Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Touche.MoveToSkypager said:
Austin had over 100 receptions his last season at West Virginia (same as Stedman Bailey, who indisputably can catch the ball - both had about 115?), so he was presumably getting open and catching the ball. Many Rams observers thought Austin was misused as a rookie by the OC (in fact, some in this thread). IMO he is just scratching the surface of his potential. It will be very interesting to see if they add the "stiff" Sammy Watkins, as he could create a lot of space for Austin. But adding OT Robinson or Matthews would be a plus for the offense as well. I think they are their three most likely draft picks with the higher first round pick, and if they played their cards right by maneuvering (down from 1.2 and up from 1.13), there is an outside shot they could end up with two from that short list group of three.
Cooks is small at 5'10" and 186 lbs. - but what he did this past year was amazing, and I think he will have a chance at becoming a respectable fantasy football asset. Not a WR 1 type, but a very consistent WR 2 - WR 3 player working from the slot.
I didn't intend to imply that Austin can't get open, only that Cooks does it better. The latter enters the draft as a much more polished product.
They've invested a lot of high picks in the WR position with their last two drafts. Don't know if they go BPA or not, but they sure could use some help on the o-line.
I only brought it up because you noted they didn't compare favorably, and than stated Austin can run fast and juke, but Cooks can get open and catch, so I was unclear if you thought Austin could get open and catch, thanks for the clarification. I'm hopeful about his projection if he is used more effectively, but it is a concern that there isn't much to go on by way of precedent when it comes to recent NFL success at his size. Maybe the closest contemporary veteran frontline WRs by size are Steve Smith (about an inch taller and more than five lbs. heavier - though their games don't share much in common) and DeSean Jackson (about same weight though a few inches taller). As to high picks in the last two drafts, I get that a lot, I can see both sides of that observation/commentary. Bailey was a low third and Givens a high fourth, so IMO those aren't super high picks, top 100 yes, but not top 10 where Austin was drafted, and it is handy to have more than two good WRs (hi CAR and DET!). I am extremely high on Bailey (Hines Ward/Derrick Mason/Greg Jenning recombinant DNA love child) for different reasons than Austin, and like both quite a bit... but neither is a prototypical WR1. Watkins would fix that instantly. Givens I'm starting to think may be too one dimensional to be more than a situational WR3/WR4. Pettis (another third rounder) doesn't need to be on the team, he was just stealing reps from Bailey and Quick, and has already been passed on the depth chart by Bailey. Quick is admittedly a relatively high pick at 2.1, but if he was overdrafted (ahead of Jeffery and Randle that year), the bottom line is, maybe he shouldn't have been such a high pick, and not upgrading could be compounding the initial mistake. DET took FOUR top ten WRs in about a half decade (Austin was the only STL first round WR in close to 15 years, since Torry Holt), and while bungling the first three, they absolutely did the right thing drafting Calvin Johnson second overall.
Steve Smith, Antonio Brown, DeSean Jackson, Julian Edelman, and Marvin Harrison (to name a few who come to mind) have succeeded with similar stature. It's prudent to at least try decipher why these small receivers performed well amid a crowd of extra large comrades - in an effort to figure out whether Cooks can as well. Following his dominant performance in 2013, in my opinion, it's at least worth inquiring whether Cooks has it in him to overcome his shortcoming in stature.
Cooks record breaking stats could mean he has butt loads of talent, in addition to what you said. The Detroit Lions lead the NFL in passing attempts in 2012, but they also only had one dude worthy of targets. That season, Calvin Johnson broke records as well. It just so happened that CJ has talent, and he played in a very stat-friendly situation.
I wasn't comparing them as players. Only as draft commodities. Hass was a 6th round pick, so despite his production people obviously realized that he wasn't a good prospect. What I'm saying is that Cooks is more like Wheaton in the sense that he's a real NFL prospect who will go pretty high.
Yea, I get that. Just because a guy plays in a friendly system doesn't make him a "system player." Michael Crabtree is a great example.
Sometimes it makes sense to look at school/scheme tendencies, especially if there is continuity.
During his two years as a starter, Penn State ranked 44th and 51st in the NCAA in pass attempts. So they were hardly a prolific passing attack. And Robinson's stats actually went UP as the team's overall passing stats went DOWN. Penn State's passing totals by season:
I think that he is just generally referring to "a few folks on this chat board".
Cooks was used all over the field at all depths and ran a variety of routes: http://secondroundstats.com/?p=515
It depends which numbers you look at. There are some numbers which aren't much influenced by a team's number of passing attempts, and Cooks did quite well on those too. Yards per target, yards per target minus the team's yards per attempt, percent of his team's receiving yards, percent of his team's receiving touchdowns, percent of his team's 30+ yard receptions, yards after catch per reception, drop rate. Cooks's 2013 was better than Wheaton's 2012 on pretty much all of those, and comparable to Watkins's 2013.
Where do you find these stats?ZWK said:
Greg Peshek for drop rate and yards after catch, Bill Connelly for yards per target, and the long receptions and team-relative stats I calculate from data on cfbstats.com (which I can do relatively quickly for many players at once by copy-and-pasting tables into an excel spreadsheet & then using vlookup and other formulas).
When the godfather speaks, I listen. I remember Brandt was one of the few talking heads on Sirius that firmly believed Cam was a top QB prospect when he came out.
Three years ago sounds right. I was watching the Indiana/Nebraska game and they mentioned how Tim Miles tried recruiting Mike Evans when he was still at Colorado St.
Here is my data spreadsheet with the 2013 receiving stats for this draft class's WR prospects (along with a bunch of other WRs). It should include all the numbers needed for something like my Benjamin vs. Beckham vs. Evans comparison, including yards per target, yards per target minus team yards per attempt, yards per team pass attempt, percent of team's offensive touchdowns, and number of 40+ yard receptions. Yards per target currently does not include bowl games, and drop rate & yards after catch are only available for the receivers that Greg Peshek has charted.
Did you think about using 25+ and 40+ per reception or per target instead of per game?Here is my data spreadsheet with the 2013 receiving stats for this draft class's WR prospects (along with a bunch of other WRs). It should include all the numbers needed for something like my Benjamin vs. Beckham vs. Evans comparison, including yards per target, yards per target minus team yards per attempt, yards per team pass attempt, percent of team's offensive touchdowns, and number of 40+ yard receptions. Yards per target currently does not include bowl games, and drop rate & yards after catch are only available for the receivers that Greg Peshek has charted.
The next-to-last column, which I'm calling "production score" is basically an attempt to combine all of the other numbers into a single number representing a player's 2013 production. It is something like a weighted average of the other numbers, though the formula is a bit more complicated than that. It's similar to the score that I calculated in this thread about last year's receiving class (unfortunately, all of the tables in that thread have gotten messed up).
The data is sorted by the last column, overall rating. It is calculated by a formula which combines this year's production score with previous years' production scores, height, weight, and estimated 40 time.
I do something similar with RBs (as I described last year in this thread), but I don't have that data ready to share at this point.
I'm generally not a fan of using per target or per reception numbers for receivers, because getting the ball is a sign of a good play. An 8-yard reception is (typically) not a bad play, and it doesn't make sense to count it against a receiver. A versatile receiver who can be a chain-mover on short passing plays, as well as dangerous down the field, is more valuable (both for NFL & for fantasy) than someone who is just a deep threat. Greg Peshek has published some data on the types & depth of routes that prospects run, and my guess is that the strongest predictors there of NFL success are route diversity (running at least some of each type of route), running an above average number of deep routes (more is probably better up to a certain point), and running an above average number of screens.Did you think about using 25+ and 40+ per reception or per target instead of per game?Here is my data spreadsheet with the 2013 receiving stats for this draft class's WR prospects (along with a bunch of other WRs). It should include all the numbers needed for something like my Benjamin vs. Beckham vs. Evans comparison, including yards per target, yards per target minus team yards per attempt, yards per team pass attempt, percent of team's offensive touchdowns, and number of 40+ yard receptions. Yards per target currently does not include bowl games, and drop rate & yards after catch are only available for the receivers that Greg Peshek has charted.
The next-to-last column, which I'm calling "production score" is basically an attempt to combine all of the other numbers into a single number representing a player's 2013 production. It is something like a weighted average of the other numbers, though the formula is a bit more complicated than that. It's similar to the score that I calculated in this thread about last year's receiving class (unfortunately, all of the tables in that thread have gotten messed up).
The data is sorted by the last column, overall rating. It is calculated by a formula which combines this year's production score with previous years' production scores, height, weight, and estimated 40 time.
I do something similar with RBs (as I described last year in this thread), but I don't have that data ready to share at this point.
I'm curious to know why you think more deep routes and screens is a good thing, especially the latter. Personally, I like to see a receiver earn separation versus man coverage, because it's probably the most accurate sign of success in the NFL. A screen pass doesn't require much skill for a receiver to get open.
With deep vs. short catches, my guess is that deep catches are a better sign of route running ability, since they require beating the secondary rather than just taking what the defense gives you. And even though most NFL passes are short to intermediate, most of the top receivers are guys who are capable of going deep.First of all, thanks for sharing your hard work with us.
I'm curious to know why you think more deep routes and screens is a good thing, especially the latter. Personally, I like to see a receiver earn separation versus man coverage, because it's probably the most accurate sign of success in the NFL. A screen pass doesn't require much skill for a receiver to get open.
I would prefer more short and intermediate stuff because NFL teams will probably require more of these types of routes. Although scheme has a lot to do with it also.
Cooks is listed at 5'10" and 186 lbs.
I don't see Welker take too much of a beating. He seems to avoid big hits, for the most part by playing wisely. Choosing to give himself up or go out of bounds rather than take an unnecessary lick. Marvin Harrison played the same way. Maybe Michael Vick would have had a more successful career if he would have also.
