded onto the scene in 2013, grabbing 101 passes for 1,464 yards and 12 scores. When DeAndre Hopkins left for the NFL following the 2012 season, and Watkins became every defense’s primary target, he was even more productive than he’d been before, which speaks to his potential.

“I think I can do just about anything on the field from wide receiver to running back to slot — I can make plays all over the field,” he said in February. “What I love doing is dominating defenses. I think that’s what I bring to the game and I think that’s going to turn over to the NFL. When I come into the NFL, I think I can be that dominant receiver.”

Athletically, yes. Schematically? There are a few things to work out in Watkins’ case, but over time, he could be just as dominant as he hopes.

Strengths: One of the things that makes Watkins so captivating as a player is that he is a legit weapon to make a big play from anywhere — from the backfield to the slot to any position in trips or bunch formations. Tremendous after-catch player on bubble screens, and he’s very dangerous on end-arounds. As a backfield weapon, he looks and thinks like a running back with his foot-fakes and acceleration. Has the pure speed and second gear to outrun college cornerbacks to the end zone, but will also gain separation with an estimable array of jukes off the line and in space. Tremendously effective in motion plays, especially out of the backfield — this is how he often creates separation — and his understanding of formation spacing and timing serves him well. He’s very tough to cover when he’s hitting the line with a full head of steam, and his NFL team would do well to use him in these types of “waggle” plays. Blocks with above-average effort and form, though not a lot of power.

Weaknesses: Watkins’ height creates concerns with regards to jump balls and contested catches; he’s simply not big enough to grab some of the balls that more physically imposing receivers might. And while he’s strong, he needs space to operate — he’ll get taken down on first contact a lot if the first contact is a form tackle attempt, though he’ll drive his helmet in and try to gain extra yardage. Watkins said at the combine that he’s comfortable with all manner of route concepts, but he was a quick up-and-out and vertical target at Clemson, and there are times when he appears a step slow on some more angular routes — especially curls and comebacks or anything with really quick cuts. Has the physical talent to master the techniques required and shows it at times, but that could be a process.

To his credit, Watkins addressed specific route issues from the podium at the scouting combine.

“I’ve become a pretty good route runner, but there are areas I can still improve in with getting out of my routes,” he said. “What I’m really focused on is my curl routes and my comebacks. I’ve got to get my transitions, and know when to run full speed or not, and sync my hips and get out of my routes.”

Conclusion: It’s clear that Watkins is one of the best athletes in this draft class at any position, and he’ll help whatever team drafts him right away, as long as that team understands what he can and can’t do. Watkins has credited South Carolina receiver Bruce Ellington (a very underrated player, in my book) with helping him grasp other route concepts besides the bubble screen and the straight go.

“They say I can’t run routes, so I definitely have to show them that I am probably one of the best receivers at running routes in the combine,” Watkins told TheState.com in February. “I don’t think a lot of guys are on mine, and [Ellington's] level on route running and knowing the fundamentals of break points and things like that.”

NFL teams don’t always take these limitations and strengths into account. When the Vikings took Tennessee’s Cordarrelle Patterson with one of their three first-round picks in 2013, it took a while for the now-departed coaching staff to mix him in as anything but a dynamic returner. When he was finally given the opportunity to use his full array of attributes, Patterson put up performances Minnesota hadn’t seen from a rookie receiver since Randy Moss scalded the league with his talent in 1998. Watkins could have a similar impact at the next level, but it will take an open-minded staff and creative playbook to get the most from him at the start.

NFL player comparison: Cordarrelle Patterson, Minnesota Vikings (1st round, Tennessee, 2013)

 

[Soulfly3]

compared to cordarelle?

that's just lazy

 

[matttyl]

With the teams being discussed that will draft him - Oakland, Cleveland, Detroit, whoever - does Sammy stand a shot to also receive return duties? In my league another 500-750 return yards is like 200-300 extra receiving yards.

 

[Soulfly3]

I wouldnt risk him returning kicks

 

[matttyl]

I wouldnt risk him returning kicks

Minnesota did with Harvin. Dallas did with Dez.

 

[Soulfly3]

I wouldnt risk him returning kicks

Minnesota did with Harvin. Dallas did with Dez.

I know.

I just dont like it

 

[B-Deep]

SI has a great article about Watkins this issue

 

[T with T]

AJ is a true freak of nature.

If I had to pick a comp it would Dez even though Dez is an inch taller and 13 lbs. heavier.

I would say a mix of Roddy white/Blackmon and Harvin all in one... Really he is unlike anyone we have seen. in 3 years he will Dynasty Wr1 overall